HomeMy WebLinkAboutNotes, Work PLANNER 9/20/2006
.Revie~ of Jasper Meadows ,,-d and Fourth Addition
- , .
,
.
Page 1 01'6
DONOVAN James
From: DRISCOLL Jon
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 9:29 AM
To: Lloyd Tolbert
Cc: ERNST Dennis; DONOVAN James
Subject: RE: Mountaingate West-Second Comments
Lloyd,
First off, I am tracking down an answer to the private/public easement issue. The engineer left early yesterday
and will be in iate today, but I've got a meeting set up to clarify this.
Lot 130 vs Tract A: I've spoken with Dennis and Jim Donovan, and they see no problems at all usfng the Lot
130. (i.e. You can hold us to that.)
Keeping Tract B joined across Jade Ave:. My only concern is that It could cause confusfon. However, if you want
to use the joining symbol (struant?), that would be acceptable to me as long as you adequately define it in the
legend.
I'll get back to you on the BOB, as I have a meeting with the engr. now.
fk~
Jon Driscoll, PLS, EIT
Surveyor
City of Springfield, Public Works
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97478
Phone: (541) 726-3679 Fax: (541) 726-3781
id riscolllalci .sprinqfield .or. us
From: Lloyd Tolbert [mailto:lloyd@tolbertassociates.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 8:23 AM .
To: DRISCOLL Jon
.Cc: mark@suntrustland.com
Subject: RE: Mountaingate West--Second Comments
Jon,
My only concern is: does it unintentionally and unnecessarily kill a future lot? That would be a $150,000 mistake.
My preference would be to leave it be.
I need client approval before I can change the name. i
I
In the mean time, please let me know that if I call it Lot 130, that's how it's going to stay.
Also, If I show a line connecting the current Lot B across Jade Avenue, is that ok or does it have to be a separate
Tract? See attached. 0 t R Iv d' IVI0- O(P
. ., l;l@QCie.
Planner: to\'(~
\-3\ pa.gu
9/25/2006
~evie~ of Jasper Meadows TW and Fourth Addition
.
Page 2 of6
Thank you,
Lloyd
Lloyd L. Tolbert, L.S.
Tolbert Associates, LLC
P.O. Box 70224
(83 Centennial Loop, Suite 1)
Eugene, Oregon 97401
541-359-8426/541-747-0177 fax
Iloyd@tolbertassociates.com
From: DRISCOLL Jon [mailto:jdriscoll@ci.springfield.or.us]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 5:40 PM
To: Lloyd Tolbert
Cc: ERNST Dennis
Subject: RE: Mountaingate West--Second Comments
Lloyd,
I did suggest "Tract" as a word for what you previously called "Open Spaces." Dennis pointed out later that Tract
'.often times refers to land that is for parks or won't be subdivided later, as Tract A would.
You can call this area a lot or tract, though. Lot just seemed to make more sense.
(Consider calling it Lot 130, and then change the northerly TraCt B to a Tract A, leaving the southerly Tract B as
Tract B. (See comment #2 of latest comments.))
Call if this raises more questions than It answers.
jlo-
Jon Driscoll, PLS, EIT
Surveyor
City of Springfield, Public Works
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97478
Phone: (541) 726-3679 Fax: (541) 726-3781
idriscoll (a)ci .sprinQfield .or. us
From: Lloyd Tolbert [mailto:lloyd@tolbertassociates.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 2:55 PM
To: DRISCOLL Jon
Subject: RE: Mountaingate West--Second Comments
Jon,
9/25/2006
. ~eviev.: of Jasper Meadows .d and Fourth Addition
.
Page 3 of6
Please confer with Dennis and decide what how you wish me to handle' this comment.
If you change them from Tracts to numbered Lots they will be out of sequence and I
know you're asking me to re-number the whole subdivision.
1) Is there a reason to can Tract "AN a tract? If it (or any other tract) is
going to be further developed, it is customary to call it a lot.
You asked me to change from Lots and call the future areas and park areas Tracts.
Lloyd L. Tolbert, L.S.
Tolbert Associates, LLC
P.O. Box 70224
(83 Centennial Loop, .Suite 1)
Eugene, Oregon 97401
541-359-8426 I 541-747-0177 fax
lloyd@tolbertassociates.com
-----Original Message-----
From: DRISCOLL Jon [mailto:jdriscoll@ci.springfield.or.us]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006.10:23 AM
To: Lloyd Tolbert
Cc: mark@suntrustland.coID; Lindsey Taft; ERNST Dennis
Subject: RE: Mountaingate West--Second Comments
Lloyd,
That will work fine. I'll notify the field crew they can re-check this.
Jon
Jon Driscoll, PLS, EIT
Surveyor
City of Springfield, Public Works
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97478
Phone: (541) 726-3679 Fax: (541) 726-3781
jdriscoll@ci.springfield.or.us
-----Original Message----- .
From: Lloyd Tolbert [mailto:lloyd@tolbertassociates.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 10:17 AM
To: DRISCOLL Jon
Cc: mark@suntrustland.com; Lindsey Taft
Subject: RE: Mountaingate West--Second Comments
Jon,
I will change the Basis of Bearings to be between the "Mag" nail and the
Section Corner if that is ok and my crew will go locate the two
monuments
you are making me locate as well.
Both items should not affect the outcome of a field check as they are
9/25/2006
.Revie~ of Jasper Meadows .d and Fourth Addition
.
Page 4 of6
drafting issues.
Please go ahead with your field check.
Thank you,
Lloyd
Lloyd L. Tolbert, L.S.
Tolbert Associates, LLC
P.O. Box 70224
(83 Centennial Loop, Suite 1)
Eugene, Oregon 97401
541-359-8426, I 541-747-0177 fax
lloyd@tolbertassociates.com
-----Original Message-~---
From: DRISCOLL Jon [mailto:jdriscoll@ci.springfield.or.us)
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 9:01 AM
To: Lloyd Tolbert
Cc: Lindsey Taft; Mark Vukanovich; ERNST Dennis
Subject: RE: Mountaingate West--Second Comments
Lloyd,
Yes, I. did receive your comments from the field that you are ready' for a
field check; however, you stated you were refusing to comply with two
comments. I don't want to send out the field crew when there's a couple
of issues not dealt with yet. (Those issues are the basis of
bearing--which may not need field change {See the end of previous
arnail's attachment} and the missing monuments not tied from the.
Mountaingate 1st Addition.)
Let me know when those comments have been fulfilled, and then I will
send out the,fie1d crew.
Thank you,
Jon
Jon Driscoll, PLS, ErT
Surveyor
City of Springfield, Public Works
225 ,Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97478
Phone: (541) 726-3679 Fax: (541) 726-3781
jdriscoll@ci.springfield.or.us
-----Original Message-----
From: Lloyd Tolbert [mailto:lloyd@tolbertassociates.com]
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 7:41 PM
To: DRISCOLL Jon
Cc: Lindsey Taft; Mark Vukanovich
Subject: RE: Mountaingate West--Second Comments
Jon,
I don't see an attachment.
9/25/2006
.Revie.; of Jasper Meadows .d and Fourth Addition'
.
I thought I'd already sent you my response to the field check comments
and let you know it was ready to be checked.
1-' 11 re-send again iOn the morning.
