HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneous - 33 WALKER ROAD 4/30/2018 (4)w
3 a
Redgate Pasture Definitive Subdivision
The Planning Board herein APPROVES the Definitive Subdivision for a four (4) lot
subdivision, made up of four new single family homes known as Redgate Subdivision.
Redgate Realty Trust, 33 Walker Road, North Andover, MA 01845 submitted this
application on May 14, 2001 in accordance with the Order of Remand issued by the Land
Court on October 22, 2001. The area affected is located off Salem Street in the R-2
Zoning District, Map 65, Lot 21 & 164. This approval is for the construction of four
lots ONLY.
The Planning Board makes the following findings as required by the Rules and
Regulations Governing the Subdivision of Land:
A. The Definitive Plan, dated November 22, 1996, revised last on 2/26/01 includes
all of the information indicated in Section 3 of the Rules and Regulations
concerning the procedure for the submission of plans.
B. The Definitive Plan adheres to all of the design standards as indicated in Section 7
of the Rules and Regulations.
C. The Definitive Plan is in conformance with the purpose and intent of the
Subdivision Control Law.
D. The Definitive Plan complies with all of the review comments submitted by
various town departments in order to comply with state law, town by-laws and
insure the public health, safety and welfare of the town. A review by Coler &
Colantonio, the town's outside engineering consultant, dated March 20, 2001
indicates that all outstanding engineering issues have been addressed. Also, a
review by James Rand, Director of Engineering from the Department of Public
Works, indicates that all slopes have been stabilized satisfactorily. (memos
attached). Furthermore, a separate cash performance bond, as provided in
condition 3c, will be posted to ensure the stabilization of the slopes for a period
of three years from the date of completion of slope construction or acceptance
of the subdivision roadway by Town Meeting, whichever comes first.
E. The Definitive Plan complies with all standards and requirements of the Zoning
Bylaw and the Board of Health.
Finally, the Planning Board finds that the Definitive Subdivision complies with Town
Bylaw requirements so long as the following conditions are complied with:
1
1) Environmental Monitor: The applicant shall designate an independent
environmental monitor who shall be chosen in consultant with the Planning Department.
The Environmental Monitor must be available upon four (4) hours' notice to inspect the
site with the Planning Board designated official. The Environmental Monitor shall
make weekly inspections of the project and file monthly reports to the Planning Board
throughout the duration of the project. The monthly reports shall detail area of non-
compliance, if any and actions taken to resolve these issues.
The environmental monitor referred to in condition #1 must provide in-depth
reports relative to the stabilization of the slopes located on the rear of Lots 2 and 3.
The environmental monitor shall make weekly inspections during the construction
of the slopes and file the weekly reports to the Planning Board throughout the
duration of the project. The environmental monitor shall schedule monthly
inspections with the Town Planner and the Town Engineer of the Department of
Public Works during the construction of the slopes until the slopes have been fully
constructed. The environmental monitor shall appear before the Planning Board
at one point during and upon completion of the construction of the slopes to present
their findings as to the slope stabilization.
2) Prior to endorsement of the plans by the Planning Board the applicant shall adhere
to the following:
a) A Site Opening Bond in the amount of ten thousand ($10,000) dollars to be
held by the Town of North Andover. The Site Opening Bond shall be in the
form of a check made out to the Town of North Andover that will be placed
into an interest bearing escrow account. A covenant (FORM I) securing all lots
within the subdivision for the construction of ways and municipal services must
be submitted to the Planning Board. Said lots may be released from the covenant
upon posting of security as required in Condition 5(c).
b) The applicant must submit to the Town Planner a FORM M for all utilities and
easements placed on the subdivision.
c) All subdivision application fees must be paid in full and verified by the Town
Planner.
d) The applicant must meet with the Town Planner in order to ensure that the plans
conform to the Board's decision. A full set of final plans incorporating a
landscaping buffer comprised of trees of an evergreen species along the
frontage of Lot 1 on Salem Street to adequately screen the detention pond
must be submitted to the Town Planner. Additionally, the plans must be
revised to incorporate a detail of erosion control matting for the slopes on Lots
2 and 3; and to include a detail of the detention pond depicting a v -shaped
outlet containing adjustable baffles to accommodate the 25, 50 and 100 year
storm must be submitted to the Town Planner for review and approval prior to
2
endorsement by the Planning Board, within ninety (90) days of filing the
decision with the Town Clerk.
e) The Subdivision Decision for this project must appear on the mylars.
f) All documents shall be prepared at the expense of the applicant, as required by
the Planning Board Rules and Regulations Governing the Subdivision of Land.
