Loading...
ZE-68-82ENDA, 0_.. 'EK 9, 1982 SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING HEARING EXAMINER COMMIT.!IE Place: Broadway Centre Building, Secoa :lcor North 721 Jefferson Street, Spc:.•.r.a ZONING APPLICATIONS WILL BE HEARD IN THE FOLLO'lliNG ORDER. THE NE!..2r; :r COMITTEll WILL RECESS FROM 12:00 NOON TO 1:30 P.M. FOR LUNCH AT A PLACE TO 3E ,AN CE :r[E,. :TEMS ..._ HEARD PRIOR TO THE 5:00 P.M. ADJOURNMENT, WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT 7.2Y•A_j,,JLE DATE AS ANNOUNCED BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE HEARING EXAMINER COMMITTEE. LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS AND PROJECT DETAILS FOR THESE PROJECTS ARE ON FILE AND -E I; THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S OFFICE. - } " IL ''' 9:00 A.M. A. ZONE RECLASSIFICATIONS 1. ZN -72 -82 LOCAL BUSINESS TO CO"MERCIA'_ (Continued from November 4, 1982 Hearing) (Generally located adjacent to and west of Division Street and approximately 225 feet south of the intersection Holland Road/ Division Street in Section 19- 26 -43.) Proposed Use: Site Size: Owner /Applicant: Retail /Office Complex with Site Plan. Approximately 49,000 square feet STEVE HASSING North 9105 Division Street, Suite Spokane, WA 99218 2. ZN -73 -82 RESIDENTIAL OFFICE /LOCAL BUSINESS TO COiMERCIAL AND /CRLOCAL BUSINESS (Continued from November 4, 1982 Hearing) (Generally located adjacent to and west of Division Street and approximately 150 feet south of the intersection Graves Road/ Division Street in Section 18- 26 -43.) Proposed Use: Site Size: Owner /Applicant: Retail /Office Complex with Site =tan. Approximately 60,693 square feet STEVE HASSING North 9105 Division Street, Suite A Spokane, NA 99218 ZE-68-82 ULTIPLE'FAMILY SUBURBAN TO COMMERCIAL OR LOCAL BUSINESS (Generally located at the southeast corner of Fourth A.veAUe and University Road in Section 21- 25 -44.) Proposed Use: Site Size: Owner /Applicant: No Site Plan. Approximately 23,000 square feet UILLIAM ADAMS c/o Jini Mathis, Sunshine u,okers North 524 Mul l an Road Spokane, WA 99206 (coals ;-d .dENDA, DEr '3ER 9, 1982 - - TE ::EPHC:, : :y - 208 f SPOKANE COUNTY ZONING HEARING EXAMINER COMMI . FEE Place: Broadway Centre Building, Seconc =loor North 721 Jefferson Street, SpcLne (Continued from Page #1) A. ZONE RECLASSIFICATIONS (continued) 4. ZN -69 -82 AGRICULTURAL SUBURBAN TO RESIDENTIAL OF• (Generally located at the soutneast corner of h;: :,tins ;cad and Bellwood Drive in Section 7-26-43.) Proposed Use: Dental Office with Site flan. Site Size: Approximately 19,500 square feet Nner /Applicant: ROBERT M. HUGHES West 624 Hastings Road Spokane, WA 99218 5. ZE -78 -82 AGRICULTURAL TO COMMERCIAL OR LOCAL SUSINESS (Located in extreme east Spokane County, the site is generally bounded by the Spokane River cn the southwest, the Idaho State Line on the east, and Wellesley Avenue on the northwest in Sections 31 -26 -46 and 6- 25 -46.) Proposed Use: No Site Plan Site Size: Approximately 13.15 Acres Owner /Applicant: KENNETH PEARSON c/o Jim Mathis, Sunshine Brokers North 524 Mullen Road Spokane: WA 99206 6. ZE -83 -82 AGRICULTURAL SUBURBAN TO COMM•iERCIAL AND MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBURBAN (Generally located adjacent to and west of Pines Road, adjacent to and south cf Alki Avenue, adjacent Le and north of Valley • Way in Section 16- 25 -44.) Proposed Use: Commercial Park and Apartments - No Site Plan Site Size: Approximately 6.3 Acres Owner /Applicant: NORTH PINES VENTURE East 715 Sprague Avenue Spokane, WA 99202 5:00 P.M. ADJOURNMENT Except when an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) has been prepared, a propose:: declaratio,: of non - significance (a preliminary decision, which may be reversed, that an EIS is not needed) has been administratively issued. This insures the applicant of a timely processinc of his /her proposal at the time of the public hearing. GUT, a major purpose of the public hearing is to afford the opportunity to present the decision makers with inforT.ac..m as to whether or not a potentially SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE impact upon the physical environment will result from implementation of the proposal, thus resulting in the need for an EIS. However, most "change of conditions" are exempt from the provisions of SE;%A; check with the Planning Department staff, if uncertainty exists. * * x * * * ,r * No. 83 0152 IN THE MATTER OF ZE- 68 -82, ) MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBURBAN ) TO COMMERCIAL OR LOCAL ) BUSINESS /ADAMS ) The above referenced matter having come before the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County on February 15, 1983 for a decision, the following motion was made, seconded and passed in conjunction with the zone change request: Mr. Chairman, after carefully considering all public testimony submitted at the public hearing held February 1, 1983, in conjunction with 2E- 68 -82, Multiple Family Suburban to Commercial or Local Business, Adams, Applicant, as well as personally visiting the site, I hereby move that the zone change be approved from Multiple Family Suburban to Local Business. In making this motion I note that the applicant during the course of the public hearing, withdrew his request for com- mercial zoning. Additionally I note that the approved zone change to local business is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The approved re -zone as conditioned, would not be inconsistent and incompatible with the surrounding land use classifications. Finally I note that the Hearing Examiner Committee denied the requested re -zone. I have reviewed very carefully the Findings of Fact and after consultation with counsel, note that several may be legally inappropriate, and additionally deal with the requested commercial zoning, not local business as approved herein. I request that the Planning Commission staff prepare Findings of Fact, Decision and Order reflecting this motion, to include the authorization for the execution of a final declaration of non significance. By BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF DATED this Deputy Clerk SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON ATTEST: WILLIAM E. DONAHUE Clerk of the Board ` 1 DECISION day of Q(J,a.f5 1983. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPQKIy COUNTY, WJkSHINGTON r DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: I. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: STATUS OF APPLICANT: REQUESTED ZONING: EXISTING ZONING: PROPOSED USE: PROJECT LOCATION: II. SITE PLAN INFORMATION STAFF REPORT DECEMBER 9, 1982 HEARING EXAMINER COMMITTEE PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF ZONE RECLASSIFICATION NUMBER: ZE -68 -82 Z14 /K -c 1 WILLIAM ADAMS Owner Commercial or Local Business Multiple Family Suburban (established in 1968) No Site Plan This site is generally located at the south- east corner of Fourth Avenue and University Road in Section 21- 25 -44. SITE SIZE: Approximately .53 acres (± 23,000 sq.ft.) SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The site is flat and contains one single family dwelling and two accessory structures which are to be removed. Fourth Avenue, a residential access street, borders to the north with University Road, an arterial to the west. University Road is an improved four lane road but narrows to two lanes near the south end of this property. - NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER: This site is located in an area between two different development trends; the first being Sprague Avenue and its commercial uses. These commercial uses have been held to an area located north of Third Avenue. The second is an older established residential area located mainly south of Fifth Avenue. The property between these two development trends may be called the transition area, as they relate to existing land uses, in which efforts appear to