Thank you,
Lloyd
-----Original Message-----
From: "DRISCOLL Jon" <jdriscoll@ci.springfield.or.us>
To: "lloyd@tolbertassociates.coin" <lloyd@tolbertassociates.com>
Cc: "HUNTER Peggy K" <Peggy.HUNTER@CO,Lane.OR.US>; "ERNST Dennis"
<dernst@ci.springfield.or.us>; "DONOVAN James"
<jdonovan@ci.springfield.or.uS>i "WALTER Eric"
<ewalter@ci.springfield.or.us>; "rnark@suntrustland.com"
<rnark@suntrustland.com>
Sent: 9/18/06 6: 04 PM
Subject: Mountaingate West--Second Comments
Lloyd,
I've attached the next comments from the Surveying Division. Two other
sets of comments are yet to hit your desk. Jim Donovan will be getting
you his planning review, and the field cre~ will be getting in there's
once you let us know all monuments are ready to check (See "Field Notesll
at the end of the attachment).
After these have been received, bring in a final paper copy to myself
and Jim Donovan. After this has been checked by both of us, I will
notify you to bring in the mylars. This will ensure a more speedy mylar
turnaround.
Yours.truly,
Jon
Jon Driscoll, PLS, EIT
Surveyor
City of Springfield, Public Works
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97478
Phone: (541) 726-3679 Fax: (541) 726-3781
jdriscoll@ci.springfield.or.us
9/25/2006
Page 5 of6
,Revie~ of Jasper Meadows.d 'and Fourth Addition
.
Page 6 of6
9/25/2006
~evie..: of Jasper Meadows Wand Fourth Addition
.
Page 1 of 1
DONOVAN James
From: DRISCOLL Jon
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 2:06 PM
To: DONOVAN James
Cc: ERNST Dennis
Subject: mtgate West--slope easemenets in CC&R's
Jim,
On Page 4 of the CC&R's-last paragraph-there is a reference to "Bianket easements on the slopes,. .."
The main issues I have are:
1) The aspect of these easements dealing with view preservation, fencing or slope beautification does
not need to be on the plat, but the CC&R's are the appropriate place for that.
2) The aspect of said easements that have to do with structural stabiiity should have a note about
requiring the homeowner to contact the City of Springfield for permission to alter the slope
configuration...and this should be shown on the face of the plat, as it affects the setbacks of the iots.
The easement could have a sunset clause or abiiity to be altered or vacated by the City Engineering
department with the proper supporting documentation being provided.
Hope this helps.
\.
~J~"
~
,
~~
~~
-...e:'ytd
~~
Jon Driscoll, PLS, EIT
Surveyor
City of Springfield, Pubiic Works
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97478
Phone: (541) 726-3679 Fax: (541) 726-3781
idriscoll@ci.sarinqfield.or.us
9/25/2006
~evi~~ of Jasper Meadows TW and Fourth Addition
.
Page 1 of 1
DONOVAN James
From: DRISCOLL Jon
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 5:56 PM
To: DONOVAN James p vV-
Cc: ERNST Dennis
Subject: MTgate west--tree replacement /
One more CC&R issue for your side:
On page 6, second paragraph, it speaks of trees being replaced in a PUBLIC conservation easement. No where,
however, does it define who pays for the tree replacement.
I assume it would be the individual property owners, but if not stated, someone might say the City of Springfield,
as it's in a public conservation easement.
I'll leave it in your court to mention this or not.
fen,
Jon Driscoll, PLS, EIT .
Surveyor
City of Springfield, Public Works
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97478
Phone: (541) 726-3679 Fax: (541) 726-3781
id riscoll@ci.sprinqfield.or.us
9/25/2006
. I Rev,ie,w of Jasper Meadows.rd and Fourth Addition
.
Page 1 of 1
DONOVAN James
From: DRISCOLL Jon
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 3:14 PM
To: DONOVAN James
Subject: Mtgate West
Jim,
Question on the CC&R's:
Fire Protection Standards (Page 7): Who is going to enforce this? The HOA? The Fire Dept?
fk~
Jon Driscoll, PLS, EfT
Surveyor
City of Springfield, Public Works
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97478
Phone: (541) 726-3679 Fax: (541) 726-3781
jdriscoll@ci.sarinqfield.or.us
9/25/2006
.
.
SUPPLEMENTARY
DE CLARA TION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS,
RESTRICTIONS AND EASEMENTS FOR
MOUNTAINGATE WEST AND ANNEXATION TO
MOUNT AINGA TE SUBDIVISION
THIS SUPPLEMENTARY DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS,
RESTRICTIONS AND EASEMENTS FOR MOUNTAIN GATE WEST
AND ANNEXATION TO MOUNTAIN GATE SUBDIVISION
("Supplementary Declaration") is made by MountainGate Development LLC ("Original
Declarant") and SunTrust Land Company LLC ("Declarant").
RECITALS AND OBJECTIVES
A. Declarant is the owner of all the real property and improvements thereon located in
Lane County, Oregon, described as: Lots 1-129 inclusive and shown on the final plat map
of MOUNTAIN GATE WEST as platted and recorded on _2006, in the Plat
Records of Lane County, Oregon, and assigned Recorder's Number 2006- in
the Official Records of Lane County, State of Oregon ("MOUNTAIN GATE WEST")
B. MOUNT AINGA TE WEST is part of a larger 338-acre area, known as
"MountainGate, A Proposed Residential Development" which received Master Plan
Approval from the City of Springfield, dated May 13, 1998 (Spr. Journal No. 95-02-39),
the notice of which was recorded April 19,1999 at Reel 2540, Instrument No. 99035359,
in Lane County OFFICIAL Records ("the Master Plan Property").
C. The final plat for MOUNTAIN GATE SUBDIVISION was recorded on May 10,2005
in Lane County Deeds and Records at Recorder's Reception No. 2005-033764. The plat
contained 7 I lots and the owner and declarant of MOUNT AINGA TE SUBDIVISION
("MOUNT AINGA TE") was MountainGate Development, LLC ("Original Declarant")
The Original Declarant recorded a "DECLARATION OF COVENANTS,
CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS AND EASEMENTS FOR MOUNTAIN GATE
SUBDIVISION" on May 10,2005 in Lane County Deeds and Records at Recorder's
Reception No. 2005-033770 ("the CC&Rs").
D. The Original Declarant, in the CC&Rs, created a nonprofit corporation, The
MountainGate Lot Owners Association ("the Association"), whose members are all the
owners of Lots within MOUNTAINGATE.
E. By adoption of this Supplementary Declaration it is the intent of Declarant and the
Original Declarant to annex MOUNTAINGATE WEST to MOUNTAIN GATE and to
adopt the terms and provisions of the CC&R's
f<
~
It is the intent of the Declarant and the Original Declarant to include future owners of
Lots described and depicted on the plat of MOUNT AINGA TE WEST (WEST
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration ofCC&Rs - Page 1 of 17
July 24, 2006
.
.
OWNERS") as full and equal members of the Association, prior to turnover as hereafter
described, for the purpose of assessments and the enforcement of use and other
restrictions set forth in the CC&Rs. It is their further intent that the WEST Owners will
become full voting members of the Association after turnover, provided however, that for
purposes of review and approval of house and other improvement plans, the Declarant
and, after turnover occurs, a committee' or association of WEST Owners, shall act and
function as the Architectural Review Committee as described inArticle 6 herein.
NOW THEREFORE, Declarant and the Original Declarant declare that
MOUNTAIN GATE WEST shall be held, transferred, sold, conveyed, and occupied
subject to the Oregon Planned Community Act as may be amended from time to time
(ORS 94.550-94.783) and further subject to CC&Rs of MOUNTAIN GATE except as
modified herein wruch shall run with the land, which shall be binding on all parties
having or acquiring any right, title, or interest in MOUNTAIN GATE WEST or any part
thereof, and which shall inure to the benefit of the Association and of each Owner.
