The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutOriginal Plan Review Correction Notice PacketBUILDING DEPARTMENT 1O8 E¡ghth Street, Su¡te 401, Glenwood Spr¡ngs, CO 81607 Tel: (97o) 945-8212 s\rls ra ñ T.)s t'CORRECTION NOTICE - Maior Gradíng Permít Permit No. GRAD-12-2L-727 L Date: February 7,2022 Location: 360 Cerise Ranch Road, Carbondale Review Comments By: Chris Hale, Mountain Cross Engineering The following plan review comments are to be addressed pr¡or to issuance of this Grading Permit. Please provide narrative description, revised, supplemental or amended plans and/or specifications addressing the following comments or questions so that we can finalize our review and issue the Grading Permit. L. Easements -a. A 4O-foot-wide "Access Easement" is labelled on drawings as being for use of Lot 52 - and it's assumed that 360 Cerise Ranch Road is Lot 52 - but we cannot not verify this. Uphill of the hairpin turn, access easement is labelled as "Proposed 4O-foot Access Easement". Has this easement already been created & recorded, or does it still need to be obtained? Provide clear and detailed evidence of a legal access easement for Lot 52. b. Similarly, the construction easement is called out as "Proposed". Evidence of a legal easement is required. c. Utilities are shown leaving the driveway and paralleling Lot 54/53 Property line. However, no utilities easement is shown on the subject property. Provide evidence of a legal easement for utilities. 2. Driveway Design & Alignment -a. The driveway is perched above steep slopes. Guardrail(s) should be provided to protect errant vehicles from leaving the driveway, especially around the hairpin turn. lllustrate location of guardrails & provide detaÌls by Engineer. b. Engineering rules of thumb suggest 60/o is a maximum grade for safely negotiating around a curve during snowy and iry conditions. The Applicant should consider flattening the grades around the hairpin turn. c. Extents and placement of driveway surface materials (gravel vs. pavement) are not clearly illustrated. Provide clarification on plans. d. Gravel road section does not include thicknesses. Revise detail(s) to provide specifications. 3. Fire District Approvals -a. Local fire jurisdictions typically have a 10% maximum grade for fire and emergency vehicles; t2% may be allowed for short distances, typically a few hundred feet. This proposal is over 700 feet in length at t2% grade. Applicant to confirm driveway design requirements with Bill Gavette, Carbondale's Fire Marshal and modify plans accordingly. b. With a 12'drivewaywidth, pull-outs are necessaryforvehiclesto pass each other, ot provide sections of 20' driveway width. Verify Fire District approvals with Bill Gavette, and modify plans according to Fire District's requirements. 