The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001-05-18 Response Comments JUN.14.2001 2:00PM VHB N0.062 P.2 TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD ENGINEERING REVIEW OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN FOR CONFORMANCE WITH PLANNING BOARD RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND AND STANDARD ENGINEERING PRACTICE Subdivision Title: Lawrence Municipal Airport VIM No.: 06716,39 Industtial Park Subdivision Location: Clark Street Owner&Applicant; City of Lawrence--Office of Planning and Development,225 Essex Street,Lawrence,MA 01840 Applicant's Engineer: Gale Associates,Inc.,33 Riverside Drive,Pembroke,MA 02359 Plan bate: 05-18-01 Review Date: 06.14.01 The Applicant's engineer submitted plans and documents to'VHB for review on May 30,2001. The submission was reviewed for conformance to the October 2000 Rules and Regulations Governing the Subdivision of Land,appropriate sections of the 1972 Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaw amended in May 2000 and standard en&ecring practice. The following comments note non-conformance with specific sections and questions/comments on the proposed design. The Applicant has submitted the following information for VHB's review: o Foram B--Application for Preliminary Subdivision Approval 0 Preliminary Subdivision Plan(29 sheets)dated 05-18-01 • Traffic Impact and Access Study Report by Vanasse and Associates,Inc. SECTION 4. PRELLKINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN Section 4.3 Form and Contents 1) 4.3.If Proposed easements within the subdivision appear to be omitted from the lot plans. 2) 4.3.11 No existing or proposed canter line profile of proposed Clark Street extension has been provided in this submission,The Applicant should include the existing and proposed profile for review in the Definitive Subdivision plant set. 3) 4.3.14 VflB suggests that a key plan shown at a scale of 200 feet be included In the Defmitive Subdivision plan set. r:IO6TI�O7YGS�IIp(N�'(�f,Wf000O AkpM PmSmLGfy SVMIWlon nviy:W.Q* 7 TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD ENGDMERING REVIEW OF PRELEW N,AARY SUBDIVISION PLAN FOR CONFORMANCE WITH PLANNING BOARD RULES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE SUBDIVISION O'V LAND AND STANDARD ENGINEERING PRACTICE Subdivision 75tle: Lawrence Municipal Airport VIM No.: 06716.39 Industrial park Subdivision Location: Clark Street Owner&Applicant: City of Lawrence—Office of Planning and Development, 225 Essex Street;Lawrence,MA,01840 Applicant's Engineer: Gale Associates,Inc„33 Riverside Drive,Pembroke,MA 02359 Plan Date: 05-18-01 Review Date: 06.15-01 Tie Applicant's engineer submitted plans and documents to VHB for review on May 30,2001. The submission was reviewed for conformance to the October 2000 Rules and Regulations Governing the Subdivision,of Land,appropriate sections of the 1972 Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaw amended in May 2000 and standard engineering practice. The following comments note non-conformance with specific sections and questions/comments on the proposed design. The Applicant has submitted the following in€orumdon for VHB's review. • Form B Application.for Preliminary Subdivision Approval • Proliminary Subdivision Platt(29 sheets)dated 05-18-01 • Traffic Impact and Access Study Report by'Vanasse and Associates,Inc. SECTION 4. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN Section 4.3 Form,and Contents 1) 4.3.1f Proposed easements within the subdivision appear to be omitted from the tot plans. 2) 4.3.11 No existing or proposed center line profile of proposed Clark Street extension has been provided in this submission,The Applicant should include the existing and proposed profile for review in the Definitive Subdivision plan set. 3) 4.3,14 VHB suggests that a key plan shown at a scale of 200 feet be included in the Definitive Subdivision plan set, TA0V16W0t4WP*MXIAWM'Yft M)valt?lS1hn�8ySut+livitian Aek+v.ADe r SECTION 6. RE'OUIREMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENTS ANID DESIGN Section 6.8 Street—Design Standards A construction baseline has not been defined for the proposed Clark Street extension.The Applicant should provide a construction baseline on Clark Street in the Definitive Subdivision plan set. Section 6.9 Curbing This section requires that sloped granite curbing be provided for all new streets.The Applicant should provide sloped granite curbing for the Clark Street extension or request a waiver. Section 6.11 Sidewalk 6.1.1.1 This section requires that sidewalk be proposed on one side of a proposed subdivision roadway. No provisions for sidewalk are apparent on the plans. Section 6.14 Storm Drainage 1) 6.14.5 The Applicant should Otsider emergency overflow treatments for the proposed drainage areas. 2) 6.14.10 The side slopes of the drainage area in Lot 2 appear to exceed the maximum slope of 3 feet horizontal.to 1 foot vertical(3.1).Also,VI-M recommends that chain link fence be,proposed around the perimeter of the drainage areas with an access gate for maintenance. 3) 6.1.4.11 Proposed drainage easements should be provided for the drainage areas located at Lot 2 and 4.Drainage easements must be,provided for future maintenance purpose. 