View: Project Documents
| Agency | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2024 2:00:11 PM |
V3: Letter of Intent comments | 4/26/2024 2:00:11 PM |
|
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2024 1:01:53 PM |
Review 3: PCD Planning Division has comments on the following documents: - Preliminary Plan (to be uploaded by review engineer) - Letter of Intent |
4/26/2024 1:01:53 PM | |
| View |
County Attorney - Water
4/24/2024 2:41:58 PM |
See attached Water Supply Review and Recommendations. | 4/24/2024 2:41:58 PM |
| View |
Colorado Department of Transportation - Pueblo Office
4/17/2024 3:26:20 PM |
4/17/2024 3:26:20 PM | |
| View |
EPC Environmental Services
4/12/2024 2:40:20 PM |
4/12/2024 2:40:20 PM | |
|
911 Authority - El Paso/Teller County
4/12/2024 7:56:25 AM |
Comments for E911 as follows: Public Tody Way – Acceptable and reserved for this project Buteos Ln – Acceptable and reserved for this project Motmot Way – Acceptable and reserved for this project Sapoya Pl – Acceptable and reserved for this project Jacamar Pl – Acceptable and reserved for this project Jackdaw Dr – Acceptable and reserved for this project Retail Row St – Acceptable and reserved for this project Nunbird Ct – Acceptable and reserved for this project Becard Rd – Acceptable and reserved for this project Hoopoe Ln – Acceptable and reserved for this project Dovekie Dr – Acceptable and reserved for this project Private Limpkin Pt – Acceptable and reserved for this project Dunlin Hts – Acceptable and reserved for this project Perula Pt – Acceptable and reserved for this project Thank you Justin |
4/12/2024 7:56:25 AM | |
|
Pikes Peak Regional Building Department
4/11/2024 1:26:02 PM |
1. 12445 Rio Lane home will be removed. A wrecking permit with Regional Building Department will be required prior to plans being approved for permit on this new project. 2. 12455 Rio Lane has phone equipment, verify with the utilities provider if this service is active. On parcel 43070-00-001. 3. Can Jackdaw Drive and Retail Row Street be one street name? Page UT2, overlaying in the street names, they are difficult to read. Street name LIMPKIN POINT is not on the approved list. 4. For assignment of addressing for lots and tracts, place addressing marker (xxx) where they are intended to be utilized. Addressing marker for lots should be front door. 5. Will there be more than 1 commercial building on each lot? Amy Vanderbeek Enumerations Plans Examiner Pikes Peak Regional Building Department O: 719-327-2930 E: Amy@pprbd.org |
4/11/2024 1:26:02 PM | |
|
RBD Floodplain
4/10/2024 4:31:23 PM |
approved CLOMR required prior to grading in the SFHA | 4/10/2024 4:31:23 PM | |
|
Mountain View Electric Association, Inc.
4/2/2024 7:56:00 AM |
See comment letter dated April 17, 2023 - all comments still apply. No additional comments at this time. | 4/2/2024 7:56:00 AM | |
|
County Attorney - Water
3/20/2024 1:48:29 PM |
The Land Development Code establishes presumptive water use values based on developed square footage for commercial uses. The County Attorney’s Office understands that the Woodmen Hills Metro District uses SFEs to estimate water demand and has established a value of 3 SFEs per acre of commercial development. This office needs more information to evaluate whether this is a reasonable amount. Please include in the Water Resource Report a discussion of the District’s approach to estimating commercial demand, i.e., how have they arrived at 3 SFEs per acre? Include a comparison to the presumptive values in the Code. An example of a similar discussion, though there is room for improvements, can be found on pp. 2-3 of the Water Resource Report for the Bent Grass Replat, File No. VR2316. | 3/20/2024 1:48:29 PM | |
|
911 Authority - El Paso/Teller County
3/20/2024 10:44:05 AM |
Comments for E911 as follows: Tody Way – Available Buteos Ln – Available Motmot Way – Available Sapoya Pl – Available Jacamar Pl – Available Jackdaw Dr – Available Retail Row St – Available Nunbird Ct – Available Becard Rd – Available Hoopoe Ln – Available Dovekie Dr – Available Perula Way – Available – Private roads require the following suffixes – Grove, Heights, Point, or View. Dunlin Dr – Available – Private roads require the following suffixes – Grove, Heights, Point, or View. Willet Way – Not available – Existing name – Please also submit proper suffix for private road. Streetnaming information (Existing/reserved names and naming criteria) can be found on the E911 website at: http://elpasoteller911.org/191/Street-Name-Database Thank you Justin |
