Loading...
MMD2000-00024 MMD2OOO - 00024 PURKEY-PLEX DRIVE MODIFICATION October 2, 2000 CITY OF TIGARD Diane Kociemba Purkey 12810 SW Walnut OREGON Tigard, OR 97223 Dear Mrs. Purkey: This letter is in response to your request for Minor Modification (MMD2000-00024) approval to modify the location of the access drive associated with (SDR1999-00029) the modification of an existing single-family home into a four-plex residential unit located at 9600 SW North Dakota Street in the City of Tigard. This property is designated for Medium Density Residential (R-12) within the R-12 zoning district. The use of the site is listed as a permitted use for this zoning district. The Tigard Community Development Code, Site Development Review Section, states; "if the requested modification meets any of the major modification criteria, that the request shall be reviewed as a new Site Development Review application." Section 18.360.050.B. states that the Director shall determine that a major modification(s) has resulted if one (1) or more of the changes listed below have been proposed: 1. An increase in dwelling unit density or lot coverage for residential development. The proposal does not increase the dwelling unit density. This modification is for the location of the access drive only. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 2. A change in the ratio or number of different types of dwelling units. There is no change to the number or types of dwelling units associated with the original approval. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 3. A change that requires additional on-site parking in accordance with Chapter 18.765. Table 18.765.2 states that the minimum parking for multi-family units is 1.25 spaces for 1-bedroom units and 1.75 spaces for 3-bedroom units. The proposed project has 3, 1-bedroom units and 1 , 3-bedroom unit. Therefore, 6 parking spaces are required for the proposed use. The site plan shows 6 parking spaces which includes one (1) van accessible disabled parking space. The proposed modification to the approved access drive will not displace any parking spaces. 4. A change in the type of commercial or industrial structures as defined by the Uniform Building Code. No change in the structural occupancy type of the existing buildings is proposed. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. 5. An increase in the height of the building(s) by more than 20 percent. There will be no increase in the height of the building. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 6. A change in the type and location of accessways and parking areas where off-site traffic would be affected. Moving the access drive thirty (30) feet to the east will not affect off-site traffic. The access drive will remain at 24 feet wide. Page 1 of 2 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223 (503) 639-4171 TDD (503)684-2772 7. An increase in vehicular traffic to and from the site and the increase can be expected to exceed 100 vehicles per day. The proposed modification is necessary in order to save an existing 40-foot cedar tree and will not increase vehicular traffic. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 8. An increase in the floor areas proposed for a non-residential use by more than ten percent excluding expansions under 5,000 square feet. The modification does not involve an increase of floor area. 9. A reduction in the area reserved for common open space and/or usable open space that reduces the open space area below the minimum required by the code or reduces the open space areas by more than ten percent. The requested modification does not involve open space. The modification pertains only to the location of the access drive. Therefore, this standard does not apply. 