Agency CommentsDevelopment Services Department
~~
~~ ~~~
D
Project/File: Whitebark Subdivision (MPP-13-028)
The applicant is requesting preliminary plat and development agreement modification
approvals fora 62 lot residential subdivision on approximately 19 acres of land.
Lead Agency: City of Meridian
Site address: 2135 E. Amity Road
Staff Approval: October 15, 2013
Applicants: Cindy K. Lewis Trust
2025 E. Chateau Drive
Meridian, ID 83646
T&M Holdings, LLC
16166 N. 20th Street
Nampa, ID 83687
Representative: Dave Yorgason
Tall Timber Consulting
14254 W. Battenberg Drive
Boise, ID 83713
Staff Contact: Lauren Watsek
Phone: 387-6218
E-mail: Iwatsek(a~achdidaho.orq
A. Findings of Fact
1. Description of Application: The applicant is requesting preliminary plat and development
agreement modification approvals for Whitebark Subdivision. The proposed project includes 55
buildable lots and 7 common lots. The site is currently zoned R-4. The applicant's proposal is
consistent with the comprehensive plan for the City of Meridian.
2. Description of Adjacent Surrounding Area:
Direction Land Use Zoning
North Rural Urban Transition RUT
South Rural Urban Transition RUT
East Low Density Residential R-1
West Rural Urban Transition RUT
3. Site History: ACHD staff previously reviewed this site as Whitebark Subdivision (MPP06-
046/MAZ-06-044) in September 2006. The requirements of this staff report are consistent with
those of the prior action.
1 Whitebark Subdivision
4. Adjacent Development: The following developments are pending or underway in the vicinity of
the site:
• Messina Meadows Subdivision, Estancia Subdivision and Bellingham Park Subdivision,
located north of the site, are all in various stages of development.
5. Transit: Transit services are not available to serve this site.
6. 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.
7. Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)/Five Year Work Plan (FYWP):
• Amity Road is listed in the Capital Improvements Plan to be widened to 5 lanes from Locust
Grove Road to Eagle Road between 2022 and 2026.
• Locust Grove Road is listed in the Capital Improvements Plan to be widened to 3 lanes from
Amity Road to Victory Road between 2017 and 2021.
• Eagle Road is listed in the Capital Improvements Plan to be widened to 5 lanes from Lake Hazel
Road to Amity Road between 2022 and 2026.
• Eagle Road is listed in the Capital Improvements Plan to be widened to 5 lanes from Amity
Road to Victory Road between 2027 and 2031.
• The intersection of Amity Road and Eagle Road is listed in the Capital Improvements Plan for a
roundabout to be constructed and to be widened to 5 lanes on the north leg, 4 lanes on the
south, 4 lanes east, and 4 lanes on the west leg, and signalized between 2022 and 2026.
• The intersection of Amity Road and Locust Grove Road is listed in the Capital Improvements
Plan for a roundabout to be constructed and to be widened to 4 lanes on the north leg, 4 lanes
on the south, 5 lanes east, and 5 lanes on the west leg, and signalized between 2017 and 2021.
B. Traffic Findings for Consideration
1. Trip Generation: This development is estimated to generate 524 additional vehicle trips per day;
55 additional vehicle trips per hour in the PM peak hour, based on the Institute of Transportation
Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 9th edition.
2. Condition of Area Roadways
Traffic Count is based on Vehicles per hour (VPH)
PM Peak PM Peak Existing
Roadway Frontage Functional Hour Hour Level Plus
Classification Traffic Count of Service Project
Amity Road 501 feet Minor Arterial 209 Better than
"
" Better
"
"
D than
D
Locust Grove None Minor Arterial 466 Better than Better
Road "D" than "D"
* Acceptable level of service for atwo-lane minor arterial is "D" (550 VPH).
3. Average Daily Traffic Count (VDT)
Average daily traffic counts are based on ACHD's most current traffic counts.
• The average daily traffic count for Amity Road west of Cloverdale Road was 5,097 on
August 8, 2012.
2 Whitebark Subdivision
• The average daily traffic count for Locust Grove Road south of Victory Road was 6,981
on November 27, 2012.
C. Findings for Consideration
1. South Meridian Transportation Study
The South Meridian Transportation Plan (SMTP) is a long range planning tool developed to plan
for future growth in the South Meridian Area by identifying future roadway, intersection, and
corridor needs. The SMTP provides a framework for future roadway improvements based on the
land use designations. The plan also investigates alternative transportation solutions including
pedestrian and bicycle pathways. The plan was created in collaboration the City of Meridian and
was adopted by the ACHD Commission in May of 2009.
