REZ-29-05 CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY HEARING EXAMINER
RE: Zone Reclassification from the Urban )
Residential-3.5 (UR-3.5) Zone to the )
Urban Residential-7* (UR-7*) Zone; and ) FINDINGS OF FACT,
Environmental Appeal of MDNS; ) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,
Applicant/Appellant: Richard and Melinda ) AND DECISION
Thomas )
File Nos. REZ-29-05 and APP-01-06 )
)
I. SUMMARY OF DECISION
Hearing Matter: Application for a rezone from the UR-3.5 zone to the UR-7* zone, and appeal
of MDNS issued for application.
Summary of Decision: Approve application, subject to conditions of approval. Approve appeal
of MDNS.
II. FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The application seeks approval of a zone reclassification from the Urban Residential-3.5
(UR-3.5) zone to the Urban Residential-7* (UR-7*) zone, on approximately 3.67 acres of land.
2. The site is located along the south side of Broadway Avenue, south of the intersection of
Broadway Avenue and the right of way for Blake Road; in the SE 1/4 of Section 15, Township 25
North, Range 44 EWM, Spokane County, Washington.
3. The site is currently referenced as County Assessor's tax parcel nos. 45154.0701 and
45154.0604, and is addressed at 13420 East Broadway, Spokane Valley.
4. The applicant and site owner is Richard and Melinda Thomas, Thomas Construction, 2901
Point, Hayden, Idaho.
5. On November 3, 2005, the applicant submitted the current application, along with a
conceptual site development plan, to the City Department of Community Development, Planning
Division("City Planning Division"). The conceptual site plan illustrated development of the site
for 24 multi-family dwelling units, in the form of triplexes and four-plexes, for independent
retirement living, at a residential density(net and gross) of 6.53 dwelling units per acre.
6. On November 16, 2005, the City Planning Division found the application to be incomplete,
because the conceptual site plan did not show the existing improvements on the property. The
applicant submitted a revised conceptual site plan showing the location of existing improvements,
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 1
along with the proposed multifamily development. The City Planning Division again found the
application to be incomplete, and requested that the second site plan be revised to show only the
existing improvements on the property.
7. On December 1, 2005, the applicant submitted the current site plan of record,which shows
only the existing improvements on the site. On December 7, 2006, the City Planning Division
found the application to be complete.
8. On January 13, 2006, the City Planning Division issued a Mitigated Determination of
Nonsignificance (MDNS) for the rezone application. On January 27, 2006, the applicant timely
appealed the MDNS to the Hearing Examiner, in File No. APP-01-06.
9. On February 16, 2006, the Hearing Examiner conducted a public hearing on the rezone
application and MDNS. The notice requirements for the public hearing were met. The Examiner
conducted site visits on February 15, 2006 and March 16, 2006.
10. The Hearing Examiner heard the proposal pursuant to Chapter 10.35 of the City Municipal
Code, and the City Hearing Examiner Rules of Procedure.
11. The following persons testified at the public hearing:
Karen Kendall and Greg McCormick Stacy Bjordahl
Spokane Valley Community Development Attorney at Law
Department, Planning Division Witherspoon, Kelly, Davenport & Toole
11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 422 West Riverside, Suite 1100
Spokane Valley, WA 99206 Spokane, WA 99201
Ann Winkler Carl Johnson
4310 S. Ball Drive 13405 E. Valleyway Avenue
Veradale, WA 99037 Spokane Valley, WA 99216
Hal Sarff Dale Lively
13505 E. Broadway 13523 E. Valleyway Avenue
Spokane Valley, WA 99216 Spokane Valley, WA 99216
Sandra Raskell Mike Connelly
Spokane Valley Public Works Department, City Attorney
Engineering Division 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106
11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Suite 106 Spokane Valley, WA 99206
Spokane Valley, WA 99206
12. The Examiner left the record open after the public hearing until March 7, 2005; to allow the
City Attorney to respond to the memorandum of authorities submitted by the appellant's legal
counsel, and to allow the appellant's attorney to reply to any response submitted by the City
Attorney. No additional documents were submitted by the parties during the comment period.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 2
13. The Hearing Examiner takes notice of the City of Spokane Valley Interim Comprehensive
Plan and Interim Zoning Code; 2001 County Standards for Road and Sewer Construction
(adopted by reference by the City); City Municipal Code; other applicable development
regulations; and prior land use decisions in the vicinity.
14. The record includes the documents in File Nos. REZ-29-05 and APP-01-06 at the time of
the public hearing, the documents and testimony submitted at the public hearing, and the items
taken notice of by the Hearing Examiner.
15. The site is approximately 3.67 acres in size, and is relatively flat in topography. The north
part of the property is improved with a residence and two detached accessory structures. The site
is vegetated with deciduous and evergreen trees, shrubs and grasses.
16. In 1991, Spokane County reclassified the zoning of the site and nearby land to the UR-3.5
zone; except for several parcels of land located approximately 500 feet west and southwest of the
site, east of McDonald Road and south of Broadway Avenue, which were reclassified to the
Urban Residential-22 (UR-22 zone); all pursuant to the Program to Implement the Spokane
County Zoning Code.
17. In 1999, the County approved the rezone of five (5) acres of land located northeast of the
site, at the northeast corner of the intersection of Broadway Avenue and the unimproved right of
way for Blake Road, to the UR-22 zone; and authorized bonus density in such zone; for the
development of 110 multi-family dwelling units, in the form of retirement/elderly apartments. See
Hearing Examiner decision in File No. ZE-23-98.
18. The decision in File No. ZE-23-98 required the dedication of 20 feet of the rezoned
property for Blake Road, and the applicable radius at the intersection of the right of way and
Broadway Avenue, along with applicable border easements, to the County. The decision
prohibited access to Blake Road until specifically authorized by the County Engineer; and
provided that at such time as Blake Road is constructed and established as a public road, the
County Engineer would determine if the driveway approach to the proposed use should be
modified or relocated.
19. The rezone decision in File No. ZE-23-98 also required the installation of 32 feet of asphalt,
curb and sidewalk along the frontage of the proposed development with Blake Road; which the
decision provided could alternatively be accomplished through the landowner's participation in a j.
future road improvement district(RID).
