The URL can be used to link to this page

Application(~irE IDIAN*-- • IDAHO TRANSMITTALS TO AGENCIES FOR COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WITH THE CITY OF MERIDIAN Mayor Tammy de Weerd City Council Members: Keith Bird Brad Hoaglun Charles Rountree David Zaremba To ensure that your comments and recommendations will be considered by the Meridian Planning and Zoning Commission please submit your comments and recommendations to Meridian City Hall Attn: Jaycee Holman, City Clerk, by: 9-Jun-11 Transmittal Date: May 16, 2011 File No Hearing Date: June 16, 2011 PP 11-001 Request: Public Hearing -Preliminary Plat approval consisting of six (6) multi- family building lots and six (6) common/other lots on 24.61 acres of land for Avendale Subdivision By: Silver Oaks Apartments, LLC Location of Property or Project: north of W. Franklin Road and west of N. Ten Mile Road Joe Marshall (No FP) Scott Freeman (No FP) Steven Yearsley (No FP) Michael Rohm (No FP) Tom O'Brien (No FP) Tammy de Weerd, Mayor Charlie Rountree, C/C Brad Hoaglun, C/C Keith Bird, C/C David Zaremba C/C Sanitary SerVICeS (No VAR, VAC, FP) Building Department /Rick Jackson Fire Department Police Department City Attorney City Public Works/Scott Steckline City Planner Parks Department Economic Dev. (CUP only) City Engineer Your Concise Remarks: Meridian School District (IVo FP) Meridian Post Office (FP/PP/sHP only> Ada County Highway District Ada County Development Services Central District Health COMPASS (Comp Plan only) Nampa Meridian Irrig. District Settlers Irrig. District Idaho Power Co. (FP,PP,CUP/SHP only) QWest (FP/PP/SHP only) IntermoUntaln G8S (FP/PPlSHP only) Idaho Transportation Dept. (No FP> Ada County Ass. Land Records Downtown Projects: Meridian Development Corp. Historical Preservation Comm. South of RR / SW Meridian: NW Pipeline New York Irrigation District Boise-Kuna Irrigation District Boise Project Board of Control /Tim Page City Clerk's Office • 33 E. Idaho Avenue, Meridian, ID 83642 Phone 208-888-4433 •Fax 208-888-4218 • www.meridiancity.org • E IDIAN~-- IDAHO C~ Planning Department COMMISSION & COUNCIL REVIEW APPLICATION ~~y I ~/F ~`'~ ~' >. ~~ Type of Review Requested (check all that apply) ^ Alternative Compliance S ^ Annexation and Zoning F `~ ~, ~ a ^ Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment ^ Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment STAFF USE ONLY: ^Conditional Use Permit File number(s): 1'P- 11-OOl ^Conditional Use Permit Modification ^Design Review ^ Final Plat ^ Final Plat Modification Project name: ~,~en da.le. ~bdi vC Si t~ ^ Planned Unit Development Date filed: 5 '~ " ~ ~ Date complete: 5 - ~ - t ~ 0 Preliminary Plat ^ Private Street Assigned Planner: ~ ~~ a~--1er.5 _ ^ Rezone Related files: ~~J P-10 -®- `1 '~ MD,q - I o -O t 1; ^Shortplat Ij~$-1o-OS~', lkZ~S-Ollo~ ~P-~`a ^ Time Extension (Commission or Council) ^ UDC Text Amendment Hearing date: ca - I lO" t 1 ®'t`,ommission ^ Council ^ Vacation (Council) ^ Variance ^ Other Applicant Information Applicant name: Silver Oaks Apartments LLC Phone: (208) 288-0100 Applicant address: 1409 N. Main Street Meridian Idaho Zip: 83642 Applicant's interest in property: ^ Own ^ Rent ^ Optioned ^ Other Developer Owner name: Ten Mile Development LLC Phone: (208) 288-0100 Owner address: 1409 N. Main Street Meridian Idaho Zip: 83642 Agent name (e.g., architect, engineer, developer, representative): Beck~McKav Firm name: En ing_eerin~ Solutions LLP Phone: (208) 938-0980 Address: 1029 N. Rosario Street Suite 100 Meridian Idaho Zip: 83642 Primary contact is: ^ Applicant ^ Owner ^ Agent ^ Other Contact name: Becky McKay _ Phone: (208) 938-0980 E-mail: es beck~m~awestoffice net Fax: X2081938-0941 Subject Property Information Location/street address: N of W Franklin Road and W of N Ten Mile Road off W Perugia Street (Address Number Not Assigned) Assessor's parcel number(s): 88778730020 Township, range, section: T.3N. R.1 W.. Section 10 Total acreage: 24.61 Current land use: Undeveloped Current zoning district: R-15 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Suite 210 • Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: (208) 884-5533 • Facsimile: (208) 888-6854 • Website: www.meridiancity.org 1 i Project/subdivision name: Avondale Subdivision (resubdivision of Lot 1 Block 2 Umbria Subdivision) General description of proposed project/request: Preliminar~Plat for 6multi-family residential lots, 2 common lots and 4 ineress/egress parking and public utilities lots on 24 61 acres, Proposed zoning district(s): N/A - Existii~ R-15 Acres of each zone proposed: N/A -Existing R-15 Type of use proposed (check all that apply): ^ Residential ^ Commercial ^ Office ^ Industrial ^ Other Amenities provided with this development (if applicable): Clubhouse fitness centerLpooUspa tennis court, pla~~ound community~arden area and picnic area Who will own & maintain the pressurized irrigation system in this development? N/A Which irrigation district does this property lie within? Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District Primary irrigation source: KennedkLateral Secondary: Citv of Meridian Square footage of landscaped areas to be irrigated (if primary or secondary point of connection is City water): N/A Residential Project Summary (if applicable) Number of residential units: 369 Number of building lots: 6 Number of common and/or other lots: 6 (clubhouse lot is a buildable lotl - Proposed number of dwelling units (for multi-family developments only): 1 Bedroom: 92 2 or more Bedrooms: 277 Min. s.f. of structure(s) (excl. garage): 1,924 s.f. (duplex tilde.) Proposed building height: Max. 35' Minimum property size (s.f): N/A Average property size (s.f.): N/A Gross density (DUlacre-total land): 14.99 Net density (DUlacre-excluding roads & alleys): 14.99 Percentage of open space provided: Sualified: 22.84 Acreage of open space: Oualified• 5 62 acres/Non-Qualified: 8.20 acres Percentage of useable open space: 22.84 (See Chapter 3, Article G, for qualified open space) Type of open space provided in acres (i.e., landscaping, public, common, etc): Landscaping playQt'ound clubhouse tennis court fitness center pathways communit~g_arden area water feature pool and spa Type of dwelling(s) proposed: ^Siogle-family ^ Townhomes ^ Duplexes ^Multrfamily Non-residential Project Summary (if applicable) Number of building lots: Gross floor area proposed: Hours of operation (days and hours): Percentage of site/project devoted to the following: Other lots: Existing (if applicable): Building height: Landscaping: Building: Paving: Total number of employees: Maximum number of employees at any one time: Number and ages of students/children (if applicable): Seating capacity: Total number of parking spaces provided: Number of compact spaces provided: Authorisation Print applicant name: Silver Oaks A artmen s LLC Beck Mcxa,~ a ent for H ucant Applicant signature: •._•„_ ''~'° s ~ %~ Date: S'~~ `~~ t 33 E. Broadway Avenue, Suite 210 • Meridian, Idaho 83642 Phone: (208) 884-5533 • Facsimile: (208) 888-6854 • Website: www.meridiancity.org 2 • • Avendale (Silver Oaks) Preliminary Plat Application Written Narrative Silver Oaks Apartments, LLC, hereby submits this preliminary plat application to resubdivide Lot 1, Block 2, of Umbria Subdivision. The original Umbria Subdivision platted the multi- family portion of the project with a single lot and delineated numerous easements for access, parking and utilities. We propose six (6) multi-family lots, two (2) common lots and four (4) lots for ingress/egress, parking and public utilities. The proposed separate lots for the access drive, parking and utilities are superior to the original complex series of easements on the Umbria plat. Three phases are delineated on the preliminary plat and are representative of the proposed construction phases as outlined in the previously approved conditional use permit (MCUP-10- 014). Financing requirements demand that each phase consists of individually platted lots. The subject property consists of 24.16 acres and is improved with sewer, water, pressure irrigation, public utilities, retention ponds, partial sidewalk and curbs. The improvements were installed according to the original site plan in 2006. A preliminary utility plan is included with the preliminary plat application delineating the changes to the existing sewer and water facilities. The project engineer will provide the Public Works with detailed construction plans for modification of sewer and water facilities upon submittal of the final plat. Anew grading/drainage plan will be provided for City review with the final plat application addressing the additional parking and modification of the building sizes and locations. The City Council approved the conditional use permit (MCUP-10-014}, development agreement modification (MDA-10-011) and design review (MDES-10-050) applications on February 15, 2011. The approved site plan included 25 multi-family buildings, surface parking and eight (8) parking garages. The approved multi-family structures are two and three stories in height-and will consist of five (5) building types. The building types are as follows: Building 1 -two-story with 12 units; Building 2 -three-story with 18 units; Building 3 -two-story withl6 units; Building 4 -three-story with 24 units; and Building 5 -two story duplex with garage. The total open space provided with the approved site plan is 13.82 acres. The qualified open space consists of 5.62 acres, or 22 percent of the site. The proposed amenities include a clubhouse, pool, spa, fitness center, play equipment, picnic area, tennis court and community garden. The project will be under single ownership and provisions for maintenance of structures, common areas, access drives and parking areas will be provided by the applicant. No variances are required with the proposed preliminary plat application. • • AVENDALE SUBDIVISION (SILVER OAKS APARTMENTS) PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION PRELIMINARY PLAT LEGAL DESCRIPTION: A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, UMBRIA SUBDIVISION, LOCATED IN THE S 1/2 OF SECTION 10, T.3N., R.l W., B.M., MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO 11f17l2004 15:55 FAX 9275514 • TITLE DEPT ~ ~ 002 ~~~ s 9~s$©3 ADA SQUNtY RECORQER J DAVID MAUARRO ao~sE iQAKO m~neroa Aa:zz p~ QEPUI'Y KaA+Y fngragarn _. ..a._ - _ aECORQEQ-REauEST of lil itlltllllil#illil~[llll1111111111 .~ ^ " c «, fitd AmariC~ 10002568 ,,as `'~.,, A~aou~r 9.oA WA~~tRANT'Y U1~Ir:u ~' ~ L~~ Fb= Value Received R.I.S.K., i'INr~~'If;O, L.L.C. aB IBaho Limited Liabj.litY y t,~;nafrer r~'err~ed to 2S [~aiitor, does by giant, ~, se11, and cxmvey unto Teri Mile nacna7 r ~nr ~ tar bereinaftex refexaed to as Grantee, Grhose F+~rmr'~t adctr2SS 18 1409 N. Maia1 Skzeet Mesi.dian, TD H3642 the £cllcw:isxg dQ.scribad F¢emiaee, to-wit: See iit °A° attached hareto and made a ~t hsreaf_ Rn HAVE Alm To F8]YJb C17e said px~i.8eg, arith their appl~t~nn's unto tME said craratee, kris heirs and assigns forever. Anc3 the said Granter does hereby covenant to and with the said G~aratee, that C~-antar is the owner in fee simile of said ~~++~ ~~; that cai A p'r@1tiS~$ Sra ~]:ee ~1 27.1. erica ewcept CU.LT31t year3 t3?CLt;, levies, and ,asaear~nts, and exc~t U. S. Patent resarvationa, resrr~.ctions, ea:.errrents of ye~-d, ~ c Ao rrwnts visible u~,xon tY1e pt~nisES, grad tkiat Grantor' Gull vrdrxr3Yit at7d defend. ttie same £zaa all claims whatsoever. Dated.: January 9, 2004 R.I.S.K., L.L.C. ss a»n o~ a~r3a a ~~~P ~` Michael Sxaora Rod Kes pn `ih'i9,~" day of January, in the year Zao4, Y~fore me, a Notary Public in and £ar said State, PeraonallY ~P~~ RiChaxtl ~xown, MicYrae:1 Srewn, Russell 1~n~,i.ller and Rai ltesier, ]mown or iden~-rzed t~ me to Ise the Perr~m url~se ram is snr3we+ril~osi tp ~g ~rh;n 7ns:r»m,e+,r ag ~ Zg pf tj1e R.I.5_K., Tfi7L.ZMII~D, L.L.C., which is Ia~Gcni bY' ideatif~.ed to rre to be Cbe entity wYnee xiartre is subscribed to the within instru~it as the members at the R.I.S.K., r~a.rMr~rFn, L.L.c., stud aclmo~wledged eo ~ that such Limited liability cnmpanY's e~aecuted the same. g0~ * a9' ~~ s~ .= .yam ,-, ~ 130 is Eor zdalao C ae Jr' ~ i Residing 3t : ISampa i ~ o = ~ ~ o : cYxrarrissiGG1 Ezgizs:a: 4/26/20b'7 b. First A~tr~ Compcrrzy of 1'~1~rizo s» o>• 71» ~ 11/17/2004 15:55 FAX 3275514 • TITLE DEPT • I~j003 EICHTBIT "A" 288035 A parcel of land being a portion of Parcel B of Amended Recoxd of Survey No. 4837, recorded December 16, 1999, as Ynstrumeat No. 99119419. being a portion of the South half of Seatxon 10, Tawaship 3 North, Range 1 bleat, Hoise Meridiem„ Ada County, Idaho, described as follows Beginning a.t a fau~td 5/8" rebar at the squtheast corner of said Section 10, said point bears Sauth 00°27'06" West 2b46.07 feet from the East quarter cosaex of sa~.d Section 10, said paixxt also bnarkiag the centerline intersection of Ten M~.Ie Road and Franklin Road, said pof.nt being the REAL POINT OF BEGINNING; thence i~arth 89°40'29" West 270$.62 feet to a point being south 00°09'31" West 25 feet from the intersectionx with the cexiterliae of a ditch; thence North 00°09'31" East 25.00 feet to the iateraectxatl of said centerline of sa~.d ditch; thence along said eeaterliae North 42°03'29" West along said centerline of said ditch a distance of 300.00 feet; thence North 41°15'29" west slang said centerline of said ditch a distance of 300.00 £eQt; thence North 39°06'29" west along said centerline of said ditch 490.00 feet; thence North 32°46'29" west along said centerline of said ditch 4Q9.25 feet to a paint on the North-Squth mid-seotiga lime of said Section Z0; thence continuing North 32°46'29" West aloxlg said cesi.terline of said ditch 280.75 feet; thence North 43°22'29" West 99.57 feet; thence North 00 ° 09' 31" East 68.02 feet to a point as the South liaae of the Un~.an pacific Railroad right of way; thence South 86°5].'50" East along said South lice of the Union Pacific Railroad right of way 221.04 feat to a point on the Neazth-South mid-seetian line of sa3.d Section 10; thence coutiau~.ttg South 8B °51' S0" Es,st slang said Satzth line of the Union Pacific Railroad right of way 1492.9$ feet to a poa.ut of intersection with the centerline of a ditch; thence Sauth 30°34'50" East slang the cex~.terline of sa~.d ditch 50.06 feet; thence South 44°52.15" Ea~3t along' said centerline of said ditch 944.20 feat; thence South 89°02`09" East 459.53 feet to a point on the Ea~3t line of said Section 10; thence South 00°27'06" West along said East line of Said section 10 a distance of 849.80 feet to the Southeast coaCUer of said Seetioa 10, the REAL PaTNT OF HEGII~fiTI1rTG. Coritin~iad • • ~ 004 TITLE DEPT 11/17/2x04 15:56 FAX 3275514 ~~ E~IBIT A CONTIN[7ED EXCEPTING THEREFROM the following described prQpezty: Begisuting at a fauad 5/8" rebar, at the Southeast coffer of said Section 10, said pout bears South DO°27'Qfi" Went X646.07 feet from the East crsarter corner of said Sec~ioa 3.0. Maid paint also n-arkiag the centerline intersection of Tea ~t33~e Road and Franklin Road; thence North $9°40'29" bleat 15S$.6~ feet along the centerline of ea;.d Franklin Road to a point; thence laaviag said centerline North O1° 08' 10+~ East 1568 . Bl feet to a point oa the Southerly lisle of the IIn~,ozi Pacific Railroad right of va~ay; thence along said Southerly right of way xirie South $8°5I.50'~ East 383.18 feet to a point; thence leaving said $autherly right of way l~.~a,e South 30°34'50" East 50.06 feet to a point; t.~aeace South 44°52'15" East 948.20 feet to a point; thexxce South 89°02'09" East 459.53 feet to a paint vn the centerline of said Ten ~2ile Roac$; thence slang said centerline South 00°27'06" West 849.79 feet to tha POINT OF BEGINNIN(4. • 251 CFRTIFIGATE OF ORGANIZATION LIMITiED LIABILITY COMPAN'~ .IAN 26 AM 8= ~8 (Instructions on back of application) SEGF~'~: ~`~Y OF STATE S -~l v JF {DAHO 1. The name of the limited liability company is: SILVER OAK5 APARTMENTS, LLC 2. The complete street and mailing addresses of the initial designatedJprincipal office: 1409 N MAIN STREET, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 (Street Address) {INa»nq Address, ff different than street address) 3. The name and complete street address of the registered agent: GRAYE H WOLFE SR 1409 N MAIN STREET, MERIDIAN, ID 83842 ame {street Aadress~ 4. The name and address of at least one member or manager of the limited liability company: i~aans GRAYE H WOLFE, SR, MANAGER TEN MILE DEVELOPMENT, LLC 1409 N MAIN STREET, MERIDIAN, ID 83842 5. Mailing address for future correspondence (annual report notices): 1409 N MAIN STREET, MERIDIAN, ID 83642 6. Future effective date of filing (optional): Signature of a onager, ember or authorized person. Signature Typed Name: GRAYE H WOLFS SR Signature Typed Name: Secretary of State use ony II~AIID l~CRETAR9 OF STATE Iail26/21811 ~Ss®fa (~: Zi14 CT: 1A661b IIH: 1Z5b9s1 1 ! 1A9.1lB = 1lQ.A9 OR61W LLC 1 S ~qq~ r I • 251 ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION sF~, "~ ~~ . ,~~, LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY sr4F;~.,,.. ~1,~~' ,~ (Instructions on bads of application) ~ ~ ~i.'' s~, ~ I` ayp,~~~ 1. The name of the limited liability company is: T~ MI~.E DEVE[APMENT. LLC 2. The address of the initial registered office is: Lrt1° ~ 1 ¢r St•rr+A~, ME+r; ~; A.,, rn aa~~~ and the name of the initial registered agent at that address is: Grave H. Wolfe, Sr. 3. The mailing addressforfuturecorrespondence: 1409 E. 1st Streets Meridian. ID___ 83642 4. Management of the limited liability company will be vested in: Manager(s) ®or Member(s)^ . (please check the appropriate box) 5. If management is to be vested in one or more manager(s), list the name(s) and address(es) of at least one initial manager. ff management is to be vested in the members, list the name(s) and address(es) of at least one initial member. .