HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-08-16 Stormwater Correspondence NFUSON
Town of 120 Win Street, 01,945
4
DirectorKARENHY' * . NORTH ANDOVER
CONSERVATION D24MMN OF
HFA17
PLANNING PLANNING OM TMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
June 20, 1994
Mike Rosatti
ar hiond Associates,
1i Montvale Ave.
Dear Mile
As per our conversation an this date, you have been awarded the
contract to review the drainage/flood control issues. eurreundin
the proposed ogee Drug at #1325 Turnpike. The amount of the,
contract is, $750. 0 + . The scope e'1 'work includes responding to the
specific concerns addressed by MerrimackCollege in the documents,
detailed below and advising us if the proposed project will create,
a flooding problem and/or exacerbate an existing one.
'Enclosed for your review are the following documents:
1. Notice of Intent dated May 12 ,E 19 .
. Hydrologic Analysis prepared by CDW Consultants.,
The following have been previously forwarded to you;:
1. Letter from Merrimack College to the Conservation Commission
dated June 6, 1994 .
2 . Letter from CDW to Conservation Commission dated June 9 , 1994 .
3 . Letter from errimack College to Conservation Commissian dated
June 17 , 19,9,4 . Please disregard items 02 , 5, 6, 9 , 10 ei ee
these de net pertain to drainage and flood control .
Please have your review completed by Juune 30, 1994 .,
sincerely,
Richard P. Doucette
Conservation Administrator
CC Karen Nelson, Director of Planning
Kathleen Bradley, Planner
Tom Kennedy, applicant
Scot Cote, Morrimack College
' • '. . '1. s;�M1.. 'x a,cf n.`,a.`:b:-.}�J:]a+.�✓''.. r.. .
� n&
Mar- S. 1 .
June 29. 1994
% 4f - { 1 lr[1 pc uccttc
Consen'zitic rl r�isti for
c rth Afidovcr onser ation oMruissioll
i QNybin Street {)1
l �opo c i C co € , 525 Tum*e Poad
rAcar ichal '
Pursuanttc� }•our rcqucst
. c have e to ed the 01i() jns� infoiTnatior, regar&ng the subject
proposal,
notice cif Intent d.1ted jj l?. 1994
* an
a1 s s anal draimj e calculations preparcd by C�DNV
Hvdrolortlscai
Consuitants.
orri 'Merrimack olle{}c to the on issi(m clued torte , 19 4
� letter fr
* from CDW COnsulu)ts to the oLntni.ssinn dated June 9. 199
letter
1994.
fir
m ' ferrirr�a C r lleQe to the Conlrnission dated June 17.
letter
' to a review of tl�e site 1��'drolo"� t��e� and a te�'ie.��� of on site drainage
01xr rc.�ie�.� is di��i�led �
design- Our 00r lcnts arc as fajlo��s:
ste d� l02: act. if ��ri '. 'he
aro
at
-nie rnaun issue
betty -en the applical-kt t cl the cattle{}c ccri� }�d sit�oFto h pcc�Ile�c
act cif tltie de �eioptncM the applicant's gmeee 1 s core cte
praposed cic..'elaptncnt ��-i11 ha�c ors the -ainage o � � sear storm et'erits.
ropern' lctei�nine the p sed cnnstruczion
Zd c)st dc��clapmcj3t lIroi€ gicat�nal �sls des{it of the propo
a pre 4 p
T results of tic co iriee caiculatian arc that. c o t}-i rate or Volume of
there \�zll t}ot be r increase in either the Peak rate or �alu t o�tno foam t o
i-edevelopsIcnt rates. The rcasan ft1t there "vill not be area calculations
p e °e10 i lent s5 due to the fact that there vvi111 a decrease to t1 e
articular d p endentl-r checked the nn ' .
runat�` for this }�' er�rious �srea.
