Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Application
Cit y Clerk’s Office ▪ 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Meridian, ID 83642 ▪ P: 208-888-4433 E:cityclerk@meridiancity.org ▪ www.meridiancity.org TRANSMITTAL TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN To ensure that your comments and recommendation will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission/City Council, Please submit your comments and recommendations to cityclerk@meridiancity.org, Attention: Chris Johnson, City Clerk by June 17, 2019 Transmittal Date: May 22, 2019 Hearing Date: June 20, 2019 Project Name & File Number: Caldera Canyon MDA, PP H-2019-0062 Applicant: Vanessa Klaus Property Location: 1294 E. Leigh Field Drive Application Request: 1. A Preliminary Plat consisting of 16 building lots and 3 common lots on 2.83 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district 2. To modify an existing development agreement for the purpose of removing the subject property from DA Instrument #106064914 to be placed in a new and separate agreement City Council / Planning and Zoning Commission Valley Transit Mayor Idaho DEQ Sanitary Services West Ada School District Building Department & Community Development Meridian Post Office Fire Department Ada County Highway District Police Department Ada County Development Services City Attorney Central District Health City Public Works Compass City Planner Nampa Meridian Irrigation District Parks Departments Settlers Irrigation District Economic Development Idaho Power, Intermountain Gas, Century Link Historic Preservation Commission Idaho Transportation Department New York Irrigation District South or RR/SW Meridian Boise Project Board of Control NW Pipeline Boise-Kuna Irrigation District Ada County Associate Land Records Downtown Projects Meridian Development Corporation Hearing Date: June 20, 2019 File No.: H-2019-0062 Project Name: Caldera Canyon Request: (PP): Request for a preliminary plat consisting of sixteen (16) building lots and three (3) common lots on 2.83 acres of land in the R-8 zoning district; and (MDA): Request to modify an existing development agreement for the purpose of removing the subject property from DA Instrument #106064914 to be placed in a new, separate agreement, by Vanessa Klaus. Location: The site is located at 1294 E. Leigh Field Dr., in the SE ¼ of the NE ¼ of Section 31, Township 4N., Range 1E. ECEIVE MAY 14 2019 Pla>1>n� Division DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION STAFF STAFF USE ONLY• B Project name: File number(s):01 !9 - e�� 2— Assigned Planner: 54RO �lan��P �2.ov►g,� Related files: Type of Review Requested (check all that apply) ❑ Accessory Use (check only 1) ❑ Final Plat Modification ❑ Daycare ❑ Landscape Plan Modification ❑ Home Occupation 0 Preliminary Plat ❑ Home Occupation/Instruction for 7 or more ❑ Private Street ❑ Administrative Design Review ❑ Property Boundary Adjustment ❑ Alternative Compliance ❑ Rezone ❑ Annexation and Zoning ❑ Short Plat ❑ Certificate of Zoning Compliance ❑ Time Extension (check only 1) ❑ City Council Review ❑ Director ❑ Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment ❑ Commission ❑ Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment ❑ UDC Text Amendment ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Vacation (check only 1) ❑ Conditional Use Modification (check only 1) ❑ Director ❑ Director ❑ Commission ❑ Commission ❑ Variance ❑ Development Agreement Modification ❑ Other ❑ Final Plat Applicant Information Applicant name: fi�1E554 7c��US Phone: Applicant address: IZcI��• �,Ej(a/{�'1�L7) �/L Email: City: 1''�-EM -T> i ATI State: It> Zip: 8.3 % Applicant's interest in property: KOwn ❑ Rent ❑ Optioned ❑ Other Owner name: '54 til E Owner address: City: Agent/Contact name (e.g., architect, engineer, developer, representative) Firm name: i 16'/ y'[UJIti�',�tJl C�3 L%C Phone: Email: State: Zip: pc�/ElopE t on/s-rAw-n /c-5 Phone: 006. Clog. /410? Agent address: P-0. /--,)OX 'tv5 Email: VV; Ef C �P'yyA A/cj- City: -Bo/ SE State: /7:> Zip: 83 ?b / Primary contact is: ❑ Applicant ❑ Owner XI Agent/Contact Subject Property Information Location/street address: /Zq 4 1F - 1L5/6i -f? �� �2 Township, range, section: 3� Assessor's parcel number(s): 88- /0 /30 Total acreage: 2 � Zoning district: ^� Community Development ■ Planning Division ■ 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Ste. 102 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-884-5533 Fax: 208-888-6854 www.meridiancity.org/planning -1 Rev: (2/2/20182/7/2018) A ✓- Project/subdivisionname: ��tpEZA General description of proposed project/request: 14 %Arr5LJ F'�7i 1hS row; ✓ pry Mont `c1r5; /,T5 Proposed zoning district(s): Acres of each zone proposed: N f A Type of use proposed (check all that apply): Residential ❑ Office ❑ Commercial ❑ Employment ❑ Industrial ❑ Other Who will own & maintain the pressurized irrigation system in this development? yfO 14 Which irrigation district does this property lie within? 5e-rr (e/LS Primary irrigation source: 5U'li;4 E aftsE AC�;&c Secondary: Oso6/ -I> A7'1 Square footage of landscaped areas to be irrigated (if primary or secondary point of connection is City water): �Islo1./ I,SZZ 1�1 �ry�toal�vL �ai5 Z r:Og4 Residential Project Summary (if applicable) Number of residential units: lS / -FX l5T/AJ6 Number of building lots: !S- Number of common lots: ,3 Number of other lots: tVL'f Proposed number of dwelling units (for multi -family developments only): 1 bedroom: 2-3 bedrooms: 4 or more bedrooms: Minimum square footage of structure (excl. garage): Maximum building height: 3� Minimum property size (s.f): V32 Average property size (s.f.): (P 3� Gross density (Per UDC 11-1A-1): S &5'1A't tE Net density (Per UDC 11-1A-1): w• 9/1AY_-/L6 Acreage of qualified open space: JV LA Percentage of qualified open space: t4. A Type and calculations of qualified open space provided in acres (Per UDC 11 -3G -3B): N 1A Amenities provided with this development (if applicable): N 1A Type of dwelling(s) proposed: X Single-family Detached ❑ Single-family Attached ❑ Townhouse ❑ Duplex ❑ Multi -family ❑ Vertically Integrated ❑ Other Non-residential Project Summary (if applicable) Number of building lots: _ Gross floor area proposed: Hours of operation (days and hours): Total number of parking spaces provided: Authorization Print applicant name: Applicant signature:. Common lots: Other lots: Existing (if applicable): Building height: Number of compact spaces provided: aAJ5-1—ANi 5 O.U��1T] V Date: 5-//5// v ay Community Development ■ Planning Division ■ 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Ste. 102 Meridian, Idaho 83642 40 1&0 Phone: 208-884-5533 Fax: 208-888-6854 www.meridiancity.org/planning -2- Rev: (2/7/2018) RILEY PLANNING SERVICES P.O. Box 405 Boise, ID 83701 May 13, 2019 City of Meridian Community Development Planning Division 33 E. Broadway Ave., Suite 102 Meridian, ID 83642 RE: CALDERA CANYON SUBDIVISION - PRELIMINARY PLAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION Dear Staff: On behalf of Vanessa Klaus, please accept the attached Preliminary Plat Application for Caldera Canyon Subdivision and associated Development Agreement Modification. The subject site located at 1294 E. Leigh Field Drive is the original host parcel of Quenzer Commons Subdivision No. 10 and is 2.831 acres in size. No variance from Meridian City Code is requested. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION The subject site is subject to the Development Agreement (DA) between the City of Meridian and Brighton Development recorded on April 27, 2006, under Instrument No. 106064914 as a part of approval of Quenzer Commons N. 10. The current DA provides the existing residence with the right to keep horses until such time as the current owner (Vanessa Klaus) vacates the property. The project team assumes that the intent of the DA Modification is to remove the subject site from the Quenzer Commons Development Agreement since the parcel will become part of a new and different subdivision, and replace the DA with a new agreement to allow the continued keeping of horses while Ms. Klaus is the owner occupant of the existing residence. PRELIMINARY PLAT Caldera Canyon Subdivision is proposed with 19 lots —15 new residential parcels with 1 existing residence to remain, and 3 common lots. Lot sizes range from 4032 to 5372 s.f excluding the 34,668 s.f. existing residential lot. With an R-8 zoning designation and a Medium Density Residential Land Use, the site meets these standards with a gross density of 5.65 units per acre and a net density of 6.91 units per acre. Open space close to the site include the school site at the SE corner of E. Leigh Field and Locust Grove LAND USE PLANNING - DUE DILIGENCE • INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS Caldera Canyon - Page 2 of 3 and a school NW of the site at Red Horse Way and Red Rock Drive as well as Settlers Park SW of the site and Champion Park to the east. A public street is proposed to access E. Leigh Field to the south and will traverse the site to the north boundary. Services will be extended through the site as discussed in the Pre -Application Meeting held on February 15, 2019. Four (4) homes will be served with a shared driveway west of the public street close to the north boundary with a driveway length that meets the maximum of 150 -feet requirement of the Meridian Fire Department as shown on the preliminary plat. The public street is proposed to be within 47 feet of right-of-way with curb, gutter and sidewalk on both sides. A neighborhood meeting was held on Monday April 15, 2019, and 7 neighbors attended the meeting. The subdivision name Caldera Canyon was reserved with the Ada. County Surveyor on November 30, 2018, and a copy of the reservation is included in the application packet. Other submittals include the neighborhood meeting list provided by the Land Records Division of the Ada County Assessor's office, meeting notice and sign -in sheet, and the City of Meridian Parcel Verification documentation. Architecturally, the proposed home are planned to be all single level. Included in the application packet is a selection of images that are representative of the types of styles anticipated for the homes. The applicant's intent is that the new homes will be compatible with and complement the existing homes in the neighborhood Currently the site is served with gravity surface irrigation. A pressurized irrigation is planned and is anticipated to include a pump station. The final PI system plan will be submitted with the Final Plat Application. A waiver is requested by the applicant from the City of Meridian City Council to keep the existing residence driveway access onto E. Leigh Field Drive. To meet the density requirements of Medium Density and lot sized compatible with the neighborhood an internal access point could not be provided. The garage faces south with an apron of approximately 35 -feet which also provides access to the gated entry for the outbuildings and horse stable. The applicant proposes an HOA for Caldera Canyon to provide for maintenance and watering of the existing landscape buffer along E. Leigh Field and for the access across and maintenance of the shared driveway as shown on the plat serving four lots — Lots 6 and 7, and Lots 10 and 11 of Block 2. A Shared Driveway Exhibit is included with the application. Setbacks for the residences are allowed to be 10 -feet from living areas and 20 -feet from the face of the garage in the R-8 Zone. Caldera Canyon Subdivision meets or exceeds these standards. The existing landscape buffer along E. Leigh Field is currently within an easement. With platting of Caldera Canyon this buffer will be placed in a common lot. The existing landscape buffer includes mature arborvitaes that were planted with Phase 1 of Heritage Commons. A landscape plan showing the entry treatment and vision triangle is included with the application materials. In compliance with Meridian Code residential subdivision trees will be provided and included in the CCR's. A 6 -foot vinyl fence is proposed with the project — primarily for the east and north site boundaries. The west site boundary is adjacent to Quenzer Commons and was fenced with the development of this subdivision. LAND USE PLANNING • DUE DILIGENCE - INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS Caldera Canyon - Page 3 of 3 ACHD is not requiring a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) with this development. Correspondence between the applicant's representative and Mindy Wallace with ACHD is included in the applicant packet. A street name for the new public street will be determined by the Ada County Street Naming Committee and will be determined prior to submittal of the Final Plat Application. As an infill development, the project team believes Caldera Canyon will be a valuable additional to the City and the neighborhood. The new public street will provide connectivity for future infill development to the north and add to the transportation network. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have questions or need additional materials. Best regards, RILEY PLANNING SERVICES LLC lonlS�i ��� Penelope Constantikes Principal LAND USE PLANNING • DUE DILIGENCE • INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS o m a ®m y COBRE BASIN S U so I V I S I O N N 0. 3 - P�'RR�4$R fill z¢o� fi {^ NOW. '28332 1273n a drn - `OTE u� core �1- - 62.60' 65.990 N. WENZER WAY o, Q ® N00 b'2b'E 286.99' 1 0 E.92e.16 66 66. 