3/20/2024 10:44:05 AM | |
|
RBD Floodplain
3/19/2024 2:41:50 PM |
approved CLOMR required prior to grading in the current effective floodplain. | 3/19/2024 2:41:50 PM | |
| View |
EPC Health Department
9/1/2023 1:19:21 PM |
9/1/2023 1:19:21 PM | |
|
Colorado Department of Transportation - Pueblo Office
8/29/2023 3:54:35 PM |
CDOT Access Comments: • Two CDOT Access Permit is required for this development. One for the closure of Rio Lane to SH24G and the other for the 4-leg connection of Woodmen Rd. Please coordinate with Arthur Gonzales for access permitting at arthur.gonzales@state.co.us • Roadway work will be detailed in the terms and conditions of the Access Permits. See below for for Traffic Operations summary comments. CDOT Traffic Operations Comments: The site will require an access permit for the construction of the 4th leg of Woodman and the closure of Rio. The applicant will be responsible for constructing improvements as described in the TIS, namely: 1. EB to SB right turn deceleration lane 2. NB to EB right turn acceleration lane 3. Signalization of 4th leg of the intersection 4. Laneage as described in the TIS for the NB Woodman movement |
8/29/2023 3:54:35 PM | |
|
County Attorney - Development Review
8/24/2023 2:19:48 PM |
No comments from County Attorney - Development Review. | 8/24/2023 2:19:48 PM | |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
8/23/2023 9:52:37 AM |
Deviation 4 intersection spacing urban local comments | 8/23/2023 9:52:37 AM |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
8/23/2023 9:51:59 AM |
Deviation 3 turn lane lengths comments | 8/23/2023 9:51:59 AM |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
8/23/2023 9:51:29 AM |
Deviation 2 access to collector comments | 8/23/2023 9:51:29 AM |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
8/23/2023 9:50:56 AM |
Deviation 1 intersection spacing Comments | 8/23/2023 9:50:56 AM |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
8/23/2023 3:19:54 PM |
Preliminary Plan Comments | 8/23/2023 3:19:54 PM |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
8/23/2023 9:29:08 AM |
TIS comments | 8/23/2023 9:29:08 AM |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
8/23/2023 9:27:50 AM |
GEC Plan comments | 8/23/2023 9:27:50 AM |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
8/23/2023 9:27:23 AM |
Preliminary Drainage Report Comments | 8/23/2023 9:27:23 AM |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
8/23/2023 9:26:47 AM |
Letter of Intent Comments | 8/23/2023 9:26:47 AM |
|
PCD Engineering Division
8/23/2023 3:19:19 PM |
Review 2 comments on the following documents will be uploaded: -Letter of Intent -Preliminary Drainage Report -GEC plan -TIS -Preliminary Plan -Deviations 1-4 If still requesting pre-development site grading, please submit an FAE form. Staff recommends a meeting be held to discuss comments/concerns. Please reach out to the project manager to set up a meeting. Due to the volume and complexity of comments and redlines and the additional information and details required, Staff will provide additional comments on the next submittal. A minimum 21-day review period will be necessary for any additional deviation requests. reviewed by: Daniel Torres danieltorres@elpasoco.com |
8/23/2023 3:19:19 PM | |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
8/17/2023 11:35:02 AM |
V2 - Water Resources Report Planning comments attached | 8/17/2023 11:35:02 AM |
|
PCD Project Manager
8/22/2023 8:39:26 AM |
Review 2: PCD Planning Division comments have been provided (in green) on the following uploaded documents: - Letter of Intent................... (to be uploaded by Engineering) - Preliminary Plan................ (to be uploaded by Engineering) - Water Resources Report |
8/22/2023 8:39:26 AM | |
|
Colorado Geological Survey
8/15/2023 11:02:44 AM |
