HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-12-07 Engineer Review SPR Transportation
Lalid Developutestit
Environmental
4j"Iffi.11141AU01-1�,111TIOV41timill O'kergy C I ing resah's fi)l aar c kunis and blemw6k fur rmir aminrumifies
November 3Q,20M
Rf4. (M716.25
Ms. I leich A. Gri IF fin
Tou,n Plariner
COMMUnity Development &Services
Town of North Andlover
27 Charles Street
1'�orth.Andover, MA 61,645,
Rc Florist Shop .Racifity
Sit
e' p hu.1 Keview
North Andover, MA
Hvidi,
ValAOIS'Se I'langen Brustlhi,InC. 'VF'TB)hrJS received written response lettersan,d vivious
olli,er documen la lion.from Merrimack Enghwering Services, Inc. iri response fo-tour
t"'Ilgil-lecring Revic'm for fl-kcabove rp,ftnrcnccd project, it appears that all of VHB's
cornments have been adeqUately addressed and V HlYs concern-9 in this matter have bream
safigfied., No furffier engineeritig review is required at this fimc.
If you have ariy questionsor concerns, please call meaL YOUr convienence.,
Very truly yours,
VANASSE HANGEN BRUSTLINr f INC.
Tityriothy B. NIcIntosh,P.E.
Senior rroject Engineer—Higiriwa Y &Mu n icip a] En gineeri n g
CC Anthony Donato,P.E —Merrimack Engineering
I(III M11II)LA StrIA
post Officu Box 91151
Wo tertown, Massat i iuse I t 02 4 71-9 11.51
TAMMGI(A& 61Z924.1770 im FAX 617.924-2.28�(A
emaIIII: hifi)&Ovhh.ceam
leowwxhb,com
TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER PLANNJNG BOARD
ENGINEERING REVIEW OF SITE PLAN/SPECIAL PERMIT
FOR CONFORMANCE WITHTHE'roWN OF NORTH ANDOVER.
ZONING BYLAW & STANDARD ENGINEERING PRACTICE
Site Plan Title: Florist Shop Faciliky VHB No.: 06716,25
Locatims, 1292 Osgood Street
Owner: Daniel &Joanne Forgema, 1292 Osgood Street., North Andover, MA
0 1845
Aliplicant: Daniel &Jmnne Forgetta, 1292 Osgmd'Streei, North Andover, M.A
01845
Applicant's Engineer: Merrimack Engineering Services,, 66 11cark Street, Andover, MA 0 18 10
Plant Date: 10-06-00 Review Date: 1.1-07-00
TI'le A,pp;hcant subtnitted pla nos and ductnuents to V.1113, for review on Ooober 13, 20010., The site
Plan suhniission was rcviewc(l fair,co�nforn.iance to the apprnpr.iatesections of the 1.9172 Town of
North Andover Zoning Bylaw reprinted in 19,98 and standard engineering pr.,acticu. 'I"he
following C'01111m nts mote non-confori-nance,with specific sectiong, and questionsluornments on
the proposrA des,jgni�,
1) Sectiort 8.3.5.c :This section requires that all plans bc signed and sta raped. 1'he proposed
landscape/ lighting plan and preliminary building floic)r I elevation phan have not been signed
and slarriped.
'2) The following infartnation is required by Seetion 8.15 and VJJB offers, the following
conill'y'l�('111ts,
a) EASEMENT1 S/LE,(jA.LCoND,ITIONS�-.� VHR assumes thm there are no easeme�n:ts or
legal encumbrances on the property that may p;Mma or place conclitilons, on the proposed
development. 1"he Applicant should verify flails.,
b), STORMWATFR DRAINAGE/DRAINAGE BASIN STUDY-, See comalents bolow
under the item ;3) Drainage Revitw.
BUrLDING LOCATIOM VHB reconmierids, that overall height in f6et and gross floor
area in squ,are feet of proposed.florist shop Neshowrl o.n the plans,.