6 669 VcI C n ili pig _ 1190-11, , , a I \,�W r -0 j-@ 1, fff999 s i, E� I f\ /� /a M "I \ v Mn _ ' ` vI>I1 a p�¢ A 0 MppX �qg �G '✓�, 4� 9 1{ IJ 7 f Q$ Ti O $ O _` .v 1.1 l J $$ ql: i}6�[Fw Q; p 'a� 1� `a 1 �`;o/J r `•/ 8 r ,x,'j" g $a G d I - lJ O O Z QQ § 8 `� 16%30' MOT 8600 6200 I C 9: O � gb ' 88 �.g s y 6 No"5,2 267, aO I I ® ZTl o O y q Ly . ij sa•2r-9 Z D .' L S y 'Y y ¢ SII I 63,06 1 �� wy U) ¢ g Tg� g NNg C S ( ! 1 $ � m> C W0 aA$9°g pRik � f+ Iii a ;u W Q -o gg �� 8 2 anD z II _. gti O I N 0 O mMIR INA —Ai at �lo ��p nZ �W z O! O O KIn �►1 i itR 0 Z 1'''1 z Y q r itRy% oo y y1 1 F t` rn Z O 0z; qp q q R� SL eco 1 f�, lz9 011-1 D O @@ >Z q y oy 40 asp { t O O g g a __ _ S p eq� T a __ w�sY�J32A' (2l 0 O �, Z SUBDIVISION°NIT. i ��� spa = g z O o ® 6 74 74n n I -' lagy u ii i l o a ; Q �p I £ W# �� N. LOCUST GROVE RD. � r+073�'W-265%. y, f+ w Ag BASIS Of' BEARING w � T 15, Lq qW. fig � 3i'' g '' ' wiz' axo�s Willi �Sc;�o �m2o��� �'S Q rk�3 cZ L2XN Q RY .aid will nA �m=� r{ RIM, - Ya'•engF,g4 gimZ $yyy�yyv�ppat` pN}pZ Qg 8 gyv �C1� m = m a K VC Q��y x yx_ n J c x :• 1 U ���2� O i'f fS O �m N m W Ail ffi 7" �AQ Q$ " z Aar. Q P o ap so 51 .1 C cog lie 0 N:0 gig g0gL2 n> a4� Igi� U�� 8 1 > O S u VA Stephanie Leonard From: Penelope Riley <penelope@rileyplanning.com> Sent: Monday, May 20, 2019 11:20 AM To: Stephanie Leonard Subject: Re: Caldera Canyon Hi, Stephanie! There is no deed because when Brighton (or their title company), they purchased a portion of the original parcel from Vanessa Klaus, did not have a deed prepared. According to the Recorder's office, the plat with Vanessa's signature on page two, is in lieu of a deed. Apparently this is somewhat unusual, but it is not uncommon. The Record's office email indicating that the plat is in lieu of a deed was included in the application materials. The take away for me is that if I am ever party to a situation like this I will make sure that a deed is prepared for the seller's parcel. Thanks! Penelope Constantikes Principal x 270 N. 27th Street, STE 101 - Office P.O. Box 405, Boise 83701 - Mailing Address On Mon, 20 May 2019 16:54:59 +0000, Stephanie Leonard wrote: Hi Penelope, I've just looked through the application materials for Caldera Canyon PP, MDA and we need one additional item: Warranty deed for property — need this to enter the property into its own DA and to verify ownership When you have a chance, could you send that over? I'm hoping to get the project scheduled for June 20''', does that work okay? Thanks! Stephanie Leonard I Associate City Planner City of Meridian I Community Development Dept. 33 E. Broadway Ave., Ste. 102, Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-489-0574 1 sleonard@meridiancity.org Cql(EFIDIANR-- Built for Business, Designed for Living AFFIDAVIT OF LEGAL INTEREST STATE OF IDAHO ) COUNTY OF ADA ) sA K� S Ja94 E �� �L i ' 4 •l �! �!� (address -83 6 4—!- (city) (state) �P being first duly sworn upon, oath, depose and say: That I am the record owner of the property described on the attached, and I grant my permission to: Penelope Constantikes, Riley Planning Services P.O. Box 405, Boise, ID 83701 Derritt Kerner, Rock Solid Civil 270 N. 27th, STE 100, Boise, ID 83702 (name) (address) to submit the accompanying application(s) pertaining to that property. 2. I agree to indemnify, defend and hold the City of Meridian and its employees harmless from any claim or liability resulting from any dispute as to the statements contained herein or as to the ownership of the property which is the subject of the application. 3. I hereby grant permission to City of Meridian staff to enter the subject property for the purpose of site inspections related to processing said application(s). Dated thisg2Q, r-4 day of avia 20 19 (Signature) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me the day and year first above written. ( otary Public for Idaho) LDANA LEON a p Notary Public, State of Idaho Residing at�i� mmission No. 45730 t mission Expires 11/20/2023 My Commission Expires: 33 E Broadway Suite 210 • Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: (208) 884-5533 ® Facsimile: (208) 888-6678 . Website: www.meridiancity_org ❑❑ Ell ❑ - ® fD 0)00 Q� 1111111I11lIIl!lII�;CD 0 CD (D Oa p N y ul p y or 3 0 T m y" Q. NEj- N o D m < O m G CD O O J Q n O �G D U) CD U) cn O CITY OF MERIDIAN PRE -APPLICATION MEETING NOTES Project/Subdivision Name: Caldera Canyon Subdivision Date: 2/15/19 Applicant(s)/Contact(s): Penelope Constantikes Vanessa Mae Klaus Randy Sohn Derritt Kerner City Staff: Stephanie, Bill Caleb R an Joe Amanda Location: 1294 E. Leigh Field Size of Property: 2.83 Comprehensive Plan FLUM Designation: MU -N Existing Use: Single family residence Existing Zoning: R-8 Proposed Use: SFR subdivision keep existing home Proposed Zoning: R-8 Surrounding Uses: North: rural residence, zoned RUT in County; South: E Leigh Field Dr (collector) and SFR sub. (Quenzer Commons) zoned R-8; East: rural residence, RUT in County; West: SFR sub (Quenzer Commons) zoned R-8 Street Buffer(s) and/or Land Use Buffer(s): 20 foot landscape buffer to E Leigh Field Dr. Open Space/Amenities/Pathways: Adding open space/pathway may make sense if there's an easement for water anyway Access/Stub Streets: Access proposed via E Leigh Field Dr.: turnaround/stub street to north Waterways/ Floodplain/Topography/Hazards: History: AZ -05-063 (DA Inst No 106064914) hftp://weblink meddiancity org/weblink8/0/doc/26619/Page1.aspx Additional Meeting Notes: If current owners move from Lot 7 Block 31 horses will no longer be allowed per UH - Public street required to stub to north — sidewalk required along both sides Services will need to be extended north— coordinate with Amanda in Land Development 208489-0311 If desired could design a common driveway within the subdivision off the public street — max. of 6 homes can access from - Would create a separate HOA for subdivision -10-ft setback from living space, 20 -ft setback from Qarage in R-8 Can request to keep driveway for existing home may not be granted or be required to close upon redevelopment - Required landscape buffer along Leigh Field required to be in common lot - coordinate with Joe Bon iorno regarding Fire requirements 208-489-0458 Note: A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) will be required by ACHD for large commercial projects and any residential development with over 100 units. To avoid unnecessary delays & expedite the hearing process, applicants are encouraged to submit the TIS to ACHD prior to submitting their application to the City. Not having ACHD comments and/or conditions on large projects may delay hearing(s) at the City. Please contact Mindy Wallace at 387- 6178 or Christy Little at 387-6144 at ACHD for information in regard to a TIS, conditions, impact fees and process. Other Agencies/Departments to Contact: ® Ada County Highway Dist. (ACHD) ❑ Nampa Meridian Irrigation Dist. (NMID) ❑ Public Works Department ❑ Idaho Transportation Dept. (ITD) ❑ Settler's Irrigation District ❑ Building Department ❑ Republic Services ❑ Police Department ❑ Parks Department, Jay ❑ Central District Health Department ❑ Fire Department ❑ Other: Application(s) Required: ❑ Administrative Design Review ❑ Conditional Use Permit Modification/Transfer ❑ Rezone ❑ Alternative Compliance ® Development Agreement Modification ❑ Short Plat ❑ Annexation ❑ Final Plat ❑ Time Extension — Council ❑ City Council Review ❑ Final Plat Modification ❑ UDC Text Amendment ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Map ❑ Planned Unit Development ❑ Vacation ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment — Text ® Preliminary Plat ❑ Variance ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Private Street ❑ Other Notes: 1) Applicants are required to hold a neighborhood meeting in accord with UDC 11 -5A -5C prior to submittal of an application requiring a public hearing (except for a vacation or short plat); and 2) All applicants for permits requiring a public hearing shall post the site with a public hearing notice in accord with UDC 11 -5A -5D.3 (except for UDC text amendments, Comp Plan text amendments, and vacations). The information provided during this meeting is based on current UDC requirements and the Comprehensive Plan. Any subsequent changes to the UDC and/or Comp Plan may affect your submittal and/or application. This pre -application meeting shall be valid for four (4) months. Development Services Division (:> WE P,1DIANMeridian City Hall, Suite 102 33 E. Broadway Avenue ® Meridian, Idaho 83642 Community Development (208)887-2211 Department PRE -APPLICATION MEETING NOTES ProjectlSubdivision Name: Applicants)/Contact(s): Community Development Staff.c- PL Mapping Provided: ❑ Y Reuse Water Service: Waterways/ Floodplain/TopographylHazards: GravitylPressurized Irrigation: Street Lighting: Mapping Provided: ❑ Y ❑ N Mapping Provided: ❑ Y ❑ N Mapping Provided: ❑ Y ❑ N District(`�s Reqs. Provided: ❑ Y ❑ N The City of Meridian's Improvement Standards for Street Lighting can be found online at: HOPAw.meddiancity.org/public w.meddiancity.org/public works.aspx?id=272 H.TomsTre-Application Meeting Notes.docx Rev. 10062015 PLANNING SERVICES Dear Neighbor: P.O. Box 405 Boise, ID 83701 Please join me for a neighborhood meeting about a proposed subdivision at 1294 W. Leigh Field Drive. The proposed subdivision will have fifteen (15) new residential lots and will include the existing residence (16 total residential lots) and out buildings, and three (3) common lots. Anticipated applications for this project include a Preliminary Plat and a Development Agreement Modification. A public street will be extended into the site and four (4) lots will be served with a common lot / shared driveway. WHEN: Monday, April 15, 2019 — 6:00 to 6:30 PM WHERE: 1294 W. Leigh Field Drive in alignment with Heritage View Avenue A representative of the applicant will be present at the meeting to provide information about the proposed development and answer any questions you may have. This is not a public hearing and no public officials will be present at the neighborhood meeting. Thank you in advance for your interest. Penelope Constantikes penelope@rileyplanning.com 208.908.1609 LAND USE PLANNING • DUE DILIGENCE - INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS UD Q r r�� z J 4 v �Nr 4 6 COMMITMENT OF PROPERTY POSTING Per Unified Development Code (UDC) 11 -5A -5D, the applicant for all applications requiring a public hearing (except for a UDC text amendment, a Comprehensive Plan text amendment and/or vacations) shall post the subject property not less than ten (10) days prior to the hearing. The applicant shall post a copy of the public hearing notice of the application(s) on the property under consideration. The applicant shall submit proof of property posting in the form of a notarized statement and a photograph of the posting to the City no later than seven (7) days prior to the public hearing attesting to where and when the sign(s) were posted. Unless such Certificate is received by the required date, the hearing will be continued. The sign(s) shall be removed no later than three (3) days after the end of the public hearing for which the sign(s) had been posted. I am aware of the above requirements and will comply with the posting requirements as stated in UDC 11-5A-5. Applicant/agent signature Date Community Development ■ Planning Division ■ 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Ste. 102 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-884-5533 Fax: 208-888-6854 n,%Nnv.meridiancitv.or-O/Plamring (03/23/201 S) 5/7/2019 Address Verification Complete Webmail 7.0 - Address Verification Complete.eml From: "noreply@meridiancity.org" <noreply@meridiancity.org> Date: 05/07/2019 08:53AM To: <penelope@rileyplanning.com>, <tricks@meridiancity.org>, <rbeecro$@meridiancity.org> Address verification is complete for record LDAV 2019-0277 Project: Caltera Canyon Address: l 1294 E LEIGH FIELD DR MERIDIAN, ID 83646 Parcel(s): R7288710130 Lot: 7 Block: 31 Subdivision: QUENZER COMMONS SUB NO 10 Comments: Parcel Verification City of Meridian 33 E. Broadway Ave., Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: 208-888-4433 www.meridiancity. org All e-mail messages sent to or received by City of Meridian e-mail accounts are subject to the Idaho law, in regards to both release and retention, and may be released upon request, unless exempt from disclosure by law. https://webniail.deluxeforbusiness.com/index.php?view-print#24904 1/1 Page 1 of 2 From: "Sub Name Mail' <subnamemail@adacounty.id.gov> Date: Friday, November 30, 2018 11:28 AM To: "Penelope Riley" <penclope@rileyplanning.com> Cc: "Sean Sullivan" <Sean.Sullivan-Survey@deainc.com> Subject: Caldera Canyon Subdivision Name Reservation November 30, 2018 Sean Sullivan, David Evans & Associates Penelope Constantikes, Riley Planning Services RE: Subdivision Name Reservation: CALDERA CANYON SUBDIVISION At your request, I will reserve the name Caldera Canyon Subdivision for your project. I can honor this reservation only as long as your project is in the approval process. Final approval can only take place when the final plat is recorded. This reservation is available for the project as long as it is in the approval process unless the project is terminated by the client, the jurisdiction or the conditions of approval have not been met, in which case the name can be re -used by someone else. Sincerely, Jerry L. Hastings, PLS 5359 County Surveyor Deputy Clerk Recorder Ada County Development Services 200 W. Front St., Boise, ID 83702 (208) 287-7912 office (208) 287-7909 fax E-mail: jhastings@adacounty.id.gov From: Penelope Riley [mailto:penelope@rileyplanning.com] Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2018 10:56 AM To: Sub Name Mail Cc: dkerner@rocksolidcivii.com Subject: Subdivision Name Reservation Request On behalf of Vanessa Klaus, property owner, please reserve the name Caldera Canyon for the parcel located at 1294 E. Leigh Field Drive, Meridian. The parcel is located in Section 31 of Township 4N, Range 1 E and will be a re -subdivision of Lot 7, Block 31 of Quenzer Commons Subdivision No. 10. The project surveyor is Sean Sullivan, David Evans and Associates. Please let me know if you need additional information or have questions. Thank you very much! Penelope Constantikes Principal 5/13/2019 I'l Z' I UTI W ffm x= A lei I M°wurzmo um KILIM SSMW 3M a 1V1dkmvNivm3Hd W aW'1Wd.0 3M1 M 30 M SI a" on � xm -11AID ClrH:)S m0cm I 33VIt - A "B"d 3� SI JM W� JO BURMSKI KV SV NOM (MVMJLWM OHV(]I'NVIG183VI SM M OXV SUM 3M OXV IMON SIR NOMMIS NOANVO V83GIVO 11 SUOISIA011 S-DN[MVUG dO MMH 2 V Hill " SIM a Mill, h egh. --we N RER, R if I] 0 0,90003 Cox 000 J¢9.. I/f I, 13 "If if HE 6AR ,5 t Ggvs 'ail pq R 9 :C2, gg 35 ,2,z 65 25M Ul M. m O E-, P -I Mmm. E2 z 8.4 J, 5 9 : 1 11 rr! L__ L T� -4. - - L L___T �T F�q ER it 1 1 1rm l T �Ri ng 73a INN J 1 If ",I -- ---- - ---- -------------- F k;--------- L r ---------- 9� n 101301 mew 3M OIOlUm NVId 3dVOSONVI n�e�°•e�...oPn v- nro 10]�Otld >OH10 A" 801'lPd a0 MHII el ` -11A10 41105 MOOZ1 MIN 3e 01 Sox sl aer 3n ♦ n � >WH . = f �— s 1 30 ArKWM 3Hr SI 30aei5 1YN065330tld 39 3113AMW er sr 7a3tm1 anre0aW316 OHV01'NM(IIH3W- 39�a wa Q 5X1630 Qn SY301 331 ONY 1 e3110]00 SMf1S NOISIAIOHNOANVO Vd30IVO a k 1 SUO!