ARTICLE 1
DEFINITIONS
The terms and provisions of ARTICLE I of the CC&Rs are hereby adopted and
incorporated herein except for and with the following changes, amendments and
additions:
1. Lot shall mean a platted lot within MOUNTAI NGATE WEST. Except as may
hereafter be stated or distinguished in trus Supplementary Declaration, all of the terms
defined in Article I of the CC&Rs shall mean, refer to and include all the platted lots and
Owners thereoflocated within MOUNTAIN GATE WEST.
2. All references herein to the "Architectural Review Committee" or "ARC" shall mean
and refer to the Declarant or any committee created by the Declarant until turnover, as
described hereafter, should occur.
ARTICLE 2
PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THIS DECLARATION
The terms and provisions of ARTICLE 2 of the CC&Rs are hereby adopted and
incorporated herein except for and with the following changes:
1. MOUNT AINGA TE WEST. Declarant and the Original Declarant hereby declare
that MOUNTAINGATE WEST shall beheld, transferred, sold conveyed, encumbered
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration ofCC&Rs - Page 2 of 17
July 24, 2006
\
.
.
and occupied subject to this Supplementary Declaration and is more particularly
described as follows:
MountainGate West as platted and recorded ,2006, in the Plat Records of Lane
County, State of Oregon and assigned Recorder's Number 2006- in the Official
Records of Lane County, State of Oregon and located in the City of Springfield, County of
Lane, State of Oregon ("MOUNTAINGATE WEST")
ARTICLE 3
OWNERSHIP AND EASEMENTS
The terms and provisions of ART]CLE 3 of the CC&Rs are hereby adopted and
incorporated herein.ell;~8jlt [OJ =.d with the tolJowmg additions.-
Public Conservation Easement
The public conservation easements as re ected alon the rear oflots 9-]],20-28 and 74-
77 will have the s .c IOns as shown in section 5.2.2 "Private Conservation
Eas 0 the CC&R's of the original MountainGate subdivision.
ARTICLE 4
LOTS AND HOMES
The terms and provisions of ARTICLE 4 of the CC&Rs are hereby adopted and
incorporated herein except for and with the following additions:
Views
Structure, lighting, landscape designs and locations on Lots and Common Area property
must take into consideration the preservation of natural site features and not unreasonably
restrict or impact the views of neighboring homesites. It is not intended that a view will
remain without some alteration in appearance over time, but it is expected that all
reasonable efforts will be made to minimize the impact on a view from neighboring Lots
and Common Areas within the Property. Pre-existing trees -- which were not planted
concurrent with or following the construction of the initial residential unit -- on the
Respondent's Lot, and those existing on Common Areas are exempt from such review
and will not be considered an impairment of views. All conditions are subject to any
governrnenta] regulations or any conditions of approval placed on the development by the
local governrnental authorities.
(a) Enforcement Procedures
In the event an Owner (Aggrieved Owner) determines that the view from
such Owner's Lot is unreasonably obstructed, the Aggrieved Owner shall
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration of CC&Rs - Page 3 of 17
July 24, 2006
.
.
notify the other Owner (Respondent) that a view impairment issue has
occurred. The Respondent shall have a reasonable period, but not more
than sixty (60) days following receipt of such notice, to correct the
condition. Either the Aggrieved Owner or the Respondent may apply to
the Board of Directors (Board) of the Association for either a formal
hearing or a request for a determination without a formal hearing by the
Board. The Board shall issue its findings within thirty (30) days following
the receipt of such request, unless written notice is given to both parties by
the Board extending the review period for not more than an additional
thirty (30) days due to circumstances of the review process.
In rendering its decision, the Board of Directors may, in its sole discretion,
direct by written notice to both parties that (a) no action be taken, or (b)
that the obstruction be partially or completely removed or otherwise
modified. Ifthe Respondent fails to comply with the directive, the Board
of Directors shall have, in addition to any other rights or remedies
provided in this Declaration, at law, or in equity, the rights described in
ORS 94.777, including the right of the Association to take corrective
action at the expense of the appropriate Owner. The review by the Board
of Directors described in this Section shall be an Owner's sole and
exclusive remedy in connection with an alleged obstruction or impairment
of view by trees, other vegetation, lighting and structures. The
determination of the Board of Directors in connection with such matters
shall be final and binding on the Owners in question. If the Respondent is
the Association, as Owner of a Common Area tract, the Board will follow
the same procedures, and act in an impartial manner with respect to their
decision.
Maintenance and Easements of Rear Slopes
The rear slopes oflots 40,41,45,46;"50-52,54,56-61 that abutf'''"'j;', ,'I an lopes
oflots 87-97 ofiIit~C'irf<:?~ all have a blanket easement~g the slopes for the bene
the Homeowners ociation to maintain and/o['~autifY said slopes. The intent of the
"
Homeowners sociation maintaining said slopes is to have a consistent style of
landscapi ,view preservation and to reduce the individual lot owner's burden of having
to mai in and landscape th).-Slopes. The slopes are to feel as thought they one and the
sam s the tracts they abut. L\ny landscaping, movement of dirt, placement of retaining
wa s, fencing or any other structures are forbidden without the prior written approval of
t ARC] ,J LttJ<!O'( tl!'ll'o-''''tl,., ,..-- '7 1/
rJ y,pt-ur ~~ . r1bi
~W- f ~4A
OJ ~~~'L ~v
~.~'"
. '~.:..i.;.
MountainGa
eclaration ofCC&Rs- Page 4 of 17
July 24, 2006
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
.
.
ARTICLE 5
OPMENT PLAN FOR MOUNTAINGATE SUBDIVISION
,
The terms and provisions of ARTICLE 5 of the CC&Rs are hereby replaced and
superceded in their entirety by the following:
Introduction. MountainGate West, which was approved by the City of Springfield as
Phase 4A, B & C of the Master Plan Property, consists of 129 lots that have been
approved as a residential subdivision under the provisions of MountainGate Master Plan
Approval (City File 95-02-003 9) and Springfield Development Code (SDC) standards
contained in SDC Article 35 Subdivisions, SDC Article 38 .Tree Felling, and SDC
Article 26 .Hillside Development. This document satisfies the requirements of the
Hillside Development and Master Plan approvals for a comprehensive "Hillside
Development Plan" for the subdivision to guide the construction of dwellings on the
individual lots. This plan incorporates the referenced reports required by the Hillside
Development article and the City of Springfield, Developer, and future owners will use
the approved Hillside Development Plan to assure that tree felling, grading, construction,
and future use will conform to subdivision conditions and provisions of the Master Plan
requiring the protection of trees, drainages, and slopes. The Hillside Development Plan
includes a lot by lot description of conditions that will affect the design and location of
structures and driveways, including special foundation requirements on some lots.
The plan also includes general guidelines for the entire subdivision contained in required
reports and final plans. The structure of the remainder of this document is as follows:
I. Tree Preservation Plan
2. Fire Protection Standards
3. Geotechnical Requirements
4. Grading, Slopes, and Drainage Guidelines
The requirements of the Hillside Development Plan, including individual lot plans
(shown in Exhibit "B"), are hereby incorporated into these CC&Rs. A copy of the
approved geotechnical report is attached as Exhibit "A".
Tree Preservation Plan
I. The purpose ofthis plan is to summarize and implement measures adopted to maintain
the aesthetic and erosion control value of trees and native vegetation within the
MountainGate West as established by the approved tree felling permit, the final forester's
report, Hillside Development Plan, and individual Springfield Development Code (SDC)
standards.
