APP-08-08 SHP-16-08 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY HEARING EXAMINER
RE: Appeal of an Administrative Decision by the )
City Community Development Department, ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
denying a Preliminary Short Plat; ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,
Applicants/Appellants: McManus, Argaw ) AND DECISION
File Nos. APP-08-08 and SHP-16-08 )
I. SUMMARY OF DECISION
Hearing Matter: Appeal of an administrative decision by the City Community Development
Department, denying a preliminary short plat application.
Summary of Decision: Affirm the appeal in part and deny the appeal in part. The preliminary
short plat may serve a maximum of one(1) dwelling off the existing 14-foot wide private
driveway and easement extended off Best Road, without widening it; provided the driveway is
signed and provided a turnaround as required by the County Road Standards; and provided the
driveway meets the grading and stormwater requirements of the SVMC, except for the driveway
width and turnaround specifications. The preliminary short plat is prohibited from serving more
than one (1) dwelling unit off the existing 14-foot driveway and easement extended off Best
Road.
1 II. FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural Background
1
1 1. The site is located approximately 100 feet west of the intersection of Calvin Road and Heroy
Avenue, 250 feet east of Best Road, 500 feet south of Wellesley Avenue, and 200 feet north of
the intersection of Longfellow Avenue and Ellen Road; in Spokane Valley, Washington.
2. The site is currently referenced as County Assessor's tax parcel no. 45022.1506, and is
legally described on the preliminary short plat map of record.
3. On December 4, 2008, the City Community Development Department("Department")
completed and initialed an administrative decision to deny the preliminary short plat application
submitted for the site in File No. SHP-16-08. The denial was based on findings that the private
driveways proposed to serve the lots in the project did not meet the minimum design standards of
the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC).
4. The administrative decision, entitled"Staff Report and Notice of Decision", advised that a
written appeal must be filed with the Department within 14 days after the date the notice of
decision was mailed, pursuant to Section 17.90 (Appeals) of the SVMC; the appeal must contain
all of the information required by SVMC 17.90, together with the applicable appeal fee; and the
appeal deadline was 5:00 p.m. on December 18, 2008.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 1
5. On December 18, 2008, Cristin Argaw faxed a letter to the Department, signed by Negussie
Argaw and Mark McManus. The letter requested that the administrative decision be
reconsidered, because Spokane County Fire District 1 (also referenced as "Spokane Valley Fire
Department")had submitted a letter stating that it had no problem with the Best Road and Calvin
Road accesses proposed by the short plat.
6. On December 22, 2008, Cristin Argaw submitted a completed"Appeal Application"for the
administrative decision to the Department, on a form provided by the Department, and the
required appeal fee; on behalf of Negussie and Cristin Argaw, and Mark McManus. The appeal
form attached a handwritten note from Cristin Argaw stating that Fire District 1 had approved
the 14-foot drive/access off of Best Road, Rick Frier of Fire District 1 would be faxing such
information to the Department, and she had faxed a note regarding such information to the
Department on December 18, 2008.
7. On January 6, 2009, the Department faxed a printed note to Cristin Argaw requesting that
she complete the items in"Part II-Reason for Appeal"of the Appeal Application, and send such
information to the Department so that the appeal could continue to be processed.
8. On January 9, 2009, the Department sent a letter to the appellants, advising them of the
scheduling of a public hearing before the Hearing Examiner on the administrative appeal; to be
held on February 26, 2009. The letter requested that the appellants submit the requested
information regarding the appeal form by January 30, 2009,to allow the Department to prepare a
i timely staff report for the appeal hearing.
9. On January 20, 2009, attorney John Bury submitted a letter to the Department on behalf of
the appellants, supplementing the grounds for appeal. The letter attached a letter dated January
7,2009 from Rick Freir, a fire inspector Fire District 1, a 2-page summary of events signed by
Mark McManus on January 14, 2009, and a notarized statement by Cristin Argaw attesting to the
contents of the appeal supplement.
10. The applicants for the preliminary plat are Negussie Argaw and Mark McManus. The site
owner is Negussie Argaw.
11. Mark McManus has a mailing address of 4609 N. Calvin, Spokane Valley, WA 99216.
Negussie and Cristin Argaw have a mailing address of 4606 N. Best, Spokane Valley, WA
99216.