10. A reduction of project amenities (recreational facilities, screening; and/or, landscaping provisions) below the minimum established by the code or by more than ten percent where specified in the site plan. The modification to the access drive will require the removal of a tree that is included in the screening percentage required for the proper screening of the parking area. Therefore, the applicant will be required to submit a plan that shows that the parking area is screened according to SDR1999-00029. 11. A modification to the conditions imposed at the time of Site Development Review approval that is not the subject of criteria (B). 1 through 10 above. The proposed modification has altered the original screening condition set forth in the original approval for the parking area. FINDING: Based on the analysis above the original screening condition of the original approval has been altered. If the applicant complies with the condition below, the standard will be met. CONDITION: Submit a plan that shows that the parking area is screened according to SDR1999-00029. This request is determined to be a minor modification to an existing site. The Director's designee has determined that the proposed minor modification of this existing site will continue to promote the general welfare of the City and will not be significantly detrimental, nor injurious to surrounding properties provided that, development which occurs after this decision complies with all applicable local, state, and federal laws. If you need additional information or have any questions, please feel free to call me at (503) 639-4171 ext. 317. Sincerely, CG -... ,- - c A. /.---'- Ma ew Scheid-•g er Assistant Planner is\curpin\Mathew\minmod\2000-00024.doc c: MMD2000-00024 Land use file SDR1999-00029 Land use file Purkey Minor Mod/MMD2000-00024 Page 2 of 2 Re: MMD approval to modify the access drive associated with SDR1999-00029 MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Monahan , Jim Hendryx, Dick Bewersdorff, 'MINAS Ron Goodpaster, Gary Lampella, FROM: Albert Shields RE: Diane Purkey, & her house at 9600 SW North Dakota St. CC: Hap Watkins, Matt Scheidegger DATE: Thursday, May 24, 2001 No immediate action required on your part. This is a "head's-up" memo to alert you that we have an extremely disappointed applicant from whom we will probably receive some complaints about being misdirected or inadequately counseled by the City. In RE: Diane Purkey, her house at 9600 SW North Dakota St., "The Purkey-Plex," and permits ENG2001-00022, MMD2000-00024, SDR1999-00029, VAR2000-00004, VAR2000-00005. STATUS: Hap and I met with Diane and Denny Purkey this afternoon and reviewed with them the modifications to the "house" at 9600 SW that would be required under the building codes to change the use from single-family to 4-unit multifamily. The changes are substantial, including sprinklering the four units, providing handicapped adaptability, documentation of previous construction approval by Washington County, etc. The costs will also be substantial and doubtless greatly exceed anything Mrs. Purkey anticipated. She left, visibly upset, complaining that she would not have invested as much as she already has in addressing requirements for her Planning and Engineering permits if she had known that the costs of modifying the building itself would be so high. She complained specifically that in none of her discussions with Planning had anyone suggested that there might be any difficulty in meeting Building requirements nor had anyone suggested that she might want to submit specific plans for review before proceeding. We started to point out that Planning's focus would have been on land use as opposed to