Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 1 of 27 TABLE OF CONTENTS PART I INTRODUCTION Summary of Salient Facts and Conclusions................. Property Identification....................................... . .. Client.............................................................. Intended Use and User (s) of the Appraisal Report......... Type of Appraisal Assignment................................ Property Rights and Interests.............................. Effective Date of Value- Date of Completion.............. Competency Statement.......................................... Definition of Value . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . . .. .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . . Current Ownership.............................................. Sales History..................................................... Exposure Time................................................... 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 PART II FACTUAL DATA Regional and Community Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zoning and Land Use Regulations........................... 5 5 PART III ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS Highest & Best Use............................................. Sales Comparison . .. . .. .. .. . . .. . .. .. .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .... Reconciliation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ce11ification of Appraisal . .. .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . 5 6-7 7 8 PART IV EXHIBITS Last Deed of Record ............................................ . Photographs of Subject Property ........................... .. Maps of Subject Property ....................................... .. Maps & Photographs of Sales ................................. . Assumptions and Limiting Conditions ........................ . Resume .............................................................. . 9 I 0-12 13-16 17-20 21-22 24 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 1 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 2 of 27 PART I SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS & CONCLUSIONS Property Type: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unimproved Rural Residential Home-Sites Location: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Morrow County, Oregon Owner: . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . Daniel Brian Williams Map Number................................... 02N23 Tax Lots 1400 & 1402 Assessor's Market Value: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tax Lot 1400 - $30,860 Tax Lot 1402-$29,420 Assessed Value: .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . ... .. ... Tax Lot 1400- $23,580 Tax Lot 1402- $22,790 Taxes for Year 2014-2015: .. . .. .. .. .. .. . . .. ... Tax Lot 1400 - $366.65 Tax Lot 1402- $349.69 Zoning: .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. Exclusive Farm Use Present Use: ..................................... Unimproved Rural Residential Home-Sites Highest & Best Use: ........................... Assemblage/Plottage Subject's ''Hypothetical Value ............... $59,000.00 Subject's Current "As Js" Value ............. $12.400.00 Effective Date of Appraisal: .................. January 27,2015 Completion Date: . .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . . . .. .. .. .. . .. March 5, 2015 2 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 2 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 3 of 27 PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION The property that is the subject of this report consists of two tax lots, 02N23-1400 & 1402. Tax lot 1400 is 16.82 acres in size and tax lot 1402 is 14.87 acres in size for a total of 31.69 acres. The property is located along State Hwy-74 approximately 16 miles northwest oflone and I 0 miles south of the l-84 Freeway in the northwest corner of Morrow County, Oregon. Both tax lots are hilly with rocky outcrops. There are excavated areas on both tax lots that have been leveled for future construction sites. There is a water well on tax lot 1400 that is intended for use by both tax lots for domestic and/or livestock water use. The tax lots can be sold separately. Legal Description: Parcel I and Parcel 2, Partition Plat 2006-8 Client: Griffin & McCandlish Attorneys at Law 465 NE 181 St., No. 500 Portland, OR 97230 Authorization: James E. McCandlish COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS Based on the findings from Invenergy's experts Theriault & Acoustical Consultants and Daly Standlee & Associates, Tnc. Engineers that were presented to the Morrow County Planning Commission and acknowledged by the Morrow County Court and the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals that noise from the Tnvenergy Willow Creek Wind Energy Facility exceeds DEQ noise limits, it is my opinion that the external influence of excessive noise causes the residential use ofTax Lots 02N23-1400 & 1402 to be diminished to the point that they are not