Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence - 1635 OSGOOD STREET 12/11/1997 Marchionda, y4 yy� E not i nPoi.^.0 Y n rig and IInan'Munnt,CernIa,nxI6sounk December 11, 1997 k „ f 9 Ms. Kathleen Bradley Colwell North Andover Planning Board 30 School Street ` North Andover, MA 01845 Re: 1635 Osgood Street Dear Kathleen: At the December 3rd meeting of the Consevation Commission, the public hearing on the latest site plan for Mr. Monroe's proposal was closed with the anticipation of an Order of Conditions being issued. Same minor changes to the plan were made to satisfy the concerns of Mr. Chessia and the Commission. Enclosed are two copies of the latest site plan submitted. for your review. Changes were made to address stormwater quality issues. The following is a brief list of the differences between the Latest plan and the plan approved by the Planning Board, * The trench drain leading to detention basin #2 was eliminated * A water quality swale was added at the end of detention basin #1 * The pavement around the garage was reduced * The recharge structure was relocated adjacent to detention basin #1 Please let me Imow if the changes require a modification to the recent Planning Board approval. Should you desire more information please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Marchionda & Associates, L.P. Michael I Rosati cc: Tyler Monroe 62 Mowvah, Avenue Suite I Storms hainrn,MA 0218 0 (6 17)43 8.0:121 Fa x (617)4341-9654, . ' � r Engineering p@ . P aaaa!nburt„Consultants November 24, 1997 Ms. Kathleen Bradley Colwell Planning Board 30 School Street North. Andover, MA 01845 RE: 1635 Osgood Street North Andover, MA Dear Ms. Colwell: Enclosed for your use is an updated set of plans (rev. 11/17/97) for the project referenced above. The package set to you with a cover letter dated November 20 1997 may have inadvertently included a old plan set with a revision date of October 31, 1997. If this was the case please disregard the superseded plan set. I apologize for the confusion. Should you have any questions or connnents, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, JJ n A. Barrows, P.E. Marcluonda & Assoc., L.P. 62 Montvale Avenue Saahm.I Stoneham, MA 02 180 Fax (617) Marchlkmida & Associates, LT. R November 20, 1997 F ; Ms. Kathleen. Bradley Colwell Planning Board 30 School Street North Andover, MA 01845 RE: 1635 Osgood Street North Andover, MA Lear Ms. Colwell: Enclosed for your review is an updated set of plans, hydrology report, and water quality calculations for the project referenced above. Enclosed is a copy of a letter sent to John. Chessia outlining how his coirnnents on the project have been addressed in the updated plans and calculations. Should you have any questions or coirnnents, please do not hesitate to call. Very,.ti-rtlyours, IIIHI A. Barrows, P.E. Marcbionda & Assoc., L.P. 62 Nionivale Aveime Stoneham, MA 02180 (61 7)4311-6:112:1. lhix (017)438-9654 0 a &Associates, L.P. Engineering and i.sh= Planning Consultants November 19, 1997 John Chessia, P.E. Coler and Colantonio, Inc. 101 Accord Park Drive Norwell, MA 02061-1685 RE: 1635 Osgood Sheet North Andover, MA Dear Mr. Chessia: Enclosed for your review is an updated plan set, water quality calculations and hydrology study for the project referenced above. The plans and hydrology study have been revised to address comments presented to the North Andover Planning Board and Conservation Commission in your letter dated November 14, 1997. Following is a list of responses outlining how the issues presented in your letter of November 14, 1997 have been addressed: Item#2: As we discussed in our recent phone conversation, the outlet to the culvert in question is inaccessible. From our field observations we feel that the culvert is presently operating properly. In the event that the culvert was not operating properly we have provided spots shots on the plan to show the rnaxirnum elevation to which water could raise to before overflowing into Osgood Street. As you can see from the plan, any impoundment of water that would take place in this scenario would not effect any of the proposed drainage and water quality devices. We have also provided a copy of the U.S.G.S. quadrangle for the site showing the flow path which the water would take if the bank was ever over topped. From the map, water would flow into Osgood Street and run north into the state highway drainage systern which ultunately flows into the Merrimack River. Item#12: Please note that trench drain has been removed and the septic system is proposed to be redesigned, moving it fiuther from the wetlands. 