3) Prior to ANY WORK on site:
a) Yellow "Caution" tape must be placed along the limit of clearing and
grading as shown on the plan. The Planning Staff must be contacted prior to
any cutting and or clearing on site.
b) All erosion control measures as shown on the plan and outlined in the
erosion control plan must be in place and reviewed by the Town Planner.
c) A Slope Stabilization Bond in the amount of twenty thousand ($20,000) to be
held by the Town of North Andover. The Slope Stabilization Bond shall be
in the form of a check made out to the Town of North Andover that will be
placed into an interest bearing escrow account. These monies may be
utilized by the town to ensure the stabilization of the slopes. These
monies, or the balance thereof, will not be released until three years from
the date of completion of slope construction or acceptance of the
subdivision roadway by Town Meeting, whichever comes first. For
Purposes of this section, "date of completion of slope construction" shall
be defined as complete when the Town Engineer certifies in writing to the
Planning Board that the slopes have been constructed in accordance with
the approved plans and this decision. Furthermore, the Town Engineer
shall not make this determination until a joint site visit has been scheduled
with the Planning Board.
4) Throughout and During Construction:
a) Dust mitigation and roadway cleaning must be performed weekly, or as deemed
necessary by the Town Planner, throughout the construction process.
b) Street sweeping must be performed, at least once per month, throughout the
construction process, or more frequently as directed by the Town Planner.
c) Hours of operation during construction are limited from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday and 8 a.m. — 5 p.m. on Saturdays.
d) A construction schedule shall be submitted to the Planning Staff for the
purpose of tracking the construction and informing the public of anticipated
activities on the site.
3
5) Prior to any lots being released from the statutory covenants:
a) Three (3) complete copies of the endorsed and recorded subdivision plans and one
(1) certified copy of the following documents: recorded subdivision approval,
recorded Covenant (FORM 1), recorded Growth Management Development
Schedule, and recorded FORM M must be submitted to the Town Planner as proof
of recording.
b) The applicant must submit a lot release FORM J to the Planning Board for
signature.
c) A Performance Security in an amount to be determined by the Planning Board, shall
be posted to ensure completion of the work in accordance with the Plans approved
as part of this conditional approval. The bond must be in the form acceptable to the
North Andover Planning Board. Items covered by the Bond may include, but shall
not be limited to:
i) as -built drawings;
ii) sewers and utilities
iii) roadway construction and maintenance
iv) lot and site erosion control
v) site screening and street trees
vi)drainage facilities
vii)site restoration
viii)final site cleanup
6) Prior to the issuance of a building permit for an individual lot, the following
information is required by the Planning Department:
a) The applicant must submit a certified copy of the recorded FORM J referred to in
Condition 5(b) above.
b) A plot plan for the lot in question must be submitted, which includes all of the
following:
i) location of the structure,
ii) location of the driveways,
iii) location of the septic systems if applicable,
iv) location of all water and sewer lines,
v) location of wetlands and any site improvements required under a NACC order of
condition,
vi) any grading called for on the lot,
vii) all required zoning setbacks,
viii)Location of any drainage, utility and other easements.
11
c) All appropriate erosion control measures for the lot shall be in place. The Planning
Board or Staff shall make final determination of appropriate measures.
d) Lot numbers, visible from the roadways must be posted on all lots.
e) An as -built plan must be submitted to the Division of Public Works for review and
approval prior to acceptance of the sewer appurtenances for use.
f) The roadway must be constructed to at least binder coat of pavement to properly
access the lot in question. Prior to construction of the binder coat, the applicant shall
ensure that all required inspection and testing of water, sewer, and drainage facilities
has been completed. The applicant must submit to the Town Planner and the
Department of Public Works an interim as -built, certified by a professional engineer,
verifying that all utilities have been installed in accordance with the plans and profile
sheet.
g) The applicant is required to pay sewer mitigation fees in accordance with
the current and prescribed policies at the Department of Public Works.