building use and that their presumption would have to be that a developer knew what they were proposing to get into, but she seemed to believe that she should have been guided better towards anticipating difficulties. t_ She also complained that Hap and I, who had met with her and Matt Scheidegger in July, 1999, had at that time mentioned only relatively minor changes and corrections that would be required, some of which she has already done, such as installing a larger window in a bedroom to provide required egress. At that time she was insisting that only her immediate family lived in the house and that no units were rented out — so the property continued to be a single-family residence and the corrections we commented on were those required by the Housing and Building Codes for any occupancy as a residence, not requirements for conversion to use as an apartment house. BACKGROUND: • The house was Mrs. Purkey's former marital residence. Her former married name was Kociemba. Mr. Kociemba (and one or more of their sons) apparently did the construction work involved in converting an existing garage to a studio apartment for one son, adding a two-story structure with garage below/apartment above, and subsequently converting the new garage to another apartment, leaving four potential dwelling units. That work was reportedly done under permit from Washington County, but the documents we have seen so far do not show a four-unit floor plan or any added kitchen or bathroom facilities, only a garage with an undefined room above to be attached to a single-family house. • Recent work on the building has consistently been begun without a permit. In 1998 Mrs. Purkey rebuilt (and possibly enlarged) a deck and stairs to the second floor without a permit. In 1999, at the time of our visit, the gas service had been expanded to four meters and new gas furnaces and ranges installed in at least two units, again without permits. And more recently, excavation for street widening and parking was begun without a permit. It is obvious that electrical and plumbing work that required permits has also been done, presumably by her sons. • The original permits for the deck (1998) and gas lines (1999) have expired and even that work has never received final inspection approval. No inspections were ever requested under the deck permit and required corrections were not completed under the gas line permit. • Hap and I visited the property again last Friday, when the police department executed a search warrant and notified us of some Housing and Building Code issues. We drew up a list of current violations that I reviewed with Mr. & Mrs. Purkey in a meeting on Monday, 5/22, in Ron Goodpaster's office. In that meeting I explained to the Purkeys that a number of the noted violations had to be addressed immediately even if no one were currently living in the property and that others would have to be corrected if members of her family were to live in it as a single- family home. Specifically, I told them that new Mechanical and Structural permits, for the gasline and deck work, would have to be taken out within 7 days and that the work under those permits would have to be completed, including final inspection approval, within 30 days. We plan to enforce that timetable while making every effort to cooperate with the Purkeys. • In our meeting today we did point out that conversion from single-family to two- family/duplex would require much less modification and would be far less expensive. Please let me know if you have any questions. APPLICANT MATERIALS MINOR MODIFICATION ,,r e.