Loading...
Agency Comments.. .s RICT CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT Return to: HEALTH Environmental Health Division ^ ACZ DEPARTMENT ^ Boise ^ Eagle Rezone # ~Z /TOD~ ^ Garden City Conditional Use # ^ Kuna Preliminary /Final /Short Plat ~P l.2 -O~[~ ~eridian ,,,~c,~. .e~.~ S~.-~ ^ Star ^ 1. We have No Objections to this Proposal. ^ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. ^ 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. ^ 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. ^ 5. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth of: ^ high seasonal ground water ^ waste flow characteristics ^ bedrock from original grade ^ other ^ 6. This office may require a study to assess the impact of nutrients and pathogens to receiving ground waters and surface waters. ^ 7. This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and water availability. ~J 8. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: ~ ~ central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water well ^ interim sewage central water ^ individual sewage individual water 9. The followi plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality: tral sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water ^ sewage dry lines ~ntral water ^ 10. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ^ 11. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ^ 12. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ^ food establishment ^ swimming pools or spas ^ child care center ^ beverage establishment ^ grocery store ~t3. Infiltration beds for storm water disposal are considered shallow injection wells. An application and fee must be submitted to CDHD. ^ 14. Reviewed By: Dater/~/ ~ Z Review Sheet 15726-001EH1111 November 13, 2012 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH FAX #208-463-0092 City t~f Meridian City Clerk's Office 33 E Broadway Avenue Ste 102 Meridian, ID 83642-2619 RE: AZ12-008, PP 12-004/Isola Creek Subdivision Dear Jaycee: NAMPA, IDAHO83651-4395 nmid.org OFFICE: Nampa 208-466-7861 SHOP: Nampa 208-466-0663 AZ12-008: Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) has no comment on the above- referenced application. PP12-004: Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) requires that a Land Use Change Application be filed, for review, prior to final platting. Please contact Suzy Hewlett at 466- 7861 for further information. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. The District's Creason Lateral courses through this proposed project. The District's easement for the Creason Lateral at this location is a minimum of sixty feet (60'), forty feet (40') left and twenty feet (20') right of the centerline (facing downstream) for a portion of it and twenty feet (20') left and forty feet (40') right of centerline for the other portion. However please contact the District directly to verify the width of easement necessary to operate, maintain, and repair the Creason Lateral. The Dic#ri~:t's Five Mile r?r31n also coursos through thi3 NrG~,us~G prUjeCY. The. District's easement for the Five'Mile Drain at this location is a minimum of one hundred feef (100'), fifty feet (50') each side of the centerline. However please contact the District directly to verify the width of easement necessary to operate, maintain, and repair the Five Mile .Drain. Page 1 of 2 a ,~ ~ ~~ _., _ .. ~ t APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS -40,000 City of Meridian AZ12-008 & PP 12-004/Isola Creek Sub November 13, 2012 Page 2 of 2 Please send revised plans showing exactly what proposed encroachments, if any, will be within the District's easement and exactly how far. This easement must be protected. Any encroachment without a signed License Agreement and approved plan before any construction is started is unacceptable. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on site. If any municipal surface drainage leaves the site, the Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) must review drainage plans. The developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. Sincerely, Gre G. Curtis 9 Water Superintendent Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District GGC/dbg C: File/Office 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO83651-4395 FAX #208-463-0092 nmid.org OFFICE: Nampa 208-466-7861 SHOP: Nampa 208-466-0663 Becky McKay Engineering Solutions, LLP 1029 N. Rosario Street, Suite 100 Meridian, ID 83642 RE: Land Use Change Application -Isola Creek Subdivision Please note the District now requires three (3) sets of plans Dear Ms. McKay: Enclosed please find a Land Use Change Application for your use to file with the Irrigation District for its review on the above-referenced development. If this development is under a "rush" to be finalized, I would recommend that you submit a cashier's check, money order or cash as payment of the fees in order to speed the process up. If you submit a company or personal check, it must clear the bank before processing the application. Should this development be planning a pressure urban irrigation system that will be owned, operated and maintained by the Irrigation District, I strongly urge you to coordinate with Greg G. Curtis, Water Superintendent for the Irrigation District, concerning the installation of the pressure system. Enclosed is a questionnaire that you must fill out and return in order to initiate the process of contractual agreements between the owner or developer and the Irrigation District for the ownership, operation and maintenance of the pressure urban irrigation system. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to call on me at the District's office, or Greg G. Curtis, at the District's shop. Sincerely, Suzette G. Hewlett, Asst. Secretary/Treasurer NAMPA & MERIDIAN IRRIGATION DISTRICT SGH/smk cc: File Water Superintendent City Clerk's Office, City of Meridian Coleman Homes, LLC, 1859 S. Topaz Way, Suite 200, Meridian, ID 8 Leonard Huskey Estates, c/o Ed McNelis, 921 N. Robinson Road, Na ~'1~~7 enc. .~ APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS - 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 16 November 2012 ;~ _.~ /~ ~. .. Date: October 24, 2012 To: Thomas M. Coleman (sent via email) Coleman Homes, LLC 1859 S. Topaz Way, Suite 200 Meridian, ID 83642 Subject: Isola Creek Subdivision (MPP-12-004 & MAZ-12-008) N. Ten Mile Road Rebecca W. Arnold, President Sara M. Baker, Vice President John S. Franden, Commissioner Carol A. McKee, Commissioner Mitchell A. Jaurena, Commissioner On October 24, 2012 the Ada County Highway District Commission acted on your application for the above referenced project. The attached report lists 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) 387-6174. Sincerely, ~~ Jarom Wagoner Planner II Development Services Ada County Highway District CC: Project file City of Meridian (sent via email) Becky McKay, Engineering Solutions, LLP (sent via email) Ada County Highway District • 3775 Adams Street • Garden City, ID • 83714 • PH 208-387-6100 • FX 345-7650 • www.achdidaho.org s ~~~~~ (i'Ot~wnvi~~ ~O 1'itw'i~GG Development Services Department ProjectlFile: Isola Creek Subdivision (MPP-12-004 8~ MAZ-12-008) This is an annexation and preliminary plat application to rezone and subdivide approximately 74.6 acres into 168 residential lots and 18 common lots. The site is located on the east side of Ten Mile Road, approximately'/4 mile north of Ustick Road. Lead Agency: City of Meridian Site address: N. Ten Mile Road Commission Consent Agenda Hearing: October 24, 2012 Applicant: Thomas M. Coleman Coleman Homes, LLC 1859 S. Topaz Way Ste. 200 Meridian, ID 83642 Representative: Becky McKay Engineering Solutions, LLP 1029 N. Rosario Street Ste. 100 Meridian, ID 83642 Staff Contact: Jarom Wagoner Phone: 387-6174 E-mail: jwaaonerCa~achdidaho.ora Tech Review: October 1, 2012 A. Findings of Fact 1. Description of Application: The applicant is proposing to annex and rezone approximately 74.6 acres from RUT (Rural-Urban Transitional) to R-4 (Medium Low-Density Residential). The applicant is proposing to subdivide the 74.6 acres into 168 residential lots and 18 common lots. 2. Description of Adjacent Surrounding Area: Direction Land Use Zonin North Medium Low Densit Residential R-4 South Medium Low Densit Residential R-4 East Medium Low Densit Residential R-4 West Rural Urban Transition Zone RUT 3 Site History: ACRD has not previously reviewed this site for a development application. 2 Isola Creek 4. 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. 5. Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)/Five Year Work Plan (FYWP): • The intersection of Ustick Road and Ten Mile Road is currently under construction to be widened to 5-lanes on the north leg, 6-lanes on the south leg, 6-lanes on the east leg, and 6- lanes on the west leg, and signalized. • Ten Mile Road is listed in the Capital Improvements Plan to be widened to 5 lanes from Ustick Road to McMillan Road between 2017 and 2021. B. Traffic Findings for Consideration 1. Trip Generation: This development is estimated to generate 2,107 additional vehicle trips per day (none existing); 314 additional vehicle trips per hour in the PM peak hour (none existing), based on the traffic impact study. 2. Traffic Impact Study Engineering Solutions prepared a traffic impact study for the proposed Isola Creek Subdivision. Below is an executive summary of the findings as presented by Engineering Solutions. The following executive summary is not the opinion of ACHD staff. ACHD has reviewed the submitted traffic impact study for consistency with ACHD policies and practices, and may have additional requirements beyond what is noted in the summary. ACHD Staff comments on the submitted traffic impact study can be found below under staff comments. Executive Summary The purpose of this letter is to summarize the transportation impacts of the proposed Isola Creek Subdivision (Huskey parcel) east of Ten Mile Road between Ustick Road and McMillan Road. The standard format for a traffic analysis is not provided since the two adjacent arterial intersections (Ten Mile/Ustick and Ten Mile/McMillan) have been or are in the process of being widened to accommodate future development. The Ten Mile/Ustick intersection is currently under construction through a project in ACHD's Five-Year Work Program. The Ten Mile/McMillan intersection widening was completed as part of an adjacent major commercial development. Existing Conditions The site is currently in agricultural production. The 74.6-acre site has an agricultural access at the northwest corner and a residential access from Ten Mile Road. There are no site improvements such as curb, gutter or sidewalks. Ten Mile Road is a two-lane facility with a signed speed limit of 50 MPH abutting the site. ACRD conducted traffic counts on Ten Mile Road in August 2011. Their data shows 287 and 460 vehicles per hour during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The daily traffic volume was 4,927 vehicles. The staff at Engineering Solutions conducted additional traffic counts in August 2012; however, those numbers were lower than ACHD's 2011 counts due to the ongoing construction at the Ten Mile /Ustick intersection. For this analysis, the ACRD counts were used. The proposed project is expected to generate approximately 2,107 daily vehicle trips and 136 and 314 trips during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. The proposed project includes 168 single-family homes, plus 14.38 acres of common area within the total site area of 74.6 acres. The open space areas include private open space, multi-use pathways, a community pool for residents and public open space for potential development