Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0_Prescott Street_North Andover_MA_Response to HW Comment - Civil Deisgn Group - Consultant Review - 0 Prescott Street 2/11/2026 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com February 11, 2026 via email Ms. Jean Enright, Planning Director Planning Department Town of North Andover 120 Main Street North Andover, MA 01845 Re:Proposed Residential Development – Comprehensive Permit Application 0 Prescott Street, North Andover, MA 01845 Peer Review- Response to comments Dear Ms. Enright and Board Members: On behalf of the applicant,East Mill Housing, LLC, Civil Design Group, LLC (CDG) is in receipt of the Horsley Witten Group (HW) peer reviewcomment letters, dated 12/17/2025. Our responses are provided in bold below the original comments. Supporting plans, calculations and additional informationare enclosed herein: 1.Standard 1: No new stormwater conveyances (e.g., outfalls) may discharge untreated stormwater directly to or cause erosion in wetlands or waters of the Commonwealth. a.The Applicant has analyzed the pre- and post-development stormwater runoff to four points of analysis (POA). •POA-1 is an existing 18-inch culvert that carries stormwaterfrom the existing garage roof and a portion of the existing parking lot (EX-1) under the western driveway and discharges intothe existing municipal drainage system in High Street (POA-2).The culvert will remain under proposed conditions. The proposed catchment area(PR-1) isreducedsignificantlyfromthe existing catchment area because it does not include the proposed building. CDG Response: Acknowledged. No response required. •POA-2 is the existingmunicipal drainage systeminHighStreet.Thestormwater from alarge portion of the existingand proposed siteisdirectedinto the municipal system(EX-2). Under proposed conditions a portion of the development is directed towards a subsurface chambersystem(SIS-1) and a portion of the building is piped directly towards the closed drainage system.Thecatchmentareas directed towards POA-2 include most of the proposed development. HW notes that the stormwater from a portion of the southern parking lot withinEX-2 andPR-2 appearstoflow offsite via the center driveway. It is not obvious how this runoff isdirected into the drainage system defined by POA-2. CDG Response: The runoffsheet flowing from the area in question flows down the center driveway and then in a westerly direction toward High Street as illustrated by the contours just south of the property line. The POA-2 lineis intended todenote runoff flowing from thesite towards High Street. 1 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com •POA-3 is the portion of the project area on the east side of the site that flows towards the east and the adjacent Meadow View Condominium property (EX-3). Under proposedconditions this area is reduced slightly (PR-3). CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. •POA-4 is the portion of the project area that flows southeast onto the southern parkinglot(EX-4).Underproposedconditionsthiscatchment areaisreduced slightly (PR-4). HW notes thatthenarrativeandFigure3describe EX-4as consistingof0.24acres.However, itis approximately 0.39acres as listedinthe HydroCADmodel.HWfurther notesthatitappears thatthewesternsideofEX-4 andPR-4flows towardsan18-inchcorrugatedmetalpipe(CMP)that isdirected intoEX-1andPR-1. HWrecommendsthattheApplicant revisitthecatchment areastoPOA-4underexistingandproposedconditions. CDG Response: EX-4 and PR-4 subcatchments have been revised accordingly. b.The closest resourcearea isMill Pond tothesoutheast ofthe project area.The proposed development is greaterthan100feetfromthis pond. HWrecommendsthatthe Applicant clarifywherethe closed drainage systemmodeled asPOA-2 dischargesto.HW furtherrecommendsthatthe Applicant confirmthat thefinal discharge point isnot currently causingerosionin wetlands or watersofthe Commonwealth. CDG Response: The closed drainage system thattakesrunoff from POA-2 is the system at the High Street curb cut. The systemcontinues to travel south down High Street and eventually connects into the large culvert conveying runoff through West Mill tothe ponds in therear of the West Mill site. 2.Standard 2: Stormwater management systems shall be designed so that post-development peak discharge rates do not exceed pre-development peak discharge rates. a.The Applicant hasincluded a PeakFlow RateComparison Table in Section 7.0of the StormwaterManagement Narrative. ThePost-development peakflows donot exceed the pre-development values. HWrecommendsthat the Applicant updatethe Table, if applicable, after responding tothe other comments in thisletter. CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. b.Per §250-22B.