4. Water Service Line - For the water line bury, 4.5' of cover is typically not sufficient for frost protection at this altitude. Bury depth should be increased to match Carbondale's water service line requirements, 5. Retaining Walls -a. Call out maximum wall height on each detail and at each tier. b. lnclude minimum offset distances between tiers of walls on the details. c. Will there be a cut ditch above the highest wall tier or is water okay to cascade over the face of the walls? lf not, drainage features above the walls should be shown on plans. d. Drain mat and perforated pipe daylight locations should be shown on plans, Will the drain for upper tier daylight on top of the lower tier? Or will it be piped to the culvert? 6. Stormwater Discharge - lt appears that storm flows from daylight end of the culvert discharge into the irrigation ditch. Applicant to verify that this situation is acceptable with the irrigation company by providing evidence of approvals. lf not approved by the lrrigation Company, then provide drawings & speclficatlons illustratinH lrow ston¡r flows l.ie irttr¡ Lhe Cerise Ranclr Road drairrage systetî. Garfield County \ Maior Groding Perm¡t Rev¡ew Paøe 2 Cerise Ranch - Lot 52 February 7,2022 Weed Management & Site Reclamat¡on Requirements: ln addition to the Engineering comments/questions as described above, the following items also need to be addressed prior to issuance of the Grading Permit: lo Control all noxious weeds. Treat existing weeds prior to relocation plants and seeds. ¡ Re-vegetate all disturbed areas not part of a road or non-seeded area. o Provide erosion controls until seeded areas can be established. o Contact Steve Anthony, Garfield County Vegetation Manager for all weed management and site reclamation requirements. (Tel:970-945-4305 or Email: santhony@garfield-county.com) I Dave Argo From: Sent: To: Gc Subject: Attachments: Dave Argo Monday, February 7, 2022 3:00 PM Jspung@jvajva.com' Steve Anthony; Colleen Wirth Cerise Ranch Lot 52 Grading Permit Correction Notice GRAD -7 27 1 Correction Notice.pdf Please reference the attached "Plan Review Correction Notice" for the Grading Permit submitted on behalf of Cerise Ranch, Lot 52 Owners. Engineering review of the submitted plans was conducted by Chris Hale, P.E. of Mountain Cross Engineers who is Garfield County's consulting Engineer for review of major grading permits. Please follow-up by addressing these corrections at your earliest convenience with submission of any supplemental/amended plans or other correspondence addressing all outstanding issues. Our office cannot issue the Grading Permít unt¡l we have received response to these items. ln addition to Engineering review items included in the attached Correction Notice we also urge you to contact Steve Anthony, Garfield County's Vegetation Manager, to determine specific requirements related to weed control, erosion control, and reclamation of all disturbed areas affected by regrading of this property. You can reach Steve at the following - Tel:97O-945-L377 x 4305 or Email: santhonv@earfi eld-countv.com Thank you for your attention to this matter. Dave Argo Chief BuildingOfficial Building Department 708 9th Steet, Suite 407 Glenwood Springs, CO 87607 Te I : 970.945. 