�'i�� TYPE I APPLICATION CITY OF TIGARD 13125 SW Hall Blvd., Tigard, OR 97223(503) 639-4171 FAX: (503) 684-7297 GENERAL INFORMATION / Dig-toffy Property Address/Location(s): %/ e ASS, N' /, PRE-APP. HELD WITH: Tax Map &Tax Lot#(s):/5/ 3,� e..4- jy O.2, DATE OF PRE-APP.: Site Size: / 'J £600 Property Owner/Deed Holder(s *:])j/.�,V D �. c'fi71( -f{heteci Address:/2Z/D Lac) /"Qiit.Gct Phone:,1"9O-‘//5- / FOR STAFF USE ONLY City: /c y/ff-',CT pie. 97223 Zip: Applicant: jGG , ce Case No.(s): M 00 /g - Address:% g/C %fa) Phone:-570-- 775 City: 7`- /-.eL� Zip: G�'7,;�2e� Other Case No.(s): No.: 9 Me9 41- When the owner and the applicant are different people, the applicant Application Accepted y: must be the purchaser of record or a lessee in possession with written 9/ ,7t1-authorization from the owner or an agent of the owner. The owner(s) Date: 3 must sign this application in the space provided on the back of this form or submit a written authorization with this application. Date Determined Complete; PROPOSAL SUMMARY Rev.7/31/2000 i:lcurpin\masters\revised\minormod.mst The owners of record of the subject property request permission for a Minor Modification. To review a modification as a Minor Modification, the Director must first find that the expansion does not invoke one or more of the 11 criteria discussed within Section 18.120.070(B) of the Tigard Development Code. If the modification exceeds the maximum allowed under any one or more of the following criteria, a Major Modification review is required. Major Modifications are processed in the same manner as a new Site REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS Development Review. In a separate letter, please address the (Note: applications will not be accepted criteria below contained in Section 18.360.050(B) including a detailed without the required submittal elements) response to each criteria. I. An Increase in dwelling unit density or lot coverage for residential development. 2. A change in the ratio or number of different types of dwelling units. ,Application Form 3. A change that requires additional on-site parking in accordance with Chapter 18.165. 4. A change in the type of commercial or industrial structures as defined by the Uniform Building Code. d Owner's Signature/Written Authorization S. An increase in the height of the building(s)by more than 20%- c Vr Title Transfer Instrument or Deed 6. A change in the type and location of accessways and parking areas where off-site traffic would be affected. 1. An increase in vehicular traffic to and from t e site an increase can be expected to exceed 100 vehides per day. 2/Site Development Plan (3 copies) 8. An increase in the floor area proposed for a non-residential use by more than 10%exduding expansions under 5,000 square feet. yam' Site/Plot Plan (reduced 8'/:"x 11") 9. A reduction in the area reserved for common open space and/or usable open space that reduces the open space Applicant's Statement(3 copies) area below the minimum required by this code or reduces the open space area by more than ten percent. (Addressing Criteria Under Section 18.360.050(8) 10. A reduction of project amenities (recreational facilities, screening, and/or, landscaping provisions) below the minimum established by this code or by more than 10%where specified in the site plan. v Filing Fee (City) $100.00 11. A modification to the conditions imposed at the time of Site Development Review approval that are not the (Urban) $236.00 subject of Criteria I through 10 above. In addition, the Director must find that the proposed change complies with the underlying standards of the applicable zoning district. To complete this review, the Applicant's proposal must include a discussion indicating how the site expansion will continue to comply with the minimum setback, building height, parking land landscaping standards. Other applicable requirements