Tree Removal _General
SDC requires that a tree felling permit be obtained for the removal of more than five trees
greater than five inches in diameter at breast height per year. However, a tree felling
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration ofCC&Rs - Page 5 of 17
July 24, 2006
.
.
permit is not required for the initial removal of trees from the lots during preliminary
grading or the construction of the approved dwelling footprint and driveway provided
that no tree removal is allowed within building or vegetative setback areas without prior
city approval through the LDAP or building permit process. Additional restrictions for
tree removal exist within the tree conservation easement and vegetative setback areas as
described below.
Acce table Re lacement TreeslPlantin Standard
1. Trees replaced withi II .! servation easement as established on the recorded
Subdivision Plat ofMo est shall be of a native species specified for hillside
development in Section 0 the City of Springfield Design Standards and Procedures
Manual.
Tree replacement is acceptable when, for example, a mature tree has a broken top. The
mature tree in this circumstance could be removed and replaced by an acceptable
replacement tree. Otherwise, the tree shall be pruned and shaped to improve its health and
appearance.
Tree planting shall follow the procedures contained in Section 6 of the City of Springfield
Design Standards and Procedures Manual. ~c')<1>-
i.', '/'".
.' _', 'I....::
Street Trees '"'''' .i,' '0
During the subdivision process no trees or tree groupings have been protec~ted for .'V'. ~ .
potential qualification as street trees that will meet City requirements 1,' ,
. /AI s.-t.. :.U.
However there maybe individual trees, tree clusters and tree groupings located close ).
enough to the street curb that they could qualifY as street trees if not damaged or removed ~
with house and driveway placement. Generally trees within 20 feet of street right-of-way
may qualifY as street trees. Groupings of trees even beyond the 20 foot distance may be
retained in lieu of City required street trees along the lot street frontages. Hardwood trees
must be located at least 5 feet and conifers must be 10 feet behind curbside sidewalks.
Street trees should be 10 to 20 feet from streetlights. Specific standards regulating the use
of existing native trees as street trees are contained in Section 6 of the City of Springfield
Design Standards and Procedures Manual.
Tree Protection During Construction
During house and driveway construction trees selected as native street trees as discussed
above under "street trees" shall be protected with construction fencing. Construction
fencing shall be placed between the construction site and tree conservation easement or
vegetative setback area to protect trees and shall be a minimum of 5 feet from trees in the
conservation easement or vegetative setback areas.
Hazard Trees
Hazard trees are not identified, but are present within the boundaries of Mountain Gate
West. Property owners are responsible for identification and removal of hazard trees with
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration ofCC&Rs - Page 6 of 17
July 24, 2006
.
.
verification by a professional forester or arborist and approved by the city through an
LDAP or subsequent tree felling permit process.
Fire Protection Standards
I. Due to the forested setting of this subdivision certain fire protection measures
should be observed to help protect dwellings within a forested environment from
the dangers of wildfire.
The subdivision has been designed and constructed so that all dwellings will be located in
close proximity to fire hydrants that are,to be used for fire protection. Further any lots
deemed by the City Fire Marshall to be located within a vegetated area subject to wildfire
the building(s) shall have a Class A or B roof in accordance with the Oregon State
Structural Specialty Code. In addition landscaping within the lots should establish fuel
breaks around the dwellings that discourage the spreading of wildfire. There are two
levels of fuel breaks based upon proximity to the dwelling:
Primarv Safety Zone: The primary safety zone is a firebreak extending a minimum of30
feet in all directions around the dwelling except however that it shall not extend into the
tree conservation easement or vegetative setback areas. The goal within the primary
safety zone is to exclude fuels that will produce flame lengths in excess of one foot.
Vegetation within the primary safety zone could include green lawns and low shrubs.
Trees should generally be spaced with greater than 15 feet between the crowns and
pruned to remove dead and low branches.
Secondary Fuel Break: The secondary fuel break extends a minimum of 100 feet down
slope from the primary safety zone. The goal of the secondary fuel break is to reduce
fuels so that the overall intensity of any wildfire would be lessened and the likelihood of
crown fires and crowning is reduced. Vegetation within the secondary fuel break shall be
pruned and spaced so fire will not spread to the Primary Safety Zone via the tree crowns.
Small trees and brush growing underneath larger trees should be thinned or pruned to
prevent spread of fire up into the crowns of the larger trees. Dead fuels shall be removed.
Fuel breaks may not extend beyond the boundary of the affected lot unless an easement
eys)S upon the adjacent 'pro erty that allows for such use.
~. ?f/u?
Geotec . al Re uirements . J
A geotechnical investigation for MountainGate West has been conducted by PSI
Engineering. PSI Engineering prepared a report dated July 21, 2006 that provides specific
recommendations for the level of geotechnical review appropriate for the individual lots.
The geotechnical report is attached as Exhibit "A" and is to be used with individual lot
development. An evaluation of the building sites is to be conducted by a geotechnical
engineer prior to house construction. Either of two levels of review is required depending
upon specific site conditions. The attached geotechnical report lists the req~~en~
the levels of evaluation specified for each 10t.~. ~~. ~ ~.~
. MountainGate West Declaration ofcc~a~
After Recording Return To July 24, 2006
Lane County Surveyors
.
.
Gradinl!. Slopes. and Drainal!e
1 ?
Grading, Slopes, and Drainage'""";> ~
There shall be no interference wffi1 the established drainage patterns or systems over or
through any other lot or common area or any adjacent property unless adequate
alternative provisions are made by a licensed engineer for proper drainage and approved
by the city engineer. The term established drainage shall mean predominant slopes, the
drainage swales, conduits, inlets, and outlets designed, maintained, and constructed for
MountainGate West.
Stormwater sewer laterals have been extended to each lot for conveyance of roof drains,
building foundation drains, and private property surface drainage.
Private Storm Drainage Easements
I. Private storm drainage easements are designated on the plat and are located across
portions of Lots 107 and 108. These are private easements for drainage of private storm
water. Management goals of the drainage easements include the maintenance and
enhancement of natural, scenic and environmental qualities while maintaining storm
water quality and a functional storm water system. All effort shall be made to avoid
allowing any pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, petroleum-based products or other
hazardous or foreign substances from entering or contaminating the easements. Natural
vegetation shall not be disturbed except as necessary for maintenance, to reduce fire
hazards or to control noxious and invasive overgrown vegetation such as blackberry
vines. No tree shall be cut within the drainage easement except for diseased, dead,
damaged or hazardous trees. No building shall be allowed within the drainage easements.
Lot owners shall perform any maintenance necessary to cause drainage to occur as
planned. Provided, that any maintenance, repair or other work necessary as the result of
any wrongful act or omission of another party shall be performed by that party. If that
party fails to do so, the same shall be performed by the homeowners association subject
to reimbursement as provided in the CCRs. Subsurface drainage systems and open swales
or ditches have been constructed in certain locations along the back side of curbs or
sidewalks within the public street rights-of-way. The purpose of these systems is to
improve individual lot drainage and intercept water in sloping areas and direct it into
the public storm water system. These drainages are within the City street maintenance
system and shall not be blocked or diverted by adjacent lot owners.