have been made to establish a variety of medium intensity land uses of the Muntiple Family Suburban and Residential Office Zones. No Commercial or Local Business uses exist south of Third Avenue until the intersection of 16th and University where there is approximately a 3 -acre site of Local Business zoning. Sixteenth Avenue and University are considered secondary arterials. AGRICULTURAL SUMMARY: Designated as committed to URBAN uses by U.S.D.A. - Soil Conservation Service. II. SITE PLAN INFORMATION (continued) ZONING: LAND USE: III. BACKGROUND /ANALYSIS Z14 /K -c 2 ZONE RECLASSIFICATION NUMBER: ZE -68 -82 North Multiple Family Suburban, established, 1937, 1939, 1968, 1973 and 1978 Commercial, established, 1971 East Agricultural Suburban, established, 1955 West Multiple Family Suburban, established, 1962 Agricultural Suburban, established, 1958 South Agricultural Suburban, established, 1955 Residential Office, established, 1980 Agricultural, established, 1950 Site Single family and accessory structures North Krause Nursery, Chiropractor's office, vacant, single family East Apartments, single family West University Manor Convalescent Home South Single Family 1981 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: URBAN NUMBER OF EXISTING BUILDINGS: 3 (to be removed) NUMBER OF BUILDINGS PROPOSED: No Site Plan A) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - The site is located in the Urban category of the Generalized Comprehensive Plan. The characteristic features section of the Urban category text states that: "... neighborhood commercial will be located near the heavily traveled streets ..." Major commercial uses are non - compatible in the Urban areas. Beyond these comments, there are no specific decision guidelines stated in the Plan Text that are directly applicable to neighborhood commercial uses in Urban designations. Major commercial is designated along Sprague Avenue to the north of the site. The older residential character of the site and other parcels along University Road, designated a major arterial, is potential pressure for change from single family residen- tial. To date, physical changes haven't become noticeable. B) SITE CONSIDERATIONS - The site is flat with direct access to Fourth Avenue and University Road. As mentioned, University changes from four lanes to a two lane road at this site. The County Engineer has requested a 5 -foot dedication along University with sidewalks and 5 -feet along Fourth Avenue. III. BACKGROUND /ANALYSIS (continued) ZONE RECLASSIFICAT( J NUMBER: ZE -68 -82 Z14 /K -c C) HISTORY OF OTHER LAND USE ACTIONS - In 1968, the Spokane County Planning Commission undertook a study of 97 acres and initiated a 'block' rezone of the study area. Results of that action included the Multiple Family Suburban reclassification of this site. To date, only one Commercial rezone, along University Road south of the abandoned Milwaukee Road Railway, has been approved; that being the 1971 action for additional University City property. In 1980, a Residential Office rezone was approved 250 feet south of this current proposal. D) CONCLUSION - The Comprehensive Plan would indicate that neigh- borhood commercial could be appropriate for this 'type' of site in the Urban category. However, given the variety of existing commercial uses and property along Sprague Avenue and no continuation of the Major Commercial category beyond Sprague, south along University Road, and the lack of commercial rezones south of Fourth Avenue, the proposal appears not to be appropriate. A less intense zoning, such as the existing Multiple Family Suburban or Residential Office, and their permitted uses, appears more suitable. Consideration of a neighborhood commercial area, with more acreage, located at intersect- ing arterials is more logical under the existing circumstances. IV. AGENCIES RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS, IF APPROVED a) COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1. The Zoning Administrator shall approve a specific exterior light- ing plan for the approved area prior to installation of such lighting. (Such plan shall attempt to confine illumination to the area with full consideration to adjacent properties). 2. Approval by the Zoning Administrator of a specific lighting and signing plan for the described property prior to the release of any building permits. 3. A specific landscape plan, planting schedule and provisions for maintenance acceptable to the Spokane County Zoning Adminis- trator shall be submitted with a performance bond for the project prior to release of building permits. 4. Direct light from any exterior area lighting fixture shall not extend over the property boundary. 5. The specific development plan will be submitted for Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. 6. All current standards of the Residential Office Zone, as amended, shall be complied with in the development of this site. ZONE RECLASSIFICAT. 1 NUMBER: ZE -68 -82 a) COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT (continued) 7. Signs for this project shall conform to standards as set forth in Section 4.09.125 Signs. 8. Landscaping shall . be provided for this site, in conformance with Standards as identified in Section 4.07A.120 Landscaping. 9. A 6 -foot sight- obscuring cyclone fence shall be provided along the east and south of this proposal to provide a buffer for the existing residential use located immediately east and south of this site. A comparable substitute to the cyclone fencing may be approved by the Zoning Administrator. 10. Applicant shall comply with '208' recommendations concerning stormwater runoff and provide necessary landscaping for runoff. 11. The applicant shall comply with RCW 58 -17 and the Spokane County Platting Ordinances prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Applicant shall comply with all agency's regulations as amended prior to issuance of building permits. 13. That the provisions of SEPA's NOTICE OF ACTION pursuant to Chapter 43.21C.080 RCW and the Board of Spokane County Commissioners Resolution #77 -1392 be initiated by the project applicant within thirty (30) days of final disposition of this application, and prior to any on -site improvements, or file appro- priate documents to the effect that the NOTICE OF ACTION is waived in accordance with Spokane County Commissioners' Resolution #82 -0458 dated May 4, 1982. 14. Pursuant to ,the provisions of Chapter 43.21C RCW, the SEPA Guidelines (WAC 197 -10) and the Spokane County Environmental Ordinance - (SCEO), a proposed declaration of non - significance has been issued at least fifteen (15) days prior to this date; the official file, written comments and /or public testimony con- tain information regarding assessment of the proposal's adverse impacts to the physical environment; a finding is hereby made that no potentially significant adverse impacts upon the physical environment are anticipated as a result of the project; and a final declaration of non - significance is hereby to be issued. b) COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Prior To The Issuance Of A Building Permit: 1. Applicant shall dedicate 10 feet on Fourth Avenue for right -of- way prior to any use of the property: 2. Applicant shall dedicate 5 feet on University Road for right -of- way. Z14 /K -c 4 Z14 /K -c 5 7. ZONE RECLASSIFICATION NUMBER: ZE-68 -82 b) COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT (continued) 3. Access permits for approaches to the County Road System shall be obtained from the Spokane County Engineer. 4. Applicant shall improve University Road in a manner consistent with Spokane County TYPICAL roadway section No. 1 minimum paving width Major Arterial Standard. 5. Applicant shall improve Fourth Avenue in a manner consistent with Spokane TYPICAL roadway section No. 1 minimum paving width Access Standard. 