~].~ ~ Grave H. Wolfe, Sr. 1409 E. 1st Street Meridian, ID 83642 __ responsible for forming the limited liability company: IDi~r~II~tQFa'~~ ~ ~ AS/ 12/2D3~A ®9:9~ ~ CK: 2t'393 CT: P~95 B~: 317436 ~ 1 E 189.99 = 198.98 aRGAFI LLC N ~ U ~ I193~ a Annual Report for W 1193 8 No. W 11938 Return to: SECRETARY OF STATE 700 WEST JEFFERSON PO BOX 83720 BOISE, ID 83720-0080 Due no later than May 31, 2010 Annual Report Form 1. Mailing Address: Correct in this box if needed. TEN MILE DEVELOPMENT, LLC GRAYE H WOLFE SR 1409 N. MAIN STREET MERIDIAN ID 83642 USA 2. Registered Agent and Address GRAYE H WOLFE SR 1409 N. MAIN STREET MERIDIAN ID 83642 3. New Registered Agent Signature:* Page 1 of 1 PO NO FILING FEE IF RECEIVED BY DUE DATE i. Limited Liability Companies: Enter Names and Addresses of at least one Member or Manager. Office Held Name Street or PO Address City State Country Postai Code MANAGER GRAYE H WOLFE SR 1409 N. MAIN STREET MERIDIAN ID USA 83642 5. Organized Under the Laws of: 6. Annual Report must be signed.* ID Signature: Graye H Wolfe Sr Date: 03/11/2010 W 11938 Name (type or print): Graye H Wolfe Sr Title: Manager Processed 03/11/2010 * Electronically provided signatures are accepted as original signatures. httn•//www ~~~ ictahn.~w/servlet/TransformXMLDoc?URL=%SC20100311%SCXMLPORTS 1007... 10/27/2010 • AFFIDAVIT OF LEGAL INTEREST STATE OF IDAHO ) COUNTY OF ADA ) I, Graye H. Wolfe, Sr., Manager of Ten Mile Development, LLC, being first duly sworn upon, oath, depose and say: 1. That I am the record owner of the property described on the attached, and I grant my permission to: Engineering Solutions, LLP 1029 N. Rosario Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID 83642 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 properly 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 this~'e' ~.Ll~day of 2010. (Si tore) SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me the :~< ~r ~~yw ~ •'~ ~ lye <, ~~,.~u W" ~ ~~~~ ~ •~ `~~lJ Y v `~ ~~ ~,`~ d* fl •r._ My Commission Expires: O O O RV~ R•$ R~ UNION PACIFIC RR G.G RV~ W J_ > G•N Z as Z F S ~.O ~ J z= W. FRANKLIN RD $ R.~S Rv~ R• R,40 SDALE '~~ = 6°°~ AVEN DALE SUBDIVISION DWG.DATE 05/05/2011 NGINEERING PROD. NO. 101122 A RESUBDIVISION OF LOT 1, BLOCK 2, UMBRIA SUBDIVISION, SHEET ~ of ~ LOCATED IN SECTION 10, T.3N., R.1 W., B.M., MERIDIAN, ADA COUNTY, IDAHO OLUTIONS LLP V ~ C ~ N VICINITY MAP 1029 N. ROSARIO ST., STE. 100 MERIDIAN, IDAHO 83642 \101122 APR SS Pho~„ (206)936-0880 Foz (~) 936-0841 • Project/Subdivision Name: Applicant(s)IContact(s): _ City Staff: ~is~yn. ~ s tc CI CITY OF MERIDIAN PRE-APPLICATION MEETING NOTES Date: 5-S ~'1 Location: • r ~ranK.t ~~- , W • ~ Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Design Guidelines Development Context: _ Proposed Use: ~ Existing Use: ~/a Surrounding Uses: Proposed Zoning: Existing Zoning: ~- is Street Buffer(s) and/or Land Use Buffer(s): - - Open SpacelAmenitieslPathways: Access/Stub StreetslStreet System:. Sewer & Water Service: Topography/HydrologylFloodplain Issues: Canals/Ditchesllrrigation/Hazards: History: PAS totoozav ~: os- of ~: ~?t~-a5-oz3' ~P- oto-o t- : -ram-bl-c~o~t Additional Meeting Notes: ~-~ CUP --fl' ~'`~ ~~ n^ ~" t °- p1t ' ~ - ~~-OS° Other AgencieslDepartments to Contact: ^ Ada County Highway District ^ Idaho Transportation Department ^ Sanitary Services Company ^ Central District Health Department Application(s) Required: ^ Administrative Design Review ^ Alternative Compliance ^ Annexation ^ City Council Review ^ Comprehensive Plan Amendment -Map ^ Comprehensive Plan Amendment -Text ^ Conditional Use Permit ^ Nampa Meridian Irrigation District ^ Settler's Irrigation District ^ Police Department ^ Fire Department ^ Conditional Use Permit ModificatioNTransfer ^ Development Agreement Modification ^ Final Plat ^ Final Plat Modification ^ Planned Unit Development preliminary Plat ^ Private Street ^ Public Works Department ^ Building Department ^ Parks Department ^ Other: ^ Rezone ^ Short Plat ^ Time Extension -Council ^ UDC Text Amendment ^ Vacation ^ Variance ^ 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 posf 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) monfhs. of Property: -)E ulaLwkS -ho 9to.~l' t n (3)~l ~ C ~ i i i • • ~ ~l ~l G`~ --- - _ __ ~ _._,~__,__._....J._.~ ~_.~ .,_._..Y.~. ___~___ _~_. _ _ ' _. __......___ _____.. ~.»_..~_.~.......- N_._. e..~~_~.~.____.. .. .._~ i . _ . _.._.-..__--°.__.._...___r.__~ I ~ n...___..u.-.~._-~~.,.._....._._. _.__...~._._..___~__._.__..___.___.......-. _ _ - _ _._.___ - I _ __ __ ...___~_._.. ______.._~_..~_.______.__~.....___._ ~_.. u.. - i i i I i ~ `t i i I ~ ' ' ' s ~ .__..._.~_..._.~_._~__._.._.._~._ _~.._.....__._~..__._.._....___._...,.._...,..._..~._._w...r......~._...._._._..._....._._._ ---..,.._~._ ,..._ .. -_. Y._._..-._~__...~_~... I ~ I ; : ; gi ~ ~ 1 . _ ~ _~~._._~ ..-- ~ .~ ---__.._....._--- • COMMITMENT OF PROPERTY POSTING Per Unified Development Code (UDC) 11-SA-SD, 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-SA-5. Applicant/agent signature S~s~// ~~ Date Page 1 of 2 Brad Bishop From: "Jerry Hastings" <jastings@adaweb.net> To: "Brad Bishop" <es-brad@gwestoffice.net> Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 2:52 PM Subject: Avendale Subdivision Name Reservation June 23, 2009 Brad Bishop Engineering Solutions Dear Brad, RE: Subdivision Name Reservation: "Avendale Subdivision" At your request, I will reserve the name "Avendale Subdivision". !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. Sincerely, Jerry Hastings, P.L.S. County Surveyor Ada County, Idaho 208-287-7912 jhastinc~s~adaweb. net From: Brad Bishop [mailto:es-brad@gwestoffice.net] Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 12:01 PM To: Jerry Hastings Subject: Re: Subdivison Name question /reservation Hi Jerry, sorry to be so long getting back to you, had to check some stuff with Becky here -the developer on this is Ten Mlle Development LLC, and the surveyor will be someone with Idaho Survey Group, but I guess we are not sure yet exactly who will be the PLS. It will be a resubdivison of Lot 1, Block 2 of Umbria Sub. Also, I goofed a little on the name, it was supposed to be 'Avendale', with an E - I hope that name would still be acceptable? Thanks for your help - Brad Bishop Engineering Solutions ----- Original Message ----- From: Jerry Hastings To: Brad Bishop Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 8:56 AM Subject: RE: Subdivison Name question /reservation Hi Brad, how are you? Good, I hope. Avondale will work. Sorrento has already been reserved. I could use a little more information: who is it for and which lot(s) it will be in. Who will be signing the plat (PLS)? Thanks, Jerry. Jerry Hastings, P.L.S. County Surveyor Ada County, Idaho 208-287-7912 jhastings(a~adaweb. net From: Brad Bishop [mailto:es-brad@gwestoffice.net] 5/5/2011 1110-Kt (tl[I N EwJ-Itf (tlU xW! LfOCS 0 NMOeL311 dMl 'I.INxO~ 'QY 'lIIIALLTI 9 "MIY "MCl 'Ol NWIJ36 'L/t 8 w 031WQ1 ~I ~ ~ ~ W lN0-K! (OR1 mf 4110'RI (10~ x~N ' y ^'x ~ x w OOl `345 ' 15 OWVBOtl 'N 6ZOl Wlw1i NMwl1 2 Ip01B 't Lfl .p NOBWGBIIBAtl Y 5 wL0'~ (1N) mJ 10-R (00W oNd zlece awa 'xvwlx>r '15 NOT N 0004 1100-YL (1011 m! 0o10-Ow (10t) ~+W zwn arwai •xm53n '15 NMI 'N 1001 NMOW)1 Zs0[5 OI ao4 als -!s oi5lson ~x ezat AtlNOw AN~3B m YNOI~IR 10~ 1Vld Atlb'NIWI73Hd ~ ~ ° o-rl fwawdotan3a nlw N31 n+ •s3ra3w1avdv. sRVO a3m19 l l~tl1N0~ / F13NNb'ld 9N/B~~N/9N~ rtn R~iDi/fiQ~ll~ ~QH~~ ~ 9 ~ ~ ~ s OF10~3k! d0 Sa3NM0 3A34 li3dO ....a-° .-a-a ~~ ~ 0 9-~~ d~~ _~~ ~~ r-- 9 - I I I c~ 4 I 9 S 9 1 I 1 I, 1 ~ f e ~~ 3 I I 9D ,. e ® 0 ~,' / ~_/~ ~I~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~p}e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 9 ~ ~ ~ i y ~ ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~6 ~~ ~~ ~ tl ~q~y u S~Igy4 ~ y$ y®i 9 ag b~ ~ y® ® [ C ~ ~ ~ C 7M I! ~ ~ C Y 2ba ~1° ~~ ~~ 66~ y~ ~ ~ b Li 8 ~ iCt bgg @ 5 yyyy pg JJ I I I i~ F=i it ~ ~ i I I\\ i I itt=il I u•1 ®@I i~l ~j/ aeo=q ~ I I I ~ 4 1 I I '-I ~~ ~ T~ r ii ~ i ~0 ~ i ill I I T'1N3tl 30VY019 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ NDtll1N0 NVLLSIYN~ 3lIW N33 ~~ ~~ t1331YIdNf1 I~~ w -- _ 9-~ ~~ y@ Ib d18~Y t~E O31.LY1dNW 0zg~g -------~-------~--------~---------------- ~- ~~ l --•-~~~~---- P~ ~`I- ti~SS Aa .f ; IC ~ ~ r ~ Ott i l ~~~ ~ ~ _, _ /. / ~ xn nNxl r miss I I ~ ~ t j ~/~ \ ~ ~ :mot un xlWlil ,a ~am O 11 ~ a ._~ l/ ~ .ar l ~ C1 x~~ J ~I "f ~~ I~>>i 00 ! I ~ y ~ W I \ _____ ~ :'x ~ ., r ~-Vflj ~ ~~ ~ .mat ~ ~ II $ ~ ' N f~ ~1 '. J /, a ~ y/ ( ~ t ~ i ~ ~; I 1 'i i ~ .~f ~~ ,Rl--, -[ ~ // ~ I III ~ f (l li '~~ q +t ((illk~~j ~ a~ --~a_~s=-~' 11 ~~'..... ~'.. ~ar. ... -.._,...'~ ~ ~ ~~ L II!I ~~ o ~i ~i m I I t' ~^ ~s ~ `~~ jI ` J' ~\ j =Zea-~-_~- - - ------ " ~I' ~ ~' ~.~\`~ ~ ~ ' r J i f1 I I'! ~ '~; I I o m ~ ~~~ ~'..= a -^: i a'.`.. ~ ~ / ~ '~'~~ a "v~\ ~ s~--ter, ~~p ...u, ............. J '~ 3 11 ,,~ ~ -:taa-i_ d iM1 ~ d Q ~$ f C ! ~ ~,~ ~~ a ffi 1 ~ \ \ ........ A ~.__, c+1il~.,?" ~ l ( i "~ -~% ,~ ~ . ; . ,; _,_.: ~_ ~ it e~ ~ i i ~r _.< ~_!. ,: ,l ~11 I to ~ ~ ~./ ';,~`i_~' ,': ~ .~ ~~ ~ ~ J ~ ~" i ~ ~ ~ # s y ~ ~ ~ 5~®_ U 1 ~,a.ol IF~~ -I. ~ , I ^ .Wi"` e.~r.`~ w ~ ~ ' l ,Gl,~„-_gf~' °' 'ivxu in-Ilo -.vgu.. . -f`~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ e ~ ~~ ~ y ~ ~b ~ I~~IE 9 ~ 1,14 r I I ~ /~~~- '~/~~'"~., Rw~~ ~ is~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ !~1 ~ i I ~ a+ I f/.y.- ~ ~d._ ~ ~ ~ ~ B_ ~ ~ ply W i ~~,~ ,/ e ~~~~~ ~ ~~~ge 9w G/~~ 'ylse. ~ ~cnoa ~~W ~~~ ~~ 4~d~~ /~/IIJ/ ~ - a s w . ,. . s _ _ a 8SS3=g$=$833 aaa~aa8aa a as ~8 p~ .~x ~e 3 f ~~4~ ~ !! S= d P 2 t t Y t 8 5~~ E !~ 9 3 e 8 8 8 S 3 S 3 ~} i a O ~ ~ ~~ u~ s ~~ ~ ~~= o ~ ~ ~~~ ~~M1~w _~~~ ~~~~ h~ w~ ~ ~•~ ~; ~ Q~®- w 5 ~ ~~a~ ~~~~ ~~ ~o ~ a~a4' ~ & Sy oQ ~ ~~ ~ _ E 0 U ~ I 1 I _;~~. , ~, ` w i ~' ~ ~~ i I ~^ i ~~ ~ r \~~~ ~~ (~~ i ~; ~~i~~ a ~~~ ~~~~~ ~~ W o~ Z J ~~ ~~ ~; i~ a~ 9 a~ i~ ~~ ~n Z ~ oc o W~ z. fr_~+ W 1 ~~ ~~ 1 7 e ~~ ~< ~~ ~3 ~ ~ ~ ~~ e~ ~~ $ 8 ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~9 ~, I~ ~I ~I z No Y N as z s J JZ O ¢ QC ~ w g~Q w ~ o J_ZZ c~ ~ ~aW~ y a a H~NJ W0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ JAN ~ ~ ~~ w S~~ . N OIL S ~ ~~~a ~ w ~s~" o ~ -~~ U 8 Q O `~ ~~~' $ U ~~ a W ~ ~a~ Z ~ ;~. Z = ~~ a s z~ 2 ~o z~ ~~ ~~ ~~ i~ Z Q J ua d U ~a D~ Z- Q \~ W I~I I~I~ ~; o W ~ ~P'~~~ ~~ Q b ~ m as ~ ~ W ~~ ~>o ~_ / g~~` ~ y'a ---~ JZ~~ ~S -- " a z I ~~~~ ~ ~$ NUara ~ ~ ~~f~~_ I ¢U~d b o 4~~i I OZtl=l~ ~~, ~§~~ ~ JgWa ~ ~ ~~ w I ~wa~ I W~uiz ~ S r W S- ~~~g I ~UJO~ K ~~~88 I Z ~' ~~o I 5 I a -------------------- -- 'ij ? z 8 ~ ~i~ ~ o ~~9 ~~s ~~~ Z ~ -------- --- - --- ---- - - - ~ - i - - # ~ ~ -- -- ~ ~~ ~~ . _ ~ ~ _ ~~ i _ ~ ~~ i ~~ ~~ ~~ c r. .^r. ~~~' ~~ ,~ ~, ~, ~, ~`"~ J aZU~ a~~~ aZ~Z ~a~~Z 4~UGla LL~Na JJW w~NO ~o~Q Wp J fAUO~ z W Q 0 z C' ~~ ~yo as ?~ o >a J W N a O ~~R w ~Y~F o ~-}e a 8 a $s o ~,aPw U i ~o ~ x ~~~$ z ~ a~. ~ "s ~. a ~ (n 8 ~ ~ ~ F z W ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ W 7 S ~ ~II 9~ I~ ~1 ~JI ~. f U WU R U a W ~i3~ 3 ~ i a a H .. ~o H as ~~ ~a J°z~ V1 a V ~ s Gee o ~ ~~~ ~ R_ w ~ ~~8 ~ ~ Ya U 8 Q a_ z i,ffi o ~ .~A U i H m P ~ ~~s z Cd~;€s z ~~ a s 1 ~' 1 1 ~~ 1 1 . ~ 1 . _~ ~; F J Z Q Q ~?~~ Ul 4 (Q J~ Z y Z ~~JZ W ~~~g og~Q FJ W WJ~~ =O~Z Q ~~o~ Z ~ ~o W ~ Z ~ ~3 { ~~ ~~ ~ 1~ Z 4 ua 4 U ~e ~a Z= Q ~~ C. ~~N~I .. ~Q a' o~ >a = Z Y/ a V ~ ~°- o ~~ w ~ ~~- o ~-~~ a W e ~~$- a ~ ~o~ U > _ . ~~$~ Z ~ ~~o 5 "s_ € a 1~ (aosl -, L.BB-.. UBLI «nua ' anal 'w+nw wv •Nnaw3w 'Ml'tl "NCl 'pl NOW'!35 'L/4 a M p31YJpp f B~ N T BpiCB (BWJ ~! LIb-B[6 (IYS) q°I! ' 1 B ~wew NwpRl311 Z1BCp OI pal '315 "JS ONNSW 'N aLpl 'N 6 hwnn 'L NJ041 'l 101 !D Noaxrmra:3tl Y ~ O BiiYBBL (802) m! Opla-BR (WZ) BiNYd ' LIStB 01 NB1pal3w B1io'aII (BOL) m! rol (BNp r°'N oot '31s °u olaYSptl r azol zwce oVMpl rmpw3w m ' SN~I107~ Lllll(11.Hb'NIWI73dd l Nb'ld 8 Nwpw3n zwn oxvai 'LS NNn'N apB1 ill 1N3wdOl3/30 3lIW N31 '1S NBM'N apBl AYNMW AN~3B3 on 'swawlavdv s>tvo a3mis l~V1N0~ / d3NNVld s ~ . l rt~ ~ry/~~T Qa11~ ~ i ~ lLLr~~ ~ ~ ~ ad0~3d d0 Sd3NM0 d3dOl3A3a 9N18~3NIJN 1DlAl 1r ~ ~ ' E ~ t ~,. ~ ~ '° ~~~ ;~ ~~~ ~W6 ~ e ~;~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ h~~ ~ 8~~ ~ ~ ~ Y~ d ~ ~~, C 8 ~ i ~~~~~ ~ ~ g ! ~~ i ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~1~~ L~~ ~'~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ a ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~! ~~~~~~ ~. ~W ® ®®m®®®~ ©®®® ~~/,'~ %~~ ~ I aeo-a'e hesl m! awo-ace host ww ' 1 a~ 'Awnm wv ' "Ml'tl "XC'1 'al NOaa35 'L/1 5 NI a3l\Oa1 { ~ ~ tv N deo-we hoa) p! aseo-We heal sww ' t ~ •%~ e~sw HWaLLiW Z.aLB OI sot ~5 "~5 aavsou 'N azat oars wetvn 'L v~me 't so'1 io NoaWOerlsin v § ~ 1 alm-au (aW m! 0ele-avx IWLI WWyd z.eca aWwl •NWaltl3n 8ML ' IMOW3W Z.9[i al alZe-OL hasl ^°! OOtO-RZ (YAC) WI z.oro Duval •NVpltl3W oat •vs °ss atlrsotl Na 6Lal 15 NWW 'N ewt A.alaW AM~3B m SN~~1070s' N`dld 1.111L1.~1 ltlt/NIWIl3ad Y $ ~ N !5 NMY DTI 1N3WdOl3n30 3lIW N31 DTI 'S11131'11WdY SNYO tl3flifi lOV1N00 / FJ3NMdld 9N/N~~N/JN~ AiOIBIAIQ$Il$ ~['IVQ1~A~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Okf003k1 d0 Skl3NM0 kl3dOl3N30 ~~ • ~ ~e ~ 9 i gL ~ N ~ y~y ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~b ~~ ' 8>w R ~ ti. ~ ~~i ~ n 9 € ~~ g ~ ~~ ~ ~ p ~~ 91~~@~@++~ ~!~ ~ ~ ~~~p® y~ g~g @~ B~ ppn ~ ~~+ ~~ ~~ G~ ~ ~r g~ ~g~~ ~b~ i< 8 ® ® a ® ® ® O F ~~~ ~~~ W ~~~ ~~~~ a ~~~~~ e ~ ~ ~ ~4~i $@@@$~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~ a ~RE~~~ ©® - -~ --- --r -- -- I ~ r ~ , ~~ ~ , _ I 1/ J i l •M -i ~ ~ ~~--~ ~' \ / / . y I f ~.~ ~ l i .. ~'~ li 1 1' , / /~ ~ ~~ ' t I ~I 1 ~/. 1 l II. \ ` / II } 1 1 I 17s ~~ ~ ~ \ I ~I I III I IIN~-- I I I I ~~` I \ ~ ~~ --• -• !/ II I / ~ 1 ~ ~ I ` I I ~ ~ rj I., ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 I ~ I I ~ -- ~ I < I I I (` ,,~a,~'I' Trf-I r ~ \ ~ J~ jIII J II~ ~} ~~ i I ~ /I illi II \ ~ ~ I -~ I `I t ~-I-I ~~ ~ 1 ' 1 1 i rl( ~ ~ I ~~'-,--~- ~ i. _ i ii I ~ i i . - i. li r %~ ~~; ~~ ~; '' .} / ~, j/. I Il ~' ~ J I g -~ L I~ ~ ~ /~ ail II ~~i ~ I Ili i '/'"~~"\ I i ~ I~ i , ®" I• I ~ I 1 I I I~ \ _ ~ / ~~~ II ,G~,.~~'/~/. Ica ~'-~' / ~ 1 1! ~ ~;- IFII ,,, r~ I, , , R e R A 8 ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~Y r F ¢ e_p s~s_~~$$$ W C m~ ` ^7p~ i~yy ~ W °~ ' ~~a ~' i ~9~~Y¢ Ni zf ~~~ tt ~ Sg10 ~~ ~4 ~ ~ ~, ~ ~y d ~ ~~ pw x~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ a O ~b ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L w w + .n ~= T ~z ~~ i ~p p O F F b ~ W ~ ~ roams ~ W O ~ ~ ~~ ~ ee 6 g -, aoWr. ~~~~~ ~ ~~ E ~ ee W s ~ 1E ~ ~ ~ 9 N ~ ~ ~~~~~ S_ 6yr F ® i -~ m ~ S d C I O J ~4 Q T ~~ WI~ I~ ~~ i O J ~~ m y ~~ C. O O J W i2 V @ N 1 ~~~~ e ~; ~b ~ ~ d a. w M i O r m d ~a LL 9~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ r a z 9 5 m d C O s ~a °z 4~Ey w ~!tl ~ ~~~ r 4 ONIOl1t18 ~ 4 ONIOl108 NVId il00ld ON003S NVId il00ld Oi11H1 ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ a~io ~r ~~ 1~ ~ ~ e~~~~ r.N rA .b-A rA r.[ rJ r.i } ~ 9 ~ Y 4 --- I -- I I ~ ~ 7 4 -------- I I I - ~ _ __ - - -~ i _ - - I I I I I I i I I I I I ~ II +a+ ~ ~ I I I I ti i i I I -~ L. i____ I I I I I '~. I I I ___ ~ --- ~ ~ i I I --- ____ ___ I I } __ I I I I I ~ I I -- - I I I I I :~, I y __ -- , I i st I I I Al-.~ .1-,n I I I rl I I _ -~ ~____ _.__ I I ~ i I - _~ i_-_- I i ~ I i ` _-_ i I 7 --- -- 4 Y 9 ~ ~ 4 r.. rA ttG ~J "s ua i J m O s ti p ~~ T ri rA Al-A i-F ri rF 4 ,I-.I to r.ll -'-- ° ~ - -8 e -' I~ I~ II I _J I o I o i -- ~ i ~ } I a '~ 4 s Y i-.u rA ri .ora rA ri d __--~ i ~ ~ -=- d =---- ~ w ~" ,- .rA ~ rA .r. -~ -~ h - ~ ~ rA r Q hi rA •r,ii c _-_- __ i ~ i-a. _~ T ri r.[ ai-s A-A rF ~ w b I ¢ i - 1 ___ I I I I '-,~ ~ 4 © '-- o O ' I~ II ~ - ~ 4 A-A to r.~t N W i 9 m C zY ~~ N N ~~~ ,~ ~ ~ M ~m e a ~~ ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~~ ~~ II=~ : ~ ~ e o N ¢~ ~ s i ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~~ ~ ~ ~ a ~, Z ~~~~~ r,N rA AI-A Y/ rA .o-r rz $ ~ s ~ $ $ $ i____ I I I ~ i I ~ I __ ___ I ____-_ _-__.___Y _ ~ ~L_ _ __ -- ___ _ i i - i i i i ~ i i i i _~ ~ i i i i i i i L $ _ w ~_ i____ i i i i i `,~" i i ~ ___ $ ~ +r - i I I I --- - $ i i - i ~ - L , $ ~ - -~ w -------- r--- r--' i ~ --- $ ~ i '" i $ i - i i i i - --- - $ m 5 ~ ~ ~^ .o-.r .o-z _ - . ~~~ ~~ z 9 m s. °s r r.N rA AA rAl rA rA -------- 4 ~ qi e Y S a i t O._C1 ------t l_ 0 $ s-.u rA z-A __~ $ ~ T s 1 ' _ i ~ -- =--d' - H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .rz rA .u -~ '$` - _ _~ „ _ ~' r.S .r,i rA •r•~I Q $ --==a=- w 0 -------- --' $ ~ Y a 1 "' $ z-.II tF i-.1 i'A ~- a © ire ------~ ~~ - $ ~ ~ - $ H ~ tlll H ~__ . ________ Q '~rz rA rn rz rz ~~ I~ ~~ W i m m S _~ va ~~ N ~~~~ ~ ~ i. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~s~ ~ ,~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~ y~ ~ ~ 1y~~ d C O W W N O 9 S ~ C1~~e T ~~~~~ ~ ~ s ~ ~~~~~ - FW i W V W W d 4 i O~~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~_~ r 6yW F m s 5 m r 0 s C :- r W 9 m e s W W ~ ~I~ r y~ F 's s m 0 s W O wt ~~ ~~~ ~s ~~~~ ~v a ~° ~ ~ ~~ N r' ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q W S . ~. ~ z~ ~4 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ is ~$ ~ t ~ I ~ `) ~ Ii '~ ,~ ~~yy ~ i ~~ ^ ~ ~ ~~ a~~ m $ gg S` W ~ 1~1N. ~ Ni ~~>~.