Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-04-08 Peer Review SPR V E I Transportation Lane! Development . Environmental APR 0 7 2001 Services a imagination I innovation�energy Creasing results For our Clients and benefits for our communities April 3,2003 _.Yanasse_ UCM 1�t�B—r—US WA122s1.— Ref: 06716.71 J.Justin Woods Planning Director Town of North Andover Community Development&Services 27 Charles Street North Andover,MA 01845 Re: North Andover Business Center,Sutton Street North Andover,MA Dear Justin, Vanasse Hangen Brustlin,Inc. (VHB)has received email correspondence from Karl Dubay of MHF Design Consultatnts,Inc.responding to the issue raised in our review dated April 1,2003. The explanation provided by the Applicant's engineer adequately addresses VHB's concerns. No further engineering review is required at this time. Very truly yours, VANASSE HANGEN BRUSTLIN,INC. �,4r1 t,w"' �,,d ,✓ Andrew W. Ogilvie,P.E. Senior Project Engineer-Highway&Municipal Engineering cc: Timothy B.McIntosh,P.E.-VHB 101 Walnut Street Post Office Box 9151 Watertown, Massachusetts 02471-9151 TA0671671\dons\1etters\su1tonstreet-apprava4.3-031.doc 617.924.1770 a FAX 6IZ924.2286 email: info@vhb.com www.vhb.com Page 1 of 1 Woods, J. Justin From: Dermot Kelly [dkelly@djkinc,comj Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 3.30 PM To: J. Justin Woods Cc; Jim Cyrier; Karl R. Dubay; rnagi@vhb.com; tmcintosh@vhb.com Subject: Site Plan Review for 492 Sutton Street, North Andover I have review the MHQ accident CD and found no reported vehicle accidents for the Airport Entrance Drive and Sutton Street intersection for the most recent three years of available data, 1998 through 2000. If you have any additional comments, questions and/or if you require any additional information please feel free to contract me. Dermot Kelly 3/21/03 1 '� �' . 1 Transportation Land Development �R� � � 2Q�� Environmental $ e r V I C e s N(Y�'t tl ANDOVER ® PLANNING DEPARTMENT ® imagination I lnnovatlon energy Creatilig results for our clients and benefits for our communities April 1,2003 Vanasse Han gen Brusdin, Inc Ref: 06716.71 J.Justin Woods Planning Director Town of North Andover Community Development&Services 27 Charles Street North Andover,MA 01845 Re: North Andover Busin--ss Center,Sutton Street North Andover,MA Dear Justin, Vanasse Hangen Brustlin,Inc. (VHB)has received revised plans and documents that respond to our original review dated March 17,2003. In general,the Applicant has addressed our comments and concerns.VHB offers the following comment: DRAINAGE REVIEW 1. The Applicant has revised the HydroCAD model at the detention pond but has not included the 12-inch pipe from the detention pond to the control structure as the control. In addition, the HydroCAD model shows the pipe as 12-inch HDPE,and the plans note this section of pipe to be 18-inch HDPE, The intent of the comment was that the pipe leading from the detention basin to the control structure presented more of a constriction to the outflow from the detention basin than the outlet structure in DMH 3,which was used as the detention basin outlet in the model. As such the peak elevations in the detention basin would be higher than presented. The Applicant has changed the plans to show an 18-inch pipe connecting the detention pond to the outlet structure. The 18-inch pipe may be large enough to avoid constricting the flow. If this was the intent,then the Applicant should provide capacity calculations to demonstrate that this pipe is no longer a constriction. VHB recommends that the Applicant provide a written response to the above comment. Very truly yours, VANASSE HANGEN BRUSTLIN,INC. Andrew W. Ogilvie,P.E. ` Senior Project Engineer-Highway&Municipal Engineering cc: Timothy B.McIntosh,P.E. -VHB 101 Walnut Street Post Office Box 9151 Watertown, Massachusetts 02471-9151 Tr\0671671\does\letters\sutlonslreet-approval.doc 517.924.1770 . FAX 617.924.2286 email: infoC@vhb.com www.vhb.com I VHB Proj, No. 06716.71 Engineering Review of Site Plan and Watershed Special Permit Airport Drive & Sutton Street—North Andover APPENDIX A Scope of Services The scope of services consists of the engineering review of the site plan and special permit application. The major tasks are listed below: 1. Plan Review: Review the plans for conformance to Zoning Bylaw (2000) and standard engineering practice. Prepare one (1) engineering review report listing written comments. Provide one (1) `follow- up' letter that addresses the Applicant's responses to the engineering report. 2. Drainage Review: VHB will provide an engineering review of the site drainage design for conformance to the zoning bylaw, DEP Stormwater Standards and standard engineering practice. Written comments will be included in the engineering review report. 3. Traffic Review: Review the traffic information for accuracy, completeness and for specific issues related to the site. Written comments will be included in the engineering review report. 