There appears to he a discmpancy with the labeling of the floor elevations on the
Grading Plan. Them are three abbreviations (F.F., F.F. and G,F) which VHB assurnes,
stand for top floor,, first floor and ground floor, respectively, Tbi^ Applicant should
review annul Confirm tile elevations shown with these abbroviations,
d") LOCATION OF SIGNS: V11B, suggests that tint:Applic."Int provide,details of the
proposed sign on the site plans. T'hodemils should include,the dimensions xxi materials
to be used for the proposed sign.,
(a I
repotL doe
,t2:) LION ITING FACTLITEES-, The landscape plan shows a layout of propused fighting for
the site and the Applicant hits,provided as catalogue cut frorni Spatilding Lighting, Inc.
However, it is,not clear what clirection,and degree of illuminalion has been proposed.
"I he should clarify.
f) TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY This section,requires that a traffic impact study be
conducted to assess,the expected traffie impacts based upon the proPased, development.
'I'he Applicant has requested as waiver from this section. VI III suggests that III is waiver
nIay be granted,for this location based on the following reasons:
* The Applicant states that the proposed flofist shop,development is,a relocation of an
existing florist shop located on Osgood Sired, aprproxiniately 1,M0 fect south of the
proposed site.. Further,the Applicant states that no increase in traffic denIand or
change in the niumber of etnployces is expected..
0 A comprelreasive traffic finpactstudy has heericonducted for the proposed Endicott:
Phan devefopnIent by Vanasse & Associates, Inc. (Wed Attgust 8, 2000. The
proposed D'idicutt Plaza will be located in the area where,the existing florist shap is,
currently located.,
g) COMMONWRALTH REVIEW- The site plans indicate that.proposed work will be
performed withinj the layout of Osgood Street (Route 125), Since Clsgood Street i('Rowe
125) is define(I as State Highway, au State Highway Access Pernift Nvill be required from
the Massachusetts Higinvay Depzirtment(:MHi)),. It is unclear whether the Applicant has
submitted the State Highway Access Permit to,M I ID, If a pi,-rmil has been prepared, the
Applicant should fbrward as uopy to .,
3), DRAINAGE' REVIEW VHB has reviewed the drainage design and calenlations., The
proposed drainage drsign is a,closcd drainage system that includes catch basins, drain
manholles, a trench dr-ain 3tld as detention basin,. VHB offers the following coniments
regarding,the proposed drainage desigm,,
a), There appears to be as d i screpancy between the su tni nary t a ble and the Hyd rocad
jl)rintows regarding the post-development peak discharge rate of reniaining site overflo,w
for the 2-year storm. The peak discharge rate should read 2.30 cubic feet per second
(cfs) rather than 2.03 cfs. Therefore,the corril')ined post-development peak dischar'W nate
for the 2-year storm should be 1109 cfg, which is,greater than the pre-development peak
discharge rate of 2. 2 cfs. The Applicant sbould address this,discrepancy and revise the,
drainage design asneciessary.
b) The site plans shoiw (lie proposed dischargeontlet located on, the west side,of the site.
V 1:113 assumes that true proposed rtinuff will flow overland westerly toward the Lawrence
Municipal Airport. VHB rcu~omrnends that the Applicant submit as narrative.describing
wbere tbia,proposed rurroff flows and assess any plotential impacts of the overland flow to
downst rea In properties.
c) The proposed detention pond cannot be adequately reviewed becau.se no grourld wmer
elevation data has beeii provided at 1hat loct'dion. VHB, recornrnie rids that tile Applicant
obtainat least one (1), soil boring or observation hole to deterniftic the elevation of the
groundwater at the proposed detention pond. Without this data, it is not clear whellier the
detention pond will function as designed.
d) If there will be standing water in the proposed detention basin for ari extended period of
time, VIJB recornmends, that a fence be provided around the,perhimer of the detention
basin wilh ;an a000ss gate for maintenance.
