Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-04-06 Engineer Review Withdrawn r COLER cam. COLANTONiO Z m - r ENG1NEEn5 ANI.) GOGNT11STS March 4, 1999 Richelle Martin- Conservation Associate Conservation Commission Town Hall Annex 27 Cbarles Street North Andover,MA 01845 RE: Engineering Review Northeast Storage Corporation Notice of Intent Dear Ms, Martin: In response to your request, Coler& Colantonio, Inc. has reviewed the submittal package for the above referenced site. Our efforts included a comparison of information submitted with respect to the requirements of the Wetlands Protection Bylaw and Wetlands Regulations. We visited the site on February 24, 1999 to observe existing site conditions. We also compared the design assumptions and calculations with the Stormwater Management Policy. The submittal package included the following information: Plans Entitled * "Site Plan for Northeast storage Company", located in North Andover, Mass." consisting of two sheets dated 2/2/99, Prepared by Christiansen & Sergi Engineering Services. Received February 18, 1999. • "Notice of Intent Filing including Hydrology Report", dated February 4, 1999 and Prepared by Christiansen & Sergi Engineering Services. Received February 18, 1999. We offer the following comments: Section 1V.)B.) State Stonuwater Standards: Standard Satisfactory subject to other comments, 101 Accord Park Drive y 781-982-5400 Norwall, MA 02061-1685 Fax: 781-982-5490 SUndard 2 The entire system should be modeled for the 1-year storrn event, approximately 2.6 inches. The existing conditions Tc appears Iow, especially when compared with the Tc for Subarea 8 under proposed conditions. The time of concentration should reflect the longest hydraulic Length. Slandard 3 Recharge calculations should be performed and submitted. Test pits performed by a licensed soil evaluator and witnessed by an agent of the Town should be done to demonstrate proper soil conditions for the assumed infiltration trenches. It is unclear that the "Water Quality Swales"will function for infiltration, S=&d 4 It is not clear that the TSS removal rate of 80% will be achieved by the proposed BMP's. A Water Quality Swales as defined by the Stormwater Management Policy should infiltrate or detain, runoff, it is not clear that these requirements have been met. An Extended. Detention Basin as defined by the Stormwater Management Policy should detain all runoff for atleast 24-hours and include a forebay. It is not clear that Detention Basin #1 meets the detention time requirement and Detention Basin #2 meets either of these criteria. It is not clear that Extended Detention Basin #1 detains runoff for a 24-hour period, which is a required design criteria for extended detention basins under the Stormwater Management Policy, The Water Quality Swale appears to be a drainage channel more than a Water Quality Swale. Standard The Water Quality Volume should be calculated and treated as required by the regulations, Standard 6 Not Applicable, SiMdDi¢7 Not applicable. f f Standards 8 &9 These standards are typically reviewed by Town staff. I� Minimum Submittal Requirements. 1. Section IV.)B.)l.)b.)Test pits performed by a licensed soil evaluator were not submitted. Existing and proposed ;low paths were not indicated. 2. Section IV.)C.)1.) The existing and proposed 100-year floodplain elevation for the wetland to the east of the site should be indicated. 3. Section IV.)C.)2.) The 100-year flood elevations should also be done for streams crossing the site. The existing 12" RCP culvert to the south of the site, should be modeled for the 100 year storm. 4. Section IV.)CC.)3.)Please refer to Stormwater Management comments. 5. Section IV.)C.)6.)a.) Drainage easements were not indicated on the plans. We recommend that stormwater facilities be designed constant with, the requirements of ASCE Manual and Reports of Engineering Practice No. 77 and the DEP Stormwater Management Policy. It is recommended the drainage basin berm be a minimum 8 feet wide for the.purpose of maintenance vehicle access. 6. Section IV.)C.)6.)b.) Trash racks should be installed on outlet orifices to prevent clogging. 7. Section IV.)C.)6.)c.) Rip-rap should be placed at culvert swales interfaces to prevent scouring and erosion. 8. Section IV.)C.)6.)d,) Test pits performed by a licensed soil evaluator should be included to determine the high groundwater separation from the bottom of the proposed basin. 9, Section VI.)B.)4.)e.) The plans do not indicate existing septic systems, if any, on the plans. 10. Section. VI.)B.)4.)i.) The existing and proposed 100-year flood elevations should be determined and indicated on the plans. 11. Section VI.)C.)4.)j.) Hydrologic calculations showing the fu11 flow capacity and velocity of all watercourses onto and out of the property should be submitted. The existing 12" RCP culvert, should be modeled for all storm events. 