Proof of payment must be supplied to the Planning Department.
h) If a sidewalk is to be constructed in front of the lot, then such sidewalk must be
graded and staked at a minimum.
7) Prior to a Certificate of Occupancy being requested for an individual lot, the
following shall be required:
a) All necessary permits and approvals for the lot in question shall be obtained from the
North Andover Board of Health, and Conservation Commission.
b) Permanent house numbers must be posted on dwellings and be visible from the road.
c) There shall be no driveways placed where stone bound monuments and/or catch
basins are to be set. It shall be the developer's responsibility to assure the proper
placement of the driveways regardless of whether individual lots are sold. The
Planning Board requires any driveway to be moved at the owner's expense if such
driveway is at a catch basin or stone bound position.
8) Prior to the final release of security retained for the site by the Town, the following
shall be completed by the applicant:
a) An as -built plan and profile of the site shall be submitted to the DPW and Planning
Department for review and approval.
5
b) An as -built plan and profile of the slopes on Lots 2 and 3 must be submitted to the
DPW and Planning Department for review and approval.
c) The applicant shall petition Town Meeting for public acceptance of the street. Prior
to submitting a warrant for such petition the applicant shall review the subdivision
and all remaining work with the Town Planner and Department of Public Works.
The Planning Board shall hold a portion of the subdivision bond for continued
maintenance and operations until such time as Town Meeting has accepted (or
rejected in favor of private ownership) the roadways. It shall be the developer's
responsibility to insure that all proper easements have been recorded at the Registry
of Deeds.
9) The Applicant shall ensure that all Planning, Conservation Commission, Board of
Health and Division of Public Works requirements are satisfied and that construction
was in strict compliance with all approved plans and conditions.
10) The applicant shall adhere to the following requirements of the Fire Department:
a) Open burning is allowed by permit only after consultation with the Fire Department.
b) Underground fuel storage will be allowed in conformance with the Town Bylaws
and State Statute and only with the review and approval of the Fire Department and
Conservation Commission.
11) There shall be no burying or dumping of construction material on site.
12) The location of any stump dumps on site must be pre -approved by the Planning Board.
13) The contractor shall contact Dig Safe at least 72 hours prior to commencing any
excavation.
14) Gas, Telephone, Cable, and Electric utilities shall be installed as specified by the
respective utility companies.
15) Any action by a Town Board, Commission, or Department which requires changes in
the roadway alignment, placement of any easements or utilities, drainage facilities,
grading or no cut lines, may be subject to modification by the Planning Board.
16) The utilities must be installed and the streets or ways constructed to binder coat two
years from this approval. If the utilities are not installed, the streets or ways are not
constructed to binder coat and the Planning Board has not granted an extension by the
above referenced date, this definitive subdivision approval will be deemed to have
lapsed.
17) This Definitive Subdivision Plan approval is based upon the following information
which is incorporated into this decision by reference:
rel
Plan titled: RedGate Pasture
a
Report titled: Drainage Report
Prepared by: Daniel Koravos, P.E.
25 Teloian Drive
Hudson, NH 03051-3937
Dated: April 4, 1999, revised March 22, 2000
Attachments: March 20, 2001 Engineering Review, Coler & Colantonio
Memorandum to Heidi Griffin from Jim Rand dated 6/4/01
7
Definitive Subdivision Plan
North Andover, Massachusetts 01845
Dated:
November 22, 1996, revised 9/2/97, 12/26/97, 1/19/98, 6/14/99,
2/26/01
Applicant:
RedGate Realty Trust
33 Walker Road
North Andover, MA 01845
Civil Engineer:New England Engineering Services, Inc.
