Staff Report - County CUP - Internet Tower
Land Use and Zoning
Development Services Building
Mike McCallister, Manager
150 Beavercreek Road, Oregon City, OR 97045
Phone: (503) 742-4500 fax: (503) 742-4550
e-mail: zoninginfo@co.c1ackamas.or.us
m Web: http://www.clackamas.us/transportation/planning/
CLAC:KAMAS
COUNTY
Land Use and Zoninf! Staff Report and Recommendation
To the Hearings Officer
This document represents the Land Use and Zoning Staff recommendation to the Clackamas
County Hearings Officer for application file no. Z0101-11-C / Z0102-11-D as cited below. It
contains three parts:
Section 1- Summary, Section 2 - Conditions of Approval and Section 3 - Findings.
SECTION 1 - SUMMARY
DATE: April 28, 2011
HEARING DATE: May 5, 2011
CASE FILE NO.: Z0101-11-C & Z0102-11-D
STAFF CONTACT: Scott Hoelscher, (503)742-4524, scotthoe@co.clackamas.or.us
LOCATION: 9765 SE 302nd Lane; TIS R4E Section 30, Tax Lot(s) 01901, 1910
APPLICANT:. City of Sandy; 39250 SE Pioneer Blvd., Sandy, OR 97055
OVVNER: James Crawford, 9765 SE 302nd Lane, Boring, OR 97055
TOTAL AREA: Approximately 22.53 acres
ZONING~ Rural Residential Farm Forest 5.,.Acre (RRFF-5)
CITIZENS PLANNING ORGANIZATION: Boring CPO; Les Otto, P.O. Box 391, Boring,
OR 97009
PROPOSAL: Telecommunication facility c~msisting of a 120-foot steel lattice structure and
antennas :DJr broadband serviceto rural Sandy residents and businesses.
SITE DESCRIPTION: The five acre subject property is zoned Rural Residential Farm Fores~-
5 acre and is currently developed with a single family residence and shop building. The site
includes two tax lots. The tower is proposed to be located on tax lot 1910 and a portion of the
r:.~,~,-::-":7-::--~~'-"''''.''-
Staff Report - File No. Z0101-11-C j Z0102-11-D
pa'g~1..of"2i='"
;"~':"::7';:':==:::'.c:':~' .
access drive will be across tax lot 1901. The property owner also owns three adjacent tax lots for
a total site area comprising approximately 22 acres. The single family residence is located in the
central portion of tax lot 1901. The wireless broadband facility is proposed to be located in the
northeast comer oftax lot 1910,just south of the existing shop building and 50 feet from the east
property line. The parcel consists primarily of timber stands with some lawn/pasture areas near
the existing residence. The site is accessible via a shared easement extending from 302nd Ave.
The subject property sits on a hilltop which is approximately 900 feet above sea level.
SURROUNDING CONDITIONS: The properties to the south and east of the subject site are
also zoned RRFF-5. Zoning to the north and west of the subject site is EFU: Exclusive Farm
Use. The hilltop where the subject property is located is predominantly forested. Beyond the
hilltop, the surrounding area consists of rural residential acreage and farm land. Hwy. 26 is
approximately 12 mile to the south of the subject property.
SERVICE CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Sewer: The subject property is not located within a public or private sewer district. Sewage
disposal is accommodated by an on-site sewage disposal system.
2. Water: The subject property is not located within a public or private water district.
3. Surface Water: The subject property is located outside the boundaries of any Surface Water
Management Agency. Surface water management is subject to Section 1008 of the ZDO as
administered by the Clackamas County Engineering Division.
4. Fire: Boring Rural Fire Protection District #59.
RESPONSES REQUESTED:
-1. Boring Rural Fire Protection District #59.
2. . Boring CPO .
3. DTD, Traffic Engineering
4. Oregon Dept. of Aviation
5. Clackamas County C-Comm. (911)
6. Property Owners within 750 feet
OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE RECORD: A copy ofthe Land Use and Zoning staff
report and all evidence submitted with this application is available for inspection, at no cost, at
the LandUse and Zoning office during normal business hours. Copies of all documents may be
purchased at the rate of 10-cents per page. The staff report contains the findings and conclusion
upon which the recommendation is based along with any condition of approval.
APPLICABLE APPROVAL CRITERIA: This application is subject to Clackamas County
Zoning and Development Ordinance (ZDO) Sections(s) 309, 835, 1007, 1009, 1022, 1102 and
1203.
Staff Report - File No. lOlOl-l1-C I lOl02-11-D
Page 2 of 22
Location Map
~t: \I'fHt:I!Ll:::K ! I J
Staff Report - File No. Z0101-11-C / Z0102-11-D Page 3 of 22
~,.,-------._._----- --- --- - -- -- - ---- - -- - ----
l!:
LlI
;C'
.....
o
f-w
~
o
IJ.I
a
r,r.:
0.. Z
r:1 o:r
2: ...J
-'I: CL
[(I L!J
r:ll-
<(-
o(f.t
0:::
[(I
_I
~:
cr:
=1
a:
)--
Ci
2~
...:'
rt,i
Site Plan
-Il
I.L
~
'..
;:) -P.
E h
i "J
{-.-'
---.-J
~
;;;
wg
8.J
:r::";
Q
....-...-....----...-.- . -..----.--t
b -
':j ~ .~
5;,.....
'\
0::
ILl
6
~ ~
-~ Gl
z
r~~-,
---.---.1
. ....
'!?"'C
'-iJ ~- oQ>
~W-J~Q
s,()-.;:::.."",
I;:: ",,'1: <-}
<:r.<\lg~W
) ~
Staff Report - File No. Z0101-1l-C / ZOl02-1l-D
*'
"
'J
g
"I
~
~
"I
8
.....
Page 4 of 22
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS
SECTION 2 - CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The Clackamas County Land Use and Zoning staff recommends APPROVAL of application file
ZOlOI-II-C / Z0102-11-D subject to the following conditions:
Land Use & Zoning Conditions of Approval
1. Clackamas County Department of Transportation and Development, Building Services
Division, approval of a building permit and related plumbing, electrical, mechanical permits,
if applicable, are required for this facility.
2. The lattice tower shall observe a minimum setback of 120 feet from all property lines.
3. No lighting or marking shall be placed on the tower except as required by state and/or federal
regulations.
4. Landscaping shall be planted along the east perimeter of the fenced lease area. Evergreens
such as arbor vitae spaced at 3 foot on center and a minimurnof 4 feet tall at planting shall be
planted to form a continuous, sight-obscuring landscaping strip. Prior to the.issuance of a
building permit for the facility, a landscape plan demonstrating compliance with this
condition shall be submitted to the Land Use and Zoning Division for review and approval.
5. The lattice tower shall not exceed 120 feet above ground level.
6. The applicant shall obtain a Utility Placement Permit prior to commencement of utility work
within the County right-of-way.
7. The applicant shall remove the facility from the site when the applicant or any other
successor in interest ceases to use it as a communications facility.
8. The wireless broadband facility shall be located within an area that is enclosed on all sides.
The enclosure must be at least six feet tall and sight obscuring.
9. The wireless broadband facility shall be designed and built to accommodate collocation of
the additional equipment identified in Subsection 835.08.B of the Clackamas County Zoning
and Development Ordinance.
10. Maintenance of the leased area and the landscaping is the responsibility of the
owner/operator of the wireless communication facility. The owner/operator shall prevent the
facility from entering into a state of disrepair due to negligence, vandalism, natural hazard, or
any other source.
11. This Conditional Use permit is approved for the specific use and facility described in the
application to the extent it is consistent with the conditions of approval.
Staff Report - File No. Z0101-11-( / Z0102-11-0
Page 5 of 22
12. This Conditional Use permit is granted subject to the conditions of approval. Non-
compliance with any of these conditions constitutes a violation ofthis permit and shall be
cause for revoking this permit.
13. This Conditional Use shall expire in the event the approval is not implemented within two (2)
years of the final written decision. The Conditional Use approval will be considered
implemented when all necessary permits for development have been secured and are
maintained.
14. The federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) is not a criterion for approval of this application.
The County has reviewed the approval standards in light of the requirements of the ESA and
believes that the criteria for approval are consistent with the terms ofthe ESA and has
submitted the Development Ordinances for consideration for a "4(d)" programmatic
limitation. However, the analysis included in this report does not include aJ? evaluation by
the County ofthe application for consistency with the ESA nor does the report reach any
conclusions concerning that federal law. The applicant is responsible for designing,
construction, operation and maintaining the actives allowed by an approval of this
application in a manner that ensures compliance with the ESA. Any question concerning this
issue should be directed to the applicant, its consultants and the federal agencies responsible
for administration and enforcement of the ESA for the affected species.
Development Engineering Conditions of Approval
15. All frontage and on site improvements shall be in conformance with the
2010 Clackamas County Roadway Standards.
16. The applicant shall maintain adequate intersection sight distance at the intersection of the
driveway approach with SE 302nd Lane. In addition, no plantings at maturity, retaining
walls, embankments, fences, signs, structures, parked vehicles, or any other objects shall be
allowed to obstruct minimum required sight distances. Minimum intersection sight distance
shall be 205 feet both northerly and southerly, along SE 302nd Lane, measured 14.5 feet
back from the edge of the travel lane at the intersection ofthe site driveway approach with
SE 302nd Lane.
17. The applicant shall design and construct one on site turnaround, near the lattice tower lease
area, consistent with Roadway Standards drawing C350, or an alternative design approved by
both the Fire District and Engineering staff.
18. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall verify existing access
easements, and obtain new easements as necessary to provide a minimum
20-foot wide easement from SE 302nd Lane to the lease area, for ingress, egress, and
utilities, except where the easement is required to be wider to accommodate turnouts, radii,
the turnaround, etc.
Staff Report - File No. ZOlOl-l1-C / ZOl02-11~D
Page 6 of 22
1.
(~'
q:>O ~
J A
.tt\JV
19. The appljcant shall design and construct the private road/driveway, between SE 302nd Lane \ I
and the lease area, to standards contained in the Clackamas County Roadway Standards. The \v ~
private road/driveway shall meet the following standards:
a) The minimum width for the driving surface shall be 12 feet and shall be centered in a 20-
foot wide clear zone. Wherever the private road is paved, minimum two-foot wide
compacted gravel shoulders shall be provided. Wherever the private road is surfaced
with gravel, minimum four foot wide compacted earthen shoulders shall be provided.
b) The private road shall be constructed in accordance with Roadway Standards drawing
RIOO, with a minimum of 9 inches of 3/4" minus crushed, graded and compacted rock on
a compacted base and sub grade, over geotextile fabric, and shall be able to support a
75,OOO-pound fire apparatus. Wherever the private road is to be paved, the
aforementioned gravel section shall also require a three inch thick asphalt pavement
section over the gravel, placed in two one and
one-half inch lifts. Any sections of the private road that exceed 15 percent slope shall be
paved. For the gravel portion qfthe existing access road, pull out areas shall be identified
and improved as necessary to meet the minimum standards provided in Road Standards
Drawing C350. The onsite parking space and turnaround area shall provide the same
structural section as the private road.
c) V/ritten verification must be received from the local Fire District that the private road will
support a 75,000-poundfire apparatus, that road grades and surfacing materials are
acceptable, that a sufficient turnaround exists or will be constructed, that comer radii are
acceptable, and that vertical (13.5 feet) and horizontal (20 feet) clearances are acceptable.
Attention must be given to weight limits of culverts. All culverts shall be cleaned and
maintained in a clean condition. The applicant shall obtain written approval of the road
construction plans from the local Fire District prior to issuance of a Development Permit.
d) Positive drainage must be provided for surface water to an acceptable outfall. Erosion
control measures shall be installed and maintained throughout the construction process.
(2DO section.l008)
e) Construction or reconstruction of the private road/driveway requires plans prepared and
stamped by an Engineer registered in the State of Oregon and a Development Permit. To
obtain a permit the applicant shall submit detailed construction plans to Deana Mulder,
who works inthe County's Engineering section. The applicant shall also provide a .
Performance Guarantee equal to 100% of the estimated cost of construction plus a 25%
contingency and pay an Inspection Fee.
Staff Report -File No. lO101-11-C I lOl02-11-D
Page 7 of 22
SECTION :3 - FINDINGS
This application is subject to Clackamas County Zoning and Development Ordinance (ZDO)
Section(s) 1203, 835,309, 1007, 1009, 1022 and 1102. The Clackamas County Land Use and
Zoning Staffhas reviewed this Section of the ZDO in conjunction with the home occupation
proposal and makes the following findings and conclusions:
ZDO SUBSECTION 1203
A. Section 1203.01A: The use must be listed as a Conditional Use in the underlying zoning
district.
The subjectproperty is zoned Rural Residential Farm Forest - 5 acre (RRFF-5). Section 309
of the ZDO controls land uses in the underlying RRFF-5 zoning district. Section 309.06.A
of the ZDO lists the conditional uses allowed in the RRFF-5 zoning district. Section
309.06.A (11) specifically lists "Wireless telecommunication facilities listed in Subsection
835.06(A), subject to Section 835;"
Section 835.03H defines a Wireless Telecommunication Facility as "An unmanned facility
for the transmission of radio frequency (RF) signals, consisting of an equipment shelter,
cabinet or other enclosed structure containing electronic equipment, a support structure,
antennas or other transmission and reception devices. "
The City ofSaridy proposes to construct an unmanned wireless facility consisting of a 120-
foot tall lattice tower. Antennas for the City of Sandy rural broadband service will be placed
on the top of the tower. There will be no ground-mounted equipment for the proposed
facility; instead small utility cabinets will be mounted on the actual tower. The proposed use
meets the definition of a Wireless Telecommunication Facility and is listed as conditional
use in the underlying zone. This criterion is met.
B. Section 1203.OlB: The characteristics of the site must be suitablefor the proposed use
considering size, shape, location, topography, existence of improvements and natural
features..
Size and Shape: The subject property consists of six tax lots which total approximately 22
acres. The communications facility will be situated on two of the tax lots: the actualtower
will be located on tax lot 1910, while the access driveway will traverse a portion of tax lot
1901 as well as part oftax lot 1910. The entire 22 acre site is essentially a rectangular
shaped parcel with a "panhandle" in the southeast comer. The two tax lots where is the
communications facility will be . located is also rectangular in shape. The lattice tower will
be located on a 12' x 12' concrete foundation pad. A small utility cabinet will be mounted
on the tower; no equipment shelter will be located on the site. The property is of adequate
size to accommodate the lease area for the facility as well as parking for the occasional
maintenance vehicle. The large size ofthe property would also allow the monopole to be set
Staff Report - File No. Z0101-11-C / Z0102-11-D
Page 8 of 22
back a distance not less than its height from all property lines. However, the applicant has
reqm::sted an adjustment to the setback standard and has proposed a setback of 50 feet from
the east property line. A discussion of the setback adjustment is on pages 17 and 18 of this
report. The size and shape of the subject property are suitable to accommodate the siting of
the proposed tower facility.
Topography: The subject property is northwest of the City of Sandy and sits on a hilltop
which is several hundred feet above sea level. According to the contour information
provided on the submitted site plan, the area for the lattice tower slopes gradually uphill to
the north. Although sloped, the site for the telecommunications facility is not excessively
steep and is suitable to accommodate construction and placement of the tower.
Location: . This facility is intended to improve wireless internet service to the surrounding
rural community. The City has. utilized a roof-mounted antenna on an adjacent parcel since
2003.. ill order to improve broadband service, a taller site is needed. The applicant has
submitted a propagation study demonstrating the need for the tower to provide coverage in
this area. This location is suitable for the proposed wireless telecommunication facility.
Improvements: The tower will be located in the northeast comer of the property. Existing
improvements ofthe subject property include a single family house and a shop building. A
significant portion ofthe site is comprised of cedar and fir trees. As shown on the submitted
drawings, several trees will need to be removed in order to construct the facility. The
proposed tower will not require the removal or modification of any existing improvements
on the property. In order to access the telecommunication facility, the existing driveway will
be extended to the tower site. The proposed site will not interfere with any of the existing
improvements.
Natural Features: According to the Department of Geology and Mineral illdustries
(DOGAMI) maps, the subject property does not contain any regulated geologic hazards.
According to the FEMA Floodplain maps, the subject property is not located within a
designated floodplain.
The subject property does not contain any regulated wetlands identified on the National
Wetland illventory (NWI).
There are no streams regulated under the River and Stream Conservation Area Ordinance
(Section 704) located on the subject property.
Summary:. The size, shape, topography and loeational characteristios of the subjectproperty
are suitable to accommodate the proposed use. The proposed use will not impact the
function of the existing improvements on the property. There are no natural features located
Staff Report - File No. Z0101-11-( / Z0102-11-0
Page 9 of 22
on the subjectproperty or adjacent and nearby properties which would be impacted by the
proposed use. This criterion is met.
C. Section J203.01C: The development must be consistent with Section 1022 of the ZDO and
the safety of the transportation system must be adequate to serve the proposed
development.
Section 1022 of the ZDO outlines the Concurrency Standards for sanitary sewer, surface
water management, water service and minimum standards for transportation facilities.
a. Section 1022.03: Sanitary Sewer Service: Approval of a development that requires
public sanitary sewer service shall be granted only if the applicant provides a
preliminary statement of feasibility from the sanitary sewage treatment service
provider and the collection system service provider. The statement shall verify that
sanitary sewer capacity in the wastewater treatment system and the sanitary sewage
collection system is available to serve the development or can be made available
through improvements completed by the developer or the system owner. The
statement shall be dated no more than one year prior to the date a complete land use
appUcation is filed and need not reserve sanitary sewer system capacity for the
development.
The subject property is not located within a public sanitary sewer district. The proposed
facility will be unmanned and will not require sanitary sewer service. This criterion is
not applicable.
b. Section 1022.04: Surface Water Management: Approval of a development shall be
granted only if the applicant provides a preliminary statement of feasibility from the
surf(we water management regulatory authority. The statement shall verify that
adequate surface water treatment and conveyance is available to serve the
development or can be made available through improvements completed by the
developer or the system owner. The statement shall be dated no more than on.e year
prior to the date a complete land use application is filed and need not reserve surface
water treatment and conveyance system capacity for the development.
The subject property is located outside all Surface Water Management Agencies of
Clackamas County. Therefore, the Clackamas County Engineering Division is required
to review the project and submit the Statement of Feasibility. The Statement of
Feasibility is dated March 21, 2011. The Engineering Division states that the surface
water impact will be minimal after construction and will not impact adjoining properties.
This criterion is met.
c. Section 1022.05; Water Service: Approval of a development that requires public water
service shall be granted only if the applicant provides a preliminary statement of
feasibility from the water system provider. The statement shall verify that water
service, including fir flows, is available in levels appropriate for the development. and
that adequate water system capacity is available in source, supply, treatment
Staff Report - File No. Z0101-11-C / Z0102-11-D
, Page 10 of 22
transmission, storage and distribution. Alternatively, the statement shall verify that
such levels and capacity can be made available through improvements completed by
the developer of the system owner. The statement shall be dated no more that one
year prior to the date a complete land use application is filed and need not reserve
water system capacity for the development.
The proposed facility will be unmanned and not require water service. This criterion is
not applicable.
d. Section 1022.07; Transportation Facilities: Section 1022.07A states "Approvalofa
development shall be granted only iftranspf!rtation facilities are adequate or will be
made adequate in a timely manner. "Adequate" as defined in Sectionl022.07B
means a Level-of-Service (LOS) D, except in certain areas of the County identified
in Section 1022.07B (5-9).
The proposed use is considered an unmanned utility facility. These facilities are
exempt from Section 1022.07.A. This criterion is not applicable.
The second portion of Subsection 1203.01.C states that the safety ofthe transportation
system must be adequate to serve the proposed development. The primary transportation
safety concern for this type of development is the provision of adequate intersection sight
distance for the access road serving the subject site. The Development Engineering staff
visited the site and measured the intersection sight distance at the intersection of the access
driveway/private road and SE 302nd Lane. As indicated in the April 26, 2011 memorandum
from Kenneth Kent of the Engineering Division, the existing intersection of the private
road/driveway with SE 302nd Lane exceeds the minimum sight distance requirements.
Summary: This proposal complies with the applicable requirements of Section 1022 and the
safety of the transportation system is adequate to serve the proposed development. This
condition is met.
D. Section 1203.01D; The proposed use will not alter the character of the surrounding area
in a manner which substantially limits, impairs, or precludes the use of surrounding
properties for the primary uses litited in the underlying zoning district.
The properties surrounding the subject site are zoned EFU: Exclusive Farm Use and RRFF-
5: Rural Residential Farm Forest - 5 Acre. The primary uses allowed in the EFU zoning
district are listed in Section 401.04 ofthe ZDO and primarily include, but are not limited to,
farm uses and forest uses. The primary uses allowed in RRFF-5 district are listed in Section
309.03 of the ZDO and include, but are not limited to, single family dwellings, farm uses
and propagation of forest products.
The proposed telecommunications facility is a passive use that does not emit odors,
vibrations or a significant amount of noise. The proposed use has not been shown to
Staff Report- File No. lO101-11-C / lO102-11-D
Page 11 of 22
preclude farm or forest activity from occurring on nearby lands. The RF/electromagnetic
emissions generated by this facility are regulated by federal law. At the levels proposed,
there is not a basis for concluding that such fields will affect human health.. Further, federal
law prohibits the county from making potential health effects a criterion for approval.
Although the tower will be visible from off-site views, staff fmds that the tower will not
substantially impact the views or visual character of this area because landscaping will be
required at the base ofthe tower and the grey galvanized steel color of the tower will not
result in a significant visual impact.
In summary, planning stafffinds this use will not substantially limit, impair or preclude the
use of surrounding properties for the primary uses identified in the underlying zoning
district fix the following reasons:
1. This is a passive unmanned facility.
2. The use will not require the use of any public water, storm drainage or sewer system.
3. The use will not generate significant traffic. Once constructed, traffic will be limited
to maintenance visits once a month.
4. The facility will not limit farming or forest activity in the surrounding area.
S. If approved, staff recommends that the bottom portion of the tower be visually
screened by landscaping.
6. The proposed use will not generate any odors, vibration or require the use of
hazardous wastes.
T.his criterion is met.
E. The fifth criterion requires the proposal satisfy the goals and policies of the
Comprehensive Plan that apply to the proposed use.
Stafffincls the following specific policies ofthe Comprehensive Plan (CP) to be
applicable to the proposed telecommunication facility: Policy 20 ofthe Roadways
Section of the Transportation Element and Policy 20 of the Public Facilities Section of
the Public Facilities and Service Element of the CPo
Policy 20.0 of the Transportation Element of the CP requires an assessment of anticipated
off-site traffic impacts caused by new developments and subdivisions. Following
construction of the tower, the proposed use will not generate any significant traffic.
Vehic1e trips will be limited to occasional maintenance visits. This will not result in any
measurable off-site traffic impacts.
Policy 20.0 of the Public Facilities Section ofthe Public Facilities and Service Element of
the CP requires submission of storm drainage, water quality and eros~on control plans
prior to approval of all new development and implementation of such plans. Erosion
control and storm water management in this area is governed byClackamas County
Staff Report - File No. 20101-11-C / ZOl02-11-D
Page 12 of 22
Engineering Division. The applicant has submitted a Preliminary Statement of
Feasibility from the Clackamas County Engineering Division.
Staffhas not identified any additional goals or policies of the Clackamas County
Comprehensive Plan that apply to the proposed use. This proposal is consistent with
, Policy 20.0 of the Public Facilities Section and Policy 20.0 ofthe Transportation Section
of the Plan. This criterion is met.
--.--------...-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ZDO SUBSECTION 835
A. Secliion 835.06: Conditional Uses. The following uses may be approved by the Hearings
Officer when the applicant demonstrates compliance with Subsections 835.07,835.08 and
835.09 and Sections of 1000 and 1203:
1. Wireless Telecommunication Facilities proposed in the Village Community Service
District or on a site with a CP designation of Residential, Rural Center, Rural or
Forest; and
The subject property is located on a site designated Rural on the Comprehensive Plan.
. Therefore, this application can be approved by the Hearings Officer, providing the applicant
demonstrates compliance with Subsections 835.07, 835.08, and 835.09 and Sections 1000
and 1203. The criteria in Section 1203 have been addressed above. Based on those
findings, this application can satisfy the criteria in Section 1203 if an adjustment is granted
pursuant to Subsection 835.11. The applicable standards and criteria in Section 1000 and
835.07,835.08, and 835.09 are addressed below.
2. Subsection 835.06A(2): Wireless Telecommunication Facilities located in an
h.xclusive Farm Use (EFU) District that include a tower over 200feet in height.
Thesubject property isnot located within anEFU zoning district. This standard is not
applicable.
B. Section 835.06B: The Hearings Officer may require the applicant to provide information
about possible alternate locations on the tract. The Hearings Officer may require
placement of the tower in an alternate location on the tract if the Hearings Officer finds
that the alternate location would result in greater compliance.with the criteria in Section
1203 than the proposed site. In order to avoid relocating the proposedfacility, the
applicant must demonstrate that the necessary service cannot reasonably be provided from
the alternate location.
The applicant has not provided evidence that alternative locations on the subject property
were considered. The Hearings Officer may require the applicant to address the above
standard. This standard can be met.
Staff Report - File No. l0101-11-C / l0102-11-D
\
Page 13 of 22
Section 835.07; Collocation. No new tower will be permitted under the provisions of
Subsections 835.05A(1) or 835.06 unless the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the
Planning Director or Hearings Officer, as applicable, that no existing tower or support
structure can accommodate the applicant's proposed antenna. All proposals for new Wireless
Telecommunication Facilities must be accompanied by a statement from a qualified person, as
determinetr by the Planning Director or Hearings Officer, that the necessary service cannot be
provided by collocation for one or more of the following reasons:
1. No existing towers or support structures, or approved but not yet constructed towers or
support structures, are located within the geographic area required to meet the applicant's
engineering requirements;
2. Existing towers or support structures are not of sufficient height to meet the applicant's
engineering requirements;
. 3. Existing towers or support structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support
the applicant's proposed antenna and related equipment;
4. The applicant's proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference with the
antenna on the existing tower or support structure or the existing antenna would cause
interference with the applicant's proposed antenna; or
5. The applicant demonstrates that there are other limiting factors that render ex(sting tOWers
and support structures unsuitable. .
The applicant has conducted 'a search of the surrounding area for existing towers that may be
able to accommodate the proposed broadband facility. The existing tower nearest the proposed
site is an American Tower facility located approximately 1.18 miles from the subject property.
Compliance with this subsection depends on the applicant providing substantial evidence that no
exiting towers or other support structures can accommodate the City of Sandy antennas for one
or more of the reasons listed in Subsection 835.07 of the Zoning and Development Ordinance.
In the Alternatives Analysis from the City of Sandy Network Engineer, the applicant disqualifies
the American Tower facility for insufficient height reasons (Item #2 under Subsection 835.07).
The letter from the City of Sandy Engineer indicates that the existing American Tower facility is
at a ground elevation of 61 0 feet with the top of the tower at 775 feet. The top of the proposed
broadband tower is at an elevation of approximately 900 feet. Therefore, the proposed site is 125
feethigher than the American Tower facility. A coverage analysis to determine the feasibility of
the American Tower site was performed. The applicant submitted propagation maps showing
coverage provided by the existing American Tower site and coverage via the proposed facility on
SE 302nd Lane. The coverage maps indicate that collocation on the American Tower facility
would significantly compromise coverage to the surrounding rural areas. Stafffinds that the
app Ii c ant has provided information that no existing towers or support structures are present
within the geographic area required to meet the applicant's engineering requirements. Therefore,
co-location is not possible. This criterion is met.
C. Section 835.08; Conditional Standards
Staff Report -!File No.ilO101-11-C I ZOl02-11-D
Page 14 of 22
1. Section 835.08A: All wireless telecommunication towers proposedfor location within
the Portland metropolitan area urban growth boundary shall be of monopole type
construction.
The subject property is not within the Portland metropolitan urban growth boundary.
This criterion is not applicable.
2. Section 835.08B: AI/new wireless telecommunication towers shall be designed and
built to accommodate collocation or additional loading. For the purposes of this
provision, this means that the tower shall be designed specifically to accommodate no
less than the following equipment, in addition to the applicant's proposed equipment;
ll. Twelve antennas with a jloatplate wind-loading of not less thanfour square feet
per antenna;
b. A standard mounting structure, stand off arms, platform or other similar structure
designed to hold the antennas;
c. Cable ports at the base and antenna levels of the tower; and
d. Sufficient room within or on the tower for 12 runs of7/8" coaxial cablefrom the
base of the tower to the antennas.
The tower proposed by the applicant is a 120 foot lattice tower as shown on the
submitted drawings. The applicant has not specified the loading capacity of the
tower. Based on the submitted information, it appears that small microwave
antennas as well as panel style antennas will be placed on the tower. The applicant
states that the tower will accommodate collocation of antennas similar to the
wireless internet antennas that the City of Sandy will mount on the proposed tower.
Future equipment for collocation may include antennas for public safety such as fire
or sheriff communications. The applicant argues that the above collocation
requirements are designed for cellular phone carriers such as AT&T and Verizon
and because the City of Sandy is not a conventional cellular phone carrier the
loading capacity specified above does not apply to the proposed broadband tower.
Regardless of the type of structure, the proposed development is, by definition, a
wireless telecommunication facility and subject to Subsection 835.08B. Therefore,
staff finds that the proposed telecommunications tower should be designed and
engineered to accommodate the additional loading required by this subsection.
Staff does not have the discretion to modify or amend the additional loading
requirement and the applicant has not provided evidence to justify an adjustment to
this standard. If the Hearings Officer approves this application, staff recommends a
condition of approval requiring that the facility be designed and engineered to
accommodate the equipment required by this subsection. This criterion can be
met.
3. Section 835.08C: Wireless telecommunication towers shall be painted or coated in a
manner that blends with the surrounding area. The finished coloring shall result in a
non-rejlective surface that makes the tower as visually unobtrusive as possible, unless state
Staff Report -File No. ZOlOl-l1-C / Z0102-11-D
Page 15 of 22
or federal regulations require different colors. Colors will be determined through the
Design Review process.
The applicant does not propose to paint the 120 foot tower. Instead the applicant proposes to
leave the tower in its natural galvanized steel color. Staff agrees that an unpainted gray steel
color is typically the most visually unobtrusive color and blends well with the surrounding
environment. Staff does not recommend painting the proposed tower. This criterion can be
met.
4. Section 835.08D: Equipment shelters may be painted or coated with a finish that best suits
the operational needs of the facility, including the ability to reflect heat and to resist
accumulations of dirt. Colors will be determined through the Design Review process. If,
through the Design Review process, it is determined that there is a conflict between
acceptable colors and the operational needs of the facility, Design Review may require the
use of architectural screen panels.
No equipment shelter is proposed for this telecommunications facility. A small utility
_cabinet will be mounted on the tower. ;:rhis criterion is not applicable.
5. Section 835.08E: No lighting shall be permitted on a tower, except as required by state or
federal regulations. If required, the light shall be shielded or deflected from the ground
and otherproperties, to the extent practicable.
The applicant has not proposed to establish any lighting on the tower. The Oregon
Department of Aviation CODA) was sent notice of the proposed tower. As of the date of this
staff report, staffhas not received any comments from ODA. Ifthis application is approved
by the Hearings Officer, a condition of approval should be placed on the permit prohibiting
tower lighting unless required by the Oregon Department of Aviation or federal regulators.
This criterion can be met.
6. Section 835. 08F: The wireless telecommunication facility shall be located within an area
that is enclosed on all sides. The enclosure must be at least six feet tall and sight
obscuring..
The submitted narrative indicates that the proposed tower will not be fenced due to its remote
location. The site plans, however, show a new fence surrounding the tower. The above
subsection requires a wireless communication facility to be located within a fenced enclosure
that is at least six feet talland sight obscuring. Staff recommends that the Hearings Officer
include a condition of approval requiring a fenced enclosure around the facility. This
criterion (~an be met.
7. Section 835.08G: Landscaping shall be placed outside of the enclosed area and shall
consist of the following;
a. A combination of landscaping materials that includes ground cover, shrubs and trees
that are reflective of the natural surrounding vegetation in the are, as determined
through the Design Review process;
Staff Report -File No. ZOlOl-l1-C / Z0102-11-D
Page 16 of 22
b. Existing landscaping/vegetation may be used to satisfY the above requirements;
c. Through the Design Review process, applications shall be reviewed for consistency
with Subsection 1009.10; and
d. In cases where a portion of the wireless telecommunication facility is screened from
points off-site by a building that is at least eight feet tall, the landscaping requirements
of this subsection will not be required for the screened area.
The applicant argues that existing vegetation will screen the base of the tower from off-
site views. Therefore, no additional landscaping or screening is proposed. Staff
reeeived comments from owner of the property located directly to the east of the subject
site. The residence on this property (tax lot 1909) is located approximately 60 feet from
the proposed tower site. The owner ofthe property is concerned about tower visibility
and would like to see installation of landscaping to camouflage the base of the tower.
Staff agrees. that existing vegetation is not sufficient to screen the base of the tower and
that landscaping should be installed between the tower and the property to the east.
Tl:Jlere is existing vegetation in other directions that should be sufficient to screen the
tower from the north, south and west. To provide an adequate buffer and screen the base
ofthe tower, staff recommends the following landscaping along the east side of the site:
arbor vitae trees spaced at 3 foot on center and will be a minimum of 4 foot tall at
planting. If the Hearings Officer approval this application, staff recommends a condition
be included requiring landscaping on the east side of the site. With condition of
approval, staff finds that this standard can be met. This criterion can be met.
8. Section 835.08H: Applications reviewed under Subsections 835.05(A)(1) and (3) and
835.06 are subject to Section 1102 (Design Review).
This application is being reviewed under Subsection 835.06. Design review is included in
this application. This criterion can be met.
9. Section 835.08/: Equipment shelters shall be entirely enclosed. Equipment shelter
exterior materials shall be those approved through the Design Review process.
The City of Sandy has not proposed to install an equipment shelter at this location. This
criterion is not applicable.
10. Section 835.08J: Noise generated by the wireless telecommunication facility shall not
exceed the levels established by the State of Oregon, Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ). If properties adjacent to the property upon which the wireless
telecommunication facility is proposed have a lower DEQ standard than the proposed site,
the lower standard shall be applicable.
The noise generated by the proposed facility is not expected to exceed the limits established
by the State of Oregon, Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). A condition of
approval requiring compliance with DEQ standards shall be placed on the permit. This
criterion is met.
Staff Report - File No. l0101-1l-C / l0102-11-D
Page 17 of 22
11. Section 835.08K: Maintenance of the lease area is the responsibility of the
owner/operator of the wireless telecommunication facility. The owner operator shall
prevent the facility from entering into a state of disrepair due to negligence, vandalism,
natural hazard, or any other source. This requirement places the responsibility for
maintenance on the owner/operator and is, otherwise, consistent with the requirement of
Subsection 1102.09.
This conditional standard is not an approval criterion, and is only intended to identify
maintenance responsibilities for the facility. A condition of approval is warranted to that
effect.
D. Section 835.09; Dimensional Standards. Minimum tower separation distance and
minimum setback requirements. Either Section 835.09A, B or C is applicable depending
on the location of the subject property and the underlying Zoning and/or Comprehensive
Plan designation. The subject property is located within an area with a Forest
Comprehensive Plan designation. Therefore, Section 835.09(A) and (B) are not
applicable. Section 835.09(C) is applicable.
1. Section 835.09(C): Lands within a Comprehensive Plan designation of Rural or
Agriculture:
a. Section 835.09C (1): Wireless telecommunication tower maximum height: 150 feet.
A 120-foot tower is being proposed. This standard is met.
b. Sectlon 835.09C (2): Minimum tower separation: 2000 feet.
The applicant has submitted an inventory of existing towers in the vicinity of the proposed site,
There are no towers within 2000 feet of the proposed facility. This standard is met.
c. Section 835.09B(3): Setbacks: Must satisfy setbacks of the zone. Additionally, the
wirelesS' telecommunication tower shall be set back a distance not less than its height from
all property lines.
The 120-foot City of Sandy broadband tower is proposed to be located 420 feet from the north
property line; 230 feet from the south property line; at least 200 feet from the west property line
and 50 feet JIT-om the east property line. The lattice structure will satisfy the setbacks of the
RRFF-5 zone. However, because of the placement near the east property line, the applicant has
requested an adjustment to the setback standard requiring the tower to be setback a distance not
less thanits height from all property lines. See the following section for a discussion ofthe
setback adjustment. This standard can be met.
Section 835.11A(1): Adjustments to the standards of this section may be approved by the
Hearings Officer. The Hearings Officer may grant an adjustment when a gap in the
applicant's service exists and that gap can only be alleviated through the adjustment of one or
Staff Report - File No. Z0101-11~C / Z0102-11-D
Page 18 of 22
more of the standards of this section. If an adjustment is to be approved, the applicant must
demonstrate the following:
a. A gap in coverage or capacity exists in the wireless telecommunication provider's
service network that results in network users being regularly unable to connect with the
provider's network, or maintain connection;
b. The proposedfacility will fill the existing service gap. The gap would be filled if the
proposedfacility would substantially reduce the frequency with which uses of the network are
unable to connect, or maintain connection, with the provider's network; and
c. The gap cannot be filled through collocation on existing facilities, or establishment
of facilities that are consistent with the standards of this section on properties other than the
proposed site or on the proposed site in a manner which does not require an adjustment under
this subsection.
The applicant has requested an adjustment to the following standard: the wireless
telecommunication tower shall be setback a distance not lessthan its height from all property
lines. (Section 835.09.C.3). As proposed, the 120 foot lattice structure would be setback from
the north, south and west property lines over 120 feet. However, the setback distance from the
east property is only 50 feet. Therefore, an adjustment to the required 1: 1 setback is requested
for the east property line. As justification for the property line setback adjustment, the applicant
notes that maintaining a 120 foot setback to the east would require clear-cutting a significant
portion ofthe forest that covers the hill. In addition, the applicant argues that a 120-foot setback
would cause the crest of the existing hill to block wireless internet signals.
The Hearings Officer may grant an adjustment to Section 835 standards under either of two
circumstances: 1) a gap in service can only be alleviated through an adjustment; or 2) the
proposed adjustment would utilize existing site characteristics to minimize potential impacts on
surrounding properties. In either circumstance, staff does not find that the applicant has shown
that the adjustment to the 1: 1 setback standard is warranted. In terms of a coverage gap, the only
justification provided is a statement that the "crest of the hill itself would block wireless internet
signals." No evidence to support this claim has been submitted by the applicant. The applicant
has not provided propagation maps or other evidence which would indicate that a gap in service
is eliminated through the requested adjustment. In order to grant the requested adjustment under
Section 835.11.A.l the applicant must demonstrate that if the proposed tower was placed at least
120 feet from all the property lines a gap in coverage or capacity would exist. Staff finds that it
is not clear whether the desired coverage can be achieved from a location on the subject property
that meets the 1: 1 setback standard.
The second circumstance for an adjustment has to do with impacts on surrounding properties.
Subsection 835.11.A.2 states the following: "Applicants for an adjustment under this provision
must demonstrate that the adjustment will result in a lower level of impact on surrounding
Staff Report.- File No. ZOlOl-l1-C / Z0102-11-D
Page 19 of 22
properties." The requested adjustment would reduce the yard setback from the east property line
from 120 feet to 50 feet. The single family residence on the property adjacent to the subject
parcel would only be 60 feet from the proposed facility if the adjustment was granted. Staff does
not consider a distance of 60 feet from the residence as opposed to 130 feet to have a lower
impact on the adjacentproperty. The applicant states that trees would need to be removed in
order to meet the 120 foot setback. However, itis not clear how many trees would be impacted
or if compliance with the 1: 1 setback standard would increase visual impacts Qr lower the impact
on surrounding properties. Based on the evidence, staff finds that the adjustment would increase
the impact on adjacent properties due to the proximity to the adjacent residence.
For the reasons discussed above, staff does not support the request to adjust the 1: 1 setback
standard and recommends to the Hearings Officer that the tower be sited at least 120 feet from
all property lines.
--- - ~.- -- --- -_. - ---- --- --- --.- - - -- - -- ---- -- - - ----- ---------- - -- ---- --- - ------- --- ---- -- -- ---- -- - --------- --- ---
OTHER APPLICABLE STANDARDS
A. Section 309.08 and 309.09 of the ZDO outlines the Dimensional and Development
Standards in the RRFF-5 zoning district.
The dimensional standards that apply to the proposed development are the yard setback
standards. As previously discussed, the wireless facility satisfies the setback standards of the
underlying zone. There. is no height limit in the RRFF-5 zoning district. Therefore, the proposed
wireless facility meets the dimensional standards of the RRFF-5 zoning district. Subsection
309.09: Development Standards states that development shall be subject to the applicable
provisions of Sections 1000 and 1100. The sections which are relevant to this proposal are
reviewed below. No other development standards in Section 309 ofthe ZDO are applicable to
this application.
B. Section 1007 outlines the Parking, Circulation and Loading Requirements.
. 1. Section 1007.03 requires right-ol-way dedications and improvements for all new
developments as deemed necessary ~y the Department of Transportation and Development.
The Clackamas County Engineering Division has not recommended the dedication of any
additional right-of-way on the affected road frontages.
2. Section 1007.04 A requires the location of accesses to existing and new developments be
planned, coordinated and controlled by the Department of Transportation and
Development. '
Access to the tower site is from a private road/driveway off of SE 302nd Lane. The private
access road measures approximately 3,000 feet in length and is paved for the first 1,296 feet.
Staff I~eport"- File No. ZOlOl-l1-C / Z0102-11-D
Page 20 of 22
The remaining 1,705 feet of roadway is a l2-foot wide gravel surface. To access the lease area,
the applicant proposes to extend the existing gravel drive. The Department of Transportation
and Development, Development Engineering staff has reviewed the access to the
telecommunications facility. In order to comply with the Clackamas County Roadway
Standards, Engineering staffhas recommended a number of conditions relating to site access.
The suggested conditions of approval are listed in Section 2 of this staff report. This criterion
can be met
3. Section 1007.07 outlines the minimum parking standards for new developments.
Table 2 in Section 1007.07 outlines the minimum parking standards for certain land uses. A
telecommunication facility is not specifically identified in the table. In the absence of the use
being specifically listed, Section 1007.07(A)(15) provides for "off-street parking requirements
for types of uses and structures not specifically listed in this Ordinance shall be determined by
the Planning Director". Given the nature ofthe use, one parking space is adequate to
accommodate the occasional maintenance vehicles for the telecommunication facility. Staff
finds that there is adequate space on the subject property to accommodate vehicles associated
with the proposed use.
4. Section 1007. 07E outlines the Bicycle Parking Standards.
These standards are not applicable to a Wireless Telecommunication Facility.
5. Section 1007.08 outlines the Off-street Loading Regulations.
These standards are not applicable to a Wireless Telecommunication Facility as no off-street
loading or unloading will be required. The standards of Section 1007 can be met.
C. Section 1008 outlines the requirementsfor Storm Drainage and Erosion Control.
The Preliminary Statement of Feasibility for storm drainage signed by the Engineering Division
indicated that it is feasible to accommodate storm drainage from this facility. Thestandards of
Section 1008 can be met.
D. Section 1009 outlines the requirements of Landscaping.
There is no minimum landscaping requirement in the RRFF-5 zoning district. As previously
discussed, staff recommends a condition of approval requiring fencing around the entire facility
and landscaping, at a minimum, on the east side of the site.
The standards of Section 1009 are met.
Staff Report -- File No. Z0101-11-C / Z0102-1l-D
Page 21 of 22
SUMIVIARY: The Land Use and Zoning Staff finds that the applicant has submitted information
which demonstrates that the proposed wireless broadband facility can conform to the approval
standards of the Zoning and Development Ordinance as outlined in Section 3 of this report. The
imposition of Conditions of Approval found in Section 2 will assure compliance with the Code.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the findings and conclusions herein, staff recommends that
file no. ZOlOI-II-C / ZOI02-II-D be APPROVED subject to the conditions of approval found
in Section 2.
Staff Report - Fiile No. Z0101-11-( I Z0102-11-0
Page 22 of 22
)<-
~,
, ?<!. 'S.s~,
c..l
<!
o
:lI:'!
:N
;g "
>.... <(
0 0 ""'"
0 0 r-
C\J 0 C)
...,
U
N <t
0 o;;t on
r0 tli l.D
en to
- ~
~;I'
t'. .;,
Ii ;'
~ '
~
~
<(
.. '0
00,
O.
r0::;?
,Q
MI
WJ:l
'".,...
ri:!ll
~t
III .\4 ,j
~'
.~
ti(
~ "
t; 0
~O
f'-
<>
~ <(
'l!~
f:
u
f'- g".,
o ar-
C]) to:;;
w
i); ..
'~@
~ . 2" :7p.
~
I!N, i .o.t.'-e
I.; ~lt
,~
IJI'
~I G'SU/
1'\\, "
.~
f '"
!I-
tJ~
"
I.
j:";\:~
'.' .~'
, iff',"'",. _,0'>
. _ !~'"'d!~'~~W. ,_ . c:r:t:i.
, ,'Ii
~I:~~
~'~
oJ
..
''''-
\:l -.
tL,
,n' ,', .
""', 'u
, <:t'
..:",0-1'
00
'<.0 r---: "
""z"?';p
1:\
~
~
. ,:
'/ .
u
<(
No
"00
t(>t-.:
O' Z'?-r
.; :;:1 ~.,
';,.,
,...r!:'.__.,
. ....,.~.
<-~'<,;,'T';~,,;.'.;':".'
~.
"
~(!f"
,~..:
~':,
~,
~.
.....
Q:
~
/~';'
w"
~
ci/
<t'
o
'~.i
. ." "~'?~ '
~.. Z:~ M,?~'ON
'. ;"",'.<<-i:i;
Qo
~
.-ll
. ",,:,":;;";';'~';"';""'~::~:~':t~~;~,~;~~:;;;,,,,,,,
.~_J;:S ~~~If: .
, ".,u~
...,'~
'''!
Ii;
"(.'~'~'~'~"M'_"""~"''''''''_'~'''' -;;;:;;i='-"'-~':~
<(
o
<t;
m'..."
S' (.
.J <~
41'
]1.-
'."',,'
,"""
,. .
.r/!
"oJ;
v
\;
u
..... <;1;;;
eO
$0.
oJAN
~)
.~
". ~.,~.t~\\.*
fi0' Q)fG '" ,
~r Ki:if) ~
~
~ !~" =--=~;=~';"'.~"~
~~ ~ '7;::":=."~:~~~~"",":';"i,:.r;:M~';:;':''-~"''~~'':-.
U
00;:(
co
00'1
1'--"
.0
(\J.~
,L O. t. 'Z s> /VI ,,:?S,
U)
~
>-<
E3
~~
(')t"""
Ztd
:=3~
-<~
~t;
?;~
t;
>-:l
o
~
~
--~"3_
~-~'-'-'~~,~
CLACKAMAS
COUNTY
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT OF FEASIBILITY
To be completed by the applicant:
Applicant's Name: City of Sandy
Property Legal Description: T _1_ S, R _ 4E_, Section _30_, Tax Lot(s) _01901
Site Address: 9765 SE 302nd Lane, Boring OR
Project Engineer: N/ A
Project Title/Description of Proposed Development: Antenna tower for broadband service to rural county residence provided by
City of Sandy in partnership with Clackamas County. Antenna mounted on 11'x 11' concrete base, located on the top of a
forested hill (residential property). _
To be completed by the service provider or surface water management authority:
Check all that apply:
o Sanitary sewer capacity in the wastewater treatment system and the sanitary sewage collection system is available to serve
the development or can be made available through improvements completed by the developer or the system owner.