~ ~ ~ ,~ 1l6 ~1 ~ N W z 9 'o m 0 s W 4 ~~ W h z 9 5 m 0 s W t C C W z 9 5 m 0 s ~, O y§y M C ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ate' ~` e ~ ~~~~ ~~~~~ - ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ ~ ,3 ~~ ~ ~ ~~ a ~_ ~~ fH~~ ~ ~ a ~~ ~ ~~ W 9 m z 0 i W 4 O ~ C W W m z F a W ~ ~I~ i 9 5 m 0 s e ~~ ~I~ ~~~ ~ ~ t t +~~ ~ +a~ € ~ ~ ~ > y !~ M FN ' ~ ~_ $ W W m~ io f;~~ ~ ~ a~~ I N d iO i 9 a m z 0 a W 4 O ~ y ' ~ i i 9 5 ~ m m e ~~ o ~ ~ ~ S W 4 C ~~ ~ ~~~ ~` a ~j ~ ~~ ~~:,; ~ e rn o $ 1 ~ s~ u~ ~ _ ~~ a you W ~ M 2 ~ ~ 9~~~~€ r+ W m ~+ W D J m 'a j C W W S O N :- ai W ca v 0 m e s W q_ Nli 9 e m e s V Q (~ ui ~ ZV' n. . i V O W ~ ~ C ~ C~ a~ ® 9~3 ~ ;g ~a~ y $ ea E ~ .-A~ ~v Y/¢o~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~~~ ~ '~ d ~~ E~ ~ ~~~~~ fr N 6 z'f ,:. ~ ~ ~~EO 6 ~~ l ~ ~ ~ ~S m a W a W i O ~_ m i O ~y W p O w O C r e W m s s m 0 W W D' fA ~~>~W ~~ g ~p ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 6z r$ ~ ~ I~ji ?Wy9 ~ ~ e=a ~~f ~ Wj ~ 'n o ~~~ a ~ Q m ~~43 ~ ~x e '~!-~a i ~~x~4 i~ 6 z ~ ~ ~5~0 ~ 6~ r~ 14 f ~lil' ~ ~~~~~ - ~ ~4g4g g~g ~W ~E W ~ $ ~ ~ $ W = i I I I ~ p ~ r I i ~ ~ m ail I ~ m ' p 'I I ~ I ~'oo = ~ I N II I e loo W W I I~' O W W O ~ 4 ~ H 4 ~ ~ S Id 1 I I I ~ I ~ W g I ~ ~ I N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ B b W 's m e F W 0 ! Q~ W r W s m e s W q C S C M a~~W ; s . M 1. ~WW ~ ~ s G ~~6 ~ ~~ i 6 • ~~ _ ~ _ ~s~~ ~ mo ~~ ~ awe ~..~~ m ~~~~~ wC zE ~ EBi~ ~8 a~ f4 ~ $$~~~ ~ ~ ~ _3F T~ g 2 ~ ~ i I ~ = s , m , m F °oo 0 s W W O 1 ~ W W C w I ~ ~ ~ ' N ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ W Z s m 0 s 2 O yk W 3 T W Z m 0 e ~4 C. C M a ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ a `~ y ~ F ~ ~ ~ ~ iiii p W x o ~ yy Y^y{ jjpp Y~~ ~ Fi ~f,~ K ~E EF ~ .~i >> ~ W 8 C' ~ ~d ~ ~qQg3 ~ s ~ o '~i yJ-~. t ~~~3 ~ i z g ~~ °'~ E?5ti~5 ~ ~ E650 ~ S i~ ~ ¢o a -m ~ ~ia ' ~ ~~~~~ W fA O m V i O t W W O w N 9 ~~ C w 'o s m J V i O t W 4 C W W N 7 O m J V i O W W O t~ 4 s ~~ W °x m 3 V i O 't j W Q E a~ C W V W O a6 W W W O ~g i 4 C WC F z v W W i W C '~ W C W V i/J W¢ LL O C W W O y 9 ~s ~~ C W w s O t ~~ s~ • .@ r ,~~,.a ~r. • ,,,, ~j t-r -~ ; "^ 4 ~ ~~c ti. Date: January 5, 2011 To: Silver Oaks Apartments, LLC 1409 N. Main Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 Subject: MCUP-10-014, MDES-10-050 & MMDA-10-011 North of Franklin Road, West of Ten Mile Road Sherry R. Huber, President Rebecca W. Amold, Vice President John S. Franden, Commissioner Carol A. McKee, Commissioner Sarah M. Baker, Commissioner On January 5, 2011 the Ada County Highway District Staff acted on your application for the above referenced project. The attached report fists site-specific requirements, conditions of approval and street improvements, which are required. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (208) 387-6171. Sincerely, Kristy Heller Planner II Right-of-Way & Development Services Ada County Highway District CC: Project file City of Meridian, Engineering Solutions, LLP Ada County Highway District ~ 3775 Adams Street o Garden City, ID ~ 83714 ~ PH 208-387-6100 ~ FX 345-7650 ~ www.achdidaho.org • s ~,1~ J`~sy`' ~; li'o~wrwv`~"co~~o ~itrn:u. Project/File: MCUP-10.014, MDES-10-050 &MMDA-10-011 This is a conditional use application for amulti-use development consisting of 369 units on 24.61-acres. This site is located % mile west of Ten Mile Road, north of W. Franklin Rd in Meridian, Idaho. Lead Agency: City of Meridian Site address: W. Perugia St. Staff Approval: January 5, 2011 Applicant: Silver Oaks Apartments, LLC 1409 N. Main Street Meridian, Idaho 83642 Representative: Engineering Solutions, LLP Becky McKay 1029 N. Rosario St., Suite 100 Meridian, Idaho 83642 Staff Contact: Kristy Heller Phone: 387-6171 E-mail: kheller(a~achdidaho.oPa Tech Review: December 30, 2010 A. Fin~9'sngs ®f Fact 1. Description of Application: This is a conditional use application for amulti-use development consisting of 369 units on 24.61-acres. 2. 3. 4. _J! A.. UeSCrI Y9 0r1 OT N-a ilVesr~s auo o vu~w... r.^ ~~• in Z Direction Land Use on North Medium-Densit Residential District R-8 15 R South East Medium-Hi h Densit Residential District Nei hborhood Business District Ten Mile Christian Church - C-N T West Rural-Urban Transition Zone RU Site History: ACRD staff/Commission previously reviewed this site as Umbria/Silver Oaks Apartments (MCUP-05-024, MAZ-05-016, MPP-05-023, MCZC-06-046) in November 2005. A road trust for $10,700 was received in June 2006 for the street extension and bridge culvert to the west boundary for the crossing of the Kennedy Lateral. The requirements of this staff report are consistent with those of the prior action. Adjacent Development: The following developments are pending or underway in the vicinity of the site: m Baraya Subdivision, (334-single family detached lots, 260-multifamily units, and one elementary school), located immediately south of the site on the south side of Franklin Road in March 2007. Right-~ay & Development Services Department 1 MCUP-10-014, MDES-10-050 ~ MMDA-10-011 5. Impact Fees: There will be an impact fee that is assessed and due prior to issuance of any building permits. The assessed impact fee will be based on the impact fee ordinance that is in effect at that time. 6. Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)/Five Year V11ork Plan (FYWP): m Franklin Road is scheduled in the Five Year Work Plan and CIP to be widened to 5-lanes from Black Cat Road to Ten Mile Road between 2019 to 2027. ® The intersection of Black Cat Road and Franklin Road is scheduled in the Five Year Work Plan and CIP to be widened to 4-lanes on the north leg, 3-lanes on the south, and 5-lanes on the east and west legs, and reconstructed/signalized between 2014 to 2018. ~o Traffic Findings f®r C®nsiderati®n 1. Trip Generation: This development is estimated to generate 2,454 additional vehicle trips per day (none existing); 229 additional vehicle trips per hour in the PM peak hour (none existing), based on .the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 8"' edition. A TrafSc Impact Study was submitted with the original application for Umbria SubdivisicwVSi~Mwer Oaks Apartments in 2005. Anew study was not required with this application due to the fact that there are no significant changes to the site. there has been limited development adjaoairt !o the site, and the internal streets are partially oorr+pleted and pending completion/approval. 6ebw is e summary of the original submitted Traffic Impact Study: Traffic Impact Study Summary (2005): ® The proposed subdivision is a 30-acre mixed-use development with 350 multi-family units on 27-acres and an office complex on 3-acres and is anticipated to generate 2,490 vehicle trips per day. The project is expected to be fully developed by 2010. ® Franklin Road is classified as a minor arterial and consists of 2-traffic lanes and 4-foot gravel shoulders. The posted speed limit is 50-MPH. o Ten Mile Road is classified as a minor arterial and consists of 2-traffic lanes and 4-foot gravel shoulders. The posted speed limit is 35-MPH. ® The Ten Mile Road/Franklin Road intersection is an all-way stop controlled intersection with single-lane approaches in all quadrants. © Ten Mile Road is included in the District's Five Year Work Program to be widened from 2- lanes to 5-lanes between Franklin Road and Pine Avenue. The project includes the signalization of the Franklin Road/Ten Mile Road intersection to 5-lanes on all legs. Construction is planned for fiscal year 2007. 2 I1~CUP-10.014, NiDO=S-10.050 ~ MINDA-10-011 a ilizin t• ublic roadway located at the east•perty line will experience Vehicles ut g p moderate delay. A separate left-hand turn lane should be constructed to alleviate some of the time delay. Both aleft-hand turn lane and aright-hand turn lane will be needed at the proposed site access to Franklin Road to accommodate the projected turning traffic. The recommended deceleration lane improvements include a 12-foot wide by 100-foot long deceleration lane with a 600-foot taper. The gravel shoulder width could be reduced to 4-feet in this segment. Staff Comments to Traffic Study (2005): • Franklin Road (from Ten Mile Road to Black Cat Road) is included in the District's Five Year Work Program to be reconstructed to a 5-lane roadway with vertical curb, gutter and sidewalk within a total of 96-feet of right-of-way. This project is in preliminary development and is not anticipated to be reconstructed prior to 2010. Although this project is scheduled in the District's FYWP, it is not included in the District's Capital Improvements Plan. • The site does meet the warrants for the construction of a center turn lane and a right turn lane at the intersection of Franklin Road and the proposed public road. • The public road that intersects Franklin Road is anticipated to cant' traffic from this development as well as a future church. Due to the surrounding uses, the applicant will be constructing a commercial street. A commercial street allows for the construction of 3- traffic lanes with vertical curb, gutter and sidewalk. This street section will accommodate for the left-turn lane that has been recommended by the traffic impact study. 2. Condition of Area Roadways Traffic Count is based on Vehicles per hour (VPH) Functional PM Peak PM Peak Hour Existing Plus Roadway Frontage Classification Hour Level of Project Traffic Count Service Peru is Street 430-feet Local Commercial N/A N/A N/A Umbria Hills 70-feet Local Commercial N/A N/A N/A Avenue Franklin Road 0-feet Principal Arterial 499 Better than "D" Exceeds "E" Ten Mile Road 0-feet Minor Arterial 708 Exceeds "E" Exceeds "E" `Acceptable level of service for atwo-lane principal arterial is "E" (690 VPH). * Acceptable level of service for atwo-lane minor arterial is "D" (550 VPH). 3. Average Daily Traffic Count (VDT) Average daily tragic counts are based on ACHD's most current trafric counts. . There are no traffic counts available for Perugia Street or Umbria Hills Avenue. a The average daily traffic count for Franklin Road west of Black Cat Road was 9,512 on 5/28/2009. . The average daily traffic count for Ten Mile Road north of Franklin Road was 10,951 on 3/18/2009. Ca Findings f®r ~®nsiderati®n 1. Meridian's Ten Miie interchange Specific Area Plan The City of Meridian's Ten Mile Interchange Specific Area Plan, adopted June 2007, evaluated future land use, and transportation needs and established design guidelines for new development in the Ten Mile Interchange area, an area that includes the Franklin Road ,Ten Mile Road to Linder Road project. 3 MCtJP-10-014, NIDES-10-050 ~ AANiDA-10.011 • • 2. Franklin Road a. Existing Conditions: Franklin Road is improved with 2-travel lanes, and no curb, gutter or sidewalk near the site. There is 78-feet of right-of-way for Franklin Road (30-feet from centerline). b. Policy Arterial Roadway Policy: District Policy 7203.4.3 states that if a proposed development abuts an arterial street, the developer shall provide sidewalk along the paved frontage and dedicate right-of-way required by the proposed land use and scale of the project. Right-of-Way and Street Section Policy: District policy requires 96-feet of right-of-way on arterial roadways (Figure 72-F1 B). This right-of-way allows for the construction of a 5-lane roadway with curb, gutter, 5-foot wide concrete detached sidewalks and bike lanes. Right-of-Way Policy: District policy requires 70-feet of right-of-way on arterial roadways (Figure 72-F1 B). This right-of-way allows for the construction of a 3-lane roadway with curb, gutter, 5-foot wide concrete detached sidewalks and bike lanes. Sidewalk Policy: District policy requires 7-foot wide attached (or 5-foot wide detached) concrete sidewalk on all collector roadways and arterial roadways (7204.7.2). c. ACRD Master Street Map: ACRD Policy Section 3111.1 requires the Master Street Map (MSM) guide the right-of-way acquisition, arterial street requirements, and specific roadway features required through development. This segment of Franklin Road is designated in the MSM as a Planned Commercial Arterial with 5-lanes and on-street bike lanes, an 82-foot street section within 96-feet of right-of-way. d. Applicant Proposal: The applicant is not proposing any improvements to Franklin Road with this application. e. Staff Comments/Recommendations: When this site was reviewed as part of UmbrialSilver Oaks Apartment in 2005, the submitted traffic impact study recommended the construction of a center turn lane at the intersection of Umbria Hills Avenue and Franklin Road and a westbound right turn lane at the intersection of Umbria Hills Avenue and Franklin Road into the site. At the time of this application, those improvements have not been constructed. Consistent with ACHD's prior action on the site, and the findings of the submitted traffic impact study, the applicant should be required to construct a center turn on Franklin Road (at the intersection of Umbria Hills Avenue and Franklin Road) that provides a minimum of 100-feet of storage with tapers for both the approach and departure directions abutting the site as identified in the original staff report. The applicant should also be required to construct a westbound right tum lane at the intersection of Umbria Hills Avenue and Franklin Road. The applicant should coordinate the design of the center turn lane and the westbound right turn lane with District Traffic Services and Development Review staff. 3. Perugia street a. Existing Conditions: Perugia Street is improved with no pavement, vertical curb, gutter, and 5-foot wide attached concrete sidewalk abutting the site. There is 54-feet of right-of--way for Perugia Street (27-feet from centerline). This street has not been completed or accepted for maintenance at the time of this application. b. Policy: 40-foot Street Section Policy: District policy 72-F1A requires that industrial/commercial roadways be constructed as 40-foot street sections with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete within 54-feet of right-of-way. 4 MCUP-10.014, MDES-10-050 8< MMD~--10-011 Half Street Section: district policy 7203.4.2 states "if a prop~ed development abuts an unpaved street or streets the developer shall construct one-half of the full street improvements, including curb, gutter and concrete sidewalk plus additional pavement widening beyond the centerline established for the street to provide a minimum 24-feet wide paved surface. A 3-foot wide gravel shoulder and a drainage swale sized to accommodate the roadway storm runoff shall be constructed on the unimproved side. This street section shall be constructed within a minimum 40-foot right-of-way." Turnaround Policy: District policy 7205.2.1 requires turnarounds to be constructed to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. Landscape and parking islands may be constructed in turnarounds if a minimum inside curb radius of 28-feet, and a minimum outside radius of 45- feet are provided. The pavement width shall be sufficient to allow the turning around of a standard AASHTO SU design vehicle without backing. c. ACHD Mast®r Street Map: ACRD Policy Section 3111.1 requires the Master Street Map (MSM) guide the right-of--way acquisition, collector street requirements, and specific roadway features required through development. Anew collector roadway was identified on the MSM with the street typology of Towncenter Collector. The Towncenter Collector typology as depicted in the Livable Street Design Guide recommends a 3-lane roadway with bike lanes, and on street parking, a 60-foot street section within 88-feet of right-of-way. d. Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is not proposing any improvements to Perugia Street abutting the site. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant should be required to complete the construction of Perugia Street as one half of a 40-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5- foot wide attached concrete sidewalk plus additional pavement widening beyond the centerline established for the street to provide a minimum 24-feet wide paved surface. A a- foot wide gravel shoulder and a drainage swale sized to accommodate the roadway storm runoff shall be constructed on the south side of the roadway. The new collector roadway identified on the ACRD Master Street Map and the City of Meridian's Ten Mile Specihc Area Plan was originally intended to align with Umbria Hills Avenue, extend north through the site, turning west near the sites north property line, stubbing to the west (see below). 