of a tot lot, soccer fields, picnic shelter, and basketball courts. The pool facility and private amenities serve only the subdivision residents; therefore, no external trips will be generated. The traffic 3 Isola Creek analysis is includes the traffic volumes generated by development of the neighborhood park. The park design is only conceptual and may develop differently. The assumed trip rate for seven soccer fields generates more trips than the other uses. The table values may be lower (i.e., fewer vehicle trips) under an alternative park development plan. The project is planned for completion within five years. The assumed build-out date is 2017. Summary and Recommended Mitigation The proposed project is expected to generate approximately 2,107 daily vehicle trips and 136 and 314 trips during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. A technical analysis shows that Ten Mile Road has sufficient capacity to accommodate the build- out traffic volumes. The main site entrance to Ten Mile Road provides an acceptable level of service. None of the internal streets with front-on housing exceed the planning threshold of 1,000 vehicles per day. The site volumes are large enough to require a southbound left-tum lane on Ten Mile Road at the main site entrance. Two mitigation items have been identified in this analysis: • Construct the main site access intersection with Ten Mile Road to include a sufficient width to accommodate simultaneous westbound left- and right- turning traffic. • Construct a southbound left-tum lane on Ten Mile Road at the main site entrance. 4 Isola Creek Staff Comments/Recommendations: District Traffic Services staff had the following concerns regarding the submitted traffic impact study: • Staff agrees with the recommendation to construct a southbound left-turn lane on Ten Mile Road at the main site entrance. • The traffic impact study fails to give consideration to a northbound dedicated right-turn lane from Ten Mile Road into the development. • The traffic impact study does not provide information regarding parking for the proposed soccer fields, as these are heavy traffic generators. The proposed parking would not be sufficient for the expected use. On October 2, 2012 staff received the applicant's response to ACHD's review comments for the traffic study. The applicant provided aright-turn analysis and indicated that a northbound right- turn lane is warranted for the subdivision. The applicant also stated that they have not yet determined if the soccer fields will be built as part of the park project or not. When the park develops in the future, ACRD will re-evaluate the requirements depending on what types of facilities are proposed. The District has concerns regarding the existing proposal for the soccer fields due to the lack of parking demonstrated. With the high trip generation that would occur, it would force the majority of those vehicles to park on the neighborhood streets. 3. Condition of Area Roadways Traffic Count is based on Vehicles per hour (VPH) Functional PM Peak PM Peak Existing Future Roadway Frontage Hour Hour Level Plus Level of Classification Traffic Count of Service Pro'ect Service Ustick Road None Principal 521 Better than N/A N/A Arterial "D" Ten Mile 1,525 Minor Arterial 423 Better than 737 "F" Road feet "D" * Acceptable level of service for afive-lane principal arterial is "E" (1,770 VPH). * Acceptable level of service for atwo-lane minor arterial is "D" (550 VPH). 4. Average Daily Traffic Count (VDT) Average daily traffic counts are based on ACHD's most current traffic counts. • The average daily traffic count for Ustick Rd. east of Ten Mile Rd. was 12,313 on June 14, 2011. • The average daily traffic count for Ten Mile Rd. north of Ustick Rd. was 7,769 on August 23, 2011. Conditions of Area Intersections 5. 2 -Way Stop Controlled Intersection Main Site Access/Ten Mile WB Road Main Site Access N/A Current V/C Raito Future V/C Ratio 0.23 *An acceptable V/C ratio for the side street (left turn) of a stop controlled intersection is 1.0 or less. 5 Isola Creek C. Findings for Consideration 1. Ten Mile Road a. Existing Conditions: Ten Mile Road is improved with 2-travel lanes, and no curb, gutter, or sidewalk abutting the site. There is 50 to 72 feet of right-of--way for Ten Mile Road (25 feet from centerline). b. Policy: Arterial Roadway Policy: District Policy 7205.2.1 states that the developer is responsible for improving all street frontages adjacent to the site regardless of whether or not access is taken to all of the adjacent streets. Master Street Map and Typology Policy: District Policy 7205.5 states that the design of improvements for arterials shall be in accordance with District standards, including the Master Street Map and Livable Streets Design Guide. The developer or engineer should contact the District before starting any design. Street Section and Right-of-Way Width Policy: District Policies 7205.2.1 & 7205.5.2 state that the standard 5-lane street section shall be 72 feet (back-of-curb to back-of-curb) within 96 feet of right-of-way. This width typically accommodates two travel lanes in each direction, a continuous center left-turn lane, and bike lanes on a minor arterial and a safety shoulder on a principal arterial. Sidewalk Policy: District Policy 7205.5.7 requires a concrete sidewalk at least 5-feet wide to be constructed on both sides of all arterial streets. A parkway strip at least 6-feet wide between the back-of-curb and street edge of the sidewalk is required to provide increased safety and protection of pedestrians. Consult the District's planter width policy if trees are to be placed within the parkway strip. Sidewalks constructed next to the back-of--curb shall be a minimum of 7 feet wide. Detached sidewalks are encouraged and should be parallel to the adjacent roadway. Meandering sidewalks are