ZE-20-00
t ` ' , , •
SPOKANE COUNTY HEARING EYAMINER
RE: Zone Reclassification from the Urban )
Residential-3.5 (UR-3.5) Zone to the ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
Urban Residential-22 (UR-22) Zone; ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,
Applicant: Jeff Morse ) AND DECISION
File No. ZE-20-00 )
1. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL AND DECISION
Proposal: Application for a rezonc from the Urban Residential-3.5 (UR-3.5) zone to the
Urban Residential-22 (UR-22) zone, for the developinent of 125 multi-family dwelling units on
approximately S acres of land.
Decision: Approved, subject to conditions.
The Hearing Examiner has reviewed the zone reclassification application and the evidence
of record, and hereby adopts the following findings of fact, conclusions of law and decision:
H. BACKGROUND/FINDINGS OF FACT
A. Generallnformation:
Applicant: Jeff Morse, Storhaug Engineering, 1322 North Monroe, Spokane, WA 99201
Site Owner: Sonrise Land LLC, 11219 East Sundown Drive, Spokane, WA 99206
Location: Generally located south of and adjacent to Valleyway Avenue, north of and
adjacent to the right of way for Main Avenue, in the SW '/4 of Section 13, Township 25 North,
Range 44 EVVM, Spokane County, Washington.
Parcel Number: County Assessor's tax parcel nos. 45133.1011,.0901, and.0902
Zoning: Urban Residential-3.5 (UR-3.5) zone. The site is also located in the Aquifer
Sensitive Area and the Public Transit Benefit Area designated by the County Zoning Code.
Comprehensive Plan: Urban category. The property is also locatcd within the Aquifer
Sensitive Area, Priority Sewer Service Area and Urban lmpact Area designated by the
Comprehensive Plan.
IUGA: The site is located inside the interim urban growth area boundal-ies designated by
the County pursuant to the State Growth Management Act.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 1
-0 •
• ' 7 , ~
Envaronmental Review: ADetennination of Nansigiiificaiice (DNS) was issued on
Deceinber 15, 2000.
Site Descript:on: The site is approxii-Tlately Saci-es jn size, is generally flat, aiid cansists of 3
tax parcels. An existing residence, and associated aut'buildings are found in the northwest Rartion
of the subjec.t property. T'he renla,inder ofthe site is vacaiit.
Area Road Systern: Valley Way Avenue in the viciiliCy is designated as aCollector Arterial
by the County Arterial Road Plan. .Broadway Aveilue, Sprague Avenue aizd Su11iva.n Road in tlle
area are designated as Friilcipa1 A.rtea-ials. Maizi Aventie soutlz of ti7e site consists Of an
unirnpraveci cou7ity right of way-
, Ttle :I,nterstate 90 fr~eway (1-90)lSullivan R,aad freeway interchange is lacated over a half
I1`l11e ]-iOrthweSt of tI1e site, di=t distax7ce. Tlze Couiity at7d zhe WashinatoTi State Depart2~lerit of
Traxisportation (WSDOT) are scli.eduled to ~-iake irnprovements to sucli iiiterchange 13-A 2001, to
II-npI'QVe acCesS a11~ trar1C flOVI(. Tt1c C[]Ullty FeGe17C1y widened EvCrgTet']'1 Road, lacated so1-ne
distance west of Sullivan Raad, to 4 laiies, ar1d WSDOT'i 5 1ri the proCeSS of C0mp1eting a t7eW
freeway iiltercliange at Evergreen Road and 1-90. The interchange project wi11 pravide oa-i and
aff-rarnps for fteeway access, and an overpass over T--90 tY~~t will extend Evergrf,~en Road fr'om
Mission A-venue to Indiar~~ Avenue, on the north side of I-90.
Surroundirtg coaditions: Sprague Avenue and Sullivan Road comprise rnaja~ i-raffic and
corrimercial corridars in the area,. The land lying betweeri Broadvvay Aven.ue and In,terstate 90,
betveen Sulliuan Road and Canklin Road, is designated in the Major Commercial categoi-y of
the Comprellensive Plasi, is zaned Reg'tonal Business (B-3), and is developed with major
commercial iFSes ar vacant land. This includes a recenlly developed Walmart store. Tlae
Spokane VaTley Mall, a large regional shopping mal1, aiid other nearby retail uses, have recently
be~~-i developed northwest of the I-901Sullivarl Raad intercharzge.
The land lyiizg directly north, east and uxest of the. site is designated in the Urban category of the
Coxs-iprehensive Plan. The Iand lacated near or adjacent to the site, to the east and west, is zoned
Urban Residential-3,5 (U-R-3.5), and as developed vvith single-family hotnes on ]ots of various
size, or lies vacant. The rectangular area of land lying betweei~ the site and Valley Way Avenue
is zoned T,TR-3.5 and is impraved with ? single-fanlily resideiices. A strip of land abutting the
site an ~he ufest is vacant, while ~~e 2.2-acre parce1 that abuts the depth of the site on the east
contains a single-,tamily xesidence. Residences ar.e found along Canl-lin Raad easter1y ❑f the site.
The land located nortll of the site across ValleyWay Avenue is zaned UR-3.5 anci U'rban
Residentia]- i(UR-?), and is developed with single-fami]y fiomes on ua-ban-sized lots and or
larget parools. Furtlier t+o the north, a 10-acre. pa.rcel z.Qned LTR-3.5 is propos+ed for developmeni
of a liospice care center, wsth access provided to Conk]in Raad.
T'he land lacated along Sullivan Raad and Sprague Avenue in the area is designated in the MajQr
Commercral category. 'The Majar Commerci.al categai-y extends north of Spra.gue Avenue to
Nlain Avenue extended, in the, area, sautherly of the site. The land lyln'g d'rectly soizthwest of
the site is zoned Utban Residential-22 (UP,-22), ancf is developed with aii apartanent camplex.
Th~-, remaiiider of the land lying southerly of the site, betvveen Sprague Avenue and Mail'i
HE Findin.gs, Conclusions and DecisiorI ZE-20-00 P age 2
~ ' • ' .
Avenue, is primarily zoned and developed for major cominercial uses. A large Community
Business (B-2) zone, improved with a Fred Meyers store, is located approximately 250 feet
southwest of the site, at the nortlleast corner of Sprague and Sullivan.
A number of recent land use actions have taken place in the vicinity of the site, which allow
more intensive commercial or residential development and zoning, as discussed on page 2 of the
Staff Report.
Proposal: Application for a zone i-eclassification from the UR-3.5 zone fio the UR-22 zone, for
the development of multi-family residences. A revised sitc plan of record was submittcd at the
public hearing, dated 1-3-01. The site plan illustrates the westerly portion of the site developed for
SO senior housing units, contained in several single-story buildings. The site plan illustrates the
easterly portion of the site developed for 75 general multi-family dwelling units, in a total of five
(5) 2.5-story buildings. The site plan also illustrates a ceiitra] recreation area and an optional
maintenance building.
The maximum building height indicated on the site plan is 38 feet, which Would apply to the 2.5
story buildings proposed in the easterly portion of the project. The building coverage illustrated on
the site plan is approximately 21%, and the residential density of the project is 15.6 dwelling units
per acre. Required perimeter landscaping is illustrated along the various perimeters of the site.
Sight-obscuring screening, required by the UR-22 zone along the perimeter of the site acijacent to
UR-3.5 zoning, is not illustrated on the site plan. The projECt would be ser-ved witll public sewer,
through an extension in the Main Avenue right of way.
B. ProceduralInformation:
Applicable Zoning Regulations: Spokane County Zoning Code Chapters 14.402 and 14.622
Hearing Date and Location: January 3, 2001, Spokane County Public Works Building,
Lower Level, Commissioners Assembly Room, 1026 West Broadway, Spokane, WA.
Site Visits: January 2 and February 19, 2001
Notiees: Mailed: December 18, 2000, by applicant
Posted: December 18, 2000, by applicant
Published: December 15, 2000) by County '
Compliance: The legal requirements for public notice have been met.