amont Of p elous surface. we dep ro �matei 4.000 sf in imp
and t concur that there �01 be a deuce of app
62 ��ii4t1k1:lyk' : }'+'91k]k•
~lfYSl' i
diktat ala�Ys. ?IA 3Y1 1#5{}
s617) 3# fs1'21
V.r j 61,1-t3R-9654
Marchionda
L nghwerinL.rnki
We also reviewed the calculations to determine if the applicant's engineer had understated the
runoff fronj the roof as had been qumfloned by the college. The appli=fs cnonecr has
wffe.c:tiv included the roof area in the hydrology calculations. SpecificAy, no reduction
intensity, of the r(x)f area eras made in computing the pre and post development analysis.
The question the college had raised was re2wding the rainfall intemity that was used in sizing
die on site drain lines. To reflect the capacity of the roof drainage systerm the eftc6hcer had
reduced the inicnsity to coincide vdth the roof drainage's capacity. We agee NNith die
applicant's engineer that Ns appmach is a reasonable way to compote the flow which needs
to be convcy d by the on site drainage systern.
Qn_site Drai e
Although we agree with the applicmit's engineer reL rding the overra11 site hydrolo, we do
have a concern VOth the desist of the on site drainage system. The outlet for the drain lines
are proposed in a low a3r,-,a to be created at the southerly end of the site. The bottom of this
low area and the invert elevations of the drain lines are proposed to lie 2 feet louver than the
vvetlanas made. This creates several concerm,
In order for any drainage to f o%v out of the drainage system and into the wctlaiads. the water
needs to pond to the top of the berfn at elcvation 94. Tl s submer2es the drainage inverts by
feet. Therefore the drain lines will not have the capacities as indicated in the calculations.
The capacities in the calculations assume that the ends of the drain lines are expericncing free
floe. wnditions, not submerged.
Also. it is possible that the bottom of Lhe low area Mll intercept the ground 'water level
because it is ? feet below the wetlands €--&de. If so, there will be water back, f m%ing into the
drainage systeEn during a si ificant potion crf the ycar. Wien the drainage system is
stlbrnergcd in addition to reducing the capacity, sediments can build up in the Structures and
pipes relatively quicidy reducing the capacities every further.
It is our opinion. that the design of die on site drainage and site g ding should be revised to
raise the outlet elevation of the drainage systtrn above the wetlands grade.
If there are any questions or if any additional assistance is necessary, please do not hesitate to
call
Marchnda & Assoc es. Inc.
1
i HIM PE
President
Merr.lumack
C 0 L L E G E
.............--
North Andover, Mwmachusetts 01845, 309-4t 7111
�� _�
IN 1.!
0 f f icc-apt S 1)a c L 1 11 a tin i nf, a ki d Project M anage in ent
P '.
July 11, 1994
Mr- Richard Nard-ella, Chairman, Norffi Andover Planning Board
MT-Cuorge Reich, Chairman, ComF,-rvation C()rnmisskm
Tuwn of North Andover
120 Main St.
North AndOVffr Ma- 01845
Di�ar Mr. Nardella & Mr. Reich:
On We�tnr,,Wny,July 6, 1994 the Conservation Curnrni5siun'5 piAilic hearing regarding thu
05cc} Drug project can tinnud- Thc hearing openud %vi t h discu 55i ons concerning the req)unse I ol to
i ro n) .%l a rchi onda k, Associates to t 11 L-(-0 1112 Ili SSi011 regard in Me rri ma&'w(OTIC.Orn s about the
proposed project drainage. N1 r. Ma rc hi o n d a's ]et ter Indicated that th u pro rn,ed p roj42ct %VG Ll:I d
nat I i ke-1 y have a n y impact on Merri 5na ck Col loge or i vor sen the existing problems. However,
Mr. LM a rch ionda did i nd i ca to that the on si to drainage system t15 d CSi gned wo U I d riot perfom-L in
accordance with the past devolopinent cakLthlfiOnS, due in part. to (lie proposed clevation of the
outlet of the drain limes.
