Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 2000-11-06 PM PLANNING DEPARTMENT FILE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMISSION AGENDA PACKET NOVEMBER 6, 2000 vt�oE LAKE pSit,FCp City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission Monday, November 6, 2000 7 p.m. oREGo$ Marylhurst Conference Center Commons Building (Room C-106) 17600 Pacific Highway Members: Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Douglas P. Cushing,Chair Nan Binkley,Vice Chair Douglas Kiersey Bruce Miller For Information: 635-0290 Julie Morales Sheila Ostly Dave Powers Agenda This meeting is in a handicapped accessible location. For any special accommodations,please contact Janice Bader at 635-0297, 48 hours before the meeting. * I. CALL TO ORDER Agenda Book H. ROLL CALL HI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES October 2,2000 IV. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS,CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER V. PUBLIC HEARING LU 00-0055, a request by KPFF Consulting Engineers to construct a 6 ft. wide, 4,800 ft. +/-paved pathway along the east side of Old River Road. This project includes the realignment of approx. 1,050 ft. of existing roadway to the west,construction of 2 retaining walls and a bridge, and removal of 20 trees. The project is located along Old River Road, from Glenmorrie Drive to Southern City Limits. (Tax Map 21E 11 & 14) The staff coordinator is Elizabeth Jacob. Continued from the October 16,2000 DRC meeting. LU 00-0072, a request by Steve and Doris Baird for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing single family dwelling into a Montessori School. The application also propose to add more parking and additional landscaping to the site. The site is located at 4320 Douglas Way(Tax Lot 13800 of Tax Map 21E 8BC). The staff coordinator is Michael. R. Wheeler. AP 00-0015 [LU 00-00341,an appeal by Wis and Susan Macomson of the Planning Director's decision to approve a two-parcel minor land partition request. The applicants, Raymond and Delal Lehman had proposed to divide a 28,498 sq. ft.parcel into two parcels approximately 15, 129 sq. ft. parcel (parcel 1) and 10,134 sq. ft. parcel (parcel 2). The site is located at 635 Iron Mt. Blvd. (Tax Lot 2100 of Tax Map 21E 3CB). The staff coordinator is Hamid Pishvaie. • VI. GENERAL PLANNING& OTHER BUSINESS VII. ADJOURNMENT MEMORANDUM • of L"K1 o:w TO: Development Review Commission c?� EQo FROM: Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager DATE: October 23, 2000 onc.0% SUBJECT: AP 00-15 {LU 00-0034-Lehman Partition] - - ----� BACKGROUND On September 12, 2000, the Planning Director issued a decision approving LU 00-0034, an application filed by Raymond and Delal Lehman. The applicants had requested approval to divide a 28,498 square foot lot into two parcels, measuring 15,129 square feet (Parcel 1) and 10,134 square feet (Flag Parcel 2) in area, [Exhibit B, Exhibit 5]. The Planning Director determined that the applicants had provided substantial amount of information in support of the application, and that they had sufficiently addressed the criteria to demonstrate that the proposed minor partition should be approved. A detailed analysis of all applicable criteria and related issues is provided in the September 12, 2000, staff report and • decision on LU 00-0034, [Exhibit B]. On September 26, 2000, Wis and Susan Macomson, in disagreement with these findings, appealed Planning Director's approval (Exhibit A). An appeal of a minor development decision is enabled by LOC 49.40.820(4). The appellants have not identified any specific issues in the notice of appeal. Therefore, staff is not able to address any issues at this item. This memorandum has been prepared to present the original application to the Development Review Commission, as required by LOC 49.44.915. Pursuant to LOC 49.40.820(4), appeals of Planning Director's decisions are heard de novo (i.e., as if no decision had been rendered) at a public hearing before the Development Review Commission. This means new evidence may be submitted prior to and during the hearing. Attached are exhibits received since the appeal was filed on September 26, 2000, as well as the original Planning Director's report and decision, as follows: Exhibit A Request for Hearing by Wis and Susan Macomson, dated September 25, 2000 Exhibit B LU 00-0034, Planning Director's report, including Exhibits 1-16, dated September 12, 2000 PROPOSAL • The applicants had requested approval to divide a 28,498 square foot lot into two parcels, [Exhibit B, Exhibit 5]. The site contains an existing single family dwelling with an attached garage, proposed to remain on Parcel 1. The applicants proposed to share the existing driveway • apron with a new driveway to serve the future dwelling on Parcel 2. • The site is generally flat on Parcel 1 where a retaining wall has been established, [Exhibit B, Exhibit 4]. Parcel 2 has an overall gentle slope(approximately 7%) from the north property line toward Iron Mountain Boulevard. There are twelve trees on Parcel 2, of which the applicants have indicated that three would require removal to situate a new home, [Exhibit B, Exhibit 4]. Parcel 1 also has twelve trees, although none would be required removal. The tree issue has been addressed in detail in the September 12, 2000, staff report. The Planning Director found that the applicant's proposal met, or could meet, all applicable criteria with imposition of several conditions of approval. CONCLUSION Based upon the evidence submitted to date, staff finds the applicants have satisfied the criteria for approval for the proposed minor partition, as noted in the September 12, 2000, staff report. Staff recommends that the Commission uphold the Planning Director's decision to approve the requested minor partition. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends DENIAL of AP 00-15 and APPROVAL of LU 00-0034. • 1:lhamid p\reports\APOO-I 5R • Memorandum to DRC,October 23,2000, 1999 Page 2 of 2 "e - AP GO- l G DATE RECD q-0)& -OD Datit TIME /i-a 00-1-1 CityRecorder Oswego, Deputy 655 iron Mtn. Blvd. Lake Oswego, OR 97034 25 Sep 2000 Lake Oswego Planning Department Lake Oswego City Hall PO Box 369 380"Au St. Lake Oswego, OR 9 034 Re: appeal of minor development decision We request that a hearing be held on the application proposing a partition of 635 Iron Mtn. Blvd, tax lot 2100 of tax map 21 E 3CB. 1. File number: LU 00-0034 date of decision: September 12, 2000. • 2. Appellant names and address: Susan and Ws Macomson 655 Iron Mtn. Blvd. Lake Oswego, OR 97034 3. Signatures: is u ie-a'2-1 Susan Macomson 4,&(aceAtte. Wis Macomson • EXHIBIT A AP 00-15 [LU 00-0034] STAFF REPORT CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PLANNING DIVISION APPLICANTS S FILE NO. Raymond and Delal Lehman LU 00-0034 PROPERTY OWNERS STAFF Raymond and Delal Lehman Morgan Tracy LEGAL DESCRIPTION DATE OF REPORT Tax Lot 2100 of Tax Map 21E 3CB September 12, 2000 LOCATION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION 635 Iron Mountain Boulevard Forest Highlands • COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION ZONING DESIGNATION R-10 R-10 I. APPLICANTS 'S REQUEST The applicants are proposing to partition a 28,498 square foot lot into two parcels. The new parcels are proposed to be 15,129 sq. ft. (Front Parcel 1) and 10,134 sq. ft. (Flag Parcel 2), Exhibit 5. The access easement is approximately 3,235 square feet. H. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A. City of Lake Oswego Zoning Ordinance: LOC 48.02.015 Definitions (generally) LOC 48.02.020 Compliance LOC 48.06.195 -48.06.225 R-10 Residential LOC 48.19.005 -48.19.035 Flag Lots LOC 48.20.505 Accessory Uses LOC 48.20.515 General Exceptions LOC 48.20.535(3) Special Street Setback • EXHIBIT B AP 00-15 [LU 00-0034] B. City of Lake Oswego Development Code: 111 LOC 49.16.015 Definitions (generally) LOC 49.16.020 Application of Code LOC 49.16.025 Authority of Planning Director LOC 49.16.035 Development Permit Required LOC 49.16.060 Planning Director Interpretations LOC 49.20.110 Minor Development LOC 49.22.215 Review Criteria for Minor Developments LOC 49.40.800 -49.40.820 Review of Minor Development Applications LOC 49.22.200 Burden of Proof LOC 49.22.205 Development Standards LOC 49.22.225 Conditions of Approval LOC 49.30.500 -49.30.720 Application Requirements C. City of Lake Oswego Development Standards: Street Lights 5.020(1), (2), (3) Off-street Parking, Loading and Bicycle Access 7.020(1) - (9) • Drainage For Minor Development 12.020(1); 12.025(1); 12.030(1), (2); 12.035(1) Utilities 14.020(1) - (8); 14.025(1) - (9); 14.035; 14.040 Flood Plain 17.020(1) - (8); 17.025(1) - (6); 17.035(1) - (3) Access 18.020(1) - (5); 18.035; 18.040(1) - (2) On-site Circulation- Driveways and Fire Access Roads 19.020(1) - (2); 19.025(1) - (19) D. City of Lake Oswego System Development Charges (LOC Chapter 39): LOC 39.02.031-39.06.105 Collection E. City of Lake Oswego Streets and Sidewalks (LOC Chapter 42): LOC 42.02.010—42.12.670 S LU 00-0034 Page 2 of 2 • F. City of Lake Oswego Tree Code (LOC Chapter 55): LOC 55.02.035 Tree Removal in Conjunction with Major or Minor Development Permit LOC 55.02.080 Criteria for Issuance of Type II Tree Cutting G. City of Lake Oswego Solar Access Code (LOC Chapter 57): LOC 57.04.020-57.04.040 III. FINDINGS A. Background: 1. The site is approximately 0.65 acres (28,498 square feet) in area, Exhibit 1. It is roughly rectangular but is slightly wider at the street frontage than at the rear. The property is located on the north side of Iron Mountain Boulevard, Exhibit 2. 2. An existing 1-story dwelling occupies the proposed Parcel 1. A driveway serves an attached garage. The applicants propose to share the existing • driveway apron with a new driveway to serve the rear lot. 3. Surrounding land uses include single family homes adjacent to the site and within the immediate area, Exhibit 6. The surrounding area is zoned R-10 (Exhibit 2). 4. The lot is generally flat on Parcel 1 where a retaining wall has been established (Exhibit 4). Parcel 2 has an overall gentle slope (approximately 7%)from the north property line toward Iron Mountain Boulevard. 5. There are twelve trees on Parcel 2, of which the applicants have indicated that three would require removal to situate a new home. Parcel 1 also has twelve trees, although none would require removal. 6. An 8-inch water line and an 8-inch sanitary sewer line are located in Iron Mountain Boulevard, and an additional 8-inch sewer is available in an easement on the west border of the subject site. 7. There is no improved public drainage system in the vicinity. 8. Iron Mountain Boulevard is a 19-foot-wide paved street plus a 4 foot wide • bicycle/pedestrian path in an 80-foot-wide right-of-way with no curbs or LU 00-0034 Page 3 of 3 gutters. This section of Iron Mountain Boulevard is classified in the • Comprehensive Plan as a local street. C. Review Criteria for Minor Development A minor development is subject to the following review criteria [LOC 49.22.215]: The burden of proof[LOC 49.22.200]: "The applicant for a development permit shall bear the burden of proof that his or her application complies with all applicable review criteria or can be made to comply with applicable criteria by imposition of conditions of approval. " The applicants have supplied the materials marked as exhibits, listed at the end of this report. This material is sufficient with which to evaluate the request. a. The requirements of the zone in which it is located; LOC 48.06.195—48.06.225 (R-7.5 Residential Zone Requirements) The site is in the R-10 Residential zone. The zone requires the following minimum requirements: R-10 ZONE DESCRIPTION [LOC 48.06.195-48.06.225] Dimensional Required Parcel 1 Parcel 2 Standards After Partition After Partition Minimum Lot Area 10,000. 15,129 sq. 10,134 sq. Minimum Lot Width 65 ft. 130 ft. 76 ft. Minimum Lot Depth 100 ft. 123 ft. 130 ft. LOC 48.06.225 -Lot Coverage LOC 48.06.215—Setbacks, Buffers LOC 48.06.220 - Height Limits The information below identifies the requirements of the R-10 zone for an "alteration" that does not qualify as new construction, as defined by LOC 48.02.015. These requirements apply to the existing dwelling on Parcel 1, which is proposed to remain. The zone requires the following minimum requirements: II/ LU 00-0034 Page 4 of 4 • Detached(Alteration): Required Parcel 1 Setbacks Front Yard 25 ft. 34.8 ft. Side Yard 10 ft. 19.9 ft..(west) 14.4 ft.(east) Rear Yard 25 ft. 43.96 ft. Max.Height Flat Lot 35 ft. 1-story(14 feet) Sloped Lot N/A N/A Max.Lot Coverage 35 percent 14.5 percent The information below identifies the requirements of the zone for"new construction" as defined by LOC 48.02.015, which applies to future structures on Parcel 2 and qualifying subsequent additions to structures on Parcel 1: Detached (New Required Parcel 2 Construction): Setbacks Front Yard 25 ft. Undeveloped Side Yard 15 ft. Undeveloped Rear Yard 30 ft. Undeveloped Max.Height • Flat Lot 30 ft. Undeveloped Sloped Lot N/A N/A Max.Lot Coverage 25 percent 2.534 s.f. potential Except as modified by this decision, the setbacks, lot coverage and height in effect on the date this application was submitted shall continue to be applicable to Parcels 1 and 2 for a period of one year following the recordation of the final plat of the proposed minor partition [LOC 48.20.515(3)]. This requirement will be reflected as a condition of this action, if approved. Flag Lots (LOC 48.19.005 - 48.19.035) In addition to the provisions noted above,the site is subject to the requirements regarding flag lots [LOC 48.19.005 —48.19.035]. These provisions enable the creation of parcels in the shape of a"flag", including a"flag pole"that is usually the location of a driveway or access easement. The applicants' partition proposes Parcel 2 as a flag lot. The access requirements of the flag lot ordinance specify that accesses be consolidated where practicable. The applicants have proposed a 12 foot wide driveway in a 25 foot flag pole to serve the rear parcel. This drive merges with the parent parcel's driveway approximately 10 feet from the front property line. A shared access easement is shown over this portion of the 4110 parent parcel driveway (Exhibit 5). By consolidating the driveway, no new access points to Iron Mountain Boulevard are created. In addition, a large 36" LU 00-0034 Page 5 of 5 diameter fir tree is provided ample room for its critical root zone. To prevent • future modification of the drive by subsequent owners, a condition of approval will be imposed to require joint shared access and the driveway apron will be limited to a 24 foot width, per LODS 19.020(1)(e). There is a stand of large evergreen trees along the east property line of Parcel 1 where the access drive is proposed. As shown, the driveway is approximately 5 —7 feet from the base of these trees (Exhibit 5). Staff concludes that this distance would not be adequate to ensure the survival of these trees. It is generally accepted that a minimum of 10 feet must be maintained from the trunk of a tree to any disturbance for it to be able to survive the impact of development. As a result, staff concludes that the driveway be moved 3 feet to the east, so that a 6 foot wide buffer from the abutting neighbor to the east is provided, a 12 foot driveway can be constructed and the remaining area left undisturbed to protect the fir trees. This will be required as a condition of this action, if approved. The existing driveway is 230 feet from the driveway to the west, and 100 feet from the driveway to the east (Exhibit 6). The minimum lot width in the R-10 zone is 65 feet. There are no other driveways within 65 feet of the existing access, the proposed driveway configuration satisfies the requirement of LOC 48.19.020. • LOC 48.19.025 specifies lot configuration requirements. The front lot line for the proposed flag lot (Parcel 2) is defined as the line that is most parallel to and closest to the street, excluding the pole portion of the flag lot. If this standard is not practicable due to placement of structures on adjacent lots, topography, lot configuration or similar reasons, then the front lot line will be measured from a property line that abuts the access portion of the access easement or pole. The applicants have shown that it is impractical to comply with this standard because there is insufficient lot depth available. By placing the rear lot line of Parcel approximately 25 feet from the rear of the existing house, Parcel 2 would have a lot depth of only 98.53 feet, 1.47 feet short of the 100 foot minimum. Moreover Parcel 1 would only have 99.64 feet of depth, 0.46 feet short of the minimum (Exhibit 5). By orienting Parcel 2 in an east west direction, all minimum zoning requirements are easily satisfied, as demonstrated in the"R-10 Zone Description"table on page 4, above. Parcel 1, as a regular lot, does not have the ability to alter the lot orientation; and as a result, for the purposes of applying setbacks, the south property line on Iron Mountain Boulevard is considered the front yard. Building and site design standards are reviewed primarily at the time of • building permit application, with the exception of building orientation. Building orientation is reviewed at the time of lot creation [LOC LU 00-0034 Page 6 of 6 • 48.19.030(1)]. Buildings shall be oriented to provide the maximum separation and privacy from existing and future dwellings on adjacent lots. Exhibit 6 shows the placement of existing dwellings on adjacent lots [LOC 48.19.030(1)]. The closest abutting structure is on the property to the east (15 feet to the property line). By reorienting the flag lot so that the front setback is measured form the eastern property line, the new structure would be a minimum of 45 feet away. To retain the existing fir trees along the north property line to ensure maximum preservation of privacy with the use of existing natural features, a minimum of 20 feet shall be provided from this line for siting the new home. This still provides for a 3,000 square foot envelope,with which to site the maximum 2,534 square foot footprint for the new home. Dwellings on abutting lots to the west and south will be separated by existing setbacks maintained by those dwellings, and the setbacks required for the new dwelling (Exhibits 5 and 6). The height limit for the proposed flag lot is based on an average height of all dwellings on lots abutting the flag lots and is established at the time of creation of the flag lot,per LOC 48.19.030(1). For the purpose of calculating the average height of abutting homes, the applicants have submitted pictorial evidence (Exhibit 7), as well as calculated heights (Exhibit 6). Based on this information, proposed Parcel 2 will be limited to 16.2 feet per LOC 4111/ 48.19.030(3). This will be noted on the partition plat or through covenants, conditions and restrictions. The standard also requires that the flag pole be a minimum of 12 feet in width, and that it be buffered by a six-foot-wide landscape strip when the driveway is proposed to be within 10 feet of an existing dwelling or driveway [LOC 48.19.035(1)]. In this case, the flag pole is 25 feet wide with a 12 foot wide driveway (Exhibits 4 and 5). The driveway is proposed to be set off the east property line 7.5 feet and the nearest dwelling is fifteen feet from the property line for a total separation of 22.5 feet. However, to provide the greatest protection for the line of fir trees, the drive may be shifted to the east. Even so, the 15 foot setback provided from the abutting dwelling satisfies this requirement without the need for a six foot buffer. These provisions also require that the flag lot be surrounded by a six-foot-tall sight-obscuring fence and a planting strip that will achieve a six-foot height within two years [LOC 48.19.035(3)], unless written approval is secured from abutting property owners. The applicants have proposed fencing around the flag lot (Exhibit 5) and planting a hedge in the rear yard to satisfy this requirement(Exhibit 8, narrative). • Tree removal will be subject to the provisions of the Tree Code in effect at that time. Tree protection will be emphasized over proposed development, as LU 00-0034 Page 7 of 7 is the intent of the Flag Lots Ordinance [LOC 48.19.010], discussed earlier in this report. This will be required as a condition of this action, if approved. • b. The Development Standards applicable to minor developments; The following are applicable to the proposal: Street Lights (LODS 5.005 - 5.040) This standard requires street lights when new streets are created or when necessary to properly illuminate public rights-of-way and uses taking access from them. Street lights are not typically imposed on infill projects when no new street has been proposed. Staff has evaluated the existing street lights, and finds that no additional street lighting is required as a part of this application. The standard is satisfied as a result. Off-street Parking, Loading and Bicycle Access (LODS 7.005 - 7.040) This standard requires that one off-street parking space be provided for each dwelling unit [LODS 7.020; Table 7.1(A)(1)]. Parcel 1 has an existing garage to accommodate the one required space, and there is sufficient space in the driveway in lieu of the garage space. The proposed Parcel 2 is sufficiently large enough to accommodate this requirement. Compliance with this standard will be required as a condition of any building permit requested subsequent to this action, if approved. Drainage For Minor Development (LODS 12.005 - 12.040) This standard requires that drainage alterations resulting from development not adversely affect neighboring properties. The site drains across Parcel 2 from the northwest corner to the southeast corner. The applicants have proposed a drainage swale to intercept the drainage before crossing to the eastern neighbor's property and carry it to Iron Mountain Boulevard. The applicants have also proposed a culvert crossing to a small wetland on the opposite side of the road. The City will not require this as a condition of approval, but instead will require that the swale be underlayed with a perforated pipe set in gravel. If percolation conditions are insufficient to handle the site runoff,then the City may allow a street cut to construct the culvert. • LU 00-0034 Page 8 of 8 • Utilities (LODS 14.005 - 14.040) This standard requires that all required utilities be installed underground, where appropriate. Water: Water is provided from an 8" water line in Iron Mountain Boulevard. A fire hydrant is located on the south side of Iron Mountain Boulevard, which is adequate to provide the fire flows necessary to satisfy the City's Fire Code. Sanitary Sewer: The Engineering staff notes that an 8 inch sewer line is located in Iron Mountain Boulevard. An additional 8 inch line is available along the west property line. This service is adequate to serve the two proposed parcels. The sewer was constructed as part of Local Improvement District (LID) #222 in 1994. Properties outside the LID boundary are required to pay an assessment to connect; however,the subject site is within the LID boundary, and therefore no additional LID assessment will apply. Normal System Development Charges (SDCs) and connection fees will apply nevertheless. • Streets: The applicants propose to create one new parcel, for a total of two, from the site. Staff has identified that Iron Mountain Boulevard is a 19- foot-wide paved street plus a 4 foot wide bicycle/pedestrian path in an 80- foot-wide right-of-way with no curbs or gutters. As such, staff finds that Iron Mountain Boulevard is adequate to accommodate the 10 additional vehicle trips which will be generated by the construction of an additional dwelling on Parcels 2. Access (LODS 18.005 - 18.040) This standard requires that each parcel abut a public street for a minimum of 25 feet, except for flag lots. The applicants propose the following frontage lengths: Parcel 1 135 feet Parcel 2 25 feet Because the application is for the creation of a flag lot, Parcel 2 is exempt from the requirements of this standard [LODS 18.020(1)]. Regardless,the applicants' proposal complies with the requirements of this standard. LU 00-0034 Page 9 of 9 Additionally, staff notes that Iron Mountain Boulevard is a local street, compliance with LODS 18.020(4), which requires direct access onto a local • street, can be achieved. This standard is satisfied. On-site Circulation - Driveways and Fire Access Roads (LODS 19.005 - 19.040) This standard requires that driveways not exceed 20 percent grade, nor a five percent cross slope. The site of the proposed minor partition currently maintains a grade of approximately 7 percent(Exhibit 4). The access driveway is on an approximate 5.5 percent slope. As a result of this moderate grade, both parcels can easily achieve compliance with this requirement. Demonstration of compliance with this design will be required in application for any building permit requested subsequent to this action, if approved. c. Any additional statutory, regulatory or Lake Oswego Code provisions which may be applicable to the specific minor development application. The following provisions are applicable to this request: City of Lake Oswego System Development Charges (LOC Chapter 39) 1111 This Code requires payment of SDCs for use of the City's existing infrastructure. These include water, sanitary sewer,parks, storm drainage, and transportation. These charges are in addition to required improvements necessary to enable proposed single-family dwelling construction. Payment of these charges will be required as a condition of any building permit requested subsequent to this action, if approved. City of Lake Oswego Streets and Sidewalks (LOC Chapter 42) This Code requires widening or construction of streets and sidewalks to City standards. Staff has identified that the existing pavement and drainage along Iron Mountain Boulevard are adequate to serve this site; therefore, this standard is met. City of Lake Oswego Development Code (LOC Chapter 49) The application is required to be processed as a minor development. The applicant has submitted substantial information and a complete application as illustrated in the exhibit section of this report. The City has provided adequate public notice and an opportunity to comment on this application as required 110 LU 00-0034 Page 10 of 10 by LOC 49.44.920. In response, six letters have been received from the • nearby neighbors (Exhibits 10-13), raising the following issues: • Tree Protection: Staff has provided a detailed analysis of this issue on pages 5, 6 and 11 of this report. With the staff recommended changes to the site plan, which require the relocation of the shared driveway, staff believes adequate protection would be afforded to the existing fir trees along the south end of Parcels 1 and 2. • Compatibility of Flag Parcel 2 with Surrounding Neighborhood: The issue of neighborhood compatibility has been adequately addressed in detail on pages 5-8. The Flag Lot Ordinance establishes specific requirements for building orientation and sitting, building height, screening and buffering, and access limitation. Please refer to staff analysis of these issues under the Flag Lot Ordinance earlier in this report. • Minimum Lot Area Requirement for Parcel 2: Parcel 2 in proposed to be approximately 10,134 square feet in size in compliance with the minimum requirement of the R-10 zone. The staff recommended access easement for the shared driveway will be placed on Parcel 1, not the flag Parcel 2. Therefore, Parcel 2 will continue to meet the minimum lot area • requirement of the R-10 Zone. In addition, the proposed lot area for Parcel 1 is large enough(at over 15,000 square feet) that a small reduction for the access easement would not affect its compliance with the lot size requirement. This compliance will be assured prior to approval of the final partition plat. • Notification of the Property