6. Other specific improvements: Improvements to University Road shall consist of construction of sidewalk. Applicant shall submit for approval by the Spokane County Engineer road, drainage, and access plans prior to the issuance of a building permit on the property. 8. The applicant shall submit for approval by the Spokane County Engineer and the Spokane County Health District a detailed com- bined on -site sewage system plan and surface water disposal plan for the entire project prior to the issuance of any building permit on the property. 9. A parking plan and traffic circulation plan shall be submitted and approved by the Spokane County Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit on the property. The design, location, and arrangement of parking stalls shall be in accord- ance with standard traffic 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. 10. The word "applicant" shall include the owner or owners of. the. property, his heirs, assigns, and successors. - 11. The construction of the road improvements stated herein shall be accomplished as approved by the Spokane County Engineer. 12. All required improvements shall conform to the current State of Washington Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construc- tion, and other applicable county standards and /or adopted reso- lutions pertaining to Road Standards and Stormwater Manage- ment in effect at the date of construction, unless otherwise approved by the County Engineer. 13. Roadway standards, typical roadway sections and drainage plan requirements are found in Spokane Board of County Commis- sioners' Resolution No. 80 -1592 as amended. c) COUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 1. Pursuant to Board of County Commissioners Resolution No. 80 -0418, the use of on -site sewer disposal systems is hereby authorized. This authorization is conditioned on compliance with all rules and regulations of the Spokane County Health District and is further conditioned and subject to specific application approval and issuance of permits by the Health District. 2. The owner, his heirs or successors shall join and participate in any petition or resolution which purpose is the formation of a utility local improvement district (ULID) pursuant to RCW, Chapter 36.94, as amended. The owner, his heirs and success- ors shall further agree not to oppose or protest any legal assess- ments for any utility local improvement district (ULID) estab- lished pursuant to RCW Chapter 36.94, as amended. 3. Any water service for this project shall be provided in accord- ance with the Coordinated Water System Plan for Spokane County. 4. Each unit shall be double plumbed for connection to future area - wide collection system. d) COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT 1. A combined surface water and sewage disposal detailed plan shall be approved by the County Engineer and the Health District prior to the issuance of any building permit for this project. 2. Sewage disposal method shall be as authorized by the Director of Utilities, Spokane County. 3. Subject to specific application approval and issuance of .permits by the Health Officer, the use of an individual on -site sewage system may be authorized. 4. Water service must be coordinated through the Director of Utilities, Spokane County. 5. Water service shall be by an existing public water supply when approved by the Regional Engineer (Spokane), State Department of Social and Health Services. 6. Use of private wells and water systems is prohibited. 7. Disposal of sewage effluent beneath paved surfaces is currently prohibited. Z14 /K -c 6 ZONE RECLASSIFICATION NUMBER: ZE -68 -82 f) WATER PURVEYOR Z14 /K -c 7 ZONE RECLASSIFICATION NUMBER: ZE -68-82 e) COUNTY BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT 1. The site is located in Fire District #i1. 2. Installation of fire hydrants to be in accordance with the require- ments of the Spokane County Department of Building and Safety. 3. Reclassification of an existing building shall require an applica- tion for change of occupancy permit, and susequent inspection for approval. 1. Purveyor is Modern Electric Water Company, and they can supply the site with adequate water for domestic, fire and irriga- tion uses. r te. NO.: 83 0214 , BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS or SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON IN THE MATTER OF ZONE RECLASSIFICATION, r: ZE=68 1 827 MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBURBAN TO LOCAL BUSINESS: ADAMS FINDINGS OF FACT, DECISION AND CONDITIONS THIS MATTER, Being the consideration by the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, hereinafter referred to as the "Board" of an appeal of Spokane County Zoning Hearing Examiner Committee Decision of December 9, 1982, denying the zone reclassification (ZE- 68 -82), Multiple Family Suburban to Local Business, for the purpose of a Western Clothing Store, hereinafter referred to as the "Proposal ", and the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County having held a public hearing on February 1, 1983, and having fully considered all testimony presented thereat, and further having individually visited with the site and vicinity in question, and having rendered a decision on the 15th day of February, 1983, APPROVING said proposal, does hereby make the following: FINDINGS OF FACT aECEIVEDIT 0044 I cfilINTT tN€INEEaa MAR1 71983 1. That the proposal is generally located at the southeast corner of Fourth Avenue and University Road in Section 21- 25 -44. 2. That the proposal consists of a zone change to Local Business. 3. That the adopted Spokane County Generalized Comprehensive Land Use Plan indicates "Urban" type usage of the area encompassed by the proposal The characteristic features section of the Urban category text states: " neighbor- hood commercial will be located near heavily traveled streets " The proposal appears to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 4. That the provisions of RCW Chapter 43.21C, (State Environmental Policy Act) have been complied with, and the Board adopts a Declaration of Non - Significance for this proposal. 5. That the Spokane County Hearing Examiner Committee held a public hearing on December 9, 1982, concerning the proposal, subsequent to which by Findings of Fact, Decision and Order dated December 16, 1982, they denied the proposal. The proposal was for Commercial or Local Business zoning. 6. That the existing land uses in the area of proposal include: Single family residential with accessory structures, apartments, Krause's Nursery, Chiro- practor's office, University Manor Convalescent Home, and undeveloped land. 7. That the proposal is compatible with existing uses in the area. 8. That the proposal as conditioned is not detrimental or otherwise harm- ful to the public health, safety, and welfare. 1 (continued) • FINDING .F FACT, DECISION AND CONDITIONS ZE -68 -82 2 9. That the applicant has demonostrated changed conditions since the original zone change in 1968 warranting a zone change from Multiple Family Suburban to Local Business including: Adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, Commercial and Multiple Family Suburban zoning in the area. 10. That the proposal is consistent with the surrounding land use classifications and does not grant a special privilege or rights to the applicant different than those enjoyed by adjacent property owners. 11. That the Board finds that the proposal is located within the recorded water service area of Modern Electric Water Company, and that the District indicates there is an adequate system capacity and that the Company is desirous of serving the proposal for domestic, fire and irrigation purposes. 12. That the proposal is situated within the recorded fire service area of Fire District #1. 13. That the proposal lies within the boundaries of Central Valley School District. 