Lot Drainage and Slope Maintenance
The slope areas and improvements on said slopes of any Lot shall be landscaped,
irrigated and maintained in compliance with all of the applicable requirements of the
Municipal Code for the City of Springfield and the documents of MountainGate
Homeowners Association, and in such a manner as to enhance the appearance thereof and
to preserve established slope ratios, prevent erosion and facilitate the orderly discharge of
water through established drainage systems. The Association shall have the sole and
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration ofCC&Rs - Page 8 of 17
July 24, 2006
. p~~1
exclusive authority in all decisions with respect t~enance of slope areas. The
Association shall also have the responsibility to maintain any exterior slopes adjacent to
private or public street areas, including slopes created or manufactured as a result of
Declarant grading operations, incident to the development of the properties, except those
slopes along a side lot line that would ultimately be between two houses. The
Association shall also have the responsibility to maintain within the properties, all bench
drains, down drains, brow ditches, pipe drains and other facilities of the established
drainage facilities within the property.
Lots 50-51 ~~~~
As of the time ofrecording the plat for MountainGate West, a delineated wetlands report
identified wetlands on lots 50 and 51. As long as this delineated wetlands report is in
effect, any disturbance of the lots cannot occur within the delineated wetlands unless a I
joint DSLIUSACOE permit is obtained.
Lo"U"'29 A/()~ ~ ~ ~ . I
Declarant has the rig~SUbdivide lots 116-129 or any portion thereof_. ~
Tract "A" ~ ~tII"
-~=~.-=--=
-
Tract "A" was specifically approved through the Master Plan approvals as a higher
density site also known as a "cluster" development. The approvals allow up to 10 units
per acre and the Declarant is in the process of obtaining a tentative subdivision approval
for this cluster development.
qL
,
ARTICLE 6
l
ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
The terms and provisions of ART1CLE 6 of the CC&Rs are hereby adopted and
incorporated herein except for and with the following changes, provided further that the
function and authority of the Architectural Review Committee ("the ARC") as it relates
to approval of house and improvement plans and site development shall be administered
and conducted for Lots within MOUNT AINGA TE WEST by the Declarant until such
time that turnover, as hereafter described, occurs:
1. ARC Prior to Turnover. Prior to turnover, Declarant reserves the right to create a
committee to assist it or any successor Declarant in the performance of the duties,
responsibilities and functions of the ARC as described herein. Declarant further reserves
the right to create rules and regulations for the operation of this committee and further to
allow it to continue to function after turnover has occurred so long as the original
Declarant or, if turnover has occurred for MOUNT AINGA TE, the Association concur in
a written document that shall be recorded as an amendment to this Supplementary
Declaration.
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration ofCC&Rs - Page 9 of 17
July 24, 2006
.
.
ARTICLE 7
ASSOCIA TION
The terms and provisions of ARTICLE 7 are hereby adopted and incorporated herein
except for and with the following changes:
1. By acceptance ofa deed to a lot in MOUNTAIN GATE WEST, the "West Owners"
agrees to become a member of the Association described in Article 7 of the CC&Rs and
to pay assessments in accordance with Article 10. West Owners further agree that they
shaH not be entitled to any votes in the Association until turnover by the Declarant
occurs.
2. Prior to turnover, Declarant may, but is not required to, form a sub-association of the
West Owners to perform any function and assume any duties or responsibilities that are
delegated to it by Declarant so long as such are not in conflict with other provisions of
the CC&Rs or this Supplemental Declaration. The sub-association shall be established by
Declarant's recordation of a supplemental declaration in accordance with Section 2.2 of
the original CC&Rs described herein. Such sub-association may continue to exist and
function even after turnover has occurred so long as the Original Declarant, or if turnover
has occurred for MOUNTAINGATE, the Association concur as evidenced by
recordation of a document to that effect, except that if either the Original Declarant or the
Association do not concur, then the sub-association shaH cease to function and exist and
all of the West Owners shall, upon the date of turnover, become voting members of the
Association.
3.1fa sub-association of West Owners is created, it can function and operate in
accordance with the authority granted by this Article to the Association, so long as it does
not take action which conflicts with any other provisions of the CC&Rs or this.
Supplemental Declaration.
4. Declarant shaH be a member of the Association so long as it owns a Lot in
MOUNT AINGA TE WEST but shaH not have any votes.
ARTICLE 8
DECLARANT CONTROL
The terms and provisions of ARTICLE 8 of the CC&Rs are hereby adopted and
incorporated herein except that the provisions therein apply only to the Original
Declarant as to MOUNTAINGATE and to the Declarant for MOUNTAIN GATE WEST.
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration ofCC&Rs - Page 10 of 17
July 24, 2006
.
.
ARTICLE 9
DECLARANT'S SPECIAL RIGHTS
The terms and provisions of ARTICLE 9 of the CC&Rs are hereby adopted and
incorporated herein except that the provisions therein apply only to the Original
Declarant as to MOUNTAIN GATE and to the Declarant for MOUNTAIN GATE WEST.
ARTICLE 10
FUNDS AND ASSESSMENTS
The terms and provisions of ARTICLE 10 of the CC&Rs are hereby adopted and
incorporated herein except for and with the following changes:
I. Upon purchase of a Lot from the Declarant, West Owners will be charged an initial
assessment of $1 00 which shall be in addition to any other assessment or fee described
herein and which shall be payable to the Association at the time of or prior to the
purchase. The Declarant may establish other fees or charges that are payable at the time
of purchase.
2. Assessments for MOUNTAINGATE WEST. It is the intent of the Declarant in
adopting this Supplementary Declaration to require the purchasers of Lots within
MOUNTAIN GATE WEST to pay assessments to the Association in accordance with the
terms and provisions ofthis Article in amounts and shares that are equal to those paid by
the owners of Lots in MOUNTAIN GATE, including, but not limited to, the initial
assessment described in paragraph 1 above. By execution of this Supplementary
Declaration, the Association agrees to accept WEST Owners as voting members of the
Association upon turnover of MOUNT AINGA TE by the Original Declarant and upon'
turnover of MOUNTAIN GATE WEST by the declarant, except that the function and
responsibilities of the ARC may continue to be conducted separately for each phase or
addition of the Master Plan Property even after turnover.
ARTICLE 11
GENERAL PROVISIONS
The terms and provisions of ARTICLE II of the CC&Rs are hereby adopted and
incorporated herein except fat and with the following changes:
I. Declarant may not amend, alter or change the original CC&Rs or this Supplemental
,
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration ofCC&Rs - Page 11 of 17
July 24, 2006
.
.
Declaration without the written concurrence of the Original Declarant or, if turnover has
occurred, the written concurrence of the Association, which concurrence shall be
recorded in Lane County Property Records.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Declarant and the Original Declarant have executed this
instrument this _day of ~.2006.
SUNTRUST LAND COMPANY LLC MOUNTAIN GATE DEVELOPMENT LLC
By Mark Vukanovich, Managing Member By Michael P Evans, Managing Member
State of Oregon )
)
County of J
This instrument was acknowledged before me on ,2006 by MICHAEL P.
EVANS, Managing Member of MountainGate Development, LLC.
Notary Public for Oregon
My commission expires:
State of Oregon )
)
County of)
This instrument was acknowledged before me on , 2006 by Mark
Vukanovich, Managing Member of SunTrust Land Company, LLC.
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration ofCC&Rs - Page 12 of 17
July 24, 2006
.
.
Notary Public for Oregon
My conunission expires:
EXHIBJT "A"
K & A Engineering, Inc. P.O. Box 23624, Eugene, OR 97402
521 Market St., Suite B, Eugene, OR 97402 (541) 684.9399 Voice
(541) 684-9358 FAX
Project: 116.05
Alberts Development
P.O. Box 10545
Eugene, OR 97440
Subject: Geotechnical require
Mountaingate Subdivision ph
Springfield, Oregon
Revision 1
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
As requested, K & A Engineeri , c. is pro endations for the
development of individual residential lots for the s . ion. These recommendations
are supplemental to those presented in our origin I ge ort dated April 15, 2004 which
were made for overall development of this subdivi' includin!Jflarthwork, drainage, and stability
for roads and, utilities.
