Loading...
VE-21-89 • t BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF A VARIANCE FROM ) LOT AREA REQUIREMENTS FOR A ) FINDINGS OF FACTS, PROPOSED NURSERY SCHOOL IN THE ) CONCLUSIONS, TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-2) ZONE ) DECISION AND ORDER LORI WILSON (VE-21-89) ) This matter, being an appeal of an action by the Spokane County Zoning Adjustor, denying a vanance from lot area requirements for a Nursery School in the Two Family Residential Zone and the Board of Adjustment, hereinafter r+efernod to as the "Board", havuig held a pubhc heanng on August 16,1989, and havmg fully considered all tesamony, as well as, all the contents of File No. VE-21-89, dces hereby make the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The proposed Nursery School is generally located at the northwest corner of 32nd Avenue and Woodlawn Street in tle SE 1/4 of Section 27, Township 25N, Range 44EWM. 2. The site is zoned R-2, which allows day care centers only in conjunction wnth churches and other conditions. However, nursery schools, the present proposal, are pernutted on parcels having fifteen thousand (15,000) square feeL 3. The existLng land uses in the area are predominantly duplex and suigle-family residendal uses. The site adjoins 32nd Avenue, a pnncipal arterial. ' 4. The R-2 zoning regulatians and standards for day care facilities are the same as those of the Agricultural Suburban zone. Day ccrre centers are not permitted in the R 2 zone except when operated in a church. Even when allowed in churches, a fifty (50)-foot setback from the property line is required of the outdoor play areas [4.06.020, 4.05.060(g)]. 5. The apphcant, at the roqaest of the Zoning Adjustor, submitted a letter to the Zorung Adjustor indicating that mamfy of the children using Little Rascals Daycare, Inc., will be there in excess of four (4) haurs per day. 6. The applicant retains the right to operate a muri-day cane center on the pmoperty without any zoning peranits. A mini-day care center would allow twelve (12) or fewer children at the proposed site. The applicant indicatei up m twenty-seven (27) children were neoessary tro ma.ke the proposal ~'inancially viable. 7. The testimony and letteirs of adjoining owners and residents were opposed to the proposal, due to the increase in naff'ic and noise and inuusion onto theu fences and back yards by children playing in Wdson's rear yard. 8. A petiaon was submitted by the applicant which supported the proposal. The peaaon dzd not ind.icate how many children would potentially use the site if the proposal were approved. Other tesamony was received which indicated property values would not be affected by the establishment of the prroposal. , ~ CASE NO VE•21-89 SPOKANE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 2 9 The Spokane County Zorung Adjustor held a public heanng on June 7, 1989 in the matter of a Variance from lot area requirement for a nursery school (VE-21-89), and did, on the 7th of July, 1989 deny the appucation for the Variance for the following reasons. a) The revised Code of Washington RCW 74.15.020 (4)(d) defines ntinsery schools more or less as a private agency, school or instituaon engaged in educaaonal wark with preschool clrildren and in which no child is enrolled on a regular basis for four Qr more hours ner da_v. Enrollment for four or more hours per day shall classify this famhty as a"Day Care Facility" or "Kindergarten". The proposal does not meet ' nurseiy school definition but does meet the day care definidon. b) Applicant indicated that many children using the "Little Rascals Daycare, Inc." site will be there in excess of four hours per day. The only type of day-care facility allowed on the subject site is a mini-day care center which, by defimtion, allows furnishing care, supervision and guidance of a child or group of children up t4 twelve (12) years of age or under for a period of more than four (4) hours, but less than 24 hours per day..." for up to a maxunum of twelve children. The apphcant wants tio have up to 27 children. c) The proposal dces not safisfy the local ordinance and statutory requirements for vanance approval [Section 4.25.030 b. 1(a)] regarding the granting of a special ~ pnvilege inconsistent with the nghts of the neighboring properties and sinnlarly zoned properties. In its progosed site, the approval of the variance would grant a privilege not enjoy by the neighbors. d) The applicant wants to save up to 27 children