12. The notice requirements for the February 26, 2009 appeal hearing were met, by the
Department mailing notice of the hearing to the appellants/applicants. The Department also •
provided an optional published notice of hearing. On February 26, 2009,the Hearing Examiner
continued the hearing on the record until April 2, 2009; at the request of the appellants, and after
taking testimony regarding the proposed continuance.
13. On April 2, 2009, the Hearing Examiner conducted a continued public hearing on the
administrative appeal. The Examiner conducted two (2) site visits prior to such date.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 2
14. The following persons testified at one or both of the hearing sessions held on February 26
and April 2, 2009:
Tavis Schmidt and Greg McCormick Mike Connelly
City Community Development Department City Attorney
11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Spokane Valley, WA 99206
John Bury Steve Hergenrather
Attorney at Law 4604 N. Best Road
818 W. Riverside, Suite 631 Spokane Valley, WA 99216
Spokane, WA 99201
Rick Freier Steve Durant
Deputy Fire Marshall 4624 N. Best Road
10319 E. Sprague Avenue Spokane Valley, WA 99216
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Negussie and Cristin Argaw
4606 N. Best Road
Spokane Valley, WA 99216
15. The Examiner heard the appeal pursuant to Sections 18.20.020, 17.90.040, 17.90.050 and
17.90.060(1) of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC); and the Hearing Examiner Rules
of Procedure, set forth in Appendix B of the City Uniform Development Code (UDC).
16. The UDC comprises Title 17-25 of the SVMC, and contains all of the City's development
regulations and procedures regarding project permits.
Items in Record
17. The Hearing Examiner takes notice of the City Comprehensive Plan, the SVMC, the
development regulations adopted by reference in the SVMC, and prior land use decisions for the
site and in the vicinity.
18. The record includes the documents in the appeal file and application file at the time of the
April 2, 2009 hearing session, the documents and testimony submitted at the February 26 and
April 2, 2009 hearing sessions, the items taken notice of by the Hearing Examiner, and copies of
certain statutes and codes adopted by reference in the SVMC and referenced in this decision.
19. The Hearing Examiner also includes in the record an 11-inch by 17-inch photocopy
enlargement of the short plat map and dedication for Short Plat No. 1185-98 found in the record,
a photocopy assembling the copies of three (3)portions of the short plat map and dedication for
Short No. 1145-97 submitted by the applicants into a single page, and a copy of the
Emergency Vehicle Turnaround Easement that burdens the site recorded at County Auditor No.
4261843.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 3
1
Description of Site
20. The site is approximately 1.47 acres in size, 388 feet long, 165 feet wide, rectangular in
shape, and relatively flat in topography. A single-family dwelling constructed in 1960 is located
in the north central portion of the site.
21. The site consists of a portion of a block/tract in the Trentwood Orchards final plat, recorded
in 1909. Such plat was replaced to the south and east by the Throop and Fitzpatrick's
Subdivision, recorded in 1943; to the west by Short Plat No. 1185-98, which divided the land
lying between the site and Best Road into two (2) tracts; and to the north by Short Plat No. 1145-
a 97.
Easements affecting the Site and Adjacent Land
22. The residence on the site is served by a graveled driveway that extends from Best Road to
the west. The driveway is located in an easement that burdens the northerly 14 feet of the two
(2)tracts lying between the site and Best Road. The easement was recorded in 1995, under
County Auditor No. 9504060013.
23. The 1995 easement grants the future purchaser of the site the"...right,privilege and
authority to construct, improve and maintain..."the northerly 14 feet of the land lying between
the site and Best Road "...across, over, and upon..." such land; in order"...to reach parcel
45022.1506". The site is currently referenced as tax parcel no. 45022.1506.
1
24. On August 28, 2008, a previous owner of the site granted an easement for an emergency
vehicle turnaround located in the extreme northwest corner of the site, for the sole benefit of
Short Plat No. 1185-98.
25. Short Plat No. 1185-98 shows and references the 1995 easement referenced above. The
short plat also shows an"Ingress/egress, Utility & Sewer Easement" over the same northerly 14
feet of the short plat area; as well as over the extreme northeast corner of Short Plat No. 1185-98,
for the westerly portion of the emergency turnaround that abuts the easterly portion of the
emergency turnaround easement that affects the site.
26. The dedication for Short Plat No. 1185-98 provides that the private driveway"...as shown
and platted hereon is an Easement for Ingress/Egress and Utilities for Tract "B"within this
Short Plat having frontage thereon." Tract`B" abuts the site on the west.