Owner at 611 Iron Mt. Blvd.: The neighbors contend that since the abutting property owner to the east no longer lives at that residence; the owner must be located and further notified. LOC 49.40.805(1) requires written notification of owners of property within 300 feet of the subject site. The notification list is required to be complied from the most recent property tax assessment roll. A research of the County's tax roll on September 5, 2000, shows Ms. Melissa Hodge as the current property owner for 611 Iron Mt. Blvd.. The City has mailed the required public notice to Ms Hodge at the above address. Staff finds that the requirements of LOC 49.40.805(1) are satisfied. • Drainage: The citizens have raised several drainage related issues in the neighborhood. The issue of on-site drainage has been adequately addressed on page 8 of this report. In addition, the Engineering staff has • further reviewed and evaluated the historical and current drainage concerns in the area and provided a detailed response in Exhibit 16. Staff LU 00-0034 Page 11 of 11 concludes that the findings and conclusions presented on page 8 of this report are not materially affected by the new information submitted by the • citizens. • Fencing: The neighbors immediately to the north have testified that there is a 30' gap in the existing fencing along the common property line. LOC 48.19.035(3)requires that rear and side yards of the flag lot be screened from the adjacent property with a six foot tall fence. Exhibit 5 illustrates an existing cedar fence along the north (side yard) and west (rear yard) property lines of Parcel 2. If in fact there is a gap in the existing fencing along either of the side or rear property lines of Parcel 2, the applicant will be required to install additional fencing as required by the Code. City of Lake Oswego Tree Code (LOC Chapter 55) This Code requires a tree cutting permit in order to remove any tree 5-inches or greater in diameter. The applicants have provided a graphic tree inventory (Exhibit 4), which indicates the diameter and species of trees present on the site. As illustrated, a mixture of deciduous and evergreen species are located on the site. The applicants have indicated that three trees will necessitate removal in order to situate a home on Parcel 2. These three trees lie in the • center of the building envelope. To avoid the remaining fir trees, a minimum of 20 feet shall be provided on the northern setback. The 18 inch maples shall also be preserved and protected through the construction process. As required by the provisions regarding flag lots, discussed earlier in this report,protection of the trees on the site shall be emphasized over the construction of proposed improvements. The applicants shall be encouraged to design dwellings, and staff shall implement the Code requirements, with this as a primary objective. Application for tree removal, subject to the Tree Code requirements in effect at that time, will be required upon application for a building permit requested subsequent to this action, if approved. City of Lake Oswego Solar Access Code (LOC Chapter 57) This ordinance requires that a minimum of'80 percent of newly created parcels be designed for solar access through one of three methods [LOC 57.02.020]. Parcel 1 complies with the basic requirement, as it is 21 degrees off an east west alignment [LOC 57.02.020(1)], and has a depths of more than 90 feet. Parcel 2 will require the imposition of a protected solar building • line. The applicants have proposed a solar building line (Exhibit 5)that LU 00-0034 Page 12 of 12 complies with the requirements for the Solar Access Ordinance. This • standard is satisfied as a result. Compliance is required with the Solar Access Code requirement for protection of the resulting solar lots from future shade [LOC 57.04.020 and 57.04.035]. This will be required as a condition of this action, if approved. d. Any conditions of approval imposed as part of an approved ODPS or prior development permit. The site is not subject to any prior approvals. IV. CONCLUSION Based upon the material submitted by the applicants and the findings presented in this report, staff concludes that the LU 00-0034 applicants' proposal can be made to comply with the applicable criteria through the imposition of certain conditions. V. ACTION TAKEN Based upon the conclusion noted above, staff approves LU 00-0034, subject to the following conditions: A. Prior to Approval of the Final Partition Plat, the Applicants /Owners Shall: 1. Submit a final partition plat [dimensioned as depicted in Exhibit 5, and modified by Conditions Numbers B(3) and B(4), below, and referencing this land use application -- City of Lake Oswego Department of Community Development, File No. LU 00-0034] to City staff for review and signature of approval within one year of the date of this decision. Upon written application,prior to expiration of the one-year period, the City Manager shall, in writing, grant a one- year extension. Additional extensions may be requested in writing and must be submitted to the City Manager for review of the project for conformance with current law, development standards and compatibility with development which may have occurred in the surrounding area. The extension may be granted or denied and if granted, may be conditioned to require modification to bring the project into compliance with then current law and compatibility with surrounding development. • 2. Register the final partition plat with the Clackamas County Surveyor's office and record it with Clackamas County Clerk's office, within 30 LU 00-0034 Page 13 of 13 days of receiving its signature of authorization by the City following return of the plat to the applicants. • 3. Declare and illustrate the location of a private access and utility easement on the final partition plat, along the east property line of Parcel 1 for the benefit of Parcel 2. 4. Provide the following notes on the final plat: a. "Parcels 1 and 2 are solar lots. Development of structures or planting of non-exempt vegetation on Parcels 1 and 2 shall comply with the Solar Balance Point provisions of the Solar Access Ordinance (LOC 57.06.050-57.06.090). This requirement shall be binding upon the applicants and subsequent purchasers of Parcels 1 and 2." b. "Parcel 2 is a Flag Lot. Development of structures shall comply with the provisions of LOC 48.19.030 regarding Building and Site Design Standards, including height limitations, garage placement, and landscape buffer requirements, except as modified below:" • (i) The maximum allowed height of future structures on Parcel 2 (the flag lot) shall be 16.2 feet. c. "Front yard setbacks for Parcel 2 shall be measured from the east property line, as illustrated on Exhibit 5. d. "Direct vehicular access to Iron Mountain Boulevard from Parcel 2 shall be prohibited, except within a 24-foot-wide access easement located on the east side of Parcel 1." e. "The above requirements are conditional restrictions of the City of Lake Oswego and are not a part of the plat." B. Within 30 Days of Recordation of the Final Plat, the Applicants !Owners Shall: 1. Submit a title report from a title company showing that the private access and utility easements required by Conditions B(3) and B(4), above, are valid and subsisting easements on the property not subject to any prior liens, encumbrances, or interests other than statutory real property taxes. 1111 LU 00-0034 Page 14 of 14 • C. Prior to the Issuance of any Building Permit for Parcel 1 or 2,the Applicants/Owners Shall: 1. Provide evidence that Conditions A(1)-(4), and B(1), above, have been satisfied. 2. Apply for tree cutting permits and provide tree protection plans in accordance with LOC Chapter 55. 3. Pay any System Development Charges (SDCs)required by the Lake Oswego Code. Such charges include, but are not limited to sanitary sewer, water, parks, storm water management and transportation. 4. Provide a site plan and building design for Parcel 2 in compliance with the flag lot Building Site Design Standards of LOC 48.19.030 regarding height, setbacks, garage placement and landscape buffer requirements, and Condition B(4)(b), above. The site plan shall also illustrate a six foot tall fence along the north and west property lines of Parcel 2 for review and approval of staff: 5. Provide a final site plan for Parcel 2 illustrating the relocation of the • 12' driveway towards the east property line to provide a minimum of 10' separation between the driveway and existing evergreen trees along the east property line of Parcel 1. 6. The final site plan for Parcel 2 shall include a final drainage and grading plan for review and approval of staff. A culvert crossing under Iron Mountain Boulevard may only be allowed if on-site disposal is found to be not practicable. 6. Obtain a permit from the Engineering Division for the sanitary sewer tap. D. Prior to Construction of Any Improvements on Parcel 1 or 2, the Applicants /Owners Shall: 1. Remove only those trees necessary to site a dwelling or accessory structure on Parcel 1 or 2. Protection of existing trees shall be considered over the design of dwellings and accessory structures proposed. This removal shall comply with LOC 55.050 - 55.080 (Trees Ordinance)and LOC 48.19.005 (Flag Lots). An approved Tree Removal Permit shall be secured from the City of Lake Oswego prior to such removal. • LU 00-0034 Page 15 of 15 E. Prior to issuance of Final Building Inspection Approval for the Dwelling on Parcel 1 or 2, the Applicants /Owners Shall: • 1. Install the 6' cedar fence and the four foot high evergreen hedge on Parcel 2, as illustrated on Exhibit 5. F. As Miscellaneous Conditions the Applicants /Owners Shall Note: 1. Except as modified by Condition B(4)(b), above, development of Parcels 1 and 2 shall be subject to the setback, lot coverage and height requirements noted in this report for a period of one year following recordation of the final partition plat with the Clackamas County Clerk. Development proposed subsequent to that date shall be subject to the requirements in effect upon the date of application for such development. 2. The permit or approval granted hereby, or any inspections conducted on the site hereafter, shall not be construed as authorizing any activity in violation of any applicable federal or state law or regulation, including but not limited to the federal Endangered Species Act and its regulations. • Prepared by: 2 aD Morgan Tracy Date "Associate Planner Approved by: Tom Coffee Date Assistant City Manager • LU 00-0034 Page 16 of 16 • Reviewed by: je.....„7, j T- l 2 - t7 a David Powell Date City Attorney EXHIBITS 1. Tax Map 2. Vicinity map 3. Site Survey Map, dated November 1948 4. Site Topography Map 5. Preliminary Site Plan 6. Building Height Information on Lots Abutting Parcel 2 7. Pictures of Existing Dwellings on Lots Abutting Parcel 2 • 8. Applicant's Narrative 9. Minutes of August 23, 1999,Neighborhood Meeting 10. Letter by Walter and Theresa Taylor, dated September 1, 2000 11. Letter by Susan and Wis Macomson, dated September 2, 2000 12. Letter by Margaret Reeder, September 3, 2000 13. Letter by Wis Macomson, dated September 5, 2000 14. Letter by Scott and Joan Benge, dated September 4, 2000 15. Letter by Eric and Sharon Tuppan, dated September 5, 2000 16. Memorandum by Russ Chevrette (with attachment), dated September 5, 2000 Date of Application Submittal: February 2, 2000 Date Application Determined to be Complete: June 19, 2000 State-Mandated 120-day Rule: October 17, 2000 [I:\mike_wlworkspaclreports\Iu000008l000723r0.doc) 4110 LU 00-0034 Page 17 of 17 3... VII0•0r`s , lr a-- ' . • Al__ , , .......1, I T (^ ,iin_ •0 .6-, - * . bZZ a \ •7�p0Q M,__. r IoS X cp • P �',.. •av9Z'0 a w ..-1 gil fZZI / �r,d 008 C•OOZ£ u� . (* i y .l $—1 r �5Z dr �, p s e o 2. N 0° . g. w `� ,i .J►, _. .�-o `F/tom �dSi£'O 3 r p' • 0OL l 1.„. -c,-2, N, , ,.. isa 0 IC I!S ji ' , o a it • - 1. . .44 ' 311 t I p . -.. • / SS11 000Z ' S S09 Y OOO� 00i� re B` Sfg I 3V69'O C 0!9 F �� .a s 3 ,,..,1 A •r -t . C20/Z O w9Z'o OO b I r :: nOSI L� S Col' •1 is CrFr-sue . I 7 ..n1:1:`•41 [I (02. t d 2 A., \Oo1 Y e 01 0 rs, I v. . . 'm .1s r St \ a 2 • I' 7a1 \O a ` " t v •1 � 099' K • 13 .•E I v i S° �.� • I �t/S9'0 \ 06Z1 „ Lb00£I . + \ Cf,7,92 005Z sbZ 0 OOf! ,.n�3 tr-n, \ 0.... �'Z.a r +of ei 4f QbZ ODSlg N ! tee„ i2 t , P t nrY - , 192 °" o • 1t Z9 ,rrr`0 ,a, ,F5•or 5 'r D a • I. a a5 �`` r 5' ' 41?) O .'e`' y � "' , ' d ' sr. o0O11 ; -1 wtiMO i °o.Ja C. v . z Y t r ' - h .� SO69f1 o n- 00£ • : 00b b. SiS - w b h i •raf.. r) 0001 ., • H ' f. ....G..lH S' •i _ V t 1' 4 �, 1'.r F 0.4 (,-.. al 1 M C-, X w 'ID ,-1 I I N t , , .•";,,, \I,-k iii; 7.7'.. - • -„1 , r,, .-.7 .„ .= - -- -----i-iir i ill H,A. „ / A /4-Li . ii A: a N N t *'„'..\,,,' 4,•,. 4 ' V t\ Ti 1 It ___\-- 1 .'".' .• .. •" ti[ ._ ;.c.:: ..-- .:,s4.\%/1 \x)< ,.*‘ #' :N ,,0 1 i ; .!ft i * vit 416 I I 2 7.-',7 !': if ..10.1.0 ---.zv -{11/VrOM--& . . r % 11° 1111111411411111 qofficjiy.itie4.44.,..pta. NB, -", 1 oPog, .... --- -... . ..... 1 fz'-3 • , -__A . t 0,1, '1 - ...t,,,,;,t,.....,•,.%. ,.. NOW 001111 11133.010 0 gigflp -- I ..... —,,, ..... t S.2,t • ',,,,N ,___ a - kr f . . , .,,,i0 Ili ....a...)"`-.,,,....- --7-_,.._! tigi ,.. 1 • ''''e - it4# i i 0 D r' I '..,!il • fa, ..• IS ,1 ,-• • •;•._-••,, i,_•_•- 7 ..... , , .... .,illx .... . . 40A Vr f.,.. ,f•,. ,, °1 -'-Eu-go ill 1-ill.2 ..,.. % ...... ., •ii „ ti.,...• _ ,..,.:-:-.:1-:•,,,,... , , •-' -:----',. -.....„.../. I, i'-, , ' 1 g g nr... --,....- :,..-_-_........ ........ .,-.. .„ _ ...)-- •c 1 . _ ais , - ,.... , i,,,, „, --7,-, _i_•-: ;Al a 1 11111111100-1r. 11114F`>,',-1-,:'I:::1 z I- - --— -. . - . is 4 , .t I,, MI •-•..,R. 76 -.... -.tz 0E1 lett - , .„1*,- ri:':' ---- ---"Iffl.---... 0 a , -, , 1 1 -- - t t t t A, --• tillif • -- 1,•r 1 lial. ••-' c--•-..,-. ''',1-.::\';'01', ,..rt- 1 _ ,... ...,-. ....1 .,... ..,r ,,..„ ..... . .:... 4. , 11001 110101 .• % % ...`4,410 - S . ..• \.... ..... p; \1, '4\ Oi r . k• 1 •••••1... -- ..- , 1,. kki? ) • , 1 ... , / 2,c poir gu .> s'',„ sk 1 - . --a:0 -L--i ! . 4 -- 1_, / i o i„„13*• - ,\ i:4 , - ...„ ' - -- '11 I - ,- 41 • i''-- ,r 3 11\4;:-4-0:-• .....-.- 11r....-7 7''''...:' 1-1-z .--1-....`i:!LEILH''''LY-')4's —- — — -- i— ) i. t 7.' i I 1 '.1"1Y I• - ,... -.... _ ..- :ill - I.- !-__ ?_._ I- ,;. ••••7 ,I \ •''.. Nt'.111,1•0.-i . • •• ' : ty, •., 41% .4R)11t7l' ittil - -..TV--1 1111 s I. i i ' III -1- - _.. .., 1 """ ' " 1 -- ..,-, - clr-k• ______ 1 ,i/S VLI.,0 Icv, 1 ,rtrii__---,i_i 1'1-f" ,1 UNIIIIIIIIM -. Ilv 0 i - - 1 .,. - - -.. : , - - . .... 1315 i li,„:z.nr;rigil .1..„.'414,,elvi I 1 •' • .• ; illeV' i 44 MONTI 7-114441111 '''iC I ,,,JJ 11 1:411 I 1•••••.H W . • I I I I \N. i . • • ' t-, ., WA R-:.c, -... ..... 1 .... i i „ 6 .$ -- __ -I all t I A \ ' ii 31- ' l' ' ""1 "' Y - AUL 1”...•".: ....7. ......,.„.„ I a • • 1 .. /'i:17.4' cl r 5 4/R A'VIZ' Showirq Lecn1`np ey Residence REGL5TERED 1 Orr Lcf 2.'.'2 FORE97r N/1Ls-PLNT g O R E G O N - • C'i�.� -/�+,',ws CD UNrY OFAraoN.0 LAND SURVEYOR • Sur.v ere d Ale v. /14cf O..,Err 7es,'Nelson v.4ss.e• G��y ��iy�poy(— 6y G•l/ernngNe/rsn JANU•IIV 1ST.1111I15 �acilc /"=Z0 ` O.VERNON NELSON • No. 107 Iran PP' • ,I e 7 rS ""A loot I 1 1' • • ,I C Z 1 0 O 1 0 • 0 ! - '-). - o U" • Zo `e./ ^8oic• 0.7 �r�y.�� 1 \ �. �,-=�A.•-ate-_ y�.yvv. - • I i 1.1) 1 A - IA I Ts a • I% ,lronrii" fen PP. i ------ /3 2.0 ZB•0c •- n'.69'e2'Pe. • I I I. t I °i • — —J,. _ 1.;DN Mo-r.Wr:9/N_6o_r,� Ii.�R2 _ I--- - EXHIBIT I I I LU 00-0034 I I I . . TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY i 7.1.."*".....-"......-.......... -_.„ ,�- I ----. e._ N '1° ........ � 4li I` 2,10 a ,d u• - , / 26_ - . '.� 1..A �� CmVt�.Cam- (CP / 1, R' •��i=owlrow E air 4460 tilt' 40 ti50 11/ 4,cs * PLAN r SCALE: 1" = 30' / 270 AC— �ewc. eox N, ��0 269 — :ae®-' — .I Av _1\ 7 i / ' , rohf ......!ri . Al y/ 0i,,, 1,,? re, 'd Fitc,,, 0 EXISTING HD / %��,, II tic i/ USE 1 c ier, ' ors)/ 1 266 - ��d 265 /I/ 62 / 264 CRtCi. _ `ULY 57,oolf/ 97 N CO r. 263 /261 ���'''��LL Gw�� 1u. / 922 ,f, - 262 �'ZSF-DO `O 26 N / .. N 26' Ij ' tst /q Nti it ``260 258 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY FOR: 43)0A, R N I *`/ RAYMOND & DALAL LEHMAN Q ►4 635 IRON MOUNTAIN BLVD. N M ® Crs LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 O(�NT N h� 1503) 897.o050 Q/N ►� �, N �Q-- wet frp, u2 �— — '�G Scn \ EXISTING SANITARY MANHOLE • RIM: 260.78 IE. IN 255.48 _h \ IE. OUT 155.33 LEGAL: 2 1E 3CB T.L. 2100 A COMPASS ENGINEERING DATE: MARCH 2000 ■3s ENGINEERING * SURVEYING * PLANNING EXHIBIT 4 uu s.r.wct" 'wF ae%t'z fiC 13)- sMa7 tK JOB NO: 00-46393 a LU 00-0034 PREL [ L, Wsliti ‘ Y PARTITION MAP 4: 0 40 i • i t 1 1 0 ns a -.... -....\,... 724.9c., .0 /41 High .....-'•- - Existing .0 Arborvitae Hge \\* .-' < Cedar Fence .0;„ : ••- oho TL 21.0-0 ,474,1 ‘1 ' o • .;...:- "'-'"'"!:':•-•:T . ,,.:• V l'ff l'r* 11./ . ,,1Q.'.....'.... -14L.\V4- 0 i\ .. ' • NI: , /1\... ....,,3'. ,, °q•IA 1. ./,•*1'...:' / ,x ')5f:%...''.•11: .-- i ,ii• ,./. .-24' Av.,... - Trees to be . -‘'.; ..:Existing ;.) ••ft3 .„, --a. cE N i .-. .....-- -7... •.' Removed , / 0 .. ..: Cedar Fence ... ..,. •PC• 0,7-- , ••:,.' / •••••• , .• ,,..• .." i'.' .- .• .- .. • 0....' , .. . • PAR C.1. 1::. 2 .: 1 /./ // .., / ./ EXCLUDING 10,1.34: S.F. -- •• • 1111Viiro,Alla \\/,,,"bol..., ....... ;t1'' -.'-‘7S /.. ACCES , •/1 ..„- TY 1,,lir 1 i r i 0 IF E .\\lay'1/41141p 6 1.ks'' ----- -.--,T;-- -- - V i .• ://:J, , :.,!:::-. i „. . . 4.—°tect,,,, -- . / v-./..-/ ,/ ...,-- ......z.,:,,,:..---• . -4-06777, -=----- sok,/ . inttall 6' s ../.. ../... .... •-• ---- . libP11'"--- .... .9 Li716- -74. Cedar Fei PLAN i ,... . / .--- ----- . 2 • FIR SCALE: 1" = 30' i 1 7..--". - ---_, / -7I\; j / .:, I lj -_____ I. i .......*:a A R C E L 1 ' / , . /• E----r- ----. zi:)-- ).//. ./ /; 0, , 36...FFR 0.,. ...:.... ,,` 15,129 S.F. • .., / 00 P. 9(FiR .17;2' I III . • •..._-„,§ ,.„-.-,•- -99' C\J • io>;, fi01 FIR le)/ . ./.5.30. • .2 PR, ..(0 CO. ... ..• ..... ../...,/ . .. /%. /.. / TING H ' ' . . 0... ••".•,-. Ouse .,..--. • , ,-./I\.•'•7".• R 16- • Co- . . CO . . .. .. . . ..• . / ..• ...• .• .• .' . . • / /'" . -••.1 /.. ; . . • / al . . . . . . . 0). ._........_,L____y . . .• • - . •. .. - .483 / ..../ . .. •• • • • / • p\S- ? .f 1 ' i' '"''''' ..../ .... .../ p—Provide .„ ,,. .1.0*- A•T ,:, \c.„, / ...,./../••••'. i.•;.f ; ,......r. ' ..---/ ., ,...- drainage swole $e' ..- • I.''''S.„ .15611'• i : / - ' Combirtiiii"-° / "- -•-- ...-.1 EciftApor tiveYar..for I LEGAL: 2 1E 3CB T.L. 2100 i •••.›.s:.:2- ----'''''''''' .." 7 ., -''..--•''. ' er- . : /k4I /-------'- I//_ZONING• R-10 •• l .;,:•,` ... "''''''''--,A:.1., 0 , ....;:j-.41*- /,--.. r /12- ".. . ''.--.. ;\--c-,35. nR '''''''',..‹,,,,,..,...:,:: :::::-'' 'TT.''''''--:".-J.`"'• - --.--/ '„. ' .... ------ i \AREA: 28,498 SO, FT, • .-1-- :-;-' z<`+-...-,.:'''"T...'''''''-.::-.................... - / •••40, ---- : , c'; ::;-.4;: -..-c..--.:..................... /_• i :•„: i 25 i ° /I?ON • .,.. :19, 49 f..?".: .,:i Mailboes- ?..------...,1 i . .... :.:....• ... ! ... 11 7:7---- -------...1Att,:::-....... .._................_. . .....4 bit rob . // ,__ 6'4 fr6 --------'----------L_________LI: : ..: ...,.., --.-----L -- rt>es.. • III.„ A COMPASS ENGINEERING EXHIBIT 5 ENGINEERING * SURVEYING * PLANNING '4i? tillati,l'astrin= flaBitilgtiun LU 00-0034 JOB NO: 00-4639 SUR ,' OLJI, DING LAND 1 SE • - - A ''I _ _ NDREWB ROAD /' / ./ /• / , IF] 1 ' 15' Bldg HL , t • I 1 / 22' Bldg. Ht. 1 1 .\ ' I �_� 1 / j TL 2300 I ------...._ 675 Andrews Rd., „� / --� TL 2400 j 1300 Andrews Rd. TL 2200 865 Iron Mtn. Blvd/ __'..__ TL 2500 TL 2100 � 835 Iron Mtn. Blvd. � / -� , T i / 1 t Bldg. Ht. 1 ' \ ie Driveway / TL 2000 1 611 Iron Mtn. Blvd. I i / / I f I / %I 15' Bldg. HL / ,.`' .... / \ 14' Bldg. HI. i `",.............1".....,...... .. 1 / N. SON .............1.______ Driveway 12• oeway ``\ MOUNT,,H B -- kit N A_\ Ixii rA. • ----PARTITION APPLICATION FOR: W 1"11 E RAYMOND & DALAL LEHMAN /� 635 IRON MOUNTAIN BLVD. S 4 COMPASS ENGINEERING LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 o.. (5031 897-0650 P LA N a •; :y ENGINEERING * SURVEYING * PLANNING .y . SSSt I.E. 4KC SD�D (503)11i=01's u"E EXHIBIT 6 SCALE: 1" = 60' s 1514 I.E. AIE IO �7331 LU 00-0034 -- . i _ ...L...., •••• __.------s- • -,.••••,f. .,--• i L. of- .• •, ••• •• t• -.a. , - .Ti - „ . *... • 0 .7-•. • . - •1, dn.-. '''‘.. . . • • - I •,- fp •t -•.••-•••••. t •4,- '.1.5..;'.• -v. '' r ,... • • 2,.....?..`-:;- -..:•---Y-;,--c.N.&'?:' .:2-..:'-f--'.,--..'i. 4 . - 7.4' '3 --.. •t..-..1"..,, J-4.---41,-;1 ...41- • . . - ':•••P•':' ";"..--;-'; .'• -.,-• -:-:''' -.:-.F.=-••--,-;:,13,1. .-- - - , ' .. —. _,. . 481-1.4.. . ••=, i . ,30.• c'-: z. ..e... _ - -"Zi4,0'.1-.-1.-14.J.4 .0.,,,,i•-.-. .., __- _ ":x•e s,:, --- .. ` ,--v....F' ra- "" • i ' , ' Tax Lot 2300 Tax Lot 2400 675 Andrews Rd. 1300 Andrews Rd. .•I. _ .., --, l'-'34-`,1* • ,d!,I_4., ' _ . itt.. 0..et i,. - .''..--- ---- -••''''''' ------ • • U, III Mr....•4 r 214...-i liant a_..... 1 Tax Lot 2100 635 Iron Mountain Blvd. (Subject Property) ,.. • ..6 •••_. . •• '4'.1' . "ii .3 • .., . ,., _t ft Pi 14',..... e- .a. • IVY)` • ilit'd • '11 •A - 17E, • + li; . , jog,...- • ,- 'tiik•.•.f-- 3W 0 . .• • .d , '4 • ,:..-• , . l • NP 44r.,, , ,„. .. .. ,A,,.. . .„ . .... . -... . .. . . -!:-..27:4?Tir7'1.. 1•' . . • • .”ft• ' -141 ,I . ". ,f•,;;. .,....4. :• ;:-...-.. ..E, ,'i.."„.. ,- - f'`---".: 2-.11-i-' - „- . . t•-• - . .k.. aawellige ,..:Jf. irkr. . 1• • 5 • -.•.,--443 Ir,44, :„..•„ P •P-• ' • 1 l" -... -•72:. - . • III . _ .. ... -- - :-- -- ------- , • ___ ..___ . , . , .,.._ ....... __ _ ., . . _.__ • _ Tax Lot 2200 ..-----i Tax Lot 2000 665 Iron Mountain Blvd. EXHIBIT 7 611 Iron Mountain Blvd. LU 00-0034 MINOR PARTITION APPLICATION 410 RAYMOND&DALAL LEHMAN REQUEST: This application requests approval of a minor partition to divide a 28,498 sq.ft.parcel located on SW Iron Mountain Blvd. into two lots. The property subjectis described as Tax Lot 2100 of Clackamas County Assessor's Map 2 1E 3CB. This property is zoned R-10. The subject property is located on the north side of SW Iron Mountain Boulevard, west of its intersection with Bayberry Road. An existing single-family residence is developed on the property and will be retained on Parcel 1 of the proposed partition. Parcel 2 is a flag lot located to the rear of the existing home. The following information addresses provisions of the Lake Oswego Zoning Ordinance and other City development standards that are relevant to this proposal: ZONING ORDINANCE: The zoning of the applicants'property is R-10. Both lots in the partition will be used for single-family detached homes—a primary permitted use in the R-10 district. The proposed lots exceed the minimum dimensional standards of the R-10 zone: Lot Size Lot Coverage Setbacks Lot Width Lot Depth Height Standard 10,000 sq. ft. 30%(existing home) 25' Front 65' 100' 30' • 25%(new construction) 25' Rear 10' Side Parcel 1 15,129 sq. ft. 2,198 sq. ft. (14.5%) 34.88' Front 123' 123' 14' 43.96' Rear 14.48' Side Parcel 2 10,134 sq. ft. Will comply with 25% Will comply 77' 132' See standard. with standards. Narrative DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS `.> EC A g The proposed partition conforms to the Lake Oswego Development Standards as follows: 7 1f[ 1.005 Historic Resource Preservation-(Repealed by Res. R-90-07; 03-13-90). CITY CT LAKE OSWEG Comment: No longer in effect. Not applicable. Gept.of Planning&Development 2.005 Building Design-Development involving a structure for commercial, industrial, institutional, multi family residential,attached single-family(three or more units)residential development, and to all minor development within the DD zone. This standard is also applicable to exterior modifications of a structure which does not qualify as a ministerial development pursuant to LOC 49.20.105(2)(c). Comment: Not applicable to single-family detached developments. EXHIBIT 8 LU 00-0034 3.005 Stream Corridors-(Abolished by.Res. 97-I1; 05-20-97). • Comment: No longer in effect. Not applicable. 4.005 Wetlands-(Abolished by Res. 97-11; 05-20-97). Comment: No longer in effect. Not applicable. 5.005 Street Lights-All public and private streets,public pathways and accessways, and all parking lots. Comment: The closest streetlight is located at the intersection of Iron Mountain Boulevard with Bayberry Road, approximately 180 feet from the site. Streetlights are not typically required on infill projects. No new streetlights are proposed in conjunction with this partition. 6.005 Transit System-All new subdivisions,planned developments, residential developments offour units or more, and new commercial, institutional and industrial developments located on a transit street or within one-quarter mile of a transit street. Comment: Not applicable to minor partitions. 7.005 Off-Street Parking, Loading and Bicycle Access-All development which generates a parking • need. This shall include the construction of new structures, the remodeling of existing structures and a change of use which increases on-site parking or loading requirements or which changes access requirements. Comment: At least one off-street parking space will be provided on each lot. As shown on the site plan,Parcel 1 has considerable existing parking area and well exceeds this standard. Parcel 2 will be reviewed at the time of building permit. Loading and bicycle parking standards do not apply to single-family homes. 8.005 Park and Open Space -All major development Comment: Not applicable to minor partitions, as they do not constitute"major development". 9.005 Landscaping. Screening and Buffering-All major development, except that the section Fences applies to all development. Comment: Not applicable to minor development. 10.005 Fences(Repealed by Res.R-94-38, and Ord. No. 2100, 08-01-94;Replaced by LOC Chapter 45: Article 45.15 Fences). Comment: Not applicable. No fencing proposed. • Lehman Minor Partition Page 2 of 7 11.005 Drainage Standard for Maior Development-All major development. Comment: Not applicable to minor development. 12.005 Drainage Standard for Minor Development-All minor development. Iron Mountain Boulevard is paved to a width of approximately 19 feet,plus a 4 foot pedestrian/bicycle path on the south side of the street. This street has no curbs. Storm drainage runs into a small wetland area between Iron Mountain Boulevard and Country Club Road. Onsite drainage flows from the northwest to the southeast across the property. There are no watercourses or other drainageways in the vicinity of this site.Drainage for the proposed partition will be accommodated via a drywell for the roof drains of the new home. To avoid potential impacts on the adjacent parcel to the east,plans include construction of a drainage swale along the east border of the property to intercept runoff prior to its exiting onto Tax Lot 2000. A new culvert will be installed under SW Iron Mountain Boulevard to carry this surface water to the existing wetlands on the south side of the road. 13.005 Weak Foundation Soils-All development which includes areas identified as including "Potential Weak Foundation Soils"by the City. Comment: Not applicable. The subject property is situated outside of any areas identified as including"Potential Weak Foundation Soils". 14.005 Utility Standard-All development requiring connection to utilities. • The subject property is presently served with all required utilities. Sanitary sewer service is provided from an existing 8-inch sewer line in SW Iron Mountain Boulevard. Additionally, a sewer line is available in an easement on TL 2200 along the west border of the subject property. Water service is available from an existing 8-inch City of Lake Oswego waterline in Iron Mountain Boulevard.The existing home is presently connected to the water line. Storm drainage has been described above. Access is provided via SW Iron Mountain Boulevard,which is paved to a width of about 19 feet. The existing right-of-way width is 80 feet.No additional right-of-way will be required along the frontage of the subject property. 