Hearing Procedure: Pursuant to County Resolution Nos. 96-0171 and 96-0294
Testimony:
Tammy Jones Scott Engelhard
Division of Planning Division of Engineering
1026 West Broadway 1026 West Broadway
Spokane, WA 99260-0240 Spokane, WA 99260
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 3
,
Jerry Storhaug Grant Person .
1322 North Monroe 11219 East Sundown
Spokane, WA 99201 Spokane, WA 99206
John Konen John Stock
110 West Cataldo 2335 North Bank Road
Spokane, WA 99201 Columbus, OH 43220
Todd Prescott Bill White
8585 Woodvine Drive 176 South Stevens
Hayden, ID 83835 Spolcane, WA 99221
Dorothy Ricgel Arthtir Dryver
503 North Conklin 16414 Easi Main
Veradale, WA 99037 Veradale, WA 99037
Grant Rice Don Rader
16620 East Valleytivay 2] 9 North Conklin
Veradale, WA 99037 Vet-adale, WA 99037
Dolores Eberspeber
211 North Conklin
Veradale, WA 99037
Items Noticed: Spokane County Generalized Comprehensive Plan, 1996 Update to
Comprehensive Wastewater Management Plan (CWM.P), County Zoning Code, County Cocie,
County Standards for Road and Sewer Construction, County Guidelincs for Stornlwater
1'vlanagement, County official zoning maps, and County Arterial Road Plan maps. County
Resolution Nos. 99-0261 (revising Road Standards), 97-0874 (revising interim regulations for
County ICJGAs), 96-0585 (adopting 1996 Update to CWMP), 96-0294 (Hearing Examiner Rules
of Procedure), 96-0171 (Hearing Examiner Ordinance), and 85-0900 (adopting Zoning Code, and
Program to Implement Zoning Code). Final land use decisions referenced in Staff Report and in
this decision.
Procedural Matter: The Examiner left the record open after the public hearing to allow
County Engineering to submit additional written coinments on traffic issues, and responses
thereto by others. On January 22, 2001, a letter was received from Joseph anci Sophia Wetzler, in
response to the letter from County Engineering. The record was closed on January 23, 2001,
upon receipt of a letter from Storhaug Engineering, on the applicant's behalf, responding to the
letter from County Engineering.
III. LA.ND USE ANALYSIS
FINDINGS 4F FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
A. Aupi-oval criteria
In considering a rezone application, Washijlgton case law generally provides that 1) there is
no presumption in favor of the rezone, 2) the applicant for the rezone must prove that conditions
have substantially changed in the area since the last zoning of the property, and 3) the rezone
proposal rnust bear a substantial relationship to the public health, safety or welfare. Parkridge v.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 4
•
i , .
Seattle, 98 Wn.2d 454, 462, 573 P.2d 359 (1978); and BjaYnson v. Kitsap County, 78 Wn. App.
840, 899 P.2d 1290 (1995).
Some Washington cases have dispensed with the changed circumstancES requirement where
the rezone specifically implemented the policies of the comprehensive plan. I3jaj'nson v. Kitsap
County, supra; Save Our- Rural Enviro»»>ejit v. Snolrornish Courrty, 99 Wn.2ci 363, 370-371
(1983); and TLigwelt v. Kir.rirus Counry, 90 wn. App. 1, S, 951 P.2d 272 (1999).
A comprehensive plan is considered as a general blueprint for land use regulation. Only
general conformance with a conlprehensive plan is required for approval of a rezone proposal.
Citizei7s for Mouiit Vernon v. City of Mount Ver-non, 133 Wiz. Zd 861, 873 (1997); and Ccrthcaj-t v.
Snohomislr CoLtftty, 96 Wn.2d 201, 211-12 (1981).
Where the policies of a comprehensive plan conflict with zoning regulations, the provisions
of tlie zoning code will usually be construed to prevail. See Weyerhaeusej- v. Pierce Counry, 124
Wn.2d 26, 43 (1994); C01.1g'C1Y Mt. ASSOCS. V. Klllg COlli'lly, 111 Wn.2d 742, 755-57 (1988); and
Nugutani Bros. v. Cornmissioners, 108 Wn.2d 477, 480 (1987).
The County Hearing Examiner Ordinance authorizes the Hearing Examiner to grant, deny
or grant with such conditions, modifications and restrictions as the Examiner finds necessary to
make a land use application compatible with the Spokane County Gencralized Comprehensive
Plan and development regulations. See County Resolution No. 96-0171, Attachment "A",
paragraphs 7(d) and section 11. Development regulations include, without limitation, the
County Zoning Code, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the County's Local
Environmental Ordinance (chapter 11.10 of Spokane County Code).
Section 14.402.020 of the County Zoning Code authorizes amendments to the Code based
on any one of six (6) grounds, without differentiating between amendments to the text of the
Zoning Code and amendments to the official zoning map. Zoning Code 14.402.020(1)
authorizes the Code to be amended if the change is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan
and is not detrimental to the public welfare...". Zoning Code 14.402.020(2) authorizes a Code
arnendment where "[c]hanges in economic, technological, or land use conditions has occurred to
warrant modification of this Code...". These are the most relevant criteria for consideration of a
site-specific rezone application.
Section 14.100.104 of the County Zoning Code states that the provisions of the Code shall
be interpreted to carry out and implement the purpose and intent of the Comprehensive Plan, and
the general plans for physical development of the county adopted by the Board of County
Commissioners. Zoning Code 14.100.106 indicates tllat when the provisions of the Zoning Code
conflict with the Comprehensive Plan, or other adopted plans and development regulatiocls, the
more restrictive provisions shall govern to the extent legally permissible and the Zoning Code
provisions will be met as a minimum.
The Comprehensive Plan indicates that the decision guidelines stated in the various
sections of the Plan should be used as a resource and guide for approving specific land uses.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 5
• , (
I
B. The proposed rezone, as conditioned, generally conforms with the Spokane County
Generalized Comprehensive Plan; bears a substantial relationship to and will not be detnmental
to the nublic health, safety and general welfare; and complies witli the Spokane County Zoning
Code and other applicable development reaulations.
1. Apnlicable policics of Comprehensive Plan
a. Urban categorv
The site is designated in the Urban catcgory of the Comprehensive 1'lan. The Urban
category is intended to providc the opportunity for a"citylike" environment, which includes
various land uses, residential developmenfi and a high level of public facilities and urban
services. 1t is primarily a residential categoiy of single-fanlily, two-family, multi-family, and
condominium buildings along tvith neighborhood commercial, light induslrial, and public and
zecreational facilitics.
The Urban category reconImEnds a residential net density range of 1 to 17 units per acre.
The more intensive uses in the Urban category, SllCl1 1S llght 1T1dUStZla1 and IlElg}1bOI"1100d
commercial, are typically located near or along the lzeavily traveled streets. The least intensive
single-family residential uses should be isolated from the noise and heavy traffic, whilc
multifamily structures will usually be a transitional use located between single-family residential
and the more intensive areas. See Coinprehensive Plan, Section 1, "Purpose" and "Detailed
Definition".
The Urban category includes the following relevant policies:
Goal .1. 1 Encourage u var•iety of housing types and derisities.
Objective l.l.a Promote fill-in within established development areus and
existing outlying commuriities wheYe utilities, arterials, sclzools and
community facilities have already been established.
Decision Guideline 1.1.1 Urbarr development will be approvetl in ureas
having adequate power supplies, water, sunitury and storm sewers,
streets, and school and fere sertiices, provided that such development
meets the intent of other Objectives and Decision Guidelines of this
section.
Ohjective 1.1. b Higher-clensity developments suelz as ni ulti fa,nily uncl
mobile homes (manufactured homes) purks shoulcl be locuted with direct
or n.ear access to the major- urterial systems rather lhan on interior
neighborhood streets. Access to pubic trartsportatiort sliould also he
corrsidered.
