Loading...
VE-04-02RE: SPOKANE COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER Variance from fence height restrictions, in the Urban Residential-3.5 (UR-3.5) Zone; Applicant: The Oaks School File No. VE-04-02 FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND DECISION This matter coming on for public hearing on June 12, 2002, the Hearing Examiner, after review of the land use application and the entire record, and finding good cause therefore, hereby makes the following findings of fact, conclusions of law and decision: I. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The variance application requests a variance from the maximum height restrictions of the County Zoning Code for a non -sight obstructing, residential fence in the front yard, flanking street yard and side yard, for a school playground in the Urban Residential-3.5 (UR-3.5) zone. 2. The site is located east of and adjacent to Havana Street, south of and adjacent to 6th Avenue, and north of and adjacent to 7th Avenue, in the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4, Section 23, Township 25 North, Range 43 EWM, Spokane County, Washington. 3. The site is currently referenced as County Assessor's tax parcel nos. 35232.4102, .4103, .4104 and .4105. The subject property is addressed at 4302 E. 6th Avenue and 517 S. Havana Street. The site is legally described as Lots 3-10 of Carnhope Addition, recorded at Book "B", Page 89 of Plats, records of Spokane County_ Auditor, in Spokane County Washington. 4. The applicant is The Oaks School, c/o Greg Ditton, 3011 S. Lincoln Drive, Spokane, WA 99203. The legal owner of the site is Glad Tidings Assembly of God, 4224 E. 4th Avenue, Spokane, WA 99202. 5. The Hearing Examiner conducted a site visit on June 11, 2002. A public hearing was held on the proposed rezone on June 12, 2002. The requirements for notice of public hearing were met. 6. The Hearing Examiner heard the application pursuant to the County Hearing Examiner Ordinance (County Resolution No. 96-0171) and the County Hearing Examiner Rules of Procedure (County Resolution No. 96-0294). 7. The following persons testified at the public hearing: Jason Langbehn Division of Planning 1026 West Broadway Spokane, WA 99260 Scott Engelhard Division of Engineering 1026 West Broadway Spokane, WA 99260 HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision VE-04-02 Page 1 Greg Ditton 3011 S. Lincoln Drive Spokane, WA 99203 Gordon Churchill 4307 E. 6tb Avenue Spokane, WA 99202 8. The Examiner left the record open after the public hearing to allow the applicant to resolve differences with an adjoining property owner regarding the design of the proposed fence. The applicant submitted a letter dated July 2, 2002 from the applicant to a neighboring property owner, Gordon Churchill, indicating an agreement between such parties regarding the design of the fence. 9. On July 8, 2002, the Examiner notified the applicant by letter that the proposed variance would be approved, subject to the entry of a written decision. 10. The Hearing Examiner takes notice of the County GMA Comprehensive Plan and Capital Facilities Plan, the Phase I Development Regulations, the 2001 County Standards for Road and Sewer Construction, County official zoning maps, County Zoning Code, County Code, other applicable development regulations, and prior land use decisions in the vicinity. 11. The record includes the documents in the project file at the time of the public hearing, the documents and testimony submitted at the public hearing, the documents submitted for the record after the hearing through July 8, 2002, and the items taken notice of by the Hearing Examiner. 12. The variance application, which was submitted on June 12, 2002, is exempt from compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act and the County's Local Environmental Ordinance, pursuant to WAC 197-11-800 (6)(b). 13. The site is approximately 1.2 acres in size, relatively flat in topography, and rectangular in shape. The south half of the property is improved with a 2,000-square foot shop and an adjacent grass playfield, while the north half is paved. A 4-foot high, non -sight obstructing, cyclone fence surrounds the perimeter of the site, except that the east side lot line is partially fenced. 14. The site plan of record submitted on May 17, 2002, illustrates an 8-foot high, non -sight obstructing, cyclone fence around the perimeter of the subject property. This includes fencing along the two front yards on the site (6th Avenue and 7th Avenue), the flanking street yard (Havana Street), and side yard (east property line). 15. Section 14.810.020 (1) of the County Zoning Code prohibits any non -sight obstructing fence more than 48 inches in height from being erected and/or maintained within the required front yard or flanking street yard of any lot used for residential purposes, and also prohibits any residential fence from exceeding six (6) feet in height. 16. Section 14.810.020 (2) of the County Zoning Code prohibits residential, commercial or industrial fencing that constitutes a hazard to the traveling public, as determined by the County Engineer, within the area designated in such section as the "clear view triangle." In cases where HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision VE-04-02 Page 2 the clear view triangle will not provide adequate sight distance, County Planning and the County Engineer may determine the required area needed to reduce hazards to the traveling public. 