HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence - 430 OSGOOD STREET 5/14/2001 t a n
a r c h i t e c t s a n d p li e r s ,
Memorandum
Date: .09 April 2001
To: Planning Board.Members
Heidi Griffin, North Andover Planning Department
Tim McIntosh Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB)
From:
Jon Oxman AIA DiNisco Design Partnership (DDP)
Project North Andover High School
Project No. 99430.0
Subject: Response to Review Memos and Planning Board He,aring
1. RESPONSE TO SITE PLAN SPECIAL PERMIT REVIEW
1
1. nds comprehensively to the outstanding issues in the
This Memorandum respo
following three reviews of the Site Plan Special Permit:
Vanasse Hangen Brustlin (VHB) Review Memo dated 22 March 2001
Town Planner Review Memo dated 27 March 2001
Planning Board Hearing on 03 April 2001
2., VHB MEMO
2.1. Attached to this Memorandum are the following responses from project consultants
which are referenced below:
Bruce Campbell& Associates Memorandum (BC&A) dated 03 April 2001 001
Schofield Brothers of New England (SBNE) Memorandum dated 05 April 2
RW Sullivan (RWS) Memorandum dated 03 April 2001
2.2. Ken DiNisco, Rick Rice and Jon Oxman of DDP,
Doug Prentiss of BC&A, and Fred
King of SBNE met with Tim McIntosh and bert N Con Conclusions 06
eache�d du0r'tng that of VH
DDP's office to discuss VHB s review memorandum.
meeting are incorporated in the discussion below.
Kenneth DiNisco Richard N.Rice
Gary E.Ainslie Christopher Huston ,
v d 9 F 2 8 5 8 fax 4 2 6 1 4 5 7
Page 2
School, 09 April 2001
MEMORANDUM
North Andover High
Off Street Parking aces, 2 of
2.3. parking areas).
Parking - Plans will be revised in the north and south pe ki
2.3.1. Accessible P One each
which will be van accessible ( registered civil engineer—Plan lies with
ed by reg e Architect.This fully comp
2.3.2. Layout and Materials y es registered Landscape
stamped and signed by g uirements.
all state and local laws and req
2.4. Traffic impact Study Review
referenced BC&A memorandu ttions were takhe traffic to he BC&A
2.4.1. The above refer with VHB, and no o exce p
reviewed at the meeting analysis and review
memo.
site plan's pedestrian and bicycle
'onto the BC&A memorandum which references the an noted in the
2.42 In addition bicycle traffic,the proposed with VHB. As n
of pedestrian and
he site p the route
t Ian is consistent with f a Rail Trail along the Bicycle access to the site was reviewed at the meetm gn
original submission, the tans for the developm
Advocacy committ ee's Plans
Prescott Street to the r�o ehtoll
Essex Railroad. See attachment 26 of the original submission.
of the former E provided the entry ilso
addition pedestrian access t to is E pedestrian bridge and along
the way through
Osgood Street.
2.5. Drainage Review
E memorandum from the civil engineer was reviewed
BNE will recalculate the pipes in question and fax the
2.5.1. The above referenced iHB. S April to the
at the meeting Tuesday, 10
results directly to VHB by
2.6. Standard Engineering Practice
2.6.1. Wheelchair Ramps
to include wheel chair With
1.1. -crossing areas. It was decided at the 6 Plans will be checNka d and revised as necessary s
2 ramps at all road y
at the Osgood Street
VHB that the wheel chair would
accessible crossing at
Project does not take into
provision of a w ood Street improvement
entry.The current Osg drive sidewalk to the south side oft e
e widening of the drive at the Osgood Street curb cut.
account the relocation of the entry
entry drive, or th
MEMORANDUM North Andover High School, 09 April 2001 Page 3
2.6.1.2.
The contours will be checked and if necessary revised at the two noted
locations:
• North parking lot at crosswalks
South parking lot at handicap spaces
•
decided at the meeting with VHB that there would be no
It was d crossings and that wheel chair crossings would
speedtables at roadway
incorporate curb cuts.
2.6.2. Vehicle Turning Movements
2.6.2.1. Bus and Truck Routing will be identified on plans.
2.2. Bus and large truck movement nfi urationrlat the curve around the tennis
2.6 with VHB.The road co g
meeting from the traffic consultant, BC&A, a copy Of
courts is based on a drawing ort Revised Wetlands Crossing).
which is attached to this meeting rep the
BC&A designed the road at this afeouste by bus and accommodate
traffic. At the
wetlands site constraint and Ian and identified three
meeting Doug Prentiss reviewed the site p
locations to confirm minimum radicomers.dum Plan revisions will
Vehicle Movement attached to this and east
be made to the plans. Revisions 2001 Planning Board Hearing area Entry
courtyard shown at the 03 April _ and and
documented on the Partial Site Plan Ian also shows the addition of a
attached to this memorandum.This plan by the fire department at
paved 12 foot wide fire access lane requested
the east courtyard.
2.6.3. Pavement Markings,Warning And Regulation Signage
2.6.3.1. Pavement Markings,Warning and Regulation Signage will be included on
site plans. on was revi
3.2. Traffic flow as documented in tha6 of the obginalisubmiss oneRed at
2.6.
the VHB meeting. See attachment
arrows indicate car traffic; yellow arrows indicate e he bus route and blue
arrows show the 2 service entries
2.6.4. Guardrail and Retaining Wall Issues:
2.6.4.1. Retaining wall will be designed for vehicle surcharge.
2.6.4.2. Retaining wall/guardrail connection will be designed to address vehicle
impact.
Page 4
M
EMORANDUM North Andover High School, 09 April 2001
6.4.3. Post spacing w-11 be confirmed that it is adequate.
2 wall.
The guardrail will not extend beyond limits of the retaining
2.6.4.4. opposite
pedestrian walkway is on the op os
is not necessary. Thep ht above the adjacent grade
2.6.4.5. Fencing Note that the road heig
side of the road (0„to that
0")
ranges from 0 April 2001
note that their comment was made
Service Shutoff issue and RW Sullivan's memo dated 03 p Ic
2.6.5. The Water sprinkle,sere
were discussed at the VHB meeting.VH
as a recommendation to forestall inadvertent shut off of the
3 TOWN PLANNER MEMO Location Of Parking/Walkways)
3.1. Sidewalk Extension Along Prescott Street (x.
he high school does not reimburse for off-site improvements.
3.1.1. State funding fort 9 for the Town rather than the
This improvement would be more appropriate the town for a
artme it to address. In additi ed the
future use by the
the site
School Dep has been resew
(approximately 1 acre) which could impact sidewalks in this location.
Public Safety Comp
3.2. Retaining Walls (xii. Location Of Walls/Signs) per contract en
ral engineer will certify that th t walls
ction° pro be
ons of the
p
3.2.1. documents as part of the `controlled cons
Massachusetts Building Code-
3.3. Vehicle Movement (xii. Location Of Roadways/Drives)
3.3. Large See item 2.6.2
Lar e Vehicle Movement was reviewed at the VHB meeting•
3.3.1. g
above. in Plan)
3.4.
Additional Planting Buffer At Rear Lot Line ( [hat Landscap g
cannot be added to that part of the rear lot line area that is in
3.4.1. Additional planting neighbors that would
additional planting at the rear lot line and there orslat the
the wetland. However, the architect has met with the nethose Haig
directly be affected by ad reed to by
additional planting outside the wetland 01 s agreed
neighbors meeting on 22 February
3.5.
Refuse Area Dumpster Truck Access (xvi. Refuse Areas)
3.5.1. The issue of
truck maneuvering at the dumpster area is addressed above in
items 2.6.2• and 2.6.3.
Page 5
EMORANDUM North An
High
M School, 09 April 2001
3.6.
Commonwealth Review (xx. Commonwealth Review)
3.6.1. MEPA regulations
have been satisfied with the Certificate the Environmental
Notification Form, attachment 20 of the original submission.
letter from Fred
wired as noted inthe left the attached
3.6.2. A 401 Water Quality Certification is not required Protection correspondence that
King, attachment 22 of the oogEnvironmental snon. See also page
Massachusetts Department
further documents this.
4. PLANNING BOARD HEARING
4.1. Secondary Emergency Site Access
emergency access:the PrescRoadtreet
4.1.1. There : two options for a secondary Road,which and access off
shown on the original submisse The access off Chi kerin9 e traffic
access entry driv, access Permit.Th
opposite the senior housing
is a state highway,would require a MassHighway e wires the
hway on 05 April 2001 to discuss the requirements
access only off Chickering Road. MassHighway q
consultant m h MassHig
for an emergency or a curb opening regardless of its use. See the attached letter
same standards f bell & Associates. Because fe red option.
dated 05 April 2001 from Bruce Camp the site drive to the
requirements the emergency access o off wn connect connecting p
q
The 8 foot wide bituminous concrete p s stem of the future Public
enc access will be increased to 2 feet. Note that this site rive
Prescott emerg Y parking and road y Y
can be coordinated with the p
Safety Comp
4.2. Snow Removal
Plan" depicting designated
Andover Conservation Commission''n Order of Conditions includes he
4.2.1. The Noof submitting a"Snow.Stockp g
the requirement ate storage and a wrtten agreement from the DPW stating they
areas with adequ
concur with the designated areas.
4.3. Sidewalk Width
4.3.1. The minimum sidewalk width is 5 feet.
4.4. Building Setback from Front Lot Line partial Ian,the Front
4.4.1. As noted in the original submission Bylaw specifies a minision and the attache p site p
mum Front Setback of 30
Setback is 32 feet.The
feet.
Page 6
MEMORANDU H►9h School, 09 April 2001
M North Andover
REVISED PLAN SUBMISSION emorandum and
5 roves the project
the Planning Board appart of the order of
uments will be revised �s documented in this
5 1. Construction Doc requests that other
attachments.The architect req the revisions contained herein p
response, making appropriate.This will facilitate obtaining will
based on this Board sees approp fashion to make a submission
agencies in a timely h school project.The architect
conditions athe
from town of the hig or to construction.
required sign-Otis Board p
construction documents to the Planning
deadline of 01 Jun 20011 or state Jun ding
submit final
+jonxman AIA
DiNISCO DESIGN
Louis Minmanski
cc: Paul Szy
Nancy Kurtz
Patrick Saitta
Kenneth DiNisco
Richard Rice 03 April 2001)
En land Memorandum (05 April 2001)
Bruce Campbell &Associates g Memorandum
Enclosures: Schofield Brothers of 03 April 2001)2001)
RW Sullivan Memorandum ( 19 January 01 April 2001)
Revised Wetlands Crossing ( 09 April 2001)
Large Vehicle Movement( ondence (06
Partial Site Plan— East Courtyard and Service Entry
Partial Site Plan—Department of Environmental Protection Corresp'I 2001)
Massachusetts Dep Emergency Access (05 Ap
November 2000)Prentiss Regarding April 2001)
Letter from Doug Front Set Back(09 Ap
Partial Site Plan—
99430.0 CorPlanDept 24-PlnEW
Brace Campbell &
Associates,Inc.
38 ChauncY
Street,Suite 701
Boston,Massachusetts 02"1(617)451-9904
tel. (617) 542-1199 A N
•e-mail:info @bca-engineers.com �/( ® R
JOBIFILE NO. 977meTno06-dP wpd
TO: Rick Ri
celJon Oxman
P E IP,. Cloutier
D.Prentiss, comments
FROM 2001 Consultant's
April 3, Response to Town
DATE: h School-
SUBJECT North Andover Hig
UCTION VHB) memo dated 3/22101,
INTROD en Brustlin
to the V anasse Hang completed for theNorth AndVHB n a
emo is intended to Yes-pond traffic study
This m o f comments on the BC&A �,�,ill respond to the issues raised by
which is a
summary ti.n/ ansion proJect'- This memo ation where necessary-
rovide supplernental inform
School relocation/exp traffic
point-by-Point fashion and p aced to the standard
Plvl
is not typical when comp
school project the co Inak covers
for a school project al zed,but for any The AM hour p
In addition,a traffic study peak hours are an y this period.
T ically commuter p
study. YP peak period
of an issue since school's not"'session ur�ng
peak hour is n peak and the commuter p
both the school p
BACKGROUND
d work was completed
ber of comprehensive studies and
This included. 1-) a
traffic study,a num back to 1997- a
As noted in the BC&
ation/renovatiOn project dating a traffic
A oc acts on Osgood Street were reviewed; t-
on the High School rel the site and 3.)
txafflc signal on State
•n impact assessment where the traffic impacts
tailing a new c si nals.
reliml �` h reviewed alternate accessonc schemes to/from traffic g
preliminary
access study which
feasibility which analyzed the feasibility with two adjacent State-owne
signal feasibility study and interconnecting
Chickering Road) e recent traffic study
Route 125 ( .
All these studies were footnoted in th
2000 Existing Conditions acts of the scho il-
• The greatest imp
based on the previous studies• d the Town's
not intersections
that are one-half a mile
The study area was selected will be affecte roving area_
site,
south d imp
at other intersections to the to Main Street an Should be
related traffic are at the intersections closest to 0 0l
re razed Chicken R the school
away. While it is recognized
Street from
rading on eri od Therefore, additional traffic from
consultant is uPg ear horizon P
intersections to a 20-y lnc (BC&A);February 2001
h School:Bruce Campbell&AssOciares,
Propose North Andover HiS Bruce Campbell&
Associates,Inc.
'Tro Ic hnpoct Sandy- P
MEMO ANDUM
Ref: 977memo06.dp.��Pd
Page 2
t the locations noted by the Town's consultant•
easily accommodated a
d'ustments September and
, Seasonal Adjustments facility on
es show that traffic counts were
the assisted d living on
revious BC&A studs �collected consider
Review of the p as in session.
The july data was onl periods for
en school w_ n alternate access to the scho�l ��e o f£ being
l?
May when h when a Overpass during
the west sid aia Route talso collected on the Rock
pedestrian d
comparison purposes.
.Trip Gen eration/Distribution empirical data was presented in all
• and actual or emp a combination of
ortation Engineers(ITE) studies
Both Institute of Transp higher than ITE data. For thethee trip study- Theearlier'BC&A
$ Actual data is g were used in
$C&A studies. A atterns
School Geographic data and traffic s patterns
presented a detailed analysis
Build Conditions ent to verify background
2005 No B De artm
proposed in the area that would contribute traffic
eld with the Town of North Ae dor Planning P
Discussions were h No major projects are
developments in the area.
to immediate ment permanent count station
eriod_
ediate area intersections. hway Depart
studies,Massachusetts Hlg shows no growth in a four-year p
As noted in previous BC&A data actually
#502 in North Andover was reviewed and ro riate.
