Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Application Applicant 9/27/2024
Revised 1/7/14 kl 1 of 10 City of Springfield Development & Public Works 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 Land Division Tentative Plan Partition, Subdivision Application Type (Applicant: check one) Partition Tentative Pre-Submittal: Subdivision Tentative Pre-Submittal: Partition Tentative Submittal: Subdivision Tentative Submittal: Required Project Information (Applicant: complete this section) Applicant Name: Phone: Company: Fax: Address: Applicant’s Rep.: Phone: Company: Fax: Address: Property Owner: Phone: Company: Fax: Address: ASSESSOR'S MAP NO: TAX LOT NO(S): Property Address: Size of Property: Acres Square Feet Proposed Name of Subdivision: Description of Proposal: If you are filling in this form by hand, please attach your proposal description to this application. Existing Use: # of Lots/Parcels: Total acreage of parcels/ allowable density: Proposed # Dwell Units Signatures: Please sign and print your name and date in the appropriate box on the next page. Required Project Information (City Intake Staff: complete this section) Associated Applications: Signs: Pre-Sub Case No.: Date: Reviewed by: Case No.: Date: Reviewed by: Application Fee: $ Technical Fee: $ Postage Fee: $ TOTAL FEES: $ PROJECT NUMBER: x James Limerick Wizard Rock LLC 1528 NW 9th St Bend, OR 97703 Scott Morris, PE 541-302-9790 A & O Engineering LLC 380 Q St Ste 200 Springfield, OR 97477 same as applicant 18-02-03-33 100 N/A Springfield Meadows proposed 36 lot subdivision with associated infrastructure vacant 36 36 x11.52 Docusign Envelope ID: D0DC7A35-663D-4C7C-A856-3426D775993B Revised 1/7/14 kl 2 of 10 Owner Signatures This application form is used for both the required pre-submittal meeting and subsequent complete application submittal. Owner signatures are required at both stages in the application process. An application without the Owner’s original signature will not be accepted. Pre-Submittal The undersigned acknowledges that the information in this application is correct and accurate for scheduling of the Pre- Submittal Meeting. If the applicant is not the owner, the owner hereby grants permission for the applicant to act in his/her behalf. I/we do hereby acknowledge that I/we are legally responsible for all statutory timelines, information, requests and requirements conveyed to my representative. Owner: Date: Signature Print Submittal I represent this application to be complete for submittal to the City. Consistent with the completeness check performed on this application at the Pre-Submittal Meeting, I affirm the information identified by the City as necessary for processing the application is provided herein or the information will not be provided if not otherwise contained within the submittal, and the City may begin processing the application with the information as submitted. This statement serves as written notice pursuant to the requirements of ORS 227.178 pertaining to a complete application. Owner: Date: Signature Print Docusign Envelope ID: D0DC7A35-663D-4C7C-A856-3426D775993B James Limerick 9/26/2024 Revised 1/7/14 kl 3 of 10 Land Division Tentative Application Process 1. Applicant Submits a Land Division Tentative Application for Pre-Submittal The application must conform to the Land Division Tentative Submittal Requirements Checklist on pages 4-6 of this application packet. A pre-submittal meeting to discuss completeness is mandatory, and pre-submittal meetings are conducted every Tuesday and Friday, from 10:00 am - noon. Planning Division staff strives to conduct pre-submittal meetings within five to seven working days of receiving an application. 2. Applicant and the City Conduct the Pre-Submittal Meeting The applicant, owner, and design team are strongly encouraged to attend the pre- submittal meeting. The meeting is held with representatives from Public Works Engineering and Transportation, Community Services (Building), Fire Marshall’s office, and the Planning Division and is scheduled for 30 to 60 minutes. The Planner provides the applicant with a Pre-Submittal Checklist specifying the items required to make the application complete if it is not already complete, and the applicant has 180 days submit a complete application to the City. 3. Applicant Submits a Complete Application, City Staff Review the Application and Issue a Decision A complete application must conform to the Land Division Tentative Submittal Requirements Checklist on pages 4-6 of this application packet. A Type II decision, made after public notice, but without a public hearing, unless appealed, is issued within 120 days of submittal of a complete application. Mailed notice is provided to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the property being reviewed and to any applicable neighborhood association. In addition, the applicant must post one sign, provided by the City, on the subject property. There is a 14-day public comment period, starting on the date notice is mailed. Applications are distributed to the Development Review Committee, and their comments are incorporated into a decision that addresses all applicable approval criteria and/or development standards, as well as any written comments from those given notice. Applications may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied. At the applicant’s request, the Planner can provide a copy of the draft land use decision prior to issuing the final land use decision. The City mails the applicant and any party of standing a copy of the decision, which is effective on the day it is mailed. The decision issued is the final decision of the City but may be appealed within 15 calendar days to the Planning Commission or Hearings Official. Docusign Envelope ID: D0DC7A35-663D-4C7C-A856-3426D775993B Revised 1/7/14 kl 4 of 10 Land Division Tentative Submittal Requirements Checklist NOTE: ALL of the following items MUST be submitted for BOTH Pre-Submittal and Submittal. If you feel an item on the list below does not apply to your specific application, please state the reason why and attach the explanation to this form. Application Fee – refer to the Development Code Fee Schedule for the appropriate fee calculation formula. A copy of the fee schedule is available at the Development & Public Works Department. Any applicable application, technology, and postage fees are collected at the pre-submittal and submittal stages. Land Division Tentative Application Form Narrative explaining the purpose of the proposed development, the existing use of the property, and any additional information that may have a bearing in determining the action to be taken. Density - list the size of property (acres), maximum allowable density and the density proposed. Copy of the Deed Copy of a Preliminary Title Report issued within the past 30 days documenting ownership and listing all encumbrances. Copy of the Land Division Plan Reduced to 8½”x 11”, which will be mailed as part of the required neighboring property notification packet. Right-of-Way Approach Permit Application provided where the property has frontage on an Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) facility. Three (3) Copies of the Stormwater Management System Study with Completed Stormwater Scoping Sheet Attached - The plan, supporting calculations, and documentation must be consistent with the Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual. Three (3) Copies of the Traffic Impact Study prepared by a Traffic Engineer in accordance with SDC 4.2-105 A.4. Traffic Impact Studies (TIS) allow the City to analyze and evaluate the traffic impacts and mitigation of a development on the City’s transportation system. In general, a TIS must explain how the traffic from a given development affects the transportation system in terms of safety, traffic operations, access and mobility, and immediate and adjoining street systems. A TIS must also address, if needed, City, metro plan and state land use and transportation policies and objectives. Four (4) Copies of the Following Plan Sets for Pre-Submittal OR Three (3) Copies of the Following Plan Sets: All of the following plans must include the scale appropriate to the area involved and sufficient to show detail of the plan and related data, north arrow, and date of preparation. All plan sets must be folded to 8½” by 11” and bound by rubber bands. a.Site Assessment of Existing Conditions Prepared by an Oregon licensed Landscape Architect or Engineer x x x x x x n/a x n/a x Docusign Envelope ID: D0DC7A35-663D-4C7C-A856-3426D775993B Revised 1/7/14 kl 5 of 10 Vicinity Map The name, location, and dimensions of all existing site features including buildings, curb cuts, trees, and impervious surface areas, clearly indicating what is remaining and what is being removed. For existing structures to remain, also indicate present use and required setbacks from proposed property lines. The name, location, dimensions, direction of flow and top of bank of all watercourses and required riparian setback that are shown on the Water Quality Limited Watercourse Map on file in the Development & Public Works Department The 100-year floodplain and floodway boundaries on the site, as specified in the latest adopted FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps or FEMA approved Letter of Map Amendment or Letter of Map Revision The Time of Travel Zones, as specified in SDC 3.3-200 and delineated on the Wellhead Protection Areas Map on file in the Development & Public Works Department Physical features including, but not limited to trees 5” in diameter or greater when measured 4 ½ feet above the ground, significant clusters of trees and shrubs, riparian areas, wetlands and rock outcroppings Soil types and water table information as mapped and specified in the Soils Survey of Lane County. A Geotechnical Report prepared by an Engineer must be submitted concurrently if the Soils Survey indicates the proposed development area has unstable soils and/or a high water table b. Land Division Tentative Plan Prepared by an Oregon licensed Land Surveyor City boundaries, the Urban Growth Boundary, and any special service district boundaries or railroad right-of-way which cross or abut the proposed land division Location and width of all existing and proposed easements on and abutting the proposed land division Boundaries of entire area owned by the property owner, of which the proposed land division is a part, as well as dimensions and size of each parcel and the approximate dimensions of each building site indicating the top and toe of cut and fill slopes to scale Location and type of existing and proposed street lighting, including type, height, and area of illumination Location, widths, conditions, and names of all existing and proposed streets, alleys, dedications or other right-of-ways within or adjacent to the proposed land division. Proposed streets should also include approximate radius of curves and grades and relationship to any projected streets as shown on the Metro Plan, TransPlan, Conceptual Development Plan, or Conceptual Local Street Map. Location of existing and required traffic control devices, fire hydrants, power poles, transformers, neighborhood mailbox units and similar public facilities Location and dimensions of existing and proposed driveways Location of existing and proposed transit facilities Location and width of all existing and proposed sidewalks, sidewalk ramps, pedestrian access ways and bike trails Location, size and type of plantings and street trees in any required planter strip Docusign Envelope ID: D0DC7A35-663D-4C7C-A856-3426D775993B Revised 1/7/14 kl 6 of 10 Location and size of existing and proposed utilities on and adjacent to the site including sanitary sewer mains, stormwater management systems, water mains, power, gas, telephone, and cable TV. Indicate the proposed connection points The locations of all areas to be dedicated or reserved for public use, with the purpose, condition or limitations of the reservations clearly indicated Future Development Plan where phasing or large lots/parcels are proposed as specified in SDC 5.12-120 E. c.Stormwater Management Plan Prepared by an Oregon licensed Civil Engineer Planting plan prepared by an Oregon licensed Landscape Architect where plants are proposed as part of the stormwater management system Roof drainage patterns and discharge locations Pervious and impervious area drainage patterns The size and location of stormwater management systems components, including but not limited to: drain lines, catch basins, dry wells and/or detention ponds; stormwater quality measures; and natural drainageways to be retained Existing and proposed spot elevations and contours lines drawn at 1 foot intervals (for land with a slope over 10 percent, the contour lines may be at 5 foot intervals) Amount of proposed cut and fill Additional Materials That May be Required IT IS THE APPLICANT’S RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE IF ADDITIONAL STANDARDS/APPLICATIONS APPLY TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. THE APPLICANT SHOULD CONSIDER UTILIZING PRE-DEVELOPMENT MEETINGS AS DISCUSSED IN SDC 5.1-120: Proposed deed restrictions and a draft of any Homeowner’s Association Agreement Additional plans and documentation for submittal of a Cluster Subdivision proposal as specified in SDC 3.2-230 Riparian Area Protection Report for properties located within 150 feet of the top of bank of any Water Quality Limited Watercourses (WQLW) or within 100 feet of the top of bank of any direct tributaries of WQLW A Geotechnical Report prepared by an engineer must be submitted concurrently if there are unstable soils and/or a high water table present Where the development area is within an overlay district, address the additional standards of the overlay district If five or more trees are proposed to be removed, a Tree Felling Permit as specified in SDC 5.19-100 A wetland delineation approved by the Oregon Division of State Lands must be submitted concurrently where there is a wetland on the property Any required federal or state permit must be submitted concurrently or evidence the permit application has been submitted for review Where any grading, filling or excavating is proposed with the development, a Land and Drainage Alteration permit must be submitted prior to development x n/a n/a x n/a x x n/a x Docusign Envelope ID: D0DC7A35-663D-4C7C-A856-3426D775993B Revised 1/7/14 kl 7 of 10 Where applicable, any Discretionary Use or Variance as specified in SDC 5.9-100 and 5.21-100 An Annexation application, as specified in SDC 5.7-100, where a development is proposed outside of the city limits but within the City’s urban service area and can be served by sanitary sewer All public improvements proposed to be installed and to include the approximate time of installation and method of financing x n/a x Docusign Envelope ID: D0DC7A35-663D-4C7C-A856-3426D775993B December 6, 2013 REQUIRED STORMWATER SCOPING SHEET USE POLICY: In October 2003, Springfield Public Works released a trial “stormwater scoping sheet,” provided to help engineers and developers meet stormwater requirements in the Springfield Development Code (SDC) and Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual (EDSPM). After a five month trial period, it became apparent that users of the scoping sheet submitted much more complete applications than non-users. An added bonus was a decrease in the overall review time spent on the applications, resulting in quicker notice of decisions. As a result of the benefits of the scoping sheets, the City has decided to make their use a mandatory process. Current city policy is that the use of stormwater scoping sheets is required for all applications which require development review. All applications submitted to the City shall provide a copy of a completed stormwater scoping sheet with the application packet. Attached with this letter is the latest version of the scoping sheet, which reflects changes requested by the development community. PLEASE NOTE: SUBMITTED APPLICATIONS WILL NOW BE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT A COMPLETED STORMWATER SCOPING SHEET, STORMWATER STUDY AND PLANS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE SCOPE REQUIREMENTS DIRECTIONS FOR USING STORMWATER SCOPING SHEETS ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1.) Obtain scoping sheet from application packet, city website, or other location. 2.) Fill out project information (top half of front sheet) prior to commencement of work on stormwater study. (Note: Do not sign scoping sheet until it is received from the City with requirements checked.) 3.) Mail, fax, or email all pages to: City of Springfield, Development and Public Works Dept., Attn: Clayton McEachern. 4.) Receive completed scoping sheet (filled out by the City) indicating minimum requirements for a complete stormwater study. 5.) Include four (4) copies of complete scoping sheet (signed by engineer at the bottom of page 2), stormwater study and plans that comply with the minimum required scope with submittal of application packet. The scoping sheet shall be included as an attachment, inside the front cover of the stormwater study. Stormwater scoping sheets can be found with all application packets (City website and the DPW front counter) as well as on the Engineering and Construction Resources webpage located at: http://www.springfield- or.gov/DPW/EngineeringandConstructionResources.htm under the Public Improvement Permit Projects Forms section. Thank you in advance for working with the City of Springfield with this new process. Sincerely, Clayton McEachern, PE City of Springfield, Development and Public Works Email: cmceachern@springfield-or.gov Phone: (541) 736 – 1036 Fax: (541) 736 – 1021 CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 225 FIFTH STREET SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 PHONE: 541.726.3753 FAX: 541.736.1021 www.springfield-or.gov Docusign Envelope ID: D0DC7A35-663D-4C7C-A856-3426D775993B Return to Clayton McEachern @ City of Springfield, email: cmceachern@springfield-or,gov, FAX: (541) 736-1021 CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 225 FIFTH STREET SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 PHONE: 541.726.3753 FAX: 541.726.1021 www.springfield-or.gov STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SCOPE OF WORK Project Name: Applicant: Assessors Parcel #: Date: Land Use(s): Phone #: Project Size (Acres): Fax #: Approx. Impervious Area: Email: Project Description (Include a copy of Assessor’s map): Drainage Proposal (Public connection(s), discharge location(s), etc. Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary: Proposed Stormwater Best Management Practices: Drainage Study Type (EDSPM Section 4.03.2): (Note, UH may be substituted for Rational Method) Small Site Study – (use Rational Method for calculations) Mid-Level Development Study – (use Unit Hydrograph Method for calculations) Full Drainage Development Study – (use Unit Hydrograph Method for calculations) Environmental Considerations: Wellhead Zone: Hillside Development: Wetland/Riparian: Floodway/Floodplain: Soil Type: Other Jurisdictions Downstream Analysis: N/A Flow line for starting water surface elevation: Design HGL to use for starting water surface elevation: Manhole/Junction to take analysis to: --------------------------------- (Area below this line filled out by the City and Returned to the Applicant) ---------------------------- (At a minimum, all boxes checked by the City on the front and back of this sheet shall be submitted for an application to be complete for submittal, although other requirements may be necessary.) ------------------------------------------------- (Area below this line filled out by Applicant) -------------------------------------------------- (Please return to Clayton McEachern @ City of Springfield Development and Public Works; Fax # 736-1021, Phone # 736-1036), email:cmceachern@springfield-or.gov Docusign Envelope ID: D0DC7A35-663D-4C7C-A856-3426D775993B Form Version 5: June 2015 COMPLETE STUDY ITEMS *Based upon the information provided on the front of this sheet, the following represents a minimum of what is needed for an application to be complete for submittal with respect to drainage; however, this list should not be used in lieu of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) or the City’s Engineering Design Manual. Compliance with these requirements does not constitute site approval; Additional site specific information may be required. Note: Upon scoping sheet submittal, ensure completed form has been signed in the space provided below: Interim Design Standards/Water Quality (EDSPM Chapter 3) Req’d N/A All non-building rooftop (NBR) impervious surfaces shall be pre-treated (e.g. multi-chambered catchbasin w/oil filtration media) for stormwater quality. Additionally, a minimum of 50% of the NBR impervious surface shall be treated by vegetated methods. Where required, vegetative stormwater design shall be consistent with design standards (EDSPM Section 3.02), set forth in Chapter 2 of the Eugene Stormwater Management Manual. For new NBR impervious area less than 15,000 square feet, a simplified design approach may be followed as specified by the Eugene Stormwater Management Manual (Sec2.4.1). If a stormwater treatment swale is proposed, submit calculations/specifications for sizing, velocity, flow, side slopes, bottom slope, and seed mix consistent with City of Springfield or Eugene’s Stormwater Management Manual. Water Quality calculations as required in Section 3.03.1 of the EDSPM. All building rooftop mounted equipment, or other fluid containing equipment located outside of the building, shall be provided with secondary containment or weather resistant enclosure. General Study Requirements (EDSPM Section 4.03) Drainage study prepared by a Professional Civil Engineer licensed in the state of Oregon. A complete drainage study, as required in EDSPM Section 4.03.1, including a hydrological study map. Calculations showing system capacity for a 2-year storm event and overflow effects of a 25-year storm event. The time of concentration (Tc) shall be determined using a 10 minute start time for developed basins. Review of Downstream System (EDSPM Section 4.03.4.C) A downstream drainage analysis as described in EDSPM Section 4.03.4.C. On-site drainage shall be governed by the Oregon Plumbing Specialty Code (OPSC). Elevations of the HGL and flow lines for both city and private systems where applicable. Design of Storm Systems (EDSPM Section 4.04). Flow lines, slopes, rim elevations, pipe type and sizes clearly indicated on the plan set. Minimum pipe cover shall be 18 inches for reinforced pipe and 36 inches for plain concrete and plastic pipe materials, or proper engineering calculations shall be provided when less. The cover shall be sufficient to support an 80,000 lb load without failure of the pipe structure. Manning’s “n” values for pipes shall be consistent with Table 4-1 of the EDSP. All storm pipes shall be designed to achieve a minimum velocity of three (3) feet per second at 0.5 pipe full based on Table 4-1 as well. Other/Miscellaneous Existing and proposed contours, located at one foot interval. Include spot elevations and site grades showing how site drains. Private stormwater easements shall be clearly depicted on plans when private stormwater flows from one property to another. Drywells shall not receive runoff from any surface w/o being treated by one or more BMPs, with the exception of residential building roofs (EDSP Section 3.03.4.A). Additional provisions apply to this as required by the DEQ. Refer to the website: http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/uic/uic.htm for more information. Detention ponds shall be designed to limit runoff to pre-development rates for the 2 through 25-year storm events. *This form shall be included as an attachment, inside the front cover, of the stormwater study. For Official Use Only: As the engineer of record, I hereby certify the above required items are complete and included with the submitted stormwater study and plan set. Signature Date . * IMPORTANT: ENGINEER PLEASE READ BELOW AND SIGN! Docusign Envelope ID: D0DC7A35-663D-4C7C-A856-3426D775993B Springfield Meadows Subdivision Tentative Subdivision Narrative This written statement was created to accompany the Tentative subdivision for Springfield Meadows Subdivision. The subject property is located on the parcel south of Jasper Meadows Sixth and Seventh Addition (tax lot 18-02-03-33-00100). The existing property is vacant and is zoned Low Density Residential. It is approximately 11.52 acres. The applicant is proposing 36 lots with associated infrastructure. This proposed subdivision meets the City of Springfield’s intent to provide more housing opportunities. In this written statement, Springfield Development Code (SDC) 5.12-145 Land Divisions – Partitions and Subdivisions Plat Criteria are addressed to demonstrate that this application clearly meets all of the SDC requirements and criteria. Within this document, the SDC text excerpts are in italics and the applicant’s responses are in plain text. Applicant / Owners Representative A & O Engineering LLC Scott Morris, PE 380 Q Street, Ste 200 Springfield, OR 97477 (541) 302-9790 scottmorris@ao-engr.com Owner Wizard Rock LLC 1528 NW 9th St. Bend, OR 97703 Project Location Address: No Address Assigned Tax Lot: 18-02-03-33 T.L. 100 Existing Use of Site The project site is currently vacant. Proposed Use The applicant is proposing to create 36 lots for single family homes along with the associated infrastructure. The essential components of the Springfield Meadows Subdivision application include: • 33 lots that meet or exceed City standards for future, detached, single-family homes. There are an additional 3 lots that are below the 3,000 sf minimum, and a minor variance application for these lots is being submitted concurrently with this application. • Approximately 7.59 acres of open space is incorporated into the subdivision, with 6.95 acres being protected by wetland conservation deed restriction. This area is shown on the site plans included with the submittal. • Cluster development to protect natural features, provide needed housing, and maintain anticipated housing density across subject property. • An interconnected public street system, including sidewalks and landscaping strips. • Integrated on-site stormwater management system. This application includes the City of Springfield (City) application forms, written materials, and preliminary plans necessary for the City to review and determine compliance with applicable approved criteria. Land Use The zoning is low density residential – R-1 The land uses of the abutting properties are: North: Low Density Residential - Existing subdivision – Jasper 7 East: Low Density Residential - Existing subdivision – Jasper 9 South: Light Medium Industrial - Vacant West: Low Density Residential – Vacant owned by City of Springfield The proposed project meets the land use requirements of the development code given the abutting land use zoning and uses. The setbacks required for the project are: Front Setback: 10 feet from PL / Garage 18 feet from PL Side Yard Setbacks: 5 feet from PL Rear Yard Setback: 10 feet from PL A site assessment has been prepared by a licensed engineer including physical features at the time of the site survey, time of travel zones and other requirements. The proposed site is outside of the 500-year floodplain. A preliminary stormwater management plan has been included with this submittal. The proposed subdivision is located on the south side of the existing Jasper Meadows Subdivision Sixth and Seventh Addition. All existing infrastructure that provides facilities to this site are shown on the existing conditions and proposed site plan sheets. All public facilities proposed to be constructed to serve this subdivision are shown on the plan sheets submitted with this application. The location and dimensions of proposed and existing driveways are shown and are in compliance with frontage requirements for lot parcels established in SDC 3.2.215. There are no existing transit routes or stops within one mile of the project site. The closest transit stop is on Main Street to the North. The proposed and existing lighting is shown and is in compliance with lighting standards established in SDC 4.2.145. 25’ mounting height was used in the attached preliminary photometric analysis. Final design of street lighting system will be completed during the PIP process. SDC 5.12-115 Plat Criteria The Director, in consultation with the City Surveyor and City Engineer, shall approve or deny the Plat. Approval shall be based on compliance with the following criteria: A. The lot/parcel dimensions shall conform to the minimum standards of this code. When lots/parcels are more than double the minimum are permitted by the zoning district, the Director shall require that these lots/parcels be arranged: The proposed lots are in conformance with the minimum standards of Springfield Development Code. Three lots are less than 3,000 square feet due to minimizing wetland impacts and other factors. A minor variance application has been submitted concurrent with the tentative subdivision to request these lots to remain below the 3,000 SF minimum requirement. See table below: Lot 4 2891 Lot 5 2955 Lot 25 2902 B. Double frontage lots/parcels shall be avoided, unless necessary to prevent access to residential development from collector and arterial streets or to overcome specific topographic situations. No double frontage lots are proposed as part of this subdivision C. Panhandle lots/parcels shall comply with the standards specified in SDC 3.2.215 and 4.2.120(A). In the case of multiple panhandles in Subdivisions, construction of necessary utilities to serve all approved panhandle lots/parcels shall occur prior to recording the Plat. No panhandle lots are proposed as part of this subdivision. D. Public street standards as specified in SDC 4.2.105 (block length) The block length for South 57th Street is approximately 900 feet in length. It is impossible to shorten this block length due to existing wetlands and development on the East and West side of the street. South 57th Street will be extended to the South in the future to provide a secondary access to this subdivision. The new proposed East/West Street within the subdivision is approximately 800 feet long. Due to topography and wetlands, there are no opportunities for additional street connections. Lane County has indicated they will not allow a new intersection at Bob Straub Parkway, which prohibits extending the street to that location. However, an emergency vehicle access connecting to Bob Straub Parkway is proposed. Per adopted transportation plans, a future intersection will be created further south along the parkway, SE of the proposed development. The street system from this development will eventually have access to Bob Straub Parkway when this new intersection is constructed and the property to the South developed. In the interim, Lane County has indicated they will allow an emergency vehicle only access from the development to Bob Straub Parkway. Attached to this narrative is a copy of an email and hand sketch from Lane County that acknowledges this concept will work. A Lane County facility permit and final design of this emergency access connection will be completed during the public improvement permit process. SDC 5.12-120 Tentative Plan Submittal Requirements A. General Requirements 1) The Tentative Plan, including any required Future Development Plan, shall be prepared by an Oregon Licensed Professional Land Surveyor on standard sheets of 18 inches x 24 inches. The services of an Oregon Licensed Professional Engineer may also be required by the City in order to resolve utility issues (especially stormwater management, street design and transportation issues), and site constraint and/or water quality issues. The tentative plan has been prepared by Scott Morris, PE of A & O Engineering, and CMT Surveying to adequately and comprehensively address all standards and requirements of this code, including stormwater management, street design, transportation issues and site constraints (2) The scale of the Tentative Plan shall be appropriate to the area involved and the amount of detail and data, normally 1 inch = 50 feet, 1 inch = 100 feet, or 1 inch = 200 feet. A scale of 1 inch = 40 feet has been used. (3) A north arrow and the date the Tentative Plan was prepared. A north arrow and date are included on the tentative subdivision plan drawing set that is being submitted with this application. (4) The name and address of the owner, applicant, if different, and the Land Surveyor and/or Engineer who prepared the Partition Tentative Plan. All of the above information has been included on the cover sheet of this narrative and is also located on the plan set included with this submittal. (5) A drawing of the boundaries of the entire area owned by the partitioner or subdivider of which the proposed land division is a part. The boundaries of subject property are shown on the site plan. (6) City boundaries, the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and any special service district boundaries or railroad right-of-way, which cross or abut the proposed land division. The entirety of the proposed site is within the Springfield City limits. The annexation was completed in 2005. (7) Applicable zoning districts and the Metro Plan designation of the proposed land division and of properties within 100 feet of the boundary of the subject property. The subject property is zoned LDR (Low Density Residential) and designated Low Density in the Metro Plan. (8) The dimensions (in feet) and size (either in square feet or acres) of each lot/parcel and the approximate dimensions of each building site, where applicable, and the top and toe of cut and fill slopes to scale. The proposed lot sizes (square feet) are clearly labeled on the attached tentative subdivision plan drawing set. (9) The location, outline to scale and present use of all existing structures to remain on the property after platting and their required setbacks from the proposed new property lines. There are no existing structures on the property. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable. (10) The location and size of existing and proposed utilities and necessary easements and dedications on and adjacent to the site, including, but not limited to, sanitary sewer mains, stormwater management systems, water mains, power, gas, telephone, and cable TV. Indicate the proposed connection points. There is an existing 8” public sanitary mainline that runs underneath the proposed right-of- ways. This existing sanitary sewer was constructed to serve the Jasper Meadows subdivision, phase nine that is east of the subject property and east of Bob Straub Parkway. This existing mainline does have capacity to accept sewer discharge from the new single- family lots. It is proposed to leave this existing sanitary mainline in place and connect new 4 inch laterals to provide service to each lot. The City of Springfield Engineering Design Standards & Procedures Manual section 2.02.10.D outlines what is approved by the City for new sewer service laterals. Section 2.02.10.D.1 states: “A new sewer tap with a 4 inch service lateral in the sewer easement or public right of way will be allowed only on existing 8 and 10 inch sewer mains.” Section 2.02.10.D.4 states: “The appropriate Inserta-Tee will be used as a tap on sewer mains 8 inches in diameter and greater based on sewer main material and size….” Given the above listed code sections, it is proposed to connect one 4 inch lateral per lot into the existing 8 inch sewer main with an Inserta-tee. The above referenced sections allow for the sewage connection proposal and therefore City standards are met with the proposal. Existing stormwater runoff from the undeveloped site currently drains to wetlands in the middle of the property that then follows the historic drainage pattern to the west off-site. There are existing culverts under the existing gravel access way over the existing sewer mainline. These culverts then discharge stormwater runoff from the site into the historic drainage path to the west. It is proposed to construct filtration stormwater planters to treat and detain stormwater runoff from the new impervious improvements. Due to the wetlands and soil characteristics on-site infiltration is likely not a viable discharge option. It is proposed to discharge treated and detained stormwater runoff into upland areas (non- wetland areas). The runoff will then follow the historic drainage path to the existing culverts under the future S 57th Street. Since treated and detained stormwater runoff will be discharged upstream of any wetlands it is the applicant’s opinion that no state or federal permits are needed for this stormwater discharge. No wetland impacts are proposed as part of this development. There is an existing SUB water main at the south end of the existing S 57th Street and on the west side of Bob Straub Parkway that are available for service and connection. It is proposed to construct a new SUB water main through the development within proposed right-of-ways and easements to serve this new development. This mainline is proposed to connect into the two connection points noted above. An 8” water main will be adequate to provide the required domestic and fire protection systems for this development. Fire hydrants are proposed to meet Oregon Fire Code and provide the required fire protection for this subdivision. No fire sprinkler systems are proposed for the future homes. The water line will be stubbed to the South end of the property in each right of way to provide future service to undeveloped properties to the South. Should the line be required to be upsized, it is assumed SUB will pay the oversize costs for the water system. Franchise utilities (power, gas, cable tv, etc…) are available near the south end of the S 57th Street right-of-way for connection. There also is an existing overhead power line that is south of the subject property close to the property line (exact location shown on plans). New franchise utilities are proposed to be routed underground through the subdivision within public utility easements to serve the new development. (11) The locations, widths and purpose of all existing or proposed easements on and abutting the proposed land division; the location of any existing or proposed reserve strips. All proposed public and private easements are shown on the attached Civil Engineering Plan drawing set (12) The locations of all areas to be dedicated or reserved for public use, with the purpose, condition or limitations of the reservations clearly indicated. The attached site plan shows the areas to be dedicated to the public for streets, sidewalks and public utilities. Tract A is proposed open space to remain and has an existing deed restriction over the wetland portion to prohibit development on that portion of the property. This tract is proposed to be conveyed to the home owners association for ownership and maintenance. Alternatively, the applicant is open to dedicating Tract A to the Willamalane Parks district for their ownership and maintenance. Tract B is for a stormwater management facilities that will be conveyed to the City of Springfield for ownership and maintenance upon completion. A detailed landscape plan for each vegetated stormwater facility will be completed by a licensed Landscape Architect during the public improvement permit process. A permanent Irrigation system within the vegetated stormwater facilities will be provided, but the Owner is requesting to defer this as a design/build item during construction. An as-built of the irrigation system will be provided to the City with the PIP as-built drawings. B. A Site Assessment of the Entire Development Area Existing wetlands, for which mitigation and monitoring compliance has been completed, north of the proposed development on site are shown on included Civil engineering plans. There are no proposed wetland impacts with this project and therefore, no JPA fill permit will be necessary. The DSL wetland concurrence and a copy of the existing deed restriction are included in this submittal. Also included is the final sign off letter from DSL indicating the wetland process and monitoring was complete to their requirements. There are no areas of the site within the 100 year floodplain or floodway boundaries. There are no physical features that preclude development on the proposed property as shown on the site plan. A tree felling permit will be submitted prior during the PIP phase of the project and will be obtained prior to start of construction or removal of any trees. The soil types on the proposed property include: Hazelair Silty Clay Loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes Salkum Silt Loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes C. A Stormwater Management Plan A stormwater management plan for the development showing compliance with the applicable provisions of SDC 4.3.110 and the Engineering Design Standards and Procedures Manual has been included with this submittal. D. (D) A response to transportation issues complying with the provisions of this code. All of the required information in this checklist item are shown on the plan sheets included with this submittal. The proposed subdivision is 36 lots, which will generate approximately 360 ADT or 54 peak hour trips. Therefore a TIA is not required for this development. E. A Future Development Plan Due to the existing wetland conservation deed restriction and the inability to connect an intersection to Bob Straub Parkway, there is no future development possible on the site. Therefore, no future development plan is included with this submittal. (3) Discusses the timing and financial provisions relating to phasing. The project is intended to be constructed in one phase in Spring/Summer, 2025. 5.12.125 Tentative Plan Criteria (A) The request conforms to the provisions of this code pertaining to lot/parcel size and dimensions. The average lot size is 3,436 square feet which conforms with Springfield Development Code standards. There are 3 lots below the 3,000 square foot minimum which is being addressed with a minor variance application concurrent with this submittal. The average lot frontage is 34 feet. (B) Capacity requirements of public and private facilities, including but not limited to, water and electricity; sanitary sewer and stormwater management facilities; and streets and traffic safety controls shall not be exceeded and the public improvements shall be available to serve the site at the time of development, unless otherwise provided for by this code and other applicable regulations. The Director or a utility provider shall determine capacity issues. In preliminary discussions with City of Springfield Public Works and Springfield Utility Board, the existing public utilities and facilities available to the site are adequate to serve the proposed development. (C) The proposed land division shall comply with all applicable public and private design and construction standards contained in this code and other applicable regulations. The proposed land division complies with all applicable public and private design and construction standards contained in this code and other applicable regulations. (D) Physical features, including, but not limited to: steep slopes with unstable soil or geologic conditions; areas with susceptibility of flooding; significant clusters of trees and shrubs; watercourses shown on the WQLW Map and their associated riparian areas; other riparian areas and wetlands specified in SDC 4.3.117; rock outcroppings; open spaces; and areas of historic and/or archaeological significance, as may be specified in SDC 3.3.900 or ORS 97.740.760, 358.905.955 and 390.235.240, shall be protected as specified in this code or in State or Federal law. Wetland permitting was completed and resulted in the wetland conservation deed restriction that is shown on the existing conditions plan sheet. A copy of the final approval letter from DSL is included with this submittal. GeoPacific performed a site geotechnical investigation which concluded the site soils are suitable for this development. A copy of the geotechnical report is included with this application submittal. There are no physical features that would prevent developing the property as designed and shown on the proposed site plan. (E) Parking areas and ingress-egress points have been designed to: facilitate vehicular traffic, bicycle and pedestrian safety to avoid congestion; provide connectivity within the development area and to adjacent residential areas, transit stops, neighborhood activity centers, and commercial, industrial and public areas; minimize driveways on arterial and collector streets as specified in this code or other applicable regulations and comply with the ODOT access management standards for State highways. The proposed local street section meets the requirements outlined in the Springfield Development Code. This will include provisions for vehicle traffic and sidewalks. There is no on-street parking proposed. (F) Development of any remainder of the property under the same ownership can be accomplished as specified in this code. Due to wetlands, no additional site development is proposed. (G) Adjacent land can be developed or is provided access that will allow its development as specified in this code. The proposed development is designed in such a way that adjacent parcel to the South has been provided access to and is able to be developed in the future. The property to the West is owned by the City of Springfield and is designated as wetland that will prohibit development. The Eastern edge of the property is the right of way for Bob Straub Parkway, which Lane County has indicated will not allow a future full intersection. As discussed earlier in this narrative, Lane County has indicated an emergency vehicle access only is feasible and they provided a rough sketch of one possible design. Final design and Lane County facility permit will be completed during the public improvement process. Correspondence from Lane County regarding this issue is attached to the narrative. 5.12.130 Tentative Plan Conditions (A) Dedication of Right-of-Way and/or Utility Easements. (1) Right-of-way, when shown in the Springfield Transportation System Plan (including the Conceptual Street Map), the transportation elements of refinement plans, or as specified in Table 4.2.1. (2) Easements as specified in SDC 4.3.140, when necessary to provide services, including, but not limited to: sanitary sewers, stormwater management, water and electricity, to the site and neighboring properties. The dedication of easements shall also include any easements required to access and maintain watercourses or wetlands that are part of the City’s Stormwater Management System. All proposed tracts, rights of way and easements are shown on the proposed site plan. (C) Installation of traffic signals and signs; restricting access to and from arterial or collector streets; requiring a frontage road; restricting and strategically locating driveways; and/or requiring the joint use of driveways to serve 2 or more lots/parcels through a Joint Use/Access Agreement when transportation safety issues are identified by the Transportation Planning Engineer and/or a Traffic Impact Study. No new traffic signals are proposed as part of this subdivision. No joint use driveways are proposed as part of this subdivision. (D) Modification of the layout of parcel lines caused by the location of streets, required stormwater management systems, including but not limited to: swales and detention basins or when required by the Geotechnical report specified in SDC 5.12.120 There are no specific modifications proposed, except the (3) lots that are slightly below the 3,000 sf minimum. (G) Submittal of a Land and Drainage Alteration Permit A Land and Drainage Alteration Permit will be submitted as part of the PIP process and prior to starting construction. Additionally, a 1200-CN permit will be obtained from the Department of Environmental Quality prior to the start of construction. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Scott Morris via email (scottmorris@ao-engr.com) or phone (541-302-9790). From:BAJRACHARYA Shashi To:LIEBLER Michael Cc:SOLIWODA Mike; VARTANIAN Sasha L Subject:RE: Jasper Phase 10 conditions for secondary access Date:Tuesday, July 25, 2023 3:00:29 PM Attachments:Xerox Multifunction Printer 230725 14_35_21.pdf **| WARNING: This email originated from outside of your organization. Please do notclick on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. |** Hi Michael, Thanks for reaching out to us for County’s expectations in creating an emergency access off BSP. As you are aware, BSP is a limited access facility and it must remain so including to pedestrians for the traffic safety. We recognize the need for an emergency access for developing parcel 18020333 00100. Lane County believes that the emergency access can be temporary, designed for single use, and created with minimum impact to the right of way. Here is a concept for creating an unrecognizable, minimal impact emergency access within the County right of way. -Developer creates a standard access approach within the property as per developer’s plan and per city requirements that will be stubbed out at the property line. -the property will be fenced off with standard residential fence without a gate or opening. -LC will permit minimum improvements required for accessing the internal street. Access tracks can be concrete blocks or compacted gravel adequate for passing the fire engine across the right of way. No apron or visible improvements will connect to BSP. The improvements can begin from the roadside ditch and the crossings will be just adequate for limited use and will not affect the local hydraulics. Attached is a rough sketch of the concept. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Shashi Bajracharya Cell: (541) 525-1822 Desk:(541) 682-8510 From: LIEBLER Michael <mliebler@springfield-or.gov> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 9:23 AM To: BAJRACHARYA Shashi <shashi.bajracharya@lanecountyor.gov> Subject: RE: Jasper Phase 10 conditions for secondary access [EXTERNAL ⚠] Great! Thanks, Michael Liebler, P.E. Transportation Planning Engineer City of Springfield, Public Works 225 Fifth Street Springfield OR 97477 Phone: 541.736.1034 mliebler@springfield-or.gov From: BAJRACHARYA Shashi <shashi.bajracharya@lanecountyor.gov> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 9:23 AM To: LIEBLER Michael <mliebler@springfield-or.gov> Subject: RE: Jasper Phase 10 conditions for secondary access **| WARNING: This email originated from outside of your organization. Please do notclick on links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. |** Certainly, I will work on it soon. Thank you. Shashi Bajracharya Cell: (541) 525-1822 Desk:(541) 682-8510 From: LIEBLER Michael <mliebler@springfield-or.gov> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 9:21 AM To: BAJRACHARYA Shashi <shashi.bajracharya@lanecountyor.gov> Subject: Jasper Phase 10 conditions for secondary access [EXTERNAL 14835 SW 72nd Avenue Tel (503) 598-8445 Portland, Oregon 97224 Fax (503) 941-9281 Real-World Geotechnical Solutions Investigation • Design • Construction Support Geotechnical Engineering Report Limerick Property Lane County Tax Map 18020333 Tax Lot 100 Springfield, Oregon GeoPacific Engineering, Inc. Project No. 23-6386 October 5, 2023 Real-World Geotechnical Solutions Investigation • Design • Construction Support 6386-Limerick Property GR i TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Appendices ............................................................................................................................................... i List of Figures ...................................................................................................................................................... i PROJECT INFORMATION ..................................................................................................................................... 1 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................ 1 REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGIC SETTING ......................................................................................................... 1 REGIONAL SEISMIC SETTING ............................................................................................................................... 2 Cascadia Subduction Zone ............................................................................................................................................. 2 FIELD EXPLORATION AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................... 2 Soil Descriptions ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Groundwater and Soil Moisture .................................................................................................................................... 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................... 6 Site Preparation Recommendations .............................................................................................................................. 7 Engineered Fill ............................................................................................................................................................... 8 Excavating Conditions and Utility Trench Backfill .......................................................................................................... 8 Erosion Control Considerations ...................................................................................................................................... 9 Wet Weather Earthwork .............................................................................................................................................. 