such as minimum Clear Vision areas near driveways and street intersections may also be applicable depending on where the building expansion is proposed to be constructed on the site. 1 I APPLICANTS: To consider an application complete, you will need to submit ALL of the REQUIRED SUBMITTAL ELEMENTS as described on the front of this application in the "Required Submittal Elements" box. (Detailed Submittal Requirement Information sheets can be obtained, upon request, for all types of Land Use Applications.) THE APPLICANT(S) SHALL CERTIFY THAT: • The above request does not violate any deed restrictions that may be attached to or imposed upon the subject property. • If the application is granted, the applicant will exercise the rights granted in accordance with the terms and subject to all the conditions and limitations of the approval. • All of the above statements and the statements in the plot plan, attachments, and exhibits transmitted herewith, are true; and the applicants so acknowledge that any permit issued, based on this application, may be revoked if it is found that any such statements are false. • The applicant has read the entire contents of the application, including the policies and criteria, and understands the requirements for approving or denying the application. SIGNATURES of each owner of the subject property. ktd DATED this CZIIIX ` day of ,',a k1L 20 OD t_ e__ ems . I O ner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature Owner's Signature 2 J hrasrlington County }J ."- STATUTORY SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED (Individual or Corporate) Kay W. Livingston and Bessie E. Livingston, husband and wife ri grantor, conveys and specifically warrants to: LeROY AUGUST KOCIEMBA and DIANE E. KOCIEMBA: husband and wife grantee, the following described real property, free and clear of encumbrances created or suffered by the grantor except as specifically set forth herein, situated in the County of Washington , State of Oregon, to wit: 1.1..t The East one-half of the North 175 feet of Lot 1, BOETCHERS ADDITION TO GREENBURG J I+ I HEIGHTS, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon. ..:c (� O Z 3 La P CI This Deed is in fulfillment of Contract dated October 14, 1964; recorded October 27, 1964; Book:528,Page:141. THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES. THE TRUE AND ACTUAL CONSIDERATION FOR THIS CONVEYANCE IS $....14.,_9011-0.0 (See ORS 93.030) Dated this--7 day of -..January . 19 91 • 1' 40, k , / Ka . Livin to �/ (If executed by a corporation, r i ' affix corporate seal, -. - Bessie E. Livingston - STATE OF OREGON, _ ) STATE OF OREGON, County of )ss. ss. , 19 C unty of �� ) 19 91. Personally appeared. and Personally appeared the above named who, being duly sworn, ay W. Livingston and Bessie E. each for himself and not one for the other, did say that the former is the -.-I,Iv.ings•ton president and that the latter is the secretary of i 1,,._11 p , a corporation, 114 and acknowledged the foregoing instru- and that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal .- C to be.:*+ s1 voluntary act and ed. of said corporation and that said instrument was signed and sealed in be- .! half of said corporation by authority of its board of directors; and each of r •:-: O1 A�rBe(ozl.nae: them acknowledged said instrument to be its voluntary act and deed. VI.. (drFICIAL 4,-. Before me: .. (OFFICIAL \ a.; ' ) 1�''•., r g� Nqt Public for Oregon n /J� Notary Public for Oregon SEAL) �'; .. ,.flMSe`cQrnrnission expires: / 8 7/ My commission expires: _ nc �C OC - LIVINGSTON STATE OF OREGON County of Washington SS D..PANT.Dt-s NAME AND ADDRESS KOCIEMBA I,Jerry R. Han ,• e' _ •r of Assessment and Taxation a.• •fficio _. •rder of Con- .. -:7.