5 MCUP-10014, MDES-10-050 & MMDA-10-011 However, the approval~f the Umbria/Silver Oaks Apartments iT~2005, and the subsequent construction of both public and private roads prohibit the ability to extend the roadways north and west as noted in the Master Street Map (see above). Therefore, staff recommends that the existing roadway configuration replace the collector roadways planned in Meridian's Ten Mile Specific Area Plan and the Master Street Map. This would allow for the future extension to the west providing connectivity and an alternate route to Black Cat Road as identified in the Master Street Map. 4. lJmbria Hills Avenue a. Existing Conditions: Umbria Hills Avenue is improved with 2-travel lanes (18-feet of pavement), vertical curb, gutter, and 5-foot wide attached concrete sidewalk abutting the site. There is 54-feet of right-of-way for Umbria Hills Avenue (27-feet from centerline). The street has not been completed or accepted for maintenance at the time of this application. b. Policy: 40-foot Street Section Policy: District policy 72-F1A requires that industrial/commercial roadways be constructed as 40-foot street sections with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide concrete within 54-feet of right-of-way. Half Street Section: District policy 7203.4.2 states "if a proposed development abuts an unpaved street or streets the developer shall construct one-half of the full street improvements, including curb, gutter and concrete sidewalk plus additional pavement widening beyond the centerline established for the street to provide a minimum 24-feet wide paved surface. A 3-foot wide gravel shoulder and a drainage swale sized to accommodate the roadway storm runoff shall be constructed on the unimproved side. This street section shall be constructed within a minimum 40-foot right-of-way." Turnaround Policy: District policy 7205.2.1 requires turnarounds to be constructed to provide a minimum turning radius of 45-feet. Landscape and parking islands may be constructed in turnarounds if a minimum inside curb radius of 28-feet, and a minimum outside radius of 45- feet are provided. The pavement width shall be sufficient to allow the turning around of a standard AASHTO SU design vehicle without backing. c. IVevv Collector ACHD Waster Street IIAap: ACRD Policy Section 3111.1 requires the Master Street Map (MSM) guide the right-of-way acquisition, collector street requirements, and specific roadway features required through development. Anew collector roadway was identified on the MSM with the street typology of Totivncenter Collector. The Towncenter Collector typology as depicted in the Livable Street Design Guide recommends a 3-lane roadway with bike lanes, and on street parking, a 60-foot street section within 88-feet of right- of-way. d. Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is not proposing any improvements to Umbria Hills Avenue abutting the site with this application. Staff Cornrraents/Recornrnendations: The applicant should be required to complete the construction of Umbria Hills Avenue as one half of a 40-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot wide attached concrete sidewalk plus additional pavement widening beyond the centerline established for the street to provide a minimum 24-feet wide paved surface. A a- foot wide gravel shoulder and a drainage swale sized to accommodate the roadway storm runoff shall be constructed on the south side of the roadway. The new collector roadway identified on the ACRD Master Street Map and the City of Meridian's Ten Mile Specific Area Plan was originally intended to align with Umbria Hills Avenue, extend north through the site, turning west near the sites north property line, stubbing to the west (see below). 6 NiCUP-10-014, MDES-10-050 ~ MMDA-10-011 However, the approval of the Umbria/Silver Oaks Apartments in 2005, and the subsequent construction of both public and private roads prohibit the ability to extend the roadways north and west as noted in the Master Street Map (see above). Therefore, staff recommends that the existing roadway configuration replace the collector roadways planned in Meridian's Ten Mile Specific Area Plan and the Master Street Map. This would allow for the future extension to the west providing connectivity and an alternate route to Black Cat Road as identified in the Master Street Map. ~. Sta.rlb Streets a. Existing Conditions: There is an existing 54-foot wide right-of-way stub to the west property line located at the terminus of Perugia Street. b. Policy: Stub Street Pol'ocy: District policy 7203.5.1 states that the street design in a proposed development shall cause no undue hardship to adjoining property. An adequate and convenient access to adjoining property for use in future development may be required. ff a street ends at the development boundary, it shall meet the requirements of sub section 7205, "non-continuous streets." District policy 7205.5 states that stub streets will be required to provide intra-neighborhood circulation or to provide access to adjoining properties. Stub streets will conform with the requirements described in Section 7204.5, 7204.6 and 7204.7, except a temporary cul-de-sac will not be required if the stub street has a length no greater than 150-feet. A sign shall be installed at the terminus ~of the stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE." District policy 7203.5.2 states that an existing street or a street in an approved preliminary plat, which ends at a boundary of a proposed development, shall be extended in that development. The extension shall include provisions for continuation of storm drainage facilities. Temporary Turnaround Policy: District policy 7205.2 requires construction of a temporary cul-de-sac with the same dimensional requirements as a standard cul-de-sac, with a minimum turning radius of 45-feet where curb is required and 42-feet where curb is not required. The pavement width shall be sufficient to allow the turning around of a standard AASHTO SU 7 NiCUP-1®y014, f1A®ES-10-050 & MM®A-10-011 design vehicle without Ddcking. if a temporary turnaround is pr~ed to be located within a future building lot, the temporary turnaround easement shall be for the entire building lot to prevent the easement from being constructed over. c. Applicant Proposal: The applicant is not proposing any changes to the existing right-of-way stubbing to the west property line abutting the site. d. Staff CommentslRecommendations: The applicant's proposal meets District policy and should be approved, as proposed. 6. Driveways 6.1 Perugia Street a. Existing Conditions: There is an existing 25-foot wide driveway onto Perugia Street located on the north side of the turnaround (at the terminus of Perugia Street) abutting the site. b. Policy: Driveway Location Policy: District policy 72-F4 (1) and 72-F4 (2}, requires driveways located on commercial/industrial roadways to offset a controlled and/or uncontrolled intersection a minimum of 50-feet (measured near edge to near edge). Commercial Driveway Policy: District policy 7207.9.3 restricts commercial driveways with daily traffic volumes over 1,000 vehicles to a maximum width of 36-feet. Most commercial driveways will be constructed as curb-cut type facilities if located on local streets. Curb return type driveways with 15-foot radii will be required for driveways accessing collector and arterial roadways. Driveway Paving Policy: Graveled driveways abutting public streets create maintenance problems due to gravel being tracked onto the roadway. In accordance with District policy, 7207.9.1, the applicant should be required to pave the driveway its full width and at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway and install pavement tapers with 15- foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. c. Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing 25-foot wide driveway onto Perugia Street abutting the site. d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant's proposal meets District policy and should be approved, as proposed. The applicant should be required to pave the driveway it's full width at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway. 6.2 Umbria Bills Avenue a. Existing Conditions: There is an existing 27-foot wide driveway onto Umbria Hills Avenue located on the north side of the turnaround (at the terminus of Umbria Hills Avenue) abutting the site. b. Policy: Driveway Location Policy: District policy 72-F4 (1) and 72-F4 (2), requires driveways located on local residential roadways to offset a controlled and/or uncontrolled intersection a minimum of 50-feet (measured near edge to near edge). District policy 72-F4 (1) and 72-F4 (2), requires driveways located on commercial/industrial roadways to offset a controlled and/or uncontrolled intersection a minimum of 50-feet (measured near edge to near edge). Residential Driveway Policy: District Policy 7207.9.3 restricts residential driveways to a maximum width of 20-feet. Industrial Driveway Policy: District policy 7207.9.3 restricts industrial driveways to a maximum width of 40-feet. Most industrial driveways wil! be constructed as curb-cut type 8 MCUP-10-014, MDES-10-050 & MMDA-10-011 ilities if located on IocaT streets. Curb return type driveways wit-foot radii will be required fac for driveways accessing collector and arterial roadways. Commercial Driveway Policy: District policy 7207.9.3 restricts commercial driveways with daily traffic volumes over 1,000 vehicles to a maximum width of 36-feet. Most commercial driveways will be constructed as curb-cut type facilities if located on local streets. Curb return type driveways with 15-foot radii will be required for driveways accessing collector and arterial roadways. Driveway Paving Policy: Graveled driveways abutting public streets create maintenance problems due to gravel being tracked onto the roadway. In accordance with District policy, 7207.9.1, the applicant should be required to pave the driveway its full width and at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway and install pavement tapers with 15- foot radii abutting the existing roadway edge. c. Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing 27-foot wide driveway onto Umbria Hills Avenue abutting the site. d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant's proposal meets District policy and should be approved, as proposed. The applicant should be required to pave the driveway it's full width at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway 7. free 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 II trees may be allowed in planters with a minimum width of 8-feet, and Class I and Class III trees may be allowed in planters with a minimum width of 10-feet. ~. Landscaping Landscaping Policy: A license agreement is required for ali landscaping proposed within ACRD right-of-way or easement areas. Trees shall be located no closer than 10-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 40-foot vision triangle and a 3-foot height restriction on all landscaping located at an uncontrolled intersection and a 50-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. ®. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. Construct a center turn on Franklin Road (at the intersection of Umbria Hills Avenue and Franklin Road) that provides a minimum of 100-feet of storage with tapers for both the approach and departure directions abutting the site. Coordinate the design of the center turn lane with District Trafi:tc Services and Development Review staff. 2. Construct a westbound right turn lane at the intersection of Umbria Hills Avenue and Franklin Road. Coordinate the design of the right-turn lane with District Traffic Services and Development Review staff. 3. Construct Perugia Street as one half of a 40-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot attached concrete sidewalk plus additional pavement widening beyond the centerline established for the street to provide to accommodatetthe roadway st am runoff she II bec onstructed on the a drainage swale sized south side of the roadway. 4. Construct Umbria Hills Avenue as one half of a 40-foot street section with curb, gutter and 5-foot attached concrete sidewalk pmumd2 itfeetlwide paved surfs eg A 3-foottw de gravlel shouldelr and for the street to provide a mi g MCUP-10-014, MDES-10.050 ~ MMDA-10-011 ina a swale sized t•commodate the roadway storm runo~all be constructed on the a d ra g west side of the roadway. 5. Utilize the existing 25-foot wide driveway onto Perugia Street located on the north side of the turnaround (at the terminus of Perugia Street) abutting the site. Pave the driveway it's full width at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway. 6. Utilize the existing 27-foot wide driveway onto Umbria Hills Avenue located on the north side of the turnaround (at the terminus of Umbria Hills Avenue) abutting the site. Pave the driveway it's full width at least 30-feet into the site beyond the edge of pavement of the roadway. 7. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. E. Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the ACRD right-of-way. 2. Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within the ACRD right-of- way. 3. In accordance with District policy, 7203.6, the applicant may be required to update any existing non-compliant pedestrian improvements abutting the site to meet current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. The applicant's engineer should rp Quids documentation of ADA com liance to District Develo ment Review staff for review. 4. Replace any existing damaged curb, gutter and sidewalk and any that may be damaged during the construction of the proposed development. Contact Construction Services at 387-6280 (with file number) for details. 5. A license agreement and compliance with the District's Tree Planter policy is required for all landscaping proposed within ACRD right-of-way or easement areas. 6. All utility relocation costs associated with improving street frontages abutting the site shall be borne by the developer. 7. It is the responsibility of the applicant to verify all existing utilities within the right-of-way. The applicant at no cost to ACHD shall repair existing utilities damaged by the applicant. The applicant shall be required to call DIGLINE (1-811-342-1585)1 cant shall contact ACRD days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The app Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACRD conduits (spare or filled) are compromised during any phase of construction. 8. Utility street cuts in pavement less than five years old are not allowed unless approved in writing by the District. Contact the District's Utility Coordinator at 387-6258 (with file numbers) for details. 9. All design and construction shall be in accordance with the ACRD Policy Manual, iSPWC Standards and approved supplements, Construction Services procedures and all applicable ACRD Standards unless specifically waived herein. An engineer registered in the State of Idaho shall prepare and certify all improvement plans. 10. Construction, use and property development shall be in conformance with all applicable requirements of ACRD prior to District approval for occupancy. 11. No change in the terms and conditions of this approval shall be valid unless they are in writing and signed by the applicant or the applicant's authorized representative and an authorized representative of ACRD. The burden shall be upon the applicant to obtain written confirmation of any change from ACHD. 12. If the site plan or use should change in the future, ACRD Planning Review will review the site plan and may require additional improvements to the transportation system at that time. Any change in the planned use of the property which is the subject of this application, shall '90 MCUP-10-014, N1DES-10-050 ~ AAAADA-10-011 • re uire the a licant to comply with ACRD Policy and Standard C~ditions of Approval in q pp place at that time unless awaiver/variance of the requirements or other legal relief is granted by the ACHD Commission. Fo C®ncluss®ns ®f Law 1. The proposed site plan is approved, if all of the Site Specific and Standard Conditions of Approval are satisfied. 2. ACHD requirements are intended to assure that the proposed use/development will not place an undue burden on the existing vehicular transportation system within the vicinity impacted by the proposed development. Ge Attachments 11 iiflCUP-10-014, M®[=5-10-050 ~ MM®A-10.011 1. Vicinity Map 2. Site Plan 3. Utility Coordinating Council 4. Development Process Checklist 5. Request for Reconsideration Guidelines • da Count Utilit Coordinating Courl~il A Y Y Developer/Local Improvement District Right of IMay Improvements Guideline Request Purpose: To develop the necessary avenue for proper notification to utilities of local highway and road improvements, to help the utilities in budgeting and to clarify the already existing process. 1) Notification: Within five (5) working days upon notification of required right of way improvements by Highway entities, developers shall provide written notification to the affected utility owners and the Ada County Utility Coordinating Council (UCC). Notification shalt include but not be limited to, project limits, scope of roadway improvements/project, anticipated construction dates, and any portions critical to the right of way improvements and coordination of utilities. 2) Plan Review: The developer shall provide the highway entities and all utility owners with preliminary project plans and schedule a plan review conference. Depending on the scale of utility improvements, a plan review conference may not be necessary, as determined by the utility owners. Conference notification shall also be sent to the UCC. During the review meeting the developer shall notify utilities of the status of right of way/easement acquisition necessary for their project. At the plan review conference each company shall have the right to appeal, adjust and/or negotiate with the developer on its own behalf. Each utility shall provide the developer with a letter of review indicating the costs and time required for relocation of its facilities. Said letter of review is to be provided within thirty calendar days after the date of the plan review conference. 3) Revisions: The developer is responsible to provide utilities with any revisions to preliminary plans. Utilities may request an updated plan review meeting if revisions are made in the preliminary plans which affect the utility relocation requirements. Utilities shall have thirty days after receiving the revisions to review and comment thereon. 