HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication - 1679 OSGOOD STREET 8/29/2011 Transportation
Land Development
Environmental °
e
Services
(ae
imagination I mnovatton energy Creating results for our clients and benefits for our commtudties
August 29,2011 yanass-e—Uange.12_Bytli e enc.
Ref: 09280.44
Ms.Judy Tymon
Town Planner
1600 Osgood Street
Bldg.20,Suite 2-36
North Andover,MA 01845
Re: Definitive Subdivision Application
1679 Osgood Street,North Andover MA
Jones&Beach Engineers,Inc.Comment Response Letter
Dear Ms.Tymon,
VHB has received the most recent submission(July 25th,2011)on the subject project. At this
time all of VHB's comments are addressed and no further engineering review is necessary.
If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact me at 617-924-1770.
Sincerely,
Stephen Rhoads
Project Engineer—Transportation Engineering
Vanasse Hangen Brustlin,Inc.
Cc: Tim McIntosh
101 Walnut Street, P.O.Box 9151
Watertown,Massachusetts 02471-9151
617.924.1770■FAX 617.924.2286
email:info@vhb.com
\\%hb\proj\1Vat-TE\09280.4!\docs\letters\let-16790sgood-Def Subdivision JBERespame.doc www.vhb.com
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD
ENGINEERING REVIEW OF DEFINITIVE SUBDIVISON
FOR CONFORMANCE WITH THE
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER SUBDIVISION RULES AND REGULATION
AND ZONING BYLAW
Plan Title: Definitive Subdivision Plan VHB No.: 09280.44
Location: Osgood Street(Rte 125)&Bradford Street
Applicant: G.M.Z.Realty Trust, 1679 Osgood Street,North Andover MA 01845
Applicant's Engineer: Jones&Breach Engineers,Inc.,85 Portsmouth Avenue,Stratham NH 03885
Plan Date: July 14,2010 Review Date: Sept. 8,2010
2nd Review Date: 11/23/2010
The plans were reviewed for conformance to the 1972 Town of'North Andover Zoning Bylaw(last
amended July 10,2006)and the Town of North Andover Rules and Regulations Governing the Subdivision
of'Land(last amended December-2002). The Applicant has submitted the following information for'VHB's
2nd review:
• Five(5)Letters to North Andover Planning Board,including Waiver Requests dated
November 12,2010.
• Response to 1St Review Comments,dated November 11,2010.
• Definitive Subdivision Plans(22 sheets total),dated July 14,2010 and revised November 12,
2010..
• Stormwater Management Report,dated.July 14,2010 and revised November 11,2010.
The following comments note non-conformance with specific sections of the Zoning Bylaw,Subdivision
Rules and Regulations and questions/comments on the proposed design and VHB's recommendations/
suggestions..
Note:Drainage review is performed by the North Andover Conservation Commission's review consultant
and septic design is assumed to be reviewed by the North Andover Board of Health.
Rules and Resulations Governing the Subdivision of Land
1. Section(5..2.5.2..11): The lot layout plans do not show the proposed structures on each lot,as is
required by this section.. The Applicant should add this information to the lot layout plans.
Addressed.
2. Section(5..2.5.3.10): This section requires that the logs of the test pits be shown on the definitive
subdivision plans. VHB notes that the logs have been included in the definitive subdivision written
documentation packet,however it does not appear that these logs have been included in the plans.. The
Applicant should add this information to the plans,or request a waiver..
Addressed. The Applicant has requested a waiver.
3. Section(5.2.5.3.15): This section requires that the location and identification of a minimum of 2 bench
mark are to be shown on the grading&drainage plan. It does not appear that any bench marks have
been shown on the plans.. The Applicant should add this information to the plans.
1
r:\09280 41\docs\memos\0928041-1679 Osgood St Definitive Subdivision Review-2.doc
Addressed.
4., Section(5.2..5.3.22): The grading and drainage plans do not appear to show the volume of excess
material to be disposed of off site,as is required by this section. The Applicant should add this
information to the plans..
Addressed.
5. Section(.5.2.53.22): This section states that a permit for earth removal shall be obtained from the
Special Permit Granting Authority prior to submitting the definitive subdivision plans.. Has the
Applicant applied for such a permit?
Addressed. The Applicant has stated that the permit is pending.
6. Section(.5.2,4.5,b.5): This section requires that proposed lot line frontages be shown on the roadway
and profile plan(sheet 12). It does not appear that the roadway plan and profile sheet shows this
information.. The Applicant should add this information to the plans.
Addressed.
7. Section(5.2.4-5.b,12): This section requires that existing and proposed gas mains be shown on the
plans, It does not appear that the utility plan(sheet 14)shows any proposed gas main. The Applicant
should add this information to the plans.
Addressed.
