HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 2017-09-05ritliapsw://%*. 0 ",, O) V C o
Oc - cN
3 O O in_. im H O) 4) .1111416 1
t.li0 Q * 2 • ilk;
a ' 404 "'!‘ ��,_
4i, a) c
.....
% - O V0
O h- 0.
1.- .
- _0 . 2 ED a) (1111111
‘ 0.. 0 tn
,,,. . 10"1 '1,,,,,,J oV �
0, 01) >% 7.9
...
JIM ii ..4117' ' 1 i 13; • in ,
1' 41.41111 .„., . a) 7
It illeig„144100 itV
me 11 Iv
„. _ . .
.-.1,-, iiii? . '10:*.'1::::: I
1 J k 1
mk
•
iiP
1111:41111111:r *
N F
ir , :„, ,
, . • ,
,• I:
a
i 'a�
. 4,,,*
g.
CO 4 ip vilive.. 00
o
0 4/1 ,
2 ,•
MALI '. •I
Oil 14,1 Ilki
Iiiiik
dimiir
;44
lift
* ipii,,,
44( ?Pill* fp ..\
CI Mr
Z10-1111/frt- * i At oe 1
W
r
.., I
0 r
1 1. 1. 11111 A apNr I 4opZ N .' 1CU
W
r
Z
O N CU N r
CD
CU
NiPik
V '' — li ,i , Air
rfoN
N
Q . CD R 0-
_
Ce
+ o 0 0IP
111 0 >
a
NJ
O
Q ,i N 4 , i 01141,11:11111
m m m 2
4
ilk - .ter•
13111 viirria Irlik ru.L. 1
LORA AND CITY COUNCILL'
EXECUTIVE SESSIONSskiL
LORA and the City Council are meeting in
consecutive Executive Sessions, each under
authority of ORS 192 . 660 ( 2 ) ( e ) to conduct
deliberations with persons designated to
negotiate real property transactions, and ( 2 ) (f)
to consider information or records that are
exempt by law from public inspection .
0) N
rittili• iT
C
// •- 0
4N
I V LC)
a
._____. _.„, t;00, .„_. ----. Ilf I * al) III: :1 ._ E
___. . o $2,.... ii0 .....% ,i c;11- •
- - 0 . a
‘ if:,
', iv o ....
, >% .cm?
—
I
JIM t ..417I •mi tin
V a)
I, - 01", -. - ” .,
o 1-
P. 4141111111114 Cr)Illt ,,. 41,44 4)
411111 A, A
Oa V
40 I'V*4':'• • 0
Ili
..
, diis 1 Oa ..... h:
•
• t
ii
.t 11 - - '(‘-I
4,. N
f 1 ,Illi Alf
O ,
Ar gib
-r a)
Ci
2C Iit/pi
10
t.
.
} �a •
CO 4 f , qiilaw 00
o
0 /Ill . , 'I o ip,•
i CL A
r . s 1
CONSENT AGENDA
Will"rinir, Cit2
i ___,,,,,Iii'llIV 4,11,11, ...
• The consent agenda allows the City Council to consider items that require no discussion. IIIIN
• An item may only be discussed if it is pulled from the consent agenda.
• The Council makes one motion covering all items included in the consent agenda. aq
411111
Motion: Move to adopt the consent agenda.\1111, _
14.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes
,:il ill ik;1111 it, ' .---, J.
lir,ciiiiiiiiiiir,
14.1.1 June 20, 2017, Regular Meeting
14.1.2 July 5, 2017, Regular Meeting
14.1.3 July 17, 2017, Regular Meeting
Motion: Move to approve the minutes as written.
14.2 Purchase of Pierce Velocity PUC Pumper NH657 Fire Engine
Motion: Move to authorize the purchase of one new Pierce Velocity PUC Pumper NH657 Fire Engine from
Pierce Manufacturing, Inc., by means of FireRescue GPO, a program of NPPGov.
* 14
r . Z _ S
CONSENT AGENDA
, • : .41
14.3 Purchase of Precision Weld 22' Rescue Boat and Trailer 4, igN.-
Motion: Move to authorize the purchase of one new Precision Weld 22' Rescue Boat and Trailer from
Precision Weld Boats, Inc.
14.4 Resolution 17-53, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Declaring a Public
Necessity to Acquire Real Property Interests at 16140 and 16650 Boones Ferry Road and Exercise the Powe
of Eminent Domain (Boones Ferry Road Project).
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-53.
14.5 Contract Amendment for Pre-Design of Marylhurst Pump Station — WO 238.
Motion: Move to authorize an amendment to an existing Pre-Design Personal Service Contract with
Murraysmith, Inc. (formerly Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.), Engineers/Planners, to provide additional
design, permitting and construction phase services for the Marylhurst Wastewater Pump Station
Replacement Project, Work Order 238, in the amount of$430,424.00.
/VA -
I
r Ai. r Z / _1
CONSENT AGENDA
41111pwirrin ., 0 : ...„ .41
..ik !drill Air ._ _
II. iiiN
14.6 Resolution 17-52, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Initiating Proceedings to
Vacate Portions of the right-of-way for Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place and Authorizin
the City Recorder to Give Notice of a Public Hearing.
.;
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-52.
14.7 Resolution 17-49, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Approving the
Appointment of the Public Art Committee Chair.
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-49.
14.8 Boones Ferry Road Annexation Agreement
Motion: Move to authorize the City Manager to sign an annexation agreement between the City and the
owners of properties located at 16524, 16552 and 16556 Boones Ferry Road substantially in the form
presented.
+ I f _ _
AGENDA
o �
LAKE OSWEGO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING
IV O September 5, 2017
5:00 p.m.
OREoc) Council Chambers, City Hall
Contact: Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
Email: asimpson@lakeoswego.city
Phone: 503-534-4225
Also published on the internet at: www.lakeoswego.city. The meeting location is accessible to persons
with disabilities.To request accommodations, please contact the City Manager's Office at 503-534-4225
48 hours before the meeting.
1. CALL TO ORDER, LAKE OSWEGO REDEVELOPENT AGENCY (LORA)
2. ROLL CALL
3. CONSENT AGENDA
3.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes
3.1.1 July 5, 2017 Special Meeting
3.1.2 July 18, 2017, Special Meeting
Motion: Move to approve minutes as written.
4. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
5. RECESS TO RECONVENE IN LORA EXECUTIVE SESSION: Under authority of ORS 192.660
(2)(e)to conduct deliberations with persons designated to negotiate real property
transactions, and (2)(f)to consider information or records that are exempt by law from
public inspection.
6. CALL TO ORDER, CITY COUNCIL
7. ROLL CALL
8 RECESS TO RECONVENE IN CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SESSION: Under authority of ORS
192.660(2)(e)to conduct deliberations with persons designated to negotiate real property
transactions, and (2)(f)to consider information or records that are exempt by law from
public inspection.
9. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION AND ADJOURN, LORA
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Page 2
10. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION, CITY COUNCIL—Begins at 6:30 p.m.
11. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
12. PROCLAMATION
12.1 Safe, Caring, and Respectful Community
13. PRESENTATION
13.1 Video Contest Winner Awards
14. CONSENT AGENDA—Full Council Approval
♦ The consent agenda allows the City Council to consider items that require no discussion.
♦ An item may only be discussed if it is pulled from the consent agenda.
♦ The City Council makes one motion covering all items included in the consent agenda.
Motion: Move to adopt the consent agenda.
14.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes
14.1.1 June 20, 2017, Regular Meeting
14.1.2 July 5, 2017, Regular Meeting
14.1.3 July 17, 2017, Regular Meeting
Motion: Move to approve the minutes as written.
14.2 Purchase of Pierce Velocity PUC Pumper NH657 Fire Engine
Motion: Move to authorize the purchase of one new Pierce Velocity PUC Pumper NH657
Fire Engine from Pierce Manufacturing, Inc., by means of FireRescue GPO, a program of
NPPGov.
14.3 Purchase of Precision Weld 22' Rescue Boat and Trailer
Motion: Move to authorize the purchase of one new Precision Weld 22'Rescue Boat and
Trailer from Precision Weld Boats, Inc.
14.4 Resolution 17-53,A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Declaring a
Public Necessity to Acquire Real Property Interests at 16140 and 16650 Boones Ferry Road
and Exercise the Power of Eminent Domain (Boones Ferry Road Project).
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-53.
14.5 Contract Amendment for Pre-Design of Marylhurst Pump Station—WO 238.
Motion: Move to authorize an amendment to an existing Pre-Design Personal Service
Contract with Murraysmith, Inc. (formerly Murray,Smith &Associates, Inc.),
503.635-0215 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Page 3
Engineers/Planners, to provide additional design, permitting and construction phase
services for the Marylhurst Wastewater Pump Station Replacement Project, Work Order
238, in the amount of$430,424.00.
14.6 Resolution 17-52,A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Initiating
Proceedings to Vacate Portions of the right-of-way for Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and
Kruse Way Place and Authorizing the City Recorder to Give Notice of a Public Hearing.
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-52.
14.7 Resolution 17-49,A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Approving
the Appointment of the Public Art Committee Chair.
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-49.
14.8 Boones Ferry Road Annexation Agreement
Motion: Move to authorize the City Manager to sign an annexation agreement between the
City and the owners of properties located at 16524, 16552 and 16556 Boones Ferry Road
substantially in the form presented.
15. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
16. CONSENT AGENDA—Councilor Approval
16.1 Resolution 17-47,A Resolution of the City Councilors of the City of Lake Oswego Approving
Appointments of Youth Members to Advisory Boards.—appointing Karthik Sreedhar to the
Sustainability Advisory Board, Sabrina Safari to the Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resources Advisory Board, Michael Murry to the Transportation Advisory Board, and Caleb
Bryan to the Historic Resources Advisory Board.
Motion: Move to approve Resolution 17-47.
17. CITIZEN COMMENT(15 minutes)
The purpose of citizen comment is to allow citizens to present information or raise an issue
regarding items not on the agenda or regarding agenda items that do not include a public
hearing. A time limit of three minutes per individual shall apply.
17.1 Prior Citizen Comment Follow-Up
18. COUNCIL BUSINESS
18.1 Contract Award for Construction Management Services for WO 183-Boones Ferry Road
Improvements Project
Motion: Move to award a personal services contract to Otak, Inc. to provide Pre-
Construction Phase Construction Management Services for the WO 183-Boones Ferry Road
Improvements project for a not-to-exceed amount of$152,212.
503.635-0215 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Page 4
18.2 Resolution 17-34,A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Adopting the
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan
Motion: Move to approve Resolution 17-34.
18.3 Contract Award for Hazelia Turf Replacement
Motion: Move to authorize the City Manager to sign contract with FieldTurf USA Inc.
in the amount of$638,984.71 for replacement of the artificial turf at Hazelia Field.
18.4 Botticelli Striping Update
19. PUBLIC HEARINGS
19.1 Appeal of TR 499-17-02043 (AP 17-05),Appeal of a Permit of Tree Removal at 1053 C
Avenue.
Motion:[See staff report for options. Decision will be tentative, including direction to staff
to present findings, conclusions and an order for adoption on September 19, 2017.]
Public Hearing Process:
Pursuant to LOC 55.02.085(4),the hearing before the City Council shall be on the record
established before the Development Review Commission (DRC) and only persons who
appeared before the DRC orally or in writing may testify. No issue may be raised before the
City Council that was not raised before the DRC with sufficient specificity to enable the
hearing body and parties to respond.
The appellant shall testify first,followed by persons in favor of the appeal, persons in
opposition to the appeal (beginning with the applicant), and concluding with rebuttal by
the appellant.
1. Review of hearing procedure by David Powell, City Attorney
2. Staff Report by Ellen Davis,Associate Planner
3. Testimony:the following time limits shall be observed, but may be changed by the
Council: 15 minutes for the appellant's presentation,followed by 5 minutes for
other persons in favor of the appeal, 15 minutes for the Applicant's presentation,
and five minutes for other persons in opposition to the appeal.A representative of
a recognized neighborhood association, homeowner association, or government
agency, or other incorporated public interest organization will receive 10 minutes.
Testimony concludes with a 5 minute rebuttal by the appellant.
4. Questions of Staff
19.2 Ordinance 2750, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending the Zoning Map
to Change the Zone Designation for Property at 10 Touchstone (21E05BD02000,
Supplemental No. 1) and Abutting Right-of-Way from R-3 to R-7.5, and Adopting Findings
(LU 17-0022).
Motion: Move to approve LU 17-0022, adopting the Findings, Conclusion and Order in
503.635-0215 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Page 5
Exhibit A-1.1, and enact Ordinance 2750.
City Council Review is limited to the evidence in the record before the Planning
Commission. No new evidence may be presented at the hearing and no person may testify
unless that person appeared orally or in writing before the Planning Commission. No issue
may be raised that was not raised before the Planning Commission with sufficient
specificity to allow the Commission and the parties to respond.
Public Hearing Process:
1. Review of hearing procedure by David Powell, City Attorney
2. Staff Report by Paul Espe,Associate Planner
3. Testimony: the following time limits shall be observed, but may be changed by the
Council: 10 minutes for representatives of recognized neighborhood associations,
homeowner associations, government agencies, or other incorporated public
interest organizations; 5 minutes per individual
4. Questions of Staff
19.3 Ordinance 2754, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Amending
LOC Chapter 50 (Community Development Code) to Clarify and Update the Criteria for
Design Variances in the Downtown Redevelopment Design (DRD) District(LU 17-0039).
Motion: Move to approve LU 17-0039 and enact Ordinance 2754, including the findings and
conclusions in Exhibit A-1.1.
Public Hearing Process:
1. Review of hearing procedure by David Powell, City Attorney
2. Staff Report by Scot Siegel, Director of Planning and Building Services
3. Testimony:the following time limits shall be observed, but may be
changed by the Council: 10 minutes for representatives of recognized
neighborhood associations, homeowner associations,government
agencies, or other incorporated public interest organizations; 5 minutes
per individual
4. Questions of Staff
20. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL
21. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
22. ADJOURNMENT, CITY COUNCIL
503.635-0215 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
3.1
D A E qf REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REPORT
/,,,//lir o
dR�ddC.‘
TO: Kent Studebaker, Chair
Scott Lazenby, Executive Director
FROM: Anne-Marie Simpson, Recording Secretary
SUBJECT: Approval of Board Meeting Minutes
DATE: August 28, 2017 MEETING DATE: September 5, 2017
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to approve minutes as written.
ATTACHMENTS
1. July 5, 2017, Draft Special Meeting Minutes
2. July 18, 2017, Draft Special Meeting Minutes
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
ATTACHMENT 1
E____
A E �st LAKE OSWEGO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
MINUTES
. CJuly 5, 2017
EGO�
13. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Studebaker called the Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency (LORA) meeting to
order at 9:13 p.m., following the regular City Council meeting on July 5, 2017, in the City
Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue.
Present: Chair Studebaker and Board Members LaMotte, Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill,
Manz, and Gudman
Staff Present: Scott Lazenby, Executive Director; David Powell, LORA Counsel; Anne-
Marie Simpson, Recording Secretary; Sidaro Sin, Development Project
Manager
14. BOARD BUSINESS
14.1 Public Improvement Contract Award for Work Order 235 for 2nd Street
Improvements
Report and Attachments
Mr. Sin noted that the Board was asked to consider approval of the contract award for
improvements to 2nd Street between A Avenue and Evergreen Road, as detailed in the
Redevelopment Agency Report. The primary purpose of the project is to improve the roadway,
grades, and cross-slope across 2nd Street. He discussed photographs that illustrated issues to
be addressed by the project and a graphic rendering of the proposed improvements (Attachments
1 and 2 to the Report). In responding to Board Member Buck's questions about the stormwater
improvements, he and Mr. Powell clarified how this aspect was distinct from the Block 137
project.
Mr. Sin highlighted advantages of the two-phase construction schedule: 90% completion is
planned for the first phase, producing a drivable roadway by the end of October. As a portion of
2nd Street is the primary delivery and staging area for Block 137 construction, the remaining 10%
will be completed in the second phase, with the final layer of asphalt to be completed in early
2018. This will produce a high-quality roadway at the completion of the Block 137 project. In
proposing Lease Crutcher Lewis, the contractor for Block 137, Staff recognized various benefits,
as discussed in the Report. The opportunity for coordination during the concurrent projects was
Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 2
July 5, 2017
the significant factor, he indicated. The bid of $301,713 is considered fairly competitive in
comparison to the engineer's estimate of $265,000, given the higher costs of staging for two
phases versus one and other factors outlined in the Report (p 2). Concluding with a summary of
benefits to both the City and the Block 137 development, he conveyed Staffs recommendation to
award the contract to Lease Crutcher Lewis.
Mr. Lazenby noted that the bid was the outcome of Mr. Sin's extensive efforts to obtain the lowest
cost possible through both Lease Crutcher Lewis and the Block 137 developer. Member Buck
inquired about the initial bid, and Mr. Sin advised that it had been $365,000. The reduction to
$301,713 for a full rebuild can be regarded as quite competitive, considering that the initial bid
was for a partial grind and overlay, he noted.
Board Member Gudman moved to award a public improvement contract to Lease Crutcher
Lewis in the amount of $301,713 for Work Order 235 — 2nd Street Improvements. Board
Member LaMotte seconded the motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed. with Chair Studebaker and Board Members
LaMotte, Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill, Manz, and Gudman voting `aye'. (7-0)
15. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Studebaker adjourned the LORA Board meeting at 9:21 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Anne-Marie Simpson, Recording Secretary
APPROVED BY THE LAKE OSWEGO
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ON
Kent Studebaker, Chair
Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 2
July 5, 2017
ATTACHMENT 2
O�`A Ey
t LAKE OSWEGO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
C MINUTES
. C July 18, 2017
GREGO�
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Studebaker called the Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency (LORA) meeting to
order at 3:02 p.m. on July 18, 2017, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Chair Studebaker and Board Members Gudman, LaMotte, Kohlhoff, Buck,
O'Neill, and Manz
Staff Present: Scott Lazenby, Executive Director; David Powell, LORA Counsel; Corinne
Strauser, Deputy Recording Secretary; Jordan Wheeler, Deputy City
Manager
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Studebaker led the Board in the Pledge of Allegiance.
4. CONSENT AGENDA
4.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes
4.1.1 June 6, 2017, Special Meeting
Motion: Move to approve minutes as written.
Report and Attachment
END CONSENT AGENDA
Board Member Gudman moved to approve the minutes as written. Board Member Manz
seconded the motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Chair Studebaker and Board Members
Gudman, LaMotte, Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill, and Manz voting 'aye'. (7-0)
Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 4
July 18, 2017
5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
No items were removed from the Consent Agenda.
6. BOARD BUSINESS
6.1 Architectural and Engineering Services for City Hall and Civic Center Project
Report and Attachment
Mr. Wheeler asked the Board for consideration and approval of a contract with Mackenzie for
design and engineering services for a new City Hall, as presented in the Redevelopment Agency
Report. He provided background on the City Hall/Civic Center project, emphasizing the
advantages of having the Mackenzie team on both the Police facility and City Hall projects. This
would support the objective of a coordinated design process and a staggered construction
schedule. He highlighted the scope of the initial Basis of Design phase that was proposed,
focused on validation of space needs and activities related to design concept development,
including public input (p 3 of the Report); a series of public forums would be a key element in
achieving successful integration of the two projects. He discussed the more complex scope of
the City Hall project in comparison to the Police project, citing the possibility of incorporating the
property at Evergreen Road and 3rd Street in this project. The services for the proposed first
phase, Basis of Design, would be $380,440, part of the $2,081,235 total contract amount. He
recapped key assumptions for the City Hall project (p 4 of the Report), describing aspects of the
building design and the potential need to remove some trees; planned programming for the Police
facility is unchanged, with the Booktique and Arts Council still recommended in that location.
Finally, he asked for direction on two issues: (1) The 3rd and Evergreen property offers potential
in terms of some stormwater management for the Civic Center block. The proposal does not
currently include this, but the scope and fee for Mackenzie's work does include exploring the
possibility. (2) As noted, one of the assumptions for City Hall programming is that it does not
include small-retail services such as a coffee shop. While this may be explored through the public
input process, Staff would welcome Board members' views at this time.
Chair Studebaker asked whether or not the total ($2,081,235) contract amount would allow the
City to meet the projected total cost of the City Hall. Mr. Wheeler indicated that a review of costs
several months earlier showed the total to be in the projected range, based on project
assumptions at that time. Impacts of any major changes to the scope, however, would need to
be considered. Mayor Studebaker noted that he would not favor including a coffee shop there.
Board Member Manz asked for clarification of the stormwater-management capacity of the
3rd/Evergreen property. Mr. Wheeler indicated that it might provide one element of stormwater
management for the whole site, describing potential design features. Such improvements could
make the property more usable for the neighborhood, he added. Member Manz stated that she
did not see a need to dedicate space for a coffee shop in the City Hall, and discussed how a
standalone coffee cart might be accommodated in the future.
Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 4
July 18, 2017
Board Member Buck suggested that the Board consider designating the green space at
3rd/Evergreen as an official park if a stormwater facility there was implemented; this would bring
certainty and other benefits for neighbors. He asked about plans for determining the size and
configuration (two versus three stories) of the new City Hall building. Mr. Wheeler described the
greater complexity of this effort in comparison to the Police project. Space needs would be
identified over the next two or three months through cooperative efforts with staff, including
department directors; the City would also work with Mackenzie to learn about workplace needs of
the future. As discussed earlier, it is anticipated that the new City Hall will not be dramatically
different from the current facility, he noted. Essentially the assumption is for a 30,000-square-
foot building, with more efficient use of space, updating to current building standards, and a focus
on meeting the needs of the community. Input on the customer experience would be obtained
through the planned community forums. He outlined considerations that would be involved in the
decision about a two-story versus three-story building.
Board Member Kohlhoff expressed concern about the tree-removal component of both the
Police and City Hall projects. Mr.Wheeler discussed the challenges of minimizing tree removals,
including the needs for stormwater management and improved parking. Until site plans were
available it was not possible to specify which trees would need to be removed; however, he
described one Douglas Fir removal that had been earmarked on the Police facility site. The goal
would be to retain as many trees as possible and to mitigate any necessary removals, he
indicated. Member Kohlhoff asked that the value of preserving Douglas Firs and significant trees
be recognized as a priority, and not simply as a matter of mitigation.
Board Member Gudman endorsed the need to keep the Board apprised of any tree removals
and expressed support for the planned public input process. He asked that the proposed
$380,440 contract be paid from the City Hall set-aside in the Capital Reserve Fund.
Chair Studebaker moved to authorize the Executive Director to execute a contract with
Mackenzie for architectural and engineering services for the new City Hall. Board Member
LaMotte seconded the motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed. with Chair Studebaker and Board Members
Gudman, LaMotte, Kohlhoff, Buck, O'Neill, and Manz voting 'aye'. (7-0)
7. ADJOURNMENT
Chair Studebaker adjourned the LORA Board meeting at 3:23 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Anne-Marie Simpson, Recording Secretary
Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 4
July 18, 2017
APPROVED BY THE LAKE OSWEGO
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ON
Kent Studebaker, Chair
Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 4
July 18, 2017
From: todd(etoddoraaer.com on behalf of Todd Prager
To: Council Distribution
Subject: Re:Public Safety Fair I Moving Sale I Oregon"s Iron Jubilee
Date: Monday,September 04,2017 10:40:23 AM
Councilors,
I have reviewed the proposed master plan for Woodmont Park and would ask that you consider
greatly expanding the grassy play area of the park(aka flexible open space). Flexible open space
allows for informal recreation such as pick up soccer for kids.Note that Mr. Meyer's deed explicitly
lists a soccer field and soccer goals as one of the few allowed uses at the park. The proposed plan has
a very limited grassy area with the vast majority of the park reserved in a natural state,unusable for
most people. Please consider expanding the flexible open space to the size of a soccer field and
including goals as allowed in Mr. Meyer's deed.
Thanks for your consideration.
Todd Prager
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 12:15 PM, City of Lake Oswego<bhirshberger@ci.oswego.or.us>wrote:
Photo by Dave Arpin,2017
What's On The Agenda? Photo contest
The next City Council and Lake Oswego
Redevelopment Agency meetings are scheduled
for Tuesday, September 5. For a full agenda,
plus detailed information regarding the topics
below, please see the September 5, 2017
Interactive Agenda.
At 5 p.m.,the Lake Oswego Redevelopment
Agency(LORA), made up of City Council
members,will meet in executive session.
9th Annual Photo Contest
Following the LORA meeting, City Council will Deadline Friday!►
hold its next regular meeting. The City Council
will begin its meeting in executive session. Open Enter your best images in the Ninth Annual City
session is expected to begin at 6:30 p.m. of Lake Oswego Photo Contest for a chance to
win! First place winners will receive a$100 gift
The following items are on the Council agenda: card; second place winners a$50 gift card; and
• A proclamation reiterating our commitment third place winners a$25 gift card. Entries need
to being a safe, caring and respectful to be submitted by 5 p.m., September 8. Contest
community where hate in any form is not details.
tolerated.
• Awards presentation for the 2017 Video
Contest winners. Fire Sprinkler Demonstration
• Authorization for the purchase of one a
new Pierce Velocity PUC Pumper NH657
Fire Engine.
• Authorization for the purchase of one new
Precision Weld 22' Rescue Boat and
Trailer.
• A resolution declaring the public necessity
to acquire real property interests on two
properties(16140 and 16650 Boones
Ferry Road)for the Boones Ferry Road
Improvements Project.
• An amendment to an existing Pre-Design
Personal Service Contract with Public Safety Fair
Murraysmith, Inc. (formerly Murray, Smith Wednesday, September 13, 5-7 p.m.,
&Associates, Inc.), Engineers/Planners, Westlake Park, 14165 Bunick Drive
to provide additional design, permitting Meet first responders, learn safety tips for
and construction phase services for the emergency preparedness, and explore
Marylhurst Wastewater Pump Station emergency vehicles. Brought to you by the city of
Replacement Project. Lake Oswego,this free family-friendly event will
• A resolution initiating proceedings to feature activities and demonstrations in addition
vacate portions of the right-of-way for to informational booths. Stop by any time
Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and between 5 and 7 p.m. Don't miss:
Kruse Way Place.
• Appointment of a Chair for the Public Art • Fire Sprinkler demonstration (at 6 p.m.
Committee. sharp)
• An annexation agreement between the ▪ 811 Bike&Car
City and the owners of properties located ▪ Lake Oswego Fire and Police emergency
at 16524, 16552 and 16556 Boones Ferry vehicles
Road. • Bike Rodeo
• Appointments of Youth Members to ▪ Sand bag demonstration
Advisory Boards. • LOPD's K9 Team
• A personal services contract to Otak, Inc. ▪ Junior Firefighter Obstacle Course
to provide Pre-Construction Phase • Water Container Giveaway
Construction Management Services for • Amateur radio demonstration
the Boones Ferry Road Improvements ▪ Hands only CPR training
project. Read more about the Public Safety Fair.
• A resolution to adopt the Woodmont
Natural Park Conceptual Plan (Master
Plan).
• A contract for replacement of the artificial
turf at Hazelia Field.
• Discussion of roadway striping on
Botticelli.
• A public hearing for tree removal
Water Quality Report
application for 13 trees at 1053 C Ave.
• A public hearing to consider a zoning map
amendment for property and right-of-way
located at 10 Touchstone in the Mountain
Park Neighborhood.
• A public hearing to consider amendments
to the Community Development Code
clarifying and updating the design
variance criteria for developments in the
Downtown Redevelopment Design
District.
2017 Drinking Water Quality Report
Available Now
Did you know, before it gets to your faucet,your
water is tested for over 90 contaminants from
customer locations throughout Lake Oswego?
Did you also know in one year the water
treatment plant processes enough water for LO
customers to equal about half the total volume of
Oswego Lake?
Providing residents and businesses in Lake
Oswego with safe, dependable, high-quality
water is our top priority. The good news is: Lake
Oswego's water system meets or exceeds every
State and Federal drinking water requirement for
safe water.
Learn more about where your water comes from,
how it is treated and purified and what it is tested
for by reading the latest Water Quality Report
online or call 503-635-0394 to request a mailed
copy.
Public Works Moving Sale
Friday, September 8, & Saturday,
September 9, 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
Public Works staff have been very busy getting
organized for their big move to the new
Maintenance Center facilities—which means it's
time to clean house!
The Public Works Department has hired A&S
Estate Sales of Oregon to conduct a moving
sale. Shoppers will have the chance to purchase
office furniture, shop items and other odds and
ends at a fixed price from the soon-to-be
demolished Public Works building. The sale will
take place at 5705 Jean Road in Lake Oswego.
Please visit A&S Estate Sales for more
information. Oregon's Iron Jubilee
Saturday, September 9, 3-9 p.m. in
George Rogers Park and Old Town
Unsung Heroes Neighborhood
The Jubilee celebrates the 150th Anniversary of
the birth of the Oregon iron industry.
Presented by the Lake Oswego Preservation
Society and the Lake Oswego Parks&
Recreation Department. Family-friendly
festivities include: a pioneer baseball game
played with 1860's rules and replica uniforms,
live bluegrass music and clogging, a blacksmith
demonstration, food vendors, and horse-drawn
wagon rides between the furnace and the
Society's museum housed in the City's last
remaining Iron Company Worker's Cottage. The
Looking for Heroes grand finale will include flames inside the furnace
and fireworks in lower George Rogers Park. A
Nominate that special person who has made a
companion exhibit at the History Center&
positive difference in our community-someone
Museum explains the significance of the
who spends his or her free time volunteering,
helping neighbors, or trying to make a difference anniversary.
in the lives of those around them. Read more about Oreaon's Iron Jubilee.
The deadline for submission of nominations is
Friday, November 18.
Beer Brats&Bingo Night
Applications are available at City Hall- Public
Information Office or online.
Contact Diana Smith-Bouwer at 503-635-0257
for additional information or questions.
113.
Board & Commission Vacancies
The city is seeking applicants for the Planning
Commission and Development Review Beer, Brats & Bingo
Commission. For more details, go to Boards and Fundraiser to benefit LO Meals on Wheels
Commissions Vacancies or contact the City Join the fun at the annual Beer, Brats&Bingo
Manager's Office at 503-635-0215.Applications event on Friday, September 22,from 5-8 p.m.!All
can be filled out online. proceeds will benefit the local program- Meals
on Wheels-which serves over 16,000 meals
annually to seniors, disabled, and homebound
What's Happening in LO LO residents.
To see what other events and activities are Purchase your tickets online or by calling 503-
taking place this month, check out the online 635-3758, or stopping by the Adult Community
community calendar! Center, 505 G Avenue.
Watch City Council Meetings Live or at
Your Convenience
Keeping up on City issues has never been easier. You can
watch meetings live or at your convenience online at
www.ci.osweao.or.us/boc/streamina-media.As you watch B❑
the meeting, you can link to related material as it's being
discussed. Plus you can quickly jump exactly to the
agenda topic in which you are most interested.
City Council meetings are also broadcast live on Tualatin
Valley Community Television (TVCTV)Channel 23 or 28. Visit TVCTV.org for up-to-date playback times
and channels.
Lake Oswego City Councilors 2017 Lake Oswego City Council
The City of Lake Oswego has a mayor and six councilors,
all elected city-wide. Meet your Mayor and City
Councilors.
0.
City of Lake Oswego
Share this email:
B❑
El ill
ill
Manage your preferences I Opt out using TrueRemoveTM
Got this as a forward?Sign up to receive our future emails.
View this email online.
380 A Avenue PO Box 369
Lake Oswego,OR 197034 US
owered by emma
This email was sent to toddeprager@gmail.com. ®❑
To continue receiving our emails,add us to your address book.
12.1
o �
o
OREGOta
PROCLAMATION
Given recent events both locally and nationally, your Lake Oswego City Council would like to reiterate our
commitment to being a safe, caring and respectful community where hate in any form is not tolerated.
Our city charter specifically states that; 'It is the policy of the City of Lake Oswego to eliminate
discrimination based on race, religion, color, sex, marital status,familial status, national origin, age,
mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity. Such discrimination poses a threat to
the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of Lake Oswego and menaces the institutions and
foundation of our community.'
As your representatives, we promise to uphold these charter provisions and to strive to ensure that
everyone living, working or visiting Lake Oswego feels safe, secure and respected.
Signed this 5th day of September,2017
Lake Oswego, Oregon
Sincerely,
Kent Studebaker, Mayor Joe Buck, City Councilor
Jeff Gudman, City Councilor Theresa Kohlhoff, City Councilor
John LaMotte, City Councilor Jackie Manz, City Councilor
Skip O'Neill, City Councilor
14.1
D A E 44 COUNCIL REPORT
r o
dR�ddC.‘
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
City Manager's Office
SUBJECT: Approval of Meeting Minutes
DATE: August 22, 2017 MEETING DATE: September 5, 2017
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to approve minutes as written.
ATTACHMENTS
1. June 20, 2017, Draft Regular Meeting Minutes
2. July 5, 2017, Draft Regular Meeting Minutes
3. July 18, 2017, Draft Regular Meeting Minutes
503.635-0215 380 A Avenue PO Box 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
ATTACHMENT 1
O�`A E �
a„ �� CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
H MINUTES
V .iii C
June 20, 2017
GREGO�
1. CALL TO ORDER
Council President Manz called the regular City Council meeting to order at 3:01 p.m. on
June 20, 2017, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Council President Manz and Councilors Gudman, LaMotte, Kohlhoff, Buck,
and O'Neill
Excused: Mayor Studebaker
Staff Present: Megan Phelan, Assistant City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney;
Corinne Strauser, Deputy City Recorder; Ivan Anderholm, Parks and
Recreation Director; Sarah Selden, Senior Planner; Don Johnson, Police
Chief; Erica Rooney, City Engineer; Scot Siegel, Planning & Building
Services Director
Others Present: Michael Buck, Susanna Kuo, and Julia Wood, Iron Mountain Park
Planning Advisory Committee
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council President Manz led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.
4. CONSENT AGENDA
Motion: Move to adopt the Consent Agenda.
4.1 Resolution 17-18, A Resolution of the City Council of the City Of Lake Oswego
Adjusting the Compensation for Management and Confidential Positions Not
Represented by a Bargaining Unit
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-18.
Report and Attachment
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 12
June 20, 2017
4.2 Award of a Public Improvement Contract for Construction of WO 254- Botticelli and
Oak Terrace Pavement Rehabilitation Project
Motion: Move to award a public improvement contract to Benchmark Contracting in the
amount of $700,018.00 for WO 254 — Botticelli and Oak Terrace Rehabilitation Project.
Report
4.3 AP 17-01/LU 16-0053, Adoption of Findings, Conclusions and Order affirming a
Development Review Commission Decision approving a minor variance reducing
the front yard setback from 25 feet to 20 feet, and a Residential Infill Design variance
reducing the rear yard setback from 30 feet to 10 feet, at 2101 Goodall Court
Motion: Move to adopt the Findings, Conclusion and Order in AP 17-01/LU 16-0053.
Report and Attachment
4.4 Dedication of a Parcel Abutting 16858 Boones Ferry Road
Motion: Move to authorize the City Manager to execute a Dedication Deed for a parcel
abutting 16858 Boones Ferry Road.
Report and Attachments
END CONSENT AGENDA
Councilor Gudman moved to adopt the Consent Agenda. Councilor O'Neill seconded the
motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Councilors Manz, Gudman, Kohlhoff,
Buck, and O'Neill voting 'aye'. Councilor LaMotte voted 'no'. (5-1)
Council President Manz commented with regard to Item 4.2, related to the Botticelli and Oak
Terrace rehabilitation project. The decision on the striping would not be made until the end of
summer, and this Council action is simply to move the physical project along, she noted.
5. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
No items were removed from the Consent Agenda.
6. CITIZEN COMMENT
• Wendelin Russell, 4340 Botticelli Street
Ms. Russell, homeowners' association (HOA) president of the 22 Botticelli Townhouses,
discussed background of the residents' notification of removal of on-street parking and addition
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 12
June 20, 2017
of bike lanes on Botticelli Street. She challenged the portion of the notice that indicated the project
had been approved by both the Mountain Park HOA and the neighborhood association.
Expressing strong opposition to elimination of the on-street parking and to the bike path, she
outlined a number of adverse neighborhood impacts and other disadvantages. She noted that
she does support the repaving of Botticelli, but suggested pedestrian improvements and speed
bumps as alternatives to the other changes.
• Brian Rockwell, 4342 Botticelli Street
Mr. Rockwell, also a resident of the 22 Botticelli Townhouses, expressed support for the
repaving/re-striping of Botticelli Street; however, he opposed removal of the on-street parking.
He described the residents' constrained parking, their reliance on the street spaces, and negative
impacts of removal. He noted that the Transportation Advisory Board had heard comments at
their June 14 meeting and had voted unanimously to reject the bike lane and to preserve the on-
street parking. Council was asked to take their recommendation and homeowners' opposition
into account when deciding on the removal of on-street parking.
6.1 Prior Citizen Comment Follow-Up
No follow-up on prior Citizen Comment was presented.
7. COUNCIL BUSINESS
7.1 Resolution 17-37, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
Amending Resolutions 17-07 and 17-08 to Postpone the Effective Dates for Changes
to the Transportation System Development Charges Methodology and Rates
Report and Attachment
Ms. Rooney noted that the Resolution was follow-up to Council's request on June 6 for the
delayed effective date, as explained in the Council Report. Staff also suggested that the related
study session be scheduled for July 18 rather than July 5.
Councilor Gudman moved to adopt Resolution 17-37, as noted in the Council Report, and
hold a work session on the issues and concerns on July 18. Councilor LaMotte seconded
the motion.
In brief discussion of the motion, it was confirmed that Council intended for the effective date in
Sections 1 and 2 of the Resolution to be shown as January 1, 2018, Staff's suggestion. Mr.
Powell reminded Council members of the sequential increases for the residential SDCs that had
been scheduled in January of the three years following the original July 1 date. Councilor
Gudman confirmed that, with the implementation date of January 1, 2018, those increases were
now intended for January of 2019, 2020, and 2021 for purposes of this Resolution.
A roll call vote was held, and the motion passed, with Councilors Manz, Gudman, LaMotte,
Kohlhoff, Buck, and O'Neill voting `aye'. (6-0)
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 12
June 20, 2017
7.2 Iron Mountain Park Concept Plan (Master Plan)
Report and Attachments
Mr. Anderholm presented key elements of the Iron Mountain Park Master Plan, beginning with
a graphic rendering (Council Report, Attachment 1) of the site design. He highlighted the role of
the Planning Advisory Committee (PAC) and provided background on various elements of the
Plan, including the stream relocation, parking, and realignment of the local trail. Reviewing the
amenities and trail connections of the developed portion of the park, he noted that these would
provide a gateway to the natural area. Discussing the total project cost estimate of$1.35 million,
he reported that the stream restoration and development of park elements were key components;
funding mechanisms for these and other aspects were detailed, along with expenditures to date
of$180,000. He concluded with an update of the project timeline.
Councilor Buck inquired about any resolution of traffic speed concerns on the adjacent portion
of Iron Mountain Boulevard. In brief discussion, Mr. Anderholm indicated that he regards this as
a transportation planning issue that would be referred to transportation staff; he noted that a
reduced speed limit would have a positive impact on the park. The pathway realignment into the
park would also be beneficial. Councilor Buck asked if the PAC had given its approval to the
proposed version of the Plan, and Mr. Anderholm advised that they had not done so. He
reviewed the process and the purpose of the PAC: to represent stakeholders and to ensure that
all public input has been considered and reflected in the Plan. Councilor Buck indicated that he
would favor allowing the PAC a final opportunity to review the Plan so that Council was assured
of their endorsement. Mr. Anderholm expressed his willingness to provide the proposed version
to the PAC for final comments. Also, he indicated that this review could be added for future
projects as a final step before Council presentation.
Councilor LaMotte expressed support for Councilor Buck's suggestion, assuming that there
would be no adverse impacts on the grant process. He outlined how an additional PAC review
might be incorporated before Council made a final decision, as well as involvement of the Planning
Commission. Mr. Siegel clarified that the conditional use permit process for this project would
instead require Development Review Commission action. Councilor LaMotte discussed the
importance of follow-up with Police, Engineering, and Planning on anticipated impacts of the park
development. He requested information on funding, suggesting how the City might take
advantage of the reduced cost estimate in relation to the anticipated project budget. Mr.
Anderholm provided funding details and confirmed that Staff was prepared to move forward with
planning and phasing for the project; alternate funding plans had been developed, depending on
grant outcomes and other factors, he noted.
In response to questions from Councilor Gudman, Mr. Anderholm discussed the project
timeline, leading to anticipated groundbreaking in spring 2018. He confirmed that the only
bicycle/pedestrian improvements encompassed by the Master Plan related to the path
realignment on the north side of Iron Mountain Boulevard. He described related trail connections
as referenced in the Master Plan Report (Council Report, Attachment 2).
Councilor Buck asked about any plans to incorporate art in the park. Mr. Anderholm indicated
that the PAC had discussed this and that consultation with the Arts Council was anticipated.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 12
June 20, 2017
Councilor Buck also expressed concern about poor cell phone access in the area of Iron
Mountain Boulevard adjacent to the park, particularly in the event of an emergency. Mr.
Anderholm reported that recent service improvement has been seen, but access remains a
concern. Clear sightlines were given consideration in designing the park, he noted, and Staff is
exploring the possibility of making some sort of Wi-Fi available.
Councilor Gudman moved to approve the Conceptual Plan (Master Plan) for Iron Mountain
Park. Councilor O'Neill seconded the motion.
Council members discussed options and preferences for adopting the Plan in relation to affording
the PAC the opportunity to weigh in. Michael Buck, speaking as a member of the PAC, described
factors that had precluded a full review by the group. They hoped to have the opportunity to read
the complete report and reconvene the group to address remaining questions and points of
clarification. This would enable them to convey their "stamp of approval", he indicated.
After further Council discussion of considerations for moving forward, Councilor Gudman
withdrew his motion. Councilor Kohlhoff moved to defer the decision until after the Planning
Advisory Committee has had an opportunity to review and make recommendations.
Councilor Buck seconded the motion. Following additional Council and Staff discussion of
timing implications, Councilor Gudman offered a friendly amendment such that the motion would
specify a date of July 18 for the Council's decision. Councilor Kohlhoff accepted this
amendment, confirming that her motion was to defer a decision on Resolution 17-37 to
July 18th, in order to give the Planning Advisory Committee an opportunity to review and
comment. Councilor Buck seconded the motion.
A roll call vote was held, and the motion passed, with Councilors Manz, Gudman, LaMotte,
Kohlhoff, Buck, and O'Neill voting 'aye'. (6-0)
8. STUDY SESSIONS
8.1 Economical Housing Solutions
Report
Councilor Kohlhoff introduced the study session, indicating that it would address a 2017 City
Council goal. In describing the purpose of the goal, she emphasized that the focus was to meet
the housing needs of the community. Examples of need were cited in three key areas:
households that included school-age children or persons with disability or mental illness; older
people; and workforce housing. In considering the staff report, Council members were asked to
remember that these groups comprise a desirable asset for Lake Oswego that is being deterred
by lack of economical housing in the community.
Ms. Selden noted that her report was intended as a starting point for the Council discussion, and
that the focus of the session would be on the two near-term strategies identified (Council Report,
p 2-5): (1) reducing barriers to development of secondary or accessory dwelling units (ADUs)
and (2) considering a menu of approaches used successfully in the Portland region to facilitate
housing developments through a nonprofit affordable-housing developer such as Northwest
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 12
June 20, 2017
Housing Alternatives. She provided background on both approaches, discussing opportunities,
barriers, and specific examples shown in a table listing (Council Report, p 5); included were
strategies for making affordable housing financially feasible. The City would need to talk further
about financial implications and then establish some criteria, she noted. Finally, she summarized
the longer-term approaches presented in the Council Report(p 5-7)and requested any questions
or indications of interest in particular strategies.
Councilor O'Neill asked about any data reflecting actual use of ADUs in Portland since the City
had foregone SDCs in order to encourage them for affordable housing. Ms. Selden indicated
that she would request this information, noting that affordability could be provided not only by
renting an ADU, but by housing aging parents or others who might have no alternative.
Councilor Buck raised the issue of ADUs being used as short-term rentals as opposed to
affordable housing, and brief discussion followed. He expressed his belief that the need for
affordable housing is real, particularly for workforce housing. Outlining various concerns, he
noted that that he and other members of the business community have found it increasingly
difficult in recent years to find employees who reside in Lake Oswego. This is an important
consideration if the city wants to have a healthy business community, he opined. In response to
his questions, Ms. Selden described the current SDC methodology, and Councilor Buck
suggested that changes be considered that could help address the affordability goal.
After requesting clarification from Ms. Selden about current City policies on SDCs for residential
development, Councilor LaMotte indicated that reasonableness and equity issues, particularly
in relation to ADUs, needed research and possible revision. Overall, he recognized a definite
need in the community, but did not believe it was the same as in Portland. He also recognized
the value of getting involved in development with one of the nonprofit organizations, and
discussed potential funding and the City role in such a project. The first step, he suggested, could
be to show leadership in identifying appropriate sites and bringing people to the table.
Councilor O'Neill inquired about plans for affordable housing that could be built on large parking
lots on properties owned by Lake Oswego religious organizations. The City could consider easing
the process for such development, which might distribute smaller complexes around the city,
rather a 40-unit complex in one location. This would also leave the funding and other matters to
the religious organization. Ms. Selden indicated that there was not a plan at this time, but this
could be an aspect of a search for appropriate sites. Mr. Siegel reminded Council of House Bill
2007, which would provide for affordable housing on religious institution properties by right. If the
bill were to pass, the City would likely need to review its code for any needed revision to recognize
this as a permitted outright use, possibly to include process streamlining.
Councilor Gudman pointed out the inevitable trade-off between reducing SDCs and the resulting
decreased funding for desired improvements, including additional parks, trails, and
bicycle/pedestrian facilities. He posed questions about past and potential ADU development in
the city, initiating discussion of a variety of impacts. In responding to various questions and
comments, Ms. Selden noted that the number of ADUs could increase over time as the housing
market gets tighter, with less developable land available; Lake Oswego is regarded as a desirable
place to live. In response to Councilor Gudman's question about preferred forms of subsidies,
Ms. Selden indicated that it would be good to identify whether it was the upfront costs of
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 12
June 20, 2017
construction or longer-term assistance that would be most desirable to an owner wishing to add
an ADU.
Councilor Kohlhoff discussed the opportunity for administering a range of SDCs, rather than a
full waiver, in order to incentivize inclusion of disability accommodations and other features. She
described several ways that the ADU could serve the needs of elderly people wishing to remain
in their homes, a different approach to offering affordable housing. She favored more study and
exploration with organizations such as Northwest Housing in terms of long-term housing
affordability and emphasized the importance of achieving more capacity to meet the community's
true needs.
Councilor Buck expressed various concerns, wondering what amounts and types of incentives
would be enough to attract affordable-housing development. In ensuing discussion, Ms. Selden
described some of the many factors, their interrelationships, and the need for more information
from developers of affordable housing. She indicated that Staff could return with more information
at a subsequent Council study session, perhaps including experts in the funding strategies.
Councilor Buck noted that the City's standards regarding prescribed materials might be another
aspect to explore; perhaps these developers might suggest alternate materials or other changes
to design standards that would achieve the desired aesthetic. These might produce a better
trade-off than the financial concessions, he indicated.
Councilor LaMotte advocated the need for further study of options for adjusting SDCs for ADUs,
recognizing the various impacts. He noted that consideration of discretionary versus clear and
objective standards was also needed. Given the complexity of the issues, he wanted to ensure
involvement of the Planning Commission, which was confirmed by Ms. Selden. In further
discussion of how the process might move forward, Councilor LaMotte emphasized the
importance of maintaining affordability over the long term. He discussed the need to identify
potential sites for affordable-housing developments, which the City could begin to think about. As
Council contemplated the menu of approaches that had been outlined in the report, they should
consider whether or not these were logical for a city of 37,000 to achieve.
Councilor O'Neill noted that he did not believe Lake Oswego citizens were asking the Council
to solve problems of other jurisdictions with economical housing; they wanted solutions for
perceived problems in Lake Oswego. The City should set some thresholds for each of the
categories, based on the degree of need in the community. This would guide the setting of goals,
rather than a strategy based on what is desirable but might not solve Lake Oswego's problems.
Ms. Selden discussed the City's Housing Needs Analysis as a resource for helping to set some
targets. With updating of its demographic and housing-costs data, this could be considered
together with identifying the City's goals.
Council President Manz asked about the percentage of land in Lake Oswego that would be
available for ADUs. Ms. Selden explained that this information was not fully available, outlining
the complexities presented by the various types of ADU configurations. Mr. Siegel described an
additional factor, which related to the requirement for one off-street parking space per ADU. This
could be modified up or down, depending on the degree of flexibility the City wanted to afford.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 12
June 20, 2017
In summarizing, Ms. Selden indicated that she had heard interest from the Council in several
areas: (1) additional analysis of the SDCs and the related trade-offs if they were reduced or
waived; (2) Planning Commission exploration of potential changes to the development standards
for secondary dwelling units; and (3) further investigation of some opportunity sites for an
affordable-housing developer, along with further review of the menu of options.
Councilor Gudman cautioned against following the example of another jurisdiction such as
Portland, while also being open to considering appropriate zoning changes to support multi-unit
proposals. With respect to development through an affordable-housing organization such as
Northwest Housing, he indicated that he did not favor change on a systemic basis. Rather, this
could be more appropriately addressed when a larger property became available and the
developer had approached the City about concessions or other opportunities. At this time, the
focus should be on the ADUs and how the City might revise SDCs and processes or permissible
materials.
Councilor LaMotte expressed support for Councilor Gudman's view as to SDCs for the ADUs,
while noting that this might not make a significant contribution. The targets proposed by Councilor
O'Neill would also be desirable. He indicated that the City should be proactive about development
on the limited number of sites suitable for affordable housing, rather than waiting to be approached
by a nonprofit developer or by a property owner. It was also important to be prepared with a menu
of strategies that had been vetted as appropriate to Lake Oswego.
Councilor Kohlhoff called for Council members to continue to educate themselves on the topics,
including the Northwest Housing development model. She advocated being prepared and staying
informed about other cities' efforts. A commitment to continuing to learn would allow the Council
to make wise decisions when opportunity arises, she indicated.
Ms. Selden suggested that discussion could be continued in another study session. The
consensus of Council indicated support for a date in early fall.
8.2 Short-Term Rentals, PP 17-0004
Report and Attachments
In providing background on the topic, Council President Manz noted that it had arisen from an
enforcement issue related to an Airbnb rental operating in a residential neighborhood.
Subsequent exploration had identified an unexpectedly large number of such rentals operating in
the city. As discussed in the Council Report, current City code does not permit short-term rentals
in residential zones, and a variety of concerns have been raised. Ms. Selden noted that Staff
was seeking Council direction as to permitting this use in residential zones. If Council favored it,
Staff would need to know the level of (1) regulation that should be outlined for review by the
Planning Commission and (2) community input that should be sought. Mr. Siegel emphasized
the time sensitivity of the issue and the importance of direction from Council. He outlined the
City's current approach to related code enforcement, which is complaint driven. In addition to a
Council decision about moving forward on permitting the short-term rentals, Staff also would need
direction on how to approach the enforcement question.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 12
June 20, 2017
Council President Manz called for questions.
Councilor O'Neill stated that he did not support permitting short-term rentals in residential
neighborhoods. The precedent would be set for allowing a business use in residential zones,
which would fundamentally change the definition of these neighborhoods and potentially allow
other business uses. He opposed spending any time on this subject.
Councilor Gudman expressed agreement with Councilor O'Neill's position. If Council decided
against changes to code, then the issue would be enforcement. A decision in favor of allowing
short-term rentals in residential zones would present an array of complexities to address. He did
not support a code change and asked that Council be provided with information about ensuring
effective enforcement.
Councilor Buck discussed the importance of identifying the code violations and effective
enforcement measures. He advocated significant fines for those failing to comply when warned;
if fines were not a sufficient deterrent, Council could be asked to consider larger penalties.
Allowing these businesses to operate outside the law was unfair to businesses that operated in
compliance, he observed. An even greater concern was that these short-term rentals remove a
needed supply of long-term housing from the market that would otherwise be available. He
discussed specific scenarios under which rooms in owner-occupied homes might be rented out,
within appropriate parameters; however, he indicated that he did not favor permitting short-term
rentals outright in residential zones.
Councilor Kohlhoff expressed her strong opposition to allowing the short-term rentals, as well.
She endorsed the need for consistent enforcement, suggesting measures that could convey to
violators that the City is serious about code compliance. While she might consider reasonable
exceptions in certain situations, she was aligned with her Council colleagues in opposing the
change.
Councilor LaMotte endorsed Councilor Buck's position on strong enforcement as opposed to
the current complaint-driven approach, citing neighborhood impacts and unfairness to hoteliers.
He discussed various factors, including economic development and neighborhood effects that he
had considered, and affirmed that he opposed the change, as well.
In brief additional discussion, Councilor Gudman asked about the City's ability to impose a fine
on the Airbnb organization and others offering similar services. Mr. Powell indicated that he
would need to explore any penalties, such as business license-related violations, that might be
applicable to such organizations; however, traditional enforcement was directed to the property
owner.
Council President Manz asked that Staff return to a subsequent Council meeting with the
enforcement ramifications, including staffing requirements and fines, and a general enforcement
process. She indicated that there was Council consensus to call for enforcement as opposed to
changing the regulatory approach on short-term rentals. Brief discussion about scheduling and
format followed, with Mr. Siegel noting that Staff could develop a timeline and process, and would
be prepared to answer questions at the July 18 Council meeting.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 12
June 20, 2017
Councilor Gudman initiated additional discussion about possibilities of assessing fines to Airbnb
or other such organizations. Mr. Siegel, having met with Airbnb, observed that they would not
want their operators running afoul of local regulations. He indicated that it would be beneficial for
the City to maintain lines of communication with the organization. The study session concluded
with additional discussion of approaches for enforcement.
8.3 City Fireworks Show
Report
Ms. Phelan reported that Staff had followed up on Council's request to explore feasibility of a
City-sponsored fireworks display rather than the joint display with the Lake Oswego Corporation
(Lake Corp) on the west end of the lake, as outlined in the Council Report. The purpose of the
study session was to obtain direction on how Council wished to proceed. Council President
Manz invited her colleagues to address questions to Chief Johnson and Mr. Anderholm.
Councilor O'Neill asked if the City of Gladstone or any other jurisdictions across the river had
been notified of the project. Chief Johnson indicated that this had not been done, and Councilor
O'Neill discussed the importance of considering impacts in areas across the river.
Councilor Buck agreed. Acknowledging the creative thinking by Police Department staff, he
noted that the Lake Corp was supportive of the idea. Among benefits was improved safety and
a public fireworks show that would be accessible to many people at the park site. He expressed
his strong support for moving forward.
Councilor Gudman commented that the idea was worth trying. Assuming the Lake Corp
continues to present its fireworks, congestion could be expected at locations where both shows
would be visible, he cautioned. He inquired about plans for an after-event summary.
Chief Johnson indicated that Staff would be preparing a summary and that Council should also
expect to hear from the community afterward. In the event of two shows on the 4th of July, he
emphasized that the Police Department anticipates challenges in addressing issues at both ends
of the lake. He discussed staffing constraints and other factors, indicating that resources would
be focused primarily on the public display; for neighborhoods at the west end of the lake, this
might result in a level of service different than had been experienced in years past. Councilor
Gudman indicated that the Police Department recommendation would be an important
component for Council to consider in the post-event report.
Chief Johnson responded to additional questions about allocation of staffing resources between
the west and east ends of the lake. He clarified that one or two police officers would be assigned
to handle higher-level issues on the west end, with others hired as flaggers, and funding would
be provided by the Lake Corp. Police Department staff would continue with advance preparations
in these neighborhoods, he indicated. Barricades would be placed in support of the lake show,
but to a lesser degree than in past years. He emphasized that significantly fewer resources would
be directed to the lake, or private, show as Police efforts would be focused on the public show.
In additional discussion, Council members expressed acknowledgement that the coverage on the
west end of the lake would not be at the same level as in previous years.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 12
June 20, 2017
Councilor Gudman indicated that he would support trying the public event at Foothills Park,
where parking access is good.
Councilor Kohlhoff also expressed support for this plan, including the reallocation of Police
resources; it would be appropriate for the City to facilitate an event where the public would have
improved access, she indicated.
The study session concluded with additional discussion of background of the City/Lake Corp roles
and responsibilities over the years. Council President Manz inquired about next steps, and Ms.
Phelan noted that there seemed to be overall support for presenting fireworks at Foothills Park in
2018 on a trial basis. There was an expectation that Staff would return after that date with a
comprehensive report of the outcome so that Council could determine whether or not to continue
with it. Staff also had made note of Councilor O'Neill's concern about notifying the City of
Milwaukie or City of Gladstone. Parks and Police staff would proceed with event planning. The
Council consensus indicated support for moving forward accordingly.
9. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL
Councilor Gudman noted that the recent status report on the City's 10-year program for removal
of invasive species was on track to be completed as scheduled. He wanted residents to be aware
that the reduced maintenance would be reflected accordingly. After offering a "shout-out"for the
upcoming Festival of the Arts, he advised Council members that they had been provided with
written material from TriMet on planning for transportation projects anticipated through 2040, as
presented at the latest Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation.
Councilor Buck reported on the interviews conducted the previous week by the Youth
Leadership Council. From a highly-qualified field of applicants, they had selected two new
members to replace graduating seniors. He conveyed the group's pleasure in serving the City
and their pride in being connected with the City Council.
Council President Manz updated Council on the Tourism Advisory Committee's efforts to
streamline their processes to align better with the City's budget process.
10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
No reports were made.
11. ADJOURNMENT
Council President Manz adjourned the meeting at 5:49 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 12
June 20, 2017
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON
Kent Studebaker, Mayor
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 12
June 20, 2017
ATTACHMENT 2
r
�� CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
H MINUTES
40
V �� O July 5, 2017
O ____ )
REGON
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Studebaker called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:35 p.m. on July 5,
2017, in the City Council Chambers, 380 A Avenue.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Studebaker and Councilors O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, LaMotte,
Kohlhoff, and Buck
Staff Present: Scott Lazenby, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Anne-Marie
Simpson, City Recorder; Shawn Cross, Finance Director; Brad Stevens,
Assistant Finance Director; Paul Espe, Associate Planner
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Studebaker led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.
4. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Under authority of ORS 192.660 (2)(d) conduct deliberations
with persons designated to carry on labor negotiations.
Mr. Powell reviewed the statutory basis for entering executive session and outlined the
parameters.
The Council met in executive session beginning at 6:38 p.m.
The Council reconvened in open session at 7:33 p.m.
5. CONSENT AGENDA— For Full Council Approval
Motion: Move to adopt the Consent Agenda.
5.1 Ordinance 2751, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending
Ordinance 2739 (AN 17-0003) to Correct a Scrivener's Error in the Text of the Legal
Description.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 10
July 5, 2017
Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2751.
Report and Exhibit
5.2 Ordinance 2747, An Ordinance Annexing to the City of Lake Oswego One Parcel
Consisting of 0.25 Acres at 5750 Washington Court; Declaring City of Lake Oswego
Zoning Pursuant to LOC 50.01.004.5(a-c); and Removing the Territory from Certain
Districts (AN 17-0004).
Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2747.
Report and Exhibit
5.3 Ordinance 2748, An Ordinance Annexing to the City of Lake Oswego One Parcel
Consisting of 0.21 Acres Located at 6030 Shakespeare Street, Together with the
Adjacent Public Right of Way; Declaring City of Lake Oswego Zoning Pursuant to
LOC 50.01.004.5(a-c); and Removing the Territory from Certain Districts (AN 17-
0005).
Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2748.
Report and Exhibit
5.4 Ordinance 2749, An Ordinance Annexing to the City of Lake Oswego One Parcel
Consisting of 0.48 Acres at 6040 Lakeview Blvd; Declaring City of Lake Oswego
Zoning Pursuant to LOC 50.01.004.5(a-c); and Removing the Territory from Certain
Districts (AN 17-0006).
Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2749.
Report and Exhibit
5.5 Public Improvement Contract Award for Work Order 255 for Cedar Court and Collins
Way Waterline Replacement
Motion: Move to award a construction contract to Subcom Excavation & Utilities, LLC, for
the Cedar Court and Collins Way Waterline Replacement (WO 255) in the amount of
$205,650.
Report
5.6 Resolution 17-43, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
Establishing a Mobile Emergency Responder Radio Coverage System Program and
Related Fees
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-43.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 10
July 5, 2017
Report and Attachments
END CONSENT AGENDA
Councilor Gudman moved to adopt the Consent Agenda. Councilor Manz seconded the
motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors
O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, Kohlhoff, and Buck voting 'aye'. (7-0)
6. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
No items were removed from the Consent Agenda.
7. CONSENT AGENDA— For City Councilors' Approval
7.1 Resolution 17-35, A Resolution of the City Councilors of the City of Lake Oswego
Approving Appointments to the 50+ Advisory Board
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-35.
Report and Attachment
7.2 Resolution 17-39, A Resolution of the City Councilors of the City of Lake Oswego
Approving Appointments to the Sustainability Advisory Board
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-39.
Report and Attachment
7.3 Resolution 17-41, A Resolution of the City Councilors of the City of Lake Oswego
Approving An Appointment to the Library Advisory Board
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-41.
Report and Attachment
7.4 Resolution 17-40, A Resolution of the City Councilors of the City of Lake Oswego
Approving Appointments to the Youth Leadership Council
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-40.
Report and Attachment
END CONSENT AGENDA
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 10
July 5, 2017
Councilor Manz moved to approve Consent Agenda Items 7.1 through 7.4. Councilor
Gudman seconded the motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Councilors O'Neill, Manz, Gudman,
LaMotte, Kohlhoff, and Buck voting 'aye'. (6-0)
8. CITIZEN COMMENT
No Citizen Comment was offered.
8.1 Prior Citizen Comment Follow-Up
No follow-up on prior Citizen Comment was presented.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9.1 Resolution 17-36, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
Revising Fees and Charges Relating to Water Rates in Unincorporated Former
Forest Highlands Water District
Report and Attachment
Mayor Studebaker noted that three letters had been received earlier in the day regarding this
agenda item.
Mr. Powell read the Resolution title. Noting that the public hearing process was outlined in the
agenda, he reviewed the hearing format and time limits for testimony.
Staff Report
Mr. Lazenby noted that Finance Department staff members were present to address any
questions. He reviewed background leading to the proposed Resolution. The key trigger had
been the expiration in spring 2017 of a 1991 intergovernmental agreement (IGA) under which the
City provided water at in-city rates to former Forest Highlands Water District residents. The
understanding, he believed, had likely been that any properties that had not annexed to the City
by 1991 would do so over the next 25 years. This had not been case, and 70-plus properties
currently remained outside the City. The City's rate structure includes a provision for a rate that
is 50% greater for non-residents; this had been in place since at least the 1950s. This rate is
typical of what other cities charge and is based on the idea that the risk of ownership of the utility
is fully borne by City residents and property owners, he noted. Recognizing the financial impact
to the affected Forest Highlands customers, he observed that most of the properties were
essentially contiguous to the City of Lake Oswego; therefore, one way the City rate would be
reasonably available would be through annexation. He clarified that connection to sewer was not
necessarily a condition of annexation as long as the customer's septic system was functioning.
Council had rate-setting authority, he advised, and the approach, including a possible phase-in,
could be discussed in the hearing.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 10
July 5, 2017
At Mayor Studebaker's request, Mr. Lazenby confirmed that customers outside the City were
charged only for water; utility bills for City residents, however, included street and stormwater
utility fees, along with sewer fees, when applicable. Councilor Buck asked if property owners
had the option to replace a failed septic system. Mr. Lazenby indicated that when a municipal
sewer system was available in reasonable proximity, owners typically were required to connect.
Most of the former Forest Highlands water utility customers had annexed either to connect to
sewer or to develop property, he added. Councilor Manz expressed her wish to clear up
misunderstandings, specifically the perception that annexation required connection to City sewer.
Mr. Lazenby reiterated that the City generally did not require connection so long as there was a
functioning septic system.
Testimony
Scott Bullard, 14130 Taylors Crest Lane, spoke on behalf of the Forest Highlands
Neighborhood Association. He described the Association's challenges in considering the topic
since learning of the expiring IGA about 18 months earlier; the option of annexation entailed a
$300 application fee, but property owners with a failed septic system would face a significantly
larger fee at such time as they connected to sewer. Reflecting on the background of the
agreement and neighbors' perspectives, he noted that the Forest Highlands Water District had
given up assets in exchange for the 25-year agreement for in-city water rates. The 77 affected
residents would experience much higher rates with the 50% surcharge and yet would still see no
advantage in annexing, for various reasons; the surcharge is viewed as punitive. The Association
proposes a strategy session with City staff to explore incentives for annexation, such as fee
waivers or deferrals or sewer-related concessions.
Questions and comments from Council members followed, with Mr. Bullard emphasizing the
benefits of a positive annexation policy, the need for cost analysis, and the Association's desire
to work collaboratively with the City. Mayor Studebaker stated that the revised rates were not
proposed in order encourage annexation; however, Council would discuss alternatives to the 50%
increase. Councilors discussed various concerns, including the City's current approach to
annexation and how it might be addressed in the neighborhood planning process; issues of equity
also were posed by offering annexation incentives in Forest Highlands. Mr. Bullard indicated
willingness to discuss other options, including a phased-in approach to ease the financial impact.
Chris Foster, 13612 Knaus Road, described his lifelong residence and active involvement in the
community. He expressed dissatisfaction with the tone of the City's letter regarding the 50%
increase and noted the disproportionate impacts on many residents, including the elderly. He
questioned the 50% increase amount, which is too high and may be regarded as a discriminatory
sort of tax. This will take a toll on neighbors who have contributed greatly to the community for
many years, he indicated. In responding to follow-up questions, he expressed concerns about
the lack of discussion with residents in the process.
Chris Robinson, 14000 Goodall Road, stated that he opposes the Resolution, with a primary
reason being the process. Noting the lack of outreach to affected property owners and other
communication problems, he asked that Council table the matter; it should be addressed after
there has been analysis of the rate structure and factors specific to the Forest Highlands situation,
such as the transfer of assets to the City. He observed that residents are open to a discussion of
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 10
July 5, 2017
alternatives to the 50% surcharge and to finding a way to achieve some kind of parity with City
residents. As proposed, the increases are excessive; they appear to be punitive and linked to
annexation. He indicated that his written testimony had also been provided.
Sam Taylor, 13170 Thoma Road, expressed concerns related to the suddenness and amount
of the increase, without appropriate notification to residents. The 50% increase poses a dilemma
for him in terms of his age and limited income, and others in the neighborhood share this feeling.
He related the need for analysis of how the rate was determined, as well.
Michael Pittman, 1301 Forest Meadows Way, requested that Council not increase the water
rates by 50%. He regards this as excessive and cannot reconcile it to principles of utility rate
making with which he is familiar. In his area, he indicated that these customers are creating no
additional burden or risk, from either a capital or an operating-expense perspective. The amount
seems arbitrary. He also perceives resentment toward those who reside outside the City; if
annexation was the issue, he hoped there would be a different process. Mayor Studebaker
assured him that annexation was not the basis for the rate change.
Steve Spahr, 13050 Forest Meadows Way, noted that he was testifying because he had
questions about the process. He was uncertain about how the City would shut off water service
to individual properties, but would view that as a punitive action. The greater issue, he indicated,
was the apparent perception that these customers were not paying their fair share. Following a
brief exchange with Council members, he requested clarification of the current rate and the
justification for an additional 50%. It appeared to him and many other residents that annexation
was a factor; they were willing to pay for the City services they used, but wanted to understand
the basis for the higher rates before they were implemented. In a further exchange, he noted that
much of the testimony was based on concern about the Council's process.
Carl Grossman, 13780 Knaus Road, explained that he shares the concerns of most of the
affected property owners about the punitive nature of the increase and the pressure to annex. He
described the high costs of annexation, which he had noted had always involved sewer
connection. He emphasized the need for Council to understand that, while the increase would
not have a big impact on the City, it would adversely affect the neighborhood and these
customers, many of whom were on fixed incomes. He urged Council members to vote against
adoption of the Resolution.
Mayor Studebaker called for any further testimony. Hearing none, he closed the public hearing.
Questions of Staff
Councilor Kohlhoff requested clarifications regarding the 25-year IGA and the relationship of
the parties following its expiration. Through the term of the agreement, Mr. Powell explained, the
City had been engaged in contractual obligation, which had expired in March. It is now in the
City's discretion whether to continue or not. With regard to how the 50% surcharge for out-of-city
customers was determined, Mr. Lazenby indicated that it had been in place since the 1950s; Staff
had found no detailed analysis. He surmised that the in-city rate had been established for non-
resident Forest Highlands customers in recognition of the Forest Highlands Water District assets
that had been transferred. It was entirely within the Council's discretion to revisit these rates, he
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 10
July 5, 2017
advised. In subsequent discussion, he confirmed that rates for other out-of-city customers
included the 50% surcharge and clarified the timeline leading to proposal of the Resolution.
In response to questions from Councilor Buck, Mr. Lazenby confirmed that annexation requests
in the neighborhood had been seen only where there was a need for sewer connection, i.e.,where
a septic system had failed or development was desired. Mr. Powell followed up on earlier
testimony, clarifying that connecting to sewer was never a condition of annexation. He discussed
the relationship between DEQ rules applicable to a failed septic system in relation to applying for
annexation, which would follow. Lastly, he outlined the notification process for an increase to
utility rates, including this one. The process entailed a public hearing, typically held at year end
when Council considered annual adoption of the Master Fees and Charges schedule.
Councilor LaMotte asked for clarification of water rates throughout the City. Mr. Cross outlined
the categories of residential water customers: in-city, out-of-city (subject to the 50% surcharge),
and those who were customers of other water districts. Councilor Manz offered a recap of the
discussion, including options for a discretionary decision by the Council.
Mayor Studebaker moved to adopt Resolution 17-36. Councilor Kohlhoff seconded the
motion.
Councilor Buck pointed out issues of equity for other out-of-city customers if Council decided to
take any action other than adopting this motion. He acknowledged that residents of the city are
the ones assuming the risk for the system and it is therefore logical to have a higher rate for those
outside the city. Mayor Studebaker indicated that he would entertain a friendly amendment to
set a modified out-of-city rate. Discussion ensued about various considerations. Councilor
LaMotte moved to amend the motion to defer any rate increase to January of 2018 so that
Council could consider it in the annual review of Master Fees and Charges. Mayor
Studebaker expressed opposition to the amendment, and called for a second. None being heard,
the motion to amend died for lack of a second.
Councilor Manz suggested an amendment to Mayor Studebaker's motion that would provide for
a phased-in implementation of rate changes. Discussion continued, including the need to have a
rational basis for treating the Forest Highlands customers differently from other out-of-city
customers. After additional refinement, Councilor Manz offered a friendly amendment to
increase the rate 10% a year for five consecutive years for Forest Highlands, beginning
July 18, 2017, to be reviewed again in December 2017. Mayor Studebaker expressed his
willingness to accept the amendment.
Councilor Gudman noted that he would vote in favor of the amendment, although he believes
the long-standing policy has served the City well and sees no compelling reason to change it.
Councilor Kohlhoff observed that the key question is whether or not the 50% is an unreasonable
rate for out-of-city customers. Her assumption is that over the years it has been determined to
be reasonable.
A roll call vote was held, and motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors
O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, and Buck voting `aye'. Councilor Kohlhoff voted 'no'. (6-
1)
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 10
July 5, 2017
9.2 Ordinance 2740, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending the
Zoning Map for 6150 Kenny Street (Tax Lot 2800 Map 21E1 8CC) and the Abutting
Right-of-Way; Rezoning the Subject .61 Acre Parcel and the Abutting Right-of-Way
from R-7.5 to R-10, and Adopting Findings (LU 17-0009).
Ordinance 2741, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending the
Zoning Map for 5711 McEwan Road (Tax Lot 10602 Map 21 E18CD) and Abutting
Right-of-Way Directly in Front of 5711 McEwan Road; and the Right of Way Along
Pilkington Road Between Kenny Street and the North Property Line of 18625
Pilkington Road; Rezoning the Subject .22 Acre Parcel and Right-of-Way from R-7.5
to R-10, and Adopting Findings (LU 17-0010).
Ordinance 2742, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending the
Zoning Map for 6135 McEwan Road (Tax Lot 8400, Map 21 E18CC); Rezoning the
Subject 1.27 Acre Parcel and Abutting Right-of-Way from R-7.5 to R-10, and
Adopting Findings (LU 17-0011).
Ordinance 2743, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending the
Zoning Map for 6397 McEwan Road and the Abutting Right-of-Way (Tax Lot 6400
Map 21 E18CC); Rezoning the .23 Acre Parcel and the Abutting Right-of-Way from
R-7.5 to R-10, and Adopting Findings (LU 17-0012).
Ordinance 2744, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending the
Zoning Map for 18485 Donlee Way (Tax Lot 4200 Map 21 E18CC); Rezoning the
Subject .23 Acre Parcel from R-7.5 to R-10, and Adopting Findings (LU 17-0013).
Ordinance 2745, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending the
Zoning Map for 18521 Donlee Way (Tax Lot 4100 Map 21 E18CC) Rezoning the
Subject .24 Acre Parcel from R-7.5 to R-10, and Adopting Findings (LU 17-0014).
Ordinance 2746, An Ordinance of the Lake Oswego City Council Amending the
Zoning Map for 661 S. State Street (Lake Oswego Corp. Power Station Property)
(Tax Lot 200, Map 21E10DA) and Abutting Right-of-Way; Rezoning the Subject .45
Acre Parcel and Abutting Right-of-Way from R-7.5 (Single-Family) to PNA(Park and
Natural Area) and Adopting Findings (LU 17-0015).
Report and Exhibits
Mr. Powell introduced the matter before the Council as shown in the titles for Ordinances 2740,
2741, 2742, 2743, 2744, 2745, and 2746. He reviewed parameters for this land use proceeding
and noted that the hearing process was outlined in the agenda. He asked if any City Council
member needed to make any declarations with relation to ex parte contacts, bias, or conflicts of
interest. None were heard.
Mr. Espe explained that the proposed Zoning Map amendments would make corrections for six
lots in the Rosewood Neighborhood and one lot owned by the Lake Oswego Corporation (Lake
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 10
July 5, 2017
Corp), as detailed in the Council Report. The proposed map revisions would implement
recommendations of the 2015 Audit of the Comprehensive Plan and development code. For
purposes of the public hearing, the seven ordinances were consolidated, as were the related
findings, it was determined. With an accompanying PowerPoint presentation, he first reviewed
zoning history of the Rosewood properties. He explained how the change from R-7.5 to R-10
might affect the development potential of two properties (at 6135 McEwan Road and 6150 Kenny
Street); however, the owners had not objected to this point and the changes were consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan designation for lots in this area. Next he reported on the Zoning Map
change from R-7.5 to PNA for the Lake Corp power station property (Council Report, p 3). He
then displayed graphics illustrating the change for each individual property. Finally, he noted that
the changes would not result in non-conforming land uses and that the uses are permitted in each
proposed zoning designation. Staff recommended approval.
Councilor Gudman complimented Planning staff and the Planning Commission for their efforts
to get the Comprehensive Plan and zoning into alignment. Mr. Espe acknowledged benefits to
Staff, the development community, and citizens.
Mayor Studebaker asked if anyone wished to testify in opposition to or in favor of adoption of the
Ordinances or if anyone wished to present neutral testimony. No requests being heard, he closed
the hearing.
Councilor Gudman moved to enact Ordinances 2740, 2741, 2742, 2743, 2744, 2745, and
2746. Councilor Manz seconded the motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed. with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors
O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, Kohlhoff, and Buck voting 'aye'. (7-0)
10. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL
Mayor Studebaker expressed appreciation to Police and other staff for their contributions to the
successful July 4 parade.
Councilor Gudman drew Council members' attention to materials provided regarding Metro's
"high road" initiative. As discussed at the previous week's Metropolitan Policy Advisory
Committee meeting, this would promote the idea of public/private partnership for transportation
infrastructure. He had conveyed that this would entail tolling and was thus a fantasy, he noted.
Police Department staff was complimented for their quick response and resolution in a recent
bank robbery. He highlighted efforts of donors and volunteers in support of Community Clean Up
Day, held several weeks earlier, and provided statistics reflecting its success.
Councilor Manz added her kudos to Jenny Slepian and the Youth Leadership Council for their
coordination efforts on the clean-up event.
Councilor Kohlhoff followed up on the goal of developing a program to expand residents'
financial capability through community education. She reported that her efforts, together with
Councilor Gudman, Happy Valley City Councilor Brett Sherman, and Ann Adrian of the Adult
Community Center, had culminated in a "gatekeeper training" that would be presented through
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 10
July 5, 2017
Clackamas County. The objective is to alert those who interact with older people to signs of elder
abuse and to enable them to educate those who are most likely to be targeted. The event will be
held on August 1 and will be offered at no cost.
11. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
No reports were made.
12. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Studebaker adjourned the meeting at 9:12 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON
Kent Studebaker, Mayor
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 10
July 5, 2017
ATTACHMENT 3
� �A E
O
sCITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
CJ �_ O July 18, 2017
OREGON
8. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Studebaker called the regular City Council meeting to order at 3:23 p.m., following
the Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency meeting on July 18, 2017, in the City Council
Chambers, 380 A Avenue.
Present: Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, LaMotte,
and Kohlhoff
Staff Present: Scott Lazenby, City Manager; David Powell, City Attorney; Corinne Strauser,
Deputy City Recorder; Sarah Selden, Senior Planner; Chip Larouche, Chief
Technology Officer; Ivan Anderholm, Parks and Recreation Director; Tom
Mueller, Golf Course General Manager; Jeff Munro, Parks Superintendent;
Amanda Owings, Traffic Engineer; Erica Rooney, City Engineer; Scot Siegel,
Planning and Building Services Director
Others Present: Brian Jackson, Brian C. Jackson, LLC; Todd Chase, FCS Group
9. CONSENT AGENDA
9.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes
9.1.1 June 20, 2017, Regular Meeting
Motion: Move to approve the minutes as written.
Report and Attachment
9.2 Resolution 17-44, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
Declaring a Public Necessity to Acquire a Temporary Construction Easement and
Exercise the Power of Eminent Domain at 16354 Boones Ferry Road (Boones Ferry
Road Project)
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-44.
Report and Attachments
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 11
July 18, 2017
9.3 Resolution 17-42, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
Adopting the Iron Mountain Park Master Plan
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-42.
Report and Attachments
9.4 Resolution 17-48, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
Consenting to the Indirect Transfer of Control of Astound Broadband LLC, as
Provided Under the Non-exclusive Telecommunications Franchise.
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-48.
Report and Attachments
9.5 Resolution 17-50, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
Authorizing an Amendment to the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
Intergovernmental Agreement with Clackamas County to Add a Provision Required
by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development Relating to the
Transfer and Exchange of CDBG Funds
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 17-50.
Report and Attachments
END CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Studebaker asked if anyone wished to request removal of any Consent Agenda items.
Councilor LaMotte asked for clarification regarding the Iron Mountain Park Master Plan (Item
9.3), wanting to ensure that all Council members were aware of a last-minute addition to the Plan
report concerning Iron Mountain Boulevard. Mayor Studebaker indicated that all were aware.
Councilor Gudman moved to adopt the Consent Agenda. Councilor Manz seconded the
motion.
Mayor Studebaker confirmed that the motion before the Council included the minor change to
the Mountain Park Master Plan that had been communicated to all members by Mr. Anderholm.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors
Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, and Kohlhoff voting 'aye'. (7-0)
10. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA
No items were removed from the Consent Agenda.
11. CITIZEN COMMENT
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 11
July 18, 2017
No Citizen Comment was offered.
11.1 Prior Citizen Comment Follow-Up
No follow-up on prior Citizen Comment was presented.
12. COUNCIL BUSINESS
12.1 Neighborhood Enhancement Program Grant Awards
Report and Attachments 1 and 2
Attachment 3 - Applications (Large File)
In her role as neighborhood planner, Ms. Selden described the purpose of the Neighborhood
Enhancement Program and benefits of the grant awards, as outlined in the Council Report.
Referencing the associated award criteria (p 2 of Report), she highlighted the principal
requirement to provide a benefit to the community. The 13 grant applications submitted by
neighborhood associations were reviewed by a seven-member committee, which recommended
full or partial approval of all requests, utilizing nearly the full $60,000 budgeted for the program
(Council Report, Attachment 1). She provided background on the committee's decision regarding
the two partially-funded grant requests, as noted in Attachment 1: (1) the Hallinan Heights
Neighborhood request for $2,000 to remove invasive plants in the public right of way and (2) the
Forest Highlands Neighborhood request for $1,000 for one component of an event tied to
emergency preparedness. Summarizing the total grant award, she reported that it would provide
funding for five physical improvements in the right of way, three public art projects,four emergency
preparedness projects, and five neighborhood events.
Mayor Studebaker asked for clarification about the $300 limit on funding for neighborhood social
events that was determined to apply to the Forest Highlands request. Ms. Selden provided
background, indicating that the limit had been established a couple of years earlier at the City
Council's direction.
With regard to the determination not to award the $2,000 for Hallinan Heights invasive species
removal, Councilor Gudman noted that Council had approved funding in the 2017-2018 budget
for removal of invasive species in the public right of way throughout the city. In an ensuing
exchange, Council members and Staff discussed removal of invasives as an element of the City's
streets maintenance program and how it might bear on this neighborhood request.
Councilor Gudman moved to approve the 2017-2018 Neighborhood Enhancement Program
grants as recommended by the Grant Review Committee. Councilor LaMotte seconded
the motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors
Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, and Kohlhoff voting 'aye'. (7-0)
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 11
July 18, 2017
12.2 Resolution 17-45, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
Authorizing the City Manager to Sign Ten Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs)
with Clackamas County for Fiber Optic Network Connectivity Not to Exceed
$300,000
Report and Attachment
Mr. Larouche conveyed his recommendation that Council approve the Resolution. After
highlighting the background of improvements to the City's network since 1985, he described this
proposal as a unique opportunity to take advantage of sharing government-owned fiber with the
School District to connect all permanent City facilities. The result will afford significant ongoing
cost reductions and the opportunities for benefits of gig-speed internet service. In the preceding
two years of planning, Staff had made conscious decisions to forego or delay purchases of
hardware and software and had taken advantage of favorable pricing for other information
technology (IT) expenditures. As a result, all funding for these IGA projects was already a part of
the IT operational budget, and no other funding was necessary. Details were provided in the
Council Report, he advised.
Mr. Lazenby reminded Council of the previously-approved franchise agreement issued to
Clackamas County, which included a reciprocal arrangement that was of benefit to both
government entities. Mr. Larouche had parlayed that into the cost reduction, as well.
Mayor Studebaker asked if the deferral of equipment and software purchases would require the
City to spend additional monies to take advantage of the new improvements. Mr. Larouche
indicated that this would not be the case; delaying the non-critical expenditures had enabled the
reserve to be established in advance.
Councilor LaMotte questioned the need for 10 IGAs rather than one that would encompass
connectivity for all of the facilities. Mr. Larouche explained that, under a single IGA, a
construction complication with any one facility could delay the entire process. With 10 IGAs, the
City would have more flexibility in addressing such a situation. Councilor LaMotte asked about
the need for this connectivity at facilities that seemed to have less need for it. Mr. Larouche
indicated that a facility currently on the City network would still require connection through the
Comcast cable modem, which would cost more on a monthly basis than the fiber connection.
Councilor Buck posed questions about terms of the per-month pricing. Mr. Larouche explained
that, with specified notice, the City was free to exit any one of these IGAs. The pricing was not
guaranteed, but based on his long and positive experience with Clackamas County, he is
convinced of their strong commitment to providing the service. They also have motivation to price
it competitively as they serve other jurisdictions, he suggested.
Noting his appreciation for an investment where there is an actual return on dollars, Councilor
Gudman expressed his support for the Resolution.
Mayor Studebaker moved to adopt Resolution 17-45. Councilor Gudman seconded the
motion.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 11
July 18, 2017
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed, with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors
Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, and Kohlhoff voting 'aye'. (7-0)
13. STUDY SESSIONS
13.1 Lake Oswego Municipal Golf Course
Report
Mr. Lazenby noted the two 2017 City Council Goals relating to the study session subject, one
being a decision on the future of the municipal golf course. He highlighted the operating deficits
and decreased course usage of recent years, as discussed in the Council Report. Council was
urged to consider this informal discussion as an opportunity to learn about options and to provide
direction to Staff.
Mr. Anderholm, accompanied by Mr. Jackson, an architect assisting with the project, reviewed
operational background of the golf course since it opened in 1968 (Council Report). In addition
to the subsidy required in recent years, a significant concern was the diminishing number of nine-
hole rounds played over the 15-year period following the peak year of 2000: from about 72,000
to 33,500 rounds. This is consistent with national trends, he indicated. Staff had identified some
possibilities for the golf course and the site, and hoped to learn about Council interest in these.
Addressing questions throughout, Mr. Anderholm first addressed the question: Is golf a function
that the City should continue to operate? He reviewed challenges of the existing golf course and
facilities, as well as the successful collaboration with Mr. Mueller to improve operating efficiency,
assess profitability of various segments, and analyze the customer base. A significant finding
was that about 9% of Lake Oswego residents use the golf course; this is about three times the
typical community use, he indicated. It suggests that having a municipal course is very valuable
to the community and that this is a service the City should seek to maintain in some form.
Councilor Gudman stated that Council direction should be to take sale of the golf course off the
table. As a Parks property, the City would need to maintain it, regardless of the use; however,
the cost savings to maintain it for alternate recreational uses were not significant in comparison
to the value of the golf course to residents. The City can and should absorb this difference, he
opined. Councilor Buck concurred about the important role of golf in the community and
expressed support for maintaining it. He inquired about adding other uses at the site and their
potential for enhancing golf activities. Mr. Anderholm confirmed that attracting people to a site
through additional programming would increase participation in the existing activity at the site.
Improvements to the golf course and its facilities would not only enhance the golf experience, but
would also increase overall usage, potentially in poor weather conditions, for example.
Councilor Kohlhoff expressed opposition to sale of the golf course. It is a public service of the
City and should not be viewed as a business. She regards the potential savings in maintaining it
as a park instead of a golf course as negligible. Decreased golf course usage should not be a
particular focus; it is also a factor with other important activities that offer quality of life to citizens,
including tennis and swimming. If a permanent facility for the Parks and Recreation Department
were feasible at this site, with space for other programs, this would be reasonable, in her opinion.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 11
July 18, 2017
In response to questions from Councilor Manz, Mr. Anderholm indicated that any
reconfiguration of the course, e.g., to an executive nine-hole course, would take into account the
necessary upgrades.
Councilor LaMotte called for evaluation of the feasibility of various course configurations on the
site. While noting the limited amount of space, he indicated that a permanent location for Parks
and Recreation was desirable. Strong consideration should be given to the opportunity for a multi-
use recreation center.
Noting that Council consensus indicated a desire to maintain some form of golf function, Mr.
Anderholm posed a second question: Is the golf course site the right location for other services?
In addition to a permanent home for Parks and Recreation, he discussed benefits of such
possibilities as trails and an expanded driving range that would incorporate a baseball/softball
hitting facility. The City could also consider selling some of the property to generate capital to
offset improvements to the course or other possible municipal functions; Council direction was
requested about where this might make sense, in terms of both financial and community
considerations.
In introducing three potential options for the site (Council Report, p 2), Mr. Jackson explained
that either a nine-hole executive or 12-hole hybrid golf course would require 20 to 22 acres;
additional area of the 39-acre property was taken up by the parking lot, clubhouse, and other
facilities. Beyond the green space for a reconfigured golf course, remaining acreage could be
utilized for a variety of purposes. He displayed an aerial photo as he outlined the three options,
provided comparisons, and responded to questions. Option 1, he confirmed, was the only one
that included a golf course.
Mr. Anderholm described challenges of developing the options, but the guiding principle was to
find ways to bring more people onto the property to use facilities. Council members were
encouraged to consider the components as a menu of choices, with the options illustrating how
they might fit on the property. In ensuing discussion, Mr. Jackson pointed out the need to
determine what choices had priority for the Council, which led into observations about funding.
Approaches might include issuance of General Obligation bonds or sale of a portion of the
property and reinvestment of the proceeds. Housing of the Parks and Recreation Department
was a factor, Mr. Anderholm noted; direction from Council about the facility was needed before
a funding method could be determined.
In response to an inquiry from Councilor Manz about potential sale of property for residential
development, Mr. Anderholm estimated that $300,000 to $500,000 per lot would be expected.
Councilor O'Neill maintained that a bond would not be a feasible approach in light of the recent
school bond. If property was sold for the potential 30-plus lots, it was essential that the proceeds
not be used only for building a new golf course; the City would be better off leaving the course as
is if funds are not set aside for facility construction and driving range improvements. While these
and other parks priorities might be weighed, if Council wants to improve this asset, a means of
funding it through selling land must be found. Councilor Buck concurred, inquiring about
possible sale of other underutilized Parks properties and opportunities for other golf-related
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 11
July 18, 2017
services on the golf course property. He expressed reservations about additional Parks
investment that already seems weighted to this side of the city.
Councilor LaMotte, commenting on various considerations for the Council, indicated that the
commitment to golf was a priority, as well as finding a home for Parks and Recreation that
supported necessary programming at the site. Specific costs should not be a focus until it is
apparent what can be done on this property. He called for creativity, both from Council members
and Staff.
Councilor Gudman confirmed that Staff recommended a reconfiguration of the golf course in
order to improve it. Mr. Anderholm clarified that the reconfiguration could be modified,
depending on whether or not a new recreation facility was added. As the study session
concluded, it was indicated that Staff would return to Council with a couple of reconfiguration
scenarios for exploration.
13.2 Traffic Signal Assessment Report
Report and Attachments
Ms. Owings presented an overview of the traffic signal assessment project, noting the
collaborative efforts of the City's Planning and Engineering departments in infrastructure planning.
Using resources such as the Transportation System Plan (TSP), Comprehensive Plan, and traffic
impact studies, Staff had identified 11 un-signalized intersections and two pedestrian crossings
for study by a consultant. The purpose, as noted in the Council Report, was to determine whether
or not a traffic signal was warranted at any of the locations and, if so, when the City should plan
for it. After providing background on the methodology, she discussed PowerPoint slides.
Included was a map showing locations of five intersections requiring traffic signals within the next
six years, as well as several that would be reviewed for longer-term implementation. Staff's next
step would be to add the projects to the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). One of the intersections
(Jean Road/Bryant Road) had been included in the current year's CIP, and she discussed plans
for this first implementation. The others would be added and reviewed for ranking in the next CIP
update.
In response to Mayor Studebaker's questions about funding, Ms. Rooney explained that traffic
signals are almost 100% eligible for System Development Charge (SDC) funding; if needed, the
street fund was another source.
Concluding her presentation, Ms. Owings discussed Staff's related efforts to bring fiber
communications to City traffic signals and to plan for future installation of traffic-operations
cameras. The signal projects would also be kept in mind when new land use applications were
received and at the time of the next TSP update.
Councilor Manz inquired about any efforts made to resolve intersection issues at Childs Road
and Stafford Road, a County road. Ms. Owings indicated that the intersection is identified in the
County's TSP. The City continues to communicate with the County regarding complaints, she
noted; also, the County would be doing a road safety audit of Stafford Road within the next year.
Councilor Manz requested that Council be kept informed on this audit.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 11
July 18, 2017
In responding to questions from Councilor Buck about signal-related engineering costs, Ms.
Rooney clarified the roles of City and County staff and consulting engineers. She discussed the
separate effort related to the potential role of the County in managing the City's 32 signals(Council
Report, p 3) and responded to additional questions. Staff would be returning to Council with a
proposal, possibly in September.
13.3 Accelerated Street Preservation Program
Report
Mr. Lazenby advised the Council that this option for street preservation, as described in the
Council Report, had both strategic and financial implications. He reported that Councilor Gudman
had identified the prospect of increased State transportation funding as an early opportunity for
the City to clear some of its backlogged pavement preservation projects through a "surge". By
acting quickly, the City could be positioned to secure a road contractor during a period of expected
high demand, once the State transportation package is adopted. With Council's direction, Staff
could begin to lay groundwork for the bid package and financing. He cautioned the Council,
however, about the increased State and federal regulatory burden for such projects in recent
years. Notably, requirements related to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) entailed
additional design and planning, at disproportionate expenditure of cost and time.
Ms. Rooney addressed questions about staffing and budget related to this initiative. A Request
for Proposals (RFP) would be issued later in the year for a consulting team to support the City's
pavement management program. The RFP process would also include discussion of the
accelerated preservation work, subject to availability of the new State funding; a program
management approach would be specified, continuing over a period of three to five years. Staff
expected to return to Council in early October regarding the contract award.
Councilor Kohlhoff requested clarification of a Staff comment related to extra costs associated
with meeting ADA standards. Ms. Rooney described some requirements, but noted that these
varied according to the facilities already existing on the street. At this time she was not able to
provide an estimated dollar amount or percentage that was added to the cost, but indicated that
design work was the most significant factor. Councilor Kohlhoff expressed support for the ADA
standards and the need for compliance.
Councilor Gudman discussed the importance of the "surge" and this opportunity for earlier
implementation. He noted that the trade-off would be the interest cost incurred. However, the
benefits of doing the work sooner would offset this, and financing with a margin of safety appeared
feasible. He asked when the "surge" might be delivered. Citing variables of funding availability,
staffing, and bonding approach, Ms. Rooney indicated that the summer of 2018 was improbable,
but this work would be done in the 2018-2020 timeframe. Councilor Gudman noted that the City
Council needed to be prepared to support Staff during that period, as the many road projects
would generate increased feedback from the community.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 11
July 18, 2017
Councilor Gudman moved to move forward as quickly as possible with the securitization
of the funding to move forward with accelerating the road work. Councilor O'Neill
seconded the motion.
A voice vote was held, and the motion passed. with Mayor Studebaker and Councilors
Buck, O'Neill, Manz, Gudman, LaMotte, and Kohlhoff voting 'aye'. (7-0)
Note: The foregoing motion was offered directly following consideration of Agenda Item 13.4,
followed by the vote.
13.4 Transient Lodging Enforcement Plan
Report
Mr. Siegel noted that the Council Report outlined Staffs plan for enforcement of the City's
prohibition on short-term rentals in residential zones, as directed by Council at its June 20
meeting. He outlined the three-pronged approach to active enforcement and supporting activities
(p 2 of report): (1) enhance community awareness of the prohibition; (2) identify ownership and
other information related to rentals operating in violation of the code; and (3) continue to follow up
on active complaints, as detailed in the report. Also identified were resource needs for this Council
priority. Recruitment of a temporary code enforcement assistant had produced a strong response,
and this addition was expected to contribute to enhanced enforcement.
13.5 Transportation System Development Charges Alternatives
Report and Attachments
Ms. Rooney, accompanied by Ms. Owings and Mr. Chase, explained that they were following up
on the earlier Council study session and public hearing. She recapped the SDC report,
emphasizing that the methodology was fundamental to quantifying the needs identified in the
TSP. In using current industry standards to develop the City's new rates and methodology, the
team had compared proposed rates to those of other cities (Council Report, p 3). She reminded
Council that Lake Oswego's slower growth rate, lesser extent of new commercial development,
and limited available land should be considered in comparing SDC applicability in other suburbs.
After discussing the four alternatives for consideration (Council Report, p 7), she called for
questions and direction from Council.
Councilor Buck expressed support for indexing to inflation for the SDCs, but otherwise not for
any other increase at this time. He discussed the interdependency of Lake Oswego businesses
and suggested rates be more uniform across all business categories. Council also might consider
approaches for maintaining a base of locally-owned small businesses, e.g., discounts.
Councilor Gudman suggested that the discussion be focused first on the methodology. Varied
input from Council and Staff members was then considered, focusing on financial impacts of the
30% increase inherent with implementation of the new versus old methodology. The consensus
was to accept the new methodology, and discussion was next directed to approaches for phasing.
In a brief exchange about potential discounts for locally-owned businesses, a number of
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 11
July 18, 2017
challenges were identified. Mayor Studebaker requested that Council consider whether or not
the new methodology should be implemented to achieve the initial 30% increase only or to allow
subsequent adjustment without Council action, according to the methodology. Councilor
Kohlhoff expressed opposition to phased-in approaches and to rate reductions for various
business categories because the methodology itself affords considerable fairness. However, an
implementation that would take the level from perhaps 50%to the full 100% might be acceptable,
she indicated.
Following additional discussion and clarification, Councilor LaMotte moved to base the
transportation SDC on the formula and methodology as provided by the professionals
starting January 1, 2018, at a rate representing 30% of the maximum level, with no change
unless or until authorized by the City Council. Councilor O'Neill seconded the motion.
Councilor Gudman stated he would vote 'no' because the proposed SDCs, even at the 100%
level, were in line with those charged by the other cities in the metropolitan area.
Mayor Studebaker confirmed that the intent of the motion was to direct Staff to return in
September with the resolutions and necessary implementing documents, and this vote would be
a preliminary decision of the Council. He noted that he opposed the motion because he wanted
to see more increases.
A roll call vote was held, and the motion passed, with Councilors Buck, O'Neill, Manz, and
LaMotte voting 'aye'. Mayor Studebaker and Councilors Gudman and Kohlhoff voted 'no'.
(4-3)
14. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL
Councilor Gudman announced that the PERS Board would likely be reducing the assumed rate
of return on investments at their July month-end meeting. As a result, the City can expect another
increase in its annual contribution, beginning in 2019-2021, he indicated. He reported on his
participation in the water audit offered by the City, noting that helpful suggestions for saving water
had been provided. He recommended that, in light of expected transportation funding, the City of
Lake Oswego should issue a joint letter with the cities of Tigard and King City to TriMet; this would
call for measures to improve bus service in a specific area of need in Tigard. Finally, in reference
to a racial incident reported in the local newspaper, he pointed out the opportunity for the
community to re-commit to the dignity due every resident or visitor to the city.
Councilor LaMotte conveyed information about the upcoming Chamber of Commerce golf
tournament and noted that proceeds would benefit the veterans' memorial.
Councilor Manz reported that both she and Councilor Kohlhoff had attended a recent citizen
forum on racism that had been well attended; continuing community dialog on the topic is
anticipated. She also had attended the well-received opening of Westridge Park, where she
fielded compliments for the City's concert series.
15. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 11
July 18, 2017
No reports were made.
16. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Under authority of ORS 192.660 (2) (d) conduct deliberations
with persons designated to carry on labor negotiations
Mr. Powell reviewed the statutory basis for entering executive session and outlined the
parameters.
The Council met in executive session beginning at 6:09 p.m.
The Council reconvened in open session at 6:43 p.m.
17. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Studebaker adjourned the meeting at 6:44 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
ON
Kent Studebaker, Mayor
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 11
July 18, 2017
14.2
D0s COUNCIL REPORT
442,cc)
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: David Morris
Assistant Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Authorization to Purchase one Pierce Velocity PUC Pumper NH657 Fire Engine
DATE: August 10, 2017 MEETING DATE: September 5, 2017
ACTION/SUGGESTED MOTION
The Council is requested to authorize the purchase of one new Pierce Velocity PUC Pumper
NH657 Fire Engine from Pierce Manufacturing, Inc., by means of FireRescue GPO, a program of
NPPGov.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
The Lake Oswego Fire Department responds to fire and medical emergencies from four
strategically located fire stations. Within these four fire stations, the Department staffs three
Pierce Pumper Fire Engines and one 105' Pierce Aerial Ladder Truck.
The 2001 Pierce Fire Engine is scheduled and budgeted for replacement in Fiscal Year 2017-18.
The Fire Department has an apparatus replacement schedule that was developed using
recommendations outlined in the National Fire Protection Association's (NFPA) Standard 1901
Standard for Automotive Fire Apparatus. The NFPA Standard 1901 recommends that apparatus
greater than fifteen-years of age that have been properly maintained be sent into reserve
status. In addition to the recommendations outlined in NFPA Standard 1901, the Department
takes into consideration the condition and maintenance history of the apparatus when
developing the replacement schedule. If the purchased is authorized, a 1994 reserve fire
engine will be sold.
DISCUSSION
The Lake Oswego Fire Department began developing general specifications for replacement of
the 2001 Pierce Pumper Fire Engine in March 2017. An internal committee was established to
review the service needs and design features that were to be included in the apparatus
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeosweao.citv
Page 2
specifications. The committee identified a Pierce Velocity PUC Pumper NH657 Fire Engine with
specifications that meets the City's needs through the Permissive Cooperative Procurement.
Pursuant to LOPCR 46-131(1)(b), OAR 137-046-0400 et seq., and ORS 279A.215, notice was
given that the City of Lake Oswego intends to enter into a contract for the purchase of a fire
engine from Pierce Manufacturing, Inc., by means of FireRescue GPO, program of NPPGov.
FISCAL IMPACT
The funds to purchase the new Pierce Velocity Pumper NH657 Fire Engine are already covered
and approved in the Fire Department budget.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the purchase of one new Pierce Velocity Pumper NH657 Fire Engine from Pierce
Manufacturing, Inc. in the amount of$663,913.00.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Purchase Agreement
2. Copy of Public Notice of Intent to Establish Contract through Permissive Cooperative
Procurement.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
ATTACHMENT 1
pfece
PERFORM. LIKE NQ OTHER:
This Purchase Agreement (together with all attachments referenced herein, the "Agreement"), made and entered into by and
between Pierce Manufacturing Inc., a Wisconsin corporation ("Pierce"), and City of Lake Osweao. a City ("Customer") is
effective as of the date specified in Section 3 hereof.
1.Definitions.
a. "Product" means the fire apparatus and any associated equipment manufactured or furnished for the Customer by
Pierce pursuant to the Specifications.
b. "Specifications" means the general specifications, technical specifications,training, and testing requirements for the
Product contained in the Pierce Proposal for the Product prepared in response to the Customer's request for proposal.
c. "Pierce Proposal" means the proposal provided by Pierce attached as Exhibit C prepared in response to the
Customer's request for proposal.
d. "Delivery"means the date Pierce is prepared to make physical possession of the Product available to the Customer.
e. "Acceptance" The Customer shall have fifteen (15)calendar days of Delivery to inspect the Product for substantial
conformance with the material Specifications; unless Pierce receives a Notice of Defect within fifteen (15) calendar
days of Delivery, the Product will be deemed to be in conformance with the Specifications and accepted by the
Customer.
2.Purpose. This Agreement sets forth the terms and conditions of Pierce's sale of the Product to the Customer.
3. Term of Agreement. This Agreement will become effective on the date it is signed and approved by Pierce's authorized
representative pursuant to Section 22 hereof("Effective Date") and, unless earlier terminated pursuant to the terms of this
Agreement,it will terminate upon the Customer's Acceptance and payment in full of the Purchase Price.
4. Purchase and Payment. The Customer agrees to purchase the Product specified on Exhibit A for the total purchase price of
$663,913.00("Purchase Price").Prices are in U.S.funds.
5. Future Changes. Various state or federal regulatory agencies (e.g. NFPA, DOT, EPA) may require changes to the
Specifications and/or the Product and in any such event any resulting cost increases incurred to comply therewith will be added
to the Purchase Price to be paid by the Customer. In addition, any future drive train upgrades (engine, transmission, axles,
etc.), or any other specification changes have not been calculated into our annual increases and will be provided at additional
cost. To the extent practicable,Pierce will document and itemize any such price increases for the Customer.
6. Agreement Changes. The Customer may request that Pierce incorporate a change to the Products or the Specifications for
the Products by delivering a change order to Pierce; provided, however, that any such change order must be in writing and
include a description of the proposed change sufficient to permit Pierce to evaluate the feasibility of such change ("Change
Order"). Within [seven (7) business days] of receipt of a Change Order, Pierce will inform the Customer in writing of the
feasibility of the Change Order,the earliest possible implementation date for the Change Order,of any increase or decrease in
the Purchase Price resulting from such Change Order, and of any effect on production scheduling or Delivery resulting from
such Change Order. Pierce shall not be liable to the Customer for any delay in performance or Delivery arising from any such
Change Order. A Change Order is only effective when counter-signed by Pierce's authorized representative.
7. CancellationiTermination. In the event this Agreement is cancelled or terminated by a party before completion,Pierce may
charge a cancellation fee. The following charge schedule based on costs incurred may be applied: (a) 10%of the Purchase
Price after order is accepted and entered by Pierce; (b)20%of the Purchase Price after completion of approval drawings, and;
(c) 30% of the Purchase Price upon any material requisition. The cancellation fee will increase accordingly as costs are
incurred as the order progresses through engineering and into manufacturing. Pierce endeavors to mitigate any such costs
through the sale of such Product to another purchaser; however Customer shall remain liable for the difference between the
Purchase Price and,if applicable,the sale price obtained by Pierce upon sale of the Product to another purchaser,plus any costs
incurred by Pierce to conduct any such sale.
8.Delivery.Insnection and Acceptance. (a)Delivery. Delivery of the Product is scheduled to be within 9.5.to 12.5 months of
the Effective Date of this Agreement, F.O.B. Customer's location,Lake Oswego,Oregon.Risk of loss shall pass to Customer
upon Delivery. (b)Inspection and Acceptance Upon Delivery, Customer shall have fifteen (15) days within which to inspect
the Product for substantial conformance to the material Specifications, and in the event of substantial non-conformance to the
QSD 1398 1 Revised: 09/10/2010
material Specifications to furnish Pierce with written notice sufficient to permit Pierce to evaluate such non-conformance
("Notice of Defect"). Any Product not in substantial conformance to material Specifications shall be remedied by Pierce within
thirty(30)days from the Notice of Defect. In the event Pierce does not receive a Notice of Defect within fifteen(15)days of
Delivery,Product will be deemed to be in conformance with Specifications and Accepted by Customer.
9.Notice. Any required or permitted notices hereunder must be given in writing at the address of each party set forth below,
or to such other address as either party may substitute by written notice to the other in the manner contemplated herein,by one
of the following methods: hand delivery; registered, express, or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid; or
nationally-recognized private express courier:
Pierce Manufacturing,Inc. Customer
Director of Order Management City of Lake Osweeo
2600 American Drive
Appleton WI 54912 300B Avenue/P.O.Box 369
Fax(920)832-3080 Lake Oswego.OR 97034
503-635-0275 Phone
503-635-0376 Fax
10. Standard Warranty. Any applicable Pierce warranties are attached hereto as Exhibit B and made a part hereof. Any
additional warranties must be expressly approved in writing by Pierce's authorized representative.
a. Disclaimer. OTHER THAN AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT, NEITHER PIERCE, ITS
PARENT COMPANY, AFFILIATES, SUBSIDIARIES,LICENSORS OR SUPPLIERS, THEIR RESPECTIVE OFFICERS,
DIRECTORS, EMPLOYEES, SHAREHOLDERS, AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES, MAKE ANY EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED WARRANTIES WITH RESPECT TO THE PRODUCTS PROVIDED HEREUNDER OR OTHERWISE
REGARDING THIS AGREEMENT, WHETHER ORAL OR WRITTEN, EXPRESS, IMPLIED OR STATUTORY.
WITHOUT LIMITING THE FOREGOING, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OR CONDITION OF MERCHANTABILITY,
THE IMPLIED WARRANTY AGAINST INFRINGEMENT, AND THE IMPLIED WARRANTY OR CONDITION OF
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE EXPRESSLY EXCLUDED AND DISCLAIMED.STATEMENTS MADE
BY SALES REPRESENTATIVES OR IN PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS DO NOT CONSTITUTE WARRANTIES.
b. Exclusions of Incidental and Consequential Damages_ In no event shall Pierce be liable for consequential,
incidental or punitive damages incurred by Customer or any third party in connection with any matter arising out of or relating
to this Agreement, or the breach thereof, regardless of whether such damages arise out of breach of warranty, tort, contract,
strict liability, statutory liability, indemnity, whether resulting from non-delivery or from Pierce's own negligence, or
otherwise.
11.Insurance. Pierce maintains the following limits of insurance with a carrier(s)rated A-or better by A.M.Best:
Commercial General Liability Insurance:
Products/Completed Operations Aggregate: $1,000,000
Each Occurrence: $1,000,000
Umbrella/Excess Liability Insurance:
Aggregate: $25,000,000
Each Occurrence: $25,000,000
The Customer may request: (x)Pierce to provide the Customer with a copy of a current Certificate of Insurance with
the coverages listed above;(y)to be included as an additional insured for Commercial General Liability(subject to the
terms and conditions of the applicable Pierce insurance policy); and (z) all policies to provide a 30 day notice of
cancellation to the named insured
12. Indemnity. The Customer shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Pierce, its officers, employees, dealers, agents or
subcontractors, from any and all claims, costs,judgments, liability, loss, damage, attorneys' fees or expenses of any kind or
nature whatsoever(including,but without limitation,personal injury and death)to all property and persons caused by,resulting
from,arising out of or occurring in connection with the Customer's purchase, installation or use of goods sold or supplied by
Pierce which are not caused by the sole negligence of Pierce.
13. Force Maieure. Pierce shall not be responsible nor deemed to be in default on account of delays in performance due to
causes which are beyond Pierce's control which make Pierce's performance impracticable, including but not limited to civil
wars, insurrections, strikes, riots, fires, storms, floods, other acts of nature, explosions, earthquakes, accidents, any act of
government, delays in transportation, inability to obtain necessary labor supplies or manufacturing facilities, allocation
QSD 1398 2 Revised: 09/10/2010
regulations or orders affecting materials, equipment, facilities or completed products, failure to obtain any required license or
certificates, acts of God or the public enemy or terrorism,failure of transportation, epidemics,quarantine restrictions,failure of
vendors (due to causes similar to those within the scope of this clause) to perform their contracts or labor troubles causing
cessation,slowdown,or interruption of work.
14. Default. The occurrence of one or more of the following shall constitute a default under this Agreement: (a)the Customer
fails to pay when due any amounts under this Agreement or to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement;(b)Pierce
fails to perform any of its obligations under this Agreement; (c) either party becomes insolvent or become subject to a
bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings; (d) any representation made by either party to induce the other to enter into this
Agreement is false in any material respect;(e)the Customer dissolves,merges,consolidates or transfers a substantial portion of
its property to another entity;or(f)the Customer is in default or has breached any other contract or agreement with Pierce.
15. Manufacturer's Statement of Origin. It is agreed that the manufacturer's statement of origin ("MSO") for the Product
covered by this Agreement shall remain in the possession of Pierce until the entire Purchase Price has been paid. If more than
one Product is covered by this Agreement,then the MSO for each individual Product shall remain in the possession of Pierce
until the Purchase Price for that Product has been paid in full. In case of any default in payment, Pierce may take full
possession of the Product, and any payments that have been made shall be applied as payment for the use of the Product up to
the date of taking possession.
16. Indenendent Contractors. The relationship of the parties established under this Agreement is that of independent
contractors and neither party is a partner,employee,agent,or joint venturer of or with the other.
17. Assignment. Neither party may assign its rights and obligations under this Agreement unless it has obtained the prior
written approval of the other party.
18. Governing Law: Jurisdiction. Without regard to any conflict of laws provisions,this Agreement is to be governed by and
under the laws of the state of Wisconsin.
19. Facsimile Signatures. The delivery of signatures to this Agreement by facsimile transmission shall be binding as original
signatures.
20. Entire Agreement. This Agreement shall be the exclusive agreement between the parties for the Product. Additional or
different terms proposed by the Customer shall not be applicable, unless accepted in writing by Pierce's authorized
representative. No change in, modification of, or revision of this Agreement shall be valid unless in writing and signed by
Pierce's authorized representative.
21. Conflict. In the event of a conflict between the Customer Specifications and the Pierce Proposal,the Pierce Proposal shall
control.In the event there is a conflict between the Pierce Proposal and this Agreement,the Pierce Proposal shall control.
22. Signatures. This Agreement is not effective unless and until it is approved, signed and dated by Pierce Manufacturing,
Inc.'s authorized representative.
Accepted and agreed to:
PIERCE MANUFACTURING,INC. CUSTOMER: City of Lake Oswego
Name: Name:
Title: Title:
Date: Date:
QSD 1398 3 Revised: 09/10/2010
EXHIBIT A
PURCHASE DETAIL FORM
Pierce Manufacturing,Inc.
Director of Order Management
2600 American Drive
Appleton WI 54912
Fax(920)832-3080
Date:
Customer Name:City of Lake Oswego
Quantity Chassis Type
Body Type Price per Unit
One I Velocity PUC I Pumper NH657 I $682,881.00 I
Less I Chassis Progress Payment in the amount of$380,042.00 I I (11,401.00) 11
Less I Payment Upon Completion at the Factory Discount I ! (7,567.00)
Total I I I $663,913.00
Warranty Period:Standard per Proposal NH657 submitted 7/27/17. .
Training Requirements: Standard per Proposal NH657 submitted 7/27/17.
Other Matters:A performance bond will be provided.
This contract is available for inter-local and other municipal corporations to utilize with the option of adding or deleting any
Pierce available options,including chassis models. Any addition or deletion may affect the unit price.
Payment Terms:A chassis proaress payment in the amount of$380.042.00 will be due three (3 months prior to the
ready for pick un (RFPI from the factory date. If payment is not made when due. $11.401.00 or a portion thereof will
be added to the final invoice. Final pa+iment including any changes processed during manufacturing will be due
Limn completion of the unit at the factory and prior to the unit beina transported from the factory. If payment is not
made when due. $7.567.00 or a portion thereof will be added to the final invoice.
[NOTE: If deferred payment arrangements are required,the Customer must make such financial arrangements through a financial institution acceptable to
Pierce.]All taxes,excises and levies that Pierce may be required to pay or collect by reason of any present or future law or by any governmental authority
based upon the sale,purchase,delivery,storage,processing,use,consumption,or transportation of the Product sold by Pierce to the Customer shalt be for the
account of the Customer and shall be added to the Purchase Price. All delivery prices or prices with freight allowance are based upon prevailing freight rates
and,in the event of any increase or decrease in such rates,the prices on all unshipped Product will be increased or decreased accordingly.Delinquent payments
shall be subject to a carrying charge of 1.5 percent per month or such lesser amount permitted by law.Pierce will not be required to accept payment other than
as set forth in this Agreement. However,to avoid a late charge assessment in the event of a dispute caused by a substantial nonconformance with material
Specifications(other than freight),the Customer may withhold up to five percent(5%)of the Purchase Price until such time that Pierce substantially remedies
the nonconformance with material Specifications,but no longer than sixty(60)days after Delivery. If the disputed amount is the freight charge,the Customer
may withhold only the amount of the freight charge until the dispute is settled,but no longer than sixty(60)days after Delivery.Pierce shall have and retain a
purchase money security interest in all goods and products now or hereafter sold to the Customer by Pierce or any of its affiliated companies to secure payment
of the Purchase Price for all such goods and products. In the event of nonpayment by the Customer of any debt, obligation or liability now or hereafter
incurred or owing by the Customer to Pierce,Pierce shall have and may exercise all rights and remedies of a secured party under Article 9 of the Uniform
Commercial Code(UCC)as adopted by the state of Wisconsin.
THIS PURCHASE DETAIL FORM IS EXPRESSLY SUBJECT TO THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT TERMS AND
CONDITIONS DATED AS OF , 20 BETWEEN PIERCE MANUFACTURING INC. AND CITY OF LAKE
OSWEGO WHICH TERMS AND CONDITIONS ARE HEREBY INCORPORATED IN, AND MADE PART OF, THIS
PURCHASE DETAIL FORM AS THOUGH EACH PROVISION WERE SEPARATELY SET FORTH HEREIN, EXCEPT
TO THE EXTENT OTHERWISE STATED OR SUPPLEMENTED BY PIERCE MANUFACTURING INC.HEREIN.
QSD 1398 4 Revised: 09/10/2010
EXHIBIT B
WARRANTY
STANDARD PER PROPOSAL NH657 SUBMITTED 7/27/17.
QSD 1398 5 Revised: 09/10/2010
EXHIBIT C
PIERCE PROPOSAL
STANDARD PER PROPOSAL NH657 SUBMITTED 7/27/17.
QSD 1398 6 Revised: 09/10/2010
ipECIores
August 3,2017
Lake Oswego Fire Department,OR
One(1)Velocity PUC Pumper NH657
Build Location:Appleton,Wisconsin
Proposal Price 682,881.00
Less chassis progress payment discount (11,401.00)
The chassis progress payment in the amount of
$380,042.D0 will be due three(3)months prior to the ready for
pick up from the factory date.
Less payment upon completion @ factory discount (7,567.00)
Proposal Price including all pre-pay discounts 663,913.00
Terms:
Based on Pierce's current delivery schedule the unit would be ready for delivery from factory within 9.5 to 12.5 months after contract
execution.Delivery is subject to change pending Pierces delivery schedule at time of order.
The above quote is subject to change.
An invoice will be provided 30 days prior to the chassis payment due date if elected.
If payment discount options are not elected standard payment terms will apply: Final payment will be due 30 days after the unit leaves
the factory for delivery. If payment is not made at that time a late fee will be applicable.
The above prepayment discount is valid for orders placed no later than September 27,2017.If order is not submitted prior to that date,
the prepayment discount will be revised.
The proposal price is based on the unit being purchased through FireRescue GPO/NPPGov.This pricing is only valid for a
FireRescue GPO I NPPGov purchase on PPA MPA for RFP No. 1420.
Transportation of the unit to be driven from the factory is included in the pricing.However,if we are unable to obtain necessary permits,
due to the weight of the unit,and the unit must be transported on a flat bed,additional transportation charges will be the responsibility
of the purchaser.We will provide pricing at that time if necessary.
Two(2)factory inspection trips for four(4)fire department customer representatives and one(1)factory inspection trip for two(2)fire
department customer representatives is included in the above pricing.The inspection trips will be scheduled at times mutually agreed
upon between the manufacture's representative and the customer.Airfare,lodging and meals while at the factory are included.If the
Department elects to forgo an inspection trip$1,850.00 per traveler(per trip)will be deducted from the final invoice.
ATTACHMENT 2
City of Lake Oswego, Oregon
Public Notice of Intent to Establish Contract Through
Permissive Cooperative Procurement
Velocity PUC Pumper NH657, with options
Pursuant to LOPCR 46-131(1)(b), OAR 137-046-0400 et seq., and ORS 279A.215, notice is
given that the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon, intends to enter into a contract for the purchase of
a fire engine from Pierce Manufacturing, Inc. by means of FireRescue GPO, program of NPPGov.
Description of Procurement: One (1) Velocity PUC Pumper (NH657).
The FireRescue GPO ID#32744 was utilized for this sale.
Estimated Amount of the Procurement: $663,913.00
Administering Contracting Agency: Public Procurement Authority (PPA)
Comment Deadline: August 25, 2017
Submission of Comments: Any comment or protest should be received by the Contact Person
below, no later than the respective date and time specified (see* and ** below):
Contact Person: Troy Bany
Lake Oswego Fire Department
Physical Address: 300 B Avenue
Mailing Address: PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Email: tbany@ci.oswego.or.us
* Submitter assumes risk of late delivery to the post office box. The City collects the mail
from the PO Box at approx. 8 am. If the comment is not deposited into the PO Box at the
time of City's collection, it shall be deemed not received by the deadline.
** Submission of comments by email shall not be considered delivered until confirmation
of email receipt is issued by the City. The City endeavors to confirm email receipt within 2
business hours following receipt. It is incumbent upon the submitter to verify receipt prior
to the deadline for submission of comments.
Publish: The Oregonian, August 18, 2017
14.3
D0s COUNCIL REPORT
442,cc)
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: David Morris
Assistant Fire Chief
SUBJECT: Authorization to Purchase one Precision Weld 22' Rescue Boat and Trailer
DATE: August 10, 2017 MEETING DATE: September 5, 2017
ACTION/SUGGESTED MOTION
The Council is requested to authorize the purchase of one new Precision Weld 22' Rescue Boat
and Trailer from Precision Weld Boats, Inc.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
The Lake Oswego Fire Department has been a regional leader in Dive Rescue and Water Rescue
emergency response for many decades. The Fire Department Dive Team consists of twelve
certified divers trained as Dive Rescue specialists that are required to complete extensive dive
training each year. The Dive Team responds from the Main Fire Station and are trained and
equipped to respond to dive emergencies as well as ice rescues.
The Fire Department Boat Team consists of six certified Boat Operators and six certified Rescue
Boat Operators that are highly trained in swift water and surface water rescue, including ice
rescue. The Boat Team is required to complete extensive skills training throughout the year.
The Boat Team responds from the South Shore Fire Station and are trained to respond to water
emergencies.
Both teams are members of the Clackamas County Water Rescue Consortium which is a
regional Water Rescue Team comprised of members from the Clackamas County Sheriff's
Marine unit, Clackamas County Fire District 1, Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue, Estacada Fire,
Sandy Fire Department, Gladstone Fire and Rescue, Canby Fire Department and AMR.
The Fire Department has a vehicle replacement schedule and takes into consideration the
condition and maintenance history of the vehicles when developing the replacement schedule.
The 2002 Motion Marine Rescue Boat has exceeded its expected 10-year lifespan by five years.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeosweao.citv
Page 2
The Rescue Boat is scheduled and budgeted for replacement in Fiscal Year 2017-18. The 2002
Water Rescue Boat will be sold if the purchase is authorized.
DISCUSSION
The Lake Oswego Fire Department began developing general specifications for replacement of
the 2002 Motion Marine Water Rescue Boat and Trailer in early 2016. An internal committee
was established to review the service needs and design features that were to be included in the
rescue boat specifications. Following the requisite solicitation process and after reviewing the
three bids, the selection evaluation committee finds that a Precision Weld 22' Rescue Boat and
Trailer from Precision Weld Boats, Inc. complies with the specifications that meets the City's
needs. The other two manufacturers did not submit responsive bids. No protests were filed.
FISCAL IMPACT
The funds to purchase the new Precision Weld 22' Recue Boat are already covered and
approved in the Fire Department budget.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the purchase of one new Precision Weld 22' Rescue Boat and Trailer from Precision
Weld Boats, Inc. in the amount of$119,950.00.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Standard Procurement of Goods Contract Agreement
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
ATTACHMENT 1
iK4crACITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
�_ O Standard Procurement of Goods Contract
pR G pia Lake Oswego Fire Department Rescue Boat
Goods/ Precision Weld Custom Boats, Inc., Date of Contract: 07/01/2017
Equipment: a Washington Corporation
Contractor: Date of To be established by
Completion: mutual agreement
upon placement of
Order(following
Council approval)
Mailing 2422 NE 172"d Ave
Address: Vancouver, WA 98684
WITNESSETH:
Contractor and the City of Lake Oswego, a municipal corporation, mutually covenant and agree to
and with each other as follows:
1. SCOPE OF WORK AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. The Contractor shall sell to the City the
Goods/Equipment as outlined in this Contract. The contract documents shall consist of,and any conflicts
shall be resolved in the following priority:
1. This Contract;
2. The City of Lake Oswego Standard Public Contract Provisions—Procurement of Goods,
which are hereby incorporated by reference;
3. The exhibit(s)to this Contract in the following order of priority:
Exhibit A: Precision Weld Boat proposal.
This contract shall supersede any prior representation or contract,written or oral.
2. DURATION OF CONTRACT. This Contract shall become effective on the date this Contract has
been signed by every party hereto. Contractor acknowledges that the Goods/Equipment will not have
been finally accepted and placed into City ownership until delivered and accepted. Contractor shall make
available for delivery or shall deliver, if required by Exhibit,on or before the Date of Completion stated
above.
Contractor's tender of Goods/Equipment shall not extinguish or prejudice City's right to enforce
this Contract with respect to any breach of Contractor warranty or any default or defect in Contractor
performance or in the Goods/Equipment.
3. PAYMENT.
A. Amount of Payment. Contractor shall be compensated for all goods, materials, expenses,
and services, including delivery and installation if specified in the Scope of Work, as follows: a fixed fee in
the amount of$119,500.00.
B. Manner of Payment. Payment shall be due to the contractor, in accordance with the
subsection C below, upon the following:
• The first installment of$39,833.33 will be due upon placement of the order;
• The second installment$39,833.33 will be a progress payment due upon installation of engine and
jets
• The final payment$39,833.34 will be due upon receipt and final acceptance by the Public
Contracting Officer of the City..
C. Social Security or Employer Identification Report/Date of Payment. No payment shall
be due to the Contractor until the Contractor has completed and submitted to the City's Finance
Department the IRS Form W-9 Request for Taxpayer Identification and Certification
(http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/fw9.pdf). Payment shall be tendered,when due, in a manner consistent
with the City's Finance Department's accounts payable check run cycle in place at the time payment is due.
4. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE. Contractor agrees that time is of the essence under this Contract.
5. TERMINATION.
A. Parties' Right to Terminate for Convenience. This Contract may be terminated at any time
by mutual written consent of the parties.
B. City's Right to Terminate for Convenience. City may, at its sole discretion and prior to
receipt of the goods or equipment,terminate this Contract, in whole or in part, upon 10 days notice to
Contractor.
C. City's Right to Terminate for Cause. City may terminate this Contract, in whole or in part,
immediately upon notice to Contractor, or at such later date as Public Contracting Officer may establish
in such notice, upon the occurrence of any of the following events:
(i) City fails to receive funding, or appropriations, limitations or other expenditure
authority at levels sufficient to pay for Contractor's Goods or Equipment;
(ii) Federal or state laws, regulations or guidelines are modified or interpreted in such a
way that either the Goods or Equipment under this Contract is prohibited or City is prohibited from
paying for such Goods or Equipment from the planned funding source;
(iii) Contractor no longer holds any license or certificate that is required to manufacture
or sell the Goods or Equipment; or
(iv) Contractor commits any material breach or default of any covenant, warranty,
obligation or agreement under this Contract, or fails to make available for delivery or to deliver, as
required, under this Contract within the time specified herein or any extension thereof, and such
breach, default or failure is not cured within 5 business days after delivery of Public Contracting Officer's
notice, or such longer period as Public Contracting Officer may specify in such notice.
D. Contractor's Right to Terminate for Cause. Contractor may terminate this Contract upon 30
days' notice to Public Contracting Officer if City fails to pay Contractor pursuant to the terms of this
Contract and City fails to cure within 30 business days after receipt of Contractor's notice, or such
longer period of cure as Contractor may specify in such notice.
E. Remedies. In the event of termination pursuant to subsections B, C(i), C(ii) or D,
Contractor's sole remedy shall be a claim for the sum designated for the Goods or Equipment, less
previous amounts paid and any claim(s) which City has against Contractor. If previous amounts paid to
Contractor exceed the amount due to Contractor under this subsection, Contractor shall pay any excess
to the City upon demand.
In the event of termination pursuant to subsection C(iii) or C(iv), City shall have any remedy
available to it in law or equity. If it is determined for any reason that Contractor was not in default
under subsection C(iii) or C(iv), the rights and obligations of the parties shall be the same as if the
Contract was terminated pursuant to subsection B.
F. Contractor's Tender Upon Termination. Upon receiving a notice of termination of this
Contract, Contractor shall immediately cease delivery and shall cancel sale of the Goods or Equipment
to City.
PRECISION WELD CUSTOM BOATS, INC. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
By:Thomas A Maxfield
Scott Lazenby, City Manager
Title: CEO Date:
Date: Public Contracting Officer
380 A Avenue
Check one: P.O. Box 369
Sole Proprietor Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Partnership
Corporation _X Date Authorized by Council, if applicable:
Limited Liability Company x .
Limited Liability Partnership
Other:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Domicile, if other than Oregon: Wash.
Evan P. Boone
Deputy City Attorney
Ver.0313
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO STANDARD PUBLIC CONTRACT PROVISIONS —
PROCUREMENT OF GOODS (01/13)
The following City of Lake Oswego Standard unemployment insurance, or the Public
Public Contract provisions are made a part of the Employee's Retirement System, except as a
Contract between City and Contractor by self-employed individual;
reference. D. Contractor is not currently an
employee of the federal government or the
CHANGES State of Oregon; and
This contract, including all attachments E. The Contractor is not a
and exhibits annexed hereto, shall not be subject contributing member of the Public Employee's
to modification or amendment except in writing, Retirement System.
executed by both parties. This contract and any F. Contractor is not an "officer,"
substantive changes to the scope of work or "employee," or "agent" of the City, as those
changes to the contract costs will not be terms are used in ORS 30.265.
effective until approved in writing by the Public
Contracting Officer of the City of Lake Oswego. ASSIGNMENT
This contract is not assignable by the
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS Contractor, either whole or in part, unless
The Contractor agrees and certifies Contractor has obtained the prior written
that: consent of the City.
A. The Contractor is engaged as an City and Contractor are the only parties
independent contractor. Although the Public to this Contract and are the only parties
Contracting Officer of the City reserves the right entitled to enforce its terms. Nothing in this
(i)to determine (and modify)the delivery Contract gives, is intended to give, or shall be
schedule for the Work to be performed and (ii) construed to give or provide any enforceable
to evaluate the quality of the completed benefit or right, whether directly, indirectly or
performance, City cannot and will not control otherwise, to third persons.
the means or manner of Contractor's
performance, nor provide any tools or HOURS OF LABOR
equipment for the performance of the Work, For those employees of Contractor
except as provided elsewhere in this Contract. covered or subject to Oregon employment
Contractor is responsible for determining the laws, the Contractor shall pay employees for
appropriate means and manner of performing overtime work performed under the public
the Work. contract in accordance with ORS 653.010 to
B. Contractor shall be responsible for all 653.261 and the Fair Labor Standards Act of
federal or state taxes applicable to 1938 (29 USC 201 et seq.).
compensation or payments paid to Contractor
under this Contract and, unless Contractor is ERRORS
subject to backup withholding, City will not The Contractor shall perform such
withhold from such compensation or payments additional work as may be necessary to correct
any amount(s)to cover Contractor's federal or errors in the work required under this contract
state tax obligations. without undue delays and without additional
C. The Contractor will not, on cost.
account of any payments made under this
contract, be eligible for any benefit from REPRESENTATIONS AND COVENANTS
federal social security, workers' compensation, A. Contractor's Representations. Contractor
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO STANDARD PUBLIC CONTRACT PROVISIONS —
PROCUREMENT OF GOODS (01/13)
represents and covenants to City that:
(1) Contractor has the power and RECORDS
authority to enter into and perform this Contractor shall have access to the
Contract, books, documents, papers and records of the
(2)This Contract, when executed and City as necessary for Contractor's performance
delivered, shall be a valid and binding obligation of the work. The Contractor shall not disclose
of Contractor enforceable in accordance with all or any part of such records to any other
its terms, and if Contractor is a partnership, person, firm, corporation, association or other
corporation or other form of business entity, entity except as reasonably necessary to carry
this contract was duly approved and executed out the Work, without the consent of the Public
pursuant to authority of the governing body or Contracting Officer.
parties of the Contractor, The Contractor agrees that the City and
(3)The goods or equipment shall meet its authorized representatives shall have access
all specific representations that Contractor has to the books, documents, papers and records of
made to City, whether of general the Contractor which are directly pertinent to
merchantability or for a particular purpose if the specific contract for the purpose of making
express representations have be made by audit, examination, excerpts and transcripts.
Contractor in regards to the suitability of the Contractor shall maintain all fiscal
goods or equipment for the City's purposes. records directly relating to this Contract in
(4) Contractor's completion shall not accordance with generally accepted accounting
extinguish or prejudice City's right to enforce this principles. In addition, Contractor shall
Contract with respect to any breach of maintain any other records pertinent to this
Contractor warranty or any default or defect in Contract in such a manner as to clearly
Contractor performance. document Contractor's performance.
B. Cumulative. The representations and Contractor acknowledges and agrees that City's
covenants set forth in this section are in duly authorized representatives shall have
addition to, and not in lieu of, any other access to such fiscal records and other books,
representations and covenants provided. documents, papers, plans and writings of
Contractor that are pertinent to this Contract to
INDEMNITY AND HOLD HARMLESS perform examinations and audits and make
The Contractor shall defend, indemnify, excerpts and transcripts. Contractor shall
and hold the City, its officers, agents and retain and keep accessible all such fiscal
employees, harmless against all liability, loss, or records, books, documents, papers, plans, and
expenses, including attorney's fees, and against writings for a minimum of three (3) years, or
all claims, actions or judgments based upon or such longer period as may be required by
arising out of damage or injury (including death) applicable law,following final payment and
to persons or property caused by or resulting termination of this Contract, or until the
from any act or omission of an act sustained in conclusion of any audit, controversy or
any way in connection with the performance of litigation arising out of or related to this
this contract or by conditions created thereby, Contract, whichever date is later.
or based upon violation of any statute,
ordinance or regulation. This contractual ATTORNEY'S FEES
indemnity provision does not abrogate If a suit or action is filed to enforce any
common law or statutory liability and of the terms of this contract,the prevailing
indemnification to the City, but is in addition to party shall be entitled to recover from the
such common law or statutory provisions. other party, in addition to costs and
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO STANDARD PUBLIC CONTRACT PROVISIONS —
PROCUREMENT OF GOODS (01/13)
disbursements provided by statute, any sum
which a court, including any appellate court, WAIVER
may adjudge reasonable as attorney's fees. In The failure of the City to enforce any
the event the prevailing party is represented by provision of this contract shall not constitute a
"in-house" counsel,the prevailing party shall waiver by the City of that or any other
nevertheless be entitled to recover reasonable provision..
attorney fees based upon the reasonable time
incurred and the attorney fee rates and charges INTEGRATION
reasonably and generally accepted in the This contract represents the entire and
metropolitan Portland, Oregon area for the integrated agreement between the Contractor
type of legal services performed. and the City, and supersedes all prior
negotiations, representations or agreements,
CONSTRUCTION either written or oral.
The provisions of this contract shall be
construed in accordance with the provisions of
the laws of the State of Oregon and ordinances
of the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon. Any action
or suits involving any question arising under this
contract must be brought in Clackamas County
Circuit Court.
SEVERABILITY
The parties agree that if any term or
provision of this contract is declared by a court
of competent jurisdiction to be illegal or in
conflict with any law,the validity of the
remaining terms and provisions shall not be
affected, and the rights and obligations of the
parties shall be construed and enforced as if the
contract did not contain the particular term or
provision held to be invalid.
COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
The Contractor shall comply with all
federal, state and local laws and ordinances,
applicable to public contracts, and to the
delivery of the Goods/ Equipment to be done
under this contract.
The Contractor shall comply with all
applicable federal,state, and local laws, rules,
and regulations on nondiscrimination in
employment because of race, color, ancestry,
national origin, religion, sex,sexual orientation,
marital status, age, medical condition, or
disability.
Precision
We/dCiiswm
General Requirements
This vessel is custom built for Lake Oswego Fire Department. Its main purpose is
dive/rescue/recovery operations.
All work done, must comply with current USCG regulations. All equipment shall be new
and of the highest quality.
Performance requirements:
Completed vessel full of fuel with 2,500 pounds of additional crew and cargo will run a
minimum of 40 mph.
Specifications:
BOAT FRAME / ENGINE
22' length hull
6.5' width bottom
8.5' width beam
All marine grade aluminum construction
Hull, welded, .250 minimum bottom, 5086 aluminum
Hull design for severe duty, maximum load capacity, stability and straight tracking
NO box stringer construction
7 full length stringers equally spaced
Transverse frame bulkheads
Formed longitudinal's
Centerline Length from bow to transom: approximately 22'
35" side height
Kodiak Marine 6.2L DI(direct injected) marine engine
Hamilton 213 Jet Drive
Engine forward design to walk around rear of engine (approx. 12" spacing to walk)
(6) 8" deck cleats 3-on each side of the boat.
NMEA 2000 backbone with engine data and fuel usage display along with navigation,
control and monitoring inputs.
Sand Trap
Engine Cover Lift Supports
Fuel Capacity: approx. 100 gallons, fuel gauge NMEA 2000
(2) Rule 1500 Bilge Pumps with auto float switch
2422 NE 172"d Ave (360) 607-3546
Vancouver,WA 98684 Fax (360) 256-9574
Precision
We/dCiswm Boars
www.precisionweldboats.com
Cabin Roof
The roof should have grab rails all around near the outside edges.
Flood Lights (LED) to illuminate the Aft Deck
Light bar Rigid Industries RDS 50" or comparable
Bow Deck
Either closed or recessed deck(customer choice)
Large scuppers (on recessed bow only)
Rope bow (on closed bow only)
Bow ladder with automatic handles
Aft Deck
Engine forward design
Engine cover lift supports
Wash-down system
Swim Platform / Ladder
The swim platform shall serve to protect the jet drives from impact as well as providing a
swim platform. Swim platform to have one step under swim platform on each side.
There will be a folding ladder to assist people getting out of the water. When folded up it
shall not extend above the transom.
CABIN
Hard fixed frame cabin with fixed side widows, three quarter hard top with front above
front seating being canvas top.
Center helm with dual exit/entry doors on each side.
NMEA 2000 sensors shall be used. (Fuel tank, Fuel Flow, DC Electrical and more)
Heater/defroster system operating from the engine coolant system
Pantographic type wipers on all 3 front windows
Led rocker switches for 12v systems
LED Cabin lights (White-Day, Red-night). White lights to provide sufficient light for
reading anywhere in the cabin. Red lighting sufficient to allow for safe operation of the
vessel and movement throughout the cabin at night.
(2) Panel Mount Dual USB Charger Sockets
The cabin shall have sufficient grab rails to support customers and crew members
anywhere inside the cabin to be determined by LOFD during build.
The front windows shall be lightly tinted
Three Air ride type driver seat, arm rests
Heated helm seat
Large bench seat/storage
In floor storage compartments
Diamond plate gunwale steps
Safety walk around cabin on top of gunwales
2422 NE 172nd Ave (360) 607-3546
Vancouver,WA 98684 Fax (360) 256-9574
Precision
We/dCiswm Boars
www.precisionweldboats.com
Roof handrails
Cabin handrails around helm
Overhead inside cabin handrails
Stick steering with wiper control in handle to operate all 3 front windows
Full instrumentation for engine
Recessed lighting at bow, sides and stern with high illumination LED, future wiring for
possible new equipment.
INTERIOR
LED Red and Green Navigation lights
White all around mounted on mast
Large bench seat/storage
Cup holders
Cabin handrails around helm
Overhead inside cabin handrails
Stick steering with wiper control in handle
Full instrumentation for engine
Dual batteries
Horn
National air ride seat/heated and on board compressor
Large bench seats
Roof trays
Under bow storage
Beneath floor removable storage boxes
Vinyl flooring
Custom Imron paint above gunnels and interior
Vinyl wrap on exterior
Graphics
Harmonic dampening material on stringer's, transom and fuel tank
Sound deadening material throughout engine compartment
Wiring for lighting, radios (wiring harness provided by LOFD)
Garmin 7610 with side sonar, GPS plotter
Total 22'Precision Weld built per above specifications $112,000.00
//
2422 NE 172nd Ave (360) 607-3546
Vancouver,WA 98684 Fax (360) 256-9574
Precision
We/dCiiswm Boars-
www.precisionweldboats.com
Boat Trailer
HD Gateway tandem axle galvanized trailer
2 5/16"Ball Hitch
HD 6 lug axles
Electric/Hydraulic Disc Brakes
Brakes on all axles
LED Submersible lights
Spare Tire
Total Trailer built per above specifications $7950.00
Total boat and trailer $119,950.00
2422 NE 172nd Ave (360) 607-3546
Vancouver,WA 98684 Fax (360) 256-9574
14.4
D<0,-Pt E oc COUNCIL REPORT
r o
oReoo�
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: David Powell
City Attorney
SUBJECT: Declaring a Public Necessity to Acquire Real Property Interests at 16140 and
16650 Boones Ferry Road and Exercise the Power of Eminent Domain for the
Boones Ferry Road Improvements Project
DATE: August 28, 2017
ACTION
Adopt Resolution 17-53 declaring the public necessity to acquire real property interests on two
properties (16140 and 16650 Boones Ferry Road) for the Boones Ferry Road Improvements
Project and authorize eminent domain proceedings if necessary. This resolution reduces the
acquisition areas that were previously approved for these two properties under earlier
resolutions.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to adopt Resolution 17-53.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
The Boones Ferry Road Project team continues to progress their final design work and the
acquisition of the right-of-way and easements needed to construct the project improvements.
The acquisition effort entails notifying affected property owners that the City will be acquiring
right-of-way and easements, as well as addressing impacts such as the loss of parking,
relocation of signs, etc. Appraisals of all properties have been completed or are in the final
stages of completion.
Staff has discovered that, for two of the properties that were the subject of earlier City Council
resolutions of necessity (16140 and 16650 Boones Ferry Road), deed records indicate that the
City has more existing right-of-way than previously thought. As a result, a new resolution (17-
53) is presented to the City Council with revised legal descriptions for these two properties. The
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Page 2
project consultant, Universal Field Services, will revise the appraisals to account for this new
information and will then submit formal offers to each of the property owners.
DISCUSSION
Most of the Boones Ferry Road Project will be constructed within the existing public right of
way. However, due to the roadway being widened, the City will need to acquire right of way,
permanent easements, and temporary construction easements along the length of the project.
As stated in the attached memorandum from Project Engineer Stacy Bluhm, project staff
throughout the preliminary design process have taken concerted steps to minimize impacts to
properties and the amount of right of way and easements needed, while fulfilling essential
project goals.
As part of the property acquisition process, efforts will be made to negotiate voluntary
agreements with property owners. Nevertheless, it is possible that circumstances could arise
requiring the City to use its condemnation authority to ensure that the project stays on
schedule and that the public pays a fair price for an easement or other property interest.
The initial steps for property acquisition include obtaining an appraisal to determine the
amount of fair compensation, followed by offers to property owners. Having a resolution in
place that authorizes condemnation where necessary helps to ensure that the appraisal and
negotiation phases of the process will qualify as required steps under Oregon condemnation
law in the event that negotiations are unsuccessful.
The attached Resolution 17-53 accomplishes the following:
• Declares that the acquisition of property (with the revised description of acquisition
areas for the two subject properties) for the Boones Ferry Project is necessary and
serves a public purpose;
• Declares that the Project improvements have been planned, designed, located, and will
be constructed in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good
and the least private injury;
• Authorizes negotiations for the acquisition of property interests for certain properties
within the Project; and
• Authorizes eminent domain proceedings in the event that property agreements are not
reached.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution 17-53, declaring the intent and necessity to acquire revised real property
interests at 16140 and 16650 Boones Ferry Road for the Boones Ferry Road Project and
authorizing eminent domain proceedings if necessary.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Page 3
ATTACHMENTS
1. Memorandum from Project Engineer Stacy Bluhm
2. Resolution 17-53 including Attachment 1— Legal Descriptions and Maps Depicting
Right of Way and Temporary Construction Easement Needs at 16140 and 16650
Boones Ferry Road, for the Boones Ferry Road Project
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
ATTACHMENT 1
is E�fp MEMORANDUM
wow
0
°REG0
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
CC: David Powell, City Attorney
FROM: Stacy Bluhm, Project Engineer
Engineering
SUBJECT: Boones Ferry Road Project Easement Acquisition
DATE: August 28, 2017
As stated in Resolution 17-53, the Boones Ferry Road Project public improvements are to be
planned, designed, located, and constructed in a manner that will be most compatible with the
greatest public good and the least private injury.
The purpose of this memorandum is to confirm that we are building the necessary street and
utility improvements while minimizing impacts to the adjacent property. We continue to refine
our design to be certain that we will construct high quality public improvements while ensuring
that we are meeting the needs of the adjacent properties and minimizing impacts to those
properties as best we can.
503.675.3984 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION 17-53
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO DECLARING A PUBLIC NECESSITY
TO ACQUIRE REAL PROPERTY INTERESTS AT 16140 AND 16650 BOONES FERRY ROAD AND EXERCISE THE
POWER OF EMINENT DOMAIN (BOONES FERRY ROAD PROJECT)
WHEREAS,the City of Lake Oswego may exercise the power of eminent domain pursuant to The Lake
Oswego Charter of 1964, as amended and the law of the State of Oregon generally, when the exercise
of such power is deemed necessary by the City's governing body to accomplish public purposes for
which City has responsibility;
WHEREAS, City has the responsibility of providing safe transportation routes for commerce,
convenience and to adequately serve the traveling public;
WHEREAS,the project or projects known as either BOONES FERRY ROAD or BOONES FERRY RD:
OAKRIDGE RD/REESE RD - MADRONA ST(ODOT Key No 18809) are within the recited City responsibility
and have been planned in accordance with appropriate engineering standards for the construction,
maintenance or improvement of said transportation infrastructure such that property damage is
minimized, transportation promoted, and travel safeguarded; and
WHEREAS,to accomplish the project or projects set forth above it is necessary to acquire the interests
in the property described in "Attachment 1," attached to this resolution and by this reference
incorporated herein; now,therefore
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by City of Lake Oswego Council:
Section 1. The foregoing statements of authority and need are, in fact, the case. The project or
projects for which the property is required and is being acquired are necessary in the public interest and
will serve a necessary public purpose, and the same have been planned, designed, located, and will be
constructed in a manner which will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least
private injury;
Section 2. The power of eminent domain is hereby exercised with respect to each of the interests in
property described in Attachment 1. Each is acquired subject to payment of just compensation and
subject to procedural requirements of Oregon law;
Section 3. The City's staff and the City's legal counsel are authorized and requested to attempt to agree
with the owner and other persons in interest as to the compensation to be paid for each acquisition,
and, in the event that no satisfactory agreement can be reached,to commence and prosecute such
condemnation proceedings as may be necessary to finally determine just compensation or any other
issue appropriate to be determined by a court in connection with the acquisition. This authorization is
not intended to expand the jurisdiction of any court to decide matters determined above or
determinable by the City Council.
Section 4.The City expressly reserves its jurisdiction to determine the necessity or propriety of any
acquisition, its quantity, quality, or locality, and to change or abandon any acquisition.
Resolution 17-53
Page 1 of 2
Section 5. This Resolution replaces the description of the property interests to be acquired at 16140
Boones Ferry Road in Resolution 16-40, and the description of the property interests to be acquired at
16650 Boones Ferry Road in Resolution 17-09.
Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon adoption.
Adopted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on the 5th day of
September, 2017.
AYES:
NOES:
EXCUSED:
ABSTAIN:
Kent Studebaker, Mayor
ATTEST:
Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Powell, City Attorney
Resolution 17-53
Page 2 of 2
RESOLUTION 17-53
Attachment 1
Legal Descriptions and Maps Depicting Right-of-Way and Temporary
Construction Easement Needs for the Boones Ferry Road Project
Legal Descriptions and Maps are included for the following properties:
1. 16140 Boones Ferry Rd (File No. 39)
2. 16650 Boones Ferry Rd (File No. Al)
EXHIBIT " A "
Boones Ferry Rd Lake Oswego Work Order No . : 183
(Oakridge Rd/Reese Rd - Madrona St) File No . : 039
August 18 , 2017 Assessors Map : 2 1 E 08CB
Parcel 1 Tax Lot No . : 04600
PARCEL 1 (RIGHT- OF - WAY DEDICATION)
A parcel of land lying in the Southwest quarter of Section 8 , Township 2 South, Range 1
East of the Willamette Meridian, Clackamas County, Oregon, and being a portion of that
tract of land conveyed to Ray C . Debord and Anne Jill Nelson-Debord, Trustees of the Ray
C . Debord and Anne Jill Nelson-Debord Living Trust dated June 6 , 2013 by Statutory
Warranty Deed recorded July 15 , 2013 in Document No . 2013 - 049009 , Clackamas County
Official Records , said parcel also being all that portion lying Northwesterly of the line
delineated by following the noted stations and offsets , shown hereinafter and being
Southeasterly of the centerline of Boones Ferry Road, as said centerline is described
below.
B O ONE S FERRY ROAD CENTERLINE
A road centerline situated in the Southeast one- quarter of Section 7 , and in the Southwest
one - quarter of Section 8 , and the Northwest one - quarter of Section 8 , all within Township
2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in the City of Lake Oswego , Clackamas
County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows :
RoadCenterline + per Record of Surveynumber
Beginning at Boones Ferry Station 10 00
2013 - 083 as recorded in the Clackamas County Survey Records . Thence from said point of
beginning North 47 ° 36 ' 13 " East, a distance of 167 . 89 feet to Station 11 +67 . 89 at a point of
curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 5729 . 58 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 03 ° 06 ' 00 " (the long chord bears North 49 ° 09 ' 13 " East, 309 . 96 feet)
310 . 00 feet to Station 14+77 . 89 at a point of tangency; Thence North 50 ° 42 ' 13 " East,
637 . 07 feet to Station 21 + 14 . 96 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 5 72 9 . 5 8
foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 02 ° 36 ' 00 " (the long chord bears
North 49 ° 24 ' 13 " East, 259 . 98 feet) 260 . 00 feet to Station 23 +74 . 96 at a point of tangency ;
Thence North 48 ° 06 ' 13 " East, 85 . 00 feet to Station 24+59 . 95 at a point of curvature ;
Thence along the arc of a 1145 . 91 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of ►
10 ° 31 ' 00 " (the long chord bears North 53 ° 21 ' 43 " East, 210 . 04 feet) 210 . 33 feet to Station
26+70 . 29 at a point of tangency; Thence North 58 ° 37 ' 13 " East, 768 . 60 feet to Station
34+38 . 88 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 716 . 20 foot radius curve to the
left, through a central angle of 15 °25 ' 30 " (the long chord bears North 50 ° 54 ' 28 " East,
192 . 23 feet) 192 . 81 feet to Station 36+31 . 70 at a point of tangency ; Thence North
43 ° 11 ' 43 " East, 516 . 51 feet to Station 41 +48 . 21 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the
arc of a 954 . 93 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 12 ° 42 ' 30 " (the long
chord bears North 36 ° 50 ' 28 " East, 211 . 37 feet) 211 . 81 feet to Station 43 +60 . 02 at a point
P :\ODOT\0008087W\Survey\Documents\ EXHIBITS LEGALS\0008087W-V-EX39RW legal . doc
Page 1 of 3
of tangency ; Thence North 30 °29 ' 13 " East, 279 . 39 feet to Station 46+39 . 41 at a point of
curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 716 . 20 foot radius curve to the left, through a central
angle of 18 °22 ' 30 " (the long chord bears North 21 ° 17 ' 58 " East, 228 . 71 feet) 229 . 69 feet to
Station 48 +69 . 10 at a point of tangency ; Thence North 12 ° 06 ' 43 " East 511 . 40 feet to
Station 53 + 80 . 49 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 1432 . 39 foot radius
curve to the right, through a central angle of 11 ° 20 ' 33 " (the long chord bears North
17 ° 46 ' 59 " East, 283 . 10 feet) 283 . 56 feet to Station 56+64 . 05 at a point of compound
curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 3819 . 72 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 07 ° 34 ' 57 " (the long chord bears North 27 ° 14 ' 44 " East, 505 . 13 ) 505 . 50
feet to Station 61 +69 . 55 at a point of tangency; Thence North 31 ° 02 ' 12 " East 104 . 47 feet
to Station 62+74 . 03 at the point of termination .
Centerline stationing and Basis of Bearings are determined by holding a station of
10+00 . 00 at a 3 /4 " iron pipe at the Centerline of Boones Ferry Road as per survey number
2013 - 083 , Clackamas County Survey Records .
Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
27+ 17 . 00 to 27+95 . 00 45 . 96 feet to an arc with a 3954 . 06 foot
radius , concave Northwesterly, with a central
angle of 01 ° 07 ' 55 ", the long chord of which
bears North 55 ° 34 ' 23 " East, a chord length of
78 . 11 feet, and an arc distance of 78 . 11 feet,
to 41 . 81 feet
Excepting therefrom , all that portion of said parcel lying within the existing right- of-way
of Boones Ferry Road .
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 301 square feet, more or less .
( REGISTERED
2\
PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURVEYOR
_ tZ .----
7/ OREGON
JULY 15 , 2003
TOD V . KELSO
50701 .1
EXPIRES : 6 / 30 / 2019
P :\ODOT\0008087W\Survey\Documents\_EXHIBITS LEGALS\0008087W-V-EX39RW legal . doc
Page 1 of 3
EXHIBIT " B "
oc3
ir
Q.'
'S°% b\S) 9?
c(C.7' \
C36 V2'
s CP
4 66)475
11 CC
v 45 ' 6)
Vi ` 0
EXISTING 4 ) est
CP
x /6)4RIGHT- OF- WAY
o LINE
co
irD o
ys°L9 ####N °°
6.: 0# cv \fla zi, cpcp p c
0 V c-S1 1
G
II )
vs--2_ svpuNJ
x2' PARCEL 1
RIGHT- OF- WAY DEDICATION
00 AREA 301 SQ . FT. I
R = 1145 . 91 '\_.
0
L= 210 . 33 ' �i 1iV�
X10 °31 ' 00 " ��S �• �/
of ��, '�4Y �F
CH = N53 °21 ' 43 " E �Q� D4C`� C ko
210 . 04' ,4 0�e geOtee�
40,041//4/0 40 i 3,rt ,4kke S te 440
4
Deep 6/� 0,47/4‘ y 0� ��F
oO 0 ® e® F`4S it J/L
D 't F6 0� r
207 �F , . Bob c
� o ��y o�� o ,
1900 X04
L/46,
SCALE
30 0 15 30
1 LEGEND
( FEET )
1 INCH = 30 FT. r Z A RIGHT- OF- WAY DEDICATION ( PARCEL 1 ) 301 SQ. FT. ±
I FILE NO . : 039 BOONES FERRY RD I SUBMITTAL DATE : 08/ 18/2017 I
W1IPirifl2p (
TAX LOT: 04600Oakridge Rd / Reese Rd - Madrona St) I REVISED DATE : I 9755 SWBamesRd. Sute300
Pcrtland.=5%2:503
R 97225
I TAX MAP : 2 1 E 08CB I REVISED DATE : I 503 &26-0455 2 503-526-0775
vn�nv.whpacdc.com
I
ADDRESS : 16140 BOONES FERRY RD LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO . 183 REVISED DATE : I DWG : 0008087-V-EX39RW.DWG
as
EXHIBIT " A "
Boones Ferry Rd Lake Oswego Work Order No . : 183
(Oakridge Rd/Reese Rd - Madrona St) File No . : 039
August 18 , 2017 Assessors Map : 2 1 E 08CB
Parcel 1 Tax Lot No . : 04600
PARCEL 1 (TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT)
A parcel of land lying in the Southwest quarter of Section 8 , Township 2 South, Range 1
East of the Willamette Meridian, Clackamas County, Oregon, and being a portion of that
tract of land conveyed to Ray C . Debord and Anne Jill Nelson-Debord, Trustees of the Ray
C . Debord and Anne Jill Nelson-Debord Living Trust dated June 6 , 2013 by Statutory
Warranty Deed recorded July 15 , 2013 in Document No . 2013 - 049009 , Clackamas County
Official Records , said parcel also being all that portion lying Northwesterly of the line
delineated by following the noted stations and offsets , shown hereinafter and being
Southeasterly of the centerline of Boones Ferry Road, as said centerline is described
below.
BOONES FERRY ROAD CENTERLINE
A road centerline situated in the Southeast one - quarter of Section 7 , and in the Southwest
one - quarter of Section 8 , and the Northwest one- quarter of Section 8 , all within Township
2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in the City of Lake Oswego , Clackamas
County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows :
Beginning at Boones Ferry Road Centerline Station 10+00 per Record of Survey number
2013 - 083 as recorded in the Clackamas County Survey Records . Thence from said point of '
beginning North 47 ° 36 ' 13 " East, a distance of 167 . 89 feet to Station 11 +67 . 89 at a point of
curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 5729 . 58 foot radius curve • to the right, through a
central angle of 03 ° 06 ' 00 " (the long chord bears North 49 ° 09 ' 13 " East, 309 . 96 feet)
310 . 00 feet to Station 14+77 . 89 at a point of tangency; Thence North 50 °42 ' 13 " East,
637 . 07 feet to Station 21 + 14 . 96 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 5729 . 58
foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 02 ° 36 ' 00 " (the long chord bears
.
North 49 °24 ' 13 " East, 259 . 98 feet) 260 . 00 feet to Station 23 +74 . 96 at a point of tangency ;
Thence North 48 ° 06 ' 13 " East, 85 . 00 feet to Station 24+59 . 95 at a point of curvature ;
Thence along the arc of a 1145 . 91 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of
10 ° 31 ' 00 " (the long chord bears North 53 °21 ' 43 " East, 210 . 04 feet) 210 . 33 feet to Station
26+70 . 29 at a point of tangency; Thence North 58 ° 37 ' 13 " East, 768 . 60 feet to Station
34+38 . 88 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 716 . 20 foot radius curve to the
left, through a central angle of 15 ° 25 ' 30 " (the long chord bears North 50 ° 54 ' 28 " East, •
192 . 23 feet) 192 . 81 feet to Station 36+31 . 70 at a point of tangency; Thence North
43 ° 11 ' 43 " East, 516 . 51 feet to Station 41 +48 . 21 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the
arc of a 954 . 93 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 12 ° 42 ' 30 " (the long
chord bears North 36 ° 50 ' 28 " East, 211 . 37 feet) 211 . 81 feet to Station 43 + 60 . 02 at a point
P :\ODOT\0008087W\Survey\Documents\_EXHIBITS LEGALS\0008087W-V-EX39TCE . doc •
Page 1 of 3
of tangency ; Thence North 30 °29 ' 13 " East, 279 . 39 feet to Station 46+39 . 41 at a point of
curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 716 . 20 foot radius curve to the left, through a central
angle of 18 °22 ' 30 " (the long chord bears North 21 ° 17 ' 58 " East, 228 . 71 feet) 229 . 69 feet to
Station 48 +69 . 10 at a point of tangency; Thence North 12 ° 06 ' 43 " East 511 . 40 feet to
Station 53 + 80 . 49 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 1432 . 39 foot radius
curve to the right, through a central angle of 11 ° 20 ' 33 " (the long chord bears North
17 °46 ' 59 " East, 283 . 10 feet) 283 . 56 feet to Station 56 +64 . 05 at a point of compound
curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 3819 . 72 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 07 ° 34 ' 57 " (the long chord bears North 27 ° 14 ' 44 " East, 505 . 13 ) 505 . 50
feet to Station 61 +69 . 55 at a point of tangency; Thence North 31 ° 02 ' 12 " East 104 . 47 feet
to Station 62+74 . 03 at the point of termination .
Centerline stationing and Basis of Bearings are determined by holding a station of
10+00 . 00 at a 3 /4 " iron pipe at the Centerline of Boones Ferry Road as per survey number
2013 - 083 , Clackamas County Survey Records .
Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
27+ 16 . 00 to 27+58 . 29 55 . 04 feet along a straight line to 52 . 58 feet
27+58 . 29 to 27+58 . 85 52 . 58 feet along a straight line to 63 . 57 feet
27+58 . 85 to 27+94 . 00 63 . 57 feet along a straight line to 61 . 93 feet
Excepting therefrom , all that portion of said parcel lying within the existing and any
future right- of-way dedications of Boones Ferry Road .
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 949 square feet, more or less .
( REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURVEYOR ,,
.l
/ / I
OREGON
JULY 15 , 2003
TOD V . KELSO
50701 }
EXPIRES : 6 / 30 /2019
I
P : \ODOT\0008087W\Survey\Documents\_EXHIBITS LEGALS\0008087W-V-EX39TCE . doc
a
Page2of3
EXHIBIT " B "
r0)(00
0 0
P
\ o c(C" �o
c c)*i ,(<5-3.
goo
%
eal
�1
J
\ \ \
s
EXISTING ___NJ .
(51
k�o RIGHT- OF- WAY
O `1� 0 �o
. -, LINE o_. ° o,N
SI ON r0
.04 • x
37-0
.p °p
�� o� 0
. �(..g xs
CP
o (9 (5\
R = 1145 . 91 ' t� °oa PARCEL 1
L= 210 . 33 ' x� TEMPORARY
A10 °31 ' 00 " o CONSTRUCTION
CH = N53 °21 ' 43 " E 0 EASEMENT
210 . 04' 1 AREA 949 SQ . FT. I
Opp
o� e�S Fi4?° ,r
gyp/, Ory\ �� // 1
0440 0�� Y ° ��, 61
SSS• 0 'I sle 4�
of 7 47 4 FS
Fo 6/� Fo els OF 4/N
opo, o a (10k °l;°e49,0
i F J/
° iy Op e 6 � 0/94 )-Q 0 SFS �
2p, ti; 073 Po C \ 1
,05,9 /9k
op° �0
SCAlE Ai
30 0 15 30
lwli ii LEGEND
( FEET )
1 INCH = 30 FT. : - . - : - - TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ( PARCEL 1 ) 949 SQ . FT. ±
ii
I FILE NO . : 039 BOONES FERRY RD I SUBMITTAL DATE : 08/18/2017
LOT: r
I TAX 04600 (Oakridge Rd / Reese Rd - Madrona St) I REVISED DATE . 9755 SW9amesRd. Surte300
Portland, OR 97225
I TAX MAP : 2 1 E 08CB I REVISED DATE : I 503626-0455 Fax 503-526-0775
vnwtwhpacific.com
I
ADDRESS : 16140 BOONES FERRY RD LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO . 183 I REVISED DATE : IDWG : 0008087-V-EX39TCE. DWG
I
EXHIBIT " A "
Boones Ferry Rd Lake Oswego Work Order No . : 183
(Oakridge Rd/Reese Rd - Madrona Street) File No . : Al
August 14 , 2017 Assessors Map : 2 1 E 07DD
Parcels 1 & 2 Tax Lot No . : 02200
PARCELS 1 & 2 (RIGHT- OF - WAY DEDICATIONS )
Parcels of land lying in the Southeast quarter of Section 7 , Township 2 South, . Range 1
East of the Willamette Meridian, Clackamas County, Oregon, and being portions of that
tract of land conveyed to Paul Pyung Nai Rhee and Soo Nam Rhee, husband and wife by
Statutory Warranty Deed recorded March 20 , 1990 in Document No . 90 - 12181 , Clackamas
County Official Records , said parcels also being all those portions lying Northwesterly of
the lines delineated by following the noted stations and offsets , shown hereinafter and
being Southeasterly of the centerline of Boones Ferry Road, as said centerline is described
below.
BOONES FERRY ROAD CENTERLINE
A road centerline situated in the Southeast one- quarter of Section 7 , and in the Southwest
one - quarter of Section 8 , and the Northwest one- quarter of Section 8 , all within Township
2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in the City of Lake Oswego , Clackamas
County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows :
Beginning at Boones Ferry Road Centerline Station 10+00 per Record of Survey number
2013 - 083 as recorded in the Clackamas County Survey Records . Thence from said point of
beginning North 47 ° 36 ' 13 " East, a distance of 167 . 89 feet to Station 11 +67 . 89 at a point of
curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 5729 . 58 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 03 ° 06 ' 00 " (the long chord bears North 49 ° 09 ' 13 " East, 309 . 96 feet)
310 . 00 feet to Station 14+77 . 89 at a point of tangency ; Thence North 50 °42 ' 13 " East,
637 . 07 feet to Station 21 + 14 . 96 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 5729 . 58
foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 02 ° 36 ' 00 " (the long chord bears
North 49 °24 ' 13 " East, 259 . 98 feet) 260 . 00 feet to Station 23 +74 . 96 at a point of tangency ;
Thence North 48 ° 06 ' 13 " East, 85 . 00 feet to Station 24+59 . 95 at a point of curvature ;
Thence along the arc of a 1145 . 91 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of
10 ° 31 ' 00 " (the long chord bears North 53 ° 21 ' 43 " East, 210 . 04 feet) 210 . 33 feet to Station
26+70 . 29 at a point of tangency ; Thence North 58 ° 37 ' 13 " East, 768 . 60 feet to Station
34+38 . 88 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 716 . 20 foot radius curve to the
left, through a central angle of 15 ° 25 ' 30 " (the long chord bears North 50 ° 54 ' 28 " East,
192 . 23 feet) 192 . 81 feet to Station 36+31 . 70 at a point of tangency ; Thence North
43 ° 11 ' 43 " East, 516 . 51 feet to Station 41 +48 . 21 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the
arc of a 954 . 93 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 12 ° 42 ' 30 " (the long
chord bears North 36 ° 50 ' 28 " East, 211 . 37 feet) 211 . 81 feet to Station 43 +60 . 02 at a point
of tangency ; Thence North 30 °29 ' 13 " East, 279 . 39 feet to Station 46+39 . 41 at a point of
P : \ODOT\0008087W\Survey\Documents\_EXHIBITS LEGALS\0008087W-V-EXA1RW legal . doc '-
Page 1 of 4 '__
curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 716 . 20 foot radius curve to the left, through a central
angle of 18 °22 ' 30 " (the long chord bears North 21 ° 17 ' 58 " East, 228 . 71 feet) 229 . 69 feet to
Station 48 +69 . 10 at a point of tangency; Thence North 12 ° 06 ' 43 " East 511 . 40 feet to
Station 53 + 80 . 49 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 1432 . 39 foot radius
curve to the right, through a central angle of 11 °20 ' 33 " (the long chord bears North
17 ° 46 ' 59 " East, 283 . 10 feet) 283 . 56 feet to Station 56+64 . 05 at a point of compound
curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 3819 . 72 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 07 ° 34 ' 57 " (the long chord bears North 27 ° 14 ' 44 " East, 505 . 13 ) 505 . 50
feet to Station 61 +69 . 55 at a point of tangency; Thence North 31 ° 02 ' 12 " East 104 . 47 feet
to Station 62+74 . 03 at the point of termination .
Centerline stationing and Basis of Bearings are determined by holding a station of
10+ 00 . 00 at a 3 /4 " iron pipe at the Centerline of Boones Ferry Road as per survey number
2013 - 083 , Clackamas County Survey Records .
Parcel 1 Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
10+20 . 28 to 10+27 . 07 42 . 09 feet along a straight line to 45 . 15 feet
10+27 . 07 to 10+49 . 06 45 . 15 feet along a straight line to 44 . 66 feet
10+49 . 06 to 10+ 54 . 39 44 . 66 feet along a straight line to 42 . 33 feet
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 77 square feet, more or less .
I
1
I
I
1
I
P :\ODOT\0008087W\Survey\Documents\_EXHIBITS LEGALS\0008087W-V-EXA1RW legal . doc
Page 2 of4
Parcel 2 Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
13 + 10 . 29 to 13 + 16 . 55 46 . 02 feet to an arc with a 20 . 00 foot radius ,
concave Northerly, with a central angle of
18 ° 34 ' 58 " , the long chord of which bears
North 65 ° 11 ' 37 " East, a distance of 6 . 46 feet,
an arc distance of 6 . 49 feet to 47 . 82 feet
13 + 16 . 55 to 13 +25 . 00 47 . 82 feet along a straight line to 47 . 82 feet
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 7 square feet, more or less .
Excepting therefrom, all those portions of said parcels lying within the existing right- of-
way of Boones Ferry Road .
REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURVEYOR
_ _L.-Z.__
_____777es
OREGON
JULY 15 , 2003
TOD V. KELSO
50701 1
EXPIRES : 12 / 31 /2017
I .
P :\ODOT\0008087 W\Survey\Documents\ EXHIBITS LEGALS\0008087W-V-EXA1RW legal . doc
Page 3 of 4
EXHIBIT " B "
ICi 55°
, oz . a ({3-DJ
.
C?2-1 \
+4 goo . I X q'J. 13)
G <O 82
°
c1
X
° \\ US)4( cfr
70 .
�s o
S
0
o° A
��
0
O 0
ctic) PARCEL 2 -
EXISTING RIGHT- OF- WAY DEDICATION
AREA 7 SQ . FT.
RIGHT- OF- WAY , , .,
<<<& LINE
ccp,c),\\ °o P�0
x . 0 \45.- \cc.
\\0,c,% •,
<61C) 03 G p Nk % R = 20 . 00
�� Q ��S S c ,��\ L= 6 . 49 '
o, Q t, (# �1`L A= 18 °34' 58 "
1� C' ' ��� �° ()o CH = N65 °11 ' 37 " E
10 - 00 ,%<c, p ` 0C . 6 . 46 '
‘ PCD4 'SciDee \)1
P sc)c59
l
' 6'-/ (1-9
ZS 7) s
AgOr X 7
"A \ `g0
LI
20X 0x
O 0 `P
PARCEL 1 ; ,
RIGHT- OF- WAY DEDICATION
, ,„ ,.
AREA 77 SQ . FT. I '0
SCALE4 _
40 0 20 40 LEGEND
i =nueli -
��' RIGHT— OF— WAY DEDICATION ( PARCEL 1 ) 77 SQ . FT. I
( FEET ) bk• •- 7 RIGHT— OF— WAY DEDICATION ( PARCEL 2 ) 7 SQ . FT. I
1 INCH = 40 FT. RIGHT— OF— WAY DEDICATION ( TOTAL) 84 SQ . FT. ±
I FILE NO . : Al BOONES FERRY RD I SUBMITTAL DATE : 08/14/2017 1 wripn, ...._
dC111C
I TAX LOT: 02200 (Oakridge Rd / Reese Rd - Madrona St) I REVISED DATE : 9755 SWBamesRd. Sude300
Potand, OR 9!2_5
I TAX MAP: 2 1 E 07DD I REVISED DATE : I 5vn3526-0acfi455c Faxcom 503-526-0775
nv whp
I
ADDRESS : 16650 BOONES FERRY RD LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO . 183 J REVISED DATE : I DWG : 0008087-V-EX A1RW.DWG
a11
EXHIBIT "A"
Boones Ferry Rd Lake Oswego Work Order No.: 183
(Oakridge Rd/Reese Rd - Madrona Street) File No.: Al
January 27, 2017 Assessors Map: 2 1 E 07DD
Parcels 1, 2, 3 & 4 Tax Lot No.: 02200
PARCELS 1, 2, 3 & 4 (TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS)
Parcels of land lying in the Southeast quarter of Section 7, Township 2 South, Range 1
East of the Willamette Meridian, Clackamas County, Oregon, and being portions of that
tract of land conveyed to Paul Pyung Nai Rhee and Soo Nam Rhee, husband and wife by
Statutory Warranty Deed recorded March 20, 1990 in Document No. 90-12181, Clackamas
County Official Records, said parcels also being all those portions lying Northwesterly of
the lines delineated by following the below noted stations and offsets, Southeasterly of the
centerline of Boones Ferry Road, as said centerline is described below.
BOONES FERRY ROAD CENTERLINE
A road centerline situated in the Southeast one-quarter of Section 7, and in the Southwest
one-quarter of Section 8, and the Northwest one-quarter of Section 8, all within Township
2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in the City of Lake Oswego, Clackamas
County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at Boones Ferry Road Centerline Station 10+00 per Record of Survey number
2013-083 as recorded in the Clackamas County Survey Records. Thence from said point of
beginning North 47°36'13" East, a distance of 167.89 feet to Station 11+67.89 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 03°06'00" (the long chord bears North 49°09'13" East, 309.96 feet)
310.00 feet to Station 14+77.89 at a point of tangency; Thence North 50°42'13" East,
637.07 feet to Station 21+14.96 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58
foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 02°36'00" (the long chord bears
North 49°24'13" East, 259.98 feet) 260.00 feet to Station 23+74.96 at a point of tangency;
Thence North 48°06'13" East, 85.00 feet to Station 24+59.95 at a point of curvature;
Thence along the arc of a 1145.91 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of
10°31'00" (the long chord bears North 53°21'43" East, 210.04 feet) 210.33 feet to Station
26+70.29 at a point of tangency; Thence North 58°37'13" East, 768.60 feet to Station
34+38.88 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716.20 foot radius curve to the
left, through a central angle of 15°25'30" (the long chord bears North 50°54'28" East,
192.23 feet) 192.81 feet to Station 36+31.70 at a point of tangency; Thence North
43°11'43" East, 516.51 feet to Station 41+48.21 at a point of curvature; Thence along the
arc of a 954.93 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 12°42'30" (the long
chord bears North 36°50'28" East, 211.37 feet) 211.81 feet to Station 43+60.02 at a point
of tangency; Thence North 30°29'13" East, 279.39 feet to Station 46+39.41 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716.20 foot radius curve to the left, through a central
P:\ODOT\0008087W\Survey\Documents\_EXHIBITS LEGALS\0008087W-V-EXA1TCE.doc
Page 1 of 3
angle of 18 ° 22 ' 30 " (the long chord bears North 21 ° 17 ' 58 " East, 228 . 71 feet) 229 . 69 feet to
Station 48 +69 . 10 at a point of tangency; Thence North 12 ° 06 ' 43 " East 511 . 40 feet to
Station 53 + 80 . 49 at a point of curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 1432 . 39 foot radius
curve to the right , through a central angle of 11 ° 20 ' 33 " (the long chord bears North
17 ° 46 ' 59 " East, 283 . 10 feet) 283 . 56 feet to Station 56+64 . 05 at a point of compound
curvature ; Thence along the arc of a 3819 . 72 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 07 ° 34 ' 57 " (the long chord bears North 27 ° 14 ' 44 " East, 505 . 13 ) 505 . 50
feet to Station 61 +69 . 55 at a point of tangency; Thence North 31 ° 02 ' 12 " kast 104 . 47 feet
to Station 62+74 . 03 at the point of teiIuination .
Centerline stationing and Basis of Bearings are determined by holding a station of
10+00 . 00 at a 3 /4 " iron pipe at the Centerline of Boones Ferry Road as per survey number
2013 - 083 , Clackamas County Survey Records .
Parcel 1 Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
10 +07 . 00 to 10+50 . 16 50 . 60 feet along a straight line to 49 . 64 feet
10 +50 . 16 to 10+64 . 04 49 . 64 feet along a straight line to 43 . 56 feet
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 275 square feet, more or less .
Parcel 2 Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
11 +08 . 13 to 11 + 19 . 79 43 . 17 feet along a straight line to 48 . 26 feet
11 + 19 . 79 to 11 +45 . 26 48 . 26 feet along a straight line to 47 . 92 feet
11 +45 . 26 to 11 +51 . 21 47 . 92 feet along a straight line to 44 . 21 feet
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 151 square feet, more or less .
Parcel 3 Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
12 + 16 . 98 to 12 + 16 . 98 45 . 51 feet along a straight line to 69 . 33 feet
12 + 16 . 98 to 12+27 . 90 69 . 33 feet along a straight line to 83 . 02 feet
12+27 . 90 to 12 +58 . 85 83 . 02 feet along a straight line to 45 . 93 feet
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 904 square feet, more or less .
P : \ODOT\0008087W\ Survey\Documents\_EXHIBITS LEGALS\0008087W-V-EXA1TCE . doc
Page 2 of 3
Parcel 4 Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
12+90 . 95 to 13 + 12 . 81 46 . 04 feet along a straight line to 61 . 64 feet
13 + 12 . 81 to 13 +25 . 00 61 . 64 feet along a straight line to 61 . 98 feet
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 195 square feet, more or less .
Excepting therefrom , all those portions of said parcels lying within the existing right-of-
way of Boones Ferry Road .
( REGISTERED
PROFESSIONAL
LAND SURVEYOR
OREGON
JULY 15 , 2003
TOD V . KELSO
50701 y
EXPIRES : 12 /31 /2017
P :\ODOT\0008087W\Survey\Documents\_EXHIBITS LEGALS\0008087W- V-EXAITCE . doc
Page 3 of 3
J .
EXHIBIT " B "
Q,
\" ,ist° .6o , mord \
cNi -IID° Q6,
ffo
za
QS 1 <ft; x
`�Li' �x00
YT rte, x •.7 00
°0 & c9S �`9S �
A0� < V IL e •lm.
x
,/XX> 715\ &&S
. 5�9
OQS EXISTINGcl>> ` PARCEL 4
RIGHT- OF- WAY ���� TEMPORARY
�� LINE CONSTRUCTION
�� > sr �x EASEMENT
�� ° o��,' <00 xr-).