*aa �.. SONIMViJO JO 3Sf13N t> l 11 a 1♦♦c i ��� g 1 c i. w y ♦� o 5~ 1 I e® O z sa 7 o E � �♦ Fn d� �'z � pE R _ ._.1 a .. ♦ - vvvvvo - F, v3 dy E 3 k r, c v ca m �qq o � Z _ w O W 3AYA13Y139VJIN3H'N .0 � p ♦♦ 0 Q L-7 "'-n Y - ♦ I�,j O I' r=a M ♦® 'yin 'x gl♦.. tim p0 c€�3t.♦t 1 01-101 OQ O W o CZ � v F p rn Wp CQ uv3�2\m I bI iiii� _ it (�.4 I ge is Ij (� r/] � p W o", W q ..:. 1 �p 1 11 3VYff1 V — — — — ——3IItlM3iA 39YJIll3N'N 2 1 1139Y3IY3H alI l;l $�• ' I &� it 11 It l= x 1'.1:: Illi D o O t 1, \ o p \\\ AL � s \ *gAVM91A 99V1183H'N lot? lov 0 z Z!k W- z 00 0 Lump ISI 00 Lu Cc (A > Ln C) I U§z 0 0 w W cr < UW1 I— (D z z < 0 < w � 0' cE < < r en C:) 00> II CO z tq < Z u 0 V) (D Z< OZ <11 i —n < W i;: 0 CL CL 'W " OR z < < u zz � 0 < u .1 O;i CS < O'D z 0 < IN 000 1w *gAVM91A 99V1183H'N lot? lov MATERIALS TESTING £r INSPECTION ❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections GEOTECHNICAL. ENGINEERING REPORT of Caldera Canyon 1294 East Leigh Field Drive Meridian, ID Prepared for: Randy Sohn 1294 East Leigh Field Drive Meridian, ID 83646 MTI File Number B190036g 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mti(a)mti-id.com M ATE M ,�, L5 TESTI NG & ONSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 1 of 27 b 190036g_geotech ❑ Enviiuiii, i aai ui vices ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections Mr. Randy Sohn 1294 East Leigh Field Drive Meridian, ID 83646 208-995-9034 Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Caldera Canyon 1294 East Leigh Field Drive Meridian, ID Dear Mr. Sohn: In compliance with your instructions, MTI has conducted a soils exploration and foundation evaluation for the above referenced development. Fieldwork for this investigation was conducted on 7 January 2019. Data have been analyzed to evaluate pertinent geotechnical conditions. Results of this investigation, together with our recommendations, are to be found in the following report. We have provided a PDF copy for your review and distribution. Often, questions arise concerning soil conditions because of design and construction details that occur on a project. MTI would be pleased to continue our role as geotechnical engineers during project implementation. Additionally, MTI can provide materials testing and special inspection services during construction of this project. If you will advise us of the appropriate time to discuss these engineering services, we will meet with you at your convenience. MTI appreciates this opportunity to be of service to you and looks forward to working with you in the future. If you have questions, please call (208) 376-4748. Respectfully Submitted, Materials Testing & Inspection ,G�1i� � -) Maren Tanberg, E.I.T., G.I.T. Staff Engineer and Geologist Reviewed by: Eli Brc Y Geotechnical f.NSFo�i�n s 14898 P1.\xar �3 ' / Reviewed by: Momc4Sacul es, P.E. Senior Geotechnical Engineer cc: Derritt Kerner, Rock Solid Civil (PDF Copy); Vanessa Klaus (PDF Copy) 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copy www.mti-id.com • mti(&rnti-id.com Copyright 02018 Testing 8lnspeedosspecllon MATERIALS TESTING Fr INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 2 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................................................3 ProjectDescription.................................................................................................................................................3 Authorization..........................................................................................................................................................3 Purpose...................................................................................................................................................................3 Scopeof Investigation............................................................................................................................................3 Warrantyand Limiting Conditions.........................................................................................................................4 SITEDESCRIPTION..........................................................................................................................................................5 SiteAccess..............................................................................................................................................................5 RegionalGeology...................................................................................................................................................5 GeneralSite Characteristics....................................................................................................................................5 Regional Site Climatology and Geochemistry........................................................................................................6 SEISMICSITE EVALUATION............................................................................................................................................6 GeoseismicSetting.................................................................................................................................................6 SeismicDesign Parameter Values..........................................................................................................................6 SOILSEXPLORATION......................................................................................................................................................7 Explorationand Sampling Procedures....................................................................................................................7 LaboratoryTesting Program...................................................................................................................................7 Soiland Sediment Profile.......................................................................................................................................8 VolatileOrganic Scan.............................................................................................................................................8 SITEHYDROLOGY...........................................................................................................................................................8 Groundwater...........................................................................................................................................................9 SoilInfiltration Rates..............................................................................................................................................9 FOUNDATION, SLAB, AND PAVEMENT DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS...............................................................9 Foundation Design Recommendations.................................................................................................................10 CrawlSpace Recommendations...........................................................................................................................11 Floor, Patio, and Garage Slab-on-Grade............................................................................................................... 11 RecommendedPavement Sections.......................................................................................................................11 FlexiblePavement Section...................................................................................................................................12 PavementSubgrade Preparation...........................................................................................................................12 Common Pavement Section Construction Issues.................................................................................................12 CONSTRUCTIONCONSIDERATIONS...............................................................................................................................13 Earthwork.............................................................................................................................................................13 DryWeather.........................................................................................................................................................14 WetWeather.........................................................................................................................................................14 SoftSubgrade Soils..............................................................................................................................................14 FrozenSubgrade Soils..........................................................................................................................................15 StructuralFill........................................................................................................................................................15 Backfillof Walls...................................................................................................................................................16 Excavations...........................................................................................................................................................16 GroundwaterControl............................................................................................................................................17 GENERALCOMMENTS..................................................................................................................................................17 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................................................18 APPENDICES................................................................................................................................................................. 