Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995, 05-16 Permit: CUE-3-95 Findings of Fact , 1 li0g ; (,)&eifiAlfilr.r 5 P O K A N E _. 'I ,- "I�1p°'°f�fluk� � I III F.r;, C O U N -I' Y t 't I -Sc PLANNING DEPARTMENT WALLIS D. HUBBARD,DIRECTOR MEMORANDUM TO TOM DAVIS Division of Buildings FROM: THOMAS G. MOSHER,Al Senior Planner DATE: May 16, 1995 SUBJECT: FILE NO. CUE-3-95 Please flag the parcel number involved in this case and/or your file so that a thorough review is accomplished by the Planning Department. This review might be triggered by the Building Permit, Certificate of Occupancy,final inspection, Change of Use Permit or the application for a sanitary waste disposal system. Thank you for your cooperation. hrd 4'ery4/ fg-. u7iLITItS 9IVIStoNJ wrvi_ uu o1,, - AttA4.44...... itut *An YU•14 4,v..,14,-.4 ri r' ' ower -6/ / , , ,,,p027 °,, / , 7 /14 O< 1026 WEST BROADWAY AVENUE • SPOKANE,WASHINGTON 99260-0240 • (509)456-2205 • FAX (509)456-2243 • TDD: (509)324-3166 ZONING ADJUSTOR SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF A CONDITIONAL ) FINDINGS OF FACT, USE PERMIT FOR A HOME INDUSTRY ) CONCLUSIONS, (retail sales of crafts and antiques) ) AND DECISION APPLICANT: Penny Simonson (Watson) FILE: CUE-3-95 COMPANION 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 County 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,approximately 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 public earing held on April 12, 1995,the Zoning Adjustor rendered a written decision on May /W , 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 lightly graveled. c. A 7 foot tall bather fence partially exists on the north property line of the property and is apparently 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 presently 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 displays 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 respective 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 recently 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 10 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"DETAILED DEFINITION: B. Characteristic Features: The presence of neighborhood commercial business is described as acceptable to be found with the predominant residential uses. b. Under"DETAILED DEFINITION: D. Non Compatible 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 compatible 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 activity business operated subordinate to the primary residential use. HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson(Watson) 2 a CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 3 d. Objective 1.1.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. The 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 barns 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 meeting the standards of section 14.616.240.4 of the Zoning Code of Spokane County, the section pertaining to the conditional use permit 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 meeting 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 determining if the ". . .property . . .retain(s)its residential appearance and character. . . ," the definitions of key words from Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 10th 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 compatibility in the given instance. But,pursuant to 14. 404.101,the requested conditional use permit 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 surrounding 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 compatibility. In the instant situation,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. HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson(Watson) ' Y CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE 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 be 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 perception 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 nearly 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 Permit could eliminate the validity 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 Permit or Certificate of Occupancy for the building from the Spokane County Division of Buildings. The record does 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 parking identification and the possible need to provide public restrooms,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 Buildings. 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 probable significant adverse impacts to the physical environment. A Mitigated Determination of HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson (Watson) CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 5 Nonsignificance(MONS)was issued on March 13, 1995 and sent to ten (10) agencies and parties of interest. The 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 environmental 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 refmishing furniture and other processes that were suggested by comments in the checklist. This resulted in a disclosure by the applicant that very little refmishing was done at the site. The quantities 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 be reduced in size and not be offensive. Traffic will be generated by the continued operation of the craft store; but,traffic is fed to the site by Wellesley Avenue,a minor arterial. The residential property to the immediate southeast,has fenced its property,which effectively blocks the view of any busy activity at the craft store site,and furthermore 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 HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson(Watson) k CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR 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 family 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 parking 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 surrounding area,and may only slightly 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 location,parking lot definition,visual privacy of the property to the north,etc. HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson(Watson) w CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE 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)concept. 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 Cy, 93 Wn. 2d, 1148 (1980). The Plan was used for the development of the Zoning Code, which in turn authorizes conditional use permit for home industries under certain qualifying conditions and circumstances. 4. Some aspects of a home industry were not raised as concerns or anxieties 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 Determination 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 ULID in the future. It also includes provisions to pave the parking lot area, striping it with paint and including tire stops to keep cars contained within the parking lot area. The parking 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 needed to make the use compatible with other permitted activities in the same vicinity 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 permitted 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 HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson(Watson) CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 8 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL I. GENERAL 1. The following conditions 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 administratively 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,the 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 determination to renew the permit shall be sent to adjacent property owners, with a description of the right to appeal such administrative determination. 4. Additional improvements or alterations of the site shall consist of the following and be installed within 90 days of the final disposition of this permit, unless adjusted by the Division for weather interference: HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson(Watson) CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 9 a. The applicant shall cause the west facing windows of the public areas of the shop to be lightly frosted, sufficient to distort the vision of anyone looking from the inside to the outside. b. The upstairs part of the barn shall 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 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 bather 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 administratively 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 good 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 shall 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 limitations to restrict the volume of business if the volume of business grows to the point of threatening the residential 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 reconsideration of HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson(Watson) • 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 Division of Planning shall prepare and record with the Spokane County Auditor a Title Notice noting that the property in question is subject to a variety of special conditions 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 Title Notice should be recorded within the same time frame as allowed for an appeal and shall only be released,in full or in part, by the Division of Planning. The Title 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 Act. Design/development concerns include: FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROADS;FIRE HYDRANT/FLOW;APPROVED WATER SYSTEMS; BUILDING ACCESSIBILITY; CONSTRUCTION TYPE;OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION;EXITING; EXTERIOR WALL PROTECTION;AND ENERGY CODE REGULATIONS. 2. The applicant shall comply with any requirements of a Change of Use permit 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 Commissioners 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 permits 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 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 assessments)on the property as a HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson(Watson) CASE NO. CUE-3-95 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 11 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. V. SPOKANE COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT 1. Sewage disposal method 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 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 FO "MENSES AND INCONVENIENCE INCURRED BY THE APPLIC• IF THE PROJECT APPROVAL IS OVERTURNED OR ALTERED UPON APPEAL. DATED this / ;111- day of May, 1995. ... .4r1./J _4..!1 THO • S G. OSHER,AICP ' •ping .• djustor Spok. e Coun y,Washington FILED: 1) Applicant(Certified/Return Receipt Mail) 2) Opponents of Record 3) Spokane Division of Engineering and Roads HD/CUE-3-95 Simonson(Watson) 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 FILE AN APPEAL WITHIN TEN(10)CALENDAR DAYS OF THE ABOVE DATE OF SIGNING. APPEAL MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY$215.00 FEE APPEALS MAY BE FILED AT THE SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF PLANNING,PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING, 1026 W.BROADWAY AVENUE,SPOKANE,WA 99260 (SECTION 14.412.042 OF THE ZQNIrODE FOR SPOKANE COUNTY). DEADLINE FOR APPEAL IS 4:00 PM ON 5//?-(o HD/CUE-3-9S Simonson(Watson)