Therefore, a 1%am"
growth rate is app P
Co.clusions/ReCommendations
• t analysis can be Provided with acs
a signal warrant school-related situations,
At a future date,when the school is built-out, These measures can be revisited
rather than projected school traffic khours onlyn many
site-related traffic data for school pea
police officer control is often
's built-out and traffic monitored at the site drive.
-when the school t
Comments on the Traffic Impact and Access Study
le driveway serving
, General Comore a sing
condition and there Osgood Street,it appears that the
Osgood Street is an existing plans to upgrade'The site drive on Osg the Town consultants
the site. After reviewing the
site distance will be improved- sive analysis and review was conducted of
noted in earlier BC&A studies for the project;extensive
As no grace Campbell&Associates,Inc.
Ref: 977menlo06.dp.wpd
Paae' considered along
Overpass was being
Chickering Road).
and bicycle traffic when demolition of the Roc
pedestrian
direct access to Route rofessional engineers as they are
with considering ed by registered p are not required to be
typically stamped High�"�ay Office of
Traffic impact studies are not typ act studies submitted to Mass or Executive
Q documents. Traffic imp vironmental Affairs entalPolicy Act
planning the Executive Office of En
'v
no does -the,reviewing agencies of Massachusetts a Env
ironm
stamp Construction th require such
Transportation& Town by-laws also do not
(MEPA) submissions•
Bruce Campbell&Associates,Inc.
p. 2
HOFIELD Bp OF NE
-05 1 508 879 1797
a -2001 3.13PM FROM SC
Q� HM�LL EYING , FLANNXNG
�N�INEFitIN . SCJR
of New En91and,
o$e►d$rotor Road
1071 Wo`ces
Framingham'p/IA 01701-5298
j 0"79-0030
r slow 287a
FA(508•$79-V
p,pril 5,2001 2021'1
Kenneth DiNisco
DiNisco Desi b Partnership
87 Summer Street
02110
Boston,MA .
RE. North Andover High School Pro1eet
ent System design
Dear Ken: water Managem Bergen,
the Storm repajeil by Vanasse,
ents relative to re ort P 2101 The following
V,Ie have reviewed the coontmained in the review PBoard dated 3/2
plans and calculations ver Planning
Iz,c. ��g) for the North Ando
Brustlin, t those items: ,.eater will discharge to
is our response o indicates that storm
,e systetn y� Applicant should verift
The proposed drainage the bank, x fisting pipes* �
ITEM 4) a) _ h existing Pipes along acity of the ex
act the cap checked to ensure that erosive
eochichewick �roo owrwi l not adversely imp also be
that the proposed fl outlet should
velocity at the existing Pipe
discharge North Andover Conservation
does not occur. the N Inc, and was
octant issue reviewed by Cotantonio, the pipe
This was also an imp t robe Ch. of Color � �,e included
Res_ p_PIQ during their review, the storm events.
Com.onisston and their consultan eir concerns work during odeled as the
reviewed: T° address th these PiPeS outfall are m «pond 307'
ctosely drologic model to show how d the 15 inch
0 24 inch outfall an the outlet owick Brook
outlets w the u the existing 30 inch outfall is show ed at Cochiche
The flows throw are submerg of discharge As an
,Pond,,,, and the existing and the velocity results
outfall from The outfails from all these PiPeS 14 CFS This
odel. which
restricts the capacity ' inch pipe is 3. oua11 is
in the m_ froze the l5 • inch Pipe
under norm-C►l conditions whi ear storm outflow,,for the
the outflow for the 10 Y The 10 year std of S 2 PPS• These velocities cruces
example velocity of 2.6 FPS• the velocity
in an outl'ow CPS which results in a eel art�ularly since The flows
compute to be 16.21 acceptable P' ded water at the brook- there is
comp Were considered the Pon g conditions and
excessive and o the pipe and entering from existing act at these two
I icantly reduced
irnrnediately uP°n are sign arch pipe culvert, so there is no imp
to the 30 inch Pik at the existing
essentially no chin$,
locations.
FRO►► SCHOF
IELD BROS OF NE 1 50$ 879 1797
nncc
4-05-2001 3=�apM f( ���i►.7
eBscfl ` ILD PLANNING
ENCITIE�EING•SURVEYING
20217
pirtisco Desigtl p�tttership
ppvil 5,2001 #3b. x h1S
e considered for pMH o the
Pag.2 hole should b integrity f
entering/exiting and therefore, the K
S 4 b) _g large diameter drain man
'ITEM ) ore that four drain pipes
manhole has rn question- the standard 4 foot
manhole wall is in q anhole than will be
�Hg that a larger d�aeter m Sheet 3.11
We concur with
5 foot inside diameter minimum
Res nse; cture. d drain m i
o ,,,�aal be requixed for this ea n the standar c�yo�0 f� oor where
diameter This is cover total de ' ex deemed necessary, we
1equired in this case- diameter v`,hen
"Use $ ft t of the manhole sectio�5 cific manhole
that requires ve the into call to call out the sPe
arrancement w'll dama the nest plan revision set to
can modify the de 'l on aired.
the soccer
Structures where this is req tail of
I de the Swale located at north side of
X13 recommends that a details plan.
TI'EM�)c)' stvrmn'ater drainag Swale in the classic
fell be added to the soccer fields is not a a °°stone
of the soc In this case, it is
The- "Swale" at the north end etc. grade of the soccer
once: el with a slope, Slope and the gx off the
Res --- having azi actual charm ortherly water shedding
sense of » yvhere the base of then emont allows point.
for/sub-dta,n is arrang th of the low p
intexcep real depression but them Along the endrO leng
field meet• There is no elevation 104.0. The detail of the in1etc$Ptes,
e to enter the drain or is �cading,P Fe .
soccer field and slop plan for the g if ip"'additional
grade at the top of the stone etail She plan revision
The g contained on the detail sheet 0 detailron the the
Xt p
/ sub��ain is co ,,formation to th
W e can add more inf ro osed
etc. essary.
clarification is nee reinforce concrete flared end s aged enare eCtions on
re the rei-nf Proposed fl
rrEM'�)d)_It is not clear where the locations of P p
Applicant should identify
on the site. APP e plans, the rip_
the storrnwater draina, P for pipe ends that also shows only
eneric Plan WpF and PVC Pipe of the
nse: The detail sheet contains a g ends such as $ubdxain located easterly
Res er types of Pipe i end was cut
rap apron and includes oth a for this Pipe ake it
re this applies is for the oWeen°ed ha the la n Modify the detail to m
location whe driveway- and we can modify
aridus lot and main dri
lower P out so that will be corrected
off in the sheet lay capacity
clear where it applies. between the Pipe
discrepancies slopes_ VHB
ears to re arding the Pip,
EM 4) e) - There app be plans 8 Pipe
sections are then
YT the sivrnlwater ,d revised. (certain pip
calculations and Pipe slopes be reviewed
reCornrnends that the pip
listed).
p• 4
FROM SCHDFIELD BROS OF NE 1 BOB 879 1797
4-05-2001 3:14PM FR
ggS pHUD B 11M
ENGIPIBBRING •Rt1AvEY1NC•)MANNING
• 2�I7 -
DlNisco Dcsib 1'artlier3hip
April 5,2001
page 3
water Keport calculations and t e
ancies between the Storm 8, 2001 plan that underwent
to comply with a request
There are some minor disc�:ep ort was based vn the January
7arivary 31, 2001 plans. The rep at the wetland crossing
driveway i layout. This resulted In
some modifications to shift the i es. Pi e Commission determined
Conservation commis,-,ion and some f tho t al-a i the p of modified drain
by the presentation
d did not require the p runs for
some minor shifts in the location f a few of the drain P ons for those pipe
that these
were insignificantovide updated capacity calculate
calculations, but we will pr calculations and we will prepare these within the nex
cal _
review. These are relatively simple Drain
few days. ears to be Missing fro
ITEM 4)�) m the om CB#4Q for DMH#36 apP
-�The invert in from .
Manhole Rim and Inverts schedule, added to the ne"t Plan revision.
Response: We concur and that invert will be
arding the above,please do not hesitate to call.
If there are any questions re-
very
truly yours, land,Inc•
Schofield Brothers of New Eng
Fredric
W.King,P-
Senior Engineer
(FAX)6
115238016 Y,001
AYR-03-Z001(TUE) 11 ;19 .
SIGN CO�R SHEET
FAX TR�.NS�S . . n �n c.
W Sucllivac ,
Robert
Consulting Engineers
307 Vnion wharf
Boston,MA 02109
7) 523 -
8016
(617) 523 - 8227 Fax 61
Apra 3,2001
Date: DDP
To; _ Ken VNisco
Attn to (pWS#5592)
Fax: NABS
Subject: p jannin g 13 0 ard Plan S Review
Sender: Gene Kingman
CC: L 617) 523-g?27_YOU
CFsIVE ALL THE PAGES,PLUS CpvER SPIFFY.
IF YOU DO NOT B INCLUDING
SPIOUI-D RECEIV l;ONE PAGES)
Ken: icc valve
s was that we should consider locating the rare
VHA about water sere ter service.
The comment from► "tee„to the domestic wa m our,
$ervice shut off berore the would be shut o wf 11 We
and the domestic water Services off the dome�
This would mean that both the without sbutti g a separate valve for Bch_
end this•We would do as we have shown'
valve,and the fire service not be shut o valve on the
would not normally re° we would add another
services with one�1 near the roadway.
If it is desires to shut off bath servi d the fire by
combined lira,between the"tee" an
U HAVE ANY QUESTIONS PLEASE CALL.
1F YO
TI-IANKS,
GENE KjNGMAN
VIIDCoMMc„L,{:n„mcmo.wpd
Oo r
C> , a
7:2— v
711 1
_ / t
t \
_.. \.� '_f. �'� ^'� t,.,..:•� _'fir �_` t e
y.. � � .�_=` � ���• _:r=te
i1�_
v
MN
W
J ..
i
k �
"�`{ � it#' -• _`" ��� €�{ I �
r r
- N� 19 Ja
r
" 3
-
r�
� � S
-
/�9'%3�� a JET
b F�
r� g
V_.
f -
� 4 � M1 • e, �WO—MR-
k�
vi
_
s°
a
Oil!NI MEMO v
.� i
r �T�
� ; r
Yr s 1. �!� .� �.� � ...r ,.-� , f f ,+i f�J 1�'�\s��'"�-r�-�:�t i f'• '��
}p�
i;
r
ICA
S pt, oft
L
{ 1 c
L I c
V i NG
_g _ ... ..
.t cis Cro
. }` Wt n ► t ,.s
_ - oy HIGH SGH.: L
KIM
1 J =� o -
Me t ► — -
WIN
a� f
'WIMM
eA
Ni
MWWOM-
i
■ � , �,��� '*"'�d � � ` ���R¢_�.. c+S`rte�.�
A
■
gill - M ant
t
i
F�
Y,
--
fry
—
'',. •'-tom !�� ((( j eet i�� i - *,`r n., _----'— t` — .J�.—..., —
O 4�
it
-E Og'April 20'
Partial Site Plan -Movement at "
e Vehicle
Sou Parking hot Entry (1)
South � NAt%- m itea
HIGH ��/! s and Planne
IGH S _ �, ; sec t
00
400! 101
f 115
-0�
Q V
z Y
J
J00
.0i
y
41 7,
A10,
oof
20
09-April 2'
Partial site plan -
ie Vehicle ,,ovement at
Larc
,e Entry (2)
FastService d p a n
mo�illillillillilllllllllIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII OOL
II t e c
vivi SC
t;
dD 519,
%:25A oi
%
OVA- "
E V�
.J V�
150,
OWN
W,f
woo zk,-
saw
woo W-tl\
won r P-
I n,7 in T
�;Yl IV P
v-3�
Q, up
N
0
09 APO 201
Site Plan
partial le
Vehicle Movement at
Larg . Entry (3)
Service
VVest pmV%,Zn4te,
SCVJOOL chiteCts and pla ,, ,Ie
mnoVER HIGH a r
O TO
O � �
N �.
r
r
• 2 �
"a
F
xi
4
x
k
CD
uj
co
� J
i
V U
c
W
{
x-�
3 a
co
7
ONwEALTH OF MASSACHUSETT
S .� � `0
COMM ROI`1M
ENTAL AFFAIRS
OFFICE �F ENV IRO F
E CUTIVF F ENVIRONMENTAL pR
DEPARTMENT O Tonal Office
Boston
—Northeast Reg
Metropolitan B BOB DURAND
Secretary
oM 5�• LAUREN LISS
UCCI Commissioner
ARGEO PAUL CELL
Governor
JANE SWIFT
Lieutenant Governor DEp File 1045
# 24 AVER _
ERN•
AND
S PROTECTION ACT FILE
NpT�ICATION OF WETLAND
( tent filed in accordance
RE as received a Notice of In
1116100 rental Protection h
DATE:__ c. 131, §40):
meet of Environn G.L. TTEE Owner: .
The Oep Wetlands protection Act(M• G CONIMI
with the W OVER SCHOOL BLD
Applicant:N• AG ROAD
Address:
Address.. 67ANDOVER,MA 01845 RIL1G ROAD NOT
OF INTENT:
N 675 CHICKS S APPLY TO THIS N
Project LocatioDn'THE FOLLOWING ITEMo file#
IF CHECKS assigned the following
This project has been sued,please note the following= SS OF
A.� TENS
Although a file#is being TES ONLY COMpLE
BER INDICA TION information is sent to
CE OF A FILE NUM OF ApPLICA missing
ISSUANCE ppROVAL t. the following Wetlands
ITTAL9T �' ro ect un accordance with the�N
SUBM assigned to this p uirements in
INC)Elie#will be assign submittal req
B'( eet the Minimum m 10.00: 3 or Form 4 of Sect. 109 he
this office,to feted Notice of Intent(Form with a
Protection Regulations s t o f a comp smittal Form,
1 O _ copy(s) and a COPY
of the Fee Tran fee. to completely
licable) tent filin
w�chever is applicable) o f the Notice and ther documentation necessary
check for the State s sjans, calculations, easures to protect resource aie '
copy(s) s p d mitigation m GS map of the area• ental
2• ( ) — osed work and the US
describe the Pr°p ,°X 11" section®f Title 5 of the State Environm
copy(s) of an 8.5 compliance with
3' ( ) — s of plans showing d delivered to the
4. ( ) co ( ) ailed or hand
Code,
310 CMR 15�o y o f your Notice of Intent has been m
5 ( )Proof that and Endangered Species Program'
Natural Ileritag ation)
COENTS: (see page 2 for additional inform
p Coordinator at(617)574 Gii7# 978)661-7679
calling our (978)661-7615•TDr)
_ .ati MA 01887•Phone (978)661-7600•Fax
Tbis information is available in alternate format Y
A pan on RecYd�PaP�
ulatory Jurisdiction s Regulatory Program to determine
Other Reg
1 ( Application has been forwarded to Waterway
if a Chapter 91 License is advised required.forward a copy of the Notice of Intent to the Corps of
2. ( X applicant is
Engineers for review (call 1-800-362-4367 for information).