20. Effective January 15, 2002, Spokane County implemented a new comprehensive plan,
Urban Growth Area(UGA) boundaries and County Phase I Development Regulations; pursuant
to the State Growth Management Act.
21. The County Comprehensive Plan designated the site and nearby land in the Low Density
Residential category; except for nearly all the land zoned UR-22 lying to the west and southwest,
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 3
which land was designated in the High Density Residential category; and except for the land
located along the west side of Evergreen Road in the area, which land was designated in the
Mixed Use category.
22. The County Phase I Development Regulations designated the site and area in the UGA, and
retained the zoning of the site and neighboring land.
23. On March 31, 2003, the City was incorporated, with the site and surrounding area being
included in the city limits. On the same date, the City adopted by reference, as City land use
controls, the County's Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, Phase I Development Regulations,
2001 Standards for Road and Sewer Construction and official zoning maps, and other County
development regulations; with certain revisions not relevant to the current matter.
24. In 2006, the City Council designated five (5) acres of land zoned UR-22 to the northeast,
plus an adjacent acre of land lying to the east, in the High Density Residential category of the City
Comprehensive Plan; and legislatively rezoned such easterly acre of land from the UR-3.5 zone to
the UR-22 zone. See decision in File No. CPA-03-06.
25. The land located near the site consists primarily of single-family homes on parcels ranging
from acreage lots to urban sized lots. However, a 1.2-acre parcel of land improved with a small
synagogue is located directly east of the north portion of the site. A 5-acre parcel improved with
a church and private school, fronting along Broadway Avenue, is located 170 feet east of the
south portion of the site; and a 1.25-acre parcel of land used as playfields for the private school
abuts the south portion of the site on the east.
26. A 2.5-acre parcel improved with a single-family residence abuts the site on the west. A
1.25-acre parcel improved with a single-family residence is located directly south of the west
portion of the site, and derives access through the easterly extension of a private driveway from
the terminus of Alki Avenue located to the west.
27. A 2.5-acre parcel of land improved with a single-family residence lies directly south of the
east portion of the site. The owner (Delos Mettler) of such parcel controls an adjacent 20-foot
strip of undeveloped land, containing an abandoned irrigation pipe, which strip of land extends
south from the middle of the south boundary of the current site to Valleyway Avenue. A 2.2-acre
parcel improved with a single-family residence is located directly southeast of the site.
28. The land zoned UR-22 to the northeast is developed with a 110-unit "congregate care"
retirement facility(Broadway Court Estates). The retirement housing contemplated on the
current site would be functionally connected to such facility. The land lying northwest of the site,
across Broadway Avenue, consists of an elementary school.
29. Apartment complexes are located east of McDonald Road, south of Broadway Avenue,
approximately 500 feet west of the site. Some duplexes are also found to the southwest. A
mixture of office, commercial uses, nonresidential uses and residences are located to the east
along the west side of Evergreen Road.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 4
30. A convenience store is located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Broadway
Avenue and Evergreen Road, on land zoned Neighborhood Business (B-1). Further to the north,
west of Evergreen Road, are found office uses and retirement housing, on land rezoned to
Community Business (B-2) or UR-22 during the previous 10 years. See Hearing Examiner
decisions in File Nos. REZ-19-03, ZE-08-02, ZE-10-99, ZE-26-98, ZE-26A-98, ZE-41B-95, ZE-
41A-95, ZE-41A-95, and ZE-41-95; and City zoning maps in project file.
31. The land located along or near Mission Avenue to the north is designated in the High
Density Residential and Medium Density Residential categories of the Comprehensive Plan, zoned
UR-22 and UR-12, and developed with multi-family housing or offices.
32. The City Arterial Road Plan designates Broadway Avenue, Evergreen Road and Sprague
Avenue as Urban Principal Arterials; McDonald Road and Mission Avenue as Urban Minor
Arterials; and Valleyway Avenue as an Urban Collector Arterial.
33. The City Arterial Road Plan considers Blake Road in the area as Local Access road; except
from its intersection with 22nd Avenue and Saltese Road south to State Route No. 27, where it is
designated as an Urban Collector Arterial. The other public roads in the vicinity not designated as
arterials are also Local Access roads.
34. Evergreen Road in the area is improved to a 5-lane section, including center turn lane, and
has an interchange with Interstate 90 north of Mission Avenue. Broadway Avenue and
McDonald Road in the vicinity are improved to four(4) lanes. Valleyway Avenue is a 2-lane
road. Public transit is available in Broadway Avenue.
35. Alki Avenue is paved from McDonald Road east to its terminus located approximately 165
feet west of the site. A 30-foot wide, unimproved right of way for Alki Avenue also extends
westerly from the northerly terminus of Mamer Road for 130 feet, to a point lying 500 feet east of
the site. Mamer Road extends south to Valleyway Avenue.
36. The 30-foot right of way for Blake Road located to the north, between the retirement
facility and the elementary school properties, serves as a gravel driveway for such abutting uses, is
fenced and closed at the north end, and is not maintained or established by the City as a public
road. The 20 feet of right of way required to be dedicated for Blake Road by the rezone decision
in File No. ZE-23-98 has not yet been granted to the City. Further to the north, portions of Blake
Road are paved and open to public travel within a 60-foot right of way; but other portions are
located within a 30-foot right of way that is unimproved and closed to public travel.
37. Blake Avenue extends south of Valleyway as a paved road all the way to SR-27, but its
alignment shifts slightly to the east between Eighth Avenue and 12th Avenue, before returning to
the same north/south alignment further to the south.
38. The MDNS issued for the proposal requires the applicant to dedicate right of way, and
make "frontage" improvements, for Blake Road and Alki Avenue, prior to issuance of a
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 5
"commercial permit", or any further land use action; with the location and width of dedication to
be determined at the time of"Commercial Permit Application or Platting Application".