10 Spread Foundations ..................................................................................................................................................... 10 Concrete Slabs-on-Grade ............................................................................................................................................. 12 Permanent Below-Grade Foundation Walls ................................................................................................................ 12 Pavement Design ......................................................................................................................................................... 14 Seismic Design ............................................................................................................................................................. 14 Soil Liquefaction ........................................................................................................................................................... 15 Drainage ...................................................................................................................................................................... 15 UNCERTAINTIES AND LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................... 17 REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 CHECKLIST OF RECOMMENDED GEOTECHNICAL TESTING AND OBSERVATION .................................................... 19 List of Appendices Figures Exploration Logs Results of Laboratory Testing – Expansion Index Of Soil Maintenance of Hillside Homesites and Slopes List of Figures 1 Vicinity Map 2 Lidar Based Vicinity Map – with Mapped Landslides 3 Site Grading Plan and Exploration Locations 4 Cut/Fill Grading Plan and Exploration Locations Real-World Geotechnical Solutions Investigation • Design • Construction Support 6386-Limerick Property GR 1 October 5, 2023 Project No. 23-6386 Roseann Johnson Lennar Northwest 11807 NE 99th Street, Suite 1170 Vancouver, Washington 98682 Via email: Roseann.johnson@lennar.com SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT LIMERICK PROPERTY LANE COUNTY TAX MAP 18020333 TAX LOT 100 SPRINGFIELD, OREGON PROJECT INFORMATION This report presents the results of a geotechnical engineering study conducted by GeoPacific Engineering, Inc. (GeoPacific) for the above-referenced project. The purpose of our investigation was to evaluate subsurface conditions at the site and to provide geotechnical recommendations for site development. This geotechnical study was performed in accordance with GeoPacific Proposal No. P-8482, dated June 20, 2023, and your subsequent authorization of our proposal and General Conditions for Geotechnical Services. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject site is located at the southern terminus of S. 57th Street and the west side of Bob Straub Parkway in the City of Springfield, Lane County, Oregon (Figure 1). The property is approximately 11.5 acres in size and topography is predominantly gently sloping to the north with grades of approximately 5 to 10 percent (Figures 2 and 3). A tributary and an intermittent tributary to the Middle Fork Willamette River are present in the northern and eastern portions of the property. Wetland areas have been delineated by others adjacent to the tributaries. The site is currently unimproved with the exception of a gravel roadway and a waste water utility easement. Vegetation consists primarily of short grasses and sparse trees. It is our understanding that the proposed development is to consist of a 34 lot subdivision for the construction of new single-family homes with associated stormwater planters, new streets, and underground utilities. The homes will likely be two stories in height and supported by conventional spread footings. The grading plan provided for our review indicates fill placement of approximately 11 feet and cuts up to 7 feet. Retaining walls up to 7 feet are proposed (Figures 3 and 4). REGIONAL AND LOCAL GEOLOGIC SETTING Regionally, the subject site lies within the Willamette Valley/Puget Sound lowland, a broad structural depression situated between the Coast Range on the west and the Cascade Range Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 2 on the east. A series of discontinuous faults subdivide the Willamette Valley into a mosaic of fault-bounded, structural blocks (Yeats et al., 1996). Uplifted structural blocks form bedrock highlands, while down-warped structural blocks form sedimentary basins. Regional geologic mapping indicates the site is underlain by the middle Eocene to upper Oligocene aged (45 to 25 million years ago) Fisher Formation (Hladky and McCaslin, 2006). The Fisher Formation can be up to 5,500 feet thick and generally consists of sandy or cobbly mudstone and silty or clayey sandstone that are moderately to poorly sorted (Yeats, et al., 1996). In the Springfield area, the fluvial Fisher Formation is primarily massive but may contain occasional thin bedding (Hladky and McCaslin, 2006). REGIONAL SEISMIC SETTING At least one potential source zone capable of generating damaging earthquakes is thought to exist in the region. Cascadia Subduction Zone The Cascadia Subduction Zone is a 680-mile-long zone of active tectonic convergence where oceanic crust of the Juan de Fuca Plate is subducting beneath the North American continent at a rate of 4 cm per year (Goldfinger et al., 1996). A growing body of geologic evidence suggests that prehistoric subduction zone earthquakes have occurred (Atwater, 1992; Carver, 1992; Peterson et al., 1993; Geomatrix Consultants, 1995). This evidence includes: (1) buried tidal marshes recording episodic, sudden subsidence along the coast of northern California, Oregon, and Washington, (2) burial of subsided tidal marshes by tsunami wave deposits, (3) paleoliquefaction features, and (4) geodetic uplift patterns on the Oregon coast. Radiocarbon dates on buried tidal marshes indicate a recurrence interval for major subduction zone earthquakes of 250 to 650 years with the last event occurring 300 years ago (Atwater, 1992; Carver, 1992; Peterson et al., 1993; Geomatrix Consultants, 1995). The inferred seismogenic portion of the plate interface lies approximately 50 miles west of the Portland Basin at depths of between 20 and 40 kilometers below the surface. FIELD EXPLORATION AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS Our site-specific exploration for this report was conducted on August 16, 2023. Six exploratory test pits were excavated with a medium sized backhoe to depths ranging between 5.5 and 13 feet at the approximate locations presented on Figure 2. It should be noted that exploration locations were located in the field by pacing or taping distances from apparent property corners and other site features shown on the plans provided. As such, the locations of the explorations should be considered approximate. A GeoPacific Engineering Geologist continuously monitored the field exploration program and logged the explorations. Soils observed in the explorations were classified in general accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Rock hardness was classified in accordance with Table 1, modified from the ODOT Rock Hardness Classification Chart. During exploration, our geologist also noted geotechnical conditions such as soil consistency, moisture and groundwater conditions. Logs of the explorations are attached to this report. The following report sections are based on the exploration program and summarize subsurface conditions encountered at the site. Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 3 Table 1. Rock Hardness Classification Chart ODOT Rock Hardness Rating Field Criteria Unconfined Compressive Strength Typical Equipment Needed For Excavation Extremely Soft (R0) Indented by thumbnail <100 psi Small excavator Very Soft (R1) Scratched by thumbnail, crumbled by rock hammer 100-1,000 psi Small excavator Soft (R2) Not scratched by thumbnail, indented by rock hammer 1,000-4,000 psi Medium excavator (slow digging with small excavator) Medium Hard (R3) Scratched or fractured by rock hammer 4,000-8,000 psi Medium to large excavator (slow to very slow digging), typically requires chipping with hydraulic hammer or mass excavation) Hard (R4) Scratched or fractured w/ difficulty 8,000-16,000 psi Slow chipping with hydraulic hammer and/or blasting Very Hard (R5) Not scratched or fractured after many blows, hammer rebounds >16,000 psi Blasting Soil Descriptions On-site soils consist of undocumented fill, topsoil horizon, residual soil, and rock belonging to the Fisher Formation as described below. Undocumented Fill: Undocumented fill was encountered at the ground surface in test pit TP-4. The fill generally consisted of silty clay (CL) to clayey silt (ML) with trace gravel and organic debris and extended to a depth of 1 foot. Other areas or thicker areas of undocumented fill may be present outside our exploration locations, especially in the vicinity of the existing gravel access roadway. Topsoil Horizon: The ground surface in test pits TP-1 through TP-3, TP-5, and TP-6 was directly underlain by topsoil horizon. The topsoil horizon generally consisted of approximately 10 to 18 inches of highly organic, brown silt (OL-M) that contained fine roots throughout. Buried Topsoil Horizon: An approximately 12 inch thick buried topsoil horizon was encountered beneath the fill in test pit TP-4. The buried topsoil had a high organic content and extended to a depth of 2 feet below the ground surface. Residual Soil: Underlying the topsoil horizon in test pits TP-1 through TP-3, TP-5, and TP-6 and the buried topsoil horizon in TP-4 was residual soil formed by in-place decomposition of the underlying Fisher Formation. The residual soils encountered in test pits consisted of clayey silt (ML), fat clay (CH), and silty clay (CL), as described below. Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 4 Clayey Silt: Residual soil consisting of clayey silt (ML) was encountered beneath the topsoil horizon in test pits TP-1 through TP-3, TP-5, and TP-6 and the buried topsoil horizon in TP-4. The clayey silt was light brown in color and contained trace gravel in test pits TP-2. In our explorations, the clayey silt residual soil extended to depths of 2 to 3.5 feet. Fat Clay Soil – highly expansive: Very sticky, fat clay (CH) soil was encountered beneath the clayey silt residual soil in test pits TP-1 through TP-3. This gray to light brown clay contained trace gravel, had a stiff consistency, and was highly plastic. Laboratory testing of the sample obtained from test pit TP-1 at a depth of 3.5 to 4 feet indicates the fat clay is highly expansive with an expansion index of 126. The fat clay soils were encountered at a depth of 2 to 6.5 feet in test pits TP-1 through TP-3. Other areas of fat clay may be present outside our exploration locations. The highly expansive, fat clay was present at the depths indicated in Table 2. Table 2. Depths Of Highly Expansive, Fat Clay Soil Encountered As Measured From Existing Ground Surface. Exploration Designation Depths of Fat Clay Encountered (in feet) TP-1 3.5 – 6.5 TP-2 3.5 – 5.5 TP-3 2 – 4 Silty Clay: Silty clay (CL) residual soil was encountered beneath the fat clay in test pits TP-2 and TP-3 and beneath the clayey silt in TP-4. The silty clay was light brown to light gray in color, contained varying amounts of sand and gravel, and had a stiff to very stiff consistency. The silty clay residual soil extended to depths of 7.5 to 9 feet below the ground surface in test pits TP-2 through TP-4. Fisher Formation: The residual soil in all of our test pits was underlain by siltstone to sandstone belonging to the Fisher Formation. In explorations, the Fisher Formation generally consisted of light brown to gray siltstone, sandy siltstone, and sandstone. Laboratory testing of the siltstone material from test pit TP-3 indicates the siltstone has an expansion index of 131 and is very highly expansive. Although not tested for expansion potential, the sandstone member of the Fisher Formation should be considered to be expansive. Table 3 presents the depth of expansive siltstone encountered in our explorations. Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 5 Table 3. Depths of Very Highly Expansive Fisher Formation Encountered In Explorations As Measured From Existing Ground Surface. Exploration Designation Depths of Fisher Formation Encountered (in feet) TP-1 6.5 – >7.25 TP-2 9.0 – >9.0 TP-3 7.5 – >12.5 TP-4 9.0 – >12.0 TP-5 3.0 – >5.5 TP-6 2.0 – >13.0 The upper portion of the Fisher Formation materials were generally characterized as extremely soft (R0) to soft (R2) according to the ODOT Rock Hardness Classification Chart (Table 1). Siltstone and sandstone belonging to the Fisher Formation extended beyond the maximum depth of exploration in test pits. Practical refusal on soft (R2) to medium hard (R3) siltstone was achieved with a medium sized backhoe equipped with rock teeth at depths of 5.5 to 9 feet in test pits TP-1, TP-2, and TP-5. Table 4 below presents the depths at which rock was first encountered and the depth at which practical refusal on soft (R2) to medium hard (R3) rock was achieved in test pits. Table 4. Depth Of Hard Rock And Practical Refusal Encountered In Explorations. Exploration Designation Depth Rock First Encountered (feet) Depth of Practical Refusal on Medium Hard (R3) Siltstone (feet) TP-1 6.5 7.25 TP-2 9.0 9.0 TP-3 7.5 N/A (>12.5) TP-4 9.0 N/A (>12.0) TP-5 3.0 5.5 TP-6 2.0 N/A (>13.0) Groundwater and Soil Moisture On August 16, 2023 soils encountered in our explorations were damp to wet and perched groundwater seepage was encountered in test pits TP-2 through TP-4 at depths of 9 to 12 feet. Discharge was visually estimated at ¼ gallon per minute. Our review of nearby water well logs indicates static groundwater is present at a depth of approximately 85 feet below the ground surface (Oregon Water Resources Department, 2023). Experience has shown that temporary perched storm-related groundwater conditions often occur within the surface soils over fine- grained native deposits such as those beneath the site, particularly during the wet season. It is Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 6 anticipated that groundwater conditions will vary depending on the season, local subsurface conditions, changes in site utilization, and other factors. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Our investigation indicates that the proposed development is geotechnically feasible, provided that the recommendations of this report are incorporated into the design and construction phases of the project. The primary geotechnical constraints to development include: 1. The presence of highly expansive fat clay soils and very highly expansive siltstone. We encountered highly expansive fat clay soil in test pits TP-1 through TP-3 and very highly expansive bedrock in TP-1 through TP-6. Based on the subsurface conditions and the proposed grading, it is our opinion that the most practical and effective options for lowering the risk of damage to the proposed structures due to the presence of expansive materials are as follows: Design the foundations for the proposed residential structures with only continuous footings and selectively overexcavate the expansive clays and/or bedrock from below proposed structural foundation elements to a depth of at least 4 feet below the footings. By using continuous footings rather than isolated spread footings, the risk of damage to the proposed structure can be significantly reduced. Isolated spread footings are more likely than continuous spread footings to rise and fall differentially in relation to adjacent foundation elements, and are therefore more likely to lead to sticking doors and windows, unlevel floors, cracks in the drywall, etc. It may be advantageous to utilize truss joists between the continuous footings, so that loads occurring between the continuous footings can be transferred to the footings and minimize the areas, and thus volumes, requiring overexcavation. The minimum width of overexcavation should be at least 9 inches beyond the outside edges of the continuous footings. The material removed to a depth of at least 4 feet below the footings should be replaced with low expansivity soils containing at least 15 percent fines. These soils should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the Standard Proctor (ASTM D698). We anticipate that a silty gravel product from a quarry, commonly referred to as “reject rock” would be the ideal material to use for this application. Reject rock is a crushed rock product which simply contains too many fines to meet typical gradation specifications for use as road base rock or utility trench backfill. It should be noted that the fine- grained soils or silty gravel (reject rock) materials recommended for use as part of this option are likely to be moisture-sensitive and may be difficult/infeasible to place in periods of wet weather. This option is likely to be most practical when performed under dry weather conditions. 2. The depth of the bedrock beneath the site. Siltstone and sandstone belonging to the Fisher Formation were encountered throughout the site and was first encountered at depths of 2 to 9 feet. Practical refusal was encountered on soft (R2) to medium hard (R3) siltstone at depths of 5.5 to 9 feet in test pits TP-1, TP-2, and TP-5. Difficult excavating conditions should be expected. 3. The potential to encounter field drains at depths of up to about 5 feet. The storm system should be prepared to accommodate. Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 7 Site Preparation Recommendations Areas of proposed construction and areas to receive fill should be cleared of vegetation and any organic and inorganic debris. Inorganic debris and organic materials from clearing should be removed from the site. Organic-rich soils and root zones should then be stripped from construction areas of the site or where engineered fill is to be placed. Depth of stripping of existing topsoil is estimated to be approximately 9 to 12 inches; however, depth of organic soil layers may increase in areas. Deeper removals, root picking, and ripping may be necessary in areas of the property. The final depth of soil removal will be determined on the basis of a site inspection after the stripping/excavation has been performed. Stripped topsoil should be removed from areas proposed for placement of engineered fill. Any remaining topsoil should be stockpiled only in designated areas and stripping operations should be observed and documented by the geotechnical engineer or his representative. If encountered, undocumented fills and any subsurface structures (dry wells, basements, driveway and landscaping fill, old utility lines, septic leach fields, field drain tiles, etc.) should be completely removed and the excavations backfilled with engineered fill. Field drain tiles, if encountered, should be intercepted at the high end of the site and routed to the storm drain system. Undocumented fill was encountered at the ground surface in test pit TP-4 to a depth of 1 foot. Other areas and thicker areas of undocumented fill may be present outside our exploration locations, especially in the vicinity of the existing access roadway. Undocumented fill and any buried topsoil horizons should be removed to firm inorganic native soils and replaced with properly compacted engineered fill. Organic or otherwise deleterious portions of the fill should be exported from the site. Portions of undocumented fill soils that do not contain significant percentages of organics may be stockpiled for later use as engineered fill provided they are properly moisture conditioned for compaction and not mixed with topsoil or other organic/unsuitable materials. The final depth of removal should be determined on the basis of a site inspection after the initial stripping / fill excavation has been performed. Where encountered, highly expansive fat clay soils can be removed and replaced with compacted, engineered fill to a depth sufficient to allow a 5 foot separation between foundation footings and the fat clay material, chemically treat the soil with hydrated lime or alternative chemicals, blended with low expansivity soil, or be completely removed. Once topsoil stripping and removal of organic and inorganic debris are approved in a particular area and prior to placement of engineered fill, the underlying soils should be over-excavated, ripped, aerated to optimum moisture content, and recompacted to project specifications for engineered fill as determined by the Standard Proctor (ASTM D698). Exposed subgrade soils should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer. For large areas, this evaluation is normally performed by proof-rolling the exposed subgrade with a fully loaded scraper or dump truck. For smaller areas where access is restricted, the subgrade should be evaluated by probing the soil with a steel probe. Areas proposed to be left at grade may require additional over-excavation of foundation areas in order to reach soils which will provide adequate bearing support for the proposed foundations. Site earthwork may be impacted by shallow groundwater. Stabilization of subgrade soils will require aeration and recompaction. If subgrade soils are found to be difficult to stabilize, over- excavation, placement of granular soils, or cement treatment of subgrade soils may be feasible Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 8 options. The depth of overexcavation, if required, should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer at the time of construction. Engineered Fill In general, we anticipate that low expansive soils from planned cuts and utility trench excavations will be suitable for use as engineered fill provided they are adequately moisture conditioned prior to compacting. Imported fill material should be reviewed by GeoPacific prior to being imported to the site. Oversize material greater than 6 inches in size should not be used within 3 feet of foundation footings, and material greater than 12 inches in diameter should not be used in engineered fill. All grading for the proposed construction should be performed as engineered grading in accordance with the applicable building code at time of construction with the exceptions and additions noted herein. Proper test frequency and earthwork documentation usually requires daily observation and testing during stripping, rough grading, and placement of engineered fill. Engineered fill should be compacted in horizontal lifts not exceeding 8 inches using standard compaction equipment. We recommend that engineered fill be compacted to at least 95% of the maximum dry density determined by ASTM D698 (Standard Proctor) or equivalent. Field density testing should conform to ASTM D2922 and D3017, or D1556. All engineered fill should be observed and tested by the project geotechnical engineer or his representative. Typically, one density test is performed for at least every 2 vertical feet of fill placed or every 500 yd3, whichever requires more testing. Because testing is performed on an on-call basis, we recommend that the earthwork contractor be held contractually responsible for test scheduling and frequency. Site earthwork will be impacted by soil moisture and shallow groundwater conditions. Earthwork in wet weather would likely require extensive use of cement or lime treatment, or other special measures, at considerable additional cost compared to earthwork performed under dry-weather conditions. Excavating Conditions and Utility Trench Backfill We anticipate that on-site soils can be excavated using conventional heavy equipment such as trackhoes; however, siltstone and sandstone rock belonging to the Fisher Formation was encountered in test pits throughout the site at depths of 2 to 9 feet. Practical refusal was achieved on soft (R2) to medium hard (R3) siltstone and sandstone at depths of 5.5 to 9 feet in test pits TP-1, TP-2, and TP-5. Difficult excavating conditions should be expected, especially for deep utility trenches. Due to the presence of nearby wetland areas, shallow, perched groundwater conditions that could cause sidewall caving in excavations may be encountered in utility excavations. These conditions could make utility trenching difficult, especially in the winter months, and adequate shoring should be maintained. All temporary cuts in excess of 4 feet in height should be sloped in accordance with U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations (29 CFR Part 1926), or be shored. The existing native near surface soils are classified as Type B Soil and temporary excavation side slope inclinations as steep as 1H:1V may be assumed for planning purposes. This cut slope inclination is applicable to excavations above the water table only. Maintenance of safe working conditions, including temporary excavation stability, is the responsibility of the Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 9 contractor. Actual slope inclinations at the time of construction should be determined based on safety requirements and actual soil and groundwater conditions. Soft, saturated soils and groundwater may be encountered in utility trenches, particularly during the wet season. We anticipate that dewatering systems consisting of ditches, sumps and pumps would be adequate for control of perched groundwater. Regardless of the dewatering system used, it should be installed and operated such that in-place soils are prevented from being removed along with the groundwater. Trench bottom stabilization, such as one to two feet of compacted crushed aggregate base, may be necessary in deeper trenches. Vibrations created by traffic and construction equipment may cause some caving and raveling of excavation walls. In such an event, lateral support for the excavation walls should be provided by the contractor to prevent loss of ground support and possible distress to existing or previously constructed structural improvements. Underground utility pipes should be installed in accordance with the procedures specified in ASTM D2321 and City of Springfield standards. We recommend that structural trench backfill be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum dry density obtained by the Modified Proctor (ASTM D1557, AASHTO T-180) or equivalent. Initial backfill lift thicknesses for a ¾”-0 crushed aggregate base may need to be as great as 4 feet to reduce the risk of flattening underlying flexible pipe. Subsequent lift thickness should not exceed 1 foot. If imported granular fill material is used, then the lifts for large vibrating plate-compaction equipment (e.g. hoe compactor attachments) may be up to 2 feet, provided that proper compaction is being achieved and each lift is tested. Use of large vibrating compaction equipment should be carefully monitored near existing structures and improvements due to the potential for vibration-induced damage. Adequate density testing should be performed during construction to verify that the recommended relative compaction is achieved. Typically, one density test is taken for every 4 vertical feet of backfill on each 200-lineal-foot section of trench. Erosion Control Considerations During our field exploration program, we did not observe soil types that would be considered highly susceptible to erosion, except in areas of moderately sloping topography. In our opinion, the primary concern regarding erosion potential will occur during construction, in areas that have been stripped of vegetation. Erosion at the site during construction can be minimized by implementing the project erosion control plan, which should include judicious use of straw bales and silt fences. If used, these erosion control devices should be in place and remain in place throughout site preparation and construction. Erosion and sedimentation of exposed soils can also be minimized by quickly re-vegetating exposed areas of soil, and by staging construction such that large areas of the project site are not denuded and exposed at the same time. Areas of exposed soil requiring immediate and/or temporary protection against exposure should be covered with either mulch or erosion control netting/blankets. Areas of exposed soil requiring permanent stabilization should be seeded with an approved grass seed mixture, or hydroseeded with an approved seed-mulch-fertilizer mixture. Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 10 Wet Weather Earthwork Soils underlying the site are likely to be moisture sensitive and may be difficult to handle or traverse with construction equipment during periods of wet weather. Earthwork is typically most economical when performed under dry weather conditions. Earthwork performed during the wet-weather season will probably require expensive measures such as cement treatment or imported granular material to compact fill to the recommended engineering specifications. If earthwork is to be performed or fill is to be placed in wet weather or under wet conditions when soil moisture content is difficult to control, the following recommendations should be incorporated into the contract specifications. Earthwork should be performed in small areas to minimize exposure to wet weather. Excavation or the removal of unsuitable soils should be followed promptly by the placement and compaction of clean engineered fill. The size and type of construction equipment used may have to be limited to prevent soil disturbance. Under some circumstances, it may be necessary to excavate soils with a backhoe to minimize subgrade disturbance caused by equipment traffic. The ground surface within the construction area should be graded to promote run-off of surface water and to prevent the ponding of water. Material used as engineered fill should consist of clean, granular soil containing less than 5 percent fines. The fines should be non-plastic. Alternatively, cement treatment of on-site soils may be performed to facilitate wet weather placement. The ground surface within the construction area should be sealed by a smooth drum vibratory roller, or equivalent, and under no circumstances should be left uncompacted and exposed to moisture. Soils which become too wet for compaction should be removed and replaced with clean granular materials. Excavation and placement of fill should be observed by the geotechnical engineer to verify that all unsuitable materials are removed and suitable compaction and site drainage is achieved. Straw wattles and/or geotextile silt fences should be strategically located to control erosion. If cement or lime treatment is used to facilitate wet weather construction, GeoPacific should be contacted to provide additional recommendations and field monitoring. Spread Foundations The proposed residential structures may likely be supported on shallow foundations bearing on competent undisturbed, low expansivity native soils and/or engineered fill, appropriately designed and constructed as recommended in this report. Highly expansive, fat clay soils were encountered in test pits TP-1 through TP-3 at depths of 2.0 to 6.5 feet below the ground surface. Very highly expansive siltstone belonging to the Fisher Formation was first encountered in test pits TP-1 through TP-6 at depths of 2 to 9 feet. Based on the subsurface conditions and the proposed grading, it is our opinion that the most practical and effective options for lowering the risk of damage to the proposed structures due to the presence of expansive materials is to design the foundations for the proposed residential structures with only continuous footings and selectively overexcavate the expansive clays and/or bedrock from below proposed structural foundation elements to a depth of at least 4 feet below the footings. By using continuous footings rather than isolated spread footings, the risk of Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 11 damage to the proposed structure can be significantly reduced. Isolated spread footings are more likely than continuous spread footings to rise and fall differentially in relation to adjacent foundation elements, and are therefore more likely to lead to sticking doors and windows, unlevel floors, cracks in the drywall, etc. It may be advantageous to utilize truss joists between the continuous footings, so that loads occurring between the continuous footings can be transferred to the footings and minimize the areas, and thus volumes, requiring overexcavation. The minimum width of overexcavation should be at least 9 inches beyond the outside edges of continuous footings. The material removed to a depth of at least 4 feet below the footings should be replaced with low expansivity soils containing at least 15 percent fines. These soils should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the Standard Proctor (ASTM D698). We anticipate that a silty gravel product from a quarry, commonly referred to as “reject rock” would be the ideal material to use for this application. Reject rock is a crushed rock product which simply contains too many fines to meet typical gradation specifications for use as road base rock or utility trench backfill. It should be noted that the fine-grained soils or silty gravel (reject rock) materials recommended for use as part of this option are likely to be moisture-sensitive and may be difficult/infeasible to place in periods of wet weather. This option is likely to be most practical when performed under dry weather conditions. Areas where homes are to be constructed where no engineered fill will be placed should either be prepared as recommended for roadway areas; or the foundation envelopes of the proposed homes should be over-excavated to expose native soils on a lot by lot basis (see Site Preparation Recommendations section). Foundation design, construction, and setback requirements should conform to the applicable building code at the time of construction. For maximization of bearing strength and protection against frost heave, spread footings should be embedded at a minimum depth of 12 inches below exterior grade. The recommended minimum widths for continuous footings supporting wood-framed walls without masonry are 12 inches for single-story, 15 inches for two-story, and 18 inches for three-story structures. Minimum foundation reinforcement should consist of a No. 4 bar at the top of the stem walls, and a No. 4 bar at the bottom of the footings. Concrete slab- on-grade reinforcement should consist of No. 4 bars placed on 24-inch centers in a grid pattern. The anticipated allowable soil bearing pressure is 1,500 lbs/ft2 for footings bearing on competent, low expansivity, native soil and/or engineered fill. A maximum chimney and column load of 40 kips is recommended for the site. The recommended maximum allowable bearing pressure may be increased by 1/3 for short-term transient conditions such as wind and seismic loading. For heavier loads, the geotechnical engineer should be consulted. The coefficient of friction between on-site soil and poured-in-place concrete may be taken as 0.42, which includes no factor of safety. The maximum anticipated total and differential footing movements (generally from soil expansion and/or settlement) are 1 inch and ¾ inch over a span of 20 feet, respectively. We anticipate that the majority of the estimated settlement will occur during construction, as loads are applied. Excavations near structural footings should not extend within a 1H:1V plane projected downward from the bottom edge of footings. Footing excavations should penetrate through topsoil, undocumented fill, and any loose soil to competent subgrade that is suitable for bearing support. All footing excavations should be trimmed neat, and all loose or softened soil should be removed from the excavation bottom prior to placing reinforcing steel bars. Due to the moisture sensitivity of on-site native soils, Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 12 foundations constructed during the wet weather season may require overexcavation of