(5)(b) and §250-23A.(1) ofthe NorthAndoverStormwaterRegulations, Low-Impact development(LID)siteplanning anddesign strategiesmust be implemented tothemaximum extentfeasible. The Applicant has incorporatedone subsurface infiltration chamber system asan LIDtechnique.HW recommendsthatthe Applicant document otherLID options itconsidered withinthe Project Area. CDG Response: The Applicant has requested a waiver from the local Stormwater Bylaw. The plan intends to comply withthe applicablestormwater regulations in accordance withthe MassDEP Stormwater Handbookand the EPA NPDES/SWPPP requirements. However, additional LID measures include re-using 2 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com the existingswale to capture and convey runoff and to substantially match the existing impervious area in the proposed condition. c.In accordance with §250-22 B. (5)(c), HW recommends that the Applicant identify the watershed basin and the downgradient water body that stormwater from the project site discharges into. CDG Response: The Applicant has requested a waiver from the local Stormwater Bylaw. The plan intends to comply withthe applicablestormwater regulations in accordance withthe MassDEP Stormwater Handbookand the EPA NPDES/SWPPP requirements.Thewatershed basin associated with this site is the Merrimack River basin. Runoff from this site and the campus as a whole drains in a westerly direction via large culverts and piping to Osgood Pond behind the West Mill Campus. Runoff continues towards Sutton Pond and eventually into the Merrimack River. d.In accordance with§250-22 C. (4)(c), HW recommends that the Applicant delineate any existing or proposed slopes between 15% and 25% and over 25%. CDG Response: The Applicant has requested a waiver from the local Stormwater Bylaw. The plan intends tocomply withthe applicablestormwater regulations in accordance withthe MassDEP Stormwater Handbookand the EPA NPDES/SWPPP requirements.The existing and proposed developed portions of the site are less than 5% and the sloped areato therear is less than 10%. The side slope of theexisting swale to remain is 3H:1V. e.In accordance with §250-22 C. (4)(g), HW recommends that the Applicant call out any significant or unique trees or tree clusters. CDG Response: The Applicant has requested a waiver from the local Stormwater Bylaw. The plan intends to comply withthe applicablestormwater regulations in accordance withthe MassDEP Stormwater Handbookand the EPA NPDES/SWPPP requirements.Much of the site lies within the developed area and the project includes arobust landscaping plan, particularlyalong the outer edges of the site. f.In accordance with §250-22 C. (5)(b), HW recommends that the Applicant includes profiles of the drainage truck lines. CDG Response: The Applicant has requested a waiver from the local Stormwater Bylaw. The plan intends to comply withthe applicable stormwater regulations in accordance withthe MassDEP Stormwater Handbookand the EPA NPDES/SWPPP requirements.The drainage system sizing in High Street at the connection point is a 12”drainlineand conflict points with other utilities have been evaluated. g.In accordancewith §250-22 D.(1and 4),the calculations providedshouldinclude peak flow rates andvolumes.HW hasconfirmedthatthe peak volumeshave been reduced over existing conditions.However, werecommend thatthe Applicant includes atable with thepre-andpost-peak volumesof stormwater runoff fordocumentation purposes. 3 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com CDG Response: The Applicant has requested a waiver from the local Stormwater Bylaw. The plan intends to comply withthe applicablestormwater regulations in accordance withthe MassDEP Stormwater Handbookand the EPA NPDES/SWPPP requirements. A volume mitigation tablehas been added to the Stormwater Report. h.HW notesthat theApplicant hasuseda direct entry of 6minutesfor thetimes of concentration(Tc) values for all Pre-development and Post-development catchment areas. HW recommendsthat theApplicant revisit the Tcvaluesfor catchment areas EX- 2 and PR-2in accordance with §250-23 E. (18) and providetheflow pathson Figures3 and4. CDG Response: Tc’s have been added to