27. Short Plat No. 1185-98 dedicated the utility easements shown on the short plat to the
serving utility companies for the construction, reconstruction, maintenance and operation of
utilities; along with the right to trim and remove trees as needed in the easement area.
28. Short Plat No. 1145-97, located north of the site, dedicates a 20-foot wide ingress/egress,
utility and sewer easement. The easement abuts the site, and Short Plat No. 1185-98 located to
the west, on the north. The easement is improved with a graveled private road that extends
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 4
easterly from Best Road. A wire fence runs along the north border of the site, adjacent to the
easement.
29. Public sewer has been extended in the 20-foot wide easement in Short Plat No. 1145-97,to
serve the lots in such short plat. Avista Utilities previously extended a gas line in the easement
to serve the lots in the short plat, as well as the residence on the current site and the residence on
the tract abutting the site on the west.
History of Short Plat Application
30. On July 10, 2008, the applicant submitted a preliminary short plat application and
associated map to divide the site, and a portion of the land lying between the site and Calvin
Road to the east, into three (3) lots for new duplex dwellings; and four(4) additional lots to
accommodate three (3) existing single-family dwellings and one (1) new single-family dwelling.
31. The July 10, 2007 map illustrated private driveway access to Best Road for the two (2)
westerly lots, and a private road access to Calvin Road for the other five (5) lots; for a total of 10
dwelling units.
32. On August 14, 2008,the applicant submitted a new preliminary short plat application and a
partially revised map for the same land. On August 25, 2008, the Department issued a
determination that the application was incomplete. On the same date, the applicant revised the
application to remove the land lying east of the current site from the project; but did not submit a
revised map to reflect such change.
33. On September 2, 2008, the applicant submitted a revised map. The map illustrated the
same plat design as the map submitted on August 14, 2008, which included land lying between
the site and Calvin Road; and also showed the location of the drainfield for the existing residence
on the site. On September 10, 2008, the Department issued a Determination of Completeness for
the revised application.
Description of Current Project
34. On November 4, 2008, the applicant submitted a revised map that is limited to the current
site, and is considered the preliminary short plat map of record("map of record"). The map
illustrates four(4) duplex lots, ranging from 15,000 square feet to 17,682 square feet in size.
35. The map of record shows an"Existing Ingress/Egress Utility &Sewer Easement" affecting
the northerly 14 feet of the land located between the site and Best Road, the west emergency
turnaround area shown on the face of Short Plat No. 1185-98, and the abutting emergency
turnaround area on the site granted by the 1998 easement. The map shows the westernmost lot in
the current preliminary short plat deriving access through such"existing easement", but fails to
distinguish or reference the 1995 easement that burdens the northerly 14 feet of the land lying
west of the site.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 5
36. The map of record illustrates the existing residence located on an interior duplex lot. The
w easement shows such lot being served by a new ingress/egress, utility and sewer easem t that would
extend easterly through two (2) other proposed duplex lots, and the side yards of two (2)existing
residences situated on abutting lots to the east, to Calvin Road.
37. The map of record indicates that all existing buildings on the site are to remain. This
suggests that the existing residence on the site will be converted to a duplex after final short plat
approval.
Conditions of Approval for Project related to Private Driveways
38. On November 14, 2008, the City Development Engineering Division submitted a
memorandum recommending that the preliminary short plat of record not be accepted; on the
basis that access to the proposed lots does not meet the City's standards for private driveways
widths.
39. The memorandum from City Engineering advised that SVMC 24.50.060(E) requires "...an
engineered roadway..."to be at least 20 feet wide; and also states that the County Road
Standards, applicable to the project under the SVMC,provide that"...a private driveway/private
road serving 0-6 lots must be 20 feet wide. This is shown in Table 3.03, Access Street Design
Elements, Footnote 9, Page 309."
40. On November 21, 2008, Avista Utilities requested that a 5-foot wide easement for utilities
be dedicated"...to connect the private drive existing on Lot 1 with the private drive on Lot 2...",
in order to allow a loop feed of utilities between Calvin Road and Best Road. Lot 1 is the
westernmost lot in the preliminary plat, and Lot 2 would contain the existing residence on the
site.
41. On November 25, 2008, County Fire District 1 recommended revised conditions of
approval for the preliminary short plat of record. The revised conditions requested, in part,that
the... "Private driveway shall meet current standards (Minimum 20 foot driving surface and 28
feet turning radius...)", and... "Fire apparatus access roads/driveways and turnarounds shall be
posted on both sides as "No Parking-Fire Lane".