The purpose of this document is to provide additional criteria for geotechnical evaluation and
recommendations for the design and construction of individual single-family residences on
individual lots of this phase of the subdivision.
RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Levels of Geotechnical Investigation
To be consistent with criteria established for phases I and Ii of the Mountaingate subdivision, we
are identifying two levels of geotechnical recommendations, Levell and Ii, that we recommend be
implemented for individual lots on this phase. Levell criteria is the least restrictive based on a
lower level of risk, and level II criteria is reserved for those lots that may present a higher level of
risk from development from the standpoint of stability, drainage, or foundation support.
Levell Geotechnical Investigation
General Recommendations
Levell geotechnical investigation is reserved for those building lots where ground surface and
subsurface conditions are generally known to consist of competent soil or bedrock and having
natural slopes that are not significantly steep and do not present issues with long-term slope
stability.
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration ofCC&Rs - Page 13 of 17
July 24, 2006
.
.
For Level I lots, a site-specific geotechnical investigation is not required for submission of plans for
permit review. Foundations for these lots are expected to consist of conventional construction,
including cast-in-place .
K & A Engineering, Inc.
concrete spread footings and conventionally framed structures, supported by limited select
granular fills required, and having low cut heights outside of the foundation pad.
We recommend Levell status for lots 72-77, 109-111, 81, 83, 87, 88, 92-96, and 98.
Building Plans for Level I Lots
We recommend that permit applications for construction of new single-family residences include
specific proposed details including:
1. A general site plan showing the location of the proposed construction (foundations, pavements,
landscaping or grading retaining walls) with existing topography and final grade topography,
2. One or more typical cross sections of the site showing the house elevation and foundation
system and other proposed features (e.g. landscape retaining walls) relative to street grade and
grades of adjacent lots,
3. Drawings or narratives (as appropriate) detailing the proposed design criteria and design for
foundations (including allowable bearing capacity and lateral earth pressures), details for concrete
slabs-on-grade, proposed foundation and crawlspace drainage systems, design of pervious
pavements if required, and methods, grades, and locations of subsurface and roof drainage
disposal systems.
4. Clarification that no foundations (for Levell) sites will be supported by native or non-native fine-
grained soil fills. Use of silty fills will require a level II analysis. Use of select granular fills should be
restricted to depths less than or equal to 3-feet.
5. A certification that cuts into native ground, outside of the foundation pad, will not exceed 4-feet.
Cuts greater than 4-feet require a level II geotechnical evaluation. Note that cuts for basement
retaining walls, located within the foundation pad, do not require Level II analysis, provided that
drainage, bearing capacity, and lateral earth pressure criteria is submitted as per these
requirements (number 3 above).
Field Verification _Level) Lots
We recommend that a geotechnical engineer review these lots during excavation to verify suitable
conditions for the proposed foundation and to make on-site recommendations for foundation
drainage and preparation of the foundation pad. As a minimum, the geotechnical engineer should
provide:
1. An examination of foundation soils during excavation to verify design criteria assumptions and to
make recommendations for modifications to the foundation pad preparations, if necessary,
including depth of excavation, placement of select granular fill, and additional drainage,
2. Verify that site work does not adversely impact adjacent lots, utilities, and street improvements,
and
3. Note any special, unexpected, or latent conditions that would require a level II investigation.
Upon successful completion of the foundation pad construction and sitework, the geotechnical
engineer should submit recommendations, in writing, for acceptance of the foundation pad
construction and sitework, by the local building official. Completion of a form and affidavit, similar to
those for phases I and II, would be a suitable substitute for a written report by the geotechnical
After Recording Return To
.Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration ofCC&Rs - Page 14 of 17
July 24, 2006
.
.
engineer.
Project: 116.05 Mountaingate Subdivision Phase Ilia, Springfield, OR Page 2 of 4
Client: Alberts Development March 28, 2006
K & A Engineering, Inc.
Level II Geotechnical Investigation
General Recommendations'
We recommend a more developed geotechnical investigation for lots where surface or
subsurface conditions present steep slopes, higher-than-normal groundwater levels, poor
subgrade soils, cut slopes exceeding 4-feet, or construction on native or imported fine-
grained soil fills. Additionally, some of the building lots present unique challenges in access
and foundation construction due to steep and high road cut and fill slopes. These lots we
have also recommended for level II geotechnical investigation.
We recommend Level II status for lots 78-80, 82, 84-86, 89-91,97, 99-108, and 112-114.
Level)) Lot Categories
Level II geotechnical investigation can be made for groups of lots having similar identified
existing or potential geotechnical hazards. Thus, a thorough and detailed investigation can
be made for building sites, the cost of which can be shared by owners of lots having similar
hazards. Table 1 groups lots of Level II status by similar existing or potential geotechnical
hazards.
Building Plans for Level)) Lots
We recommend that, in addition to the recommended submission elements for Level I lots,
a site specific geotechnical report be submitted that makes specific evaluations and
recommendations regarding cut slopes, fills, steep slopes, poor soils, and drainage issues.
Level II geotechnical reports should include the following:
1. A summary of the site investigation and existing conditions for that lot which mayor may
not include subsurface test pits or borings or soil testing. Note that the need for and number
and location of subsurface test pits, borings, or subsurface testing is left to the judgment of
the geotechnical engineer. However the documentation should demonstrate a reasonable
basis for the recommendations made,
Project: 116.05 Mountaingate Subdivision Phase Ilia, Springfield, OR Page 3 of 4
Client: Alberts Development March 28, 2006
Lot .
Group Existing Geotechnical Hazard
112- These lots are in a known area of poor surface and subsurface drainage.
114 Standing water on the natural, undeveloped ground surface is common. There
appears to be an excessive amount of surface runoff from the south slope.
Expect poorly drained, highly plastic and highly expansive silty soils. The issue is
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration ofCC&Rs - Page 15 of 17
July 24, 2006
.
.
stability of foundations on weak, saturated, or expansive soils. Expect that
deeper foundation excavations or special foundation systems may be necessary
to provide adequate foundation support, including granular fill, drains, and final
grading.
105- Expect steep natural slopes wh high, steep cut slopes from the paved street
108,82,
91 grade.
Expect steep, natural slopes. The issue is overall slope stability of natural slopes
101 -1 and in zones of expected high cuts and fills. Some of these lots may have
04 competent, hard bedrock near the ground surface, in which case they may be
downgraded to level I status.
78-80, Expect relatively high, steep fill slope from the paved Street grade to the natural
84-86, ground surface. The issue is providing adequate access to the home site while
97,99, preserving fill slope stability. Foundations should not be supported by road fill
100 soils.
K & A Engineering, Inc.
2. The identification of geotechnical hazards specific to the building lot and proposed structure that
exist or could be caused by the proposed development, and
3. Recommendations to mitigate existing or created hazards including, but not limited to, slope
movement, drainage, expansive soils, cuts and fills, retaining walls, and access from the street to
the home site.
The geotechnical report for lots 112-114 should include specific recommendations for the design of
grading, subsurface drains, and surface drains to collect surface water and subsurface
groundwater.
The geotechnical report for all Level II lots, in addition to recommendations for foundation drainage,
make recommendations for grading and other drainage systems to manage surface runoff and
minimize the risk of overly soft or wet soil conditions behind and around the structures.
