RZ-13-010 PP-13-025 THREE CORNERSIDIAN Planning Department
ANNEXATION/REZONE r Application Checklist
Project nrrne,3 Corners Fire#: K?- tla
Applicant/agent: C1 3 LLC/Kent Brown
Application is required to contain one copy of the following:
Note: Only one copy of the above items need be submitted when submitting multiple applications
Additional Requirements for Annexation/Rezone Applications
APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS ALLAPPLICABLE ITEMS ON THE CHECKLIST ARE
SUBMITTED.
33 E. Broadway Avenue, Suile 102 o Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: (208) 884-5533 o Facsimile:
(208) 888-6854 o Website: www.meridiancity.org
(Rev.02/082013)
D
6P
lot
Applicant
(i) Description
Sraff
(i)
I Completed & signed Commission & Council Review Application
J Narrative fully describing the proposed proiect
Legal description ofthe property to be annexed and/or rezoned
o Include a metes & bounds description to the section line ofall adjacent roadways, stamped & signed by a
registered professional Iand surveyor, with a calculated closure sheet. -
r Scaled exhibit map showing the boundaries ofthe legal description in compliance w/ the requirements ofthe
Idaho State Tax Commission Property Tax Administrative Rules IDAPA 35.01.03.225.01.h.
o Ifrequesting more than one zoning designation, include a legal description for each zone along with an overall
annexation/rezone boundary description. Also include the boundaries of each different zone on the map.
*Note: When also subrnitting a Preliminary Plat application, a separate legal description is required
for the
boundaries of the plat, excluding property to the section line as required for
annexations/rezones.
J Recorded wiuranty deed for the subject property
J Affidavit of Legal Interest signed & notarized by the property owner (If owner is a corporarion,
submit a copy ofthe Articles of Incorporation or other evidence to show that the person signing is an authorized agent.) ,/-
+ r/ Scaled Provide vicinity concept map plan showing (Roads, access the location points, parking, of the general subiect layout property of buildings and building elevations.) <t(
,rr/ Pre-application meeting notes (All applications rhat require
a public hearing are required ro conduct a pre-
appliqa1ion meeting with the Planning Department.)
/ Neighborhood meeting sign-in sheet (Applicants are required to hold a neighborhood meering to provide
I an Commitment opportunity for of public Property review Posting of theproposed form signed project prior by the to the applicant/submittal agent of an applicarion.)
Parcel verification letter from Development Services (887-2211)
Y-
Fee (Please call Planning Deparment to calculate correct fee.
Applications with
incorrectfees will not be accepted.) h
Applicant
(i) Description
Staff
({)
If this application is not accompanied by aplat, conditional use permit, orplanned unit
development application, submit a conceptual development plan and elevations for the
property (also submit an electronic version of the plan(s) in pdf format on a disk with the file named
plan type [i.e. conceptual development plan,
with project name & elevations])
/
E IDIAN Planning Division
PRELIMINARY PLAT r Application Checklist
Proiect nu*",3 CORNERS rt"*, l/-13 -025
Applicant/agen1' Cl 3 LLC/KENT BROWN
All applications are required to contain one copy of the following:
Note: Only one copy of the above items need be submitted when submitting multiple applications
Additional Requirements for Preliminary Plat Applications
33 E. Broadway Avenue, Suite 102 r Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: (208) 884-5533 o Facsimile:
(208) 888-6854 o Website: www.meridiancity.org
(02/082.013 )
, Rlb
Applicant
({)
Description
Staff
(J)
Completed & signed Commission & Council Review Application
Narrative fully describing the proposed project
{ Legal description of the subject property (I-or, Block, and Subdivision name if located in a recorded
subdivision OR a metes and bounds legal description of the property if not in a subdivision.)
Recorded warranty deed for thc subject property
{ Affidavit of Legal Interest signed & notarized by the property owner (If owner is a corporation,
*- submit Scaled a copy vicinity ofthe map Articles showing of Incorporation the location or other evidence of the subiect to show that property the person siqning is an authorized agent.)
{ Pre-application meeting notes (AU applications that require a public hearing are required to conduct a pre-
application meeting with the Planning Department.)
{ Neighborhood meeting sign-in sheet (Applicants are required to hold a neighborhood meeting to provide
t. an Commitment opportunity for of public Property review Posting ofthe proposed form signed proiect prior by the to the applicant/submittal agent ofan application.) A
Parcel verification letter from Development Services (887-2211)
Fee (Please call Planning Department to calculate correct fee.
Applications with
incorrect fees will not be accepted.)
Applicant
({) Description
Staff
({)
Include the following additional information in the project narrative:
the ordinance describing the particular provision, the variance requested, and the
reason thereof
lt* Approval development. of the proposed (e.g.subdivision , larger rear name setback from to the buffer Ada adjoining County Surveyor's properties, office etc.)
{ Preliminary Plat-*1 copy (folded to8Vz" x I l" size)
The following items must be included on the preliminarv plat:
Proposed subdivision name (Do nor use numbers in preliminary plat names.)
a
o Drafting date
Section location and county (situate statement)
o
o North arrow
a Scale (not less than 1"=100')
,/ Name, address and phone number ofowner(s), applicant, and engineer, surveyor or
planner who prepared the preliminary plat
o
Proposed site(s) for parks, playgrounds, schools, churches or other public
a uses
-z
- -tL
33 E. Broadway Avenue, Suite 102 o Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: (208) 884-5533 o Facsimile:
(208) 888-6854 o Website: www.meridiancity.org
aeasements Proposed corrunon area lots and/or landscape
{ Streets, street names, rights-of-way and roadway widths, including adjoining streets
or roadrryays (details on plan)
a
,/ Proposed and existing lot lines and blocks showing scaled dimensions and numbers
of each
a
osy4bols Legend of
Minimum residential house size (for R-2 and R-4 zones only)
a
,/
Contour lines shown at 5' intervals where land slope is greater than ll%o and at 2'
intervals where land slope is 10Vo or less, referenced to an established benchmark,
including location and elevation
o
{ Any dedications to the public and easements together with a statement of location,
dimensions and purposes of such
a
aboundary Floodplain boundary as determined by FEMA or measures to amend this
aroadways Stub streets to provide access to adjacent undeveloped land or existing
,/
Block faces not more than seven hundred fifty feet (750') in length for residential
districts, and five hundred feet (500') in the TN-C & TN-R districts, without an
intersecting, street or alley, except as allowed in UDC 11-6C-3F.3
o
a Cul-de-sac lengths not in excess of450'
Reduction of the preliminary plat (8 Yz" x ll")
,/
Landscape plan -
*I copy (folded to8Vz" x 1 l" size)
Plan must have a scale no smaller than l " = 50'
(1 " = 20'
is prefened) and be on a standard drawing
sheet, not to exceecl 36" x 48" (24" x 36" is preferred). A plan which cannot be drawn in its entirety
on a single sheet must be drawn with appropriate match lines on two or more sheets.
The following items must be included on the landscape plan: G
Date, scale, north arrow, and project name
a
{ Names, addresses, and telephone numbers ofthe developer and the person and/or
firm preparing the plan
o
Existing natural features such as canals, creeks, drains, ponds, wetlands,
oodplains, high grou!.ldwater areas, and rock outcroppings
a
n
,/
Location, size, and species of all existing trees on site with trunks 4 inches or
greater in diameter, measured 6 inches above the ground. Indicate whether the tree
will be retained or removed.
a
{ A statement ofhow existing healthy trees proposed to be retained will be protected
from damage during construction
a
,/
Existing buildings, structures, planting areas, light poles, power poles, walls,
fences, berms, parking and loading areas, vehicular drives, trash areas, sidewalks,
pathways, stormwater detention areas, signs, street furniture, and other man-made
Written confirmation that a traffic impact study is not required and/or has been submitted for
review to ACHD. Please contact Mindy Wallace at387-6178 or Christy Little at 387-6144
for more information. /&
Conceptual Submit two elevations (2) sets ofconceptual of proposed engineering stnuctures, including plans building materials -1
Electronic Submittal (Separate disks required)
( 1) Disk with electronic version of the conceptual engineering plans in a format
that complies with the Specifications for Project Drawings found at:
http:ttwww.me!t!li
( 1) Electronic version of the preliminary plat & landscape plan in pdf format submitted
on a disk with the files named with project name & plan type (i.e. preliminary plat,
landscape plan, etc.). We encourage you to also submit at least one color version for
presentation purposes.
Supplementary informntion at the discretion of the Director or City Engineer may be required to sufficiently detail
the proposed development within any special development area, including but not limited to hillside, planned unit
development, floodplain, cemetery, manufactured home parks, and,/or
hazardous or unique areas of development.
*Once an application is accepted, staff will contact you to let you know how many additional copies
of plans are
required. All plans are required to be fufulg1lto
8 /2" x I l " size.
APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS ALL APPLICABLE ITEMS ON THE CHECKLIST ARE
SUBMITTED. THIS APPLICATION SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE (NOR WILL A PUBLIC
HEARING BE SET) UNTIL STAFF HAS RECEIVED ALL REQUIRED INFORMATION.
33 E. Broadway Avenue, Suite 102 . Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: (208) 884-5533 r Facsimile:
(208) 888-6854 o Website: www.meridiancity.org
'*.* lyd
I
ot{.ry Planning Division
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION
Application Checklist
Proiect nu-",3 Corners Frte#:
1ll(1fi'13'O l'
Applicant/age11; C1 3 LLC/ Kent Brown
All applications are required to contain one copy of the following:
APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS ALL APPLICABLE ITEMS ON THE CHECKLIST ARE
SUBMITTED. THIS APPLICATION SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE (NOR WILLA PI]BLIC
HEARING BE SET) UNTIL STAFF HAS RECEIVED ALL REQUIRED INFORMATION.
33 E. Broadway Avenue, Suite 102 r Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: (208) 884-5533 r Facsimile:
(208) 888-6854 r Website: www.meridiancity.org
(02/08/20t 3)
Applicant
(i) Description
staff
({)
Completed & signed Commission & Council Review Application
Narrative fully describing the proposed request, including but not limited to the following
{ Affidavit of t egal Interest signed & notarized by the property owner (If owner is a corporation,
{. submit Scaled a copy vicinity of the map Articles showing of Incorporation the location or other evidence of the subiect to show that property the person signing is an authorized
agent.)
{ Pre-application meeting notes (All applications that require a public hearing are required to conduct a pre-
application meeting with the Planning Department.)
{ Neighborhood meeting sign-in sheet lApplicants are required to hold a neighborhood meeting to provide
an opportunity for public review of the proposed project prior to the submittal of an application.)