� AREA 195 SQ . FT. ±
O�� �,�x° u�� PARCEL 3
Q `+ � u OWNER. FILE NU TEMPORARY
S > > p MBER CONSTRUCTION EASEMEP
J>' so S5��' ADDRE c6 A SAM RHELEP �10 N4 1 k AREA 904 SQ. FT. I
- 10+ 00 „F <0 77 zx;oo- PARCEL 2 DEED, DOc. jNES ERR Wl ED
��D �� 0� `�> TEMPORARY 90, 12 /8 / ROAD
b'\� �0 • S&-• . �S 0 CONSTRUCTION
&7' EASEMENT
° \ AREA 151 SQ. FT, ±
. 0x� .,
ci06,0 '// If;
LS ox(9 o�
10 s
,6'
x0 c SLI,
0 § PARCEL `
It TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
AREA 275 SQ . FT. ±
LEGEND
SCALE 1 1 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ( PARCEL 1 ) 275 SQ. FT. ±
40 I 2I 40
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ( PARCEL 2) 151 SQ. FT. ±
mu i 1 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ( PARCEL 3) 904 SQ. FT. ±
( FEET ) TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ( PARCEL 3) 195 SQ. FT. ±
1 INCH = 40 FT. TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ( TOTAL) 1 , 525 SQ. FT. ±
FILE NO. : Al I BOONES FERRY RD I SUBMITTAL DATE: 08/14/2017 I t
I TAX LOT: 02200 I (Oakridge Rd / Reese Rd - Madrona St) I REVISED DATE: I 9>559W Games F4 Salle 09
I TAX MAP: 2 1 E 07DD I I REVISED DATE I 5503626 5 9,225
£25-0455 825035969»5
v wM1OaMc mm
I ADDRESS: 16650 BOONES FERRY RDI LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO . 183 I REVISED DATE : I DWG : 0008087-V-EX A1TCE.DWG
f'
14.5
o0-ft 40 COUNCIL REPORT
GREGG�
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Pat McDougal, PE, Senior Associate Engineer
Erica Rooney, PE City Engineer
Engineering Department
SUBJECT: Amend an existing Pre-Design Personal Services Contract for Marylhurst Pump
Station —WO 238
DATE: August 25, 2017 MEETING DATE: September 5, 2017
ACTION
Authorize an amendment to an existing Pre-Design Personal Service Contract with
Murraysmith, Inc. (formerly Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc.), Engineers/Planners, to provide
additional design, permitting and construction phase services for the Marylhurst Wastewater
Pump Station Replacement Project, Work Order 238, in the amount of$430,424.00.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
The City of Lake Oswego owns and operates the Marylhurst Pump Station as part of their
overall wastewater collection system. It was built in 1980, is the second largest wastewater
pump station in the city, and has become a significant maintenance cost and challenge. The
2013 Wastewater Master Plan Updated identified the need to fully replace the pump station
with a more reliable, and accessible system, while also eliminating the potential for sewer
overflows during power outages.
Engineering services for this project were intended to be completed in two phases. The first
phase (Pre-Design) was completed by Murraysmith in August 2017. The first phase addressed:
• Design alternatives
• Public Outreach and Neighborhood Impact
• Constructability Issues
• Preliminary Design and Cost Estimate for Construction
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeosweao.city
Page 2
The second phase, which is subject of this amendment authorization request, will include
detailed design, permitting, and construction management services. A separate construction
contract will also occur as part of the second phase.
DISCUSSION
On September 6, 2016, the Lake Oswego City Council awarded a pre-design personal services
contract to Murray, Smith & Associates in the amount of$195,400. The Engineering
Department's intent was, upon successful completion of the pre-design phase, to obtain a
proposal from the pre-design consultant for an amendment to the pre-design personal service
contract to include provisions for final design and construction contract administration services.
The original Request for Proposals to provide Pre-Design Services included the statement "It is
.... anticipated that, upon successful negotiation following pre-design, the scope of work could
be amended to include provisions for final design and construction contract administration
services by the pre-design Consultant." In August 2017, Murraysmith submitted their proposal
for Phase 2 services. Murraysmith's proposed fee for phase 2 services is $430,424.
The estimated construction cost determined by Murraysmith during pre-design, including
contingency, is approximately $1.8M. The total engineering services (including engineering,
permitting, public involvement, and construction contract administration) will be approximately
$626K; which would be approximately 35% of construction. This is a reasonable ratio for this
project which involves a very tight site, acquisition of a major land use variance, and working
with a very active and interested group of neighboring property owners and the Glenmorrie
Neighborhood Association.
FISCAL IMPACT
Through the end of FY 16/17, this project has cost approximately$300,000 in staff and
consulting work for the past 18 months. The CIP for FY 17/18 and FY 18/19 allocate $1,000,000
each year for finishing the project. Therefore, there are sufficient funds available for the
contract amendment of$430,424.00 Proposed total costs at this time are as follows:
Expenditures to date $300,000
Final Design 430,424
Staff 70,000
Construction 1,900,000
Total Costs $2,700,424
In spring of 2018, the CIP allocation amount will be adjusted to match estimated costs at that
time, likely resulting in a higher allocation request than is currently proposed for FY 18/19.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Page 3
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to an existing Personal Services Contract
with Murraysmith, Inc. in the amount of$430,424.00 for the Work Order 238, Marylhurst
Wastewater Pump Station (PS-2) Project.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
14.6
D<0,-Pt J oc COUNCIL REPORT
r o
oReoo�
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Erica Rooney, P.E., City Engineer
Tom Workman, City Surveyor
Engineering Department
SUBJECT: Resolution 17-52, Initiating Proceedings to Vacate Portions of the right-of-way
for Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place
DATE: August 15, 2017 COUNCIL DATE: September 5, 2017
ACTION
Adopt Resolution 17-52 initiating proceedings to vacate portions of the right-of-way for Boones
Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place and authorizing the City Recorder to give notice of
a public hearing.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
In a separate proceeding, the owner and developer of 3800 and 3900 Kruse Way Place is
proposed to create a large facility for assisted living purposes (LU 15-0056). The application
was reviewed and approved by the Development Review Commission on December 7, 2015.
The conditions of approval for development requires a number of frontage improvements and
the relocation of a public 12" water main that currently cuts across the properties. In order to
accomplish these improvements, it is necessary to provide new public easements for existing
and proposed public facilities, dedicate some right-of-way, and also vacate other right-of-way
areas to provide clarity of ownership and use.
The Commission's approval of the development application specifically contains a condition for
the applicant to apply for and receive approval from the City Council to vacate "three small
areas" as shown on the exhibit attached to Resolution 17-52. In accordance with Resolution
06-56, the City has a policy that values the retention of public right-of-way, and it shall not be
vacated, except when certain circumstances are of greater benefit to the City than keeping the
right-of-way. The City is receiving a number of benefits from this overall development and
subsequent street vacations:
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 2
• It corrects errors or inconsistencies in right-of-way boundaries.
• The vacations are coupled with dedication of additional right-of-way in order to achieve
more logical or useful right-of-way boundaries.
• The dedication of easements for existing sewer facilities adjacent to Boones Ferry
improves access for maintenance purposes, and clarifies responsibility and restrictions.
DISCUSSION
The proceedings for street vacations are dictated by Oregon Revised Statues. A street vacation
proceeding may be initiated by either:
• The City Council on its own motion (ORS 271.130). Following the public hearing, the
vacation can be approved unless a majority of the owners in the "affected area" object in
writing. The "affected area" is 200 ft. out from the street and a distance of 400 ft. beyond
the ends of the area to be vacated. (ORS 271.080). If the vacation will substantially affect
the market value of property abutting the street, and the vacation ordinance is to be
adopted, there must be a provision for paying damages. Whether there would be a need to
provide for payment of damages will be determined at the public hearing.
• A property owner(ORS 271.080). A property owner initiates a vacation proceeding by filing
a petition with the consent of the property owners abutting the proposed vacated street,
and at least two-thirds of the owners in the "affected area."
Engineering staff supports the initiation of the street vacation proceeding by the City because
of the benefits the City is receiving through the development's commitment to various
dedications and easements, and the relocation of the 12" water main. Therefore, it is
recommended the City formally initiate the street vacation of portions of the right-of-way for
Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place, and set a formal public hearing for the
October 3, 2017 council meeting. Resolution 17-52 would initiate the formal proceedings to
vacate these three areas of right-of-way.
ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT
There are two alternatives available to the Council
1. Deny the request for initiating the street vacation. This will negatively affect the
opportunity to develop the properties at 3800 and 3900 Kruse Way Place, as the street
vacations are conditions of approval for LU 15-0056.
2. Approve the request to initiate the street vacation and schedule a public hearing for
October 3, 2017.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 3
There are no direct fiscal impacts for the City in initiating a public hearing for a street vacation.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution 17-52, initiating the street vacation proceedings for portions of the right=of-
way for Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place, as noted in the attachment.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 17-52
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION 17-52
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO INITIATING
PROCEEDINGS TO VACATE PORTIONS OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR BOONES FERRY ROAD,
KRUSE WAY, AND KRUSE WAY PLACE AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY RECORDER TO GIVE
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING.
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Oswego has jurisdiction of three various shaped tracts of land on
Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and Kruse Way Place, identified on the attached Exhibit 1
(vacation area), and
WHEREAS, the adjacent property owner at 3800 Kruse Way Place will be dedicating right-of-
way and public utility easements to accommodate frontage improvements and underground
infrastructure along Boones Ferry Road and Kruse Way, and
WHEREAS, the compilation of street vacations, right-of-way dedications, and easements will
improve the clarity of ownership and responsibility of both the private property and the public
easements and right-of-way, which is a benefit to the City of Lake Oswego, and
WHERAS, as these proposed modification meets City Policy established through Resolution 06-
56, in that
1. Vacation is coupled with dedication of additional right of way in order to achieve a more
logical or useful right of way boundaries or routes, and
2. The City Council finds that vacating a right of way serves the public interest, and
WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to ORS 271.130, desires to initiate street vacation
proceedings for the vacation area, now therefore
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that:
Section 1. The Council incorporates the above recitals.
Section 2. The Council finds that the owner of 3800 and 3900 Kruse Way Place has shown
reasonable intent to provide the necessary dedication of other right-of-way and public
easements.
Section 3. Pursuant to the provision of ORS 271.130, the City Council does hereby initiate
proceedings to vacate portions of the right-of-way for Boones Ferry Road, Kruse Way, and
Kruse Way place, on the attached Exhibit 1.
Section 4. The City Recorder shall give notice of a public hearing to be held before the City
Council upon this proposed vacation on or after October 3, 2017.
Resolution 17-52
Page 1 of 2
Section 5. This Resolution shall be effective upon passage.
Considered and enacted at the regular Council Meeting of the City of Lake Oswego held on the
5th day of September, 2017
AYES:
NOES:
EXCUSED:
ABSTAIN:
Kent Studebaker, Mayor
ATTEST:
Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David D. Powell, City Attorney
Resolution 17-52
Page 2 of 2
0 100 200
_ = = - Feet
\ 1 INCH = 100 FEET
vv-qy
4004 KRUSE WAY A, j
TAX LOT NO. 1CF '7
21E08BA05900 N
NY
EXISTING .N
3900 KRUSE WAY PLACE RIGHT OF WAY
TAX LOT NO. 21E08BA03300
PROPOSED/ /
RIGHT OF WAY /
VACATION
,
PROPOSED 4
RIGHT OF WAY \/�O
VACATION
3800 KRUSE WAY PLACE /4&
` TAX LOT NO. 21E08BA03200 0)
\ \ EXISTING 444/
.�� RIGHT OF WAY
US� �l ,
w /
q \ /C1
VICINITY MAP- Not To Scale illh \ /
'\I /
4� earmanPr 1 0
,a s b 9
I a
J 4-,.. a o
p '4 Fir Ridge
Way Kruse wayp, LEGEND
Galewoodsr. +.° o PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY VACATION
itilb.e,
WALLU'GA 4
tNtrItage L n F•.a^rey Wayb. W t .
zr g i.,/ r Ad
it " r
cir
OF`AK -0 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PROPOSED DESIGN: -- DRAWN: TW CHECK: ER
°�AFAIINo RIGHT OF WAY
ENGINEERING VACATION SCALE: DATE: AUGUST 23, 2017
SPRINGS AT 1 = 100
W0
DEPARTMENT LAKE OSWEGO SHEET Files\2015\LU
015\LU 15-0046(3
- 6(38 0&3900
°REG°N (LU 15-0046) 1 OF 1 FILE: Fres\zKf seLWayPLL)\DWG\LU 3900
15-0046 ROW Vacation.dwe
14.7
-kik4 COUNCIL REPORT
cc)
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Ivan Anderholm, Parks and Recreation Director
SUBJECT: Resolution 17-49 Approve Public Art Committee Chair
DATE: August 25, 2017 MEETING DATE: September 05, 2017
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to adopt Resolution 17—49 appointing Bob Lindell as Chair of the Public Art Committee
for a three year term ending June 30, 2020.
BACKGROUND
The Public Art Guidelines require that the Public Art Committee nominate a Chair to be
appointed by the City Council for a term of 3 years. The committee nominated Bob Lindell to
be appointed chair for a three year term ending June 30, 2020 at their June 19, 2017 Public Art
Committee meeting.
DISCUSSION
The Public Art Committee had nominated Bob Lindell as the Chair for 2017-2019.
RECOMMENDATION
Move to appoint Bob Lindell as chair of the Public Art Committee.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 17—49
2. Public Art Committee Minutes June 19, 2017
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeosweao.citv
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION 17-49
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO APPROVING THE
APPOINTMENT OF THE PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE CHAIR
WHEREAS, the Lake Oswego City Council entered into an agreement with the Lake
Oswego Foundation of the Arts, doing business as the "Arts Council of Lake Oswego,"
("Arts Council") for the administration of City public arts programs on July 5, 2016; and
WHEREAS, the agreement requires the Arts Council to establish and oversee a Public Art
Committee (PAC) consisting of seven members; and
WHEREAS, the agreement also requires the City Council to select the committee chair
from among the seven members of the PAC; and
WHEREAS, the PAC met on June 19, 2017 and voted to recommend to the Lake Oswego
City Council that Bob Liddell continue as chair for three years; and
WHEREAS, the Lake Oswego City Council concurs with the reappointment;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
approves the re-appointment of Bob Liddell as the Public Art Committee Chair for a
term expiring June 30, 2020.
This resolution shall take effect upon passage.
Considered and enacted by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego at a regular
meeting held on the 5th day of September 2017.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Kent Studebaker, Mayor
ATTEST:
Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Powell, City Attorney
ATTACHMENT 2
Arts Council
OF LAKE OSWEGO
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE
Minutes
June 19, 2017, 2:00 PM
ACLO Office: 520 1st St.
Members: Bob Liddell, Kathleen Wiens, Rosalyn Kliot, Curtis Schade, Barbara McDonald, Rieko
Warrens, Kent Studebaker
Board Liaison: Pat Vessely Staff: Nicole Nathan, Kelsey Ferreira
Alt. Member: Dave Bower
City Council Rep:John LaMotte
Excused: Pat, Dave, Kent
I. Chair Bob calls the meeting to order at 2:01 PM
II. Vote to approve minutes (Committee)
a. John motions to approve May minutes; Curtis seconds the motion; all vote in
favor to approve May minutes
III. PAC Applications Update (Kelsey)
a. Kelsey lets the committee know an Appointment Committee has been formed to
review and recommend three new members to PAC. Members of the
appointment committee are the two City Council liaisons (John LaMotte and
Kent Studebaker) and two members of the ACLO Board (Pat Vessely and Liane
Cabot). Appointment Committee members have been emailed a packet of
applications and have been asked to submit their selections by June 30.
IV. Vote to Recommend to City Council a Chair for the Public Art Committee (Committee)
a. Kathleen makes a motion to recommend to City Council that Bob Liddell
continue as PAC Chair; Rosalyn seconds the motion; the motion is approved
unanimously by PAC to recommend Bob continue as Chair for another three year
term.
V. GWW De-Install and Install Schedule (Bob and Kelsey)
a. All committee members are given a copy of the current de-install and install
schedule. Committee members are encouraged to attend de-installs and installs
according to their schedules.
VI. People's Choice Permanent Location Discussion (Committee)
a. Aspens will be de-installed June 30 and placed in storage until a permanent
location is decided on and approved by PAC. PAC will continue to look around
the City to determine a permanent location. Some suggestions discussed were:
Arts Council
OF LAKE OSWEGO
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
near the Windward (formerly Block 137) development to signal the excitement
and beauty of the new project with an eye-catching sculpture like Aspens.
Aspens also has the appropriate scale to be adjacent to the new development.
Other ideas are Millennium or Lower Millennium, but these were not discussed
in detail.
VII. Chronicic Updatc (KcIscy)
VIII. Other Business (Committee)
a. Bob brings up the importance of reviewing GWW contracts and artists calls prior
to the next call for incoming sculpture. He mentions the need to standardize the
base dimensions of future works in order to streamline and simplify the
installation process. He recommends looking at Wenatchee, WA's rotating
sculpture program for ideas. John mentions he'd be happy to assist with editing
the next call and also with determining guidelines for artists in terms of install
and insurance. It's agreed that Nicole, Kelsey, and possibly Bob and John might
sit down with the City attorney to discuss the next batch of contracts.
b. Kathleen mentions the possibility of moving Guardian of the Lake back to the
Windward area so that it's in proximity to the Lake instead of at Luscher Farms.
Other suggestions are to change the landscaping around the sculpture to make it
more prominent. Bob mentions the difficulty in relocating the sculpture.
c. John mentioned that he met with Anthony Hooper, Public Works Director, about
the old Wizer historic light fixtures, which are currently in storage at the Tualatin
Temporary Yard. John plans to measure the lights and the committee is
considering using these historic features as a part of a possible commission.
IX. Sculpture Marketing & Promotion (Committee)
a. Kathleen discusses the work of the PR and Marketing Committee in the
opportunities to purchase sculpture before they go back to the artist. The
committee is considering language like investment and legacy to encourage
people to look at the sculpture as permanent objects. It's discussed that this part
of marketing might be good for a volunteer art broker/intern to really pursue
this on an ongoing basis. The committee is considering a %z page article in the LO
Review.
X. Goodbye Outgoing PAC Members (Barbara, Rieko and Curtis) (Committee)
a. The Committee wished the outgoing members well and is excited to welcome
three new members to the Committee at the July meeting!
Adjourn at 3:10 PM
Next Meeting: July 17, 2017, 2:00 PM
Arts Council Office
14.8
D0s COUNCIL REPORT
442,cc)
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Brant Williams
Jessica Numanoglu, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Boones Ferry Road Annexation Agreement
DATE: August 29, 2017 MEETING DATE: September 5, 2017
ACTION/SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to authorize the City Manager to sign an annexation agreement between the City and the
owners of properties located at 16524, 16552 and 16556 Boones Ferry Road substantially in the
form presented.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
Mark Fitkin, managing member of the owners of properties located at 16524, 16552 and 16556
Boones Ferry Road, is interested in redeveloping these properties as a mixed-use office and
residential development. This would require annexing the three properties into the City. Prior
to annexation, Mr. Fitkin would like the opportunity to expand the existing building at 16524
Boones Ferry by approximately 2,300 square feet and make associated site improvements. This
building is currently known as the Marquis of Granby building. He would then move the
existing salon/spa use operating at 16552 Boones Ferry into this building. The properties at
16552 and 16556 Boones Ferry Road would be developed later after annexation.
By means of the proposed annexation agreement, the City would grant permission to connect
the expanded Marquis of Granby building to the City's sanitary sewer prior to annexation
provided that the proposed building expansion and site improvements meets all City Code
requirements and the owners of the three properties agree to both the future annexation of
the properties and the dedication of certain portions of the properties as right-of-way and
easements necessary for the City's Boones Ferry Road project.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeosweao.citv
Page 2
DISCUSSION
The proposed annexation agreement would benefit Mr. Fitkin by allowing him to redevelop the
three properties in a timely manner (this includes retaining the characteristic Marquis of
Granby building) and to retain the existing salon/spa tenant on the site, which is an allowed use
under Clackamas County zoning, but is not permitted in the City's WLG RMU zone. The
salon/spa use would move from its current location at 16552 Boones Ferry Road into the
expanded Marquis de Granby building and would become a legally nonconforming use upon
annexation to the City.
In return, the City would benefit by ensuring annexation of these properties and by not having
to acquire right-of-way and easements for constructing the Boones Ferry Road project. The
value of this right-of-way and easements is estimated at over$200,000. Annexation and
redevelopment of the three properties would also allow LORA the option to expand the Lake
Grove Urban Renewal District boundary to include these three properties and receive the
associated tax increment revenue, which would help fund Boones Ferry Road and public
parking in the district. Street frontage improvements for these three properties would be paid
for and constructed concurrently with the City's Boones Ferry Road project.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager to sign an annexation agreement between the City and the owners
of properties located at 16524, 16552 and 16556 Boones Ferry Road, substantially in the
attached form.
ATTACHMENT
1. Annexation Agreement for properties located at 16524, 16552 and 16556 Boones Ferry
Road.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
ATTACHMENT 1
ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
This Annexation Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into this day of September,
2017, between the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon, an Oregon municipal Corporation ("City"), NIKTIF LLC,
an Oregon Limited Liability Company("NIKTIF"), and MKTM, LLC, an Oregon Limited Liability Company
("MKTM").
RECITALS
A. MKTM owns the real property at 16552 Boones Ferry Road described on Exhibit A
("16552 Boones Ferry). NIKTIF owns the real property at 16524 Boones Ferry Road described on Exhibit
B ("16524 Boones Ferry) and the real property at 16556 Boones Ferry Road described on Exhibit C
("16556 Boones Ferry"). The three properties are referred to collectively in this Agreement as the
"Properties."The Properties are currently in unincorporated Clackamas County, but are collectively
adjacent to the City. MKTM and NIKTIF have some membership in common.
B. The City desires to annex the Properties into the City of Lake Oswego, and NIKTIF and
MKTM are willing to allow the properties to be annexed under the terms and conditions of this
Agreement.
C. Before annexation, NIKTIF desires to expand the current building on 16524 Boones Ferry
by approximately 2,500 square feet and make certain site improvements, as generally shown on Exhibit
D (the "Building Expansion"), and to move the salon/spa use currently operating at 16552 Boones Ferry,
which is a use allowed by the current Clackamas County General Commercial (C-3) Zoning, into the
structure to be expanded at 16524 Boones Ferry. NIKTIF also desires sanitary sewer service for the
expanded building prior to annexation.
D. The City is willing to grant permission to connect the building on 16524 Boones Ferry to
the City sanitary sewer system before annexation, provided that: the Building Expansion meets Lake
Oswego Code requirements, NIKTIF and MKTM irrevocably agree to the annexation of the Properties,
and NIKTIF and MKTM agree to dedicate certain portions of the Properties as right-of-way for the City's
Boones Ferry Road project.
AGREEMENT
1. Upon execution of this Agreement, subject to the terms and provisions of the ordinances,
resolutions,fees and requirements of the City relating to the provision of sanitary sewer services, and
for so long as MKTM and NIKTIF are in compliance with all terms of this Agreement,the City will allow
connection to the City's sanitary sewer facilities from 16524 Boones Ferry Road.The City shall give
MKTM and NIKTIF notice of its intent to terminate sanitary sewer service based upon any non-
compliance with this Agreement, and will afford MKTM and NIKTIF 60 days from the date of the notice
to cure the non-compliance before terminating service. Any notice to MKTM and NIKTIF under this
section shall be given by personal delivery to the following listed person, or by registered or certified
mail, and addressed as follows:
Page 1—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
Mark G. Fitkin, Managing Member
MKTM LLC and NIKTIF LLC
18691 SW Stafford Rd.
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
or addressed in such other way as MKTM and NIKTIF may, from time to time, designate in writing
dispatched as provided in this paragraph. Notice shall be considered received on the earlier of (a) the
date of actual receipt, or(b) three (3) days after the date of mailing.
2. MKTM and NIKTIF irrevocably consent to annexation of each of the Properties to the City of Lake
Oswego at any time on or after the earlier of 90 days following the date Clackamas County issues a
certificate of occupancy for the Building Expansion, or September 1, 2019. Simultaneously with the
execution of this Agreement, MKTM and NIKTIF will execute and deliver to the City the Application and
Petition for Annexation for the Properties in the form attached as Exhibit E. The City staff shall pursue
annexation of the Properties and timely process the Application and Petition for Annexation following
the earlier of the two dates referred to above. MKTM and NIKTIF acknowledge that the annexation
proceedings may be initiated by the City in its discretion in the absence of the Petition for Annexation,
but in that event neither MKTM nor NIKTIF shall lose any rights hereunder provided they are each in
compliance with the terms of this Agreement. MKTM and NIKTIF represent and warrant that they are
the only owners of the Properties and that there are no electors (or registered voters) residing on any of
the Properties. The City represents and warrants that it has authority to enter this Agreement.
3. If NIKTIF elects to implement the Building Expansion prior to annexation, the Building Expansion
shall be substantially completed, and a certificate of occupancy issued, on or before September 1, 2019,
and shall comply in all respects with all provisions of the Lake Oswego Code that would apply if the
Properties were within the City boundaries, including without limitation the provisions listed on Exhibit
F,through the date of annexation. Upon reasonable advance request by NIKTIF,the City will inspect and
confirm Lake Oswego Code compliance of the Building Expansion. No other improvements or
development of any kind shall occur on any of the Properties, nor shall permits for any such other
improvements or development be applied for, between the date of this Agreement and the effective
date of annexation of the Properties, it being the intent of the parties that any such other improvements
or development shall only occur following annexation and be subject to the Lake Oswego Code and
permitting authority of the City of Lake Oswego.
4. Between the date of this Agreement and the effective date of annexation of the Properties no
change of use, or new use, may occur on any of the Properties that results in a use not expressly allowed
as a "Permitted Use" in the Lake Oswego West Lake Grove Residential Mixed Use (WLG-RMU) Zone,
except for the current salon/spa use on 16552 Boones Ferry, which may be relocated to 16524 Boones
Ferry prior to the annexation. The described salon/spa use may continue to operate following
annexation as a non-conforming use, subject to all Lake Oswego Code provisions pertaining to non-
conforming uses.
5. On or before September 30, 2017, NIKTIF shall dedicate to the City of Lake Oswego the rights-of-
way and temporary construction easements described on Exhibit G, and MKTM shall dedicate to the City
of Lake Oswego the right-of-way and temporary construction easement described on Exhibit H, in
consideration of the mutual covenants in this Agreement, and without monetary compensation. The
Page 2—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
dedications shall include the consent of the holders of all encumbrances on the Properties. The City
agrees to work with NIKTIF and MKTM to allow for their reasonable access to the Properties during
construction of the Boones Ferry Road improvement project associated with the temporary construction
easements and the right-of-way acquisition.
6. This Agreement, including without limitation the irrevocable consent to annexation, shall run
with the land and shall be recorded in the deed records of Clackamas County, and shall be binding upon
the successors in interest to each of the Properties, including but not limited to owners, residents,
tenants and lessees.
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, an Oregon municipal NIKTIF, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company
corporation
By: Scott Lazenby, City Manager By: Mark G. Fitkin, Managing Member
MKTM, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company
By: Mark G. Fitkin, Managing Member
Page 3—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
STATE OF OREGON
) ss.
County of Clackamas )
On this of 2017, before me, the undersigned Notary Public,
personally appeared SCOTT LAZENBY, personally known to me to be the person who executed the
within instrument as City Manager of the City of Lake Oswego, an Oregon Municipal Corporation, on
behalf of the entity therein named, pursuant to authority, and acknowledged to me the execution
hereof.
Notary Public for Oregon
My Commission Expires:
STATE OF OREGON
) ss.
County of Clackamas )
On this of , 2017, before me, the undersigned Notary Public,
personally appeared MARK G. FITKIN, proven to me to be the person who executed the within
instrument as Managing Member of NIKTIF, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company, on behalf of the
entity therein named, pursuant to authority, and acknowledged to me the execution hereof.
Notary Public for Oregon
My Commission Expires:
STATE OF OREGON
) ss.
County of Clackamas )
On this of , 2017, before me,the undersigned Notary Public,
personally appeared MARK G. FITKIN, proven to me to be the person who executed the within
instrument as Managing Member of MKTM, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company, on behalf of the
entity therein named, pursuant to authority, and acknowledged to me the execution hereof.
Notary Public for Oregon
My Commission Expires:
Page 4—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
EXHIBIT A
16552 Boones Ferry Legal Description
Block 7, BRYANT ACRES, in the City of Lake Oswego, County of Clackamas and State of Oregon.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion lying within SW Boones Ferry Road.
Page 5—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
EXHIBIT B
16524 Boones Ferry Legal Description
Lot 8, BRYANT ACRES, in the County of Clackamas, State of Oregon.
Page 6—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
EXHIBIT C
16556 Boones Ferry Legal Description
Tract 9, BRYANT ACRES, in the City of Lake Oswego, County of Clackamas and State of Oregon.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM a 3 foot strip along the Southerly boundary of said Tract, heretofore conveyed
to the Public as a footpath by Deed recorded December 16, 1915, in Book 142, Page 84, Deed Records,
Clackamas County, Oregon.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM that portion conveyed to the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon, a municipal
corporation by deed recorded February 9, 1993 as Fee No. 93 09212.
Page 7—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
�••r1A ,,X t „ development Information
M1l 1.1{fl:-0P . TA 4--]^�_ ../+ Ja.V•rRw.4RaF•A.•^+ •
A ' F:Yf11.9rL:MrN1 raGal ' calv+c:= •11aY R2.ER'I"Jpt•R7 -k71M
.• \ ]SNUVi• ...LR.ia UC * •
, • Ydpma.• ]91C -dllc
. I 1• IIII_ 'L • r..rgoIbr.rr lbr.roy:C n-a a o-lU
L al n••uvin.n -ran.
rioniRe
• ''•1.,7r 1T. •' ^,r •
P.rlrY.tl i1.1311-kW Ma .•df•1 Z'
U R1.rF 41 r y • •
4' .{FM;1%G F4L' ��y# f rXir$tlu Y.3rWi.Ran -.Cr
1J4KL Y -sir . ._gwyn Mk �Fs,+r
- 0,m. a .A # ;� Fhriwr Ran JAr .Fh.r
^.SSP ma } #' < , .i firmly %P. •rAi.F
�. t s3. C• 4 y h9 FWM$ {$Jrbabl -6Rr W
/•' - '�� ..' :a. • .1 r`','� \vTM,�'1�-T� /' virus LAI Min 0 EC two-NW 'SW
*11�L r "4 PrHH r LHTIILOf•1 QV&r •6•IF.
-... -41•, Ill .. ••....... '4:4 7 .,..4 .1:,...._,...:, ,.... '}� +4�! pFys3rS.up Sr. ,•1J t.r..•.rtdl -1•r:.rvoor
.,4 1 .r 4'• - PYIMrP4v.Mpy-kfi .,`]dla,.Ir .r.
y. jii_ Irin4 I.1.4M1 x.Mr -I 1..P.'15.1......
+y` ••x 3� �i PbnRUR I�IIW4 an.-la, .R
4
* ' + \ ...51.1:1:... .' •'
' .,..1.4.;:,-.1F { 5.. .. . *� 7�mea trump -raidH
D Town 91:11411=1,7.2., Arare.l
•
1W •fflW Al
'CF
Q- • 3ti 7y tp -.r-- t kxl, P. Fr.r.•wY+IrFo .22•poop•
•
11 C " Promenifirlep Fara ..•4 Komi!Mir
e PrwONr+..17.0.roPrrOHnefilaKle %1I. -1.711
I— p a / r4w9.l+wrwu - 7errPi•V44•f"
r -.M '• Pr000.1•M•W)L.rlrl�fa4•P.M `1.Ml n 9.44
m b .F k • A' •.� . ■....
2 • 1 yw..FaYF4arv..9g1Y••l9F Wlhrip1dm9.4A4 sa.rrmF
COIowa 11.
- 7, \''''.
l / ti� - Y '.� .▪•w.-.•a.oxnnm•••••xari9aco.a.wvn.wt
• • l/ M :,- CI
,dBY\1. *I?Lr • �SiY.bmd r Tin 1�w qp.V ti.•r..y
16
"1�.. ..r= Ca oya1.M9 o•••p ru•ma
1 4 - �..- C!1 EIMN PrIXrta lyq}
�,S P.
'_� 1 FSAJnIll.&g• I—
.�y, r F 2-..,':WGu..r-I:X•53 Z
LU
yr ULif1LOa1f s.fr 1.Mgl'LNIP.4 LU
I
¢� r.. ;Wang C:•7 rel a1•nw.fa LU
LLJ
.M1 Ell Y0.>lo Fri ca Ni•Ui11 r4M+4q.HK,1YRSr•4111
ilesirr6r
CC
• 4, 1AX 101711.1711 (CC'5A \ .G..•1{a••wrd
-.rW r-,r:a F9-�:.
c••••••...;....... ; Q
; i bDWL� Z
11. e'y
MrNN•7I—
West LakeGrove Tax Lots 1)1) & 2500 � W11116,14..1.1.`r..
Lake
r� Aryea N11599,1..kflp•
1 a Ir. Ill e1a CarAeC1'�3n W
(.'onceptual Site Plan Clackamas.County, Orezor z
Q
1
00
a)
dA
rts
0_
EXHIBIT E
Annexation Application and Petition
ANNEXATION APPLIATIN
E
` Department of Planning and Building Services
38DAAvenue
O Post Office Box 369
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
OR E o o 503-635-0270
www.ci.oswego.or.us
FILE NAME: SUBMIT: REVIEW:
RESUBMIT: REVIEW:
FILE NUMBER(S): HEARING DATE:
CITY FEE RECEIVED: $ METRO FEE RECEIVED: $ CHECK it
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSN: RECEIPT#:
CHECKLIST: 0 Legal Description 0 Title Report COMPLETENESS DATE:
❑ Assessor's Map 0 Petition 0 Fees (City and Metro)
❑ Delineation of Natural Resources Of required)
❑ Resolution I4-38 given to Applicant on ::late)
PRINT OR TYPE ALL INFORMATION BELOW
APPLICANT USE MPJUNG ADDRESS FOR HEARING NOTIFICATION
Mark Fitkin (503)789-4553
YOUR NAME PHONE#
MKTM LLC and NIKTIF LLC
BUSINESS NAME FAX#
9819 SW Stafford Road
ADDRESS SUITE
Lake Oswego. Oregon 97034
CITY STATE ZIP
mfiazinaoomcast.net
E-MAIL ADDRESS
SIGNATURE (ORIGINAL REQUIRED} DATE
Note: I consent to an on-site inspection by an employees)or the City of Lake Oswego
PROPERTY OWNER ❑ (ADDITIONAL OWNER-SEE PAGE 2)
Mark Fitton {503)784858
YOUR NAME PHONE#
NIKTIF LLC
BUSINESS NAME FAX#
9819 SW Stafford Road
ADDRESS SUITE
Lake Oswego. Oregon 97034
CITY STATE ZIP
mfitkinoomcast.net
E-MAIL ADDRESS
SIGNATURE (ORIGINAL REQUIRED} DATE
Nate: I consent to an on-site inspection by an employees)or the City of Lake Oswego
Page 9—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
ATTACH ANNEXATICN PETFTICN AND LEGAL CESCRIPTICN FROM DEED
ADDITIONAL PROPERTY OWNER 0 IF MORE TI-tAll ONE OWNER
Mark FIIkIn (56.3)789-4858
YOUR NAME PHONE*/
MKTM LLC
BUSINESS NAME FAX
18691 SW Siatrtrd Road
ADDRESS SUITE
Lake Oswego OR 97Q34
CITY STATE ZIP
ralttklnccrncastnel
E-MAIL ADDRESS
SIGNATURE (ORIGINAL REQUIRED) DATE
WILE: I conser1 to an an-Elte Inspeclton by an emplayee(s)or the Ctty or Lake,Oswego
PROPERTYZONINO DATA
15.521.1E552 and 16556 SW 6aones Ferri Road Lake CsSt ao
Address
On 1t'e south sldefll Domes Ferry Road at the rrlersectlon or Boar 2E =err/Road and Madrona Street
Location Description
MAP S.TAX LOT !pa NOT USE SITE ZONIFJG(PROPERTY INFORMATION
',Mane perine) LOTa6LOCi} oats 701:1SrNGCW,MTr 417C347i1:M:7cHGMAN cwa:xrA!3.1264.1:1 WILLIS ,or..LAS„c
MIMS C6LtiFTE44 MSGh�TIOh
21E67DD 62406 (16524&nane3 Feng) C-3 4'!LG .MU 495,557
21E67DD 62506 (1.5552 13oanes Ferry) .3' C 3 '.NLG RMU 845
21E67DD 62306 (16556 Baonea Ferry) .61 C-3 .'!LG 3ML' 428,153
.}7713 9c FT.
TOTAL CF PARCEL AREAS: 2.22 95.7032
EIGHTS-OF-WAY
TO BE INCLUDED: Pcrtlonrt of the Dames Fenn Rawl rkirrt at way al Me north sloe DI eacr F•c_E-•
REASON FOR
ANNEXATION:
uturarrst VUMDER(11U 7 r ra OF STRUCTURES ON TFE PARCEL(S)(USE TAX LOTS AS REFERENCE):
Approximately 6 oitloe I:kill:lrrgs on The three parcels which,supp]r1 offlce,commercial services,and a salon
Tax lol 2360:eornrnerclal ser.1ces;Tax 101 24132 otllce;Tax lot 2650:Moe and satin
EXISTING USE OFAREA TO BE ANNEXED:
B unit ETES
PROPOSED USE 0=ANEA TO E E ANNEXED
E Eiri r.e and R2EIder4131
DESCRIBE SURROUNC.I G LAND USES (USE TAX_CTS AS REFERENCE)
NORTci—Tax 11t 21E67Da]17D]IE ornrnerdal property;rrertherr property lues abut Biomes Fart'Road
SOUTH of 21E57DLd723E0 If ,3car:land abuttlig single'amity rEddEnnes;Set of 21 E07CD02490 arid525139 are srlgle Family residences_
154.9.E Bcones Ferry Is 3100 m tie 3c•JUIlE{r porll]n Gf 21 E•]7DCE12600
EAST of 21EI57D13] 5[J Is 1643] 3oones Ferri{21 E0760026M}wellichi Is a]mmercIa1 papally
WEST er2.1E07Ed6233D In commercial property kcaled al 16650 Bowes Ferry(2itufuue. uuJ
Page 10—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
PETITION FOR ANNEXATION TO THE
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON
To the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego:
We, the undersigned owners and/or electors,petition and consent to be annexed to the City of Lake Oswego at any time on or after the earlier
of 90 days following the date Clackamas County issues a certificate of occupancy for the"Building Expansion"described in the attached
Annexation Agreement, or September 1, 2019.
A map is attached, marked Exhibit A, showing the affected territory and its relationship to the present City boundaries.
PETITION SIGNERS
I Am A* Property Description
Signature Printed Name (check both if Owner's/Elector's Mailing Date**
applicable) Address
I PO I RV Tax Map I Tax Lot
Mark Fitkin,
Managing Member of: X
NIKTIF,LLC
MKTM,LLC
*PO=Property Owner,RV=Registered Voter **Within 1 year from the date of filing petition with City
Page 11—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
EXHIBIT F
Code Criteria
A. City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code (LOC Chapter 50):
LOC 50.01.004.6 Effect of Conditions of Approval or
Development or Design Regulations
Imposed Prior to Annexation
LOC 50.01.006 Nonconforming Uses, Structures, Lots and
Site Features
LOC 50.02.002.2 Site Specific Standards for Commercial, Mixed
Use, and Industrial Zones
LOC 50.03.002.3 Commercial, Mixed Use, Industrial, and
Special Purpose Districts Use Table
LOC 50.03.003.6 Use Specific Standards
LOC 50.04.001.4.b WLG RMU Zone Dimensional Standards
LOC 50.04.002 Special Street Setbacks
LOC 50.05.005 West Lake Grove Design District Standards
LOC 50.06.001.5.g Commercial, Industrial and Multi-family
Building Orientation
LOC 50.06.002 Parking
LOC 50.06.003.1 Access/Access Lanes (Flag Lots)
LOC 50.06.003.2 On-Site Circulation—Driveways and Fire
Access Roads
LOC 50.06.003.3 On-Site Circulation—Bikeways, Walkway and
Accessways
LOC 50.06.003.5 Transit
LOC 50.06.004.2 Fences
LOC 50.06.004.3 Lighting
LOC 50.06.005; 50.07.004.7 Park and Open Space Contributions
LOC 50.06.006.3; 50.07.004.1 Stormwater Management
LOC 50.06.008; 50.07.004.11 Utilities
B. City of Lake Oswego Streets and Sidewalks [LOC Chapter 421:
LOC 42.03.130 Sight Distance at Roadway Intersections,
Private Streets and Driveways
LOC 42.03.135 Method of Establishing Special Street Setback
Reference Line
C. City of Lake Oswego Signs [LOC Chapter 47]
D. City of Lake Oswego Tree Code [LOC Chapter 55]:
LOC 55.02.080 Type II Tree Removal Criteria
LOC 55.08.030 Tree Protection Measures Required
Page 12—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
EXHIBIT G
Boones Ferry Rd Lake Oswego Work Order No.: 183
(Oakridge Rd/Reese Rd- Madrona Street) File No.. 056
March 28,2017 Assessors Map: 2 1 E 07DD
Parcel 1 Tax Lot No.: 02300
PARCEL 1 (RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION)
A parcel of land lying in the Southeast quarter of Section 7, Township 2 South Range 1
East of the Willamette Meridian, Clackamas County, Oregon, and being a portion of that
tract of land conveyed to NIKTIF, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company by Statutory
Warranty Deed recorded February 19, 2015 in Document No. 2015-008616, Clackamas
County Official Records, said parcel also being all that portion lying Northwesterly of the
line delineated by following the below noted stations and offsets, Southeasterly of the
centerline of Boones Ferry Road,as said centerline is described below.
BOONES FERRY ROAD CENTERLINE
A read centerline situated in the Southeast one-quarter of Section 7, and in the Southwest
one-quartet'of Section 8, and the Northwest one--quarter of Section 8, all within Township
2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in the City of Lake Oswego, Clackamas
County, Oregon,being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at Boones Ferry Road Centerline Station 10+00 per Record of Survey munber
2013-083 as recorded in the Clackamas County Survey Records. Thence from said point of
beginning North 47°36'13"East, a distance of 167.89 feet to Station 11 167.89 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58 .foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 03°06'0D" (the long chord bears North 49°09'13" East, 309.96 feet)
310.00 feet to Station 14+77.89 at a point of tangency; Thence North 50'42'13" East,
637.07 feet to Station 21+14.96 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58
foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 02°36'00" (the long chord bears
North. 49'24'13" East, 259.98 feet) 260.00 feet to Station 23+74.96 at a point of tangency;
Thence North 48'06'13" Last, 85.00 feet to Station 24+59.95 at a point of curvature;
Thence along the arc of a 1145.91 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of
10°31'00" (the long chord bears North 53°21'43" East, 210.04 feet) 210.33 feet to Station
26+70.29 at a point of tangency; Thence North 58"37'13" East, 768.60 feet to Station
34+38.88 at a point of curvature; Thcncc along the arc of a 716.20 foot radius curve to the
left, through a central angle of 15°25'30" (the long chord bears North 50'54'28" East,
192.23 feet) 192.81 feet to Station 36+31.70 at a point of tangency; Thence North
43°11'43" East, 51.6.51 feet to Station 41+48.21 at a point of curvature; Thence along the
arc of a 954.93 foot radius curve to the Icft, through a central angle of 12°42'30" (the long
chord bears North 36°50'28" East, 211.37 feet)211.81 feet to Station 43+60.02 at a point
of tangency; Thence North 30°29']3" East, 279.39 feet to Station 46+39.41 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716.2.0 foot radius curve to the
Page 13-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
left, through a central angle of 18'22'30" (the long chord bears North 21°17'58" East,
228.71 feet) 229.69 feet to Station 48+69.10 at a point of tangency; Thence North
12"06143" East 511.40 feet to Station 53+80.49 at a point of curvature; Thence along the
arc of a 1432.39 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 11020'33" (the
long chord bears North 17°46'59" East, 283.10 feet) 283.56 feet to Station 56+64,05 at a
point of compound curvature; Thence along the arc of a 3819.72 foot radius curve to the
right, through a central angle of 07°34'57" (the long chord bears North 27°14'44" East,
505.13) 505.50 feet to Station 61+69.55 at a point of tangency; Thence North 31°02'12"
East 104.47 feet to Station 62+74.03 at the point of termination.
Centerline stationing and Basis of Bearings are determined by holding a station of
10+00.00 at a 3/4" iron pipe at the Ccnterlinc of Booncs Ferry Road as per survey number
2013-083, Clackamas County Survey Records.
Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
13+13.00 to 13+28.88 47.41 feet to an arc with a 369.00 foot radius,
concave Southeasterly, with a central angle of
02°28'34", the long chord of which bears
North 56°35'23" East, a distance of 15.95
feet,an arc distance of 15.95 feet to 49.48 feet
13+28.88 to 13+92.10 49.48 feet to an arc with a 431.00 foot radius,
concave Northwesterly, with a central angle
of 08°21'25", the long chord of which bears
North 53°38'57" East, a distance of 62.81
feet, and arc distance of 62.86 feet to 54.00
feet.
13+92.10 to 14+50.00 54.00 feet parallel with the centerline along
an arc with a 5,675.58 font radius, concave
Southeasterly, with a central angle of
0434'42", the long chord of which bears
North 50°08'07" i-cast, a distance of 57.29
feet, and arc distance of 57.29 feet
Page 14-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
Excepting therefrom, all that portion of said parcel lying within the existing right-of-way
of Hoones Ferry Road.
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 1,969 square feet, more or
less.
•R0+
.#!C, N
Aiv li, isc2
JACK 2 5U.LI
EXP 'ES: 12/31/20/7
Page 15—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
-
/' Z
/f
r r �+
V
/ [ S ��k •41\
Vgyp ��' I►X+
/ 4 tir43,, 4114111111011 ellipl' . 4, R2
�5 EXISTING 0
, a RIGHT-DF-WAY w
LINEr. �0`,152.,-;.,..
�v J0
',, TP' PARCEL 1
0 RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION
AREA 1,969 54. FT. k
.41111111
,, `41'<4r
- f FILE NUMBER: 55
1`x‹ OYIHER: NIIKTIF, LCC, AN OREGON
/ -% 0 LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
ADDRESS: 16556 BOONES FERRY ROAD
DEED DOC_ NO. 2015-008616
8469.06 =431.Cti iTs, R-3675.58'
L=15.95 :.f ■62.46' •57.29'
X0228'3#' 1w:1621'25" b,0034'42"
CH1=N5d35'23 CFI=N53'3. Sri CH•0501U447`E
15.45 62.61' 57,28'
SCALE 4
30 0 15 30 N
LEGEND
FEET 1 INCH - 30 FT. r-- , RIGNT-OF-WAY DEDICATION (PARCEL I) 1,9E9 Sq. FT.
FILE 1'1O.: OS& SLIBMrn-AL BATE a3,28f2017 111 aTifi
BOOKS FERRY RD I1] ��1.
TAX LOT: 02304 (Oakridge Rd l Reese Rd-Madrona St) REvISED DATE _
wrMWMM1701
_TM MAP: 2 1 E 47DD REVISED DATE 460141.14
A DCRESS:1865E 604HE6 FERRY RD I LAXE O8WEGO WORK ORDER NO.183 _I REVISED DATE: DWG:ooanc v.n6SPNLIAM (
Page 16—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
Boones Ferry Rd Lake Oswego Work Order No.: 183
(Oakridge Rd/Reese Rd-Madrona Street) File No.: 056
March 28,2017 Assessors Map: 2 1 E 070D
Parcel 1 Tax Lot No.: 02300
PARCEL 1 (TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT)
A parcel of land Iying in the Southeast quarter of Section 7, Township 2 South, Range 1
East of the Willamette Meridian, Clackamas County, Oregon, and being a portion of that
tract of land conveyed to NIKTIF, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company by Statutory
Warranty Deed recorded February 19, 2015 in Document No. 2015-008616, Clackamas
County Official Records, said parcel also being all that portion lying Northwesterly of the
line delineated by following the below noted stations and offsets, Southeasterly of the
centerline of Boones Ferry Road, as said centerline is described below.
BOOKIES FERRY ROAD CENTERLINE
A road centerline situated in the Southeast one-quarter of Section 7, and in the Southwest
one-quarter of Section 8, and the Northwest one-quarter of Section 8, all within Township
2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in the City of Lake Oswego, Clackamas
County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at Boones Ferry Road Centerline Station 10+00 per Record of Survey number
2013-083 as recorded in the Clackamas County Survey Records, Thence from said point of
beginning North 47°36'13"East, a distance of 167.89 feet to Station 11+67.89 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 03°06'00" (the long chord bears North 49°09'13" East, 309.96 feet)
310.00 feet to Station 14+77.89 at a point of tangency; Thence North 50'42'13" East,
637.07 feet to Station 21+14.96 ata point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58
foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 02°36'00" (the long chord bears
North 49°24'13"East, 259,98 feet) 260.00 feet to Station 23+74.96 at a point of tangency;
Thence North 48'06'13" East, 85.00 feet to Station 24+59.95 at a point of curvature;
Thence along the arc of a 1145.91 foot radius curve to the right,through a central angle of
10°31'00" (the long chord bears North 53°21'43" East, 210.04 feet) 210.33 feet to Station
26+70.29 at a point of tangency; Thence North 58'37'13" East, 768.60 feet to Station
34+38,88 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716.20 foot radius curve to the
left, through a central angle of 151'25'30" (the long chord bears North 50°54'28" East,
192.23 feet) 192.81 feet to Station 36+31.70 at a point of tangency; Thence North
43°11'43'° East, 516,51 feet to Station 41+48.21 at a point of curvature; Thence along the
arc of a 954.93 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 12'42'30" (the long
chord bears North 36°50'28"East, 211.37 feet) 211.81 feet to Station 43+60.02 at a point
of tangency; Thence North 30'29'13" East, 279.39 feet to Station 46+39.41 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716.20 foot radius curve to the
Page 17—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
Lefty through a central angle of 18'22'30" (the long chord bears North 21'17'58" East,
228.71 feet) 229.69 feet to Station 48+69.10 at a point of tangency; Thence North
12°06'43" East 511.40 feet to Station 53+80.49 at a point of curvature; Thence along the
arc of a 1432.39 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of 11'20'33" (the
long chord bears North 17°46159" East, 283.10 feet) 283.56 feet to Station 56+64.05 at a
point of compound curvature; Thence along the arc of a 3819.72 foot radius curve to the
right, through a central angle of 0734'57" (the long chord bears North 27°14'44" East,
505.13) 505.50 feet to Station 61+69.55 at a point of tangency; Thence North 31°02'12"
Fast 104.47 feet to Station 62+74.03 at the point of termination.
Centerline stationing and Basis of Bearings are determined by holding a station of
10+00.00 at a 3/4" iron pipe at the Centerline of Baones Ferry Road as per survey number
2013-083,Clackamas County Survey Records.
Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
13+10,00 to 14+50.00 61.56 feet along a straight line to 63.93 feet
Excepting therefrom, all that portion of said parcel lying within the existing right-of-way
of Bo ones Ferry Road.
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 1,340 square feet, more or
less.
.
GISTER i
CI
Vi 111
I
ç.;,,
21, ,887
C°I BUTLER
554
EXF E S: 12/31/2017
Page 18—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
,2.
•
-07°�
I�
i
f7 Cy
b
� '��
\. . '
�;
RIG
RUCTION EASEMENT 1
, . . ±
r ��4. FILE NUMBER: 56
r OMER: NIISTIF, LOC, AN OREGON
.619 LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
ADDRESS: 16556 BONESFERRY ROAD
DEED DOC. ND. 2015-008616
SCALE 4
30 0 15 30
ii 1 LEGEND
( FEET ) •
1 INCH = 30 FT- F•.,7-• 1 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT (PARCEL 1) 1,340 S0. FTS±
FILE NO.: 096 BOONES FERRY RD SUBMITTAL DATE: Q '23i2O17 • WRI Ufi
TAX LOT: 1I23Ur (Oakridge Rd I Reese Rd-Madrona SI) REVISED DATE:
'TAM MAP, 2 1 E OIOD REVISED DATE: m-... '°•m°'
I ADORES&MIBa EOONES FERRY RD LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER NO.1B3 IEVEVISD DATE: jI DWG:w>a1w erceowo
Page 19—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
Boones Ferry Rd Lake Oswego Work Order No.: 183
(Oakridge Rd/Reese Rd -Madrona Street) File No,: 054
March 28, 2017 Assessors Map: 2 1 E 07DD
Parcel I Tax Lot No.: 02400
PARCEL 1 (RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION)
A parcel of land lying in the Southeast quarter of Section 7, Township 2 South, Range 1
East of the Willamette Meridian, Clackamas County, Oregon, and being a portion of that
tract of land conveyed to NIKTIF LLC, an Oregon Limited Liability Company successor
by merger to (and which acquired title as) MKTM2, LLC, an Oregon limited liability
company by Statutory Special Warranty Deed recorded October 3, 2013 in Document No.
2013-069230, Clackamas County Official Records, said parcel also being all that portion
lying Northwesterly of the line delineated by following the below noted stations and
offsets, Southeasterly of the centerline of Boones Ferry Road, as said centerline is
described below.
BOONES FERRY RQAD CENTERLINE
A road centerline situated in the Southeast one-quarter of Section 7, and in the Southwest
one-quarter of Section 8, and the Northwest one-quarter of Section 8, all within Township
2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in the City of Lake Oswego, Clackamas
County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at Boones Ferry Road Centerline Station 10+00 per Record of Survey number
2413-083 as recorded in the Clackamas County Survey Records. Thence from said point of
beginning North 47°36'13" East, a distance of 167.89 feet to Station 11+67.89 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 03°06'00" (the long chord bears North 49°09'13" East, 309.96 feet)
310.00 feet to Station 14+77.89 at a point of tangency; Thence North 5F42'13" East,
637.07 feet to Station 21+14.96 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58
foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 02'36'00" (the long chord bears
North 49°24'13" East, 259.98 feet) 260.00 feet to Station 23+74.96 at a point of tangency;
Thence North 48°06'13" East, 85.00 feet to Station 24+59.95 at a point of curvature;
Thence along the arc of a 1145.91 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of
10°31'00" (the long chord bears North 53°21'43" East, 210.04 feet) 210.33 feet to Station
26+70.29 at a point of tangency; Thence North 58°37'13" East, 768.60 feet to Station
34+38.88 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716.20 foot radius curve to the
left, through a central angle of 15°25'30" (the long chord bears North 50°54'28" East,
192.23 feet) 192.81 feet to Station 36+3 L70 at a point of tangency; Thence North
43'11'43" East, 516.51 feet to Station 41+48.21 at a point of curvature; Thence along the
arc of a 954.93 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 12°42'30" (the long
chord bears North 36°50'28" East, 211.37 feet) 211.81 feet to Station 43+60.02 at a point
Page 20—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
of tangency; Thence North 30'29'13" East, 279.39 feet to Station 46+39,41 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716.20 foot radius curve to the left, through a central
angle of I8°22'30"(the long chord bears North 21°17'58"East, 228.71 feet)229.69 feet to
Station 48+69.10 at a point of tangency; Thence North 12°06'43" East 511.40 feet to
Station 53+80.49 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 1432,39 foot radius
curve to the right, through a central angle of 11°20'33" (the long chord bears North
17°46'59" East, 283.10 feet) 283.56 feet to Station 56+64.05 at a point of compound
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 3819.72 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 07°34'57" (the long chord bears North 27°14'44" East, 505.13) 505.50
feet to Station 61+69.55 at a point of tangency; Thence North 31'02'12" East 104.47 feet
to Station 62+74.03 at the point of termination.
Centerline stationing and Basis of Bearings are determined by holding a station of
10+00,00 at a 3/4" iron pipe at the Centerline of Boones Ferry Road as per survey number
2013-083, Clackamas County Survey Records.
Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
14+44.00 to 15+39.27 54.00 feet parallel with the centerline
15+39.27 to 15+53.74 54.00 feet along a straight line to 60.61 feet
15+53.74 to 15+54.25 60,61 feet along a straight Iine to 65.28 feet
15+54.25 to i 5+63.73 65.28 feet along a straight line to 66.52 feet
15+63.73 to 15+65.88 66.52 feet along a straight line to 50.00 feet
15+65.88 to 15+82.00 50.00 feet parallel with the centerline
Excepting therefrom, all that portion of said parcel lying within the existing right-of-way
of Boones Ferry Road.
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 1,781 square feet, more or
Tess.
1EG151�`'ER
OF
l I 1 A/
.,,�4 ` • !+ rr R
alh
DtAIA-,L....N- I
JJLY 29, 19U2
JACt4 BUTLER
2550
E S: 1 2/312017
Page 21-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
0 6b'
T.
lo.X ,A yr 4 a. cam.
EXISTING .9t . r:x
..
RIGiiT-OF-WAY 5... rc. :r 10x S
LINE r x x a. 1' P
fig .i'k
Lx0
.4111111111111107 I
4111,4111111111111P PARCEL 1
RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION
AREA 1,161 SO. FT. ±
'rn
s.
.... . FILE NUMBER: 54
rc. OWNER: NIKTIF LLC, AN OREGON LIMITED 1
ri? LIABILITY COMPANY SUCCESSOR BY MERGER
cb
• TO (AND WHICH AQUIRE0 TITLE AS) WaTid2,
LCC, AN OREGON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
ADDRESS: 16524 BOCINES FERRY ROAD
1 DEED DOC. NO. 2013-069230
1
SCALE 4
30 0 15 30
I LEGEND
( FEET )
1 INCH = 30 FT, 1-----..1 RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION (PARCEL 1) 1,781 SQ. FT. ±
FILE NO.: 054 BOONES FERRY RD 'SUBMITTAL DATE o3r2ar2o17 T Hpa lil.
TAX LOT: 02400 (paridge Rd 1%Ins Rd-Madrona St) REVISED DATE:
m..WiYr.II. M.
hi ii,
I.
2 1 E 0700 REVISED DATE e __.._- _
ADDRESS:19624 BOONES FERRY RD LAKE 0SWECa0 WORK OMER NC_1193 REVISED DATE: JI INia nuag waseti*n1+a
Page 22—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
Boones Ferry Rd Lake Oswego Work Order No.: 183
(Oakridge RdiReese Rd- Madrona Street) File No. 054
March 28, 2017 Assessors Map: 2 1 E 07DD
Parcel 1 Tax Lot No.; 02400
PARCEL 1 (TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT)
A parcel of land lying in the Southeast quarter of Section 7, Township 2 South, Range 1
East of the Willamette Meridian, Clackamas County, Oregon, and being a portion of that
tract of land conveyed to NIKTIF LLC an Oregon Limited Liability Company successor
by merger to (and which acquired title as) MKTM2, LLC, an Oregon limited Iiability
company by Statutory Special Warranty Deed recorded October 3, 2013 in Document No.
2013-069230, Clackamas County Official Records, said parcel also being all that portion
lying Northwesterly of the line delineated by following the below noted stations and.
offsets, Southeasterly of the centerline of Boones Ferry Road, as said centerline is
described below.
SCONES FERRY ROAD CENTERLINE
A road centerline situated in the Southeast one-quarter of Section 7, and in the Southwest
one-quarter of Section 8, and the Northwest one-quarter of Section 8, all within Township
2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in the City of Lake Oswego, Clackamas
County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at Boones Ferry Road Centerline Station 10+00 per Record of Survey number
2013-083 as recorded in the Clackamas County Survey Records. Thence from said point of
beginning North 4796'13''East, a distance of 167.89 feet to Station 11+67.89 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 03°06'00" (the long chord bears North 49°09'13" East, 309.96 feet)
310.00 feet to Station 14+77.89 at a point of tangency; Thence North 50'42'13" East,
637.07 feet to Station 21+14.96 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58
foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 02°36'00" (the long chord bears
North 49°24'13" East, 259.98 feet) 260.00 feet to Station 23+74.96 at a point of tangency;
Thence North 48°0 '13" East, 85.00 feet to Station 24+59.95 at a point of curvature;
Thence along the arc of a 1145.91 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of
1031'00" (the long chord bears North 53°21'43" East, 210.04 feet) 210.33 feet to Station
26+70.29 at a point of tangency; Thence North 58'37'13" East, 768.60 feet to Station
34+38.88 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716,20 foot radius curve to the
left, through a central angle of 1525'30" (the long chord bears North 5054'28" East,
192.23 feet) 192.81 feet to Station 36+31.70 at a point of tangency; Thence North
43'11'43" East, 516.51 feet to Station 41+48.21 at a point of curvature; Thence along the
arc of a 954.93 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 12¢42'30"(the tong
chord bears North 36°50'2.8" East, 211.37 feet) 211,81 feet to Station 43+60,02 at a point
Page 23—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
of tangency; Thence North 30'29'13" East, 279.39 feet to Station 46+39.41 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716.20 foot radius curve to the left, through a central
angle of 1822'30"(the long chord bears North 21°17'58" East, 228.71 feet) 229.69 feet to
Station 48+69.10 at a point of tangency; Thence North 1206'43'° East 511,40 feet to
Station 53+80.49 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 1432.39 foot radius
curve to the right, tl rough a central angle of 11020'33" (the long chord bears North
17°46'59" East, 283.10 feet) 283.56 feet to Station 56+64,05 at a point of compound
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 3819.72 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 07°34'57" (the Iong chord bears North 27°14'44" East, 505.13) 505.50
feet to Station 61+69.55 at a point of tangency; Thence North 311'02'12" East 104.47 feet
to Station 62+74.03 at the point of termination.
Centerline stationing and Basis of Bearings are determined by holding a station of
10+00.00 at a 3/4" iron pipe at the Centerline of Boones Ferry Road as per survey number
2013-083,Clackamas County Survey Records.
Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
14+40.00 to 15+49.33 63.$7 feet along a straight line to 64.00 feet
15+49.33 to 15+83.00 94.00 feet parallel with the centerline
Excepting therefrom, all that portion of said parcel lying within the existing right-of-way
of Boozes Ferry Road.
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 2,067 square feet, more or
less,
FiEGr5TE+ E
+•4 .. .IO's '
L' II S ,R ll' i
iglI PIRA
J11 198E
,.1 OK 5 t.)TLER
EX R . 12/31/201 7
Page 24—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
/
/
/
`� /f
' 4 0 •
• ,r,' A` v°' .
' •: 0
RIGHT—OFEIS—WAYDNG .` -• ..
A�- a LINE
........,N,..,-.-.-.-.".
.
to Jam ' fir. '%i
---- -- PARCEL 1
TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT
AREA 2.067 SQ. FT, f
•
f FILE NUMBER; 54
x� OWNER: NIHTIF LLC, AN OREGON LIMFIED
o� LIABIUTY COMPANY SUCCESSOR BY MERGER
(AND WHICH AQUIREO TIRE AS) MKTM2, ICC,
AN OREGON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
ADDRESS: 16524 BOONES FERRY ROAD
DEED DOC. NO. 2013-069230
SCALE 4
30 0 15 30
( FEET ) I LLEGEND
1 INCH = 30 FT. F...-.••.1 TEMPORARY COMSTRUCTrON EASEMENT(PARCEL 1) 2,067 SQ. FT. t
FILE NO,:: 054 DOC/NES FERRY RD I sLIBMITTALDATE. 0er23(I7 IH iii
TAX LOT: 02490 (Oakridge.Rd 1 Reese Rd-Madrona St) REVISED CATE: a41t
TAX MAP. 21 E 071313I REVISED DATE swila.m.ki..-3...}
ADDRESS:19624 BOONES FERRY RD Ii_ LAKE osvvEGo WORK ORDER NO.182 i REVISED DATA DWG.amairNFXSIrcEUWG
Page 25—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
EXHIBIT H
Boones Ferry Rd Lake Oswego Work Order No.: 183
(Oakridge Rd/Reese Rd- Madrona Street) File No.: 053
March 28,2017 Assessors Map: 2 1 E 07DD
Parcel 1 Tax Lot No.: 02500
PARCEL 1 (RIGHT-OF--WAY DEDICATION
A parcel of land lying in the Southeast quarter of Section 7, Township 2 South, Range 1
East of the Willamette Meridian, Clackamas County, Oregon, and being a portion of that
tract of land conveyed to MKTM, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company by Statutory
Bargain and Sale Deed recorded August 1, 2006 in Document No. 2006-070669 and by
Statutory Warranty Deed recorded November 8, 2007 in Document 2007-095556,
Clackamas County Official Records, said parcel also being all that portion lying
Northwesterly of the line delineated by following the below noted stations and offsets,
Southeasterly of the centerline of Boones Ferry Road, as said centerline is described
below.
BOOKIES FERRY ROAD CENTERLINE
A road centerline situated in the Southeast one-quarter of Section 7, and in the Southwest
one-quarter of Section 8, and the Northwest one-quarter of Section 8, all within Township
2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in the City of Lake Oswego, Clackamas
County, Oregon, being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at Boones Ferry Road Centerline Station 10+00 per Record of Survey number
2013-083 as recorded in the Clackamas County Survey Records. Thence from said point of
beginning North 4736'13" East, a distance of 167.89 feet to Station 11+67.89 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729,58 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central' angle of 03406'00" (the long chord bears North 49"09'13" East, 309.96 feet)
310.00 feet to Station 14+77.89 at a point of tangency; Thence North 50'42'13" East,
637.07 feet to Station 21+14.96 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58
foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 02°36'00" (the long chord bears
North 49'24'13"East, 259.98 feet) 260.00 feet to Station 23+74,96 at a point of tangency;
Thence North 48°06'13" East, 85.00 feet to Station 24+59.95 at a point of curvature;
Thence along the arc of a 1145.91 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of
10°31'00" (the long chord bears North 53°21'43" East, 210.04 feet) 210.33 feet to Station
26+70.29 at a point of tangency; Thence North 58'37'13" East, 768.60 feet to Station
34+38.88 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716.20 foot radius curve to the
left, through a central angle of 15°25'30" (the long chord bears North 50°54'28" East,
192.23 feet) 192.81 feet to Station 36+31.70 at a point of tangency; Thence North
43°11'43" East, 516.51 feet to Station 41+48.21 at a point of curvature; Thence along the
arc of a 954.93 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 12°42'30"(the long
chord bears North 36°50'28" East, 211.37 feet) 211.81 feet to Station 43+60.02 at a point
Page 26—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
of tangency; Thence North 30°29'13°' East, 279.39 feet to Station 46+39.41 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716.20 foot radius curve to the left, through a central
angIe of 18022'30"(the long chord bears North 21'17'58" East, 228.71 feet) 229.69 feet to
Station 48+69.10 at a point of tangency; Thence North 12°06'43" Fast 511,40 feet to
Station 53+80.49 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 1432.39 foot radius
curve to the right, through a central angle of 11020'33" (the long chord bears North
17946'59" East, 283.10 feet) 283.56 feet to Station 56+64,05 at a point of compound
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 3819.72 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 07°34'57" (the long chord bears North 27°14'44" East, 505.13) 505,50
feet to Station 61+69.55 at a point of tangency; Thence North 31'02'12" East 104.47 feet
to Station 62+74.03 at the point of termination.
Centerline stationing and Basis of Bearings are determined by holding a station of
10+00.00 at a 3/4"iron pipe at the Centerline of Boones Ferry Road as per survey number
2013-083,Clackamas County Survey Records.
Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
I5+79.00 to 15+99.88 50.00 feet parallel with the centerline
15199.8E to 16+09.80 63.42 feet along a straight line to 64.70 feet
16+09.80 to 16+1 1.27 64.70 feet along a straight line to 60.64 feet
16+11.27 to 16+33.13 60.64 feet along a straight line to 56.00 feet
16+33.13 to 16+91..29 56.00 feet parallel with the centerline
16+91.29 to 17+01.82 56.00 feet to an arc with a 20.00 foot radius,
concave Northwesterly, with a central angle
of 31947'18', the long chord of which bears
North 34°48'34"East,a chord length of 10.95
feet, and an arc distance of 11.10 feet, to
53.00 feet
17+01.82 to 17+17.00 53.00 feet to an arc with a 20.00 foot radius,
concave Southeasterly, with a central angle of
45°12'59", the long chord of which bears
North 4131'24" East, a chord length of 15.38
feet, and an arc distance of 15.78 feet, to
50.54 feet
Page 27-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
Excepting therefrom, all that portion of said parcel lying within the existing right-of-way
of Boones Ferry Road,
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 2,]92 square feet, more or
less.
t2EG15'a
PR r. ! L
OND 1',,` R
l IP
2ory
Zi
JAC A BUTLER
2550
IRES; 12/3t/2017
Page 28—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
• .
•
ti�x
42 I
4
! .„) , ..
: (i, <z' `b' 4 4
(C<C EXISTING k�j
I ,,
j RIGHT—OF—WAY1111”.",i. . '
LINE '{
tik s 0s, 0
CV 1
'°O • ---6 r, PARCEL 1
Li? { � RIGHT—OF—WAY DEDICATION
r dr 'F`e`• •'. AREA 2,192 SQ. FT.
‘-..i.- R•20_06 1
lir 4.: .1 " 6( } L=11,10'
j d`( }, X31'47'1r
} `fixc. ,j CH=N34'4B'34"E
`x% 1095
1 40, FIEF Nr,1,tg8E Z R=21},01)'
115552 "4 LLC t4,512'5g.'
CH=H4-131'24'E
NO 2 09,E Ria 1536'
SCALE 4
30 0 15 30
1w11 1 LEGEND
( FEET )
1 INCH = 30 FT, RIGHT—OF—WAY DEDICA11aN (PARCEL 1) 2,192 SQ. FT. f
JlFILENO.: UE 1BpQNES FERRY RD suR�Trr LbATe -Et/2112017 rillll
TAX LOT, 4251 J (Oakridge Rd I Reese Rd-Madrona 5t} Revised DALE
TAX!AAP: 21 E MDPcrmaLigriLY
..11....”......,.....7,
�" a
'ADDRESS;15552 @OONI=S FERRY ELI LAKE OSWEGO WORK ORDER ND.1E13 REVISED DATE DING: TWYA roWc
Page 29-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
Boones Ferry Rd Lake Oswego Work Order No.: 183
(Oakridge Rd/Reese Rd -Madrona Street) File No.: 053
March 28, 2017 Assessors Map: 2 1 E 07DD
Parcel 1 Tax Lot No.: 02500
PARCEL 1 (TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT)
A. parcel of land lying in the Southeast quarter of Section 7, Township 2 South, Range I
East of the Willamette Meridian, Clackamas County, Oregon, and being a portion of that
tract of land conveyed to MKTM, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company by Statutory
Bargain and Sale Deed recorded August 1, 2006 in Document No. 2006-070669 and by
Statutory Warranty Deed recorded November 8, 2007 in Document 2007-095556,
Clackamas County Official Records, said parcel also being all that portion lying
Northwesterly of the Iine delineated by following the below noted stations and offsets,
Southeasterly of the centerline of Boones Ferry Road, as said centerline is described
below.
BOONES FERRY ROAD CENTERLINE
A road centerline situated in the Southeast one-quarter of Section 7, and in the Southwest
one-quarter of Section 8, and the Northwest one.quarter of Section 8, all within Township
2 South, Range 1 East of the Willamette Meridian in the City of Lake Oswego, Clackamas
County, Oregon,being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at Boones Ferry Road Centerline Station 10+00 per Record of Survey number
2013-083 as recorded in the Clackamas County Survey Records. Thence from said point of
beginning North 47836'13"East,a distance of 167.89 feet to Station 11+67.89 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 03'06'00" (the long chord bears North 49'09'13" East, 309.96 feet)
310.00 feet to Station 14+77.89 at a point of tangency; Thence North 50'42'13" East,
637.07 feet to Station 21+14,96 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 5729.58
foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 02°36'00" (the long chord bears
North 49°24'13" East, 259.98 feet) 260.00 feet to Station 23+74,96 at a point of tangency;
Thence North 48'06'13" East, 85.00 feet to Station 24+59.95 at a point of curvature;
Thence along the arc of a 114191 foot radius curve to the right, through a central angle of
10°31'00" (the Iong chord bears North 53821'43" East, 210.04 feet) 210.33 feet to Station
26+70.29 at a point of tangency; Thence North 58437'13" East, 768,60 feet to Station
34+38.88 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716,20 foot radius curve to the
left, through a central angle of 15°25'30" (the long chord bears North 50°54'28" East,
192.23 feet) 192.81 feet to Station 36+31.70 at a point of tangency; Thence North
43'11'43" East, 516.51 feet to Station 41+48.21 at a point of curvature; Thence along the
arc of a 954.93 foot radius curve to the left, through a central angle of 12°42'30" (the long
chord bears North 36°50'28" East, 211.37 feet) 211.81 feet to Station 43+60.02 at a point
Page 30—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
of tangency; Thence North 30'29'13" East, 279,39 feet to Station 46+39.41 at a point of
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 716.20 foot radius curve to the left, through a central
angle of 18°22'30"(the long chord bears North 21'17'58"East,228.71 feet) 229.69 feet to
Station 48+69.10 at a point of tangency; Thence North 12°06'43" East 511.40 feet to
Station 53+80.49 at a point of curvature; Thence along the arc of a 1432.39 foot radius
curve to the right, through a central angle of 11°20'33" (the long chord bears North
17°46'59" East, 2.83.10 feet) 283.56 feet to Station 56+64.05 at a point of compound
curvature; Thence along the arc of a 3819,72 foot radius curve to the right, through a
central angle of 07°34'57" (the long chord bears North 27°14'44°" East, 505.13) 505.50
feet to Station 61+69.55 at a point of tangency; Thence North 31'0212"12" East 104.47 feet
to Station 62+74.03 at the point of termination,
Centerline stationing and Basis of Bearings are determined by holding a station of
10+00.00 at a 3/4" iron pipe at the Centerline of Boones Ferry Road as per survey number
2013-083,Clackamas County Survey Records.
Offset Distances Southeasterly of
Station to Station Boones Ferry Road Centerline
15+73.00 to 16+14.80 94.00 feet parallel with the centerline
16+14.80 to 17+17.00 66.00 feet parallel with the centerline
Excepting therefrom, all that portion of said parcel lying within the existing right-of-way
of Boones Ferry Road.
The parcel of land to which this description applies contains 2,399 square feet, more or
less.
REGISTERED
PROFESTe
Lo-ADs
./f/1/1 'Or I/
LY 2. 1sgz.
A I<. 2A 550 BUTLER
/
XP ES; 12/31/2017
Page 31—ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
I
❑ 27- r
<cC EXISTING _
FS RIGHT-CF-WA?LINE x
4004.
s
. a, . PARCEL
TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION
6,.. 40'o. EASE6IENT
.S, AREA 2,399 5Q. FT, ±
),
FILE
MAISER
OUREss 5 , Cp
CON �
DCROAD
- 4a -42- 095556
-
1
'66. I
r
SCALE 4
30InnnI15 30 N
E-r I LEGEND
I INCH = 30 FT. 1==iTEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT (PARCEL 1) 2,399 SQ FT. ±
FILE NO.; 459 BOONES FERRY RD I SUBMITTAL DATE: 03128l2a1T I WT1P
TAX LOT: a¢as (Claridge Rd f Reese Rd-Madrona St) I REVISED DATE: Y1 Il
TAX MAP. 21E47D6 +REVI5EL DATE: I .,':;: ;
,a:".::'-
ADDRESS:18662 BOOMES FERRY Mali LAKE ammo WORK GIRDER NO.183 f REVISED DATE: ii DWG: oame74,DMITC E
Page 32-ANNEXATION AGREEMENT
16.1
Dj'p` 424� COUNCIL REPORT
r TIO
r o
0Rd�
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Corinne Strauser, Deputy City Recorder
SUBJECT: Resolution 17-47 - Youth Members to Advisory Boards Appointments
DATE: August 28, 2017
ACTION
Adopt Resolution 17-47, approving appointments of Youth Members to Advisory Boards.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Adopt Resolution 17-47
BACKGROUND
The City Council Interview Committee consisting of Councilors Manz and Gudman met on
August 24, 2017 and August 25, 2017, to interview candidates for youth members on Advisory
Boards.
It was the consensus of the Interview Committee to recommend the re-appointment of Karthik
Sreedhar to the Sustainability Advisory Board, the appointments of Sabrina Safari to the Parks,
Recreation and Natural Resources Advisory Board, Michael Murray to the Transportation
Advisory Board and Caleb Bryan to the Historic Resources Advisory Board. Mayor Studebaker
concurred with the recommendations of the Interview Committee and has made the
appointments.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution 17-47.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 17-47
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION 17-47
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCILORS OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO APPROVING
APPOINTMENTS OF YOUTH MEMBERS TO ADVISORY BOARDS
WHEREAS, a City Council Interview Committee consisting of Councilors Gudman and
Manz met on August 24, 2017 and August 25, 2017 to interview candidates for the
youth members on the Advisory Boards; and
WHEREAS, it was the consensus of the Interview Committee to recommended that
Karthik Sreedhar be re-appointed to the Sustainability Advisory Board; that Sabrina
Safari be appointed to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Advisory Board; that
Michael Murray be appointed to the Transportation Advisory Board; that Caleb Bryan be
appointed to the Historic Resources Advisory Board; and all with terms expiring on
August 31, 2018; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor has made the appointments recommended by the Interview
Committee;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
approves the re-appointment of Karthik Sreedhar to the Sustainability Advisory Board;
the appointment of Sabrina Safari to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources
Advisory Board; Michael Murray to the Transportation Advisory Board; and Caleb Bryan
to the Historic Resources Advisory Board; all for one-year terms expiring August 31,
2018.
This resolution shall take effect upon passage.
Considered and enacted by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego at a regular
meeting held on the 5th day of September 2017.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Kent Studebaker, Mayor
ATTEST:
Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Powell, City Attorney
LAKE OSWEGO
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
rcr;
CITIZEN COMMENT
Date: ail Ce Subject: Le GU r
Name: IA ):71/1r11If
c
„t)
Address: 1-1 ,113 .4H
City/State/Zip: L (,2 a- ?
Phone:
Are you part of an Organized Presentation? Yes No
If yes, list speakers in order of presentation:
You will be called to the microphone at the appropriate time.
Submit this form to the City Recorder before or at the meeting
E0 LAKE OSWEGO
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
..aur
CITIZEN COMMENT
(3REGo
44. '
Date: 61 (4- I
Subject: tv--10-4/
Name: ,,lis-( ' 14
; n
Address: 1,-
r
City/State/Zip: ,
Phone:
Are you part of an Organized Presentation? Yes No
If yes, list speakers in order of presentation:
You will be called to the microphone at the appropriate time.
Submit this form to the City Recorder before or at the meeting
4 0 LAKE OSWEGO
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
10 o
CITIZEN COMMENT
OREGON
Date: 17 Subject: Dydoce/U_ 1� Ok5
Name: MAI du favts.u0A-b
Address: L1312. ojic.eLL' c_ ..40
City/State/Zip: t---0
Phone: S 0 3 - 3`f 3-575F
Are you part of an Organized Presentation? Yes_ No ,_
If yes, list speakers in order of presentation:
You will be called to the microphone at the appropriate time.
Submit this form to the City Recorder before or at the meeting
LAKE OSWEGO
�:.. CITY COUNCIL MEETING
V` � O
CITIZEN COMMENT
OREGON
Date: Subject: l772,@2/ vivilices�
Name: •hs by
/V7,07/-
Address:
2/i/1-Address: 17P S!1/ -45k-g( Z/
City/State/Zip: AiGhtiO /7"IgX9
Phone: .�1�—�/ �Q�� 4/-€.-1?
44.e
Are you part of an Organized Presentation? Yes_ No _
If yes, list speakers in order of presentation:
You will be called to the microphone at the appropriate time.
Submit this form to the City Recorder before or at the meeting
City Council
Meeting Time: 09-05-17 17:00
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting Agenda Comments Support Oppose Neutral
Time Items
City Council 09-05-17 59 1 0 0 0
17:00
Sentiments for All Meetings
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented
will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
▪ Support(4%)
•Oppose(4%)
▪ Neutral(4%)
No Response(100%)
City Council
09-05-17 17:00
Agenda Nam Comments Support Oppose Neutral
18.4 Botticelli Striping Update 1 0 0 0
Sentiments for All Agenda Items
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented
will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
▪ Support(0%)
•Oppose(0%)
▪ Neutral(D%)
No Response(100%)
Agenda Item: eComments for 18.4 Botticelli Striping Update
Overall Sentiment
▪ Support(9%y
•❑ppose(4%)
▪ Noutral(D%)
No Response{100%)
Ken Rust
Location:
Submitted At: 3:36pm 09-04-17
I live at 4318 Botticelli, since 2004. The street parking is the main overflow parking for our townhomes. Removing
it would decrease property value, ability to sell my house in the future, and limits ability to host family and friends.
A bike lane is not necessary, parking is.
Ken Rust
Ken Rust
18.1
D0s COUNCIL REPORT
442,
ri
o
OREOOY
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Crystal M. Shum, P.E.
Boones Ferry Road Project Manager
Engineering Department
SUBJECT: Council Award for Construction Management Services for WO 183-Boones Ferry
Road Improvements Project
DATE: August 17, 2017 MEETING DATE: September 5, 2017
ACTION/SUGGESTED MOTION
Award a personal services contract to Otak, Inc. to provide Pre-Construction Phase Construction
Management Services for the WO 183-Boones Ferry Road Improvements project for a not-to-
exceed amount of$152,212.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
After years of studies and design work, the Boones Ferry Road Improvements project is now
entering the preconstruction and construction phases. The project is approximately 0.8 miles in
length. Project limits begin just south of Madrona Street to just north of the Oakridge
Road/Reese Road intersection and includes the installation of a traffic signal at Lanewood
Street.
Due to the size and nature of this project, it is necessary to contract for construction
management services. The city issued a request for proposals for these services, and received
three proposals on July 26, 2017. A selection committee evaluated and scored the proposals
and determined that Otak, Inc. is the highest ranked qualified firm in which to offer
construction management services for both pre-construction and construction phases.
DISCUSSION
In 2008, after many years of work by community stakeholders, the Lake Grove Village Center
Plan was adopted by the City Council and incorporated into Comprehensive Plan (Vol. III). The
Plan defines and outlines implementation measures to achieve the community's vision for a
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeosweao.citv
Page 2
welcoming and comfortable community nucleus. The transformation of Boones Ferry Road to
address infrastructure and amenity deficiencies is a key element of the Plan.
During the design phase, this project was partially funded by an Oregon Department of
Transportation (ODOT) Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) grant. The STIP
grant included money from the federal government and as a result the city is required to
manage the construction project per ODOT's construction management requirements. Otak
Inc. has extensive experience with ODOT projects and understands what is required for
construction management administration, inspection, and closeout to meet the requirements.
Scope of Services
As mentioned above, there are two construction phases for this project: pre-construction
services and construction services.
Otak Inc. has prepared a detailed scope of work (Exhibit A) for the pre-construction phase.
Key tasks for the pre-construction phase:
• Constructability review and cost analysis
• Developing construction staging concepts
• Assisting in prequalifying contractors
These key tasks will help minimize the impacts of construction to businesses, citizens, and
traffic. Otak Inc. is committed to begin the pre-construction phase work as soon as the contract
is executed. The construction phase is scheduled to begin in summer 2018.
Once the project gets closer to construction, city staff will ask Council to award a contract to
Otak for construction services. Using a draft scope of work provided by ODOT, Otak, Inc. has
estimated that the cost of this two year phase of construction services will be between
$2,600,000 and $3,000,000. Deferring the contract for the construction phase will allow both
Otak Inc. and the city to use the final construction plans and staging plans to determine exactly
what tasks are necessary for this project. Thus, keeping the construction management costs to
a minimum.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Award a personal services contract to Otak, Inc. for Pre-Construction Management
Services for the agreed upon services for the not-to-exceed amount of$152,212. This is
the preferred alternative because the city will be contracting with a group familiar with
ODOT construction project requirements and they have the personnel to cover all
aspects of both the pre-construction and construction phases of the project.
2. Reject the proposal and reissue the RFP for Construction Management Services. This
alternative would delay the project and would increase costs. After going through a
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Page 3
thorough competitive process, it has been determined that Otak, Inc. is the highest
qualified firm.
FISCAL IMPACT
This project is identified as a funded project in the FY2017/18-2022/23 Capital Improvement
Plan and is included in the adopted city budget for FY2017-18. The costs for the pre-
construction management services are included in the project's budget.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager to award a personal services contract to Otak, Inc. to provide Pre-
Construction Phase Construction Management Services for WO 183-Boones Ferry Road
Improvements project for a not-to-exceed amount of$152,212.
ATTACHMENT
Exhibit A—Scope of Work, Pre-Construction Phase Construction Management Services
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Exhibit A
Scope of Work
Boones Ferry Road Improvements Project, Phase I
Pre-Construction Phase Construction Management Services
August 16, 2017
Dear Ms. Shum:
Thank you for selecting Otak to provide Pre-Construction and Construction Phase Services for the
Boones Ferry Road Improvements Project,Phase 1. I have prepared this scope of work and fee
proposal for the Pre-Construction Phase Services to describe our understanding of the City's needs,
our approach, and a proposed scope of work and budget.
Each task has a defined scope of work, a budget, and deliverables. The total not-to-exceed budget
for this phase of the project is $151,212.
A. Project Description and Overview of Services
The City of Lake Oswego (City) is contracting with Otak,Inc. (Consultant) for Services in
connection with the Boones Ferry Road Improvements Project,Phase 1.
This Project is divided into two phases:
• Phase 1 —Pre-Construction Phase Services
• Phase 2—Construction Phase Services
This scope of work (SOW) addresses Phase 1 of the Project (Pre-Construction Phase Services), and
is for project management,Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) review, staging, schedule and
estimate review and development, contractor prequalification, and bid assistance.
Phase I—Pre-Construction Phase Services
Task 1—Project Management & Coordination
Consultant will provide overall direction and coordination of Project team members, and coordinate
project issues with the City. Tasks will include:
• Lead Consultant project team and coordinate with subconsultant
• Coordinate with Design Team and City
• Coordinate with City and ODOT, as needed,leading up to Construction Phase
• Submit monthly invoices and progress reports
L:\Project\18400\18401\Contract\BFR SOW 08.16.17.docx
Scope of Work
Continued
Deliverables and Schedule:
• Monthly invoices with progress reports (submitted to City monthly)
Task 2—Project Kickoff Meeting
Consultant will attend and participate in a kick-off meeting with the City and Design Team.
Consultant will provide City with list of topics to discuss at kickoff meeting to determine which City
and Design Team staff should attend. Tasks will include:
• Attend kickoff meeting with City and Design Team (prepare draft agenda in advance)
• Prepare action items resulting from meeting
Deliverables and Schedule:
• List of topics for discussion at kickoff meeting (to City at least two days prior to meeting)
• List of action items, questions, and comments based on meeting discussion (to City within five
days of meeting)
Task 3—Develop Project Manuals and Plans
Consultant will prepare project manuals and plans for review and approval by City. It is assumed
that due to ODOT involvement, the ODOT Construction Manual, Inspection Manual,Non-Field
and Field-Tested Materials Acceptance Guides, Contract Administration Guidelines, and Manual of
Field Test Procedures will be utilized to define general construction management and inspection
processes. Consultant will prepare a summary of these manuals and guides for City review. In
addition to these ODOT documents, Consultant will provide the following manuals and plans:
• Project Risk Register- Consultant will prepare draft risk register and schedule and participate
in a project risk identification discussion with City and members of the Project Design
Team. Consultant will keep project risk register updated throughout duration of Phase 1.
• Construction Management Staffing Plan—Consultant will utilize the ODOT Quality
Assurance / Construction Administration Plan (QA/CA Plan) form to identify Consultant
and City staff and their proposed roles for Phase 2 (Construction Phase Services).
Deliverables and Schedule:
• Draft project risk register (to City within one month after completion of the 95% PS&E review)
• ODOT QA/CA Plan (to City no later than one month prior to bid advertisement date)
• Summary of ODOT manuals and guides to be used to establish Phase 2 services (to City no later
than two months prior to bid advertisement date)
L:\Project\18400\18401\Contract\BFR SOW 08.16.17.docx
Scope of Work
Continued
Task 4—Progress Set Review
Consultant will review progress review set provided by Project Design Team. Purpose of this initial
review is to familiarize Consultant team with the project details in advance of the kickoff meeting.
Deliverables and Schedule:
• Consultant will provide comment/response log with general comments. Detailed comments
to be withheld until review of 95% (general comments to be formatted in table content and
brought to kickoff meeting for discussion).
Task 5—95%PS&E Review
Consultant will provide detailed review of the 95%PS&E documents prepared by the Project
Design Team. Tasks will include:
• Review 95%plans, specs, estimate for constructability and consistency
• Perform thorough review of construction estimate to advise City on budget status
• Review current construction schedule (if draft is available from Design Team)
• Review utility coordination documents
• Review ROW agreements,limits,Temporary Construction Easements (TCEs)
Deliverables and Schedule:
• Provide comment/response log with applicable comments (to City within four weeks of
receiving 95%PS&E documents)
Task 6—Staging, Schedule and Estimate Development
Consultant will utilize knowledge gathered during review of 95%PS&E documents to perform a
thorough staging, schedule and estimate analysis. Tasks will include:
• Develop staging concepts for review with City and Design Team
• Develop construction schedule and provide insight and guidance to develop interim
completion dates,work restrictions, and final completion date(s)
• Review project estimate and provide guidance for bid items,unit prices, etc
Deliverables and Schedule:
• Draft staging sketches and narrative explanation (to City within six weeks of receiving 95%
PS&E documents). This task assumes Project Design Team will perform drafting and plan
production of contract staging and traffic control plans.
L:\Project\18400\18401\Contract\BFR SOW 08.16.17.docx
Scope of Work
Continued
• Final staging sketches and narrative explanation (to City within two weeks of receiving
comments and feedback from draft submittal). This task assumes Project Design Team will
perform drafting and plan production of contract staging and traffic control plans.
• Draft construction schedule in MS Project or Primavera format (to City within six weeks of
receiving 95%PS&E documents).
• Final construction schedule in MS Project or Primavera format (to City within two weeks of
receiving comments and feedback from draft submittal).
• Review comments and suggestions based on estimate review and recommendations for
adjustments according to City budget (to City within six weeks of receiving 95%PS&E
documents)
Task 7—Develop Contractor Prequalification
Consultant will work with City to determine format and process for prime contractor and
subcontractor (if applicable) prequalification. Tasks will include:
• Develop format of prequalification (prime and subcontractors) and distribute to contractors
• Review prequalification submittals and recommend list of qualified contractors
Deliverables and Schedule:
• Prequalification document for City review (to City no later than three months prior to
project advertisement)
• Review comments and prequalification recommendation after reviewing contractor
prequalification submittals (to City within one week of receiving prequalification submittals)
Task 8—100%PS&E Review
Consultant will provide detailed review of the 100%PS&E documents prepared by the Project
Design Team. Tasks will include:
• Review 100%plans, specs, and estimate
• Provide comment/response log with applicable comments
Deliverables and Schedule:
• Provide comment/response log with applicable comments (to City within two weeks of
receiving 100%PS&E documents)
L:\Project\18400\18401\Contract\BFR SOW 08.16.17.docx
Scope of Work
Continued
Task 9—Advertisement and Bid Review
Consultant will assist City with advertising project to construction contractors and in all facets of bid
assistance,bid review,and bid award. Tasks will include:
• Assist City with posting bidding documents for contractors
• Assist at pre-bid meeting
• Assist with bid inquiries and questions as needed
• Assist with development of addenda and letters of clarification as needed
• Attend bid opening
• Perform review of contractor bids
• Provide recommendation to award and assist City with award of contract
Deliverables and Schedule:
• Responses to bid inquires and questions, and development of addenda and letters of
clarification,if requested by City (within one day of receiving request from City)
• Review of contractor bids (within one day of receiving bid tabulations from City)
• Recommendation to award (within one week of bid opening)
Task 10—Implement Document Management System (Contingency Task)
If authorized in writing by City, Consultant will provide services for this Contingency Task to
research, recommend, acquire and implement a Document Management System (DMS) for use
during Phase 2 (Construction Services Phase). Tasks include:
• Evaluate the applicability of a formal DMS
• If deemed appropriate,propose a minimum of two DMS for City review
• Procure DMS and implement with Consultant team
• Provide training to City and Project Design Team
Deliverables and Schedule:
• Recommendation of DMS alternatives (to City within two weeks of authorization of
Contingency Task)
• Procure DMS (within four weeks of authorization of Contingency Task)
• Project Team training (no later than one month prior to project advertisement)
L:\Project\18400\18401\Contract\BFR SOW 08.16.17.docx
Scope of Work
Continued
We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal and look forward to working with
you on this project. If you have any questions or need further information,please do not hesitate to
contact me directly.
Sincerely,
Otak,Incorporated
Ian Machan
Project Manager
L:\Project\18400\18401\Contract\BFR SOW 08.16.17.docx
18.2
E2 COUNCIL REPORT
row
o
PREGo\-
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Bruce Powers, Park Analyst/Project Manager
Parks& Recreation Department
SUBJECT: Woodmont Natural Park Concept Plan (Master Plan)
DATE: September 5th, 2017
ACTION
Review Conceptual Plan (Master Plan) for Woodmont Natural Park.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to adopt Resolution 17-34, adopting the Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
The City of Lake Oswego Parks & Recreation Department engaged Mackenzie (Consultant)to work with
Parks staff to develop a Master Plan for the 6.8-acre Woodmont Natural Park located in the Forest
Highlands neighborhood of Lake Oswego.The goals of the Master Plan process have been to create a
sustained treasure for the residents of Lake Oswego that honors the wishes of Mr. Meyer and responds
to the priorities of those who will be using it.
The work,to date, has built on Lake Oswego's long history of ensuring that its parks system meets the
needs of the community, and can be managed responsibly by the city. From the Lake Oswego Open
Space Plan, developed in 2001, to the 2004 Parks and Recreation Facilities Survey Analysis,to the Parks
Plan 2025 completed in 2012, much has been done to contribute to cultural, aesthetic, and natural
environmental enhancements throughout the City.
Woodmont Natural Park is located west of downtown and north of the golf course at the corner of
Atwater Lane and Knaus Road. Historically,the land was owned and farmed by the Meyer family who
allowed much of the site to revert from the once heavily farmed site to a natural state prior of its sale to
the City of Lake Oswego in September of 1997. As part of this sale the late Mr. Donald Meyer in
agreement with the City's Parks and Recreation Department made provisions to focus future
improvements to a more natural setting.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Page 2
With over two decades of stewardship the City's Parks and Recreation Department understands the
need to preserve the natural character of the site. Improvements are focused on the removal of invasive
plants, increased visibility and circulation, accessibility, preserving and enhancing the overall ecological
health of the property and enhancing view corridors
DISCUSSION
Previous planning efforts include the Parks 2025 initiative,which identified Woodmont Natural Park as a
key location for the development of a site master plan.The primary focus of this master plan is to
ensure that new and existing parks incorporate a variety of recreational needs for the community.The
master planning efforts employed to date allowed members of the community, stakeholders, public
advisory committee (PAC) and the City of Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation Department an
opportunity to voice their concerns as well as their support allowing Mackenzie, in conjunction with the
City,valuable feedback and direction in finalizing the Master Plan.
In keeping with this vision,the Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan has identified five focused
environments:flexible open spaces, natural open spaces, oak savanna, enhanced wetlands, and
enhanced forest. Clearly defined trails, mowed paths, and boardwalks provide access through the park
while maintaining a direct connection with nature.
Flexible Open Space: Provides for a variety of open recreational options with clear undeterred views of
the surrounding area.
Natural Open Space: Provide wildlife habitat with tall nesting grasses as the predominate plant type.
Oak Savanna:The oak savanna, and understory plant selection are slated to be reflective of regional
historic ecology and provide valuable habitat for wildlife.
Enhanced Wetlands:The Atwater Tributary runs east to west through the northern portion of the site.
Wetlands are enhanced through healthy plant selection and eradication of invasive plants.
Enhanced Forest: Improvements to wooded trail and along Atwater tributary for stabilization and
biodiversity.
Through broad community input and a clear decision-making process, the City of Lake Oswego Parks and
Recreation Department, Mackenzie, and the community have worked closely together to determine
what Woodmont Natural Park will become.
The framework for the current Master Planning efforts has been based in a combination of Public
Advisory Committee (PAC) meetings centered on neighborhood and city voices; public outreach
meetings where people can offer feedback, ask questions, and stay informed as the process evolves; and
online surveys to ensure that anyone who hasn't been able to attend in-person still has a substantive
opportunity to have their voices heard.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Page 3
The Public Advisory Committee approved the preferred alternative of the Master Plan and the Forest
Highlands Neighborhood Association Board voted unanimously to support the current plan and
development of the park during their August 5th, 2017 Board Meeting.
Public Outreach Process:
• February 2017 Onsite Site Analysis Information Gathering
• March 02, 2017 PAC Meeting#1: Site Analysis & Public Outreach Review
• March 20, 2017 Public Outreach Design Charrette#1
• March 23—April 07, 2017 Online Survey#1
• April 05, 2017 PAC Meeting#2: Design Charrette and Online Survey Review
• May 22, 2017 Public Outreach Design Charrette#2
• May 25—June 04, 2017 Online Survey#1
• June 07, 2017 PAC Meeting#3: Design Charrette &Online Survey#2 Review
• August 02, 2017 PAC Meeting#3: Master Plan Review
• August 28, 2017 Planning Commission: Presentation of Master Plan and Public Planning Process
• September 05, 2017 City Council: Presentation of Master Plan and Public Planning Process
• October 02, 2017 Public Outreach#3: Presentation of Approved Master Plan
• October 18, 2017 PAC#5: Public Outreach Review and Final Recommendations
• November 08, 2017 Neighborhood Meeting: Presentation of Approved Master Plan
• December 18, 2017: Final Master Plan Document Submission to City of Lake Oswego Parks and
Recreation
Attached are the Illustrative Conceptual Plans showing a site plan view of the proposed park, sections
through the Park, Image Board, and Master Plan Narrative Report describing the process and
recommendations for the proposed Woodmont Natural Park.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Woodmont Natural Park Conceptual Plan (Master Plan).
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 17-34, with Exhibit A, Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan
2. Illustrative Concept Plan
3. Site Sections
4. Image Board
5. Master Plan Narrative Report
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION 17-34
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO ADOPTING THE
WOODMONT NATURAL PARK MASTER PLAN
WHEREAS, the community values the park property known as Woodmont Natural Park as an
important element to Lake Oswego's quality of life; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to utilize Woodmont Natural Park in a manner that meets the
community's expectations for diverse recreational opportunities, protection of historic and
natural resources, and educational opportunities; and
WHEREAS, the Parks and Recreation Department has completed an eight month process
involving the community to develop a community based vision and implementation plan for
Woodmont Natural Park; and
WHEREAS,the resulting plan is called "Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan" and establishes an
approach for restoring, protecting and developing the property.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that:
Section 1. The Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan is adopted in the form attached as
Exhibit A.
Section 2. Effective date.This Resolution shall take effect upon passage.
Considered and enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on
the 5th day of September, 2017.
AYES:
NOES:
EXCUSED:
ABSTAIN:
Kent Studebaker, Mayor
ATTEST:
Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
Resolution 17-42
Page 1 of 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Powell, City Attorney
Resolution 17-42
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT 2
4.04 *
1
�r 4.A NI _
'4S
.401w,i*
-
i0•1116-,
i 16
•I '. irt le -"I'a• - •
yl1 ..*,. '.. 1411:1:j g.
•a
i
• . • 6 4-'fii 41.11" - et- i . ..
, i y tx .l
r rr r # _
‘ /
. .*, . . . • I '* $4* / /
lik
. X. . ..----- _ e
•
• 7
/ 4• A!, •,,..
;lir o
L.
_ u err" - �� :- � '_G - ,
•
I
1 .
. ,
.._ , ,
•ii,
.4 it - ......., 4
, 7. A
4. ...outig.
i -
.F.'-'r"-Pe.:#:.:7 //I. , , .. <- ------s- . 'INN......„ \ '1'. , ,
411141r-5-‘ \ ., -',,-___...._
/ /7..-'-'''--.- • 4.-/,/,': -0..........„.... \ '..•%•....,,
--.4%.;-7.A i
. ok 1 /,.7.:#.'e 7.: j"rr.F- f f_...,.....'e- '''''''Ar":" . .r. -:---- -•;---- e-—--- I .
jer /07/1....... .,....-•••• . /7"' r
''.: ‘400.00110110...: je...-- _......."..-••• pr:
•
Lit:Is ) ,
•
.A1 01 \err ' ilit;:::"./. or........ .... .., : ..
ki
'./)7 ./.
i. ,_ yrs 'v, .__,c—i\...// \ '� if .1 � - �
. ?ii• .14-. ..6,4N....._„...........Fr ,I . I
• NI : 10 .
.4111
_,...=7:7-.1, :A die..-1. C-': •) ) 1.
; -,
- i \
10 I\ .
I- •••• . • • .1. i - i /
•
Alk .
I/ - ----.
. 'boil , \ .40 .,
CI • .rIr. ildrili • ..
\ 4 _.-------
•
li
..P . -
- . 1
•
411:111;111"
.61
. / Pr 1 0'2 . '' v_ F. ,,.
I pit* ,
...----} ., .. ..., ,,,..mmi....I
_ , • , ii......4....„ ' IP". 7:1: f ,,
•. i . iiii,,,. r,. ,
. 'elli*C:46&1/4311- . ii.•
•0140
1111111
. 'Ill' - -.._
* '0- ,-----,.. iiiihinidim.
47111;-.I.r. .�
� iii,ilo , . 7.1% 1117 •
_x -
f
-. .(
I
1 T_ -_ - -
•
4
1 r
41IV
CI4111111111P} wr 4 ; i -.:_4k
.
D.
ff •
0 \\
el ifIll" \\ _.0.'-'—`---
j r
......., -\yi3 , I.
14- .
111111.44
1
I 1 1 * 'I \\\I - - -
111,11111 \
Al
‘I.14\ 1
C
. 'I, - \\ `" 4. -
. '''''''-,-,_..f\ 1 . _
'''"C, .._ _. Illit6 -, .
's D • l� 4 D
M1
irol
1
i .
1 r 4.J
IL
ill
d. f (
.. L -.:,{. t
. : II' •
\I\ II :
k
416re
r-
-- -- = ' 1.__Illif 1111 \
Mt
- t
44-44-Ik `
il . 119
.-..ppr IIIIIIWIIIIZIIIIIIIIIIIIlikr . 4' ' -
:11 . A ....\ . i .
- -
.,., It"
-41:4," 4. %\\s._.F.,n';,,,L,_ .L._
: • IS " 4141144.111111111111r- a \ .
I-4\
r c
.)
F -1
i r •
•
ch
. 0 iv . . . , 14,...._____....N „..... Arlirk
ri
14.
F I
! , 'Ilit.e&. ,.. • ' B okivi '.. . ill •
i_ ...
e.),
:ill
II _ .-- • -fit. r6 Z'� �
. ._ 001.' . • —1— A i -. simmillori ,s .% • IL . "..4 i frj iti
. . III_ b )
I I IIIIIW.
t _ 4 _
• - 1 Atwater Road
k Knaus Road „io,.....w.,,,.......mimommi....t
,... , _ _ .
.16_ ., *mbar .., ..„......,4_____ ,... . B. 1
_11 _rte - •.
}
Jilf . .
\ or• 4.11*Ord 41111r '. 4.1111.1111.11111.1111
OA NII\
441% 41041
I !PI
!rte
.0I
Ilr
11111111 . 7,
R Ili ! ,� _4.ILA
• '_
d
`f -mai
t. a"MI.4111111111/Wialla..--• . -
LEGENDC,) 0 20 40 60
0 Parking Interactive Natural Areael Enhanced Wetland
O Restroom • Wooded Trail0 Boardwalk
O Flexible Open Space 9 Oak Savanna
L__,I Natural Open Space 410 Overlook
__ ___
, -10,.. E --.......
1841$11
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan ...,ok ,,,
.. , "
. ,r.._.
1 V II
Lake
\ 0711111.1111P
iii lib... fril ■
POWERED BY PARKS & RECREATION
PARKS& RECREATION. {
ATTACHMENT 3
MeMIS 611141r • •
1 -lir Z�
r
-t' '. 7ll +f L Ike - M .r
b ..•
,..:44. - ,••
. , , i -40[•
• 6. a . ./ 'a " ••••• 4
/'G R' f
'► -... R - il L�r • • '% I& 41., . _ , • . 24'F '��
_ , /hi
-
' ■ ~ L - iii i - , O.'
- -. .41CA '0°
ir
•
a • • IliJ + '
. til,,Lt ti, .
•
1
D D D11111
Section One
- -111L__
�
.0
. .. . • .4 e. •--• .
F.
• • s
#11F
'1•J . . •
t Wa • .. T'1 ..
•
likaillid ti Y + k • i • . a +..
10
t
•
•
•
• ' -' • • •
• r , :- a 'L ' •
Ir irri ri fit• t y y s J -
' ' •._:.- :. . . -• 110111. - 110. .
A
e D
0 011
Section Two
LEGEND
A Parking Interactive Natural AreaEnhanced Wetland
B Restroom Q Wooded Trail0 Boardwalk
Flexible nn
ID Natural Open SpaceelOverlook
_ _
Woodmont Nat +.... ... ......0.,....\\
}�. 8,,.,1 711. .....,, • tr,
ni
oi 41.140,44 Well ar to
Lake ....... / .
\ 0--11P, /
....,__ REGo ..„.
ull ........ POWERED BY PARIS & RECREATION
-- __-- frill .
PARKS& RECREATIONS {
ATTACHMENT 4
• � , •�— ,�s 7'. #*� �� -{ � s�.. -� � *�
r _; F M T tiy• • i t � � � � F � f- 4 - , �, JL�
_ r - ` � � ��
. i� f .� # "!±� .• .��; ' � ` '' '� _ � �� _ } ' - } }} -�y'� a
•.�F.y�. _ �{�k + � �„Y_'� -� I' � �r._ ' � t �, ',} 4S � t+ -,ti� �'� '
++�rr� 1K' F
_ _ • _ � ,� 4, t} � � ' + � � � #{ � .�.� � ��+ .• ,�
� ._ _ _- � ' . � � � `� •f��" �r�b �
� �� ` 4� r � _ ' { �
. -_ �'ti- �S� . . ' � a * r • -
, k ` i � I �'- �. { �' r 3 { _ ,�f:
�� ' . ' �I � I • _ J� 'T' }.� �f•r��1. � •� ,.e r � _ _ .
� 1 f '�+- ti �:}� . � r�v
N+ ' • ��r ' � {. �
�{ � � �'� ' = 1 � , ��� � - _�� .� . : � -
� �, L E � _ . _ � �� � �S � ���
� +�t.
kr�� . x ` , '� � ��, - ry
, . � �� �
M � � �
,� , �'� —: M �' , � �� . . . �'� ��,` , � _ #
� ,� _- � � � �' �'�� r .�- - � � ��' � -i � - �
� ti.
� � • ti I , • �y i ' �� � i
•� ��'� � I ' II t ����-•-,�- R�
� � . � t � ����";��� _ .
'��'#I�� � �*� - � �J�":
_ • � �� • •, F,�,u I � . �� �!� � �
* ' ' I � , �� I �� ��� � '�- ` � � � , , r � , � F� _
�' . . i � . I � �r��■rr� �� � •' , . R . ' •
_.� � ; � � � � �r — .
� �_. �� � ± � I �� ■I�j�� � i � � -
� 7q•i 1 � - L � � }i� � �� � l - . y
��'_ -�� � ' � •�
�� �- �{,� ' I �• � �� ' y ; �� �.� � � � L . �� �� � _ r . I ' �, ' ,r� ' • I� � y .
:.+-r�� . I � ` •� �� �' _ � - _ _ -J�+• _'�r :� _ - �� . ' -. }, . Y+ z� _ _ .
�' � ~ - I � �Y 5� .F � , • � ..�tr ' �� i`' .���y/���~ � ���;�•.'�;�����f• �, � . , ti�_•� a•�{�{ ��4� ��� � ti ty •_ � FY1 �� M1 41 Lh-��iti=�--�7 �
�� � � � � � ! p � �h-#.�•� ��1��� i'��`� �S. � .]y:',Y'!F �+ };{�Y,�fR .� � I�� ' } 4 . 1 •.� �J ������ 4�
, G + i ,{ � �� � � Jr��i _ _ � ��,��� � . -�'�� �*� ��� ,� � -�R�� �� ���:� a ~-�r���.�� .__1� ��`_ �� '�
ti ' � '� �' �_� � � '�� ' ii �1`-� -� ��''rti�,t� �;�''�~x rt *ti{� +, •r��� ��}i� r. � ���� +'�tiy����{.��..' S n{�I���iSf�; 3� � I
�'' 1 � + f � i4 '�/�' �•� �• � � ��5 �' +h ''� �.•' � • �,�'�,�:.� • �j � � �y . ��� � ��
+ � �' i � �� Cr� ��� . f •� � Eti � �ti ���Y. �r4 _ '4 � � � �,fy� :r • � + •! !. � ti �5
r t � - •� J•+�,, , , � . � �� ffi.. _ • �-.�[ ' �'���� . � , r �_, , � � _ ' � . . `� ."�{ *.��#•���;_'y�� ' ''{���i_ " ti��i k��. ��•��� �ti� � 1 -.k_'��.- , � �=r5 r-. `F���'y �~-
,� �} � •� # � }
Iri . .�'. ' ' �4 'w�� �• ' - L y � :��'�r ' � �i +�'' �. i#����' � �� ;#I��;i�i�� rj ��;: V•}�T� 5�'.,`}��4 ' 4•',��� k�* ,
" y,' •�F �. - - .� �� '� ' r � �� 4 4 J�`1 { � - � � ' �i� 1� 4 ..q 1� � _ 5'�'� _' - ����'ti.
, F.. �� � � � � �'�1''. • � '�t''� ;�
r �' ' " y .- •.�._ -• ;` � �y�- v:'.- � �i'� - � _ ,_ _ - � • �•." -f � r1�• _ ��ti�. ��-e� 7�,J `'� -. �, . .. •�� � t'���• y ti� ' '- -_ •���t
�� f�'� ' �f: r.tir`�' . Y4'�F. • r',� � � +!� � ��i4' r�'`dt_; _ _ . . . . _ �'f����ti'�+}Y��,�` � �' �{� r � ��r'• . - � �L'� � �� � ti }� r� . �
y+,� * �' '�, � � •.�� ��y.' tr ' � i.. ���yy F•..S *„��'���X_�{',�•I�5� f�+}� • '' �'�j� �.' t' i =F •` !�ti3' +�� ' ,t f
`_,.�I "�i. ��fz���... ��.'�L.*ti�'. .'� y.. _ .. r . * �• X'.�.- i F ' '�+�� r����' *-��4�����1�O�hi�Ck ,� � . _ . F '�. �'��14_��'y�� ������3 r�Ll�.���� . , .-� � -�.�JJ"r��'_L�1� _ '1�._ - _ � .�•_ .
I� ��tr�� r� Fl ��i � I � � � � r� � �� �� �1 � � � �� I � �� r� � �� ��
a� .r. � �,. � � * . , . � . ._ � �r � � � �� � _� �,,+ ..
�� � M�,� � � �� 'r .1 .r r �`r
� ~ r " #I-� � ' �'� . 't �� ' ' � � r . �'� •.4 �i •• ��
. _ � � �J � � . � � . - • • � ,� ' . ' f . , r '
1�a- k k I I � _ r Y i � � F� � •i
.� t � _ � F. �1�• 'i � yir' � �� � . i '� , � _
�� l ` ir r •� � , Y Y J
r � � �' .� {' L } a' � r � � �F ' ` �:�
� * •� � � � � r +.� � � F�i',��^ ri i ���� �. r ' � � i �� 4 F � *�i� T"�{ . .. _.
� � �
�y � � ,_r� + � _. -�� r' I .'k r • � r� � ,1 �•" ' :� ��� + . ! +y
� �� � _ ' � � ��' + , '
_ _ � �. _ f , ,�, �, � ��
f �r - �����+ ~} M ' � -�� �M1 +y '�}�� �' . . r�4 ,,�`j r� ,+ � + r ; ��r�y� �� 1 '' �
� ; � a• �� �? • �'� � . � 3'� � �5� •, r� �� � �� �a � � ' +��t
� - �.� , .�Y- ����r �� • �� �a , �F _, �., "
r x* y }��
#� � y �_ , - r � r - ' � . . �4'_ , -y ,r ~ y�_ -p F_Y�.� •'F ' ' Y ' .� • � �'R . F}r �:
ti v � {t �.: .� �' ` k r '� � �� ' �,,.
�� ' ifi. R y� � f��� 1 L � �. �� � 1.;_�� - 'l � f., � a.�y:; r+Y,
��� ,•� �, �,' ���' f,�*'� }� � ' � . �'}Qr � � ;1 '� �"' . .��i,r�� -�' �.' + .' , , � ''
r' � • #•F � � . _ .t n' � T A -rt,l � � �ti ��' � �+ � +' � � '_ �. ''�
� y ��+ � � ' � �i _ . ';,�� � . '� - . . , F ; �,,�{: . �.
� ,� � _ .+ � . . i �. ,.� ,;� �� � � , � .-•r � . , � � i �r-� � , � , � .
��* � , �. �t .� •,. � •�� -�.=• • �� �, �'� , � ��
�I t �� � � . �
� �� •�L � ��•• `� ., ��� `* � . . _ .� � F �,1'� k .•� =.�sa. �� '1�' F :_��� � - -` ' k � '` � • • �• ' �
S{'F
, � � F+ C r` `'�T � • � k w -�r �� . -i ' - - , . '•`••' F i •� � ' . i
_ - � � y - ! Lry � r' �S . �Ky, 4�. � , �.,L F• � k� I �' ` k � .
_r . _� � .� � - t�� ���~J � ; �, � �rt. . ti4���'..�{-� Fa. . -�,I� � �. � ,� ' ���' �R r li �� 1'
_� r*� • �. _ ' ' ' �:'�,�+�i�� �'.{�.+ }_� ;� �' k ����j��#�' �4: .4'� -_ ;y � '
�� , ''_ , �.ti � � '��_ ��� � _ ., ��F��{�,,_ �•��•,�,__ ; .�y•' .�•• �� � f �' r�. 1 � �• '�`� _�•
fi�_ � �iif' . ,� .
.`� �
- ��� � _ � ' i , r , �� - } .•, . . � } . _ �
• �. . � rt 'F� * 1 ` ' � '�{ .4 '�� .��+- `�*.,*� . ;�ti��#-.� � '`f � . � +, 4 �F � .� � ,_ �
#+ �� � �� ��' � � � � ~ - T�+�"�Y'� + � � t�� .. .�a - ' � ' _ . i •
_# ' ' . ��+ � � ' L • � � V r� F4 ��jy�` � �� l � M1 � �4 y ' .• � '3 �F ,
..� �• � . �� . - {• �� ~ � ,• � _ � i ��"+'�{F;i,y y��� +!i3 . +�. 1 , �� '�.
- + + -�t� •� .y'=�- ~ ' 1 � � �� � �- � � , _ � '}� ��^F-- .'� � t�T �•- � 'yL� �� _ �� 1�
t' r'� '��� � i ' �� � �� �f��� e+ - '� �� - ��J��y �r . � 'h �+ �i� . r • '+ �' � � �
�}�� 4 � A ��_ � � i �' '�'� � _`� ��t �
,�•w- '� } ' � �
• �� �� �fr Y R� _� �F��f.�r '"+� � � • 4 ''�-I I �r+A�wy���•-•�� +T •r.'' .�� � � . _ry • . x ' ... . . .
� - ti���f•� � " . r ' �4 � � - I7 ` F � I �I� �I' ; ��+IT�iI � � _ r � � � ��ka� v '" -
k . /� ��' • � - � � �lC•' � - � �� � "___ "
__ 'Yr � F {ti-�� : � 4 • •y; �•� _ . . � # . ��} �� �� '•� - #'y J ~ �/f��~ -��•
- � �;�� � � � ��' '' ti' � .� r, f. ' # ��� � �! -
#-` _ , ��''�� �� � ,'�• � ,r � �� � � � �'• •y� � � ,�y � fi' �#� �+ ,+=- � � _ �'.1, "�� � __ � �# l}
• _�• � - '� 1 _ - � � .� , .- � ti' �� 'y` f 3' '�#� .k , R � � � �
- .� . - •• �� ' " . '� ..iy���{1rL • J � 1'� •• '{ ' - �k. . k „ � � � �
s t : �J � ' y y w *' • r" ,r4t�3 �'_���� � 1 •■ F � , � •if .k - �_ 4+ r �'.
��' • '- . - � ' �� : � y ' - - � y . - � �r�_�i r ti_ _ _• . �T`� ,I�Fr+ �� � }� � h •�'_ �� ,
,� _ � � `l��t ..�,• '� ! �; + � � .�r _ ��� � � _ . . * y' 4 7 �� � '�_� y .
� . � �� � '�� �r� � _ 'r - �� _ � � k ' �} +~ '~� ' � _ � . � � �.�� *'4 i�i�* {�
� ����� � .
I � �� �� �� I �� 1 � � L �..�1 �� I � ��� I � �� �� � � I �� 1 1 � � �..+1 �� I � ��� I � L� �� �� I �� 1 1 � �� �� I � ���
� � .- ' '� ' � ' _-_ __ � ' � � ��� �'����+ _ _ �•L x�� � ~ ~ - `�� _ - ti
{ tf ; � ; � #�-*�� , + _ . � _ F' _ . � , y � .
* '' � �
y - y� - • ' ; • - . • - ' ti
� �r +*I ' L �,��� ��'��� 4 _- . , ' _ � . . ' • �,�� I � - _-�' � .
_ 3 .t- � ` # � � ; . *�+y� F � �.
�.� � � •-■ • .�r � � ��. �
_ t � - •" '��4 '�� . ' _ � - . � • � r � ' - . � � � - - _ ' - -' . -- . ti • ����,i� . �� _ � -�__ •
ti �- - ; � -} - - — r` �
� 7 Y�� _ -` ' J � � ti - � ' •� - � " F+ J - a��y � • ���y�� 'J � ��a
t�
� ��� - . _ �t � • - +� =� +F-� 1 �� �� a 'r•- • ����" #'
' . �# 4��: '� . � . • . .
.�( .,._ � _ _ #�. '`� � � � � - � - _ - _ _ M' -- ' - a • -_ ��� -. 4��k.-��� �� • �'ti .t� 7�_' 'Y� , - ,t
,�- � ' r, „ - . � .- ,m � h ..� _; y ' -�} {=a - 'r �. �r* _iy�` ri' ' � _� : _� - �..+��'f _ -• -� i' . �'ti'` + � ����''
_ � �� �£���ry �� � _ _ � .���.� � ~"..��*. � � �.�L �,i T i-�� _ _ � * _ .� � �� = �.
� � '�� - _ 'l�i.i����: . : - � �� f ' . ..M_ �`_ _ �� ;����� ���� ` �� `�+ y .4i `.� 4�'. �',{{�- �, • • ,,�~ �" l�f� �R � �
� � �•. �� #:� I - � _ _ � } ' ',',q W� _4 ` �7�^ # , _- _ ' _- • _ - t F � � , r �• ,fr� �F "�'_'.�' �`�i�ta" ��~��• � ' -�� _ ,
� .r �' � � rt�4^�� �� •. ' ,� . ._ - i ' ' . �. �. '•�' -r..• � _- ��� �'� �[' - � • .�����'if`� _
.y � _� ��
� ��� _F 'T�R _i �~ /' 1_ � �F - �. ' ' x ' � � r• S 'r , - rr�''+� + � ]z- ti_ f T �' ;� �
;ti ��'� ' � � �J - , _ -. � �_ �=i�F` .+til� �'� y�p ti '+��•' "'�� � • ���� _ _ ,. � . ' ��� +�~� ' � ' I��• � ' •* ��
L ' � ' ��y . ~ �' v ' ,� � t� '��� . .� �FJ. - . � T _ - � � ��+' , ' t �. . � � .
F_��, � _ .,�` � - . '',� _ ������"�:- • . �.' 'r _ . - _ - — . . _ � . . I �#,.
�` J 7���_ + } .
�i �ti�` ` + � • � � � - .� ' ' I
�. '•� ��' �-� _ " - .� �-- -. _�� .�'1�'�� • - _-_ _�-'� ���� � }� ���' .: � -� . � � I � T i L .�� ' F i.{� i-
��y ���.y�# �� ��#���+z 'k -+ _ ��}..�'�� # . '} -� - ,�� .��+�r��n� ,��.��a � . a - J��'+ ti1� . } , �+ ' i+ - � �- �� �ti.,k' � # -��.
�+ .�{ ��
T=Y�� ,����} +;_�'_ � .'�� � �•-_��-_ _i' ` r` -K f,'� P� �t _ � � � K � . , _ �� , -- � �I i' .� }�• � . ���� �� • . .
'.�' ��'�` ..�r1 .� ' ` � ��•��• '' , _ -.- ' . ' - ' - . ~ I�
��'f ' .+��� .'�`�f����{�G^� � ���'���� " _ .�:�"+�- �� 'r._•� �.F��, � � � �'�G.�' �� �� Ii � - s ' # � ' �i�- �y — L . , j � , f • - •}!�•�'� . . . • . _ , .
� ' - - �-.' ` �����-�. tiF�� �� �_ ti, ���'� _ .+ �-.�iF��, -'� � 'F�f � y+ �=� � � � _ T !k -� � � � ' �f }� : i � 'i I .�+ _ � ' ~ ����i�� � ���• r- � ��, - `5 _ �i� -
k ��`�.�-� 'J:�� �F.'• ' '.�'� �. �' ��� �" 5� _ �y �r } , t � � � � .-' . ' � �, � , i • �.` � l
,'�� , €� � '�� { , �� � # _ � ti r'- �.t ,i � . � • i" . � � ;��
� T,• 1�;, � �.�� �}�i•-1Y�� �`�� '�`'.�.�-��,�,� ~�L����' � �� �'` �-+�� . � _ � � .� ��Ff+ ��� �Y ' '�•Li�'�'L � },�L�' +���` .� ��:�•�y_ +� .�� �. •7, L
` �� ' Y• rr _ - � � ti.�fi' ' _ f _ f R '��r ■ 'I' ' 1 � - �
�!�"Y,� .���". ���#•�~ !� � •j _ _•F _ •��-', � ' �� •*f' •_; . - � ��-� � . • ' '. �. ' _ , _t-r �� ' �'{ ^� �=ti� �'�� � • '�� ��F • � ��_� �:'a' Y� i 't� i y�',�
� • '_ � _} ��.� ' • � �'�i,:�� ^�.�, y _ ,_ - �� '{ y� _ f. . � - �' , - � �� + �,� . � ' �i;� _�.,' � '{ . .' � w �.��' ���,����
��y�•����`�fr'`�� ���'���• �k��i.., t.-,1 r � 'y� _ � � � ��� . , •�� I �` - � ���r ��L-MVti�y �'��' +�,�rl� '� �t� i, I �T;�`
� . -• �"�'•�y�a r *� r���_�, �fx � • � ,,�� ,rg����, �� � • � � • - .�'' - . � �* , t ��' Y ��, •.�� • ;�-
' `� �-�; ,:� ��-'�,� �.1�: �`�- �'M1'" �=�z��•}�•'+�}�;t�:�;�f'� � - } ' •` _ �.�•`��� +�_�r y•� • ` 4 - !' �.�• �f1 �'-y�.�•.�''��;�.F�, i �`•'• � ,��',�
•.+r�•R'r���*��_ �� � ;R�- ' � ��+�-. � :• -�'.�y�� _ r �' y �_ - -�• ;�� R _•� _ _ _ `� � � M1''� - � -s� +;I�. �1r���5r, . ��� ''v .+ - � n
���� � • �+ � �� 'S � �. } r -1-, � ' �j ,
���-' �,����� ��� �� ����+_ �� ti ti�+��i����:1=;� 4 _.�,'~ `'F � � � -* � .��� Y �• � .�• � '�' �_ � ,�� •:�•� r�.� ' -�� ' F�• -
,.��+�.. : �+� �.� � � , r� _� — . _,�'• . ; `;��� �� �''i_�+��• y � �.r - . ' • _ � �' '• . • �t,r„#. ��#, .�'F� ���� �-. 4
� �-�,,,�� ��j- _ r � T`wF���- � - . 4'•3� ����Y��•+� �f�a� -� I _ �c �+ .� • - -_' - ` .t r�..i,� . ; �f-' �
���y � �++ � � R �. '�y���a �it��� yy�� .M, ��� .- a . _ _ � r i � '] Ta� . � �' •� '� _ '•R'�L
i ;� ����� �- �� �r�� ~�� -� W �`vkvf' .�• � .. �� � • , _ ,' _ � . __- ' - —: • • �ya• _ a
- / � {� i�L �� � .�, �r,�} �l� �-�._ � r ' •5������� - - - _ - _ �r� ' �' � -' '-�� _ � - * ���' �
� � r FI � .���_. � � ���•,ff � �. � ��._��_� ���-�� —� !� J^� ��y � � . ' .
trt�� � ..���. � � ����f_ � - -� - - • - - - . _ .. _ .
_ �� �� � . . '� ri!r .�� ._ •����z. - i�. + � • •- �
I r� �� �� �ti �� I� � t� r� l � r�� I�� � I� � � �� �� � � ir� � �� t ����
'� �;. �. �� . � �,:� _*, �.�. _ r s
M1 f � { .4} Y M1 •{ r
- _1. •i
�` � 4 S•+- * �• + a.� • • ' a �� �LT '
L. � �l� ,� I - � � 'S �' _
�� � ��.. � ' �, �.
T� ` ; • ' a
� � #' M1 ~
. - j" � _ � . _`', � ' • ,
i�F .. _ . • . a
I 1 _ � �� _ . ' } . , \; 1�a
�_� ��' y •� t i
���' �� _ �'��,._ - � � . '� ' ' . . i �
���• -� '� - -- �- � � � { - y ,
� j}_� r -� �''+►' � Y.�
, � , , �� -�t - r � � � - .
; � -;. � � ' . .
- - �{ ' r � . � �� � �
■ 4y i � �� ' � •�' :1 .{ . � � + 1 �
�l,�' ���ti`-1 •' � � � '�* '' •a y �• � i � x ;p
�' ' �, �' i � .* T
II { •i � ' I I � �i � - �� �� .I • , �� F � � •� _ +,� � � _ I i• � �� -�L
� {� � .; 5 .�' � � ' . � ' � ' r� � 'r i r = �' F �� �� ; { � }
. i� •� ` � � ti I � _ ' �� '� � � ti � - �� _
��+ � � I '' �� � •S ,� � � � +
� r■ ' , r t • •�i � ' �, : r� �,
• 4 'r �' • � `� � � '� � �� +' �. " �� , . , �1� L �
. y r � � �' •L, .+ti �� ;, ��{ _ , , , a �
' '' � ry �''�� + �~ # � � ' `~ � ' � �
y 'c• , r - i
� - � - + : I .�� - � �, � � � .1 ,�� r�}� � r� •y t•
�� f �i M�•- ' �'n `' • �, � �� . ',, � . �'� -� �• .� � �.+- �.
i • � �� y * .
i+ '� � r � I �� ' •� �j� �
�' 1 � l �'l •�+ ��. +�:- ' ." -�•' .J �. c + _ r +`F , _ �
� � X .Y , � ' ' ,� � r� `�� : • •+*� � .}• _ • �� , �' Yt` .. -.
� a. �• + • • - : � - �~ , , . .
r � � F`w•� i r , .. � ,� � �� ��. • • f
7 r � • � �� � �� •� �'ti ��• � ��� �_-- � - - - � - _ ; - '--
�� '�.�� i - M i� � - _ • . , � _���� •_ � �G, i•��_ _�.r � '� �r.. _ T� ' . � ' ■F.* �
��i ��� ' '••�,',�� 'y y '� � I� �.� . � + � �+� � ' Ea � } ;, c�. . +*. ���'� ��`_� � ,,��� � �� • , �� �, ;, " _ . ,',�+ ' , *' i
�� F��.�`� '�� .���� . � I'� � � , T' • � y �1' ,� i -��,� 5.�, a} '�� _ �t• _ ,'t. �r�i � � '_���r-*4. _ � .`�� J-' y � �, � _
� i� I _s � .� L w � '�.. � ' ' - .• r �' L _ _ ' . �
` I , . . � � , k y .t� � . ;'�,�._- � �"�� � �, •: �- �"� - , _ .
� ' ,�� �Ly, i ��. I�� I 1 � �� � 2 �� r � � l+ '+ �����y�..�r - wY�� '� ��i _ � �� 1_ �� � r+� .� ' � � �� � �
� �I' R���, ' �'� •�� • 4 _�, � I �' !�- � I}� G ■ y , '.�. _ "� }",�- ' r,�' , _ * �' "� "' " ,
F� ,f .,_� I' J !.�� � � � I.r���+. '`'�* � - . _ } � ' ` ` �� �~ �'. �,Y -'�`' . . �. ����.� ;• �� �.�Ir �a . ' + `. . , .
"� f "� ��. . � � . �i - � � � � . r"
+ I � � L�'�.� � � '•5 4 l _ _ _ - � � 'Y ' �x _ - � ��� 4 a � � * _ _ _
L . � �� . " •.�� • +J �� �k -� � ' .
+ � M � F 5 #f #!��' � � ^k,- �,M� �� , ����#' ����� -- - , � ;� • *-� +.' � .� �� -
� � .�� ' 4 . � - 5 • - -�� • - � � _� �
- ' � J�'i��ry N + 4 � i�. ' � . . _- _ � ty � - _a� � r�- � � ' ' ti
I �� �1��1�� ri�� ' �� �_ �.���� �� f k� a, y _� __ � �. .r __'��' �F+` - �,
�� tl� ��� �� t ���� � � I� � ��� r� r� �
. � �
� � +}
_ _ . � , : �� �
�� �
• � • � .+ `�
r� . ° _,�� , , _ �. � _. � - - �
, ��� _ F � . . r � . .
f 4 } . ' � . `��-�� �� �.if �� s �,�� ' - _� . •�;k 'f � � �
� ,�1! ' ���� �ti �r��r� ! � �''' 'k{ �*F '1�; 1� •� � � '4.� �, �r
+ 4' � � . r x ���#�t �,a� y ' � �F: � f 't •��tF n�
w� ��� �ti a�.:.�� ,'��:�•ti� � � ',.�� . : � ����#yt,,�� t '� '� °�� � � r � •������r:��.
: } *#� �;� _J
Y ' i 4` R�y� ��� F � f
F'-'•+4..�� � ' F� ,'+'_ �..'Sr-.' k�� �r , . I � t .7, �E ''2�'.Y! � '} T� .�� ��M1r • � 1 i } "•'�,b� �
i •�� �,� r ��• � , � ' • ' • * '
L . L 1 J
■a �` " ' 1 ����- i � +�� •�l`' - �� � �r �_ .i� �.'+�M�l��.� F
f5ti `���� v , t .� - • �� � ;�: �}�+�f� . ����*� '��� � �f y' f r.�: �T �F _ �'�'?� ti7�� ;
I� k ']+� � •' � . ' ��7T�J.. ���• I �i �P . . 5�~ -���'r+ �;~�n �5`� �7�;5� l"1�.1� . � r�� f,� + ' �f��� r � f� � _ -
t '�� -'� k a' � ��,���, � �y L �r � �� + '� � �
�i�, • , � - M1r'• �� x'•� �• , � � ''ti ���w.. _ , }�•� , _ � -S �t .'� ���'' , } � � �,. _ -
# � �� �.� - �� .'����. iti' ��`' �' 4 r.� L y� 'x r � .�. �� �+J "#., r. � � � � _ aY� . �:; � L r
� , � � �- '� , �+�1, F. fy, ' � i � ''�'f y �� � �z ��� _ i _!� ���� ��' � r'r'r ryr . ' _ ' � * ' ' . � . . ��(,� .�,1 f. t' ;
�� �� � � " � �:� ��� �� �- �� y+' �� - �� 1� ,�{ �--F� �_� � r � •3• .. �' Ff :r�;��r� ����� + r fi M�' _� ��, � � - .�+'�, • , . i {'k;� _ ���� � •_�rl
� � * r ' �� � �: �,� r :k.i�' •�i-h'� � . y
i���+.� . - � ' , � '�+'�4�� { '�. � �+�• , " • � t � � ti�' if ' i l4 f�F "f : , ��� � � � ' � ' � ���: •��� ' � ,��•F��' :. -� � -- _ . • - �'., �. ����
�; ' �' �. �`� �� �'• y � � M1 ; ��.�J f r� X�ry ��F, +i� � ` �.2M1� ��•�,} :� � ' ■•
�'� � +��• ,� �• - .c�� � �4��}F ��� • � F } �s� ���- r�.��.� �� tk4 � �'l. ' ��;�' ti ��,�� ���''�� '�-� �•• ' �{,�fti.� {io— t �. ' :s, Y+ -•� ��, _�r ' - �,. � . r - _ ti _�.:_
*� �. �L�" ' l_•�� -� �- � 'r , �'�• {' r'� �;�r� •.� 'w'� '7� �'+� ��F" � - - - r.. f f i
'y+ ��'~}��F r � .+� � ~� � �r�. 1 i ` � �, � � 'L�� .� �•�� � _ �Y'r, �� ~� F�� . -r +�•r •�_}. .,�•••r � ��� ' ��J�. J� _ � � �
t ��� ��. r
�'�`'�ti��rt ��i��. � i �'�y•h y ��'t `� ���.� •'� � • ����,��"'�+°� �� :�,.rt y.:.. _.;�y��� ' ti � �,�r*.ti��
�•�` _ }� - ,�f .���
� � _ • •� �. �.r�=_ • • • - ��i- � �� ��Y.+4,� � . ' � �, �i*i� �'� K• �,l ' �� f y��,-�#1-T �i•� Y �.� �� ",��f����'������'. ��� �� k� �:l���� +�`��;.x����� - - �L
�
� � �+
-.rt r �* � .ti t •. •_ • � y��-r �y . � •- � f k SF � 14�
� ' .� � '�J ��� ~' ��v'r ��'.r'•� �i�; •� � • 1•�Y• ;'�� yx . - �_ -* '�; '���•..ti i�; ��' �-� �' ati��9f.4�, ���_ '+1��� -#F �4 4 , Y _ t�i_ ���r.'���''�.,�i- �' ti �i �•� # � �_ � ' ' -- � - � -
� , . ' � - _i� � L r _ �� � .r } � + y �, 4 ,ti �
.��r. '1�� 1 - i F';�� r i- . •�•�y ` � �� � • : �� � � ,��v•• ' • � �7 y z� - L +�}r -��•� J� �]/�.. a � ,�r 4� _���1F � � - : i .
r��,� �•�L, 1 r � [ Y � � ;y� f� ti_ F � , _ • � .�y �' � �! � '}� �:� T.Y.� r '.��'M1 �;''� '�M1'+�L' - ��a'-4 � �! ��-} �� J"4y;
' r 7��� � , � !� �#y�'� �-7 L • ' � e .� ��r��'y ti, x , ��., . �ti ■� '� . f _ ��� . . ' ��:�����ix'� � ' •�� +" _
'� _� . ' '�'1• y . � �� ���'�r,� . :�� � �� _ � � � 7� ��� ,1.. } � a r� M� �� -i �� r��'r T'� ' � �,?��i�� �� {��� �, � • • .- 1 5 . M+ ��� r ��k. � ti.
7 �•• r r• !� ' i
� .� �F•*� ~! �'� T �' �r rf•1'�• � f . . �,��-� •�. " � �� y " �". L ' Js t ��� ' � �{•F•J �,} I � . �•� ''� �'� +'�r},, � � , �'' � w .
ti�.c . �y � �:• t � '�•' ' �'. � �' # �� �- a �}+ 4�'� � �, � �. y r• - #` rr - -
_ • y' +rtr � • ry��_, � r+�Y� ti�. . ,�' �K � + F�'� 11 � y�'•f�.. �i: y 5 ,�M1"L�l., '�l4,�+. �� �t r' ' �#�` �f a� J � Fj �a ��' �i!'� - f'1r - 'T,Yi- �.- i• r �
�i ' `t�r'�� � • "v- " 'y r _ ''��' 'r.5�'� �' . � ` {�#`'t T ��f ?,�'�• �� . �� r'��+}� �r. � �I .
_'� �y '}�+� �M1 � �� ..; . . �Ly?���� �� � r�� ''�Y �� , _ '� - ��_ ��� �: � ���� .i'�• ` ~� � ,�ti'.i� r'i.- � .X.f '�f'7{�� _ , �, ��.k�+�� ' j '"� i +
-_•# � f' - . - r - . �` �Y, i -�y.�,•S � ; ' � 5 � ' -` • ,+ - -F � F�•' �`� �b` ir � ��r � �}" �..+ 1.
r �K{'��' v�+' � �S�S� + ��'tii,y'�'• � �-�ti��• � ��'' � ' - ��i - • � til•' �i 'i �� �_ j �.'�� �' �,��'� + �t �;- � • � 3 y �
�� =�! r;�' � •l r�d �•�� �'t'� *�� ��- R�u{• ��•� +�� ��'_. �. �•��;}r� _ ,�t;.+ ' � �- � M1 � � '�4 � r, � #, f,�,!�''r� k �l I�� �
_�: ' _ �+ r���a � ��� - �� Ir � �. �� `+ �'• +' 'r# 'r+ . . . �+r �, � - '4' �� .� �
• ~*.� ' �• d�i�'�� �� � L �� } � T�. +� +� - # �•+' ' }� � �r ,�� '� ' � � � � � �'
��.-� , 1.���T;T;., 7r y' ��.�� �� �� 1 � r 1'� :.�* � .{ � ' � {�_..'�'.'�i.�� .r���; �, 4n.r i �f 1�� � •�� � � .�Sti � � � . � �-i� �� ; * � y' F� '•�'
k� ' �� _��'• , i i �'�F��j •r � •tr' •Z;��.'� .� •���'Ja + f.� -�L' _.��•,r: ��~ �} _`��i [ r'�' {� �- k .� � � . L ' ��•' i+���� '.r + i•
._� ��. �s ��
'`+ 'f '� ; � � � � ,+ i, • i+ lfr;57�i�F� , �;�.".�w •itiyy '���, .� � } �` L • LTM� 1,�.���•,y�,' _ ..�4�� lf' S t.. � � _� • L� , • � �� �_ �. �M ��
•- • 'f'• �� �'i S -�� � #� � �1 �k� � '��) �r' `1�= i�'�- :���i '�i �}�.;• f�� ��'."�.`L'Ji. • _� '.� ��'�', � .� � ' , r � �~ �tii � k* �M1 � _ _ �1
�� • . � � F � • �. � ' r��. r ��M"'r ti {;.�� ��?��' ■� � �'" ,� �-,t=�- _ i ''�. •L.,_�. • � �;� , � � i . � _
�i •Tl�� � r• �!� �+. .; , ��.. ,s+ .'�4+ �� - •� �M1 ti • � '•� �
�r' _ ti . •fl •, ."�� ..�'� • �}� ��' 2`�����: � f {��.,� �� - ` � ,��• ~JtJ- r•f� .r•_! w� -�• lr�' *;5 .r .� �'`} � } . ' , � k . �~ � � y _ _ - - _ _.
� � �'�� � �'
�'�"'• ` • ' s'K.� .--,t" �, , ti ���� �, , M ti�� �, �•+�:L��Y'�.,• �t� • . •". - ' 'r • �� ' �� y �r t4 '��.'S� � . �. ��. . • '. . � 4� - -� _ _ �?..: , t
•�_ {L _ J�� �.�a r �'aµ � F "'��� �y�'r �� �� � ".�.��' �r 4'= }i;y ����•. ti�#�'rr ���. � �'���~ • J-� � ����� � r'�� Sy � .L �,� ` y'1 y � �_ � a . •. �_ k � _ ��� � �... — .
4f
5y��� � �r,� }. L}+�
-�` � .. • � � ` •'_y•/tir���?� �= � a�� Y;+�B�i� '4-_ .�+3Y��;'� 1L r�•, . at �� zi �rtLy. �'��{ ,�'.'�,'r� _ . .� - � '���4 L��' kM1�M1� k • _ k -�_ ' - ---- _ ��
Er� � � r� �� � I�� � I � r� �l �� � �� �� I I� �� � �� �� I I�
�� �-� _ � �
� ��
� � � � � � � �� � � � � � � � � .� r 5 ��' '
ti . �',
�� I �' . # � �
L � �� � ��� � � �� � � �
� � � � � � �
�� �� . � ■
� � ��� � � � � � ��a � �cs � R � c � � �aT � � r�
P�I���� R������1�#J r
ATTACHMENT 5
WOODMONT
NATU RAL PARK
MASTER PLAN
D RA FT
Prepared for the
City of Lake Oswego
Parks and Recreation
Department
September 2017
`� A i C.r� I.�:'�
M AC I<E N Z I E. :; '' - ��` ,�,�►�r���p
DESIGN DRIVEN I CLIENT FOCUSED -
■
OUR HISTORY. OUR FUTURE. OUR PROMISE.
The values of our founder, Tom Mackenzie, remain the hallmarks of our firm.
Upon this foundation we have, steadily and intentionally, built
leaders in architecture, interiors, engineering, and planning, focused on
delivering the highest level of design excellence in service to our clients.
This mark is our signature and our promise.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements.........................................................................................................v
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Master Plan.............................................................................................................1
1.2 Project Goals.................................................................................................................1
2. EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.1 Site History....................................................................................................................2
2.2 Current Use..................................................................................................................2
2.3 Physical Features ......................................................................................................3
3. SITE ANALYSIS
3.1 Opportunities and Constraints.............................................................................6
3.2 Site Analysis................................................................................................................7
4. PLANNING PROCESS AND PUBLIC OUTREACH
4.1 Public Outreach Events...........................................................................................9
4.2 Public Advisory Committee Meetings.............................................................9
4.3 Online Surveys.........................................................................................................10
5. MASTER PLAN
5.1 Conceptual Alternative Plans...............................................................................11
5.2 Summary of Outreach Results..........................................................................13
5.3 Preferred Alternative and Recommendations............................................14
6. APPENDICES
CostEstimate....................................................................................................................A
Woodmont Natural Park Deed..................................................................................B
MasterPlan Graphics.....................................................................................................C
ProjectTimeline...............................................................................................................D
MeetingMinutes............................................................................................................... E
OnlineSurveys...................................................................................................................F
�;,�,.
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan � i-��
2160495.00 ■ �_
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT
• Ivan Anderholm, CPRE, Director, Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation Department
■ Bruce Powers, RLA, Project Manager, Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation Department
PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE
■ Jeff Munro (Staff)
■ Megan Big John (Staff)
■ Rob Amsberry (Staff)
■ Scott Bullard
• Kirsten Giacomini
■ Ed Brockman
■ Phil Zald
■ Heidi Schrimsher
MACKENZIE (DESIGN TEAM)
■ Brad Theurer, Landscape Architect and Project Manager
■ Steven Tuttle, Landscape Architect
• Andrew Schneider, Landscape Designer
■ Andrew Jepson-Sullivan, Landscape Designer
-�LA f d\. �
, p s f ,�"
� 5`� �, ' �
, � �
`' � � r/, 1.la/[!�► Weu lIl j0
■ '
�DR�GOr�� � � POWERED BY PARKS S fZECREATION
MACKENZIE LAKE OSWEGO PARKS & RECREATION
RiverEast Center 1500 Greentree Road
1515 SE Water Ave., P.O. Box 369
Suite 100 Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Portland OR, 97214
www.mcknze.com www.ci.oswego.or.us/parksrec
�;,�,.
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan � i-��
2160495.00 ■ �_
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
D RA FT
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
1
1 . I NTRODUCTION
1.1 THE MASTER PLAN 1.2 PROJECT GOALS
The City of Lake Oswego Parks & Recreation
Department engaged the design team to develop The Deed
a Master Plan for the 6.8-acre Woodmont Natural The guiding goals for the development of
Park, located in the Forest Highlands neighborhood Woodmont Natural Park were originally expressed in
of Lake Oswego. The goals of the Master Plan Mr. Meyer's deed to the city. They included:
process have been to create a sustainable ecological
and recreational treasure for the residents of Lake ■ Park to be established on the property and
Oswego that honors the wishes of the former named "Woodmont Natural Park"
property owner, Mr. Meyer, and responds to the . park should be maintained in its historic
priorities of those who will be using the park. natural condition, including retention of
The process to create this plan has built on Lake existing grassy areas.
Oswego's long history of ensuring that its parks ■ Maintain the natural setting of the park, only
system meets the needs of the community, and building a restroom, parking lot and pathways
can be managed responsibly by the city. From out of natural materials, or installing safety
the Lake Oswego Open Space Plan, developed in lighting as necessary
2001, to the 2004 Parks and Recreation Facilities
Survey Analysis, to the Parks Plan 2025 completed parks Plan 2025
in 2012, much has been done to contribute to
cultural, aesthetic, and environmental enhancements Additional goals were prescribed by the Parks Plan
throughout the City. The current master planning 2025, such as:
engagement work has been designed to build on
these frameworks. • Provide additional recreation options to
citizens
Woodmont Natural Park has been clearly identified ■ Provide play areas and trails in new parks
as a key park within the Lake Oswego parks system
in need of a master plan. The Woodmont Natural ' Invest in existing natural areas, open spaces,
Park Master Plan addresses site constraints and and parks while enhancing stewardship,
opportunities, while providing a comprehensive maintenance, and operations
vision and direction.
Other Project Goals
Other goals were revealed throughout the
,�, community engagement process. These included:
_-� �
, .��::.=. .
• Maintain the park's natural setting
�:
■ Minimize development and amenities as much
as possible
` .�, � -"°�" ■ Encourage wildlife habitat where possible
���i��,,:4 ,. µ . -. " .r�'.-. _ � . - -. c `
■ Design the park to be usable in all four
,-.�v `�,._ �:""�'�:' r. �ti seasons
�•1"' ' .Z,+ ., : t , . �_.. .�.�}y��-`. �•.^ _ ..
� •. • ' '[`'NL� ' ~'�'i: ''-.... • . :�t w .
l.. ' e� : =""Z.T` �n. . . �.�y:�f • "" `-�
i�;� ,;���; �i��,._ ;Y;�:-=;�++�;:��*s�;::: - •�:;�;�__ �,;.::; ■ Give the park a neighborhood park feel while
`Y���,� �',��;���:' �� �. s�y� �, .�,.�,;� serving the city
�
'�•���3^� � . •"�'� _ ����`" `�p_�� ��"�' K�,� • Honor the existing deed from Mr. Meyer
� _ � �':...:,', �.�,
r t: .• �...:
.• �r
-`� .'�"` ���- h �-���:"'.�'°"$ Keep things simple
.
Open views through the meadows and wetlands of
Woodmont Natural Park.
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan � ;�'�+ '
2160495.00 ■ ��
2 . EXISTING CONDITIONS
2.1 S I T E H I STO RY '`' "`""a". '�
�r`� ;,
���•�
�� - •i�F:r.:4.�': .
Prior to settlement, the Willamette Valley was �'�� - ":��
dominated by diverse forest, prairie, and savanna ;��;;..: _ . ,�'
habitats. As settlers be an to head west, towns like �: �- ��� T �' ` �'.�r�
g �- y,'"� -��.
Oswego (or as it is known today, Lake Oswego) _ , �;�� �,_ ,, .�
;�'.. -.� . , ...�"�
began to grow. While the growth that Oswego ` •
experienced was due in large part to the nearby � ,��: "�•' � .
+;,k:e. �,; ,�� . .
lumber and steel industries, agricultural use �= =_�z��:_;. , S�0. ;:•. ��.'� �i
predominated the outer edges of developed areas. - - • � - �� '
The Woodmont property was sold to the Meyer
family in the early part of the 20th century as a - Y '��"� ��
patchwork of agricultural fields, orchards, and ��
homesteads. Located just outside of the more
heavily developed downtown area, the site had few Existing access trail at the southeast corner of
neighbors and was only bound by farm field and �Noodmont Natural Park.
native forest. Donald Meyer, the son of Adolphus and
Clara Meyer, cared for the property until his passing
in 1997, maintaining a garden as well as admiring the upon his passing, under the condition that it would
re-naturalization that had taken place on his land. become a city park. The former Meyer property is
Prior to his death, Mr. Meyer formed a deal with the now known as Woodmont Natural Park.
city of Lake Oswego to sell his family's property
2.2 CURRENT USE
Woodmvnt Toda
�r'=.�-�;�a y, Woodmont Natural Park is owned by the city
Nat�ural Park �"�r=��'� � of Lake Oswego and maintained by the city's Parks
;: "'= � ����:r�:"LY�: � and Recreation Department. The city has honored
+; `��:�: Y 1�'a' ,: ,:��.R
�r �. .; � •w the deed put in place by Mr. Meyer, and the site has
��'��." :i.i:�.�t._'^. • •Y'1- .fW�." .. ��
._��^.����;;�ti4„�;� _ �,. remained largely unchanged since the transfer of
,�r:��; �• - . . . . .
,�- ; ' .;.�;.,�: � � ownership. Several trails have been introduced to
,�;�;:iF;. �_ �:;���'. ,:�..
'� �•;;. �•� • � �; •`�`��3„�� �'' ;.;� the site, and firebreaks have been mowed into the
:: ,-.;-r ,, :_...;'..' . '�;;,--
L,..��� ',`�.-��Y;�°°'c �: ;.:� grassy areas by the parks department's maintenance
��� �• 'j��'�':.��'�������' .;��_.�=`"�:'� team. The ark is currentl en o ed b nei hbors as
�,,�, . •;� ; -•:�:;,�;�.��y; p Y 1 Y Y J
�•' y
._�y � ''�'� � '' �' ` � a respite from the city and as a place to experience
'� -..� '� .f~.,:�'� r a
•�. -,:-r���< :�� :.�:� ` ���� �'' nature.
,�: �;
�c,�..:�-��.:-� " _ � �...' - �:���,r� .�;.�.a,. .
.�:;1� . , -,-i,, ..
,.,,�.��.'�r�;_,..._,, �� . . The property is made up of grassy areas, wetlands,
�`�,;�� � -� �
�;��� _�,�_•��
� ��;i ��,,.i��,��,� woodlands, and dense forest. Large numbers of
y�.: ' .�. <'-.� •�
�' ��,���;c..�;��-��;��'- � ,:��': existin trees reside throu hout the ro ert
�].�.- �.� ,...._ "+�..,. - g J p p Y•
:_�-..2 • :.. f.i:.. :� � .5+�-�],r.-i Y -�i- 't`^.`::1_.`_`:?;'
_ ��; �,,.�._:, �' ��� Y, r : �= � . Atwater Tributar runs west to east on site with
• �, ;.Sr''`',' '*�``::-...';:.:'.I�=.:� � . Y
'��"�' ��'��� = ��'��' � �Y�Y the western portion being classified as a natural
... , a � ;�,.;.
� � � -
•`,;��`-t � ���' - %�
�; •� wetland. The eastern portion flows through a
ry� '���:, > -� :,' � steep forested ravine before continuing off site.
� �r•- y _r'
Woodmont Natural Park is primarily accessed by
foot traffic with limited vehicular access points to
Context map showing location of Woodmont Natural the north and south.
Park in relation to downtown Lake Oswego (yellow),
Oswego Lake, the Willamette River (blue), and Tryon
Creek State Natural area (green).
City of Lake Oswego
August 2017
3
' `" 2.3 PHYSICAL FEATURES
; � ; ;, ,: �
_i`,1.: :
r - �.s;:. . � at
?'.i`�:; � •:f,
y, :. � 'a.'. .
� �:�-a,:`�' �`�.-=-���., � �� Vegetation
.� �a;, ,� ��, ,.;�r ���, �yfA;.�,
� , . ,�•�� 3�'..
�-.< �-,.. _� ���,.,; .a :� Woodmont Natural Park is comprised of several
� �• ���;, :�';.� - _ -�,: �
_ '�;;.. ;�.;. ��,��,,,..:�° �^ `� �v_:,��; � different and overlapping habitats. For simplicity,
� ` ;:.. .,: ,r s... ..
� " ' ��`�'"' ` �":'� these habitats can be broken down into three
�o �'� Yr Y i: ..
'��` -..... "r�� . . � � . :.. �r�'
.va� w.� ti:���'p
��"� �V F �: .,.�:,}�� �:-.-.::�:,.�r::. .: g� main t
� ': ,h,.-.rF. � &9 ypes: forest, meadow, and wetlands. Several
'-.�-�� ��• '�'�
:��+�5'�=-`� invasive species are also present on-site.
-,�'�';..�:•:
�--;._. . , .. �...
_ �:;'�t , '. ..� Forest: The forested areas of Woodmont Natural
- . . "'"`r �"� ' Park are located, in general, at the southwest and
� = .� . ..� . �.
-. � ;. .;;r�`���_�:�;. ':.. " " ..`' �:..�..�,��;� northeast corners of the property. These areas
,�.8�. .. �� . �,y� i'��-u y''.. . - : - .�:-:'�Hi�b.3;r� .w;�•°-�
��.,�.,;�...;�� � . ��::.� � � ��; ,�,,,� .:�.f:-._,,�,,��- �; are mostly dominated by native trees, such as Big
k�,.
2.��� �.`:�:�,,,"Y� 1� �a� � �::�,,;:&'� '�����'���� Leaf Maple (Acermacrophyllum), Oregon Ash
Non-native English Hawthorne orchard. (Fraxinus latifolia), Cascara (Rhamnus purshiana),
Beaked Hazelnut (Corylus cornuta), Douglas Fir
z (Psuedotsuga menziesii), and Western Red Cedar
� ' `��-�a;�v'�:�Jt �.� (Thuja plicata). There are also several non-native,
;, r. � ��
r� y non-invasive tree species represented throughout
.� �*g.^ � the site, including a variety of apple trees (Malus
.a �f.��".�• t-:H-
.." r r��`.� • r
J ,.:��'�.. '� .-<��.= .. ' . spp.), pear trees (Pyrus spp.), ornamental Dogwood
e .,�,:. ."�,.� �,.`` �� ,��'r;„;'.
�-�-.,y � ::�,��{.'`. , trees (Cornus spp.) and Japanese Maples (Acer
� �" �:;�`': •�a;,:�,-.�d�.�i�"z.�.".
,�y":, ., � . ,. �r.�^ �,.� �aponicum).
�:. : ; . � �:� .:�` - t.:
y�.;'_�• . -' ;�:�.. ,•:�y, �„•..;. _
h:�� '; ,--"�:: � , �:
�-�-�;•��:- ` �� �t���� = Meadow: The meadow makes up a significant
�+�h � ,,.�-'�;.
� -. ;��' `• -- �,t;.,;w;'
� • a� portion of the vegetated area at Woodmont. These
-N •"=, ' �� ..;���,:: � :: ;���; ';� :: .���. .
-� � - ' ' � ' tall grasses create a thick habitat for nesting birds,
_ - -: :'� and provide natural, open view-corridors through
'���•.:.-, � -- the site.
�:.. �.,� .. .�._:,
.� �:k:�;: �� :::
''� ���=y'��-°�- . Wetlands: There are three areas that have been
.�..
A user-made trail running through a stand of English identified as wetland habitats, two in the western
Hawthorns (Crataegus monogyna). half of the site and one in the forested portion in the
� _ � . ; ,.�,�.-.f i .• _ .�4 , �Urt . . northeast corner. In 2015, these wetland areas were
��`' 'Y � �+° � •�'"��'- officiall delineated throu h a surve
i f � :�, .�Y.,� _::+:Y��;;'x._:::- �:-: , - �r Y J Y performed
- - � ���=:;�4,; - '� •�`':"-. �:� _ `. .�\� by Environmental Science Associates (ESA). There
� � : �.. �
- ' 'F :':�'"`_° ���, s
��'��'��'' � �-" � have been recent efforts to restore these wetlands
s �,: �-,�� � �.
:r =.<.. .� _..' ::�� , .
-:� = ' �.-'�'A�+�;y _ �;, ":'��=y,�' through revegetation.
_.�... y . =� ` .
�': �' �� ��;i."� .i�i�.����� � � r4-�- -
��_- ;�� i ��:. �;;-- L,. ' " � Invasives: A considerable number of trees on
� �
��'�=�''="`� �`�� r ��'���.�,� �" -�:�� �� site have been found by arborists to be English
..��
��,�p ����''�'- y `i= - �Y`�E `�.'R:�`-`'�" n'� Hawthorns (Crataegus monogyna), a non-native
�},S�:: _..` . '� �� � a [ . � -,a
Z,`'IE' .r��. '�:'..- - , ..,.. �Y��'�f� � � •
��.._ �'; -_ ��:� - ��-,�:,��.�-::.� ..�.� and invasive tree species. Additionall En lish
t���' - _ :�� . � }�-�� �.}�=.'�,. ''� Y, g
"� � , . �.,��. �-�.�-:-�,=:�r . Laurel (Prunus laurocerasus), English Holly (Ilex
_,�'r,�; :�'�•
�:����" _,,� ' �� ��;a�� ��"�` aquifolium), English Ivy (Hedera helix), Armenian
5�. `�'.'- � .
��:�� " �=�.���T`_.� °:;�= . -:_�
t�- �'-� � • '�= ��� - � � ;,��.- -"Y��e,�:�:� Blackberry (Rubus armeniacus), and Norway Maple
,��•:.- ��'� ::l`=- ..�.��'f:-;� .�' ° - --- :-�=
,� f a �.:; `.--''" - " � . , =`: �- (Acer platanoides) are all found currently on site.
� `+``',� ,��.-.. �;=:: � :.: - ;, -
�=" �: . � "• -� � ��="'�•� Invasive and non-native naturalizing plants such
�..�_��::�:. � _ ..t �" . . _ : ....�_ _ F __ . .
A trail runs through the forest in the northeast corner of as these can have a negative impact on native
the site. ecological systems and their long-term future.
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan � ;�'�+ '
2160495.00 ■ ��
4
Circulation and Site Access Topography
Woodmont Natural Park is situated at the The site exhibits a wide range of topographic
intersection of Knaus Road and Atwater Road. conditions, with gentle sloping meadows and steep
Atwater Lane bisects the site and is not passable forested ravines both present on-site. In the western
by vehicles. Beyond the existing north and south half of the site, high points are in the northwest
gates, which are the two main access points, the and southwest corners (at approximately 380 feet
lane narrows and deteriorates. There are a number above mean sea level), the topography gently slopes
of man made pedestrian paths throughout the toward the center of the site, ending in the channel
site, which were created through frequent use. for Atwater Tributary. The eastern portion of the
A pedestrian access point can be found at the site gently slopes from Atwater Road to the north,
southeast corner of the property. There is also ultimately dropping off into the steep forested
a designated hiking trail through the heavily ravine where the low point of the site is located (at
vegetated portion of the site, to the northeast. approximately 320 feet above mean sea level).
����� �^� � ����� �^�� �:
ti� ,�.::. �:
. . � . . . -�,�i; � ��_'�:�,,,�
�
� �y,.. - ,��.,� }''� � . - - �
.�4;�
�+ �` -� : � �,���
� �., ������
� � � =_,�,,�,- �,_ .� �
f.; n • "`-i �.� , .
?►���'k' . � �e•p , +,�' � � _ � " ,� �; . _.. _ _-�'�,
�• �= R �'- ' � � �� '��'� _
�� . ` - ��i��4 ''"y �„>,_ � ,".� ����� �
� l :y � ; ?� _ ..�..,�,.9 ��y• �r
� f�i�i�� �� � �' � .. 'l r� i��t�,��j��,� ■i�f � r
: * 'r: ��. iC 1 r
�a�i`.r .• _ � r �• ���'� A r
� - _ .ly � � - yy�����
S�`•�� � � r�' 'y �,�rTJ '���
�'�� � � ����� :�
��
Vehicular route 0 10%slope
Transition point 10-15%slope
15-20%slope
Site access - 20-25%slope
Trail �� >25%slope
Diagram showing existing vehicular travel routes (yellow Diagram showing existing topography on site. The
arrows), the location of site access points (dashed majority of the site is gently sloped, with steep sections
circles), and pedestrian trails (green dotted lines). in the southwest and northeast corners.
The large X's denote where pathways transition from
vehicular to pedestrian use.
City of Lake Oswego
August 2017
5
Water
;
The Atwater Tributary flows west-to-east into
Woodmont Natural Park from the west and '* -
into Nettle Creek, followed by Tryon Creek, and ''�8 � �� � ''
ultimately, into the Willamette River. It is primarily �!�=� . ' '
fed by run-off from surrounding properties. ��:'��`�';,':'-':: r �;s:k
... •.. �' �� y .
:``-_ ' . " .. '�V�t�'�
:-Af.�i -.� "•���•';�_'.-: _-r��-.'•.:y"✓:.•ie'�' - - •-.. � ..'� S�"
�'.�N�����` �•�rt��Y ei-i1���.i��e��.+�.¢��. ,r�
y.5•' �� ' � _ .vL�''. . . . o� _
r .'*% � s`� " . ' ' .
n?i - -.��,_; d�-- �''`"-•...ag�,+ A.
-�_:��.v Y��R3 �C
�. �' �� .�r��� 'q�i;� ��ils�•_� ' d��'d;,�,��?�::�.b,
p� _-- -- : ;.;gs .��,.,yfy G', r� -•�-.
.R.y,,.� .��� _,s��1�.� i�. �° '►.-i�
. �q�=`��Y x[.��, 4a j�/� ���'�i'�',�M.4
� r•
, .1� �.. � LF! 1�.= ��i �1 S
j 8 �y�� 6 1�� ���
� '� ^�:�' ..:��� � . �f��;�`�,., ,����
' �
The wetland and the Atwater Tributary, in summer.
:'�!"Tg�-salfv'/�,+.: 'jt:
�,r '�s.. `.;'�: �:.p�}`
� • . ,�,; � . �'';��!..
; ;YA�y��.;w�i�� �C3
. ^_ ....� .�..�f���T�� •"-"•F �"!
C� �4�i �..j�'t �'��'�
'.� •.`',�r.�•. Y.E'S��
� �t +� " � _ : . • s �'* � -�� " "°`. � �``'���
�,� + '� �_ - � ;�'",��._ 1,
����l;� -i.: ea . r.� ",�.r�� .. s`;•jl'��� ��
, -` .�� . ' �jYr. � 1 .. .. ,.:�'�'��"e f,'�G� �;�
, -, '-�c'-._�� ���w � ' . ''�''k ,�' � ''i
_ e ' :�!'� r �y� , ��{�r�"r.. �<,+`�r�' T'�}�
�.S �y �•:_',.'�� Y
� _ � �-..�._�.,.� ,- 4'r ,����'�;� - rY�3��1, �. �'
C��"'�"�� .. - .iF• e
, - `�!+ .� I� � __ =r���:.� 'y� � �i:.:
t � ?'_"� ~•�j;.:�:�::�j y'"_ ..n � i��;�M1� _ •' i+:��
�y� �� i' .:.w ��:,:
. 7�C'7C'� ��-'��_-`� �;�:.;,fk� , ,{;j� � . . y,;,,' . � �-
. _ ' ,y�tti'1'ti'.' .1r%� Y .. c•-363�,;s: 't ��r�:. '�-
- •iy - r �7ex���"�"''$' f+"�lJ..�..�a:..k; �'.�� ..: �l•': �����y�.
� • ..��•J� !'. r" -.�r,'.-.�� ' �_•�"',: s Ii:��.w. .."p:.:�...,' �.r-y.�� �T
�y�,.���.'� K'+ti� .-�v' K,'�,
. .. � . . � ' - -� '' }�,:s'[ .-� -- ..,�'-.. ."; • �-� _ �. _ .
_? . . �`..�-.`r-:!. � Y , fd.j.. .��,.. , r•„17a
�_ _ . - � . �-'�"`��° r:' �. ..� f-'�!x�n:..`{: �a;
� �- � .:: �,,�.;.�; Si..,�:_... � .� 3isr-v,�• ,Q .-... -
. _� "iti- .•-�:
_ '..-�i.-s ='C��', ^ a? .l .�=:�:;�rs t�=�sii � ��:�=�r3,'.".�� :!as
� � r' -. , ..Ai:�'_ . ;i?�-.,;� •-'azr-' . ��-...,ti ar !'.N d,-_� �5'.?'�
.;� �� `�..,a�•�:'�-:: .;�.r `'�
" �• --;,t- -_�- �,�;�����:• ;�,,;'�t .�,. . ��
���•'•a,_ ......
�7. � -•- :.�' .x. , *;; �i�Y�s.;`-;-;�... •'�,; ii. :
s,,, ,6� e� ' - a� ���" ` rAy t � �:`` .:�.'$ � .. : ''�.�:. �:''" 1���5'� �,�.
` l � �� - -- s✓'�_�.'_ 4.:e��:'+��'��,�61G't.:=�r:��.�..�.+�i'4` ..��ti..+.s d^�_=�._�rs�_:.�fi
, •.' �':�11 � "�e:.�s�."
'r�
a� �R s•� _� �� � The wetland and the Atwater Tributary, in winter.
_ +, .� �\�•!� � T k � ,;�� xti
�_ �� 1
rt �r -� ."� �� .•.,� ., ,
� +� � z. � w_ �. r �. -
� : ';�':�* ;�... i - ;.
,� � ,., . ..
-� -- .. . �. a.r-, ��.,:, ' �
�, ,� ;� :��, �,;.:
¢� �; vF
� } �f� � �.':9' '�i�y{�'•��' �.f' '•
_��._ - �-:� :v��� , ; ,�
'�. �� �,k '�'•� �.�:`.i� �
_ � +.,��; � ;�,,� -�� �
. � . � , : �,
Y �` :�; a,:
- . - .VA�:-'- ,T:-- _."^=� t ]F
E r� �'.., �'
� � �
Saturation Zone ... - � -
Runoff Direction -�� - . �'�-:��� • -
�---- . • '. -.- .-..,,,t=_,�;xi�,:;����-.•- �
�-,�.� Stream -_ :-_-,,.� -�,��' ' .-,.,ow. -:r-�• _ -��e:���f�a��ia
� - -. .. �"" � _ � . _ _A' _ .:._-.�.�,..... ',�
Wetland Delineation -_.�. '.3� y�:Y-`r- �: -:' :-:�:_��" _ _ -'"�`^.�'"- , �-�
s � „',.=, _ • "-' .:.. . �.-.=-rp�`�'
r<;+�. ,'--y.:>` �!,^�`�"'.� .-o,.; ..�
. +.y�` '.'•._'�•4'F-y� �.'� _ '• '.y�
Ordinar Hi h �� _ r ';'" •�r�.. - •-:�- ~j�
Y 9 � y " ';�.....�...i ,. -- ;:� ._ :`
, . ��:� •. - - ,.:. ��s��....,:: �; • - _
. ,.,. Water Llne ��- _ �«.••s� pr,�.` -- - .'� --==s z�_• ` '
;, .•. ., r I. , ., 'c=,:'. . ��.3. ^ tr-. ,�'� .--' .�...:-'�"' :ae
� ' e:." �_,'�' M:•',•'': . < _ -
Diagram showing existing hydrology of the Woodmont E,ri.-''.,.�:��'"�'�-,;;.�;:t�����_:,�.+�:�� �Y`��'� ��•• �-��'"'
Natural Park site, including the areas delineated as ��''-`• --•�`'�""'-'' - x'°"�'�'-�.��'�`����'3'��•
official wetlands, and the flow of the Atwater Tributary Small wetland at the forest edge in the southwestern
through the site corner of Woodmont Natural Park.
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan � ;�'�+ '
2160495.00 ■ ��
3 . SITE ANALYSIS
- =-�..�r-,�;�,� ., , _�.. ��:
3.1 OPPORTUNITIES AND • . --
� . .,i] �._c•' , 5 .�y_
:�.f�y1''��. �.�Y�/ r3R.,yir � ��
CONSTRAINTS ;iw'�.''" , �°
��:,,� � � �
�..� =� �- s
The develo ment of the Woodmont Natural Park �. : �
p ::. . ` : -.. �� ' :.
� �' •, - �: Y�� '
Master Plan stems from an in-depth understanding �>>` .���,; �,: �r ,
and analysis of the site as it currently exists, the '�Y' f.:�'� ����,. �
; . ;�1� �, �.' • ". Y�.:
site's context, and the deed that was provided by � ����;- ':,;�::�;���y���,��:�
� i�; „►k�'::'"�:'..',.:';,`"�':i��k::r.'.fi.:",�'e
Donald Meyer at the sale of his property to the City ��- _ -< � �r ,�.. :,-.�a
of Lake Oswego. Existing vegetation, topography, W"��� ' � .�i��
.. �'�� �, . ; ,;:i
::i'. �1�•... �l.:•..,„.'i�..'`;'-�;?. 3�:..
hydrology, circulation, utilities, and the need for r--�tr�'� � �''�, � ��
y.� �'A
accessible amenities characteristic of a city-wide `. - ' �-�. �:.�;'_:,,.
park represent additional layers of complexity. - : �:��.= =:�;�„�;��
These factors set the boundaries for what features i
Woodmont Natural Park will have, where they are �� :. - � ' .- :��
.�.;. ,_ .-
located, and how the are executed. Durin the � Y �� v"'}�`•�` `" "" =°��''�
Y J ;. ���;. . . ;.-�-�,;;.� .. `���.'�
inventory and analysis phase, the following key -,y F`'�� ;�:;�� , . • ' .':.;.�:��� .: .-�AR�'
��_,.:�. �r_.........,... u��. . - ��•. ._.. y���:�
opportunities and constraints presented themselves
to inform the approach to the master plan design. Site frontage along Atwater Road, looking west.
Opportunities
The major opportunities that were identified on the • Grading allows for boardwalks through
site are as follows: wetlands, allowing them to be accessible to all
■ Stream, wetland, and native forest restoration. ' The high point in the northwest corner of the
Possibility for including Oak savanna into site site can allow for an overlook for rehabilitated
design. habitats
■ Large open areas that can accommodate a ' Large gently sloped areas will minimize
variety of uses or habitat restoration grading impacts while providing ADA
accessible trails
■ A wide range of natural resources and Deed restrictions will minimize built amenities
habitat typologies that lend themselves to � Which will ultimately lower the impact to the
educational purposes and a wide range of
user experiences natural setting
. SYy, !x: .� �[y ' � �. , .r T4 �,Q.� ..
.a R:k.���� . � ��1��� � - ��.' �l � .. �.�'" . gh�( Y ".�� � ."
'�.:.:.,.-`i �� �. t ' � .1. ^`" ' °�`'
'�.. . �� � ���'�,'4� •~ r��•�•�
��Y ���� d� '� ; � ' .���� .. .. i . .N„':
� �;yl,,�:���"t� . ki� 'h. J.'� -:'Y , *' � +�.:.�� ����^�.�. .. �f:�
5 • ,}! �"p��~�µ'A`T�. 1 f�r : .� y �
a �•
'� .'�•F�s.. ' '1 ' � '.''� {,y `�k; =��.a' � "� .. ' ��� r r;. .,r.
�i'.'_:• � ''k?f�iy•1�._ ;1'� �3„� 1 'S$.j. ti ;r���' ry.�-- �'�y`'. . i ��.� ry F:. �'i .�
���'�:�r'�'.� "�y'' '��' .1 y 6. .i�.^�' ;= r•'-' � tr� . .$�� ryfM.C'� ... �`L .
. _�c,• �.f . �a, �.. , f Y k �•-
.�x:'� �� :�' °�•' :� �� :.�* ''� �' � ��� �, :
�� ,� .� � e�� ,�.,: .:w .�_k...��`_' +� .�. _. '. �� ����. 4
kf� . . J '��' .�,�.`y ' P�. �� � _�r ";� �.��e �C` �y�.� , �~ �� �J '� r, �
:=�'� "�,�S.'�����1 '���,p,�' 4 y- f e�� ' ..� ^�, ¢��,
)►'_
�`'1'.�,-1 �� � .-�� -f� d. _ . r. . .
„`i!'J+s�." �� _ -. .,»��v. . • . _ � -.-. .. ` y _ �9"}S.�� -..r j�f�•�.
Y- . - - . - .. � . .
_-'��. -�%'' �"� _ ''.y�.. - - `.�'
"' . _ ��w�r,-�,,.p."�.�r X•rrt -�. `:R�._�,c ci�� .�.' - '+�F� �� �. . � . � .
_ -.�• ��:r. .;�.. :.Y�l�� -'y.�'. _ ''aY�i ' _ _ '
`ilL., �F:' a��4�� �; 'd��.'_. .'t� �� - .�.� _ :-1:.��a...� - ..
;��'� .. :"„�.��".�'• _ _ _�.. _
"•�'� _ '.ay�.: ilav�'. ;Ja.: - •!rt�'n
_�,... &�' ...�L:;' .+�" - t
A.�.. ^�:rh�„ . _ - .:^�+.-.'.�' `_r� -
�;'� _ � ��;:�,:. :�_ . _. �':�. .
_ . _ .�__�. ...•: --- �_. _ _Q._ _ ._�:+r�'•=^±'-9�f= _-.. ._. . .. . . .:.;.m_ .„•�=� ._ _.
Panoramic view of the eastern portion of the site in winter, showing the transition from dense forest, to a hawthorn
orchard and meadow.
City of Lake Oswego
August 2017
o�
Constraints Trails throughout the site are mostly defined by
The major constraints that factor into the master Worn paths and mowed fire breaks. A single trail
plan design are as follows: cuts through the densely forested northeast corner
and is prone to erosion and washout. Atwater Lane
■ A sensitive riparian corridor that runs the bisects the site from north to south; it has been
width of the site which can be further gated at the park's property lines to create a north
impacted by animals (both domestic and wild) and south entrance leaving the asphalt on the park's
and foot traffic property to decay and a hazard to walk on. Trails on
site are not currently ADA accessible.
■ Dilapidated forest understory competing with
invasive plant species Residential properties surrounding the park on
■ Inadequate existing pathways throughout the most sides provides an opportunity for increasing
site caused by steep or unstable slopes tree density and diversity, while at the same time
screening residences from the park.
■ Undefined pedestrian access points and an
undeveloped frontage
■ Limited site lines through the park which
poses a safety hazard
■ The site is surrounded by existing and
proposed residential properties that will need
separation from the site
■ Grading and locations of existing utility lines
have the potential to impact restroom location
3.2 SITE ANALYSIS
The forested areas of the site reflect the damage
done by invasive species. A struggle with invasive
blackberry and English Ivy have impacted
groundcovers and low growth shrubs, overall
decreasing the health of these forested areas as an
ecosystem.
Most trees throughout the site are in fair condition.
There are a significant number of invasive trees
throughout the property that will need to be
addressed as they can continue to propagate and
impact this site or others in the area.
Atwater Tributary flows from west to east through
the site. On the west half of the site, the tributary
flows through a wetland that has been degraded
through vegetation reduction as well as human and
domestic animal impact. The eastern portion of the
tributary cuts through the most drastic topography
of the site. The banks of this portion have minimal
vegetation and are susceptible to erosion. The
tributary passes through a single culvert in the
middle of the site.
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan � ;�'�+ '
2160495.00 ■ ��
�$ .-�� ���� -
$ R '- .
• • i .A+ � .�'', � f ' _ . . �.
e a
qr� � . ' � ��:.. ��' ..
~ ' ' . � #q.�� RF.� �
� �
� �'�'���-� --
� ��x�1 . - �.�i
�• �� . . _ I J{IN • _`}1S kYf-'+ ��
".-�L. � '1� .. `_ ' '�
i.