D. ( X )401 Water Quality Certification Quality
o'ect described in your Notice of Intent requires Protection
and may re�ire
The project
Certification from the Department of S e below forafurther details: Notice of Intent a
submittal of a 401 application f our Noti
I. X )Based upon the information submitted in and with Y required. The
( Quality Certification application form is not
separate 401 Water Q the applicant and finds that there is
Department has reviewed the plans submitted by pP
that the project or activity will be conducted in�manner d that will
reasonable assurance t p Standards,.p.
not violate the Massachusetts Surface Water Quality
a) the applicant receives and complies with a Final Order of Conditions from the local
conservation commission or the Department;
of more than
of Conditions does not cause the loss of more the dredging of
b) The Order and/or J
bordering vegetated wetlands and land under water
100 cubic yards of land under water; replication of 1:1;
Wetlands designated as
'an loss of vegetated wetlands has been mi ugetth with
oss of any �m e Act;
c) Y
and is not part of a subdivision; does 4. c 131,'§40-the, Wetlands Protection
d) The project is not exempt from the M.G•L salt marsh.
Outstanding Resource Waters; and does not cause the loss of any 1
t relieve the applicant of
Therefore,provided
that the above conditions are satisfied,then w anprder of Conditions wi
serve as the Water Quality Certificatioutes orhregulationsThls
the duty to comply with any other stat
activity described in the Notice of Intent can commence,you must
2, ( )Before the Y
Tonal Office. Please complete
obtain a Water Quality Certification form from this R cation form and file it with this
the enclosed 401 Water Quality Certification app
Regional Office for review. ands of material or
involves dredging of greater than 100 cubic y
3. ( )Your project Re Regulatory Commission for work in"Waters d
requires a permit from the Federal Energy proposed project is subject to 314 CMR
the Commonwealth." �Cert re,Your
Please complete the enclosed 401 Water
requires a Water Quality
' Certification application form and file it with the Department Of
.Boston, .
Quality s Program, and One Winter Street,
Waterway at 617-292-5655 if you have
Environmental Protection, program
MA 02108. Contact the Division of Waterways p
any questions. STANDISH,at 978-661-7600.
For more information please contact:MR. ( )U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Cc: Conservation Commission( )Coastal Zone Management R ST.,
( )DEP-Water Pollution Control 87 SUIvIME
Representative-MR.RICE,DINISCO DESIGN PTNSHP.,
Bc&n-
B ,l P.E.
ociate , Bruce � ,
mpbell & Ass Georgy Be koravainy
.
C Bruce Ca PE'
Michael Greenbaum,P E
En ineers and PlanneTs
Gultekin Sultan,P.E.
& Transportation g pssodates
nC0'C0n5PvjI'UtMAG Vede A1san,P•E
�— Ronald D.Desrosiers,P.E.
er P011n
��((���� nsS�NCt
Bonnie S- Premiss,P-E
�y 1 LWt nsP umb Douglas C•
C.
APR •' onsHVAC onsEle=-�_�ns 2001 onlrador nl�, ner Ap w&E
r,OtA OPJC r]�tG
Mr.Ken DiNisco
President ershil LTD D
DiNiseo Design.Pam
Via fax-
. 1-617
426-1457
87 Summer Sueet 02110
Boston,Massachusetts
:North AndOver 1ligh School-Emergency Access
Subs ect
the Plannrg Board the
Dear Ken the comments made by renovated
1p This correspondence is intended to fold secondary or Sated access to the relocated/
other night(April 3,2001)regarding
North Andover Eigh School from State Route 125. way Di�ct 4
N way at the age(se gh ached letter) as
Weer of Mass P�
with the Permits Engineer iaonnation on drainage��(see
access onto
This morning I met leme1S Q
office in Arlington. 1 submitted sued the discussion on a seco a of use of the curb Opening,
Mass Highway and P ardless of the t5'P
requested by It was indicated to me that regardless lords and at a minimum
to Massl-hgh"°ay�' until
further
State Route 125. would need to GOnfonn of 24 feet wide- U
u and be a rninimt>� ents(tic,
the intersection design 0 foot curb radii er de a'tm what additional
would likely require 30-5 cOncept�sketch,etc.,other P
traffic data, ent on the proposed use tO etc.
details are available, t n lanes on Route 125,
environmental,utilities,etc-)would dewalksol�g'
requirements would be necessary-
stions On this meeting,Please contact us.
If you have any que
y yo
Douglas C.Prentiss,P. -
Senior TranspOMtion Engineer
971105-4
St. - Boston, MA 02111 • Phone:t6171 542-1199
• Fax:(617) 451.9904 e-mail: lnfo�6�'"cngineers.co
boa°a°
it
�i f �r i• y\`\r E`; I # N g S
it
%lial CD
1�. tls% ' i i=
ou
--�.�� ` ` •T ../\`- �I' L) '•1' =�� o = it `1$rt }1� !i if 1 r t
=f i t
OL
O •..� � � < t�� ii;r� it .)
V �� I} � # ( t .�a,� _ :L•• iI`�;Ett��`7, ;CVs
'r-t
<ilk{' 1 i %- /^^� i# i
jQ -j
ca 0
Co 0
.r
cc
ca
Q- _
t t
P. 2
4-10-2001
11 :40AM FROM SCHOFIELD BROS OF NE 1 508 g79 1797
g� ClfIFID 1111 N�y
MioSL RING •
kNr�INE
Schofield Brothers of New En9land,Inc.
1071 Worcester Road
Framingham.MA01701-5298
508-879-0030
1-800-696-2874
FAX 508-879-1797
April 10,2001
20217
Vanasse Hanger+Brustlin, Inc.
101 Walnut Street
Watertown,MA 02472
Attn: Timothy B.McIntosh,P:E•
Bl✓. North Andover Nigh School Project—Stognwater.
Dear Tim:
a with you on April 6, 2001, we reviewed the
pointed out in the VHB review
To follow 1.tp on our discussions at our meetinb � are our findings and
plans and calculations for thesome disc
repance c s ThenfO 1°wino
report (3/22/01,) as having
corrections that are prop°sed to address these items:
p e slope's
CB#11 to DMH#12 and CB#18 to DMH#16 o error on the plan- The ip P
In both of theses pipe runs, there is a draftinb es shown on the plan are will
indicated in the drain calculations aThe pipe slopeseforothesE two pipe runs should be
be corrected in the next revision,
0.013 ft./ft. and 0.068 ft./ft.respectively.
CB#36 to DMA#32 but the
case, the Pipe slope shown on the plan as 0Ao 0 as 0.01 is from at previous
In this ca p
calculations in the Stormwater Report shows the A3 6 of the report.
revision. Attached is the corrected calculation page A
DMA#36 to PS#3 pi as 0.010 ft./ft. is cOnect
In this case, the pipe slope shown on the P e slope as 0,017 from a previous
calculations in the Stozix►c rrected calculation page A3-18 of the report-
revision. Attached is the
CB•#45 to DMH#41 prev
case, the ipe slope shown on the plan as Olo� as Ot011 from a �but the
In this c p on shows the pipes p
calculations in the Storznwater Rep
revision. Attar-hod is the corrected calculation pane A3-22 of the report.
4-10-2001 11 -41AM FROM SCHOFIELD BROS OF NE 1 508 879 1797
P- 3
BBSCIIOFIUD BROTHERS
EtiGiNEER1NC•SURWEYING• PI ArirING
Vanasse Hangen Brustlin,Inc. 201-17
RE; North Andover high School
April 10,2001
Page 2
If you have any questions regarding this infoxm.ation, please do not hesitate to call.
Very truly yours,
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc.
Fredric W. King,P.E.
Senior Engineer
Cc: DiNisco Design Partnership
Enclosures (3 pages).
p. 4
AM FROM SCHOFIELD BROS OF NE 1 508 g79 1797
4-10-2001 11 :41 P ® �
Job # 2021
Pipe
Plow - Proposed
CB#11 to DMH#12 10 In
CB#10 to DMH#12 Size ,G
10 in. Slope
Size 0.05 ft.Ift. 2
0.01
Slope 0.037 ftAl. Manning's coef. n=
0.01 z
Manning's coef. n= 78.54 in? or 0.55 ft•
Area 2-62 ft.
78.54 in? or 0.55 ft? Perimeter 31.42 in.
Area 2.62 ft. 0.208 ft.
Perimeter 31.42 in. R=A/P
0.208 ft 1171
R_A/P V-1. �
10.0 O=VA 6.39
7 _
V=1.49/n(R)rW'2 5.49 7 Q = r- 1.61
Q=VA, capacity
Q 25 r. 1-1 c 0 to DMH#1$
Size 10 in.
DMH#12 to DMH#13 10 in Slope 0.04 ft-/ft-
size . 0.01
Slope 0.052 ft./ft. Manning's coef. nT
0.01 z
Manning's coef. n= 78.54 in- or 0.55 ft-
Area 262 ft.
78.54 in? or 0-55 ft.2 perimeter 31.42 in.
Area 2,62 ft. 0.208 ft.
Perimeter 31.42 in. R=A/P
R=A/P 0.208 ft. V.1.49 1n(R)M(Sf2 10.47
11.94 ( VA 5.71
�-
V=1.49In(R)y3(S) 6.51 a 25 r, 1.61
Q_VA 2.71
Q 25 r. GB#13 to DMH#14 10 in
DMH#13 to MH#14 Size
21 in. Slope 0.04 ft-/ft-
size 0.01
Slope 0.0086 ft./ft. Manning's coef• n=
0.012 2
Manning's coef. n 78.54 in 2 or 0.55 ft•
Area 2.62 ft.
346.36 in.z or 2.41 it? 31.42 in_
Area 5.50 ft. Perimeter 0,208 ft.
Perimeter 65.97 m.
0.438 ft.* V_i,49/n(R(S)'12 10.47
R_A/P .64 5.71
V=1.49/n(R)ys(S)1i2 6 O=VA.15.96 Q 25 r. 0.55
1. 14 68 DBH#14 to PS#1
Q 25 r. 21 in.
C5#14 to DMH#14 Size 0.02 ft-/ft.
10 in. Slope
$1Ze 00054 ft./ft. 's coef. n= 0.012
.
Slope Manning
's coef, n- 0.01 in? or 2.41 ft?
Manning Area 346.36
2 5.50 ft.
78.54 in? or 0.55 ft- Perimeter 65.97 in_
Area 2.62 ft. 0.438 ft.
Perimeter 31.42 in R-A/P
R=A/P 0.208 ft. V=1.49/n(R)�(S)1 10.12
24.34
V_1.49/n(R)V3(Sf2 2 8� (�=VA Q 25 r. 16.22
Q=VA 0.99
Q 25 r. CB#15 to PS#1 10 in.
Manning'S coefficients size 0.05 0.012 Slope ft-/It-
Concrete p►Pg 0,01 0.01
PVC Manning's coef. n=
0.01 z
Concrete lined 78,54 in.z or 0.55 ft.
Area 2.62 ft_
perimeter 31.42 in.
R_AtF 0.208 ft.
V=1.49/n(R)?a(S)/2 11.71
Q=VA 6.39
73
P. 5
OM SCHOFIELD BROS OF NE 1 508 879 1797 � / 0
o
4-10-2001 1 1 :41 AM FR �'�
2®217
Flow - proposed Job #
pipe DMH#33 to DMH#36
size 151n.
CB#37 to DMH#33 8 in. Slope 0.017 ft./ft.
Size 0.068 ft./ft. coaf. n= 0.012
Slope Manning's
Manning's coef. n= 0.01 or 1.23 ft 2
2 Area 176.71 in? 3,93 ft.
50.21 in? or 0-35 ft. 47.12 in.
Area. 2.09 ft perimeter 0.313 ft
25.13 in. R
Perimeter
R_AIP 0.167 ft, V-1,49/n(R)ys(S)1� 9,15
11.77 Q=VA
V=1.49 1n(RP'(S)112 6.77
4.11 Q 25 r•
6-VA,capacity 1.1 t DMH#34
Q 25 r- CB#39 o i0.in.
gize 0 01 ft./ft.
CB#38 to pMH#34 10 in. Slope
Size 0,051 ft./ft. n= 0.01
slope Manning's coef•
's coef. n= 0.01 E 0,55 ft?
Manning z Area 78. in-2 °t 2.62 ft.
or 0.55 ft. 31.42 in-
Area 78.54 in?3 . . 2.62 ft. Perimeter 0,208 ft.
142 in R=Alp
Perimeter ;208 ft V=1.49/n(R) '(
R=AIP 23 2
0 2.86
iii Q=VA
V=1.49/n(R)�(S) 16 45 Q 25 r. 2-8
()=VA
Q 25 T. 184 CB#40 to DMH#36 10 in.
Size
DMH#34 to MH#36 15 in Slope 0.1 ftJft.
Size 0.01
Slope 0.0073 ft./ft• Manning's coef- n=
Manning's coef. n= 0.012 or 0.55 ft?
78.54 in
2 or 1-23 ft a Area 31.42 in,
2.62 ft.
Area • 176.7'1 in. 3.93 #t. Perimeter 0.208 ft.
47.12 in. R=A/P
perimeter 0-313 ft.
R-1uP V=1.49/n(R)�(S)1/2 19 03
ys �� 4.$9 Q_VA 3.14
V.1.49/n(R) (S) 6,00 Q 25 r.