15.005 Erosion Control Standard-(Repealed by Res.R-96-19; 06-18-96). Comment: Not applicable. No longer in effect. or areaswitherosion Hillside Protection Standard-All development which includes hillsides a osron potential(R-92-48; 10-06-92). Comment: Not applicable. No hillside areas will be developed. • 1 7.005 Flood Plain-All development within an identified flood plain. Lehman Minor Partition Page 3 of 7 Comment:Not applicable.The site is not within a flood plain area. 18.005 Access-All major development and all partitions of land. • I P Comment: Both lots in the partition have direct access to Iron Mountain Boulevard. Each lot fronts on this road for more than the minimum 25 foot standard(Parcel 1 —134.85',Parcel 2— 25.19'. The proposed partition will create negligible impact on this street; generating approximately 10 new trips per day when the new home is constructed on Parcel 2. 19.005 On-Site Circulation-Driveways and Fire Access Roads—All development proposing a new use of private streets, driveways, or parking lot aisles. Comment: The existing driveway serving Parcel 1 is mapped on the topographic survey and the site plan. Driveway approaches for each lot will be about 12 percent in grade;well under City maximum of 20 percent. 20.005 On-Site Circulation-Bikeways, Walkways and Accessways-All minor and major development involving the construction of a new structure other than a detached single family dwelling, ... Comment: Not applicable. Only single-family residences are proposed. 22.005 Manufactured Home Placement Standard-Any manufactured home placement. Comment: Not applicable. No manufactured homes are proposed. • 23.005 Downtown Redevelopment District Design Standard-All development in the EC(East End Commercial)zone. (R-97-12; 05-20-97) Comment: Not applicable. 24.005 Old Town Building Design Standard-Any minor or major development in the DD(Design District)zone. Comment: Not applicable. The subject property is zoned R-10. 25.005 West Lake Grove Design District Standard-All development in the West Lake Grove Design District. Comment: Not applicable. The subject property is located outside of the West Lake Area. LOC CHAPTER 42: STREETS AND SIDEWALKS This section of the Code provides standards for street and sidewalk improvements in the City of Lake Oswego. As discussed in the pre-application conference notes,Iron Mountain Boulevard is a Neighborhood Collector street. No portion of this road presently meets City street standards. The applicants have no objection to a condition of approval requiring signing of a petition and a non-remonstrance agreement for the formation of a future Local Improvement District to improve this entire street to City standards. • Lehman Minor Partition Page 4 of 7 • LOC CHAPTER 47—SIGNS Comment: Not applicable. No signs are being proposed. LOC 48.19—FLAG LOTS 48.19.010. Authorization;Application Requirements As demonstrated in the chart on page 1 of this report,the proposed flag lot will conform to the basic requirements of the R-10 district and flag lot standards.The site plan depicts full development of the subject property. A plan depicting locations and heights of surrounding homes is included in the submittal package.Nothing in this proposed development would preclude full development of adjacent properties. 48.19.015 Exceptions No exceptions to the flag lot standards are proposed at this time. 48.19.020. Access Access plans for the proposed development are depicted on the site plan submitted with this application. The proposed flag lot will have a 25-foot wide deeded access strip to Iron Mountain Boulevard.A 12-foot wide driveway • is proposed within this access strip, consistent with City standards. The driveway serving the flag lot is proposed to be merged into the existing driveway serving the residence on Parcel 1 so that there will be a single driveway approach onto Iron Mountain Boulevard. An easement ensuring the joint use of this driveway will be created on the final partition plat. Because the proposed driveway serving the flag lot is less than 150 feet in length, no fire truck turnaround will be needed. 48.19.025 Lot Configuration These standards typically require that the front yard be the line most parallel and closest to the street(the south property line in this instance). The front yard for the flag lot to be created in this partition is proposed to be 90 degrees to the street, however, and perpendicular to the accessway.Flexibility in determination of front yard location is permitted when the usual practice is"not practicable due to placement of structures on adjacent lots, topography, lot con5guration, or similar reasons. In this instance,the configuration of the subject property would not permit the creation of flag lot oriented in the usual manner without variance to the minimum rear yard standard for the existing house on Parcel 1. The orientation of the flag lot with its front yard towards Iron Mountain Boulevard would require that the flag lot be a minimum of 100 feet deep on its north-south axis. The minimum rear yard setback is 25 feet in the R-10 zone. As shown on the attached site map, locating a lot line between Parcels 1 and 2 at the 25 foot setback would result in each lot being slightly under the 100 foot minimum lot depth standard. There is no other configuration that could be used to avoid the necessity for a lot depth variance if Parcel 2 is oriented towards Iron Mountain Boulevard. The Surrounding Land Use map submitted with this application demonstrates that the closest home to the subject property is situated on Tax Lot 2000 immediately east of the proposed flag lot. Orienting the flag lot in the usual manner would result in the new home having a side yard adjacent to its eastern border so that the new home would Lehman Minor Partition Page 5 of 7 be located closer to the neighboring house than would result from the proposed alternative orientation. Conversely, the home that is most distant from the proposed flag lot is located to the north of this site. Having a side yard setback • adjacent to the north line would have a lesser impact upon this neighbor because of this greater separation distance. For all of the above reasons, the proposed design is consistent with the provisions of this section. 48.19.030 Building and Site Design Standards The orientation of the future home on Parcel 2 would have its front yard towards the east property line. All required setbacks of the R-10 zone will be maintained. Garage orientation will be reviewed at the time of building permit application. The height of the home to be constructed on the proposed flag lot will be no higher that the average of the homes on the adjacent lots. All adjacent homes are single-story structures,with the exception of the existing home on Tax Lot 2400,which is a daylight basement home. The abutting single-story homes all have fairly low- pitched roofs (approximately 4:12)and estimated heights of 14 to 16 feet. The existing home on Parcel 1 has a height of approximately 15 feet. The daylight basement home has an additional height of about 8 feet, for a total height of about 22 feet. Assuming an average height of 15 feet for the three abutting single-story homes, 15 feet for the existing home on the subject property, and a height of 22 feet for the daylight basement, an average height of 16.4 feet is obtained. The proposed home will maintain a maximum height no greater than this average. 48.19.035 Screening. Buffering and Landscape Installation The proposed driveway serving the new flag lot is not located within 10 feet of another driveway except where it merges into the driveway that serves Parcel 1. No new landscaping is required for driveway buffering. The site plan maintains a row of mature fir trees located along the proposed boundary line between Parcels 1 and 2. • Approximately three trees will need to be removed to allow for construction of a new home on Parcel 2 (24" & 14" firs and 9 inch cedar).These trees will be mitigated with new trees on a 1:1 ratio as specified in this section.Because the floor plan will not be selected until the lot is sold, the tree removal and mitigation plan should be a condition of building permit issuance. The requirement for 6-foot tall fencing of side and rear yard areas is met by existing fences along the west and north property lines. The existing wire fence along the east property line will be replaced with a 6-foot cedar fence. A six-foot wide area within the rear yard of Parcel 2 wiIl be planted with an arborvitae hedge to comply with this section. LOC CHAPTER 55—TREE CUTTING Comment: The required tree-cutting permit will be obtained by the builder of the home on Parcel 2 prior to the removal of any trees on that lot. The site plan depicts the location of the existing trees on Parcel 2. There is a cluster of evergreen trees in the north central portion of this lot that will be impacted by the placement of a home on this parcel. Three trees(14" and 24" fir and 9"cedar)are near the center of the proposed lot and will have to be removed to provide a suitable building pad on this parcel. A group of firs near the north boundary(7", 14",and 22" firs)should be able to be saved as they are in the area of the side yard of the home. A 30"fir located just east of this group of trees is of some concern as it is situated further south, outside of a typical side yard setback. It could be argued that moving the line between Parcels I and 2 further south would provide more room for the placement of the home on this lot while retaining this tree. However, this option would necessitate moving the building envelope such that an 18" maple and a 10" pine tree would have to be removed, and may jeopardize a 20" fir tree near the juncture of the flagstrip and the south line of Parcel 2. This design option would also impact established landscaping and grading between the two parcels. Finally, moving the building site further south would make compliance with • solar access standards more difficult as there would be less north-south separation between the structures. For these Lehman Minor Partition Paae 6 of 6 reasons, the applicants are not in favor of shifting the lot line to the south. All practicable efforts will be made to • retain the 30" fir by requiring the builder to select an appropriate floor plan and, if necessary, to retain the services of an arborist should the home be sited close to this tree. Also of concern in developing this site is the preservation of a 36" fir near the southeast corner of the subject property. To avoid impacting this tree, the drainage swale has been configured to meander to the west to avoid impacting the roots of this tree. LOC CHAPTER 57— SOLAR ACCESS Comment: Parcel 1 complies with the basic design option,being more than 90 feet deep on a north-south axis and having a front lot line oriented within 30 degrees of east-west. A Protected Solar Building Line is depicted on the site plan to provide compliance with solar access standards for that lot. LOC CHAPTER 58—HISTORIC PRESERVATION Comment: Not applicable. The subject property is not identified as a historic site and contains no historic structures. • • Lehman Minor Partition Page 7 of 7 • Minutes of Public Meeting Held on August 23, 1999 about the proposed partition of 635 Iron 11111 Mountain Boulevard, Lake Oswego, Oregon. The meeting began at 7:00. The first 15 minutes of the meeting involved a discussion of a major auto accident that occurred in the neighborhood that day. Next the representative of the Forest Highlands Neighborhood Association introduced herself and her organization. Then the Lehman's representative explained that the purpose of the meeting was to inform the neighbors of the Lehman's proposal to partition their property creating a flag lot. Concern was expressed by one attendee that the neighbors (Macomsons) to the west of the Lehman's were out of the country. It also was brought out that the neighbors(611 Iron Mountain) to the east of the Lehman's had sent out letters to several of the neighbors requesting them to attend the meeting. Some concerns about growth and infill were expressed. It was explained that the Lehman's property is large enough to be divided into two R-10 lots. Questions were asked and answered about the partition process. Neighbors were told they could write letters to the city. A major concern expressed by the representative of the neighborhood association was the preservation of trees on the property. The neighbors at 1290 Andrews Way expressed concerns about drainage patterns in the neighborhood and the effect that additional development would have on run off. There were also some concerns expressed about height issues and privacy. When the neighbors to the east at 611 Iron Mountain arrived, their concerns revolved around issues related to property values and they expressed their belief that the creation of a flag lot would lower neighborhood property values. Those attending the meeting were invited out into the Lehman's yard to view potential placement of the house. The meeting adjourned around 8:15. • Nancy M. Mundy • EXHIBIT 9 LU 00-0034 II lea.. ,�.�. N nvi EL CITY OF L 7 OSWEGO Dept.of?lanr r Ddvalo meog 9/l 00 Lake Oswego Planning Department Lake Oswego City .TIall PO Box 309 380 "A" Avenue Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Subject: File No. LU 00-0034 Gemtl eaten: Until such time the ground water problem is this neighbor— hood is solved, there should be no sub—division, hard top surfaces or buildings added. Above all no trees or shrubs removed. Our home has had the bz,seuent flooded many times in the forte years we have lived here. • Sincerel;, yours, Walter & Theresa Taylor 670 Iron c t. Blvd. Lake Oswego OR 7 r34 1111 EXHIBIT 10 LU 00-0034 f 655 Iron Mtn. Blvd R 7 C 7 ! V Lake Oswego. OR 97034 02 September 2000 ._ . - 2000 • Lake Oswego Planning Department Lake Oswego City Hall CITY OF LAKEpS E (} PO Box 369 Dept of Planning&Devainpment 308 "A"Ave. Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Re: File No.: LU 00-0034,partition of 635 Iron Mtn. Blvd. To Whom It May Concern: This is to state our opposition to the subdivision of the parcel at 635 Iron Mtn. Blvd. We object on several points. First,there is no benefit to the city for this development to occur. There is sufficient available housing stock available and density requirements are already met. There is no pressing need to make building lots available and therefore no need to partition the lot. Second,the drainage from the proposed "Flag Parcel 2'is described as emptying into the wetland area across Iron Mtn. Blvd. The application fails to note that the wetland already overflows in heavy rain. emptying onto the street through a pipe under the walkway_ Replacing porous soil with a structure and driveway in the proposed flag parcel will only exacerbate the flooding that occurs. Additionally,the proposed under-street storm sewer will only provide another outlet for the wetland overflow. Third.the proposed development not only allows removal of three mature trees. it places a significant risk of damage to other. larger trees. In addition to the three established trees specified for removal,there is insufficient • protection listed for a 30"fir. "...retention of the services of an arborist"would not prevent its removal should a building be sited on the parcel. Further,the stand of firs at the end of the flag strip would be in grave danger of damage to their roots by construction equipment.pavement, and subsequent vehicle traffic. Fourth, placing a new house in close proximity to the existing houses significantly degrades the quality of the backwards of the existing homes.without a similar increase in any other aspect of the neighborhood. Noise and visual clutter caused by a new structure would only make the area less livable. It is questionable that the applicants. currently residing in the"Front Parcel I"will maintain residence there if the proposed partition is approved. It would be a case of exploitation for short-term profit at the expense of existing. long-term residents. Finally,the owner of the house at 611 Iron Mtn. Blvd., immediately to the east of the proposed development, has not been notified of this action. Since the house is unoccupied at this time, simply mailing to the house address is not effective.in alerting the owner. Because the house at 611 Iron. Mtn. is sited well back from the street. it will be the closest and hence most affected by any structure in the proposed Flag Parcel 2. In the interest of full discussion of this matter,the owner should be located and informed of this proposal and given a chance to comment before this decision can be made. This application of proposed development should be denied. Yours truly, i ibeze4-1,0`1---, sat co •�+ o/(m=eA,#-L_____ O Wis Tvlacomson EXHIBIT 11 LU 00-0034 _J RECEIVED • 675 Andrews Rd. 013-y CF LAKE OSWECO Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Dept.of Planning&Dsvaiopment September 3, 2000 Lake Oswego Planning Department Lake Oswego City Hall PO Box 369 308 "A" Ave. Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Re: dividing lot at 635 Iron Mtn. Blvd.. file: LU 00-0034 To the Planner: I am against splitting the lot at 635 Iron Mtn. Blvd. into two lots. I am concerned that a new building and driveway placed in the proposed lot would cause water problems, since there would be more runoff to the street. The small wetland across the street already overflows when it rains heavily. • I also think that there is not enough space to build a house in the area behind the existing house at 635 Iron Mt. Blvd It would be too close to the other houses, reducing privacy, increasing noise, and hurting views from the backyards. I object to the loss of trees that development of the lot would cause. There is no way to guarantee even more tree loss beyond what is listed in the application, especially the tall trees near the proposed driveway. I don't think that Lake Oswego needs this piece of land developed. There have been plenty of houses for sale in the last few years and no big demand for more in the future. Lastly, I don't think that the owner of 611 Iron Mt. Blvd. has been given notice of this application. The house is currently not occupied. and since notices were only mailed to the residences around 635 Iron. Mt. Blvd., the owner does not know of this application and so can't respond. Please deny this application to create a flag lot. Yours truly, '�,z �Z. dam/ Margaret Reeder 111 EXHIBIT 12 LU 00-0034 655 Iron Mtn. Blvd RECEIVED Lake Oswego, OR 97034 05 September 2000 • Lake Oswego Planning Department Lake Oswego City Hall CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PO Box 369 Dept.of Planning&Development 308 "A"Ave. Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Re: File No.: LU 00-0034, partition of 635 Iron Mtn. Blvd. To Whom It May Concern: This is to record an objection to the above minor development application. Section 48.19.005 (1) (c)of the City Code says that one of the purposes of the Flag Lot Ordinance is to "Reduce the area of impervious surface resulting from redundant access paving..." The proposed development shows the driveway from the new"Flag Parcel 2"joining the existing driveway at a minimum distance from the street. This maximizes the impervious area caused by the new driveway. contravening the purpose of the code. To reduce the area of new driveway in a meaningful manner, it must join the existing driveway as far away from the street as possible. In doing so. however.the easement required in "Front Parcel 1"must be increased significantly. Since the area of this casement is deducted from the area of flag parcel 2,the area of flag parcel 2 falls below the minimum lot size of 10,000 sq. ft. Therefore_ this application for partition should be denied. 111/ Yours truly. Wis Macomson EXHIBIT 13 LU 00-0034 September 4, 2000 • Lake Oswego Planning Department Lake Oswego City Hall P.O. Box 369 Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 RE: File Number LU 00-0034 Applicant Raymond and Dalai Lehman Dear Sir or Madam: We are the property owners of tax lot 2400 directly north of the proposed flag lot. We have concerns regarding the application for the partition tax lot 2100. Our home is elevated above the Lehman's lot. Our view is looking directly down on the location of the proposed home. Currently there are several fir trees that create a visual and noise barrier to the Lehman home and Country Club Road. In the proposed partition, 3 of these trees are to be cut down. Removing these trees will decrease our privacy and increase the street noise from Country Club Road and the proposed new residence. We request that no trees be cut down. Regarding surface drainage, the proposal is to create a swale and culvert to the wetlands across Iron Mountain Blvd. The drainage in front of tax lot 2100 is east along Bayberry. Currently the wetland drains through a culvert onto Bayberry when it fills to capacity. The proposed drainage • will not work. Our concern is the flooding that occurs each winter along Bayberry and that this hazard would increase with the building of this home and the resultant reduction of ground to absorb rains. Regarding fencing, the proposal refers to an existing 6' fence between our lots. The 6' fence does not exist along approximately 30' of the property line. Knowing that our personal desire has little effect on the outcome of this matter, we still want to express our disappointment in losing the privacy and quality of life that our large lots in this neighborhood have afforded us. We bought this home with that in the forefront of our minds. We have an in-ground swimming pool near our southern property line. The proposed home would in-fringe on the privacy we now enjoy in our backyard. We request that no deck or large windows be placed on the north side of the new construction. We also have some concern that the construction near by might cause some structural stress on our aging pool. Our final concern is a real decrease in our property's value due to the increased density with this proposed construction. One of our properties finest qualities is its distance from surrounding homes. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, rz„J L rao C E 6 E • Sc and Joan Benge 1300 Andrews Rd. Lake Oswego, OR. 97034 EXHIBIT 14 frr s LAKE ;:;WE LU 00-0034 tapt.of P anninj&-Davaiopr September 5, 2000 r` 7 c y ""' Lake Oswego Planning Department Lake Oswego City Hall PO BOX 369 '7 OF LAKE OSV,I::::.0 380 "A" Avenue of p,anninz;&Devalcpmer, Lake Oswego, OR 97034 Attn: Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager RE: LU 00-0034; Application for Minor Development by Raymond and Dalai Lehman, 635 Iron Mountain Boulevard This letter is written in response to the above referenced application. For the reasons given herein, the application should be denied. 1 . Drainage Standard (12.005 and 14.005 of the Application). The applicant fails to address various issues relating to the protection of the existing wetland between Iron Mountain Boulevard and Country Club as a natural resource. First. the application is silent on whether the proposed diversion of storm water to the wetland complies with Goal 5 of the state land use regulations concerning environmental issues, specifically the conservation of wetlands. • Second. the application is silent on the approvals from the City of Lake Oswego or the Division of State Lands to use the wetland for the intended purpose. Additional input of storm water may upset equilibrium conditions currently established in the wetland and lead to degradation of water quality (e.g., increased suspended solids) in the wetland. Third. assuming that drainage can be lawfully diverted to the existing wetland, the applicant does not confirm the capacity of the wetland to handle the additional runoff anticipated from the increased impermeable surfaces (e.g. roof and paved areas) of parcel 2 without flooding and creating a nuisance hazard to the abutting streets. Seasonal flooding already occurs from the wetland and additional flashing of runoff from impermeable areas to the wetland may exacerbate the problem. Fourth. the planned culvert is potentially submerged, as proposed. because of the high water table under Iron Mountain Boulevard, and would fail in its intended design; the applicant fails to confirm that there is sufficient area for excavation at an elevation above the water table. Seasonal submergence of the planned culvert would lead to long-term maintenance issues associated with clogging or obstructions in the culvert. The wetland is at risk of serious disturbance by the creation of this flag lot because of applicant's intentions to divert storm water to it. • EXHIBIT 15 LU 00-0034 2. The neighboring home most directly impacted by this partition is to the east. tax lot 2000, which is currently unoccupied as the result of a recent sale of the property. We are concerned about notice to the new owners. whether the new owners have been identified and properly notified about this proceeding, and whether they have been given an adequate opportunity to be heard. 3. Grounds exist to treat this application as a major development" rather than a "minor development" as filed. Variances should be required under the Class 2 Zoning Code or the Class II Development Code related to the wetland issue discussed above and/or the minimum lot size requirement of 10,000 square feet which would not be met if the driveway were constructed differently than proposed to reduce the area of impervious surface resulting from redundant access paving. Sincerely, Eric and Sharon Tuppan 680 Iron Mountain Boulevard Lake Oswego. OR 97034 503-635-6146 • • Page 2- Objection to Lehman Application Ir I I ,-,--'<ir -- .. •.4 Qo I4fe4 id 4d8 rqY LO 2400 4 I. r ;. 'r 0 �� L 1 '? Q4£FNyI'` . / p /% • ` 0 , / ç7jg ED . • Etas ,G-\ q / PA a a T I r AR Cf r I 4 .; 4,00, 1:411,, 1 �� 4` /� / (.____ 1. 1. 1_ .__ os 3-1-. .*".:- ------____) TAI - -___:\ 1\\.1 4 41 ON ° ,..'1;;;,_. . (L. 4, ,:;;... ..-:‘,..:, \ 1 V. or HNJ( Qy r�N , W9._ r rell ..: • \ ...._ LOT \\• , ''. ` el/ ��, 000 0 IR INTAIN BLVD- \ qr'".: A/N • if ----6, .\\\\ . ,,,iiii , i 20',_,_ , N. N. APPL e ; --------- .... i„,,,,,,, 0 „. ,,,, \s, ......4%mideo, • ,......„ . . ..,..,*, 4,,,,..k. ,I.p.