--- : veyances for cgGnfpre• ertify that SPACE RESERVE the within 't:,. e•• eceived GRANTEE S NAME AND ADDRESS FOR and recor.t • • Q 1, ounty. m r air... br,..s.�'CV� '99N After recording return I. RECORDER'S VS �p,- r- or of e T- W at . . Ex- Mr. and Mrs. LeRoy Kociemba f 0.‘ ,..,.,,.,,,, • a ddka ��!e>r 96.0.0_..SR.Noxth.Dakota Ny ;� �� T�,gard,_..OR- -9?223 �ycl -; :y oe - NAME.ADDRESS ZIP �� ••• . - Until e change is requested all lox statements shall be sons to the following address. COUh'Ck Doc : 91001987 - _ Rect: 47227 33 . 00 •°��-e ,-_- -, NAME.ADDRESS•ZIP 01/11/1991 0 3: 21: OOPM �yy Washington County - • STATUTORY BARGAIN and SALE DEED - (Individual or Corporate) LeRoy August Kociemba (IIgrantor, conveys to Riane.-E_..Kociemba. grantee, the following described real property, situated in the county of Washington , State of Oregon, to wit: The East one-half of the North 175 feet of Lot 1, BOETCHERS ADDITION TO GREENBURG HEIGHTS, in the County of Washington and State of Oregon. wC F--VI ti l O sizt Z t0 ' THIS INSTRUMENT WILL NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY APPROVED USES. THE TRUE AND ACTUAL CONSIDERATION FOR THIS CONVEYANCE IS $ None (See ORS 93.030) Dated this �r11__- day of January 199 Le August ociemba (If fed by a corporation, affix corporate teal) STATE OF OREGON, ) STATE OF OREGON, County of )ss. )ss. 19 `col 4i ."i,1ashingtan ) 9 , Personally appeared. and „: .. ` �1 who, being duly sworn,• .pe 'i{ppeaird the above named it st..Kaeiemha each for himself and not one for the other, did say that the former is the vs: -�.� president and that the latter is the tit! •_ P�1:3 ' secretary of �•• . : , a corporation, ��� �• •�rpd acknowledged the foregoing instru- and that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal meFlf_ro Qr +1�� ' voluntary act and deed. of said corporation and that said instrument was signed and sealed in be- +'a ; half of said corporation by authority of its board of directors; and each of Before me �J them acknowledged said instrument to be its voluntary act and deed. ' �/ Before me: (OFFICIAL (OFFICIAL SEAL) SEAL) Notary Public f r Oregon Notary Public for Oregon My commission expires: 2/8/91 My commission expires: KOCIEMBA STATE OF OREGON County of Washington GRANTORS NAME AND ADDRESS I,Jerry R.Han=•t • «•r of Assessment KOCIEMBA and Taxation ar-1 - lc ••rder of Con- veyances for • cepn t•• re• ertify that the within ', e,.— eceived SPACE RESEI and recon,- • ' •■ al• •linty. � E GRANTES NAME AND ADDRESS FOR CO ,' ./‘ RECORDER'S After recording return}e; -- - 1 CZ'p• tl or of r�N r--• Ri_.-' aaati', . Ex- I1i -•ids -- N �iV K-oe-iemba 960(3 Sit-Alor t b Ikot y ", ,O Tigarn-,- OB .91773 NAME.ADDRESS.ZIP 04/ CO R^r�`,,�• /�Pr ‘ Until a Change is requested all fax statements shall be sent to the fallowing address. same as above Doc : 91001988 Rect: 47227 33. 00 01/11/1991 03: 21: OOPM ___. FNTO-0013 NAME.ADDRESS,Zip 1-) ,. . • . !e--)4 - / /r1 77v,e. _Z-- A,,L/c,777:7/1/ ? .5 e_c__:-/e.(/ 7r, 3 tO, 06-0 (a) 73 • . 1 - - 0 - Z.) rs4igyee /s Ala /Al'c.e E..4--Z E //t/ . 1c1 ..zZ 7A./7 Zi/t/4 : . 0 1 Pe-Ai-V/77 OX Z-47-- 44;a E.e4-5 t-ge.e , ,_<7,0e,2 7-7,9_4_ CD------ : .. .. ..,.. _•-s- G .: . ..-...,.....: .....„. 0 0 2) 4 141A r L.,4' A 1 0 C A i AtIV:C ,,e/ 7-,ve• ie.9r/a oie Nei&re - -.: _ ,. III :,. .. ,r- . , _ ___________32, D '---, P‘tr- r/7-- -- tx2z/t/4,-, /4) /51-CC.-e4/217-X/CC Ge /7"/"-- --- . . C4 oly 71-e... . /X 76.5-'- VV :-) - . U 41) 7:1/"C-ie-e Me.<— /OD Cl/4,1ES 7-70 CD/Pn7e.eCl - 0 . .. 0 ePle-- ik,av5rie (i5L-z._ _r,r--.Cac 7-4-/e ' 7 LE i e Oi? - • L -- ---: b-,) rxie,ec is _Aid. hoc,,ee4.9-5-E. /w- 7--/-/ . , g./G',‘ 7- e-zi __. 