Objective l.l.c When multifumily dwelli,igs are to be located udjucent to
single fumily areas, careful cofisideration must be given to the density uitd
designs of the multiple family developtnent so us to ensure protection of
the umenities of the sirigle family area.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision , ZE-20-00 Page 6
Decisioii Guideline 1.1.3 A multifumily dwellitrg structure exceeding
thj-ee (3) residential units oY a developriient of such structures or•
manufactzcred homes (except those on single fumily lors) shoulcl:
a) locate adjacent to designated arterials;
b) IOCQt2 i22ClY 2XISllllg Of' plQP111eCI J7LlbIIC tyansit routes;
c) impYOVe oY maintain the consistency of a4jacef7t single family
artrertities.
Decision Guideline 1.1.4 A variety of clensities and r-esidential uses
should be available to provicle a fr-eedoni of choice to live in Uj-bccn areas
with varyirig densities, conzbifrutiotis, ojr rnix of trses (s2e cletailecl Urban
clefrnc.'tions).
Decisroii Guideline 1.3.3 All UYban developmertt proposals sl2ot.clcl
yequire public sanitary urrd stornz seiver systems oy- interirrt sewer systems
to pr•otect ivuter yuulity.
Goul .1.5 Encourage a healthful and pleasirzg efrvirorirrierit in the
Courity's residentiul ureas.
Objective I.S.a New residential or multiple family should be buffered
fYOm existing adjacent lund uses where udverse effects nzuy develop.
Decision Guideline 1.5.1 13uffer-ing and/or lccndscaping will be used to
mitigate the differences between proposed developinents uncl existing uses.
Decision Guideline 1.5.2 L«iidscccping m(iy be i-equired t.o provide a
healthful and pleasing resiclential eyrvironmeiit.
Objective I.S.f Consider the profile, especially height, of the existing
neighhorhood when evuluuting multifamily developnzents.
Objective 1.5.8 When cleternzining whetlier a proposal will chunge the
existing land use cl:aructer of an area, factors to corisider may include:
a) the structure height of the proposal in relation to structure
height of nearby structures, and b) whether new structures will huve a positive or negative impact
upon the neighborhood 's architectural charucter.
Decision Guideline 1.6.1 Before lund use proposals are approved they
should:
a) confornz to plans, policies ancl regulations of County water, sewer, storm sewer,
utility and special service districts;
b) conform to County transportution plaizs and policies; arid
c) identify and take steps to resolve significant adverse impacts upon existing
utilities, (i.e. ivater, sanitary and storni sewers, utility, availuble uncl future
energy resources), and traffic systeins
b. Urban Impact Area
The proposal is located in the Urban Inlpact A.rea (UIA) designated by the Comprehensive
Plan, an area where growth, development and higher intensities of land use are encouraged.
Comprehensive Plan, Objective 14.1.a. Objective 14.1.b states that "fill-in development", public
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 7
utilities, and public services within the UXA should be encouraged, where consistent with tlle
policies of applicable land use categories.
"Fill-in development" is defined in the Comprehensive Plan as development lying between
and in close proximity to at least 2 existing developed geographic areas, having densities and
land uses whicli conform to the Comprehensive Plan Map categories designated for those areas,
and w11ich would aid in the economic support of public servicc by increasing the cost-
effectiveness of utilities and public facilities and services. Comprehensive Plan, Glossary.
Traditional urban problems such as incompatible land uses, environ.inental pollution and
traffic congcstion are to be managed with greater attention to the general public's well being
insidc the UTA. Compl-ehensive plan, Objective 14.1.e. The UTA section of the Comprehensive
Plan contains no decision guidelines. See Comprehensive Plan, Section 14.
c. "Tiansition area" policy
The site is located adjacent to and north of the Major Commercial category designated by
the Comprehensive 1'lan, which category is divided by Main Avenue extended. Because the site
lies adjacent to land designatcd in the Major Commercial category, the "transition area"
guidelines discussed in the Comprehensive Plan may apply to the proposal. The introduction to
the Comprehensive Plan contains the following statenient, under the heading "Guidelines for
Monitoi-ing and Amending the Plan":
Trunsition Area The area along the boicridary between hvo or rnore lancl-
use categoi•ies is the "transitiorr ar-ea It is the intent thut the estahlished
boundaries between land use cutegor-ies are accurate and clefl'nahle on the
ground, but it is also recognized that a specic proposal may cross or be
adjacent to these boundaYies and be situuted in a"tf'ansitiorz area In
these instayices, depenclirig on the impacts to existing luNd use categories
and the distance a use intrudes into on ucljacerzt category, un amendment
may f2ot be required. In those cases where the deterinination is that the
pYOposal is not in the transition area, a Compreherrsive Plan amendrnent
may be necessary.
See Comprehensive Plan, p. 11.
The Comprehensive Plan glossary also coiitains the following relevant definitions:
Trunsitiorral areas-The fi^inge areas bet.tiveen two or more C'on7prehensive
Plun land use categories. This is un area which cajT allow developments
corrzplying with either of the Luj7d-Use irtap Cutegories clepenclent upon
the clecisiori niakers ' site-specific approvul. f
Transitionnl buffeYing-Buffering techfliques which might be required on
the periphery of two or more CompYehensive Plan lurad use categories to
ensure compatibility. Such techniques might include increasirag the lot
sizes on the perimeter• of a development which abuts another land use
category to create open space hetween two poterrtially incompatible uses.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 8
"Buffering" is defined by the Comprehensive Plan glossary as a"...technique of
separating incompatible land uses by distance, changing density, landscaping, screening and/or
physical features or structures". "Compatibility" means [when] two different land uses
exist adjacent to one another in such proximity to one another that adverse impacts are
insignificant".
"Mitigation" means strategies such as avoiding impacts by not taking a certaitl action or
parts thereof; minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action, through
techrlology or other affirniative steps; rectifying impacts b}j restoring or repairing
environmentally sensitive areas; reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation or
maintenance operations during the life of the development; compensating for the impact by
replacing or enhancing substitute envirorvnentally sensitive areas; aild monitoring the impact and
taking appropriate corrective measures. See Comprehensive Plan, Section 50
d. Maior Commercial catei4orv
The Major Commercial category of the Comprehensive Plan is intended to provide the
opportunifiy for development of commercial uses, "...spccifically community and regional
shopping centers and commercial uses, directly related to major throughways". Comprehensive
Plan, Major Commercial category, p. 99. The Major Cominercial category includes the
following relevant descriptions, characteristics and policies:
Residential use in Major- Commereial areas is not intenclecl to be a high
priority in this cutegory urrcl niay be Izmited to preexistr'izg uses. Certairr
residential uses, particularly multifamily developments, may be
compatible throug{i the use of proper screening and performance
staridards.
The Major Commercial Category will be composed of three differ-ent types
of commercial development: shopping centers, highway and arterial
commercial strips, and freeway commercial.
Major Commercial areas feature high-interisity uses. The heuvy
autorrcobile traffic and the related congestion may create pollution
prohlems, especiully along the commercial strip developments.
Most conimercial developnzent will be on relatively flat larid and buildirtgs
will be of a low profile. Paved parking, streets and man-made structures
will dominate tlle site, witli few riatural features to be found.
Landscaping, screening, lighting, signage and other architectural
treatment will provide for aesthetically pleasiiig development.
1'leasing aesthetic and architectural treatment of new developnzent which eliminates or is gerrerally not chui-acterized by signage clutter, provicles
maintuined landscuping, scj-eens exterior storage, provides sufficient
setbucks and screens parking areas, should foster improved land use
computibility with adjacent non-commercial uses and should suppor•t
existing and attr-act new viable commercial development.
HE Findinas, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 9
. • Major Commerciul areas require a fiill line of services ayid utilities.
