EDARP
Project Review Comments
- Project Name
- Kettle Creek Estates Filing No. 2
- Description
- Lot 1 Kettle Creek Estates (VR2211) proposed to be split into two lots. These will be Filing 2, Lots 1 and 2.
- Location
- Parcels
- 6228005030 6228005030 6228005033 6228005033 6228005048 6228005048
- Applicant
-
Jay D Stoner
Jay Stoner ( jay@ldicolorado.com )
(970) 566-4891 Jay Stoner ( jay@ldicolorado.com )
(970) 566-4891 - EA Number
- EA21111
- File Number
- VR246
- Project Manager
- Scott Weeks
- Status
- Active
- Created
- 8/25/2023 11:38:32 AM
View: Project Documents
| Agency | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| View |
Colorado Division of Water Resources
10/8/2024 10:36:46 AM |
Our prior comments from July 24, 2024 continue to apply. | 10/8/2024 10:36:46 AM |
|
PCD Project Manager
10/1/2024 3:06:48 PM |
Plat cannot be approved until state water resources finds a decree of water sufficiency. After we receive the decree, it will be sent to our attorney to review the 100-year finding and to see if there is sufficiency to make a 300-year finding, which is County requirements. | 10/1/2024 3:06:48 PM | |
|
Colorado Geological Survey
9/30/2024 1:01:08 PM |
As requested by the county (email, September 18, 2024), the Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) has reviewed the resubmittal (County File # VR246, located at 38.9805°, -104.7866°). For the resubmittal, we received a revised Plat (Cornerstone Land Surveying, revised September 13, 2024) and an Addendum to Subsurface Soil Investigation (RMG, Job No. 184689, August 7, 2024). We reviewed this submittal previously in our comments dated July 16 and September 6, 2024. We offer the following comments and recommendations. Groundwater is discussed in RMG’s Soil, Geology and Wastewater Study (Amended April 18, 2024). They state on p.8, “Groundwater was not encountered in the four test borings performed by RMG. However, we would anticipate the potential for periodically high subsurface moisture conditions due to the proximity to Kettle Creek. Review of the reports in the immediate area, referenced above, indicates that groundwater conditions were encountered at depths ranging between 9 and 28 feet.” “In the absence of irrigation, we anticipate a 4 to 6-foot fluctuation in groundwater levels, perched or within the fractured bedrock should be expected.” RMG has submitted an Addendum to Subsurface Soil Investigation (Job no 184689, August 7, 2024). They state, “Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 28 feet during drilling. A subsequent water check was performed two days after the date of drilling and water was measured at a depth of 27 feet. A third follow-up water check was performed approximately 12 days after drilling and groundwater was measured at 26 feet.” While groundwater levels were measured at 28 feet during July, this is not a monitoring program and does not support the development of basements at this location based on the other evidence provided by RMG. CGS agrees that “periodically high subsurface moisture” is likely at this location due to its proximity to Kettle Creek. RMG has also stated that groundwater was encountered at 9 feet in the vicinity. It should be noted that flow in Kettle Creek is intermittent and will have greater flow some years over others, and the variations over the years in this Creek are not being measured even in a 12-month monitoring program. This is a poor location for basement construction, given the likelihood of shallow groundwater conditions over the engineered life of these structures. We recommend that basements not be allowed at this location without a 12-month monitoring program. The applicant has addressed our previous comments about Note 13 on the Plat. CGS has no objection to the project's approval provided that no basement construction is allowed, a note to that effect is placed on the plat, or a 12-month monitoring program demonstrates the feasibility of basements. Submitted 9/30/2024 by Jonathan R. Lovekin, P.G. Senior Engineering Geologist, Colorado Geological Survey, jlovekin@mines.edu |
9/30/2024 1:01:08 PM | |
|
PCD Engineering Division
9/25/2024 1:20:29 PM |
Engineering Review Ver.3 No further engineer comments. Thank you. Edward Schoenheit, Engineer E.P.C. Dept. of Public Works 2880 International Circle Colorado Springs, CO. 80910 Office: 719.520.6813 Cell: 719.502.9659 https://planningdevelopment.elpasoco.com/ |
9/25/2024 1:20:29 PM | |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
9/10/2024 6:34:38 PM |
Final Plat_V2 | 9/10/2024 6:34:38 PM |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
9/10/2024 6:34:09 PM |
FDR_V2 | 9/10/2024 6:34:09 PM |
|
PCD Engineering Division
9/10/2024 6:34:55 PM |