theplanand revised in the modelling. i.In accordancewith §250-23 E. (19),the Applicant must utilize the24-hourrainfall data takenfrom National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Atlas 14forthe rainfall precipitationdepths. TheApplicant hasused theNortheast Regional Climate Center(NRCC) values, which are similar. YearNRCC ValuesNOAA Atlas 14 Values 2-year3.15 inches3.15 inches 10-year4.83 inches5.00 inches 25-year6.16 inches6.15 inches 100-year8.94 inches7.93inches CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. j.In accordance with §250-23 E. (22), HW recommends that the Applicant provides pipe sizing calculations using Mannings Equation and confirmsthat the drainage pipes can accommodate a 25-year storm event. CDG Response: The Applicant has requested a waiver from the local Stormwater Bylaw. The plan intends to comply withthe applicablestormwater regulations in accordance withthe MassDEP Stormwater Handbookand theEPA NPDES/SWPPP requirements.The drainage connectionpoints in High Street are 12”pipe,therefore, increasingpipe sizes based on onsite pipe capacity would be ineffectiveif its required. The Applicant intends to continue their conversation withthe DPW regardingthe regional flood management studyand to explore alternatives to maximize runoff conveyance through thecampus. k.HW notesthattheexistingpipeconfigurationattheintersectionwithHighStreetand thedriveway accessdriveisconfusing.HWrequeststhattheApplicant clarifyhowthe various catchbasins andmanholesareconnected. Furthermore,theApplicant is connecting anew18-inchdrainpipe totheexistingdrainagesystem atanexistingcatch basin, itis notclearthesizeoftheexistingdrainpipes andiftheexistingsystemcan 4 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com manage the proposed runoff. HW recommendsthat the Applicant provides additional documentation on the existing drainpipes. Iffeasible, HW recommends that the Applicant tieinto the existing systemat a manhole. CDG Response: The existing drainage infrastructureis comprised of multiple catch basins that ultimately tie intotheHigh Streetdrainage systemand is conveyed towards the large existingculvert that traverses to Mill Pondbehind the West Mill Development.The proposed 18” pipe denotation is intended to indicate a 12” pipe, and the same has been corrected on the plans. Since the watershed to swale has been reduced by 2 acres, the 18” existing pipe is oversized as compared to the contributing flow.For comparison, a 12” RCP with a 1.2% slope can convey 4.6 cfs of runoff and an 18” RCP with the sameslope can convey over 11 cfs. The contributing watershed generates approximately 4.1 cfs of flow. l.In accordance with §250-23 E. (30), all drainpipes areto be reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) with aminimum diameter of 12 inches. HW notes that the Applicant is proposing high-density polyethylene (HDPE) pipes. CDG Response: The Applicant has requested a waiver from the local Stormwater Bylaw. The plan intends to comply withthe applicablestormwater regulations in accordance withthe MassDEP Stormwater Handbook and the EPA NPDES/SWPPP requirements. Plastic pipe is an industry standardmaterial widely accepted onprivate property projects. 3.Standard 3 requires that the annual recharge from post-development shall approximate annual recharge from pre-development conditions. a.The Applicant has provided a NaturalResources Conservation Service(NRCS) Soils mapwhich documented that the soils on siteareclassified as UrbanLand and Woodbridge. The Applicant conducted soil test pits within the footprint of the infiltrationsystem toconfirmthe EstimatedSeasonalHigh Ground Water(ESHGW) and the exfiltration rateusedin the HydroCAD model. The soil in the testholeswas listedassandand the Applicant has usedanexfiltrationrate of 2.41 inchesper hour (iph) in the HydroCAD model. HW finds the exfiltrationrateto be reasonable. CDG Response: Acknowledged. No response required. b.HW notes that bottom of the infiltration system isset at elevation 95.0 and the ESHGW in test pit T-1 indicates that ESHGW is at approximately elevation 91.0 providing the required four feet of separation. No further action is requested. CDG Response: Acknowledged. No response required. c.The Applicant has provided drawdown calculations in Section 9.0 of the Stormwater Management Narrative.HW notes that the Applicant has stated that the increase in impervious area is approximately 0.03+ acres. The HydroCAD calculations indicate the increase is 0.041 acres. HW could not confirm the volume of stormwater being retained in the subsurface infiltration system with the information provided. HW recommends that the Applicant provide the stage storage area printout from the HydroCAD model for confirmation. 