2. Amity Road
a. Existing Conditions: Amity Road is improved with 2 travel lanes, and no curb, gutter or
sidewalk abutting the site. There is 50 feet of right-of-way for Amity 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.
Right-of-Way Dedication: District Policy 7205.2 states that The District will provide
compensation for additional right-of-way dedicated beyond the existing right-of-way along
arterials listed as impact fee eligible in the adopted Capital Improvements Plan using available
impact fee revenue in the Impact Fee Service Area.
No compensation will be provided for right-of-way on an arterial that is not listed as impact fee
eligible in the Capital Improvements Plan.
The District may acquire additional right-of-way beyond the site-related needs to preserve a
corridor for future capacity improvements, as provided in Section 7300.
Sidewalk Policy: District Policy 7205.5.7 requires a concrete sidewalks 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-
3 Whitebark Subdivision
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: ACHD 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 Amity Road is designated in the
MSM as a Residential Arterial with 5 lanes and on-street bike lanes, a 72 foot street section
within 96 feet of right-of-way.
c. Applicant Proposal: The applicant is not proposing any improvements to Amity Road
abutting the site.
d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant's proposal to not improve Amity Road
does not meet District Policy and should not be approved as proposed. The applicant should
be required to dedicate 48 feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Amity Road abutting the
site. As this section of Amity Road is listed in the Capital Improvements Plan, the District will
provide compensation for additional right-of-way dedicated beyond the existing right-of-way.
The applicant should be required to construct a 5 foot wide detached sidewalk located a
minimum of 42 feet from centerline on Amity Road abutting the site. A permanent right-of-way
easement shall be provided if public sidewalks are placed outside of the dedicated right-of-
way.
3. Internal Roads
a. Existing Conditions: There are no roads constructed internal to the site.
b. Policy:
Local Roadway Policy: District Policy 7207.2.1 states that the developer is responsible for
improving all local street frontages adjacent to the site regardless of whether or not access is
taken to all of the adjacent streets.
Standard Urban Local Street-36-foot to 33-foot Street Section and Right-of-way Policy:
District Policy 7207.5.2 states that the standard street section shall be 36-feet (back-of-curb to
back-of-curb) for developments with any buildable lot that is less than 1 acre in size. This
street section shall include curb, gutter, and minimum 5-foot concrete sidewalks on both sides
and shall typically be within 50-feet of right-of-way.
The District will also consider the utilization of a street width less than 36-feet with written fire
department approval. Most often this width is a 33-foot street section (back-of-curb to back-
of-curb) for developments with any buildable lot that is less than 1 acre in size.
Sidewalk Policy: District Policy 7207.5.7 states that five-foot wide concrete sidewalk is
required on both sides of all local street, 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-
4 Whitebark Subdivision
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 7207.5.16 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 fora 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.
c. Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to construct one entrance road with two 21
foot travel lanes, an 11 foot center median, vertical curb, gutter, landscape buffers and 5 foot
detached meandering concrete sidewalks on both sides of the street.
The applicant is proposing to construct Scrub Pine Street as a 34 foot street section with
rolled curb, gutter, and 5 foot wide attached concrete sidewalk within 46 feet of right-of-way.
The applicant is proposing to stub Scrub Pine Street at the north and south property lines.
The applicant is proposing to construct all other internal local roads as 34 foot street sections
with curb, gutter, 8 foot landscape medians and 5 foot wide detached concrete sidewalk with
40 feet of right-of-way.
The applicant is proposing one knuckle and two circular islands on the site.
d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant's proposal to construct one entrance
road with two 21 foot wide travel lanes, an 11 foot center median, vertical curb, gutter,
landscape buffers and 5 foot detached sidewalks meets District Policy and should be
approved as proposed. The applicant should be required to construct sidewalks parallel to the
entrance street and provide right-of-way easements for public sidewalk placed outside of the
dedicated right-of-way. The easement shall encompass the entire area between right-of-way
line and 2 feet behind the back edge of the sidewalk. The applicant should be required to plat
the center median as right-of-way owned by ACHD. The Developer or Homeowners
Association shall apply for a license agreement if landscaping is to be placed within this
median.