These ifzclicde service by, or comrriitme»t to, sunitajy and slorrn sewers,
public lvater systems and undergrouncl utilities sucli us telephone, gas and
electricity. Also availuble will be paved urid lighted streets, pCZYICtl1g lOIS,
street nzaintejzafice, garbage collection andpolice arid fiy-e pj-otectioit.
In most cnses interrsive farniirtg acfivities, 171111111g Q12d h2ClVy lj1CIuSt1'•iul
aises woulcl be incompatible with Majoj' Commer•cial uses. Likewise, fnost
sirrgle-fainily resitlerrtial ar-eas and sclrools woulcl nol be compatihle
within the MajoY Commer•cial Category unless proper screenii7g ajid
perforn7ance standaYds af-e established.
Goal 6.1: Prornote developntent of comntercial lalzd in a murrrrer wliich is
coiriplementayy ajul corripatible lvith adjucent lcuid 74ses afid the
surroundirig environmeiit.
OUjective 6.l.cc: Comrnercial developm errts should be buffeiled to protect
ucljucent ureas.
Objective 6.1. b: Provide for aesthetics of cleveloplnent uloflg County
Artei-iuls and State Highways or Freewuys.
Decision Guideline 6.1.1: The best ineuns of encour•agirtg compatibility
between commerciril uses and adjclcent lunrl arse cutegories will be
uccomplished by considering:
a) orieritation of the strr.cctures ancl/or facilities of the proposal to
maintairi or improve upon the aestltetics and energy efficiency of all .
areas affected by the proposal; and
b) provision of buffering needs; and
c) provision of landscaping rieeds.
Decision Guideline 6.1.2: Buffering or spatial separation betiveen
. proposed and existing uses should be required of a developer if
deternzined that the proposed developmetzt's physical characteristics may
be objectionable to future development on neay-by lurt(ls.
Decision Guideline 6.1.8: Appropriately buffered inultifamily resideritial
development coinpatible with existing and potential commercial activities •
may be nermitted as transitiori between higli-intef7sity uses (for example,
commercial uses) and low-intensity uses (for exarnple, single family uses),
especially when the commercial tlcti>>ities can pYOVide or share wuste
energy.
Ohjective 6.1 j: Consider smull-scale conven ience stores and commercial
ei-rterprises adjacent to residential neighhorhoods.
Decision Guideline 61.13: Stores and commer-cial services estUblished to
serve residents within u few blocks' radius mtry be cottsidered computible,
and therefore appropriate, when they are adjacent to residential land-use
ccctegories.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 10
Decisiort Guicleline 6.1.14: Maifltenunce of any small-totivn ta,r base aiid .
economic vitcclity should be a high priority when making u lartd use
decisiorr.
e. Transportation section
The Transportation section of the Comprehensive Plan contains the Arterial Road Plan
(ARP) and policies related to the development of and along county roads. The A.R.P describes
and designates county arterials into the classes of Principal, Minor and Collector Arterials. All
other county roacis are considered Local Access roads. See Comprehensive Plan, Sectiori 21.
The ARP indicates that it is to be impletnented through adopted arterial road plan maps, adopted
road standards, and the County's Six-Year Capital Improvement Plan. Coiiipreheilsive Plan, p.
261.
The ARP characterizes a typical Principal A.rterial as a 4 or more lane (including turning
lane), moderatEly fast facility designed to permit relatively unimpeded traffic flow between
major traffic generators, such as the central business district, major shopping centers, major
employment districts, etc. Principal Arterials are considered the framework road system for the
urbanized portion of the county, and are fio be located on community and neighborhood
boundaries.
Valley Way Avenue adjacent to the site is designated as a Collector A.rterial. The ARP
characterizes Collector Arterials as relatively low-speed, 2-lane facilities desigiled to provide
greater access to adjacent property, rather than providing mobility. The function of a Collector
Arterial is to collect and distribute traffic from Principal and Minor Arterials to Local Access
roads, or directly to traffic destinations, to serve neighborhood traffic generators such as a small
group of stores, elementary schools, church, small apartment areas, neighborhood parks, etc.
Sidewalks are generally used to provide a means for children to walk to school, if located in the
neighborhood, or to bus routes located on Minor Arterials, along neighborhood boundaries.
The Transportation section encourages an adequate, efficient, safe, economical and energy-
conserving arterial system; one which provides convenient access to homes, employment,
shopping, personal business and recreation. Decision Guideline 21.4.2. Decision Guidelines
21.4.5 and 21.5.7 of the Transportation section recommend that the function of existing and
future arterials be preserved by controlling land uses, parking and direct access along the
arterials. Decision Guideline 21.5.3 encourages land use planning that minimizes the need for
high capacity transportation corridors, and encourages land uses in areas that can take advantage
of the available capacity of existing arterial streets.
Decision Guideline 21.5.11 recommencis the development of pedestrian facilities that
enhance the safety and convenience of pedestrian travel and to provide access to neighborhood
facilities. Decision Guideline 21.1.5 states that sidewalks should at a minimum be provided
along all arterial roads and all local access roads which lead to schools, parks and shopping
districts.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 11
The Arterial Road Plan in the Transportation sectiion recommends the early acquisition of
the prescribed right of width for Principal Arterials, though actual road construction within such
right of way may be accomplished in phases over time. Comprehensive Plan, p. 253. Decision
Guideline 21.1.3 stiates tliat the review of land use proposals should contain provisions for•
extensions, alignments and adequate right of way acquisition for designated County Arterials.
Objective 21.1.6 recommends that long-range widening requirements be considered in
developments adjacent to arterials and anticipated arterials, to allow for increased traffic volumes
caused by futurE developments. Decision Guideline 21.1.13 states that in selecting long-range
arterial improvements, consideration should be given to long-range improvements at significant
locations, where such improvements will delay or eliininate future higti cost reconstniction. Tlle
Transportation section recom_mends that proposed development be required to dedicate needed
right of way, or to widen, or assist in widening, existing transportation facilities; all in
accordance with established road design criteria and official Inaps. Decision Guideline 21.1.7.
The primary function of Local Access roads is to provide access to adjacent property and
dcliver traffic to arterials. Such roads are to be designeci and located to providE convenient
access to residential lots, discourage flows of traffic tlirough a neighborhood, and encourage
continuous or unobstructed flow of traff c fronl a neighborhood to a neighborhood Collector
Arterial. Comprehensive Plan, p. 247 and 260; and Decision Guideline 21.3.3.
Decision Guideline 21.5.10 discourages "through" traffic from using residential access
streets, and encourages making residential neighborhoods more attractive to family residents.
The alignment and trafi'ic control of such roads should encourage a slow, safe speed. This may
be accomplished by utilizing physical and traffic management techniques such as offset
intersections, circle drives, curvilinear street design and cul-de-sacs.
f. Wastewater Mana.izement policies
Decision Guideline 23.1.2 of the Comprehensive Plan recorrunends that sewer facility
planning and development be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in regard to size, location
and timing. Decision Guideline 23.1.3 indicates that capital improvement plans for sewer
facilities should be used as an implementation tool for the Land Use Element of the
Comprehensive Plan. The more restrictive of the policies in the CWMP and Comprehensive Plan
are to be applied by public agencies using sucll policies. See County Resolution No. 96-0585.