4. Project Management: Provide a preliminary review of the site plan submission for the purpose of establishing a detailed budget with upset limit for engineering services for the scope of services contained herein. Plan, monitor and coordinate the review efforts. Services Not Included The following additional services are not provided in this scope of work: 1. Review of Architectural plans. 2. Review of lighting design. 3. Review of sewer. 4. Review of sprinkler system design or any mechanical engineering design. 5. Review of any structural design. 6. Review of any environmental permits. 7. Attendance at project or public meetings or hearings. Should services be required in these areas, or areas not previously described, the ENGINEER will prepare a proposal or amendment, that contains the Scope of Services, Compensation, and Schedule to complete the additional services, nVa originals of this Authorization need to be executed. One original tieeds to be forwarrieri ro Accotrnting Contract Files. T.•106716Wocsl cottracilClntAjttlr-Lighdrousereatty-task7l.doc TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER PLANNING BOARD ENGINEERING REVIEW OF SITE PLAN AND WATERSHED SPECIAL PERMIT FOR CONFORMANCE WITH THE TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER ZONING BYLAW AND STANDARD ENGINEERING PRACTICE Site Plan Title: Site Plan for North Andover Business Center VHB No,:06716.71 Location; 492 Sutton StreetRECE9 , ED Owner: Lawrence Municipal Airport MAR 1 8SOD Applicant: Lighthouse Realty Trust t 01-11'll ANDOVEr3 Applicant's Engineer: MHF Design Consultants,Inc. tT.ANNINO QRPARTMENT Plan Date: February 14,2003 Review Date: March 17,2003 VHB has received the following plans and documents for review: • Site Plans(9 sheets)dated February 14,2003 • Special Permit Application—Supporting Information • Traffic Impact and Access Study--November 2002 • Stormwater Management,Drainage Calculations and Best Management Practices booklet dated December 4,2002 The submission was reviewed for conformance to appropriate sections of the 1972 Town of North Andover Zoning Bylaw amended May 2001 and standard engineering practice. The following comments note non-conformance with specific sections and questions/comments on the proposed design. L WATERSHED SPECIAL PERMIT The parcel of land falls within the general watershed protection district of Lake Cochichewick. 1. Section 4.116.4.c.ii.(3-5)The limits of the Conservation Zone,the Non-Disturbance and the Non-Discharge Zones have not been shown on the plans. The zones are based on the distance from Lake Cochichewick or a wetland resource area within the watershed district as described in Section 4.136.2,Table 2. It is assumed that the lot was created prior to October 24, 1994 and would be subject to the 325-foot limit. The Applicant has stated that there are no resource areas on the development site but no information has been provided regarding the location of resource areas within 325 feet of the proposed work. The Applicant should verify that there are no resource areas within 325 of the proposed work. 1 Tc\0671671\dots\repoits%Sutton$tmt•revleWAM i i 2. Section 4.136.4.c.iii. This section requires written certification that there will be no significant degradation of the quality or quantity of water entering Lake Cochichewick by a registered professional engineer, The Applicant has provided this statement however,the.TS removal rate for the portion of the site within the Watershed district i 6hly 57%. Jhe Applicant has received a negative determination of Applicability from the North Andover Conservation Commission and may not be required to meet the DEP Stormwater Standard�4 80%,h�wever the site is within the protected watershed district and is required to protect the quality of runoff from the site to the greatest extent possible.VHB suggests that the Applicant consider adding additional treatment measures to further protect water quality. 3, Section 4.136.4.c.iv. It is unclear whether the project is located within the non- 1 Disturbance and/or Non-Discharge Buffer Zones(see comment no. 1 above). If the project falls within these zones,this section requires that the Applicant demonstrate that there is no reasonable alternative location for the improvements outside of the Non-Disturbance�n�oir le Non-Discharge Buffer Zones. VHB recommends that the Applicant be prepared to provide a statement as to why there are no other reasonable alternatives, 4. Section 4,136.41 This section requires that any new structure be constructed outside of the non-disturbance zone. VHB assumes that the construction is outside of the non-disturbance zone and is in compliance,however if it is determined that the non-discharge zone is within the site area this section will need to be re-evaluated. it. SITE PLAN REVIEW 1. 