8.. Section(5.2.5.5,b): The existing grades of the stormwater management facilities(infiltration basins
and wet ponds)are not shown on the detail of the facilities provided on sheet 18,as is required by this
section.. The Applicant should add this information to the plans..
Addressed.
9. Section(5..2..5,5..b): This section also requires that the inlet and outlet pipes full flow capacity be
shown on the plans. It does not appear that this information has been included.. VHB notes that this
information may be included in the drainage report. Regardless,the Applicant should add this
information to the plans,or request a waiver.
Addressed. The Applicant has requested a waiver.
10.. Section(5.2.5.5..b): This section requires that the volume of storage capacity be shown on the plans. It
does not appear that this information has been included.. The Applicant should add this information to
the plans.
Addressed.
11. Section(.5.2.5.5.c): Profiles of cross country drain pipes and swales do not appear to be shown on the
plans,as is required by this section. The Applicant should add this information to the plans.,
Addressed.
11 Section(5.4.4.6): This section requires the Applicant to provide a more detailed traffic analysis of the
Proposed development than that which is provided under section.5.4.43.. Has the Applicant prepared
this information for the Planning Board? If not,a waiver should be requested,
Addressed. The Applicant has requested a waiver.
13. Section(5.4.4,91b): This section requires that a separate plan of the proposed subdivision regarding
soil erosion and sedimentation control be prepared and signed by a qualified firm or person. This plan
should fulfill the requirements of subsections(i-ix)., The Applicant should prepare this plan and add it
to the overall plan set..
Addressed.
14.. Section(63.4): This section states that lots shall be laid out to provide positive drainage away from all
proposed buildings.. It appears that the proposed house on lot 16-7 may be in the path of runoff coming
2
r:\0928044\docs\memos\0978044-1679 Osgood St Definitive Subdivision Review-2 doc
down the hill on the south side of the house.. The Applicant should revise the grading in this area if'
possible..
Addressed.
15.. Section(6.3.4): This section requires that the proposed street name be included in the plans. It does
not appear that this has been included in the plans.. The Applicant should add this information to the
plans.
Addressed.
16, Section(6..8..1)Table IA:VHB notes that the Applicant has requested a waiver to the maximum
roadway length of a cul-de-sac under the design standards for local streets table. The maximum
roadway length per the table is 600',while the proposed roadway is approximately 8.50'long from
Bradford Street to the end of the cul-de-sac.
VHB assumes the Applicant has discussed the street length with the North Andover Fire
Department to assure that there is adequate fire protection.
17. Section(6.8.4): The Applicant has provided a plan("Highway Access Plan")showing resulting sight
distances from the proposed roadway along Bradford Street to be 200'in each direction.
a. A sight distance of 200'meets requirements for a roadway with a design speed of 30 MPH.
b. What is the posted speed limit of Bradford Street?
c.. Has a speed study been performed on Bradford Street? If so,what are the existing 85`h
Percentile speeds along the street? It is common practice to refer to the 851h percentile speeds
to determine required sight distance..
The Applicant should investigate,and provide calculations for-,the required sight distance based on the
above points., If any lengthening of sight distance from the proposed roadway is required we suggest
the Applicant may propose clearing and thinning of the wooded area(based on satellite imagery
available)within the roadway layout on the west side of Bradford Street to the north of the proposed
roadway.,
Addressed. The plans indicate a 250 foot sight distance,which exceeds the minimum sight
distance(200 feet)for a 30 MPH design speed,however it is still unclear what the actual vehicle
operating speeds are as a speed study has not been performed.
18. Section(6.9): This section states that vertical granite curb is required at cul-de-sac turnarounds and
intersections. It is not clear whether-the plans propose vertical granite curb at the intersection of the
proposed roadway and Bradford Street., The Applicant should revise the plans as necessary..
Addressed.
19. Section(6112): This section states that the proposed underground utilities shall have identification
tape placed above them during installation.. It appears that the plans show conflicting information
regarding the color-of identification tape to be placed(see Utility Plan note#13 and notes on the utility
trench detail on sheet 15).. The Applicant should review and revise the plans as necessary to meet the
requirements of this section.
Addressed.
20. Section(6..13..3): It does not appear that drainage easement 16-3 provides full access to infiltration
basin#2. The Applicant should review and revise the plans as necessary.
Addressed.
21.. Section(6.13..3.VIl):VHB notes two separate issues regarding this section's requirements:
a.. It appears that proposed drainage easement 16-3 (accessible from the street)has 3:1 side
slopes..This section requires that the side slopes shall be no greater than 4:1. The Applicant
3
I':\0928044\docs\memos\0928044-1679 Osgood St Definitive Subdivision Review-2.doc
should revise the grading in the easement area in order to comply with Town requirements,or
request a waiver from this section..