The revised Soil and Geology Study (Entech Engineering, Inc., 7/21/2023) references the updated preliminary plans. Entech’s characterization of the geologic hazards and constraints associated with the project site is valid. Provided Entech’s recommendations are strictly adhered to, CGS has no objection to the preliminary plan. We offer the following comments and recommendations. 1. As page 8 of Entech’s revised report states, “The constraints/hazards identified on this site include artificial fill, hydrocompaction, potentially expansive soils, seasonal and potentially seasonal shallow groundwater areas, areas of ponded water, springs, unstable slopes, and floodplains.” Entech observed groundwater in all the borings at depths ranging from 1.5 to 12.5 feet during their 2021 exploration program and at depths ranging from the surface to 8 feet in the piezometers recently installed. Entech states (page 16), “Basements or useable areas below grade are not recommended on the majority of the site.” CGS agrees with Entech that the shallow groundwater conditions preclude the construction of basement levels for this development. CGS agrees with the preliminary plan's soil & geology conditions note (Drexel, Barrel & CO., 6/28/2023), “Due to the potential of shallow groundwater basements are prohibited.” This statement should also be shown on the final plat/final plans in future submittals. 2. The preliminary plan should be updated to include Entech’s 7/21/2023 report. 3. The grading and erosion control plans (Drexel, Barrel & CO., 6/28/2023) should be updated to include Entech’s 7/21/2023 report. 4. As previously recommended by CGS in our 4/14/2023 comments, Entech is performing continued groundwater monitoring for the fall, winter, and spring seasons, which satisfactorily addresses our previous comment. CGS agrees with Entech (page 14) that “Filling the site would further raise foundations above the groundwater level” and (page 10), “Unstable conditions should be expected where excavations approach the groundwater level.” Entech’s recommendation, “Further investigation will be necessary to determine the groundwater depth at each individual building site,” should be performed early in the design process to determine subsurface drainage recommendations (i.e., perimeter drains, underslab drains, interceptor drains, etc.) for each lot. 5. As noted on page 9 of Entech’s report, “Some of the steep slopes along the drainage in the central portion of the site have been identified as unstable.” However, we understand that “the drainage area with the unstable slopes (Lots 81 and 82) will be regraded and filled mitigating the unstable slopes hazard” and ”The existing drainages will be routed through a pipe or box culvert.” Careful consideration of building placement within Lots 81 and 82 should be made during design. Submitted 8/15/2023 by Amy Crandall, Engineering Geologist, Colorado Geological Survey |
8/15/2023 11:02:44 AM | |
|
EPC Stormwater Review
8/17/2023 9:33:39 AM |
Review 2: EPC DPW Stormwater comments have been provided (in orange text boxes) on the following uploaded documents to be uploaded by PCD Engineer: - Drainage Report - GEC Plan EPC DPW Stormwater comments have been resolved on the following documents: - ESQCP - Soils & Geology Report EPC DPW Stormwater provided comments on the following documents in Submittal 1 and they must be resubmitted with comments addressed since early grading is now being requested: - GEC Checklist - PBMP Applicability Form - SWMP - SWMP Checklist Due to the volume or complexity of the comments provided, these comments are preliminary in nature and EPC DPW Stormwater reserves the right to make additional comments. Additional detailed comments will be provided upon receipt of complete information/plans and resolution of the major issues. Please feel free to call if you have any questions regarding this review. Reviewed by: Mikayla Hartford Stormwater Engineer I MikaylaHartford@elpasoco.com |
8/17/2023 9:33:39 AM | |
| View |
Colorado Division of Water Resources
7/31/2023 12:03:50 PM |
See attached letter. | 7/31/2023 12:03:50 PM |
|
911 Authority - El Paso/Teller County
7/31/2023 7:21:25 AM |
Comments for E911 as follows: E Woodmen Rd – Logical continuation of existing roadway. Rio Ln – Logical continuation of existing roadway. Tody Way - Available Buteos Ln - Available Motmot Way - Available Sapoya Pl - Available Jacamar Pl - Available Jackdaw Dr - Available Retail Row St - Available Nunbird Ct - Available Becard Rd - Available Hoopoe Ln - Available Perula Way – As a private road, this should have one of the following suffixes – Grove, Heights, Point, or View. Avocet Pl – Not acceptable, existing road name. Trogon Way – Not acceptable, similar to existing road name. Barbet Dr – Not acceptable, similar to name reserved for another road. Streetnaming information (Existing/reserved names and naming criteria) can be found on the E911 website at: http://elpasoteller911.org/191/Street-Name-Database Thank you Justin |
7/31/2023 7:21:25 AM | |
|
Pikes Peak Regional Building Department
7/27/2023 11:05:41 AM |