62 Montvale Avenue Suite I Stoneham,lllA 02180 (617)438-6121 Fax(617)438-9654 I Mairchionda &Associates, L.P. Engineering and Planning Consultants Drainage Item#5 A test pit will be performed by a soil evaluator in the area of the proposed recharge structure. The planning board has indicated that this will be a condition of the planning board approval. Stormwater Management Policy Item#2 The hydrology study has been revised to show all runoff rates to the nearest tenth of a cTs.. Stonnwater Management Policy Item#3 See Item 45, above. Storinwater Management Policy Item#4 As shown in the revised water quality calculations, Ave are no longer taking credit for the sumps in the proposed outlet structures to the detention basins. Although eve expect some T.S.S. removal fi'om these structures. We have added a drauiage/tz'eatlnent channel at the outflow of Detention basin #1. We are using die 25%T.S.S. removal design rate allowed by D.E.P. for this type of B.MP. While this type of B.M.P. is sometimes referred to as a pretreatment technology Ave feel that this removal rate is accurate due to the low vol une and velocities (0.3 c.£s./ 0.25 fp.s. -• 100 yr event) whch will occur in this B.IvLP...To fiuther support this we have enclose&an example fiom the D.E.P.'s Stonnwater Technical Handbook in which tlis type of B.M.P. was used after a extended detention basin just as we have proposed. Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, John A. Bar rows, P.E. Marchionda & Assoc., L.P. cc: Michael Howard, North Andover Conservation Commission Kathleen Colwell, North Andover Planning Board .� ah ro J5� V X, •• OL /// 1100 / •a / P ate o /�� oL Ai �n I U ICi AL c Ss C J loo ( 7" MARCHIONDA & ASSOC ,L.P. LOCO S PLAN ENGINEERING AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS 1635 OSGOOD STREET 62 MONTVALE AVE. SUITE I NORTH ANDOVER, MA STONEHAM, MA. 02180 (617) 438-6121 - SCALE: 1"=1500' DATE: 9/8/97 FI G. 1 Structural Best Management Practices Calculation of TSS Removal for the BMPs proposed: STEP#1. Compute the TSS removed by each BMP, using the following formula: (Removal rate %) X ( annual TSS load entering the BMP) i. BMP1 - Catch basin with deep sump: (.25) X (1) = 25 % of TSS removed by BMP 1 ii. BMP2 - Sediment trap: (.25) X ((1)(total TSS) - (.25)(TSS removed by BMP 1)) (.25) X (.75) = 18.7% TSS removed by BI 41? 2 iii. BMP3 - Extended detention basin (.60) X (.75=.187) (.60) X (.60) X (.56) =33.8 010 TSS removed by BMP 3 iv. BMP 4 -Drainage channel (.25) X (.56-338) (.25) X (.222) = 5.5 % of TSS removed. STEP #2. Add together the amounts removed by each BMP to get the 80 % TSS removal that is required in the Stormwater Management Standards. The formula is as follows: (TSS removed by BMP1) + (TSS removed by BMP2) + (TSS removed by BhIP3) + (TSS removed by each additional BMP) = 80 90 of the total annual TSS for the site. i. (25 % removed) +(18.7 % removed) + (33.8'% removed) + (5.5 % removed) = 83 % of TSS removed by the entire system. Since the 80 % removal is required, the stormwater system will achieve the TSS Manage- ment Standard when sized to handle either the required 0.5 inch,or 1 inch of runoff. II. Water Quality Volume WQV = water quality volume ReV = recharge volume I = total impervious area(including rooftop) Ir= rooftop impervious area RR= rooftop runoff I � (1) Compute total site area in acres (A). (2) Compute total impervious area including roofs (1) in acres. Stormwater Management(Volume Two) 3 - 13 Structural Best Management Practices Then, apply the wet pond removal: . TSS load remaining (0.675) * BMP3 Removal Rate (0.80):= 0.54 [TSS load estimated to be removed]. 