8.3.5.3.e.ii.Survey of Lot Parcel-Requires a valid boundary survey to be submitted with the application. The Applicant has submitted a dimensional plan describing the lot area to be leased from the Lawrence Airport. A valid boundary survey has not been submitted. VHB suggests that because no new property lines are to be created and the Lawrence Airport property is substantial,that a full boundary survey of the property would not be necessary. 2. 6.6,G.3 This section requires signs attached to the face of a building in an industrial district to be no more than 200 square feet in total area. The Applicant has proposed thirteen separate signs,which will total approximately 232 square feet. VHB suggests that the Applicant revise the plans or request a waiver from this requirement. 2 TA0O71671\dM\report5\Sutt9n StreeHeyiew.doc 111. DRAINAGE REVIEW 1. The test pit togs indicate that the seasonal high groundwater is higher than the bottom of the proposed detention basin. It appears that the basin will intercept the groundwater table and standing water will be present in the basin,therefore the detention basin will not function as currently desi ed. 2. The proposed infiltration systems appear to be within 2 feet of the seasonal high groundwater table. A minimum 2-foot separation between the bottom of an infiltration structure and the seasonal high groundwater table is required. The infiltration system will not function as currently designed, 3. The HydroCAD model of the outlet from the proposed detention pond does not appear to match the plan. The HydroCAD model shows a 6-inch orifice at elevation 153.40 and an overflow weir at elevation 156.00,which corresponds to the outlet structure in drainage manhole 4, However, the outlet structure is connected to the pond by means of a 12-inch pipe. The capacity of the 12-inch pipe connecting the detention basin to the outlet structure has not been included in the model. It is likely that the capacity of the 12-inch outlet pipe would be the controlling factor under high flow rates. The Applicant should revise the model to account for the possible ry constriction, 4. The proposed detention basin does not have an emergency spillway. While the HydroCAD model shows that the basin is not overtopped during a 100-year event, this assumes that the outlet is functioning properly and is free of debris. The Applicant should provide an,e�cy spillway to xuduce the possibility of a failure in the event that the outlet is compromised or the design flows are exceeded. IV. TRAFFIC REVIEW VHB has performed a professional and independent technical review of the Traffic Impact and Access Study—Proposed Warehouse/Office Development prepared by Dermot J. Kelly Associates,Inc.(DJK)for the construction of a warehouse/office building on Airport Drive in North Andover,Massachusetts. This review of the transportation study focuses on the technical information presented and a thorough review of the recommendations.In addition,VHB offers findings and suggestions to the Town as the process moves forward. Submission Materials As part of the technical analysis for the Town,VHB reviewed the following reports and plans submitted by the applicant: Special Permit Site Plan for Planning Board North Andover Business Center, 500 Sutton Street,North Andover,MA 01845;Prepared by MHF Design Consultants,Inc;September 11,2002. 3 TA067167tWoos reports\Sulton51reekevlewduc ■ Traffic impact and Access Study, Proposed Warehouse/Office Development, North Andover,MA;prepared by Dermot J. Kelly Associates,Inc.;November 2002. This information has been considered in the preparation of this memorandum and other various sources of information were also referenced,as needed,and are footnoted in the memorandum. Overview In general,the traffic report has been prepared in a professional manner generally consistent with transportation industry standards.However,from a transportation perspective,the impact analysis has a few areas of concern: ■ Accident data was not obtained or reviewed in the traffic report and does not evaluate the current safety of drivers entering and exiting Airport Drive;and ■ The turning radius of a WB-50 truck,the largest truck proposed to use this site, entering and maneuvering internally on site and at each of the new openings at the Airport Drive median should be assessed. The following provides specific comments on the traffic study and provides traffic comments on the site plan submitted along with the study. Traffic Impact and Access Study Review In general,the study has been prepared to industry standards using information and methods suitable for a traffic impact and access study. Existing Conditions The description of the study area and methodology were presented in a standard manner and appear to be accurate.The study notes traffic volumes were collected both manually and mechanically during October 2002.Vehicle classification and manual turning movement counts were conducted in 15-minute intervals for the weekday morning(7:00—9:00 AM)and