1. Provide a new list of street names that have been approved from El Paso-Teller County 9-1-1 Authority. This is required to be email to this department. 2. How many buildings will be on each of the commercial lots? Are there proposed construction drawings? If so, this would help in addressing the lots appropriately. Please clarify. 3. For assignment of addressing for lots and tracts, place addressing marker (xxx) where they are intended to be utilized. Addressing marker for lots should be front door. 4. Provide a 100 scale copy or larger of the entire APPROVED development plan (d.p.) to this department so that addressing can be assigned. Once received, the development plan will be placed on a list to be addressed. Development plans that are not yet approved may be addressed, however additional plan review fees will accrue if changes are made to the D.P. after initial addressing. Amy Vanderbeek Enumerations Plans Examiner Pikes Peak Regional Building Department O: 719-327-2930 E: Amy@pprbd.org |
7/27/2023 11:05:41 AM | |
| View |
EPC Environmental Services
7/25/2023 2:05:45 PM |
7/25/2023 2:05:45 PM | |
|
RBD Floodplain
7/25/2023 10:07:16 AM |
according to the letter of intent "Design and analysis for a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) is underway to modify the floodplain. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) will be prepared upon completion of the site improvements." please coordinate a local floodplain permit once the CLOMR is approved prior to commencement of earth work or early grading Keith Curtis, PE, CFM, LEED AP Floodplain Administrator Pikes Peak Regional Building Department 2880 International Circle Colorado Springs CO, 80910 O: 719-327-2898 E: keith@pprbd.org W: pprbd.org |
7/25/2023 10:07:16 AM | |
| View |
Colorado Parks and Wildlife
5/11/2023 5:20:03 PM |
5/11/2023 5:20:03 PM | |
| View |
Parks Advisory Board
5/11/2023 9:48:53 AM |
See final Park Advisory Board endorsed comments attached. | 5/11/2023 9:48:53 AM |
| View |
Colorado Department of Transportation - Pueblo Office
5/8/2023 2:32:47 PM |
5/8/2023 2:32:47 PM | |
|
County Attorney - Water
5/8/2023 9:34:36 AM |
In a letter dated April 20, 2023, the Colorado Division of Water Resources found that the water supply was not adequate to meet the demand and requested clarification on well no. 1924. The County Attorney's Office will complete its review once conditions in the State Engineer's letter have been met, and a finding of sufficiency has been made. Thank you. | 5/8/2023 9:34:36 AM | |
|
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 4:14:41 PM |
Due to the volume or complexity of the comments provided, there may be additional comments provided with subsequent reviews. If the applicant has any questions, PCD Project Manager recommends that the applicant reach out to staff to schedule a meeting to discuss the comments. | 4/26/2023 4:14:41 PM | |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:36:32 PM |
Water Supply Summary comments (incl. Planning) | 4/26/2023 3:36:32 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:36:12 PM |
Water Resources Report comments (incl. Planning) | 4/26/2023 3:36:12 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:35:50 PM |
TIS comments (incl. Engineering) | 4/26/2023 3:35:50 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:35:16 PM |
SWMP comments (incl. Stormwater) | 4/26/2023 3:35:16 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:34:50 PM |
SWMP Checklist comments (incl. Stormwater) | 4/26/2023 3:34:50 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:34:29 PM |
Subdivision Summary Sheet comments (incl. Planning) | 4/26/2023 3:34:29 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:34:00 PM |
Soils & Geology Report comments (incl. Engineering and Stormwater) | 4/26/2023 3:34:00 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:33:34 PM |
Preliminary plan comments (incl. Planning and Engineering) | 4/26/2023 3:33:34 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:32:30 PM |
PBMP form comments (incl. Engineering) | 4/26/2023 3:32:30 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:32:11 PM |
Letter of intent comments (incl. Planning) | 4/26/2023 3:32:11 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:33:10 PM |
GEC Plan comments (incl. Engineering and Stormwater) | 4/26/2023 3:33:10 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:31:27 PM |
GEC Checklist (incl. Stormwater comments) | 4/26/2023 3:31:27 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:32:53 PM |