19 AcronymList........................................................................................................................................................19 GeotechnicalGeneral Notes.................................................................................................................................20 Geotechnical Investigation Test Pit Log...............................................................................................................21 AASHTO Pavement Thickness Design Procedures.............................................................................................24 R -Value Laboratory Test Data..............................................................................................................................25 Plate1: Vicinity Map............................................................................................................................................26 Plate2: Site Map...................................................................................................................................................27 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 als www.mti-id.com • mti(cDmti-id.com Copyright®2g&lnsp18 rion Testing 8lnspection MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 3 of 27 b 190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ _geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections INTRODUCTION This report presents results of a geotechnical investigation and analysis in support of data utilized in design of structures as defined in the 2015 International Building Code (IBC). Information in support of groundwater and stormwater issues pertinent to the practice of Civil Engineering is included. Observations and recommendations relevant to the earthwork phase of the project are also presented. Revisions in plans or drawings for the proposed development from those enumerated in this report should be brought to the attention of the soils engineer to determine whether changes in the provided recommendations are required. Deviations from noted subsurface conditions, if encountered during construction, should also be brought to the attention of the soils engineer. Project Description The proposed development is in the northeast portion of the City of Meridian, Ada County, ID, and occupies a portion of the SEl/4NE%4 of Section 31, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian. This project will consist of developing a 13 lot residential subdivision with associated private streets. The site to be development is approximately 2.05 acres in size. Total settlements are limited to 1 inch. Loads of up to 4,000 pounds per lineal foot for wall footings, and column loads of up to 50,000 pounds were assumed for settlement calculations. Additionally, assumptions have been made for traffic loading of pavements. Retaining walls are not anticipated as part of the project. MTI has not been informed of the proposed grading plan. Authorization Authorization to perform this exploration and analysis was given in the form of a written authorization to proceed from Mr. Randy Sohn to Monica Saculles of Materials Testing and Inspection (MTI), on 20 December 2018. Said authorization is subject to terms, conditions, and limitations described in the Professional Services Contract entered into between and MTI. Our scope of services for the proposed development has been provided in our proposal dated 19 December 2018 and repeated below. Purpose The purpose of this Geotechnical Engineering Report is to determine various soil profile components and their engineering characteristics for use by either design engineers or architects in: • Preparing or verifying suitability of foundation design and placement • Preparing site drainage designs • Indicating issues pertaining to earthwork construction • Preparing residential pavement section design requirements Scope of Investigation The scope of this investigation included review of geologic literature and existing available geotechnical studies of the area, visual site reconnaissance of the immediate site, subsurface exploration of the site, field and laboratory testing of materials collected, and engineering analysis and evaluation of foundation materials. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mtiaAmti-id.com Copyright®2018 Materials Tesgng 3lnspe fion MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 4 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Service,,, ❑ c_,eotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials i csting ❑ Special Inspections Warranty and Limiting Conditions MTI warrants that findings and conclusions contained herein have been formulated in accordance with generally accepted professional engineering practice in the fields of foundation engineering, soil mechanics, and engineering geology only for the site and project described in this report. These engineering methods have been developed to provide the client with information regarding apparent or potential engineering conditions relating to the site within the scope cited above and are necessarily limited to conditions observed at the time of the site visit and research. Field observations and research reported herein are considered sufficient in detail and scope to form a reasonable basis for the purposes cited above. Exclusive Use This report was prepared for exclusive use of the property owner(s), at the time of the report, and their retained design consultants ("Client"). Conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the agreed-upon scope of work outlined in this report together with the Contract for Professional Services between the Client and Materials Testing and Inspection ("Consultant"). Use or misuse of this report, or reliance upon findings hereof, by parties other than the Client is at their own risk. Neither Client nor Consultant make representation of warranty to such other parties as to accuracy or completeness of this report or suitability of its use by such other parties for purposes whatsoever, known or unknown, to Client or Consultant. Neither Client nor Consultant shall have liability to indemnify or hold harmless third parties for losses incurred by actual or purported use or misuse of this report. No other warranties are implied or expressed. Report Recommendations are Limited and Subject to Misinterpretation There is a distinct possibility that conditions may exist that could not be identified within the scope of the investigation or that were not apparent during our site investigation. Findings of this report are limited to data collected from noted explorations advanced and do not account for unidentified fill zones, unsuitable soil types or conditions, and variability in soil moisture and groundwater conditions. To avoid possible misinterpretations of findings, conclusions, and implications of this report, MTI should be retained to explain the report contents to other design professionals as well as construction professionals. Since actual subsurface conditions on the site can only be verified by earthwork, note that construction recommendations are based on general assumptions from selective observations and selective field exploratory sampling. Upon commencement of construction, such conditions may be identified that require corrective actions, and these required corrective actions may impact the project budget. Therefore, construction recommendations in this report should be considered preliminary, and MTI should be retained to observe actual subsurface conditions during earthwork construction activities to provide additional construction recommendations as needed. Since geotechnical reports are subject to misinterpretation, do not separate the soil logs from the report. Rather, provide a copy of, or authorize for their use, the complete report to other design professionals or contractors. Locations of exploratory sites referenced within this report should be considered approximate locations only. For more accurate locations, services of a professional land surveyor are recommended. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyright ®2018 Materials www.mti-id.eom • mtiCZDmti-id.com Testing & Inspection MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 5 of 27 b 190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections This report is also limited to information available at the time it was prepared. In the event additional information is provided to MTI following publication of our report, it will be forwarded to the client for evaluation in the form received. Environmental Concerns Comments in this report concerning either onsite conditions or observations, including soil appearances and odors, are provided as general information. These comments are not intended to describe, quantify, or evaluate environmental concerns or situations. Since personnel, skills, procedures, standards, and equipment differ, a geotechnical investigation report is not intended to substitute for a geoenvironmental investigation or a Phase II/III Environmental Site Assessment. If environmental services are needed, MTI can provide, via a separate contract, those personnel who are trained to investigate and delineate soil and water contamination. SITE DESCRIPTION Site Access Access to the site may be gained via Interstate 84 to the Eagle Road exit. Proceed north on Eagle Road approximately 2.5 miles to its intersection with Ustick Road. From this intersection, drive west 1 mile to Locust Grove Road. Continue north on Locust Grove Road for %-mile to Leigh Field Drive. Proceed west on Leigh Field Drive for 0.17 mile. The site is north of Leigh Field Drive. Presently the site exists as a pasture. The location is depicted on site map plates included in the Appendix. Regional Geology The project site is located within the western Snake River Plain of southwestern Idaho and eastern Oregon. The plain is a northwest trending rift basin, about 45 miles wide and 200 miles long, that developed about 14 million years ago (Ma) and has since been occupied sporadically by large inland lakes. Geologic materials found within and along the plain's margins reflect volcanic and fluvial/lacustrine sedimentary processes that have led to an accumulation of approximately 1 to 2 km of interbedded volcanic and sedimentary deposits within the plain. Along the margins of the plain, streams that drained the highlands to the north and south provided coarse to fine-grained sediments eroded from granitic and volcanic rocks, respectively. About 2 million years ago the last of the lakes was drained and since that time fluvial erosion and deposition has dominated the evolution of the landscape. The project site is underlain by the "Gravel of Whitney Terrace" as mapped by Othberg and Stanford (1993). Sediments of the Whitney terrace consist of sandy pebble and cobble gravel. The Whitney terrace is the second terrace above modern Boise River floodplain, is thickest toward its eastern extent, and is mantled with 2-6 feet of loess. General Site Characteristics This proposed development consists of approximately 2.05 acres of relatively flat terrain. The site is primarily used for pasture. Throughout the majority of the site, surficial soils consist of lean clays. Vegetation primarily consists of a few mature trees, bunchgrass, and other native grass varieties typical of and to semi -arid environments. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mtiCo7mti-id.com Copyright 02018 Materials Testing &Inspection MATERIALS TESTING & %11� INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 6 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections Regional drainage is north and west toward the Boise River. Stormwater drainage for the site is achieved by percolation through surficial soils. The site is situated so that it is unlikely that it will receive any stormwater drainage from off-site sources. Stormwater drainage collection and retention systems were not noted on the project site, but do exist along Leigh Field Drive in the form of curbs, gutters, and drop inlets. Regional Site Climatology and Geochemistry According to the Western kegional Climate Center, the average precipitation for the Treasure Valley is on the order of 10 to 12 inches per year, with an annual snowfall of approximately 20 inches and a range from 3 to 49 inches. The monthly mean daily temperatures range from 21°F to 95°F, with daily extremes ranging from - 25°F to I I l'F: Winds are generally from the northwest or southeast with an annual average wind speed of approximately 9 miles per hour (mph) and a maximum of 62 mph. Soils and sediments in the area are primarily derived from siliceous materials and exhibit low electro -chemical potential for corrosion of metals or concretes. Local aggregates are generally appropriate for Portland cement and lime cement mixtures. Surface water, groundwater, and soils in the region typically have pH levels ranging from 7.2 to 8.2. SEISMIC SITE EVALUATION Geoseismic Setting Soils on site are classed as Site Class D in accordance with Chapter 20 of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) publication ASCE/SEI 7-10. Structures constructed on this site should be designed per IBC requirements for such a seismic classification. Our investigation did not reveal hazards resulting from potential earthquake motions including: slope instability, liquefaction, and surface rupture caused by faulting or lateral spreading. Incidence and anticipated acceleration of seismic activity in the area is low. Seismic Design Parameter Values The United States Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Maps (2008), includes a peak ground acceleration map. The map for 2% probability of exceedance in 50 years in the Western United States in standard gravity (g) indicates that a peak ground acceleration of 0.201 is appropriate for the project site based on a Site Class D. The following section provides an assessment of the earthquake -induced earthquake loads for the site based on the Risk -Targeted Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCER). The MCER spectral response acceleration for short periods, Sms, and at 1 -second period, SNn, are adjusted for site class effects as required by the 2015 IBC. Design spectral response acceleration parameters as presented in the 2015 IBC are defined as a 5% damped design spectral response acceleration at short periods, SDs, and at 1 -second period, SDI. The USGS National Seismic Hazards Mapping Project includes a program that provides values for ground motion at a selected site based on the same data that were used to prepare the USGS ground motion maps. The maps were developed using attenuation relationships for soft rock sites; the source model, assumptions, and empirical relationships used in preparation of the maps are described in Petersen and others (1996). 