Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-12-07 Landscaping Response Comments HUNTREss AssociA-TES ` LANDSCAPH ARCIIITHCTURE & LAND PLANNING November 13, 2000 Ms. Heidi Griffin Town Planner Town of North Andover 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Re: Endicott Plaza—Forgetta Development LLC Dear Ms. Griffin: On behalf of Forgetta Development LLC, we are pleased to provide the following response to the review letter provided by VHB regarding the proposed multi-use development entitled Endicott Plaza: The following is an item-by-item response to the review letter prepared by VHB on November 8, 2000, 1. SITE PLAN REVIEW a) Location of Signs: The plans have been revised to show the location of warning and regulatory signs within the site. The plans prepared by Design Partnership Architects, Inc. include a sign elevation detail with the legend of"Endicott Plaza Office Park". The proposed location of this sign is not clear. The applicant should indicate the proposed location of this large sign and the location of any other retail signs proposed, The proposed entry signs shall be located within the large landscape buffer provided along the front of the site.The plans will be revised to show the exact location of both signs. All signs will comply with the requirements of Section 6 of the North Andover Zoning Bylaw. b) Lighting Facilities: The applicant's engineer states that lighting fixture type was submitted in the original submission. VHB has no record of this. The Applicant's engineer stated that an illumination plan showing foot-candle levels would be provided. VHB Has not received this. The fixture type was included in the application packet originally submitted on September 1,2000. The pole height, and light source were also indicated on the lighting facilities plan. Should VHB not be able to locate this information we would be happy to provide it a second time. Based upon comments received from your office dated September 28,2000, it was our understanding that the lighting plans submitted to date were appropriate and adequate for the proposed use. Please contact my office should the Planning Board feel that additional information is required. 2. TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY REVIEW 17 Tewksbury Street, Andover MA(Wlio 97fi,�yo.$S$z chIIW1—sc holm,ii1X0111 Ms. Heidi Griffin 11/13/00 Page 2 of 3 i a) The Applicant's Engineer stated in his response that the site driveway would be restriped to provide a shared through/left-turn lane and an exclusive right-turn lane. The plans do nor indicate any striping changes" The plans have been revised to incorporate a shared through/left-turn lane and an exclusive right-turn lane exiting the primary site driveway onto Osgood Street (Route 125). The revised Conceptual Improvement Plan for the primary site driveway is enclosed (Figure 1) and depicts the proposed striping changes. i b) As stated in our original comments, VHB's experience with pharmacies with drive-up windows is that traffic generation can be 3 times higher than the standard ITE data presented in the report. The Applicant's Engineer references past studies (conducted by VAI) which indicate trip rates are based on a number of factors including traffic volume on adjacent streets, competition in the area, and the retailer itself Furthermore, the rates for these types of pharmacies fall both above and below those rates documented by ITE. The Applicant's Engineer justifies the use of the standard ITE trip rates based on these studies. VHB recommends that a summary of these past studies completed by VAI be submitted for review. VHB's main concern is not specifically with the actual traffic generation rate itself, but whether internal traffic circulation may be adversely affected by the potential vehicle queue that may develop at the drive-up pharmacy window. The plans currently show storage for approximately 2-3 cars before internal site circulation becomes affected. VHB recommends that the Applicant's Engineer address these internal traffic concerns. i VAI will provide the requested documentation in a supplemental technical j memorandum that will be submitted to the Town and VHB for review in support of our conclusions. 3. STANDARD ENGINEERING PRACTICE a) It is not clear whether the fire department has approved of or has issues with the proposed driveway under the building overhang between the proposed retaillof ce building and the proposed office building. Lt. Andrew Melnikas has reviewed the plans and has no issues regarding the proposed driveway under the building overhang. The clear height is a minimum of 16 ft, and the overhang will be provided with automatic fire sprinklers. b) It appears the proposed retaining walls will be modular type (e.g. Varsa-lok). The design of these walls must account for surcharge resulting front vehicular impact to the proposed guardrail. The design is typically completed during construction. The design of the walls will account for surcharge resulting from vehicular impact to the proposed guardrail. 