The applicant's proposal to construct Scrub Pine Street as a 34 foot street section with rolled
curb, gutter, and 5 foot wide attached concrete sidewalk within 46 feet of right-of-way meets
District Policy and should be approved as proposed.
The applicant's proposal to construct all other internal local roads as 34 foot street sections
with curb, gutter, 8 foot landscape buffers and 5 foot detached concrete sidewalk with 40 feet
of right-of-way meets District Policy. The applicant should be required to provide aright-of-
way easement for public sidewalks placed outside 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.
5 Whitebark Subdivision
The applicant should get written fire department approval from the City of Meridian for the
proposed reduced street sections.
The applicant's proposal to construct one knuckle and 2 circular islands meets District Policy
and should be approved as proposed.
4. Traffic Calming
a. Speed Control and Traffic Calming Policy: District policy 7207.3.7 states that the design of
local street systems should discourage excessive speeds by using passive design elements. If
the design or layout of a development is anticipated to necessitate future traffic calming
implementation by the District, then the District will require changes to the layout and/or the
addition of passive design elements such as horizontal curves, bulb-outs, chokers, etc. The
District will also consider texture changes to the roadway surface (i.e. stamped concrete) as a
passive design element. These alternative methods may require a maintenance and/or license
agreement.
b. Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to construct two circular roadway islands in
the proposed development.
c. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The proposed traffic calming design is not the preferred
passive design element of the District when the islands conflict with residential driveways. Staff
recommends the implementation of designs such as horizontal curves, bulb-outs, and chokers.
If the circular roadway islands are constructed, landscaping in the center islands should not
exceed a height of 3 feet and the Landscape Medians Policy 7207.5.16 will apply
5. Roadway Offsets
a. Existing Conditions: There are no roads constructed internal to the site.
b. Policy:
Local Street Intersection Spacing on Minor Arterials: District policy 7205.4.3 states that
new local streets should not typically intersect arterials. Local streets should typically intersect
collectors. If it is necessary, as determined by ACHD, for a local street to intersect an arterial,
the minimum allowable offset shall be 660-feet as measured from all other existing roadways
as identified in Table 1 a (7205.4.6).
Local Offset Policy: 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 all internal local streets to
provide a minimum offset of 125 feet and is proposing to located the entrance street to
intersect Amity Road in alignment with a single family driveway..
d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant's proposal to construct all internal local
streets to provide a minimum offset of 125 feet meets District Policy and should be approved
as proposed. The applicant's proposal to construct the entrance street to intersect Amity Road
in alignment with a single family dwelling driveway should be approved as proposed.
6. Stub Streets
a. Existing Conditions: There are no roads constructed internal to the site, and no stub streets
are being extended from adjacent properties.
b. Policy:
Stub Street Policy: District policy 7207.2.4 states that stub streets will be required to provide
circulation or to provide access to adjoining properties. Stub streets will conform with the
requirements described in Section 7207.2.5.4, except a temporary cul-de-sac will not be
6 Whitebark Subdivision
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."
In addition, stub streets must meet the following conditions:
• A stub street shall be designed to slope towards the nearest street intersection within the
proposed development and drain surface water towards that intersection; unless an
alternative storm drain system is approved by the District.
The District may require appropriate covenants guaranteeing that the stub street will
remain free of obstructions.
Temporary Dead End Streets Policy: District policy 7207.2.4 requires that the design and
construction for cul-de-sac streets shall apply to temporary dead end streets. The temporary
cul-de-sac shall be paved and shall be the dimensional requirements of a standard cul-de-sac.
The developer shall grant a temporary turnaround easement to the District for those portions
of the cul-de-sac which extend beyond the dedicated street right-of-way. In the instance
where a temporary easement extends onto a buildable lot, the entire lot shall be encumbered
by the easement and identified on the plat as anon-buildable lot until the street is extended.
c. Applicant Proposal: The applicant is proposing to construct 4 stub streets.
• A stub street to the east property line located 520 feet north of the south edge, to serve an
undeveloped 10 acre parcel.
• A stub street to the west property line located 480 feet north of the south edge, to serve an
undeveloped 5 acre parcel.
• A stub street to the south property line located 190 feet west of the east edge, to serve an
undeveloped 113 acre parcel.
• A stub street to the south property line located 170 feet east of the west edge, to serve an
undeveloped 113 acre parcel.
d. Staff Comments/Recommendations: The applicant's proposal to construct stub streets at
the east, west and south property lines of the site meet District Policy and should be approved
as proposed.