e) The drainage repo ft does not includo pipe sizing calculation,s. These calculations are
necessary to deterinine whether the proposed pipes are properly rind and have enough
capacity to,handle the� volutrw,of's lormwater., The Applicant has subinitled, Hydrocad
prii,itouts f6r the drain pipes and the intent of these printouts is tositow the capacity of
the pipes by using the Soil.Conservation Service (SCS) method. VHB recoinniends that
the Rationalrnohod be, used for pipe.sizing purPose."',
f), VHB reconimends that a detail of the proposed trench drain manufactured by ER Shea
be shown on the detail sheet,
S) Larger diarricier draiti manholes may be required when M()rl than fOLIX drain pipes
enter/exit as inanbole. The pl-ans should include provisions for largcr diameter manholes,
4), STANDARD ENGINEE RING PRACTICE VIIB has reviewed thusite plans for
coflforniance to standard engineering practices. The pirpose is to document the engineering
andpotendall ccmstruction issLies associated with the project, VHB offers the following
COMEW111ts relative to vehictilar safety, pedestrian safetyand p(Aenfial.construction issues;
a), VHB recommends that existing septic; systcm for the existing building be shawl] on the
plains. The.proximity of the existing re,sjdencc, to tht proposed development warrants this,
request and will ensure no, impacts to thic, oxisfing septic System.
b) The existing stone wall appears to conflict with the proposed soutbern access, drive.
VHB, reconunend%that thte plins iridicate that the conflicted stone:wall will bo removed,.
c) Thj,plans show one (1) wheelchair ramp location on, the south side of the proposed
building, VHB suggesis that as second wheelchair ramp location be,considered, pos,sibly
oj,i this northeast side of the building. This second wheetchair ramp location would be
convenie,ni,for as handicap person that might he forced to park- in the parking area to the
north of the proposed building.
(1) The wheelchair ramp detail does not rnect AD A requirements regarding level landing
area slope. The recommended lev(,] landing are-,,x slope should be 15%, Also, as typical
cross slope 2% max.),for proposi�d cepnem concrete sidewalk should be shown[ on the
sidewalk detail.
e) VHB recomimends llha.t pavement markings and appropriate signage(e.g., stop signN, 110
paiki ng signs„ etc.,) be provided on the site p I ans,
f), VHB recommends that as saw-cut fine be, shown.on the plans to in6cate ffie limit of work
at the Osgood Street(R outc 125).
g), The detail entitled "Typical Class B Trench Detail" calls fbr sand and crushed store
backfill for proposed water and sewer lines, respectively. VHB recommends proposing
gravel borrow backfill.
(D 3,
r rtdw
h) VHB recornmends that aver6cal grankc curbing con structiondetail be providedon th�c
Plans.
i) The proposed hondi,"p sign shown on the Lai youtwid Grading Plan must hc relocated
outs,kic of the proposed wheelch air ramp area.
It is,rccornmended that the applicant provide WRITTEN RESPONSES to the issues and
comments contained herein-
Revi'vwed by,
Danny H. Wong, E.I.T.
Civil.Enginver - Highway and Municipal Engineering
Tirnothy ., McIntosh, P.H.,
Senior Project Engineer—.Highway and Municipal F-�nginccring
(a 4
urporimW,
MERRIMACK ENGINEERING SERVICK INC.
F'€ OI-ESS€ONAL ENGINEERS • LAND SURVEYORS + PLANNERS
65 PARK STREET •ANDCWLR.MNZ AC:HUSLTTS 4k910 -TEL(918)47b-.5555.373-5721 +TAX(978)47Er 1448-F-1AX merr$ng�[�nF,��m
November 13,2000
Alison 1&scaT'beasr,C habpefson
'Town ofhlotilt Andover FtECENMIJ
111anOng 13oard
27 Charles Street MV 140
North Andover,MA 01845
RL: florist Shop Facility l' i{Tv AWOVE8 -
1)artieE and Joan��e Forgetiu
1292 ClVood Street(haute 125)
North Andover, MA 01845
(978)692-3885
Deaf Ms. Woarbeau:
Rtgarding the above referenced project,we offer the following fesponsos to review Wmillenh for tine
project plans dated October 6, 2000, M will bring a act of the revised ftwh�gs to the November 14
pabljo hearin and will be happy to answer any questium y(w.or any m"nber of the board, may have.
rRasJrcrasa fo Tow#Planner eolr weids hi a leffer dated Noventher 2,2000:
xi l; Signage is proposed aloug the$ontage but a more deWIM signage piml needs to be provided,
14FSPONNE,-Details of ilia proposed signing have scot bee determined as ofyct, however signing will N
designed tie conform to the Towit of North Andover Zordrtg guidelines, Final diDsign of ilia proposed sin
will be providiDd to t lie board for approval_
Xill:The erigimu sho>dd supply site distances when taking a left turn out of Route 125.