Q=VA 64 DMH#
4.
Q 25 r. CB#42 to 35 g in.
CB#41 to DMH#35 Size 0,1 ft-/ft-
12 in. Slope 0.01
Size 0.01 ftdit, Manning's coef. n=
Slope 0.01 2
manning'$coef. n= 50.27 in? or 0.35 ft-
2 Area 25.13 in. 2-09 ft.
113.10 in-2 °� 0'73 ft perimeter
Area 3-14 ft. R_A/P 0.167 ft.
37.70 in.
Perimeter 0.250 ft.
V=1.49/n(R)�(S)iiz 14.98
R=
V=1.49/n(R)2n( (�=VA
S)itx 4,64 1:125 r. 0.39
q=VA
Q 25 r, 4.57 DMH#36 to PS#3 21 in-
DMH#35 to DMH#36 Size 0,01 ft./ft. Z� K
15 in. Slope
Size 0.01 ft./ft. 's coef. n= 0-012
slope r 2.41 ft.
Mahrnng z
coef. n= O.d12 346.36 in o
Manning's Area 5.50 ft.
or 1.3 293 3 ft ft` 65.97 in,
Area 176.71 in.` Perimeter
47.12 in. R=A/P
perimeter 0,313 ft.
R=A/P V=1.49//n(R) (S)�� 0,438 ft.
17.21 /<
z/3(S)1t2 5.72
V_1.491n(R) 7.02 Q 25 r 17.16
.Q=VA A OC,
EROS OF NE 1 506 879 1797 3 ® *2,SCF E
HOILD �
t1-1 a-2001 1 1 :d2AM FROM R-
job # 20217
pipe Flow r ��®p°�eci
C5#44 tos a#4 10 in
p.02 it./ft.
CB#43 to pS#4 10 in. Slope 0.01
Size Mllt. Manning'--coel' n^ 2
0.029 2 4r p,55 ft.
Slope 0.01 78.54 in• 2.62 ft.
's coet. n= z Area 31.42 ►n•
Manning or 0.55 lt. perimeter 0.208 ft.
78.54 . 2,62 ft• R=AIP
Area 31.42 in. ys s)�rz 7.40
perimeter 0.208 #t• V=1.49Q=N 4A4
R_A/p Q=VA 2.22
S irz 8.92 r.
V:1,491n(R)�acity 4.86 4t
Q_VA,cap 1.16 CB#45Cto DMA# 10 ,n.
size 0.04 itAt.r•SL �„✓/L
Q 25 r 6 Slope 01
p.S#4 to DMH# 12 in. 0.
manning Copt. n=
Size 0.015 ft.lft• 0.55
or n z
z
slope 0.0i2 78.54 ►n 2.62 ft.
�$ coef. n= Area 31,42 in
ManninJ z or 0.79 ft? perimeter It.
113.10.in. 3.14 it. 0.208
Area R-A1P S 1/2 10.47
Perimeter 37.70 in. g T1
Perim 0.250 ft V_1,49/n (
R-
pip 3�s);iz 6.03 Q 2.09
V_1.491n( ) 4.74
Q;�VA 3,38
Q 25 r
a r h
i t e t s a n d P 1 a_ n n e r s
L'uttited
10 April 2-0011
Corps of Engineers
U.S. Army Branch -New England District
Regulatory
696 Virginia Road
Concord, MA 01742-2751
Attention: Tina Chaisson,Assistant project Manager
North Andover Iiigh School
Reference: North Andover, MA
orp
s of Engineers File Number 200002868
Army C
Subject: Order of Conditions
on ear Tina, h Andover Conservation omle'ns' O Ider
D of the Nort s of Engineers
our records a copy Corp
h School.The Army
-1 have enclosed for) ns is being submitted as additional documentation o
Order of conditions he Massachusetts Programmatic General Permit:
of Conditions for tOhe North Andover High of t
200002868•The - self.
.
compliance with the terms and conditions
ns lease do not hesitate to contact Rick Rice or my
If there are any questio p
Sincerely;
Jon O man AIA
DiNISCO DESIGN
(no enclosure)
Heidi Griffin, (no enclosure)
cc
Louis Minicucci
Kurtz (no enclosure)
Nancy no enclosure)
Paul Szymanski (no
o-enclosure)
Patrick Saitta (no enclosure)
Fred King no enclosure)
Kenneth UNisco (no enclosure)
Richard Rice
arch 2001)
Enclosures:
Order of Conditions (01 M
99430.0 CorArmvCorpEnq 02 Christopher Huston
Gary E.Ainslie 4 z 6 . 1 4 5
Richard N. Rice Z g 5 g f a x
Kenneth DiNisco M A 0 2 1 1 0 6 1 7 4 2 6 -
t o n m
r�ool
04/15/2001 16:47 FAX
--- i� l anRr9
and P tv1 A 11217.�
a Y c h t C t s s t J n
�? 5unll�ics
$trczt Bo
ndo, H1 h S ooi
Transnrrittat Project:
To P nni ®e atiA oov Projevt No 'X376 88- 2
-r wn No Fax NO.:
Attn:
Fax
the fallowing: Courier to Follow
We are sending {Mail–Mailed Go9Y
C] Letter(S) ® pvernight Mail
Prints) ® Other:
C3 shop Drawings) Action
Specifications(8) _
® Other- By
p®scription
Date Revised Radii
Merrtorandurn® �--
�/g3/d1 �—
�f
7- joviawed,
no approval required
,�- Forr�Ywour f ormation 6. other
as submitted 3- Revise and resubmit ed
g. For your approval
1. Approved �. Approved as
2 ApPrpve as noted
Com►rents:
cc:
FaX 617-426-1457
gy; Jon_01(m a receive ail pa9ES gont9ln informative,
ou do nOt listed above and maY uSe, disclosure,
Pease ca11617°
426-28581E yfor the addressee Possible- Any
Skis is page 1 of —�' ittal is+mended odd contact us as soon as
of confidentiality::Thrs trans f ou are not the addressee, prohibited,
Y
Notice ;vile ed• Y
that is cor con and pr 9
copying
or nicatiorrs of the contents of this transmission,s
04/13/2001 16:47 FAX ldl002
C's :a •n d P
L•imited.
Memo and urtl
Date' 13 April'2001. :. .
To:. Tim Mctntosh Vihasse Hangen.Brustlin ( ;
' Heidi'Griffin North'Andover Planning Department
'
From:- on.Oxrnan'
Project, N®rth.Andover High /School
Project No: ; '99430.Q_ _
Subject: Revised Radii for Vbh'icle'Turning•MovemOnts "
1: RESPONSE'TO V MEMO:
1,•1. .-.This memo responds'to.the last-outstanding item tliscus§ed in the VHi3 memo to ;
the Plarining Board dated'12'ApriI 2001.
2. :
REVISED RADII'FOR TURNING VEHICLE MOVEMENTs
2.1:' The'radii will-be,revised'at:the three,locations-recorBMended by VHB.and shown '
in the attached sketches.This will address the issue.'of large vehicle movements
at'the'loeations in-question.
Jon Oman-AIA :
DiNISCO DESIGN
cc` Louis'.Minicucci
Paul Szymanski'
Naricy.•.Kurtz . ;
Patrick Saitta. • . ; '
•Kenneth DiNisca
Richard Rice,'
Enclosures:, Revised Radii for Vehicle Turning.'Moveinents (13 April'2001 1
99430;.d CorPpnDeDt 32.VHBRvw ,
Kenneth DiNisev RzcJiard N.Rice. Gary E.,Ainslie ChristoFhes Huston
B'.7 S'u m m e r 5 t r'e•e't S o s ( o n M A 0 2.1 t' 0 -6 T 7_- 4 .2.6 ..2.8'5, 6 £•a x 42 6 1 b 5.7
: W, w'..'d i n.i ,-e-0 .•c 0 to
3
t,
S
i
IT
Fwx
w
�f
���■rw■fir+ ;
_ C
.� sal .-.■ '� �r�� . •
z �
�`• PP
r
1�
wow
,".r � � �
Now-
r -
r
r,-
1 . , ` •
r
t
r
r
y:
a
WOO
Ole
f �
r�oo5
04%13/2001 16:49 FAX
y
NA
�j t �
Ited V { 1---"---'
.. " .t
CL
-- oA —
Cs l CC>
, a
a. r c h t e c t s a n' d p l a n n e r s
Limited
VIA FACSIMILE
14 May 2001
U.S. Army.Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Branch - New England District
696 Virginia Road
Concord,.MA 01742-2751y ,
Attention: Tina Chaisson `
Assistant Project Manager o PA
Reference: North. Andover. High School
North Andover, MA
Army Corps of Engineers File Number 200002868
Subject: Order of Conditions
Dear Tina,
At your request I have enclosed for your records a letter from Fred King dated 21 December
2001 regarding the North Andover High School project relative to Section 404 and 401 permit
requirements. I have previously sent you the North Andover Conservation Commission Order
of Conditions referenced in this letter.
As we discussed on the phone today, you have determined that this is a Category 1 Permit,
which is in the non-reporting category, and will be closing out your file on the North Andover
High School project.
Sincerely,
Jon Oxm n AIA
DiNISCO DESIGN
JO/jo
cc: Heidi Griffin, (no enclosure)
Louis Minicucci (no enclosure)
Nancy Kurtz (no enclosure)
Paul Szymanski (no enclosure)
Patrick Saitta (no enclosure)
Fred King (no enclosure)
Kenneth DiNisco (no enclosure)
Richard Rice (no enclosure)
Enclosures: Letter from Fred King (21 December 2001)
99430.0 Cor*wCorpEnq 03
Kenneth DiNisco Richard N. Rice Gary E.Ainslie Christopher Huston
� n r I A 5 7
SBSC OFIEW BROTHERS
NNING
FNIGINEEIZING - SURVEYING
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc,
1071 Worcester Road
Framingham,MA 01701-5298
508-879-0030
Room 1-800-696-2874
FAX 508-879-1797
October 10)2001
20217
TO: North Andover Conservation Commission
,,/North Andover Planning Board
D. Robert Nicetta,Building Commissioner
DiNisco Design Partnership—Attn: Rick Rice
(for furthur distribution to applicable parties)
FROM: Fredric W• King,P.E.
.on Report SEPTEMBER 2001
RE: N High Andover Hgh School -Monthly Inspect'
s of New England,Inc. has been designated as the"Environmental/Erosion
Schofield Brother for the North Andover High School Project. The purpose of the Environmental
Control Monitor" inspections of the project site to insure compliance
Erosion Control Monitor is to perforn,weekly inission and the Special Permit
with the Order of Conditions issued by the Conservation Con,
blimit of work
issued y the Planning Board with respect to sediment ameat on controls,compliance,wetland replication and stormwater manage issues.
monthly inspection report prepared and submitted in compliance with the above
,1-1 October 1,2001,
This is the first M e period from the start of site work throug
referenced permits. It covers th' (#0 1 to#04)relative to the inspections
Attached are Copies Of the Weekly Inspection Reports
performed on September 10, 17,24 and October 1,2001. of tile Site
nce was held on August 23,v00 1 itrivThe pre-construction confere arious concerned Town departments and
Zoppo Corporation), the project architect, Work on the
Contractor (R. d Brothers of New England Inc, (SBNE)
other project consultants including Schofield security fencing,project signs and
project began the following week with the installation of the secur rosion Control inspection was
The first Environmental/E
perimeter erosion and sediment controls. ter erosion control installation on
coincide with the near completion o f t he penine
timed to coinc scheduled for each Monday following that date while
September 10th. Regular inspections are
construction is in progress. erforined by
Environmental/Erosion Control Inspections and Weekly ss o s The routine En s Specialist for SBNE, Building mioner,Robert Nicetta is
Ms, Jennifer steel, a Wetland e site for tile Conservation Commission until a new
also performing periodic inspections of the p Mr.Nicetta informed of the results of our
Conservation Agent is employed. This office will kee es arise that need immediate
inspections through the weekly reports and consult with him s issu attention relative to the Special Permit or Order of Condition
the installation of the erosion controls and the start of the
As can be seen from the weekly reports, entrances are
imeter erosion controls and g iosite work have gone very well. The per ulously in complyiwith the erosion
properly installed and the Contractor is working irletic erp rainfall events avert his
irements. The project is benefiting from the lack P f sev control requ o sediment control on the ste. Te rimary roblem for the first month
first month with respect t
CSCHOFIELD�BR®THERS
ENGINEERING
20217
over High School—Monthly Inspection Report—SEPTEMBER 200
North And
October 10,2001
Page 2
he dry conditions,but the contractor has been keeping this under control
was dust control due tot Y
h exposed surfaces.
with the application of water to the p
w
construction of the two w
etland replication areas began immed'ivated to
acceptable sub-
The installation
a satisfactory"organic topsoil" for placement in
of the perimeter erosion controlen actively seeking have been satisfactory 11 tes and SBNE are
grade and the Conti actor has be Carol R. Johnson Associates)
the areas. The project Landscape Architect( expected shortly and the soil
s of prop soil material submitted beXhe Contractor for determination
reviewing the test result P ose. A decision is P
of a mix that will be acceptable of this Pu mediately thereafter.
placement and planting
will take place
isco Design Partnership has consultedwith dule for construction of the
The Project Architect,DiN Commission,to determine that the
Monitor for the Conservation buff one plantings as part of the initial site work will satisfy the
wetland replication areas an
requirement of Condition#35 of the Order of Conditions. It is our understanding that the
Commission has concurred with that schedule. performed in
Based on
our inspections, we have found that the,Co don s• Please let es know if there are any
compliance wiahe nosawa e of rriiit and order of
issues that we s If you
recommendations that would help us provide
weekly inspection reports provide detailed information as to our finding
The attached we Y you have any comments or rec
have any questions or if y to hear from you.
information you need,we would be happy
Very truly yours,
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc.
Fredric W.King,P.E.