39. The Staff Report submitted by the City Division of Planning indicates that the City
requested the applicant to dedicate a 38-foot wide strip of land for Blake Road, and a 14-foot
wide border easement on each side of such proposed right of way, extending from north to south
through the site; and the dedication of 25 feet of land for right of way purposes for Alki Road
along the south boundary of the site. The City may also request dedication of a border easement
on the north side of the requested right of way for Alki Avenue, on the site.
40. The applicant's appeal of the MDNS objected to the mitigating conditions required by the
MDNS; on the basis that there is no "public problem" such conditions are designed to address,
there is no relationship or"nexus"between the impact of the contemplated development of the
site and any public problem created or exacerbated by such development, and the required
dedication and frontage improvements are not "roughly proportional"to any public problem
created or exacerbated by such development.
41. In support of its position, the appellant cited the "taking" cases of Nollan v. California
Coastal Commission, 483 U.S. 825, 107 S.Ct. 3141, 97 L.Ed.2d 677 (1987); Dolan v. City of
Tigard, 512 U.S. 374, 114 S.Ct. 2309, 129 L.Ed.2d 304 (1994);Burton v. Clark County, 91 Wn.
App. 505 (1998), review denied, 137 Wn.2d 1015 (1999); and Benchmark v. Battleground, 146
Wn.2d 685 (2002).
42. The applicant also contended that the site can be developed to a maximum residential
density(net) of seven(7) dwelling units per acre, instead of the maximum density of six(6) units
per acre stated in the Staff Report, based on recent amendments to the UR-7 zone and City
Zoning Code.
43. Dale Lively, the owner of a 2.2-acre parcel lying directly southeast of the site, improved
with a single-family residence, testified that he preferred development of the site for a small
retirement community over other potential residential uses, but generally opposed intensive
development of the site. Lively also owns a 1.5-acre parcel of undeveloped land located
approximately 340 feet southeast of the site, fronting along Valleyway Avenue;
44. Dale Lively also testified that if the parcel containing his residence is divided in the future
for residential development, or his vacant parcel located to east is developed, such new
development would access Valleyway Avenue, and that there was no need or justification to I .
extend Alki Avenue to serve his two parcels. Lively stated that existing improvements on his
property and on neighboring properties would make it difficult and undesirable to extend Alki
Avenue or Blake Road in the vicinity; and that he has no reason to access Blake Avenue north of e
Broadway Avenue considering its current condition.
45. Carl Johnson, the owner of a 1-acre parcel located 70 feet southwest of the site, which is
improved with a single-family home and accessed through a 30-foot wide extension of such parcel
to Valleyway Avenue, testified that he was neutral regarding the proposal. Johnson indicated that
FIE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 6
his north fence line actually encroaches five (5) feet onto the portion of Alki Avenue abutting his
property, and that the County previously granted him a license to keep his fence in the right of
way until such time as the road may be extended to the east. Johnson advised that it would be
difficult to get a fire truck through the 30-foot wide portion of his property that extends south to
Valleyway Avenue, and that fire access for his property, and the abutting parcel to the northeast,
would probably need to be achieved via Alki Avenue.
46. The City Zoning Code authorizes approval of a site specific rezone if it is consistent with the
City Comprehensive Plan and is not detrimental to the public welfare. See Zoning Code
14.402.020(1), 14.402.100(1) and 14.402.120.
47. The City Phase I Development Regulations require all zone reclassifications to be consistent
with the implementing zones specified in such regulations for the Comprehensive Plan
designations that apply to the property involved. The implementing zones for the Low Density
Residential category, in which the site is designated, are the UR-3.5 and UR-7 zones.
48. Under Washington case law, the proponent of a rezone must establish that the rezone bears
a substantial relationship to the public health, safety or welfare; and that a substantial change of
circumstances has occurred in the area since the property was last zoned. However, where the
proposed rezone implements the comprehensive plan of the local government, a substantial
change of circumstances does not have to be demonstrated.
49. The UR-3.5 zone,which currently applies to the site, is intended to promote areas of
primarily single-family residences in an urbanized neighborhood setting. Such zone permits
single-family homes, duplexes and certain other uses; but does not allow multi-family dwellings.
The UR-3.5 zone permits a maximum residential density(net) of 4.35 dwelling units per acres.
The minimum frontage for a single-family dwelling in the UR-3.5 zone is 80 feet, and the
minimum lot size is 10,000 square feet.
50. The UR-7 zone is intended to add to the variety of housing types and densities, and to
provide standards for the orderly development of residential property in a manner that provides a
desirable living environment that is compatible with surrounding land uses and assures the
protection of property values. The UR-7 zone permits the development of single-family homes,
duplexes, multi-family dwellings and certain other uses.
51. Section 14.618.300 of the City Zoning Code states that the maximum density(net)
permitted in the UR-7 zone is seven(7) dwelling units per acre. The minimum lot area and
minimum frontage for a single-family residence in the UR-7 zone are 6,000 square feet for a
single-family dwelling and 65 feet, respectively. The minimum lot area and minimum frontage for !'
a multi-family dwelling unit are 15,000 square feet and 100 feet, respectively.
52. The City Phase I Development Regulations limit residential development on land rezoned to
the UR-7 zone under such regulations to a maximum density(net) of six(6) dwelling units per
acre. Such zoning is referred to by the City as "Urban Residential-7* (UR-7*)", and is reflected
as "UR-7*" on City zoning maps. Land zoned UR-7 prior to adoption of the City(and County)
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 7
Phase I Development is shown on City zoning maps as "UR-7", and can be developed to a density
of seven(7) dwelling units per acre.
53. In 2004, the City made minor changes to the setback and building height standards of the
UR-3.5, UR-7 Urban Residential-12 (UR-12) and UR-22 zone; in replacing Sections 14.618.305
through 14.618.375 of the City Zoning Code with City Municipal Code Section 4.15.1
(Residential Zone Dimensional Standards Table). See Zoning Code 14.618.300. However, such
changes did not revise the maximum residential density(net) permitted in such zones, or other
development standards. See City Ordinances Nos. 04-033 and 04-046.