33 Walker Road, Suite 23
North Andover, MA 01845
Sheets:
1-7
Scale:
F=40'
a
Report titled: Drainage Report
Prepared by: Daniel Koravos, P.E.
25 Teloian Drive
Hudson, NH 03051-3937
Dated: April 4, 1999, revised March 22, 2000
Attachments: March 20, 2001 Engineering Review, Coler & Colantonio
Memorandum to Heidi Griffin from Jim Rand dated 6/4/01
7
U
COLANTONIOZ
ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS
March 20, 2001
Heidi Griffin
Planning Board
27 Charles Street
North Andover, MA 01845
RE: Supplemental Engineering Review
Red Gate Pasture
Revised Definitive Subdivision
Dear Ms. Griffin.
In response to your request, Coler & CoIantonio, Inc. has reviewed the supplemental
submittal package for the above referenced site. The project has been reviewed for
conformance to the requirements of the "Rules and Regulations Governing the
Subdivision of Land" in North Andover as well as standard engineering practice. The
submittal: package included the following information:
Plans Entitled:
• "Red Gate Pasture, Definitive Subdivision Plan" seven sheets dated 11/22/96,
revised on 2/26/01, Prepared by New England Engineering Services, Inc.
Reports Entitled
• Response letter dated February 26, 2001 prepared by Benjamin C. Osgood, Jr.
Current comments are in italics. Previous comments are screened.
Subdivision Requirements:
1. Section 3. C.) 3.) c.) A test pit is shown in the driginal detention pond area- Based
upon the information in New England Engineering Services letter, ground water is
located 2 to 3 feet below the surface. The new detention ponds are located in cut
areas ranging in depth from 8 to 12 feet. This could result in unstable slopes in the
detention basins. We anticipate that slope stability will be a concern. The Applicant,
may want to consider altematives to patching unstable slopes with iip rap. This is not
desired in residential sites.
101 Accord Park Drive 781 982-5400 l
Norwell, MA 02061-1685 Fax: 781 982-5490
Test Arts t►l?ieully. ,should be provided iii the )pit iiiit.- of they pi-opo house locations,.
and the detention basin on Lot 4.:1 ese teats shoidd be performed by a licensed sail
erahtritor ro indicate lii;;h gl citliirlwciter conditioii.s. In precious, .submissions it has
been that the seasonal welter table is appro iinatell- 10-incites below
grade.
No additional testing has been provided. As rioted above estimated high groundwater
Is within 10" of the suiface. The. design indiceltes.foundations beloir the high
grollndivater elevation. The plans and details indicrae folailrlation drains on each
house, which di.sch arae overland. The millinn ni cover over the proposed curtain
drains should be indicated. A slope stabilization and maintenance plan including
details of stabilization inethods should be provided
No Additional testing itiforination has been provided for the sn'ule within lot d. It is
our under.standirtg that es•tinta-ted high grounrhvater is within 10" o}'the existing
surface. Overall, the site regnires axtensh-e cut. Groutidwater is proposed to be
directed to the infiltrationliletention basin via curtain drains, faundarion drains or
overland f o from these pipes. The groundiv ater could contribicte eitensive flow to
the basin e)'eia during a non-stonil period. Constant flow from these grounehvater
.sources into the infiltration basin mai shorten the easeful life of the basin. The n1noff
from the .subdrain located on the east side of the slope (int . 170.00) should be
directed atiti a from the eastent abutter to be consistent with the hydrology catchment
area plaits. Care .should be taken during construction to assure the eastern abutter i:s
not inipacted from an increase of storm water onto their property.
The inininluin corer over the proposed curtain drain appears to be 30". The slope
.stabilization plait includes placing rip-rap in the areas of groundwater breakout, iritli
loran and seed covering the rip-resp. The DPIV should review and comment on the
slope stabilization method
A gravel drain has been added to the bottom of the infiltration basin. The. drain
appears to have adequate capacity to dissipate groundwater flow. We recommend
the DPW to comment on slope stabilization.
?. Section 3. C.) 3.) d.) See Drainage Issues below.
3_ Section 3. C.) 3.) k.) g.) Satisfactory•, roadway stationing has been added.