Senior Engineer
Environmental Planner
enclosures
ao O�IELD B��TNERS ,
CSC
RPI
E Iand.Inc.
schofield Brothers of New Eng
1071 Worcester Road
Framingham,MA 01701-5298
508-879-0030
1_8()()-696-2B74 97
Now
FAX 508-879
20217
NjU,MOItAND'UI\'I
To. Mr.Rick Rice
DiNisco DeSigr
87 Pt rtnership
Summer 0�110
Boston,M
Cc.:
North Andover Conservti Boa Commission
North Andover planning a)
From: Jennifer Steel,`Vetland Specialist
Date: September 10,2001
Re:
North Andover High School (20217)
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection No.: 01
Date: 9110101
By; Jennifer Steel
INTRODUCION ro ect>vork relative to colriplia�tCe
ectioiis is to observe and review the project liitieiit and
s Andover Conservatioli Co�1eCiissio�i and the
The P1111,pose of these m p the North A respect to s
Coriditi�oils issued by Board with resp erenee,
tivith t}ie Orders of d by the Nort}l Andover Pld sto ,7
ce cu>d storniwater management issues. For re
Special Permit issue tivork compliafi ro ect ilrclude
erosion controls, limit of
the Orders of Co'File isstite1045a1ss�ed 2/21/01 4/01
o DEp pile No. 242 Decision: Issued 51 the
Pl P illg Board Notice of
® o�it were told to the Clerk of
ul bold faced and italic f )
Note: all problems listed below ( the site visit.
works and Siipei'irite�idetit at the tit�ie of
ry Brothers of New England,Inc.know if Vol_,have any
Q at Schofield Broth
Please let Inc or Fred King
Qardin, the information contained in thisrePOrt-
questions re-
8BSCHOFILLD
F RI YBROTHERS
E�GItit
INSPECTION SUNIyIARY
ed correctly and according to the plans (in fact,
I. Sediment control ban'iers around the erimal,r of the current wor area:
®
Sediment control barriers were inst
all barriers were double-lined with hay bales).
Perimeter of the current work area (roughly 300 feet
® One location oil the westerly p otential erosion and
north of the southern boundary of V O of sedim�tt fe cirtg cued fury bales should
nc�
sedimentation problems. A short segment rotect Route 125 c g
be installed as a precautionary measure in this location to p
0 o riding. Establishment of near trial grades should alleviate all
the initial stages f g
potential problems.
abort on the southerly perimeter of the current work area (the southtives errt
One loc hires sedimentation controls for the duration prior to
corner of the work site) requires
the eo
nstructiort of the temporary retaining wall. A short segment of sechmen
fencing (with hay bales placed at high risk areas) shott�rkin�rarea dttrirrg the initial
precautionary measure ut this location to protect the parking
stages of grading.
2. Sediment control barriers around the
ere nstaldled correctly and according to the plans (in fact,
Sediment control barrier
all barriers were double-lined with hay bales).
3. Loam stockpile area in the northern
n created. No the
er site'on of the stockpile was observed.
® The stockpile was dust b portion of the-site'
4. Ordinar, borrow stock ile area in the northern o erosion of the stockpile was observed.
The stockpile was just being crew
5. Main entrance gate near trailers:
No erosion or sedimentation problems were observed• vehicle tires prior to exiting
® Gravel is to be installed to assist with the cleaning of
the site.
6. Emergrenc exit grate near trailers:
G No erosion or sedimentation problems were observed.
7. Catch-basins:
® Silt boots and hay bales at the functioning catch basins the contractor,
stalled (an were
being installed) correctly and are being maintained y
F 0217
isco Design Partnership^ ^, Page 2
SEBSCHO�IE[DYBROTHERS
EtiGINE(RING
Other catch-basins and pipes to be abandon
are being disabled and pipes capped
°
and filled with conc rete.
g Detention basins: et been constructed.
® Detention basins have not y
basin 1 to Existing Drain Manhoompl teactKennedy
Road repairs yet to be
9. Sediment ears to have been p g the site
Connection apP
completed. No sediment was observed leavmb
10. General Ero
lion Control: ruction site appears to be under control at this the Sediment and dry conditions prevail).
time (Note: very y
g»to allow for the addition
11.
and re lication: send the specificatiolls to the Superirttendertt
o initiral excavation needs so be increased y
The depth f a IV"'
of g» of organic soils. Fred Ki�ib
immediately.
General'. ing very meticulously and precisely within the
12 G�e� ear to be work b
. Contractors app
elines of the conditions. �irtst be addressed ininiediatel tack is dtte to bey
gurd robleirt and t water. A water
Dust is a signifiea11t p It the application of
(weather depending) throng
to ed later ill the day (10 September 2001).
emp y PORTS
GARDING PREVIOUSLY
RESOLVED ISSUES FRONT PAST RE
NOTES RE
Nothing at this time"
ST ORM�V A
TER MANAGEMENT STRUCTURES
. Nothing at this time' -
page 3
20217
�..,: n.sign Partnership— n,
C::)°SCHOL1EL1) BROTHERS
P�CEgRitiG Si;R�'E1'1` (�
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc.
1071 Worcest r 01701 5298
Framingham,MA
508-879-0030
OW 1-800-696-2874
FAX 508-879-1797
1\1ENIORANDUM
To: Mr. Rick Rice
DiNisco Desig n Partnership
g7 Summer street
�110
Boston,MA
Cc.: North Andover Conservation commission
North Andover Planning
From: Jennifer Steel,`Vetland Specialist
Date: September 17, 2001
Re; North Andover High School (20217)
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection No.: 02
Date'. 9/17/01
By: Jennifer Steel
INTRODUCION
work relative to compliance
h Andover Conservation Commment and erosion
Purpose of these inspections is to observe ortd review the project o sedi
The pure Q Board with respect t
with the Orders of Canby the North Andover Planning anaaement issues. For reference,the
Special Permit issue y compliance, and storm-water m
controls, limit of work comp project include:
orders of Conditions issuedfo1045- Issued 2/21/01 4/01
• DEP File No.
Planning Board Notice of Decision: Issued 5 1
•
ms are listed below in boldfaced and italic font•
Note: all pr•oble you have any
T• Q Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc. know if}
Please let me or Fred Ie in at
'ons regarding the information contained in this report.
quests
Bc,�::)SCHOFIEI.D}BROTHERS
INSPECTION SUMMARY
the superintendent (Jack Farrington) at the beginning of the site visit.
I spoke briefly with P
ace and in good condition.
1, Sediment control ban around the perimeter of the current won' area:
• Sediment control barriers remain m p
location on the westerly perimeter of the current work-si ns of potential eoios on and
• The which shove
north of the southern boundary of work)
problems appears to be fine without the installation of sediment fence,
sedimentatio n p
due to the establishment of near-final grades. protected
o The location on the southerly perimeter of the current work area (the southwestern
comer of the work site) requiring sedimentation o llroel has ed the possibility of
c grading work has y
with silt fence; in addition, g g
sediment traveling off site.
s remain in place and in good condition.
2, Sediment control barriers around nd the wetland re lication area.
Sediment control barite
25 feet tall and growing. A sediment fence will be installed
3. Loam stock ile area in the northern ortion of the site: . ed in 2 weeks if
The stockpile is roub y
as soon as the pile is finished(in 2 days if no screening is requir
screening is required).
inar borrow stock ile area in the northern ortion of the site:
4' Grp
No stockpile was apparent.
5. Main entrance gate near trailers: Q the
No erosion or sedimentation problems h helclean ng of vehicle tires prior to exitinb
Gravel is being installed to assist
site.
6. Emergen,,y exit gate near trailers: problems were observed.
No erosion or sedimentation
7. Catch-basins: Q catch basins have been installed correctly
® Silt boots and hay bales at the functioning
and are being maintained by the contractor. e should have a few more hay
basin in the southeast corder of the sit
® The catch basi
bales installed arol" it to
een cap
dl and will be removed very shortly.
® Other catch-basins have b PP
20217
niNisco Design Partnership^ n^ :Page 2
°oSCH0YIELD BROTHERS
ENGINEERING ' ;,7- E 1NG ' PLANNING
g. Detention basins:
Detention basins have not yet been constructed.
9. General erosion control: ears to be under control at this
. Sediment and runoff from the construction site app
time (Note: very dry conditions prevail).
10. Im ermeable barrier: o riate based on the anticipated finished
. The barrier is being installed to a depth appr' p
grade of the cut below.
11 Wetland replication: to secure organic-rich loam to
finish excavation and grading when the loam is available.
No activity has occurred here.The Contractor is still trying
meet the specification and w
12. General:_l
appear to be working very meticulously and precisely within the
. Contractors
guidelines of the conditions. a application of water.
Dust is being actively addressed thro' the
i VIOUSLY UNRESOLVED ISSUES FROM PAST REPORTS:
NOTES REGARDING PRE
Nothing at this time.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STRUCTURES'
. Nothing at this time.
RiNisco 0217
Design Partnersh�pn n' page 3
°SSCHOFIELD BROTHERS
ENGINEERING SURD"EYING PLANNING
Schofield Brothers of New England.Inc.
1071 Worcester Road
d Framingham,MA 01701-5298
508-879-0030
1-800-696-2874
20217 FAX 508-879-1797
To: Mr. Rick Rice
DiNisco Design Partnership
87 Summer Street
Boston, MA 02110
Cc.: North Andover Conservation Commission
North Andover Planning Board
From: Jennifer Steel,Wetland Specialist
Date: September 24, 2001
Re: North Andover High School
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection No.: 03
Date: 9/24/01
By: Jennifer Steel
INTRODUCION
The purpose of these inspections is to observe and review the on Commission�nd the ce
with the Orders of Conditions issued by the North Andover Conservation
Special Permit issued by the North Andover Planning Board with respect to sediment and erosion
controls, limit of work compliance, and stormwater management issues. For reference,the
Orders of Conditions issued for the project include:
• DEP File No. 242-1045: Issued 2/21/01
• Planning Board Notice of Decision: Issued 5/14/01
Note: all issues indicated below with u check-mark were discussed with the Superintendent at
the time of the site visit.
Please let me or Fred King at Schofield Brothers of New England, Inc. know if you have any
questions regarding the information contained in this report.
o°BSCHOTIEI.D BROTHERS
ERGIVEF;RI`G • SL R%[.) 1\G- P1.ANv1-�G
INSPECTION SUMMARY
1. Sediment control barriers around the perimeter.of the current work area:
✓ Sediment control barriers remain in place and in good condition. The entire perimeter
of the site has been cut down below exterior grade as anticipated. This forms a
further barrier against off-site migration of sediment.
2. Sediment control barriers around the wetland replication area:
• Sediment control barriers remain in place and in good condition.
3 Loam stockpile area in the northern portion of the site:
✓ The stockpile is full volume. According to the contractor, it will be moved a bit,
neatened up, and ringed with sediment fence shortly. No erosion of the stockpile was
observed.
4 Ordinary borrow stockpile area in the northern portion of the site:
• The stockpile has been initiated.
5 Main entrance gate near trailers:
✓ Gravel has been installed, and more is due to be added. No erosion or sedimentation
problems were observed.
6 Emergency exit ¢ate near trailers;
• Some gravel has been installed. No erosion or sedimentation problems were observed.
7. Catch-basins:
® Silt boots and hay bales at the functioning catch basins have been installed correctly
and are being maintained by the contractor.
✓ Additional haybales will be added to the catch basin in the southwestern corner of the
site.
8. Detention basins:
✓ Detention basins have not yet been constructed, but will be as the grading progresses.
9. General erosion control:
✓ Sediment and runoff from the construction site appears to be under control at this
time.
10 Impermeable barrier:
✓ The barrier has been installed. Installation appears to be in conformance with the
plan.
F 2TWisco Design
D Partnership
- _-
°°oSCHOHELD BROTHERS
E`iGINEERING • SL'R\ENING • PLANNING
T'
11. Wetland replication:
• The additional 8 inches of excavation in mitigation area#2 was completed
appropriately. Contractor is awaiting a soil analysis from UMass (due in two days), to
determine whether their loam supply would suffice for the requisite "organic-rich
loam". Wetland plants were due to be delivered today.
• Contractor will excavate and add organic rich loam to mitigation area#1 as well_
12. General:
✓ Contractor appears to be working very meticulously and precisely within the
guidelines of the Orders of Conditions.
NOTES REGARDING PREVIOUSLY UNRESOLVED ISSUES FROM PAST REPORTS:
• Nothing at this time.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STRUCTURES:
0 Nothing at this time. '.........
2
DT Desivi Partnership
E-D"B'SCHO IELD BROTHERS
ENGINEERING • SURVEYING PLANNING
i Schofield Brothers of New England.Inc.
1071 Worcester Road
Framingham,MA 01701-5298
508-879-0030
1-800-696-2874
FAX 508-879-1797
To: Mr. Rick Rice
DiNisco Design Partnership
87 Summer Street
Boston, MA 02110
Cc.: North Andover Conservation Commission
North Andover Planning Board
From: Jennifer- Steel, Wetland Specialist
Date: October 1, 2001
Re: North Andover High School (20217)
E
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection No.: 04
Date: October 1, 2001
By: Jennifer Steel
INTRODUCION
The purpose of these inspections is to observe and review the project work relative to
compliance with the Orders of Conditions issued by the North Andover Conservation
Commission and the Special Permit issued by the North Andover Planning Board with respect to
sediment and erosion controls, limit of work compliance, and stormwater management issues.
For reference, the Orders of Conditions issued for the project include:
• DEP File No. 242-1045: Issued 2/21/01
• Planning Board Notice of Decision: Issued 5/14/01
Note: all issues indicated below witlt a check-mark were discussed witli the Superintendent at
the time of the site visit.
Please let me or Fred Kind at Schofield Brothers of New England, Inc, know if you have any
questions regarding the information contained in this report.
20217
DiNisco Design Partnership
Inspection Report No. 04
==)SCHOFIELD BRKHERS
F:\GINFVRIVG St R%F:YI\G • P LAN NING
INSPECTION SUMMARY
1. Sediment control barriers around the perimeter of the current work area:
✓ Sediment control barriers remain in place and in good condition. The entire perimeter
of the site has been cut down below exterior grade, so forms a barrier against off-site
migration of sediment.
2. Sediment control barriers around the wetland replication area:
• Sediment control barriers remain in place and in good condition.
3. Loam stockpile area in the northern portion of the site:
• There was no sign of activity since the previous site visit. No erosion of the stockpile
was observed.
4. Ordinary borrow stockpile area in the northern portion of the site:
• The stockpile has been initiated. No erosion of the stockpile was observed.
5. Main entrance gate near trailers:
• Gravel entry has been installed and appears to be working well.
6. Emergency gate near trailers:
• Some gravel has been installed. No erosion or sedimentation problems were
observed.
7. Catch-basins:
✓ Silt boots and hay bales at the catch basins are being maintained by the contractor.