!`ft�WONSE_ Field mewwminenf at the site has deteEmined tbo site distance to bo grcater than 200€eet.
Accrual site distances for both propo&W let and right turns out of tip site bss beers detemlinod as
appvoxhualy 275-325 feet.
The 2 proposed orb cults will iquh7e,permits from the MA lighway Dep$Ttinent. A copy of the
appkalian shmild be supplied to the Planning Board.
RESf'ONSK' Ow origin intent was to apply for State Highway Access after Pl"ng board review,
however we have completed ilia application and plan(dated l 000)and will forward copies to the
Mining Board end VHB for review.
Responsea so VUB retni w commeno{leoer da od 11I7100).
COARVMW:2a: The applicant sisould verify diet there am no a emmts or legA encumbrances on the
property that map prevent or place cordtions on the proposed propeily.
RESP(]NV. Tbafe aru no emments oT lege 4 esrNmbr=eLs on the sight,
C014i1w++iENT: 2e. VHB recommends that the overall h6ght hk feet and gross floor area N aware feet of
proposed florist shop be shown ork the plam-
ItWONS& lavt consplied.
COMMENT:2c(cant-); There appears to be a disctepancy with the labeling oftlae floor elevations on tiro
grading plea- There are three abbreviations(f-F-, F.F. and G.F.)which Vllfi assunws to stand for top
lour, first door, and ground floor,restively.
ItF'VON E. F,V,, T.F Cx-F- stud for fl33t floor, top of fouadation,and game fluoT. These abbreviations
have been added to the hst of abhrevim ions ou sheet one to dimivate any conf ision-
CONEMENT,2d- VHB suggests that the applicant provide details of dw proposed sign on the sight plans-
RESFONSE: Dc ails of the proposed signing have riot been deternined as of yet,ho►wver silpang will be
designe4 to confonn to the Tierwn oFNorth Andover Zwgng lainal dexiga iDf the proposed sign
will I.re provided to the board for approval.
CONfiME T' 2e; The landscape plan shows a layout of proposed iiglniigg For the site and the applicant has
provided a catalogue cut from Spaulding Lighting, Inc. However, it is not C.le41r what direetinm and degree
ofitlumination has been proposed-
F..8NNS '_ Our opinion is that tk light plat is sufficient, however additional information Cati be
provided at the fequag ofihebaard.
ONIM1:3N'f:2g: ,., it is unclear whether the applicwt has submitted the State M811wsy Access Permit to
the i~,il D- life permit has been prepared, ilre applicant sltutxld forward a copy to VHB-
RESPONSE. Our orj9jtW intent was to apply for State Highway Access OUT Plaoning Bmrd review,
faowevcr we have completed tie application and plan(dated 1 PM)and will forward copies to the
Plantnitig Board and V141a for review
EOA+IIx+iFNr,3a: '1'hve appears to be a discrepancy Wtween the summary table and Piydrocad printouts
regarding the pose-development pease discharge rate of refraining cite overflow for the 2 Year storat The
peak elh6arge rite should read 2-30 cubio fxc4 per second rather than 2,01 cis, Therefore, tho combined
post-development peak discharge rate for the 2 year storm sE Ot d be 3.09 crs, which is greater than tine pre-
development Fate of 2-92- The applie t should address this discrepancy and revise the drainage design a8
ne('essary.
12P S'PONSE: The,detention paid exidet has been revised so as not to exceed pre-developmcnt rate. The
results of the draianage revisions are shown i n the revised plans and Drainage Report(Dated November 9,
2000)-
CO M T; 3b. The site pl,n shows life proposed discharge outlet located on the west side of the site.
VHR assnMes that the proposed runoff wilt flow overland westerly toward the Lawrence.Muificipal
Airport. VHB recon umnds t hat the applitaaftt submit a narrative describing where the proposed ruwff
flows ark assess miy pelential impacts of the evedand flour to downstrearrf properties.