Commitment of Property Posting form signed by the applicant/agent
Parcel verification letter from Development Services (887 -2211) rb
Fee v
V
IAN Planning Department
!DAHO PROJECT REVIEW
UDC Survey and Plat Compliance
Project ,u ",
$ hp-tVgtJ File #:
Applicant/agent:
1.1 Verify legal parcel
l 2 Review allowed use
l 3 Review district set back and dimensional standards
1.4 Identify any existing structures and/or easements
1.5 Check history GIS layer for past entitlements
2.1 For residential districts-PP (IJDC 11-68-2) or combined PP,iFP (UDC l1-68-4)
2.2For all other districts-PP (UDC I l-6B.2), SHP (uDC 11-68-5), or PP/FP
ruDC I l-6B-4)
2.3 For surveys-PBA (JDC 11-68-8)
3.1 Sections 4, 5, 9 and l0 applicable for all proiects
3.2 If private streets are proposed section 6 applies (Chapter
3 Article F)
3.3 If open space is required per Chapter 4,6 or 7, section 7 applies (Chapter 3 Article G)
3.4 If located along a State Highway, section 8 applies (Chapter 3 Article H)
3.4 Check floodplain GIS layer, review standards in Title l0 Chapter 6, and coordinate with PW
4.1 Access to Streets
4.2 Bikeways
4.3 Ditches, Laterals, Canals or Drainage Courses
4.4 Fences
4.5 Pathways
4.6 Natural Features
4.7 Outdoor Lighting
4.8 Outdoor Service and Equipment Areas
4.9 Pressurized Irrigation Systems
4.10 Sidewalks and Parkways
4.1 1 Storm Drainage
4.12 Utilities
5.1 Ifapplicant notes a specific use, determine ifstandards are listed for such use
5.2 Apply standards and inform applicant that such standards will apply at time of CZC approval
6.1 Application and fees
6.2 Apply standards
33 E. Broadway Ave. r Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: (208) 884-5533 r Facsimile: (208) 888-6854 r Website: www.meridiancity.org
I 2 /4/08 )
1.0 Applv Chapter 2 District Resulations and Other
2.0 Verifv aoorooriate aoolication
3.0 Determine appropriate standards
4.0 Applv Chapter 3 Article A Standard Reeulations in All Districts
5.0 Applv Chapter 4 Soecific Use Standards
6.0 Applv Chapter 3 Article F Private Street Requirements
7. 1 Determine requirement
7
t.5 of life amenities
7.4 Recreation amenities
7.5 Pedestrian or :le circulation amenrtres
7.6 Multi-modal facilities
8.1 Access
8.2
8.3 Noise abatement
applicant depicts offstreet parking and loading, apply standards and inform applicant that such
standards will at time of CZC
9.1If
9.3 Number
9.4 Use
9.5 Location
9.6
9.7
9.8
9.9 Off Street
9.10 Altemative
10.1 All standards apply
10.2.1 Size
10.2.2Locatton
10.2.3 Material
10.3.1 Size
10.3.2 Location
10.3.3 Material
10.4 buffers to USES
10.4.1 Size
10.4.2 Location
10.4.3 Material
10.5 Tree
10.6 Storm water ration
33 E. Broadway Ave. o Meridian, Idaho 83642
Phone: (208) 884-5533 o Facsimile: (208) 888-6854 r Website: www.meridiancity.org
5/20120 I I
8.0 Apply Chapter 3 Article H Development Along Federal State Hiehwavs
9.0 Requirements
9.2 Determine applicability using Developed or Partially Developed Property Standards t""l
10.0 Aonlv Chaoter 3 Article B f .owlsaono Daa,iranar+c
10.2 Landscape buffers along streets
10.3 Parking lot landscaping
10.7 Pathway landscaping (and possibly lighting from PW or
pD)
Cffi m uri'ity Development Dept.
Community Developmenl
Deporlment
IDAHO
TRANSMITTAT MEMORANDUM
Meridian City Hall, Suite 102
33 E. Broadway Avenue
Meridian. Idaho 83642
To: o(2013a -, August 27,
From:
Re:
Robin,
Bruce
Robin Jack
Bruce Freckleton
Three Corners Subdivision No. 2 - preliminary plat
,)
Attached are the electronic and hard copy conceptuar engineering
for the above named
development' These are being derivered to you for entry into
Grs for the purpose of
engineering modeling.
Th anks,
\7v
1. PROJECT NAME
2. LOCATION OF
WA
z
3. LOCATION OF
\/v
DND A4
L PP-13- oL6
.-l
,€l)
za0 4=r>
+. IS A PRV REQUIRED FOR THIS PROJECT-YES-NO X
(IF YES PLEASE INDICATED LOCATION ON MAP)
FIREFLOW REQUIREMENTS MET FOR RESIDENTIAL? lcs,
5. IS A FLUSH LINE REQUIRED? YES NO X
L oo7
6. IS ANY PART OF THIS PROJECT IN THE FLOOD PLAIN
(YES)
7. IS THIS PROJECT REQUIRED TO UPSIZE/OVER DEPTH ON ANY
WATER LINES
/0,
wltr*
t^.l C1 4r.Jb
up StlE
I
(NO
-(ON
SITE / OFF SITE)
8. IS THIS PRO]ECT REQUIRED TO UPSIZE/ OVER DEPTH ON ANY
SEWER LINES
-(ON
SITE / OFF SITE)
/f,,^/
WATER
r) q.\2-\3
V
Planner: t7; tt
City of Meridian Development Review
Agency Comments Meeting
froo^, Date: ?tr- t 3 Date of List:
Project Name: -/Ar*.
Corn-erc
Fire
Notes
VE:
0/ ro ,b e
A B C D
I .) A 5 6 7 8 ( l0 (1D t2
nl3 t4
2L 22 t23 15 t6 l7 tg (rg) 20,
24 25 26 27 28 -fs
30 3l 32 JJ 34 35 36 37 Ys 39 40
42 44 45 46 47 48 49
Police
Notes:
VE
A B C D E
71 72 t5 74 75 76 77 78
S
Notes
Services 0
A B C
1 2 J 97 98
Parks
Notes
ative:
6 46 47 79 80 81 82 83 84 85
Public Works
Notes
VC:
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 l3 t4 l5 l6 l7 l8 t9 20
2t 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Rev. 6/6/12
a --u
1 e)
4t 43
A o). 1l t-o 9c /^-{. ( '/? A.
^ol
6. Tree Planters
Tree Planter Policy: Tree Planter Policy: The District's Tree Planter Policy prohibits all trees in
planters less than 8-feet in width without the installation of root barriers. Class ll trees may be
allowed in planters with a minimum width of B-feet, and Class I and Class lll trees may be allowed
in planters with a minimum width of 10-feet.
7. Landscaping
Landscaping Policy: A license agreement is required for all landscaping proposed within ACHD
right-of-way or easement areas. Trees shall be located no closer than 1O-feet from all public
storm drain facilities. Landscaping should be designed to eliminate site obstructions in the vision
triangle at intersections. District Policy 5104.3.1 requires a 4O-foot vision triangle and a 3-foot
height restriction on all landscaping located at an uncontrolled intersection and a SO-foot offset
from stop signs. Landscape plans are required with the submittal of civil plans and must meet all
District requirements prior to signature of the final plat and/or approval of the civil plans.
8. Other Access
Locust Grove Road is classified as a minor arterials roadway. Other than the access specifically
approved with this application, direct lot access is prohibited to this roadway and should be noted
on the final plat.
9 DRAFT Three Corners 2
't.
I
il
I
$PProxigrate
lobation of Stub
Street
.+i {.
c
,
t:
[":
t t
Tral€c
r
t
It-
.! ?
T
r.,_. "!l
q
rl ) -*'t {-
,*
't
. t-{
!+( a ,
^l
I
}.
\-
I
&
N jlj.
L5 't
'. tl
{
C
f * iu" l}-
t 1., '*,_, )
f*.f r
I \ v v \-r' \-/
Meridian City Council
August 12, 2008
Page 4 ot 52
Item 6: Consent Agenda:
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: AZ 08-
006 Request for Annexation and Zoning of 0.92 of an acre from R1
to an R-2 zone for Alter Propertv by Denise Alter - 2741 East
Leslie Drive:
B. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for Approval: SHp
08-006 Request for Short Plat to create 4 office condomaniums in
an existing building on 1 commercial building lot on 0.66 of an acre
in an l-L zone for North hickory Condominium by Hickory Land
Partners, LLC - 1020 North Hickory Avenue:
Sanitarv Sewer and Water Easement Aqreement for Three
Corners Subdivision by David & Luane Dean:
Addendum to Development Agreement Ml 08405 Request for
a Miscellaneous application to amend the existing Development
Agreement to allow the construction of the four eight-plexes prior to
the construction of the Pine/Ten Mile lntersection for Sommepbv
Subdivision by Libefi Partners, lnc. - Northeast Corner of West
Pine Avenue and North Ten Mile Road:
E. C,hanoq grder No. 2 wl
Phase 2 Proiect for 95,069.95:
H. Dircctive Approval for tlVeed Abatement. 1528. 1516. and 1440
West Cherrv Lane:
l. Approva ot fnS nan
Revieions for Preliminarv lndoor Ranoe Desiqn for $3,000.0&
De Weerd: Thank you, lieutenant. Okay. As we are just drying
up over here, ltem No.
6 is our Consent Agenda.
Zaremba: Madam Mayor?
De Weerd: Mr. Zaremba.
Zaremba: On the Consent Agenda I would remind everybody that ltems G and H have
been withdrawn. I would also restate for the record that on item E that the change order
with K2 Construction for an amount not to exceed $5,069.95. ltem I is a service
contract addendum with TRS Range for an amount not to exceed 3,000 dollars. And
A.
G
D.
Merilhn Caty Council
August l2, 2008
Page 5 of 52
with that I would move that we approve the Consent Agenda and for the Mayor to sign
and the Clerk lo attest.
Rountree: Second.
De Weerd: Okay. I have a motion and a second to approve the Consent Agenda as
amended. Madam Clerk, will you, please, call roll.
Roll-Call: Bird, yea; Rountree, yea; Zaremba, yea; Borton,
yea.
MOTION CARRIED: ALL AYES.
De Weerd: Before we move into the Department Reports, if any of the members from
the public are here for ltems 10, 1'l or 12, they are requested to continue because of
posting or other reasons. So, we apologize if you're here tonight for any of those items.
Are any of you here for any of those items, if you will raise your
hand. Okay. Well,
good. Then, I don't have to apologize. They were not signed, so we do have to
continue them.
Item 7: Department Reports:
A. Sanitary Service Department:
1. Update aboutAnnual CPI Rate Adjuetment:
De Weerd. Okay. ltem 7 is Department Reports. We will start tonight with Sanitary
Services and ask Steve to come foruvard.
Sedlacek: Thank you, Madam Mayor, Members of the Council. I think in your packet
you have a memo, dated August 12th from m€, regarding our standard annual rate
increase. And the rate increase is tied to our contract. One of the difficulties or issues
that we need to talk about tonight is the county land fill rates. I have assumed in this
memorandum, since I have heard that the rates will be going up October lst,
unfortunately, the commissioners have not published what the rates will be, but I must
come to you on a certain schedule to hit my timelines to be effective October 1st, in
case we need to go to a public hearing. So, I ne€d your guidance on this issue,
I guess.
What I have heard is the land fill fees will go up at least 25 percent, but most likely
50
percent.
De Weerd: Fifty?
Sedlacek: Yes. And that's on the heels of last year,s 67 percent increase. So,
basically, this memorandum is based on a 50 percent landfill rate increase and, then,
CPl, which I guess my thought was if you have a public hearing, it's
better to say what
A0A C0UI+LiC0RDE[/. V|0
iotsE l0AH0 mra/08 10:56 lil
DEPtff Ur, l I
f,EC(,Bt}EI).REOUESI ()F
illc?ldhn Clly
TIAVABRO At ouH .00
THIS INDENTURE, made ttris k1 day z&b"tr"", David J. Dean and Luane 1. Dean
Husband and Wife, and Foundations Academ Inc. the parties ofthe first part, and hereinafter called the
Cranlors, ald the City of Meridian, Ada County, Idaho, the party ofthe second part, and hereinafter called the
Granlee:
WITNESSET}I
WHEREAS, the Grantors desire to provide a water main right-of-way across the premises and
property hereinafter particularly bounded and described; and
WHEREAS, the water main is to be provided for through an underground pipeline to be constructed
by others; and
WHEREAS, it will b€ necessary to maintain, seryice and subsequently connect to said pipeline from
time to time by the Grantee;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ofthe benefits to be received by the Crantors, and other good
and valuable consideration, the Grantors do hereby give, grant and convey unto the Grantee the righl
of-way for an easement for the construction, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement ofa water
main over and across the following described property:
(SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT A and B)
The easement hereby granted is for the purpose ofconstruction and operation ofa water line and their
allied facilities, together with their maintenance, additional connection thereto, repair and replacement
at the convenience ofthe Grantee, wilh the free right ofaccess to such facilities at any and all times.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, the said easementand right-of-way unto the said Grantee, it's successors
and assigns forever.
lT IS EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, that affer
construction, making repairs, performing other maintenance or making subsequent connection to the
water line, Grantee shall restore the area ofthe easement and adjacent property to that existent priorto
undertaking such construction, repain and maintenance. However, Graatee shall not be responsible for
repairing, replacing or restoring anything placed within the area described in this easemenl that was
placed there in violation ofthis easemenl
THE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree that they will not place or allow to be placed any
permanent structures, trees. brush, or perennial shrubs or flowers within the area described for this
easement, which would interfere with the use ofsaid easement, for the purposes stated herein.