discouraged. A permanent right-of-way easement shall be provided if public sidewalks are placed outside of the dedicated right-of-way. The easement shall encompass the entire area between the right- of-way line and 2 feet behind the back edge of the sidewalk. Sidewalks shall either be located wholly within the public right-of-way or wholly within an easement. ACHD 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 Ten Mile Road is designated in the MSM as a Residential Arterial with 5-lanes and on-street bike lanes, a 71-foot street section within 100 feet of right-of-way. c. Applicant Proposal: The applicant is proposing to dedicate 40 feet of right-of--way from the centerline of Ten Mile Road, abutting the site. The applicant is proposing to construct a disconnected 5-foot wide meandering sidewalk along Ten Mile Road, abutting the site. The sidewalk is proposed to meander into the subdivision on the north and south sides of the proposed internal street, rather than make a thru connection (see Exhibit "A"). 6 Isola Creek Exhibit "A" ~ ~ I I 10 ~ 5 ~ *S. ~ I I ~ 1287s of \ ~ -- -- L~jr (I / 1+~, `3 i ~ 4 --75' --- ~ I 1 \` 14114 d 3 2 2 . ~, IDENTIAL f! 1 ``~ S ~ o 12262 of g 10450 f ~ ~ i ~. ` SF ` Bt1~ 1 o a I I ~ COI1 EXI ~~ECT TO LING WATER ~~_ -.,.~,, _'-,1a _- --~--~ c~~ ~ ~=~~ ~;~f~ ~. ICIE ACQES'S'". . ~ ~~ ~(ISTING SEWER I '- -° -- _- - ~,- - . . INV. 2543.40 ~l ~# -'^~ _ i ~ _ , - `~" ~ ~ 1 i 38 ~ i 32 i / 3 ii 9 SF ~ ,r~ I ~ j ~ I ~ 15899 d ~ n 1148s at I ~ 114 5 s1 R I ii4 30 I 1 i ~ 29 I O I ~ .I II I~ 1 I ~ I' ~ 15560 of d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: In accordance with the MSM the applicant should be required to dedicate 50 feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Ten Mile Road, abutting the site. In accordance with the submitted traffic impact study the applicant should be required to construct a southbound left-turn lane and a northbound right-turn lane on Ten Mile Road at the main site entrance (Tesino Drive). The applicant should be required to construct a 5-foot wide concrete sidewalk located a minimum of 43 feet from the centerline of Ten Mile Road (measured to near edge of sidewalk). The sidewalk should make a continuous connection along its entire frontage on Ten Mile Road. District Policy 7205.5.7 states that detached sidewalks should be parallel to the adjacent roadway and that meandering sidewalks are discouraged. 2. Tesino Drive a. Existing Conditions: The site has no internal collector streets. b. Policy: Collector Street Policy: District Policy 7206.2.1 states that the developer is responsible for improving all collector frontages adjacent to the site or internal to the development as required below, regardless of whether access is taken to all of the adjacent streets. Master Street Map and Typologies Policy: District Policy 7206.5 states that if the collector street is designated with a typology on the Master Street Map, that typology shall be considered for the required street improvements. If there is no typology listed in the Master Street Map, then standard street sections shall serve as the default. Street Section and Right-of-Way Policy: District Policy 7206.5.2 states that the standard right-of-way width for collector streets shall typically be 50 to 70 feet, depending on the location and width of the sidewalk and the location and use of the roadway. The right-of-way width may be reduced, with District approval, if the sidewalk is located within an easement; in 7 Isola Creek which case the District will require a minimum right-of--way width that extends 2 feet behind the back-of--curb on each side. The standard street section shall be 46 feet (back-of-curb to back-of-curb). This width typically accommodates a single travel lane in each direction, a continuous center left-turn lane, and bike lanes. Residential Collector Policy: District Policy 7206.5.2 states that the standard street section for a collector in a residential area shall be 36 feet (back-of--curb to back-of-curb). The District will consider a 33-foot or 29-foot street section with written fire department approval and taking into consideration the needs of the adjacent land use, the projected volumes, the need for bicycle lanes, and on-street parking. Sidewalk Policy: District Policy 7206.5.6 requires a concrete sidewalk at least 5 feet wide to be constructed on both sides of all collector streets. A parkway strip at least 6 feet wide between the back-of-curb and street edge of the sidewalk is required to provide increased safety and protection of pedestrians. Consult the District's planter width policy if trees are to be placed within the parkway strip. Sidewalks constructed next to the back-of--curb shall be a minimum of 7 feet wide. Detached sidewalks are encouraged and should be parallel to the adjacent roadway. Meandering sidewalks are discouraged. A permanent right-of-way easement shall be provided if public sidewalks are placed outside of the dedicated right-of--way. The easement shall encompass the entire area between the right- of-way line and 2 feet behind the back edge of the sidewalk. Sidewalks shall either be located wholly within the public right-of-way or wholly within an easement. Landscape Medians Policy: District Policy 7206.5.14 states that landscape medians are permissible where adequate pavement width is provided on each side of the median to accommodate the travel lanes and where the following is provided: • The median is platted as right-of--way owned by ACHD. • The width of an island near an intersection is 12-feet maximum for a minimum distance of 150-feet. Beyond the 150-feet, the island may increase to a maximum width of 30-feet. • At an intersection that is signalized or is to be signalized in the future, the median width shall be reduced to accommodate the necessary turn lane storage and tapers. • The Developer or