acceptable in the residential market. Interviews were conducted with a number of appraisers, realtors and mortgage underwriters to determine whether the negative external influence of noise would need to be disclosed to prospective buyers and the impact disclosure would have on financing. My conclusion is disclosure is necessary and would severely limit the ability to secure financing. INTENDED USE OF APPRAISAL REPORT The intended use of this appraisal report is to estimate the difference between the subject's "Hypothetical" use without the negative external influence of noise from the Tnvenergy Willow Creek Wind Energy Facility and the subject's "As Is" value with the negative external influence of excessive noise that currently exists. Two value opinions were concluded. A "Hypothetical" value assuming noise from the wind energy facility has no external influence on value and a current "As Is" value recognizing the negative influence of excessive noise from the wind energy facility that exceed DEQ standards. INTENDED USER(S) OF APPRAISAL REPORT The intended user of this report is the Client. The intended use is to evaluate the property for the Client's purposes, subject to the stated scope of work of the appraisal, reporting requirements ofthis appraisal and Definition ofMarket Value. No additional Intended Users are identified by the Appraiser. 3 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 3 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 4 of 27 TYPE OF APPRAISAL ASSIGNMENT This is a Restricted Appraisal Report -completed in a Summary Narrative Format. The Client has determined that a Restricted Appraisal utilizing the Sales Approach is sufficient for their intended use. The scope of work included an inspection of the subject property and a search of county records for comparable sales. The sales were verified and analyzed, viewed and photographed from the street. Appraisers, Realtors and Mortgage Underwriters were interviewed. The scope of work necessary to report a credible result was performed. The information in the report is restricted to the Client's use only. The appraiser's opinions and conclusions set forth in the report may not be fully understood without additional information retained in the appraiser's work file. PROPERTY INTERESTS AND RIGHTS APPRAISED The property rights considered in this report are an undivided ownership in a fee simple estate; subject only to the limitations imposed by governmental powers of taxation, eminent domain, police power and escheat. EFFECIVE DATE OF VALUE-DATE OF COMPLETION The effective date ofvalue ofthis report is January 27,2015 The date of completion of this report is March 5, 2015. COMPENTENCY STATEMENT The appraiser has the appropriate knowledge, education, and experience to complete this assignment with competence. The appraiser's qualifications are included in the addenda of this report. DEFINITION OF VALUE Market Value: "Market value means the most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition are the consummation of the sale as of a specified date and the passing of the title from seller to buyer under conditions whereby: I. Buyer and seller are typically motivated; 2. Both parties are well informed and acting in what they consider as their own best interest. 3. A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market. 4. Payment is made in cash in US dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and 5. The payment represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale." Source of Definition: The Market Value definition is from regulations published by federal regulatory agencies pursuant to Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (FIRREA) of 1989 between July 5, 1990, and August 24, I 990; by the Federal Reserve System (FRS); National Credit Union Administration (NCUA); Federal Deposition Insurance Corporation (FDIC); the office ofThrift Supervision (OTS); the Office of Comptroller ofthe currency (OCC), Rules and 4 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 4 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 5 of 27 Regulations, Federal Register, Vol S5, No. 165, Page 34696. This definition is also referenced in regulations jointly published by the OCC, OTS, FRS, and FDIC on June 7, 1994, and the Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, dated October 27, 1994. The value opinion in this report is stated in terms of cash or in terms of financial arrangements equivalent to cash. CURRENT OWNERSHIP The assessment records of Morrow County show the current owner as Daniel Brian Williams. SALES HISTORY According to County Records the subject property has not sold or transferred in the last three years. Per County Records the subject last transferred on May 26, 1999 for no stated consideration. A copy of the Last Deed of Record is included and made part of this report. According to RMLS both of the subject tax lots were previously listed for sale. The tax lots were first listed on September 22, 2006 with asking prices of$98,500 each