Loading...
ZE-29-96SPOKANE COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER RE: ZONE RECLASSIFICATION FROM COMMUNITY BUSINESS (B-2) TO REGIONAL BUSINESS (B-3) Applicant: Buster Heitman File No. ZE-29-96 FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL AND DECISION Proposal: Zone reclassification from Community Business (B-2) to Regional Business (B-3), on approximately 9.69 acres for those uses allowed in the Regional Business (B-3) zone. Decision: Approved, subject to conditions. It. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS The Hearing Examiner has reviewed the zone reclassification application and the evidence of record and adopts the following findings of fact and conclusions: A. GENERAL INFORMATION: Applicant: Buster Heitman, 8205 N. Division, Spokane, WA 99208 Address: Undetermined. Location: Generally located north of and adjacent to Sprague Avenue and east of Carnine Road, in the SE 4 of Section 13, Township 25 North, Range 44 EWM, Spokane County, Washington. Legal Description: Tract 14 of Vera, according to plat recorded in Book "0" of Plats, Page 30, records of the Spokane County Auditor's Office, Spokane County, Washington; EXCEPT the North 25.00 feet thereof; ALSO EXCEPTING Right of Way as deeded for Sprague Avenue. Zoning: Community Business (B-2) Comprehensive Plan Category: The property is designated in the Major Commercial category of the Spokane County Generalized Comprehensive Plan. The subject property is also within the Priority Sewer Service Area (PSSA) and Urban Impact Area (UTA) designated in the Comprehensive Plan. Environmental Review: The Division of Building and Planning issued a Determination of NonSignificance on August 30, 1996. HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 1 Site Description: The site is approximately nine acres in size, level, vacant and undeveloped. A preliminary short plat to divide the site into four commercial lots was approved in May, 1996, in Building and Planning File No. SP-1069-96. The site is bounded by Sprague Avenue on the north, Carnine Road on the west and Main Avenue on the south. Commercial property abuts the site to the east. Surrounding Conditions: Sprague Avenue is identified on the Arterial Road Plan as a Principal Arterial, with a future right of way width of 130 feet. Carnine Road is an unimproved 20-foot wide county right of way. Main Avenue is a local access street which extends through to Conklin Road on the west but will dead-end at the easterly boundary of Armstrong Estates after such plat has been fully developed. Existing businesses line Sprague Avenue to the west and east. The land located north of Main Avenue (and Main Avenue extended) in the area is designated within the Urban category of the Comprehensive Plan, while the land situated south of such line is designated within the Major Commercial category. The final plat of Armstrong Estates (PE-1679-92), approved in 1994, lies along the north side of Main Avenue across from the site and has been partially developed with single-family residences. The property west of the site is zoned Urban Residential-22 (UR-22) and Community Business (B-2). Along Riverside Avenue and Main Avenue to the west, the property is developed with single-family residences, while the land fronting Sprague Avenue to the west is mostly vacant. The side yards of three single-family residences border the west side of Carnine Road, directly across from the site. The commercial property to the east is zoned Regional Business (B-3) and B-2. The applicant also owns Lots that front the north side of Sprague Avenue, between the site and Conklin Road to the west. The applicant further owns the parcels located at the southwest and southeast corners of Conklin Road and Sprague Avenue, and is developing the large Shelley Lake preliminary plat/planned unit development further to the south. The applicant will be paving Conklin Road south of Sprague Avenue, and is required to install a traffic signal at Conklin Road and Sprague Avenue as a condition of the Shelley Lake development. Spokane County plans to widen Sprague Avenue between Sullivan Road west of the site and Tschirley Road east of the site in the spring of 1988, as indicated in the County's Six Year Arterial Road Plan. Project Description: No site plan has been submitted for the proposal, but development of the site would be subject to the development standards of the proposed Regional Business (B-3) zone. The applicant indicated that the site was the right size and location for a major retailer such as ShopKo/Kmart/Fred Meyer, but has not committed to such use. A Large Fred Meyer is located west of the site, at the northeast corner of Sullivan Road and Sprague Avenue. A threshold traffic study was performed by the applicant for the proposed zone reclassification, which concluded that development of the site would have no significant impact on neighboring intersections and proposed no mitigation. The study assumes that the intersection of Conklin Road and Sprague Avenue will be signalized. The applicant also proposes the extension of public sewer to the site, most likely by extending a public line from the site along the north side of Sprague Avenue to Conklin Road, then south across Sprague when such arterial is improved by the County, then south in Conklin Road to the sewer interceptor. HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 2 B. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION: Applicable Zoning Regulations: Spokane County Zoning Code chapters 14.402 and 14.628. Hearing Date and Location: September 25, 1996, Spokane County Public Works Building, Lower Level, Commissioners Assembly Room, 1026 West Broadway, Spokane, WA. Notices: Mailed: September 5 , 1996 by Elizabeth Larsen Posted: September 6 , 1996 by Jaryl Weisen Published: September 6, 1996 Site Visit: September 24, 1996 Hearing Procedure: Pursuant to Resolution No. 96-0171 (Hearing Examiner Ordinance) and Resolution No. 96-0294 (Hearing Examiner Rules of Procedure). Testimony: Louis Webster, Planner II Spokane County Division of Building and Planning 1026 West Broadway Spokane, WA 99260-0240 Pat Harper Spokane County Division of Engineering and Roads 1026 West Broadway Spokane, WA 99260 Buster Heitman 8205 N. Division Spokane, WA 99208 Terry Schmike E. 16712 Valleyway Veradale, WA 99037 Ann Winkler W. 707 7th Ave., Suite 200 Spokane, WA 99204 Items Noticed or Incorporated by Reference: Spokane County Comprehensive Plan, Spokane County Zoning Code, Spokane County Code, Resolution Nos. 96-0171 and 96-0294. The Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Decision in Building and Planning File No. SP-1069-96, dated May 6, 1996, are incorporated by reference as part of the record. C. ZONE RECLASSIFICATION ANALYSIS: Washington case law generally provides that (1) there is no presumption in favor of a 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 must bear a substantial HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 3 relationship to the public health, safety or welfare. Parkridse v. Seattle, 98 Wn.2d 454, 462 (1978); Bjarnson v. Kitsan County 78 Wn. App. 840 (1995). Case law also indicates that a county's comprehensive plan provides guidance to the hearing body in making a rezone decision. Spokane County Zoning Code 14.402.020(1)(2), indicates that consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, detriment to the public welfare and changed circumstances are relevant considerations when a site -specific rezone is sought. The rezone proposal must also comply with the Spokane County Zoning Code, the State Environmental Policy Act, the County's Local Environmental Ordinance, and other applicable land use regulations. Conditions may be imposed to assure the consistency of the proposal with applicable regulations. The following findings of fact and conclusions are made: 1. The proposed rezone generally conforms with the Spokane County Generalized Comprehensive Plan. A county's comprehensive plan provides guidance to the hearing body in making a rezone decision. Belcher v. Kitsan County, 60 Wn. App. 949, 953 (1991). Deviation from a comprehensive plan does not necessarily render a rezone illegal, only general conformance is required. Bassani v. County Commissioners, 70 Wn. App. 389, 396 (1993). The site is designated within the Major Commercial category of the Comprehensive PIan. The Major Commercial (C) Category is intended to provide the opportunity for development of commercial uses, specifically community and regional shopping centers and commercial uses directly related to major throughways. Major Commercial areas typically require a full line of public services and utilities, including public sewer. The Regional Business (B-3) zoning is tended to implement the Major Commercial category of the Comprehensive Plan, including those policies which encourage commercial development along Principal Arterials or highways and the establishment of regional -serving commercial uses. Zoning Code 14.628.100. The proposed rezone clearly implements such policies, since it is located along a Principal Arterial and B-3 uses are intended for the site. The Major Commercial category indicates that commercial developments should be buffered to protect adjacent areas. Goal 6.1, Objective 6.1.a. Only one person spoke in opposition to the proposal at the public hearing, contending that insufficient infrastructure was in place to support the rezone. A petition containing the signatures of several owners of single-family property located north and east of the site was submitted prior to the public hearing in opposition to the project. Correspondence was also received from the developer of Armstrong Estates and from several residents in Armstrong Estates requesting mitigating measures by the applicant, including requests that the applicant (1) dedicate 20 feet of right of way along the frontage of the property with Carnine Street, (2) install a six-foot high noise barrier fence of cement block along the frontage of the site with Main Avenue, as well as landscaping between the wall and Main Avenue, (3) pave and curb Main Avenue between the site and Armstrong Estates, (4) not install any in/out driveways on Main Avenue or Carnine Road, (5) install landscaping along the east and west borders of the site. Such correspondence also expressed concerns over potential impacts from the site on the adjacent single-family areas, including potential changes in traffic patterns, the location FEE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 4 of businesses with evening hours or of a type that would increase crime or the noise level in the area, and the location of industrial uses. The Findings of Fact and Conclusions in Building and Planning File No. SP-1069-96 indicate that similar concerns and requests were expressed previously by area residents regarding the preliminary short plat application approved for the site in April, 1996. Some of the neighborhood's concerns have been addressed in the condition of approval recommended by commenting public agencies. County Engineering requested that the applicant add 5-7 feet of asphalt, and install curbing and sidewalk along Main Avenue adjacent to the site. To prevent the mixing of residential and commercial traffic, County Engineering also requested that access from the site to Carnine Road or Main Avenue be prohibited, and suggested that Carnine Road be vacated and used as a utility easement and possible fire access. County Engineering also requested that the applicant install a traffic