TIIE GRANTORS hereby covenant and agree with the Grantee that should any part ofthe right-of-
way and easement hereby graated shall become part of, or lie within the boundaries of any public
street, then, to such extent, such right-of-way and easement hereby granted which lies within such
Water Main Easement Meridian water
lil [ llllllllllllllllllllllllllll I lll
1s,8097652
Easement.doc
I
WATER MAIN EASEMENT
"*l--u-l-
v \-, \-/ \-/
boundary thereof or which is a part thereof, shall cease and become null and void and of no further
effect and shall be completely relinquished.
THE GRANTORS do hereby covenant with the Grantee that they are lawfully seized and possessed of
the aforementioned and described tract of land, and that they have a good and lawful right to convey
said easement, and that they will warrant and forever defend the title and quiet possession thereof
against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said parties of the first part have hereunto subscribed their signatures
the day and year first herein above written.
F
J
I. Dean
, Inc. David Goodwin, President
Water Main Easement Meridian Water
Easement.doc
"-!-dr=
200n, before me, the undersigned, aNotary
appeared David Goodwin, who being known or
said corporation that executed the within instrument or
I't/,6nCE
\/ \/ \-/ \-/
STATE OF rDAHO )
)ss
County of Ada )
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day
and year fist above written.
NOT PUBLIC FOR IDAHO
Residing at: A)+ Et-*
commissio@
STATE OF IDAHO )
)ss
County of Ada )
on this.l \ Jt day of
on this nlL duy of J, l:a
,zl1g,before me, the undersigned, aNotary
Public in and for said stutl p.[*friffiared David J. Dean and Luane I. Dean, Husband
and Wife, known or identified to me to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the
within instrument, and acknowledged to me that they executed the same.
(
Public in and for said
identified to me to be the
the person who executed the instrument on behalf of said corporation and acknowledged to
me that such corporation executed the same.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my offrcial seal the day
and year fist above written.
NOTARY
Residing
Commission Expires:
(
Y
E
ortt
c
Water Main Easement
Easement.doc
Meridian "&Water J-
Iat t
\7 \/
GRANTEE: CITY OF MERIDIAN
Tammy de
Attest by Holman, City C
Approved By City Council On:
\-/ V
alultt
Y PUBLIC FOR IDAHO
Residing at: ftlldJatl.l - rD
Commission Expires: r\-tH r
STATE OF IDAHO,
,:
County of Ada
on this -la$*, oL 1-rl49Sl- zo{a"n
"me,
the undersigned, a
Notary Public in and for said State, personally upf"r"a fet tMy OB WEERD and JAYCEE HOLMAN,
known to me to be the Mayor and City Clerk, respectively, of the City of Meridian, Idaho, and who
executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that the City of Meridian executed the same.
lN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my offrcial seal the day and year first
above written.
)
SS.
)
(sEAL) ,tlST.;i*q.l
:rjr' a!1 i. j:
:'.'e#. 's .i:
gEAL
Water Main Easement Meridian Water
Easement.doc
"-I--1-
v v \/ \-.7
TOOTHMAN.ORTON ENGINEERING COMPANY
CONSULTING ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS AND PLANNERS
9777 CHINDEN BOULEVARD
BOTSE, |DAHO 8371 4-2008
208-323-2288 . FAX 208-323-2399
boise@toengrco.com
ProjectNo: 07i21
Date: June 5,2008
Page: I of 1
EXHIBIT "A'
City of Meridian Water Easement - Description
A l0-foot wide strip of land being a portion of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest
Quarter of Section 29, Township 4 North, Range 1 East, Boise Meridian, City of Meridian, Ada
County Idaho, described as follows:
COMMENCING at a found 5/8" iron pin, marking the Southwest comer of the Northwest
Quaner of the Northwest Quarter
of said Section 29, from which a found brass cap marking the
Section corner common to Sections 19,20,29 atd 30, Township 4 North, Range I East, Boise
Meridian, bears N.00"37'24"8.,1328.30 feet; thence, along the South line of the Northwest
Quarter of the Northwest Quarter
of said Section 29,
A) 5.89"36'15"8., 35.00 feet; thence,
B) N.00"37'24"E.,47.45 feet to the POINT OF BEGII\NING; thence, continuing,
l) N.00"37' 24"E., 10.00 feet; thence,
2) S.89'36'20"8., 183.25 feet; thence,
3) 5.49"47' 34"8., I 9.54 feet; thence,
4) 5.89"22' 40"8., 27 6.63 feet; tlence,
5) S.00"37'24"W., 10.00 feet; tlence,
6) N.89'22'40"W., 280.23 feet; thence,
7) N.49" 47'34"W., 19.52 feet; thence,
8) N.89"36'20"'W., 179.67 feet to the POINT OF BEGII{NING.
CONTAINING:4,794 square feet, more or less.
SUBJECT TO: All Rights, Rights-of-Way and Easements of Record.
Exhibit "8", attached and by this reference, made a part hereof.
Hl07 I 2 I \WPfi les\Survcy\ExhA-Meridran Water Esmt(2).doc
BOISE . COEUR cl'r\LENE
. CALDWELL "-5-rJ-
E
F
E
E
2
:?
E
- =
F
=
=a
=
H
5
6
E
e
e
=
e5
+ =
E =
F
=
2
E
--
=a
=
9
H
=
av
E
a
30 29
EXIIIBTT T" - trATERUNE EAS'EUENT UAP
LOCATEo rN THE NW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTTON 29,
TOWNSHIP 4 NORTH, RANGE 1 gAST,
BOISE MERIDIAN
CITY OF MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO
N89'59'56"E 509.97'
47 4.97'
LEGEND
t5
I
I
I
I
I
l,
r!N
I
1^-
l'+
J.N
lN
ln lb
t8
I
v\/ v \-/
Parcel name: WATERLINE ESl"fI #2
North: 725947.2!52
Line Course: North: N 726957 00-37-.2]24 -47 E
Line Course: North:E S 726955.89-35-9531 20
Line Course North:E S 726943 49-47--3397 34
Line Course: North: S 725940.89-22-3355 40 E
Line Course: Northzw S 725930.00-37-3352 24
Line Course: North:w N 726933.89-22-3794 40
Line Course: North: N 726945.49-47-9783 34 W
Line Course: North:W N 726947.89-35-2152 20
2459796.47L8
10. 0001
East : 2459795.5806
L83.2525
East : 2459979.8289
r.9.5389
East : 2459994.7510
276 -63L1
East : 246O27L.3558
10.0000
East z 245O27L.2570
280.2297
EasE : 245999]-.0439
19.5L5s
East : 2459976.1388
L7 East 9 . 571,: 4 2459795.47r.7
East
Length:
Lengtsh:
Length:
Length:
Lengt,h:
Length:
Length:
Length:
Perimeter: 978.8403 Area: 4,794 sq. ft.0.l-1 acres
Mapcheck Closure - (Uses listed courses, radii, and delt,as)
Error Error Closure: North: 0.0.0002 00005 Course: East. : N -0.G8-00016 2G-36 W
Precision l: 4,894,20L.5000
"*I--rrJ-
{
i
In+-2rr*y y'ro*t
+/t-z Qrounl Uf
\/ \J
GEOT EC I"{ NICAL IiNG INEERIN$ & I.,4ATERIALs TEIiTI NG
March 26,2008
\/ ,J
REPORT
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
Locust Grove and Chinden Boulevard
Meridian, ldaho
sTFr.aTa
t
STFTATA ij::i)iii;j{:r!t:)il iifi{i1l,i::r,,:iiirir,!.1Iii:.1itll\la;1!'.')t::\.1
-{.u-izyrr"ty lrr>o< *ka t:P*u<d rtg* March 25,2008
File: DEADAV 8071784
Dave and Luane Dean
1746 E. Dunwoody Court
Meridian, lD 83646
RE REPORT
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
Locust Grove and Chinden Boulevard
Meridian, ldaho
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Dean
STRATA, lnc. is pleased to provide this geotechnical engineering evaluation to
assist civil engineering infrastructure design and planning for the proposed Three
Corners Subdivision to be located southeast of the intersection of Locust Grove and
Chinden Boulevard in Meridian, ldaho. We accomplished our services referencing our
proposal dated July 26, 2007.
The accompanying report summarizes our field evaluation results, laboratory
testing and presents our geotechnical engineering opinions and recommendations.
Based on our findings, our opinion is the site is suitable from a geotechnical standpoint
for the proposed development, provided the recommendations in this report are
accomplished. We recommend STRATA be retained to review the plans and
specifications for the project as well as provide construction consultation, observation
and material testing services to verify the recommendations contained in this report are
accomplished. lf we do not perform the above-recommended services, we cannot be
responsible for design and construction-related errors or omissions.
The project site encompasses soil conditions including uncontrolled fill near canal
ditches and surficial lean clay. STRATA did not identify soil conditions that would
require remediation prior to constructing infrastructure or structures. We did not
encounter groundwater during exploration, and we do not anticipate groundwater will be
encountered within the upper 15 feet of the soil profile. lnfiltration rates measured
below cemented soil are relatively high which may help reduce the size of stormwater
infiltration facil ities.
As we discussed in our proposal dated July 26, 2007, this geotechnical
engineering evaluation is of a preliminary nature and will be likely used to assist the
design team in preliminary planning and design. Once the final building configurations
are known, we have been authorized to provide a final geotechnical engineering
evaluation that will include additional exploration and 1 exploratory boring. We strongly
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA ORIGON U;AH WASI1INGTON WYOft,iIING
www.stratageotech.com 8653 W. Hackamore Dr. Boise, ldaho 83709 P.208.376.8200 F.208.376.8201
i {'
J\r€\/
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
File: DEADAV 807187A
Page2
recommend STRATA be retained to provide geotechnical continuity from design to
construction. ln addition, the preliminary geotechnical recommendations for foundations
provided herein are based on an assumption of potential structural loads and foundation
configurations for the proposed residential or commercial structures. STRATA must be
retained to review our geotechnical recommendations relative to sife-speclfic residential
or commercial structure design and provide final geotechnical recommendations to
assist structural design. Providing geotechnical continuity through construction provides
the design and ownership team with verification that geotechnical-related project plans
and specifications are followed, which helps protect the development team's
investment.
We appreciate the opportunity to assist you on this project. Please contact us if
you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
STRATA, lnc.
Brent Norris E.l.T
Assistant Project Engineer
"Original signed by Chris Comstock"
"Dated original signed 03-26-08'
Chris M. Comstock, P.E., P.G
Project Manager
Michael G. Woodworth, P.E
Engineering Manager
BN/nm
Cc: Mr. Tim Mokwa, P.E., Toothman-Orton Engineering
The originat geotechnical evaluation is on file at STRATA, lnc. located at 8653 W. Hackamore Drive, Boise, ldaho, 83709
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.strata geotech.com
r ft?44
v\- \/v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND SITE DESCRIPTION..
FIELD EVALUATION ............
