VE-9-91ZONING ADJUSTOR
SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON
IN THE MATTER OF A VARIANCE FROM)
MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT IN THE )
FRONT YARD )
[VE-9-91] RONALD WILLCOCKS )
COMPANION FILES: CV-62-89 )
ADDRESS: 7308 E. 1ST AVENUE
PARCEL NUMBER: 35241.0407
FINDINGS OF FACT,
CONCLUSIONS,
AND DECISION
APPLICATION DESCRIPTION: The applicant proposes to allow a 6 foot high cyclone
fence to remain in the front yard of a vacant lot in a residential zone; whereas, section
14.810.020 requires that no cyclone fence be more than 48 inches in height in the front yard in
a residential zone. Authority
to consider such a request exists pursuant to section 14.404.080 the Zoning Code for Spokane
County and Spokane County Board of County Commissioners resolution No. 89 0708, as
may be amended.
PROJECT LOCATION: Located in east central Spokane County, south of and adjacent to
1st Avenue and approximately 500 feet west of Park Road in the NE 1/4 of Section 24,
Township 25 N. Range 43 EWM; 7308 E. 1st Avenue.
OPPONENTS OF RECORD: NONE
PUBLIC HEARING AND DECISION: After consideration of all available information
on file, exhibits submitted and testimony received during the course of the public hearing held
on May 8, 1991, and the Zoning Adjustor rendered a written decision on Y►kl 41. / 6
1991 to APPROVE the application as set forth in the file documents and as conditioned below.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
1. The proposal is described above and detailed in documents contained in the file.
2. In compliance with RCW 36.70.450, the Planning Department determined that this
proposal is not inconsistent, as conditioned, with the Urban category of the Comprehensive
Plan.
3. The site is zoned Urban Residential - 7 (UR-7), which allows the proposed use
upon approval of this application.
CASE NO. VE-9-91 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 2
4. The existing land uses in the area of the proposal include business and commercial
to the north and mildly deteriorated to very deteriorated residential to the east, south and west,
all of which are compatible with the proposal.
5. The applicant claims, as one of his special circumstances justifying a variance, that
Spokane County will shortly be purchasing this parcel as a site of the Second Avenue arterial
system. Checking with the County Engineer's Office, the Zoning Adjustor finds this to
generally be the case. The tentative, but relatively advanced, firm plans call for the arterial to
be centered almost precisely on top of this parcel. The applicant also claims that the property
has been subject to vandalism and has been used as an illegal drug exchange site. This was not
substantiated; but to the extent it is true, it contributes to the special circumstances associated
with this property.
The County is presently in the process of drafting the Environmental Impact Statement which
will help to finalize the exact location of the future arterial. If the property is to be purchased
for the roadway, it would likely happen within the next 7 to 12 months. The property would
then sit, along with all other similar acquisitions as vacant land until construction would occur
in approximately 1 1/2 to 3 years. The County Engineer's Office reports to the Zoning
Adjustor that all structures will be removed in order to keep them from being vandalized and a
general hazard to the public. It is entirely likely that this fence may remain, as it does not
contribute to vandalism and is not attractive nuisance. The applicant mentioned, and it does
seem reasonable to speculate affirmatively, that this enclosed fenced area may serve as some
kind of an equipment or material storage area during a portion of the construction. At any rate
the fence, without the barbed wire topping, seems to not pose a problem in the sense that it
would normally pose in an established, well kept, single family neighborhood.
6. The proposal is exempt from the provisions of the Washington State Environmental
Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 (6) (b).
7. No adverse testimony or written comments were received regarding the proposal.
8. To the extent that acquisition by Spokane County occurs, it will take care of this
situation. On the other hand, if Spokane County does not acquire the property and it evolves
into a more traditional and upbeat residential situation, the fence in the front yard would not be
appropriate. The reasons for granting the variance are to do with the property being in limbo
prior to apparent acquisition by Spokane County. Therefore, it is reasonable to approve the
variance only insofar as it relieves the applicant from possibly removing a fence which may be
of later use to the County. In the event that property acquisition does not occur, the Zoning
Adjustor should revisit the situation and possibly determine a different outcome for the fence.
Three years seems like a reasonable period of time for Spokane County to proceed and finalize
its plan.
9 . The Zoning Adjustor may require such conditions of approval as necessary and
appropriate to make the project most compatible with the public interest and general welfare.
