HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-04-08 Response Comments SPR t
103 Stiles Road•Suite One•Salem, New Hampshire 03079
MHF.Design Consultants, Inc. TEL(603)893-0720•FAX(603)893-0733
MEMORANDUM
AI'l 4 0(ifil
To: Tim McIntosh, P.E. Date: 20 March 2003 " ^R!�!hf t3t°PARTMEMT
VHB
From: Karl Dubay, P,E, Re: Lighthouse Realty Trust
MHF Response to 03-17-03 VHB Review Comments
In summary, we generally agree with the reviewer's findings and suggestions, which we
believe are minor in nature,-and have earnestly enclosed the revised plans and
calculations accordingly.
I. Watershed Special Permit
1. Refer to memo and figure (attached)prepared by Epsilon Associates, In
summary, the Non-Discharge(N-D) Zone Limit (325' for this property) appears
to be approximately at the proposed lease area limit, or worst case about 25' into
the lease limit—the proposed building therefore would be outside the N-D Zone,
and the proposed grading may be in the zone, Thus, the project design for flows
in this area needs to have full BMP's integrated into the plans, and we do just that
with the minor plan revisions (e.g., addition of the Stormeeptor, etc.). We intend
to confirm the exact N-D limit for the Planning Board prior to the hearing.
2. The revised plan changes out DM114 to a Storinceptor(this was predesigned for
it on the original submission if the substitution was needed). The revised plans
and study now fully meet the TSS removal rates and other criteria as
recommended.
3/4. See discussion on Item I.1 above. If the proposed drive area IS in the N-D Zone,
we DO meet the stormwater criteria, and this portion of the site IS required for
emergency access and safety reasons. We will confirm this information,
including the proposed building relation to the N-D Zone,prior to the hearing.
II. Site Plan Review
1. The original plans submitted do include a stamped and certified boundary for the
portion of the airport property where the proposed lease area is located. We agree
ENGINEERS PLANNERS SURVEYORS
i
II
with VHB that a FULL boundary of the entire airport property is not necessary
and is commensurate with how previous site development activities at the airport
have been permitted.
2. Each of the unit wall signs will be reduced on average by at least 2.5 SF to bring
the total sign areas into conformity [(232-200)/13=2.46]. Furthermore, based on
initial new occupants' interests,this may be a moot point, as some have indicated
their intentions to occupy multiple units under one company sign.
III. Drainage Review
1-4. Additional verification test pits were performed and integrated into the design
The revised plan and calculations fully address the typos, details, and modeling
suggestions which now fully accommodate the reviewer's requests. This includes
the provision of an emergency spillway, although the reviewer acknowledges that
it is not required but suggested.
IV. Traffic Review
The revised plans integrate all recommendations. A 5"'handicap space has been
added. The curb radii at Sutton Street have been widened (refer to revised WB-50
turning detail which already presented the WB-50 turning through the site). The
sight distance clearing notes on the plans will include the recommended 200-foot
distance. Note that the Traffic Study was performed using a slightly higher
building area,which is conservative. Also,the traffic engineer's research of
recorded accident data history as requested came up negative.
V. General Review
Yes, we are cognizant of the NPDES Permit requirements—the site contractor
and owner will be responsible for this permit and its related requirements (e.g.,
filing onNOI within 48 hours of construction commencement, etc.) and a
reminder note will be added to the plans.
03/21/03 FRI 08:58 FAX 19788970099 EPSILON ASSOCIATES 121005
• -sue : 3!4' - ,' ' / •r :ff'•'' r•' '"`r�'�.,. �1'/ir'.P'� 4
y�4 ,[ .+, .�/.kfi.�:%� �.:�^.,.f.._.�,��;.� `.'�' .+� :yak• �`- f.• ��
�� � rl'.t.�';"/yy� .�ti Fr��YC'i ` �i �•3� 1• ly'= ^y:i ' i
"• .� :: /5+ " r •' '• .h ~i\•�.i,.� 55•y 'fv `r� 1r •,'S+ '°,�, rFf .{• I!
x`-S�'.1, ., f•,e'rr�r�pi•`�',tl:�n'r/'y., ,•' r,a.'y ,t 'i'. `•. ,
dli. it '" in� , ,�'r�T.' n5/5• r,� �4 lY' ti I
;��y ' �• ,r{I,Y` - •./ } •�.y/ �y "Itf .:••,�:.. .
�� �'•�' �•c•�,��l�i�:' 1;c`1.fy,,,��"�� '' rc �� =.'r:; '�I
rid• 1 �'. Y.::.�'� .�.�,,..,yy�'?}„i5.4��a,•�_ ,^ �� ;f• ,� ��'A•: {-;.,-'_' 'ram i I
yt,`_as��>,X,�'G. '• , '1 , ,i;'! rt_'<' R'�x="'••..-• 'J I'.
If
T M.
.�
Y ,J ,
'Y•' !h 1
WN
:i�:�+ .�:. ,, .'r!' .Sf',j •r ��'•`� f` ,vA�1�'`�ri�H' f tL7171 }dK ',
. A • ' �,'`' �f'J'/( r� � •'�lr v ,liv.':' `ri{ (/ �• ,�Cl['� .,�•:, I1
:�.'•�Fi'. 1F'r _ ''/�' /�, �1%`6.• ! .S:J. :,� el `■+ 'F.wi .'• .��..•�'
'�. ;'A'y is s'r.`"d� "�'S` ,I'•''Y:;`-,`i��rw�F ''',•` •'�\., .�, l�l, y,� I�a;' ,
E, •r .1. +�� ''� Y'Y l� R
IL
,,''. "'-ey'~:::�.'n-,;r4�i'`'i:3}>, �(�"�' •tom; 1 1 `
+.P •T1 Y'
� 'dV •,h,. •J
,
•�� �r^"�'�aLr ?^'�• ��'„ -aY: 1�7G- '�• ���'_t';i'�,'f,. '4r.,Skr�y4[
Legend
Approximate Site Boundary
Rfeims
"kR' y' yi, {! r y r i-:"4►��l'F�S€�:,,. �,3 DERep Marsh
V.
� ; 1 Shrub SwAn€p
�• ", - t t k .• ;� ... Vdnndrd Swamp DeCIIJU V,
,. Aff€"€i15(7rih«�Iic��ti>, YUUf
Sct�le 1:6OQp 45'- Figure 1 wi-d,anlr,mcfwea? daiapro5•ldedbvAf;as-Gl:
1 ilwh = 500 fe l I Watershed Wetland Distances
r r
30 a 250 SOQe�I North Andover Business Center
��nyl:.....,,s Fnvlrnnm�ntrl Ccnar'fl'•�['t '..
, . �.. i .r. .n.if ia•h trn.l I