The applicant should be required to construct temporary turnarounds at the termini of the two
stub streets at the south property line. The temporary turnaround should be paved and have
the dimensional requirements of a standard cul-de-sac.
The applicant should be required to install a sign at the terminus of each stub street stating
that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED IN THE FUTURE."
7. 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.
8. 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
7 Whitebark Subdivision
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.
9. Other Access
Amity Road classified as minor arterial roadway. Other than the access specifically approved with
this application, direct lot access is prohibited to this roadway and should be noted on the final
plat.
D. Site Specific Conditions of Approval
1. Dedicate 48 feet of right-of-way from the centerline of Amity Road abutting the site. The District
will provide compensation for additional right-of-way dedicated beyond the existing right-of-way.
2. Construct 5 foot wide detached sidewalk on Amity Road located a minimum of 42 feet from
centerline of the roadway. A permanent right-of-way easement shall be provided if public
sidewalks are placed outside of the dedicated right-of-way.
3. Construct one entrance road to the site from Amity Road as proposed, located 300 feet east of
the west edge of the site. The entrance shall be constructed as proposed with two 21 foot travel
lanes, an 11 foot center median, vertical curb, gutter, landscape buffers and 5 foot detached
sidewalk. Sidewalk should be constructed parallel to the entrance road. Provide aright-of-way
easement for public sidewalk placed outside 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.
4. Plat the center median as right-of-way owned by ACRD. The Developer or Homeowners
Association shall apply for a license agreement if landscaping is to be placed within this median.
5. Construct Scrub Pine Street as a 34 foot street section with rolled curb, gutter, and 5 foot wide
attached concrete sidewalk within 46 feet of right-of-way, as proposed.
6. Construct all other internal local roads as 34 foot street sections with curb, gutter, 8 foot
landscape buffers, and 5 foot detached concrete sidewalk with 40 feet of right-of-way as
proposed. Provide aright-of-way easement for public sidewalks placed outside 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.
7. Written fire department approval from the City of Meridian for the proposed reduced street
sections is required.
8. Construct one knuckle and 2 circular islands as proposed. Landscaping in islands shall not
exceed a height of 3 feet.
9. Construct all internal streets to provide a minimum offset of 125 feet as proposed.
a. Construct 4 stub streets as proposed:
• A stub street to the east property line located 520 feet north of the south edge, to serve an
undeveloped 10 acre parcel.
• A stub street to the west property line located 480 feet north of the south edge, to serve an
undeveloped 5 acre parcel.
• A stub street to the south property line located 190 feet west of the east edge, to serve an
undeveloped 113 acre parcel.
• A stub street to the south property line located 170 feet east of the west edge, to serve an
undeveloped 113 acre parcel.
8 Whitebark Subdivision
10. Construct temporary turnarounds at the termini of the stub streets at the south property line. The
temporary turnarounds shall be paved and have the dimensional requirements of a standard cul-
de-sac.
11. Install a sign at the terminus of each stub street stating that, "THIS ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED
IN THE FUTURE."
12. If the circular roadway islands are constructed on the two north-south streets, landscaping in the
center islands shall not exceed a height of 3 feet and the Landscape Medians Policy 7207.5.16
shall apply. The islands shall not restrict any driveways.
13. Direct lot access is prohibited to Amity Road, other than the access specifically approved in this
application and be noted on the final plat.
14. Payment of impacts fees are due prior to issuance of a building permit.
15. Comply with all Standard Conditions of Approval.
E. Standard Conditions of Approval
1. All irrigation facilities shall be relocated outside of the ACRD right-of-way.
2. Private Utilities including 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 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) 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
ACHD 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
9 Whitebark Subdivision
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. Utility Coordinating Council
4. Development Process Checklist
5. Request for Reconsideration Guidelines
10 Whitebark Subdivision
VICINITY MAP
11 Whitebark Subdivision
SITE PLAN
i _ _
~ - ,
I¢ I _ ~~
~_ __
_ Y.i
11
1
i
I i
°.`. .e
i. .. - ~r~. ~ ~ -
`~` ~_
x
C~_ ~ a
a
z~ .o
~~-~~~
N~~S ~rn^ r~
°' !~ y vl y
A u:~'~~
-+ tl]
' ~ ~d
N
O i r
p
Z
N
°~~~
s
~.`\`-`
mow,-...I~_
A s- ' N'' x ''!i~'
~~I;~ ~~~ ~~E ~E Y~~ ~~~ ~~~'~ ~ i a
s.
