HomeMy WebLinkAboutLetter from Karnes Lateral AssociationKARNES LATERAL ASSOCIATION, INC. `
~~~
Offices of the Chairman ~ ~ }
3877 Elgin Way
Boise, Idaho 83713 ,~~ „~~~~~
208-323-0464 ~ °~ ~a''..
February 23, 2009 `~ ~~ ~ ' la\~~~/`~_
6
~~ ~`'~
Sonya Wafters ~ ~,
City of Meridian, Planning Department
City Hall
Meridian, ID 83642
Re: 6325 N. Locust Grove Annexation
Hearing Date Z-24-09
Valley Life Community Church Property
Sonya
Kames ovens and operates an irrigation lateral distributing Settlers Irrigation District
water to its members along its ditch system stretching from its headgate near Five Mile Road
and Ustick Avenue to its multiple termini in the vicinity of Chinden Boulevard and Jericho Rd.
One branch of our lateral crosses Locust Grove Road approximately 450 feet South of
Chinden Boulevard, immediately North of the driveway for the Valley Life Community Church.
During the 2005-20~ time period, Valley Life Community Church cmnsolidated that waterway
with a drain ditch used by shareholders of the Zinger Lateral and piped the ditch across their
property in an eighteen inch (18~ pipe with at least two turns and no access manholes at such
turn points, all without the written permission of Kames and, in fartt, against the
recommendation of the then Lateral Manager. This action is a direct violation of Idaho Code
Sections 42-1102, 42-1207, and 42-902.
Karnes does not oppose the pending action by the City of Meridian in annexing the
property into the City of Meridian at this time. Kames is requesting, however, that the City of
Meridian mark its records to show that the Valley Life Community Church property at 6325 N.
Locust Grove Road is not in compliance with the provisions of Idaho Code Sections 42-1102,
42-1207, and 42-902. It is the position of Kames that no government entitlement should be
considered, and if considered, no permission should be granted, until such time as Valley Life
Community Church has brought its property into compliance with Idaho Code Sections 42-1102,
42-1207, and 42-902.
Idaho law is very speafic about the requirements for mod~yying an irrigation ditch by a
property owner. IC 42-1102 states, in part, the following:
`?he existence of a visible ditch, canal or corroluit shall constitute notice to the owner , or
any subsequent purchaser, of the underlying servient estate. that the owner of the ditch,
canal or conduit has the right-of-way and irtciderttal rights cor~fim~i or granted by this
section.
-1
"Rights-of-way provided by this section are essential for the orations of the ditches,
canals and conduits. No person or entity shall cause or permit any encroachments onfo
the right-of-way, including public and private rid, utilities, fences, gates, pipelines,
sfructures, or other construction or placement of objects, without the prior written
permission of the owner of the right-of-way in or~r to ensure that any such
encroachrr~nts will not unreasonably or materially interfere with the use and enjoyment
of the right-of-way. Encroachments of any kind placid in such right-of-way without the
express written permission of the owner of the right-of-way shall !a' removed at the
expense of the person or entity causing or permitting such encroachment, upon the
request of the owner of the right-of-way, in the event that any such encroachments
unreasonably or materially interfere with the use and enjoyment of fhe right-of-way."
it says:
IC 42-1107 makes it clear that a drain has equal status to that of a supply ditch. In part,
"such drains shall be n~arded as equal to that of irrigation canals. r
IC 42-1207 speaks to the issue of a properly owner's right to modify and bury a ditch on
such owner`s property. The applicable part of that section says:
WVhere any ditch, canal, lateral or drain or buried irrigation conduit has heretofore been,
or may hereafter be, constructed across or beneath lands of another, the person or
persons owning or controlling said land shall have the right at their own expense to
change said ditch, canal, lateral or drain or buried irrigation conduit to any other part of
said land, but such change must !~ made in such a rr~nner as not to impede the flow of
the water therein, or to otherwise injure any person or persons using or interested in
such ditch, canal, lateral or drain or buried irrigation conduit. Any increased operation
and maintenance shall be the responsibilify of the landowner making the change.