Engineering Review Ver.2 Please see engineering review comments on the following documents: Final Plat_V2 Drainage Report_V2 Edward Schoenheit, Engineer E.P.C. Dept. of Public Works 2880 International Circle Colorado Springs, CO. 80910 Office: 719.520.6813 Cell: 719.502.9659 https://planningdevelopment.elpasoco.com/ |
9/10/2024 6:34:55 PM | |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
9/10/2024 5:42:52 PM |
See comments: - Final Plat - Letter of Intent |
9/10/2024 5:42:52 PM |
|
Colorado Geological Survey
9/6/2024 1:33:49 PM |
As requested by the county (email, August 27, 2024), the Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) has reviewed the resubmittal (County File # VR246, located at 38.9805°, -104.7866°). For the resubmittal, we received a revised Final Drainage Report (JPS Engineering, Project No. 112303, revised August 16, 2024) and a revised Plat (Cornerstone Land Surveying, revised August 14, 2024). We reviewed this submittal previously in our comments dated July 16, 2024. Our previous comments have not been fully addressed and remain part of this second review. The Final Drainage Report states, p.5, “Individual lot grading is the sole responsibility of the individual builders and property owners.” P.6 “Property owners need to understand that Kettle Creek is an actively flowing stream subject to potential future erosion and meandering.” It is unclear how future property owners will be led to understand the hazard of “future erosion and meandering” or why scour erosion and related slope stability problems are the responsibility of future lot owners who may not be equipped to address them. Note #13 on the Plat states: “An engineered site plan will be required prior to construction on Lots #1 and Lot #2.” CGS recommends that the county require the applicant to define what this means on the Plat. The geologic conditions at this location constrain these lots. The constraints consist of: •Identified shallow groundwater conditions that preclude basements unless a 12-month monitoring program demonstrates their feasibility.•Unknown scour erosion of the lots by Kettle Creek.•Stability of the lot edges adjacent to the creek. Before the plat is approved, it would be prudent for the county to require that Plat Note 13 be expanded to explicitly list the constraints of shallow groundwater, scour erosion, and potential instability OR that the applicant provide the analysis and mitigation for these conditions. As we stated in our first review, before approval of this subdivision, CGS recommends that the county require: • A note on the plan stating that no basements are allowed unless a monitoring program over 12 months establishes the depth and fluctuations of groundwater at this location. • Permanent mitigation be developed for the potential scour erosion of the stream banks during the design storm event. The civil engineer should evaluate the extent of scour erosion for the design event and provide mitigation, such as armoring of the slope bank. • Setbacks from the top of the creek banks should be established for all structures based on slope stability and scour potential. • Site-specific soils and foundation investigations for all proposed structures Submitted 9/6/2024 by Jonathan R. Lovekin, P.G. Senior Engineering Geologist, Colorado Geological Survey, jlovekin@mines.edu |
9/6/2024 1:33:49 PM | |
|
EPC Stormwater Review
9/3/2024 1:31:13 PM |
Review 2: EPC DPW Stormwater comments have been resolved on the following documents: - Drainage Report...(to be uploaded with Development Services comments) EPC DPW Stormwater has no further comments. Planner: no re-review necessary. Reviewed by: Glenn Reese, P.E. Stormwater Engineer III 719.675.2654 GlennReese@elpasoco.com |
9/3/2024 1:31:13 PM | |
|
Pikes Peak Regional Building Department
8/28/2024 2:05:56 PM |
1. STANARD FINAL PLAT COMMENTS: a. Enumerations will review the pre-plat (mylar) prior to plat for address placement, street names, and title block. b. A $10.00 per lot and tract platting fee will be due at the time of the review of the pre-plat, (two addresses per lot and tract). If an address is not needed on a tract then no fee applies. Check should be made out to PIKES PEAK REGIONAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT or PPRBD. Paid directly to the Enumerations Department. As of December 5th 2023, the fee for all credit/debit cards has changed from the flat 2.95% fee to the following: Over the phone Credit/Debit Card payments will be 2.3% and In-Person Debit Card payments will be 1.5% (in-person only). c. Pre-plat reviews can be reviewed via “pdf” or in-person. The pre-plat will be stamped by Enumerations for accuracy and returned to the applicant and the planner. All payments to be mailed to RBD via a check or credit card payment over the phone. Plats should not be recorded prior to Enumerations stamping the pre-plat and receiving payment of plat fees. If any pre-plat changes occur, even