RESPONSE., A nmrrative hw;been added in Section 2.0 of the revised Drainage Report and reprinted
below:
17re proposed ondet frr the cdetenolo r pond is foweedapproximatel 75 feel franc file we,sf,lprgvrty fire.
the uburlitw Lawrence Airport Cart imssrort is fartdewlrWd aW heavily ivgzfaled al that locwimi and also
tillyslrjfAv,s westerly ro a screech hlaok. The 1ws been designed so chat dwe is
)w h r'ease of r•arri-o for the 2, 10, aid 100 year slam events and no alteration of the direo ian{rf j7ow.
t herefcrre, no irrr)ads on dcFwAvfneaw jimperfies c4m be ex1mcled
CONEVIENA" 3o: The proposed pond cannot be adegaately reviewd because no grougdwater elevation date
lies been pwc idM, VHB.recammnends one soil boring or observation bole to deterrnifle the elevation office
groan dwater at the proposed detention pond. Without thia data, it is nut olear whether the deteadon pond
will function as designed,
,lx'MPONSE. Extened4M deters#ion facilities regWre acceptable percolation rates and a two foot rtnun man
separation to the says nal highwater elevation- Howevor,the proposed detention f ility Ines been de'signed
so as net to hold Arty kw diq water after a storm with no allowance included for infiltration. Therefore,
additiond testing in the locatiou of the detention hood is not eri#iW, The following reapoziw was added iv
Section 2.0 of the revised Drainage Report;
The defendon porrd has been designed to stone rao-offfnins the proposed impervious arms of the site
(i.e.,Larking area and roof drainage),sloody r elea ving she story nearer ar a mete so as not to O-Weed
predepefopownt rasem Other than a 6 inch 2vamp, she ondel of the faeifily fleas hr4m{lcxigned to
corxiplefrly*dig after the stoner event, w thwtt any starrOng waferrerrr4ming. No fryfilsrat on wd1hirt+Arc
pared was accounted for in the design calculations, howl er facer deep ob-swwHon hales and pereofersion
trms Fwc re dome on the site for she design of the subsurface wwqgc d4p.-mat xysfem. These tests pry laced
remit fypWfor a PMAm a (P B)soil as classifted by she Soil Conserw on Serw a(NCV). flk- oladan
fimes wem reppmvimweJy 10-I2 rerireutesperr ieeh Dish an esdhtafed seasonal high wader table abouf.36L
36"belmv grade
COMMENT: 3 d: If thur,will Wounding water iu the proposed delention Win for an extended period of
time, VHB rewftmw►ds a f ltwe be provided around the perimeter with an acaass gate ffw r intenartce_
RESPO SE TN doentiun panel has bmi designed to drain completely after a storm event.
COMME T. 3e ...VBB recminaiands that the Raiionat Wthod be used for pipe sizing purposes.
RL5'P[7tVSE: lave complied. Rational Method calculations have been included in the revised brain
Report(Dated November'), 000)
0I4 MWI': 3 C V 14 B recommends That a deaai I of the proposed trench drain be shown on the dcffd sheet_
RESPO1V�SE: Ifave eusfkplied (ShDPA 5 of 5).
COMMENT: 3g: Larger diameter drain inanholea may be fequired when four or more pipet enterlexit a
watpliole. The plans should inclu4e provision for larger diameter mm hales_
RPSPON E:have complied.
CONUYffiNT- 4a; VIW reCOmmends,that existing septic system for the existing balding be shown an the
plans._._
IlL',S OMW Have compfieO.
C:OMMFNT: 4b. The existing store wall appears to be iii ennttict with the proposed access d rive. VFIB
rewynrnends that the p1mis iodinate thet that the conflicted stone wall be removed.
N ;SPONSE:have complied f soe Sheet 2 of 5).
CONEMENT; 4; _,. VHB suggests that a second wbeeld4ir ramp be added be considered, possibly m the
ncoheast side of the builiiing...
RF-VPON,FP:': Have complied.
COMMENT: 4d- The wbeetchasr ramp detail does not meet AAA requir-emer3ts for level landing area
RKSFONSE; I vis?M whedchwt ramp details(sheet S)to comply with ADA requirements_
CONWENT: 4e. VHB re ends tlrat paventaut warkings sod apt}ropriatC signage be providod or1 site
plaga,
RF.S'POA SE. Pained parking, stop,slid lrwWicap access lire m shaven on sheet 2 of-S Layout and
Materials plan.