4. Section 3. C.) 3.:) k.) h.) Satisfactory, the tot plan has been corrected.
5. Section 3. C.) 3..) k.) j.) Satisfactory, The water main has been relocated and the
hydrant has been shown.
6. Section 3. C.) 3.) k.) k.) Satisfactory. the contours have been extended.
7. Section 3, C.) 3.) k.) l.) Satisfactory. the fol=iage line has been added to the drainage
plans.
2
N
8. Section 3. C.) 3.) k.) tn.) Previous correspondence recommended that test pits be
excavated within the proposers detention basin and at locations of major cuts in slopes
to determine the elevation of the eroundwater table. Reportedly, seasonal high water
will be as close as .10'- to the surface based on hand testing performed. This could
result in long term maintenance difficulty for the town due to groundwater breakout,
unstable slopes and difficulty maintaining vegetation. Subdrains should be located
upgrade of potential groundwater breakout on the cut slope, generally this is at or gear
the top of the slope. Swales to the catch basins should be more defined. There is
significant flow to these inlets in large storm events
The sirale details rise inconsistent with the plans. Comment remains.
Ae Swale detail has been modified to match theplans. 77re Swale pitch is 18% and it
is unclear thra it will not erode dice to high flow relociries.
The srrade detail has been modified The detail shows a 12" depth of rip -rap,
consisting of stone between 6" and 10''' in size. It should be noted that long term
aaaaintencuace drfculh- for the Town nagy result due to groundwater break-out,
unstable slopes and maintaining vegetation on the slopes..
9. Section 3. C.) 3.) k.) n.) We recommend that the existing drainage channel, which
was observed by us in the field, be indicated on the plans. This channel should also
be used in the drainage calculations for the flow path. This channel was located in the
slope and not in the field.
No fanTher comment.
10 Section 3.C.) 3.)k.)p.) The profile does not comply with all the .requirements of this
section. The proposed roadway grade should be indicated and the location of the
benchmark should be indicated on the plan. Existing sideline grades have not been
shown, elevations have not been labeled at the top and bottom of all even grades. 25'
intervals and on vertical curves. The stopping sight distance at the vertical curve
station 00+40 to 00+90 is inadequate for a speed of 30 miles per hour. Information is
still missing from the profile. Specifically, roadway grade is not indicated, sideline
grades have not been shown, elevations at 25 -foot intervals on vertical curves and
stopping sight distance is not in conformance with the requirements_ It is assumed
that a waiver Nvill be requested from the stopping sight distance requirement.
The plans hm•e been amended to include rocadi,•cay grades, side line grades, adegajate
vertical curve design and 25 foot elerraions inters°als at r•ertical Curve locations. A
sight distance study and reinediution plan has been pertonaaed and si4binatred. Nc)
f ofrther ronu tent.
11. Section 3. C.) 4.) Satisfactory
3
12. Section 7.) A. 3.) b..) There is insufficient data on the profile to determi=ne if the
leveling area is adequate.
Secy 10. Above
There appears to be a SD' leveling elrea with cr 21170 slope. This comment is
safi,cfactorfl.v addressed.
13. Section 7. D.) It is our understanding the Planning Board will decide whether a
sidewalk is required or a donation will be made to the sidewalk fund.
No jZ rlher COIMIrent.
14. Section 7. E.) 1.) Satisfactory, the street trees are shovvn on the pians. The PIanning
Board may require information on the type of tree to be planted. Trees should be
indicated outside of the right of %pati.
The proposed. street trees have been relocated outside of the Raw. Nofurther
15. Section 7. G.) 1.) Satisfactory, electric lines shown on the plans.
tb. Section 7. L.) 1.) Satisfactory. the proposed fire hydrant is shown.
17. Satisfactory, a north arro«• has been shown on the Locus plan.
18. Erosion control measures are shown on the plans. however, they should be cle-arly
labeled and/or shown on the legend. Erosion control measures should 'also be sho%,,,n
around catch basins and detention pond outlets. We recommend that a stabilized
construction enhance be provided and erosion control be installed along the Salem
Street right of way -
We recommend that a sates iiawy slope hispection. maintenance and stabilization
plata be submitted. A 1abilized cons_'rlrction entrance I= been indicated on the plans -
Erosion control h(is beelr provided throe how the thnit of work. No further conunent.