�. �1 �' r�,� `��Z
.�i.• • � � • �
/1� -- � �4�I��� �' + �`
����� �
:-� � '` ,Ats ",, - ��i �'►
� .
�
'�. ,� •�, .�, •^7 '� ik ! , *-.
''� _,�s� r� 'M _`� '--
.� -
_ • �� ��
y •• d � _ _ a . .
Map of site opportunities: Map of site constraints:
1. Open area, open viewsheds, screening of neighboring 1. Sensitive riparian corridor, high water table, potential
properties contamination to Atwater Tributary from animals and
2. Improved wildlife habitat at wetland area, improved foot traffic, inadequate pathways
water quality, embankment stabilization and buffer 2. Invasive plant species present, unstable topography,
zones along Atwater tributary inadequate pathways
3. Open understory, good quality existing trees 3. Steep slopes, sensitive stream corridor, dilapidated
4. Stream restoration/native forest restoration, understory, inadequate pathways
embankment stabilization and buffer zones along 4. Hawthorne orchard, road frontage, public access
Atwater tributary, contours and ecosystem enables a points, limited sight lines, inadequate pathways
variety of user experiences 5. Narrow existing right of way, inadequate pathways
5. Steady slope, pedestrian access to site, ADA 6. Existing residential areas
accessibility, mix of open spaces and medium density
vegetation 7. Future residential areas
City of Lake Oswego
August 2017
09
4. PLAN N I N G PROCESS AN D
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Through broad community input and a clear conditions, and what constraints and opportunities
decision-making process, the City of Lake Oswego the site allows. Thirty-four people attended,
Parks and Recreation Department, the design team, including representatives from the PAC. The group
and the community have worked closely together included long time Lake Oswego residents as well as
to determine what Woodmont Natural Park will newcomers, neighborhood members, parents, and
become. dog owners. The meeting provided attendees the
opportunity to voice suggestions and concerns, and
The framework for the current master planning consider options for the park. Interactive activities
efforts is based in a combination of Public Advisory With participants followed a presentation in which
Committee (PAC) meetings with the design the community learned more about the park, its
team, centered on neighborhood and city voices; relationship to the city, key anchor locations in the
public outreach meetings where people can offer area, and the restrictions and intended purpose of
feedback, ask questions, and stay informed as the Donald Meyer's deed that created the park design
process evolves; and online surveys to ensure that parameters.
anyone who hasn't been able to attend in-person
still has a substantive opportunity to have their
voices heard. Refer to the enlarged timeline in Outreach Event #2
Appendix E for a list of all events and meetings. The second public outreach meeting took place on
May 22, 2017, and included 25 attendees. The goal
4.1 PUBLIC OUTREACH EVENTS at this meeting was to get feedback on three design
alternatives developed for the Master Plan.
Outreach Event #1 Outreach Event #3
The first public outreach meeting and design Scheduled to take place October 02, 2017.
charrette occurred on March 20, 2017, and
was designed to provide the community an
understanding of the site location, existing 4.2 PUBLIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MEETINGS
f _ C �� The Public Advisory Committee (PAC) was
�� established to represent a broad range of
�, --- stakeholders, and to communicate to the broader
�� R �.� ��. community about the ongoing efforts of the
�� � � �j Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan. The committee
�" 'ti� is composed of park neighbors, representatives of
'� the Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation department,
�� other city employees, and citizens of Lake Oswego.
�`r ,� � At the beginning of the master planning process, a
charge was given to the PAC members, that they
would be a mouthpiece for the community and
� � _ encourage those impacted by the master plan to
� ` be invested in the process to ensure a successful
� r �-
outcome. Working with the consultant team,
. Y�� ,� a �� the PAC offers feedback, reviews background
` `` ` documen ts, an d con tri bu tes to t he vision, princip les,
Lake Oswego resident Peter Wright (left) and Mackenzie and programming elements of the Master Plan.
design team member Steven Tuttle discuss the existing
conditions of the Woodmont Natural Park site at a public
outreach event. Photo:Lake Oswego Review
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan � ;�'�+ '
2160495.00 ■ ��
10
PAC Meeting #1 4.3 ONLINE SURVEYS
The first Public Advisory Committee (PAC) meeting In an effort to gain further input from the general
occurred on March 2, 2017. During this PAC kick-
off ineeting the Site Analysis and Project Timeline public, two online surveys were conducted. These
developed by Mackenzie and City of Lake Oswego surveys were intended to engage individuals who
Parks and Recreation was presented and received could not attend outreach events #1 and #2. Survey
positive feedback from PAC members. questions and responses can be viewed in full in the
appendices.
PAC Meeting #2 Online Survey #1
The second PAC meeting occurred on April 5, Survey #1 went live in the days following Outreach
2017. PAC members discussed the public outreach Event #1. This survey ran for two weeks to
meeting, which most them attended and provided accommodate anyone who may have been unable
constructive positive input. Discussion included to attend the public meeting. Ultimately there were
next steps and the development of three design 139 respondents. This survey was designed to
alternative options to be presented during the
second public outreach design meeting. gauge potential park users, what people like about
that park as it currently exists, desired elements
that would like to be seen in the master plan, and
PAC Meeting #3 concerns about the master planning process. A
The third PAC meeting occurred on June 7, 2017. section for comments was provided for additional
Discussions covered review of public outreach input when required for some questions.
design charrette and online survey #2. The design
team discussed the next steps of developing a Online Survey #2
final Master Plan that pulled key elements from the Survey #2 was live for one week following Outreach
previous design alternatives, and defined the public Event #2 and received 62 respondents. This survey
input gathered to date. was designed to walk individuals through the three
design alternatives by providing an image of each
PAC Meeting #4 alternative with a narrative. This was followed by
The fourth PAC meeting occurred on August 2, 2017. specific questions about different locations for each
At this meeting, Mackenzie presented the Master element, whether or not individuals like the idea of
Plan for review and a certain elements, and what the pros and cons were
pproval from PAC members. for each alternative. When questions called for it, a
section for comments was provided for additional
input.
City of Lake Oswego
August 2017
11
5 . MASTER PLAN
The Master Plan is intended to create design Alternative A
direction for a city owned and operated park. The This alternative is characterized by two large,
park design is strongly influenced by the deed separated, grassy open areas. The northwestern
restrictions set forth when the city purchased the
property from Donald Meyer in 1997. The Preferred portion of the site includes boardwalks and an
Alternative for Woodmont Natural Park is the overlook. Above this area is a group of trees that
culmination and expression of all of the input could be fruit or nut trees that enable casual
gathered throughout the public planning and design foraging from park users. The southwest area of
process. The Preferred Alternative applies the the site is the site of a small, fenced, dog park
constraints of the deed and the site to the desired and an interactive natural area where younger
program elements. The Preferred Alternative is users can create, collect, build, or climb on natural
intended to be the groundwork for the Construction elements such as boulders, logs or sticks. In the
Document phase. forested northeast portion of the site, the existing
trail system is enhanced and expanded upon.
Bisecting the northeast and southeast segments
5.1 CONCEPTUAL ALTERNATIVE of the site is a boardwalk. South of the boardwalk
PLANS is an outcropping of boulders, creating areas of
visual interest and use for children. Directly south
Based on early input from the community and the is a natural open space consisting of tall, bird
nesting habitat. Lastly, a restroom is located near
parks department, three conceptual alternative the southeast corner of the site close to the parking
plans were created to illustrate program elements area, which is accessed off of Atwater Road.
on the site. Each plan had common program
elements as well as elements that were unique to
each plan. The location, shape and size of these _ �
were expressed uniquely in each plan. These plans j ' �� �
were shared with the community at the second ��"------�----------- ���° 'j' `�
public outreach event and online to gain additional '
1 I
feedback from the community. _ _ �� _____� ��
t -- - _- =�
1 � n •� C�-� �w.
.t �• � x� ��::.� , y �1
� � 1r '� . I /f�M1
.�c � � � �� � .�
' - . 1 � '_" '-�� � y.
IS �
� �� �� 1.
_ ;[ �
~i �,•� � ��', �
�� . f• -� ,.. �4 � ��
,,'•• -
;,1\,� I -
� = I I �.-
� ,�
!' - '� r- . I'y tiy �•�'�� �
� ' � i��
` " `-..,.V e.
� ,�.. � '/ '�!
� , � - -- .,��:, I
� �,� y� '�� + ,��
-�_---- �' __ _ �' - - �--_
� �- --- __ -- - - -
. - �- - _ ;� � , - --
, � �
Conceptual Alternative A
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan � ;�'�+ '
2160495.00 ■ ��
12
Alternative B Alternative C
This alternative is characterized by a long, open view This alternative is characterized by a large
corridor diagonally across the site. At a high point contiguous open space with a greater number
to the north, an overlook takes advantage of views of programmed elements that are separated and
across the site. The western half of the site is largely surrounded by a continuous loop trail. The northeast
dedicated to the habitat and natural character of corner illustrates the introduction of a native oak
the wetland, while the southeastern portion is given savannah landscape. An arcing boardwalk crosses
to more usable open space. The site is bounded the stream tributary and offers an overlook that is
by new trees, and the trails in the existing forested closer to the wetland and lower in elevation than the
area are enhanced and expanded. Wider paths other two design alternatives. The center of the site
provide primary circulation around the site, while is given to a flexible and usable open area. To the
smaller paths provide connection and movement east of that, a large fenced dog park is shown with
throughout the enhanced wetland area. Interactive a mound in the middle that offers views throughout
natural areas along the forest edge create a the park. South of the dog park is a grove of
sequence of experiences for hands-on learning trees that speak to the history of the site and the
and engagement that are influenced by forested numerous trees that are there now. Adjacent to this
and wetland ecologies. Stormwater, or runoff, is grove is a fenced community garden and a larger
celebrated in this concept and would flow towards restroom. In this alternative, interactive natural areas
the wetland. There is no designated dog park area in are smaller and dispersed along the circulation
this concept. The restroom is shown on the east side route. A small and rugged amphitheater looks out
of the site and parallel parking is delineated along onto the natural areas and parking comes off of the
Atwater Road. Atwater Lane right of way.
�'�- �_ ��. � _ __ �� �.�a
� _ _ �--+ - r �f---�, � . �;
�I � TrTr�Y'�1»,Pr.� _ _ __ _ � � �L'_�'_..-.' — — '�
-, �.• � .��'J`''` :`r-- .�
, , � '� �� •
: .� � ' ' .. -� tiF:�' ' . � .,.M1' '�.:�
,. I� .• . � � •, f �_ . ,
�� ;� �, �.. " - � ` ' �y:r �.�� •:�
� ;' . , ';'�.--
,�, , _ '� !�, .;;%�r �.�'<� -
ti�.�'i1�� �`,�"�l ���� �" ..!?"_i ��.
� f � ` p k � ' •`.'- �� �
� ' a.:_: i� � � �,��� w
:� •..N , � n� � � ^ � �'+�- i
� ��°' �,�1�
%��,,; � '�'�•
�,1 �i • - ��. �.
�-�� . �,�, �- � '' � ` _ �
.. � . � :� r�� '���r� ..
� . .. • � :� . �� .
.L ^ ��� � � � ��
■Y � � �� � „ �:r .�_%�
+ w � � � ` +�' � �� • � � I r �
� '�, r R � ' �. �-;_..... �
- ,
'� � �' . ,' �, .
�.� � � l�, �,
. .. _. - _ .
. � . .
= : �: .
,:
-------��Y~ __________
- - --- _ . -= - -- � ._.: . ._ --- _
- ��- - ��-
Conceptual Alternative B Conceptual Alternative C
City of Lake Oswego
August 2017
13
5.2 SUMMARY OF OUTREACH For Option C, key takeaways included the following:
RESULTS ■ Pathways were too structured
There were several key takeaways from the ' Parking layout was generally disliked
combined public meetings, online surveys and PAC ■ Proposed restroom was too large
meetings. These results are outlined below. No desire for a fenced, off-leash dog park
For Option A, key takeaways included the following: ■ Many respondents wanted fewer interactive
elements
■ Too much area dedicated to boardwalk
■ There was a general feeling that this plan was
• Good path circulation too structured/planned
■ Parking layout was generally disliked ■ Majority opposition to the idea of a
■ No desire for a fenced, off-leash dog park community garden
■ Respondents were not excited about the
interactive areas In general, respondents wanted to keep
■ Respondents liked the wooded natural tree �/�/oodmont's natural feeling. Most respondents
area liked the introduction of oak savanna habitat.
A community garden or dog park was largely
■ Respondents did not like the proposed bird viewed as unwanted. Parallel parking, rather than a
blind designated parking lot, was the preferred parking
scheme for the park. A small restroom, designed to
For Option B, key takeaways included the following: be in keeping with the natural feel of the park was
The perimeter loop trail was desired, but there desired. Most respondents liked creating boardwalks
■ were too many trails overall or raised walkways in areas of the park that can get
too muddy or fill with water in the winter. This way,
• Excellent parking location, clear choice for the residents can still reach those areas on foot during
majority of respondents the wet months. Respondents liked the notion of
■ Many respondents had mixed feelings on the trails and boardwalks but did not want the site to
proposed restroom feel overdeveloped. Interactive areas received mixed
reviews but the final sense was that folks liked the
■ Absence of a dog park was seen as a positive notion of havin laces that ou "ha
g p y ppen upon" to
■ Respondents preferred the more limited explore but, again, didn't want enhancements to feel
approach to interactive areas "contrived."
■ There was a generally positive response to
the proposed natural spaces
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan � ;�'�+ '
2160495.00 ■ ��
14
5.3 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Interactive Natural Area: At the forest edge is an
interactive natural area that will cater to younger
The combination of feedback from the public park users. Characterized by natural elements such
meeting, the online survey and the subsequent as logs, stumps, boulders, and stormwater, this
PAC meeting on June 9th generated very useful, space is intended to nurture a love for nature and
thoughtful feedback for the design team to create provide tactile experiences for users.
a final, preferred alternative. The elements that
follow were included in the Preferred Alternative as Enhanced Forest: The plan indicates improving the
described below. existing forested area through trail improvements,
creek restoration and improved understory planting.
Parking: Parking will be required at the park to The intent is to create a healthier ecosystem,
accommodate users coming from other areas of improve user experience and stabilize degraded
the city. The plan indicates parallel stalls along slopes.
Atwater Road and this approach will continue to be
studied in the next phase. A traffic study was not Oak Savanna: The oak savanna and understory
required for this site, but a traffic letter based on trip plant selection are envisioned to be reflective of
generation and trip distribution explained that there the regional ecology and provide valuable habitat
would be minimal impact on the supporting road for wildlife. The goal is to encourage a regeneration
network. of the traditional oak stands of the past and allow
native plant establishment to occur.
Restroom: There will be one restroom with two
unisex stalls in the southeast portion of the site Overlook: Within the oak savannah area is an
to serve park users. The restroom is sited in this overlook that gives park users the chance to view
location for ease of maintenance access and the park from a higher vantage point. The overlook
proximity to connecting utilities. It will require a will be subtle in its design and will be served by a
pump to connect to street utilities near the corner of trail loop.
Atwater Road and Atwater Lane. Enhanced Wetlands: The Atwater Tributary runs
Flexible Open Space: This grassy area is intended to West to east through the northern portion of the site.
provide usable open space for unstructured active This area will be improved through the eradication
uses such as throwing a frisbee. It will gently slope of invasive species and the introduction of additional
to the north to create a relatively flat surface with Wetland species to improve the biodiversity of
open views to the forest. This area will be irrigated flora and fauna. In an effort to minimize permitting
and mowed semi-regularly by the parks department. requirements and timelines and distribute project
resources where they are most useful, minimal
Natural Open Space: This area will have a steeper grading is proposed within the wetland area.
slope than the flexible open space and is intended
to be of a natural and historical character dominated Boardwalk: In order to provide passage across the
by taller nesting grasses and improved biodiversity. Wetland and through the often-soggy natural area,
These natural areas will have selective mowed paths a boardwalk bisects the western portion of the site
to create unique user experiences and a secondary lust south of the wetland and then turns north to
link to adjacent uses. This grassy open space will cross the tributary. The boardwalk will be slightly
be mowed infrequently by parks staff in order to raised above finish grade and may have bumpers or
manage fire risk. Existing native trees that are in kickplates, but not guardrails.
good health have been retained in this area.
City of Lake Oswego
August 2017
15
`° ;= :: - -,� -.� �
_ �i�, � �� y�
' 4 . � . ' . � �!�► •6
.."'v ' v . �t ���F 1 ..��.
� y r- �� - ������♦ ..f�. ,...F�°'�' -
`�..� ...0 �'r'�i .r....
� `�-- - ' �43 = - }
• • �� � � � '�
.;
�
� ' ' �-� � � ��
,:. � �� -�" ': �
':r... ,,,..,.�r-+ r� .
o. � i � '' =-.
. ' . �� -'�
. v � ti' --t - �.�`� � �� ,�
' `.__ `_�; ' � . C.
+ _ -- - �. .
� ,� o �� ��'�;.' _ . � . � F -.
. � � -��.�;@; � � . -
, . . � - . - `_`� �� -;
.�• . : ��: .,� .{�
�`
� ; �1 `-- _
�; ' ..
�� -� � � ' �
�` o �� � � o '
- �:_ . -
- � �:* � �
- . . . �- �
. . . • � _�- _ . fti . +�'
�+� ,_� . ��.! *� � �A
i� ■
1 •:r
� � � � .,�� D �, •
� '
. J�� �� � � , . r _
`� .�. =
•. � � . r -.� .
� u�
� �.
� � .
� ' _ -ti�'1� -- � ;'�-.
�'� "- �. ,�:.,::.
FCnaus Road ---�� � .
�� _�� ��.� ,.�� _ �.,.� ���-- �
� -, _ . .� ..�.- - -.- .� �'°�
LEGENo Q o zo o so
Q Parking 0 Intera�ti�e Natural Area Q Enhanced Wetland
� Restroom Q Wooded Trail � Boardwalls
� Ffexible Open Space � Oak Savanna
{� Natural Open Space m D�erlaak
Preferred Alternative
For an enlarged version,
refer to Appendix C
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan � ;�'�+ '
2160495.00 ■ ��
16
'���=:�
. ���' �� � S•��'' ..
�- t' - ". �'. _t'"-` ,i, , '�'
��� �,t� ' r:; -
, :�_ ���
� "�':��;, �
s +r J;
� � o 0 o v �r
5ection�ne
�• -
_:�':
� ��. �
� � � - �,,�P� - t. - -
i
n � �� , �; _ •
�
� � � � �
Section Two
LEGEND
� Parking Q Interacti�e Natural Area Q Enhanced Wetland
�] Restroom Q Waoded Trail g Boardwalk
� Flexible Open 5pace � Oak 5a�anna
� Natural ❑pen 5pace � D�erlook
Section Illustrations of the
Preferred Alternative
City of Lake Oswego
August 2017
17
� � . j =•'-�'��,�. �-��.,,....,. -
� :��.'��ar•;�. ,. � .. ..•...
_ �� '�'';�;;. �'::'.''r'x ��s
* �;�= �:� 'va
r::a• �-
� ..��t�. ��,�a'
..r � _ - l' _ ���%e:.
','`� ' -- ti..
�� �i�.. � �h. ''� -
J '"i - � ?'' - - .� �.�' � �;f.
- _ f 1 n.3-s�-.�' 'r
�� :���h. ��; �•�'; �'a.
-- �+� _- }, ,��.�;a.
���� -... . _ . ._ _ _ . ..
Restrnom Fiexlble Dpe�� 5pace Natural 4pen 5pace
� v ,E � ' . ,
� ` �� �� Z + � � � � � �i
����y�� ; ,<; '" �' ` �� . I � k`' k 4 .r ,.
.....:.k� i ;�1 . � �� .� 'f+ r� �..
II�-j�y,��,,"�,� > i �\' �'t Y' � � f f �j 'i f r ,�•
- �'_ '�. ;„:..'
. . . `� � � _ - � i.: � z�,;.
�.r �-Y�� -� �x �::: �j; � ,
_- �,�� � -... ;'..�';� • I '- : ' 1'
-�� � :,. �.'-�
__ r - :� =�` \ :� � ��.,r�..� _ ;;'•. ?�9ra.�1,K:�,;�.o,�
_ -- � �;, „_� Z r .e
Inter�r_ti�e N�tural .arPa 1nt2ra�tive Natural Ar2a Intera�=ti��e Natural Area
t ~ � • ,-��
: � • ►�:. � ��- -.. _�,.,..�
� � ' J' �. ". �:r..y: - _ � ' . _ � �
,���"�"�:.��� = = ��,,,, -_ - - - - .,•� . _
�."Y.— a.rw .�. � � w :: .
f.-� •� . :�c¢.. .-�� :;y��y?s . - . .� t
�F�•':_ � '�' �_ �S", �.. ��"�9:��i ~ - "- ' -�_. . � �}1�
fF=�"• �`:R��<". -. ; ��.:;, �� .
l F; :��::�s__:x,� �': .., _ .) - � , �.
���a .-. :,��,��J �� .�•
_.�v�,_; •.N„`s-�'.:- ':.:���"�,_ _•.'�..._ �'� _ _� - �;. +� � 1
.r y'�.7.r?�:' �. •,- :_�`..=.�3�..-.,-3
ar�`F'..'-':C. ''s�l^. �,_1�.-=`'i.' -�' _a . - - _ f�:�4
s��..�+' `}~- --
�;� �' -.�� �
Interacti�e Natural Area Ro�k dutcrapping Patf�way
� _
� ` _ _�.i c� s` ; Y•
. i '� � � i f
�, � �. ns�� ��L�r f � 1 A �
���'�F��� .i � .r �� �� p
• 1� !�I � �. ;� ��i �r- .,.
' a �il �y, �/� . ,s. t�. �r y
i �i , � •'R�r � `-•'""_;"• _-TS -1_ _ =^�`^ . •
.4��` ��'�r'--�K�j�:r.��� .... _��v �` _ � i � ' -r. ..
I�• �� ;.,., _..�l�L.'� �
�-� ' _
Path�::��y Pathv�ay Oak 5a�anna
� �1 I; �
�� . .����� '���.. r �"�,��'��" �- �
� �' - , � ;��a��.� - , �.�y• �` ,�
�",,.� � �„ 6 �';; ,-a= ` + =�i��s•�''�'''. ` - .
�• �y .:,a'�� � r�;.r�. .r C-��:r.,• ."�.� ,�}�'���.c��" .� _ .i'� �� *,
.., .�L �' �;� . s :�; �.
��. ��.�� .��i "r 4L. '.Y� • .y� �1'R.;'+�.5'pf°�du_
�:�id"�;�y, 'i.l�.i� - .�;'in�•- .. -' — _
��*�' h ...�... . :•g.����.�� -j .
t ' j[�. t s,r .r
�.�� ^��� :. �{i'�� , _
�� �� . � � �E�
^�p,$�•-' �F".'�"6��-`'''�.�...'.'�' 5' :.: ' �1'"'r'....' .
Y �� ' � �i F^ � �- �r-•....� ,
x �g� : ;.� •.pw. �r.
_ '�5�''"' ��t��.. . _.. _ t,.=�,,� `'�� �
su; •,�: -r:..
Enhan�ed Wetla��d � Soardwalk Boardwalk
Precedent Images for the
Preferred Alternative
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan � ;�'�+ '
2160495.00 ■ ��
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan — Engineers Estimate of Cost
September,2017
ITEM# DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS
1 Sediment Fencing LF 2000 $ 3.00 $ 6,000
2 Inlet Protection EA 2 $ 90.00 $ 180
3 Tree Protection Fencing LF 2000 $ 5.00 $ 10,000
4 Construction Entrance EA 1 $ 2,500.00 $ 2,500
5 Temporary Construction Fencing w/Gate LS 1 $ 18,000.00 $ 18,000
Erosion and Sediment Controls Sub-Total $ 36,680
DEMOLITION
6 Tree Removal EA 306 $ 900.00 $ 275,400
7 Clearing and Grubbing SF 107223 $ 0.25 $ 26,806
8 Remove asphalt SF 6100 $ 1.00 $ 6,100
Demolition Sub-Total $ 308,306
EARTHWORK
9 Excavation CY 1500 $ 15.00 $ 22,500
10 Stockpiled Soil CY 200 $ 25.00 $ 5,000
11 Hauling and Disposal CY 200 $ 35.00 $ 7,000
12 Finish Gradin SF 100000 $ 0.10 $ 10,000
Earthwork Sub-Total $ 44,500
UTILITIES
Water
13 1"Water Supply pipe-Restroom LF 200 $ 30.00 $ 6,000
14 1 1/2" Water Su I i e LF 200 $ 35.00 $ 7,000
Water Sub-Total $ 13,000
Electric
15 Electrical conduit-Restroom LF 200 $ 20.00 $ 4,000
Electric Sub-Total $ 4,000
Sewer
16 6"pipe to sewer system(including cleanouts) LF 270 $ 90.00 $ 24,300
17 Sanitary sewer pump and manhole LS 1 $ 15,000.00 $ 15,000
Sewer Sub-Total $ 39,300
SITE WORK
Pedestrian Paving
18 Boartlwalk SF 4020 $ 60.00 $ 241,200
19 Decomposed Granite SF 27400 $ 3.00 $ 82,200
Pedestrian Paving Sub-Total $ 323,400
Site Structures
20 Restroom Building EA 1 $ 165,000.00 $ 165,000
Site Structures Sub-Total $ 165,000
Page 1
Interactive Natural Area
21 Boulders EA 28 $ 400.00 $ 11,200
22 Skinned Logs EA 6 $ 900.00 $ 5,400
23 Stepping Logs LS 1 $ 3,600.00 $ 3,600
24 Bark Mulch SF 11800 $ 3.00 $ 35,400
Interactive Natural Area Sub-Total $ 55,600
Landscaping
25 Planting(shrubs,grounticover,mulch) SF 51968 $ 4.00 $ 207,872
26 Seeded Rough Meadow(native,nesting,pollinator mix) SF 100000 $ 0.25 $ 25,000
27 Seeded Lawn SF 23405 $ 0.25 $ 5,851
28 Topsoil CY 1900 $ 30.00 $ 57,000
29 8-10'Evergreen Trees EA 15 $ 300.00 $ 4,500
30 2.5"Caliper Trees EA 23 $ 300.00 $ 6,900
31 >4"Cali er Oaks,s ecimen EA 15 $ 600.00 $ 9,000
Landscaping Sub-Total $ 316,123
Irrigation
32 Temporary Irrigation System SF 117000 $ 0.75 $ 87,750
33 Permanent Irrigation System SF 35000 $ 2.00 $ 70,000
Irrigation Sub-Total $ 157,750
Environmental
34 Stream Restoration SF 40700 $ 2.00 $ 81,400
Environmental Sub-Total $ 81,400
OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS
35 Pedestrian Concrete Paving(with Base) SF 616 $ 7.50 $ 4,620
36 Vehicular Asphalt Paving(with Base) SF 6100 $ 12.00 $ 73,200
37 Striping LS 1 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500
38 Parking Lot Signage/ADA LS 1 $ 1,500.00 $ 1,500
39 Stormwater Planting SF 2100 $ 7.00 $ 14,700
40 Storm system LS 1 $ 12,500.00 $ 12,500
41 Concrete Curb,6"no gutter LF 330 $ 21.00 $ 6,930
Off-Site Improvements Sub-Total $ 114,950
Sub-Total $ 1,660,009
30%Contingencv $ 498,003
Base Project Sub-total $ 2,158,012
Permits&Fees $ 22,000
8%MobilizationllnsurancelBonding $ 172,641
10%Overhead&Profit(Contractor) $ 215,801
10%Design&Engineering $ 215,801
Estimate - Base Pro'ect Total $ 2,784,255
Page 2
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
SPECiA L WAHRANT'Y D,EED
D�NALD W. M.EYER, Gran�or, �Qn�reys and specially
warrants �o CI1'Y OF LAICE QSWEG�, Grante�, the property
describ�d on E�hi.bi'� A at�ached I�ere�o {�he "Praperty" } , �ree
a� encumbrances creat�d or suff�red by Grantar egcept far li�n
of �axes nat y�� due and payable and encumbrances created
pursuant �a this ❑eed.
The �rue �onsa.deratian fo�r thi.s cQn�eyance is $35D. 4�0 .
By acceptance v� �his Deed. Gran��e �ovenants ,
�ramzses, and a�rees �a ma�.ntai.n the Prvper�y subject to the
fallawing restriC�ions wY�ich Grant�r and Gxantee agz�ee are
intend�d to �ind Gran�ee, its s�ccessvrs and assigns :
�a} Grantee shal]. estab3.i.sh a park on �he
Prape�ty which sha�.3. be "Woadmant Na�ural Park" ��he
"Park"} ;
{b} The Paxk shall fare�er be main�ained hy
Grante� in its histaric na�ural �ondi�ion with
trees , haw�ho�rns. shrubs, gra�ses. and berry bushes
and vines which are Qnl�r na�ive to this are� and,
excep'� as pravided hEr�in, wi�h nv s�ru�tures.
playgrounds . picnic equi.pment. o� a�h�r impravemen'�s
or appurt�nanc�s c�ns'�ruc�ed �herean;
(c} Grant�e shall make every �£fQr� possik�le
t� retain such ❑� the tal.�. n�sting grasses ❑n the
Park praperty £ox� bird nesting purposes and, in
additian. sha].1. construc� at l.eas� one smal.l dam on
CL;{i�-i�.0 ;u �'". A�'F;��� P,ti�.���;���':
GOrY 0�= �i�;� i:�':�li�lA� R�CCr:':�'J
t�N _!�� L,� -
���As_____q���73 �1�--- - �
FiRv=AM�Fi�Ci,;•: : -L� IRSURANG� , _ � _
�Q!�"�.4!�Y, :v '�;�� �x�en
''V ._._�..-�_.�.
�he Park proper�y £�r the maintenance and
pr�serva�ion of wa�erfowl;
�d� Gran�ee sha�� have �he right of reasonable
maintenan�e of �he Pa�k �roperty, including the
�zgh� ta rem�ve dis�ased, dead. or dangerous trees
or ❑egeta�i�n;
(e} Pathways may be c�nstru��ed upQn �he Park
£ar ped�strian use only bu� na hard surfaces may be
used �q �v��r the pa�hways or any other portion a�
�he Park, e�cept t�e parking Io� as se� f�rth below
zn su�paragraph (i} ;
�f} �n accardance wi�h appZicab�e regulations
of �he san�tation au�hQri�ie5, Gz�ntee may c�nstruct
and main�ain a small zestroom buzlding on thE Park
property;
(9) No lightxng of any �ype shall be erect�d
or maintain�d an �he Park prapexty except far the
in�erior por�ian a£ the restrooms described in
subparagraph (f} , above. and ��c�pt f�r low
silhou��te wa�kway and guide ligh�s alang �he -
pa�hways, zf the same are r�qu�red �or sa�ety
�urpvses ;
{h} A grass sQcc�x field. w�th saccer goal
pQsts on�y and no ath�r qQal pos�s or �acksta�s , may
b� ��nstruc��d and ma�ntained an �he Park prop�r�y;
and
� _ � _
(i} A parking lv� rnay be cans�ruGt�d and
mazn�ain�d an the Park prop�rty in a�cardance with
applica�le czty and/or county cade requir�ments
pravided, hawever, that the placemen� of �he parking
lot and its cons�ruc�ion be accam��ished in a manner
which w�u1d be consis�ent w��h �he na�ural s�a�e o�
th� Park property and tha� a�I mea�ures be takeri as
are posszb�e to avazd the use af grave� . �ement. or
blacktop in the cons�ruc�ion o� fhe surface ther�a� .
The forego�ng c�venants shall be co�enants running
with �he land. Upon a breach a� any of �h� �aregaing
cvvenants , Grantor or his hears may enter the Pr�perty and
farfei� the �sta�e gran�ed her�in.
Dated.: .2�� _ � �_ _ , 199�.
oc-�(N1 A.0 d ��Ji-
J3�NA�D W. MEYEI� �
�?'A�.� �F �REG�N }
r` } SS
C�Ul�.��' QF ����"i c`��7S}
on this v�� day �� . 1991. before me, -
a natary pub�ic zn and fax said c�unty and �ate, personal�y
appear�d the wzthin-named D�n.a1d �. Meyer, �o me knpwn to be
the id�ntical person described an and wh� executed tf�e
faregaing a�nstrumen�, and acknawledg�d �Q me that he executed
th� same f��ely and vo3.untarily fvr '�he us�s anr3 pu�poses
�herein s'�ated.
IN TEST�M�NY WHEkEOF I ha�� h�reun�o se� my hand and
a��ixed my o��a.cial seal �he da�e first hereinabnv� wri�'�en.
� .
otary Pu�lic far Qregon
_ y �vmmis�iqn expir�s : �, � 5 �
. - 3 -
EXHIBIT A
PRDPERTY DESCRI�TI�N
PARCEL I :
Lo�s I3 , 14 , 15 and ].G, Trac� 1, WD�DMONT, in the County o�
C�aekamas and State of �regon.
PARCELL �I •
The North thre�-quar'�ers �f Lo� 3. Tract 4 , W��DMONT 15T
ADDITi�N, in �he Caun�y �f Cl.ackamas and S�a�e �f ❑reg�n,
Al.so known as Tax Lo'� Z and Tag L�t 3 . Woadman� ��t Addi�ian,
Clackamas County■ ❑regan (address : 13701 S.W. A�water Lane�
Lak� ❑swegQ, �regvn 97434} . The proper�y can also ��
describ�d as Tax Lo�s 19D0 and 2�a4 of Assessoz ' s M�p 2 lE 4AC,
C�ackamas Caunty, Oregon.
�
. �. . . , .
,-�� °F'�� ��F- ��1 T Y .�J F L A K E C�S 1N E G� �$�ao:oR�, , ;z3o�$
� � No: 68'S44
LAKE O,SWEGO,OREGON 97034
.. � •
o t� ,����2b0�b,�4...20���r�
RFGC� . • � . � _ 09/...19./:97 ,. .
PAY �,�TO HilNDRED SIXTY THO�iSAND SIX HUNDRED FQUR�iDQLT;EiRS AND TWENTY CE1�FT5**�*�
=� -. , . . � " �._ : _�h:•.. N 1 :s
�oRneAOF FIR.ST AMERICAN: •TITLE . ' .- •�..:_'` '_�r� .�_. Y___....
r!� ' ,,,'. ��, .��!+ ��..
� � �; c r��v+r. ��.,,,,„, .•
> i r �F ��i � �`� � ,y�
� r'• . - �( • ^'
.. . � � � . .. �� . , y�.+ 4"�Jr';.�..� d, r't i.ti. �'i;J�..
. _.
��'0 68 5�, 4�i' �: 1 2 3000 2 20�: 2 28 000 Z 2 3 5 u'
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO—wc�oSwecso,oAEGo�u e�o�+ ,
V�UCEROI q�QD p�,�pS� PROPERTY AQUISTION
VENDOR�� 503601 MEYEk ESTATE— $260,b44.2D
�¢ST �M�Rf� F�rs� ' rrierrcax� �'z�1� �r�s�rranc ompa�zy �� D,�,� ��
ti �y �
�
An aswmepb�Ry,neSs nameal 71T�E INSIJRANCE COAAPAHY�F flp��,4N
� .�-� u�Gro�r�.a� c�MM��crAL nzvzszo�
��[}S.W. Market 5t., Suite 177G Partiand, Oregon 97201-578G
(S173} 795-760� Na[ional I-8[]0-q29-3G51 Fax{5�3} 795-7514
c�,asz�r� s��a�rar��ur
Escrow: 97154565 Order_ 829958
Escrow �fficer: M. J. Kzmball Date: 9�17�97
�sxzr�.��n
ESCRDW 5TA'FEMEItiTT OF: C�,ty �� Lake Oswegn
Praperty Adciress: �.37��. SFi Atwater Lane, Lake Qswego, Q�t 97434
�TEMS DE"r3ITS CREDTTS
T'OTAI, CQNSIDWRATI�N
3�o, Rao.�4
PftORAT���vS�A.�J�3S'Y'MEN'F5 FFtOM TO
Cavnty Taxes� TA�C ACCflUNT 20�258 �
CL�RENT Y6AR TAXES A'_' $3,�58.2� 7�Q1�97 9I19I97
County '�axes, 7'AX ACCOtTNT 2�0071 757.5�
CUP.R�NT YEAR T,r.1�CE 5 A'� $2, 7 9 6.�3 7�d 1/9 7 9/19�5 7
❑ption Paymen� 612.83
i�onthl S�, or �
y �p�zon Credit
38,5L �4
TITL� CHARGES T(7 �'izst Amex'i.can Tit�.e Comgany
'7eed Recording �'ee 15� . 0�
�SCRDW C:I.AF2GE5
�scrow Fee
325.DD
13ALANCE LrT7E ESC12�W
�, .
�'OTALS . .
$ 35�,�75 . 04 $ 350,475.a0
City Qf Lalce flswego
BY: �
�e��� ��-���� -
�
llaugl�s J. Schmitz, Ci�y Manager
Certi�ied t❑ be a Txue and Exa�� CvPY
�elivered ta Parties Herein.
Escrow affzcer: M. ,3_ ICa.mbal�
� �
Recording Date:
�5� AMFR!
k� c� Frrs�- ��a�rrcae� Tzf.�e Ins�rran�� or�pany af �regan
y
�Vn assumaCbu.r+xss rtame o! TITLE IN$t1RANCE CdIv1PANY OF QqEGON
� .�� R]EGI�NAI. C�MIV1E�tCIA.L D�VI5I4N
?��S.W. Market St., S�ite 177� Portland, �regan 972Q1-5785
(5D3) 795-7540 I*iational 1-8C1Q-9�9-3551 Fax t5�3) 795-7514
CLDS�NG STR`FEMENT
Esc�Qw: 97164555 Drder: 829958
Escrow O��icex: M. J_ I{im2aaZ� Date: 9/22/97
FLNAL Closing Dat�: 9I22197
£SCR�Gv STATEM'�'NT QF: Cz�y a� I,alce Oswego
Property Address: �370� Sw A�water Lane, I,ake �swego, QR 97034
3TEM5 L1ES2T5 CREDITS
TOTAI, COi�T52I]ERAT'I�N 3SQ.��Q .00
INITIAL DEPDSIT Tq �SCROW 254,6�4 .2t
PRdkA7'IUNS/ADJ[]S'�MEN7'S �'RdM TD
County 'Faxes, TAx ACC�I3NT 20fl258
CI7�R�NT YEAR TAX�S AT $3�658.22 7/QI.�97 9/22�97 786.3°
Co�nty Taxes, TA� ACC�i}NT �fl0071
��RREIvZ' YEAR TA��S A'T $2,796.�3 7I01I97 9I2�I97 635.8:
�a.on PaymEn� 5�,Q44.�C
�Ifln�h�,y apti,an Credit 38,5a�.Dr
TI'TLE CHARG�S TO Fax'st American Ti�.1e Company
�eed Re�ozding Fee 45 .�0
ESCR�W CHARGES
�scr�w Fee 325.aD
BALANC� DUE YOC7 IS6 .40
7'QTAL,S $ 35�,52G .40 $ 35D, 526.a�
City a� Lalce �sw�ga
BY•
�'s��rey Conda,�, City Attarxi�y
Certified tv be a True and Exacr Copy
nela.v�red to Parta.es Herea.n_
8 crow vf€ic . . ,7, Ya�c.taa.J.� �
Recordina I?ate: 9I22/97
Pr�pQrty Infarrnati�n
�i#y o� Lake ��wego
I'ark� and R�creatian D�partmer�t
Praperty IVan�e: Woadmonf IV�tural Area
Ad�ress: 136QQ►4#water Lane
Alsa kr�ovu as: Meyer Prvper�y
LJse:Parl� ar Open ���� �p�ce
Space
� _ __
Acre�ge: 5.84
Tax Lot hlumb�rs: 2'�Ea4ACD190Q, 21 E04AGQ��OQ
�
�ate af Acq�isi#ian: 9119d1997
-- -- --�_ � - -- - --
5eller: Cla��ld Meyer
Purchas� Price: �35fl,526.4Q
- - � - - ---- ---
D�nat�d bY:
Dvr�ation Value:
5our�e of Funds_
Date Recvrded:
_- _ 1'e� _ IVo Explain: ---- --__—-
Deed RestrietEons: �
t
De�elapmer�t - _.Yes � No Explain: - -�--
Conditi�ns vf
Appravaf:
Ex�eptivns: Maas# he ca�led Waadmont IVa�urai Pa�k
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
�� f � �� �
� � � � i
� , ` ,
--�-- -- -- ----- --� .
� •
, ` �
1 � { �fy � � �
� � � � �
�
i i . �
4 ! -------- ---- — — --
���--:
. �'��,°�_,_ _ :-`- � .
� � ..:� = :�-�� ,
�����SK �.E�' � . . • .. �
� _ • � f _ ,� �—_ — .
: �_ _ ,�� ,_,\ I
� _ =�s,� �. �-. .._
, � �_� ••� ,
� , -' - _ , �' -:.••' .:.�;�: �-. `T ._ � �
� �:.� �� �� _ , - _ - .. - ����
;
� !3 � ��4' _ � �
�$" �.__ _:_ _ i ""_ .. J I
--- ' -- ; I
�" ' � ` �
, �,
�
+ f++; � , �
� + t � � � � i
� ;1,+ + Q - { ,.. n t i
; ; k;.Q' ``•
'+ i + �:f . I
� �. �
� � ,�• i `
.J
\ ��y a _ I
.. y L
I �. .
� � �i 1
� =.��wt 1 a�. 1 I
- °�' i �
__ - - �i��' I
� �_; y� /' ' � �
�:;•
� x' 1 i
- i i � 1
� � I � � ,
_ �_ , , � , �
___ �.,,, _:� ` � �
� , ,: , •r�. \ �,V� -; � ,
. -'4� .{'� . I �
I I ' I .
� . I � .. fd_��-. .'�"�.. �� _ � �._� � I I
� '� - - _ ��� I �
� ::,�. � --- J �;:, j I .�
� I �,i i � W '�� i
• �� f � I �
I .� � r� • • � � � �
��_#..�_--�-_�-- ---- � �
----------- ^ `�` "--T-------
I I
T__ _ _� i
Primary Trail Loop�istance:.33 mi€es
LEGEND ��
0 2� 40 60
(J Parking Q Rock Dutcropping � Bird Blind�O�erlook
Q Restroam Q Boarclwalk Q Enhanced Wetland
Q Flexibfe ❑pen Space (� Enhanced Wooded Trai! 5ystem Q Interacti�e Natural Area
� Naturai Open Spa�e Q Foraging Forest Q �ff-Leash Dog Park
Design A}ternati►►e - Qptian A ��� f�rs
Woodmont Natural Park ' ,���_ y �� 1ivi�,�e�i�lp M �
.1, PowEREo a. 4A�=b RE�REar�o�
�M1�KS.i�=CREATIDN
� i � ��� �
� � I � I
� I ` !
� � ��^ � �♦
�• I II` ` I
I � � r � 1
� � � ` l
� s.
� � i � �, +•.. ` i
I � �` i
I � - " L-- — ,•�� — — -- --
�
_
.
� . . .
� •
�, � •, , �
� � � � ;:'
� - . - -.
� � �
t. -
,
� �
� �
� a
I � aQQ � o�°e
� � °v �
� ��
�
1 � , op
.� 4 00 \
� � ` � aC]��w
� R
' I 1
■r '�
, '�U
'�� �• � �. �
� '.. � �
. �. .' �
� ■ �
�.� -- � ; �
___ . , o ;
� �: �
� � � �� � �
_ � �,� � � r
, �� � - �
� . � �:� �� .- . I �
,., � � I
I � j • �
• � � 4 .. I ,�
� w
r '
� ' _�:� '- I �
. . "�� ,
' � y I �
r.
i _ ' i
�--�----------�-- ------ —--- ._ _._�_..--Q-----�--� •
+.,
----------� �--.�--.� �� --� ---
Primary Trail Lvvp�istance:.34 miles
L E G E N D '�^—^�
❑ zo a❑ s❑
Q Parkfng Q Enhan�ed Wooded Trail System � Natural Qpen Spa�e
Q Flexibke apen Space Q O�erlook
(� Restroom � Boardwalk
� Interacti�e Natural Area �1 Enhanced Wetland
Design Alternati►►e - flptian B �� f�rs
Woodmont Natural Park ' ;���_� = �� 1u,i�,�e�i�lp M �
.1, PowEREo a. 4A�=b RE�REar�o�
�M1�KS.i�=CREATIDN
--� I �\ "
� � � . �
� � ` �
____ __ _______�__, �
� �
� � �
I� � . � -`•S;�• '
� i,• �
t � � � �. _ `, �
i � .
' � . ---------=---_-�.-_�--�--
_ . ,
.R _ o • , _ ,f �
, , . I
�
I ' . .
�
�
f �� � �+` - - - ,
--- � .
,
�
I
„ . .
. �
�bv , � � �
o �tr •
e❑ : �,
1 Q���
a� r
ti
•
,�� I
� 9
� D❑ y '
I . ��n "'2� i
V �
� �� ��]Q 4� ,
I
�� � �
• r i
• i." - - _ � I
: � 1
�. .. . � � i �
,- - — i .
■ •
--- • . � , _ ■
� ` -. + � i
i � �+-. �� � i
..__. ` ! f� . ' C
� � � � - �� 0 ,
; � � , - . �. �. , ,
! � � �;� ' � :� 000 �� � a
. � � . � �1
� � � a
� �� � � � � �
� .. , . - -------__�_----_�_
----�----�--- - ---__ � .
---�--____--- ___—�— _-----�--�.----
�_____ _� , ,
Primary Trai!Loop Distance:.33 miles
LEGEND �^J
❑ zo a❑ s❑
Q ParkEng [� �ff-Leash Dog Park � ��eriook Q Flexible ❑pen Space
Q Restroorn Q Intera�ti�e Natural Area Q 8oardwalk
(� Community Garden (e] Redefined Woaded Trail � Enhanced Wetland
� Tree Gro�e Q Dak Sa�anna � Natural Arnphitheater
Design Alternati►►e - Qptian � �'� f�rs
Woodmont Natural Park '',���_ = �� 1ivi�,�e�i�lp M �
.1, PowEREo a. 4A�=b RE�REar�o�
�M1�KS.i�=CREATIDN
��
��� v ,, ,
y ' . . .`F �����,
4 .� ,4�� .. •a
r �
. • � e :� ''�.� � �� '�►;�� , `,
a e � - . �ro
,� �. �i,�.�,►�� ��+.. � I
. ,� ����� �M .
, ��'° '�.•.- �,�: ��, ��. -..- �'„
�,�� ;��,
� � ' �� � ��
e � ,� • _.r--�-.�--�
. �� - ;.
� \ a ��
i �`. �,�.�-�--.��� � ��`-:�'
�: � � _ � �� �
" ��
� �
�� � �-� ���
�. �� i � � � �'� �-°-
_ , �� �y
o , —� � ��
� , o ,�, ,
�_��� .���� ��:: ��,J--� ti� �
�----�. `�,'�
_ �y o ,.;� '. �
� �
_`
• i , - � � � � k .�►
,, \ ,
\ �4�1 �
• l' e • �� - -- �r '
1
i , � e � ���� � a � �
� � � /
�� � �� � � � � _, ',, ,� �. ..
� . ti • �� , ° � �� �
� � �e �,� — e " � � ,
� � 8:� e o �'I��� / � �
. 'I"�pt�:> � �
. 'r s �
° � � � ' e
' "' � ' '�� � '!�l.'�!
°.ti :� a � e � �'� _� �� ,� -
, _ � �
. �
� , y�,.
�
1.
�,� ���:�;,,� '��r. . � �
��. _ _ . , , • A,, � , ``� - .,
� , � '�::n�
� �j \\ + � ti
�� � �+ _ ° �
.; l �+' `�. '� � O �
�� �� " "�� " ��l �
, ", � / ` �
i�: � �- . � .�
.ri�:M' �'� �'�� � � � �++�� - �t�!�'' �t " • Y .
i �
�. I �; �:1� - � xy� '��'�,, - - ' � : �,p�•.=� ` ' ' `�
_- � �;, _ �� ,.r '
,�r, + , _- «
I ..� '��, #.� � � � � • ''��,�
r,�' � �� n
�. � - ��` -
` � �'� • - :,� . 0 . . . . .
1 '� .
�. - _ _. �-. � �. `�� . :
' � -
. , ..�.:I �I-�.V L-�4�
Knaus Road �---- +. •
,�, ,_. .. - � � � �.
� �!► ��:..:- ��'i
�� � _` �" � . ' �� ` �-'�,1 ��� I+ �.a�'a�� s � �
�l y �it• y?, �r�i ` � •J.. . . •, "�� L���r ��
�� -t.r�'
LEGEND ^�^J
0 20 40 60
Q Parking Q Interactive Natural Area Q Enhanced Wetland
Q Restroom Q Wooded Trail Q Boardwalk
0 Flexible Open Space Q Oak 5avanna
� Natural Open Space Q Overlook
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan �`A f°
+��;.- �,�c.
Lake Oswego, Oregon o � '�I� �[1�[!�r�i�/eu[!t LQ � �
�OREGO�. J��
i�Owcaco ar Pwaas 6 Rccacwrior+
P0.RN5&AECPEaTiON -
., �.f�
s�.�:7��
� ..�,,� i �'
r 5,;�
.' � . ��- . � � . _.
.y + �„' ,�.�; � �� �'x:3 .��, ,�� "'t"
r� �`"
�>e,`ya�� �q'Oy�., '`A� �' �,. ,
,"'� Y� -� A� � �'- . . . _1�N '
`,, .� ,� �
,.y ,-�:- .. .
��rr: �'t,_ �_
i�' r
� ���', ��
O O O O O O O
5ection �ne
- = • �� � — �,.�
. _
' , r
:
�� .t�. ;�y�
'1.- �y 4 . -. _.
-•��, � _
� _ h _ b
i�i ��� �5�.'.. ��' _ �
Y:' " }
�" , i1a_
- � --.
•��;,1 . .. ,_-
= yp�+-7RV'�i
O O O � O
Section Two
LEGEND
Q Parking Q Interactive Natural Area Q Enhanced Wetland
Q Restroom Q Wooded Trail Q Boardwalk
� Flexible Open Space Q Oak Savanna
� Natural Open Space Q Overlook
Woodmont Natural Park Master Plan °��� �°s�
�=,;-�; c.
Lake Oswego, Oregon '�oa o� '�I� �i�I[l�r�i�/p,u[ltlQ �
J�.� Powcaco sr Pwwas 6 ReGacw=ion
P0.RN5&AECflERTION -
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PHASE 1 PHASE 2
Site Analysis Design Alternatives
;z,
Start �
��� ,�� � ���� ,��
�,� Q,���Q ar ��� ,��� r,�ti �� ���
�`o� �e �.�'� ,�,�e ,��� `o� �,�� �a� \�e`' \o�
.\�,�a �o'� � �`�' �,�e p� ,�� ,�� ��'� �c,� e�, �,�� �a�. �,1, � �a�.
�� 3 e �� �o� a� � L`� �•� �.� •� ,� �o �.'� �,�� p �� ,� ,� �o
�'` �` ��� ae �� P� C.,�` 4� �� ��'` ea� �a� r�` '��'�Q.e�' ��� �a ��� Q�'` ea� a�' - �''� e�'
�o�� a'�,��,�e .��'` �a� ��.� QP \�� pQ ,�a� ��.� ��� Q.L q� ra �.�� �� �\ �.� ,��� ' C. ��
Q � 0 1, J 'L C. O c� Q ,�e C' Q� Q �.'� O� p�' QP ,�,�
t� � e �� a� �` r e r � � Q h e�. ,�h ,� .y'ti ,�� � � 1 ��.
��.p• �e.p�`�a�`Qo���.pQ �e.p.�' ��,t�\,�e� ��,�0��,��o��.� :.� P,��t`�ra.�� �a O���o, �a��,�ao��.� :..� �.� ,J,,��ra��
PHASE 3 PHASE 4
Master Plan Plan Approval
� � Pcicc Pcicc � B&c s � DRC DRC inish
��o .\pt` ,��. ,p\ ,a�` �'��5�1 �.����1
e`'`'���.��\� ���� . Q'-e�� ��� o�'` ,�� �cQ�a �'`��.�� �`'` �. \o�a \�\o�
� o o� � �� a e� a� y�.e �O ��° ooa . .�°° \e• \ �� ��.�'� ��
�a�\�a ��` �`�� •�� � • �� ��` o�� ���o�� J�,��`�� �a Q� �� r '`e� °� ,�`p �a a� `P �P
e � �, � �,� o (., � �,� p �� ` �� �,�'� ,po �'� �.0 ,�`p ��� �a� �o ��� �,O C,�
��`� ,�e�e QP �,�� �a�� a�� �.�� C?`� QP�' .�aa ,p�`� �� �.�'�� Q.L a� �� ��.� ro°�c e�� a�� ��� �,�Q �C, Q,�� �<, ���� �o�\o
�op a�' y'�~ �Q� `bQ �Q\ � � y �' � QJ Q\a °y `bQ a� �e ��� °� 1���� �`b4 '��'� °�O � �O �� 1�
'�. ���` �J. ��� 'y � o� �h �� ,�;�'o,�� ��, ��� �Q �� \e� J�b Q�`� ,�`p .�, J� c� `, ��l` � �\,�� 'L �3 �:L
�o,��O,�a Q,o �a Q,o.� yeQ �,e� ye�Q yeQ ye��� p��a`' ��'`' O��,e� �o QO �e�Q: �o ��,� pe���a �e�,�,ea �e�� �a Q,Q
��,A E� Legend
� s� Brown=Web Involvement
�
�" � = Plannin Adviso =Advisor Board/Commission �an e ient
U J O g ry =Deliverable = Public Outreach Event PC Y g
Committee Meeting(PAC) Meetings Black=Landscape Architect/Team Involvement
�REGO�
Woodmont Park Planning Process M
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
MACI< E NZ I E �
P 503.224.9560 ■ F 503.228.1285 ■ W MCKNZE.COC� M E ETI N G M I N UTES
RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214
� .:.�.., . .... ... . � '., . . . . . . e .- ' . '.. ,
PROJECT NUMBER: 2150495.00 ISSUE DATE: March 8, 2017(Revised March 9,
2017J
PROJECT NAME: Woodmont Park Master Plan
RECORDED BY: Brad Theurer, Project Manager
TO: FILE
PRESENT: Bruce Powers, Ivan Anderholm —City of Lake Oswego, Parks and Recreation
Rob Amsberry, Ed Brockman, Megan Big John—PAC
Scott Bullard, Heidi Schrimsher —PAC
Brad Theurer, Steven Tuttle, Andrew Schneider —Mackenzie
SUBJECT: Meeting Minutes#01 (March 2, 2017,2:00 pm)
ACTION ITEMS
1.1 City (Ivan Anderholm and Bruce Powers) to provide a clear integration and direction of the deed
restriction to Mackenzie and PAC by 3/15/17.This is needed to provide clear direction on what is
and what is not allowed to take place related to design of Woodmont Park prior to our first Public
Outreach meeting on March 20, 2017.
1.2 City (Bruce Powers) reached out to a City-approved Arborist prior to the PAC meeting for
assistance in identifying the conditions of the existing tree on site. Mackenzie has requested that
this information be provided to them by 3/15/17, allowing the design team to have a better
understanding of the site prior to the first Public Outreach meeting.
1.3 City (Bruce Powers) to provide photos and background information on Mr. Donald W. Meyer to
Mackenzie by 3/10/17.
1.4 Mackenzie (Brad Theurer and Andrew Schneider) to add a page to the presentation that focuses
on the vision/spirit of the Deed by 3/17/17.
1.5 City(Bruce Powers)to provide 'Clicker' information to Mackenzie by 3/10/17.
1.6 Mackenzie (Brad Theurer and Andrew Schneider) to provide Bruce with an updated timeline by
3/3/17 that identifies future PAC meetings being moved to Wednesdays from 2 PM-4 PM.
(Completed 3/7/17)
1.7 City (Rob Amsberry) to provide Mackenzie with existing as-built drawings by 3/10/17.
(Complete 3/7/17)
H:\Projects\215049500\6_Final\MM-01-170302 REV.docx
Meeting Minutes#01 (March 2, 2017, 2:00 pm)
Woodmont Park Master Plan
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 2
UNRESOLVED ITEMS
None at this time.
RESOLVED ITEMS
1.6 Mackenzie (Brad Theurer and Andrew Schneider) on 3/3/17 provided City (Bruce Powers) with
updated timeline via. Email. Resolved.
1.7 City (Bruce Powers and Rob AmsberryJ on 03/3/17 provided Mackenzie with existing as-built
drawings via Email. Resolved.
INFORMATION ITEMS
1. Introduction of PAC members, City management, and Design team.
2. Roles and Responsibilities:
A. PAC
1. Advisory role that offers feedback to the City and Mackenzie.
2. Review background documents and contributing information.
3. Contribute to the vision, principles, and programming elements of the Master
Plan.
4. Represent your networks and constituencies, even when they may hold opinions
other than your own.
5. Help communicate to the broader community about the ongoing Master Planning
process.
6. Attend PAC meetings on a regular basis.
7. Assist in public meetings by promoting positive involvement in the development
of the Master Plan.
B. City Parks and Recreation and Mackenzie
1. To review and synthesize input from stakeholders and public obtained
throughout the public outreach process phase.
2. To make final design decisions and direction of the Master Planning process based
on information gathered throughout the public outreach and coordination efforts
with the PAC, City Council and Planning Commission.
3. Rules of Engagement: Defining the Master Planning process.
A. A Master Plan is:
1. A graphic plan used to better understand the existing conditions of the site and
its opportunities and constraints.
2. A guide to decision making.
H:\Projects\215049500\6_Final\MM-01-170302 REV.docx
Meeting Minutes#01 (March 2, 2017, 2:00 pm)
Woodmont Park Master Plan
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 3
3. A framework for more specific planning.
4. A tool for education and communication.
B. A Master Plan is not:
1. A set of construction documents.
4. Project Overview:
A. Review of Site Context
1. Review of the site location relative to downtown,Tryon Creek State Natural Area,
and other City amenities.
B. Review of Existing Conditions
1. Reviewed panoramic photos of the site that focused on Atwater Tributary, NE
wooded area and the existing Hawthorn tree stands in the SE.
C. Review of Deed
5. Project Status:
A. Review of Site Analysis Diagrams
1. Review of Site — 1936 when the site was a patchwork of agricultural fields,
orchards, and some forested areas to the NE. The park site was surrounded by
farm fields and a few single-family residences. Atwater Tributary bisects the site
running from west to east.
2. Review of Site —2015 based on Aerial and topographic survey. Woodmont Park
site consists of 6.8-acres with approximately 5 of those acres being developable.
The present character of the site consists of grasslands, wetlands and wooded
areas. Atwater Tributary continues to bisect the site running from west to east,
and the site continues to be primarily accessed by foot traffic.
3. Review of Existing Vegetation — Identified multiple ecological systems and their
diverse habitats that the site has and, with the correct mitigation, how this park
site could support a broader range of wildlife.
4. Review of Existing Topography—A general overview of the steepness of the site
that averages below a 10 percent gradient--but in sections of the site, particularly
in the NE and SW, can exceed 25 percent.
5. Review of Existing On-Site Water—Review of the Atwater Tributary running west
to east and the potential high water and wetland areas, as outlined by ESA(who
is under contract with the City),for stream stabilization/restoration efforts to the
west.
6. Review of Existing Circulation — Vehicular and pedestrian access points and
circulation onsite.
7. Review of Existing utilities—Existing water and sanitary line locations.
H:\Projects\215049500\6_Final\MM-01-170302 REV.docx
Meeting Minutes#01 (March 2, 2017, 2:00 pm)
Woodmont Park Master Plan
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 4
8. Review of Constraints — Review of the sensitive riparian corridor along Atwater
Tributary,of the existing tree stands and non-natives/invasive species throughout
the park site,on the steep slope considerations, and the existing 30-foot Atwater
right-of-way,and review of the lack of ability to grow the park site due to existing
and future residential development constraints.
9. Review of Opportunities—Review of view sheds,and mitigation areas to increase
wildlife habitat, review of improving water quality on site and downstream, the
open tree understory in the NE, and the potential to provide safer
pedestrian/vehicular access to the site.
B. Review of Timeline
1. Dates and times of upcoming public outreach design charrettes, PAC,City Council
and Planning Commission Meetings throughout the Master Planning process.
2. It was discussed that the second public outreach design charrette scheduled for
May 22nd might be better attended if it was rescheduled to accommodate a
planned neighborhood meeting. Bruce to follow up and provide any date
revisions to Mackenzie to then be incorporated into the Timeline. This will be
critical, as these public outreach meetings will be officially posted within their
predetermined timeframe.
6. PAC Question and Input: Open discussion.
A. Bruce and Brad requested the PAC to provide feedback related to the Site Analysis.
B. Invasive plant removal progress was discussed by Megan who provided some background
information related to the City's continued efforts to remove invasive species from their
lands.Scott and Heidi discussed the existing Hawthorn trees and other existing vegetation
being non-natives and that the Deed outlined the protection of natives alone, and
therefore these non-native invasive species should be allowed to be removed for the
betterment of the project. Bruce followed up by letting the PAC know that he has sent a
request to a City-approved Arborist to visit the site and determine the current conditions
and species variety of the existing trees.
C. Heidi and Scott requested that the two (2) existing apple trees be protected, if possible.
The potential for a small orchard was discussed. The City has existing gardens on other
properties they own and manage that produce fruit trees.
D. Ivan reiterated the importance of being upfront with the public related to the deeds
restrictions.
E. The PAC discussed that Mr. Donald W. Meyer loved watching kids explore and be full of
wonder and those types of opportunities should be looked at.
F. The PAC discussed those present should become familiar with the City's Parks Plan 2025.
G. City as-built drawings contain sizes and onsite locations of existing storm water and
culvert information.
H. The PAC and design team discussed that Natural Play was already occurring throughout
the site. It was noted that there are multiple opportunities to incorporate Natural Play
elements in a passive way,while maintaining the vision/spirit of the deed.
H:\Projects\215049500\6_Final\MM-01-170302 REV.docx
Meeting Minutes#01 (March 2, 2017, 2:00 pm)
Woodmont Park Master Plan
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 5
I. The PAC consensus was that the City's existing hand-held 'clicker system' provides an
immediate visual understanding of attendee's goals and direction, which is facilitated via
PowerPoint. A select set of questions will be provided allowing participants to choose if
they strongly agree,somewhat agree, or strongly disagree with each question presented.
This information is then presented on the screen in a real-time response.
J. Steven requested from Heidi the planned Woodmont Park work day dates. Heidi informed
the PAC date and times are as follows: March 12, 2017 from 1:00-3 PM, and again on
April 9, 2017 from 1:00-3:00 PM.
K. Scott explained in his own words the importance of the Park to the neighborhood, and
the lack of park space within this neighborhood which, per Scott's comments, is the
second largest neighborhood within the City limits.
L. Ivan confirmed the official name, per the deed, is'Woodmont Nature Park.' Mackenzie to
update Site Analysis.
7. Next Steps:
A. Charrette preparation to continue with City Parks and Recreation, Mackenzie and public
outreach consultant, Nancy Hamilton Consulting.
B. Ivan confirmed full name of'Woodmont Nature Park,' as identified in the deed, needs to
be used on the presentation materials. Mackenzie to update graphic presentation.
C. City and PAC to look at alternative locations for the next two Public Outreach meetings,
i.e., Adult Community Center (ACC) or at a local school. The next planned neighborhood
meeting date and location is either May 5, 2017 or May 13, 2017; one of these might be
appropriate for the second Public Outreach Meeting.
D. Public outreach Design Charrette #01 scheduled on March 20, 2017 (at 1500 Greentree
Road, Lake Oswego, OR) from 6:00-8:00 PM.
E. PAC Meeting#2 scheduled for April 6, 2017 from 2:00-4:00 PM.
Every effort has been made to accurately record this meeting. If any errors or omissions are noted, please
provide written response within five days of receipt.
c: Present
Dina Balogh—City of Lake Oswego, Parks and Recreation
H:\Projects\215049500\6_Final\MM-01-170302 REV.docx
MACI< E NZ I E �
P 503.224.9560 ■ F 503.228.1285 ■ W MCKNZE.COC� M E ETI N G M I N UTES
RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214
� .:.�.., . .... ... . � '., . . . . . . e .- ' . '.. ,
PROJECT NUMBER: 2150495.00 ISSUE DATE: April 12, 2017
PROJECT NAME: Woodmont Natural Park
RECORDED BY: Brad Theurer, Project Manager
TO: FILE
PRESENT: Bruce Powers, Ryan Lentz,Jeff Munro, Megan Bigjohn—City of Lake Oswego
Rob Amsberry, Ed Brockman, Heidi Schrimsher, Scott Bullard, Phil Zald—PAC
Brad Theurer, Steven Tuttle—Mackenzie
SUBJECT: Meeting Minutes#02 (April 5, 2017,2:00 PM)
ACTION ITEMS
None at this time.
UNRESOLVED ITEMS
1.1 City (Ivan Anderholm and Bruce Powers) to provide a clear integration and direction of the deed
restriction to Mackenzie and PAC by 3/15/17.This is needed to provide clear direction on what is
and what is not allowed to take place related to design of Woodmont Park prior to our first Public
Outreach meeting on March 20, 2017. 4/12/17: Ongoing.
1.2 City (Bruce Powers) reached out to a City-approved Arborist prior to the PAC meeting for
assistance in identifying the conditions of the existing tree on site. Mackenzie has requested that
this information be provided to them by 3/15/17, allowing the design team to have a better
understanding of the site prior to the first Public Outreach meeting.4/12/17:City(Bruce Powers)
informed the PAC at today's meeting that a City Approved Arborist is contracted to visit the site
in a couple weeks once the trees have leafed out. Arborist Tree Survey will occur at southern
edge of Atwater Tributary and head south.Trees to the North will not be surveyed due to steep
slope conditions.
1.5 City(Bruce Powers)to provide 'Clicker' information to Mackenzie by 3/10/17.4/12/17: Ongoing.
RESOLVED ITEMS
1.3 City (Bruce Powers) to provide photos and background information on Mr. Donald W. Meyer to
Mackenzie by 3/10/17. 4/12/17: Provided to Mackenzie prior to Public Outreach meeting#1.
1.4 Mackenzie (Brad Theurer and Andrew Schneider) to add a page to the presentation that focuses
on the vision/spirit of the Deed by 3/17/17. 4/12/17: Provided by Mackenzie prior to Public
Outreach meeting#1.
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-02-170405.d ocx
Meeting Minutes#02 (April 5, 2017, 2:00 PM)
Woodmont Natural Park
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 2
1.6 Mackenzie (Brad Theurer and Andrew Schneider) to provide Bruce with an updated timeline by
3/3/17 that identifies future PAC meetings being moved to Wednesdays from 2 PM-4 PM.
4/12/17: Provided by Mackenzie prior to Public Outreach meeting#1.
1.7 City (Rob Amsberry) to provide Mackenzie with existing as-built drawings by 3/10/17. 4/12/17:
Provided to Mackenzie prior to Public Outreach meeting#1.
INFORMATION ITEMS
1. Mackenzie (Brad Theurer) reviewed the charge of the PAC and their role in the planning process.
2. Mackenzie (Brad Theurer) provided an overview of the events, attendance, and information
shared at the first public outreach design charrette meeting held Monday, March 20, 2017.
3. Mackenzie (Brad Theurer) provided a review of the break-out session held during the first public
outreach design charrette on March 20, 2017. Attendees were encouraged to sit next to other
attendees that they may not know or who may have a varying outlook to help promote a more
diverse and positive public engagement. Four questions were asked that night of the attendees
which we covered during this PAC meeting and have been included below.
Question 1:What do you like about the park now?(Trail,Creek,Trees,Open Space,Other?) Please
be specific.
Question 2: Given that the deed has determined that Woodmont Park will remain as a 'Natural
Park,' what are the elements of the future park that you hope to see?
a. Riparian Protection.
b. Grove of Trees.
c. Trails/natural walkways.
d. Natural 'Play' areas that leverage the park in its natural state.
e. Small, informal 'field' for soccer or other neighborhood games.
f. Other? Be specific.
Question 3: What are your biggest concerns for Woodmont Natural Park that should be kept in
mind as the Master Plan process moves forward?
Question 4: Why did you choose to attend this meeting tonight? What do you hope your voice
will help ensure?
4. Mackenzie (Brad Theurer) reviewed the current responses from the online outreach as well. Key
words trending from the online outreach were reviewed, and it was noted that the online
outreach was extended to Friday, April 7, 2017, and not concluded at the time of this meeting.
5. PAC provided feedback on the public outreach event and the online outreach.
A. PAC(Scott Bullard) expressed there was a desire from parts of the community to provide
accessible options for play and circulation in the park.
B. PAC discussed that one gentleman at the public outreach event left early after expressing
divergent opinions from the rest of the table group about Right-of-Way utilities and
connections throughout the park.
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-02-170405.d ocx
Meeting Minutes#02 (April 5, 2017, 2:00 PM)
Woodmont Natural Park
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 3
C. PAC members noted that, often in the City of Lake Oswego, minority opinions get too
much attention due to persistence and attendance at critical meetings despite not sharing
the majority opinion, which is sometimes under-represented.
D. PAC members discussed the interpretation of the deed and the need to balance the
design with allowed and intended uses of the park.
E. PAC members conveyed that most people pass through the park, but do not stay.
F. PAC members, City and Mackenzie discussed trail construction and the need to meet
current accessibility guidelines in efforts to provide inclusive design elements within the
park. Mackenzie(Brad Theurer) mentioned that once the planning process was complete,
during the construction document phase the USDA Forest Service Trail Accessibility
Guidelines(FSTAG)would be considered based on the existing slope conditions of the site
within this forested area.
G. PAC suggested the following ideas for the park: fruit tree orchard, boardwalk near
sensitive riparian areas, accessibility to riparian areas, coordination with Oregon White
Oak group.
H. PAC (Heidi Schrimsher) suggested the public outreach venues should have included an
opportunity for the public to weigh in on the idea of community gardens, as they are
included in the Parks Plan 2025. Mackenzie(Brad Theurer) read from the Parks Plan 2025
identifying that community gardens are allowable if "supported by the community and
management resources are available." PAC members commented that gardens would
need deer deterrent (fencing) in this area since it has been somewhat problematic.
I. PAC members expressed concern that online survey results from outside the
neighborhood would change the direction of the park design from the desires of the
immediately adjacent community. City (Bruce Powers) reminded the PAC that, as
taxpayers, all city residents have the opportunity to weigh in on the design.
J. PAC (Jeff Munro) brought up the need to place restrooms and a small parking lot area in
city parks. If one is not included upfront on this project, more than likely the city typically
ends up placing a port-a-potty on the site in the future to facilitate this need. Consensus
from the PAC and City was generally supportive and that restrooms should be shown on
the alternatives presented at the second public outreach meeting.
6. Next Steps:
A. Public Outreach Design Charrette #2 preparation to continue with City Parks and
Recreation, Mackenzie and public outreach consultant, Nancy Hamilton Consulting.
B. Public Outreach Design Charrette #02 scheduled on May 22, 2017 (at 1500 Greentree
Road, Lake Oswego, OR)from 6:00-8:00 PM. Mackenzie to present three alternatives for
park design.
C. PAC Meeting#3 scheduled for Wednesday,June 7, 2017,from 2:00-4:00 PM.
Every effort has been made to accurately record this meeting. If any errors or omissions are noted, please
provide written response within five days of receipt.
c: Present; Dina Balogh—City of Lake Oswego, Parks and Recreation
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-02-170405.d ocx
MACI< E NZ I E �
P 503.224.9560 ■ F 503.228.1285 ■ W MCKNZE.COM M E ET I N G M I N U T E S
RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 97214
� .:.�.., . .... ... . � '., . . . . . . e .- ' . '.. ,
PROJECT NUMBER: 2150495.00 ISSUE DATE: June 19, 2017
PROJECT NAME: Woodmont Natural Park
RECORDED BY: Brad Theurer, Project Manager
TO: FILE
PRESENT: Bruce Powers, Ryan Lentz,Jeff Munro, Megan Bigjohn—City of Lake Oswego
Rob Amsberry, Ed Brockman, Heidi Schrimsher, Kirsten Giacomini—PAC
Brad Theurer, Steven Tuttle—Mackenzie
SUBJECT: Meeting Minutes#03 (June 07, 2017,2:00 PM)
ACTION ITEMS
3.1 Mackenzie and City of Lake Oswego, Parks and Recreation to develop a preferred master plan to
be presented to Planning Commission and City Council that draws elements from the three design
alternatives presented on May 22, 2017 at the second public outreach design charrette meeting.
UNRESOLVED ITEMS
3.2 None at this time.
RESOLVED ITEMS
1.1 City (Ivan Anderholm and Bruce Powers) to provide a clear integration and direction of the deed
restriction to Mackenzie and PAC by 3/15/17.This is needed to provide clear direction on what is
and what is not allowed to take place related to design of Woodmont Park prior to our first Public
Outreach meeting on March 20, 2017. OS/17/17 (Bruce Powers) Provided Mackenzie with
Arborist Report identifying Native and Non-Native Trees South of Atwater Tributary and During
PAC meeting#03 the City confirmed that they will provide direction on all design related items
as they relate to the Deed moving forward.
1.2 City (Bruce Powers) reached out to a City-approved Arborist prior to the PAC meeting for
assistance in identifying the conditions of the existing tree on site. Mackenzie has requested that
this information be provided to them by 3/15/17, allowing the design team to have a better
understanding of the site prior to the first Public Outreach meeting.04/12/17:City(Bruce Powers)
informed the PAC at today's meeting that a City Approved Arborist is contracted to visit the site
in a couple weeks once the trees have leafed out.Arborist Tree Survey will occur at southern edge
of Atwater Tributary and head south. Trees to the North will not be surveyed due to steep slope
conditions. 05/17/17: (Bruce Powers) Provided ESA Woodmont Park Tree Survey which
identified a variety of tree types south of Atwater Tributary including(Malus sp./Apple Species;
Corylus cornuta/Beaked Hazelnut;Acer macrophyllum/Big-Leaf Maple; Rhamnus purshiana/
Cascara; Syringa vulgaris / Common Lilac; Pseudotsuga menziesii / Douglas Fir; Crataegus
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-03-170607.d ocx
Meeting Minutes#03 (June 07, 2017, 2:00 PM)
Woodmont Natural Park
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 2
monogyna / English Hawthorn; Ilex aquifolium / English Holly; Prunus laurocerasus / English
Laurel; Aesculus sp. / Horsechestnut; Acer sp. / Japanese Maple; Populus nigra var.
Italica/Lombardy Poplar; Acer platanoides/Norway Maple; Fraxinus latifolia / Oregon Ash;
Cornus sp./Ornamental Dogwood; Pyrus sp. / Pear Species; Prunus sp./Plum Species;Juglans
sp./Walnut Species; Malus fusca/Western Crabapple;Thuja plicata/Western Red Cedar).
1.5 City (Bruce Powers) to provide 'Clicker' Information to Mackenzie. 05/16/17: (Bruce Powers)
Provided to Mackenzie prior to Public Outreach meeting #2. After further discussions, it was
determined to not use'Clickers'since the public outreach methods being utilized in the second
meeting warranted other methods of public input.
INFORMATION ITEMS
1. City(Bruce Powers)Welcomed all and introduced new PAC member Kirsten Giacomini.
2. Mackenzie (Brad Theurer) reviewed the charge of the PAC and their role in the planning process.
A. Review background documents &contributing information.
B. Advise and offer feedback to the City of Lake Oswego Parks Staff and Mackenzie.
C. Contribute to the vision, principles, and programming elements as appropriate.
D. Represent your networks and constituencies, even when they may hold opinions other than
your own.
E. Help communicate to the broader community about the ongoing planning process.
F. Attend PAC workshops.
G. Assist in public meetings by promoting positive involvement.
3. Mackenzie (Brad Theurer) provided a brief overview of the previous events, attendance, and
information shared at the first and second public outreach design charrette meetings.
4. Mackenzie (Steven Tuttle) provided a review of the three (3) design alternatives presented at the
second public outreach design charrette meeting held Monday May 22, 2017 and posted as part
of the online survey that followed.
Alternative A: This alternative is characterized by two large, grassy open areas, which are
separated and bounded by trees and forested area.The northwestern portion of the site includes
boardwalks and an overlook designed to look out over the future restoration of Atwater Tributary
and wetland.Above this area is a group of trees that could be fruit or nut trees that enable casual
foraging from park users. The southwest area of the site is forested and shows a small, fenced,
dog park and an interactive natural area where younger users can engage their senses to create,
collect, build or climb on natural elements such as boulders, logs or sticks. In the forested
northeast portion of the site, the existing trail system is enhanced and expanded upon. Bisecting
the northeast and southeast segments of the site is a boardwalk that would engage the forested
area and provide overlooks into the forest. South of the boardwalk is an outcropping of boulders,
which would allow the area to the south to be leveled out to create a more useable space, while
also creating areas of visual interest and use for children. Directly south is a natural open space
consisting of tall, bird nesting habitat. Lastly, a restroom is located near the southeast corner of
the site close to the parking area, which is accessed off of Atwater Road.
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-03-170607.d ocx
Meeting Minutes#03 (June 07, 2017, 2:00 PM)
Woodmont Natural Park
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 3
Alternative B:This alternative is characterized by a long, open view corridor diagonally across the
site.At a high point to the northwest,an overlook takes advantage of views across the site looking
southeast.The western half of the site is largely dedicated to the habitat and natural character of
the wetland, while the southeastern portion is given to more usable open space where one can
go off the path and have a picnic or throw a frisbee. The site is bounded by new trees, and the
trails in the existing forested area are enhanced and expanded. Wider paths provide primary
circulation around the site, while smaller paths provide secondary connection and movement
throughout the enhanced wetland area. Interactive natural areas along the forest edge create a
sequence of experiences for hands-on learning and engagement that are influenced by forested
and wetland ecologies. Stormwater, or runoff, is celebrated in this concept and would flow
towards the wetland.There is no designated dog park area in this concept.The restroom is shown
on the east side of the site and parallel parking is delineated along Atwater Road.
Alternative C: This alternative is characterized by a large contiguous open space with a greater
number of programmed elements that are separated and surrounded by a continuous loop trail.
The northwest corner illustrates the introduction of a small oak savannah landscape, which is
native to the Willamette Valley. An arcing boardwalk crosses the stream tributary and offers an
overlook that is closer to the wetland and lower in elevation than the other two design
alternatives.The center of the site is given to a flexible and usable open area.To the east of that,
a large fenced dog park is shown with a mound in the middle that offers views throughout the
park. South of the dog park is a grove of trees that speak to the history of the site and the
numerous trees that are there now. Adjacent to this grove is a fenced community garden and a
larger restroom, which would also provide storage for garden tools and shelter for rainy or hot
days. The site is generally bounded by trees for buffering from adjacent properties. In this
alternative, interactive natural areas are smaller and dispersed along the circulation route.A small
and rugged amphitheater looks out onto the natural areas and parking comes off the Atwater
Lane right of way.
5. Nancy Hamilton Consulting (Nancy Hamilton) provided a review and key take always from the
public outreach meeting design charrette process in relation to the three Alternatives A, B, and C.
Twenty-two people attended the May 22nd meeting and there was a robust, engaged dialogue
about the park,the alternatives, and pros and cons of each.
Following the public meeting, a total of 62 participants took an online survey over the course of
10 days with the goal of getting additional feedback from folks who were unable to attend on the
22na and/or wanted to leave additional feedback.
There were key take-aways from the combined public meeting and survey that are outlined
below.A PDF of the online survey results is also available.
A. For Option A, key take-aways included the following:
1. Too much boardwalk.
2. Good Path Circulation.
3. Disliked parking.
4. Do not want a fenced, off-leash dog park.
5. Not excited about the interactive areas.
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-03-170607.d ocx
Meeting Minutes#03 (June 07, 2017, 2:00 PM)
Woodmont Natural Park
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 4
6. Liked the wooded natural tree canopy connection.
7. Did not like the Bird Blind.
B. For Option B, key take-aways included the following:
1. Too many trails but liked the perimeter loop.
2. Excellent parking location, clear choice for majority.
3. Restroom—mixed feelings.
4. Liked that this option had NO dog park.
5. Preferred the more limited approach to interactive areas.
6. Positive response to the natural spaces,generally.
C. For Option C, key take-aways included the following:
1. Pathways were too structured.
2. Didn't like parking.
3. Restroom scale too large.
4. Didn't like dog park.
5. Wanted fewer interactive elements.
6. Felt this plan was too structured/planned.
7. Majority oppose the idea of a community garden.
More generally, respondents wanted to keep Woodmont's natural feeling. Less is more. Most
respondents liked the Oak Savanna, preferred no dog park, no community gardens, parallel
parking on the street, smaller restroom that was designed in keeping with the natural feel of the
park. Most respondents liked creating boardwalks/raised walkways in areas of the park that can
get too muddy or fill with water in the winter. This way, residents can still reach those areas on
foot during the wet months. Respondents liked the notion of trails/boardwalks but wanted
assurances that it doesn't feel too built out. Interactive areas received mixed reviews but the final
sense was that folks liked the notion of having places that you "happen upon" to explore but,
again, didn't want enhancements to feel "contrived."
The combination of feedback from the public meeting,the online survey and the subsequent PAC
meeting on June 9t" has generated very useful,thoughtful feedback for the design team to begin
to work toward a final, preferred alternative that will be presented to the Lake Oswego Planning
Commission on August 14, 2017 and to City Council on September 5, 2017.
6. Question and Answers(PAC Members). PAC members took time providing feedback on items like
looking at maintaining the Douglas Fir and Cedar Trees where possible since these were originally
planted to mitigate the non-native English Hawthorns. Half street improvements will more than
likely not be needed along Atwater Lane. Maintenance will need access to paths and proposed
looking at Atwater Lane right of way. Desire to see the natural interactive areas typically preferred
from Alternative Option B to blend more into their surroundings. Discussed the need to reduce
the boardwalk footprint shown on Alternative Option B but supported boardwalks where
appropriate for viewing and wetland crossings. Discussed looking at other Oak tree species and
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-03-170607.d ocx
Meeting Minutes#03 (June 07, 2017, 2:00 PM)
Woodmont Natural Park
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 5
appropriate understory plantings during the Construction Document phase. Rock outcropping
look at reducing overall scale and/or density based on public input. Users like a direct access
through the site and would like the design to maintain an access path or low accessible plantings
in this area.
7. Mackenzie (Brad Theurer) Next Steps:
A. Public Outreach Design Charrette #03 preparation to continue with City Parks and
Recreation, Mackenzie and public outreach consultant, Nancy Hamilton Consulting.
B. PAC Meeting #04 Master Plan Review is scheduled for Wednesday August 2, 2017 from
2:00 PM-4:00 PM.
C. Planning Commission scheduled on August 25, 2017.
D. City Council scheduled on September 5, 2017.
E. PAC Summary and Recommendation Report scheduled September 22, 2017.
F. Public Outreach Design Charrette#03 scheduled on October 2, 2017 (at 1500 Greentree
Road, Lake Oswego, OR) from 6:00 PM-8:00 PM. Mackenzie to present the Preferred
Design alternative for Woodmont Natural Park.
G. PAC Meeting#05 Review of Final Recommendations Report October 18, 2017.
H. Neighborhood Meeting scheduled for November 8, 2017.
Every effort has been made to accurately record this meeting. If any errors or omissions are noted, please
provide written response within five days of receipt.
c: Present
Dina Balogh—City of Lake Oswego, Parks and Recreation
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-03-170607.d ocx
MACI< E NZ I E �
P 503.224.9560 ■ F 503.228.1285 ■ W MCKNZE.COl�� M E ET I N G M I N U T E S
RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 9721"
� .:.�... .... .. . � � , . . . . . . e . ._ . .. .
PROJECT NUMBER: 2150495.00 ISSUE DATE: August 8, 2017
PROJECT NAME: Woodmont Natural Park
RECORDED BY: Brad Theurer, Project Manager
TO: FILE
PRESENT: Bruce Powers—City of Lake Oswego
Sarah Hartung— ESA
Brad Theurer, Steven Tuttle—Mackenzie
SUBJECT: Meeting Minutes#04(July 20,2017,9:00 AM)
ACTION ITEMS
None at this time.
UNRESOLVED ITEMS
None at this time.
RESOLVED ITEMS
3.1 Mackenzie and City of Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation have developed a preferred Master Plan
to present to Planning Commission and City Council that draws the elements from the three
design alternatives presented on May 22, 2017 at the second public outreach design charrette
meeting. 7/20/17: The master plan was refined and will be submitted to the Planning
Commission on 8/28/17 and to City Council on 9/5/17.
INFORMATION ITEMS
1. ESA (Sarah Hartung) indicated tree removal in sensitive lands overlay (wetland boundary) is
difficult.Tree removal outside sensitive lands follows normal tree code.
2. Attendees discussed the process involved for working within Sensitive Lands Overlay.
A. The Department of State Lands(DSL)and Army Corp of Engineers(Corps)would be a joint
permit application. Both agencies would be looking at different criteria however having
ecological diversity will be a key consideration.
B. Currently the site is dominated by one or two sedge species and would benefit from some
diversity including emergents, forbes, rushes, camas bulbs, scrub shrub, natives, etc.
C. The team will demonstrate coordination with DSL,Army Corps, and DEQ.
D. If there is less than 50 cubic yards of material removed from within the wetland boundary,
the project will be easier to permit.
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-04-170720.d ocx
Meeting Minutes#04(July 20, 2017, 9:00 AM)
Woodmont Natural Park
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 2
E. Open water ponds would have to be six feet deep so they do not silt up or become
emergent wetlands.Currently no ducks visit this area but they might if there was ponding.
F. The team preferred to avoid the need for a development permit incurred through the
disturbance of more than 50 cubic yards of material. The team agreed that creating
ponding in the Sensitive Lands Area would be expensive and permitting heavy with little
benefit to the project.
3. The team wishes to focus restoration effort on incised Atwater tributary/creek within the forested
area located on the northeast portion of the site. Trail layout within this area will be revised to
become more accommodable for users.
4. Tall grasses in meadow areas can stay but could be enhanced by over-seeding with natives and
pollinators.
Every effort has been made to accurately record this meeting. If any errors or omissions are noted, please
provide written response within five days of receipt.
c: Present
Dina Balogh—City of Lake Oswego, Parks and Recreation
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-04-170720.d ocx
MACI< E NZ I E �
P 503.224.9560 ■ F 503.228.1285 ■ W MCKNZE.COl�� M E ET I N G M I N U T E S
RiverEast Center,1515 SE Water Avenue,#100,Portland,OR 9721"
� .:.�... .... .. . � � , . . . . . . e . ._ . .. .
PROJECT NUMBER: 2150495.00 ISSUE DATE: August 9, 2017
PROJECT NAME: Woodmont Natural Park
RECORDED BY: Brad Theurer, Project Manager
TO: FILE
PRESENT: Bruce Powers, Jeff Munro, Megan Bigjohn, Madeleine Nelson — City of Lake
Oswego
Ed Brockman, Kirsten Giacomini—PAC
Brad Theurer, Steven Tuttle—Mackenzie
SUBJECT: Meeting Minutes#05 (August 2, 2017, 2:00 PM)
ACTION ITEMS
None at this time.
UNRESOLVED ITEMS
None at this time.
RESOLVED ITEMS
None at this time.
INFORMATION ITEMS
1. Introduction of PAC members, City management, and Design team: The goal of this meeting was
to review the master plan and to obtain 'approval' from PAC prior to presenting to Planning
Commission on Monday,August 28, 2017 at 6:00 p.m.
2. Roles and responsibilities of the PAC:
A. Advisory role that offers feedback to the City and Mackenzie.
B. Review background documents and contributing information.
C. Contribute to the vision, principles, and programming elements of the master plan.
D. Represent your networks and constituencies, even when they may hold opinions other
than your own.
E. Help communicate to the broader community about the ongoing master planning
process.
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-OS-170802.d ocx
Meeting Minutes#05 (August 2, 2017, 2:00 PM)
Woodmont Natural Park
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 2
F. Attend PAC meetings on a regular basis.
G. Assist in public meetings by promoting positive involvement in the development of the
master plan.
3. Presentation of master plan:
A. Presentation of master plan: Mackenzie(Brad Theurer, Project Manager)provided a quick
synopsis covering the public outreach to date. Public outreach #2 and PAC focused
primarily on elements from the Design Alternative Options A and B.The master plan that
was presented draws from these two concepts and overall public input received to date.
B. The preferred alternative was presented by section.
C. A — Parking: The new plan presented shows a parking design with minimalistic parallel
parking along the street.
I. The park site is located at 13600 Atwater Lane and is currently zoned Park and
Natural Area (PNA). Three Lake Oswego public parks (Freepons Park, Pilkington
Park,and Bryant Woods Nature Park)were surveyed during the PM peak hour for
the purpose of establishing an average PM peak hour trip rate.
II. The City's Community Development Code (CDC) requires submittal of a Level 1
Traffic Impact Study(TIS)for development applications generating fewer than 25
peak hour vehicular trips. For developments generating 25 or more peak hour
vehicular trips, a Level 2 (TIS) is required. There will be no traffic study required
based on this information.
III. A traffic letter(trip generation and trip distribution)of the area reflects that there
will be a low trip volume generated from the park enhancements, with an
estimated <2% impact anticipated on Country Club Road, Knaus Road, and
Atwater Lane. With such minimal impact resulting from the proposed park trips,
no additional analysis is anticipated.
D. B—Restroom:A minimalistic(two unisex accessible) restroom will be installed to the right
of the park entrance, backing up to Atwater Road.
I. The location requires a pump however the location in closer proximity to Atwater
Road provides good access for maintenance.
E. C—Flexible Open Space:The space provides an area for recreation and will be irrigated.
F. D — Natural Open Space: A natural open space will closely reflect the existing park
features.
I. Several mowed paths will intersect the area for parts of the year.
II. The improvements will enhance the biodiversity of the land.
III. A temporary irrigation system may be required for plant establishment.
G. F—Wooded Trail: This will be refined and slopes reduced where possible however from
early site analysis, it may not be possible to meet accessible standards due to onsite
hydrology, etc. requirements.
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-OS-170802.d ocx
Meeting Minutes#05 (August 2, 2017, 2:00 PM)
Woodmont Natural Park
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 3
H. G—Oak Savanna:The grove will bring back the historic plant to the area.
I. H—Overlook: A heightened area will provide a scenic viewing area of the park.
J. I — Enhanced Wetland: The biodiversity of the area will be improved after the park
enhancements. English Hawthorns and other invasive species will be removed from the
area.
K. J—Boardwalk:The boardwalk was reduced in length to only cover the necessary areas of
the trail.The boardwalk will not disturb the tributary.
I. The length is estimated to be 350 feet.
II. There will be no handrails added to the boardwalk, but low bumpers to
accommodate wheelchair accessibility will be considered.
L. Additional information regarding the master plan (preferred alternative/option)
I. The darker trees shown represent the existing tree canopy being proposed to
remain.
II. The main trail layout and flow was laid out to facilitate City of lake Oswego
maintenance needs.
II. Probable cost of the project will be available prior to City Council on September
5, 2017.
4. Questions/answers:
A. PAC(Kirsten Giacomini) stated the area feels natural, but improves usability.The current
plan is great and should be kept the same. The neighborhood will be happy with the
preferred alternative.
B. The City(Megan Bigjohn/Jeff Munro) approved the preferred alternative.
C. PAC (Ed Brockman) is not in favor of the on-street parking the plan projects. PAC is
concerned about the additional housing being constructed in the neighborhood, and
beieves there will be conflict with getting in and out of cars on the street.
D. PAC (Kirsten Giacomini) was concerned that an alternate parking plan would disrupt too
much park space.
E. PAC discussed a potential comprise to the parking design to include a buffer.
F. Changes to the parking design can be done after the Planning Commission and City
Council presentations.
G. The edits can be made in the construction documents.
H. PAC (Kirsten Giacomini/Ed Brockman) is positive about how the master plan reflects the
public input.
I. PAC (Kirsten Giacomini) believes the plan meets the needs of the local neighborhood
community and the entire city.
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-OS-170802.d ocx
Meeting Minutes#05 (August 2, 2017, 2:00 PM)
Woodmont Natural Park
Project Number 2150495.00
Page 4
5. Next steps:
Planning Commission August 28, 2017
Planning Commission Recommendations September 1, 2017
City Council September 5, 2017
City Council Report September 15, 2017
PAC Summary and Recommendation Report September 22, 2017
Public Outreach#3 Preferred Alternative Plan Review October 2, 2017
Posting Preferred Alternative Online October 4, 2017
PAC#5 Public Outreach Review and Final Recommendations October 18, 2017
Neighborhood Meeting November 8, 2017
Neighborhood Meeting Summary November 17, 2017
Estimated Construction to Begin Early to mid-summer 2018
6. Meeting adjourned.
7. The next PAC meeting will be on Wednesday, October 18, 2017 from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m. (Oswego,
Room Palisades)
Every effort has been made to accurately record this meeting. If any errors or omissions are noted, please
provide written response within five days of receipt.
c: Present
Dina Balogh—City of Lake Oswego Parks and Recreation
H:\P roj ects\215049500\6_F i n a I\M M-OS-170802.d ocx
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
4/11/2017 Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey-Responses�SurveyMonkey
Do you live in Lake Oswego?
Answered: 138 Skipped: 1
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 97.10% 134
No 2.90% 4
Total 138
Comments (127)
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XM RVH Q5G/ 1/1
4/11/2017 Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey-Responses�SurveyMonkey
Have you ever been to Woodmont Natural
Park?
Answered: 138 Skipped: 1
Yes
No
Not sure
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70°/a 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 71.01% 98
No 24.64% 34
Not sure 4.35% 6
Total 138
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XM RVH Q5G/ 1/1
4/11/2017 Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey-Responses�SurveyMonkey
Do you have kids?
Answered: 137 Skipped: 2
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 78.83% 108
No 21.17% 29
Total 137
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XM RVH Q5G/ 1/1
4/11/2017 Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey-Responses�SurveyMonkey
If yes, are your kids still living at home?
Answered: 114 Skipped: 25
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 63.16% 72
No 36.84% 42
Total 114
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XM RVH Q5G/ 1/1
4/11/2017 Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey-Responses�SurveyMonkey
Do you have one or more dogs?
Answered: 136 Skipped: 3
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 56.62% 77
No 43.38% 59
Total 136
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XM RVH Q5G/ 1/1
4/11/2017 Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey-Responses�SurveyMonkey
Can you walk to Woodmont Natural Park
from your home?
Answered: 137 Skipped: 2
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 64.23% 88
No 35.77% 49
Total 137
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XM RVH Q5G/ 1/1
4/11/2017 Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey-Responses�SurveyMonkey
Had you heard of Donald Meyer before
taking this survey?
Answered: 138 Skipped: 1
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes 37.68% 52
No 62.32% 86
Total 138
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XM RVH Q5G/ 1/1
4/11/2017 Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey-Responses�SurveyMonkey
What do you most like about Woodmont
Natural Park now? Check all that apply.
Answered: 136 Skipped: 3
Trai I s
Creek/Riparian
areas
Open Space
Trees
Don't
know/Never b...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Trai I s 45.59% 62
Creek/Riparian areas 49.26% 67
Open Space 56.62% 77
Trees 50.00% 68
Don't know/Never been there 25.00% 34
Total Respondents: 136
Comments (29)
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XM RVH Q5G/ 1/1
Q8 COMMENTS:
Keeping it as open and pristine as possible is the best use of this small area.A soccer field would be inappropriate and add
to traffic and noise in the community.
4/6/2017 10:13 AM
It's a wild jewel in a neighborhood that continues to loose its semi-rural feel due to development.
4/5/2017 6:I 6 nM
That it's undeveloped and natural
4/2/2017 10:59 PM
Nature.
4�,'017 8:57 P��1
Woodmont is a nice,quiet partially wooded natural area in the neighboorhood.It's great to have some free space available
close by.
4;?i2017 1:35 PM
My boys and I knew Mr.Meyer and where he lived in the woods.I have walked through the area for 30 years.I like the
Hawtharne trees,apples and pears.
4/2/2017 12:29 PM
I knew Mr Meyer personally I thought he donated the park not sold it to the ciry?
4/2/2017 10:21 AM
undeveloped,natural space
4/U2017 8:50 PM
I like the fact that it is a wild area.
4/1/2017 6:.`" "''i
Trail which diagonally across west part of park.
3/3 1/20 1 7 4 T
Blackberry bushes
3/3 U2017 4:19 PM
I love the open space in an urban area.I am in the park everyday as it is my back yard.I love to see the wildlife that
migrates through and I love the natural water way that is there(although it would be great to have a dry path through the
park during the winter).
3/31/2017 12:51 PVI
The natural state it is in.I grew up in a rural area and agree with Mr.Meyer.It should be maintained in its"historic and
natural state".
3/31/2017 I 1:43 AVI
I have never been there,but I appreciate nature parks and all of the things listed here.
3/31/2017 9:13 nM
Wetland area
3/31/2017 9:00 AM
I like having an open space with no improvements in the middle of a neighborhood.
3/30/2017 3:40 PM
The natural state of the area.The QUIETNESS.
3/30/2017 237 PM
Although I haven't been there,I love the idea of preserving the space and a new LO park to visit.
3/30/2017 10:20 nVI
I enjoy watching the wildlife whenever I visit Woodmont
3/27'2017 12:33 P\�1
Trails that are ADA compliant would be a wonderful addition.I would recommend removing some of the stinky Hawthorne
trees and replacing with a more beautiful type of tree.
3/27/2017 9:�0 nM
Peaceful The blocked gravel road preventing through traffic.
3/27/2017 8:53 AM
Tall grass
; �Z�O17 8:33 AM
Quiet serene atmosphere.No,to very little automobile traffia Lots of wildlife.
_ _.,�3017 lO:IR PVI
Don't like the invasive hawthornes,like the other trees.Would like to see more restoration with natives such as fir,white
oak,western red cedar,other native trees and grasses.
;i2(v?pl7 R:S� PM
Natural"un-manicured"nature of the park
3/26/2017 3:05 PM
We really appreciate the benefits to local wildlife.I would like the creek/riparian areas better if it didnt run into the paths,
making them very muddy.Any effort to better interface trails with waterways would be a huge benefit.
3/24/2017 9:18 AM
wildlife
3i24/?017 9:I 1 AM
I like that we have a natural open space in our very-developed neighborhood! �t is a wonderful walking destination in our
neighborhood.
3/24/?017 7:49 AN1
It remains more or less as it was during Donald Meyer's life,wild and unkempt.
3/24/2017 5:54 AM
4/11/2017 Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey-Responses�SurveyMonkey
Given that the deed has determined that
Woodmont Park will remain as a " Natural
Park" , what are the elements of the future
park that you hope to see? Check all that
apply.
Answered: 131 Skipped: 8
Riparian
Protection
Benches for
sitting
Grove of Trees
Trails/n atu ral
walkways
Natural "play"
areas that...
Small,
informal...
Restrooms
Low wattage
path lights
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Riparian Protection 61.83%
81
Benches for sitting 46.56%
61
Grove of Trees 58.78%
77
Trails/natural walkways 83.97%
110
Natural "play" areas that leverage the park in its natural state 49.62%
65
Small, informal "field" for soccer or other neighborhood games (not scheduled and not 19.08%
regulation size for team use at any age) 25
Rest ro o m s 28.24%
37
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XM RVH Q5G/ 1/2
4/11/2017 Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey-Responses�SurveyMonkey
Low wattage path lights 25.95%
34
Total Respondents: 131
Comments (50)
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XM RVH Q5G/ 2/2
Q9 COMMENTS:
Co�nmcnts(50)
I would love to see the existing trails have bark chips.Other than that,leave it as is.
4/7/2017 4:18 PM
The only benches that would be in keeping with this park are large tree stumps one could sit upon.
4/6/2017 10:13 AM
Please remove the"orchard" ...it's a mess and not conducive to a narive habitat far birds,eta Create a test/demo garden that
highlights plantings for visitors to use in their own yards.Of course the vegetation would enhance the bird habitat.And i think if
done properly private clubs/individuals would help maintain it.Too many parks tend to replicate each other.It would be great to
offer something unique-not just a neighborhood outlet but a leaming experience.
4/6/2017 931 nM
Dog poo bag station and trash can.
4/5/2017 6:16 AM
I vote no on restrooms,lights and informal field.
4/3/2017 9:31 PM
Dog Park
4 3;2017 9:20 PM
Would love to see a park within the neighborhood where kids could gather and play.Maybe a small where the kids could play
basketball.
4/3/201- � �PM
Dogs allowed offleash
4/3/2017 i� M
Elimination or reduction of the Hawthorne Trees
4/3/2017 9:44 nM
I'd really like to see nothing changed.It's naturally perfect.
4/2/2017 2:41 PM
In keeping with Mr.Meyer's wishes,it would be nice to add a few more features,such as benches and more paths within,and
some better maintained open areas.Given the small size,it will never be a hiking area but if there was more useable space that
would be great.It looks a bit overgrown right now with scraggly hawthornes and blackberries.
4/2/2017 1:25 PM
There needs to be a sign describing Mr.Meyer and his history plus a garbage can and dog bags.Trails would be nice and in the
summer the grassy areas need to be mowed regularly Planting native plants in the forest.
4/2/2017 12:29 PM
Leave as is,just keep the invasive plants in check such as the blackberry bushes.
, ' ,,,,� ]0:55 AM
Dog use including a dog waste station.
]0:31 AM
Following Mr Meyers requests regarding his land!
4/2/2017 10:21 AM
Community garden space since this was a farm....
4/l/2017 6:26 PM
Tennis practice wall.
4/1/2017 6:55 nM
Dog park
3/3 1/201 7 7:09 PM
Keep it the same.No change.
3/31/2017 6:42 PM
Thin out some of the Hawthorne trees.Leave the one apple tree.
3/31/2017 434 PM
Community garden
3/3l/2017 336 PM
I really hope that the space can be left as natural as possible.The area is beautiful!It just needs to be cleaned up(invasive species
and dead trees removed),new native trees introduced,pathways created and maintained,etc.
3/3U2017 12:51 PVI
No parking,restroom,lighting ar play field
3/31/2017 I I:43 A VI
Simple sitting areas/benches to reflect would be nice.Low maintenance natural state should be continued.No need for any°field"
of sart as there are other places around town and the area available.Mare Natural spaces are needed.
3 31'2017�:,6 AN1
PLEASE NO DOGS! Dogs disturb wildlife,contaminate the area with their urine and feces,and create potential safety issues
(and therefore liability for the city)for other users of the park.
3/30/2017 10:29 PVI
Minimal expenditure of elaborate structures.Paths if any with wood chips and a few benches.
3/30/2017 7:31 PM
Fenced dog park
3/30/2017 6:13 PM
An open area that could be used for community events that 6t in with the"natural"part of the park.The field could fit this.
3/30/2017 5:19 PM
Please leave it as it is.
3/30/2017 3:40 PM
Flowers and parking
3/30/2017 3:22 PM
Dog park with private play areas
3/30/2017 2:55 PM
Bike trails!
;;30''_017 3:5� PM
Please keep the park as is.Please add gravel to the existing"road"so people do not slip and fall.At present,the'road'area
becomes flooded with water,making the silt below as slick as a banana peel.Mud is a on-going factor in the rainy months.
"017 2:37 PM
a short disc golf course
7 10:21 AM
Trails are the most appealing to me.
3/30/2017 1020 AV1
Barkdust running trail around the perimeter! Lots of runners in LO and having a safe,soft place to run would be great!
3/30/2017 9:55 AM
I would like to see space for Forest Highlands neighborhood community gardens and no dogs.
3/29/2017 12:53 PM
Please leave the area in its natural state.No sports,restrooms,path lights etc.
3/27/201 7 73 1 PM
I recommend keeping it in it's natural state and make improvements for long term existence. Soft trails with placards explaining
the benefits of each natural zone.Another placard with history of Mr Meyer and his goals of protecting this special place would
be nice.
3/27/2017 12:33 PV[
Please leave in a natural state,although adding all weather paths would be terrific!
3/27/2017 9:40 AM
No gardening plots
3/27/2017 9:34 AM
Would love to see native oak restoration as well as other native trees and grasses.
3/26/2017 8:55 PM
Provides habitat far butterflies,birds,small creatures,transit zone for deer.
3/26/20 1 7 3:05 PM
-No cars,bicycles or parking.-Garbage can and waste bags for dogs could help keep the area clean.-There are dead trees behind
our home that,should they fall,could damage our property and potentially cause injury.I am told by the parks maintenance
office that this dead trees are natural,and i suppose that is true,but I am very concerned about the proximity of dead or sick trees
to my home.It would be great of risks to attached properties were a consideration.
324'?0179:18AM
limit to pedestrian traffic only.Garbage cans for dog waste would also be appreciated.
3/24/2017 9:11 AM
Community garden plots like at luscher farm
3/24/2017 9:03 AM
Please keep the field"as is,"in its natural state,without adding many improvements to it.I appreciate the birds and other wildlife
that visit Woodmont.I worry that some improvements(lighting,parking)will take away its natural wonder,and be a deterrent to
wildlife.
3/24/2017 7:49 AM
Few benches,only near the play area.NO RESTROOMS NO LIGHTS
3/24/2017 5:54 AM
community gardens
3/23/2017 10:54 PV[
Parking,I will drive to this park for my children to experience nature,LO always builds parks without enough parking.
3/23/2017 5:08 PM
4/11/2017 Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey-Responses�SurveyMonkey
What are your biggest concerns for
Woodmont Natural Park that we should
keep in mind as the planning process
moves forward? Check all that apply.
Answered: 130 Skipped: 9
Parking
Traffic
Vehicular
access
That the
"wild" natur...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Parking 35.38% 46
Traffic 33.08% 43
Vehicularaccess 21.54% 28
That the"wild" nature of the park will be diminished or compromised 73.85% 96
Total Respondents: 130
Comments (44)
https://www.surveymonkey.com/results/SM-XM RVH Q5G/ 1/1
Q10 COMMENTS:
Commcnts(44)
Inviting transients to squat in the park.
4/7/2017 4:18 PM
Potential impact of development on the Nordahl site.Especially runoff into the wetlands and excess storm water.Ibe been going
to Woodmont for 8 years and each winter it seems to get wetter and wetter.
4/5/2017 6:16 AM
I would like to see the park kept natural and as is with some minor improvements.No parking,bathrooms,play structure etc.
4/3/2017 9:31 PM
We are apposed to the road going through the park and any addirional parking.Any investment to traffic control is appreciated
and desired at the juncrion of Knaus/Boones Ferry and Knaus/Counhy Club.
4/32017 9:44 AM
Homeless camping.I'd prefer no restroom too.
4/2/2017 2:41 PM
�think building a road through the park would be a poor idea. It's a small neighborhood park,much like Pinecone Park,and
adding a street through it would really diminish the natural beauty as well as violate the donar's wishes.�t will never be used the
way other LO parks are utilized(i.e.George Rogers)due to the location and size. I'm a little worried that overdevelopment will
lead to mare attention and unscrupulous activity.It looks like it's already a teen bike ramp area and I wouldn't want to attract too
much attention to the area.However it would be nice to make it more useable with some open areas,gravel paths,and benches.
4/2/2017 1:25 PM
If you put a field in there for soccer there will NOT be parking.If you add a parking area you will destroy a good portion of the
park.I think even a small soccer field would destroy what you are trying to do.
4/2/2017 12:29 PM
Permitting multiple more new houses adjacent.Permitting one house is OK.Can the city buy the adjacent open land and preserve
it including if needed through eminent domain?
4/2/2017 10:5�AM
I would prefer the space remain as is
4/1/2017 8:50 PM
Not sure if you mean concern that there will be or won't be parking,traffic,vehicular access.I am against parking,traffic,
vehicular access.
4/1/2017 3:27 PM
Would like to see the traffic kept to a minimum so little parking would be better.
3/31/2017 5:39 PM
Litter
3/3 1/201 7 4:34 PM
Traffic and noise from cars.Area has narrow roads park was meant for neighborhood to walk to open area not drive and park.
3/31/2017 2:12 PM
That it tums into something that brings a lot of traffic into the neighborhood.It would also be so great to see it developed as one
contiguous piece of property.
3/3 U2017 I 2:5 I PV[
Limit anything man-made to a few simple benches to accommodate disabled or elderly.
3/31/2017 I 1:43 nM
I'm also concerned about other,similar natural areas.I don't want you to compromise protecting Hallinan natural area in favor of
Woodmont,for example.Hallinan,if the Yates property were acquired,would be almost as big as Woodmont.It is just as
important to protect now.Woodmont's trails etc can wait;the Yates property is going to be developed very soon.
3/3 U2017 9:13 nM
As we see considerable deforestation from new housing development along Attwater,it is increasingly vital to protect whatever
"wildness"and farest remains in Woodmont.
3/3 U2017 9:00 nM
A glance at the map of the respective areas,and the limited but indicative usage surveys conducted by local residents,would
suggest that acquiring the privately held part of Hallinan Woods,and adding it to the portion already publicly owned to create a
Natwe Park there,would be a better use of public funds than implementing the present plans for Woodmont.
3/3 U2017 5:59 nM
Because it is relatively small,my concem is that it will become only a dog exercise area for the neighborhood.With good design,
it could also be a nice area for kids to play and learn about nature.
3;31i2017 8:3>:�M
Parking has not seemed to be an issue.Plenty of room for this on vacated Atwater Lane to avoid issues on Atwater.If you
succeed in design and attention/attraction if that is the goal,you will need to consider both traffic to the area and parking.
Building and development in the area and specifically on Atwater in the recent few years has added more traffic to the area.
3/31/2017 536 AM
Please do not allow dogs at this park!
3/30/2017 10:29 PV[
Cost will detract from improvements to more deserving parks.Woodmont park will get little usage as Tryon Creek is so close by.
3/30/2017 926 PM
Preserving the natural beauty&habitat is important.I would like to see the ivy if any removed from the trees.Parking area with
fine gravel instead of asphalt?
3/30/2017 4:04 PM
None,it needs some love.Any work on it would be an improvement,it is overgrown and has too many invasive trees.
3/30/201 7 3 22 PM
That restrooms eill attract every contractar and landscaper in town.Please don't put in restrooms.Other parks of equal size are
6ne without them.
3/30/2017 3:14 PM
That restrooms eill attract every contractor and landscaper in town.Please don't put in restrooms.Other parks of equal size are
6ne without them.
3/30/2017 3:14 PM
It's inside of a neighborhood...no parking or vehicular access should be available.
3/30/2017 3:04 PM
Please leave the park a"neighborhood"park.Do NOT encourage added carshraffic.We value ow QUIET neighborhood.
3/30/2017 237 PM
I hope there can be a balance between access(parking)and the natural state of the park.I live far enough away that driving to the
park would be my way to enjoy it.
3/30/2017 10:20 nVl
Atwater road is not in good condition and needs help especially if more cars will be on this road
3/30/2017 10:00 A!VI
I request the hawthorn trees(since they unfartunately are to remain)be pruned up and maintained as single-stem trees.I would
like to see the parking lot be minimal,perhaps angled parking along Atwater only.
3/29/2017 12:53 PM
Parking,traffic and vehicular access should not be allowed!
3/27/2017 73l PM
Less sriuctures/hard surfaces and keep it as-is far maximum wildlife viewing.Definitely NOT a dog park because too many
people fail to follow leash laws now and this would disrupt the wildlife here forever.
� �7;�017 12:33 PM
People only and no cars.
7 9:50 AM
Keep cars out completely.No automobile access in anyway should be the standard.
3/27/2017 9:40 AM
No Parking Please-Keep all Vehicles out
3/27/2017 9:34 AM
Keep access for foot traffic.Coyote and other predators becoming a big concern to streets in vicinity.
3/27/2017 8:53 AM
In a strength place.Isn't even clear it is a park.Atwater road in terrible condition.
3/26/2017 10:37 PM
No thru road in existing ROW please.Keep it quite,natural.Could be a real jewel for educational activities for school kids at
nearby elementary,middle and high schools to teach restoration ecology,native plants,wetlands biology.One example of similar
area would be the Tualatin Wildlife Refuge.Great accessibility and restoration efforts but largely keeping with special natural
character of the area.Remove invasive Hawthorne!Replace with native trees.
3/26/2017 8:55 PM
That development of parking,soccer field,etc.will diminish the"wild°habitat acreage.With more development in the area-e.g.
new construction and habitat destruction on Atwater Road-Woodmont will become even more important in this regard,and the
natural acreage should not be reduced by development.The main pathway through the park,particularly at the north end at
Atwater Lane,should be crowned to make the trail mare walkable in wet weather.
3/2(i;2017 3:05 PM
But the park does need to be made more people friendly with better paths and better water management.
3/24/2017 9:18 AM
I am against installing parking in the park area. Similarly,there should be no through street access joining Atwater to Country
Commons.
3/24/2017 9:1 I nM
I warry that if you add benches,parking,and lighting(!!),you are making it into a nighttime hang out spot for ldds(and adults)
who may want a place to party.There is already evidence of this(empty cans,bottles,etc in the field)and I worry lighting and
parking will make it more desirable.Also,I worry that lighting and parking will take away from our wildlife's needs.
3/24/2017 7:49 nM
The plan should reflect the communities desire and not just the immediate neighbors
3/23/2017 5:08 PM
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Do you prefer the Flexible Open Space
location in option: (please select one)
Answered:6: :0
A
B
C
Is there
anything els...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
A
32.26% 20
B
29.03% 18
C
20.97% 13
Is there anything else you would like us to know about Flexible Open Spaces?Please comment below.
17.74% 11
Total 62
# Is there anything else you would like us to know about Flexible Open Spaces?Please comment below. Date
1 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
1 Worry about parking and bathrooms-Atwater is such a bad road and does not need more traffic-really would be badll 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
2 I wish there were trees throughout the park like there are now to provide home and coverage for wild animals that inhabit the park. 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
3 Please do not allow dogs.Thanks 6/1/2017 8:06 PM
4 A north-south trail is needed to connect nearby streets.It needs bicycle access and parking. 6/1/2017 7:38 PM
5 Add a few Natural Benches(not stone)in Option B 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
6 would this area include any benches or picnic facilities? 5/31/2017 6:02 PM
7 Don't need to rock stacks,nor the bird watching wall.Please keep it as minimal as possible.NO DOG PARK.There are too many houses nearby and 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
dogs off leash can get into other neighbor's yards.You will get complaints about this.Keep dogs on leash as they are required now.
8 Open space should be rambling,not clearly defined as in the drawings. 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
9 Interactive natural area ideas and pictures are fantastic! 5/26/2017 8:26 PM
10 Leaving orcahrds tree is a good thing.Everyone seems to want to cut those down 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
11 None of these options 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
2 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Do you prefer the Natural Open Space
location in option: (please select one)
i 5 �ped:
A
B
C
Is there
anything els...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
A
32.20% 19
B
33.90% 20
C
15.25% 9
Is there anything else you would like us to know about Natural Open Spaces?Please comment below. 18.64% 11
Total 59
# Is there anything else you would like us to know about Natural Open Spaces?Please comment below. Date
3 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
1 I love the natural open space as it is in the park now 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
2 I like A and B,but think B is too open.You can still have views,but need more trees 6/3/2017 10:02 AM
3 Please do not allow dogs.Thank you. 6/1/2017 8:06 PM
4 Car parking is not needed. 6/1/2017 7:38 PM
5 Rocks unnecessary in Interactive Natural Area 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
6 I don't get the differences on these pictures.Most of the park should be a natural open space with minimal development. 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
7 Likewise,natural open space should be rambling.Your park is too neat and defined in almost all regards. 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
8 Leaving orcahrds tree is a good thing.Everyone seems to want to cut those down 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
9 but too many boardwalks 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
10 K 5/25/2017 9:58 PM
11 None of the above 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
4 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Do you prefer the Boardwalk option in:
(please select one)
C red:62 Skipped:0
A
B
C
Is there
anything els...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
A
40.32% 25
B
22.58% 14
C
17.74% 11
Is there anything else you would like us to know about the Boardwalk options?Please comment below.Other(please specify)
19.35% 12
Total 62
# Is there anything else you would like us to know about the Boardwalk options?Please comment below.Other(please specify) Date
5 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
1 I prefer boardwalk only where necessary to provide access in the park during the winter months. 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
2 would like boardwalk in forested area 6/3/2017 10:02 AM
3 Boardwalk wherever the ground will become over saturated with water.Anything that makes paths accessible to people of all abilities. 6/2/2017 7:17 PM
4 Please do not allow dogs.Thank you. 6/1/2017 8:06 PM
5 I think the smallest amount of boardwalk to maintain would be best 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
6 keep the boardwalk as small as possible 5/30/2017 7:08 PM
7 No need for boardwalk option except over swamp area.Please keep as natural as possible. 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
8 I pick B.There is too much and unnecessary boardwalk in A.By the way,on all these questions,the questionnaire does not allow me to pick a letter 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
option AND the"Is there anything..."option.
9 B is better because it is less.You can't make open land better by building wooden pathways. 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
10 there are no boardwalks shown inside the wooded area in NE.I think a boardwalk over the stream would be good. 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
11 Option A is preferred-boardwalk should be limited-iYs not a great site for boardwalk usage considering cost and maintenance. 5/26/2017 12:11 PM
12 None of the above 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
6 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Do you prefer the Overlook in option:
(please select one)
Answered:61 Skipped: 1
A
B
C
Is there
anything els...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
A
32.79% 20
B
37.70% 23
C
18.03% 11
Is there anything else you would like us to know about the Overlook concept?Please comment below.
11.48% 7
Total 61
# Is there anything else you would like us to know about the Overlook concept?Please comment below. Date
7 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
1 Necessary?Also,the 3 options look similar. 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
2 Please do not allow dogs.Thank you. 6/1/2017 8:06 PM
3 the area is so small there is no need for an'overlook' 5/30/2017 7:08 PM
4 Keep it as simple as possible. 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
5 B's overlook is best because it seems to be the least intrusive. 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
6 no need to build one.Use existing high point of topography 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
7 None of the options 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
8 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Do you prefer the Enhanced Wooded
Trail in option: (please select one)
iswered:59 Skipped:
A
B
C
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
A
45.76% 27
B
32.20% 19
C
22.03% 13
Total 59
Do you prefer the Interactive Natural
Area layout in option: (please select one)
9 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
A
B
C
Is there
anything els...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
A
25.42% 15
B
25.42% 15
C
25.42% 15
Is there anything else you would like us to know about the Interactive Natural Area concept?Please comment below. 23.73% 14
Total 59
# Is there anything else you would like us to know about the Interactive Natural Area concept?Please comment below. Date
1 I would prefer to keep the park as natural as possible 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
10 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
2 Eliminate Interactive Natural Areas. 6/2/2017 7:17 PM
3 Please do not allow dogs.Thank you. 6/1/2017 8:06 PM
4 Rocks unnecessary in Interactive Natural Area-Option A&B OK 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
5 I prefer a larger interactive area and no amphitheater in plan C 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
6 No interactive area needed. 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
7 Keep it near the areas where there is visability for parents using the dog park,etc. 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
8 No interactive area.Nature is interactive enough. 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
9 I do not like the interactive natural areas.These are unnecessary. 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
10 The current park is interactive.It shouldn't be forced by some designers ideas of nature. 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
11 Would be great to maximize this as well as keeping the overall 5/26/2017 8:26 PM
12 it would be nice to have one in the wetland and one higher up.Wet play and dry play options 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
13 Bathroom near it is essential 5/26/2017 1:35 PM
14 None of the options 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
11 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Do you prefer the Off-leash Dog Area in
option: (please select one)
Answeri SkipK
A
B(no
designated d...
C
Is there
anything els...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
A
16.73% 10
B(no designated dog area)
37.10% 23
C
24.19% 15
Is there anything else you would like us to know about the concept of a designated dog area?Please comment below.
22.58% 14
Total 62
# Is there anything else you would like us to know about the concept of a designated dog area?Please comment below. Date
12 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
1 Please NO DOG PARK. 6/4/2017 11:24 PM
2 No off-leash dog area-seems to dangerous 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
3 I prefer no off-leash dog area in the park 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
4 Eliminate Off-leash Dog Areas. 6/2/2017 7:17 PM
5 It would be nice to not have a designated dog area,there are plenty in LO already.Luscher Farms have a lovely one and it is often unused. 6/1/2017 6:15 PM
6 I do not like off leash dog parks-my dog is afraid of other dogs and in general this causes more issues than benefit. 5/31/2017 3:47 PM
7 Dogs should be allowed,but no specific area required.Don't want it to be a destination dog park. 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
8 Keep the dog park in the middle of the park to keep it away from the homes.Make sure that there is good drainage. 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
9 I would not like there to be an off leash area.We already have a lot of park space available for dogs. 5/30/2017 2:12 PM
10 NO OFF-LEASH AREA.other off-leash areas get regular police calls because poor human interactions.I don't want to bring that into this peaceful 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
community.Also dogs off-leash run off and ruin neighbor's lawns,poop on their properties,advance toward young kids,run in the street.NO OFF-
LEASH DOG AREA.Dogs should stay on leash.This should be a peaceful place for humans.
11 Te park's current use is mostly by dog owners with their pets.IYs a shame to restrict their use to a small area of off leash. It should all be off leash. 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
12 the designs shown are too small to be of any use to dog owners. 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
13 It seems we need more dog park areas in LO,so this is an important element to include. 5/26/2017 1:06 PM
14 None of the options 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
13 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Do you prefer the location of the
Parking in option: (please select one)
Answered:6 �ped:2
A
B
C
Is there
anything els...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
A
26.67% 16
B
35.00% 21
C
20.00% 12
Is there anything else you would like us to know about the location of the parking?Please comment below.
18.33% 11
Total 60
# Is there anything else you would like us to know about the location of the parking?Please comment below. Date
14 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
1 I was at the first park meeting in March and I thought it was made very clear by all attending(all neighbors to the park)that no one was in favor of 6/4/2017 10:09 PM
parking.
There is no need for parking.
2 There should not be parking-absolutely no room for extra traffic on that corner and Atwater is a narrow.The park is for neighborhood people will be 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
walking
3 Please do not allow dogs.Please post clear signs prohibiting dogs.Thank you. 6/1/2017 8:06 PM
4 Parking buffered from Atwater is Good in Option A:however,don't narrow Atwater,this corner is visually challenging for cars,bikes and walkers.) 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
5 No parking.Much better to have as a walking destination. 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
6 Option C.With bathroom nearby for easy police monitoring of both.Don't separate those two-harder for local police to monitor. 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
7 I prefer no parking.If it must be included,keep it to a minimum of intrusion as in B 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
8 not sure parking area is the best idea,but B seems least impact 5/26/2017 4:57 PM
9 We don't need a lot of parking at the park.Total parking should be keep to the least intrustive SQFT into the park's center 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
10 It doesn't appear that existing firs and cedars were considered in any alternative.Would like to see as many saved as possible. 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
11 Noneof the options 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
15 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Do you prefer the Restroom location in
option: (please select one)
Ans 61 �ped: 1
A
B
C
Is there
anything els...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
A
29.51% 18
B
22.95% 14
C
29.51% 18
Is there anything else you would like us to know about the location of the restrooms in these concepts?Please comment below.
18.03% 11
Total 61
# Is there anything else you would like us to know about the location of the restrooms in these concepts?Please comment below. Date
16 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
1 Again at the first park meeting in March,it was made very clear by all attending that no one was in favor of a restroom.There is absolutely no need for 6/4/2017 10:09 PM
a restroom at all.This is a neighborhood park used by neighbors...we all have bathrooms at our houses.Bathrooms can attract an element not
welcome in our neighborhood.We do not want to see an increase in crime,drugs etc because of this park.NO BATHROOMS!!!
2 There should be no restroom-the neighbors don't need to have a restroom there 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
3 I would prefer no restroom.There is no need for it at this time.Perhaps the infrastructure could be put in case there is future need. 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
4 Please post signs prohibiting dogs.Thank you. 6/1/2017 8:06 PM
5 The restrooms should be near the parking 6/1/2017 12:29 PM
6 Option C SIZE in Option A LOCATION 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
7 No restrooms.This is an element I don't want to see.It brings with it too many risks. 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
8 No restroom-this is a neighborhood park 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
9 Option C.Should be close to street.Tucked back makes it an easier homeless location to sleep in the back of the pakr and use the bathroom without 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
being noticed.
10 A small park does not need a restroom.Larger parks in the city don't have them. 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
11 None of the options 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
17 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Do you prefer the layout of the
Pathways in option: (please select one)
Answered:61 �K
A
B
C
Is there
anything els...
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
A
40.98% 25
B
27.87% 17
C
18.03% 11
Is there anything else you would like us to know about pathways in these concepts?Please comment below.
13.11% 8
Total 61
# Is there anything else you would like us to know about pathways in these concepts?Please comment below. Date
18 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
1 There needs to be direct access across the park for school children and people on bikes trying to avoid the curve on Knaus 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
2 A-Use dog park area for more paths 6/2/2017 7:17 PM
3 Please post signs prohibiting dogs.Thank you. 6/1/2017 8:06 PM
4 A path that is approximately Atwater Lane to Atwater Road Option A(or maybe Option B) 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
5 Minimal paths.Please don't make zig zags everywhere. 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
6 A few pathways as possible.A perimeter path with perhaps one pathway connecting through the middle,and thaYs enough.IYs not a large area and we 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
don't need it densely covered with patchs.
7 Less boardwalks better.Keep it natural 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
8 None of the options 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
19 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Do you like the idea of an Oak Savanna
landscape?
Answered pped:2
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
75.00% 45
No
25.00% 15
Total 60
Do you like the idea of a Foraging
Forest?
20 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
70.49% 43
No
29.51% 18
Total 61
Do you like the idea of a Rock
Outcropping?
21 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
62.30% 38
No
37.70% 23
Total 61
Do you like the idea of a Community
Garden?
22 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
38.33% 23
No
61.67% 37
Total 60
Looking at each Design Alternative,
what are the PROS & CONS of Design
Alternative A, in your opinion?
Answer Choices Responses
PROS
80.43% 37
CONS
93.48% 43
23 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
# PROS Date
1 The park is hidden from the road a bit 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
2 feels natural in some ways 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
3 keeps the park very natural 6/3/2017 10:02 AM
4 Wooded trails,bathroom location,open spaces,parking lot 6/2/2017 7:17 PM
5 many trails and boardwalks 6/1/2017 8:59 PM
6 Oak trees 6/1/2017 7:38 PM
7 The overlook and boardwalk look,Interesting path design,dog off-leash area thaYs not the primary part of the park 6/1/2017 12:29 PM
8 Parking buffered from Atwater is Good.(But don't narrow Atwater,this corner is visually challenging for cars,bikes and walkers.) 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
9 more parking and boardwalk 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
10 Seems like a great layout 6/1/2017 10:50 AM
11 Biggest enhanced wetlands,rock outcropping,paths to keep folks out of the wet wreas 6/1/2017 10:47 AM
12 Boardwalk,small flex space 5/31/2017 6:21 PM
13 Large open area,a lot of pathways 5/31/2017 6:02 PM
14 more open,more trail 5/31/2017 3:47 PM
15 rock outcropping if you are using materials already on site. 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
16 Ample boardwalk 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
17 The most minimal.Enhances but doesn't overwhelm for the most part except the large amount of boardwalk.Like that it retains the existing pathway flow 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
18 Nice long boardwalk,rock cropping and its location,smaller flexible open space 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
19 boardwalk since is the wet area. Nature viewing areas 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
20 location of the natural area 5/30/2017 7:08 PM
24 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
21 Best handicapped access 5/30/2017 5:39 PM
22 Nice amount of Wooded trails 5/30/2017 4:00 PM
23 Great boardwalk,foraging area 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
24 Fewer paths through the middle 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
25 Broad mix of uses. 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
26 Lots of trees.An open space.The view from H. 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
27 ??? 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
28 I like the overall design 5/26/2017 4:57 PM
29 none 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
30 good flow 5/26/2017 2:16 PM
31 walking loop,natural feel, 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
32 Rock outcropping 5/26/2017 1:35 PM
33 Lots of boardwalk.enclosed dog park,rock outcropping 5/26/2017 1:06 PM
34 Open space 5/26/2017 12:41 PM
35 least intrusive trails,and maintains wilderness 5/26/2017 12:39 PM
36 Good layout,broad appeal in uses considred 5/26/2017 12:11 PM
37 Open space 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
# CONS Date
1 bathrooms&parking-no need for either one 6/4/2017 10:09 PM
2 Parking lot and bathroom 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
3 Too much boardwalk, bad parking design 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
4 DOG PARK.Natural open space should be larger. 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
25 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
5 Too much boardwalk(expense and maintenance),don't like the rock outcropping 6/3/2017 5:12 PM
6 too many boardwalks,dog park too small,needs more screening from adjacent properties,play area in the forest seems to uninviting for much of the 6/3/2017 10:02 AM
year
7 Interactive areas,off-leash dog park&interactive area-would rather have another path,not generally bounded by trees, 6/2/2017 7:17 PM
8 Lacking a community garden. 6/2/2017 5:03 AM
9 only 1 large interactive natural area,space for rock outcropping seems like it could be better used 6/1/2017 8:59 PM
10 Car parking is a waste of land 6/1/2017 7:38 PM
11 The interactive natural area needs to be off of a main path;not secondary one 6/1/2017 12:29 PM
12 Too much Boardwalk. Eliminate Off-Leash Dog Park,Bird Blind/Overlook,and Rock Outcropping. 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
13 small dog park and no community garden 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
14 Small dog park 6/1/2017 10:50 AM
15 Dog Park 5/31/2017 6:21 PM
16 no picnic tables or benches or swings 5/31/2017 6:02 PM
17 Too many wood boardwalks,hazard for slipping and maintenance costs.Parking lot not needed,Restrooms not needed 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
18 Off leash area,Out of character rock feature 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
19 Boardwalk overdone.Parking location.Too many trails in the woodland area.Don't need the interactive areas. 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
20 The dog park 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
21 Dog park too close to a home 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
22 way too much boardwalk,unnecessary overlook 5/30/2017 7:08 PM
23 Not enough open flex space 5/30/2017 4:00 PM
24 No water in the kids area 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
26 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
25 Off-leash dog park. 5/30/2017 1:26 PM
26 bathroom location, 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
27 Too intensively developed. 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
28 Way too much boardwalk.Toilet should be aUnearer to parking area.No need for dog park.No need for interactive areas. No need for rocking 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
outcropping.
29 Too much boardwalk construction 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
30 Dog park 5/26/2017 8:26 PM
31 no community gardens 5/26/2017 4:57 PM
32 No histrorical orchard area 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
33 may need more parking 5/26/2017 2:16 PM
34 too much boardwalk,foraging forest,rock outcropping,small dog park,play area in forest,not enough screening on western property line(future 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
development)
35 dog park 5/26/2017 1:41 PM
36 Bathroom far from playground 5/26/2017 1:35 PM
37 Lack of property boundary to the west 5/26/2017 129 PM
38 bird blind farther from wetlands,restroom would be better on left side of parking lot closer to natural play areas 5/26/2017 1:06 PM
39 Dogs 5/26/2017 12:41 PM
40 Parking isn't as good as B,and too many boardwalks 5/26/2017 12:39 PM
41 WAY too much boardwalk.Boardwalk is a nightmare and should be reserved for use only when absolutely necessary.Our parks can't keep up with 5/26/2017 12:11 PM
maintenance as it is.
42 Maybe too many trails 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
43 Simply maintain it in iYs present state 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
27 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
28 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Looking at each Design Alternative,
what are the PROS & CONS of Design
Alternative B, in your opinion?
Answer Choices Responses
PROS
83.33% 35
CONS
92.86% 39
# PROS Date
1 I like how undeveloped it is,I like this parking plan 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
2 larger mowed area,parking alternative,2 choices for nature play(edge of forest and in wetland area),like the pathway, 6/3/2017 10:02 AM
3 Paths on west side of park,no dog park, 6/2/2017 7:17 PM
4 a lot of individual areas created by pathways,stormwater runoff 6/1/2017 8:59 PM
5 No car parking 6/1/2017 7:38 PM
6 The locations of the interactive nature area,the flexible open space 6/1/2017 12:29 PM
7 Pathway extends simply from Atwater Lane to Atwater Road. 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
8 Great open space 6/1/2017 10:50 AM
9 No dog park,street parking only 5/31/2017 6:21 PM
10 I like the location of the overlook 5/31/2017 6:02 PM
11 no dog park is a plus 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
12 More wooded area,realistic parking plan,No off leash area,Overlook 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
13 Like parking and bathroom locations.Boardwalk in the wet spots.Not overdone. 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
14 No dog park,no community garden and street parking only 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
29 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
15 minimal parking,this is a park to walk to... 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
16 most similar to present day,more enhanced wetlands 5/30/2017 7:08 PM
17 Lots of open space and flexibility 5/30/2017 4:00 PM
18 Great kids nature area 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
19 There is no Off-leash dog park. 5/30/2017 1:26 PM
20 design B seems more natural to me...the way Mr.Meyer would have wanted it. 5/30/2017 1:18 PM
21 less boardwalk 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
22 Emphasis on natural areas.Seems more in keeping with Meyer intent. 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
23 Overlook.Boardwalk just what is needed to allow passage through wet areas. 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
24 Minimal parking intrusion and impact 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
25 Design okay 5/26/2017 4:57 PM
26 Least invasive parking 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
27 too much open,undefined space 5/26/2017 2:16 PM
28 play areas,connection to wetland,flex space,parking 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
29 love it 5/26/2017 1:41 PM
30 Bathroom near playground 5/26/2017 1:35 PM
31 more wetland 5/26/2017 1:06 PM
32 More open space 5/26/2017 12:41 PM
33 almost as good a design as A,but a few too many trails 5/26/2017 12:39 PM
34 good use of boardwalk(minimal) 5/26/2017 12:11 PM
35 layout is balanced 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
30 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
# CONS Date
1 Too open from Knaus and Atwater-no parking or bathrooms 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
2 Too many pathways 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
3 Natural open space should be larger. 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
4 Don't like the proposed parking design and location 6/3/2017 5:12 PM
5 too open,need more trees,especially along property line 6/3/2017 10:02 AM
6 Type of flexible open space,restroom location,parking location,not bounded by trees,interactive area 6/2/2017 7:17 PM
7 lacking a community garden. 6/2/2017 5:03 AM
8 parallel parking,flexible open space is almost too large without other amenities 6/1/2017 8:59 PM
9 No mountain bike trails. 6/1/2017 7:38 PM
10 the location of the bathroom 6/1/2017 12:29 PM
11 Parking is problematic.Too many Waterways. Rocks unnecessary in Interactive Natural Area 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
12 no dog park 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
13 No dog park 6/1/2017 10:50 AM
14 Boring design,fewer areas to enjoy 5/31/2017 6:21 PM
15 no dog park area 5/31/2017 6:02 PM
16 Neither parking lot nor bathrooms needed 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
17 Unnecessary crossing trails in the"Enhanced Woodland" 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
18 Too much going on in general. 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
19 Boring design with fewer areas to enjoy/investigate 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
20 restroom is too far from street-could be a problem with trespassing.Plus it is close to home 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
31 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
21 not having a dog park 5/30/2017 7:08 PM
22 No rocks or Amphitheatre 5/30/2017 4:00 PM
23 No dog park 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
24 bathroom location 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
25 Move the restroom a bit closer to the parking area. 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
26 Too many pathways.Bathroom is way too far from parking area. No need for interactive areas. 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
27 Way too many enhanced wetlands 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
28 no dog area or community garden area 5/26/2017 4:57 PM
29 No histrorical orchard area 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
30 needs a lot more trees(too open),no screening on west side of park 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
31 none 5/26/2017 1:41 PM
32 No dog park 5/26/2017 1:35 PM
33 Lack of property boundary to the west 5/26/2017 129 PM
34 no dog park,restroom too far from parking lot 5/26/2017 1:06 PM
35 Too many trails 5/26/2017 12:41 PM
36 Restroom location 5/26/2017 12:39 PM
37 No dog park 5/26/2017 12:11 PM
38 not able to enjoy and interact with small wetland area as much 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
39 Same as above 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
Looking at each Design Alternative,
what are the PROS & CONS of Design
Alternative C, in your opinion?
32 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Answer Choices Responses
PROS
80.00% 36
CONS
86.67% 39
# PROS Date
1 The path through the forest 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
2 Community Garden! 6/3/2017 10:31 PM
3 Oak Savanna 6/3/2017 9:58 PM
4 Community garden,Oak savanna,parking area,larger restroom for storage 6/3/2017 5:12 PM
5 community gardens, 6/3/2017 10:02 AM
6 Tree grove,bounded by trees,parking, 6/2/2017 7:17 PM
7 Love the community garden plot and location. 6/2/2017 5:03 AM
8 natural amphitheater,community garden,larger restroom building 6/1/2017 8:59 PM
9 Oak trees 6/1/2017 7:38 PM
10 Bathroom location 6/1/2017 12:29 PM
11 Larger size Restroom. 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
12 Has something for everyone good dog park and garden 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
13 Great dog park 6/1/2017 10:50 AM
14 Small community garden 6/1/2017 10:47 AM
15 Few trails,wasted space on parking,dog park! 5/31/2017 6:21 PM
16 more parking,dog park area 5/31/2017 6:02 PM
33 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
17 community garden as long as there is a plan. 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
18 Open Space 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
19 None 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
20 Dog area is in middle of park 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
21 Best dog park;best restroom location 5/30/2017 5:39 PM
22 Amphitheatre included 5/30/2017 4:00 PM
23 Garden 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
24 parking and bathroom location.Should be single toilet only. 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
25 Not much. 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
26 Toilet is near parking 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
27 Couldn't think of any 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
28 has a community garden 5/26/2017 4:57 PM
29 Leaves some historical orchard,yay! 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
30 garden 5/26/2017 2:16 PM
31 community gardens(but not enough and bad location-better in NW area above wetland);oak savannah,but should extend down west border and 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
wrap around SW border(Glacomini house).And shouldn't be an oak savannah with just oaks and grasses.Should be underplanted with natives for a
mixed border(talk to Mark Wilson-oak habitat expert)
32 Continuous loop trail 5/26/2017 1:35 PM
33 large grassy open space,attractive boardwalk design 5/26/2017 1:06 PM
34 Open space 5/26/2017 12:41 PM
35 Nane 5/26/2017 12:39 PM
36 parking ingress egress 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
34 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
# CONS Date
1 Way too developed.Do not want to see community gardens put in,do not like the large structure in the park 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
2 DOG PARK.Natural open space should be larger. 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
3 Community Garden 6/3/2017 9:58 PM
4 parking,too designed looking-not natural,boardwalk too big and fancy,no improvement to paths in forest,paths look"cool"but aren't functional for 6/3/2017 10:02 AM
someone cutting through the park
5 Gardens,dog park,interactive area,amphitheater,wooded trail to small 6/2/2017 7:17 PM
6 dog park is too large,no added/enhanced wooded trails 6/1/2017 8:59 PM
7 Too many car parking spots 6/1/2017 7:38 PM
8 The off-leash takes over the open space in the park 6/1/2017 1229 PM
9 Eliminate Off-Leash Dog Park,Amphitheater,Community Garden and Rocks in Interactive Natural Area 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
10 could use a few more parking spaces 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
11 I don't think we need a garden 6/1/2017 10:50 AM
12 Off leash and flexible areas too big-will ruin the natural ambiance and just turn into another mowed lawn 6/1/2017 10:47 AM
13 tree grove will leave the park not visible from the street which will make it harder for kids to feel safe in the park. 5/31/2017 6:02 PM
14 neither parking lot nor bathrooms needed.Dog park is way too large. 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
15 Off leash area,Parking location,Community Garden 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
16 This is a stretch for this type of park.Too many built elements. 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
17 Fewer trails,wasted space with the parking,community garden,dog park 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
18 No community garden-there are plenty at Luscher Farms 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
19 ampitheatre,parking takes up too much of the park space,community garden 5/30/2017 7:08 PM
35 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
20 Not enough wooded trails 5/30/2017 4:00 PM
21 Short wooded trail,nature play too separated 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
22 Off-leash dog park. 5/30/2017 1:26 PM
23 dog park.Waste of space for humans who are using it 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
24 Too many uses.Oak savanna is too small to be of any significance or educational value. 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
25 Totally unnatural design that is superimposed on the natural landscape.No need for dog park. Restroom way too big.Parking area too large. No 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
community garden.No need for interactive area.
26 Community garden is a stupid idea.Parking and restrooms are too prominent. 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
27 Dog park 5/26/2017 8:26 PM
28 don't love the overall design 5/26/2017 4:57 PM
29 Concerded about community garden getting overgrown 5/26/2017 221 PM
30 too stylized,not enough trails through the forest. 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
31 bigger dog park 5/26/2017 1:41 PM
32 Bathroom far from playground 5/26/2017 1:35 PM
33 Lack of property boundary to the west.Unnecessarily large restroom. 5/26/2017 1:29 PM
34 shortage of wooded trail 5/26/2017 1:06 PM
35 Dogs 5/26/2017 12:41 PM
36 Overdesigned,don't like the community garden(doesn't fit in a natural/wilderness park) 5/26/2017 12:39 PM
37 I don't care for the path layout 5/26/2017 12:11 PM
38 Out of balance 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
39 Same as abovementioned 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
36 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
What else do you want us to know as
we continue to refine the Master Plan for
Woodmont Natural Park into one preferred
alternative?
.1�. . .
# Responses Date
1 In general,I walk through the park on average twice a day.After starting this survey, I went for a walk,and i find it almost absurd that in each of these 6/4/2017 11:24 PM
versions,nearly the entire park will be stripped of existing foliage and re-graded to turn a natural park into a"natural"park.In a world where everything
is manicured,this has been a gem.Sure,it would be nice if it was weeded,the trees and shrubs pruned,but instead,the entire park is going to be
turned into something not even reminiscent of the original setting or intent.It bothers me that something that could have some operations and
maintenance gets a major overhaul that requires constant operations and maintenance.To me,this renovation is reflective of what Lake Oswego is
turning into:no charm,all shiny and new,and no regard for simpler living.Although I am not in favor of a developed road that goes through the park,I
will miss,and I know a lot of neighbor kids will miss,walking through the park on Atwater Lane.I also think that there is an agenda here that is being
presented WITHOUT much regard for the local neighborhood. It is the"Field of Dreams"mentality:'If you build it,they will come.'Rather than make
this a unique park in the Lake Oswego system,keeping it in a natural state,it will become just another glorified built-up park.The City has already
removed the blackberries that many families came to annually throughout the summer to pick berries and which protected the wild rabbits.I have not
seen one bunny since the park has undergone Phase I of development.I suspect that no deer or even coyote will be passing through.Squirrels and
birds will be contained in a specified area.The remaining apple trees will be removed,which means another source of neighbors coming to pick
apples will be gone.The pear trees,too,will be removed though I admit that those pears never looked good.The park will be neat and pretty,which is
the agenda and goal of the City.It will end up being a shadow of what it was and rather soulless.I get it.Too bad the City could not keep the wildness
and contain areas of blackberries,blueberries,and such.The park in any of these layouts will be a man-made,artificially constructed park.There is an
opportunity to enhance,not destroy this park,but I think that is not what is planned or desired by the City.After all, I bet no one lives in the
neighborhood and recognizes how the development will alter the rural aspect of Forest Highlands and will make it into just another cookie cutter
neighborhood.There will be nothing unique.How depressing.I don't think this is what Mr.Meyer intended or envisioned.
2 The park should remain very similar as it is today...just needs to be cleaned up a bit.No bathrooms and no restrooms...absolutely unnecessary....and 6/4/2017 10:09 PM
will ruin the look and feel of the park.Also can invite unwanted situations into our nice neighborhood.All of us at the first park meeting in March were
very clear that we did not want either restrooms or parking and I'm not sure why that was not heard. I felt good walking out of that first park meeting....l
felt like all of the neighbors were on the same page about preserving the park as it is today and I thought that was well communicated in the meeting.
Now,I feel sick to my stomach after looking at all of these alternatives.Our voices were not heard!
3 The park is for the neighborhood so it should not have parking when people will be walking!!No bathrooms!! 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
4 I think the park should be left as natural as possible. It would be nice to see some new trees replace the hawthorns and other dying trees.It would be 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
great to remove the ivy from the park
37 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
5 1. I was one of the 2 people involved in 1991 to help Donald Meyer decide to sell this property to the City of Lake Oswego. I firmly believe that we all 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
should bend over backwards to honor his wishes--which I clearly remember--that this should be a NATURAL PARK.That DOES NOT include an
offleash dog park,etc.2.If there is"flexible open space"and"interactive natural areas",these uses need to be carefully managed......3.As many
trees,as possible,should be retrained--including some of the non-native Hawthornes.Trees that are removed should be replaced.This would be a
good use of the City of LO's$$allocated for this park.4. Don't know what a"Foraging ForesY'is...5.I heard from several long time neighbors that the
plans were based on feedback from neighbors--but none of them were included in the"feedback loop".I agree with the comments that were passed
on to me:no community garden,no dog park,no kid's play areas,a single unisex bathroom if necessary.Also,a bird blind is not necessary. I'm a past
president of Portland Audubon,so I obviously love birds.It simply is not a good location.6.The neighbors were pleased that,for the most part,the
plans are consistent with the wishes of Donald Meyer.....Feel free to contact me,if you like...
6 Community gardens should be given more consideration and there should be more of them.Remember that currently most people visit this park as 6/3/2017 10:02 AM
part of a larger walk through the neighborhood,so the paths need to reflect that preference.The wetland,even when it is restored,is small and does
not warrant a giant boardwalk.There are many other restoration projects underway in other parks that would warrant boardwalks(Iron Mountain and
Luscher)and the money would be better spent at those locations.
7 Good amount of paths for people of all abilities,dogs on leash only-no off leash area,boardwalks where needed due to water,in option A would like to 6/2/2017 7:17 PM
see site generally bounded by trees,
8 We would like to see a pollinating/butterfly garden added to Woodmont Natural Park.We would also like to see milkweed planted,to help in the 6/2/2017 5:03 AM
conservation efforts for the monarch butterfly.
9 It needs mountain bike trails 6/1/2017 7:38 PM
10 I think try to keep the kids interactive natural areas away from the dog park. 6/1/2017 12:58 PM
11 Of all the designs, I prefer A the most,but I like the locations of the interactive natural areas in option B 6/1/2017 1229 PM
12 Atwater Road and Knaus is a dangerous corner.Don't narrow Atwater,this corner is visually challenging for cars,bikes and walkers.In you Survey, I 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
could not pick an Option and make a comment for the same question. Frustrating!
13 I think we need a off leash dog park and community garden. 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
14 A place where the community can come together and enjoy nature without the current safety worries present in woodmont park.Swings and picnic 5/31/2017 6:02 PM
facilities would encourage families to spend time there.
15 i think you preserved the ability to enter from both sides of the neighborhood,but that would be important if not 5/31/2017 3:47 PM
16 I would really like to see no bathrooms.I like the idea of this park being enhanced,but there is no need for bathrooms.Please consider the risks and 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
complications associated with having restrooms:maintenance,vandalism,illegal activities,squatters.This can be a great place without this element.
17 Some of the design elements are quite tasteful but seem like solutions is search of problems. I prefer a"less is more"approach.Please no soccer field. 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
38 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
18 Enhance whaYs there-don't turn it into an overdone"something for everybody"park.Preserve what Mr Meyer envisioned-a quiet natural area to be 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
enjoyed for generations.
19 Consider a small lake or water feature for kids and wildlife to enjoy. 5/31/2017 1129 AM
20 Be considerate of the neighboring homes(I don't live in one of them).Make the connection with nature available for people who visit. 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
21 Even though this will be classified as a city-wide park,it is too small for most citizens to be driving over to it for a'park experience'. It will remain 5/30/2017 7:08 PM
primarily a neighborhood park.Thus it should have the least amount of development and amenities as possible.Just a place for people to wander
through and enjoy the greenery and creatures.
22 Would like a dog park that is close to my home 5/30/2017 5:39 PM
23 Pleas include a great kids natural area with water play(preferably year round via a creek or stream) 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
24 I like that several new features are proposed that are not yet present in other parks.I would like to see a children's water feature. 5/30/2017 2:12 PM
25 It would be so nice to walk in an area where no dogs are allowed.Everywhere it seems(e.g.Tryon Park)dogs are not kept on leashes(as required) 5/30/2017 1:26 PM
and the owners are oblivious to the effect of their dogs'behavior on others.Please,please construct a natural area for those who would like a respite
from badly behaved dogs.Thank you for your attention to this.
26 LESS IS MORE.NO DOG PARK PLEASE.KEEP AS NATURAL AS POSSIBLE.NEIGHBORS LIKE IT AS IS,SO PLEASE RESPECT THAT. 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
27 The project should prioritize minimalization.No dog park. No food trees or gardens.No interactive areas.Just a natural area enhanced with good 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
paths,though not too many,with minimal parking and a single toilet.Dogs can come but on leash.An off-leash area is wasted space for such a small
area.
28 Put in a drinking fountain for people and dogs 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
29 Prefer no dog park and to keep it as natural as possible.The storm water and interactive natural play areas seem great! 5/26/2017 8:26 PM
30 Seems like a nice venue for a family picnic.What about trash and clutter. 5/26/2017 5:07 PM
31 This is most important!The first thought should be taking in to consideration of Mr.Donald W.Meyer wishes.He sold his family property of more than 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
100 years well below market value to the City of Lake Oswego in 1991 with the intention that the site be preserved and maintained in a natural state to
serve as a historic example of the Forest Highlands that his family had known;one of farm fields,orchards,and forested creeks.Keeping the historical
tree orchard or a large part of it is critical.Having the least intrusive parking is critical too.Most people who use the green space walk there
32 Thank you!This is a great opportunity to create a great community space for Forest Highlands neighbors.More needs to be done to promote 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
community and this is a great start!
33 keep it more natural,less about dogs or people and more about nature. 5/26/2017 1:41 PM
39 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
34 I noticed no physical boundary(biological or otherwise)to the Meyers property to the west. 5/26/2017 1:29 PM
35 No dogs area wanted 5/26/2017 12:41 PM
36 I don't like the off leash dog areas in A or C.I think its great to have dogs on leash in the park,but there's no need to have an off leash area in the 5/26/2017 12:39 PM
wilderness park.
37 Decrease boardwalk usage. It may be fun and fancy to design and construct,but cost and maintenance make it troublesome.Consider ensuring paths 5/26/2017 12:11 PM
are built on small fills with adequate cross drainage(culverts,etc)to make sure they are usable throughout the year and don't rot and become slippery
liabilities.
38 different elevations to communicate street view. 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
39 After living on Atwater Road for over 50 years we prefer that Mr Meyer's property remain as it is. 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
C What is the zip code for your home?
Answered kipped: 1
# Responses Date
1 97034 6/4/2017 10:09 PM
2 97034 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
3 97034 6/4/2017 3:44 PM
4 97034 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
5 97035 6/4/2017 2:54 AM
6 97034 6/3/2017 10:31 PM
7 97034 6/3/2017 9:58 PM
8 97034 6/3/2017 5:12 PM
9 97034 6/3/2017 10:02 AM
10 97034 6/2/2017 7:17 PM
11 97035 6/2/2017 8:10 AM
40 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
12 97035 6/2/2017 5:03 AM
13 97034 6/1/2017 8:59 PM
14 97034 6/1/2017 8:06 PM
15 97035 6/1/2017 7:38 PM
16 97034 6/1/2017 6:15 PM
17 97034 6/1/2017 12:58 PM
18 97035 6/1/2017 12:29 PM
19 97034 6/1/2017 11:18 AM
20 97034 6/1/2017 11:12 AM
21 97034 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
22 97034 6/1/2017 10:50 AM
23 97034 6/1/2017 10:47 AM
24 97034 5/31/2017 6:21 PM
25 97034 5/31/2017 6:02 PM
26 97034 5/31/2017 3:47 PM
27 97034 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
28 97034 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
29 97034 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
30 97034 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
31 97035 5/30/2017 9:14 PM
32 97034 5/30/2017 5:59 PM
41 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
33 97034 5/30/2017 7:08 PM
34 97034 5/30/2017 5:39 PM
35 97034 5/30/2017 4:00 PM
36 97035 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
37 97034 5/30/2017 2:12 PM
38 97034 5/30/2017 1:51 PM
39 97034 5/30/2017 126 PM
40 97034 5/30/2017 1:18 PM
41 97034 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
42 97034 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
43 97034 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
44 97034 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
45 97034 5/26/2017 826 PM
46 97035 5/26/2017 5:07 PM
47 97034 5/26/2017 4:57 PM
48 97034 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
49 97034 5/26/2017 2:16 PM
50 97034 5/26/2017 1:54 PM
51 97034 5/26/2017 1:41 PM
52 97034 5/26/2017 1:35 PM
53 97034 5/26/2017 1:29 PM
42 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
54 97034 5/26/2017 1:06 PM
55 97034 5/26/2017 12:41 PM
56 97034 5/26/2017 12:39 PM
57 97034 5/26/2017 12:11 PM
58 97034 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
59 97034 5/25/2017 9:58 PM
60 97034 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
61 97034 5/25/2017 4:53 PM
43 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Did you take the first online survey
after the March 20th public outreach
meeting?
:o
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
46.77% 29
No
53.23% 33
Total 62
Did you attend the public outreach
meeting on May 22nd?
44 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Yes
No
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Answer Choices Responses
Yes
17.74% 11
No
82.26% 51
Total 62
If you would like to be added to the
City of Lake Oswego's email list to receive
updates about the planning process for
Woodmont Natural Park, please include
your name, mailing address, email & phone
# below. (Note: If you are already on our
list, you do not need to fill this out again)
Answer Choices Responses
45 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
Name
96.55% 28
Address
96.55% 28
City
93.10% 27
State
93.10% 27
Zip
96.55% 28
Email
96.55% 28
Phone
79.31% 23
# Name Date
1 - 6/4/2017 10:09 PM
2 - 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
3 - 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
4 - 6/4/2017 2:54 AM
5 - 6/3/2017 9:58 PM
6 6/3/2017 5:12 PM
7 6/2/2017 5:03 AM
8 - 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
9 - 6/1/2017 10:47 AM
10 - 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
11 - 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
46 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
12 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
13 - 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
14 - 5/30/2017 9:14 PM
15 - 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
16 - 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
17 - 5/30/2017 1:26 PM
18 - 5/30/2017 1:18 PM
19 - 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
20 - 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
21 - 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
22 - 5/26/2017 5:07 PM
23 _ 5/26/2017 4:57 PM
24 - 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
25 - 5/26/2017 2:16 PM
26 - 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
27 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
28 - 5/25/2017 4:53 PM
# Address Date
1 6/4/2017 10:09 PM
2 - 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
3 - 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
4 - 6/4/2017 2:54 AM
47 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
5 - 6/3/2017 9:58 PM
6 - 6/3/2017 5:12 PM
7 - 6/2/2017 5:03 AM
8 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
9 - 6/1/2017 10:47 AM
10 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
11 - 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
12 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
13 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
14 5/30/2017 9:14 PM
15 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
16 - 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
17 5/30/2017 1:26 PM
18 5/30/2017 1:18 PM
19 - 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
20 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
21 - 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
22 - 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
23 - 5/26/2017 5:07 PM
24 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
25 - 5/26/2017 2:16 PM
48 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
26 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
27 - 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
28 - 5/25/2017 4:53 PM
# City Date
1 Lake Oswego 6/4/2017 10:09 PM
2 Lake Oswego 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
3 Lake Oswego 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
4 Lake Oswego 6/4/2017 2:54 AM
5 Lack Oswego 6/3/2017 9:58 PM
6 Lake Oswego 6/3/2017 5:12 PM
7 Lake Oswego 6/2/2017 5:03 AM
8 Lake Oswego 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
9 Lake Oswego 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
10 Lake Oswego 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
11 Lake Oswego 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
12 Lake Oswego 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
13 Lake oswego 5/30/2017 9:14 PM
14 Lake Oswego 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
15 Lake Oswego 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
16 Lake Oswego 5/30/2017 1:26 PM
17 Lake Oswego 5/30/2017 1:18 PM
49 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
18 Lake Oswego 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
19 Lake Oswego 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
20 Lake Oswego 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
21 Lake Oswego 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
22 Lake Oswego 5/26/2017 5:07 PM
23 Lake Oswego 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
24 Lake Oswego 5/26/2017 2:16 PM
25 Lake Oswego 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
26 Lake Oswego 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
27 Lake Oswego 5/25/2017 4:53 PM
# State Date
1 OR 6/4/2017 10:09 PM
2 OR 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
3 OR 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
4 Or 6/4/2017 2:54 AM
5 Oregon 6/3/2017 9:58 PM
6 Oregon 6/3/2017 5:12 PM
7 OR 6/2/2017 5:03 AM
8 Oregon 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
9 oregon 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
10 OR 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
50 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
11 Or 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
12 OR 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
13 OR 5/30/2017 9:14 PM
14 OR 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
15 OR 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
16 Or. 5/30/2017 1:26 PM
17 Oregon 5/30/2017 1:18 PM
18 OR 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
19 Oregon 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
20 OR 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
21 Oregon 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
22 OR 5/26/2017 5:07 PM
23 OR 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
24 OR 5/26/2017 2:16 PM
25 OR 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
26 Oregon 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
27 Or 5/25/2017 4:53 PM
# Zip Date
1 97034 6/4/2017 10:09 PM
2 97034 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
3 97034 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
4 97035 6/4/2017 2:54 AM
51 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
5 97034 6/3/2017 9:58 PM
6 97034 6/3/2017 5:12 PM
7 97035 6/2/2017 5:03 AM
8 97034 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
9 97034 6/1/2017 10:47 AM
10 97034 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
11 97034 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
12 97034 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
13 97034 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
14 97034 5/30/2017 9:14 PM
15 97034 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
16 97035 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
17 97034 5/30/2017 1:26 PM
18 97034 5/30/2017 1:18 PM
19 97034 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
20 97034 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
21 97034 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
22 97034 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
23 97035 5/26/2017 5:07 PM
24 97034 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
25 97034 5/26/2017 2:16 PM
52 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
26 97035 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
27 97034 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
28 97034 5/25/2017 4:53 PM
# Email Date
1 6/4/2017 10:09 PM
2 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
3 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
4 6/4/2017 2:54 AM
5 6/3/2017 9:58 PM
6 6/3/2017 5:12 PM
7 6/2/2017 5:03 AM
8 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
9 5/31/2017 3:19 PM
10 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
11 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
12 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
13 5/30/2017 9:14 PM
14 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
15 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
16 5/30/2017 1:26 PM
17 5/30/2017 1:18 PM
53 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
18 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
19 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
20 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
21 5/26/2017 8:54 PM
22 5/26/2017 5:07 PM
23 5/26/2017 4:57 PM
24 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
25 5/26/2017 2:16 PM
26 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
27 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
28 5/25/2017 4:53 PM
# Phone Date
1 - 6/4/2017 10:09 PM
2 - 6/4/2017 5:03 PM
3 - 6/4/2017 2:33 PM
4 6/3/2017 9:58 PM
5 - 6/3/2017 5:12 PM
6 - 6/2/2017 5:03 AM
7 - 6/1/2017 11:02 AM
8 - 5/31/2017 3:15 PM
9 - 5/31/2017 3:01 PM
10 - 5/31/2017 11:29 AM
54 / 55
Woodmont Natural Park Planning Survey#2
11 - 5/30/2017 8:59 PM
12 - 5/30/2017 2:32 PM
13 - 5/30/2017 1:26 PM
14 - 5/30/2017 1:18 PM
15 - 5/27/2017 9:35 AM
16 - 5/27/2017 6:56 AM
17 - 5/26/2017 8:56 PM
18 - 5/26/2017 5:07 PM
19 - 5/26/2017 2:21 PM
20 - 5/26/2017 2:16 PM
21 - 5/26/2017 10:49 AM
22 - 5/25/2017 7:47 PM
23 - 5/25/2017 4:53 PM
55 / 55
18.3
o�c�'p` �os� C�UNC�L R�PORT
r-�` • � n
� � o
QREGOr�
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Ivan Anderholm, Parks and Recreation Director
SUBJECT: Hazelia Turf Replacement Contract
DATE: 08-25-2017 MEETING DATE: 09-05-2017
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to authorize the City Manager to sign a contract with FieldTurf USA Inc. in the amount of
$638,984.71for replacement of the artificial turf at Hazelia Field.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
During the 2017 -2018 budget process the replacement of the artificial turf at Hazelia Field was
approved. The replacement will be performed by the same contractor that originally built the
field, FieldTurf USA Inc. The cost of the contract is $638,984.71, and was secured through the
National Joint Powers Alliance permissive cooperative public improvement service contract.
Community users have been notified that the field will be closed September 18 through
October 22, 2017. All user groups have been re-scheduled at other facilities during the closure.
RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager to sign a contract with FieldTurf USA Inc. in the amount of
$638,984.71 for replacement of the artificial turf at Hazelia Field.
ATTACH M ENTS
1. Permissive Cooperative Public Improvement Service Contract
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswe�o.city
ATTACHMENT 1
O��A � O CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
s
� n�, PERMISSIVE COOPERATIVE PUBLIC WORKS/PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT/
� � � �
V Q � SERVICE CONTRACT FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
� (Greater than $50,000)
�REGor�
Contractor: FIELDTURF USA, INC. Date of Contract: September 5, 2017
Mailing Attn: Steve Coury Date of Substantial November 3, 2017
Address: 7447 Cote-de-Liesse Road Completion:
Suite 200 Date of Final
Montreal, QC, H4T 1G2 Completion
Email:
scouryfieldturf@gmail.com
Work: Hazelia Turf Replacement Contract Amount: $638,984.71
Project: Project Amount: $Greater than $100,000
Engineer(if N/A
applicable)
WHEREAS, Contractor and the National Joint Powers Alliance previously entered into the
following Contract: Indoor-Outdoor Athletic Surfacing with Related Equipment Products,
Supplies, Installation and Services [NJPA #082114-msl] ("Original Contract"), a copy of which is
attached hereto (excepting the project specific specifications); and
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Oswego may enter into a Permissive Cooperative Procurement
without competitive bidding if the Original Contract and its solicitation complied with ORS
279A.215;
WHEREAS, the solicitation of the Original Contract complied with the requirements for a
Permissive Cooperative Procurement;
WITNESSETH:
Contractor and the City of Lake Oswego, a municipal corporation, ("Owner") mutually
covenant and agree to and with each other as follows:
1. WORK/ PROJECT
1.1 General Description of Work. The Work is generally described as follows:
See Quote— Exhibit 1
The Work is part of the above named "Project", if stated above.
1.2 Project. The project for which the Work under the Contract Documents may be
a part is referenced above.
2. CLASSIFICATION OF WORK/CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
2.1 Classification of Work. This Work is classified as:
Applicable Classification Description of Classification
classification(s)
Public Work Construction-includes the initial building of structures and roads.
X Reconstruction-includes the restoration of existing buildings and the
restoration, rebuilding or resurfacing of existing roads(includes
(Note: Public Work and emergency work).
Public Improvement are Major Renovation-includes any remodeling or alteration of existing
not mutually exclusive; structures or roads(includes emergency work).
a public impvt contract Painting of structure or building.
is frequently also a General Maintenance/Demolition—Only if part of construction or
public works contract). major renovation project
Public Improvement Construction, reconstruction or major renovation on real property,
not including emergency work, or ordinary repair or maintenance
necessary to preserve a public improvement.
Service Contract Relating to General Maintenance necessary to preserve a public improvement
Public Improvement (not part of construction or renovation).
Project Demolition—Only if not part of construction or renovation).
2.2 Contract Documents. The Contract between the parties includes all of the
following documents, and any conflicts shall be resolved in the following priority
Classification of Work Documents
(*indicate documents attached;otherwise incorporated by reference)
Applicable to all Classifications This Contract, addenda*, Proposal / Bid*; Specifications and Drawings (including Written
of Work Amendments)*
....J1 fD��L.I��\A/...I..J..���..�.....h�I��+.,.J 6..,1..�.,-, -,I�..�....I��.J...J 1 '
Public Work Lake Oswego Public Works Contract Provisions (includes Prevailing Rate Of Wage)*; Notice
to Proceed; Change Orders and ENGINEER's written interpretations and clarifications issued
on or after the Date of Contract; Post Bid documentation submitted prior to the Notice of
Awa rd*
Service Contract Related to Lake Oswego Standard Public Contract Provisions*
Public Improvement
Together with the following additional Exhibit(s):
Exhibit 2 - National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA) RFP
Exhibit 3 — NJPA Forms C, D, E, F, and P
Exhibit 4— NJPA Oregon Pricing
3. Bonds. The City elects to require the Contractor furnish a Payment Bond and a
Performance Bond, in the manner required by OAR 137-049-0460, and a Public Works Bond
(see attached Lake Oswego Public Works Contract Provisions), as required by OAR 137-049-
0460, prior to commencement of Work:
(1) Public Improvement Contracts. [T]he Contractor shall execute and deliver to the
Contracting Agency a performance bond and a payment bond each in a sum equal to
the Contract Price for all Public Improvement Contracts. ... Also see OAR 137-049-0815
and BOLI rules at 839-025-0015 regarding the separate requirement for a Public Works
bond.
***
(3) Requirement for Surety Bond. The Contracting Agency shall accept only a
performance bond furnished by a surety company authorized to do business in Oregon
unless otherwise specified in the Solicitation Document (i.e., the Contracting Agency
may accept a cashier's check or certified check in lieu or all or a portion of the required
performance bond if specified in the Solicitation Document). The payment bond must
be furnished by a surety company authorized to do business in Oregon, and in an
amount equal to the full Contract Price.
(4) Time for Submission. The apparent successful Offeror must promptly furnish the
required performance security upon the Contracting Agency's request. ....
4. CONTRACT TIMES/ LIQUIDATED DAMAGES
4.1 Dates of Substantial and Final Completion. The Work will be substantially
completed on or before the Date of Substantial Completion stated above, and completed and
ready for final payment in accordance with paragraph 14.07 of the General Conditions on or
before the Date of Final Completion stated above.
4.2 Liquidated Damages. OWNER and CONTRACTOR recognize that time is of the
essence of this Contract and OWNER will suffer financial loss if the Work is not completed
within the times specified above, plus any extensions thereof allowed in accordance with
Article 12 of the General Conditions. They also recognize the delays, expense and difficulties
involved in proving the actual loss suffered by OWNER if the Work is not completed on time.
Accordingly, instead of requiring any such proof, OWNER and CONTRACTOR agree that as
liquidated damages for delay (but not as a penalty) CONTRACTOR shall pay OWNER Liquidate
Damages - One Thousand and no/100 dollars ($1000.00) for each day that expires after the
time specified for Substantial Completion until the Work is substantially complete. After
Substantial Completion, if CONTRACTOR shall neglect, refuse or fail to complete the remaining
Work within the time specified for completion and readiness for final payment or any proper
extension thereof granted by OWNER, CONTRACTOR shall pay OWNER One Thousand and
no/100 dollars ($1000.00) for each day that expires after the time specified for Final
Completion.
5. CONTRACT AMOUNT.
5.1 Amount of Payment. Contractor shall be compensated for all goods, materials,
expenses, and services as follows: a fixed fee in the amount of Contract Amount stated above.
5.2 Manner of Payment. Payment shall be due to the contractor, in accordance with
the subsection Employer ldentification Report/ Date of Payment below, with an invoice being
submitted by contractor within the first 30 days of the start of Work and continuing each month
thereafter until completion or termination. Although this is a fixed fee payment contract, for
purposes of determining the amount of a periodic payment, the rates set forth on Exhibit 1 shall
be used for the work installed or the task completed at the time of submission of the payment
request, except the retainage amount below shall be withheld from the progress payment and
paid to the Contractor upon successful completion of the project.
5.3 Retainage. City shall make monthly progress payments on account of the Contract
Price on the basis of Contractor's Applications for Payment as approved by the City's Project
Manager as provided below.
5.3.1. Prior to Substantial Completion, progress payments will be made in an
amount equal to the percentage indicated below, but, in each case, less the aggregate of
payments previously made:
95%of Work completed (with the balance being retainage). If Work has
been 50%completed as determined by the City's Project Manager, and if the character and
progress of the Work have been satisfactory to City, City may determine that as long as the
character and progress of the Work remain satisfactory,there will be no additional retainage on
account of Work completed, in which case the remaining progress payments prior to Substantial
Completion will be in an amount equal to 100%of the Work completed less the aggregate of
payments previously made; and
95% (with the balance being retainage) of cost of materials and equipment
not incorporated in the Work(but delivered, suitably stored and accompanied by documentation
satisfactory to City.
5.3.2. Upon Substantial Completion, City shall pay an amount sufficient to
increase total payments to Contractor to 100%of the work completed, less such amounts as the
Project Manager shall determine for the estimate of the value of the Work to be completed or
corrected as shown on the tentative list of items to be completed or corrected attached to the
Certificate of Substantial Completion.
5.3.3. As provided by ORS 279C.570(7), 5%of the monthly progress payments due
to Contractor shall be retained by the Owner until final payment is paid at the completion of the
Project, unless the Contractor complies with ORS 279C.560 and provides required security to
reduce the retainage.
5.3.4 Final Payment. Upon final completion and acceptance of the Work, City
shall pay the remainder of the Contract Price.
5.4 Employer ldentification Report/ Date of Payment. No payment shall be due to
the Contractor until the Contractor has submitted to the City's Finance Department IRS Form W-9
Request for Taxpayer ldentification and Certification (http://www.irs.�ov/pub/irs-pdf/fw9.pdf).
The City prefers to pay contractors by electronic fund transfer; the contractor may submit the EFT
agreement (http://tinyurl.com/LO-EFT) to the City's Finance Department. Payment shall be
tendered, when due within 30 days from the date of receipt of the invoice.
6. TERMINATION
6.1 Parties' Right to Terminate for Convenience. This Contract may be terminated
at any time by mutual written consent of the parties.
6.2 City's Right to Terminate for Convenience. City may, at its sole discretion,
terminate this Contract, in whole or in part, upon 10 days' notice to Contractor.
6.3 City's Right to Terminate for Cause. City may terminate this Contract, in whole
or in part, immediately upon notice to Contractor, or at such later date as Public Contracting
Officer may establish in such notice, upon the occurrence of any of the following events:
(i) City fails to receive funding, or appropriations, limitations or other
expenditure authority at levels sufficient to pay for Contractor's Work;
(ii) Federal or state laws, regulations or guidelines are modified or interpreted in
such a way that either the Work under this Contract is prohibited or City is prohibited from
paying for such Work from the planned funding source;
(iii) Contractor no longer holds any license or certificate that is required to
perform the Work; or
(iv) Contractor commits any material breach or default of any covenant,
warranty, obligation or agreement under this Contract, fails to perform the Work under this
Contract within the time specified herein or any extension thereof, or so fails to pursue the
Work as to endanger Contractor's performance under this Contract in accordance with its
terms, and such breach, default or failure is not cured within 5 business days after delivery of
Public Contracting Officer's notice, or such longer period as Public Contracting Officer may
specify in such notice.
6.4 Contractor's Right to Terminate for Cause. Contractor may terminate this
Contract upon 30 days' notice to Public Contracting Officer if City fails to pay Contractor
pursuant to the terms of this Contract and City fails to cure within 30 business days after
receipt of Contractor's notice, or such longer period of cure as Contractor may specify in such
notice.
6.5 Remedies. In the event of termination pursuant to subsections 6.2, 6.3(i), 6.3(ii)
or 6.4, Contractor's sole remedy shall be a claim for the sum designated for accomplishing the
Work multiplied by the percentage of Work completed and accepted by Public Contracting
Officer, less previous amounts paid and any claim(s) which City has against Contractor. If
previous amounts paid to Contractor exceed the amount due to Contractor under this
subsection, Contractor shall pay any excess to the City upon demand.
In the event of termination pursuant to subsection 6.3(iii) or 6.3(iv), City shall have any
remedy available to it in law or equity. If it is determined for any reason that Contractor was
not in default under subsection 6.3(iii) or 6.3(iv), the rights and obligations of the parties shall
be the same as if the Contract was terminated pursuant to subsection 6.2.
6.6 Contractor's Tender Upon Termination. Upon receiving a notice of termination
of this Contract, Contractor shall immediately cease all activities under this Contract, unless
Public Contracting Officer expressly directs otherwise in such notice of termination.
Upon termination of this Contract, Contractor shall deliver to Public Contracting Officer
all documents, information, works-in-progress and other property that are or would be
deliverables had the Contract been completed. Upon Public Contracting Officer's request,
Contractor shall surrender to anyone Public Contracting Officer designates, all documents,
research or objects or other tangible things needed to complete the Work.
7. INSURANCE. The Contractor will not perform any work under this contract until the
City has received copies of applicable insurance policies or acceptable evidence that the
insurance indicated as required in subsection D below is in force.
7.1 Scope of Insurance. The Contractor shall obtain prior to the commencement of
the Contract, and shall maintain in full force and effect for the term of this contract, at the
Contractor's expense, the policies indicated below in subsection 8.4 for the protection of the
Contractor. The Contractor shall not undertake any acts that shall affect the coverage afforded
by the above policy.
7.2 Coverage Amount. The policies shall be issued by a company authorized to do
business in the State of Oregon, protecting the Contractor or subcontractor or anyone directly
or indirectly employed by either of them against liability for the loss or damage of personal and
bodily injury, contractual liability, death and property damage, and any other losses or
damages above mentioned with limits not less than as stated in subsection 7.4 below or the
limit of public liability contained in ORS 30.260 to 30.300 for any policy, whichever is greater.
7.3 Certificate of Insurance/Additional Insured and Waiver of Subrogation
Endorsement. The Contractor shall cause the insurance company to provide the City with: (i) a
certificate of insurance and, (ii) if an additional insured endorsement is indicated as required in
subsection D below, an endorsement thereto naming the City, its officers, agents, and
employees as an additional insured for those policies indicated. To the extent permitted by
law, the policies will be endorsed to provide a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City and all
additional insureds. The Contractor shall provide the City written notice of cancellation or
material modification of the insurance contract for not less than the following notice for the
purposes stated: 30 days prior notice for reasons other than non-payment; 10 days prior
notice for non-payment.
The Contractor shall further cause a certificate of insurance to be issued not less than S days
prior to any policy expiration date by the Contractor's insurance company or companies during
the term of the Work, to assure that the required insurance is maintained.
If the insurance policy is issued on a "claims made" basis, then the Contractor shall continue to
obtain and maintain coverage for not less than three years following the completion of the
contract, and shall provide certificates of insurance evidencing the required insurance is
maintained.
7.4. Insurance Policy Requirements.
Required? Type of Insurance Minimum Coverage City named as
Additional
Insured
Yes Comprehensive general Yes
or commercial general
liability
Property Damage (XCU
coverage) (incl. in $2�000,000 per occurrence and
liability insurance) $3,000,000 in the aggregate
Products—Completed
Operations (inc. in
liability insurance)
No Protection and $2 million per accident
Indemnity
US L&H $1 million per person per accident
No Builders All Risk Value of materials in Builder's custody
Yes Limit per Person $5,000 minimum
Medical Expense
Yes Fire Legal Liability $500,000
Yes Automobile liability $2,000,000 per accident-combined
(owned, hired, & non- single limit or $2,000,000 bodily injury
owned) and $1,000,000 property damage
Yes Workers Compensation Statutory Coverage No
Employer's Liability $1,000,000
(incl. in Worker Comp.
insurance)
[Next page contains signatures]
//
//
FIELDTURF USA, INC. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
By:
Name: Scott Lazenby, City Manager
Title: Date:
Date: Public Contracting Officer
380 A Avenue
Check one: P.O. Box 369
Sole Proprietor
Partnership Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Corporation X
Limited Liability Company Date Authorized by Council, if applicable:
Limited Liability Partnership
Other: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Domicile, if other than Oregon: Florida
Evan P. Boone
Deputy City Attorney
Ver. 1412
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO STANDARD PUBLIC CONTRACT PROVISIONS FOR PERSONAL SERVICE/SERVICE CONTRACT
(6/16)
The following City of Lake Oswego Standard Public Contract any permitted subcontract under this Contract a requirement that
provisions are made a part of the Contract between City and the subcontractor be bound by the following sections of this
Contractor by reference. Where the Lake Oswego Redevelopment Contract as if the subcontractor were the Contractor:
Agency(LORA)is the contracting party,"City"shall refer to LORA. Independent Contractor Status;Other Contractors;Hours of
Labor;Ownership of Work;Indemnity and Hold Harmless;
CHANGES Records;Attorney Fees;Compliance with Laws. PCO's consent to
This contract,including all attachments and exhibits any subcontract shall not relieve Contractor of any of its duties or
annexed hereto,shall not be subject to modification or amendment obligations under this Contract.
except in writing,executed by both parties. This contract and any This contract is not assignable by the Contractor,either
substantive changes to the scope of work or changes to the contract whole or in part,unless Contractor has obtained the prior written
costs will not be effective until approved in writing by the City's Public consent of the City.