The southwestern catch basin structure is due to be installed at a grade appropriate for
the retaining wall within the next few clays.
8. Detention basins:
• Detention basins have not yet been constructed, but will be as the grading progresses. '....
9. General erosion control:
• Sediment and runoff from the construction site appears to be under control at this
time.
10. Impermeable barijer:
• Excavation to the west of the barrier has be('un. There was no sign of seepage.
11. Wetland replication areas:
✓ The Contractor is still awaiting a soil analysis from UMass to determine whether the
material available from a supplier will suffice for the requisite "organic topsoil"for
the wetland replication area.
20217 j
DiNisco Design Partnership
Inspection Report No. 04
October 1, 2001 Page 2
�SCHOFIELD BROTHERS
ENGINEERING • StR�E5 ING• PL ANN I\G
I'
12. General:
✓ Contractors appear to be working very meticulously and precisely within the
guidelines of the conditions.
NOTES REGARDING PREVIOUSLY UNRESOLVED ISSUES FROM PAST REPORTS:
• Nothing at this time.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STRUCTURES:
• Nothing at this time.
20217
DiNisco Design Partnership
Inspection Report No. 04
n.,tnb,.- i onn i
ooS E BROTHERS
ENGINEERING • SURVEYING • PLANNING
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc.
1071 Worcester Road
Framingham,MA 01701-5298
508-879-0030
1-800-696-2874
November 16, 2001 FAX 508-879-1797
20217
6 r. "Y
TO: North Andover Conservation Commission
North Andover Planning Board NOV 2 1 2001
D. Robert Nicetta, Building Commissioner
DiNisco Design Partnership—Attn: Rick Rice NORTH n�oVj t
(for furthur distribution to applicable parties) RTnnNT
FROM: Fredric W. King,P.E.
RE: North Andover High School -Monthly Inspection Report—OCTOBER 2001.
DEP File No.242-1045
Planning Board Notice of Decision dated 5/14/01
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc. has been designated as the"Environmental/Erosion
Control Monitor" for the North Andover High School Project. The purpose of the Environmental/
Erosion Control Monitor is to perform weekly inspections of the project site to insure compliance
with the Order of Conditions issued by the Conservation Commission and the Special Permit
issued by the Planning Board with respect to sediment and erosion controls, limit of work
compliance, wetland replication and stormwater management issues.
This is the second monthly inspection report prepared and submitted in compliance with the above
referenced permits. It covers the period for the month of October 2001. Attached are copies of the
Weekly Inspection Reports (#05 to#08)relative to the inspections performed on October 10, 15,
22 and 29, 2001. The routine Environmental/Erosion Control Inspections and Weekly Reports
were performed by Ms. Jennifer Steel, a Wetlands Specialist for SBNE.
For the month of October, the project continued to benefit from the lack of rain and the work
progressed smoothly. As can be seen from the weekly reports, the only erosion control problems
are very minor and the Contractor is responding to those issues. The main erosion control issues at
this time are what we foresee as "potential"problem areas. For those situations we are making
recommendations and working with the Contractor and Project Architect to address those,to make
sure the work site in good condition relative to erosion control for the approaching winter months.
The construction of the two wetland replication has been progressing more slowly than anticipated
due to the problem of finding acceptable organic topsoil for installation. The Contractor supplied
complete testing of numerous soil samples and the test results were reviewed by the Project
Landscape Architect (Carol R. Johnson Associates). The excavation for the Replication Areas has
been completed and the plant materials have been delivered to the site for the installation. (Note
that a satisfactory soil mix was approved for installation on November 6, 2001 and the material
installed shortly thereafter.)
aSCHOFIEI.D BROTHERS
ENGI\ RING sCR��FYI�L • PLANNING
20217
n Report—OCTOBER 200
mom North Andover High School—Monthly Inspect"
November 16,2001
Page 2
is a summary of progress on other important items during the month of October,
The following
relative to erosion control and environmental concerns to protect the easterly wetland area has
The Impermeably Barrier pears tolberworking sattisfacctorily• building has been
been completed appears
- The temporary retaining wall to the rear of the existing school
completed. grading is nearly complete.
The general site prep excavation yand g g y fete and stabilization of the
- Stockpiling of loam and ordinary borrow is pearl comp
piles needs to be done. has and work on the
- The grading for the temporary sediment basins as been comp
outlet structures has begun. s under the Site Prep
_
installation of the permanent drainage structure Contract
I as
begun. ears to be a problem at the site since the end of the hot
Dust control no longer app
weather conditions that were making the site exceedingly dry.
performed in
project es g
Based on our inspections,we have found that r of work
kon th Please let u know if there are any
compliance with the Special Permit and Or de
issues that we are not aware of.
endations that would help us provide
weekly inspection reports prove detailed information as to our findings. If
you
id
The attached w Y
recomm
have any questions or if you have any com oeheaofrom you
information you need,we would be happy
Very truly yours,
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc.
/ Fredric W.King,P.E.
Senior Engineer
Environmental Planner
enclosures
oo
ENGINEERING • SURVEYING • PLANNING
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc.
1071 Worcester Road
20217 Framingham,MA 01701-5298
Now 508-879-0030
1-800-696-2874
FAX 508-879-1797
To: Mr. Rick Rice
DiNisco Design Partnership
87 Summer Street
Boston,MA 02110
Cc.: North Andover Conservation Commission
North Andover Planning Board
From: Jennifer Steel,Wetland Specialist
Date: October 11, 2001
Re: North Andover High School (20217)
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection No.: 05
Date of Inspection: October 10, 2001
By: Jennifer Steel
INTRODUCTION
The pu
-pose of these inspections is to observe and review North AndoveroConsertvation
compliance with the Orders of Conditions issued by t ater management issues.
special Permit issued by the North Andover•Planning Board with respect to
Commission and p
sediment and erosion controls, limi ions�issued for the project include:
For reference, the Orders of Condit
• DEP File No. 242-1045: Issued 2/21/01
• Planning Board Notice of Decision: Issued 5/14/01
Please note that issues needing rectification have been put in bold-faced type.
Please let me or Fred King
at Schofield Brothers of New Eng if you have any
land,Inc. know
questions regarding the information contained in this report.
RVGtNF, D6 �TH
° H R
S yo FE
ER
INSPECTION SUMMARY
d the erimeter of the current WOnd tion.
control barriers remain in place and in good co
1 Sediment control barters around
Sediment
n lace and in good condition.
2. Sediment
control barriers around the wetland re lication area.
® Sediment control barriers remain
onion of the site:
ile area in the northern Served.je,sediment fence has been installed and
3 Loam stock per the pc ifications.
® No erosion of the st beet bilized P
the pile remains to
d.No erosion of the stockpile was
w stock ile area in the northernortion of the site:
4. Ordinar borrow actively stockpile
Ordinary borrow was being
observed.
s been installed and appears to be worlcmg well.
5. Main entrance has near trailers'
Grave
6 Enter enc exit ate near trailers:
problems were
gravel has been installed.No erosion or sedimentation
Some
observed.
7. Catch basins: bales at the catch basins are being
maintained by the contractor.d.
® Silt boots and hay
The southwestern catch basin structure has been installe
g n basins: et been constructed,but will be
Detentio as the grading progresses.
® Detention basins have not y
plantings) has not yet been
9. Wetland rep-11-cation areas: soil (and associated wetland p
for the
The organic-rich top r has submitted test data to DD kand
place aE
® T Contractor
added to the site• ur ose. Installation w e used for this
proposed soil to of a material to be installed.
following approval
10. Gem' genera on-site,however,the problem was minimal and
o Some dust was being g
within the guidelines of the conditions. Dry
the water truck was still on-sWor and vaihin h ion and sediment control
The Contractors appears to be
® conditions have been a benefit with respect to erosion
weather
to this point.
I
i
Page 2 I'
V02
co Design PartnershiP
_. ., uenort No. 05
ao MELD E
— � SURt'Et'ING • PLANNING
ENGINEERING iand.lnc.
Schofield Brothers of New Eng
1071 Worcest r 0add01 5298
Framingham,MA
50B-879-0030
1-800-696-2874
IMMEMN FAX 508-879-1797
To: Mr. Rick Rice (for funehshiplstribution)
DiNisco Design Pant
g7 Summer Street
Boston,MA
Cc.: North Andover Conse v ti on Cdommission
North Andover Plann b
From: Jennifer Steel,Wetland Specialist
Date: October 15, 2001
Re: North Andover High School (20217)
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection No.: 06 October 15,2001
Date of Inspection:
By: Jennifer Steel
INTRODUCTION to ect work relative to
The purpose of these inspections is to observe an b e he North Andover Conser lawlth respect to
comp the North Andover Planning Board issues.
Hance with the orders cial Permit issued by issued Ce and stormwater mana�
Commission and the Sp han ,
Of Conditions issued for the project include:
sediment and erosion controls,limit of work compliance,
For reference,the Orders
DEP File No. 242-1045Issued 2/21l0ssued 5/14101
® Planning Board Notice
• mediate attention have been pnt in bold-faced type-
Please note that issues needing ml Brothers of New England,Inc.know if you have any
Please let me or Fred King at Schofield B
questions regarding the information contained in this report.
��CHOFICLD BBpTHER�
ENGINEERING
NOW SIR�'itil`�G • PLANNING
INSPECTION SUMMARY
control barriers around the erimeter e and in good condition.
1. ediment co ain in lace
S p
® Sediment control barriers rem
observed. Contractor will do final shaping of the pile
Loam stock ile area in the northern was ion of the site:
2 di oseeding.
No erosion of the the°pler meter silt fencing and by
before installinb
tock fled.No erosion of the stockpile was
r borrow stock ile area in the norther op ion of the site:
3. Ordma actively
Ordinary borrow was being
observed.
Gravel has been installed and appears to be working well.
4. Main entrance ate near trailers:
5. Emeraenc exit ate near trailers:
ioblems were
ravel has been installed.No erosion or sedimentation p'
Som e g
observed.
(,. Catch boots and hay bales at the catch basins are being
maintained by the contractor.
The sediment fence around the more westerly of the south-eastern catch basins
needs to be reinstalled.
Sediment basins: #3 has begun. Others will be constructed as the
�' S Q of sediment basin
® The gradinb
grading progresses further.
excavation have begun (but does not appear complete) in the
g Wetland re lication grand exca
® Hand clearinb previous
eastern replication site.
s been no change in the southern replication oil have been s tbmitted and are
® There has ro oSed organic p
inspection. Test results of p p
being reviewed.
9 Im eimeable barrier:
epage has been observed.
To-date,no se
General: s at the base of the retention wall on of the proposed
10 - addle exist
® A fairly deep p aloe its length. The installat
building, roughly midway g
drain shown on the plans should resolve this•
temporary within the guidelines of the conditions.
The Contractors appears to be wonting
® I
I
20217 Page
DiNisco Design Partnership
n...'-t No. 06
ao
5
00
PLANNING
ENG N
IEERING SURVEYING'
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc.
1071 WorcestWA°01701 5298
Framingham.
20217 508-879-0030
1-800-696-2874
EVEN FAX 508-879-1797
: Mr. Rick Rice (for furehshdistribution)
To
DiNisco Design Paitn P
87 Summer Street
Boston,MA 02110
Cc.: North Andover Conservation commission
North Andover planning Board
From! Jennifer Steel,Wetland Specialist
Date: October 22, 2001
Re. North Andover High School (20217)
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection No.: 07 October 22,2001
Date of Inspection:
By: Jennifer Steel
INTRODUCTION ro ect work relative to
inspection is to observe and re�ne North Andover Conservation and with respect to
The purpose of P Qement issues.
ermit issued by the North Andover Plena e nBnab
com fiance with the Orders oPConditions issue y arid storm
p eclat fiance, a
Commission and the Sp include:
sediment and erosion controls, anions Work sued for project
For reference,the Orders o Decision' Issued 5114101
e DEP File No. 242-1045 f D ed 2121101
Planning Board Notice e and
® ut in bold-faced typ
t issues needing immediate worke have
you at the time of the site
please note that erintendent, site
were discussed vvith the Sup you have any
visit. Aland,Inc. know if
e or Fred King at Schofield Brothers of New England,
please let m Q the information contained in this report.
questions regarding,
�SCtIOLIELD BROTHERS
gfiGINH-ERItiG tiIR1,1,1 G PLANKING
MMM
INSPECTION SUMMARY e It work area:
some disturbed portions of erosion contronbarrier f barriers the 1. Sediment control barriers around the erimeter of the curt
® ouh the exception of the sediment co
southerly wetland replications condition.area (see below), inadvertently knocked out were in place and in good
lication
An haybales or sections of sediment loan in the southerly wetland rep row
y lacing the organic ri
of place when p
area must be reinstalled immediately. It is not necessary to install a double
of haybales. A single row is sufficient.
2. Loam stock ile area in the northern he stockpile was observed. ndent for the
No significant erosion o Superintendent
has been added to the stockpile area, that is a
To-date,the sediment fence has not been installed. The up installed
Contractor indicated that all l
area
would be"neatened up", and that the sediment fence would be
few days• to be done.
$ydroseeding the loam stockpile is then required
1 stockpiled. No erosion of the stockpile was
3, Ordinar borrow stock file area in the northern ortion p of the site:
Ordinary borrow was being acts y
observed.
appears
to be working well to reduce the tracking of mud onto the
4, Main entrance ate near trailers'
o Gravel entrance pp
roadway.
5, Emer enc exit ate near trailers:
® No erosion or sedimentation problems were observed.
(. Catc�tns:
g the contractor.
® Silt boots and hay bales at the catch basins are being maintained y
7. Sediment basins: aded and is being completed. Runoff from a small
Sediment basin#3 has been g l•graded earth to the west of the sediment basin and
wall will not be captured by the sediment basin
portion of the site with newly g p e but has
off the west end of the retaining plan for that area. The area is not larg ,
based on the proposed grading p t in some gully erosion of the area around the
captured
sufficient overland flow to Qewall. At his point,the sediment is being i uc along rol that was western end of the retaining
b the additional perimeter erosion that additional onal erosion control and/ or
y
the security fence. It is recommended
be done to control the erosion in this area. It is recommended t to
stabilization i
i
ao2 7
DiNisco Design Partnership Page 2
"__,.,.r Nn 07
=SCHOFIELD BROTHERS
F.tiGINP,BRING • SURVFYI\G YLA�\ING
MEMMthis area be looked at closely during the next regular inspection and a solution
determined.