m a day care center operation. Day care centers are only allowed in the R 2 Zone when operated in a church. e) The adjoining owners and residents were opposed to the proposal, due to the increase in noise aad traffic az the site. f) The petition submitted by the apphcant in support of the proposal did not indicate the number of chikiren (up to 27) that would potentially be camd for. 10) On Jnly 17, 1989, an appeal of the Zoning Adjustor was filed by Lori Wilson far the followmg reasons: a) Wilson believed the Zoning Ordinance and Revised Code of Washington Id allow nursery schools to run more t6an four (4) hours a day. b) A mini-day care center allowing only 12 children was not economically possible for her situation. c) County staff processing the variance did not advise her of any four hour limit for a nursery school. d) Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) staff had no time limit rec}uumtnents for nursery schools. 11) A review of RCW 74.15.020 (4)(d) brought the Board to conclude that nursery schools were not excluded, by definiaon, from operating more than four hours a day. , CASE NO VE-21-89 SPOKANE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 3 12) A day care center is not allowed on the property, but a nursery school is (Secuon 4.05 060f ) 13) A nursery school, is defined in Section 4.03.020 of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance as a school or organized program for the care and instrucaon of preschool age children under the age of six Years whether Pubhc or Pn 'vate and whether operated for profit or not operated for profit". 14) The applicant can run Little Rascals Daycare, Inc. as a nuisery school only, but may retain the word "Daycare" in the incorporated name if they so desue. 15) The nursery school should have an estabhshed cumculum or learning plans as evidence that the operation is a nursery school and not a day care center. 16) The neighborss have same legiamate concerns regarding the outdoar play areas for the children and operating hours for the nursery schooL The decision will be conditioned to nudgate these concerns. 17) The Zoning Ordinance roquirements for minimum lot size puts an unreasonable dunensional hardslup on the applicanL 18) The proposal is compatible vath the existrng neighborhood because of daynme operation and no weekend operaaons. 19) The applicant's financial haniship reasonmg for the applicadon is discounted ui light of the above findings. 20) The request meets the rennaining cnteria for a varianve. DECISION Frum the foregaing F'indings and Conclusions, the Board of Adjustonent by a 4-0 vote, with the Chairman abstaining, REVERSES the Zoning Adjustor decision and thereby APPROYES the proposal snbject m compliance with the following: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I. GENERAL The following condinons shall apply to the applicandowner and suocessors. 1. Failure to comply wnth any of the conditions of approval contained in this decision, except as may be relieved by the Beard shall constitutie a violaaon of the Zoning Ordinance and be subject to such enforoement actions as are appropnate. H. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 1. The pmposal must be run as a nuisery school, not a day care center. Children attending must be under six years of age. CASE NO VE-21-89 SPOKANE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 4 2 The nursery school must have, and follow, a learning program. 3. A landscape site plan for the rear yard is reyuired and must mclude evergr+een shrubs on the west pr-operty line and shade mees away from the west property line. III. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 1. Dnw acoe.ss to 32nd Avenue from the subject property is prohibited. IV. UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 1. Pursuant to the Board of County Commissioners Resolution No. 80-0418, the use of on-site sewer disposal systems is hereby authonzed. This authorization is conditioned on compliance with all rules and regulaaons of the Spokane County Health District and is further oondiaoned and subject to specif'ic application apprnval and issuance of pennits by the Health DistricL 2. The Owner(s) or Successor(s) in interest agree to authorize the County to place theu name(s) on a petidon for the fomaaaon of a ULID by peation method pursuant to RCW 36.94 which the peation uicludes the Owner(s) property and further not to object by the signing of a protest petition against the frnmation of a ULID by resolution method pursuant to RCW Chapter 36.94 which includes the Owner(s) property. PROVIDID, this condition shall not prohibit the Owner(s) or Successoz(s) from objecrion m any assessment(s) on the property as a result of improvements called for in canjunctiion with the rformation of a ULID by either petition or resolution method under RCW (hapter 36.94. 