12. Section VI.)C.)5.)b.) It is unclean where, if any, the subsurface sewage disposal system will be located, i P I 13. Section VI,)G.)5.)d.) The design and location of the proposed roof drain system on the west side of the site should be submitted. Pipe calculations should be submitted. General Comments: 14. The detentions basin are proposed to contain 6" of standing water below the outlet invert. 15. The zoning districts are not delineated on the plans. A portion of the site seem to be located in a Residential zone. 16, Thc-storage buildings are proposed to be constructed over the existing sewer line. We appreciate the opportunity to assist the Conservation Commission 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, 9oOLER& COLANTONZO, INC. hn C. Chessia, P.E, xc Christiansen& Sergi Engineering Jim Rand jag/JCC i U - - - -- ._COLANTONI--- m zRECE WE ENGINEERS AND SCIENTISTS MAR 2 5 1999 March 23, 1999 NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING DEPARTMENT Planning Board C/o William Scott Town Hall Annex 27 Charles Street North Andover, MA 01845 RE: Engineering Review Northeast Storage Corporation Special Permit Dear Mr, Scott: In response to your request, Coler & Colantonio, Inc. has reviewed the submittal package for the above referenced site, Our efforts included a comparison of information submitted with respect to the requirements of the North Andover Zoning Bylaws. We visited the site on February 24, 1999 to observe existing site conditions: The submittal package included the following information: Plans Entitled • "Site Plan for Northeast Storage Company", located in North Andover, Mass." consisting of two sheets dated 212199, Prepared by Christiansen & Sergi Engineering Services, Received March 8, 1999. • "Site Plan for Northeast Storage Company", located in North Andover, Mass," consisting of two sheets dated 212199,revised March 19, 1999 Prepared by Christiansen& Sergi Engineering Services. Received March 22, 1999. • "Hydrology Report", dated February 4, 1999 and Prepared by Christiansen & Sergi Engineering Services. Received March 8, 1999, • "Hydrology Report", dated February 4, 1999, revised March 19, 1999 and Prepared by Christiansen & Sergi Engineering Services. Received March 22, 1999. • "Legal, Fire Protection, Building Elevation, Signage, Lighting and Traffic Studies", dated March 19, 1999 and Prepared by Christiansen & Sergi Engineering Services. Received March 22, 1999. • " Special Permit", dated March 5, 1999 and Prepared by Christiansen & Sergi Engineering Services. Received March 8, 1999. 101 Accord Park ©rive 781-982-5400 Norwell, MA 02061-1685 Fax: 781-982-5490 r i The proposed development is located within.the Residence-4 Zoning District and does not conform to its respective regulations. However, we have performed a Site Plan Review and offer the following comments: Zoning Bylaw: 1. Section 8.1) It is unclear that proposed development conforms to the bylaw's off- street parking requirements. Site Plan Review 2. Section 8.3)5.)ii.) A boundary survey of the site, including meets, bounds and geometry; should be submitted. The Board may consider relief of this requirement given the extent of the property. 3. Section 8.3)5.)iv.)The site is located within a Residence-4 Zoning District and does not conform to requirements for this zone. Drainage easements are not indicated on the plans. 4. Section 8.3)5.)v.) The plans and zoning table indicate that the site is located in the Industrial-1 Zoning District. The site is located in the Residence-4 Zoning District. 5. Section 8.3)5.)vii.)Please refer to our Notice of Intent Review for Drainage System issues, copy enclosed. 6. Section 8.3)5.)xi.) Please see Notice of Intent comments. 7. Section 8.3)5.)xv.) Trees with a diameter over 12" were not indicated. 8. Section 8.3)5.)xvi.) The location of trash enclosures, if any, was not indicated. 9. Section 8.3)5.)xviii.) Please see our comments on the Notice of Intent Review. 10. Section 8,3)5.)xix.) Typically reviewed by Town Staff. 11. Section 8.3)5.)xxii.) Typically reviewed by Town Staff. 12. Section 8.3)5.)xxiii.) Typically reviewed by Town Staff. 13. Section 8.3)6.)ii.)d.)Please see Notice of Intent review. 14. Section 8.3)6.)ii.)f.) Riprap should be placed at the culvert/swale interfaces to reduce erosion and scouring. I y 1 1 S. Section 8.3)6,)ii.)h.) It is not clear that there will be no adverse impact on the surrounding area as a result of noise, sinoke, dust or vibration, 16. Section 8.4)4.) It is not clear that the required vegetation for the proposed parking area has been provided. We appreciate the opportunity to assist the Planning Board on this project and hope that this information is sufficient for your needs. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact us. Very truly yours, COLER& COLANTONIO, INC. t )John C. Chessia, P.E. XC: Christiansen& Sergi Jim Rand, DPW