10. Various performance standards and criteria are additionally needed to make the use
compatible with other permitted activities in the same vicinity and zone and to ensure against
imposing excessive demands upon public utilities, and these shall be addressed as conditions
of approval.
VE-9-91 DECISION
CASE NO. VE-9-91 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR
PAGE 3
11. With the conditions of approval set forth below, the variance will: a) not constitute
a grant of special privileges inconsistent with limitations on other properties in the vicinity and
similar zone; b) ensure that the intent and purpose of the Zoning Code is achieved with regard
to location, site design, appearance, landscaping, etc.; and c) protect the environment, public
interest and general welfare.
DECISION
From the foregoing Findings and Conclusions, the Zoning Adj
the proposal as generally set forth in the file documents, subject to compli
following
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
I. GENERAL
stor APPROVES
ce with the
1. The following conditions shall apply to the applicant, owner and successors in
interest; but shall not run with the land indefinitely.
2. The Zoning Adjustor may administratively make minor adjustments to site plans or
the conditions of approval as may be judged by the Zoning Adjustor to be within the context of
the original decision.
II. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1. This parcel shall not be further subdivided unless consistent with RCW 58.17, the
various county subdivision regulations and the Spokane County Comprehensive Plan for the
area.
2. The variance is only granted on the presumption that Spokane County is going to
eventually acquire the property and that the fence, at the present time, serves a useful purpose
to secure the property from vandalism and trespass. In the event the County has not acquired
the land by June 1, 1994, the Zoning Adjustor shall re-examine the situation. At that time the
Zoning Adjustor may administratively extend the variance situation based on the likelihood of it
being acquired by Spokane County or may suspend the variance if it is found that the Second
Avenue arterial or any pertinent feeder streets thereto will not be utilizing this parcel of land.
The Zoning Adjustor or the owner of the land may call for a public hearing to explore the issue
of whether or not the fence should remain.
3. The applicant shall remove the barbed wire from the top part of the fence within 30
days of the final disposition of this order. The barbed wire shall be disposed of in a safe
manner and not left at the property.
VE-9-91 DECISION
CASE NO. VE-9-91 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 4
1. None is needed.
1. None is needed.
1. None is needed.
III. DIVISION OF BUILDINGS
IV. UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
V. HEALTH DISTRICT
VI. SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEER'S OFFICE
1. Applicant's fence shall not encroach on Spokane County Road right of way, (1st
Avenue). If the fence was constructed within the right of way, the applicant, at the County
Engineer's discretion, may be financially responsible for its removal.
NOTICE: PENDING COMPLETION OF ALL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL WHICH
NEED TO BE COMPLE I'ED PRIOR TO PERMIT ISSUANCE, PERMITS MAY BE
RELEASED PRIOR TO THE LAPSE OF THE I'EN (10)-DAY APPEAL PERIOD.
HOWEVER, THE COUNTY HAS NO LIABILITY FOR EXPENSES AND
INCONVENIENCE INCURRED BY THE APPLICANT IF THE PROJECT APPROVAL IS
OVERTURNED OR ALTERED UPON APPEAL.
DATED this iv day of May , 1991.
THOM S $ MOSHER, AICP
Z nin_ Adjustor
Spokane • ty, Washington
FILED:
1) Applicant (Certified/Return Receipt Mail)
2) Opponents of Record
3) Spokane County Engineer's Office
4) Spokane County Health District
5) Spokane County Utilities Department
6) Spokane County Division of Buildings
7) Planning Department Cross-reference File and/or Electronic File
8) CV-62-89
9) Stan Waltz, Deputy Prosecuting Attorney
VE-9-91 DECISION
CASE NO. VE-9-91 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING ADJUSTOR PAGE 5
NO 1'E: ONLY THE APPLICANT OR AN OPPONENT OF RECORD MAY FILE AN
APPEAL WITHIN TEN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE ABOVE DATE OF SIGNING.
APPEAL MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A $100.00 FEE. APPEALS MAY BE FILED AT
THE SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT, BROADWAY CENTRE
BUILDING, NORTH 721 JEFFERSON STREET, SPOKANE, WA 99260 (Section
14.412.042 of the Zoning Code for Spokane County).