3. Any watier so-vice for this project shall be provided in a~ccordaave with the Coordinated Water System Plan for Spokane County, as amended. 4. Each new dwelling unit shall be double plumbed for connection to future area-wide collection systems. VL DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND SAFETY 1. 1'he applicant shall contact the Deparanent of Building and Safety at the earliest possible stage of design/development in onier to be informed of Code requirements administered/eaforced by the department, e.g., State Building Code Act regulations such as requumments for fire hydrantlflow, fne apparatus a,cccess roads, stmet address assignment, bamer-free regulaaons, energy code regulations, and general coordination with other aspects of project implementation. V. HEALTH DISTRICT 1. Sewage duposal method shall be as authonzed by the Director of Utihaes, Spokane County. , CASE NO VE-21-89 SPOKANE COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT PAGE 5 2. Water service shall be ooordinated through the Director of Uuliaes Spokane County. 3. Water sernce shall be by an easang public water supply when approved by the Regional Engineer (Spokane), State Department of Social & Health Services. 4. A public sewer system will be made available for the project, and inchvidual service will be provided to each lot prior to sale. Use of individual on-site sewage disposal systems shall not be authorized. 5. Use of private wells aad water systems is prohibited. NOTICE: PENDING COMPLETION OF ALL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WMGH NEED TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE, PERMITS GAN BE RELEASED PRIOR TO TI-E LAPSE OF THE TEN (10) DAY APPEAL PERIOD. HOWEVER, T'IRE COUN'I'Y HAS NO LIABILITY FOR EXPENSES AND INCONVENIENCE INC'IJRRED BY TIHE APPLICANT IF TI-E PROJECT APPROVAI. IS OVERTURNID OR ALTERED UPON APPEAL. DATED tlus 20th day of September, 1989. BOARD OF ADNST1ViENT OF SPO CO WUNGTON Marnn Hibbs, D yPaul E. Eichin Su Blakeley Vernon Laubach 1 gt C. ce" Pettit ♦ CASE NO VE-21-89 SPOKANE COUNTY BOARD OF°ADJUSTiIAENT PAGE 6 , FII`,ED' t • 1) Apphcant (Cerafied/Return Receipt-Mail) 2) Parties of Record 3) Spokane CountyEngineer"s`Departmea 4) `Spokane County Health Ihstrict ` ' S) Spokane County, Depardment of Builduigy& Safety ,6) Spokane County Unlities Deparoment 6) Planning Department Qross-reference F, ile andlor Electrunic F'~le Revised 5-3-89 rP , . ZONING ADJUSTOR SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF A VARiANCE FROM ) LOT AREA REQUIREMENTS FOR A ) FINDINGS OF FACT, PROPOSED NURSERY SCHOOL ) CONCLUSIONS, LORI WILSON [YE-21-89] ) DECISION AND ORDER PARCEL NUMBER: 27543-1920 ADDRESS: Eaet 12818 31st Avenue APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: Tbe applicsnt pmposes to locate a nnrsery school (dsy care facility) for up to twenty-seven (27) cluldren on a parcel having 13,000 square feet of lot area, wbenas Spoksne County Zoning Code Section 4.05.060 requires a minimum of 15,000 sqasre feet for nursery sebools. Day care centera are allowed onlY in conjuncuon with churcbes in this zaae.. Authonty to consider such a request euists pursuant to Section 4.25 of the Spolcam County Zoning Ordinanoe. PRUJECT LOCATION: . Generally located at the northwest corner of 32nd Avenue and Woodlawn Street in the SE 1/4 of Section 27, Township 25N, Rsnge 44 EWM. PARTIES OF RECORD: 1. Carol Okugawa 13. Jeff 1Vioos 2. Julie M. Battler 14. b. Hayes 3. Muriel NL TownSend 15. Marvin A. Jenldn 4. D. Jay W'ilHams 16. Chris Smith 5. Marvin Wilm 17. Venive Dowell 6. Lauri Willerson 18. Laurie Peerson 7. Lori Thison 19. Leslie I.autz 8. Joan OBrien 20. Boake Cards 9. T. F. Fuher 21. Brett Mci.azwnt 14. Renee Lopez 22. Tammy Johnson 11. Linda Cummings 23. Jan Robbins 12, Denise Mann 24. June Groen ~ Jlo'L 0 7 1989 + i r 4 ~1 k ,~C _.3--~ w ~ CASE NO VE-21-89 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADNSTOR PAGE 2 PUBLIC HEARING: After examining all available information on file vhth the applicadon, considenng the tesamony and exhibits submitted at the public hearing on June 7,1989, and after visiting the subject property, the Zoning Adjustor rendered a written decision on July 7,1989. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIUNS 1. The proposal is descnbed above. 2. The site is zoned R-2, which allows day care centers only in conjunction with churches and othe,r conditions. Nursery schools are pemutted on parcels having fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet. 3. The existing land uses in the az+ea are predominandy duplex and single-family residential uses. The site adjoins 32nd Avenue, a pnncipal arterial. 4. The R-2 zoning regulations and standazds for day cane facilities ane die same as those of the Agricultural Suburban zone. Day care centers are not permitted in tlie R 2 zoae except when opercued in a church Even when allowed in churches, a fifty (SO)-foot setback from the pmperty line is nequired of the outdoor play areas [4.06.020, 4.05.060(g)]- S. The applicant, at the request of the Zoning Adjustor, submitted a letter to the Zoning Adjustor indicating that many of the children using Litde Rascals Daycare, Inc., wiU be there ir► excess of four (4) hours per day. . 6. The Zoning Adjustor notes that the tenns nursery school and dary core faciliry can be difficult to distingvish. The Zoning Qniinance specifically defines day core facilides as those which furnish care, guidance, supervision for children up to twelve (12) years of age for more than four (4) hours but less than tweaty-four (24) hours per day. 7. Nursery schools by regulations provide that children not be taught or cared for for more than four (4) hours a day [RCW 74.15.020(4)(d)). As such, it appeais reasonable to conclude that this proposal does not meet the nursery school definiuon or requuments which would allow it to be located wnthin this zone. The Zoning Adjustor believes the 4rd.inance, by its organizatton, intended to distinguish between day care and nursery school facilities, and the curnent proposal would properly be teitned a day care center. 8. In addinon to the defirution problein, the proposal dces not satisfy local ord,nance and statutory requirements for vananoe approval. Vanance approvals basically requut that the applicant not be granted a special privilege inconsistent with the nghts of other properaes in the area and zone, and that special circwnstances apply to the property which deny it uses commonly enjoyed in the zone. The site is located on a level lot within a standard subdivision where the granting of the proposed vanance would be a special pnvilege not generally allowable within the zone on this size lot even if it were concluded to be a nursery school s-- CASE NO VE-21-89 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONIlVG ADJUSTOR PAGE 3 9. The appLcant retains the nght to operate a muu-day care center on the property without any zomng pernuts. A muu-day care center would allow twelve (12) or fewer children at the proposed site. The apphcant indicatied up to twenty-seven (27) children were necessary to make the center financlally viable. 10. The teswnony and letters of adjoinuig owners and residents wea e opposed to the proposal, due to the increase in tiaffic and noise at the site. 11. A peation was subnutted by the apphcant which supported the day care facility. The petiaon dhd not indicate how many children would potentially use the site if the proposal were approved. Other testimony was received which indicated property values would not be affected by the establishment of the day care center. DECISION From the foregoing Findings and Conclusions, the Zonung Adjustor DEIVIES the request for a vanance. DATED this 7th day of July,1989 , ouglas . Adams Zoning Adjustor Spokane County, Washuigton FII.ED: 1) Lon Wilson, apphcaat (Cenified/Return Receipt Mail), East 12818 31 st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 2) Parties of Reconi: Carol Okugawa, East 10009 48th Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 Julie M. Batder, East 12806 31st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 Munel M. Townsend, East 12808 31st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 D. Jay Williams, 13126 Guthne, Spokane, WA 99216 11+iarvin Wilson, East 12818 31st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 Laun Wilkerson, Route 3, Box 858-A, Otis Orchards, WA 99027 Lon Thison, East 12818 31st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 Joan O'Bnen, East 12904 31 st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 