In 1996, the County aciopted an update to the County Comprehensive Wastewater
Management Plan (1996 CWMP Update). The CWMP is incorporated by reference into the
Comprehensive Land Use Plan adopted by the County. The 1996 CWIvTP Update designates 6-
year and 15-year capital improvement areas where the County plans to extend public sewer
service. See County Resolution No. 96-0585, adopting CWMP 1996 Update, p. 2-8, 2-10 and
Exhibit 4-2.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 12
i '
2. Consistencv of probosal with rezone criteria
Tlie applicant proposes to rezone the site from the Urban Residential-3.5 (UR-3.5) zone to
tlie Urban Residential-22 (UR-22) zone, a zone that is specifically intended to implement the
Urban category of the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Code 14.622.100 sets forth the purpose and
intent of the UR-22 zone, as follows:
7'he purpose of the UR-22 zo«e is to set standurds foj- the orclef-ly
development of yesidenticcl property in a manner that provides udesirable
living envir•onment that is compatible with surrouf-rding lcrrrd uses and
assur-es the protection of property vcllues. It is intended thut this zone be
usecl to add to the variety of housifag types ancl derisities, and as an
implementution tool for the ComtpYChensive Plan Urburi Cutegor-y. Cejler-ul
char-ucteristics of these ureas inclucle pavecl roads, pacblic sewer and water-,
uccessibility to schools and libraries, arrd a firll lirie ofpublic services
irrcluding manned fire protection undpublic transit accessibility. Offices
ure permitted in the UR-22 zone iji oi-der to provide solne of the ser-vice
needs generated by lzigh-intensity land uses. The hi'ahest densitv Yesidential
zone, UR-22 is intended nrimarilv for multinle-farrrilv dwellines urrd is
usuullv located adiacent to muior of- secondarv arterials. It is used as u
transition between low or• medium derrsitv multinle-familv uses and intensive
commercial or• low intensitv industrial uses and to provicle for hizher densitv
housin,a in locations close to enzplovment, shoDDinz and malor
transnortation where rnovements ofpeople can be hartdled effrcientlv and
with least overull adverse i»znuct. [emphasis added]
Medical, business and professional offices are a permitted use in the UR-22 zone. Multi-
family dwellings, duplexes and single-family uses are amoilg the residential uses permitted
outright in such zone, at densities (net) not exceeding 22 units per acre. Bonus densities above
22 dwelling units per acre may be approved for multi-family projects that are directly connected
to public sewer, depending on land use impacts. Multi-family dwellings include the use of
retirement/elderly apartments. Hospitals, day care centers, nursing homes/convalescent homes,
and community residential facilities are among the other uses permitted in such zone. The
maximum building height in the UR-22 zone is 50 feet, and the maximum building coverage is
65%. See Zoning Code chapter 14.605.
The project has been revised at least 3 times since the time of initial application. The
. applicant first proposed the development of 195 dwelling units on an enlarged site of 9.01 acres,
including 75 units of 2-story senior housing, and 120 units of 2.5-story general multi-family
housing, at a residential density of 21.6 dwelling units per acre. In November, 2000, the project
was revised to provide for the development of 172 multi-family dwelling units on the current
site, in the form of 75 units of 2-story senior housing, and 95 units of 2.5-story general multi-
family housing, at a residential density of 21.5 dwelling units per acre. At the public hearing
held on January 3, 2001, the project was revised to provide for the development of 125 multi-
family dwelling units, in the form of 50 units of single-story senior housing and 75 units of 2.5-
story general multi-family housing, at a density of 16.5 dwelling units per acre.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 13
The project will be ser-ved by a high level of public services, including public, sewer and
water, and modern utilities. The site lies inside the Public Transit Benefit Area, the area wllere
the Spokane Transit Authority is authorized to provide public transit services. See Zoning Code
14.300.100. Public transit is available in Sprague Avenue aiid Sullivan Road, which are both
located within reasonable walking distance of the site. tn 1997, the site was designated inside the
interim urban growth area (IUGA) boundaries adopted by the County pursuant to the State
Growth Managcment Act (GMA). Morc intensive urban developmcnt is encouraged within the
IUGA.
The current site is located outside both the 6-year and 15-year sewer program areas.
However, the applicant plans to extend public sewer from the southeast to serve the project. The
extension of public sewer allows the project to comply with County Resolution No. 97-0864,
which pi-ohibits the rezoning of land located within the County's IUGA boundaries, but 1ying
outside the 15-year sewer program area, unless public sewer is available.
The project represents "fill-in development", since it is located bet-vveen developcd areas to
the north and south that have deiISities and land uses which conform to the Urban and Majol-
Commercial categories respectively designated for those areas, and approval of the project would
aid in the economic support of public service, by increasing the cost-effectiveness of utilities and
public facilities and services. Fill-iTi development is encouraged in t11e Urban category of the
Comprehensive Plan.
The site generally meets the location criteria foi- multi-family development recommended
by the Urban category, and in the purpose and intent statement for the UR-22 zone. The site is
located along a designated arterial, and is reasonably close to public transit, employment and
shopping. The UR-22 zone prefers, but does not require, the location of higll-density multi-
family uses along a Principal or Minor Arterial.
An Urban Residential-12 (LTR-12) zone might be the most optimal zone for tlle project
under the Comprehensive Plan. See Zoning Code 14.620.100. However, the location of the
proposed rezone conforms to the Comprehensive Plan, considering the relatively low density of
the project for the UR-22 zone, at approximately 15.6 dwelling units per acre, the provision of
less intensive senior housing in the project, and the proximity of the site to the business districts
located along Sprague Avenue, Sullivan Road and Broadway Avenue. Senior housing typically
generates less traffic and land use impacts than general multi-family housing, due to the older
age of the residents. As revised, the project provides transition from the intensive commercial
uses and zoning abutting the site on the south and the single-family residEntial uses and vacant
land lying near or adjacent to the site, zoned UR-3.5 or UR-7. Such transition is encouraged by
both the Major Commercial category and the Urban category of the Comprehensive Plan.
The easterly portion of the project would be improved with a higher density of housing
than the westerly portion, in the form of general multi-family housing, in 2.5 stories with a
maxiinum height of 38 feet. The land lying directly east of the multi-family buildings represents
the vacant portion of a strip of land improved with a single-family home along Valley Way,
zoned UR-3.5. The nearest multi-family building in the east portion of the project is set back
over 200 feet from Valley Way Avenue, and would be approximately 200 feet southwest of the
single-family residence located on the adjacent property to the east. The proposed height of the
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 14
• . "
multi-family buildings in the easterly portion of the project is well below the maximum
allowable building height of 50 feet in the UR-22 zone, and is near the maximum building height
allowable in the UR-3.5 zone of 35 feet.
The westerly portion of the project would be improved with a lower density of housing,
contain senior housing and single-story buildings of low prof le. A strip of vacant land zoned
UR-3.5, approximately 160 feet wide, is located directly west of the site. The l.l-acre
rectangular area located between the site and Valley Way Avenue contains 2 single-family
homes. The owners of such residences do not oppose the project. The land located south of the
site consists of the unimproved right of way for Main Avenue. The land lying beriveen such
right of way and Sprague Avenue includes a UR-22 zone improved with an apartment complex,
and Regional Business (B-3) zones improved with intensive coinmercial uses. A large
Community Business (B-2) zone, improved with a large Fred Meyers store, is located
approxilnately 250 feet southwest of the site.
The above discussion indicates that the project is reasonably well buffered by distance from
existing single-family homes in the area. Required landscaping and screening will provide
further buffering effects. IJnder the UR-22 zone, the applicant is required to install 5 feet of
Type 1 landscaping and a 6-foot high sight-obscuring screen (masonry wall, fence or solid
landscaping) along the east arld west borders of the site adjacent to UR-3.5 zoning. The site plan
of record shows the required perirneter larldscaping, but not the sight-obscuring screen. A
condition of approval has been added to ensure that this requirement is met. The project also
illustrates 20 feet of Type III landscaping along the frontage of the site with Valley Way and the
IV1ain Avenue right of way, as required by the UR.-22 zone. The proposed building coveragc on
the project site is approximately 21%, which is less than a third the maximum building coverage
of 60% allowed in the UR-22 zone.
On October 6, 2000, after the project was revised to provide for the development of 172
multi-family dwelling units, notice of the application was provided to all owners of property
located within 400 feet of the site. Only 2 owners of property responded to the notice of
application. One such owner (Wetzlers) resides on Moore Road northwest of the site, and the
other (Margaris) lives along the south side of Valley Way, directly east of the site. Such letters
raised concerns over cumulative traffic impacts from such project, in conjunction with other new
development proposed or approved in the area, the potential use of Moore Road for access to
Broadway Avenue to the north, the inadequacy of Valley Way Avenue for the project, an
excessive amount of multi-family development in the Valley area of the county, increased traffic
congestion in the area, impacts on property values, increased crime, impacts on local schools,
and other concerns.