VE-9-91 DECISION
fl
11
DEPARTMENT OF BUILDINGS
JAMES L. MANSON, C.B.O., DIRECTOR
A DIVISION OF THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
DENNIS M. SCOTT, P.E., DIRECTOR
TO: ZoNIN, , Planning Department
FROM: Tom Davis, Code Compliance Coordinator
DATE: ��� t t_ I ( i9
RE: File Number: - 9 9 I
Address: C.
- t's7 3fJ
Our comments regarding the above are reflected in the marked box(es) below:
The applicant shall contact the Department of Buildings at the earliest possible stage of design/development•in order to be
informed of code requirements administered/enforced by the department; e.g., State Building Code Act regulations such as
requirements for fire hydrant/flow, fire apparatus access roads, street address asignment, barrier -free regulations, energy code
regulations, and general coordination with other aspects of project implementation.
Theissuance of a building permit by the Department of Buildings is required.
Requirements of Fire District No. need to be satisfied during the building permit process.
The applicant is advised that the private road shall be named and signed in accordance with the provisions of Spokane County
Road Standards. This condition may be waived in the event that the Department of Buildings determines addressing on the
private road is not acceptable. However, at such time the Department of Buildings feels the need for the road to become a
private, named road, the applicant/owner shall participate and cooperate in this process.
Therequired fire flow for any building or subdivision is determined by building size, type of construction and proximity of
exposures, Based on information presented to this office regarding this subdivision, the minimum fire flow established by code
of 500 gallons per minute for 30 minutes is being required.
Hydrant distribution will be as follows: Residential Development(s)- Fire hydrants shall be located at roadway intersections
wherever possible and the maximum average distance between them shall be no furhter than 900 feet and these hydrants shall
be placed so no portion of the structures are in excess of 450 feet from a hydrant.
We have no requirements for this proposal - existing conditions.
•
No additional comments.
Specific comments are as follows:
CODE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
WEST 1303 BROADWAY • SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99260-0550 • (509) 456-3695
FAX (s09) 4SA- e7m
Y(1� J( l`
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
BROADWAY CENTRE BUILDING N. 721 JEFFERSON STREET
PHONE 456-2205
SPOKANE, WASHINGTON 99260
SPOKANE COUNTY COURTHOUSE
NOTICE OF §Iln®IKANIE COUNTY ZORANG AIDSUTIPOIE. IIFU
IHIIEARIING
DATE: May 8, 1991
TIME: 10:30 a. m. or as soon thereafter as possible
PLACE: Spokane County Planning Department
2nd Floor Hearing Room, Broadway Centre Building
721 North Jefferson Street
Spokane, WA 99260
1,)
I/
LIIC
AGENDA ITEM #: 2
File: VE-9-91
VARIANCE FROM MAXIMUM FENCE HEIGHT IN THE FRONT YARD:
LOCATION: Located in east central Spokane County, south of and adjacent to lst Avenue and
approximately 500 feet west of Park Road in the NE 1/4 of Section 24, Township 25N, Range 43
EWM; 7308 E. lst Avenue.
PROPOSAL: Applicant is requesting permission to allow a 6 foot high cyclone fence to remain
in the front yard of a vacant lot; whereas, section 14.810.020 requires that no cyclone fence be
more than 48 inches in height in the front yard in a residential zone.
EXISTING ZONING: Urban Residential -7 (UR-7)
SITE SIZE: Approximately 7907 square feet
APPLICANT: Ronald Willcocks
1305 N. Wilbur
Spokane WA 99206
NO'1'E: ONLY THE APPLICANT OR AN OPPONENT OF RECORD MAY FILE AN APPEAL
WITHIN 1'EN (10) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE ABOVE DA FE OF SIGNING. APPEAL
MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY A $100.00 NEE. APPEALS MAY BE WILED AT THE
SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT, BROADWAY CENTRE BUILDING,
NORTH 721 JEFFERSON STREET, SPOKANE, WA 99260 (Section 14.412.042 of the Zoning
Code of Spokane County).