1377 xl 560 Email : d o rgo @ g a rfi e I d -co u nty.co m Web : go rfie ld -co u nty.com Garfield County 1 DRAFT CONDITIONS OF PERMIT GRADING PERMIT # GRAD-12-2T-7277 Glynna Baker & Bert Obleskí Replace & Regrade Long Driveway and Retaining Walls 360 Cerise Ranch Road, Carbondale Cerise Ranch Subdivision - Lot 52 1) PURSUANT GARFIELD COUNTY LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE, DRIVEWAY GRADE SHALL NOT EXCEED MAXIMUM T2% SLOPE AS ALLOWED UNDER TABLE 7-1O7, 2I ANY REPAIRED, REPLACED AND/OR NEW BOULDER WALLS GREATER THAN 4 FEET IN HETGHT WILL REQUIRE SEPARATE BUILDING PERMIT(S). 3) REFERENCE BELOW PLAT NOTE #10 AND ATTACHED PLAN SHEETS C1.0'STORM WATER CULVERT UNDER ROAD'AND DETAILS ON CD1.O tO. GRÂDtt¡ô fOR COI{*T¡¡ùCE OF SrffirrrrtrEß ¿lhtt} $KS fLOtr år Y tf(Itl sär.¡cruius snlu æ nc ffiFoù[n¡n¡ü ç EAãt r,ol oü¡ttrn oruJD¡$G ntt C0NSnUCnCN $ OggÊtS fLOfi rön$ÂîOl SnUCnnCS ¿rS llECfSÀnY rO ntOwim OOuvgyÀHcE Or S¡OmnrAn ¡üÞ Oe¡mt rLOü ï*0t Ol Îr8n toL 4l REFERENCE BELOW PLAT NOTE #11AS SPECIFIED FOR LOT 52: fl. PftOR Þ rHE nnnßDûl r Allr cRror¡ô oR co.sfRtcllsf Qn Lor 5a _ out¡lr¡o EN6til€Eftl¡C mAnNßS (r fiE Pn0FO6[D 0nSlErf¡Y åoc[sstl6 tor å2 uús¡ ıS st¡årt¡nto rO ït tr¡fÉrD ærnTT DgP¡nruær 0r ntLmx¡ rùÐ F[rìNtllt{C fm REr€'fi r¡O ¡FPRüiA- 5) WEED MANAGEMENT & SITE RECLAMATION REQUIREMENTS - CONTROL ALL WEEDS, MITIGATE EROSION AND RECLAIM/RE-SEED ALL DISTURBED AREAS AFFECTED BY THE GRADING OF SUBJECT PARCEL. CONTACT STEVE ANTHONY, GARFIELD COUNTY,S VEGETATION MANAGER, AT 970-945-1377 x 4305 FOR ACCEPTABLE SEED MIXTURE. CONSULT WITH A PROFESSIONAL REVEGETATION CONSULTANT FOR RE-SEEDING REQUIREMENTS. Dave Argo From: Sent: lo: Chris@ mou ntai ncross-eng.com Tuesday, January 18,2022 5:29 PM Dave Argo lExternall Baker-Obleski DrivewaySubject: Mr. Argo: I have reviewed the plans for the Baker-Obleski grading permit for the proposed driveway. The review generated the following questions or comments: 1. A 40' wide access easement is labelled on the drawings as being for Lot 52. lt is assumed that 360 Cerise Ranch Road is Lot 52 but I could not verifl, this. But then uphill of the hairpin turn, the access easement is labelled as a Proposed 40' access easement. Does this easement still need to be obtained? Evidence of a legal easement should be provided. 2. Similarly, the construction easement is called as Proposed. Evidence of a legal easement should be provided. 3. The driveway is perched above steep slopes. A guardrail should be provided to protect errant vehicles from leaving the driveway, especially around the hairpin. 4. Utilities are shown leaving the driveway and paralleling the Lot 54/53 Property line. No easement is shown for this. 5. Local fire jurisdictions typically have a L0% maximum grade for fire and emergency vehicles; t2% may be allowed for short distances, typically a few hundred feet. This proposes over 700 feet of L2% grade. The applicant should verify acceptability with the Fire Marshal. 