weekday evening(4:00—6:00 PM)peaks. All traffic count locations appear to be reasonable given the amount of traffic likely to be generated by the development. The automatic traffic recorder data collected,when compared to MassHighway data for Sutton Street seems reasonable.The historical traffic data presented indicates a growth rate of approximately 2.1 percent,which seems reasonable and is consistent with other projects reviewed by VHB in the vicinity of this project, There is no indication that accident data for this area was collected or discussed.It would be helpful to determine if existing safety issues currently exist at the intersection of Sutton Street and Airport Drive through a review of this data. 4 T. 0671671\dots\reports\$utlon 5aeet-revlew.doc Summary—The analysis of the existing conditions as presented in the Traffic Impact and Access Study appears to be reasonable and accurate and fellows general industry guidelines for the preparation of a traffic impact study. It would be helpful in the review of this project if the Applicant would provide historical accident data on the study area roadways so that any pre-existing roadway deficiencies might be highlighted and addressed. Future Traffic Volume Conditions The study reviews the future 2007 No-Build and 2007 Build scenarios,which is a standard time frame for this development.It is noted that the proponent contacted the Planning Office for the Town of North Andover and a background growth rate of 2 percent was used to account for future developments not anticipated;this appears to be a conservative and acceptable estimate from a planning perspective. The study includes the potential for up to half the project to be developed as a Warehouse use.In order to present a conservative assessment of the project's traffic generation,the Applicant presents traffic generation assuming that the entire development would be office space. It should be noted that the warehouse usage would likely generate less vehicular traffic than a comparable office use,however the warehouse use may generate a higher percentage of heavy vehicle traffic if approved. Site plan„consideration should be given to the ability_ r g stte truck rr�aneuve ri and parlanif warehouse s ace is a com onent of the final develo me Trip distributionlassignment to this site was determined using existing traffic counts along Sutton Street.The site-generated traffic was assigned to Airport Drive as follows: 55 percent via the east and 45 percent via the west.This is an acceptable methodology for assigning traffic to the area roadways. Summary—The analysis of the future conditions as presented in the Traffic Impact and Access Study appears to be reasonable and follows general industry guidelines for the preparation of a traffic impact study. Traffic Operations Analysis The following is a summary of the results for the capacity analysis at Sutton Street and Airport Drive.According to the analysis presented in the traffic study,the southbound Airport Drive approach is projected,during the 2007 Build Condition,to operate at Level of Service(LOS)C during the morning and evening peaks;this appears to be accurate. Summary—The traffic study used the appropriate analysis software and methods to analyze the intersections and roadways within the study area.The analysis is based on the most recent version of the Highway Capacity Software(HCS)and is an approved and widely recognized analysis tool for traffic operations analysis. The 5 T\0671671\do«s\reports\Sulton Street-reAmdoe i 9 , i project does not appear to create any significant operational issues on the surrounding roadways. Site Plan Review The proposed site plan indicates that the building development is proposed to be 30,800 square feet of office and warehouse use. The traffic study assumes that there will be 32,000 square feet(SF)of building space. This should be clarified to address parking ratios and Floor_to_Areea..Ratio..FAR considerations. In addition,the site plan indicates 4 handicap accessible spaces and,according to ADA guidelines,the development on this site should accommodate 5 handicap spaces where one of these spaces is a handicap vary accessible parking space. This site is designed to accommodate WB-50 trucks at a maximum;according to the site plan notes.The Applicant should provide some information confirming that adequate turning radius is available for this type of vehicle both on-site and at the site driveways leading to the Airport Entrance Drive. The study recommends that some clearing will be required to provide the appropriate sight distance measurements at the site driveways. It is recommended that a clear sight distance to the intersection of Airport Drive at Sutton Street be provided for the south driveway of this site;approximately 200 feet. Conclusions and Recommendations It appears that the Applicant has made a commitment to provide off-site improvements to minimize the impacts of