Contracting Officer(PCO). City and Contractor are the only parties to this Contract
and are the only parties entitled to enforce its terms. Nothing in
INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS this Contract gives,is intended to give,or shall be construed to
The Contractor agrees and certifies that: give or provide any enforceable benefit or right,whether directly,
A. The Contractor is engaged as an independent indirectly or otherwise,to third persons.
contractor.Although the PCO reserves the right(i)to determine
(and modify)the delivery schedule for the Work to be performed HOURS OF LABOR
and(ii)to evaluate the quality of the completed performance,City For those employees of Contractor covered or subject to
cannot and will not control the means or manner of Contractor's Oregon employment laws,the Contractor shall pay employees for
performance,nor provide any tools or equipment for the overtime work performed under the public contract in accordance
performance of the Work,except as provided elsewhere in this with ORS 653.010 to 653.261 and the Fair Labor Standards Act of
Contract. Contractor is responsible for determining the 1938(29 USC 201 et seq.).
appropriate means and manner of performing the Work.
B.Contractor shall be responsible for all federal or state ERRORS
taxes applicable to compensation or payments paid to Contractor The Contractor shall perform such additional work as
under this Contract and,unless Contractor is subject to backup may be necessary to correct Contractor's errors in the work
withholding,City will not withhold from such compensation or required under this contract without undue delays and without
payments any amount(s)to cover Contractor's federal or state tax additional cost.
obligations.
C. The Contractor will not,on account of any REPRESENTATIONS AND COVENANTS
payments made under this contract,be eligible for any benefit A. Contractor's Representations.Contractor represents and
from federal social security,workers'compensation, covenants to City that:
unemployment insurance,or the Public Employee's Retirement (1)Contractor has the power and authority to enter into
System,except as a self-employed individual; and perform this Contract,
D. Contractor is not currently an employee of the (2)This Contract,when executed and delivered,shall be
federal government or the State of Oregon;and a valid and binding obligation of Contractor enforceable in
E. The Contractor is not a contributing member accordance with its terms,and if Contractor is a partnership,
of the Public Employee's Retirement System. corporation or other form of business entity,this contract was
F. Contractor is not an"officer,""employee,"or duly approved and executed pursuant to authority of the
"agent"of the City,as those terms are used in ORS 30.265. governing body or parties of the Contractor,
(3)Contractor is not in violation of any Oregon tax laws.
OTHER CONTRACTORS (4)Upon acceptance of each project,the Contractor
The City may undertake or award other contracts for warrants that it will carefully examine,as necessary,the site of the
additional or related work,and the Contractor shall fully work contemplated and any plans,specifications,and contract
cooperate with such other contractors and with any City documents pertaining to work,with the exception of unknown
employees concerned with such additional or related work,and physical conditions at the work site,of an unusual nature,differing
shall coordinate its performance under this contract with such materially from those ordinarily encountered and generally
additional or related work. The Contractor shall not commit or recognized as inherent in work of the character provided herein..
permit any act that will interfere with the performance of work by (5)Contractor shall,at all times during the term of this
any other contractor or by City employees. Contract,be qualified,professionally competent,and duly
licensed to perform the Work.
SUBCONTRACTORS AND ASSIGNMENT (6)Contractor will accomplish the work using a standard
Except as set forth in Contractor's proposal or otherwise of performance and care that is currently accepted by other
in this Contract,no subcontract shall be made by the Contractor contractors engaged in similar work, under similar conditions
with any other party for furnishing any of the work or services and at the date the services are provided in the Portland
herein contracted without obtaining the prior written consent of inetropolitan area(Standard of Care).
the City,which City may withhold without cause. In addition to (7)Contractor's invoices shall describe all work
any other provisions PCO may require,Contractor shall include in performed with particularity,by whom it was performed,and
Page 1—City of Lake Oswego Standard Public Contract Provisions(6/16)
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO STANDARD PUBLIC CONTRACT PROVISIONS FOR PERSONAL SERVICE/SERVICE CONTRACT
(6/16)
shall itemize and explain all expenses for which reimbursement is INDEMNITY AND HOLD HARMLESS
claimed. Contractor shall send invoices to City's Project Manager. The Contractor shall defend,indemnify,and hold the
(8) Contractor s completion shall not extinguish or City,its officers,agents and employees,harmless against all
prejudice City's right to enforce this Contract with respect to any liability,loss,or expenses,including reasonable attorney's fees,
breach of Contractor warranty or any default or defect in Contractor and against all claims,actions or judgments based upon or arising
performance (defect is defined herein as services that do not out of damage or injury(including death)to persons or property,
conform to the Standard of Care (Section 6) in the performance but only to the proportionate extent caused by or resulting from
of the Contract). any act,error,or omission(excepting professional services
(9)Contractor has no present interest and shall not acquire performed under this Contract)of an act sustained in connection
any interest,direct or indirect,which would conflict in any manner or with the performance of this contract or by conditions created
degree with the performance of its Work, and that in the thereby,or based upon Contractor's violation of any statute,
performance of this contract no person having any such interest shall ordinance or regulation.
be employed. With respect to professional services performed under
(10) Contractor has no interest and shall not acquire any this Contract,Contractor shall defend,indemnify,and hold the
interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner or City,its officers,agents and employees,harmless against all
degree with the performance of contractor's services, and in the liability,loss,or expenses,including reasonable attorney's fees,
performance of this contract no person having any such interest shall and against all claims,actions or judgments based upon or arising
be employed. out of damage or injury(including death)to persons or property,
B. Cumulative. The representations and covenants set forth in but only to the proportionate extent caused by any negligent act,
this section are in addition to,and not in lieu of,any other error,or omission of an act sustained in connection with the
representations and covenants provided. performance of this contract or by conditions created thereby,or
based upon violation of any statute,ordinance or regulation.
OWNERSHIP OF WORK
All work products of the Contractor,including RECORDS
background data,documentation and staff work that is Contractor shall have access to the books,documents,
preliminary to final reports,which result from this contract are papers and records of the City as necessary for Contractor's
the exclusive property of the City. If this contract is terminated by performance of the work. The Contractor shall not disclose all or
either party or by default,the City following payment as required any part of such records to any other person,firm,corporation,
by the Contract,in addition to any other rights provided by this association or other entity except as reasonably necessary to carry
contract,may require the Contractor to transfer and deliver such out the Work,without the consent of the Public Contracting
partially completed reports or other documentation that the Officer.
Contractor has specifically developed or specifically acquired for The Contractor agrees that the City and its authorized
the performance of this contract. representatives shall have access to the books,documents,
The reports and all material contained in the reports papers and records of the Contractor which are directly pertinent
(graphics,photos,etc.)shall become the property of the City;the to the specific contract for the purpose of making audit,
City may reproduce and distribute the reports,or any part examination,excerpts and transcripts.
thereof,in such form as the City desires. Contractor shall maintain all fiscal records directly
relating to this Contract in accordance with generally accepted
ELECTRONIC CONTRACTING AND REPORTS accounting principles. In addition,Contractor shall maintain any
This contract and any amendments may be executed by other records pertinent to this Contract in such a manner as to
a party electronically by use of a digital signature issued by a city- clearly document Contractor's performance. Contractor
recognized certification authority(such as Symantec Digital ID), acknowledges and agrees that City's duly authorized
pursuant to the Oregon Uniform Electronic Transactions Act,ORS representatives shall have access to such fiscal records and other
Ch.84.001—84.063. Upon execution of this contract books,documents,papers,plans and writings of Contractor that
electronically,the party consents to conduct further are pertinent to this Contract to perform examinations and audits
communications and transactions under this Contract by and make excerpts and transcripts. Contractor shall retain and
electronic means. keep accessible all such fiscal records,books,documents,papers,
Unless otherwise stated in the Scope of Work or plans,and writings for a minimum of three(3)years,or such
separately waived in writing,all final reports,including reports of longer period as may be required by applicable law,following final
phases of the project and of the entire project,shall be provided payment and termination of this Contract,or until the conclusion
in both written and electronic format. Electronic format shall be of any audit,controversy or litigation arising out of or related to
in a format coordinated with the PCO and shall be fully this Contract,whichever date is later.
compatible with such software programs specified by the PCO,
.e.g.Microsoft Word,Microsoft Excel,Microsoft PowerPoint, PUBLICATION RIGHTS/RIGHTS IN DATA
Microsoft Access,Microsoft Publisher,Adobe Creative Suite, To the extent the Work Product consists of material
Adobe PDF,or such other software program as specified by the capable of publication,all publication rights in the product
PCO. produced by the Contractor in connection with the work provided
for under this contract,whether in preliminary draft or final form,
shall be vested in the City.
Page 2—City of Lake Oswego Standard Public Contract Provisions(6/16)
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO STANDARD PUBLIC CONTRACT PROVISIONS FOR PERSONAL SERVICE/SERVICE CONTRACT
(6/16)
The Contractor shall not publish any of the results of the and ordinances of the City of Lake Oswego,Oregon.
work without the prior written permission of the City. The Contractor shall comply with all federal,state and
All original written material and other documentation, local laws and ordinances,applicable to public contracts relating
including background data,documentation,and staff work that is to Contractor's obligations and performance,and to the work to
preliminary to final reports,originated and prepared for the City be done under this contract.
pursuant to this contract,shall become exclusively the property of The Contractor shall comply with all applicable federal,
the City. The ideas,concepts,know-how or techniques relating to state,and local laws,rules,and regulations on nondiscrimination in
data processing development during the course of this contract by employment because of race,color,ancestry,national origin,religion,
the Contractor or City personnel,or jointly by the Contractor and sex,sexual orientation,gender identity,marital status,age,medical
City personnel,can be used by either party in any way it may condition,or disability.
deem appropriate.
Material already in the Contractor's possession, WAIVER
independently developed by the Contractor outside the scope of The failure of the City to enforce any provision of this
this contract or rightfully obtained by the Contractor from third contract shall not constitute a waiver by the City of that or any
parties,shall belong to the Contractor. However,the Contractor other provision.
grants to the City a nonexclusive,irrevocable and royalty-free
license to use such material to the extent such material is INTEGRATION
incorporated into the Work. This contract represents the entire and integrated
This contract shall not preclude the Contractor from agreement between the Contractor and the City,and supersedes
developing materials that are competitive,irrespective of their all prior negotiations,representations or agreements,either
similarity to materials which might be delivered to the City written or oral.
pursuant to this contract. The Contractor will not,however,use
any written materials developed under this contract in developing
materials for others,except as provided in this section.
CONFIDENTIALITY
No reports,information and/or data given to or prepared
or assembled by the Contractor under this contract shall be made
available to any individual or organization by the Contractor without
the prior written approval of the City.
MEDIATION/VENUE
In the event a dispute shall arise between the parties to
this contract,and prior to the commencement of any suit or
action,the parties agree to participate in mediation in accordance
with the mediation procedures of the Oregon Mediation Service,
or such other procedures as the parties agree. The parties agree
to share equally in the costs of the mediator. The mediator shall
be selected by the parties,either upon mutual agreement within
15 days written notice by one party to the other requesting
mediation,or if the parties are not able to agree upon a mediator
within said period,the mediator shall be chosen by the City
Manager from the list of inediators maintained by the Oregon
Mediation Service(http://omediate.org).
Any action or suits involving any question arising under
this contract must be brought in Clackamas County Circuit Court.
SEVERABILITY
The parties agree that if any term or provision of this
contract is declared by a court of competentjurisdiction to be
illegal or in conflict with any law,the validity of the remaining
terms and provisions shall not be affected,and the rights and
obligations of the parties shall be construed and enforced as if the
contract did not contain the particular term or provision held to
be invalid.
COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
The provisions of this contract shall be construed in
accordance with the provisions of the laws of the State of Oregon
Page 3—City of Lake Oswego Standard Public Contract Provisions(6/16)
LAKE OSWEGO PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT PROVISIONS
(with Additional Standard Contract Provisions)
The following Public Works Contract Provisions are made a prescribed by the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor
part of the Contract between Owner and Contractor. and Industries,certifying the hourly rate of wage paid each
worker which the Contractor or the subcontractor has
RELATIONSHIP WITH ADDITIONAL STANDARD employed upon such public work, and further certifying
CONTRACT PROVISIONS that no worker employed upon such public work has been
If the Contract also contains either the Lake paid less than the prevailing rate of wage or less than the
Oswego Public Improvement Contract Provisions or the minimum hourly rate of wage specified in the Contract,
Lake Oswego Public Contract Provisions for Personal which certificate and statement shall be verified by the
Service/Service Contract,these provisions are in addition. oath of the Contractor or the Contractor's surety or
subcontractor or subcontractor's surety that the
PUBLIC WORKS BONDS FOR CONTRACTS$100,000 OR Contractor or subcontractor has read such statement and
ABOVE certificate and knows the contents thereof and that the
If the original Contract Amount is$100,000 or same is true to the Contractor or subcontractor's
greater,or if the Contract Amount is amended to a knowledge. The certified statements shall set out
Contract Amount$100,000 or greater,and unless accurately and completely the payroll records for the prior
otherwise exempt under ORS 279C.836(4),(7)—(9),the week including the name and address of each worker,the
Contractor shall file a public works bond with the Oregon worker's correct classification, rate of pay, daily and
Construction Contractors Board before starting or weekly number of hours worked, deductions made and
continuing work on the project. Further,the Contractor actual wages paid. The certified statement shall be
shall then include in every subcontract a provision delivered or mailed by the Contractor or subcontractor to
requiring the subcontractor to have a public works bond the Owner within the time required by ORS 279C.845 and
filed with the Oregon Construction Contractors Board OAR 839-016-0010. If Contractor fails to file the certified
before starting work,or if the Contract Amount is statement, the OWNER shall, pursuant to Oregon law,
amended to$100,000 or above,before continuing work shall withhold 25% of amounts owed to contractors, in
on the project. ORS 279C.830(3)(a,b) addition to any retainage withholding. Contractor shall,
similarly, withhold 25% of amounts owed to
PREVAILING RATE OF WAGE subcontractors if the subcontractor fails to file the
1. The hourly rate of wage to be paid by any certified statement.
contractor or subcontractor to workers upon all public 6. The Contractor or subcontractor shall preserve
works where the Project Amount price exceeds $50,000 the certified statements for a period of three years from
shall be not less than the prevailing rate of wage for an the date of completion of the contract.
hour's work in the same trade or occupation in the locality
where such labor is performed as determined by the
Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries,
unless the project is subject to both the Oregon Prevailing
Wage Law and the federal Davis-Bacon Act,in which event
the payment to the worker shall be the higher of the state
or federal rates. See applicable state rates:
http://www.boli.state.or.us/BOLI/WHD/PWR/pwr book.s
html; and projects that are also subject to federal
prevailing wage laws,see www.wdol.�ov/for federal wage
rates.
2. Any contract between Contractor and a
subcontractor shall contain a provision that shall require
the Subcontractor to pay workers not less than the higher
applicable specified minimum hourly rate of wage.
3. The Contractor and subcontractor(s), if any,shall
keep the prevailing wage rates for this project posted in a
conspicuous and accessible place in or about the project.
4. If the Contractor or subcontractor also provides
for or contributes to a health and welfare plan or a
pension plan, or both, for its employees on the project, it
shall post notice describing such plans in a conspicuous
and accessible place in or about the project. The notice
shall contain information on how and where to make
claims and where to obtain further information.
5. The Contractor and every subcontractor shall file
certified statements with the Owner in writing in form
Page 1—Lake Oswego Public Works Contract Provisions
� �I�I�T��� �FULTIkhTE
SURFACE�3IPERIEHC�
A T�fkett Spn�ts Campa nY
Date: 7/17/2017
To: Jeff Munro, Parks Superintendent
Lake Oswego Parks &Recreation
1500 Greentree Road
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Phone: 503-635-0280
Email: jmunro(�a,ci.oswe o.o�r.us
From: Steve Coury,Regional Sales Manager
Phone: 503-939-1832
Email: scouryfieldturf(a�,�mail.com
Subject: Luscher Farm City Park Field Replacement
FieldTurf USA, Inc. is pleased to present the following proposal. Price estimates are based off of The
National Joint Powers Alliance (NJPA)pricing. NJPA provides predetermined preferential pricing
through approved vendors. Since the products have already been bid at the national level, individual
schools do not have to duplicate the bidding process per NJPA Contract#082ll 4
Description Quantity Units Unit Price Total
Sitework
1 Removal&Responsible Disposal of Existing Surface 1 LS 57,846.40 $57,846.40
2 Contingency Funds—Remediation of Existing Base 1 LS 27,677.70 $27,677.70
Synthetic Turf
3 Install FieldTurf Classic 2.5" 113,452 SF 4.8002526 $544,598.26
4 Inlaid Football Hash Marks 1 EA 7,140.00 DONATED
S Inlaid Football Numbers&Arrows 1 EA 7,140.00 DONATED
6 Inlaid Soccer Markings 1 EA 7,140.00 DONATED
7 Inlaid Men's Lacrosse Markings 1 EA 7,140.00 DONATED
8 Inlaid Women's Lacrosse Markings 1 EA 7,140.00 DONATED
9 Gmax Testing(1 Test at Completion) 1 EA 1,530.00 $1,530.00
Subtotal Project $631,652.36
10 Performance& Payment Bonds 1 LS 7,332.35 $7,332.35
Total Project $638,984.71
Voluntary Alternate#1—Used Turf on Driving Range Quantity Units Unit Price Total
1 In lieu of Removal&Responsible Disposal of Existing 1 LS (30,168.69) $(30,168.69)
Surface at FieldTurf yard,transport rolls of turf to
Lake Oswego Public Golf Course Driving Range.
FieldTurf—7445 Cote-de-Liesse Road Suite 200—Montreal QC H4T 1G2—Tel 1-800-724-2969—Fax(514) 340-9374
www.FieldTurf.com
Luscher Farm City Park Field Replacement
July 17, 2017
Page 2 of 4
2 Provide 110 Yards of Base Stone on Driving Range area 1 LS 102,961.04 $102,961.04
Owner to cut/cap existing irrigation
Loose lay and install used turf. No electrical or plumbing
is included in this offer. No warranty on used turf.
3 Performance& Payment Bonds 1 LS 828.23 $828.23
Total Voluntary Alternate#1 $73,620.58
Product Details
FieldTurf, the worldwide leader in artificial turf, is pleased to offer the FieldTurf Classic FTHD-1 system,
with the following product characteristics:
Pile Height: 2.5 Inches Pile Weight: 36 oz/ydZ
Infill Weight: 9.2 Ibs/ftz Total System Weight: 1382 oz/ydz
The FieldTurf Quality Guarantee
To achieve unmatched quality and level of performance, we have invested heavily in modernizing our
plants with the latest fiber manufacturing, coating and tufting technologies along with top
manufacturing talent, and specialized installation equipment. Our dedicated CAD-based design
department supports customization for each client, and our experts ensure timely delivery and
installation on every project.
The world leader in artificial turf innovation is ISO 9001, ISO 14001 and OHSAS 18001 certified for its
leadership in quality, environment and safety management systems. FieldTurf's Calhoun facility
represents the only artificial turf manufacturing operation in North America to have received these ISO
certifications.
FieldTurf has taken the necessary steps to ensure that your project will run smoothly and that the
quality promised will be the quality delivered.
Base Bid Price Includes:
a) Remove existing synthetic turf&truck all materials to recycling facility.
b) Responsibly dispose of existing turf
c) Installation of the artificial in-filled grass surface upon a suitable base prepared by others;
d) An 8 year 3rd party pre-paid insured warranty on the FieldTurf artificial grass surface;
Price does not Include:
a) The base upon which the FieldTurf field will be placed. FieldTurf shall not be responsible for the stability,
the porosity, nor the approval of the base upon which the FieldTurf surface will be installed,the drainage
system, nor any construction or modification of existing installations around the fields.
b) The supply or installation of the field edging
c) Any costs associated with necessary charges relating to the delineation of the field (change in field size
from original estimate)
d) Unless otherwise specified, does not include any G-max testing
e) The supply of manholes or clean-outs or grates,or supply of the manhole covers;and
Luscher Farm City Park Field Replacement
July 17, 2017
Page 3 of 4
f) Any alteration or deviation from specifications involving extra costs,which alteration or deviation will be
provided only upon executed change orders,and will become an extra charge over and above the offered
price.
g) Any electrical work
h) Unsuitable soils:once subgrade has been established, a proof roll will be performed to ensure structural
stability of the soils; in the event that unsuitable soils are encountered,a price to remedy these areas can
be negotiated. (Relevant only if unknown conditions are discovered that require excavation to repair an
issue with the field sub base.)
i) Relocation, removal and repair of existing utilities not limited to electrical conduits, power poles,water,
sewer,gas,cable,telephone, owner placed conduits or communication feeds within the field of play
j) Design services and construction documentation, including, but not limited to:conceptual
drawings/preliminary design;construction drawings;storm water management;submittal reviews and
processing;architectural/engineering inspections;soil borings; professional survey;and as-built drawings.
k) Logos or additional sport markings other than noted as included
I) Replacement or modification to the existing perimeter nailer board.
m) FieldTurf is not altering or improving the existing drainage under the existing turf limits. No removal,
milling, ponding,flooding or corrections within the existing drainage is included and any existing
conditions will remain the responsibility of the owner.
The price is valid for a period of 90 days. The price is subject to increase if affected by an increase in raw
materials,freight, or other manufacturing costs, a tax increase, new taxes, levies or any new legally
binding imposition affecting the transaction.
Please feel free to reach out to any member of our project team with questions about our offer:
Patrick Dawson Steve Coury
Project Manager Regional Vice President
503 563 6391 (503) 939-1832
Patrick.Dawson@fieldturf.com scourvfieldturf@�mail.com
Thank you again for your interest in FieldTurf, we look forward to working with you.
����� ����
. k Y � �I �
Per: �
Marie-Christine Raymond, Director of Project Management
FieldTurf USA, Inc.
Conditions
Notwithstanding any other document or agreement entered into by FieldTurf in connection with the
supply and installation only of its product pursuant to the present bid proposal,the following shall
apply:
a) This bid proposal and its acceptance is subject to strikes, accidents, delays beyond our control
and force majeure;
b) Final payment shall be upon the substantial completion of FieldTurf's obligations;
c) Accounts overdue beyond 30 days of invoice date will be charged at an interest rate of 10% per
annum.
Luscher Farm City Park Field Replacement
July 17, 2017
Page 4 of 4
d) FieldTurf requires a minimum of 21 days after receiving final approvals on shop drawings to
manufacture, coordinate delivery and schedule arrival of installation crew. Under typical field
size and scenario, FieldTurf further requires 28 days per field to install the Product subject to
weather and force majeure.
e) If FieldTurf is under contract with access to the site by September 15`,the above will apply and
the work can be completed in 4 weeks. If work begins in December, FieldTurf will require a
minimum of 8 weeks with weather delays possibly pushing completion into the Spring of
2018.
f) FieldTurf requires a suitable staging area. Staging area must be square footage of field x 0.12,
have a minimum access of 15 feet wide by 15 feet high, and, no more than 100ft from the site.
A 25 foot wide by 25 foot long hard or paved clean surface area located within 50 feet of the
playing surface shall be provided for purposes of proper mixing of infill material. Access to any
field will include suitable bridging over curbs from the staging area to permit suitable access to
the field by low clearance vehicles.
g) This proposal is based on a single mobilization. If the site is not ready and additional
mobilizations are necessary, additional charges will apply.
h) FieldTurf shall be accountable for its negligence but shall not be bound by any penalty clauses.
i) FieldTurf shall be entitled to recover all costs and expenses, including attorney fees, associated
with collection procedures in the event that FieldTurf pursues collection of payment of any past
due invoice.
j) All colors are to be chosen from FieldTurf's standard colors.
The price is valid,for a period of 90 days. The price is subject to increase if affected by an increase in raw
materzals,freight, or other manufactur-ing costs, a tax increase, new taxes, levies or any new legally
binding imposition affecting the transaction. The price of the base preparation is subject to increase in
the event FieldTurf encounters any of the following site conditions: soil contamination; bedrock,�
unknown utilities; underground springs; unstable or unsuitable ground,� and any concealed or unknown
conditions.
Please contact Eric Fisher if you have any questions or require additional information regarding FieldTurf's SmartBuy
Cooperative Purchasing Program. 888-209-0065, ext. 246 or via e-mail at eric.fisher@fieldturf.com. Be sure to visit
our website at www.fieldturf.com
�J�A AWARDED
�a � T �ACT
`E.�`,��:c:v,.rr,.
��Fk•
�,J, T � � nI'r
� �JPA `
� unw�: .,. ...
� * * * ` r=�
JG �
�'
b�h❑ '�.
�'-�]a1'1:�s..
National Joint Powers Alliance° (herein NJPA)
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (herein RFP)
far the procurement of
INDOOR-OUTDOOR ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH RELATED
EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES, INSTALLATION AND SERVICES
RFP Opening
AUGUST 22, 2014
8:00 A.M. Central Time
At the offices of the
National Joint Powers AllianceOO
202 12�"Street Northeast, Staples,MN 56479
RFP #082114
The National Joint Powers Alliance RO(NJPA), on behalf of NJPA and its current and potential Member agencies to include
all Government, Higher Education, K12 Education, Non-Profit, Tribal Government, and all other Public Agencies located
nationally in all fifty states, Canada, and internationally, issues this Request For Proposal (RFP) to result in a national
contract solution for the procurement of INDOOR-OUTDOOR ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH RELATED
EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES,INSTALLATION AND SERVICES. Details of this RFP are available beginning
NLY 7, 2014 and continuing until AUGUST 13, 2014 . Details may be obtained by letter of request to Maureen Knight,
NJPA,202 12th Street Northeast,P.O. Box 219, Staples,MN 56479, or by e-mail at RFP@njpacoop.org.Proposals will be
received until AUGUST 21, 2014 at 4:30 p.m. Central Time at the above address and opened AUGUST 22, 2014 at 8:00
A.M. Central Time .
RFP Timeline
JULY 7,2014 Publication of RFP in the print and online version of the
Minneapolis Star Tribune,in the print and online version of the Salt
Lake News within the State of Utah, in the print and online version
of the Daily Journal of Commerce within the State of Oregon (note:
OR entities this pertains to: http://www.njpacoop.or /g oregon-
advertisin�), in the print and online version of The State within the
State of South Carolina,the NJPA website (njpacoop.org),MERX,
Noticetobidders.com,PublicPurchase.com, and Biddingo.
August 11,2014 Pre-Proposal Conference (webcast — conference call - Connection
10:00 A.M. Central Time information sent to all inquirers 2 business days prior to event)
AUGUST 13, 2014 Deadline for RFP requests and questions
AUGUST 21, 2014 Deadline for Submission of Proposals.Late responses will be
4:30 P.M. Central Time returned unopened.
AUGUST 22, 2014 Public Opening of Proposals
8:00 A.M. Central Time
Direct questions regarding this RFP to:Maureen Knight at maureen.kni�ht(c�r�,nipacoop.or�or(218)895-4114
1
K. Sales Tax
A. Contract L. Shipping Requesting Pricing Changes
B. Currency
C. Exclusive Vendor
D. FOB A. Proposal Evaluation Process
E. Hub Partner B. Proposer Responsiveness
F. Proposer C. Proposal Evaluation Criteria
G. Request for Proposal D. Other Consideration
H. Sourced Goods E. Cost Comparison
L Time F. Marketing Plan
J. Total Cost of Acquisition G. Certificate Of Insurance
K. Vendor H. Order Process and/or Funds Flow
I. Administrative Fees
2. A �1F RFP' J. Value Added
-, .
K. Waiver of Formalities
A. About NJPA � ' � 'r�
B. Joint Exercise of Powers Laws A. Subsequent Agreements
C. Why Respond to a National Cooperative B. NJPA Member Sign-up Procedure
Procurement Contract C. Reporting of Sales Activity
D. The Intent of This RFP D. Audits
E. Scope of This RFP E. Hub Partner
F. Expectations for Equipment/Products F. Trade-Ins
and Services Being Proposed G. Out of Stock Notification
G. Solutions Based Solicitation H. Termination of a Contract resulting from
this RFP
A. Inquiry Period A. Advertising a Contract Resulting From
B. Pre-Proposal Conference This RFP
C. Identification of Key Personnel B. Applicable Law
D. Proposer's Exceptions to Terms and C. Assignment of Contract
Conditions D. List of Proposers
E. Proposal Format E. Captions,Headings, and Illustrations
F. Questions &Answers About This RFP F. Data Practices
G. Modification or Withdrawal of a G. Entire Agreement
Submitted Proposal H. Force Majeure
H. Proposal Opening Procedure I. Gratuities
I. NJPA's Rights Reserved J. Hazardous Substances
K. Licenses
L. Material Suppliers and Sub-Contractors
A. Line-Item Pricing M. Non-Wavier of Rights
B. Percentage Discount From Catalog or N. Protests of Awards Made
Category O. Suspension or Disbarment Status
C. Cost Plus a Percentage of Cost P. Affirmative Action and Immigration
D. Hot List Pricing Status Certification
E. Ceiling Price Q. Severability
F. Volume Price Discounts/ R. Relationship of Parties
Additional Quantities .,
G. Total Cost of Acquisition
H. Sourced Equipment/Products/ 0. PRE-SUBMISSION CHECKLIST
Open Market Items 1. PRICE & PRODUCT CHANGE REQUEST
I. Price and Product Changes �ORM
J. Payment Terms
2
A. CONTRACT
"Contract" as used herein shall consist of: this RFP, pricing, fully executed forms C, D, F & P from the
Proposer's response pursuant to this RFP, and a fully executed form E ("Acceptance and Award") with
final terms and conditions. Form E will be executed on or after award and will provide final clarification
of terms and conditions of the award.
B. CURRENCY
All transactions are payable in U.S. dollars on U.S. sales. A11 administrative fees are to be paid in U.S.
dollars.
C. EXCLUSIVE VENDOR
A sole Vendor awarded in a product category. NJPA reserves the right to award to an Exclusive Vendor in
the event that such an award is in the best interests of NJPA Members nationally. A Proposer that exhibits
and demonstrates the ability to offer and execute an outstanding overall program, demonstrates the ability
and willingness to serve NJPA current and qualifying Members in all 50 states and comply with all other
requirements of this RFP, is preferred.
D. FOB
FOB stands for "Freight On Board" and defines the point at which responsibility for loss and damage of
product/equipment purchased is transferred from Seller to Buyer. "FOB Destination" defines that transfer
of responsibility for loss is transferred from Seller to Buyer at the Buyer's designated delivery point. FOB
does not identify who is responsible for the costs of shipping. The responsibility for the costs of shipping
is addressed elsewhere in this document.
E. HUB PARTNER
An organization that a member requests to be served through with an Awarded Vendor for the purposes of
complying with a Law,Regulation,or Rule to which that individual NJPA Member deems to be applicable
in their jurisdiction.
F. PROPOSER
A company,person, or entity delivering a timely response to this RFP.
G. REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
Herein referred to as RFP.
H. SOURCED GOODS
A Sourced Good or Open Market Item is a product within the RFP's scope - generally deemed incidental
to the total transaction or purchase of contract items - which a member wants to buy under contract from
an Awarded Vendor that is not currently available under the Vendor's NJPA contract.
I. TIME
Periods of time, stated as number of days, shall be in calendar days.
J. TOTAL COST OF ACQUISITION
The Total Cost of Acquisition for the equipment/products and related services being proposed is the cost
of the proposed equipment/products and related services delivered and operational for its intended purpose
in the end-user's location.
K. VENDOR
A Proposer whose response has been awarded a contract pursuant to this RFP.
3
2.1 NJPA shall advertise this solicitation: 1) for two consecutive weeks in both the hard copy print and on-
line editions of the MINNEAPOLIS STAR TRIBUNE; 2) once each in Oregon's Dailv Journal of
Commerce, South Carolina's The State and Utah's Salt Lake Tribune; 3) on a national wire service and
website by the MINNEAPOLIS STAR TRIBiJNE; 4)on NJPA's website; 5)on other third-party websites
deemed appropriate by NJPA. Other third party advertisers may include Onvia, Bidsync,
PublicPurchase.com, MERX and Biddingo.
2.2 NJPA also notifies and provides solicitation documentation to each State level procurement departments
for possible re-posting of the solicitation within their systems and at their option for future use and to meet
speci�c state requirements.
� �iv � rlUUU�:I'IUN
A. ABOUT NJPA
3_1 The National Joint Powers Alliance� (NJPA) is a public agency serving as a national municipal
contracting agency established under the Service Cooperative statute by Minnesota Legislative Statute
§123A.21 with the authority to develop and offer, among other services, cooperative procurement services
to its membership. Eligible membership and participation includes states, cities, counties, all government
agencies, both public and non-public educational agencies, colleges, universities and non-profit
organizations.
3_2 Under the authority of Minnesota state laws and enabling legislation,NJPA facilitates a competitive
bidding and contracting process on behalf of the needs of itself and the needs of current and potential
member agencies nationally. This process results in national procurement contracts with various Vendors
of products/equipment and services which NJPA Member agencies desire to procure. These procurement
contracts are created in compliance with applicable Minnesota Municipal Contracting Laws. A complete
listing of NJPA cooperative procurement contracts can be found at www.njpacoop.org.
3_3 NJPA is a public agency governed by publicly elected officials that serve as the NJPA Board of
Directors.NJPA's Board of Directors calls for all proposals,awards all Contracts,and hosts those resulting
Contracts far the benefit of its own and its Members use.
3.3.1 Subject to Approval of the NJPA Board: NJPA contracts are awarded by the action
of NJPA Board of Directors. This action is based on the open and competitive bidding process
facilitated by NJPA. The evaluation and resulting recommendation is presented to the Board of
Directors by the NJPA Proposal Evaluation Committee.
3_4 NJPA currently serves over 50,000 member agencies nationally. Both membership and utilization of
NJPA contracts continue to expand, due in part to the increasing acceptance of Cooperative Purchasing
throughout the government and education communities nationally.
B. JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS LAWS
3_5 NJPA cooperatively shares those contracts with its Members nationwide through various Joint Exercise
of Powers Laws or Cooperative Purchasing Statutes established in Minnesota, other States and
Canadian Provinces. The Minnesota Joint Exercise of Powers Law is Minnesota Statute§471.59 which
states"Two or more governmental units...may jointly or cooperatively exercise any power common to
the contracting parties..." This Minnesota Statute allows NJPA to serve Member agencies located in
all other states. Municipal agencies nationally have the ability to participate in cooperative purchasing
activities as a result of specific laws of their own state. These laws can be found on our website at
http://www.njpacoop.or�/national-cooperative-contract-solutions/legal-authorit�.
4
C. WHY RESPOND TO A NATIONAL COOPERATIVE PROCUREMENT CONTRACT
3_6 National Cooperative Procurement Contracts create value for Municipal and Public Agencies, as we11
as for Vendors of products/equipment and services in a variety of ways:
3.61 National cooperative contracts potentially save the time and effort of Municipal and Public
Agencies who would have been otherwise charged with soliciting vendor responses to individual
RFP's, resulting in individual contracts, to meet the procurement needs of their respective
agencies. Considerable time and effort is also potentially saved by the Vendors who would have
had to otherwise respond to each of those individual RFPs. A single, nationally advertised RFP,
resulting in a single,national cooperative contract can potentially replace thousands of individual
RFPs for the same equipment/products/services that might have been otherwise advertised by
individual NJPA member agencies.
3.6.2 NJPA contracts offer our Members nationally leveraged volume purchasing discounts. Our
contract terms and conditions offer the opportunity for Vendors to recognize individual member
procurement volume commitment through additional volume based contract discounts.
3_7 State laws that permit or encourage cooperative purchasing contracts do so with the belief that
cooperative efficiencies will result in lower prices,better overall value, and considerable time savings.
3_8 The collective purchasing power of thousands of NJPA Member agencies nationwide offers the
opportunity for volume pricing discounts. Although no sales or sales volume is guaranteed by an NJPA
Contract resulting from this RFP, substantial volume is anticipated and volume pricing is requested and
justified.
3_9 NJPA and its Members desire the best value for their procurement dollar as well as a competitive price.
Vendors have the opportunity to display and highlight value added attributes of their company,
equipment/products and services without constraints of a typical individual proposal process.
D. THE INTENT OF THIS RFP
3.10. National contract awarded by the NJPA Board of Directors: NJPA seeks the most responsive
and responsible Vendor relationship(s)to reflect the best interests of NJPA and its Member agencies.
Through a competitive proposal and evaluation process, the NJPA Proposal Evaluation Committee
reviews and recommends vendors for to award a national contract by the action of the NJPA Board of
Directors. NJPA's primary intent is to establish and provide a national cooperative procurement contract
which offer opportunities for NJPA and our Member agencies to procure quality product/equipment and
services as desired and needed. The contracts will be marketed nationally through a cooperative effort
between the awarded vendar(s) and NJPA. Contracts are expected to offer price levels reflective of the
potential and collective volume of NJPA and the nationally established NJPA membership base.
3.11 Beyond our primary intent,NJPA further desires to:
3.111 Award a four year term contract with a fifth year contract option resulting from this RFP;
3.11.2 Offer and apply any applicable technological advances throughout the term of a contract
resulting from this RFP
3.11.3 Deliver "Value Added" aspects of the company, equipment/products and services as
defined in the"Proposer's Response";
5
3.11.4 Deliver wide spectrums of solutions to meet the needs and requirement of NJPA and NJPA
Member agencies.
3.11.5 Award an exclusive contract to the most responsive and responsible vendor when it is
deemed to be in the best interest of NJPA and the NJPA Member agencies
3.12 Exclusive or Multiple Awards: Based on the goals and scope of this RFP, NJPA is requesting
responders to demonstrate their ability to serve the needs of NJPA's national membership. It is NJPA's
intent and desire to award a contract to a single exclusive Vendor to serve our membership's needs. To
meet the goals of this RFP, NJPA reserves the right to award a Contract to multiple Proposers where the
result justifies a multiple award and multiple contracts are deemed to be in the best interests of NJPA
Member agencies.
3.13 Non-Manufacturer Awards: NJPA reserves the right to make an award related to this invitation to a
non-manufacturer or dealer/distributor if such action is in the best interests of NJPA and its Members.
3.14 Manufacturer as a Proposer: If the Proposer is a Manufacturer or wholesale distributor,the response
received will be evaluated on the basis of a response made in conjunction with that Manufacturer's
authorized Dealer Network. Unless stated otherwise, a Manufacturer or wholesale distributor Proposer is
assumed to have a documented relationship with their Dealer Network where that Dealer Network is
informed of, and authorized to accept,purchase orders pursuant to any Contract resulting from this RFP on
behalf of the Manufacturer or wholesale distributor Proposer. Any such dealer will be considered a sub-
contractor of the Proposer/Vendor. The relationship between the Manufacturer and wholesale distributor
Proposer and its Dealer Network may be proposed at the time of the proposed submission if that fact is
properly identified.
3.15 Dealer/Re-seller as a Proposer: If the Proposer is a dealer or re-seller of the products and/or services
being proposed, the response will be evaluated based on the Proposer's authorization to provide those
products and services from their manufacturer. Where appropriate, Proposers must document their
authority to offer those products and/or services.
E. SCOPE OF THIS RFP
3.16 Scope: The scope of this RFP is to award a contract to a qualifying vendor defined as a manufacturer,
provider, or dealer/distributor, established as a Proposer, and deemed responsive and responsible through
our open and competitive proposal process. Vendors will be awarded contracts based on the proposal and
responders demonstrated ability to meet the expectations of the RFP and demonstrate the overall highest
valued solutions which meet and/or exceed the current and future needs and requirements of NJPA and its
Member agencies nationally within the scope of INDOOR-OUTDOOR ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH
RELATED EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES, INSTALLATION AND SERVICES .
3.17 Additional Scope Definitions: For purposes of the scope of this solicitation:
3.171 In addition to INDOOR-OUTDOOR ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH RELATED
EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES, INSTALLATION AND SERVICES this solicitation
should be read to include,but not limited to:
3.17.1.1 N/A
3.17.2 NJPA reserves the right to limit the scope of this solicitation for NJPA and current and
potential NJPA member agencies.
6
3.18 Overlap of Scope: When considering equipment/products/services, or groups of equipment/
products/services submitted as a part of your response, and whether inclusion of such will fall within a
"Scope of Proposal,"please consider the validity of an inverse statement.
3.18.1 Far example, pencils and post-it-notes can generally be classified as office supplies and
office supplies generally include pencils and post-it-notes.
3.18.2 In contrast, computers (PCs and peripherals) can generally be considered office supplies;
however, the scope of office supplies does not generally include computer servers and
infrastructure.
3.18.3 In conclusion: With this in mind, individual products and services must be examined
individually by NJPA, from time to time and in its sole discretion, to determine their
compliance and fall within the original"Scope"as intended by NJPA.
3.19 Best and Most Responsive—Responsible Proposer: It is the intent of NJPA to award a Contract to
the best and most responsible and responsive Proposer(s) offering the best overall quality and selection of
equipment/products and services meeting the commonly requested specifications of the NJPA and NJPA
Members, provided the Proposer's Response has been submitted in accordance with the requirements of
this RFP. Qualifying Proposers who are able to anticipate the current and future needs and requirements
of NJPA and NJPA member agencies; demonstrate the knowledge of any and all applicable industry
standards,laws and regulations; and possess the willingness and ability to distribute, market to and service
NJPA Members in a1150 states are preferred. NJPA requests proposers submit their entire product line as
it applies and relates to the scope of this RFP.
3.20 Sealed Proposals: NJPA will receive sealed proposal responses to this RFP in accordance with
accepted standards set forth in the Minnesota Procurement Code and Uniform Municipal Contracting Law.
Awards may be made to responsible and responsive Proposers whose proposals are determined in writing
to be the most advantageous to NJPA and its current or qualifying future NJPA Member agencies.
3.21 Use of Contract:Any Contract resulting from this solicitation shall be awarded with the understanding
that it is for the sole convenience of NJPA and its Members. NJPA and/or its members reserve the right to
obtain like equipment/products and services solely from this contract or from another contract source of
their choice or from a contract resulting from their own procurement process.
3.22 Awarded Vendor's interest in a contract resulting from this RFP: Awarded Vendors will be able
to offer to NJPA, and current and potential NJPA Members, only those products/equipment and services
specifically awarded on their NJPA Awarded Contract(s). Awarded Vendors may not offer as "contract
compliant,"products/equipment and services which are not specifically identified and priced in their NJPA
Awarded Contract.
3.23 Sole Source of Responsibility-NJPA desires a"Sole Source of Responsibility"Vendar. This means
the Vendor will take sole responsibility for the performance of delivered equipment/products/ services.
NJPA also desires sole responsibility with regard to:
3.23.1 Scope of Equipment/Products/Services:NJPA desires a provider for the broadest possible
scope of products/equipment and services being proposed over the largest possible geographic area
and to the largest possible cross-section of NJPA current and potential Members.
3.23.2 Vendor use of sub-contractors in sourcing or delivering equipment/product/services: NJPA
desires a single source of responsibility for equipment/products and services proposed. Proposers are
assumed to have sub-contractor relationships with all organizations and individuals whom are external to
the Proposer and are involved in providing ar delivering the equipment/products/services being proposed.
Vendor assumes all responsibility for the equipment/products/services and actions of any such Sub-
Contractor. Suggested Solutions Options include:
7
3.24.1 Multiple solutions to the needs of NJPA and NJPA Members are possible. Examples could
include:
3.24.11 Equipment/Products Only Solution: Equipment/Products On1y Solution may
be appropriate for situations where NJPA or NJPA Members possess the ability, either in-
house or through local third party contractors, to properly install and bring to operation
those equipment/products being proposed.
3.24.1.2 Turn-Key Solutions: A Turn-Key Solution is a combination of
equipment/products and services which provides a single price for equipment/products,
delivery,and installation to a properly operating status. Generally this is the most desirable
solution as NJPA and NJPA Members may not possess,or desire to engage,personnel with
the necessary expertise to complete these tasks internally or through other independent
contractors
3.241.3 Good, Better, Best: Where appropriate and properly identified, Proposers are
invited to offer the CHOICE of good—better—best multiple grade solutions to NJPA and
NJPA Members' needs.
3.241.4 Proven — Accepted — Leading Edge Technology: Where appropriate and
properly identified, Proposers are invited to provide an appropriate identified spectrum of
technology solutions to compliment or enhance the functionality of the proposed solutions
to NJPA and NJPA Members' needs both now and into the future.
3.24.2 If applicable, Contracts will be awarded to Proposer(s) able to deliver a proposal meeting
the entire needs of NJPA and its Members within the scope of this RFP. NJPA prefers Proposers
submit their complete product line of products and services described in the scope of this RFP.
NJPA reserves the right to reject individual, or groupings of specific equipment/products and
services proposals as a part of the award.
3.25 Geographic Area to be Proposed: This RFP invites proposals to provide INDOOR-OUTDOOR
ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES,INSTALLATION
AND SERVICES to NJPA and NJPA Members throughout the entire United States and possibly
internationally. Proposers will be expected to express willingness to explore service to NJPA Members
located abroad;however the lack of ability to serve Members outside of the United States will not be cause
for non-award. The ability and willingness to serve Canada, for instance, wi11 be viewed as a value-added
attribute.
3.26 Contract Term: At NJPA's option a contract resulting from this RFP will become effective either
the date awarded by the NJPA Board of Directors or the day following the expiration date of an existing
NJPA procurement contract far the same ar similar product/equipment and services.
3.26.1 NJPA is seeking a Contract base term of four years as allowed by Minnesota Contracting
Law. Full term is expected. However, one additional one-year renewaUextension may be offered
by NJPA to Vendor beyond the ariginal four year term if NJPA deems such action to be in the best
interests of NJPA and its Members. NJPA reserves the right to conduct periodic business reviews
throughout the term of the contract.
3.27 Minimum Contract Value: NJPA anticipates considerable activity resulting from this RFP and
subsequent award; however, no commitment of any kind is made concerning actual quantities to be
acquired. NJPA does not guarantee usage. Usage will depend on the actual needs of the NJPA Members
and the value of the awarded contract.
8
3.28 Estimated Contract Volume: Estimated quantities and sales volume are based on potential usage by
NJPA and NJPA Member agencies nationally.
3.29 Contract Availability: This Contract must be available to all current and potential NJPA Members
who choose to utilize this NJPA Contract to include all governmental and public agencies, public and
private primary and secondary education agencies, and all non-profit organizations nationally.
3.30 Proposer's Commitment Period: In order to allow NJPA the opportunity to evaluate each proposal
thoroughly, NJPA requires any response to this solicitation be valid and irrevocable for ninety (90) days
after the date proposals were opened regarding this RFP.
F. EXPECTATIONS FOR EQUIPMENT/PRODUCTS AND SERVICES BEING PROPOSED
3.31 Industry Standards: Except as contained herein, the specifications or solutions for this RFP
shall be those accepted guidelines set forth by the INDOOR-OUTDOOR ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH
RELATED EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES, 1NSTALLATION AND SERVICES industry, as
they are generally understood and accepted within that industry across the nation. Submitted
products/equipment, related services, and their warranties and assurances are required to meet and/or
exceed all current,traditional and anticipated needs and requirements of NJPA and its Members.
3.31.1 Deviations from industry standards must be identified by the Proposer and
explained how, in their opinion, the equipment/products and services they propose will render
equivalent functionality, coverage,performance, and/or related services. Failure to detail all such
deviations may comprise sufficient grounds for rejection of the entire proposal.
3.31.2 Technical Descriptions/Specifications.Excessive technical descriptions and specifications
which, in the opinion of NJPA unduly enlarge the proposal response may reduce evaluation points
awarded on Form G. Proposers must supply sufficient information to:
3.31.21 demonstrate the Proposer's knowledge of industry standards;
3.31.2.2 identify the equipment/products and services being proposed; and
3.31.2.3 differentiate equipment/products and services from others.
3.32 New Current Model Equipment/Products: Proposals submitted shall be for new, current model
equipment/products and services with the exception of certain close-out products allowed to be offered on
the Proposer's "Hot List" described herein.
3.33 Compliance with laws and standards: All items supplied on this Contract shall comply with any
current applicable safety or regulatory standards or codes.
3.34 Delivered and operational: Products/equipment offered herein are to be proposed based upon being
delivered and operational at the NJPA Member's site. Exceptions to "delivered and operational" must be
explicitly disclosed in the"Total Cost of Acquisition" section of your proposal response.
3.35 Warranty: The Proposer warrants that all products,equipment,supplies,and services delivered under
this Contract sha11 be covered by the industry standard or better warranty. A11 products and equipment
should carry a minimum industry standard manufacturer's warranty that includes materials and labor. The
Proposer has the primary responsibility to submit product specific warranty as required and accepted by
industry standards. Dealer/Distributors agree to assist the purchaser in reaching a solution in a dispute over
warranty's terms with the manufacturer.Any manufacturer's warranty which is effective past the expiration
of the warranty will be passed on to the NJPA member. Failure to submit a minimum warranty may result
in non-award.
9
3.36 Additional Warrants: The Proposer warrants all products/equipment and related services furnished
hereunder will be free from liens and encumbrances; defects in design, materials, and workmanship; and
will conform in a11 respects to the terms of this RFP including any specifications or standards. In addition,
Proposer/Vendor warrants the products/equipment and related services are suitable for and will perform in
accordance with the ordinary use for which they are intended.
G. SOLUTIONS BASED SOLICITATION
3.37 NJPA solicitations and contract process will not offer specific specifications for proposers to meet or
base your response on. This RFP is a"Solutions Based Solicitation." This means the proposers are asked
to understand and anticipate the current and future needs of NJPA and the nationally located NJPA
membership base,within the scope of this RFP, and including specifications commonly desired or required
by law or industry standards. Your proposal will be evaluated in part on your demonstrated ability to meet
or exceed the needs and requirements of NJPA and our member agencies within the defined scope of this
RFP.
3.38 NJPA does not typically provide product and service specifications; rather NJPA is requesting an
industry standard or accepted specification for the requested product/equipment and services. Where
specific line items are specified,those line items should be considered the minimum which can be expanded
by the Proposer to deliver the Proposer's "Solution"to NJPA and NJPA Members' needs.
�+ �i��. .tut,� �vl�� r�rc rrcEl�.arc�.v�. r(�UK rrct�r��.vi.
A. INQUIRY PERIOD
4_1 The inquiry period shall begin at the date of first advertisement and continue to the "Deadline for
Requests." RFP packages shall be distributed to Potential Bidders during the inquiry period. The purpose
for the defined "Inquiry Period" is to ensure proposers have enough time to complete and deliver the
proposal to our office.
B. PRE-PROPOSAL CONFERENCE
4_2 A non-mandatory pre-proposal conference will be held at the date and time specified in the time line on
page one of this RFP.Conference call and web connection information will be sent to all Potential Proposers
through the same means employed in their inquiry. The purpose of this conference call is to allow Potential
Proposers to ask questions regarding this RFP and hear answers to their own questions and the questions of
other Potential Proposers. Only answers issued in writing by NJPA to questions asked before or during the
Pre-proposal Conference shall be considered binding.
C. IDENTIFICATION OF KEY PERSONNEL
4_3 Vendor will designate one senior staff individual who will represent the awarded Vendor to NJPA. This
contact person will correspond with members for technical assistance, questions or problems that may arise
including instructions regarding different contacts for different geographical areas as needed.
4_4 Individuals should also be identified (if applicable) as the primary contacts for the contents of this
proposal, marketing, sales, and any other area deemed essential by the Proposer.
D. PROPOSER'S EXCEPTIONS TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS
4_5 Any exceptions,deviations,or contingencies a Proposer may have to the terms and conditions contained
herein must be documented on Form C.
10
4_6 Exceptions, deviations or contingencies stipulated in Proposer's Response,while possibly necessary in
the view of the Proposer,may result in disqualification of a Proposal Response.
E. PROPOSAL FORMAT
4_7 It is the responsibility of all Proposers to examine the entire RFP package, to seek clarification of any
item or requirement that may not be clear and to check all responses for accuracy before submitting a
Proposal. Negligence in preparing a Proposal confers no right of withdrawal after the deadline for
submission of proposals.
4_S All proposals must be properly labeled and sent to"The National Joint Powers AllianceOO,202 12th ST
NE Staples, MN 56479."
4.9 Format for proposal response: All proposals must be physically delivered to NJPA at the above
address in the following form and with all required hard copy documents and signature forms/pages inserted
as loose pages at the front of the Vendor's response:
4.9.1 Hard copy original signed,completed,and dated forms C,D,F and hard copy signed signature
page only from forms A and P from this RFP;
4.9.2 Hard copies of all addenda issued for the RFP with original counter signed by the Proposer;
4.9.3 Hardy copy of Certificate of Insurance verifying the coverage identified in this RFP; and
4.9.4 A complete copy of your response on a CD (Compact Disc) or flash drive. The copy shall
contain completed Forms A, B, C, D, F & P, your statement of products and pricing (including
apparent discount) together with all appropriate attachments. Everything you send with your hard
copy should also be included in the electronic copy. As a public agency,NJPA proposals,responses
and awarded contracts are a matter of public record, except for that data included in the proposals,
responses and awarded contracts that is classified as nonpublic; thus, pursuant to statute, NJPA
policies and RFP terms and conditions, all documentation, except far that data which is nonpublic
is available for review by the public through a public records request. If you wish to request that
certain information that falls within Minnesota Statute §13.37 be redacted, such request must be
made within thirty-days of award/non-award.
4.10 A11 Proposal forms must be submitted in English and be legible. A11 appropriate forms must be
executed by an authorized signatory of the Proposer. Blue ink is preferred for signatures.
4.11 Proposal submissions should be submitted using the electronic forms provided. If a Proposer chooses
to use alternative documents for their response,the Proposer will be responsible for ensuring the content is
effectively equal to the NJPA form and the document is in a format readable by NJPA.
4.12 It is the responsibility of the Proposer to be certain the proposal submittal is in the physical possession
of NJPA on or prior to the deadline for submission of proposals.
4.12.1 Proposals must be submitted in a sealed envelope or box properly addressed to NJPA and
prominently identifying the proposal number, proposal category name, the message "Hold for
Proposal Opening", and the deadline for proposal submission. NJPA cannot be responsible for
late receipt of proposals. Proposals received by the correct deadline for proposal submission will
be opened and the name of each Proposer and other appropriate information will be publicly read.
4.13 Corrections,erasures,and interlineations on a Proposer's Response must be initialed by the authorized
signer in original ink on all copies to be considered.
11
4.14 Addendums to the RFP: The Proposer is responsible for ensuring receipt of all addendums to this
RFP.
4.14.1 Proposer's are responsible for checking directly with the NJPA website for addendums to
this RFP.
4.14.2 Addendums to this RFP can change terms and conditions of the RFP including the deadline
for submission of proposals.
F. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THIS RFP
4.15 Upon examination of this RFP document, Proposer sha11 promptly notify NJPA of any ambiguity,
inconsistency, or error they may discover. Interpretations, corrections and changes to this RFP will be
made by NJPA through addendum. Interpretations, corrections, or changes made in any other manner will
not be binding and Proposer shall not rely upon such.
4.16 Submit all questions about this RFP, in writing, referencing INDOOR-OUTDOOR ATHLETIC
SURFACING WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES, 1NSTALLATION AND
SERVICES to Maureen Knight, NJPA 202 12th Street NE, Staples, MN 56479 or RFP@njpacoop.org.
Those not having access to the Internet may call Maureen Knight at(218)895-4114. Requests for additional
information or interpretation of instructions to Proposers or technical specifications shall also be addressed
to Maureen Knight. NJPA urges Potential Proposers to communicate all concerns well in advance of the
deadline to avoid misunderstandings. Questions received less than seven (7) days ending at 4:00 p.m.
Central Time of the seventh (7r�) calendar day prior to proposal due-date cannot be answered; however,
communications permitted include: NJPA issued addenda or potential Vendor withdrawal of their response
prior to RFP submission deadline.
4.17 If the answer to a question is deemed by NJPA to have a material impact on other potential proposers
or the RFP itself,the answer to the question wi11 become an addendum to this RFP.
4.18 If the answer to a question is deemed by NJPA to be a clarification of existing terms and conditions
and does not have a material impact on other potential proposers or the RFP itself,no further documentation
of that question is required.
4.19 As used in this solicitation, clarification means communication with a Potential Proposer for the sole
purpose of eliminating minor irregularities, informalities, or apparent clerical mistakes in the RFP.
4.20 Addenda are written instruments issued by NJPA that modify or interpret the RFP. All addenda issued
by NJPA shall become a part of the RFP. Addenda will be delivered to a11 Potential Proposers using the
same method of delivery of the original RFP material. NJPA accepts no liability in connection with the
delivery of said materials. Copies of addenda will also be made available on the NJPA website at
www.njpacoop.org by clicking on "Current and Pending Solicitations" and from the NJPA offices. No
questions will be accepted by NJPA later than seven(7) days prior to the deadline for receipt of proposals,
except Each Potential Proposer shall ascertain prior to submitting a Proposal that it has received all addenda
issued, and the Proposer shall acknowledge their receipt in its Proposal Response.
4.21 An amendment to a submitted proposal must be in writing and delivered to NJPA no later than the
time specified for opening of all proposals.
G. MODIFICATION OR WITHDRAWAL OF A SUBMITTED PROPOSAL
4.22 A submitted proposal may not be modified, withdrawn or cancelled by the Proposer for a period of
ninety (90) days following the date proposals were opened. Prior to the deadline for submission of
proposals, any proposal submitted may be modified or withdrawn by notice to the NJPA Contracts and
Compliance Manager. Such notice shall be submitted in writing and include the signature of the Proposer
and shall be delivered to NJPA prior to the deadline for submission of proposals and it shall be so worded
12
as not to reveal the content of the original proposal. However,the original proposal shall not be physically
returned to the Potential Proposer until after the official proposal opening. Withdrawn proposals may be
resubmitted up to the time designated for the receipt of the proposals if they are then fully in conformance
with the Instructions to Proposer.
4.23 Examples of Value Added Attributes: Value-Added attributes, products and services are items
offered in addition to the products and services being proposed which adds value to those items being
proposed. The availability of a contract for maintenance or service after the initial sa1e, installation, and
set-up may, far instance,be "Value Added Services" far products where a typical buyer may not have the
ability to perform these functions. The opportunity to indicate value added dimensions and such
advancements will be available in the Proposer's Questionnaire and Proposer's product and service
submittal.
4.24 Value added equipment/products and services and expanded services, as they relate to this RFP, will
be given positive consideration in the award selection. Consideration will be given to an expanded selection
of INDOOR-OUTDOOR ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS,
SUPPLIES,INSTALLATION AND SERVICES and advances to provide equipment/products/services or
supplies meeting and/or exceeding today's industry standards and expectations.A value add would include
a program or service that further serves the members needs above and possibly beyond standard expectation
and complements the equipment/products/services and training. Value added could include areas of
equipment, product and service, sales, ordering, delivery, performance, maintenance, technology, and
service that furthers the functionality and effectiveness of the procurement process while remaining within
the scope of this RFP.
4.25 Minority, Small Business, and Women Business Enterprise (WMBE) participation: It is the
policy of some NJPA Members to involve Minority, Small Business,and WMBE contractors in the process
to purchase equipment/products and related services. Vendors should document WMBE status for their
organization AND any such status of their affiliates (i.e. Supplier networks) involved in carrying out the
activities invited. The ability of a Proposer to provide "Credits" to NJPA and NJPA Members in these
subject areas, either individually or through related entities involved in the transaction, wi11 be evaluated
positively by NJPA and reflected in the "value added" area of the evaluation. NJPA is committed to
facilitating the realization of such"Credits"through certain structuring techniques for transactions resulting
from this RFP.
4.26 Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Opportunities: There is a growing trend among NJPA
Members to consider the environmental impact of the equipment/products and related services they
purchase. "Green" characteristics demonstrated by responding companies will be evaluated positively by
NJPA and reflected in the "value added" area of the evaluation. Please identify any Green characteristics
of the equipment/products and related services in your proposal and identify the sanctioning body
determining that characteristic. Where appropriate, please indicate which products have been certified as
"green"and by which certifying agency.
4.27 On-Line Requisitioning systems: When applicable, on-line requisitioning systems will be viewed as
a value-added characteristic. Proposer shall include documentation about user interfaces that make on-line
ordering easy for NJPA Members as well as the ability to punch-out from mainstream e-Procurement or
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems that NJPA Members may currently utilize.
4.28 Financing: The ability of the Proposer to provide financing options for the products and services being
proposed will be viewed as a Value Added Attribute.
H. PROPOSAL OPENING PROCEDURE
4.29 Sealed and properly identified Proposer's Responses for this RFP entitled INDOOR-OUTDOOR
ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES,INSTALLATION
AND SERVICES will be received by Maureen Knight, Contracts and Compliance Manager, at NJPA
13
Offices, 202 12th Street NE, Staples, MN 56479 until the deadline for receipt of, and proposal opening
identified on page one of this RFP. We document the receipt by using an atomic clock; an NJPA
employee electronically time and date stamps all Proposals immediately upon receipt. The NJPA
Director of Contracts and Marketing, or Representative from the NJPA Proposal Evaluation Committee,
will then read the Proposer's names aloud. A summary of the responses to this RFP will be made available
for public inspection in the NJPA office in Staples, MN. A letter or e-mail request is required to receive a
complete RFP package. Send or communicate a11 requests to the attention of Maureen Knight 202 12th
Street Northeast Staples,MN 56479 or RFP@njpacoop.org to receive a complete copy of this RFP.Method
of delivery needs to be indicated in the request; an email address is required for electronic transmission.
Oral,facsimile,telephone or telegraphic Proposal Submissions or requests for this RFP are invalid and will
not receive consideration. All Proposal Responses must be submitted in a sealed package. The outside of
the package shall plainly identify INDOOR-OUTDOOR ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH RELATED
EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES, INSTALLATION AND SERVICES. To avoid premature
opening, it is the responsibility of the Proposer to label the Proposal Response properly.
I. NJPA'S RIGHTS RESERVED
4.30.1 Reject any and all Proposals received in response to this RFP;
4.30.2 Disqualify any Proposer whose conduct or Proposal fails to conform to the requirements of this
RFP;
4.30.3 Have unlimited rights to duplicate all materials submitted for purposes of RFP evaluation, and
duplicate all public information in response to data requests regarding the Proposal;
4.30A Consider a late modification of a Proposal if the Proposal itself was submitted on time and if the
modi�cations were requested by NJPA and the modifications make the terms of the Proposal more
favorable to NJPA, and accept such Proposal as modified;
4.30.5 At its sole discretion,reserve the right to waive any non-material deviations from the requirements
and procedures of this RFP;
4.30.6 Extend the Contract, in increments determined by NJPA, not to exceed a total contract term of five
years; and
4.30.7 Cancel the Request for Proposal at any time and for any reason with no cost or penalty to NJPA.
4.30.8 Correct or amend the RFP at any time with no cost or penalty to NJPA. If NJPA should correct or
amend any segment of the RFP after submission of Proposals and prior to announcement of the
Awarded Vendor, a11 Proposers wi11 be afforded ample opportunity to revise their Proposal to
accommodate the RFP amendment and the dates for submission of revised Proposals announced at that
time. NJPA will not be liable for any errors in the RFP ar other responses related to the RFP.
4.30.9 Extend proposal due dates.
5_1 NJPA requests Potential Proposers respond to this RFP only if they are able to offer a wide array of
equipment/products and services and at prices lower and better value than what they would ordinarily offer
to single government agency, larger school district, or regional cooperative.
5_2 RFP is an Indefinite Quantity Equipment/Products and Related Service Price and Program Request with
potential national sales distribution and service. If Proposer's solution requires additional supporting
documentation, describe where it can be found in your submission. If Proposer offers the solution in an
14
alternative fashion, describe your solution to be easily understood. All pricing must be copied on a CD or
thumb drive along with other requested information as a part of a Proposer's Response.
5_3 Regardless of the payment method selected by NJPA or NJPA Member,a total cost associated with any
purchase option of the equipment/products and services and being supplied must always be disclosed at the
time of purchase.
5_4 All Proposers will be required to submit "Primary Pricing" in the form of either "Line-Item Pricing,"
or"Percentage Discount from Catalog Pricing,"or a combination of these pricing strategies. Proposers are
also encouraged to offer OPTIONAL pricing strategies such as but not limited to "Hot List," "Sourced
ProductlEquipment" and "Volume Discounts," as well as financing options such as leasing. All pricing
documents should include an effective date, preferably in the top right corner of the first page of each
pricing document.
A. LINE-ITEM PRICING
5_5 A pricing format where specific individual products and/or services are offered at specific individual
Contract prices. Products/equipment and/or related services are individually priced and described by
characteristics such as manufacture name, stock or part number, size, or functionality. This method of
pricing offers the least amount of confusion as products/equipment and prices are individually identified
however, Proposers with a large number of products/equipment to propose may find this method
cumbersome. In these situations, a percentage discount from catalog or category pricing model may make
mare sense and increase the clarity of the contract pricing format.
5_6 All Line-Item Pricing items must be numbered, organized, sectioned, including SKU's (when
applicable) and easily understood by the Evaluation Committee and members.
5_7 Submit Line-Item Pricing items in an Excel spreadsheet format and include all appropriate identification
information necessary to discern the line item from other line items in each Responder's proposal.
5_8 The purpose for a searchable excel spreadsheet format for Line-Item Pricing is to be able to quickly
find any particular item of interest. For that reason,Proposers are responsible for providing the appropriate
product and service identification information along with the pricing information which is typically found
on an invoice or price quote for such products/equipment and related services.
5_9 All products/equipment and related services typically appearing on an invoice or price quote must be
individually priced and identified on the line-item price sheet, including any and all ancillary costs.
5.10 Proposers are asked to provide both a published"List"price as well as a"Proposed Contract Price"in
their pricing matrix. Published List price will be the standard"quantity of one"price currently available to
government and educational customers excluding cooperative and volume discounts.
B. PERCENTAGE DISCOUNT FROM CATALOG OR CATEGORY
5.11 A specific percentage discount from a Catalog or List price" defined as a published Manufacturer's
Suggested Retail Price(MSRP) for the products/equipment or related services being proposed.
5.12 Individualized percentage discounts can be applied to any number of de�ned product groupings.
5.13 A Percentage Discount from MSRP may be applied to all elements identified in MSRP including all
Manufacturer Options applicable to the equipment/products or related services.
5.14 When a Proposer elects to use "Percentage Discount from Catalog or Category," Proposer will be
responsible far providing and maintaining current published MSRP with NJPA and must be included in
their proposal and provided throughout the term of any Contract resulting from this RFP.
15
C. COST PLUS A PERCENTAGE OF COST
5.15 Cost plus a percentage of cost as a primary pricing mechanism is not desirable.
D. HOT LIST PRICING
5.16 Where applicable, a Vendor may opt to offer a specific selection of products/services, defined as Hot
List pricing at greater discounts or related advantages than those listed in the standard Contract pricing. All
product/service pricing,including the Hot List Pricing, must be submitted electronically provided in Exce1
format. Hot List pricing must be submitted in a Line-Item format. Equipment/products and related services
may be added or removed from the "Hot List" at any time through an NJPA Price and Product Change
Form.
5.17 Hot List program and pricing when applicable may also be used to discount and liquidate close-out
and discontinued equipment/products and related services as long as those close-out and discontinued items
are clearly labeled as such. Current ordering process and administrative fees apply. This option must be
published and made available to a11 NJPA Members.
E. CEiLING PRICE
5.18 Proposal pricing is to be established as a ceiling price. At no time may the proposed
equipment/products and related services be offered pursuant to this Contract at prices above this ceiling
price without request and approval by NJPA. Contract prices may be reduced to allow for volume
considerations and commitments and to meet the specific and unique needs of an NJPA Member.
5.19 Allowable specific needs may include competitive situations, certain purchase volume commitments
or the creation of custom programs based on the individual needs of NJPA Members.
F. VOLUME PRICE DISCOLTNTS/ADDITIONAL QUANTITIES
5.20 Proposers are free to offer volume commitment discounts from the contract pricing documented in a
Contract resulting from this RFP. Volume considerations shall be determined between the Vendor and
individual NJPA Members on a case-by-case basis.
5.21 Nothing in this Contract establishes a favared member relationship between the NJPA or any NJPA
Member and the Vendor. The Vendor will,upon request by NJPA Member,extend this same reduced price
offered or delivered to another NJPA Member provided the same or similar volume commitment, specific
needs, terms, and conditions, a similar time frame, seasonal considerations, locations, competitively
situations and provided the same manufacturer support is available to the Vendor.
5.22 All price adjustments are to be offered equally to all NJPA Members exhibiting the same or
substantially similar characteristics such as purchase volume commitments, and timing including the
availability of special pricing from the Vendor's suppliers.
5.23 The contract awarded vendor will accept orders for additional quantities at the same prices,terms and
conditions,providing the NJPA Member exercises the option before a specific date,mutually agreed upon
between member and contract awarded vendor at time of original purchase order. Any extension(s) of
pricing beyond the specific date shall be upon mutual consent between the NJPA Member and the contract
awarded vendor.
G. TOTAL COST OF ACQUISITION
5.24 The Total Cost of Acquisition for the equipment/products and related services being proposed,
including those payable by NJPA Members to either the Proposer or a third party is the cost of the proposed
16
equipment/products product/equipment and related services delivered and operational for its intended
purpose in the end-user's location. For example, if you are proposing equipment/products FOB Proposer's
dock., your proposal should identify your deviation from the "Total Cost of Acquisition" of contracted
equipment/products. The Proposal should reflect that the "contract does not provide for delivery beyond
Proposer's dock, nor any set-up activities or costs associated with those delivery ar set-up activities." In
contrast,proposed terms including all costs for product/equipment and services delivered and operational
at to the end-user's location would require a disclosure of"None."
H. SOURCED PRODUCT/EQUIPMENT/OPEN MARKET ITEMS
5.25 A Sourced Good or an Open Market Item is a product that a member wants to buy under contract that
is not currently available under the Vendor's NJPA contract. This method of procurement can be satisfied
through a contract sourcing process. Sourcing options serve to provide a more complete contract solution
to meet our members' needs. Sourced items are generally deemed incidental to the total transaction or
purchase of contract items.
5.26 NJPA or NJPA Members may request product/equipment and/or related services that are within the
related scope of this RFP,which are not included in an awarded Vendor's line-item product/equipment and
related service list or catalog.These items are known as Sourced Product/Equipment or Open Market Items.
5.27 An awarded Vendor resulting from this RFP may "Source" equipment/products and related services
for NJPA or an NJPA Member to the extent they:
5.271 Identify all such equipment, products and services as "Sourced Products/Equipment " or
"Open Market Items" on any quotation issued in reference to an NJPA awarded contract, and
provided to either NJPA or an NJPA Member; and
5.27.2 Follow a11 applicable acquisition regulations pertaining to the purchase of such equipment,
products and services,as defined by NJPA or NJPA Member receiving quotation from Vendor;and
5.27.3 Ensure NJPA or the NJPA Member has determined the prices as quoted by the Vendor for
such equipment,products and services are deemed to be fair and reasonable and are acceptable to
the member/buyer; and
5.27.4 Identify all product/equipment sourced as a part of an NJPA contract purchase with all
required NJPA reporting and fees applying.
5.28 Cost plus a percentage is an option in pricing of sourced goods.
I.PRODUCT &PRICE CHANGES
5.29 Requests for equipment/products or service changes,additions or deletions will be allowed at any time
throughout the awarded contract term. All requests must be made in written format by completing the
NJPA Price and Product Change Request Form (located at the end of this RFP and on the NJPA website)
and signature of an authorized Vendor employee. All changes are subject to review and approval by the
NJPA Contracts & Compliance Manager, signed in acceptance by the NJPA Executive Director and
acknowledged by the NJPA Contract Council. Submit request via email to your Contract Manager and
PandP@njpacoop.org.
5.30 NJPA's due diligence in analyzing any request for change is to determine if approval of the request is:
1) within the scope of the original RFP and 2) in the `Best Interests of NJPA and NJPA Members." A
signed Price and Product Change form will be returned to vendor contact via email.
5.31 Vendor must complete this change request farm and individually list or attach all items or services
subject to change,provide sufficiently detailed explanation and documentation for the change, and include
17
a compete restatement of pricing document in appropriate format(preferably Excel). The pricing document
must identify all equipment/products and services being offered and must conform to the following NJPA
product/price change naming convention: (Vendor Name) (NJPA Contract#) (effective pricing date); for
example, "COMPANY 012411-CPY eff 02-12-2013."
5.32 New pricing restatement must include all equipment/products and services offered regardless of
whether their prices have changed and include a new "effective date" on the pricing documents. This
requirement reduces confusion by providing a single, current pricing sheet for each vendor and creates a
historical record of pricing.
5.33 ADDITIONS. New equipment/products and related services may be added to a contract if such
additions are within the scope of the RFP.New equipment/products and related services may be added to a
Contract resulting from this RFP at any time during that Contract to the extent those equipment/products
and related services are within the scope of this RFP. Those requests are subject to review and approval of
NJPA. Allowable new equipment/products and related services generally include new updated models of
equipment/products and related services and or enhanced services previously offered which could reflect
new technology and improved functionality.
5.34 DELETIONS. New equipment/products and related services may be deleted from a contract if an item
or service is no longer available and thus not relevant to the contract;for example, discontinued,improved,
etc.
5.35 PRICE CHANGES: Request prices changes in general terms along with the justification by product
category for the change; for example, a 3% increase in XYZ Product Line is due to a 3% increase in
petroleum, or this list of SKUs/product descriptions is increasing X% due to X% increase in cost of raw
materials.
5.35.1 Price decreases: NJPA expects Vendors to propose their very best prices and anticipates
price reductions are due to advancement of technologies and market place efficiencies.
5.35.2 Price increases: Typical acceptable increase requests include increases to Vendor input
costs such as petroleum or other applicable commodities, increases in product utility of new
compared to old equipment/product or service,etc. Vendor must include reasonable documentation
for the claims cited in their request along with detailed justification for why the increase is needed.
Special details for price changes must be included with the request along with both current and
proposed pricing. Appropriate documentation should be attached to this form, including letters
from suppliers announcing price increases. Price increases will not exceed industry standard.
5.36 Submit the following documentation to request a pricing change:
5.361 Signed NJPA Price and Product Change Form
5.36.2 Single Statement of Pricing Excel spreadsheet identifying all equipment/products and
services being offered and their pricing. Each complete pricing list will be identified by its
"Effective Date." Each successive price listing identified by its `Bffective Date" will create a
"Product and Price History" for the Contract. Each subsequent pricing update will be saved using
the naming convention of"(Vendor Name)pricing effective XX/XX/XXXX."
5.36.2.1 Include all equipment/products and services regardless of whether their prices
have changed. By observing this convention we will:
5.36.2.1.1 Reduce confusion by providing a single, easy to find, current pricing
sheet far each Vendor.
5.36.2.1.2 Create a historical record of pricing.
18
5.37 NJPA reserves the right to review additional catalogs being proposed as additions or replacements to
determine if the represented products and services reflect and relate to the scope of this RFP. Each new
catalog received may have the effect of adding new product offerings and deleting products no longer
carried by the Vendor. New catalogs shall apply to the Contract only upon approval of the NJPA. Non-
approved use of catalogs may result in termination for convenience. New price lists or catalogs found to
be offering non-contract items during the Contract may be grounds for terminating the Contract for
convenience.
5.38 Proposers representing multiple manufacturers, or carrying multiple related product lines may also
request the addition of new manufacturers or product lines to their Contract to the extent they remain within
the scope of this RFP.
5.39 Proposers may use the multiple tabs available in an Excel workbook to separately list logical product
groupings or to separately list product and service pricing as they see fit.
5.40 A11 equipment/products and services together with their pricing, whether changed within the request
or remaining unchanged, will be stated on each "Pricing" sheet created as a result of each request for
product, service, or pricing change.
5.41 Each subsequent "Single Statement of Product and Pricing" will be archived by its effective date
therefore creating a product and price histary for any Contract resulting from this RFP. Proposers are
required to create a historical record of pricing annually by submitting updated pricing referred to as a
"Single Statement of Product/Equipment and Related Services Contract Price Update". This pricing update
is required at a minimum of once per contract year.
J. PAYMENT TERMS
5.42 Payment terms will be defined by the Proposer in the Proposer's Response. Proposers are encouraged
to offer payment terms through P Card services if applicable.
5.43 If applicable, identify any leasing programs available to NJPA and NJPA Members as part of your
proposal. Proposers should submit an example of the lease agreement to be used and should identify:
5.43.1 General leasing terms such as:
5.43.1.1 The percentage adjustment over/under an index rate used in calculating the
internal rate of return for the lease; and
5.43.1.2 The index rate being adjusted; and
5.43.1.3 The"Purchase Option" at lease maturity($1, or fair market value); and
5.43.1.4 The available term in months of lease(s) available.
5.43.2 Leasing company information such as:
5.43.2.1 The name and address of the leasing company; and
5.43.2.2 Any ownership, common ownership, or control between the Proposer and the
Leasing Company.
K. SALES TAX
19
5.44 Sales and other taxes shall not be included in the prices quoted. Vendor will charge state and local
sales and other taxes on items for which a valid tax exemption certification has not been provided. Each
NJPA Member is responsible for providing verification of tax exempt status to the Vendor.When ordering,
NJPA Members must indicate that they are tax exempt entities. Except as set forth herein, no party shall
be responsible for taxes imposed on another party as a result of or arising from the transactions
contemplated by a Contract resulting from this RFP.
L. SHIPPING
5.45 NJPA desires an attractive freight program. A shipping program for material only proposals, or
sections of proposals, must be defined as a part of the cost of equipment/products. If shipping is charged
to NJPA or NJPA Member, only the actual cost of delivery may be added to an invoice. Shipping charges
calculated as a percentage of the product price may not be used, unless such charges are lower than actual
delivery charges. COD orders will be accepted if both parties agree. It is desired that delivery be made
within ninety-days(90) of receipt of the Purchase Order.
5.46 Selection of a carrier for shipment or expedited shipping will be the option of the party paying for said
shipping. Use of another carrier will be at the expense of the party who requested.
5.47 Proposers must define their shipping programs for Alaska and Hawaii and any location not served by
conventional shipping services. Over-size and over-weight items and shipments may be subject to custom
freight programs.
5.48 All shipping and re-stocking fees must be identified in the price program. Certain industries providing
made to order product/equipment may not allow returns. Proposers will be evaluated based on the relative
flexibility extended to NJPA and NJPA Members relating to those subjects.
5.49 Proposer agrees shipping errors will be at the expense of the Vendor.
5.50 Delivery effectiveness is very important aspect of this Contract. If completed deliveries are not made
at the time agreed, NJPA or NJPA Member reserves the right to cancel and purchase elsewhere and hold
Vendor accountable. If delivery dates cannot be met, Vendor agrees to advise NJPA or NJPA Member of
the earliest possible shipping date for acceptance by NJPA or NJPA Member.
5.51 Delivered products/equipment must be properly packaged. Damaged equipment/products will not be
accepted, or if the damage is not readily apparent at the time of delivery, the equipment/products shall be
returned at no cost to NJPA or NJPA Member. NJPA and NJPA Members reserve the right to inspect the
equipment/products at a reasonable time subsequent to delivery where circumstances or conditions prevent
effective inspection of the equipment/products at the time of delivery.
5.52 Vendor shall deliver Contract conforming products/equipment in each shipment and may not substitute
products/equipment without approval from NJPA or the NJPA Member.
5.53 NJPA reserves the right to declare a breach of Contract if the Vendor intentionally delivers substandard
or inferior equipment/products which are not under Contract and described in its paper or electronic price
lists or sourced upon request to any member under this Contract. In the event of the delivery of non-
conforming equipment/products,NJPA Member will notify the Vendor as soon as possible and the Vendor
will replace non-conforming equipment/products with conforming equipment/products acceptable to the
NJPA member.
5.54 Throughout the term of the Contract, Proposer agrees to pay for return shipment on
equipment/products that arrives in a defective or inoperable condition.Proposer must arrange for the return
shipment of damaged equipment/products.
20
5.55 Vendor may not substitute equipment/products unless agreed to by both parties.
5.56 Unless contrary to other parts of this solicitation, if the product/equipment or the tender of delivery
fail in any respect to conform to this Contract, the purchasing member may: 1)reject the whole, 2) accept
the whole ar 3) accept any commercial unit or units and reject the rest.
6 EVALUATIOV C, __
A. PROPOSAL EVALUATION PROCESS
61 The NJPA Proposal Evaluation Committee will evaluate proposals received based on a 1,000 point
evaluation system. The Committee establishes both the evaluation criteria and designates the relative
importance of those criteria by assigning possible scores for each category on Form G of this RFP.
6_2 NJPA shall use a final overall scoring system to include consideration for best price and cost evaluation.
NJPA reserves the right to assign any number of point awards or penalties it considers warranted if a
Proposer stipulates exceptions, exclusions, or limitations of liabilities. Strong consideration will be given
to the best price as it relates to the quality of the product and service. However,price is ultimately only one
of the factors taken into consideration in the evaluation and award.
6_3 Responses will be evaluated first for responsiveness and thereafter for content. The NJPA Board of
Directars will make awards to the selected Proposer(s) based on the recommendations of the Proposal
Evaluation Committee. To qualify for the final evaluation, a Proposer must have been deemed responsive
as a result of the criteria set forth under"Proposer Responsiveness."
B. PROPOSER RESPONSIVENESS
6_4 All responses are evaluated for 1eve1 one and level two responsiveness. If a response does not
reasonably and substantially conform to all the terms and conditions in the solicitation or it requests
unreasonable exceptions, it may be considered non-responsive.
6_5 All proposals must contain answers or responses to the information requested in the proposal forms.
The following items constitute the test far"Level One Responsiveness"and are determined on the proposal
opening date. If these are not received,your response may be disqualified as non-responsive.
6_6 Level One Responsiveness includes:
6.6.1 received prior to the deadline for submission or it wi11 be returned unopened;
6.6.2 properly addressed and identified as a sealed proposal with a specific opening date and
time;
6.6.3 pricing document (with apparent discounts), sample certificate of liability insurance and
all farms fully completed even if "not applicable"is the answer;
6.6.4 original signed, completed and dated RFP forms C, D, and F hard copy signed signature
page Only from forms A and P from this RFP and if applicable, all counter signed addenda
issued in relation to this RFP;
6.6.5 an electronic copy(CD ar flash drive) of the entire response; and
6.6.6 falls within the scope as determined by the NJPAs Proposal Evaluation Committee.
6_7 "Level Two"responsiveness is determined through the evaluation of the remaining items listed under
Proposal Evaluation Criteria below. These items are not arranged in order of importance and each item
21
may encompass multiple areas of information requested. Any questions not answered will result in a loss
of points from relevant Form G criteria and may lead to non-award if too many areas are unanswered
resulting in the inability for evaluation team to effectively review your response.
C. PROPOSAL EVALUATION CRITERIA
6_8 Evaluation Criteria:Forms A and P includes a series of questions encompassing,but not limited to,the
following categories:
6.8.1 Company Information&Financial Strength
6.8.2 Industry Requirements & Marketplace Success
6.8.3 Ability to Sell&Deliver Service Nationwide
6.8.4 Marketing Plan
6.8.5 Other Cooperative Procurement Contracts
6.8.6 Value Added Attributes
6.8.7 Payment Terms &Financing Options
6.8.8 Warranty
6.8.9 Equipment/Products/Services
6.8.10 Pricing&Delivery
6.8.11 Industry Specific Items
6_9 Evaluation of each Proposer's Response will take into consideration as a minimum response but not
necessarily limited to these items.
D. OTHER CONSIDERATION
6.10 The Proposer is required to have extensive knowledge and at least three (3)years of experience with
the related activities surrounding the selling of the equipment/products and/or related services.
6.11 NJPA reserves the right to accept or reject newly formed companies solely based on information
provided in the proposal and/or its own investigation of the company.
6.12 If a manufacturer or supplier chooses not to produce or supply a full selection and representation of
product/equipment and related services it has available which fall within the scope of this RFP, such action
will be considered sufficient cause to reduce evaluation points.
6.13 NJPA reserves the right to request and test equipment/products and related services from the apparent
successful Proposer. Prior to the award of the Contract, the apparent successful Proposer, if requested by
NJPA, shall furnish current information and data regarding the Proposer's resources, personnel, and
organization within three (3) days.
6.14 Past performance information is relevant information regarding a Proposer's actions under previously
awarded contracts to schools, local, state, and governmental agencies and non-profit agencies. It includes
the Proposer's record of conforming to specifications and standards of good workmanship. The Proposer's
history for reasonable and cooperative behaviar and commitment to member satisfaction shall be under
evaluation. Ultimately, Past Performance Information can be defined as the Proposer's businesslike
concern for the interests of the NJPA Member.
6.15 NJPA shall reserve the right to reject any or all proposals.
22
E. COST COMPARISON
6.16 NJPA uses a variety of evaluation methodologies, including but not limited to a cost comparison of
specific and deemed to be like equipment/products.NJPA reserves the right to use this process in the event
the Proposal Evaluation Committee feels it is necessary to make a final determination.
6.17 This process wi11 be based on a point system with points being awarded for being low to high Proposer
far each cost evaluation item selected. A "Market Basket" of identical (or substantially similar)
equipment/products and related services may be selected by the NJPA Evaluation Committee and the unit
cost will be used as a basis for determining the point value. The"Market Basket"will be selected by NJPA
from all product categories as determined appropriate by NJPA.
F. MARKETING PLAN
6.18 A key element of an NJPA awarded a contract will be based on your marketing response to
this solicitation. An awarded Vendor's sales force will be the primary source of communication to
the customers and NJPA members directly relating to the contract success. Success in marketing
is dependent on delivery of inessaging and communication relating to the contract value,
knowledge of contract, proper use and the delivery of contracted equipment/products and related
services to the end user. Much of the success and sales reward is a direct result of the commitment
to the Contract by the vendor and sales teams. NJPA reserves the right to deem a proposer non-
responsive or to not award based on an unacceptable or incomplete marketing plan
6.19 NJPA marketing expectations include:
6.19.1 Vendors ability to demonstrate the leveraging of a national sales force and/or dealer network.
Vendors must demonstrate the ability to sell, service and deliver products and equipment through
acceptable distribution channels to customers and NJPA members in all 50 states. Demonstrate
fully the sales and service capabilities of your company through your response; outline Vendor's
national sales force network in terms of numbers and geographic location and method of
distribution of the equipment/products and related services. Service may be independent of the
equipment/product sales pricing but is encouraged to be a part of your response and contract.
6.19.2 Vendor is invited to demonstrate the ability to successfully market, promote and
communicate the opportunity of an NJPA contract to current and potential members nationwide.
NJPA desires a marketing plan that communicates the value of the contract to members.
6.19.3 Vendor is expected to be receptive to NJPA sales trainings. Vendor shall provide a venue
for appropriate personnel from both management and the sales force who will be trained. NJPA
commits to providing contract sales training and awareness regarding all aspects of communicating
the value of the contract itself including:the authority of NJPA to offer the contract to its Members,
value and utility the contract delivers to NJPA Members, scope of NJPA Membership, authority of
NJPA Members to utilize NJPA procurement contracts, marketing and sales methods, and overall
vertical strategies.
6.19.4 Vendor is expected to demonstrate the intent to a commit to full embracement of the NJPA
contract. Identify the appropriate levels of sales management and sales force that will need to
understand the value of and the internal procedures necessary,to deliver the NJPA contract solution
and message to NJPA and NJPA Members. NJPA shall provide a general schedule and a variety
of inethods surrounding when and how those individuals will be trained.
6.19.5 Vendor wi11 outline their proposed involvement in the promotion of a contract resulting from
this RFP through applicable industry trade show exhibits and related customer meetings. Proposers
are encouraged to consider participation with NJPA at NJPA embraced national trade shows.
23
6.19.6 Vendor must exhibit the willingness and ability to actively market and develop contract
speci�c marketing materials including,but not limited to:
6.19.61 Complete Marketing Plan.Proposer shall submit a marketing plan outlining how
the Vendor will launch the NJPA contract to current and potential NJPA Members. NJPA
requires the Awarded Vendors to embrace and actively promote the Contract in
cooperation with the NJPA.
6.19.6.2 Printed Marketing Materials. Proposer will initially produce and thereafter
maintain full color print advertisements in camera ready electronic format including
company logo and contact information to be used in the NJPA directory and other approved
marketing publications.
6.19.6.3 Contract announcements and advertisements. Proposer will outline in the
marketing plan their anticipated contract announcements, advertisements in industry
periodicals and other direct or indirect marketing activities promoting the awarded NJPA
contract.
6.19.6.4 Proposer's Website. Proposer will identify how an Awarded Contract will be
displayed and linked on the Proposer's website. An on-line shopping experience for NJPA
Members is desired when applicable.
6.19.7 An NJPA Vendor Contract Launch will be scheduled during a reasonable time frame after
the award and held at the NJPA office in Staples,MN.
6.20 Proposer sha11 identify their commitment to develop a sales/communication process to facilitate NJPA
membership and establish status of current and potential agencies/members. Proposer should further
express their commitment to capturing sufficient member information as is deemed necessary by NJPA.
G. CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE
6.21 Vendors shall provide evidence of liability insurance coverage identified below in the form of a
Certificate of Insurance or an ACCORD binder form with their proposal. Upon Award issued pursuant to
this contract and prior to the execution of any commerce relating to such award,Vendor will be responsible
for providing verification, in the form of a Certificate of Insurance identifying the coverage required below
and identifying NJPA as a "Certi�cate Holder." Vendor will be responsible to maintain such insurance
coverage at their own expense throughout the term of any contract resulting from this solicitation.
6.22 Any exceptions and/or assumptions to the insurance requirements must be identified on Attachmerct
C. Exceptions and/or assumptions will be taken into consideration as part of the evaluation process;
however,vendors must be specific. If vendors do not specify any exceptions and/or assumptions at time of
proposal submission, NJPA will not consider any additional exceptions and/or assumptions during
negotiations. Upon contract award, the successful vendor must provide the Certificate of Insurance
identifying the coverage as specified.
6.23 Insurance Liability Limits: The awarded vendor must maintain,for the duration of its contract, $1.5
million in General Liability insurance coverage or General Liability insurance in conjunction with an
Umbrella for a total combined coverage of$1.5 million. Wark on the contract shall not begin until after
the awarded vendor has submitted acceptable evidence of the required insurance coverage. Failure to
maintain any required insurance coverage or acceptable alternative method of insurance will be deemed a
breach of contract.
6.23.1 Minimum Scope and Limits of Insurance: Vendar shall provide coverage with limits
of liability not less than those stated below. An excess liability policy or umbrella liability policy
24
may be used to meet the minimum liability requirements provided that the coverage is written on
a"following form"basis.
6.23.1.1 Commercial General Liability—Occurrence Form
Policy shall include bodily injury,property damage and broad farm contractualliability and
XCU coverage.
6.23.1.2 Each Occurrence $1,500,000
6.24 Insurance Requirements: The limits listed herein are minimum requirements for this Contract and
in no way limit the indemnity covenants contained in this Contract. NJPA in no way warrants that the
minimum limits contained herein are sufficient to protect the Vendar from liabilities that might arise out
of the performance of the work under this Contract by the Vendor,his agents, representatives, employees
or subcontractors and Vendor is free to purchase additional insurance as may be determined necessary.
6.25 Acceptability of Insurers: Insurance is to be placed with insurers duly licensed or authorized to
do business in the State of Minnesota and with an "A.M. Best" rating of not less than A- VII. NJPA in
no way warrants that the above required minimum insurer rating is sufficient to protect the Vendor from
potential insurer solvency.
6.26 Subcontractors: Vendors' certificate(s) shall include all subcontractors as additional insureds under
its policies or Vendar shall furnish to NJPA separate certificates for each subcontractor. All coverage
for subcontractors shall be subject to the minimum requirements identified above.
H. ORDER PROCESS AND/OR FUNDS FLOW
6.27 Please propose an order process and funds flow. The Business-to-Government order process and/or
funds flow model involves NJPA Members issuing Purchase Orders directly to a Vendor and pursuant to a
Contract resulting from this RFP. Administrative fees may also be used far purposes as allowed by
Minnesota State Law and approved by the Board of Directors.
6.28 Additional Terms and Conditions can be added at the PO level if both Vendor and Member agree.
I. ADMINISTRATIVE FEES
6.29 Proposer agrees to authorize and/or allow for an administrative fee payable to NJPA by an Awarded
Vendor in exchange for its facilitation and marketing of a Contract resulting from this RFP to current and
potential NJPA Members. This Administration Fee shall be:
6.29.1 Calculated as a percentage of the dollar volume of a11 equipment/products and services
provided to and purchased by NJPA Members or calculated as reasonable and acceptable method
applicable to the contracted transaction; and
6.29.2 Included in, and not added to, the pricing included in Proposer's Response to the RFP; and
6.29.3 Designed to offset the anticipated costs of NJPA's involvement in contract management,
facilitating marketing efforts, Vendor training, and any order processing tasks relating to the
Contract resulting from this RFP. Administrative fees may also be used for other purposes as
allowed by Minnesota law. Administrative fees may also be used for other purposes as allowed by
Minnesota law.
6.29.4 Typical administrative fees for a B-TO-G order process and funds flow is 2.0%. NJPA does
not mandate a specific fee percentage,we merely state that 2%is a typical fee across our contracts.
The administrative fee percent varies among vendors, industries and responses.
25
6.29.5 NJPA awarded contract holder is responsible for the Administrative Fee and related
reporting.
6.30 The opportunity to propose these factors and an appropriate administrative fee is available in the
Proposer's Questionnaire Form P.
J. VALUE ADDED
6.31 Examples of Value Added Attributes: Va1ue-Added attributes, products and services are items
offered in addition to the products and services being proposed which adds value to those items being
proposed. The availability of a contract for maintenance or service after the initial sale, installation, and
set-up may, for instance,be "Value Added Services" for products where a typical buyer may not have the
ability to perform these functions.
6.32 Where to document Value Added Attributes: The opportunity to indicate value added dimensions
and such advancements wi11 be available in the Proposer's Questionnaire and Proposer's product and
service submittal.
6.33 Value added equipment/products and services and expanded services, as they relate to this RFP, will
be given positive consideration in the award selection. Consideration will be given to an expanded selection
of INDOOR-OUTDOOR ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS,
SUPPLIES, INSTALLATION AND SERVICES and advances to provide products/services, supplies
meeting and/or exceeding today's industry standards and expectations. A value add would include a
program or service that further serves the members needs above and possibly beyond standard expectation
and complements the equipment/products and services and training. Value added could include areas of
product and service, sales, ordering, delivery, performance, maintenance, technology, and service that
furthers the functionality and effectiveness of the procurement process while remaining within the scope of
this RFP.
6.34 Minority, Small Business, and Women Business Enterprise (WMBE) participation: It is the
policy of some NJPA Members to involve Minority, Small Business,and WMBE contractors in the process
to purchase product/equipment and related services. Vendors should document WMBE status for their
organization AND any such status of their affiliates (i.e. Supplier networks) involved in carrying out the
activities invited. The ability of a Proposer to provide "Credits" to NJPA and NJPA Members in these
subject areas, either individually or through related entities involved in the transaction, wi11 be evaluated
positively by NJPA and reflected in the "value added" area of the evaluation. NJPA is committed to
facilitating the realization of such"Credits"through certain structuring techniques for transactions resulting
from this RFP.
6.35 Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Opportunities: There is a growing trend among NJPA
Members to consider the environmental impact of the equipment/products and related services they
purchase. "Green" characteristics demonstrated by responding companies will be evaluated positively by
NJPA and reflected in the "value added" area of the evaluation. Please identify any Green characteristics
of the product/equipment and related services in your proposal and identify the sanctioning body
determining that characteristic. Where appropriate, please indicate which products have been certified as
"green"and by which certifying agency.
6.36 On-Line Requisitioning systems: When applicable, on-line requisitioning systems will be viewed as
a value-added characteristic. Proposer shall include documentation about user interfaces that make on-line
ordering easy for NJPA Members as well as the ability to punch-out from mainstream e-Procurement or
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems that NJPA Members may currently utilize.
6.37 Financing: The ability of the Proposer to provide financing options for the products and services being
proposed will be viewed as a Value Added Attribute.
26
6.38 Technology: Technological advances, increased efficiencies, expanded service and other related
improvements beyond today's NJPA member's needs and applicable standards.
K. WAIVER OF FORMALITIES
6.39 NJPA reserves the right to waive any minor formalities or irregularities in any proposal and to accept
proposals, which, in its discretion and according to the law, may be in the best interest of its members.
7 PU5 1 A��ARD OPERATI�'C: ISSUES
A. SUBSEQUENT AGREEMENTS
7_1 Purchase Order. Purchase Orders for equipment/products and/or related services may be executed
between NJPA or NJPA Members (Purchaser) and awarded Vendor(s) or Vendor's sub-contractors
pursuant to this invitation and any resulting Contract.NJPA Members are instructed to identify on the face
of such Purchase Orders that "This purchase order is issued pursuant to NJPA procurement contract
#XXXXXX." A Purchase Order is an offer to purchase product/equipment and related services at specified
prices by NJPA or NJPA Members pursuant to a Contract resulting from this RFP. Purchase Order flow
and procedure will be developed jointly between NJPA and an Awarded Vendor after an award is made.
7_2 Governing Law. Purchase Orders shall be construed in accordance with, and governed by,the laws of
a competent jurisdiction with respect to the purchaser. Each and every provision of law and clause required
by law to be included in the Purchase Order shall be read and enforced as though it were included. If
through mistake or otherwise any such provision is not included, or is not currently included, then upon
application of either party the Contract shall be physically amended to make such inclusion or correction.
The venue for any litigation arising out of disputes related to Purchase Order(s)shall be a court of competent
jurisdiction to the Purchaser.
7_3 Additional Terms and Conditions. Additional terms and conditions to a Purchase Order may be
proposed by NJPA, NJPA Members, or Vendors. Acceptance of these additional terms and conditions is
OPTIONAL to all parties to the Purchase Order. The purpose of these additional terms and conditions is
to formally introduce job or industry specific requirements of law such as prevailing wage legislation.
Additional terms and conditions can include specific local policy requirements and standard business
practices of the issuing Member. Said additional terms and conditions sha11 not interfere with the general
purpose, intent or currently established terms and conditions contain in this RFP document.
7_4 Specialized Service Requirements. In the event service requirements or specialized performance
requirements such as e-commerce specifications, specialized delivery requirements, or other specifications
and requirements not addressed in the Contract resulting from this RFP, NJPA Member and Vendor may
enter into a separate, standalone agreement, apart from a Contract resulting from this RFP. Any proposed
service requirements or specialized performance requirements require pre-approval by Vendor. Any
separate agreement developed to address these specialized service or perfortnance requirements is
exclusively between the NJPA Member and Vendor. NJPA, its agents, Members and employees shall not
be made party to any claim for breach of such agreement. Product sourcing is not considered a service.
NJPA Members will need to conduct procurements for any specialized services not identified as a part or
within the scope of the awarded Contract.
7_5 Performance Bond. At the request of the member, a Vendor will provide all performance bonds
typically and customarily required in their industry. These bonds will be issued pursuant to the
requirements of Purchase Orders for product/equipment and related services. If a purchase order is
cancelled for lack of a required performance bond by the member agency, it shall be the recommendation
of NJPA that the current pending Purchase Order be canceled. Each member has the final decision on
Purchase Order continuation. ANY PERFORMANCE BONDING REQUIRED BY THE MEMBER OR
CUSTOMER STATE LAWS OR LOCAL POLICY IS TO BE MUTUALLY AGREED UPON AND
SECURED BETWEEN THE VENDOR AND THE CUSTOMER/MEMBER.
27
B.NJPA MEMBER SIGN-UP PROCEDURE
7_6 Awarded Vendors will be responsible for familiarizing their sales and service forces with the various
farms of NJPA Membership documentation and shall encourage and assist potential Members in
establishing Membership with NJPA.NJPA membership is at no cost,obligation or liabiliry to the Member
or the Vendor.
C. REPORTING OF SALES ACTIVITY
7_7 A report of the total gross dollar volume of all equipment/products and related services purchased by
NJPA Members as it applies to this RFP and Contract will be provided quarterly to NJPA. The form and
content of this reporting will provided by NJPA to include, but not limited to, name and address of
purchasing agency,member number, amount of purchase, and a description of the items purchased.
7.71 Zero sales reports: Awarded Vendors are responsible for providing a quarterly sales report
of contract sales every quarter regardless of the existence or amount of sales.
D. AUDITS
7_8 No more than once per calendar year during the Contract term, Vendor may be required to make
available to NJPA the invoice reports and/or invoice documents from Vendor pertaining to all invoices sent
by Vendor and all payments made by NJPA members for all equipment/products and related services
purchased under the awarded Contract. NJPA must provide written notice of exercise of this requirement
with no less than fourteen (14)business days' notice. NJPA may employ an independent auditor or NJPA
may choose to conduct such audit on its own behalf. Upon approval and after the auditor has executed an
appropriate confidentiality agreement, Vendor will permit the auditor to review the relevant Vendor
documents. NJPA shall be responsible for paying the auditor's fees. The parties will make every reasonable
effort to fairly and equitably resolve discrepancies to the satisfaction of both parties. Vendor agrees that the
NJPA may audit their records with a reasonable notice to establish total compliance and to verify prices
charged under of the Contract are being met. Vendor agrees to provide verifiable documentation and
tracking in a timely manner.
E. HUB PARTNER
79 Hub Partner: NJPA Members may request to be served through a "Hub Partner" far the purposes of
complying with a Law,Regulation,or Rule to which that individual NJPA Member deems to be applicable
in their jurisdiction. Hub Partners may bring value to the proposed transactions through consultancy,
Disadvantaged Business Entity Credits or other considerations.
7.10 Hub Partner Fees: Fees, costs, or expenses from this Hub Partner levied upon a transaction resulting
from this contract, shall be payable by the NJPA Member. The fees, costs, or expenses levied by the Hub
Vendor must be clearly itemized in the transaction; and to the extent that the Vendor stands in the chain of
title during a transaction resulting from this RFP, the documentation shall be documented to show it is
"Executed for the Benefit of[NJPA Member Name]."
F. TRADE-INS
7.11 The value in US Dollars for Trade-ins will be negotiated between NJPA or an NJPA Member, and an
Awarded Vendor. That identified"Trade-In"value shall be viewed as a down payment and credited in full
against the NJPA purchase price identified in a purchase order issued pursuant to any Awarded NJPA
procurement contract. The full value of the trade-in will be consideration.
G. OUT OF STOCK NOTIFICATION
28
7.12 Vendor shall immediately notify NJPA members upon receipt of order(s)when an out-of-stock occurs.
Vendor shall inform the NJPA member regarding the anticipated date of availability for the out-of-stock
item(s), and may suggest equivalent substitute(s). The ordering organization shall have the option
of accepting the suggested equivalent substitute, or canceling the item from the order. Under no
circumstance is Proposer permitted to make unauthorized substitutions.Unfilled or substituted item(s)shall
be indicated on the packing list.
H. TERMINATION OF CONTRACT RESULTING FROM THIS RFP
7.13 NJPA reserves the right to cancel the whole or any part of a resulting Contract due to failure by the
Vendor to carry out any obligation, term or condition as described in the below procedure. Prior to any
termination for cause, the NJPA will provide written notice to the Vendar, opportunity to respond and
opportunity to cure. Some examples of material breach include, but are not limited to:
7.13.1 The Vendar provides products/equipment or related services that does not meet
reasonable quality standards and is not remedied under the warranty;
7.13.2 The Vendor fails to ship the products/equipment or related services or provide the
delivery and services within a reasonable amount of time;
7.13.3 NJPA has reason to believe the Vendor will not or cannot perform to the
requirements or expectations of the Contract and issues a request for assurance and
Vendor fails to respond;
7.13.4 The Vendor fails to observe any of the material terms and conditions of the
Contract;
7.13.5 The Vendor fails to follow the established procedure for purchase orders,invoices
and/or receipt of funds as established by the NJPA and the Vendor in the Contract.
7.13.6 The Vendor fails to report quarterly sales;
7.13.7 The Vendor fails to actively market this Contract within the guidelines provided
in this RFP and the expectations of NJPA defined in the NJPA Contract Launch.
7.13.8 In the event the contract has no measurable and defining value or benefit to NJPA
or the NJPA member.
7.14 Upon receipt of the written notice of concern,the Vendor shall have ten(10)business days to provide
a satisfactory response to the NJPA. Failure on the part of the Vendor to reasonably address all issues of
concern may result in Contract cancellation pursuant to this Section. If the issue is not resolved within sixty
(60) days, contract will be terminated.
7.15 Any termination shall have no effect on purchases that are in progress at the time the cancellation is
received by the NJPA. The NJPA reserves the right to cancel the Contract immediately for convenience,
without penalty or recourse, in the event the Vendor is not responsive concerning the remedy, the
performance, or the violation issue within the time frame, completely or in part.
7.16 NJPA reserves the right to cancel or suspend the use of any Contract resulting from this RFP if the
Vendor files for bankruptcy protection or is acquired by an independent third party. Awarded Vendor wi11
be responsible for disclosing to NJPA any litigation, bankruptcy or suspensions/disbarments that occur
during the contract period. Failure to disclose may result in an immediate termination of the contract.
29
7.17 NJPA may execute Contract termination without cause with a required 60-day written notice of
termination. Termination of Contract shall not relieve either party of financial, product or service
obligations incurred or accrued prior to termination.
718 NJPA may cancel any Contract resulting from this solicitation without any further obligation if any
NJPA employee significantly involved in initiating,negotiating, securing, drafting or creating the Contract
on behalf of the NJPA is found to be in collusion with any Proposer to this RFP for their personal gain.
Such cancellation shall be effective upon written notice from the NJPA or a later date if so designated in
the notice given. A terminated Contract sha11 not relieve either party of financial, product or service
obligations due to participating member or NJPA.
7.19 Events of Automatic termination to include,but not limited to:
7.19.1 Vendor's failure to remedy a material breach of a Contract resulting from this RFP within
sixty (60) days of receipt of notice from NJPA specifying in reasonable detail the nature of such
breach; and/ar,
7.19.2 Receipt of written information from any authorized agency finding activities of Vendors
engaged in pursuant to a Contract resulting from this RFP to be in violation of the law.
2i GL�I��Ercr.i, 7��:llivi� A�D C VivDl'1 IONS
A. ADVERTISING A CONTRACT RESULTING FROM THIS RFP
8_1 Proposer/Vendor shall not advertise or publish information concerning this Contract prior to the award
being announced by the NJPA. Once the award is made, a Vendor is expected to advertise the awarded
Contract to both current and potential NJPA Members.
B. APPLICABLE LAW
8_2 NJPA's interest in a contract resulting from this RFP: Not withstanding its own use, to the extent
NJPA issues this RFP and any resulting contract for the use of its Members,NJPA's interests and liability
for said use shall be limited to the competitive proposal process performed and terms and conditions relating
to said contract and sha11 not extend to the products, services, or warranties of the Awarded Vendor or the
intended or unintended effects of the product/equipment and services procured there from.
8_3 NJPA Compliance with Minnesota Procurement Law: NJPA will exhaust all avenues to comply
with each unique state law or requirement whenever possible. It is the responsibility of each participating
NJPA member to ensure to their satisfaction that NJPA contracting process falls within these laws and
applicable laws are satisfied. An individual NJPA member using these contracts is deemed by their own
accord to be in compliance with their own requirements and procurement regulations.
8_4 Governing Law with respect to delivery and acceptance: All applicable portions of the Minnesota
Uniform Commercial Code, all other applicable Minnesota 1aws, and the applicable laws and rules of
delivery and inspection of the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) laws shall govern NJPA contracts
resulting from this solicitation.
8_5 Jurisdiction: Any claims pertaining to this RFP and any resulting Contract that develop between NJPA
and any other party must be brought forth only in courts in Todd County in the State of Minnesota unless
otherwise agreed to.
8.5.1 Purchase Orders issued pursuant to a contract resulting from this solicitation shall be
construed in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of a competent jurisdiction with respect
to the purchaser.
30
8_6 Vendor Compliance with applicable law: Vendor(s) shall comply with all federal, state,or local laws
applicable to or pertaining to the transaction, acquisition, manufacturer, suppliers or the sale of the
equipment/products and relating services resulting from this RFP.
8_7 Other Laws, whether or not herein contained, shall be included by this reference. It shall be
Proposer's/Vendor's responsibility to determine the applicability and requirements of any such laws and to
abide by them.
8_8 Indemnity: Each party agrees it will be responsible for its own acts and the result thereof to the extent
authorized by law and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other party and the results thereo£ NJPA's
liability shall be governed by the provisions of the Minnesota Tort Claims Act,Minnesota Statutes, Section
§3.736, and other applicable law.
8_9 Prevailing Wage: It shall be the responsibility of the Vendor to comply, when applicable, with
prevailing wage legislation in effect in the jurisdiction of the purchaser(NJPA or NJPA Member). It shall
be the responsibility of the Vendor to monitor the prevailing wage rates as established by the appropriate
department of labor for any increase in rates during the term of this Contract and adjust wage rates
accordingly.
8.10 Patent and Copyright Infringement: If an article sold and delivered to NJPA or NJPA Members
hereunder shall be protected by any applicable patent or copyright, the Vendor agrees to indemnify and
hold harmless NJPA and NJPA Members against any and all suits, claims,judgments, and costs instituted
or recovered against it by any person on account of the use or sale of such articles by NJPA or NJPA
Members in violation or right under such patent or copyright.
C. ASSIGNMENT OF CONTRACT
8.11 No right or interest in this Contract shall be assigned or transferred by the Vendor without prior written
permission by the NJPA. No delegation of any duty of the Vendor shall be made without prior written
permission of the NJPA. NJPA shall notify members by posting approved assignments on the NJPA
website (www.njpacoop.org)within 15 days of NJPA's approval.
8.12 If the original Vendor sells or transfers all assets or the entire portion of the assets used to perform this
Contract, a successor in interest must guarantee to perform all obligations under this Contract. NJPA
reserves the right to reject the acquiring person or entity as a Vendor. A change of name agreement will
not change the contractual obligations of the Vendor.
D. LIST OF PROPOSERS
8.13 NJPA will not maintain or communicate to a list of proposers. All interested proposers must respond
to the solicitation as a result of NJPA solicitation advertisements indicated. Because of the wide scope of
the potential Members and qualified national Vendars,NJPA has determined this to be the best method of
fairly soliciting proposals.
E. CAPTIONS, HEADINGS, AND ILLUSTRATIONS
8.14 The captions, illustrations,headings, and subheadings in this solicitation are for convenience and ease
of understanding and in no way define or limit the scope or intent of this request.
F. DATA PRACTICES
8.15 All materials submitted in response to this RFP will become property of the NJPA and will become
public record in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, section 13.591, after the evaluation process is
completed. If the Responder submits information in response to this RFP that it believes to be nonpublic
31
information, as defined by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statute § 13.37, the
Responder must:
8.15.1 make the request within thirty days of award/non-award, and include the appropriate
statutary justification.Pricing is generally not redactable.The NJPA Legal Department shall review
the statement to determine whether the information shall be withheld. If the NJPA determines to
disclose the information, the Bids & Contracts department of the NJPA shall inform the Proposer,
in writing, of such determination; and
8.15.2 defend any action seeking release of the materials it believes to be nonpublic information,
and indemnify and hold harmless the NJPA, its agents and employees, from any judgments or
damages awarded against the NJPA in favor of the party requesting the materials, and any and all
costs connected with that defense.
8.16 This indemnification survives the NJPA's award of a contract. In submitting a response to this RFP,
the Responder agrees that this indemnification survives as long as the confidential information is in
possession of the NJPA. When the situation warrants, Proposer may be able redact additional nonpublic
information after the evaluation process if legal justification is provided and accepted by NJPA.
G. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
8.17 The Contract, as defined herein, shall constitute the entire understanding between the parties to that
Contract. A Contract resulting from this RFP is formed when the NJPA Board of Directors approves and
signs the applicable Contract Award&Acceptance document(Form E).
H. FORCE MAJEURE
8.18 Except for payments of sums due,neither party shall be liable to the other nor deemed in default under
this Contract if and to the extent that such party's performance of this Contract is prevented due to force
majeure. The term "force majeure" means an occurrence that is beyond the control of the party affected
and occurs without its fault or negligence including,but not limited to, the following: acts of God, acts of
the public enemy, war, riots, strikes, mobilization, labar disputes, civil disorders, fire, flood, snow,
earthquakes, tornadoes or violent wind, tsunamis, wind shears, squalls, Chinooks, blizzards, hail storms,
volcanic eruptions, meteor strikes, famine, sink holes, avalanches, lockouts, injunctions-intervention-acts,
terrorist events or failures or refusals to act by government authority and/or other similar occurrences where
such party is unable to prevent by exercising reasonable diligence. The force majeure shall be deemed to
commence when the party declaring force majeure notifies the other party of the existence of the force
majeure and shall be deemed to continue as long as the results or effects of the force majeure prevent the
party from resuming performance in accordance with a Contract resulting from this RFP. Force majeure
shall not include late deliveries of equipment/products and services caused by congestion at a
manufacturer's plant or elsewhere, an oversold condition of the market, inefficiencies, or other similar
occurrences. If either party is delayed at any time by force majeure, then the delayed party shall notify the
other party of such delay within forty-eight(48)hours.
I. GRATUITIES
8.19 NJPA may cancel an awarded Contract by written notice if it is found that gratuities, in the form of
entertainment,gifts or otherwise,were offered or given by the Vendor or any agent or representative of the
Vendor, to any employee of the NJPA.
J. HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
32
8.20 Proper and applicable Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) that are in full compliance with OSHA's
Hazard Communication Standard must be provided by the Vendor to NJPA or NJPA Member at the time
of purchase.
K. LICENSES
8.21 Proposer shall maintain a current status on a11 required federal, state, and local licenses, bonds and
permits required for the operation of the business that is anticipated to be conducted with NJPA and NJPA
members by the Proposer.
8.22 All responding Proposers must be licensed (where required) and have the authority to sell and
distribute offered equipment/products and related services to NJPA and NJPA Members nationally.
Documentation of required said licenses and authorities, if applicable, is requested to be included in the
proposer's response.
L. MATERIAL SUPPLIERS AND SUB-CONTRACTORS
8.23 The awarded Vendor shall be required to supply the names and addresses of sourcing suppliers and
sub-contractors as a part of the purchase order when requested by NJPA or the NJPA member.
M. NON-WAIVER OF RIGHTS
8.24 No failure of either party to exercise any power given to it hereunder, nor to insistence upon strict
compliance by the other party with its obligations hereunder, and no custom or practice of the parties at
variance with the terms hereof, nor any payment under a Contract resulting from this RFP shall constitute
a waiver of either party's right to demand exact compliance with the terms hereo£ Failure by NJPA to take
action or assert any right hereunder shall not be deemed as waiver of such right.
N. PROTESTS OF AWARDS MADE
8.25 Protests shall be filed with the NJPA's Executive Director and shall be resolved in accordance with
appropriate Minnesota state statutes. Protests will only be accepted from Proposers. A protest must be in
writing and filed with NJPA. A protest of an award or proposed award must be filed within ten(10)calendar
days after the public notice or announcement of the award. A protest must include:
8.25.1 The name, address and telephone number of the protester;
8.25.2 The original signature of the protester or its representative (you must document the
authority of the Representative);
8.25.3 Identification of the solicitation by RFP number;
8.25.4 Identification of the statute or procedure that is alleged to have been violated;
8.25.5 A precise statement of the relevant facts;
8.25.6 Identification of the issues to be resolved;
8.25.7 The aggrieved party's argument and supporting documentation;
8.25.8 The aggrieved party's statement of potential�nancial damages; and
8.25.9 A protest bond in the name of NJPA and in the amount of 10% of the aggrieved party's
statement of potential financial damages.
33
O. SUSPENSION OR DISBARMENT STATUS
8.26 If within the past five(5)years,any firm,business,person or Proposer responding to NJPA solicitation
and submitting a proposal has been lawfully terminated, suspended or precluded from participating in any
public procurement activity with a federal, state or local government or education agency the Proposer must
include a letter with its response setting forth the name and address of the public procurement unit, the
effective date of the suspension or debarment,the duration of the suspension or debarment and the relevant
circumstances relating to the suspension or debarment. Any failure to supply such a letter or to disclose
pertinent information may result in the cancellation of any Contract. By signing the proposal affidavit,the
Proposer certifies that no current suspension or debarment exists.
P. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND IMMIGRATION STATUS CERTIFICATION
8.27 An Affirmative Action Plan, Certificate of Affirmative Action or other documentation regarding
Affirmative Action may be required by NJPA or NJPA Members relating to a transaction from this
RFP. Vendors shall comply with any such requirements or requests.
8.28 Immigration Status Certification may be required by NJPA or NJPA Members relating to a transaction
from this RFP. Vendors shall comply with any such requirements or requests.
Q. SEVERABILITY
8.29 In the event that any of the terms of a Contract resulting from this RFP are in conflict with any rule,
law, statutory provision or are otherwise unenforceable under the laws or regulations of any government or
subdivision thereof,such terms sha11 be deemed stricken from an awarded Contract resulting from this RFP,
but such invalidity or unenforceability shall not invalidate any of the other terms of an awarded Contract
resulting from this RFP.
R. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES
8.30 No Contract resulting from this RFP shall be considered a contract of employment. The relationship
between NJPA and an Awarded Contractor is one of independent contractors each free to exercise judgment
and discretion with regard to the conduct of their respective businesses. The parties do not intend the
proposed Contract to create, or is to be construed as creating a partnership,joint venture, master-servant,
principal—agent, or any other relationship. Except as provided elsewhere in this RFP, neither party may be
held liable for acts of omission or commission of the other party and neither party is authorized or has the
power to obligate the other party by contract, agreement, warranty, representation or otherwise in any
manner whatsoever except as may be expressly provided herein.
9 FORMS
[THE REST OF THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK.]
34
Form A �*+f\'
':,;�JPA""
�1'�\t +�/,F�i
�*��
PROPOSER QUESTIONNAIRE- General Business Information
(Products, Pricing, Sector Specific, Services, Terms and Warranry are addYessed on Form P
Proposer Name: Questionnaire completed by:
Please identify the person NJPA should correspond with from now through the Award process:
Name: E-Mail address:
Provide an answer to all questions directly below each question(do not leave blank,mark NA if not applicable)and address
all requests made in this RFP.Please supply any applicable supporting information and documentation you feel appropriate
in addition to answers entered to the Ward document. All information must be typed, organized, and easily understood by
evaluators. Please use the Microsoft Word document version of this questionnaire to Nespond to the questions contained
herein.
CompanV Information &Financial Strength
1) Why did you respond to this RFP?
2) What are your company's expectations in the event of an award?
3) Provide the full legal name, address, tax identifications number, and telephone number for your business.
4) Demonstrate your financial strength and stability.
5) Are you now, or have you ever been the subject of a bankruptcy action?Please explain.
6) Provide a brief history of your company that includes your company's core values and business philosophy.
7) How long has your company been in the INDOOR-OUTDOOR ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH RELATED
EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES, 1NSTALLATION AND SERVICES industry?
8) Is your organization best described as a manufacturer or a distributor/dealer/re-seller for a manufacturer of the
products/equipment and related services being proposed?
a) If the Proposer is best described as a re-seller, manufacturer aggregate, or distributor, please provide evidence of
your authorization as a dealer/re-seller/manufacturer aggregate for the manufacturer of the products/equipment and
related services you are proposing.
b) If the Proposer is best described as a manufacturer, please describe your relationship with your sales/service force
and/or Dealer Network in delivering the products/equipment and related services proposed.
c) Are these individuals your employees, or the employees of a third party?
d) If applicable,is the Dealer Network independent or company owned?
9) Please provide your bond rating, and/or a credit reference from your bank.
10) Provide a detailed explanation outlining the licenses and certifications that are both required to be held, and actually
held by your organization in pursuit of the commerce and business contemplated by this RFP.
11) Provide a detailed explanation outlining licenses and certifications both required to be held, and actually held,by third
parties and sub-contractors to your organization in pursuit of the commerce contemplated by this RFP.If not applicable,
please respond with"Not Applicable."
12) Provide all "Suspension or Disbarment"information as defined and required herein.
13) In addition to the $1.5 million in General Liability and/or in conjunction with umbrella insurance coverage, what level
of automobile and workers compensation insurance does your organization currently have? If none,please explain.
14) Within the RFP category there is potential to be several different sub-categories of solutions; list sub category title/s
that best describe your equipment/products, services and supplies.
Industry Requirements &Marketplace Success
15) List and document recent industry awards and recognition.
16) Supply three references/testimonials from customers of like status to NJPA Members to include Government and
Education agencies. Please include the customer's name, contact, and phone number.
35
17) Provide a list of your top 5 Government and/or Education customers(entity name is optional)including: entity type,the
state the entity is located in, scope of the project/s, size of transaction/s and dollar volumes from the past 3 fiscal years.
18) What percentages of your current (within the past three (3) fiscal years) national sales are to the government and
education verticals?Indicate government and education verticals individually.
Proposer's Abilitv to Sell and Deliver Service Nationwide
19) Please describe your company sales force in terms of numbers, geographic dispersion, and the proportion of their
attention focused on the sale and services of the equipment/products contemplated in this RFP?
20) Please describe your dedicated dealer network and number of individual sales force within your dealer network in terms
of numbers, geographic dispersion, and the proportion of their attention focused on the sales distribution and delivery
of your equipment/products and related services contemplated in this RFP?
21) Please describe your dedicated company service force or dedicated network in terms of numbers,geographic dispersion,
and the proportion of their attention focused on the sale of the equipment/products and related services contemplated in
this RFP?
22) Please describe your dedicated dealer service force or network in terms of numbers geographic dispersion, and the
proportion of their attention focused on the sale of the equipment/products and related services contemplated in this
RFP? Additionally,please describe any applicable road service and do they offer the ability to service customers at the
customer's location?
23) Describe in detail your customer service program regarding process and procedure. Please include,where appropriate,
response time capabilities and commitments as a part of this RFP response and awarded contract.
24) Identify any geographic areas or NJPA market segments of the United States you will NOT be fully serving through the
proposed contract.
25) Identify any of NJPA Member segments or defined NJPA verticals you will NOT be offering and promoting an awarded
contract to? (Government, Education,Non-profit)
26) Define any specific requirements or restrictions as it applies to our members located off shores such as Hawaii and
Alaska and the US Islands. Address your off shore shipping program on the Pricing form P of this document.
Marketing Plan
27) Describe your contract sales training program to your sales management, dealer network and/or direct sales teams
relating to a NJPA awarded contract.
28) Describe how you would market/promote an NJPA Contract nationally to ensure success.
29) Describe your marketing material, and overall marketing ability, relating to promoting this type of partnership and
contract opportunity. Please send a few representative samples of your marketing materials in electronic format.
30) Describe your use of technology and the internet to provide marketing and ensure national contract awareness.
31) Describe your perception of NJPA's role in marketing the contract and your contracted products/equipment and related
services.
32) Describe in detail any unique marketing techniques and methods as a part of your proposal that would separate you
from other companies in your industry.
33) Describe your company's Senior Management level commitment with regards to embracement,promoting, supporting
and managing a resultant NJPA awarded contract
34) Do you view your products/equipment applicable to an E-procurement ordering process?
Yes No
a) If yes, describe examples of E-procurement system/s or electronic marketplace solutions that your
products/equipment was available through. Demonstrate the success of government and educations customers to
ordering through E-procurement.
35) Please describe how you will communicate your NJPA pricing and pricing strategy to your sales force nationally?
Other Cooqerative Procurement Contracts
36) Describe your level of experience with national, state and local cooperative contracts.
37) What is the annual dollar sales volume generated through each of the contract(s)identified in your answer to the previous
question.
38) Identify any GSA Contracts held or utilized by the Proposer.
36
39) What is the annual combined dollar sales volume for each of these contracts?
40) If you are awarded the NJPA contract, are there any market segments or verticals (e.g., higher education, K-12 local
governments, non-profits etc.) or geographical markets where the NJPA contract will not be your primary contract
purchasing vehicle? If so, please identify those markets and which cooperative purchasing agreement will be your
primary vehicle.
41) How would you leverage an NJPA awarded contract in your sales process?
42) Identify a proposed administrative fee payable to NJPA for facilitation, management and promotion of the NJPA
contract, should you be awarded. This fee is typically calculated as a percentage of Contract sales and not a line item
addition to the customers cost of goods.
Value Added
43) If applicable, describe any product/equipment training programs available as options for NJPA members. If applicable,
do you offer equipment operator training as well as maintenance training? Yes No
44) Is this training standard as a part of a purchase or optional?
45) Describe current technological advances your proposed equipment/products and related services offer.
46) Describe your"Green"program as it relates to your company, your products/equipment, and your recycling program,
including a list of all green products accompanied by the certifying agency for each(if applicable).
47) Describe any Women or Minority Business Entity (WMBE) or Small Business Entity (SBE) accreditations and the
general minority and small business program of your organization as it relates to a Contract resulting from this RFP.
48) Identify any other unique or custom value added attributes of your company or your products/equipment or related
services. What makes your proposed solutions unique in your industry as it applies to NJPA members?
49) Other than what you have already demonstrated or described, what separates your company,your products/equipment
and related services from your competition?
50) Identify and describe any service contract options included in the proposal, or offered as a proposed option, for the
products/equipment being offered.
51) Identify your ability and willingness to offer an awarded contract to qualifying member agencies in Canada specifically
and internationally in general.
52) Describe any unique distribution and/or delivery methods or options offered in your proposal.
NOTE: Questions regarding Payment Terms,Warranty, Products/Equipment/Services,Pricing and
Delivery, and Industry Specific Items are addressed on Form P.
Signature: Date:
37
F o r m B /�`Y-��`\�
�:;�'JPA"�'
�;_ �_�
,......_.........:.:.
���*tj.e
PROPOSER INFORMATION �=-�µ�
Company Name:
Address:
City/State/Zip:
Phone: Fax:
Toll Free Number: E-mail:
Web site:
Voids sometimes exist between management (those who respond to RFPs) and sales staff (those who contact NJPA
Members) that result in communication problems. Due to this fact, provide the names of your key sales people, phone
numbers, and geographic territories for which they are responsible
COMPANY PERSONNEL CONTACTS
Authorized Signer for vour or�anization*:
Name:
Emai1: Phone:
* By executing Form F, the "Proposer's Assurance of Compliance,"you are certifying this person identified here has their
authorization to sign on behalf of your organization:
Author of vour proqosal response
Name: Title:
Email: Phone:
Your PrimarV Contact person regardin�your Uroposal:
Name: Title:
Email: Phone:
Other important contact information:
Name: Title:
Email: Phone:
Name: Title:
Email: Phone:
38
Form C
EXCEPTIONS TO PROPOSAL,TERMS, CONDITIONS ��;:��,���
AND SOLUTIONS REQUEST �'''
r,;�JPA.1+
�,,......_.�_..--; �
��*•*��
:_.�_�
Company Name:
Note: Original must be signed and inserted in the inside front cover pouch.
Any exceptions to the Terms, Conditions, Specifications, or Proposal Forms contained herein shall be noted in writing
and included with the proposal submittal. Proposer acknowledges that the exceptions listed may or may not be accepted
by NJPA and may or may not be included in the final contract. NJPA may clarify exceptions listed here and document
the results of those clarifications in the appropriate section below.
Term, Condition, or NJPA
Section/ a e S ecification Exce tion ACCEPTS
Proposer's Signature: Date:
NJPA's clarification on exception/s listed above:
39
Contract Award
RFP 082114#
FORM D ~'`
�
;�•..�* �
���;,
I;�;�JPA�;°+
Formal Offering of Proposal '"'��'�°�"'"�""'
\.�t%�
(To be completed Only by Proposer) �-���
1NDOOR-OUTDOOR ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES,
INSTALLATION AND SERVICES
In compliance with the Request for Proposal (RFP) for INDOOR-0UTDOOR ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH
RELATED EQUIPMENT PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES, INSTALLATION AND SERVICES the undersigned warrants that
Uwe have examined this RFP and, being familiar with all of the instructions, terms and conditions, general specifications,
expectations,technical specifications, service expectations and any special terms,do hereby propose,fully commit and agree
to furnish the defined equipment/products and related services in full compliance with all terms, conditions of this RFP,
any applicable amendments of this RFP, and all Proposer's Response documentation. Proposer further understands they
accept the fu11 responsibility as the sole source of responsibility of the proposed response herein and that the performance
of any sub-contractors employed by the Proposer in fulfillment of this proposal is the sole responsibility of the Proposer.
Company Name: Date:
Company Address:
City: State: Zip:
Contact Person: Title:
Authorized Signature (ink only):
(Name printed or typed)
40
Form E g��J���ryT
�
���� � ��A■ �'�
x 4�4f�l 1 � i
` ,�fk�.T.u� x c
�L��...1.1 i.ui �
Y� lf �R hs
.�a
nl1'/N d��
Contract Acceptance and Award
(To be completed only by NJPA)
NJPA 082114#
Proposer's full legal name
Your proposal is hereby accepted and awarded. As an awarded Proposer, you are now bound to provide the defined
product/equipment and services contained in your proposal offering according to all terms, conditions, and pricing set forth
in this RFP, any amendments to this RFP,your Response, and any exceptions accepted or rejected by NJPA on Form C.
The effective start date of the Contract will be , 20 and continue for four years
from the board award date. This contract has the consideration of a fifth year renewal option at the discretion of NJPA.
National Joint Powers Alliance0 (NJPA)
NJPA Authorized signature:
NJPA Executive Director (Name printed or typed)
Awarded this day of , 20 NJPA Contract Number 082114 #
NJPA Authorized signature:
NJPA Board Member (Name printed or typed)
Executed this day of , 20 NJPA Contract Number 082114#
Proposer hereby accepts contract award including all accepted exceptions and NJPA clarifications identified on FORM C.
Vendor Name
Vendor Authorized signature:
(Name printed or typed)
Title:
Executed this day of ,20 NJPA Contract Number 082114#
41
Form F /i;`�;;��
�z
PROPOSER ASSURANCE OF COMPLIANCE ;;�;;�JpA.�;;s�'�
,,......._.�......,.,�,
��*"��/
�-_-::�
Proposal Affidavit Signature Page
PROPOSER'S AFFIDAVIT
The undersigned, representing the persons, firms and corparations joining in the submission of the foregoing proposal
(such persons, firms and corporations hereinafter being referred to as the "Proposer"), being duly sworn on his/her oath,
states to the best of his/her belief and knowledge:
L The undersigned certifies the Proposer is submitting their proposal under their true and correct name,the Proposer
has been properly originated and legally exists in good standing in its state of residence, that the Proposer
possesses, ar will possess prior to the delivery of any equipment/products and related services, all applicable
licenses necessary for such delivery to NJPA members agencies nationally, and that they are authorized to act on
behalf of, and encumber the"Proposer" in this Contract; and
2. To the best of my knowledge, no Proposer or Potential Proposer, nor any person duly representing the same,has
directly or indirectly entered into any agreement or arrangement with any other Proposers, Potential Proposers,
any official or employee of the NJPA, or any person, firm or corporation under contract with the NJPA in an
effort to influence either the offering or non-offering of certain prices,terms, and conditions relating to this RFP
which tends to, or does, lessen or destroy free competition of the Contract sought for by this RFP; and
3. The Proposer or any person on his/her behalf,has not agreed, connived or colluded to produce a deceptive show
of competition in the manner of the proposal or award of the referenced contract; and
4. Neither the Proposer nor any officer, director, partner, member or associate of the Proposer, nor any of its
employees directly involved in obtaining contracts with the NJPA or any subdivision of the NJPA, has been
convicted of false pretenses,attempted false pretenses or conspiracy to commit false pretenses,bribery,attempted
bribery or conspiracy to bribe under the laws of any state or federal government for acts or omissions after January
1, 1985; and
5. The Proposer has examined and understands the terms, conditions, scope, contract opportunity, specifications
request and other documents of this solicitation and that any and all exceptions have been noted in writing and
have been included with the proposal submittal; and
6. If awarded a contract, the Proposer will provide the equipment/products and/or services to qualifying members
of the NJPA in accordance with the terms, conditions, scope of this RFP, Proposer offered specifications and
other documents of this solicitation; and
7. The undersigned, being familiar with and understand the expectations requested and outlined in this RFP under
consideration, hereby proposes to deliver through valid requests, Purchase Orders or other acceptable forms
ordering and procurement by NJPA Members. Unless otherwise indicated, requested and agreed to on a valid
purchase arder per this RFP, only new, unused and first quality equipment/products and related services are to
be transacted with NJPA Members relating to an awarded contract; and
8. The Proposer has carefully checked the accuracy of all proposed products/equipment and related services and
listed total price per unit of purchase in this proposal to include shipping and delivery considerations. In addition,
the Proposer accepts all general terms and conditions of this RFP, including all responsibilities of commitment
as outlined and proposed; and
42
9. In submitting this proposal,it is understood that the right is reserved by the NJPA to reject any or all proposals and
it is agreed by all parties that this proposal may not be withdrawn during a period of 90 days from the date proposals
were opened regarding this RFP; and
10. The Proposer certifies that in performing this Contract they will comply with all applicable provisions of the
federal, state, and local laws, regulations, rules, and orders; and
11. The Proposer understands that submitted proposals which are marked"confidential"in their entirety, or those in
which a significant portion of the submitted proposal is marked "nonpublic" will not be accepted by NJPA.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statute §13.37 only specific parts of the proposal may be labeled a "trade secret." All
proposals are nonpublic until the contract is awarded; at which time, both successful and unsuccessful vendors'
proposals become public information.
12. The Proposer understands and agrees that NJPA will not be responsible for any information contained within the
proposal.
13. By signing below, the Proposer understands it is his or her responsibility as the Vendor to act in protection of
labeled information and agree to defend and indemnify NJPA for honoring such designation. Proposer duly
realizes failure to so act will constitute a complete waiver and all submitted information will become public
information; additionally failure to label any information that is released by NJPA shall constitute a complete
waiver of any and all claims for damages caused by the release of the information.
[The rest of this page has been left intentionally blank. Signature page below]
43
By signing below, Proposer is acknowledging that he or she has read, understands and agrees to comply with the terms
and conditions specified above.
Company Name:
Contact Person for Questions:
(Must e m ivi ua w o is responsi e or i ing out t is Proposer's Response orm)
Address:
City/State/Zip:
Telephone Number: Fax Number:
E-mail Address:
Authorized Signature:
Authorized Name(ryped):
Title:
Date:
Notarized
Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 20
Notary Public in and for the County of State of
My commission expires:
Signature:
44
Form G /�`*�"��
,�'JPL��
',�,�.., *., i...,:�,'
OVERALL EVALUATION AND CRITERIA �`��*-µ�
For the Proposed Subject INDOOR-OUTDOOR ATHLETIC SURFACING WITH RELATED EQUIPMENT
PRODUCTS, SUPPLIES, INSTALLATION AND SERVICES
Conformance to Terms & Conditions 50
Financial, Industry Requirements & Marketplace 75
Success
Proposer's Ability to Sell and Deliver Service 100
Nationwide
Proposer's Marketing Plan 50
Value Added Attributes 75
Warranty 50
Equipment/Products and Related Services 200
Pricing 400
TOTAL POINTS 1000
Reviewed by: Its
Its
45
_�
���.{::*�
�;�,
Form P �•�:���'JPA'`"
`�;:�................�'f 7
���.*.�
._.;�°�
PROPOSER QUESTIONNAIRE
Payment Terms,Warranty, Products/Equipment/Services,Pricing and Delivery,Industry Specific
Proposer Name:
Questionnaire completed by:
Payment Terms and Financing Options
1) Identify your payment terms if applicable. (Net 30, etc.)
2) Identify any applicable leasing or other financing options as defined herein.
3) Briefly describe your proposed order process for this proposal and contract award. (Note: arder process may be
modified or refined during an NJPA member's final Contract phase process).
a. Please specify if you will be including your dealer network in this proposal.If so,please specify how involved
they will be. (Far example, will he Dealer accept the P.O.?), and how are we to verify the specific dealer is
part of your network?
4) Do you accept the P-card procurement and payment process?
Warrantv
5) Describe, in detail, your Manufacture Warranty Program including conditions and requirements to qualify, claims
procedure, and overall structure.
6) Do a11 warranties cover all products/equipment parts and labor?
7) Do warranties impose usage limit restrictions?
8) Do warranties cover the expense of technicians travel time and mileage to perform warranty repairs?
9) Please list any other limitations or circumstances that would not be covered under your warranty.
10) Please list any geographic regions of the United States for which you cannot provide a certified technician to perform
warranty repairs. How will NJPA Members in these regions be provided service for warranty repair?
Equipment/Product/Services,Pricing, and Delivery
11) Provide a general narrative description of the equipment/products and related services you are offering in your
proposal.
12) Provide a general narrative description of your pricing model identifying how the model works (line item and/or
published catalog percentage discount).
13) Please quantify the discount range presented in this response pricing as a percentage discount from MSRP/published
list.
14) Provide an overall proposed statement of inethod of pricing for individual line items, percentage discount off
published product/equipment catalogs and/or category pricing percentage discount with regard to all
equipment/products and related services and being proposed. Provide a SKU number for each item being proposed.
15) Propose a strategy,process,and specific method of facilitating"Sourced EquipmentlProducts and/or related Services"
(AKA, "Open Market"items or"Non-Standard Options").
16) Describe your NJPA customer volume rebate programs, as applicable.
17) Identify any Total Cost of Acquisition (as defined herein) cost(s) which is NOT included "Pricing" submitted with
your proposal response. Identify to whom these charges are payable to and their relationship to Proposer.
18) If freight,delivery or shipping is an additional cost to the NJPA member,describe in detail the complete shipping and
delivery program.
46
19) As an important part of the evaluation of your offer, indicate the level of pricing you are offering.
Prices offered in this proposal are:
a. Pricing is the same as typically offered to an individual municipality, Higher Ed or school
district.
b.Pricing is the same as typically offered to GPOs, cooperative procurement organizations or
state purchasing departments.
c. Better than typically offered to GPOs, cooperative procurement organizations or state
purchasing departments.
d. Other;please describe.
20) Do you offer quantity or volume discounts?
YES NO Outline guidelines and program.
21) Describe in detail your proposed exchange and return program(s) and policy(s).
22) Specifically identify those shipping and delivery and exchange and returns programs as they relate to Alaska and
Hawaii and any related off shore delivery of contracted products/equipment and related services
23) Please describe any self-audit process/program you plan to employ to verify compliance with your anticipated contract
with NJPA.Please be as specific as possible.
Industry Specific Items
n/a
Signature: Date:
47
,;�%*�'�f�\,
''��JPA;�°I
10 PRE-SUBMISSION CHECKLIST �.\,;t�
°�- -
Electronic Copy
Check when Hard Copy Required Required-CD or
Completed Contents of Your Bid Proposal Signed and Dated Flash Drive
Form A: Proposer Questionnaire with all
questions answered completely X- signature page only X
Form B: Proposer Information X
Form C: Exceptions to Proposal,Terms,
Conditions, and Solutions Request X X
Form D: Formal Offering of Proposal X X
Form E. Contract Acceptance and Award X
Form F: Proposers Assurance of Compliance X X
Form P: Proposer Questionnaire with all
questions answered completely X-signature page only X
Certificate of Insurance with $1.5 million coverage X X
Copy of all RFP Addendums issued by NJPA X X
Pricingforall Products/Equipment/Services
within the RFP being proposed X
Entire Proposal submittal includingsigned
documents and forms. X
All forms in the Hard Copy Required Signed and
Dated should be inserted in the front of the
submitted response, unbound.
Package containing your proposal labeled and
sealed with the following language:
"Competitive Proposal Enclosed, Hold for Public
Ope n i ng XX-XX-XXXX"
Response Package mailed and delivered priorto
deadline to:
NJPA, 20212th St NE, Staples, MN 56479
48
.' �1�•'
��,�.b]PA `�
._
NJPA VENDOR PRICE AND PRODUCT CHANGE REQUEST FORM
Section 1. Instructions For Vendor
Pursuant to section 4 of the NJPA RFP,requests for equipment/products or service changes, additions or deletions wi11 be
allowed at any time throughout the awarded contract term. All requests must be made in written format by completing
sections 2, 3 and 4 of the NJPA Price and Product Change Request Form and signature of an authorized Vendor employee
in section 5. All changes are subject to review and approval by the NJPA Contracts & Compliance Manager, signed in
acceptance by the NJPA Executive Director and acknowledged by the NJPA Contract Council. Submit request via email
to your Contract Manager AND: PandP@njpacoop.org.
NJPA's due diligence in analyzing any request for change is to determine if approval of the request is: 1) within the scope
of the original RFP and 2) in the `Best Interests of NJPA and NJPA Members." A signed Price and Product Change form
will be returned to vendor contact via email.
Vendor must complete this change request form and individually list or attach all items or services subject to change,provide
sufficiently detailed explanation and documentation for the change,and include a compete restatement of pricing document
in appropriate format (preferably Excel). The pricing document must identify all equipment/products and services being
offered and must conform to the following NJPA product/price change naming convention: (Vendor Name)(NJPA Contract
#) (effective pricing date); for example, "COMPANY 012411-CPY eff 02-12-2013."
NOTE.• New pricing restatement must include all equipment/products and services offered regardless of whether
their prices have changed and include a new "effective date" on the pricing documents. This requirement reduces
confusion by providing a single, current pricing sheet for each vendor and creates a historical record of pricing.
ADDITIONS. New equipment/products and related services may be added to a contract if such additions are within the
scope of the RFP.
DELETIONS. New equipment/products and related services may be deleted from a contract if an item or service is no
longer available and thus not relevant to the contract; for example, discontinued, improved, etc.
PRICE CHANGES: Request prices changes in general terms along with the justification by product category for the change;
for example, a 3% increase in XYZ Product Line is due to a 3% increase in petroleum, or this list of SKUs/ product
descriptions is increasing X% due to X% increase in cost of raw materials.
Price decreases: NJPA expects Vendors to propose their very best prices and anticipates price reductions are due
to advancement of technologies and market place efficiencies.
Price increases: Typical acceptable increase requests include increases to Vendor input costs such as petroleum or
other applicable commodities, increases in product utility of new compared to old equipment/products or service,
etc. Vendor must include reasonable documentation for the claims cited in their request along with detailed
justification for why the increase is needed. Special details for price changes must be included with the request
along with both current and proposed pricing. Appropriate documentation should be attached to this form,including
letters from suppliers announcing price increases.
Refer to section 4 of the RFP for complete"Pricing"details.
Section 2.Vendor Name and Type of Change Request
CHECK ALL CHANGES THAT APPLY.•
AWARDED ❑ Adding Equipment/ Products
VENDOR NAME: /Services
❑ Deleting/Discontinuing
Equipment/Products/Services
❑ Price Increase
NJPA ❑ Price Decrease
CONTRACT
NUMBER:
49
.' �1�•'
��,�.b]PA `�
._
NJPA VENDOR PRICE AND PRODUCT CHANGE REQUEST FORM
Section 3. Detailed Explanation of Need for Changes
List equipment/products and/or services that are changing, being added or deleted from previous contract price list along
with the percentage change for each item or category. (Attach a separate, detailed document if more than 10 items.)
Provide a general statement and documentation explaining the reasons for these price and/or equipment/product/service
changes.
SAMPLES: 1-All paper equipment/products and services increased 5% in price due to transportation and fuel costs (see
attached docu�nentation of raw materials increase). 2-The 6400 series floor polisher is added to the product list as a new
model replacing the 5400 series. The 6400 series 3%increase reflects technological improvements made that improve the
rate of e�ciency and useful life. The 5400 series is now included in the "Hot List"at a 20%discountfi^om previous pricing
until remainin invento is li uidated.
If addin e ui ment/ roducts/services, rovide a eneral statement how these are in the sco e.
If changing prices and/ar adding equipment/products/services,provide a general statement that the pricing is consistent with
existin NJPA contract ricin .
50
.' �1�•'
��,�.b]PA `�
._
NJPA VENDOR PRICE AND PRODUCT CHANGE REQUEST FORM
Section 4. Complete Restatement of Pricing Submitted
A COMPLETE restatement of the pricing including all new and existing equipment/products and services is attached and/or
has been emailed to PandP@njpacoop.org.
❑ Yes ❑ No
Section 5. Signatures
Vendor Authorized Signature Date
Print Name and Title of Authorized Signer
NJPA Executive Director Signature Date
51
_ __ . . ._ . .. . . __ . _ i
FnrEi� G I
EXCEP'TiOV5 TO PRQ]'DSAT, '1'CItMS,C01�3T'�O\5 �;.�
AIY�SOLiiTIONS REO[F�:S'1'
4 ..._._.�.z
�•�,,'
Contpnny Namc:FIELDTURF[lSA,INC.
�'otc:nrf�f���l int�sS be si�ned pt�cl iikserted in the inside frant eovcr poiicl�. I
Any exceptio�s to the Tem�s,Conditions,Specifscations.or Proposal Torrns conlained ijcreiu shall6e notecl u�writiug '
ai�d includcd�viili the pmposa�submitt��l. Praposer acknowied�es tl�at the e�ceptions listed may or may not be�ccept�cl �
by NJPA�nd may pr may not be inciuded in tl�e fina!contract. N3PA niay clarify c�ceptions lisrec�here and dacunzcnt
t4ie resuits aPthose cl:�rificattions in tho�ppropriate sectiou bclu�v. �
� Term,Condiiinn,or ���'� i
Scctianlp�c S cification Exce tion ������f5.
, . ,
{
I
E
�
�
�, ,
. Ij
I
i
----- 'i �
Proposei's 5ignaturc: Daic: C�S� I��� ��'�!�� +
�
� _
�
i
���� �
� ;tia� �
� Date i. I
. I
f
CU�ri�-:ict A�4�iird
R�F 032i�.i#
FORiIi 13 -==�-
r.,�•'.-,
"�JP�1��;
Fm•n��l nffcrin�af!'roposs�l � �...,-�
("fn 1,e con}�aletecl O�ily by Prnpaser) -
I�IDOOR-OUTE]OOR ATIILE`['IC SURI�AC[NC; 1NITH RCLA�'�'D CQUlP1�iEN'1' PRODUCTS, SUhPL1ES,
INSTAII[.A'I'!ON AND SERVICES
li� can�p�iance ��-itl� tlzc [icqucst ii�r f'rnp«s�l (1�f'f'} tcar 1udOOlt-OU"T'�OOIi A�i�I ILETEC SU�t�AC1NG �Vl l f-i
ftf;I,AT�'D I:QIJfP�1T'.�1T PRn17lJC.'1'4, SfiPf�f.lf'fi, l�ISTt11.f.ATIC�N AN� SERVIC�S the u�i�ersigiicd ��r��rranls llit��
Un�e I}ave es7��tined dtii� Ri�P aitd, bciii�, faittili�r ��°ith all oS the i�ist�•uctions, terntis and co�tdiiions, gejieraE speciticatic��ts,
C\�t'ClilfID115,tech��ic�1 specilica�ions,scrvice ctipecta�ions���d�tny speci�il terms,do iiereE�y propo5e,iully cont�nit anri:i;;ree
to fiiriiisli tlle det7iEed ecguip�i►enUpro�uct� anc� r�l:�teei service� iii full compliance �viih a!I tern�s, eo��ditio�75 ot tE1i5 IZ��P,
any ap�iiclUle amei3dments of this ItFP, an�i all I'ro���s�er's Re�punse d�cume����.►lion. P�'a��ose�' till'l�l�l' llI1dCPstacids they
accept tl�e Siill respoitsibilily as ihe sole source of resE�onsibility oi tlte��roposed rzsponse k�ereitt and th�lt tft� perf'ormatt�c �
of��ny sub-coniractors em�iln}'�d hy the Prt►Einser iti fulfillment nt ihi� pro�j��sal i5 Ehe wle respo�isibility of th� PropuSer.
Company Naine: FIELDTURF USA INC. Uat�:
c�mpany ncld��ess: 7445 COTE-DE-LIESSE, SUI7� 200 . __.._
Cit}'; MONTREAL. State: QU�BEC 7,ip: H4T 1 G2
Contact P�rso��: ERIC FISHER Titic: DIR�CT�R OF SAL�S,.$M,ARTBUY
���thori�eci Signat�tr+:(iitk o��iy}; DARREN GILL I
(,N�nte pri��tcd or tyE3ed)
i
�
I
40 I
i
�
r��rE„r r��'�,
��� � ����
;i�JPA�'
�`�,*�f:!�
��.....i
[.'anlr:icl Accrpi7nce nnd,1u;ird
('I'o bc rnmpleted anly by N.1i'A)
�iJP,1i1v?li•1!! � rif�; .��titk�((GyY��f?'fti?L.`i�.Y�li��141��[�-t.�(l�d��f�t�° �UL�IICfS�
S�E���IeS, i�l�+� Lct���—��r��c.�S
�I�l���r� ���-�' --
Prapaser's full iegol i�anic
Yuur pin}>usaE is lscRby� accepted and a+va�dc3. As as���varded E'roposer,y�au nre now Dound to provide ti�e�lefine�l
prod�ictlequipmenl and services con�ainec[in your pro�sosat oftering according t�a!I Icrnis,rnndiliens,and prici�ig sal foAl�
in�liis RF[',any a��ic�i�lmc3�ts lu di�s RFP,yow R�:,pansc,u��d ai�y csccptian;acctpted or rcjcctcd Uy NJ�'A an Fo�m C.
Thc c€fec�i�•e s�art date of�he Caniract�vill be �'ti 4v���-��.3p__]_�.and canlinu�fvr four y���-s
Prunj�he board award date. This conuati Isas t[ie cor� i�l�1�of a�flil year r�fietval opdo3i at llie�iscrctin�!nf,lJPr1.
Y�lio�i:al Jaiut Puivcrs Alli:iucc ,( J��1)
NJPr1 AuclEoriz��!aiesiatuEc: -- __ �{� . L�� C�.(�.l,�C,l�1,..- —
NlP.1[:xcci�tive Uircctor (Namc�riEilcd ar ly�td)
rin��rd�c!Il�is �c[ay of c�L: �J ��(� '�0 ��:1 N.IPA Conlr�ct\nn�ttcr 1192i 1•I#�-'rU
NJF',1 As�lhorizcc!si;;nature: ��.��� ��J��:� �
4 DI1PA Suaril�,ie�Edaer (Name prinsed ar t}'ped)
i:secuted this�d:i}uf � � .26�_ NJP��CmilrscE�'umUcr D�i2t ld?i�='i b(
Pro�iostr hzre6�•accepts caotr<�et a�sard ind¢dinb all accepteel excepf'suns xsuk�flPrl clarificaliunx i�lcutiGed u�a['DR41 C.
�'cndor\�nic TfcldTurf US�.[nc.
r
Ve��doe rluillorired sion:�ti��e: I)arrrn tiitl
��'amc 1�ri�11cd or LYik'�)
Ytllt: y�}-Cl`Ii�iZI iI�I11'jCe[itln�Ir,��L�uc�,�d�tsl�nex..�er�ic�
L�c�tdcdlhis ISIh �Iflyof� m�cr _ ,2014 __1�JP�LCo�ih-:�ct�Iumhcr08?1ld,'P��
�E I
I
Form F -�`�`
•,. +.s 7�Jl'
PROPOS�R �iSSURANCE OF CONIPLIA\TCE ��� '"
�,,�?fi3I'�:,,�
.,�.;; i
Pr•aposai Affidavit Siguatu�•e Page
PROPOSER'S AFFIDAVIT
TI�� unde��si�ned, represencin� tl�e persons, firms and corporations joining in the s��ii��ission of lEie fore�oin� proposal
(such pec�sons,firms a��c!coE•}��rations l�er����aRer being rzierred to as€iie"Pcoposer"), t�}ein�dtily s�ti�orn on l�is/l�er oatfi,
sEares to the best of hisllier belief aiid]cno�vled¢e:
1. Tlie undersigncd certitEe�the Proposer is submitting their�roposal uEider tlie�r true and correc[��an�e,t�e Proposer
has k�een p��o�e►�ly oi�ginated a�id legally elisis in good standin� in its state of residence, that the P�•oposer
possessas, or will possess prior to tl�e delivery of a�1y eyuipEnentlproduets and related services, all applicable
licenses necessary fo�'stEch delivery to�1JPA ntembers agzncies nationally,and tl�at tli�y are auth�rized to act or►
bekialf af,1nd encusnber tltie"Aropaser"irt this Contract;and
2. To tiiz best of tt�y kuowl�d�e,i]p Pz'opose�'nr Potential Proposer,nor�y persan duly representing ihe sarne, has
d�rectly ar ii�directly e�tt���ed into any agree�ie��t or an�antrement wiih any other Proposers, PoCe�itial Praposers,
any of�icial or e�pfoyze of tlie NJPA, o�• an}s per�an, l�rm �r carporatian under contracE rt�ith tlle NJPA iu An
effo�-t to influei�c�eitizer tl�e off�ris���7r non-afFering of ce►-tai�i prices,t�rms, aud conditions r�latitig to d�is RI'P
which te���s to,or daes,Lessen ar c#zst�-oy trze ca�:ipetitiun of the Contract sou�hht for t�y tltis i�Fi�; and
3. T�ie Proposer or a��y person on hislher beE�alf;l�as nat ae,��eed,coni�iyed ar calluded to produce a deceptive show
o��ompetitioi� in the m�uler of tl�e proposal or a�yard of the refereneed cont��act;a�id
4, Neitl�er i�ie Pro�osec ❑or any officer, directoi•, par#ner. nieniber or associate of the Prapaser, nor aizy of its
ernployees du�ectly involved in obtaiivng cont�acts with tL�e I�TJPA u3� a�iy subdivision of the NJPA, l�as been
canvictzd of false pretenses,attempt�d false prztenses or conspiracy to coiumit fals�pretenses,bri6e��,atteuipted
briUery oi•carispiracy to bribe under the laws of a�zy state or federal gover►�nent t��r acLs ar omissio��s aftzr January
I, ]955;and
5. '1'lie Proposer has examined and understands tl�e temis, c���dirions, sco�e, contract opporti�niry, specifications
reGuest a�id ather clocu�nents of this solicitation and that any and aI1 exceptions have be�n��oted in writing and
have�ee��i��clucled tivirh tl�a pro��osal sub�tiittal;and
6. If a�varded a cositract, tl�e Pi•opo�zr�vilf pr�vidc tllc equipmc��t/products a�ldlor services to c�aalifying tne��lbers
of tf�e NJPA in acco�•dance �vitli the terms, condicions, scnpe of tfus KFP, Pro�aser offci•ed specificatians and
other documznt� of ihis solicitation;and ',
7. The undersianed,be�ng fa�niliar with a�lcl�inderstar�d the expectatio�is reqEiested��d outliued in this RFP under
consideration, hereUy proposes to deli�-er tl�ro�ah valid ►�equests, I'urcl�ase Orders or other acceptable fornis
orde;�ing and �rocurement by ��JPA 1�te�ubers. Ui�less otherwise indicated, reqaested an� ajreed to on a vafid
purcl�ase oi•dei• per this RFP, only' RZIV� t�nused and �rst qualiry equipment,'�r�oducts and related services are to
be h�ansacted with N7PA Met�6ers r�lati�ig to an a�vardeci co�itract; a��c�
8. �hz P�•oposer has carefitlly checked tlje accG�racy of all praposed �E�oducts/e��ui�n�ent and rzlated ser�ices a�id
listed total price per unit of�jurclfase in tflis propnsal to include shipping and de�ive�}�cons�deratioi�s. In addition,
the Proposer accepts all ge��eral terms and conditions of t��is R�P, iifcluding all responsibilities of comniitnient
as outlined aiid prnposed;a�id
�#?
9. Ii�submi�Iing this proposal,it is understood that tEie ri�l�t is reseived E�y tl�e NJPA Eo reject any o��all p��aposals and
'sL is agreed by al[pa�-ties tl7at tE�s pro�osal may nnt b�witlici,�an�n cluring a periucl of 40 daVs fs�u�u the date proposais
were ope3zed regarding tk�is RFP;and
10. `i'13e Pi�o��o�e�• certifies that in performing t�is Coniract they will co�npiy wirl� all applicaUle provisions of the
federal,state,and local la��°s,re��lations,rules;a�1d ordei•�;and
1 l. The Propo�z��ucl;lei�stands that submitted p:-upo�als wtucli are Tnarked"c�i7fide��tia�" in t�ieir entirety, ar those in
4�luch a si�nifcant po�tion of t�ze subtnit[zd proposal is marke�l "nunpul�lic" �17�I 110t I�C 1CCC[Jt2(� �y i`�JPA.
P�srsu�it to Miiuiesota Statute �13.37 only specific parts of the proposal may be lat�eled a `•trade secret." All
proposals a�•e t�onpublic until tlze contract is awarded; at which time, both successful and unsuccessfuE vendors'
proposals becowe public informatio�i.
1?. The Praposer understands and agrees thatNJPA �vill not bc responsible for any infoi7nation cQnt�ined cvitilin the
proposal.
13. By signing belo�v, the Propose�-undeistands it is klis ar her resp«nsi6ility as the Vendor ta act in protacc'son of
laheled ir�fonnation and ag�•ee to defend a��d iilde�nnif5� NJPA f�r honoring such desi�nation. Proposer duly
realizes failtua to so act will constitute a carnplete waiver and all suUmitted information will become public
information; additionally failtn•e to laUel any infonnatioi� that is released b_y N3PA sUall constinrte a coniplete
wai�er of any and all cEaiius for dama�es caused by the release of tl�e iuformation.
�The i�est of tt�is page l�as been left in�entional�}�blanl:. Si�ature page belo�v]
�3
By si�nin� Uelaw, Pro}�oser is acknowledging tliaf ite or�he ll�, cead, undzcstauds aud aerees to con�p{y «3ith th�terr�is
and conditions specified above.
Company Name: FIE�DTURF USA, INC.
Contact Person fur Questions: ERfC �ISH�R
(MusT be ind�vi ual�vlia is respons� le Ior tt ling out t us roposec s espoi�se fot-ni}
Address: 7445 COTE-DE-LIESSE, SUITE 20
CiryiStatelZip: MONTREAL, QUE��C CANADA H4T 1G2
Telephone Nun�ber: 'i-$8$-209-0�65 ext.246 Fa.�Nw��ber: - -
E-mail Addr�ss: ERIC.FiSHER@FIEL RF.COM
Atit3lorized Sigr�a�ura: �
�
5
Autliorized Name{t��ped): DARREN G1LL
�1���: Vice-Preside�t - Marketing, Inr�ovatior�, Customer Service
Date:
Noirarized
Subscri6ed and swoi�n fa bztore n�e this � � cfay of AL�GUST .�0 14
Natary PuUlic in a�id for the Cow�t�T of MONTREAL State af QUEB�C
My conlmission expsres: �� �-t'� � � �E>l+'�'
�� � � �.
/. �
�'1�Tliilllfe: �` ����-�C-r� - - -
/C�,�f
1
��
.'�����.��.
FOI'IIl � '. ���f�
r.
PROPOSER QC�ESTIO\TNAIRE
Payment Terms,Warranty, Produ�tslEquipmentlSer��ices, Pricing and Delivery,Industry Speci�ic
Proposer Name: FieldTurf USA,Inc. Questionilaire completed by: Erie J. Fisher-Director of Sales SmartBuy
Payment Ter�ns and Financing Optior�s
1) Identify your payment tenns if applicable. (Net 30,etc.)
Belo��� is typical paynteiit sclteciule altltiough �ve are open to adjustiuents on a case-by-case basis.
PRICE
The purchase price for tl�e Praduct fully installed shall be [write out dollar amount here] $YXX
{the"Purchase Price") plus any other ap�licable taxes and/or any bonc�ing costs. The Price is
subject to increase if affected by a tax increase,ne�v taxes, levies or any new legally binding
imposition affecting the transactio�i.
The Purchase Price slfall be payable to Supplier by way of�vire tra�isfer ar banker's check in
accardance with the follo�ving pay�nent schedule:
i) Thirty �ve�ercent(35%)of the Purchase Price due upon Customer's execution of
tliis Agreement;
ii) Thirty flve pereent{3w%) of the Purchase Price o�i deliveiy and recei�t of tlfe
componet�ts af the Product to the Site;
iii)Twenty pereent(20%)of the Purchase Price upo�z campletion qf the work;
iv) [temaining balance ten percent(10%}upon the sigEiing of tlfe Certificate of
Cotnpletion.
Supplier will issue an invoice to Customer upon the occurrence of each af the events listed abo�e,
and paytnent of each invoice is due�vithin 14 days following the cfate to the applicable invoice.
Any unpaicl balance bears iuteE-est at a rate of ten percent (lp%) pe��year.
2) ldentify any applicable leasing or other financing aptions as defined herein.
�G'e t�ave]easing and Fi�tancing optio►is for any type of}�rqject re�ardless of bu�get and t'st��efi-ame. Please see �ornt P #2
attached"Financing�ptio��s"l��nclaut.
3} Briefly describe your proposed order process for t�iis propasal and contraet award. (Note: order process may be
modified or refi�fed during an NJPA member's fina] Contract phase process),
l. Client/o�vnerl o�vner's representative m�3ces contact ��ith FieldTurFor Beynon Sports.
2. 1�ieldTwf or Beynoii Sports RepresentaEive{or authorized represenEative) sets up a site visit.
3. A FieldTurfl Beynon Sports/ NJPA proposal is produced for review �y the client/ o�vnerl
ou�ner's representative.
4. Propasa] is reviewed and if changes or additions are needed, they are co�npleted.
5. 4nce approved the clientl owner/owner's representative sends FietdTurf a g.0.
6. A sales ab eement, AIA contract or similar fonn of agreement is entered into.
7. Constniction begins with pro��ress payments throughaut.
8. Caitstructio�� is st�bstantially complete and 100%0 of the contract price {includiiig any
relcnliou) is acquired.
9. NIPf1 is re»�ittecl their l5-2%, fee far the E�roject.
io. Pro�z�c E,����,�d.
a. Flease specify if you wi�l be iEicluding your dealer net�vork in this proposal. If so, please specify how
invalved they ��ill be. (For example, will he Dealer accept the P.4.'?), and how ar� «�e to ��erify the specific
dealer is part of your nerivork?
Our dealer net��orl: «iE] �e incluiled in thc pra��u�t1l as an e.�t�nsion of ou�•sale, Sorce �fncl installaticm ❑et«�ork. [�hey
wi�l not deal directiy�vith N.�PA and ���i11 not be per►nitted to acccpt tl��P.O. nor handle any af the papenvark. That is
the duty of the liighly trained, proven and dedicated SmartBuy and contracts team. Over the past ten years, tllis has
pro��en to yield positive results for FieldTuE-f, Beynon,NJPA, our dzaler»ehvorE:and our clients.
4) Do you accept the P-card procurement and payment process?
Due co tiie nature of our business, P-cai•ds are not applicable. Standard progress payments or other e�uivalent fonns
of payii�ent�viil�e used.
Warrantv
5) Describe, in detail, your Manufacture Warranty Program including conditions and requirements to qualify, claims
procedure,and averall structure.
5ee attaclied�=ai-�n P#� ��arranties.
6} Do all warranties cover all productsleyuipment parts and labor?
Our$ yeaE-3`� �arry insured nlanufacturer's ��'arra�tty co��ers al] Tu�•f cou�po�te��ts �� Instailation. Maintei�aFice Equi;»a�ent
and site�vos�k is coverect t'or 1 �ear.
7) Do warranties iinpose usage limit restrictions?
Usage restnctions are li�nited to 3,040 per year, roughly S hours per day. Baseball/Softball Higl� Traf�c areas (Home
Plate, Pitcher's Mound, Base Areas an� Base paths) are generally covered for 2 years. The rest of the feld is 8 years.
Fields under 30,OO�sq.' are S years.
Ho�t�e��er, on a case-by-case basis, there may bu t�djti:t�ttents niade ta�varrautie� in �p�cir�l circ�im,ta�tc��.
8} Do warranties cover the expense of technicians travel tiuie and u�ileage ta perfonn�van-anty repairs?
Uependin«on the issue the expense of€echnici�ns �ra�el tisi�e a�id�nileage are typically included.
9) P]ease list any ather limitations or circumstances that would not be covered under your�varranty.
See Slmple Wan•anties attaciied�onn P#� «�`arranties. }
]0) Please list any geographic regions of tl�e United States for which you cannot provide a certifed technician ta perfonn
wairanty repairs. Ho�v will NJPA Members in tlfese regions be provided service for warranty repair?
Not applicable. Any«-here ���e can install a tield or track,�ve can and�vill perfonn �vairanty repairs.
l
E�C uinment/ProductlServices.Pricing,and Deli�ery
11} Provide a general ��arrative d�scriptio�i of the equipment/products and related services you are offering in your
proposal.
1- Iildoori Outcioor s��nthctic lurf sup��ly and installation.
�- IIiCI001'!Ol1CijOQ]'[Zl[llilllt�',lCc1CIC Sllil�l]y al]({ 3RSCallation.
3- [nclaorl Outdoor tennis coua��sport court/synthetic floori��g supply and installation.
4- Related site work greparation (on a per projecl basis) including hut not limited to: aspl�alt, concrete, curbing,
football and track ec}t�ipment, drainage, sto�ie, grading, HDPE piping, demolitian, reitioval/ disposal services,
in�i;�ation, suh��ade prep., consh�ction rr►anaQement, project management, Eayout, sun�ey work, StiVPP, millin�,
capping, turf/track pratection,;eotextile fabnc etc. 4
5- Professio��1 Services fF�i�.�ineerin�, project man�4�e�neeit, canst�vctio:t mana��ement etc.}
12- Provide a ge�leral nan�at�ve description of your pricing moc�e] identifying ho�v t13e model works (line ite�n and/or
published catalag percentage discount).
Line itein pIus�-piutne discount� ���here a}���ic�ble. Ple�se see pricing spreadshezi.
13- Please quantify the discount range presented in this response pricing as a percentage discount fram
MSRPlpublisl�ed list.
9"„off A�[SRP/ I'ublic b�d marketplace.
14- C'ravide an overall proposed statement of�nethod of pricitfg for individual ]ine items, percentage discount off
published product/equipment catalogs a»d/ar category pricing percentage discount widi regar� to all
equip�nentfproducts and related services and be�ng proposed. Provide a SKU number for each tte3n being
proposed.
Please se�the attached pi•icin���cel spc•eadslieet.
15- Propose a strategy, process, and specific method of facilitating "5ourced Equipment/Products ancllor related
Services"{AKA,"Open Market"items or"Non-Standard Options"}.
If a clie�it should �v�nt a E�rociuct khat �ve have�1at priced via line item, �ve �vi41 titi ork ��itll tl��t ct�stozl7�r tt� identiF} tlie
exact iieeds and then price within cun-ent n�arket rates. 1�Ve liave ii�cluded pricin�� for > 9�`% of product/ service
options that ou�• clients want. "Che additional 5% of the market we will deal �vith on a case-by-case basis and wi11
price to mee! our client"s needs, 4Ve will use the 1CIS (petrochemical iEidex) in accordance �vitl� inclustry standards in
pricin�.
16- Descr�be your NJPA customer volume�-ebate pragrams, as applicable.
que to tlfe n�ltui-e of o��r bttsiness, rebate pE-o���ams ar� �tot �ip�3iicable. EEo���ever, on 1 c�se-by-case; basis, FieldTurf
and Beynon will off'er spe�ial pricing for bulk orders or tracl: and turf com��ii�ation projects.
17- Ic�entify any Total Cost of Acquisition {as defined herein} cost(s) which is NOT included "Pricing" submitted
with yaur propasal response. Identify to wlfatn these charges are payable to and tt7eir relatiansl�i�to Proposer.
Not applicable. Produci pricin�r is all inclusi�'e.
18- If freiaht, deliveiy or shipping is an additional cost to the NJPA meinber, describe in detail the complete shippiilg
and delivery program.
A11 product priein� is"all-in" and conlains s�tippi�i� (i�� continental US),deli��ery a��d associated inst�ll��tion costs.
19- As an in7portant part of the evaluation of your offer,indicate tl�e level of pncing you are offerin�.
I
Prices offere�i in this propasal are;
a. P��icing is tile same as rypically offered to an individiial inunicipality,Higlier Ed or school
district.
h. P��cing is the same as typically oFfered to GPOs, cooperative procurement organizations or
state purchasing departments.
c. Better than typically offeeed to CPOs,cooperative procuremecit organizations or state
purehasing departments.
X d. Other; please descnbe.
Published pricin« is consistent across all cooperntive offers but i�3clud�s a 9`;4, C�ISCOLIEIT off of ty��ical �1�[S[ZP� Bid
marketplace pricin,� for additionttl sa��i���� to NJPA customers.
20- Do you offer quantity or voluine discounts?
_X_YES NO Outline guidelines and prograin.
If a client purchases both a Beynon tlinning track and a FieldTuri ti�ld, FieldTurf/ Beynon Sports will discount the total
and in certain circu�nstattces and k�ased ott project size, may offer additional discounts.
If a client purchases �nultiple fields,runniug tracks or tennis coui�ts at once(on tl�e same P.Q.} FieldTurf will offer��olu��le
discounts that are substa�ftial but vary based on tota! size location ete.
dverall dfe nature of our business is not comnfodity base. Fixed discoei��ts are nnt offered. 4�ather, varied discounts are
and we pass on sa��intrs based on econo��lies of scale. These sa��ings can be substantial dependin� on the scope �nd total
cost of die prnject.
21- Describe in detail your proposed exchange and return pragram(s) and policy(s).
Do ta the natu►-� oF our business, exchan��es are not apE�liclble. i#�diere is an issue with a field or track �ve �viil �vork
with tkte customer to tnake sure it's resolv�d.
22- Specificai�y identify those shipping and delivery and exchange and returns programs as tlfey relate to Alaska and
Hawaii and any related off shore delivery of contracted products/ec�uipment and related services
Ple�se see attactied 20�� NJPA "1'u��f, Track and Courts pricin� spceadsheets. ,-ldditio��al sllip��int co:ts uill be
accaunted for, as needed, i�i special ar extenuating circumsta�ices. Exclfaii�� and cielivery pro��ra�ns are not
applicable.
23- Please describe any self-audit process/program you plan to employ to verify compliance with your anticipated
contract with N.TPA. Please be as specific as possible.
As part of the curr4��t Co-�p requireinents, Field"Curf keeps asici maEia�es�dmin f�e report s�readsheets and nlaintains
an ha�iest and transparent rappo�•t with the various cooperati�e pua�chasir►g agencies we are a part of. All co-op fees
are icientificd and Fie[dTurf�vill send quarterly, annually or in any format or fas[iion that NJPA requires.
Please see attachment Fonn P#2; "Co-�p Reporting Esample Template"
Industry Speci�c Items
NIA
Si�nature: Date:
cEistrict.
b. Pricing is the sa�ne as typiealfy offersd ta GT'Os, eaop�r�tive procurement organizations or
state purchasing deparnnents.
c. Better tl�an typicaliy�offered to GPOs, cooperative��rocurement organizations ar�te
}�w-ciiasing departments.
X d. Other;please descrihe.
ZO) Do yu��pfFer yuantity or�ralume discaunts?
_X_YES NO Outline guidelines and progra�u.
2l} Desc��iba in detail you�•prapc�sed excUange and return pragram(sj aud palicy(s).
2?) Specifically identify thase shipping and delivery azid exchange and returns programs as tliey reiate to A1asI:a and
Hawaii and any rclated off share delivery of contractecI products/equipinent ai�d related services
23)Pl�asa d�scribe any self=audit �arocess/program you plan to etnploy to verity compliance w�ith your anticipated
contract with NJPA. Please be as specific as possibie.
TijdusU�v�eci�ic Ttems
n/a
�-�� �5-�-- ���_� 3���(
Signature: f Date: _���- --- -
�
�
�
www.njpa[oop.org [Vational Join# Pawers AIliance1
,-�; �_ -
_,_ _ . .
P.O. 8�:. �? 19
5taples, Iv1N �5�79
�
Pricing,financials and marketing material were submitted with the respon5e and is 2�ailable upon request. Due to
the difficulty in emailing such a large file they were not induded.
As a �ublic agency, NJPA proposals, responses and awarded contracts are a matter of public record, except for
that data included in the proposals, responses and awarded cantracts that is classified as nonpublic; thus,
pursuant to N��A policies and RFP terms and condi�ions, all dacumentation, except far data which is nonpublic,
is availabfe for review through a forma! request process including a written reque5t.
�regon T41F�F IJNIT Cast ta �ustamer
FieldTuif Re�,folu#ion 3G0, l�erte� Prii77�; Cas#Sq F#
or l�erte�c �.�" � 4.SQQ3
FieldTurf Revo lutio n 3G0, l�erte� Prime; o r
l�erte� �.���� cost sq. Ft. � 4.5��3
FieldTurf Re�o lutio n 3G0, l�erte�€ Prime, o r
l�erte�€ �.0�� cost sq. Ft. � 4.34�3
FieldTurf �lassic H� (slit film���.�" Cas#Sq. Ft. � 4.50�3
FieldTurf Classic H� (slit film���.�5" Cos#Sq. Ft. � 4.5��3
FieldTurf �lassic H� (slit film���.0" Cas#Sq. Ft. � 4.34�3
FieldTurf �1�9-C���.�" Cos#Sq. F#. � 4.2�15
FieldTurf ��1-�7�.��" Cas#Sq. F#. � 4.1323
FieldTurf ��1-�0 �.0" Cas#Sq. F#. � 3.��77
FieldTurf �T-C���.�" Cos#Sq. F#. � 4.1910
FieldTurf �T-�7�.��" Cas#Sq. Ft. � 4.�5�43
FieldTurf �T-�0 �.0" Cos#Sq. F#. � 3.���5
18.4
o�c�'A � �s� COUNCIL REPORT
� � �
� �,
� � o
�REG��
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Amanda Owings, PE Traffic Engineer
Engineering Department
SUBJECT: Botticelli—Striping Update
DATE: August 25, 2017 MEETING DATE: September 5, 2017
ACTION
Provide direction to staff regarding roadway striping on Botticelli.
BACKGROUND
Botticelli is one of two roadways currently being reconstructed under Work Order 254.
Botticelli is a major collector roadway in the Mountain Park neighborhood, averaging 3,300
vehicles per day. It is posted at 25 mph, though traffic generally travels at 32 mph. The right-of-
way width is SO feet, the pavement width is 30 feet. There is a sidewalk on the south side and a
double yellow centerline stripe offset toward the north which allows on-street parking on the
south side. It is a school bus route.
Botticelli has been identified to have bike lanes in the following documents and requests:
� The project to stripe bike lanes on Botticelli was listed on the 1997 Transportation System
Plan.