4) The drainage design,including hydraulics and hydrology,were not reviewed for this preliminary subdivision submission because detailed drainage calculations were not submitted The drainage system layout shown in this preliminary plan appears to be consistent with standard engineering practice.VHB suggests that the Applicant refer to Section 6,14.9 for the necessary drainage calculations required during the Definitive review.The drainage design will be thoroughly reviewed with all of the required calculations during the definitive subdivision submission. Section 6.21 Street Lighting No provision for street lighting is apparent on the plans F10tiT16Woc.kvpo.cdSawrcnce Almon PK1MM rySUb&ufslon Ravlemdoc 2 1 STANDARD ENGMERING PRACTICE AND CQNSTRUCTI'ON ISSUES 1) VHB recommends that chain link fence be proposed at the north,side of the proposed Clark Street extension. Proposed fencing would prevent access to the railroad property, TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY REVIEW General.Comntents The traffic impact assessment appears to have been prepared in a professional manner with regard-to general transportation engineering standards.VHB recommends that the report be stamped by a registered professional engineer licensed to practice transportation engineering in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Site-Generated Traffic The Applicant proposes to use the Industrial Park land use code from the Institute of Transportation Engineers and states that there will be 2,172 daily vehicle trips generated at the proposed development with 278 morning and 287 evening peak hour trips. While this land use code would appear to be accurate,VHB suggests that the Applicant also provide information on Land Use Code 110(Light Industrial)to support the expected traffic generations at the site. The Applicant should provide an estimate of the number of heavy vehicle trips expected to be generated by the propose}development, Signal•Warrant Analysis We feel that the traffito signal warrant analysis is slightly misleading. Traffic data gathered as Part of�be project was only for the morning and evening 2--hour peak periods. While the data suggests that a traffic signal is not warranted during the morning peak period,the evening pea period clearly warrants signalization. However,there is not enough data to effectively evaluate the other traffic signal warrants(particularly the four hour volumes which were analyzed). V'HB recommends that additional data be colleeted'to support the conclusion that traffic signals are not warranted. This should include,at a minimum,a 24 hour traffic volume observation along both Osgood Start as well as Holt Road. The Applicant should provide a hourly breakdown of traffic expected to be generated by the proposed development over the course of a typical 24-hour period to adequately assess the likelihood for traffic signalization at the intersection. Recommended Mil ation Actions The Applicant concludes that there will be,in gonual,no significant change in traffic operations at study area iuwsc4tions. VHS generally supports this conclusion with the exception of the following specific locations. 1`505f16�d0051iGE4rtalCAlvlenCeAlmonPRtGltinkrYsuEdLiSiBnRev�w_doc 3 Site Access Access is proposed to be provided via four driveways off of Clark Street. While the Applicant recommends improving available sight distance at each of the four driveways through limiting signing and landscaping,VHB recommmends that actual sight distance measurements be provided at each location along Clark Street where the proposed driveways are to be constructed and demonstrate that adequate sight distance is provided at each location- Off-Site olt Road and—Osgood Street The Applicant notes that the peals period traffic operations at this intersection are currently constrained(LOS F) and will deteriorate as traffic increases both regionally and as part of the ,proposed development. According to the traffic signal warrant analysis,a signal is warranted under Warrant#11(peak-hour volume)during the evening peak hour conditions,Although,the Applicant notes that the signal does not appear to be warranted at this time. VIM does.not teach the same conclusion as there is not adequate information available to analyze other warrants. Regardless,the Applicant,proposes to monitor the intersection within one year of issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the proposed project to determine if signalization is warranted. VHB recommends that the Applicant expand the commitment to monitor the intersection to occur upon initial occupancy of the development as well as after full occupancy of the proposed development to confirm that traffic sig►alization istis not warranted. VHB also recon mends that,should signalization be warranted,the Applicant agree to fund the signalization of the intersection. Additional Studv In summary,VHB suggests that additional Information on the following topics be provided as part of the Definitive Subdivision submission package for this project: • Provide intersection and stopping sight distance(ISD&SSD)measurements at each of the four driveways to the development off of Clark Street, • Provide data available regarding the hourly breakdown of traffic arriving and departing the proposed industrial park over a typical 24 hour period to assist in the development of traffic signal warrants analysis. •' Consider the preparation of a detailed traffic signal warrant analysis at the intersection.of Holt Road and Osgood Street, • Review the potential for developing a traffic signal system along Osgood Street between the intersections of Sutton Road and the intersection of Molt Road(if signalization is warranted). 1 WF7i41Qocsiteponsllau�rnaAuponerauan3nerySuLe�vislan Rn�a+a.dcc 4 It is region ended that the applicant provide WRITTEN RESPONSES to the issues and comments contained herein. Reviewed by: Date: Danny H.Wong,E.I.T. Civil Engineer—Highway and Municipal Engineering Cheeked by: Timothy B.McIntosh,P. . Project Manager—Highway and Municipal Engineering T.1faf,7S61don�irerwultsnvkreeA3rp-Ra--ryS*MvAloeKtvftw.eet S