42. The Department's December 4, 2008 decision advised that it was denying the proposed
short plat based on the comments it received from the City Developing Engineering Division and
from County Fire District 1.
43. On January 7, 2009, Fire District 1 submitted a letter to the Department clarifying the
comments it submitted on November 25, 2008. The letter advised that the existing driveway
serving the site from Best Road would not need to be widened, as long as the number of existing
lots served by the driveway was not increased. This is consistent with Fire District l's October
9, 2008 comments submitted for an earlier version of the project.
44. The January 7, 2009 letter from Fire District 1 requested that the existing private driveway
extended from Best Road, and its associated turnaround, be upgraded to an all-weather surface;
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 6
and proper signage be installed for the driveway. The letter also requested that the proposed
driveway extended from Calvin Road conform to current private driveway standards, as required
by the 2006 International Fire Code.
Issues pertinent to Appeal
45. The appellants contended that the administrative decision should be reversed because Fire
District 1 had not requested that the existing private driveway extended from Best Road be
widened for the project. The appellants also contended that the appellants had relied on previous
assurances by the Department that at least one (1) lot in the project could be served from the 14-
foot driveway extended from Best Road, as long as Fire District 1 concurred.
46. The Department indicated at the public hearing that its denial of the preliminary short plat
was based only on the inadequacy of access provided from Best Road, and not the adequacy of
access via Calvin Road.
47. The administrative decision does not state when the decision was mailed to the applicants,
that all persons who have standing under SVMC 17.90 may appeal the decision, where further
information can be obtained concerning the appeal, that the complete case file is available for
review, details regarding the availability of the file, or who may be contacted about reviewing
the case file; as required by SVMC 17.80.130(3).
48. The record does not include any direct evidence from the Department that the
administrative decision was actually mailed to the applicants, or when it was mailed; as required
by SVMC 17.80.130.
49. The notice of decision included in the decision implies that the decision was mailed on
December 4, 2008, the date of the decision. This is based on the notice stating an appeal
deadline of December 18, 2008, and that an appeal must be filed within 14 days after the date the
notice of decision is mailed.
50. The letter from the applicants dated December 17, 2008, and faxed to the Department on
December 18, 2008, establishes that that the applicants received knowledge of the administrative
decision; but not when or if a copy of the decision was mailed to the applicants.
51. Neighboring property owners expressed numerous concerns regarding the proposed
preliminary short plat,prior to the administrative decision being issued; which are summarized
on page 4 of the administrative decision. Some of these issues were expanded upon at the appeal
hearing. Many of the concerns expressed do not pertain to the access issues involving Best
Road, which is the only substantive issue raised by the appeal.
52. The owners of the two (2) tracts located west of the site along Best Road contended that
use of their land by the owner of the current site was limited to a right of vehicular access to the
existing parcel making up the site and the existing residence on the site, through the 14-foot wide
easement granted over such adjacent land in 1995.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 7
A 53. The owners of the tracts lying north of the site contended that the applicants had no right to
use the 20-foot easement on their property abutting the site for any purpose, and that any
expansion of the use of the 14-foot easement over the land lying west of the site would create
additional conflicts with regard to the 20-foot easement.
Land Use Desi•nations for Site and Nei_hborin_ L nd urroundin; on itors
54. The site and neighboring land are designated in the Low Density Residential category of
the Comprehensive Plan and zoned in the Single-family Residential (R-3) District. The City
Arterial Street Map designates Wellesley Avenue to the north as a Minor Arterial.
55. Neighboring land generally consists of single-family homes on lots ranging from urban to
one (1)acre in size.
56. The Comprehensive Plan, in its form adopted prior to the current application being
submitted as complete on September 2, 2008, contains generally pertinent policies regarding the
access issues involved in the appeal. See policies LUP-1.1, LUP-1.2, LUP-1.4, LUP-2.3, LUP-
16.1, LUP-16.2, LUP-16.3, TUP-1.1, TP-2.1, TP-9.9 and TP-9.10.
57. SVMC 20.20.090(6) requires every lot in a preliminary short plat to have access to a paved
public street, private street or private driveway easement. SVMC 20.20.090(10) requires all road
designs to be in conformance with SVMC 22.130 and adopted street standards.