54. The applicant contended that the 2004 amendments to the City Zoning Code indirectly
amended the City Phase I Development Regulations; on the basis that the 2004 amendments
specified a maximum residential density(net) of seven(7) dwelling units per acre in the UR-7
zone, and that such density allowance contradicted or was more specific than the density
provisions of the City Phase I Development Regulations.
55. In support of its position, the applicant cited Schumacher v. Williams, 107 Wn. App. 793
(2001), review denied, 145 Wn.2d 1025 (2002). Such case, citing other authorities, articulates
rules of construction in cases where the language of a statute is ambiguous. Such rules indicate
that where a later enacted statute on the same subject is more specific than an earlier and more
general statute, the later enacted statute is controlling. However, such rule gives way to the duty
to construe related statutes harmoniously, if possible, the assumption that the legislature did not
intend to effectuate a change in the law by implication; and that the principal objective in
interpreting a statute is to effectuate the intent of the legislature. Id.
56. The provision in the City Phase I Development Regulations limiting the residential density of
land rezoned to the UR-7 zone, and designated in the Low Density Residential category of the
Comprehensive Plan, to six(6) units per acre implements policy UL.9.1 of the Comprehensive
Plan, which states that "Low density residential areas shall range from 1 to and including 6
dwelling units per acre..." The City Phase I Development Regulations logically do not impose a
similar density limitation on land designated in the Medium Density Residential category of the
Comprehensive Plan that is rezoned to the UR-7 zone; since policy UL.9.1 of the Comprehensive
Plan embraces a residential density range in the Medium Density Residential category of
"...greater than 6 to and including 15 dwelling units per acre."
57. The 2004 amendments to the Zoning Code made no change to the residential density
permitted in the "UR-7" zone, expressed no intent to amend the City Phase I Development
Regulations by implication, and can easily be read harmoniously with the provision in the City
Phase I Development Regulations limiting the residential density of land designated in the Low
Density Residential category of the Comprehensive Plan and rezoned to the "UR-7*" zone to six
(6) dwelling units per acre.
58. The applicant also contended that it would be a"denial of equal protection"to allow
properties zoned UR-7 before adoption of the City(and County) Phase I Development
Regulations, designated in the Low Density Residential category of the Comprehensive Plan, to
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 8
enjoy a maximum residential density of seven(7) dwelling units per acre,while properties zoned
UR-7 after the adoption of such regulations,
and designated in the Low Density Residential
category of the Comprehensive Plan, are limited to a residential density of six(6) dwelling units
per acre.
59. It was rational for the City(and the County, prior to incorporation of the City) to not
"downzone" property designated in the Low Density Residential category of the Comprehensive
Plan, that was zoned UR-7 prior to adoption of the Phase I Development Regulations; and/or
potentially make certain residential uses developed on such properties nonconforming; by
reducing the allowable densities on such properties to six(6) units per acre.
60. It was rational for the City(and the County, beforehand) to implement the maximum
residential density recommended by the Comprehensive Plan in the Low Density Residential
category of the Comprehensive Plan of six(6) units per acre only for properties newly zoned
under the Phase I Development Regulations, that are designated in the Low Density Residential
category of the Comprehensive Plan.
61. RCW 36.70B.030 requires that a comprehensive plan and development regulations adopted
by local government under the State Growth Management Act (GMA) serve as the foundation for
project review; and that where standards for development are set forth in local development
regulations, or in the absence of applicable development regulations, are addressed by a
comprehensive plan, such regulations or the comprehensive plan, respectively, are determinative
of the features of development regulated by such standards of development.
62. Policy UL.9.1 of the Comprehensive Plan recommends that residential densities in the Low
Density Residential category of the Comprehensive Plan range from 1-6 dwelling units per acre.
Policy UL.9.2 recommends that the County seek to achieve an average residential density in new
development of at least four(4) dwelling units per acre, through a mix of densities and housing
Policy UL.8.1 recommends that mixed-income development be provided for in residential areas.
The proposed rezone generally implements these policies.
63. Policy UL.2.11 of the Comprehensive Plan promotes the linkage of developments with open
space, parks, natural areas and street connections. Policy T.4a.9 of the Comprehensive Plan
states that adequate access to and circulation within all developments shall be maintained for
emergency service and public transportation vehicles.
64. Policy UL.2.17 of the Comprehensive Plan recommends that multi-family housing be sited
throughout the UGA; including integration into small, scattered parcels throughout existing
residential area; with new multi-family dwellings built to the scale and design of the community or
neighborhood, while contributing to an area-wide density supportive of public transit and that
allows for a range of housing choices.
65. The Urban Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan states as follows:
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 9
"Street design can have a significant impact on community character. Closed
development patterns, which often include dead-end and cul-de-sac roads, tend to
isolate communities and make travel difficult. Integrated neighborhoods provide
connected streets and paths and often include a central focal point, such as a
park or neighborhood business. Integrated development patterns promote a sense
of community and allow for ease of pedestrian/bicycle movement. The illustration
below contains an integrated, as compared to a closed, development pattern.
Integration does not necessarily mean development in grids. Rather, roads
should connect and provide for ease of circulation regardless of the layout."
The illustration referenced in such quotation compares an integrated street pattern with a closed-
development pattern; and states "Clear,formalized and interconnected street systems make
destinations visible,provide the shortest and most direct path to destinations and result in
security through community rather than by isolation."
66. Policies UL.2.20 and T.4a.12 of the Comprehensive Plan encourage new developments,
including multi-family developments, to be arranged in a pattern of connecting streets and blocks
to allow people to get around easily by all means of transportation; but finds that cul-de-sacs and
other closed street systems may be appropriate where topography and other physical limitations
make connecting systems impracticable, and in other pertinent circumstances.
67. Policy UL.2.21 of the Comprehensive Plan encourage techniques to slow vehicle traffic and
reduce the volume of traffic in residential neighborhoods, giving due consideration to traffic,
pedestrian safety, mobility and conforming to Goal T.4a of the Comprehensive Plan. Policy
T.4a.13 recommends the development of local access roads that are curvilinear, narrow, or use
other street designs consistent with safety requirements, to discourage through traffic in
neighborhoods; where such design fits into the surrounding street systems or aids in implementing
specific land use designs.