19. The proposed sub -drain locations should be shown on the plans and detailed. The
plans seem to indicate erasion control measures only. We understand the symbols on
the plans.
No further comment.
Drainage Issues:
20. Satisfactory, both Pre and Post construction drainage area plans have been submitted.
21. Satisfactory, runoff curve nunil.)ers now include meadow.
11
221. Satisfactory, [tic sheet low lengths used in. the "t -R-55 calculations etre now 100 feet or
less.
2:3. The comment on the outlet structure is no longer applicable.The inipact of existing
flow and pipe capacity in the Salem Street drainage s;•stem should be considered. It is
possible that the Salem Street systent is more restrictive than the proposed outlet
structure. This could result in offsite impacts. Outflows .from the proposed outlet
structure will enter the municipal drainage system for the 1(1 and 100 -year storms_
The existing municipal system ,shouICI be modeled For these storms. Con nlent remains.
The proposed flolr's and volumes to the e..list iig itiunicipcil Stormwcttc'.r s i,stent. are
reduced front existin, conditions. The proposed detention/infiltration basin should be
excavated to the elevation t)f, the underlying sandy soil and backfilled with similarly
pervious nuverial. The functionality of this basin is contingent upon sititahle soils at
the bottom of the basin.
A Rote has been added to sheet S> Sediment basin and ittfiltrationldetentton pond
detail stating all loans, .subsoil, fill or other deleterious material .shall be removed in.
the area of the basin bottom and replaced with clean sant. Top area with 4" loamy
sand., rak=e stnooth and seed. 7ypir. ally loant_i= sand has a lower permeability than
sand. We recommend AV te.sring to demonstrate compliance tvith the design be
required
A gravel drain has been added to the bottom of the infiltration basin. The drain
appears to have adequate capacity to dissipate groundivaterflow.
24. It is unclear if the proposed drainage channel will he located in the Salem Street right- .
of -way. The dimensions of the channel, as detailed, are inconsistent with the
overflow- ditch described in the drainage report. The overflow ditch does not appear
to be included in the drainage model. Capacity calculations should be included in the
drainage report to support the proposed design. The plans do not indicate a channel,
although a channel detail .is included in the report.
Tire rip -rap swales slunild be indicated as such on the plans_ These sivales ,should be
modeled for rel ocit}; and capacity. The reported sivale at Salem Street should be.
indicated and modeled.
The rip -rap swale detail was clarijhed. Repoitedl ti-. there is no swale e_t7sting or
proposed at Salem .Streel. The desi,;ti calculation for the level spreader should be
submitted. Existing spot grudes in the vicinity of the proposed level spreader should
be submitted.
Based on the new .spot elevations. the Jloit• front the detention basin appears to, floly
into Salem Street within a proposed depression. The proposed elevation at the
northeast property corner (Elev. 144.74) is higher than the northwesterly elevation of
143.67. The rim of the existing cutch basin located north-west Elf rh s area is elev.
144.29. Calculations_for the level lip spreadertire inchided with the letter response.
5
a
The detail avid plaits show a letzgih (j ftppr(rl'hnateh- -15'. The calculations use 31'.
The colculeations do not appear to be c.crosiStent with the plans and details.
Additional spot grades have been added to the grading plan and the flow from the
basin appears to flow to the double catch basins. Satisfactorily addressed.
25. The regulations require a catch basin to manhole alTangement. The plans indicate the
outlet from Pond 17 enters a catch basin. The outlet from this pond should discharge
into a'manhol.e. This design should be revised to comply with Town requirements.
Satisfactory.
No further comment.