Field Verification _Level 11 Lots
We recommend that a geotechnical engineer review these lots during excavation to verify site
surface and subsurface conditions reported in the Level II report, and to verify that the measures
recommended in the report are implemented. The geotechnical engineer should also make
additional on-site recommendations to address actual conditions exposed during foundation pad
construction.
Upon successful completion of the foundation pad construction and sitework, the geotechnical
engineer should submit recommendations, in writing, for acceptance of the foundation pad
construction and sitework, by the local building official. Completion of a form and affidavit, similar to
. those for phases I and II, would be a suitable substitute for a written report by the geotechnical
engineer. This report should specifically comment on the performance of recommendations made
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration of CC&Rs - Page 16 of 17
July 24, 2006
e
e-
.
in the level II geotechnical report.
Thank you for the opportunity to be of service. Please call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Michael Remboldt, P.E. K & A Engineering, Inc.
Project: 116.05
Client: Alberts Development
Mountaingate Subdivision Phase III, Springfield, OR
Page 4 of 4 March 28, 2006
After Recording Return To
Lane County Surveyors
MountainGate West Declaration of CC&Rs - Page 17 of 17
July 24, 2006
\"
v~ it
. J-/I//S J DL .'
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR
MOUNTAIN GATE WEST
( ftVS-re- i ,v'l.llt.j. fJlIV >I 4)
.~..
'10 ~ 'fW'-
.AJY.
~)t '.
.
INTRODUCTION
MountainGate West, which was approved by the City of Springfield as Phase 4A, B &. C
of the Master Plan Property, consists of 129 lots that have been approved as a residential
subdivision under the provisions of MountainGate Master Plan Approval (City File 95-
023-003 9) and Springfield Development Code (SDC) standards contained in SDC
.Article 35 Subdivisions, SDC Article 38 Tree Felling, and SDC Article 26 Hillside
Development This document satisfies the requirements ofthe Hillside Development and
Master Plan approvals for a comprehensive "Hillside Development Plan" for the
subdivision to guide the construction of dwellings on the individual lots. This plan
incorporates the referenced reports required by the Hillside Development aJiicle and the
City of Springfield, Developer, and future owners will use the approved Hillside
Development Plan to assure that the tree felling, grading, construction, and future use will
confom1 to subdivision conditions and provisions of the Master Plan requiring the
protection of trees, drainages, and slopes. .
'. -..
The Hillside Development Plan includes a lot-by-Iot description of conditions that will
affect the design and location of structures and driveways, including special foundation
requirements on some lots. The plan also includes general guidelines for the entire
subdivision contained in required reports aJ1d final plans, including a Tree Preservation
Plan and Fire Protection Plan. The structure of the remainder of this document is as
follows:
.,
The Development PlaJ1 is on file with the City and consists of the following components:
. Development Plan Map (Scale I" = 100')
. Tree Preservation Plan
. Fire Protection Plan
. Geotechnical Requirements
. Grading, Slopes, and Drainage Guidelines
/'
/\'C-'~'
\."."":
'._.CJ,
. 'i,'- P
,,J/" o<~
.,;:;v
,,6
\"- r..-
.
.
TREEPRESERV ATION PLAN
The purpose of this plan is to summarize and implement measures adopted to maintain
the aesthetic and erosion control value of trees and native vegetation within
MountainGate West as established by the approved tree felling pennit, the final forester's
report, Hillside Development Plan, and relevant Springfield City Code standards.
Tree Removal- General. Springfield Development Code requires that a tree felling
pennit be obtained for the removal of more than five trees greater than five inches in
diameter. Within this phase of MountainGate a tree felling permit is. not required for the
initial removal of trees from a lot that is required to construct the dwelling, dliveway or
!,'Tading necessary to place the dwelling and driveway. For other portions of the lot a City
tree felling permit is required for the removal of more than five trees that are greater than
five inches in diameter. Additional restrictions for tree removal exist within Conservation
Easements and Vegetation Easements as described below.
Private Conservation Easements. Conservation easements have been established on the
Plat of MountainGate and are located upon portions of Lots 9-11. These easements have
Of6 been established to preserve the natural vegetation and character ofthe northern ridgelme
If./'" boundary of the development primarily to protect viewsheds from lower elevations
_ I>" J. towards the northern boundary of MountamGate. No structures, including decks, porches,
, Olu!" eaves, etc. shall be located within these areas~~t ff'nc"s)Retaining structures required
"t\ '--------- t~; maintain the stability of a dwelling on a lot or to prevent soil movement may be
~{ '/'" . ~d if recommended by a geotechnical engineer or structural engineer licensed in the
State of..Qregon and if specifically approved by the Springfield Development Services
Departmei1'l\ Any such structure shall be designed to intrude the least amount possible
into the Conservation Easement area. No native vegetation may be removed from within
~ these areas except as necessary to meet fuel break standards for fire protection
, ~ I ~ diseased or danger trees as detennined by a professional forester or arborist iseased and
'XII t\ J noer trees to be removed shall be shown on the initial building pennit application
'J! X /1:t submitta 0 . or must otherwise be authorized for removal through an
,~ ; ~~I'~ independent tree felling pennit issued by the City. Trees and understory may be thinned
X),. <;4' and pruned to enhance their health and appearance and to meet fire protection standards.
~f'"~ \~ Nonnal1ve vegetal10n mcludmg blackbemes, scotch br00111 and IVY may be removed. The
l"~ use of?erbicides within the Conservation Easement is limited to application to individual
nonnatIve plants. Broadcast apphcatIon IS stnctly prohIbited. Use of heavy eqUipment
" within the easement area is limited to the minimum necessary for permitted tree removal
or utility maintenance and repair. Fencing is allowed within the Conservation Easement
provided that it is not a solid fence such as wood or block but consists of wrought iron or
other open fencing materials as approved by the Architectural Control Committee. The
fence shall be nonreflective and colored to blend in with the natural landscape. Black is
preferred; white, yellow, red, blue and other bright coloring is prohibited. Fencing located
within the Conservation Easement shall be installed such that it does not impact healthy
native trees that have'a diameter at breast height (DBH) of~inches or greater. This
may be accomplished by offsetting sections of fencing at right angles to include or
~#tn:{
.~~-
.
Iii'
~fl
'-
.
.
exclude trees from fenced-in yards. Fence posts. shall be placed at least three feet from the
tree at breast height and shall be placed to minimize root damage. Fencing shall not be
,attached to trees. Maintenance aJ1d repair of utilities and access for such purposes within
the Conservation Easement is allowed provided that care is taken to prevent damage to ,
trees.
Private Vegetation Easements.
Private Vegetation Easements have been established on the Plat cifMountainGate along
certain rear lot lines. The goal within the easement areas is primarily to retain or create an
internal buffer of trees along internal property boundaries, This may be achieved by
pruning and shaping existing, healthy trees; by thim1ing younger existing trees to
ourage growth into healthy, properly spaced mature trees or by planting new trees.
Mature n e trees with broken tops may be removed if replaced by an acceptable
replacement tr Otherwise, the trees shall be pruned and shaped to improve their health
and appearance. Diseased, deformed or danger trees as determined by a professional
forester or arborist should be removed. Grading may occur within the easements as
necessary to establish a dwelling or retaining walls, provided that where native trees are
removed they are replaced by acceptable replacement trees at a maximum spacing of
thiliy feet. No struct\lres shall be located within these areas except fences and retaining
structures that are required for foundation or soil stability. The design and placement of -sW Iv..
any :etaining structures recommended by a geotechnical engineer or structural engineer .p/~ 'f.
shall be included with the initial building permit application submittal to the City: ,;.:'
M."I~'~
/'^./HvU.S; r-!.I
",'1> ';.e./u-;'
It>(j ~ -It-,
C/O
Street Trees.