signal at Conklin Road and Sprague Avenue concurrently with the improvement of Sprague Avenue, between Sullivan Road and Tschirley Road, if a building permit was sought for the site prior to installation of the signal in conjunction with the Shelley Lake project. The applicant generally did not oppose the conditions requested by County Engineering, and expressed a willingness to accommodate the concerns of the residents in Armstrong Estates. However, the applicant requested flexibility regarding the restriction of access along Main Avenue and the installation of the requested wall along the north boundary of the site depending on usage of the site. The applicant testified that a manufactured home sales office/display use might be located initially on the site, which would tend to have less traffic and impact on the adjacent single-family areas than other B-3 uses. The applicant also indicated that the commercial uses allowed under the B-3 and B-2 zones were substantially the same, and that the site would be developed in an aesthetic and pleasing manner. However, while general retail use is allowed in both the B-2 and B-3 zones, there are a number of intensive uses that are allowed in the B-3 zone that are not allowed in the B-2 zone. This includes the uses of automobile/truck painting, repair, body and fender works; automobile/truck sales; retail building supply; contractor's yard; hoteUmotel; retail lumberyard; manufactured home sales; large recreational vehicle sales; self- service storage facility; outdoor theater, truck stop; and warehouse. See Zoning Code 14.623.020. Further, the development standards of the B-3 zone allow somewhat more intensive commercial development of a site, e.g. maximum building coverage, maximum building height and signage. The Comprehensive Plan outlines several techniques for separating or buffering incompatible uses, including the orientation of structures, spatial separation, landscaping, screening, and changing density. Major Commercial category, Decision Guidelines 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3; Glossary; definition of "buffering". The B-1 zone in the Major Commercial category and the Urban Residential-12 zone in the Urban category are used to buffer low density single-family areas from adjacent, intensive business uses, if arterial access can be provided. Zoning Code 14.620.100, 14.624.100. The development standards of the B-3 zone to some extent implement the buffering policies and aesthetic development policies of the Major Commercial category; in provisions relating to required setbacks, maximum building height, landscaping, maximum building coverage, parking standards and signage standards. See Zoning Code 14.628. However, such provisions do not always go far enough to protect adjacent single-family properties from the potential noise, HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 5 odor, aesthetic and traffic impacts generated by many of the intensive commercial uses allowed in the B-3 zone. The applicant has not submitted a site plan, which makes it difficult for County staff and the Hearing Examiner to recommend or impose measures to mitigate specific impacts from intensive uses that might be placed on the site. The Hearing Examiner could approve the rezone, subject to the submittal of a detailed site plan for review at a future public hearing at such time as specific development is proposed for the site. See Zoning Code 14.504.040; Spokane County Code 1.44.050. This is a very time-consuming and expensive process, and should be used sparingly. The.Hearing Examiner may also require administrative site plan review by the Division of Building and Planning, with authority to allow the imposition of additional requirements if needed to mitigate environmental impacts from site development and to ensure compliance with the standards of the B-3 zone. See County Code 1.44.050 and Zoning Code 14.408. Under the circumstances, the Hearing Examiner finds it appropriate to require the installation and maintenance of a six (6)-foot-high concrete, masonry or decorative block wall, solid Landscaping, or site -obscuring fence along the north boundary of the site, and the Division of Building and Planning may also require the same along the east boundary of the site where adjacent to any single-family lot across Carnine Road. The type of screening shall be determined by the Division of Building and Planning, depending on the use located in proximity to such boundaries and its potential impacts on adjoining properties. Twenty (20) feet of Type I landscaping shall also be required between such screening and the property line. If screening is not required along the west property line, 20 feet of Type I landscaping shall still be required adjacent to any single-family lot across Canine Road. Access to Canine Road and Main Avenue shall also be prohibited, as recommended by County Engineering. The development standards of the B-3 zone shall otherwise be applicable to development of the site. The Division of Building and Planning always has the authority to place additional conditions on site development where necessary to mitigate environmental impacts on adjacent properties. The applicant has the right to request changes to any required conditions through the change of conditions public hearing process. With the above added conditions, it can be found that the proposal generally complies with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. Conditions in the area in which the property is located have changed substantially since the property was Last zoned. 