77/-e gafz.a/A7 ....,_ 0 _)____Gie-Jee 0,r -s -6 / 4 / ,...::.... - :D c#A-xle evooLo a A-)c-y ZA 2:) . ----/-ie- o ie tUe_ uiety /.2?o v m _ , e_A ,c_. LI) . a a/e1 //7 f citi_ ( __ AIL _ i) e---- 4-- 414o / _ 2 _&_ eee_ re A ) ,...s.). . , • 044 i: 41A—VI 6 i a ) 649 tA) 6_ m4;. 4 /, 7 , T,:e:.::,:._i.:+i.:,,1...c.4,i 1'L4.I,1.-1-.,.1,i,:,1):_.-.-1-1-44.--„-.;.7,....C.:,,....7k17...7Z;,.:-.;•-:•,,:'7_'-,i - -,z-f1-47.il.:4_,,L:-f_1r. t'- .. , . . c-..,:-.. .c.-.2..., \:.„.... , .:„...,. ... , .4-4.i. . - -1 )22,Ar,A .t.__ /.) o 4 0/ ' --/ e/52,rioA) 7-- ,E... .1.• (e) . . ,...j , .., . , .7) 7,-,,,,c... 1,4)a c/4,4 ,z3E_ ,Vo /oti c.ke 4-.5 C /,c) liebz/cuz.d9A. • .._ _. AA i AO , ee in , .,.-f•-t. ..3 , .-,,,„;.4..,,,,....,,.....,.f 8) 7:1/1-,g..€2.e.. IS W.O /Ai c.e.. 2 4t.6-C I Al 71--A.,e_ )Cio 0 ae iteE,4_ , ' pea -S- 40 E A-) 7-//5 2-Z_ _..0 5- __ ________ '44-r---74ii- trth 9.). Ti.-f.If Z E-- AS._ AZO /e .40 ac - /AV riti- f 5--&.ezi E 00 .7 6/2,_ 6 o/29/2?0 A) s-0/52 ,c__ ._____( orocAl 4,0 A-C-e• _ . - ' ..---.,i __1_4•_)__7;44._e,te,€________z_s_lit).____te.ffA_o_ te_a.0 6-L' /9 R-4 Z":E c T.— ,4-/72 g--A) / 7-2 s Ckc c,e e 4-7--,.4 -0,41.c... ) ,5 c,.. er-ti , -, , . ...., .. .„ ,, . s-c„47- ,0 e, ia,e, c../st ei Afsi le40 ce....) _ . • ...: _c__21 77441 /22/A//r/14/4 6-5 r41-- e.-i-5/I- o ..er C.0,0e er ie z q 7 r-lo,e E r4,4 -Ai i b : Id Iii-eL- si oe c- /L no ,',2 \ 11) 71/ /e-c- 71.-k6.--- Al i fl /4 6 /97 IA) e _TO 74-he . 0 I 1---7 o Ars / frvils. 77/7 01) • , ..52_17C____Deil_g.,ipp77.fzni ice-the:a) J-ffileptiAz _4-4A7--- • • y--ri, __ 41C.fe___A_-_t__O_r_____-_______CH_ so edi _ex.)____ o _r_extmt k i 7464L0_,_____ :.'.'.:', .,::- ' ,:;-- T.''..`':;'._. 7.:::• ..::;::::::;.".:'..:.:.1:': '::.::i.:::'1, :',.''':::..:f-:'77,-:: 7...:;-:'1: "' ::: :'7.;-:::.1.-:::"":: F7;77.774. .4.-147P.! .. . . . . . .. . . . . . ,. . . .. - - , 1 [ - L •-tom v�_L 1`„Tir �1<✓_r��±Q_.L- - -- 1 ��� ! 1 2 I l/. r N ,1} 1 r N jf-vir V 11,11 1-c.t_ I (SCI I \�\ V Lei - - ._ --- — -- -- --- -_ __, t� Et.i' _.1_.1 e-__ 1 !7 i \ 1 _ ,�_ 64 ,l f, I K1 \ 6' SIDEWALK - V 'r 10' RAN DEDICATION `� _ REP U ! I l'' '■4', \O O I 0 r RHO --' -yr I'u�w� - A.' 7 CE.DAFL �J. L6-GI-R �4u d e /. •� I t 1 AUREL1 G e , S.� v _ FFF�R EDGE 6'0.C. r�! --.1 . i!.S I: 1 ,e� 1I o& �-- 1 I �,' 1 01644 To . 'f REMOVE V� �� �� v�lc�fl �� C�=�( A_ IL.-.1 EXISTING �� �,� '� .tt� ...� £rS �� I � 16” PLUM �� r- ► -- ��� S• ..-.. H E 1i SST i PLUM 8 1 NT . r r _ ppyy __ _L6i4 • ' -'• - IP`w t, -- f I..,, \,1 p.--‘• 8S •, '� , (to, E Lf 1 .' BIKE RACKS - c •ANTED I.,--r, c ee I - �DEr1DROr�S " ' 1`, ►�/ `• :. ,-__1_,S__,-_-/. -14 '-�' UNIT ..3.. }' `� S ' �i I BEDROOM .'4';1.rte ,',,;s "` �+' t� I J +.:• :V,., T- � _ l� ,• zC4 (, 755 SF_ '1 tl 4; ' 1 ' ,y1 ;'... '7/4 DOWNSTAIRS c — 4 R►t000p£NDRONS •■■ ••■1)/__ Q- ,! . 1. i''''M'''';' 64..... s■e ..m...T.,... I �5 UNIT "1" UNIT "2" - UNIT "4" LS STUDIO 3 BEDROOM 4 1 BEDROOM 462 SF 950 SF ' �" �" 913 SF r UPSTAIRS CANIEL.L11., HE�G - %IFFER id III -`11111111 -� ` I T,. -4-- %, -r 1 We=+}tv 7 1 ), , ,. _ 1 �, i fig i T t-cL- , r- 1 j 1 . li - 1 ,\4_ 69p.coiff:C) 0..-z74'1 — — - '�„�r ! \` _ _ li l'_A,.1:-AE- 2f____t--A 6:firA___133;-V et-lehll '--7,2 r 1 ✓ 1 • "1r V 11 1r 1f 'j f r1!!Ir 1,4.11 1.471_ r 1 kil) 1 •,•ilisloilLy_m. ., c. 1• A 9g Al 6' SIDEWALK _. 10' RMI DEDICATION , V Tx` w a 'a �W ` �� REPLANTED —RHODODENDRONS • 1 0160--• f,i..,..*: ,,40 .i \p ) . .1 110 'LO f ; • • CEDAR .•e LF•C.lo-Fz d N e c Ac .4 * ii1 `G fir- r ik!- ��, REMOVE —'i . it 4. � 1 I FFF�FZ. AUREL Al .C2 EXISTING 1 ', ' ,. � ►-�1U� EDGE 6'0 C. , 1 �. .S » � JI I GAL � REMOVE u CEDAR ! PLUM .%. F � p—� �. • EXISTING r rA4b la `� j 16" PLUM c. AA 4/ �lC •" �►tr HE PLUM �� ` " t; 1,.4 - I, 8 r.; le . __1290 ___ �� . • i O cili "ALM ' li •: