HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018 05 15 AIS for Marcola Meadows Zoning Map AmendmentAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 5/15/2018 Meeting Type: Regular Meeting
Staff Contact/Dept.: Andy Limbird, DPW
Staff Phone No: 541-726-3784 Estimated Time: 15 Minutes
S P R I N G F I E L D PLANNING COMMISSION Council Goals: Encourage Economic Development and Revitalization through Community Partnerships ITEM TITLE: ZONING MAP AMENDMENT – REZONE APPROXIMATELY 19.3 ACRES OF VACANT
LAND FROM COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC) TO MIXED USE COMMERCIAL (MUC)
ACTION REQUESTED:
Conduct a public hearing and deliberations, and approve, approve with amendments, or deny a
request for Zoning Map Amendment from Community Commercial (CC) to Mixed Use
Commercial (MUC).
ISSUE STATEMENT: Schirmer Satre Group, on behalf of MidFirst Bank (owner) is requesting a Zoning Map Amendment for a 19.3-acre parcel from CC to MUC.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Staff Report and Findings for Zoning Map Amendment
2. Application and Exhibits
3. PC Final Order – Zoning Map Amendment Request 811-18-000053-TYP3
DISCUSSION:
The property requested for Zoning Map Amendment is a vacant 19.3-acre parcel within the
southwestern quadrant of a larger, vacant, 100-acre property at the northwest corner of Marcola Road and 28th Street. The subject property is commonly known as Marcola Meadows and it was
the subject of a 2008 Master Plan approval that identified a combination of residential, commercial, and mixed use development on the site. The subject 19.3-acre parcel was originally contemplated for a “big box retail” site and a zoning map amendment to facilitate construction of a
Lowe’s home improvement store was undertaken in conjunction with approval of the Final Master Plan. The Lowe’s store is no longer being considered for the site and the applicant is now
requesting a zoning map amendment to restore the MUC zoning for this parcel. Approximately 26
acres of the adjoining property, including portions to the south and east that have frontage on Marcola Road, are zoned MUC. The property is currently vacant and has not been assigned a
municipal street address (Assessor’s Map 17-02-30-00, Tax Lot 1800 and Map 17-03-25-11, Tax
Lot 2300). The subject property is zoned CC on the Springfield Zoning Map and is designated Commercial in
the adopted Metro Plan diagram. Section 3.2-605.A of the Springfield Development Code (SDC)
provides for MUC zoning to be applied to properties designated for predominantly commercial development, although residential uses are also allowed. The proposed MUC zoning is consistent
with the commercial designation for the property as depicted on the adopted Metro Plan diagram. The Zoning Map Amendment is being processed concurrently with a Final Master Plan
Modification submitted under separate cover (Case 811-18-000054-TYP3). The proposed Final Master Plan Modification contemplates the zoning change from CC to MUC in order to accommodate a combination of commercial and higher density residential development on the
parcel.
Staff Report and Findings Planning Commission Zone Change Request (Schirmer Satre Group on behalf of MidFirst Bank)
Hearing Date: May 15, 2018 Case Number: 811-18-000053-TYP3 Applicant: Rick Satre, Schirmer Satre Group
Property Owner: MidFirst Bank
Site: Marcola Meadows Master Plan Site (Map 17-02-03-00, TL 1800 & Map 17-03-25-11, TL 2300)
Request
Rezone 19.3 acres from Community Commercial (CC) to Mixed Use Commercial (MUC). Site Information/Background
The application was submitted on March 30, 2018 and the public hearing on the matter of the Zone Change request is scheduled for May 15, 2018. The City conducted a Development Review Committee meeting on the Zone
Change request on April 24, 2018. The property requested for Zoning Map Amendment is a 19.3-acre portion of a vacant 100-acre parcel at the
northwest corner of 28th Street and Marcola Road. The site has not been assigned a municipal street address and is identified as Assessor’s Map 17-02-03-00, Tax Lot 1800 and Map 17-03-25-11, Tax Lot 2300 – more commonly known as the Marcola Meadows development area. A Final Master Plan was approved for the property in 2008 and
the 19.3-acre portion was rezoned to Community Commercial to accommodate a Lowe’s home improvement store. No development has occurred on the site since the original Master Plan approval and zone change, so the applicant is now requesting to rezone the 19.3-acre portion to MUC, which is consistent with the adjoining 26-acre portion of
the site. The proposed Zoning Map Amendment would allow for a combination of commercial and higher density residential uses to be built within the 19.3-acre area. Concurrently with this request for Zoning Map Amendment,
the applicant has submitted a Final Master Plan Modification under separate cover (Case 811-18-000054-TYP3).
The proposed Final Master Plan Modification contemplates uniform MUC zoning for the southern half of the development area.
In accordance with Section 3.2-605.A of the Springfield Development Code (SDC), the Mixed Use Commercial district is used to accommodate predominantly commercial uses, but residential and public uses are also allowed.
Mixed Use Commercial zoning can be used to implement Commercial and/or Nodal Development designation as
depicted on the adopted Metro Plan diagram. The proposed change of zoning from Community Commercial to Mixed Use Commercial does not affect the adopted Metro Plan diagram or plan designation for the property so it is
being processed as a Type III Zoning Map amendment. Notification and Written Comments
Notification of the May 15, 2018 Planning Commission public hearing was sent to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the outer boundary of the Marcola Meadows development site on April 23, 2018. Notification was also published in the April 30 and May 7, 2018 editions of The Register Guard. Staff responded to several telephone
calls and emails inquiring about the proposal but no written comments were received. Criteria of Approval
Section 5.22-100 of the SDC contains the criteria of approval for the decision maker to utilize during review of Zoning Map amendment requests. The Criteria of Zoning Map amendment approval criteria are:
Attachment 1, Page 1 of 6
SDC 5.22-115 CRITERIA
C. Zoning Map amendment criteria of approval: 1. Consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan diagram;
2. Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans; and
3. The property is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation networks to support the use, or these facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to
be provided concurrently with the development of the property. 4. Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall:
a. Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100; and
b. Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060, where applicable.
Proposed Findings In Support of Zone Change Approval
Criterion: Zoning Map amendment criteria of approval:
1. Consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan diagram; Finding 1: In accordance with the Economic Element of the Metro Plan, “it is essential that an adequate
supply (quantitatively and qualitatively) of commercial and industrial land be available. An adequate supply of land includes not only sites sufficient in size to accommodate the needs of the commercial or
industrial operations (including expansion), but also includes sites which are attractive from the standpoint
of aesthetics, transportation costs, labor costs, availability of skilled labor, natural resource availability, proximity to markets, and anticipated growth of local markets.”
Finding 2: Metro Plan Policy B.6, Page III-B-4 states: “Increase the amount of undeveloped land zoned for light industrial and commercial uses correlating the effective supply in terms of suitability and
availability with the projections of demand.” Finding 3: Metro Plan Policy B.16, Page III-B-5 states: “Utilize processes and local controls, which
encourage retention of large parcels or consolidation of small parcels of industrially or commercially zoned land to facilitate their use or reuse in a comprehensive rather than piecemeal fashion.”
Finding 4: Metro Plan Policy B.22, Page III-B-6 states: “Review local ordinances and revise them to promote greater flexibility for promoting appropriate commercial development in residential
neighborhoods.”
Finding 5: Consistent with the above-listed Metro Plan policies, the subject property is a 19.3-acre portion
of a larger 100-acre property under single ownership. The applicant is proposing to consolidate the 19.3-
acre portion currently zoned CC with the adjoining 26 acres already zoned MUC. Upon rezoning, the contiguous 45.3 acre portion of the site would be uniformly zoned MUC.
2. Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans;
Finding 6: There is no adopted neighborhood Refinement Plan specific to this area of Springfield. Therefore, the Metro Plan diagram remains the prevailing comprehensive plan diagram for this site.
Attachment 1, Page 2 of 6
Finding 7: The City adopted the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element in 2017 through Ordinance 6361, which is currently effective but still pending acknowledgement from LDCD. Effective
but unacknowledged comprehensive plan amendments are applicable to land use decisions under ORS
197.625 when, as here, no stay has been granted. The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element is intended to update, refine and implement the Economic Element policies found in Section III-B
of the Metro Plan. The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element does not repeal the policies
in Section III-B of the Metro Plan.
Finding 8: Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 197.625(5) provides that, if an effective but unacknowledged
provision of a comprehensive plan fails to gain acknowledgement, “a permit or zone change approved, in whole or in part, on the basis of the [unacknowledged comprehensive plan] change does not justify
retention of the improvements that were authorized by the permit or zone change.”
Finding 9: If the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element fails to gain acknowledgement,
the decision to approve the proposed zone change remains valid because, alternatively, the decision can be based solely upon compliance with the policies in Section III-B of the Metro Plan as stated in Findings 1 through 5 herein. For that reason, any improvements authorized by this decision may be retained under
ORS 197.625(5).
Finding 10: Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element Policy E.1 states: “Designate an
adequate supply of land that is planned and zoned to provide sites of varying locations, configurations, size and characteristics as identified and described in the Economic Opportunity Analysis to accommodate
industrial and other employment over the planning period. These sites may include vacant undeveloped
land; partially developed sites with potential for additional development through infill development; and sites with redevelopment potential.”
Finding 11: Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element Policy E.5 states: “Provide an adequate, competitive short-term supply of suitable land to respond to economic development opportunities
as they arise.”
Finding 12: Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element Policy E.7 states: “Where possible,
concentrate development on sites with existing infrastructure or on sites where infrastructure can be provided relatively easily and at a comparatively low cost.”
Finding 13: Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element Policy E.15 states: “Work with Lane Transit District and Oregon Department of Transportation to ensure that transportation system
improvements address the needs of existing commerce while strengthening Springfield’s economic corridor
connections and development/redevelopment potential.”
Finding 14: Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element Policy E.16 states: “Consider the
economic opportunities provided by transportation corridors and seek to maximize economic uses in corridors that provide the most optimal locations and best exposure for existing and future commercial and
industrial uses.”
Finding 15: Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element Policy E.19 states: “In the 2030 Plan
diagram and Land Use Element, and future refinement planning, locate regional, community and neighborhood-serving commercial uses to support economically viable centers, enhanced commercial corridors, and walkable neighborhood scale mixed-use centers.”
Finding 16: Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element Policy E.22 states: “Plan, designate and zone land to allow community and neighborhood retail commercial uses in new, existing or expanded
mixed use centers/nodes to address the land need for retail described in the Economic Opportunities Analysis; timing shall be coordinated with City refinement planning processes or through property-owner
initiated proposals that are consistent with Springfield Comprehensive Plan policies.”
Attachment 1, Page 3 of 6
Finding 17: Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element Policy E.23 states: “Identify and target commercial activities that will generate living-wage employment opportunities and/or meet daily
needs of local residents.”
Finding 18: Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element Policy E.38 states: “Strengthen the
coordination between infrastructure, planning and investments, land use, and economic development goals
to prepare land and physical infrastructure, in a timely fashion, that is necessary to support business development and stimulate quality job creation.”
Finding 19: Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element Policy E.47 states: “Enhance, maintain and market Springfield’s reputation for: rapid processing of permits and applications, maintaining
City agreements and commitments, and providing developers with certainty and flexibility in the
development process.”
Finding 20: The application is consistent with the above-listed applicable policies of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element for the following reasons: The subject site is within the approved Final Master Plan area of Marcola Meadows. The 2008 Master Plan identifies a separate 19.3-acre site for
CC zoning to accommodate a “big box” home improvement store. The property is no longer being considered for a home improvement store – or any other type of “big box” retailer for that matter – so the
applicant is proposing to restore the MUC zoning to be consistent with the adjoining portion of the site. In
conjunction with the requested Zone Change, the applicant has submitted a Final Master Plan Modification under separate cover (Case 811-18-000054-TYP3). The Zoning Map Amendment and Final Master Plan
Modification are being reviewed concurrently at the public hearing meeting on May 15, 2018.
Finding 21: The requested Zoning Map Amendment is consistent with the zoning configuration depicted in
the proposed Final Master Plan Modification submitted as Case 811-18-000054-TYP3.
Finding 22: The proposed Zoning Map Amendment is consistent with the provisions of the Springfield
2030 Refinement Plan – Economic Element as it retains the commercial viability of the 19.3 acres but
allows for increased flexibility to address changing market conditions and modified development plans.
Finding 23: The Springfield 2035 Transportation System Plan (TSP) is the functional refinement to the Metro Plan dealing specifically with transportation facilities and Springfield’s compliance with statewide planning Goal 12. The applicant submitted a revised Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) with the accompanying
Final Master Plan Modification (Case 811-18-000054-TYP3) to update the previous Traffic Impact Study (TIS) prepared for Marcola Meadows in 2008. Based on the findings of the revised TIA, the proposed zone
change from CC to MUC is consistent with, and does not alter the TSP’s policies and projects, and is
therefore consistent with the TSP.
3. The property is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and transportation
networks to support the use, or these facilities, services and transportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development of the property.
Finding 24: The site requested for Zone Change has a full range of public utilities and services available, and a developed urban transportation network (Marcola Road and 31st Street) on the southern and eastern
property frontages. Urban utilities are currently available along the property frontages or internal to the site
(i.e. sanitary sewer) and can be extended through the property as future development occurs on the site.
Attachment 1, Page 4 of 6
4. Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall: a. Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100; and
b. Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060, where applicable.
Finding 25: The requested Zone Change is being undertaken as a quasi-judicial, site-specific change in compliance with provisions of the adopted Metro Plan and Section 3.2-605.A of the City’s Development
Code. Because the proposed MUC zoning is consistent with the Commercial land use designation found on
the Metro Plan diagram, a Comprehensive Plan amendment is not required or warranted. Therefore, the criterion to comply with SDC 5.14-100 is not applicable.
Finding 26: The Transportation Planning Rule, OAR 660-012-0060(1), requires a local government to put in place certain mitigation measures if an amendment to a land use regulation (including a zoning map
amendment) would “significantly affect” an existing or planned transportation facility. OAR 660-012-0060 (9) provides that the “local government may find that an amendment to a zoning map does not significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility” if all the requirements in subsections (a)-(c) are met.
Finding 27: OAR 660-012-0060 (9)(a) requires that the proposed zoning map amendment be consistent
with the existing comprehensive plan map designation, and the map amendment does not change the
comprehensive plan map. As found above, the proposal amends only the Springfield Zoning Map, and not the Metro Plan diagram.
Finding 28: OAR 660-012-0060 (9)(b) requires that the local government has an acknowledged Transportation System Plan (TSP) and that the proposed zoning map amendment is consistent with the
TSP. The Springfield 2035 TSP was acknowledged by DLCD, and the proposed zone change is consistent
with the TSP, and does not affect TSP policies or projects.
Finding 29: Ordinance 6196 (adopted in 2007) amended the Springfield Zoning Map in conjunction with
approval of the Marcola Meadows Master Plan and implemented a trip cap as a demand management strategy to meet Goal 12 requirements. In accordance with OAR 660-012-0060, the trip cap remains in
effect for the 100-acre site. The applicant has submitted a revised TIA in support of the Zoning Map Amendment and Final Master Plan Modification that demonstrates that the existing trip cap of 1,430 PM peak hour net primary external non-bypass trips is not exceeded under the proposed Zoning Map
Amendment.
Finding 30: OAR 660-012-0060 (9)(c) requires that the area subject to the proposed zoning map
amendment is not subject to an exemption from the TPR standards pursuant to a prior UGB amendment or TSP amendment to account for urbanization of the area. The subject site is within the Springfield UGB and
City limits, so this criterion is not applicable.