Addressed.
b. The section requires the first 20'of the easement from the edge of roadway to have a 12"deep
gravel sub-base material beneath the topsoil in order to support maintenance vehicles. The
Applicant should revise the plans as necessary to show this..
Addressed.
22. Section(6.15..2):It appears the plans show proposed fire hydrants.. VHB assumes that the Applicant
will review fire protection issues with the North Andover Fire Department,,
Addressed.
23, Section(624..b): This section requires that natural slopes exceeding 2.5%(4:1)over a distance of 10
feet remain in their natural state.. It appears that lot 16-6 disturbs an area meeting this criteria.
Proposed contours indicate a proposed slope of 3:L. The Applicant should evaluate whether a
proposed 4:1 slope can be designed at this location. A short retaining wall along the westerly property
line might be considered to limit impacts to the adjacent property..
Addressed.
24• Section(6.24.c):This section requires the planting of low growing plant materials or grass on out and
fill slopes within or contiguous to the street right-of-way.. It appears that the plans propose 4"loam
borrow to be seeded on proposed 3:1 side slopes.. The Applicant should verify with the Planning Board
that this treatment is acceptable.
Addressed. The Applicant has requested the Planning Board verify this slope treatment.
2.5. Appendix II-1: This section requires that pipe for drainage systems be reinforced concrete(ASTM C-
76 Class 4). It appears that the plans call for ADS N-12 pipe,which is a polyethylene drainage pipe.
The Applicant should revise the plans as necessary or request a waiver from this requirement.
Addressed. The Applicant has requested a waiver. The Applicant should discuss with the DPW
as they will presumably be responsible for maintenance of the roadway assuming the roadway is
accepted as a public way.
26. Appendix II-1: This section also requires drainage pipes to be laid in a bed of 6"of processed gravel
or crushed stone meeting respective MassDOT standard specifications.. The drainage trench detail
(sheet 15)proposes sand bedding below the pipe.. The detail also references a number of NHDOT
standards.. The Applicant should revise the plans as necessary..
Addressed.
Town of North Andover Zoninjz Bylaw
27. Section(.3.2): According to the plans the lot to be subdivided is divided by a zoning district boundary
line.. The zoning map appears to show the area on the west side of this district line to be zoned as
Industrial S,however the plans label this area as Coiridor Development District 3. Additionally,when
VHB performed the preliminary subdivision plan review in April 2008,the plans labeled the same area
as Industrial S. The Applicant should verify and the revise the plans as necessary..
Addressed. The Applicant has stated that the plans are correctly labeled as Corridor
Development District 3.
28. Section(4..1): Table 2 summarizes the permitted uses within each zoning district. If the western
portion of the lot to be subdivided falls within either the Industrial S district or Corridor Development
District 3 the construction of one-family dwelling is not allowed according to the table.. It appears that
4
I:\09280 44\docs\memos\0928044-1679 Osgood St Definitive Subdivision Review-2.doc
the dwelling on proposed lot 16-3 crosses over the zoning district boundary line and therefore is non-
conforming. The Applicant should consider requesting a waiver to allow this,or revise the plans as
necessary.
Not addressed. The revised plans show the proposed dwelling on lot 16-3 falling within both the
Residential 2 District and the Corridor Development District 3. According to Table 1 of the
Zoning Bylaw the construction of a single family dwelling is not allowed in the Corridor
Development District 3.
Additionally,the Applicant has stated that a Special Permit has been included in the review
package however VHB has not received a copy of this.
General Comments/Standard Enaineerina Practice
29.. Will the infiltration basins and wet ponds have fences around them? For safety reasons VHB
recommends proposing fences if the basins/ponds will be holding water.
Addressed.
30.. The typical driveway detail on sheet 16 indicates that granite curb is the typical edge treatment adjacent
to driveways,however the roadway plan and profile(sheet 12)indicates many proposed driveways also
have sloped granite curb adjacent to them. We suggest revising the detail to indicate that either vertical
granite curb or sloped granite curb will be"tipped down"..
Addressed.
31. A permeable concrete paver detail is included in the plans(sheet 17),however it is not clear where this
paver treatment is proposed. The Applicant should revise the plans to clarify the intent of this
treatment..
Addressed.
32. VHB assumes the Applicant has coordinated with and submitted all required information to the
Conservation Commission due to the wetlands impacted by the proposed subdivision.
Addressed.
It is recommended that the Applicant provide WRITTEN RESPONSES to the issues and comments
contained herein..
Reviewed by: � _�z� � Date: 1 lllJ
Stephen oads
Civil Engineer—Highway and Municipal
Checked by: b IA Date:
Timothy B.. clntosh,P..R.
Project Manager—Highway and Municipal
5
IA09280.44\docs\memos\0928044-1679 Osgood St Definitive Subdivision Review-2 doc