5 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com CDG Response: Enclosed in the resubmission is the infiltration storage table. As illustrated, there is approximately 588 cubic feet of storage below the lowest orifice,thereby exceeding the requirement. 4.Standard 4 requires that the stormwatersystem be designed to remove 80% Total Suspended Solids (TSS) and to treat 1-inch of volume from the impervious area for water quality. a.TheApplicant hasprovidedwaterqualitycalculations toconfirmthatthetreatment trainsexceedthe80% TSSremovalrequirement pertheMSHand§250-23C.(1) ofthe NorthAndover StormwaterRegulations. HWrecommends thattheApplicantprovides documentationconfirmingtheTSSremovalprovidedbytheproposedproprietary devices. HWnotesthattheApplicant hasprovidedadetailofaHydroworks HS4. However, wecouldnot locatewherethisdeviceis proposed. CDG Response: The HS unit is locatedin front of the garage portion of the buildingand is labelled as DMH-9. The rooftop garage parking lot drains into the HS unit. b.In accordancewith §250-23 B. (1)(b), HW recommendsthatthe Applicant provides calculations toverifythat theproposedstormwater chamber systems cancaptureand retainthe volume of runoff generated by1-inchtimesthe increase inimpervious area of the site. HW couldnot confirm thevolumeof stormwater retained withthe documentation provided. CDG Response: The impervious area increaseof 0.03 acres translates to approximately109 cubic feet, which is retainedwithinthe subsurface infiltration systembased on previous responses. c.HW recommends that the Applicant address the Phosphorous removal calculations in accordance with §250-23 C. (1) of the North Andover Stormwater Regulations. CDG Response: The Applicanthas requested a waiver from the localStormwater Bylaw. The plan intends to comply withthe applicablestormwater regulations in accordance withthe MassDEP Stormwater Handbookand the EPA NPDES/SWPPP requirements. As previously stated, the infiltration system captures and infiltrates the 1-inch volume from the proposed impervious areaincrease. 5.Standard 5 is related to projects with a Land Use of Higher Potential Pollutant Loads (LUHPPL). a.The proposed project is not considered a LUHPPL. Standard 5 is not applicable. CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. 6.Standard 6 is related to projects with stormwater discharging into a critical area, a Zone II, or an Interim Wellhead Protection Area of a public water supply. a.The proposed development is not discharging near or into a critical area, Zone II or an IWPA area. Standard 6 is not applicable. CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. 6 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com 7.Standard7isrelatedtoprojectsconsideredRedevelopment.Aredevelopmentproject is requiredtomeetthefollowingStormwaterManagementStandards onlytothemaximum extentpracticable:Standard2, Standard3,andthepretreatment andstructuralbest management practicerequirementsof Standards4,5,and6. Existingstormwater discharges shallcomplywithStandard1only tothemaximumextentpracticable.A redevelopment projectshallalsocomply withallotherrequirements oftheStormwater Management Standardsandimproveexistingconditions a.This project is considered amix of new development andredevelopment.The Applicant is requiredtocomplywith thenew development standardsfortheincreasein impervious areas asdescribed under Standards3 and4 above. TheApplicant isrequiredtomeet the standardsfortheremainder ofthesitetothemaximumextent practicable andimprove existing conditions. HWrecommendsthatthe Applicant describehow it isimproving existing conditions. CDG Response: Existing conditions are improvedby reducing the amount of non- rooftopimperviousarea. The existing garageand proposedbuildingare approximatelythesame area, however,thetop-levelparking deck totalsover 2 acres and the proposed garagedeckhas been reduced to 0.60 acres, therefore, 1.4± acres of imperviousareahavebeen converted to ‘clean’runoff. Additionally, the watershed associated withtheexisting swale on the lower parking lot has been reduced bythe same2 acres in theproposed condition. Assuch, the swale’s treatment effectivenesstheoreticallywill be