26. The ultimate discharge of the closed stormwater system in Salem Street is not
described in the report. Calculations should show this system has the capacity for the
new flows. The intent of the design is to meet or reduce existing runoff rates. The
timing of this runoff to the street system and the additional runoff volume may itirpact
the existing system. If the capacity of Salem Street system is .restricted, the increase
in total runoff could result in offsite impacts. The Post -development runoff volume
entering the Salem Street drainage system will increase for all storms. The
Department of Public Works should be aware of this especially if the drainage system
is currently undersized. Volume calculations for the infiltration area should be
clarified in the report. In addition, we recommend that the infiltration system be
further detailed to indicate sections and elevations on the plans. The sample design in
the report indicates pipe outlets from each Infiltrator versus the design proposed. It is
unclear that the increased volume from development haus been accommodated in the
design. The report lists total runoff voluune pre and post, however, it is unclear where
the values for post development are in the report.
The proposed sub -surface detention Mesio has been redesigned as a surface
infiltration basin. It is unclear that the proposed Detention Basila .nit Lot 4 is located
above the groundwater table. In addition, the ultirnate discharge paint frons
Dere-ration Basila A-1 should be clarified, detailed ctndl modeled. A model.for this basin
should be provided and a satisfactory overflow should be desz.gned and indicated. -Tlw
bene on this basin shn dd be uvidened to $ feet
The grading for the shale area within Lot 4 will result iii the discharge of
grotar)divater to the stivale. The discharge point for basin A-1 has been clarified.
Please see comment #24 regarding the shot grades. The be)711 iridth has been
tividened to 8 -
.feet.
Spot grades have been provided. however it is unclear; based on the proposed spot
grades hois- or where the water will eater the Saler) Street drainage systeinfirom the
proposed irufilt)atiorr/dete)ttic'at bczsirr. The tearer appears to puddle between the
e�risting catch basin located northeast of the proposed entrance tend the proposed spot
elevulion of 144.74.
Satisfactorily addressed.
Col
Additional Comments
27. The proposed roadtv'ay will have a slope of 8 �..It is our understanding this issue was
discussed with the Planning Board and the change in grade was recommended.
No further comment.
28. The detention pontis do not provide an eniergency spillway. Calculations should
include routing of the I00 -year storm with a plugged outlet to assure the spilhvay is
adequately sized. Overflow from basins could damage homes as currently designed.
Spillways have been provided and have adequate capacity. Note that the design
.requires that. overflow spillways discharge to the street.
The impact Uf'this condition should be modeled cued indicated
See response t0 confluent 26.
29. The drainage design at the steep slope .may result in maintenance problems. The
calculated loft -year flows from subcatchment area 5 and 6 are 6.1 and 3.3 efs
respectively. This flow could result in scour at the bottom of the slope. Since the
swale is proposed to be located within the right-of-way, the Town will be responsible
for all maintenance associated with this swale. Details of these swales should be
included in the plans. Grate capacity calculations should also tv included in the
report to support the design and assure tlo«.' does not by-pass catch basins. Swales
have been eliminated and inlets provided. Grate capacity calculations have not been
prop: ided.
Mler capacities have been provided, hoii-ei-er each of'the inlets are unlikely to capture
the Ttldicated capacities. The calculations are based orf an acsutrned depth of flow.
AcmaI values should be uutilizcd.
Inlet capacity calculations have been modified to represent the actual flow depth
conditions. A pass has been indicated at catch basins 7&8, which is not consistent
With the model, ho-wever it is unlikel-- to have a significant iinipuct. No furthev
comment.
30. Detemion pond 12)'s missing the .174' contour on the uphill side. Satisfactory.
31. Detention pond 17 is missing the 162' contour on the uphill side. Satisfactory.
32. It is unclear where reach 8 is located. The calculations are not consistent with the
design in this area.
No f I(rther comment.
33. The area Treasured for subcatchment area 1 «vas 6.1 acres. The report uses 5.62. The
area should be double checked. Subcatchment areas 5. 6, 8, 13,and 14 were also not
consistent with our calculations and should be checked. Satisfactory. %--__-.
7
34. The curve number and areas should be checked for suhcatchment area 13. hood lawn
Frith D soil type :should have a CN = 61. mote that the assumption used results in a
more conservative design.
No further comment.