RIVERSIDE
` j =10p0
0
VE-9-91
DE. ;; N: TE T
SDRIu6E
A LK I
rH cam,
c, E
GATALDO
HARRIN
• SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
APPLICATIONS BEFORE THE ZONING ADJUSTOR
Certificate of Exemption No.: Application No.:
Name of Applicant: C'Yl d I.4111 I ( mo^ jK Agent: Y()
Street Address: l Y + W 5 Kb i I) I
City: -Dh-e State:
Name of Property Owner(s): PrAck-)-]
Street Address:
City: tom, r G State:
REQUESTED ACTION(S) (Circle appropriate action):
Vanance d _. ' Conditional Use Permit
Other:
v�-�IAQ5
Phone - Home:
Code: -7o, Work:%Y� P
Agent's No.:
Zip ���hone - Home:
Code: t--�) Work:
Expansion of a
Nonconforming Use
e)
11
FOR STAFF USE ONLY
Section.'i Township
•Lot and legal checked by:
•CWSSA Water (pveyor):
•Existing zone: 111C o 7
Violation/
Range Enforcement:
•Easement legal checked by:
•ULID Aggrreeement n
C to Applicable Section: Imo, ao.
•Arterial Road Plan designation: lVA, •Comp. Plan design
•Fire District: Q\ •Personnel doing preapp conf.:,_
•Other/previous Planning Department actions i volvi g this property:
•Hearing Date: �� (_J •Maint. agreem nt checked by: VA
N
ed: Y
lion W r h
n nC(,Yi G ,!rib.)
ABOUT THE PROPERTY
Zip
•Existing use of property:
perty: 7/:! _ �' ' l r�i'/ / '. Cc
•Describe proposed use of the property: a a , I 1 / IL- C
ff t 11 \; rf .L rn 1« Yro
•If a variance a..licati •' , state thee C • • e s . • •and and d s be e v - ance'snug
terms: �' .' • . C �` , ,/,` i - A - .11 r met %sG p
•rf a conditional use permit applicati.n, d• - s propo al meet all standards? Y N.
If not, has one or more variances been requested? Y N. N/A
•What is the size of the original parcel if this proposW is, a recent or proposed division?
fl—pi�S
•Street address of property (if known): � i k-,-f Aieiti1
•Legal description of property (include easement, if applicable):
_Lot 9, Block 4, MIDWAY ADDITION, according to plat thereof recorded in
Volume "T" of Plats, Page 44, in Spokane County, Washington.
IL
4efg3
9c
in comp ble
•Parcel No(s).:
,.
•Source of legal: 1---1 cc "T; --I1(-' I ra%`n( (?m
•Total amount of adjoining land controlled by this owner, sponsor and/or agent: )/
•What interest do you (applicant) hold in the property? )f )( ri'!--
(T(
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS
COUNTY OF SPOKANE )
I SWEAR, UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, THAT: (1) I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OR
AUTHORIZED AGENT FOR THE PROPOSED SITE; (2) IF NOT THE OWNER, WRITTEN PERMISSION
FROM SAID OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON HIS/HER BEHALF IS ATTACHED: AND (3)
ALL OF THE ABOVE RESPONSES AND THOSE ON SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS ARE MADE
TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.
Signed: riL2
Addres • (4) I ID
P ne No.: 72 & Date: /9- 9/
NOTARY SEAL:
ary P he i d f the state of Washington, tiesidir 2
(r LJ My appointment expires:
page 1 of 2
A. BURDEN OF PROOF
It is necessary for the applicant or his/her representative to establish the reasons why the
REQUESTED ACTION should be approved and to literally put forth the basic argument in favor
of approving the application. Accordingly, you should have been given a form for your requested
action (variance, conditional use, etc.) designed to help you present your case in a way which
addresses the criteria which the Zoning Adjustor must consider. Please fill the form out and return
it with your application.
B. SIGN -OFF BY COUNTY DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER AGENCIES
SPOKANE COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT
a) Proposed method of water supply:
b) Proposed method of sewage disposal:
A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant has been informed
of requirements and standards.
(Signature)
(Date) (Sign -off Waived)
SPOKANE COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant
has binfgrmed of requirements and standards.
Signature)
(Date) (Sign -off Waived)
POKANE COUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT (Planning Department may waive
if outside WWMA)
A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant has been informed
of requirements and standards.
(Signature)
(Date) (Sign -off Waived by Planning?)
[ ] The applicant is required to discuss the proposal with
to become informed of water system
requirements and standards. (See #4 below)
[ ] The applicant is required to discuss the proposal with
to become informed of sewage disposal
requirements and standards. (See #5 below)
� 7WATER PURVEYOR:
a) The proposal ids not located within the boundary of our future service area.
b) The proposal is/is not located within the boundary of our current district.
c) We are/are not able to serve this site with adequate water.
d) Satisfactory arrangements have/have not been made to serve this proposal.