4. SEWER EXTENSION REVIEW i i Ms. Heidi Griffin 11/13/00 Page 3 of 3 { 1 I a) The applicant has provided traffic management details showing how the traflrc is maintained during the construction. Temporary road closures should be discussed with the Department of Public Works (DPW). The DPW should determine whether a road closure (temporar},or not) is appropriate for this roadway given the traffic volumes. We are not presently proposing temporary road closures as a part of our traffic management plan. We will continue to work with the DPW to determine the most appropriate measures to manage traffic during construction. On behalf of Forgetta Development LLC, and the design team we thank you for the careful and considerate review provided by the Town and the reviewing agents. We look forward to resolving any outstanding issues contained herein, and will continue to work with you to find appropriate solutions to your concerns. As always, please feel free to contact my office with any further questions or concerns, Sincerely, HUNTRESS ASSOCIATES, INC. Christian C. Huntress, ASLA Landscape Architect Cc: W. Barrett, Forgetta Development LLC A. Petrozelli, Design Partnership Architects, Inc. M. Howard, Epsilon Associates, Inc. J. Dirk, Vanasse Associates, Inc. M. Rosati,Marchionda&Associates,Inc. X 1 INV 1WVrA4c,74,-- . Ile Olt ----------- �,,,MARY ,Tc3 V 'I,R P , Al) A"C 11 �NED W/ G. 9 �R ROA jf WIDEN 10 PROVIDE EXCLUSIVE R3-7R PHARMA LEFT TURN LANE P OSED;. DRIVE—TH AL W, Ps tAN UUMM I U 7 ------ J LEN1\T10\jT 0 M D E 'EXCLUSIVE FT .7� t\FT AND RIGHT 1URN..1-Aigs _7 R3-7L, 3-71- swt R3-711711 48 S R3--7L -30 "ti s R 33, R3-7R z U-71- t -S RO 6SEQ.,YMEELCHA&-. V-W, 'R$w,P.,(T'ni'J" PROPOSED 8''"F.,WALK 7 �N Q RI-1 MEET EXISTINGG OF ROADWAY W3-3 (325! FROM St) 0 40 80 rm"Wpm"801 Scale in Feet Figure 1 Osgood Street at Barker Street and the Primary Site Driveway (Modified) R:\2640\2640sa.4wq 11/13/00 10:24:04 AM AM EST Copyright @ 2000 by VAi, All Rights Reserved. fi IJUNTRESS Asson../-1.�ES �i LANDSCAPE ARCHTTrCTURE & LAND PLANNING Tuesday, October 17, 2000 Ms, Heidi Griffin Town Planner Town of North Andover 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Re; Endicott Plaza---Forgetta Development LLC Dear Ms. Griffin: On behalf of Forgetta Development LLC, we are please to provide the following response to the review letters provided by VHB regarding the proposed multi-use development entitled Endicott Plaza: The following is an item-by-item response to the review letter prepared by VHB on September 28, 2000. 1) Section 8.1.7. : This section requires that the dimensions ofproposed parking spaces shall not he less than 9' wide and 18'long. The parking plan indicates that sonte of the parking spaces located at the east side of the proposed office building are 8'wide. The Applicant should revise the plan to conform the requirement of this section. HP spaces are shown as 8 ft wide with a shared 5 ft aisle for an equivalent width in excess of 9 ft. This has been considered adequate for meeting zoning requirements. 2) The following information is rewired by Section 8.3.5 and VHB offers the following conenrents: a) NORTHARROWILOCATIONMAP. A north arrow and the scale of the location map should he shown on the cover street. The location map is typically shown in 1"=1500'. North Arrow and Map will be provided as requested. b) EASEMENTS/LEGAL CONDITIONS. VHB assumes that there are no easements or legal encumbrances on the property that may prevent or place conditions on Ilse proposed development. The Applicant should verify this. All easements known to us have been shown on the submitted plans. c) STORMWA TER DRAINAGE/DRAINAGE BASIN STUDY:See comments below under the itent 4)Drainage Review. (1 BUILDING LOCATION. While fire report indicates the number of stories for each proposed building, VHB recommends that the number of stories, overall height in feet and gross floor area in square feet of all proposed structures be shown on the site plans. Information will be provided on the plans. 17 Tewksknry S€rect, Andover MA 018€0 g•�f3.c}/a.888z rhimtres,-halin.,iLrnu, I I i Heidi Griffin Town Planner October 17,2000 Page 2 of 13 e) BUILDING ELEVATION. The submission did not include an illustration of llte exterior of the buildings, as viewed from the front(street view). VHB recommendls that the illustration be submitted to the Planning Board. Plans were submitted to the Planning Board in the original package. We will forward an additional set to VHB for their files. f) NOTICE OF INTENT: VHB understands that a Notice of Intent has been filed with the North Andover Conservation Commission. VHB recommends that the findings of file Conservation Commission be forwarded to us for review. (EPSILON) g) LOCATION OF SIGNS: The plans do not indicate lire location of any proposed signs. The Applicant should add this information to the plans. The plans will be revised to show the location of proposed signs as requested. Both retail signage and internal directional signage are being proposed. The plans will be revised to show this information. h) LIGHTING FACILITIES: While the landscape plan shows a light layout of the site, no direction and degree of illumination has been provided. Also, the type of lighting fixture Gas not been provider. The Applicant should provide this information. The lighting fixture type was provided in the original submission. At your discretion, we would be happy to provide an illumination plan showing foot-candle