Homeowners Association shall apply for a license agreement if landscaping is to be placed within these medians. • The license agreement shall contain the District's requirements of the developer including, but not limited to, a "hold harmless" clause; requirements for maintenance by the developer; liability insurance requirements; and restrictions. • Vertical curbs are required around the perimeter of any raised median. Gutters shall slope away from the curb to prevent ponding. Minor Improvements Policy: District Policy 7203.3 states that minor improvements to existing streets adjacent to a proposed development may be required. These improvements are to correct deficiencies or replace deteriorated facilities. Included are sidewalk construction or replacement; curb and gutter construction or replacement; replacement of unused driveways with curb, gutter and sidewalk; installation or reconstruction of pedestrian ramps; pavement repairs; signs; traffic control devices; and other similar items. c. Applicant Proposal: The applicant is proposing to construct Tesino Drive as a 36-foot residential collector with vertical curb, gutter, 8-foot wide planter strip, 5-foot wide detached sidewalk, and no front-on housing. Tesino Drive is proposed as a residential collector from its intersection with Ten Mile Road to Teano Drive (approximately 1,000 feet). 8 Isola Creek The applicant is proposing to construct two landscape medians on Tesino Drive. They are located as follows: • 25-foot wide landscape median beginning at the intersection of Tesino Drive and Ten Mile Road and running east for approximately 200 feet. • 10-foot wide landscape median beginning at the intersection of Tesino Drive and San Remo Drive and running east for approximately 200 feet. d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant's proposal to construct Tesino Drive as a residential collector meets District Policy and should be approved, as proposed. The applicant should be required to construct the landscape medians with a maximum width of 12 feet for the first 150 feet, as required by District Policy 7206.5.14. The proposed islands can then widen out to a maximum width of 30 feet. Staff is recommending a modification of the MSM to delete the residential collector roadway that was to run along the south property line, connecting Ten Mile Road to Towerbridge Way (see Exhibit "B" below). The modification is due to the fact that with the development of Bridgetower Phase 1, there is no feasible way for the road to connect to Towerbridge Way. Additionally, there is an existing residential collector located '/4 mile to the north that provides a through connection and is able to be accessed from the development. Exhibit "B" The city of Meridian and ACHD Planning and Projects staff have indicated that they are in favor of the proposed modification (see Attachment 3). 3. Internal Local Streets a. Existing Conditions: The site has no internal streets. b. Policy: 9 Isola Creek Required Improvements Policy: District Policy 7207.2.2 states that required improvements to an internal local street shall consist of a complete street section with curb, gutter and sidewalk (minimum 5-feet) on both sides of the roadway. Street Section and Right-of-Way Policy: District Policy 7207.5 states that right-of-way widths for all local streets shall generally not be less than 50-feet wide and that the standard street section shall be 36-feet (back-of-curb to back-of-curb). The District will consider the utilization of a street width less than 36-feet with written fire department approval. Continuation of Streets Policy: District Policy 7207.2.4 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. Benefits of connectivity include but are not limited to the following: • Reduces vehicle miles traveled. • Increases pedestrian and bicycle connectivity. • Increases access for emergency services. • Reduces need for additional access points to the arterial street system • Promotes the efficient delivery of services including trash, mail and deliveries. • Promotes appropriate intra-neighborhood traffic circulation to schools, parks, neighborhood commercial centers, transit stops, etc. • Promotes orderly development. Sidewalk Policy: District Policy 7207.5.7 states that afive-foot wide concrete sidewalk is required on both sides of all local streets, except those in rural developments with net densities of one dwelling unit per 1.0 acre or less, or in hillside conditions where there is no direct lot frontage, in which case a sidewalk shall be constructed along one side of the street. Some local jurisdictions may require wider sidewalks. The sidewalk may be placed next to the back-of--curb. Where feasible, a parkway strip at least 8 feet wide between the back-of-curb and the street edge of the sidewalk is recommended to provide increased safety and protection of pedestrians and to allow for the planting of trees in accordance with the District's Tree Planting Policy. If no trees are to be planted in the parkway strip, the applicant may submit a request to the District, with justification, to reduce the width of the parkway strip. Detached sidewalks are encouraged and should be parallel to the adjacent roadway. Meandering sidewalks are discouraged. A permanent right-of-way easement shall be provided if public sidewalks are placed outside of the dedicated right-of-way. The easement shall encompass the entire area between the right- of-way line and 2 feet behind the back edge of the sidewalk. Sidewalks shall either be located wholly within the public right-of--way or wholly within an easement.). Cul-de-sac Streets Policy: District Policy 7207.5.8 requires cul-de-sacs to be constructed to provide a minimum turning radius of 45 feet; in rural areas or for temporary cul-de-sacs the emergency service providers may require a greater radius. Landscape and parking islands may be constructed in turnarounds if a minimum 29-foot street section is constructed around the island. The pavement width shall be sufficient to allow the turning around of a standard AASHTO SU design vehicle without backing. The developer shall provide written approval from the appropriate fire department for this design element. The District will consider alternatives to the standard cul-de-sac turnaround on a case-by-case basis. This will be based on turning area, drainage, maintenance considerations and the written approval of the agency providing emergency fire service for the area where the development is located. 