20200806CDS Stoneridge to Staff (1-3) (11-14).pdf

To whom it may concern,

This is the response from Stoneridge utilities addressing requests 1 and 2 from the first production
request Case NO. SWS-W-20-01.

Request # 1:
Maps of our service area have been forwarded.

Here is the break down of lots by Subdivision;
Happy Valley Ranchos units 2 and 3 Total lots: 103 Undeveloped: 23

Happy Valley Ranchos Unit 1 Total lots: 44 Undeveloped: 8

Stoneridge Addition Total lots: 19 Undeveloped: 4

Forest Subdivision Total lots: 88 Undeveloped: 46
Notes: Block 1,2 and 3 are not platted as of now, Block 5 lots 1 and 2 are for multi family units
and have 4 hook up each, accounting for 8 of the undeveloped connections.

Lake Neighbor Hood Total lots: 60 Undeveloped: 28

Stoneridge road Total lots: 50 Undeveloped: 21

Fairway Meadows Total lots: 30 Undeveloped: 0

Stoneridge Resort timeshare Total lots: 150 rooms plus pool/event center Undeveloped: 0

Vineyards Total lots: 24 Undeveloped: 0

RECEIVED
2020 August 6, PM 4:22
IDAHO PUBLIC
UTILITIES COMMISSION
Fairways Total lots: 71 Undeveloped: 30

Motor Coach Total lots: 77 Undeveloped: 0

Ironwoods Total lots: 13 Undeveloped: 5
Notes: ironwoods is a total of 28 lots, but lots 8 through 22 where never completed and can
not be developed at this time.

Total number Stoneridge lots: 579 plus the timeshare Undeveloped lots: 165

Request No. 2:
A) We became aware of the lack of lot connections after closing. It became more evident as we
took responsibility for making the water and sewer connections for the undeveloped lots.
B) The fact the most of the old subdivisions date back to the late 1960’s and the lack of “as built
plans” it is hard to answer why this information was not discovered.
C) Lots with corp. stops: 44
D) Lots without corp. stops: 121 Some of the lots in the Forest and lake neighbor hoods
have inadequate water connections. What we are finding is ONE, 1 inch tap to the water main
with the intent to hook up as many as FOUR homes, Two homes on each side of the road. This
along with the products used does not meet state standards. So a new up to date connection is
needed for each lot in these neighborhoods.
Request No. 3:
The $9,375 charge would cover everything in lines A-F and I. H falls under the “contingency
estimates” which is line J.

Request No. 11: Rejected bids were not used in the calculations to my knowledge. The information
submitted from the three contractors is actual work preformed or a bid from Leo’s excavation.
Contractors are largely chosen by availability and capability.

Request No. 12: Stoneridge does allow owner to use their own contractors, but they must have a
municipality license and their information (license, bond, insurance ect.) must be submitted to our office
along with a cost estimate.

Request No. 13: No one to my knowledge has any financial interest in any of the companies that have
bid for work at Stoneridge.

Request No. 14: No one to my knowledge has any financial interest in any of the companies that have
performed work to connect new customers at Stoneridge.