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyright ®2018 Materiels www.mti-id.com • mti(a�mti-id.com Testing B Inspection MATERIALS �. TESTING 6 INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 7 of 27 b 190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ _jeotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections Seismic Design Values Seismic Design Parameter Design Value Site Class D "Stiff Soil" SS 0.296 (g) Si 0.104 (g) Fa 1.563 F,, 2.386 SMS 0.463 SMI 0.247 SDs 0.309 SDI 0.165 SOILS EXPLORATION Exploration and Sampling Procedures Field exploration conducted to determine engineering characteristics of subsurface materials included a reconnaissance of the project site and investigation by test pit. Test pit sites were located in the field by means of a Global Positioning System (GPS) device and are reportedly accurate to within fifteen feet. Upon completion of investigation, each test pit was backfilled with loose excavated materials. Re -excavation and compaction of these test pit areas are required prior to construction of overlying structures. In addition, samples were obtained from representative soil strata encountered. Samples obtained have been visually classified in the field by professional staff, identified according to test pit number and depth, placed in sealed containers, and transported to our laboratory for additional testing. Subsurface materials have been described in detail on logs provided in the Appendix. Results of field and laboratory tests are also presented in the Appendix. MTI recommends that these logs not be used to estimate fill material quantities. Laboratory Testing Program Along with our field investigation, a supplemental laboratory testing program was conducted to determine additional pertinent engineering characteristics of subsurface materials necessary in an analysis of anticipated behavior of the proposed structures. Laboratory tests were conducted in accordance with current applicable American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) specifications, and results of these tests are to be found on the accompanying logs located in the Appendix. The laboratory testing program for this report included: Atterberg Limits Testing — ASTM D4318, Grain Size Analysis — ASTM C 117/C 136, and Resistance Value (R -value) and Expansion Pressure of Compacted Soils — Idaho T-8. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mti(cDmti-id.com Copyright 02018 Materials Testing d Inspection MATERIALS TESTING £r INSPECTION ❑ Environmental Services ❑ (;eotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing Soil and Sediment Profile 23 January 2019 Page # 8 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Special The profile below represents a generalized interpretation for the project site. Note that on site soils strata, encountered between test pit locations, may vary from the individual soil profiles presented in the logs, which can be found in the Appendix. The materials encountered during exploration were quite typical for the geologic area mapped as Gravel of Whitney Terrace. Lean clay soils were encountered at ground surface. These soils were brown to dark brown, moist, and medium stiff to very stiff. Organic materials and disturbed materials, as a result of plowing activities, usually reached a depth of 1.1 feet. In test pit 2, silt was encountered below the lean clay. The silt was dark brown, slightly moist, very stiff, and contained fine-grained sand. Below the silt in test pit 2 and lean clays in test pits 1 and 3, sandy silt was encountered. The sandy silt was brown to light brown, dry to moist, very stiff to hard, and contained fine to medium -grained sand. This soil horizon also contained some varying degrees of calcium carbonate cementation (hardpan). In test pit 3, silty sand and poorly graded sand was encountered below the sandy silt. The silty sand was brown to red brown, dry to slightly moist, dense to very dense, and contained fine to coarse-grained sand. The poorly graded sand was light brown, dry, medium dense, and contained fine to coarse-grained sand. In test pits 1 and 2, poorly graded gravel with silt and sand was encountered below the silty sand. The poorly graded gravel with silt and sand was brown, dry to slightly moist, dense to very dense, and contained fine to coarse grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 5 -inch -minus cobbles. At depth, poorly graded gravel with sand was encountered. The poorly graded gravel with sand was light brown, dry, medium dense to dense, and contained fine to coarse- grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 12 -inch -minus cobbles. Competency of test pit sidewalls varied little across the site. In general, fine grained soils remained stable while more granular sediments readily sloughed. However, moisture contents will also affect wall competency with saturated soils having a tendency to readily slough when under load and unsupported. Volatile Organic Scan No environmental concerns were identified prior to commencement of the investigation. Therefore, soils obtained during on-site activities were not assessed for volatile organic compounds by portable photoionization detector. Samples obtained during our exploration activities exhibited no odors or discoloration typically associated with this type of contamination. No groundwater was encountered. SITE HYDROLOGY Existing surface drainage conditions are defined in the General Site Characteristics section. Information provided in this section is limited to observations made at the time of the investigation. Either regional or local ordinances may require information beyond the scope of this report. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyright 02018 Materials www.mti-id.com • mtiCa)rnti-id.com Testing B Inspection MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 9 of 27 b 190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ 3eotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections Groundwater During this field investigation, groundwater was not encountered in test pits advanced to a maximum depth of 16.1 feet bgs. Soil moistures in the test pits were generally moist within surfrcial soils, and lessened in moisture content with depth. In the vicinity of the project site, groundwater levels are controlled in large part by residential irrigation activity and leakage from nearby canals. Maximum groundwater elevations likely occur during the later portion of the irrigation season. During previous investigations performed in September 2005, February and July 2016, and August 2017 within approximately %3 -mile to the southeast and south of the project site, no evidence of groundwater was noted within numerous test pits advanced to depths as great as 10.8 to 15.8 feet bgs. Furthermore, according to Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) monitoring well data 0.1 -mile south of the project site, groundwater was measured at a depth at 22 feet bgs. Based on evidence of this investigation and background knowledge of the area, MTI estimates groundwater depths to remain greater than approximately 15 feet bgs throughout the year. This depth can be confirmed through long-term groundwater monitoring. Soil Infiltration Rates Soil permeability, which is a measure of the ability of a soil to transmit a fluid, was not tested in the field. Given the absence of direct measurements, for this report an estimation of infiltration is presented using generally recognized values for each soil type and gradation. Of soils comprising the generalized soil profile for this study, lean clay and silt soils generally offer little permeability, with typical hydraulic infiltration rates of less than 2 inches per hour. Sandy silt soils will commonly exhibit infiltration rates from 2 to 4 inches per hour; though calcium carbonate cementation may reduce this value to near zero. Silty sand and poorly graded gravel with silt and sand sediments usually display rates of 4 to 8 inches per hour. Poorly graded sand and gravel sediments typically exhibit infiltration values in excess of 12 inches per hour. Infiltration testing is generally not required within these sediments because of their free -draining nature. It is recommended that infiltration facilities constructed on the site be extended into native poorly graded gravel with sand sediments. Excavation depths of approximately 8.6 to 10.2 feet bgs should be anticipated to expose these poorly graded gravel with sand sediments. Because of the high soil permeability, ASTM C33 filter sand, or equivalent, should be incorporated into design of infiltration facilities. An infiltration rate of 8 inches per hour should be used in design. Actual infiltration rates should be confirmed at the time of construction. FOUNDATION, SLAB, AND PAVEMENT DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Various foundation types have been considered for support of the proposed development. Two requirements must be met in the design of foundations. First, the applied bearing stress must be less than the ultimate bearing capacity of foundation soils to maintain stability. Second, total and differential settlement must not exceed an amount that will produce an adverse behavior of the superstructure. Allowable settlement is usually exceeded before bearing capacity considerations become important; thus, allowable bearing pressure is normally controlled by settlement considerations. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mtOrriti-id.com Copyright 02018 Materials Testing & Inspection MATERIALS TESTING & �. INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 10 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections Considering subsurface conditions and the proposed construction, it is recommended that the development be founded upon conventional spread footings and continuous wall footings. Total settlements should not exceed 1 inch if the following design and construction recommendations are observed. Presently, there are 13 lots proposed for the project site. The following recommendations are not specific to the individual structures, but rather should be viewed as guidelines for the subdivision — wide development. Foundation Design Recommendations Based on data obtained from the site and test results from various laboratory tests performed, MTI recommends the following guidelines for the net allowable soil bearing capacity: Soil Bearing Capacity Footing Depth ASTM D1557 Sub rade Compaction Net Allowable Soil Bearing Capacity Footings must bear on competent, undisturbed, 1,500 lbs/ft' native lean clay, silt, or sandy silt soils, or Not Required for Native compacted structural fill. Existing plow zones and Soil , A /3 increase is allowable organic materials must be completely removed from for short-term loading, below foundation elements.' Excavation depths 95% for Structural Fill which is defined by seismic ranging from roughly 1.0 to 1.1 feet bgs should be events or designed wind anticipated to expose proper bearing soils.2 speeds. 'It will be required for MTI personnel to verify the bearing soil suitability for each structure at the time of construction. 2Depending on the time of year construction takes place the subgrade soils may be unstable because of high moisture contents If unstable conditions are encountered over -excavation and replacement with granular structural fill and/or use of geotextiles ma by e required. The following sliding frictional coefficient values should be used: 1) 0.35 for footings bearing on native lean clay, silt, or sandy silt soils and 2) 0.45 for footings bearing on granular structural fill. A passive lateral earth pressure of 286 pounds per square foot per foot (psf/ft) should be used for lean clay, silt, or sandy silt soils. For compacted sandy gravel fill, a passive lateral earth pressure of 496 psf/ft should be used. Footings should be proportioned to meet either the stated soil bearing capacity or the 2015 IBC minimum requirements. Total settlement should be limited to approximately 1 inch, and differential settlement should be limited to approximately '/2 inch. Objectionable soil types encountered at the bottom of footing excavations should be removed and replaced with structural fill. Excessively loose or soft areas that are encountered in the footings subgrade will require over -excavation and backfilling with structural fill. To minimize the effects of slight differential movement that may occur because of variations in the character of supporting soils and seasonal moisture content, MTI recommends continuous footings be suitably reinforced to make them as rigid as possible. For frost protection, the bottom of external footings should be 24 inches below finished grade. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyright ®2018 Materials www.mti-id.com • mti(a)mti-id.com Testing s Inspection MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 11 of 27 b 190036g_geotech ❑ Environmenta Services ❑ eotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections Crawl Space Recommendations All residences constructed with crawl spaces should be designed in a manner that will inhibit water in the crawl spaces. MTI recommends that roof drains carry stormwater at least 10 feet away from each residence. Grades should be at least 5 percent for a distance of 10 feet away from all residences. In addition, rain gutters should be placed around all sides of residences, and backfill around stem walls should be placed and compacted in a controlled manner. Floor, Patio, and Garage Slab -on -Grade Plow zones, which should be treated as uncontrolled fill, were encountered across of the site. MTI recommends that these plow zones be excavated to a sufficient depth to expose competent, native soils. MTI personnel must be present during excavation to identify these materials. Organic, loose, or obviously compressive materials must be removed prior to placement of concrete floors or floor -supporting fill. In addition, the remaining subgrade should be treated in accordance with guidelines presented in the Earthwork section. Areas of excessive yielding should be excavated and backfilled with structural fill. Fill used to increase the elevation of the floor slab should meet requirements detailed in the Structural Fill section. Fill materials must be compacted to a minimum 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. A free -draining granular mat (drainage fill course) should be provided below slabs -on -grade. This should be a minimum of 4 inches in thickness and properly compacted. The mat should consist of a sand and gravel mixture, complying with Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction (ISPWC) specifications for 3/4 -inch (Type 1) crushed aggregate. The granular mat should be compacted to no less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. A moisture -retarder should be placed beneath floor slabs to minimize potential ground moisture effects on moisture -sensitive floor coverings. The moisture -retarder should be at least 15 -mil in thickness and have a permeance of less than 0.01 US perms as determined by ASTM E96. Placement of the moisture -retarder will require special consideration with regard to effects on the slab -on -grade and should adhere to recommendations outlined in the ACI 302.1R and ASTM E1745 publications. Upon request, MTI can provide further consultation regarding installation. Recommended Pavement Sections MTI has made assumptions for traffic loading variables based on the character of the proposed construction. The Client shall review and understand these assumptions to make sure they reflect intended use and loading of pavements both now and in the future. MTI collected a sample of near -surface soils for Resistance Value (R -value) testing representative of soils to depths of 1.3 to 2.3 feet bgs. This sample, consisting of lean clay collected from test pit 3, yielded a R -value of less than 5. The R -value was converted to a CBR value of 2 for design calculations. The following are minimum thickness requirements for assured pavement function. Depending on site conditions, additional work, e.g. soil preparation, may be required to support construction equipment. These have been listed within the Soft Subgrade Soils section. Results of the test are graphically depicted in the Appendix. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyright ®2018 Materials www.mti-id.com • mti(a�mti-id.com Testing 81nspecdon MATERIALS TESTI NG & INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 12 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections Flexible Pavement Section The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) design method has been used to calculate the following pavement section. A calculation sheet provided in the Appendix indicates the soils constant, traffic loading, traffic projections, and material constants used to calculate the pavement section. MTI recommends that materials used in the construction of asphaltic concrete pavements meet requirements of the ISPWC Standard Specification for Highway Construction. Construction of the pavement section should be in accordance with these specifications and should adhere to guidelines recommended in the section on Construction Considerations. AASHTO Flexible Pavement Specifications Pavement Section Component' Residential Roadway Asphaltic Concrete 2.5 Inches Crushed Aggregate Base 4.0 Inches Structural Subbase 16.0 Inches Compacted Subgrade See Pavement Subgrade Preparation Section 1It will be required for MTI personnel to verify subgrade competency at the time of construction. Asphaltic Concrete: Asphalt mix design shall meet the requirements of ISPWC, Section 810 Class III plant mix. Materials shall be placed in accordance with ISPWC Standard Specifications for Highway Construction. Aggregate Base: Material complying with ISPWC Standards for Crushed Aggregate Materials. Structural Subbase: Granular structural fill material complying with the requirements detailed in the. Structural Fill section of this report exce t that the maximum material diameter is no more than 2/3 the component thickness. Gradation and suitability requirements shall be per ISPWC Section 801, Table 1. Pavement Sub2rade Preparation Plow zones, which should be treated as uncontrolled fill, were encountered across of the site. MTI recommends that these plow zones be excavated to a sufficient depth to expose competent, native soils. MTI personnel must be present during excavation to identify these materials. Depending on final site grading it is possible that the native clay soils may be completely removed from beneath the proposed pavement section. If that is the case, MTI can be contacted to provide alternate pavement section recommendations. Common Pavement Section Construction Issues The subgrade upon which above pavement sections are to be constructed must be properly stripped, inspected, and proof -rolled. Proof rolling of subgrade soils should be accomplished using a heavy rubber -tired, fully loaded, tandem -axle dump truck or equivalent. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyright ®2018 Materials www.mti-id.com • mtiCcilmti-id.com Tesfing 8lnspe fion MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 13 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections Verification of subgrade competence by MTI personnel at the time of construction is required. Fill materials on the site must demonstrate the indicated compaction prior to placing material in support of the pavement section. MTI anticipated that pavement areas will be subjected to moderate traffic. Subgrade clays and silts near and above optimum moisture contents may pump during compaction. Pumping or soft areas must be removed and replaced with structural fill. Fill material and aggregates, as well as compacted native subgrade soils, in support of the pavement section must be compacted to no less than 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698 for flexible pavements and by ASTM D1557 for rigid pavements. If a material placed as a pavement section component cannot be tested by usual compaction testing methods, then compaction of that material must be approved by observed proof rolling. Minor deflections from proof rolling for flexible pavements are allowable. Deflections from proof rolling of rigid pavement support courses should not be visually detectable. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Recommendations in this report are based upon structural elements of the project being founded on competent, native lean clay, silt, or sandy silt soils or compacted structural fill. Structural areas should be stripped to an elevation that exposes these soil types. Earthwork Excessively organic soils, deleterious materials, or disturbed soils generally undergo high volume changes when subjected to loads, which is detrimental to subgrade behavior in the area of pavements, floor slabs, structural fills, and foundations. Mature trees, brush, and thick grasses with associated root systems were noted at the time of our investigation. It is recommended that organic or disturbed soils, if encountered, be removed, and wasted or stockpiled for later use. However, in areas where trees are/were present, deeper excavation depths should be anticipated. Stripping depths should be adjusted in the field to assure that the entire root zone or disturbed zone (plow depths) or topsoil are removed prior to placement and compaction of structural fill materials. Exact removal depths should be determined during grading operations by MTI personnel, and should be based upon subgrade soil type, composition, and firmness or soil stability. If underground storage tanks, underground utilities, wells, or septic systems are discovered during construction activities, they must be decommissioned then removed or abandoned in accordance with governing Federal, State, and local agencies. Excavations developed as the result of such removal must be backfilled with structural fill materials as defined in the Structural Fill section. MTI should oversee subgrade conditions (i.e., moisture content) as well as placement and compaction of new fill (if required) after native soils are excavated to design grade. Recommendations for structural fill presented in this report can be used to minimize volume changes and differential settlements that are detrimental to the behavior of footings, pavements, and floor slabs. Sufficient density tests should be performed to properly monitor compaction. For structural fill beneath building structures, one in-place density test per lift for every 5,000 square feet is recommended. In parking and driveway areas, this can be decreased to one test per lift for every 10,000 square feet. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyright ® 2018 Materials WWW.mti-id.com • mtiCrD.mti-id.com Testing& inspection MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION ❑ Environmental Services Dry Weather ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testin 23 January 2019 Page # 14 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Special Inspections If construction is to be conducted during dry seasonal conditions, many problems associated with soft soils may be avoided. However, some rutting of subgrade soils may be induced by shallow groundwater conditions related to springtime runoff or irrigation activities during late summer through early fall. Solutions to problems associated with soft subgrade soils are outlined in the Soft Subgrade Soils section. Problems may also arise because of lack of moisture in native and fill soils at time of placement. This will require the addition of water to achieve near -optimum moisture levels. Low -cohesion soils exposed in excavations may become friable, increasing chances of sloughing or caving. Measures to control excessive dust should be considered as part of the overall health and safety management plan. Wet Weather If construction is to be conducted during wet seasonal conditions (commonly from mid-November through May), problems associated with soft soils must be considered as part of the construction plan. During this time of year, fine-grained soils such as silts and clays will become unstable with increased moisture content, and eventually deform or rut. Additionally, constant low temperatures reduce the possibility of drying soils to near optimum conditions. Soft Subgrade Soils Shallow fine-grained subgrade soils that are high in moisture content should be expected to pump and rut under construction traffic. During periods of wet weather, construction may become very difficult if not impossible. The following recommendations and options have been included for dealing with soft subgrade conditions: • Track -mounted vehicles should be used to strip the subgrade of root matter and other deleterious debris. Heavy rubber -tired equipment should be prohibited from operating directly on the native subgrade and areas in which structural fill materials have been placed. Construction traffic should be restricted to designated roadways that do not cross, or cross on a limited basis, proposed roadway or parking areas. • Soft areas can be over -excavated and replaced with granular structural fill. • Construction roadways on soft subgrade soils should consist of a minimum 2 -foot thickness of large cobbles of 4 to 6 inches in diameter with sufficient sand and fines to fill voids. Construction entrances should consist of a 6 -inch thickness of clean, 2 -inch minimum, angular drain -rock and must be a minimum of 10 feet wide and 30 to 50 feet long. During the construction process, top dressing of the entrance may be required for maintenance. • Scarification and aeration of subgrade soils can be employed to reduce the moisture content of wet subgrade soils. After stripping is complete, the exposed subgrade should be ripped or disked to a depth of I % feet and allowed to air dry for 2 to 4 weeks. Further disking should be performed on a weekly basis to aid the aeration process. • Alternative soil stabilization methods include use of geotextiles, lime, and cement stabilization. MTI is available to provide recommendations and guidelines at your request. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyright®2018 Materials www.mti-id.com • mti(Dmti-id.com Tes8ng& Inspection MATERIALS TESTING it INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 15 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ 3eotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections Frozen Subgrade Soils Prior to placement of structural fill materials or foundation elements, frozen subgrade soils must either be allowed to thaw or be stripped to depths that expose non -frozen soils and wasted or stockpiled for later use. Stockpiled materials must be allowed to thaw and return to near -optimal conditions prior to use as structural fill. The onsite, shallow lean clay and silt soils are susceptible to frost heave during freezing temperatures. For exterior flatwork and other structural elements, adequate drainage away from subgrades is critical. Compaction and use of structural fill will also help to mitigate the potential for frost heave. Complete removal of frost susceptible soils for the full frost depth, followed by replacement with a non -frost susceptible structural fill, can also be used to mitigate the potential for frost heave. MTI is available to provide further guidance/assistance upon request. Structural Fill Soils recommended for use as structural fill are those classified as GW, GP, SW, and SP in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) (ASTM D2487). Use of silty soils (USCS designation of GM, SM, and ML) as structural fill may be acceptable. However, use of silty soils (GM SM and ML) as structural fill below footings is prohibited. These materials require very high moisture contents for compaction and require a long time to dry out if natural moisture contents are too high and may also be susceptible to frost heave under certain conditions. Therefore, these materials can be quite difficult to work with as moisture content, lift thickness, and compactive effort becomes difficult to control. If silty soil is used for structural fill lift thicknesses should not exceed 6 inches (loose) and fill material moisture must be closely monitored at both the working elevation and the elevations of materials already placed. Following placement, silty soils must be protected from degradation resulting from construction traffic or subsequent construction. Recommended granular structural fill materials, those classified as GW, GP, SW, and SP, should consist of a 6 -inch minus select, clean, granular soil with no more than 50 percent oversize (greater than 3/4 -inch) material and no more than 12 percent fines (passing No. 200 sieve). These fill materials should be placed in layers not to exceed 12 inches in loose thickness. Prior to placement of structural fill materials, surfaces must be prepared as outlined in the Construction Considerations section. Structural fill material should be moisture -conditioned to achieve optimum moisture content prior to compaction. For structural fill below footings, areas of compacted backfill must extend outside the perimeter of the footings for a distance equal to the thickness of fill between the bottom of foundation and underlying soils, or 5 feet, whichever is less. All fill materials must be monitored during placement and tested to confirm compaction requirements, outlined below, have been achieved. Each layer of structural fill must be compacted, as outlined below: • Below Structures and Rigid Pavements: A minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D 1557. • Below Flexible Pavements: A minimum of 92 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557 or 95 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D698. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mtiamti-id.com Copyright ®2018 Materials Testing S Inspection ,{ MATERIALS TESTI NG & INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 16 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections The ASTM D 15 57 test method must be used for samples containing up to 40 percent oversize (greater than 3/4— inch) particles. If material contains more than 40 percent but less than 50 percent oversize particles, compaction of fill must be confirmed by proof rolling each lift with a 10 -ton vibratory roller (or equivalent) until the maximum density has been achieved. Density testing must be performed after each proof rolling pass until the in-place density test results indicate a drop (or no increase) in the dry density, defined as maximum density or "break over" point. The number of required passes should be used as the requirements on the remainder of fill placement. Material should contain sufficient fines to fill void spaces, and must not contain more than 50 percent oversize particles. Backfill of Walls Backfill materials must conform to the requirements of structural fill, as defined in this report. For wall heights greater than 2.5 feet, the maximum material size should not exceed 4 inches in diameter. Placing oversized material against rigid surfaces interferes with proper compaction, and can induce excessive point loads on walls. Backfill shall not commence until the wall has gained sufficient strength to resist placement and compaction forces. Further, retaining walls above 2.5 feet in height shall be backfilled in a manner that will limit the potential for damage from compaction methods and/or equipment. It is recommended that only small hand - operated compaction equipment be used for compaction of backfill within a horizontal distance equal to the height of the wall, measured from the back face of the wall. Backfill should be compacted in accordance with the specifications for structural fill, except in those areas where it is determined that future settlement is not a concern, such as planter areas. In nonstructural areas, backfill must be compacted to a firm and unyielding condition. Excavations Shallow excavations that do not exceed 4 feet in depth may be constructed with side slopes approaching vertical. Below this depth, it is recommended that slopes be constructed in accordance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, Section 1926, Subpart P. Based on these regulations, on-site soils are classified as type "C" soil, and as such, excavations within these soils should be constructed at a maximum slope of lye feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical (1%2:1) for excavations up to 20 feet in height. Excavations in excess of 20 feet will require additional analysis. Note that these slope angles are considered stable for short- term conditions only, and will not be stable for long --term conditions. During the subsurface exploration, test pit sidewalls generally exhibited little indication of collapse; however, sloughing of native granular sediments from test pit sidewalls was observed. For deep excavations, native granular sediments cannot be expected to remain in position. These materials are prone to failure and may collapse, thereby undermining upper soil layers. This is especially true when excavations approach depths near the water table. Care must be taken to ensure that excavations are properly backfilled in accordance with procedures outlined in this report. Shallow soil cementation (caliche) was observed throughout much of the site and may cause difficulties during foundation development and utility placement. Cemented soils should be anticipated throughout the site at depths of 2.0 to 6.8 feet bgs. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyright 02018 Materials www.mti-id.com • mtita rriti-id.com Testing & Inspection MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 17 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ :geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections Groundwater Control Groundwater was encountered not during the investigation and is anticipated to be below the depth of most construction. Special precautions may be required for control of surface runoff and subsurface seepage. It is recommended that runoff be directed away from open excavations. Clay and silt soils may become soft and pump if subjected to excessive traffic during time of surface runoff. Ponded water in construction areas should be drained through methods such as trenching, sloping, crowning grades, nightly smooth drum rolling, or installing a French drain system. Additionally, temporary or permanent driveway sections should be constructed if extended wet weather is forecasted. GENERAL COMMENTS Based on the subsurface conditions encountered during this investigation and available information regarding the proposed development, the site is adequate for the planned construction. When plans and specifications are complete, and if significant changes are made in the character or location of the proposed structure, consultation with MTI must be arranged as supplementary recommendations may be required. Suitability of subgrade soils and compaction of structural fill materials must be verified by MTI personnel prior to placement of structural elements. Additionally, monitoring and testing should be performed to verify that suitable materials are used for structural fill and that proper placement and compaction techniques are utilized. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mti(ZD.mti-id.com Copyright 02018Materials Testing 8lnspection MATERIALS TESTING fs INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 18 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Service„ ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections REFERENCES American Concrete Institute (ACI) (2015). Guide for Concrete Floor and Slab Construction: ACI 302.1R. Farmington Hills, MI: ACI. American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (2013). Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures: ASCE/SEI 7-10. Reston, VA: ASCE. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2013). Standard Test Method for Materials Finer than 75-µm (No. 200) Sieve in Mineral Aggregates by Washing: ASTM C117. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2014). Standard Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates: ASTM C136. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2012). Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Standard Effort: ASTM D698. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2012). Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Compaction Characteristics of Soil Using Modified Effort: ASTM D1557. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2013). Standard Test Methods for Resistance Value (R -Value) and Expansion Pressure of Compacted Soils: ASTM D2844. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2011). Standard Practice for Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System): ASTM D2487. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2010). Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index of Soils: ASTM D4318. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) (2011). Standard Specification for Plastic Water Vapor Retarders Used in Contact with Soil or Granular Fill Under Concrete Slabs: ASTM E1745. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM. American Society of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) (1993). AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures 1993. Washington D.C.: AASHTO. Desert Research Institute. Western Regional Climate Center. [Online] Available: <http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/> (2018). International Building Code Council (2015). International Building Code, 2015. Country Club Hills, IL: Author. Local Highway Technical Assistance Council (LHTAC) (2017). Idaho Standards for Public Works Construction, 2017. Boise, ID: Author. Othberg, K. L. and Stanford, L. A., Idaho Geologic Society (1992). Geologic Map of the Boise Valley and Adjoining_ Area, Western Snake River Plain, Idaho. (scale 1:100,000). Boise, ID: Joslyn and Morris. U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration. CFR 29 Part 1926 Subpart P: Safety and Health Regulations for Construction, Excavations (1986). [Online] Available: <www.osha.gov> (2018). U.S. Geological Survey (2018). National Water Information System: Web Interface. [Online] Available: <http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis> (2018). U.S. Geological Survey. (2011). U.S. Seismic Design Maps: Web Interface. [Online] Available: <https://earthquake.usgs.gov/designmaps/us/application.php> (2018). 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyright ®2018 Materials www.mti-id.com • mtiCcilmti-id.com Testing B Inspection MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 19 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ 'geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections APPENDICES ACRONYM LIST AASHTO: American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACI American Concrete Institute ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASTM: American Society for Testing and Materials bgs: below ground surface CBR: California Bearing Ratio D: natural dry unit weight, pcf ESAL Equivalent Single Axle Load GS: grab sample IBC: International Building Code LL: Liquid Limit M: water content MSL: mean sea level N: Standard "N" penetration: blows per foot, Standard Penetration Test NP: nonplastic OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PCCP: Portland Cement Concrete Pavement PERM: vapor permeability PI: Plasticity Index PID: photoionization detector PVC: polyvinyl chloride Qc: cone penetrometer value, unconfined compressive strength, psi Qp: Penetrometer value, unconfined compressive strength, tsf Qu: Unconfined compressive strength, tsf RMR Rock Mass Rating RQD Rock Quality Designation R -Value Resistance Value SPT: Standard Penetration Test (140:pound hammer falling 30 in. on a 2:in. split spoon) USCS: Unified Soil Classification System USDA: United States Department of Agriculture UST: underground storage tank V: vane value, ultimate shearing strength, tsf 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mti(a.mti-id.com Copyright ®2018 Materials Testing a Inspection MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 20 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections GEOTECHNICAL GENERAL NOTES Moisture Content RELATIVE DENSITY AND CONSISTENCY CLASSIFICATION Field Test Coarse -Grained Soils SPT Blow Counts N Fine -Grained Soils SPT Blow Counts N Very Loose: < 4 Very Soft: < 2 Loose: 4-10 Soft: 2-4 Medium Dense: 10-30 Medium Stiff: 4-8 Dense: 30-50 Stiff. 8-15 Very Dense: >50 Very Stiff. 