levels. i) TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY: See comments below under the item 3) Traffic Impact Study Review. No response necessary. Responses indicated under item 3)Traffic Impact Study Review as appropriate. j j) COMMONWEALTH REVIEW: VHB understands that this plan will be submitted to the Massachusetts Highway department for application for appropriate permits. Osgood Street (Route 125) is defined as State Highway, therefore a state Highway access permit and traffic signal permit will be required from Massachusetts Highway Department(MHD). VHB recommends that the MHD permit requirements be forwarded to us for review. A State Highway Access Permit will be required from the Massachusetts Highway Department (MassHighway)for access to the project site from Osgood Street (Route 125), as well as for the construction of improvements within the State Highway Layout. These permits will be filed with MassHighway at the completion of the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act(MEPA) process and upon issuance of a Section 61 Finding from MassHighway. The Section 61 Finding will establish the requirements for the issuance of a State Highway Access Permit that the project proponent must meet. This document will be forwarded to the Town of North Andover Planning Department for review once MassHighway has issued it. k) FISCAL IMPACT: A fiscal impact report has not been submitted. The Applicant should submit this for review. Q\Huntress Associates\Jobs\Epsilon\Endicott Plaza\$evlew Letters\response-endicott-traffic.doc it Heidi Griffin Town Planner October 17,2000 Page 3 of 13 i A Fiscal Impact and Community Impact Report was prepared and submitted as a part of the original application package. 1) COMMUNITY IMPACT. No community impact report has been,submitted. The Applicant should submit the community impact report for review. (EPSILOA9 A Fiscal Impact and Community Impact Report was prepared and submitted as a part of the original application package. 3) TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY REVIEW. The traffic study,prepared by Vanasse and Associates InG, dated September 11, 2000, in general follows the standard engineering procedure for assessing the traffic impacts of the proposed development. VHB offers the following comments regarding the traffic study: a) Existing Conditions Evaluation The existing condition information and data gathering methodologies generally conform with standard engineering practices. The Applicant's engineer should provide clarification on the dates of the accident data gathered for the study. The report lists the latest three-year period available as January 1, 1996 to January 1, 1998. This range of dates only covers a 2-year period The accident data provided is for the most recent three-year time period available(January 1, 1996 through December 31, 1998)and is summarized in Table 2 of the Traffic Impact and Access Study (TIAS)that was prepared for the subject project. The reference to the time period covered by the accident data that was reviewed on page 5 of the TIAS is incorrect and should have read"... for the period from January 1, 1996 through December 31, 1998, the most recent three-year period { available." b) Future Conditions Evaluation The future condition information and methodologies generally conform with standard engineering practice for the preparation of a traffic impact assessment. Tile following sections were reviewed for general and technical conformance with engineering guidelines, I. Background Traffic Growth: The Applicant's engineer leas found that there are no specific developments planned or under construction in the vicinity of the proposed site that may affect traffic volumes along area roadways. Based on a review of Ilse Highway traffic volume data provided by MassHighway and through discussions with the planning department, a 2.0 percent growth rate was selected to project future traffic volumes onto the area roadways. Furthermore, there are no roadway improvements near the project either planned or currently underway that would change traffic volumes in the area. C_\Huntress Associates\Jobs\Upsilon\Pndlcolt Plaza\Review Letters\responseendicott-lraffic.doc 1 Heidi Griffin Town Planner October 17,2000 Page 4 of 13 No response necessary. 2. Traffic Generation: The Applicant's engineer has used standard Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE) data to project traffic volumes associated with the proposed development. The data presented in the report is consistent with ITE data and methodologies. The 25 percent pass-by rate is also consistent with MassHigh way policy. However, it has been our experience that the traffic data presented by the ITE for pharmacies with drive thru windows is significantly lower than actual "real-world" results. In certain cases, actual traffic generation can be 3 tintes higher than the data presented in ITE's Trip Generation. For this reason, it may be worthwhile for the Applicant's engineer to provide justification of the use of the ITE data or provide existing traffic generation data from a similar pharmacy with a drive-thru window in tie area. The volume of traffic generated by a retail use such as a pharmacy is highly dependent on a number of factors including the volume of