„10 0, -i�aki. 1111 cl()(1- • . ......._ ...,..,....., ,,t_ ..........._ • NI - _ ,_ : ` "141111114 :A,: ,--- __ ist4 II tr A 1LN Iff � y _ w . . . • pjtAKEps „An �f C)0p Engineering Division Memorandum DREGos TO: Hamid Pishvaie,Director of current planning FROM: Russ Chevrette, Engineering Tech. III RE: Drainage issues for LU 00-0034,flag lot partition at 635 Iron Mountain Boulevard DATE: September 5, 2000 You requested additional comments to respond to letters of objection received earlier today from Margaret Reeder,Walter and Theresa Taylor, and Susan and Wis Macomson. Among other points of objection, all three parties share a concern that allowing the partition will have some adverse drainage effects. • Regarding comments that the small wetland between Iron Mountain Boulevard and Country Club Road routinely overflows (resulting in a huge puddle in the eastbound lane on Country Club Road), this admittedly routine occurrence was remedied as part of the 1997 street overlay program. The wetland's overflow prevention culvert, which crosses Country Club Road to reach the pond in the golf course,was found to be completely packed with mud. The culvert was replaced with a new 15" culvert, and the flooding problem has not reoccurred. Regarding the statements that the neighborhood has ground water problems and that the Taylor's basement(670 Iron Mountain)has flooded many times over the past forty years, I call your attention to the attached contour map. The proposed building site on the applicant's property is about 300 feet east and about five feet lower than the Taylor's lot. The Taylor's basement flooding problems are better attributed to local subsurface patterns emanating from uphill territory to their west. We also note that the Taylor lot had a history of septic system problems, indicating a localized high water table. Finally, the Clackamas County Soil Survey identifies this site as "Laurelwood Silt Loam." This soil type has"moderate"permeability, and for that reason it is somewhat limited for septic tank absorption fields. Nevertheless, this neighborhood was originally developed with septic systems, and didn't obtain sewer service until five years ago. Recent sewer connections have greatly reduced the quantity of water being introduced into the soil. Those sewer connections greatly offset the amount surface runoff from a new roof or driveway. In conclusion,the findings and conclusion of the staff report are not materially affected by the new testimony. H:\RUSS_C\LU's100.034 drainage merno.doc EXHIBIT 16 LU 00-0034 STAFF REPORT CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PLANNING DIVISION APPLICANTS FILE NO. Steve and Doris Baird LU 00-0072 PROPERTY OWNERS STAFF Steve and Doris Baird Michael R. Wheeler LEGAL DESCRIPTION DATE OF REPORT Tax Lot 13800 of Tax Map 2 lE 8BC October 27, 2000 LOCATION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION 4320 Douglas Way Waluga • COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION ZONING DESIGNATION R-7.5 R-7.5 I. APPLICANT'S REQUEST The applicants are requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to convert an existing single-family dwelling for use as a Montessori School. The existing improvements consist of a 1,480 square-foot dwelling and an attached two-car garage on an 11,610 sq. ft. lot. The applicants also propose to add parking spaces for two vehicles, and to provide additional landscaping. The details of the applicants' proposal are found in a narrative (Exhibits 4, 5 and 14). II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan: Goal 1: Citizen Involvement Policies 5 Goal 2: Land Use Section 1: Land Use Policies 1, 2,3, 10, 22, 24, 25, 26 • Section 2: Community Design 2 Goal 5: Open Space, Scenic, Historic, Natural Resources Section 2: Vegetation 1, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14 0 Goal 6: Air, Water, Land Resource Quality Section 4: Sound Quality 4, 5, 6, 7 Goal 7: Natural Disasters and Hazards Section 3: Landslide, Erosion, Unstable Soils 2, 5, 8, 10 Goal 11: Public Facilities and Services Section 1: Public Safety 12 Section 2: Storm Water Management 6, 9 Goal12: Transportation Subgoal 3: Neighborhood Collectors, Local Residential Streets 5 Subgoal 4: Land Use and Transportation Relationships 4, 9, 10 Subgoal 11: Parking Policies 2 B. City of Lake Oswego Development Code: LOC 49.16.015 Definitions (generally) LOC 49.16.020 Application of Code ID LOC 49.16.025 Authority of Planning Director LOC 49.16.035 Development Permit Required LOC 49.16.060 Planning Director Interpretations LOC 49.20.110 Minor Development LOC 49.22.215 Review Criteria for Minor Developments LOC 49.20.115 Major Development LOC 49.22.210 Review Criteria for Major Developments LOC 49.22.200 Burden of Proof LOC 49.22.205 Development Standards LOC 49.22.225 Conditions of Approval LOC 49.30.500 -49.30.720 Application Requirements LOC 49.44.900- 49.54.1205 Review of Maj. Dev. Appl. and Appeals of Min. Dev. Decis. LOC 49.56.1300 - 49.58.1310 Effect of Approval/Denial of Development Permit LOC 49.58.1400 -49.58.1430 Compliance with Approved Permit C. City of Lake Oswego Zoning Ordinance: LOC 48.02.015 Definitions (generally) • LOC 48.02.020 Compliance LU 00-0072 Page 2 of 20 LOC 48.06.195 -48.06.225 R-7.5 Zone requirements 411 LOC 48.22.550 - 48.22.560 Conditional Uses LOC 48.22.575 Schools LOC 48.22.585 Major Public Facilities and Institutional Uses D. City of Lake Oswego Development Standards: Building Design 2.020(1) - (6) Street Lights 5.020(1), (2), (3) Transit System 6.020(1) Off-street Parking, Loading and Bicycle Access Standard 7.020(1) - (9) Park and Open Space 8.020(1) or(2); 8.035 (1) - (5); 8.040(1) - (2) Landscaping, Screening and Buffering 9.020(1) - (8); 9.025(1) - (10); 9.030 Drainage For Major Development 11.020(1) - (5); 11.025(1) - (9); 11.030(1); 11.035(1) - (3); 11.040(1) - (3) Weak Foundation Soils 13.020; 13.035(1) - (7); 13.040 Utilities 14.020(1) - (8); 14.025(1) - (9); 14.035; III 14.040 Access 18.020(1) - (5); 18.035; 18.040(1) - (2) Site Circulation-Driveways and Private Streets 19.020(1) - (2); 19.025(1) - (19) Site Circulation—Bikeways and Walkways 20.020(1) - (4); 20.025(1) - (5); 20.030 E. System Development Charges (LOC Chapter 39) LOC 39.02.031; 39.06.105 F. Fences (LOC Chapter 45.15) LOC 45.15.005 -45.15.035 G. Signs(LOC Chapter 47) LOC 47.03.005 -47.12.500 Ill LU 00-0072 Page 3 of 20 H. Tree Removal (LOC Chapter 55) LOC 55.02.010 - 55.02.135 • III. FINDINGS A. Existing Conditions: 1. The site is composed of 11,610 sq. ft. in a rectangular configuration. It currently includes a single family dwelling, parking for two vehicles and landscaping. The existing dwelling is located centrally on the lot. 2. The site is located on the south side of Douglas Way (Exhibit 1). 3. There are no street lights located along the segment of Douglas Way abutting the site. 4. An 18-inch water line is located in Douglas Way. A fire hydrant is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Douglas Way and Quarry Road, approximately 240 feet west of the site. 5. A 10-inch sanitary sewer line is located in Douglas Way. 6. The site is gently- to moderately-sloping, draining southeasterly 1111 (Exhibit 26). Twenty-five trees are scattered throughout the site (Exhibit 7). 7. A 24-inch public storm drain line is located in Douglas Way. This line drains easterly into Springbrook Creek. 8. Douglas Way is a 19-foot-wide paved street in a 30-foot-wide right-of- way, without curb, gutter,or sidewalks. A pedestrian pathway is located on the south side of the right-of-way, abutting the site. Douglas Way is classified in the Comprehensive Plan as a local street, which is intended to carry fewer than 1,200 vehicle trips per day. 9. Quarry Road, which is classified in the Comprehensive Plan as a neighborhood collector, is located approximately 250 feet west of the site, and intended to carry an average of 1,000 and 3,000 vehicle trips per day. • LU 00-0072 Page 4 of 20 B. Review Criteria for Minor and Major Development • The following regulations were in effect on the date the application was submitted (July 24, 2000): LOC 49.22.200 Burden Of Proof The applicants have provided materials with which to evaluate the request, as evidenced by the exhibits. As will be noted throughout this report, the applicant's materials do not fully satisfy all applicable criteria. A minor or major development is subject to the following review criteria [LOC 49.22.215 and 49.22.220]: a. Any applicable regulatory policies of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plant; The applicants have incorporated the applicable Comprehensive Plan policies into the narrative (Exhibit 14). Staff has provided the following review of the relevant plan policies only when there is need for clarification or correction. Citizen Involvement Policies • These policies require an applicant to give residents an opportunity to review an application in advance of submittal to the City. These policies are implemented through provisions of the Development Code requiring neighborhood meetings. The applicants have provided documentation of this meeting, which meets these requirements (Exhibit 18). Land Use Policies These policies require the development to conform to all applicable regulations, to resolve negative impacts generated by the proposed development, and to provide solutions prior to approval of an application. These policies are implemented through the various development standards, reviewed later in this report. Open Space Policies These policies also require the City to enact regulations which require buffering and screening between dissimilar land uses. As noted above, these policies are implemented through the Landscaping, Screening and Buffering Development Standard, reviewed later in this report. • ` The listed Comprehensive Plan policies are applicable only to the conditional use,which is classified as "major development". LU 00-0072 Page 5 of 20 Economic Development Policies • These policies require development to provide adequate, but not excessive parking for customers and employees; and,to preserve natural resources and open space. The policies are implemented through the Off-street Parking, Loading and Bicycle Access Standard, the Park and Open Space and Landscaping, Screening and Buffering Development Standards, which will be reviewed later in this report. Air, Water, Land Resource Policies These policies require that proposed development minimize noise impacts on residential neighborhoods. These policies are implemented through various provisions of the Development Code, particularly the conditional use review process. The applicants' proposal will generate some human noise from children's' play in the rear yard of the proposed school. This noise will be similar to that generated by the nearby Lake Grove Elementary School, and no worse than that generated by trucks and busses used by the Lake Oswego School District at their facilities, abutting to the east and south. Natural Disasters and Hazards Policies • These policies require the City to regulate the intensity of land use on unstable soils. These policies are implemented through the provisions of the Hillside Standard. The applicants' proposal includes pavement improvements that will generate additional storm water runoff. The new runoff will be required to be directed to the storm drainage line located in Douglas Way, or equivalent. This will be required as a condition of this action, if approved. Public Facilities and Services Policies These policies require that proposed development meet the requirements of the Uniform Fire Code, and that storm water be accommodated. These policies are implemented through oversight by the Fire Marshal, and by the drainage standards [LODS 11 and 12]. The applicants have had a fire inspection performed by the Fire Marshal, who has determined that the facility complies with the requirements of the Fire Code (Exhibit 9). To meet the storm water disposal requirements, the • applicants will be required to direct additional runoff to a positive system, LU 00-0072 Page 6 of 20 such as the 24-inch line located in Douglas Way. This will be required as a condition of this action, if approved. Transportation Policies • Neighborhood Collectors, Local Residential Streets • Land Use and Transportation Relationships • Parking Policies These policies require that developers pay for measures required to mitigate any negative impacts generated by proposed development. A traffic analysis is required in order to demonstrate that affected streets and intersections can accommodate projected traffic increases, or that necessary improvements can be constructed as a part of the project. Also,parking facilities must be designed to be convenient to pedestrians and transit riders. These policies are implemented through the Transit Standard, and the Off- street Parking, Loading and Bicycle Access Standard. Please see the discussions on pages 13 and 14 regarding compliance with these standards. b. The requirements of the zone in which it is located; LOC 48.06.195 -48.06.225 R-7.5 Residential Description The site is in the R-7.5 Residential zone. The existing dwelling is classified as an "alteration that does not qualify as new construction", as defined by LOC 48.02.015, which is subject to the following: Detached (Alteration): Required Tax Lot 13800 Setbacks Front Yard 25 ft. 57 ft. Side Yard 5 ft. minimum, 15 ft. 6.4 ft.(west) total 4.4 ft.(east) Rear Yard 25 ft. 82 ft. Max.Height (Alteration) Flat Lot 35 ft. One-story(actual height unavail.) Max.Lot Coverage (Alteration) 35 percent 16 percent(approximately) The 4.4-foot sideyard maintained by the existing dwelling on the east is in not in conformance with the five-foot side yard required in 1978. At the time of construction, the Zoning Ordinance required a side yard setback of five feet. 1110 LU 00-0072 Page 7 of 20 However, upon inspection of actual construction, City staff determined that this requirement was satisfied (Exhibit 27). Based upon this exhibit and the • evidence supplied by the applicants (Exhibit 7), the 4.4-foot sideyard may be treated as nonconforming, rather than as a violation. The existing, combined side yard total may also be treated as legally nonconforming, despite not providing the 15 feet currently required. Additionally, since the application does not propose structural additions to the existing facility, the requirements of LOC 48.04.120 - 48.04.155 and LOC 48.06.195 -48.06.225 are not directly applicable to the proposed Conditional Use. Conditional Use Private schools, defined as "institutional use" [LOC 48.02.015], are allowed in the R-7.5 zone through the conditional use permit process [LOC 48.06.200(1)]. The Zoning Ordinance establishes the following procedure regarding conditional uses [LOC 48.22.550(1)]: A conditional use is an activity which is permitted in a zone but which, because of some characteristics which are not entirely compatible with other uses allowed in the zone, cannot be permitted outright A public hearing and review of the proposed conditional use by the [Development Review Commission]and the imposition of conditions, if necessary, is intended to insure that the use proposed will be as compatible as practical with surrounding uses, and is in conformance with the purposes and requirements of the district, if any, and with other applicable criteria and standards of the Ciry. In considering a Conditional Use application, the following criteria must be applied [LOC 48.22.555]: 1. An application for a conditional use shall be allowed if: a. The requirements of the zone are met;and The requirements of the zone were reviewed earlier in this report. b. Special conditions found in LOC 48.22.565 to 48.22.610, if applicable, are met;and, These requirements are reviewed below. c. The site is physically capable of accommodating the proposed use;and, • LU 00-0072 Page 8 of 20 The applicants indicate in the narrative (Exhibit 4) that the residential • character of the dwelling will be retained, and is large enough to accommodate 12 children, a limit set by the state of Oregon. The applicants suggest that by reconfiguring the pavement in the front yard, all requirements can be met. While the site may be large enough to accommodate the proposed use, the applicants have not demonstrated that the facilities proposed, including parking, fully comply with applicable standards. Staff finds that parking is inadequate, circulation patterns have not been demonstrated to function properly, tree protection will not satisfy the applicants' arborist's recommendations, parking surfaces are not proposed to be paved as required, and a drainage design has not been submitted. The functional characteristics of the proposed use are such that it can be made to be reasonably compatible with uses in its vicinity. The existing dwelling has been used as a residence since 1978, following its construction. Surrounding uses are residential in nature to the west, southwest and north. A nonconforming shop facility is abutting to the east; a nonconforming motor vehicle shop facility is abutting to the south. The applicants have indicated that the proposed use would be compatible with surrounding uses because hours of operation would be 8:00 AM—5:00 PM, Monday through Friday, and will generate less noise and traffic that the shop facilities to the east, or the school to the east and southeast. Compliance with on-site circulation requirements are proposed to be addressed through the expansion of parking area in the front yard, intended to enable a forward flow of vehicles for delivery of the children to the school. Staff has expressed concerns about the design of this improvement in terms of its function, and impact upon the existing, specimen trees on site. These concerns will be discussed in detail on pages 12, 15 and 16 of this report. 2. In permitting a new conditional use, or the modification of an existing conditional use, the[Development Review Commission], or the City Manager in the case of a minor modification, may impose conditions which are suitable and necessary to assure compatibility of the proposed use with other uses in the vicinity. These conditions may include, but are not limited to: a. Limiting the manner in which the use is conducted, by restricting the time an activity may take place and by minimizing such environmental effects as noise, vibration, air • pollution,glare and odor; LU 00-0072 Page 9 of 20 b. Establishing a special yard,setback, lot area or other lot dimension. • c. Limiting the height,size or location of a building or other structure. d Designating the size, number, location and design of vehicle access points. e. Increasing roadway widths, requiring street dedication, and/or requiring improvements within the street right-of-way. j. Designating the size, location,screening, drainage,surfacing or other improvement of a parking area or truck loading area. g. Limiting or otherwise designating the number,size, location, height and lighting of signs. h. Limiting the location and intensity of outdoor lighting, requiring its shielding, or both. i. Requiring berming,screening or landscaping and designating • standards for its installation and maintenance. j. Designating the size, height, location and materials for fences. k. Protecting and preserving existing trees,soils, vegetation, water resources, wildlife habitat or other significant natural resources. On and off-site public improvements. The number of residential units allowed by the provisions of this • chapter on a site may be reduced only if it is found that development to that number will result in a violation of the standards stated in subsection I of this section. [Emphasis added] The types of conditions that may be appropriately imposed by the Commission are underlined above. The Commission has the ability to deny the request if it does not satisfy all applicable criteria. In the alternative, the Commission could approve the application with conditions that address the issues highlighted above. Such conditions could include required redesign of proposed circulation and parking improvements. This will be discussed in detail on pages 14 and 17 of this report. The following standards are applicable to schools, approved as Conditional Uses [LOC 48.22.575]: 1. Public elementary or secondary schools shall provide the site area/pupil ratio required by State law. Other schools shall provide one acre of site area for each 75 pupils of capacity or for each two and one-half classrooms, whichever is greater except as provided in subsection 2. [Emphasis added] The proposal to create a school facility for 12 students (Exhibit 4) will require 0.16 acre of site area. The 0.26 acre site complies with this requirement. • LU 00-0072 Page 10 of 20 2. Preschools, nursery schools, day-care centers or kindergartens shall • provide a fenced, outdoor play area of at least 75 sq.ft for each child of total capacity, or a greater amount if so provided by State law. In facilities where groups of children are scheduled at different times for outdoor play the total play area may be reduced by one-half Based upon the proposed student population of 12 students, this standard requires a play area of 900 sq. ft.. The applicant proposes to utilize the existing rear yard of the dwelling for this purpose, which provides a total of 3,090 sq. ft., well in excess of the requirement. This rear yard is currently fenced (Exhibit 7). 3. Walkways, both on and off-site, will be provided as necessary for safe pedestrian access to schools. The existing pathway is located along the site frontage on Douglas Way, satisfying this requirement. This pathway leads west, toward Waluga Park, and east to the frontage of Lake Grove Elementary School on Douglas Way. 4. Sight-obscuring fence offour to six feet in height shall be provided to separate the play area from adjacent residential uses. The existing six-foot-tall fencing surrounding the rear yard of the existing dwelling complies with the Code in this regard (Exhibit 7). While the applicants propose additional fencing along the westerly property line, this is not required by the Code. S. Public services are adequate to serve the facility. All cable and subsurface utilities are adequate to serve the existing facility. The right-of-way and paved improvements in Douglas Way do not meet the City's urban standard for local streets, which includes a minimum of 20 feet of pavement, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and pathways. Douglas Way is only 19 feet wide (Exhibit 25), and has no curb, gutter or sidewalk. A four- to five- foot-wide pathway is located on the south side of the right-of-way. Staff finds that despite these deficiencies, Douglas Way is sufficiently improved to enable the use of the site for a school (Exhibit 23). See the discussion regarding Utilities on page 15 regarding this level of public service. 6. Safe loading and ingress and egress will be provided on and to the site. Because Douglas Way is not fully improved to an urban street standard, it does not provide a sufficient width (i.e., narrow pavement, lacks curb, on- street parking, and sidewalks) in which to safely load and unload students • from vehicles (Exhibit 23). LU 00-0072 Page 11 of 20 The applicants propose to widen the existing driveway on site, and to install two additional off-street parking spaces in the front yard. A loop drive is • proposed (Exhibit 8). However, this proposed configuration does not provide for adequate parking space dimensions or turning movements necessary to travel through the site in a forward motion. For example, a minimum turning radius of 25 feet is necessary to enable a continuous turning movement. The proposed driveway provides turning radii of eight to 15 feet (Exhibit 8), in order to avoid one of the four' specimen Douglas-fir trees in the front yard of the site. The applicants' arborist(Exhibit 12) states that a minimum of 12 feet must be maintained from the trunk of the tree to the edge of proposed asphalt improvements. The applicants' proposal does not comply with these recommendations. The resulting impact to the 20-inch Douglas-fir located on the east side of the site is that its roots will be cut to construct the asphalt improvement, and the distance from the base of the tree to the edge of the asphalt will be approximately two feet. This minimal distance is not sufficient to assure the survival of the tree. The turning radius is not sufficient to assure that vehicles can use the loop for continuous motion. In the current configuration,two vehicles may be parked in front of the existing garage (Exhibit 7). In the proposed reconfiguration, these two off- • street spaces are relocated to the west side of the yard, allegedly to enable the loop circulation discussed above. The spaces in front of the garage will no longer be useable, and the functionality of the circulation is questionable. The applicant's current proposal does not satisfy Items 5 and 6, as noted above. c. The Development Standards applicable to major developments; [Note: Because one component of the application is classified as a Conditional Use per LOC 48.06.200(1)and LOC 49.20.115(2)(e), the following standards include those applicable to major developments.] The following are applicable to the proposal: Building Design (LODS 2.005-2.040) This standard requires that development involving a structure be designed to be complementary to surrounding structures and features. The site includes an existing dwelling, which the applicants do not propose to alter. Therefore, the standard is not applicable. The 36-inch Douglas-fir located in the west half of the front yard is actually a multi-trunked tree composed of two 30-inch Douglas-firs. • LU 00-0072 Page 12 of 20 Street Lights (LODS 5.005 - 5.040) This standard requires street lights where necessary to properly illuminate public rights-of-way and uses taking access from them. It also requires a uniform level of illumination in their installation. Street lights are not currently located along this segment of Douglas Way. Staff has evaluated the current street light configuration in the neighborhood along with other street-related amenities, and finds that the absence of a street light does not provide an urban level of service in this regard. Staff also finds that the addition of an average of 24 vehicle trips generated by the school use will result in an increased need for illumination on Douglas Way. The requirement that one or more street lights be installed on Douglas Way is roughly proportional to this proposed increase in use of the street, particularly at night. However, while a utility pole is located on Douglas Way at the northeast corner of the site, it would not be prudent to require the installation of a single street light there. The addition of only one or two street lights would provide an intermittent spot of illumination that would not satisfy the requirements of LODS 5.020(1)(b)(i), which requires an average of 0.15 —0.40 foot-candles, measured on the street. As a result, no additional street light is required at this time; however,the applicant will be required to sign a nonremonstrance • agreement for future street improvements on Douglas Way, including installation of street lights. In lieu of a more extensive street light installation (i.e., one that would satisfy the illumination level requirements of the standard), a signed nonremonstrance agreement will be required as a condition of this action, if approved. Staff finds that provision of the required nonremonstrance agreement is roughly proportional to the impact of the 24 additional vehicle trips that will be generated by the school use, and that the actual proportional cost of the obligation will be determined through the local improvement district procedures, as required by the Supreme Court decision, Dolan v. City of Tigard. The standard will be satisfied as a result. This nonremonstrance agreement will be required as a condition of this action, if approved. Transit System (LODS 6.005 - 6.040) This standard requires that hard surfaced paths be constructed to connect a proposed development to existing transit facilities. A pathway is located along the frontage of the site, leading east west along Douglas Way. The nearest transit facility is located on Boones Ferry Road, approximately 950 feet to the east. The existing pathway satisfies the requirements of this standard. • LU 00-0072 Page 13 of 20 Off-street Parking, Loading and Bicycle Access Standard (LODS 7.005 - 7.040) • This standard requires that off-street parking be provided in numbers sufficient to meet the peak demand of the uses occurring on site. Required parking for a"nursery, day or child care facility, or kindergarten", based upon the 1,480 sq. ft. floor area of the existing dwelling, is four spaces [Table 7.1, LODS 7.020]. These spaces may not be located in a required yard [LODS 7.020(1)(c)(i)]. The site now provides two off-street parking spaces'. The applicant proposes to provide two off-street parking spaces in the front yard of the site, approximately 10 feet from the front property line of the site. This proposed location does not comply with the requirements of the standard. The two spaces proposed are deficient of the four spaces required for the proposed use. This standard is not satisfied by the applicant's proposal. Park and Open Space (LODS 8.005 -8.040) According to an interpretation of City staff, a school use is considered to be a commercial use for the purpose of applying the standard. As such, the required landscaping may be also be attributed toward the open space requirement, discussed below. This standard requires