� It also showed up on the 2000 Comprehensive Plan.
o It is listed as a project to be completed in 11-20 years (which is now!)
• The 2014 TSP lists a bike lane project with two options:
o #93.2, striping a bike lane on the south/east side from Melrose to Touchstone.
o #93.1, widen to allow for bike lanes on both sides of the road.
• Request for bike lanes made by individuals from Mountain Park Neighborhood Association
and Homeowner's Association at:
o Planning Commission walk through on July 10, 2016
o Planning Commission meeting on September 12, 2016
o Presentation to staff in March 2017.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.cit�
Page 2
As with any reconstruction project, staff looks to fulfill projects identified in the master plans or
recommendations that have been thoroughly vetted by neighborhoods. In this case, WO 254
construction plans includes striping a bike lane on Botticelli. Striping a bike lane would supplant
the space currently used by on-street parking due to the limited roadway width. Notifications
were sent to abutting property owners in early June, 2017 regarding the removal of parking and
installation of a bike lane.
DISCUSSION
Since early June, staff collected comments from residents, businesses, and commuters using
Botticelli. The results of the comment period are:
• 30 commenters oppose the bike lane, requesting to preserve on-street parking
• 5 commenters are in favor of a bike lane, requesting removal of on-street parking
• 2 commenters offered solutions
The Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) also received comments at their June 14t" meeting.
After a brief discussion of the project, TAB agreed that on-street parking supported a larger
number of users in the area. Staff has since learned that the request made by neighborhood
representatives were not well-vetted by residents, with no evidence of ineeting minutes or
notifications.
The residents at Twenty-Two Botticelli Condominiums provided ample comments. The parking
situation on that site consists of 22 garages with one parking space in front of each garage door.
Additionally, there are approximately 23 paved spaces available between buildings. In
summary, there are 22 condominiums with 67 parking spaces on site. It appears the majority of
opposition to the parking removal comes from this area, and that guests and residents are
parking along the street, despite the ample on-site parking options.
ALTERNATIVES
The centerline of Botticelli will be striped in its ultimate location, offset to the north side of the
street. There are three alternatives to consider:
1. Allow parking to remain on Botticelli, the same as pre-construction function. This would not
preclude the option to remove parking and adde�a striped bike lane at some future date.
2. Remove parking along the south side and install a painted bike lane for uphill travel (south
side). This eliminates all parking options on Botticelli.
3. Allow parking to remain, and add only a "sharrow" bike legend that alerts drivers to share
the uphill lane with bikes.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Page 3
FISCAL IMPACT
The cost to stripe a bike lane is already included in the construction project budget. If it is
striped at a later time, the overall current construction cost will be lower increase.
RECOMMENDATION
Provide directive to staff regarding striping on Botticelli.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Exhibit A, vicinity map and bike lane rendering.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
Page 4
EXHIBIT A
. . � ��,' �t ai1�,i i� �-�� ; � ��n, �' 'rq�.. t _...,.�aa,F�. � --' i � ?< <r
._,�^� � i 'Ra �.,.d��i r+f � lY . '"I'- � .t � � y; �' i� y _ �� 1��`�X 4 �� y .
v ri 1
r rr 1 '� ;—f i x i �3'c . � I x ���i _
L'-�.'S _ Y r ",L Y k �L � �.� I 4 ;I� �'n� Fl�.. } ( �� ,
'� Y� '� .�J �� i-6- y f 3 � - I �' 'Y� 'b - � . 7 �t�T
� L �"�.i. �..h'p`. �� ., � 1 .L ' 1� o�� b �� � �r Ss� � r� 1 ' �y� �'�I� •
� p�� i _ I _ _ �#�r .,yt� �i i, '�sx,\` � � �" '`� �-� :?-�• `�F sY�xg° i i' �.y} .
� .0 ,w�I ' �� "� M .''� 3,^.-,+ s �-. ; `� i :F1i
}4:� I --�� � ��i �.._\ ._ 5 � ,I i s �-- ,: e, ..k � �(' v'-, � .'�� ;�f .
1 ; �i Y� i �T�. x :f- � h E`°Eet � 1:. � i ..,��.����' `7� ,.�r �f�`��-i s i`,'� �`� ��'_
� � "-s , 7 ': ,� • �/ k J'k `
r . v's '� a�' 1 ,''-`-� E , _ i�, i .� � , . .� k 3-.� ��+ �. � ,.
k �.�, {r- �: 3 '� -'' `�� �.�-'�`� � . k ��� �4 l a d, at+-
+-� � ��. n '°S; rp..... `�& �, � � � 2L � `+-
t ��Y�k'�W .'''I'� e � .� 'T.�!!�P AOkENi t fY '4�I y - I i ,ry � T ��� � ��_ �� 3�'� � i.a:_
} l� y j
pz� r � p`� � -11 T I . - . • � �I-�l�'��-_��� f 4 � Y�SU dna F�r� y � ' �y�.
'-�t�vad � 1 r �:'. i f .���' x 1 . - �"1� � 5. .���� , ��°.
1a
,}p � �; aah ��.� ,_'°W ' 1 r � :� � '�. , c",,,F
r . i i`r'- � �- �. yr' -n � i . � .,.� �.y', g - : �� '��. ..�.
. - t.�j - , ...-a i . � � „�f-�r- 'f r� �, n � T�ivn
.... ':�I ..�.
siL i 3IN��- � 1
' .-� S -�I h 74� T���� fJ } y�l �' 1 I �
- ��.! II..�.I 1 �
. . .�y .�� .. e �. "y ry � ' i�`''�n �� . 1 .;''�ra-�-' -�-=-^w
a7�y " s $T �!-�e - ._� , :� K 1 � � -_�. �y4'�.� � d i .` -',� �' +� ��r:� -
�.. :�W�r _. �6 - :q.� ' �Y'"'Y � P' �,.� 11 -t ,�`?, �. • '_ � '�. .sr �-.;.
� ` _ #; � y ^ a- s r` � ; v- r �;_ .J � q'�
� �� �� ` '���`�' ' ���� � ��`a � I �_ � � � t ��1 ��'�.' I , i
b "`� • k �+iE�" �'�a�rr�i��.` � .�.; ��,� I.:. i � �.,�ai F;: �� � f�����, ° �� j �
' ..� 't k� - � ' F -w��� i �4�.��` �' -- � 1 3 � r �a`� , o. i 'd�� ��
� . f -' " � A 7�..1I1.� _ r�.. .. y c ° I ` F ._-� .�'r�1- �_:. a � .,I .s�
� �th � �ra° ,a � �,:5:,:�`r�. H i , ��.y,�, i , � ��� �.:
rF�', ���' -- `.�an,�4i��" nr { i x L a �'4 _;,�I
�f . 4 ; � _. q� - ' . � TM �� ��I�k ��� � �i,w
:.: 1 w,��: � ... � �.. a , -. ..
�`�,-�.�r.z x �'� �.��� � ��'. LI.,, - -_ � � .�:�, �. �.��� I 7,- �� � ��� r i s ..
, i .�, ..-, . - l` . -r W,4.�= r � �� i� �� `�� '�"� L -. ' 1 r
R-i �_, � ' ,$�` � ��.: y � � � �;,,,���„�:�=�,�L-.
�E �� i... ,� .I�3us�_ _ .t.a ::: M�r i � - .. �✓���q� � i=� : I� ,/.�, .��l� ��.I
f` i'- = , . I , �—�. . . .. �. �'� . a� f.i �Fa �����- a�i , .F. . r:.�
� ��-!� :ii .�� , � � , -.. .i�' `:, I � . . .� ''�� l'i : , , 3; x
Vicinity Map
� �
� �
P ��
C �� '4�j' 9 e ..
_ y4
_ ' yp ':Y . ..
� ._ Y ,'�.�� � y `�' ��p
{
� k ' »**
.'°��y°' r �„�.,.
i I � � �'.��a., ��.
I � �
f � �� � . . ��y,�
' ' :� �
� �� ; ; ��
. ��;
,��
b_.
{� A
- T�� �;,r
� .� e _
�.� �;� � ;.
-� � Y '�=�'� �
_ .=- . - - _ � �,�,�.,�
�.� - � _
-.. s�v. -
-«'~" i. � e lane 11.5't►avel lanes _
- —--- �
- �_1 , -
� � � �
—��� -. - �, -�' .:
� _._._ .__ _. . _- �`� � _:'_ -_-s� �
�y Z'�'�
� �
Bike Lane Rendering
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.lakeoswego.city
; /' �'Kty�ti31F� �� ._.��.i _ {'�,�� '��:T'�. +`�,i�' ' n�6�=. �k:.rll`:,Y°' �_�r'"� ! �'a.�•_�i�` :In4 . �' "' 4� � . ' .
� � ���� °��� _.�� v��� .�.. .��� � ;. r�: :�:;�n ��k =:�;� �.r.�_ �� ��{ _ ���� ��'� � ��� �:: �;��.��_,��. +rr�•x - Botticelli �tri in Pro'ect. �:
.. . _ �, 3 �}�� - __ -r .� -���'.. �-};��:.. ,����- � {`' �.�` :�� ��; �-� `.,. � ,�.��. � ,. :., ,�.r�,�;:�.:�.. . .P 9 J ,fa� . . .
�; '�� '�r '(. .�y�L;r-�`�,.$ �`i - � r=�.: -���.. =�.g.$`�:•_; i����.>•3��-. ,:�..+�'-� .' "*. _,:'*�.- • �� . +�,��
�s' �` ,C4Y ,.�s. r. ��, � ��}..�.,`•.-�'L.����{* .� 'I.Y�,. ..�i .��:�-�'.,;�'�..-�� .���r�"� - ry{ '�,��.`�.� '�s���� ..'�`.':�"zq,�,A`a` '�"
�t�_�'; ;�, ;;,.€�d.� ' .,:" �'; ` ' � ,'�'��-��. �.�.�.'' _. ,�� �' 1 �} �� �� .r , �;��t �fi:'' �� n� '� Presentation Slides ..�.,
� j`r �*� .�'�� _ �.� .z��.' ;� ,�r ,. �+,: ��� ,r_.��-=��;1t.:��:° . ,;�. ..w� . t��'�;• _ _,�� ` - _ G. . _ . `_?�. ;�
. - :3. '{ "�--'�'-� � ' -� � - �LI .s� +3 ,'•7� '�', :�?� �c; '� } :x I �; I � � � V�i f�:' � r �4�.:.��"�=`�.�'i� �;,.;,�� .. . . .i'.' -�1 :}}'��' � �.
r'n J' ��3- i ' '�.�::� - � ,7-r� �+� €-- iry k'�� ,� �.` _ :�.�. t .. ;';;'} ,�....'�� t'� �iY, - .�4-��. '+k:�r.• _�+..���� , . ry'i: .-, �"x� � �r'(�'
"Y• {} Y"k•�._ - -r { .'� , ,� _ 'E��:��' - {�yl �' � Y� _ k. "r': - � `T 'f{:+�� }: ' A.n- 'S�.'J.+L�� ' . ' . ' •��. ��. °>-i
_ . _ .I1 ' .. '� +i�t. ��'�� j4i. :i.. �..�.��;�} ��,�.:C°" LF'� ' �'�.� k+ ' �'..L _.^4n:'�y" - . ' k1..F; �
_ � . ' _
# �
� �fi�y� - x-� 1 . . - a
. �{.-�- ��Y-_ � �4 - 5 .� �� t .
., ... .. .: t, '
•. - , . , �.
. .�.� y J.F� �T-��'.T .. i'�d.. �'� '�iv_ �� .���i=y. 1 .�"t:� '�i � �-�',k`' x --4' ��r r
' i '
_ r.jr�_�
�;��� �l }.. �s �n�: .
... ..; _
,_�,1 __ i - '�. �'•-- �:���
� �-�` ��.. �j�..� rL��_ 'i '��� ��' r I ' �.`Y'- - .�':. �.�! '� I:� I � �'�.f. ir 4� .,.-..� ;,... 'g �I: _,}j: .7J��'M1l ,
�' �7i �` �1 :�- -. '�I''4- - _- .'A �� ''^�� m��,. .�Cs . , 4' �� �h�. ,� - 'if �:�'J -"'
- � 3'' ,��� _i1 . �'� -- 41 �,�'�. ' - ��l '��' �x � ��� #* `� +� �'S"� �t
- .:�„�i �]a: i�f:pL+3� v;o'o i� �'Fti_��;.'�� 'ti7 ,�r � _ .- - ."�" �.txs�`.:s�,.xti'=�.: . '\•' '��.f� . �, .0 '�'�'�� ',�,;'+� � +�=� n':,�. ,�r�? . _ ' .�•
7.. � _�,.a..: ..�' �,7._ _ . _ - _ �I �•��¢.��., F. �{?_ /�." �.��� -*�c'.y�F� `{'� r .f�::�ar, rt ,:*T' 'i�' w,��T .�ti. - �.6
_� r . .� i �� ,��` x�xy. . i~ 1�.:.,� .�w .'i:.A. ��-� - . ..,� �4`F�. A�'.•,� I 1 '�. .ti � •�7*� ���
+.� -•:s�. ',�. �� '� �'% r' a1:��..' � - .��`�._:'-' �� ���/' �tif .� ,11� �". r%. l,' J. - ^�s .. -
� �' -' . -I. _ ..�. ��'J;Y. ?'` tifl . �', i., _ , I ��...i '' k _/� J f ��.. �� .�+�}-.. �' �:��•� ••�
t+� '� ��l 'fi + � ..Cr.•h _��� ?�'�� � ��. � , _ I f�f�f fx� !. � 1.~ `��} � +f �} N�-��� .
� _
F�•� ��f �' Y'�f. •r
. � . _
- .1 7 T� .tiw ,5
_ . �
.�
_ . . ... . ' '
� "' ' .' '. ',: ' - #,
�c �,{� - �:�'v��r. .�: �- ��
t� c - k: `�r���` _ - -��r'- .I'- 1�; 'f`}-�,.-;.r .�' - -- r -'�•.1 � ' r• �x.��'`-•� .�}. �'� . , _ _�'�'' '' ''p �i' T�. '�', >S?y 41' .� _ �'
t�. �� �y��^i - r� a�_k' - '�-�+ .�'�-' i � d *+' .s �� LI s �r �� 4 -{:o_y, , .� �� .� .�. -.'.'-`�., .?�`-°�t 'titi� `]�
.��'�•, '�_' F �. . ' S - 4' '�I} __ �'` iL .�} �{ 5 , kx. •�}..'�1 �4 .� '+L�.�'. . .
'\ .`��EC - J.S .'�'"`� �� - .'-�'�'f'� � J r `�.)t` ' . ��M1�' � �;y� -- '� g� ^�' r�'Y J�
. _ _
..i '`�'l x ._ .�f�• 'i . .�.., 'f,�. .. �
' :-' : .. __
..i � ���' -k +a� �x
I ��F� {i� "`� ' n� _ _ i� ' '`•, �ii . ' s- Y��; " i' '�''�.'�, ' ..}i ' . f�, ._�-rr�i�+ ..k.. . !�db�' .�t•.f..�lr r�� ,s,rt ;r._
r�KR :1':.f��Jr.'� "�,F 4� '.j rS'. :�A;,'.i= -'Y. , k7-.: - '� ��'-- ' ` - -:r- .a - s_.r s� '.'4 . .4 ,.� •�'4 �_.� - ',�� .�' �.4, .�ri.
,
.r. .{�k . . .i . #'- . r'r �'�r- \
: � _
. _�' ,r`'�
� � k -. . � ,. . •
7 _ - �Y:._, _ . -�6
-. , . . ,_ , � , �
. •�, -� 1.ii��2. ,W� - . �} •"+# i ,l'
. � .. ,_ . . _
�'} - I_� � �.� �'
� � '�-
�'- �.. � - � :� .���'i W, • - + _ - - r.'n. -� -++�-` �- - �.�r._, .. k�m: � �'S :�a, '�- rn'
�F ���� ��. �� � - T� -0'�a: . '7'•.{i_ _ ���'i� .{V . - rxC :.�. ��.+�c}�� k- n .. � '%�+ � t��ni: .�f��'i'�.'�,�.�� �"
'1} t�'�. .6 �7. L$_ �� r �%' .�.. \ x�+�� ' , ' . � cr �.{ ,L � ' ��;.+ �-�y'JYQ_ . i.�
, . �[
.1�. ' .4. } �{�y ;.��... �a;.
k-;y .$;« 4�''1 .}'��� .,11 _ Y �) v.}- l�. . ..�f�f� � f J-� - - f' +'��.,. .}k . '�y:�i '�:.' f_ ��-_' t1� _ "� . t '
lt{ '��? � l'.5 � ..x" .'"� .� 'k •�-�'�r' ' . ,�,.. ,�� � y��.� . '.� ,[' .'��' C
- -�i4' ti� _ r� _ _ry --- - '� � �,.ys .� y`:�... .}�} .+:�y �.., � . °yk` -'n t �- '�, �°.+ �rr . �4 - f� :�.. - t.�.i v's'' - �i i �
:LL� s'l.-�2.h . r.•;� � � s a s' � .�: �, �y� � � , - f,�•G� �_}: y" .,�� '� ,a4
� � -.� .��.a_.L.�� ' �*". �� �1�:�. .�{'.M1"'�••.r.�._� }'� {" x: n'O'� �`.�'L� .�. !. � . 11 ' , "����� •r� ..fV� +��y'�
F '�-r Ic].�w ' -;�C�ii[� i t.i�-' M1x� .��J . i �_" r', i _ ;'�"'s'r•.'"' . �'`.��,r �U•'��rS r- -'� .,+`�
r ,� '�'_ - �_ �: ..� ts4� ..a •��.��#,��•�,.�`.�.�. '`Y#� _[_�f' f-,,fJ'.- ��,��',' 'e,� 4 '�y. _ , '�+, 4 _ ..} ��v;�_,F 'I
'�'- ' � � ;'�� y •� � � .-- , . �. � � � �y {�•�. , ` ' ,:�+ �t <�. - r
,Y�..Y'1. - - `•'�., 1k �1.;�.. .# .5 �'. � f'..�T ���s . � . r� r2ti " _
r ..�f' _,� .'�1f- - . - !k� ..� _fr� �1 �L.��� ��� ��� t 5 _I {' 1"• .�'�h� ..1 '^,._�' .
'�' � i� :x '.7x. �k ,{{�, ' ti ��N� . . r�„�, '�'+ �• - r .� ,� _m} .f�.
. ��.w �ri-1�;,,�-�� i�*��d�' _q_ -�� _ � ,:s'=er�e�L�J�-�5�:?c�'���155c.1�t2f}d. - -•�•. .k _ s�Iw .M1n..�ti,.- ,,�� �I„ . 1 >"�� .� .. ��!_��:Fi�t041�3 ' .lz� •,�t��.t �.�r :ir� t; �• +<�'�:
' �-*��.}. •�• ... '{ �� ��' _� _ .� t� �1 .. �'t-I��r,r�l ' '� � i , I .fb.���:��` .�,'.^"'C'+'A.�` �i�l a.�''. - ��C�1'D� ��-�!'���r '� ;�ti' � _ - .T -
�� p� i . .'a r�'�'.+��� �- ��"?`{.``��'-r. - . . � <��� �+- '"t.�.,•�.�"�'.-p� '�JF� . . _ . r+4,��. ''�'�.5�''.�"c �;� ,,; .'P'
• fv '�:Z ir r -�� ' .1 � '��. _ . '.'�" -a:I-r;.} ��L�r,�- �}� �'�I - '} .?: {� 4 $� . �i.. kS, �° �rt _ 3+ . � - �' .i �'
� � .�ih'� 'y.� F' - . ������ �...�.. °'. ;-y-�-..�{��"1- _ ^�z + � r.'�a .�'°��lf.�'} _ TQ4l�..�i:-��'7rh8� �r� .*�' �� �}�� - , ' .
. r, - ��- '�s"y , ��.. ;� ���1:,.�.'{G.t� <.=J_.��. _ .. ','Y.•��,.!_ � - ''�,I_ � �.';� �;. . _ ���� ..�.:2 ..�"��',;�Y ,�x q,
'}� �:Y^.-,�� 4�!�� �e �����"f"_ �- �r-w. �Ivf �!`�4' . -�,.�,� '�� �.M1 ';�, °E. ��S:tJO��"� �Li��.xE.\ a5' �` .#_ ?..=�
' 'rt'��- �� F��-i� r.:'• - :'� _ e• ' J1��� �s -5 ' 'rr . - -+�+dGh x. -.�".'. �._�%,.�.}..�, . {:' '��t,�
" . , .. � - Y � - � �� � k �r +f�'�' • - '}" k ��
�� , � - �:{�.�:a�� _,kr.,•r�]��`:l4. ..�_ �d�� .c..;��1�"F:�!}' �� ���+t -� �� �'���5� �.�,�: - - �4y;., �., r .,�. �l-!.' r . 'r � :t ,c�_4��'��=. '`�:
� � - + '1.r �� � '�_� •�.�.' �_�. .. .. ��+ �i,''x .�- ��� + '� ��- Y�'.. r�'�� .�'s-'� �b...�� . 'w :,�'f .rt��-;<'l��,•� t;.: <.��'.�.. �;�,'
'.kj:_ ;�' F' di'� �.; 5' .�. > '��L'`- -� S�10C1� r' �! "I"�'�''�r r --4 ---j '-.?. "� �} '�':'..-'� �ti., s-_•� - ,�::. .�._ -.l"'ti'- � �.,�_.,.� } k��:.���.
�}. 'a. .]�r '�,� N ..�:. .� j r ' �. �i -'t r� t Y .P+- r�,_ .
��� � r.7� � � � • tilbl I ��i' ,t,�s �4..��- y 1. ,��,} i. I:�'''' - ;'�-,-.�` f��'-. x' +k]"� �'.�''=.=�r' �:'�:. ' �1��� F.. .j j:
, , i __f...- _ '",y . , �''� ..���-,'•�'?w.,��'#� 'y� {��� �'.'.11ll;{� �q.��.- �F' �'��F-� �h�Y:�w�1P'�y� ''; Fti.� :�'' - .li C�'{��--.J '�,'}� {,y.-' . �':�� �.M1 ' �-
- ' � � � � k�*$� i � � '- --� �.��� i ,`'��� !y -�_x }' - �.s�r ��� -4-� •3 ~�,y. x�,�. � - '��u�4 r"� - -.
� _ - . - -h- - =-�2• r�� . •:i •l�•�� ���c�:.,4ia.! .t_ � lf ' e1`?J � -.� 4:... 4..1f .'t' _ _�,.0 ?���a�; •F' �2 r'�"• '}�' ?�-. 7 ir ��'. f•�% '��'d'
.-� �� �� �� .. . _ ` _
. . z. . .
' �r.e� _ '.."" ' -�� 4•
.. -�� - � � � � �- . - . =-'r _. _ �.~ _. ����:. .l�- `��: . :l r��
. , . . _
, .. _ _
� , - �r�- :-� }�f
.� � _ �.x ...r . .. .,
�^ �a� :t, '.�c...
, I :. ti' '• -� '. }r�y - �4 _ ,�L }f•
`"
"i�`� '�J� �'y. •�F,'
,{ k * .
� � _ � - �f�. M�. �-�:� ,y^
" r,,:'' .. ' . �' � .i` ; �"' . p 't, - -- �' 'tyf7
.t �: • .
� •�
�i �i� ��
. .� .�,
;� � �,M1 . . . � �..� �. e' i. _ � yJ j�', , - iy-R�!`�+''�� `r r '�` ' ��'i�
-- �•'�I� }� a[�5 ? ' ' R '� � ' - . . '.}•' � '� _�+
:I _�1 ' ' 'f j�l ♦'T.._J .�l' +�� .L i � � .���� �.. xk �}L � 41 .:.�"ti 'I- �,������..� .. .� .�'- r7 i�
�_ _ . n��� ,' �.��' _ '• s . ��.� �..__ ` �;#... �-�-.� +. v� \ �,�'''7��� �; �}'•`�t�:�L ' � :
, ,�: 'f: i � ���.' � �` •I:il��,41__'.M i� . �. �i.' .�.�,�y '� i "5' '�.•'LV. '.. r� s�.
�� � .:6'} _ .4' ' `c�' r � � I ...��t �: .��I� �����:. '�'{' i '�'
' �� _ �-'�l�"�`�`'' .��z'. .�}+�,�`.y* �P.i �' ' 1 _�'• •7��;=�,_V4'�;�I��IS!'F'r.il M � _�c ! � r , -�.�� , ,;: '_ ,���?`���} :w;«.� til'�;�f_,��rp.__�.�'.:� '��� "=� ;�
� �e ' .. . 4x��. _ - yc....y:,' . J . ' F '�f ,�+''R`'i'. '_ �- �''- .�,r� .'�� �'_�4' '°�•�~y �¢�: � --vY-�
� . �;s y--�-rr"-• _ - .� '"_ .�: 1_. - I� . � '�rdfY�- + -.ti __ I_ �I Y IT $ �C.} '�- _�
. . . }:�1 't�{`-' ' i:�k�: 7 �i '+��.--• �i L : o-:'� r.', � �� � ,�- � .�'. }.�F •��w...
�. - -�'�y {A��. ..� ��..;;� T�.�J'.� r:. �,���¢,,',!,,�r•rN--. .�- ��. J`r- ...C' �_�,7��'['j�.'��:.4q��'{�'�-t ^� y. -�r`:f{i�C� �1,� '�..
1'. : � '��5��4 }�. - 'y2 .•��} i' �'�4. ~ .. �'��4•' •�.k� �f ` 'Lr' -�. Y J � .f'.b� �t�"•��.'�.�' �� ��1 ��h'�r .:�`�rl §
, ��. �..�;� ,�� �k� =���r . .��.. ��. � �=��Y �� .�.�. (r�� __ _ ��i� �:�. _� .�_ �;.. t- ��� ,. f� . ��'�
.. � .
'�'} .i !{ a Y' { ' i_+J , ry �..ST'. � -/} y.7. %'�� - �*r f
�M�+y, . �{�l��t 4��iry ''`f _ y�Y '�J 5�5,,,� }. +�}�I� � -'�F. l M1- " `�y��_�.��y� � ��]4,�''}-� ~iS�' �_�.
•f: � .� �r {�}� '.�. r'}Y � Y Y�' '�. � 2y '''i :l. •� i.�.' ~ � �k. .-��� _'��. `A4' le._ .Y+c. �- 2.Jo-^..+���.1 � l Y '�
. �;�.�� :v� -fx#�'� '_� ���o' s� �* �y.'+� .i 9 .i. "�w�k..*.' I ��•� �� �I�r �. T �, r�.��`��s `+��`�. " ��''.: {• �'
'��� . . _�._. � ..,.*�l-i >� "�..'�"� f �lr� -y 'k�-'S.' . _ 4�, '� �'� 'e � �.�,-�a ' rr ._ � �- � e. . ,���,-k_' .�� _ �� � �-:. s�. L�';..�x � .�:i� t-
''�:� 'J . � � .�' y -�+�� ��;},. {...�•=-�� .�:��: _ .f`a�r- . . i.:i ��}�'��X _- __ '4 �' ��', �'r
- �.���� . _y_... ._r { 'h 1 #. �' f' 1'Y:�' . ��i_•" ..3 4 � 1�'�4 �..�7�' k'? .'�7 �;#�� - " Y.� ���V ' ..4�)+' C, "�F �.�'� �..
X}'r`lr' � �"4 .'T�' _5��� :�� t�.` {�.� _ - .H,I �.., f {.":�. � . ' ��f�•Y�r+� �h I ��y' l ] _..x. __ �_r+�l" .( �
;� . � y5�. � '}:. ..i� 'l � '�y I ."7� �J. .L'. t� F".� -- � (� '! ~f � '47c�
.. - --�� �"*� ��"$� .�M1 ��k �l'��'' J� 1' I �T�s�: 4°i� --�i.�.y l �>F'''� +1....'C'�'�.'� �'I _L' _1',_-I� �ri-'- ~lYry '_f4�-�"� --
�Y,, t¢ } ' s. M1��_f ..�. h4 „�;n~�... f�� �--yr�' r .�1.... * � ' _ � . � '_ _ �'� �
�j�• �. � { � �t � a ..� � � � t �,�r_.=_.�rs .� s�` 'r { ' �� __ -1
� . . � ' , ' _ •a.y ._. 1' � `.x `� �' �,?=±�'��' �.:���,# -�/.�-L� � r}M�:s7.i;�js�vJ:�-i }.- y l i�- �{ - - ��,.,�:,-'�P".".� -"�• "��r'��'�' . ' .� _'� �',:���_��•.�- ���1- _
:�-�x�,e-�-:�'k �� _ __ i'•'' ''.;"��r=Y'y�." i-��� � �I__'.�fi.�!�.#W IZ� - ery�.d.:.l:_�y�.l � �-'�'�- ..Y•y. �'� -
. �' � `3.' �w;,.?' � .�.. i ,f . � � '4!�. .� i. �? ! _ �,� �-?3.t,- - �M1��•�� ,,Y��t-:f 'i�' �r � -'3�' -°' •]'.����x`. �.'l�.. s �
�'�? - wx`r '�.� . ._ �a .�• � '+r. j� �' •�-- I �� - . - .� ' ���,`r- �' ;`'� r' � _�' `�+ / .� .x-�- �.`i:...�.f`�.*�: ��it'.-•��
��� '`� �*.. ,�.� . *r' -,#��",x:�. r�, #�*�� .�S,��f�r""�x� '��,_ �.-.y�--'=.�i..� �,.:--�� .',, l�� *5`�"" `�K,,��•-�;. .�.�y'.�" _ =-�:� r��:s_.-����� r
_--� ���� -_ . ���� _ � �lk]� - -�? r .r ,;��?�� � �' -_ _t�r_ � ;� _��,�;�- -.��•�' ,. _ �,.f R�'.: .a.� :;�
, � � _
���syr x �E �-� . �:. ��. � �
:. ,.
. i� r 1 �=^' r�
.. . ._ �
�,y_ . � .._. 'G� ,g,+'� r S I °���.- ^_��4 � -.- '"0 - . - rt I-_k.�.:�r'.�'.. - -��,� -�-1.�a •�:',�Y `���� ° ''C`. °.,P`-!-I�' - �i
. a'=:' 'i�' - �- �'"�'�•�4 ; +l�4ri `rY, - "� 'a..�' -� -'��- .'�l - .� ts.+6^r . 1 a.� �ti.'�`�_. � . � '_+. �1
, ...
. _ .... -
�`, - .v :h.. , .
� _-� . . � _
1 i � 4 y.�
�r .Fa F - � Y"r�M1 �F 6' .
. ;�.'~t'? -.v�k� "��y -iryr x�, `�.�'r'�} ..�. �:� �'� r` . � . ? 4��" ..�.�•-ti. :.�: -�������.} ' `..�''�Y hk _/' +.� 'l ,+ 'I
� ' � , • "� � >;�r:�:i:}�� .�5.�' ,i_-�����•.�'',� - � .� ����f�i�r�1�IIk:�� '�'t�-��_:�--��, • 'a f•_.}..,� .��s':���-`�� '.,� i�:�'"',{� .r. -�.: - -
. . ,.i�' +' £ .� -� _ f�'�" i� r.`�t� .'� 4 � 7 'L�r'.._ {' � ' i �� _,} � �k ,'� ,
_ . _-. . ti: .7��E:' .x''� �'�#• � x'�'.xa�.�r��� r I T+ .�". ¢ -{4.�� ��1?�:.�� '�-7:.. �I �� LL���:�.`�� # ;* F ¢'� r.�; .�' �.
� ��� r�' . �'�-� .`�j,#. . ',�� � `'�`-+�_ .I . �- :�'� lE� �µ '.�,'°�- �� �r .ia.`�{:41' � .t..'�_S,�Y.l •�.�. �".��....T� : . .;:;�i�� v.�r��,wi �-,�: .�y� ��,.'�r`�, �:1e7. �;,h
'� . . r;�.� •�• -_ � "�-' � �. .�„ r�..i;, ��•,�, 2 . . . r � _ .:�:~�. .�: ��• a-y� .��� �C``�,,�'�.,� ,LL.'d,�, ��. �` - .
�i : . . �'r: -.�:� .�' - tc'� �:.'_ . �, .� `'f' _ ' -..''s�y' . _ �� '�'.:; � .�'� _�, ��` ' .t '.J •�1�_T
'�x�" . 'k_'��„- •i'-�'�.M- -.��+ x� ��.�`s�.��_ - . ..�► . ,��.'.�" � �l� . • ���-`� ,°'��"'� `.�� �"��:'_ `�" '� - �..� .I '��.
� 4r�'%� �� -�: ry �� �, ^'k - i �, k 1� , �i I 1.�. }+.�., O"' �� � ~� . _ t� /`+il.��.r '. �^�� . i . 'C .�4 x • •�. �'' .
i ' �' �� , 4-"�..-.� ,- '7r '�,.�j'F���� `��{'@-^ __t` _ lr `� :�anYS ?t' �'.�` a#. `�r: �,{.` I ��� '��,,r...�_��n�'a�n.. .�` ���.* �.' � -�!, �. . -• . .
{ ��� =�. .{ /.� '+'V':-"- R'�'4 [ }.fi" y1-=� Ri- . �'��s�� ��+� •. e� �'�. - �• J '� . .- . • -L�•
. �.}rti .�Y ' f ly�!r. f�! :�1 ' �. ��P.r4 k r��. '}�/ .��y . �.: ��'>5?`• ''� }. J� - JI y'{
�.' .+i4 . . •{r�Y�� . . r Y �� . �� �y�-•.� 1 � �� .�} _ __ ',� .�'K�t' � _ ' �:{;.�� -1 '�
�1. �'"f . �L y�y.�..r ��� I .1�. � 1� � :{ _ I .•� .�_t.. ?.� �� _ .. r�Y.a i r M1 �;.• �• •I�. .��W' .
� . _
' � _
r .. _
��.��•'��`�,��. 1�7 '�• .
�' � .� . �r�=rt - � - -�� _ _ _ .�a � � ., , _� _ � ?�c'
.�� .
._
��• .
_ �� �r � .� r } r .
�I.; .�- , . �. � �� � - , . �._.
,x- � - � �+�+�•4 ' ,� _ r 1 ,. :�" ,'.: ,, .��� - �,��. r ���.g., +�4.. ��.• tl�'. � �F� �
���:`�.��'--- . . �sk: ��.-��+s.•..'.ra�y�1 ' �'F . . . I"•--- ----��r�_ _.m�M1 _s.. i`,�', N .r�. �.�' �;i-A._-��'-�--. �p� �� � .�'''. 'n 9,�° _ r.- ! �' �' � . . ; . . . '
.�. . '�' . .t,�.•_ _-- - " � ' , �rt . s , + . ,�' Srx.�`�..3 a�' . . .
.F. . ��_. . ' ° . ��� . Y��� - ��-. . 11`� �.' �,� � '�' f7Fp J -�`x x` �• y�� ! � I . . . ' � .
-� r}.]r., ry'is�c ' ' + ` -'F� ' _ J . ` _ !}�� ��`� . " ' , ''�'�' . '
-.1. ' ��'7�� ~'i? ':y��.a .ri � � . J . ~�'"i-~'.�`.1* .x' h r. � ?}y J°�f . i � . �� �_.. ' . ,��'.i'f�,$`^ ' ' 'T . y .
�-+� .`� •'C • x � ._�� ' ��., --�,+�_- �_},�g. ..y,:.�i�� I��,:t .1 -- - ���? .�y . +
� �5.. � .�,L_ _ .�_ . - . . - ����=..eLl ' . _ r} .i:' ' ". -
i I �y�,� - - - ,...._ . �Y, .I ' � ' ..r�. �n�k': ` ,� . , . r � i i�I=r �}''�r.�i- y=,l-�...E•" .'�;a'. ��
��: �.= 'rv��,.i r,rt_T � ' • i � � .�r.� I. � i�-' �� � .�
I � �ti__��~ ���fi`d:.k'��.:.--y '� - ,���I , . . '` ��" Y '� I i� '��. � _��},f' _ �' I i .'�4 � ,�+��
.� , _ nr; ..�,�„ �` _�...��� �._�^ ,�� �'' '.� _ .�' �� . . � � =r Y,�•'_ �� ,t�r,;it' �I � �j' � � `� i f'�i.��t�� ��l .f- ,�f � i��i �
� 7' E - ' � -.�. � . � �" �m- - r. - � ��- �.... �.,s-,.,.'�', �s��I -�. �r-F�-. =f�'.F.�:�. ' � -i ° .�. '?�l ,.�._�,•. '�':l'f � :�
.�� ' . i _ * ��';"`°�:.��.' _3*a"`" "a ,;� -�f'y '�*'� �r.. a`�y, ._rh` k+o-;�z:_ � �.i� �r`�,,:.'.. , �,.+6�.y �T����I �� ,�' r . -��°-
��'" �p,f��� t..�-x �, .�x#�3� ��r: .v�.,� '�'`: F...�y' �-'
� � .wr' _ ' � � i ,!� l� � _'.�'�a�+�- }�,:�.�ee:- � i' . � �' . �#'" ��' r, r� r�:! _ -- I ..J. � . . �.t�' !
�` I �'=a . �'��'ry c`�' � f \ f .I �..�_
_ -,� . •
, ,: . _ R .
.. r . .
_ .�
. , . .:� <, .
2 � t' .r '�'r��..�._��}� " M��•�• <ti'�t I� . ..��� . !.'t . �c�u�� �'.e,+.-�' 1 � . _�'�� � ' � .�:�ti.�; .F�� . -wcry_ ._ . i . �✓.. .. . ����s-�I:.�I: v �.�.'�'1... � i � _ � k �r��. . �._'I .'���f .
�1 d"i " JI �„ � �
_ �. .. ""s M{�=�'� � ��.�.. --J�-,..� " � �� t�"���� '� (� �% : -3 �. .I�''
_ � _ � � ' . � �P� `'�-�". ,�1�. /'�' ►? v� � `�X��, J'"`^� e✓ ..
'�o�'� , f Y�, '�`,� ( � f_ �'. -
� ,,t��� ,�, $� � �'► '-is �;,� "%.. � . r ,�`,- _
, �. ., .
�' „�#�.�i i�a� ' �" �xa„ '^J�f��f' '�` `{ ' f_,
- r� ,�� � . {�'�'-n Y ;����y'�1�, "'ly���' "},
J� `� 1' ' L , r�y1�y � . �;'Y7.� .j. .,i,�.`.� � ,7�r �,�!� �
_ - . �'S�i '4 ,1\` �� -V.---� - "P7Vr'rY."'�'' ,�'`f� �'�� ��' '`��x'°�; -.''y �j1y ~ �` s �-+ � ` �
� ���, ��4 tt�t A� .����ti Y�'(v �� �� ��� !,/'' �} � i+�;.y`s ��
/ -t� '� • r����.��'`YFIi"� !� �r� � .r `r h^' *�,'f, �c.� �r� /�� �
l ��� �� : + '�$�f9�N", r�� � [ •.L �ff ��� - � ���;!/� '1 .N', � �
�!l�7. !� � � S �� !../�� 'J
� �4��'�0 ',Jr, '�•`t�'.�{�a �.� �m " ��
. �. Cf '/"�� '��'r�i��.. �� '�'i'� � .� ^ i �
s Ir���u, r S!� � �t};!W�-. . "' , 'C,
. �
y-y_ + �,'y.i•Y t��'.' r." ,;�. :� +
.. �. I�
� }�+ � :. �.i,,r,• �''� � ��1�'i .�si✓. r�
�. �� ' �� � � �� w�r, +'
_ �` ' ,� '!�. j . '���'".''`� '�'•., � ' �
�t �a �. q „ _ .�.. ,.�;`o„''����a . ,. �r -
� 1 �y.'1 � '" ���' ,� � y .
f } .. � �ry tl�.
�� x ;�'' �:'- � 1..s� �� ,.,,�'Y"A '�=�=}_ -�^ '�Y:�'_ �_
. �, • . � ~� `������ �.�„�.�.,�►� ' r._ _ � � .A •�v� �`� ' - r
�,:� - � " �_.�.r.' �� ' � �+�T"_��,+ �`" Y ' + � _ � y�.-
— �� _ , ��" `j�?r`�` ` �i �n '`: _ - � =;;,�"' _ _ `
�� �N �'� �� �� ^ ' . %� � � ��
_ - - � . i�' � '-�� �� �, ��'3' _��� " � ti•
�,�� l jj� J ��, .',""' � 4 � '� �.. �/r " � .I
_ � '' „ � ^�iY' f, �� _ �, J`��JY � ��� "r �
. � ' '�(� � .. � '�y
� �4 . r� �,. ' � ,"� �� - ' .. * � ,�' r/. � � � t�
.�� . �. _ .� ,�_�. ♦ ia�, � T: (�I► rA _�� .�da �,�
- �r � �. � �r y�.
___ .:.ra {r a� �l. �'b'; ° �.'�', '� f, .
-� - . _ .+ ���
- - .,yp� . � ,e�� ► ` _^J � -��f,' -�; _ �
� � ' _ � ,y,Zl:���r+""� ' �• "-�� . ���,`. -��
- � �J ' - -- - - '���'` �`- -- _-i�,C'j �,�
� �i'��"'�!'r�; ,�-'-#;�_�. �
' - � ' r#� - . Y_ �',+�.�j�-r
- '� _ J _ ' ','- ~`4��,:����`��
i . ' - - ` - �-���
`� - .
'�+vl
�.� -
.r
�-� Y -
. N�.` - _ _ ' _
.��� �. � . _ . . . .
�'- _ � _ . . .. -- . ' ' . _ _ '_
_ .�r
. '�i �' ��L�V�1�o� L � 1.1 � ��./
,./.�,
����+ ; � � [� � � �
L � 1.��,T 7� d.a �a��'V� +� y� �-�� -.t+l�► ��� �s� «` ���� •� � �!'
� - i - . �"; � • ��' ��
.� , � '"� �a �.' �� l. ; �� �+ 4 ,, '� ��
- - C� �; .�. �'- ,� .�: �►,L�'rs, `,��;�� - '.��
-.R «� )- E.� .� , �►,,.; 1 ,� '`�".-' -
_ � � .� L 1e. K*- _ - ' i ' �� � .
� _,v. *� �;� '�� �, �l 4 '��. ��i�� 4 '� -
_ W�,,; a� _ Z .r� `r"T-•�" �� . � .- 1�
r� ,� l �'l.a � � `� . ' 13. � ��..�^,,�+` `�t'•._ ;,i.
-� � ~} ry � �-�
Y a ' . -- .
s t � � �' ` t - � -
_ � � ,.i.�� t 1 . ~t'•���- �'
�` .� - �-T :�,;�� _ . � t, �y �%�.}^ Y�i •-1
�e_ . � ' � ,..� _ ���yjY� . '� ,y �� � .�..f.a�t ..r
,ti;, y :�_. ��. �r, a� i �- �a - - - �^ ,},. x�. �, - _ -
„ .
- �G� ;G�� _� �� rt^�. .�. � ' �.� r� ` �. ����yY�C't ,r ^ -- �� i
~t 'e. k.• r:(, A / :.;�, - Y�.�ti�E {�.'.� j�'�` `�gtV� �r.,�� i.`l ��•y•� ` '
, _ �r � �. ,�,� ;� s ' ._ � �. - ��
.��� � r •f ,'!' aor... r .i '�i-'�`- ��� ,a-� �`" �` 1`
� � �_ ��
•'> � , � . .�; r. ',.:•. __ 'ffi � � �(y7-� �7'r"%' , . ,'� � � ,At. . _�'� - - .
'� 3 \''
` t - -� 1 �• .�,i'r.•. � V�.11.. � .��t_ - .i.. ��
- � - � : � �1��� � ' : `4 �.�`` - i. r._ � ,
- ,;# " : � ��'..ra���L `'._ y,` .�, a� .a-�--.. ��a., ��.� . �� ,:�
,��t'",�, _� ,'� ,�.�'� _, Y �,�'r '� - ,, ' "L�- y, ''�`:��+�: ;,�, �" ,�', � � ���
s.k ,i . �j� , .,�'k:+� t.; '� } �y` �. � A�:- k� :�,� ' ��.?"'�
,. � `� ' �' yr��i�:c_ � . w"r` :� s,�.; � :� w{�- . �i- ?b�''�1�u. . � �'�
— ` - w.: ,,``fq4��.., " v 7`!�� . _,L' _9a�'-� �. _ �! �a.' '�,,,'. . .��_ . ',t'��
i� � - �� : �. . . e .'. p�p�-' ` }yµ�,+�.s- - . , i�`..� .
�� - _ - � ��� .� �r��'�r�i��r� �'����1'1�:� � .� ; • . . , �d _`
r' 'a� 'i
F � �l ]f�5_ �� � � _ `.., .� �� }�� � . � r!~C'i+ _ y�
`� - '- '� ti d ��a�. �:", ,. ' Z -� '� „� �J.'� , .� .
= - �!T' yy�! � I � . � "��''�
y�� 1��;' \Y, � 1 � � 1 . ' �� -� i/�
_ —_ _ �11�7. 1.E3�. .:. n• � ' i T'�!. ,.� �l"`.. �{1` �? �-`�,-yJ 4 s.
_ ,�.}. �y � x y i� � � ,a . �3'� �
-_ -- `__ .. Ju_ � _ . '1. � i gl���-a� y L.+ ' _ ' �. _� ' t�' ` ` i.t�9� � , �
�'^ �r ��,�4 ��� ` �S�a'.�` ���� �' � t.
_ . ' � - �h � �-'�. :'2t ��,'i,���� � ��l`� _ , '� Jx .�'}`�ty �`tc�•� � r`�'.:h'+`I���
,� -��►� ��� 1 y� ��Y�I�.y� � � �w:' s.�rh -� a � �y`j�� �
— - _ _ - ���� . ._ � - � ��� ��_ .S-��•�' 1+^-�1.�� �\�lirr,�'�T°�"i �' ��11+:r'����-iP" F�" �a�-��Y'
_ � _ � _-, ���i"��t� ,�`;�����,1�4".+,�;"� �� ,.}•`���,.. �t*= r�r-�r�r• :
c� , � � � -
� .. � : _ w� .�.; . �
=�';�.?�'��'�t' ` , " ;ir .f, . � -
��
_ - T -� , : �,;` ".� � �'y�` ���.��: �, � _�
_ -� _ ���-- . � ^ ' _.f-rti - ,
-s� + - "� �
..�, T
�r' - .yt � : - - ,, -- - . . ,r1����+� �i - ��
_ . . _ i. �
_ _ .� w �- _ � _
r� - •
�� ��� �y •
, , �
. ' , � - �
'J� � 5
,. ' ' '�, r Jr� �{ i r,3'�- � �
� ��� _. . `
� �������� � � � � ��
, - � � . . . J �. ._
�. _ , ,- -,,�,
; � .� ,
�' � , - � ,
' �`'� •,
'+ir7��:T• _ - :- I.(�� • a�� � .. . �* 1 ' ' , TtS. . � ' , .
� 1.�! ti. % t:�l� .Ji �... ' ,� - � .. �y . . `� � �.Z:�� � . r'
�OL`
..,� ' '�w .'�`� � ' i .n�,,. ��''� •4'�� 3 �-�,�••r . 'y., r •� r - n .
��,yr` _ _ T • . . „t' � %�' � �►``p� t .�C,� ,�.��.! y . .
' - - . • . �: -� ,.- y ' '� ' ;��. .�:. ,�:�. - .
�� �., _. < ' " .'t:• .. .- . � �, .� ' -
��� _ . ' , k_ ,• '.�.,� , _ °�: �
��" �` ,� '� ..��,, r,' +� ! .�. , ^ S
�' - '�v�'� � i � �l„ � , ,� .� . . � � ., � �*s, � . -
•a' _ :�- - . _ , '�'� ,5 �{• . s.�.M�-w _ �F . • �'.a. �'�, _ �" , !Ar- n ' , _ y
. ,��� ��• �.
'♦ . � ��ad��" •r � �. T ��'�'i' �� '+
,,�}ir ��-_ � 3.
; =-�� "I1 '�8,j;.r.•''.- •L' ��� i ,^'i �R.
-- � _ . �- . • .r�•: - .�., '{'w..`Ai. . . .
. ' � •'� "�.. �;� - . �� �t+i� 'a. ,.r� _
_;� - ��' •/;3 .�.,1�. �•.
_ _� ,, x � __�. . .� - �r �' , .�F / ! �' ` IC � �r ,
� F � �
_ ._ . __�_- - _��§�� ��. .��:. :..1 :. : • � - - �� - , sTo P
�� . �.:., _ - . � . ,
� _ �;�Y � �y�►-: �� � �F r � � �, + �. •
�` �c� _ �� - �•''�' �;� �. .�� .. _Q,,''?�'`.`'.'L. ?~•. �� r�►r �
_ �f - �`".:- � : . ti ,�,; �r q s. �� ` ' ' �� :}� �
: --"� � _ ' '}'k}' `'�-_-' �; ,�,;� . � � ��� _ �, "ql r. • . 1� �, •� � � ..
. _ _. _ _ . . � . :'_. "....� / �. `.t ,:��c �� � y �. '` '�i�
' , -c - � ' . . - - ' ��� � � . y�
� ' . ._'7 � ' - , • / ' , . � . ���,,"`�r t� •
� _ , � - � � _.••J�.' — _ �}� �'�`�-• .►�'�L� { - _
'_ _ ��— - _ ' ` ' 'r- ' . _, ' �— "
' ; --- :�i _ - - - ~� —
r� " . - . ' ' � -,. -
� � � � -
-�_ _ ��w
w
� �
�t� .
� �
�
• �
� �
.��
,�
� 126izo � � � 1 : � 5
. _.
' y.'4 4 _ t �r%" ` 'r� ��. 6 '; ��"ti..c`r�� �t'.��y� .:
r . -�.'i ��i� -.� � t3� - a�� �i:',`���F �-,�
.� + _�� ` e'. �
�� �
a "'�: ' �
� =. t y� �',k`.t
� � � 3� }r r. ,� _. �a . �� `. 5;,�.
3' F" _'iA�y �` � }' �,y� �'
�5�y •& .� � ti ����;�� '� � �t .
Y k�.'3Y�
�� .� _ '"•'� ..!`. \�'� '.fC �i' _
'�'`t_ifi �i�y- ;II .`�!� �� -
� l � .��^�� � b Y•
� , � .,� �� F� 7_ . `+' � a � �� ?.�� .
} p;�
.S � �' � a f�at�. � y . _ ��;,1- �y• '.
�:'�L� t . ' � � a �c` .. Qa'�y� ��-j.' � �ay . �•,� �!� � `',�
Y r' �,
�''�., �L y '�1.4� Y�', �� 4 � �; t '.:� �1.
�' t�+`i� A`f ���!� = 2�j' t ���a �^ ��'`� /�� (�
. �i-:�4r . . a.x �j����, w ) � � " �,
y � F . ��� -i�, , �r�� v ..�?psr,y 4 ,� �"- � 6;
�
R � � t "'_ � 4 :�1 h�� h, �� 4f ,.�� �a ..,�'�^ }s �.,
4. � .1., . tii_i � .`:1 k '�1 �'�' �+,� ,a .� ���r F }
_ ',c �<� � �.& �t wq� � , k
� 5 .w.�� S �"a �l`�; ' ,S � ��
_ 3i. . -' ' '�.{ .i Y ,���1v `�N yr�. � ' ' -
, � r � +Rr
� �. �� Uy6, � i > � .p':_ `�� � ` +i ' �
' ;a t, !�f��� '� i-Y: i`��i� �9��Sw :� } �� yt. J �, .Nr�� � ,,..
_�� �,1�� — , � ♦��.���f �, � !� ��i �� N..
".-1r5 � . � � i � 'P-3�: i4 i .h ' .
lt"1 � , . r '. � � .. ,i . �++ _ '.
�. �' ? f �L,r �' � , � -�'
+a�",� ��Y +h�� �� � r d .���$ '�A� > Pt ��r'►. �r�}�"'p. ��` � , . . .� � • �'�.
�,'.. ' '�}y�' . ' . ?} f�'i�.,�_ . '�ra„� . _ � ��� i - .t <�n '�yv. � ..
� y�� 's '`'R "i � �� .'�' . .� .°4' ,� ^" ��� "4",,' 4� �'i.
� � . .. .. ��� . o '�}.Y'4� `� ��^.b . � . .
• �� ' a .' •.: `V. . . ' ��� ; y ,
�
� • . . . .' - :K- 1,��+°�`S.. _ 'Wr � c4 '� v. �K -, -
. . _.X��v�3�� �y, f � I.S � ...�,.n..
• ` " •�-. ` ' _ y;T1 '�,$z-t?'�(,.;�.�: ` - �t yk `�r
� . . ,� . . .. - ' Y . _ - i'� .. ���:
A
♦ .. ..; ' - _ •.,�' � 3
. , , -_�A ,'y. _
_� . �o ¢ �°'K''
� . , -. 'a' 0 4'�`�X�i�: t ; ','�T�.
_y
. � .�! ��zyyy� : 1 .-.
, . .. <� � 'l.p,��.. 2` —.ml� ' �"°�:Y
� � .t � ^��•'* yy ' � k< y. �y P:
s '� 3�&,�t R�,. r*' • . L.i
. � s� r��+'3`+
� � �yy t F ti�` it • '-.a �s��s�,,- s�':
� i 1 $^ ^ ��ly,,�i.- . ,S s'' �','iC� -. �-i'
r ,. s` E ,!� + 1�'�� -, -�a R-- , _ �,riA, _
. . . . •3 . � -., . + ."� ' �3• - - � _
_-,•`e'•iK��— �' .. .Cww��� � �.�` '
- �. , ,a,�,..� �t
_ _ .. .��. ., '_
. �-..-. ._. :�._.. . .:s. _ ry - _ . • " -. �.. , _
.- -, c:..' ��..,Fc-• �' . ., .
i_' �
s},v:ar,�i�' ' '
�;,�„�^�`� _ , -_
.,,,, , . . �-
�_qy - - - � . � � - � . . .
. `„�" . _ - � � ,
' .�� �r'e; � -�+_..�
'�' . ... . _ _ .._, �c. -
a
;�
. rr' _ #.- ,.' ' . _ . ��, '. � �
�y.,�.. ., , ._ _; ' `�_' :-�����. � ,-
' '4'�� . ' `� i � ,rti, � JJ� ? _ . ��1.z
-� . I - + F '� . _. '1" ,".� . ,Y -' _ }�i,
i ,' ..y�, '�-� '�} ���' zf' ��',',,��e
e7_:�'� . � r�, 3Sisy�� ..._ _'�� � 1}�� ' ���F �`�"� - - '•i1F
' ' _ -�' � y'_���g�. 4il�"��� •.�k ��
��, �:t� �� '�� . . ��+-� .. � _ ' '=
�- ��s �J f f- -# ' #'F 5 - �
� '
�` �-_}
� �n- � ' �
� � �
� �rtr �
__ ,�.. +T
� � {* � 6 �_-�
_. . � . ��� � � � -- - --
=�. , .
.��-- � _ - -- �. t �;:: — ��- _ -
_ _. _ �� _ -
. _� -. s��..:.
� . ,,. . ._ . . _ � �����..�
� - ;¢ ,�
�,'� ��
� . ` �R�,
. - - � - -� ��-- l
r�i�y4F.
�'F
:i.
,.�ti, . . . . . y�� �r
`�`�� . . .. . . . . c� �.
. .�. _
. -- . . � . . '��'�
7::_:•,...� .;' . .
:_ :�.;._ � . . _ . . _ '
��. .. ,..,.. .•���'
,`----�:,:.:.- _ -�a=�` - - -
..-. „ _... :.::� _ _ _
f............. _ -� �
. _. . .
..:...,-,..._�.._.._. ..:. - - .'.:;�5� - -_;���.:.�P:;�.t�,'Si<-
Gw:1'.. .....,,:.:"•., .:... .�,. -�,§4^.'C _ - _ _ " Y.
p,r:.�•'i'.,:y,.:�..�... ..........:' _ :�,..,..
� . �.�.�.,:.. ..:=' - � -
rK;,�:.,,�`_�,,..c:.�.�_i��: ........... .:� _ ' .�,ryY�j'.3':sg
. ..--.. . ...�r.�
���..: .
h"
- :Y.l.'�'��11_r„Ls '_f�' __ - ' - _ _ ':�t"�WY��'.
�.�'�4:`4vf;�'„":���`��:�'y" _ _ _ -..a.;��''�,;�:= - -'�,`.
';�r.. :'r'r"'= ---
�_,.�y:4" - - —
'y1'r;.-:;,ii�.':�'':_�' . . :�,'_;'
�:.3-�..,���...:.�: '._r:;s, .,
�•r.t�'.i ." _
`3 r;�,;Yr':t:� -- - - -_ .
�.;.F'`_'��':a;c=:=��� :,.'. .
�r,�� st:,-i:x���.,_ .�, .: - �
,rr d l - �r:_,_ �'
. ;'��i;;:'�.`, _.
�62;y;�:[ry:^�..-.::'-. '.•:'. � ;ht. �F.1
fiR�4 ,..,.,..,.�.,.,,. _ � _'''_ " _ •
� i�r�"3i:"'_'_-�..:-_:'�V.v :._-_ :`!a �L4. _ _
A��'''i�- •"l:':%'.. �-%�n�.li": r-F,x��?.Tr. - _ r��;"F. ini.
+v,- ' ' ' �� q.� ' - V:fq:3
y.,'^- - s'"k?'. - - �'.r.m
- - ':'�y: .:�. - -
"�.v3'..� i�F� - - -w�� -
' r' ' _ '
��
f:'.`�.:��:'..'_ e.� ,,g"
- ,.�.. k�c.
...J: :._�;^� .r.:�.,k _ _
,1?�.S',`� .�r, �: .�"1:�.����-
.����'�� ' ' �,� ' ' ti�;"�� ' ' '
�' ;.:.
_
.;a�:::� '
_ _ _ '?:E_.�..,�'
tir�.' ::4"� _
- .�-''. _- ••7'•
_ _ _ _ +�i"
i,� -
_ _ _ _ ' �.�;,.�x _ ,��:i-
1.'i•�:=�� - - _
'T��=.• :s�cv.... _ _ _
=.�'�' -:.y'1�r
- ��f." - r�c
e.r, - �b:-:�� =
-.k'•.'' - •'`j,.'r,� :.Y. _
t - - ?f.-? '
- �..i��•'.'.f,�c�r�:r,.
'J r r..•�.yr '
!.�.��~ �.��_:.:�i<-� _
- u�
_ _ �":?,�.c�:.�.:
�i:` - - - r�.-�� ..�1
're`� - �.
i; -
�'�, :'r"-��.a. ' - _,y..
- - - �
=_r'.�:
r:.L'.� - _ .'-i':::: ..'C�
��. ���'r.•,.1.. '.
::.,�,''��;`.� a'ka: ��•a"'. - 3-.r ..�4"
�'}='� - - dw.
3� '
;�.':.
�e :s�:�. - �:i.^ +,:.�,_:�.
.:c��:' _ - _
���`.-�``" �.�:
-.5.::,' _ �%>a,P„-
-r:� - - - '•x- -
_ _ q:--J,.;h;''. -
uC:: - '
_ +.Z�' _ ,, ''�:,, _- -
_ _ _ :.rx:'�
..
..�,.�,:..°:.•: „
....
,..
...�,;t�-� - - - - - - - �?��'4.i5`
nb
��7T:=:. - r y�'_�«
- - ' - `'a:-'f
:M ' _ _
.� '.r5�'- - .r�-.�s.
' ���n.`t� . - ��Y.�
' ' �.
•�. ' ' ' - ..4� :'F
- - �'�•� - - - ti..
��;:.: -
�.'!'%. .�
_ _ .':'1:',r �`.��
�r,'.-.a _ _ ..il�
' ' ' ::a�r.J...
:i•�Y '' :.f!�� .�
- - _ - - - .i• e.�.t�
r.,. . �.. -. -...:: .;
_. : ...;.
r:�• . ...�.�:-.�.. .. :•�j� ;,:,'
1 �f... ..C' - .:j.`:^:": _ _ ,.,j.�.��.:�'.5;, rC.. .��''�:'
=:}""' ..f'-�_.'. "�.:, - _ _ _ _ _
,..
.�,,. ...�... ,. .,�.
S rr,.:.,. _.L.. ,�, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ <'v' �I
�a' .r - -_.C?:'_
,y,�; :7.. -s:s..;`ir'.: 'L�
F.-'' �;,` _ _ st,s F�.S
�. .i��.<.1'� _ _ _ - .�1�...•.'. - r�l
- s - - •.s:
"+'':'-�� - - - an.,.
�..�,.. _
'::t;�.,...,.- -
,:�n; - �
_ _ - - ,..�..Fw. .0
�'�i�.� - - - �,��s�,�- �`.
- - -`�ser - _ 'k'.
_ - :.:�'z ':;�... � - ,-,.
titr�:N;�� _ _ �.r
�r;_ - - _ - :�;:;ti',''.'��';%':. <�
. � '�rr�S3.x-�:`2r,_...r=e�_., . . ..,. :!�•�r+��r�N:"t"`�'f�"'�!;��•�:%ri�)``���P..::.. ....� .r��,c:�;-..--r..'.�,�,`�,�e'. s .
19.1
a�tiA .�as CnUNCl1 REP�RT
� , �,1
�� � n
V ❑
°REGar�
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Ellen Davis, Associate Planner
Planning and Building Services Department
SUBJECT: City Council public hearing for tree removal application 499-17-02043
(Matthews)
DATE: August 25, 2017 DATE OF MEETING: September 5, 2017
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Move to deny appeal AP 17-05 of the tree removal permit TR 499-17-02043 and to approve the
permit subject to the following conditions of approval:
A. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, submit a revised mitigation plan substituting
the mitigation trees close to the future dwelling with species that are suited to the available
planting area. At least 10 of the 13 required mitigation trees shall be native species. If
insufficient space is available to plant all 13 trees on the site, the applicant may pay a fee in
lieu of planting up to four of the 13 required mitigation trees.
B. Prior to the issuance of the final building inspection for the new dwelling, the
applicant/owner shall plant the mitigation trees required by Condition A, above.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
This is an appeal of the Development Review Commission's (Commission) decision to approve
an application to remove 13 trees at 1053 C Ave [499-17-02043].
The applicant, Mr. Matthews, proposes to remove 13 trees to construct a new single-family
dwelling and driveway. Staff's initial approval of this application was appealed to the
Commission by Ms. Brisley (Exhibit A-1). The Commission held a public hearing on July 17,
2017. The Commission's Findings, Conclusions and Order approving the application with two
conditions, stated above, was adopted on August 7, 2017 (Exhibit B-1).
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 2
On August 18, 2017, the appellant, Ms. Meckel, filed a notice of intent to appeal the
Commission's decision (Exhibit A-2).
Pursuant to LOC 55.02.085(4), the hearing before the City Council shall be on the record
established before the Commission and only persons who appeared before the Commission
orally or in writing may testify. The decision of the Council shall be final.
DISCUSSION
The July 7, 2017, Staff Report (Exhibit D-1) and Findings adopted by the Commission on August
7, 2017 (Exhibit B-1) provide detailed findings for each of the applicable approval criteria for
this application.
The appellant raised the following issues for the City Council's consideration in her appeal letter
(Exhibit A-2). The appellant's arguments have been copied from the Notice of Intent to Appeal
and pasted below in bold italics. Staff's response follows each issue raised.
1. Ms. Meckel cites page 3, lines 11-14 of the Commission's findings and states that the
findings are incorrect and that the correct interpretation of the definition of"significant
tree"found in LOC 55.02.020 is that "if any one of four elements are met, the tree is
significant."
Response: LOC 55.02.020 defines "significant tree" as:
"A healthy, noninvasive tree over 15 in. DBH that is considered significant to the
neighborhood due to size, species, or distinctive character, or the only remaining tree on a
property."
If a tree is a "significant tree," under LOC 55.02080(3)(a)1, its removal would have a
"significant negative impact on the character or aesthetics of the neighborhood." In that
case, the applicant could not be granted a tree removal permit unless the applicant
demonstrated that an exception to Criterion 3 applied, such as "alternatives to the tree
removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to
be used as permitted in the zone" by showing that no alternative site plan would lessen the
impact on trees.
The Commission, applying the code text, concluded that to be a "significant tree," a tree
must meet all of the first three "tree characteristic" elements: healthy, non-invasive, and
greater than 15 in. DBH; and must also meet one of the "neighborhood significance"
1 There are other subcriteria under LOC 55.02.080(3)(b-e)that would similarly result in a proposed tree removal
being denied unless an exception to LOO 55.02.080(3)were shown, but those subsections are not relevant to the
appellant's notice of appeal.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 3
criteria: significant to the neighborhood due to size, species, or distinctive character, or be
the only remaining tree on the property.
Only six of the 13 trees proposed for removal are non-invasive and greater than 15 in. DBH:
they are one spruce and five Douglas fir trees. (All trees were presumed healthy because no
evidence was submitted by the applicant that any tree was not healthy.) However, the
Commission found, as stated on page 5 of the staff report, none of those six trees proposed
for removal were significant to the neighborhood due to:
• Size — there are other trees of similar or greater size in the immediate area,
including several mature Douglas firs on site up to 51" DBH;
• Species — none of the trees are of specimen quality or are an unusual species in the
area; or
• Distinctive character —none of the individual trees have a particular distinctive
character.
The Commission's findings are set forth in Exhibit B-1, pages 4—5.
Also, removal of those six trees would not result in removal of the only remaining tree on
the site. Ten trees on the property have not been requested to be removed, four of which
can be removed only through the dead or hazardous tree removal application process as a
condition of approval of partition LU 07-0076 (Exhibit F-2).
2. "Element 4, significance to neighborhood due to size."Ms. Meckel cites page 4, lines 10-13
of the Commission's findings and states that "the predominant tree size in(First Addition
Neighbors/Forest Hills NeighborhoodJ is on the order of 10". 45"diameter trees are not
common. In addition, trees of this large diameter are old, well over 100 years. 100 year
old trees are significant by any reasonable definition and are no longer common, let alone
predominant, in any urban area in Oregon, including this neighborhood in Lake Oswego.
The Board is on record wrongly interpreting this part of the code to the detriment Lake
Oswego residents'rights. The large diameter pouglas Fir trees are significant to the
neighborhood due to their size and associated age."
Response: No evidence was introduced as to the predominate tree size in the
neighborhood. In the appellant's notice of appeal, it is stated that the predominate size of
trees in the First Addition Neighbors/Forest Hills Neighborhood is 10". The Commission's
Findings hypothesized that where the predominate size of other trees was substantially
smaller, such as 10"', then a larger sized tree such as 45" could meet the "significant to the
neighborhood due to size"
The Commission found that the site contains other similar size, large trees along the west
side property line and that the site is surrounded by other large trees of similar or greater
size on adjacent properties that are not proposed for removal (Exhibit B-1, p. 4).
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 4
Age is not specified as an element of significance in the definition of significant tree in LOC
55.02.020.
3. "Element 5, significance to neighborhood due to species."Ms. Meckel cites page 4, lines
32-38 of the adopted findings, and states that "nowhere in the code is the commonality of
a tree species defined or interpreted as a criteria that diminishes a tree's significance. lf a
neighborhood is named The Blue Haven because most of its houses are painted blue, then
a blue house is significant to the neighborhood. Similarly, Lake Oswego markets its real
estate as the City of Trees. Is there a more significant tree species in the City of Lake
Oswego that supports this moniker than the Douglas Fir species?The city's origins date
back to the iron furnace fed by charcoal from Douglas Fir trees cut in the area. The City of
Portland was originally Stump Town because of the vast expanse of Douglas Fir stumps
that covered the city's beginning development. The Oregon State official tree is a Douglas
Fir. If our neighborhood had to pick one species that defines the City of Trees it would be
the Douglas Fir. The fact that there is this remaining stand of Douglas Fir trees is
significant in itself. What we have here is a significant stand of significant trees. These
trees and this stand are significant to our neighborhood."
Response: The Commission found that for any of the six trees to be "significant to the
neighborhood due to species," it meant that the tree was "not generally found within the
species of trees in the neighborhood ... and [the tree] contributes to defining the
neighborhood character and aesthetics (Exhibit B-1, pg. 4)." This element is applied on a
"tree-specific" basis: is the specific tree in question "significant to the neighborhood due to
species."
Other pouglas firs are located on site. (Applicant's tree removal plan, Exhibit E-1). Off-site
Doug firs can be seen in the pictures (Exhibit E-4). The Commission found that none of the
trees were of specimen quality or were an unusual species in the area. (Exhibits B-1, pg. 1
and D-1, pg. 5).
No testimony was received regarding the spruce and the Commission found no evidence
was presented that the spruce was significant to the neighborhood due to species (Exhibit
B-1, pg. 5).
The argument that the trees proposed for removal should be considered significant due to a
history of tree removal in Lake Oswego and Portland was not raised in the Commission
hearing and is not in the record. As stated above, the hearing before the City Council shall
be on the record established before the Commission (LOC 55.02.085(4)).
The Commission found the status of the Douglas fir as the official state tree was not
relevant to the subcriterion element of"significant to the neighborhood due to species"
because such declaration by the Legislature was likely unrelated to the neighborhood
context (Exhibit 6-1, pg. 4).
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 5
4. "Element 6, significance to neighborhood due to character."Ms. Meckel cites page S, lines
15-18 of the Commission's findings and states that "nowhere in the code is this
interpretation supported. There probably is an argument that a tree with character is only
significant to the neighborhood if it can be seen. However, it does not have to be 'uniquely
visible'or in a 'prominent location'. A tree with a distinctive character that is visible from
a public alley can be significant to a neighborhood. Many of our residents walk back alleys
and enjoy the treescape. A tree with character is always appreciated and therefore
valuable and significant. In the case of this application for removal, any large diameter
Douglas Firs that are protected may very well be seen and appreciated by the
neighborhood after the clearing, excavating, and construction is completed. Some of the
largest may be of very impressive character. However, these trees are not readily visible
at this time so it is difficult to argue they are significant to the neighborhood now due to
their character."
Response: The Commission interpreted this element to require that the tree provides distinctive
character to the neighborhood, i.e., by being in a prominent location or uniquely visible at a
prominent neighborhood location, such as a prominent street corner(Exhibit B-1, pg. 5).
Twelve of the 13 trees proposed for removal are located at the center of the block and are only
partially visible from C Avenue (Exhibit E-3).As the appellant states,the trees proposed for removal
"are not readily visible at this time so it is difficult to argue they are significant to the neighborhood
now due to their character."The Commission found no evidence was presented that any specific
tree, or multiple trees, provided "distinctive character"to the neighborhood.
5. "Alternative Site Plans."Ms. Meckel cites page 8, lines 15-20 of the Commission's findings,
and states that "the Commission's finding is an incorrect interpretation of the City of Lake
Oswego Tree Removal Code. As described above, the large diameter pouglas Fir trees
proposed for removal in the application are significant to our neighborhood. They meet
the criteria of Elements 4 and 5 above, and perhaps even Element 6 if one accounts for the
character the trees remaining after the applicant clears, excavates, and builds the
proposed structures. These trees need only qualify under one of these elements to be
significant, as defined in the code. As a result, the Commission and the City staff are
obligated to require conditions such as alternative site plans,placement of structures, or
structural design to protect as many large diameter pouglas Fir trees as feasible.
We request the City Council direct the City's Planning Staff to not approve this tree
removal permit until after alternative plans to protect large diameter pouglas Firs have
been prepared,presented to and evaluated by City staff, and offered for public review by
public notice. We also request the City Council provide guidance to the Development
Review Commission and City staff on how to interpret the City Code for the protection of
the City of Lake Oswego's neighborhood residents'rights to the beautiful and green
setting into which we bought because we believed that the City is in fact The City of Trees.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 6
Response: The Commission found that no individual tree was found to meet the definition
of"significant tree" and that all subcriteria of LOC 55.02.080 Criterion #3 were met.
Because the Commission found that the applicant met Criterion #3, no consideration of
alternatives to the proposed tree removal and reasonable alternatives under the exceptions
to Criterion #3 was required (Exhibit B-1, pg. 7).
RECOMMENDATION
The City Council has the following options, upon adoption of findings and conclusions:
1. Affirm the Commission's decision and approve TR 499-17-02043 with the Commission's
conditions of approval, or with changes to the Commission's conditions; or
2. Reverse the Commission's decision and deny TR 499-17-02043.
EXHIBITS
A. NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL
A-1. Request for Development Review Commission public hearing by Lisa Brisley,
received June 23, 2017
A-2. Request for City Council public hearing by Suzanne Meckel, received August 18,
2017
B. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND ORDER
B-1. Development Review Commission Findings, Conclusions, and Order, dated
August 7, 2017
C. MINUTES OF THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMISSION HEARING
C-1. Minutes from July 17, 2017, Development Review Commission meeting
C-2. Minutes from August 8, 2017, Development Review Commission meeting
D. STAFF REPORTS
D-1. Staff Report, dated July 7, 2017
E. GRAPHICS/PLANS
E-1 Tax map
E-2 Existing Features Map
E-3 Tree Removal Plan
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 7
E-4 Pictures (7/3/2017)
F. WRITTEN MATERIALS
F-1 Tree Removal Application TR 499-17-02043, Submitted April 24, 2017
F-2 Notice of Development Restrictions for LU 07-0076
G. LETTERS
Neither For Nor A�ainst
None
Support
G-100. Letter from Brad Grove, received July 10, 2017
Opposition
G-200. Letter from Lisa Brisley, received May 7, 2017
G-201. Letter from Barbara Kelley (forwarded by Sharon Gustafson), received May 8,
2017
G-202. Letter from Sharon Gustafson (FAN/Forest Hills Tree Subcommittee), received
May 8, 2017
G-203. Letter from Jim Bolland, received May 8, 2017
G-204. Letter in Opposition Submitted by Lisa Brisley at DRC Hearing
G-205. Copy of Oregon State University Extension Service Publication "Tree
Protection on Construction and Development Sites" Submitted by Neil
Kozlowski at DRC Hearing
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
AP 17-05
�`�� t��''��' ..,_.
J u ne 2Z, 2017 ��� � � ���:�
����'�`���E'° -���,�: �� ,.
L; .M, _,�
To : City of la ke Oswego
Frorn Lisa Brisley
Re: Appeal / Request for a Hearing
Dear City of Lake Oswego,
Th�s letter is an appeal and a request for a hearing to be held on
the following:
1. File Number/Tree Application No.: 499-17-D2043
2. Date of Tentative Decision: June 16, 2017
3, Appe I le nt:
�isa Brisley
295 3rd Street #14
Lake Oswego, OR 97034
4, App�ican#: Blue Palouse P�operties
5. Location: 1053 C A�e.
��=�E=��1�'��z�.�..�
Kind regards, .�UN Z 3 2���
� �� .
� � '�I� L1.-
i' i._f�{„� �.
G/
��� 4�i i�!P��r...
Lisa Brisiey ,� `������ � , �
C�fL��-L �- c� ��� ob — (�`� �3 �e �� �
�. �,�w,�,�� s fe� � �
(s�3� C� � 1 -- l�f�� �
o�� �� °s �--
� �...,i ,s:��, NOTICE OF TENTATIVE STAFF
� � o DEC�SI4N ON TYPE II TREE �,
oR��o� REMOVAL APPLICATI4N* �
,���
DECISION —Tentat��ely Approved �
*A notice of tentative staff decfsion aA this applicatlon was previously Essued on May!6,2017.The application �,� �n
was subsequently put an hald pending a revision of the proposed house in arder to retafn a 33"Douglas�}r,The qi"��'"'
applicant has suhmitted a revised site plan,which is pasted wfth the application materfals on the Cit}�s Tree V��j�
Web Page:www.lakeosweso.cftv/trees.The appEicant withdrew the 33"Douglas fir fram the tree remaval 1`� `�'"
applicatidn,revisjng the requested numher of trees frorrE�,4 to 13.
Tree Applit�tion No.: 449-17-02043
Date of Tentative Decision: June 16,2017
Applicant: Blue Palouse Properties
I.ocation af Property: 1053 C Ave
Description of Decision; Staff has tentative�y APPROVED this app[ication to remove 13 trees,subject to
the following condition of approval:
• Prior to the issuance of the tree permit, identify the loeation,size and species of 13 mitigation
trees,l0 of which shall be a native species.The trees shall be a minimum of 1.5-inch caliper for
decEduous or six feet tall for evergreens.See tMe City's Pfant l.ist in LOC 5Q.11.a0a4,Appendix D
for a list of native trees.
�'his deci5ion witl become final seven days from the date of tentative decision unless appealed as
described be�ow, �
Right to Appeal: Tf�is decision may be a�pealed by filing a written ftequest for a Hearing alang with the
appeal fee within seven talendar days fram the date of tentati��decision, abo�e. A Request for Hearing
shall:
1. list the File Nurnber and Date of pecision.
2, Request that a hearing be held on the applicatiQn,
3. Include name,address and signature of the appellant.
4. Be accorr�panied by payment of any f+�ing fee.
Failure to comply with these requirements can result in rejection of t�e Appeal.
T�e Reauest for a Hearing must be�led by 5:00 p.m.on Friday,lune 23,2017:
C+ty Recorder
City of Lake Oswego � � ��{ �
P.D, Box 369 ��`�� .
38a"A"Avenue ,� �! 7
Lake Oswego,OR 97034 I,�� ���� � `��
Phone: (503)575-3984
Decision Making Process: If appeafed,this appfication will be heard at a noticed public hearir�g held by
the pevelopment Review Corrrmissian (DRC). Any person may appear and testify. 7he�RC wiil
render a final dec�sion,which may be appealed to t�e City Council, If not appealed, this decision will
becorne final and binding.
The cost to file an appeal is$I86.00.
August 15, 2017
To: City of Lake Qswego
�rom: Suzanne Meckel
Re: Appeal/ Request for a �earing with the Lake Oswego City Council
Dear City of �ake Oswego,
This letter is an appeal and a request for a hearing to be held on the following:
1) �ile No: AP 17-05 {TR 499-17- �2043� and Date of Decision: August 7, 2Q17
2) 1, 5uzanne Meckel, was present at the 7/17 DRC hearing and gave public,
�erbal testimony. 1 filled out a �orrn at the public hearing documenting my
attendance and te�stimony. My testimony is on pubfic record.
3� Suzanne Meckel, 658 5t� Street Lake Oswego, OR 97034
4) Payment of $2�1 dollars is accompanied with this �etter of appeal ar�d
request for public hea�ing
5) See attach�d 3 page description ofthe iss�aes raised for Council's
consideration and the specific reasons why the appellan� belie�es the
De�elo�ment Re�iew Commission's decision €s incorrect or not in
canformance with the applicable criteria.
Sincerely,
kt��oc.K.c�.e� �{��.�.
�� '�-s���;-��c���t
�° � -��s- �� � �� ► �: . �Z � C � � � � �
�� g �� �- , AUG � $ 20f7
��� �SW���, �lC� � ���� Ci��r������osv��Q
��'r�'�;� ��'�,,�J'�/ % ��` �fl - ����
� �,
�(�{ � � [�: Y L�T �``) Q i f � (Q�1
����r C'� � �i.���:i �v �C�S
�
�� � ��
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]-1920
The City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission and Planning Department have
not been interpreting the Tree Protection Code accurately, fairly, or in accordance with
community desires. It has not protected our neighborhood's rights as the code writers
intended. Specifically in the case of tree removal application 499-17-o2o43, the record of the
recent Public Hearing on this application clearly indicates the areas of loose and unfounded
interpretation of City of Lake Oswego Code 55.02.080.
From the record, page 3, lines ii-14:
To determine whether a "significant tree" is proposed for removal, its seven elements must be
reviewed. If all elements are met for a tree, then the tree is a "significant tree"that cannot be removed
unless the Criterion #3 Exception provisions are met. Conversely if any element is not met, then the
tree is not a "slgnificant tree."
This statement is absolutely incorrect. Here is what the code states:
From the record, page 3, lines �-9:
Subcriterion (a):A significant tree (defined as a healthy, noninvasive tree over 15"DBH that is
considered significant to the neighborhood due to size, species, or distincfive character, or the on/y
remarning tree on the property);
Note the word "or", twice in the description. Also note the absence of the word "and". The
correct interpretation of the code is that if any one of four elements are met, the tree is
significant. Here are the four elements as they are numbered in the Record of Decision, any
one of which define the tree as significant:
Element 4, significance to neighborhood due to size.
From the record, page 4, lines io-i3:
The Commission interprets this element to require examination of the neighborhood in which the
specitic tree is located: a 45" tree is significant to a neighborhood where the predominant size of other
trees is substantially smaller, such as 10".
We could not agree more. The predominant tree size in our Lake Oswego neighborhood is on
the order of io". 45" diameter trees are not common. In addition, trees of this large diameter
are old, well over ioo years. ioo year old trees are significant by any reasonable definition
and are no longer common, let alone predominant, in any urban area in Oregon, including
this neighborhood in Lake Oswego. The Board is on record wrongly interpreting this part of
the code to the detriment Lake Oswego residents' rights. The large diameter pouglas Fir trees
are significant to the neighborhood due to their size and associated age.
Element 5, significance to neighborhood due to species.
From the record, page 4, lines 32-38:
Similar to the Commission's interpretation regarding Element #4, the Commission interprets this
element to require examination of the neighborhood in which the specific tree is located to determine
whetherthe species of the tree proposed for removal is "significant," which the Commission interprets
as not generally found within the species of trees in the neighborhood and the rare tree species, within
the neighborhood canopy, contributes to defining the neighborhood character and aesthetics. A
Douglas fir proposed for removal in a neighborhood of Douglas firs is not unusual or"significanY' to the
neighborhood because of its species.
Nowhere in the code is the commonality of a tree species defined or interpreted as a criteria
that diminishes a tree's significance. If a neighborhood is named The Blue Haven because
most of its houses are painted blue, then a blue house is significant to that neighborhood.
Similarly, Lake Oswego markets its real estate as the City of Trees. Is there a more significant
tree species in the City of Lake Oswego that supports this moniker than the Douglas Fir
species? The city's origins date back to the iron furnace fed by charcoal from Douglas Fir trees
cut in the area. The City of Portland was originally Stump Town because of the vast expanse
of Douglas Fir stumps that covered the city's beginning development. The Oregon State
of£icial tree is a Douglas Fir. If our neighborhood had to pick one species that defines the City
of Trees it would be the Douglas Fir. The fact that there is this remaining stand of Douglas Fir
trees is significant in itself. What we have here is a significant stand of significant trees.
These trees and this stand are significant to our neighborhood.
Element 6, significance to neighborhood due to character.
From the record, page 5, lines 15-i8:
The Commission interprets this element to require, as distinct from size or species, that the tree
provides distinctive character to the neighborhood, i.e., by being in a prominent location or uniquely
visible at a prominent neighborhood location, such as a prominent street corner.
Nowhere in the code is this interpretation supported. There probably is an argument that a
tree with character is only significant to the neighborhood if it can be seen. However, it does
not have to be "uniquely visible" or in a "prominent location". A tree with distinctive
character that is visible from a public alley can be significant to a neighborhood. Many of our
residents walk back alleys and enjoy the treescape. A tree with character is always appreciated
and therefore valuable and significant.
In the case of this application for removal, any large diameter pouglas Firs that are protected
may very well be seen and appreciated by the neighborhood after the clearing, excavating, and
construction is completed. Some of the largest may be of very impressive character.
However, these trees are not readily visible at this time so it is difficult to argue they are
significant to the neighborhood now due to their character.
Element �, removal of only remaining iree on property.
We agree with the Commission, the application will not remove all trees from the property.
Alternative site plans.
From the record, page 8, lines i5-2o:
The Commission finds that an applicant's obligation to demonstrate that alternatives to tree removal
have been considered arises only if the applicant does not meet Criterion#3. Because the
Commission finds that the applicant meets Criterion #3, the applicant need not use the Exception to
Criterion #3 to obtain tree removal approval, and the Commission may not itself require or impose
conditions to alternatives to the tree removal, such as alternative site plans, placement of structures,
or structure design, if the applicant has met Criterion #3.
The Commission's finding is an incorrect interpretation of the City of Lake Oswego Tree
Removal Code. As described above, the large diameter pouglas Fir trees proposed for
removal in the application are significant to our neighborhood. They meet the criteria of
Elements 4 and 5 above, and perhaps even Element 6 if one accounts for the character the
trees remaining after the applicant ciears, excavates, and builds the proposed structures.
These trees need only qualify under one of these elements to be significant, as defined in the
code. As a result, the Commission and City staff are obligated to require conditions such as
alternative site plans, placement of structures, or structural design to protect as many large
diameter pouglas Fir trees as feasible.
We request the City Council direct the City's Planning Staff to not approve this tree removal
permit until after alternative plans to protect large diameter pouglas Firs have been prepared,
presented to and evaluated by City staff, and offered for public review by public notice. We
also request the City Council provide guidance to the Development Review Commission and
City staff on how to interpret the City Code for the protection of the City of Lake Oswego's
neighborhood residents' rights to the beautiful and green setting into which we bought
because we believed that the City is in fact The City of Trees.
APPROVED
1 BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMISSION OF THE
2 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
3
4 AN APPEAL OF A TYPE II TREE REMOVAL PERMIT ) AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]-1920
5 IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT A NEW SINGLE-FAMILY ) BLUE PALOUSE PROPERTIES LLC
6 DWELLING ON THE SITE. ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS& ORDER
7
8 NATURE OF APPLICATION/REQUEST FOR HEARING
9
10 The applicant is requesting approval to remove thirteen trees under a Type II tree removal permit
11 in order to construct a new single-family dwelling and driveway on the site.
12
13 The site is located at 1053 C Avenue (Tax Lot 5201 of Tax Map 2 1E 3CA).
14
15 Lisa Brisley timely filed a request for hearing.
16
17 HEARINGS
18
19 The Development Review Commission (Commission) held a public hearing and considered this application at
20 its meeting of July 17, 2017. The following additional exhibits were submitted at or just before the hearing
21 and were entered in the record:
22
23 Exhibit G-100 Letter in Support from Brad Grove, received July 10, 2017
24 Exhibit G-204 Letter in Opposition Submitted by Appellant at Hearing
25 Exhibit G-205 Copy of Oregon State University Extension Service Publication "Tree Protection on
26 Construction and Development Sites" Submitted by Neil Kozlowski at Hearing
27
28 CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
29
30 A. City of Lake Oswe�o Tree Code (LOC Chapter 55)
31
32 LOC 55.02.080 Criteria for Issuance of Type II Tree Cutting Permits
33 LOC 55.02.084 Mitigation Required
34 LOC 55.02.085 Request for Public Hearing on a Type II Tree Cutting Permit
35 LOC 55.02.094 Conditions of Approval for Tree Cutting Permits
36
37 CONCLUSION
38
39 The Commission denies the appeal and concludes that TR 499-17-02043, with conditions as proposed by
40 staff, complies with all applicable criteria.
41
42 FINDINGS AND REASONS
43
44 The Commission incorporates the July 7, 2017, Staff Report (with all exhibits attached thereto), as
45 support for its decision. To the extent they are consistent with the decision herein,the Commission
46 adopts by reference its oral deliberations on this matter.
47
48 Following are the supplementary findings and conclusions of this Commission:
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]-1920
Page 1 of 10
1
2 1. Criterion#1 fLOC 55.02.080(1)1.
3
4 The Commission finds that the trees proposed for removal are within the applicant's proposed
5 development area for constructing a new single family dwelling pursuant to the Lake Oswego
6 Code and therefore this criterion is met. (Whether an alternative development analysis is
7 required would be addressed in Criterion #3).
8
9 2. Criterion #2 fLOC 55.02.080(2)1.
10
11 a. Impacts on Adjacent Trees
12
13 Public testimony raised concerns about the impacts of proposed tree removal on adjacent
14 trees. Staff reported the findings of the City's contract arborist Morgan Holen:
15
16 She visited the site and evaluated the proposed tree removal application for impacts on
17 adjacent trees, on site and on neighboring properties. She found no significant negative
18 impacts on adjacent trees or on existing windbreaks.
19
20 This evidence was unrebutted.
21
22 The Commission finds, based upon the unrebutted findings of the City's contract arborist,that
23 the proposed tree removal will not have significant negative impacts on adjacent trees or on
24 existing windbreaks.
25
26 3. Criterion#3 fLOC 55.02.080(3)1.
27
28 This criterion first requires the Commission to determine whether or not tree removal would have a
29 "significant negative impact on the character or aesthetics of the neighborhood." If tree removal
30 would not have such an impact,then Criterion#3 is met and no exception to compliance with
31 Criterion#3 is needed (by demonstrating there is no reasonable alternative site plan or landscaping
32 plan, per Exception (b)). Stated in reverse, consideration of whether there is an alternative site plan
33 or landscaping plan that would not require tree removal cannot occur before the Commission first
34 finds that tree removal would have a "significant negative impact on the character or aesthetics of
35 the neighborhood." See LOC 55.02.080(3) and Exception:
36
37 3. Removal of the tree will not have a significant negative impact on the character or
38 aesthetics of the neighborhood. This standard is met when removal of the tree(s) does not
39 involve: *** [subcriteria (a)—(e)].
40
41 Exceptions:This subsection (3) is not applicable when:
42 a. A tree is likely to or will continue to cause damage to a permanent,viable existing structure,
43 or to infrastructure, such as utilities or paved landscape features, that cannot be remedied
44 through reasonable tree maintenance or pruning; or
45 b. Alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable alternative exists
46 to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. In making this determination, the City
47 may consider alternative site plans or placement of structures (development purpose) or
48 alternate landscaping designs (outgrown landscape area; landscape plan) that would lessen the
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]-1920
Page 2 of 10
1 impact on trees, so long as the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Lake
2 Oswego Code.
3
4 Whether tree removal would have a "significant negative impact on the character or aesthetics of
5 the neighborhood" is determined by examining the following subcriteria:
6
7 Subcriterion (a): A significant tree (defined as a healthy, noninvasive tree over 15"DBH that is
8 considered significant to the neighborhood due to size,species, or distinctive character, or the only
9 remaining tree on the property);
10
11 To determine whether a "significant tree" is proposed for removal, its seven elements must be
12 reviewed. If all elements are met for a tree,then the tree is a "significant tree"that cannot be
13 removed unless the Criterion #3 Exception provisions are met. Conversely if any element is not met,
14 then the tree is not a "significant tree." Whether a non-significant tree can be removed without
15 considering the Exception depends on whether the tree proposed for removal would meet
16 subcriteria (b)—(e).
17
18 Element#1—Healthv:
19
20 There was no evidence presented that any of the trees were not healthy. Therefore,for purposes of
21 the first element of this subcriterion,the Commission assumes the trees are healthy.
22
23 Element#2—Noninvasive:
24
25 The species of trees proposed for removal are Douglas fir, maple, cherry, and spruce. The two
26 sweet cherry trees proposed for removal are considered invasive; none of the other trees proposed
27 for removal are listed as invasive on the Invasive Tree Species List1.
28
29 Element#3—Over 15" DBH:
30
31 The trees range in size from, and the Commission finds:
32
33 • Nine Douglas firs ranging in size from 6"to 46" DBH.
34
35 Only those Douglas firs greater than 15" DBH would potentially qualify as a "significant tree", if
36 the specific trees greater than 15" DBH met the additional elements of this subcriterion.
37
38 • One 6" DBH maple
39
40 This tree cannot qualify as a "significant tree" because it is not over 15" DBH.
41
42 • Two cherry trees, 9" and 14" DBH,
43
44 Neither of these trees can qualify as a "significant tree" because neither has a DBH over 15".
45
�
htt�://www.ci.oswcgo.or.us/sitcs/dcfault/filcs/filcattachmcnts/trccs/wcbpa�c/24966/invasivc trcc_spccics_list rcv0
7-11-14.�df?t=1501282103997
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]-1920
Page 3 of 10
1
2 • One 17" DBH spruce.
3
4 This tree would potentially qualify as a "significant tree" if it meets the additional elements of
5 this subcriteria.
6
7 Element#4-Considered Si�nificant to the Nei�hborhood Due to Size:
8
9 The question for this element is whether any specific tree that also meets Elements# 1-3 is
10 significant to the neighborhood because of its size. The Commission interprets this element to
11 require examination of the neighborhood in which the specific tree is located: a 45"tree is
12 significant to a neighborhood where the predominant size of other trees is substantially smaller,
13 such as 10". However a 45"tree would not itself be significant to a neighborhood where it is within
14 the predominate range of size of trees, i.e., 40"—50" trees. For a tree's size to be "significant"to
15 the neighborhood, its absolute size is irrelevant.
16
17 Of the Douglas firs greater than 15" DBH and the spruce tree, as can be seen in Exhibits E-2 and E-4,
18 the Commission finds the site contains other similar sized, large trees along the west side property
19 line and is surrounded by other similar large trees on adjacent properties that are not proposed for
20 removal.
21
22 The Commission received testimony that large trees would be a significant tree based on size
23 because mature trees had a greater contribution to the forest ecosystem than young trees. In
24 determining the parameters of neighborhood significance,the Commission is guided by the overall
25 purpose of Criterion#3: character or aesthetics of the neighborhood. The Commission finds that
26 this element is whether the tree is significant to the neighborhood due to size (for its contribution to
27 neighborhood character and aesthetics), not the significance to the forest ecosystem due to size.
28
29 Element#5 -Considered Si�nificant to the Nei�hborhood Due to Species:
30
31 The question for this element is whether any specific tree is significant to the neighborhood because
32 of its species. Similar to the Commission's interpretation regarding Element#4,the Commission
33 interprets this element to require examination of the neighborhood in which the specific tree is
34 located to determine whether the species of the tree proposed for removal is "significant," which
35 the Commission interprets as not generally found within the species of trees in the neighborhood
36 and the rare tree species,within the neighborhood canopy, contributes to defining the
37 neighborhood character and aesthetics. A Douglas fir proposed for removal in a neighborhood of
38 Douglas firs is not unusual or"significant"to the neighborhood because of its species.
39
40 The Commission received testimony that Douglas firs should be considered "significant trees" due to
41 species because the State of Oregon has declared the Douglas fir to be the "official state tree." The
42 Commission notes that the subcriterion element focuses on significance to the neighborhood, not
43 the significance to the state. The Commission finds that the fact that the Douglas fir is named as the
44 official state tree is not relevant to the subcriterion element of"significant to the neighborhood due
45 to species." (The Commission also notes that the Legislature's basis for declaring the Douglas fir to
46 be the official state tree is likely unrelated to neighborhood context, but rather is due to a larger,
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]-1920
Page 4 of 10
1 statewide impact, such as either the prevalence of the tree species in the state or the economic
2 impact of the species to the state's economy.z)
3
4 The Commission also received testimony that a tree should be considered significant to the
5 neighborhood due to species if the tree is native. As noted above,this subcriterion element focuses
6 on significance to the neighborhood character and aesthetics. The Commission finds that whether a
7 tree is listed as a native tree species or not on a list is not relevant to this subcriterion element.
8
9 No testimony was received regarding the spruce. Accordingly, the Commission finds no evidence
10 was presented that the spruce tree was significant to the neighborhood due to species.
11
12 Element#6-Considered Si�nificant to the Nei�hborhood Due to Distinctive Character:
13
14 The question for this element is whether any specific tree is significant to the neighborhood because
15 of its distinctive character. The Commission interprets this element to require, as distinct from size
16 or species,that the tree provides distinctive character to the neighborhood, i.e., by being in a
17 prominent location or uniquely visible at a prominent neighborhood location, such as a prominent
18 street corner.
19
20 There was no evidence cited to the Commission that any tree, or multiple trees, proposed for
21 removal are in a prominent location or uniquely visible at a prominent neighborhood location, i.e.,
22 they are not trees at a prominent street corner. The Commission finds no evidence was presented
23 that any specific tree, or multiple trees, provided "distinctive character"to the neighborhood.
24
25 Element#7—Removal of the Only Remainin�Tree on the Propertv:
26
27 No argument was made that removal of any of the trees would result in no trees remaining on the
28 site, and, as shown on Exhibit E-3,the Commission finds that would not be the case.
29
30 Subconclusion for Subcriterion (a)-Si�nificant Tree: Based on the above findings, the Commission
31 finds that no tree proposed for removal qualifies as a "significant tree" and thus subcriterion (a) is
32 met.
33
34 Subcriterion (b):Alterations to the distinctive features or continuity of the neighborhood skyline, as
35 viewed from all public streets and properties within 300 ft. of the property;
36
37 This subcriterion is met when the tree removal would not leave a significant, noticeable gap or break
38 in the continuity of the tree canopy of the neighborhood skyline as viewed from public streets and
39 properties within 300 ft. of the property. The site is an interior lot, without frontage on any street.
40 Exhibit E-2. No testimony was submitted that demonstrated the tree removal would result in an
41 alteration in the neighborhood skyline, as viewed from nearby streets or properties. Due to the
42 presence of other large trees on surrounding properties that are not proposed for removal (visible in
43 Exhibit E-2 and E-4), the Commission finds that the proposed removal of 13 trees will not result in a
44 significant, noticeable gap or break in the continuity of the tree canopy of the neighborhood skyline
2 See Oregon Blue Book: "The Douglas-fir was chosen because of the leading role it has played in the
economic development of the state." http://bluebook.state.or.us/kids/focus/tree.htm
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]-1920
Page 5 of 10
1 as viewed from any street or properties within 300 ft. The Commission finds that this subcriterion is
2 met.
3
4 Subcriterion (c)—Tree serves as a visual screen;
5
6 This subcriterion is met if the tree(s) proposed for removal does not:
7
8 "[serve] as a visual screen between a residential zone and an abutting non-residential zone, or
9 between a low density residential zone and a medium or high density residential zone, or
10 between a medium and high density residential zone."
11
12 As stated in the staff report, pg.7:
13
14 "The subject site and all surrounding sites are zoned R-10 residential zoning. None of the trees
15 proposed for removal serve as a visual screen between the site and an adjacent property with a
16 different zoning designation."
17
18 There was no contradictory evidence submitted. This subcriterion is met.
19
20 Subcriterion (dJ-Street Tree;
21
22 This subcriterion is met if a tree proposed for removal is not a street tree. As stated in the staff
23 report, pg. 7:
24
25 "None of the trees proposed for removal are street trees; they are not located within the public
26 right-of-way or pedestrian easement abutting a right-of-way, nor were they used to meet the
27 street tree requirements for a prior development."
28
29 There was no contradictory evidence submitted. This subcriterion is met.
30
31 Subcriterion (e)—Greater Than 50%of a Stand of Trees Are Proposed For Removal
32
33 This subcriterion is met if the tree(s) proposed for removal would be more than 50%of the trees in a
34 stand of trees. A stand (of trees) means "a group of trees (of the same species or a mixture)that
35 forms a visual and biological unit at least 15 ft. in height with a contiguous crown width of at least
36 120 ft." LOC 55.02.020. The Commission notes that the boundaries of a "stand" are not further
37 defined or limited by the lot boundaries. In other words,the boundaries of a stand of trees can
38 cross lot boundaries.
39
40 As stated in the staff report, pg.7:
41
42 "The 17" spruce proposed to be removed for the driveway access to C Avenue is not located in a
43 stand of trees. The 12 other trees proposed to be removed exceed 50%of the trees on the site;
44 however,the entire stand of on-site trees are a part of a larger stand of contiguous tree canopy
45 containing more than 24 trees, as shown in the below aerial image. Thus, the 12 trees proposed
46 for removal are less than 50%of the stand."
47
48 There was no contradictory evidence submitted. This subcriterion is met.
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]-1920
Page 6 of 10
1
2 Conclusion—Subcriterion (a)—(e):The Commission finds that the applicant has demonstrated that
3 the proposed tree removal will not have a significant negative impact on the character or aesthetics
4 of the neighborhood because all of subcriteria (a)—(e) are met: the trees proposed for removal do
5 not constitute a significant tree, alter the neighborhood skyline, serve as a visual screen, constitute a
6 street tree, or remove 50%of a stand of trees.
7
8 Exception:Alternative Site Plans/ Landscapin� Desi�n That Would Lessen Impact on Trees
9
10 Some persons testified that the Commission should require the applicant to demonstrate that
11 alternatives to the tree removal, such as alternative site plans, placement of structures, or structure
12 design, were considered and that no reasonable alternative exists to allow the property to be used
13 as permitted in the zone, as provided in Exception (b) of Criterion#3.
14
15 The Commission finds that an applicant's obligation to demonstrate that alternatives to tree
16 removal have been considered arises only if the applicant does not meet Criterion#3. Because the
17 Commission finds that the applicant meets Criterion#3, the applicant need not use the Exception to
18 Criterion#3 to obtain tree removal approval, and the Commission may not itself require or impose
19 conditions to alternatives to the tree removal, such as alternative site plans, placement of
20 structures, or structure design, if the applicant has met Criterion #3.
21
22 4. Enhancin�Views fLOC 55.02.080(4)1.
23
24 The Commission finds that the trees proposed for removal are not being removed for the sole
25 purpose of providing or enhancing views.
26
27 5. Miti�ation Plan fLOC 55.02.050(1)(b)1.
28
29 LOC 55.02.050.1(b) states that tree removal applications other than invasive tree removal
30 applications shall contain a mitigation plan if required by LOC 55.02.084. LOC 55.02.084(1) and LOC
31 55.02.080(5) requires an applicant for a Type II tree removal mitigate for any tree permitted for
32 removal.
33
34 The appellant submitted written testimony(Exhibit G-204) and testified that the application should
35 not have been accepted without a mitigation plan. Staff stated that it was staff's interpretation that
36 LOC 55.02.050.1(b) did not require Type II tree removal applications without a mitigation plan be
37 rejected; rather it is common to receive Type II applications before the applicant has fully designed
38 their mitigation plan.
39
40 The Commission finds that the applicant did submit a mitigation plan with the application, although
41 it was clearly deficient because it showed only one mitigation tree (Page 4 of Exhibit F-1). Staff
42 received the updated mitigation plan on June 3, 2017 (Page 2 of Exhibit F-1).
43
44 The Commission notes the historic practice by staff of accepting applications that are not submitted
45 with a mitigation plan, with the mitigation requirements later imposed as a condition of approval,
46 per LOC 55.02.080(5):
47
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]-1920
Page 7 of 10
1 "City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree pursuant to LOC
2 55.02.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit."
3
4 The Commission finds that LOC 55.02.050 does not require the staff to reject a tree removal
5 application if certain information is not contained in the application. See,to the contrary, LOC
6 50.07.003.1.c(ii) [City manager may decline to accept an application if a listed procedural
7 requirement is not met], and 50.07.003.7.b.iii and iv [City Manager shall reject an appeal if the
8 appeal filing does not comply with certain requirements].
9
10 The Commission finds that requiring a mitigation plan as a condition of approval meets the
11 mitigation requirement of LOC 55.02.084:that every tree removed under a Type II permit be
12 mitigated per LOC 55.02.084(1), (4). The Commission further notes that a mitigation plan is not a
13 landscape plan. A mitigation plan would meet its minimal requirements if it shows the mitigation
14 trees on the site. (The authority to direct where a mitigation tree is to be planted on site is per the
15 conditioning authority of LOC 55.02.094(1):
16
17 "1. The reviewing authority may impose conditions of approval on any tree cutting permit if
18 the condition is reasonably related to preventing,eliminating or mitigating a negative impact
19 or potential impact on natural features or processes or on the built environment of the
20 neighborhood which is as created or contributed to by the approved tree removal.")
21
22 Finally, the Commission finds that its authority is limited to determining whether or not the
23 application, as supplemented by all testimony and evidence submitted by the applicant,those in
24 favor of the application, and those opposed to the application shows that the criteria of LOC
25 55.02.080 is met (not LOC 55.02.050):
26
27 "Following the close of the public testimony,the DRC shall determine, based upon the evidence
28 and testimony in the record, whether or not the application complies with the criteria contained
29 in LOC 55.02.080."
30
31 LOC 55.02.085(3).
32
33 As noted, LOC 55.02.080(5)states that the "City shall require"mitigation by a condition of approval:
34
35 5. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree pursuant to LOC
36 55.02.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of approval of the permit.
37
38 Staff's approval required mitigation (a revised mitigation plan was required as a condition of
39 approval), and this Commission's Order similarly requires the revised mitigation plan.
40
41 Accordingly,the Commission finds (1) a mitigation plan (although clearly deficient) was submitted
42 with the application, and (2) even if a clearly deficient mitigation plan is tantamount to not filing a
43 mitigation plan,there is no authority to deny the application based upon the initial failure of an
44 applicant to submit a mitigation plan at the time of submitting the application.
45
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]-1920
Page 8 of 10
1
2 6. Other Items Raised Durin� Public Testimony.
3
4 a.Application Fee.The appellant submitted written testimony(Exhibit G-204) and testified that the
5 application fee for Type II tree removal applications should be greater because the fee does not
6 reflect the age and value of the trees requested for removal.
7
8 The Commission finds the fees required for tree removal applications, including Type II applications,
9 are established by the City Council, through its adoption of the 2017 Master Fees and Charges
10 Resolution3. The Commission finds that the applicant paid the applicable fee.4
11
12 b. Proportional Trunk and Canopv Site Plans. During public testimony there was a request to require
13 site plans for Type II tree removal applications to depict trees proposed for removal with to-scale
14 representations of their trunk diameter and canopy size. The appeal before the Commission is
15 whether the record before the application and record shows that all applicable criteria of LOC
16 55.02.080 has been met. The site plan requirement is found in LOC 55.02.50(1)(b)(i):
17
18 "The number, DBH, species and location of the trees proposed to be cut on a site plan of the
19 property, except as provided for a major forest management permit application under LOC
20 55.02.072(4):
21
22 The Commission finds that even if it has authority to deny an application for tree removal based
23 upon failure to comply with the submission requirements of LOC 55.02.050, LOC 55.02.050(1)(b)(i)
24 does not require the application contain a site plan that has to-scale representations of their trunk
25 diameter and canopy size.
26
27 c.Tree Protection. During public testimony a concern was raised about the adequacy of tree
28 protection measures in preserving trees not proposed to be removed during construction activities
29 on the site and a copy of a document released by Oregon State University's Extension Program,
30 "Tree Protection on Construction and Development Sites"was submitted into the record as Exhibit
31 G-205.
32
33 The Commission finds that the tree protection requirements of LOC 55.08,to protect trees during
34 construction activity, are not criteria for determining whether to grant or deny a tree removal
35 application under LOC 55.02.080. See LOC 55.02.085(3) quoted above. Approval of the tree
36 preservation measures is under the authority of the City Manager(staff), and is not a subject of
37 appeal before the Commission. LOC 55.08.020(1).
38
39 The Commission notes that staff stated that a tree protection plan has been submitted (499-17-
40 02044).
41
3
http://www.ci.oswe�o.or.us/sites/default/files/fileattachments/finance/webpa�e/11471/2017 master
fees booklet final.pdf?t=1501258553808
4 The Commission does not address here whether the Commission could deny the application if the
application were accepted when less than the applicable fee were paid. But see Mitigation Plan [LOC
55.02.050(1)(b) discussion above.
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]-1920
Page 9 of 10
1 ORDER
2
3 IT IS ORDERED BY THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMISSION of the City of Lake Oswego that:
4
5 1. The appeal [AP 17-OS] of tree removal permit [TR 499-17-02043] is denied, and the tree removal
6 permit is approved, subject to the following condition of approval:
7
8 A. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, submit a revised mitigation plan substituting the
9 mitigation trees close to the future dwelling with species that are suited to the available
10 planting area. At least 10 of the 13 required mitigation trees shall be native species. If
11 insufficient space is available to plant all 13 trees on the site,the applicant may pay a fee in
12 lieu of planting up to four of the 13 required mitigation trees.
13
14 B. Prior to the issuance of the final building inspection for the new dwelling,the
15 applicant/owner shall plant the mitigation trees required by Condition A, above.
16
17
18 DATED this 7t" day of August, 2017.
19
20 David Poulson/s/
21 David Poulson, Chair
22 Development Review Commission
23
24
25 Janice Bader/s/
26 Janice Bader
27 Administrative Support III
28
29 ATTEST:
30
31 TENTATIVE DECISION—July 17, 2017
32 AYES: Ahrend, Poulson, Shur, Shearer, Smith and Taheri
33 NOES: Prichard
34 ABSTAIN: None
35 ABSENT: None
36
37 WRITTEN FINDINGS—August 7, 2017
38 AYES: Poulson,Ahrend, Shur, Smith and Taheri
39 NOES: Prichard
40 ABSTAIN: None
41 ABSENT: Shearer
42
43
44
45
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]-1920
Page 10 of 10
DRAFT
�� �� �
�� ��
ti �-
�' M � � CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
��� � �
Development Review Commission Minutes
� _ � Monday, July 17, 2017
�e�;,c�
The Commissioners convened at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 380 A Avenue.
Members present: Chair Brent Ahrend, Vice Chair David Poulson, Paden Prichard, Jeff Shearer,
Nick Shur, Kirk Smith and Nader Taheri.
Members absent: None.
Staff present: Jessica Numanoglu, Planning Manager; Ellen Davis, Associate Planner; Evan
Boone, Deputy City Attorney; and Janice Bader, Administrative Support.
MINUTES
None.
FINDINGS
None.
PUBLIC HEARING
TR 499-17-02043 [AP 17-05], a request for hearing on the tentative decision by the Planning &
Building Services Department on a Type II tree removal application to remove 13 trees in order to
construct a new single-family dwelling.
The site is located at 1053 C Avenue (21 E03CA05201). The staff coordinator is Ellen Davis,
Associate Planner.
Chair Ahrend opened the hearing. Mr. Boone outlined the applicable criteria and procedure.
Commissioners Taheri, Prichard, and Ahrend reported visiting the site prior to the public hearing
but were unable to access as it was overgrown and there was a fence. No one challenged any
Commissioner's ability to consider the application.
Staff Report
Ms. Davis provided a brief staff report presentation. She introduced Exhibit G-100, a letter in
support, into the record. The applicant's request is for a Type II tree removal application to remove
13 trees in order to construct a new single-family residence and driveway at 1053 C Avenue. She
showed an aerial photograph of the site and surrounding area, which is a vacant flag lot created by
minor partition in 2007. The site is in the R-10 zone and is heavily treed. As part of the land use
conditions of approval for the minor partition, four trees were protected that cannot be removed
under a Type II application. None of those trees are requested for removal by the applicant.
She briefly addressed the review criteria for Type II tree removal applications, with more detailed
discussion found in the staff report dated July 7, 2017:
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission
Minutes of July 17, 2017 Page 1 of 11
DRAFT
1. The proposed tree removal is for a single-family residence on the site.
2. The proposal will not result in a significant negative impact on erosion, flow of surface
waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks.
3. The removal will not have a significant negative impact on the character or aesthetics of the
neighborhood:
• None of the trees proposed for removal are significant individually based on the
definition of a significant tree, which considers the size, species, distinctive
character, or the only remaining tree on the property.
• None of the trees serve as a screen between a residential and non-residential zone.
• No street trees are proposed for removal.
• Less than 50% of the stand, which includes trees both on site and adjacent
properties, is proposed for removal.
• The removal of the 13 trees will not alter the continuity of the neighborhood skyline
as viewed from public streets and properties within 300 ft. because the site is a flag
lot located in the middle of the block and there are many equally large trees on and
surrounding the site that are not proposed to be removed and which will maintain
the character and continuity of the neighborhood skyline.
Ms. Davis showed photographs taken from the north and south of the site to illustrate the impact of
removal to the neighborhood skyline, noting trees that will not be removed. From the Bayberry side
the trees proposed for removal are not visible. From the C Avenue side three trees (Spruce in the
foreground and two fir trees further back on the site) that are proposed for removal are visible,
however there are other large mature trees that will continue to contribute to the neighborhood
skyline. She showed the proposed tree mitigation site plan and noted the trees that are not allowed
to be removed per the 2007 minor partition approval.
4. The trees proposed for removal are not being removed for the sole purpose of view
enhancement.
5. Regarding the proposed mitigation planting plan, staff is concerned that there is insufficient
planting area for several proposed large-stature mitigation trees, which are in close
proximity to the future dwelling. Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring the
applicant to submit a revised mitigation plan substituting the mitigation trees close to the
dwelling with species that are suited to the available planting area and to allow the applicant
the option to pay a fee in lieu of planting up to four of the 13 required mitigation trees if
insufficient space is available to plant all 13 trees on the site.
She concluded that staff finds that each of the approval criteria of LOC 55.02.080 are met and
recommends approval of the Type II tree removal application, subject to the following conditions of
approval:
1. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, submit a revised mitigation plan substituting the
mitigation trees close to the future dwelling with species that are suited to the available
planting area. At least 10 of the 13 required mitigation trees shall be native species. If
insufficient space is available to plant all 13 trees on the site, the applicant may pay a fee in
lieu of planting up to four of the 13 required mitigation trees.
2. Prior to the issuance of the final building inspection for the new dwelling, the
applicant/owner shall plant the mitigation trees required by Condition 1, above.
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission
Minutes of July 17, 2017 Page 2 of 11
DRAFT
Questions of Staff
In response to a question from Commissioner Prichard, Ms. Davis described how the updated
mitigation plan relates to the photograph showing trees from C Avenue, based on the information
provided. She added that the applicant might be able to shed some light on this during their portion
of the hearing. In response to a question from Commissioner Smith regarding Exhibit E-6 and the
prior conditions of approval for the trees that have to be protected, presuming that trees that are
supposed to be protected will be protected and the proposed structure will be at least 12 feet away,
Ms. Davis stated there will be a tree protection plan on file and the inspector will visit the site to
ensure fencing is installed correctly around trees proposed for protection and that the required
distance has been met. In response to a question from Commissioner Poulson about the four trees
that are to be preserved as part of the partition and what the criteria were, Ms. Numanoglu shared
that she reviewed that project and as part of a flag lot partition you can require specific trees be
preserved to ensure screening and buffering as flag lots have an irregular lotting pattern. The
preservation of those trees were required as screening in the rear yard. She confirmed that the
trees protected were chosen as they were in good shape and condition. In response to a question
from Chair Ahrend, Ms. Numanoglu confirmed that during the review of the flag lot, consideration
of the location of the access easement was given and it made sense to preserve the four trees in
the back of the lot with the building area to be located next to the access easement.
Applicant (16:55)
Rob Matthews, Blue Palouse Properties, 333 S. State St., Ste V-452, Lake Osweqo, OR,
shared background about his company, which he owns with his wife. Blue Palouse purchased the
site, which was created legally in 2007 with access coming off of C Ave., with the intent of building
a single-family home. He and his wife have been practicing architects and design each home they
develop within a site's unique conditions. He opined that land within Lake Oswego is very difficult
to develop and often requires trade-offs. He added that City Code outlines policies and
procedures that allow construction and a balance between the quality of life and safety and the
need for expansion. He noted the home proposed on this lot represents a creative, balanced
solution between site impact and the new home. The proposed home has been determined to
comply with all applicable Code standards by City staff.
He noted that there are many mature trees on the site that are part of a much larger grove
surrounding the site. He recounted when the partition was created in 2007 the four large trees that
were to be protected on the site from construction activity while leaving a reasonable building area
near the access easement. He added that as noted in the staff report, none of the individual trees
requested for removal have unique characteristics that merit them to be considered significant
trees. Tree removal was a key consideration during the design of the home. A majority of the trees
to be removed are located within the proposed footprint of the building or are too close to the
building's foundation. Taking the protected trees into consideration, he added, our ability to move,
relocate, or redesign the building is not feasible nor would make a meaningful reduction in tree
removal. He reminded that per City Code, a home under 22 feet in height is allowed to occupy up
to 35% lot coverage. We carefully designed the home to be two-story home to reduce the footprint,
resulting in 21.3% lot coverage, which is significantly less than the amount allotted by the Code. He
reviewed the required yard and garage setbacks, which in addition to the already reduced lot
coverage and location of protected trees reduce the opportunity to adjust or alter the home's
footprint.
He opined that since we have already been very diligent to reduce the home's footprint it is
unreasonable to require alternative options that further reduce the project's scope and scale. He
concluded by asking the Commission to agree with the staff's findings. He noted a great deal of
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission
Minutes of July 17, 2017 Page 3 of 11
DRAFT
time has already been invested in this application and it complies with all applicable criteria set
forth by the City, including tree protection and mitigation plans, and mitigation trees will be planted.
Questions of Applicant
In response to a question from Commissioner Shur if they are proposing to plant 13 mitigation
trees back on the site, Mr. Matthews confirmed he would and referred to Exhibit E-3, and noted
that they will also plant two new street trees along C Ave. Ms. Numanoglu clarified that street trees
do not count toward the required mitigation trees. In response to a follow up question, he then
listed the types of mitigation trees proposed, including Western redcedar and bigleaf maple,
depending on the type of screening needed. In response to Chair Ahrend's question if the
proposed trees are in keeping with the staff's proposed conditions of approval. Mr. Matthew's
noted he worked with staff to provide a revised tree mitigation plan. Ms. Davis clarified that staff
had some concerns that the Western redcedar and bigleaf maples may be too big for the available
growing area in some places and so left some leeway in the conditions to allow for smaller trees to
be planted in some locations to avoid future conflict with the proposed structure or to pay a fee in
lieu of planting four of the trees if necessary.
In response to a question from Commissioner Prichard regarding the proposed home's square
footage, Mr. Matthews stated that the ground floor, including garage and outdoor living area, is
3,004 square feet and the second floor is smaller, though he could not provide the area off the top
of his head. Commissioner Prichard responded that the roof plan makes the house appear more
like a one or one and a half story house, rather than a two-story house, which could occupy a
smaller footprint. Mr. Matthews agreed that stacked boxes would have a smaller footprint and
noted the proposed layout is due to the master bedroom on the main floor, which is desirable in
this demographic. He added that the master on the main floor creates this unequal balance;
however a two-story rectangular box with the master does not serve the market demographic we
are going for especially given the cost of the land. Ms. Davis added that the height is limited to 22
feet on this flag lot, though some roof height exceptions are allowed. The dwelling is proposed is
24'-2", which makes use of the outright permitted height exception. Commissioner Prichard
responded, in other words the design is based on market value instead of the site context. Mr.
Matthews countered that it has to be a combination of both. He added that we create housing
specifically for people and have already looked very closely at what is needed to create a home
that will be marketable, which is good criteria. He noted they did look at reduced footprints all the
way around but the problem is that a majority of the larger trees are in the middle of the site.
Commissioner Prichard asked about the proposed location of the garage, which Mr. Matthews
stated is located as shown to match up with potential future access via easement from Bayberry
instead of C Ave. He added this has not yet been approved and would potentially be part of a
different application or easement and would eliminate the access from C Ave. altogether. In
response to a follow up question from Commissioner Prichard, he added they hoped to make that
decision and retain the spruce proposed to be removed for the access lane from C Ave. until the
access easement is in place. Mr. Matthews shared he also owns the property fronting on C Ave.
and the adjacent parcel on Bayberry in response to Commissioner Prichard's question.
Responding to a question from Commissioner Poulson, Mr. Matthews confirmed one of trees to be
saved is a 33-inch Douglas fir. Commissioner Poulson wondered that as six of the 13 trees to be
removed are on the west side could the 33-inch Douglas fir be removed instead by shifting of the
footprint to save some other trees to the west. Mr. Matthews responded that the program proposed
for this house is basically the minimum of what is needed to provide a decent house for someone.
He added that they also have to build 12 feet away from the trees that are being protected, which
makes the home about 30 feet wide. Ms. Numanoglu clarified that the 33-inch Douglas fir could not
be removed as part of this application, as it is required to be preserved as a prior condition of
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission
Minutes of July 17, 2017 Page 4 of 11
DRAFT
approval of the flag lot partition. She added that the applicant could elect to apply for a modification
of the previous land use approval to request a change in the tree preservation conditions.
Public Testimony
In Support
Ed Brockman, 1141 C Ave, Lake Oswego, OR 97034, shared he lives about three properties to the
west of this site and is a real estate broker for 27 years. He shared some perspectives about
private property rights. He opined that we have codes and regulations to make sure one person's
rights do not infringe on another person's rights, which results in differences of opinions and
weighing an individual's rights versus the rest of society. Mr. Brockman added that from a real
estate perspective marketability is a crucial factor in Lake Oswego especially given the high price
of homes and the demands of people who buy homes here. One of the things that is important
within a home is interior site lines. He opined that this is very expensive land as well and the price
of the finished product requires the master bedroom being on the main and careful internal room
placement. He added these are all issues of private property rights and predictability based on our
code. Mr. Brockman continued that the removal of the trees would not have a visual effect to any
great extent from the road. Lastly, he opined that there are so many people here tonight because
they received a letter asking them to show up and oppose this application, and that the amount of
people in the room should not have much bearing against what is allowed by the Code and the
rights of the property owner. He added that this is a thoughtful design that does not take the full lot
coverage. He stated he has no financial interest in this project.
In Opposition
Lisa Brislev, 295 3rd St., Lake Osweqo, OR 97034, provided copies of written testimony to the
Commission. She noted she filed the appeal of the tentative staff decision to approve this tree
removal application. She opined this is the most aggressive Type II tree removal permit she has
ever seen based on the health, age, quantity, and native species involved. She urged the DRC to
deny the application, as the applicant has not met the criteria established by the Lake Oswego
Tree Code.
She opined trees proposed for removal are healthy and significant due to size, species, and
contribution of character to the neighborhood. Six of the 13 trees proposed for removal are healthy,
old growth native Douglas fir with DBH's ranging from 21 inches to 46 inches diameter and with an
age span of 105 to 230 years old. She disagreed with the staff report assertion that each individual
tree proposed for removal was not significant to the neighborhood due to size because "there are
other trees of similar or greater size in the immediate area, with the maximum measuring 51-inches
in diameter." She expressed disagreement with the staff report as trees, like humans, while
individuals rely on a larger community called a forest ecosystem, so when you cut down individual
old growth trees in a stand you are taking away the strongest members in the community. She
quoted Jim Labbe, Urban Conservationist with Audubon Society of Portland, regarding the
importance of old growth trees ecologically, especially old growth conifers, which provide important
wildlife habitat. Regarding significance due to contribution to the neighborhood due to species, 10
of the 13 trees proposed for removal are native species. The Douglas fir tree is the official state
tree of Oregon, which makes them significant.
Additionally, she continued, the applicant did not include the mitigation plan with the Type II tree
removal application as required by the Tree Code. As a result residents did not have access to the
required mitigation plan at the start of the 14-day comment period. She raised the point that staff
had concerns about proposed big leaf maples. She opined that the application should not have
been considered complete without all of the required materials. A tentative decision should not
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission
Minutes of July 17, 2017 Page 5 of 11
DRAFT
have been rendered without all of the required information at hand. The public has a right to review
the required mitigation plan at the beginning of the 14-day comment period. She suggested the
total fee required by the City of Lake Oswego to cut down 13 healthy trees was $402, which is
unimaginable that a healthy tree that has lived for 230 years and provides irreplaceable services to
our community is valued so low. She thanked the Commission for their consideration in denying
the application.
Commissioner Shur referenced Ms. Brisley's remark that the Douglas fir is Oregon's state tree and
wondered if she is against all tree cutting and logging? Ms. Brisley declined to answer the
question.
Chair Ahrend asked staff to comment on the timeliness of the mitigation plan. Ms. Numanoglu
responded that it is quite common for people not to have a final mitigation plan or even a mitigation
plan when they submit an application. Staff has found that it can be problematic when people are
forced to come up with a plan on the spot prior to considering location and species and have
allowed people to submit them prior to issuing the tree permit as a condition of approval. Chair
Ahrend agreed this was his recollection and that in some cases staff would work with the applicant
on the mitigation plan.
In response to a question from Commissioner Poulson if she could imagine a mitigation plan that
would have addressed her concerns, Ms. Brisley stated that she did not know of any application
process that would be allowed to go through without all of the required components. She added
that she understands that a mitigation plan might have to be modified later. She stated it was not
acceptable as neighbors to lose the right to review and comment on a primary mitigation plan until
the tentative approval is issued. In response to a clarifying question from Chair Ahrend, Ms. Brisley
stated that the neighbors did not get to see the mitigation plan with the tree removal application is
her concern.
In related questions from Commissioner Smith about when the mitigation plan was received by the
City and posted on the website, Ms. Numanoglu stated that the staff report, including the updated
mitigation plan, was made available to the public 10 days prior to the public hearing. She clarified
that it does not state in the Tree Code that an application for tree removal will be rejected without a
mitigation plan; the tree removal permit can be conditioned to comply with the mitigation
requirement by requiring a mitigation plan before the permit is issued. The applicant typically
specifies the replacement trees but in some cases staff can impose a condition of approval for a
specific type of species. For example, a condition can be imposed that if the applicant removes
Doug firs, they have to replant with a native species. Chair Ahrend further clarified that the
mitigation plan is not an approval criterion, rather it is a code requirement after trees have been
approved for removal and is often required as a condition of approval.
In response to a comment and question from Commissioner Prichard that applicants can
sometimes propose a mitigation plan on the spot and if this mitigation plan would be considered a
thought out mitigation plan or something that just meets the requirements for a certain number of
trees, Ms. Numanoglu stated that most people who come in for tree removal are single-family
homeowners who want to remove trees for landscaping or because they are in bad shape, but
often do not know they have to mitigate or what they want to do. So we provide them with time
prior to the permit being issued to figure out what they want to plant and staff works with them to
make a more thoughtful choice in terms of a mitigation plan. Regarding this particular mitigation
plan, that is why we have conditions of approval. Staff thought the big leaf maple species and
location were problematic so proposed a condition of approval requiring more appropriate trees to
be substituted or to reduce the number of trees required to be planted to ensure there is sufficient
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission
Minutes of July 17, 2017 Page 6 of 11
DRAFT
growing space that will not cause future conflicts with the dwelling. Commissioner Prichard opined
the applicant's mitigation plan seems to have been done on the spot.
Andv Clarke, 1011 Bavberry, Lake Osweqo, OR 97034, stated that several of the large trees that
are noted as being in the surrounding neighborhood are on his property. He opined that the
developer has really tried to work with the neighborhood about what he is planning for all of the lots
he purchased. His main concern is about the staff review about whether these are significant trees,
such as the 46-inch diameter tree, is determined based on there being other trees that will remain,
including on neighboring properties. He added that this implies it will always be okay to take down
large trees as long as there are a few nearby. At some point there will not be other trees so when
do we decide how many we want to retain for our neighborhood. What happens to the quality of
the neighborhood? There is another building lot going on at Bayberry and 10th and a proposal to
take down more Douglas firs.
Stacv Yost, 1011 Sher Lane, Lake Osweqo, OR 97034, shared she has lived in the neighborhood
for 15 years and chose to live in the First Addition/Forest Hills neighborhood because of the
Douglas fir canopy. She opined that we have probably lost over 150 large Douglas fir trees in those
15 years. When we talk about tree removal we need to be careful about the intensity and the
impact on our neighborhood. She added that she is a mortgage banker and understands real
estate development but it has to be done with integrity. She opined the applicant was aware of the
trees when he bought the property and while she appreciates he met with the neighborhood, he
should take more time to be more creative about the design in order to save a few more large
Douglas fir trees. She added that many of the mature conifers that are being removed in the
neighborhood are often replaced with smaller maples that will not get larger than 15 feet, which
has changed the neighborhood character. She then expressed concern about potential future
actions by the applicant and shared observations about development practices that have harmed
trees in the neighborhood, such as chains being wrapped around trees from foundations and
garages always being sited where there is the biggest tree. She asked the Commission to please
consider the cumulative impacts on the neighborhood.
In response to a question from Commissioner Shur if she had a chance to look at the mitigation
plan, Ms. Yost replied she was quite pleased to see that red cedars were proposed and she could
do without the maples. She added she would rather save a few large Doug fir trees than try and
mitigate them and that cedars and Doug firs grow in groves which when removed can make single
trees hazardous then later removed, which is part of what is happening in our neighborhood. She
also noted that she did not hear about the tree removal from a flyer, rather it was from an email
and that she has contested tree removal applications for large fir trees in the past. Commissioner
Shur agreed it was a grove as shown in the photographs.
Neil Kozlowski, 95 D Ave., Lake Osweqo, OR 97034, stated he understands that this project is a
business venture and that there are risks in real estate investment just like other types of
investments. He expressed concern that the safety zones around the trees are not clear on the
mitigation plan. There was a safety zone of 39 inches around a 36-inch tree that was recently
destroyed when they dug into the roots of the tree and it died within three weeks, located on the
corner of 2"d and D. He opined they never really planned to keep the tree. He stated according to
Oregon State University Extension tree protection during construction information recommends
protection around the root structure at the radius of the tree that is at least at the drip zone of the
tree and often an additional 1.5 feet for each inch of diameter of the tree. He noted he could not tell
what the measurement of the proposed tree protection was on this proposal, which is a question
he would ask of the developer. He wondered if an arborist had reviewed and approved the
proposed setbacks for tree protection. He also wondered how the proposed tree removal would
affect the grove that is partly on plat 1068.
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission
Minutes of July 17, 2017 Page 7 of 11
DRAFT
Chair Ahrend asked staff to address tree protection requirements to which Ms. Davis shared that
tree protection plans are reviewed as a separate application and require an arborist's report for any
work within the drip line of the tree. She added that if a tree protection plan is violated there would
be a fine and citation through Code Enforcement, and clarified that the three trees Mr. Kozlowski
asked about near the foundation are proposed mitigation trees, not existing trees on the site. He
shared the critical root zone protection document from Oregon State University with staff.
Nicole Seawriqht, 540 8th, Lake Osweqo, OR 97034, stated she lives two blocks away at 8th and C
and wanted the Commission to know that people in attendance were there because of the facts of
application, not simply as the result of a flyer. She added this is not the first time she has testified
because of a tree being removed. She asked if there is a goal for individual lot tree canopies and if
staff knows how much of this tree canopy is being removed. Chair Ahrend responded there is not a
goal or a requirement for canopies in the Code. Chair Ahrend and Ms. Numanoglu reviewed the
applicable Tree Code criteria.
In response to a question from Ms. Seawright if there is an analysis of wind throw and impacts, Ms.
Davis shared that the City's contract arborist visited the site and evaluated any impacts on
adjacent trees or wind throw and did not have any concerns. Ms. Davis noted there was no formal
report from the arborist. Commissioner Shur wondered if the idea of canopy could be studied as
part of the mitigation plan to determine how all of the trees work together, to inform a mitigated
design that would allow for continuous canopy. Ms. Seawright expressed concern that the removal
was being allowed based on what other lots have on them. She wondered if there might be other
pending or future tree removals on these lots for development?
Cathv Kraus, 435 G Ave., Lake Osweqo, OR 97034, shared that she is a neighbor and also a
licensed architect in the State of Washington. She wondered how the City could allow applications
that do not show the diameter and drip lines of trees, which makes it hard to see the overall impact
of the trees being removed. She shared the more stringent tree protection requirements in the
Seattle area. She asked that the City consider requiring applicants to show the diameters and drip
lines of trees so people can better review what is being proposed.
Suzanne Meckel, 658 5th, Lake Osweqo, OR, stated that in 30 years she has lived in this
neighborhood she has seen 50% of the mature tree canopy be removed, mostly Douglas fir. She
opined the removal was mostly through development, taking away the trees that made this
neighborhood popular in the first place. She added that mitigation trees are being promptly
removed once the City inspector has left the site so eventually there will not be any trees left.
Neither For Nor Against
None.
Rebuttal
Mr. Matthews clarified that they were granted an outright permitted height exception for the
proposed dwelling, not a Variance as someone who testified stated, which is different and allowed
outright in the Code. In terms of mitigation, he stated they like to get the right trees where they
belong for screening, shade, landscaping, curb appeal, etc. We do not always have that figured out
on paper first, he added. He recognizes that neighborhoods get impacted; he lives in Lake Oswego
and has made an effort to get to know City staff and build trust.
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission
Minutes of July 17, 2017 Page 8 of 11
DRAFT
Questions of Applicant
Commissioner Shur opined that related to the drip zone and the canopy, the mitigation plan does
not seem to have much thought put into it in. He wondered if Mr. Matthews would be willing to take
another look at the mitigation plan and address the canopy aspect in some way to better support a
continuous canopy tying into the rest of the wooded area. Mr. Matthews agreed, absolutely they
want to have a good, healthy site and have the trees remain healthy. He acknowledged that
sometimes people put these things together too hastily and he did not give enough consideration
to the size and diameter of the mitigation trees, as the trees proposed for removal are mature
trees. He agreed to work with staff to create a revised mitigation plan that is more thoughtful.
Chair Ahrend, referring to Exhibit F-1, pointed out that the footprint of the proposed home changed
between the original and revised plan. He observed that the three trees to the northwest corner of
the home's prior footprint would have been pretty close to the footprint and wondered if the
applicant pulled the house a little bit back from those three trees there was a chance they could be
saved? Mr. Matthews replied there is a chance. He explained these trees were included as part of
the removal as there would be a lot of machinery on the site and it is hard to move around small
trees without harming them; it would be very difficult to ensure the viability of those trees after
construction. In response to a follow up question from Chair Ahrend if the home is set back far
enough from the 33-inch Douglas fir that is required to be saved to protect it, Mr. Matthews
responded that it is —there is a predetermined 12-foot setback required by the 2007 land use
approval. He was unsure why 12 feet was required but does know it would provide adequate room
to install tree protection fencing plus have enough room to get around the trees. Chair Ahrend
noted a tree protection plan would still need to be applied for, to which Mr. Matthews agreed and
added that City Code Enforcement really does a good job. He opined that sometimes carelessness
happens that may result in trees being impacted, but this does not mean the entire system is
broken. He added that if staff feels there is a risk they can require an arborist to be present during
site work.
Commissioner Taheri wondered if the applicant had any information about the health of the trees.
Mr. Matthews responded that was not a requirement of the application so he had not hired an
arborist to determine the health of the trees to be removed. Commissioner Taheri asked if it was
possible to shift the building to the east to help to save five to six trees. In response the applicant
stated they have looked at this site in a number of different ways for the program being proposed,
with the footprint proposed the minimum we can accept. He added that moving one line could have
a large impact on the interior of the building. Chair Ahrend summarized how the proposed footprint
was already pushing up against the side yard setbacks and the trees that were to be preserved.
Deliberations
Mr. Boone reviewed the criteria, shared staff interpretation, and made suggestions as how the
Commission could move forward.
The applicant waived their right to additional time to submit a final written argument. Chair Ahrend
opened deliberations.
Commissioner Shur expressed concern about the canopy and cutting it up. He also commented
that some of the proposed mitigation trees might be too close to the home.
Commissioner Poulson acknowledged that they need to focus on the Code and how the Code
defines significance and would agreed with staff's recommendation to approve the permit.
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission
Minutes of July 17, 2017 Page 9 of 11
DRAFT
Chair Ahrend stated that the Code does say a home is allowed to built in that zone. He added that
the applicant is saving as many trees as they can while building a product that fits in the
neighborhood, and certainly is a smaller footprint than what could be allowed by the Code. He
acknowledged concerns about the canopy and what might happen if an adjacent property owner
wanted to cut down trees; we have to make sure too many trees are not getting cut down. He
stated he was generally in support of the application and shared some ideas for conditions that the
neighbors might appreciate:
• As the intent is to gain access from Bayberry to the north could we write a condition that if
access were gained to the north those two trees would be saved?
Staff clarified that if he was referring to the 17-inch spruce and 14-inch cherry, the cherry is an
invasive species and the spruce was found to have poor structure by the City arborist so both
could be removed anyway. Chair Ahrend agreed.
• Could we add a condition that they explore alternative construction methods to ensure the
trees are preserved?
Ms. Numanoglu clarified that would fall under the tree protection application, and with recent
updates to the Tree Code, the City could impose conditions of approval to require less impactful
construction methods. Chair Ahrend shared his main concern is the 33-inch Doug fir that is
required to remain and ensuring that construction and the home being there do not impact that
tree. Commissioner Smith also expressed concern about the trees being protected during
construction. Commissioner Poulson agreed this was important. Mr. Boone reiterated that the
proposal to remove trees did not have any bearing on tree protection for the remaining trees; this
would be reviewed under tree protection criteria. Commissioner Shearer agreed with the others, he
could not see how to move the structure around to save more big trees, and would support staff's
decision.
Commissioner Prichard stated that comparing the site plan and the criteria for a significant tree, he
had identified seven trees of the 13 trees that are not above 15-inches in size. He opined there are
five trees that are clearly in the way of any kind of footprint on this site so would have to be
removed. He added that one tree proposed for removal really bothers him, the 46-inch Douglas fir
that is inside the setback. He added that as the property to the north is likely to be developed in the
same way, the 46-inch Douglas fir is the one tree that keeps any bit of canopy or grove on that side
of the property, and there is nothing else on the north side that creates any kind of screening or
protection. He suggested the applicant could design around this tree if he really wanted to. He
opined that the proposal is for the most part for a single-story house and that there is a way to
design a house on this property that would meet the economic goals and save that 46-inch tree in
addition to the others already identified. Regarding the mitigation plan, Commissioner Poulson
suggested perhaps the line of of arborvitae at the rear of the lot could be replaced with a grove of
native fir trees. Commissioner Prichard stated that as presented tonight he could not support
upholding the approval of the application as the dwelling could be redesigned to accommodate that
46-inch fir tree. He added, if approved and access is provided to Bayberry there should be a
condition that any access to C Ave would be removed. Additionally, the 51-inch fir tree on the east
adjacent property should also be included in the tree protection plan.
Commissioner Poulson wished they had additional criteria to look at. He added he would love to
see the Code expanded to address ecological issues and the incremental removal of trees. He
asked Commissioner Prichard to help him find Code criteria that the application violates.
Commissioner Prichard suggested that one tree meets the City's criteria for significance. If
removed, along with the others trees proposed, when viewed from Bayberry or C you would
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission
Minutes of July 17, 2017 Page 10 of 11
DRAFT
definitely see a missing tree; it is one of the prominent trees from both sides. He suggested that it
would fit under criteria 2, protection of adjacent trees, which was not discussed in this application.
Mr. Boone suggested it would fit better under 3., b., creating a gap in the continuity of the
neighborhood skyline. Chair Ahrend pointed out there was no evidence in the record to support
what Commissioner Prichard was saying, and Commissioner Prichard countered there was also no
evidence saying removing this tree would not harm adjacent trees. Mr. Boone reminded of the
staff's summary of the contract arborisYs evaluation. Ms. Davis clarified that the contract arborist
had evaluated trees both on and off the site and did not find any negative impacts to wind breaks
to trees on or off the site. Mr. Boone pointed out that no one requested additional information or
evidence from the contract arborist during the testimony portion of the hearing. In response to
Commissioner Prichard's question if the Code can require for a home to be redesigned if
something can be saved, Ms. Numanoglu noted that if the tree removal is found to have a
significant negative impact on the character or aesthetics of the neighborhood, staff can consider
reasonable alternatives to save the tree, but staff has never considered a whole redesign to be a
reasonable alternative if the dwelling complies with the zone requirements.
Commissioner Taheri opined that the project meets the intent of the Code and would vote in
support of the application. Commissioner Shur stated he agreed with the building design but would
like to see more focus on the canopy as part of the mitigation plan and would like to see a
landscape plan that includes an outline of the vegetation and the trees. Mr. Boone clarified that a
landscape plan is not required with the tree removal application. Chair Ahrend inquired if the
Commission could place a condition related to the mitigation plan to which Mr. Boone reviewed the
condition authority under which it would be allowed. Commissioner Shur stated he would like to
impose a condition requiring a mitigation plan that shows the tree canopy. Chair Ahrend suggested
there were no requirements about tree canopy on a site in the current Code, which would be
something the Planning Commission and City Council would have to weigh in on.
Commissioner Smith stated that as an architect he has been struggling with the garage issue;
theoretically they could move the garage and save a tree. However, he added that the Commission
has to review what is in front of us without considering what might happen in the future. He stated
he believed the applicant has met the criteria.
Mr. Shur moved to approve the proposal for TR 499-17-02043, as conditioned by staff. Mr.
Poulson seconded the motion and it passed (6:1). The vote on the findings, conclusions and
order was scheduled on August 7 at 7pm.
GENERAL PLANNING AND OTHER BUSINESS
Election of Chair and Vice-Chair— Ms. Numanoglu noted that Commissioner Ahrend has served as
Chair for two terms so is not eligible again, but is eligible for Vice Chair.
Mr. Smith moved to nominate David Poulson for Chair and Brent Ahrend for Vice-Chair. Mr. Shur
seconded the motion and it passed (7:0).
Ms. Numanoglu reviewed the schedule for August.
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Ahrend adjourned the meeting at 10:OOpm.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/
Janice Bader, Administrative Support
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission
Minutes of July 17, 2017 Page 11 of 11
DRAFT
EXC E RPT
��.,� �� �.
�
�' }f . �� CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
'�' � � Development Review Commission Minutes
������ Monday, August 7, 2017
The Commissioners convened at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 380 A Avenue.
Members present: Chair David Poulson, Vice Chair Brent Ahrend, Paden Prichard, Nick Shur,
Kirk Smith, and Nader Taheri.
Members absent: Jeff Shearer
Staff present: Scot Siegel, Planning & Building Services Director; Leslie Hamilton, Senior
Planner; David Powell, City Attorney; Erica Rooney, City Engineer; and Janice
Bader, Administrative Support.
MINUTES
None.
FINDINGS
TR 499-17-02043 [AP 17-05], a request for hearing on the tentative decision by the Planning &
Building Services Department on a Type II tree removal application to remove 13 trees in order to
construct a new single-family dwelling. The site is located at 1053 C Avenue (21 E03CA05201).
The staff coordinator is Ellen Davis, Associate Planner.
Mr. Ahrend moved to approve the findinqs as written for TR 499-17-02043. Mr. Smith seconded
the motion and it passed (5:1).
City of Lake Oswego Development Review Commission
Minutes of August 7, 2017 Page 1 of 1
STAFF REPORT
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
PLANNING DIVISION
APPLICANT/OWNER: FILE N0:
Blue Palouse Properties LLC AP 17-05 (TR 499-17-02043)
TAX LOT REFERENCE: STAFF:
21E03CA05201 Ellen Davis
LOCATION: DATE OF REPORT:
1053 C Ave July 7, 2017
COMP. PLAN DESCRIPTION: Date of Hearin�:
R-10 July 17, 2017
ZONING DESIGNATION: NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION:
R-10 First Addition Neighbors/Forest Hills
I. APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The applicant is requesting approval to remove 13 trees under a Type II tree removal permit
in order to construct a new single-family dwelling and driveway on the site.
II. RECOMMENDATION
As staff finds that each of the approval criteria of LOC 55.02.080 are met, staff recommends
approval of the Type II tree removal application, subject to the following conditions of
approval:
1. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, submit a revised mitigation plan substituting
the mitigation trees close to the future dwelling with species that are suited to the
available planting area. At least 10 of the 13 required mitigation trees shall be native
species. If insufficient space is available to plant all 13 trees on the site, the applicant
may pay a fee in lieu of planting up to four of the 13 required mitigation trees.
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]
Page 1 of 9
2. Prior to the issuance of the final building inspection for the new dwelling, the
applicant/owner shall plant the mitigation trees required by Condition 1, above.
III. TENTATIVE STAFF DECISION / REQUEST FOR HEARING AND APPEAL
The applicant initially applied to remove 14 trees. On June 16, 2017, the applicant
withdrew one tree from the application (Exhibit F-1).
On June 16, 2017, staff tentatively approved the applicant's request to remove 13 trees
under a Type II tree removal application (TR 499-17-02043).
On June 23, 2017, Lisa Brisley filed a request for public hearing on the application
(Exhibit A-1). Pursuant to LOC 55.02.085, the Development Review Commission
(Commission) shall hold a public hearing on this request.
IV. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
A. City of Lake Oswe�o Tree Code fLOC Chapter 501:
LOC 55.02.080 Criteria for Issuance of Type II Tree Cutting Permits
LOC 55.02.084 Mitigation Required
LOC 55.02.085 Request for Public Hearing on a Type II Tree Cutting Permit
LOC 55.02.094 Conditions of Approval for Tree Cutting Permits
V. FINDINGS
A. Back�round/Existin� Conditions:
1. The site is approximately 14,039 square feet in size and is a flag lot created by
minor partition in 2007 (LU 07-0076).
,� � -;,e� �°�'"� � �' e-` � ,'.�k ��• - ; � ���;� �
�r � , � ' �'�°~ .- � ��.,�. ` .
.�4'� ��� d '� � �
r" �: � • ..� ' , �� � _ :' - . _ .'P,`.- ,
. 5�.y�.- ` �;f� li. � ,. � ,�-R.•.'�� -�:. _ c ` -� � y:° � �
�.. � , r = , �. � ��
'f a.;-: � •..
�..:,_ �,'� *" '�;- ., ..��'�;` .
� .,� r_ '+!�^ i� r�'^'" '$ r
.+ � • • �. . f A• J�.
,.'T�L',.. . . - . . 't . �,- a �� {� 'A�7.y�'�.w;,� :�.. ..�-,
-u �` � }� r. � � � � r ��' - 1k-,-�' �2� :� ' .
�- �$, ' ;" .� '''�� •���� .t...: i� 1
�r�" �� v t r'�`r�� `�•������� � � �+.`� .
-r}- � ' . �' �� �
�� , ,��- � ... '.' r..
' � �� 't `��� . �.. ,�'^�,:'���~s� s 1 �€
. . ` ,� • �. '* : � _ _ � .�- �-�
e 'F• 4i � f, I�l. . F'4__f {���_ /�r . , T�I�
a. ' �"1� �I: .. ,t '��`'.� -.u-_
� J. ` ��t Y :N '�*•� ����!�1, r.' a
�'F �:{�'•' ; y� � , ., .. �:1�� r��7:� �:� i��" �,._.�:. '
�� . � _�'•� s i
�, �` :.Yry.� .� .� �' � � p,: _ � � '� ,.
- ���'F ��� 5� a�... ���� � �.�y:� :�. �* �� , .
'.!� . "���r � �r�� . ffi��, �� r-1` •+ ' =,� -�� �
�� �
.
-
�.�-"a.�� .. � ,+ � t �+� - '���C'�_•�
.
y ;,
� ,... ..
���. ,.�'�4 ' � �
. .
.
. ,- .
7 � E' '
. . � . � '� � '2
— � � ` .• �'' � _ � �.�
- �:'�": -- -�. r.. Aerial Ima�ery:/2�15 ,
�b. � �� . �—� �;� � .. . ,-�
�� �.,, t� _.�.._
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]
Page 2 of 9
2. The site is zoned R-10 and is vacant. A building permit for a proposed single-
family dwelling on this site is currently under review (BP 499-17-02047).
3. As illustrated in the aerial photograph, above, the site is entirely covered by tree
canopy. The Tree Removal Plan shows that there are twenty-three trees on the
site with a diameter at breast height of six inches or greater (Exhibit E-3). 13
trees are proposed for removal under the Type II application 499-17-02043; the
10 remaining trees on the site are not proposed to be removed and would be
protected under Tree Protection Plan 499-17-02044 (Exhibit E-3).
4. The site slopes slightly down from the west to the northeast with an elevation of
462 feet on the west side of the site and an elevation of 460 feet at the
northeast corner (see contours, below).
�� �; .... �..
�� ��
�T I _
� ,
Elevation f-���
— 260'� �j
t
� �
0 Elevation O �
262' r�
«�
—-�J �
� -_�'-�-
6��0
� � � o � � �
� � o � o � �
� U7 � � � � N c�
I � �
�
- C � � AV2
B. Compliance with Criteria for Approval
Type II tree removal applications must comply with the following approval
criteria of LOC 55.02.080:
1. The tree is proposed for removal because it has outgrown its landscape area or
the removal is part of a landscape plan, or in order to construct development
approved or allowed pursuant to the Lake Oswego Code or other applicable
development regulations.
This criterion is met when:
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]
Page 3 of 9
(a) Out�rown Landscape Area: A tree has grown such that damage to a
structure or facility cannot be avoided by pruning or other maintenance, a tree
that has grown too large within a constrained space such as a deck or other
built feature that was constructed around the tree, or thinning to improve the
health of other trees);
(b) Landscape Plan: The applicant has submitted a landscape plan for the site
and the tree is not part of the landscape plan ("the plan must include more than
removing the tree for which the Type II permit is requested and planting
required mitigation trees"); or
(c) Proposed Development:The tree proposed for removal is within the
proposed development area by the applicant or additionally as conditioned
for development approval; whether an alternative development analysis is
required is addressed in Criterion #3. [See Kash Investments, LU 17-0005;
Mission Homes NW, LU 17-0016].
The tree removal is requested for development purposes, to construct one new
single-family dwelling and driveway on the site. All 13 trees are located within
or near the footprint of the proposed development. Single-family dwellings are
permitted outright in the R-10 zone.
Staff finds that this criterion is met.
2. Removal of the trees, considering proposed mitigation measures, will not
have a significant negative impact on erosion, soil stability,flow of surface
waters, protection of adjacent trees, or existing windbreaks;
Erosion:
The building permit plans show that sediment fences will be installed to prevent
erosion during construction. The erosion control plan for construction has been
approved by staff.
Flow of Surface Waters:
There are no water courses on this site. The property slopes down approximately two
feet from west to northeast. The applicant proposes to install an on-site infiltration
system to manage stormwater runoff from the new dwelling. Staff finds that removal
of the 13 trees will not have a significant negative impact on flow of surface waters.
Protection of Adiacent Trees or Existin�Windbreaks:
• Removal of the 11 trees located within or immediately adjacent to the
proposed dwelling will not negatively impact protection of the adjacent
trees. They are located to the north and east of the adjacent trees on the site
not proposed for removal and for that reason they do not provide a
windbreak to those trees from southwest winds.
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]
Page 4 of 9
• The 14" cherry tree in the proposed driveway is located to the southwest of a
56" Douglas fir, however, removal of this comparatively small tree would not
negatively impact the adjacent 56" Douglas fir.
• There are no trees adjacent to the 17" spruce located in the driveway
easement.
For these reasons, staff finds that the removal of the 13 trees will not have
significant negative impacts to erosion, soil stability, flow of surface waters, or
protection of adjacent trees. This criterion is met.
3. The removal will not have a significant negative impact on the character or
aesthetics of the neighborhood. This standard is met when removal of the
trees does not involve:
• A significant tree (defined as a healthy, noninvasive tree over 15"DBH
that is considered significant to the neighborhood due to size, species,
or distinctive character, or the only remaining tree on the property);
The trees proposed for removal are nine Douglas firs ranging in size from 6" to 46"
DBH, one 6" DBH maple, two cherries that are 9" and 14" DBH, and one 17" DBH
spruce. Each individual tree proposed for removal is not significant to the
neighborhood due to size (there are other trees of similar or greater size in the
immediate area, including several mature Douglas firs on site up to 51" DBH),
species (none of the trees are of specimen quality or are an unusual species in the
area), or distinctive character (none of the individual trees have a particular
distinctive character).
Accordingly, none of the trees are a "significant" tree.
• Alterations to the distinctive features or continuity of the
neighborhood skyline, as viewed from all public streets and
properties within 300 feet of the site;
There are large trees located on the subject property on the west side of the site
that are not proposed for removal (they will be protected from development
activities under tree protection permit 499-17-02044). There are also large trees on
nearby adjacent properties, especially the properties to the north and east, which
contain several large and prominent evergreens (see pictures below). The removal
of the 13 trees will not alter the continuity of the neighborhood skyline as viewed
from public streets and properties within 300 ft. because the site is a flag lot located
in the middle of the block and there are many equally large trees on and
surrounding the site that are not proposed to be removed and which will maintain
the character and continuity of the neighborhood skyline.
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]
Page 5 of 9
�`�.�
��,;�� �=. ;. .�'' �
;�,_ 0.; � :��� .-
'�,: " , - .
�.`. �a; r.
•;�`a '�-''
V:� � t>� � +�.'?.
•` ' � '`.��. '' ` a
'� a -. � _ � :'. � :
� =�,_.%.���3.; '� '� .� �
_ �, �-•}." ;::-�. t
�� �': �`'
T.. . ,,� , — � 'n�#`'��� s' ��.
'� �;'�, � ; a*��.. `i'��;: �
'���'.:.". . y`�l}tl--.V�.��- `, '��.9•. . Q� ' :.'�.�� l�.,�'T.�r�
_ '.j�:��•T�W:'-... SIY , .����
y.' 'i�� ..;�y� .. '�'-�r9.:.. y.
-� 'SZ '� �•�+�Y".�.:74s" �+�.�; �'+
�; �' , . :���=�°:; -
;��a�..-'��.s,�.�': ,�;s".���.: '�:� . ,�
�. ,���� - �a�j ,��c�'�i_`";::-•' r'S�s. , ,eG,•.-:�,..._ .+F�, i.
.:_f_ r^:-. s��� :�'=�-;•ofY�.��' �'."�:;�.:��;•: �-�,�:��'_�.�.��'r- �.
..� ���L :,+. _. . -
� .. F ' -y�•• � '"s,+ �� ..:.:�
�,y.,. �x• :�;�=.
� �� -� :�',
:��. '4+r _�l."Y
.�;::�- '- _ �-�_�:e'��.�=��� �
x��� ..:� :. �:,�Y �._-- � ���:=:�t':.: �t:.
� ,;.� � :�;:n� :-;: �
4•�y ,_���,,yE`� :�,�, ;. r.:'.-•wl . �'r'�y, "..�.
�� .. •=+ - 'f=- ,�;:�.:��.;v': ,� �e fFxF.�
(-p. �' Y �� :., ,i� _-�� f "�,y� li�:_s_ �'�n. t•� �(�'
� �y^..�� �L�-�... y. z .�.o=...�.'�' .
a :'..' ,. � .uis�.. �y A'�- �.
.,��_r., �'=. 'r .F ~����y� �'k�'. �" i�.'
y- ��`"`�.� `0. "
~"a i:: N�T�y r_�•. .
'i' i 516.1.. . 4'
-..�„�:h,y�.tii � �.
r �� ,� .
s._, ,i Y•�R.�� ..�. �4s. 1✓•�: ':�.M1 ..:; �
.YC" �� �,. �� �..�yy� ti
•i`� ��.'a��. ;� . =f� r_
� 6�r � .. . f'. ' � ��r. .�,`. y�
•+�M1- . -��,. t. 'x - � ��"��
"Y� 'a � � ' �'••.- � 3
��-- ia ��'-w .
-.�•. . , . - � „ � . ..
_"r '• ,+�.% ,�. . _.
View From 8ayberry Raad Looking South 4 �� * �
1. '� . . � _ _i . ,v���•`��. .�
.�;.
� _5�.,..���.. .�« _'�i . � - ':�•�.',7".
�-T�- i�".'��'X- ��� �r
;� ��� . . �`' 4 �. , �;�. -'����
...� ?�;. '. � . ,�, j ,�,�' -Ys..�F-�,.
� . .. .:�� .�'.� : ., � �:,'�•.: �
��`�'. �}' .� ; , , r4 ' � -
ra+.� •N �.;� w,�y ��; �: �.I
- -.�•4-'�: . ��.i.7`s � ..� ��_:�'�r._ 1 . r�j_tid'��^�,_.,��.-�
Sf:�� 9.!'Ll -�-i f+7F �`... i�'Y9'��i
�-:..
• .. �� P. ' *'q.h:. :� �F ''Y:�����
if' ..e� � 't `!V,r. 3;y ��}`:L�4��.. :-��'�.�'+�X. '��� ; ';T '�; .
�":- . '�'. 4Z `�r°"f�i��i�.����`'g:.. .' ;:,�. .. � •�
�. ` : �'`�tr-�.- _ ��'����..r F��
;�•Yr �` '•�,;.��.....��:��,�-._ +� �
-r��L::.. i�. �. .. l,k' �-:'k_k r •��:� � '� ��
- iNj��,L' �:' ',�'�y' ,�.
�S�� i.� 1: h�..�'{' �'� ��Y. v: .��.. .� � l
r¢�, ��i. :� r. . �7w.�' -'� �-.�.
�. .r_:�:'..�� �r'- v,�i. i' }�,.
6:.r�,�j; ♦.
il�:. .:�k s�,, '' - ' �1'r'r 3= ��'
.+a '�` ?e�'.0 a -,�`�V �?y..� ,y.
�'ti �`�.#�=�'_ • ..�SY.�'1�-�r:. s,,,.,.��.:-_: ,� fdi'x� `�� .s:- ^: .�
,�� ''��,� �,'•.'" "S-..'" .fs�� - --- �� .� ..•,`�
�' ��` '��� . �i�� �����'.�. �, �k �
H�::. t
3� '� ��r.�,. �.•�� �°��� .
x��yw��Y�� ' . �°'t ����':'��y,.14�t "T :...Rei4 �rM1�}�.
T�y .r ��� � . L•.,�tf lek. A'' ^ � - �' T
.� ,� , �,-�'e • �{.� �'. ��;�' .��-' �,T:�:�. .
s a� ''*�: i '
-� - �.
'r� �rG��-� 1��:r•�� ?•�`�.� .i'��e �i'S[ �� y .
�' �.�� +�+�����_ �'=.�'�,, , .k...
� - ��y�.
�:� v •u r° � : ,� �.,, �..._ :..
:�'�j�c�" �-:#3ts- �'I�ti.;,:��'.^��,.,� � "'_x�
'I �: ': _i +�� ,��I' �'.4y .. . �y..
�' ;. *' ��-o-.�°9� F^ � '�• aiF� f y �
��ry�" '�t. ��r�•� '���. .,'f
`�G� �"��{�''ti""i�. �r`�'��!'';�':.� ; ,
�:�� � ��,: .. t�' .
�.. � .._, _:_y', ,� �, '' .�, !
e', , . .... �.
•:�,: . . . - - - -
:� -_�'4`.��y , ,,�� �� �.,.,,
..r� ��-�.'�_'..':"' S 1L•..�. -' � '� �•i. - -- ��y.
; �, �
�vr. �� y�:��.�C '�.a�� �
a��� .�� .�C' � . ti
�' a -_ a.
`;J �,�}r , �� ._,t
..rt.;.
, � '�,:
�-. ._ . . -'�#. - �'- Y -
t r��r■■�r����rm �j t� �:1 Y"
i. 'n:R`�' a � r �*y 4.$�� ' ' :t
. ' .� .w��� 4~ � .�r 'f•'h .� �,. - � .•��•} ��
� , w ,., . � �.
y� 'z � _ � �;�.:���, ��
oace:��� 3.2D17 � ,' View From C Avenue Lookin �Jarth ' — �
y . _ 9 �
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]
Page 6 of 9
• A tree that serves as a visual screen between a residential zone and an
abutting non-residential zone, or between a low density residential
zone and a medium or high density residential zone, or between a
medium and high density zone;
The subject site and all surrounding sites are zoned R-10 residential zoning. None of
the trees proposed for removal serve as a visual screen between the site and an
adjacent property with a different zoning designation.This subcriterion is met.
• A street tree;or
None of the trees proposed for removal are street trees; they are not located within
the public right-of-way or pedestrian easement abutting a right-of-way, nor were
they used to meet the street tree requirements for a prior development.
• Greater than 50°0 of a stand of trees (a "stand"is defined as a group
of trees of the same species or a mixture that forms a visual and
biological unit at least 15 feet in height with a contiguous crown
width of at least 120 feet).
The 17" spruce proposed to be removed for the driveway access to C Avenue is not
located in a stand of trees. The 12 other trees proposed to be removed exceed 50%
of the trees on the site; however, the entire stand of on-site trees are a part of a
larger stand of contiguous tree canopy containing more than 24 trees, as shown in
the below aerial image. Thus, the 12 trees proposed for removal are less than 50%
of the stand.
,�'.�. �-_,
,�.: . �„- �. ��, � �.
[� 1`' �-•� . ��'/- P.
i� ,.�• . • � • T � .. �
J - •, �j.. ' �. �
� ��6 � � • ; �, i S �r �••
�``�i" � . � '�1�'F -+' . - �. '� -
• �, • �a' :zs
i. .
r �� �w _
� . . � r
�• . �'��y!� .' . .
�^T'' .� `�•-�' ``��1
,� ':�� _ �` , �� � �
r � , :�`.� ,... ��
� ` ��,�?�.s� : � � �� 5 =/;
) . � , �� _ :� *
�` f . i� _ '`.' p
.,// AS%'
�` .+. �.�'�� S:x� :��� � � . •.�i� 1
F� �`� � - � i`
�i 'r i: - ����`0 �� r ��
� .�.� . � ., �
F- ... S� ,,�" ��'" + ../*, �
�� ati ,:•�. � - � .
i ` �.• ,�y.,
� .�� � r x'�'..' J n� � T`} Y
_�r" "'C
,� �.`x � , ` � � ,
] � . s : ! F.�e,
- �.{: �.� ¢ _ . 7.�Y'�...� �^�y�^�
` ���• `�5-[ +��{.�'' r��4 x'd.E�'. _-• _
� �,. '� � , :-a�4�,-rt •.�,.'k ;'�!1 ��~�� .
� � ' ,�
if,r � �yy � � �� y��•� �.� n L
L „ , � .�I . ' r* �
� � k, i,`�.. .}.•. - - :s�. �
'�� ,'+� .� �F .� �� .,��_ •. I p q, . . � .
'{ i �.''
� F � �� i _ - � ���,�. .
i� , _ '�� � � �R �' �
9 . �,�'' • `_� �._,' �` ' _. �.. ��r' �'A�',: �.�':r
� �V�
r•:�
Lr--_.' ���L �, • , � .ry
•'- • s
� 8 :3 � .J]�;" r -+'�r.�- . � �� ti
B � ,. � ' o�'..
^�:�:a. � °��� , , ,.;,:�.i. � �r + IL: ..�: �C
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]
Page 7 of 9
Because the proposed tree removal is not found to have a "significant negative
impact on the character and aesthetics of the neighborhood," per this criterion, the
applicant need not demonstrate that alternative site or landscaping plans have been
considered and the applicant has not proposed alternative plans.
Exceptions: This subsection (3) is not applicable when:
a. A tree is likely to or will continue to cause damage to a permanent, viable
existing structure, or to infrastructure, such as utilities or paved landscape features,
that cannot be remedied through reasonable tree maintenance or pruning; or
b. Alternatives to the tree removal have been considered and no reasonable
alternative exists to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone. In
making this determination, the City may consider alternative site plans or placement
of structures (development purpose) or alternate landscaping designs (outgrown
landscape area; landscape plan) that would lessen the impact on trees, so long as
the alternatives continue to comply with other provisions of the Lake Oswego Code.
4. The removal is not for the sole purpose of providing or enhancing views.
The trees proposed for removal are not being removed for the sole purpose of view
enhancement because, as found in the first criterion, their removal is proposed for
development purposes. Staff finds that the proposed tree removal plan would not
open up desirable views for the dwelling on this property. This criterion is met.
5. The City shall require the applicant to mitigate for the removal of each tree
pursuant to 55.02.084. Such mitigation requirements shall be a condition of
approval of the permit.
Any tree approved for removal under the Type II analysis shall be mitigated at a
minimum 1:1 ratio. Mitigation trees shall be a minimum 1.5-inch caliper for
deciduous trees and a minimum 6-foot height for evergreen trees. Native trees that
are removed are required to be mitigated with a native tree. If the Commission
approves the tree removal application, the applicant shall be required to plant 13
mitigation trees, including 10 that are native species, on the property. The applicant
is proposing to plant eight Bigleaf maples and five Western Red cedars to meet the
mitigation requirement (Exhibit E-3); however, staff is concerned that there is
insufficient planting area for several of these large-stature mitigation trees, which
are in close proximity to the future dwelling. Staff recommends a condition of
approval requiring the applicant to submit a revised mitigation plan substituting the
mitigation trees close to the dwelling with species that are suited to the available
planting area and to allow the applicant the option to pay a fee in lieu of planting up
to four of the 13 required mitigation trees if insufficient space is available to plant all
13 trees on the site. This criterion can be met.
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]
Page 8 of 9
VI. RECOMMENDATION
As staff finds that each of the approval criteria of LOC 55.02.080 are met, staff recommends
approval of the Type II tree removal application, subject to the conditions of approval on
pages 1-2, above.
EXHIBITS
A. NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAL
A-1 Request for public hearing from Lisa Brisley, received June 23, 2017
B - C. [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
E. GRAPHICS/PLANS
E-1 Tax map
E-2 Existing Features Map
E-3 Tree Removal Plan
E-4 Pictures (7/3/2017)
F. WRITTEN MATERIALS
F-1 Tree Removal Application TR 499-17-02043, Submitted April 24, 2017
F-2 Notice of Development Restrictions for LU 07-0076
G. LETTERS
Neither for nor A�ainst (G1-99)
None
Support (G100-199)
None
Opposition (G200+)
G-200. Letter from Lisa Brisley, received May 7, 2017
G-201. Letter from Barbara Kelley (forwarded by Sharon Gustafson), received May 8, 2017
G-202. Letter from Sharon Gustafson (FAN/Forest Hills Tree Subcommittee), received
May 8, 2017
G-203. Letter from Jim Bolland, received May 8, 2017
AP 17-05 [TR 499-17-02043]
Page 9 of 9
� x � � � i � � �. iv i X �. � x � � � n �i� � i� � � �' � i � i n � i�i � � � �
,� �` �� 'C h y �i � � ��i �'y �` � �' �� u �` i� x x �i ,� � �C n �� � n � � � �� � � v � }i � ���� x h `� x � ,�'� � i � � � � � � �i � � �
�` i '�, � � �i� �` � �. u � �� � x � �C x � � X � '� i� � .� � �i � � u i x.i�.� , � � �� � � ��' � .� �' 2 1 E 03CA
i\ X x �, � \ /\ i ,< / \ / � �! . ,r i ,i /, �� \/ �` �, �(
/ y y� �� �i \ ' /� � �' �' "��' \� �/ '' �` � � � �c x % , � � • �C � /� � ` ` '� '� ' l y ' i� � ' % � k � � �% . �c , �/ �
� � � �� � � �i� � �� � � `� � � �` '� X � � x � � %� i� �< � �i �� � � � ' � � � X �� ,� � � � �� %� � � �i � �� � � LAKE SWE
���� � � ,< �"\� �� � ��,< % % ���� ����� y ��, �,x � ,� u � ��� u ,�h � � x ,� � �<,�� �� � � � �� % %'`' y � x ���`� x ,� x �����x n � ,� ,����' �` " x �� x u O G O
� n �� n ���, �. � . , v � � � �� ,
'� �C � � /� % :` ''��i�ji\ ��/�c�/, / j� \x/ i y /� . �'� �� i� � � � ix� � � 1� }' v x i /K '� /� � � � / \ \ �\ \ % % \,xv� . X k � /� x � / � / �
i�� � � �� � % �� � � \ � x� �, ,� X � � k � �� � n �� � . � � �``� u � u � ��`/ � �� � � v
�i'� � � ( �� � � y u y � h � X i '� � / � � � �i X � � � �i� C ,�' �'" ��� �' i �'
� �� x \Q � n /� '\ n �\ �'��.� i/\ \ �\/\/ \/�\%\%� �` �'/ i� x��/\� x / / /� / / �� x . �.!�\/ / � �x. /�`�� � � /� .'\ i � \ \ \ \\ \
� �C � �,l '� > ,. \ '� �, � ^ � . �C ��\� x S� �t'jAT�,2�'� �'.�,��� i��� �y Y �i � x�x�� � �C ��\'� � �� � � �� i �y � �
�, � � x �' ,�''�� '� � �i� %��i��� y �i �, y�` i u �` ��' < � �� �� �P � �i � � �` `� �� �i �� �. � x � � i� � � i� i� �, % ��� �� i �
� x ,� � ;; x �,� � x �� � n �„�,� � � � < ��� � � > � � � u � , � , �� � -� �� % ,y � �� ��, � ,� u ,� � x �, ; , , � � � N.E. 1 /4 S.W. 1/4 SEC.3 T.2S. R. 1 E. W.M.
�, . �. � , �. �`� x �,,, � i �'� .� �� . , , i �, �i � � i , � �. u � � `C � i � � . , ,� � � i � y �. �i x .�` '� x � � ,� .i � � �� i ��
� � � i� � X \ '� �'� \ �� i� ' � �i��'� � �i �'�l ''� o � � �, ; _ ., , � x� �.`�,`XX � { ,` � '\ y ' �,, ', � � u i x i � � n ��k �`� �
� � x � � x � � � n � �� � �� � � �i � �
-� � � X � < � � �"� o � F�(� � < ''� � � '` � �' � CLACKAMAS COUNTY
�i� '< x x0� �i u ��`�i�'��X �� '� x �`i�,� h . �x� � p � " � i X x � i ,�'�,�'` i� � i � �.i � � ,i � i
k �i" � � X i ' � � � x ; . � , � �`� �`< � i� n''C , p' � �. u �'C \ X �`< %` � ' �, , '\ -�i �'� % �� r� \- �, . �u ,� �, � , � �� _ �
� i � i u � �i
� � i y �. �i v � �� � �� y �� ,�
u \� \ / n � � u � � � � /\ � � � > C �s.00 �s.�o� `° � X � '� X �--����� � /� � � ��� / \ �\ �\/ � X x �� � \ /� 1 - 100
/ /\ /` � � �/ � �\/ � �� �`�/�u � u /��if��� 70 00� �o.00� �s.os a �c �t, �, i , /\ .'� \ /\ \ �` '�
\ �. � � , � ; i � . �.0 2800 2700 I� `� o �` '� u �` i � � �< , '` '�� . � ,/ � ,� %� � , - ���-'� ,,��� i �
� y �Q � i ��� �.. }�, �- � 2900 � 2600 � x . � i'C � � ' ` � � � �� i� >
i y ��i� �'� � �i �,�`� o0 3000 �os2 1040 0 0. ' x �� ,� x� , � i� '� � i� \� �% j� i �j y'� � }�i \
\/ x ��/� �/ 1 �o � 1036 �� � 1012 y h ' . � X
u � � � i���,i� $� i\ '� � ��v o• 3100 1070 � o �, x w ,Z000, �. k / � ,� / \ . � / � �'
� -'< i'� , j � ��' � �30 1 � z V S 24�� zo �. X j �, , � / . �n i\ '� , �,C � �� T. � �
� �� v' /� '� � �x� � / \ \/�1 1112 � s.��� >c �- �/� �, / � �C � � � / � /�
yX / . � / x j��,/� r'J /� /� � e�°� z o - � h � - sai� .00� �/ � � / \ \/ �` / D.�.�.