Thk3 applicant's de-gign engineer WaS d(arlV Mad(' Of thiS CDMIWO]l prior to this
MCOIingr for tho applicant 5iibmitted a roviwd plan. for the Commission's review immediltrAy
f0lj0%Nrijjg MT- Mk rC hio d r. i[oil. The Commission i lid i ca t ed that a derision tvv u Id be
eini non t within the next 21 days conce r2i i n S this project, pe n d i n S f 11 rt her study by the
Commission and a reaction from the Planning Board. L%7errltnack College respects and
ii Tid or-,ta nd,; the in vn1vr,,d in thQ. review of:env projE�c t and we d*not i nw nd to co nip]i ca to
the process for the applicant or ffic Tuwn of North AnduvcT- Holvuve.r, the C-ciflege still
belic%rcs that the entire water-'111ed ATQZI indusive (if the propv%qud projuct Lifte i2i in trouble and
the prohlorns associated ivith this awii must be fully consifkrvd- While the delibcradons
rL%Irdint, this PrOjOCt COFItiTIUP, MOrrinlA(k College would requem thu Conservation Commission
and the Planning Board L, seriously ct in Lrid or t h e to I lo ivill itiSuo -
First, the -,,u bmis s iun u I a revised d ra i na go p[an- As mentioned, t h e a ppi j cart t ha
s ki bu-6 t ted a rev i LLJ d rain a gi. plan t�a,,<xl v n the concerns i rid i ca ted wi I hi n t h o roport by
Ma rchi c mda & Assc wia tes- Merrimac k Col I ege wo U I d ruqu eti t the' up pur t1i ni ty to rev i ew the'
revised plans and also hehovi.x tk pkins Lhouid bu eva[uat4,j by -Aarchiun(ia & Associatcs.
We sore' v o ncerri ed that the revi-1i 0 rl'%,' nl:l d(. Tl):IV have' cha n ged t h uriginal hydrulogical
analysis and calculations submitted,
r_ €6chard Narde€la, Chziirr an, North Andover Planning B04rd
Mr_George Reich, fr�irman, Conservation Commiz-5jon
0"'(0 Drug Project
Ji;€v 11, 1994
Page 2,
econd, the IV3Wr 5h('d iMM, T1te fellowship !�}�t' SChCIC1€, C hestn;tk {are[E� offi c3 drlc , nci
Hi]]side Road, abuiit 17 acres in tota], coinprises the %vator Shed circa #hat flows through a
c u I%vrt pipe under €fit, 125 to (he hiorrirrta(']c ColIcge campais. The poin( of concentration of this
entire ovawr shcKl arCa is the site of the proposed project_ Clrearly, t% major flooding problem
currenily exists Mthiri this area and thu gOUrce of thr. pr(blems are riot diificu€t to determine if
a 1)rief study of the do%-elop men t %within the entire water shed area is ovaIuoted_ Pease
an&rstarid the Co€Iege's concerns, the proposed pToject niay not iiicrE,]x-, the voluEnc 01 wAter
f€cux hrk;;vpver, t€)e }project %vili do rtot11ing to ioiprove what is an intoIcrab]e condition.
0n a nuT-nber of occasions, M r. D.L)ucet#t thL Town Conservation Ad ininistrator has staEud
that as tong a i the t'ximing prob]em is not made ant' worse, the prUFect 5110UId :got be questioned.
.Merrimack College is nOt ir1 al'reOnlcilt With this stt3tcrn(}t)t or phi€{rst}phv anci belje�res that
thu T(nvn of North Andover should work towards corrccting exis#iz pr€sblc'n15 as Well as
preventing future problems.. At surile poinit a pro-active position must he taken to as�Eire,any and
all ffitnnT . development will riot only be appropriate to the chararter of the ;UM bkrt 1011 a150
add sotne value to the community in the form of infra�itmcture irtiprovcmenls or otherwise.