that commercial development provide a minimum of 15 • percent of the gross site area in open space. Following construction of the dwelling on the site, approximately 84 percent of the site remains in landscaping and open space. The standard is satisfied as a result. Landscaping, Screening and Buffering (LODS 9.005 - 9.040) This standard requires a school, which is treated as a commercial use, to provide a minimum of 15 percent of the net buildable area in landscaping. The standard is met by the 84 percent of the site which is in landscaping (or open space) following construction of the existing dwelling. The applicants propose to add landscaping along the west property line of the site (Exhibit 8), inside an additional length of fence in that vicinity. Although the installation of additional landscaping is indicated, the applicants have not specified the types and sizes of plants proposed. A final landscaping plan will be required as a condition of this action, if approved. Drainage For Major Development (LODS 11.005- 11.040) This standard requires that drainage alterations resulting from development not adversely affect neighboring properties. In addition, the standard requires 5 The dwelling provides two spaces in the garage,which satisfy the requirement of the residential use of the structure,but do not qualify as required parking for a school [LODS 7.020(1)(a)]. LU 00-0072 Page 14 of 20 that storm water generated from major development be detained as outlined in • the standard, and that excessive amounts of phosphorus be removed from the storm runoff before it is returned to a natural source. A conditional use is major development by classification, not necessarily by function. Minor drainage alterations are necessary in order to relocate two parking spaces from in front of the existing garage to a location near the front property line, as requested in the current application. The approximately 1,176 sq. ft. increase in surface area does not merit construction of a detention facility6. These alterations are minor in scope, but must be designed by a competent professional, to the satisfaction of the Building Official. This will be required as a condition of this action, if approved. Weak Foundation Soils (LODS 13.005 - 13.040) This standard requires a soils report be submitted to address construction of structures on soils identified as "weak foundation soils". The northerly 25 percent of the site is illustrated as having weak foundation soils. Given that the applicants' proposal does not involve the construction of a structure in the area of the weak soils, a soils report is not necessary. This standard is satisfied as a result. Utility Standard (LODS 14.005 - 14.040) This standard requires the construction of streets or street improvements as necessary to serve a proposed development. While the applicants do not propose any structural improvements that would require the construction of a new street, the proposed school use would have an impact upon the transportation system. The applicants have not submitted a traffic study, as required by a Plan policy [Transportation Policies, Goal 4, Policy 4]. Instead, they have relied on the observations of the Engineering Division staff in this regard (Exhibits 14 and 23). Staff agrees that the 24 additional vehicle trips (i.e., not including those of the applicants, in order to arrive at, and depart from the site each day) will not significantly affect the capacity of Douglas Way (Exhibit 23). This standard is satisfied. Access Standard (LOBS 18.005- 18.040) This standard requires that every lot abut a street for a minimum of 25 feet, and that current and projected traffic impacts be taken into account when evaluating proposed development. • 6 Water quality treatment and storm water detention facilities are required for projects which provide over 6,060 sq.ft. of additional impervious surfaces. LU 00-0072 Page 15 of 20 A traffic study has not been submitted; instead, the applicants have relied upon observations of staff during a preapplication conference. • As noted above,while staff agrees that the 24 additional vehicle trips (i.e., not including those of the applicants, in order to arrive at, and depart from the site each day) will not significantly affect the capacity of Douglas Way, the efficiency and safety of vehicle movement from Douglas Way through the site and back onto Douglas Way has not been proven. In addition, sufficient off- street parking has not been provided by the proposal. The conclusions reached by staff are sufficient to address the impact of traffic generated by the proposed school use. This standard is satisfied. On-site Circulation - Driveways and Fire Access Roads (LOPS 19.005 - 19.040) This standard requires that driveways not exceed a 15 percent grade (for commercial uses), nor a five-percent cross-slope. The site is gently sloping, draining southeasterly. While the applicant proposes additional paving improvements, this paving can easily comply with these grade limitations. Driveway and parking surfaces are required to be paved [LODS 19.025(1) and LODS 19.015(9)]. The gravel improvements proposed by the applicants will not satisfy this standard. Compliance with required materials will be required as a condition of this action, if approved. The standard does not require continuous, forward flow of vehicles for schools of fewer than 25 students [LODS 19.020(6)(a)]. Staff has correctly noted (Exhibit 23) that efficient on-site circulation may not be achieved through the use of a loop drive (i.e., with two driveway approaches on Douglas Way) on lots of less than 75 feet of frontage [LODS 19.020(1)(c)]. This standard is not fully satisfied by the applicants' proposal. On-site Circulation—Bikeways,Walkways and Accessways (LODS 20.005 - 20.040) This standard requires that development proposals involving the construction of a structure provide bikeways, walkways or accessways achieving connectivity. The applicants' proposal does not include the construction of any structures;therefore, this standard is not applicable. d. Any additional statutory, regulatory or Lake Oswego Code provisions which may be applicable to the specific minor development application. System Development Charges (LOC Chapter 39) These provisions require payment of systems development charges for utilities and transportation, when an increase in the intensity of an existing use is • LU 00-0072 Page 16 of 20 proposed. The standard defines "development", which is subject to fee . payment, as including"...making a physical change in the use or appearance of a structure or land...". As such, the applicants' proposed increase in the intensity of the use of the existing structure (i.e., school use) will require payment of the SDC charges. This will be required as a condition of this action, if approved. Fences (LOC Chapter 45.15) This ordinance requires that fences abutting a public right-of-way not exceed four feet,though elsewhere they may be up to six feet tall. Clear vision areas are more restrictive. Existing fencing on the site complies with these requirements. The applicants propose to install additional fencing along the west property line of the site. Compliance with the requirements regarding fences will be required as a condition of this action, if approved. Signs (LOC Chapter 47) The provisions of the Sign Code enable the placement of a monument sign of up to 32 sq. ft. in area along the frontage of the site, subject to further requirements of the Code regarding design, compatibility with adjacent signs, height, construction and illumination. The applicants have not proposed any signs as a part of this application. However, subsequent signage, if proposed, will be subject to the applicable provisions of the Sign Code in effect at that time. A approved sign permit is required in order to install such signage. Trees (LOC Chapter 55) There are 25 trees on the site. Four specimen Douglas-fir trees are located in the front yard (Exhibit 7). Although none of these trees are proposed to be removed,driveway and parking improvements as proposed, or those needed to fully comply with related Code requirements, could have a significant impact on the trees. The applicants have submitted an arborist report(Exhibit 12)which states that no grading should occur within 12 feet of the 20-inch Douglas-fir tree proposed to be surrounded by pavement. An additional arborist report was submitted (Exhibit 13),but is less specific in its recommendations. The proposed on-site circulation is within two feet the 20-inch Douglas-fir tree (east), far closer than recommended setbacks by the arborist in Exhibit 12. The design is therefore not acceptable and should not be approved as submitted. • LU 00-0072 Page 17 of 20 IV. CONCLUSION Based upon the material submitted by the applicants and the findings presented in this • report, staff concludes that the proposal does not comply with the applicable criteria, and can not be made to do so through the imposition of certain conditions. Approval of this application for Conditional Use Permit would result in an adverse impact on the site in the form of vehicular circulation and tree protection. While the applicants may be able to design a circulation system and parking layout that enables safe delivery of enrolled students, and four required off-street parking spaces, that design has not been presented here. Such design must also assure that a minimum of 12 feet of separation, as recommended by the consulting arborist, is maintained from the trunk of existing specimen trees to the proposed pavement surface or zone of construction impact. In the alternative,the applicants must provide an addendum to the arborist report which recommends measures necessary to assure the survival of these trees at a lesser distance. A drainage plan must also be submitted. V. RECOMMENDATION Based upon the conclusion noted above, staff recommends denial of LU 00-0072. However, in the event that the applicants' present materials described above to the satisfaction of the Development Review Commission, staff recommends that at a • minimum, the following conditions be attached to any approval: A. Prior to the Occupancy of the Structure as a School, the Applicant/Owner Shall: 1. Provide an application for, and receive approval of, a grading/plumbing permit for required storm drainage, parking and circulation improvements, prepared by an appropriate professional, to the satisfaction of the Building Official. 2. Provide a signed nonremonstrance agreement for participation in a future local improvement district(LID) for future street improvements to Douglas Way for street light improvements. This agreement shall be binding upon subsequent owners of the site and will be recorded by the City. 3. Provide a final tree protection or removal plan, and if necessary, apply for Tree Removal permits in accordance with LOC Chapter 55, illustrating the following: a) Remove only those inventoried trees necessary to site approved parking lot improvements on the site. This removal shall comply with LOC 55.02.050— 55.02.080 (Tree Removal Ordinance). An • approved Tree Removal Permit shall be secured from the City of LU 00-0072 Page 18 of 20 0 Lake Oswego prior to such removal. Mitigation shall be provided at a rate of 1:1 for those trees that are removed, consisting of coniferous trees that shall be a minimum of 6- to 8-feet tall (not including the leader) at installation; or deciduous trees that shall be a minimum of 2-inch caliper; and, b) The location of minimum 6-foot-tall chain-link tree protective fencing below the drip-line of the trees proposed to remain on the site. 4. Pay any System Development Charges (SDCs) required by the Lake Oswego Code. Such charges include, but are not limited to sanitary sewer, water, parks, storm water management and transportation. B. Prior to Commencement of any On-Site Grading or Plumbing Installation, the Applicants/Owners Shall: 1. Install the tree protection fencing required by Condition A(3)(b), above. C. As a Miscellaneous Conditions the Applicants/Owners Shall Note: 1. Any fencing installed on the site shall comply with the provision of LOC 45.15.005—45.15.035. III 2. The permit or approval granted hereby, or any inspections conducted on the site hereafter, shall not be construed as authorizing any activity in violation of any applicable federal or state law or regulation, including but not limited to the federal Endangered Species Act and its regulations. III LU 00-0072 Page 19 of 20 EXHIBITS 110 1. Tax map 2. Vicinity map 3. Application form; dated July 24,2000 4. Applicants' narrative; dated July 23, 2000 5. Narrative addendum; dated September 6, 2000 6. Statutory warranty deed, R. Marvin to S. and D. Baird; dated March 29, 2000 7. Drawing: Site map, by Thurston and Associates; dated August 25, 2000 8. Drawing: Parking plan; dated September 6, 2000 9. Fire and Life Safety Inspection report; dated August 25, 2000 10. Letter from R. Campbell; dated August 24,200 11. Letter from L. and P. Baker; dated August 25, 2000 12. Construction evaluation, by C. T. Morine; not dated 13. Arborist report, by M. Bruno; not dated 14. Narrative addendum; dated September 23, 2000 15. Petitions(3); not dated 16. Letter to Waluga Neighborhood Association from S. Baird; dated September 23, 2000 17. Letter from D. Baird; dated September 24,2000 18. Neighborhood meeting materials; various dates 19. Letter from D. Baird; dated July 22, 2000 20. Letter from R. Hall and J.Novak; dated September 8, 2000 21. Plat of Lake Grove Acreage Estates (portion); not dated • 22. Letter from R. Hall; dated August 3, 2000 23. Memorandum from R. Chevrette; dated August 11, 2000 24. Photographs (4); not dated 25. Drawing: As-built of Douglas Way (portion); not dated 26. Aerial photo; not dated 27. Building permit and inspection record, BP 144-78; dated May 8, 1978 Application Submitted: July 24, 2000 Application Determined Complete: October 9, 2000 End of 120 Period: February 6, 2001 [1:\mike_w\workspac\reports\I u000072\001020r0.doc1 • LU 00-0072 Page 20 of 20 {' n III r ia° a . 1 • • i 61 •lo.icu 7000 h M \� F, i, �� 4181. .$ii.VS.J677 in 4315 r ` /i J4 � o b r 4 ! 9400 rrd - 0 a-_--,.-3•�3—.sf' ' fA:7_ -fly+ �i —�.'n 3 -_-00 ;3 a� —31 — 30__ r 4 a ••"ase>•r COLLINS WAY /0\ VACATED — 10600 "" ^ 60 5 ba — H 017D. N0. 1966 Q / . 0 e' — 7 v—d--- d--_93- 6J — .fw mvL uY _.,._-._ .__ — a h 437a • 10500 10400 10300 10200 10100 100000 99001 1 99011L 9800�3,& 14 f5 -`16 ►-- I 1 4362 4342 4322 4300 4290 4260 4230 4200 4190 4 9700 I 141 00 ' 0 10700 7 M �, W 15444 4 a 6 ; g I �: b I • n ce- + N, 4 2 3 4 N • ao- ¢J. 6p' `0• LO— I0600 � _ , h 15488 11000 11100 11200 11300 11400 11500 11600 11700 11800 11900 12000 \'' !� 4311 4281 4263 4235 4207 4179 4151 4123 n. v- 3 I p; 10900 �' h • h i) h i, u o) •o Z 1380 h `` r r-" M `� 'a �' ,! h h 4 �� w --�; Q 9 38 ti°• 37 ::.0• 36 �• 35 ,,°• 39. so- 33 p,. 32 �•�cv ,� I 6��• 30 s' 2 9 x r,2 8+ ``' DOUGLAS �: — .moo r • 14 000 so' Ja• o o - ar,- �a-v 9 0 o:r•.5- 0� �� 10 I I 12 1 3l 141 60 151 �''16 s° 17 su 18 so =wo ao. 13900 13 00 13400 I 19 201 21 m; $ 4380 4320Is 4200 13200 13 4040 . 14100 I '„ v 15550 ;,,. , • \ i Op n 1I �0.Iit i ' 14Z00 _ 0)1 �I2 v o M EL �� arm I I I 2 3 b pJ pJ a°. ;q14300 14600 ,1-,.,-L. . . '.,';'‘,»>>'0,•,s1, ‘,.,• .�,,, w; n 15460 14700 rov'. 4. .�. s�.� v iv, 4301 6.20Ac. v I 7 o = 14400 , Q ET,. .... 2 1 f.)-1 1 ,, . . ,/ r.„, N I o.r �p •• r,J n, , •y�> y� Q.,ti 414500 M 4343 t, , 4 a LOT '3 31.50 T 2 S R 1 E '` 'a 9i. i NEXT MAP PAGE 10� W .� , - 61-82 E 3 r4 W R— O I 7 £EtNG eID7 CF - l' 'YRU KRUSE 4000 -,r = S O f SAVED] J p ID7NG 2 = . R-3 c _ 14tl61 0 W Q GC/Rh o -, T1T[N IR KRusE ZONING ATLAS way y r,1 t v R\ $ / I4967 X`�` `ii \ ARNESON WILDING / �/OC ttq 4 r E.tUV I 1 11 o / '250 1✓qy / CF a u� 13003I 15001. Mt/ - 6/2 5/9 8 GALEvaaD ( —f ` ' LANE y ISM 13L25 — 15I121 0 +• i'u u . iu I YA NINGTW % 36p0 �t,1 15043 ` I e P NImI a Ivn _ ' - T m 7 a5y 's�pp ,xA1.1 t]13, BRDQK 15139 i 1SLG`. m I- 'N r LARMRA SUE SEAL 'tie na 13744 y`b5 CT,13147 _S11° I492C -_ 4 a' Sy�.�,di °/ Ate° ^ a101 MERCANTILE - in / Ilea 115180 1[/NG. MO , 35133 lC_.' 5 �,,y� 4.. a2601 -04'. MEDICAL� ST.VMCENT ,S�1p �aR t� -II1 15273 15260 �o Q e 6m\ T 'O 5 $ Y Y S G'r� arg / i / W Id uV. L5290I` ' �I� WIN n'�I=iiA GC �� � y " "N'� I��X a.] 1527' t5700 �•o i.uQ.�. - / J' 9 FURVEY VAY 18 C1 1 ' iN T oo Ia H 49„t • C R-3 ..1. N + Is.iwo :80 cILIN I - TP♦.1,5 I ro - - c =I� 155a 2. .CALIF I`S WAY �F.+/• p WALUGA t3)B I N a o $ LS,55 548: 15,80 r m P - . u u , —t N N 13 a Q N 15"' 1SiB3 RED CEDAR \ \ it I WAY 2 1548e 11 I` . ji. I155d: " m :Sd767600/) J II,,, .7� '�'T c'!`P -1"2 u 1. I:o,.° u a F u� lz. .: 5540 ICINDi m D,.,��— l I`rob I \ .\ ,•` PART{ .I • VAY :3560 CARE isa `9 ^/'°`1I'�� a 3129 .7. °380 u > ' I t5572 CENTER 9i �4,is,B,, ) + 5,- 'l " 15533 I_550 m $ a 156/5 9 SC103OL u °j� 313 ��� ���sss 5�59 13600 - a 9°I g1°'S �..�° 3136 _ 5ITa �..r� DISTRICT SHOP W `1 r 1565G VA SHOP 15630 ' 'I N ,:9�° 5.0 X ry 1 N w 3:<0 � VA SHGP � LAKE GROVE LANE DOD 316C ,'1"' ' ELEMENTARY 15777 ; !ill q E 157i6® Isr,® { �tuu: NFASI F WA, SCHOOL t$700 = 6 : J ;� — LAKE GROVE 3.p - 1 ^' .n 19751 G C/R O :5780 15749 -"'g rS� CHRLSTIAN 15750 15790 MARKET 3ji y 1gT Sp 15794 S C . JNes Ha 0 \ GNRCM 15760 3777 IIVIS 4N I? sG 3320 / X .`:E 1502f�. +� E �'•S$ ,,,�pp9 -Pwil I' __ . W GR17VE 'ABjs'4S QV' $MDN TAY k 333 732: 0 LAKE ps Z ;5830 A ,POST PRq!'.1I A `, SEC. J !11 H s kr, GE `�9k�r \T1R _' 3563!..-i N p _ ur- � um '� �3 4 :y, 9� � '"� �f J 4 - J AG j N I P �N p.� v- 1 �- IY STCIdK7" c'� Q�' S N N N 9 IA El b ' a ....!...7,-4.-,4i 1.-• ft.' I- 4 #"V---4'-*-SA . 0*,„ ,.?,..„ 3740 tl:♦ J 1i/,t16031 , u t .1/011) J0 1G T J JJ Pits" aEGON o a / _ tb , 715 3595 y J �' '` ^''o J ,.„ taeS `eALLERTSONS % �, ♦ m ?a y�y R 5 .S ��5 G% ,ZSl!'�Gt N N ®® 'f5�� GEOGRAPHICit I NF0RMATION P o , °z AllI'� 62`' � � `� W SYSTEM ;�� 16210 �� 0 4, •J‘C� ce GOEa,e1 J� % , �P F t \ ‘,/,ittIt. '- OF ;1 t// % % , ' 1.I; 10 , ,:f4 V\II 11. '....--.\\.\ *141;1• 1'V _ . +,`' C „ 16400 � 'J i 'b\ \ � \ � 0 500' z, 's \ \ �a .51111114,*Ai ,--_ ENEMA MEM 0 t..1 '1' t101, . CI ...'.4 \ 6, _ =: ' \N _9 ® �60 ,b _-MAP l' = 500' o \ '1 \ E G < _.,..., Nf%' ,I • d .i16626\ !arN� �-� Fie .2.73 n S -\f\I 2 N Ni i dE5 - \JN N ia�®_ -' . j ann g145 7 J `' 'r� ' 66- '' .173 EXHIBIT 2 ,, �i x P \ z▪ '6., �r 3,e Y 6 3 Ti.. LU 00-0072 / 7 � T, �` LAKE Ojk,! LAND USE APPLICATION File No. LU 00- Y �,,�,,�, OWNER RQII'C/ * APPLICANT NAME Ce5ii .� �" e.Ve NAME (DM [ COMPANY // COMPANY ADDRESS7(92 luke cC9tegr C1I`' ADDRESS CITY • 0. STATE(2rZIP Q7034 CITY STATE ZIP PHONE (.5-0.3".636 52 20 PHONE DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY TOTAL PROPERTY M STREET ADDRES 'Xt�' 1 11 M• ' ' _i . r we. orf/1 TAX MAP.2 :' C TAX L•TS(S) .r• OT SIZE !, Or (Acre q.Ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION, METES AND BOUNDS (ATTACH COPY) PLAT NAME LOT BLOCK PROPERTY OWNERSHIP LIST If necessary,attach a list of the names and addresses of the owners and renters of properties located within 300* feet of the subject property. Lists of property owners may be obtained from any title insurance company or from the County Assessor. If the property ownership list is incomplete, this may be cause for postponing the hearing or administrative decision. (*Note: Special requirements apply in certain areas) USE EXISTING PROPOSED. no Chou e S EXISTING STRUCTURE(S) �l y1 1� 4204 1, how.e / f/or / 6122.-R1) eOJECT DESCRIPTION t oProf, vide Conks c e zieab'e,fri -iv& 12 fwe% ,f7Let aeui * 7o h.c Wisedflop), tic feed 71-0 k«i e (f220 (2)oce5y l&s tVety. f cf ev ' ease w ZONING/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIIGNATION Ih,a/ o,.may �y NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION Walla b'e N /J( gge. PREVIOUS ACTION Care 4Ile J,/9OD-" ie-2 H E " L '`"- i 3` I consent to an on-sitee inspection by an employee(s)of the City of Lake Oswego. [ Date 7-2 ( ---2DQ,Property Owner's Signature y(�7 (_'•Y OF LC;.r_ OSW -'_.` Dept.ofPtanntri:; ( „ucstnni Date Property Owner's Signature *If the applicant is not the property owner, applicant must attach documentary evidence of his authority to act as agent in making application. DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE 1 Pre App Date 6`o7�ZQJ DRC or PC Final Action Receipt No. Admin Decision I Coordinator ceived By 51- I Date Received 7/d.y/ov . Completeness Check Wier I l q 7 1 "? File Type See Reverse Side EXHIBIT 3 LU 00-0072 CO 3 S S r�o� • tixa cf=-, 4 .. �..er .. 4111 The Request i !° Dort.o To issue a Conditional Use Permit to excuse the owner/operator of a group home from the requirement to live at the home. Introduction I am Doris Baird, a resident of Lake Oswego for over 12 years. I am married and have a daughter who has just graduated from Lake Oswego Junior High. I am a certified Montessori Teacher. History In May of this year, I purchased a house located at 4320 Douglas Way in Lake Oswego with the intention of using the property as a group home for a small number of pre-school age children to provide Montessori instruction. Prior to the transaction, the Realtor informed me that the only limitation to my plans was the total number of children (12) that could be enrolled. I understood that he had spoken with the Planning Department. He was told that if more than 12 children were to be enrolled, a Conditional Use Permit would be required. I proceeded to invest approximately $15,000 in learning materials to prepare it for use as a • group home in September. I had no intention of enrolling more than 12 children, so I did not anticipate the need for a Conditional Use Permit. During the process of licensing through Children's Services Division, I was informed that I would have to live in the house in order to offer group home services to be in compliance with the City of Lake Oswego. Since I am presently very happy in my home with my family, I started to seek a solution to this problem. I do not want to leave my home and family and reside on Douglas Way to be able to provide Montessori education to children. After discussions with the Planning Department, application and granting a Conditional Use Permit was determined to be necessary for compliance. The Property The property is bordered on the east side by the maintenance yard for the Lake Oswego School District. In addition to the metal sheds, approximately 6 trucks are parked with their exhaust pipes facing my property. The way the trucks are parked creates a noise problem for permanent residents. The property is bordered on the south side by the bus parking lot for the Lake Oswego School District. Again, I would like to bring awareness to the noise factor relating to the vehicles are parked. A single family home borders the property on the west side. I have talked to my neighbors • about my intended use of the property and have made plans to install (at my cost) a decorative EXHIBIT 4 LU 00-0072 n05 fence to insure their privacy and enhance the value of their home, They are supportive of my plans, • Prior to my purchase of the property, it was used as a rental. I understand that because of the atmosphere created by the two bordering industrial properties, the tenants did not exhibit pride in the property nor were beneficial to the neighborhood and community. The prior owner had to perform extensive repairs to the property because of damage by the tenants. I spent almost a month cleaning up the backyard and found numerous "unusual" objects such as a BB gun and various types of arrowheads and ammunition. The property is clearly questionable when used as a residence. I believe the highest and best use for the property as well as providing the most positive impact for the immediate property owners would be use as a children's group home without requiring an owner to live in the home with the associated negative aspects. The building would serve as a buffer property — appearing as a home without having residential occupants. I believe that the Neighborhood Association is concerned about the quality of life for it's members and my intended use would provide a substantial benefit by removal of the property as an undesirable residence. Intended Usage and Need for a Conditional Use Permit I intend to create a home like atmosphere for a small group of children, following Montessori principals and practices. Following the Montessori guidelines require me to keep the property • appearance as a home — not a commercial building. This would benefit the neighborhood in that it would remain a residential property. The group home would have programs starting at 8:30 and ending at 4:00 with children present shortly before and afterward. The home is not used during the summer months, or on weekends. We would operate concurrently with the Lake Oswego School District schedule. There is no need for my presence at Douglas Way when there are no children in attendance. I have a residence that I share with my family and it would be not only unnecessary, but a personal hardship to be required to live at the group home. From my review of the LOC codes, I believe I am in complete compliance. Benefits From Granting the Conditional Use Permit • The property will not be placed on the market as an undesirable rental home. • There would be less traffic if I did not have to reside at the property — my family would not need to visit during the evening hours, weekends or summer. • Lake Oswego would have a high quality Montessori environment in a traditional environment. • co 1 • I believe that my Montessori environment would serve siblings of students attending Lake Grove Elementary School, located on the same block and will most likely arrive in the same cars, at the same time. • The property would serve as a buffer between an Industrial use property and a residential property. • There would be no issues regarding the noise impact on residents of the property, since the property would be unoccupied during the times when the trucks and busses are starting their engines. • The City would allow the property to be used for a Montessori School without a Conditional Use Permit, if I lived there — any impact such as traffic concerns or suitable use have already been addressed. The only real issue is my living at the property. • h hq nos Thurston & Associates, Inc. 415 N. State Street,Suite 134 Lake Oswego,OR 97034 Phone (503)697-0757 Fax(503)699-5556 6 September,2000 • Application For Conditional Use Proposed Montessori School @ 4320 Douglas Way . Case File #PA00-0042 (Village Montessori, Inc.) Tax Map 2 1E 8BC, Tax Lot 13800 Staff Coordinator: Michael R Wheeler Applicant: Doris Baird •c `i OF LAME OSWEGO Dept.of Planning&Development • EXHIBIT 5 LU 00-0072 INDEX S 1. Narrative and response to 14 August, 2000 from Hamid Pishvaie, Development Review Manager, 2. Attachment"A" Site Map 3. Attachment"B" Parking &Landscape Plan 4. Attachment"C" City Fire, reserve&Life Safety Inspection Report 5. Attachments "D" & "E" Letters from neighbors 6_ Attachment"F" & "G" Arborist Reports • S ()I0 Narrative and Response Review: The pre-application review was held on 29 June, 2000. The original application submitted 24 July, 2000. The original application was determined to be incomplete 14 August, 2000. The following narrative and Exhibits are •presented to address the concerns and regulations cited in Mr. :iamid Pishvaie's 14 August, 2000 letter to Ms Baird. The primary concerns appear to be the site circulation (student drop-off and pickup) and whether the owner lives at the site. Narrative: Comprehensive Plan Policies: Goal 1- Citizen Involvement. The requirements of this Goal have been met. The documents of notice, posting and meeting minutes are in the case file. Goal 2- Land Use. Section 1: Land Use Policies 2.1-4 1) The site is currently served by all the necessary facilities. No changes in the size of the current building or new structures are proposed. 2) No additional or enhanced public facilities or services will be required. 