traffic passing a site; the convenience of access; competition in the area; and the retailer itself(types of products sold, prices, store layout, etc.). All of these factors are highly variable and very site specific and retailer dependent. Studies performed by Vanasse& Associates, Inc. (VAI)at a number of pharmacies with drive-through windows over the past several years have shown trip rates both above and below those documented by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Accordingly, the use of the ITE trip rates results a reasonable, average condition, for the assessment of the traffic impacts of the proposed pharmacy and is in accordance with the procedures established by MassHighway and the Executive Office of Transportation and Construction(EOTC) guidelines for the preparation of Traffic Impact Assessments. Further, at this time, a specific tenant has not been identified for the pharmacy land use, and it may be that a general retailer, or other use, will occupy this building. In addition, it has been observed that the ITE trip rates for office buildings, hotels, and general retail space tend to overestimate the volume of traffic generated by these uses. Accordingly, the use of the ITE statistics to generate the anticipated traffic characteristics of the project site on an individual land use basis and not accounting for the interaction of land uses (internal trips)results in a reasonable, and prudent estimate of the traffic characteristics of the project. 3. Trip Distribution: The trip distribution and assignment for the development was broken into three separate components(retail, office, and hotel). The methodologies used to arrive at each components assignment appear to be sound, however no technical justification is provided to support these findings. A review of the trip assignment appears to coincide with lire existing traffic volumes on area roadivays. The Applicant's engineer should provide some technical justification for the traffic distributions arrived at in the study. As presented in the TIAS, the trip distribution for project was determined based on a number of factors including existing travel patterns within the study area, 1998 population and labor C;\Huntress Associates\Jobs\Upsilon\Endicott I'laza\tteview teliers\response-endicott.trafEic.doc Heidi Griffin Town Planner October 17,2000 Page 5 of 13 force data available from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Revenue, and the expected market area for the project. The trip-distribution pattern for the retail components of the proposed project were determined based on existing traffic patterns in the area, with a greater weighting on the Saturday midday peak hour, which is representative of the typical retail peak period. The trip distribution for the office component of the project was determined based on existing travel patterns within the study area during the weekday morning and evening peak-commuter periods, which directionally tended to coincide with the 1998 population and labor force statistics for the communities in the vicinity of the project site. The hotel trip distribution was determined based on the expected market area for a regional hotel chain, which would cater to local business travelers in the area and those traveling to and from 1-495 and the regional roadway network. Accordingly, the majority of trips related to the hotel component of the project were assigned to and from the north on Osgood Street and assumed to originate from the major employers to the north(Lucent Technologies, etc,) and the Route 125 connector to 1-495. e) Traffic Operations Analysis The traffic operations analysis methodologies generally conform to standard engineering practice for the preparation of a traffic impact assessment It should be noted that the operational analysis is based on the latest version of the Highway Capacity Software that reports information slightly different from previous analysis packages Tlhe following sections were reviewed for general and technical conformance with engineering guidelines. 1. Analysis Results. The study area signalized intersections currently operate at acceptable levels of service(LOS) that generally correspond to the actual observed operations of the signals. The unsignalized analysis indicate that vehicles exiting the side streets do so with some difficulty based on the current traffic volumes along Osgood Street. This is also consistent with brief observations in the field. We concur with VHB's interpretation of our results and their field observations. 2. A review of the analysis indicates that all area intersections under review will operate at acceptable levels(LOS D or better) under the 2005 Build Condition. The lone exception to this is the unsignalized intersection of Holt Road and Osgood Street, which will operate at LOS F under future conditions with or without lire project in place. No response necessary. 