T. F Fuher, East 12908 31st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 Renee Lopez, East 12903 31 st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 Linda Cummings, East 12815 31 st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 Denise Mann, East 12805 31st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 CASE NO VE-21-89 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADNSTOR PAGE 4 t Jeff Moos, East 12804 31st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 D. Hayes, East 12710 31st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 Marvin A. Jenkin, East 12718 31st Aveaue, Spokane, WA 99216 Chrls Smith, East 12717 31st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 Venice Dowell, East 12706 31 st Avenue, Spolcane, WA 99216 Laune Peterson, East 12704 31 st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 Leslie Lantz, East 12619 31 st Avenue, Spokane, WA 99216 Boake Curtis, South 3021 Woodlawn, Spokane, WA 99216 Brett McLazzent, South 3017 Woodlawn, Spokane, WA 99216 Tammy Johnson, South 3016 Woodlawn, Sgokane, WA 99216 Jan Robbins, South 3013 Woodlawn, Spokane, WA 99216 Ju,a~rmm South 3007 Woodlawn, Spokane, WA 99216 ~09~ ~►~~Engineer's Office d) '~po`~ane Countyliealth District 5) Spokane County Utilities I?eparanent 6) Spokane County Deparanent of Building & Safety 7) Spokane County Fire Protecdon District No. 1 8) Planning Department Cross-refenence F'ile and/or Electronic File NOTE: ONLY TBE APPI.ICANT 4R AN OPPONENT OF RECORD MAY FII.E AN APPEAL WMHN TEN (10) CALEMDAR DAYS OF THE ABOVE DATE OF SIGNING. APPEAL MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A$100.00 FEE. APPEALS MAY BE FILED AT TBE SPOK;ANE COUNTY PLANNIING DEPARTMENT, BROADWAY CENTRE BUII,DING, NORTH 721 JEFFERSON STREET, SPOKANE, WA 99260 (Sections 4.25.090 and 4.25.100 of the Spokane County Zoning 4rdinance). . Rev. 5-3-89:rp/fcu / OFFICE OF THE COUNTY EhIGINEER SPOk Ah{E CQUNTY, WASHINGTON May 17, 1989 TO: SPOKANE COUNTY PLaNNING DEPARTMENT (Current Planninq AdrninistratUr) FROM: SPOk:ANE C(]UNTY ENG I NEER SUBJ: VE 21-89 re: Variances The County Engineering Department has reviewed the above referenced applicatian. The follawing comments are offered for inclusion in the Finda.ngs and Order as "Conditians of Approval" should the request be approved. 1. Direct Access to 32-nd Averiue from the subaect property is prohibited. ' ~ ~ t ~ `°rF'ko~~~ ~ ~ I " 1 1 S a 's' '''.t i PLANNING DEPARTMENT BROAOWA1f CENTRE BUILOING N 721 JEFFERSON STREET PHONE 456-2205 rx- SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99260 : ' . c , - 'SPOKANC COUN7n COURT NOYS[ 140TIIC1B O11y 37OKMlB ~OUNTlY ZOMNQ~ ADJUSTO1R PMII.II~ ~ARMQa DATE: June 7, 1989 TIME: 9:30 a.m. or as soon thereatter as possible PLACE: Spokane Countq Planning Department 2nd Floor Hearing Room, Broadway Centre Building North 721 Jefferson Street Spokane, WA 99260 AGENDA ITEM 3 Fil,e VE-21-89 - L O C A T I ON~ Generally located at the northwest corner of 32nd Avenue and Woodlawa Street in the SE 1/4 of Section 27, Township 25N, Range 44EWM- PR OPO S AL _ The applicant proposes to locate a nnrsery school oa a parcel having 13,000 square feet of lot area whereas, the Spokane County Zoning Code Section 4.05.060 requires a minimum of 15,000 square feet for tbis use. FXISTINC 2.ONri11C=: R-2 CROSSOVER : U. R-7 COMPREHENISIVE PLAN: Utban , SITE SIZE: Approximately 13,000 squsre feet APPLICANT: Lori Wilson E. 12818 31sL Avenue Spokane, WA 99216 ITEMS CARRIED OVER FROM PREVIOUS HEARINGS MAY BE HEARD FIRST, FOSSIBLY CAUSING DELAYS. LEGAL DESCRIPTTIONS AND PROJECT DE'I'AILS POR THESE P'ROJECTS ARE AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNIIVG DEPARIMENT FILES. APPEALS OF 1'HE DEQSION ON TI-E ABOVE LISTED CASE MAY ONLY BE FII.ED BY THE APPi.ICANT OR AN OPPONENT OF RECORD ACCOMPANIED BY A $100.00 FEE. (Secuons 4.25.090 and 4 25.100 of the Spokane County Zoning Ordinance.) ~ y ~ • IG' A E ~ ~Z Y~ ~ ~v E 13TN • ' . , _ s Y ~~Tr ~ T L ~w 1 E _ OL - ~ • ~ ~ i ~ ' • ~ ~ ~ CL ic ' ~L Z p7Z w,~,~ T~ nes ! d S~►Lr ~ ~ ~ to . . Ce~neterd J, ~s~ R~,Q 2yt~ ~ 3rd . a 0 , « r ~ i 24 . V40 74 5 i r 25T~ ~ ~ : pl ~ . . tbTH ° ~ . s ■ ' . , r~ ~T_2'_ 9 ` . , _ T~ b ' 1 f ~j ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~!3 SU 1 ' ~ ~ ~ . 40 129 at > Q ~ • , Av ENu ` ~ . . . ~ ~ ~ . . ~ ~ ~ o~ • ~ 4' t ~ 3 1 r'`~ ~ ~ . s SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNNO DEPART'M:NT A, UE 1-~ Certificate of Exemption No.: Application No.: ltcaat: ~•os' 14 wi" Agent: Y ~ Nata~ of App . Stract Address:--E j Zyp 14P ~ City. Phoae - Home:,.