Field Exploration
Subsurface Conditions
Laboratory Testing
GEOTECHNICAL OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Earthwork.
Wet WeatherMet Soil Conditions...........
Foundation and Slab Design Criteria
Pavement Areas
Stormwater Disposal
Pond Excavations
ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED SERVICES
Plans and Specifications Review
Construction Observation and Testing
EVALUATION LIMITATIONS......
PAGE
.2
.2
.4
.4
,4
.5
.5
.6
.8
.8
.9
12
13
14
14
14
15
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
\-, \-/
REPORT
Geotechnical Engineering Evaluation
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
Locust Grove and Chinden Boulevard
IVleridian, ldaho
INTRODUCTION
STRATA, lnc. has accomplished the geotechnical engineering evaluation for the
proposed Three Corners Subdivision to be located southeast of the intersection of Locust Grove
and Chinden Boulevard in Meridian, ldaho. This geotechnical engineering evaluation
constitutes Phase 1 of our proposed scope of services described in our proposal dated July 26,
2007. The purpose of this initial evaluation was to obtain site soil and groundwater information
and to provide geotechnical recommendations for earthwork, stormwater disposal, preliminary
pavement design, and preliminary foundation and slab design criteria. Specifically, we provided
geotechnical recommendations for:
. . . .preparation o rcriteria .criteria . . .design Additional Allowable Site Structural Earthwork Reusability Preliminary Preliminary Recommended Preliminary fill stormwater recommended
of foundation concrete flexible and on-seasonal site compaction pavement slab-soil infiltration design services high on-grade criteria groundwater rates design levels
The following sections present the site description, our project understanding, field
exploration, subsurface conditions, laboratory testing, engineering opinions and
recommendations, evaluation limitations and additional recommended services.
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND SITE DESCRIPTION
IDAHO I\4ONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
The project is located southeast of the intersection of Locust Grove and Chinden
Boulevard in Meridian, ldaho. The site is located in a relatively flat area adjacent to several
Iarge residential developments. Based on our discussions with you, we understand the project
will consist of approximately 39 acres of mixed residential and commercial development with
asphalt paved parking, individual retail and office pads, and 1 to 2 large ponds for stormwater
detention and water features. Specifically, we understand up to 13 residential single-family lots,
21 town homes/patio homes, 9 office buildings and 1 commercial/retail lot may be planned for
this development. Phase 1 currently consists of the construction for the roadway access from
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
File: DEADAV 807178A
Page No.3
Locust Grove and up to 3 office and 1 commercial/retail lot. The main project access will extend
from Locust Grove to the commercial and multi-family portion of the project, and then extend
south toward the single{amily residential lots. We understand the site may be elevated with on-
site structural fill on the order of 1 to 3 feet.
Based on discussions with you and Mr. Mokwa, we feel that it is difficult to provide
specific geotechnical recommendations for foundations and slabs without reviewing actual
foundation details or structural loads. Accordingly, we discussed that STRATA would provide
preliminary recommendations for foundation and slab construction herein, with the
recommendation that STRATA review individual office, commercial or multi-family lot pians and
specifications and provide final geotechnical recommendations specific to each parcel. We do
not propose to provide preliminary recommendations for the single-family residences located on
the south portion of the project. As indicated by your authorization for our services, we
understand you agree with this approach.
We understand preliminary planning for the roadways allows for local residential roads
and a designated commercial section of road. We preliminarily assume the designated traffic
loading will be equal to a traffic index (Tl) of 6.0 for local roads and a Tl of 8.0 for commercial
roads.
Based on our experience with residential developments of this nature and discussions
with you, we anticipate the retail structures will be single-story with wood-frame or concrete
masonry unit (CMU) construction. The office buildings will likely wood-frame construction with
relatively light structural loads. While the multi-family structures are anticipated to be 1 to 2
stories, the structures are anticipated to have conventional foundations with light structural
loads. A school project is planned in the southwest portion of the site, but is beyond
the scope
of this evaluation.
Stormwater will likely be disposed via subsurface seepage beds or swales ad.lacent to
East Chinden Boulevard, but specifically within seepage beds in the Phase 1 portion, east
Three Corners Drive. The project concept was initially developed for up to 3 ponds used for
irrigation storage and control. At this time, it appears only 1 pond may be planned to the east of
the northeast corner of the school site. The proposed ponds will likely be lined; however, the
project team has not established whether synthetic liner or a clay liner will be used. Soil
excavated from the ponds will likely be used to generate structural fill to elevate the site,
specifically to the north along East Chinden Boulevard.
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON 6 UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMINC
www.stratageotech.com
vv
FIELD EVALUATION
Field Exploration
On August 1, 2007, STRATA observed the excavation of 6 test pits at the project site.
We coordinated the test pit locations with you and with Mr. Weiser, who is currently farming
portions of the project. We attempted to locate test pits outside active farming areas. A
standpipe piezometer was installed 2 of the test pits to help verify the absence of groundwater
at the site. Approximate test pit locations are provided on Plate 1, Test Pit Location Plan. We
described and classified the subsurface conditions encountered referencing ASTM D 2487 and
ASTM D 2488, Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). A brief explanation of the USCS is
presented in Appendix A and should be used to interpret the terms used on the exploratory logs,
which are also provided in Appendix A. We retained select soil samples for laboratory testing.
At the conclusion of our subsurface evaluation, test pits were loosely backfilled level with
the existing ground surface. Test pits were staked prior to their advancement and were later
surveyed by Toothman-Orton Engineering. The survey information provided by Toothman-
Orton is presented below in Table 1. Test pit locations are identified in the field with labeled
stakes or standpipe piezometers. We recommend all loose test pit backfill be completely
removed during construction to undisturbed native soil and backfilled with structural fill
according to the structural fill requirements presented herein.
Table 1. Test Pit Survey Data
Subsurface Conditions
The soil encountered in the test pits generally consisted of lean clay overlying silty sand
underlain by poorly-graded gravel with depth. ln TP-4 and TP-S, we encountered silt with sand
underlying the clay to a depth of 4 to 4.5 feet below existing grade. TP-5 encountered
uncontrolled fill at the ground surface to a depth of 2 feet below existing grade, which is likely
associated with construction of the adjacent ditch. Specific subsurface conditions, soil
descriptions, and sample locations can be referenced on the exploratory logs provided in
Appendix A.
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHIh]GTON WYOMING
www.strata geotech.com
Northing 726,221.95 725,690.23 726,795.67 726,942.36 728,146.97 728,142.12
Easting 2,461,644.64 246,097.02 2,461,017.71 2,460,318.32 2,459,966.39 2,460,909.67
Ground 2,604.14 2,600.39 2,602.82
Elevation
2,610.30 2,609.95 2,607.38
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
File:DEADAV 807178A
Page No.4
.ft$t,Pit ..tr.F"ll TP,2 THIS TP4 TP-s'i .
.TP:c
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
File: DEADAV B07178A
Page No.5
Groundwater was not encountered within the depths of exploration at the time of
excavation. Based on our knowledge of the area and review of well logs, groundwater is
anticipated to remain at depths of greater than 15 feet below existing ground surface throughout
the year. STRATA is available to monitor groundwater levels throughout irrigation season to
verify the absence of groundwater as requested by you or Toothman-Orton Engineering.
Laboratory Testing
We performed laboratory testing on select soil samples obtained from our field
exploration referencing ASTM procedures. Laboratory testing included grain-size distributions,
moisture content, R-value, and Atterberg limits determinations. Laboratory index test results are
provided on the individual test pit logs. R-value test results are provided in Appendix B.
GEOTECHNICAL OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Our opinion is the site is suitable from a geotechnical standpoint for the proposed project,
provided the recommendations in this report are accomplished. Our geotechnical
recommendations are generally limited to infrastructure improvements with respect to
pavement, stormwater and earthwork considerations for the proposed development. We are
also providing preliminary foundation and slab recommendations to provide preliminary design
criteria to assist individual pad development. However, STRATA is not providing final
geotechnical recommendations for individual commercial or multi-family development. STRATA
can review the plans and specifications for individual structures to verify the preliminary design
criteria provided herein is suitable for the proposed building construction. We recommend
individual commercial developers be informed of our recommendations to accomplish individual
geotechnical evaluation of each structure. However, if STRATA is retained to provide
geotechnical continuity via earthwork testing, additional exploration may not be required to allow
us to review individual project plans and provide geotechnical recommendations. Accordingly, if
the commercial or multi-family developer does not retain STRATA or a licensed geotechnical
engineer to provide final geotechnical recommendations for structures, STRATA is not
responsible for foundation-related construction errors or omissions that have the potentral to
negatively impact each structure.
The subsurface conditions may vary at the project site and the variation may not be
known until construction. Variations in soil and groundwater conditions may impact construction
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMINC
www.stratageotech.com
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
File: DEADAV 807178A
Page No. 6
plans and/or costs. Given the above understanding, the following paragraphs provide our
geotechnical opinions and recom mendations.
Earthwork
We recommend test pit backfill located beneath future structures or pavement, sidewalk,
or proposed structural fill areas be completely removed to undisturbed native soil and backfilled
with structural fill placed and compacted in accordance with this report. Toothman-Orton
surveyed test pit locations following their excavation and their coordinates are provided in Table
1, which will allow the test pits to be accurately relocated prior to mass grading or after site
stripping.
We recommend the upper soil with vegetation and organics (topsoil) be stripped to a
minimum depth of 4 inches beneath all planned pavement, sidewalk, and structural flll areas.
lsolated thicker areas of topsoil may be encountered. ln addition, any uncontrolled fill should be
completely removed to undisturbed native soil. We encountered uncontrolled fill in TP-5 to a depth
of about 2 feet. We anticipate several irrigation laterals in the southeast and northwest portions of
the project site may be re-routed or piped. We anticipate these laterals may contain soft or loose
soil or uncontrolled fill in and adjacent to the channels. lf the ditches will be re-routed, piped or if
structural fill will be placed over the ditches, we recommend the base of any ditch be
overexcavated to firm or medium dense native soil and structural fill be placed in the
overexcavation in accordance with this report. The base of this overexcavation may incorporate
extremely wet and soft soil conditions. STRATA should be consulted if these difficult excavation
and fill placement conditions are encountered during construction.
Following uncontrolled fill and topsoil removal, the stripped subgrade in structural fill
areas should be proofrolled with a minimum of 5 passes of a vibratory roller having a drum
energy rating greater than '10
tons or other equivalent heavy construction equipment as
approved during or prior to construction by the geotechnical engineer's representative.
Prior to structural fill placement, if any weaving or pumping is observed during
compaction, those areas should be removed to firm or medium dense native soil and replaced
with structural fill or alternatively, recompacted in place to structural fill requirements. After the
above sorl stripping, fill removal and proofrolling operations have been observed by the
geotechnical engineer's representative; structural fill placement may commence to site grades.
ln roadway subgrade areas, the subgrade must be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of
the maximum dry density of the soil as determined by ASTM D 698 (Standard Proctor) as
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.strata geotech.com
v\-.\.7.v
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
File: DEADAVB07178A
required by the most current edition ol lhe ldaho Standards for Public Works Construction
(rsPWC).
AII fill placed to support structures should consist of structural fill. Structural fill should be
free from vegetation or organics and be moisture conditioned sufficiently to achieve compaction
requirements. All structural flll should be classified as silt, sand or gravel (SP, SW, SM, GP,
GW, GM or ML) in accordance with the USCS. Structural fill should not contain particles greater
than 6 inches in diameter. The on-site silty sand, sandy silt and poorly-graded gravel soils may
be used for structural fill. However, soil containing more than about 10 percent silt may be
moisture sensitive and may experience difficulty when moisture conditioning the soil. During
periods of extended wet or cold weather, silty soils may be difficult to utilize as structural fill. We
do not recommend the on-site clay be reused as structural fill. The native clay can remain on-
site and does not require overexcavation, but will be extremely difficult to reuse as structural fill.
lf it is excavated as part of site development, clay soil can be used as landscape fill away from
settlement-sensitive structures or be removed from the project site if it is excavated as part of
site development.