Finding 31: Because the proposed zoning map amendment meets all the criteria of OAR 660-012-
0060(9)(a)-(c), the proposed amendment does not “significantly affect” an existing or planned
transportation facility under OAR 660-012-0060(1). Because the applicant previously implemented a trip cap on the property as a demand management strategy and that trip cap remains in effect under the
proposed Zoning Map Amendment, no additional mitigation measures under that rule are required.
Therefore, the proposal complies with the Transportation Planning Rule, OAR 660-012-0060.
Conclusion: Based on the above-listed criteria, staff recommends support for the request as the proposal meets the stated criteria for Zone Change approval in accordance with provisions of the Metro Plan, the applicable elements of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan and the Springfield Development Code.
Attachment 1, Page 5 of 6
Conditions of Approval SDC Section 5.22-120 allows for the Approval Authority to attach conditions of approval to a Zone Change request
to ensure the application fully meets the criteria of approval. The specific language from the code section is cited
below:
5.22-120 CONDITIONS
The Approval Authority may attach conditions as may be reasonably necessary in order to allow the Zoning Map amendment to be granted.
No recommended conditions of approval.
The Planning Commission may choose to apply conditions of approval as necessary to comply with the Zone Change criteria.
Additional Approvals The 19.3-acre site proposed for Zoning Map Amendment is part of a larger, vacant development area that is subject to a Final Master Plan Modification advanced as Case 811-18-000054-TYP3. Upon approval of the Final Master
Plan amendment, a series of land use applications and construction plans would need to be submitted for
development of the property. Site development would occur in conjunction with approved subdivision, site plan review, and Public Improvement Permit plans in accordance with provisions of the City’s Development Code and the adopted Engineering Design Standards & Procedures Manual.
Attachment 1, Page 6 of 6
Attachment 2, Page 1 of 12
Attachment 2, Page 2 of 12
Attachment 2, Page 3 of 12
Attachment 2, Page 4 of 12
Attachment 2, Page 5 of 12
Attachment 2, Page 6 of 12
Attachment 2, Page 7 of 12
Attachment 2, Page 8 of 12
Attachment 2, Page 9 of 12
Attachment 2, Page 10 of 12
Attachment 2, Page 11 of 12
Attachment 2, Page 12 of 12
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON REQUEST FOR ZONING MAP AMENDMENT + CASE NO. 811-18-000053-TYP3
+ FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, + AND ORDER NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
Zone change from Community Commercial to Mixed Use Commercial for a 19.3-acre portion of Assessor’s Map 17-02-30-00, Tax Lot 1800 and Map 17-03-25-11, Tax Lot 2300.
1. On March 30, 2018 the following application for a Zoning Map Amendment was accepted:
Rezone approximately 19.3 acres of land from Community Commercial to Mixed Use
Commercial, Case Number 811-18-000053-TYP3, Richard Satre, Schirmer Satre Group on behalf of MidFirst Bank, applicant. The area requested for rezoning is generally depicted and
more particularly described in Attachment 1 to this Final Order. 2. The application was submitted in accordance with Section 5.4-105 of the Springfield
Development Code. Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing, pursuant to Section 5.2-
115 of the Springfield Development Code, was provided.
3. On May 15, 2018 a public hearing on the Zoning Map Amendment request was held. The
Development and Public Works Department staff notes including criteria of approval, findings and recommendations, together with the testimony and submittals of the persons testifying at that
hearing have been considered and are part of the record of this proceeding. CONCLUSION
On the basis of this record, the requested Zoning Map Amendment application is consistent with the
criteria of Section 5.22-115 of the Springfield Development Code. This general finding is supported by
the specific findings of fact and conclusions in the staff report (Exhibit A) attached hereto.