and were on the market 180 days without a price change when the listings expired on March 22, 2007. The tax lots were then relisted with the same Realtor on November 12,2012 with asking price of$65,000 each and were on the market 383 days when the listing expired with reduced asking prices of $49,000. Per RMLS the subject tax lots were on the market a total of 563 days. Per Mr. Arthur Kegler the Listing Broker no offers to purchase were made or written. Per Mr. Kegler the acknowledged DEQ noise violations from the Willow Creek Wind Energy Facility would have to be disclosed to prospective buyers and he is now unwilling to list the subject's tax lots. EXPOSURE TIME Exposure time for the subject's current "As Is'' value could range from less than 45 days to more than three years. PART II REGIONAL AND COMMUNITY DATA Morrow County is a rural agriculture county in northeastern Oregon. There are less than 12,000 people in Morrow County. ZONING - LAND USE REGULA TTONS The subject tax lots are in an EFU "Exclusive Farm Use" 160 acre minimum zoning. The tax lots were created by partition as "Non-Farm Dwelling" conditional use parcels. Per the Morrow County Planning Departments Non-Farm Dwelling Parcels are allowed by statute within the EFU zoning ordinance and the conditional non-farm residential use is a legal conforming use. 5 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 5 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 6 of 27 PART III ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS HIGHEST AND BEST USE Highest and Best Use is defined as "The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property that is physically possible, legally permissible, appropriately supported and financially feasible that result in the highest value," 200 l, Twelfth Edition of the Appraisal of Real Estate. The four criteria that Highest & Best Use must meet is Physically Possible, Legally Permissible, Financially Feasible and Maximum Productivity. Physically Possible: The subject property consists oftwo separate tax lots 02Nl23-l400 & 1402. Both tax lots have public road frontage along State Hwy-74. There is an electric power line along Hwy-74. There is a water well on tax lot 1400 that provides water to both tax lots. Public access, existing power source and well make it physically possible to use the property for numerous legal uses. Legally Permissible: Zoning is typically the determining factor in analyzing the Highest and Best Use of undeveloped property. The tax lots were legally created as non-farm dwelling parcels. Both agriculture and non-farm dwelling residential uses are outright permitted uses. Financially Feasible: The existing intra-structure makes the subject's agriculture and non-farm dwelling residential use feasible. However, the size ofthe respective tax lots makes the subject's agriculture use financially questionable. The external int1uence of excessive noise also makes the subject's non-farm dwelling residential use financially questionable. Maximum Productivity: Due to the questionable financeable feasibility the maximum productivity ofthe subject's tax lots is limited. Without an acceptable residential use productivity is limited to an agriculture use. Due to the size of the individual tax lots 16.82 acres and 14.87 acres respectfully, the subject's agriculture use is equally unacceptable in the market. The subject's Highest and best Use for both tax lots is assemblage/plottage. To be bought by neighboring property owners and incorporated into larger parcels of adjoining land. SALES COMPARISON A search of County Records identified 4 sales of unimproved buildable tax lots in the Tone area ofMorrow in the past year. The most recent sale is a 39.87 acre parcel of farm land along Hwy-74 approximately two miles west of lone and sold in December of 2014 for $48,000 between family members. The sale was for a home site The other three sales are located in the Emert Addition to Tone and sold between February 24, 2014 with selling prices from $15,000 to $40,000 and site sizes 1.05 to I 0.36 acres. The Emert Addition sales were between Grow lone and two different buyers for home sites. Construction has started on Sale #2. Similar to the subject tax lots all four sales have water and electric services readily available. 