• Other sediment basins have not yet been completed, but limited ponding is occurring.
8. Wetland replication areas:
• Hand clearing and digging have begun (but do not appear complete) in the
eastern replication area. Prior to the installation of organic-rich loam (and
associated wetland plantings), the contractor must ensure that the entire area
called for has been cleared and excavated to the appropriate depth to receive the
loam.
• The organic-rich loam was actively being added to the southern replication area.
9. impermeable barrier and embankment:
• Minimal dampness attributed to seepage from the perched wetland was
observed at the top of the slope and midway down the slope at the end of a
section of impermeable barrier.No significant seeps were observed.
• The proposed stabilization of the embankment may run into problems due to the
anticipated late date of the hydroseeding (late November).I discussed the
possibility of earlier hydroseeding and/or mechanical stabilization enhancement
(e.g.,jute netting and mulch)with the Superintendent.
10. General:
• The Contractors appear to be working within the guidelines of the conditions.
F 17
isco Design Partnership
°° LIE BROTHERS
ENGINEERING • SURVEYING • PLANNING
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc.
1071 Worcester Road
momV I, 20217 Framingham,MA 01701-5298
{E 508-879-0030
1-800-696-2874
FAX 508-879-1797
To: Mr. Rick Rice
DiNisco Design Partnership
87 Summer Street
Boston, MA 02110
Cc.: North Andover Conservation Commission
North Andover Planning Board
From: Jennifer Steel, Wetland Specialist
Date: October 29, 2001
Re: North Andover High School (20217)
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection No.: 08
Date of Inspection: October 29, 2001
By: Jennifer Steel
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of these inspections is to observe and review the project work relative to
compliance with the Orders of Conditions issued by the North Andover Conservation
Commission and the Special Permit issued by the No compliance, Planning
management issues t to
sediment and erosion controls, limit of wort p nce
For reference, the Orders of Conditions issued for the project include:
® DEP File No. 242-1045: Issued 2/21/01
® Planning Board Notice of Decision: Issued 5/14/01
Please note that issues needing immediat �siteworkers, and/or ayou at the h time
of these issues were discussed with the Superintendent,
of the site visit.
Please let me or Fred King at Schofield Brothers
this rep England, Inc. know if you have any
questions regarding the information contained
'SCHOE[ELD BROTHERS
ENGINEERING - SC'R%EI ING - PLANNING
INSPECTION SUMMARY
1. Sediment control barriers around the perimeter of the current work area:
• Sediment control barriers remain in place and in good condition.
• The runoff from the southwesterly corner of the site that is currently running
around the west end of the retaining wall and is beginning to cause gullying. We
are concerned that there may be undermining of the wall if stabilization
measurers are not taken. Much or the area draining to this problem site will be
eliminated once the grading is completed and the roadway area will drain to the
sediment basin. To assure that the remaining area will not be a problem, we
recommend that a low earth berm be formed that would extend south from the
utility pole, then curve east around the sediment basin, thereby directing most of
the runoff into the basin. The very small area to the west of the berm will still
drain to the western perimeter of the site and around the westerly end of the
wall. That runoff should be addressed with a sediment fence/staked hay bales
installed at the base or the slope and hydroseeding with a mulch and tacifier, or
other suitable method. This could be completed when the adjacent sediment
basin is stabilized.
• It appears that there is a potential for runoff around the easterly end of the
retaining wall that may also cause an erosion problem. This can be addressed by
the installation of a short section of sediment fence/staked hay bales at the
easterly end of the retaining wall. Additional sediment fence should be installed
at a key location at the bottom of the slope along the chain link fence to ensure
that no sediment will travel to the parking lot.
2. Loam stockpile area in the northern portion of the site:
• No significant erosion of the stockpile was observed.
• Sediment fence should be installed.
• Hydroseeding is required.
3. Ordinary borrow stockpile area in the northern portion of the site:
• Ordinary borrow was being actively stockpiled. No erosion of the stockpile was
observed.
• Once the stockpiling of borrow is complete, the sediment fence should be
installed as required and the hard-shell applied.
4. Main entrance gate near trailers:
• Gravel entrance appears to be working well to control the tracking of mud onto the
roadway.
5. Emergencv exit gate near trailers:
• No erosion or sedimentation problems were observed.
F 20217
DiNisco Design Partnership
==SCHOFIELD BROTHERS
ENGINEERING • SURVEYING - PLANNING
I
6. Catch basins:
• Silt boots and hay bales at the catch basins are being maintained by the contractor.
• Drainage pipes and outlet structures were beginning to be installed at the time of the
site visit.
7. Sediment basins:
• Sediment basins have been graded and ponding is occurring as expected. Installation
of the outlet structures for the ponds and final stabilization remains to be completed.
8. Wetland replication areas:
• Organic-rich topsoil was being added to the eastern replication area during the
inspection.
• Two extra loads of organic-rich topsoil were stockpiled in the southern
replication area. The grades of the replication area appear correct and these
stockpiled loads should not be spread (or the final grade will be too high to allow
wetland vegetation to thrive).
9. Impermeable barrier and embankment:
• The proposed stabilization of the embankment may run into problems due to the
anticipated late date of the hydroseeding (late November). Alternative interim
stabilization plans should be considered for the slope.
10. General:
• The Contractor appears to be working within the guidelines of the conditions.
20217
DiNisca Design Partnership
hirnorHnn Rnnnrt Nn nR
0o SCHOFIELD BROTHERS
ENGINEERING • SURVEYING • PLANNING
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc.
1071 Worcester Road
MIN= Framingham,MA 01701-5298
508-879-0030
December 17, 2001 1-800-696-2874
FAX 508-879-1797
20217
I
TO: North Andover Conservation Commission
North Andover Planning Board DEC
D. Robert Nicetta, Building Commissioner
DiNisco Design Partnership—Attn: Rick Rice N®R`i'IA ANDOVL:-1
(for furthur distribution to applicable parties) PLANNING DEPAi-f I IWLNT
FROM: Fredric W. King, P.E.
RE: North Andover High School -Monthly Inspection Report—NOVEMBER 2001.
DEP File No. 242-1045
Planning Board Notice of Decision dated 5/14/01
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc. has been designated h School Pr ject. The purpose pose of the
Erosion Control Monitor for the North Andover H
Environmental /Erosion Control Monitor is to perform
by the Conser�afro project
site to insure compliance with the Order of Conditions
Commission and the Special Permit issued by the Plan ning Boat do and stwith
mwateediment
and erosion controls, limit of work compliance,
p
management issues.
the
This is the third monthly inspection report prepared th of Novembep12001 Attached
above referenced permits. It covers the period for t he mon
are copies of the Weekly Inspection Reports (#09The routine relative
Environmental/Eros'
Control performed on November 5, 12, 19 and 26, 2001.
Control Inspections and Weekly Reports were performed by Ms. Jennifer Steel, a Wetlands
Specialist for SBNE.
For the month of November, the project continued to benefit from the lack of rain and the
related determining
work progressed smoothly. The main erosion contr slopes and stock pile due tohhe time
best handle the final stabilization of the embankment
of year. The plans called for hydroseeding those areas
poor. This is discussed or would p cuss d further
of grass for stabilization would not occur
below.
The only other erosion control problems are very minor, primarily relating to items we
foresaw as "potential" problems to make sure ths� The Contractor continued to re pond
erosion control for the approaching winter m
well to recommendations made to address those issues,
'H�=5SCHQFILLD BROTHLRS
ENGINEERING • SI R%F.1 I�G • PLA.\\ING
ME r M20217
North Andover High School —Monthly Inspection Report—NOVEMBER 2001
December 17, 2001
Page 2
The construction of the two wetland replication areas were completed during this month
following approval of the organic-rich topsoil by Carol R. Johnson Associates (Landscape
Architect) on November 6r". Following installation of the topsoil, additional soil tests of
the in-place soil were made. Based on the test results, peat moss was blended into the
topsoil, the plant materials were installed and the areas were seeded. To protect the newly
planted shrubs through the winter, we recommended the application of straw mulch around
the plants. The wetland replication areas will be periodically monitored beginning next
spring to assure survival of the plant materials and success of the wetland replication in
conformance with the Performance Standards under the Wetlands Protection Act
Regulations.
The following is a summary of progress on other important items during the month of
October, relative to erosion control and environmental concerns:
- The general site prep excavation and grading is complete.
- Stockpiling of loam and ordinary borrow is complete, required perimeter silt
fencing has been installed and stabilization of the loam pile is about to take
place. (See also next item below).
- Stabilization of permanent side slopes and the loam topsoil stockpile. —The
following decisions were made to address the concern that the time of year may
not permit adequate cover to develop in time to properly stabilize the site for the
winter:
1. Additional mulch and taclifier will be added to the hydroseed application
mix and it will be applied in a heavier coat to provide more protection
against erosion in the event of no (or poor) germination.
2. Winter rye may be added to the seed mix.
3. Jute matting and straw mulch will also be applied over the steeper portions
of the easterly side slope for added protection.
- The temporary sediment basins have been completed except for some final slope
stabilization scheduled to take place in the first week of December.
- Installation of the permanent drainage structures under the Site Prep Contract
has been completed.
- The "potential" erosion control problems at the westerly and easterly ends of the
temporary retaining wall were satisfactorily addressed by the installation of
additional haybales and silt fences at the recommended locations.
- As part of the completion of the grading in the area of the Southern Entrance
Gate, some minor grading adjustments were recommended to prevent runoff
from flowing into the existing parking lot from the haul road. The runoff will
be directed via a swale toward the southwesterly catch basin that is already
protected by existing vegetation, haybales/ silt fencing, and a silt boot.
of SCI OFIELD RRI)TUERS
E�GtAE 'KIN(; SCR ESI- "(' - �'t"'N"I";
OREM20217
North Andover High School—Monthly Inspection Report—NOVEMBER 200
December 17,2001
Page 3
_ s art of the final work for the Site Preparation Conoion for the next 1 be
A p
added to the construction entrance to leave it m new cond
Contractor.
Dust control was not a problem during November.
ections, we have found that the work on the project is being performed i
Based on our insp n
mit and Order of Conditions. Please let us know if there
compliance with the Special Per
are any issues that we are not aware of. our f Indings. If
weekly inspection reports provide detailed recornmeiodations that would help
The attached w Y p
you have any questions or if you have any comments to he01 from you.
us provide information you need, we would be happy
Very truly yours,
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc.
A
Fredric W. King,P.E.
Senior Engineer
Environmental Planner
enclosures
ao�Cl� ITID BROTHERS
f tit t.F:[i[�t; • st K� f.ti flit, t t.n
SNG
Schofield Brothers of New England.Inc.
1071 Road 0 5298
Framingham,M
20217 508-879-0030
1-Soo-696-2874
FAX 508-879-1797
To: Mr. Rick Rice
DiNisco Design Partnership
87 Summer Street
Boston, MA 02110
Cc... North Andover Conservation Commission
North Andover Planning Board
From: Jennifer Steel,Wetland Specialist
Date: November 5, 2001
Re: North Andover High School (20217)
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection No.' 09
Date of Inspection: November 5,2001
By: Jennifer Steel
INTRODUCTION
se inspections is to observe and review the 1pAndoveroConservation
The purpose of the P
compliance with the Orders of Conditions issued by the Qerrlent issues.
• permit issued by the North Andover Planning Board with respect to
Commission and the Special dance, and storm
sediment and erosion controls, limit
iiosued for the project include:
For reference, the Orders��2 1045: Issued 2/21/01
• DEP File No.
• Planning Board Notice of Decision: Issued 5/14/Ol �e. all were
a rectification have been put in bold-faced tyl
Please note that issues needinb
discussed with the Superintendent at the time of the site visit. .f you have any
Please let n
Ze or Fred King at Schofield Brothers t this England, Inc. know 1 y
questions regarding, the information contained m
INSYECrION SUMMARY er of the current work area:
lace and in good condition.
1 Sediment control b�r��t of bare ers rem' n in p e southwest corner of the«ork site
® Sediment con
Relative to the potential erosion problem at the
° ion this item remains to be addressed. Refer to the
and recommended act Re port. wall to partially
Inspection#8 (10129101) 1
on. �`'e recommend installata Il Of t of
bales have been installed at the easterly I encl of the retaining med 1 to
® Hay z- r parking b
address the potential erosion at that o n eC ge of the existing l
staked sediment fence along the uFext '
to pr against potential erosion fr ect>oneRePolrt#8•
the school building p
disturbed slope in that area. This was mentioned in Inspection
dI
2. Loam
stockpile area in the nortf the °ockpile wassobserved.
° No signifi f n e should be installed.
° Sediment
gydroseeding is required.
® borrow stock Ile area in the northern of the site:
3. Ordinar b
° No significant erosion of the1 stockpile
e sediment fence should be installed as
Once the stockpiling is con p
required and the hard-shell applied.
req
4 Main entrance enir�trance appears to b
e working well to reduce the tracking of mud onto the
°
Gravel
roadway.
5. Southern erficil recently occurred
in this area
No erosion or sedimentation problems
® Final grading
have been observed.
6. Car`1 t boots and hay ales at the catch basins are being maintained by the cone actor•
°
onding is occuriing as expected. touches
7. Sediment bas�ent bacons have been graded and p Ve been installed; only finishing
• Sedim
The sediment basin outlet structures a
® a and loam and seed) remain.
(e-(,;-final grading,
S. Other drainage structures:
haul road has been installed and appears to be
® The sub-drain under the eastern
functioning.
pes have been installed.
Other drainage pi
20-2 17 DiNisco Designs Pam te�911P
�SC11()1�II:I.D E;�pTt1FRS
w
' that cross the site were being installed at the time
The drainage swale and sub-drain
° and emergency overflow areas m the
of the site visit. rock was used
site.Due to limited stock,larger ( ld be unimpaired.
® Trap rock has been installed in the splash c ute,
southeastern portion of th
than was called for in the specifications,but functionality
9. NVetland re lication areas' soil has been added to the eastern rep
lication area.
® Organic-rich loam top e of any soil additives are
-•ich topsoil installed have been submit oil and are
Test results of the organic i
° the Landscape Architect to d�anlsli
being reviewed by
necessary prior to installation of the wetlanc s l
run into problems clue to the
10. Im ermeable barrier and embankment: T Alternative
roseeding (late November).