� 3200 � � x �s� ,Zo , > � } � 3 0 � � �
�,�` ''��Y� �� i � %`� � � '\.'� O i 3300 1118 R < M w� ,z4�3� � h �——_ __ 16� 0 1300 '4'0o E � �, �- �. i� , i���. . , j,
" ' 1� ? � - ���C��-� �' Y " �� �` �` SOCRATES H. TRYON NO. 42
�,� \ Xx � / � n /\� �� Q �op0 1144 �, y N_ ��-- � � z �[ sas�aroo��e h iao.00• � �922 _ i2o.oa \ \ /\ \ �� /� �/
i �✓ �,� �`� i� , . >. � 400 2 w � � � �� w 2300 —— __ 1 0 1200 � �� �C � � �
� k � >C �i t' � � w � � i 2500 0 � . __ zo . � ,� � ��
� y j� y x� / \/ � /O 350 1154 2 �N o 1 Z I 764 h -�a 765 793 0 ,zo.00� �Cx ��X � /'� � �
-'� , x ' � JOSIAH FRANKLIN NO. 43
� �/ � /� �� y 0.25 Ac. N N �� i � �; � — �� ��J� iao.00, � 12 h S 8�°ia oo^ ' � / � \ u x
� \��� � �� '� � 1166 wo. �o � �' � � 240 � Z � � —� o.00• 16 � 100 E _ ,'< �� � � h�j� �� �
� �� � � uxu'��'�� 3500 �.s; ��,:� ., 241 y0.15' ' 63.�z� 5,.�z� 61 ,2,.66 239 � ,Zo. ° o'�400_ __ 2 1100 �s2 ,Zo. h � uX i i�� '��x
\/�/ � oo• � 7s2 _ � 7s5 00• 1 �' �
� . �� �/ 0.24 Ac. � � � �) �� 60.15' o � �` k � u
/` /. �/ \ A
45.44' S 89°47'00"E �� �
/ ��� �/V �'�2� 1178 2Nwo �j� ' 's � 1 > ZYZ 562z 4 N 81°35'3�'E N 8 7 32728"E � �/ /
� -�2ao_ _ � 0 200 '� �� � �� �� � � ��� Cancelled Taxlots
y���' � � �,N�, ��'� � �J g422 E N � 4201 4300 w � �s3 ——_ ,Z000• � ———_ __ 15� � �s2 _ '< � '< n i�
�� � a5 .E � ,�, 0 3 N 5oq3,Qo„ � 4101 42��� 1011 - l� � iao.00• o ''�, � � , � '��^ 4800
x \/ �/ 1A�g�� 3600 ?,o �'�� � i��� 5�3A 44 00 Z 0.25 C. z 0.24 A0. � ��JQe— �� � 2 h ,/ � %� \ \/ \ l
���,�hi• 56 1192 yo r� � 243 4100 e o.25 Aa /j � �` 1 2 p � � �54 1101 �� � x i � i i� �200
� � C ,�' q, gq6a A p"E 1 0 4 7 1035 � , �1023 � o o• . � 7 6 3 a 201 ,Zo.00� � '� �
r 6°�' a 5` 4 0 0 0 0.2 4 A c. � � � � 0 1 3 �� o _ X k �/ � / 3 9 0 0
>` /� Y� ���- � � P/��2CEL2 00• "6� 1059 �' `. Z o � a2100 � � — —_ _ 14 � 772 �' i \� � /� X 10900
x�/\ �� o R.Qo, � ' 9. Z6. 1111 Z ` ��, � � � � � � 743 \ 4 � � _� iao. � \ �\ � _� i . \ �\%\j 7901
PARCEL 1 �' � �PAF�CEL 1 PARCEL 2�' � o \ oo• 3 " � � � ,
' so 6 A �' � '��0' 1 16000 � ,Zo.00• 0 300 r�X � �/ y�` ��� x �
3901 P A R C E Lp r�f _f� � 1 / � 7 5 2 �i\ \ �i
y� jc��i �o. �z $a2� o PARCEL 1 � r �,\ ^ �zo.00• �2 � —1 Q00 � \/\ \ �' � �/
i� 6,� 1137 Z LOT 2 - �'1� �`� 60, 2000 �44 W — _ 13 - ,. � � �i �
� y� N � � J� - ,I r r 1 238 � . ; o_ o �43 ___ o n � �^ �� � �
\ n x � � 1 52 �'�.2g �� —r—J J 6e �� 0 725 � � �� —� � � W - ^ h �\ , �
�(�� \ �j aN � /R��4� � � � � 8602' 61� �\� = _ �� ;1 �_ � 120.00' Y �\.� �\ V � � � � /�\/�X
� �
> � � \
j/�j/'/� j�� N`'' Ati�O o E o. ,��' � � \�\� ���- '11 h 1700 'zo.00• �^ o Zp �ao.00• 12 � 400 �' ,�� �j�uX�x�/�� y/�//'� X
�/��� y� 245 y6°83 74500 �"o � � �OAD - �� �z�oo, o�18——__ 6 ��J 1001 _ __ � �i � �.�`�i k �`�;�� X
��, �, ��\ �� N ;So� °�\ 235 9056 /� _w 1900 � —- - ,Zo.00•— _5`° �'� h�'� � n��� � � \��
� ao-• i\
\25 9 0 � 900 �� - ��� ��^� � i� ��� Parcel Boundary
ri� �/� �;�� �� o � 16, 36 � o _ 10 h ,Zo. �� � 0 500 � , \�
�,��/.\A\� � /\ �o ,b��ry �`'� 38�� 9�� °1yga � R=1970' 9355' �Qo. ��\ �o � o izo. 7 0 717 p 730 �ao , (/� /�\ ,`� X`// '< � \x\\ , �"
� � `� �� y �� �o. ti� 1159 �� g9 Q� 9135' I 4400 50 �� Z oo � 0 1800 �� o 00 6 a �;x � � x k x� i� �C
1038 � 58��„� 0 600 �� � y� � u y' } � �,h ���'� ---- Private Road ROW
��� �\j\/x � �a� � 234 �� _ 15435' 4500 � � o .� ,Zo.00• E 9 � s25 _ � � ,(
_ 1050 . o �Zo.00•
w � 20� o / �\ � /\ � \
� � 10 " � �20 � �i�� � i�
�\�'�� \� � � 1os�� �v ° o � 0 800 0 � - \ \�� �� .. ——— Historical Boundary
}/�/� ` \/ � � I �P �—� Z �N � � D 1zp0p' $ � o a53 �ao.00• 7 � � � /\/� � X x� �� u Railroad Centerline
i/\'� xy\t\�u \/�� �� ����1 tio 2p2oA 4801 > so.00� 1� z N '�✓\ sai°ia�oo„E h a 7�� � ���n� � \ \ %� ��\�\ �� ��
� x / � �� _ 3 � 139.37' �� �Zo.00• 9 � 817 �` /� X � `� x;
� �i �` / � ;233 1 �-` 0.33 Ac. I zzs.sr m � o � �` � \ / n /
� \�i ��`� � , � � � �� c� i 1122 � �� 4600 � N9o�oo�oo��E � w ,Z000, 20� h n � v y �.�\ i'� ��`� �•� � � TaxCodeLines
� �� � � � � � �, - \� / w sso � o 0 6000 20 ,Zo oo• g . � � � � � � �
� x �i x hi���� i 8,.,0� �� 4800 � w � ��J - �W � �� 675 i2000� � � �\� �X \� '� �
��, u �c � � x i � 1� � 0.32 Ac. � - � o �Z � o—__ 16 � �610�87°�4�0o E AV �� �j�\�/\� u X � �./ . Map Index
�� �C � '� � �� }� � �� 1144 - �� - Z� ---�J--- --- 230 � �O Z --_ ^" 690 0 �N '� � � ,� \ �.\/\ � �,
���� X x ��i ,� x T� ��x � ,� � N Z — - -- � oo• oo• � � 0 7100 72000� zo� s8 0 , �� �/ h����x n � i� \% � WaterLines
\' ' I � 1 � ,zo. ,zo. X '� �
�� � x� � � � �,� < � i� � � ss3 0 0o E ,� x %� � � � O O Land Use Zonin
' ` ��• � X '\ �> > ,4 . '\ � �\ \ / � � � '`
� ` / � �< � `� W s��_ _ 15 � s 401 � 7200 720.00� u x � ,�x j� �'��C
> �/ / � �x � X ��,� � PARCEL2o 213.95' � _ 0 1zpoo• h h / x � 00 / � 9
\/ \� �` i � . . � � . X �c' � � � �/ - PARCEL1 o i � —_ 0 16 � �� �` � � �. `� �C �� �� � Liiii
� � �` k h `� �C� � � � � � � O - 0 7000 �' �l >c' �,� � x� � ,'< X . Plats
� sss i
� '' i` �: X ' ` ` ' � '� . >� � 5300 �. ,Zo.00• � o
�. 2 � y � � � X xiii�
� \/�\/ � � � � � �c �`� � \ \�`�'��n, r � ��� � C, 650 � I � ,zo.00• 6 600 � 683 0 1 . / / '�/�\// �` � � / �
��` �CXx � �� �� j`�'�� ' ��i� �� ���� ��� �� 231 - � . �i � 14^ 15 � � 7201 � ��� i� y�� ��� v � � u � Water
� i� � i � v �, �i �` � � � ,Zo.00• � ,. lw�� � �` �
�� ��• � x � X h/\�'� �.J� / � . o� Nas�sz�oa��w� � ��� � �68�� 6900 678 y/� � /�Nj \ �/� � � \ \ �
�i� � � � � �i'��'�� so.00� 90.00� 520 � � V�1 R. � _ 3 � . ����, x �, � �,�� �
� �i �, �'�� � X >c' �w , o., � � � G� 42 � O o 6201 �w s5� ,Zo.00• 2 \ � %� � ,� O Corner
�i � � �� �,� �i \ �\ � � k ��c =�00_ �17�'^s��— — — o.s2ac. I_' I_' �' �O�G NO� � ,Zo.00• 13" ss2 - - h o 7300 �� � ��� u x�` � Xx �� � �C �� Section Corner
� ,� � x � x /� �� �� � � . - 1053— ' ���— — — — — — 6 , 229 g LIN� OF 5700 � � 14 � �sss _ � � � � / xh �`�,��X y� ,� —
� � � X �i � h � �C n �� n _ _ SOCRATES � � �' � 1/16th Line
�� y � v i � �� ,� x � ,� PARCEL2 w 5400 N90°oo�00��E — �— — — �o� — — — — — — — — — ' H• 4 TRYON o Z 6901pLC N ,Zo.00• 3 � �i � � �i �� � , � � ���u � i
�`�i>� } u �x� �� �` �` i'� '� � r r r �� - soo N LIN� opF __ JOSIAH � 63bb — FRA �N — — — — 5a8 — — — — � � �Z4D2 _ i ������� �, u � ` � k x�i� � Govt Lot Line
�`� i � �' � �� v �` � u �` i� Q- � w �1 1 � � � w _ __ 12 � sao o � ,Z000, � o s52 DL� fV0 3 � � � i i i �
i � � �i ��`���, � � ;l�, ' w �$�,,JE; � � 13 —> � i� �� � ���'� y� %� v �' � — — — DLC Line
'� � � � \� � � 0 6800 0 � � � \�
� � i �i � _ � � ,Zo.00• � i �
�� n /\ \ �9. \ \ �" � � - _ so.00� so.ii si.00 N o rJ � x � � � /\ '� /\ /
�/ x�,�' , h x .ro �{���'�{���� o � 5100 200 � N9o�oo 0o E � `\\ 0 6400 � 631 0 ,Zo.00• 4 � � �i � xn i � n � �� ,� � �'� \� ---• Meander Line
� �\/� �� �`�j' �� ���1 �' �� �` i N Z Z � 1097 1057 Ac. I 5500 izz.se� —�_ �\���o � 630 _ �zo. 75�� X � �� �' ���� � � i� \ �� x �� �
� /� � � / �/ \/ \�\/ � �` x � �z 1041 N so�oo�oo��e O ��)— � o oo• �2" � 642 K u x / � \ �� x � �
� � �� � % �tb, � i ���� �- ` l �w w 5600 �� � 0 6700 _ } �` i �i ,� � ��' PLSS Section Line
�x xx/� '� �C � i '� ��/ � '� %� \ � f ('� a o _ - i� � �zo.00• 6 � —� � " /\ / � � u x �
� � X �` � X � �� \'� S ITE � J J�w 1025 r , - _ � s2� _ ___ 5 � '� � � �i� �' � �v� � � k- �,
� ��i � x � � r l � 6500 0 _ � � � y } u y Historic Corridor 40
� � � � u � u x x � �� �w � J.� J � —— 10 ,Zo.00• � � i{ �C � �i� � ��� � �� �
'�C i �, u �' � �./ x `�` `l x >` �� � (> Z N (' � � � � —___ s2o ,Zo.00• 11 " 7600 � ��a ki��� �C � �
��`������\ � � u ��' u'�xn �'���C , 226_——— _ 227_ � oPARCEL 1 � a ` 228 �� 0 ��� 12p�o• 7 � w 6601 � s3o ��i � �i� ���`�� � �\ � Historic Corridor 20
� i i � � y � � ��'�� vx --- -- - � - '-- �+ /
� � x � � �i� � �
� / � " 60.00' 90.00�VACATED 60.00' � _ _— N 89°53'30"W �.�0 � S 81°70pp�„E � u�i 6�O� p v�i 615 120.00' V o�' :\ '' �x /�uk/ � / � � '\ � '� / ����
120. y
� X ,� � , s,oo� 834�� o _ 6600 y
� u ��` i �'� X i� '� �¢;�j.� '� x j`i�,� qz55 20, 10 0 7700 � � � ��i ��`� �` / � � ,��\/u � u
/,`/ �'� ��\ � � `/� ��'� /\/y\ �\ %/ y / A\/ � � izo.00• $ � z h �-�5 h� X /� ,/� � .x � j� %� � ���
��uX h/�`��x�//���X� /\ 'C /` j� \'� \/� %\ \� � \�/"\/'\i �% �'\'�"'��` �` �` < x ��c � x � � 88ssi�ia-oo �—�7 '\ \ J\/� y� �'� \ � �`�%� �/X� \�\�x �
/ � . . � . �, i'C �x ,/ �� /� /� \ / /� /, i /. � k \/ \/ � / . E /� /� i� i \ \,- /` i �p Mi�lw��aukie---- ------ -------------�
j' x j�/ ��' x �� / �` ? � �' �� /� /'c �C x /� `�^ izo.00• 9 �� \ � X ��� x� /� � � /� / �� \i \ ---1T�r'+�„- Damascus <
�` �i � �( �� X h � � x �/ � / � /\�/ \ � \� � � i2o.00� 20� , � �( � �� n / � n g �•V y l
�� �i � �`�i� � .�`��� u �.� u �'� x � � � ��i� �/ � i o 11100 S 8,o i � �� `
\ � � � ` ,� \ /\ � J� � y � �/ 20� �4'oo^E �20.00• � � v � �� � � \ � 9 � Tuaatne Oswe. o WaPPY�e y �1_,`
/ � '\ �\ /\ '� /` ^ '� \� � � �\ /�` / � �� � � � X � /� '� n /'C � n � � � ��/ � " 980 0 $ �� /� � � / � � �n7est Linn
� / X h � X x \� ^ /� '� / \/ \/ � / � \ X x � /\ '� l` \ � o izo.00� � h � � �C /� \� /� /�,/'C /\u\ / River ro e Sand �
� � � �/ � �C / u � � u � x � \ � � Or.ggon City � �
�i� � � u i '� � � ,� � ,� � � i� � � ��i � y � � � ���� u �` i� X x � ,� ,Zo.00• 16 � � 10100 �' X. � x i h ,'� I
� � . � �, x �. �� � ,� . y���� � �. � \ � ;. � � X i so� � � � . '` \ '� i '' i �-
/ � ,� �� � i � /\/�\ �\ \ �/•` �/ � /� � �x�• `� ' w 592 � � / ` ' 'Isonville
\ �C / n /\ � / � \ /� � � � � �/ �. \� �/ � `� X � � ; 11000 ,zo � X x � � n � � �/\ r- j a �
/� � X � x /\ �\ � /� /\ � � �/ \ \ ��/\ /' � � � / o .00� ' � \/ � / � X � n /\ � Estacada 1
�'� � � �% � �C� � ' x�/� '< X i '� � �<'� �'� ��/� �\ � �/ ���/ ;�� �� \ `�` � �Q 577 1 a o 10000 Zo� �1i � k �� �` �� h ,`� >C � _ � c�anby
� �( / � V � X _ - � " �! Barlo..
� �� ��`�, ��y �� �.�\��X j� � ,�'�x�� \ %�\� � � � �i � ��� �� �u O z _ __ 15 o h 10101 �_ sso S$02000�E 1/ �' r�� �j�j�\/ \/ \ /� � �' / / � � , 7
�C � '� / \ \ \/\ \ �' �' \ �/ /
�� � �j, � �.i ��� u . �,� u �� \/ � '�� x �� ,� �� /\>l�.i'� /�,/� � ,� �i, \ �/ � —= —__ 16� � 9000 14'00 o so, v \,/\,� �,`� '< �'` �'�
� > � '\ h / �/ y�'� � � \%� izo.00, izo.00• 810 izo.
� � % �/ � / � \ � x �� � /\ � � \`/\ \ , / izo.00, iao.00, � �{ � J
i x i� �i � � �i � � �� 2 � � 0 8900 °°' ss,o � '{ �'�.i r,
k h � �i � � } i � �` � `l � u �` i� '� �� � x � '� � i��/ � � i��� \% �i� 10800 0 10200
\ � / � �\ �� �\ \ �i� \ \. \ � i \ik\ �` � �C k � Y k� \ �� h i\ �� � i\ '� � 9900 0 9100 � 776 0 20, ia�oo•E i� \ � �f Mol'all'a `l
� � / , � /� � �� ,� ,� i� i' �� i �, i � � i� x X � x � � � ���—_ 14 � 5s2 . o ,Zo.00�
,� ,� � x �� �C x � � � � i� � � ��i� �'� � �� � ��� u\ ���` �� x o ———� o 0 3s�- ____ �5 � 5so 0 16 h o 7800 6 i� �`�i� `� `��-
y � ,ao.00• ,
�� \ �/`/ � �'%\ X\/�\�,CX� �� � \ �'�n\ \'��\�/\�.� �j�� ��\�/ ��%�/ xx� � a 10201 3 � � o �ao.00• 2 "' 592 0 �� �j �.� 1
�` V � � \ \/ \ � \ X ~ /\ h o ��oo )
i i � � ,`� h ,`� � x��� � i � / � � i� �� ���� � � u �` �' X —_ _ " 9201 � 575 ,Zo.00• 1 " x �i� ti .-�
� x x �� � � x / '��C��� � � i � � � � � ___ _ � 5ss o 14 . 55s � 0 7802 � �'�� t M �
x � / �`. . . � / /�/ � / i �; ,zo.00, \ \, \ C
� � /'� ��i`X� �.� u � %uX /\� � X ��� x /\ ` /�/ ` j��� \ \/\/ \�`\ \� � 10801 �zo.00, � W 9800 � ,Zo.00• 15 " � 580 0 �� / �� �`4 �^�
\ \/ \ �' � X j` � n � � �� /\ � / / O 53s � 4 � I
� 3 N o 8700 � Ll.y � � �; ,
/� � �` \ � /, \/ �` �c �( / /\ � \ /\ „ - 0 541 �——
i � k, �. �, �'� i o 10300 � o _ ,Zo.00• h � � �
��/'� �C\v x ��x��,� '��' ��/�� �\/� h� j� � � i��/� � � / '� /` j������� \ �� �zo.00• �2� � 544 0 �� _ —_ � 569 0 2 � � n ,t \
� �,'� i '� i� '� �� �i � � �i�i � �`�� �` �. u k � � � �C h '� ,� � '� o Z —_ _ 13 � ,s.5• ,Zo. 0 7801 � �`� y �,,,
�/ \ \ / � � � / n \ _ ,ao. ��`
. , n , � � .� � � � � y �; � � , u � , �C .n o 10700 _ oo• oo• 14 � � 5�0 �� � � �--- �
�. .'` / � �- i � �C � . ,� /� � x � . ,zo.00• h � i o . ..�
i� � �` i � �- ' � � �i � ��`� � ��'u i x �� > , i� i� � � 52� 0 5 ,Zo.00, �200 0 8600 0 � � ~'�-`
\ � � / \/ / � >C � '� � � - — �
�i'� � `� i ,'� � � � � � �'�, �` ,� x � � i � O h o 10400 9700 � 54 —T 4 � 555 ,Zo.00• 3� i ��� -----------------------------�
�� u i � �i�,,� .�C n � � � ��� � ��i� . �� � � � u y i �� x ,Zo.00• 11 � � 520 0
%� i� '� x i �� < � n �i � � �i� � � �' y v W o � �j - 0 7900 � � �
i � �C � � i�`/ , � � x ��i x i �� � i� � � ,� � �\� \'� ;�> � �� � 10601 h o 5�3—_ __ 12 C� ,Zo.00• 13" � 556 _ u x �i �
� /� X x \/ � ` /\ � � � \/ x x � � X \ � \ \ � ,zo.00• ; o
/ . . �C � \ \ �` / � u � . / '� .X � � P 515 6 � o / �/�� �
,� X � x . '� , /. � � \ � ' � ` � � � � ' � i� �� i ` �i'C �'�1` %� � 8500
�i � � x i x �� � � � i� i i o 10500 � ,Zo.00• 5 � 533 M—__ _ 4 � � u � i
� �` ° � k � u ��,��i x �` � � �� I` i'� n �� � n i� � i� � �'� O Z 1�. 915 r � 0 9300 � _ n
� � �i �i �� i �� �� � �! �� � x <, �, � � ,`� �� '� � - o —— 530 - '� i
\ �` i u �, }.u„ � �\ �` � ; �`�l .x, ` > �` �� h `\ �'�i"� % i� � 10600 a-__ � ,—Zo.00•� '� o ——__ __12 . � ,Zo.00• h i i��'� \'�
i� �% � � � ��i �,�` � �`� ��� y y ��i y i� x � ,� ,'�.,n i� n N 5os — __ 7 o h —
� � � � y� i�� ,�' � y � �'� ,�� �, � �/ � } �,�.,'`Y� / . � ,� X x _�. � 9600 ,Zo.00• 6 � 8000 " ��, i�i�i
�r'� i u^ �� �<�^ �c � / X ��/�j /\/`v� �' � �' /\� � � \/ \ �\ �\/\ '\ � � s$o izo.00• 9 � �505 0 9400 528�— �� rJ N �,� 0 /�
'� ��?i� �� �`�i � � � � �\��, �{ �,��� i� v Y �i <n���� � �� �,(� �� �Q�oo�E ——-40-g o 5 - 11 0 � ��i'�
j ,/\X \ /�// \/ /, T` � i I�� � �-�j \'� j�� / � n i�/ \ / 0 zo izo.00• $ ^ � = so.00• izo.00• _ � \ x�/\/
/�\ \/\ �` � � � � \ % � \/�� � � /\ �� � \ '\ �` p izo. � so. � \ \
i � i �y� � i � � i �� oo• oo• h x �i
� � � � � �i � ��i �� �` i � � � �i� �"� i � x � � �C i� � � � i� �� �'L7% � ss,� 0 9500 � � w 8400 8300 � oo• g v �i�i �
\ /\ / '� /� � '� � /� \ ,a. ,zo.
�'� '� � ,� �� � ���� � � , �� � ��� � � .� x i n � ,� ,� � �� . oo E � 0 505 .i i � n x
,� , � / '.` /� \ �� X � / � �l � k �• � '� � /� •'� i� ,zo.00• � 504 � 0 741 0 8100 � �
i X ,� � x � � x i� '` � � � >C � � ` � � �� � � } � �' �i h �`< x i� �� 9 0 � �p—— � 516 � � xx� i
�i �` � X �i X h �� n �� i �� % ��/� i i � �i � u � �� � � 20 �� —o __ 10 0 _ k
y i � � � � � � � i � i i � v �' �i X �` �` �� ., - o _ � �
i� � �' � \. \,� \ �,- �` . k � i � i\ � �/\ \ i� �� � � �� �.� x � \ ?� X � � i2o.00• 8 � Z o � � \ /'
� ,� � � � �� � / ,� �, , �, y� ,�� , X >, . x �� �� ,� , � � ,� � ��� � >'�� y ' , � � , ,Z000• 7 � L , �,� � �
x� �'��'�x � /� '� i`�� � \ � � u �,� X �.� �x / /\�'� � � � � \� \�/\ \\ � / � � ����x� � � Sgso�oa E^ o $2�� 1��`� '� �.� y/��>C /
� X / '� � \, � / �` X ,�" / \/ \ oo"
� � ��' � `� .x � < � �� �i �� �, �i � � � � � u k � x�,��VI� ��� � y � y � �i
i x � X � � � � �" u' i � � �i� , �� g � ��� � _ 1� � � �
� � u� � ,� ,� � �C � � � � -� i� / � � y �/ � ,� � X � k ,� ,� � � �, so oo� r � � �
�'� � v y � h � , � � �� � n ��! � �i� � �� u x�` �� x �, �� x ,�~� ���/ � % % i� �� y Zo� �� o � � � �,� �,� �
X % \/\ / � ` � j/ � � / u x /% �� � / '� � /% \ � � � / y � x � � /`\�'� � � ,� ��\ /\� .��'/� izo.00• $ � '� �'� '� � ,�
� � �'� x �'� ,,� � � i� � ;� � � '� . �, , nh i ., "
, � � , � ,� � �� � �� �. � � � � � � �� � y� � �
, r , . , i\ i � w �
� ����ti� ,�/�'�y' � y�` �� � ' x'� ,< � ` l � k �� � � n � X � � �� � � '�� v ,� ;� ��,�
�i � � } x � �C x �� '� %� � � � � � �� u � u i �'� x � �� �- � �
� � � { � � i �� i i� � � � �i � � �i � , � �C � � � �
� � � �' � } � u h �'� x � � % � � � � x � � x �� � n �< ,` � �� THIS MAP IS FORASSESSMENT
,`C ,>C � \� '� '` �\ ''� /` '� i�\ � %� ;� � � u � � � � '� .�C � ,'� �C � � ���� ���y� �` � ; � �, �� .� x �. ,� �C .�� � ,� ,�� %� i� � � � . �
� � � i� �� �� �' �,- �, � � � - �� k ,� � x � ,�C � ,� < � � �, ��`� ��i � }� �� �� � u i � x � x k PURPOSES ONLY
x �� x h � i� '� n �� � � �i �� � �`�i �� � u '� � �. � x � � � � � i � i� \
x \ /\ \/ \ \/ k h / � / / � �/ \/ � u X �` /� x � � � X u �/ \/\
� �� u � �.i u � �C x � � �C h � � i��� � i�i� % � �i �� �� � � ��X �i � x � x �� ,� i� � � i� � % i�i� y� � � �' ��i y �` � � x �c � ,� �C � i� i� n
/� �� U /\ � � � � �� �`�X � ���J� �` �`� `�nX� •� �� �� �� \,C \�� � y� � / \/\ '� � \i �,�` � �Xv)` �`� /X ��� /�i � ��'��� � � '` �\ /� � ��� � � �\� \�\ �� � � ' � � � ��� � �C �
i� � � � �i � " �� � i n � � � u � � �� x i � x � i y v � � i� x h
uX i � � n � � � � i� \� y v u � x � x i �i � � � � h i � i� i� � i �' i �` �` /'�� �
� h � x � � � i� i � �i �� �� \�,� i hi� ��x� � � � i� � �i �i �, i u x �� , � � ��i � � } . � � �
��� .� x �. � '� n � � � ��� �, } , u �� ,� � � x � x k , � n ,< , � � � � x , �
,� ,� � . �, � `� � �. � �� ., �- U y � � �. , -
'C � i� i i � i � u x' � � � h � i � �� i� � � � ' �� �� �
�` k- �, � k, �C �\ �: h � x \ '�� x /� \ � � � � � ��` / �/ �.` � � � � � i � � � ' v�� / X ' � k' \ � \
\ \ / / � / � \ \ � / �/ /
y � �� � i � � u � � i � �C i� � i �i X � i n � � i '
,�� �� � �'` �' � �i �'" �` '�X � xh � �'��� �� � � � � >' v �'� v< �c>i �, �'� � ",\ '� �` �,�'� �` \{� , ' ,� � \�,�X,��i � � � �' �'�` �"� \����`�` �� 2 1 E 03CA
i� � � y �i � � x � � � �'�Y'� � � , �C ��`� .� i� � � � . � � h x� i . x �� � nh �� i� , � � , �i �,
� � � � / � /� � � �. � �/ � � � /� �. � / �
�i � �i �` � u i x ��' � �x � � � i� �� i �i� � � �`` � i x � �� x . � �
�' � u i � X i � � � \i \ l � �' � � u� h �C i\ '� � i� � / �� � �i � /� x, � � . � � �� �� � / .
i� % � �i �� i�� �, � �� x � �i x � �'� x n � �C n � � �� � � i� � i v y i v i x � i � i� � � i v i �� � }
� ,� ���, � �' ,� � y, > v �- i �.�,�� ;� ,� X k�� �C x � i > �� � � x � � n � �� y v � � > > > }
n . . i � � � � � / i � � '� � n . \/\.. i � � x /�. � X >. �� n i \ �' \ \ \ �' 5/8/2017
{ � ,C \ \.� � � , �
�� v �'�� �x�� �� X h �� x�n��� " i` y� � �� � y � u'`�� �`' xx '�,�� '� .��� i' �'� �����'� �` i'�u x ��`u�`x'� i x �,' � � %� Y� � ���`��,� }� �� � � � � �� ��x'��,���� LAKE OSWEGO
._„.`. e�. ;$` . b t,xe 1Y , . .^`�rn�� �� Ai
� ; � �. F-' • ^ r . et
� �,� � � , ��. � � t- � � -
4 � �
IY � M. .
?� a A� � ( J"� . �'.
'.A . � S J � E. �I
'j ,S' f. I 4 . �.
� � '�0 A �' . � � ,� � �
} .;.Y ��� r"�RaY . , .l�',X. �
r' ",� p, f& : � ! w) �
"'Y � � � ' fRe �'.; ��'.M� '
Y `�
y� !h .r� v�� L � � � � Y .
`A`.. r � � . �,L '. y '��4 . .
n ^�
'1 ' "�i rb 4?�'r" t..d Y .. � � ° ��' A,_ �
� � � � � � �� ����� �y��� �
�`�' � m ��k �, � K'.� %` � o ��(1
tq� ,' `{:;� � �2 �y ,{3 ti ^� � .n ,� �-- , . ' 3.- .
,rYy.` �v'.;.. '��' n.a ����� � * �,Tx '��.,� „"f
� � � � y � ����
�i ' ..-�p � . ����� �4 �� R.��� '�A§„ j d � .
�.� ' #�;.R'.
..I b - . —.� ,� '� .. _ �:. .��� .. Aenallmagery: 2015 - _
I , `, � I ' I
e'xne ur�osawe�uoir rors I I I �
_ n�e m�o-�T ar rueco.s i e z
MI?IGATION T�E I 15)NEW 5 GA. '�
TCH BASM-SEE �E' PR?ECi 'CzR4VEL 6'CEDAR W 7 P81 W EW 3"ABS CATCH BASM-9EE IaODODENDREN-PER LUR I I s�" � �
0'ClDAR StOFMU147ER PLAN -BIG LE?F Z�E STRIP � FENGE GAS LME IAJDER310.71ND BMIITART BELLER BTORI'AUATER PLAN O'7'1-00�6 LANDSCAi°E NEW I-I/4'PEY� �
• FENCE —'�.—�. ELECTRIC 8ERIYCE LATERAL 5 0000'00'£130.00' - — BI�FER - - - - -TE��_i.
� TIEEE- • LANDSCAPE• ��h�4T'E'_ 101�.—.—, . .O .`.—. —.—� —,—.� . Y— —__ __—__— — .—.—.—.—.—.—:—:—:�R � cN R R � 'R ' 'R- ', .� �
� �� � a -ai��e,oF sTwQ � -BIG LE?F ♦ ` �/ � / —J � e.o• ��v r�w a• � �.�� ���'� I
�• �'� COLUI'1WiR N 00'00'W 40.00' —.� I
Mri�ma�s `� � va�i Fr a� /� _ , �' _������,�. �.�-.,�..��---._---, ,—,—"=�,"a_ ' �.—'—' j
� a � _"""'� _` - —_—_ _— _ _�CI`1ERRY MINIMUM i �', — MM��°� MM�,�°� ',.\ ;�, gr�� � r —'�. .��._ I
'-"va�i Fr s�or� � �---- _ � va•i Fr�o� T ��' b 1 � /� �� � �������� �����s�..� r�T�.—.T..�.� �.� �
� —� roRrnecaa c+wr�eERs- ������ � O
- �__ �/' � .e�ai,6L'S9 M.00,OR00 N �\ � 6tol�lulAtER � �
, MMI� LL MIhM1-SLOPE �_MMIMIA'1 -- —1----�SEEBTOIa'1WATERREPORf i / -------------------- ) REI°ORT +� ' � ` I
I --'___ �------- ------- ----------�--------'-- / _.... ' � , �EDGE OF
__ _ _—_--- \ '
/� \
'---- ' // .. � EXISTINCs
i �E�SE?BAC1C GRAVEL BTRIP .—����. ��� . ... ---- , � i ASPHALT
—_—_—_—_—_—
'—•—— W SANIiARY � ' I I
A98UNED Fk^ONT C r 0 TREE- E� EASE7'1ENT BEWER LATERAL � I I 1
PROPERTY LME -WESiEFd�l RED � I ��� Y008-I08 GLEAN q1T ,OZ'46 M.00,00.00 N '�
I MITIGATI 21''5' MI?I A?I � GEPAR � /�,y0 46 CEDAR y�. S�T I
E- NEW CONGRETE IT I�Ak FENCE °.�
I Q pTE�0 9 tR PRIVEWAT / EXISTING I I I � I \`�� 1
VARIA9LE N1DT1 COMMON VfdVAIE ABPNALT � I `\
� �
. -�T� �D � Q �m IN�h ECftE55 EASEMENT µ� `� � I
CEPAR 'L 0� ul �D R �R ILDMG RD — . RED P BENEFITUOG ^P RaF.�isM7�k i0R 7HE
_—_—_—_— --------- -- —_"_ � FIRE I
FRONT9UILDING -- Y----- '-- — NYDRMIT ��
� �/ . � i i � O MI I ?ION = I LOGATED ` �
I � � LL � I i V I
,
3�� , . Al�ROXIMAIELT I�
�\
TION CAVER4C�E r-J ------------------------ Rd RED LLEBT OF� � �
A MCL1IDMG � �
O � �E�� ��i DECKB - ---- I 105�c AVE I-�.`� I
. � � � ' , �
�E � o I
.�--- � � � � I
------
MITIG.4TION/
I _i________________ - MITIUATION I L—' BTREET TIZEE- ``� I I I I
GA i I I � TREE_ � EpC�E OF��``�\ I
-�I��� MAPLE�UR O DCIBthYa �
M KrATION TREE- � 10'- MAPLE q$p{�q�?
- IG LEOF � �Mt• ' BIDE YARD �"��6
I O M p_E CAY! ABF�D LINE ;I req.BI11LD I �\I
1 •IB'-4' _ � 1 _ CY86�_���)74�.��� �I 9EISACK I
.s'c. �g�_�� ae' M�IMl1RINIEC�F1T �� � MITIGATION I _
43�_6� �� o FlR �/ 39 BF-EXEMPTI ARE /S T I Z E E T T R E E- I �`�I I l
ALL D � µ� / 5F-TOTAL O HITIGATION MPpLE P�ER LUR I �
I EXEMPTION A 11�E- 0"I-00�6 I I ',, O
� il -816 LECF I �
� � �_m• ___. i I 10�_y� � MAPLE � I I I "�,
i
SIDE 7 � BUILDMG
� i�� �,R,�. --- �' �� i ' � 1
� -�___;' . j j I �'�,
I GNEARY 9' / � i �
/ � �
/ \ ' !
I � � —L__ \` '" I I ,`,,�'�,
--� ' i i I
j •�,.e• / I �:��^ i �\. l
I � � �
I R�" I I O I 4n I I 1
� I , I I I I 1
1
I �� �� \ � � i MITIGA?ION
� � �� _B E�.� l
3 � oh7rrg' �_---� ��( i/ I MAPLE I
,9 � i /�� \ ��� � ` i�/ � \�\� 1' �__� I // I
rw N �^�° �B . ��'� ' ,, .- 1
� i ,��\ `. ' o .�' `,�'';' '� �.�
tI�E ��/� R x• iREE I___ - ' �
2 I ZONEC; � ` ��— —�� ��A ZO�N �I��"- '-' I I
/ �� � � I J
I � � �/ I \\ ' O I � I I I
� � ♦ l Y� I � I
�___�__a � I
I� j �/ arw az• ��cr ok �`-�------�..`. I i \� I ,
���, o , � ,1 . ��. ' 1
i � i _ , . � ,, , i
\Q,
i i i --------------�_ O ..\yi` ' ,,' ',,\ i i '�\\\ 1
� i �HITKx4tIGN \`\\ / ---' � I � 1
� i� I �LEAF \� � `T' � �``• \\ I
i I i MAPLE �\ � /� i \ �"'_' �_—= I �
I � \-p `\��`..`` �/ � �
,T; � ' l
I I � REAR TARD BE?BAGC LINE \ I i�U!i' I
; � �------ -------\- �-___--,�--------- � -----� � �
� i �W 6� '�� ,
',�� �'� � � �
� i •zeze' o.w r j I I
I � O 5./l.J' � I
II II � 6 a� Y r p
� 9 '° I
I � �
� NEW ARBORVIiEA-4' '� O NEW ARBORVITEA-4'OG.
I � -PER LUR 0�-00�6 �r NEW 6' -PER LUR 0l-m016 I
I I Ll+NPSCAPE B�ER 0 CEDAR Ll+NPSCAPE BU�€R
FENCE
' ����� ��� � ��������� � ! �
� --_----- --—. -- _----- --�-�-�-J-�- -- �.-•-•- I
��No� ,4926 3,SZ,10.00 S J �
� � I
� . .
�� SITE PLAN �
�, SCALE:I"=1fD'-(D' I
�\ PLAN i
��, -
,��'�� � , Permi# No. 7�r"1 � — b ZU��
-�4 � T ree Re m��a l F��: � ,.,,.,-�
, �I `, ��,` Recor�ls Fee: `� �"_
1 } C : ■ � (Type II &Verific�tian �niy)
� � ►�#ppl�cat�on o�t�: �-l:�y���
�
St��: .��
`�R�Ga�fl,
p�li�ant: I�I.V� ��LGr75� P��� Phane: ,5�3 �36 3ZfZ
E-mail: �-0�Wt[�_�3LI��PA�t-�J�.CCW�
dd�ess �f Tree Remaval 5ite: �65���
F►roperty �wner: ��� f��(�S�- f�� Phane: �3 43�; �Z(�
�
umber, 5ize �Trunk Diameter�, and Type of Tree[s] tv t�e Removed: i �� �'�'��
eason far Remova{: I�/5��---
f grant pe � sian to City af Lake �swega employees to enter tf�e abo�� property to ir�spect the trees
r ques d f� o�al. I agree to restrain any dag�s} on inspection day.
��� __.__�
agnature of Property �wner (requireci} 5ignature of App4i�ant (if difiFerent}
The Ci#y Manager or the desigrree must sign for�trees located nn publi�property.
� TYPE E Submit: (1} 5i#e plan [8'/z x 11"}
TYPE H� Submit: (1} 5ite plan �8'/�x 11"}, (�] Checklist, �3} Mitigation plan, 44} Landscape plan {if
applicahle}
Ta ❑o: (1) Mark tree�s}with yell�w ribhan, (2} Past sign, {3} Stake building en�elvpe &
driveways if new constructiQn is pro{�osed
�EAD 5ubmit: (1) Site plan (8'/2 x 11"}, �2} Printed phatograph of free[s}
❑eciduflus trees require a site visit by staff hetween No�ember 15t and April 15t''.
To ❑Q: Mark t�e tree(s}with yellow ribbon if a site �isit is required
HAZARDDIIS Submit: (1} 5ite plan [8%z x 11"}, [�) Printed �hotagraph of tree,
{3} Hazard Evaluafian Form cornp�eted by a Tree Risk Assessor Qualifi�d Arborist
7o Do: �1} Mark tree{s}with yellow ribbon if a site �isit is required
EMERGEHCY Submit: �1) 5ite pian {8Yz x 11"}, [�} Printed photographs of tree ar�d emergency condition
VERIFIGATIQN * 5ubmit: �1} Sife plan (S'/z x 11"}, (2} Mitigatio� p�an
To ��: �1} Mark tree(s}with yellow ribhon, (2} Stake building en�e3ope R driveways
Buildrng P�rmits will nat be issued prlor to tree rernv�a!nr tree protectiv►a inspection and apprvval.
Fvr City StafF LJse�nly
taff End af Cammen# Periad i �{.� � � �"
ei hborh�ad Associatian ri(�� �;�.,`.�!rr[in - {-��a� "l�1 � ;
g � � �nd af Appeal Period
� c� y � � -�.v}�
lanning or Building Fiie # ''�`��-I - ����" Mitiqat�on Plan Appravedl�enied
emoval Appror►ed ar Denied (circle ane} Number of Trees Appraved
1:lfarmslapplctnsltree permit appsltree permit application-re�ised 08-6-tfi
��' -I�r;e.� v�Qiw���-- I u� -�c� f �-��e�e,S �f��- � �- - C�Z o�3
� � �
� C3 3 `` �a�-c. �� �s�'�,�,,��
�
� f � �i� � � ��
i � ��\�� � I
; �
FBib441�1 PRICTGN 4 . . .. ....._ _._. . . .. ._.... � l871&JN$�qPAp�it iai
ifCL°. � ` i
� 'LOild¢ -1�IPM .� r '
.. Ta6 �LLY.' . � � °
,._ _- .., �,. � � f .--�-}-
._.._ __......we.....�.................... 5 OOW'PO'E iJ0.01]' � � �^""'
,� ., �_"�. . ..e..._.�._ ..�.. ...... __.._ a __. � „�,�,p,.R�.�.�'� ' '
t ..... .. . _
/� Q F�EV I.F41F QF�CCAPE � � ,,.6'......,..a- J✓ _� _.__��_ .:e...�sew�w�w.�wr=w._ �.e.._R a.. � w R. c R:..._. �M � E R �,.�.,..e-'""� ; S �
� -�o t.e.w � �' �/ � � I .. . ...` �j ���.,,--�� � �
/—�.—_�e—,e_.___ `" � �
!`^",^.., oe. ^'� �
-�-�-.-.w..--'-�----�,,� ._ � y N OOT1000 W M .� Y� s�
�� � .�. � �,.:��w�.a�nw...e__re._^mY"
a . �...i...._ K. 17E�PRIEGT1GN /_�.n. , e ❑ "Y...�-«--_•- +..._.... _- � ._'_'.--_°'--._•--.�..a---'�'--�:-._.�w--._.._ .a..— _`_`_
� ' �_
.....,,,.., �� '� -o, ..� . `_�`'�.-l-
� _
.d��w.B
. ,-...y........_ �'� .x...5 _. ._..
f� "��........� • �! � e
........._.......s..�..�.R�.�w....��...+t�x'T�..
..... � ...�..e...�.._._R�_. _..�e.�.��_�� .�...._..__._... �...._...._e.._....Y
�.�..,� t � e
rl M ���.�..�._�.,_._�._.py4GGTl8 M.00,P0.00 N.._'_ �^ . ���� �--��� e
T ___�_ '
/ t `^�""...... .______________ _ _ __'_ .+..�......�v.�=�.'_______
`--_.._. __ w �� _
f �:�:. ' - ... .-,.�R-��;-„� ,�.y�, _._ - __ � �r +
,r:"•o.r.:�, �L.y., r. i
�� ,,,...... _ .. .-� � , i��� f..�
.�4Y+,y:i.'�..' � �'.."..„�-v�.. /� r/r€ � D(IBvei3 �`"�.
�..:..,..., Y_ _'
w�...�._�
_M.v J
....._-._.,."
__________'__ � O � /.� ��� ; ...._.._.__. ...,w"_.._........e_.._._ .......�...._...�_�-� I `�!
�Pl�[TT LC@ e�r�' ` d � �
•�lFd1CR11lG /�%;� i y\I • i � � F
-_____ MR�A7I � Mtt. C&DeR ✓� i+l' ' .OZ'D{'M.Q7.06Q7 N, .
z R �( �
.•_ __ °
jrXf O � -uE8 I�D `v ' � �S� ' � ! �l € Zi
t �� O CPD � / � ' P!9 � 8 b �1 � � ��
� -------- ` i' ; E 8 � Q (
----------- - -
�reuu.ar� --- - -—- i _-- ------- -�- . ; 2 �
°�` _� � ' �''--_-______ ' ; � j l ��
�
, , .
� EL
--- , __ :
f - — - --- �; ; ; � I r v �
. � � -.
� �_
� ,, i �_��__ �..�---__ �--��
��� _ __ __� D
/ . �_.._.q , � . , � ninmaria+ � .� ��y._.�-, �__nmoarkxdi ._.._��__ � �
_ - p � ___ _� � � { �
___ E� �-,� � a�,��
,� , .�r�,�. ;� „�.s -��,
� � � �r �� �� �� i i �'� ° : �j i � I
f ��.�. / � -- -��:-� --� ;� � � ; I � � �
fr Jtt»»vo ` ' �I r �� ( MTkb47'tJk + �
t �� rcr�s,ata� �� � ion�ar�- � � �`�q..� � �
' O •tw�r�.e�ue¢ i 1 ! �O„ � [��
,,�`j � ; �� � 3-� _.�,�?,`�r^�� �.°� I ' € �� i
• � .� , I z�
-
__._�_________�_--- �
_ � ��� --- ---- , � ;i . l
s' '` ' '� �,�� � � �
I ' ' �`
o :
,
E
, <
\ �,r ---------- � NARRATIVE , ` I i't �
� �� ---------- - ��._ ��° ��
�� '�" ''�� � ` 1. EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE STABUZED BY 4'COVER OP
� ; ,
. � _ ___.___�_' r F '%,� O ; STRAW OR OTHER VE�3ETATED MATERIAL AS TO NOT CREATE
� � ��- � ,� �, � � �� RUN O�. -
.��.
° ' ' �� �" %` ' � "°� 2. ROUTINE INSPECTIONS OF EROSION CONTROL METHODS �
��r.uar.v 3 � ma`F>^s ms nzrecriorir° i I ' -�-- . . . �
�� ' 0 ���*�� '�"'� , '` - � SHALL BE CONDUCTED WHICH MAY NECESSITATE _
� %�' ��°� !�� ��''`������'� � � REPLACEMENT OR ENHANCEMENT OF FAILED EROSION
, �"' ° ,
�
� � � .
�
� �.____�_�__ . � . , o � CONTROL STRUCTURES.
.#,„„ , ,�e_____�, �
,—E--� � '�g � `��-�- ��., 3. WET WEATHER SEASON-OCT 1 -MAY 31ST �;�`� .,\,
-�� ���, o ��+ �'`�.. �
ki� . _ . „ .
,E � � "�`�`��� � �� ' �`�"� 4. ADDITIONAL EROSION ic SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES �
�
� ,,, .....� ,
f „,�D____.� � ���,,� r~`�'��-�_.v�. __z A V A I L A B L E U P O N R E t i U E S T
,,,�'� , ; a � � 5. PROVIDE�CHAIN LINK OF OTNER WIRE MESH
; � �REIR TA�BeTS4GY'LPe , „ I d'
_____'__________�_`.�.,r___� _
�f .� � - --- � -----� � PROTECTION AROUND TREES AS INDICATED
�
F�, � � �0 �
.��`� � �
s , 6otl T ��
�� � �
-- ��✓���Y �� � .� �r O ,ro� TREE PROTECTION / EROSION CONTR - - �m ��
� � ,��._..oG o `� OL s-� 17 �
�E -�� o ' �� ��`�°� NE1N SINGLE FAMILY HOME � �
________�_�_��� L�����a������ __� ����a:����� � �� `
__.__..� ----__----- .—_ ___ -�-, �
- _ _- � ��
� �... � ..w��r.a .f9i6 ' 3.4T.,fQ00 S i
f i, :
e
J �
. • ~
• »....--....._........_--
,._.....-..._.._
...
..__...._._....._..__.._._ —
i ,.._...._.._...__._._.___-.-'_..� � �
� SITE PLAN
SCAL�: 1"=2�'-m'
PlAN
___
jO� �A EOs \
� ' City of Lake Oswego
��� �� ` T1
��
� Q ,� PUBLIC NOTICE
\O,p�GO�� Pending Tree Removal Permit
�� Notice Date: `� � Z `� � � �
I, �6 iM�'�TH�� do certify that I am, or I represent, the party
A�inti�oso�name (7.� 46'� OFI¢ CI)43 OPf2 CZ) 6'� OFiR CUGHER4`f
r questing a permit to cut�4�torn�. — ��� Z� pF�� ���" pFiR �2� 9 Pp�4 � � 'F Lvekai
I\ 7" DO 4 h 1 Z9" 4 6Jc6 Q) 4W'� ��((�
Sice, nuruber, mid Npe o/'trees w be remaved
t ees on property located at /o53 G ,aJE
Addrass nr]oca(ion
ursuant to LOC 55.02.082, this notice has been prepared to notify the neighborhood association of
t e pending application. I will mark the proposed trees with yellow tagging tape and post a
ublic notice sign on the subject property, prior to your receipt of this notice. I understand
t iat I am responsible for maintaining the notice and marking during the entire 14-day comment
eriod. � ���
'=,� --
Sig ture
I ��5� !"��LV( �1C1'l - �ZVPS� � � �.S
Neighborhood Association
City of Lake Oswego Planning and Bullding Services Department 503-635-0290
I'.I:�plenning staR resourcee\Ireestlree forms entl epps august 201BVevise4�ree lorms\type_ii_cM1eckllsl 8_publlc nofice_8-69 fi.0oo6.doc
J����IOFIVFWAYTOPESTPOOM eECYCLE�EBPScoxiexePS �. `� ��yJ/ K*� ' I�"�c COMINVOII$ �f .�.� CSTFENE� J.. . .n1m •L 6�J � • ~��
��u � �
nm �
❑ I �
� flEMAIN TPOCKENTflANCE � SILTFENCE .n mmx ��, � > iJ i ■ f .
� TFUCKWHSH �� V ... ��-�� �' . . _ _ � � �
srPi�ox �MFIEPUL, w,w.m - . �: %I� � � I � -- � ' � I
�SfOC1�R� �g�p�.��'� A� x �
� � �
� � 7U rz� � i .
�o"m•'"'"M � �.T..�4 ow� �° !I
I \- �. � �. _ i� i .�. : �., .m.. ��'�4 i
, � i�
I ` r r� i�',.. '
� .�e �
� i o��
( - � �i . � - -, . .._..
,�� t ' � ,
I .^'° -- �� i^ J �w^�> � , � I �—''��
� V � ' I
. /V � � �s,.� .
o �
� � �'' .. _ ��
w( ��� / ��\ NARRATIVE
� � � � ` \.. �,. �a
� t. SHED TO BE REMOVED
�'•'� _ �� �� � 2. EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE STABLIZED BY 4" COVER OF
� ^ m STRAW OR OTHER VEGETATED MATERIAL AS TO NOT CREATE
�,.� �
� � �� ���� ' —^� � ^a ; RUN OFF.
' � �.� / , ��� ���� � 3. ROUTINE INSPECTIONS OF EROSION CONTROL METHODS
� � '� A'` --_ � ---- SHALL BE CONDUCTED WHICH MAY NECESSITATE
. i�„„,: � ' �, � � . �
�m,� � �'�� �� '"""P`�� � REPLACEMENT OR ENHANCEMENT OF FAILED EROSION
... . I � ��_____�'� � � . � CONTROLSTRUCTURES.
__ i o � � 4. WET WEATHER SEASON - OCT 1 - MAY 31 ST
� � �� � 5. ADDITIONAL EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES
. . " ` AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
I
�� 1053 C AVE DRIVE
�i O �' � C TREE PROTECTION SITE PLAN
'� �� I EROSION CONTROL SITE PLAN
� •�• �1�_ ' _ __. ___�. !.__ BLUE PALOUSE PROPERTIES a-2o-1�
TYPE II APPLICATION CHECKLIST
Type II permit may only be approved if you can demonstrate through the required application materials that
II ot the criteria in LOC 55A2.080 are satisfied. This checklist assists you in demonstrating that the criteria
re met. City staff will visit the site, review the information contained in this application, and make a decision
r garding this request. You will be contacted by staff if additional information is needed.
Rlease check the a ro riate boxes:
1. Please indicate the reason for removal (check all that apply and note if different trees are removed for
different reasons):
❑ The removal is part of a landscape plan.
❑ A landscape plan is attached or noted on the site plan (required)
'�" The removal is to construct development approved or allowed by Code.
Describethedevelopment: AiEw Si.vGc� rfiWicV Ha.vnE
❑ The tree has outgrown its landscape area because:
❑ It is too close to a structure or facility and damage cannot be avoided by pruning or
maintenance,-
❑ It has grown too large wifhin a constrained space (e.g, within a deck or other built feature that
was constructed around the tree);
❑ The [rees are overcrowded and thinning is needed to improve the health of other trees.
Notes:
2 Please indicate if any of the following apply. The City's Interactive Zoning Map can assist in creating a
site plan and answering these questions (See, https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/maps/interactive):
❑ The land in the area of the proposed tree removal is sloped greater than 15°/, or 3 ft. drop for every 20
ft. oi horizontal distance (this information is to assist the City in evaluating potential erosion).
❑ The site contains a wetland, stream, drainage course, or approved stormwater facility. (Type II tree
removal does not apply to Sensitive Lands districts. See Planning Department if in Sensitive Lands.)
O Such features are illustreted on the sife plan (required) �
O The site is in a known landslide area.
O The proposed tree removal or associated landscaping or development will disturb 500 square feet of
land area or is located within 50 feet of a stream or wetland boundary.
O The tree(s) being removed are part of a stand of trees that will partially remain.
O The tree removal is located at the south or southwest edge of stand of trees where removal couid
cause nearby trees to be susceptible to prevailing winds (wind-throw).
❑ None apply
Notes: A/ONE /rDpG'/
3. In your bestjudgment, please indicate if any of the following apply (also see #4, below):
O One or more of the trees to be removed is a healthy tree over 15" DBH that may be significant to the
neighborhood due to size, species or distinctive chareder, or is the only remaining tree on the site.
O The tree removal may alter a distinctive feature or continuity of the neighborhood skyline as viewed
from public streets and properties within 300 feet of the site.
❑ The tree(s)serve as a visual screen between lots with different zone designations.
❑ A street tree is proposed to be removed.
Il:\plenning stell resourcesbeaesllree forme antl epps eugus�2016�revisatl Iree torms\type_II_cM1ecklist_&yublic notice_BE-t6.doefi-tloa
❑ More than 50°/ of a stand of trees is proposed to 6e removed.
❑ None apply
, Notes: AiDe/� APP�y
4. If you checked any boxes in #3, above, please also indicate if any of the following apply:
❑ One or more of the trees to be removed has caused or is likely to cause damage to a permanent,
viable, existing structure or infrastructure, and such damage cannot be remedied through reasonable
maintenance or pruning. Please explain in notes section, below.
O Alternatives to the Iree removal have been considered and presented and no reasonable altematives
(e.g., altemative placement of stmctures or alternate landscape plans that comply with the Lake
Oswego Code)exist to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone.
� None apply
NOfes: �La'�f G� - �j�� CO✓�AUF AG[OwEb P Z2 � 577QlXTUrp� {(7--
Of/R Pi�oPoSHi rs F=DK fF BU/Cbi.c.¢ cJ/ff/ Ltxs 7F/Priu Za'la
CovE.4-AC E - n�-�R+�/�tNGS H�� /3E�/ 57Z/oie'D -
ree removal for the sole purpose of providing or enhancing views is prohibited. Mitigation for the removal of
ach tree is required as a condition of approval of a permit, if approved.
tl9plenning stelf resources\VeesUree forms antl apps eugust 2016\revlsed teee forms\type_ii eM1eckllsi,ByubM1c notice 8-8-�8 doc6.doc
Davis, Ellen
From: robm@bluepalouse.com
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:48 AM
To: Davis, Ellen
Subject: RE: 1053 C Ave
good morning Ellen - I meant to send this ago - but please remove tree #261 from our tree removal application.
Thanks for your help in this matter.
--------- Original Message ---------
Subject: 1053 C Ave
From: "Davis, Ellen" <edavis@ci.oswego.or.us>
Date: 6/14/17 3:28 pm .
To: "robm° <robm@bluepalouse.com>
Hi Rob,
I have reviewed the new corrected sheets you turned in for 1053 C Ave and I have signed off for Planning.
Please respond to this e-mail or write a letter requesting to withdraw tree#261 (the Doug fir you had to
redesign the house around because it was required to remain under LU07-00"I6). Once I get that request to
withdraw the tree that can't be removed I will send out the notice to re-start the appeal period.
Thank you!
Ellen Davis
�i-'�; Associate Planner Q[if!vml]><![endifJ>
� , `�
�s r
1 � ' S03.635.0294
� www.lakeoswe2o.citv .
380 A Avenue
PO BOX 369, Lake Oswego OR 97034
PUBLIC RECORDS LAW DISCLOSURE This e-mail is a public record of the City of Lake Oswego and
is subject to public disclosure unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. This
email is subject to the State Retention Schedule.
i
I , `, � I ' I
e'xne ur�osawe�uoir rors I I I �
_ n�e m�o-�T ar rueco.s i e z
MI?IGATION T�E I 15)NEW 5 GA. '�
TCH BASM-SEE �E' PR?ECi 'CzR4VEL 6'CEDAR W 7 P81 W EW 3"ABS CATCH BASM-9EE IaODODENDREN-PER LUR I I s�" � �
0'ClDAR StOFMU147ER PLAN -BIG LE?F Z�E STRIP � FENGE GAS LME IAJDER310.71ND BMIITART BELLER BTORI'AUATER PLAN O'7'1-00�6 LANDSCAi°E NEW I-I/4'PEY� �
• FENCE —'�.—�. ELECTRIC 8ERIYCE LATERAL 5 0000'00'£130.00' - — BI�FER - - - - -TE��_i.
� TIEEE- • LANDSCAPE• ��h�4T'E'_ 101�.—.—, . .O .`.—. —.—� —,—.� . Y— —__ __—__— — .—.—.—.—.—.—:—:—:�R � cN R R � 'R ' 'R- ', .� �
� �� � a -ai��e,oF sTwQ � -BIG LE?F ♦ ` �/ � / —J � e.o• ��v r�w a• � �.�� ���'� I
�• �'� COLUI'1WiR N 00'00'W 40.00' —.� I
Mri�ma�s `� � va�i Fr a� /� _ , �' _������,�. �.�-.,�..��---._---, ,—,—"=�,"a_ ' �.—'—' j
� a � _"""'� _` - —_—_ _— _ _�CI`1ERRY MINIMUM i �', — MM��°� MM�,�°� ',.\ ;�, gr�� � r —'�. .��._ I
'-"va�i Fr s�or� � �---- _ � va•i Fr�o� T ��' b 1 � /� �� � �������� �����s�..� r�T�.—.T..�.� �.� �
� —� roRrnecaa c+wr�eERs- ������ � O
- �__ �/' � .e�ai,6L'S9 M.00,OR00 N �\ � 6tol�lulAtER � �
, MMI� LL MIhM1-SLOPE �_MMIMIA'1 -- —1----�SEEBTOIa'1WATERREPORf i / -------------------- ) REI°ORT +� ' � ` I
I --'___ �------- ------- ----------�--------'-- / _.... ' � , �EDGE OF
__ _ _—_--- \ '
/� \
'---- ' // .. � EXISTINCs
i �E�SE?BAC1C GRAVEL BTRIP .—����. ��� . ... ---- , � i ASPHALT
—_—_—_—_—_—
'—•—— W SANIiARY � ' I I
A98UNED Fk^ONT C r 0 TREE- E� EASE7'1ENT BEWER LATERAL � I I 1
PROPERTY LME -WESiEFd�l RED � I ��� Y008-I08 GLEAN q1T ,OZ'46 M.00,00.00 N '�
I MITIGATI 21''5' MI?I A?I � GEPAR � /�,y0 46 CEDAR y�. S�T I
E- NEW CONGRETE IT I�Ak FENCE °.�
I Q pTE�0 9 tR PRIVEWAT / EXISTING I I I � I \`�� 1
VARIA9LE N1DT1 COMMON VfdVAIE ABPNALT � I `\
� �
. -�T� �D � Q �m IN�h ECftE55 EASEMENT µ� `� � I
CEPAR 'L 0� ul �D R �R ILDMG RD — . RED P BENEFITUOG ^P RaF.�isM7�k i0R 7HE
_—_—_—_— --------- -- —_"_ � FIRE I
FRONT9UILDING -- Y----- '-- — NYDRMIT ��
� �/ . � i i � O MI I ?ION = I LOGATED ` �
I � � LL � I i V I
,
3�� , . Al�ROXIMAIELT I�
�\
TION CAVER4C�E r-J ------------------------ Rd RED LLEBT OF� � �
A MCL1IDMG � �
O � �E�� ��i DECKB - ---- I 105�c AVE I-�.`� I
. � � � ' , �
�E � o I
.�--- � � � � I
------
MITIG.4TION/
I _i________________ - MITIUATION I L—' BTREET TIZEE- ``� I I I I
GA i I I � TREE_ � EpC�E OF��``�\ I
-�I��� MAPLE�UR O DCIBthYa �
M KrATION TREE- � 10'- MAPLE q$p{�q�?
- IG LEOF � �Mt• ' BIDE YARD �"��6
I O M p_E CAY! ABF�D LINE ;I req.BI11LD I �\I
1 •IB'-4' _ � 1 _ CY86�_���)74�.��� �I 9EISACK I
.s'c. �g�_�� ae' M�IMl1RINIEC�F1T �� � MITIGATION I _
43�_6� �� o FlR �/ 39 BF-EXEMPTI ARE /S T I Z E E T T R E E- I �`�I I l
ALL D � µ� / 5F-TOTAL O HITIGATION MPpLE P�ER LUR I �
I EXEMPTION A 11�E- 0"I-00�6 I I ',, O
� il -816 LECF I �
� � �_m• ___. i I 10�_y� � MAPLE � I I I "�,
i
SIDE 7 � BUILDMG
� i�� �,R,�. --- �' �� i ' � 1
� -�___;' . j j I �'�,
I GNEARY 9' / � i �
/ � �
/ \ ' !
I � � —L__ \` '" I I ,`,,�'�,
--� ' i i I
j •�,.e• / I �:��^ i �\. l
I � � �
I R�" I I O I 4n I I 1
� I , I I I I 1
1
I �� �� \ � � i MITIGA?ION
� � �� _B E�.� l
3 � oh7rrg' �_---� ��( i/ I MAPLE I
,9 � i /�� \ ��� � ` i�/ � \�\� 1' �__� I // I
rw N �^�° �B . ��'� ' ,, .- 1
� i ,��\ `. ' o .�' `,�'';' '� �.�
tI�E ��/� R x• iREE I___ - ' �
2 I ZONEC; � ` ��— —�� ��A ZO�N �I��"- '-' I I
/ �� � � I J
I � � �/ I \\ ' O I � I I I
� � ♦ l Y� I � I
�___�__a � I
I� j �/ arw az• ��cr ok �`-�------�..`. I i \� I ,
���, o , � ,1 . ��. ' 1
i � i _ , . � ,, , i
\Q,
i i i --------------�_ O ..\yi` ' ,,' ',,\ i i '�\\\ 1
� i �HITKx4tIGN \`\\ / ---' � I � 1
� i� I �LEAF \� � `T' � �``• \\ I
i I i MAPLE �\ � /� i \ �"'_' �_—= I �
I � \-p `\��`..`` �/ � �
,T; � ' l
I I � REAR TARD BE?BAGC LINE \ I i�U!i' I
; � �------ -------\- �-___--,�--------- � -----� � �
� i �W 6� '�� ,
',�� �'� � � �
� i •zeze' o.w r j I I
I � O 5./l.J' � I
II II � 6 a� Y r p
� 9 '° I
I � �
� NEW ARBORVIiEA-4' '� O NEW ARBORVITEA-4'OG.
I � -PER LUR 0�-00�6 �r NEW 6' -PER LUR 0l-m016 I
I I Ll+NPSCAPE B�ER 0 CEDAR Ll+NPSCAPE BU�€R
FENCE
' ����� ��� � ��������� � ! �
� --_----- --—. -- _----- --�-�-�-J-�- -- �.-•-•- I
��No� ,4926 3,SZ,10.00 S J �
� � I
� . .
�� SITE PLAN �
�, SCALE:I"=1fD'-(D' I
�\ PLAN i
�� : w �r`+<'`:' , .� _ .bi► i�E.
i� ;a� �iw ' "f; � .
.� � r
Y ...�� } • . `2:•��,��* � �� '�.� �" �►�
�.� i� # .,� � � .��.�; ° a...�� ! `�-s" �� h �+� ..J�,�
��� � S .�.�.. _ � ' � .����� .
0
��� ' � Y' ' � : .` � .y�..
/ +i
t_"1 l�. ' ♦� ���� . R ' _ � ,. ' ^��
'.\. \. �/� � ♦ !.'?.
�y/ 4'• � �� �T •'yi:': � �» , S . , "Y�r. \ �' �• 1 ,
♦ .a . ' �}' �,.? M ,t ".
�k . �� !i y�,��'� ' , ' T '�aF i ��`��' � ,x'} :
.�,. �k"��'�' �,* `�� ••,� .�� r' +, f` ' .. k V��. !
a� ° „�
y$ .�,'�' � . >. � �S ,p - a
� � �.�.�+i-; - � `. �� ..;� y�ijL . `'. �J ,3 . �a M1 . . ,� ti�
� �.+a. t..`R '�'!,''�tT,A-�y; `.�• A'; !'*.di, �',��;� .
,` � dt�. �� '.�` � , "+ � _,�
� , ' . ' - ` �
�i. - .��a "� . 1. .. .. ,_e �`•p � 1��.� �.
� � � .
3�: i ��1.r � . 3 �� �� �\
lR y � �j, .. �^.. .1� '�:, w•��' ���..�i e4��4 , ' ,�� i
� f� �''` '� �a; {!'' °� �� 1�.+� �I t r, M'Z 1�� .y �' .��! ..i•� .���t' . °1
.
,
.�. , .
�y�� ^, ��, � 4 '' �� �., P. ��1� �i.� � �- '� � }� �.�� � '� +' �
� '
'Se .
h, ;=, ��� � ,• ♦ y �' _L '�* �� �
. . x d4'!� ' j-� 7l
{, 1 A�
.�.i , �_ .� . t, l �• y��
w � �; � ;�;. •��. ���Y . � 7 4y�. ��...- �����' tt • .� r 1.
';` `,t . ,n.� � .z:. ' '� "`a > ' �. . ,�. ` � .
� �:'. � , v i - ,� . �. .`'A ' � .
� � ¢
��� :'t" ` _Ij. � Y� �1�'. 4 :�`�
d `�. � - . fr. .0 . .
� . �. . . �`W y �-a�
'� `�1�M i�Ib . . � �. ,� �! �r'4i.,
.
;� ,y.*�� ���� R 4` . �I � }'�'.' �" : °� ��y�,� �. �: _ . . �� ti �'�'�'� ,
1 �4'��``���`� ` � '� >; �.��, '' , r�S � �.
�• �" _ � �•, �
,
I
� ~ . <
� � r A �.. B . , `
r� '.��g. � i S' �,�, � . .� � :.: ;� � � � ���� „�.:�
:K � �L' J= '*�, .� • '1t` It " ' . '.�,, ��,.
- I . -' ��a � - ,�„� � i` �' I*
� f � _ � � r
'�' ? �.�.�q�T_+ � # I��n r� �'.., ...��.�',��,� ,�' ' ..a . . . .� +� ��w , , � .y �s .. - . . . . ;
� �A. ��!�F,�� f �" 3.k . ..t �� . k� i .��� . . ?: .. ��1
�.. 4 � ._r�, iT '��i
�=`T �'' .�`s. ` .a�, r �y„ »:_,�'",�T��'�#c ��k { . ,/V • .� , . '��* i, 'f` � ... ��,+,
�.,
Y �� . �
' .. . ! . �� -'''f `�� '� . . ..s , �
3 )�. ���/
-+�M'..� � .���l , . ,, � .. .. Zy',C .+ �. c S -F ': ,1 * ,p�ii � ' � Y' ' � '+"
q -�.w ,y� �')'1tn � . 7xa � ,�
��'p• � '�• ' -...�;�. .y� 4MW' j 1� /� � . I.� � � � � � .7
,a ,�.. ��,� � �y, f, ,.6:�T`�y� t.' r ��` ..� +�, e �` .l��. R ,-i .. i'�' .
.q,, �,n. �•�..�� �e �ti.. r �:. . . ��'.. � ,1 . !
� ,.*. " :.�., i/.�':d �,� . �. l--.�3 . .. �.r�
k. �• " ' �„;� +' ;'- � :!� =�3 . .s � } � v � �
.r%'. �
'�A� M,�. �� ^���_: ,�� * � A' . .
\ ` � .�g• .: ..w .7". .
I � � �_. �,' � .Y .. ���� ' lr;�h .i.' .. .
�x'• k` •"'.'+'
•'r r 'f� p�e. .�� ���� � � . ' .r^�..
' '. �t �' � \ ;' �. , -
. .yt f' . �.-w �` .~ � !�� �+ .� ,
' • �i•�`��t 't'�� � '�- 1 t " i
.. . •� � � -! y r. � � � r r" 4 i r.� _ y
",� _ �, ,,�, _ ` ,.' - - . �
�, � .
�`►: r-s:i , . • : . • ' •. • •• . • �
Date: JiSly 3,'�4b1� � � �.a�. .� �. - .••
� ����, �\ �"t � �t�� � k�� ,�'"
,�. �� � • . � "�. � � �"
' � ��a ��' r .�'�t �:,,�` 'K �R, V� �}�� r� �� � � ji
�}l�k� . _ � ..�� '� +��'Y � ^i1; N n 1�' ','�� �+
'.,�y �A, � ;�' a ti F�
�`��� �� �. }Y � 3 . �� �.: �V *; �
G. Y!� � x��,�y . *]f . 'EJ}1� +� r:k '}� � ?�.
�� '� ¢ ',\ ���,_ .m '\�,k * ,,�,�� s� —� ,� � �� ��^* "��``. _
' � s�'�. �r" _ ��-_ ��� . .. � AtT ���`�.7I: ��Y'..
. ,`
� .� d
3�¢ F � w
� � � ,�,�t}. ,�.r�,+y, LYy ,_.�'��,�r,�+,i " ��� ���.�1 :n:"''� �. � �:r� w.�,.1,. "°t�'�, .
� �., ,pt�.:.y a:`w._'�� kai� ai �� � e ' :cg 4 .
��t �;�� h �#���,�G �W a�! '�r� , � �y;., ,�: Y'
._� � �w � ��`j`�+r � ,�� -��i+ .�� �� ' _ . ,�i ,-+. r ��`#�" r�'�.: '•�4.y
t , * i'�`�.� `l�^ �� y�5�+'� i ���;' ��,Fv �tl .���-...' � � � ' �fi�.
' Lj4, �� �'�'�r++ .'�" �t �� � !R �..p 5� ! r�'- �S� -��. ;�- 1
� �"�` e r '�,+- ,� ,.w. �-. � f' ' '�}'i�;
� .� ��i`y �,�''� �r����.l�p• �, pv� f'�y �'��� ' „-
? 1 ..�r R��t ' ���� }��"11�:1��� _ -.. . Fy.::s � i� ..e�:.n.� �.SS"�-.t�!i�..l� �7
�\'�0 �iOry .w. �'- I �.�+,._4 �. . � � .. �� __ ^T 7 .
r �
�p�, F+ r r 44 r� 'j����
a rl �i K�9L�� #�}"� �: �' " � . a '���'` � `�'i' .
..�F' i �Y( r� t � � �. t�'C'.' -��"H�,�.�. r,�.. ��� �� � .
,g� r�,�
�?l! �.�`ry,_� �e, j"�� ��fi, .,+�' . o � \ r � �
�
t ` '�_��` ,�,5 -" q '� �' ; '�'�i '
M1
`�1M"� ��a s �� >X* �"`, k� gfa • ^� ,r
0. 1 �� �
�.Y � ,� �.$ , x
.� ��
� j , ���� .
' � 4��� ;I� �•�7��,�',��C��• �y..��.�i . 4 ������� d s �� »» ��V .
4 t ��e� g.t ,. �y"►�a`�*S��M � a "r,'. "�'R" �-n` ' � ,r,"
� � �.��
�?�'�� �;;, k '�':� t�4�4 ,A�► �"irt`�.i- S .. ..�. t,..
_ ,.
ky � �� : . ��L ���;
.�_
`
. � `
.,
, �_ _ .
.
_ . �y '"'y�k� 7S ...��_ _ ..:I� ,z d� �' �,� •�� �., "�'� � - q{�• ::�
�.�y br ,,�!''� ...r( � �'�f- _ ��H,4'�'f�,.,� � _.. .;.J�r -
�ea'^ � � S"�,._.._ � �:,...�':���';; '�'r'���,��� ' 1 . �- _� �F, w � s�.
� _ t�_ � �
~�.�� ,�,�' :a;;-�, ' r���"�` �' .3� M'�' �:
� 0. .'`t�"G'°.. '�x ��,�' > , � '�
<"j� � ^ ,t'
J` ,�y�A��",+ G i�" �+"y a, y � � � .-"�,, ';a/Pa,.., r'"'.
�� "M'�d� �.M w�'T + � Y'� �'�1 7\ —"i __. . F. �;�". A .a s
Y +•.����� ^ � i I� . . � ..'x
ti
�
. �'a. ,u� r��_.
�„ � . ��� � � ������ .
> ��+ � ��� .� i�f �� �j�
./ �" ..y . . ;,'4 , ; .
�[ � , ��•
, , ,.
, , _ .
t 4 •" .
:;' �$ ��C4 + � i��
._ �- f". . , *.' �u■ u�■ ���� ��n � �-_ •� �„�..� -
�:► � � ' �f'�'� �•� � �F �
�,.,. --4, � � - >, _ ' *.wrt� � �;� �� �
� � ► f'� } �
, �. �� � � �.�+ „�-.-,:. ,-,-. � .; � ��
. �;..
� � ■ � :'��, �. �+ � �
� � � � � ,; `� ��
Date: July 3, Zo�� _. View From C Avenue Looking North � �
��, -
,��'�� � , Permi# No. 7�r"1 � — b ZU��
-�4 � T ree Re m��a l F��: � ,.,,.,-�
, �I `, ��,` Recor�ls Fee: `� �"_
1 } C : ■ � (Type II &Verific�tian �niy)
� � ►�#ppl�cat�on o�t�: �-l:�y���
�
St��: .��
`�R�Ga�fl,
p�li�ant: I�I.V� ��LGr75� P��� Phane: ,5�3 �36 3ZfZ
E-mail: �-0�Wt[�_�3LI��PA�t-�J�.CCW�
dd�ess �f Tree Remaval 5ite: �65���
F►roperty �wner: ��� f��(�S�- f�� Phane: �3 43�; �Z(�
�
umber, 5ize �Trunk Diameter�, and Type of Tree[s] tv t�e Removed: i �� �'�'��
eason far Remova{: I�/5��---
f grant pe � sian to City af Lake �swega employees to enter tf�e abo�� property to ir�spect the trees
r ques d f� o�al. I agree to restrain any dag�s} on inspection day.
��� __.__�
agnature of Property �wner (requireci} 5ignature of App4i�ant (if difiFerent}
The Ci#y Manager or the desigrree must sign for�trees located nn publi�property.
� TYPE E Submit: (1} 5i#e plan [8'/z x 11"}
TYPE H� Submit: (1} 5ite plan �8'/�x 11"}, (�] Checklist, �3} Mitigation plan, 44} Landscape plan {if
applicahle}
Ta ❑o: (1) Mark tree�s}with yell�w ribhan, (2} Past sign, {3} Stake building en�elvpe &
driveways if new constructiQn is pro{�osed
�EAD 5ubmit: (1) Site plan (8'/2 x 11"}, �2} Printed phatograph of free[s}
❑eciduflus trees require a site visit by staff hetween No�ember 15t and April 15t''.
To ❑Q: Mark t�e tree(s}with yellow ribbon if a site �isit is required
HAZARDDIIS Submit: (1} 5ite plan [8%z x 11"}, [�) Printed �hotagraph of tree,
{3} Hazard Evaluafian Form cornp�eted by a Tree Risk Assessor Qualifi�d Arborist
7o Do: �1} Mark tree{s}with yellow ribbon if a site �isit is required
EMERGEHCY Submit: �1) 5ite pian {8Yz x 11"}, [�} Printed photographs of tree ar�d emergency condition
VERIFIGATIQN * 5ubmit: �1} Sife plan (S'/z x 11"}, (2} Mitigatio� p�an
To ��: �1} Mark tree(s}with yellow ribhon, (2} Stake building en�e3ope R driveways
Buildrng P�rmits will nat be issued prlor to tree rernv�a!nr tree protectiv►a inspection and apprvval.
Fvr City StafF LJse�nly
taff End af Cammen# Periad i �{.� � � �"
ei hborh�ad Associatian ri(�� �;�.,`.�!rr[in - {-��a� "l�1 � ;
g � � �nd af Appeal Period
� c� y � � -�.v}�
lanning or Building Fiie # ''�`��-I - ����" Mitiqat�on Plan Appravedl�enied
emoval Appror►ed ar Denied (circle ane} Number of Trees Appraved
1:lfarmslapplctnsltree permit appsltree permit application-re�ised 08-6-tfi
��' -I�r;e.� v�Qiw���-- I u� -�c� f �-��e�e,S �f��- � �- - C�Z o�3
� � �
� C3 3 `` �a�-c. �� �s�'�,�,,��
�
� f � �i� � � ��
i � ��\�� � I
; �
FBib441�1 PRICTGN 4 . . .. ....._ _._. . . .. ._.... � l871&JN$�qPAp�it iai
ifCL°. � ` i
� 'LOild¢ -1�IPM .� r '
.. Ta6 �LLY.' . � � °
,._ _- .., �,. � � f .--�-}-
._.._ __......we.....�.................... 5 OOW'PO'E iJ0.01]' � � �^""'
,� ., �_"�. . ..e..._.�._ ..�.. ...... __.._ a __. � „�,�,p,.R�.�.�'� ' '
t ..... .. . _
/� Q F�EV I.F41F QF�CCAPE � � ,,.6'......,..a- J✓ _� _.__��_ .:e...�sew�w�w.�wr=w._ �.e.._R a.. � w R. c R:..._. �M � E R �,.�.,..e-'""� ; S �
� -�o t.e.w � �' �/ � � I .. . ...` �j ���.,,--�� � �
/—�.—_�e—,e_.___ `" � �
!`^",^.., oe. ^'� �
-�-�-.-.w..--'-�----�,,� ._ � y N OOT1000 W M .� Y� s�
�� � .�. � �,.:��w�.a�nw...e__re._^mY"
a . �...i...._ K. 17E�PRIEGT1GN /_�.n. , e ❑ "Y...�-«--_•- +..._.... _- � ._'_'.--_°'--._•--.�..a---'�'--�:-._.�w--._.._ .a..— _`_`_
� ' �_
.....,,,.., �� '� -o, ..� . `_�`'�.-l-
� _
.d��w.B
. ,-...y........_ �'� .x...5 _. ._..
f� "��........� • �! � e
........._.......s..�..�.R�.�w....��...+t�x'T�..
..... � ...�..e...�.._._R�_. _..�e.�.��_�� .�...._..__._... �...._...._e.._....Y
�.�..,� t � e
rl M ���.�..�._�.,_._�._.py4GGTl8 M.00,P0.00 N.._'_ �^ . ���� �--��� e
T ___�_ '
/ t `^�""...... .______________ _ _ __'_ .+..�......�v.�=�.'_______
`--_.._. __ w �� _
f �:�:. ' - ... .-,.�R-��;-„� ,�.y�, _._ - __ � �r +
,r:"•o.r.:�, �L.y., r. i
�� ,,,...... _ .. .-� � , i��� f..�
.�4Y+,y:i.'�..' � �'.."..„�-v�.. /� r/r€ � D(IBvei3 �`"�.
�..:..,..., Y_ _'
w�...�._�
_M.v J
....._-._.,."
__________'__ � O � /.� ��� ; ...._.._.__. ...,w"_.._........e_.._._ .......�...._...�_�-� I `�!
�Pl�[TT LC@ e�r�' ` d � �
•�lFd1CR11lG /�%;� i y\I • i � � F
-_____ MR�A7I � Mtt. C&DeR ✓� i+l' ' .OZ'D{'M.Q7.06Q7 N, .
z R �( �
.•_ __ °
jrXf O � -uE8 I�D `v ' � �S� ' � ! �l € Zi
t �� O CPD � / � ' P!9 � 8 b �1 � � ��
� -------- ` i' ; E 8 � Q (
----------- - -
�reuu.ar� --- - -—- i _-- ------- -�- . ; 2 �
°�` _� � ' �''--_-______ ' ; � j l ��
�
, , .
� EL
--- , __ :
f - — - --- �; ; ; � I r v �
. � � -.
� �_
� ,, i �_��__ �..�---__ �--��
��� _ __ __� D
/ . �_.._.q , � . , � ninmaria+ � .� ��y._.�-, �__nmoarkxdi ._.._��__ � �
_ - p � ___ _� � � { �
___ E� �-,� � a�,��
,� , .�r�,�. ;� „�.s -��,
� � � �r �� �� �� i i �'� ° : �j i � I
f ��.�. / � -- -��:-� --� ;� � � ; I � � �
fr Jtt»»vo ` ' �I r �� ( MTkb47'tJk + �
t �� rcr�s,ata� �� � ion�ar�- � � �`�q..� � �
' O •tw�r�.e�ue¢ i 1 ! �O„ � [��
,,�`j � ; �� � 3-� _.�,�?,`�r^�� �.°� I ' € �� i
• � .� , I z�
-
__._�_________�_--- �
_ � ��� --- ---- , � ;i . l
s' '` ' '� �,�� � � �
I ' ' �`
o :
,
E
, <
\ �,r ---------- � NARRATIVE , ` I i't �
� �� ---------- - ��._ ��° ��
�� '�" ''�� � ` 1. EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE STABUZED BY 4'COVER OP
� ; ,
. � _ ___.___�_' r F '%,� O ; STRAW OR OTHER VE�3ETATED MATERIAL AS TO NOT CREATE
� � ��- � ,� �, � � �� RUN O�. -
.��.
° ' ' �� �" %` ' � "°� 2. ROUTINE INSPECTIONS OF EROSION CONTROL METHODS �
��r.uar.v 3 � ma`F>^s ms nzrecriorir° i I ' -�-- . . . �
�� ' 0 ���*�� '�"'� , '` - � SHALL BE CONDUCTED WHICH MAY NECESSITATE _
� %�' ��°� !�� ��''`������'� � � REPLACEMENT OR ENHANCEMENT OF FAILED EROSION
, �"' ° ,
�
� � � .
�
� �.____�_�__ . � . , o � CONTROL STRUCTURES.
.#,„„ , ,�e_____�, �
,—E--� � '�g � `��-�- ��., 3. WET WEATHER SEASON-OCT 1 -MAY 31ST �;�`� .,\,
-�� ���, o ��+ �'`�.. �
ki� . _ . „ .
,E � � "�`�`��� � �� ' �`�"� 4. ADDITIONAL EROSION ic SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES �
�
� ,,, .....� ,
f „,�D____.� � ���,,� r~`�'��-�_.v�. __z A V A I L A B L E U P O N R E t i U E S T
,,,�'� , ; a � � 5. PROVIDE�CHAIN LINK OF OTNER WIRE MESH
; � �REIR TA�BeTS4GY'LPe , „ I d'
_____'__________�_`.�.,r___� _
�f .� � - --- � -----� � PROTECTION AROUND TREES AS INDICATED
�
F�, � � �0 �
.��`� � �
s , 6otl T ��
�� � �
-- ��✓���Y �� � .� �r O ,ro� TREE PROTECTION / EROSION CONTR - - �m ��
� � ,��._..oG o `� OL s-� 17 �
�E -�� o ' �� ��`�°� NE1N SINGLE FAMILY HOME � �
________�_�_��� L�����a������ __� ����a:����� � �� `
__.__..� ----__----- .—_ ___ -�-, �
- _ _- � ��
� �... � ..w��r.a .f9i6 ' 3.4T.,fQ00 S i
f i, :
e
J �
. • ~
• »....--....._........_--
,._.....-..._.._
...
..__...._._....._..__.._._ —
i ,.._...._.._...__._._.___-.-'_..� � �
� SITE PLAN
SCAL�: 1"=2�'-m'
PlAN
___
jO� �A EOs \
� ' City of Lake Oswego
��� �� ` T1
��
� Q ,� PUBLIC NOTICE
\O,p�GO�� Pending Tree Removal Permit
�� Notice Date: `� � Z `� � � �
I, �6 iM�'�TH�� do certify that I am, or I represent, the party
A�inti�oso�name (7.� 46'� OFI¢ CI)43 OPf2 CZ) 6'� OFiR CUGHER4`f
r questing a permit to cut�4�torn�. — ��� Z� pF�� ���" pFiR �2� 9 Pp�4 � � 'F Lvekai
I\ 7" DO 4 h 1 Z9" 4 6Jc6 Q) 4W'� ��((�
Sice, nuruber, mid Npe o/'trees w be remaved
t ees on property located at /o53 G ,aJE
Addrass nr]oca(ion
ursuant to LOC 55.02.082, this notice has been prepared to notify the neighborhood association of
t e pending application. I will mark the proposed trees with yellow tagging tape and post a
ublic notice sign on the subject property, prior to your receipt of this notice. I understand
t iat I am responsible for maintaining the notice and marking during the entire 14-day comment
eriod. � ���
'=,� --
Sig ture
I ��5� !"��LV( �1C1'l - �ZVPS� � � �.S
Neighborhood Association
City of Lake Oswego Planning and Bullding Services Department 503-635-0290
I'.I:�plenning staR resourcee\Ireestlree forms entl epps august 201BVevise4�ree lorms\type_ii_cM1eckllsl 8_publlc nofice_8-69 fi.0oo6.doc
J����IOFIVFWAYTOPESTPOOM eECYCLE�EBPScoxiexePS �. `� ��yJ/ K*� ' I�"�c COMINVOII$ �f .�.� CSTFENE� J.. . .n1m •L 6�J � • ~��
��u � �
nm �
❑ I �
� flEMAIN TPOCKENTflANCE � SILTFENCE .n mmx ��, � > iJ i ■ f .
� TFUCKWHSH �� V ... ��-�� �' . . _ _ � � �
srPi�ox �MFIEPUL, w,w.m - . �: %I� � � I � -- � ' � I
�SfOC1�R� �g�p�.��'� A� x �
� � �
� � 7U rz� � i .
�o"m•'"'"M � �.T..�4 ow� �° !I
I \- �. � �. _ i� i .�. : �., .m.. ��'�4 i
, � i�
I ` r r� i�',.. '
� .�e �
� i o��
( - � �i . � - -, . .._..
,�� t ' � ,
I .^'° -- �� i^ J �w^�> � , � I �—''��
� V � ' I
. /V � � �s,.� .
o �
� � �'' .. _ ��
w( ��� / ��\ NARRATIVE
� � � � ` \.. �,. �a
� t. SHED TO BE REMOVED
�'•'� _ �� �� � 2. EXPOSED SOILS SHALL BE STABLIZED BY 4" COVER OF
� ^ m STRAW OR OTHER VEGETATED MATERIAL AS TO NOT CREATE
�,.� �
� � �� ���� ' —^� � ^a ; RUN OFF.
' � �.� / , ��� ���� � 3. ROUTINE INSPECTIONS OF EROSION CONTROL METHODS
� � '� A'` --_ � ---- SHALL BE CONDUCTED WHICH MAY NECESSITATE
. i�„„,: � ' �, � � . �
�m,� � �'�� �� '"""P`�� � REPLACEMENT OR ENHANCEMENT OF FAILED EROSION
... . I � ��_____�'� � � . � CONTROLSTRUCTURES.
__ i o � � 4. WET WEATHER SEASON - OCT 1 - MAY 31 ST
� � �� � 5. ADDITIONAL EROSION & SEDIMENT CONTROL NOTES
. . " ` AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST
I
�� 1053 C AVE DRIVE
�i O �' � C TREE PROTECTION SITE PLAN
'� �� I EROSION CONTROL SITE PLAN
� •�• �1�_ ' _ __. ___�. !.__ BLUE PALOUSE PROPERTIES a-2o-1�
TYPE II APPLICATION CHECKLIST
Type II permit may only be approved if you can demonstrate through the required application materials that
II ot the criteria in LOC 55A2.080 are satisfied. This checklist assists you in demonstrating that the criteria
re met. City staff will visit the site, review the information contained in this application, and make a decision
r garding this request. You will be contacted by staff if additional information is needed.
Rlease check the a ro riate boxes:
1. Please indicate the reason for removal (check all that apply and note if different trees are removed for
different reasons):
❑ The removal is part of a landscape plan.
❑ A landscape plan is attached or noted on the site plan (required)
'�" The removal is to construct development approved or allowed by Code.
Describethedevelopment: AiEw Si.vGc� rfiWicV Ha.vnE
❑ The tree has outgrown its landscape area because:
❑ It is too close to a structure or facility and damage cannot be avoided by pruning or
maintenance,-
❑ It has grown too large wifhin a constrained space (e.g, within a deck or other built feature that
was constructed around the tree);
❑ The [rees are overcrowded and thinning is needed to improve the health of other trees.
Notes:
2 Please indicate if any of the following apply. The City's Interactive Zoning Map can assist in creating a
site plan and answering these questions (See, https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/maps/interactive):
❑ The land in the area of the proposed tree removal is sloped greater than 15°/, or 3 ft. drop for every 20
ft. oi horizontal distance (this information is to assist the City in evaluating potential erosion).
❑ The site contains a wetland, stream, drainage course, or approved stormwater facility. (Type II tree
removal does not apply to Sensitive Lands districts. See Planning Department if in Sensitive Lands.)
O Such features are illustreted on the sife plan (required) �
O The site is in a known landslide area.
O The proposed tree removal or associated landscaping or development will disturb 500 square feet of
land area or is located within 50 feet of a stream or wetland boundary.
O The tree(s) being removed are part of a stand of trees that will partially remain.
O The tree removal is located at the south or southwest edge of stand of trees where removal couid
cause nearby trees to be susceptible to prevailing winds (wind-throw).
❑ None apply
Notes: A/ONE /rDpG'/
3. In your bestjudgment, please indicate if any of the following apply (also see #4, below):
O One or more of the trees to be removed is a healthy tree over 15" DBH that may be significant to the
neighborhood due to size, species or distinctive chareder, or is the only remaining tree on the site.
O The tree removal may alter a distinctive feature or continuity of the neighborhood skyline as viewed
from public streets and properties within 300 feet of the site.
❑ The tree(s)serve as a visual screen between lots with different zone designations.
❑ A street tree is proposed to be removed.
Il:\plenning stell resourcesbeaesllree forme antl epps eugus�2016�revisatl Iree torms\type_II_cM1ecklist_&yublic notice_BE-t6.doefi-tloa
❑ More than 50°/ of a stand of trees is proposed to 6e removed.
❑ None apply
, Notes: AiDe/� APP�y
4. If you checked any boxes in #3, above, please also indicate if any of the following apply:
❑ One or more of the trees to be removed has caused or is likely to cause damage to a permanent,
viable, existing structure or infrastructure, and such damage cannot be remedied through reasonable
maintenance or pruning. Please explain in notes section, below.
O Alternatives to the Iree removal have been considered and presented and no reasonable altematives
(e.g., altemative placement of stmctures or alternate landscape plans that comply with the Lake
Oswego Code)exist to allow the property to be used as permitted in the zone.
� None apply
NOfes: �La'�f G� - �j�� CO✓�AUF AG[OwEb P Z2 � 577QlXTUrp� {(7--
Of/R Pi�oPoSHi rs F=DK fF BU/Cbi.c.¢ cJ/ff/ Ltxs 7F/Priu Za'la
CovE.4-AC E - n�-�R+�/�tNGS H�� /3E�/ 57Z/oie'D -
ree removal for the sole purpose of providing or enhancing views is prohibited. Mitigation for the removal of
ach tree is required as a condition of approval of a permit, if approved.
tl9plenning stelf resources\VeesUree forms antl apps eugust 2016\revlsed teee forms\type_ii eM1eckllsi,ByubM1c notice 8-8-�8 doc6.doc
Davis, Ellen
From: robm@bluepalouse.com
Sent: Friday, June 16, 2017 9:48 AM
To: Davis, Ellen
Subject: RE: 1053 C Ave
good morning Ellen - I meant to send this ago - but please remove tree #261 from our tree removal application.
Thanks for your help in this matter.
--------- Original Message ---------
Subject: 1053 C Ave
From: "Davis, Ellen" <edavis@ci.oswego.or.us>
Date: 6/14/17 3:28 pm .
To: "robm° <robm@bluepalouse.com>
Hi Rob,
I have reviewed the new corrected sheets you turned in for 1053 C Ave and I have signed off for Planning.
Please respond to this e-mail or write a letter requesting to withdraw tree#261 (the Doug fir you had to
redesign the house around because it was required to remain under LU07-00"I6). Once I get that request to
withdraw the tree that can't be removed I will send out the notice to re-start the appeal period.
Thank you!
Ellen Davis
�i-'�; Associate Planner Q[if!vml]><![endifJ>
� , `�
�s r
1 � ' S03.635.0294
� www.lakeoswe2o.citv .
380 A Avenue
PO BOX 369, Lake Oswego OR 97034
PUBLIC RECORDS LAW DISCLOSURE This e-mail is a public record of the City of Lake Oswego and
is subject to public disclosure unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public Records Law. This
email is subject to the State Retention Schedule.
i
I , `, � I ' I
e'xne ur�osawe�uoir rors I I I �
_ n�e m�o-�T ar rueco.s i e z
MI?IGATION T�E I 15)NEW 5 GA. '�
TCH BASM-SEE �E' PR?ECi 'CzR4VEL 6'CEDAR W 7 P81 W EW 3"ABS CATCH BASM-9EE IaODODENDREN-PER LUR I I s�" � �
0'ClDAR StOFMU147ER PLAN -BIG LE?F Z�E STRIP � FENGE GAS LME IAJDER310.71ND BMIITART BELLER BTORI'AUATER PLAN O'7'1-00�6 LANDSCAi°E NEW I-I/4'PEY� �
• FENCE —'�.—�. ELECTRIC 8ERIYCE LATERAL 5 0000'00'£130.00' - — BI�FER - - - - -TE��_i.
� TIEEE- • LANDSCAPE• ��h�4T'E'_ 101�.—.—, . .O .`.—. —.—� —,—.� . Y— —__ __—__— — .—.—.—.—.—.—:—:—:�R � cN R R � 'R ' 'R- ', .� �
� �� � a -ai��e,oF sTwQ � -BIG LE?F ♦ ` �/ � / —J � e.o• ��v r�w a• � �.�� ���'� I
�• �'� COLUI'1WiR N 00'00'W 40.00' —.� I
Mri�ma�s `� � va�i Fr a� /� _ , �' _������,�. �.�-.,�..��---._---, ,—,—"=�,"a_ ' �.—'—' j
� a � _"""'� _` - —_—_ _— _ _�CI`1ERRY MINIMUM i �', — MM��°� MM�,�°� ',.\ ;�, gr�� � r —'�. .��._ I
'-"va�i Fr s�or� � �---- _ � va•i Fr�o� T ��' b 1 � /� �� � �������� �����s�..� r�T�.—.T..�.� �.� �
� —� roRrnecaa c+wr�eERs- ������ � O
- �__ �/' � .e�ai,6L'S9 M.00,OR00 N �\ � 6tol�lulAtER � �
, MMI� LL MIhM1-SLOPE �_MMIMIA'1 -- —1----�SEEBTOIa'1WATERREPORf i / -------------------- ) REI°ORT +� ' � ` I
I --'___ �------- ------- ----------�--------'-- / _.... ' � , �EDGE OF
__ _ _—_--- \ '
/� \
'---- ' // .. � EXISTINCs
i �E�SE?BAC1C GRAVEL BTRIP .—����. ��� . ... ---- , � i ASPHALT
—_—_—_—_—_—
'—•—— W SANIiARY � ' I I
A98UNED Fk^ONT C r 0 TREE- E� EASE7'1ENT BEWER LATERAL � I I 1
PROPERTY LME -WESiEFd�l RED � I ��� Y008-I08 GLEAN q1T ,OZ'46 M.00,00.00 N '�
I MITIGATI 21''5' MI?I A?I � GEPAR � /�,y0 46 CEDAR y�. S�T I
E- NEW CONGRETE IT I�Ak FENCE °.�
I Q pTE�0 9 tR PRIVEWAT / EXISTING I I I � I \`�� 1
VARIA9LE N1DT1 COMMON VfdVAIE ABPNALT � I `\
� �
. -�T� �D � Q �m IN�h ECftE55 EASEMENT µ� `� � I
CEPAR 'L 0� ul �D R �R ILDMG RD — . RED P BENEFITUOG ^P RaF.�isM7�k i0R 7HE
_—_—_—_— --------- -- —_"_ � FIRE I
FRONT9UILDING -- Y----- '-- — NYDRMIT ��
� �/ . � i i � O MI I ?ION = I LOGATED ` �
I � � LL � I i V I
,
3�� , . Al�ROXIMAIELT I�
�\
TION CAVER4C�E r-J ------------------------ Rd RED LLEBT OF� � �
A MCL1IDMG � �
O � �E�� ��i DECKB - ---- I 105�c AVE I-�.`� I
. � � � ' , �
�E � o I
.�--- � � � � I
------
MITIG.4TION/
I _i________________ - MITIUATION I L—' BTREET TIZEE- ``� I I I I
GA i I I � TREE_ � EpC�E OF��``�\ I
-�I��� MAPLE�UR O DCIBthYa �
M KrATION TREE- � 10'- MAPLE q$p{�q�?
- IG LEOF � �Mt• ' BIDE YARD �"��6
I O M p_E CAY! ABF�D LINE ;I req.BI11LD I �\I
1 •IB'-4' _ � 1 _ CY86�_���)74�.��� �I 9EISACK I
.s'c. �g�_�� ae' M�IMl1RINIEC�F1T �� � MITIGATION I _
43�_6� �� o FlR �/ 39 BF-EXEMPTI ARE /S T I Z E E T T R E E- I �`�I I l
ALL D � µ� / 5F-TOTAL O HITIGATION MPpLE P�ER LUR I �
I EXEMPTION A 11�E- 0"I-00�6 I I ',, O
� il -816 LECF I �
� � �_m• ___. i I 10�_y� � MAPLE � I I I "�,
i
SIDE 7 � BUILDMG
� i�� �,R,�. --- �' �� i ' � 1
� -�___;' . j j I �'�,
I GNEARY 9' / � i �
/ � �
/ \ ' !
I � � —L__ \` '" I I ,`,,�'�,
--� ' i i I
j •�,.e• / I �:��^ i �\. l
I � � �
I R�" I I O I 4n I I 1
� I , I I I I 1
1
I �� �� \ � � i MITIGA?ION
� � �� _B E�.� l
3 � oh7rrg' �_---� ��( i/ I MAPLE I
,9 � i /�� \ ��� � ` i�/ � \�\� 1' �__� I // I
rw N �^�° �B . ��'� ' ,, .- 1
� i ,��\ `. ' o .�' `,�'';' '� �.�
tI�E ��/� R x• iREE I___ - ' �
2 I ZONEC; � ` ��— —�� ��A ZO�N �I��"- '-' I I
/ �� � � I J
I � � �/ I \\ ' O I � I I I
� � ♦ l Y� I � I
�___�__a � I
I� j �/ arw az• ��cr ok �`-�------�..`. I i \� I ,
���, o , � ,1 . ��. ' 1
i � i _ , . � ,, , i
\Q,
i i i --------------�_ O ..\yi` ' ,,' ',,\ i i '�\\\ 1
� i �HITKx4tIGN \`\\ / ---' � I � 1
� i� I �LEAF \� � `T' � �``• \\ I
i I i MAPLE �\ � /� i \ �"'_' �_—= I �
I � \-p `\��`..`` �/ � �
,T; � ' l
I I � REAR TARD BE?BAGC LINE \ I i�U!i' I
; � �------ -------\- �-___--,�--------- � -----� � �
� i �W 6� '�� ,
',�� �'� � � �
� i •zeze' o.w r j I I
I � O 5./l.J' � I
II II � 6 a� Y r p
� 9 '° I
I � �
� NEW ARBORVIiEA-4' '� O NEW ARBORVITEA-4'OG.
I � -PER LUR 0�-00�6 �r NEW 6' -PER LUR 0l-m016 I
I I Ll+NPSCAPE B�ER 0 CEDAR Ll+NPSCAPE BU�€R
FENCE
' ����� ��� � ��������� � ! �
� --_----- --—. -- _----- --�-�-�-J-�- -- �.-•-•- I
��No� ,4926 3,SZ,10.00 S J �
� � I
� . .
�� SITE PLAN �
�, SCALE:I"=1fD'-(D' I
�\ PLAN i
�� 1'� �
�� � ��._� �
� - .. ..
Name of Document For Recording: Notice of (For County Recording Use Only)
Development Restrictions
Grantor: Pinson No. 1,LLC Clackamas County Official Records 2�08-p71792
Grantee:none Sherry Hall, County Clerk
Tax S atement oObe mailed to:No Change IIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIII(IIIIIII I�IIIIII�IIIIII I III III �s�.��
Recordat�on Author�ty: LOC 12.52.010(2),(14) 01256322200800717920030030
After Recording,Return To: City of Lake Oswego, 10/17/2008 09:46:13 AM
Attn: City Recorder,P.O.Box 369,Lake Oswego, D-oD Cnt=1 5tn=4 KANNA
OR 97034 $15.00$16.00$10.00$20.00
Notice of Development Restrictions
Whereas, Pinson No. 1, LLC, "Grantor," applied for and has obtained land use development approval from
the City of Lake Oswego far the purpose of development of the Real Properiy described as follows:
Clackamas County Partition Plat No.�(,��� 0 ,Parcels 1-2,
pursuant to Order or Decision in Lake Oswego Community Development Dept.File No.LU 07-0076; and
Whereas, pursuant to LOC 12.52.010(2) and (14), the recordation of this Notice is to meet, in part, the
requirements of the Order or Decision;
Now, Therefore, Grantor, does hereby impose upon and bind the Real Property, and give notice to future
owners and holders of interests in the Real Properly, of the following requirements, restrictions, and
regulations,which shall be a covenant binding upon the real properly and running with the land,and shall be
binding upon Grantor,Grantor's heirs, successors or assigns:
a) Parcel2 is a flag lot. Development of structure on Parcel2 shall comply with the provisions of
LOC 50.20.030 regarding Building and Site Design Standards, including height limitations,
garage placement, and landscape buffer requirements. The maximum height for structures on
Parcel2 shall be 22 feet,measured from the ground to the ridgeline of the roof, as defined by
LOC 50.02.005 "height of Building."
b) The front yard on parcel 2 shall be measured from the east property line for all future structures.
c) Parcels 1 and 2 are solar lots, subject to the requirements of LOC 57.04.035 (protection from
future shade). 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]. These requirements shall be binding upon the applicant and subsequent
purchasers of Parcels 1 and 2.
d) Trees#240, 241, 245, and 261 on Parcel 2 shall be preserved unless determined to be dead or
hazardous pursuant to LOC 55.02.080 and a tree removal permit is obtained from the City of
Lake Oswego. Structures shall be set back a minimum of 12 feet from these trees as generally
depicted on E�chibit E6 of LU 07-0076, attached.
e) The city of Lake Oswego has determined that the fire apparatus means of access to Parcel2 does
not meet the minimum requirements of the Fire Code and State Building Code requirements.
Page 1 -Notice of Development Restrictions
The Building Official may allow an alternate to minimum requirements of One-and-Two Family
Dwelling Specialty Code as authorized by ORS 455.610,which may include, but is not limited
to, installation of an automatic fire sprinkler system or a monitored fire alarm system. The
Owner or Owner's representative shall offer an approved alternative method for fire suppression
on Parcel2, such as an NFPA 13-D residential fire sprinkler system,to the satisfaction of the
Building Official.
Because this Development Restriction is required by the City of Lake Oswego, this Development
Restriction may not be amended or repealed without the written consent of the City of Lake Oswega
The true consideration for this conveyance is zero dollars; the requirements are imposed as a condition of
development by the City of Lake Oswego.
i''3y
Dated the - day of � , 2008.
(Corporate) Grantor Name: Pinso . l, LLC
By: --.�-
N e ignor: z� �. v �
Office/Title of Signor: _�- � .��.f
State of Oregon )
County of Clackamas )
�
On this�S _day of , �a�before me the undersigned Notary Public,
personally appeared
70 .�.� i� ' �� �.��
❑ personally known to me
� proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence
To be the person who executed the within instrument
❑ as or on behalf of the entity therein named,pursuant to authority,
and acknowledged to me the execution hereof.
WIT'NESS my hand and official seal Notary Seal (Do not place seal over any portion of
Nota Si nature text or signature)
_._._
e : OFFICIRL SEAL
�� �
�$.L.E�1.�^Y+t�E Ca�O�E
w`-�-"-,,'� NC3Ta�RY PiJBL1C-JREGON
z;�r�9�i�S3��r�o.412638
Nota name: �[,�'� T �.p �-� p . �14i%0'��J���51Ui�'���RwtiDEGEt�BER22,2010
Page 2 -Notice of Development Restrictions
r
' Trees required to be preserved unless
.i a.i a .n.sa
determined to be dead or hazardous .,,.,4
3' CHLP.
.. ��t_I ,, i '� ' ; .
N89'S2'04"W��\ � !15D.00'-
� _ '...� ";X .. ., , " � , .
� � . \�1�� �i ,1 � .
, .; � �l i •- ' ,...:
� 1 �,.��"�S�t " Irr' ,— —r�.
� t'' ..� � _ \ ,` I �
b' F�.N c.E a -- ' �O'o
�cv R� �aSM��..t» � -.:ti �. �
� ":, � ' : � ., �! y�.,�;oJ � ,,.' eS�6JuLF1�
S�Oa:B ¢�- e ( y
@ f.i.JES m I-�-,tiy /��U '_: l ;r /r �'� yr �- -�'" ��.o��y-�
�IUtI'�� LL 1 A�t16L� -
i I �^s L . A '4 I
� \ r
" �ti � `1 �`--eK-� � � �-
1 � w > � X �
ti 1i � u\, � ` l
��1 '
t ���i jt yUlr,G� ���� 1� � , ��t
-�i� %„- .__—�--�.; � `�� �
. . x �� -� . ��
7 .--t /}� � 1�' " c.. � `.�,�,+�� �i, •21.51 �
� i : � }11!' \��'\� � 1.�iq�� J.� c''7C \ jh�;; . . .
� � � �:_.� ��' . ��� t � ..--� �� ---
i
. � . . � �-� � \, �� � ryd _I� �/ ' � � �� .�� .
� _ �, �, �_ _'� _ ti ,� �
,u: ,��� ,�� o� ,
N '33"W 60.00'�����;� - Y�,/;�' 4.5' HO WIRE
. . - z6p � X FENCE � .
. .
-..._.,`..,. �. .. ..
_ <er++•+e�.
' P�+acE� � +� 4
_
, , K .. 'l1'1o05F �M x U
_ :���"� .
- - • - - - -- _� �."}'� ;e BE R �EU
� -\��-�- ^�t a 2 � ..' rn (1w.rt )
o„�� ' _ /. � � o
. � rCpVERED 'o �29.3'� q� N Il��. ,
~ � DECK � /,13.3'�, u , � �
i/� �
/ C� IB.O'/� % e'i8.3'/ 19.5' i i .
�''/ m RESIDENCE ' !o ���.75
16.39• 17.16• m ' 13.34• \ �-. �.���� .X �m . .
/ O jl / N /
i32.9'i i /
. . � �,� . I � ' ���. _
. �� � �A°���f '� �f��C
' � � � �t� . o BE 1�
� � X �� �-
r / ,�
��h �\� H��I���1 I ,I I��. -
.%al�' L ��pl.,L�'� I 4] \ t ,_����' Yi���'R.���11�
� .� q"'�i r+. ( �1S'�6'R.)
.� 1� .�," `,�.;�_ ..
� i � ❑WM.� l .o~ 1� � 34'.CHLf.
_ /% � ' /��,`� �
�'� 89'S7'33"W �
— H f`_ _ _ — _ � s.� .
R,r, �::—r E,TdcN
� � � . 1`9 ��` '�4'�� �
� � __.. � �".
��.__. �-� .��. �fY�`
*� k ,, B.M.
. d . _ . . . - ..
. (80' 'E7�:��. . . ... . � � K AVENl1E I�E i
� �S g —� - �• EV.=256.75 I
TREE TABLE
� N N0. TRUNK SIZE IYPE 0 DRIP . I
v � ,es 24 FIR so L E G E N D BENCHMARK
� � 17p 14 SPRUCE 20 LAI(E OSWEGO I.D. NUMBER i5E 1
171 �2 SPRUCE 20
� � 233 14 APPLE 15 BLDC.. BUILDING V FIRE HYDRAM ANDREWS R0. & RYE RD. . �
234 21 FIR 20 � BRASS DISK AT FOREST HILLS G ADE SCHOOL
� N 235 44 FlR 60 CHLF. CHNN LINK FENCE � WATER VAI.VE ON THE SIDEWALK AT THE CORN R OF A-4.5'
� � 2�6 14 CHERRY �� CM GAS IAETER -o- POWER POIE TALL BRICK WALL NEPR THE SW CORNER Of
2J) 3� fIR 40 THE SCHOOL.APPROX. 500' OF RYE RD.
a�
i 23B �40 FIR 60 WM WqTER METER T.B.M.� TEAIPORARY
- � O 239 40 FlR 60 ELEV. = 283.171
BENCH MARN
i� � 240 40 FIR 60 S,F. SOUARE FEET� pSpHALT .
Q � 241 14 FIR 20 . E ��'��`
242 36 f�R <� -E,ikN— OVERHEAD ELECTRIC, �
� � 243 30 FlR 30 CONCRETE
� � � TELEPHONE AND .
244 24 HEAILOCK 30 CABLE N UNES �
O � 245 30 FlR JO GRAVEL REGIS'f�RED
254 I6 CEDAR 25 —5— SEWER UNE PROFES$IONAL�
� � 255 14 CEDAR 25� 13.34• BUILDING HEIGHT (GROUND (.AND SU VEYOR
� � +-+ 256 i6 CEDAR 25 OS SEWER MANHOLE TO MIDDLE OF HIP)
L -� 257 12 FIR 20 ,
�� � 258 24 FlR 40 �
� � 259 12 CEUAR IS
260 I6 CEDAft �s � � NOTE OREGON
� � 26i 3a FlR ao JULY 17, 1994
� � L 268 36 CORONWOOD �0 THIS IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY. THOMAS P. BEINHAUER
� . � � SOB 6 DECIDUOUS 20
N � EXPIRES 12-3'I-07
H �
W.B. WELLS SIT . —
�• and associates, inc. C�- EXHIBIT E-6 �5°B
,�' ENGINEERS•SURVEYORS•PLANNERS _
4230 NE FREMONT STREET J 0 H I LU 07-0076 _
� PORTLAND,OREGON 97213 —
'ti ' —
,� ociates� PHONE;(503)284-5896 FAX:(503)284-8530 LOCATEO IN n+E s.w. i
I'n 1 � e-mail address:infoC�wbwells.com �N TME CITY OF LAKE osw�.,.;, �,..",•,,,•,..� ..�..,.� , � � �• ..�,..-.,���.owc
From: Brad Gro�e [mailto:b�rove[uu�r2c�rouq.tom]
Sent: Monday,July 10, 2017 10:47 AM
To: Numanoglu,Jessica<'numano Iu ci.oswe �.ar.us>; Qavis, Ellen <�d�visC�ci.osew�a.or.us�
Ce; Brad Gro�e<b�rc��e�r2e�roup.com>; robrrE blue aEause.cc�rt� .�
5ubject:Camrr�ent t�n Tree Removal Permit Application#499-17-02043
Jessica:
I strangly agree with the City of Lake�swego's tentative appraval of Tree Remo�a) Application#499-17-
�2043.
After re�iewing the drawings and information pro�ided, it is cEear that Blue Palouse Properties has
worked�ery closely with the LO Planning Department to custom tailar this beautiful new home to the
unic{ue lot and has met all the requirements imposed upon them.
�'he Lake Oswego building codes,Tre� Removal applicatian process and other formal guidelines (such as
plant mitigationJ are in place to create a structure and process far 5uccessful developrnent that is
Predictable and Repeatable from case to case.
Please appro�e Tree Remo►ral Application#499-17-02043.
Sincerely,
�r�� �r���
21 year resident of Lake Oswega
First Addition
Lake Oswego,OR. 97034
Linder, ICari
From: Numanoglu, Jessica
5ent: Monday, May O8, 2QI7 1:03 PM
Tfl� Isb515@comcast.net
C�: Qavis, Ellen; treecarr�mittee@com�ast.net; Linder, Kari
5ubject: RE; Final Comment an tree remo�al appli�ation 499-17-Q2D43
Ms. firisley,
rhank yau for yaur cnmment. Yfl�r email is parC af the record for this appli�ation and yata wifl be natified when a
tentati�e staff cfecisian is made.
6est regards,
Jessi�a Numanoglu, AICP � Planning Manager
oF�-A �o,, 5D3.63�.�283
� �\ �, www.Iakeaswe ❑.cit
�� ,� ' � 38Q A A�enue
. ��E�o� PD E30X 369, Lafce Oswego�R 97fl34 �
From: Ist�515@corr�cast.net [mailto:lsb57.5@comcast.net]
5ent: 5unday, May�7, 2�17 10:49 PM
To: Numanogiu,lessica �jnumartoglu@ci.oswego,or.us�
Cc: ba�is, Ellen �eda�is@ci.oswego.or.us�; treecommittee@corrscast.net; Linder, Kari �kiinder@ci.oswego.ar.us�
Subject: Final Comment on tree removal appli�ati�n 499-17-Q2�43 �
lmportant: I made ane additional statement ta the first paragraph. Please submit this final email as my
comment for the Lake Qswego Tree Committee. Thank yau so much.
"Trees produce the vxygen we breathe. They are the lungs ❑�'the Earth. !f we destray fhem, we
destroy vurselvQs."
Dear �ake Qswego Tree Cammittee:
Aft�r reviewing the tree remaval application 499-17-02043 facated at 1Q53 C Avenue in the First
Addition Neighborhood and visi#ing th� site in person, ! am writing the following comment t❑
respectfully urge yau to deny the applicant's (Blue Palouse Properties} request to rem�ve 14 healthy,
o!d growth native Oregon trees. This is the most aggressive tree remo�al reques# that I have seen
because of the health, ag�, c{uantity, and r�ative species of trees involved. It is impartant ta note that
t�is small parce! af lar�d is very special in that it is truly a mini-suburban ❑Id growth forest that has nat
underg�ne any unnaturaf changes �such as iogging} for more than 100-�50 years, cantains yaung
and mat�re trees and provides a home far a diversity af wifdlife species. Please deny this request and
encaurage Blue Pafouse Praperti�s ta find an aiternative, viable svfutiart which may entail aiterna�ive
pla�ement of the structure ❑r change the sizelfootprint af the s#ructure in order to preserve thes�
significant native trees.
i
(1) As human beings, we take great pride in celebrating the life of other human beings. For example,
it is a blessing, an amazing feat, and some would say a miracle, when a person reaches the age of
100 years old. It is a celebrated milestone and often that person is featured in an article in the town's
local newspaper or a beloved family member posts a public announcement to share the celebration
with the community. But, what about the life a tree? This life force that produces the oxygen that we
need to breathe and live? How do we celebrate that? When convenient and a tree is not in our way,
some towns or home owners will designate an old growth tree as a Heritage Tree. On the other
hand, when it is not convenient and a tree is in our way, we discount a tree's value to the community,
to wildiife, to the environment, and to our own personal dependency on it for life, and we hastily cut it
down. In this tree removal application, Blue Palouse Properties is requesting to cut down 14 healthy,
Native Oregon old growth trees in order to build one single family home. Due to the mass scale of this
request and the fact that we as human beings value the life of a person, I thought it would be
important to highlight the age of each tree that is included in this application.
To determine the age of a tree, measure the diameter in inches x growth factor= the age of a tree
2 Douglas Fir- 46" diameter x 5 = 230 years old �
1 Douglas Fir - 44" x 5 = 220 years old
1 Douglas Fir - 43" x 5 = 215 years old
1 Douglas Fir- 33" x 5 = 165 years old
1 Douglas Fir- 21" x 5 = 105 years old
2 Douglas Fir - 9" x 5 = 45 years old
1 Douglas Fir - 7" x 5 = 35 years old
2 Dougias Fir - 6" x 5 = 30 years old
1 Spruce - 27" x 5 = 135 years old
1 Cherry - 14" x 5 = 70 years old
1 Cherry - no DBH measurement provided by applicant
Using the information provided above and applying the same celebration and reverence we as human
beings have for our human life, I am asking you to deny this tree application and encourage Blue
Palouse Properties to make the necessary changes in order to preserve these trees. Once the life of
a tree is gone, it is gone forever, and that is true for any life.
(2) The applicant failed to check the first box of# 3 of the Tree Removal Application Checklist that
reveals that all 1� Douglas Fir trees are healthy, native trees. And 6 of the 14 proposed Douglas Fir
trees are healthy trees that are over 15" DBH. They are significant due to size in that they are old
growth trees (see DBH above). They are significant due to species in that the 11 trees are Douglas
Fir that are native to Oregon and are distinctive in character in that they are Oregon's official sWte
tree. The 3 remaining trees are also healthy, one Spruce has a DBH of 27" and one Cherry was not
measured and all three could very well be native Oregon trees, but the applicant has failed to identify
their species - they simply identified the type of tree as 1 Spruce and 2 Cherry trees. It is important to
the Mitigation Plan that these trees be accurately identified because there are native Oregon Spruce
and Cherry trees and will need to be replaced with natives if removed.
(3) The application is incomplete due to the fact that the applicant has failed to submit a Mitigation
Plan that would identify and show the species of trees they are planning to plant in place of the 14
trees they are requesting to be removed. All 14 trees could be native trees which according to the
City of Lake Oswego Tree Code, are required to be replaced with native trees. For sure, 11 trees
are native Douglas Fir and the other 3 need to be identified in order to determine if they are a native
Oregon species. Regardless, there is no suitable replacement for an old growth native tree.
According to Jim Labbe, urban conservationist for the Audubon Society of Portland, "old, heatthy
z
trees play a far more important role ecologically than young saplings, especially mature conifers like
Douglas Fir and Sequoia. These trees provide wildlife habitat for hundreds of different animals, birds,
insects, flora; symbiotic relationships that have evolved for over millions of years."
Thank you for your consideration in denying this tree removal application and encouraging the
applicant, Blue Palouse Properties, to find an alternative solution to removing this mass scale of
healthy, native Oregon old growth trees.
Trees are a part of our health and heritage. They are a living, breathing Life Force that provide
irreplaceable services to all living beings on Earth. Please click on the following link to learn about 22
benefits of trees: http://www.treeoeople orq/resources/tree-benefits
Kind Regards,
Lisa Brisley
(Lake Oswego Resident)
3
Linder, Kari
F+'��= Davis, Fllen
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2017 3:54 PM
To: Linder, Kari
5ubject: FW; Notice of th�foffowing pending tree remo�al permit is attached:499-17-d2043 -
Barbara Kelley Cornment
A#tachments: 499-17-02Q43natice.pdf
Hi Kari,
Woulci you rr�ind adding the belaw cornment to the tree wehsite? I think ! have a few more i'll forward #o you.
ThanksE
Ellen Da�is
. �a r- Associate Planner
pf .� ,� "s�. 5o3.63s.ozg4
� �.
f � � www.iakeoswe��...o.�it�
��� ` 380 A A�enue
°R E��� PQ BDX 3b9, Lake�swego�R 97Q;4
From: treecarnmittee@�arr�cast.net [mailt�:tree�ommittee@comcast.net]
5ent: Monday, May Q8, 2417 Z;15 PM
Ta: Numanoglu,lessi�a�jnuman�glu@ci.nswega.or.us�; �a�is, Ellen �edavis@ci.aswego.vr,us�
5ubje�t: Fwd: fVotice of the fol�owing pencfing tree removal permit is attached:499-17-02Q43 - Barbara Kelley Camment
Jessica & Ellen,
Belaw is a cvmment ! received directly fram 6arbara Kefley, a C Avenue r�sident. I am forwarding it
t❑ you far the re�ord.
Thank yau,
S�aron Gustafsan
Begin forwar�fed message:
Frvm: cedar77� camcast.net
Date: April 2�, 2p17 at 11:1D:5� AM P�T
To: treecommitte� camcast.net
5ubject: Fwd: [Vvtice of the following per�ding tr�e remo�al permit is attached:
499-17-D�Q43 - Please Lovk!
This is tov mu�h cut�ing away af our Lake �swego heritage!
It is a slaughter. .
I abject.
6arbara Kelley
i
Linder, Kari
Fram: Davis, Elien
s���� Monday, May 08, Z�17 3:55 PM
7�� Linder, Kari
Subject: FW; Comment Tree Removal Appli�ation 499-17-��D43
Hi Kari,
Anather e-maii to please add ta the tree we6site.
Thanks!
Ellen Da�is
F�� �U Associate P�anner
p .r� 503.635.Q294
�,•... � .�.
i,� ' �? � �` www.lakeaswega.citv
38�A A�enue
°k��o�'. PD B�X 359, I.ake�swego��R7434
From:treecommittee@c�mcast,net [mailto:treecammittee@�amcast.net]
Sent: Mflnday, May 08, Z�17 3:11 PM
To: Numanagiu,Jessi�a �jnumanoglu@�i.oswego.or.us�; Davis, Ellen �eda�is[7�i.oswega.ar.us�
5ubjeet:Camment Tree Removal Application 499-17-�ZQ43
.�essica and Ellen,
I strflngly disagree wi#h the removal af this grove of D��glas Fir and ane large spruc� iacafed at 1�53
C Avenue. This significant stand of trees is one vt the last and largest Fn the FANIForest Hills
Neighbarhood. These trees cantribute ta the canapy of the neighborhoad, pravide shade, absvr�
pallutian and ground wat�r. They pro�ide homes for a variety Qf native wildlife, In addition, the trees
on this property are par# of aur local history and are irrepfaceable.
It should be a priority far the developer to redesign the praposed structure(s} to sa�e as many of the
t�ees as passible. It seems like this beautiful stan� af trees wauld be a selling poin#, maicing this
��veiopment a secfuded aasis, close to th� city center.
Thank you for your cansideration.
Best regards,
5haron G�stafs�n
FANIForest Hilfs Tree Subcammitte� Chair
1
Da�is, �ilen
�rp�� Numanoglu, Jessica
5ent: Tuesday, May�9, 2��7 11:15 AM
T�= Davis, Ellen
Suhject: FW: Tree Rem��ai Permit#4gg-17-OZ�43
Comment on the C Ave tr�e perr-nit helow. ! respnnded tp 1�m,
,�essira Nurnanoglu, A�CP � Planning Mana�er
o�'-'` �o�,� 50.�.fi35A283
,'� �� `F �* ww4v.lakeaswe�o.city
+ c
''-� � 38a A A�enue
op � PQ S�X 369, L,ake�swego�R 97�34
c � .
Frnm:Jim Boliand (mailta:j�ol�and@trackpro.arg]
Sent: Mpnday, May Q8, 2017 5:43 PM
Tn: Numanagiu,Jessica �jnumanoglu@ci.aswego.or,us�
Gt:Sharan�ustafson �sharonm.gustafson@gmail.com�
5ubject:7ree Removal Perrnit#499-17-��043
Dea r lessica,
Permitting the remo�al r�f the significant trees nutside of the building footprint would have major negati�e ir►�pa�t on the
character and quality of life af the neigh�orhood anat would consequentEy violate the tree code.The permit far�utting the
trees autside of the builing permit should be denied.
Thankyou.
Jim 8olland
FAN/Forest Fiills NA Vi�e Chair
1
�
� would like to �hank the De�elopment Review Cornmittee and the
applicant Blue Palouse Properties for listening to my testimony today.
My name is lisa Brisley. 1 am a resident of lake Oswego and am the
person who offiCiaily appealed the "tentati�ely appro�ed" decision of
this tree removal application: 499-17-02043
Important: The StafF Report is inconsis�en� with the Tree Application in
tha� the applicant/developer fisted 11 Doug[as Fir ranging from 6' to 46"
DBH (vne Douglas Fir was later withdrawn from the application, making
it now 10 Douglas �ir) and 127" DBH Spruce, 1 14" DBH Cherry tree and
1 Cherry tree that was not measured. The Staff Repor� claims �hat there
are only 9 Douglas Fir ranging from 6" to 46" DBH , 1 17" DBH Spruce, 1
14" DBH Cherry, 19" DBH Cherry �ree and�1 6" DBH Maple.
We are alive today because vf the oxygen tha�t trees produce for us to
breathe. Trees are the lungs of the �arth �they are a living, breathing
Life Foree. Trees provide irreplaceable community, environmental and
economic ser�ices to our cities and to our planet.
This is the most aggressive Type II tree remo�al application I ha�e seen
based on �he health, age, quantity, and native species in�ol�ed. Based
on the following reasons, I am respectfully urging the Development
Review Commiss�on to deny this tree application:
(Reason 1� This tree applieation has not me� the required cr�teria
estabiished by the I�ake Oswego Tree Code — LOC 55.02.080 due to the
fact that the na�ive Douglas Fir trees in question are healthy, o�er 15"
DBH and (a) significant due to size, �b� signi�icant due to species, and �c�
significant due �to distineti�e character to the neighborhood:
Sign�ficant Due To Size- 6 of the 13 trees are significant to the
neighborhood due to size in tha� they are healthy old grvwth Doug�as
Fir trees with a DBH ranging from 21"- 46" diameter, w�th an age span
of 105 to 230 years old!
(diameter in inches x the growth factor = approx. age of a tree) Douglas
Firs have a growth factor of 5.
(According to the Planning Division's Staff Report, each individual tree
proposed for removal are not significant to the neighborhood due to
size because "there are other trees of similar or greater size in the
immediate area ..." The maximum measuring 51" diameter)
I disagree with the Planning Division because trees, like huumans, are
individual living, breathing life forces, and like humans, trees' survival is
dependent upon a larger community called a forest ecosystem. This
stand of trees in question functions as a forest ecosystem community,
and healthy forest ecosystems require trees of various sizes and ages.
So, when you cut down individual old growth trees in a stand, you are
taking away the strongest members of the community. According to Jim
Labbe, urban conservationist for the Audubon Society of Portland, "old,
healthy trees play a far more important role ecologically than young
saplings, especially mature conifers like Douglas Fir and Sequoia. These
trees provide wildlife habitat for hundreds of different animals, birds,
insects, flora, symbiotic relationships that have evolved over millions of
years.
Significant Due To Species — 10 of the 13 trees are significant to the
neighborhood due to species in that they are native Oregon Douglas Fir
trees, 6 are native Oregon old growth Douglas Fir trees. Again,
according to Jim Labbe, urban conservationist for the Audubon Society
of Portland, "old, healthy trees play a far more important role
ecologically than young saplings, especially mature conifers like Douglas
F i r ..."
(According to the Planning Division's Staff Report, none of the trees are
significant due to species because "none of the trees are of specimen
quality or an unusual species in the area")
Native trees, like Douglas Firs, by nature are "common" trees because
they are native to the area in which they live and provide all the
necessary life elements needed to sustain their native, local
environment — they are not meant to be "unusual" or "exotic"
specimens. Rather, native trees, like Douglas Firs, are prized for the
essential role that they play in the local community, local environment
and local economy — and therefore these Douglas Fir trees are very
significant due to species to the neighborhood.
Significant Due To Distinctive Character- (According to the P/anning
Division's Staff Report, "none of the individual trees have a particu/ar
distinctive character.")
10 of the 13 trees are native Douglas Fir trees and are significant due to
distinctive character to the neighborhood and to the state of Oregon
based on the fact that since 1939, the Douglas Fir tree has been given
the honorary status as the Official State Tree of Oregon! The Douglas Fir
tree was chosen as Oregon's Official State Tree because of its
extraordinary nature, species, and strength, and its leading role in the
economic development of the state of Oregon. As the Official State Tree
of Oregon, I would say with 100% certainty that these native Douglas Fir
trees that the applicant proposes to cut down are very significant due
to distinctive character to our neighborhood and state!
(Reason 2) There are 4 required submissions for a Type II Tree Remova)
Application: (1) Site plan (2) Checklist (3) Mitigation Plan and (4)
Landscape Plan (if applicable). The applicant did not provide a
mitigation plan at the time he submitted the application to the City of
Lake Oswego which is one of the requirements of the Lake Oswego Tree
Code: LOC 55.02.050 and LOC 55.02.084. As a result, Lake Oswego
residents did not have access to the required mitigation plan at the start
of the 14 day comment period.
(The Staff Report simp/y states that "the applicant is proposing to plant
8 Big Leaf Maples and 5 Western Cedars to meet the mitigation
requirement; however the staff is concerned that there is insufficient
planting area forseveral of these large-stature mitigation trees, which
are in c/ose proximity to the future dwe/ling.")
The Planning Division should not accept an application until ALL the
required information is submitted by the applicant. A "tentative"
decision should not be rendered without all the required information in
hand. A mitigation plan is not an afterthought — it is an essential part of
any decision that is resulting in a negative impact. A mitigation plan
shows that the applicant has created a thoughtful, conscientious plan
prior to implementing a proposal that will negatively impact an area.
And the public has a right to review the required mitigation plan at the
beginning of the 14 day comment period in order to make the most
informed comments, just as the Planning Division needs to have the
required mitigation plan before the application is even considered or
reviewed in order to make an informed decision.
Progressive cities around the nation recognize that trees, especially
native and native old growth trees provide major economic benefits to
the areas in which they live. These cities are creating urban and
suburban "forest" or "tree" master plans to ensure the long-term
health and sustainability of its tree canopy, which in turn ,ensures long-
term economic health and sustainability for its cities.
The City of �ake Oswego does not currently have a successful plan to
ensure that its greatest community, environmental, and economic asset
is protected and preserved. Our current model, makes it easy for
developers to cut down trees. In this specific application, the applicant
Blue Palouse Properties is requesting to remove 13 healthy trees, 10 of
which have been identified as native Douglas Fir, 6 of those 10 are
native old growth trees whose ages range from 105-230 years old and
all 13 trees' ages range from 30 to 230 years old. This parcel of land is
special in that it is truly a mini-suburban old growth forest in the heart
of the city. And the total fee required by the City of Lake Oswego for
Blue Palouse Properties to cut down these 13 healthy, mostly native
old growth trees was $402. That is approximately $30.92 per tree. It is
unimaginable to think that a healthy tree that has lived for 23U years
and is providing irreplaceable community, environmental and
economic services to our city is valued at a mere $30.92.
Native, old growth trees are a precious and limited natural resource.
We, the City of Lake Oswego, can choose to use our innovative and
creative abilities to save our most precious resource without sacrificing
the economic stability of our city, in fact, the only way that we can
ensure the economic future of our city is through saving our native
trees. We have to be visionaries with both short and long-term quality
of life in mind — that is the key. We have to partner with thoughtful
developers who incorporate our existing healthy, mature native trees
into their design.
Trees are a part of our health and heritage. They are a living, breathing
Life Force that provide irreplaceable community, environmental and
economic services to our city and to our planet.
Thank you for your consideration in denying this tree application.
� � • r • � _ �• � . •� - • • -�• - -• :••�
,�,�;: EM 8994 � L7ecember 2009 i• +4,a �
� r � ��'i -.�"•,; 3l r y
'.� .. � _ � ♦'� . � *i: ��` !�.
,� � � j.
, ' t :�- � Oregon State Extensinn _ . ��•
���� Oq1YER51fY I Service � j
,�
.�`"�''��''� . . �' � � ,..�' ��
�. , � •,. , ,� ;
] :k ' . � "� � ... � h
. ' ';�x•a� M�� �, . � .�
fr"ej . �4 X�1L.,� . _ . - �" ,�I� . �� � �.
� P� '�#^h��� .:5:' �"y "`s . ... J'r"y '� '�.'d'� - ,C � .
� �� � ' �ay. .+�y,�,,,y� �,�+T' ,,,�'ti:, r�
� � �� .r, .
� w ����td� ' .� - �-" i ' '1� .''r`,�. �\, .,
�; y�•,y,y���� ta�,��_ ��'�� ,,� � ���:�,��,,. - -��h� a �'�: c
� #s � ,r��: •� ;-,. � �aa-ir; ,
� �"" ,,,��`•��'r :� � �?'t'�,. .� y� ����� � .
-'�'�r� � :'�s`ti�!'�" a', ��: i �"--`' � t -
�#�� ' .� a �i�';p. � _ 4 � ..
��2.". ' ,�ar' ��;r -i� •..M . ' _ yq 'i . . ,."r '. �► . ". .u.�s
J. �. � }�r - .,L � �k . .
�A� � ^. �� � t St_� � ��f��_� .. . - .,
a �
���'� .�F � _ ;�&.L'�",Y '"_3yj� �,r.
�,� ; .a�.� �� �, '�►� ��
L'", -: 4a�kt.�., ��s ; �' �
� � :.5. � �+y,
_ �,�� t ��, :,�. `�,�
- � �,� ' '
� k�
a�-
r •�:
� i1�1�;{+���I�-.A..ry. .'4--;'•.� �
�: S' y.YYI:'��
�� �,,-.,r_; _, � . - ,, • � •
�r�
1 �.�' '
-� ��._ � �'',¢� s.. • ' •
�� � - i� : �t `��
,
^� fr'�S 4�'• " •'��• • • '
at �' . `�;
� ��� ��� ._. �� �
�: �:�� .+#
�� '" a
. .i.: . ....__.�... . . . ..�:�Cr '..x-I _.
{ . 5 4� { � ��•���I�i��,
94
INTRODUCTION
................... �
WhaC's at Stake PROTECT �
FOREST ''
Purpose of REMNANT '
Guidebook STANDS........ a
Who Should Use PROTECT
This Guidebook Exrellent Stand �' �"""""-"�
ProtetTion Zone �NDIVIDUAL
Poor Stand TREES .......... 3 . -_.
Proieciion Zone CHANGING �
Why ProtectTrees GRADE AROUND
� BMPs for Tree Protet[ion TREES .......... 8 MAINTAIN
�
w Protecting Native Techniques TREES
� Raisin the Exisxin
Z Forest Remnanu g g PROPERLY... �0
p Crixical Root Zone Grade
� Protetxion Don'tTo Trees!
Lowering[he p
BMPs forTree Existing Grade Tree Maintenance
Pro[ection
Trenching BMPsforTree
Pruning PLANTING $[
..... ..:..........._:.�, ,.. ESTABLISHING
ProperTree NEW TREES.. �4
Removal and
Replacement ProperTree
BMPs forTree Planting
Removal and BMPs forTree
Replacement Establishment
�. � ".�.... ... �� :. .. ............ .... ..... ........�
INTROOYC'f10N PUrposeofGWdebook Cnntac[youxlocalplanningdepactmenefor
'I6is publication is a guide frx protecdi�,coivsecv- specific regulaeions fnr your area.
What'S 3t Stdke ing,selecang,mainraining,remcrving,and replacing
Urba�i foresrs consisrof che nacive fores[ ttees on developme�t sices in[he Pacific Notthwesc Who Should Use This Guldebook
remnants and the planred forested lan�l- T��e guidebook is designzd co assise people who This�idebook is inrended co suppott xhe
scapes in our cidea wock with ttees duri�g che�evelopmen�a�d building,development,and consteucoo�
7'he urban foces�ls a valaable iesource consovcrion phases of both new a�d ceistlng industries.If you axe a construction wnh�ac
diai provides economic,environmental, P�ojecrs to keep healthy trees a part of tl�e urban ror or employee,builder or land developer,
and social benefits.Quality of life in cities emdmnmenc d�rough the use of accepred vee care heavy equipment operamp landscape
is enhanced when we have a canopy of st'andards and pcacdces. mainCenance contractor or empbV�tree
z �ees shading our 6omes and streecs,mici- ��Publication pcovides best managemene prae care service eonhaeCor or employee,or
� garing s[ormwarer efkcts,providing energy Uces(BMPs)developecl a�d recommended by pm utiliry employee,diis guidebook is for you.
� savings,and impmving properryvaluu. fessional arborists,urbaii attd mmmuniry foresters, You are an impor[an[part of successfld tree
� Reseazch by tlie USDA Furest Sexvice and landscape arc6itecrs.BMPs are widely accepYed pmrecrioii eHarts! 1
�� rzcrices and scandacds used 6 mdus rofessioer This ublication will also be hel ful to
indica[es fha4���i'Y$1 spen[on�rban p� Y n1'P P P
� trees,$2.70 in benefia is cetumed �dnd based on the best availabte�esearch.The e�gineers,landscape acdii�ets,and plannecs
As foresrs in the Paeific Nor[hwes[ ��dehook prwides basic and pracriral infnrma2ion diac are imotved in planning and designiug
bemme mote fra�nenced throupJi about methods co give ttees planred or retairied on conscr�ction projects.Itcan be osed as a
urbanizarion and development,we lose developiuenc sites ehe best chance m survive and project planning and implemen[atlon mol,as
a significa�c am�unt of die ecasystem thrive dututg and a8er the constmecion process_ well as a tesource for community educa[ion.
services tha[forescs provide,such as storm- pjease n�re that while the BMPs i�this guidebook The guidelines in dti publication could
water and flood control,and mirigation of are widely accepred prac[ices and standards,they make a significant diHerettce[o your wn-
grernhouse gases. don'c waran[ee 100%successful ttee survival. struc[ion sice for yeacs ro rome.Trees that
This bvidebook is designed tn help che ��e rhese pcaaices axe presenred here u are treated as assetr rad�ec d2ao liabilifles
user ietain healehy trees d�at conaibure wluntary�,niidelines,some loca(jurisdic[ions have may savc chousau3s of dnllars on a project
ehese services and ben�[s. tree procection regularions that mus�be followed. through reduced s�ormwater i�frasaucttve
neecLs and increased properry vaWrs.
PROTECi FOREST REMNAN* STANPS Poor Stand Protection Zone
Stands,groves,or patches of nacive Pacific Nor[hwest[rees,such as Scattered ctees wieh a highly dismrbed or
Oxegon white oak,Wesrem red cedar,red aldu,bi�leaf mapLe,and °1tSsing undecsrory may no[be worth saving.A
DougLss-fit,are often found in urban or urbanizuig areas.These p°or erand pro�ution zone has rhe following no-
emsystems are remnants of[he larger foresrs ehac previously covered characrerisvcs:
che acea.They may range from tess than a quarcer acre to several ' Trees blow ovec easily due eo lack of suppor[.
acres in size.Conservaflon of c�isang geoves of naave tiees oken ' SoiL drias out and soil erosion occurs due co
o providea gceater ea�nomic and envimnmei�cal benefi[dian pceserv- dismrbed soils and lack of undecs[ory.
Z • Foresc miaoclimare is disttirbed_
N ii�g individual crees in che developing landscape. A,ra�d d��may no�be
• Sunli�caad rempeca[ure inerease. .,m.ehsnoing.Reproduced
� • Weeda•and invasive s ecies take over. a�«h Pe.mission by thc Ciiy oj
Z Excellent Stand Protection Zone P cl,�ttan���
z High cree densi[ies widt an undismrbed understory are charac�eris ' Focesc successioi�ic ince��upted and little g�
w tics of a high-qualiry forest remnant worth preserving.An excellent �egenera[ion ocwrs.
`� • The stancl is visuall unatnactive. 2
r seand protecrion zone has the following chaxactecisrics: Y
� • Trees saucmraLly support o�e ano[6er. • Ecological functions are severely intertup[ed.
� � Soil remains undismrbed.
� • W�ldiik uses are reLaH�ely uaimpaired. BMPs for Proteeting NaLive Forest Remnants
p • Shady microdima[e encoarages namcal � /"ti • Fence the entire s[and,�rove,or patch to pro[ett understory
a woodland plants. � vegetation and soil as well as tmes.Healthy soik requice little if any
� Naaval firest succession concinuu and � �rhLiza[ion,pesticides,oi iaigaaou[o support[cee health_
4 • Avoid removina vigorous,healelry ttees and vege[aciou from die stand.
Furest xegenetaxion is ongoine. �
• The seau�is visually at[ractive. • Do oo[retain isolared suinle,tall,spindly trees;such ttees are more
• Emlobrical func[ions ace rela[ively likely[o bewme scrucnixally unstable,bend or blow over in storms,
unimpaired. or l�emme diseased and/oc infested with insecrs.
• Avoid creating new h�rest edges thac may noc be wind-firm;rerain
a,mnd��p.orecc Reproduced wiih laege aees ehnr are on the windwacd side of a sclnd ro provide sup-
pe.mus�o�by rhe Cicy of Cha�mnoosa� poct and pro[ution to ihe interioc of the scand.
�-
. . . . � . . . . � .:l . . . .. . . . .� . . . . . .. . �.'.A
PRO*ECT INOIYIPYAL TREES Tree pxotection may be passive or auive.Passive ttee procecfio�,
mosc co�nmonly used duri�g rhe planning or posedevelopment s[ages,
Why Proteet Trees siinply means avoiding any dismrbance or harmful accivity near ti�e
Trees should be prorec[ed chroughuux their lives from damage[o ttee.Ac[ive tree pmrection,by concrasc,involves physical protective
maaimize their healch,sakry,funetionaliry,and 6enefi[s.Young, barriers and is gene�ally required duting any site disturbance dtax
newly plaz�ted trees need procecrion as much as large,matuxe may impact retained aees,such as geading,building consttuction and
trees. maii�[enance,in&asecucmre and utlliry inscallation and maintena�ce,
Proreccing rrees in new and�cis[iiin developme�u and o[her landscape changas[hat may affece dze saucmral in[egrity
• reduces lott�term cree maintenance and teplacemenx costs; and sxabiliry of re[ained crees.
� • reduces site preparation and grading costs;
� • picrvides immediate aesthetic and uommic benefirs buause CritiCal Root Zone Protettion
j pcopercies wi[h more ma[ure rrees and grea[e�[ree canopy cover A�Ti�¢al step in retaining healdry tcees during construc[ion and
� sell fasrec and accme propecty vaLue fasrer in wmparison co development is ehe pro[ection of¢ee coors from discurbance.Each tree
o properties withou[chese assets; liaz a cri[ical roo[zone(CR�that varies by species and site condi- 3
� [ionsT7ietn2erna[ionalSocie ofArboriculmre
F • generates positive response from neighbors and die surround- ry (ISA)defines CRZ
w ing community; as an area equal co ldoo[radius from rhe base of rhe ttee's trunk for
p • generares good public retatioas;and each 1 inc6 of the rree's diamerer a[4.5 fee[abwe gcade(referred w as
a • peovidac healrhier crees,fores[eeosys[em,and eaviro�uuent fnr diainemc ac bceast heighc).
a heal[hiey safrr,more vital community.
Cd�ical rmt zane radius dism.�-es mkulated by eree diameter at Meast height.
Tree Proteetion Teehniques Tree diamecer Ccitical root Total proCection mue diameter,
Tree prc�[u[ion involves acrivitiu desigiied Co preserve and protect zone radius ineluding trunk
tree heald�by avoiding dainage m aee roors,tmnk,or crown.Siie 2 inches 2 feec 4�feec
development plannirg+pcior m site disturbance should indude 6 inchec 6 ke[ 135 fect
idenrifying cree pcoa�ceion zones('IPZs)foc all[rees duiy�a[ed foc 20 inches 20 feec 42 feee
retenrion. 46 incl�es 46 Eeer 96 kec
�:
Anot6er common rule of thumb • Post appropriate signage[o help convey the importance of the
is ro use a ttee's dripline co eseimace CRZ[o workers.
che CRZ(see figure).We cecommend - • Avoid cutting tree coors wex 4 inches in diame[er.
you waluare boeh of chue and choose • Make all necessary cu[s ro tcee roors deanly wich Sharp rools;
whidiever pcovides the larner CRZ. nevec cear with a backhoe.A dean cut enwurages good wound
Undex cenain circums[ances,dis- � ebsure and confines die spread of decay_
[urbing or cuC[ing toots in a CRZ may i�"a���°�
be unavoidable. Ia soch cases,t6e To procect trees aiid tree moca within[he fe�eed CRZ,do not do
,� work should be done onLy under the '� ----- che foltowing:
� onsite supervision of au ISA certiEied exZ • S[ockpile construc[ion materials or demoli[ion debris.
� acborisc ' • Park vehide or equipmene.
� Cuering oc dismcUing a laege Usin�dn6<<��e ro es�tma�e • pile soil and/or nmtcli.
o crt�iml.000,one(CR2). . 'Trench foc uulities inscallacion or re aic,or for irrigaeion s stem
� pecceiitage of a[ree s rooGs ineceases Adap�ed wi�h perm[ssion by P Y
o d�e likelihood of die tcee's failure or �he Ciry ot�«a�ooga. ins[alla[ion. q
� death.Most tree roots over 4 inches • Change soil grade by cutting or filling.
� • Dama e toots b �radin b �rz
w in diame[er are likely ro be strucmra(roots;cut[i�g these roors b' Y 6 g,tearin�,or ubbing.
� may impace[he sttuccural stability of[he tree,creating the • Compact soil with equipment,vehides,matecial s�ocage,and/or
� pocential foi carastrophic failure(the ceee may fall wer). foo[[reffic.
The BMI's lis[ed below re[ain good air and water supply • Contamina[e soil from wasliing ou[equipment(especiaLly ron-
to ehe criticaL roots oE pro[ected ttees,as well as prorect dtem crete)and vehicle mai�[enance.
from mechanical damage,w help ttees remain as lieal[hy and • Ins[all impervious parking lots,dxiveways,and walkways.
stable as possible during che coustruction process and beyond: ' Aceach anything to creac using nails,secews,and/or spikes.
• Establish a CRZ for both large and small trees. • Wound oc break ttee au�ks or branches chrough con[ac[wi[h
• Ins[all s[mng fencing amund die CRZ and require die fence vehicLes and heavy equipment.
co remain in place foc the life of the devzlopment pxoject m • Wound[runks wi[h svin�weed rrimmers and lawn mowers.
ensure proteccion. • Cause injury by fice or�cessive heat
�
19.2
a�ct'p` ���,� C�UNCi� REPaRT
I,+� � n,
�`� � o
flREGdr�
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Paul Espe, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for a zoning map amendment for property and right-of-way
located at 10 Touchstone in the Mountain Park Neighborhood (Ordinance 2750,
LU 17-0022).
DATE: August 16, 2017 DATE OF MEETING: September 5, 2017
ACTION
� 38a1.� 2a. A_ . _,� ���iv.
The City of Lake Oswego is proposing to amend 3�,'8= '°`E 1, F ,° _ �,
n�i 1`i ��.BBD n��F
nt- �, '�-, �' cF-
�'. ��- J �Bti-
the Zoning Map for one property and abutting F�z '3��� �e4`� ��� :. ,x :� R;
oe - saa , �o „
right-of-way from R-3 to R-7.5, in the Mountain }��P��t� _ �., �«���s����P -���r,
� �
Park Neighborhood. The Planning Commission ase '�� � 1 -� ' p� - � m� .
has recommended approval of the Ordinance; »y �
6�3�� ��, N �Z�. �� iz '— . �.��_ -P�
see the Commission's Findings, Conclusion and � 39;� a � _ ,s ,s ,a 35� - _-
Order, attached as Exhibit B-1. d=°°J `'`� w ` � �,°� — ��`� ,;`
`� ' T(1l�HSTt - ,.6. I R�`� F'1�
�� $ � $ iE��rmHaiis s_ �'� � 39e7� a m o
�' . _ �� � '!d. ' 13 3989 „ W 375
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to approve LU 17-0022, adopting the Findings, Conclusion and Order in Exhibit A-1.1, and
enact Ordinance 2750.
Alternatively, if the Council makes changes to the proposed map amendment or has additional
findings, move to tentatively approve the Land Use Case file, and direct staff to return with
proposed findings and conclusions, together with a final version of this ordinance for adoption
on October 3, 2017.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
One of the Planning Commission goals for 2016 is to implement the recommendations of the
2015 Audit of the Comprehensive Plan (Plan) and Community Development Code (CDC),
including revisions to the Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map to remove conflicts
between the two maps. At the Commission's joint meeting with the City Council on January 11,
2016, the Council directed the Commission and staff to proceed with this work.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 2
On July 5, 2017, the City Council adopted zoning map amendments for properties in the
Rosewood Neighborhood and George Rogers Park (Ordinances 2740, 2741, 2742, 2743, 2744,
2745, 2746 (LU 17-0009, LU 17-0010, LU 17-0011, LU 17-0012, LU 17-0013, LU 17-0014, LU 17-
0015). The attached ordinance is next in a series of quasi-judicial zoning map corrections
implementing the Audit. The draft ordinance with attachments are contained in Exhibits A-1.1.
The Planning Commission Findings and Staff Report are attached as Exhibits B-1 and D-1.
DISCUSSION
At its public hearing on June 26, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended that the Council
adopt the proposed amendment to amend the Zoning Map from R-3 to R-7.5 for this property
(10 Touchstone). Please see Exhibit B-1 for the Commission's recommendation. There was no
testimony in opposition. The proposal is summarized below.
The R-7.5 zone is a low density residential zoning designation consisting of single-family homes
on larger lots with densities ranging from four to five dwelling units per acre, with a minimum
lot size of 7,500 square feet. The R-3, R-2, and R-0 zoning classifications are for high and
medium density residential uses, including attached single-family and multi-family dwellings,
duplexes and detached single family homes on small lots. The minimum lot size for R-3 is 3,375
square feet per lot.
Existin� Condition: This property has a Comprehensive Plan designation of"Low Density" (R-
7.5) and a zoning designation of"High Density" (R-3).
Kev Issue: The zoning designation of R-3 for 11 Touchstone (Lot 102) is not consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan designation of R-7.5. The R-3 designation is also not consistent with the
average lot size (9,500 square feet) within the Mountain Park No's. 7 and 8 subdivision plats.
The pattern and size of the lots in the Weatherstone Planned Development, located east of the
site, are much smaller (between 2,368 and
1,956 square feet). The planned ,_ ..,,, °��°
develo ment a roval allowed these lots Mountain Park No 7 � ;:�. w�-,�;.��-. _,
p pp �: ,�, ::�".Y_
,++. .;, 4�,m ., �,J
to be smaller in exchange for providing 11 Touchstone ;� - �;� �
open space. Changing the zoning ;,, � ��'"" -�`�������'�
Platted as a part , � � �,� ., "" &. ,
designation from R-3 to R-7.5 may reduce of Mtn. Park No. 8 ;'V, . �,�,`���,�; .:- ��
•�.
the development potential from three lots '��'��• . �.-�•�'a•�4��`
to one, but would achieve consistency with - F����' s �8����.�����
"� ,�.;.
- - ?� m-,`� � �,`..
the Comprehensive Plan and existing � -• � � �����- ?�_ ��.�'`��"`� ���+,��.`� ;,
lottin attern within Mountain Park No.'s �� Y ' °�"Y�� � .- _ ����r�� j'�i
g p r i�^�- . ..,�... _-���� �� �-�' �;"`�`.•f t�
;` ,,,.'�.�. .�, . a� ��•.:f':�_.., S=';._-+� '�
7 and 8. Further this lot has been ' ��'�y o-`�=��:`�-�.,�,',��=s''` �`��, �
i y "r_ : � x°e —a ��y;-• •'w� .. 5��:�=..�•�l
'�� i
� .y n .,�iryt� -:�'�'a:„=:':. ��, ;{s�:li i
developed with a single family residence ''- ��_�`�:w;��, ���� ;•` . � '�
. .K���� k�,:
f r-' ' - , • ;e�;'•-` .�.. ;�,� ��;
under R-7.5 zonin re uirements. The ;� • ��&.s;'�°�`•a��=�'x " ' - � ,�"�� �
� _�::�� d
g q _:- .,t•a°a-{;��,-�•: �; �`�=.a: �d:�•.:�
proposed zoning amendments do not . �:�:s�;��;���-$-�"��"�
.. .,� ,, �Q
�=-?��� ,",
result in any existing land use or �� --� <<
development becoming non-conforming.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 3
CONCLUSION
As discussed in Exhibit D-1, the proposed amendment is in compliance with applicable City
Comprehensive Plan policies and Special District plans, state laws, and Statewide Planning
Goals.
ALTERNATIVES & FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed map amendment may indirectly have a positive fiscal impact by allowing for
more efficient interpretation of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps. An alternative,
amending the Comprehensive Plan to be consistent with the current R-3 zoning, could have a
positive fiscal impact but would be contrary to the City Council's intent during the 2013
Comprehensive Plan update, which was to not increase zoned densities in established
residential neighborhoods.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the information presented in this report, staff recommends that the Council approve
LU 17-0022, and enact Ordinance 2750.
EXHIBITS
A. Draft Ordinance
A-1 Draft Ordinance 2750 (dated 06/15/17)
Attachment 1: City Council Findings and Conclusions [Not yet available]
Attachment 2: Proposed Zoning Map Amendment (dated 06/15/17)
**Superseded by A-1.1**
A-1.1 Draft Ordinance 2750 (dated 08/16/17)
Attachment 1: City Council Findings and Conclusions
Attachment 2: Proposed Zoning Map Amendments (dated 08/16/17)
B. Findin�s, Conclusion and Order
B-1 Planning Commission Findings, Conclusion and Order
C. Minutes
C-1 Planning Commission Minutes 06/26/17
D. Staff Reports
D-1 Planning Commission Staff Report, 06/15/17
E. Graphics/Plans
E-1 Comprehensive Plan Map, 03/21/17
E-2 Zoning Map, 03/21/17
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 4
F. Written Materials
F-1 2013 Comprehensive Plan, Housing Needs Analysis,Table 20 (June 26, 2012; updated
March 19, 2013)
G. Letters
[No current exhibits]
BACKGROUND MATERIAL AND REFERENCES
The Staff report, exhibits and notices can be found by visiting the land use case webpages for
LU 17-0022.
Use the link below to visit the City's "Project" page. In the "Search" box enter the land use case
number then press "Submit":
http://www.ci.oswe�o.or.us/prolects
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034 www.ci.oswego.or.us
DRAFT 08/16/17 EXHIBIT A-1.1
ORDINANCE 2750 LU �7-0022
AN ORDINANCE OF THE LAKE OSWEGO CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO
CHANGE THE ZONE DESIGNATION FOR PROPERTY AT 10 TOUCHSTONE (21E05BD02000,
SUPPLEMENTAL NO. 1)AND ABUTTING RIGHT-OF-WAY FROM R-3 to R-7.5, AND
ADOPTING FINDINGS (LU 17-0022).
WHEREAS, a notice of public hearing for consideration of this Ordinance was duly given in a
manner required by law; and,
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on June 26, 2017; and
before the Lake Oswego City Council on September 5, 2017, to review the proposed
amendments;
WHEREAS The Planning Commission did deliberate, adopt findings of fact and conclusions
and recommend that Ordinance 2750 be approved by the City Council of the City of Lake
Oswego.
The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows:
Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings and Conclusions (LU 17-0022) in
Attachment 1.
Section 2. The Zoning Map is amended to change the zone designation for the property at
10 Touchstone, (21E05BD02000, Supplemental No. 1) and the abutting right-of-way from R-
3 to R-7.5 as shown on Attachment 2.
Section 3. Effective Date of this Ordinance: Pursuant to Lake Oswego City Charter Section
35.6., this ordinance shall be effective on the 30t" day after its enactment.
Read by title only and enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake
Oswego held on day of , 2017.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Dated
Ordinance No.2750, LU17-0022
(21E056D02000) EXHIBIT A-1.1/PAGE 1 OF 2
DRAFT 08/16/17
ATTEST:
Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David Powell, City Attorney
Ordinance No.2750, LU17-0022
(21E056D02000) EXHIBIT A-1.1/PAGE 2 OF 2
ATTACH M ENT 1
LU 17-0022
1 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
2 OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
3 A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENTTO THE LU 17-0022
ZONING MAP TO MAKE THE ZONE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
4 DESIGNATION FOR 10 TOUCHSTONE
CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS
5 MAP.
6
NATURE OF APPLICATION
7
Amendments to the Zoning Map to make the zone designation for 10 Touchstone and the
8
abutting public right-of-way consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Map
9
10 NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS
11 This matter came before the Lake Oswego City Council on the recommendation of the
12 Planning Commission for a quasi-judicial amendment to the Zoning Map to correct a conflict
13 between the Zoning and Comprehensive Plan maps for the property at 10 Touchstone.
14 HEARINGS
15 The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered this application at its
16 meeting on June 26, 2017, where the Commission adopted its Findings, Conclusions and Order
17 recommending approval of LU 17-0022.
18 The City Council held a public hearing and considered the Planning Commission's
19 recommendation on September 5, 2017.
20
21 CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
22 A. City of Lake Oswe�o Community Development Code-Procedure (LOC Chapter 50)
23 LOC 50.07.003.1.b Burden of Proof
LOC 50.07.003.7 Appeals
24 LOC 50.07.003.15 Major Development (excluding subsection d.ii)
25 LOC 50.07.003.5 Conditions of Approval
LOC 50.07.003.3 Notice of Public Hearing
26 LOC 50.07.003.4 Hearings before a Hearings Body
LOC 50.07.003.16.a Legislative Decision Defined (Quasi-judicial Comp. Plan and Zone Map
Amendments to be processed via Major Developments Procedures)
Attachment 1 (Ordinance 2750) Page 1 of 2
FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS (LU 17-0022)
1 LOC 50.07.003.16.c Required Notice to DLCD
LOC 50.07.003.16.d Planning Commission Recommendation Required
2 LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision
3 B. City of Lake Oswe�o Comprehensive Plan Policies
4 Land Use planning
Policies D-1 and D-5 Land Use Administration
5 Policy E-2(a)(b)(i)(ii A-G) Comprehensive Plan Amendments
6 Community Culture (Civic Engagement)
� Policy 1, 2, 4 and 5 Citizen Involvement
g Complete Neighborhoods and Housing
9 Goals 1-5
Policy A-1c Housing Location and Quality
10 Policy A-2 Density
11 Connected Community
Policy C-6 Efficiency
12
13 C. Metro Urban Growth Mana�ement Function Plan
Title 1: Housing [MC 3.07.12.E
14 Title 5: Regional Transportation Functional Plan [3.08.510.A]
15
D. Transportation Plannin� Rule (Chapter 660, Division 12)
16 OAR 660-12-060(1)
17 FINDINGS AND REASONS
18 As support for its decision, the City Council incorporates the Planning Commission staff
19 report dated June 15, 2017, and the Council Report dated August 16, 2017, with all exhibits,
20 together with the Findings, Conclusions & Order of the Planning Commission.
21 CONCLUSION
22 The City Council concludes that LU 17-0022, as recommended by the Planning
23 Commission, complies with all applicable criteria and should be approved. The Council also
24 concludes that proposed Ordinance 2750, which implements LU 17-0022, should be enacted.
25
26
Attachment 1 (Ordinance 2750) Page 2 of 2
FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS (LU 17-0022)
ATTACHMENT 2
Ordinance 2750
LU 17-0022
Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map Changes
The following amendment shall be made to the Lake Oswego Zoning Map, for the referenced
property: 10 Touchstone (21E05BD02000, Supplemental No 1.) and the abutting right-of-way.
136p6 �' 4 51- 11-16
64 139-14E
,��� 23-28 17-22
127-
�,5_ 131-138 �� 126
72 TANGL�WQOD 2 �
�5 ;.
��.
3822- 7� ��92 C' �2
382B $° ��s� ga �G'. �°�a
� sa �fl�,
$�_ U
gq 9� 9� 141- '!03- � 84
32_ - ,00 ,oz ,qs 82 �_� f
38 j � sa
: s
� , _ WHEATHERSTONE
, � � $
�.2- s, �, ,
848 j o� �c� a� o � a,-
9 ��-7.5 a�._r
__ ����.���.,r
�� i � 119 y� '�, � �,�
�= 6� � � 12 '��'�, � � ti. w�
� � r., 121 �� W F ; � `�
'�.s. Q ��� �-1 �
PG{G - . - Z •., ��� 'dF c? �{ --� cs,
38 78 � �
�`+�v hM1 ��" � � ��i,
� � W �4 15 � 14 3943
� N -- - z {:
`�,d, COCI'�T T�UCHST�NE � 15 :-- � ,, � ,ij; �
6' � � TOWNHOLJSES 17 p 3967 � ; � , wo ,�
"°�o � � I— ��`
=--��° 0 724 R-7 5 _. _..�>� 3
-� � . :,,.
ri � ��s - , 18 3989 3996 .�,�, �..
��,� �2 19 -. - _ - -�,_� r �. �;`
�° $ 2a 4aa� "1I � , -1)��' �2
4.' `� � ���� ''0.rk
,�"' ,�wh G� , ' ' . , . '_' �4 �`� I� O� �f �� �N
-.. ._ �� * -.9 , ,Z,
J� � ti�� . - ,a�� ,e�� �Y? �SI
,,o� ^�, W � 23 2 � �pg ,:> � �r.- ��' -� �i,
`<}`=' � - - ��� N y�T T� ��i
.s � C
�. ��J ,•. -. Q
. "t2 �" ^''r `-�S'
f 4077 Ji 4 , 3560 �� ,�5� �
_ _ '� �I � �:Y.� O �
li� `� ,;� "}S
rt�9 �+: 2� �r , c5`�=:"x
O � � fi� 5 p,;a
LU 17-0022 Comprehensive Plan/Zone Map Amendment
August 16, 2017 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 1 OF 1
APPROVED: 06/26/17 EXHIBIT B-1
LU 17-0022
i BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
2 OF THE
3 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
4
5
6 A REQUEST FOR ZONING MAP ) LU 17-0022 - 1919
� AMENDMENTS TO CORRECT MAPPING ) (CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO)
8 ERRORS AND TO MAKE THE ZONING MAP ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & ORDER
9 CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE)
io PLAN MAP. )
��
i2 NATURE OF APPLICATION
13
i4 Amendments to the Zoning Map for 10 Touchstone and a portion of the public right of
is way to correct mapping errors and to make the Zoning Map consistent with the
i6 Comprehensive Plan Map.
��
�8
i9 HEARINGS
20
2i The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered these applications at its
22 meeting on June 26, 2017.
23
24 The Commission did not recive testimony at the hearing in favor or against this
2s application.
26
2� CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
28
29 A. Citv of Lake Osweqo Community Development Code-Procedure (LOC Chapter 50)
3o LOC 50.07.003.1.b Burden of Proof
3i LOC 50.07.003.7 Appeals
32 LOC 50.07.003.15 Major Development (excluding subsection d.ii).
33 LOC 50.07.003.5 Conditions of Approval
34 LOC 50.07.003.3 Notice of Public Hearing
3s LOC 50.07.003.4 Hearings before a Hearings Body
36 LOC 50.07.003.16.a Legislative Decision Defined (Quasi-judicial Comp. Plan and
3� Zone MapAmendments to be processed via Major
38 Developments Procedures)
39 LOC 50.07.003.16.c Required Notice to DLCD
4o LOC 50.07.003.16.d Planning Commission Recommendation Required
4i LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision
42
LU 17-0022 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 1 of 3
APPROVED: 06/26/17
i B. Citv of Lake Osweqo Comprehensive Plan Policies
2 Land Use Planning
3 Policies D-1 and D-5 Land Use Administration
4 Policy E-2(a)(b)(i)(ii D-G) Comprehensive Plan Amendments
s Community Culture (Civic Engagement)
6 Policy 1, 2, 4 and 5 Citizen Involvement
� Complete Neighborhoods and Housing
8 Goals 1-5
9 Policy A-1 c Housing Location and Quality
io Policy A-2 Density
i i Connected Community
i2 Policy C-6 Efficiency
13
i4 C. Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan
is Title 1: Housing [MC 3.07.120.E]
i6 Title 5: Regional Transportation Functional Plan [3.08.510.A]
��
i8 D. Transportation Planning Rule (Chapter 660, Division 12)
i9 OAR 660-12-0060(1)
20
2i CONCLUSION
22
23 The Planning Commission concludes that LU 17-0022 is in compliance with all
24 applicable criteria.
2s
26 FINDINGS AND REASONS
2�
2g The Planning Commission incorporates the staff report, dated June 14, 2017, on LU 17-
29 0022 (with all exhibits attached thereto) as support for its decision, supplemented by the
3o further findings and conclusions set forth herein. In the event of any inconsistency
3i between the supplementary matter herein and the staff report, the matter herein
32 controls. To the extent they are consistent with the approval granted herein, the
33 Commission adopts by reference its oral deliberations on this matter.
34
3s Following are the supplementary findings and conclusions of this Commission:
36
3� 1. The Planning Commission accepted the findings in the attached staff report and
38 finds that the proposed zoning map amendments will correct the inconsistencies
39 between the zoning and Comprehensive Plan Maps.
40
LU 17-0022 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 2 of 3
APPROVED: 06/26/17
i ORDER
2
3 IT IS ORDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION of the City of Lake Oswego that:
4
s 1. The Planning Commission recommends that LU 17-0022 be approved by the
6 City Council.
�
8 I CERTIFY THAT THIS ORDER was presented to and APPROVED by the Planning
9 Commission of the City of Lake Oswego.
io
ii
i2 DATED this 26t" day of June 2017.
13
14
15
i6 Robert Heape /s/
i� Robert Heape, Chair
i8 Planning Commission
�9
20
z�
22 ATTEST:
23
24 ADOPTION OF FINDINGS AND ORDER— June 26, 2017
2s
26 AYES: Arthur, Baker, E. Brockman, Heape, Sweers, Ward
2� NOES: None
28 ABSTAIN: None
29 EXCUSED: Gaar
LU 17-0022 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 3 of 3
APPROVED: 08/14/2017 EXHIBIT C-1
LU 17-0022
��`�� �� ��'i
ti� �_ CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
� M �
,� , � Planning Commission Minutes
June 26, 2017
������
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Heape called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 380
A Avenue, Lake Oswego, Oregon.
2. ROLL CALL
Members present were Chair Robert Heape, Vice Chair Bill Ward, and Commissioners *Randy
Arthur, Skip Baker, Ed Brockman, and Nicholas Sweers. Commissioner William Gaar was
excused. Council Liaison Theresa Kohlhoff was also present.
*Arrived at 6:45 p.m.
Staff present were Scot Siegel, Planning and Building Services Director; Paul Espe, Associate
Planner; Johanna Hastay, Senior Planner; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney; Iris McCaleb,
Administrative Support; and Stacy Bluhm, Associate Engineer.
3. COUNCIL UPDATE
Councilor Kohlhoff reported that she recently joined the Lake Oswego Amateur Radio
Emergency Services group during one of their practice sessions. She provided a date on
the recent Council discussion on the 30-day limitation on short-term rentals, w ' resulted in
the Council deciding to not move forward in establishing rules that would w short-term
rentals in residential zones. She advised that the Council wants unifo enforcement of illegal
rentals, not a complaint-driven response. Lastly, she shared ther as good reception for
Secondary Dwelling Units (SDU)with the Council. Conversa ' covered reduction of barriers
to building SDUs, such as clear and objective standards possibly some System
Development Charge (SDC) reductions for specific si tions. Regarding the second piece to
the economical housing discussion, she added t the Council was working through some
national strategies and there would be anoth study session possibly in the fall.
In response to a question from Com � sioner Brockman regarding SDU's and if the Council
had considered allowing them w re the owner does not live on-site, Councilor Kohlhoff
shared there was not any di ssion of that. She noted a main objection to short-term rentals
was that it took affordab ousing out of the market. She added that work to update the
housing needs anal s was in progress. Commissioner Brockman noted he had attended a
workshop in Po nd on SDUs with a very knowledgeable instructor who could be invited to
Lake Oswe . In response to a question from Vice Chair Ward if Council had considered
reducin ny of the SDC's, such as the Parks SDC, which was about $11,000 for a single-
fa ' residence, she responded that Council was split at the moment on this topic. She added
ey were working through this challenging topic and recently discussed Transportation SDCs.
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of June 26, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 1 of 3
APPROVED: 08/14/2017
4. CITIZEN COMMENT
None.
5. COMMISSION FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT— GENERAL UPDATES
Chair Heape announced recruitments for City boards and commissions. oted that the
next neighborhood tour was McVey-South Shore and that it would b cheduled in July. He
shared that the Waluga Neighborhood Association was holdin meeting and an ice cream
social on Sunday, August 6 and would like a Planning Co issioner to attend.
Mr. Siegel advised that the recent presentatio the City's Historic Preservation Code was
available on the City's Historic Resource dvisory Board webpage.
6. MINUTES
6.1 Vice Chair Ward mo to approve the Minutes of Mav 22, 2017 as written. Commissioner Baker
seconded the on and it passed 6:0.
6.2 Com � sioner Baker moved to approve the Minutes of June 12, 2017 as written. Commissioner
eers seconded the motion and it passed 6:0.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
7.1 Zoninp Map Amendment from R-3 to R-7.5 (LU 17-0022).
A request from the City of Lake Oswego for proposed amendment to the Zoning Map for 10
Touchstone (21 E05BD00200) and a portion of the public right of way from R-3 (Multi-Family) to
R-7.5 (Single-Family) to correct a mapping error on this property and to make the Zoning Map
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The staff coordinator was Paul Espe, Associate
Planner.
Chair Heape opened the hearing and Mr. Boone outlined the applicable criteria and
procedures. At time of declarations no conflicts of interest were reported and no one
challenged any Commissioner's right to consider the applications.
Staff Report
Mr. Espe presented the staff report. He explained that the proposal implements
recommendations of the 2015 Audit of the Comprehensive Plan (Plan) and Community
Development Coded (CDC), including revisions to the Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning
Map to remove conflicts between the two maps.
Mr. Espe provided some history about the site and when it was platted as part of Mountain
Park, noting the Comprehensive Plan designation at the time of platting was R-7.5. He stated
that changing the zoning designation from R-3 to R-7.5 may reduce the development potential
from three lots to one, but the Comprehensive Plan Map would need to be amended to realize
the three lot potential. He added that the proposed zone change would not result in any non-
conforming land uses on the property as this lot had been developed with a single-family
residence under R-7.5 zoning requirements.
Mr. Espe concluded the staff presentation and provided the staff recommendation:
• The proposed zone change met the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Goals and
Policies and Lake Oswego Code.
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of June 26, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 2 of 3
APPROVED: 08/14/2017
• Amend the Zoning Map on the subject parcel to R-7.5 to be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and present use of the property.
Questions of Staff
None.
Public Testimony
None.
Rebuttal
None.
Questions of Applicant
None.
Deliberations
Chair Heaped opened deliberations.
Vice Chair Ward moved to approve LU 17-0022 as proposed bv staff and to adopt the
Findinqs, Conclusions, and Order. Commissioner Arthur seconded the motion and it passed
6:0.
8. OTHER BUSINESS
8.1 Boones Ferry Road Proiect Nonconformities—Work Session #1 (LU 17-0028)
The Commission reviewed proposed code amendments that would help impleme e
Boones Ferry Road capital improvement project and identified additional infor ation needed
for the public hearing. The staff coordinator was Johanna Hastay, Senio anner.
Chair Heape stated that public comment would be accepted. M oone noted this was a work
session.
Mr. Siegel made a disclaimer: one property along nes Ferry Road, identified as the Jenike
Property, had his wife's business in it; and tha ile he did not believe he had any conflict of
interest, he would excuse himself from the om when that item was discussed.
Comments from Boones rry Road Project Advisory Committee Co-Chairs
Carol n Krebs 16925 Den Court Lake Oswe o 97035, shared her thoughts about how the
planning was going in ards to no net loss of parking. Ms. Krebs replied it was going about
as good as it coul e. She added that from the start there was agreement that public parking
should be incl ed in the Lake Grove Village Center (LGVC) District, but it was proving to be a
challenge find willing property owners since they wanted to develop their property to the
high and best use. She added that the neighborhoods would be thrilled to preserve
i ntified trees.
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of June 26, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT D-1
STAFF REPORT LU 17-0022
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER
City of Lake Oswego Tuan A. Nguyen
ADDRESS File No
10 Touchstone LU 17-0022
TAX MAP TAX LOT AC ORDINANCE
21E05BD 00200 .30 2750
NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATIONS STAFF
Mountain Park Paul Espe, Associate Planner
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION ZONING DESIGNATION
R-7.5 Single-Family R-3 Single-Family
DATE OF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE
June 15, 2017 June 26, 2017
I. APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The City of Lake Oswego is proposing to amend the Zoning Map for 10 Touchstone and a portion
of the public right of way from R-3 (Multi-Family) to R-7.5 (Single-Family) to correct a mapping
error on this property and to make the Zoning Map consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. This
correction, as detailed in Attachment 2 of the ordinance, will be reviewed by the Planning
Commission, which will make a recommendation to City Council on the ordinance after a public
hearing, using the quasi-judicial land use review process.
II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
A. Citv of Lake Oswe�o Communitv Development Code-Procedure (LOC Chapter 50)
LOC 50.07.003.1.b Burden of Proof
LOC 50.07.003.7 Appeals
LOC 50.07.003.15 Major Development (excluding subsection d.ii).
LOC 50.07.003.5 Conditions of Approval
LOC 50.07.003.3 Notice of Public Hearing
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 1 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
LOC 50.07.003.4 Hearings before a Hearings Body
LOC 50.07.003.16.a Legislative Decision Defined (Quasi-judicial Comp. Plan and Zone Map
Amendments to be processed via Major Developments Procedures)
LOC 50.07.003.16.c Required Notice to DLCD
LOC 50.07.003.16.d Planning Commission Recommendation Required
LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision
B. Citv of Lake Oswe�o Comprehensive Plan Policies
Land Use planning
Policies D-1 and D-5 Land Use Administration
Policy E-2(a)(b)(i)(ii D-G) Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Community Culture (Civic Engagement)
Policy 1, 2, 4 and 5 Citizen Involvement
Complete Neighborhoods and Housing
Goals 1-5
Policy A-1c Housing Location and Quality
Policy A-2 Density
Connected Community
Policy C-6 Efficiency
C. Metro Urban Growth Mana�ement Functional Plan
Title 1: Housing [MC 3.07.120.E]
Title 5: Regional Transportation Functional Plan [3.08.510.A]
D. Transportation Plannin� Rule (Chapter 660, Division 12)
OAR 660-12-0060(1)
III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
One of the Planning Commission goals for 2016 is to implement the recommendations of the
2015 Audit of the Comprehensive Plan (Plan) and Community Development Code (CDC), including
revisions to the Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map to remove conflicts between the two
maps. At the Commission's joint meeting with the City Council on January 11, 2016, the Council
directed the Commission and staff to proceed with this work.
The Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan, most recently updated in 2014, guides land use and
development in the city pursuant to State Planning laws and the community's vision. The
Comprehensive Plan Map designates how land can be used and developed over time in
accordance with the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. It assigns land use categories and
planned densities to all land within the city's urban services boundary, including land that is
unincorporated and would join the city upon annexation.
The Zoning Map implements the Comprehensive Plan Map's land use designations, and when
coupled with the Community Development Code identifies the permitted uses and development
standards for each zone. Although some cities use a very general Comprehensive Plan Map with
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 2 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
broad land use categories such as 'commercial', 'industrial', 'low-density residential' and 'high-
density residential', Lake Oswego's Plan Map is much more specific; i.e., instead of'Low Density
Residential', it assigns land as R-15, R-10 and R-7.5, representing a range of low density
designations. In this manner, the Zoning and Plan Map designations are intended to be
consistent, and zoning should not allow densities greater than the Plan.
The map corrections identified during the 2015 Audit were divided into two categories; map changes
that could be made through the City's legislative process, and those that would be reviewed through
the quasi-judicial land use process similar to a development application. This application is for quasi-
judicial map amendments.
DISCUSSION
This proposal is to amend the Zoning Map from R-3 to R-7.5 for this property (10 Touchstone)
discussed below:
The R-7.5 zone is a low density residential zoning designation consisting of single-family homes
on larger lots with densities ranging from four to five dwelling units per acre, with a minimum lot
size of 7,500 square feet. The R-3, R-2, and R-0 zoning classifications are for high density
residential uses, including attached single-family and multi-family dwellings, duplexes and
detached single family homes on small lots. The minimum lot size for R-3 is 3,375 square feet per
lot.
43Ii3
Existin� Condition: This property Mountain Park No 7 ` fn� ,�, '���
Y � ..., - •.;1
has a Comprehensive Plan '� `� . `�,������- - - "
—.... .�..n ..� ,� `�•, _"��.
designation of"Low Density" (R- �'" '`�,
7.5) and a zoning designation of 11Touchstone Y ��� - �m_
�, :
Platted as a part of � :!• .`,:��. 'u �p���
"High Density" (R-3). =p= � • 4�� � �`
� *� ��
Mtn. Park No.8 y ;hg.i; '�� �a- '
Y ;��';•� .���,��`'�,
Kev Issue: The zoning designation of :; �. ��' @
..�'. �`�'�.
R-3 for 11 Touchstone (Lot 102) is _ - _ - _ • � _ ���.��
- - _ ,�. ,
not consistent with the _ -_.•�W . -_• -.•..�_.., - ;;�• �'• 's; ;;`�i'`�;
. �,
Comprehensive Plan designation of t °�W'•."•` "` -°"�'"� ° ;' �`��. • , ,
,t•¢•:•���.����•�M� ���� �ti�:::��;��
,� • .���:�; , �
R-7.5, nor is it consistent with the � �:� '��:� •'�'�'�- �:r ��� ��"` ��.�►��+,�-���ti
��,: ;�;�. ;;-. z
lotting pattern in in the Mountain - � T,` ��� . �j� ���"�" '�,: ' �'` ;�� `� ��
�r ,.p��:< �s�� ..�y;,, 'ii,
�:: �'�°�� - �.�'• � �` �.�:`�� ��;
Park No's. 7 and 8 subdivision plats. ± � ` �",y ° �'�� �•. '�`� � a�"`�°
.y �•�y:&:3� ,;�^"��r �f;`d�db%er ��yv�T .,_.i-a
y .a. r.k`� �' - -y Y.-�,,�'."''4 i;�.
.',;",+�'�k¢'�':ri:�.���
Thesubjectpropertywasplattedin - ��. �-a, _,, ,, ti.�,�_.� .�.�_����,;- d' �
1971 as a part of Mountain Park - -���-� ` � -""��� ���
a�,� �:
.-.;;:�.��"v-. ksi!
No. 8, shortly after Mountain Park
No. 7 was platted in 1970.
While Mountain Park No. 8 was platted along with the Weatherstone Planned Development
(located east of 10 Touchstone) the pattern and size of the lots in the Weatherstone PD are much
smaller. The Mountain Park 7 and 8 subdivisions are a combined low density residential
subdivision with lots ranging from 7,500 and 10,000 square feet. Adjacent lots in the
Weatherstone PD are zoned R-3 and range from two to three thousand square feet. The planned
development approval allowed these lots to be smaller in exchange for open space.
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 3 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
Changing the zoning designation from R-3 to R-7.5 may reduce the development potential from
three lots to one, but would achieve consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and existing
lotting pattern within Mountain Park No.'s 7 and 8. Further, this lot has been developed with a
single family residence under R-7.5 zoning requirements.
,� --- , - ,�
y; -_ _, _' R o `�.��; -1°
332�- �4 ,
38 7' ' r 7� f� �-R-o y' �2:
�- 3f3�8. �-�n -_��_�.r �'- {�o �,�,�
°��33'8 �i _-;-�' i � �'i I 88 �$
t�s1`j�i I�'y_•, �I �' 4,�
_ R-3 ' I 84-' e��— 9g_ 1�11- r��,3- I 84
�i��- � ��.RG''- I ' �� � .. 1��f] �L2 _ -If'�.:dLi . "� R-3
08 3838 1 j � _ _ �o R_3
Ifflf41E5 � ��J _ ��, 1" c�thors[anP {�VTi
-. ' _ $
852- �8.42- . � � �� I �- I_�
��-' - .y f� N� .•�SV �-y �'^n -3 y.w u -.T'.
.7� �_.�'��1.' ,. . � Q: �.��7 I JI- _�I �r..lr ' -y CV� N M ry. M.i."
I �� L
� _ �� - I . . . ..