4) Final Notification: The developer will provide highway entities, utility owners and the UCC with final notification of its intent to proceed with right of way improvements and include the anticipated date work will commence. This notification shall indicate that the work to be performed shall be pursuant to final approved plans by the highway entity. The developer shall schedule a preconstruction meeting prior to right of way improvements. Utility relocation activity shall be completed within the times established during the preconstruction meeting, unless otherwise agreed upon. Notification to the Ada County UCC can be sent to: 50 S. Cole Rd. Boise 83707, or Visit iducc.com for a-mail notification information. 12 iUICUP-10.014, MDES-10-050 ~ MNiDA-10-011 ~~Development Process Checklist IJ Items Completed to Date: ®Submit a development application to a City or to Ada County ®The City or the County will transmit the development application to ACHD ®The ACHD Planning Review Section will receive the development application to review ®The Planning Review Section will do one of the following: ^Send a "No Review" letter to the applicant stating that there are no site specific conditions of approval at this time. ®Write a Staff Level report analyzing the impacts of the development on the transportation system and evaluating the proposal for its conformance to District Policy. ^Write a Commission Level report analyzing the impacts of the development on the transportation system and evaluating the proposal for its conformance to District Policy. Items to be completed by Aoglicant: ^For ALL development applications, including those receiving a "No Review" letter: v The applicant should submit one set of engineered plans directly to ACRD for review by the Development Review Section for plan review and assessment of impact fees. (Note: if there are no site improvements required by ACRD, then architectural plans may be submitted far purposes of impact fee assessment.) ® The applicant is required to get a permit from Construction Services (ACHD) for ANY work in the right-of- way, including, but not limited to, driveway approaches, street improvements and utility cuts. ^Pay Impact Fees prior to issuance of building permit. Impact fees cannot be paid prior to plan review approval. DID YOU REMEMBER: Construction (Non-Subdivisions) ^ Driveway or Property Approach(s) v Submit a "Driveway Approach Request" form to ACHD Construction (for approval by Development Services & Traffic Services). There is a one week turnaround for this approval. ^ Working In the ACHD Right-of-VVay v Four business days prior to starting work have a bonded contractor submit a "Temporary Highway Use Permit Application" to ACRD Construction -Permits along with: a) Traffic Control Plan b) An Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative & Plat, done by a Certified Plan Designer, if trench is >50' or you are placing >600 sf of concrete or asphalt. Construction (Subdivisions) ^ Sediment & Erosion Submittal o At least one week prior to setting up aPre-Construction Meeting an Erosion & Sediment Control Narrative & Plan, done by a Certified Plan Designer, must be turned into ACRD Constructicn to be reviewed and approved by the ACHD Stormwater Section. ^ Idaho Power Company m Vic Steelman at Idaho Power must have his IPCO approved set of subdivision utility plans prior to Pre-Con being scheduled. ^ Final Approval from Development Services is required prior to scheduling aPre-Con. 13 iN9CUl'-10-01~, RflD1=S-1®-050 d~ IVIMDA-141.011 Re nest folr A ead of Staff D~cisi~n q ~~ 1. Appeal of Staff Decision: The Commission shall hear and decide appeals by an applicant of the final decision made by the ROWDS Manager when it is alleged that the ROWDS Manager did not properly apply this section 7101.6, did not consider all of the relevant facts presented, made an error of fact or law, abused discretion or acted arbitrarily and capriciously in the interpretation or enforcement of the ACHD Policy Manual. a. Filing Fee: The Commission may, from time to time, set reasonable fees to be charged the applicant for the processing of appeals, to cover administrative costs. b. Initiation: An appeal is initiated by the filing of a written notice of appeal with the Secretary of Highway Systems, which must be filed within ten (10) working days from the date of the decision that is the subject of the appeal. The notice of appeal shall refer to the decision being appealed, identify the appellant by name, address and telephone number and state the grounds for the appeal. The grounds shall include a written summary of the provisions of the policy relevant to the appeal and/or the facts and law relied upon and shall include a written argument in support of the appeal. The Commission shall not consider a notice of appeal that does not comply with the provisions of this subsection. c. Time to Reply: The ROWDS Manager shall have ten (10) working days from the date of the filing of the notice of appeal to reply to the notice of the appeal, and may during such time meet with the appellant to discuss the matter, and may also consider and/or modify the decision that is being appealed. A copy of the reply and any modifications to the decision being appealed will be provided to the appellant prior to the Commission hearing on the appeal. d. Notice of Hearing: Unless otherwise agreed to by the appellant, the hearing of the appeal will be noticed and scheduled on the Commission agenda at a regular meeting to be held within thirty (30) days following the delivery tofttheadecils on of the ROWDS Manager's reply to the notice of appeal. A copy being appealed, the notice of appeal and the reply shall be delivered to the Commission at least one (1) week prior to the hearing. e. Action by Commission: Following the hearing, the Commission shall either affirm or reverse, in whole or part, or otherwise modify, amend or supplement the decision being appealed, as such action is adtiquately supported by the law and evidence presented at the hearing. 14 Ni~~9P-10.014, N9~1=S-10.050 ~ MNiDA-'i0-011 fo•Reconsideration of Commiss~n Action Request Request for Reconsideration of Commission Action: A Commissioner, a member of ACRD staff or any other person objecting to any final action taken by the Commission may request reconsideration of that action, provided the request is not for a reconsideration of an action previously requested to be reconsidered, an action whose provisions have been partly and materially carried out, or an action that has created a contractual relationship with third parties. a. Only a Commission member who voted with the prevailing side can move for reconsideration, but the motion may be seconded by any Commissioner and is voted on by all Commissioners present. If a motion to reconsider is made and seconded it is subject to a motion to postpone to a certain time. b. The request must be in writing and delivered to the Secretary of the Highway District no later than 3:00 p.m. on the day prior to the Commission's next scheduled regular meeting following the meeting at which the action to be reconsidered was taken. Upon receipt of the request, the Secretary shall cause the same to be placed on the agenda for that next scheduled regular Commission meeting. c. The request for reconsideration must be supported by written documentation setting forth new facts and information not presented at the earlier meeting, or a changed situation that has developed since the taking of the earlier vote, or information establishing an error of fact or law in the earlier action. The request may also be supported by oral testimony at the meeting. d. If a motion to reconsider passes, the effect is the original matter is in the exact position it occupied the moment before it was voted on originally. It will normally be returned to ACRD staff for further review. The Commission may set the date of the meeting at which the matter is to be returned. The Commission shall only take action on the original matter at a meeting where the agenda notice so provides. e. At the meeting where the original matter is again on the agenda for Commission action, interested persons and ACRD staff may present such written and oral testimony as the President of the Commission determines to be apAropriate, and the Commission may take any action the majority of the Commission deems advisable. f. If a motion to reconsider passes, the applicant n4ay be charged a reasonable fee, to cover administrative costs, as established by the Commission. 15 MCtJP-1D-014, MD~S-10-050 ~ MMDA-10-011 a, ~~~ • . ~ i~IIATER1Al5~ ~ ~ ~ 1 TES'TIIVG ~ ~ ~ ~ I INSPECTION ^ Environmental Services O Geotechnical Engineering O Construction Materials Testin O Special Inspections ' GEOTECHNICAI ENGINEERING REPORT of TEn Mile/Franklin Subdivision Ten Mile and Franklin Roads . ~ Meridian, Idaho Prepared for: CongEr Management Group . 405 South 8th Street, Suite 290 Boise, ID 83702. ~ . MTI File .Number B41374g ~ . 7.446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 ~ 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 E-Mail mtiC~mti-id.com _ wwwmti-id.com i lt,.-• M1 . ` MATERIALS • ~ ~ December 2Q, 2004 ' TESTING ~? Page# i of29 ~ NSPECTION O. Frwironmental Services O Geotechnical Engineering O Construction JVlaterials Testing O Special Inspections Mr. Jim Conger Conger Management Gronp 405 South 8th Street, Suite 290 Boise, ID 83702 _ Gentlemen: \\tntiserver2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200.1399\b41372g\b41272 geotecl~.doc Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Ten Mile /Franklin Subdivision Ten Nile and Franklin Roads Meridian, Idaho In compliance with your instructions, we have conducted a soils exploration and foundation evaluation fora the above mentioned development. Field work for this investigation was conducted ~ on 7 December 2004. Data have been analyzed to evaluate pertinent geotechnical conditions. Provided geotechnical; groundwater and construction recommendations are listed in the, Table of Contents. Results. of this investigation, together with our recommendations, are to be found in the following report. Often, because of design and construction details that occur on a project, questions arise concerning soil. conditions. We would be pleased to continue our role -as geotechnical engineers during project implementation. MTI also has great interest in providing materials testing and special inspection services during construction of this project. If you will advise us of the appropriate time to discuss these enginee><ing services, we will be pleased to meet with you at your convenience. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to you and we future. If you have questions please call us at (208) 376-4748. / . Respectfully Submitted, ., Materi Tes Inspection, Inc. ~"`" W Brandon Wright, E.I.T Staff Engineer . Geotechnical Services Geotechnical Engineer to working with. you in the ' Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376.4748 Fax 208 322-6515 ' ' °E-Mail mtiC~mti-id.com www.mti-id.com . . MATERIALS • December 20, 2004 TESTINE Fs' Page# 2of29 1 NSPECTION ,,. ^ Environmental Services O Geotechnical Engineering O Construction Materials Testing O Special Inspections' \lmdservet2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372gW41272 geotech.doc TABLE OF CONTENTS _ INTRODUCTION....»....» .............»».»...».»......»............»...».......»...»».«»»....»...»....»..»....»3 • Project DescrIption ............................................................................~..................3 Authorization ........................................................................................................3 Purpose ........................................................................................................:.........3 .-. • cope ......................................................................................................................3 Warranty And Limiting Conditions ...................................................................4 • ~ General .....:............................................................................................................4 • . DESCRIPTION OF SITE .......».».....». .......»...».»....»»»..........»»......»..........».»..........»....:.».5 Site Access .............................................................................................................5 ..... • General Geology Of Area ............................................................................ ...5 • Site Topography, Drainage And Vegetation ..:.:...:.............................................5 • Site Climatology And Geochemistry ..............................:....................................6 • - Geoseism~c Setting ...............:.......................................................................:........6 SOILS EXPLORAI'ION.......»»....»...»....» ..............».»....».......»:.........».»...»»....».»........».....6 . ................................ .. Exploration and SarapHng Procedures .........:.:.......: • ...........6 ' Laboratory Testing Program .......:...:..............:...................................................7 Soil And Sediment Profile ...................................................................................7 ... - Soiis~ Survey Review ..............................................................................................7 Volatile Organic Scan ...........................................................................................8 • SITE HYDROLOGY........».........»»»......».»» .....................»»......:...»»».......».....»..»».»..»»»8 General Notes .................:.... .............................................................................8 ..... • Grouadwater ..............:..........................................................................................8 Soil Infiltration Rates .........................:................................................................8 FOUNDATION AND PAVEMENT DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS.«....»»»...«........».9 _ General Notes ........................................................................................................9 Foundation Design Recommendations ............................:..................................9 .. ~ Crawl Space Recommendations ........................:.................................................10 Recommended Pavement Seetions ......................................................................10 .. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERAT[ONS..........» ........................................................»»....»........11 . Earthwork .............................................................................................................1 l .. Dry Weather .................................. . .... .................................................................12 - Wet Weather .........................................................................................................12 Frozen Subgrade Soils ......:..............................:....................................................12 Structural Fill ........................................................................................................13. Backfiil ................ ..............................................................................................13 Excavations ............................................................................................:........14 ..: Groundwater Control ..........................................................................................14 GENERAL COMMENTS....».»..........«..» ..........................»»............»...».».»........................»15 . REFERENCES ...................»......:............»...............................»................»..».».............».....16 .. ..APPENDIX LIST........ ..................»..............».».....,...»........................................»...........1.7..... . .. Geotechnical General Notes .................................................................................18 Unified Soil Classlfication ....................................................................................19 Test Pit Logs ...................:..............................................................:.......................20 Copyright ~ 2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St, Boise, ID 8309 • 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 . E-Mailmti~mti-id.com • www.mtiid.com_ T '' ~ December 20, 2004 MATERIALS • ~ • ' TESTING ~ - Page# 3 of29 ' ~ NSPECTION O F~vironmentai Services O Geotechnical F~tgineering O Constructlon Materials Testing O Speaal Inspec[ions \~mtiservea2\reports\boise12004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g~b~41272 gcotech.doc INTRODUCTION This report presents results of a geotechnical investigation and analysis in support of data utilized in design of structures as defined in the 2003 International Building Code (1BC).