HomeMy WebLinkAboutEmail from Kerby Kirkham
Tara Green
_._-"-----
. ._~-"--_."_._-_.
From: Sonya Watters [watterss@meridiancity.org]
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 12:11 PM
To: 'Barb Shiffer'; 'Mike Cole'; 'Tara Green'; 'Jessica Johnson'; 'Craig Hood'
Subject: Response to staff comments for Kingsbridge Final Plat
..-----
From: Kerby Kirkham [mailto:kerby@thelandgroupinc.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 20,2005 12:00 PM
To: watterss@meridiancity.org
Subject: Kingsbridge Final Plat
Sonya,
I have read over the staff report for the final plat for Kingsbridge Subdivision. At this point, I do not see any major
problems with any ofthe listed comments. I do have a couple points of clarification.
The first co'mment I have is on the notes on the plat. Our only stipulation that we have to any of these is that they also
have to go through the Ada County Surveyor office. They sometimes reject some of the notes that can be required from
other agencies. We do agree to the notes that you require but they are subject to the County Surveyor's review.
In regards to the pond located adjacent to Lot 2, Block 1, there is no other reasonable place to put this pond as this
became necessary once we got deeper into the irrigation design for this subdivision. We agree with staff comments on
this but I just wanted to emphasize that we could not do much of anything else and did not want to reduce the size of Lot
2, Block 1 but it became the best option available given the irrigation parameters we had to work with. We did not reduce
this lot to make other lots larger and so as you stated the proposed configuration should meet the intent ofthe condition.
Site specific Comment #7 talks about a utilities easement on Lot 1, Block 8. We will do what we need to to keep the tree
(s) in this lot and will either move the utilities or dedicate what is required for an easement so as to allow for the
landscaping.
Site Specific Comment # 22c,d: There is not room to widen the gravel shoulder to 10' wide- Our design is per the Ada
County Highway District Standards and will meet all oftheir requirements.
Comment #24 talks about a grading plan for the five lots on the northwest comer of the site. We do have a grading plan
submitted with the construction documents that does address those lots. Please refer to this for grading in that area.
We agree with what you have stated in regards to the irrigation laterals in site comment #27. We plan to tile the other
irrigation ditches that are located on this property (most of which will be in the later phases). As you stated, the Corps of
Engineers will not give us approval for the realignment of Nine Mile Drain if we tile it. The only way to be able to realign
this ditch is to keep it open per the USACE regulations. The Ten Mile Feeder is a large ditch and the Boise Project Board
of control as well as the Nampa Meridian Irrigation Disbict (they own the ditch directly downstream ofthe site) do not want
this feeder canal to be tiled. We will take all necessary precautions to provide for the safety around the ditch which lies
within a 60 foot easement.
I believe this is all that I had to comment on at this point. If I have any further questions on this, I will let you know.
Please contact me if you have any questions on anything I have responded to. Thank you.
9/20/2005