~~: ' ~~D. . fg Work:_ s~ ^ 70-~ : kaf)s State: • Code. ' Agents No. , Nasae of Property Owner(s): Street Address: Zi Phone - Home: p City: State: Code: Vvork: R.BQUESTED ACTION(S) (Circle appropriate acdoa): C~Va_rlaace)s) Condidonal Usa Penait Nonconforming Lot/Use -iver of Violation Temporary Use/Structure Othcr: CQDE:~^' ORDINANCE os-. o ~o k Cite Re ulations Sactioa(s): Propcr, aViolatioai g 4 p Raage: d4` Size:/~d~2 Enforcerncat: Y Towashi : Section, Existing Zoaiag: Comp. Plan Dcsignation; ~ AL ~~p Y N ASA~~Y N F~ DIST.f ~C~D BY: ~ PSSA YN L`~ •ng Date• . Porsonnel TakYng in Applicatioa: 01(-d Hean . + Existing Use of troperty: (ZZ'rl 1441 4 Describa Inteaded Proposal ia Terms of REQUESTED ACTTONS above: es;s Strcet Address of Property: Lagal D cription of Propert (include eascaieat, if~ epplicaple): ~ a~ ~ ~ 4Ad -7~ ~3 O Source af Le8al:_PG?~t~/`7-~UG ~~l,a►'~'7~ Parcel No(s)• Total amaunt of adjoining laad conuollcd by this owaor/sponsor: n,itZMP What iaterost do you bold in tho property? C r,4 Please list previous Planning Departmeat actioas involving this property: 401, 9 , i SWEAR, UNDER PENALTY OF PERNRY, THAT: (1) I AM THB OWNER OF RECOR.D OR AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR THE PROPOSED SITE,; (2) IF NOrI' THE OVVNER, WRIT'TF.N PERMISSION FROM SAID OWNER AUTHORIZINC3 MY ACTIONS ON HISIHER BEHALF IS ATTACHED: AND (3) ALL OF THE ABOVE RESFONSFS AND THOSE ON SUPPORTING DOCUNENTS ARE MADE TR Y AND T0 THE BFST OF MY KNOyVLEDGE. .Sigaed: ~ ~`0~ 4~~~.~ ~ ~ ~ Address: t~/q:6 Phone No.: f50 9 ) r9AS-8906 Date: 5--9-89 ~ Q •~S „ / I~ ~ ' • / / NOtaT ~ .1 0. ' Date: . , . Pag (Over) Revised 3-4-88 ~ - . , s t A. Ri1RDEN QF PRnOF It is necessary for tbe applicsnt or his/her representative to establish the reasons why the REQUESTED ACTION should be approved sad to literally put forth the basic casc. Accordingly, you sbould havc been given a form for your requested action (variance, conditional use, etc.) designed to help you present your case in a way whicb addresses the criteria wbich the Zoning Adjustor must consider. Please fill the form out and return lt with your application. If you did not get a form, ask the Planning Department personnel for advice oa how to proceed. B. SI(:N•OFF BY COUNTY DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER AGENCIES , (3COUNTY HEALTH DISTBICT a) Proposed method of water supply: b) Proposed method of sewage dispos : ~ A~reliminary consultation has bean held to discuss the proposal. The applicant has ea infoped u'rements and t da ds. ` (Slgaature) (Date) (Sign•off Waived) COUHTY EN GINEERING DEPARTMEN'T (Je-Yril 5%mn) A preliminary eoasultatioa has been hcld to discuss the proposal. The applicant has een informed f requlremeats aad standards. ' ~ _,)-T._8 9 (Sig ture) (Date) (Siga-off Waived) 3. (Waive if outside WMAB) A prelimiairy consultatioa bas beea held to discuss the proposal. The applicant bas been informed of requirements and standards. V\-,\, ?b Lt! 8~ (Signature) (Date (Sign-off Waived) Tho aevlican) is requireA to discuss the proposal witb . *o become informed of water system requirements and staxidards. The applicant is required to discuss the ptoposal with to become infornned of sewage disposal requiremeats and standards. 04. WATER PURVEYOR~ ;j~ha OSIMaive ' ' a) The proposal isPrsgow Iocated witbin tOc boundary of our future service area. b) The proposal is locatcd within the boundary of our currcnt district. c) We able to serve this site with adequate water. d) Satisfactory arrangements MM/have , not been made to serve this pro al. ~ ~i ~ (Signatu ~ (Date) (Sign•off Waived) G)SEWERAGE PURYEYORT (If other than Spokaae County) A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant has becn infornaed of requirements d tandards. ~ (Si nature) Date Si ~ Waived S t ) ( 8 ) Page 2 of 4 -W . , t APPLICANT'S FORM NAME: Lori Wilson FILE: I. YARIANCES ' A. Wi11 the variance authorizP a use otherwise prohibited in this zone? Y85 ; NO X ; Comment: Insofar as the Snokane Countv Code (SCC hereinaf ter) 4.05.040(f) authorizes family daycare homes, and (g) authorizes many daycares the type of Ug, i,e., prov_ ding carP for young children is authorized in this zone. Pursuant to SCC 4.05.060(f), nursery schools are suthorized as long as there is 15 _000 sauare feet with 125 feet of frM tae e. B. Will special circumstances a licable