~ Adequate surface water treatment and conveyance is available to serve the development or ca~ be made available through
improvements completed by the developer or the system owner,
o Water service is available in levels appropriate for the development, and adequate water system capacity is available in
source, supply, treatment, transmission, storage and distribution or such levels and capacity can be made available through
improvements completed by the developer or the system owner. This statement 0 applies 0 does not apply to fire flows. *
*Ifwater service is adequate with the exception of fire flows, the applicant shall submit a statement from the fire district
serving the subject property that states that an alternate method of fire protection, sUl;h as an on-site water source or a
sprinkler system, is acceptable.
o This statement is issued subject to conditions of approval set forth in the attached.
o Adequate 0 sanitary sewer service, 0 surface water management, 0 water service cannot be provided.
o Adequate access is available to serve this development or may be provided through improvements completed by the
developer, 0 Adequate access cannot be provided,
<:
:; ZI J (
Date
C)tJJ Co. /D(D
Name of Service Provider or Surface
Water Management Authority
Comuletilln of this statement does not reserve capacity for the develO'pment and does not alter an applicant's obHl!ation to
somply with the service Dl"Ovider's or surface water manal!'ement authority's ree:ulations. Completion of this statement
,goes not oblie:ate the service provider or surface water mariaeement authority to finance or construct improvements
necessary to nrovide adequate service for the uroposed development. ComDletion of this statement does not
guanmtt::e that land use aPllrovaI for the proposed development win be l!ranted.
9101 SE Sunnybrook Blvd., Clackamas, OR 97015; (503) 353-4400; (503) 353-4550
2 .
~=~."~[
" -:...::._~....:....~_..:.::-"....::::.~~",-,::c.", ..:.: _ ~.
Hoelscher,' Scott
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
merwayt@comcast.net
Monday, April 11 , 2011 9:33 AM
Hoelscher, Scott
File No: Z0101-11-C,Z0102-11-D
We respectfully request that this petition be denied for the following reasons:
1. The long term effects on people and animals living close to these towers is unknown.
2. We have a private roadway which the six families living here have paid to have paved.
This request would
would Irequire heavy equipment along with the people to construct and maintain the
structure to travel our
heavy
roadway causing more damage than already has been caused by Mr. Crawford bringing in
equipment this winter. The expense of this will become a hardship for all the
families living here.
3. Directly south of this hill is a much larger and taller hill that already has existing
towers on it> why not
construct the tower on a hill that has already been compromised?
4. Surely the City of Sandy can find a more suitable location.
We basically have an undisturbed hill full of wildlife that will be forever altered with such
a structure! Please can we not keep some of our hills free from towers? As previously
stated this is a very small hill in comparison with other options that are. already
compromised. We again> respectfully request that this application be denied.
Sincerely>
Lee and Meredith Wayt
9773SE 302nd Lane
Boring> OR 97009
NOTE: This message was trained as non-spam. If this is wrong> please correct the training as
soon as possible.
Spam < http://mhub.co.clackamas . or. us/ canit/b .php ?i=01EugXCKF&m=f5f7a7f9fae9&~;=:cs?;;'WiP -..5 ,_,
1 ~j_, _,;-"; J, ==~,~~=-~----
Hoelscher. Scott
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
kjfrancis@frontier.com
Wednesday, April 13, 2011 5:23 PM
Hoelscher, Scott
Internet tower
This email is in reference to file number 20101-11- c,20102-11-0
I am curr,~ntly in Oklahoma and will not be returning to Boring until mid-May and my mail is
being held at the post office. My neighbor, Meredith Wayt, contacted me saying that we
received a form regarding placement of an internet tower on the hill on which we live. She
also said that I needed to respond to the form by April 20. Since I will not be home and
have not seen the form I hope this email will suffice.
My husband and I, John ancl I(ay Francis, 9733 SE 302nd Lane, Boring, OR 97009 live on the hill
where Jim Crawford is evidently planning to put an internet tower. Along with our neighbors,
the Wayts and the Oldhams, we would prefer for this not to happen. We were approached years
ago about leasing part of our land for a cell phone tower and turned down the offer because
not only were w'e not interested, none of the neighbors wanted it there either (incluqing the
Crawfords).
If there is a form that I could fill out via email please send me the document and I will
respond.
Thank you for your help and consideration in this matter.
Kay Francis
BEGIN-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
NOTE: This message was trained as non-spam. If this is wrong, please correct the training as
soon as possible.
Teach Canlt
Spam:
Not spam:
Forget vote:
if this mail (TO 01EvcmWJu) is spam:
http://mhub.co.clackamas.or.us/canit/b.php?i=01EvcmWJu&m-7f92ec4f6dla&c-s
http://mhub.co.clackamas.or.us/canit/b.php?i=01EvcmWJu&m-7f92ec4f6d1a&c=n
http://mhub.co.clackamas.or.us/canit/b.php?i=01EvcmWJu&m-7f92ec4f6dla&c=f
ENO-ANTISPAM-VOTING-LINKS
.- .~-_.
1
3. Return your mailed comments to: Clackanias County Land Use and Zoning Division, 150
Beavercreek Rd, Oregon City, OR 97045
Comments:
1/115 Pt2'ofJ, /'(1:5 f;/PPCJX4 ;{ MIlL ;::;CDI# tJOU-IiJ7}f !2orf{) 04 PIZ'vl1r~A.f
IYJ(jltVrlja..JC 0 !,/)(UF_;, f/..f..J{ aooiC() rIlJJ.!-';= Fe t.J.);t:C 10)/ (36" u;J~LC{lp(rp>
All interested citizens are invited to attend the hearing. An agenda will be provided at the hearing.
Testimony and evidence should address those criteria identified above and any other criteria relevant to
the application. p;Ulure to raise an issue at the hearing, or by letter, or failure to provide sufficient
specificity to afford the Hearings Officer an opportunity to respond to an issue precludes appeal to the
Land Use Board of Appeals. based on that issue. The following procedural rules have been established to
allow an orderly hearing.
1. The length oftime given to individuals speaking for or against an item will be determined by the
Hearings Officer prior to the item being considered.
2. A spokesperson representing each side of an issue is encouraged.
3. Only specifically relevant testimony to the item being considered will be allowed.
4. Prior to the conclusion of the evidentiary hearing, any participant may request an opportunity to
present additional evidence, arguments, or testimony; the Hearings Officer will either continue
the hearing or leave the record open.
A staff report for the application will be available seven (7) days prior to the hearing. In the case of an
appeal no additional staff report will be prepared. The staff report, applicable criteria, application, and all
documents and evidence relied on by the applicant are available for inspection and may be purchased at
reasonable cost at the Clackamas County Land Use and Zoning Division, Development Services
Building; ISO Beavercreek Road; Oregon City, OR 97045, (503~742-4500). Direct all calls and written
correspondence to the Land Use and Zoning Division. Anyone may request, at the hearing, that the
record be kept open for at least seven (7) days.
To receive written notification of the Hearings Officer's decision, provide the Land Use and Zoning
Division with a written request indicating the application file number.
NOTICE TO MORTGAGEE, LIENHOLDER, VENDOR, OR SELLER: ORS CHAPTER 215
REQUIRES 'mAT IF YOU RECEIVE THIS NOTICE, IT MUST BE PROMPTLY FORWARDED TO
TIIE PURCHASER.
(;&N/,IA. 0 D. ~ 0 X
t:f78t; 3.C :}01. hAl.
;38(21 DC 9'7oo?
2
ZOlOl-ll-C, Z0102-11-D HO Notice.
Hoelscher, Scott
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
nikkyoldham [nikkyoldham63@yahoo.comJ
Sunday, April 24, 2011 9:.14 PM
Hoelscher, Scott
Z0101.11 C,Z01 02.11.0
File number Z01101-11-C, Z0102-11-D
Dear Scott,
This is in regards to the Telecommunication facility being placed on the Crawfords property. My
house is located just below the Crawfords, and will be within 50 feet of this steel structure. Scott
Lazenby came out to see me, and showed me where the structure was going to be place. Currently,
the antennas for the broadband service is located on the roof of my house. I understand, the need for
the antenna to be higher, and the need for the tower. My only concern is that it is only 50 feet from
our house and from our view. Scott reassured me that he would have something placed to
camouflage the base 10 feet up from the base. this would be greenery or something appealing. I do
want to make sure this happens. I want the tower to be as less visible as possible. This structure will
be behind the house, however, one of our play rooms face the tower, as well as if we look out from
our deck, drive up our driveway, etc. It is just going to be very close! When I originally agreed to this,
I did not think that all the trees would be going down that I now see marked. I'm not sure how
camouflaged this will be with all the trees gone, for I thought it would just blend in. This truly
concerns me. I didn't think I had much of a say, when they told me the tower was going in. Sure, I
would rather it never go in, if I had my voice in it all. We moved into the woods to stay away from
stuff like this, now to see a big tower 50 feet from the house, it hard to believe.
Another concern is our driveway. We share a gravel driveway with 4 homes. This driveway needs
maintenance, however, I never see the Crawfords help out with any extra repairs. They have had
logging trucks up and down, and the road is suffering. We can't afford to keep fixing it. Now to think
we are going to have even more equipment really worries me. If this goes through, I would want the
Crawfords, and the City of Sandy to pay for the repair of the road when finished, as well as
maintaining the road during the process.
Thank you for hearing my voice. Please keep me updated on this process.
Sincerely,
Nikky Oldham
Spam
Not spam
Forget previous vote
y
1
Memorandum
TO: Scott Hoelscher
FROM: Development Engineering
Kenneth Kent, Land Use Review Coordinator
DATE: April 26, 2011
RE: ZOlOl-11-C and Z0102-11-D, City of Sandy Rural Broadband
120-foot tall lattice antenna structure and private access road
TIS, R4E, Section 30, Tax Lot 1901
Development Review staff has visited the site and reviewed this application with the
attached drawings, dated November 2010. We have the following comments:
.Facts and Findings:
1. The applicant proposes installation of a 120- foot tall steel lattice tower to provide
broadband service to rural Sandy residents. The tower site is situated on private
property, and will include construction of an onsite private road/driveway, allowing
vehicular access to the lattice tower lease area. The total length ofthe private
road/driveway, between the tower site and SE 302nd Lane, measures approximately
3,000 feet.