footings and backfill with compacted, crushed aggregate. Our recommendations are for house construction incorporating raised wood floors and conventional spread footing foundations. If living space of the structures will incorporate basements, a geotechnical engineer should be consulted to make additional recommendations for retaining walls, water-proofing, underslab drainage and wall subdrains. After site development, a Final Soil Engineer’s Report should either confirm or modify the above recommendations. Concrete Slabs-on-Grade Preparation of areas beneath concrete slab-on-grade floors should be performed as recommended in the Site Preparation section. Care should be taken during excavation for foundations and floor slabs, to avoid disturbing subgrade soils. If subgrade soils have been adversely impacted by wet weather or otherwise disturbed, the surficial soils should be scarified to a minimum depth of 12 inches, moisture conditioned to within about 3 percent of optimum moisture content and compacted to engineered fill specifications. Alternatively, disturbed soils may be removed, and the removal zone backfilled with additional crushed rock. Removed soils should be replaced with structural fill as described in the Engineered Fill section of this report. Exposed subgrade soils should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer. For large areas, this evaluation is normally performed by proof-rolling the exposed subgrade with a fully loaded dump truck and potholing with an excavator to evaluate the buried layers of undocumented fill near the ground surface. For smaller areas where access is restricted, the subgrade should be evaluated by probing the soil with a steel probe. In areas where moisture will be detrimental to floor coverings or equipment inside the proposed structure, appropriate vapor barrier and damp-proofing measures should be implemented. Other damp/vapor barrier systems may also be feasible. A minimum of 12 inches of ¾”-0 should be provided beneath slabs-on-grade. Appropriate design professionals should be consulted regarding vapor barrier and damp proofing systems, ventilation, building material selection and mold prevention issues, which are outside GeoPacific’s area of expertise. Permanent Below-Grade Foundation Walls Lateral earth pressures against below-grade foundation retaining walls will depend upon the inclination of any adjacent slopes, type of backfill, degree of wall restraint, method of backfill placement, degree of backfill compaction, drainage provisions, and magnitude and location of any adjacent surcharge loads. At-rest soil pressure is exerted on a retaining wall when it is restrained against rotation. In contrast, active soil pressure will be exerted on a wall if its top is allowed to rotate or yield a distance of roughly 0.001 times its height or greater. If the subject retaining walls will be free to rotate at the top, they should be designed for an active earth pressure equivalent to that generated by a fluid weighing 35 pcf for level backfill against the wall. For restrained wall, an at-rest equivalent fluid pressure of 55 pcf should be used in design, again assuming level backfill against the wall. These values assume that drainage provisions are incorporated, free draining gravel backfill is used, and hydrostatic pressures are not allowed to develop against the wall. Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 13 During a seismic event, lateral earth pressures acting on below-grade structural walls will increase by an incremental amount that corresponds to the earthquake loading. Based on the Mononobe-Okabe equation and peak horizontal accelerations appropriate for the site location, seismic loading should be modeled using the active or at-rest earth pressures recommended above, plus an incremental rectangular-shaped seismic load of magnitude 6.5H, where H is the total height of the wall. We assume relatively level ground surface below the base of the walls. As such, we recommend passive earth pressure of 320 pcf for use in design, assuming wall footings are cast against competent native soils or engineered fill. If the ground surface slopes down and away from the base of any of the walls, a lower passive earth pressure should be used and GeoPacific should be contacted for additional recommendations. A coefficient of friction of 0.42 may be assumed along the interface between the base of the wall footing and subgrade soils. The recommended coefficient of friction and passive earth pressure values do not include a safety factor, and an appropriate safety factor should be included in design. The upper 12 inches of soil should be neglected in passive pressure computations unless it is protected by pavement or slabs on grade. The above recommendations for lateral earth pressures assume that the backfill behind the subsurface walls will consist of properly compacted structural fill, and no adjacent surcharge loading. If the walls will be subjected to the influence of surcharge loading within a horizontal distance equal to or less than the height of the wall, the walls should be designed for the additional horizontal pressure. For uniform surcharge pressures, a uniformly distributed lateral pressure of 0.3 times the surcharge pressure should be added. Traffic surcharges may be estimated using an additional vertical load of 250 psf (2 feet of additional fill), in accordance with local practice. The recommended equivalent fluid densities assume a free-draining condition behind the walls so that hydrostatic pressures do not build-up. This can be accomplished by placing a 12 to 18- inch wide zone of sand and gravel containing less than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve against the walls. A 3-inch minimum diameter perforated, plastic drain pipe should be installed at the base of the walls and connected to a suitable discharge point to remove water in this zone of sand and gravel. The drain pipe should be wrapped in filter fabric (Mirafi 140N or other as approved by the geotechnical engineer) to minimize clogging. Wall drains are recommended to prevent detrimental effects of surface water runoff on foundations – not to dewater groundwater. Drains should not be expected to eliminate all potential sources of water entering a basement or beneath a slab-on-grade. An adequate grade to a low point outlet drain in the crawlspace is required by code. Underslab drains are sometimes added beneath the slab when placed over soils of low permeability and shallow, perched groundwater. Water collected from the wall drains should be directed into the local storm drain system or other suitable outlet. A minimum 0.5 percent fall should be maintained throughout the drain and non-perforated pipe outlet. Down spouts and roof drains should not be connected to the wall drains in order to reduce the potential for clogging. The drains should include clean-outs to allow periodic maintenance and inspection. Grades around the proposed structure should be sloped such that surface water drains away from the building. Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 14 GeoPacific should be contacted during construction to verify subgrade strength in wall keyway excavations, to verify that backslope soils are in accordance with our assumptions, and to take density tests on the wall backfill materials. Structures should be located a horizontal distance of at least 1.5H away from the back of the retaining wall, where H is the total height of the wall. GeoPacific should be contacted for additional foundation recommendations where structures are located closer than 1.5H to the top of any wall. Pavement Design For design purposes, we used an estimated resilient modulus of 9,000 for compacted native soil. Table 5 presents our recommended minimum pavement section for dry weather construction. Table 5. Recommended Minimum Dry-Weather Pavement Section Material Layer Light-duty Public Streets Compaction Standard Asphaltic Concrete (AC) 3 in. 92% of Rice Density AASHTO T-209 Crushed Aggregate Base ¾”-0 (leveling course) 2 in. 95% of Modified Proctor AASHTO T-180 Crushed Aggregate Base 1½”-0 8 in. 95% of Modified Proctor AASHTO T-180 Subgrade 12 in. 95% of Standard Proctor AASHTO T-99 or equivalent Any pockets of organic debris or loose fill encountered during ripping or tilling should be removed and replaced with engineered fill (see Site Preparation Section). In order to verify subgrade strength, we recommend proof-rolling directly on subgrade with a loaded dump truck during dry weather and on top of base course in wet weather. Soft areas that pump, rut, or weave should be stabilized prior to paving. If pavement areas are to be constructed during wet weather, the subgrade and construction plan should be reviewed by the project geotechnical engineer at the time of construction so that condition specific recommendations can be provided. The moisture sensitive subgrade soils make the site a difficult wet weather construction project. During placement of pavement section materials, density testing should be performed to verify compliance with project specifications. Generally, one subgrade, one base course, and one asphalt compaction test is performed for every 100 to 200 linear feet of paving. Seismic Design The Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (Dogami), Oregon HazVu: 2023 Statewide GeoHazards Viewer indicates that the site is in an area where strong ground shaking is anticipated during an earthquake. Single family structures should be designed to resist earthquake loading in accordance with the methodology described in the 2021 International Building Code (IBC) with applicable Oregon Structural Specialty Code (OSSC) revisions (current 2022). We recommend Site Class C be used for design as defined in ASCE 7, Chapter Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 15 20, Table 20.3-1. Design values determined for the site using the Applied Technology Council (ATC) ASCE7-16 Hazards By Location Online Tool are summarized in Table 6 and are based upon existing soil conditions. Table 6. Recommended Earthquake Ground Motion Parameters (ATC 2023) Parameter Value Location (Lat, Long), degrees 44.028, -122.926 Mapped Spectral Acceleration Values (MCE): Peak Ground Acceleration PGAM 0.359 Short Period, Ss 0.631 g 1.0 Sec Period, S1 0.366 g Soil Factors for Site Class C: Fa 1.247 Fv 1.5 SDs = 2/3 x Fa x Ss 0.525 g SD1 = 2/3 x Fv x S1 0.366 g Residential Seismic Design Category D Soil Liquefaction The Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries (DOGAMI), Oregon HazVu: 2023 Statewide GeoHazards Viewer indicates that the majority of the site is in an area considered to not be at risk for soil liquefaction during an earthquake. Soil liquefaction is a phenomenon wherein saturated soil deposits temporarily lose strength and behave as a liquid in response to ground shaking caused by strong earthquakes. Soil liquefaction is generally limited to loose, sands and granular soils located below the water table, and fine-grained soils with a plasticity index less than 15. Our explorations indicate the site is underlain by stiff to very stiff, fine grained soils above the water table and siltstone and sandstone bedrock, which are not considered prone to liquefaction. For construction of single family structures or townhomes three stories or less, special design or construction measures are not required by code to mitigate the effects of liquefaction. However, GeoPacific may be consulted to perform further study of seismic hazards on the site if desired. We anticipate that our additional explorations on the site for the purpose of evaluating seismic hazards would include at least two cone penetrometer tests. Drainage If the proposed structure will have a raised floor, and no concrete slab-on-grade floors are used, perimeter footing drains would not be required based on soil conditions encountered at the site and experience with standard local construction practices. Where it is desired to reduce the potential for ponding water in spaces, footing drains may be installed. If concrete slab-on-grade floors are used, perimeter footing drains should be installed as recommended below. Where used, perimeter footing drains should consist of 3 or 4-inch diameter, perforated plastic pipe embedded in a minimum of 1 ft3 per lineal foot of clean, free-draining drain rock. The drain pipe and surrounding drain rock should be wrapped in non-woven geotextile (Mirafi 140N, or approved equivalent) to minimize the potential for clogging and/or ground loss due to piping. Water collected from the footing drains should be directed to the local storm drain system or other Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 16 suitable outlet. A minimum 0.5 percent fall should be maintained throughout the drain and non- perforated pipe outlet. The footing drains should include clean-outs to allow periodic maintenance and inspection. Subject to considerations as provided for hillside lots, footing drains may outlet at the curb, or on the back sides of lots where sufficient fall is not available to allow drainage to the street. In no case shall collected stormwater be discharged at the top of a slope or allowed to flow freely over a slope face. Construction should include typical measures for controlling subsurface water beneath the homes, including positive crawlspace drainage to an adequate low-point drain exiting the foundation, visqueen covering the exposed ground in the crawlspace, and crawlspace ventilation (foundation vents). The homebuyers should be informed and educated that some slow flowing water in the crawlspaces is considered normal and not necessarily detrimental to the home given these other design elements incorporated into its construction. Appropriate design professionals should be consulted regarding crawlspace ventilation, building material selection and mold prevention issues, which are outside GeoPacific’s area of expertise. Down spouts and roof drains should collect roof water in a system separate from the footing drains in order to reduce the potential for clogging. Roof drain water should be directed to the storm drain system. Grades should be sloped downward and away from buildings to reduce the potential for ponded water near structures. Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 17 UNCERTAINTIES AND LIMITATIONS We have prepared this report for the owner and their consultants for use in design of this project only. This report should be provided in its entirety to prospective contractors for bidding and estimating purposes; however, the conclusions and interpretations presented in this report should not be construed as a warranty of the subsurface conditions. Experience has shown that soil and groundwater conditions can vary significantly over small distances. Inconsistent conditions can occur between explorations that may not be detected by a geotechnical study. If, during future site operations, subsurface conditions are encountered which vary appreciably from those described herein, GeoPacific should be notified for review of the recommendations of this report, and revision of such if necessary. Sufficient geotechnical monitoring, testing and consultation should be provided during construction to confirm that the conditions encountered are consistent with those indicated by explorations. The checklist attached to this report outlines recommended geotechnical observations and testing for the project. Recommendations for design changes will be provided should conditions revealed during construction differ from those anticipated, and to verify that the geotechnical aspects of construction comply with the contract plans and specifications. Within the limitations of scope, schedule and budget, GeoPacific attempted to execute these services in accordance with generally accepted professional principles and practices in the fields of geotechnical engineering and engineering geology at the time the report was prepared. No warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The scope of our work did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands or hazardous or toxic substances in the soil, surface water, or groundwater at this site. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service. Sincerely, GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC. Beth K. Rapp, C.E.G. James D. Imbrie, G.E., C.E.G. Senior Engineering Geologist Principal Geotechnical Engineer Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 18 REFERENCES Applied Technology Council (ATC), 2023, Hazards by Location Online Tool, https://hazards.atcouncil.org/#/seismic Atwater, B.F., 1992, Geologic evidence for earthquakes during the past 2,000 years along the Copalis River, southern coastal Washington: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 97, p. 1901-1919. Carver, G.A., 1992, Late Cenozoic tectonics of coastal northern California: American Association of Petroleum Geologists-SEPM Field Trip Guidebook, May, 1992. Goldfinger, C., Kulm, L.D., Yeats, R.S., Appelgate, B, MacKay, M.E., and Cochrane, G.R., 1996, Active strike-slip faulting and folding of the Cascadia Subduction-Zone plate boundary and forearc in central and northern Oregon: in Assessing earthquake hazards and reducing risk in the Pacific Northwest, v. 1: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1560, P. 223-256. Hladky, F.R. and McCaslin, G.D., 2006, Preliminary Geologic Map of the Springfield 7.5’ Quadrangle, Lane County, Oregon: Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, Open File Report O-06-07, 1 plate, 1:24,000 scale. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, 2023, Oregon HazVu: Statewide Geohazards Viewer (HazVu): http://www.oregongeology.org/hazvu/ Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, 2023, SLIDO: Statewide Landslide Information Database for Oregon: https://gis.dogami.oregon.gov/slido/ Oregon Water Resources Department, 2023, Well Report Query: https://apps.wrd.state.or.us/apps/gw/well_log/ Peterson, C.D., Darioenzo, M.E., Burns, S.F., and Burris, W.K., 1993, Field trip guide to Cascadia paleoseismic evidence along the northern California coast: evidence of subduction zone seismicity in the central Cascadia margin: Oregon Geology, v. 55, p. 99-144. Yeats, R.S., Graven, E.P., Werner, K.S., Goldfinger, C., and Popowski, T., 1996, Tectonics of the Willamette Valley, Oregon: in Assessing earthquake hazards and reducing risk in the Pacific Northwest, v. 1: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1560, P. 183-222, 5 plates, scale 1:100,000. Limerick Property Project No. 23-6386 6386-Limerick Property GR 19 CHECKLIST OF RECOMMENDED GEOTECHNICAL TESTING AND OBSERVATION Item Procedure Timeframe Whom Done 1 Preconstruction meeting Prior to beginning site work Contractor, Developer, Civil and Geotechnical Engineers 2 Fill removal from site or sorting and stockpiling Prior to mass stripping Soil Technician/ Geotechnical Engineer 3 Stripping, aeration, and root-picking operations During stripping Soil Technician 4 Compaction testing of engineered fill (95% of Standard Proctor) During filling, tested every 2 vertical feet Soil Technician 5 Compaction testing of trench backfill (95% of Modified Proctor) During backfilling, tested every 4 vertical feet for every 200 lineal feet Soil Technician 7 Street Subgrade Inspection Prior to placing base course Soil Technician 8 Base course compaction (95% of Modified Proctor) Prior to paving, tested every 200 lineal feet Soil Technician 9 Asphalt Compaction (92% Rice Value) During paving, tested every 100 linear feet Soil Technician 10 Foundation Subgrade Inspection During Foundation Excavation Soil Technician/ Geotechnical Engineer Project Name: Project #:23-6386 Sample ID:S23-172 Depth:3.5-4ft Material Type: Material Source: Sampled By:EKR Tested By:TMM Sample Date:8.16.2023 Tested Date:9.6.2023 Expansion Index, EI Very Low Low Medium High Very High 0-20 21-50 Initial Moisture Content (0.1%) Initial Dry Unit Weight (0.1 lbf/cu.ft.) Initial Degree of Saturation (50.0+/-2%) 51-90 91-130 >130 17.2 86.5 48.4 Potential Expansion 48.5 EXPANSION INDEX ASTM D4829 Final Moisture Content (0.1%) Expansion Index Final Dial Reading (0.001 in.) Initial Height (0.001 in.) 0.2318 0.1057 Initial Dial Reading (0.001 in.) Limerick Property Clay TP-1 1.000 126 Project Name: Project #:23-6386 Sample ID:S23-173 Depth:8-9ft Material Type: Material Source: Sampled By:EKR Tested By:TMM Sample Date:8.16.2023 Tested Date:9.14.2023 Expansion Index, EI 51-90 91-130 >130 Very Low Low Medium High Very High 0-20 21-50 Final Moisture Content (0.1%) Expansion Index Final Dial Reading (0.001 in.) Initial Height (0.001 in.) Initial Moisture Content (0.1%) Initial Dry Unit Weight (0.1 lbf/cu.ft.) Initial Degree of Saturation (50.0+/-2%) 0.2292 0.0983 Initial Dial Reading (0.001 in.) Limerick Property Siltstone TP-3 1.000 131 26.3 70.7 50.6 Potential Expansion 61.0 EXPANSION INDEX ASTM D4829 Tested By: TMM LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT PLASTICITY INDEX0 10 20 30 40 50 60 LIQUID LIMIT 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 CL-ML CL or O L CH or O H ML or OL MH or OH Dashed line indicates the approximate upper limit boundary for natural soils 47 WATER CONTENT45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 NUMBER OF BLOWS 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 25 30 40 MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL PL PI %<#40 %<#200 USCS Project No.Client:Remarks: Project: Location: TP1 Sample Number: S23-174 Depth: 2-2.5ft GEOPACIFIC ENGINEERING, INC.Figure ML-CL 47.8 27.1 20.7 23-6386 Lennar Northwest Inc Limerick Property Real-World Geotechnical Solutions Investigation • Design • Construction Support 14835 SW 72nd Avenue Tel (503) 598-8445 Portland, Oregon 97224 Fax (503) 941-9281 MAINTENANCE OF HILLSIDE HOMESITES AND SLOPES All homes and slopes require a certain level of maintenance for general upkeep and to preserve the overall integrity of structures and land. Hillside homesites and slopes require some additional maintenance because they are subject to natural slope processes, such as runoff, erosion, shallow soil sloughing, soil creep, perched groundwater, etc. If not properly controlled, these processes could adversely affect your or neighboring properties. Although surface processes are usually only capable of causing minor damage, if left unattended, they could possibly lead to more serious instability problems. Slumps are common and unpredictable and should be considered part of standard slope maintenance. The primary source of problems on hillsides is uncontrolled surface water runoff and blocked groundwater seepage which can erode, saturate, and weaken soil. Therefore, it is important that drainage and erosion control features be implemented on the property, and that these features be maintained in operative condition (unless changed on the basis of qualified professional advice). By employing simple precautions, you can help properly maintain your hillside site and avoid most potential problems. The following is an abbreviated list of common Do’s and Don’ts recommended for maintaining hillside homesites and slopes – including those within open spaces. Do List 1. Make sure that roof rain drains are connected to the street, local storm drain system, or transported via enclosed conduits or lined ditches to suitable discharge points away from structures and improvements. In no case, should rain drain water be discharged onto slopes or in an uncontrolled manner. Energy dissipation devices should be employed at discharge points to help prevent erosion. 2. Check your roof drains, gutters, and spouts to make sure that they are clear. Roofs are capable of producing a substantial flow of water. Blocked gutters, etc., can cause water to pond or run off in such a way that erosion or adverse oversaturation of soil can occur. 3. Make sure that drainage ditches and/or berms are kept clear throughout the rainy season. If you notice that a neighbor’s ditches are blocked such that water is directed onto your property or in an uncontrolled manner, politely inform them of this condition. 4. Locate and check all drain inlets, outlets, and weep holes from foundation footings, retaining walls, driveways, etc. on a regular basis. Clean out any of these that have become clogged with debris. 5. Watch for wet spots on the property. These may be caused by natural seepage or indicate a broken or leaking water or sewer line. In either event, professional advice regarding the problem should be obtained followed by corrective action, if necessary. 6. Do maintain the ground surface adjacent to lined ditches so that surface water is collected in the ditch. Water should not be allowed to collect behind or flow under the lining. Don’t List 1. Do not change the grading or drainage ditches on the property without professional advice. You could adversely alter the drainage pattern across the site and cause erosion or soil movement. 2. Do not allow water to pond on the property. Such water will seep into the ground causing unwanted saturation of soil. 3. Do not allow water to flow onto slopes in an uncontrolled manner. Once erosion or oversaturation occurs, damage can result quickly or without warning. 4. Do not let water pond against foundations, retaining walls or basements. Such walls are typically designed for fully- drained conditions. 5. Do not connect roof drainage to subsurface disposal systems unless approved by a geotechnical engineer. 6. Do not irrigate in an unreasonable or excessive manner. Regularly check irrigation systems for leaks. Drip systems are preferred on hillsides. First American Title Insurance Company 3500 Chad Drive, Ste 350 Eugene, OR 97408 Phn - (541)484-2900 Fax - (877)783-9167 Order No.: 7000-4155871 September 26, 2024 FOR QUESTIONS REGARDING YOUR CLOSING, PLEASE CONTACT: JOYCE JAMESON, Escrow Officer/Closer Phone: (503)350-5005 - Fax: (866)656-1602- Email:jjameson@firstam.com First American Title Insurance Company 4350 Galewood St., Ste. 125, Lake Oswego, OR 97035 FOR ALL QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS PRELIMINARY REPORT, PLEASE CONTACT: Alex Manwill, Title Officer Phone: (541)484-2900 - Fax: (877)783-9167 - Email: amanwill@firstam.com 2nd Amended Preliminary Title Report This report is for the exclusive use of the parties herein shown and is preliminary to the issuance of a title insurance policy and shall become void unless a policy is issued, and the full premium paid. Please be advised that any provision contained in this document, or in a document that is attached, linked or referenced in this document, that under applicable law illegally discriminates against a class of individuals based upon personal characteristics such as race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientat ion, gender identity, familial status, disability, national origin, or any other legally protected class, is illegal and unenforceable by law. Situs Address as disclosed on Lane County Tax Roll: Limerick, Springfield, OR 97478 2021 ALTA Owners Standard Coverage Liability $ 1,190,000.00 Premium $ 1,789.00 STR 2021 ALTA Owners Extended Coverage Liability $ Premium $ 2021 ALTA Lenders Standard Coverage Liability $ Premium $ 2021 ALTA Lenders Extended Coverage Liability $ Premium $ Endorsement 9.10, 22 & 8.1 Premium $ Govt Service Charge Cost $ 10.00 Other Cost $ We are prepared to issue Title Insurance Policy or Policies of First American Title Insurance Company, a Nebraska Corporation in the form and amount shown above, insuring title to the following described land: The land referred to in this report is described in Exhibit A attached hereto. and as of September 20, 2024 at 8:00 a.m., title to the fee simple estate is vested in: Wizard Rock, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company Subject to the exceptions, exclusions, and stipulations which are ordinarily part of such Policy form and the following: Preliminary Report Order No.: 7000-4155871 Page 2 of 10 First American Title 1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records; proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. 2. Facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 3. Easements, or claims of easement, not shown by the public records; reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water. 4. Any encroachment (of existing improvements located on the subject land onto adjoining land or of existing improvements located on adjoining land onto the subject land), encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the subject land. 5. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, material, equipment rental or workers compensation heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. The exceptions to coverage 1-5 inclusive as set forth above will remain on any subsequently issued Standard Coverage Title Insurance Policy. In order to remove these exceptions to coverage in the issuance of an Extended Coverage Policy the following items are required to be furnished to the Company; additional exceptions to coverage may be added upon review of such information: A. Survey or alternative acceptable to the company B. Affidavit regarding possession C. Proof that there is no new construction or remodeling of any improvement located on the premises. In the event of new construction or remodeling the following is required: i. Satisfactory evidence that no construction liens will be filed; or ii. Adequate security to protect against actual or potential construction liens; iii. Payment of additional premiums as required by the Industry Rate Filing approved by the Insurance Division of the State of Oregon 6. Water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not shown by the public record. 7. Any claim to (a) ownership of or rights to minerals and similar substances, including but not limited to ores, metals, coal, lignite, oil, gas, uranium, clay, rock, sand, and gravel l ocated in, on, or under the Land or produced from the Land, whether such ownership or rights arise by lease, grant, exception, conveyance, reservation, or otherwise; and (b) any rights, privileges, immunities, rights of way, and easements associated therewith or appurtenant thereto, whether or not the interests or rights excepted in (a) or (b) appear in the Public Records. 8. Taxes for the year 2023-2024 Tax Amount $ 6,372.57 Unpaid Balance: $ 201.38 , plus interest and penalties, if any Code No.: 01936 Map & Tax Lot No.: 18-02-03-33-00100 Property ID No.: 1671104 9. City liens, if any, of the City of Springfield. Note: NO SEARCH HAS BEEN MADE. If inquiry is desired, please contact your Title Officer for a lien search. Preliminary Report Order No.: 7000-4155871 Page 3 of 10 First American Title 10. The rights of the public, governmental bodies, and public utilities, in and to that portion of the herein described property lying within the limits of public roads and highways. 11. Intentionally deleted. 12. Public Utility Easement and Agreement to Dedicate Public Right of Way, including terms and provisions thereof. Recorded: January 07, 2020 as Instrument No. 2020-000642 13. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements; but deleting any covenant, condition or restriction indicating a preference, limitation or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, family status, or national origin to the extent such covenan ts, conditions or restrictions violate Title 42, Section 3604(c), of the United States Codes: Recording Information: November 24, 2021 as Instrument No. 2021-073440 14. Any conveyance or encumbrance by Wizard Rock, LLC should be executed pursuant to their Operating Agreement , a copy of which should be submitted to this office for inspection. 15. Due to the high liability requested, this Commitment is subject to review and approval from an Underwriter with First American Title Insurance Company. The Company reserves the right to add additional items or make further requirements after such review. Please contact your Title Officer prior to closing. PLEASE PROVIDE 3 DAYS NOTICE PRIOR TO CLOSING TO OBTAIN FINAL UNDERWRITING APPROVAL FOR HIGH LIABILITY TRANSACTIONS. 16. Taxes for the fiscal year 2024-2025 a lien due, but not yet payable. 17. Deed of Trust and terms and conditions thereof. Grantor/Trustor: Wizard Rock, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company Grantee/Beneficiary: Lennar Northwest, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company Trustee: First American Title Amount: $70,000.00 Recorded: July 10, 2024 Recording Information: Instrument No. 2024-019682 18. Memorandum of Agreement and the terms and conditions thereof: Between: Lennar Northwest, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company And: Wizard Rock, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company Recording Information: July 10, 2024 as Instrument No. 2024-019683 - END OF EXCEPTIONS - NOTE: We find no matters of public record against Lennar Northwest, LLC that will take priority over any trust deed, mortgage or other security instrument given to purchase the subject real property as established by ORS 18.165. NOTE: According to the public record, the following deed(s) affecting the property herein described have been recorded within 24 months of the effective date of this report: NONE THANK YOU FOR CHOOSING FIRST AMERICAN TITLE! WE KNOW YOU HAVE A CHOICE! Preliminary Report Order No.: 7000-4155871 Page 4 of 10 First American Title RECORDING INFORMATION Filing Address: First American Title Insurance Company of Oregon Attn: Recorder 3500 Chad Drive, Suite 350 Eugene, OR 97408 Typical Recording Fees: $ 87.00 per first page (most documents) $ 5.00 per additional page $ 5.00 per document e-recording fee NOTE: An Additional fee of $20 may be imposed by the County Clerk if a document presented for recording fails to meet the requirements established by ORS Chapter 205. cc: Lennar Northwest, LLC cc: Wizard Rock, LLC Preliminary Report Order No.: 7000-4155871 Page 5 of 10 First American Title Exhibit "A" Real property in the County of Lane, State of Oregon, described as follows: Parcel 1, LAND PARTITION PLAT NO. 99-P1279, as platted and recorded August 17, 1999, Lane County Oregon Plat Records, in Lane County, Oregon. Except therefrom: All the lands contained within the boundary of JASPER MEADOWS, as platted and recorded February 15, 2002, Reception No. 2002-012568, Lane County Deeds and Records, in Lane County, Oregon. Also except therefrom: All the lands contained within the boundary of JASPER MEADOWS FIRST ADDITION, as platted and recorded November 22, 2002, Reception No. 2002-091218, Lane County Deeds and Records, in Lane County, Oregon. Also except therefrom: All the lands contained within the boundary of JASPER MEADOWS SECOND ADDITION, as platted and recorded December 13, 2004, Reception No. 2004-094865, Lane County Deeds and Records, in Lane County, Oregon. Also except therefrom: All the lands contained within the boundary of JASPER MEADOWS THIRD ADDITION AND JASPER MEADOWS FOURTH ADDITION, as platted and recorded May 22, 2006, Reception No. 2006-035144, Lane County Deeds and Records, in Lane County, Oregon. Also except therefrom: All the lands contained within the boundary of JASPER MEADOWS FIF TH ADDITION AND JASPER MEADOWS SIXTH ADDITION, as platted and recorded October 4, 2007, Reception No. 2007-068791, Lane County Deeds and Records, in Lane County, Oregon. Also except therefrom: All the lands contained within the boundary of JASPER MEADOWS SEVENTH ADDITION, as platted and recorded April 1, 2009, Reception No. 2009-016601, Lane County Deeds and Records, in Lane County, Oregon. Also except therefrom: that portion described in Dedication to Lane County recorded July 18, 2007, Reception No. 2007-048812, Lane County Deeds and Records, in Lane County, Oregon. Also except therefrom: that portion conveyed by deed recorded on November 4, 2013 as Reception No. 2013-057786, Lane County Deeds and Records, being more particularly described as follows: All that portion of Parcel 1 of LAND PARTITION PLAT NO. 99-P1279, as platted and recorded in Lane County Oregon Plat Records lying Easterly of the Eastern Bob Straub Parkway right of way margin, Southerly and Westerly of JASPER MEADOWS FIRST ADDITION, as platted and recorded in the Lane County Oregon Plat Records, and Westerly JASPER MEADOWS SECOND ADDITION, as platted and recorded in Lane County Oregon Plat Records, in Lane County, Oregon. NOTE: This legal description was created prior to January 1, 2008. Preliminary Report Order No.: 7000-4155871 Page 6 of 10 First American Title First American Title Insurance Company SCHEDULE OF EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE ALTA LOAN POLICY (07/01/21) The following matters are excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, atto rneys’ fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. a. any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) that restricts, regulates, prohibits, or relates to: i. the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; ii. the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; iii. the subdivision of land; or iv. environmental remediation or protection. b. any governmental forfeiture, police, regulatory, or national security power. c. the effect of a violation or enforcement of any matter excluded under Exclusion 1.a. or 1.b. Exclusion 1 does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5 or 6. 