Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVOID-CorrespondenceJohn Plano From: John Plano Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2023 9:19 AM To: Chris Jung Cc: Glenn Hartmann; eric@ruddconstruction.com Subject: FW: Rudd - Grading Permit Attachments: 4059_001.pdf Good Morning, Chris, The response to our engineer's comments were not adequate. Please see the additional information needed below. Attached are the original responses to comments. Sincerely, John Plano Garfield County Chief Building Official 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-1377 (1560) From: Chris@mountaincross-eng.com <Chris@mountaincross-eng.com> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2023 5:13 PM To: John Plano <jplano@garfield-county.com> Subject: RE: Rudd - Grading Permit John: I have reviewed the additional information provided. I have the following additional comments: - A copy of the CDPHE permit for SWMP should be provided, per comment #2 - The Erosion Control plan does not seem to show the delineation of the wetlands and/or it is not clear where the wetlands are located, per comment #6 - The Applicant address that the source of water to be used is the Last Chance Ditch but does not provide evidence that they have the water rights and/or permission to use that water for dust control. Permission or evidence of ditch rights should be provided, per comment #8 - The Applicant should verify that the existing driveways are permitted with Garfield County, per comment #9 - The Applicant should provide a copy of the LOMR, per comment #11. Call or email any questions or comments. Thanks. Sincerely, Mountain Cross Engineering, Inc. Chris Hale, P.E. 826 1/2 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Ph: 970.945.5544 Fx: 970.945.5558 From: John Plano <ilano arfield-count .com> Sent: Friday, May 12, 2023 10:14 AM To: chris@moun_t_aincross-eng_com Cc: Glenn Hartmann <ghartmann@garfield-county.com> Subject: Rudd - Grading Permit Hey Chris, Thanks for talking this morning. Attached is their response to comments, a copy of the land use permit and the site plan. Didn't know if this was the same site plan that was originally submitted or a revised one. Thanks again! John Plano Garfield County Chief Building Official 108 8th Street, Suite 401 Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 (970) 945-1377 (1560) From: Chris ]una To: Brooke Winschell Subject: FW: [E)Remall Rudd Rifle Floodplaln Permit Date: Monday, November 7, 2022 4:15:02 PM Attachments, 07 EROS SED CNTRL PLeN.PDF 08 EROS_5ED ML D 15.PI) Here it is Brooke. Chris Jung, Manager Wayne Rudd, Rudd LLC, Aces & Eights LLC, YDD LLC, CCC-B dba/Rudd LLLP, and 5447 LLC. 132 Park Ave Basalt, CO 81621 chris@ruddconstruction.com (970) 309-0123 Cell (970) 927-4038 ext 4 Office -------- Original message -------- From: Eric Rudd <eric@ruddconstruction.com> Date: 7/l/22 10:15 AM (GMT-07:00) To: Chris Jung <chris@ruddconstruction.com> Subject: FW: [External) Rudd Rifle Floodplain Permit Section 4 Cost Estimate The proposed project is a general site fill project the disturbed area will be approximately as shown on the grading plans. The owner intends to continue their Agricultural activities on the site as the fill is being place. To accomplish this once the fill has been placed the owner will utilize typical agricultural equipment such as a "no till seed drill" and water cannons to revegetate the areas. A cover crop along with the seed mixes will be drilled in. The cover crop will vary depending on the time of year. We expect the cost for seeding to be 1,550 per phase. I reviewed the files for the grading permit. The documentation for the floodplain permit was referred to only as it pertained to the grading permit. The following are the comments that were generated: 1. The application materials state that erosion and sediment control will be implemented per the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, Sheet 7. That sheet was not included in the pdithat was received. The applicant should provide Sheet 7 and it should become part of the grading permit documentation. A copy could be forwarded to this office for review, if deemed necessary. See attached Sheet 7 (07 EROS SED CNTRL PLAN) 2. The Applicant should provide a copy of the SWMP permit from CDPHE once it is obtained. The SWMP that will be prepared to obtain the CDPHE permit should be congruent with the Sheet 7 discussed in the above comment. Confirmed 3. The Cost Estimate refers to the project as a pipeline project. This seems incongruent with the plans. Additionally, the post project grade will not be re-established as is stated. The cost estimate amount should be evaluated. The estimate should include the earthwork, the necessary erosion control, and revegetation as a minimum. Other items necessary for construction should be included and the amount adjusted accordingly. Confirmed Section 4 should be revised from page 6 of the weed management plant. 4. The plan sheet should be revised to include the material and compaction specifications of the fill to be placed. Filling operations are intended to comply with Section J107 of the 113C Appendix J, as included in the Garlleld Cozentzr Fill Permit Application Package. excepting that minim itin compaction shall be 85% of the Modified Proctor value for the specific material. Compaction testimg shall nor ripply to pit rain type material that is too coarse.1br normal testing 5. The plan sheets should be revised to include existing surface preparation necessary prior to placing fill. The existing surface shall be scarified prior to placement qJ jill. Any areas with useable topsoil shall be removed and stockpiled for reuse. 6. The Applicant should provide a Wetland delineation to Garfield County as required by the conditions of the Floodplain permit. The wetland delineation may be referred to the USACoE as might be necessary for evaluation and approval. See attached Sheet 7 (07 EROSSED CNTRL PLAN) 7. A condition of the floodplain permit requires the Applicant to address existing structures. The Applicant should provide this information either in a narrative or a plan, as might be applicable. The existing structures were addressed in the phasing plan, in that they were to remain "as is" until the last phase. 8. A condition of the floodplain permit requires that the Applicant address the source of water to be used for dust control. Evidence of any associated water rights also is required to be provided. Last Chance Ditch 9. A condition of the floodplain permit requires that the Applicant obtain a driveway/access permit form Garfield County Road & Bridge. We don't have any plans at this time for a new driveway andlor expansion of the existing drives to county road 320. 10. A condition of the floodplain permit requires the Applicant to address existing utilities and any impacts. The Applicant should provide this information either in a narrative or a plan, as might be applicable. There are no existing utilities that will be impacted by the placement offill. In the event that a utility is impacted we will coordinate with the utility provider on a solution. 11. The floodplain permit conditions requires that a LOMR is completed by the Applicant after fill is placed. This could also be included as a condition on the grading permit. Correct per the land use permit we will be completing a LOMAR III