Loading...
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