10 Isola Creek c. Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to construct the internal local streets as 36- foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter, 8-foot wide planter strip, and 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalks within 50 feet of right-of-way. The applicant is proposing to construct one cul-de-sac street (Teano Court) within the development with a turning radius of 45 feet. d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant's proposal meets District Local Streets Policy and should be approved, as proposed. The applicant should provide a permanent right-of--way easement for the detached sidewalks. The applicant's proposal meets District Cul-de-sac Streets Policy and should be approved, as proposed. The applicant should be required to provide a minimum turning radius of 45 feet. 4. Roadway Offsets a. Existing Conditions: There are no existing roadway offsets internal to the development. b. Policy: Collector Street Intersection Spacing on Minor Arterials: District Policy 7205.4.6 states that the minimum allowable offset for unsignalized collector street intersecting a minor arterial shall be 1,320 feet as measured from all other existing roadways as identified in Table 1 a. Local Offset Policy: District Policy 7206.4.5, requires local roadways to align or offset a minimum of 330 feet from a collector roadway (measured centerline to centerline). District Policy 7207.4.2, requires local roadways to align or provide a minimum offset of 125 feet from any other street (measured centerline to centerline). c. Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to construct Tesino Drive, a collector roadway, to intersect Ten Mile Road approximately 1,100 feet north of the nearest intersecting street. The applicant is proposing all of the internal local streets to offset a minimum of 125-feet. d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant's proposal does not meet District Collector Roadway Offset Policy; however, staff recommends a modification of policy to approve the applicant's request, as proposed. The requested modification is minimal as the roadway is offset over 1,100 feet from the nearest roadway, and that the nearest roadway is classified as a local commercial street. All internal streets offset by a minimum of 125 feet and should be approved, as proposed. 5. Tree Planters Tree Planter Policy: Tree Planter Policy: The District's Tree Planter Policy prohibits all trees in planters less than 8-feet in width without the installation of root barriers. Class 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. 6. Landscaping Landscaping Policy: A license agreement is required for all landscaping proposed within ACHD right-of-way or easement areas. Trees shall be located no closer than 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. 11 Isola Creek 7. Other Access Ten Mile Road is classified as a minor arterial roadway. Tesino Drive is classified as a collector roadway. Direct lot access is prohibited to these roadways and should be noted on the final plat. D. Site Specific Conditions of Approval 1. Dedicate 50 feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Ten Mile Road, abutting the site. The right- of-way purchase and sale agreement and deed must be completed and signed by the applicant prior to issuance of a building permit (or other required permits). Allow up to 30 business days to process the right-of--way dedication after receipt of all requested material. The District will purchase the right-of-way which is in addition to the existing right-of-way from available Corridor Preservation Funds. 2. Construct a southbound left-turn lane on Ten Mile Road at the main site entrance (Tesino Drive). 3. Construct a northbound right-turn lane on Ten Mile Road at the main site entrance (Tesino Drive). 4. Construct a 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalk located a minimum of 43 feet from the centerline of Ten Mile Road, abutting the site. The sidewalk shall provide a continuous connection along the sites entire frontage abutting Ten Mile Road. 5. Construct Tesino Drive as a 36-foot residential collector with vertical curb, gutter, 8-foot wide planter strip, 5-foot wide detached sidewalk, and no front-on housing within 50 feet of right-of--way, from its intersection with Ten Mile Road to Teano Drive, as proposed. Provide the District with a sidewalk easement for any segment of the sidewalk located outside of the right-of-way. Parking and front-on housing are prohibited on Tesino Drive. 6. Construct the internal local streets as 36-foot street sections with rolled curb, gutter, 8-foot wide planter strip, and 5-foot wide detached concrete sidewalks within 50 feet of right-of--way. Provide the District with a permanent right-of-way easement for the detached sidewalks. 7. Construct the internal cul-de-sac (Teano Court) with a minimum turning radius of 45 feet, as proposed. 8. Direct lot access is prohibited to Ten Mile Road and to Tesino Drive from its intersection with Ten Mile Road to Teano Drive. This access restriction shall be noted on the final plat. 9. Payment of impacts fees are due prior to issuance of a building permit. 10. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval. E. Standard Conditions of Approval 1. Any existing irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the ACHD right-of--way. 2. Private sewer or water systems are prohibited from being located within the ACHD right-of- way. 3. In accordance with District Policy, 7203.3, 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 provide documentation of ADA compliance to District Development 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 ACHD right-of--way or easement areas. 12 Isola Creek 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) at least two full business days prior to breaking ground within ACHD right-of-way. The applicant shall contact ACHD Traffic Operations 387-6190 in the event any ACHD 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 ACHD 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 ACHD 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 ACHD. 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, ACHD 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 require the applicant to comply with ACHD Policy and Standard Conditions of Approval in place at that time unless awaiver/variance of the requirements or other legal relief is granted by the ACHD Commission. F. Conclusions of Law 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. G. Attachments 1. Vicinity Map 2. Site Plan 3. Email from City of Meridian 4. Utility Coordinating Council 5. Development Process Checklist 6. Request for Reconsideration Guidelines 13 Isola Creek Vicinity Map 14 Isola Creek Site Plan y m.n r'«w w+.:."~.w _ C •,•.. ioww~B4 ~-r ra iua ~..~x.°mam•~i.`w r.. as•w ;.. . ,+ :',::` ~ ~ ~~ r sa, w a;.~ ..~.. lvb ui/~W~M}Tw a;.~,,.>~..»„«~:r >~..>,~ ..a~, ~ "SOS NOIS-I~148r1S ~ ;. n ~ 7a ~.„, ' IINdN:~ ?1332i~ V'tOSi e ~ t ~ ~:- t? ~ ~ x ~~BBi96988~668$981 ~" " ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ 6 ~ { t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ '~ ~ ~'1~ ~~ p ~~''I 'tai}t"~+ ii ~~~~~~~~~~~ 111111111 _ ~~~ ~t~~ E.~`j 3~ '45~$ ~~II~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ s•• ~ ~~ 1 ~ ~ _ • p i ~~ 7 555 i4 ~xi ~~~t~~~~ ~..,. tiM1,,..,_ ~ _._._, _~ _ __ ~ ~ ~ ~~>d~~~tr~~~~~~~ { -~~~o. ~ ~ ~, ~t I ,, ui ~ ' ~ . ~s . s~`# - i v w ~ t ~ ~-~-- " f t ~ _ ~ 1 rj'~ .~ !~ x i z wm_ r L ~~ s to ~~ r a =, .^~ t . t a ~ E r' ~ a' ~. y , - , k _ ; i ~,{ 1 ~a... ~~.. dj' j~ fi~ ~ ~~~~., E ~ E~dj pF ~~t~~ ~.f~ ... x .~ .~ ~ 1~ ~ ~ .... A ~ /J/^ ~ ~j \ ~ r; ~ ~ '~ . i a r ~ u i ~ ~ a ~~ iii 1 _ ~ " 1 t I• ~ ..~ ~ ~ „~ s 7_ ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~' ~ a~ ) ~ + P --t~ t f ~` e ) ~ ( ~ ~ e ~ ,, ., .w ~ ~ .. . -~~ , ~ ~ +~. F a ~ ' ! ~ • x~ .. . A~ ~ ~ ~ %/~ ~ 5 ~.: ' '' J I ~ r i ~ ~ ~~ ,.~ ~~ ..~ y ~ ~. , .• ~~ ~~ AE ~~ x~ a~ /~/, 1./ Y / s sn,.,.. _`: - 9 . ~ ...... ~' ~-~ . __~ .. ., , _ - .. n ' #` ~ j__. _ ' t_ .~ ~ . , .` ....~ Qg -. 15 Isola Creek Email from City of Meridian .Jarom Wagoner From: Bill Parsons <bparsons@mendiancityorg> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 3:53 PM To: Jarom Wagoner Subject: RE: Isola Creek Sub Jarom, The Cit~• would support ACHD's recommendation to remove the future collector street designation from the MSM. Tha,iks, Bill Parsons, AICP Associate City Planner Community Development Department 33 E. Broadway Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 PNONE: (208} 884-5533 FAX: (208) 888-6854 bparsons n.mcridiancit~~.org 16 Isola Creek Ada County Utility Coordinating Council Developer/Local Improvement District Right of Way 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 shall 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. 17 Isola Creek Development Process Checklist 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. Itefrts tQ be cant! ~ A~i~ra~rt:: ^For ALL development applications, including those receiving a "No Review" letter: • The applicant should submit one set of engineered plans directly to ACHD for review by the Development Review Section for plan review and assessment of impact fees. (Note: if there are no site improvements required by ACHD, then architectural plans may be submitted for 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 Approaches) • 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 ACRD Right-of-Way • Four business days prior to starting work have a bonded contractor submit a "Temporary Highway Use Permit Application" to ACHD 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 • 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 ACHD Construction to be reviewed and approved by the ACHD Stormwater Section. ^ Idaho Power Company • 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. 18 Isola Creek Request for Reconsideration of Commission Action Request for Reconsideration of Commission Action: A Commissioner, a member of ACHD 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 ACHD 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 ACHD staff may present such written and oral testimony as the President of the Commission determines to be appropriate, and the Commission may take any action the majority of the Commission deems advisable. If a motion to reconsider passes, the applicant may be charged a reasonable fee, to cover administrative costs, as established by the Commission. 19 Isola Creek \DAHO August 30, 2012 * ~ ~ ~ Z ~Ao9lA1'ION p~CQPPti Machelle Hill Meridian City Clerk's Office 33 East Idaho Avenue Meridian, Idaho 83642 VIA EMAIL Re: AZ 12-008 and PP 12-004 for Isola Creek The Idaho Transportation Department has reviewed the referenced annexation and preliminary plat application for the Isola Creek subdivision northeast of Ten Mile Road at Ustick Road. ITD has the following comments: 1) ITD has no objection to the requested applications. The project does not generate any more trips than anticipated under the Comprehensive Plan and this site does not require access to the State Highway System. If you have any questions, you may contact Matt Ward at 334-8341 or me at 334-8377. Sincerely, ~~~~~~- IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 8028 Boise, ID 83707-2028 (208) 334-8300 itd.idaho.gov Dave Szplett Development Services Manager dave.szp lettna, itd. idaho.gov .. ~~ TRICT CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT Return to: HEALTH Environmental Health Division ,~ ^ ACz DEPARTMENT ~~ ^ Boise ^ Eagle Rezone # .