~~ ~+° ~~ aj ~~ ;~ R~11$ ~ ~
~j i5 ~ ~f A~ ~~~ ~ ,.
pp !3 ~ ~ ~ ~• Y' C p
~9~ '. ~• to . c~~~ N N
ti~?ti.
•\
~ii ~3iE y+~~ga~4°@al~F~a~
I k
~~ i1 ads;~~~~~~~~ z t i ~ @ !l l! a
IL F9 ~ {' ~ {[~° r. ~ L K
L4~~~ ~I ~~~ i ~ ~ ~~ ~ f ~ `''
f' ! ~ I T
F,' 9 I~ ' 1 i ~ ~' ' ~1
~6' U 1 II? ~+I
~ Clt £NCt1FEg1NG ~~- p'~'- ~yb,,,K, ~i
n ~
^` sr'
~'~ ~ ~ ~_`~ ~,
~^ rr ~-h-------
PRFCIh~iNbRY PtAi YfHITEBA.RK SUBt}IVISION
SCCTION 32, 1.3N., R. i C_, Q.A4.
`"'_ _
o ~' '~ «ti ~-~~.-~
"~ .,."' I~ERIDiAh, AGA COUNiY, tGAHJ
-
~r -
12 Whitebark Subdivision
~~~~~ q
'~~~~ ~
r
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.
13 Whitebark Subdivision
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 Applicant:
^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 Approach(s)
• 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-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.
14 Whitebark Subdivision
Request for Appeal of Staff Decision
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 to the appellant
of the ROWDS Manager's reply to the notice of appeal. A copy of the decision
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 adequately supported by the law and
evidence presented at the hearing.
15 Whitebark Subdivision
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 ACRD 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.
f. If a motion to reconsider passes, the applicant may be charged a reasonable fee, to
cover administrative costs, as established by the Commission.
16 Whitebark Subdivision
10/10/2013 09:22
RICHARD MURGOITIO
CHAIRMAN OF THE nOnRO
KENNETW COLE
VIOL- CHAIRMAPI OF THE DOARO
TIMOTHY M. PAGE
PROJECT MAPIAGER
ROB~FtT D. CARTER
ASgISTnN7 PROJECT nMNAGEq
APRYLGARDNQR
SFCRFTARY•TRFaSURF_R
JERRIFLOYD
Ae3~srnrlT ^EGRF_Tnr,Y.
TRFA.gURER
2083441437
BOISE PROJECT
BOISE I~IiO.TECT BOARiD ®r CONTFl;.OI.
(FORMF_RLY r~Olyp U.S. RFf;LAMAT10N f• RO.IFCT)
2x65 OVERLAND ROAD
ools~, lonl•log~7osalg,
NPJIAFA•ME:RIDIAN DISTRICT
801ST I(UNA DISTRICT
WILDER DISTRICT
NSW YORK DISTRICT
UIG BEND DISTRICT
TEL: (249) 344-1141
FAX; (208) 344.7431
l0 October 2013
City of Meridian
City Clerk's Office
33 F, Idaho Avenue
Meridian, Idaho 53642
RE: Cindy K. Lewis Trust & T & M Holdings, L.L.C.
Whitcbark Subdivision
2135 E. Amity Road
New York Irrigation. District
Beasley Lateral 24+40
Sec. 32, T3N, R1E, RM.
raycee i Colman, City Clerk:
Fiie No. PP 13-028
NY-23h~002-00
Th.e United States' Beasley Lateral lies along th.e boundary of the above-mentioned
location. The easement for this lateral is held in the name of the United States through
the Bureau of Reclamation under. the authority of the Act of August 30, ].890. (26 Stat.
391;43 U.S.C. 945)
The Boise Project Board of Control is contracted to operate and maintain this lateral. We
assert thus federal easement 15 feet westErly and 10 feet easterly of the Lateral's
centerline. Whereas this area is for the operation and maintenance of our facility, no
activity should hinder our ability to do so.
Wording on the preliminary anal final recorded plat needs to state that any proposed
and/or, future usage of the Boise Project Board of Control facilities are subject to Idaho
Statues,. Tit1E 42-1209.
Fencing (as may bE required} znu.st be constructed just off the lateral easement.
Parking lots, eurbi.ng, light poles, signs, etc. and the placing of asphalt and/or cemcr~t
over Project facility easements must be approved by Boise Project Board of Control prior
to construction.