~ 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. Project Description: The proposed development is located south and west of the City of Meridian, Ada County, .Idaho; and .occupies a portion o>1"~the SW'/+SE'/< of.Section 10; Township 3~North,'Range 1 VVesf, Boise Meridian. The project will consist of development of approximately 85 single family residential lots on. an approximate 28.6-acre site. Roadways are anticipated to be included as part of the development. Authorization: Authorization to perform this exploration and analysis was given in the form of verbal authorization to proceed from Ten Mile Development, LLC to Jennifer Miller of .Materials Testing and Inspection, Inc. (MTI), on 29 November 2004: Said authorization is subject to terms, conditions, and limitations descnbed in the Professional Services Contract entered into between Ten Mile Development and MTI. Our scope of services for the proposed development has been provided in our proposal dated 22 November 2004, and .again below. ~ ~ ~ . • .Purpose: _ The purpose of this Geotechnical Engineering Report is to determine various soil profile components and their engineering characteristics for use by design engineers and/or architects in: • Preparing or verifying suitability of foundation design and placement, . ' • Preparing site drainage designs, and, • Indicating issues pertaining to earthwork construction. Scope: The scope of this investigation included review of geologic literature and existing. available geotechnical studies of the area, review of available environmental reports, visual site reconnaissance of the immediate site, subsurface explo~atis-n, field and.laborato~y.. tcstng, .and an engineering analysis and evaluation of foundation materials. The scope of work did not include design recommendations specific to individual residences. Copyright ~ 2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208.376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 E-Mail mti~mti-id.com www.mti-id.com 5 December 20, 2004 MATERIALS • <. TESTING ~ ~ Page# 4of29 INSPECTION ' O~ Environmental Services ^ Geotechnical Engineering ^ Construction Materials Testing O Special Inspections \Mtiservei2\reports\boise12004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 geotxhdoc Warranty And Limiting Conditions: Field observations and reseazch reported herein aze considered sufficient in detail and scope to form a~ .reasonable basis for the purposes cited above. MTI warrants that findings and conclusions contained herein have been promulgated 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 descn'bed in . this report. ' These engineering methods have been developed to provide the client with information regarding apparent or potential engineering conditions: relating ~to the subject property within the scope cited above and .are necessarily limited to conditions observed at the time of the~site visit and~research. The report is also limited to information available at the time it was prepared. In the event additional information is provided to MTI following the report, it will be forwarded to the client in the form received for evaluation by the client. There is a distinct possibility that conditions may exist which could not be identified within the scope of the investigation or which were not apparent during the site investigation. This. report was prepared for the . exclusive use of Conger Management Crroup and their retained design consultants ("Client. Conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based upon agreed-upon scope of work outlined in the report and Contract for Professional Services between Client and Materials Testing and Inspection, Inc. ("Consultant'). i~7se 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 __ whatever, known or unknown to Client or Consultant. Neither Client nor Consultant shall have liability to, or indemnifies or holds harmless third parties for losses incurred by actual or purported use or misuse of this report. No other warranties are implied or expressed. General: Revisions in plans and or drawings for the proposed development from those enumerated in this report should be brought to the attention of the soils engineer to determine if changes in foundation recommendations are 'required. Deviations from noted subsurface conditions. if ~ encountered during construction, should also be brought to the attention of the soils engineer. - Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. . 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 ~- 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 ' E-Mail mti~mti-id.com www.mti-id.com. ' ~ December 20, 2004 : MATERIALS • ~ ~ Pa e # 5 of 29 'TESTING ~ ~ ~ g INSPECTION O Ernironmental Services ^ Geotechnical Engineering O Construction Materials Testing •O Special Inspections . \\mtiservefL\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 geotech.doc DESCRIPTION OF SITE Site Access: Access to the site may be gained via Interstate 84 to the Meridian Road off ramp (exit 44). Proceed north on - Meridian Road approximately 1 mile to its. intersection with Franlin Road. From this intersection, proceed west on Franklin Road 2.3 miles. The site is located to the north of Franklin Road, 0.3 mile west of Ten •_ Mile Road. Presently the site exists as undeveloped agricultural land. The locafion is depicted in site map . plates included in the Appendix. General Geology Of Area: The subject site is located within the Boise Valley which is directly underlain by a, thick sequence of alluvial _: sands and gravels typically deposited on basalt fornlations. These sediments are loosely named the Boise , River Gravels and were deposited as river floodplain and stream outwash from the Boise River. These .gravel deposits tend to have imbricated well-rounded clasts, poor sorting and crude stratification. Beds of gravel and lenses of cross-bedded sands/silts suggest deposition in braided channels. The Boise River Gravels consist of.unconsolidated clay, silt, sand, gravel, and cobbles. The Boise River Gravels have been • subdivided into smaller units based on their age and are exposed as distinct alluvial terraces. dive of these terraces 'are well exposed in the Boise area and range in age from Middle Pleistocene to Holocene (<1 million years ago). The site is situated ~on the Sunrise Terrace, the third terrace above the flood plain. The . Sunrise Terrace generally consists of sandy pebble and cobble gravels with a mantling of 3 to 7 feet of loess. ` The entire thickness is approximately 44 feet: Underlying these soils are poorly graded free draining washed sands and sandy gravels. Geologic data published for the area indicate that bedrock may not be. encountered at depths less than 500 feet beneath the soil surface (Othberg and Stanford, 1992). . .: Site Topography, Drainage And Vegetation: The proposed development consists of approximately 28.6 acres of gently sloping agricultural land. Surface .. soils generally exhibit fine grained textures throughout the majority of the site. The parcel is bounded on the north by Union Pacific Railroad, on the east and west by existing rural development, and on the south by Franklin Road. Regional drainage is north and north toward the Boise River. Stormwater drainage for the -- site is achieved by percolation through surficial soils. No stormwater drainage facilities are located in the _ vicinity of the site and the area does not receive significant off-site drainage. Vegetation throughout the area .. _ consists primarily of alfalfa.. _ . Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing ~ Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 E-Mail mti@mti-id.c:om www.mti-idcom . MATERIALS ~ ~ December 20, 2004 ` TE5TIN6 F7' - Page# 6of29 INSPECTION ^ Environmental Services O Geotechnical Engineering ~ ^ Construction Materials Testing O Special Inspections \\mtiserver2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b413?2g\b41272 geotech.doc Site Climatology And Geochemistry: Average precipitation for the region is on the order of 10 to 12 inches per year. Annual average tea-perature range from 20° F to 91 ° F with extremes ranging from -4° F to 102° F. Average wind speed range to 11 miles per hour in spring with a prevailing direction from the southeast. Soil in the •area is primarily derived from siliceous materials and exhibits low el$ctro-chemical potential for corrosion of metals or concretes. Local aggregates are generally appropriate for Portland Cement and Lime Cement mixtures. 'f he State Transportation Department has adopted anionic asphalt cements. The pH of surface water, groundwater, and soil in the region typically range from 7 to 9. No indication of abnormal geochemical conditions was noted . on-site. Nominal frost penetration is typically on the order of 6. inches, with extremes ranging to 3 feet. . Geoseismic Setting: Soils on-site are classed. as Site -Class D in accordance. with .Chapter 16 of the 2003. edition of the IBC. ~. Building structures on this project should be designed as per the IBC requirement for such a seismic classification. Our •investigation did not reveal potential hazards resulting from earthquake motions: slope .-. instability, liquefaction, and surface rupture because of faulting or lateral spreading. •Incidenc~ :arid ~. anticipated acceleration of seismic activity in the area is low. SOILS EXPLOR.AZTON Exploration And Sampling Procedures: The field exploration 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 normal taping procedures .from.on-site features .or ?mown locations and are presumed to be accurate `~ to within a few feet. Upon completion of investigation each test pit was backfilled in with loose excavated materials. These loose areas need to be re-excavated and compacted prior to constructing structures over them. Samples were obtained from representative soil strata encountered in test pits. Samples obtained have been visually classified in the field by an engineer or geologist, identified according to test pit number and depth, placed in sealed containers and transported to our laboratory for additional testing. These materials- have been further described in detail on logs provided in the Appendiz. Results of field and laboratory tests are also presented on these logs. It is recommended~that these logs not be used for estimating quantities~because of highly interpretive results. Copyright ~ 2004 Materiais Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-474.8 Fax 2Q8 322-6515 E-Mail mti ~ mti-id.com www.mti-id.com December 20, 2004 IVIATERIAlS TESTI NG ~ 'Page # 7 of 29 INSPECTION ^ F~vironmentai Services O Geotechnica! Engineering O Construction Materials Testing O Special Inspections \\mtiserver2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b4I372g1b41272 geotech.doc Laboratory Testing Program: . Along with the field investigation, a supplemental laboratory testing program was conducted to determine additional pertinent engineering ~ characteristics of subsurface materials necessary in analyzing the behavior of the proposed structures. Laboratory tests were conducted according to current applicable American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) specifications, and results of these tests are to be found on then accompanying logs located in the Appendix. The laboratory testing program for this' report included Atterberg Limits Tests - ASTM designation D 4318, •Grain Size Analysis - ASTM designation C 117,~C 136, and Resistance R-Value and Expansion Pressure of Compacted Soils - ASTM~designation D 2844. • Soil And Sediment Profile: Eight test pits were advanced ta.depths of 8.1 to 15.1 feet across the site. Because of the.extent.of the studied parcel, the. developed soil _profile represents only a• generalized case, .and variations between.test, pits should be anticipated: Sandy Lean Clay (CL). -Brown to dark brown, moist, stiff to hard, lean clay soils were observed at. ground. surface across the site. Disturbed soils associated with the plow zone were Noted in the upper 10 inches. Lean clay soils were noted to depths of 0.9 to 1.7 feet within the test pits. . Silty Sand (S1Vn -Underlying surficial clay, brown to red-brown, dry to moist, weakly to moderately cemented, silty sand is present. As indicated, the strength of cementation within this soil type varies, however cementation was present in all test pits. T}us soil extended to depths. of 3.1 to 10.3 feet.. ... Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel (SP) and Poorly Graded Sandy Gravel (GP) - Brown to red-brown, dry to saturated, poorly graded sandlgravel sediments were observed in all test pits. Gravel and cobbles of • up to 6 inches in diameter were present within this horizon. Poorly graded sand with gravel sediments • ~ extended through the termination depths of test pits 2, 3, 5, ~6 and 8. Silty Sand (S1V1)~-Brown to ;red. -brown; • dry to saturated, dense to very dense .silty sand is, present underlying •" gravel sediments. Some weakly to moderately cemented, silty sand was noted in test pits 1 and 4. This soil extended through the termination depths of the test pits where encountered. . Walls of each test pit were stable with the exception of those through native granular soils. Excavations through granular soils will have a propensity for sloughing or caving. • • Soils Survey Review: A"review of the United States Department ofAgriculture, Soil Conservario~ Service, Soil Survey of Ada County Area, ~ Idaho, 1980, indicated the site can be characterized by the Aeric Haplaquepts soil type. Specific soils characteristics; as defined by the USDA, for this soil type include moderately slow.to very slow permeability, very slow runoff, and slight hazard of erosion. •. Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6.515 E-Mail mti ®mti-id.com ~ wvuw.mfi-id.com MATER1Al.5 • ~ ~ December 20, 2004 . Page # 8 of 29 TESTING ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . INSPECTION - ^ Environmental Services 0 Geotechnical engineering ^ Construction Materials Testing O Special Inspections 1lmtiservefLlreportslboise12004 reports11200-13991b41372g1b41272 geotech.doc 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. contamination. ~ ~ ~~ SITE HYDROLOGY General Notes: Existing surface drainage conditions are defined in the Description of Site. Information provided in this section is limited to observations made at'the time of the investigation. Regional and/or local• ordinances . may require information beyond the scope of this report. ~ ' . Groundwater: . Groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from . 7.7 to greater than 15.1 feet during the field investigation. Ground elevations across the site change by as much as 13 feet across the site to allow irrigation of agricultural crops, consequently significant changes in actual depth to groundwater varies across the site. Estimation of extent to which groundwater levels fluctuate under seasonal influences is problematic without regulaz monitoring. However,. groundwater levels in the site vicinity are controlled in large part by residential and commercial irrigation activity and canal leakage in the local area, and -axe lil~ely at their .--m~inmun~--eleva#ens during irrigation season. Based . on evidence ~of this investigation, a review of local topography, and background knowledge of the area, groundwater may be encountered during construction. Seasonal high groundwater is anticipated to be at an elevation of 2557 feet above sea level throughout the •year. Three piezometers installed in test pits 1, 5 and 8 will be monitoring to confirm this estimation. Soil Infiltration Rates: Soil permeability is a measure of the ability of a liquid to move through a soil and was not tested in the field. In this report this parameter is approximated by soil type and gradation. Of soils comprising the generalized soil profile for this study, clay soils generally offer little permeability, with typical.infiltration rates less than . 2.inches .per~.haur.. Silty sand generally exhibits hydraulic. conductivity rates between 2.and 6 inches per hour, however, calcium carbonate cementation encountered within this horizon may reduce this value to neaz zero. Poorly graded~sandy gravel soils typically exhibit infiltration values in excess of 24. inches per hour, and percolation testing is typically not required within these soils as a result of the free-draining nature of the gravel sediment. Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing 8c Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 E-Mail mtiC~mti-id.com www.mti-id.com .MATERIALS ~ ~ ~ December iU, 2004 . TESTING ~ page # 9 of29 INSPECTION ^ Environmental Services D Geotechnicai. Engineering O Construction Materials Testing ^ Special Inspections \\mtiserver2lreports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 geotech.doc All infiltration facilities .constructed on-site should be extended into native sandy gravel sediments. excavation depths of approximately 8 feet should be anticipated to expose sandy gravel soils. In addition, because of the high permeability, ASTM C 33 filter sand, or equivalent, should be incorporated into design of infiltration facilities. ~ . FOUNDATION AND PAVEMENT DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Notes: . Presently, approximately .85~ lots aze proposed for the project site. Considering typical residential construction, and subsurface conditions, it is recommended that the structures be founded upon conventional spread footings and continuous wall footings. The following recommendations ~ are not sneciSc to the individual structures, but rather should be viewed as suideHnes for the subdivision wide develoument~ . Foundation Design Recommendations: - On the basis of data obtained from the site and test results from various laboratory tests performed, IVTI'I . recommends following guidelines be used for the net allowable soils bearing capacity. ASTM D 1557 ~ ~ Net Allowable Soils Footin De th Sub ade Com action Bearin Ca aci Footings should bear on competent, native, silty . sand present at depths of 1.0 to 1.7 feet across the Not required for 1,500 lbs/fl site. All surficial clay soils must be removed native soil . from below footin s. ~ iVerification of bearini: soils for each residence by a qualified seotechnical engineer at the time of construction ~is recommended.. Footings should be proportioned to meet the stated bearing capacity and/or the IBC 2003 minimum requirements. Total settlement should be limited to about 1 inch with differential settlement of approximately 1/2 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 footing snbgrade will require over-excavation and backfilling with structural fill. To minimise the effects of slight ~~ differential movement that may occur because of variations in character of supporting soils, and in seasonal moisture content, MTI recommends continuous footings be suitably reinforced to make them as rigid as possible. For frost protection the bottom of external footinas• should be 30 inches below finished•l~ade, ' Copyright ~ 2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 E-Mail mtiC~?mti-id.com www.mti-id.com MATERIALS ~ • ~ December 20, 2004 TESTING Fs' Page# to of 29 1 NSPECTfON • O Environmental Services ~ ^ Geotechnical Engineering ,O Construction Materials Testing ^ Special Inspections \\~ntiserva2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 geotech.doc Crawl Space Recommendations: Considering the presence of shallow cemented soils across the site, all residences constructed with crawl spaces should be designed in a manner that will inhibit water in the crawl spaces.