6 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 6 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 7 of 27 Sale #I: 0 I S42-21 00 Date ofSale 12/23/2014- Doc# 2014-35304 Sales Price - $48,000 Site Size- 39.87 acres Price per acre $1,203.912 ($ 1,200 rounded) Sale #2: 0 I S2403 B-1 00 & 200 Date of Sale 11/17/2013- Doc# 2014-35117 Sales Price- $40.000 Site Size- 10.36 aces Price per acre- $3,861 ($3,860.00 rounded) Sale#3: 01S2403B-1000 Date of Sale 06/13/2014- Doc# 2014-34280 Sales Price - $15,000 Site Size- 1.05 acres Price per acre- $14,285.71 ($14,285.00 rounded) Sale #4: 01 S2403B-800 Date of Sale 02/24/2014- Doc# 2014-33807 Sales Price- $15,000 Site Size- 2.32 acres Price per acre- $6,465.52 ($6,465.00 rounded) When appraising unimproved acreage building sites the price per acre is typically considered to be the best value indicator. However, in this instance there is a wide range in the size of the available sales 1.05 to 39.87 acres and a wide range in the price per acre $1 ,200 to $14,285 per acre. The wide range in the price per acre is attributed to the limited demand for home sites in the subject's marketing area. Therefore the price per acre is not the best value indicator for the subject tax lots. In this instance the selling price of the four sales fall more in range with residential building sites much smaller in size and are typically seen in suburban areas in the larger cities of northeastern Oregon. In arriving at a supportable value for the subject tax lots the principle of substitution was applied and the individual selling prices ofthe four sales were given equal weight in a weighted average as follows: Sale #1 's Selling Price Sale #2's Selling Price Sale #3's Selling Price Sale #4's Selling Price $48.000 $40.000 $15.000 $15,000 X X X X .25 = $12,000 .25 = $10,000 .25 = $ 3,750 .25 = $ 3,750 +------------Subject's indicated "Hypothetical" value per tax lot--- $29,5000 Subject's ''Hypothetical" value for both tax lots-------- $59,000.00 7 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 7 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 8 of 27 ADDITIONAL SALES DATA The preceding land analysis was used to estimate the subject's "Hypothetical" value assuming there no negative external influence from noise caused by the Invenergy Willow Creek Wind Energy Facility. However, when recognizing the finding acknowledged by the Morrow County Court and the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals that noise from the Willow Creek Wind Energy Facility exceeds DEQ noise limits and the necessity to disclose the DEQ noise limits violation to prospective buyers the subject's "Hypothetical" is not supportable in the market. Therefore a current "As Is" value has been developed. The "As Is" value is based on a limited agriculture use. In estimating the agriculture use value a survey of dry pasture unimproved land sales was made in Morrow and Gilliam Counties. That survey gave a value range from $75 to $500 per acre. Due to the size of the subject's tax lots, 16.82 acres for tax lot 1400 and 14.87 acres for tax lot 1402 the agriculture use is further limited in the market. Therefore the low end ofthe value range is most appropriate in estimating the subject's current "As Is'' value. A contributing factor in value is the existing water well which has an estimated contributory value of $10,000. The subject's "As Is" value was calculated as follows: Tax Lot 1400- 16.82 acres X $75 = $ I ,261.50 Tax Lot 1402- 14.82 acres X $75 = $ I, 111.50 Existing Water Well--------------- + $10,000.00 Subject's Estimated "As Is'' Value $12,373.00 ($12,400.00 rounded) Continued 8 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 8 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 9 of 27 RECONCILIATION The purpose of this report is to estimate the subject's market value to assist the Client in a pending litigation. The subject consists of two tax lots unimproved buildable EFU zoned pasture land. The Sales Approach was given exclusive consideration. The most current and relevant sales available were verified, analyzed, and employed in a weighted average to arrive at a "Hypothetical" value for the subject's two buildable tax lots assuming there is no negative external influence from noise caused by the Tnvenergy Willow Creek Wind Energy Facility. A current "As Is" value was also concluded using a survey of unimproved dry pasture land sales and the estimated contributory value of the subject's existing water well. The "As Is" value recognizes the findings acknowledged by the Morrow County Court and the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals that noise from the Willow Creek Wind Energy Facility exceeds DEQ noise limits and that the findings and noise violations have to be disclosed to prospective buyers. Based on the analysis and studies made that as of January 27, 2015 the subject has the value: Subject's "Hypothetical Value ---- $59,000.00 Fifty Nine Thousand Dollars Subject's Current "As Is" Value--- $12,400.00 Twelve Thousand Four Hundred Dollars Richard J. Barnett Certified Appraiser C000205 March 5, 2015 9 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 9 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 10 of 27 CERTIFICATION OF APPRAISAL T certify that, to be best of my knowledge and belief: I. The statements of fact contained in this report and true and correct. 2. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and is my personal and impartial, and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, conclusions and recommendations. 3. Thave not present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and T have no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. 4. Thave no bias with respect to any property that is the subject of this report or to the parties involved with this assignment. 