68. Policy T.3e.1 recommends that the City transportation network provide safe and convenient
bicycle and walking access between housing, recreation, shopping, schools, community facilities
and mass transit access points; and that obstructions and conflicts with pedestrian and bicycle
movement be minimized.
69. Policy T.2.2 of the Comprehensive Plan recommends that transportation improvements
needed to serve new development be in place at the time new development impacts occur, or that
a financial commitment, consistent with the City's Capital Facilities Plan, be made to complete the
improvement within six(6)years.
70. Policy T.4a.1 of the Comprehensive Plan recommends that best available engineering
practices be utilized to ensure a safe and efficient roadway system.
71. Policy T.4a.2 of the Comprehensive Plan recommends that the capacity of existing roads be
maximized to reduce the need for new or expanded roads; through the use of signalization,
improved signage and other appropriate means.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 10
72. Policy T.4a.9 of the Comprehensive Plan states that adequate access to and circulation
within all developments shall be maintained for emergency service and public transportation
vehicles.
73. The Staff Report sets forth other relevant policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
74. The guidelines set forth in the City 2001 Standards for Road and Sewer Construction("City
Road Standards") recommend, in planning transportation systems for new development, the
provision of adequate vehicular and pedestrian access to all parcels of land, designing local access
roads to minimize through traffic movements and excessive speeds, providing logical street
patterns, minimizing vehicular and pedestrian-vehicular conflict points, considering traffic
generators in designing a street system in a proposed development, and considering bordering
arterial routes. See City Road Standards, p. 1-5 and 1-6.
75. The City Road Standards set forth standards for right of way dedication, border easements,
width of paving, and the installation of curb and sidewalk for arterials and local access roads in or
abutting new development. This includes requiring the installation of curb and sidewalk along the
frontage of new residential developments, and along both sides of a new public road, in the urban
residential zones of the City Zoning Code.
76. The City Road Standards set forth standards for private driveways. Such standards vest the
City Engineer with the authority to impose requirements in addition to those stated in the City
Road Standards, based on existing or anticipated conditions, to ensure proper control of access or
egress for traffic, and to safely provide for traffic using the street.
77. The City Road Standards vest the City Engineer with wide discretion in designating the
public roadway section to be applied to a particular development, utilizing such standards. This
includes consideration of such factors as the functional classification of the roadway, traffic
volume, terrain, density of the proposed or existing development, the proposed or existing zoning,
existing roads located in the immediate area, the cost relationship of the proposed improvements,
the surrounding developments, and other pertinent factors relating to the public health, safety and
welfare.
78. The City Road Standards indicate that Local Access roads allow direct access to abutting
lands and connections to the "higher order" systems. This includes through streets, loop streets
and cul-de-sac streets that provide access to homes connecting to a Collector Arterial or other
residential access streets; and which do not support through traffic. A Collector Arterial collects
traffic from Local Access roads and distributes it to the greater arterial system.
79. For general approval purposes, the City Planning Division regards the proposed rezone as a
"blanket"rezone not tied to a specific development plan. However, for the purposes of SEPA,
the City Planning Division considered the potential environmental impacts from development of
the site for multi-family housing, at a maximum residential development of six(6) dwelling units
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 11
per acre; with such development being served by a private driveway system connecting to
Broadway Avenue, and no other public road connections or provisions.
80. Under Washington case law, local governments evaluating the environmental
impacts of a proposed rezone may consider the general use and development possibilities
of land under a new zoning classification; even though specific projects on the land may be
environmentally evaluated and appropriately conditioned or denied at the building permit
or post-rezone regulatory stage. This is particularly the case where specific development
of the property as rezoned is probable based on the record, as in the current case. See
King County v. Boundary Review Board, 122 Wn.2d 648 (1993); and Settle, The
Washington State Environmental Policy Act, pages 13-11 through 13-13.
81. Washington cases generally do not authorize the "vesting" of contemplated development in
rezone cases. The City Phase I Development Regulations and the City's land use processing rules
do not provide for the vesting of development contemplated for a site in a"blanket" rezone
situation; although the City's land use processing rules require a rezone application to be
considered under the development regulations in place at the time a complete rezone application
was submitted.
82. The proposed rezone would allow up to 22 dwelling units to be developed on the site, at the
maximum density(net) of six(6) dwelling units per acre allowed in the UR-7* zone, if right of
way is not dedicated for Alki Avenue and Blake Road. The site could be developed for 15 or 16
dwelling units per acre under its existing UR-3.5 zoning, at a maximum density of 4.35 dwelling
units per acre; without the dedication of right of way for Alki Avenue and Blake Road. However,
the site can only be developed for multi-family housing under the UR-7* zone.
83. The record indicates that the City has requested the dedication of 27,746 square feet for
Blake Road and 7,788 square feet for Alki Avenue, if the site is developed as contemplated. If
such dedication is required, the maximum number of dwelling units that could be developed on
the site under the UR-7* zone would be 17 dwelling units. If the applicant was required to only
dedicate 7,788 for Alki Avenue, the applicant could potentially develop 20 or 21 dwelling units on
the site. If the applicant was required to dedicate only 27,746 square feet for Blake Road, the
applicant could potentially develop 18 dwelling units on the site. See Zoning Code 14.300.100,
definition of"density".
84. If the City requires the dedication of border easements along Blake Road and/or Alki
Avenue, in addition to the dedication of right of way, the land required for border easements is
not deducted from gross acreage in determining the number of dwelling units that can be
developed on the site under the maximum residential density(net) permitted in the UR-7* zone;
although the provision of border easements could impact the location and design of proposed
improvements.
85. The applicant contended that the dedications and border easements requested by the City
would cause it to lose three (3) senior housing units in the north portion of the contemplated
development and up to eight (8) units in the south portion, and would make the contemplated
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 12
development unfeasible. This conclusion is somewhat erroneous, since it assumes the applicant
can develop 24 multi-family dwelling units on the site without right of way dedication, instead of
the 22 units that can be developed on the site under the UR-7* zone without right of way
dedication. See Exhibit#19, and testimony of Stacy Bjordahl.