~ Z`/Z --[~©~ ^ Garden City Conditional Use # ^ Kuna Preliminary /Final /Short Plat t' (aZ '-G1>y Meridian ^ Star ^ 1. We have No Objections to this Proposal. ^ 2. We recommend Denial of this Proposal. ^ 3. Specific knowledge as to the exact type of use must be provided before we can comment on this Proposal. ^ 4. We will require more data concerning soil conditions on this Proposal before we can comment. ^ 5. Before we can comment concerning individual sewage disposal, we will require more data concerning the depth of: ^ high seasonal ground water ^ waste flow characteristics ^ bedrock from original grade ^ other ^ 6. This office may require a study to assess the impact of nutrients and pathogens to receiving ground waters and surface waters. ^ 7. This project shall be reviewed by the Idaho Department of Water Resources concerning well construction and water availability. ~. After writter} approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for: ntral sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water well ^ interim sewage f~ central water ^ individual sewage ^ individual water /~' The following plan(s) must be submitted to and approved by the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality: ,central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water ^ sewage dry lines .central water ^ 10. This Department would recommend deferral until high seasonal ground water can be determined if other considerations indicate approval. ^ 11. If restroom facilities are to be installed, then a sewage system MUST be installed to meet Idaho State Sewage Regulations. ^ 12. We will require plans be submitted for a plan review for any: ^ food establishment ^ swimming pools or spas ^ child care center ^ beverage establishment ^ grocery store ~13. Infiltration beds for storm water disposal are considered shallow injection wells. An application and fee must be submitted to CDHD. ^ 14. Reviewed By: _ '~%I~~G,9~ ~ c Date:~l~~ //L- Review Sheet 15726-001EH1111 ~~I`~ oint School District No. 2 1303 E.Central Drive • Meridian, Idaho 83642 • (208) 855-4500 • Fax (208) 350-5962 City of Meridian City Clerk's Office Attn: Jaycee Holman 33 East Broadway Avenue Meridian, ID 83642 Dear Planners: Joint School District No. 2 has experienced phenomenal student growth in the last ten years. Nearly every high school, middle school, and elementary school throughout the district is operating at or over capacity. Approval of Isola Creek Subdivision will have an impact on school enrollment at Hunter Elementary School, Sawtooth Middle School and Eagle High School in Joint School District No. 2. Based on U.S. census data, we can predict that these homes, when completed, will house 135 school aged children. Joint School District No. 2 supports economic growth. However, growth fosters the need for additional school capacity. Revenue support from developers of new residential subdivisions is required for the purchase of the school sites necessary to serve the proposed subdivision. Joint School District No.2 estimates the revenue required for the purchase of future school sites is $830.00 per new home unit. The approval of Isola Creek Subdivision will create the need for $139,440.00 in revenue to purchase the school sites this subdivision will require. In lieu of these sources of revenue, the district will accept the donation of land appropriate for school sites. Such sites will need water and sewer service available, and prior to the commencement of construction, the district will need to pass a bond issue for the construction of schools. Residents cannot be assured of attending the neighborhood school as it may be necessary to bus students to available classrooms across the district. We ask that you require the developer to provide safe walkways, bike baths and safe pedestrian access for our students. School capacity is addressed in Idaho code 67-6508. Joint School District No. 2 is currently operating beyond capacity. Future development will continue to have an impact on the district's capacity. Sincerely, ~"~'~ ~- ; Bruce Gestrin Ph.D. Assistant Superintendent SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Linda Clark September 6, 2012 ~7n~~Rla r ~~ air 1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395 FAX # 208-463-0092 Phones: Area Code 208 OFFICE: Nampa 466-7861 SHOP: Nampa 466-0663 City of Meridian City Clerk's Office 33 E Broadway Avenue Ste 102 Meridian, ID 83642-2619 RE: AZ 12-008 & PP 12-004/Isola Creek Subdivision Dear Jaycee: Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) has no comment on REZONE only. All laterals and waste ways must be protected. NMID's Five Mile Drain (100' easement; 50' each side) and Cresson Lateral (60' easement; 20' left and 40' right of centerline facing downstream) course along the south boundary of this proposed project. Therefore at the time of development a Land Use Change Application will be required. All municipal surface drainage must be retained on-site. If any surface drainage leaves the site, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) must review drainage plans. The Developer must comply with Idaho Code 31-3805. Sincerely, Gre r: Curtis Water Superintendent Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District GGC/dbg C: File/Office APPROXIMATE IRRIGABLE ACRES RIVER FLOW RIGHTS • 23,000 BOISE PROJECT RIGHTS - 40,000 September 5, 2012