14. That the proper legal requirements for advertising of the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County have been met. 15. That on the 15th day of February, 1983, the Board of County Commis- sioners of Spokane County at a regular meeting did APPROVE the proposal, subject to certain conditions. 16. That the applicant during the course of the public hearing, withdrew his request for Commercial zoning. 17. That the Board has reviewed the 'Conclusion' of the Staff and notes the adequacy of other similar zoning in the immediate vicinity. (McNaughton v. Boeing 68W2d 659, 414P2d278 (1966)) From the foregoing Findings, a review of the Planning Department Staff Report dated December 9, 1982, and the Staff presentation of File No. ZE- 68 -82, the Board hereby in APPROVING the proposal does make the following conditions: 1. That the conditions set forth in the Spokane County Zoning Hearing staff analysis dated December 9, 1982, on Pages 3 through 7, are hereby adopted as conditions of approval, subject to the following amendment: Amend Condition #6 of the County Planning Department to read as follows: "All current standards of the Local Business Zone, as amended, shall be complied with in the development of this site." (continued) FINDINGS`uF FACT, DECISION AND CONDITIONS DATED This ATTEST: WILLII . DONAHUE C1: o the Board /&*-- day of ,. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOON OUNTY, 4,�9flflGTON .44:0 ZE -68 -82 3 , 1983. i GARY KENNALY ENGINEERS — _. BEFORE: THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SPOKANE COUNTY, ?':ASH. - NGION IN THE MATTER CONCERNING ZONE RECLASSIFICATION ZE -68 -82 MULTIPLE FAMILY SUBURBAN TO COMMERCIAL OR LOCAL BUSINESS APPLICANT: ADAMS ) ) ) ) ) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that William A. Adams has filed a Notice of Appeal of the denial by the Hearing Examiner Committee of the above captioned zone reclassification. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that the Board of County Commissioners of Spokane County, Washington, will hold a public hearing at 1:30 P.M. on Tuesday, February 1, 1983, at its office in the County Court- house, West 1116 Broadway Avenue, Spokane, Washington 99260-0100 to consider an application for a zone reclassification from Multiple Family Suburban to Commercial or Local Business on property generally located at the southeast corner of Fourth Avenue and University Road in Section 21- 25 -44. NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN that any person interested may appear at said hearing and present testimony in support of or in opposition to this application for zone reclassification. BY ORDER OF THE BOARD this 11 day of January, 1983. PUBLISH: SPOKANE VALLEY HERALD JANUARY 19, 1983 (map) WILLIAM E. DONAHUE CLERK 0 T}TE BOARD BY i &f, P i2 / 1 ✓ T*LRSANNE MONTAGUE, DEF gY)CLERK [r: ECLE6Q EL0 0201AR Minn EMME Ji 3'933 �� -2j earing Examine Title: wring Date: pies to: Planning 2 Norma Smith e Received: Check 7: e '5 APPEAL EAL I; ;( I :S1 Fulfil TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY C0MMISSIONERS Appeal. Fee - $75.00 AL.' cn ealed Z E Y 2 - Preliminary Subdivision Number: OFFICE USE ONLY 54 -at ame : ,' I ( 44 /1- 4 Ai/ 5 (P ease Print) ddress : / ;L. / q . 5 /i i 8 y F--0 Zip Code: q 9 ,2 o 6 ome Phone: -72,Q Business Phone: r/) (� y n 5 — Today's Date /r - Zone Reclassification Number: Date of Hearing Examiner Committee Action: /2 - /C 9.2-- ignature: .x/27.-- /CLeenc- �L /✓P�� >�� ignature of Authorized Representative: ddress: / / .S 62-i.vA..--F,2 . I ri 9;06 JUR'REASONS FOR APPEAL n f - " ---n-fr _G � ) /. - »_i / v�i /x/ 1/1/ Engineers a Environme °1' Health fECEflE Cash ReceiptjQNumb-er,4t+n it 6tujtw ©O DEC221982 L1 7anA A- 4 ,,l0 # //5 (Please Print) ddress: /2. %9 3 !e yF.-'t - Zip Code: q ,2o ‘ ome Phone: 72 // ,� y� Business Phone: q.1 ' //f 2 s' earing Examiner Committee Action Being Appealed ame: :2 Title: Preliminary Subdivision Number: Zone Reclassification Number: Date of Hearing Examiner Committee Action: ignature: �// / ^!�C�feytti �[' /Y.cytv-,7----, ignature of Authorized Representative: J ddress: l /C% 5. ���r.v -iF� ��l 99 �0� OUR REASONS FOR APPEAL raring Date: Z L -» _yam 2 g APPEAL R ;:SP F1(11 TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COPUPISSIONERS Appeal Fee - $75.00 OFFICE USE ONLY Environmental Health / Today's Date /,.Z - 2 P / > / G' - 5? -2_ Ties to: Planning 0 2 Engineers Norma Smith :e Received: Check 7 —, N_ Cash Receipt Number A. INTRODUCTION This matter having come before the Zoning Hearing Examiner Committee on December 9, 1982, and the members of the Committee present being Kenneth Kennedy, Chairman, F. Lynn Tennican, and Ronald L. McVicker. B. PROPOSAL The sponsor, William Adams, is requesting approval of a zone reclassification, File No. ZE- 68 -82, Multiple Family Suburban to Commercial or Local Business, with no proposed development at this time. C. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. That the existing land use in the area is commercial, convalescent home, residential, and vacant. 2. That the Comprehensive Plan designates this area as appropriate for Urban development. 3. That the existing zoning of the property described in the application is Multiple Family Suburban. 4. That the provisions of RCW 43.21C (The State Environmental Policy Act) have been complied with, and the Committee concurs with the Declaration of Non - Significance. 5. That the proper legal requirements for advertisement of the Agenda Item have been fulfilled. 6. That the and in this area is unsuitable for the proposed use, or uses within the proposed Zone Classification. 7. That the applicant has not demonstrated that conditions have substantially changed since the original zoning of this area and accordingly, the pro- posed rezone is not justified. 8. That the proposed use is incompatible with existing uses in the area. 9. That the owners of adjacent lands expressed disapproval of the proposed use. 10. The Hearing Examiner Committee does not find the proposed use to be in harmony with the general purpose and will not be otherwise detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare. Z14 /T -c 1 SPOKANE COUNTY HEARING EXAMINER COMMITTEE FINDINGS AND ORDER File No. ZE -68 -82 C. FINDINGS OF FACT (continued) Z14 /T -c File No. ZE -68 -82 11. The ,following are additional findings of fact considered by the Hearing Examiner Committee: a) That the Hearing Examiner Committee felt the request for Local Business or Commercial zoning is premature and not appropriate at this time. b) That the guidelines of the Generalized Comprehensive Plan for Spokane County do not indicate commercial development in this immediate area which is primarily residential in character. c) Sprague provides adequate commercial services to this area, and that Local Business or Commercial zoning may change the character of the area, or establish a precedent that would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the area. d) That although Residential Office zoning was not requested, if a proper site plan had been submitted and advertised mitigating impacts to area residents, the Committee may have considered it. D. ORDER The Hearing Examiner Committee, pursuant to the aforementioned, finds that the application of William Adams, for a zone reclassification for the following described property should be DENIED: The North 200 feet of the West 120 feet of Tract 196 of Opportunity in Section 21- 25 -44. Motion by: McVicker Seconded by: Tennican Vote: Unanimous to Deny ( 3 - 0 ) Kenneth Kennedy - Aye F. Lynn Tennican - Aye Ronald L. McVicker - Aye ATTEST: For W•LLIS D. HUBBARD PI . ing Director , By STEVE HOR•BIOW KI Acting oning Administrator Date: et. /6, /rd Z- 2 HEARING EXAMINER COMMITTEE HEREBY ATTEST TO THE ABOVE FINDINGS, ORDER, AND VOTE Section: 21 Source of .Legal: Conte Person: ^\.ndree Chi cha Transamerica Title 2 22-2 2 • SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT v1 APPLICATION FOR ZONE RECLASSIFICATION ZE —b -8 2._.) Date: Senteriber 20, 1932 Application No: Name of Applicant: ?JTilliam Adams c/o Jim Mathis, Sunshine Brokers Street Address of Applicant: N. 524 !Julian Road City: Spokane State: Via Zip Code: 99206 Tele. No. 928 Name of Property Owner(s): same Authorized Agent representing Owner (if other than owner): Jim Mathis Township: 25 Titl company MPS 7nnino egtahliched 11 - 63. Assessor's Parcel No: (See tax statement) Existing Zoning Classification: Multi Family Suburban Date Existing Zone Classification Established: 1968 Existing Use of Property: cma11 ainol a fani lv residepce Proposed Zone Classification: Commercial or Local Business Proposed Use of Property: no site Plan at this time Legal Description of Property: The ;forth 200 feet of the We 120 four of Trorr 196 of OPPORTUNITY, as per plat thereof recorded in', Volume "K'• of Plats, nage 20; EXCEPT University •noad Range: 44? 