0.135 of the TSS load remains (0.675 - 0.54). Lastly, the remaining TSS load is subtracted from the initial TSS load to derive the Final TSS Removal Rate: 1.00 - 0.135 = 0.865. The Final TSS Removal Rate can be estimated by adding sediment loads removed by each BMP. For this example, that would be: (0.10+ 0.225 + 0.54) which totals 0.865 or 86.5%. For this drainage area, this system as designed will remove an estimated 86.5% of the annual TSS load and therefore will meet the TSS removal standard if properly sized, designed, and maintained. For the rooftop drainage area: Dry well: 80% (uncontaminated) Applying the dry well removal rate to the average annual load,results in 80%: Average Annual Load (1.00) Y B,MP1 Removal Rate (0.'80) = 0.80 Relying on dry wells to infiltrate uncontaminated rooftop runoff will remove an,estimated 80% of the annual TSS load, and therefore this rooftop system will meet the TSS removal standard. The volume of storm- .. : water infiltrated through dry wells will also be applied to the recharge volume requirement. This is explained below. Example 2: Proposed Storinwater Management System: The stormwater manage- ment system directs runoff from the parking and roadway areas to catch basins with deep sumps (25% TSS removal). Drainage pipes convey the stormwater to sediment traps (25% TSS removal) and an extended deten- tion basin (60% TSS removal). Discharged runoff from the basin enters a drainage channel (25% TSS removal) with an outlet in the buffer zone. . TSS Removal Requirement: To meet Stormwater Management Standard #4, the system must remove 80 %1(0.8 of 1) the average annual load of TSS. To ealsily compute TSS removal, the average annual TSS load entering the stormwater system from any site is set at 1 (i.e., 100 percent) of the total suspended solids. 3- 12 Stormwater Management(Volume Two) MARCHIONDA & ASSOCIATES, L.P. J0B '��� ��� �� ' N 1�J'De-✓� Engineering & Planning Consultants SHEET ND. OF 62 Montvale Ave. Suite I CALCULATED BY 12Td DATE STONEHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02180 (617) 438-6121 CHECKED BY �ryDATE A SCALE AO? 0.5"0- AAA IZ.*'AL-- AYE -'P 7-A I M I Q41 'T-v "-E�-MA t� = 13, t� 'p '!:;6 A,c t*tf 6"toU ut'I,._ �,3u kcyo.► I0A) 5'�0 FTZ 3 �EDIa-leltifi TAP vet- PoYt.DE.t? von / 3 { n4 X05 �oS IO '�g � 11+x_ o, K_ AAA ►► �t�OF Mqs� sqc� DAVID T. yN g OUELLETTE CIVIL cn A No.40151 ► 4 �GI SIER�G���� fib'6 r MARCHIONDA & ASSOCIATES, L.P. JOB Engineering & Planning Consultants SHEET ND. OF 62 Montvale Ave. Suite I CALCULATED BY DATE STONEHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02180 (617) 438-6121 CHECKED BY DATE SCALE G�-1•-Fx,� �ba�D 51� of �aA-'�' ___ �Q �I C�/ � O . S" x I►�-�'P�/1 dot S ��k'£�A� tZ r► ) A� . . ... . ............ ........................ P0E-o x{01,. 1 b Z 4 E14 QCs o'S 128 I o8 qo4 3?�' 3 x161 n.K MARCHIONDA & ASSOCIATES, L.P. JOB Engineering & Planning Consultants SHEET NO. OF 62 Montvale Ave. Suite I STONEHAM, MASSACHUSETTS 02180 CALCULATED BY DATE (617) 438-6121 CHECKED BY DATE SCALE O �� I�Q�® ��'�"" � lac+► �/�I� �Z 2 1"r t`:1 TO '�� UI� .MF.+ .' 0 . I I►�tk ��4c . AfZ) 0 , S X GHPt=,/ItMe A-°- A �. as Ae-)C I �� �( o. - Xq�,s�oZ IS3 12, i t3 _ A R 6�4 TAP-+k,k)j kz -ro J;)rte, "'I pd = 1&90 f t I,�R�/ - O • S 12 �dc.µ J 7 0 F7 '� C'°►�.°VS . . . . . .......:............. V o t.. Vo L . Cr-,- . . . . . .... . ... ...... o 10 Z 5 Sao 1570 gZ ,5' `a`70 PA09JCi 2044ISinyL Srea¢i 291-1 i�zoo=.tl 11/19/97 Open Channel Flow for Trapezodial Channel Input Quantities Bottom Width: 2 . 8200 ft Manning' s n: 0 . 1750 Channel Slope : 0 Calculated Flow Rate : 1 . 0248 cfs Side Slope : z Depth of Flow: 0 . 6700 ft Calculated Quantities Area Of Flow: 2 . 7872 sf Wetted Perimeter : 5 . 8163 ft Hydraulic Radius : 0 . 4792 ft Velocity: 0 . 3677 ft/s Critical Slope : 88 . 3873 0 Top Width: 5 . 5000 ft Froude Number: 0 . 0910 Critical Depth: 0 . 1541 ft HHCalc, Version 7 . Os Eagle Point, 4131 WestMark Drive, Dubuque, IA, 52002 , 1-800-678-6565 W 67T AP�64 --- C-), z " -- --------------- - ' X i --------------- ................ . - ---- --- ......L ................. : ...........