For ,years many CorrErrtttilitics have mandated community lased improl emunts for
rotzdw'IYs, in11()1k finfiltr;1t c rE fur drainaSe and sowage Enitign fi on and broad based fees b yond
the norma€ application and building perinit fees_ N1erriinack Col IL g(- tjndcrs tan ds that
€ ennedv tievOopmerE# is not the cause of the probk€ ms that exist in tins area, howe• ,er, the
pmb]ems do exist and an opporttlali#v iL,before us to wurk Iu wards aii appropriate resolution for
e%-42n+otic involvcd, I the Town contin ues #cr permit further devQlup men t wi thotat consi&ration
of resolving problems, when will the probli?rns he Tc?Lo€vvd?
Third, the proposed pTojuct design. To date tho planning boy ird draw requested Kennedy
Deg-clopmcn# to re%•ise the architectural plan-, to hr- rr 4im sensitive tci thu character of the area,
On July 19, 1994, Kennedy Development will present what. is to tie a filial revibiun for this
project that may include a compktely different l)rti€diet; configuration than the original
propo&il. if this is in fact the case, should thE, Co Commist;iL,n reserve a d-ecis1on on
this project Earth] a fu1] revicw of any Granges iE0 the plan acc c%-,31natcd? Any chattges %Vithitt
the plaits could result in a number of si to and conditional changes thi t could liaee an impact in
one forte or another,
'l•he rerlLEest fro in the Planning Board for a revision of the proposed b Ll i I di 11g deli€;n iS
centered around the configuratsnn trf a box 1ilkc structcire tlia t iil the opinion ref the Planning
Board, may not be appropriate for thu area_ During the last Planning Board meeting, fir. John
Simons in icatcd that he belicved a favr�rab€e recormm ndation of thu rc-zoning of t€le Bible
School property was based on a nuinber of(.ondibr)n!j that werc not being nict under th.e proposed
P1a11, 111 light of N1n Sirnans concerns, t h-,IVO researched the mi€utes of the P1ann[ng Boards
ori iEial decisioil regardhig the re-?r)ning of this pruperty_ At0c€red for your rcviex you wi€€
find a number of docu€sicnis that will supper# Ir_Sim011s concerns- The documents include;
■ A copy of the minutes of the P]M111i:Ig 1iozrds Nib]ic HearirEg on the re-zoniE4g 0f the
Fellowship Bible Property,
+ A ]et ter of intent fro en t€ie RubiTIC) Dc,vc.€4iprnent Company dated April 27, 1990.
Mr. Richard Nardella, Chairman, North Andover Planning Board
Mr.George Reich,Chairman,Conservation Cornmission
Osco Drug Project
July 11, 1994
Page 3'
• A copy of the urigina[ purchase and sales agrcemen.t For the Fellowship €3ibk� property.
• A copy of the Deed ffir thu property rcflectil.g the covenants of the premises dated
Decomber 27, 1965.
■ A copy of the site plan. en(it]ed Dell nwship bible Church Site, prepared by the Rubino
€1 viAopmeElt Company prese3.ted to the Planning Board 01. April 25, 1990_
Of particular interest within a I I the attached documun€aIion is the letter from Rubino
FX-v.elopEnestt Company to the P1aiiiiing Board dated Apr i€ 27, 1990, paragraph # 3. , sL-1ting.