86. The environmental checklist submitted for the application states that a private drive would
be constructed to provide internal access for site development. The checklist indicates that the
transportation impacts of the proposal are reduced by the proposed development of retirement
"villas" on the site, compared to the development of general multi-family uses on the site; and that
busses and vans from the related Broadway Court Estates retirement center located to the
northeast would provide transportation for future residents on the site on a scheduled basis.
87. The trip distribution letter submitted by the applicant's traffic engineer indicates that
residents in the senior housing developed on the site would use their own cars, but that some
would use some of the transportation, meals and other options available to the existing residents
in the congregate care facility located to the northeast. The letter observed that traffic generated
by site development could be represented by a variety of land use categories under the Institute of
Transportation Engineers Manual(ITE), Trip Generation 7th Addition; but that the most
appropriate classification is "Congregate Care Facility, Land Use Category 253". The letter
found that development of the site for 24 senior housing units under such classification would
generate only four(4) PM peak hour vehicle trips, one (1) AM peak hour vehicle trip and 48
average daily vehicle trips.
88. The trip distribution letter stated that if two other possible classifications in the ITE Manual
for the contemplated senior housing had been chosen, up to seven(7) PM peak hour vehicle trips
and five (5)AM peak hour vehicle trips could be generated. The letter concluded that even this
amount of trip generation would have little impact on the surrounding transportation system, and
that such trip generation was low enough to meet concurrency requirements without additional
traffic analysis. The City did not dispute this. The letter further noted that if the site was
developed for 22 single-family homes under the UR-7 zone, the site would generate 22 PM peak
hour vehicle trips and 17 AM peak hour vehicle trips.
89. The peak hour traffic load from development of the site for the contemplated senior housing
would actually be even less than indicated by the trip distribution letter; since the site can only be
developed for at most 22 dwelling units under the UR-7* zone, if no right of dedication is
required; and for a range of only 17-21 dwelling units, if right of way dedication is required for
Blake Road, Alki Avenue, or both Blake Road and Alki Avenue, respectively
90. The City did not request dedication or frontage improvements for Broadway Avenue,
because such road has already been improved to City standards along the frontage of the site,
including the installation of curb and sidewalk.
4-'
91. McDonald Road and Evergreen Road are separated by a distance of approximately .5 miles,
not 1.5 miles as indicated in the Staff Report. Broadway Avenue and Valleyway Avenue are
separated by a distance of approximately .25 miles.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 13
92. The applicant's traffic engineer indicated that the typical spacing of arterials in the Spokane
Valley, at a distance of every mile to one-half(1/2) mile,without the development of local access
streets as through streets in a classic grid pattern, provides adequate connectivity of streets; and
preserves the integrity of local access streets, by ensuring that they do not have "excessive"
connectivity and encourage through traffic to use them. See letter dated 2-16-06 from Sunburst
Engineering.
93. The applicant's traffic engineer indicated that the arterials in the area are currently well
below recommended transportation capacity; and that through streets are not needed between
nearby arterials to preserve transportation concurrency for the public road intersections impacted
by the contemplated senior housing on the site. See letter dated 2-16-06 from Sunburst
Engineering.
94. The applicant indicated that fire access for the contemplated development had been
discussed with County Fire District 1; and that the district had indicated no safety concerns with
the driveway access proposed by the applicant, as long as the driveway was of adequate width
and provided an adequate turnaround for fire and emergency vehicles. See testimony of Hal Sarff
and Ann Winkler. The fire district submitted a letter dated August 25, 2005, indicating that it had
no objections to the rezone, but would comment on access, fire protection and fire hydrant
locations at "...time of Plat."
95. The applicant's traffic engineer indicated that the driveway access planned for the
contemplated senior housing on the site generally meets City Engineering and County Fire District
1 standards for accessibility and safety. See testimony of Ann Winkler and Hal Sarff, and letter
dated 2-16-06 from Ann Winkler.
96. The applicant's traffic engineer indicated that McCabe Road is a better candidate for
extension between Broadway and Valleyway Avenues, than extending Blake Road between such
roads; on the basis that it would require right of way from fewer parcels and already has public
road connections to Broadway Avenue and between Valleyway Avenue and Sprague Avenue.
However, such extension is problematic since it would pass through two existing residences. See
aerial photo of area in project file.
97. The extension of Alki Avenue east of the northerly terminus of Mamer Road to Evergreen
Road is problematic, because of the existing residences and the Vera Water and Power Company
buildings located between such road terminus and Evergreen Road.
98. The extension of Alki Avenue from the paved portion located west of the site to Mamer
Road located east of the site would be hindered somewhat by the existing accessory buildings
located in the north end of the parcel lying directly south of the east half of the site and in the
north end of the parcel lying directly southeast of the site. The extension of Blake Road south of
the site would be hindered somewhat by the existing outbuildings located in the north end of the
parcel lying directly south of the east half of the site. See testimony of Dale Lively, and aerial
photo.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 14
99. Considering the existing UR-3.5 zoning of the acreage parcels located near the site, the
designation of such parcels in the Low Density Residential category of the Comprehensive Plan,
and the availability of public sewer in the area, it is conceivable that such parcels may be divided
and developed, or further developed, for urban residential uses in the future. It is also conceivable
that, as part of such future development, right of way may be dedicated, or required to be
dedicated, to the City for the extension, or partial extension, of Alki Avenue to the east and west,
and of Blake Road to the south.
100. The City cited Section 14.710.220 of the City Zoning Code in support of its request for
right of way dedication and road improvements for Alki Avenue and Blake Road. However,
Chapter 14.710 (Arterial/Road Overlay) of the City Zoning Code only applies to proposed
development where official Arterial/Road Maps have been adopted as "official controls"pursuant
to chapter 36.70 RCW. See Zoning Code 14.710.020 and 14.710.080.
101. The City has adopted the City Arterial Road Plan as an element of the City Comprehensive
Plan. However, the City has not adopted specific Arterial/Road Maps as an"official control"
under chapter 36.70 RCW, for Alki Avenue, Blake Road, or any other roads in the area. Zoning
Code 14.710.220 therefore does not apply to the current circumstances.