21547 -1 ?0'! 115 Fourth Property Size: 23.000 so ft Frontage: 200 Feet on: University • Total amount of adjoining land controlled by this owner or sponsor: note Street Address of the Property: E. 10706 4th Ave. ' If you do not hold title to the property affected by this application, what is your interest in it? n/a Please list previous Planning Department actions involving this property: ALL OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS MUST BE ANSWERED: 1. What are the changed conditions of the site area, which you feel make this proposal warranted? Increased traffic and commercial uses along University render this site unsuitable for residential uses. Commercial zoning would be compatible with surrounding uses. 2. What effect will the proposed zone reclassification have on the adjacent properties? Litt - p effort sipce most Parcels in the vicinity are rrecently „curl for commercial and business uses. Rev. 2/3/81 APPLICATION FOR ZONE RECLASSIFICATION -- continued -2 This section of the application will provide the Planning Department's Staff with written verification that the applicant has had preliminary consultation with the agencies identified. Results of the preliminary consultation should be incorporat- ed in the proposal before final submittal to the Planning Department. 1. COUNTY ENGINEER'S OFFICE A preliminary Signature' a) r 2. COUNTY UTILITIES OFFICE (Signature) 3. WATER PURVEYOR 4. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT (Signature) consultation has been held I, THE UNDERSIGNED, SWEAR UNDER THE ABOVE. RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY LEDGE. I FURTHER SWEAR THAT I AM THE OWNER POSED FOR ZONE RECLASSIFICATION, OR, HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM ACTIONS ON HIS OR HER BEHALF., NOTARY SEAL: NOTARNC to discuss the proposal. Our ubmitt• of this proposal for rezone have been satisfied. ATUR.E QF APPLIC /0— (Date) A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal.. Our, requirements for submittal of this proposal for rezone have been satisfied. -: - The designated water purveyor for this site is • (Date) (NAME) /nilcfe r.. (Signature) (Date) (Date) . (Signe (Address) /, / I d 4.� T OR AGENT The proposal (is) (is not) located within the boundary of our service area. t . b) Satisfactory arrangements (have) (have not) been made to this proposal. c) We (are) (are not) able to serve this site with adequate water. . A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the prbposal":'"" requ' ments for submittal of this proposal for rezone have been satisfied. T t .- prop I oc at-d in Fire District # (Me- teg - ure e fees i� ea -,b All .Q3 ` CJ .... ; 5. COUNTY HEALT DISTRICT ate" ir A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. applicant has been informed of our requirements and standards. PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THE AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOW- OF RECORD OF THE SITE PRO - IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED SAID OWNER AUTHORIZING ' MY Date: -,7 .2- ,Zy'. Phone: 9'J S? A /„20„5 Zip: 6 79,24E Date: pp Date: 4 4; - Rev. 2/3/81 A. PROPOSAL B. DEVELOPER or AGENT vimer q a/ ENGINEER Preliminary Conditions Remarks: A \\ C. INSPECTION Name: D. SPECIFIC CONDITIONS: Fee Paid: Planning die ' -*Ss Pkanbel SOJlyvuhs orll . + ° ; �� 00'OOZ$1Nnowv Z8 -01 • oael /R-eI NOIONINSYM '3nA31138 ity,; ; , NNW, 1VNOLLVN tI3INIYL1 S P O K A N E C O U N T Y E N G I N E E R - - -PREL I M I NARY CONSULTATION - -- Project Narne: _ZONe Choi . MVS lre Comm Dv {,aeA,J Number of Parcels: Section 2/ T. 25 N., R. Q 9 E.W.M.; Quarter l Name: T. p , Address: Phone: Business Name: Address: Phone: Business Address: ALS 4,0 Phone: Business - Home IQ A Date: / / By: Remarks: .112 E 2 4 Z:.t:t9iOt; Pft -N/72. 92.2- 22 2 L No Amount $ ),0'0. ication Signed: Date / / By: - aL E 00005T:1:! t .. 00 O OZ' {- 1Nn0wv, !1,' i� 41114 . 11111i1p10SNU'111 Home Home PRELIMINARY CONSULTATION: Date: l0 / 7 / $' 2- $4 t 0A.0 N • Number 7E SPQ 8Z a) Right -of -Way /0 .P' on -Pout- n /'s4- Oa U,viveRSily b) Curb / c) Sidewalk s d) Pave e) Approaches, Qu1R.6d f) Drainage DA pp �Oli __ g) State /City Rev Ye3' (a.. No ( ) Call wa jeer TL . SSusAjG �_aa•sir.r�l� ��. NO : is propo a must comply with Spokane County Requ ations o `oafs, Ap- proach and Drainage in New Construction; Board of County Commissioners Resolution No. 80 -1592 as amended. Conditions are preliminary and may change after field in- spection and review of County records. 10186 uolaul4sem 'ewes lee11S QlsieAlun IS enuenV twos Auedwoo eoueinsul ouu. esjJewesueJ j Cash Check RR aiuo SLGO SZSt, I Z8T.:,50' dens{ ? l /•J,y "A1Q`+,j31V15J i n+:• - t:c h B2 1 0000: I !r a " cult? z ens 1 J 31v0 SHHHNIONH AINI100 . 2■VX0dS ' AO 83080 3H1;01 s a . 0 V .3018d e11Vd V 1V 301AH3S 31VH . l . seDWes ells;,..' . eaiiawesuw Conta Person: ^,ndree Ciiic:ia Trans—erica Title 7_2-2222 SPOKANE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FOR ZONE RECLASSIFICATION . c Date: September 20, 1932 Application No: 2E -_ a f_ Name of Applicant: William Adams c/o Jim Mathis, Sunshine Brokers Street Address of Applicant: N. 524 ;'?ullan Road City: Spokane State: T.,a Zip Code: 99205 Tele. No. 923 - 41 72 Name of Property Owner(s): same Authorized Agent representing Owner (if other than o wner): Jim Mathis Existing Zoning Classification: '�!viulti- Family Suburban V/ Date Existing Zone Classification Established: 1968 I/ Existing Use of Property: coral 1 c;nol p family residence Proposed Zone Classification: Proposed Use of Property( no site plan) at this time Legal Description of Property: The _fo r th 200 feet of the West 120 foot of Source of Legal: m 196 of OPPORTUNITY, as per plat thereof recorded in Volume "K" of Plats nage 20; EXCEPT University "Road Section: 21 Township: 25 Range: 44 . Titles company Assessor's Parcel No: (See tax statement) 2156.2 -1202 115 Fourth Property Size: 23.000 so ft Frontage: 200 Feet on: University Total amount of adjoining land controlled by this owner or sponsor: none Street Address of the Property: F. 10706 4th Ave. If you do not hold title to the property affected by this application, what is your interest in it? n/a Please list previous Planning Department actions involving this property: MPS znnino established 31 - 63. ALL OF THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS MUST BE ANSWERED: 1. What are the changed conditions of the site area, which yoir feel, make this proposal warranted? Increased traffic and commercial: along University render this site unsuitable for residencial uses. Commercial zoning would be comnatible with surrounding uses. 2. What effect will the proposed zone reclast ification have on the adjacent properties? T.ittle effect since most parcels in the vicinity are nrncam iy Commercial or Local Business • „ e l for commercial and business uses. Rev. 2/3/81 APPLICATION FOR ZONE RECLASSIFICATION - -continued -2 This section of the application will provide the Planning Department's Staff with written verification that the applicant has had preliminary consultation with the agencies identified. Results of the preliminary consultation should be incorporat- ed in the proposal before final submittal to the Planning Department. 