,-,� i--} 7��-, � I ' R-
���,�. ��� . �.��,� � 12'I ' 11 72 � � � c'' .
n� �g� ���-+ . - � � ` i
�� ''' --�' .,It
3878" � � � ���, �� aa s 1A ; �9�13 ' ��
R-roc �' `� ti �j _ . �-�.5 :- , —-
`p Tca,�UC;HSTt� E �fi w � � R'1�
`5�_- -� T�)�'U'NH0115 S �7 � 396,�• w � -� ,
�,� � A � _ ' �-.; i o -.. .
`9� �_ �. r - -.—.
n:
� 1�4;; _ - ' � _ - 375
�� - � 18 +� 3989 �, •
Staff Recommendation: Amend the Zoning Map on this parcel to R-7.5 to be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and present use of the property.
IV. NOTICE OF APPLICATION
A. Newspaper Notice
On June 6, 2017, a public notice of the proposed Zoning Map amendment and
Planning Commission public hearing was published in the Lake Oswego Review.
B. Measure 56 Notice
On June 6, 2017 a "Measure 56" Notice per ORS 227.186 was sent to the affected
property.
C. DLCD and Metro Notice
Pursuant to LOC 50.07.016, the City provided notice of the proposed Zoning Map
Amendment to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development
(DLCD) and Metro.
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 4 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
V. COMPLIANCE WITH APPROVAL CRITERIA
A. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE—CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL
1. Classification of Amendment Procedure. The proposed amendment is a "quasi-judicial
decision" under LOC 50.07.003.16; it is not a "legislative decision" under the same code
section because the proposal applies to "a single lot".1 No development is proposed for
the site in conjunction with the map changes. While the request is processed as a major
development (LOC 50.07.003.16.a.ii), it is not itself a "development".
2. Identification of Criteria ("Malor Development" Standards Not Applicable). Although this
request follows the review procedure of a major development under LOC 50.07.003.15,
the "major development" criteriaZ are not applicable to the rezone. The applicable
criteria for rezone are contained in the "Land Use Planning" Chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan.
3. Goals and Policies (Lake Oswe�o, METRO, and LCDC) Applicable. An amendment of the
Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map must comply with the rezone criteria set forth
in the Comprehensive PIan3, the Transportation Planning Rule, and Metro code.
The applicant has submitted sufficient information to address the criteria listed in
Applicable Regulations, Sections B-D, pg. 2-3, above.
1 "A'Legislative Decision' is an amendment to the policies, procedures, standards,criteria or Map designations of
the Comprehensive Plan,and this Community Development Code, unless such amendment applies to a small
number of identified properties only or is required to effect a particular development permit application." (LOC
50.07.003.16.) "An amendment to the policies, procedures, standards,criteria or Map designations of the
Comprehensive Plan,or this Community Development Code which is not a 'legislative decision'as defined in
subsection (1)of this section shall be considered "quasi-judicial"and shall be processed as a major
development." (LOC 50.07.003.16.)
2 Section 50.07.003.15 Review Criteria for Major Developments.
A major development shall comply with:
1. Any applicable regulatory policies of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan;
2. The requirements of the zone in which it is located;
3. The Development Standards applicable to major developments;
4. Any additional statutory or Lake Oswego Code provisions which may be applicable to the specific Major
development application,such as the variance provisions,the Streets and Sidewalks Ordinance(LOC
Chapter 42),the Tree Cutting Ordinance(LOC Chapter 55),the Solar Access Ordinance(LOC Chapter 57),
and the Historic Ordinance(LOC Chapter 58);and
5. Any conditions of approval imposed as part of an approved ODPS or prior development permit affecting the
subject property.
3 Amendments of Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps for a single or small number of identified parcels are not
"legislative decisions" per LOC 50.07.003.16.Therefore the "Legislative Decision Criteria" under LOC
50.07.003.16 are not applicable.
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 5 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
B. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Staff has identified the following Comprehensive Plan Policies applicable to this proposal.
Following each policy or group of policies is a response:
Land Use Plannin�- Land Use Administration
Land Use Administration Policies D-1 and D-5
Comprehensive Plan Amendments: Policy E-2(a)(b)(i)(ii D-G)
Policv D-1: Coordinate the development and amendment of City plans and actions
related to land use with other affected agencies, including county, state, Metro,federal
agency, and special districts.
Policv D-5: Review and update the Comprehensive Plan periodically to ensure it:
a. Remains current and responsive to community needs
b. Contains reliable information and provides dependable policy direction;and,
c. Conforms to applicable state law, administrative rules and Metro requirements; and,
Finding: As identified in Part V of the staff report, required public hearing notification was
provided to Clackamas County, DLCD, and Metro consistent with this policy. Pursuant to
Policy D-5, the proposed ordinances are based on a review of the Comprehensive Plan and
Zoning Maps to correct Zoning Map designation errors.
Conclusion: The proposal is consistent with Policies D-1 and D-5.
Policy E-2: Maintain residential neighborhoods at existing zone and plan density designations
except where...
Finding: The proposed amendment does not increase allowable density. See below, for
findings relating to decrease in density.
(D) A proposed plan/map density change shall address the effect of the
change on overall land supply and shall comply with the Metro Housing
Rule(OAR 666-07-000J;
Finding: The purpose of the Metropolitan Housing Rule (MHR) is to ensure the
opportunity for an adequate number of needed housing units and the efficient use of
land within the Metropolitan Portland (Metro) urban growth boundary. The MHR
requires that Lake Oswego provide the opportunity for at least 50 percent of new
residential units to be attached single family housing or multiple family housing and
for an overall density of ten or more dwelling units per net buildable acre [OAR 660-
07-035(3)]. By zoning land to accommodate the required mix and density of housing,
the City allows a range of needed housing types while providing certainty in the
development process.
The Complete Neighborhoods and Housing section of the City's Comprehensive plan
discusses Metro's twenty year population and employment forecast for the Portland
Metro area in 2012 and is based on expected land supply and demand. The forecast
was then distributed among the local jurisdictions in the region.
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 6 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
The 2035 forecast outlined in the Comprehensive Plan is within the range that the
city used in the Housing Needs analysis for the Comprehensive plan update, which
directs the location of future population and job growth within the Urban Services
Boundary.
The current request is for a zone change from R-3 to R-7.5 on 10 Touchstone in the
Mountain Park Neighborhood.
Multiple family housing is an allowed use in the existing R-3 zone but is not allowed in
the R-7.5 zone. The primary purpose of the R-7.5 zone is to provide lands for single-
family detached residential development with densities ranging from two to five
dwelling units per gross acre.
Changing the zone from R-3 to R-7.5, on a 0.3 acre property that is currently occupied
by a single family dwelling, would result in the potential loss of three lots, which is
negligible, as it is approximately 0.06% of the surplus of 561 units in the land use
category that includes R-3, identified in Exhibit F-1, the City's 2013 Comprehensive Plan,
Housing Needs Analysis,Table 20). The housing needs analysis indicates that 65.2
percent of the housing stock consists of multi-family or attached dwellings. The
reduction of three units would not adversely affect the availability of multi-family
housing stock.
In regards to MHR requirement of 10 DU/acre [OAR 660-07-035(3): "an overall density
of ten or more dwelling units per net buildable acre"], the 2013 housing needs analysis
found that the City met the 10 DU/acre requirement. See Exhibit F-1, pgs. 26 and 31.
Since this finding was based upon the Comprehensive Plan's map designation for the
Urban Service Boundary(not the zoning designations), changing the zone designation to
conform to the Comprehensive Plan map designation would have no effect on City's
compliance with the 10 DU/acre determination found for the 2013 comprehensive plan.
This criterion is met.
(E) The applicant shall demonstrate a public need for the proposed
plan/map density change and that the proposed change will best meet
the need when compared to alternatives.
Finding:The City's Housing Needs Analysis, June 26, 2012 (updated March 19, 2013),
Table 20, categorizes the housing needs into three Land Use Classifications:
• Low Density (large lot single family dwelling in R-7.5, R-10, and R-15 zones)
• Medium Density (small lot single family dwelling in R-3*, R-5, and R-6 zones)
• High Density (multi-family dwellings in R-0, R-2, R-2.5, GC, NC/R-0, OC/R-3, EC, HC,
CR&D, EC/R-0, and OC zones)
[*The Comprehensive Plan, Vol. 1, pg. 95 has different land use classifications for
Medium and High Density residential zones:
• Low Density: R-15, R-10, R-7.5
• Medium Density: R-6, R-5, R-DD
• High Density: R-3, R-2, R-0, R-W
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 7 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
The Housing Needs Analysis is used to support the Housing Policies and Comprehensive
Plan Map designations in the comprehensive plan. This report considers the R-3 zone
as High Density, however, relying on the findings for Medium Density under the
Housing Needs Analysis.]
Under Policy E, "public need" means the public's need for housing within one of the
above three Land Use Classification categories. The Housing Needs Analysis was used
to support the Comprehensive Plan Map designations, showing that the designations
complied with the needed housing requirements.
"This report provides an evaluation of Lake Oswego's 20-year housing needs to
inform the update of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, it provides the
technical background to assist the City and community in developing policies that
will implement the community's vision for 2035 while complying with state housing
goals and requirements. This report was originally drafted during winter/spring
2011 and was updated in June 2012 primarily to reflect most recent Census
information and 2012 median family income levels. The report was updated again
in March 2013 to reflect consistency with the Metro adopted 2035 forecast. The
Housing Needs Analysis will be adopted by reference when the Comprehensive Plan
is adopted by ordinance in 2013, and serve as a factual basis for goals and
policies."
Needed Housing Analysis, pg. 5
(http://www.ci.oswe�o.or.us/sites/default/files/fileattachments/plannin�/web
pa�e/11839/housin� needs analysis updated march 19 2013.pdf?t=1497400
284023)
Rezoning the subject site to conform to the comprehensive plan map designation
therefore complies with the needed housing requirements. Although R-3 housing is
also counted and considered "needed housing," the City has met the R-3 housing needs
per the Needed Housing Analysis and the 2013 comprehensive plan map's R-3
designations. Conformance of a parcel's zoning with its comprehensive plan map
designation better meets the public need to assure that the comprehensive plan is
implemented.
(F) The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed density is appropriate for
the location given public facilities, natural resources and hazards, road or transit
access and proximity to commercial areas and employment concentrations;and,
Finding:The proposed rezone from R-3 to R-7.5 would result in a decrease in density.
Redevelopment of this site at the R-7.5 density results in a decrease in potential units
for this parcel and thus a corresponding reduction in the potential number of
occupants on the site. A reduction of occupants on the site would not result in the
existing capacity of the public facilities being exceeded; in fact, the effect on public
facilities would be a reduction from that would occur if developed to R-3 density. The
site is located close to transit facilities and commercial areas and there are no
resources or natural hazards associated with this site. Future development on the site
will be required to comply with the applicable development standards in the
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 8 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
Community Development Code and other regulations applicable to new development
or redevelopment. This standard is met.
(GJ The applicant shall demonstrate that development allowed by the proposed
zone/map residential density change will be compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood, or can be made compatible pursuant to development review of
an individual application pursuant to the criteria contained in the Community
Development Code.
Finding:The proposed Zoning Map change from the high density Residential R-3 zone,
to the low density R-7.5 zone, results in a residential density that is more compatible
with the existing development pattern of the Mountain Park No's 7 and 8 subdivisions
than the current zoning designation of R-3 because an R-7.5 zone, allowing single-
family residential on the site, would be consistent with Mountain Park 7 and 8's
combined low density residential subdivision with lots ranging from 7,500 and 10,000
square feet. This standard is met.
CommunitY Culture—Civic En�a�ement
Policies 1, 2, 4 and 5.
Policy 1: Provide opportunities for citizen participation in preparing and revising local
land use plans and ordinances.
Policy 2: Provide citizen involvement opportunities that are appropriate to the scale of a
given planning effort. Large area plans, affecting a large portion of community residents
and groups require citizen involvement opportunities of a broader scope than that
required for more limited land use decisions.
Policy 4: Encourage citizens to participate through their neighborhood without excluding
participation as individuals or through other groups.
Policy 5:Seek citizen input through service organizations, interest groups and individuals,
as well as through neighborhood organizations.
Findings: The CDC, which implements the Comprehensive Plan, contains requirements for
a citizen involvement program that clearly defines the procedures by which the general
public will be notified in the on-going land use planning process and enables citizens to
comprehend the issues and become involved in decision making. All required notifications
for input as specified in the Code were provided during this process, including noticing to
all recognized neighborhood associations and business organizations and public hearings
will be held before the Planning Commission and City Council. Through this outreach the
City hosted a meeting with and received input from members of the Mountain Park
Neighborhood Association. Therefore, the process followed for these amendments is in
compliance with the above cited Comprehensive Plan policies. This criterion is met.
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 9 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
Complete Neighborhoods and Housing
Goals 1-5 Policies A-1c Policy A-2
Housing Goals
1. Provide the opportunity for a variety of housing types in locations and environments
to meet the needs and preferences of current and future households
2. Provide opportunities for housing at price and rent levels commensurate with the
needs of current and anticipated residents.
3. Preserve and enhance the character of existing neighborhoods
4. Provide opportunity for needed housing while using land and public facilities as
efficiently as possible and facilitating greater walking, biking and transit use.
5. Foster distinct and vibrant neighborhood mixed use villages to serve the daily needs
of nearby residents.
Housing Policies
Policy A-1c: When reviewing requests for residential zone changes, in addition to
applying the criteria outlined in the Land Use Planning Policies the following locational
criteria apply:
a. Low Density Residential
Density Classification Minimum Spuare Feet of Area per Unit
R-15 15,000 sq.ft.
R-10 10,000 sq.ft.
R-7.5 7,500 sq.ft.
Low density is intended for areas:
i. Where the predominate land use is low density housing;
ii. Where transportation routes are primarily collectors and local streets;
iii. Where public services are adequate but development constraints may
exist; and
iv. Where less intense residential development can better adapt to the
development opportunities and constraints posed by natural resources
and hazards.
Finding: The R-7.5 zone would allow a lower density upon redevelopment in an area
where the predominate land use is designated R-7.5 (Low Density). The site is located
on a local street and public services are available. Abutting properties are developed
as low density subdivisions. Natural resources on the site will be subject to Sensitive
Lands standards regardless of the increase in potential dwelling units. This criterion is
met.
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 10 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
1. Policy A-2: Develop and maintain regulations and standards that ensure residential
densities are appropriately related to site conditions including slopes,potential
hazards, natural features, and the capacity of public services.
Finding: The site is currently developed as a single family residence and is connected
to public services. The current single family residential use demonstrates that low
density, single family residential (R-7.5) use could occur on the site appropriate to site
conditions, e.g., potential hazards, natural features, and are within the capacity of
public services. This criterion is met
Connected Community
Efficiencv C-6
Goal C- Efficiency
1. Policy G6:Require applicants for zone change requests and conditional use
permits to determine the resulting extent of impacts to the transportation system
and provide mitigation deemed appropriate by the City to maintain transportation
efficiency.
Finding: The proposed zoning map amendment results in a slight reduction in potential
development density on the subject lot. Therefore, any impact on the transportation
system would be positive or neutral. This criterion is met.
C. METRO URBAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT FUNCTIONAL PLAN
The Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan was approved November 21, 1996 by the
Metro Council, and became effective February 19, 1997. The purpose of the plan is to implement
the Regional Urban Growth Goals and Objectives (RUGGO), including the 2040 Growth Concept.
The following findings address compliance with relevant Titles of the Functional Plan.
Title 1 —Housing Capacity(MC 3.07.120.E].
E. A city or county may reduce the minimum zoned capacity of a single lot or parcel so
long as the reduction has a negligible effect on the city's or county's overall
minimum zoned residential capacity.
Finding: Changing the zone from R-3 to R-7.5, on a 0.3 acre property that is currently occupied by
a single family dwelling, would result in the potential loss of three lots. The residential dwelling
capacity and projected housing demand for 2010-2035 (Table 20)found in the City of Lake
Oswego Housing Needs Analysis states that the overall minimum zoned residential capacity for all
zones is 5,063 units. The proposed zone change would result in a reduction to 5060 units, a
0.060% decrease resulting in a negligible impact to the residential capacity. This criterion is met.
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 11 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
Title 5 Regional Transportation Functional Plan [MC 3.08.510.A]
Amendment of Comprehensive Plans
When a city or county proposes to amend its comprehensive plan or its components, it shall
consider the strategies in subsection 3.08.220A as part of the analysis required by OAR 660-012-
0060. Metro Code 3.08.510.A.
Finding: This standard outlines Transportation System Management strategies and access
management improvements, transit bicycle and pedestrian system improvements, traffic calming
and other land use strategies outlined in OAR 660-012-0035(2). This would include connectivity
improvements to provide parallel arterials, collectors and local streets that include pedestrian
and bicycle facilities. This standard is applicable when there is an amendment of"the
comprehensive plan or its components." An amendment of the zoning map is not an
amendment of the comprehensive plan or components of the comprehensive plan. Therefore
this standard does not apply.
(Further, staff notes that the rezone brings the zoning into conformance with the comprehensive
plan designation. Thus there is no necessity to reconsider transportation strategies that were
based upon the comprehensive plan designation. Finally, the proposed rezone is for one 0.30
acre parcel and would result in a reduction in potential density that would reduce any potential
any impacts to these transportation systems.)
D. TRANSPORTATION PLANNING RULE-OAR 660 12-0060)
The Transportation Planning Rule implements Statewide Planning Goa112 (Transportation)to
provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. If an
amendment to a land use regulation (including a zoning mapJ would significantly affect an
existing or planned transportation facility, then the City must(either find that the land uses will
be consistent with the planned function, capacity and performance of the transportation
facility]or put in place measures(to improve the transportation facilityJ, unless the
amendment is allowed under section (3J�inadequate facilities but amendment does no
additional harmJ, (9J(rezoning consistent with comprehensive plan and Transportation System
Plan (TSP)], or(10J(map amendment affecting only land entirely within a multimodal mixed-use
area(MMAJ, and other requirements]of this rule.
Finding: This standard is met for any one of the following reasons: a reduction in potential
numbers of vehicles using a transportation facility (1) will not "significantly affect" a
transportation facility; (2) is automatically consistent with the maximum planned function,
capacity and performance of the transportation facility; and (3) the rezoning from R-3 to R-7.5 is
consistent with the comprehensive plan designation (R-7.5), does not change the comprehensive
plan map, and is therefore also consistent with the TSP.
Other Considerations
The proposed zoning amendment does not result in any existing land use or development
becoming non-conforming. The subject property is currently occupied by a single family dwelling,
a use that is permitted in the R-7.5 zone.
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 12 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
VI. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the information presented in this report, staff recommends approval of the proposed
zone change.
EXHIBITS
This staff report and all exhibits referenced below are part of the record and can be found by
visiting the land use webpage for the case file. A link is provided at the end of this report.
A. Draft Ordinance
A-1 Draft Ordinances 2750 (dated 06/15/17)
Attachment 1: City Council Findings and Conclusions [Not yet available]
Attachment 2: Proposed Zoning Map Amendments (dated 06/15/17)
B. Findin�s, Conclusions and Order [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
C. Minutes [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
D. Staff Reports [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
E. Graphics/Plans
E-1 Comprehensive Plan Map, 03/21/17
E-2 Zoning Map, 03/21/17
F. Written Materials
F-1 2013 Comprehensive Plan, Housing Needs Analysis,Table 20 (June 26, 2012; updated
March 19, 2013)
G. Letters [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
Staff reports, exhibits and notices can be found by visiting the land use case webpages for
LU 17-0022.
Use the link below to visit the City's "Project" page. In the "Search" box enter the land use case
number then press "Submit":
http://www.ci.oswe�o.or.us/prolects
Planning Commission Public Hearing EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 13 OF 13 LU 17-0022
June 26, 2017
�
W.PAGIFIG s rvcTo EEi au ory ¢uoomcTON > .� - ����s � - ���� �30o m c� x zzos ��30o zo ��x3� �� $ �, Na� a ° iii.. � i .�.<a .,,m \���
r � 9I� I ,�yJ , S � $ awnno
�I T I �f � iiaia EXIT L L ^ = P iiao .� � ._a�o � � � ' s s� x � iao, . � s . iiao, � :e . iia�. BU�oiNGTON SIkEET a a �E Dft ^ �a iixai iixao � � PIPT�NE _ a � .�� o m �30 .,, pPPS�NE o .iss nH000 � q \ \�� -
f I J I I ' 296A � _ iia., iiaaa � P iiaai ian iia 9 iia�a iiao, u i �o�.,. P �.o � HIL� q0 \
r.r> "s
II I I I I : ., ., y � � ., ., ., ��aaa . ��ag ��,., .is,. _ _ .z... - �3., . \"�N
; ; a
I - �
'--'--�J . .. .� ., < < . � ., .. � ��aa., m ��3aa ��3�3 ��3oa rn� .� .. .�. �
x .g= � .,, .,
9 °s c
' o �
r � w ��� �' � '^ covorwoo stueer coaoNnoo �� '� _ - ���� �`�n
I � p ii,i� ��R . _ ii,aa ii, - i , �P THEEi CORONA�O J -� .,, � � �J� J � ri� � Q¢ ���
I a h ,,,,, a = . _ ,,,o, „o SIkEET ,,,a ��R(>ryA o A , 3 A v I z ,ao =
� „ , . =e = e = �oR�,�Aoo s,kEE, », „ � � oo� < ��� , 33 �
,,,,, ,,,,, ,,,,. _ � ., x ���� _ TRYON CREEK „ 3 0 > +o
, �, > > > 13, � a .,.., RESIDENTIAL
� o . . ,
m x ,
p,Ci C� .� „», „�3, „�ao � „�,o � = a ,, s �oa��Aoo ��� o . �� m �. ��— m .,., .,.E.
� , e
�r g g i „so� L „ . . �, „��o .,. s,kEE, c 1 m
� - � a - � ., ., ., : ii� o��F rye = - N
� i .. . .'. .,
... itsas « �i�a .� �., r. �8
iisse « . � �� ., , .,
t5 +� lSA� � Q' „�:� '° � ` � ''" .' : c, .� a: '�:z �ie � e „ ' _ e ., ,.,, e „a,o STATE NATURAL lF, m e , .:
„�:, " u
a e �
„a� i �
p h
� � � ' �i � a ' „a,a 3AA 33A 3A: " 3�0 �,�N.
„s,� � »soa „s,s �99 vncuNn srkeer vnc . .r ., _ ., � .a � „�a, ' e s i �, „�o� � SRs �..s o e � � „a,� AREA 90, ���55 o m �� - ,3a,Am%� ��"
i ; c
33
���s�� I
„s:� � „�,> ; ' �, ,aa� as. ��„ ,; . .,,A. z.� �
� sis
� � � .:�, iisii uNn siuE[r vncuNn � z.3i , � T �� aao .� ��a . ��sos ry a
iisii �. ., ..,
i „s,�_ �, I / _ a �P > > x� - � °, < < o e e e „�09 1�� . ,,,� ,,,,, P N a�oo�N�T�No 00 s ft. area er unit
o ,
. �
. �
� �
I _ P �
� � _ �� � �� „an �s�� = e e „am s,kEE, „6,6 _ _ _ e rss a k.q ��0 3� - 5,0 q. p
0
„o
� ,a
I � �
P
r 0
� , e .: _ = a =_. . e e �A��� � , � �, a � „ � �� o s' .,..s
P „o
I =P >,, „:, m _ e
m
I �� � R 15 �
� I ii�o,� � I {J( iie— r . . � e e iic . . P iieu m � iuu A STHEET JQ� y ive G� O� �� �oa a3 aav 5 _
f � � � �sos � � ii,o, . , axx
I icii vFSTA .� ., ., . � - .� ., _ _ ., _ - . ns couar � „o,� „oo, „sos , � P 9p ' oasE NATURE iiaz� m e��� „ Au� ii.n � �� ii.ii ,w �y�P o
v
p e � �
s � � e a e e
I ,n,s ' _ � ' > • : " � : a e e e � e � ' .' , !� � „sos „o, � .. .. ran�nccEss CENT ''
� � � w ,
�
s
ER N
I � �, a :� :e e e e e e srueEr ,.;� vesTn s�eeer ��� LJ s� . , _ °°� ` ;p°� c � . , „�,o = ,,, „ .,,� ,s :� z >> .,o., .,o�@"� .,00 ,,,as ._ ._ - 1 00 s ft. area er unit
,�' � � z e e > ; � _ _ ,,,o, _ _ � o „�,a , �a s,kEE, �o„ „ a ,s � z 3 0 . R-10 , a p
� � :_, = e � � ,,,,> > _ _� _ � e � e = „_, �� �Esra REF � �� _ � M �EE e�o P ,o -
_ .:,
»� p
k"h
�
O O
'� i�aa ' s : ` ���39 � >»xa e � � • � ' �� o ���oo TREET � RiVE STEPHENSON , . c - sso �q 5 ;o, �9mR`..
o a� �:, ' � �_ � � Z� : �� .e e e „6^'� irr�r ii.i, DESCH � > I o STE O A oox .,, ao
'£ ry iiaxo s �.'.� _ .s. ii�a� ' .., � �� �_� e 8 8 e e e e e e e . � ,� ia iea, RA 00 ( iises HE 9 UNP � .. �
S �a'� K ' <P � s'�°
4: en r.,:.�.��� s�rvt.vso.0 �., �:� e:. .. � �. . . ,...r,� _ ' �` � ii J % NSO . 4 `,JP� ' o o iis ROA� . .,
,n -- � '_S .- v c a ..� � iici ii x i ' I '1'
� sM1s
x �
� x . I
� a A � �s J iinc i � � S _ I � �� .
Nb
s��'z `
�o a »
J A
i�
a�
F
R ��
¢ �nzi r°�u m J
�` s � +
� ��. w r zi� - - �+ �'
�
E m m � wrcEc9wcOo v�ro. m rY z. m , F . -J. 'i�9 r ew
� � N �
� _ _ iisee
rm � :. ,. . ii.is v� � �
r.,:.�n�i. � r,:.�v�i. � . .. :< A _ > > ri i� x
� � = � REs� „�, � „ ��s�� „6,s .zz.. ,� R-7. 00
��
y ' o
� �� p M _ ft ,r 5 7,5 sq. ft. area per unit
i ,�¢ „�„ , s� � a a _ � � _ .� _ �. m _ � o �° =„o - � ,, � „s, � „s,o s ����� ., ,sa .�
s - ,� RE � � titi -
� � ti _ _ � > > � o �
�1/1 , o �
= � 1�■ _ u a a _ _ _ _ � „ �EoswEoo � srF � � � �� = � "� � ,�°�° - � ���ao�R zz ���
_ , w . � � P
MT.AMIWiEA : , � u P ' ,�
WAY � � 6
eos
� iias n o �° N � � e ii. . ".. , sa
��s� LESSER a "9's s I »sox IiI�PLGO HI��LGO � �s 's EoswEco 'a a EN50 STkEE ' �, � ' � a _ a - - - ii.00 .'. m �� MILITARY ' �, _ o��� Hn�ar�nn r�� �� s � ��s ��sxo
� >>sas �sao - � � x > 4�m �� zz �� � �� - „,3,�as a�a,a3 -. _ - $ . _ "e Poyy ROAo ��sa >>s�� �P 9 �� o
6 >>sas >>sxs izooe i �o� ss s� s, �� � - " = e "e' ,� _ STEPIi h - .io �.a� fq �oe ii�xa �
i ,o, �, , 3s „P,� ,P�o , „�,- � � e � � e ENso� =�--I . _ . °P m „ . „ „s�o R-6 6,000 s ft. area er unit
� „s�s „sso 3 a �� , � � „A�, _ � „P„ � . , , _ .,� ,s�o
„s,P < < �„P3> > �� , , ,,,o a' p
�,.�� a ,o, sP ss �, �o � � > > > sTEP�E�soN o o ,,,,o
,���, ,�o�s „s„ oo �� ,� ,. „P„ - � = srREE, � „ �� o � ,,,
i s o� „ „ a � 3, „so P „A„ � „e ,, �a.,wo ,,,3 ,os
1 , „s, „�„ . � e �
,.. ,, �� , „s,� „ � � �� �'
,., , ,o o R-O� � _ „A,� v
� x oo� ' KERR x �. - o �ao �..
I z.z iz.z iz.i. ix oia H a 6 � ios C� 0i a a as a � 3, iisi .�sarvr r�.v 3 . iie, iie,o iie,3 iiaas iia iia.,o iieai � iieaa Z � _ _ ` iieie �iei. iiPxs ' v . � _. n .z z � ���ss m �� za
P 9 NATIIRAL
'$ �x aaa �x o33 � z.ze �x ox� �x oao 3 P '�6 AREA aa � ^ ' _ ., ,���t � - .,, ,� �s _ - 6 a� M z �r.o
z.» x o.o �o iii s � �� ��sa� _. Q ry ��� � � � � e ; . .. - P „ � o
,o� „s3o s� . � � , o�, , 3, R-5 5 000 s ft. area er unit
� , P , q• p
�soN�A�E � ��k s� m ,,,°°
I izizz PORTLANDCOMMUNITYCOLLEGE � „ " oa " a � 9 ' ' �� , " � "s's 9 � 9 � -' >>sx, „g3P " G o�c� ncox M y
�,�� �,�. ,�,o� ,�,00 — , , � „� � � 33 , ,a � � R,-3�° s���A�� ,�RRA�Fg s�� s r = - P �:� o a , � Aoo q A ,o
,i,o MT.SYLVANIACAMPUS x ° ,g iz�z. � R�P - "�p 2 �o
� HpH
, p , o
p , , . , �
w '
w �� o o'
' x�oe �x�„ �x��a �x� LESSER g s NP sEry SUM MlT � � �5 o xx z �J� _. . � i „ . z., i e e z�z ��sa� »sz ' ' � P � m ' y ��s�sxs °i' _ m .z.� �� ��ex'pp� s
y � �
w ` c N 9 oa
I «., s�., �x�v izizi PARN �� ii � ' x� '� 3 a,� iz�.. �EN _ couRi � e c � , � o p ��P� e3s eRevmnn e o� o
� E�., PA��A��, „o ,� ,�„s �,��� ,�,,, ,�„o ,�, �� „ , � ,� R=7.5 6 a �EoswE�o ,P�� �P , P ., ,�� e z � "`°� e o .0�� f�-3 3,375 sq. ft. area per unit
�x xos _ �x�as �a �a a � ^ ii ° x s �s x� xs�a�� z�� "" �z�.� .� �,;5 . � ^ o „ o o,�s RIVERDALE m sxa "' exs
I �x xoo � �zz�� � '� ' ' �� �a �s �� s � 10 x e �a �s xs ' ' - � � � „ e ,. o� ELEMENTARV Z eRevmuu �
- _ ° ' 6 s �x �� u �zia3 z.�s ,q _ . SCHOOL
_ „ �x xn ' - _ , - '" s. " „� g�F2 e 'o y e iww �o � Q x. z a� _ GRRT . izi3z g ' .� _ � y �zz � s o oro3o �
W���s ,� � = s� ti a � � � ,� o, �/LG R-2.5 2,500 sq. ft. area per unit
j HnirvEs " s ,a �� �� a a ' ° ' r����� ��� g � � � ' �z�.� h z�.s � zw � -z �osaunst6 's.A o a .63� o I i /
6 i y - z�a .. _ = ixaxo STH xi a gBC�e x �s �P xo a� a ini P�� � � t� zz�e z a ,� zz. , AY � .rn � .,, NE .5 � y p5NUP5 �6 � ��
- _ _ _ - �° „ ,g ��q ,P '° ° 6 s 's "" � _ ,,,-s „ -' � � s� TRYON CREEK STATE NATURALAREA ° oro� ��
I _ - ., i .. n. xi xs xe xi i3 RE2a xe i , GE '. „ 4 e � ro 2o i2o
a E " � n
�=�=s s,� P PPR�a,o =_ _ ��� �,,,� = 9 z= ,.. � �oRaE. , � �,o % R_2 (Minimum area per unit
i ,�,�� ,�„� . ,�, �,». ,�, , , ,�„� „ qR q �, �, , , ,°a �� � ,s „ M��ARr ' s =_ ,,,. � � � «. ,,, � �, _ ,','3J � �N�� ,,, � � m �. ,�3, ��� %' determinted b FAR
w , � �
� ,H o
, , o�s,
h
> �
���,�ER � = o � ` z� _ �,,� ��
i ,�� iz»> r� N �od � p<r'� ' . :a aeECNa T as�nRrc � z a..a. ' .= z . _ zE zz�i F OPHELIA S ., o o � �x>>� iz.z. �
�x a�s �x a�s �x a�� . InNE h`2 , �. � § + z , izz.o eae rnnn
Ea T= � �� y �
� ao = ,�,�o m ,�,�, v '„ ° , ej s ,, „ J�, �o�Rr „ � -� �A�„��ooA ��� „ ry , z� � N � a o ., • - �_�__ '
_��. �' ,=a,� 35 s , s ,=»s �, _ _� , �a � - ,_, s o � Minimum area er unit
�x aa . iz�iz e . ffi kE . ,n.. . , _ � �'L26 - -� �z l �,
,�„s ,�„ ,�„o ,.,a s s, ra, RF P o � � ,. <�e: -� o � „3. _ � p
I m a �,.» � � � _,_ � �� . oR��ARo � � s �a�r �,,, „o �' R 0
�, ,�,�� �,�� a =, = S P� � _ . „�, ,E. 4y R-Q o , �a., � �,� a� �=�.s aaE�,�� 2 �
i ,���� ,��o, ,�„P ,.�s �� � �ER�aN,E' „ __� s�MM. e ,_ °� g a%,� determinted by FAR)
� _ ; , , , ,.� ,�,,, T � ao�, �����.} s z, , a a, ,�,,, < a e P e � „a e �,,,. A .�, p �,,.E . �,�
so����Ew¢ �_,�, � '� �,s ,�,,, � „ ., ,sa =� ,� ,., _ 'E -� ,., �N �___� aaE�,�� �
SrkEEr . �s =� .R-0� a�N � F� �,,.� � R �
W I iz», t an ve x°' m weco s�mmir n , �A '�c z.z. C � � -, PF 'ti
sournviEW � , M b �n �rx ��� i . . z.iz , ., ,� z. ��f <F ' _ � �
F- '���s �x s:+o _ '��° z P� �x su PORTL4NDCOMMUNITYCOLLEGE �� '' ak .� , . ns .. - � z= , o "s o � Fqi�iNc coUaT zz3i x � � �
Q = ,���� � 3z, 3 „ ,o s ��� �o �,.s s oo � � o„ ===3 � � Waterfront Cabana District
I , s _ ,a ,3 � �o .� ,s �o �, s �,... m „3. R-W
F- ` � MT.SYLVANIACAMPUS �� � '0 ° " � �" s iz.z ' ' '1 a ' �
�x so z.,a. � � , �x v3z .a n ,3.,. - e P _i za v ��-�- - .i,z. e oie3� �
ix soe o i � ,�G '�'✓'. o ` 2e�
� �x,ao . x,.. x,aa OR s ., v �
, c�� _ - Peter Kerr
�so, z»> . H
A ARD+o « P
y ����J ry z z e _
�TS` �a *' zs.
I o �
5 G r izz.i
� $ � � e r .r 9i�
s 32 c I
zs. . s 2 es� �ea
� �2y � �
zciz a 2
� s Y Park
� ary,,
� ` ' � ,2, : �z, ..+ „
PP = , �
" ,sa.,
., _ ^ •s �ea��a
33<. ..3,s
„-
" m � N � "" 1\....O„ .E,. `
,o,�gr
c
;f
E
,,,
.y �, w , � d � crecic s- '- ,o
�, -a
�
, Q " �
v z 2
�
a tx NORTHGATE
� " 6 �°asn
ru e � � �
L1J I izsz� �x sxs izsi zc� s �. �x s�� a NOVP a o ° t = e rvoomn�ms . ., o .r i a. .,o ' aVE o�z " F w 1
F- � ` � � � zEz` �zE s s �� . `. o ,,,..,, �oa � , o� , �szs ��., - , -� �aEEN� , Elk Rock
m � , � u �
Z zs» _ Eosw "'"� ,� = a � ,s a , 3 �F , . ,: .m o e ,uo a - �
i s
�P
. . < R
i
— .. �� zE�s � .,,..,, .o .� �z..� Island
V�e .. z , ��e a �a'
zE� s e
,i�, r
� . o
� u .s, .<�o .,
` 3 , .. ,...�,.N ,..
z�. ,i s„ ,� +o.� aa .,,,,, „ � P
izw> > K � ao ss . ' o
QP � a
ee.� ractecR
d �.e >s-s co
e�s
s �.,, zz qYnNrE sn_'+a Q
_,. „o EA��E � COMMERCIAL
: � � � � �o
s � R s =�
- � o�F � s R��E p`�
� �.E sPNA „ P ,�� PaRkAP.s �, a o e �
�, e , _
„ s s , � � s=o
e <� �, „ », 5 -
„ q �
,� , � � k�oER��E ,
� ,,. , o � � ,
� s � ,,,, ,,,. „� � „E se�, * ,,. $ ss osA 3 � so s� » � _, _ �°F x o�� ��� a o„ _ � .
� Kk�sE �� a 3� sP,� , , a� �° m..,. � ��M P��� n =_ � o AF � � £ �, �
R���E � s,�o, � � . _ . �
< as o °� , s = � � �,33 .E s
F . 36 w ,
RK rs �p r �E ,
�
,o �
oH�E ,o, � �RK � o � ,ps � z
� ,P,� , , � ."��s � a ,s��� �� ,«. z :� a
' ' ' SFq�� - � �x ixe so � . " . 3
_ _ .a� , PNA s � ;��
I ���R�� �
_ � �
, ., Mixed Commercial District
� N iz,
�z. O
}-- r. > >0 3as �_\'x
z ,oa � M C
__ , P ` 3 � , .�,
��a� � z
N � , y
'E �
�, ,P
F ,�,s
_ _: 4 o,p9
F ,�, , �_�_�
�;{ - � ro � _
E E �P
� z[z a
rr )
% �
n N . � '��`
IT 293No /1�
cu, 4
e � �
o � �
C'� � . / n <, z .
0 00 , 9
r .� „ „ „� so . A ss,z 3 . �
3 0 0�,
,�,�, �, ��s�:U _
e »s ` _
,o ,a�P ,
—����-____ P �a aas � a � ,,, o WCOLEGE�
� _ , _ tzo �v6��O . - E . nz� a m z iz,
� po„��q sourHwoo�o , . _ _ _ `aa �l- ��� . a r "`\
s oH��E , ,,, � ----- _, s r ����Fw000 �c PNA �
, � }E. - --- - J �
PARK 2 A _
e� RDGET � � � ..sz.. e ,�n n��sc ___ - a3 x,a ax ' a.H`aa : z,3�
OP i n a
o ii �o
�sa ,ee. CT . .. _ � - --- __- zse.
— Q`�„
— _ 0.� 1
s : . „z� �— i'f �J in ? s
,a a T z�
� �
7.5
i _ N � 'h
� _ x E � �
a m = e r.. , NC 5 „ -�ac�- - - _ - a f. � � P M�o a z,z� „ � R .���, � �z,3, �
�P, � s�� tEs „� r MAs�o��.� —,=°�P'=" __ __ �� 9 m NRy � �{ o G � �=»s , � NC Nei hborhood Commercial District
� a„ _ : ,_,s ,o�a , �, �s ,� „ -- — — -- ---- � ,� oF ��E �„ „ � �,»> g
, r.� - -- -_ �=1�1�50 ,,,, s � o [
,�s, ,�s,a �s„ „ _ � m ,o --A ---- ---- e a A
y �e�°�a ,�P„ ,�P�, . ,s ��MA=�o��,� _ - f
P�, t, �o�' _ e e � .,�, \
c . _ MP CT , _ . � as _ {' �
s ,s,o A a, --- R�
_ .. N eo -- _ _ 't/ �
1 e3s . � � - _ iz�.
� .c f A� . — �'� � ,
� � \
Q P izei
A F
so� U
$ '.� 'y � ' ,v�o_.
�ry :mz�a�Z ' : . i i ..
tz.
x �so
xa
as f J
i eo ., . � .e Pp `
.' � ',�'. '' ' .. e i�c i� s '� f
.ah" n^" � . _ 'P.s s� iNq 60 e �x p i �— - _ i2w,Y G
��
� � s _ 1
� " �x s�a »e�s �x eaa " b �s � -, -, w :� . ,� e � ^ e , s � ' 3� , — — ------ � z�z 1 h o izezi
x sss �x sss '., ^` �x s�a = _ > rez � + _ . �: _ �s � �a � -- - �
,�9 � �� _ � , = e , ,3 a _3= x,�� 3 . -�.A-MAS - - .,�, A ,no, =s,� � �
,�s �9 9, eA�� � � s .� � � _ . s, N� - � 1�„ �� �o��.� -===--,-=- - � . �9� A � � �� ,
, „g ,,,s aowr oai e �anr� _ _ �. o ,o _ .. ,a ea s
s�s,i 9 i 9 s�o 5 4 Ey��� couar . ,� e
'€ r. �
�
,*s „`�� _ , e A� �
zaiz -�+ B \
x e mR � eV ,te x +--.-�.«
5 a �
x e x sxs O �+� � izw3 izc<o
General Commercial District
,�o, , o00,�o ,9 � _ _ � a, ,� „ � a ���s�aR.s n _.__�___ �„a G C
3 , a�� �
aP � ,
� ��a av , CA
> > a 9�� s +URN r e +, „ STLERI�GE iz�i� �O
� w w z
a > � �a u w > ., . .a .` ,
wxcscr.rE p �ea
3 o s�3 oo� s H x� a a �o �, cn�� �„�. ,3 �2s O N
�x G . a P� � � zss ,mK=
1 ��sse , _ = a P� o a za. z _ {
i ss P„ , ' ' ' ' , ., ..- - ,z�z� "�, �.
, a 2 , . , .� ' ' .
x ee. ,ez ,se� s KK� R n ee x � , � LANE �i ., z�i.
�3 0�0�3 0�� � �_:, a - +�—�� �
�a � eea F ry r a »�....
�a .o e�a o�s �a o �a ees x s =+A .q.� �ear �3 v�[oswcc a-...��._ �'� pc �.
.oxs �a� . e '2� ,� � , o .-�_�
.o� . ., .. � 3 2
�a o. rz.�.,Erou . '�. m s A i-� , \
�3 ozs o ,.c . �„o 'W�\
x ssa cr �a R �
ReA � �4
7 ACCE N PARKN
i a LKSSTROL G �-.
i 3 00, U+MESA �z, s Rec i i
3 00o x� MN
ss� Sr�f ` a �6 J �t
,e�e A o
i i Y
xss ( a zazz zazs z � ,
3 iz N& 3 u
ia oao ia on O ' ' iz�i�
1 . �a �a � �a o ss ,. a ' ' ,+
.030 .03 �� � $ �
, a aa���� o�> � �o a� ea �. � a .„
� `= s
a � ,z o , 1
,
s �z +
,�o�`Do
` � �, w , _ f
a �
�a , o� x � z x>� ' m . w �. ., , ��v .. /�,
• z e�-sx
3?
sa � sa-
��oss �3on . o .,.,.� ' V�Ep . s ' ' ' �u�.,,u�av,. � + �
.: Cr �_, t e ciinNns _ ' , � ., .,. 7 �
�3mo �� �� � °� ias� n - _ weos iz�3�
a oss oos .o .ooa � � "� s . , wEco
oo, 3 0, � , F�-3 «.,. . � �
„ R
0 3 �_�,
e � ,
� ,
_ = o »� r �o� �o �=�- �„� �„�a
7 »m s - u TRVON CREEK F
„o ,os�„o , ---.�--__'' ,
,o� ,o s ,s , _ �J �E os .-.-. ,
3 �s� � �oRs wE�o
E
ia i i m i x K M (A .-�-.
. o � ia o 3 „i. x a s . - ie.e NE
�s oao�� a
ia ox p ia s io p ia
v > n
� � o� o�s io „ �aa .a i, ize zenz �za3a iz ' �,a, PoRE ft s
: ¢ .., . ,.. -.
o s> >. a� .s iax rc . ' ��
s
PP
"°. s v�, a xi
� � �� ,���P w,= ��P ,,, < , , «� „o � = r „y, sr _.�_� �� � East End Commercial District
�
� _,3,os,�,o�o 0 0 � ,�oo � �P w,� ,> > �3�„ � � e � MEA�o;;�s � _�._.��� .w.. EC
� rc ,,,,o p ,,,,x,,, � � „ox� � o m � = y� �: �: > oozz ,,, i�iec � = � ., �. _ , a. �s � xo, zz. STATE NATURALAREA ,.. _ •• ��-•��-�.-.�r� � ..
„„ ,» „ � . os� „„� ,3 _„„a ,o�s „o,s ,3 0�, „o,a a = :� � s ^ s , ...< °.,, ,:� . „ � ' FR P � 9 , � cEn.ER , - r.�RrcE.P�ACE �a� wnr . ' ' ' ' - s� . -.-.�--.-.-.-�.-�
. .s 3 .� .� � ,x, ,�,z ' s ,., . ae q sx n �e , o �s-s iaz3 sb . a, e _ _ - o ,nas �--"'�...-�.�. \ �,��..
, �o
z> > ry
�xa-
i �xe
�-
�a
a ��g so-
i3 iao����s�o o�� ., r s ��as- -w RecReA.nn _ swEc v - , z � �_ -
m �xa Huiv�e�� rr i3izz ' a�. s o° °s �� ���- s3 ' ' o y
a �
' .a x, �e v ::
m W.`e
" ow.� e.. �xs azcc . a, y i ;,
���ao���a� ���3e ���xe ,�.»,��oao a caEek � ' .G �`" ..n� [n ' ' ' - .w _ . . � � p . �zsoo o — —_—__J
���ss ���n ����o �3 os���oxa oalVe " w � a o � a ° .a � a
����s ,a s s s „a, ,>.., �xa . �n � .,
,a ,�, s s .,.,.9 a anc ° � ^ ^ i3ise "'.:9a, �o � ¢��s as '0 4, �aa �sa- �o _ x �o '� s � a � 8 0 8 `8 `8 � <
� � r.�ox �� 8 z3oo zzo ., � e iai iaoi -
�i3 iso���ss ���so���ss ����sx��� ��. ,� e� �. �. � Z: � owz �P �xx c� �zs w �� � ^ � " �.� < ' - i.wso , _
� 3 3 .a�; ; �,, �. ��ma .. �r .,. � Z w v e 3. r .. �;;;� v a3 n �' xa, xe �s s x : _ _ . .. . . _ .. �
� �� � � � � � �x3 . i3zaa H �° o�o > o ,. �� 'ao� a xsso
ia ns 3 ao 3 y „ ,: iaz " �as aa R - �a r,re� a� a:+ vr.Rrci Rv�e, ' � .,, _ _ - o ,�,
�a�so�a�es �,F » s as ��oo� ,. 4t^ � _ �
'M ,�
,P, „ .a , „ �,� - _ V o
ia i R 9 � oF AY
ia i ea i �
. so ia is� , ia i 3z.. _ - iae Y , . - E R o
oa o OA�
� i�i .
" N , °� ,"°e � s � °6 ° '°� ` w Commercial District
, a r Hi h a
�i o ° wo a
m P 2E _
eAv �, Rc - 3
LF
�z�� ax F �2 0 S�o-
ta �a�a h n
,�, � F �� HC
�a � , , � ,Ew � 9 Y
„ R- . , 9 ,a o
� �sPNA _ � , E � �E �'
F �
, ,�
= s �s , H
- � r
, = s
�, �y
� , RE� � _ ,��a
R s = ,�
„ - N
,�o� »a s
„�o � ,,,, ,o . P
�
, s a
e » n ao .e m F e - ' ...
.i t v mN e��sa
E 3 os 3 � aa , ' a a . , o e° T9N
� , ia x�o�a xos . . r» aa = . ' � a -., izn � ,�
, �a r> >a, e � i3izn M��
3az e S
- 3. ��fr� cecs e u
' . i�i s ai a k `fi m
ia axs . � p = t'�a �3�3� o � ON
ia i o R , E e
ia ia i . 2 "����W' 1
.xxs . �s 3 zo ' D
ia a e BLVD �
J O m o
aA G U
zz .. >>� .a � - `�S i
� 'd'g ��N e f xsso
��s JS e a
_ _ , �RP ., . .
REMB
�i - ia . o . . 0 �oN - ' . �
ta xxe .xn '�.. e . . 3a i.+o u iz�.. �C
s .��s _ . . .. . .� .,, m 4
„ r „ „o„ �„ o . ,,, �� , „ . �� , AM �a ,� , S P _ 3000�oA � F o
� sa�' , ,
� �oA
e P � . - R Q
xae ia a a >> >e = U
as �N
»z flP" � �s a �s , ,s a - w in.t
F� Ro � i a � NE CONE c o i
SALA n � a. a 3..i SH � a000
W O
z. co�
.. _ AY . s ai m ,
- .. s »zz _ � . . p� i3i.rs i3i3z � .a 00 �au ry COURT - '
4 � . VIEW � 4
ia m�n ���nt^ n i ry �A W .
. s �nx - 0 3zsn N
� 9 h � rm E
_ P �a 3oen
„ , Office Cam us District
�s, �� , §5 3as � „ v
#� 7:5 �� � o
§ s �
� F
� � OC
� , � ,
� s p
� �„ ��,,, � ,3,0, Ao,
0
sw so�r�w�oo 90 „ e ,,, ,o M , � R 5 a s , . _ „os�
, oH�E � � „ ';� oswE�o n,,. , � � ��oa , �� �s �, �, x �o � d ��<< ,� �,� �,s
�,a , x n „o �� 3 ,�,s � o e � P`�A a �
�3 3x3 .. ' �' s° _ �RIDGE ' ivzz ? 31�0 � � � h �
ia az� a
8E 2 m aao
s ias s e� e. tot tta N s � . m so �
_ � J r.m izs.
� xo a
�. 6
�s izsz
, R0 � o .
� _ „�s� �E � ,� �o , �3 . «.. a 9 _
= m,=, . �31e �� _.
- e ��s � _
���
. .. =9
_ o, ,
: e 3,
o , ��o <
. s . ,� � < , � �.
, , . s m �
3 36, , „,a o s � ,», 3 3„0 ., ���-
s, s � �, h � a „a ,,, , �� �� m , �s E=ra.Es �3�,0 3�0� a a a �F � . .
N �� �o ss , . c ' - g a � _
` " ^' .,. .. ; ea• � s
�
<{ ..a ,a a owve , �5' �a m'v BR/ .,, - _ Rq c.� a
� =PNA3 �a , „ ,
, . x ., - .- e , �
, . - v m, a96� ,,, E . .. - oR ,
3, , .r ssro �,a� ,<s., I
,„, � - F�-7�.5 , � �.s ..E u _
q = e � 33a� � s AM a ,3a . _
w � m,,. ,9 r �
� �� � - ,36 „ ,� , Cam us Institutional District
. _ � � � s> � M , a s � �
��, ,o ,� z C�
H ,3a "„ ;�'°� .�''J � „�os„a,� a � � . �, „� � °oRr � p,�„ �3�00 — 3�o MstRiwe oaive TRYONCREEK e �
a, „a, „ z�o � ,.�9 . „ A ,. o�E �3.�3 �3.�6 a + - - � 9., aao � , a �
Q .a ,»E s a� n „ z9a -
s „ ,,, R-� 5' ,�
,,, �_` e � ,s m ,,,,, �
,3, ,� R-�
.a, . > STATE NATURALAREA
„a5, � �oP� a �
F _ 9y a� :.v �.s. i
,3ai3 „aia„ai, „a,�„a =,A, K , o „o��E ,s ^ ,i „ r,M . ,335 _ e e ' - a s � - � o
z m m�
9� a < a o ���Noo,
lA „a , _ , s3 . Ro� 3�, �3zo � 3300 < < _ �
w �./ ,3:e: �
C 330 'x
„ E . �Ea , 3,0 3 ss i3iao a �
� a , ,,, ono
,� . i� AM �, N
ai r Ror�o U _ R o
ian �aa. .P s n in so v
�s'2 a � J 0.
i .. iax nm s �o S s o
� \/El�nl v�rn
�� 3 a�3 �a n�n»a» >a nas�a a soUTHN/000�� N ii a � PE "�wo
��s - _ � ,� .ow�� ��� N �a o Cam us Research and
w „ , y = �..� �EA,PR��A.E, � �.s �o�MR� a A= , ,�� s p
„,90 , e 9 , . . ,�o �oM �
a ia ,3e3 ,�e. , y x s s i33z � MONSus i33z� o FOSW� o
ia,oa �a so as. ��a�i .. R . i3zaa ✓�E osw[c - ?
� ,,,ss ,,,s, [� , s ,3,�o R-15 �
� �NE , P v
�s , �3,�� � �. � A �
� � o ,o
,� _ � CR D
� '9�� s 3333, _ PNA &
a�a�RN�a�E ,30 � , , �
� �R s ��e - es o
�a� a ae ., � �- o ' ¢T,
,o„, �� e I�Cve s
� r�, "TP , Develo ment
Z „ „ ,�, �
� „, „„ E � o
,3�,3 „,,, „,,, �s � �, �s s �3�6 p
�s�
,�, R- �s =
�s� , �so � �o� �
- „� .� , � � - �r��
� ���
a � ,,,��„�„ � , � : so�,�w000 . , ,�a , � � 3 s � a �, ,3�» 3,�, �o�.,. a � � � „��o„�.�, a�o s � �
� ta�xa ia�xa ta�xa a, .,aa ia,. ze survAP ok �.,�_ �,» ��~ '^ �8 5qy s, `3 .s aea _ vee ixs �� ai x, xa x� x a st o x reEe. js�o a o _ _ 33 se ' - ' m �s "'
„�a, „�aa„�, „�. „> >s �ss ^ �. .� � = a A e „ 3„6 3„a �s �, ' „ . ., a �. weco , ., Q 0 o ,so TRYON CREEK � o �
. . . . . . �,o � ss - . = s 3,�z o�oa Ra ,�o �35,5 ,s» �° a e� "e .,
e . o
. i K .o s �aaii
3 3 � , s i3,�s an � �� HGH�cHoo� .. .
. . .,�., ��s � . i �x .zz - O�
_ _ . =�a =s�= .�..,.,.o., 3� �� m��, - m STATE NATURALAREA P 1
�a,„�P „s,o s m n , PNA
„> > „� „ x �35,� , ,o �, �o , �oMMo�s = � R-10
, ,o �z ,s ne, so�soa .. ,�a s �
� �aa � , � _ M I XE D U E
, o S
� � �� P �
»as a
�36�� » 6 ,� d`��°` �3,a�
mo�... � ,s„ "�
F� R-5 � �
�35� � � s r
, ,3 6 ,��� ,
. ,s sa3 .s3 ��r+� . . y �- �s i nse � ivai i�.. ss+ .
� �3 �
� 3 3� 3' �N�a s3e . .. � a, �,e i3si, 4 .,, ''o ��`Y �#° r,r � �� �a rRe sr,„on� sao ,cP 9^r'2 a� eo s �� O i3xo � > . > pR� m o c� �eFry �'PV� ,� e - e
� a a e s� i
� ,3 s�, „s�a,3 s�, „s� ,3 sa, „sao s„ s ��8 e �, �� �. �E,�o R . , e . . ..�. �� A �, � ,a,�, o ,e., �3,es �see �Esuc y wNE � RFR�� W � ,� g a 9 Me R � o
�363, ,_, , � ,�6a3 6„ TM�"�oF „ ��o s ., � � q ,30 � F<qN �fP`$ Office Commercial/2 500 s
,3 6,3 ,3 6„ s„ "� , 0 3„� ''� o� � � „ ,a a �, �, s�, aEA�� s � ,so � a•
, ,�s, ,3 sa, ,�s,� s = �36, x ,�s,s �13 EE ,o , ,., a, ,s �ss v � ��E . . P$ 9$ w orE
z = s ,s r sa� A ��� a $ � � . �q .e,
. � . . � s,s � �.EA� E���.
� „5
A
.� ,� � N
�
�. � , �
_ �E a�
,3 , �z. � o , � ,
o ,,, 6:
i �a ss3 ,3 ssa,3 sss � SOUTHWOOD PARK o 3z z ..."� � �v "` ,. �s e� ' ew000� aoiai P g �.� md°$ > . „o o p , _ cF o ,a _ o . W LG RM U
,6s3 � . e. „ a 633 ,� �o��, � z z . o � �� � ft. area er unit
, „sa, �3,� , =a ,,, ,A� . a,'3,oa ,o R" � .. � s 3 - P � o _ � , p
� , ,�k, �
° � s��> � � � ° w �� � Ah°' ,
a� �e�=
3
„
.r „
s�= , ,y e =
� o r � � ,
0
�� o F � � o
s
= R 3 „ ,o
P F . ,3,,, � ,�o��as u� �, �o � � ,s,, ,,,3 ,,,, ,� 3s,o a =, �
sw PNA . , s „ „ ��,,, ,3,,, �.s a , s ��SF� .��` R-15 E _ � y % � �9. w
PAMELA sse� _ ��Gy ��E 13tls � ' oswcco � � p
, .. 3 � ,,, n » � ssa �
, .s�E r s . ���
N s � 3»> �s.a��. s �5,�„ ,� z � a P 2
zee OAK CREEK
.a �� , .���Ev�000� i��
� s
' ' 3 e xa , ., a
_ _ f x � a i3srr f�
���RE�� _ �' °s a � � P p Office Commercial/
, _ = us
ss , ��E���oE�, 9� AFFORo
,, �. = s ,�
,
N � :,, �a
g . .. . ,, ° s oaive .�-J l�, .;e ���o�wN� oF�E - 3a�� a�� , � ��1 .� �z , .�5 �- :90 w
�� ..^.. ., ' � �` _ ,. ;�. R�7.5 �` :., ., s � �. � .,,,. � ,. .- ,.,� ELEMENTARYSCHOOL ..nnnras ' ,o c� _ °
� cRovErnRrc
� _ 6PN� s , , ,A=a � ,s o 36„ „ � � s ,a n s �� a _
,� s . s e z TM a a�o �� „ � ,a,e , ,s, � , WLG OC
EoswE�� P ,�. . a so � q�¢
: � /� a E Nei hborhood Commercial
' _ �s o 5 m.�, �_ � coux,v � �� N
��E�RosE v o mo�mv = ��',3 m„asa � a° �, , � @ . .. z ,�, �S , F� s��P , sso � �6 �F � y ,S��3w 9
, ._ oswEcon�is . .3'� is x E`� 0 00 �o: n w i��W� �3 i3wi waa - E ; xsiopp .» x _ z�o ,�P.
� ' a STRE[T MEL '3" S�G �s n ox � � �s � s srr.ron � POOL a �� .,, D�e a ,�, s P i a � "' 3n
� e ,b ftOSE STREEi zzeorrccu couoos """"" BOZ ,.oN�s a HEATHERSTONE » �� �o � s � a � �3 �� �js4 ,�/�MONT o ' sso s RO�� �� m ¢ � a _ 'go
s � ' � � � .� .�ev.tx ' .. 3�aa 3�oa PqRK _ m o a„6'u
3se3 .� WESTLAKE `� '� .wce =ese s = .. ..n a - ' . ^ es m . nx sa
wz3 � �" .wee � , ....ee.sr..w , ,a �, a
CHURCHOFJESUSCHRIST . o a . h�
� z �, �a , F . a Foothills Mixed Use
. `oR o
� s� FM U
�� P� a as �oMM���ry
. oN „oi x a P -, as � �
LATTER DAY SAINTS � r-� o NS " FIRE ,. 3e �' ' PCIRc�E ' ' r.ron �3�as �3�a� n�eurery c. ' ' a� s, ss ' ' ^ 's' °
TEMPLE i3eoo ,•.� � 9`'' � . • a ` „ STATION ,+s�e ° ° ' " ., ,�" , arrce �e _ u � - eso m as� s' ' avENUE N co
�`� � e . ��� _ _ . >. : � � �, �" . � o �., ' - - ' � wso e,e ' s� ss �' ,ae„ �
. ze _..� &� _ .s.i ' w _ �
_ _ ' - 210 ��z ,, , .-e� w , , s ,e LAKEOSWEGO o e _ ,».s s,� �� s s PFR
� e ,,,, �� � 3, . 7a ,,, , naP`` a 3�3 r a�E � , s P � _ �sb �� � � s �3`"=
3 k . - .n e
�` _
iEMP Yr - w �� se s
LE WAY q , s ORC _ ,
m HA � s
PNA Ro � �
^.Y M, _ - - �� HIGH SCHOOL , aco s s�,
� a:z. w � ., sa, as o
e nv �¢ �3a
a ao� , E rscH a
� a �
� a rcN q y
a � nus °w
. � �e^�NTfi � �
e a , 'c�
i E i
0 & s w
�� �..
§� E R F
_ R v WESTLAKE PARK on� _
ry o s�
o e ...,, arw �
- R�`"� _ ��A e 3�e3 a sH� , . , niea as as N �
W s BE aaY , � � sEs 3s�� i = > REV _ eoo s � es� U 4
� :� � _ ,o � A �E�sw � � � F � � INDUSTRIAL
� ��� e � � � oR��E ROAo �, � � .
�� � ��o F = , � $ � .,s° a,
s�a , ��r s s» �� . _ � o o , aao e�
e PN o ,> � �
mA�,A E �, z e � 3,,, . w
NA �2 s a 4
LN m � e
� � i3�a� e
�R�� � s �eo u P �e 3ses � i3eee � e o>
� CT�� �Ye,�e,� ��e ��Re< .� e e s . P6' � phnP . 3sw s �a � ROAD - s �.�eao , a a i3eoo a �a a e� °� a�c se� se s,�
e. ., zi c �P m F f �5 �� i a �s &� 4 z i3eei � � o ,ss > e µo m a s s " i�' .,
s ,. � �z� . ., . _ � , �Jg i3�s, � '� ' ' ' e„
. � on � xo ��. G sis < o os"E`O
, , .,. _ a, , > W, t i3e,z a o �
. a �uf . i.ee. 3wo P k
c £ N "-e� � a CAM
� tt E _ n �p�, �0✓�E
0 o- �'b Z x� s 3s.. a P �. a
a O � h a
� � a v[s . ' rs . �s'k
P 2 6 �s r E "cv�
3 , 3, ��° P F _ . ,
P' .. o ax� � P T
s - a �'v '40.� . h aa� c
5 1 +» >>3 ' �3stt A
�A - s c
R� a � �
n o�z s � oh Go
s S�
�s o'L� s �
z n n i.uai a �� � �'
c fl � � s ai
('� o 0 o m E�5 .t
s �s �3 � , �P Industrial Park District
W m r ,� ,�� , 3 � , � � �, Rv �3sao �39,0 €' � a a. oa o ,s< ,s e, �
s 3 r '� - : T - � ' N . si ;� 4sN, �'
-s '� ' � , N . c>
s � r ,ze, � .. m . . U , r
N�s � � a�
"a o a � a o s
. , � ., . o3s �� b � .. xs o s � � s, s, q �.
�e � G
�
4 . . _ P � a� a��
��3P s
E , Z
Hasl� F
� � a
i3s,s _ nvE
o� a N
, s u �v
��a , � E`%
e� .,, , .. o0
a � .
w s « w , a o , e � ^°rs �
r � > ,s� . h , .
ssz. G
P a �, s� f
, i 33s J+6P� 3roa
e STREET�
< ams SH W �i 6 i3sso w
Fi CKBRU C i3sso ,
n o O a
e n no �J - s� m a,
F °2v x �
6 0 � F
cerv.eavo rv.e `$ i3rsi
[ P
.� a � s ,
D � a
.. ,� ��Yw - - �
N
s a P
si �'v ., o a s� . ��
e�`k� ,46 _ T��� s
� a r oo e ci
� ., nveRv , � , � s`�,�
� R �� , s
3 �az o b'`2��, ,*co .,sz� r � o, � ¢= e [ �4, xs s .,, s Y , " ,�o ' ; � ea a� si se �� '' ., << QP '
a o ,d H �P�'� � , > �a a� . � inioo 3rcz P �, sa E bN ay -
. >e � �i
ss r c z
5 NITED
� �9 =&5 e a z o ' RCWS a .ta �, ., �
�S '� , s��` No �>
� � , A F
o a �
„ �,,, o0
� a� . - o e , , . m s
/ x �� ME e � . € E u ` c'�? _ e a . �p N CPry _ - - �ai �ai ^ pOPD P D » � � 64 se c ' s A' R �
3 W ac - O F, a _ ' P O � a, n .. 6
a H A a
� , ��P'° , t SEMI P BLI
� 3 a < U C
� e « �
, , � n �, E �
�( � iez LAKE OSWEGO a A -
. o a n ��o ry ,
o=, -1�fl e oF��Rsr ,
P , �
� � , , , �E
e �
. a Ar��, e s, �
� � �,� _ _
�o-" , �
� , s � � �e
Y N s , . SCENTST O ss
9 6 ioe 7 z a
/ o '?v 9 e o F Q �r �o ., � s�� . a ' s
��R �. a � . = a e , n -
, ,a„o R- .5 a N , ,
a p ,
cenreavonre _ JR.HIGH SCHOOL "s �
.�. C' . r
�� co�rs�Foor�nrvEi __ �,oA��ERRo,� -
, , sad
� i. �o
<
G � ,.z „ y � . a „ ,n b z o � sa :. n
- � o P� s � '^ froz � e�5o i�' � .. e azso � se _ �x vn, j @ n zz n za �-°` � P n ; � �i� �a „ ss .s � �
� � 4. e z �naz an � ia3ss _ ' i<zs. d ' iei U rnr.�e ini3o �a>>x - z sso , y. D _ ai� `�W
�- �n� o R ��a0 '''b V� 5 �.�a� . .. r _ .. - ^ ss� N xa a» s� %
, e y y a a a i-.. e . i e a.� ,? , _ . � s ai� xs
n E z n
� � + a ry
LF
h `�, �� s avr
O � �.'t �.�o� 3x ^ � nnn �3s, s�o ' � h „ ss i, a sa rvu�
x �E i s e, a
s d�� »
�`Sn T CHIIRCH s �n'
s � Y _
C> > c n i e � a
N � z s�
n saro . _ � a - _ ' . � �
� � AVE ss
�s � _, P Semi Public
� „ � _ N , S
� s ��"' � . W , , �_�a� a . , „ , o� , a � � � - � s�o „ �E ,� � �< � ry
� . g � `` . � ��"� ��,�ER �,3, � r � „ , ,,s s, P r ,„o �, �, r =. � se o
��� a ,< _ � R > - < �i so., ss - � ,, <� ooce
_ Ta<Tn , » oRc . - „ o p s„ - 36 . �
� 6Hnrro� = a � A _ .. s s�
9 -az, ae3� � oaiv corvo � � O e .,, _ - .s
E ns 9 J �
'cEe a �
.� ,a � a �oo = =,�R=��
_ �=� , E �, �
_ _ . ,E. � E , �
w � _
���
e �, = 3�
,� . .,� [� PNA s ,
, � , z ,a �,�� >i�-0'���00=
a . � _ . e a�, A P
�E�,Eaoo�,E s ., , a � s
. 9 � e a Ne
� , 6,3 � _
e < �
�a. . , z � _ � �
� e . � � cnnoeN COUNTRV , a ss .
s..3s covF � - ia3e3 e s ii s n s _ - o - - .x� o . ManoRr.vrs osrRcr
. _ __ � ,., „ - n - e°
- v , zz izz a z P �, .;.[�_� �� � - - _ - ' -s
s �„
PF
s , �, � A . a . . _ _�, » s,, F
�r�o . _ �
m � w �
,R��,o ,,,A �E m , asos �_�as ��s .,, � _� __, < < ,,
,o„ ��a�
a� ,o a
��R—�.5�o
. 9 w A�E
. � J „ N
o � ER� �
.s � .� R s, E�
OA��
xo ��
h � c n
PNA s� a
„ , F ,� ���a h ,,,
� � u e s �
� _ �o A�t x �
r �NT �� _
� - RV �E o iun
a ��� PNA
� ,s, B R
"2 , xa - a�sa OA� -
e . ., ,s �� ,sa, , RNA a =�� ,
� e = s a . e =_
.,� _ � � , —
� 9 P BLIC E
, , U US
s _ „a, s °� s�o a�s� �o�a, � . . ,� y� ,o,� � . } . s� s , .
`� , , a , w e ��,� � ,a „ , � '�f� �� � �s ,.�s, m a P � s,o „ , P�K
� � ,a,,, �� � e `��� - . - .,N ,s �� ,s � ,o,� Q � 19 ,.�so 5 � ,,, � �, �� ��,
m �E e e ,�e ,, �. „P
sx cErvrErevorvrE m „����e .. ; p xi 9qk ' e c> ^" e e e � „:. " e r " ,w ia �"F`�a ,s a 1e �V �4sv, o `� m .. - NEWiHOUGHio :as a = sxe y s
y
ca .y a = � e 2 � tnxs� ^ ' si
e[rvreRrorvre __ - � i e �ez ^ ,. � � - 'e� .� S � . �r nzz. ' AVE sos c YON _
,,, i � � 4 ' e �n , a O , ts - CHURCH u� . Nu o�
Sr.9s F u� saa E > .�.
seii �V 3 . � . , covE P RK
, ,6 '�, s nn h� � - o SPRINGBROOK PARK �e �yer s „ . n 4
S P s �� 9 a, �� , ,oa� , „ � r
� e � � .�ao �R-2°
s _ "°��� � - .,, ,s m , � ,.�, , „ �� =b � � <
�r �����E , � , . ,a � �r T� , � ,�s
m �� ,9 „
- „ s Public Functions
EXIT 292 �. ., � s
�° x s u�
A s,. » u e
,o o a pss s ,. P F
, r s a ���a. o �� R sr����s 5 � � _ , ,y, � , so, �� . „o ,�� ,s s.oaA�E
�� � ,s� � ��55 30„ ,os, ,�o, � e , �
m . �� F � . �o � ,ass ,.36o MA,�.oFF,�Eo��W�.R����a , ,_ � , m , �a ,
. a» �� R _ � m . „ ,=s =s , _ R.�E� �
AP �1� � , _
� , , P�� _
a� � e m ��„ . a�3 a �°�.�e s��oo� = s�NOEW 5 � �� oR��E ,�o� ,� „o � ,95, ,ao , a ,� ° � ,» ,s , _ � n,�.�, �,F���
0 . � PARKVEW . � 3 ~ xn xs '� N e. �as.s ., ..- ., ° ,s 6e EntlbOw '9 ,yeo '] ia3ia �y .. G '+ '� s�, ,�s s,s s„ OSSMAN s.vo AVEN�E6� = '-� . sai � ONCREEK �
qp � ' b � gs ae �y ayy, s y PORTLAND TRY
��� �, � a ,q imzn zios z o i � a3ea �G� , " oM�, _
qp sy sx Lake �c i e � x sc�
.'��m SEwAGEiREAiMENiPLANi /
v n o a �'.� at � �
� e mAcrE �6'p Cs� s s. � ga� m 8
,00a �� , � P��=�� � � Park and Natural Area
R�< . AP �ARMA e o �e o z �„3 � . a „ PNA
s �33 � aaas�3
� � F�� , � , , FF� s� � s, PI� o�, ,�,� �30 �vA � � r „ aaa L
3 �s e s s, ,�3so a, as , ,=o ,s� �
�R�� s .s � , a �� g� _ > > „ „ ,s,= �� a �r � � a�, a� �,�_
,a x �� „� . „s ,soo PNA �A�E o
„s,o �T� a �,�.�,E�,s AP � 39,z s E , � ,a,o � a a, : N�E� �. _� PF �
�o ,. na "s s 6�� �"o g r.v �. g� TOUCHSTON sa R �e 'e" 3 �4z o :, m .e o p axo s, asa a�, ass ' a� -. , ' c sse b. o a �
_ wKE vs OSWEGO LAKE 9� _ �;� . F M U
� �� . .o �o�z noe
�e , cHURCHs L.O.INDOOR
o /(R Y iawz 5 � ° a r,P E nvcoMMorvs "' � asez � �Fr�F ` " _ .a:N 'a 'c �a �x �0 5 ._ < z «s <ss� — zi<e �o ,� _ COUNTRYCLUB cq ' ,a � ais an � a� �n as ' ' � , � .. s�o <„ �,
�SE �,� �, " s �_' � �,.�� TENNISCENTER z�s, zi�e �s3a „� rROEry ^_, ais a� "' °Jp ' _, OVERLAYS
� N 2� � , _,� �s�e �A���oREssESE�E� - = N� , � ,00 oswE�o P m a„ � a . _ ,_� � s
� e `S KE GROVE WARD zeao kn � 2 Ny�� CT as3z se ziez ' R�VEtl.' S P , , , HERITAGE P �a ao� a a�, k a�, a Y � »> o
iaai� � / TAKEHOIISE qry nn xis n QP c � � e m cramAnnus ' l�S asss z�'� �O za s. " _ HOVSE a a� a aa abde$�2 o E a,"" ry . �oo�
Hl1_ m „P „p �� > , a<„ asa_ ,a636 , a . ` Po ✓ , , a, v„� . �,ot�,"= Foor � Willamette River Greenwa
, ,oaa � AP �� = P „s„ ,�s, ,�, � N � ao . � . a�= V�''� .�� F ao9 P� . y
m �flNFnRos yyqY ,oa � a a PNA�o SPRINGBROOK os ., - , „ p ��rory +� - a qo
A�K �� rs uE�� =o s m � „3� �,�, a� a�s ,,.� u , P�P�aN � �. $ �� ��A�o�ER a� aao b °as a a� � �, WRGM Mana(y ement District
� �oMlc PARK �� 'b a �E� Pv,zr, " av v, � � •"J
° o �as�W, _ (approximate location)
� ° KRUSE A� cnrvons o � "' " $ o � a6a o o aeCvcuNG a
o WAV �� rce ni ss�a i<�z� iae�a � z o a � o
1 iass � ss ss � e i.,eoo - i io o COMMIIN inz» i��� zE_e o _ _ $P P �s T : 9T�P? o a CHWSTH 8 N aoo y� aio aie p ss
j O � e��o R CHIIRCH T �R VE �'"s AJE N e�R�VF : Q. J b CHURC g ,� e CENTER
, `""°`" '�° .�° �=3„,a � � ° � � � a � °' O Glenmorrie R-15 Overla District
� :�> ias .,, Fl� ro�re 3 auE N o �,ez ' .. .,, z ze ' a cRE t a " 51 DRNE � T a �'P b U T o ` �' .��s AVEN�E �... '_ � ... .�. N �TNi[(S , � Y
�Z [e[[s t cArzo[rvs s�ez rvAveuce ' � �, G a • s
' MEHDOWS " - P�A ^ isze e z PHRK V�RK zzso � '� s 4 _ E� c o a � �✓ ` . Vm ' � ,. .y.
_ $ � Rp� ftE C IS
� ROAD , " x -, asasm[noows �se�n�uce : R� S a.•w ,� ef Ro zz. zzzz � - " a s .�� . � � E% �."`$ CIiY . » LL - ' _
� e 0���'V - EM 40 :im - � Hu�
�R EC
� o `� m
P � � r a .�
h� & R �ss
io -YP W�
�
� s?
o�a n[ - ry ' � t � -
'?b _ WP � �cK � V
MENDOWS 8 � - e cnrs zsx -- "' .. � »a o
e 0. J�� �
� Ever reen R-10 Overla District
_ o �� °°p F��
_,� � F co
a . FP r E ..
TMREE � � e .
. EC��R 0 g Y
o � „oo � -
s000�,EAoo� � �'�I�� �
Aoo� � _ r v ,
�
a N � „s, � ��y , —
�� P v P F
. . . m F�R� N �.E
3� 5 9 -
� a E F v
p NRIv
P KRusE 'DGE J o H� ,
R O �9�Y �
r C R&D �oAo �
�$ .
� __ �a�E ..
aes s . m 3
� r o
e
. o ��� �'r-, .�
�o,aao �a� a"w
i I
�1 � xoPA �„*eR � s kre�sEo�s� o �0 , '� a = _ 9�' . "$ rnRrcrwicrc e�q c _ o. � ° OSWEGO LAKE a Roao ,p „ _ - '°' �,a 'r �P� .oss .�� Ro�o
io as o�o � o 0 0 o a a a a .��. z m � ., .. �� O . ry _ > ��N n u, _ o�Zh, L
�� OC , � a _ �o�NTR����g � �, _ � _ . o �ER�REEN o F Lake Grove R-7.5/R-10 Overlay
o ME�ows � , 30� �� z � �� „ , w ,ao Ro �, �� Foo,o a,�E 3,0
� e�o _ �D �a, H��LsosiO I
soa= ��sEo�s� ��sEo�s� � PN�a _ � � N� O
�� n� R-10 �,��� oR L
`� �� 2 IRON �a �o �
, a M
- ^ rxE �
„oaa J ,000�,EAoo,� _� 3o3s � . �� ��p �p a � � o = v o R�9 � . .. _.. , „ °°N>F ��a „35 Distsrict
� ss, n,Er�oows , ,�,�. zy� � so �. MOUNTAIN g , _ o $ �/ � ��q �
1 .,se „ - 2 Ri � "• isooe `" ' .$ l ��p ? . � 7'/ MILtN�A W nn oRNE
` � isao �, s � � 's PARK d _ t;■ .�m nn aa
- � u_w iA k% 2 .� p P �R ' PARK
sso + �9 . isoo� oio - ��� ON � c? T
� - y
� � PNA
�
rvce P r
seo �.� _ ! a - n�
. ���, �-o PN/�
� � /�
� o o �
ti � � �so �
, g g � � �.� 9 � .s Lake Grove Villa e Center
�� �,�aa �o�oa �F a � LL \,
< P�R
�o�oa q e , � 9
5 a a�E r�
ae v F � �
m P�
ES
g s.
i N 9 qN I Y
CO
s=oo �a� o ��
r P�� o ,
Ny SNV
MO F
isizs . R
� E D P
RIVE s..
� U
� O n �
� 9
o ew
� N
_ � �
N F A, ..
P W�o
� , 9 A� A� �
.�. � TAiN �• 8 n n
STE N
+ ., . � .� .,, � i..z. r n n
� R R
o , Overla District
, � r N P z Ao , �
��P � _,
� �
R m -
�
Y
� q P,�E
5 4 � J �
o zoe .,, �P4' - _ s 3a 6RooK s'" o fqG^ ,� a o I<RO �xPe �,�A �lE ^ > o, - ,. nn
� , "s WEM6 (f .o . HD Q , m � e v VA o - R .. nn qry �c.3
: �' BLEY S
� si- C 54P�Z .� z - - nn
i i,i 2 . nre2vrs
D
� 8
O��
�o�oe .. _ . E�y . �
�
s� � U
"8 . c3 . � - - iio n,�
g ro zoe � � - , P � '°'S, .. . ��' e
ONITA o qR
R � � a a � D .
OAO szo U
031� o-ioe �
o�-oe sosi o �- U
. s ze a R s U
.,, s - a a ' oq � ,,,,, orrcE _
D
. _ '��P.:..
� �
� u > e a s EJ
BONITA � - V 8
R SUNDELEAF
� a - N OAKGROVE
z '& PD
NOA� � �
O
s . e � ..i.po �..� vl nn
� �ze� �
o � .
_ P
BONTA ,. i PIAiA e,!�
Southwest Overla District
�� �PORr�� o
�
�o a wF �/
� srER� S �
,P RA��ROA�
p EC/�� aoAr�MP
�r
, Y
a �
, . s P ��
00 .,o - $= Po,�.EAP� oAK
r 1N
,�_ . �F�
J J � nn
i� �r s Lil Ba An �
�o��R � P o a o � o . � a , v v No m ay �Ro�E
e e _ .. _ � �� PNA a R,� �AaA�A ��E �E , �
, � q eo , vvPag � - - � , _ � � . a o od ��
� � �o�oa FF�E ��, � o o �, 6 ` �, _ � s'- P _ .� , �s„ aa'' e ,�, � - � SHoa �, .�o s�`°� e�o < � A� A�
�3a o:oa 's ' . ,.�, e � o ,. > a K
�,s, , � � �.�,.v. x , a v A„ -
�_
, , R' a a <
, » , „ - . _ - ,. A . o
i e �.
,s�s � TPG e � 96 p ea .: O
i� ROA
�.�
i s � _ D p nn
t t = e HERI '(q� a � r o _ n i
e
N .. , , e .. � ., ��e
e K
,�ss � �L _ _ �i�� �C
e E
0 0
� � = h e
1 A' _ 3 �N
�. P
s ,� 9 �
p ,o,oa ,o,� ,o,� o ,o oP
� � =o=� =�s ss.
,s ,,o a ,o,oa ���.���a e o .
� � „ v e e
, ��.ME�.s s=s _ � � 3, � � � : s
=o=oa o°�A � . ,s�, . � s
,a . N�,�,�,� _ E�sErE�.
00
, � o
� �
� �, � wA. _
�°_ = DE I N DI TRI T
. �o _ _ m o S G S C S
. P SH
��
�a> ,a � _
. a �PNA ,,,, �5� a
� ,�. �R
o�E�, o . �E z � „ s .. � s
. � _ »� . / �
�� r . , � a �
��N� a. � „��o
=o=oa Fo
s=so Ro i A,
�sEMEn. 's
, �o �`� - ,„ P - , v P'6
�a rvc , e - � .a° nn
� J �
, � . a P ., , � ccrvreE A kn
z d
— 4 J
a� - ''ssv i..i�3 a e
a LAN�� E .i -�� - v �seMewr c
GFO LAN „
ao z' p
} o ioa �
R-15�;s��
� �36, .s a � �e9 � z Na°� � . �
a �e
._„ w z s� . , � P R =„
w sz�o E
wzz �
i-e a e-oe s s
,�e� _ .. s p 'v � e �: ' � . .,. p . ry cr x � n n
cy� e, y
s px i
� i�H,% si
. . isr „ eTa �
. . ....�� r. o . z e z e. � e. e: s " s s o > > . . v = e » � .a.. , F% � nn LnNE
... � . . . � � . .. .. ssa i�sFO'
� mroeR ..,'�.>, � � : .,. .,. .,. � p e a e a e a� � e � e = s. e > . . ' r :6 w 3 n � .
r o
s» "' rc
: w . < < s ,s, , s es� R 15 , s P . ���
,o.
„ A
}OCdR-3
z , e , o
� s ,F,a, • ,�„3 ,,,£� z
,�Es .,w . < < , ? F a w e e . ,6.3 � ,�� F9 �/ �. �
..,_ ; � ntiP � _ A ., _ o ,s, s
..�, v o a, � : _ � � s s = ` � � ,55 .
� aqRiRi , - , >e aem o �.a"" ' ' ' I� IRON BETH � ' z � � �' _. ., nn nn vew
»o . R-0 :-:, o�E z �=s . . � : � s s �� � s,= ,6= �,s.� � � . � -1� „ � Pe o ,.°� s East End Desi n District
� � � ,v,� oo�E e � � � s s s = ,s �° � _ z � m � � � � /� w ��,� East End DD g
�... . ,,,,,r... � cr o�es " " .,5 '" e, " ' `�,�+ -t�,�G 5 s�s _'' 'a � a -_.... TRAI MOUNTAIN RYAN • �'"., ' y�- ^
� ..,, '. � o •.� .. .. 'a a a e � .��v ' . o » R [J an
urssa rzaa�cE :<�� �s<zs ,ss „� ,ss awxnurr , , CT EO F ��zra z �, _ _ -, � v _ e - P� " 0 90 T R v'
ir, P oo a
,.. , ., .,�ee 6.. F ..crw"':"�c ,z�.a " vaarcwi� - EAST PARK NATURE A pP`�'�� s�e3 ��fi �\�"- .... 1 . �� �� ` '
_ �s,
_ � -, :,<.� �.< , P £ m � `, 4�`. .,Ays �,wa �f " . SiREEi WALUGA A A A o = - '`b o ,.�GE ' tEONARO ., �vonrer.vrs �
� , � �-' RESERVE JANTZEN _R'" � � weco
� �. „ �.<, s: .ss� �' P . � � . � .�-� a ,�. � , „�o . ., �semenr �
.<.. „< P ^ ^ .szxi ' ee.s p�E PARK _ s , ,n�� 'e�`4 z�, e� P ��F � � m �. �cer J ���E o� 5 �
, aze ',�,4 NP sa 9 0. . a ,. m �ze� n oNqpv �
v a P xoMe }' .e Ro s�
� � .' qo ..s�W m ,
' ' ' ' .,, .. ,b3z�m' o P� a .�ee y O W ,s.z , s ISLAND gaY .�. , w�s I� rREE. m I
� FF _ . . .� z , e°'��- ��� n o
<„ o�"
, , � ^
, � / CLUB une easemenr
M . Old Town Desi n District
,e &
� �
_ S'� s
� �53 , Id Town DD
, � �s O
& BOP � , a ►�,Ew�� -_ 9
� suRMn o . .,, _ _ s a, ,s' . S 5�° ,ss ,� ., � a � . '� ,,.� „ , Na , '., ", e° . oos �ao ��a �
d 1 aoau _" �,sos s "°a , n x K �o :• � � � �
a P�`P A i,,s^ e^N .� ;> _
i�P , , , o�,« �,sErEn. ,. �
°� s � �z
e, �ce ly,Ao w ��s °� �
' o o o o a o � r $ iss � �p0 ' P� , m DRIVE S � � " R�h a `Y N � � GREEN WOOD a �s[i>
, ssss a a a _ RpyV c. e issso 4 �r. ' is�.. Y6 a ri s <t <
� � e � a a E 8 « � zf
� � � s �
o � E 3 West Lake
� pF 8�T � b �4 '� Vli_NGE � � N � SHOR a . ,� o, /1 h a `��Noos z s� .�. i..zi
cnr�vE� . 9 issze ' R lsie ,r 'lPY`E .. ,JQo .Y �.'_ •
_ _ _ - 8 . . a '2 e -. ".�, l-
� . O `& O
- R-1�5 8 ,
, �
� ej� We t Lake r ve DD
_ �N �,-
s Go
s , , Grove Desi n
P o � ��� _,
, EAST � � ,� - , o h
., , F v , z _ �u�wo�c R}€a
� r isss� �.z . ,� �
�, , o �oaE - 9
_ � _� � ���A��
r �� � ���R R�S�
-F . 9s"P . e �
d sfl� �9k� T N . . - �s
SHn 0. 3 - _ e
KESPEA � f 0 ti �e ��� iz.
� NE v G _ PoR THE PfiTS STR
— � 6 sraEEr � �n m ,� WALUGA PARK �ss,z s��"' � o�oo$ '�� �o � ��s� >" s, w�., P ao � tl _ :;1 k� EEr �
N " .� _ ; s ' .�, 9 " .
caaoiNa� wNE � y - � � ., r � H -
e .r m so �
�� `
� �
< ` R�� 5= District
iss» �6� a _ _ ' o .a i,ns "' `{� D°$ . s o� �� R N � �p2 � �e � � ieso ss � � �KF . ^ 9P0 a O��F � �` " �.ROAD MO LECRES �s� ° �ia - e
� a � a a a a a v WEST PNA o PF °,�o, _ ,� � s�n ��v �a RF . o _ �" � R=0
1 a m a . WALUGAPARK x „ nROEry ' E o ' �, �a h �ao�`' e� a p��E csa s� � aa ' _ b Rono w aeR�� � ns�c.
� � a e.v �,�,a o o � � 've . � s� e , z� �� " o a �e STREer ' -.�. �
>1> `� �� s�so , - � a �
� , s ° o� � �+ .,,, a
� �= A SCIlOOIS
�
. 5w�
J� « . - e e =
s u�. � , �
J BtIR
- S
T
�
CH c��m� �
rP m
isaii c �Fh•ry9 . - zi
] � a �
V r
� 5 EC a , o, o arz ' j
0
f s � n a�
" s � F� ,�5� �� _ � ti �z o , ' o � �3WG�P tl R/O�F� " ' o a., ' � � '" e �� ea�I ry eza - - - a� �ss LL 2
] , '6� is axs �z �'C. � z e �. � _ , � ` �'�'H e � � . i.zz
�1 = . � � � o ft --
. sa �
�P0 s- rasemenr
. n c� � z
"�5 i�ese a s o seo .
�x IIMMT
Ao op° is n
�s� w �^
s �e s
„a,s SP , �.�
_ as� ._ a�sPa�
�
. �`A . _ LL
. �
� � . `�aso , � H =,—� ,�, �r�r_� _ s,RE
�-J'�€_ ,a� ry P �,
3� � � �° 9 �s "e�. , � _
ss� „asa o Ao� �
+'z ��aa - , � � — -
`9P do z
+ o'� is sxi �G SE r
� F P . .,, .3 - ., �K , ,. s,. �Mo
, s .,, . nrErfi �ma SWIM;. �wr �a
� , $ P� � ,. o r,
F ��-o ,s. Lak O w Cit Limit
A�c�R-o � , , e s e o s
�� _ a
� =�E _ �
. ssa a ,6, �..
� � � . � .b,
m M
„s3� 9 Y
� '�
9AA m, aa
6°`� =.P. is s3o lKs , _ - �y� PARK
R
� . , � SO . �I ., z �..
, v
P� s.� . ���onK� o . o � - m� �y/�� ,.
�a
E �
�e. so o � �5 0a3
h 5 " a w
„y m, o w �5 a� .,
_ � a p :„o � " ��..
.
„ y,, s � ,� ,.�. _
y 5 �oa� .a .,. os"E°
i ,S9a o : � ' � ns�,s o .PKE .,..; 'eono py e �5a� s �, ,s.�. d .s �( 11 1
,�" ' is sn s se �s� ,�. D e o �'� =�. �,!" ` x se�x � R c��a ensemenr 1\�V,°as -..GEOR6E R06ER5 PARK --�- a� '
. � � g e IAKE �se � ' F m
000 �soii , �'� d m 5, R � R
soos iseiz ,es so ,� .3 ro� p H
, A
K
s'is s N
a<r�N �
. , y Oil rasemervr
isoii �s oo - s R W
se e � eae O
O ����
$' /�o
� . 0
=,Rf- ,�,� �
,� �
� �.
�
$
F �
. N� _ ��
� s�� ;� ,,, o Es.A.Es�sEME�. �
e s��, � �J , � �REE� V
a _ nt Lin
� s s�s� ,so�o �� _ Cou es
�,
: f
ty�, 1 �s ox �OP ., ssso " - 3��,,. /� _&" 's.N ,o .. sT - m J
E ��` ,so,3 oAkRo�E �a . R=� ,,, � � . � REEr
s , m s ��,. � ,
e o�3 �
,s o,o � .
� . E�EME�. c��
ko�k„ a ,o Y
� o ,s o93 � � >
�o � � J
�, � � �
a � _ ��.
� -sa F
� 1 S, D o O
scxnn� s oso � ES � . FR� + HEST
1 �s ' - * ' i�is .. O " - UE e k_l
� ts a P o � �r� & NT.p� cVEN
s� �ew[sr�r�[ ts oxs g 9 se�a se��
oss ts oso o � >9 '$ � o u _ '
�e>» o o = _ a m EYP .�.
g G 4 a .
. e r � fi McV ...
ae"2
s9 ' n�nrvr[ssnrz byo . � ' � .. '.
�03 Q i os3 �� � .r � �; a � � a a ._
,s os� ,s t� T��=�=o o � n m �oRoa�o � Lake Oswe o U rban Services
� , . a ,s o9, � ,s N s � �r�c� o
s ,s,�, ,s,�, � kE ----------- g
� ,e,., a sW
� � � _
. � a �
� $ . _ _ , �o
� z p . sv
�
, e �
a� �,
,s,s. �s�=s oso _ ` � . - _
,s,,, �
_ k VE e �� /
, � �, �, � �, 'e� � o�,
f ti R,
a
� s , � � w m �
,s � s�, P ; �,�
,>o ��
o >> ts t �s ie, .,, � .+ Hry ,
� ie, - �/ isiei
� �PA o �.,+ D
R t� G
�Y easemenr _ fe�'F
. °R-'F�5.e .
I � �� ,
��
oo,a
0
���"
� � E
EA��� F�R - � o
woo -
D �
is iax is ise l
_ -�� ,� B ndar U B
. ,s„� $ , 9F ou S
o ,s,96 � x P °= o�.
l
eg s
PNA
,s,s3 a Y � )
n �
a �� P We9
g N 9�`°� e d
� ,e�„ � 5 � . p, e,kzb
� ^ ,T is xio ie xn is xix is xoo a _ - _ Q �� G e��E�PR, ., w ., % p , o � OS .T '`�6 " s.3 ,> ' � _ .,, � _ _ o�A�E `N�E 7J
I " isxao isms tsxa� isxii isi�3 � v e a o m a a a a 8 v s = o0 0 8 `g r � c�enrasemenr '05 .s� s ,�9 E ms z , io.si _ MAPLE 'r o .,, i� .,, r �`4RF.�s � s� PJE �� �
KABLE LANE � " ., � � 6 �s x3s �s x3, �s xax �s xis �s x�x z ` � �' rasemenr $ i,� SC R � �s�' .aoFs - _ _ _ _ _ STREET o �s •, e e e I'. { cou T PA R m
x�� �s ns �s xe> >s xaa - E° P ��s�'�' � � a ��so T UNE ec. , szz m a a a a a . o r�r�e smeer � 'L rou�r K I�
I �s xe� is xxa o � �,�nQ ��4 e o z P _ _ wnz w, o H�n „ss F
- ' ..�p o sis � z.i;, „n - v e - exs EN BERGIS N4 wv H �L
,s�ss ,s��, � R- 0 � o e e , _ �
� z �E�aa
� � �
a ,s�s, � � a E
sa s o � _
g �Rs^e �s xes �s xas ie ns �s:+n is x3x � � � y � ^ �R m ' 6 a , r.r _ - e < y s � > � _ = o a 8 5<E'� rvnruRE vRESERVE
m EXIT � ' , �, - - _ _ z �ssi _ � � .,, _ � ese o
� s �'� ,s 3„ ,s 3,o s��� ,., ���s I�-1;,0 � ���� �-�
_ . is�zo is�is isxe� � ` K G „ P � " ,. ._ � e . � � �E�c`
s xea v� .,, .,, �qk . e - asn � m� , , /
291 HARRtN v c�is �� r
GTONv � / �f , QP e �
ts z J .,, RACE 5 a - � �
�� l�VENIIE - y E 't TER „ :. > >wa � � _ _ _ .� � _ . J �.. P
� is 3x3 is 33o S a� L' � � � i»s � � � .,
� _ �6��� ' / � %S,�"' OAK LERRACE . _ A5� STREET � � �c<` ��
's axa - = isva ts at� T/ ^ _ . � a a � a k Qoa - - NSH STREET ?
e e v „ - , �s 3» SOUTH SHORE - � a a z,. s - asn sT
_ _ P z °v
e �9 _ P P - . ��
x a �c3ax .. .,, r ' _ - c/ + - P - - - ' �o i�is s. z ioi- ,. so9 - �� � _
6 ;
' ' �� ' > '� � ' a'' " :: � ' ' ,. s o z _
v 2 ..> r -� � s � o U o e >
� n� c oz �„
czs
�a... m _ ' -",�
p ,.
a � a a _ _ " � . io o ,�. _ �
n � .
. > P �
. � � � �
� e . � � .o J � � o
,,, .2 ,c 3s z, � " � _ ^ N . ,,,, f . ' " ^ � _ , z s,o so. - �i
N „ �� 4 ry ^ "
, � _ o o �
a _
w , _
� nz "
> >,
P ���
" ", �. " •,�� " ' � � , �s m � NATURALAREA r = �� a - � � .,, ' ' - a - . m o s,o �
s�s� ,s 3,3 � s=,s �s=es R „H3, . . n PN�4 � 1ERRA�E � v o a . . ;
, ,s,,, ,s.�� ,s., ... ,s„ s,,, . ,s 3s3 ,s 3ss ,s 3„ �.A,ao�, z Q__ �� � � R 7.5� � � _ _ ,, 990 � sAA . - �,
I �s ai, is a�o � °�• JE 0.�� � SOUTH - P 9a9 �oa r , y a pp s� z0 j m
�,s • 6
= o , _ , 6 � ,��
�E ,,,6
No p,, ,6 ,„o .�.. e,. �
»aao �s ae� is a�o is ass �e axx - �R� � Y� e e SfREEi � � z � • - _ nr�n ,v�° ow
� ,s a o a x � � � � m �F�=7,� Pt�As . _ sao o s,� sso "� � �
,s.e� ,s � s ,e ,s,,, ,s„o ,s,�, o e � �� � � �H � _ oAK . . . . _ _ - M
r e,�z " vaax �va3e �saxe � x Es $ g€o sNoqE e3s P a z e z , � _Y_�.i,.� siREEi Cl ^� ,ry nn« �
,s�„ Es� ,e��� . , , � �PNA a ��RE� SrREEr � F2-0 F
s,� w�� � mE a _ a�RE� srREEr
, a g m PARKA�AOEMr
,s s„s � �
� � �s a N 6��" _ Hoosi s = - -
is s aa aaa I z
sxs e pe5°� �6 _ = a
P � z
UVLG RM l"�r a a
�. , x n a s o w .
� s R � e � .. - z > _ �/
.J a, O r� , ' �
���R�� =�,ow��oMEs � P�VA
e _ ._. . � a s �
,s„3 0 <F
_ P o 0 0
� �fr o J
,c, cs cs a , , � P w�� �. - � _ - - ao
s asa s o � - - �i
a �s ,s aao � o ooinNo E . ��soH
� , "'� ,s�,o �s�,s r - 7 ' € 9' oave .. ..-.. .� � _ . . � _ .,, . � « .s oss " .n ,.
� s�e. w _ wuaei 6 .., . .� .� orFOE
, `�° ,s�,a A /� s: � ioz3 N
,s - srREEr � e , 0,3 0, ,o, PNA . .
= r
� a� �
/ 96
`��� I `y�� , P ��, E
. y� `` RosE R
� ,s�s3 � ,.s, , ,o
s a ,so, e� a
�� . �o
,s�ss .» . s
"� �, ry
. K
d e� , OP
� . n aL
e �o�? .. iiio U y s T
4WS�r" �4' ( P
� it�. t
s,3s �, J 5 SSQP K 8 STREET G
1 � F
PNA , e s
_ � �03�
, r� _
a � , , �
s�
, q P � .
��« ., ,03,
E- ,,, ���s �,
4. R - r�vrs. .
� �`ss � �
.. s, o s O N - ' ' �ws
� i�„s in» �. e�s iixo -. �w3 . ry SE
@ � �
0 1 0 , z e .. ¢ io3a
' � s�rvse.crzns �semenr a isoo ��� � �, z z a „ oi ���
�A�
Nuc ? `2
\� �
. s�,s ,s�,3 0 , � � o a , .s ... �5� ry
P , s. v z o v ae� �.. .z „ ,
�Y� i euRNH ���
� is sa3 �s exa 1^� � & � O SW M PARK E � s 4. 'Eo = �u � , .,. . - - - - ' '" < � s __ AM OAD
� N�'� F P s a i�.,,i D ., r . _ _ _ _ iiiz i.�. � ;9`� ., u
�4 - a - iii� - -
is,ss JP eo _
> 9 _ �
JYr� o��
�� e E � '"v s ..� - _
� SP s � .
ss, c � so�1� . - ry
a , ``=� . s
� `��6 ��
r �"` �°z �
. � �P s�oRE
m �
a � � �
e � ao� �
,,, m � o „ E�ARo .
, � �
, , a a�e � � ,
$- � � . s�
e e. � . ao
a � �s, , , .
a o „ 9���s a„ , . �A�.a �EOAR . , , < �
L is so� '6 , >> - - �
� , R=�"':��.:.
_ ;
a �
�,
v �, EER-7:5
. � o =s
_ � o �E��
F � _ ,s, AR srR ,
Etr y
ees / �� R
. �� �
��°"� ,,, ry
� 2 ,
,s e ��ss „oo a ,,. _�
is se3 �s vaa , _ ' GLENMORRI
is - 4
e96 a^ ,s e� 5 3 , 'e
� �
�so ebN�'° >
�s - o w 6' � . ' .
(°
9ke" 63� ssii 3 sovrHSHoae a ,
, is vo� a o ' SPy c�P`o R
1 �s�eo . o z z
es ,ee e . �z .��„e3; z z z . � - s _ �
o e P�S�oRE e ,
s,s s r N z � � �
@ e m "W z
� �� i�io s - 6REEN
N�
2`� �aa
� b FftESTATON z e
�is u a � 6� �°
e�o n �w
o ses z is• , s�r is °' �. o':
m °
p o ,s� ,�_,e .6 o 6�. a �I1lLG O� � `
is�xa ie oS� " 3��o 's ` x,�ss zz zv s a e iz.. -� . ._ izv .> z. iz, __ _ p �e°, , Rry ryF
�x� . 6� i ' cc,� ' . F
is�oo is� . y . o�'�, m z z zza -
e» R
e 2 W� �a,
iz�z _ � z s . E scouRr , .ns
. a - 'S� / - ., -
� 1 . .�. ,,. oMaN r r r -
h^
� �o� . � H , 6
6 , w w
p w��E oswEco " ' ,� '2'p ,s ,s ,s � > s,o
s � • � o „ m ~ r. e`
f s
a �s,�, � s �b,n 66�� a 6 ,.,, 6 a n s � � ^ �. .. _ _ s cr � .,, , , �
. � ,
� 9a
m > ' � p
-mz a,
� 'se,
� s � s a,
, , � a _ _ o N . m � . s,.= ' ' ,s , �6� ., . ., �z, z� �zss ,� % �
" 's9
�- o° '°ro
��s<.: N � , ��
o � � o
a ,s,�o o m 6 ,�� � z sss �;� a - a ,4 m ,665 e. . .,, �s ;� o o o � ., _ _ . _ e y ,,, � �z�� . � � �zz� , o
,� „�s � , � � _ �
,s„� ,F s,o ,s s�, s,�o � es, 6 �m � s E PNA
2 ,s, �,�, s, m � , o sP .
�e ne LG R:2 "w, SCHAEFER _ z 3 '�� „ s„ aucE srREEr „��
, , � _1 IN � s , z ,s, �,a,
s �„ � °� � =3 > � 2 �'�`' srR � �,00 sNR��E srRF � z o o � �,� �,as �P
.,, S �w-E ISLAND o�a. sP s e ' o, o „ 2�' _ Er izze ' - 6' �
E�.�*. �b�aF c ' � � �� s�*s ' a s r�nce .,, �e ' ' ' - � � � � , 5
�n,s� »x 5 sy6 N s� ,,n o - ' c, o ,� a a ' ' ' ��., - c �`pe
- 1 . � � ., , r" . , ,ss. s,z a a ��.e ,
�c E m o � 0 2 . _ n s, z z ��. - - - �
,s,9, . � � - _ z e ��., ,
r o �d
� z ,
� .. � , - - a r�°
_ , , 'k, , , - z z z z
� E
e�sx O 4 c
, � �D y, r ir,�es v � i ' o ,
� SS
iuncr �, o a c�N� e ' e� � ,
O , �
r H r
. S' ¢ e �ssz� a mr.e r. a r.i e e »,
J 0 s s
wAsl11 & .
6 NGT -
o - ., ss � is�z �s�s� r ' - R
S.e i�i r r r - - �„
� sfW G:�R U= _ , r ARE
L 3,a
� °F' ,»a ,
� , ,s, �� r �„ �
E
. .. J . H r � .. e a A
�b , , . a .. a e
89 � e
N � v q0
� SH� � �
� O
H9 � �
� �° o " h �NA
, . w E6 r .
F /�,
o � � N , os ,
, �a�Rr� e �REsr�
Ew oH ao� . �EM�o�K
� �F �
, � N I��V
= a ,o �AR � �= oME SrREE1�
. � �s r�R��w
a� �;°
@ r s ss R � .,, ,
ise �'<a , � ., 4_ �
�y 1 HEMLOCK�5 REET Q,
WASHINGiONCOIIRT�1 y' WE0. �o°" � �E OpE BOULE BOf1LFVqRp _ +��.en L + _ - _ a 7 _ _ _
ee� 8 / cRe2rion N VqR��� a !' +« i�ss . � �
is�.. 5 Po - �i . , ., C�
P� s > CHF
. ee z „ , RRV o ' - - s . ., ,
s S e . a - ' - ., 'T
, a "°R 3�.�
�� a �`°°� ,
,, �
5� � 6 �
, e = . �sEME�. E ,� , �
P ise sez a x e HO ' .. � G
eeo �, � _ � � - s � AO a
'pCt
°:So' 1 a : & a -
- . c �, .,, � . P . o o � a e - .
04 � S a
e e o e . _ , a = . a , r z�o ., > a siaFci .p.
� E i K
� s . a U'�o - z - oc
se / � ML
F . a NE
- � Pt ���P� > a
v �C ,
I. M
P � - _ v
sees _ b�
�� � - iesi
�sa„ � ft-10 ,
e €5 0 . �P , e �o
� ss s .. s +seoe ., o n �s z e � e+�o
�•
R � a,. zs
w ,s,zo �
os r _ < < R
� %� . , � � ��3 za za
O i , ,
w z� r
a is � . 9� F ., $
� ses i s � ^ J
w w ses�r � 6. � m
s s
� ) ossr � se
� � � H 6g ¢ i s s � e. r. F �, .��. ' :; =
yo- y
or
2a '� e^
' o _
' o sie see�U' ' = sess m � � �s� z, '
e ise.e ez � P�c�v 2 �
r �
� _ o � s o sa�. ,ss„ a �sa a . _ � g$. 9 ,,, _ ,s � �
� F �
H s - � .
ss s 1fVLG R 2.5 �...
F' �
a � ,sa, 3 ,,,, , n . P F
°c` rasemen i ii
o U . �� - �x - ?
ise � 3 3 �: �+ -
3 s.z /
�P s?, _ !�
< ti _
f iesi
� & s G+� _
1 E � , � ;
�A° � sa � n i""
I � zs s i r
../ �i tlJ
s . . . � � , P��
- � ��R� _ s �
P , �s�, saso ,, s �
- a `��� P��E s.
�
�ssoo � _ n� , Wes,Ba : � �
P �r� S - s.�e ise�i ise�e 3 Y e e � P � � `� �s�. ,z, + STREET -, = 8
.� � s / aP"- �semenr r � . F , ¢ zs �.z
M z S »zz.
s ex;." N c , �, s vc i. -
F M I � P .
0. s 6�e�s e
�'. , , , , , , F rzz ? -
E s N N E S' N ., ., ., ., ., .,
R N N - �s� u KILKENNY pRVE - -
isese P E ise� �
s s , s e pQ � G ' _
9 £� s
8� m Q
NI�Sj e ^C` -
s�3 WL � e, . 3 = _ _ �-sa �,
s so - x <
sasi , m , , � , o P� z � - - ,s .�
v o �a z
� o o ,s�o R '� e i.o. s
a s isas _ E z -
e e , a
o% s €
a,�P l � � � ,� � , E � �„
// � , , -�' a
$� , � � p z
PN 0.\ z
� �sbss' , T - z
. ze D ''a - - iss. .. iss - - a a
a = "i% R ns ' i.s
u z o E a
a� a < �F a
, a �
- - � HAVEN E P� .,
/' r �
A�
W+ P s� . ee°� E
9'
sss i o 4�P isse � i r �6t'e.54 .nS r ROA� = m . U
'�t°� � � e m a a a - ...
N
Z= �
e E
ses �➢`#2 0 � _
�. N _ is�z
iss � A
sese s N 3 J �LE � isx
o $ . G _ t. ..�s
- , . , :. isary �a�LS �s..z _ �a+ -
.� _ _ it, HALLIN�LEM
Y 3 a" . �6 m ,_ _ 4% � ^ ' isa- � , ' ' seos e
� Si .- U 4 0 SHO < w ios» � _ _ _ -
Si � RE
- . s o as � T - .+' y
. � �9 r d
e v �Te _ .,, i..
4.5 �e o is.� swz r eaio s � � � Z o Z
,. > a �s� - s.. e . _ , - � SCHooL
a' � sa�i 9 . '°�5 , � � - ,. . uecH
? ise�e �s - , AD a <3 > >se.s „ ' STREET issz
. 0.0 a P a a a a z C` a c . i,s.
- i�eee @ 6j 0 a - 3 isss
R o . o s �sarz £ � - - P ises i.uz
i�ooi E s _ $ s. � � - z � _
�8 P F W , - - . ,r �E C cF P
. �6ss . , LARCH
_ � e - 9 , �
0� n V � o
. G � e
FR m STREET R�
N caEsr P
e NE a s �
v � V
�.�z s Nn o , . - +
� �3 C
� - e '$ x - � � E
�5?ry � s s
v� eei is . » �z = _ .. o a a ?� - - -
t ey s
a �Ia > ise�z s. - i,es s�
> � a„ seaa o �, i+ - - - isaa i,r.
m 9 3°�� o
4 PO e � F
- O a � ssz
� . A� . � a , , v � �s.,
. m
-�' R1 v a _
_ �
a : '� s �
. u �F� o a
- a . sbr�lrv� , . 9s s, e r o o ' so
9 e� a
_ inme �9k� � , °'s a
9 E m o isi,
h a �
s..� �. .� , n �,
d o � . a t __ 3. �
s.� s z s a w°° . � � 0 4 - ,
� N
� .6 � - �SE � a
� ,S
� s s�i E � sGEj _ s
iuc[o � 4
swEco v L > e z R � s �8 s is�
, � - �s G � P is�s
��
P PNA � . N �.
_ s � � ss � oxFORo � s„
� � , � A C RCLEm ,
- z �� a � �' - as � �
. s 5q S s n��Ame
o f2
�i is.sz - - - - vs cT' H
.: AREA �6 .,, .,, .,, .,, .,, .,, .,, .. - _ _ o"W , .,, , -
� r s ' - s �s& y ., .,, .,, .,, .
. $ �s s�e . o - {� - - -
., . , , 2 �s - s
� . � e . 5 - � sss � _ �
4r t� _ � 2'a � o ''2 � + _. sss m. �
s r .n .,, .,, FF - ss M
ii , s�[. z. ��f�[� _ � e .__ P o„ r.
� 6 s�.
� � _ o e c
9R�' A b z � U
�0 rasem
_ m &
Y�
o+ _ � , .� Q AS�E
�i W 3 >>s ., e �N
EST P _ GRtF Ao i ARF H MF P9 s
r _NiREt u c o . r mEE. s,s VOUTH VILLAGES
0 H
urt"' ,va � .
�
AN °E
F h
8 i
_ . ROH� `S(/ -
_ i�s � _ P sr. F
,�, o r� . � PNA 5
P N
S o > > e
V R _ � i � s e .so sss sa. q
GN x N
f, n �o >> . r y < -
PNA s . .
ym
w i� s�o - - - , . CHRISTIE CAMPUS
AV _ D GR ^r
Q . � .o � OA GENTRE o.,s -
c , H G �si
. ROH� �N� � .,
Q � > > __ sss - �.
G
� _ � e �x � R-7.5 a
�� ,�, � m a a
� o , �aRE s - a o o� � s
= a ,�, � - � � ,�
s aa � oE E R
o � o a9 �
� o e m,
� 0 6
: o.
. : . �.
fr e i�o - io - D
i s P � �
o r � oS
� @ k oW l O
� � HO �
�I� _ � ' W. � a e a a a a a a a i�i. � : .. �o »z ME
� e e e , i�oea ¢ o � � a a � - i.i �a � �i .,e CORNELL i�zs ff A
� z; � s , ��� � � � ��o i�.e vond z e'a�: s� E _ ¢ a e . =�' e cR - ,� _ HERON CREEK
� a� i�� i�o�s � �nE � � o o ,. . 6ta ° s ,F3 6 ' ' �n�' ' ' ' „ �
. ��� ? .s z .. NFv - - ' �x , OPEN � ' - -
�I� < a e P a.
� . s'P\ °' .. � �,�-� a e9 �, ea `,�, ,�E � s �,w� zs �.� �' �, 'e.% "2 o . o Tw ,�. „e, o o o o o ' P a o v srq HIGHACADEMV y S<-
I �" � i�i,- Rp css P s - - �z � "i & ' a 0 SPACE � � f eAasan �
F' - oP v - i�oeo - - - ., R 4-� FT J P`
_ s c> o , s ' - 2 O
, . T o o � ! S a. - ory
�oa z� �
�� o�� � . ' � p
� » > .• �: oa.. `o.
� o
`as - Y �, _ ¢ PAL �'�u sss uarEeoe.ox.sF
� �F
_ ' i ii � t,g"•' _
� .v - _ �x isszo
�
� i�isi �'MZ2 a o .
� _ _ _ _ _ _ _ �G. $ �
� PNARK \
� � , �, a ���
��s� �
< e Poo�
� � � s �
� ., x. , y �s aP� , a � sn . �
��� CA �
N'c��� MPU J
a 5 � \
C1 'S
O E CHURCH n�MAN � s
's,�
, sax _ 3 . � .,
�3 v G W 4�
0.os i�z.. ,.Y° o Av ss ,� ,� ' t
a£`��
6wA� APFER y
� � � . � �'�
, . � "� , ��ARk ER -c�
i � ,a . <�' , r s a � , � ePa _ � . �„ p' , �o�R1 oR��E � , � ��ER � � �� � ����
�� „ `� 9 s� � �,�,� _ � a'� aoAo _ - ,,,zs e - - _ " „ ;o c�aan av �v , ¢- <o'` ��� + 2'�
�h , E ' n � a � � a _ 6 �. �'ir s o r e v P a e �ee on 'O P< <e
2 v v a r, i. , . P
` R65E4Jb0 �z � � � � P� 4!"^T: _ , ise : f �1
� Sf ^ ' = JE t� - o. N o. � � ., - _ i� a��onc ��4, F
aEEi 9 E P „ P R
m S
� r �z�� s �
� ��0. r z M"
- irzs� 'i5 P < a
iiis � i r 9
x N8 oY 2
O � 3
, a
c �a �
.p' o ,.,sa 9 A a = o,
E > o- � �
� R
� �a e
a '°s W , . � �+°`
i�zs. t�e� e a e a s , � `
D i�i.o - { ziPy�
2 t a
S t � a _ _ _ _ i� C
3
e �is � ?
9
. S ,�,y�
� 4 , �
c a` a
� 'e
. rA o
D �z e � � P �.zs + G ���
G U !
�r a , ., � ., ,
J d R
��s � � ,
- . e�o ., ., 1
: c \ 'y�
� PPF i
, G
� � , E
, R
N , � - cENa^ 0 �t .: -
d cj�°
�z� � �
e �z�a , .. i�zzo . -�Z�
z �R
I c ���ry P .3� 4,Pc�
s CiI
rz� � � M
�z �no i�zoo ., ,..a-, oRi ? �
�.s ��eo . x MAP t
LEL
s A EAF
a �
� , 0
ZA a 1
�
coee �e , . � .
m tr� 3 o se a � .
k���Es ,�o .��" � ,�� �,a�� ma wnv z z ' = a " �,�ao �` � s, „��o oao „��. _ „zo, ` - s„�a - .>°` �EAE � e-E�� �6 � oyP
� � >» e i»zi i»i� O , e . '�, _ _ - _ _ _ �
� � . 3
i�z� P g
a osro �
_ �.aoo ,. . - ., ' ' _ . . ' >3 . m o o �,� , �,� .�« , _ o v e a o o o „� ' ' ' ceMereRv ' u a e- - F
a �,- �,�, s ., v v v v = s z , �° a „zz � a oo..A�E �o "°
� �s , s>e , , ry�e �sa.
aa� , o "� �a � .,, s� „ , ' ,.z,� Konw000 �
�s oR ���
�
S P"��
� �,�a, „aso _ �
�
��
Y'
�wio „
,, wo �» ,
,a o 00 6 ,z,a
osso i s �osss , �as sr� ��a .� _ � .,,
REEi� _
3 „" 3 a e
� o a� s. ,., .< _ �
K
w O N � �
s �. „� ., i e e v � s
�+s
� ��� �;✓ i�z noo rveA�rry crR
ry �i �.'fa ....r .."' sS r ,,.. " �s ��33 �� ��o . i�zsz srvee s.vee. �
v ��s � =Y �R VE o »_i �i P`�
s
�
� "�.rs � " e. ,
.,o,
��.
ee �s " �e�
� s a�� e, � < � r>3.�.s � ' s. a �>�y ,�
�zso � -� x »zse i�, ' ��.s� � savrvA
0 o aswEcov�ACE ., s ..s :, ; - P9 s a . . �
v oq �� � > e e � '� '�a '"es o i�rc ''�s' '�r "za i�»� .� LL �'' CEMETERY �� � P ee o*� �. � EF'
o i�a�o �i .4••". < s, _ -
i��. �� � a
��
m e
N �, �
+ s . e s� i�as� n" � ¢�' e e e ^ - "' e , � i�.'fa3
., .. - P s ° . ., � N
+ � � WaEN zoo - 9 �
� _ sREEt e � - SISTERS OFJTHE HOLV coHveH,
_ i»ez s ew a ' '
. o n ss
I 3s . e `a .
o �
o s , . , s ,�s�s.Eo , �.�� E. _; � , ,> e � , . e � e e , > o
., .. w m . _ .,, ,>,a
P
� ; _ r e e: . ., ., - ' �,a. a �>, o e � m _ sz�� ROCK
� _ _ _ = e e e � z , , �, F
� ivwc - . ., ., .�s � ,s
m o
z.�
i �/ ^'s 9 � a .,, .,, .,, .,, .,, .,, i��zs a .
�»o a i�w� o . a .,, E^
� rvo�
'S'y ' ' - - ,,,,a '� ,,,,, NnveN srRE�r ,,,s „s $ a o oH „�o f� .. ,,,,s ,,,,s LAKEOSWEGO ,,,o, �� Ea -, GLENMORRIE F�, NAMES-MARVLHURST ���FF ¢p5 �p
qM ., ., s s . '�, z Hiu �,aza q � �,�ss o „ A�e o = oeuwoo � , FeaNwo V R �,�oo � r�aERosE ' � ,
I '4 a �-�� �" � � oH � s �� aoRivEN SP - s�o PARK No�sE � R�SUN
��e� e 2 . MUNICIPAL - - �,..
'� � „
�s, c�
, ¢ ia�
ISLAND
, ' = 3no '� ,.. _
I . _ m e N i��i .3`'
, - - � , ., ' i�s a a � a � �44'
EMY �sse PT� . r � e �2�
i��so aa � � ti
,a. ,s �,, ,�F�-1,5
a
,� z ,_. �,a � _ ,,s. „p � E
.. _ � 2 , , � , E
�zs, i�s�s . � r , � e a v a a - ' GOLF COURSE p s
.�°� �, � , - a v a a ' - a�v
h, � a a a - s _ MARVSWOODS
r� �. �cx a a a s`P
o �• o
�° a PNA
o a �
� „ ��� ���
,,. ,s�� ,s o ��` �oo a
-� ,� > > _ �,»,
o E � a�
� s N ,.
� ,,o ,s. ,
s ,s� a nn�� � , HOG ISLAND
'�s � �,� i esz
T` ,s. E .n�A�ov, .
re, , ( )
'¢ � ,
, , N �"
�s.. �e . � o �F i.s� E
aN
S D .
> >» Ja9�� ia� �
�A �?�
szo �s� 1°
�see a a d _
� � � s. o � OR V 'a
Z 3 .� �' �. i ii �es �ae 2 E o �� �I
e � ,ss n�s , ,� = R�7,V�5 s � � � �� o�.REs�
O1= 8 �� z i�.vz i�ssa = �..a i�.zz .� g � ° ' �&; � s : ' » e ' � i�me , ouAocneA ` ��ao� '"2�
�z �z.. _.iam �.. �sz �.�� ��ae �-i '-s' o e i�aan .� ,i s. ., ' ' ' ' ' ' � �s. m a m- x �
m �s �sz a - � � s = - - � 3 v ����� �� a�se
�sio ��_, �sz� i�sie � 2 v
a s's s v . . � ., - ,
/y .. �ss a v�S�P . .,, , . '9si
i�s» E
� mP P
i �: 'SS� s � S - .,, � . O
��so �0 6 - J �
�ss `� � a .,,
O P
GOODS �-� �sse � c 3 , P
, ., MARVSWOODS
PN ,�s �
!� P F
. sAFEwAv , E
O �
� �sz o
O t. . E
� >> J N
- �, �se r f i�o FS
.� nzs P- . . �s�. �s� Fono ..
P�o N
o e P9
..� i�s.� z "&s �Es, �"FA i�r.� of A tf F
cENTER �s !R 2 - � ��6 CLOVEFLEAF R� P� +
. ., W� � HOA�� E 4i i»>s x
- . s �s. �sss +a� e R _ Y ' _ �OV i» . 'Y Es�
�s�s � a � cLUB HousE I ?
"��P , � �� =15 � M
� s � � ,
� ,
�,�, s J � � P � 1 P
¢ o A�ES �
�,�. MARYLHURST
oFIN A s N
DL �s�� . � P�
AV SJ W , f t s �Q�
V ROAO' -
O
> >zi i�n� c s � s „ W�EOswE�
sH�a�r , � r w . �t
r+os a e � , i� O��
ss 3
o , �4r
� c H
3a - o T P��
0 V a rtESEavoiR �
�z e _ s R o i�e i»s, w .
� �z�s � "&' .
�e r C ' o � .� �
�zs L «' � . . cenreR
� � ss
inz� � ¢ S . L^q �
r n � OE - � F
� s UNIVERSITY
_ _ , ,s� �,s, �`
a ,. H�� I
,s�z c
rc : -
ou '&
a
r e ��
Ery R °h'''s� �sz � ?, a � s i I N .
E� oRo
�s�s 5 . �
�sz a z so � Ev'
��e, _ � IANE s s o �'.8°hv >» �� �J*
� o N
.�b'as � ' � - �x> >_
> s . i .
�zs 'GJ �_ s N i
ir �zs. � o , v ��"'6 - e.
,sao c o . s .� I� �I
¢ sb,a � �zsa i�zsz i�z.a i�v> >zz� � , o .. c ..: e , � zi °e o . p�F m o a o ,� i.
i�ss- � i�v uNE i�zzi 'S� o ''�9os c ^ m .. - r i�szs o s - i�ai i�si� S i i 3i�i
� � �.� ,s. s o PNA p ��� � P�a�. MAR�
I'P no� , �
, � = so , m
�ss, s 30
a�� _ �s� in,s
MER NSQUARE e�$ � i i� i�se> >se i�sei �sa� �ss - s - .. �- m � ��asa s J�S ' 3�ss
isr3� CEN �see �se i�s�� n�� �> . _ � � in, s ' mr.c r a> S 3in� i.
i�se� E� n z inoo Q� o
1` s � N,�
� � o
904, a a
�„�� ,sa� ��EAso�oa SP
� , o � �
sao , „o N o �,=.s ,sa � r= a ,� , a ,, , �
,,, s � r ��'s
,,. -m'.
mz C "h 9 PS
in m < i�sse . 'T n
isms o G�P zzw � inss v
e S F
L � �u � J
Y o � e v t
imo P V ��e'�' m
_ �ia . �c5, . NO
I �
n.� �e�� o r 41RC inso �..ROP� � O
ins� m �s s C � �� 4,
ini s S� J�� � .
e d'" s.
ti oos i�zn � � w N �
IP _ � �
, �v.�,z9 MA�rE�A��E ��s .
nss o - .o K _ s BER , a
I , � in. , ve
-6 o c � ��
_ sz z.i 4 0o v , ., �
nze ��
�.u.�. , L4KERIDGE . �.
« . .,. ., OR �.
ux. ,o IV �� 9�2 Pac F c nrvv
N „s � �� -
�ns „so s �,,, �,sa, , o �R s �, � �„_ � � � E „ss --- m x � A � ,m
siniioN e��r ,. N g' » . �,, . BER�iS — � _ �A�A
�.u,. I � K �,e� u � ,
e � O �� 8 s 9
- r i . . .. �az.
N s HIGH SCHOOL �
�ei , �ei, z - F�o r i 3iz� 3ies w'
s $ a
t���ox ., PB F. E e i�sso + .
5 N9 i H
I V ,
ozo . eo, _ ' , zii a 9 �. a a � . e
i�e, so _ J O w,.
E 6 v
r ACAoen� � � �S"
� N
». C
N = ,,,ss
o s �,s� „5 �„s� _ ,,,,
�I�A _
, ea �o�,E s „ss �, _s� �Sr6��p �,a,. s, _ �,�� �,s.� e ., � - � � — � � e = o= � ry � , s.�A.�ER�E �
�so �,, �r � a m „ —_ ,,, ,�,oa
f s., � � ,
a a _ a"y� , �..
as ERSRo ,s� , ,
R � 2
OA i�se R iv.a
D �
J �
e ez n �s � x o A '�W���
- a �so � r . °<
�, z, P F R
9� . �..e r �.ss
VB � rz � O
r _ ✓C
aa 3 � � F
, ��k
e s � ga
e. i Hry
D I 3 s e
OA - e � R k
R i
� k 2
anE oN m
k V e
ERR - R
ES F . � R arrar.
ON i i
BO sz� no _
inoi h�
e�e a�,., z ��E
e9 r r �
eEre � A F
r eo � /C �c`
I e � z.i �
��¢�� „� �- "& on
s S o�e � 9 O ( ar J D P
t�o i � � s � � v
a,o ,s , � I�-,1"0 �aR�
. � P
� o -1�Q'
� „ o,,�
0a u, � w
�,a.s :� ,e�s , a �� me - , R� <^
�,aoo e� � e , a
LO� 4 e :
o a o i�e.z oe � . _ � �Op
e o � RN $
rer. O �P
.s n , _ ��Rosses
i W
� C � n w3�
u �v - C
eE i . a '� m�L �
� 6 > >z i . - O �
, . A.4 °'x � P<
„ 5
s a � e„ � ER
3 i . .i. 3im �RS
Q oa i o
I` m s f
eae i�es� i�e�e „ r.z. , o 'S ro�Rsa�r.Recrv�Rcry J �G
� 9P
O PT�
. e�s ,�e�o n.� - r� , " ��R�
G�
� z.5 na� ._ r �2 arrce O
,.�s - ��Z a -
1� �a. i
� a rs i 4
tt E ' .. . .�s � m> >zso _ _ _ , �i �i .. OV . s _ ��e
� ERLO ea 9 E ,
OK � e
I :Wo� urvc - _ i�eoo .+ � �I .
- �" �.� »e� �e� i�ee� i�ees .r x 3za .s. �ss� W r^F33 , �RIVE sso .�-. �� P � p common P _ �
a oa v s : �i i�e�s� i� SCHO �ez� a & W
. a ixq'os �.
o.s�
-� sn[i o. �� . . .*v.�
' �'•*' � ~ , �>��a ,,•� ine�m ., ESTVIo OURT �� � 0�2 . a- ��m OVERLOOK S O r.nce x5
� ��
t�iso 'i� m.�'° s uAc� �ese ° .
m �
� o e ..�o�� E ., reizi N rs.s.s ..s�. p m � EW � �Ot- h � . � �RIVE ,� �ci` ^ pS� _
e � fl, '
�P ..o� � e.z, i�eoe `- i�e7a . .^`" - 'rsno i>.e�> o i�se, ne� m � P s ; e� .. T ' .�z i�. � r �ti JP� srveu 3iss FO�E?
I .�.rv-�s � �z� �� a i�.z �.i .r @ .sie � �n a p E e � e `i �' . ' .. ia». i�az � 4 crv�e� �e
..te a o.. re�z " o �r
�� ��...� n [ r[ , o ,�� � ? i�sz °" .... :. R � �e. � i�ai a�w �' �, a sr . �i iaeoo _ rr+ncln ii bo° (HIy,
Pp ;«.s�o ,. 1 � _ . - �a� �aso �
A g � .�z ., qh rsr.o �� p �. �. � o � _ � u . n o i�i i�.ei o ia3zs - ' ` .us `` �was� ,
�° _ �e��. . �,e,e o�o a m I .�
,. - nz d_ , m �. a HAZELIAFIELDAT - - MARYLHURST
. .z i�.i i�. s.3o o�tm �i ce
,; Y, � s�e � a�
, �a reom� �d a c,,
�os� ' e000 o, o ., r »s, m re�
, �F � I sas� �, > . a., «,,... o� „ � e.,, a , 9 . > �,a�� � a _ ,a �` v o � „�. �ss ,�
a» L. � ,aa, _ � F ,�, �0��5
r rn � � COMMIINTv O s, A
P o >> S c, i�.z� 3�
E� P F oo e S 9 9
. . n LUSCHERFARM
a e
I UNIVERSITY
�` �
'o e �.se e. ��gW e.z. i�me ieiai L., .a sso i�e.e roo� .,, . G�� z � ° F GREENo,u FF ORIVE �9 � .V ( ane° F � zo .,,
e* . e S . �.� ' a '` z3,� �z� IAKERDGEWARD �� �e »« + � vAv�on �vT P
� I y .+ ao � soa Y - i�ezo ' issi
P iew. '3 ieia� . _ - - J n
¢ e.e ¢ i�.ss 8 _ e ' ,,, .,, .,, .,, ,� �sz �.wo _ " ` cemereRv o
R '&
I �
Qo y g
,,, a � s _ „ - �5 = ���s�' I ,. ca
e , 9 ,ai
> - o z.z LAKE OSWEGO ..v
� � �,.oe „. .�k �
s �'e, ���,MARA ,
� aisi sio s R a , ,
00o y�e m ,
O �P ieiee
w L P
a R-15
� s ,.
„ �� s� � o ,
w 9 = o ,m
�a �o s. ,�„> A Q �oa o, .. w
a �,�F az, .a,s �a � > ,;o °°s
, , ,a�e
��
o ae� „
i a a e e . ,eo „ � '�
e : „�� a � aE�MORE p -a, E
. „ a a�. ., ., e::, �, � o�, e ea � �s eoso �eo�o �� "9se �,s.es o o wnv m ,e 2w o � �--` z.�� g E �,.,. DOG PARK � o 'o sk »�a � q ,
F� 9 � ,R a _ ieia, ieiz, � ,eo„ ie�ss ieis� , . s, �w $ y9 i,wi .r ., �p)� ,� � q �cANo ,,, ' " F`2 \ , �oECS
y s z. ieoio w ' " . 'p ' e� q �.
O i
'� 2 /� ln '" 'e9 � i�m � n' s s _ '
� m o a9�3 ieoi� P � � a
,. � .ao y ,e i. o o .
� n e.,� y� y� N izi w . ' ," <e w000soe � �e� AN i�s�s T .
w e s uKERIDGE ' L, cRc�e 'a��o o '9''a ,�s�, �s,."s,� WEST 6E `-, e � `96 o 0 C(AR �°sF��t pk � `OC`,t, ��M1�Ea
/ �� I _ �eo. , a a ., a a U �^eP� G ., e . R
� ` YFa ,x .` �' ^ _ _ r� s � � °' �e w' :. '>s <..o � � s �s � 0 8 ie,
, z � .r N � � ..s z�zi .,, ,
� s^ .� � - �� e „ . s s s ,
a �
s , _ _ ieie semenr g y s ELEM NTARV F . P _ �3 �5 .� %
� _ �P' . � �° 3 �i�� '��.. _
P O E e iei�s r s & p .,, � �
� � �aN. �
O � F z'3a � � _ .. ie.z� eers sy''i SCHOOL , - .o �o '�P a $CH E ORIVE . ' . � .ss CHIIRCH - � �e �'. p »so _ _ �s R` ' N0.' ' �i
o '+.�., �p . ",Q - , TREE .. L, eo.zo c ��ai 9�P� x3ii »ssi i�s, � P a , .,, a
t m 2 STREET ' i g � _ � _ s " .a VP��g g � - �
kNc - i�e E t�c
e�� L.o . . V s
s o ¢ �_ R C� , .1F'T
conoon�n�n�s n 4
D�
„ - v _ � .. E aisa ,
KEN a
NYC ee.. . N e ,{.
ROF v Y' , ft s.
T Y i P
P F a ya o ��.
{ � wAv o e � s A � � 36 6 N � a _.. �, ,� ,, ,e �, z �'2 ,e �� s� o �9
s� °"a� . e o a�oo a - - �rw, � , <s, _ � m��.e Ro�EPo��,EOR - ----•------ , h. „ o �s �5 0 � Ro
., ... Q a � - zzss \ re�_ .a 33 ., �.is CHER� ,2 .t-�•q 3'
o - 6 e � . z. � za . 90 u � ,a t"4^�z i�esi i�.00 � � - o . .. � _ iu,�c ^� � . AR00R o o `� �4� ,yy�
0o ieiz � - �e>>s �ra�a , e o �s Q-
� �E
�z�� . � � i ii �U v ae
w�� e o 0
x N�( "Po s �
NE sz. s
N > > 9
e z� z . EG''6 3i.c
r r �N a
- eAsenervr o R _ E . N_
� _ - _ , �" . , LQF ,
, . .. - 9r`' ENkn J o .,
�I r . _ _ _ _- cE 3� � 3<�o E''
o , P
� e �
� ' ' s�s x ss - aiz- , s e, .,, � , ,
e �a�'
s , ��¢ y
_ n �
- �a� , �� �ao�o �,� x�= „mo
o _ s r a � e r
�I s � � x°m
_ � _ UHLATA _ �fANE s OR VE m ' � '�� . o - z� szz �� <L� �W << �'° 6°e '�' � 3nd ��'�'
� � - _ ez�s � � �, + 4 � '� , 3iz� s
R Q
� � e �
.� - 3s - � t{� 3icz
i P
m s - s�� � a s c E a
�s - . . r a a '�^cf52
� r .. s i�sro `Y. o O' e
E iei�z T �
� NNY s e e + ,p
�VA a °A s�
0 o°eo _ - _ �n ' - _ _ _ - e`rs • �Ev '�, ^ ,x�. s,� _ sz o a y F ,a *�`�` Pa� ;G �'P � � '
_ - .. ieieo �M rvY S �''g � � 9T 9 , ,,, �e aN �Y
o 's STREET NENNY STREET = - s.zi eroou.xR�sxs* a � iei-� NEER O�R r 33 � . � ° °a f ZF,6 w '{ �� � � F � � „ - a QO
_ � � P10 i J b - �av d a A _ .a . 3zz. ,
:. ' o a e7 g a e
O � � 0 3ia
_ . ,�a� ,s PNA
, '� a,,. e < . , � a,. . oR��E . _ , � . eoR e
s � .�s �P = _ . sw� s��. . a��� e�� , ,, m �a,_� ,�.. ao, _ T o �� . AR .a
„ �P s , a = s , r r s s
9 _ e s . ., ss
� y = s ee s
� . e es ,
sr e � ,m e = e :... s .. u � � e�se ^ � ni e-e - e . � 3x s � ,e a ixazi o ,� RG� , � coP e„6�' �% +e pa 4. O
y. , N
o � 'm
�az�a - e e e = e . . . _ ,s3 3 ��� .. �a��, e = �a�oa o ez, ez �` � LUSCHER FARM � F o a `�v� ".v s R�o
�� � _ - _ ., , e � �a o "_ �az " ,aa, _ _ _ � �o ,, s ., , ,� . �,�. ., F
9e� s .�°0 , o . . = a�ss a� ,aa, �� P��" �, ��os �s s � e � z �S ,ea„ �,eP` _ - swE�o P � � Pe o o s eyPc,
� s ez� " •a s zaa _ 'e � ier� _ ^ �� +i�° ie�ss e 30 _ ..� � �s �eaoe . ,� �yy.c� ePRkW � Z 6 isis. ROBINWOOD _ e
'� 090" �s seza ciRCLE iexi ` a. .. � 'b n e ixai� eree�E 3' ` e.z� =o u . . � r . �63+ ry .a
p , ieas, a . 0 2 > > >sac� � < �
o iez + N � < .r s � i i.. s
�a � n H � PARK
�g ieoeo � _ ,. -
r P a�}� _ �s.�
. � I�A� , � �a o
s ea. ��a nA�A,� swEs, �, _ � e
��SR� < R, e�„ ., R�o�E� , .
a �_, ao oH�� 3, �"�
,a��, o E� 3 3
$ w s
. ��� 5 Es; , .
� R�o� � ,�,s
a�s ea„ `�� , �E ao s 9 �
�e7es �
F �� � �
� , . A
�� a aa A : .,
3 z N .
se . � _ . - . n o AL '�3.�,: ! ,a
, e a sarvir .. 'O is.i� .r . c a
$ ie'�z � _ � v�r.tir � iex� . '
s � � C
�se , zo - e� P �
ex e . n x `h�w +
'� � a� £ xs ieoz
o . a�s r xa . �d. ` �
s e = .. s r � m aea s /<
�
asz a iaze � iai� a i � (� �eanz (Z
. a� a, PNA , �
, s., a 9roo . , 4
s wnv ,
_ - � - s ,. . � h
u �Afl . . +
a _ l o - _ SO��9 . , y�i
MaE , R-1�5�A�� P
R�R = a �.
�� o fl P a
r sr � _ . . e W
� A ,
_ , „ _ 4 o e\ r 'v
�� 9s - iaiz�
n e n 9 ie�oo �
a'6 e e�s �A o zsz S
a� O ieano
Po9 F RNBROOK 5 LL +� is.z 3
m is '
0 E r �z � � e.. ,e O
T�4.e z 3 .. C
e»z .a a �ei3z a y `� � �
�c s ¢ d � � .v .
FEv U ea�e as - , a OS 9
a$ NBROOK s�, o , i . e'- s
sn - 3 3 n i � 3'0.'
? * �
'RP s n o 6
iewe P��
s � a F
o -z cr . es.� . _ � R NY� � .a �
a ii > S �o
� r, P
� O� a - rov � a, a K
�0 ieisi
s F ZM1 s
$
Veg �ea>> - r e a m ie�ao o e 5 � �F
e a� �s F y
- r,r s MIDHILL � s
� e S
s�e. � P
0 0 . _ &�e e a .+r ,Aa, s . �.� � ., s�, �,s H�..�.��:, ,m ��' o " s , cr s , QP�yy��,� � � COOKS ry ,,, s _ ROse s s �,a `F� �F ,e �,z3z �r ac �ze<
P iesse o _ V� ie..-a �� es�� p �a� e < < � s � :r.� p Mp , ep' . . o '
O �V ie.zi ese - a < esoz � s NT r PARK
' . iea�e > > iez� '"b ie�eo _ ��
r e��s e esos s ie�cs %5 _ �� c�P m
e- 3 . BUTTE , � , ,� , �
s o s
�a - z�z � es � e
�.z s ,a3„ zs,s 6
as� � _ .�s, e _ , . .a°`� �
� . e .
es.e wrv��i P� 3z.
es�. .r c '� � s
a& eu es� e � : � � .s
, � , , „ a_ , , , . ., .'� , - ..a. ��.� � , ,a �esz. �as�a ' s a s a � PARK ,i " Firz�o.NE s _ 9 ,e 3'.
ess ies�e yy si e iesz� � 3o iez.i . tDHVEP P'e� o „ �„ m ,� . o
'"L esz ie[ao o i.z - E
iess, e.. e.e. _ e �RNE � . .. e1
o �o�e�
'�J � ry �ms o »..
ieass ies�. ,, r o s �o ie�z ��yP
er, es� i 4�p "wi4ze s O
� R ��WAV� z s S� $ Y� .
�K i��
� ies�i o �49
: 0. s P
e..z i c55jF
� , v i x 3 9 + isi3a
F _ . o �`.+-�} �P
.z iess , . s � �az
h , m � ���
�w�a s,
e. . - �r �� ,o - - .. , s
� a ,.. , �� � � 's .
�L _ - -es. e e � D� 9
ess, z d
es., u , > >> . v9`i � �
� a� m o �
EP k
9 ��^. iea� e.. , es� - e � e A M . .
es� i�i� � �zs � � 3c� 3c � , �
Q a
� � �es>> > a .. ,
iesse � � 3 �£ � s ,
'� - CiNooK C . e � � �
.a, oURT eze�
4 L r �
� ie7�s P �
� E�GEWOO� s •� ies�z s , r, a _ � p I � � z c a „v
i 8c9
z � s 3 99
z 3 x _
e e � � a
iae (� ° iesss r a a aae . O , s,ta 3 �� JE m �., - .. � �si�s �u CALAROGA
'"yo y �,�` TREET - es� ._ es�, es� � ese 0 5 , ` �s noo�oucu5r x� 60R i4� F _ .. , . .n .. � . F, .a. - .. � „
I ies.e s es� ss� . _ = S��o x � '�
� �a m P , z
� z
•� � a ' o
s . e a ROSEMONTARENA
� z - NNrEa ie��i r iev� e -
cE . a �Z
_ 6 . e �
ie � � R , �..
s s P �. N�
Q- _ - - ieni ' ie,,, � s rvv�evoR. . � .v
ie�aa zs e 3 ts ) r � ; „ �u �
�C/ __ , 9 ., . P
�c ,�s _ °�40
. e w i . � A P� s .
58 x � d z !�
e�' HV , . HAVEN � .
. e,.. - . 9 w`O� � .
F e ese D .. , s�e.srr,rory a . <<
. � ., � � o , YE a .
, o v , ��� 5 3 3 .
/� N R c �
f i
N
» e � �h 'Y �._.
i s0
- r � a ��'F ' e
� _ '`t x 4. . �
.. e e u`' s .a
e� ie»>
O
�
ie»s � ym ia
es e ?o
e�s . 'Li
9i e, D �e,ze ,
P
, - Z `" e�e , m ie � L4NE � � �P'O e
P
�» e,ez . (� � o9z�
a & s � �
W'y e
ess r _ rv°° � s U
� � J� � a a .�. �
N p
. e�z &" . N � �
E ��
.. e�� ie�ee is K� > >ne a
r e � � ? e
- ie�sz � � ie�e� � ' ' z � , 90 iii�x s �' ax i, �. S . �. w `tb .a.i � � P� T((` .ea �n �e z.,o ez. m
_ � � - .. s - e� - r �D ' ' SH IREO - . . �. � �b�� r, � �-�z
- ie�aa .�i� ie.t� � _ � �s � ��ti «>
s YE . £
Rv✓�o o-
. e s . a`�°M1 �
� , _ . t/�EoswEco
� R aa � P
e�e . z. ,� � inso _
A, as a . �s
� aa . � ��� ,
„ h,eussA ��` e ,
a DR z P� a a
9 s
E - s = � ie�04�cH��TE SCErvT � �o cr 3s - � , - vs. � n �
pN y� ie�ee „ , �as Eaw000 BRYANT a� oRi VE � _ � , o y 1z o naz �s q .. �o ' y '�' �e m ' _ �' �s��
go � � _ � e�ez .� s�rtE[r ,pa'c� WOODS .,e '6 �`*4 m eesa �z� w a 3s j� �o �ea�� `� � .. ' ,+�°� �esri F aoo � aooN s , ��. � FR,a,,a ., ci�avtwq '-6 - `�
_ s e . ' ' ' ' a ,�3 °' a� w as �� r e,� �n� o,� � 2 �, Rp � z .s n .. P �.x �s+ �s+ �n �� A �s3z. �nc ��� `
__ _ _ e NATURE s.3s ir r P . F m
x . > E�
e = _ �aa� _ _ . STEVENS MEADOWS »s� .
a
s 3s a
- .�.� i�s� , � e
, � R 1� . , �� r , q
1 ea ieee. 1eB eee� e _ _ ' ' ' ' PARK ss �e.s n xa 3a oy oEu voAo " _ � ,>'�' P '� 1- 3 �' z y ° �. , o� �. ` �s� � � � °' P
o ro��E a, . . e ,aa aa�a �� .9 ,� F � � ,. /,q .o ,. �P i93,. ,E�E, F
90 � _ _ � ee � '� iee a RE� ieeia �s � p n �av�u �.o�rz., � ie.se is � 33 sa �5 i ., zs�o � ., . �a � z (� .a �. ... �so .�
� eze k> " eez iee o 3 e a �EaF siREET � .. 'tr _ 5i 30 ' P` ' 2 �„� �8 . s � 8" ,s . P 'g e�.o
ee� 00J1 ee ees� ieess ., ie.�� < O � 3 � � � '� � v e e. . SKVLINE .. ry is�i ��p �a z � o ai
o- �s � .. : ^ aes sz � a
N „ e � _ .� ee» z .
ie e N o 00 0 0
s ^
� s �ea a �
� e�.. '" a w FEo . _ x� 3� ze�e z e � . '� .. _ 4 . � azs is�3., �
u°E � s� >
� �a e�• WqvzATn couRi ie.i e , �' � ., �h�RF �oV[R� aivEN oE�� a� � aoo RIDGE ARaPN 3� 'o � . `Y�
� w iee�o w r
Qe5° o a ' rc o o �
� Q i '
�. � ..^ szsz �: o a o 6 5��¢ '"3o w o NnAN o � ie.ez xa xa xx wAY i c no '°� ARKW � � c PL� . p �•
ee� w°° J
� a ; eoe� ieo 0 0es^ ieeei a .N eeos > ee.z a ^ ai. � x� � �.., - PARK � ' 9oP` ,k` � ,s F` ... m ,m P e
N � e, e � g ¢ - n xo �a � ,. ,� . ,. L W� � � F �w °s is�aa ia.c�
^d � s s a m ies�o = 1e e ., e ieeaa iee ees, ee ie.. iz s � iee. � 5 �, P . �5�q� � � ycb9 6< � " F aFP�R\E ' e�M .,
.e F e a . ¢' m � � F` 2 . '�! s �aen "''
- _ e= PF �e,s - = o v x
a, P� , � ,
, e� 4� J�'S s
- ., e z e �ELL T -i r�i .. e e s
ca�. o N
. MON ' . ¢ ie-n . ee z ssz L� ¢ R"m R .8e � .9 y� r.. . . ��6 �a n is a �
> r�k �� ., onwry _ . RIVER GROVE q e eess e z. s q m ,:+ . s°' "s ,p' , o�P�` b ' .� " �az.
_ = e as� e. e e ,reAc,A .. _ r � ., _ . o a" �`� eT , ,n s.9 . +y o a � , .wav
.a' e., esz e ,as,s V iNoinNCR ., ,a ,s , — Mv H . ,. , < ,Ess.
.�c e s� i.eze e zs e.z. ., - _ o e �w�. '� R � < v . wa
'zc •"e �,«, r e : a�,a e e
.,� " .� ��w..,o oss ` �
n
a ^ti„ � �
p s �o., do
- �.,.. � � , :a �s°- � ` �� � � '� '� s: srREEr °` o o s �,e ELEMENTARY ° e�e _ > e zz e. eHno� oaivE s , . � �aro� „� �vq ,e ., 5 ,;t� „ H�H „ � <
^ .,A � e . , I �s „ „ v � � e . ' ia.
. i.ei z , i... a i>>. ,_, �
€ a � e� 9ss5 aaa „ �a az
a e,. e e s' N, ,
��ri SCHOOL e iee�s =
�r
t . e . h� o x �'%
,.�,� . es � z s e . ¢ o� o . P
e �� , soN "J
s - e.s s �,�e �o�Rr �_ , �;'°`
� ,
�
� = I ai ,s.Es
03 G ai >
� es
� e,. �ecoo �P•~
'� 3 e i e R.
� ,a� mo , .. m
F
, PILKINGTON . . >.�. 93 m
e„ u�e oswec s ., f s i�, � < .
' ., � .a e , V F w
e ss � �`°R
es 9
� I is s a e e
� , - e�e ��� ' . �� x
3' . _ , . e . z . � : ia«.
; r �
. .. - . 1 isua
� � s , � .w� .. �.. - . oz e� .. Ro ia PS R .. F
z . Ap
e e. J
- z. _ iaeao 5 x
.. - � � RGROVE e
o/�WN - z^� i� � . . �
^ 5 0
O � -
�R�
e�8 �
� �
P.., .. _ -_ .zs - ' ' - O '
P e
P�I`A s
o�a�� � d � s�,
� ,a
=,s ,1 �� = J _
P o� ,., �s � o . n,
. ,o o , �s, � � m � .,.
�� e� _ . ; � � ` 2 � � � �9� .A,, „ w � � � °�
�� �
� z t e o 0 o,e
� , e
, ae,� m �° � , ,,, ,s„s AEH� �..s, sraeer .z m . s w eR�srRicr a�o ,m�3 � tv�F ,aa�. - 4 , v � s �y,e` . i s� � " _ .ad. ��,: wnumc ,46 , �� �e
= . 'a�:s s� ^ ' ,
� „ s� �. p �,� s 3 E��� ,so, - _ _ _ - - om cr,Te� �aono� ., seRJoiRs '��,� - s ° � . � ,sez y . 9
., F ``"�.e ' - e - - os ..s. � � � . . � .a„ . .
s " a e .. _�,. , e �
: _ � s � r
� . ..s .s. ..s i.wi w � - _ ., W + .
�>
N .wa = a , . �s _
. e � e � . �, - „e , _ -
599� e
s a�
x a � a
i�i i.��a .. - . e � e . .�, $
e - v e � -, � ,so„ � v >-_-
� 2�
� � a. s�.
I � / k .
reN<a � � ..,a .
„ b a�
"'+4.wo�E " v re� o. . 6 3`" n'c
e�9 r
m � � s e g . e r ., .,
w
� s �
z oiro �
o,,
a s. p � �
r » P .< �, m s�ze o o �: �: a � �,. � 2 � e ' x y o0
g � e � � s�..s � - sisz ioess � N ~ 0 6 i o S' � - � $� . . l oGEWo
� e ¢
N e r � w o.. ., o., ti ` �
�
a �� !�
�
o a
r.wai e e .. e e o.,
N o
�RE
� RoqO . y M�ovrreT ry '9'": .: � �.v�.i. 1 o a � o.. � o cc oce ocec ' i i.ize c �r a . u �s ieess / STON H s� �b, 4��� z s � � ,O^ ur 'Y � R� � ee
i�i'.i '9�s � recwo� v �
�� � .; I ,.c.zg �> ioisa ioise sen � �v�r � r� weu i.�i. �� _ �I i z ENCE iER CE�� e , �s4, � a � .,, .,, � RiF" az� '�i�, ii.�� � 9 am
.., ` I �o �, ' � i.i� i.i.. ' i.ii isiio � '8 i.izs mo �. ♦FOa�� �R s� a e � ' � iaaaa l, s�za �
v�s _�is7
^� _� ^� ^ y e�s iut[oswEco �s � __•. � N ��
�� s oi�s o, o i
`�a,.� ' .', 'a. bak Ms �e p :. � z » wz 5 - z
�3 � ..:, �sx�� iozia se�z eo�ev eT �� w o,o � �sa i- a + z �vn .,, " 3 zz _ 3 ns
a� .a '' cwx.r � ��. cwx.r a � ioz::. w � „o�� _ $ o c - � WAV � � iaa3i ��e� trti, i..,
C o �
1 y � t � �r szz w 'i��:....... ioiei ¢ [� o oi�o � P9 9 c �4. -
v ,..ve». ° '<_ 'ss � iozzz isxii r o " i.ise a
Y � I �r c.� o z e � � szoa szoo � °ee o �s> > �
o.. a 3 a � i.z.t� �ze �z:.. w � � 9 q s� >>
N' � i-is s� �. . U . s Zr P � �7 � `5? 2 � �a
sz 1 0� o, e
. i- � 2 o- szie ioz» y4 r o z.s. s
Q W M1 a�m
iozaz o z� ezis i s e � � °E0 � �z c o.. 3 oieo ozoo � � ., on i.iss ° i.ws � nvNEv uNE c� � e v � z o�`` �t " voy,N,e O
y � s 6N PNA e� os _ o a e . . ,9,so
,w Q
�. e � �o,aa , � } R°s e �
w s o �,.� m u m �,,. _ �� F� � sT a P�
- . �_„ __ � �=.o z� _ � � � �a,_
_ �Htos." - ,szs� ''zz ,s a ' ,sza ,, �.z�� 3 �,� �.�z zo « ry , � v � ° s . p � e F` CEDARO
�: e: � e, �, o s . o o e
„ e: . �. ,. vs � _
� � zao�
' _ • - N 6: .. = � �zse r � r s w � � I szsa s � _ zz s, - BRYANTWOODS � R �eo . � op'� z , . W 3azo
� " � r J � � i.z, z� _ ie z�e zaao ea. �3e«
_ • •.�"""'�' ' " " s s �on� m x g ^ p s .� x e s � . e z.s� 6. � E5� ELEMEN
I � o,. °" o.
o u
� zse� w °'� �,.. o
_ o..
s o ,a w �zs
_ _, "_""_""_ s ' N - ^ �oros a s ,. I � _ � s „ ., ., w �._ z p NATUREPARK xome zze vs zzs5 PEo .�, e
� ,,� a
� e _ .._.._r�"........ � - � ;, .� I .� s s e .< � . � �'^ .vz,rc -i.w _ I♦ METRO ' � 0 q o.s, yG2� . '3 naiF�S> >a�
' _ '. I I ' „ e e , . o ; oey R,o P , �e. _ - SCHOOL
� aoa� '' ......-._' -••- ' o sze� - ., E5 0 �z�o r u o ' ' ' � r+iu �p S , �N _ � 4 �.. a, ,� " e,�°'
I " _ �.•"•°'.,F '•� �LL � . � � .� _ � zaz _ _ ., - _ zae - �z zs ' } f PECAN CREEK � .o , a _ _ � , �e��y cHuacH saaa �a�. �sc""
I : � _ culLos �_."'�_._""_."." ' - r f J m c cR �R" ^ , .,, .,, .,, � .,, .,, s TRACTOR ,* cittG�O :y � p �an 9
o - _ _ _ � a a0ao cNiLDs H J NATURALAREA ,y� cLE .o . , J N�LLCREsi ' � INTERSTATE 0 C
I w �,., .a,z ,� .,e., � �, i.i�. J W F� �,e�,� OPEN SPACE � F
I o„ °R-15 � ,,,o ,
� DR vE
J i.aze ' - . '9 SUNNV$LOPE J
�� I a � a �. �a , s PN/�a. .. . . � ��� � ��s Ro P .��.�e, a ., � a T�
I �� I ' i.as .a_ aai�5 }z �� �saoo �� � � .� . �.x� �y OPENSPACE 40^y � ��^ sa' , ' 13..� � „ o -
I �s� ¢ �s. ' ie .s. .is, ., ze - � BASS�� IANE� �z s �a '� zi.i �� iz.. isas v o �pR
I iw_ �is mi. �g� »> v wo a... ,
: . N ., � �. �z. � y �z � �. .i.� w� s�s� ase �� �' -
a � = ' �da w ��e " �,z ms, w000 a r � ��� g ACNAL ACRES ° s e v �-so . `� ss ' 3 _ �'z" z,.w o9 ,s,,, � n��Fv v�ev�, �—_-�
�o - RES NATURAL sa,x �, A9�a � mz } o � � z,s. o s z _ s o okvE � � ■ N
Tua/ ��sa `s �s �,e � 6 ��s� = e . _ z = NATURAL AREA ,aas s �ao„ � � � � '� � m crn�os �9p ,s, � � ` >. ,s,z � � � ^ �� � V
at;�R;��, � �o�oM�oR= � ��.� �e �. �se AREA � ��o� � � a � � m � _ u, ,�,a� � ,�,s. ,�z, ��«E��T � � � � ��/J C�ty of La ke Osweg o
�oGw PARK � n .ne . � ms . e "6n a ��s �aia. exa �azno � � 1� L
o ��� � a � � � 1
� �R�VE s�. _m ovE � � o . ��� � mea }� ,�� rc � m ��e. �axzi �axzz MARVLHURST o
F o e " d� »ss - iv �� ., iaaio
. , p�OtfT WAY .
� PARrc e R�1 O oe � z,u PARK � �� I � -
; � m � � ��oe �w0000R m� o� ,= e �a �=os =� �.. _ = a a o �� __. � �,az�� ,�z�z ,� ��. ���� �,so � � 7 Com rehens�ve Plan Ma
o woon� A'■ �� a _ � �,� � p p
IBROWNS �` . �� R� . s �" �5 or`' avEas �—` � y ' e�e� ,�,e. ,�. ana�L ,e`0 � ��
zee � : � FERRY �.un. � � o 0 oRv � s o o p s � o P o P � ' � j e �a�n e �a-�. ,�� r�a , �Q r r G
I PARK �", W m 1 � '�,� �❑'• C V O� O O.�J O.�
mvannc aono � MerRo � • '�° �' a { � .' a w n � s � ; � �, ��o »s e. � � �-- _
� y PN� „s�. o a �as a
� aono�` " _� �
i �" �L HEnocnrE � RIVER RVNYARI(� � � � N ` � ,e,ez L�n o aono 1e e � e� .e ,a� e� o m
6 a Miles
iNvaEac uNE � RNER RUN PARK G '-`-- yI oqo ��^"� B6e0 � e e, Po � R� � ��� ��83 FGG l
��sWeco �o�..,. � �e�s�0 1 _ ' �asee ' o�Ee
•wu, •. o
�"'" 7 �, � o �' a �e�es
MErRo •-• �� A�oE� R � �s=, ,u. "s � R�F�a N ��_� ,�,e ,�s 000, � � ��:" ,�a, � 0 490 980 1,470 1,960 2,450
I �o NATCHEZ ono R� _ �no-r �� - �acai '
� � � � � � DISCLAIMER:
GREENWAV t o � � " m '�'-�
BRq i�i � E &
W I is000 _ _ ` MOSs�' P P Roq� . . aT o Wqy ` " oys e .�,.,. cn��E 'eceB ' _
N RV WAY
`� � � � ' � � � � '�" '�'� � This product is for informational purposes only and may not have been prepared for or be suitable for legal
_ N SUNSHiNE �qNe NFR = y
i s � , osS� N^� m � � �°s�� " oy� a SiATON tArvE y � e
� � ` ��. p�,��.; �� c �a� � ��N� � � ��s�_ 5 �ARR�A�E wA� engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review, or consult, the primary data
� a� � m
i ��� " � � _ - � �°"° � � ,��' � � � � s � - and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information. This map represents the best data
a � �R
! _ � ''�a,a,. � , " � � �^° � ���� ��>s�� ss,o '�_ ,� ol R"° s P available at the time of publication. While reasonable effort has been made to insure the accuracy of the
� o �R; ` , e � ,� : =<.a � �3, e a �
� �� � I I � � �e� �ss, s�,�, �' � ���� ���= n o � o o a , � � '°� information shown on this page, the City of Lake Oswego assumes no responsibility, or liability, for any
�i ��� s,�o m , � � N�
I �oo .� � ,�s ��a � � ' , , � eTTOTS, 011]1SS10T1S OT USe Of t�11S 117fOTI11a�lOT1. aizuzon
,�
I MERIDIAN PARK METRo � y> ao ry"�"q 2 0 � R � �<o ' e��a � g ' � " , e �`�
IO �SE.� _ � ' ia�. �3 .
ENP s iioav� �� ao . i oaw 7ai a� t� w \
I ii 'w x ii SPD .e .. . .�. iioo? STREET 5J a 2i � _ s � . s w s� �o _ _ mvEa r e c r.zao A .
i "o'� PP c 5 �G cb � �p�� g�q yZs � o N P� COMUSeSTREET 1REE� ,� � P� o� �bg qLHTINE COMl15 0
\F �o �o �. S 5 . ( tl ,� STREET JP
n T 1oa��
G s
e 4 �
� I �oe
S
� ! Co
R _ Mu �P
nc ssr V
1�J iioi RE
ET
P d N�P c
F
P <
g
� e e e s
0
! r� ,z> ,o s� (
c < wnvea�v
S � �
o a �oso ios �
s3� r
seo P �P
R �
t \
^` �POM „
oN F
A� � �
5 O
G \� i�s
POMONA �' �a
� no
09 @ l
sa P o
G O
� a River
�
\`� w COl1NTRV CL118
� N
I 'JSTE i�
REEo 5 � STrz� i�5 T
T EE�T °9��{ 10
� O a x
� � � o �
e
�I s
G � o o Mile
P
OMONA N O o
Z �
S iii� k
c i >> o r'�J / I I
o ����
���n P
� o� - ca
\
- Z
�r iao
� . �
s
sra � �o
eer 9'� \
w
c a s�a 6 s / �
' � ,� e � :, � � .s �o.s o., .. .. _
N . . .�,.. ~ ...�a iiiie P iii�i � iiiie P m N . � :, � w� � k s qR� � �� � � � PPNo �. mU' aoo 9.oz^�G+R od� e�s 10 os�o iioi� w �O a» � ias�s // II 1I
� Q _r �r � ...�z � �m i_a3 J �� n��� .r : � n�.' N��� � 0 b � m9�s i�9�_ _ SANo��ARK �� n�w �oN �IJ �
i PRgU�e`v �HNOL� STREET � �Q�� Q a � � �' � - � 2J � �1 p EGE aen3 iic oio O \
B �� qRNOLD STREEi � � ��AT cin 9 9 �
11z J �NEa r �9 MNNORHOuSE �9 � �
' nNo�o >�a � � _ r,w
o�G G G - �a P \
H�'�" v iizie o � g STREET a �J $ 'S t iio 55 ii oz iio5z ii �� ata �F OAo �
H�l. v :. . . c]G
O o
q n
Y
y ii
"23 �
S ce \
Y
h
. �'W aTH9AV NUE
tt�taa
��L � ���� NORTH REEK
�j �g C Z POMONAST
�PqWTINEST� � ci icne � !
� -� ii �� u �9S TRAILACCE55 TRAIL CE55 0
° an�HTINE � TFR o STREE � ix ncx a� -
. . _ STREET T � � g S ss ��� ii�oa �� \ \. � /
� � � � I I � �
11 O � �� � = ' ' PHLqTINE ' a �
o � '?& � �� � N � x = 'v 5 ii h .r.a �ie..$� S g STREET n _ � ttaa Z�xW � � m O iax5 i�o co�. co�. 9 \
D „ "e� � ,a r , . _ P W B N € aoa o, ao � �
ss a s n�
u� � an�nriNE �v�`�' a ,,, aw000
99W � �' nn �
sr
RE
Y Er
d � . C`
A a
W > ,
N k� �eN o�aaa ai oso
H �'^ �. „x�a
G m BUDoi ii
� 1 NGro� � aa
,��33v N 'STx o
nG N aEEry �¢
pG�FI euooiNcroN �`�., n '�x G s _ \ �
$W.P Q ��INGTON �� � ' � - g �H\��o g o�o a��000 �m
iia � STREET � � z � \ � _
� G BU��INGTON � zz`Z'zg 8 N
� 1a .
'�'J � 11fao g
� ^ - O �
STREET NSNE 8 � ��» N ' TN S� \
aia E 96IA y�'3 x x �'D ��� ii»i r r. . .. P... .. �� �zry inin coui+r. PP�A� mPPW� a��000 ' �`K.Ws..
n£�+ NC - $1 >>a �� oi PHLHTINE m HILL ROAD N oxo - >>� MOMx��ry
� � C � �
„�,o „
6TREET 11A m �
` OORONADO OORONA�O � �, 46 aw o�� N _ m '�\
r
� iis 'u r ii �� �u C G G STREET CORONADO �d v s COq 3 ]1 A6� G 3 �ie Ai. <� m ¢a iiaao �
� . a r i��a. _ _ STREET ii �e � NAO� � A @ � � � �
, „ - NCORONHDO STREET � �" �2 � � 3 -< A A >» - �YJ <� G
�, „ r � , � TRYONCREEK e �� �� RESIDENTIAL
iisu >> , ii .�`'� �S �[ oz
� nsno N 3'" i .� r , ia�a 4J e O � (<`
iis iis�� � G's' V C.' o o CORON N + -. ox �
,� � � � noo sr G �n p
isz+ �' C � REET i
�Z� o
F e C N
� ur� e- �
� � e
a i S �
� 3J
/� „ � ° � F STATE NATU F . `� y
� ,,,,� 6 '
vn � k � �e
cun�a ,,,, c , \
neie P a ee
� n F'-� .fi A,. iiaae iaaz 1 iiaa
� nsas STREET �p a F 5 a o . o na 9 naw » F` naa (�
„ vncun�a �� �, �n e AREA P '� I L
�v za iii y sos 9 1 F T+ y�p
� Q- � ''r� , � , , STREET VACUNA �m�m � � M o �q�m i +e a5 _ 0 iaa5 OP N �� iinle <G BUOOINGTON � rv�inRv ^ 1 V o0o S . I`. �IG� er unit
�, � , r r ,E„ srREEr „5� �s '2 = „�� Ma�P ,a s� „3 R-15 , a p
�� � � . . r a a r ii �� VACUNA STftEET 2is9JP�C >ci �s6' 8 9 � ii S'C JOoNG'� iiaa 3 � �
� s K' �'K' �rn ii °3 � ii5sz `J's ' ROq iia 9.�0 � euo iaii �P '
igg q o m
n ,� NATURE
� OURT S 8 0z� �'A
�o u I I I 1 BOONESFERRVHORSE �N�
6n 11561
vEsrn �� , o n
r �sre� =�� �� � I I 1 I 1I 3 nsce �e �� e �P s ae� �.� n nc ni�nccess CENTER � ne �, � '�
J U ��^ T VESTA '�-�-�-�J STR� r�a��� �fi iiq � GJ `9 ii1 � ii5in - ii5 . 5 i5 - ' �
� � � , , �� _ .F� � � „ � , _ „3 a� R 10
� 9 9 e „ � � �n " r , � �srREEr o 8 „5� , � ,s,� RQ 10,000 sq. ft. area per unit
�... � . o � a r o r r m . ;. a i ii VESTH oSTR � RFFh"e STEPHENSON � `b� �� �Oa� � ; �36 µo'. SpEE1 auo. ii5io 9m2 5^9 Mile
- V �.�n ' o m � ffT ' DRNE "sbo ac � � Sl P � 5 ,p15 >>5 ��5» GC` ao �[. / 185
4 I I � ..- >> „ t a Y Fp � P + p
ff RHDESCHOOL a o N
� N 9 > >
iem ���� = Y >>se P F �' J �
� 1 „ � J N G RN .
3 O
O
� S A
P D
r J �
�3 O O ii5z�
11 5�
� CP
, n uu m E aswE n � � „s, „ „ _ o N � � 5 /
)Q- macK a � O a[s �.n..�. � C C zg��o �+ 5 5ee S `�ec5 � �� 115� p oueo +�
� '� " „ � � P �,� , R-7.5 7 500 s . ft. area er unit
� � „ „ <o _ ,6� ,,�� , q P
� r Nc o� _ O ;,� ,s,l � �
�Wnv ne� � u u�aswec � o % ns z� � n
�MT.PHRKPLHZHPL R STEPHEN50 S , G >> a�% >>5
�� r�nr�� Q ��oA� R � � EaswE�a � ;,_
I ESSER P �g� O HIDALGO� G m I � Ts � � tsst - 6� � fi
I a J C C P J STREET I Q
�4 ��'16 �j/ i , zz s � o �"V �,� �ap + � MILITARV ROA� >> '�
9 c^ OS a 1 11b�c
✓/\
1 � �
+z000 >>e •M - iae ii�ze
�4 W � 'L
11 1 '
11 I G
ST 1
r EPH
O EN
50 m �
�N C
o N
B 11
"ea, new
� . n C
11e 6/
� P R` �
x cN�
, 6 000 s . ft. area er unit
� � � -� m
w � � „9 �
� A
9 = „� � R 6
,,.� + � � �9��� - g „a, a - a, � �a _ - , q P
w ,,.,. , ,o, a
Q s, Nr� � _
„9 � , gs ,s ,s s „a , � � „�
„9� �. , s, . a ,0 9 p
_�_ „�., � ' �
,z�< ,z o,9 < ,�_ . ,00 sa � � 3z =� ° „ 6 � 9� m m a� „ _ o 0 o a srEP�E�soN ,,,M Poa,�.o ��v � r ,,,,o ,,, ,,,
izoos E O n a� o ii�es ii�ic �� iie o ii , iz = STftEET n � S ii�cs
oRiot�wr�^z aa �'
s' 3
a
ie.t-r � � m o .. .. � ii a '=
'zo'z . "� ii�is ii�z.� a ° a .r a � � a ii ozi ozio ao
� aa iiie.�s N ' ye5 �9
� y., s s
i
r i e.ts �� a .t �� ^ �. e a _
I xox� �xo.3 '�ro� � 6 ic.��0P icz 3o fi, aa 'S KERR i as 6 �o � � ii iex ii iie� x iie�i e� Z o m T �i � � � � o o � d '' O iii5s yF ii za
F '�oin y,s. � � e >> NHTURHL �:P,y Q-
3� �ea9 e51 w
�2025 v �
BJ1 118.ta a � 9 �
� �o�z ai iz roa .xoxe ��cao q a e �c� � �en �s� �s '° nREn - n�n D � pg s 5 n w '9�v P� o x oo^"M� m e �
x oz �\�\ � � � ' � J m rw' d 50
�o PORTLAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE ' UO o 06 � - ' n� � '" � `' � ' - - - w = �
I s � , ,- � � � o= ,,,, „ R-5
' o,�K,�SON��E V P" i ��>� 5,000 sq. ft. area per unit
z, . { ,z a- a s�v� „s„ � � - �s � (
aos �oo MT.SYLVANIACAMPUS O � ae �v^"i^9��TERRnce '� � a. - - - \ �
� � 1/ y� s � a � n � Ro � -
e v m a ..r . P '�
� is � a \
x S� V aSEN' t�ts � y
Z N S e M cP
U m
a � �
M i o0 5 �
�o�E M�z zo - o
NP M n.zs
s �s�
�ESSEa �T 5 J
O
� � . . r - P
� �
4 �G" eaEVMnN /
� O u - o
xx E
t22W bJ o i5�l�`�P
J -
� PHRK s o - ,�
xo�ziie P 'D�E
xa . p o0
� x1 -
�
,z � F 3 375 s . ft. area er unit
� �.E�wE�o _ _ _ m" R-
eao>PnuAV CrJ z a O R S 'd 8 - .� - � RIVERDALE �G 8 s � � 1 � �
I O T � ow ' m m neze
ias � zs�,� � '�6
z z � o0 0`'O�'o o �
O
o` r
" �6 ELEMENTARV
zs
.�_ iz iza w 9 5 ia �' ��
e� _
c �
.z. 'x� . n� 'x ino iz ias w n �� 6 PoaR..o
�oo ., � � � �� '� i a o eaErmnn '
> O � G s ia 's o3 � a� ` _ �ei ,��9 oe ` � ��e o� � „p eaErmnN SCHOOL �
1�
S _ �, �, s � s�p .... ' 9,QF2 e 2� 2� W��pS +a 5 zs n iao _ zr .}e5 - o. rs o5 oian o� ` ozo�o /.
E s � 0 3 ii y lwwle y ii izi v ` D V m i i i �
o � ,� , , z wq,��'° e�ESFE'e' �os��As, 6�s o,s °°sJ a os,z e9 aRE.MA� WLG-2.5 2,500 sq. ft. area per unit
I : 9 �'�, `�' z zz� r � $o uo '"�' S £ STREET �/ � za 'ef'�.� - 3 lww�'o 1e zo zoe a iz ��`� a � `" . "NJPS . i - /.
r �. o �s �'�c �� ,T1z s' N � .,, e ����o`' o�aos o0
� _ � �� �' x 'CS � r ,� � �' ,g �� , _ ' �, . TRYON CREEK STATE NATURALAREA ozooa /
_ � 3zs ' a �' i z, ,s 21 3���naez � 5 +o "�E� „ ry'�m .� os,. _ zzz, � s qqqq _ - s� � ��RaE„ o zozo ,za, ,,.x
I � , � z '� / R = z, =s „ - , BPPa1a,° n ,, = o , °°s� o N � � R_2 (Minimum area per unit
9
� 0 5 5 aaz zn1z �� �� ry 9"�R, ' �a �WAY � at �� MCNHRV 22 ' J izzz5 �zzz �JR•( �z � m zoa �zo» [�� /
cuNrr�Ea aa " y � �s z�, as 3i eEcrcEr as anaK �xw � a 'FER oP u ��J g �"� �J �
-� �, ,s „ A 5T o� o �� _ , � determinted by FAR)
I � Z$5 L4NEJ R`ZGZ `3� St � / §^ �� as a� ? „ - .j�� `26 � g t �§ �c �22ao eaEVMnn oxo
.O nzo c� nin ^ $ � . ..ry �2a� �r_e A �3 ,e e �p o
�a '�O^R 18 m" � a leo. -1 9 y `6'� � ' R. o' �x �. m $ 2i22 �
,v a �1=ee zss ha�� KERR Q- mreP` .P �e,z�. C°� . 4�, �s za � �a izo�s
o � �� P �P� a RV�o�s ��m. � Minimum area er unit
I z � � � A �oR��ARo � afi � ,zz � P
ry 2 _ eS y e,i. �2 abo nRC o ,�ry' courrtv �� InLL 0. i2 BREVMA � s{� �
:s.� Q�g ����, s ��e, R 0
LL� nne � �as _ �}o rv� CERVqNTES� suMMii R�O - " z. `� f�
"°� � ,z�,9 '<9� ,zzz og M��e determinted b FAR
� z 4�a > o�
ry � �.�= A Y )
so zsz , z.�. z... ��� � , , �oz� ��N� NE _ �wN _ _ ,so
THVIEWa �STREET�J �`'^ $ � F � RV - B epEvmn /��3
I zas - `c
w sour N sao '�� zae �,a � suMMi, n 9•" 3,� a� �P e j z�z� � 1 ? �'F � .
H a �,o Hviewa ,, � No��NLpqa us. mo. �36 +e�e �' ..., .,, e . _ ,z � "s 'Ra�,�< o
�, t PORTLAND COMMUNITV COLLEGE � Ms � � _ _ a+s ,. , 3 �e,�= 01,��' ,g, z C FqIUNG N CO �zz � �
Q �, ,� 'eye _aza . zo ��,. i � aa tn oiz z� y
��S . z �s o�iz� /
H MT.SVLVANIA CAMPUS
�
,z„ � Desi n District Old Town
I s3o 2 .ry �,� a,e�
x
,9 4 z. A za
a , $ �
5.��- , m z � R D D
, „�� , J � )
(4 s�c z ,i`� � o z ua �w .�, sa�s >> �,� �r i I oRCHnRo ro ��°� � v - � Pete�Ke��
d' � � � zs s z 5 � v� ° � a F `� ` s o ,� e; �6 . � a. c, oR^y '�a� z y NOR� g `�o Fi �Pa�k
xs JP �' �oo�Fs o 9g� 2 - �'�^'°' � e qH ,h, THGATE E cM � G w
LLJ '& �2b n� No , v � a a5o at M 12 �
I sm � e� �'e � � x'� NooMNu �
� s, x o3 sz, z - - - - w m, _ - . .�..� , �, sa, e � . Elk Rock
� ��" � °
,:s:a ,z�5 ' "6,,,. ,��,,5 ., „ a . . , P�s as
9 '
�e o �
z, e, s
a �,
za '
� ° � � � � - s , u � ,zp
. r a zs35 '. Y � �szz E oswE�o- > _a s:
, � < , ,s a � �. _ $ �'S
Z � a .zs.� ` o ' ��='„k �a zs36 o p� s � r �R<<r , �:,�Ee��.Fs �ao += y 5 ...�. M." „�8�. . � a o a � e ,z, o a Island
- ,zsa, o ,�,,, " z,9 z,o, ,�,� � , �z�,� 9 6 :, ,�,�s- ;N � ,o s o �� o u
,d =s � PP�' , „ � A�AP,s � g � 5�4 � ,p �e� _ � \ R-�/ Waterfront Cabana District
I _ �'�£ 5 3 � ax ^ - �., ia KNOEar,naE i lG � 8 0 .
z " m m r ' a9 6 at 99
$ 5
� � _ � 2]0 2]n 2]20 . m V 3 � � �26 = a] ��29 2]��1]15 g' a 9 � ]216 2_ � n�
AiMTN 3
q -E P a� 91 xC�- .Nn- len 9�u
. � .. u 2]3 .2]ib 5903 s ,� �2> 'x]o5 L- ; 6 53 90 � ' xJ .Ne le� n.x�s Un� ,i��zc ��S.O� a g o12 m �
KRUSE � �k � a SPINOSA -3 v 5 '� so 82 ONEJEFFERSON��B ma+ . �� r p
RI�GE pRNE �S � a2 .0 - � �-PHRKW�VNPTS � MOUNTHINPHRK nurvos � `o ..�z^ �� a�� � � ^ t2as m - � - \�
� SF - _ aa ,tq M�� b Q 2 1 �.",PP ..o$ 9N Av 3 aao m � ,� 't.�
� � R CHURCH �� � �
T
4 4� '�2�i. � ?