3. We Itczve agreed 7vith ryon thrnt in the event that the to loll ttxretitng votes it; favor
of the n zoPiin , the proposal that zve bring back to [ire Fla nniug Roard for site
rcviezo it;ill be substrrintirzfly bf the fora that was presented to you at yoitr in cc tin
of April 25, itrcirfditng the r�rc_hi tee I'S and engitrecr's retrdertrrgs of the site a nd
bifi rfIin s. You sdrrled very clearly that in tip even t thot we did trot foItozv that
rtnstriocfioot, oiivpInus woiiId 1;e rejected, We aecep( that. Addit ion a11y, itr the
evens I h a I a third party shoitlit 1)uy the #xr perty, we zviii, era detrzit, expIai n tires
to this Baird parthj tyre rrbove iigrez}mont Land inakv it part Of airy purchtese raid srnie
Clearly, if the Planning Board reviu%v5 thE' pniposed 0sco Dmg }plan against the plan
originally submitted for re-zoning, yun %vili notice two very different proposals. Of p3rticUlar
concern under the Osco Plan is the i€s ten turn to demIish thy:existing church building_ UndET tine
original proposial, the church building, was to be renovated ts) support a village style retail
center. Additionally, Elie original plans does not include any curb cut on to RL 125 as proposed
wi thin the Osco Plan.
In condusion, Merdmack Col€ege has a auniber of concerns regarding the propc.kd Osco Drug
project and again., we w nuId request voiEr fall consideration of the concerns presented_ As
mentioned in pre vlaus letters to bath the I 11a n n i ng fiord and the Con scrva(ion C:omntissiun,
I'd errin.acic College i5 not anti-duv lc+per en t and we support projects that are beneficial to the
entire cornununity. Unfortunately, ivv hc-1iE!ve that the projr�ct as proposed w i I I not bu bc-nc.ficial
to thy:community of N orth ArLdover.
inhere]v
Scent A. Cote
Director of rypat`o € honing fir
Projoc't Management
SAC f hs
Attachments
cc. Mr. Jol.i. Paltt.ucci, Vice Prtsidi nt, N4crrimack Cullegu
N1r. Richard Doucette, North Andover Conservation C:omrt.ission
. Memorandum
To: Bill Enurciak
From: Kathleen Bradley Colwell 'Y�6r
Date: July 14 . 1994
Re: OSco Drug - Drainage Issues
Please review the attached material and let me know if you Bee
any issues that should be addressed by the Planning Board in
£elation to drainage. The conservation Con-mission required
outside review by Ka£chionda of the initial drainage
calculations. Poasibly the Board could require some form of
mitigation for groundwater infiltration similar to what is
required of subdivisions. Let me know b7 the July 19 meeting.
Thanks !
KAREN H.P. NELSON I rTown of 10 Main Strcer, 01845
NORTH Al I} ER (` )
DFViS30N(IF
PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
August 16, 1994
-Fs. Joyce Bradshaw,
Town Clerk
120 Main street
Forth Andover, SSA 01945
Re : Site Plea Review
525 Turnpike Street
Osco Drug
Dear Ms. Bradshaw
The North Andover Planning Board held a public hearing on June
7 , 1994 , in the Senior Center behind the Town Building, upon the
application of Kennedy Development Group, Inc. , 500 Broadway,
Everett, CIA, requesting Site Plan approval. under Section 8 . 3 of the
North Andover Zoning Bylaw. The legal notice was duly advertised
in the Nox7th Andover Citiz-en on May 18 and May 25, 1994 and all
parties of interest were properly notified. The following members
were present: Richard Nardella, Chairman, Joseph Mahoney, Vice
Chairman, Richard Rowen, Clerk, John Buttons and Jahn Daghlia-a.
Mr. Rowen read the legal notice to open the public hearing.
Mr. Rowers road a letter from Mer 7imack college, with concerns abort
drainage. A memo was Feed regarding a phone conversation with
Marian Drive neighbors, concerns about traffic, aesthetics -
gateway to North Andover.
Mr. Thomas Kennedy, president of Kennedy Development Group,
Inc. , was present.
Mr. William Scully, McDonoi.�gh and Scully, was present to
address traffic issues.
generating 1 traffic from what was initially proposed
because no Boston Chicken
worked with Masi Highway in creating traffic plan
115 midway trip hours
130 afternoon peek hours
2 vehicies per minute
80% of traffic to Route 114 0% of traffic to Route 125
not making traffic issues any gorse than they currently
are
two lane exit drive on Route 114 - 40 turd left onto
Route 114