3. Traffic Signal Warrants Analysis: The Applicant's engineer prepared a traffic signal warrant analysis at several of the study area unsignalized intersections. The results of this analysis indicate that the intersection of Holt Road and Osgood Street(toes not meet the warrants for installation of a traffic signal. A traffic signal warrants analysis was also C:\HunUrss Associates\)oUs\f?psilon\Endicalt Plaza\Review Letters\response-endicolt-traffic.dec 0 I Heidi Griffin Town Planner October 17,2000 Page G of 13 Performed at the intersection of Barker Street, Ilse proposed site driveway, and Osgood Street. The results indicate that a traffic signal is not currently warranted, but could meet the warrants when the project is in place and occupied. The traffic signal is warranted based on Warrant#11 (Peak Hour Volume) which states that a traffic signal is needed when "traffic conditions are such that for one hour of the(lay minor street traffic suffers undue traffic delay in entering or crossing a major street". Based on the traffic volume forecasts, the primary reason for lite signal being justified is to accommodate the traffic exiting die site driveway. The traffic volume solely along Barker Street would not require Ilse installation of a traffic signal at this location. We concur with VHB's interpretation of the results of the traffic signal warrants analysis performed at the intersection of Osgood Street at Holt Road and Osgood Street and Barker Street and the proposed site driveway. d) Conclusions and Recommendations The project proponent has developed a series of mitigation actions to accommodate the traffic generated as part of the proposed project. They are summarized below: 1. Site Access: The proponent proposes to provide two driveways accessing the site via Osgood Street: one right in/right out driveway and one signalized driveway opposite Barker Street. i a) The right-in/right--out driveway would provide a right-turn deceleration lane into file site. This right-turn deceleration lane could have an impact to the driveway leading to #1284 Osgood Street. The right-turn lane would make it more difficult for traffic exiting this driveway to enter the Osgood Street mainline traffic flow. We recommend that the project proponent and owner of this property discuss the impacts to this driveway. If necessary, consideration should be given to extending lire right-turn deceleration lane and/or relocating the driveway location. ' The project proponent discussed the design and location of both the north site driveway and the proposed right-turn lane entering this driveway with the affected property owner prior to the submission of the TIAS and associated Conceptual Improvement Plan to the State and Town. However, at the request of the Town and MassHighway, the proposed right-turn lane entering the north site driveway is being re-evaluated and may be eliminated in favor of a tapered, widened shoulder entering the driveway. b) The signalized driveway along Osgood Street would provide full access to and from the site as well as Barker Street. Before getting into specific comments, we concur with the statement in the report that identifies the need to prepare "a more detailed traffic signal warrants analysis... in conjunction with the preparation of the Functional Design Report(FDA) to be submitted to MassHighway" Copies of this report should C:\Huntress Associates\Jobs\Epsilon\Endicott Plaza\I Mew Leiters\respons"ndicolt-traFftcdoc Heidi Griffin Town Planner October 17,2000 Page 7 of 13 1 also be sent to the Town for review as well. The findings of this more detailed traffic signal warrant should be sufficient to justify the installation of a signal at this location. The project proponent will provide a copy of the Functional Design Report (FDR)and associated MassHighway 25 percent design plans for the proposed improvements along Osgood Street to the Town for review and comment. The FDR will include a detailed traffic signal warrants analysis justifying the installation of a traffic control signal at the intersection of Osgood Street at Barker Street and the proposed south site driveway. 2. Traffic Signal Design:In general, we feel that the traffic signal is justified based on the traffic volume projections presented in the report. However, based on the analysis presented in the report and Figure 18 (the Conceptual Improvement Plan), we recommend that the proponent consider the following issues/comments related to the operational issues of rite signal design: a) Provide queue analysis for all 2005 Build conditions. There is the potential for traffic queues at this intersection to interfere with driveways and roadways adjacent to the proposed signals Without queue information, the actual impacts are not easily identified There are a number of unsignalized driveways that are in lire immediate vicinity of d►e i intersection tltat may have left-turn access affected by the proposed signal. A vehicle queue analysis will be performed at all of the study area intersections and at the proposed signalized intersection of Osgood Street at Barker Street and the site driveway as requested by the Town and MassHighway as a part of the Single Environmental Impact Report � (SEIR)to be prepared for the subject project. b) Consider restriping the site driveway to provide a shared throughfleft-turn lane and an exclusive right-turn lane. This redesign could permit right-turn traffic to exit the site during off-peak hours as right-turn-on-reel operation and would permit an overlap phase with the left-turn phase front Osgood Street. This could provide a(I{litional greets-tine to the