58. SVMC 20.20.100, and RCW 58.17.110, require that prior to approval of a preliminary short
plat application, a determination be made by the decision maker that the application serves the
public use and interest; appropriate provision is made for the public health, safety and general
welfare; and appropriate provision is made for streets, sanitary sewer, etc. and other relevant
factors.
59. SVMC 19.40.020(2) requires that all residential driveways and off-street parking areas
shall be paved with asphalt, Portland cement, grasscrete, paver blocks or other equivalent hard
surface material.
60. SVMC 22.130.020 requires that all new development approvals and permits, including
without limitation divisions of land, and permits for new structures or site improvements; as well
any change to a building, or any change in use of a building or site to such an extent that a permit
or certificate of occupancy is necessary; comply with the provisions of SVMC Chapter 22.130.
61. SVMC requires that prior to the issuance of any approvals or permits subject to SVMC
22.130, the City Engineer determine the extent and type of roadway improvements required to be
constructed as part of the development proposal; utilizing the Comprehensive Plan, the Arterial
Street map, applicable street construction standards, and future expansion needs of the roadway
system to serve the traveling public and emergency vehicles.
62. SVMC 22.130.040 adopts, by reference, the Spokane County Standards for Road and
Sewer Construction ("County Road Standards").
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 8
1
1
63. Section 3.24 of the County Road Standards addresses driveway approaches that connect to
public or private roads, i.e. private driveways. Section 3.24(l)(A) of the County Road Standards
states that private driveways provide primary vehicular access from a roadway for up to three (3)
lots, and requires private driveways to comply with Section 3.05.050 of the Spokane County
Code(SCC). The reference to "Section 3.05.050" is a clerical error, and the pertinent provision
is"Section 3.06.050" of the County Code.
64. SCC 3.06.050 is entitled "Fire Apparatus Access". SCC 3.06.050(a) and SCC
3.06.050(a)(2)(B)provide, in accordance with the authority provided in RCW 19.27.060(5) and
WAC Chapter 51-35, that private driveways for detached one-family and two-family dwellings
may serve no more than three (3)parcels; and shall be constructed in substantial conformance
with the standards established by the County Building and Planning Department.
65. The Hearing Examiner also serves as the Spokane County Hearing Examiner. The
Examiner takes notice that the County Building and Planning Department has established
standards for private driveways serving no more than three (3) residential parcels in its Technical
Bulletin BP-17, and includes a copy of the bulletin in the record.
66. Technical Bulletin BP-17 specifies a 12-foot wide travel way with an all-weather surface.
A turnaround is required for private driveways over 150 feet in length, with a hammerhead or
50-foot minimum radius cul-de-sac required within 150 feet of the dwelling. A grading permit is
required for private driveways constructed prior to the issuance of a building permit.
67. SCC 3.06.050(d) authorizes the local fire district to designate a driveway or private road as
a fire lane, impose restrictions on parking in the fire lane and require the posting of fire lane
signs.
68. Page 3 of the administrative decision, and page 3 of the Department's Staff Report and
Recommendation to the Hearing Examiner dated February 26, 2009, assert that the County Road
Standards require a private driveway, as well as a private road serving"0-6" lots, to be 20 feet
wide; citing Table 3.03, Access Street Design Elements, footnote 9, on page 3-9 of the County
Road Standards.
69. Table 3.03, footnote 9 of the County Road Standards requires a private road serving "3-6
lots"to have a 20-foot wide road surface. The road must also be paved, if located in an urban
area; and a minimum 10-foot maintenance and utility easement must be provided on each side of
the private roadway. The reference should properly be to "4-6" lots, since a private road by
definition serves more than three (3) lots,parcels or tracts. See Section 1.02 of County Road
Standards, definitions of"Driveway"and"Private Road".
70. SVMC 24.50 requires a grading permit from the City and environmental review for all
excavation, fill, grading and leveling of land; subject to certain exceptions not relevant to the
private driveways proposed to serve the project.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 9
71. SVMC 24.50.060(5) requires private driveways in excess of 150 feet in length, measured
from the intersection of the public way to the building the driveway serves, to be considered
"engineered grading"; regardless of the amount of excavation or fill required for construction.
72. Under SVMC 24.50.060(5), the private driveway must have an unobstructed width of 20
feet; be paved with asphalt, Portland cement, grasscrete, paver blocks or other equivalent hard
surface material; have a surface designed and maintained to support a 75,000-pound fire truck
and surfaced to provide all-weather driving capabilities; and have a 120-foot hammerhead, 60-
foot"Y" or a 96-foot diameter cul-de-sac. The requirements of SVMC 24.50.060(1) and(2)
must also be met.