Although the clay cannot be reused for structural fill, it does not require removal.
However, depending upon the clay's moisture condition, the contractor's means and methods,
and weather conditions during mass grading, large earthwork equipment can disturb the clay
during proofrolling efforts. STRATA should be retained to assist the earthwork contractor during
mass grading to reduce the potential for clay disturbance from heavy equipment. A STRATA
representative can waive the proofrolling requirement for the subgrade during construction if the
clay remains undisturbed during grading. We do not recommend the owner provide contractor
compensation for soil removal if the contractor elects to use means and methods that disturb
the sensitive subgrade. Bidding contractors should review this report and provide contract and
bid submittals commensurate with the soil conditions encountered during exploration as
communicated in this report.
Structural fill should be placed to the subgrade elevation in uniform, maximum 12-inch-
thick, loose lifts, and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density of the
soil, as determined by ASTM D 698 (Standard Proctor). This assumes heavy compaction
equipment, such as rollers, with a minimum drum energy rating of 10 tons is used. The maximum
loose lift thickness should be reduced where smaller and/or lighter compaction equipment is used.
We recommend STRATA be retained to perform field density testing of structural fill to verify
contractor compliance with the above minimum compaction criteria.
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
eFposeo tnree Corners Subdivision
File: DEADAV 807178A
Page No. 8
Wet Weather/Wet Soil Conditions
We recommend site construction be undertaken during dry weather conditions. lf site
construction, particularly grading, is undertaken during wet periods of the year, the on-site soil may
be susceptible to pumping or rutting when subjected to heavy loads from rubber-tired equipment or
vehicles, which exert a point load. Wet weather earthwork should be performed by low pressure,
track-mounted equipment that spread and reduce the vehicle load. Earthwork should not be
performed immediately after rainfall or until soil has dried sufficiently to allow construction traffic.
All loose or disturbed areas should be excavated to undisturbed soil or recompacted in-place to
structural fill requirements. Compaction should be sufficient to preclude pumping of the underlying
soil. ln summary, careful construction procedures are paramount to the successful grading
operation if the on-site soil is wet.
Additional precautions should be taken if subgrade soils are to be exposed to freezing
temperatures. STRATA should be contacted to provide recommendations prior to initiating or
delaying construction during wet or cold weather to improve earthwork efficiency, achieve a stable
subgrade and to help reduce negative impacts to earthwork from freezing temperatures.
Preliminary Foundation and Slab Design Criteria
The following preliminary recommendations should be accomplished for all foundations
for the office, retail, commercial or multi-family structures.
. .gravel .sand .clay .criteria Footings Approved Undisturbed Undisturbed Undisturbed Native should soil structural recompacted bear silty silt lean with sand, only fill on placed sand
in-the place or following:overthe to structural above fill soils
ln no case should foundations bear on lean clay or silt with sand that has a pocket
penetrometer reading of less than 2 tons per square foot (tsf) at the time of concrete
placement. lf soil with a pocket penetrometer reading with less than 2 tsf is
encountered at the foundation subgrade, the foundation subgrade must be
excavated to undisturbed native soil with a pocket penetrometer reading of greater
than 2 tsf, or to undisturbed granular soil such as sand or gravel.
Exterior footings should be located at least 24 inches below final, exterior grade to
reduce frost effects.
1
2
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.strata geotech.com
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
File: DEADAV 807178A
Page No.9
Minimum strip footing widths should be consistent with the /nternational Building
Code (lBC). An IBC Soil Site Class D can be preliminarily used for structural
design.
All loose soil, frozen soil or standing water at foundation and slab subgrades should
be removed. Following removal, the footing bearing surface should be prepared as
described in item 1 above.
Structural fill placed beneath structures should extend a minimum of 1-foot
horizontally for each 2 feet of thickness placed beneath the structure. The
horizontal dimension is measured from the edge of the structure.
lf STRATA is not retained to verify foundations are constructed according to the
following recommendations, we cannot be responsible for foundation
performance.
lf the above recommendations are accomplished, an allowable bearing pressure range of
2,000 to 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) could be preliminarily used for foundation design
depending on the type of structure, structural loading, final bearing elevation, and our assessment
of subsurface conditions at the pertinent structure. Based on the above bearing pressure range,
we preliminarily estimate total and differential settlement will be less than 1-inch and 1/2-inch,
respectively. Foundation settlement can be higher if loading conditions are moderate to high or if
drastically different loads exist within the same structure.
We recommend concrete slabs-on-grade bear directly on an appropriately designed
aggregate layer placed over soil prepared as described in ltems 1 through 6 above. The architect
and/or structural engineer should evaluate the need for moisture protection beneath slabs.
lt/loisture protection could include several moisture reducing systems such as puncture resistant
vapor barriers, clean sand blotter layers or other methods to reduce moisture below slabs. The
owner should carefully evaluate the type of structure and susceptibility of equipment or assets
placed within the interior buildings that may be susceptible to moisture damage. Floor coverings
should be carefully selected.
Pavement Areas
Recommendations outlined in lhe Earthwork section of this report should be accomplished
in all pavement areas. As we previously indicated, ISPWC standards require pavement subgrades
be compacted to the structural fill criteria provided in the Earlhwork section. The pavement
subgrade is anticipated to be at a depth of approximately 16 to 30 inches below planned grades
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
4.
5.
b-
\7 \- \/ \-.7
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
r,," o.ootY;olllt
depending upon the final grading plan and bearing soil. Accordingly, it appears the majority of the
pavement subgrade will exist in silty sand or silt with sand. However, in some portions of the
project, lean clay with sand may be encountered at the subgrade. Furthermore, based on
conversations with lvlr. Tim Mokwa, we understand on-site sand and gravel derived from pond
excavations may be used as structural fill to elevate the north portion of the site. Given the above
assumptions, it appears the majority of pavement subgrade will consist of silty sand or silt with
sand and portions of the subgrade will consist of native lean clay or structural fill. Because site
grades and the trafflc loading conditions are not completely developed at this time, we preliminanly
recommend the civil designer assume the subgrade will be comprised of silty sand or silt with sand
and use the appropriate design pavement section presented herein.
The following sections provide pavement section alternatives for varying subgrades and
road designations. lf roads are designed assuming a silty sand or silt with sand subgrade, the
pavement section is anticipated to be placed at approximately 20 to 28 inches below-grade for the
local and commercial roadways, respectively (assuming a 3 to 4-inch topsoil stripping depth).
Based on our current test pit explorations, it is possible a thin layer of lean clay may exist at the
subgrade directly overiying silty sand or silt with sand. lnstead of redesigning the pavement
section thickness during construction to account for the clay, it appears reasonable to require the
contractor to remove the clay at the subgrade to the underlying silty sand or silt with sand. ln
addition, the roadway excavated at the north portion of the project may identify structural fill sand
and gravel at the pavement subgrade. Structural fill sand and gravel will likely realize an R-value of
greater than 60, which will reduce the required subbase section assuming silty sand subgrades. At
that time, STRATA can accomplish R-value testing of the structural fill and submit a revised
pavement section to the civil engineer of record for submittal to the Ada County Highway District
(ACHD). lf ACHD approves the change, the pavement subgrade can be elevated slightly using on-
site sand and gravel as structural fill to reduce the required amount of imported subbase and
realize construction cost savings.
We conducted R-value testing on the silty sand and lean clay with sand. Laboratory test
results are provided in Appendix B. We used a "design" R-value of 25 for a silty sand or silt with
sand subgrade, a design R-value of 5 for pavement design with a lean clay subgrade and a design
R-value of 60 (assumed) for granular structural fill derived from the on-site ponds. We provide the
following 3 pavement sections for either a silty sand/silt with sand, granular structural fill or lean
clay subgrade for residential and commercial roads.
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOM'NG
www.strata geotech.com
V\, \-. \J
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
File: DEADAV BO7178A
Page No. 1 1
Local Residential Roadways (TI=6.0)
Clav Subqrade (desiqn R-value =
5)
Local Roadways - Flexible Pavement
2.5"- Class lll asphalt concrete top course
4.0"- 7a-inch-minus, crushed sand and gravel base course
12.0"- Pit-run sand and gravel subbase course
Local Roadways - Flexible Pavement)
2.5"- Class lll asphalt concrete top course
4.0"-Ta-inch-minus, crushed sand and gravel base course
9.0"- Pit-run sand and gravel subbase course*
Local Roadways - Flexible Pavement
2.5"- Class lll asphalt concrete top course
4.0"-3/a-inch-minus, crushed sand and gravel base course
9.0"- Pit-run sand and gravel subbase course*
"Note: Nine inches of subbase assumes a 6-inch maximum aggregate size for subbase. ACHD
requires a minimum subbase thickness of 1.5 times maximum subbase particle size.
Commercial Roadways (Tl=8.0)
Commercial Roadways - Flexible Pavement
3.5"- Class lll asphalt concrete top course
6.0"-3/o-inch-minus, crushed sand and gravel base course
16.0'- Pit-run sand and gravel subbase course
Commercial Roadways - Flexible Pavement
3.0"- Class lll asphalt concrete top course
5.0"- To-inch-minus, crushed sand and gravel base course
12.0"- Pit-run sand and gravel subbase course
Granular Structural Fill Suborade (design R-value =
60)
Commercial Roadways - Flexible Pavement
2.5"- Class lll asphalt concrete top course
4.0"- Yr-inch-minus, crushed sand and gravel base course
9.0"- Pit-run sand and gravel subbase course*
Silty Sand or Silt with Sand Subqrade (desiqn R-value =
25)
Granular Structural Fill Suborade (desion R-value =
60)
Clay Subqrade (desiqn R-value =
5)
Silty Sand or Silt with Sand Subqrade (desiqn R-value =
25)
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMTNG
www.strata geotech.com
i
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
File: DEADAV 807178A
Page No. '12
*Note: Nine inches of subbase assumes a 6-inch maximum aggregate size for subbase.
ACHD
requires a minimum subbase thickness of 1.5 times maximum subbase particle size.
We strongly recommend STRATA traverse and observe the final road alignment
subgrade after excavation. As we previously discussed, because the northern portion of the site
must be elevated, and on-site granular structural fill from the pond excavations is anticipated to
be used as fill, we assumed an R-value of 60 for preliminary design. The actual R-value of the
material excavated during pond excavation will be tested by STRATA to verify this assumption
or provide alternative pavement sections. Placing granular structural fill such as sand or gravel
as the last lift of structural fill can realize project economy by reducing the thickness of required
imported subbase. However, the realize such construction cost savings, the granular structural
fill placement must be accomplished in a manner that allows the roadway pavement subgrade
to consist of granular structural fill, as opposed to other soil fill that may be derived on the
project. We recommend you consult STRATA during structural fill placement to allow such
project economies to become realized.
The above-recommended flexible pavement sections are based on a maximum 20-year
design life and a Tl of 6.0 for "local residential" roadways and a Tl of 8.0 for "commercial"
roadways based on the traffic loading Toothman-Orton provided. The subbase should consist
of 6-inch-minus, well-graded sand and gravel consistent with ISPWC Section 801 and with less
than 10 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. The base course should consist of 3/4-inch-minus,
well-graded, crushed sand and gravel with less than 9 percent passing the No. 200 sieve and
consistent with ISPWC Section 802. The subbase and base course should be compacted in
accordance wilh lhe Earthwork section of this report.
The asphalt concrete for the flexible pavement area should have material properties as
specified in ASTM D 3515 and have a mix design with a maximum aggregate size between %-
and 3/8-inch. The asphalt concrete should consist of Class lll asphalt concrete top course and
should be compacted as required by ISPWC Sections 809 and 810.