2. Any power of eminent domain. Exclusion 2 does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7. 3. Any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter: a. created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; b. not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at the Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; c. resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; d. attaching or created subsequent to the Date of Policy (Exclusion 3.d. does not modify or limit the coverage p rovided under Covered Risk 11, 13, or 14); or e. resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if consideration sufficient to qualify the Insured named in Sc hedule A as a bona fide purchaser or encumbrancer had been given for the Insured Mortgage at the Date of Policy. 4. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing-business law. 5. Invalidity or unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury law or Consumer Protection Law. 6. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors’ rights law, that the tra nsaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage is a: a. fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer; b. voidable transfer under the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act; or c. preferential transfer: i. to the extent the Insured Mortgage is not a transfer made as a contemporaneous exchange for new value; or ii. for any other reason not stated in Covered Risk 13.b. 7. Any claim of a PACA-PSA Trust. Exclusion 7 does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 8. 8. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by a governmental authority and created or attaching between the Date of Policy an d the date of recording of the Insured Mortgage in the Public Records. Exclusion 8 does not modify or limit the coverage provid ed under Covered Risk 2.b. or 11.b. 9. Any discrepancy in the quantity of the area, square footage, or acreage of the Land or of any improvement to the Land. ALTA OWNER’S POLICY (07/01/21) The following matters are excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys’ fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: 1. a. any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) that restricts, regulates, prohibits, or relates to: i. the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; ii. the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement on the Land; iii. the subdivision of land; or iv. environmental remediation or protection. b. any governmental forfeiture, police, regulatory, or national security power. c. the effect of a violation or enforcement of any matter excluded under Exclusion 1.a. or 1.b. Exclusion 1 does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5 or 6. 2. Any power of eminent domain. Exclusion 2 does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7. 3. Any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim, or other matter: a. created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; b. not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at the Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; c. resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; d. attaching or created subsequent to the Date of Policy (Exclusion 3.d. does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 9 or 10); or e. resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if consideration sufficient to qualify the Insured named in Schedule A as a bona fide purchaser had been given for the Title at the Date of Policy. 4. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or sim ilar creditors’ rights law, that the transaction vesting the Title as shown in Schedule A is a: a. fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer; b. voidable transfer under the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act; or c. preferential transfer: i. to the extent the instrument of transfer vesting the Title as shown in Schedule A is not a transfer made as a contemporaneous exchange for new value; or ii. for any other reason not stated in Covered Risk 9.b. 5. Any claim of a PACA-PSA Trust. Exclusion 5 does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 8. 6. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed or collected by a governmental authority that becomes due and payable after the Date of Policy. Exclusion 6 does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 2.b. 7. Any discrepancy in the quantity of the area, square footage, or acreage of the Land or of any improvement to the Land. Preliminary Report Order No.: 7000-4155871 Page 7 of 10 First American Title SCHEDULE OF STANDARD EXCEPTIONS 1. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assess ments on real property or by the public records; proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. 2. Facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or by making inquiry of persons in possession thereof. 3. Easements, or claims of easement, not shown by the public records; reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizi ng the issuance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water. 4. Any encroachment (of existing improvements located on the subject land onto adjoining land or of existing improvements located on adjoining land onto the subject land), encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the subject land. 5. Any lien" or right to a lien, for services, labor, material, equipment rental or workers compensation heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. NOTE: A SPECIMEN COPY OF THE POLICY FORM (OR FORMS) WILL BE FURNISHED UPON REQUEST Rev. 07-01-21 Privacy Notice Effective: October 1, 2019 Notice Last Updated: January 1, 2022 This Privacy Notice describes how First American Financial Corporation and its subsidiaries and affiliates (together referred to as “First American,” “we,” “us,” or “our”) collect, use, store, and share your information with the exception that a subsidiary or affiliate has their own privacy policy, that policy governs. This Privacy Notice applies to information we receive from you offline only, as well as from third parties, when you interact with us and/or use and access our services and products (“Products”). For more information about our privacy practices, including our online practices, please visit https://www.firstam.com/privacy-policy/. The practices described in this Privacy Notice are subject to applicable laws in the places in which we operate. What Type Of Information Do We Collect About You? We collect a variety of categories of information about you. To learn more about the categories of information we collect, please visit https://www.firstam.com/privacy-policy/. How Do We Collect Your Information? We collect your information: (1) directly from you; (2) automatically when you interact with us; and (3) from third parties, including business parties and affiliates. How Do We Use Your Information? We may use your information in a variety of ways, including but not limited to providing the services you have requested, fulfilling your transactions, comply with relevant laws and our policies, and handling a claim. To learn more about how we may use your information, please visit https://www.firstam.com/privacy- policy/. How Do We Share Your Information? We do not sell your personal information. We only share your information, including to subsidiaries, affiliates, and to unaffiliated third parties: (1) with your consent; (2) in a business transfer; (3) to service providers; and (4) for legal process and protection. To learn more about how we share your information, please visit https://www.firstam.com/privacy-policy/. How Do We Store and Protect Your Information? The security of your information is important to us. That is why we take commercially reasonable steps to make sure your information is protected. We use our best efforts to maintain commercially reasonable technical, organizational, and physical safeguards, consistent with applicable law, to protect your information. How Long Do We Keep Your Information? We keep your information for as long as necessary in accordance with the purpose for which it was collected, our business needs, and our legal and regulatory obligations. Your Choices We provide you the ability to exercise certain controls and choices regarding our collection, use, storage, and sharing of your information. You can learn more about your choices by visiting https://www.firstam.com/privacy- policy/. International Jurisdictions: Our Products are offered in the United States of America (US), and are subject to US federal, state, and local law. If you are accessing the Products from another country, please be advised that you may be transferring your information to us in the US, and you consent to that transfer and use of your information in accordance with this Privacy Notice. You also agree to abide by the applicable laws of applicable US federal, state, and local laws concerning your use of the Products, and your agreements with us. We may change this Privacy Notice from time to time. Any and all changes to this Privacy Notice will be reflected on this page, and where appropriate provided in person or by another electronic method. YOUR CONTINUED USE, ACCESS, OR INTERACTION WITH OUR PRODUCTS OR YOUR CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS WITH US AFTER THIS NOTICE HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO YOU WILL REPRESENT THAT YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD THIS PRIVACY NOTICE. Contact Us dataprivacy@firstam.com or toll free at 1-866-718-0097. © 2022 First American Financial Corporation and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. NYSE:FAF Form 10-PRIVACY22 (12-7-21) Page 1 of 2 Privacy Notice (2022 First American Financial Corporation) English For California Residents If you are a California resident, you may have certain rights under California law, including but not limited to the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”). All phrases used in this section shall have the same meaning as those phrases are used under California law, including the CCPA. Right to Know. You have a right to request that we disclose the following information to you: (1) the categories of personal information we have collected about or from you; (2) the categories of sources from which the personal information was collected; (3) the business or commercial purpose for such collection and/or disclosure; (4) the categories of third parties with whom we have shared your personal information; and (5) the specific pieces of your personal information we have collected. To submit a verified request for this information, go to our online privacy policy at www.firstam.com/privacy-policy to submit your request or call toll-free at 1-866-718-0097. You may also designate an authorized agent to submit a request on your behalf by going to our online privacy policy at www.firstam.com/privacy- policy to submit your request or by calling toll-free at 1-866-718-0097 Right of Deletion. You also have a right to request that we delete the personal information we have collected from and about you. This right is subject to certain exceptions available under the CCPA and other applicable law. To submit a verified request for deletion, go to our online privacy policy at www.firstam.com/privacy-policy to submit your request or call toll-free at 1-866-718-0097. You may also designate an authorized agent to submit a request on your behalf by going to our online privacy policy at www.firstam.com/privacy-policy to submit your request or by calling toll-free at 1-866-718- 0097. Verification Process. For either a request to know or delete, we will verify your identity before responding to your request. To verify your identity, we will generally match the identifying information provided in your request with the information we have on file about you. Depending on the sensitivity of the information requested, we may also utilize more stringent verification methods to verify your identity, including but not limited to requesting additional information from you and/or requiring you to sign a declaration under penalty of perjury. Notice of Sale. We do not sell California resident information, nor have we sold California resident information in the past 12 months. To the extent any First American affiliated entity has a different practice, it will be stated in the applicable privacy policy. We have no actual knowledge of selling the information of minors under the age of 16. Right of Non-Discrimination. You have a right to exercise your rights under California law, including under the CCPA, without suffering discrimination. Accordingly, First American will not discriminate against you in any w ay if you choose to exercise your rights under the CCPA. Notice of Collection. To learn more about the categories of personal information we have collected about California residents over the last 12 months, please see “What Information Do We Collect About You” in https://www.firstam.com/privacy-policy. To learn about the sources from which we have collected that information, the business and commercial purpose for its collection, and the categories of third parties with whom we have shared that information, please see “How Do We Collect Your Information”, “How Do We Use Your Information”, and “How Do We Share Your Information” in https://www.firstam.com/privacy-policy. Notice of Sale. We have not sold the personal information of California residents in the past 12 months. Notice of Disclosure. To learn more about the categories of personal information we may have disclosed about California residents in the past 12 months, please see “How Do We Use Your Information” and “How Do We Share Your Information” in https://www.firstam.com/privacy-policy. © 2022 First American Financial Corporation and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. NYSE:FAF Form 10-PRIVACY22 (12-7-21) Page 2 of 2 Privacy Notice (2022 First American Financial Corporation) English Kate Brown, Governor Oregon Department of State Lands 775 Summer Street NE, Suite 100 Salem, OR 97301-1279 (503) 986-5200 FAX (503) 378-4844 www.oregon.gov/dsl State Land Board Kate Brown Governor Shemia Fagan Secretary of State Tobias Read State Treasurer September 26, 2022 LB600/24718RF/33795FP HAYDEN HOMES LLC ATTN CRAIG SMITH 2464 SW GLACIER PL STE 110 REDMOND OR 97756 Re: DSL Removal-Fill Permit 24718FP, 33795RF Mitigation Site T. 18S, R. 02W, Section 03CB, Tax Lots 5500, 11100, and T. 18S, R. 02W, Section 03CC, Tax Lot 100 Springfield, Lane County Final Year Monitoring Report Approval and Full Release of Surety Bond # 554058S and 558901S Dear Mr. Smith: We have reviewed the final monitoring report for these projects. The mitigation area is 11.27 acres of wetlands and uplands (Attachment A). Please be advised the areas protected deed restriction are designated as compensatory mitigation areas under this permit are subject to protection under the State of Oregon's Removal-Fill Law. Permits are required for any alterations to wetland mitigation areas. Under OAR 141-085-0690(4), mitigation ratios may be doubled for any allowable impacts to the mitigation site. This Performance Bonds # 554058S and 558901S are eligible for full release, meaning Liberty Mutual shall bear no past, present and future liability or exposure, as of the date of this letter. The financial assurance can be released in full, because the final wetland mitigation monitoring report demonstrates that the mitigation site is performing to the Department’s satisfaction; and all other conditions required in the permit have been met. Please include Permit # 24718FP and 33795RF on any correspondence. In conclusion, this letter constitutes formal notice from the Oregon Department of State Lands that you are in compliance with your Removal-Fill Permit conditions. You are released from further obligations under this permit. Thank you for your good stewardship and concern for Oregon’s environment. Sincerely, Patricia Fox Southern Operations Manager Aquatic Resource Management Oregon Department of State Lands Enclosure cc: Rebecca Overby, Liberty Mutual Surety (HOSCL@libertymutual.com) Allen Martin, GeoResources Springfield Local Planning Dept. Brielle Cummings, US Army Corps of Engineers, Applicant Application No. Page 2 of 5 ATTACHMENT A Mitigation Site Location Map Applicant Application No. Page 3 of 5 Mitigation Areas Applicant Application No. Page 4 of 5 Mitigation Sites Deed Restrictions Applicant Application No. Page 5 of 5 Produced using RLID (www.rlid.org) on 08/06/2024 at 1:46 PM Produced using RLID (www.rlid.org) on 08/06/2024 at 1:46 PM Produced using RLID (www.rlid.org) on 08/06/2024 at 1:46 PM