73. The length of the existing private driveway that extends between the site and Best Road to
the west is 240 feet; well in excess of the 150-foot threshold for the application of SVMC
24.50.060(5), even before adding in the distance between the west boundary of the site and the
future dwelling constructed on Lot 1 of the proposed preliminary short plat.
74. Pursuant to SVMC 24.40.020, the City adopted the State Building Code specified under
RCW Chapter 19.27. This includes the 2006 edition of the International Fire Code. However,
RCW 19.27.060 specifically prohibits adopting any provision of the International Fire Code
concerning roadways as part of the State Building Code; provided, this does not limit the
authority of a county or city to adopt street, road or access standards.
75. The letter dated January 7, 2009 from Fire District 1 requires the proposed driveway from
Calvin Road to conform to the "...current driveway standards as required by the 2006
International Fire Code." Such reference should actually be to the City's standards for private
driveways set forth under SVMC Chapters 22.130 and incorporated County Code provisions,
SVMC Chapter 24.50 and SVMC Chapter 24.40; except for the provisions in the 2006
International Fire Code relating to restricting and signing the private driveway as a fire lane,
which are the same as provided in SCC 3.06.050(d).
76. The preliminary short plat of record proposes to utilize the existing 14-foot wide private
driveway and easement extended to the site from Best Road to serve a future duplex on the
westernmost lot in the preliminary short plat.
III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The preliminary short plat application is classified as a Type I application under the
application processing procedures set forth in SVMC Chapter 17.80.
2. SVMC 17.90.030 sets forth the required time for, and contents of, an appeal of a Type I
administrative decision. The standing requirements for such appeal are set forth in SVMC
17.90.030.
3. The administrative decision of the City Community Development Department
("Department") denying the application was subject to appeal within 14 days after written notice
of the decision was mailed by the Department in accordance with SVMC 17.80.130.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 10
4. The appellants did not submit an appeal meeting the contents requirements of SVMC
17.90.040 within 14 days of the date of the administrative decision, or the deadline for appeal set
forth in the decision, i.e. December 18, 2008; including but not limited to the failure to pay the
required appeal fee.
5. The appellants submitted an a pp eal substantially meeting the appeal requirements of
SVMC 17.90.040 on December 22, 2008; including the payment of the required appeal fee.
Negussie Argaw and Mark McManus have standing to appeal the decision under SVMC
17.90.030(1)(a), as the applicant and/or owner of the site. However, Cristin Argaw did not
establish standing under such section.
6. The decision did not contain all the information pertinent to file an appeal set forth in
SVMC 17.80.130. The decision and the record do not affirmatively establish when or if the
decision was mailed to the applicant, although the record indicates that the applicant received a
copy of the decision by no later than December 17, 2008. See above findings of fact.
7. Under the above circumstances, the deadline for appeal should be considered to be no later
than 14 days from the date it can be established that the appellants received a copy of the
administrative decision, i.e. December 31, 2008.
8. The Department had no authority under SVMC Chapter 17.90 to extend the time for
appeal, or require the appellants to complete the requirements set forth in the appeal form.
9. The County Road Standards, as adopted by the City, are applicable to the division of the
site under the proposed preliminary short plat, and the future construction of a single-family
home or duplex on Lot 1 of the preliminary short plat.
10. The specifications for private driveways in the County Road Standards, which incorporate
provisions of the County Code and standards established administratively by the County
Building and Planning Department, require a paved 12-foot wide traveled way for the private
driveway that extends from Best Road; and require a turnaround at the end of the driveway, since
the driveway exceeds 150 feet.
11. SVMC 20.20.090 and SVMC 19.40.020 require the residential private driveways serving
the preliminary short plat to be paved.
12. The 2006 International Fire Code, as adopted by the City with the exclusion of any
provisions concerning roadways, pursuant to the State Building Code (RCW Chapter 19.27),
does not require the private driveways serving the preliminary short plat to have a 20-foot
section or traveled way.
13. SVMC Chapter 24.50 requires the private driveways serving the preliminary short plat to
have an unobstructed width of 20 feet, be paved; have a surface designed and maintained to
support a 75,000-pound fire truck, with all-weather driving capabilities; have a 120-foot
hammerhead, 60-foot"Y" or a 96-foot diameter cul-de-sac; and meet certain other requirements.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 11
This is because the private driveway(s) exceed 150 feet in length, and are considered
"engineered grading".