if changes do not apply to Enumerations, we still need to re-stamp the pre-plat. The Enumerations stamped pre-plat copy should match the recorded document minus a few signatures. If you would like an in-person review, please make an appointment on our website, https://www.pprbd.org/Home/BookAppt d. A copy of the final recorded plat is required prior to plan submittal for RESIDENTIAL. A copy of the final recorded plat is required prior to approval in the Enumerations department on any COMMERCIAL plan submittal. Please email the Enumerations staff member that reviewed your project. Amy@pprbd.org; Brent@pprbd.org; or BeckyA@pprbd.org Amy Vanderbeek Enumerations Plans Examiner Pikes Peak Regional Building Department O: 719-327-2930 E: Amy@pprbd.org |
8/28/2024 2:05:56 PM | |
| View |
EPC Health Department
8/2/2024 5:57:21 PM |
8/2/2024 5:57:21 PM | |
|
Donald Wescott Fire Protection District
7/29/2024 3:38:37 PM |
The fire department has no comment on the subdivision of this property | 7/29/2024 3:38:37 PM | |
| View |
Colorado Division of Water Resources
7/25/2024 12:00:31 PM |
7/25/2024 12:00:31 PM | |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
7/24/2024 9:12:38 AM |
Version 1 Water Supply Info Summary Comment | 7/24/2024 9:12:38 AM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
7/24/2024 9:11:47 AM |
Version 1 Sub summary comment | 7/24/2024 9:11:47 AM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
7/24/2024 9:08:23 AM |
Version 1 Final Plat Comments | 7/24/2024 9:08:23 AM |
| View |
PCD Project Manager
7/24/2024 9:07:22 AM |
Version 1 LOI Comments | 7/24/2024 9:07:22 AM |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
7/17/2024 5:45:08 PM |
FDR_V1 | 7/17/2024 5:45:08 PM |
| View |
PCD Engineering Division
7/17/2024 5:44:40 PM |
Engineering Review Ver.1 Please see engineering review comments on the following documents: LOI_V1 (To be uploaded by PCD) Final Plat_V1 (To be uploaded by PCD) Drainage Report_V1 Edward Schoenheit, Engineer I E.P.C. Dept. of Public Works 2880 International Circle Colorado Springs, CO. 80910 Office: 719.520.6813 Cell: 719.502.9659 https://planningdevelopment.elpasoco.com/ |
7/17/2024 5:44:40 PM |
|
PCD Administrative Notice
7/17/2024 2:12:57 PM |
On 7/17/2024, PCD mailed "Notice of Application" letters to surrounding property owners within a 500-foot range (18 addresses). Copies of the notice, mailing labels, and selected range have been uploaded to the EDARP file. Cost of postage to be billed to the applicant = $12.42. PR | 7/17/2024 2:12:57 PM | |
|
EPC Stormwater Review
7/17/2024 11:58:35 AM |
Review 1: EPC DPW Stormwater comments have been provided (in orange text boxes) on the following uploaded documents: - Drainage Report...(to be uploaded with Development Services comments) Note that when each of the two lots are developed, an ESQCP will be required for each (or one for both) because the sites are considered Sensitive Area sites per ECM App I.4.2 (note that Table I-2 actually has an error where it says that a BESQCP is required for sites in a Sensitive Area when it should say ESQCP). The sites are considered Sensitive Area sites due to: floodplain, wetlands, and endangered species habitat (prebble jumping mouse). Reviewed by: Glenn Reese, P.E. Stormwater Engineer III 719.675.2654 GlennReese@elpasoco.com |
7/17/2024 11:58:35 AM | |
|
Colorado Geological Survey
7/16/2024 5:25:29 PM |
As requested by the county (email, June 26, 2024), the Colorado Geological Survey (CGS) has reviewed the submittal (County File # VR246, located at 38.9805°, -104.7866°). The letter of intent states that the existing 5.13-acre site will be subdivided into two 2.5+ acre parcels, with one single-family home on each lot. A Soils, Geology, and Wastewater Study is submitted with this application (RMG, Job No. 184689, Amended April 18, 2024). CGS generally agrees with the geologic interpretation, the hazards and constraints identified that are related to site geology, and the recommendations for mitigating these conditions. RMG’s recommendations concerning identified hazards and constraints should be followed except where noted in the following paragraphs where additional recommendations are provided. RMG states p.11, “Groundwater is not anticipated to preclude basement construction on Lots 1 and 2.” However, on p. 8, they state, “Groundwater was not encountered in the four test borings performed by RMG. However, we would anticipate the potential for periodically high subsurface moisture conditions due to the proximity to Kettle Creek. Review of the reports in the immediate area, referenced above, indicates that groundwater conditions were encountered at depths ranging between 9 and 28 feet.” RMG anticipates “a 4 to 6-foot fluctuation in groundwater levels, perched or within the fractured bedrock, should be expected.” It