-Therefore, proper grading should be considered to be critical. MTI recommends that roof drains carry storm water at least 5 feet away from the residence, and grades should be greater than 5% 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. Recommended Pavement Sections: ~ . MTI collected a sample of near-surface soils for R value testing representative of soils to depths of i foot - below existing ground surface.. A bulk sample collected from test pit 1,. consisting of sandy clay (CL) soil with.fine grained sand. This sample yielded an R value of less than 5. 'As.required by Ada: County ~iighway District, MTI has used a traffic index of 6 to determine necessary pavement cross-sections for the site. Additionally, MTI has made other assumptions for traffic loading variables based on the character of the proposed construction. The Client should review these- assumptions to make sure they reflect intended use and loading of pavements both now and in the future. Flexible Pavement Sections The Idaho Method as defined in Idaho Department of Transportation's Materials Manual (section 500) was ~: ,used to develop the pavement section. Ada County Highway District (ACRD) parameters for traffic index . - and substitution ratios were also used in the design, and were obtained from ACHD's Development Policy Manual. Calculation sheets provided in the Appendix indicate the soils values, traffic loading, and material ratios used to calculate the pavement sections. MTI recommends that all materials used in the construction • of Asphaltic Concrete Pavements meet the .requirements of the Idaho State Public Works Construction (ISPWC) specifications. Construction of the. pavement section should be in accordance with these specifications. The following thicknesses are l~Il~TT1VIUM THICKNESSES for assured pavement function. Pavement Section Co onent Drivewa sand Parkin ,Residential Streets As haltic Concrete ~2.5 Inches TJntreafed-A. a ate Base 4.0 Inches Granular Borrow 14.0 Inches Com acted Sub ade Not Re aired ~'°' -~`' Aggregate Base Maferiiil'coriiplying with•ISPWC Standards far Crushed Aggregate•Materials. ~ • ~ - - ° • •°~•••• Structural Subbase Any material complying with the requirement for granulaz structural fill (crushed) as defined in . ISPWC. Copyright ©2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-47.48 Fax 208 322-6515 "' E-Mail mti®mti-id.com www.mti-id.com ` ~ • MATERIALS _ December 20, 2004 TESTING ~7"' Page# 11 of 29 INSPECTION • O Errvironmental Services •O Geotechnical Engineering ^ Construcction Materials Testing D Special Inspectlons \\mtiservefL\reports\boise~2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g1b41272 geotech.doc Common Pavement Section Construction Issues . The subgrade upon which above pavement sections are to be constructed .must be properly stripped, compacted (if indicated), inspected and proof rolled. Proof rolling of subgrade soils should be accomplished with a heavy rubber-tired fully loaded tandem axle dump truck or equivalent. MTI anticipates that pavement azeas will be subject to~ moderate traffic. It should be noted that surficial clay soils near to and above optimum moisture contents •may tend to pumnp Pumping, or soft areas must be removed and replaced with structural fill. ' Fill material and compacted native subgrade soils (if required) in support of the pavement section as well as aggregates comprising the pavement section must be compacted to not less than 95% of maacimum dry _ density indicated by ASTM D 698 for flexible pavements and by ASTM D 1557 for rigid pavements. ~If a material placed as a pavement section component cannot be tested by usual compaction testing methods, compaction of that material shall 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. _ . MTI recommends that rigid concrete pavement be provided for heavy gazbage receptacle parking. This will. eliminate damage caused by the considerable load of containers transferred onto the small steel wheels and subsequently onto the asphaltic ,concrete. Rigid concrete pavement should consist of Portland Cement _. Concrete Pavement (PCCP) generally adhering to I'I'D specifications for Urban Concrete. PCCP shall be 6 inches thick on a 4 inch drainage fill course, should be reinforced with welded wire fabric, and control, joints shall be on 12 foot centers or less. • CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS Earthwork: Recommendations in this report are based .upon structural elements of the project being founded on competent native clay-silt-sand mixtures or compacted structural fill. Structural areas should be stripped to an elevation that exposes these soil types. Exe~ssively organic soils, deleterious materials, and/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. It is recommended that organic and/or disturbed soils, if encountered, be removed to depths of 1 foot (minimum), and wasted or ... _.. stockpiled for later use. Stripping .depths should be adjusted in the field to~_assure that the entire disturbed.. _.:. zone (plow depths) and/or topsoil is removed, prior to placement and compaction of structural fill materials.. Exact removal depths should be determined during grading operations by a qualified geotechnical " representative, and shall be based upon subgrade soil type, composition, and firmness or soil stability. Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 E-Mail mti (~ mti-id.com www.mti-id.com ', 4 ~ • MATERIALS December 20, 2004 TESTING ~7' Page # 12 of 29 INSPECTION ~ ~. 0 Environmental Services ^ Geotechnical Engineering ^ Construction Materials Testing ^ Speaal Inspections \\rntiservefL\reports\boise12004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 geotech.doc After existing subgrade soils are excavated to design grade, proper control of subgrade conditions (i.e., moisture content) and placement and .compaction of new fill (if required) should be overseen by a ' representative of the soils engineer (MTn. Recommendations for structural fill presented. within 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. . Dry Weather: If construction is to be conducted~during what is considered "Dry" seasonal conditions, problems associated with soft soils may be avoided However, shallow groundwater conditions, related to .springtime runoff and/or late summer/early fall irrigation,.may inducexutting subgrade soils... Problems may also.arise because.. of lack of moisture in native and fill soils at time of placement. This .will require addition of water to achieve near optimum moisture levels. Low cohesive 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 what is considered "Wet" seasonal conditions (commonly from _ _ .__ mid-November to April), 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. Frozen Subgrade Soils: . .Frozen subgrade .soils must be allowed to thaw, or may be stripped prior to placement of structural fill materials or foundation elements. Frozen soils must be removed to depths that expose non-frozen soils and wasted or stockpiled for later use. These soils must be allowed to thaw and return to near optimum .. conditions prior to use as structural fill. ' Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709. 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 E-Mail mti~mti-id.com ~ www_mti-id.rnm M~ATERIAlS ~ ~ December 20, 2(N',; t TESTING Fs' Page# i3 of29 ti 1 NSPECTION l] Envirogmental Services ^ Geotechnical •Engfnearing O Construction Materials Testing O Special Inspections \\mtiserver2\reports\boise12004 nportc\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 geotech.doc Structural Fill: Soils regarded as suitable for use as structural fill are those classified as GW, GP, GM, SW, SP, SM, and ML, in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) (ASTM D 2487). The use of silty soils (USCS designation of GM, SM, and ML) as fill may be acceptable. However, these materials require very high moisture contents for compaction and require a long tune to dry out if natural moisture contents are too high. 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. m~u tt be protected from degradation resulting from construction traffic or subsequent con§trtiction. ~~ ~ ~ . ' .Recommended granular structural fill materials, those classified as ~GW, GP, SW, SP, should consist of a. 6 , • ~ inch minus select, clean, granular soil with na. more than 3.0% oversize (greater than 3/a inch), material and no. . more than 12% fines (less than #200) and placed in layers not to exceed 9 inches in thickness. Prior to. . placement of structural fill materials, surfaces must be prepared as outlined in the Constrnei3on . _. 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 footing for a distance equal to the thickness of fill between the bottom of _. foundation and underlying soils, or 5 feet, whichever is less. ~ • Each layer of structural fill must be compacted to a minimum density of 95% of maximum dry density as determined by ASTM~ D 1557 (for rigid structures) or D 698 (for flexible pavements). The ASTM D 1557 and D 698 test methods shall be used for samples containing up to 40% oversize particles (greater than.'/a inch). If material contains more than 40% but less than 50% oversize particles, compaction of fill shall be. confirmed by proof-rolling each lift with a 10-ton vibratory roller (or equivalent) until the maximum density has been achieved. Density testing shall 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 the maximum density or "break over" point. The number of required passes shall be used as the requirement on the remainder of fill .. placement. Material shall contain sufficient fines to fill all void spaces, and shall not contain more~than 50% ' oversize particles. .. Backfill: Backfill materials shall ascribe to the requirements of structural fill except that the maximum material size shall be 4 inefies. ~~ In no case shall material greater than 2 inches in diameter bear directly on structural elements. Placing oversized material against rigid surfaces interferes with proper compaction. Backfill should be compacted in accordance with 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. Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 E-Mail m6C~mti-id.com wwwmti-id.com . • t. .MATERIALS December 20, 2004 Page # 14 of 29 TESTING ~ . INSPECTION ~ . t] Environmental Services O.Geotechnical Engineering ^ Construction Materials Testing ^ Special Inspections \MtiservefL\reports\boise\2004 reporks\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 geotech:doc 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 not exceed 1 foot vertical to 1%. foot horizontal. Shallow, cemented fine grained soils (caliche), encountered through much of the site,. may cause difficulties during foundation development and utility placement. These soils typically extended. through depths of 3.1 to 10.3 feet. lion deep excavations, native granular soils cannot be expected to .remain in position. These materials are prone to failure and may collapse, thereby undPrnLing upper soils layers. This is especially true when working at depths near the water table. Proper care must be taken to protect personnel .and equipment. During our subsurface exploration, test pit sidewalls generally exhibited little indication of collapse. j However, some caving of granular soils occuiTed, especially after penetration of the water table. Care must be ~ taken so that excavations and properly backfilled in accordance with procedures outlined . in this report.. .. . Vk~ater and loose debris should be removed from these excavations, prior to placement of fill soils or . . ~~ concrete. Groundwater Control: Groundwater was encountered in the investigation, and .may be encountered during construction. Excavations below the water table will require a dewatering program. It may be possible to discharge dewatering effluent to remote portions of the site or to a strategically located sump or pit. This will. -.. essentially recycle effluent, thus eliminating the need to enter into agreements with local drainage authorities. Should the scope of the proposed project change, MTI should be contacted to provide more ~~~~ detailed groundwater control~measures. ~_ Special precautions may b~ required for control of surface runoff and subsurface ~ seepage in general.. It is recommended that runoff caused by wet weather be directed away from open excavations. On-site silty or clayey soils can be expected to become soft and pump if subjected to excessive traffic following periods of wet weather. Ponded surface water areas should be drained to allow construction to take place through ~- methods such as trenching, sloping, crowning grades, nightly smooth drum rolling, or installation of a ' French-drain system. Additionally, temporary or permanent driveway sections may be constructed should wet weather be forecast. Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 -- E-Mail mti®mti-id.com www.mti-id.com ` ' ~ • December 20, 2004 11AATERIAlS TESTING ~ Page# 15 of 29 INSPECTION ^ Environmental Services O Geotechnicai Engineering ^ Constn~dion Materials Testing .O Special Inspecgons ., \\~ntisavei2lreports\boise~2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 geotech.doc GErrE~ Co~nv~rrrs ~iNhen plans and specifications are complete, or if significant changes are made in the character or location of . the proposed development, consultation should be arranged as supplementary recommendations may be ~~ required. It is recommended that the service of a qualified ~geotechnical engineering firm be engaged to test and evaluate soils in footing excavations before placement' of concrete to determine if soils meet compaction requirements. Monitoring and testing should also be performed to verify that suitable materials are used for structural fill and that proper placement and compaction is performed .. Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 E-Mail mtiCsilmti-id.rnm un~ne~ ~+++~_~.~ r..m •~q MATERIALS ~ necember2o,2o04 Page # 16 of 29 ' TESTING ~ INSPECTION O Environmental Services ^ Geotechnical Engineering ^ Construction Materials Testing ^ Special Inspections \\mtiservef2\reports\boise~2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\1>41272 geotechdoc REFERENCES American Society for Testing 1Vlaterials, 1999, Standard Test Method for Materials Finer than 75-µm~(No. 200) Sieve in Minexal Aggregates by Washing: C 1.17 - 95, 3 p. •~ American Society for Testing Materials, 1999, Standazd Test Method for Sieve Analysis of Fine and Coarse Aggregates: C 136 - 96a, 5 p. ' • American Society for Testing Materials, 1999, Standard Test Methods for Liquid Limit, Plastic Limit, and Plasticity Index •of Soils, ASTM Designation: D 4318 - 86, 11 p. ~ • ~. _, Collett, ~RA., 1980, Soil Survey of Ada County Area, Idaho: US Department of Agricuttwre, Soil . Conservation Service, 327 p. Othberg, K.L. and Stanford, L.A., 1992, Geologic Map of the Boise Valley and adjoining~area, Ada and Canyon Counties, Idaho: Idaho Geologic Map Series, scale 1:100,000. Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi'St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 F-Mail mfii(tDmti_iri rnm ..~.......+; :.+....... ~ATERIAr.S ~ ~ December 20, 2004 ' TESTING F7' Page# 17 of 29 INSPECTION D Environmental Services ^ Geotechnical Engineering O Construction Materials Testing O Speaal Inspections \\mtiservefl\repor~s\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 geotech.doc APPENDIX GEOTECHNICAL GENERAL NOTES UNIFYED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM GEOTECHNICAL TEST PIT LOGS PAVEMENT THICKNESS DESIGN SHEETS SITE MAP PLATES Copyright ~ 2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 ' E-Mail mtit~mti-id.com www.mti-id.com !, MATERIALS • ~ December 20, 2004 _ ~, TESTING Fs Page # l8 of 29 INSPECTION ^ Environmental Services O Geotechnical Engineering ^ Construction Materials Testing O Special Inspections \\mtiservei2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200.1399\b41372g\b41272 gsotych.doc GEOTECHNICAL GENERAL NOTES SOIL PROPERTY SYMBOLS N: Standard "N" penetration: Blows per foot of a 140 pound hammer falling 30" on a 2" O.D: SS. " Qu: Unconfined compressive strength, tons/ft2 Qp: Penetrometer value, unconfined compressive strength, tons/ft2 Qc: Cone Penetrometer value, unconfined compressive strength, pounds/in2 ~ ~ . V: Vane value, ultimate shearing strength, tons/ft2 M: Water content, % . ~ .. ~ . LL:' Liquid Limit ~ • . PI: Plasticity Index ~ ~~ NP: Non-Plastic D: Natural dry density, lbs/ft3 ~ ... :. ~ .