Loading...
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.