to the property (such as siZe, shape, topography, surroundings when combined with the standards of the Zoning Ordinance, create practical difficulties for use of the property and/or deprive the property of rights and privileges common to other properties in the vicinity and similia,r zone classification? Ye5 X ; NO ; C011mtE11t: gince nurserv schools are euthorized in an R2 Zone, but because of our lot size, we do not fulfill the 15,000 square foot requirement, this variamce will allow us to use our nropertv as others are currentlv using their property within similar zoning. There is another daycare facility within one mile of our address onPratine in an R2 classification. C. Will the granting of the variance be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the vi ci ni ty and zone? Yes ; No X ; COmmetlt5 The variance to allaw a nursery school will allow us to provide a service to the community. tacted a realtor who has indicated to us that the operation of a nursery school in a neigh- bnrhood doeg not have a detrimental iMUnt on,_phe neighborhood with regard to property values. Furthermore, the conduct of this type of business is not detri- mental to the public welfare but enhances the public welfare and is not injurious to property or improvements in this vicinity. D. Does strict application of the zoning standard create an unreasonable burden i n 1 i ght of purpose to be served by the standard? -Yes NO ; COmmeTlt:tJe have been Rranted a provisional license from DSHS conditional upon a variance, and our property fulfills their requirements for 27 ehildren. We are within 2.500 s4uare feet of ineeting the 15,000 square foot requirement. Furthermore, we have a large playground area for the children. E. Would relaxation of the zoning standard make a more environmentally sensitive or energy-conserving project or encourage continued or netiv use of an historic property? Yes ; No X ; Comment: F. Will a broader, public need or interest be served by granting verse denyi ng the vari ance? Yes __Z ; No ; Comment: We want to fulfill a need in our community for quality child care. Attached as Exhibit is a neighborhood pet;tion which was s3gned by all the neighbors that we contacted exceut one indi- cating that they have no objection to our proposal. A1so, we have 17 children nrpsPn 1 v on oir wai ting 1,~,t, See Exhibit * G. Is the case for a variance supported by other like or similar situations in the vicinity and in similar zones? Yes ; No ; Comnent: ,,,,knmn (continued on reverse side) ' , ti _ - ~ ~ - , I ~ l l ~ so ; . ftN~~ t t ~ - , r . ~ - - ~ I I YS ~ p ltr~t ~ } I 1 K ~ l 1 y , ~e I ~ W M , ~ I , ♦ ~ / j ~ f•~ II ~ 1 1 I <r ~~/`y I ~ ~ I f. I u" ~ ti 1 1 ~ ' 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 I ~ 1 ~1 i 4~ 1 Q l y T .r ~ b7 L t C ~ • ~ } ~ / ~ ~ I 1 ' ` ! ~ . ~ n ; - _ , ~ ~ ~p0 ~ _ .t w • _ . . ~ SFOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTIVENT Certf ficate of ExemPtioD No.: ~ Application N arae of APPlicant: s~ 1, N .Agcat: Y N Street Address:--c s: ~ I IA- ~p Phoae - Home:' ' o~ ~ State: • Code: Work:-!~ " ^-S~ City. Agents No. Nawe of Property Owner(s): Street Address: 4~2" ' Zip Pbone - Home: C'ty: Statc: Code: Wo~: , ~ REQUESTED ACTION(S) (Circla appropriate action): Yariance')s) Coaditional Use Permtt Noaconformtng Lot/Use alver of Violatioa Temporary Use/Structure Othor: FOR araM USE oNLY CODE: ORDII4ANCE Cite Regulatioas Sectton(s), . p,S'-L p e D J~C Psopar p/`Violation/ Section: 2-1 TowoshiP:~~ R8a8a: ~ Sizo:/I ae Enforcement: Y N Existiag Zoaiag: ~^Z Comp. Plaa Designation• U ~ 4 PSSA YN L~IAY N ASA Y FIRE DIST.t I CHI•'CKED BY: ~ I Hearing Date: Persoaael Takiag ia Application: , . Existing Use of Property: (4~Z 1- 14 It I Describe Intended Proposal in Tarms of REQUESTED ACI'IONS above: A --h. + low 93' Street Address of Property: *;5;a r&P 4LS e2 Lcgal D cription of Properi (1 cludc caseaaeat, If applicale): , IA4 d? 4~ ~ J44 r 0) Parcel No(s): ~7T4/ -3 - &.2 Q Source of Legal:~~~~ 5 Total amount of adjoiniag land controllcd by this ownor/spoasor: ~7-~ What iaterest do you hold ia the property? . r, OP Please list previous Planning Department actions involving tbis property: I S WEAR, UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, THAT: (1) I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OR AUTHORI7_ED AGENT FOR'THE PROFOSED SITE; (2) IF NOtT THE OWNElt, WRMEN PERMISSION FROM SAID OWNER AUTHORIZINC3 MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHAI.F