We recommend crack maintenance or surface soils be accomplished in all pavement
areas as needed and at least every 3 to 5 years to reduce the potential for surface water
infiltration into the pavement section and underlying subgrade.
Stormwater Disposal
We understand on-site stormwater may be retained using retention ponds, swales or
subsurface seepage beds. We performed infiltration tests within native gravel encountered at
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
Proposed Three Corners Subdivision
File; DEADAV 807178A
Page No. 13
depth across the site. We measured infiltration rates greater than 40 inches per hour within
such gravel. The on-site lean clay is not suitable to accept subsurface stormwater. The on-site
silty sand contained weak to moderate cementation from approximately 2 feet to as deep as 6
feet below the existing ground surface. We do not recommend stormwater be disposed of in or
above any cemented layer. Accordingly, we recommend infiltration facilities extend below
cemented soil. We recommend all infiltration facilities be extended a minimum of 1-foot into
native poorly-graded gravel or sand with less than 20 percent fines. Excavation depths of up to
approximately 8 feet should be anticipated to expose native poorly-graded sand or gravel soils,
depending on location. We recommend an allowable infiltration rate of 20 inches per hour be
used for stormwater facilities constructed as discussed above.
We suspect the project may incorporate shallow stormwater swales excavated 2 to 3
feet below-grade. The base of these swales may consist of weakly cemented silty sand, silt, or
structural fill, depending upon location. We recommend STRATA assist stormwater design by
excavating additional test pits in exact pond or swale locations as part of ow Phase 2, Final
Geotechnical Evaluation. Depending upon the degree of cementation, infiltration rates between
1 and 2 inches per hour could be preliminarily assumed for sandy silt or weakly cemented silty
sand. Stormwater swales can designed for an allowable infiltration rate of 20 inches per hour if
the swale will be overexcavated to the underlying poorly-graded gravel as discussed above.
As discussed in the Subsurface Conditions section, groundwater was not encountered at
the time of excavation on August 1, 2007. Groundwater is anticipated below 15 feet. STRATA
verified the absence of groundwater in TP-2 and TP-6 prior to publication of this report. We
recommend the civil designer assume a seasonal high groundwater depth of 15 feet for
stormwater design. We remain available to verify the absence groundwater as requested by
you or Toothman-Orton Engineering.
Pond Excavations
We understand up to 3 small ponds may be excavated to generate structural fill for the
site as well as for water features and stormwater purposes. Depending upon groundwater
depths and pond conflgurations, the base of the ponds may exist below the groundwater table.
Based on the test pit excavations, we estimate the sidewalls of the ponds will consist of medium
dense to dense, native, poorly-graded gravel. The upper 4 to 8 feet ofthe ponds may consist of
lean clay, sandy silt, or silty sand. We recommend the pond slopes constructed in these soil
types be excavated at 2H:1V (horizontal to vertical) assuming the ponds will be lined. ln
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.strata geotech.com
Pf/osed Three Corners Subdivision
File: DEADAV 807178A
Page No. '14
general, medium dense to dense, poorly-graded gravel with sand in the Meridian and Boise
area can be excavated below the groundwater table at 2H:1V (horizontal to vertical) side slopes
for long-term pond slope design. This assumes the pond liner will not leak. While 2H.1V side
slopes are predicted to be stable, the civil designer and owner should recognize that isolated
sloughing and spalling of the soil can occur prior to liner placement.
lf a synthetic liner will be used to line the ponds, it is feasible that the ponds could be
excavated steeper than 2H:1V. However, at this time, STRATA was not retained to accomplish
a geotechnical boring or slope stability analyses for pond configurations. As part of our Phase 2
services, STRATA can utilize our boring data and accomplish geotechnical analyses to evaluate
steeper pond side slopes, which could provide pro.lect economy.
ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDED SERVICES
Plan and Specification Review
We recommend STRATA be retained to review earthwork, pavement and stormwater
portions of the plans and specifications prior to bidding. Having us review the construction
documents reduces the potential for geotechnical-related construction errors and omissions. ln
addition, as discussed in our July 26, 2OO7, proposal and throughout this report, it will be
important for STRATA to maintain geotechnical continuity through foundation design for each
individual commercial, residential or multi-family structure. We strongly recommend STRATA
review plans and specifications for individual structures and provide specific geotechnical
recommendations as necessary. We recommend STRATA contract directly with individual lot
developers to provide final geotechnical recommendations specific to the proposed
development. lf STRATA is not retained to review plans and specifications, provide specific
geotechnical recommendations and verify such recommendations during construction, we are
not responsible for the performance of any foundation or slab at the project site. At a minimum,
we recommend the lot developers retain a licensed qualified geotechnical engineer to assist
planning, design and construction.
Construction Observation and Testing
We recommend STRATA be retained to observe mass grading, earthwork, stormwater
facility construction and pavement section construction to verify our geotechnical
recommendations presented throughout this report are followed. Providing geotechnical
continuity throughout construction provides the owner with verification that earthwork and
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.stratageotech.com
\/v \-' Pffiseo Three Corners Subdivision
File: DEADAV 807178A
Page No. 15
geotechnical aspects have been constructed as designed and recommended. STRATA can
also provide construction materials testing and special inspection of concrete, reinforcement,
steel, masonry and asphalt. lf we are not retained to perform the recommended services, we
cannot be responsible for geotechnical related construction errors or omissions.
EVALUATION LI MITATIONS
This report has been prepared to provide a geotechnical engineering evaluation primarily
to assist earthwork, pavement and stormwater aspects for the proposed Three Corners
Subdivision to be located southeast of the intersection of Locust Grove and Chinden Boulevard
in Meridian, ldaho. ln addition, we are providing preliminary geotechnical recommendations to
assist preliminary design for individual structures. STRATA is not providing final geotechnical
recommendations which can be relied upon for final design criteria. Our opinions and
recommendations are based on our preliminary understanding of the project development. The
above recommendations assume an adequate program of tests, observations and geotechnical
consultation during construction is accomplished by STRATA. Construction observation is an
important part of the geotechnical design process.
Our services consist of professional opinions and recommendations made in accordance
with generally accepted geotechnical engineering principles and practices as they exist
in
southwest ldaho at the time of the report. This acknowledgement is in lieu of all express or
implied warranties. The opinions and recommendations contained herein are based on the
findings and observations made at the time of our exploration. lf, at a later time, conditions are
exposed which appear to be different from those encountered during our field exploration,
STRATA should be notifled to consider the need for modiflcations to the geotechnical
recommendations presented herein. This report has been prepared exclusively for the use of
Dave and Luane Dean and Toothman-Orton Engineering as described for this specific project.
We do not authorize its use for any individual or firm other than Toothman-Orton Engineering.
The following plates accompany and complete this report:
Plate 1:
Appendix A
Appendix B
Test Pit Location Plan
Exploratory Logs and USCS Explanation
R-value Test Results
IDAHO MONTANA NEVADA OREGON % UTAH WASHINGTON WYOMING
www.strata geotech.com
!(I '
{
!
L
!t
{ o)
!
(a .,
't,
t
!N I
{
.?
:I
In
F
E-!
r3
m
o
ozm
!N I
o> q-o
@qd p
<x
O='
o_J
g6- o
*
-DA
-;
l
!! o_ .
o
-Tl
I
!t
a
&
!
-t
xo.
3
+o
P= o
m
i'
*
T
m
w
ll
*:'li=.=',]=
+
re
ffi ffi
#fl
ffi
Iril
$T
APPENDIX A
!_
c-
oa
o -
Bee I:LOOo-8Y3e E
Io
FO
o-L
LrJ oc
g,q,
JO
)coo
a
o
a
F
)UL
a
coo
'60 o
aN oo >
L d'6
bsz
o5
.ae c6
>3
O
Note: BGS : Below Ground
Surfoce
REMARKS
USCS Description
:-1
Leon CLAY (Notive) - CL
brown,
hord, moist.
-3
-+
=
-5
:
:
SM @
&
&
s
*
*
&
*
@
*
&
&
*
&
*
*
4
4
1
E:>
.e6
>b
oal
a.
IC
3Pg
o-E
Note: BGS : Below Ground
Su rfo ce
REMARKS
os
p,q
-ai
USGS Description
-l
-2
Leon CLAY (Notive) - CL
brown,
stiff to hord, moist.
rJ
-+
:
:E
:-A
Silty SAND - ton, SM
medium
dense, moist.
GP_GM J'
f:
C, )a
,l! t,
Poorly-Groded GRAVLL with
Silt ond Sond - brown,
dense, moist.
:- '10
:- 11
GP (
C
C
a. {
?
o,
o
Ol
92 9.9
+4.5
+4.5
2.5 l\y'oderote vegetotion ond
orgonics observed to
3 inches BGS.
Atterberg limits:
Test Performed ot
2-2.5 feet BGS
(LL=32, Pr= 19)
Weok cementotion
observed from 4 to
6 feet BGS.
Percolotion test performed ot
8.5 feet BGS.
Y
!o
tso
LL oUc
n3 i;<
JO
coJo
a
o
d
U)L
a
coo
.BR
oO s
L d'6
be=
.tg
.>3u OP e6 3(-)
=c-
-9
-6
Ud o -
r oox -:::/
LO@oc; o-E
Note: BGS : Below Ground
Surfoce
REMARKS
USCS Description
1
2
Leon CLAY with Sond (Notive) CL
- brown, very stiff, moist.
Silty SAND - ton, medium
dense, moist.
-4
-5
SM &
tu
4
&
*
*
&
s
&
&
&
&
&
;
&
*
s
w
&
&
w
4
{
'-
LE
ia e,2
9^ .5
2= .e6
>3
-a
z-
Note: BGS : Below Ground
Su rfo ce
REMARKS
USCS Description
Leon CLAY (Notive) -
to ton, stiff to hord, moist.
-1
z
CL
SILT with Sond
stiff, moist.
brown, very
1z
-4
IVL
Silty SAND - ton, medium
dense, moist.
-5
SM
Poorly-Groded GRAVEL with
Silt ond Sond - brown,
dense, moist. -6
GP_GM
tr11 f!
.r 4,/
'la'
Poorly-Groded GRAVEL with
Sond ond Cobbles - ton,
dense, moist. -7
-9
- 10
GP oc
(
C
(
C
a
o
9.'
ol
.0
c
o,
7A 25
+4.5
J.0
4.O
2.O
2.4
lVoderote veqetotion
orgonics observed
3 inches BGS.
aE V3
.BR
9
.49
.c6
sE l.
IC
oE
Note: BGS : Below Ground
Surfoce
REMARKS
USCS Description
-l
Leon CLAY with Sond (Fill) CL
brown to ton, very stiff,
moist.
:-3
SILT with sond (Notive) ML
brown, stiff moist.
GP_GM na la.
+alarl re ilt'a tlilr tr
Po-7ly=Groded GRAVEL with
Silt ond Sond - brown,
dense, moist.
L
a.
(
C
)
.0
Cr- .
o'
.0
7'
o,
23
+.4
2.O
2.O
Troce vegetotion
orgonics observed
4 inches BGS.
Percolotion test performed ot
6 feet BGS.
lnfiltrotion rote = >40
in/hr meosured.
Cobbles observed up
to six inches in
diometer.
ond
to
Poorly-Groded GRAVEL with
Sond ond Cobbles - ton,
dense, moist.