ORDER
It is ORDERED by the Planning Commission of Springfield that Case Number 811-18-000053-TYP3,
Zoning Map Amendment Request, be approved. This ORDER was presented to and approved by the Planning Commission on May 15, 2018.
_______________________________
Planning Commission Chairperson ATTEST AYES:
NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
Attachment 3, Page 1 of 3
ATTACHMENT 1
Source: Schirmer Satre Group
Attachment 3, Page 2 of 3
Legal Description SITUATED in the City of Springfield, Lane County, State of Oregon in the Northeast 1/4 of Section 25 in Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian and described as follows: BEING a portion of the lands that were conveyed as “Parcel 1" in that certain Trustees’ Deed that was recorded April 10, 2006 at Recorder’s Number 2006-024293 in the Official Records of Lane County,
State of Oregon, which portion is more particularly described as follows: BEING a portion of “Parcel 2" and a portion of “Parcel 3" of Land Partition Plat Number 94- P0491 as recorded April 19, 1994 in the Land Partition Plat Records of Lane County, State of Oregon, the perimeter boundary of which being more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the southeast corner of Lot 18 of the plat of “Nicole Park” as platted and recorded
December 21, 1992 in File 74 at Slides 30-32 in the Plat Records of Lane County, State of Oregon; THENCE, leaving said POINT OF BEGINNING and corner and along the east line of said Lot 18, the east lines of Lots 17 and 16 and the north line of said Lot 16 of said plat of “Nicole Park” the
following two numbered courses: (1) NORTH 00 03' 40" WEST 259.95 FEET and (2) SOUTH
89 58' 00" WEST 6.20 FEET to the southeast corner of Lot 4, Block 2 of the plat of “Loch Lomond Terrace First Addition” as platted and recorded August 12, 1965 in Book 46 at page 20 in the Plat Records of Lane County, State of Oregon; THENCE, along the east plat boundary of said plat the
following one numbered course: (3) NORTH 00 02' 00" WEST 112.88 FEET to the southwest corner of
Lot 15 of the plat of “Austin Park South” as platted and recorded November 18, 1993 in File 74 at Slides 132-134 in the Plat Records of Lane County, State of Oregon; THENCE, along the south
boundary of said plat the following one numbered course: (4) NORTH 89 57' 41" EAST 260.13 FEET
to the southeast corner of said plat; THENCE, leaving said plat boundary and corner and crossing said
“Parcel 3" of Land Partition Plat Number 94-P0491 along the following fourteen numbered courses:
(5) NORTH 89 57' 41 " EAST 129.00 FEET; (6) SOUTH 89 56' 46" EAST 75.79 FEET; (7) NORTH
89 58' 00" EAST 51.89 FEET; (8) NORTH 44 58' 00" EAST 102.82 FEET; (9) NORTH 62 37' 55"
EAST 69.58 FEET; (10) SOUTH 89 50' 03" EAST 589.17 FEET; (11) SOUTH 56 46' 30" EAST
92.29 FEET; (12) SOUTH 00 02' 00" EAST 739.09 FEET; (13) SOUTH 89 58' 00" WEST 388.83
FEET; (14) SOUTH 80 20' 50" WEST 121.37 FEET; (15) SOUTH 89 58' 00" WEST 231.55 FEET;
(16) NORTH 00 02' 00" WEST 290.72 FEET; (17) SOUTH 89 58' 00" WEST 330.48 FEET; and
(18) SOUTH 00 02' 00" EAST 56.64 FEET to a point; and THENCE, crossing into said Parcel 2 of
Land Partition Plat Number 94-P0491 the following two numbered courses: (19) SOUTH 8958' 00"
WEST 240.81 FEET and (20) NORTH 00 02' 00" WEST 100.56 FEET RETURNING to the POINT
OF BEGINNING and CONTAINING 19.33 acres more or less.
BEARINGS as shown hereon are based on the Survey Map by Rex A. Betz that was filed October 23, 2007 as County Survey File Number 40754 in the office of the County Surveyor of Lane County,
State of Oregon.
Attachment 3, Page 3 of 3