OMNENT= 4f. V HU mrommenda saw-cut line be shown on Route 125 to indicate tare lintiit of work on
Osgood Street_
RF..SPO NSE. Have complied(Sliest 2 of 5).
OMUMI+1'I'_ 4g, _._ VUB reminmeuds proposing gravel barrow baekffll.
1;'ES!'ONSE., have complied wii li re $in&-Typical Class B Trench Detail" (Sheet 5 of 5)to indicate
gravel!sorrow_
COMMENT: 4h: VffB recom=mis that a vwical grarAle curbing wmtsuCainn detail be provided on the
pjarks
RF—,KPgN-3 Hve complied 7k@! of%
COMMENT The proposed hudicap sigi shown an the Layout and Grading Plan must be Telocrated.
mA±eproposed wheelchair rturParea.
RESy0»SE, Have oomAed.
2 youaak any questions p cornmenu, pleasedo not|"web ulf.
Sincerely,
Meniniack Services
g /
J�
AntbLony Donato mE
ProtAfawE
co n±yMJmoshuVI-M. ViaFax6) 926
IERRIMA K ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC.
PROP F= S€ONAL EN INNER$ # LAND SURVEYORS • PLANNERS
66 SPARK STREET+ANCOVEF?,MASSACH(35T:TT5 U1830+ TEL(47R)475 9,5`a 37M721 + FAX(478)47°r�448 -E-MAIL:m6aY9ng�ao@.Com
November 15, 2000
Alison Lescarbmtu, Chairpersork
Town of North Andover
27 Charles Street
North Andover, MA 01845 NOV 1 7 2000
Imo: florist Shop lza6hly
Daniel and .loamic Vorbyetta NORTH' AND VRI
1292 [)%ctid Sired.(Route 1 5) PLANNIM, DE;f Ar}TMF-W1-
North Ana nwr, MA 01845
(978)68 -3885
Hear Ms_ Lescarbeau:
Please End enclosed, one copy of[lie mwi {drainage report (dazed 11109100)seven copies of revised plRI1s
(dated 11109100)mid seven copies of the MHD curb cut application_ The plans have b=11 revised as
outlined in our cx}mmokt r Kponge letter skated Nowmber 13,2000 to the Plam&g Board.
If you hoc any questions or comments, please do not hesitate io call_
Respectfully yours,
ME RMACKENGINEE'RiNG SERVICES, IftU_
.i P.,
Ajg (tny. Donato, I'_E_
cc= VIM Inc_Alin: Thnotky Mclntesh P- . wlcnclosure:�
101 Wahlul Sirect
Watertown, MA 02471
MERRIMACK ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC.
.
66 PARK STRIET +ANDe=1VEP I"ASSACI IUSETT, 1014910 A TEL 7 ;)41 5�555..373 a7'?1 � FAX(978)475-1446 F- AK;merrpnq nc,A.corn
November 22, 20,010
tla idi Gif i.nn,Town nn Planner
'i'oti,wn of N rors In Andover
Plan ning Bnnlnrd
7 Charles Strout
l cyrth Anclover, M it 01 45
E Florist 'Shop Facility
Daniel and Joanune T' r Delta
12912 Osgood, treet (route 125),
North Andover,,MA C118, 5
Dear Ms., Griffin:
Regard in the above referenced project„ pleas(fared For your j'Ccords,one copy of the PRELlMI h1ARY
BUILDING FLOORPLAN&ETLEVATION drawing(darnel I "22 l0tJ), slannnped by registered Architect
Jame G i;swold o. 543 l). A stamped copy of this lllaq,a,�was, requ csted by VIE3 review melt No. 1
(letter dated T 1,10(7/00), was not available at the time of our Nuvember 15 rc;,-suagnmi,ssio n._
If you have aunt or coins men i.s, Please do not hesitate to call,
eslaectf dly yours,
n
,fin thonny natcu, P.E.
0a1;; V11B Inc..Anne: "Thnot y 1'w'l 1Tntorshi 11 E, wwleuw1osu-r s
101 Walnut Street
Watertown,MA