17. Effective January 15, 2002, the County implemented a new comprehensive plan ("GMA Comprehensive Plan"), Capital Facilities Plan, County Urban Growth Area (UGA) boundaries, and Phase I Development Regulations; all pursuant to the State Growth Management Act (GMA). The County also repealed the interim development regulations previously adopted by the County under the State Growth Management Act. See County Resolution No. 2-0037. Minor revisions were made to the Phase I Development Regulations on May 7, 2002. See County Resolution No. 2-0470. 18. The land lying west of the site is located in the City of Spokane. The Phase I Development Regulations designate the site and neighboring land, except to the west, in the Low Density category of the GMA Comprehensive Plan, and inside the County UGA. Such regulations preserved the UR-3.5 zoning of the site and neighboring properties to the north, south and east. The site is also located inside the Aquifer Sensitive Overlay zone. 19. Surrounding land uses consist of single-family homes on urban -sized lots. The applicant is currently leasing the subject property from the owner, and plans to build a permanent school on the site within 4-5 years. 20. The purpose of the variance is to improve the safety and security of the playground. This includes the prevention of balls from entering the street or sidewalks, which would have to be retrieved by children along the busy arterial of Havana Street; and to provide safety in an area frequented by transients. Construction of the fence outside the required yards would make the playground, which is open to neighborhood children and Oaks School, too small to be useable. 21. The applicant submitted a sight distance analysis prepared by a qualified engineering consultant. The analysis recommended that the proposed fence be located further from Havana Street at its intersections with 6th and 7th Avenues. County Engineering concurred with the analysis, and required compliance with the recommendations contained in the analysis as a condition of approval. The City Engineer indicated that the proposed variance was acceptable as long as the clear view zone was not obstructed. The site plan of record was revised to conform to the site distance analysis. 22. The Staff Report properly analyzes the consistency of the proposed variance with the GMA Comprehensive Plan and the variance criteria specified in the County Zoning Code. The Examiner hereby adopts and incorporates such analysis by reference herein as findings of fact. 23. The proposal has been conditioned for compliance with the understanding reached between the applicant and the owner (Gordon Churchill) of the property Lying directly north of the site, across 6th Avenue, regarding the design of the fence. A resident (Jeremy Foster) of land lying east of the site, along 7th Avenue, expressed support for the proposal. As conditioned, there was no public agency or private opposition to the proposal. HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision VE-04-02 Page 3 24. The proposed variance, as conditioned, will not have any significant adverse impact on neighboring properties. Based on the above findings of fact, the Hearing Examiner enters the following: IL CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, strict application of the maximum fence height requirements of Zoning Code 14.810.020 (1) creates practical difficulties and deprives the property of rights and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and similarly zoned. 2. As conditioned and modified, granting of the subject variance will neither be detrimental to the public welfare nor injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and the Urban Residential-3.5 (UR-3.5) zone in which the site is located. The proposal, as conditioned, conforms to the GMA Comprehensive Plan. 4. The proposal, aside from the deviances requested by the proposed variance, complies with the Zoning Code and other applicable development regulations. 5. The variance application, as conditioned, meets the criteria for approving a variance under Chapter 14.404 of the County Zoning Code. Approval of the variance application, as conditioned, is appropriate under section 11 of the County Hearing Examiner Ordinance, adopted by County Resolution No. 96-0171. III. DECISION Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated above, the application for a variance from the maximum height requirements for a non -sight obstructing, residential fence contained in Section 14.810.020 of the County Zoning Code, is hereby approved subject to the conditions of approval listed below. Any conditions of public agencies that have been added to or significantly revised are italicized. Failure to comply with the conditions of this approval may result in suspension or revocation of the variance by the Hearing Examiner. SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF PLANNING 1. All conditions imposed by the Hearing Examiner shall be binding on the "Applicant," which term shall include the developer and owner of the property, and their heirs, assigns and successors. VE-04-02 Page 4 HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision 2. The variance applies to the property legally described as Lots 3-10 of Carnhope Addition, recorded at Book `B", Page 89 of Plats, records of Spokane County Auditor, in Spokane County Washington. The site is currently referenced as County Assessor's tax parcel nos. 35232.4102, .4103, .4104 and .4105. 