3) Approval of this application will follow the applicable City Land Use Regulations and Codes. 10) The proposed use will not change the designated density. Adequate services are now in place and no development is proposed. 22) The subject property is bordered by a school maintenance facility and school district bus-barn. A grade school is on the same street close by. These facilities are adjacent to residential properties which makes the current neighborhood a mix of uses. 24) The potential negative impacts of this application have been identified and will be addressed in the pertinent sections of the Development Standards. 25) The proposed use will be shown to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and Codes by the following data. 26) See Goal 1-Citizen Involvement. Section 2: Community Design 2.2-1 2) No new buildings are proposed. A general site plan (Attached "A")has been prepared to show the building location, lot size and trees. A detailed plan (Attachment`B") shows the proposed changes to the driveway and added parking spaces. Goal 5- Open Space, Scenic, Historic, Natural Resources Section 2: Vegetation 5.2-3 1) No change in the existing vegetation,trees, etc. is proposed except a reduction in the lawn area. 3) No tree removal is proposed. 6) No change in the landscaping is required by this proposed however some additional landscaping is proposed as shown on Attachment`B". 7) The property is bordered on the East side by the Lake Oswego School District maintenance yard, on the South side by the School District bus parking and on the West side by a residence. The applicant plans to install privacy fence to screen the residential property to the West. (see Attachment "B") 8) This site will remain for all practical purposes a single family residence;therefore the development requirements would not apply. 9) No tree removal is proposed. 10) Landscaping will be maintained to be compatible with the surrounding residential properties. 14) All of the existing vegetation except for a minimal area of lawn will be maintained and protected. Case File#PA00-0042 (Village Montessori, Inc_) Goal 6- Air,Water, Land Resource Quality Section 2: Water Resource Quality 6.2-3 5) The only development proposed is the construction of additional parking (Attachment `B"). Silt fences and bio-bags will be used to mitigate runoff during construction. Landscaping will be resto upon completion of construction. A gravel blanket is proposed for the parking pad to reduce runoff and encourage rainfall to return into the soil. Section 4: Sound Quality 6.4-2 4) The proposed Montessori School operation will not adversely contribute to the ambient day time noise levels. The neighboring land uses, i. e. the school district bus barn, maintenance facility, grade school play ground and normal street traffic contribute far more noise than the proposed used. 5) Noise levels from the proposed land use should not require buffering. The maximum number of students is 12. No children would be present between the hours of 5:00 PM and 7:30 AM. The school would not operate weekends or summer months 6) Only a minimal amount of short term construction is anticipated. 7) The only noise anticipated from the proposed use would be children 3-6 years old playing outside. The outside play is expected only for short periods; weekday, weather permitting. The nearby school yard and maintenance yard would produce more noise. Goal 7- Natural Disasters and Hazards Section 3: Landslide, Erosion, Unstable Soils 7.3-3 2) No increase of land use intensity is proposed. 5) See Goal 6, Section 2, Paragraph 3 8) No change or addition to the existing building is proposed. The site is nearly level. 10) No new development is proposed. Goal 11- Public Facilities and Services • Section 1: Public Safety 11) The City of Lake Oswego Uniform Fire Code requirement will be met(see report Attachment "C"). Section 2: Storm Water Management 11.2-2 6) No change in storm runoff is anticipated. See Attachment "B"which recommends the use of permeable gravel in the parking areas. 9) No new drainage improvements are necessary. Section 3: Water Treatment and Delivery 11.3-4 4) Existing fire hydrants are available. 9) Existing water service is in place. 10) Does not apply to this application. Section 4: Waste Water Treatment 11.4-5 1) No new service is required and no service extension is necessary. 2) The existing property is connected to the city system. 7) No harmful wastes are anticipated. Goal 12- Transportation Subgoal 3: Neighborhood collectors, Local Residential Streets 12-8 4) A memorandum from Russ Chevrette of the City's Engineering Division states: "Regarding traffic impact, up to 12 arrivals and 12 departures in the morning and afternoon peak hours would not have a significant impact on the capacity of the local streets and intersections". The temporary parking will be handled by the driveway improvement shown on Attachment "B". 9) The revision of the existing driveway and the on site parking is detailed in Attachment `B". 10) The existing building, parking area and garage are on the same level. No modification for the disabled use is necessary. ()I`� Case File#PA00-0042 (Village Montessori, Inc.) Subgoal 11: Parking Policies 12-20 • 2) The parking adjustment required is two (2) additional spaces. The total floor area less the two car garage is 1,480 sq. ft. 1,480 sq. ft. X 2.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. =3.7 spaces. Parking spaces: 2 in the Garage plus 2 off driveway for 4 total spaces. Zoning Goal Requirements R-7S Zoning Code 48.06.195 The existing structure complies with the one single family dwelling. Group care and family day care facilities are permitted. 48.06.210 The existing Lot area is 11,610 sq. ft.. Set backs: Front yard=57 ft. Back yard= 81 ft.. 48.06.220 The existing structure complies with the 28 foot height for a flat lot. 48.06.225 Lot coverage is 17 %. Specific Standards for Schools 48.22.575 2. The fenced outdoor play area=3.090 sq. ft. (3090 sq. ft. _75 =41) Proposed maximum enrollment is 12 students. 3. A combined walkway/bike-path fronts the property. This facility is used by children going to and from Lake Grove School. 4. The proposed play area has sight obscuring fences on all but the South side. The South side can be modified to be sight obscuring. 5. Adequate public services are available to the site. 6. Safe loading and unloading can be provided on the site. Development Standards Public Standards • 2.020 1-6. Building Standards: No new buildings are proposed. 5.020 1-3. Street Lights: Existing street lighting is adequate. 6.020 1. Transit System: Does nat apply to this proposal. 7.020 1-9. Off Street Parking, Loading and Bicycle Access: l.a No storage of vehicles or materials is proposed. .b i. See Subgoal 11: Parking Policies 12-20 iii. The structure is at ground level and currently accessible for handicapped. .f The minimum dimension parking space for residential will be used. .g See parking/turnaround design Attachment"B" 8.020 for 2 Park& Open Space: The proposed use for the subject residential property does not constitute a major residential development or office campus development. 9.020 1-8. Landscaping, Screening and buffering: 6.b Screening will be provided. 9. Screening will be provided. 9.025 1-10 Landscaping, Screening and buffering: 3. Existing landscaping will remain. Irrigation should not be required. 4. The proposed additional parking will minimally encroach on the drip line areas of two fir trees. The construction is to be permeable gravel at existing grade. 11.020-11.040 Drainage for Major Development: This proposal is not a major development. 13.020-13.040 Weak foundation soils: No structure construction is proposed. 14.020-14.040 Utilities: No utility installation is required. 18.020-18.040 Access: Current and proposed access will meet all requirements for the zone and use proposed. • 19.020-19.025 On site circulation-Driveways and Fire Access Roads: The existing access meets the requirement of this standard section. The driveway will not serve as a fire access road. 20.020-20.030 Circulation-Bikeways,Walkways and Accessways: Walkways will meet the requirements of this standard section. ()13 ova '( RECORDING REQUESTED BY RECORDED IN CLACKAMAS COUNTY �0V0'��L��{j FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE COMPANY OF OREGON JOHN KAUFFMAN, COUNTY CLERK �� GRANTOR'S NAME II - l- Roy Marvin ll1ll1 fII lll IIIIII1IIIIIIIIIll $31.0@ 30920000022126002 ANTEE'S NAME 04/0611@0@ 03:49:52 DM :). eve Baird and Doris Baird D D - 1 - 3 AMIEE S10.00 S11.00 $10.00 SEND TAX STATEMENTS TO: Mr. and Mrs. Steve Baird 762 Lake Forest Dr. Lake Oswego, OR 97034 AFTER RECORDING RETURN TO: Mr. and Mrs. Steve Baird 762 Lake Forest Dr. Lake Oswego, OR 97034 SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE �v -.A.:-, STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Roy Marvin, Grantor, conveys and warrants to _T v Steve Baird and Doris Baird as tenants by the entirety, Grantee,the following described real property, free and clear ' of encumbrances except as specifically set forth below, situated in the County of Clackamas, State of Oregon, Lot 11, Block 2, Lake Grove Acreage Estates, in the City of Lake Oswego, Clackamas County, Oregon Subject to and excepting: see exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. ± IS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF ' LICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT THE SON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES AND TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930. THE TRUE AND ACTUAL CONSIDERATION FOR THIS CONVEYANCE IS $163,000.00 (See ORS 93.030i DATED: March 29, 2000 i/./..L�te- ___ Roy-hol'm f.r-_ OFFICIAL SEAL EVA ZIEMBA . .4 . NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON ' A COMMISSION NO.056422 ®"'� MY CEMMiSSItN EXPIIIES JULY tl,N1M STATE OF OREpON _ COUNTY OF `,, /� - /� This instrument was acknowledged before me on f7' _may . /Lc- - � G.� t:e---i- L i -_ 0 ARY PUBLIC FOR OREGON /J „r:7- ,- COMt*t SSION EXPIRES: I/ ' "l 4..-(, EXHIBIT 6 LU 00-0072 FORD-313 (Rev 2/96) STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED 015 • • (�l to Case File # PAOO-0042 (Villacie Montessori, Inc.) ATTACHEMENT A" Site Map of Lot II, Block 2, Lake Grove Acrea e Estates Fnd. 5/8" IR w/ YPC Sec. S, T.2S., RIE., NM Fnd. 5/8" IR no cap aLs 486" •S89 '33'58"E 60.10 ' o N89 '24 '15"E 60.23 ' i • Fnd. 5/8" IR w/ YPC "PLS 486" a s s Douglas Nay s 0,0 [S89 '45'E 60.00'1 201 3-8" Ash I I 10 II 1 i X 12 NOTES 20" Fir Coverage 16.56% 1 This site map does not constitute a boundary survey. Monuments shown as found. 36" Fir , X [ ] denotes Plat data. / " -1 — 30" Fir1 (4c — 1 4 6.4e . -, x Lfl r' V N O PO c-Uo mP �� CU Ncu 11J House 3 cU cu LEGEND Cn 4320 Douglas way (U 3 1922 sf v 0 Found Monument O. ft.) `1. pc) • 4, r, o o Power Pole z Z m I Deck © Deck 4.4' o �? 1 Guy Wire Scale 1" = 30' m Cr) 2-14" Oak m ® Telephone 3 2-18" and Xi ® Water Meter 1-10" Oak ® Manhole • 0 i� Lot Area 11610 sf Op Q Decidious Tree �15-10" Oak Z * Evergreen Tree .3-10" Oak m Sign Post 20" Fir 16" Cherry X Fence Line S Sewer Line 0 — — — - Edge AC/Concrete 0 12" Ash X 6" Ash 9" Ash • Xv- X S89 '45'00"E 60.16 ' Fnd. 1/2" IR [S89 '45 'E 60.00'] THURSTON /I ASSOCIATES, I NG. Held Basis of Bearing 415 N. STATE ST., SUITE 134 LAKE OSWEGO, Oil ci 1034 Fnd. 1/2" IR---} PHONE (503) bc1 1-O-15-1 • Held 25 Aug 2000 Job No. 00-122q-o03 EXHIBIT 7 LU 00-0072 ()` 0 • • Case File * F A0V 00 2 (Village Montessori, Inc.) r TTACHEMENT B" Forking Plan for Lot II, Block 2, in Lake drove Acreage Estates Sec. 8, T.25., R. E., VIM 00w CL Douglas Noy ROW CL 24' Driveway = In `5 ' Bike/Ped Path • . ' Bike/Ped Asphat P�ti \ 'do.IoAsphat - — — — — — — — — 1— -- — / _ ;s� — - / A tk 'New AC New AC 3-8" Ash ,Q� — I - - x S• — 16' l Existing I Rid 01 — 1 ,..,,,...1 .1. Space 1 I X Gravel or — 6.5' to — — — — — 1 I AC as required Parking Space j 1 I 4 Gravel 120" Fir X or 1 AC as required Rad l4' Pad 12` 1 1 \ X If' + 1 �4; 1 \ i" = 10'— * OP 1 Rad 36" Fir 17.5 1 X 1 Existing AC \ Proposed Landscape 1 h - \ I X Proposed Fence i 1 I \ I p. / \ — 1 30" Fir L — — — _ l i rage 1 _ . \ : / 4Ga40 s r 11:___________] 2 — Parking Spaces TH RSTON 4 ASSOGIA —,.,, 'NG, • 10 1 415 N. STATE 5T., SUITE 134 LAKE House �(50�3)647-OR 015 r 4320 Douglas way 6 Sap 2000 1480 sf ,lob No. 00-1224-003 EXHIBIT 8 LU 00-0072 fr hn'1C''ft- (- City of Lake Oswego FIRE & LIFE SAFETY J Fire, Rescue & Life Safety 7 INSPECTION P.O. Box 369, 300 "B" Ave. Notice of Order and Correction 1 4' Oswego, Oregon 97034 a 635-0275 (503) 635-0376 g REG INSPECTION E COURTESY INSPECTION CITY SECOND INSPECTION ❑ SPEC INSPECTION 0 DISTRICT ❑ FINAL NOTICE ❑ NEW CONSTRUCTION 0 REFERRED TO OSFM ❑ CLACKAMAS COUNTY ADULT FOSTER HOME INSPECTION Page .Lof 1 Business name: itiff� -r-tf d c�cse Date: tl2s7co, Address: .'/- O .QG�c�/ / City: fn, Phone: 43Ca-S-2.2O Zip: g20 y Occupancy Type: City of Lake Oswego Fire, Rescue and Life Safety is authorized to enforce laws and rules pertaining to fire and life safety n the Uniform Fire Code as directed in Oregon Revised Statute 476,479, and 480. Entry and inspection of the building(s) or premises was made in accordance with Oregon Revised Statute 476.070/150. Failure to correct the following fire safety deficiencies immediately may result in legal action as defined under Oregon Revised Statute 476.060. We will re-inspect for compliance in days. Deficiency(s) requiring correction and/or action g AI f • Inspected by: ( -/./b Presented to: AI6' 'T ,iti . 9) Distribution:White-Business Yellow-Other ink-File EXHIBIT 9 LU 00-0072 0�� o� ATTAChiMEn17 4311 Douglas Way • Lake Oswego, OR 97035 August 24, 2000 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I am a neighbor across the street from the proposed Village Montessori Pre- School and am writing in support of the school. The property in question has been a rental since 1986 when I purchased my house. As a rental it has never been maintained to quite the level of the surrounding homes. Steve and Doris Baird have made a commitment, both in terms of time and money, to substantially improve the property and to create an exterior appearance that blends into the neighborhood. I feel that the Village Montessori School will be a good neighbor for the following reasons: • Montessori schools are more controlled than regular day care and emphasize community living and good socialization skills. • The number of students will never exceed 12. • While traffic will be increased slightly, it will be during the day. Evenings and weekends will be undisturbed by teenage children • and their guests, parties at the house, or other problems often associated with rental property. • The Bairds are committed to maintaining the well-cared for homelike quality of the house. • The Bairds are committed to being good neighbors. They have made themselves and their plans for the property known to the neighbors and have sought comment. My only concern is for the fate of the property should the Bairds decide to sell it in the future. I would favor a condition that the permit be revoked at such time and any other conditional use be subject to an approval process similar to this one. Thank you for your careful attention to planning for the city of Lake Oswego and the concern for quality neighborhoods. Sincerely, Robin Campbell • EXHIBIT 10 LU 00-0072 oa3 A77ACliinENT "E " III 4348 Douglas Way Lake Oswego. OR 97035 August 25, 2000 To Whom It May Concern: • We are the next door neighbors of the proposed Montessori Pre-School and the residents most impacted by the use of the property. We concur with Robin Campbell's August 24, 2000, letter in support of the school. Steve and Doris Baird have already improved the property appearance beyond that of any of the renters in the last five years. We believe that the Bairds will be good and active members of our neighborhood.Their use of the property only during set business hours will make use of the property very compatible to the neighborhood residences. 111 Steve and Doris Baird have committed to never placing any form of commercial signage on the property. This assures us that the property will never advertise itself to be a school or business, but will always maintain the appearance of a neighborhood home. We share Ms. Campbell's concern for the fate of the property post the Baird's ownership. Their intended use of the property will enable the home-site to become a neighborhood asset. However, we could not be guaranteed of this continuing after their departure if any permits let now were not revoked or again carefully reviewed and re-approved at the time of property sale. Thank you for your careful attention to this unique request for usage of a neighborhood dwelling. Sincerely, 6i1;4and Patrice Baker III EXHIBIT 11 LU 00-0072 0(5 halo 4 FROM : VILLAGE MONTESSORI FAX NO. : 503 675 8565 Sep. 07 2000 09:15AM R1 . /4441.1„0,erijL " F „ 0 .7;-"E: j•klt; ii-,N:7_ 17-''.: CONSTRUCTION EVALUATION _ _ Doris Baird 4320 Douglas Way. Lake Oswego, OR. 97035 Regarding: 'Datigias.fir'free abuf rtig driveway, - This Doug fir is a mature tree, 18 to 20 inches in diameter, and perhaps 120 feet in height. The cone crop and new growth are both comparable to other trees in the area. There is a wound, roughly 6 inches by 18 inches, on the buttressing root closest to the house.The wound is 3 to 5 years old. The Doug fir has grown around the stump of a dead maple tree (?), which was perhaps 10 years old at its time of death. The root structure and buttress of the maple appear to extend deep into the center of the tree. IDProtecting the tree during construction; ✓ The soil, on either side of fhe driveway, must not be compacted. Stressful compaction could be caused by repetitive passes (more than 10 or 12) of a vehicle, heavier than 10 tons. ✓ The soil, on either side of fhe driveway, must not be suffocated. This could be caused by storage of loam or fill in excess of 5 yards for more than 2 days. ✓ When removing the old asphalt, the equipment operator must be aware of the root structure beneath the pavement. Some of the trees roots are going to be damaged during the process, but the fewer the better. When working within 10 feet of the tree it is especially important that damage be kept to a minimum. When Working within 5-feet of the tree it is critical that no root greater than 3 inches in diameter be severed. ✓ Once the old asphalt is gone it is OK to add material, and then to compress or grade the added fill. However the pre-existing soil should not be graded, and it must not be graded within 12 feet of the tree. ✓ Finally, it is important to minimize wounding to the above ground free as well. Damage to a tree is cumulative. The new driveway, on some level, will disturb this Doug fir. Thedry summer, Combined with the pre-existing wounds at its base, put this tree in an already questionable position. The maplef?) stump included at the base of the tree will probably lead to problems in the far future. 110.21 EXHIBIT 12 LU 00-0072 , „r! I.` 1-1 matt- ” p " The good side: The tree is currently in goad shape. It is in a good position, relative to the energy, in and around the yard. And it has a good feeling about it. I believe that if the above criteria are met, the tree will be a healthy and attractive part of your landscape for years to come. I would love to get some pictures of the construction. If you could inform our office as to when the work is going to take place, I would very much appreciate it. Also, it will help the tree if you have it fertilized this winter. best luck, Corey Thomas Morine Arborist. • RLIf2f 1k.AII tours Marine Morton Tree & Landscape INC. Certificate # PN•1654 COB# 67428 Expiration 6/30103 Phor.e 636.7902 S FROM : VILLAGE MONTESSORI FAX NO. : 503 675 8565 Sep. 07 2000 09:15AM P2 1. JM .� .10 A 4a WIP, I44-- '' " ,,e it) - Brun Tree CareVIP Box 241 Michael Bruno I.S.A. certified Arborist Aurora,OR 97002PN#1132 678-6173 Arborist" Report for: 4320 Douglas Way Lake Oswego, OR. 97035 The tree in question is a settmi-mature dougias-fir about 70 feet" tail•, - with a D.B.H. pf 30 inches. The tree has some exposed roots. The proposed road would surround the tree leaving an oval with soil around the tree about 14 feet by 9feet in size. If no excavation is done the tree will remain healthy. It is also important to keep compaction to a minimum which will be difficult. All work must b e done while the soil is still dry. The co-dominant fir on the other side of the driveway will not be • affected as long as the above guidelines are followed. A certified Arborist will be on site to insure these guidelines are followed. • EXHIBIT 13 LU 00-0072 Dc) • • • (1 D-)() • APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PROPOSED MONTESSORI SCHOOL @ 4320 DOUGLAS WAY CASE FILE# PA00-0042 (Village Montessori,Inc.) TAX MAP 2 1 E 8BC,TAX LOT 13800 STAFF COORDINATOR:MICHAEL R.WHEELER APPLICANT: DORIS BAIRD September 23, 2000 • FILE ATTACHMENT"H" PETITION FROM IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS FILE ATTACHMENT "I" RESPONSE TO POSITION OF WALUGA NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION RECEIVED SEF 2 5 2000 C?TY OF LAKE OSWEGO Gapt.of Planning&Development • EXHIBIT 14 LU 00-0072 031 S This Petition to Support the Application (FILE ATTACHMENT"H") is signed by 10 of the 11 immediate neighbors. The 11th neighbor has given verbal support of the Application,but is on vacation and unable to sign. This Petition serves as proof of support of the immediate and most impacted neighbors by granting the Conditional Use Permit. S S o3a Walugs Neighborhood Resident Petition To support the Conditional Use Permit Application by Doris Baird for Village Montessori r owned by Doris Baird We the undersigned are immediate neighbors of the property w ethe property,Baird, trill ",� lowed et 4320 Douglas Way. Because of our dose proximity moat Impacted by it's intended use as pre-scrlod. By our signatures below, we are indicating our support of the Conditional use Permit Application to the City of lake Oswego. &IC( 4348 DOI tra ClYwo 97O S t7Carnit Address n Zire • be, 115II laS 1,4j6 54,L) 9 7a 35 N me Address i Sign ure ......._.__....-...__.mod..............--..._.....••••• --_........._.-.—.._..........._.._ £ i s INS , I�ke l)sw 0 q-7035- Namme-� Address Signature i•Z ki)LOA 1-1-k-u--( Name Address Signature • EXHIBIT 15 LU 00-0072 0 33 Waluga Neighborhood Resident Petition To Support the Conditional Use Permit Application • by Doris Baird for Village Montessori We the undersigned are immediate neighbors of the property owned by Doris Baird, located at 4320 Douglas Way. Because of our close proximity to the property, we will be most Impacted by It's Intenced use as pre-school. By our signatures below, we are indicating our support of the Conditonat Use Permit Application to the City of Lake Oswego. Q1.1.1 3 9, dra 7/i:7 Name a 1 • Address • Signature Sari ))2cCJu _ L555 6 514) Quarry Xr./1 Name Address �D� •S Sig ature ( lqs - tic91/1 c_V\vvc[ifi G1t Name Address ✓ C-4) Wt Signature CCtICO N �/e oc 1es �/q 19,e, t3oX 2/ 73 lyn e Y15/ S t✓ [h Name / Address rture 0 3L Waiuga Neighborhood Resident Petition To Support the Conditional Use Permit Application by Doris Baird for Village Montessori We the undersigned are immediate neighbors of the property owned by Doris Baird, located at 4320 Douglas Way. Because of our close proximity to the property, we will be most Impacted by It's intended use as pre-school. By our signatures below, we are indicating our support of the Conditional Use Permit Application to the City of Lake Oswego, --Jo\i\v\ 4L. LV2LS Ob(A_CiLetS t.)J Name Address Sig ture 1)0 Name' Address Signature Name Address Signature Name Address Signature i 0 35 03p This letter to the President "I") IIIof the Waluga Neighborhood Association (FILE ATTACHMENT is a response to the position taken by the Board. It is the position of the Applicant that the Board has submitted information to the Planning Department that (1) does not represent the immediate neighbors and that (2) the Board has apparently chosen to decline an invitation by the Applicant to reach an agreement or compromise. • • EXHIBIT 16 LU 00-0072 p3q' • Steve Baird / Village Montessori • 762 Lake Forest Drive Lake Oswego OR 97034 September 23,2000 Waluga Neighborhood Association Ron Hall,President 15194 SW Quarry Road Lake Oswego OR 97035 RE: Conditional Use Permit/ 4320 Douglas Way Dear Ron: We are in receipt of a letter from the Association Board stating a position against the Conditional Use Permit for our property. I am following a recommendation to formalize our communications due the actions of the Board. We have a growing concern that the Association's Board is taking this position in a manner that is unfair and questionable. Our concerns are based on the following: • The Association Board's position does not reflect the views or opinions of the Neighborhood. • Proof of this statement is the enclosed petition of support for the Conditional Use Permit. We were advised by our Attorney to circulate this petition among the neighbors most impacted by the Permit. Of those 11 neighbors, 10 were presented with the opportunity to support or oppose the Permit. (Joyce Dickson,the I 1 th neighbor is on vacation.) Of the 10 immediate neighbors,ALL SUPPORT the Permit. My wife has had discussions with Joyce Dickson and was told that she would support the Permit. It is clear that the decision by the Board is not supported,nor represents the neighborhood. • The Association Board has,and continues to meet without adequate notice to the neighbors. We provided you,at your request,with our home address for the specific purpose of mailed notices of the WNA meetings. We have never received a notice,yet the meetings continue. We were never given an opportunity to address the Board to discuss the issues and reach a mutually beneficial compromise. • The Association Board represented that an agreement or contract could be created and executed that would allow support of the Permit. During the meeting held at the property in July,memorialized by the minutes and referred to in a letter to you from my wife on July 22,2000,we shared a verbal commitment to work together to create an agreement that would compromise the business aspects of the property (such as no signage),the value of the property(the permit would be surrendered if the property were to pass from our family),the cost of operating the business (extensive and continual landscape improvements) for the sole purpose of accommodating the Association. I had a conversation withyou that specificallyaddress and reinforced the need to work telephone together to accommodate our mutual interests-which you agreed to. Contrary to these many • statements of a desire and willingness to cooperate,the Board conducted its business in manner p38 411 that I would describe as bad faith. I support this position by reference to Ms. Uchida's comments to my wife that the Board would not support the Permit,prior to knowing the outcome of the board meeting or the response from the questions posed to the WNA Liaison. • Reasons presented for not supporting the Permit are lacking in factual basis. A glaring indication of this is the Board's position that because an Elementary School is located on this street,there is no need for a Pre-School. I cannot accept the fact that the Board does not understand that the Elementary School does not offer Pre-School programs. I do not see how the Board can take the position that a complimentary educational environment is redundant. Concerns regarding parking are being address during this process. I do not believe that the Board has reviewed the plans for those aspects of the proposal before the Planning Department. Concerns regarding traffic have been addressed by the Traffic Engineering Department for the City of Lake Oswego. The report is in the file at the Planning Department. Contrary to your Boards concerns and position,the Engineer states that traffic from 12 students will not have a