1. COUNTY ENGINEER'S OFFICE A re preliminary nature 2. COUNTY. UTILITIES OFFICE A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. Our requirements for submittal of this proposal for rezone have been satisfied. The /designated /f water , (Jrvey `) r for this site is l /4'ttace , " /lam G / �ft � 4 ,% 5 €Sibilaturd) " ' -/ '% (Date)' (_;% 3. WATER PURVEYOR (NAME) ,'/ 2, 3,. ?;.'. , . , , , /0:]..f a) The proposal (is) (ie —not) located within the boundary of our service area b) Satisfactory arrangements (hba (have not) been made to serve this proposal. c) We (are) (areenbt7 able to serve this site with adequate water. S extE . (Signature) ( 4. BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. Our requirements for submittal of this proposal for rezone have been satisfied: Tly propo -i located in Fire District # O/JE air 7 n3Z L (Date) - "leer /�,Z�IE'cX� /� ��ll.Sc'd� !..($ &;•''-v. 5. COUNTY HEALT DISTRICT 41 C z r-re- ZC 'S, aelve /Ira .PC'SC A preliminary consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. The ap lic'nt hap been farmed of our requirements and standards. (Date) 1 / pp 3$.317( /O /7 /gc ci<# 000(*tla $I5, 1, THE UNDERizIIGNED, SWEAR UNDER THE PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THE ABOVE RESPONSES ARE MADE TRUTHFULLY AND TO THE BEST OF MY KNOW- LEDGE. (Sign ture NOTARY SEAL: consultation has been held to discuss the proposal. Our ubmitt of this proposal for rezone have been satisfied. I FURTHER SWEAR THAT I AM THE OWNER OF RECORD OF THE SITE PRO- POSED FOR ZONE RECLASSIFICATION, OR, IF NOT THE OWNER, ATTACHED HEREWITH IS WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM SAID OWNER AUTHORIZING MY ACTIONS ON •HIS OR HER BEHALF. (Signet® /,, .�dfv�ty er ( 'c NOTAR4 (Date) (Address) /,;2 /, Date: ATUR.E F APPLIC T OR AGENT (Date) / Date: Z ,2— Phone: £' ? f,/}05 ,/}0 5 Zip: `1,52Uc: / - ‘7 5 ,5 -do5 Date: Cr9- Rev. 2/3/81 Snannn[ COUn,, [CURL .OUSE SEC /TWN /RNG: - "3 -: !,- Introduction: The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and local governmental agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private proposals. The Act also requires that an Environmental Impact Statement be prepared for all major actions significantly (and "adversely ", as per WAC 197 -10) affecting the quality of the physical environment. The purpose of this checklist is to help the'agencies involved determine whether or not a proposal '.s such a major action. Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the information presently available to you. Please answer questions as "yes" or "maybe" if, in your opinion, even only slight impacts will result. The reviewers of the checklist will be aware of and concern themselves with the degree of impact, asking you for more information, if necessary. Where explanations of your answers are required, or where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision - makers, include your explanation in the space provided, or use adaitional pages, if necessary. You should include references to any reports or studies of which you are aware and which are relevant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help all agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review without unnec- essary delay. The following questions apply to your total proposal, not just to the license for which you are currently applying or the proposal for which approval is sought. Your answers should include the impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed, even though completion may not occur until sometime in the future. This will allow all of the agencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review now, without duplicating paperwork in the future. No application shall be processed until the checklist has been completed and returned to the appropriate County department. State law requires explanations for every "ves" and 'maybe" answer on the checklist. The person completing the form may be required to provide explanation for "no" answers, and in some cases, more detailed information to aid in a threshold determination. .NOTE: This is a standard form being used by all state and local agencies in the State cf Washington for various types of proposals. Many of the questions may not apply to your proposal. If a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and continue on to the next question. I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent: illian ?.dams, c/o Si-1 'a Phone Number: ° °.". . =72 2. Address of Proponent: Sunshine Brokers. Ni. 524 "u11an 3. Date Checklist Submitted: 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: Spokan County Planning Denart"ent 5. Name of Proposal, if Applicable: 7 x'_(- „_ O 6. Nature and Brief Description of the Proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of its scope and nature): Z.n ^.P rPcl nsgi P{ rat 10;1 tt- 'amj Iy Suburban L:o Commercial al or Local Business 7. Location of Proposal (describe the physical setting of the Proposal, as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts, including any other i information needed to give an accurate understanding of the environmental setting of the proposal): site is located n the Snokar. Valley in a transition area between Residential uses and the Commercial Are of Spramn F lniyr ry Site is fiat with an old small home and large vacant area behind the house. 8. Estimated Date for Completion of Proposal: unkunwr 9. List of all Permits, Licenses or Government Approvals Required for the Proposal (federal, state, and local - including rezones): Building permit: Sewage disposal hermit: approval of zone reclassification request 10a. Do you, or the owner in the event you do not own the subject land, have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? if yes, exolain: n n August, 1981 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FILE #: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1 2 - 10b. Do you own or have options on land nearby or adjacent to this proposal's location? If yes, explain: No 11. Do you know of any plans by others including the owner which may affect the property covered by your proposal or land adjacent or nearby? If yes, explain: 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the proposal; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: Zone reclassification application attached - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: ?es Mavbe No (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? x _ (b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil ?... . (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features/ x (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? _ x (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion or soils, either on or off the site ?. -< _ (f) Changes in deposition of erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? ' _ x Explanation: At a later date, the existing house will be removed to make way for new construction. At that time, there will be some disruptions of soils during the construction phase, with probable paving of parking 2. Air. Will-the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? _ __XL_ _____ (b) The creation of objectionable odors? x (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? x Explanation: Use of the site as a commercial site will possibly result in some changes in air duality. However. University is a heavily travelled road at this time and any changes in use would have only slight impact if anv. 3. Water. Will the prop result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Change in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? x (b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff's x (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? -a_ (d) Change in the amount of surface water in.any water body/ x (e) Discharge into surface water, or in any 'alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters/ (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters/ x (1) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? 