6. The Applicant should consider flattening the grades around the hairpin curve. Rules of thumb are that 6% is a maximum grade for negotiating around a curve during snowy and icy conditions. 7. With a L2' driveway width, pull-outs are necessary for vehicles to pass each other, or provide sections of 20' driveway width. The Fire Marshal should be consulted here, too. 8. The Gravel road section detail does not include thicknesses. 9. The extents of paved sections and gravel sections should be clarified on the plan sheets. i.0. For the water line bury, 4.5' of cover is typically not sufficient for frost protection at this altitude. Bury depth should be increased to match Carbondale water main bury depth. 11. lnclude minimum offset distances between tiers of walls on the details. 1-2. The walldetails should callout maximum wall height on each detail and on each tier. 13. Will there be a cut ditch above the highest wall tier or is water okay to cascade over the face of the walls? lf not, drainage features above the walls should be shown on the plans. 14. The drain mat and perforated pipe daylight locations should be shown on the plan. Will the drain for the upper tier daylight on top of the lower tier? Or will it be piped to the culvert? 15. lt appears that the storm flows from the daylight end of the culvert discharge into the irrigation ditch. The Applicant should verify that this is acceptable with the irrigation company. lf not, show how the storm flows tie into the drainage system on Cerise Ranch Road. Feel free to call or email with any questions or comments. I will return the plans to your office tomo rrow (OL/L9/221 Sincerely, Mountain Cross Engineering, lnc. Chris Hale, P.E. 826112 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Ph:970.945.5544 1 eUz**, GRADING PERMIT GRAD.L2-2L.727L CONDIT]ONS OF PERMIT Glynna Baker & Bert Obleski Scope: replace & regrade long driveway and retaining walls 360 Cerise Ranch Rd 239t32L02052 - Cerise Ranch Subdiv. - L) puRsuANT GARFTELD COUNW LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT CODE, DRIVEWAY GRADE SHALL NOT EXCEED MAXIMUM LZ% SLOPE ALLOWED UNDER TABLE 7-LO7 2,1 REPAIRED / REPLACED / NEW BOULDER WALLS GREATER THAN 4 FEET IN HEIGHT REQUIRE A SEPARATE BUILDING PERMIT. 3) REFERENCE BELOW PLAT NOTE #10 AND ATTACHED PLAN SHEETS C1.0 "STORM WATER CULVERT UNDER ROAD" AND DETAILS ON CD1.O lü. üfrühlut FÕÊ tff*,'€T,qråÊË tr ETSRI¡tr'4.TEE .{}¡B ÐEEftjg FL#Tf ,tFåÏ FFFU gTEtif;ruFES EktÉLl EÊ TltE Arqt'lStBtUT? tr .[¡#Þl tÖI ürt¡tË, ¡nru'ÐlHË *cE EFf{STFUçTIÕT* 'F #[FÊI5 FT;ü{¡t' UITIËåT'üH qTEUSN¡REË ,T5 HETESS.TET ÏB ,qLLÐI'T Fffi Õüt{rJEV*H# *F gTgnH$,l]En åHU FEFHIS rlç'il Û{ÊüJt¡t lFtfi¡fr LÇr. 4) REFERENCE BELOW PLAT NOTE #114S SPECIFIED FOR LOT 52: 11. Fffif,R rË THE tHtTlÅr¡âH *F,r¡,{r *frAplHË ûË ËB|{çTRUC.T|ÛH Ðlr¡ Lfi? 5?, HËT¡úLËÛ Ë!'