5. My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results. 6. My compensation tor completing this assignment is not contingent upon the development of reporting a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related to the intended use of this appraisal. 7. Thave made a personal inspection ofthe property that is the subject of this repoti. 8. No one provided significant real property appraisal or appraisal consulting assistance to the person signing this certification. 9. TcertifY that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the reported analyses, opinions and conclusions were developed and this report has been prepared in conformity with the requirements ofthe Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. Richard J. Barnett Certified Appraiser C000205 March 5, 2015 10 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 10 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 11 of 27 LAST DEED of RECORD ~!i'-'$;11.¢<1~!'~·) !:::1\'\.i'W A.tJ .l:"P.i~ .flY Iil.U.:::bl·~:.;-~£'"lTJ.. TlM. -~ ....J}J/.h•. i.~~d. --~1~~E'.. l~9~~---·-,_.. ~····-· Jp•l:tl.1ifl1r;/(,.;-:· «U~,o:!l' f:ki>i Br-•Nt{l·~\ •.jt-.kx- tw.~·":.:r _t;,r~··r_, iU:Y,J;t, 1(<;,.. ·-~-~>"'!o··~·i-t>-H, f:-(:~JU..t.::n-:-~"lt§ -!nf -•tr,.~-1 n'· "\'>W·~:}; ;,<,~-os(:.:.lr·: (;;wl~}·, ':'1"'-!iidr· c.1 {\~:;:'.$(:'". r!N:.r·rd~~,· •"tt1 /:dr-. ..-.,.,-,, ,~,·~i'lJ.t:l ~_wvd !wr.:pcr.:,v~ /;(l.f.Ai..!,\~t ~~ iJ 1 ""·nf '-~""--:-~,~· "l:. .->,:;<-J",:,;:"jt, -'!Nu.~io:.-:1 ~~· lC.: ~·it, f'':i"f..C !\• Rl.n"loi lt-.'::..;;r"''>::~·H, -:,IX4r~*-l:': ~1!:K..\J·•j :;;:.-~ ,~y., jlo!~m-t ~-!.lti r d ;;"~~-- H!H.ti. 11~ ~t.u:-:..~ b ~,;- di~ ~f~/lf\"J;i :"U'1:J }jP"''"'~'-~·'ll fwin <¥B:O"J~~~-:.-r~ ~~1:;' '-~-ti~n;. hoo~:>··1:i 4Hll- ~1':-.lrt~;H' ~,tt~.tf ;:_;~!J~~~W~J:;, ~ M:'iJ ~;i;; ifr:'Jr.:''~Kr d~i-~uJ !h(.O r:.r.h..d,rt1'~11 >r~i;kh'".tril!;~!.ll't_ Co.V~~!:>< .,_"'ffr.ir. w;"11r:'-t),~~t'TYw~-"' .·,.,,nr~,- $,1 ("4-f;~~~'r.l.i- rr-..:-.t v~~_,. ..._,. :~!Ill ~)J~ ~~~-~~<,>n?"1 "'~ -··---····---~-····--·····---·····-······--····~-- .. -· ..~~··· 'A,~:,r,:· ~-~ (.!,_,; fi\ t:r •.-',';• ·• ,, ~-.. l~\ 11·,1.~ ,¥"\".,.,;~,-.,.(l f,~f !'''· :::'!-.,_/ <...:'.! r!H• ---··--;.j..,:._y •.·<· .. .----·-----······-.-·--··---···----~ 'I~. ~-Kit UU-?:"1.~~ C~-l"i ' 0 'l:~I!:!II!O'IIIIltov. . . . . N. _., .. >;/o,·_l-~\.~Jc M~ .... ~__fi!f., :th..JN~;.~'c:}~:,.-.,_ !;.:~:.l::'~·::::·~.'/..-w·l.ltU!:.;: ., ..... N.-------- v,.rft'r"-<'~ {',."'r<.;,. ,•v:... wn:J/o.r ,.t:rj·...~d u.:;J.' 11'7 lr:;."lol;•~~~·-J;·:_,;{ih·/l..-;.~.'ff"'" _f,.•,-:::t.,::·~ .w• }Oj vT II Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 11 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 12 of 27 SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM Tax Lot 02N23-1400 From Hwy-74 Excavated Level Area on Tat Lot 02N23-1400 12 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 12 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 13 of 27 SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM Well-Head & Pump House On Tax Lot 02N23-1400 Hwy-74 In Front of Tax Lot 02N23-1400 13 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 13 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 14 of 27 SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM Tax Lot 02N23-1402 From Hwy-74 Excavated Level Area on Tax Lot 02 23-1402 14 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 14 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 15 of 27 SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM Water Line From Shared Well On Tax Lot 02N23-1402 Hwy -74 in Front in Front of Tax Lot 02N23-1402 15 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 15 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 16 of 27 LOCATION MAP -. -·-··.... . Points of lntareet & n ecreation --:.t/11) - """""·· ~ "I ~ -.,- . ..,,.. ...... f -lll-l'lllfl -·"'• 'u:;.o::~::.. Wlllerm- a -fiiiAIC.M --· --·- • • ' ~~··c::o...er.:s""' • ,... .. IIJQnlihsF•I<• Nlf•.lf.-IMmll\ll'fiiJ ......,ca..... -·· ,1LLA ..t"' l .i -~ 16 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 16 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 17 of 27 LOCATION MAP 1- 17 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 17 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 18 of 27 18 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 18 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 19 of 27 PLAT MAP OF SUBJECT PROERTY I I ..... ~ 402 ,. 102 5923.99 /J PORTJC ~~~~". - ...-~ ~ PARCEl ·16_82 AC r ~ 14.87 AC ... 19 Barnett Supp. Expert Witness Report Exhibit 1 Page 19 of 27 Case 2:13-cv-01391-AC Document 235-1 Filed 10/19/16 Page 20 of 27 FLOOD MAP SUBJRVT PROPERTY lnterFiood t.,u~ Prt~~~Wtd b 8a'MII ~1\"III!U!I•, Etc. Tu L&lCI2NZa- t.tOO & 1402 ..._,OR97843 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ rtAPOATA '"~ f'poiiJ"I ~N'It ~ ,.,._. "" .,,.. ,.~ u... It M1111 Owla. £tootiiC•n5U o.c...., It, J.UT Ill ""uloa:lood ·~· r1~ -..,....._, ( ) 5