~ . WT:' Apparent groundwater level (at time noted after completion). ~ . DRILLING AND SAMPLING SYMBOLS .. 5S: Split-Spoon -1 3/8" I.D., 2" O.D., except where noted ST: Shelby Tube - 3" O.D., except where noted' ~' AU: Auger. Sample. - DB: Diamond Bit. CB: Carbide Bit. . GS: Grab Sample. RELATIVE DENSITY AND CONSISTENCY CLASSIFICATION Non-Cohesive Soils ~ Standard Penetration Resistance Cohesive Soils Standard Penetration Resistance V Loose <4 Ve Soft <2 . Loose 4-10 Soft 2-4 Medium Dense 10-30 Firm edium Sti 4-8 Dense 30-50 Stiff ~ ~ 8-15 Ve Dense >50 Ve Stiff 15-30 Hard >30 ~~ PARTICLE SIZE - Boulders 12 in. + Coarse Sand 5 mm to 0.6 mm Silts 0.074 mm to 0.005 mm. _ . Cobbles 12 in. to 3 in. Medium Sand 0.6 mm to 0.2 mm Clays 0.005 mm & Smaller Gravel 3 in. to 5 mm Fine Sand 0.2 mm to 0.074 mm . • Copyright ~ 2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, I[3 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 • ~ E-Mail mtiC~mti-id.com www.mti-id.com • MATERIALS ~ • December 20, 2004 TESTI NG ~ Page # 19 of 29 1 NSPECTION • O Environmental Services ^ Geotechnical Engineering ^ Construction Materials Testing ^ Special Inspections \Mtiserver2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 gooboch.doc Unified Soil Classification System Major Symbol Soil Descriptions • Divisions Well-graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines Gravel GW and Poorly-graded gravels, gravel-sand rrlixtures, little or no fines Gravelly GP •Soils Silty gravels, Poorly-graded gravel-sand-silt mixtures <54% GM ~ • coarse fraction Clayey gravels, Poorly-graded gravel-sand-clay mixtures • ~ ~ passes #4 sieve GC Coarse Well-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines Grained Sand SW Soils and Poorly-graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines <50% Sandy SP passes Soils Silty sands, Poorly-graded sand-gravel-silt mixt~u~es #200 sieve >50% SM coarse iiaction Clayey sands, Poorly-graded sand-gravel-clay mixtures passes #4 •sieve SC . Inorganic silts & very fine sands, silty or clayey fine sands, Silts ML cla a silts and Inorganic clays of low to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, sandy Clays ~ CL • cla s sil cla s lean cla s Fine LL < 50 Organic silts and.organic silt-clays of low plasticity Grained OL Soils Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomaceous fine sand or silt >50% Silts MH " passes and Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays • #200 sieve Clays CH ~ - LL > SO Organic silts and clays of medium to-high plasticity OH Highly Organic Soils Peat, humus, hydric soils with high organic content PT Copyright ©2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Yno. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-65y 5 E-Mail mti@mti-id.com www.mti-id.com • MATERIALS ~ Decembex 20, 2004 TESTI NG ~ ~ ~ Page # 20 of z9 NSPECTI~N O Environmental Services O Geotechnical Engineering O Construction Materials Testing , _ O Special in~dions \linntisservec2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 geotech.doc GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log #: TP-1 Date Advanced: 12/7/2004 Logged By: Brandon Wright, E.I.T. Excavated By: Circle H Construction Location: See Lafe~ Site Map Plates Depth to Water Table: 9.7 Feet Depth to Bottom Of Hole: 10.1 Feet . Depth Field Description, w/USCS Soil Sample Sample Depth Qp Lab Test eet and Sediment Classification ~ e om-To ID Sandy Lean Clay (CL): Brown to ' 0.0-0.9 dark brown, moist, very sti, f~`'to hard. GS 0.2-0.8 3.0-4.5 A Disturbed soils associated with the plow zone were noted in the upper R Value 10 inches. Silty Sand (SM): Brown to red- 0.9-8.0 brown, dry to moist, dense to very dense. Intermittent weak to moderately strong calcium carbonate cementation throu hout. Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel 8.0-8.7 (SP): Red-brown, moist, medium dense to .d. ense with fine to co. arse ained sand and cobbles. Silty Sand (SM): Brown to red- 8.7-10.1 brown, dry to saturated, dense to very dense.. Intermittent weak to moderately strong calcium carbonate . cementation to a de th o 9.7 eet. Lab Test ID M LL PI Sieve Anal sis _ % - - ~ #4 #10 #40 #100 #200 A 26.1 45 23 100 99 90 75 64.1 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 F_~Aail mti (ir 1 mtf_ir! nnm Copyright ©2004 iYlaterials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 • ,..,.,,., ...~::a ,,...., • ' MATERIALS ~ December 20, 2004 TESTING ~T Page # 21 of 29 INSPECTION O Environmental Services ^ Geotechnical Engineering ^ Construction Materials Testing _ _O Special Inspections \Mtiserver2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\641272 geotech.doc GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log #: TP-2 Date Advanced: 12/7/2004 Logged By: Brandon Wright, E.I.T. Excavated By: Circle H Construction Location: See Later Site 1VIap plates Depth to Water Table: 7.7 Feet ~ Depth to Bottom Of Hole: 8.2 Feet ~ . , Depth Field Description, w/LTSCS Soil Sample Sample Depth Qp ~ Lab Test eet and Sediment Classification a rom-To ~ ID Sandy Lean Clny (CL): Brown to 0.0-1.4 dark brown, moist, very stif,~'to hard ~ 3.0-4.5 Disturbed soils associated with the • plow zone were noted in the upper 10 inches. Silty Sand (S1VI): Brown to red- . 1.4-4.1 brown, dry to moist, dense to very dense. Intermittent weak to moderately strong calcium carbonate cementation throu hout. Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel 4.1-8.2 (Sp); Red-brown, moist to saturated, medium dense to.dense with fine to coarse grained sand and _ cobbles. Copyright ©2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 G-f<Aaii mfi(dlmti_irl nnm .._._..~ae :~ ____ • MATERIALS ~ Decernber 20, 2004 • TESTING ~T Page # 22 of 29 INSPECTION ^ Environmental Services ^ Geotechnical Engineerin ^ Construction Materials Testing ^ Special Inspections ~ . ~. \\rntiscrverl\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\b4~272 geot~h.doc • GEOTEC~INICAL INVESTIGATION ~~ TEST PST •LOG Test Pit Log #: TP-3 Date Advanced.:.12/7/2004 Logged By: Brandon Wright, E.I.T. • Excavated By: Circle H Construction ~ Location: See Later Site Map Plates • .Depth to Water Table: 8.6 Feet • Depth to Bottom Of Holy: 9.3 Feet ~ ! Depth Field Description, w/LJSCS~Soil Sample Sample Depth Qp Lali Test eet and Sediment Classification a om-To .~ ~ID Sandy Lean Clay (CL): Brown to 0.0-1.2 dark brown, moist, very stiff to hard. 3.0-4.5 :Disturbed soils associated with the plow zone were noted in the upper 10 inches. Silty Sand (S1V1): Brown to red- • 1.2-4.2 brown, dry to moist, dense to very dense. Intermittent weak to moderately strong calcium carbonate _ cementation throu hout. • Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel 4.2-9.3' ~ (SP): Red-brown, moist to saturated, medium dense to dense with fine to coarse grained sand and cobbles.. Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 63709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 l=_AA~iI mti (rA mti i'! nnm •• !~ ~ i MATERIALS December 20, 2004 TESTING F7' Page# 23 of 29 INSPECTION . O•Ernrironmental Services ^ Geotechnical F~gineering D Construction MaterialsTesting ~ ^ Specie{ inspections \lmtiserver2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-13991b41372g\b41272 geotech.doc GEOTECHNICAL . INVESTIGATION ~ . . TEST PIT LOG Test Fit Log.#:. TP-4 Date Advanced: 12/7/2004 Logged By: Brandon Wright, E.I.T. . Excavated By: Circle H Construction Location: See Later Site Map Plates • Depth~to Water Table: 13.6 Feet Depth to Bottom Of Hole: 14.1 Feet . Depth Field .Description, w/USCS Soil Sample Sample Depth Qp ~ Lab, Test eet end Sediment ~lassificatiori a om-To ~ ID Sandy LeagClay (CL): Brown to 0.0-1.4 ~ dark brown, moist, very sti,~`'to hard ~ ~ 3.0-4.5 Disturbed soils associated with the . plow zone were noted in the upper 10 inches. Silty Sand (SNl): Brown to red- 1.4-6.0~"' brown, dry to moist, dense to very . dense. Intermittent weak to moderately . strong calcium carbonate cementation throu hout. Poorly Graded Sand (SP): Red- 6.0-7.4 brown, moist, medium dense to dense with. ne to coarse ained sand Silty Sand (S1Vi): Brown to red- 7.4-14.1 brown, dry to saturated, dense to very dense. Intermittent weak to moderately strong calcium carbonate cementation to a de th o 13.6 eet. Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 • ~- ! " MATERIALS December 20, 2004 TESTING Fs' Page # 24 of 29 INSPECTION O Environmental_SQnrices O Geotechnical Engineering O Construction Materials Testing O Spedal Inspections \\mtiserver2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 geotech.doc GEOTECHNIC.AL ' INVESTIGATION ~~ TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log #: TP=S Date Advanced: 12/7/2004 Logged By: Brandon Wright, E.LT. Excavated By: Circle H Construction Location: See Later Site Map Plates Depth to' Water Table: 7:8 Feet ~ Depth to. Bottom Of Hole: 8.1. Feet Depth Field Description,~wlUSCS Soil Sample Sample Depth Qp .Lab Test eet and Sediment Classification ~ • e ~ rom-To ID Sandy Lean Clay (CL): Brown to 0.0-1.1 dark brown, moist, very str;~'to hard. GS 0.3-0.5 ~ 3.0-4.5 B .~ _ ~bisturbed soils associated with the . plvw.zone were noted in the upper 10 inches. • Silty Sand (S1Vl):.8rown to red- '1.1-3.1 . brown, dry to moist, dense to very '. dense: Intermittent weak to moderately strong calcium carbonate ..~ cementation throu hout. Poorly Graded Sand with Gravel 3.1-8.1 _ (SP): Red-brown, moist to saturated, medium dense to dense with fine to coarse grained sand and cobbles. Lab Test ID • M LL PI Sieve Anal sis - % - - #4 #10 #40 #100 #200 B• 31.4 37 10 96 96 88 75 65.1 • ~ Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 63709 208 376-4798 Fax 208 322-8515 r ~e.,oi .,,u~..,u :a .....,.. ... . December 20, 2004 ~ ` MATERIALS ~ • ~~ • TESTING F7r' Page # 2s of 29 INSPECTION ~ ~ _ ~~ ^ Environmental Services ^ Geotechnical Engineering ^ Construction Materials Testing ^ Spedal Jnspections • ~ \~ntiservef2\teports\boise12004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g\b41272 geotech.doc GEOTECI3NICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit Log #: TP-6 Date Advanced: 12/7/2004 Logged By: Brandon Wright, E.LT. Excavated By: Circle H Construction ~ Location: See Later Site Map Plates Depth to~ Water Table: 8.4 Feet Depth to Bottom Of Hole: 9.8 Feet ' Depth ~ Field Description, w/LT5CS Soil Sample Sample Depth Qp ~ Lab Test ~eet and Sediment Classification ~ T . e rom-To ID Sandy Lean Clay (CL): Brown to ~ ~ 0.0-1.7 dark brown;~moist, very stif,~'to hard. 3.0-4.5 Disturbed soils associated with the . plow zone were noted in the upper 10 inches. Silty Sand (S1VJ): Brown to red- • 1.7-Q~.3 brown, dry to moist, dense to very dense. Intermittent weak to moderately strong calcium carbonate cementation throu bout: Poorly Graded Sand with GraQel 4.3-4.8 (SP): Red-brown, moist to saturated, medium dense to dense with fine to coarse grained sand and cobbles. . Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, iD 83709 - 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 E-Mail mti~mti-id.com www.mti-id.com • I~IATERIA[.5 DeceTnber 20, 2004 TESTING Fs' Page # 26 of 29 ~~ 1 NSPECTION ' O Environmental Services ~ ~ O Geotechnical Engineerin~I O Construction Materials Testing ~ O Special Inspections \\mtiservar2\~eports\boise~2004 reports\1200-13991b413T2g\b41272 gootxh.doc GEOTECI~TICAL INVESTIGATION TEST PIT LOG Test Pit~Log #: TP-7 Date Advanced: 12/7/2004 Logged By: Brandon Wright, E.I.T. . Excavated By: Circle H Construction ~ Location: See Later~Site Map Plates _ ' . Depth to Water Table: Not Encountered Depth to Bottom Of Hole: 15.1 Feet Depth Field Description, w/iJSCS Soil Sample Sample Depth: Qp Lib Test .~ eet ~ and Sediment Classification e ~ rom-To ID Sandy Lean Clay (CL): Brown to 0.0-1.1 dark br. own, moist, very stiff to hard ~ 3.0-4.5 . Disturbed soils associated with the . plow zone were noted in the upper 10 inches. Silty Sand (S1Vl): Brown to red- 1.1-10.3 brown,. dry to moist, dense to very dense. Intermittent' weak to moderately . strong calcium carbonate . cementation throu hout. Poorly Graded Sand (SP): Red- 10.3-11.4 brown, moist, medium dense to dense with ne to coarse ained.sand. Silty Sand (S1Vn: Brown to red-. 11.4-15.1 brown, dry to moist, dense to very dense. Copyright ©2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-cI748 Fax 208 322-6515 F_8/lail mtilt3lmti_irl rnm ..~.,......st :.J ....... ' ~ • H ~1IIATERIALS - December 20, zoo4 TESTING F7' Page# 27 of 29 . ~ NSPECTION O Errvironmental Services ^ Geotechnical Engineerin .• O Construction Materials Testing O Spedal Inspections \lmtiserva2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-13991b41372g\b41272 geotech.doc - GEOTECHNICAL - -~-- - - INVESTIGATION .TEST PIT LOG ~~ • Test Pit Log #: TP-8 Date Advanced: 12/7/2004 Logged By: Brandon Wright, E.LT. Excavated By: Circle HConstriction - Location: See Later Site Map Plates. Depth to Water Table: 14.8 Feet . Depth to Bottom Of Hole: 14.8 Feet Depth ~• Field Description, w/USCS Soil Sample ~ Sample Depth Qp ~ ~ Lab Test eet and Sediment Classification ~ e rom-To : ID ' Sandy Lean Clay (CL): Brown to 0.0-1.2 dark brown, moist, very stiff to hard. ~ 3.0-4.5 Disturbed soils associated with the plow zone were noted .in the upper 10 inches. • Silty Sand (S1Vn: Brown to red- ~ - 1.2~6.4 brown, dry to moist, dense to very . dense. Intermittent weak to moderately strong calcium carbonate . cementation throu bout. . Poorly Graded Sand (SP): Red- - 6.4-14.8 brown, moist to saturated, medium dense to dense with fine #o coarse - ained sanai Copyright ~ 2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise,lD 83709 208376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 F-R4;if mtil~imti~rl nnrn ••-•-.-__c is _ - •-- * MATERIAlS•• ~ • • • • • December 20, 2004 T`ESTI NG S' • Page # 28 of 29 INSPECTION . • • ^ Environmental Services O Geotechnical Engineering O Construction Materials Testing fl Special Inspections . • \\mtiserver2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g1b41272 geotech.doc IDAHO METHOD -PAVEMENT THICKNESS (USING ADA COUNTY HIGHWAY DISTRICT SUBSTITUTION RATIOS) Pavement Section Design Location: Ten Mile / Ftaaklin Subdivision • • • •- Average Daily Traffic Count: All Lanes dt Both Directions Design Life• 20 Yeats ' Traffic Index: 6:00 Climate Factor. ! R-Value of Subgrade: 5.00 Subgrado CBR value: - Snbgrade Mr: - R-Vslne of Aggregate Base: 80 R-Value of Grannlar Borrow: 60 • Subgrade R Value: 5 ~ Expansloa Pressure of Snbgrade: 0.33 ' Unit Weight of Base Materials: 130 Total Design Life I8 kip ESAL's: 33,131 • ASPHALTIC CONCRETE: Gravel Equivalent, Calculated: 0384 Feet Thlcimess: 0.196923077 Use= 0.208 Feet Gravel Equivalent, ACTUAL: 0.41 CRUSHED AGGREGATE BASE: Gravel Equivalent (Ballast): 0.768 (ifonly aggregate base is to be considered change B14 toB15 Thickness: 0.329 Use= 0333 Feet' I Crave) Equivalent, ACTUAL: 0.772 GRANULAR BORROW: Gravel Equivalent (Ballast): 1.824 Thickness: 1.052 Uso= 1.167 Feet Gravel Equivalent, ACTUAL: 1.939 TOTAL Thickness: 1.708 Thickmess Required by Exp. Pressure: 0.366 This number must be less than TOTAL Thickness Design (ACI.1D Values) Depth Substitution Asphaltic Concrete (at least 2S): Asphalt Treated Base (at least 4.2): Cement Treated Base (at least 4.2): Untreated Aggregate Base (at least 4.2): Grannlar Borrow (at least 4.2): Inches Ratios 2S0 1.95 (ACRD minimums: 2.5 for local & 3 for art/co0ector) 0.00 0.00 4.00 t.10 14.00 t.00 Copyright O 2004 Materials Testing & Fnspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise, ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 E-Mail mti~mti-id.com www.mti-id.com .. ~ .: -~ MATeRIALS December 20, 2004 T`ESTI NG ~T Page # 29 of 29 INSPECTION • (] Environmental Services D Geotechgical Engineering ^ Construction Materials Testing ~ ^~Special Inspections • ~ \\mtiserver2\reports\boise\2004 reports\1200-1399\b41372g1b41272 geotech.dx Resistance ~~R" value T,ah~ratorv. Test Data Source and Descri ti'on: TP-1 Sand Lean Cla Date Obtained: December 7 2004 Sam le ID• 2948 Sam lin and Pre aration: ASTM D75: AASHTO T2:. X AASHTO T87: X ASTM D421: Test Standard: ASTM D2844: AASHTO T190: Idaho. T8:. X Sam le A B C D Densi b/ NA NA ' NA Mdisttare content % NA ' NA NA Ex ansion Pressure si NA NA ~ NA Exudation Pressure si NA ~ NA ~ NA R-Value NA NA ~ ~ NA ** A$TM D2844 Note 2: Ocassionally, 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. R-Value @ 200. psi Exudation Pressure =Less than 5 • R Value @ Exudation Pressure 10.0 8.0 ~ 6.0 ie ~ 4.0 2.0 0.0 300 250 200 150 100 ' Facudation Pressure (psi) Copyright ®2004 Materials Testing & Inspection, Inc. 7446 W. Lemhi St., Boise,. ID 83709 208 376-4748 Fax 208 322-6515 E-Mail mti@mti-id.com www.mti-id.com >. . ~je,,•- .. Site Plan: Mile & Fr~nk(in Road S ~~ ._ i i ~~ i .i . .\~ , .. .. ~~`. Uev~. us;~,,,~ as .. . ~oc~,~.~.s . ~'~ TP-7 ,~ .. ~.~ ~~ :`~` .~ .. '~~~ ~. .,\~` ~`` .\~` `` ~~~~ ~~ .\~` ~` Mater iais . Testing ~ . tnspec~ion 744~1N temtd5t 208378d7d8 ` Boise; fD'$3709~283$ `~ 208 322515 m6~o me-~mm FRANKLIN ROAD Ten lNife and Frantdin Road LE Subdivision Te Meridian, ID Drawn By: MLP December 13,~2004~~~ ~ ~ ' " r DRAWING#: 8413728 Plate 2 :ND Pit locations ~ N . ~ -rt s-