(Signature) (Date)
SEWERAGE PURVEYOR:
A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The applicant has been informed
of requirements and standards.
ZA; APP
REV; 1/91
(Signature) (Date)
page 2 of 2
VARIANCE BURDEN of PROOF Form NAME: � LL► I , ] •.i, (fCc/
FILE NUMBER
Introduction to this form:
A "variance" is the means by which an adjustment is made in the application of the specific
regulations of the zoning classification for a particular (the subject) piece of property. This
property, because of special circumstances applicable to it, is deprived of privileges commonly
enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and in a similar zone classification. This adjustment
remedies the difference in privileges. A variance shall not authorize a use otherwise prohibited in
the zone classification in which the property is located.
The following questions will help to determine the outcome of your request. Your request
requires accurate and complete responses. First circle either the "yes" or the "no" answer(s)
following the questions below as they apply to your situation and then explain as needed (in the
space provided) to make your unique situation clear. Certain phrases from the Spokane County
Zoning Code section on -variances are included in these questions: They arc underlined.
If your request is a ROAD FRONTAGE VARIANCE please answer only questions A,B,C,D,
and E.
A. Will this variance permit a use which is otherwise prohibited in this zone? Yes CND
Explain:
B.
Are there special circumstances (lot size, shape, topography, location, access,
surroundings, etc.) which apply to the subject property and which may not
not apply to other properties in the vicinity?
Yes
Explain :
C. Is the subject property deprived of privileg s commonly_ enjoyed by other
properties in the vicinity and in a Limtlar zone classification? Yes
Explain :
D. Will this variance be harmful to the public welfare or to other properties in
the vicinity and a similar zone classification?
Yes No
Explain:
E. Are there other similar situations in the, in a similar zone classification? Yes Now
Are they permitted uses ? Yes Noyt•c ••re they "nonconforming" uses? Yes 7lqro
Explain:
F. Could the subject property be put to a reasonable and permitted use by you or
another person without the requested variance?
es( No�
Explain:
G. If this request is granted, will the subject property be more environmentally sensitive,
energy conserving, or will it promote the use of an historic property? Yes
Explain:
Over please
Rev: 5/22/90
Page 1
H. If this variance is granted, will the broader public need or interest be served? YeCNC
Explain:
I. Will this variance be inconsistent with the purpose of the zoning which applies
to the subject property?
Yes (No)
Explain:
Will approval of this variance grant to the subject property the privileges of a different
zone classification (in other words would this be a "de facto" zone change)? YesCNo
Explain:
K. Will this variance be inconsistent with the general purpose and intent of the
Comprehensive Plan? Ye NC
Explain
Is this variance required for a reasonable economic return from the subject property —
or is the existing structure too small? Yes 'No
Explain: �`
M Did the practical difficulty which caused you to apply for this variance exist
before you owned the subject property?
Explain:
No
Explain:
No
/I / (
eL
1 0 aLt2 - (-7t En s c or,�{ _ � �%.� �ft�UC._� 11LC�i B�Yt C��.21z� D(-
� 0 �t- � ,
Q 4
If approved, would this variance affect land use density regulations which exist
to protect the Rathdrum/Spokane Aquifer?
Yes
The following space is for further explanation. Your application will get better consideration if
what, how, and why you propose your application is clear. Attach an additional page(s) if needed.
'ou are invited to present additional photographs, diagrams, maps, charts, etc. in support of
his application (we have the equipment to display video tapes). No such additional material
required and in any case it must be BRIEF and descriptive of issues which need to be
ansidered in relation to this requested variance. If you have questions about the procedure
> be followed feel free to contact the Spokane County Planning Department (456-2205).
• Page 2
VICINITY ()AP
SPRAGae AVE
jet Eca.-t4j
/= ,.es r Air
d
ELI
S �c AJ /9vt.
iw:.,`..;.usarwewnvmum.der...ws.m»,�,.,rw.aa..rsrRauuw^..ypa2..eaw�--.,"' :--"._ �._ _ .err. .111.11.1 aa.e.
cam'
cc
L
Ltiaf CTe
SCALE
II/-3o/
0
(i)
0
M
�o' G ATc
(oo.00
FIRST" A V F