2. Engineering's comments are principally related to safe access to and from the site,
and the provision of an adequate on site private road/driveway connecting
SE 302nd Lane with the proposed tower site.
3. In accordance with the Clackamas County Roadway Standards, Section 240, the
access roads serving new developments are required to provide minimum intersection
sight distance based on the travel speed of the roadway. SE 302nd Lane is not posted
for speed and is therefore governed by the "Basic Rule. Jt When roads are governed
by the "Basic Rule" speeds up to 55 miles per hour may be allowed. However, to the
north there is a 90-degree horizontal curve where SE 302nd Lane becomes SE Waybill
Road, approximately 640 from the private road access. To the south, SE 302nd Lane
ends approximately 325 feet from the proposed access. Based on the characteristics
of SE 302nd Lane, including the narrow width of 12.5 feet, engineering staff estimates
the travel speed of vehicles is approximately 35 miles per hour. SE 302nd Lane is also
a very low volume local roadway with an estimated traffic volume of approximately
180 vehicles per day. Therefore, based on Clackamas County Roadway Standards
subsection 240.7, sight distance is based on the criteria contained in Table 2-9. Based
on speed of 35 miles per hour, Roadway Standards table 2-9 specifies 205 feet of
sight distance. The existing intersection of the private road with SE 302nd Lane
serving the project site exceeds 205 feet of sight distance and is adequate.
"
._-_....~_.,.... .
. ,-..,,'.., --.-., .,.".,........,_..~.~.,..'.
(
.~_:..~..":':..:.:.;::~~......:...-=-,..,.~~-""--,. .~':
Z01 0~1-11-C, Z01 02-11-D, SE 302nd Lane Telecom Facility
April 26, 2011
Page 2
4. Portions of the existing private road, between SE 302nd Lane and the residence on
site, are paved. The first 1,295 feet extending west from SE 302nd Lane has a paved
surface and is approximately 12 feet wide. The remaining 1,705 feet of roadway is a
12-foot wide gravel surface. There are portions ofthe roadway that exceed 12
percent in grade and appear to be approximately 15 .percent. The new portion of
access road extending into the tower site is shown on the proposed plans with a grade
of 16 percent. Specific Fire District approval is required for roadways that exceed a
12 percent grade. Roadways that exceed a 15 percent grade require a paved surface,
up to a maximum grade of 20 percent. The applicant will be required to verify the
existing grades and meet the minimum private road standards, approved by the
Engineering Division and Fire District.
5. In regards to the on site private road/driveway providing access to the lease area,
Roadway Standards Drawing Rl 00 illustrates the minimum required private road
dimensions and structural section. Staff recommends compliance with these Drawing
RIOO standards. In addition, an on site turnaround shall be designed and constructed
to accommodate fire apparatus and service vehicles.
The submitted drawings illustrate an on site turnaround near the end ofthe private
road adjacent to the lease area where the lattice tower is proposed to be located.
However, the wings of the turnaround may need to be increased to meet the minimum
dimensions qfRoadway Standards drawing C350. One ofthe proposed wings is
dili1ensioned at 61.94 feet, while the other wing appears to be approximately 20 feet.
The Roadway Standards require a 70-foot long wing and a 60-foot wing for the
Hammerhead Alternative 2. Design and construction of the turnaround shall be in
aceordance with drawing C350, or an alternative design approved by both the local
Fire District and Engineering staff.
6. The submitted plans do not indicate a specifi,c easement to the tower site from SE
302nd Lane, for ingress, egress, and utilities. The minimum access easement is 20
feet in width. The applicant will be required to verify existing easements and/or new
easements to the tower lease area. This easement width will prove sufficient for most
oftheprivate road/driveway length. However, the turnouts, measuring ten feet wide
by 30 feet long (with 30-foot long tapers) will require a wider easement, a minimum .
of22 feet in width to accommodate a 12-foot wide road and a ten foot wide turnout.
The turnout geometry is illustrated on Roadway Standards drawing C350. Additional
easement width will also be required for the turnaround proposed adj acent to the
towerlease area. .
The provision of an easement will insure access rights for personnel to maintain the
facUity, regardless of the current or future ownershipofthe property. In addition, the
easement could be enlarged and configured to accommodate the illustrated on site
turnouts, and the turnaround in the vicinity ofthe proposed lease area, which would
accommodate service vehicles and fire apparatus. Adequate road width and radii for
Z0101-11-C, Z0102-11-D, SE 302nd Lane Telecom Facility
April 26, 2011
Page 3
a turnaround area will be recommended in accordance with local Fire District
requirements.
7. Comprehensive Plan Chapter Five, "Transportation", under the heading
"Improvements to Serve Development", includes Policy 16"0, which reads as follows:
"Require development to be served by adequate roadway facilities."
SE 302nd Lane is classified as a local road and measures approximately 12.5 feet in
width in the vicinity ofthe subject property. The road is paved, with varying gravel
shoulders approximately 18 inches wide. While the county standard for a local road
is for a paved road 22 feet in width, with six (6) foot wide compacted gravel
shoulders, staff finds that SE 302nd Lane, while substandard, would be adequate to
accommodate the existing traffic (approximately 180 vehicles per day) and the
additional approximately two (2) trips per month that this type of facility typically
generates. There are existing driveway aprons along SE 302nd Lane that provide pull
out areas for two vehicles to pass. In addition, staff finds that there is sight distance
at the intersection ofthe private access road with SE 302nd Avenue. Therefore, staff
finds that it would be feasible to provide adequate roadway facilities to serve the
development.
8. In regards to Zoning and Development Ordinance (ZDO) section 1022, this type of
facility is exempt from transportation capacity concerns as noted in subsection
1022.03 A3. Therefore, staff finds that the application is in compliance with the
transportation element of ZDO section 1022.
If this application is approved, staff recommends the following conditions of
approval:
1) All frontage and on site improvements shall be in conformance with the
2010 Clackamas County Roadway Standards.
2) The applicant shall maintain adequate intersection sight distance at the intersection of
the driveway approach with SE 302nd Lane. In addition, no plantings at maturity,
retaining walls, embankments, fences, signs, structures, parked vehicles, or any other
objects shall be allowed to obstruct minimum required sight distances. M~nimum
intersection sight distance shall be 205 feet both northerly and southerly, along SE
302nd Lane, measured 14.5 feet back from the edge of the travel lane at the
interseetion ofthe site driveway approach with SE 302nd Lane.
3) The applicant shall design and construct one on site turnaround, near the lattice tower
lease area, consistent with Roadway Standards drawing C350, or an alternative design
approved by both the Fire District and Engineering staff
4) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall verify existing access
easements, and obtain new easements as necessary to provide a minimum
20-foot wide easement from SE 302nd Lane to the lease area, for ingress, egress, and
ft
Z0101-11-C, Z0102-11-0, SE 302nd Lane Telecom Facility
April 26, 2011
Page 4
utilities, except where the easement is required to be wider to accommodate turnouts,
radii, the turnaround, etc.
5) The applicant shall design and construct the private road/driveway, between SE
302nd Lane and the lease area, to standards contained in the Clackamas County
Roadway Standards. The private road/driveway shall meet the following standards:
a) The minimum width for the driving surface shall be 12 feet and shall be centered
in a 20- foot wide clear zone. Wherever the private road is paved, minimum two-
foot wide compacted gravel shoulders shall be provided. Wherever the private
road is surfaced with gravel, minimum four foot wide compacted earthen
shoulders shall be provided.
b) The private road shall be constructed in accordance with Roadway Standards
drawing RI00, with a minimum of 9 inches of 3/4" minus crushed, graded and
compacted rock on a compacted base and sub grade, over geotextile fabric, and
shall be able to support a 75,000-pound fire apparatus. Wherever the private road
is to be paved, the aforementioned gravel section shall also require a three inch
thick asphalt pavement section over the gravel, placed in two one and
one-half inch lifts. Any sections of the private road that exceed 15 percent slope
shall be paved. For the gravel portion of the existing access road, pull out areas
shall be identified and improved as necessary to meet the minimum standards
provided in Road Standards Drawing C350. The onsite parking space and
turnaround area shall provide the same structural section as the private road.
c) Written verification must be received from the local Fire District that the private
road will support a 75;000-pound fire apparatus, that road grades and surfacing
materials are acceptable, that a sufficient turnaround exists or will be constructed,
that corner radii are acceptable, and that vertical (13.5 feet) and horizontal (20
feet) clearances are acceptable. Attention must be given to weight limits of
culverts. All culverts shall be cleaned and maintained in a clean condition. The
applicant shall obtain written approval of the road construction plans from the
local Fire District prior to issuance of a Development Permit.
d) Positive drainage must be provided for surface water to an acceptable outfall.
Erosion control measures shall be installed and maintained throughout the
iConstruction process. (ZDO section 1008)
e) Construction or reconstruction of the private road/driveway requires plans
prepared and stamped by an Engineer registered in the State of Oregon and a
Development Permit. To obtain a permit the applicant shall submit detailed
construction plans to Deana Mulder, who works in the County's Engineering
section. The applicant shall also provide a Performance Guarantee equal to 100%
of the estimated cost of construction plus a25% contingency and pay an
Z0101-11-C, Z0102-11-D, SE 302nd Lane Telecom Facility
April 2EI, 20.11
Page 5
fuspection Fee.
~
S:\DEVLPMNT\201 O\ZOlOl-ll-C-ZOl 02-11-D-C&D-KK-Sandy302ndTwr.doc
f
it,
... ~..
I ~\:'
~,-.
;;~
j::;~
j
I
~. ''--C~-'.