IS ATTACHED: AND (3) ALI.OF'THE ABOVE RESPONSES AND THOSE ON SUPPORTIIVC3 DOCUMENTS ARE MADE TR Y AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. Signad: Address: Phone No.: Date: NOTARY SEAL: Notary: Date: Page 1 of 4 (Over) Revised 3-4-88 ; 1 a► I` • . A. BL1 DEN OF PRQOF It is aecessary for tbe applicant or his/ber representative to establish the reasans why the REQUESTED ACTION should be approved and to literatly put forth the basic case. Accordingly, you should bave, bcen given a fona for your requested action (variance, conditioaal use, etc.) designed to belp you preseat your case in a way wbicb addresses the criteria which the Zoaing Adjustor must consider. Please fill tbe form out and return it with your application. If you did not get a form, ask the Planniag Departmeat personnel for advice on how to proceed. B. SIGN.OFF,IIY COCTNTY D.PARTMENTS AND OTHER AGENCIES , GCOUNIX A tc a) Proposed method of water supply: b) Proposed method of sewage disposa : ~ A reliminary consultation tias beou held to discuss the proposal. The appl►cant bas~ en iaformed u' emeats aad t da ds. .r9q ~ (Sigaature) (Date) (Sign-off Waived) ' Z, (`ni1NTY ENGINEERING DEP~RTMENT („~YN 51 ms) A preliminary eoasultatioa has tteen hcld to discuss the proposal. Tbe applicane has een informed f requirements aad standards. ' re) (Date) (Sign•off V~aived) u 1.0 (Siit 3. (Vyaive if outside yVMAB) ( J A prelimiakryry coasultation bas been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant bas been Informed of requirements and standards. ~w L,<:Q_ ?3~ - (Sigaature) (Date (Siga-off Waived) ThG avplican) is requireA to discuss the proposal with * :o become informed of water system requirements and staddards. [ j The applicant is required to discuss the proposal with to become infornaed of sewage dlsposal requirements aad staadards. 0.4 WATEB PURVEYORi fWaivs if outside CWSSAI a) The proposal located within the boundary of our future servico ares. b) The proposal i,glis not located witbin the boundary of our current district. c) We arejare not able to serve this site with adequate water. d) Satisfactory arrangements havelhave not been made to serve this proposal. (Signature) (Date) (Sign-off yVaived) S. SEWERAGE PURVEYOR: (If other than Spokane County) A prelimiaary consultatioa has been held to discuss the proposal The applicant has been inforrued of requirernents and standards (Signature) (Date) (Sign-off Waived) Fage 2 of 4 r s + ~ . NAML 46 Y` 1 l s~~1 VARIANCE NO._LlG B 91 ADDRESS 8 ADMINISTEtATIVE VARIANCE ~ PHONE-HOME~~ ~i'~~+TORR S o2. 7 , T :~-S~N, R ~ NAME , ROAD NAME ~•Z ~ ~ The following documents are needed before the Engineer's Department can begin proceasiug your variance application as approved. k-""'RECORDED copy of deed contract or conveying instrument these may be obtained from the County Auditor, 2nd floar of the Courthouse - Document must displap AUDITORS STAMP. ~ legal description of your property ` ription of qour access easenent W'a listing of the nsmes of individuals who will be sigaing the documents which will be prepared by the Engineer's Department. These individual names should appear as the persoa(e) legally sign their name* a current Assessor's map which depicts the location of your property and ownership micro-run. These may be obtained from the the County Asseaaor, lst floor, of the Courthouse, Jefferson entrance, 2nd door on the left. The necessary documents will be prepared by the Engineer's Department, Rightrof Waq Section, upon provision of the information noted above. You will be notified when the documents are ready for sigaature. The documents may be sent to you, however, IT SHOULD BE NOTID THAT ALL SIGNATURES Mt1ST BE NOTARIZED. The Engineer's Department does have notaries available if you choose to sign the documents at our office. Please allow up to ten (10) days for processin.g of documents. Please call when ready Please mail when ready Notice to Public No.4t6f Right-of Way CONIlKENTS Right-of Way Agent Forward to you from 05090 ~ - ~ MARYIN L wiLsoN~ 1714 LoaI E wILsoN E 12818 31ST AVE 509 928-8906 SPOKAN E, WA 99216 ~ 9 28'8✓1251 ay to the ~ ~ - - order of noliars v1l~hingAonTivst Bamic SPOIUMWASHINCiTON 89210-Zi2T Memo Signed 1: 12 5 1000894 1021841061817116 L 7 i4 Ratk) Mnurttam Bank Note B hfanusc(v . -~r _ ~ - 5-19~ ~ . ~4) pote , 1 ie)O f rom DolictIrs c~ Rece• ~Yed , ~ ~ . Address 4a4C ^ ~ ~ 9920 ~ FOr, pCCouµt CAS" ~ ~ ~,~.~.~i • I CV*" t gYpMT PAIC 09t~ER + gKaoa 1 ~