A subsequent letter was received from the Wetzlers on December 26, 2000, before the final
revision to the project. Such letter expressed coilcern that traffic from the project would use
Moore Road to reach Broadway and shopping opportunities along such road, especially after the
installation of a traffic light at Sprague and Conklin Road, concerns over sidewalks not being
available for senior citizens, impacts on student and school bus transportation, and lack of
planning by the county.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 15
At the public hearing held on January 3, 2001, a letYer was submitted by Del and Jeannette
Liljegren in opposition to the project. The lctter states that such owners were not notified
regarding the hearing. However, the Affidavit of Mailing submitted by the applicant on
December 18, 2000 indicates that all owners of property located within 400 feet of the site were
given mailed notice of hearing, including the Liljegrens. The Liljegrens reside northwest of the
site, along the east sidc of Moore Road.
The Liljegrens' letter enclosed copies of foim lctters to the Heai-ing Examiner dated August
26, 2000, signed by numerous area residents. The fonn letters objected to an unrelatEd
application for a rezone to the UR-22 zone, for development of offices, for a site located some
distance north of the site along the south side of Broadway Avenue, between Moore Road and
Conklin Road. The Hearing Examiner approved such rezone on October 30, 2000, in Planning
File No. ZE-13-00.
The form letters submitted for File No. ZE-13-00 stated tilat a zone changc to the UR-22
would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, that UR-22 zoning would set a precedent to
rezone all surrounding land to UR-22, and that such rezones would devalue property in the area;
and further expressed concerns over increased traff c flow, increased load on fire and protection
resources, and the absence of public sewer.
At the public hearing, 5 residents in the riearby area testified in opposition to the project.
This included 3 residents along Conklin Road to the east and northeast, and additional residents
along Valley Way Avenue or Main Avenue east of Conklin Road. Such i-esidents expressed
concern that the rezone would set a precedent for other high-density projects in the vicinity, that
the senior housing in the project should be placed along tlze east side of the project instead of the
west side, excessive density, inadequzte buffering for adjoining single-falnily llomes, concerns
over the introduction of low income housing in the area, inadequate fire access, potential access
onto Main Avenue, the need for a traff c signal at Sprague AvEnue and Conklin Road, and other
concerns.
The letter dated January 2, 2001 from the Liljegrens contended that Valley Way Avenue
was an insufficient arterial road for multi-family ciwellings, and expressed concerns with the lack
of sidewalks and the presence of narrow streets along county roads leading to Valley Way and
Sprague Avenue, the lack of bus service for children walking to Central Valley High School, the
lack of planning by the County for area developYnent, excessive building heights in the project,
the lack of public transit along Valley Way, inconsistency of the project with the Comprehensive
Plan, and other concerns.
The project will increase traffic along Valley Way Avenue, and Conklin Road. However,
there is no showing that the project will result in a failing level of service at area intersections, or
along other portions of the trafftc infrastructure in the area, at the time of its projected build-out
in 2005. The traffic analysis for the project indicates that the level of service at the un-signalized
intersection of Conklin Road and Sprague Avenue, as a result of traffic impacts from the project
and other background projects will be at Level of Service (LOS) D. LOS D is an acceptable
level of service for an un-signalized intersection. See 1999 Standards for Road and Sewer
Construction, page 10.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 16
Projects in the area approved for developer Buster Heitman, located to the southeast along
Sprague Avenue, and further to the south, are expected to eventually degrade the intersection of
Conklin Road and Sprague Avenue to a failing level, in conjunction with other approved
developments. The Heitman projects have or will contribute a significant amount of traffic to the
intersection compared to the current project. Developer Heitman is required to install a traffic
signal at the subject intersection at the time signal warrants are met. When installed, this will
greatly improve the level of service at such intcrscction.
Cowlty Engineering's letter dated January 11, 2001, recommends that the applicant be
required to contribute a pro-rata share of the installation of a traffic signal at the subject
intersection, at the time signal warrants are met arld a signal is required to be installed at the
intersectiion. Tlle applicant is willing to mak-c such contribution. See letter dated 1-18-01 from
Storhaug Engineering. Opponeiits of the project subniitted no competent evidence of a traffic
engineering nature that would support requiring the applicant to pay a larger pcrccntage of ihe
cost of the signal, or provide additional traffic mitigation in the area; or that would support a
finding that cumulative traffic impacts were not sufficiently considered by the applicant's traffic
engineer or County Engineering. This includes alleged impacts along Moore Road, and at the
intersection of Moore Road and Broadway Avenue. See testimony of Bill VVhite. It is noted that
the applicant is required to contribute funds for a new loop ramp to be installed in 2001 at the
I-90/Sullivan Road interchange.
County Engineering conditions require the applicant to widen and improve Valley Way
Avenue along the frontage of the development to a Collector Arterial roadway section, including
the installation of curb and sidewalk. The applicant is also required to dedicate 2.5 feet of right
of way along such frontage, and to reserve an additional 12.5 feet for future right of way
acquisition. With the extension of public sewer to the area, and increased commercial
development along Sprague Avenue to the south and Sullivan Road to the west, it is logical to
assume that the land along Valley Way Avenue in tlle vicinity, between Conklin Road and
Sullivan Road, will continue to be developed at higher intensities. This will logically lead to the
further extension of arterial improvements, including widening and the installation of curb and
sidewalk, along such arterial. This has already occurred for the commercial development located
along Valley Way, near Sullivan Road.
The project does not intend to rely on Main Avenue for access, except for gated emergency
access. County Engineering conditions prohibit clirect access to Main Avenue until authorized
by County Engineering. If access were allowed, the applicant.would be required to improve
Main Avenue to County standards, between the site and Conklin Road. Spokane County Fire
District 1 commented tllat fire hydrant and fire apparatus access requirements for the project
would need to be addressed at the time of application for a building permits, but submitted no
other corrunents regarding the proposed rezone. See letter dated 7-17-00 from Kevin Miller to
Tammy Jones.
Van or mini-bus transportation is a common feature of senior housing. The record
indicates that only some high school students will be walking to school on area streets, with
elementary and middle school children being bussed. Many high school students currently drive
or ride to school in personal vehicles. The Examiner does not view traffic generation from the
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 17
project as presenting a significant safety hazard for those high school students who.may walk to
Central Valley High School, located a few blocks south of Sprague Avenue in the arEa.
While some residents expressed concern that the project would introduce low income
housing into the neighborhood, testimony from t11e applicant convinces the Examiner that both
the general multi-family portion of the project and the senior housing in the project will be well-
designed and well-managed, and will not have a signif cant impact on single-family amenities
and property values in the area. The applicant indicated at the public hearing fihat the density of
the general multi-family portion of the project might be reduced significantly, although this
remains to be seen. See testimony of. John Stock and Todd Prescott. The Examiner has limited
the number and types of units in the project, as proposed at the public hearing.
The Examiner has considered the views of neighboring property owners, which may be
given substantial weight, but are not in and of themsclves controlling, under Washington case
law. Such views arc not sufficient to justiFy denial of the proposcd rezone.
No deficiencies with regard to the ability of the project to comply with development
regulations have been established in the record. The project has been conditioned for compliance
with the development standards of the UR.-22 zone and other applicable provisions of the County
Zoning Code, and the recommendations of the commenting public agencies. As conditioned, the
project will be reasonably compatible with, and noC have a significant negative impact on,
neighboring land uses. The project, as conditioned, genel-ally conforms to the Comprehensive
Plan.
No public agencies objected to the Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) issued for the
proposal by the County Division of Plailning. The proposal will not have more than a moderate
effect on the quality of the envirolunent, and the Examiner concurs with issuance of the DNS.