PAGE 01/02
OPERATING AGENCY FOR 187,f1aQ
ACRE; FOR TNF FOLLOWING
IRRIGAYION DISTRICTS
The construction of any roadway crossings must be conducted only during the non-
irrigation season when t>xe canal is dewatered. to any case no work shall take place
Machelle Hill
From: Elias Oropeza <elias@settlersirrigation.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 10:17 AM
To: clerk; Bruce Freckleton
Subject: RE: City of Meridian Dev App -Whitebark Sub MDA
This project, file number MDA 13-018 does not impact any of the Settlers Irrigation District facilities.
Please contact New York Irrigation District
From: Mack Myers
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 9:42 AM
To: Elias Oropeza
Subject: FW: City of Meridian Dev App -Whitebark Sub MDA
From: Machelle Hill [mailto:mhill@meridiancity.org]
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 9:16 AM
Subject: FW: City of Meridian Dev App -Whitebark Sub MDA
From: Machelle Hill
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2013 9:15 AM
Subject: City of Meridian Dev App -Whitebark Sub MDA
City of Meridian
~~ City Clerk's Office
~ 33 E. Broadway Avenue
Meridian, ID 83642
City Council
Development Application Transmittal
To: C.it De artments Comments due b :November 19, 2013
Transmittal Date: October 21, File No.: MDA 13-018
2013
Hearin D ate: November 26, 2013
Request: Public Hearing: Modification to the Development Agreement to increase the number
of building lots allowed to develop on the site consistent with the proposed
relimina lat for Whitebark Subdivision
B Cind K. Lewis Trust & T & M Holdin s, LLC
Location of Pro a or Pro'ect: 2135 E. Ami Road
Ci Council Action:
The City of Meridian is requesting comments and recommendations on the application referenced above. To review
.. DISTRRICT CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT
HEALTH Environmental Health Division ~
DEPARTMENT \\~
\>
Rezone # ~~(~ - 1?1-'O~g
Conditional Use #
Return to:
^ ACZ
^ Boise
^ Eagle
^ Garden City
^ Kuna
Preliminary /Final /Short Ptat Meridian
~~~C'f~fl0.~C~-- S ~~ ~f ti yl~ ^ 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 conceming 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.
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 follo~g 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.
^ 14.
Infiltration beds for storm water disposal are considered shallow injection wells. An application and fee must be
submitted to CDHD.
Reviewed By:
Date:~D/ Z-~/~
Review Sheet
15726-001EH1111
10/10/2013 09:22 2083441437 BOISE PROJECT
PAGE 02/02
within the casement before the proper crossing agrcEmen.ts have been secured through the
Bureau of Reclamation and tlae Boise Project Board of Control.
Util.iti.es planning to cross any project facility must do so in accordance with the master
policies row held between the Bureau of Reclamation and most of the utilities. In al~y
case no work shall take place within the easerrtent before proper crossing agreements
have been secured through both the $ureau of Rcclam.ation and the Boise Project Soaxd
of Control.
Storm Drainage and/or Street Runoff must be retained. on site.
Local irrigation/drainage ditches tb,at cross this property, in order to serve neighboring
properties, must remain unobstructed and protectecl by ate appropriate easement.
Whereas this property lies within. the New York Irrigation District it is important that
representatives of this development contact t1~.e NYID office as soon as possible to
discuss the pressure system prior to any costly desigl~ work. I~ applicable, the irrigation
system will have to be built to specific specifications as set by the District /Project,
Boise Project Board of Control must receive a written response from the New York
Irrigation District as to who will own and operate tb.e pressure irrigation system prior to
review and, approval of an irrigation plan by Boise Project $oard of Control_
This development is subject to Idaho Code 31-3805, in accordance, this office is
requesting any copies of. the irrigation and drainage plans.
Whereas this development is in its preliminary stages, Boise Project Board of Control
reserves the right to review plans and require changes when our easements andlor
facilities are affected by unknown factors.
If you have any further questions or comments regarding this matter, please do not
hesitate to contact me at (208) 344-1141.
Sincerely,
k~ ~~
~.