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 14.402.020 (2). Washington courts have not required a "strong" showing of change. The rule is flexible, and each case is to be judged on its own facts. Bassani v. County Commissioners, 70 Wn. App. 389, 394 (1993). Recent cases have held that changed circumstances are not required for a rezone if the proposed rezone implements policies of a comprehensive plan. Bjarnson at 846; Save Our Rural Environment v. Snohomish County, 99 Wn.2d 363, 370-371 (1983). HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 6 There is sufficient evidence of change in the area since the adoption of the Zoning Code in 1986, and the cross -over zoning of the site to the B-2 zone in 1991, to justify rezoning the site to the B-3 zone. Considerable growth has occurred in the Spokane Valley east of Sullivan Road, particularly south of Sprague Avenue and near Liberty Lake. This growth has augmented the demand for B-3 uses along Sprague Avenue in the vicinity. Earlier in 1996, the Hearing Examiner approved B-3 zoning across Sprague Avenue from the site in Building and Planning File No. ZE- 11-96. Sprague Avenue west of Sullivan Road and the Sullivan Road corridor north of Sprague Avenue are becoming saturated with new commercial development, and commercial growth has been increasing along Sprague Avenue east of Sullivan Road. 3. The proposed rezone bears a substantial relationship and is not detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare. General consistency with a local government's comprehensive plan is relevant in determining whether a rezone bears a substantial relationship to the public welfare. Bassani at 396-98. As noted, the proposal generally conforms to the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal will provide regional business services to the growing population in the south Spokane Valley. 4. The proposed zone chance complies with the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act and the Countv's Local Environmental Ordinance. The procedural requirements of chapter 43.21C RCW and chapter 11.10 of the Spokane County Code have been met. The Hearing Examiner concurs with the Determination of NonSignificance issued by the Division of Building and Planning. As conditioned, the proposal will not have more than a moderate effect on the quality of the environment. 5. The proposal as conditioned complies with the Regional Business (B-3) zone, the Spokane County Zoning Code (SCZC) and applicable land use regulations. The proposal has been conditioned for compliance with the permitted uses and development standards of the B-3 zone. Compliance with the B-3 zone and other applicable land use regulations shall be further determined through the administrative site plan review process. The Hearing Examiner also finds that the right of way dedications required of the applicant are roughly proportionate to the impact of the proposal on the County road system. III. DECISION Based on the Findings and Conclusion above, the above zone reclassification application is approved, subject to the conditions of the various public agencies specified below. 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 requirements of other agencies with jurisdiction over land development. HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 7 SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF BUILDING & PLANNING The proposal shall comply with the Regional Business (B-3) zone and the Aquifer Sensitive Area (ASA) Overlay zone, as amended. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a site development plan pursuant to Spokane County Zoning Code Chapter 14.408. 3. The Division of Building and 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 Spokane County Division of Building 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 Building and Planning. Approval is required by the Division Director/designee of a specific lighting and signing plan for the described property prior to the release of any building permits. A specific landscape plan, planting schedule and provisions for maintenance acceptable to the Division Director/designee shall be submitted with a performance bond, or other suitable guarantee, for the project prior to release of building permits. Landscaping shall be installed and maintained so that sight distance at access points is not obscured or impaired. Direct light from any exterior area lighting fixture shall not extend over the property boundary. The applicant shall contact the Division of Building and Planning at the earliest possible stage in order to be informed of code requirements administered/enforced as authorized by the State Building Code Act. Design/development concerns include: Addressing, fire apparatus access roads, fire hydrant/flow, approved water systems, building accessibility, construction type, occupancy classification, exiting, exterior wall protection, and energy code regulations. (Note: The Division of Building and Planning reserves the right to confirm the actual address at the time of building permit.) 8. A six (6)-foot-high concrete, masonry or decorative block wall, solid landscaping, or site - obscuring fence shall be provided and maintained along the north boundary of the property; and such screening shall also be required at the discretion of the Division of Building and Planning along the west boundary line of the site across Carnine Street from any single-family lots. The type of such screening shall be determined by the Division of Building and Planning HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 8 based on the type of use located in proximity to such boundary and the impacts generated on nearby single-family properties. Twenty (20) feet of Type I landscaping shall also be installed between such screening and the property line. If screening is not required along the west boundary of the site across Camine Street from any single-family lot, 20 feet of Type I landscaping shall still be installed along such boundary across from such single-family lot. SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF ENGINEERING Access permits for approaches to the County Road System shall be obtained from the County Engineer. Applicant shall submit for approval by the Spokane County Engineer road, drainage and access plans. 