significant impact on the capacity of the Iocal streets and intersections. Sincerely, • 4110 0 3G 1 nun Doris Baird /Village Montessori 762 Lake Forest Drive Lake Oswego OR 97034 September 24, 2000 Michael Wheeler Community Development Department City of Lake Oswego 380 A Avenue Lake Oswego OR 97034 RE:Conditional Use Permit/ 4320 Douglas Way MEMO REGARDING LOC 48.22.555 (Conditional Use Criteria) Dear Michael: We feel that a Conditional Use Permit should be permitted for the following reasons: The use as a day care facility is permitted under the zoning code R 7.5 in the City of Lake Oswego. Even though the criteria under which it falls now due to the Conditional Use Permit referring to it as a pre-school the intended use will remain at the level permitted as such for a day care of a small group of 12 children. The residence for which this Conditional Use is requested has a very questionable value as a quality residence. The quality of life is questionable for any permanent resident as the property • is nearly surrounded by heavy commercial use,such as the Lake Oswego School District Bus Depot on the south side creating an unacceptable noise level. The property is bordered on the east side by the Lake Oswego School District Maintenance Yard,which again,creates a high level of noise and nuisance to any permanent resident. The trucks and heavy equipment are parked and are always clearly visible when looking to the east of the property. It is because this property has a questionable value to support a good quality of life that is has only attracted low-income renters. The property was on the market for a long period of time, unable to be sold at it's appraised value. The immediate neighbors would welcome my proposed use of the property for a number of reasons they have expressed in the neighborhood meeting as well as in writing. Copies of the meeting minutes,as well as additional letters are on file in this application. Added to the file was a petition signed by all neighbors supporting the Conditional Use of this property. With the scheduled operating hours,it would truly serve as a buffer for the immediate neighbors and will insure their quality of life for the evenings and weekends. The quality of life at this property is very questionable for any permanent resident due to the industrial use on the east and south sides. My intended use will allow me to keep this property as a residential property and add a quality Montessori environment for a small group of children. This pre-school environment would complement the existing elementary program and the parental need of care for younger siblings. Additional benefits would be for before and after care of children attending kindergarten at Lake Grove Elementary School. I am a certified Montessori teacher that will he able to supplement the educational needs for kindergarten aged children. • EXHIBIT 17 UT 00-0072 na�. It is my full intent to keep this property as a residence and further improve on its appearance as such. My goal is to make it sparkle and make it an asset to the community that it serves. • The requirements of the zone are met and improvements are addressed in the narratives submitted. The site is physically capable of accommodating the proposed use. The actual square footage used will allow 12 to 18 students as per the 35 square foot requirement per child imposed by the State / CCD regulations for a pre-school environment.The playground area can accommodate up to 41 children as per the 75 square foot requirement per child by the State / CCD regulations. The functional characteristics of the proposed use and its compatibility is that it will remain a single family dwelling to blend in other single family dwellings in the neighborhood. Douglas Way has 11 residences;the remainders of the properties are predominately commercial and civic use. All other requirements are addressed to comply with City Code and the only special condition remains my request to be excused from living at 4320 Douglas Way. Respectfully, CE612-7t7 Doris Baird 1111 S ova • June 30, 2000 Ron Hall Waluga Neighborhood Association 15194 Quarry Lake Oswego, Or.97035 Dear Mr. Hall: I am Doris Baird the owner of 4320 Douglas Way. As I explained to you briefly the city of Lake Oswego is recommending I file for a conditional use permit for the above address. This is subsequent to my request not having to reside at the above address while I, as the owner of this property intend to use it for educational purposes for a small group of children in the Montessori method. • I am a certified teacher and have a great passion for what I do. I also have a great interest in keeping the above property as a home thus it would remain owner occupied and would not become subject to be again an undesirable rental property, because of its location. The appearance of the house will not change, there will be no additional signs posted. I will continue to maintain and improve on the landscaping aspects for the above address. You are invited to attend, with surrounding residents, to discuss this in more detail, per requirements of the LOC chapter 49.36.705. This meeting shall take place at 4320 Douglas Way on July 21, 2000 at 6:00 PM. If you have any other questions or concerns please call me at home at 636-5220 or at 675-8565. Sincerely, • Doris I Baird • EXHIBIT 18 LU 00-0072 043 U.S.Postal Service • • . • CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT . • (Domestic. Mail Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided) 113 • m Postage $ j. Ce�tiled Fee Ir 1 `�� e �A0 Ve Return Recelpt Fes l .(i" (Endorsement Rqulred C (Endorsement Restricted Requ 4 ,-f J 0 � t��� s CI Total Ponape&Fees $ . l U G nr/ / uri Fr Several, Nome (Ph...PrletClearly) al�by sever) Q Q Street,Apt.No.;or PO Box No. C "CIly,State,ZIP*4 .�._.. .... ...� — PS Form 300,February 2000 See Reverse.for Instaiciions - ----- -- ---'----r- SENDER:-COMPLETE THIS SECTION: COMPLETE.PUS SECTION ON DELIVERY It Complete items 1,2.and 3.Also complete A. Received by(Please Print Clearly) B. Oat - • is Print 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ;7 10 _ Print your name and address on the reverse C. Si ture so that we can return the card to you. DO• Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, �F ❑ or on the front If space permits. 4 I \, �� D. del ery address di teen from Re. 1? ❑Yes 1. Article Addressed to: It YES,enter delivery address below. 0 No lei 17%M//. e, i, ;6;lq4 (�uu�- I y IOK -- Oraity0I Q70, ,...._�1 3 Type `,J Ceriit:ed Malt 0 Express Mail Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ Insured Mail ❑C.0.0. 4 Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑ Yes 7. r--- — ----- .. — -- aS 102595.99-M0789 i S llLi1.4 . AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING STATE OF OREGON ) ) SS .;. County of Clackamas) r I, 30frtsZavfrige being duly sworn, depose and say that on Joni i 3 o tt 2 C)0 , I caused to have mailed to each of the persons on the attached list a notice of a meeting to discuss a proposdd,clevelop'Irieht at(CO •;4ko i/ GII-t7er1wi•i flas liJay , a copy,of which notice so mailed is attached hereto and made a part of hereof. • I further state that said notices were enclosed in envelopes plainly addressed to said persons and were deposited on the date•indicated above in the U;iited States Post Office iithpostage prepaid thereon. . - a (23(9.41Y• - - 0 Signature Subscribed and sworn to, or affirmed before me this Z day of LL l � DEC; • . /1/1-0 0,1• -71/3- / / tary Public (�; My commission expires/ //I'L 7(1(1 7 ,J Pre-App. No.: r c L SEAL 1 -� ' JANIS M. FORSYTH 1 " . ' NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON • 1 �� C�1MMISSIJN NU.313302 ol MY COMMISSION EXPIRES JUNE 7,2002 b145 IA It o aICOS Name of Applicant a (30/1"7l Pre App # Subject Property: Tax Lot (s) 2 /E(g gC Tax Map (s) Address or General Location: 732 a Dallas' Way AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING NOTICE I, (L J(y?�' 1 Rai ed , do swear or affirm that I am (represent) the party intiating interest in a-pirdposete..TO0011h6 f. / (/J'[ , tofro /i affecting the land located at T? 20 Oco(510d 41ely , and that pursuant to•LOC 49:36.705, did on the 30 da 2` Y of ��►(!�C „� personally posted the notice indicating that the site may be proposed for a Cchdi 15.014 a! use /oeirrnAl , application. • The sign was posted at: Yt3 20 Jrxj/rye 6J L��c 0sw U, fit- 97o .? c d)06(j/de location on prope'ty) Dated THIS 30 day of C/kJ e , - 2 aoo 0 L/l Signature Subscribed and sworn to, or affirmed,before me this JCJ day of ji tc'L.E - STATE OF OREGON /f�/� COUNTY OF CLACKA v 1 I ( Notary Public for the State of Oregon OFFICIAL SEAL J r /,�� J1 y. ,�. •• JAN15 M. FORSYTH 26O ( or COMM SS ON NO.133D2 V / MY COMMISSION EXPI Iv y Commission Expires � ��ti�7,2D02 • P:lfomu1postafid3 Revised 10/14/98 1 t.` P Igese do not remove! Notice of meeting Dear neighbors; As per city code I was asked to post this sign in conjunction with the letter I wrote to you. My request to the city is, to allow me to use my property for educational purpose, such as a small Montessori environment, 12 children max. I do not wish to reside at this address and separate from my husband and daughter; therefore the need for a conditional use permit as per city code is required. I want to reassure you that there will be no additional development-taking place at 4320 Douglas way. This notice is posted to inform you, the neighbor within a 300' boundary, that I will hold a meeting (which is part of • the process for a conditional use permit) for any interested party regarding my use of my property. I am the owner of 4320 Douglas way as well as a certified Montessori teacher/ guide. The meeting shall take place on July 21,2000 at 6.•00 PM If you have any questions or concerns please contact me at home at, 636-5220 or 675-8565. I am usually at 4320 Douglas way during the day, you are welcome to stop by and talk with me then. Sinc rely Doris B rd 0 UB Meeting Agenda • July 21, 2000 6:00 PM Village Montessori Meeting purpose: Answer any questions regarding the conditional use permit and the impact on the neighborhood. The City of Lake Oswego calls this application "major development"; the reason being that I intend to have a small and private group of pre-school children to receive Montessori instruction. I believe that the City is making this permit sound a lot more complex than the actual reality. As I stated in my letter to you, there will be no additional building, the dwelling will be used "as-is" and the only reason the permit is requested is because I want to live in my current residence with my family. The City requires this permit because I will not be sleeping at this property. To be clear, this permit is not to allow me to use the property as a private day- • care - no permit is needed for anyone to use his or her property in that manner in Lake Oswego. The permit process has been started because I do not want to sleep at the property. Because of the way this property is bordered by industrial uses on two sides, we were told by the City of Lake Oswego Planning Department that it would be a good "buffer" property- meaning a residential appearance with some sort of light commercial use. Some of you have had personal experience with the tenants that the property attracted, because of it's questionable value as a home. We believe there will be the following impacts on the neighborhood by me not sleeping here: Less traffic (one fewer resident with visiting family members) Less noise - no activity in the home after 5:00 PM on weekdays, all weekends and holidays and during spring, summer and winter vacations. A better appearance for the property- many of you has seen my efforts at improving the property - not something that I could do if we used the home as a rental unit. • Facts: The children's days will start after 8:30 and end at 4:00 with some of them occasionally present before and after those times. We will follow the same school year calendar as the Lake Oswego School District. Our Daily Scheduled Activities Time Activity 9:00 Our first work period begins 11:30 Outside time (recess and play) (Half day children go home) 12:00 Lunchtime 12:30 Outside time (recess and play) 1:00 Extended work period begins (Children may have a rest period as needed) 3:00 to 3:30 Work periods end and children prepare to go home (Outside time if appropriate) 4:00 to 4:30 Children go home (at the convenience of the parents schedules) 1110 110 0(4°1 Doris Baird/Village Montessori • Conditional Use Permit Neighborhood Meeting Minutes Pursuant to requirements stated by the Planning Department of the City of Lake Oswego,notice of an informational and discussion meeting was mailed to all property owners and residents with 300 feet of the property located at 4320 Douglas Way,in Lake Oswego. A notice of the meeting was posted on the property,as well. On July 21,2000 at 6:30,the scheduled meeting was called to order. Doris Baird provided an agenda of the meeting to all attendees. Those living within 300 feet and attending were: Patrice Rae and Larry Baker Robin Campbell Peggy Fry Those attending outside of the 300-foot range,but representing the Neighborhood Association were: Ron Hall Cheryl Uchida Steve Baird was present to record these minutes of the meeting. • Doris Baird started the meeting by introductions of all attendees. She then opened the floor to questions regarding the agenda,the conditional use permit or her intended activities in the property. A question raised was the number of students in attendance answered as "not more than 12". A question raised was the necessity of the Conditional Use Permit to provide Montessori education answered as"I can provide instruction to 12 children without the permit—I only need the permit because I do not want to sleep in the property". A question raised was the number of functions such as meetings or parties that would occur in the evenings answered as"occasional,but not frequently"with further clarification as "most discussions with the parents are via telephone in the evenings". A question raised was the compliance with Fire Department regulations answered as"we are uncertain because the Fire Marshals inspection is scheduled for next Tuesday,but we will comply with any requirements". A question raised was the impact on traffic answered as"that would not be an issue if I were to live here". A question raised was the scheduled operating times answered verbally by"following the Lake Oswego School District Schedule"and supported by the written schedule in the Agenda,a copy of which is attached to these minutes. • QSO • • Discussion followed which centered on the Neighborhood Associations work in creating a Planning Document for presentation in January 2001 and the stated goal to limit commercial encroachment in the Neighborhood. Another discussion focused on the concept of creating an Agreement between Doris Baird and the Neighborhood Association that would address and clarify certain conditions that would be necessary for the Neighborhood Associations support of the Conditional Use Permit. Those conditions include: • No business signage on the property. • The Neighborhood Association support would be revoked upon sale of the property. • In the event issues from use arose that negatively impacted the immediate neighbors, efforts to discuss and remedy the situation would be pursued. The two immediate neighbors were questioned as to their concerns or objections to the Permit. A concern by Larry Baker was his dislike of a sign placed on the property. There was verbal agreement by Doris Baird not to place a sign on the property. Larry Baker was in support of Doris Baird and her efforts. Pat-rice Baker made reference to prior inhabitants of the property and the problems they encountered. She felt that the use of the property as a Montessori environment would alleviate the many problems created when lower income renters were in possession. She supported Doris Baird because the property would be unused during the time most of the problems occurred in the past—evenings and weekends. Robin Campbell supported Doris Baird because of the many visible improvements that have been made to the property and the obvious pride of ownership. She felt that the value for the neighborhood was much better than its prior use as a residential rental property. I • It was agreed that a letter would be created byDoris Baird and sent g to the Neighborhood Association in care of Ron Hall (the President) in a first step in creating an agreement for support of the Conditional Use Permit. Mr. Hall would submit the letter and plan for the agreement to the Board of Directors for discussion,approval and action. Steve Baird offered to meet with the Board to answer questions or assist in developing the agreement. It was agreed that a copy of the letter would be submitted to the Planning Department to clarify the support for the Conditional Use Permit that could be provided by the Neighborhood Association. Doris Baird provided her home address to Ron Hall for the purpose of being included in mailings from the Neighborhood Association. Many attendees voiced mutual appreciation for the opportunity to discuss the use of the property. The meeting was closed with the agenda completed and all questions answered. By: Steve Baird;July 22, 2000 • n�a • Doris Baird / VilIage Montessori • 762 Lake Forest Drive Lake Oswego OR 97034 July 22, 2000 Ron Hall 15194 SW Quarry Road Lake Oswego OR 97035 RE: Conditional Use Permit / 4320 Douglas Way Dear Ron: Thank you for your attendance and participation at the meeting held at my future Montessori School last night. I have included a copy of the Minutes front the meeting for your reference. An additional purpose of this letter is to memorialize our discussions and preliminary agreement in principal of a document that will address the concerns of the Neighborhood Association and agree to specific conditions for support of the Conditional Use Permit. I anticipate that you will present this letter and your recommendations to the Board. After appropriate discussion,and decision,we can then meet to review any additional concerns or criteria. If we have mutual agreement,we can then draft a document for Board review and • approval. From our meeting last night,I believe that the following are the initial points the agreement must contain: • No business signage on the property. • The Neighborhood Association support would be revoked upon sale of the property. • In the event issues from use arose that negatively impacted the immediate neighbors, efforts to discuss and remedy the situation would be pursued. Please allow this letter to confirm my agreement with those points and willingness to sign an agreement to that effect. 1 have included a copy of this letter in the documents that will be presented to the Planning Department. I believe that this letter is an indication that the Neighborhood Association is willing to consider support of the Permit based on an agreement for specific use conditions- pending approval of the Board. Steve and I appreciate your time spent in service to the neighborhood and would like to offer assistance in helping move this agreement along. We would be willing to meet with the Board to present our plans or answer questions. Please let us know if we can do anything. Sincerely, aL3IJAtkei Doris Baird EXHIBIT 19 LU 00-0072 053 ost} R E ' V September 8, 2000 _ • City of Lake Oswego "" +� I Hamid Pishvaie Dept.of Piannin;w Deva[acrnent P.O. Box 369 Lake Oswego,Or 97034 Dear Hamid, The Waluga Neighborhood Association met on August 2, 2000 and August 23,2000,at which time there was discussion of the Conditional Use Permit Application by Doris and Steve Baird for a Montessori school to be located at 4320 Douglas Way. The Board recommends not allowing the Conditional Use Permit as it is concerned about maintaining and increasing low density single family residences. It believes that such Conditional Use will upset the balance of such residences on Douglas Way given the current location of Lake Grove School. We believe it will negatively impact the value of surrounding residences,as well as encourage further encroachment of non-residential activities into the neighborhood, especially given that they will not be residing at the sight. We are also concerned that once the Conditional Use is granted,it is possible the property will never return to a residential use. Furthermore,we are concerned about specific issues, including: Whether there is a demonstrated need for locating this Use at this address. There is already a school next door and there is a large Montessori school less than %mile away at Carman and Fosberg Road; • The addition of vehicle trips that will be created on Douglas Way and Quarry Road at peak hours, especially given the location of the Lake Grove School and District Bus Barn. No traffic studies have been conducted to show the impact. We are especially concerned about the added traffic during the times when children are walking to/from school;and We are concerned that there is not enough parking at the sight for the pick-up and drop off of children and that the current development would provide an additional danger to children walking to/from Lake Grove School since the only sidewalk is on that side of the street. There also is not adequate on-street parking in the area. We applaud the Baird's work on improving the property. We believe that it will allow them to attract high quality rental tenants or provide a nice residence for them. We do not believe that granting the Conditional Use Permit is consistent with our Neighborhood Goals and that it has not been shown that it is consistent with the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan. Sincerejy" f Ro Hall, A C Jeff Novak, WNA Vice Chair CC: Doris and Steve Baird Peggy Fry Patrice Rae&Larry Baker Robin Campbell Sidaro Sin. City Liaison to WNAPSC EXHIBIT 20 LU 00-0072 it)5s • • • OS� i 1-gis 720 160 1 .1 l I P HA RVEY '°`,'.3,.*;t. WAY emu,=. .si=. oaa /8o 60 CO 1 v 1 ``� 5 6 7 8 9 t0 14_ t2 13 f4 E5 16 i7 18 f9 `�2f` Q i�a‘ ►7 _ 43 • 205 . ts,° 1 I NI ••a XI26� t ao 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 29 28 27 ,2e° r'• b l6.,vroi, �_ Leo sQ _ so 23 c COLLINS �P ` y„� �a 60 'et r6S5I 0.4v t 1 r,co s0 s ,i$ a 5 & 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 44 I§ 16 IT 18 19 2C): s� 196.28 a 22 d,' _ 2 Fr-7 1 .. 19C.28 A.+ ! O 3 39 33 37 36 3�. 33 32 31 yi sai 2I3 27 26 25r,a re S5 ..... a i o 'e°4 w so rai or .o° DOUGLAS c WAY Si $ - r�l \ g 4 25 = 2 10 11 1� 13 la Irj 16 17 18 19 20 2( '22 23 24 _ r I), \ t ` r28.Or N a 3 ' ` �4{� d �'�ff GO a� 60 60 -r0r•35 96 N 89°45'W. 818.52' 4 J 5 7 8 9�� •1,- / °f 4 c:i cti 2 - • Cli 0 *. 6..... Y 6a WAY °a 1—FN-S G�mt/l 5c�fo o i, /' ///t ' �; WA 5 'ad CO SO _ — E. .W.% fine lhru sec/ion 8LT. 2 S. R. I E;L \ \ N. 89°45'W. ,3916.0I - ... . rt r. 'a- 01 1 N.89°d5'W 20.0' • STATE OF ( •-q Q County of CI Q I f, Guy.H: Pf f b 0 corder of Cc • lA of the Circus :'-. ,5C _. for the Coun a i .7 city that th, _____._ __, All faxes from /0 ' � /-%'T was received k -- — ✓ ���1--—--- t.) b fh inclusive arc 'Pole • record of ... of said.Count --- ' ''w. - - — ----- Sheriff • In book :`d., if Vitness m3 EXHIBIT 21 nixed. LU 00-0072 C. . - ,rd:n Cer - - -- hc' ' OSS • August 3, 2000 Steve & Doris Baird 762 Lake Forest Drive Lake Oswego, Oregon 97034 Dear Steve & Doris, Thank you for your presentation on July 21 st regarding your plans for a Montessori School at 4320 Douglas Way. It was nice to meet you both, as well as meeting a few of your neighbors. I wanted to provide you with an update of where the WNA is relative to your request for a"conditional use" permit for the aforementioned property Last night we had a meeting of the WNA Plan Steering Committee which also included several Board • members. A report was given to the group, your letter of July 22nd and its attached minutes were read, and a discussion ensued. Several questions were asked of our City liaison concerning a number of items and answers will be forthcoming over the next week or so. The committee decided not to take any action until these answers were provided. We will have another committee meeting on August 23rd and look to have our decision at that time. With best r ar s, it/�� i ' Rgn Hall/ / Chair, WNA cc: Mike Wheeler, City of Lake Oswego , Mrs. Peggy Fry Patrice Rae& Larry Baker Robin Campbell Members, Plan Steering Committee, WNA Board Members, WNA Sidaro Sin, City Liaison to WNAPSC I EXHIBIT 22 LU 00-0072 ():1WORD\FORMS\LE TER.DOC 'S'\ U loo Pishvaie, Hamid rom: Chevrette, Russ nt: Friday, August 11, 2000 3:23 PM Pishvaie, Hamid Cc: Tushner, Tom Subject: LU 00-0072 Montessori School conditional use application Engineering Division Memorandum TO: Hamid Pishvaie FROM: Russ Chevrette, Engineering Tech. III RE: LU 00-0072, Conditional use for a Montessori School on Douglas Way TE: August 11, 2000 e proposal is for a non-owner-occupied conversion of a single family home at 4320 Douglas Way to a Montessori School not exceeding 12 students. The application does not include a site plan or narrative that specifically responds to the applicable standards and criteria for schools found in LOC 48.22.575. Regarding traffic impact, up to 12 arrivals and 12 departures in the morning and afternoon peak hours would not have a significant impact on the capacity of the local streets and intersections. (Nearby residents, however, would probably raise "quality of life"objections to the increase in traffic.) The existing head-in driveway poses the greatest problem...it is inadequate to handle potentially concentrated traffic. On-site congestion would compromise safety, and there is a high potential for on-site congestion to have unacceptable spillover effects on the adjacent street. Under more ideal conditions a circular driveway would be advised, but LODS 19.020 prohibits more than one driveway cut on lots with less than 75 feet of frontage. The subject lot is only 60 feet wide. For these reasons, I do not believe the City could support this proposal. • EXHIBIT 23 LU 00-0072 i 01v � i • • ova • , 4/4 ' Pic00006.jpg (1280x1024x16M jpeg) 1 ' _, i i, ,` _I,T�f III'- . .2.9 61 •fj 1jij. -''iT!• i4•• •.rl 1- ,- .�: _ • P, i �S G! 1 't+ • /; "..."lt„T it,i` ! r7' h �. ` rt `r�/ ,`4 s•. 51 . M - •ff -�' .,.i.•*--.7.7. I - ' ."44 ' . - 'A.Not",11.c.- ,, .. ii,..„...i.,,,,,,,,,.."....,,..,,•:,...,.....,,,.,....*-,,... .• .4..„,....„..., ., :4,, , ..,..., ..,., ... . . •. . .,..._.. ....,....,, ..,. ..7. . I.• v ••• sh -..,� ' ,te r :1„. i s_ D9' �' �',7s ' v•7,7 '''4.- • '. ''r ''..'"Laxiii,f:' '---. °If . 1:.. "`• lfi r �j . . .. � • '•i ' "tea-. K W ' 4 - - ID _. • .1., t)Q X , 1R.r, :t� a i sc.�.tdv ... • EXHIBIT 24 LU 00-0072 0(o Pic00008.jpg (1280x1024x16M jpeg) • 4+ s i• `b' aye'{.a�'� vc, 1! ) . f • • • '•.• i r'Y• . • • «.' y Nye l6,y' IP.� 3........N _ -4, . .`i 1• _ ice"3 .&. , . ,k _ _ 1./ *d •1` i �f. `'„ `� .. L� ••it fir. r`1 , dillitNN• • a - '"-e .. � • - � a*-1144 "el f . —,.e .f r 3s,:t ` -%.At"'.4 , . . . • - 1f: sal '!r fC1 • 1 a• to eN2I 1 Jr \�- tli• ' a'`e f. t;: '"- _. _ - —tea. -�...=-_ :T . • 0 (o Li 0 Pic09009.j.:g (1280x1024x16M jpeg) t tr .', '.r hi "t ,.4 ,ln .v..t}. y�1+ . F p ,t, i . Wit^ ' - .•�.� - a ., fY r , 4•-/im. 7i-N., :i..4- .-. .. . .._ ...,:.„„., ...„ ....,,:f ili • ii, • .1t d • s � 84 'a • .t • ry' Ya;r�- I. - if l Nh i a) J �Z i•' ittettior ^r - - t� 4li �' t3., , 4' ' ' ' �"1 t o i i ' •G• I • PI—, � A#.0.. `� tr '`� j \ �* "gip` • rim`e` • _ ____. f'1 ,-1 S • •Pic00007.jpg (1280x1024x16M jpeg) ;r o- 1•''! `` •r '.3,�� w• •ir-e►,bt -d • •L, t•� • 4 •. p, { ` sr •� 1wa r •f • r 'Fti s'7• 4 A l 1 4 . . + i ` . y7 t , r � hy .,- .. ' ! � ,o 4 - + .jiii ' 'r 41 t' ?e If' • , • .�. P a .✓t ? • _ \y1 � .,v... > - ! • ..Y '1,:e ?� is- ,...4„, k ,itts s,s. i,. a � .1 " j ,,11,,, �.i ,�' . *. ,.1 iv.41-4. •` . ' • -i „'. - +` il; t Y' -'4.,f T H '$ rtyi'36t 1• { r+. i y • Lr ~ t f • • : .� l•' 5_ , r., yYrj ,,.. , • .yI ' ; �!