¡ttHEWt¡6 nnÅ',*tt*Ës tr ffE FnF\fsEe BFlldEtrAT ñç*Ës5t8¡ç L*T Sl HilET EE gJfrtú¡TTED m TIIE *¡,ñFlËLb *tltr,ljTr üEFåFTI€Hr ÛF gtll-[l]li3 åþÐ FL,A¡qiilNt Fßn RHþr€Ir ,rhþ å¡æ¡Êþ'ÅL. ry Lot 52 avaikbb *z qh¿ r%-ryh Cferk*ffe*/en, K..rpþ?r?? 5Vr3638t:Ji)i¡<*rãnTINAI I]LATCI-Rï;qïi F"AliCï-1 Sl ilDIVSllûî'Ji]HASE i!s"ñeD ùs ¡¿g ô.r J O¡æf . ¡r ?oe--F odr c 1- ffiúMLSle siav-t s LA'o @1 ¿SfTI]ATED IN PAR'IS OT' SEC'IIONS 29, 3? AND 33, 'IOWNSHIP 7 SOU'I'H, RA\GE 8? WEST O¡' ]'HI] 61'H P.M.COUNTIES O!' GARFISLD AND IìAGLN. S'IA1'[] OF COLORADOsr-rEg[*.l. _.0..n..5,.r ú. 4i{^ (a:j rMì r.30¡ ^6/Rrs/Èó! ? s6o ÀilRfs^Ôr 3:2e ^0Â!s/R0t ! 4, ú/c.1/ñ\t z 1az ,./aÉ./*a.È ,0ìr ^ó/ñrs/Âe11 1 a21 te/art&50 r..ij ÀclRls^.31 1 6r¡ ^c/^Esl{s? ¡0.)4, e/Þes&rJ t.ir1 À64È44s r.41ù ÄclRri^h:r , c0. Ác/^!s/iô* 2 00¡ 4/iE!¡ù1? ¡ d.5 Ä.^Êr/ù* ?.0, !rr:/{o3r ¡r;r ÀclÈrs/RDBa z ?5e ^./Nts/rùô1 1 ôr aclFe3/Èôò2 ? clc ÂvR[s/RD¡3 ? ¡t: ^c ¿5lRÔ6r ?.066 ù/Èryrùd5 1 071 ¡5lRes/iot6 2 6t6 ^c/qrtßa17 ? $3 ^c/R€s/e.s . 1x. t6/wtßıè r rú0 8tÂRs/rR^si Rù.vd riVICINIÏY MAP_9nçEI-!NÞe)t-gttÊfl}r11-MBEa rIItEt. ,_-PLAT COVER SHÊËÎ2.3.BOUNDARYPLATPLATAND INDEX,tz.&:ã1 *,. --....,.,".,....rede.ol \frar-Pùi 1ol0rlæì-,,;^"".,4.5.,-PLAT!Ji6rÞ DÈrrRs It,00.00) ìo x.. .rt ss/.*r/. cf.ns 2s, ì04!BÉ4. i Ð1r',?0 r r2r E.Û;o Â J¡lr¡ {!!'\uu cÀ? !.5 /r$,/.'MNr* cþ Ls. P6Ìr.ñNr' ^ 3-ila ^!uv,ruu c¡È r.3hÉ Nsfxfarr rM d rn! sd/€r/4 @ er sEc]d ?¡ ^ ÞsrÀù* {E!r$ cmNlR $ sos ,, ^ r-1/.itrùc.4 E¡¡R Âr0 cd Ls.!: ùflr€ s d..t,.r r arÒr6n. .¡5Err lne ø r. srì/4*!/4 d sÀ0 stcñi ã a r¡srilc dfcra 12, À yrl. dsûur .dI{IGH COUNTRY ËNGINIIËlìINGrNc\.ì . ,.,"*''*ry@hô ¡@ @ s0 do_ !lA ^a r-X,htda4'/* -@ìil "iliTiiå"-Y. :::,::'":í,i,Í'." .t!.ßK#. <a*t-'/-" k#"J il*"re,ù'N.s M'H4. !0 {:rl]ls-År[u(qr r.ìfñc Ð¡r !ú su ¡móirfrc!*ilds {, i.,...ìr:',CONSULTINC ¡]NC1NEIR5 AND SUNWYORSS¿3 COOPIR ÀVENUEc!ÉNwooD sPRtNcs. cotouDo 81601(970) 945..86?ðRAt{cftI 872-26Iidl F:lqi- . n !üÅll¡¡*ì'þtìc;;'ii\-\;?ll"#-I,å'ì'4iIr1iTr-.--jT$:r:' -- '!I9'-lit*Ë,i.i?EiÌifAe.áli¿è\âl'1,,ri.r:,lii¡ ¡{å{ä;ì{,\.e1'{13rþ'')?i'14:Y#?iÈ'€..ìÀ"'rþ:\".dår,6zÀ!t"$:2 .;,1i .T,,{?,i4'nIr3i.;È\¡\i.1i;ÍIIli,Ê€,€-r¡l::_;/2q,,?"4?T!-/\z .1,' \, j:Ii"\ì1ri\b^q/ ,,,\ I.r:ef:?ëe¿i9*;Ê':z,¿,;,\^\lË:\:\í\"-iI['rlar,l-{lJ,I¡l _j'Í äl:.1 li-, ól;i àlaPi rl*l tn),[4i2iv.ir-rlol,1\TO THIS SHEATq "11T9:cM{TCH 10:r()?U')'E-i7it;¿- ""¡s2d fri¡.erê 3/e fÐqF¡lblic.net'.- Ga rfi eld Cou nty, Co Property Rerord CardMirp Sre¡rnch Resrlt: "Advanced Se¡rch Advanced Results* Laler: Summary Acünt Påræl Prcp€rty Addrß Legål Dscr¡diffi Atrë Land SqFt TüArea M¡ll Lcvy Subdivisim Actual Values R007147 239]32102052 360 CERTSE RÄNCH RD" CÀREONDALE, CO 81ó23 5ecti6: 32 fomsh¡p:7 Rsngs 87 Subdiv¡siotr CERISE RANCH SUB-DlV. Lot 52 P¡IASE 1 4O.74AACRE5 40,744 o 84 80-o5fi) CERISE RANCHSUB-OIV, 8AKER. GLYNNAG&OBLEsKI, BERT M PO BOX5748 FRISCO CO 80¡143 ,Owner Land Unit Type VACANI RES IOTS - 0100 {VAOANT tAi\¡Ð} Squre Fæt O Assed Yqr Lafld Actual lmprowmentActÉl 2027. iz75,ooc.oo þ.oo =Côlumß 2020 Szzs.ooo.oo 90.oo Totãl Adtrãl ( lcl Lanê Rån(h Ê-'¡ 9275,00û{n 522s,firo.(x' ¡39t1916o¡t tu¡d ßÆ, GTYNNÂ G & @SK, 8€Rf M Phytbol Âddr6r 3& C*6E RNCH RO C^R@DAGAì6æ üo¡llnc Àdd.6r PO gOX 57¡A FRSCO, CO &43 to¡dÀc.êr4.7@ll 7út 239t31202St