mainline corridor. i I Given the relatively small volume of through traffic destined to Barker Street from the project site, VAI concurs with this recommendation and will revise the site driveway layout to provide a shared through/left-turn lane and an exclusive right-turn lane, c) Provide analysis of the interaction between the proposed signal and the nearby intersection of Olt Farm RoadlBarker Street. Traffic data was not presented in dte traffic study for the intersection of ON Farm Road and Barker Street. While we recognize that the proposed signal may have some operational benefits to the Barker Street corridor(by C:\Huntress jLssodates\Jobs\Epsilon\Pndicolt Plaza\Review Utiers\responseendicott-traffic.doe Heidi Griffin Town Planner October 17,2000 Page 8 of 13 Permitting vehicles to enter Osgood Street in a controlled manner), our concern is related to traffic queues and sight distance provided at ON Farm Roars. The impact of the operation of the proposed traffic signal at the intersection of Osgood Street at Barker Street and the proposed site driveway on the intersection of Old Farm Road at Barker Street will be limited to vehicle queuing and will be evaluated in detail as a part of the queue analysis to be performed as a part of the SEIR, We concur with VHB's observation that in general, the proposed traffic signal will improve access to and from Baker Street, thereby benefiting traffic operations at the intersection of Barker Street at Old Farm Road and reducing overall vehicle delays. A review of sight distances along Barker Street approaching the proposed traffic signal was undertaken as a part of the TIAS and it was recommended that advance signing be provided on Barker Street indicating the presence of the proposed traffic signal ahead. d) Address the potential need for signal coordination between the proposed signal and the existing signal at the intersection of Osgood Street and Great Pond Road. The proximity of these signals to each other(approximately 1000 feet) and the high volume of northbound/southbound through traffic at each location may lend itself to providing j progression through this corridor. This could result in less air quality impacts to the region. We are in the process of reviewing the benefits and feasibility of coordinating the proposed traffic signal at the intersection of Osgood Street at Barker Street and the site driveway to the existing traffic signal at the intersection of Osgood Street at Great Pond Road. These two traffic signals will be located approximately 1,600 feet apart, with several driveways and a side street located between the two intersections. As such, it is likely that vehicle platooning will become dispersed, resulting in poor progression. Accordingly, the anticipated benefits of traffic signal coordination(decreased travel time, reduced startingistopping, and improved air quality) may not be achieved. e) Address the need for bicycle accommodations at the intersection. The proposed plan does not appear to provide adequate bicycle accommodations at the intersection (although it does provide provisions along the remainder of the Osgood Street corridor). MassHighway design standards will require the provision of bicycle accommodations at the intersection unless a waiver is granted. The proposed traffic signal and roadway improvements will include provisions for pedestrian and bicycle accommodations in accordance with MassHighway design standards. The proposed traffic signal will incorporate both bicycle and pedestrian detection as a part of the traffic signal system, C;\Huntress elssociatps\Jobs\Epsilon\Endicott Plaza\Review Letters\response-endkolt-traffic.doc I Heidi Griffin Town Planner October 17,2000 Page 9 of 13 e) Off-Site Improvements 1. Osgood Street and Great Pond Road. It is not clear if the proponent proposes to retime and phase the signal to provide better operations at this intersection as part of the project or merely suggest signal timing adjustments to MassHighway and the Town. The proponent should clarify this issue. Regardless, die signal tinging improvements proposed appear to improve overall signal operations at this intersection. Consideration should be given to signal coordination with the proposed signal at Osgood Street and Barker Street (as noted in comment 5 above). The project proponent will provide detailed traffic signal timing and phasing plan for the intersection of Osgood Street at Great Pond Road to MassHighway and the Town upon occupancy of the site for implementation by MassHighway. As stated previously, we are in the process of reviewing the benefits and feasibility of coordinating the proposed traffic signal at the intersection of Osgood Street at Barker Street and the site driveway to the existing traffic signal at the intersection of Osgood Street at Great Pond Road. These two traffic signals will be located approximately 1,600 feet apart, with several driveways and a side street located between the two intersections. As such, it is likely that vehicle platooning will become dispersed, resulting in poor progression. Accordingly, the anticipated benefits of traffic signal coordination(decreased travel time, reduced starting/stopping, and improved air quality)may not be achieved. 