1981, 05-20 Findings of Fact Decision BEFORE THE ZONING ADJUSTOR OF
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
IN THE MATTER OF:
APPLICANT: JAMES ROSENTHAL ) DECISION'
REQUEST: RELAXATION OF SETBACK REQUIREMENT) FINDINGS OF FACT
COUNTY CODE: 4.04A.090 (a) (1) ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
FILE NUMBER: VE-39-81
PARCEL #: 21544-1408
DATE OF HEARING: MAY 13, 1981
DATE OF DECISION: MAY 20, 1981
DECISION
The application is approved.
•
This decision will allow an addition to a
garage to be set back 25 feet from the frcnt
property line.
INTRODUCTION
This matter being the consideration by the Zoning Adjustor for Spokane
County and pursuant to Chapter 4.25, Section 4.25.010 the Zoning Adjustor
has the authority to hear and decide such matters coming before him. After
conducting a public hearing to receive all public testimony and after re-
viewing the public record, examining available information, and visiting the
property and surrounding area, the Zoning Adjustor in accordance with Chapter
36.70.810 Revised Code of Washington, and Section 4.25.03 of the county zoning
ordinance hereby makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
hereinbelow stated.
The applicant, James Rosenthal, filed an application with the Planning
Department on March 9, 1981 requesting a variance approval for relaxation of
the front yard setback. The property is located east of Spokane in Section
21, Township 25, Range 44.
That on May 13, 1981 a hearing was held before the Zoning Adjustor. After
conclusion of testimony the matter was taken under advisement for review and
decision.
FINDINGS OF FACT
I• .
The applicant is proposing to extend his garage five (5) feet into the '
front yard setback area. This would result in the structure being located
25.2 feet from the front property line or 50.2 feet as measured from the
centerline of Wilbur Road.
II.
It is found that Wilbur Road has 50 feet of right-of-way width and is
considered a minor residential street.
III.
The applicant testified that expansion to the rear is not possible be-
cause of the location of the sewage drainfield. It was further reported that
the style or character of the existing structure will not be altered.
IV.
That the proposal does not require new utility services nor require any
change in existing public services.
-eT PAGE 2
• VE-39-81
V.
Reporting County departments have no specific recommendations regard-
ing this proposal. However, a building permit will be required as per
Section 301 Uniform Building Code.
VI.
From on-site review, there are other properties within the immediate
neighborhood which have residences located approximately 25 feet from the
front property lines. Therefore this action does not constitute a granting
of a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations placed upon other
properties in the vicinity and under the same zone classification.
VII.
The opportunity was afforded at the hearing to any interested party•to
testify regarding this proposal. No one appeared or any written comments
were received in opposition.
VIII.
Any Finding of Fact stated hereinbelow which is deemed a Conclusion of
Law hereinafter stated, shall be adopted as the same.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
That the Zoning Adjustor of Spokane County has jurisdiction over the
issuance of the building permit for the project to the applicant pursuant
to the provisions of Chapter 36.70.810 RCW and Section 4.25.030 of the
Spokane County Zoning Ordinance.
II.
That the applicant submitted an application to the Planning Department
requesting a public hearing before the Zoning Adjustor, and that pursuant to •
Chapter 36.70.840 and Section 4.24.040 of the zoning ordinance, notice for a
public hearing was given through the United States mail to all property
owners within a radius of 300 feet from the subject property.
III.
That all citizens notified and public agencies having [urisdiction were
afforded the opportunity to testify or submit written comments on the proposed
project.
IV.
The applicant was able to demonstrate to the Zoning Adjustor that there
is a unique hardship associated with the subject property in that any expan-
sion of his residence to the rear would encroach on the on-site sewage disposal
system.
V.
The applicant's request for an addition containing approximately 115 square
feet is considered a minor request which will have the least amount of impact
on the surrounding neighborhood. Therefore denial would be an unreasonable
use of zoning law in this instance.
VI.
From the above Findings and Conclusions, the Zoning Adjustor concluded
that this action would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, and
general welfare.
PAGE 3
VE-39-81
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The applicant shall obtain a building permit from the Department of
Building and Safety and shall conform to all code requirements.
II.
The applicant shall construct the addition as presented in this appli-
cation. That the addition may be located no closer than 25 feet to the front
property line.
ENTERED THIS DAY OF /1(c" , 1981 PURSUANT 'f0 THE AUTHORITY
GRANTED UNDER COUNTY CODE, SECTIQ4 4.25.030.
•
THOMAS L. DAVIS
ZONING ADJUSTOR FOR SPOKANE
COUNTY, WASHINGTON
ATTEST BY:
CLERK TO THE ZON NG ADJUSTOR
A . — —' , _�._ 1 Vi 1.11%IithA..1, Ari,., alAT2'i OF % ASHINGTOI
Extra charge for setting LOT markers. Survey for Loan purposes.
I
Scale 1" = 20 Ft. Surveyed:December 24 1964
I hereby certify that I surveyed the above described property and that I find the improvements to
be on the premises in question and that they do not encroach on the property lying adjacent thereto—
. EXCEPT:
NO improvements encroach on these premises—Except: cp4..„ .17..s
OWNER or BUYERSARGENT & 7=I.Ac;..\.
?`, James Rosenthal. Registered Land .Sur;elors
•• • ti'' • • dOhl? I'honc Iii' .--c l�G✓
/4Z 33
�'
4
--
,r,
in A
i IIti
r4--
C I -, o
tri C\i • 0
c '
ii Jam. '_7 c:../•G'r
'
-J
.ti-t O uJ, pO id fr., �C
( t t /43 01 '
KI490 .
/'
'`) 1--k
N
1-
f I �\`