102. The record does indicate the presence of a"public problem"that the mitigating conditions in
the MDNS attempt to address, i.e. the lack of public road connectivity between Broadway
Avenue and Valleyway Avenue, and Evergreen Road and McDonald Avenue. This is not the lack
of continuous "through streets" in a perfect grid pattern that extend between and beyond such
arterials, but rather the relative inability to travel between such arterials through an integrated
public road system. For example, if Alki Avenue could be extended from the west all the way to
Mamer Road; or if Alki Avenue could be extended from the west to the east boundary of the site,
along with the extension of Blake Road either south to Valleyway Avenue or north to Broadway
Avenue, connectivity in the area would be significantly enhanced. See example of integrated road
system on pages UL-7 and T-13 of Comprehensive Plan.
103. The facts in the current case are extremely similar to those in Burton v. Clark County,
supra. In Burton, the court found that it could not reasonably be inferred from the evidence that
the right of way requested by the county through a proposed short plat would make the desired
connection through adjacent property to an existing public road,within the foreseeable future.
On this basis, the court determined that the county's requirements did not have a tendency to
solve or alleviate the identified public problem, and the requisite relationship or "nexus"between
the proposed solution and the public problem needed to justify the taking of land in such case was
not established; and the court refused to require the dedication or improvement of a right of way
through the short plat.
104. In the current circumstances, it cannot be reasonably inferred from the record that Blake
Road will be extended to the south through other properties to Valleyway Avenue in the
foreseeable future; or that Alki Avenue will be extended west through adjacent property to
existing Alki Avenue, or east through other properties to Mamer Road, in the foreseeable future.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 15
Since such potential extensions are only possibilities, not probabilities, the mitigation requested by
the MDNS does not tend to solve or alleviate the problem of connectivity in the vicinity, and the
requisite relationship or"nexus" between the proposed solution and the identified public problem
needed to justify the taking of land in the current matter has not been established by the City.
J �' g Y Y
105. The UR-7 zone requires the installation of a 6-foot high, sight-obscuring fence, wall or solid
landscaping adjacent to land zoned UR-3.5, except adjacent to a public road or alley. Such
requirement is applicable along the east,west and south boundaries of the site; and will help
buffer development of the site from adjacent properties.
106. Because the proposed rezone is not tied to a specific site plan for the purpose of review by
the Examiner, it is exempt from transportation concurrency requirements. Traffic concurrency
will be determined by City Engineering at the time of building permit or division of the site.
Approval of the rezone does not authorize any particular development of the site.
107. County Utilities and Vera Water and Power respectively certified the availability of public
sewer and water for the rezone and proposed short plat. The proposed rezone complies with the
public sewer and water concurrency requirements of the City Phase I Development Regulations.
108. The site is suitable for a rezone to the UR-7* zone; considering its location abutting
Broadway Avenue, the availability of a high level of public services to the site, and the proximity
of the site to the UR-22 zoning and higher density housing located to the northeast.
109. The proposed rezone conforms to the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, changed conditions
have occurred in the area since the zoning of the site was reclassified to the UR-3.5 zone in 1991.
This includes the extension of public sewer to the area, adoption of the City Comprehensive Plan
and City Phase I Development Regulations, incorporation of the City of Spokane Valley, and the
rezoning of the land located northeast of the site to the UR-22 zone.
110. The proposed rezone will not have more than a moderate effect on the quality of the
environment.
Based on the above findings of fact, the Hearing Examiner enters the following:
III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The proposed zone reclassification conforms to the City Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed rezone, as conditioned, bears a substantial relationship, and will not be
detrimental, to the public health, safety or welfare.
3. A substantial change of circumstances has occurred in the area since the site was last zoned.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 16
4. The maximum residential density(net) permitted on the site under the proposed Urban
Residential-7* (UR-7*) zone is six(6) dwelling units per acre.
5. The mitigating measures imposed by the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance
(MDNS) issued by the City Planning Division for the proposed rezone, i.e. right of way
dedication and frontage improvements, are not a valid exercise of the police power, as indicated in
Burton v. Clark County, 91 Wn. App. 505 (1998), review denied, 137 Wn.2d 1015 (1999); and in
other relevant state and federal taking cases.
6. The appeal of the MDNS submitted by the applicant should be approved, and the mitigating
measures requested in the MDNS should not be imposed.
7. The proposed rezone will not have a significant, probable adverse impact on the
environment.
8. The proposed rezone, as conditioned, complies with the UR-7* zone, the City Zoning Code
and other applicable development regulations.
9. The proposed rezone, as conditioned, meets the criteria established by Washington case law
for approving a rezone, and the criteria established in paragraphs 14.402.020(1) of the City
Zoning Code for amending the City official zoning map.
10. Approval of the zone reclassification is appropriate under Chapter 10.35 of the City
Municipal Code.
W. DECISION
Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law above, the application for a zone
reclassification of the site to the Urban Residential-7* (UR-7*) zone is hereby approved, subject
to the conditions of the various agencies specified below.
The applicant's appeal of the Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) issued
by the City Planning Division for the rezone application is hereby granted, and the mitigating
measures requiring right of way dedication and frontage improvements are not imposed on the
proposed rezone.
Any conditions of approval of public agencies that have been added or significantly altered
by the Examiner are italicized.
This approval does not waive the applicant's obligation to comply with relevant
requirements of other public agencies with jurisdiction over land development.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 17
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
CITY OF SPOKANE VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT-
PLANNING DIVISION
1. Prior to final short plat approval, the applicant shall comply with Section 14.622.356 (Walls)
of the Spokane Valley Interim Zoning Code and construct a six(6)-foot high concrete, masonry,
or decorative block wall, solid landscaping or site-obscuring fence on the south, east and west
property lines. Further, the applicant shall submit a written agreement requiring that the applicant
or successors in interest shall continuously maintain such required screening in good condition.
The applicant shall, at the same time, agree that at the time of sale of any and all of the parcels
created through the short plat action, to notify in writing all buyers of the requirement to maintain
the required screening along the portion of the property under their direct control.