:-6
-7
-8
_9
GP
74
USCS Description
tso I-o
o-U L
oc
g,q
J(-)
)
co
a
U
=rd Jo
>r<.> F
6
coo
'Ao o
L oo
d'6
bQ=
.5
at
.9? 6
<c
-o
'66q oa
-.
o
riY o_83p oa o-E
Note: BGS : Below Ground
Surfoce
REMARKS
Leon CLAY (Notive)
very hord, moist.
brown,
It
CL
Silty SAND - ton, medium
dense, moist. -2
_3
SM
&
*
4
#
e
t
*
Poorly-Groded GHAVLL with
Sond ond Cobbles - ton,
dense, moist. -4
-S
-O
=7
-8
_s
GP
.0
Cr" .
o
.Q
J,t,' ,'
sTFtaTa
!
^r...
t,, i ),
{.1/tt t }\.. <:v-,:.1
^.r'
N i.
%
MAJOR DIVISIONS
GRAPH
SYMBOL
LETTER
SYMBOL
TYPICAL NAMES
COARSE
GRAINED
SOILS
GRAVELS
CLEAN
GRAVELS
GW
Well-Groded Grovel,
Grovel-Sond Mixtures.
GP
Poorly-Groded Grovel,
Grovel-Sond Mixtures.
GRAVELS
WITH
FINES
I {
I
GM Silty Grovel, Grovel-
Sond-Silt Mixtures.
GC
Cloyey Grovel, Grovel-
Sond-Cloy Mixtures.
SANDS
CLEAN
SANDS
SW
Well-Groded Sond,
Grovelly Sond.
SP
Poorly-Groded Sond,
Grovelly Sond.
SANDS
WITH
FINES
?/
//t SM
Silty Sond,
Sond-Silt Mixtures.
@
SC
Cloyey Sond,
Sond-Cloy Mixtures.
FINE
GRAINED
SOILS
SILTS AND CLAYS
APPENDIX B
R.VALUE
IDAHO T-8
Project: Dave Dean 7O-Acre Property
Client: Mr. Dave Dean
Sample lD: Subgrade Soil
Location: TP-3 @ 2.0' - 2.5'
Soil Description: Lean Clay with Sand
Lab Number:87L2239G
File Name: DEADAV 807178A
Date Sampled: 8/18/07
Sampled by: BN/Strata
Date Received: 8/18/07
Tested by: CAKStrata
SOIL CONSTANTS
R VALUE: 12
q
s
u?
cr)
q
c)
o
o-
(o, +
o
Eo
@
G
!
x
E-
o
(! + t .l
I - I t * f
I \+r,4 ,/
4., 't'
// /'
I ,4 -{I J/ t-
\
*1\,
'*
\ \
ru ,/z
oo
o
o,
oo
o
@
oo
o
f.*
GRADATION: AASHTO T 41, f 27
SCREEN AS RECEIVED AS TESTED
SIZE %PASSING %PASSING
T
6'c o-N
o
Eafo
o-N
R.VALTJE
IDAHO T-8
Project: Dave Dean 70-Acre Property
Client: Mr. Dave Dean
Sample lD: Subgrade Soil
Location: TP-1 @ 2.0' - 2.5'
Soil Description: Silty Sand
Lab Number:87L2239F
File Name: DEADAV B0717BA
Date Sampled:8/18/07
Sampled by: BN/Strata
Date Received: 8/18/07
Tested by: CAI(Strata
SOIL CONSTANTS
R VALUE: 35
q
s
q
(f)
q
C9
oo
o
o)
oo
@o
oo
No
GRADATION: AASHTO T-11 T27
SCREEN
SIZE
i
tr
6'c (LN
o
l
Eoo
o-N
C
.9
ca
o6l.r)
x.
uJ-
Oo6
o-(oJ o
o)
f
9E o
on 1r,;
o
(u
o= ?,
ox otJJ
t
4"
2"
1"
314"
112"
v \'/
28-5990.2
i2r,a
affi
-J
tatt,
r{r{at s
/r!cLF&6
/Fe,@M
lr2.tra
p
u
8.t
f,tart
€
a
tE
a
au
's
&J
5990.2-L1952.4
!t,
te!a
HGL Profl. wfi U.rhrm Odr ol Lintt Kl+g7-Xlil-g|-OJ(liaje-l(lt99.lr-...L}t,
11ta,
.c.d
ttrS
Irz.ro
a
,g.
r.
a ,t&.4 attt ahl rt4,
v\7
7L952.4-L79L4.6
62-t
rrz{it{ rll{
1124
iar,l,t r4!la r$-., (tal
HGL PretL with L.rlmm Dtt otLlrl! Xl4.tr.l(t/l.gl{l,Kl+9ll(l+99{r,.-.,L3-'17
rrcrllGrr
trca
/ry&UrM
Laa.,
/Bkltryw
urt
at2-te
2g,a
&.,
xlo-t
(rftUih4
lg
l@
L79L4.6-23876.8
rrlla.a
rrllls
lu
812
u7t
ts
6v.t
raDs &&.4 ?w.' lrD.a
I
v \-'/ \./
V
23876.8-29893.O
'r
a
u
w
&
&
gp{
HGL ProfrL u,li LrtrnG Ddr ol Lhlo Xlrar?.1(l4t0{J(t'H{ l4.le{.-.I}i,
u!
ta-a
l__
irr&a
et
Lta
-j-
tttt,
&
& &i.,
sr4rta
f&a
ag25
Mt.l
/@&..ered
vv
K16-13 'tl
--;-l(
134
16-135
t( o-i zs
=@
6- K-r6=
-;----i
1
NOi 02-
scHooL
i'
,-.--,1
K1
K14-96 ;
iK16-
11q
20
#26 118
8W 1 6- 11
K1
K1
?'^i i rf o-rf< ci 6 t rt i=-<' r?t t n s t v x ESTATES
f-
6235
-
2120
6295
6295
61 75
6125
2099
6360 2251
1 2965
6230
6190
6170
6110
611 0
12225
=@
8S
632s I
1573
1 0326
Ig t
746
t-z
6115
mm
{c
61 00 ,
z//.
&c-
6065 6035
6065
I 8W
381 I
17't4
171*
1746
lee 1746
1 682
104
Soso
1 682
1810
1842
1921
1985
1842
fi74
1778
1BIo'
1775
1921
1985
1 839
, s?#
2798
| 938
'1970
2000
ffi
Item #91, J & K: Three Corners'TSubdivision (RZ-i3.010; PP.13-025 & MDA.t'017)
Application(s):
> > ) Rezone Preliminary DevelopmentAgreementModification Piat
Size of property, existing zoning, and location: This site consists of 31.73 acres, is cunently zoned C-C, R-8 and R-2, and is
located on the southeast corner of Locust Grove and Chinden.
History: ln2007,lhe property received comprehensive plan map amendment (CPA-07-011), annexation
(AZ-07-017) and preliminary
plat (PP-07-021) approval for a mixed use development consisting of a private school, retail, oflice and residential uses. & t-/
lkil l.-t, ''
Summary of Request: The applicant submitted a request for a rezonqrpreliminary plat and development agreement/to construct a
mixed use development consisting of 54 residential lots, 8 commercial'lots and 6 common lots on 30.27 acres of land. The purpose of
the DA mod is to incorporate the new plat design, attach new home elevations and update certain provisions
in lhe recorded DA
relevant to the proposed development.
The gross density of the proposed subdivision is 2.64 dwelling units per
acre which is under the target density of comp plan but is
higher than the previous approved plat. The minimum lot size proposed
with the residential portion of the plat is 5,235 square feet and
the average lot size is 8,500 square feet. The commercial lots range in size between 29,510 square feet up to 51,040 square feet.
Access is proposed on the plat via one public street access from E. Three Comers
Drive which connects to N. Locust Grove Road. A
stubstreetiSproposedtotheSouthforfutureextension.
Access is not proposed to Chinden Boulevard.
The residential portion of the plat consists of approximately 19.21 acres; the qualifying open space for the residential
portion totals
approximately2.96acreswhichexceedsthe10percentrequiredbytheUDcmThe
applicant is proposing the following amenities: an integrated pedestrian pathway throughout the development, 10joot multi-use
pathway adjacent to Chinden Boulevard and a covered picnic area on Lot 4, Block 2. Staff has conditioned the project to provide
a
sifting area in the park south of the commercial zoned property.
A 3s{oot wide landscape buffer is required adjacent to Locust Grove and Chinden Boulevard and alO{oot wide landscape buffer is
required along E. Three Corners Drive.
The proposed elevations consist of the following building materials: mixture ofwood and stucco siding, covered front porches
decorative corbels, window trim and varying roof planes.
Commission Recommendation: Approval at the October 3, 2013 hearing
Summary i. ln favor: of Gommission Kent Brown, Public Applicant's Hearing:Representative
ii. ln opposition: None
iii. Commenting: None
iv. Written testimony: Kent Brown in agreement with the conditions of approval in the staff repo(
Key lssue(s) of Discussion by Commission: None
Key Commission Change(s) to Staff Recommendation: None
Written Testimony since Commission Hearing: None
0utstandin lssue(s) City Council: None
Notes: 6ttn-
V
Barbara Shiffer
From:
Sent:
Subject:
Machelle Hill
Tuesday, September 03, 2013 3:25 PM
FW: City of Meridian Dev App - Three Corners RZ PP
From: Machelle Hill
Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 3:23 PM
Subject City of Meridian Dev App - Three Corners RZ PP
#,,{r I {siil*
City of Meridian
City Clerk's Office
33 E. Broadway Avenue
Meridian, lD 83642
Planning and Zoning Commissian
D evektp me n t Appl ic atio n T ra ns milt{tl
To: Cifr Departments Comments due by: September 26,2013
Transmittal Date: September 3,2013 File No.: RZ 13-010 and PP 13-025
Hearing Date: October 3, 2013
Request: Public Hearing - Rezone approximately 31. 73 acres from the C-C (Community
Business), the R-8 (Medium Density Residential) and the R-2 (Low Density
Residential) zoning districts to the C-C (Community Business) (12.52 acres), the R-4
(Medium Low Density Residential) (16.51 acres) and the R-8 (Medium Density
Residential((2.70 acres) zoning districts AND Preliminary Plat approval consisting of
8 commercial lotsr 54 single family lots and 6 common lots on approximately 30.27
acres in the proposed C-C, R-4 and R-8 zoning districts for Three Corners
By c13, LLC
Location of Property or Project: Southeast Corner of N. Locust Grove Road and Chinden
Boulevard
The City of Meridian is requesting comments and recommendations on the application referenced above. To review
detailed information about the request, please click on the file number above to take you directly to the application.
We request that you submit your comments or recommendations by date specified above. When responding, please
reference the file number of the project. lf responding by email, please send comments to clerk@meridiancity.oro.
For additional information associated with this application please contact City Clerk's Office at number below.
Thank you,
Machelle Hill
Deputy City Clerk
Meridian City Clerk's Office
33 E. Broadway Avenue
Meridian, lD 83642
(208)8884433
1
qs,, 4s
1746
2166
2167 21
Pw
TOW
99 2231
!w
I 8g
,o
to-'
(,.
J ,oU
6!'0 1874
5875 I
1775 5436
1y36 [
r soal
=6l
2798
'1025
1 553
1506
1542
irozsl
,r;;I
uxlal
1970
2000
136
I Wr
;
a
55 t6 551 5518
I
I
5491
I --_:-
I I
I I T 5463 5464
1930*.r
r,tgltl?oil5t20AZP13O
re
6295
6294
Kf 6-131
2055 ,
2060
is'- 8w 1319
t"a '
1 23
': '' -r_ :.
i<to-la+ r
_I Fr
61 50
2081
fl *,
1 B 6020
1303
a
;i '----xr6---l r '
I
,lr l .'
,.
.- .-.-'-.-----;
K1
-K1 6 115
'{
-1
r
/l
l 'c
F{
1 GgJ
-t
I
Frt
&,*
)
g ( -l
'I a.