is unclear what the baseline level of the groundwater is that will be impacted by the expected groundwater fluctuation. Due to the anticipated presence of shallow and fluctuating groundwater, CGS recommends that the county require a note on the plan stating that no basements are allowed unless a monitoring program through 12 months establishes the depth and fluctuation of groundwater at this location. RMG has identified the potential for future scour erosion that can destabilize and erode the creek banks. No mitigation has been proposed. RMG has indicated that the future owners should be responsible for evaluating active erosion that can destabilize the creek banks. CGS recommends that the county require permanent mitigation of potential scour erosion of the current stream banks for the design storm event. The civil engineer should evaluate the extent of scour erosion for the design event and provide mitigation, such as armoring of the slope bank. RMG states p. 15, “The proposed buildings should be located sufficiently away from the top of the creek banks such that slope stability should not be impacted by its construction.” CGS recommends that the geotechnical engineer provide this setback distance for the proposed buildings based on an analysis of slope stability and the scour potential determined by the civil engineer. Before approval of this subdivision, CGS recommends that the county require: • A note on the plan stating that no basements are allowed unless a monitoring program over 12 months establishes the depth and fluctuations of groundwater at this location. • Permanent mitigation be developed for the potential scour erosion of the stream banks during the design storm event. The civil engineer should evaluate the extent of scour erosion for the design event and provide mitigation, such as armoring of the slope bank. • Setbacks from the top of the creek banks should be established for all structures based on slope stability and scour potential. • Site-specific soils and foundation investigations for all proposed structures. Submitted 7/16/2024 by Jonathan R. Lovekin, P.G. Senior Engineering Geologist, Colorado Geological Survey, jlovekin@mines.edu |
7/16/2024 5:25:29 PM | |
| View |
Colorado Parks and Wildlife
7/16/2024 2:15:06 PM |
7/16/2024 2:15:06 PM | |
| View |
EPC Parks Department
7/15/2024 3:39:39 PM |
El Paso County Parks and Community Services Department, Final Administrative Comments - Please See Attached Documentation (No Park Advisory Board endorsement necessary for minor subdivisions) | 7/15/2024 3:39:39 PM |
| View |
Mountain View Electric Association, Inc.
7/15/2024 3:15:34 PM |
See attached comments | 7/15/2024 3:15:34 PM |
| View |
Colorado Springs Utilities, Dev, Svc.(includes water resources)
7/10/2024 1:39:21 PM |
Good afternoon Scott, Please see the attached CSU 1st review of VR246. One (1) comment is requested. Best, Matthew Alcuran, MPA| Engineering Support Specialist Sr. Utilities Development Services | Colorado Springs Utilities 1521 South Hancock Expressway| MC 1812 | Colorado Springs, CO 80903 O: 719-668-8261 |malcuran@csu.org |
7/10/2024 1:39:21 PM |
|
Pikes Peak Regional Building Department
7/3/2024 9:56:29 AM |
1. One side of the plat should be labeled as platted and replatted to show which side is existing and which side is proposed. 2. Add the address of 10215 Otero Ave to proposed lot 2 and add the existing address of 10245 Otero Ave, to lot 1. If lot 1 will access from Old Ranch Road, please contact me for an additional address. Amy Vanderbeek Enumerations Plans Examiner Pikes Peak Regional Building Department O: 719-327-2930 E: Amy@pprbd.org |
7/3/2024 9:56:29 AM | |
| View |
Colorado Springs Utilities, Dev, Svc.(includes water resources)
7/1/2024 3:39:56 PM |
7/1/2024 3:39:56 PM | |
|
911 Authority - El Paso/Teller County
6/28/2024 7:35:08 AM |
No action for E911 on this submittal. Thank you. Justin |
6/28/2024 7:35:08 AM | |
|
Academy SD 20 Building Fund
6/27/2024 9:05:22 AM |
Academy District 20 is in receipt of File #VR246 for approval of the Kettle Creek Estates Filing No. 2. . The District is requesting fees in lieu of land dedication per the existing County Code for all residential units within this development. The District is able to serve each student who is a resident of District 20. If you need additional information, please contact me. Don Smith Planning Consultant |
6/27/2024 9:05:22 AM | |
| View |
El Paso County Conservation Dist
6/27/2024 8:33:47 AM |
Please see attached .PDF for brief comments. Thanks! | 6/27/2024 8:33:47 AM |
|
Colorado Department of Transportation - Pueblo Office
6/26/2024 12:45:14 PM |
We are in receipt of the above-referenced development submittal. After review of the provided documents, CDOT Staff currently has NO COMMENT pertaining to this submittal. | 6/26/2024 12:45:14 PM |