SPOKANE VALLEY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS —ENGINEERING DIVISION
1. A transportation concurrency determination, and the imposition of additional conditions or
mitigation, shall be deferred until the time of preliminary short plat, building permit or other land
use application.
2. The Spokane Tribe of Indians recommended that an archeological survey and subsurface
testing be conducted at all construction and staging areas, to determine whether cultural or
historical resources are located on the site. See letter dated September 20, 2005. Upon any
discovery of potential or known archaeological resources at the site prior to or during on-site
construction, the developer, contractor, and/or any other parties involved in construction shall
immediately cease all on-site construction, shall act to protect the potential or known historical
and cultural resources area from outside intrusion; and shall promptly notify the City of
Spokane Valley Community Development Department of said discovery.
SPOKANE COUNTY DIVISION OF UTILITIES
1. A wet(live) sewer connection to the area-wide public sewer system shall be constructed. A
sewer connection permit is required. Commercial developments shall submit historical and or
estimated water usage prior to the issuance of the connection permit in order to establish sewer
fees.
2. Applicant shall submit expressly to Spokane County Division of Utilities, under separate
cover, only those plan sheets showing sewer plans and specifications for the public sewer
connections and facilities for review and approval. Commercial developments shall submit
historical and or estimated water usage as part of the sewer plan submittal.
3. Sewer plans acceptable to the Division of Utilities shall be submitted prior to the issuance of
the sewer connection permit.
BE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 18
4. Any water service for this project shall be provided in accordance with the Coordinated
Water System Plan for Spokane County, as amended.
SPOKANE REGIONAL HEALTH DISTRICT
1. The sewage disposal method shall be as authorized by the City of Spokane Public Works
Department.
2. Water service shall be coordinated through the Director of Utilities, Spokane County.
3. Water service shall be by an existing public water supply when approved by the Regional
Engineer(Spokane), State Department of Health.
4. A public sewer system will be made available for the project.
5. The use of private wells and water systems is prohibited.
SPOKANE COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AUTHORITY
1. Dust emissions during demolition, construction, and excavation projects shall be controlled.
Appropriate measures shall include but are not limited to the use of water sprays, tarps, sprinklers
or suspension of activity during certain weather conditions.
2. Measures shall be taken to avoid the deposition of dirt and mud from unpaved surfaces onto
paved surfaces. If tracking or spills occur on paved surfaces, measures must be taken immediately
to clean these surfaces.
3. Debris generated as a result of this project shall be disposed of by means other than burning.
4. All traveled surfaces (i.e. ingress, egress, parking areas, access roads, etc.) should be paved
and kept clean to minimize dust emissions.
5. If objectionable odors result from this project, effective control apparatus and measures shall
be taken to reduce odors to a minimum.
6. Special attention shall be given to proper maintenance of diesel powered construction
equipment to reduce the impact of diesel exhaust, a suspended carcinogen.
7. A Notice of Construction and Application for Approval is required to be submitted and
approved by SCAPCA prior to the construction, installation, or establishment of an air pollution j.
source. This includes emergency generators rated at 500 hp (375 kW) or higher, natural gas
heating equipment units rated at 4 MMBTU/hr or higher(input), and heating equipment units
fired with other fuels (e.g. diesel) rated at 1 MMBTU/hr (input) or higher. The applicant shall
contact SCAPCA for a Notice of Application.
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 19
8. A Notice of Intent must be submitted to SCAPCA prior to any demolition project or
asbestos project. An asbestos survey must be done by an AHERA accredited building inspector
prior to the demolition or renovation of buildings to determine if asbestos-containing material is
present at the site. Contact SCAPCA for a Notice of Intent application.
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY(SPOKANE OFFICE)
1. The applicant is encouraged to use construction products containing recycled and non-toxic
materials whenever possible, to reuse and recycle all leftover construction materials, reduce waste
generated and practice "Green Building"principals in all aspects of the project. Recycling
construction debris is typically less expensive than disposal. Please contact James Wavada at
(509) 329-3545 for assistance.
2. In the event of demolition of existing structure(s), proper disposal of solid waste, including
demolition waste, should be ensured. The applicant is encouraged to salvage, reuse and recycle
as much of the waste as possible. Recycling demolition debris is typically less expensive than
disposal. Otherwise, the demolition waste must be disposed of at a permitted solid waste facility.
3. Landscaping should incorporate waste prevention measures and the use of organic
materials. Water needs are reduced by use of native and drought tolerant plantings, compost
material, mulch, and drip irrigation. Pesticide and herbicide use is eliminated or reduced by use of
pest resistant and native plantings. Compost is also an effective soil amendment. Chipped woody
debris can be used to mulch ornamental beds, suppress weeds, retain moisture, control erosion,
and provide a base for pathways. The use of organic debris generated on-site for landscaping, if
possible, is also recommended.
4. It is preferable to leave the existing vegetation undisturbed for both aesthetic and practical
reasons. However, if it must be removed, the applicant is encouraged to dispose of it at a
compost facility or replant it elsewhere.
DATED this 22nd day of March, 2006
CITY HEARING EXAMINER PRO TEM
Mic•.el C. Dempsey, WSBA#82 '
HE Findings, Conclusions and Decision REZ-29-05 Page 20
NOTICE OF FINAL DECISION AND NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Pursuant to Section 10.35.150 of the City of Spokane Valley Municipal Code (SVMC), as
amended, the decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application for a zone reclassification is
final and conclusive unless within fourteen(14) calendar days from the Examiner's written
decision, a party with standing files an appeal of the decision with the City Council of the City of
Spokane Valley, City Hall, 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, in Spokane Valley, Washington; in
accordance with all the requirements of SVMC#10.35.150.
This decision was mailed by certified mail to the Applicant, and by first class mail to other
parties of record, on March 22, 2006. THE APPEAL CLOSING DATE IS APRIL 5, 2006.
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, (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 maybe inspected
at the City of Spokane Valley Department of Community Development, Division of Current
Planning, 11707 E. Sprague Avenue, Spokane Valley, WA, (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 REZ-29-05 Page 21