3. The proposal shall comply with the Urban Residential-3.5 zone and other applicable provisions of the Spokane County Zoning Code, as amended, except for the deviation allowed by the approval of the setback variances. 4. The applicant shall develop the proposed fencing in conformance with the site plan of record submitted on May 17, 2002, except as modified to comply with conditions of approval and regulation standards. Minor variations, to be approved by the Director of the Division of Planning/designee, shall only be allowed to meet regulation standards and conditions of approval. Any other modification must be presented to the Hearing Examiner for review and approval. 5. The fence shall generally be designed as indicated in the letter dated July 2, 2002, from Greg Ditton to Mike Dempsey, in File No. VE-04-02. 6. The Division of Planning shall prepare and record with the Spokane County Auditor a Title Notice, which notes that the property in question is subject to a variety of special conditions imposed as a result of this approval. This Title Notice shall serve as public notice of the conditions of approval affecting the property in question. The Title Notice shall be recorded within the same time frame as allowed for an appeal and shall only be released, in full or in part, by the Division of Planning. The Title Notice shall generally provide as follows: "The parcel of property legally described as Lots 3-10 of Carnhope Addition, recorded at Book `B", Page 89 of Plats, records of Spokane County Auditor, in Spokane County Washington, is the subject of a land use action by the Spokane County Hearing Examiner on August 20, 2002, approving a height variance for a fence and imposing a variety of special development conditions. File Number VE-04-02 is available for inspection and copying in the Spokane County Division of Planning." SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF ENGINEERING AND ROADS Prior to release of a building permit or use of property as proposed: 1. The fence shall be constructed in accordance with the recommendations of the sight distance analysis submitted on April 25, 2002, by CLC Associates, prepared by Timothy Schwab, P.E. The sight distance analysis has been accepted by the County Engineer, per letter dated May 2, 2002, from Steve Stair, P.E., Spokane County Transportation Engineer. 2. Roadway standards, typical roadway sections and drainage plan requirements are found in Spokane County Resolution No. 1-0298, as amended, and are applicable to this proposal. HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision VE-04-02 Page 5 3. No construction work is to be performed within the existing or proposed public right of way until plans have been issued by the County Engineer. All work is subject to inspection and approval by the County Engineer. Approach permits are required for any access to the Spokane County road system. 5. The applicant is advised that there may exist utilities either underground or overhead affecting the applicant's 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 contact the applicable utilities regarding responsibility for adjustment or relocation costs and to make arrangements for any necessary work. CITY OF SPOKANE DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING SERVICES/TRAFFIC ENGINEERING 1. Construction of the fence at 6th Avenue and Havana Street must not obstruct the clear view zone. 2. The City and the County will cooperatively require appropriate signage and markings for the school crossings. This was begun with the permitting process. DATED this 20th day of August, 2002. _ SPOKANE COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER C Michae C. Dempsey, WSBA #8235 HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision VE-04-02 Page 6 NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION AND NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Pursuant to Spokane County Resolution No. 96-0171, the decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application for a variance is final and conclusive unless within twenty-one (21) calendar days from the issuance of the Examiner's decision, a party with standing files a land use petition in superior court pursuant to chapter 36.70C RCW. Pursuant to chapter 36.70C RCW, the date of issuance of the Hearing Examiner's decision is three (3) days after it is mailed. This Decision was mailed by Certified Mail to the Applicant and by first class mail to other parties of record on August 20, 2002. The date of issuance of the Hearing Examiner's decision is therefore August 23, 2002, counting to the next business day when the last day for mailing falls on a weekend or holiday. 1'HE LAST DAY FOR APPEAL OF THIS DECISION TO SUPERIOR COURT BY LAND USE PETITION IS SEPTEMBER 13, 2002. The complete record in this matter, including this decision, is on file during the appeal period with the Office of the Hearing Examiner, Third Floor, Public Works Building, 1026 West Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington, 99260-0245. The file may 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. Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.130, affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision VE-04-02 Page 7