2 x x x Explanation: Construction of a building and associated parking area may result in some changes in flow of'surface water runoff. Increase in the size of the septic system may result in some changes of ground Watc quality, but the impact «'Dula De slims. 4. Flora. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora, and aquatic plants)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of flora? x Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier-to the normal replenishment of existing species? (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Explanation: Landscaping of the site would result in the introduc of crnri oc to the ci tc The site is primarly vacant with some older domestic shrubs and trees near the house. Some of these would be removed during construction in the suture. 5. Fauna. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or number of any species of fauna (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms,insects or microfauna)' X (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of fauna? X (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna's ' (0) x (d) Deterioration of existing fish or wildlife habitat? Explanation: The Site is 111 a henvily developed area so any impacts on fau: would he minor. Any change in use may have slight impacts. but most of the site is vacant gravel parking at this time so changes would be sli„ 6. Noise. Yes Maybe No (a) Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? Explanation: Commercial development of the site may result in some increase in noise due to vehicles entering and leaving the site, but due to the present heavy traffic on University, any change would be minor. 7. Licht and Glare. Yes Maybe No (a) Will the proposal produce new light or glare? s Explanation: Eventual construction of a new building would result in possible new glare and /or light from additional windows. 8. Land Use. Yes Maybe No (a) Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? Explanation: Change of this site from residential to commercial uses would result in the change of the use of this site, but the area near the sit: is already well along in transition From residential to commercial uses. 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? Explanation: Normal lighting and heating of a larger building on the site will require slight increases in the use of heating materials. 3 4 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (.including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions' Explanation: 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: .(a) Fire protection? (b) Police protection? (c) Schools? (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? (e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? (f) Other governmental services? 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy' 4 Yes Maybe No x x x x 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? Explanation: The house is presently a smal 1 rental hmisn• change to commercial use will eventually result in the elimination of one rental unit, but the area has an overabundance of housing at this timc Yes Maybe No 92. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for Yes Maybe No additional housing? Explanation: The reduction of one residence in an area having more than adeouate housing will have little affect on existing housing. 13. Transportation /Circulation. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement'� (b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking' x (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? X (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods? x (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? x (f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians? x Explanation: There is no site plan at this time. However. evenutal use of the site for commercial uses will have some impact_ on traffic and parking as wall as a pnccihlr inrrngcr' in Irr rro,P.Fir rn the site. Yes Maybe No x x x Explanation: Commercial use of the site will increase vehicular traffic to some extent, thereby affecting maintenance of the reads, but the present traffic patterns are already fairly heavy along University. Yes Maybe No Explanation: Ilse of the site for commercial uses will rnc„1t in the need for normal use of fuel or energy supplies for heat and Hower. 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need For new systems. or alterations to the following utilities: (f) Solid waste and disposal? Exolanation: Change from residential to commercial uses will require modifi- cation of existing systems to handle the new uses. Due to the lack of a site plan /use, the exact impact is impossible to predict, but the use wuUld nut, (equip: 8e.vil.e8 WI LI: att; hUL t diay dv..liaUi.veS Mavbe No 7,. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazards or potential health hazard (including mental health)? Explanation: 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? Explanation: 19. Recreation: Will the proposal result in . an impact upon the quality or Yes Maybe Nc quantity of existing recreational opportunities? l Explanation: 20. Archeological /Historical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a Yes Maybe No significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? _ Explanation: III. SIGNATURE (a) Power or natural gas? x _ (b) Comunication systems? - X (c) Water? x (d) Sewer or septic tanks? .(e) Storm water drainage? • .Revised: August, 1981 I, the undersigned, swear under the penalty of perjury that the above responses are made truthfully and to the best of my knowledge. I also understand that, sh uld there be any „i1i- ful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on -my part, Sp ane County may vn th- draw any declaration of- nonsignificance that it might issue in reliance pon this checklist. Date: % - ,-2 /- cf.-,2 Proponent: a'x , ,ti(cx= 1! A. B. C. (Please Print or Type) 5 Yes Maybe No Yes Maybe No Proponent: Wi 1 liam Adams . by aeent Address: Sunshine Brokers. N. S Mill l An Jim Mathis Phone: x,22 1172 Person completing form: A. Chicha Phone: 922 -7222 Date: 9-20-32 FOR STAFF USE ONLY Staff Member(s) Reviewing Checklist: Based on this staff review of the environmental checklist and other pertinent information, the staff:' Concludes that there are no potentially significant adverse impacts and recommends /issue• a proposed declaration of nonsigm ficance. Concludes that potentially significant adverse impacts do exist and recommends /issues a final declaration of significance. Concludes that there are no potentially significant adverse impacts and, because of the nature of the proposal, recommends /issues a final declaration of r.ons vnificance. Uni` e rsityy Hi Schack' wq S r Prior To The Issuance Of A Building Permit OFFICE OF COUNTY ENGINEER SPOKANE COUNTY, WASHINGTON Applicant shall dedicate /p feet on A;pmfi tb___A1/ _ _ _ for right -of = way prior to any use of the property. �� /Ile vgrrtbc/z__._ 1 TO: Spokane County Planning Department FROM: County Engineer's Department SUBJECT: Conditions of AppruvaL -Zone Change--Number: gAr 6e—e . Applicant's Name o dgrns I/y/ASS Section 2/ _Township 25___ N, Range IN EWM The following "conditions of approval" for the above - referenced zone change are submitted to the Spokane County Hearing Examiner Committee for inclusion in the staff analysis and "findings and order" of the hearing scheduled Accemb ea q, 198z. 2O. Applicant shall dedicate_$ feet _ for right -of -way, pfirr t an „sa of rha prnperry 3. Applicant shall dedicate a foot radius on and prior to any use of the property. , 19 Er._. 