-. : ; ................ ........... N/F WFA24 GMZ REALTY TRUST w A WFA22 p WF 6 PROP. C.B. � - (NTH OIL SEPARATOR HOOD &SUM_P,A21�( 0 ,-77 Ra115.00 rat 1-112.49 ti WFA7 WFA20 1. N/F m ROCHE w� w � 108 15• (MIN.) •g5J i•(<S�JOxD,g�'J� }�QO yO.�h7/ LANDSCAPED BUFFER WFA19 A8 PROP. 106 BARRIER X • 41 o (SEE DETAIL) PROP. EDGE OF WETLANDS (TYP.)� OUT UCTURE B WFA18 (SEE DETAIL) WFA9 '9pp WFA17 Rp C 0 N WFA1 g 20 10 0 20 I INV 18" P v SECTION III W v (D Lli n In m Z: � 0 � � O O a)j •j C L .� m D 3 c 1,� L+-- ° 0 > dJ ` o Q 0 0 0) (1 F- -0 �0 > U 0) o o r O co cn �N cj� C� O U� . m 3 o � cz jaagsMaoAA uol}ialnaluo 0 ca . uua `d* S S.L a. �- lino + III-12 DEP Stormwater Mamgement Workshop r , SECTION III • r-. 11.1 J �� O 0 C (D IL f�. U O cu O Q U) (tS • N Co cn E -- o a) f-- p U (i3 C uo �n�j � � � / 1 • � .. •' JII-12 DEP Stormwater Mompment Workshop i SECTION III W CL C] D- m W 0 = L L cm �P O (D O Cf3 ct3 D E (D o Q o 0 O q F1 c I1 E-- Fo J) Cn > Ems' 92 v nco) �S 0 Cn CL cn - Z Q m z P . . � L' o .o � cz }aa�s�ao,M, uoi���n���� L 13nOWGI:l SSl � CL • •• III-12 DEP Stormwater Mamgement Workshop SECTION III W •a� C� p_ m , c ^o �I p I .j L U X ' �O 0 (D 0 E > Q cm cu CD1 N U � (13 m F19 O CC G E - ° (1) w Cl) o ; p' a) � Q In O � N �-- CO -IF . ° 0 t- Q Q Id A � m -Z� -1 . T z U o a�: Q ai laags)i oAA uoijulnoIlao ca 13-AOWa%; SSJL i t L • JJJ-12 DEP Stormwater Management Workshop SECTION III W m W •� o- m C� 0 I I O •� (D x � � 3:CO 40 C� o o N M Q ° cn O N U � CD ca ° p cr W ca O M ��-- > m (D cn . ~ L m jaags)jaoAA uoileinoliao •o 2 U JBnoWa�A SS1 j III-12 DEP Stormwater Management Workshop ✓� m r Associates', I.—P, W�m � l ... I nA Engineering u�anawk � 6: Flanurcnnna�;(:o>��us0t ants . rF November 5, 1997 Ms. Kathleen Bradley Colwell i g i Planning Board 30 School Street North Andover, MA 01845 RE: 1635 Osgood Street North Andover, MA Dear Ms. Colwell: Enclosed for your review are eight sets of updated plans, and hydrology report for the project referenced above. Proposed changes to the site plan include the following: Revision of the wetland line (elinvnation of wetland flag #10) based on Michael Howard's inspection of the site. Relocation of the proposed building to the rear of the site, and associated changes to the driveway parking areas and detention basin. On November 4, this information was delivered to John. Chessia for his review. Enclosed is a copy of a letter sent to Jolm outlining how his cornrnents on the project have been addressed h-i the updated plans and calculations. Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to call. Very truly yours, �* tol q0+0 David Ouellette, P.E. y Marchionda & Assoc., L.P. 02 Monivale Avenue Suite I. Sionnce h am,MA 02180 (M'7),1311-6121 Fax(6.17)43&,9654, Mambionda &Associates, L.P. e Engineering and imc \�t Planning Consultants -J, November November 4, 1997 John Chessia, P.E. Coler and Colantonio, Inc. 101 Accord Park Drive Nonvell, MA 02061-1685 RE: 1635 Osgood Street North Andover, MA Dear Mr. Chessia: Enclosed for your review is an updated Plan set, water quality calculations and hydrology study for the project referenced above. The proposed building location has been moved to the rear of the site and the pavement location, grading and drainage have been changed to acconi-i-odate t'_re new building location. The plans and hydrology study have been revised to based on comments presented to the North Andover Planning Board and Conservation Conunission iii your letters dated October 7 and October 9, 1997. Following is a list of responses outlining how the issues presented in your letter of October 7, 1997 have been addressed: Item 112: The revised plan shows existing drain invert elevations, spot elevations along the edge of pavement near the existing 18" culvert, the basement floor elevation of the existing house and the edge of pavement on the opposite side of the street. No information on the downstream end of the 18" culvert is provided, since the outlet was not found. Item #3: Under the North Andover zoning bylaws, there is no parking requirement for a contractor's yard. 62 Montvale Avenue