14. When a local government conditions a land use permit, it must identify a public problem
that the condition is designed to address. The local government must also show a relationship or
nexus between the proposed solution and the identified problem, such that the proposed solution
tends to solve or alleviate the identified problem. See Kramer v. Clark County, 135 Wn App.
1005 (2006); Burton v. Clark County, 91 Wn. Ap. 505 (1998), review denied 137 Wn.2d 1015;
and Snider v. Walla Walla County, 85 Wn. App. 371 (1997).
15. The private driveway extended from Best Road has a substandard surface with regard to
the requirements of the SVMC for a residential private driveway serving a single-family home or
duplex. The driveway has a substandard width for the issuance of a grading permit associated
with improvement of the driveway, under the SVMC.
16. The Best Road private driveway serves the existing single-family home on the site. The
preliminary short plat proposes to access such existing driveway for a future single-family home
or duplex constructed on Lot 1 of the preliminary short plat, with the existing home being short
platted on an adjacent lot that would receive access via the proposed Calvin Road driveway.
17. The construction of a single-family home on Lot 1 of the preliminary short plat would
generally create the same level of vehicular trips and fire/emergency access impacts on the Best
Road private driveway as the existing residence on the site. However, the construction of a
duplex on Lot 1 would increase such impacts.
18. The site has only a 14-foot wide easement for a private driveway access over the land lying
between the site and Best Road. The site owner does not currently have the property interest
needed to widen the easement or driveway to 20 feet as required by the Department.
19. Under the above circumstances, the applicants should be allowed to serve one (1) single-
family dwelling off the Best Road without any widening requirement, but not a duplex.
20. To serve a single-family dwelling in the preliminary plat from the Best Road driveway,the
applicants should be required to improve the existing driveway in accordance with the minimum
standards required by the County Road Standards adopted by the City; the stormwater treatment
requirements set forth in SVMC 22.150.060; and the grading permit requirements of SVMC
24.50.060(5) for a private driveway in excess of 150 feet in length, except that the driveway and
easement do not need to be widened, and the turnaround need only meet the specifications of the
County Road Standards for a private driveway. See condition#4 in memorandum from City
Engineering dated 6-6-08.
IV. DECISION
Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated above, the administrative
decision by the City Community Development Department denying the preliminary short plat
application is hereby affirmed in part and reversed in part. The 14-foot wide private driveway
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 12
extended from Best Road is prohibited from serving more than one (1) dwelling unit in the
preliminary short plat.
The 14-foot private driveway and easement extended from Best Road may serve a
maximum of one (1) dwelling unit in the preliminary short plat; provided the driveway is
improved in accordance with the minimum standards required by the County Road Standards
adopted by the City; the stormwater treatment requirements set forth in SVMC 22.150.060; and
the grading permit requirements of SVMC 24.50.060(5) for a private driveway in excess of 150
feet in length, except that the 14-foot wide driveway and easement do not need to be widened,
and the turnaround for the driveway need only meet the specifications of the County Road
Standards for a private driveway.
The application is hereby remanded to the City Community Development Department for
the purpose of allowing the applicants to submit a revised preliminary short plat that complies
with this decision.
DATED this 27th day of April, 2009
CITY HEARING EXAMINER PRO TEM
Michael C. Dempsey, WSBA#8235
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision APP-08-08 Page 13
NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION AND NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Pursuant to Chapter 17.90 of the Spokane Valley Municipal Code(SVMC), the
decision of the Hearing Examiner on the appeal of an administrative determination is final
and conclusive unless within twenty-one (21) calendar days from the date of 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 regular mail to the Applicant, and to all government
agencies and persons entitled to notice under Section 17.80.130(4) of the SVMC, on April
27,2009. The date of issuance of the Hearing Examiner's decision is therefore April 30,
2009. THE APPEAL CLOSING DATE IS MAY 21,2009.
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; and may be
inspected by contacting Leslie Busch at(509) 477-7490. 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. After the appeal period,the file may be inspected at the
City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development-Planning Division, 11707
E. Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley,WA, 99206; by contacting Tavis Schmidt at(509)921-
1000. Copies of the documents in the record will be made available at the cost set by the
City of Spokane Valley.
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 APP-08-08 Page 14