The procedural requirements of chaptcr 43.21 C RCW and chapter 11.10 of the Spokane County
Code have been met.
3. Conditions in the area have substantiallv changed since the site was last zoned to iustifv the
proposed rezone, as conditioned.
In applying the changed circumstances test, courts have looked at a variety of factors,
including changed public opinion, changes in land use patterns in the area of the rezone proposal,
and changes on the property itself. The Zoning Code references changes in "economic,
technological or land use conditions" as factors that will support a rezone. Spokane County
Zoning Code Section 14.402.020 (2). Washington courts have not required a"strong" ShOWlI1g
of change. The rule is flexible, and each case is to be judged on its own facts. Bassani v. County
Commissiorters, 70 Wn. App. 389, 394 (1993).
As stated previously, recent Washington cases have held that changed circumstances are
not required if the proposed rezone implements policies of a comprehensive plan. The Examiner
concluded above that the property implements the policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 18
,
Changed conditions have occurred since the zoning of the site was re-designated to the
UR-3.5 zone on January 1, 1991, pursuant to the Prograin to Implement the Spokane County
Zoning Code. This includes the availability of public sewer to the subject property, road
improvements to Sullivan Road and Sprague Avenue in the area, the rezoning and development
of land along Sprague Avenue, Sullivan Road and Broadway Avenue in the area for intensive
commercial development, increased population growth in the area, and designation of the site
within the County's IUGA boundaries. See recent land use actions referenced on page 2 of Staf.f
Report.
IV. DECISION
Based on the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the application for a rezone
to the Urban Residential-22 (UR-22) zone is hereby aprroved, subject to the conditions of
approval of public agencies stated below.
Any conditions of such agencies that have been added or significantly revised by the
Hearing Examiner are italicized.
Failure to comply with the conditions of this approval may result in revocation of this
approval by the Hearing Examiner. This approval does not waive the applicant's obligation to
comply with all other requirenlents of other agencies with jurisdicfiion.
SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF PLANNING
1. All conditions imposed by the Hearing Examiner shall be binding on tl2e "Applicant, "
which term shall inclutle the owner (s) and developer (s) of the property, ancl their heirs, ussigns
and successors.
2. The proposal shall comply with the Urban Residential-22 (UR-22) zone, the Aquifer
Sensitive Area (ASA) Overlay zone, and other applicable sections of the Spokane County Zoning
Code, as amended.
3. The applicant shall develop the subject property in substantial ccccordance witli the site
plan of recoYd dated January 3, 2001, and the concept presented to the I-Iearing Examiner,
subject to compliance with conditions of approval and clevelopmerit regulations. Minor
variations, consistent with coriditions of approval and development standards, may be permitted
administratively by the County Division of Planning in accordance with Section 14.504. 040 of
the County Zoning Code. All otlier revisioris rnust be approved by the Heuring Exumrner,
pursuant to a public heaYing on a change of conditions applicatiort.
4. The number of dwelling units in the project shall not exceed SO u»its of senror housing
und 75 units of general rrtulti fanzily housing.
5. Sight-obscuring screening shall be irastalled along the interior borders of the site, as
required by Section 14.622.365 of the County Zoning Code, as amended.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 19
6. Approval is required from the Director of the Division of Plaruiing/designee of a specific
lighting and signing plan for the described property, prior to the release of any building pernzit.
7. Direct light from any exterior area li-ahting fixture shall not extend over the property
boundary.
8. A specific landscape plan, planting schedule and provisions for tlze maintenance acceptable
to the Director of the Division of PlaiIning shall be submitted with a perrormance bond or other
suitable guarantee for the project prior to release of any builciing pennits. Landscaping shall be
installed and maintained as required in Chapter 14.806 a»d Section 14.802.220 of the County
Zoning Code, as amended.
9. The Division of Planning shall prepare and record with the County Auditor a Title Notice
spccifying a future land acquisition area for road right of way and utilities. The Title Notice shall
state the following:
a. A strip of property 12.5 feet in width, in addition to the 2.5 Feet requircd to bc dedicafied
for Valley Way Avenue, shall be resel-ved for a future acquisitiou area, for additional road
right of way width along Valleyway Avenue.
b. Future building and other setbacks required by the Spokane County Zoning Code shall
be measured from the reserved future acquisition area.
c. No required landscaping, parking, `208' areas, drainfield or allowed signs should be
located within the future acquisition area for road right of way and utilities. If any of the
above improvements are within the area, they shall be relocated at the applicant's expense
when roadway improvements are made.
d. The future acquisition area, until acquired, shall be private property and may be used as
allowed in the zone, except that any improvements (such as landscaping, parking, surface
drainage, drainfielci, signs or others) shall be considered interim uses.
e. The property owner shall be responsible for relocating such "interim" improvements at
the time Spokane County makes roadway improvements, after acquiring said future
acquisition area.
9. The Division of Planning shall prepare and recorci with the Spokane County Auditor a Title
Notice, noting that the property is subject to a variety of special conditions imposed as a result of
the 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 tiine 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 [see file] is the subject of a land use action by
the Spokane County Hearing Examiner on February 210, 2001, imposing a variety of special
development conditions. File No. ZE-20-00 is available for inspection and copying in the
Spokane County Division of Planning."
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 20
' r ^
, • . .
SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF BUILDING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT
1. The applicant shall contact the Division of Building and Code Enforcement at the earliest
possible stage, in order to be infornled of code requirements administered or enforced under the
State Building Code Act. Designldevelopment concerns include addressing, fire apparatus
access roads, fire hydrant flow, approved water systems, building accessibility, construction type,
occupancy classification, existing exterior wall protection and erlergy code requirements.
SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF ENGINEERING AI\TD ROADS
Prior to issuance of a building permit, or at the request of the County Engineer in
conjunction with a County Road Project/Road Improvement District, whiciiever comes
first:
1. The applicant shall dedicate 2.5 feet on Valleyway Avenue for right of way.
Prior to release of a building permit or use of propei•ty as proposed:
2. A traffic study has been accepted by the County Engineer for this proposal and is valid
until December 31, 2005. Should there be subsfiantial changes in tlle sife design or not completed
by December 31, 2005, the County Engineer may require updated traffic information to be
submitted and additional mitigation may be required.
3. Access permits for approaches to the County Road Systcin s11a11 be obtained fi-om tlie
County Engineer.
4. Applicant shall submit for approval by the Spokane County Engineer road, drainage and
access plans.
5. A parking plan and traffic circulation plan shall be submitted and approved by the Spokane
County Engineer. The design, location and arrangement of parking stalls shall be in accordance
with standard engineering practices. Paving or surfacing as approved by the County Engineer
will be required for any portion of the project which is to be occupied or traveled by vehicles.
6. The construction of the roadway improvements stated herein shall be accomplished as
approved by the Spokane County Engineer.
7. The County Engineer has designated a Collector Arterial Roadway Section for the
improvement of Va]leyway Avenue which is adjacent to tihe proposed development. This will
require the addition of approximately 8.5-10.5 feet of asphalt along the frontage of the
development. Curbing and sidewalk lnust also be consfil-ucted. The applicant shall grant
applicable border easements adjacent to Spokane County Right of Way per Spokane County
Standards.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 21
' .
8. Direct access to Main Avenue is prohibited until authorized by the County Eugineer. The
applicant is advised tlzat any access to Main Avenue shall require frontage improvements to Main
Avenue constructed to a Local Access Roadway Standard. Frontage improvements along Main
Avenue would require 32 feet of asphalt and the installafion of curbing and sidewalk. T11e
improvements to Vlain Avenue would also require off-site strip paving to the intersection of
Main Avenue and Conklin Road.
9. All required improvements shall conform to the cui-rerlt State of Washington Standard
Specifications for Road and $ridge constr-uction and other applicable couulty standards andlor
adopted resolutions pertaining to Road Standards and Stonnwatcr Management in effect at the
date of constniction, unless othei-wise approved by thc County Engineer.