3. 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 4. To construct the roadway improvements stated herein, the applicant may, with the approval of the County Engineer, Join in and be willing to participate in any petition or resolution which purpose is the formation of a Road Improvement District (RID) for said improvement pursuant to RCW 36.88, as amended. Spokane County will not participate in the cost of these improvements. This provision is applicable to Sprague Avenue, Main Avenue. As an altemative method of constructing the road improvements stated herein, the applicant may, with the approval of the County Engineer, accomplish the road improvements stated herein by joining and participating in a County Road Project (CRP) to the extent of the required improvement. Spokane County will not participate in the cost of these improvements. This provision is applicable to Sprague Avenue and Main Avenue. The construction of the roadway improvements stated herein shall be accomplished as approved by the Spokane County Engineer. The County Engineer has designated a Special Roadway Section for the improvement of Sprague Avenue which is adjacent to the proposed development. This will require the installation of varying amounts of asphalt along the frontage of the development. Curbing and sidewalk must also be constructed. 8. The County Engineer has designated a Local Access Roadway Section for the improvement of Main Avenue which is adjacent to the proposed development. This will require the addition of approximately 5-7 feet of asphalt along the frontage of the development. Curbing and sidewalk must also be constructed. HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 9 All required improvements shall conform to the current State of Washington Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge construction and other applicable county standards and/or adopted resolutions pertaining to Road Standards and Stormwater Management in effect at the date of construction, unless otherwise approved by the County Engineer. 10. Access to Carnine and Main Avenue shall be prohibited until such time as specifically authorized by the Spokane County Engineer. 11. Roadway standards, typical roadway sections and drainage plan requirements are found in Spokane Board of County Commissioners resolution 95-0498 as amended and are applicable to this proposal. 12. No construction work is to be performed within the existing or proposed 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. 13. No construction within the existing 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 improvements shall be filed with the County Engineer. 14. Applicant shall sign "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) in interest hereby request and authorize Spokane County to include the above described property in a Road Improvement District (RID) and to support the formation of a Road Improvement District for improvement of the road(s) described below by requesting and authorizing Spokane County to place their name(s) on a petition for the formation of a Road Improvement District pursuant 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 36.88.030, and/or by not filing a protest against the formation of a RID being formed under the alternative resolution method provided for in RCW 36.88.065 and Chapter 35.43 RCW. If a RID is proposed for improvement of the road(s) described below, said owner(s) and successor(s)further 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 RID by the property included therein, together with the amount of any County participation, exceeds the cost and expense of formation of the RID, and (3) that the property within the proposed RID is sufficiently developed; provided, themselves, their heirs, grantees, assigns and successor(s) shall retain the right, 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 HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 10 method under Chapter 36.88 RCW and to appeal to the Superior Court the decision of the Board of County Commissioners confirming the final assessment roll; provided further, it is recognized that actual assessments may vary from 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 property. It is further acknowledged and agreed that at such 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 improvements 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 and Sprague Avenue. 15. The County Arterial Road plan identifies Sprague Avenue as a Principal Arterial. The existing right of way width of 85 feet 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 10 feet in width along the Sprague Avenue frontage be set aside in reserve. This property may be acquired by Spokane County at the time when Arterial' Improvements are made to Sprague Avenue. 16. The applicant should be advised that there may exist utilities either underground or overhead affecting the applicants property, including property to be dedicated or set aside future acquisition. Spokane 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. 17. The applicant shall grant applicable border easements adjacent to Spokane County Right of Way per Spokane County Standards. 