2. Osgood Street and Holt Road. The unsignalized intersection will continue to operate at or over capacity in the future as traffic volumes increase along Osgood Street. The proponent proposes to conduct a thorough traffic signal warrants analysis at this location. It is likely that a traffic signal at this location will not be warranted unless additional development occurs along Holt Road in the future. Furthermore, there does not appear to be a safety concern at the intersection based on the crash statistics presented for the past three years. We concur with VHB's assessment of the applicability of the future installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Osgood Street at Holt Road, as well as conclusion that there does not appear to be a safety concern at this intersection based on the crash statistics. 3. Transportation Demand Management Strategies: The proponent proposes to implement a TDM progra►n at the site to encourage alternative modes of transportation and reduction in single occupant vehicles (SOVs) to and from the site. While some phases of TDM programs are limited with respect to retail-based trips, the office component could provide some beneficial impacts to the local roadway system. The proponent should consider joining the local transportation management association(TMA), if one exists. lit the absence of an existing TMA, the proponent could assist the Town in developing a regional TMA far the North Audover area. C.\Huntress iVsociates`Jobs\Epsilon\Endicolt Plaza\Revlew Cotters\response endicoli-traffic.doc 1 Heidi Griffin Town Planner October 17,2000 Page 10 of 13 The project proponent will identify and join the local TMA, if available, and will work with the Town, the Merrimack Valley Regional Transit Authority and the Merrimack Valley Planning Commission on the development of a regional TMA for the North Andover area if one does not currently exist. 4) DRAINAGE REVIEW: The proposed drainage design is a closed drainage system that includes catch basin, drain manholes, stormeeptors and a detention basin.A detailed drainage review will be provided by the Conservatiott Commissions ettgineerittg consultant. VHB offers the following general comments regarding standard engineering practices and constructability of the proposer) drainage design. a) The.1 S-inch roof drain pipe located on the west side of the proposed retail building appears to conflict with I2-inch lateral storm drain pipe. The Applicant,should verify that the clearance for each utility crossing is adequate and resolves the conflict as necessary. Information as requested will be provided on the plans b) The rim elevation of SMHH7 appears to be missing from the plan. Please revise. Information as requested will be provided on the plans c) VHB recommends that a detail for proposed stormceptor(series 4800) be added to the details plait. Information as requested will be provided on the plans d) The proposed outlet control structure details indicates that the width of the headwall is 30 incites. This width of the headwall is inadequate for the proposed 30-inch diameter pipe. The Applicant should revise the width to accommodate a 30-inch cored opening, Information as requested will be provided on the plans e) VHB recommends that the emergency ou0ow channel be identified in the detention basin. Information as requested will be provided on the plans f) The "Typical Section Outlet Structure"detail refers to the Town of Westborough. This is obviously a drafting error. VHB recommends that frames and grates installer)in this development should conform to the Town of North Andover standards. The Applicant should revise this detail on sheet E-6. Information as requested will be provided on the plans g) If there will be standing water in the proposed detention basin for all extended period of time, VHB recommends that chain link fence be provided around the perimeter of the detention basin with an access gate for maintenance. The sump in the detention basin will be eliminated thereby eliminating the need for a fence. C:\Hunlress Associates\Jobs\Epsilon\Endicott f'laza\ttevlew Letters\response-endicett-trafflc.doc I Heidi Griffin Town Planner October 17,2000 Page I 1 of 13 it) Larger diameter drain manholes maybe required when more than four drain pipes enter/e-rit a manhole. The plans should include provisions for larger diameter manholes. Larger manholes will be provided. 5) STANDARD ENGINEERING PRACTICE: VHB has reviewed llte site plans far conformance to standard engineering practices. The purpose is to document tite engineering issues and potential construction issues associated with the project. VHB offers the following comments related to vehicular safety,pedestrian safety and potential construction issues: a) VHB recommends that wheelchair ramps he provided at all handicap parking areas unless the sidewalk in these areas is flush with the parking lot pavement. It is our intention to taper the curb flush with the parking lot in these areas. The plans will be revised to show this more clearly. b) The site plans indicate a proposed driveway under the building overhang between the proposed retail/office building and the proposed office building. VHB recomnrettds that the Applicaut coordinate with the fire department in regard to this overhang. Also, the