The propose stabilization of the embankment ma
s p
anticipated late date of the by
e
ization plans should be considered for the slop
stabil
11.
General-. orderly, and nearly complete.The contractor appears to be
The site is clean, dry,
working within the guidelines of the conditions.
20217 Page
DiNisco DesiStt Pnrtners{tip
.._., nannrt No. 09
ao S HOYMD
�� �;c • s�K�E�'itic
ENG� r:ER1:
Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc.
1071 w ham tMA 017701-5298
Framing
20217 508-879-0030
1-800-696-2874
31sw FAX 508-879-1797
TO'. lv1r.Rick Rice
DiNisco Design Partnership
87 Summer street
Boston,MA
Cc.: North Andover Conservation Commission
North Andover planning Boa
From'. Jennifer Steel,Wetland Specialist
Date' November 14,2001
Re: North Andover High School (20217)
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection N '1 November 12,2001
Date of Inspection.'
By: Jennifer Steel
INTRODUCTION ro ect work relative to
b the North Andover Conservation respect to
The purpose of these inspections is to observe edd y view the project .na Bo .
the North Andover P anal .., cement lssues.
compliance with the orders 1of Conditions rit ssued by and stol tnwater mana�
fiance,
Commission and the p ro ect include:
sediment and erosion controls,
ers f'Conditions isssued fop the p J
For reference, the Orders o
DEP File No. 242-1045: Issued 21n. issued
®
Planning Board Notice of Decision: Issued 5114101
® Plan t in bold-faced
needing attention or corrective action have been put
note that issues ne g you have any
type Schofield Brothers of New England,Inc. know if
e or Fred King at Sch report.
Please let ma lyding the information contained in this
questions rea
�Ctl�)TIELD 13ROT�IERS
r:vci�er;ki�c, • StHar;si�c • vt.,a��i�c.
INSPECTION SUMMARY
of barriers around the erimeter of end inrg°Od�COn tr°n'• d the
1 Sediment
control lace
aradin associated with the roadway an
Sediment control barriers remain in p g otential for runoff and erosion
In the southwesterly corner of the site, b or ts,
• bales has alleviated most of the p rep
installation of hay wall As recommended in the Previous
�1i; (1) the creation of a small
around the end of the retaining i ovided throub
further protection could be p
flit pole to redirect runoff froi'the westerly slope area as soon as
South of the utility 1 hydro seeding
into the sediment basin, and (2) appropriately at the easterly end of
is possible.
e base of the slope to the south. h inavfrom the
Ha bales and sediment fence have been installed apps
Ray a wall and along th
the retaining eriod,
all is to remain for an extendecClfier.If this
' eat from the area. If the steep slope facing westerly, running n
sedan
southerly site gate to the retaining droseed Nvith mulch and t
this area could also e stabilized soon as possible.t
is to be done,it shou
� Loam stock ile area in the northern tOekpile
Of w1assobserved.
No significant erosion of t
•• Sediment fence should be installed.
• Hydroseeding is required.
rrow stock ile area in the northern ortion of the site:
3. Ordinar b•
® No significant erosion of thenstallede was observe
® Sediment fence should be
e working well to reduce the tracking of mud onto the
4 Main entrance ate near trailers:
® Gravel entrance appears to b
roadway.
erosion or sedimentation
5. Southern emer
enc exit: but to date,no
Final grading recently occurred in this area,
® problems have been observed.
6• Catch basins:
ing maintained by the contractor.
® oots and hay bales at the catch basins are be
Silt b
raged and a propriate ponding is occurring•
�. Sediment basins and outlet structures• p
Sediment basins have been g raging and loam and seed) to the sediment basins
® Finishing touches (e.g.,final g
remain•
I
20217 page 2�
DiNisco DesigrrvPt No1. 10 rP
Tnsvectiol, Rep
Y;VGIVk.k.RlVl
liff .
PMRS-1.
al rades of sediment ar�n#2
conducted,the fm g
finish work is being accumulation is removed and check
mom When the an sediment
should be chec' that May need repair.
bank slump a the
stalled and appear to be functioning
other drainage Structures. pictures have been in ainaae Swale and sub-drain that cross the
S. O or drainabc structures the dig
® All maJ
drainage pipes,chutes, splashes,etc.).
sub-drain under the eastern hau road,
site, and all other
n�ented with peat as recommended oid
lication areas: possible,
9. Wetland fe should occur as soon as p
Both wetland replication act plant been au
• Bot e Arcblte temperatures.
by the Landsca ht about by freezing
problems broug
run into problems clue to the
t—',—'u bail.e and embankment Alternative
ed stabilization of the embanklat November). I eve
10.Im ern' ro os droseeding( e comment from p ous
Thep P
anticipated late date of the y
stabilization plans should be formulated. (Sam
report).
Iles of soil,gravel,and
other miscellaneous materials should
11. General'.nil' ears to be
Final clean-u' °f p complete.The contractor app
occur before the site a d nearly
The site i clean,he guidelines of the conditions.
work b
I
Page 3
r 17
Nisco Desigik Partnership
_., ., Report No. j0
ao pFI�I.D �R�)TNE
tiGl�Ef;Rtr('
SchoField E3rotW of t Jew Enyiand.Irc.
1071 Vp1 ham1MA 01701-5298
Framtn9
20217 508.879-0030
1-800-696-2874
son FAX 508-879-1797
To. Mr, Rick Rice
D1Nisco Design Partnership
8� Summer Street
Boston,MA 02110
North Andover Conservation Commission
CC a Board
North Andover planninC
Fm; Jenni
rofer Steel,Wetland Specialist
Date: November 19,2001
High School (20
Re
North Andover 21)
INSp�CT1ON ,RRpORT
Inspection NO.'. 11 2001
Date of Inspection.. November 19,
By; Jennifer Steel
�TRODUCTION pro ect work relative
vatioon
It observe and review the 1 J Co
ections is to the North Andover Q Board with respect to
The purpose of these Insp a ent issues.
it issued by the North Andover P1�n to rnana�em
ce with the Orders of Conditions issues y and storm
compliance Special Petn fiance,
Commission and the Sp limit of work comp to ect include:
sediment and erosion controls, ���1101
the Orders of Conditions UeC ed for the p J
For reference, 0 2,I2_1045: Iss
DEp File N ec. ion. Issued 5114101 �t 1111 were
Planning Board Notice of D
iate attention been put in boldif`c-e(1 tyl
needing imnied the site visit.
-tat issues please note th tl e Superintendent at the time of Inc kno". if you ha\e an\
discussed
T' a at Schofield Brothers ohN1epo n°land,
Please let me or Fred htn�
duestt
ons reaardina the information contained to
G�SCIIOTIF,1 D�t3RO111ER
S1 R
UNIMARY area*.
moms PECTION S current work '
erimeter of the good condition. should
lace and in g and 1lyclroseed`ro1`th•
Sediment control barrier control bat tors remain in p to final gradinb
t ent cons of the sr erminati011 and b
® Sedim corner , exit,11)'d oseeding
In the soutliweSt�rly to allow for maximal g 7ency is possible, near the enlerg
on as is possible is r econlnlendecl.
occur soSoon 1l `�sterly' portion of the site,
® In the lose(' slope as so
over the entire e•'1 of the site:
orthern onion
stock lie was observed• work oil the pile is complete.
2. ile area in the n
Loam as soon as
N0 erosion el the stoc p e installed
® Sediment fence should b
® H,ydroseeding is required.
® the northern ortion of the site:
ile area in the pile is C0111plete.
of the stockpile was observe d• as `vork on
3, Ordinary borrow stock installed as soon
. No erosion
6 Sediment fence should be Q of mud 01110 the
ce gate near trailers: working Well to reduce the traci,
4. Main enti an ears to e
. Gravel entrance app
roadway•
n emeT°gencv exit: a shallow Swale
5 Southe1 in fine condition. or sedimentation,
a larallel to the exit
The exit is currently should be du„I
• lotential for of erosion catch-basin.
Y To elin1.111, e 1 vi h gravel or crushed stone)
l or filled e channeled toward the southwestern
°peI a runoff to h
gate, allowj1lb the contractor.
6. Catch basins'.
catch basins are being maintained b}
® Silt boots and 11ay bales at t e
Ondlrl° is OCCUiI'lna
graded and approplrate p feted•
Sediment basins and nslhwerbeC" s-1 a .emain to be comp
Sediment bas and mattinb 1
Finish hyaroseedin„
® pear to be functioning
Other drainage structures:
g. 1 or dram
age structures have been installed an a
® All m�1 genic-rich topsoil.
9.
Wetland re lication areas: areas have been
a`lanle.nted with or
® g 0th
wetland replication ossible
p
Planting should occur as soon as
page
20217 on Partnership
DiNisco Desio Q• I1
�_,,,,tiore ReP°!��
SCtt(1FtL1.D�t3tt()TttE RS
grGI�V.ERI\(.
Mulched with straw or equal to protect
plants ben installation
It is recomnt end f�ec7ing to 1peratures following
against Eros
a' and is being covered with loam pool:
0 Im ermeable barrier andt n�bbe n bat a , ]cad to p
1 the embankment m 5 plans (such as
The embankmen ciroseeding
The late date of the by
® 'ted stabilization. Ahern ltiVe stabilizat►on
germination`n(d str'a-1v) should be formulate(
jute mattinb ears to be
1 L Ge_ nom' dry, ordei]y
and nearly Complete-The contractor app
The site is clean uidelines of the conditions.
within t g and other miscellane0�is materials should
working���th ravel,
Tina] clean-All °f piles of soil, g
® occur before the site is vacated.
I
i
, I
Page 3
F02 yt Partnership
o Deslg ort No. 11
tion xeP_
�� PLAN`iI�G
r�G SUR�'E�iNG
ENGINEERI.
Schofield Brothers of New England,inc.
20217 Framin9ha i1MAO17701 5298
508-879-0030
1-800-696-2874
Now FAX 508-879-j7g7
To: M•• Rick Rice
DiNisco Design Partnership
87 Summer Street
Boston,MA 02110
Commission
Cc.:
North Andover Conservation u•d
North Andover Planning C)
From.. Jennifer Steel,wetland Specialist
Date: November 26, 2001
R High School (20217)
e North Andover
INSMCrrION REPORT
Inspection No.'. 12 2001
ection: November 26,
Date of Insp Fred King
By; Jennifer Steel &
TROD'UCTION review the protect work relative to
IN respect to
The purpose of these inspections is to obseiss issued y the North Andover Ca Boar
d with
ermit issued by water mariagepzent issues•
the Norte Anddostormlanni
com Hance with the orders al PConditisue Tian
p
Commission and the c limit of work comp io ect include:
sediment and erosion controls, 21101
the Orders of Conditions red 2d for the project
For reference File No 242-1045:Issu
® DEP Issued 5114101
Q Board Notice of Decision: all were
Planning, bee put in bold-faced type ton) at the time of
attention ha`e b erintendent(Jack Farring
needing Please note that issues
and/or the Contractors Sup
discussed with y you haVe any
the site visit. hers of New Engl`Ind.Inc• know if
please let Inc or Fred KinS
at Schofield Biot ort.
. Qarcling the information contained in this re
questions leg,
INSPECTION S1MARY
he erimeter of the current condition.
trol barriers remain in place and in goo
1 Sediment control bap�ers aroun t
® Sediment co
2 Loam stock ile area in the northern
onion of the site:
No
erosion of the stockpile stalledeat the time of the site visit.as
Sediment fence was nu�edn
® Hydroseed g
onion of the site:
roar borrow stock ile alek ileheasoobserved. f the site visit.
3 Old No erosion of the es p a installed at the time o
• Sediment fence was bein„
ate near trailers: lied to mm
imize the tracking of nlud off-site.
4. Main entrance ravel will be app
• Additional g
exit: the area to the
5 Southern eme1 enc or sedimentation, ° en or fine
The exit is currently In ntial fordoff-site erosion provide a shallow swatoward the
To eliminate the pot railed slightly to p
• will be reg allovving runoff to be directed
east of the entry
filled with gravel or crushed stone)
southeastern catch basin.
6 Catc'In,s and hay bales at the catch basins are being maintained by the contractor.
• onding is occurring• above
ro riate p
Sediment basins and outlet structure raded and aPP p
® Sed
invent basins have been g actor the need tO make sure the final
® We discussed with the contr be completed. is now
ent basin#3 directs runo'ains to e basin.co the grading
sedum and matting ren
® Hydroseeding control any erosion
as" ��
est corner of the site near Sediment B ed bas
v area does not drain to the basin. Additrona
• In the south expected, only a small
fete. As Q and hay bales) have been instal to
comp silt fencing
erosion controls and appears satisfactory•
at that small area,
ear to be funuiuipment and
e structures: htl damaged by n
g. Other drama ina°e structures have been,�vials dl gd y p
® All major dra b cars t�be functioning.
e contractor. The sub-dram app
® The stone outfall at t�� sub-drain outlet
will be corrected by
Page_
20217
DiNisco Design Partnership
Inspection I , nn i 12
a��Ctttlt�IF.LD}t��t1Ti�r�`'
the existing outfall
dirt and debris in connected into that pipe
considerable H#1 is
The contractor discovered stem f role DM
' east. The new drain sy
pipe to the
Should be given to clear the drain-
and consideration s
• as: been augmented with organic-rich loam,
9 Wetland re lication are temperatures.
wetland replication areas have and seed. against freezing
Both plantings,Peat moss,
®
appropriate p protect ag
rop
® plants could be mulcheCl�v'th hay o
embankment droseeding with
r aded and covered with loam.
be by
0.Im able barrier and has been g- or stated that they and straw will also be
I The embankm matting
the Contract es. Jute
® To protect the slo�ac'" er over the slop
n the steepest portions of the slopes.
extra mulch and
employed o Should occur
other miscellaneous materials sh
11. Gem' , Iles of rock and fete. Considerable rainfall
. Final clean-UP of P and nearly comp
the site is vacated. dry orderly, 11125101) and the site weathered the
before relatively Sunday
before this inspection
. The site is clean
guidelines of the conditions. e
occurred the day Q within the g this week.
storm well. workinb
The contractor aPPea's CO be
• are trying to get all their work completed
reports that they
Page 3
2I0n� De Design Partne rsh
iP
D
iK2ort No- 12
isco
s ection & 001