this development.VHB recommends to the Town that the following issues be clarified: ■ The turning radius of a WB-50 truck,the largest truck proposed to use this site, entering and maneuvering internally on site and at each of the new openings at the Airport Drive median should be presented to assure proper operations at these locations. ■ The appropriate site distances should be made available along Airport Drive to ensure safe access/egress to this development.The proposed study indicates the clearing of a triangular area along the property frontage. V. GENERAL REVIEW 1. As of March 10th,2003 all Construction Activities disturbing more than i acre of land will require an Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)General Permit for Storrnwater Discharges associated with Industrial Activity. The proposed project will disturb greater than 1 acre of land and as such will be required to submit a Notice of Intent and a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan to the EPA for review. 6 T:\4671671\docs\reporis\Suttan Skeet-revtew.doc It is recommended that the applicant provide WRITTEN RESPONSES to the issues and comments contained herein. ``�/Reviewed by: Date: Andrew W.Ogilvie,RE. Senior Project Bngini7—Highway and Municipal Engineering Reviewed by: Date: -el 3 Robert L.Nagi,P.E.,P.T.O.E Project Manager—Transportation Systems Checked by.- Tim McIntosh,P.E. Project Manager—Highway and Municipal Engineering 7 T%\0671671\dm\reports\5vfton Street-review-doc MHF DESIGN CONSULTANTS, INC. LIEVVIEN DIP I'IRQNSUMAL Engineers • Planners • Surveyors 103 Stiles (toad, Suite One SALEM, NEW HAMPSHIRE 03079 DATE ��,� JogNol�8g (603) 893-0720 ATTFr4TrON . Fax (603) 893-0733 7—IYVL G`n. 1 TO V T"{ter'7 �•� WE ARE SENDING YOU VAttached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Shop drawings ❑ Prints ❑ Plans ❑ Samples ❑ Specifications ❑ Copy of letter ❑ Change Order ❑ COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: V,'For approval ❑ Approved as submitted ❑ Resubmit copies for approval ❑ For your use ❑ Approved as noted ❑ Submit copies for distribution ❑ As requested ❑ Returned for corrections ❑ Return corrected prints ❑ For review and comment ❑ ❑ FOR BIDS DUE ❑ PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAM TO US REMARKS w Nnf4TIA AW111VrIll CL. k_f,7- 44/) COPY T4 SIGNED: If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once, i March 21, 2003 Mr. Jim Cyrier Lighthouse Realty Trust 109 Blue Ridge Road North Andover, MA 01845 Subject: Watershed Special Permit - North Andover Business Center Lease Area; Proximity to Wetlands In the Lake Cochichewick Watershed Protection District. Dear Jim, At the request of the North Andover Planning Board, wetland scientists from Epsilon Associates inspected the above referenced project locus on March 20, 2003 to confirm the proximity of wetland resource areas within 400-feet of the proposed North Andover Business Center lease area. You will recall that the North Andover Conservation Commission (NACC) issued a Determination of Applicability on October 9th, 2002 confirming that there are no jurisdictional local or state wetlands on the subject parcel or within 100-feet of the subject parcel. Based on available data and our own field inspection, it appears that the closest wetland resource area is approximately 300 to 325-feet from the southernmost lease line. The approximate mean high water elevation associated with Lake Cochichewick is approximately 800-feet from the easternmost lease line. In reaching this conclusion we reviewed the following materials: • A color MassGISTM orthophotograph depicting 1) the approximate extent of the proposed lease area, 2) wetland resource areas and, 3) Lake Cochichewick (see attached figure). t • A topographic plan of land depicting field delineated wetland resource areas across Route 125 on the Osgood Hill property (see attached site plan).2 Wetlands and streams data layer provided by MassGISTm. 2 i It is important to note that I delineated the wetland resource areas depicted on the attached site plan on behalf of the Town of North Andover in 1998. Wetland resource areas depicted on the topographic plan of land are approximately 25 to 30-feet closer to the lease area than the approximate extent of wetlands derived from MassGIS photo interpretation. Additional instrument survey, or site plan coverage depicting adjoining properties between our site and Osgood Hill, would be required to further refine our estimated distances. I trust that this correspondence will be acceptable to the North Andover Planning Board and their consultant. However, please d❑ not hesitate to contact me at (978) 461-6247 or via email at mhoward@epsilonassociates.com if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, EPSILON ASSOCIATES, Inc. Michael D. Howard Senior Wetland Scientist 2 Prepared by Christiansen & Sergi, Inc, entitled "Topographic Plan of Osgood Hill", dated February 16, 1998.