� ..,...1 • •- a.l- f•,,: t , 't .lit: • • 1111 - E-. i- 5. N `e , f .i ° ... . �f i a .` 1 • 74 . .} 4: 1' � , 1=' t> • ' i: at `-j ��1 �is1^•`. • • r vcr a "t a.. r ;1 t r L ��,,rr �w . `ll jti i" 1 •. � �: _ --� ,_,�.�'_tpl.� '�:; , Via. : - 0lO(4° L STA. 12+36 SD I A CONSTRUCTION AND ENOSTREET MATCHEDRE— EXISTING o VACANT , #4311 , #42c Ix i , ›.4 — — — — STA. INST. 301 corn I #4390 I R W I I 1 IERA1 car I I 20' AVERAGE II ( INSTALLED 19 ILF. OF 12" • S= 0.1606 — — .— - — EP.— - - - • --1- 12`00- CL 11{OG- — 10+0 CL - - - - - -E.P. 1 I / I / I #4380I i I LP. 1 ... i #4380 i #4348 1 L I NOTE: ALL ELEVATION! 4110 EXHIBIT 25 LU 00-0072 1-ii DO MAIICIl • RAM. N.N:: 1 1 1 1 DIP-4- p I. .,\.1...... 7'7•,-:;;:: tek.. i-'..,r,r •: •. . _Jr . . , . .'1 II"....... ---nnoir- , . ir • _ • • ••.... - 1 , k•-:01‘,, .,2-4,. a ' I.-' ,'... '- 41.--- '1's-krak '--:..4.14, •.''I I •. q? , 4. . A ,, . . , •••,,,.... ...,,,,;4. . --, . • .1. •--,,••• \ . .s , ".:.....- •r, ' ' -.4:14444:: , #1 • • .,..4 , i, .-AO.' ' .. . t. r=---- . r -\ 7• •i-, . . 4.• ,, • .4.g, .•4,_ . ; .z,... . 0 1,.... .. 4.,x _ ....N : ...i.... ... 149/ , • ...reli , -L" ' ... v -4‘'.• ,.• • • '''- - •----'` .--i.: . tvi • 0) ' - .- i ti. ' •, '' 1 '0,1 -....4 .‘,,,,---• Y. 1 _le ';'i t-' .•, HEM TAG ‘. •• Misr 4 i Vt..; '. 4 , :...re , 1-iv. A • . • - 0/ 5 i,- ,, ,,_iiit,,, _ • • .1. L:tim:ik.',..-:‘...,--,,,4:-.7;-,. 11. ' , •,..4 .; 1.7.,,,,..,:.'. 11-'1117..''''''.L.:1-1_ - 7.. .:41.a AI'''. tAtlitrAitz...,,,,J.4.'''f''s ,I\•••,i: 0 . '. • . • _ . , , , • #4- A " 1"44 A. • t ' ',1 '*. '1 ' 1'VI l'ti-.. :1r k'--. • . 1- . . .' - . ' .:-',C,, '• • , ...; , 1-ez 4,,..,4112L41:Hr, J''1 ti•-, .!,,..; _It,. ,..., „ ., L. •,„ ' . i AA. ... . . ,,•_ . . :: /,...4 , • 11-:.:2.i / It..rt .4., „. 4.,„• •11)7. '.1. ..'t, , -i „oti. ,...-. ..., . .. ,,„, .. ,.... , ...... 2 \.4.,L.H1 K. • I,i, • - it.:-,:l 4.*:14 ' - '' Ti- :, , k.-...,--. .4-.4 .!.'.' . cc . .0 . r• fir.qu.„,6„-.... . Alw ..„,,,... „ , , WAY •fifa.4 111 IN I: ...It •,,,7,11• cr i. I - ...I 1)16 1 - ,..*i .. '.$,-.• 41- • • .11107 Litj ','-4T.I. l 8'il _ ,iii i• rir .• ft-, 111:7111. Ift1111). • •,, _ i': i„ilt . ,. . ,., 1 _ _. ,..!•'714 '• 1.r'4.-• ' '•• I - I i i• '21. REt9_ , -, .,..,'"--gZ.Ne '..7 ' ' , 1..1 T '.. ''' • • ,. ,• ' ' . '- :... :?,...., .lit , L--:._ • yr '... .. tilk 1-t it .' ' 1'' ''e ''. • .,'-r'"'ii Ai. - *;"- ' ' P,-•„.A,. , ... .. ,.... AL...A.,..A. -..-. V MilMig' • ..,“i• ,f, if 1 I I, .:N • . •, .IF /1111MPlir • O.: - ' . . . 1. .1. iiriE.A .4 7 E. i WA • -•:-. 1 .-' ' . 4 .' : ' 4-. -011r--, Aplit- ,_.,... .7 ....., . - , -_-•••4-_ ' , ;4".', .-, t-? i - . .r • ig •--3,:4 , ,., .-i',1•1 , ,, ;,- ''-'..:::-T..4\ I.-i.,. • ,niv: , . I - 1-,-....-, -r,r'':II•.• 7/1,./ - ft 6-1,4 „_ - •... . , , .„ • - - ..•• ... V US, .S 0 P , 1.__..- --rf ii.,,!:' ..... 4 \. , E,..,4 , , A-, 4 ,...,...k. 4. .-...-.. i - i • - .2ti... ' r .A7 tje 3 1.It,'••!.'4'',..'„,r 1.:*'„ 4 . 4. -I,• t ,,11 1 * . -.'--fi'''• • *'4f ''..,..:'4, '''..-..i.r,e ' I. I , • • i• :A -- • ' 6 T ..1-1. :"wiry Ai -14 ,. -.., • .. ., - ..--i- • LAKEt - •' '. 0 • - °B. ,'%' / (3- • .‘'".-• •'1 - . . . •..-. . I_ .k ,'''i.,:,•, • - 1' • G• __L. SC,H ii.- / : •: i t ,,..• '. ,2. , IC . r- - t • - ‘• ... . .• . .:mar •k,.- : - - • r• it.'..., . . . ii. ,. •6 4 - t,.' •.( :.4.110. . ' 4/1.... . . A i\;1.ii - ,, - - rIPTIk„,' -'• 1, ,,, • , .,,'.'1111%-i' . ,-.: IiI4.'W'$,.. ,. • -,4i ' .4.ist. •di ' - , '` 4, .,- . , lit 1k. _. - ,.. .I ' , . 1:‘ 1C.S. - -4141. .„. ' ' )11::: .0 4 :'• . II, - , :• .. P . Q. . ., :.• , 4 . • - 1,_.„lit ,. '. ' Allit C.'. f , ii141110I't•';'4. I. , ,-- . .. ., ' r- - i. /;,<(' . ,, .., ,...7,.. .7. II - .. . • .. .4' .- -. . .....)0_.•4- •. •-: ,--• •--. •.i ';,- ''''- -,'.1 • i./ :;11,-.. - . N::. .. _1 :. .. , I.t-i -zs w..o.m ik-e .,IF1 12c, rr ? -- - ' 1 s rE./ ._,.... ,,•:. . . . . . ? . "r. - " --- ; • . . ..,. ,,,, 4.--'4 --- -:• iir." i . . '-.:. t- ,/ ,' '.:- - t :-.00 ., -.4 . . p - •0, re. ' ' . * 1. ' •' . ' 01 , )1-' //-';(*S1441 . .. ..... , . . . .. ,. ....-. : . - 4_ - . - ,, • . _ ,. ,; *, •• , , ,„ ...., ..• - .., ., •,--, gl.` .- ., • ', • . - ,A • A 1 II A.. ,,:,..- ,.. 4, `-.:4--,--v-N.;v:' er' •'.1 '... ••- ' I • 'rI* ,,-- -. . ." .. _ 4, . It• ' :- . . .• ,.. gag , . 1 , •: _r:1.____,-. ....4• 4.0 ‘0,...,,--<.' ' -"' ': ' N, , ''- -„ir• . - • .. , .. , , . • 0%,;-f •-,e• -, , , . 3 \ 2' •r I ''''' . .;'' . ,1 Y . ri - , -411 ' • -' ,..., • 1<+:'( . V.r - +2'-- ,11 ',, '-itof ' ...." - - ith* * ' „,, , '.-V. ' .. . -'-r Viii 1 sti ..' " S. `.\\ ` • *;-' ''' . ''. i 7 * ..... . 41- ) ; -I, =.• ' ''•1 . • • -,, ,,,', ye.".•.... , . it.. • ' ..'' - .\ *. t :- • 7 - - ' 4 , •• ' • . I.V ' ...,..,"..i. A \ .. ., . . . ,. . . i r ••• it1 •• ,,,,,• l' • i•• • ' 411' , *,.1.. . • , • 0 i‘ . 4 . , , - , . , - ...' - - •, • ----•1- .-. . - : itik4 .1 \ \15-- . yitip.,-. ''''- ‘t.;. ,,. __„.-...-- . ., : ,. , :';'. ,:,..4IFF 1 '.. . '4. • " t -'...,1- ' ,e ••00 1,4-'• ' *r NA .P. .• --..vt, : • - ., ,,, . . .. - Ai, 3.'.. - --111`.41' ' - Nair ..„ , ....._ ....• ... EXHIBIT 26 th , . • . 41 LU 00-007 2 ' • .....i ,• - - . .., _ _ 7 . • *Vol v,- . .4010 - .• 1.A1V14(-.' t , _.,...A,1 ,.. ' . --‘ -.7.-,- �:l, T '1`',}i.`! ..., .t+ •_r f' 4' • ,., a1'T'.�.r t}`� %f;.jW.1`1...C!•n. 4.4F4c4'l56.1i:+.�.' :I'. k• ;v• A r r '•.i:fit/••• ::,«,:.:.�.•.,V?tri. KCL:•.,�. Rr r' fi.:h^.i•1 4;" 'F•: e r 1 ,a+ ` }F •:,,, ,,.e r 'r , +v; ,,1), r;' J t 7 ! `i �'�� sti,."�" ''�h�+ '- "!'/.'fi t,'iF�l! i",^•:-L-_c• :d%t`,i��,'.t,�j".� i.�b"�`.T ' n ..i� ,1 y',r ;i;y, + At •, s `,`�y' x,,K'? .F .0 y4,�iF�; r '.1• i;',.:%'',:�j t _R. ,i' Sa 0 i.. 11 S- At 3 ; t. , JAitx, ?.L., q,",lr r Vi :p 4 h`'t : �yVL `� �` e ? tr„ ii,l�}tO� h 8 'rt`.!.,� i::' ! '. ": -,,t,i.+ ,+t. 1 1{ t :,1.'til. y.. l'aigir .,,,t: 0' ' A.'AI Jp' �ic 401 .,, r' � a `'''}••1 1 r' t i%i :'::Ft l'' i..' `J :'U s '---: r �. ;;j ti, •:r „ -,,,•';`... 'v. }, p+;. � ,}t �� �r N �', 'S� J : � Vl pi S!"�4.�!• .�-,,,., M �6..•.-iw..-k�+ �'� '6• • "V,•p' r.� 4f• '{�d1 �.�SS.fi.. I. kre t'' .U�y� M A�• `� i�.}' �ul,ri t'a,e ♦ ,,,,,, ?,W r !..-,,,3•'. ..4� ah } .� , r., „H. i.'�4r {'r�: r ntl. t Y"t `� '.p _,, � •!' �: �',{ �!�r�•`a .?�,r,.l�r•�.F} .st� :f�liv�Y���"'t' �y��''t •"�, -4S '1�' ;rr;.' 1je•.4�`'�'�.i ��1� �x,� rr, ,` rt !!yyt`•ti ''. } ��,t*. V rr .k� +4..'.,' •'wj„„..,•'' 'S '„a., ,., %�.J, ' ,,. '. ,.". :.,.i ..� L ,it�• • T.,y .t J t -.1, �F ,I:.` I•.' :i•,44;.7:..,, N t �, 43 • t �;47•'Va' r ?::i•' • '''.f4 Y$ ,e- C,. 4�F-1; .�, �.• ±v1',. i.a'•":j?',`• t* .''v 7,,wA ee..' jj 4+' : �_ -ii'24;' ,1SP 4f4.1: 7t� ?-, 1 � • k +. -t :.. MS ,. +,,, '"�•�{d r -ii l• ; �X�tI' �' N'• T'4t il:.t• n fi�6 G,; �°t�' �" "Ait. .t • A';P-'11. • f * .f'- 3i,�y a r.•��,,.; !.q�!,• r .TA y4. ,s,� t,"ft•e-.• ••. •Ali ,n . +�.,•yi�l.„� " .A` i .0 ,.` . (' r • y�•i, ,Zto;+�F.'. t;,}•�+e.: E."I _'r t! 5 ,rt6! Y� Tt�. 'fir. op, .h, :Afli.'.•ti O • .s S' r- y .Yp yv.; ♦ u,. �7aa }\ S , S"..,, . yr.Py • �" ' ,} [ Y t o.r�r Ri: fin` ,� ', - � '.y' S }.. • ..i :�.,' .r ,• ;/+�` ;. o:''"!i rr' A . 1L•. 4 '.yi r Ilk. • -^I,. '1' .+;4°'tfe-4 l ''+FT ♦ � �' ,. 1r -0 . lr fo,.. �t � t,�., !pile ' '4 µ M r+%:xt! d«y.:ti alt,{;�" >H .Y.{ ,: .�•�~3 jr i {�• rhu.' °sib 'fit s l.'ira-ia1'.:d'. ,.,, � .,, n'I4u .•�}Floc`- ,e1.4 :.. %k:a,..;,57" �rrr f •n 4 �' . i 1. , N 1„.1 ` , ^21,.! , [` '. ' L � •-. • • ‘ZtA. r. ,.., ��,`. eh t' 'or•Aill`, ,. y :,,,,,4,-:,.. 4a.- ri•tiT4 • - .� '' � • iit)`ets r'11 .''}e`T. .ja. fi. "µy '��,,.._ ,., }' 4+1 , `Y = r". s •nSr. 4;7- .r.. -,y 'r v ..,.• yam�,+{r�i�: ^!.... ...„,?•-»95 <'T t S. S'L c,,�q,, '?e} YYY e' ` L "�iti ` ,:T v m t+ .` :i ..i'.a•' -7 r $1 :?$ + • a}a- a `t A r 7?^..1t°iur r t q • r -� t l • 4,� 't ,, ? !N -'" Q n? .r: ;�"y:. F is ,,,,.. , I s t. ..,, . f::t�;} `Yr-t,•,.((.lr't _ ^r, ,,p 7 a 'j v ' a1 dF 9 0 '' v ,F•r , 7 M '•tir• x ,fr • ,7Xr'7-]4+ 'S ! r.11• �'h I , `j'i• '• I:, i , f� ,�' )y ,i• NYfi e Z:ZyY _.,� •• +� i k' ^.' �, v N��kt N,•,''r 2i'.r-.r,, •t~;wsY?,^y y �, r,l� •*�Y •' p T,.},,,.• ' '•( � }' `- V- +.liV'I' Ry�1 l•'!E'fiF•'It `SS ,�"'�7 +'c Y „' 4.''. ' � (� Q� .Y•� l h l.,e,, R.� •I�..q y , .ycrl� f t\ x J'y ." •, �'�'[ 4.r,.. ": .7'. \ IA e. .+ >,,J ! ir_ 1n r,,�t'�,�`a �� :' rl 7: y }�i F Y'1. Sr ��r•�.� i, 3� 1 VVV n r 4 , ~-.' , M',`t.F a&1,,4,$� 'F • `rn,, ' { lS Sl ] L:;{ X Y`%tiy r L `4;l I 1 D +4 I r * 4 zlif7 n + 7.,/ t "� a<+'„+,. �+���}yiy'�y 6}' 3 •r;+! O G I cn GJ. 0! zi lti, 't + ,�" r ,r �� 4d- + L 1 y f yjt t. 1••,, '! s qi• '1 _ u L V \ .. '�''' •v,1 � ,� ` 1 'g k. ,s ''!A •yy Y7� ` s yf i f$r �. h w } t y F�r' cc. Si O Q �'1 Vi� _ G G •• g i',.1 F r •I . ib,.t,y,,.•,i; . yt rly" �,y t. J • �,�•N. �F $y`Mv't 61 -' S O O a r 1 yyy���fy„ CS± F, t v Y Jf , /'''..•-a.ktis, ��.,. ^ fJ.�,J" a ,�' A ,1, 1'" S152Y''1?T t t - Cl t7 t'J - ^ a.t 'V 4 1 r'gr,++S'�r J .1+i r• ' 5. •,,...-,.--.,' V�]f`� '. xC;(}?.,��*5 t} �' t dJ^t �+'y+ �j%9C Cr r, h • �� 1 v U1 �L 4,h'.t` '� ,r 1, • '(?`•sXtrn1' ' `"H',Yf ,y�e�\`'���,J , �+.'r�;{',,, �'r' ,' •• C G Ur ,'���r.. �'j Ynwtl 0.„�:r ' 1• I `.�NI r.. 44C-4W ,Y'rf. �.,�, �; ;t 7H�'r X ' 'M ° G C N 4�}r� �a V, 3'iSd' ,• SSYJ Ic��, • -r ; ,4 F ',. d� ,1 , .:• O O +l' ttn L):,44 ,.rt wt 's.7 rl ,•' "' (' i , r ,r 4, `9`/ 47 u U U U 4•s s•n 1Y s({��f wit t is tF '�' ' •, ,'u v r� yy�Yt r +'1 �1 F ; ., ,, i.t. < is. ;}r..,.• -.,..,'.• t t,�, 1l7gt� Y/.�',3, q,J".�' ynS'r ,. • \ .. In t0 cjn 3d'iwTs r,.Jt tt, '•k •) • r'j'V.' ba c,. 4 4 1' .� v x�' 4, $ t}y 4?6!j�: y1'�"•:'i' A I •L. aJ N oa s. N uD i 1' ,o ,r t,,,,,, 11-a y.:P i. „.. ,! - 4, ' ,4.41. ' ;i :,,, j .:� t, .,, CG 6J >J C CJ d C it..'S.¢ �. ,i�}�". ,l ',Pr��� r. `l, 1<F.F.�4.. Yf ' rI. C� Y"1 �u}t n Q u !~ •t1 O rJ 3 A • x F �w'„�P y' r'}G • � R l' Y+ , "` 1� U o a c ro n� .a ' ��aT,T r "ar• ag ?� <ti " * ti I. p .a U C4 `s cn M d ?,•t Z} >4 • r • z, t 'i.,4,N r,ypcici,,,,,,,,, ,..-?;:°fisY t�•r , i F r{��,fi n�S r'. ! r v1r., yF� �a .o � '' '`T.'Ay�n�vF4 1, .'..:.y,,y l f1,f„ } , F, : �p.��2 t ,' . e•,� • f' " O I I N ';+'i.l:.:t`R`Z ' 1§ �:; }A' Y� f�y IS-is_ ' 1 ,,,}T ��S.••i i*'b.r 1- c r "+•}7,��' r=Tt7 j,t`' E•.•r .. ,��'+U',��' , pit• K�' 'y". �9,i4C�, T ,. `+P '•' •,Y 1 iz., U L 7(` �M1rsr -. 4- <.`,'f i'__‘, ""....,._,-AV‘" "'4 A.. Y.+J i ; f'y�,t ✓ r•�+r✓7 r J 4 4� G 4 r ,▪J i t y 4j! i•( t t4i 4 a 3�4+y 1/4 s v` ? ` iy"1 ,'�+ ' r o p •" HiaR.: '.:At.y a p-' r'$,°.,+/.r'1?' t 1 r..s ,1.7• x 'Y'I.; e,(, S y./4,1 a •y, (/) I L+ J i t▪ t•t• Alf",I f,'' t�I t'-C- ib''- '',it ,t.•.p ��' J j�$ 'i•`•,*',"wV 'EFiN' 1,A141 y��.a' :H H 4-1 Lr •l y. 4 t'•�.,MV� ry, •,J '��-7D�i'$ '�•,d•'7 lid •}y} {�( "t �`'r{ l V. ��-��„�•'�•y,�; 5s"�tx 1 '+...t. LJ O , .. \ ',Ft t .. .�'„"y�''�.V•!_"�'M+'G.1{ y �� J'u' ••C'p fir' i 'i • Z.tr �r•�, i • • • .-] . t d N i,.'��,t!•:." U. tei ��,I' � + .SRYy�' �I �"` �'a} 43 4• �.�� - rh,, C Fd'a ,(?.�' Sib�' ' ti{`1A'p' +iV .rla k - > �{Y -�,y1 Y "4`tr}r,. ,.br F J % ..„ WE + 41 r �tl •>< t �5,,.��CCxxi r ,T1 1 a, �,:p,t}' '} 2 <-- �•h�ti,14:lt F, , 4 d t�Y � , p, + d`1 iir.' T , ''� '; 4 6 'r'r Lf'Ir' '' 'r, •S.��•a•�rYPS •-, w a s ] • A Y t0 •r•t y •!N' ,tl fi • ' { ' r iz�:, • : r :4;,t. 0' •>rti r ,F9I >;x , ▪ re A) J+Aft -•ter t�. f 1t '`� fa.t. � ! . 1 r. +1rt +:'F'4...,?...,.` -I. '!31 !�iryt. ,. t, �'�1r,6•L +r- V 1 + n� U 0) N Y'3t . r' .' i .� L .•1 i�, +i+��'+" r i',' ,; 1 :•4 ,-.r 5 �� , n la'F',' 'e 1 <. .Jf�.;.n,.tr o = t ,.d O' W CI ' It" .17i1,/Vy ,!. t • r.{�.* :r. i-,'�,`.! I T 4 J '- 11 , ('� .a O .r� Rj• Ja,,.A you " r� +� .V(4-•' ,"i , ++<S.41,I A• . ICr + ' �' " ,+3'�t .. •, � t " w r'p�'�'` 1 +, .,} .t st -"'' --i •• ",. %J'{ + 3� sZ�f�,n�r•,}a, yt2. a t a 3t 4 G el U � �r�l�b 4-.•,ti,to a ir " ,r a l�1.. .} .^:4:4'.", ; ^J.• y ' .I t= t '� , `I W • O \ L+ t0 Et aC 'LS'i °.V ,tR I , r li , spit' °r '`i .k�� '�.Rl Y .,r .>: ,: ..� •� V O a M G 'f 4}bj •• :,: J•W`^' ��! •y,�i31. 1. ' "L> .�`.��5���,• Sys t''': j`„� tr"°, a, jy' ,� '+ K, L, L A . ' .. u u ` ;; kti,• yJ y ' ,r'�'..: Irr•;�'� 'B i y�r �Y if �' P ,.�" ' 044 t4 d Y TI, ,it 1' (. I'! 4.�'� 0 4�r. ,y-ibtY ..:•, v r, r . •5� U of 4 ••.+ t.. vJ U Q, Pa iJ ,#f, �' •A43% -yi,�' o'+ 4 C1�r iT' 4 r� nt yw rk � k a +.. � 'u '1;V t �otq ro d yro V: U O. "1, t 9`r� Qr: !� r, 4l 1..YCs r+ +�'"• r a 'h• �a^' „ " 1 ',� 1F, , :' W •-+ •V Q1 G1 1•a •ri j9 �,`'p.s ,. + rt,' t �;rm.�• ^ t f � • !r ,r a. cf, k+nr ., e't. ntt{ r 6' 1. ++�� n•, r, ., 4 o .!i II h + S •• t +!` �M r.N.+Ln�� ? h ;4+ C µr, L "F WfF TJ IF C L 00 !~ dl i , 116d' r I , 4'47 t L. 4,. e• r ,,,.i O >' "f',yvr n+t .,R $ „ 'l ; lx ];• y C n ti iC ,o •.F v O C C ai tC t1 it '4'a • x't''� , , 1!• le ''�? 4E e•• .,Vv ►I J'`ti!tr',••r•., ,.3'j:. - "f F S•rw•1..Jj.1?,''}�. L.,i''t., • : ��•,. O • 'C ro 7 7 'D .0 •O ++ ..A rA N iy.,�,C''. `� 4 w .•..'•�4 r`• •r '•r1�;iF*"i�+'^1�t ti is I��iR a<'�tt�v Kil V.,. 'I.+)y f''tt,T�!;r��p,ll 71f� . ,l� aV L� N 4 H V] PC) d P, U .'� GC Ad OG f, ..et." S,tv�sn�!y,,,ur- ,.t'=i'�' ,"`,t S"i. - T+•, w�;.7'r, .'T•bu" "'ti, Jtti „ y., 11, r -., .r4, .,CS+i•{-lti ..L'Tj„,,,r:. •e...,•f'^{' ••••' •,r,. • ;ty r?,;'y,i �",.�N 1, y +, NJ,.It;'if'tie,' ?•L•, ' ' J!� 1%"Y Fj:w• ,':=,.•,•"'l .� :4 1,? 4''- .q ..( ?` :Jr' -•-'r e h. .E,G%`i i� ^t.v.•,,r t,a tr .j',tKs? w•:•:4-r?a 1 ' • .I.1•V •< .r,.�, 'al,�'.� '}' +�"� • ., .:,.�' ..,e.:i�•r •t;::. 4•M .f• x,,.: ;.t r+ 1��' 4 .!s+•t'•�`t 14-10 '.'f. } t;. > r r• y r'sRl`1 ,;1,• ,17. `7?;777,t. . r•• .a ',• [.;�,. �G'ntf 'pt .4 •t,. ,X,.N', y • "'� r �> :aA= w,I-I.;a • `' P �}•' �' fr,•' -�� y�.' ttJ.ts•:4;:�•1•rt"fir•.. t, , n'f4'.�`:•4 5 .' y1r '• i,1 .,, . .,,rr, •�4r t. - " 1 F•,,., 4. "1'• **(4 • ^?` n, '' ,C, ,k. '4104, I. .„'Nt S; 7. .r ,n.:z'4{' f„,yl. • • .•>. ,y„r, t!.� � 't •� :]�!.n ti;,' :, �,k I�'. ... .Grp ,�,;, ��. + �r. g}.y �„4,r,.?F;-,a. n. y;;.;:+;,:V� i Y�. tit rn�•t il. t s°t u ;-, T f r 1 t .n..3i,7.1. : '} .3f ,lC` r £ ,..i.T,• %: n, .`ti",a ,.3" .,i • .... - i. 5,, rf .:s. -.yKµ, i i.yly,�,, .rrr:'"H:= dt -;.4:.' .r xr`'�1z4,:FX •`f'!: '� .w •�,a;d,k`: }w:'�,'!A:•r.,,•.,f. ,.►u ys y 6 ,;T•':#� , •i. �,.X'i�tf �.-,.. :} � � f •t � J� �%�t:�r+. fit � - v�.NY.!f ytr,, r S L� �a;•{ .�, a• -J y.� rSF4V^-%4'''' _ "?,,, '. .t a Ji `.{,7E, .i .#1.4 r.. ids .a . . F J r ;1Y je M a l c. .v, b� t•• � Yw1 dr. +t: tom+"t" A. i ,FVi ty ,rye ,' ..�,'7�'i^'Y lit< '�1_ ''„ N"�.a •T`,$ ?,•^ >' S,..x'`.• .�1i ram. • . >b y >�" :41.{ ! ry :. h1+.wA S 1!" r Z ,•: d yr, y rr ''t ,•'+1,•r i�.. .. L !'i. 'V r�+++ V«�' ^'{� 5i•J {t 3-�t�• .�, �'� ':,?. �,.N .Tip .'•.. r,K f,' t:-C1.", • aR .4,, '`"--+ „' >ry1¢.Q "i' •,+- ! •i,A +Y,. ,• 4,-4. ✓`....,, +.ram ;./5 �{ ! ' r �, 'Ir ,� . �' a -5=,�.• a. ,_'. �,7y'' i�r �`' t�s" t,aR ,...r! t.r~'-e tr ,.�:!',..klPY .•' S 7`�+ ram' ;�I;I. "'1 yk,?i `°4r� ., j'{'K!t; LA n e"` ;•}ir �". .,Y7! r-... ^, t4,f. ',6 ..- -. •• - •. •:ir•`}T.• . ;i YT •jy: !''.`p �,•,,6'�G: 7 h?w•!; . +{' .,dlK�!.r-iYry .�, ' 4d l' .NI`:', -,P_•M mow'.. •r • • •_ ......• etv,,..,..1totkeecw,19„1.41A-„gtv ..... ,A,.e+ Tower- . +fsii. 41,.,,,,,;p4141. 0'.W.:,NT,FileMat S..., ......!'',. '.' -•4,,r++„.: -- - ;:- .. .t,'#i•- +•.••• 'd IV341/11,1Za•-k.',.'04ctit'4:+tgt*..V•it,,LT.,,...ti44:4W411 ;,,ttrty,fs.tek4s,..lt 5%17=4.- +:,,,.i'.;0+V)..Vr +10;1?1,,,V-44AW -4 , 4 + 17 . .•p. -4.....R.i Z k",4-4."",....,1'.i ' • .,-.-1,"':', `.. ''';';,i0ii...:77e.%. t ' 1,, -fil):.,'/'7ttt- t-. ".+7.t.'+'rtl. .. -.."+..-.r it.,N.t:'' ,r..:-.:::`,.. ';':::•••?,'...:.:•.;,;,.4r1r +,....,1%;.,:•‘.,. .t.fol .‘;ft071'.Tr.-",jk...Tittel..:::!..:17,''',;§!;.111• 4 e.• ,•:tf.,.„,y.."-'..„17.4- . ., 41,',i•temtik-.1"..f,i.. ''',;•!ir.','•11P.A.,4•11'- ..:.NO .4 4 *I 'i'•"'• •••--..."6 Xic".:i......r,'',&.-••,4• - • ' Fiko-,•,--,'-',d.4, 4,144,..-i 'Ai. '4- -,,,,d,,E,,o; iu,", -,i - -irt- ,, • ...:*,• -..,,.2,„ . • ,,,.„.!,',, :,-.. ,-i .,,,,-4:14-,th...%.„. 7-...-, ',.-o,;:;i:A‘4,41.7,,..,.....2,. a '‘- . ', e• ..,.. -7. -, ' . -via.. ,, tw-ika,,,,,-4,2tr-,..,011,,.. . .,..;-,.•,,,,,,,. 3,,• '. ' '.,s•bf 4",5N''-"- A l'i -'— ---.. . . '..07.,-.54.-,-,..e.-.4-;'. .•.; '.".,,,- .. i-4- 7 '?, .7-- `.,,,,,,, .;2 ,, ..,,,, 'av„t-•.,,,,, taa-.Z.:j.-tt-'k-If .14 4/41.41.1C'3?.4,1•frati.1,4.74•,b4"14k.7•FP'' ...',Ti.„?,,. ,.. , t-,,,,,,,Aki, 04, 4. ,...i 1..., .•er A,' ' 0 r 7 .1,scri;ti , 4 •"". ''-. ' '''• '- e,'0 '.;.,It i . .0 .• ..q., 4c-,,.. • , . 1 1 -......$'• :'4V11.'' !' ' '''' ''''''''' ... 1;.0 •'7•4. " '-$1- : -'4." '4/ ' 4.1.' . :deo ':01'',1;,,'''..):•it '''4,,`-1, l'''',',, 10, :iirgiefs.!„,;/;:f•tY,Ail;V, ,,V447.1,44.-'-!(80.1/Aiji t 7 k,, ,,...,'••• ,,,, •, ''i -•_f/ IP f..0 1-T•t* t17.41,.. 't•rVi!••• •!.:1'2.- _.e4t,:' - , .- . -11‘..;•i",,k,t,." .. • i ' , -4 -4,/t -: ii,,,,,,fie."-:..,4-,.:10„,,,,...7„1.4,' ,,,q.„4•&,,,TR.,-124:-,04-,tcy.),Z1f,Niti;""v•;kilt''' •); 't4' e.a...' .,p r.4%1'14't',..4.•;,2t " i it'.-f,', r.r... ,ii.,... ...,,,.5.,,,, •.,,i.i.,,,,,...,,,,,, ,.•:,.: , 14,..c.,.,. ,r.,,,,,.. : ,,,,.,, .. • - •i,„Atr-4,,,:-,4,„•:-mik7-,.:.;',:e:yt-ctiff,,vittt".,/,‘14,..,,,,-4.5.,,,:,,s,„;w„,:,,,•Piiv.i.44,, ..::.".*b . ''',.. i c ...kf' ' ''f'• ; -,t• --,4'..---4.-- 1.-e. - - 4' .4:-. - ,zgp., „Ls,.-.., .-:,,.,,P41,.. ...,if,:..,,,,,,•, cr. xi,, .- .. 'ir. .-4,L... , ,, .-,,,,•,......,,v,:e-,t, .,. , • -A 7'94 •,Nr .i 0-1N"....4-t:4-,..',.-ttiP'IS-.74!, . -hl"•••' ' 4 oiit .01 4.1.. oi, .. i .4 ,,,.„ ,-ig:• ' ' 14'ite1710,.'kV .,,,-..? 4 . ,,•04')",'1)•A . ' - p‘r 4.1fla:V,11 '1 't,;24.-4.,,,,,e..,r.ro,;: . ion,,,, -,..—P.4. 1,4.,' :.40' '.' ,1,..f.' •••••4 •e„,••: ' ':•--.. '"%--:; i .,....'., „.-.„..t.,,•,,.,.. .14*,064.;.:7.,,,iktic.,,,,i44,1 s..., , ,..,?.:Or lit,..,,,„,,...,4014,4„:,,. ,. %.,40.4, vt', rty-0.., ..1', i'' 5+,,,.1+ ?+-+If:.1"..1,4„ei.,y,t4,+*"..",:+1,,,+1,-,4,...,...,,,)4+,,,,.fill • ••151h0,1 , ir r fr , 1.* , , 41, : ..,,,,,,, AA,,• .vs.• . „. ,., , ,ei......„.- .,,.)„,....'....et,A$.:Rip,,:),Aft:, -,r,. ,.NI,,t.),•44 ki.-.; .4.1: •-..041%•.;:kr., :1,,, '.1',....2141..4.:-:( - -''' ' •' '4 ''.'' 4 •"-.0-•,-' ,':•.',.!"1:Sto‘;-,),45,1.14-,•'"41?;t31;i:15.4. $ ,. ,i PA, 'e: -'4 • 3''.(0t, r,,,-,t4,,,I,•r 1 .1..'' ' -4...._,..' .?'"cl,• 'f'-'"' ',`,,-- •,-;,,;-••12,,4#.10,,N..011c4A'.. 4.- ..::''..-.-4;qi.C?1,',,•:-'z.: .,•.•:,`•$•,.;- ilk- . -'-' . '.' ' ' T+...;i+ •+:, vi,. +70.4, it' L., 4",• treV,_,,, , k :_.'i--1.*: - `i,'.0 .4. p .-4,,,v46:74.4,13.1(bfrigr,..ws'J•,. l',..:,3i:,-;:z;.:.!..". ..... .:.':.•;;:,•;::, • . .,441,„(^.,44,,;: 1,1,, r•,•r ;',.. ', . .4 iliKt,.'"V., . ‘.t1'..; i.e,/.1 ' l'. i•• ' AA '19 AL. ,l'4 ' .;* A ,,,.-;,', . Ale-' ^,,, '7,1 71:::::TrV.f.),If 1,1CrAt,'1,•.,,.tv,',,,-,.. . ...'.......,;v4it•;•,* • -.' ,• : • ,:,'"" ivi 1.q; ' ,5!„01 , .. , :,-- '•or \ .... t • •, ,., fl, , set,,, ,a.);:it• • •, .'-',,,,, •••),.,:,. k ,,••,- . • .. '..4),,I,, ep 1.,; 1 •',,,,'.N .,'.• I '''. 4 , 1,,:,:l • '• r .'.'-i '4,tittPit,';' .. 14.1, .-, , . .<.•••,,,,.,..,"..,-,,t•..,.,•' . -:,-: . .' •".'"14'1, •.•'-' . 40, , ' ,',;.',.art. •')1, 4 i 4$ .,,'1.' .,-4".I ;.• •.. ri, .i'i 41 ''l - : --A ,.. ".:,e, -•...‘,,,'- -.v‘,e,,,.. .. ..L. .. . .. . - . . , . ....,....r,,,......1+" lt" •Itir-Sik.',C,N 4 k+ .Ik 4{'••.I.I.,'f+''F'/••••./ ' -el' 'se?,•4;?'.441'...v:'.s..-ti`i;I:•'-. . ' .-- ro- , 4-.,4. '' . 'ry:•:17;1',.;,•:',,n•'• ' ' ' • •' •• • .2c:',.„1.,„45.,4„r,%4 •••• , + .4„.1.:*, • t.,,,;*M. • i ,..icli,.41,1(.',.•••n5,,:4„.'4.. a. •i.k.,.L..,rd..4:•;:. ' '. •'- : •'.'-' . - , . ' ' . ',‘,',!1)",,.ti,..E:41.;* ' . ,:g,';'.-4•.0.qtit'illet.%?,'a''',4.-t' 1', i.4.',:ki-44A- ;re) ' - '.Cr- Ackft:z.••,_ • ,• ,,; , • .,. ,, . . . ., . .... ....,.1,;,!;:;,-.•;,-.1-t.'f.,'4,,,_ ;,i's-,4477. .:-..;,.E, , t : '..11..4,,..,i, .',4..., ' , l• 'I.::••,:.•.:'' ::) ,' , :. .. , •' • . 4 ....i:6'.4'lli:if:1..,114..i.Y'S 411.k.14:6...In 1'1'. I.' 4 i " ' '1••c: .g,'.1, •g.. A.", .•,.. , . . ;‘,.. •.*.. ' 4 , . . . ,.....,...,..,,,i,,,, ..„, ,,,,.•,.,,,,s,:,,,,,,,.„.l'Irii;',- 0 lrr,'!..1.4.•.'rjg•i'l.:‘:.10:.J..tIvt, r°';Ii's,,r...1'71111% '4,* ";-/..-4.'. '.'n•:1...:;'.'',:411,1, "Me*Iii:AIS't 1; ''..r.7,' 'i, . t-, .41' i 'i't-' . -1-•:'.144•1041,-.1,z,", :i;'..- . ' . ..::' ' , ' ' , • ..i, , , ...,4.,,• , .,i,, * , ,-r. . •, . +.. v,, It :c: ice44.,-L, , •-.):44,7-",-`,INI;...q.`.•'I.. . , ': . ...-.:,. •;i1,4.4?ii. A- i "t --'' : %.• .4 k. . ,4,;: A-4;A.&.f.':•;i:'.,.. '„• ,.• , .. . .• . .,, .-.v't ; :!..t .15:4,;;:le:- "-' , . ' : ' • •'• • .4.• ..... .••:.? '-$.;-';••=••- ,;-•-•••-js-,..-• . . - • I . 1.,•fr,..‘,.;,,,,).......,,,7 .,,,,,",,,,1-..,.•••..,..h.,4 4 '.1 ;).Wire!,4-47,1,:y. ,, .:.:4A,:::,t,..i.. „,,,, ,.„...,;;,:•..,,.,?,..•., .- -, . , , : . , • . . . , .i. ,g,T.-flp,.,,la..7..atirll ..,t.m-r.,.,:‘,.:,...., . .. .. • .. .• • ,,.,7„..0. 11417 1..,_ ,. I, - 14 -4--4 -7...falp%.-Gy Tr.:i•-••- ,' ,., • , ., . ' -•' ' ' L.' ' '44 Ft• ••,...!:14--,, ",•-v-'4;,' '''-.1';,-;-'-',.'-Y;i-•:,. ' . ' i I . fc,' ...-,if-,....... -- 1.•••,„,i- ,• v.:. ,• , : • . • ';'';'`ii.'. ';',:*''' . ''..,:. + e.... ‘41115/1r b *..,t,"„-‘,"2.1 • cri-•--•• •'•• • ••• I •0.0 II :..„ , .,..alif.,:rt..4,,,t,, I--ir,,,---....' - .- • • •• • .. Z . -". •; ,,. • ', .,,'crpl,,,.,',...•',;.•5.1-.tc:144::-..1, 1-4,-,7 (..-74.:4,A),•;,:').V.0-',..". • ,e,-...inti.,:%,•• . .. • . - •L,',...'4.1...,...;,.v,...11-1,.. .- tepf 4lii.V I .....0.:(%.! 4 •:,"r-i: .• .; .,. . - ' " ' \‘) . .• ... .•A,i4; t...,- , •-• ' .4+"..,M 41, ••L p 4.1:47,4‘ ,--,A:.F?A;i1-P,',. ::. .. • ' . '. . *c IN _ . . - . 1. • ',-;.- -,:,,,..e: ..P,,;.. % • --.4.asti.„ ' '1::-g,A...1,!.'-ric-''..c14;y,,,;;11,141,-' .t., ' •• - -, . , • , . • ''',4'_ 'A:...-.1%.3„i4.41,,.):•,::: ' ... -....1„...'. .' . , ... •t i .1. . • ,4-. •4 . ,,P ql7t.••jr '.• • -1,'• ••.)'' '•:. 4F.,G•../...04C - ''.' . .. •Iik .6' ,'''' •• . ,.:+ 4i •-• a . ••••'. : •,,,,,,, .....i.. , ,,,,..Ekte,;,''',:f.,-, .:-P.;.-.,,. . . . ..- - - ' ' "t,,,,..,,,,,.'.•,,,-, .'r,.-,..*,,,„:4•,.. '., ,,..,• , , , ., .,,, , 4-' ''A i,•4'-;' .,‘'410:47.,?..1.i;•-•.-1-..:: :;,'-,'. ' ' '' --, ..-1••‘-Y.- .Y. .- ."'71.+C •:+.t..c ;0'' (..40;41%,• - ' ';' ' •. i.... . ....,..ct. ,...0, ,,,.:, ,.,...,. ., . •r .. . . 021'.. .' ''; ,iltS,,V4''''',• .4174.r.:*.::;0':#!;( '. . ... \ j • 40 ..it' gj C.+ -• 'a• f . \ -4 \) 4 •. • ;: • , ; i Iv. , 4,,, . , .. • • , ..,r'' ' 'Kr 411.v Ki - '.4,,,v1.,1 ra ' •- ' ,,. ,,,A7' . ir,.1): , Tar, c .,, tt 14 CZ •r4 '.•. : . ' • •:','P,.• '.A..,',14f•Ark 41,•/•4 )1014" •••• • , R.ki,v, /L.,. " t • :, . ., , . . '..,,,...)'.;:z.t1.1,te,t..!??:;,t.i,,,,:tte-.4' 15,104.14.,,..c.:.•:,.., ' , . , -,+.1.1 tIrli,,,,eit+.• A+‘,:* L *.14-1 T-4-Mt.V:i'W.;.-.,',,,to-,:,' - , . . .. ‘,1 .. • . 1 cri . ''• .,•'s','', 'It! 4. A i :•••''n ' 41 -.. ,,.I, :,,:,(..i.t..,,,.. . ,3,:iiiit• . , 3f 3" ". ::.0 ^.l' '1 •r2` 4'1-4k,0' !1 V,,.:''' '. • . • • 4 : i 1 C C4 , „..C.,,„o. .,,,. 'At, .. .,4.s, , '. M.. ,1 ,A., •W5,- -..?'Sii`,V64:14,i Ilk fi.‘•i. '1.i.' ' " .' ' 4: •• - -4 ‘...• • -.' ,.._Ter-, -ht,.. .t4.14i, v, i;:: , ,._.4.71.k. „it. - 4.:4,99,, i..eAtk.........1,, . • :. --•-,-1-1Y07._,--„*.-,,,,..•,,,-,...t.'t-4ivr- •-; 40,t1i,,K...ig!: . .„ '- • , ••• "• -. 1-,-;44•••,,,,,...,,,,.. ,, „,„,--,.,..40,,,,,,,•,, -,t„..,...,!, ,,,,,,.i.,,,.•,•, • .. , c*,:.:4,-.-.:atc.--- :4-1;li'i''''''-'1''-';',;(., 1":"If.'',','-':-.1i,:i.:1`.. :.'-',•,',-••••: • -,.`,• •• . _ .; -'-' . •t....,...,......11,gs,:i.,',1'.'..te.„ 4'41..3-.5 r,-4.;5- „,_,L 41, ,-rag.t.icii;1,',4zi,,,I,,,,4•,-:-.-.,,,-..,: ...,•::;:-.-.-•••..- , . ,,,,),,;:•••-•:•174*-:,-;";:c-7:-•-ei 14-•:.:44 ii-r. -- - --, • -.,t41.--...,s•-•'• -,, • -..--,..:--• ••., - 1 ku, - 11 ••,.,•,•72...3.,..,..r....z,r.„•,•-: .••• f.,....p,...,1‘,.. • ..;, ... .1-0,- -‘,/a3•••• . . ; , •••:...,.-,'::.:‘. - .----, ',In C • E • C•li .31".. ....... 1 T.II 4 ic z r-,,' ,;•,:,,_••,-,:,,,,:..t,,•.-N..- ••: ••• • • . ..4 'X'. "'-e'cli-•---.',.. . • . •• .. . , ...,.. -- •-4,,,Ir . .,-1.,,•••••'•'„, c ., ... -,... • • •• '2'ilk ..ilk -,,• C` t,12. - '••... ,' -:, -1°. -4 '. • .•' :Cv.:-'4, .- • 14104,4k4; -' -ft, •:,,' 4.-1 .., ,,,,, U) cr: 1.4 ?,,, go) fii) ''.' ..-,",;•CI 0 s'.' 1 i• '. '* ' r.--•',...;,-..1:Yr 3.•-e•t• : -AV::'Pt,•41/2''''. ' ••44:41'14.i ... ....i".-_ , ,'.'..-. •". ----• C "0 ,13 .= > u) u c.„3-C3 : cl r.,.. ui .1..;‘.5.11. . v jo....,,,........44, io.t.;re.,,,,iik.,3...i..x.;:.,,;24.:...141......ii,::::,..p.,4•Vws,..,,e.....,,,:ii.:.:51., ./41i„.„.•,•;-,-....4,".s,•.•.,•••,;.: 1".":-.2.fz,..floic •,-.,.1...V..4.t...!.., .: A,L:4.2.,,E9,.. ;;,....7 -', ' ..c.:• s„„ ' -•• • - 4-, .... 1... )•••• 4,, 0 • '(IA.•if.',72;.: .....•-"•.! i',.4.?•'•.- . -P4.k4 '142:,00.Xtf‹, "4.•.,'Ilr 1•,..,,C,••"....' ..— -.' I "- ' : . VI ;"L' C`) 4. W C.-) OE' (Q/4 "C9 .--1 -'1 14 'IJ '-' .,..,14,-'.4-';','z;'7 ' .. 1 ,,..,,..44,e, ,,..,,trs4....:.. . ..,,••'*-(::"•;--'.'4',..7f'rt'.,f;'44*.1.1%,,,42k .i .1.1.-A A ' ,, WeV,I,P-7.,..'".:T),;Fi",.•,!.':.:,‘-. •,,,••",‘•`.•:-.r,•,•,,"„.. .•-••••••-••• .,,-.-r,•.:.-,!-...-•- "2. •F'•.,'_;.?'-.•• 4.;s , 4sel, ,,4,r0 Viii., (•.i.'-'"''''•-•`-'7.7•:-4-t.-77.--• ' -- :,•(..,,:r•-,-,t,' -7;51.7-- ,, , - aIn; -;•',..• , 4,:.-•-,, , •1. . .„„y t‘,•••/;,,.•,,.••• -.,--,-,, - • -.• .. :4'.. `4".... .'.,'‘:.'-' .- ' ''.%^".. .' '. ' . 'I :WI,.....•,•+.:-`,,,i•-',...,_c_ +, ,: 1 ___________, "i;i: ' 1 4 .• ?.-4;4kiw.,..-,; 1-0-''''t ' - • - ..f. ...-' . ,-q s.,...v.i.1.0,5 , . .,•,....,,,,. . . , _ . _ .„7„....,,,"0,,w4 _ • . ...... 4,,,,‘1,..r.i..,./,...'..,,i.;,.4 ,: '•. ... , „ .. .. • . + . -' ' ._ -,i.:. +„,- '....;,:...,7--.,..-;-,+.4.t,X1,',+„,.+,,-;z02-5.1.4.4%.'•+,i•Sk .' t.? . f,,, t 4-+-r,...1.- - ' . -• . • ,. • • . -.. • •'• - '+.• . t.) 1' .h• 1. " ++. :pis, ' • ' '''''''' ''.e.P , :,,,.. ,.., ,. . o,.. ' . , ,, .,. •. ,, ..:. ..i....t4\1... :,0:•Os..ii.ii. r....: 'i, ...s - _4' .+1 i"..' •inlf,iri,••4,411. .1_V.4V,...4.,,,..4..1• r .. . •- r- . 1.2.41.p,, ,,, •., ,e.- vz4f,i4.25.4.R:,,,.,.,.!.-M,..pe.fif.,;:::,:. , -..i. ,/..,....,, ; .:. .. . • . . ..-.. ......- 1:,,v.3.1:,,,,, ....,,..ii..,1..,,„,,tgi, , ; ,;.$4 ,,,,, • left': tOft '''.'4,',Iipt Re•-•4•...,-----. . ,, . . , .. ...„. ..,, ,2 4,cq.., ' . . ''.-•,, ,. ,.i 4.Y.i....t.,,E,=0.,ip,;•:.„'.. .?,- ':' . • ' •. • . '' ., ...'v' ','• .'.'-.' •,,,-;•;'1:•..i::1•',.-;.]:‘4.A'Ae• '/v 1). 1, - Istr., , t., .'os ,v,•.I 4+A.,4 1, ,I,... , •:1„,•,,,p,rart•AW,474, ' ' -.'.'; • . , "7-44+11411.ge*,. •as•-;.,.it'44, -,:-. ...• ,,c_mir-ii,:a...i-,-.•!•:- , • •• ,. ., .- „ • - ,--:;.:-,-:•••....— ',.:.-,,-.?.,-..-4g.."-.:4..,•-•.;&- -44'1.* .6".4,4,1'.'211% ',,-'." t'..t.t. r :-.4.**1.91.:41e 4 i'.• .k...15"..t44+3,;,V.:',. '..1.,:' ' '. ,' , ' nl..,.,5,, • •"t,c-,• ' •-?•••,, '., 0-w;ititrt.-..-i,,k---- •, -, • ,' ,.' ' • :., ,';- .•.,- ;4-:...,-,%f••••-;,'•,f',4"-f-.,::1';4..- -...rw--.ttr. ...0 . .;., .. . 1/4', ,r.0},AN tip* .; yt,r:4,,..0-.!:...*4';'.... •., . ...,.,- •':.1, , •.-, ei_.t...,%-c_ .••ili ••.i.•-+•-••. r -.. ', in' r;et''.1:.' i' .• '.' • •, • '.'. .,,--'-::,'rtkit A. , ‘4.4 ='. , '% ;ti- 4 ; +,..".`,1 W '4,....1* ,+, '4:1*.lf•;„•zw1,2•411` -''' • : " . ':i.!.11•44-•T-' *-'5,P11,-1 • / ` t.,i,Ift-t•- ' - '-','•z.- ., :•'" .."*..•', ''.• ---.,',:- -2.-i,iict .•t --•,,-- - ,.. -}..,'- 0-..,'ir-..,,r4 ......z- • ,t•i 4.,d-b, . .-,.,,,,..i.,.. .,...,p,..41,3,,,,,,%-fs.4-.;- k ,.. , . •....„....ii,..,..,,:. ....„,-,„.„; : , id .,..... . -4-4,,,•-•-,,-• . .;'....•,..,• •1,— ; •'••••'-;.;.-•r•••,;'•-.4.-t,i145 &b.,. • 'Tilt. 7' .0*.r4i .**. . ,P.".. ).-Ns; .11.tia:4,'...,V,Y,,,t,•'5;" ..:_.,,,,.-...,!,:...,....... ,,. . . . . . ....,,,,,,,,,.5..A,,,,,t.i.:,.,,,..i.;*,$,:,i41437:,,,,,: ...k.....61,,,i,,;,.-li,,,:,.,-. ,*4'..:,•-•,,,.e-N,,,tc.;::„.:, ,,...),-..,::.....,,.::,..c; :::.,:„,::::-.,.,i',.....::;!.t.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ., 5,,,,,,K,.. lit:, ilz....,,6„.tviliii...,,,$.,,,,,,,4,y4.4';:r.,:it*4141.1,•,..&,T,,k5.%).'itip,.1,4;IJ,_,. 40;+T,i,-i ..„:"_..„ -, •,'..,..,'„:,, . ', -;•:+:...i..,.f:+f-4.,, ••'',7,.,,iq..:`..-1,,-;,:-Ni.i. tr!,„.,,,,!.e'if:..,...,;,-,-,,...$,.,..,tA:.,, ,.c..•To'5,,,A.1.,',,'• ,,,',,-;•-•y!: 1,':-;fff.,,,lry•???1).pie.,,vx-fteal ,'•,-•4,-,•0,',0,--,0-'e ,Ni,i,, •-,4,-1,-4. • -.-.4, .,-• •=.1:,-,,.,-,'. .-1-- , , •• •• ,,....„.‘... ,1 ,- ,. c-, , c , „,.....,,, - •-. ,,,.. . ,•- ;,..,1•• c-, ..,,,,c ,., - -c,9t