Applicant should verify the clearance and the sight distance for vehicle exiting this overhang. Drive through is 16'-6"clear height. Massachusetts Highway Bridge Design requires 14'-0" clearance for height. c) VHB recommends that pavement markings and warning and regulation signage(e.g. stop signs, no parking signs, speed limit signs, etc.) be provided on the site plans. The Applicant should clearly indicate the direction of traffic flow in parking areas. The site plans will be revised to incorporate pavement markings, warning signs, and regulatory signs, as well as the directional flow in the parking areas. d) Several areas have proposed retaining walls next to the site driveway or parking lot. Given the differences in elevation and for safety reasons, VHB recommends(fiat guardrail be provided at these locations. I Guardrails will be provided in the grass strip between the wall and the parking lot on all walls greater than 30" in height. e) Given the differences in elevation and for safety reasons, the Applicant should also consider fencing at the retaining walls that are close to the driveways and in areas that any pedestrians may have access to. Fencing will be provided at the retaining wall to the left of the entrance drive. The Applicant should identify what types of retaining walls are being proposed Also, the Applicant should provide a detail that illustrates how the guardrail is attached or located oil or near the retaining wall. C:\Huntress Associates\Jabs\Hpsilou\Lndfcolt Plaza\Review letters\respons"ndkolt-traffic.doc i ' Heidi Griffin „ Town Planner October 17,2000 Page 12 of 13 Retaining wall detail will be included on the plans. g) It appears that additional proposed hydrants are required to provide adequate fire protection. VHB recommends that the number of proposed hydrants be reviewed and additional hydrants added(near proposed office building) to ensure that adequate fire protection is being provider! f) Tile proposed building all show afire protection water service and a domestic water service. VHB recommends that the Applicant cousider relocating the fire protection service shut off valve before the "T"fitting and domestic water shut off valve. g) Given the scope of this development, VHB recommends that the water main be looped aroun the site and reconnected to the existing water main on Osgood Street. (G,F,G ABOVE) We are meeting with the fire department to discuss the necessity of these iss es. �rf ' h) VHB recommends that the Applicant should consider an irrigation system for the site. An irrigation system is being considered for the site, i) VHB recommends that a detail or section showing the storntwater recharge system and lire proposed retaining wall located behind the hotel be prepared. The detail should include top of wall elevations, bottom of wall elevations,parking lot elevations,ground water elevations and drywell elevations. The detail should also address how the emergency overflow pipe will be constructed through the retaining wall. The appropriate detail will be provided. 6) SEWER EXTENSION RE VIEW: VHB has reviewed the proposed sewer extension plan,prepared by Marchionda and Associates Inc. dated August 31, 2000 for conformance to standard engineering practices. VHB offers the following comments regarding llte sewer extension design: a) No vertical scale has been shown for the profiles. b) The construction of the proposed sewer force main requires 6 to 10 feet deep excavation. VHB recommends that braced excavation measures be provided to minimize the intpacts to existing features in the vicinity.Also, the Applicant should provide traffic management plan showing how llte traffic is maintained during the construction. c) VHB recommends that a sewer force stain trench detail be provided The detail should include dimensions of the trench, backfill materials and pavement detail where the trench is in existing roadway. d) VHB recommends that erosion control measures like hay bale and silt fence be provided on the plans C:\Huntress Associates\Jobs\Epsilon\L'ndicoltPlar-a\Review Ullers\response-endicotl-traffic.doc I ' Heidi Griffin Town Planner October 17,2000 Page 13 of 13 e) The proposed sewer extension is within lire 25 foot No Disturbance Zone of die flagged wetland. A Notice of Intent is required by the Nordr Andover Conservation Commission (NA CC). (6a-c)This information will be incorporated in the plan set with the exception of the traffic management plan that will be provided on plans submitted to MHD. On behalf of liorgetta Development LLC, and the design team we thank you for the careful and considerate review provided by the Town and the reviewing agents. We look forward to resolving any outstanding issues contained herein, and will continue to work with you to find appropriate solutions to you concerns. As always, please feel free to contact my office with any further questions or concerns. Sincerely, HUNTRESS SSOCIATES, INC. Christian C. Huntress, ASLA Landscape Architect Cc: W. Barrett, Forgetta Development LLC A. Petrozelli, Design Partnership Architects, Inc. M. Howard, Epsilon Associates, Inc. J. Dirk, Yanasse Associates, Inc. M. Rosati, Marchionda &Associates, Inc. C.\Huntress Associates\Jobs\iRpsiion\Pnd(cottPiaza\[teview Letters\response-ejtdicoit-trafflcdoc