4. Applicant shall dedicate feet on and a foot radius on and for right -of -way prior to any use of the property. Access permits for approaches to the County Road System shall be obtained from the Spokane County Engineer. 6. Access permits and improvements to by the Washington Department of Transportation. 10 must .be approved and improvements to • - must,be approved 7. Access permfts by the City of SO. (a) Applicant shall improve 446 ecAisiry 7 ' a1 in a manner consistent with Spokane County TYPICAL roadway section No. L minimum paving width fNA/rQ./ 'TeQ /4I Stcf. (b) Applicant shall improvej 44y6_ in a manner consistent with Spokane County TYPICAL roadway section No. I minimum paving width cc Ess STd• (c) Applicant shall improve in a manner consistent with Spokane County TYPICAL roadway section No. minimum paving width (d) Applicant shall improve in a manner consistent with Spokane County TYPICAL roadway Section No. minimum paving width (e) Other specific improvements: .I"'m,7i201/ , .y tc it villa City ZOad _5_1a Aal __ _L' ans. tilt__ 0 .T__CDn15232td_CLDJo of [r'rw O Applicant shall submit for approval by the Spokane County Engineer road, drainage, and access plans prior to the issuance of a building permit on the property. The applicant shall submit for approval by the Spokane County Engineer and the Spokane County Health District a detailed combined on -site sewage system plan and surface water disposal plan for the entire project prior to the issuance of any buiLding permit on the - property. n r_ L t Jn'"NEGY n h,In JvE AVE 5th 1. 3rd £ 5E ": ENT* - II. SITE PLAN INFORMATION (continued) III. BACKGROUND /ANALYSIS Z14 /K -c ZONING: LAND USE: ZONE RECLASSIFICATIC NUMBER: ZE -68-82 North Multiple Family Suburban, established, 1937, 1939, 1968, 1973 and 1978 Commercial, established, 1971 East Agricultural Suburban, established, 1955 West Multiple Family Suburban, established, 1962 Agricultural Suburban, established, 1958 South Agricultural Suburban, established, 1955 Residential Office, established, 1980 Agricultural, established, 1950 Site Single family and accessory structures North Krause Nursery, Chiropractor's office, vacant, single family East Apartments, single family West University Manor Convalescent Home South Single Family 1981 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: URBAN NUMBER OF EXISTING BUILDINGS: 3 (to be removed) NUMBER OF BUILDINGS PROPOSED: No Site Plan A) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - The site is located in the Urban category of the Generalized Comprehensive Plan. The characteristic features section of the Urban category text states that: "... neighborhood commercial will be located near the heavily traveled streets ..." Major commercial uses are non - compatible in the Urban areas. Beyond these comments, there are no specific decision guidelines stated in the Plan Text that are directly applicable to neighborhood commercial uses in Urban designations. Major commercial is designated along Sprague Avenue to the north of the site. The older residential character of the site and other parcels along University Road, designated a major arterial, is potential pressure for change from single family residen- tial. To date, physical changes haven't become noticeable. B) SITE CONSIDERATIONS - The site is flat with direct access to Fourth Avenue and University Road. As mentioned, University changes from four lanes to a two lane road at this site. The County Engineer has requested a 5 -foot dedication along University with sidewalks and 5 -feet along Fourth Avenue. /7 Z14 /K -c ZONE RECLASSIFICATIC NUMBER: ZE -68 -82 a) COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT (continued) 7. Signs for this project shall conform to standards as set forth in Section 4.09.125 Signs. 8. Landscaping shall be provided for this site, in conformance with Standards as identified in Section 4.07A.120 Landscaping. 9. A 6 -foot sight- obscuring cyclone fence shall be provided along the east and south of this proposal to provide a buffer for the existing residential use located immediately east and south of this site. A comparable substitute to the cyclone fencing may be approved by the Zoning Administrator. 10. Applicant shall comply with '208' recommendations concerning stormwater runoff and provide necessary landscaping for runoff. 11. The applicant shall comply with RCW 58 -17 and the Spokane County Platting Ordinances prior to issuance of building permits. 12. Applicant shall comply with all agency's regulations as amended prior to issuance of building permits. 13. That the provisions of SEPA's NOTICE OF ACTION pursuant to Chapter 43.21C.080 RCW and the Board of Spokane County Commissioners Resolution #77 -1392 be initiated by the project applicant within thirty (30) days of final disposition of this application, and prior to any on -site improvements, or file appro- priate documents to the effect that the NOTICE OF ACTION is waived in accordance with Spokane County Commissioners' Resolution #82 -0458 dated May 4, 1982. 14. Pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 43.21C RCW, the SEPA Guidelines (WAC 197 -10) and the Spokane County Environmental Ordinance (SCEO), a proposed declaration of non- significance has been issued at least fifteen (15) days prior to this date; the official file, written comments and /or public testimony con- tain information regarding assessment of the proposal's adverse impacts to the physical environment; a finding is hereby made that no potentially significant adverse impacts upon the physical environment are anticipated as a result of the project; and a final declaration of non - significance is hereby to be issued. b) COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Prior To The Issuance Of A Building Permit: 1. Applicant shall dedicate 10 feet on Fourth Avenue for right -of- way prior to any use of the property. 2. Applicant shall dedicate 5 feet on University Road for right -of- way. 19 Z14 /K -c c) COUNTY UTILITIES DEPARTMENT 1. Pursuant to Board of County Commissioners Resolution No. 80 -0418, the use of on -site sewer disposal systems is hereby authorized. This authorization is conditioned on compliance with all rules and regulations of the Spokane County Health District and is further conditioned and subject to specific application approval and issuance of permits by the Health District. 2. The owner, his heirs or successors shall join and participate in any petition or resolution which purpose is the formation of a utility local improvement district (ULID) pursuant to RCW, Chapter 36.94, as amended. The owner, his heirs and success- ors shall further agree not to oppose or protest any legal assess- ments for any utility local improvement district (ULID) estab- lished pursuant to RCW Chapter 36.94, as amended. 3. Any water service for this project shall be provided in accord- ance with the Coordinated Water System Plan for Spokane County. 4. Each unit shall be double plumbed for connection to future area - wide collection system. d) COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT ZONE RECLASSIFICATIC NUMBER: ZE -68-82 1. A combined surface water and sewage disposal detailed plan shall be approved by the County Engineer and the Health District prior to the issuance of any building permit for this project. 2. Sewage disposal method shall be as authorized by the Director of Utilities, Spokane County. 3. Subject to specific application approval and issuance of permits by the Health Officer, the use of an individual on -site sewage system may be authorized. 4. Water service must be coordinated through the Director of Utilities, Spokane County. 5. Water service shall be by an existing public water supply when approved by the Regional Engineer (Spokane), State Department of Social and Health Services. 6. Use of private wells and water systems is prohibited. 7. Disposal of sewage effluent beneath paved surfaces is currently prohibited. 41