18. A traffic analysis has been done for this land use proposal. Based on information from the study, a traffic signal shall be constructed by the applicant at Conklin and Sprague Avenue. Spokane County will be improving Sprague Avenue from Sullivan Road to Tschirley Road beginning in the spring of 1998. The applicant shall construct the signal concurrently with this construction. The Shelley Lake Estates a plat approved south of Sprague Avenue also has the responsibility to construct a traffic signal at Conklin Road. Based on information in the study warrants are now being met at this intersection if any new final plats are done for this plat it would be the developers responsibility to construct the signal. Should the applicant move ahead to seek a building permit for this commercial rezone adequate surety shall be provided to insure the construction of the signalization. HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 11 SPOKANE COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AUTHORITY 1. All air pollution regulations must be met (see memos from SCAPCA dated August 29, 1996 and September 4, 1996). SPOKANE COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT (ENVIRONMENTAL) 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 an existing public water supply when approved by the Regional Engineer (Spokane), State Department of Health. 4. Use of private wells and water systems is prohibited. 5. A public sewer system will be made available for the project and individual service will be provided to each building. SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF UTILII ILS 1. A Covenant Agreement shall be signed stating; 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 signing of a protest petition against the formation of a ULID by resolution method pursuant to RCW 36.94 which includes the owner(s) property. PROVIDED, this condition shall not prohibit the owner(s) or Successor(s) from objection to any assessment(s) on the property as a result of improvements called for in conjunction with the formation of a ULID by either petition or resolution under RCW 36.94. A wet (live) sewer connection to the area -wide Public Sewer System is to be constructed. Sewer connection permit is required. Applicant is required to sign a Sewer Connection Agreement prior to issuance of permit to connect. Applicant shall submit expressly to Spokane County Utilities Department "under separate cover," only those plan sheets showing sewer plans and specifications for: Public Sewer Connections and Facilities for review and approval prior to the finalization of the project and or the issuance of permit to connect. Security shall be deposited with the Utilities Department for construction of Public Sewer Connections and Facilities prior to the finalization of the project and or the issuance of the permit to connect to the Public Sewer System. HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 12 Any water service for this project shall be provided in accordance with the Coordinated Water System Plan for Spokane County, as amended. DATED this 26t,day of October, 1996. SPOKANE COUNTY H H ARE% EXAMINER Michael C. Dempsey, WSBA n82.i5 NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION AND NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Pursuant to Spokane County Resolution Nos. 96-0171 and 96-0632, the decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application for a change of conditions and associated SEPA determination is final and conclusive unless within ten (10) calendar days from the Examiner's written decision, a party of record aggrieved by such decision files an appeal with the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington. However, RCW 36.70B.110 (9) indicates that administrative appeals of land use decisions and SEPA'appeals shall be filed with the board of county commissioners within fourteen (14) calendar days of the date of the decision. Depending on which appeal period is applicable, the appeal closing date is November 8, 1996 or November 13, 1996. Appeal procedures are otherwise set forth in County Resolution Nos. 96-0632 and 96-0171, and include the payment of an appeal fee of $225 as well as paying for production of a transcript and copies of the official record. The Board will hold a closed record hearing. Following the closed record hearing, the Board may affirm, reverse, modify, or remand the matter to the Hearing Examiner. Prior to appeal, the complete project file, including this decision, is available for review at the office of the Spokane County Hearing Examiner. Copies of the file and electronic recording of the public hearing conducted by the Hearing Examiner will be made available at the cost provided by County resolution or ordinance. The office hours of the Spokane County Hearing Examiner are generally Monday through Friday, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Following any appeal, the record will be filed with the Board of County Commissioners and may be inspected at such office during normal business hours. (This Decision was mailed by Certified Mail to the Applicant on October 30, 1996) HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 13 NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Pursuant to Spokane County Resolution No. 96-0171, the decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application for a change of conditions is final and conclusive unless within ten (10) days from the issuance of the Examiner's decision, a party of record files an appeal with the Board of County Commissioners. The Board shall hold a closed record hearing under procedures to be adopted by the Board. Following the closed record hearing, the Board may affirm, reverse, modify, or remand the matter to the Hearing Examiner. The date of issuance of the decision is three days after it is mailed, as provided in chapter 36.70C RCW. (This Decision was mailed by Certified Mail to the Applicant on October 30, 1996) HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision Page 14