ESQCP comments (incl. Engineering and Stormwater) | 4/26/2023 3:32:53 PM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
4/26/2023 3:30:23 PM |
Drainage report comments (incl. Engineering and Stormwater) | 4/26/2023 3:30:23 PM |
|
PCD Engineering Division
4/25/2023 5:25:17 PM |
Review 1 comments on the following documents will be uploaded: -Letter of Intent -Preliminary Drainage Report -ESQCP -GEC plan -TIS -Soils and Geology Report -Preliminary Plan Due to the volume and complexity of comments and redlines and the additional information and details required, Staff will provide additional comments on the next submittal. The subsequent submittal will be treated as a first review. A minimum 21-day review period will be necessary for any deviation requests. reviewed by: Daniel Torres danieltorres@elpasoco.com |
4/25/2023 5:25:17 PM | |
| View |
EPC Parks Department
4/20/2023 3:43:06 PM |
See preliminary Parks comments attached. | 4/20/2023 3:43:06 PM |
|
EPC Stormwater Review
4/26/2023 9:13:04 AM |
Review 1: EPC DPW Stormwater comments have been provided (in orange text boxes) on the following uploaded documents to be uploaded by project manager: - Drainage Report - Soils & Geology Report Due to the volume or complexity of the comments provided, these comments are preliminary in nature and EPC DPW Stormwater reserves the right to make additional comments. Additional detailed comments will be provided upon receipt of complete information/plans and resolution of the major issues. Please feel free to call if you have any questions regarding this review. Comments on the following documents are preliminary in nature and do not require a resubmittal under this filing. These documents should be provided with the construction application. - ESQCP - GEC Plan - GEC Checklist - PBMP Applicability Form - SWMP - SWMP Checklist Reviewed by: Mikayla Hartford Stormwater Engineer I MikaylaHartford@elpasoco.com |
4/26/2023 9:13:04 AM | |
| View |
Colorado Division of Water Resources
4/20/2023 11:48:25 AM |
4/20/2023 11:48:25 AM | |
| View |
Mountain View Electric Association, Inc.
4/17/2023 12:52:18 PM |
See attached comments | 4/17/2023 12:52:18 PM |
|
Colorado Geological Survey
4/14/2023 8:17:32 AM |
At the time of our March 3, 2021 review of this development (SP211), 20 commercial mixed-use lots were planned. However, based on the updated preliminary plan (Drexel, Barrell & Co., March 16, 2023), eight regional commercial and 169 single-family residential lots are now planned. Entech Engineering states on page 2 of their soil, geology and geologic hazard study (January 20, 2021), “The proposed development is to consist of mixed use/commercial development with retail pads and detention pond tracts.” CGS recommends that Entech be provided with the updated preliminary plans and that their report be revised as appropriate. As noted on page 9 of Entech’s Soil, Geology and Geologic Hazard Study (Entech Engineering, Inc., January 20, 2021), the hazards identified on this site include artificial fill, hydrocompaction, potentially expansive soils, seasonal and potentially seasonal shallow groundwater areas, areas of ponded water, springs, unstable slopes, and floodplains. As noted on page 17 of Entech’s report and the Floodplain Map (figure 7), “Floodplain areas have been mapped in the eastern portions of the site.” Entech also observed groundwater in all the borings at depths ranging from 1.5 to 12.5 feet. Entech states (page 16), “Basements or useable areas below grade are not recommended on the majority of the site.” CGS agrees with Entech that the shallow groundwater conditions preclude the construction of basement levels for this development. A statement indicating “No Basements” should be shown on the preliminary plans and final plat. Seasonal groundwater monitoring has not been conducted at this site as recommended by the Engineering Criteria Manual (ECM), and the extent of seasonal fluctuation is unknown. Without monitoring, potential impacts from groundwater are indeterminate. Since groundwater levels are as shallow as 1.5 feet, CGS recommends the county require groundwater monitoring/observation to verify that proposed floor levels are at least three feet, preferably five feet above maximum anticipated groundwater levels, and maintained year-round. To be effective, however, this monitoring should include observations through fall, winter, and spring rather than merely during site-specific building investigations. It is outside the scope of CGS review to determine whether the 3-ft minimum separation distance exists. CGS