Siute I Stoneham,ALA 02180 (617)438-6121 Fax(617)438-9654 _ Marchionda &Associates, L.P. Engineering and Planning Consultants Item#4: These comments are addressed in the responses to the comment letter of October 9, 1997. Item#5: It is our understanding that the applicant has provided tivs information to the town planner. We will request that he send you a copy. Item #6: Plans have been revised accordingly. Items #8 The applicant does not desire_to have a sign. Item #9 Plans have been revised accordingly. Item #10 The applicant does not anticipate needing a dumpster. Item #12 No increased sewage flow is anticipated for this project. A water line is to be extended from the existing house to the proposed building so an exterior wall spigot may be provided, no indoor plumbing is proposed. The widening of the proposed driveway to 25' and relocation to accommodate detention basin #2 will require relocation of portions of existing septic leaching trenches. The relocation of the trenches has been discussed with the Board of Health agent and is acceptable to her. Following is a list of responses outlining how the issues presented in your letter of October Marchionda &Associates, L.P. Engineering and Planning Consultants 9, 1997 have been addressed: Drainage Item #1 Not applicable to revised layout. Drainage'Item #2 Tc calculations have been revised so that sheet flow is kept to 100' in length. For flow occurring off-site, slopes were derived fiom the U.S.G.S. map for this area which has a three meter contour interval (see Figures 2 and 3 in the hydrology report). Where the Te flow path enters the site, slopes were derived from field surveyed information. Drainage Item #3 The curve nuiiibeis have been recalculated assuming the woods are in good condition and the L)%«olog!c analysis has been revised. Drainage Item #4 The proposed detention basins are further from the house than in the previous design and the basement floor elevation of the existing-'house is shown on the revised plan. Drainage Item #5 Two test holes have been dug on site shown as TI-1-1 and TH-2 on the plan. Soil logs were included in the Notice of Intent. Depths to groundNvater used for the design of the detention basin and recharge structures are based on information from these test holes. Drainage Item #6 This information is provided it the revised hydrology report. Drainage Item #7 F __ Marchionda &Associates, L.P. Engineering and Planning Consultants Plans have been revised accordingly. Stormwater Management Policy Item #1 Our interpretation of Stormwater Management Policy is that Standard #1 is to apply to pipe outfalls (point sources) discharging stormwater to a resource area. Runoff from the lower portion of the driveway flows overland a significant distance before reaching the wetland's edge and is not discharged via a point source outfall to the wetlands, therefore Standard #1 should not apply. Stormwater Management Policy Item#2 Refer to the revised hydrology study. Stormwater Management Policy Item#3 See Drainage Item#5, above. Stormwater Management Policy Item #4 In the revised water quality,calculations, no T.S.S. removal credit is taken for the proposed swales or for the forebay of detention basin #1. Detention basin #2 has been added to the site plan to provide a small measure of peak rate control and some additional water quality treatment. Due to its small size and limited detention capability, detention basin #2 is treated as a sediment trap (25% T.S.S. removal) in the water quality calculations and not as an ex-tended detention basil. We do not believe it is in violation of the Stornawater Management Policy to assign 25% T.S.S. removal efficiency to a detention basin outlet structure if it is essentially a deep- sump/hooded catchbasin. We can find:nowhere in the Stormwater Mannagement Policy where 1 if is stated that the prescribed removal efficiency of a particular B.MP. is based on it's particular location in the treatment process train. We do however realize that a deep- sump/hooded catchbasin is likely to remove a smaller qucwity of T.S.S. since the T.S.S. load of the water entering