37. It is unclear if the existing house located in. subcatchment area 14 was included in the
calculations. The open space is described as good. however, a Citi of 69 was used.
We believe this should be 61. Note that the assumption used results in a more
conservative design.
Xo further colranent.
36. We recommend that an outlet structure with two openings be used on pond 17 Versus
the two pipes over each other.
The inlel stn acture to the infiltration basun has been nIodltied to include onlj : one pipe
and a FES. We recommend that the outlet apron be constructed of rip- rap for
erosion control.
The drainage basin ttrodel indicates an inflow of 15.88 CFS. It is unclear doer the
proposed 1.5 -inch infer pipe can accommodate this,loir. The pipe calculations' f tr the
140 -_near storm consist of the .same data as the 10 -year .storm. The 100 -year .stone
pipe calculations should be revised.
77ae 15" inlet pipe has been changed to 21 ". 77re 21 '' pipe with a slope Uf *l.8%
appeaf-s to htrt,e tuleellu7te calxuity. 77ae drairn line profile on sheet i shouhl be
upcttrted to reflect this change.
The plans have been revised, satisfactorily addressed
37. The sedimentation basin and check dam should be detailed
Details have been provided fi)r the check- dorm and sedimentation basin. No frcr tlaer
comment.
33. Contours are incomplete at the top of the slope on Lot 2.
Complete topography on L,crr 2 has been indicated. However, the topography at the'
north end (?f the.site ,should he indicated.
No further comment.
New comments dated October 4, 1999:
to The extent of vegetation renlo-val. which is -required foi- adequate site distance as per
the submitted study, should be indicated on the plans.
The limit (?f clearing has been, indicated on the pans. Nofifflflef-CD7,zlnent.
0
2, Section 7.}N.)4.) The proposed double catch basin. should be clearly indicated on the
Plans.
The dorthle catch basins have been indiccued on the plans. h%o fi rther coinitrerit.
3. The ultimate discharee point for the proposed footing drains, sub -drains and curtain
drains should be indicated and modeled. A trench drain or Swale should be
constructed at the top of the proposed slope, on the southern end of the site.
The proposed curtain drains..footing drains rind sub -drains would discharge
groundiraler- and could residt in erosion as designed.
A foundtaron drama outlet detail has been added to sheet 5. S'atis/actorily addressed.
4. The overflow spillway for Detention Basin Al is indicated as a sharp crested weir and
modeled as a broad crested weir.
The model has been modified to represent the prolxosed conditions. leo further
comment.
S. Based on input at public hearings the easterly abutter expressed concern relative to
groundwater influence on their basement. The house should be indicated on the plans.
A curtain drain is indicated adjacent to this property. The capacity of this drain during
storm events should be evaluated.
The curtain drtrrn tit the eastern property line has been trande.led. however the
proposed infiltration area would include all bottom area below the orrtiet invert. 1V6
f rrther comment.
We appreciate the opportunity to assist the Planning Board on this project and hope that
this information is sufficient for your needs. We would be pleased to meet with the
Board or the design engineer to discuss this project at your convenience. If you have any
questions please do not hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours,
COLER & COLANTONIO, INC.
CC4'e'�
-
John C. Chessia, P.E.
cc: Benjamin C. Osgood, Jr., President
Devra Bailen Esq.
a
J
Division of Public Works
'384 Osgood Street
North Andover, MA 01845
Phone 978-685-0950
Fax 978-688-9573
To: Heidi Griffin, Town Planner
From: James Rand, Jr., Director Of
CC: J. William Hmurciak, PE, Dire
Date: June 4, 2001
Re: Red Gate Pasture
Engineer
Plan reviewed "Definitive Plan RED GATE PASTURE located in North Andover, MASS"
revised 2/26/01
The March 20, 2001 memo from Coler & Colantonio on page 2, 5" paragraph references
the DPW on slope stabilization. The engineer has proposed what appears to be a
satisfactory solution to the slope stabilization and we have no additional comment.
If the revised plan addresses the issues stated in my memo dated January 46, 1998, the
plan is satisfactory to us.
CNEMOS HEIDIG 2001/REDGATE 6401
0 Page 1