agrees with Entech (page 16) that “Filling the site would further raise foundations above the groundwater level.” As noted on page 10 of Entech’s report, “areas of steep slopes along the drainage in the central portion of the site have been identified as unstable,” and “the majority of the drainage is to be located in a drainage tract” (Lots 80 and 81 as indicated on the Preliminary Plan). Entech states (page 10), “A setback of 20 feet from the crest of these slopes is recommended unless stabilized,” and “stabilization could involve regrading to slope angles no steeper than 3:1 or the use of engineer-designed retaining walls, tiebacks, or buttresses.” If stabilization of the slopes is performed, CGS recommends the county requires a slope stability analysis to be completed, submitted, and reviewed for the lots adjacent to the drainage. The required setback should be indicated on the project plans. In summary, CGS recommends: • Entech is provided the revised preliminary plan and updates their January 20, 2021 report as appropriate. • A note be added to the plans stating basement construction is not allowed for this development. • The county requires groundwater monitoring/observation to verify that proposed floor levels are at least three feet, preferably five feet above maximum anticipated groundwater levels, and maintained year-round. • The county requires a slope stability analysis to be completed, submitted, and reviewed for lots adjacent to the drainage (Lots 81 and 82) if stabilization of the slopes is performed as a means of mitigation. • Entech’s recommendations are incorporated into the project planning and design. Submitted 4/14/2023 by Amy Crandall, Engineering Geologist, Colorado Geological Survey |
4/14/2023 8:17:32 AM | |
|
Colorado Springs Utilities, Dev, Svc.(includes water resources)
4/13/2023 2:49:47 PM |
No comments. Recommend approval. CJS | 4/13/2023 2:49:47 PM | |
|
Pikes Peak Regional Building Department
4/12/2023 2:11:34 PM |
1. Street names Diricawl Drive, Retail Row Street, & Woodmen Road-is this approved to extend on the south of E highway 24. These street names were not on the list of available or not acceptable. Please clarify. 2. Standard comments: a. For assignment of addressing for lots and tracts, place addressing marker (xxx) where they are intended to be utilized. Addressing marker for lots should be front door. b. Provide a 100 scale copy or larger of the entire APPROVED development plan (d.p.) to this department so that addressing can be assigned. Once received, the development plan will be placed on a list to be addressed. Development plans that are not yet approved may be addressed, however additional plan review fees will accrue if changes are made to the D.P. after initial addressing. Amy Vanderbeek Enumerations Plans Examiner Pikes Peak Regional Building Department O: 719-327-2930 E: Amy@pprbd.org |
4/12/2023 2:11:34 PM | |
|
Meadow Lake Airport Association
4/11/2023 5:44:15 AM |
No comment. Outside Meadow Lake traffic pattern. | 4/11/2023 5:44:15 AM | |
|
County Attorney - Development Review
4/6/2023 2:51:11 PM |
No comments from County Attorney - Development Review at this time. | 4/6/2023 2:51:11 PM | |
|
911 Authority - El Paso/Teller County
4/4/2023 7:46:38 AM |
Comments for E911 as follows: Buteos Lane - Available Hoopoe Lane - Available Barn Owl – Not acceptable - Existing road name Goshawk – Not acceptable - Existing road name Gyrfalcon – Not acceptable - Similar to existing road name Merlin – Not acceptable - Reserved for another project Kite – Not acceptable - Reserved for another project Caracara – Not acceptable - Reserved for another project Towhee – Not acceptable - Reserved for another project Goldfinch – Not acceptable - Reserved for another project Streetnaming information (Existing/reserved names and naming criteria) can be found on the E911 website at: http://elpasoteller911.org/191/Street-Name-Database Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you Justin |
4/4/2023 7:46:38 AM | |
| View |
EPC Environmental Services
3/29/2023 11:28:49 AM |
3/29/2023 11:28:49 AM | |
| View |
Falcon Fire Protection District
3/27/2023 9:11:40 AM |
3/27/2023 9:11:40 AM | |
|
RBD Floodplain
3/24/2023 12:52:28 PM |
This project will require a FEMA approved CLOMR followed by a LOMR to address modifications to the A-zone floodplain. FEMA approved base flood elevations must be established. LOMR must be effective, not just approved , and shown on the final plat prior to plat approval. |
3/24/2023 12:52:28 PM |
EDARP