10. Roadway standards, typical roadway sections and drainage plan requirements are found in
Spokane County Resolution I\TO. 99-0265, as atneiided, and are applicable to this proposal.
11. No construction tivork is to be pErFormed within the existing or pi-oposed right of way until
a permit has been issued by the County Engineer. All work within the public road right of way is
subject to inspection and approval by the County Engineer.
12. All required construction within the existiing or proposed public right of way is to be
completed prior to the release of a building permit, or a bond in an amount estimated by the
County Engineer to cover the cost of construction or iinprovements shall be filed with the
County Engineer.
13. The County Arterial Road plan identifies Valley Way Avenue as a 70-foot Collector
Arterial. The existing right of way width of 20 feet, measured from centerline, is not consistent
with that specified in the plan. In order to implement the Arterial Road Plan it is recommended
that in addition to the required right of way dedication, a strip of property 12.5 feet in width
along the Valley Way Avenue frontage be set aside in reserve. This property may be acquired by
Spokane County at the time when Arterial Improvements are made to Valley Way Avenue.
14. T11e applicant is advised that there may exist utilities eitller underground or overhead
affecting the applicant's property, including property to be dedicated or set aside future
acquisition. Spoka.ne County will assume no financial obligation for adjustments or relocation
regarding these utilities. The applicant should check with the applicable utilities and Spokane
County Engineer to determine whether the applicant or utility is responsible for adjustment or
relocation costs and to make arrangements for any necessary work.
15. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for any portion of the property, the
applicant shall enter into a Development Agreement with the Spokane County Engineer for off-
site mitigation to the Sullivan Loop Ramp, which this proposal impacts. Estimated construction
date of the SuUivan Loop Ramp is spring of 2001.
16. The applicant shall execute "Spokane County Notice to the Public Number 6", which
specifies the following:
"The owner(s) or successor(s) in interest agree that in consideration of Mutual Benefits
now or to be hereafter derived, do for themselves, their heirs, grantees, assigns and successor(s)
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 22
.
. .
' . • .
in interest hereby request and authorize Spokane County to include the above described property
in a Road Improvement District (R.ID) and to support the foniiation of a Road Improvement
District for improvement of the road(s) dcscribed below by requesting and authorizing Spokane
County to place their name(s) on a petition for the fonnation of a Road lmprovement District
pui-suant to RCW 36.88.050, or by requesting and authorizing Spokane County to cast their
ballot in favor of a RID being formed under the resolution method pursuant to RCW 36.88.0307
and/or by not filing a protest against the formation of a RID being fonned under the alternative
resolution method provided for in RCW 36.88.065 and Chapter 35.43 RCW.
If a RID is proposed for improvemcnt of the road(s) described below, said owner(s) and
successor(s)fiirther agree: (1) that the improvements or construction contemplated within the
proposed RID are feasible and (2) that the benefits to be derived from the formation of the RrD
by the pi-operty included therein, together with the amount of any County participation, exceeds
the cost and expense of formation of the R1D, and (3) that the property within the proposed RID
is sufficiently developed; provided, themselves, their heirs, grantees, assigns and successor(s)
shall retain the righfi, as authorized under RCW 36.88.090, to object to any assessment(s) on the
property as a result of the improvements called for in conjunction with the formation of a RID by
either the petition or resolution metllod under Chapter 36.88 RCW and to appeal to the Superior
Court the decision of the Board of County Commissioners confirming the f nal assessment roll;
provided further, it is recognized that actual assessments may vary fToin assessment estimate so
long as they do not exceed a figure equal to the increased true and fair value improvement(s)
add(s) to the properfiy.
It is further acknowledged and agreed that at sucll time as a RID is created or any County
Road Improvement project is authorized by Spokane County, the improvements required shall be
at the sole expense of the owner(s) of property within the RID or served by the improvenzents
without any monetary participation by Spokane County.
The RID waiver contained in this agreement shall expire after ten (10) years from the date
of execution below. This provision is applicable to Main Avenue."
17. The County Engineer has designated aLocal Access Roadway Section for the improvement
of Main Avenue adjacent to the proposed development. This will require the addition of
approximately 32 feet of asphalt along the frontage of the development. Curbing and sidewalk
nlust also be constructed.
18. Prior to the release of a building permit, the applicant shall contribute a pro-rata share for
the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Sprague Avenue and Conklin Road. The
traffic signal shall be installed when signal warrants are met per the IVlarnial of Uniform Traffic
control Devices (MUTCD). The estimated share of this cost is $3,600.00 and shall be paid to thc
County Engineer.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 23
. . ,
SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DtSTRICT
1. Tl1e sewage disposal method shall be as authorized by the Director of Utilities, Spokane
County.
2. Water service shall be coordiilated through the Director of Utilities, Spokane County.
3. Water senlice shall be by an existing public water supply when approved by the Regional
Engineer (Spokane), State Department of Health.
4. A public sewrer system shall be made available for the project and individual service will be
provided to tlle lot. The use of individual on-site sewage disposal systems shall not be
authorized.
5. The use of private wells and water systerns is prohibited.
SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF U1'ILITIES
1. A wet (live) sewer connection to the arca-wide public sewer system shall be constructed. A
sewer connection pernlit is required. Colnmercial devclopments shall submit historical and/or
estiinated water usage prior to the issuance of the connection pernlit in order to establish sewer
fees.
2. The applicant shall submit expressly to Spokane County Division of Utilities, "under
separate cover", only those plan sheets showing sewer plans and specifications for the public
sewer connections and facilities for review and approval. Commercial developments shall
submit historical and/or estimated water usage as part of the sewer plan submittal.
3. Sewer plans acceptable to the Division of Utilities shall be submitted prior to the issuance
of the sewer connection permit.
4. Arrangements for payinent of applicable sewer charges must be made prior to issuance of
sewer connection permit. Sewer charges may include con.nection charges and general facilities
charges. Charges may be substantial, depending on the nature of the development.
5. Any water service for this project shall be provided in accordance with the Coordinated
Water System Plan for Spokane County, as amended.
SPOKANE COUNTY ATR POLLUTION CONTROL AUTHORITY
1. All applicable air pollution regulations must be met.
SPOKANE COUNTY FIRE DISTRICT NO. 1
1. The applicant shall address fire hydrant and fire apparatus access at the time application is
made for a building permit.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 24
. ,
r
DATED this 21 st day of February, 2001
SPOKANF COUNTY HEAR_ING EXAMINER Micliael C. Dempsey, WSBA #823~
NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION AND NOTTCE OF RIGHT TO APP.EAL
Pursuant to Spokane County Resolution Nos. 96-0171 and 96-0632, the decision of the
Hearing Examiner on an application for a zone reclassification and accompanying SEPA
detennination is final and conclusive unless witliin ten (10) calendar days from the Examiner's
written decision, a party of record aggrieved by such decision f les an appeal with the Board of
County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington. However, RCW 36.70B.110 (9)
indicates t11at administrative appeals of county land use decisions and SEPA appeals shall be
fled with the board of county commissioners within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of
the decision.
This decision was inailed by certified mail to the Applicant, and to other parties of record
by regular mail, on I'ebruary 21, 2001. Depending on which appeal period referenced above
legally applies, aud counting to the next business day when the last day for appeal falls on a
holiday or weekend, THE APPEEIL CLOSING DATE IS EITHER MA12CH 5, 2001 or
MARCH 7. 2001.
The complete record in this matter, including this decision, is on file during the appeal period
with the Office of the Hearing Examiner, Tlurd Floor, Public Works Building, 1026 West
Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington, 99260-0245, (509) 477-7490. The file inay be inspected
during normal working hours, listed as Monday - Friday of each week, except holidays, between the
hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Copies of the documents in the record will be made available at
the cost set by Spokane County.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision ZE-20-00 Page 25