15-30 CH Fat clays; high -plasticity, inorganic clays Hard: >30 Moisture Content Description Field Test Dry Absence of moisture, dusty, dry to touch Moist Damp but not visible moisture Wet Visible free water, usually soil is below water table PARTICLE SIZE Boulders: >12 in. Coarse -Grained Sand: 5 to 0.6 mm Silts: 0.075 to 0.005 mm Cobbles: 12 to 3 in. Medium -Grained Sand: 0.6 to 0.2 mm Clays: <0.005 mm Gravel: 3 in. to 5 mm Fine -Grained Sand: 0.2 to 0.075 mm UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Cementation Description Field Test Gravel & Gravelly Soils <50% coarse fraction passes No.4 sieve Crumbles or breaks with handling or Weakly slight finger pressure Moderately Crumbles or beaks with considerable SW Well -graded sands; gravelly sands with little or no fines finger pressure Strongly Will not crumble or break with finger Fine Grained Soils >50% passes No.200 sieve pressure PARTICLE SIZE Boulders: >12 in. Coarse -Grained Sand: 5 to 0.6 mm Silts: 0.075 to 0.005 mm Cobbles: 12 to 3 in. Medium -Grained Sand: 0.6 to 0.2 mm Clays: <0.005 mm Gravel: 3 in. to 5 mm Fine -Grained Sand: 0.2 to 0.075 mm UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM Major Divisions Symbol Soil Descriptions Coarse -Grained Soils <50% passes No.200 sieve Gravel & Gravelly Soils <50% coarse fraction passes No.4 sieve GW Well -graded gravels; gravel/sand mixtures with little or no fines GP Poorly -graded gravels; gravel/sand mixtures with little or no fines GM Silty gravels; poorly -graded gravel/sand/silt mixtures GC Clayey gravels; poorly -graded gravel/sand/clay mixtures Sand & Sandy Soils >50% coarse fraction passes No.4 sieve SW Well -graded sands; gravelly sands with little or no fines SP Poorly -graded sands; gravelly sands with little or no fines SM Silty sands; poorly -graded sand/gravel/silt mixtures SC Clayey sands; poorly -graded sand/gravel/clay mixtures Fine Grained Soils >50% passes No.200 sieve Silts &Clays LL < 50 ML Inorganic silts; sandy, gravelly or clayey silts CL Lean clays; inorganic, gravelly, sandy, or silty, low to medium -plasticity clays OL Organic, low -plasticity clays and silts Silts & Clays LL > 50 MH Inorganic, elastic silts; sandy, gravelly or clayey elastic silts CH Fat clays; high -plasticity, inorganic clays OH Organic, medium to high -plasticity clays and silts Highly Organic Soils PT Peat, humus, hydric soils with high organic content 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mti(camti-id.com Copyright esting& Inspection MATERIALS TESTING & INSPECTION 23 January 2019 Page # 21 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log #: TP -1 Date Advanced: 7 Jan 2018 Logged by: Maren Tanberg, E.I.T., G.I.T. Excavated by: Struckman's Backhoe Service Location: See Site Map Plates Latitude: 43.641319 Longitude: -116.377389 Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Total Depth: 16.1 Feet bgs Depth Field Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth QP Lab (Feet bgs) Sediment Classification Type (Feet bgs) Test ID Lean Clay (CL): Brown, moist, stiff to very 0.0-2.0 stiff and plow zone noted to 1.5-3.75 1.5-3.75materials 1.1 feet bgs. Sandy Silt (ML): Brown, dry to slightly moist, very stiff to hard, with fine to medium - 2.0 -5.5 grained sand. --Weak to moderate calcium carbonate cementation noted from 3.3 to 5.5feet bgs. Poorly Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand 5.5-8.6 (GP -GM): Brown, dry, dense to very dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 4 -inch -minus cobbles. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light 8.6-16.1 brown, dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, 11 -inch -minus cobbles. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mflarriti-id.com Copyright®2018 Materials TesOng &Inspection MATERIALS TESTI NG & INSPECTION ❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testi GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log #: TP -2 Date Advanced: 7 Jan 2018 Excavated by: Struckman's Backhoe Service Latitude: 43.641673 Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered 23 January 2019 Page # 22 of 27 b190036g_geotech ❑ Special Inspections Logged by: Maren Tanberg, E.I.T., G.I.T. Location: See Site Map Plates Longitude: -116.377396 Total Depth: 12.3 Feet bgs 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyright ®2018 Materials www.mti-id.com • mti(d)mti-id.com Testing&Inspection Field Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab Depth (Feet b s) Sediment Classification Type (Feet bgs) Test ID Lean Clay (CL): Brown, moist, stiff to very 0.0-1.4 stiff. --Organic materials and plow zone noted to 2.0-2.5 1.0 foot bgs. Silt (ML): Dark brown, slightly moist, very 2.5-4.0 1.4-2.0 stiff, with fine-grained sand. Sandy Silt (ML): Light brown, dry to slightly moist, very stiff to hard, with fine to medium - 2.0 -5.3 grained sand. --Weak to moderate calcium carbonate cementation noted from 2.0 to 3.8 feet bgs. Poorly Graded Gravel with Silt and Sand (GP -GM): Brown, dry to slightly moist, very 5.3-9.1 dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 5 -inch -minus cobbles. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light brown, dry, medium dense to dense, withfrne 9.1-12.3 to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 8 -inch -minus cobbles. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyright ®2018 Materials www.mti-id.com • mti(d)mti-id.com Testing&Inspection MATERIALS 23 January 2019 TESTI NG & Page # 23 of 27 INSPECTION b190036g_geotecb El Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log #: TP -3 Date Advanced: 7 Jan 2018 Logged by: Maren Tanberg, E.I.T., G.I.T. Excavated by: Struckman's Backhoe Service Location: See Site Map Plates Latitude: 43.641773 Longitude: -116.377840 Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Total Depth: 15.2 Feet bgs Depth Field Description and USCS Soil and Sample Sample Depth - % - - Lab (Feet bgs) Sediment Classification Type (Feet bgs) Qp Test ID Lean Clay (CL): Brown to dark brown, moist, medium stiff to stiff. 0.0-2.3 --Organic materials and plow zone noted to A 1.0 foot bgs. Bulls 1.3-2.3 1.0-1.5 R -value --Minor organic materials noted to 2.0 feet bgs. Sandy Silt (ML): Brown to light brown, slightly moist to moist, very stiff to hard, with fine to medium -grained sand. 2.3-6.8 --Weak calcium carbonate cementation noted from 2.5 to S. 0 feet bgs. --Moderate to strong calcium carbonate cementation noted from 5.0 to 6.8 feet bgs. Silty Sand (SM): Brown to red brown, dry to 6.8-8.5 slightly moist, dense to very dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand. Poorly Graded Sand (SP): Light brown, dry, 8.5-10.2 medium dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand. Poorly Graded Gravel with Sand (GP): Light 10.2-15.2 brown, dry, medium dense to dense, with fine to coarse-grained sand, fine to coarse gravel, and 12 -inch -minus cobbles. Lab Test ID M LL PI Sieve Analysis (% passing) - % - - #4 #10 #40 #100 #200 A 26.7 39 20 100 100 99 98 95.5 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mtiOmti-id.com Copyright®2018 Malenals Testing & Inspection MATERIALS TESTI NG & INSPECTION Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical ineerinq ❑ Construction Materials Testing AASHTO PAVEMENT THICKNESS DESIGN PROCEDURES 23 January 2019 Page # 24 of 27 b I 90036g_geotech ❑ SDecial Inspections 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mtiarntkid.com Copyright®&I Materials Testing nspection Pavement Section Design Location: Caldera Canyon Subdivision, Emergency Vehicle Access Average Daily Traffic Count: 200 All Lanes & Both Directions Design Life: 20 Years Percent of Traffic in Design Lane: 50% Terminal Seviceability Index (Pt): 2.5 Level of Reliability: 95 Subgrade CBR Value: 2 Subgrade Mr: 3,000 Calculation of Design -18 kip ESALs Daily Growth Load Design Traffic Rate Factors ESALs Passenger Cars: 58 2.0% 0.0008 412 Buses: 1 2.0% 0.6806 6,036 Panel & Pickup Trucks:. 40 2.0% 0.0122 4,328 2 -Axle, 6 -Tire Trucks: 0 2.0% 0.1890 0 Emergency Vehicles: 1.0 2.0% 4.4800 39,731 Dump Trucks: 0 2.0% 3.6300 0 Tractor Semi Trailer Trucks: 0 2.0% 2.3719 0 Double Trailer Trucks 0 2.0% 2.3187 0 Heavy Tractor Trailer Combo Trucks: 0 2.0% 2.9760 0 Average Daily Traffic in Design Lane: 100 Total Design Life 18 -kip ESALs: 50,506 Actual Log (ESALs): 4.703 Trial SN: 3.21 Trial Log (ESALs): 4.705 Pavement Section Design SN: 3.21 Design Depth Structural Drainage Inches Coefficient Coefficient Asphaltic Concrete: 2.50 0.42 n/a Asphalt -Treated Base: 0.00 0.25 n/a Cement -Treated Base: 0.00 0.17 n/a Crushed Aggregate Base: 4.00 0.14 1.0 Subbase: 16.00 0.10 1.0 Special Aggregate Subgrade: 0.00 0.09 0.9 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 www.mti-id.com • mtiarntkid.com Copyright®&I Materials Testing nspection MATERIALS 23 January 2019 TESTI NG & Page # 25 of 27 j INSPECTION b190036g_geoteeb ❑ Environmental Services ❑ Geotechnical Engineering ❑ Construction Materials Testing ❑ Special Inspections R -VALUE LABORATORY TEST DATA Source and Description: TP -3: 1.3'-2.3', Lean Clay Date Obtained: 7 January 2019 Sample ID: 19-7008 Sampling and ASTM D75: Moisture Content (%) AASHTO T2: X ASTM Expansion Pressure (psi) AASHTO X Preparation : I NA NA NA D421: NA T87: NA Test Standard: ASTM AASHTO Idaho T8: X D2844: T190: Sample A B C Dry Density (lb/ft3) NA NA NA Moisture Content (%) NA NA NA Expansion Pressure (psi) NA NA NA Exudation Pressure (psi) NA NA NA R -Value NA NA NA R -Value @ 200 psi Exudation Pressure = Less than 5** ** ASTM D2844 Note 2: Occasionally, material from very plastic clay -test specimens will extrude from under the mold and around the follower ram during the loading operation. If this occurs when the 800 -psi point is reached and fewer than five lights are lighted, the soil should be reported as less than 5 R -value. 2791 S Victory View Way • Boise, ID 83709 • (208) 376-4748 • Fax (208) 322-6515 Copyri www.mti-id.com • mtin.mti-id.com ght©20&Inspection n } MI ::p9v CL ca a s JLbq O V Q pp N � • 7 r M f_ N OD E T � N W W . noxo O O '^ Ln a ii w O E w eZ a> o a rn N J U O J m Z`o U - O E iv m e -0'o w m a> > c CL) `- 3 o W o o _0 w W d V fC N cN cOO -7 N N J Q J 8 -i s w i U-14 / ILE RU` I + N'FiVE MILE RD VE S.F1V[:MILE RD a � _ {� MOVE F� iz - 4 -tom t CLOVERD A RD SGL 'VERDALE RD' -�l as JWMIDA01D a1vo1anOT) N L { a a11VO aan010 N _I ?_ V8 ...1i li..fA O O J N c E co � n gt�� �p N O a� N z L 1 VW N o E W c N io O CD t E o C) D E Z E O LL W W O a X U O ~ 0 OLij n � aJ Z z J Q m Q d d U) 4, f BZ O 3nN3AV M31A' 30`dINN HiHON I E � gt�� �p N O N z L 1 VW N o E W c N io O t E o 111 Y� LL aww C W Ln T -o C5 Z J_ N � d N O m m N C -0 N C C o W c�-o U 3 m 5in CM N O Gc zl 6 m y N m 3nN3AV M31A' 30`dINN HiHON I 5/10/2019 Webmail 7.0 - Re: Caldera Canyon P -Plat - Meridian Application (TIS Requirement).eml Re: Caldera Canyon P -Plat ® Meridian Application (TIS Requirement) From: Mindy Wallace <Mwallace ,achdidaho.org> Date: 05/10/2019 07:05AM To: Penelope Riley <penelope@rileyplanning.com>, Christy Little <Clittle@achdidaho.org> Penelope, A traffic impact study is not required for this application. Please let me know if you have any questions. Mindy Mindy Wallace, AICP Planner III From: Penelope Riley <penelope�rileyplanr�in,g.corn> Sent: Thursday, May 9, 2019 5:16 PM To: Christy Little; Mindy Wallace Subject: Re: Caldera Canyon P -Plat - Meridian Application (TIS Requirement) AI PA� x't.° sl � ` ,tom_ �_`� �� .`€_�Uf,_. IN x_.} f t_ z.Ji.`.� Christy and Mindy: am sure that it has been extra busy with your recent move to a new location. Below is a request regarding the need for a TIS for Caldera Canyon. Just checking in... Thank you! Penelope Constantikes Principal 270 N. 27th Street, STE 101 - Office P.O. Box 405, Boise 83701 - Mailing Address On Wed, 01 May 2019 15:32:06 -0400, Penelope Riley wrote: Christy: We are preparing to submit a preliminary plat application to the City of Meridian for Caldera Canyon. The plat is attached. The purpose of this email is to get your comments regarding a TIS for this project. The project anticipates 15 new buildable lots along with the existing home for a total of 16 lots and 3 common lots. Please let me know if you have any questions. https://webmail.deluxeforbusiness.com/index.php?view=print#24980 1/2 RILEY PLANNING SERVICES P.O. Box Boise, ID 83 83701 LAND USE PLANNING • DUE DILIGENCE - INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS LAND USE PLANNING - DUE DILIGENCE - INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENTS T D n ----- 0G)[w['' r T L D O D = r D W ✓mG) �r� m X -1 r0 I nT.-0-�c�ii 2Wtn v m0 - mG) I 1 I v� I I- :Z! O z z O 12' 1 C ov x I m I A I O Ln o - Z T D ------------ G O m ----- 0G)[w['' r T L D O I Z m Z 00 m F�(,n(,-mj rzr r m Z O' O 1 I C C W ✓mG) �r� 1 mr I ONZm.-jDN -1 r0 I nT.-0-�c�ii 2Wtn �0Z I NR0DmD - mG) I ---- ! 20' • N 0 w 0 EP I n 0 O � I z 20' 0 FRONT SIDE r----------- I I I I I I I I 1 � 1 I `--- SIDE -T J O Z I I � I-� O v I I � I I 2HI "' j 2' L--------- IJ 0--1 a: 0-�pw0 7o2ZrA— _ _ _02_=Zr1_ Gm�OG G n'-IOG n m N� N. HERITAGE VIEW AVE. - n m N �oO0D MOOD 'O O T - O 0 T ���m� R R R W— o0^'0 r n O O m 0 0 z�`^D0, --- m2! mrl mZOm� I 00 - - - - - - - - - - - - r----------- r---- 0 0 -n I I I I I I T' I � L A > 1 OI I � I I 1 I I I- SIDE SIDE O 12' 1 � I m I A I O I I I - F- I I IE L-- -SIDE-----J N p C� D N REAR M---------------- II N I I o Z O , i�5' --n rn I I I I ti I I 5 --------J L-------- • N 0 w 0 EP I n 0 O � I z 20' 0 FRONT SIDE r----------- I I I I I I I I 1 � 1 I `--- SIDE -T J O Z I I � I-� O v I I � I I 2HI "' j 2' L--------- IJ 0--1 a: 0-�pw0 7o2ZrA— _ _ _02_=Zr1_ Gm�OG G n'-IOG n m N� N. HERITAGE VIEW AVE. - n m N �oO0D MOOD 'O O T - O 0 T ���m� R R R W— o0^'0 r n O O m 0 0 z�`^D0, --- m2! mrl mZOm� I 00 - - - - - - - - - - - - r----------- r---- 0 0 -n I I I I I I T' I