~~~~
Bob Carter
Assistant Project Manager- B]?BC
bdc/bc
cc: Phil Comegys Watcrmaster, Div; 2 BPBC
Velta Flarwood Secretary-Treasurer, NYID
File
.. .s RiCT CENTRAL DISTRICT HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Return to:
HEALTH Environmental Health Division ^ ACZ
DEPARTMENT
1171 ~ ^ Boise
^ Eagle
Rezone # ^ Garden City
Conditional Use # ^ Kuna
Preliminary /Final /Short Plat ~ ~3°' 02$'Meridian
~h`r~~ J~ ^ 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.
8. After written approval from appropriate entities are submitted, we can approve this proposal for:
~1 central sewage ^ community sewage system ^ community water well
^ interim sewage central water
^ individual sewage individual water
9. 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
I~13. Infiltration beds for storm water disposal are considered shallow injection wells. An application and fee must be
submitted to CDHD.
^ 14.
Reviewed By: _
Dater/~/~
Review Sheet
15726-001EH1111
~p'~~
r~ia & 7~l~~cid.~aat ~I~iga Z~w.~uct
1503 FIRST STREET SOUTH
FAX #208-463-0092
~~~,30, 2013
City of I+~ieridian.
C2t~y C~erk`5 Office
33 E Broadway-Avenue, Suite 102
Me>~idian, .ID 83642-2619
_ _ _ ___
RE: PP 13-028/Whitebark Subdivision
Dear Jaycee:
NAMPA, IDAHO 83651-4395
nmid.org
OFFICE: Nampa 208-466-7861
SHOP: Nampa 208-466-0663
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District (NMID) has no comment on the above-referenced
application as it lies outside of our district boundaries. Please contact Bob Carter, Boise
Project -Board of Control, at 344-1141 or 2465 Overland Rd., Room 202, Boise, Idaho
83705-3173.
All laterals and waste ways must be protected. All municipal surface drainage must be
retained on-situ. If any surface drainage leaves the site, Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District
(NMID) must review drainage plans.
S' cerely,
Andy adsen
Asst. Water Superintendent
Nampa & Meridian Irrigation District
AM/dbg
Machelle Hill
From: Elias Oropeza <elias@settlersirrigation.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 10:49 AM
To: clerk; Bruce Freckleton
Subject: RE: City of Meridian Dev App - PP 13-028 Whitebark Sub
This project, file number PP 13-028 does not impact any of the Settlers Irrigation District facilities.
Please contact New York Irrigation District.
Thanks.
From: Mack Myers
Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 6:55 AM
To: Elias Oropeza
Subject: FW: City of Meridian Dev App - PP 13-028 Whitebark Sub
From: Machelle Hill [mailto:mhill@meridiancity.org]
Sent: Monday, September 23, 2013 1:59 PM
Subject: City of Meridian Dev App - PP 13-028 Whitebark Sub
~~ City of Meridian
City Clerk's Office
~ 33 E. Broadwa Aven
ue
Y
~~ Meridian, ID 83642
Planning and Zoning Commission
Development Application Transmittal
To: Outer A encies Comments due b :October 10, 2013
Transmittal Date: September 23, 2013 File No.• PP 13-028
Hearin D ate: October 17, 2013
Request: Public Hearing: Preliminary Plat approval consisting of 55 single family residential
building lots and 7 common/other lots on 19 acres of land in an R-4 zoning district for
Whitebark Subdivision
B Cind K. Lewis Trust and T & M Holdin s, LLC
Location of Pro a or Pro'ect: 2135 E. Ami Road
The City of Meridian is requesting comments and recommendations on the application referenced above. To review
detailed information about the request, please click on the file number above to take you directly to the application.
We request that you submit your comments or recommendations by date specified above. When responding, please
reference the file number of the project. If responding by email, please send comments to clerk(cD.meridiancitv.org.
For additional information associated with this application please contact City Clerk's Office at number below.
1DAHp IDAHO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
* * P.O. Box 8028 (208) 334-8300
Boise, ID 83707-2028 itd.idaho.gov
~ ~
Y W
1
~A~9rArioN o~QpQ~
September 23, 2013
Machelle Hill
Meridian City Clerk's Office
33 East Idaho Avenue
Meridian, Idaho 83642
VIA EMAIL
Re: PP-13-028 Whitebark Subdivision on Amity Road
The Idaho Transportation Department has reviewed the referenced preliminary plat application for the
Whitebark Subdivision on Amity Road. ITD has the following comments:
I) ITD has no objection to the requested application. 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 MS Shona Cheever at 334.8341 or me at 334-8377.
Sincerely,
Dave Szplett
Development Services Manager
dave.szplettna,itd.idaho. og_v