the structure has been reduced by upstream B.M.P.'s. To address your concerns, though, we have reduced the T.S.S. removal efficiency of the outlet structures to 20 1/o, when calculating overall T.S.S. removal for the project. r ,�. i Marchionda &Associates, L.P. Engineering and Planning Consultants Stormwater Management Policy Item #5 Enclosed is a copy of a letter sent to the Planning Board which addressed some of these issues: Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate'to call.. Very truly yours, David Ouellette, P.E. Marchionda &Assoc., L.P. I p Planning m cV01B°wlufia nt% 1997 September 30, 1997 Ms. Kathleen Bradley Colwell North Andover Planning Board 30 School Street North Andover, MA Dear Kathleen: Thank you for taking the time to meet with me at the last TRC meeting. I have discussed the concerns and questions, that the various department representatives conveyed, with Tyler Monroe and have the following to offer: Required Parking: Although there is no parking requirement for a contractor's yard, we have shown that at least 6 parking spaces can be provided for the proposed garage. Four additional spaces have been provided for the existing two-family dwelling. It is my understanding that the number of spaces shown is consistent with the building inspector's opinion relative to the number of spaces for the proposed use. I have informed Mr. Monroe that the Planning Board is expecting confirmation of this by the building inspector. Fencing: A fence was proposed around the yard for screening. It is intended that the fence would be made of wood and of the stockade type. Vehicle Trips: Mr. Monroe informs me that he has a maximum of six (6) trucks involved with his business. For the most part, once the trucks leave for the day, they do not return until the end of the day. Assuming that all the employees begin their day at the garage, we expect that there will be four (4) trips pe-r day/vehicle for a total of 24 trips. Hours of Operation: The hours of operation will be 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. with the possibility of Mr. Monroe being on site during off hours. Lighting: The plan shows two wall mounted lights at the front and rear of the building. A detail of the type of light will be submitted for review. If acceptable to the Planning Board, Mr. Monroe would like the rear light to be on a motion detector. Building Elevation: Mr Monroe will be submitting a this information to the Board. Sign: Mr. Monroe will be providing the Board with a sketch of what his sign will look like. 62 Mmuniv,0k,.,Aveipmuxr Suite, I (617) 438,­61fl (61 gin) 438-4N554 AUX i E gh a sumng and xVrUUh �.�.mih.VlVllipW @ @�,y,��,�: ''EmIII�Uld16Ni�S�m Landscaping: The plan will be updated to give the quantity and type of plants to be used for landscaping. Dumpster: Mr. Monroe does not intend to need a dmpster. Any trash generated is intended to be bagged and put out with the trash from the existing dwelling. Storage: Mr. Monroe's business does not involve the need of storing fertilizer or pesticides. Generally, his business does not involve the use of these products. If for some reason these items are needed, they are bought directly from a store. Significant quantities of oil and gas are not stored on the premises. Gasoline is purchased daily in gas cans located on the truck. A couple of cases of oil may be stored in the garage for use when needed. Equipment: Mr. Monroe's business is mainly consists of 6 trucks, 6 lawn mowers, 1 tractor and a bacldloe. Major repair of the equipment is sent out for repair. Only minor adjustments of the equipment is to be done on site. Snow Plowing: Mr. Monroe's business does partly rely on snow plowing. Typically, the drivers operate these trucks from their homes. By doing this, Mr. Monroe does not have to be concerned with workers not being able to get to the yard in their cars. I hope that this information gives the members a clear perspective of the type and size of the of business Mr. Monroe operates. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Marchionda &Associates, L.P. Michael J. Rosati Project Manager