776
J E 2036,
554.q
,l |L
2068
ti
2198
67
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 16
No. 30
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
100 100
q
u? o
oo
(or)
oo
No
---r--
ool i
o
q
o I
oooooooooo CD@l=(OlO$(f)N
R value
Note: This report covers only material as represented by this sample and does not necessarily cover all
soil from this layer or source.
STFTATA
Jn;.''jr, ,r' t',.,*\ t^.-.,.:. r's..i{'I.
R
None Point'l
Exudation, PSI 213
-----r---
Dry Density, PCF
Moisture Content, % 20.1 19.5 18.5
Exp. Pressure, PSI 0.55 0.83
328
-t-
102.0 104.4 104.6
0
(o L
(o.) I
-l + ---
o
Eo .o o I
x
E
C
o o I i l _r)
I
q.
,1 7
---f +
./ >/
,/
I /
.X,
r
^
-t- I
\ (
F
,,,
21 =-+-
I (
Reviewed by l/rffi^/;--*-*,.r--
a
I
AS RECEIVED AS TESTED
% PASSING % PASSING
%
-t-
l -
t; tf
+ 1
,/ I'
.y
/
-4
-r -ry
./1, / .,-_
c
.o
o
C
o6lr) x
IJJ -
o
Oa o_o
@J
E
8p on qJ =a
c
o
E(o
of E'
OX
oLU \t
4"
J
2"
1"
314"
112',
3/8"
No. 4
No. 8
No. 16
No. 30
No. 50
No. 100
No. 200
100 100
c
q? o
q
o
oo
o
(f)
oo
No
oo
o
oooooo o)@r.-(olr)$
R value
ooo (.) N
o
Note: This report covers only material as represented by this sample and does not necessarily cover all
soil from this layer or source.
s-rFta-ra
j 4l tc:tt "1 y t' t
' '4 / r/ { i,
f tr.4.,r' Uf-
R VALUE DATA
Moisture Content, % 19.3 18.1 i6.9
None
Exudation, PSI 149
Dry Density, PCF
Exp. Pressure, PSI 0.25 0.74 1.17
105.2 105.4 107.5
257 421
Point'l Point 2 Point 3
Reviewed by 7/,x4w
+
I
,$
,4.
,/,
1.
k .1
,r' v
,1
'/
,//// /
7 I
5I
%
LIQUID LIMIT
LESS THAN 50%
ML
lnorgonic Silt, Sondy
or Cloyey Silt.
CL
lnorgonic toLow Medium Cloy Plosticity, of
Sondy or Silty Cloy.
OL
Orgonic Silt ond Cloy
of Low Plosticity.
SILTS AND CLAYS
LIQUID LIMIT
GREATER THAN 50%
MH
lnorgonic Silt, Mico-
ceous Silt, Plostic
sitt.
CH
lnorgonic
Plosticity,
Cloy of High
Fot Cloy.
OH
toMedium Orgonic High Cloy Plosticity. of
PT
Peot, Muck ond Other
Highly Orgonic Soils.
UN D SOIL CLASSIFICAT N EM
BORING LOG SYMBOLS GROUNDWATER SYMBOLS TEST PIT LOG SYMBOLS
Shorthond Nototion:
BGS : Below Existing Ground Surfoce
N.E. : None Encountered
Stondord 2-lnch OD
Split-Spoon Somple
a
Colifornio Modified 3-lnch
OD Split-Spoon Somple
Rock Core
Shelby Tube 3-lnch OD
Undisturbed Somple
V:
=
Groundwoter
Afler 24 Hours
(7-J-07) lndicotes Dote of
Reoding
V
=
Groundwoter
of Time of Drilling
BG Boggie Somple
BK Bulk Somple
RG Ring Somple
i.q I
n'." l.'. I
0 :c
ti
tv
at
sil tt It {
.s
c.'
O. '
28 3.5
+4.5 Troce vegetotion
orgonics observed
4 inches BGS.
Moderote cementotion
observed from 2 lo
2.5 feet BGS.
Moderote cementotion
observed from 2.5 to
3.5 feet BGS.
Percolotion test performed ot
4 feet BGS.
lnfiltrotion rote )
4Q in/hr meosured.
Cobbles to six observed inches in up
diometer.
ond
to
Iest pit terminoted ot 10
feet BGS due to coving
conditions.
_ tt
tz
- 13
-14
:,l5
Stondpipe piezometer
instolled to 10 feet
BGS.
Client: DEADAV Test Pit Number: TP-6
Project: BO7178A Dote Excovoled: 8/O1 /07
Bockhoe: CASE 550 Bucket Width: 2
Depth to Groundwoter: N.E. Logged By: BN
EXPLORATORY
STFIATALOG TEST PIT
'l \t na. / t/' /,.i4, e"..
.: y', -r\(i r\. Sheet 6 of 6
%
\\
E]
- 1'l
- 1+
- 15
Test pit terminoted ot 10
feet BGS due to coving
conditions.
C ient: DEADAV Test Pit Number: TP-5
Proiect:807178A Dote Excovoted: 8/O1/O7
Bucket Width: 2'
EXPLORATORY
STFTLOG TA TEST PIT
1 ,1---, 1r /, -a ) ,.. L/, --\. rr Sheet 5
of 6
q
DepthBN to Ground\,voter: N.E Logged By:
tr
Bockhoe: CASE 550
Cobbles observed up
to six inches in
diometer.
ond
to
- 12
- 13
- 14
Test pit terminoted ot 11
feet BGS due to coving
conditions.
Client: DEADAV Test Pit Number: TP-4
Proiect:807178A Dote Excovoted: 8/01/o7
Bockhoe: CASE 550 Bucket Width: 2'
EXPLORATORY
STFTATALOG TEST PIT
'l*1.d// t,.4 t^. {/' 4r\/ vr Sheet 4 of 6
g
DepthBN to Groundwoter: N.E Logged By:
@
6
&
tu
&
*
&
*
*
&
&
tu
Ii
0,
L
U
ra,
}.
't
t.
.l
I
.t
I
t/.
rT,i
,K a
,s
{:
-7
Poorly-Groded G|(AVLL wrth
Silt ond Sond - brown,
dense, moist.
-a
0
re
=:
=:-1
GP
?
o.
(
r
:
s
{,
( .
C
+4.5
3.0 Moderote vegetotion ond
orgonics observed to
2 inches BGS.
Moderote cementotion
observed from 4 to
5 feet BGS.
Weok cementotion
observed from 6 to
7.5 feet BGS.
Cobbles observed up
to six inches in
dio meter.
Poorly-Groded GRAVEL with
Sond ond Cobbles -
ton,
dense, moist.
:11
:-12
ts
-14
- 15
Test pit terminoted of 1 0.5
feet BGS due to coving
conditions.
Client: DEADAV Test Pit Number: TP-3
Project: BO7178A Dote Excovoted: 8/O1 /O7
Bockhoe: CASE 550 Bucket Width: 2'
Logged By: BN
EXPLORATORY
STFTATALOG TEST PIT
a!*t?a./:r j. a D\ 4ar. .!V <\\ai rr Sheet 3 of 6
%
Depth to Groundwoter: N.f.
S
tr
lnfiltrotion rote = >40
in/hr meosured.
Cobbles observed up
to six inches in
diometer,
Poorly-Groded GRAVEL with
Sond ond Cobbles - ton,
dense, moist.
Stondpipe piezometer
instolled to 12 feet
BGS.
Test pit terminoted ot 12
feet BGS due to coving
conditions.
- 13
- 1+
- 15
Client: DEADAV Test Pit Number: TP-2
Project: 807'l 78A Dote Excovoted: 8/o1/oj
Bockhoe: CASE 550 Bucket Width: 2'
Logged By: BN
EXPLORATORY
STFTATALOG TEST PIT
'| *1.-,, t| /t,4 t'.. t/,d/\/rt Sheet 2 of 6
%
Depth to Groundwoter: N.E
\N \
\N
E.l
t
&
w
*
&
&
&
@
&
*
tu
*
I
s
s
Silty SAND - ton, medium
dense, moist.
86 9.4
+4.5
+4.5
Moderotevegetotion ond
orgonics observed to
3 inches BGS.
Atterberg limits:
Test Perf ormed ot
0.5-1 feet BGS
(LL:32, Pt:1 s)
Moderote cementotion
observed from 2 lo
3 feet BGS.
Weok cementotion
observed from 3 to
4 feet BGS.
Moderote cementotion
observed from 4 to
6 feet BGS.
Cobbles observed up
to six inches in
dio meter.
Poorly-Groded GRAVEL with
Sond ond Cobbles - ton,
dense, moist.
-l
fa
I
_ to
GP
(
t
)
r"t-
C.
u
) :
$
(
C
(
{
i tt
tz
113
-1+
:15
Test pit terminoted ot I0.5
feet BGS due to coving
conditions.
Client: DEADAV Test Pit Number: TP-l
Project: BO7178A Dote Excovoled: 8/O1 /O7
Bockhoe: CASE 550 Bucket Width: 2
EXPLORATORY
sTFTLOG TA TEST PIT
:l'\r*a,/t ! r'; na t *n: tf <\.tui ai{: Sheet 1 ofG
%
DepthBN to Groundwoter: N.E. Logged By:
ta\ tr
E^l
E4
g
ffi
ffiffi
Gt##&
we4#l}#
w
: il
I
I
I
I
3e .l r I
HE. t
@,
IHQI
"- >ol
: gxl
i su - - Exl .u, I
.n DLI
a HEr
= .zl
'l .3u (! 'z I I
I
I
I
BOUNDARY LINE
SECNONAL UNES
i
,:l
t>_
t=
rJ
r+
l!2
io
lo
l'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ANOINING PARCEL OR LOT LINE
f rouNo BRAss cAp
o O FOUND ANGLE POINT s/E' tRoN (NOIHING PtN rvlPusac FOUND OR cAP SET)
W72 ERtotAN WATERuNE EASEMENT
PROPOSED LOT .t,
BLOCK 1
THREE CORNERS SUBDMSION NO. 1
DEED INSTRUMENT NO. l OEO+7818
LINE TABLE
LINE BEARING TENGTH
L1 NO0'37'24"E 47.45
N0037'24'E 10.o0
LJ s49'47'34"E 19.54
L5 s00'37'24'w 10.00
L6 N49'47',J4',W 19.52
oF BEGINNING. 1O' MERIDIAN WATERLINE
EASEMEM
18J.
N89'J6',201i 179.67'
d
s89'22'40'E 276.63'
NA9'22'401 2AO.23',
N89'36'15'W 509.94',
DUNWOODY SUBOIVISION
J
:' di
z-
I
0
30 ,d, 1/4 CoRNER
50 'too 204 500
SCALE:1"=1Oo'
ENGINEERS SURVEYORS . PLANNERS
9777 CHINDEN BOULEVARD . BOISE, IDAHO EJ7I4-2008
PHoNE: 208=523-2288 Fttt 208-J2i-2J99
t-flLf] H:\07r21\trh8 lorer t!'n(2).0ilG0ft: Dtl2ym JoE: 071 lm
19 20
:l
35'
i
TOOTHMAN-ORTON ENGIMERING CO.
elements.
a
,/ Existing and proposed contours for all areas steeper than20Vo slope. Berms shall
be shown with one-foot contours.
o
aordinance Sight Triangles as defined in 1 I -3A-5 of this
a Proposed landscaping
o Proposed screening structures
{
Calculations of project components to demonstrate compliance with the
requirements of this ordinance, including:
> Width of street buffers, lineal feet of street frontage, and number of street trees
) Residential subdivision trees
F Acreage dedicated for common open space
) Number of trees provided on common lot(s)
) Mitigation for removal of existing trees
o
Reduction ofthe landscape plan (8Vz" x 11")
-1/
Site report of the highest seasonal groundwater elevation prepuued by a registered soils
scientist
,/