During the subdivision process certain trees and tree groupings have been protected for
potential qualification as street trees that will meet City requirements. There are two .
street trees shown on the Development Plan map that are to be retained as street trees.
They are located on Lots 48 and 50. These trees shall be protected dming house and.. ~. .
driveway construction and preserved as street trees. They may not be removed unless
determined to be diseased or danger trees by a professional forester or arborist. If
removed they must be replaced by street trees' that meet City standards.
Other individual trees, tree clusters and tree groupings'located close enough to the street
curb could qualify as street trees if not damaged or removed with house and driveway
placement. Generally trees within 20 feet of street right-of-way may qualify as street
trees. Groupings of trees even beyond the 20 foot distance may be retained in lieu of City
required street trees along the lot street frontages. Hardwood trees must be located at least
5 feet, and conifers must be ] 0 feet behind curbside sidewalks. Street trees should be lO
to 20 feet from street lights. Specific standards regulating the use of existing native trees
as street trees are contained in Section 6 of the City of Springfield Design Standards and
Procedures Manual.
.
.
Acceptable ReplacemeJlt Trees/Planting Standards.'
Trees replaced within the private Conservation Easements as established on the Plat of'
MountainGate shall be of a native species specified for hillside development in Section 6
ofthe City of Springfield Design Standards and Procedures Manual. Trees replaced
within the private Vegetation Easements as established on the Plat of MountainGate may
be selected from the entire list of street trees contained in Section 6 of the City of
Splingfield Design Standards and Procedures Manual. Tree planting shall follow the
procedures contained in Section 6 of the Springfield Design Standards and Procedures
Manual.
Tree Protection During Construction.
During house and driveway construction designated street trees and other trees selected
as native street trees as discussed above under "Street Trees" shall be protected with
construction fencing. Construction fencing shall be placed between Conservation
Easements and the worksites during construction. Construction fencing shall also be
placed to protect Vegetation Easements that will not be altered with house, driveway or
retaining wall construction. Silt fencing may be substituted for standard construction
fencing when located to serve this dual purpose.
FIRE PROTECTION STANDARDS
Due to the forested setting of MountainGate, certain fire protection measures should be
observed to help' protect dwellings within a forested environment from the dangers of
wildfire. MountainGate has been designed and constructed so that all dwellings will be
located in close proximity to fire hydrants that are to be used for fire protection. Unless
otherwise approved by the Springfield Fire and Life Safety Department, dwellings shall
be located within fifty (50) feet of the public street, the private joint use access roads or
private driveways constructed to standards that will accorrimodate fire fighting apparatus.
In addition, landscaping within the lots should establish fuel breaks around the dwellings
that discourage the spreading of wildfire. Fuel breaks may not extend beyond the
boundary of thc affected lot unless an easement exists upon the adjacent property that
allows for such use. There are' two levcls of fuel breaks based upon proximity to the
dwelling: . .
"Primary Safety Zone."
The primary safety zone is a firebreak extending a minimum ono feet in all directions
around the dwelling except however that it shall not extend into a Coilservation Easement
or Vegetation Easement. The goal within the primary safety zone is to exclude fuels that
will produce flame lengths in excess of one foot. Vegetation within the primary safety
zone could include green lawns, low shrubs, individual trees and tree groupings. Where.
continuous canopies exist, trees should generally be spaced with greater than 15 feet ..
between crowns and pruned to remove dead and low branches.
.
.
"SecOIidmy Fuel Break."
The secondary fuel break extends a minimum of] 00 feet downslope from the primary
safety zone. The goal of the secondary fuel break is to reduce fuels so that. the overall
intensity of any wildfire would be lessened and tbe like\ihood of crown fires and
crowning is reduced. Vegetation within the secondary fuel break shall be pruned and
spaced S9 that where continuous canopies exist; fire will not spread from crowns of trees
in the secondary fuel break to crowns of trees in the primary fuel break. Due to the
limited area affected, large healthy trees within the Conservation Easements should not
be removed for purposes of fire protection. Small trees and brush growing underneath
larger trees should be thinned or pruned to prevent spread of fire up into thc crowns of
tbeIarger trees. Dead fuels that increase fire hazard may be removed.
GEOTECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS
A geotechnical report, titled "Earthwork Summary Letter" and dated July 2], 2006, has
becn prepared by Professional Service Industries, and is attached. It providcs specific
recommendation for the use of geotechnical review appropriate for each individual lot
development. An evaluation of the building sites has been conducted by a PSI engineer
during grading operations and the attached report lists the geoteclmical investigation
requirements specified for each lot.
In hillside locations the City of Springfield requires a report from a geotechnical engineer
to be submitted with applications for a Land and Drainage Alteration Pennit (LDAP). In
Phase 4 of MountainGate details within this initial report will vary depending upon
whether the lot requires a Level I or II geotechnical investigation and upon the initial
findings of the engineer.
Within the Leyel I category (Lots 7-23, 29-34, 40-6], and 74-] 0]), neither extensive
grading nor a site-specific geotechnical investigation is expected for foundation design
prior to construction. However, the engineer should examine background reports,
physically examine the site and review proposed house plans. The initial geotech report \
may consist of a statement that the house plans submitted conform with site conditions3 (2, ~
that limit investigation to the standards for the Level I review because the foundation and 1""i5 I t.
house plans submitted meet appropriate standards for the site. ..' "t/., / ~;/
. fItUi.:.o ~k/ "'-5 -
Within the Level II category (Lots 1-6,24-28,35-39 2-73, and ]02-]29) a site-specific
geotechnical investigation is required for each 10 1e results and recommendations are
to be included with the buildinglLDAP pennit submittal. The investigation and the report
should address Level I concerns such as unstable ground, soft/wet soil eonditions,
expansive soils, cuts/fills, and retaining walls, in addition to any special conditio s
affecting a particular site.
.
.
Within both the Level I and II categories a geoteclmical engineer is required to inspect
the site and foundati011.placement during construction and to issue a final written report
in accordance with PSI standards.
DRAINAGE
Nonintelference of Drainage. f /11-10 h c..
There shall be no interference with the established drainage patterns or systems over or
through any lot or common area or any adjacent property unless adequate alternative
provisions are made for proper drainage. The term "established drainage" shall mean the
drainage swales, conduits, inlets, and outlets designed, maintained and constructed for
MountainGate.
Stann water sewer laterals have been extended to each lot for conveyance of roof drains,
building foundation drains and private property surface drainage.
Private Storm Drainage Easement.
,;".;,
A private Storm Drainage Easement is designated on the Plat and is located across
portions of Lots 107 and 108 and within adjacent offsite easements described in separate
recorded documents. It is a private stormwater easement. Normal routine maintenance of
the Drainage Easement is the responsibility of the owner of the lot upon which it is
-located, No structure, fence, planting, or other material that may damage or interfere with
the installation, operation and maintenance of stonn drainage facilities, that may redirect
drainage to outside the easement, or that may obstruct or retard the flow of water through
drainage channels in the easement area shall be place or pern1itted to remain within this
easenlent area. All effort shall be made to avoid allowing any petroleum-based products
or other hazardons or foreign substances from entering or contaminating the area of this
. easement. Vegetation shall not be disturbed except as necessary for landscaping and
maintenance, to reduce fire hazards or to control noxious and invasive overgrown
vegetation such as blackberry vines.