"A landowner shall also have the right to bury the ditch, canal, lateral or drain of another
in pipe on the landowner's property, provided that ~ pipe, installation and backflll
reasonably meet standard specifications for such materials and construction, as set forth
in the Idaho standards for public works construction or other standards recognised by
the city or county in which the burying is to ~ done. The right and responsibility for
operation and maintenance shall remain with the owner of the ditch, canal, lateral or
drain, but fhe landowner shall be responsible for any increased operation and
maintenance costs, including rehabilitation and replacement, unless otherwise ag-eed in
writing with the owner.
`The written permission of the owner of the ditch, canal, lateral or drain or buried
irrigation conduit must first be obtained before it is changed or placed in buried pipe by
the landowner."
IC 42-902 talks about diversion of water. It says:
"Any person who, without the consent of the watermaster of the district, diverts any
water from the ditch or channel where it was p~c~ed, or caused, or left to run by the
watermaster or his depufres, or who shuts or opens any ditch, gate or dam with the
intent so to divert any water, and thereby c~prive any person of the use of the same
during any part of the time he is entitled to such use, or who, without the consent of the
watermaster, cuts any ditch or the banks then3of, or breaks or destroys any gate or
-2
flume, is liable in a civil action to any person injured thereby in three times the actual
damage sustained in consequence of any wrongful act or acts."
As you can read in the Idaho Code, there are several statutes that directly bear on the
actions of the Valley Life Community Church in consolidating the two ditches into one and
burying the combined flows in the single 18 inch pipe.
The consolidation of the two ditches into one effectively diverted the northernmost ditch
into the southemmost ditch. Even though the water is described as waste water, property
owners down stream may have rights to use that water. Because the Valley Life Community
Church failed to obtain any consents for the diversion, ~ could be liable for treble damages as a
result of this diversion.
The realignment of the southemmost ditch and the burying of it both required the prior
written permission of the Karnes Lateral. In addition, the diversion of the water from the
northernmost ditch into the southemmost ditcth required the prior written permission of the
Karnes Lateral as does the intercxinnection of the ditch with the storm water detention pond
adjacent to the parking lot on the church property as both have the capacity to introduce
additional water, often contaminated with chemicals from automobile sources, into the
southemmost ditch which serves as a supply ditch for the Karnes Lateral. Not only was written
permission not obtained but Mike McCrure, the Karnes Ditch Rider at the time, expressly
instructed the Church not to bury the ditch using the size pipe being contemplated by the
Church as it was too small.
IC 42-1207, which is quoted above, n~quires that the burial be atxomplished in a manner
so °that the pipe, installafion and backfill reasonably meet standard specifications for such
materials and constnfction, as set forth in the Idaho standards for public works construction or
other standards recognized by the city or county in which the burying is to be done." These
standards are materially different from the materials and construction standards used by the
Church in burying the ditch.
Karnes was then, and now remains unwilling to grant its permission to Valley Life
Community Church for the construction as built for the following four reasons:
The pipe size, at 18 inches, was too small to contain the maximum expected flows.
During high water periods, such as storm events, the existing construction will result in
the flooding of the ACRD right of-way for Locwst Grove Road, potentially weakening the
road bed and causing unnecessarily high maintenance costs for this stretch of Locust
Grove Road.
2. No trash rack was installed at the pipe inlet, increasing the probability that the pipe
would become blocked with debris.
3. The pipe has at least one, and possibly as many as three bends over its length with no
manholes installed at these critical poirrts. This makes it difficult and expensive to loca#e
and remove any blockage at these likely points without excavating sections of the pipe.
4. Karnes does not have the authority to unilaterally grant permission for the consolidation
of the two ditches at this point
-3
Throughout 2007 and 2008 Karnes has tried to work with the Valley Life Community
Church to find a solution to the problems created by this installation. The Church has
repeatedly refused to address the issues, most recerrtly in December, 2008 when a Church
board representative informed the Kames Lateral that the Church does not intend to do
anything about the problems created by the improper and unapproved instaNation of the 18 inch
pipe and that the Church forbids the Kames Lateral from using equipment on the Church
property to correct the problem. Because of lack of cooperation on the part of Valley Life
Community Church, Karnes is unable to make any headway in correcting the problem at this
time.
Thank you for your operation in this matter. If you have any questions or wish
additional information, please feel free to contact me at the address noted above.
Sincerely,
Donald R. Alloway, Chairman
Kames Lateral Association, Inc.
-4