J4" a o
� 0 3
J~z ��a�Z t2
s �O�� f
5 5 5 � Q �n 162 �
S � O
� P o �n x °s
a ,z a s
z,36 N � s
m �
e �
�ie
J e
F s (
O ���5 15 atxa5
F za izs
R
P �\"
£ P za
T £ g�i
P
� � roi
0 ) o �€
� LE W IS HN�CLHRK
•s E 1T29�� q s4,' °sw � �
2 4 z €*
, 5
e s9,� ,
z�a��_ �zse_i9 o,3e
��� 9 '�EFFERso� p F 6 COMMERCIAL
SO THWOOD� �w�`eG ^ � e � ���� � �' ARKWNY _ � (9 ta �io R�YF �z o m PNA COLLEGE - t2 - .
011GLAS NDRNE s ��� �o � � M' - �a� � � � ' F� ��'' z � �6� mE�N� � �\
e, RK 2:i �r so ., , / \
„ �EroP" ; � „ - _ <� �, z9 + N� ,z �° zs�, ,z,�
- . 3o z > Q �' ,zs
ancKn R o�s»
� N sv (� we - �
a � scouNry
P O
5 ss O
�
9
� o- '��w
,a-o ,naa �z
N r � �°'', ,nn.�o; �n seeo 9 9 m sszs '
m N c 3, .�zisz ssoo �°°B c .� .v .� .s -
�' �sw �o� ar,cxAnnsco mr�
<ma w�a, ,6 „P ,za,< ,za,s ,_� � s �v e � � � �, ,sz NC � �'�' � ,sA, y � r = s - - _. os,��o,o,�Esa�A� z, � e� v
'P r .. � � i J ' �\ �9 ' - _ _ _ . iz�zz iz C \
z " � � Y� R` cin- - -._. � f �,�P
�e T . a � � o - cKAwns -.
' � '" M��rNomAxcouNry
_ � �' ,. oN as co- . ,
1 �
P - '�� ' Nei hborhood Commercial District
'�a� x w x _ P �e V aM cr s as ��3°- o�'a+a s m m M
r 9 R-3 H �q� - ,� a N Ci
� s �_,� 9
� � �
�
Q(/ C� -
G 25t
01 S i
��O'' zs�s L
ry SPRING PHRK
, £ � � s a � � � s� iN fi� i - �:
e z ' i�2 5 �' S s AS �� PN �a 3� is n - . ➢ 'Lj �.
el h0eo? �.� - �a �ot
s P ac- - A 9 '���
, , . scou Nnruan�ana
s� 3 �
nv� " x' , o .. y ,s�o o ,� °'� �.
,e z ,o z ze ~eav ,&� w t t g o a a m x � "g ., . ���� m�n .,. , � �
�x x ,z �. '� •,, �'a RaKiaav'aM.e� ' ,ze,e s o
; s . ,a'oNedEFFeasoN
z m s , � zsw
o �e zs S - � � �. 0 �
�a a , a SvEJ � . Niscouars
"°6 P i
o io v CA
�9 5 ' x m STL
PN V .e , i ERi
� R PnRKWnVnPTs � : aE1�T DG
w z e res w z e en z z e z z aaz z eso ss'
�s ois a ��z s�c ro ro > x hie z eie � e�z�'� r ��e e aa u y,ss a L
5a o p N�GscAiE .n`oa ��e..
ac,s�acc�, a z�,o �a,a a�. ' � �� �� ." ^ ,ns ,„�m � a o = o zs � ,o eP .����.�. E � , 9 , �s
� ��os EswE�o
z z � �R a Pti � =R-3m �; Q, ,o � a ,za,a z ro ,z,z, �
,o,a � � �' e ,-., , wnLk-iNraaL wNE �a
,30 o,sa 3o,a 30,, , ,z�, ,�so,z�, �e z�, �zz o sa �a �� N s . � s „� ,,, 3,� o o = o = o zs ,.,¢ �KEo=wE General Commercial District
3 3 � . r �, a � s �o i , ��� � G C
3 z �E s.oaA�EAaEA s �
n� �a ro SA e '�iic a 5 � c HCCE55-NOPARKING W �2�
1 Y',. ( 22 i2e2b t2 ov -� �
o C � t2 ��p
3 $a
O
o a � e O a - - .ck.
3 5 i++sr.a�nn �
9 H GH
y� C om�F � � lAN n
� DS �
3 G u
, x a <e 9�a .E o ¢-
o , �= swE ,�
3 3 . r s ..�m �o
a ros � a� s � a �D - - �,.,, _ _
- a � ,. NC R-0 zo .o z _ , ,�,
o � ae
- TRYON CREEK
,a wo oz o�s ,�a�
aw on ,zs�a '� ,zn coo a s �oe _
ao� oo� 3oe oz, 30o w
�a o�s ,a o w� rc,a o�o a� ' � R �
m � � « ,e
"' zo
nm ,. ne o n, ^o �
,a aoz� a o ,m^ ,a zs o� � .� a rc ss • �a•o ns � �
a ,a000 SP vmo
�o�- av me-z
"„a ao / a�a
a z a s .> > 'GJ �KEosw[
3 3 N HO ` co
- 1 R
1 SE v
i K
� a i LANN
s z az i ie5 ,G E i
�, , ts � 2aaa tx F O s
. R 7.5
io i ieas ORE
ST
���_� a
,os 3 5 ,zs R-N10
� � �,z,�
� � w��� r,..
� 8��TM PA� ~me o� �.
a , nooN E
iaios i aw a, aa a� aose o�s ao�e,aoio,�'aoi aozew ac� ° "' � " '
''o,�OOs r
� a s ioi-
na
ro sv .. w so � z as o s �m n a
o �'
ia
�- �
e �
xio
x:a
e" 31 m x:s
e�
Ho
a �o o � , o � �a s ..a m �, x uc - � u �ea- M..aarix .� is xxa , o.'��
. m .. e a.w sm
issi m
� " a�az _ F .b mee r�caea.o „ -� aai a iza a.0 a a
ssaa . ,a,90 �:. a s m _ _ °� "`-'°s- n �e�-m� xx „ < o � 6 «� �' r � 8 � Ws STATE NATURALAREA ��''+
d � a oan� M 3'= a�os= � ,aozs aoosN � ww<e,a�acE �
3 z 3,,,� ,_, ��s ,3�z, 30„ = 9 - s � � s a ,za ,�, . � � � � a, � s F ,za „9 ,so ,so � ��,�a z o WA� m R-5 0 ��
�.��.. �
iaias�. M � iaui -r ' '° sszs a na .�, R isz ,' - � : �•• ieas o �. � 'P y' �o�.,.
� � � � s sz � .� s uKE9o�swEco
,.0 3 , 30 ,3 ,3 - - � � q - �_ �a=� s ���� - East End Commercial District
.o �a , �EE o �E . , - - o ,o�.31 � �o ,za� a. E C
a Hme n wnv
�za�
. �,
R-10
s o
� �
� a
3 � , s� o o __�.
..� m , -
3 , <s � �,
, o Q
� < 3 9�a'� a„
K�
Eo a M ' _
� �
.tz F 6 a l � � oi saso
s; a a wya:
se 3 + so a ez a � „
se3 a �3 3
�wo ��
y v �s
0o a � _ �
'�e� xa
�u� �aosa om s � "�
ia is ' a i aia i a ize iz iao "
ss izs w
�a i s sias �^ � ,�, nas �, �za � �z
s z�z w�
awao c
e a o r > ; ss izz N izs zao w 9 �, � �'m e
_
r ' � v
r
a II
� vi � ' a i i i ia . a iac a ias � a iae ^'� 3j's o � z, �a wa , N .� " - s9 a�^"'" ,
s as izs n 'sa dz �a
z� 's e
�
is ;' <. :
_
�
aa ''o, nni' '0ies- � zacc ex _ � s xeso°
y
�
i
x a R a a �J 9 �, � � ., ., y� �
so a . 9 a9 ia "' ae ,F za zz arE aaa�rclaavarERE �� _ �, ' ° _ ........... o - ° w �
„ ''6� N� � O Q` y
N WNV F
iso � so P Y .� R e �
a i OAD
PNA � � - oa �
�y, -�=
aaa R
IE M S� r•
AY O �c4` � RCLIF -
�3 rnvc� �S O ^ 0 3
ai I Ewoo tl
p 4n 8
z� i , L /��
�.F A . • aEo Fox ni��s�� 2
„ „ zs 4 �U £
- o o N +xew
i ^ P^' T
a . S
3 �a e.s mf . m P
o t (� (�)
� �o y F
�� o �
i aa % .., �
a Y vGA �
LEN32 ao N0.1 N °Po Q
3a a o . � N U
��,'d - ' c a i �
�� m s,� o Hi hwa Commercial District
REE; � , � .,
,0 3 , 3 e o �
, s � �
M
� A� o
''pa� ��.... S \Y
�
� � $ H g y
��� m C
,,, �
�s N
, o
i 2 R
� a F 6"� � g � I ��s,b
9 6 E E 9t2a $
% BLVD
ta O o
z „5 '3NC
a N o U i
R-0 � za�
_ �RP
2�
'REMB �
0 2��P
� w 1e 3 _ c <�< - 30 0.5o v 15 4
� << 11 N - e �R
8 '1
�'TV �o a a a anoo Hon S 4
i o 3 L as o A e�
Ec e(c,
T i N
� � R P
3�3^ C x5 ' .�,
isasi U
� zi�
� � a SPINECONE�
� �2s� �
R' a aow
OSALIA n D C tat H
WHV N O �
o a4 �s0 s
zz O
�s 4 ,
_ aiss iai � D
� m ma �Z COURT '€
O � i ry VIEW C
l ^ o ��
�W a M �
N
3A6N E
i ".l J PPRK
�
a2 1316a 4
� z, z R-0 e r � �
'�� 3 z AM z ,�za, �, , �N
�sw�so�� � � ., . 6 5
�,Hw ,
000 30 0 3oso
3p 6��a; 3, s � s,
O�' i' � p105WEG0 - �� iz _
'�RNE � ., � . ss�O 2
a < g a �
e �3 � 115 � • o a P
o - Mixed Commercial District
w �RIDGE 3? �
m ff�
a 2 G ioso
a �
�
� MC
� � � �5 P , AM ,a,„a � � a o 5 0
� � � x x x x�~x , o �E � z3 0 �o nr. � � 0 ,
� r , 3 x x m.� o ,o � zz � _
,3� � � �
> > <, ,
,3 =»z ti
� ti� o
��, , �
�� , A� s EsrA.Es „ � F
�os
„� � �E,
a,aso
$ ��e,
e
�� �� �
3 _ -�I o
3 , ,s rym�a R„3 N �E ,�
w � N frca n� �� 1_ '" R � - i -�� a i .. . ais 8 DR . Mile
��^ � L�£;, 9� o '� E a ss�'sa�KS x ++ �'^'1 g s> ta S 9 C tstao TIM6 = 195
F - �" 3zos 3 �. � s � •°e� - z °�a �¢= zo,z,a ,�zos eRUNe oRive� TRYON CREEK b
¢ ��` r o � $ a „ r R-0 ,��s� o of � �3j�
3 sE & „ R- �
�,��a,3�9�= o a 3�,5 w �
� $
,�a,�w,�a,a,3a„ w m <� , ,�� � - � ,3�,3 � s� ,g s
a., ,3 5,3,�' `�'� a , s� ,,,� � � �9 >�,. „ ,a, mm ,�s ,�5 „;,s ,s F °;„EEA-M M ,a ,a
� p,_� � ,��, a��P =, 6, z ,�z�
1- '= a o pNA " 13"�� o �"� ����a6 m J . ''z � z , K�,�s . m $ e - �� STATE NATURALAREA OC Office Campus District
' ,,3 � w � a ~' K � �o ° , s3 `. " z . PNA � a
cn - �3����` � �' 3zaz ,33as aoAo � �
' :£ a s ee zp .tio iai tea i UN o ����
�� S O
N 2 � ' O _ m 0.
�a �e�a S
OUT
s o �°cn
se 5 HW
� OOD .`R� - ?
� ioWN
.y 1
.`R� .�a. ar�a aava��
R-0 , o «���P p
� p � ,
ss 9 J � �
G� R
i is ''��s��
w � 5 s eo 2 � �o
�? �i�'9P� � uKc os aa o �sW•
� 'J wE Cf
1 1
w i 'J
3 S - _
a 'J ] ?y
a O s55o
15gta
OSWEGO� �r
9lANE
'PN , _ � �
I- � �. N o ,�', Oq � �s�P�'s ��� � tz z .� io � aiaaai �33z��o 3 o e N �3 k�'Po� w 2
�o,a n� , v p coVE H s 9� ,�'`�e R � �3s,� �
„ 3 ,E,3 e � , �,5,6 ,33�� _ - �
z w� � a �.� � �
o�
Nr m
R�
� � �
�
� w
- �' „ , a
. Cam us Institutional District
B F
"� �=S� ... „ss, �
so�, -
�w13 ...
00 �o�., a 3r�.
as sis a"s'a,as„
�ssia as �sv ,as sv ,asm �asm � n '�.a�s s�as so�z ' �I
. 3 z=3 .3 �o ,.. s a s �s �� „s„ . � , _ �� p
9 �
�h� ,s,a �
�
�
„ i
,3 � , ,z . �
� ��,v
, as s, �, vAr�,
� 3�g" ,
35 a TRYON CREEK
,O ,
LHKE OSWEGO
� E�a . H B "dp i
n 3 ss���
3 a R-1� ��o
� c�ue P so
�£ .. assz tzo m
� k R
O�
� E 1b55 � o
oFve 9 K 6
tas�s HIGH SCHOOL i��
.�i 3,a n9 3 3� � .0 s� iz azz ?
N � a i a
r a s�sn 35�� o,.,,�.�,oN,. _= STATE NATURALAREA �
.�.,a �o,a , ,a . az za zo mm s
3 MO N
�'f5x��A5�� t i NS
3 51 K 35
1951J i35� SJ �35J6 5E�0 35�oi3 � t.t555 ' a ' m T
', 'r r bs C ALLBLOGs G
` � �s U21 22,31d2
350
�° � ' �358� 5�5 N�
1�59�0�3 591�i3591�5gJ�'3���3E1�r��3E 61Jui�3E1 �35ga 2� ' �5]t 1oo�i3�o9 �� . A ,yh �"�N�s'SS 3o ee 2G rulrue ��W 58
F bot �i35 58]Iz�"3 � - 55 � fn .�. 18 pE.t� ,�niE��i� 89 o ta581 16» ' ' 3ae � � ,59� � �P
„ , � � „ , , �� � � R-s � Cam us Research and
� 3 �0 3 ,e ss s, �3��6 , ,s 9 , „ 35� ,,,,o � � � e� � Q � p
e�i 3,as �ei�3.3E ,a
cza 3,a � �s a� n . .. . m
�''i- s O iaaw � c
36 ,a P�s��oo� � CR D
„ � as J s96 s, „��a,3,,, � .,�, 8c
6.� _ 9 0 �,
5 ,3�z���o�
sa�a ..oi �L c 2 M
ioi ns ' @ &
R 5 -
�35 8 '�1'0<
3 . s �99 - , �, 9 ,s� 7, � � F Develo ment
o � 53 y� ' � O � R �P
z W
r O p
�R. , oR � .� R-0���-0 a » � e o � �s � �Na
� '°a' ��E, �b9 ,s.=, �, y
3 � � , o
,. w
e � I,, � � . „ �,s i ai ss N �
a � 9�fl°` i . � -r .. io �s N k�
z as - as. » Q � )
T G a tsass
T �
z p�A z
�. 4.65 N ia eoi eia taaa C
�3E Ec1 .a651.U� i3U�3E�1 �' K
1961J .3 '" '3b3] �a�56 s�an �+ 3 J)�5 Z
35 s�
�E�J .3 6�. a�, v a 5 c t3]5s .:; �
1' f a t C
SOUTHWOOD PARK PNA F �
� � ae .aNc�Ew000i -1
. . o e -
< � o
. �a
s a _ _ a" z � 2 ,3
- � � n, rc
e ��,H , �o�... z s e9 0
e
� c�� �
� . � , � a
a> > a s � �k R i: � �
ce o ,s -
� � -
• �
PNA _ o "_�
� e s
�
o � ., I° , - a
c' �, ,,,�, �� s
� „ ,H�w ,., ,_ sp
�� o ,., a
a e
z w Q'�°�s
PNA � - � P
� a �
�
, zz �a
� ���
,3 s.w ,,. �E
PA9j x ,3 oswE � � m
MEL 69 <N
q� »�
� �
Y 2 O
e �
� � � �
_ r s .
, ��� .
, „ „sss _ �3a�
, ,� e a:
,AN �
�,Ewoa R-1f�
�o ' 3ao OAKCREEK
, o� ��s
�
z MIXED USE
s�� „sss
� � J�
3 a -
� � � J � �
�
� .�
ss srnFFoao
� .
�, 3��a�, az "=a�
vE ,z
� eo w
_ � s
R 7.5
ELEMENTARYSCHOOL
� � �ao
'm p'ar m o
a . � �
a
� „
o GROVE PHRK �
ss� 62.�a' B0 ��F G�
� aeze I c+
EoswE�o � � o m P a x � � � .aA<, � zs �,a , �E R-10 3= �A��E� q m 5 ` �.
T ��_ �',� x P�E F �
� � o 00 �
�o�., N
m . � -
� � R 7.5 3�� /
PNA� p a ,� a, s e F � s
M� - . z .m o. . � . R .5 WLG Office Commercial/Town
e aose , �, a �o
�� 3
°e�� .
- ` ��Q � s
, ,�sa, s� PN
, a� . PNA
E���
a s,P� , R-3��
REET G
g o'
, . Paa� y WLG RMU
�, �u n
�35j°
'aM0 iia� » n
S isT � UNTAI'
aai N 5
3 � O oc[1ow o _ S�sSs
ME9B [s 7
LROos
SEWE
ST m J�
REETS ,8
w�EAr
Home Residential
� � � �ER�sr ���
O m �, �' d � '� a�TCELL CONoos ONE to e ��6� WOODMONT � 5 ° s `ROAD � �� �
� �'� WESTLAKE �esx-3ase �aea :aea �asa �^ - -�m.,__ „„„ �oo anwc � � o � �� nou�r "s�0
CHURCH OF JESUS CHRI '9�° o g �� �ae p - --�„.,.,x.,. � 20 - pF �� � y o � '
LATTER DAV SAINTS � N�� �o� FIRE PF� °'96 ano�p3,� ia�os � COMMUNITv � '3e,�
/ �' �3as5 n ^AV^
9�G G oFFicE �y - CENTER
TEMPLE `� � � "r x 21d� � �3� y,o M ENUE �o
STATION „
� o�a �'
�r � �N o WLG Office Commercial/
� a o, ,��, �R��,
� ro
�° s r
��a
. �
_ �
- , �e' _ , � � � PF ,>s„
, �. �'�9�E
�4 a ao ,3,ss
. zio �
�� LAKE OSWEGO I
_ ,z g _ WLG O
� r -
PF C
PNA °� �
„ os - �A� m - es �
a E o= e
- �_ wE
�. �
�
FOREST HILLS
�0�9��' _
- - _ �, Nei hborhood Commercial
TEMP" b ae Sp
LE W �
AY N 4 ��^5
RC„ _
H
nRo ea
HIGH SCHOOL o 9
9 w.`'�°'� 6 es
��m
a ,aszs wa"
�H~^o AV, a ELEMENTHRVSC OOL W
/o w
C�1a �
$ � �ED Y ts n � 5 K q115 & k
a E WESTLAKE PARK ,„,�s aono� 5 oP
s Na � sa � sHi ,e , , nrwnrEa �
Wh ERRY o - sE �5 a REVo (f
v�vuwHoorvE O �o � A 'NE�SW � ,s+�
rs�"P�r� as°"> - �.
�n. R p
oaivE
_ �a �. 93,�a' ' �
"�
roei '� - o o -
N - Q- . a
M zi a . - �
� acra a -
. s & S�W �
�� m East End Commercial/
� . �, �__�9 - - � o u ,s � a� . � � �
6 G�� T �Y��. �a R m �m�''�m �� o ss o o �s aw o
Fe,S.� C 90"�"� e 4i ROAD eao o � ' � �
C m a �. �'e � J
6 J F i a
£ M
$ F d . 4 a 5 >
°jS� D
1s �
3 ����p/ 8 .
P �
eP 3 �O
cQ k m b
e � R �2
� o
C z�
i 88S
E < a]95
w �E�°� Minimum area er unit
33 �
�I - n 'S
- 3a ces
on (Ir'
asz - E R-
, '3s�� R 7.5 Ci� � p
, 3sss � �
� '°°� -
�, qM a eeo sso & k
,oe �v ftaf: . s,
N N�Eo
E a �
> O a � s � „
� � �s
O E s
d
m i � P
os�
� s+`-e^ � o w �
N 5
�� R 7.5
� � 3 ,� '°��'° N
s ✓ � , c s�
orz �
�
- v-'s•° saz s .�
°jr,> '°¢ ,se �
s determined b FAR
, o a E
� a� ��e,
�� o �
� � �
, z
� '��_ ,sao 1 ^��, Y
�a�s R szo
o��A ' ' o
�b r
5 !
� �
�nos s
9�e°N N
s - N R °s'+�e e�
� �
s T e
a � � U , r
N
s
s> o P
o fi i oas O 9
�n �v� oo s
''o °�Qoo as V� �
�5 a�s - �'�.
C
S ' P E m
o� eoA 1
� V ei�A F
H d
�
a > E
, N N
, D o
u mo
>�' � y �9`u � ,� „ � F �
5 > ,, �=s a,�' m � s
���90
i � - sao F �o�9�Q
aaas STn C�
'¢ REETm C
iaoas SH LN ew - i�
KJBR o
aoeU O� O n
cErv�aao rv� as � i
o> ° s� U ase
� v � Cam us Institution/
R-10 a
' oa�e 5, �s„ss
� ,9j,�=��,. m
C n;�P° k
G N�
z oo t - �z+6�
� p
, o °�o'
�o ,�sss
�p
R s
�`
�� Y
� V
os � - �3 '!
P
ep�tl9 0
/ m sio I
< , � /O�
0 9ry�r
� �
!
�Ph W� o � Stlo P
�.t�,q Eaoo P
4 i
� N a9 8��
s� e � 66 a "� >>
Z a �
� �e 'a c+
m r �.o.uNirEo
5 - ¢
,� nws � G m
/ , m a e �
P E R �
�a 6 � D �0
'6 io K p G �'�s � AN F`'� F
, a Office Cam us
�? - � a355 �
���� , N�AN o i o
Q
E ��
N R �Ae
5 � 9
u CHURCH
s o sz� \
. � „ � C�
p
P�
�eZf ao KE K D�
� A
�
- a o
, �a � I _
�( a ft
a a , O �< - A
z � �7 ,,�"
4 LAKE OSWEGO "am
, ea e
voA �9C OFCHRIST tao
N
. � U
� s
�'�9 � .. NH EH E
O C i
Y � ta _
t �v sc ENi si �
c 7Ba"
G r On �aiaa �o ph
'��
� „ ,3o a . � N ,zo s,s � a 1 as
ceN�aaow� JR.HIGH SCHOOL Ca
z s t on - o
.4 <
L or� N.7
ia �
R� ee a' a U , F o
a 3 � � Nei hborhood Commercial/
� so a
,z e ,,
.�/ e � � z ,za a�
, °R- S�°
9
� „ �
'`� �
;�
�b O h i - � BRHR
2 i 9D'
4. u aabs \
C �'3
� �
/ Y {m HonE
i i 1a11] I
p�3 � Ht
9 R 60
q _ o\
�
� 45�
�e
2
ry aoa 3'd ^ 6^6 , as \
05 r .. a . RIVERWEST
'Y� n
y� ♦
� d
i ry��
F
ao Minimum area er unit
9 ��
� �a� , N R-
�
3 � � C/ 0
, p
� s P
� ra s` �
� - ���R�� as, � �,. �*
s , a �
�es'e N ry a ai za i
�"O
�
G To�tl Atf
� - CHRMHN O '�i
V �°
E
W 6 P N
� i i �O
. U
a38 _ O E
aa&z ta
e�F tt w
1 Y � aa a
9�
@ 3j 5
3'
determined b FAR
z3z �P �
e aiocE �
s s c�a a �
> ciEH� a� ti
� Y
Y �
� �
4 m� onK�ooce
, R�
o���
o ,�
� P� a
p �� oRc �/ a +�z
Hn o - e
� RD a
o A 7.
a - � � sai VoR� '' coNoos . �
NE � D, P
9 p a
_ _ q � �/• E
2Go SHNITHRV
/.�
' 0
'�� PNA� 5
._� , �
4 _ �
, � ,�
y
�E�,�aPo�� `� a , � N P
� m e B
� � � -
, � _
L.e
�ao � �
� .. i i COUNTRY 9 - s
a �s oisraicr
aa s _ �o
. , 5 -
e a �
a �. so �a 9 . y - .�anoen"a.s
s zsz a a �
°50 J a , '
O 9 a".
3 �
NNTm � I
s wi
. 6 1
mA�,o s „3as ,u, .,,. z - Q -
, �a
9�. " a
� s CLUB�
V<` n m
� v
E
s N
HC5 q � »� �"
'°9� P
_ �� ,
R5 � R E
zo OAD
A z
L a C
a a�a s �
� �
f AV EJ
. N C NUE J �� RIVERVILu
9v OUNT
� �b RV
CL
s w UB
RO �1
06 Ao ��° $ � I N D U TR IAL
- S
'�K=��& . ��, a9 %c o .. __
5 5� `%�� n � ' �S �5 T vi o a�'�' . .i.i i 2 0 ' G .
ai NO 0.0 x , �F �b .� 14 - . PHRK
';�c, W B a ia ? �ass� o C �S
ei 3w aF Fe. ,. s o p m V'J
�.% � � ._ �s P ses � o
. � iasii m ��95 �J � 5 Q `3 c 2W
�aaow� �nsv ���'�° t� �o __
9 �a ,., . .• �a +o � A�s � m ., - NEW THOUGHT � - "
�S � aJee o = S,91 6 _
S
�f ia]
�s s � , aaz s ' e
cErvlEaPo ry o ' A 90
�� �5
�P9 O n - CHURCH E Ao
aDR o a - , �s N r
c
s = , u
0
, e
sa, "e s
- e e
aH SPRINGBROOK PARK 4 0�a arc
Y+S�N i O C�y A
�h- O xe�
aH a
< � , �
�
,,,�'�s $
eo L
� a _
i . 0 s r � �
W i 4
�9�4.9 s �as a" C'
'r N v�ucE ,
c �z cT Z
� s �
sb Industrial District General
EXIT 292
O
,a , - �
ws zoss e�o/ / \
1 1
� �� ia q \ /
�s P e Pa z> sroancE
�
WESTHILLS' s 'o + -
p`11�s
5 o aP 5
a ] �0�90
bs zo �
Mawr.oFFicE o�.couumv cwe �8 eo
aH MONTESSORI o ��� 55 � s� °
t HN F m
v 6 a5
VT V � OB � o0
� �, , ��t�'�.5
� z
6 9s�
s�� a �
5�0� �T.
a m �
scnaa� w 5
� o E ma
� ,o
P N
u r � �
,s �P zz oaive s s �
ainbow
n '< m
,. ,o c
:Ar
7
aKEP
AR3s
KV a0 �
EW�as
Ib �
OS'S N se
.o PORTL N�-TRV N REEK
End
A 0 C
, eQc
.No n wEsn q� „o
aa � �" 2a z z� ,ss ^9 < PqRK � SEWAGETREATMENTPLANT
P�ias 4i 2 �eo G
ake � e
�a�
AP e
� �w s-
S ,
i e raAcrE i � a wsH
3 �
�N P Industrial Park District
P � � � '
a"� I P
o M �`: w� �
ft 0 �
A
aP o G �
� O zi
a� 2 a l 959 , (Y a4a �� qt '
J u� �09
5 �
A X s] ,J.s�.a
LL 9 � e $ �
s a^� s�i
/� w�
nCT
05 a5� noo m A
V
H X i�� E
2 HP � N�
5 I 11 J
ia F° U So
� e nvnA. . n� n E o
uEUT LHKE v ssis � i -
o-E s �
z'
y� aa aea a KE�36
P
c� a=
�sJ � o S
s �. 3
BIBLE s � O �
� �
o � 3 -
PF
OSWEGO LAKE
+ �SLGHRDENN 9
z oa'
fr ]a 3
O CHURCH
z,oe o,s5 �s z,ae O I
z P���-=-_=��� �ss ,a
a� F , m ao °Ri _ � "' L.O.INDOOR �eec ■■4,x a��us
� U asaz �� aa KausewnvcoMMONs AP o.a. �9 0 �F� ��awa+� �'3. sa 550 � o ,��zo COUNTRYCLUB q � y„<a _ �
� m uneaonvsniNrs s _ x ,a TENNIS CENTER z� �s ,sa osw o e ��e= �
�"°�� � � s , 34ze A«A��aEssESE�E� ° P U B L I C U S E
� N m . o LAKE GROVE WAR� ��oa '� � o �
�, z hr ' cr sa s� s�ee ' ��E� rrairn � �° , k °° ��aceo o � '
o STHKEHOUSE q H � � . � � �LIS ia �� N�a aza Fi0U5E '�� R �SE^tl �
,oa, „ - � A� q A� o� � A e �aMA�oAKs ,a PNA v� �� if;;° $ �,�N p��� � ��E� �: i N
mee xss aa aa - < W"�za'� k k m � � 5 ias sas z � , L$ �o�n) S 4 FIRE FOOT F00
s,aNww �oe s,�+�s o 0 o A 'v� M _ SPRINGBROOK _ �pNos � �� _ � o� srnn N � $ �aa anwc g
aNK 2 - �a� 55a - - l�p� 'b � nCHAN� � ROAO I - 214 � o(asl
PF Public Functions
o F ivwc coNoos � _ ,a sss PARK ��L � o �ER � p �w o
P� �,aPos.e qH �, i ,a� o n 'gR o � e�1 � a�
�`9 g � � R-3o� - ��E , �,a ,>� �aPE ' , oo �� �o � g R-10 , � _ � ' �,a�sr ,� 0 1 v
EP�s�aPA� ���° �°' �'°° RE���N�
9 GYe�a COMMUNITV aen 1e ➢ r ,.� T e R_ �'a ' _ $ P aoo ��
- p � - 3 14 S ��' CHURCH fiaoRNE � _ �OR�� o J ,b9 � � N� `9s E T R '
� � � `�� e��-�� ',5� , - � �� �eo��E E o � ���R�� � � o ;, a PNA
� �A'��� � „e� F��E Fo�a ""° 3 o�E OC/R-3 o R-io . _ - za m � � �a�st � � R,�E P� � $ � ^ �A�EN� -- ' v - `°�r�,«s " Park and Natural Area
�y ia y I m N �& J s�az wava�acE ee'P_ I o o G0.ESTD J GZ, oJ ,b �C _ ' �� �E�O � 8 4., �' _ � _
MEAOOWS EE m N� ' � e��0i a 5o Y� , PARN hRK 50 0 o s n o 0 0 023� o � lio�n)6 �q,. � EC R-0 �i��
/� '�' � gp�, ROqO a o5o5MEaoows ausEv�ucE �& vaKiMa comoO� 3 ��` Rpq a o s ,�, s6', ''� « �Clry _ _ ! _ / ��.fl �
> 3 ��e �, F :i� ' �NE � o " q 90 o s o�' �\ Hnu s w�Z '
�1� sa�a .e� ��K 9� a � � e- ,�=�R , �&k° ss
< $ - HecH, � � „ �e - ' v � �"' � - s&4
/p� MEAoows � e � a� o � Lv� a /
s _ _ 9�t � a ° $ ' s&�9
_ G - �3
P
- o _ � '� ��H�50
� TMaEE '� f
P
s E sx
M O
�^&u 9?� B
�o aaa�P �ooMEAoows Aoows o - s � �� zz � o a � v � �,.�iw , PF i = p ��3 - OVERLAYS
L o 5 - �ioo FIR J RI ° �, � � s. 5z N NE� � �ry v v ��J �"z �31°zW 8 }' oirviE P
R� Maaaioi E �SME NR �& DGE' ROA� CREST �R � A � m ` +„ 3 =R�<os ��3 � N 3
l� � O,q� m � �s PRES �CK x � ,p � a 3as��E 2 O CL ��vSRr� I \/
a 4 [vTrR M' k' Y., K. k' k' + Y w6a
x � P Willamette River Greenwa
3 = r KauseoaKsi o a o . anaK � SWEGOLAKE 6Ao --
a �o 0 0 0 �/ o a a a o � 'Zrj , � � . us - O i 7
0 0 �
o - e'�
P i„ v�r
��� , . e L
� � �OUNTRY CLUB . Rca� •
EEN afi F `n,[�r�/� (y
N� h Q' a o `� 9 0 ' ,�"� � E
�E'� a Mana ement District
� o � ` mv � Ro aos "' �� a V V 1\V 1 V 1 y
; 0� �keps KausEoaKsiu Ka�sEoaKsii wooMEaoows MEaoows � ��,¢- e e�o ,�3p IRON ^ � � oN� _ � Q' $ , Ao T oc�o�p`oo aso � I
we� MEq�ws NA F R�"' �, o o � N o � �9 �� w , A F � ��_ (approximate location)
= q - ., v� z° FS ,� o o MOUNTAIN ,, P m v � 9 - � , MILLENNIUM � qH Q�
- � �s ,sooe s � ,� Fs y�� � �, oP o PARK - so - aH
�siso rvcE ¢'� ° sso om _ .� '� } P �R�/V NA 3 - v PARK Rver
,ao � � g e - ,so,z _ � �" ry � � o a �/ � �0 9 _ pN A, ,�o M,�e
uu �.we � G P o \ / '8 �as
�0 -
x1 xe 205
_ ( f, P�R u
R
xi xe � •3 ,
LANE rC
o m f
, � r �. ooi' �
a -�
�/56 �
Es �/ Y
zoo h� N M
P�� D
o Ever reen R-7.5 Overla District
o eo
9 y �A tst2 E s.. A
D U �O
RIVE P�' 6 e.
�C -
x O N M
� / J Y
o T
_ P P W a�
F �/ ias
.3 ` /
� N P 3
E A
+ � eo�.rso / s H aH
5 N aH
u N
P i T
52 A� - N R �
�s'0 O 'i���n,a
5 0 / f P � d
t A
o � P s R z�
� 5�1'ri e? o
„ � G �s�9 i as 5°' � Fo � � o N h'Ai R.epP � �JN � - t aH
,pe � � Roo o q �� �y� � o H � M e _ g
� � g K � (F s G - Roq g rv� �as
ONITA ROAD �p x x � f x x ' o ..R �� � s i WEMBLEv o Fg`�h` y S � O �U� '� -, a W �" ars ^" aH
B szor�N , q' ss�a� � � a z . F�q � ., a �� o
ONITA ROAD �' o g o o - RO � ,,.
& is�ze u
' �+ n
R
��
o� oFFCE
A _
k D � Q p
Lil -
Y , � � E
�
t
RW
a s _
ONITA o �F � V
1 S F- OHK GROVE
�9W JR N �LEAF
'£ E
D �
�""o ��>EC R-0 �
a
�
rzo�o- � _ y
, �
m � sr� A�
szo3 0 � �
, _ ��o,
� PORr
�
A HND PLAZA O
� P a wesr J" �- NS�
J PE N
ENR
AIL ON N BOHT RHMP
� - Glenmorrie R-15 Overla District
� A�
� _
. � P 4w �y 9
,,, ��� _� ,- P P
p��e � � �eP� Po��A,s
OAK
Y
s sy ' �
�% - a
xJ x J +- A� �
mi 2oe N s .� .� � s 5 x x a G k' .. " 1 N- � � �pJ � @� N R H � CHBHNA IA E• uHE Ie�' ��, v ' Q� GROVE
(1 •• .. �. � .+ � P ��V � 4 � o �� � � a�
_ 'vfWl 5��6 _ Y3'2 .. H aH aH
S P J G �
��ape ioi io e _ .a a -^r �. - ;
iei� zs
-e N r N �sv+" " Y
wzs bisz ' � s s>q .. a e o � ' .'. " "' o ^� ,� s v ,
z% w P
ioi�ioe ioCio sisz a e a a � � V 9
� �,�e ,o,,oe oFF��E .ry ,�e,� � r � a _ ,szso ° s , , _ A A �.�
,s3 ,pe 5 2 , o v ���a„�� e= A� _
� o ,
x -
s _ - ,- �-
"' E �ss��Q _
G a
_ p� E
iP ' s
N , _ � Lake Grove R-7.5/R-10 Overla
R A�
��j ►
m , E ' a�
� O� ��e
J H N '
�
s E
_ " s �.o'N
Y
k�
�s>� �
s s ,sc _
� � i
s � a E,�sEnEN.
s � r _ o
v -
r
�
m s = �4's �
_ ��. ��s _ I �
�E� PNA,..,y,..,,
r � _ �
� _ P _ _
x � � oH �
a Z
� � � 2 _
r G x 5�
� � G
a, , �v� 9
o P�
�EA ��R� � � ,s .
m s 15 ,s
�:. �
J
�
o wGO District
� eo
czso mi soe , o isi P EnsEn,Erv, � ^;�s a� H
i�vye` ,a .. r o^ NS V .. - ` os� a ctrvhE a aH
� ai = � = o aea EnsErv+ENr �S '- o es
.5 3ao I ' , .�
� � - s
`���� , � ^
= s�,ss
a � - �
,pe � � a � � .
, � � � m
„a�
s 95���
� f
�e
� x 5 .,
,, s m R
a x "'�"e H. -
x N � H
';^a'� ,o- uao e .sas . . ,� - �.
.. a ., , N s�J4J V'
, a „ , � m a�o .s o` F 1 aH
�a , �
, 9 ay
Q .. �,_,oe : .
,s3a, ,�s �. . � ., . � - � �
c a � � ,o 0 A
�s o,
�n , , a ,9 �
� � R
s, s Lake Grove Villa e Center
T ,< � ,5 �
O
��s a �s s . , _ _ �
< ao _ , ,s, e � J
� s _ _ ,s
N o � E.
x' m x 9�n IRON E
x G � � n
,^�/ n N BETH � (�
RT�
,s �z , A� I VCO
�
`�:; �
� �
_ �
�A�a . ;:: � �P ➢ a s
�r � �
��;�m �
;zga
-1 �l""'1�
9
:��a'§�� s, g
s MOUNTAIN s
TRA V
RVAN
P mr
, A� � Overla District
',E�,s
h"a� ,
m EAST "�
�
�
Y
, �_�
� �
a a 2
PARK
iez _ NATURE m 'OY'�s�
s2 a f` saa F�
� ` o
s N H 9 ` �
RKHI
LL9 v
a
, �sr�
\
� �s�j�E RE WALUGA a N�P�
�d ETN F�¢ L u�aars
ax3 u�fi 'se9s �a � EO a
, 15 N"�
a 's��� A ';
� � , R
�' �. ., RESERVE LUe V D
ona o 0 o so � EasEn�Eur 'o '
. 9 JANTZEN a $
e PARK �
, 's�' , x � 0�E � F , R-7.5 ���,. "i �`o"� s
6� o. so =�,� - 'x 'h� m � , a, � a''�o EONA
'G OP' v v e a aaa ^^ a P RO ST
K' ,. a = s 0`7 U� R
�• s
ISLAND e
B e
$ s
o r C`n/
�''s�. sa s ' ` w _
� ss�
z 9 m iesi
o e H
saey ��
� � i
3
��x
'� �- w<eeaseMeNr Mpp° \/
s 's. _ - w e
' s � V V O
Js o V
P
5
� 'o �A"� Southwest Overla District
N Ha w�
� s> > o
�0 `qzo
n � 7
°� � m �
sP o a
s y e e b
G s� � S
> +sso �
> �:
`�a RO �
A�s 5 O
H �
, ��z,A�
< '� .
EASEhE�, a�
�
, o
�3
�
R °� ,�,
� � � e 0 s � R� OP �.= is - ORIVE � T/f '� G s� s I�. WACE � s
� � o o a � � S S £ £ a E ,�e �Y a sw EJP .D P � S �5 s ,� � S R E � � A 4
, , o , , ;� ,� �� g sb�� � �' � � R-7.5 � �oaE � m �3 ���,�. ,
G G G O x', ' R5s1� s2a ,`",T R VILLA N K �SH o v � �
°� � a m� P a - � �� R-0
_ _ � n�
, s'o � �ry
''oE �
_ ��
_IoE ,s EAST
� �L!U(EWOOD CENTE
O� 6w $
� P �
FC�
CP $
H
�e �z r u
R� � xgw RWS DE IGN DI TRICT
H SJ � � �
40
K cH M1
SHn V 0.�
�� �
x�
KE � G� Se
SP� R T
EA D FIX2THE S st
RE' ���Y'� �J R
e E zzs
o Eo
WALUGA PARK t
STREE � "� O es $ "i-
T b� Z�
� ��°° _ re, 'M P�P �I
s Lake �� o
� ,
CHRDINHL o �O
�'� i
L (
d�� �z
L4NE ,
N _ O �
5�3 e J G G G � 'o .�y��5 i5»a �S Q p�^"' O D T '`�,r P •A� Re �p25 o a ot0 � ia.o '.46 ., K pP a < �F�`J ppPO MDDLECRESi a .a e � � �
., ., a � a 9 WEST na �, `9, R �� �. , a^a c 2 re,° ,�O RS R e� � 1 � �
^ WALUGA PARK �NA � � " �_ ` -
ju'� Z pO OAD
ei W I
PNA
�ce � , �
E � �
OUR SHVIORS ('�
'� - E
v � �
- I i
e s.1 R
E
o E
� y�qV r.
� �
Te9 n.
��� �
0 s°4�� i
� East End Desi n District
��r�ERAN � � , �
, �P
9�
�� s
.v�
°i�, ��^, cHuacH ' �c�^" � � -� - s � ,� a, wasuR sr 1 1 .`7
/ �'s � 15 s ,F\o✓�'�'0 m 3c� 0� ze� a � � � �g m i � � � � �
s y�, � � 2s4, \'f �15 °� _ � eR 'b o C G� - _
3 0 /D � � p
a�\Cr � � �
G
- sero �
4� � � �
�� 9 ' F nu Ji ^�
9 i Jae � m
saz W
�
„ s i q ss
y
� p�a a
0
EI R
� � �95 sa EasEMEu1
1l�_
xP o
�
�
. y SUMMR � o � -
s fs t '8�' N�
� q a, �P� �,�s �sa° os - � e = ,ao l . � � ���m � � P �R�r- = s � Old Town Desi n District
+ p � a R� :�� ,s9�, s�a -7 ro�. � � o , m > e e s o `swiM, ��� 1 �
u`P � cn �P� ¢'�£ sssa - �RE WFw R� s^ro o is e m � isec i.cc � ' � w PARK :o„ � ' tA si s � � �
� b �� �
°'��'9 9 is w i5 vs o�p SPPY � H\ 'L�5:�v ch p . / ° � ° .� a � isac as >o n r, � � � � �
� c i59n gb � � � 5� &e �(� � '� . F' as i C 1s ete ' +. �a65 � �, cLUBEHSErvErvr { ts ' �
/( GEORGE ROGERS PARK � ' I
REDWOOD �y? e FOA's� � �e ooa i5o�2 is5a o " ." � ���- �s o _ _ �o3a5
s ,so,a so„ � a � � ' � � z -�-- �- a,a � EASEME�. ��� � o , West Lake Grove Design District
a i5o 010 +- 9301 02� k m r � � z• fs a EsiniESEnsEMErvi � F gNo , GREEN �s �� � � � �
� saa�_�. '"oP0 3 .��, �P� � _ _
s � 1 rs> � ' �� W`a
NF � i�a3 soso V C�� 8 R m sso E E S - � II � N � � � 6 P EnsE.Ervi N-�6 �-6'm 'g STREET ('
,�p ocuwooucr �, �, �, g ss W s1 � q�ISqpE
is � 3 &a �\`°a.s.' '� 5�o n UE , \
o N
G as r V
E
River
o s o a �
s cao � A \
R-7. _
, 0 5�„
ss _ TM �Y
� � `�, a ,ss
� � E
�ory,E s, T ,s
� �FwEs,�E ,��zE ,s�s
°�s s ry,��,Esso� = k = � ,s�3 ,sa� ,so3s �
sas ,,, s��oo� ,e N ,s�o �, e r � m N o , 6 �
, � , � o � , _.
� 0 Mc
^ S � $ N a . Mile
59a 5
� -n � 'n =' = � ' �y� 60 'bo e � N
S a..� �.w Peo � . .
s� , g A ^h R-7.5
s s o
sa� ' ,
� x
6�� F � .H
°,,e`
�,z, ,z , l n o
� o
a s"�
, �� � Lake Oswe o Cit Limits
� s� � sw
, e 1
/ _ �
z , � � � , k o ,% - , � N p ,s J Y
N�
, 9
�s � za
sis � � T
a � ,
�,ss - � � - /
�NG
F 0 n ��
�. , -
, - � ,
s - I
s4 m P R y
& s -
o , i�is � s is �P- �a� e
EnsErv+Ervr o � R G
0
_ �
ss s9 .s F. ea� ^`^�Ao � i . is ns isao � ,� � . _ _ _
� is so s os � � .. .� :� N s � a . isos� caouc ` s
s;o ,, 'F.F�„ ,s,ez �„s ,s,es��ER�R�E � ,s,se > N � N � = � �2-�S N 6 .o ' o,s ' � � m a C�j � �E� o "s 3 9�F e �� PNA �- . . - a o� osw ee�PNA
� 3 55 / �
s�'e s ,a e9��feek d Lake Oswe o Urban Services
sTREEr �s s=,o �__, s,s � � �a«�F�E�o � � � o J 3 J
nz �� mo � �' � m �5 � s VILLAGE y�.� �o o P m P O � o „ PEN�E \
sz is� 0 9'�P`' J
t �
� . ae P /
HFTS �
Ieo i e � �+ cLEry EASEMErvi f
52a5 MAPLE'
G 1<� �� z 9�9�
IJ6 191� S
� /
r `
�
� i a A I
5 i� 3o5TREET�a N
3� Boundar U B
R-io / S
�f EasEMEui �o SCHUK F�
ry�'G'�' 1e2 32 -
�
I(HBLE LHNE o�Z s i Y � /
T y162o5
z56 G o 192 - / °o
6 � ,s�,s ,�� ��, � � n o „ Ne � , R-10 0 0 � o 0
- 5 z5 "� $�' ��' - � G o a e. . a2 is HWy �' �
�i�' � oe � �ryE$G� S ELLEN BERGIS 43
_ TO F n5 s A3 fi s �° s . m� L
ne a E
C o aF¢.
e � o m E
H o
�°� ,s=es ,�� =,s , � , � o m a , � Metro olitan Urban Growth
, , °$ �
F`�F � i NHTURE PRESERVE
1�
4
G ibai • • •
G � -
G n
G S
�
� 5
p
ss
-
� 5
L ,ss,
� J
Jo
`,F
f�
EXIT
�
S
K � /
i � � ��
s.ti �io s3 0 �
�
Oo E� �
aeo �v
�mr
i 4
tba G P
�E�
e k P ASHm d��
K m
HA . . I
z9, R .J� 1
NG P �
T _
N 1 5 5
s�E �s�%.. k' "m'
G Q
. RA � a
VE _ TE
R i5 e a �
N� PNA
E' � �
� � Boundar UGB
w - � \
� i�u ��o �ba3 � C w w" �{AGE � ��J9 � ASH STREET , � ` �
.z< a �' a y fis ,� saa s a G � - � oarc tEa SOUTH SHORE � ' - � ., � � � � � �a„ nsH sraEEr JnsH sr �
,, xz ^ x' �� , � "x � nis m v „ me � g �
� _ s . �w
e as � �N _ sac �
NATURALAREA �
- � �
ib i iG s35o b J x _ TE m a s �
RRHC p$'
OAK E �
sz is is . �ss h _ +
CountV Line
� D
�b J� 0.9i• -
� 698 J
5 OAK 9 �NI P� �
i � e n
S a 8
2 O a0
io O Ui I� 2o a
'P'� �aKEoswEco
C k� � H
a G � � � �I
eo i � zz N � _ STREEi �G u '�
b 96 I � I�.�Jm �
t - - / �
i � C
s .. e s � �.�J� I�
is es isni� io m a E P ~T"
� `
5
s o q i�� OAK
_ �y
AI ! S �
ie STRE
�
., m m �, V H �W� (l
s/ c g s , - 0 ti
si2 �o� i2 b.�e I ' `,Y �RF LHKEOSWEGO = � _ � � ' - R�O � �'�
165 � / LHUREL
i STREET
53 ss:o i5.1 / ' s " o � - LqUREL
88 �i
cP S STREET
6:�?' < . "
PHRKHCHDEMV - -
5 5 - - _ UNITEDMETHODIST g J -
cc � -
i T ! �
s�s s �s� , a zP
� - m
� . R 7.5
o � a m
5�< z 7
�� �
� - . �
� P
PkA a �
�- ���R�� �
es ,, `
, . �
o s� . , , ,
_ s��
, � P
5 i e 3 Pz G.
5a O i
c P W� W m
� 5 5 O
� O'
s.� o - - - Herita e Tree
o �A "
� -
6 6 D
b N��Y Lso
,� + _ _ _ �
s,o N a �m 5 ti
9
�oaivE o , .
�s.�< e si � r � m�0
w J uwae�� .
. `"� / i� - � oFF ce
sie ""� � � z
�35 6 z3 s �'SPN
f STREET o i
�e a�
sA F �� 1
t 8^
i1 6 o R � 1 E
k' p e �� yzye�
�e - � t
� 0 � �
g g � � � . L ,., �� P e �� �A�RE� ,s,� ,
y�F 55 F^ � STREET
�6SK /'
3 L �
- $ o � o � S
�sEv 4
IL iii i ai
lE� -
� R a
s i xA
- O
a �ou
�/ ' os i . a (1��
'E
s
n�
o,y � � � i
su�sEicao " LqKEGROVE EasEUEui o i5 �, - - � a .. m ��
6 1J a u° 3
b�
�e� °I
� �s�
o �s �
, � .
� ssa ,� o ,
N os 4s 6�4.P. P
a BURNH
/ HM RON
i c D
b 61 °m ��
SWIM PHRK
0 -
s�
' G s G
� WOeP�
6 C JR 51 < i a
e �"� x�i .�, o i J
'u c
T $ 4 = O �4
E 8 k aF P 3
RE d n
T sw J i
J �a�m
".� Historic Landmark
No x J �I'
5 s� H
�� E �
�� '�� N
s'�, sa�r�:
� . o ,ti
J� -
c S 4i _
/ M O
.o SHORE�91 v
°'P
fieN.F
BOII � �
� LEVAR
3�5fiv p
i � 0 � 5 !2
b n"}Na
� s � 95 �
O c
c � 'f
_ � �EOAR L� *'PNA
(i^ s� sF� iRAci B
mRo15 < ���
ss , � s� .3� oa� , s1REE1 � s� � � R-7.5.�
< � , R-10 0 �
1 r o > _ �EOA P
F � npF R
s� sr
RE� I-
ws '� er �
. � / k
ss m
�
� � , o
e G „ i
e G
'60
i � `GLENMORR
s se3 9\F k' _ g
i k 4
s ses � t J�S �{y�
e e' '
� ��[u m > o a.� �'9> �SWTH SHORE r
s R-1 -
��` 6 0 'R5
e i~ sa�r�s�aRE - E��;'o
�c S+s 5 G �'P�o �
c a e o V�P � = n -
s a s�o` � n a o - 5 -
s,s e a m °9�° .
ea < � o � - - I
IVF.. w S� � GREEN
� ,,, - �^ R 7.5
FIRE STATION �
a ��
E RESERVOIR& � a a5
e� � $� 1
s� � �
�h 1 �
na Q�S �� ' JJ .� o
i i Nry�' cA'h' _. > r P
s zs o ��� 4 �
rae[i �'"�r
S � �a ej S� 212 s
s cc s� 6 2��y�9�� F�s
s s W es 9
�� - rENNiscouars 8 � 3
�
e
SCIlOOI
, � ro j
MAN s
i , S� CTJ
's�
]zz � Pvr�
2 3"� , �
�z � ss 4
ssa 4. �i a i
m o C S �N6 1
6 ee� � 1 6��' ..
e I�b ra.� I,�C���G� �,
30 �S �
sq p I
5e "�nW� 5 �
ssc � �
s a o v.
� s §^" SCHAEFER o x �
� � ""s
s s� q o s s �
6 SPRUCE
] 2 - ..°g�.n
X 3
5 �V
s n5 � � N/ � STREET �oo
�'P �`°.. 6 $ �
O i
4z 1S� � P 3 a �� e o �1 g .a
� � o o WHLL
STREET m �
2��h�c� SP m . �, -
�o s P R
i UC
a s E s
- 45, TH es
^T R75 , EE,V
. ISLAND � z�°
� o
N 4N..�rvE a 1
�T i � `
��R� � . PNA 6
� � _ �� a
URHA .
M
' v s
s
ne �5 s� s,=so o - � �
, 0 1 . ,s,�� 5
s �F�r -
�= a !_
z �� ,. s . ., o
�
W L "a � _ o
- m HHLLINHN
� ¢6 m �
� '� .
� m
W o5 River
Eojd���Po � .
,, I 1 m I
N£o
... y 4- t6]es ^ ^ a a a a ��.
:�
�
h^ � NnTURnL
n'�'"� s . a I�a
�J 'S�� o � > > Mile
.. y P � iaAci A ..
S� 35
'S\P 'D O ry � 1
HI 6T
/• o . .
ON QJ ro k
C
,s ,s, "8 3A
'fiC 55 HREH
3 F ^ t
21 5
� �� t
R� �g�
„ PNA
�
s6 .
$ �r>>st F 91s
� _ .
6"S + _ o
�6�ep h�AS i
Hp � v
�a
6� O '
$ g SR
+.I R ss
W� r ,
N Q E z !
NO TE:
� o 'ry � 5
E i �f E CR zp �
'v� S ES�'�
TV31Z
OU�J IE'
W o. HEMLOCK
Sg�. J DRIVVs R � �13
o E 9 ao a
O CAR� JTHRIFTWHV STREET �
�s� 5 BOULEVqRD e .� LSON CT a �s ° L �i e i'�
� � � WqSHINGTONCOURT � I g, RE 80 > R Q HEMLOCK SiREET � 0
� .�fi aEaiiou '� � Na ULEVA - � � d`
�' o S ftD �ass y
P 5�sao� a 9��P O
o CHJ �
Y n ER
as j , o
�� ftY
o a
5 E
o - 3
� &o<
EasEmENr r $
e � s .
e Y � G RO
P eo C� Pd .
� _ . no a
_ e�
R e
�s�
� . o �
� � � fl�
� P� O o m
R � � � .
o' � � 6 , Er �"
. TRE
� m 5
e o .. o ♦ i a 'H�
i � K
s �OC
ea � 5 'f ML
&5 � ♦ �E
a H
w ry �P '7.5 v n
s v
:� o -
_ �7 ' < mj6
, F�a�
�se� a
7 � �,,,oe
5 0
g . �� o P ,s
� , 9
R e s oo c ,
G 4 16 0 4� g 25
]A F
J�6k� P i ia e��
O P �' FREEPONS
sP�stsPe o &
g' i
�
� aso o �
ezo is �d��o
_ °�P s s
F � i
ss s R�7.� so o ,
EASEME� ,s , z, �
w ` ,sa a �
� sP,s� ,sP3P a �
; Pz a r
� = sP o
w w ,sas,� m � a,s T
,saoa o a
3 , m � � s - N ;
0 0 ,z
� � $w 3
sa N�' �
ry'eo
4
s2� �
O
as 3 is '4` e E
¢be
1 �a� b�s i
a ~�
3�P �s cP ss
a�a is J o
�
� cHuacH �A 2 i
, PF
5 6 aaz i
P � a
r'a� �Pso a m ` 5 54 ,
ee94. PINE
9W 9 e a
&a i i
i eao ' �p 4. i
P � O sao s sn
��" zs
EasEMENi G STREET �5
F 9 T� 5
,a�� ���
w.�9 i
E �
V��st Ba
zo � IVVCT 15 i5
F S'� er P c<`
5 oP
KILKENNV
N r i � � � � � � Q- mDRIVE
Re �$ s
.P�s'9
ra.s 8 � �
y �
� 9'P
�A �s, e � as
� s,
we o a
so 0 0 ,
fi ,a� GR 25 o a
� °v60 m a9 ,
`a e , n o ,
Ps e �A�o ,
e 6 p e` a
� �°s, , e
�
'°�su � e a 99
� T N s
� a a
R SG T
P e0
S D 1
a ' G s i n
R is
8 � z is
�se� o
H
@ E a o
HVEN o F`� Q- o
�N f
- � �� P
� E 4
s � ftOAD J c�9 a 2
£ � �� n
�$ x � G u u C5
s - "'.c'S FB 3 ,n .n .. o �
- o +s � N r � _ �s
3� E
aso � � o�
. Gl � �5
a H� �e�o o +os n HALLIM111 ELEM
° 3 " B s
e &w o 6j 4`� N .. i
�e �
3 a�
FRos F q
S O5� ' 3 _ SH
T ] OR
ST 16 E e so O
' m �
a
a �
�^eq
6 i n
ssaz A ee s
i �o n � a�
s 2 > >
- �o aa SCHOOL
�be o �r o,
? - P c LARCH m
i � �e� aaG 5� 15
�o �➢ TREET
�
@ 9 oA P i
R o 0 o F
,'r'� m o 0 59
- o 0 0 � 4
o Ge]2 m �V 65
�]00� e . O o 9 1
O o ���
�F a
�ry
O P �
LARCH
, �
5 5 � G �a.'�`e>
0 3 �6j�d'� o i5
G
a STREET 9
'� N V CREST P
O m E
V
sA
! A
P H
sT� �
s o � 8. sa P
�
> IAMONT ., ., 9s�
c� 68]2 89
Z 1
t � 1
3 � 0 1e¢ O
m 'sYes J vP a . 4~i i
�S R �a�'z ' 1� �s i ' Q- T �i c5
34' �r 3
G 9 R �
s '�s
1 �F oU v . o
v `v m
� SPRINGS
o m
m d ? 0 1
EN
"oNE ' & o S o
o �E s O o i5
��i
- A�, 0. 0
P 9'^,sq �°'�.a a .
& S o 4� � TS se 5 , 3 a P �
G a2 93e z
s O 6 G
N& o o � � e�N
- � i E E a e
�
� � E
NHTURHL o s E > � �
Ya o o �s 1 9 1
R P
�99 N
G o i
�ys cl'� O ss
_ �M1
g �s>aJ ts
�O g° o OXFORD
�F ��t
S + o a � IRCLE
� NnLLHME
P$�6P g
r , �
g � HREH _ a5
�tss
� _ �sv
7.5�h � �
,���
,s ,P '�a
o �, � s
ss�s J
R s�'- � -
- � � , , , ,
�ERw7�5 g o � , 9 ,
�
,u�` ��" ,
�
� �'�,
, sso �'�, 55
�r L �O i s� e li
'"EaP W �
'N EnsEn 2j O o
f/v y
� a'l
r
,„�_
, PNA Q ASP <
, �vG EEP�"E I�' �9 P e YOUTHVILLAGE
wesr cree ry �'
ENTREE
H o B
S
o �
�c
�
�4p F o� �
'2 i ROAD C
� F
P 3 F
s�
oza '� N N o P ��P� �
S
� i
VIRco � ' ( s -
E GIN /v D
IH t]
a �v� CHRISTIE CAMPUS
wA� r �
NA
w 0 GR
Q '�4 � EENTRE
P S A E is R?
o NA o
R ROAD �N 's 3
Q .
o O
S
.EE. Y
J +�o � 6
SH � � � o s
OR, Op � o
o :. o E s "d 'o 0
,t ON LA e VE90
., ., ., a V N RI
. i DE 0
e �a Gemer i �4 P'
� "5�
� a9 DO
W
0 o NEA
_ O M
t �
0 o a m 3"
F� �E o . e o 0 0 o n io CORNELL
J 6g�%`
�4 & o e
»oo� . . . o oen Fontl 'Y o 0 o a �t
� „ nsaeN HERON C
oe e o a
w a a n
a � m . $
� e �" �e e
3 „o E
e e > '(>a
_ �L R Y a o 3
e S
A
OPEN
3 F N
< z o as
f STJ RK
m . a 20'0
e e s
� s
v HIGH ACA�
� a
v a a o r25
PNAr
, E a m
, „ �$ „ s
q
e a H O^F
v 5�
,�$�
a i P rz SPACE E ��
oa A 9� �
�
m � �EE f o eaesou
O �
9'G h R�o
t�aea l
i' o P
TRIUMPHHNT KING �3
& ��'?4�' 2 O
E o ou
PHLISHDES '4
��� J
R ' vW�
r.t o 6
5 11] 920
� 1]t o $ a o 09��
':�'c
_ �s�
t LUTHERHN �S.
> t� Q -
0 �'�
o �a aoo�
� S�� c� � R-1�
w - � ' �am cn a � � o _ � �,
E CHURCH CHA � �V � T MPUS u
2� S PMAN V �V O $ 4 - �
o � wA� PF
"m R y��y WnV s ^Y`e �u UK o .� ni F - ` c�aaK 1
, 4 p `� o PR _ �RIVE g' �s �.P yaP„ 'L'9
, 2 P � Q� COURT� 'R 4+ o�„
`b, 'S� ��� � G JROAD �25 s.+ CLARAN h �s Y Q- � �
Y� o ��Y :. o o i> . m da ory t� S k `R� <
'� N �5 E � (` . .. e £ .v C P @
a "'Fo ti��k . i i G & u.ux f
ROSEWOOD `4. .� 2a e o ., ., o 0 0 o E O � �e3 � v � e. . �&� �3E. F
�J w w v � Bull➢Mc P
a ( n. CFP"�'"wm
REET 9E ':SrJo »�R,-5 n i.. 4 S� -
e'G� ] \ $ �„�m
5 cV i Z �e
y- �zs� �3'� a k
�& a �, � � � N a°°
, a
a Rv
, �
g a
sa �
- a & k ^r
I x ��
� o . RT
� s �� <�
�"a o c - � co �'`
F »z i . a � nL
so r a O EL F Q- 2
i� N �+�5�
zis JOR 6
s'I � C P
� ��0.K �
3� 0 Z o o O t
.�
3
9 � F
�� �$=a P R
�$s (
o e� a +,zs G � �a e ,9z5 �aN c
"e c� c, s �
� R
� % �s � �v
� r , o a s ��sry 0 2?. F. G .�.
N ., »2s> > O ENA m �^ �t �`c
" e � � zs �zzo i� zao P rG ��n
Di l EE. soai `'PP O
4 5 � - � £, C ��� m 2�a MAPLELEAF EEn � � �0 River 'd
xuNEs 1F . � COBB 31 � � t� �,�� � �b �s ° ��2.w ROAO 22o SHCRE� m j � ��a ,qib ti
� i m �e� a i�a2o � WHV '>zg O°' �.'4 " o o �2eo o � Q HEHRT S g i�saa S� cER[ '`'PE Mile y
> +� � 3�0 O 0 3' 8 � G �9
K ��app s _ _ �g a �'s� � � »2 � „ � �� ' CEMETERV'Z � s A } w000SHoa 220 !
_ o ., R � � O 2na = ., o e A UPP � F
� ]a.lo qn321 N .. N m o 0 22a E � 1�
n �] � N o 5 'S` COiTHG lO�n v '�M1m
O - - ry �s o = » OSWEGO �nCP �eeo
� 0 3 �'�p & �, � 2550 KOAWOODDR �
»e �nno WIL�WO � 2 - '�
Z c OD m aa
bbsa tbb i] N STN '
RE i PIONEER smE .
ETS �3 9 i� s,�EE� �ao HEn�rHcra
�O zsz � P
oaivE n
v n s
sa 3 s P
�A",�P � E
I - �3 �' 2oe 2 c}' -O SoaHi
�zso � � ao �� H -
3 O » CEMETERV . , f y
���s� re v v
t �'$9 T F
�a3o i B� E
> > _ ° ? "� D
e 9
S „aaa N
� �
,a �waEN
s sraeer "'� s - - SISTERS OF THE HOLY coriveH � o v�
az � °E a o R 15„s � ��
.� � � � . a � � ROCK v
�soo ivw a . . hi q t� E
ze5 O
]3a �3�,�2 i � �
azs 3
E Z
]3 <
y F
o .. NAMES-MARYLHURST e
0
i H 'R
� nVE J o � LAKE OSWEGO GLENMORRIE
N e�
i as ass C �
�aao � � � � zzs H G��
T a t�a ER ?
E 0 i R
T O � V mC�
t� W E
0 3 ' .
qry o W �oz
p HILL �3b L 5 ti
2a E
L �
ey D �RC � O
G R-5 '�� � MAaEaos
r� o E
� - F , FE���
2 , v o wo� ^a i
THE CHILDREN'S �C
�a o 0o raw
n a
O
PARK ouse
s �¢ 90 �F �
i RIVE
c� '
� ourrr O
�
y R MUNICIPAL � "e
, c
ras� �� �e3e
ISLAND
, ,,A� „ , PNA F
� aa
�sp HOURHCHDEMV sso a¢ � m � �y e o - �,
]a ]a o 4
� �
H � l5o t 4�
i t� � O
l91 L S
o �
m � � �
_ E
�h o �
� �$
, _ � , - GOLFCOURSE v
,sso �o
, 96 0°
'9�e o o �
- , H ���� V ��� - �
�R�7.5 a � MARYS WOODS
aso o , o o �`
�
0 0 0
, 1 0 , �v
"�9�aa aao
»„`�
�, - ,a� � ti
,,, s� , aas� �,� s> N „ � 5 6
�s e- P R an e i �esz HOG ISLAND
e aw ( )
n soo v� `f� ,�a ""�z '� a 3 a F ' S ie n ,n N oav » ,�ass Qo
Z � 00 e sa �-rs aes » ,g � "u� "'.rz� o DRIVE „ � F � �e 2
p e ] ]]35 M' . �]so3 t]a92 ] .y q� A 09 A W CuraESNE
DICK'S � sax � 22 oW � � 2oa��' �� o�aocHEa .�ao�
O s .c.e �8 » 's s' � a3o m 9 `'� i �A9t
a a a aa� �e E t� � 05`� i � e,^
p� SPORTING oi o + s+o � oREGON szo +�s�e � �'� � ° '.� P _ _ � y� 39� NousE 2 y
+ � su ��Q�e acn .D 3 Jfi SE S� ,. ,. Q- O
i] r r �
a �I
6]5o i ^PO � O
]5 �s�
5]a ���9�
GOODS BUD�HIST sse ` 9
ns , .c` s MARYS WOODS
SHFEWHV P
O A E
t '
� �e 9�O J O
� s�N
�a"N�LF Q '� O d 'c
ss P N sna �
F O
»xs G 5� as� N P NROAD , °S� R�
� R E
o "�� , �1 f
� � , `� o '9�,
� CENTER i CLOV, t�s �F ' o�P e�` 0 \
PF P , �R ER�J P
3� "��9 soa >.;� ",;,� °v � � �'� »„� o EnF ROAo �vER� cY � �a ew ,>,� ' ti � p s x aE
- E N „ R � �o, �o PNA ���a�a�sE o w °m - � ME E
a s�o �% o � 3 anusnoes � c ¢- � ,. ,c�' a MARYLHURS �
uPo s s�a a N
soo s¢
CITY J WAV s Y P
�R ,F O , 3 � ,%,V
OAD "s� °& P
, s,o Rv3
- , s ,��E° �
,o /V
� o �„ - , ",� s V�� o < RESER�a�R , s ,� „o ,��
- m ME , s a , �;;&s »�� R��� � 's� �M� ,4 � �,�R �3s
OPERHTIONS � � �� ��+xy. J� � E �gp „y ���SIDE - � UNIVERSITY �'
K - ss s3z � - z H COUR �'�9'
CENTER ��h.sis � T "Ps .
W aP t '6 B ``t+
i E 1�
`A � i � s1 E
a��m sza s - o z
,�mU � lAN s N �icE P
OP - �°
�s aa
s3 � �
a > -
'ss�" "ffr �A i.
s 8 oa P
R-3 6 ����
3 0 '".�"p�=
, � m � ���
,s - o ,, �3,
�e9�
, ro
� z
a , e P
ew r - �M
sas „ s � „szs �,,, m
�sa °'� - y o - ia ,�s
SOUTHLIU(E� IANso s e h- �9$ 9
E a �� �\�3 N
] n � > a � v P� 9
� a � � R
�
cqas N
s ., ., a � � � O
MERIDIHN SQUHRE s s JPy.
3
s �n5 �
zz „s „ � , a� 1
CENTER s�o
- 2 J �os.mario aiss �i
s@ 9� iRA
saa � =R-10 e z 3,,,
ss� > ,� > ��s
,� � �
sa � , 3 � �;
"ss� ., rrw s c+
� 'F �c a o >
o �.
,s� z
fi9,s
� `6 c�EasoN oR
J
s1 `
, o . »a� � ��r„ 3 A�
�,z�a �
, �
� "sx ^'s��
g � rz , 6S
nz , � , c z m
� r , ' t ,
� i e r s�,
esno s� 'S c
m �
_ e �30 � , c m No � �o Mv n�v
a s, o� e �'�, sKv
WVENOELL DRNE voos > » >o is t� �i �; GIRC� �w � O � �R
. S� t]s �9/u � a s�`° o
F MHINTENHNCE 9�
> > IS �
i `& ERG �
� a K B
�w � re
� O i�a
_ zsa J 0 �
n....�. �s o LAKERIDGE v
� '$ >,�o .�.+rP 3
o FIRE R
�.r �so ',3 I
i» - .� 'f V P 9�2 cHwv ��
R10 E
„ � .
, �'�
o � � (�
,
R
E E
�e � ry�d i o
» (A
. ' s` � sc�n .d .
sr,� �� N
P STHTION Y '!-
� o i K
� � �
a J o ea
n C^
, � v O
$ � s
'�52.. �O t5�/
N A HIGH SCHOOL P
� �
� �o e �X 9 d' .
e x�6 e o � C�'Ffi o
z,°"
5 E, " R� aies
�ez
0 � E a � 4,os
d ry
zn , c
a � � a�'n
oza . E z�p9 w„ �6'u'Ps� ■3�
's I oN oEM a „ „ � z m � � o a , ,�� e ^� sa p F s..�A.HEawE
� o 00 ' P` e „ om
Exir 6 °am �enu u eeeNnRo J sr °» �o rs, _ s � - � �'c� ,�' e �e � a m `y. ` +��2 ,�a e
- . eA � - s �T e � m i 5 M f9 N i�� ,o \y.P osz�t"�e+p. �, � �
290 �SP
o � a B ry 2 0
vo - � H �
S eaoo
a Oe
� o k ��
„c � Rp C
Ro M 6 C 90'
Ao
, ,s PF
m� �� q�
� , �so
0
so R
r � . °o�^ v m�
�
s r "ssv r� ,. s� .r
4 � � < t � oN i`;;
� _ m r
0 3
f
� kyy
4 o»a3r @^� �
r 'v "r
.C� . B r
D
e
a H 3 6
OA - R
R e �
I 'E ON � �
O L
Y oHnan
ERR i � o e R
ES F � o'
ON G�V e , R^N
BO x � �oi n H J V s
P a2�° S �
eE F
r /C V �0b F
i e 1 0
ci �' T R O
Q�' ME m C S" %
O i OR � p � D
�30 �ei SIDEJ �. s ueanav
a � P
s �
R
P nc » � LJ e �W
4 e A oaivE
22 �a N
�e TENNIS P
E E
0 8 B 4
LOJ e <
J ] �O
� y
\ � � G
'��UM a D �r,h�
�»sb m P S
°'gp ' � eaz� W J S 9
�
' O �d �ooaEssEs
o �a °sa
COURTS� Y zo �ao3�N aoa5 J�
u � '� ¢
eE ' x� , , s 4 � �.
� MONTE ORI � a �
e J]1 � t PC
2 O
1e Ea ,R m�
Q & �Y J19a
E
w � cfi P
eae 9 Pyv
ao �e G C�eo � '$� wuasounaECHuacH N J S
��b se �r i O
9� ,9. � %�
i�aP �53 ��S�
SCHO W O
oeG 3
O �"a i�
.y1 �� � � �s y e a�p F _ � oFFCE O G O P
o / � t » E
�4 O 3�
> > ��k�e
E� 9 ]]] 'R` 'P
T K - OV � .
ERLOO x �. S�
wry myi K 9
] - fs . � coMMo �
'e� 5 0 �a ee5 ni O m�y3� - �RNE sso ,�,.. L P �'. P � �a
� �`' +�e i s� W y� - OV E
so z �e� FS � ERLOOK S � O
�P, "sy� A 1L a � K � r ?
I o i N nucE
UL � J
� .. � m E 'N^ RNE
Q' S � ✓✓ 'COURT O� c�'� P
P ese -, � - v�`s - �-^ aiss D�� �
� ao � P ., Cr ,23 , ��P� 0�D (+ sHEu F
� � J
s� � �E i �
oz �
r�s ^P 1e e � J > >
na . f
C �s A � . � cHnaE� A
C O as » ia �
]92a > I b�
aP m ��
e � ACin
R ea� i N
O
Y�� a'
"� i CHURCHOF
� THESTHFFOR� -
�ao�s 2 aW
P e 1�
�`°e . ,.S m . - .e /
0^> e � i] o �'9k" ado
9� .. � o n 9f5
5o e JESUSCHRIST
T i o�i�5
� Po
,P,P �, ' MARYLHURST
�n a 9°a 6 e
, ' S' aeriaeMeNr HAZELIAFIELDAT
0 9.
Y �5 � 3 cP
�5a o 2 s
t � ti
f 3
_ t �' BO
4 t
P a o e u 4. M' i an55 a �O
> PF ,
n � �� +� ,
- , �nrrea onv
0
s z �"'w
� aa� s � Q- P33�
'eogy a
- COMMUNITV
_t
K i i
P t ]
W�
w � LUSCHERFARM 3W
� R i d 5 V� a
r�e �
a UNIVERSITY °�'
�,E
M1J
SHINTS
I be , anoa �ti„
6 �U
K mLUF
0�95�a a 2
9ae aooL `F oZ i ..
°b � D R '
eo "Yh9 ss N R ab cs�
o i E I
�e5e � E V
1e R P
G 9
S oo e � a
2o LHKERIDGE WHRD � .
0�Ro �J$3o
N=�i2 P
so� � o-��e� i� anv�ou <
. a �V 5 � i
5 e a"
3 �
o� '� �� ,ce sss ieo 0 3 ia .� o R � a2o �� n qao s e � s� 9 .� ry,,• sq.� y o ^, 9
P . o .} coY ��s - -
Y „ �a
e m s , LAKE OSWEGO .,�.,
ro ,rsoe sa '°'�. �""
c ao - vaa Mnaw
�, � R 15
w s s = _
LL � �FyF�az �56 ,s,w m�
��
R�. H aaos� E 9 0 � � � �
a F oa �
��
- I m�-i � a " � a v
.� � z336 �
� � � , o �
, ��
� , s
e` s s . rsr DOGPARK s �\�
6fr � 'WHV n
e$ �av
9 F` s,5 ' '� iaia� iai � ieoi oso ieoso iao i i ooz SE Y'�e s 1 po �a:5 e F 3 °0 KY�qN n eO9: ct �
$ �a �2 `�'��� a S � � � 'f: � I ^ zn 4 � Op �s�'re F � � �5�0 »a5 ^,
� LHKERIDGE . ejW fl WEST GE � 9py � R CHRISTIHN t� �p � 'F � R � ��c�` i � ��^�E
� 3� '�'9� - Q � � J G. �o �i- � '� W Rver
P C eos.3 e O �
z � , EMEN, o R- � � n P
a � ��N �
� � 9 �, �u3
�a.HicH ELEM ARV R �
� �� 3
a
�� ,s�s
� E
i
i i _ Mile
O S S S P `e ��, �S ,��a
2 nr 3P
S 4` s� ,<, ��� o���
�A
�>�9fi �W2 N �T'�� eA �
O 25 I � t tea
S S� V
� CHURCH
Aj3 E
' <. aG s
'J SCHOOL �'qo� �h'- 9�^� 'X. i � m
m�ry�
�
O s SC�
3 B QP P 6
9 . i i a�
s REE . o. za i � so
22 5
�e���s .
BP
O �$ J �acr
�o
S �
TREET 'v e �.
k
5 � d
� v _ 4
_ §n:
� E s
i . � V s
�s�fi 1 '°�`S
uooM u uMs P 2 J
n s m R
�e°�oe P o m 9 y"�J ,,
vENo �.� „ e e so
v
«�, c
,. a �a i ��
� w a ao
� �a
s� „ �ao 9�P I
C 3°,
o C �c
C
�a
a + O�
£J � �
a u" 4 2 P �c C
� �M
18a D�
»e�
r _ aP � 5 A
aoo � � eO�G e raA µ. � is is . q
5 D��
9 OIME� .
'�'9v R A .. O
o I= . R-7.5 �"s, 9a°� 4
5 � � nss �,>
s s R . gcHe� , �
_ °o«�'aoz�
� r ti °�� + R� o
� Hp
9 �o
a � �0 9 *c'�. 6 9 � iA
1 aC 9
a " ft o
� a O p 3s A
� � �
e�
�
00 �cg 3s
�ry
''D . ... i 'E oia i
C yS
�z - . . ,.P q N\N�
�" b" � ��1 10 G „.� � ��s is �e Yn y� o 'A;. ^'
'a"� a s EasEn�Ev �`°a, e� _ R +�",
Q� > WESTRIDGE �s �ELENKAJ f eaO3s f + F 4i
'A � F fi d iv
. � O N 'P 9 =�, � � ,h��
F. � si , E, % „ a 3s.. ^P
9 � ���
S S G ejGy PqRK ao2o ��oo � g� p S »qap 3s
�' �' �' NTA� -1 e, a2 2a r @[ a o
q W �, � '6 NL4NE �a �RNE .. - noo $ � Q- �F� � < ` '���' 2 �
2 e� 8 F m S SQ tP �a' �P'6
��
h
? O k
G 81 �a a 4
}eY
i�szo a eP s J T a
� �
� KE 8
NN PNA ,,e � a� a
v a �'
�
P
2 9
� � � �R
. 7
�" �a ,
a �� 9
Y o sa as /�
� F � C�
a � 9ry S�� o
E _ 3 T� Y.. �P'
��a
§ n
� 2 �� �
a u B 3 �6
��t
G
mc 20 �o
K ON
o O
ST ENNY - Z'R `D �$
's w REN 2i i 81E (�
ET � a U e
� 'E C
�ST ��p
REE � N S9
'94� T ' = R n`� o
� o Tm G _
1 $
z P
�a=��'° � a3 0
PNA
a �9 , m s 3 �,
�
., . .. ., .,_ � �' ' ie2o� 0 3 � uBOR 3°n �Py�
-� � r � �," �" a3M m ie ] "e' cE R o
� ., �'r 3s .. v O 9 E 1'�tl �G
9'S 30o a � �n eOs
. r e c o s P
� � R ' �. e ,a o n
�$� � ,a,na P '�
�. , . , � � s�'
r , � N N "s. u '� s
r � a �$ °a
„ ,e & � - zs, , s e . 3zs� � -
N � � , az33 > �^e ��
P3oP LUSCHER FARM �F
O 23e 3 r`d ., Y'E ' so P q N O V �`& O �rv"ery
ca e o rouiary � � G =J 9 e i] ^�p pp S'. o F
�s�n' i �
�'$ - J 3 ` O� c� P
2 0q vA�� �so _ S o �i P
� o
ss ie z ti Y
'p4=�
O fr`' P
,EVQ�e � P a5es
O
a 'O
_ , _ W a�"'
i ROBINWOOD
9m''Fa v�°swE K v�
�
? a i
M� z o. a
d /
� h
a3 �
z C c c n �fl 3 s
k o
sc6 3� � � � � . �
33 ae� iaa � �,
� �o
� CIRCLE a a
m . ra on'� � �
!
at� y
r. Pe � / i flaJs
L4NE a a w
PARK
o aoao m + o a°�
� �as� c.
CTn�
v ieai p V pa
TU ' a o a�ti
ALAT N d� c
3 3o A WEST
�C a3 RIO � �o�
OUR ai G 3
T a E
o ae4
z o � ' ti
y��P9 A � aiv < ,
E a � �
, wes , , ,
� TRI ZS i a ea s � �
e32 DG a P
3s E
a �
C - 3ee Q`�2��a v.
a s �n / ! � 'a5
, � �, R-15 m a,
s N"
� . �
A�
�e6 /
� �
� �
� s � a„ ,
�360
F � , �
3 . PNA a , v
so � zo ss ti"� .
�� '� ,
'e�e`� P s ,Pa 4 za aa
� � �
�^ d z
�i � v 6 � - � � ,a�az
� �� a o E �
'e°� r � '
� PNA a
3�, > s� .� v
R�� 0 9�
� r � . �
� �w�� 3
_ >a,��
, �
� �
�� _ _ s
TN - A . P
IMB SO�Q\ �i
ERG n
ROVE �
STz em � 6W
� w v a
a , P
C ie � � O� F� .
�e Aye � e
� z ���
P p�5 N Y3' i �.a� F�
� ea 3 ia�ao ta
J NBROOK ST� �a Y
s�E ss, - O z � `'E � �L .a
aa2 e v v �
O 3]2 '� t�2 5 + �
E �
- <n �p
9
a3o O
A e �d4k �
ERNBROON�� s
so ey'o A
2 O
5 - eF �e
S� i i
� 590 ea e N�F'�
e�eq o� � n
� 5 NA � � `
n s� ��
� t a fi 3 S a `
sm ea i i
� e K
s e0� e '3
ie i 5
�s e L s F
5 k v
cN a]a
ryyb
�. e MIDHILL
e P s `\
R t
c s�eo , c , �e
sa �°�
eO� r �JeP� o u
e �?�s- �l
, a�s �� COOKS F a
.v�
�P , _ s �
� c
O � �v J
� Ao � P
s F �
_ l
/ a R 1� �
eoo V
o S� Q
esse 6. M �o e�
P eam '� �
rR�To n ,aa P o 0
� o �a'�.
o es � Q
�t o
� N PARK
e soz �c�
T
a '�6 zo zses
� 6 fins e o �
e s W � os a _ �` � N �
BUTTE "°�
e- � , o
a ,
� �
_ o pp�r
� ,a3, e
J
z� oa z , zssz � _ �� ,�
v, P63o ,�,�s,. � � ,a '�� 3 a3 s za
�O�&� es >+`," ies . �95 ' � P FlRLANE S
' �e 'ey� e� - PARK , m
Q �
as3o 53a s» w � ��'g
, � `
a:s e� � a
s o� v
i 9� ,
�� R \E
,�,�Q- a o e g s
e55o e no i �DRIVE � O 9h 1
2i e l
�C/ _
°s a ,
ea 'e m ,e a cs
�c EP U
sao n,o e ��s
P o � o
�wnv PB�
, us �a �, �i "
�9 es �a o w
o�'�'� , .
ssz - ° m � H �
� , v 9� P s,w �
wE
F �� a
s� - , � �sz
�w F
,� O ' �9 5 isi
e '$s� �
y ou
nGyJs, �
�L �T£' Ss v O
3P o P �
cF m @T>
- iesii - . a P '
ea . c a +E
�
/ / e ��i � cP
Q 2" sa i �
a QM g
9 d �s s �ss
@e - o i �^ a
ROAO 55o P e� a
9 CHI N
NOOK 9 C' n �
� 53o OURT 8
2 i te3 �
�se0$
s°'' _ eg
Z mg
EocE -
. � w o es.o
00o a
�:/
P
n - .cD '2 na i E b �P6O o � �'�+
O fi J N
� GA
2 _ �e� NCHLARO
� I
( b3o C C k' - t e� F ,�Av� ,�P9��
s TREET J 'P a s
e610� � s � - .
-1 3 3 3 3 r ae S �y oaF�
�1c �
� �
�3C
e�Rs � - .S+ <?
E �v J
7. ,
esso �
. es �L
� a R� _ �
Q� .Y N E
T si ROSEMONTARENA &
� E - d=
N i a c
a � a E e� a3a�
C R . i
� 5 , v � � s
o s �,�
¢- ., ,a,o, 'e'� � s ,
,I' � - , sH�P���. �e
s� , �
� y � a � i P 2
� � v
�5 p 3
3 p A cP
4. � N^ . .
E
� m v ,
JHV .. P Oa � A !
W P H 'O � a
p�, sue.siaiioN a O d�
� ' �o'ta E Maa
Q o . '+ -
R � 6=L �
P N T
s��s a
i�� a
0
3�
� 5 9
5 =oe t O`s
r F6 e -
/� z � �
e �.i ~3�
3 �l 5
t PJ v
5e = e� . 3C? A
� � 2
9m�a '! 9 '�i �
��P �za � s
. 0
, �
� l�
5 LANE J 3
a v� cp
m@ d tc
i I �
z` e o = Q ' � N� . P e, a aa3a
o�. �v
Z = �� ao
_ al �
w � o m
� �
K
3 £ s� P 2s
3 3 3 T p
900o fl E
KOREHN UNITE� !S '!
J o �v n
E e v s3 �
�sz !S >> ea !
�'ta O a
£ �k 't9 �'-1
� asos,
1e IRE 5 F
\ F� H
t a
4a �e'b 3�1C a �
mErHooisr x m /
y L e"+
E � a v c � s
. P
E R�o� .. a + e P7'
�o�
S „ eoz a e � m+= O 2
- � MELIS Z S��'�5 .. ii
DR a a
a' z '�i
£ ! p�.3
E CHURCH 9&
s c , as 9 3 L.,
- �ee ENT .. 5 a
4> ERW 5 t�
N � S` 000N BRVANT DRIV zierz , a +
O 9 F � � 'o . + i
O �o �'3 � F'� � �. ��s a � � s ano N 's o 'm�P se �°e
0 S � �' OSTREET o e »2c M �ea 3 „ ta55t 7µp0 W p � CHIPPEyyqfi -
a �' WOODS -re 6 3� F - @ Q�'9 p o�
� v m5 �O s P� e
3 3 ts ts ts re ^ as s ,a �'0 2 - - a Ry �� a � P � ,s ,s �
- � � '" NATURE s � '� - '� . P �a
a m �,
c E F
, , s�F�;s
� � 6,y
T
STEVENS MEADOWS �� o
a e , s , �o s
a mbs
�cR o oc e s� m
x o � , , s �as�'
x , , a
G
?
�'a �
83 � � �'�
PARK H
R HOME G V OELL� JROA� ejRr '� 9P 'f� J� z � O > >s � �c
O � G ia W �a O�0 N� 5»o ia
9 � t a& a � assa E 3 a � ��''i 6 c� � H� .a a p P� y�i�`
� '�"�z �' RED ' ata � � + � z ! sa ELMRAN
� am LEAF STREET � h � Y � '2 y y � O s < � x q� y .u�o
�+a � + oP
e C 4
i V
ee � SKYLINE ��
a0N\6 .1 � �k�6 ' az
eea es�o ! �O 1 N P e e
S � � N
W , �S
xxa 2e e 5 O �o
A
tP �i` d o R 9a3o
�RED R
�
WAYZATA N P
�Q a�
T ef„c v 9 �
� o o,a
w'�� i OVE 5 wo � o
o v e R RNEN DELL 9 RIDGE �o s� .
� NOIAN 9 �� 3 WHV ROAO P � _ -eP ' O a .
4� 52 ., �, z �I xyx2 � A _ �o R 92��s
i z R
e , o K F
� zs R e o L a
o W R � Z �
, e`
a dd Nyz a, � P
A N 4
Qay a
o` v �e = o
t ra PARK .
r �M. o
'� , p ,a � � �s� . F ,�° � Ew� o a�� F -
s� ,Ny,o n � P . < ,asss
z - �. '9�w � � d Ny� , �� ,�
�F � s p � 0.
.. �E6y , ,. M eo
3 3 3 ' v '( (� s
aa 'G�e P\
PF � _
ao � , '� 'o - F
,�£a m z
, �a i
azo � s� _ as
£ -
as yzs - P 4, _ J �s 9°'^5 N > S
� 3 +e DELL3 CT^ i� J _ N BFek�e �°� ��
� : Mo ��� - xyyo o sa�
- N t + R - n P �l� a".� +a �aaas
r �'� � - � , a ,
�ez3o A ass �a O F � , �ek� 7
L 8 .n �$' P a5
K �e9c�a RIVER GROVE , v M� aass
°'e DAWN a a M
�x iaa � . O S .- 4.s �;�y e,
C sa �p` X O
Ny <s� �P �a
^C� 9
R-]�0=
NDI CR� 5 h
C
ie is 9
to e 0 O� � � tab
ao �m� `° �'° yozo �, R ,+
M. Y <
ELEMENTARY , F^,
3 3 3 y' O N C �IVE a5o = .. 5522 �ao
RF" �TREET o30 - .. 522 �a e55o b S 4. ( ( �°�x6
^,Cm� 94's ,.. �3 9R J h(/ % �P a
F - 5C5 E' aE 95 �
� z R �
C t ie aoo �" a
�� ^ S ' a
N .� xy� � o S N N. ..
SCHOOL a ,
� eeas _
i�
��� r w
� � �
, m
0 A� m ffi�^ ssa ., � a o0
5 , u , , LSON I � o -
tro = a5 m COURT 552 m C � e
� ��c
@ - 3 � BG
a � 2
�tl � A" s
I ^V ysa a �esao F �e
oa �� ' ., ��5 �,
� . s5 s� o
PILKINGTON . c s
n u e a . F
.e o e oe
sw - � , �
. � - � 9�� R
.A �2
R 0e
m
� z ,a P
� , � 2
� so 00 �0y
G� s�a � �, sao � asss z
� � �
� as ie� . F^0
�2' y o0o s: s: 9P F
PARK
,s a s
� , �'%
� J
sos �eaea �H ie
RIVER OVE r
s a fiaP
'
0 0 0 � S �
�s
S OAWN�J ��? i
r. W oP
�L � �
��
fi
'v
4 i��9pJ� �
��
2 S9a3�.
026 b e
0 n i G's �
WHTE DISTRICT asso 5 x r09
�STNe �5 . 2 a � N 4 4i
REE P o
� To £ � �
�N . L1
O �
�;i � l
N f d ey l
I eio A
P
c W
B w �saza e
�
� e
P d
isi S F
FU
W 4' OLD, RESE OIRS s e�`
e � 5 2 V s
s S
6 4 S9�i
9e``. , . a
0 0e� aa:
cg '9n
>F
s ee
�^ m s 4
s oao , e�
a s �
a °c� s
,�
, �a° , .�
6a'" r s �
a oso , o� o
s w
s� 9'°�E
9 ��,,,
, � �" � .
az» �o�,
� � 8
� ,
'� � �i
PNA �
� � �
�I �
; ,a� y��
,�,°F�Ro� �.=a ° , ,3 ,s„s
�'J � y
' ,a�, F,z9 so,s ,sa� . N a �
� ,9
a � s p a�
� „ r '°�
� � � a �?
� .� e
, , e
�9 m
V - e D �
t i � O R 4
eam ffi 5 b� O
� ! W
B , 'E
9'G r � G
R 6 's°W N zs°a lo '�u'
��'epa R
- o � � o0
00 °b iee
a0^o
� s � c�ss
A .�. s o '� '�
zo �� 9
O !U So
TON R
B EHEN
G
E
s� is ., ��iv �
TER .
�a �Y'� .,a RAC�n 'M
E qi
' �a �9 a2G
WELL �2
s a' e� 8
'��9 . ,
� A
� '!
m I s (�`
2 i m 3�. - d� aaaa
so !
�y� oao c T za o �
�-y >>o �s ,so a
osoa4 3 5 33 �
��o
d0g 2
� T 99 'L
S - o � ss
e SY `�
6�COLBV CT - LV
et� t a � AN �
N Cu 19z m
� �
/ �
'�; 6 sazz �a (�` ia �as e
zi � 3 i
. VW
d
P ,o ���
AYv
� NA
C e 5 P
I rs
r�s
s , � i
9 U � +9� c a 0
eo s O s SN
. d
m � �L N L
i s 5 is
�eoj s � �
�c� i s�
. y s eoo C 6 �f 1A
�� �
E 9zp P & P
y o eoso R
_ � �
e O
NEv � �+ro s
zo �
s�ie sz ao�3 .. o h =O� J
zaz 3 3 0 5 �saas .w
n`� u
, o q
���£ y w G
�a5+ S I G �'O
d r9u
s s 9
a . rtl
.. F` a G �� E�
�M
yzzo c c � R 5�
N R �
zoo R
T� �s L R
� M C
/ o�0 9 s �"
2 � S ry E
Ma� I � � z yz ' ,s +s o, o o 'z, a � ss CEDAROAK +
y zao 3 , ' S 2 �sN a� F` o
/ V�D J .a �1 Y
a.oe . ? i o o y zao s BRYANT WOODS , ��� ,ea s000 � 5 • wP ,as m ' P i3
„ r � � ,. o ,y i9z 235 , � - ��- �a9P�5 � cn�vnav ELEMENTARY F
NATURE PARK �ry+E .? c
_ zzs s � ' � w ana i r
s s c _ ay m $
o METRO
e s � � e
°RF3� so s SCHOOL
s >
3 �
c
�
so 2
IL
ftOAO m H S CHI��CH 3
a� P � ���
aav� o T r �sos
- INTERSTA E �
s2�zo
� &
� F
J8 \ e� v
� 8_
Mlle
k \
°002' PECAN CREEK w
_ - _ � 4
��s
` a 'CH W
i�os 9 YE
0
8�� TRACTOR
s
a 9 �
85 S ry IR��
5 � ,p C
1g 3" 4 a\
S
fr 9
� 3 nH
9� ia n
"'*..`o NATURALAREA L a 2
9�zR� a^", L
OA �L C
e 0
'G R N
.. , d �
, E
5
a T
a > > D �
� ^ . OPEN SPACE
tl F
� � s. n a
v F � m�
.os sies s s ,h a'+ e
.iee . o iN� sc�v
eo CEOARO�K A
so n J D �o u
wo RN /
I aze �93 ^ .� 9 e . �sa NO y yo y � f� SUNNV SLOPE ziao . \\ $ � � m �N E N y � ' �C °� APTS oRIVE
, 51�3 � �3 a \ .. , e '" cA Y-
i. c^' � w is OPENSPACE /\ i
„ � si. �v"� s5o ka d N 4� 'So 5 P F�'�'av�s*N
33 S t9a '4 ae' / es p� Y d= 5
�s3 35a d O
� � z3bc _ P az5b
i s _ 5
93 / ' � C
50 � 9 � .! . �. P
N .1E 6 � 1]] �
9. w ze O
EJ izoo
N�
I
a z '$ o E
� i�a�� � /
siec k N
�
& G
�, sa a� ga �o y .� ,0 35 g weo wsz s ¢s PNA CANAL y � � ao �ao ` M. / aoaiNw000 �y,o, cEonaonK oaivE aaaa P ., , o. " e 2
���g�s' s�ee CANAL , e „ o a aza � m va��ev c a �-
� �� � W�DCREST ' i5255 190VIEW - - SHOPPINGCENTER
ax ,. � � 3 ACRES _ +o �/ / � s �� �'
sa a a sa as� " °yazz san s. r s wse , ACRES ,s '�"6' w 5 - z�so � z�so 90 ' �o oRive �v � �°;�� � za
, . , a woo H�' w�oea � �s�=s - aoaiNw000„
NATURAL a�,�"m s� �'9 _ 5�, '� � emmnNue� ,
90 °f sa �x � _ p � _ '� NATURAL a _ s � � � ' ,g e G G y��p Nes Q P aaesavreainN< s � � e e
/ yasa AREA ,sa , rri f � az �� "°�, s ,, srnrioN � � .
dt% ��3� sa� , AREA ,s � , m s n cHuacH . � . � „ �.
n yeN 9� �� e �
^ �LLOVDMINORS �.� Y s
R 9 �oH �A��Ev` ,
y /V i5� CT E s � - KENTHORPE�
'� �/ i a - ia a2� a i4
PARK 9 e �
5 J W�V
� � ii
d�S , ,
5»s a KENT
\ '
\ y Op3 a5� � 3 � HORPE
/ ,� LW 93]9 93]s v v a e o0 90 �92 dn aa] a' i' S 5
a �oo a,z ao � � �e� ,s � a �
� � , 3� z,zs e�� 7 � o , , a
�n , �� � , s w � m � _ � ,g �Ps � 9a�6p� ,s,ss � a � � �
� �R��f � r' N RIVERGROVE w e� 3-r �sa S zz MARYLHURST 'O6� j Q�.3 aa s� �9�a� �az � � `�
� II Pover ;��o PHRK �sa e �sai �y ffi PARK a�o oF`@ ^va 5
I / / �.s �� " „ � ' �Ea�ao� � �., ,s V ' ,s a� s� �ssm a m� e oaivE °' "� y \9 +�' - 9 zao � LAKE OSWEGO WATER
I m � R-10 A� e ,s335 �s o�,.. '
o f �{� /- o, r� w oo' R-10 �y szs � s � ao ,s
� E r � $ ,s � � z� � 3� �
0 oR, o
-/` /� BROWNS , � "��� RVERs� � � � 6 `� �% � � TREATMENTPLANT
� .: � � ` � PHR,�.`^�a
Exir FERRY ,�.,.,�. " � e �oRivE sn � 9 m � '� � IS �J e �sa '� 's'm s 's •
zes PARK � � .> >, ,ysy � I � / o e � � >za '�s�9PP m �� �
� � � � � �8 � � - � � 6 �ti � o City of Lake Oswego N
NVBERG � `� m �e ea.w �g �y sa> >s �
ROA� B METRO P 9 s� 3 C� " � n
ur�e m p Q � g s � � as ��,serz,
� � �g"""�T � Nenocnre _ RIVERRIhV�RRK "' _ � �gz s ,g ,s,o , g s I � t7�
� tiveeac �tiE .y � . 3 RIVER RUN PARK � G 's gs s� � �a� � °� � � ���� e o s I}, �{
'�oe UKEOS{.yE�O `'e ��, a RIDGE60.��s�Os a � � L l" '
METRO �� � i m i9 's 3 t
��V � 9 �� � n 'i
R�, � � � ZONING MAP
I • ALDEa ssn oa� 1e'm �ee � ODOT �w�i,.. B6 �e V � �
0z NATCHEZ Mlle ^ � ROAo fi � s- 6 '
z'I 0 i oREENWAY �- � Y e �p �° ^9 . l m N � �a.�i.. �so sa �9 es 9 e
IFve ry y � � 'd m 9 � CL1 V m �N
��" � � � � C 0 500 1 000 1 500 2 000 2 500 Feet
soe' � _� . ,g ,s,sa o p ^
al g � o s� . N TVFR = � �s 6 19CnR �L G v��� 7 7 7 7
� � m 9 ATION LANE m J N o '� y � y
i 3 � o � o � � _ �° � a t9a i9a35 .,, .,, _, .,, - �
I � w o 'S �� � FARM � t55s5 � e m OHRRINOE WHV '"
� � � r � " v �" � � � ���,� � : - �_ � � _ � ������ 0 0.25 0.5 Miles
� ����� � �d/ati '� � � �� ��� '� ° moe �� � s3� ��� �
� � � °R�,, � �s , -� � �
� . e ,s o ' e � � s
_� �ss� DISCLAIMER: ouN
' � � ,er �� � i --- m� m - ia ,s� ci
o � is3
�� �n suNsuasr
� _� � o� „ ,s3a �y
' � � � � � ss �ssa ��"���� � ° � �na.� �� oenNnoaive� <o 's o " � m s`s � w �
� � MERIDIAN PARK METRo Rayw. yyt�� qo g
S � HOSPITAL I METRo o p�� °� _ 9 � 5
� �, j � ,� � _ � M ,� so ,s ' � � o
� e MErRo , g �, �.s� �ti� �� �zs
��l � �,s .,a �a ;;w�y" R
� I ,� ��I ATHEY CREEK - � is 5 Woao J ° �z� mi B0 hP �a o oERBr u ��'
m m �s e � � �
-� MIDDLE Pp a •�z� g z 9 5�`
v � B SCHOOL Qo e �^ l���t19� " �
II s eas Aa o ,g�� �g 5� �� �e m � m o m 3/21/2017
BRIDGEPORT � _ ., , „ r
�6 T _ . 9 v
wzia � a a � � „
wa�e n � 9
a . . T
���e�� r lu
> �
�
�
ve � , �L R
�D SUNB RST o m io . .,
U � F`
SCHOOL �a� � J qr
'e�
March 19, 2013 Update
Table 20. Residential Dwelling Capacity and Projected Housing Demand, Lake Oswego USB, 2010 to 2035
Dwelling Unit Capacity and Demand Potential Land Need in by
Potential Net Buildable Land Area in Acres Forecast Year 2035
� - .
• � .
. -
. - �
� . . . . .
. . . � � � - .
.
Low Density
(primarily large
lot SFD in R-7.5, 69.2 502.7 - - 571.9 1,646 783 863 272.1 299.8
R-10, R-15
zones)
Medium
Density
(primarily small 5.5 30.6 104.3 - 140.4 1,017 456 561 62.9 77.5
lot SFD in R-3,
R-5 zones)
High Density
(primarily MF in
R0, R-2, R-2.5, 2.6 5.6 22.8 80.9 111.9 2,400 2,321 79 108.2 3.7
GC, NC/RO,
OC/R3, EC, HC,
CR&D, EC/RO,
OC zones)
Total 77.3 538.9 127.1 80.9 824.2 5,063 3,560 1,503 443.3 380.9
Updated 03/19/13
Comprehensive Plan Housing Needs Analysis EXHIBIT F-1/PAGE 1 OF 1
PLANNING AND
� �
� � B U I L D I N G S E RV I C E S
� �
�
�' �� ► � � �
� �
�
C� �
Cit Cou nci I Pu bl ic
y
.
� �e � o H ea ri n
� �
Com rehensive Plan and Zonin Ma
p � p
Corrections — LU 17-0022
S e pt e m b e r 5 ,
2017
r�rr'iw
3�p6 f— 4 ; 13-i 6
`�' 139-145 23-2 S
1�- �1� 17-22
� 131-138 �� 12fi
72 TANGLEWOOD 2 �
� � � �S
$22- �k:� '�� � '{`t _, ::
�;;�. � gp 107- �• p
�..� ,�,..,r-„u 918 �
LLl �� G'�� :
81- g� V ��
10 a
� g2 100 102 ip5 a�.. .
�- � �� R-3
--" - a J �
Touchstone 8 WHEATHERSTONE
�: � � W s
=�- .r� �� 9 ,�'�..7
Amend
��� � ��� �
• °' A N .. ,. 121 �1 W 12 `��� �.a A
zo n i n f ro m P�� -� z . ��'> `� -' "' r
� .JO�O ti y `� O
�a G, -. �� 15 � 14 3943
R-3 to R-7 . 5 � `°-�`'v N =
N
� � C�uE`r TOUCHSTONE � ; 16 „ � o �
a� _, TOWNHOUS�S 17 p 3967 � � m o
� � � > ;
o �w � � _ I^ _
p e r C o m p � ��� R-�.s r� ,�r �, �����
� �� rZs , , 18 3989 3996 :4�'
P � a n �o��'� 128 19 �;`��- '°� R-10 �,��
��'�"'0 21 20 4005 srp�2
"'6'
>�,`?� ' "�sr
'10, i �' 23 2 aQ��' o �
W �5,� ��
rn 25 ry 2 OQ`
4077 4 3560 ,� �6�'%
27 � 80
,M�A, v' �`s�g
�0yo 20 ��. � S� S
19.3
a�tiA .�as CnUNCl1 REPnRT
� , �,1
�� � n
V ❑
°REGar�
TO: Kent Studebaker, Mayor
Members of the City Council
FROM: Scot Siegel, Director of Planning and Building Services
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Ordinance 2754—Criteria for Design Variances in Downtown
Redevelopment Design District (LU 17-0039)
DATE: August 22, 2017 DATE OF MEETING: September 5, 2017
ACTION
Conduct a public hearing on Ordinance 2754 to consider the Planning Commission's
recommendation on amendments to the Community Development Code (CDC or code),
clarifying and updating the design variance criteria for developments in the Downtown
Redevelopment Design (DRD) District.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to approve LU 17-0039 and enact Ordinance 2754, including the findings and conclusions
in Exhibit A-1.1.
Alternatively, if the Council revises the amendment or has additional findings, move to
tentatively approve LU 17-0039 and direct staff to return with findings and conclusions,
together with a final version of Ordinance 2754, for adoption on September 19, 2017.
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
A City Council priority for 2017 is to allow more architectural variety in the downtown while
maintaining consistency with adopted plans. Although the code currently affords design
flexibility through the existing variance procedure, the Council is interested in clarifying the
code and streamlining the permit process while ensuring high quality design.
The code requires that new construction and substantial building remodels in the DRD District
comply with the requirements of the DRD District Overlay, which is a set of building and site
design standards adopted in 1997 that implement the Downtown Urban Design Plan, including
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 2
the vision of Village Character1. These standards are found in LOC 50.05.004.5 throu�h LOC
50.05.004.12, or in LOC 50.05.004.13 for projects that are subject to the DRD District's Clear
and Objective Housing Standards.
Though not identified in the Downtown Urban Design Plan, one of the code standards is "Lake
Oswego Style," which requires consistency with at least one of three Lake Oswego Style
options: English Tudor, Arts and Crafts, or Oregon Rustic [LOC 50.11.001 Appendix A— Lake
Oswe�o Style], per LOC 50.05.004.5a, 6.a. Building designs may also draw on elements of more
than one of the prescribed styles to comply with the standard.
At its May 16, 2017 studv session, the Council reviewed examples of projects built in
conformance with Lake Oswego Style, and variances granted, since 1997.
Proposed Amendment
Pursuant to the City Council's direction, and consistent with input from the Planning
Commission and public, the proposal amends the DRD District design variance criteria to
support greater architectural variety in the downtown. Specifically, the amendment clarifies the
existing criteria, which already afford flexibility, and adds criteria for addressing unique building
functions and sustainability.
A unique building function might include, for example, an auditorium or theater where
compliance with minimum standards for windows is impractical. The proposed amendment
also allows exceptions (design variances) to implement sustainable building features2. The
proposal specifically identifies energy production (solar, wind, or geothermal), enhanced indoor
air quality, use of daylight for interior lighting, acoustic building performance, protection of
views of Lakewood Bay or Mt. Hood, water efficiency (e.g., rainwater harvest), and increased
seismic resiliency (above and beyond minimum building code requirements) as eligible
features. It should be possible for most building projects to implement these features without
1The Downtown Redevelopment Design District, LOC 50.05.004.4, states, "As used in this section,
'village character' means a community of small-scale structures that appears and operates like a
traditional small town. A village is typically composed of an assembly of smaller mixed used structures
often centered on a square or other public space or gathering area, such as a body of water, a
transportation route or a landmark building.Adherence to village character is not intended to require an
historical reproduction of a turn of the century small town, but rather to encourage the development of
a sophisticated small city that is pedestrian friendly, creates a sense of community and attracts people
to the downtown in the same manner and using similar design concepts as historic small towns and
neighborhood centers." The specific required means and methods to achieve "village character" are set
forth in the later referenced code sections.
2 With the exception of seismic resiliency,the sustainable building features proposed in the code are
similar to those that are evaluated for certification under the Leadership through Energy and
Environmental Design (LEED) rating system for new construction and substantial remodels,though the
City is not proposing to adopt LEED. See Exhibit F-3.
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 3
the need for a variance; however, the proposed amendment provides relief where an applicant
demonstrates that a variance is necessary. This is consistent with the City Council direction to
streamline the development review process and remove unnecessary regulatory obstacles to
sustainability.
The proposed code changes (in strikeout and underline format with commentary) are contained
in Exhibit A-1.1, Attachment 2.
Problem Statement and Public Review Process
On April 24, 2017, the Planning Commission conducted an initial work session and received
public input on the DRD District Overlay and Lake Oswego Style. The City Council held a study
session on May 6 to consider the Commission's initial input. There was general consensus that
since adoption of the DRD District standards twenty years ago, the code has allowed a variety
of architectural designs, and that collectively these building projects have enhanced the
appearance and functionality of downtown. There was also consensus that the Urban Design
Plan and East End Redevelopment Plan continue to provide a solid policy basis or foundation
for downtown urban design. However, there was concern that the code presents barriers to
innovative design and may discourage sustainability. There was also concern among some that
over time downtown buildings may become too similar in appearance, for example where a
certain style or design element (e.g., gabled and hipped roofs) is repeated too often.
"Lake Oswego Style" is within the permitted scope of design variances; however, for approval
the variance must either meet the General Design Variance Criteria, or it must be necessary to
"create a complementary relationship with a viable existing structure on an abutting lot that is
not designed in Lake Oswego Style." The General Design Variance criteria, when applied to the
DRD District, can be difficult to interpret and time consuming to apply, because numerous code
sections and plans may or may not be applicable. Therefore, the proposed amendment clarifies
these variance criteria, rather than revising or replacing the DRD District standards.
The City published a Public Review Draft (Exhibit F-1) of the proposed code amendments with a
three week comment period beginning June 16. Reviewer comments (Exhibit F-2) included
support and opposition to some of the recommendations, including adding a variance criterion
for sustainable building features. One commenter suggested including seismic resiliency as a
possible reason for design variances; based on the City's commitment to emergency
management planning for natural disasters (in city operations and facilities), and the intent to
encourage others to do the same, that suggestion is included in the proposal. Another
commenter suggested revising the DRD District standards to allow more discretion in how they
are interpreted, as an alternative to amending the variance criteria. That approach was not
taken because it would be difficult to administer and could lead to more appeals.
Other Alternatives Considered But Dismissed
The proposal does not replace Lake Oswego Style, but instead clarifies the design variance
criteria. Staff considered exempting certain sites or subareas of the downtown from Lake
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 4
Oswego Style, but determined that could have unintended consequences and could be unfair to
property owners not within the exempted area. Staff also considered adding styles to the code,
but found that it would be difficult to anticipate new styles that the City might want to allow,
and making the code more complex would conflict with the City Council's desire to simplify the
code. Finally, staff considered amending the DRD District standards to provide specific
exemptions based on building functionality and sustainability. However, that too would make
the code more complex. Sustainable building technology is constantly evolving, making it
difficult to anticipate every application; different applications could require adjusting different
standards, which could have unintended consequences, a well.
CONCLUSION
The proposed amendment clarifies the design variance criteria for the DRD District with a focus
on high quality design, functionality, and consistency with adopted downtown plans. The
proposed code amendment balances the competing objectives of"flexibility" and "certainty" in
the development review process. It meets the City Council's intent to more clearly allow
architectural variety, while providing a development review process that is as efficient as
possible and does not impose undue costs or delays on applicants.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed amendment may reduce staff labor in reviewing downtown development by
clarifying the design variance criteria.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the staff report and Planning Commission public hearing record, staff recommends
that the Council approve LU 17-0039, and enact Ordinance 2754 (Exhibit A-1.1), including the
findings and conclusions.
EXHIBITS
A. Draft Ordinances
A-1.1 Draft Ordinance 2754, dated 08/22/17 (supersedes Exhibit A-1)
Attachment 1:
• City Council Findings and Conclusions
Attachment 2:
• Proposed Draft Code Amendments, 08/10/17
(Track-changes and commentary included for reference only)
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034www.ci.oswego.or.us
Page 5
B. Findin�s, Conclusion and Order
B-1 Planning Commission Findings, Conclusion and Order, 08/14/17
C. Minutes
C-1 Planning Commission Minutes, 07/24/17
D. Staff Reports
D-1 Planning Commission Staff Report, 07/13/17
E. Graphics/Plans
[No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
F. Written Materials
F-1 Public Review Draft, 06/16/17
(Due to size this exhibit is not included with the staff report. Please view on the
land use webpage using link provided below.)
F-2 Citizen Comments Received on Public Review Draft
F-3 LEED Rating System Table
G. Letters
[No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
BACKGROUND MATERIAL AND REFERENCES
Staff reports and public meeting materials that were prepared for these code amendments can
be found by visiting the project web page for LU 17-0039.
Use the link below to visit the City's "Project" page. In the "Search" box enter LU 17-0039
then press "Submit":
http://www.ci.oswe�o.or.us/projects
503.635.0215 380 A Avenue PO BOX 369 Lake Oswego, OR 97034www.ci.oswego.or.us
DRAFT 08/22/17 EXHIBIT A-1.1
LU 17-0039
ORDINANCE 2754
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO AMENDING LOC CHAPTER
50 (COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE) TO CLARIFY AND UPDATE THE CRITERIA FOR DESIGN
VARIANCES IN THE DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DESIGN (DRD) DISTRICT(LU 17-0039).
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing for consideration of this Ordinance was duly given in the
manner required by law; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing before the Planning Commission was held on July 24, 2017, at which
the staff report, testimony, and evidence were received and considered; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended that this Ordinance, based on the
record of LU 17-0039, be approved by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the amendment implements City Council direction to facilitate downtown
redevelopment consistent with adopted plans, and to reduce unnecessary costs and delays in
the development review process; and
WHEREAS, the amendment to the Community Development Code is consistent with the Lake
Oswego Comprehensive Plan, and complies with the other criteria stated in the staff report;
and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on LU 17-0039 was held before the City Council of the City of Lake
Oswego on September 5, 2017, at which the staff report, testimony, and evidence were
received and considered.
The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows:
Section 1. The City Council adopts the Findings and Conclusions (LU 17-0039), attached as
Attachment 1.
Section 2. The Lake Oswego Code is amended by adding the new text shown in underlined
type and deleting text shown in �+��'-�+"�^��rt" type in Attachment 2.
Section 3. Severabilitv. The provisions of this ordinance are severable. If any portion of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance.
Section 4. Effective Date. As provided in Section 35C of the Lake Oswego Charter,this ordinance
shall take effect on the thirtieth (30t") day following enactment.
Ordinance 2754
(LU 17-0039) Exhibit A-1.1/Page 1 of 2
DRAFT 08/22/17
Enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on the 5t"day of
September 2017.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Kent Studebaker, Mayor
ATTEST:
Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ,
David Powell, City Attorney
Ordinance 2754
(LU 17-0039) Exhibit A-1.1/Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT 1
Ordinance 2754
1 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL
2 OF THE
3 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
4
5
6 A REQUEST FOR A LEGISLATIVE TEXT ) LU 17-0039 - 1921
7 AMENDMENTTO THE COMMUNITY ) (CITYOF LAKE OSWEGO)
8 DEVELOPMENT CODE, CLARIFYING ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & ORDER
9 AND UPDATING THE DESIGN VARIANCE )
l0 CRITERIA FOR DEVELOPMENTS IN THE )
11 DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DESIGN (DRD) )
12 DISTRICT
13
14 NATURE OF APPLICATION
15
16 This is a legislative amendment to the Community Development Code to clarify and update the
17 design variance criteria for developments in the Downtown Redevelopment Design (DRD)
18 District. The proposal amends LOC 50.08.003.3 and 50.08.003.4.
19
20 HEARINGS; COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
21
22 The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered this application on July 24,
23 2017. On August 14, 2017, the Commission adopted Findings Conclusions and an Order
24 recommending that the City Council approve the application. On September 5, 2017, the City
25 Council held a public hearing and considered the application and the Planning Commission's
26 recommendation.
27
28 CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
29
30 A. City of Lake Oswe�o Comprehensive Plan
31
32 Land Use Planning Goal:
33 Development (Community Development Code)
34 Policies A-1.b, A-1.g, A-1.i, and A-3
35
36 Design Standards and Guidelines
37 Policies C-1.a and C-3
38
39 Community Culture Goal:
40 Civic Engagement
41 Policies 1
42
43 Inspiring Places and Spaces, Goal 1:
LU 17-0039 PAGE 1 OF 3
1 Policies 1.b, 2, and 7-9
2
3
4 B. Metro Urban Growth Mana�ement Functional Plan
5
6 Title 6: Centers, Corridors, Station Communities and Main Streets, Metro Code Section
7 3.07.620
8
9 C. State Transportation Plannin� Rule
lo
11 OAR 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments
12
13 D. City of Lake Oswe�o Community Development Code
14
15 LOC 50.07.003.3.c. Published Notice for Legislative Hearing
16 LOC 50.07.003.16a Legislative Decisions Defined
17 LOC 50.07.003.16b Criteria for Legislative Decision
18 LOC 50.07.003.16c Required Notice to DLCD
19 LOC 50.07.003.16.d.iii Planning Commission Recommendation Required
20 LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision
21
22 E. Metro Urban Growth Mana�ement Functional Plan
23 Title 4: Protection of Employment Areas, Metro Code Section 3.07.440
24
25 F. Transportation Plannin� Rule
26 OAR 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments
27
28
29 FINDINGS AND REASONS
30
31 As findings supporting its decision, the City Council incorporates the staff report, dated July 13,
32 2017, for LU 17-0039 (with all exhibits) the Planning Commission's Findings, Conclusions and
33 Order dated August 14, 2017, and the staff Council Report dated August 22, 2017 (with all
34 exhibits). To the extent they are consistent with the approval granted herein, the Council
35 adopts by reference its oral deliberations on this matter.
36
37 CONCLUSION
38
39 The City Council concludes that LU 17-0039 complies with all applicable criteria and should be
4o approved, and that Ordinance 2754, which implements LU17-0039, should be enacted.
41
42 / / /
LU 17-0039 PAGE 2 OF 3
1 AYES:
2 NOES:
3 ABSENT:
4 ABSTAIN:
5 EXCUSED:
6
7 DATED this 5th day of September, 2017.
8
9
l0 Kent Studebaker, Mayor
11
12
13
14
15
16 ATTEST:
17 Anne-Marie Simpson, City Recorder
18
19
20
LU 17-0039 PAGE 3 OF 3
PC RECOMMENDED DRAFT08/10/17 ATTACHMENT 2
Proposed Land Use Regulation Text Amendment Ordinance 2754
(Changes shown in bold �+����and double underline)
50.08.003 DESIGN VARIANCES
//
I 3. GENERAL DESIGN VARIANCE CRITERIA�ne o_nn �nni i i cvrn Al�lll DCC111C1►ITIA1 ini�ii i n�cicni vneinni�rc
, , ,
The reviewing authority shall only approve a design variance if it determines that the following criteria have been
met.
a. The applicant demonstrates that:
i. Compliance with the applicable standard is not practicable due to the physical characteristics of the site or
existing structure; or
ii. An alternative design will better accomplish the purposes, goals, or objectives of the base district and any
adopted plan or overlay district applicable to the property.
b. The applicant demonstrates that the proposed variance will:
i. Result in a project that is exceptional in the quality of detailing, appearance and materials; or
ii. Create a positive unique relationship to other nearby structures,views or open space�-or
iii. If in the DRD(within R-2 only)Q-' �^^��••��"�^*"�,the variance is necessary to create a complementary
relationship with a viable existin�structure on an abutting lot that is not designed in the Lake Oswe�o
style•
//
I4. DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DESIGN DISTRICT VARIANCE CRITERIA, EXCEPT WITHIN R-2
The reviewing authority shall approve a variance to the design requirements in LOC 50.05.004.5 through 50.05.004.7
if it determines that the application meets:
Ia. At least one of the criteria in subsections i.through v.:
i. The variance is necessary to create a comalementary relationshia with a viable existin�structure on an
abuttin�lot that is not desiened in the Lake Oswe�o stvle:
ii. Comaliance with the aaalicable standard is not aracticable due to the ahvsical characteristics of the site or
existing structure�
(Includes Commentary-For Reference Only)
Attachment 2 (Ordinance 2754)/Page 1 of 3
PC RECOMMENDED DRAFT 08/10/17
iii. The variance is necessary to allow a uniaue buildin�function of a aermitted use in the zone:
iv. The variance is necessary to allow one or more of the followin�features where the feature exceeds the
minimum reauirements of LOC Ch. 50 and other citv re�ulations:
I (1) renewable ener�v aroduction (solar,�eothermal, or wind •
(2) enhanced indoor air aualitv:
(3) use of davli�ht for interior liehtin�:
(4) protection of views of Lakewood Bav or Mount Hood:
(5) acoustic buildine aerformance:
(6) water efficiencv.such as rainwater harvestine:
(7) increased seismic resiliency;or
v. The alternative desi�n better accomplishes the obiectives of East End Redeveloament Plan or the
obiectives and arinciales of the Urban Desi�n Plan.
b. And the variance:
i. Results in a aroiect that is exceational in the aualitv of detailin�.aaaearance and materials: and
ii. Creates a aositive uniaue relationshia to other nearbv structures.views or oaen saace.and
streetscaaes.
. . . . . . . . . ;
//
Comments:The above proposal consolidates and streamlines the criteria for nearly all DRD design variances,
consistent with City Council direction and the Plannin� Commission recommendations. The portion of the DRD zoned
R-2, which comprises approximately residential 20 lots, is excluded from the amendment; public testimony before
the Plannin�Commission indicated that the existin� DRD standards and variance criteria are functionin�well in this
area, which is redeveloping with attached housin�.
Under'a',the proposed amendment carries forward the existing design variance options for"complementary
relationships to structures `not designed' in the Style (i), "physical characteristics of site or structure" (ii), and
"alternative design will better accomplish..." (v). Option 'v',which in the current code is found under General Design
Variance Criteria, is amended to be more precise and relevant to the DRD Overlay, as only certain elements of the
East End Redevelopment Plan and Urban Design Plan are relevant to DRD variance applications.This approach is
consistent with the Council direction to draft a more streamlined code that reduces unnecessary costs and delays in
the permit process.
The new options or tracks for DRD design variances respond to public comments the City received on the Public
Review Draft of the proposal. One track allows variances for a "unique building function of a permitted use" (iii). A
unique building function might include an auditorium or theater where it is not practical to install windows in
compliance with the DRD's fenestration standard. A second new track provides for variances to accommodate
sustainable building design features (iv). With the exception of seismic resiliency,the building features listed in 'iv'
are similar to those that would be evaluated for certification under the Leadership Through Energy and
(Includes Commentary-For Reference Only)
Attachment 2 (Ordinance 2754)/Page 2 of 3
PC RECOMMENDED DRAFT 08/10/17
Environmental Design (LEED) rating system for new construction and substantial remodels, though the City is not
proposing to adopt LEED as a variance approval standard.
Under'b', compliance with both 'b.i' and 'b.ii' is required.This is a chan�e from the current�eneral desi�n variance
criteria, which allow for a choice between the two.The proposal for the DRD (except within R-2) requires compliance
with both, because both desi�n quality and relationships to nearbv structures are critical in the downtown,where
buildin�s are taller(up to 60 feet) and the code allows commercial and mixed use buildin�s.
(Includes Commentary-For Reference Only)
Attachment 2 (Ordinance 2754)/Page 3 of 3
APPROVED: 08/14/17 EXHIBIT B-1
LU 17-0039
1 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
2 OF THE
3 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
4
5
6 A REQUEST FOR A LEGISLATIVE TEXT ) LU 17-0039 - 1921
7 AMENDMENTTOTHECOMMUNITY ) (CITYOFLAKEOSWEGOJ
8 DEVELOPMENT CODE, CLARIFYING ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & ORDER
9 AND UPDATING THE DESIGN VARIANCE )
l0 CRITERIA FOR DEVELOPMENTS IN THE )
11 DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT DESIGN (DRD) )
12 DISTRICT
13
14 NATURE OF APPLICATION
15
16 Ths is a legislative amendment to the Community Development Code to clarify and update the
17 design variance criteria for developments in the Downtown Redevelopment Design (DRD)
18 District. The proposal amends LOC 50.08.003.3 and 50.08.003.4.
19
20 HEARINGS
21
22 The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered this application at its meeting
23 on July 24, 2017.
24
25 CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
26
27 A. Citv of Lake Oswe�o Comprehensive Plan
28
29 Land Use Planning Goal:
3o Development (Community Development Code)
31 Policies A-1.b, A-1.g, A-1.i, and A-3
32
33 Design Standards and Guidelines
34 Policies C-1.a and C-3
35
36 Community Culture Goal:
37 Civic Engagement
38 Policies 1
39
4o Inspiring Places and Spaces, Goal 1:
41 Policies 1.b, 2, and 7-9
42
43
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 1 OF 4
APPROVED: 08/14/17
1 B. Metro Urban Growth Mana�ement Functional Plan
2
3 Title 6: Centers, Corridors, Station Communities and Main Streets, Metro Code Section
4 3.07.620
5
6 C. State Transportation Plannin� Rule
7
8 OAR 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments
9
lo D. City of Lake Oswe�o Community Development Code
11
12 LOC 50.07.003.3.c. Published Notice for Legislative Hearing
13 LOC 50.07.003.16a Legislative Decisions Defined
14 LOC 50.07.003.16b Criteria for Legislative Decision
15 LOC 50.07.003.16c Required Notice to DLCD
16 LOC 50.07.003.16.d.iii Planning Commission Recommendation Required
17 LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision
18
19 E. Metro Urban Growth Mana�ement Functional Plan
2o Title 4: Protection of Employment Areas, Metro Code Section 3.07.440
21
22 F. Transportation Plannin� Rule
23 OAR 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments
24
25 CONCLUSION
26
27 The Planning Commission concludes that LU 17-0039 is in compliance with all applicable
28 criteria.
29
30 FINDINGS AND REASONS
31
32 The Planning Commission incorporates the staff report, dated July 13, 2017, for LU 17-0039
33 (with all exhibits) as support for its decision, supplemented by the further findings and
34 conclusions set forth herein. In the event of any inconsistency between the supplementary
35 matter herein and the staff report, the matter herein controls. To the extent they are consistent
36 with the approval granted herein, the Commission adopts by reference its oral deliberations on
37 this matter.
38
39 Following are the supplementary findings and conclusions of this Commission:
40
41 1. The Commission received oral testimony from the First Addition-Forest Hills
42 Neighborhood Association (FAN-FH) requesting that the R-2 zone (which is redeveloping
43 with attached housing) be excluded from the revised LOC 50.08.003.4 Downtown
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 2 OF 4
APPROVED: 08/14/17
1 Redevelopment Design District criteria, and the current design variance criteria be
2 maintained for the R-2 zone. The Commission concurs and finds that the existing DRD
3 District standards and design variance criteria are functioning well in the R-2 zone.
4
5 2. FAN-FH testified in support of the amendment making both subsections 'a' and 'b' of LOC
6 50.08.003.4 applicable. These subsections require the applicant for a DRD District variance
� to demonstrate, a) "exceptional ... quality [of] detailing, appearance and materials" and b)
8 "positive unique relationships to nearby structures, views or open space, and
9 streetscapes". The current code provides a choice between 'a' and 'b'.
10
11 The Commission finds that requiring compliance with both for DRD design variances is
12 necessary to achieve the Urban Design Plan objectives because the EC zone, the primary
13 base zone within the DRD District, allows more intensive commercial and mixed use
14 development, and greater height (up to 60 feet), compared to the City's other design
15 districts. (As noted in Finding#1, the amendment excludes the R-2 zone from the DRD
16 District variance criteria.)
17
18 3. FAN-FH testified that subsections 'a' and 'b' of LOC 50.08.003.3 (General Design Variance
19 Criteria) should be amended similar to subsections 'a' and 'b' of LOC 50.08.003.4
20 (Downtown Redevelopment Design District Variance Criteria). The Commission finds that
21 this change is outside the scope of the legislative notice for LU 17-0039, as it would affect
22 design districts other than the DRD District. (The Commission asks Staff to note this
23 request for a potential future, separate legislative amendent.)
24
25 4. The Commission approves Staff's proposed addition of"geothermal" to the list of
26 examples of renewable energy production in LOC 50.08.003.4.a.iv, as geothermal energy
2� may someday provide a source of renewable energy locally.
28
29 5. The Commission approves formatting corrections identified by Staff and incorporated in
30 Attachment 2.
31
32
33 ORDER
34
35 IT IS ORDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION of the City of Lake Oswego that:
36
37 1. The Planning Commission recommends that (Ordinance 2754, perAttachment 2, dated
38 08/02/17(LU 17-0039), be approved by the City Council.
39
40
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 3 OF 4
APPROVED: 08/14/17
1 I CERTIFY THAT THIS ORDER was presented to and APPROVED by the Planning Commission of
2 the City of Lake Oswego.
3
4
5 DATED this 14t" day of Au�ust 2017.
6
7
8
9 Robert Heape /s/
lo Robert Heape, Chair
11 Planning Commission
12
13 ATTEST:
14
15
16 PRELIMINARY DECISION—July 24, 2017
17
18 AYES: Arthur, Baker, Heape, Sweers
19 NOES: None
2o ABSTAIN: None
21 EXCUSED: Brockman, Ward
22
23
24 ADOPTION OF FINDINGS AND ORDER - Au�ust 14, 2017
25
26 AYES: Arthur, Baker, Heape, Sweers, Ward
27 NOES: None
28 ABSTAIN: None
29 EXCUSED: Arthur
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT B-1/PAGE 4 OF 4
APPROVED: 08/14/17
���� � ��
�h F{. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
� �` Planning Commission Minutes
,; i =;
`� July 24, 2017
°�����
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Rob Heape called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber of City Hall,
380 A Avenue, Lake Oswego, Oregon.
2. ROLL CALL
Members present were Chair Rob Heape and Commissioners Randy Arthur, Skip Baker and
Nicholas Sweers. Vice Chair Bill Ward and Commissioner Ed Brockman were excused.
Staff present were Scot Siegel, Planning and Building Services Director; Debra Andreades,
Senior Planner; Evan Boone, Deputy City Attorney; and Iris McCaleb, Administrative Support.
3. COUNCIL UPDATE
Councilor Kohlhoff provided an update on recent Council actions.
4. CITIZEN COMMENT
There were no citizen comments.
5. COMMISSION FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT
Chair Heape announced upcoming vacancies on various b s. He also noted that there
would be an opportunity to provide input on proposed rades to the Tryon Creek
Wastewater Treatment Plant at an open house sc uled for July 27tn
6. MINUTES
6.1 Commissioner Baker moved to a ove the Minutes of Ma 8 2017, as written.
Commissioner Arthur secon the motion and it passed 4:0.
6.2 Commissioner Bak oved to approve the Minutes of Julv 10, 2017, as amended.
Commissioner eers seconded the motion and it passed 4:0.
6.3 Com ' sioner Baker moved to approve the Minutes of July 15, 2017, as written.
missioner Arthur seconded the motion and it passed 4:0.
7. PUBLIC HEARING
7.1 Communitv Development Code Amendments to Desiqn Variance Criteria in Downtown
Redevelopment Desiqn District (LU 17-0039)
A request from the City of Lake Oswego for text amendments to the Lake Oswego Community
Development Code, clarifying and updating the design variance criteria for developments in
the Downtown Redevelopment Design (DRD) District. The proposal amends LOC 50.08.003.3
and 50.08.003.4. Staff coordinator was Scot Siegel, Planning and Building Services Director.
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of July 24, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 1 of 3
APPROVED: 08/14/17
Chair Heape opened the hearing. Mr. Boone outlined the applicable criteria and procedures.
At time of declarations no conflicts of interest were reported. No one challenged any
Commissioner's right to consider the applications.
Staff Report
Mr. Siegel presented the staff report, provided background and reviewed the proposed
amendments. He explained that the proposed amendments were based on City Council direction
to streamline the development review process and remove unnecessary regulatory obstacles to
architectural variety and sustainability, and reflect input provided by the Planning Commission and
the public. He indicated that the proposed amendments to the variance criteria for the Downtown
Redevelopment Design District clarified existing criteria and added criteria for addressing unique
building functions and sustainability with a focus on high quality design and consistency with
adopted downtown plans.
Commissioner Sweers asked what the cost implications were to following the Lake Oswego Style
and did the variances, in addition to offering diversity in design, also offer any relief in terms of
cost. Mr. Siegel said it had not been quantified but that the proposed amendments would provide
an alternative that could result in savings; an alternative proposal would still need to meet criteria.
He clarified that City Council's direction wasn't to change regulations to reduce cost, but that could
be an indirect benefit of the proposal.
Chair Heape asked how some consistency would be maintained, he suggested that a certain
number of criteria or design characteristics should have to be met in order to maintain some
consistency of character. He expressed concern about character of downtown changing from
traditional to modernism. Mr. Siegel stated that he believed it was already addressed. He
indicated that criteria one through three were narrow enough in scope that they didn't open up the
review to any design that would be out character or out of sync with other buildings in the district
or the intent of the standard or adopted downtown plans. He noted that the fourth criteria went
back to the original founding documents and that when asking for a variance it had to be
consistent or better than the standard.
Commissioner Baker asked if there were definitions for some words in Attachment 2 that were
more subjective than objective. Staff reviewed the various words. When asked about protected
views, Mr. Siegel indicated that there was a code provision in the Downtown Redevelopment
Design District for those projects with orientation to Lakewood Bay or Mount Hood. Mr. Boone
explained that a variance could not be written as a "clear and objective" standard because it would
not be a variance, it would be an alternative track. Commissioner Baker indicated he was satisfied
with staff's response.
Mr. Boone referred to Attachment 2 of the ordinance, page 3, item 4.a. i-v should be double-
underlined because it didn't appear in existing text. He also noted that at the bottom of the page 3
above the comment box reference to Ordinance 2732 should not be stricken out because it was
legislative history.
Public Testimony
Carole Ockert, 910 Cumberland Road, Lake Osweqo, 97034, stated that she was the chair of the
First Addition Neighbors-Forest Hills Neighborhood Association. She referred to Attachment 2 of
the ordinance, page 2, Section 3, b.i. and b.ii. and asked if the "or" at the end of i. could be
changed to "and". Mr. Siegel indicated that the scope of the notice was limited to variance criteria
for the DRD District, but agreed with Ms. Ockert that there were probably process improvements
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of July 24, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 2 of 3
APPROVED: 08/14/17
in this set of variance criteria for the downtown that would bode well for elsewhere in the city. He
said it would be flagged for review at a future date. Ms. Ockert referred to the R-2 zone of the
DRD District, and advised that it was working well as it existed and didn't need to be fixed. She
asked that it not be changed, she suggested that a note be added at the beginning of Subsection
4, exempting the DRD District portion of R-2 from the amendment and it be covered in Subsection
3. Mr. Siegel thought this was a good suggestion and excluding R-2 from that section would work
just fine.
Questions from the Commission and Deliberations
Commissioner Baker asked how many lots were included in the overlay in the R-2 zone, in
general numbers. Mr. Siegel estimated there were possibly 20-30 developed lots and that they
were increasingly redeveloping with attached housing for the most part.
Commissioner Arthur referred to the previous discussion regarding protected view corridors in this
area and asked if it was public and private view corridors. Mr. Siegel reviewed the code for view
protection within the Downtown Redevelopment Design District (50.05.004.7).
Commissioner Baker moved to approve LU 17-0039 with amendments as proposed bv staff:
• Remove R-2 Zone from proposal (variance criteria for this zone would not chanqe)
• Amendment to Attachment 2 of Ordinance 2754, pape 3 of 4, Subsection a.iv. (1) add
qeothermal to the end (..solar, wind or qeothermal);
Commissioner Sweers seconded the motion and it passed 4:0. The vote on the findings,
conclusions and order was scheduled for August 14, 2017 at 6:30 p.m.
8. WORK SESSIONS
Chair Heape excused himself from Item 8.1 due to a potential conflict of interest. Commiss� er
Arthur was the acting chair for this portion of the meeting.
8.1 Local Street Connectivitv—Work Session #4 (PP 16-0004)
Continued discussion of a potential code amendment that would allow a xception to the
Street Connectivity Standard, LOC 50.06.003.4. Staff coordinator w ebra Andreades,
Senior Planner.
Ms. Andreades provided an update on city staff's meeti with Metro staff held on July 1 gtn
Input/Action:
• Metro recognized that Lake Oswe ad unique constraints due to topography and
natural resources and in that s se was self-contained for local street connectivity
purposes. In addition, the ' y was for the most part built-out. Metro code did not contain
a rule of reasonablen or pure discretion to waive a requirement.
• Staff to send a let to Metro formally asking for the ability to grant an exception in some
cases, and o ' ing how the criteria for an exception would be met.
• Staff to erate Public Review Draft, to be available in August.
• Pla � g Commission public hearing was scheduled for October gtn
C ir Heape rejoined the meeting.
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of July 24, 2017 EXHIBIT C-1/Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT D-1
LU 17-0039
STAFF REPORT
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
APPLICANT FILE NO.
City of Lake Oswego LU 17-0039
LOCATI O N STAF F
Downtown Redevelopment Design District Scot Siegel
DATE OF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE
July 13, 2017 July 24, 2017
I. APPLICANT'S REQUEST
A request from the City of Lake Oswego for a text amendment to the Lake Oswego Community
Development Code (CDC or code), clarifying and updating the design variance criteria for
developments in the Downtown Redevelopment Design District (DRDD).
Ordinance 2754, which would enact these changes, is attached as Exhibit A-1.
II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
A. City of Lake Oswe�o Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Planning Goal:
Development (Community Development Code)
Policies A-1.b, A-1.g, A-1.i, and A-3
Design Standards and Guidelines
Policies C-1.a and C-3
Community Culture Goal:
Civic Engagement
Policies 1
Inspiring Places and Spaces, Goal 1:
Policies 1.b, 2, and 7-9
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 24, 2017
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT D-1/Page 1 of 11
B. Metro Urban Growth Mana�ement Functional Plan
Title 6: Centers, Corridors, Station Communities and Main Streets, Metro Code
Section 3.07.620
C. State Transportation Plannin� Rule
OAR 660-012-0060 Plan and Land Use Regulation Amendments
D. City of Lake Oswe�o Community Development Code
LOC 50.07.003.3.c. Published Notice for Legislative Hearing
LOC 50.07.003.16a Legislative Decisions Defined
LOC 50.07.003.16b Criteria for Legislative Decision
LOC 50.07.003.16c Required Notice to DLCD
LOC 50.07.003.16.d.iii Planning Commission Recommendation Required
LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision
III. INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A City Council priority for 2017 is to allow more architectural variety in the downtown while
maintaining consistency with adopted plans. Although the Community Development Code affords
design flexibility (through the variance procedure), the Council is interested in streamlining the
code where it can while ensuring high quality design.
The Community Development Code requires that new construction and substantial building
remodels in the DRDD comply with the requirements of the DRDD Overlay, which is a set of
building and site design standards adopted in 1997 that implement Village Character1. These
standards are found in LOC 50.05.004.5 throu�h LOC 50.05.004.12, or in LOC 50.05.004.13 for
projects that are subject to the DRDD's Clear and Objective Housing Standards.
One of the DRDD Building Design standards is "Lake Oswego Style," which requires consistency
with at least one of three "Lake Oswego Style" options: English Tudor, Arts and Crafts, or Oregon
Rustic [LOC 50.11.001 Appendix A— Lake Oswe�o Style], per LOC 50.05.004.5a, 6.a. Building
�The Downtown Redevelopment Design District, LOC 50.05.004.4,states, "As used in this section, 'village character'
means a community of small-scale structures that appears and operates like a traditional small town.A village is
typically composed of an assembly of smaller mixed used structures often centered on a square or other public space
or gathering area,such as a body of water, a transportation route or a landmark building.Adherence to village
character is not intended to require an historical reproduction of a turn of the century small town, but rather to
encourage the development of a sophisticated small city that is pedestrian friendly, creates a sense of community and
attracts people to the downtown in the same manner and using similar design concepts as historic small towns and
neighborhood centers." The specific required means and methods to achieve"village character"are set forth in the
later referenced code sections.
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 24, 2017
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT D-1/Page 2 of 11
designs may also draw on elements of more than one of the prescribed styles to comply with the
standard.
Proposed Amendment
Pursuant to the City Council's direction, and consistent with input from the Planning Commission
and public, the proposal amends the DRDD design variance criteria to support greater
architectural variety in the downtown. Specifically, the amendment clarifies the existing DRDD
design variance criteria, which already afford much flexibility, and adds criteria for addressing
unique building functions and sustainability.
A unique building function might include, for example, construction of an auditorium or theater
where compliance with minimum fenestration or other standards is impractical. The code would
also allow exceptions (design variances) where necessary to implement sustainable building
features; consistent with green building best practicesZ, the proposal specifically identifies energy
production (solar or wind), enhanced indoor air quality, use of daylight for interior lighting,
acoustic building performance, protection of views of Lakewood Bay or Mt. Hood, water efficiency
(e.g., rainwater harvest), and increased seismic resiliency (above and beyond minimum building
code requirements) as eligible features. For many building projects it should be possible to
implement these features without a variance; however, the proposed amendment provides relief
where an applicant demonstrates that a variance is necessary. This is consistent with the City
Council direction to streamline the development review process and remove unnecessary
regulatory obstacles to sustainability.
The proposed code amendment (in strikeout and underline format with commentary) is contained
in Exhibit A-1, Attachment 2. For additional background, please refer to the Public Review Draft
dated June 16, 2017 (Exhibit F-1) and comments received on that draft (Exhibit F-2).
Analysis
On April 24, 2017, the Planning Commission conducted an initial work session on Lake Oswego
Style where it received public input. The City Council followed with a study session on May 6.
There is general consensus that since adoption of the DRDD standards twenty years ago, the code
has allowed a variety of architectural designs, and that collectively these building projects have
enhanced the appearance and functionality of downtown. However, there is concern that the
code presents barriers to innovative design and may discourage sustainability. There is also a
sense that over time downtown buildings may become too similar in appearance, where certain
architectural styles or design elements (e.g., gabled and hipped roofs) are repeated too often.
The existing code contains a design variance procedure for projects in the DRDD, and "Lake
Oswego Style" is within the permitted scope of DRDD design variances; however, the application
must either meet the General Design Variance Criteria, or it must be necessary to "create a
2 With the exception of seismic resiliency,the sustainable building features proposed in the code are similar to those
that are evaluated for certification under the Leadership Through Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating
system for new construction and substantial remodels,though the City is not proposing to adopt LEED.See Exhibit F-3.
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 24, 2017
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT D-1/Page 3 of 11
complementary relationship with a viable existing structure on an abutting lot that is not designed
in Lake Oswego Style." The General Design Variance criteria, when applied to the DRDD, can be
difficult to interpret and time consuming to apply, because they reference numerous code
sections and plans which may or may not be applicable. Therefore, the proposed amendment
focuses on clarifying these variance criteria, rather than revising or replacing the DRDD standards.
Other Options Considered But Dismissed
The proposal does not replace Lake Oswego Style, but instead clarifies the DRDD design variance
criteria, because the current code already allows design variety within the Lake Oswego Style, and
also affords latitude to grant variances to the Style (and other DRDD standards). Staff considered
exempting certain sites or subareas of the downtown from Lake Oswego Style, but determined
that could have unintended consequences and would be unfair to some property owners. Staff
also considered adding styles to the code, but found that it would be difficult to anticipate new
styles that the City might want to allow. Finally, the staff considered amending the DRDD
standards to incorporate the above described exceptions; however, that would make the code
more complex, contrary to the City Council direction to streamline the regulations. In addition, it is
not possible to anticipate every application of sustainable building technology, which is constantly
evolving, and different applications could require adjusting different DRDD standards, which could
have unintended consequences.
Conclusion
As discussed above, the City Council is interested in allowing more architectural variety in the
downtown. The Council also wants the development review process to be as efficient as possible
and not impose undue costs on applicants. Therefore, the proposed amendment clarifies the
design variance criteria for buildings in the DRDD, with a focus on high quality design,
sustainability, and consistency with adopted downtown plans.
IV. NOTICE OF APPLICATION
A. Newspaper Notice
On July 13, 2017 public notice of the amendment and Planning Commission public
hearing will be published in the Lake Oswego Review.
B. ORS 227.186 (Measure 56) Notice
As the proposed text amendment does not limit permitted uses, no notice of the
proposal was required by ORS 227.186 (Measure 56) to owners of property in the
affected zone.
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 24, 2017
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT D-1/Page 4 of 11
C. DLCD Notice
Pursuant to LOC 50.07.003.16.c and ORS 197.610, staff provided required notice of
the proposed CDC text amendment to the Oregon Department of Land
Conservation and Development (DLCD) not less than 35 days prior to the hearing.
D. Metro Notice
Pursuant to Metro Code 3.07.810 and .820, staff provided notice of the proposed
CDC text amendment to Metro not less than 35 days prior to the hearing.
V. COMPLIANCE WITH APPROVAL CRITERIA
A. City of Lake Oswe�o Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Planning Goal Policies:
Development(Community Development Code)
A-1. Maintain land use regulations and standards to:
���
b. Promote compatibility between development and existing and desired
neighborhood character;
���
g. Promote architectural and site design quality;
i. Enhance opportunities for mixed use development in Employment Centers,
Town Centers, Commercial Corners, and appropriately zoned areas within
Neighborhood Villages.
A-3. Ensure high-quality building and site design through the application of clear
and objective standards for residential development, and design review; utilize
the development review process for commercial, industrial, and institutional
development to ensure high-quality building and site design and overall
appearance.
Response: The proposed amendment maintains and clarifies the existing design
variance criteria, the purpose of which is "to allow adjustments of certain standards
where the resulting design would be superior to development in the surrounding
neighborhood or would better achieve the purpose/objectives of the applicable
zone or design district and design standards..."The design variance process
indirectly supports opportunities for mixed use development because this type of
development often requires design flexibility. Finally, the proposed amendment
does not modify the city's clear and objective standards for residential
development, but clarifies an optional, discretionary track for development review
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 24, 2017
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT D-1/Page 5 of 11
approval, which in some circumstances applicants may prefer over clear and
objective standards.
These criteria are met.
Desipn Standards and Guidelines
G1. Enact and maintain regulations and standards which require:
a. New development to enhance the existing built environment in terms of size,
scale, bulk, color, materials and architectural design;
���
G3. Ensure through development and design standards that both public and private
developments enhance the aesthetic quality of the community.
Response: The proposed amendment requires that DRDD design variances
result in projects that are "exceptional in the quality of detailing,
appearance and materials", and create "a positive unique relationship to
other nearby structures, views or open space, and streetscapes." By
exceeding minimum code requirements, resulting projects will "enhance"
the existing built environment and aesthetic quality of the community.
These criteria are met.
Community Culture Chapter/Civic Engagement Policies:
1. Provide citizen involvement opportunities appropriate to the scale of a given
planning effort, and ensure those affected by a Plan have opportunities to
participate in the planning process.
Response: The amendments are being reviewed in a public hearing before the
Planning Commission, and a public hearing will also be held before the City Council.
Notice of both hearings have or will be mailed to neighborhood and business
associations and other affected organizations. Prior to the public hearings, the City
held a work session with the Planning Commission on April 22, where it received
public comments on the scope of the proposed amendment. The City also published
a Public Review Draft (PRD) of the proposal, notifying all recognized neighborhood
associations, the Chamber of Commerce, members of the Development Review
Commission, and the developers and design professionals who participated in the
April 22 work session. The PRD and comments received on it are contained in
Exhibits F-1 and F-2.
This criterion is met.
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 24, 2017
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT D-1/Page 6 of 11
Inspiring Places and Spaces Chapter, Goa11 Policies:
1. Adopt implementation measures and guidelines that ensure:
���
b. New development in mixed-use, commercial and employment areas:
i. Promotes a safe and attractive pedestrian environment;
ii. Reflects high-quality aesthetics, considering size, scale and bulk, color,
materials, architectural style and detailing, and landscaping; and
iii. Includes buffering and screening to protect residential uses and
neighborhoods.
2. Adopt and maintain design standards and provide incentives that encourage
exceptional or high quality design.
7. Enhance the unique character of Lake Oswego's neighborhoods and commercial
districts as the City grows and changes by adopting plans, codes, guidelines and
other implementation measures.
8. Protect Lake Oswego's village aesthetic by adopting and maintaining
implementation measures and guidelines that preserve the residential character
of... neighborhoods, safeguard places of historical significance...and encourage
urban form that results in pedestrian friendly retail districts in existing
commercial areas, including buildings oriented to the street and active ground-
floor uses.
9. Preserve the visual attractiveness of the community by limiting adverse visual
impacts to the City's public spaces and streetscape.
Response: The proposed amendment addresses the City Council's desire to see
more architectural variety in the DRDD while maintaining village character. The
amendment ensures that projects approved with design variances are "exceptional
in the quality of detailing, appearance and materials", and create "a positive unique
relationship to other nearby structures, views or open space, and streetscapes."
Such positive relationships would include but are not limited to pedestrian safety,
high-quality aesthetics (considering size, scale and bulk, color, materials,
architectural style and detailing, and landscaping), and buffering and screening to
protect residential uses and neighborhoods. By exceeding minimum code
requirements, resulting projects will preserve Lake Oswego's visual attractiveness
while allowing for changes over time that enhance the existing built environment
and aesthetic quality of the community.
These criteria are met.
B. Metro Urban Growth Mana�ement Functional Plan
Title 6: Centers, Corridors, Station Communities and Main Streets, Metro Code
Section 3.07.620
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 24, 2017
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT D-1/Page 7 of 11
Response: The DRDD is within the Lake Oswego Town Center, as designated by
Metro. For cities to receive transportation funding for projects within town centers,
Metro Code requires that they have an action plan for implementing mixed use
development and multimodal transportation within the subject area.The proposed
amendment is consistent with the purpose of Title 6; the design variance process
indirectly supports opportunities for mixed use development because this type of
development often requires design flexibility.
This criterion is met.
C. State Transportation Plannin� Rule
The City of Lake Oswego is required to comply with the State's Transportation
Planning Rule (TPR) [OAR 660-012-0060]. The purpose of the transportation
planning rule is to provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic
transportation system; to coordinate a land use and transportation system that
supports a pattern of travel and land use in urban areas that will avoid air
pollution, and traffic and livability problems; ensure a mix of transportation
facilities and services to ensure economic, environmentally sound, and
accessibility for all Oregonians; and to ensure coordination among levels of
government and transit providers.
If an amendment to land use regulation would significantly affect an existing or
planned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place
measures as provided in section (2) of the TPR, unless the amendment is allowed
under section (3), (9) or (10) of the TPR. A land use regulation amendment
significantly affects a transportation facility if it would:
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation
facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan);
Response: No changes to the functional classification of an existing or
planned transportation facility are proposed.
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
Response: No changes to standards implementing a functional classification
of an existing or planned transportation facility are proposed. (Functional
classifications are not subject to modification through a variance.)
(c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C), below, based
on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period
identified in the adopted TSP [Transportation System Plan]. As part of
evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 24, 2017
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT D-1/Page 8 of 11
generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the
amendment includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would
demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited to,
transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or
completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment.
(A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional
classification of an existing or planned transportation facility;
(B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility
such that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP
or comprehensive plan; or
(C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility
that is otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified
in the TSP or comprehensive plan.
Response: The proposed amendment does not result in any of the listed
effects.
These criteria are met.
D. Lake Oswego Community Development Code (CDC) Procedural Requirements
LOC 50.07.003.3.c. Published Notice for Legislative Hearing
LOC 50.07.003.16a Legislative Decisions Defined
LOC 50.07.003.16b Criteria for Legislative Decision
LOC 50.07.003.16c Required Notice to DLCD
LOC 50.07.003.16.d.iii Planning Commission Recommendation Required
LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision
Response:The Community Development Code 50.07.003.16.a defines "legislative
decisions" to include amendments to Comprehensive Plan policies. Public hearings
by the Planning Commission for recommendations to the City Council for
"legislative decisions" are required to have at least ten days prior published notice,
per LOC 50.07.003.16.d.iii and 50.07.003.3.c. Notice is defined as being published in
a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Lake Oswego at least ten days in
advance of the hearing, and mailed at least ten days in advance to the Commission
for Citizen Involvement and to all recognized neighborhood associations. The notice
shall include:
i. The time, date, and place of the public hearing;
ii. A brief description of the proposed legislative amendment; and
iii. A phone number for obtaining additional information.
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 24, 2017
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT D-1/Page 9 of 11
Notice of the public hearing was posted at City Hall, the Adult Community Center,
and the Library on July 13, 2017. The hearing notice will be published in the Lake
Oswego Review newspaper on July 13, 2017. Legislative notice was mailed per LOC
requirements on July 12, 2017.
The criteria for a legislative decision are addressed in Sections A-D, above. The City
notified DLCD and Metro of the proposed action 35 days before the initial
evidentiary hearings.
The CDC requirements for the proposed legislative decision, including public notice
requirements for the public hearing, are met.
VI. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATION
The proposed amendment is in compliance with City Comprehensive Plan policies, state
laws, and statewide planning goals.
Based on the information presented in this report, staff recommends that the Commission
recommend adoption of the Code amendment stated in Exhibit A-1 by City Council.
EXHIBITS
A. Draft Ordinances
A-1 Draft Ordinance 2754, dated 07/13/17
Attachment 1:
• City Council Findings and Conclusions (Not yet available)
Attachment 2:
• Proposed Draft Code Amendments with track-changes and commentary (for
reference only), 07/12/17
B. Findin�s, Conclusion and Order
[No current exhibits]
C. Minutes
[No current exhibits]
D. Staff Reports
[No current exhibits]
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 24, 2017
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT D-1/Page 10 of 11
E. Graphics/Plans
[No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
F. Written Materials
F-1 Public Review Draft, 06/16/17
(Due to size this exhibit is not included with the staff report. Please view on the land
use webpage using link provided below.)
F-2 Citizen Comments Received on Public Review Draft
F-3 LEED Rating System Table
G. Letters
[No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
BACKGROUND MATERIAL AND REFERENCES
Staff reports and public meeting materials that were prepared for these code amendments can be
found by visiting the project web page for LU 17-0039.
Use the link below to visit the City's "Project" page. In the "Search" box enter LU 17-0039 then
press "Submit":
http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/projects
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 24, 2017
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT D-1/Page 11 of 11
EXHIBIT F-1
Public Review Draft, 06/16/17
Due to size this exhibit is not included with the staff report.
Please view on the land use webpage using link provided below.
http://www.ci.osweqo.or.us/projects
In the "Search" box enter LU 17-0039 then press "Submit"
McCaleb, Iris
From: Siegel, Scot
Sent: Monday, June 26, 2017 8:59 AM
To: 'Craig Stephens'
Subject: RE: LU 17-0039 PRD RE: Re seismic resiliency code requirements
Cra ig,
I think we are talking/emailing past one another. This is my final reply on the subject.The proposed code amendment is
limited to the city's development code (zoning and aesthetic standards), not the building code, which focuses exclusively
on life-safety.That is because the City Council direction was to allow greater flexibility/creativity in urban design in the
downtown (Lake Oswego Style), not to draft new life-safety standards for buildings.
We have two different codes that regulate building design, each with its distinct purpose.The city's Community
Development Code (LOC 50) regulates urban design, and the International Building Code (IBC/LOC 45) regulates building
life-safety. As directed by the City Council,the amendment is to the former. While compliance with one affects
compliance with the other,the propose changes to LOC 50 do not diminish building safety.
One of your concerns is underground parking. From an urban design perspective, underground parking, which is already
allowed by LOC 50, is a good thing; it conserves land (more compact urban form), promotes walkability, and reduces
stormwater runoff. It is also desirable for residents of mixed-use buildings who want to park in a dry and secure place
where they can easily access their dwelling. From a life-safety perspective, parking garages, like all structures, must
comply with current building codes, which include seismic, fire safety, and ADA requirements.
I understand and appreciate your point.According to FEMA F-154 and the rapid visual screening class that we both
attended, buildings with a high degree of vertical and horizontal irregularity are more vulnerable to seismicity than
those without. In other words, all things being equal (soils, code, construction, etc.) a shoebox with no underground
parking and no architectural detailing is the most efficient shape for designing seismically sound building. But it is also
true, all things being equal, a surface parking lot free of falling debris hazards is a safer place to be in an earthquake than
in a parking structure. But we are not interested in building out the downtown with shoeboxes and surface parking lots.
That would be contrary to the community vision (village character). Instead, we set a high standard for architectural
design and require adherence to adopted building codes that the state has deemed applicable to our region.The current
proposal is meant to better define the process and criteria for allowing flexibility in architectural styles.
As always,thank you for your comments.
Scot
Scot Siegel
Planning&Building Services Director
City of Lake Oswego
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego,OR 97034
tel:503.699.7474
. ��� �'��
.�� �i ���
'�� ''� �
�.������
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 1 OF 12
From: Craig Stephens [mailto:cyanblue189@�mail.com]
Sent: Saturday,June 24, 2017 1:28 PM
To:Siegel, Scot
Subject: Re: LU 17-0039 PRD RE: Re seismic resiliency code requirements
Hi Scot
OK. I want to try to put this idea of having uniform building codes into context so I can try to understand and be
more clear. Obviously you do not include allowing certain design innovations and not others in that idea
because the purpose of this project is to establish new unique building code criteria for Lake Oswego.
I am trying to get across is that seismic resilience and building design are linked. I think that should be fully
understood by anyone discussing building design codes. As I said the most obvious and profound link is that of
vertical and horizontal dislocations that create a point of high stress and start fracturing. The FEMA class starts
with the credo that architects innovating are the enemy of structural seismic event security.
Also the uniform standard for building construction is not and cannot be the same by zone of risk and changes
when the risk assessment changes so it is only prudent to understand the Cascadia risk assessment for this area
and be proactive in meeting what will be the new standards since the code is being reviewed.
In short I suggest adding to your mission statement to address "sustainability" and allowing a wider variety of
architectural "design styles" with "innovation" to include the most impartant element namely seismic design
and structural integrity in a Cascadia level seismic event.
Leaving that to some state or federal agency by ignoring it until or unless someone chooses to consider it
important when building downtown is short sighted in my humble opinion.
Thanks again
Craig
On Jun 23, 2017, at 1:42 PM, Siegel, Scot<ssiegel(a)ci.oswe o.g or.us>wrote:
Cra ig,
Thank you for your comment. I will be sure to include it with others the city receives for the planning
commission public hearing on LU 17-0039.
In my response to the commission, I will explain that in Oregon,the 'key learning', as you refer to the
process of building code reviews, below, is conducted at the State level in consultation with local
building officials, not by individual local jurisdictions, because there is a state interest in having uniform
standards.
The city's emergency operations plan establish priorities for inspections after an earthquake, beginning
with city buildings and infrastructure.The Building Official is the lead for structural damage assessment,
and the Public Works department is responsible for assessing damage to city road and bridge systems.
Here is a link to the Emer�ency Mana�ement Pro�ram.
The city has also been working diligently to upgrade essential facilities, such as the new water treatment
plant and trunk line, to withstand a major earthquake.The same approach is being taken in the design
of the new civic center.
Thanks again for taking the time to review the draft code amendments relating to downtown
architectural design variances.
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 2 OF 12
Scot
ScotSiegel
Planning&Building Services Director
City of Lake Oswe�o
PO Box 369
Lake Oswego,OR 97034
tel:503.699.7474
From: Craig Stephens [mailto:cyanblue189@�mail.com]
Sent: Friday,June 23, 2017 12:43 PM
To: Siegel, Scot<ssie�el@ci.oswe�o.or.us>
Subject: Re:Thank you for calling re seismic resiliency code requirements
Hi Scot
Thank you for your response, excellent as always.
I would like for our building codes to reflect key learning from major earthquakes and when I
look at the Kessi building I get the same feeling as when I looked at the Cypress structure in the
Bay Area. The Northridge earthquake showed that parking underneath with this type of
construction allows collapse with people living in such structures to be at risk.
Looking at the Barry Cain building right across the street with the parking not underneath shows
that it is possible to have a quality design without jeopardizing the seismic safety.
So I suggest that the City of Lake Oswego hire a consultant familiar with the key learning from
Chile, Christchurch, LA and the Bay Area to specifically create upgrades to be "tested good" for
a Cascadia quake on the Oregon coast.
And I also suggest that the City Manager establish a base level criteria and have an assessment
done on structures in Lake Oswego to identify structures that should be prioritized for checking
after an earthquake to insure life safety is OK or to evacuate.
I am coming at this as being close to the Van Nuys earthquake (which forced LA to change the
building codes and require strengthening on thousands of existing structures), the Northridge
earthquake (which taught the weakness of underground parking with concrete pillars with
welded rebar and taught that broken glass in homes is the major cause of injury), the Loma Prieta
earthquake (and I was on the key learning team that corrected some 130 problems within the
Lockheed complex alone)which taught that earthquake resilient structures with cross beams
work and concrete pillars without anti-splay rebar welding internally collapse like the Cypress
Structure, that flex on bridges is necessary or they fall down, etc. It also taught that unreinforced
brick masonry such as with fireplace chimneys fall down and houses not attached to the
foundation move ... a lot. So it strikes me as a shame that the key learning for each of these is
localized and every place has to experience a disaster before taking this as seriously as it needs to
be to avoid expense and loss of life. That is where I am coming from.
Best
Craig
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 3 OF 12
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Siegel, Scot<ssiegel(a�ci.oswe o.� or.us>wrote:
Thanks, Craig.
The city follows the state building code for seismic standards, which as you know are based on
occupancy type. We can encourage building designs that exceed those standards, and in fact public
agencies can implement a higher standard in projects they control, but ultimately the state code
governs private projects. I am forwarding your comment to the city building official who is an expert on
this and will take your comments under advisement.
As for architectural design (aesthetic) standards, I agree that the city's development/zoning code
should afford flexibility where owners are required to make seismic upgrades, and I think it already
does so. LOC 50.08.003.3 General Design Variance Criteria allows variances where "Compliance with
the applicable standard is not practicable due to the physical characteristics of the site or existing
structure" (subsection a.i).
A different question is whether the code should allow variances, or require different designs (e.g., no
under-structure parking, as you put it) simply to reduce the cost of voluntarily building to a higher
seismic standard.That is a policy question.
If you wish provide comments on the development code relative to downtown design variances, please
refer the public review draft and request for comments here:
http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/plannin�/1u-17-0039-amendments-desi�n-variance-criteria-
developments-downtown-redevelopment-design
Thank you for your interest and ongoing contributions. Please let me know if I can be of further
assistance.
Sincerely,
Scot
Scot Siegel
Planning&Building Services Director
City of Lake Oswe�o
PO Box 369 �
Lake Oswego,OR 97034
tel:503.699.7474
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 4 OF 12
From: Craig Stephens [mailto:cyanblue189@�mail.com]
Sent: Wednesday,June 21, 2017 1:17 PM
To:Siegel, Scot<ssie�el@ci.oswe�o.or.us>
Subject:Thank you for calling re seismic resiliency code requirements
Hi Scot
Thank you for calling me about the possibility of code upgrades for increased seismic stability
in new building construction.
As you suspect I am asking that seismic stability be included in the considerations far changing
the building code in addition to providing more innovative design and sustainability. In the
FEMA assessment class one of the general remarks are that architectural complexity is the
enemy of seismic stability and the scoring system deducted points for vertical and horizontal
offsets because these create high stress points that then progress like a "zipper".
I think now that my first question has been answered in that you have indicated a willingness to
talk about this consideration. The problem that I have and why I am emailing you and not
asking for a meeting to share my thoughts is that I am not knowledgeable enough to do anything
more than request that someone who is knowledgeable be consulted and that the bar for seismic
resistance be set higher than it is now.
A model for seismic resistance is found in the construction for hospitals such as the new OHSU
facility. The underground parking is not under the structure and the ground floor is not
weakened by having large expanses without major support beams. The new construction by
Kessi is just the opposite and the support beams rely on welded bundles of rebar with circular
ties, which is good but very limited compared to simply requiring no under-structure parking.
The Northridge earthquake was a good example of why this is a good idea. Non-ductile
concrete beams and high speed welding both failed to pass even a low scale earthquake when
tested in Houston on a shake table (the only way to know for sure as shown in the FEMA class
on structural integrity with the giant facility in Japan shown).
So this is a list of things to consider in a building code to stop allowing buildings that have
known weakness points. If you and your staff would please take into account seismic resistance
to at least as great an extent as architectural design flexibility and sustainability in writing new
code (and I would argue for giving the edge in such a trade-off to seismic safety because of the
risk, cost and danger vs having a less than thrilling regularity and shape or even a somewhat
heavy look at the base is a trade-off that seems pretty clearly weighted toward life safety.
So 1)No under-structure parking (which eliminates a host of problems_
2)No broad expanse of window on the ground floor but rather close and arched peripheral
support columns 3)No vertical or horizontal structural transitions (which could lead to separate
buildings which is what Kessi did to his credit) 4) When using a technology that has not been
fully tested or proven such as narrow concrete supports poured from above with dependence on
circular welds to not splay and on linear flex to add ductility and coatings not to rust etc, require
evidence of testing on a shake table and under worst case corrosion conditions etc as a good
reliability engineer would do. Preferably use I beam construction but have quality checks of the
welds and certification of material.
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 5 OF 12
And no brick facade above the ground floor should be allowed for obvious reasons. Emergency
access and multiple egress are also a given.
As I mentioned the OHSU buildings follow these mandates and they look good, are attractively
designed(strong structures normally do), are build for sustainability and while expensive not
prohibitively so.
One good thing about having buildings that survive in a big quake where emergency personnel
have a hard time getting to where they are needed is that no emergency personnel are needed for
buildings that survive and do not present a hazard for collapse. All of this argues for upgrading
the building code I hope.
Thanks very much for considering consulting with someone expert and using this opportunity to
finally upgrade our LO building code for new construction downtown in light of the Cascadia
earthquake danger.
Craig
PUBLIC RECORDS LAW DISCLOSURE This e-mail is a public record of the City of Lake
Oswego and is subject to public disclosure unless exempt from disclosure under Oregon Public
Records Law. This email is subject to the State Retention Schedule.
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 6 OF 12
Comments from Paden Prichard DRAFT June 30, 2017
RE: Request for comments; Design Variances in the Downtown Redevelopment District:
Page 1. Background: I believe architectural variety is necessary. I do not agree that there are
regulatory barriers in the code for sustainable building designs. The word sustainability is too
easily used as a sort of cop-out.
Page 2. "History....."I think we need to wait to see how the 4t" street townhouses turn out to use
as an example. Comment ...the garages are much taller than needed (14' ceiling in garage)
and they are built like studio apartments, yet cannot be rented. Who is going to regulate this?
Opinions: Best example of LO style is 555 second street.
if these various projects can be approved, then I don't think there are really very many barriers
to design variability.
Footnotes: The main fire station had to be "complementary to adjacent structures of good
design". What were those buildings at the time??? , and this is totally subjective to use as
criteria.
Page 5. III OPTIONS: ..... large undivided windows ..... and .....flat roofs....
Large undivided windows are not necessarily the most sustainable or energy use friendly. The
material used and the actual design is more critical. Large plate glass is very energy costly to
manufacture and hard to double glaze. Coatings can be used to reflect heat and let in light but
they are mostly too reflective or costly to use. Divided light windows can be large and still meet
the LO style for; example an 8 foot tall window can be divided into 24" panes with muntin bars
that show on both sides .....(I think this is a critical determinant, that the bars must show on the
outside and not be between the glass) ... and still meet the LO style.
Flat roofs ... a sloping roof is better for photovoltaic panels. Flat roofs are permitted now, just
related to building height which is critical.
I think using the catch-all buzz-word of sustainability for these two variance possibilities is real
hard to justify.
Recommended approach:
I am not sure that the variance route is the best way to approach this. I agree there needs to be
variability, but to define a couple of ways to get a variance, I don't believe is the way to go. I
think we should spend the time to redefine somewhat, the LO style or include some other
examples of actual buildings in the "named" styles. Other examples than are shown in our
design handbook.
Page 6. I agree that certain projects or properties should NOT be exempt or set aside.
#1 Why would we want to create more of the same of something that may be really bad?
#2 OK, but probably not able to be used regarding site. As it relates to existing structure, this
may be able to apply.
#3 Variance needed to implement a sustainable..... or green building.... I don't see how this
can really apply or that the necessity can be proved.
#4 Is this just for City Hall and LOCOM? Why strike out .. ..."will better .... property" ?
Summary: I would be in favor of redefining and broadening the LO Style or broaden the
definition to be more informed about how the existing styles could be interpreted. As
opposed to relying on variances to accomplish the necessary goals.
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 7 OF 12
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 8 OF 12
McCaleb, Iris
From: Craig Stephens <cyanblue189@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 01, 2017 10:47 AM
To: Siegel, Scot
Subject: Request for inclusion of seismic design principles into Comment
Hello Scot
I would like to request that the document that I have provided a link to be included in the comment relative to
the proposed design criteria changes. Understanding the information in this tutorial is the only way that the
statement that you make that there is no way that opening up the design criteria to a wider list of styles can be
verified without understanding the the shape of the building matters and that re-entry points need to be avoided
or brought to a higher standard of seismic resistance even at the risk of a building looking rectangular which
you say must be avoided at all costs.
https://www.wbd .�or�/resources/seismic-design-principles
Thanks very much
Craig
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 9 OF 12
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 10 OF 12
From: Lisa Adatto
To: Siegel,Scot; Hamilton,Leslie
Subject: Comments on Lake Oswego Design Standards
Date: Monday,July 03,2017 1:55:55 PM
Dear Mr. Siegel and Ms. Hamilton:
Thanks for the opportunity to comment on the Lake Oswego design standards. Here are my
thoughts:
• I don't think we need a town "theme". I think it is unnecessary and cheesy to require
that every building have a steep roof and look like a swiss chalet, or have some other
uniform look. In terms of appearance, I think that a variety of designs is fine.
• If possible, it would be good to include quality standards or ask that builders consider
using local materials or consider asking that builders meet LEED standards.
• It is important that the standards not preclude the use of solar energy or other building
techniques that will reduce energy use or promote renewable energy. The builders of
the WIZER block buildings told me that design standards prevented them from
including solar energy in the design.
Thanks for soliciting opinions!
All the best,
Lisa Adatto
Uplands Neighborhood
c: (503) 914-9678
ladatto3(a�um,. a,,. ll.com
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 11 OF 12
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
LU 17-0039 EXHIBIT F-2/PAGE 12 OF 12
LEED v4 for BD+C: New Construction and Major Renovation
� Project Checklist Project Name:
Date:
Y ? N
�aeda Integrative Process 1
0 0 0 Location and Transportation 16 0 0 0 Materials and Resources 13
creda LEED for Neighborhood Development Location 16 Y Prereq Storage and Collection of Recyclables Required
c�ed�c Sensitive Land Protection 1 Y Prereq Construction and Demolition Waste Management Planning Required
credii High Priority Site 2 credii Building Life-Cycle Impact Reduction 5
credii Surrounding Density and Diverse Uses 5 credii Building Product Disclosure and Optimization-Environmental Product 2
Declarations
c�ed�c Access to Quality Transit 5 c�ed�c Building Product Disclosure and Optimization-Sourcing of Raw Materials 2
credii Bicycle Facilities 1 credii Building Product Disclosure and Optimization-Material Ingredients 2
c�ed�c Reduced Parking Footprint 1 c�ed�c Construction and Demolition Waste Management 2
credii Green Vehicles 1
0 0 0 Indoor Environmental Quality 16
0 0 0 Sustainable Sites �0 Y Pre�eq Minimum Indoor Air Quality Performance Required
Y Prereq Construction Activity Pollution Prevention Required Y Prereq Environmental Tobacco Smoke Control Required
credii Site Assessment 1 credii Enhanced Indoor Air Quality Strategies 2
c�ed�c Site Development-Protect or Restore Habitat 2 c�ed�c Low-Emitting Materials 3
credii Open Space 1 credii Construction Indoor Air Quality Management Plan 1
c�ed�c Rainwater Management 3 c�ed�c Indoor Air Quality Assessment 2
credii Heat Island Reduction 2 credii Thermal Comfort 1
c�ed�c Light Pollution Reduction 1 c�ed�c Interior Lighting 2
Credit Daylight 3
0 0 0 Water Efficiency 11 c�ed�c Quality Views �
Y Prereq Outdoor Water Use Reduction Required credii Acoustic Performance 1
`( Prereq Indoor Water Use Reduction Required
Y Prereq Building-Level Water Metering Required 0 0 0 Innovation 6
c�eda Outdoor Water Use Reduction 2 c�emi Innovation 5
credii Indoor Water Use Reduction 6 aeda LEED Accredited Professional 1
c�ed�c Cooling Tower Water Use 2
Credi� Water Metering � 0 0 0 Regional Priority 4
cremi Regional Priority:Specific Credit 1
0 0 0 Energy and Atmosphere 33 creda Regional Priority:Specific Credit 1
`( Prereq Fundamental Commissioning and Verification Required c�emi Regional Priority:Specific Credit 1
Y P�e�eq Minimum Energy Performance Required credii Regional Priority:Specific Credit 1
Y Prereq Building-Level Energy Metering Required
Y Prereq Fundamental Refrigerant Management Required 0 0 0 • '� � ' '� �
c�ed�c Enhanced Commissioning 6 Certified:40 to 49 points, Silver:50 to 59 points, Gold:60 to 79 points, Platinum:80 to 110
credii Optimize Energy Performance 1S
c�ed�c Advanced Energy Metering 1
credii Demand Response 2
c�eda Renewable Energy Production 3
credii Enhanced Refrigerant Management 1
c�ed�c Green Power and Carbon Offsets 2
LU 17-0039 Exhibit F-3/Page 1 of 1
• • . �
,' .
,- ��t. �� � � . • •
.f. r
�-� � �. � � f� � �_� � �
� ��; r�4.� � t
r � � . � Trf�7r
� �
� * �'�''%-
�'���.. . . . �_� 1=���'k
�� � ,,- '�� �� �
�_. :�� .
�
•.��' . r ' .. . . _ �{- .
Jl �. fJ1
' � ��� �} '
� r ��• •T3{i7 � .
. . �ft. r�� ,��, �::;���ry. �
���r� . .
. . . - � ,7 ... . : : it ' -I�s�.
-- -i �.-: .�. � . . .
� �� �v � E�. �� � . .
a{Iyr f 1he `' �� ' , ' '�Y,lI71II:
e s�sla � s �#IN11��1�11� � �. .r.:�rk
c�
:rr.; PL R�I���I��rri�l�t �D�`' � �
�r:��f;� _� �F •J � ��E���-� i•:��,�
�� � ' - n � .
� �--.� . � �� �
�
� �-.Illlllll •+� — .{��-�f11���'�I
� 7 i . ..
� =�` k. ��iV�� �,:I
�� � F. .,. ,�,. � .
. .. .. . ;:, ���_�
. ���� . . .
:��.=� . � � ..� � ���,:�r� E��R-0 �
� _� t Iti�u7
� � �:� _ 7 • .7rk
� • ��
� ' . '
��
. . . t
' � !
�
. _ . t
. f
. �-�4r; • - l
� � .. .�t -
. � c �; � ' `�.l�
� �� .
. 1 S��f+ -� ��
� �.S'�;'«�i• . � } ' �,, �,-�� �
,_. .. . _ :r ..,. �� ._ •
�.� . � � �:�;� .:�� �I�I T��17:DD
�
.i . ,h y4''��SY1�kC'' l. , � �j,
. . . . . .� .}� _
�. .. h _ -. �,
�ti+r1�:s�`+��`� �_ �k •� r' S
. . �-� _ .
t `��s"�i r���- '
. ' r
i���,,i.�r. i��.�ul• -