(;01
~ -"'"
t')>'
F.ASnIEm AND JlOAD MAINrE:wa ~
nas ~, made this 22nd day of
May -' 198~, between
KIMBalLY Cl\U:lWttL, of 2n31 SE Haley Road, Boring, Oragon, amer of Parcel I
herein,OBM.ntNaJLvm, of 9765 SE 302nd Lane. Borin~. Ore~OD 97009
owner of Patte1 n herein, SYLVIA~, of -9165 SE lO~DdJ.-... Jlnr1"... o,.~on 97009
. owner of Patte1 In herein, and B'mNLEYR. ax.vm,of
8383 HE Sandy Blvd, Portland, Oregon
owner of Pan:e1 IV
herein:
RECITALS
(1) 7be parties have an interest: in adjOining real estate situated in
the County of Clackamas and State of Ozegcn, and described, respecuve1y,
as fo1!ows:
~I
7be West half of the Northeast quarter of the .NorthNest
~larter Ot the Southeast CIlIart:er of Sect:1on 30, Township 1
South, Range 4 East of the W1l1S1ette Herid1an, in the
O:lunty of Clackanas and State of Oregon, known as Tax Lot
1906.
~II
'111e East half of the Northeast quarter of the No~
quarter of the Southeast quarter of Sect:1on 30, Township I
South, Range .. &....1: of the Wil1amette Meridian, in the
O:lunty of Clackanas and State of Oregon, known as Tax Lot
1908.
P~In
'1h! E. 396 feet of the S. Is of the N.W. k of the N.W. k
of the S.E. k of Sect1cn 30, TIS., R4E., Clac:ksnaa County,
0I:egat, known as Tax tot 1901.
~ANo~~~
...1-
86 18494
., . - ., -
t
..,............._-.~--..,.;_.,......~IJ:,~....,~~'""'-~~~,~'~
~g
I
~
"
I
..
J
/
/
~~V^' ./
~
PAIaL IV
Tcwnsh.ip IS, Range 4E, Section 30, Parcel 01903, in
the Cbunty of Clac:k!l:nas, State of _Oregon, as J:eOO1dtod in
85-46090, Clackanas Cbunty Deed Reoords.
(2) '!'be parties to this agIee..::..t desire to CIeate a CXIlIlb1 roedoray
between the above described o!djoining lots CIWMd by thsa for the benefit
fo each of the J;llIrt1es, and for CICIIIIa1 access to the pd)lic lOl!Idway. ..,
'!'be J;llIrt1es agree as follCAlS:
(3) '1h1s eaSEmeut for access p.ttpoees, as used in this ag..--=nt,
IIIE!ans a :tesident:iaJ. l:OldIay, and each party agrees to allCllt the otl1er
parties use of the above deso:r:ibed roadway as a reaidemial driveway,
and for the necessary CXII1lI1:ruct:J and agriCUltural plttp:lees CI1 their
xespectiw pl._ties. . PIIrties agree hemt:o that: said lOl!Idway curnmtly
- ::'.' ~
c:rosses Parcel i: and Parcel n to Parcel In. '1'be part1ec agree that
the owner of Parcel IV III!ly cxmect said roadway to ha pmperty in the future.
'1'he pIlrt:1es agree that this -nlllcalt begins at the end of the pli:!lic ~.
~lbe putjes agree that this eaaement ft'11~ the J:OUt:e of the ~
l~ Line RIo ! __It., :reootdt:d as Fee lb. 72-39207, 91'ar.t......, B'DlRr.Er
't
.'t
.l!.
It. <XILVER and SYLVtA L. 0lLVER, b.1sband and Wife, and IfIU.ARD B. 1fIPH!D and
'r:ta:Br tm:liI3U, hJSband and Wife, I't'R'rLllIIl GEm!lW. ~ CDIPMY, an
Oregon C'OXpOratioo, qr.mt:ee.
(4) amm. ~ <XILVER and S'mNIBr R. aILVER grant to KDIImU.Y
OIUnolEU., her heirs, "'''X'Ali'SOJ:l!I W assigns, ~ follat1ng deecr1bed parcel.
fln- ea&eIIIent: putpoees a
PAllCEL n
.l\n ea8elll.::ul:; to be used in CXIIIlCn wUh ol:hers for tolId
PJlp::lees OYer, under, through and acrcee the South -'1.
~
.~
_t
\.
~
,..
t!!-
)
PJ\SI1left' Nt) ~ MADti_....... ~
.-2-
~
~ --::\ "Y'~~"'l<"'}> ...".. .~'~~ ~ ~-:f ,...4. -'::-~-... __
L
--I"~'--~-
- .....".-l'.,-~~.t~..
I:~-~~~~
'."".'""'."""-.'.
,; /~ \~-;,'::,~~~~:
:""<!:,
F...',""""
v..... . "!....,~.
~~,:.:.' .:: i' .~ :,.~
-1~:.s'~"
_t
J
:,..;
~
't
.
.
.
r
I
I
~
,,;'
12 feet of the East one-half of the Northeast me-qua.rter
of the No~t CXle-qUart:er of the Southeast 0lle-qUart:er
of SecUoo 30, Township 1 South, Range .. East of the
Wl11arette Meridian, in the CoImty of Clac::kllmas and
State of Ore<pt.
PARCEL m
An E!lISE!lIerIt to be used in CCIIIIl:1l with others for rO!Idway
'ptttposes over the follOld.ng real property situated
in the County of Clackanas and State of Clregtn; I:x:m1ded '
and descr1bed as foUClfS, to-wib
A strip of land 12 feet wide along the South side of the
North cnH1alf of the Northeast: <ne-quarter of the
Southeast ooe-quart:erof Sect1CQ 30, 'l'ownsh1.p 1 SOUth,
Range of Bast of the W1lllll'ette Mer1d1an, extend1nq
in an Easterly and Westerly d1%ect:1at for a dJ.stanc:e ,of
1320 feet (80 rods), Jlk)t'e or less, along the total
length of said South line.
~->{: ;-",:~{~.!r.;..:
;;.1'-:(':'Uj,
~ wrm an E!lISE!lIerIt to be used in CXIIIII:Il nth
, others, be1nc; a strip of land 12 feet in Width, adj~_('"i :
to andalcnq the Fast line of the North cne-ha1f of
the Hortbeast ate-qUarI:er of the Southeast one-quarter
of Sect100 30, Township I South, Range .. Fast of the
Wlllaaet;te Her1d1an, exb!ndinl] in a Northerly and S0uther-
ly d1rect1on.
.;-,/ ,~~ t>
(5) '!be driveway descr1bed abcM! has been oonst.ruct:ec!, and will be
, - ''', ;..' >-," . ,"-;.... .' .
II!l1nta1ned in good xepa1r with said repair and maintenance CXlIIt diVided
equally between the four parties to this ~".. '!be m!ld 18 cu:m!ntly
of qnl\'el and will need ~ qnl\'eling and oiling.
be lellpClns1ble for sched111ng said IIlI11ntenanoe and
Cil>>t bebMen the reepectiw part:1ea.
(6) Each party agrees that :':.ar reoe1pl: of t."-: . t:....~;_::. ~.
their allCllllance of the t>tber tespect1ve parties to Ul!le to'll! l'OlIdifay ocn-
stJ.tutes au!l1cient ocns1derat.icn for ~ abcM!t deecr1bec! C!laIIement.
'lhiJ:d party ag:tees to
~-. .
for the 1l1locatiClln of
(7) '1'be Pllrt1es, and their he1J:a and aaaigJw, agree to bold ead1 '
other hamless fraa any liability for any prcpert;y dmnage which ocx:urrw
!'AsP.Mmr AR> IO'\IJCAY ~ ~
-3-
o
~.._ ro.,~_,.~.,.,..,......~~~~...,...~
\j.i~:_~
~~~::~-
';"~"".:::.,
;;~~;i
?;~
"'../1
:1JL
l....,-..:
,~,.i
"""
'~~t:"..~...~..._
~'.H-:--~_""""""",""J~~___~",'_"'- '"':'.....~......
J
00 said driveway as a result of the actia1S of any party, party's visitora
or invitees.
(8) It is agreed that this~t, upon exeeutioo of all PlU'tieII,
WIll be duly AOOrded by the appt'tprtate ccunty recording officer.
(9) Bach party lIqnIU not to do anyt:h.1ng in the maJ.nt:enanoe or
use of the driveway or to adYe1:sely effect the Other parties, use and
enjc:l}'la'nt of their own property.
CIO) 'Ihis easement: is pal'5ll:JUnt to the right, title and 1nterest of
any of the parties heJ:eto in the respective servient estates 80 created, and
the parties further agree that this easement is a covenant that shall
run Vith the land and shall inure to the benefit of the partieS hemto,
their heirs. ~.... and assigns. 'Ihis easement: is a burden 00 Parcel I
and JParceJ. n described he%ein.
CI1) All notices fran ale party to the Other parties a1 the ~
~!IlleI1t:. or any' ....4l-lta hemto, WIll be deliVured by writu!n notice
thra.1gh the OUted States Mall and shall be deemed delivered When depcrit<<1
Vith postage PRPll1d thereon and addt~ to the respect1ve 0WDen at their
.... ... '';:',;{' ,"'"~'f"~~",.l-(' .1;~r.~~
aboo.Iei Dll!nt:J.cw1ed addresses, or when delivered ~ly to AJd 0WDen.
'~r,1 0,'...-"",1 .!r'" :11."''''
IN NrmE:ss 1Imla:P, the parties have executed th1a 891'6--.~ at
--Ml!IDY , 0nIgc:a, the date and year first abcoIe written. ",.
, ..-.."...,:".,..,....."....'"
..
..
'...
!NDH.:I~ AM> ~ w.~ ~
-4-
'"...--~~~_..........-'''''~--K~.io-'~,~~..,........ .. '_-" _~-:"",.....
-""'~'''. ,
. '. ~"".,- --. ...~
l..,f~"
r
~~
J