increasedand the flow throughthe 18” pipe is much less. 8.Standard 8 requires a planto control construction related impactsincluding erosion, sedimentation, or other pollutant sources. a.The Applicant hasprovided a SiteDemolition &Erosion Control Plan. HW recommends that theApplicant clarifythetype of erosion control barrier proposed. Theplans call for a wattle, andthe detail references asilt sock withasilt fence. It isHW’s opinion that the silt sockwith asilt fenceis the preferredmethod. CDG Response: The nomenclatureonthe plan has been modifiedand the intent is to installsilt sock with asilt fence. b.HW recommends that the Applicant includes a detail of the construction fence that is proposed on the northern limit of work. CDG Response: A constructionfence detail has been added to the detail sheets. c.HW recommends that the Applicant includes inlet protection in all existing catch basins within 100 feet of the construction entrance. CDG Response: A note indicating the same hasbeen added to the erosion control plans. d.The limit of disturbancewill be greater than1acre therefore aConstruction General Permit (CGP) and aStormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is required by EPA. 7 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com The ZBA may choosetorequire afinal signedSWPPP aminimum of 14days priorto land disturbance. CDG Response:Acknowledged. 9.Standard 9 requires a Long-Term Operation and Maintenance(O & M) Plan to be provided. a.The Applicant hasprovided anOperation andMaintenance Plan withintheStormwater Management Report. The plan lists thepropertyowner andsite engineer. The ZBAmay choose torequirereceipt of a signedO&M Plan prior to occupancy as acondition of approval. CDG Response: The Operation and Maintenance Plan includesthe Owner’s signature. b.The O&M Plan indicates that solid waste materials will be stored in dumpsters provided on site. It is not obviouson the Site Plan where thedumpsters are located. CDG Response: The dumpstersare stored inside the garageportionof the building in similarfashionthe recently constructedapartments on the West Mill and East Mill side. c.HW notes that the O&M Plan statesthat Pet Waste is not anticipated based on the proposed use of the site. HWrecommendsthat the Applicant clarify if dogs will be prohibited from the residential units. CDG Response: Pets are not prohibited and the Operation and Maintenance Plan has been modified. d.Section 3 of the O&M Plan references yard drains. However, it is not clear how these should be maintained. CDG Response: Yard drains shall be maintained in the same manner as catch basins. e.The Applicant has notedthat the Hydrodynamic Separator should be cleaned per the manufacturer’s recommendation. HW recommends that the Applicant includes the manufacturer’s recommendations with the O&MPlan. CDG Response: The manufacturer’s recommendations have been added to the O&M Plan. f.TheApplicant has included a Quarterly Stormwater Inspection Report. HW recommends that the Applicant include the catch basins, the yard drains, andthe deepsumpdrain manholes as part of this Report. CDG Response: The Inspection Report has been updatedas requested. g.HW recommends that the Applicant includes the snow storage locations on the Figure -1 BMP Location Plan. CDG Response: Snow storageareas have been added to theBMP Plan. 8 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com h.HW recommends that the Applicant provides the O&M Plan as a standalone document that can be provided to the property owner(s). CDG Response: The O&M Plan includes its own cover sheet;therefore,itis a standalonedocumentand will only need to be extracted from the Stormwater Report at the appropriate time. 10.Standard 10 requiresan Illicit Discharge Compliance Statement be provided. a.The Applicant has provided a signed Illicit Discharge Compliance statement. No further action is requested. CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. Site Plan Review: A multifamily dwelling unit having sevenormoreunits is allowed bySpecial Permit bythe Planning Board in Subdistrict A. The Comprehensive Permit application proposestwo new buildings housing 296 rental unitsconnected byamulti-story parking garage. HWhasthe followingcommentsregarding thesiteplans. 11.Parking: a.There are 100surfacelevel parking spaces, inthesouthside yard of theproposed building. The typical sizeis 9-feet wide by18-feet long with a25-foot-wideaisle. These spaces are inthesamelocation astheexisting parking spaces. Twoof the proposed surfacespaceswill be striped asvan accessible. CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. b.There are 77parkingspaces onthefirst floor of the garage, 10aremarked for electric vehicles (EV), andthreearemarkedasaccessible. HW notesthattheApplicant has listed 79 spaces, we recommendthat theApplicant clarifythe number of spaces provided onthefirst floor. TAT Response: Included in the resubmission on Sheet A1.04 are the parking schedule and the revised parking layout. The garage provides a total of 80 parking spaces on the first floor, consisting of 41 spaces on Level 1 and 39 spaces on Level 1.5. Of these, nine spaces are designated for electric vehicles (EV), and three are designated as accessible parking spaces,including one van-accessible space. c.There are 80parkingspaces onthesecond,third,fourth andfifthfloorsofthe garage, 22 on eachfloor aremarked for EVfor atotal of 88 spacesonthefourfloors,andtwo spaces aremarkedasaccessible.TheApplicanthas notedonthe Site Plan, Sheet 4, that 9 accessible parkingspacesareprovided. HW notesthat per521CMR 23.2.1, 497 spacesrequire aminimum of nine accessible spaces.We onlycounted seven and recommendthatthe Applicant revisit thenumberof spacesmarkedasaccessible. TAT Response: Included in the resubmission on Sheet A1.04 are the parking schedule and the updated parking layout, which indicate a total of seven accessible parking spaces within the garage. Two additional accessible spaces are provided at 9 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com the surface level, bringing the total number of accessible parking spaces to nine. Of these, two spaces are designated as van-accessible, with one located on Level 1 of the garage and one at the surface level. d.The Applicant hasproposed atotalof 497 parking spaces, 7of which aremarkedas accessible, and98 aremarkedforelectric vehicles (19.7%).HWagreesthatthetotal numberof spacesproposed complies with Section 195-8.4 ofthe NorthAndover ZoningCode. HWrecommendsthat theApplicantconfirmthe sizesofthe parking spacesandaisles inside the garage. TAT Response: As shown on Sheet A1.04, the resubmission includes the parking schedule and updated parking layout illustrating typical parking space and aisle dimensions within the garage. A total of 497 parking spaces isprovided, including nineaccessible spaces and 98 electric vehicle spaces. 12.Grading: a.Onthe northwestcornerofthe garagethereis awalkway that providesthe pedestrian connectionfromthe garage toPrescott Street. The proposedgradingin this areadirects therunofffromthe largearea onthenorth sideofthe siteoverthis walkway and along the northside ofthe west wing. HWrecommendsthattheApplicant review this corner and confirmthat pondingand/or icing inthis areawill notbe an issue. CDG Response: The walkway has been removed from the project. The gradingin this area is such that a swale is to be maintained along therear of the building to keep positive pitch around the building towards Prescott Street. b.The Applicant appears to havegraded the walkways to be ADA compliant. Note 5 of theGrading & Drainage Notes on Sheet 1 states themaximum slopes allowed. CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. 13.Retaining Walls: a.Proposed RetainingWall #1 is approximately 164feet long andislocatedon thenorth side oftheamenity space for Building 1.Sectionsof this wall are greaterthan 10feet high and thewall will need tobe designedby astructural engineer. HWrecommends that theApplicant includes Retaining Wall #1in crosssection C-C provided on Sheet A5.01. TAT Response: The wallhas been included in the section. b.Proposed Retaining Wall #2 is approximately 114feet long and islocated on the northwest side of the proposed building parallel to Prescott Street. The wall appears tobe less than 4 feet high. Because of the length of the wall, HWrecommends that astructural engineer be involved in the final design.HW recommends that the Applicant include Wall #2 on cross section B-B provided on Sheet A5.00. TAT Response: The wall has been included in the section. c.Proposed RetainingWall #3 is approximately 45feet long andis located on thenorth side oftheproposedgarage adjacent totheproposed walkway and approximately 5feet 10 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com fromthe propertyboundary with39 Prescott Street.The wall appearsto be only 2feet high. HWrecommendsthatthe Applicant include Wall #3 oncrosssectionF-Fprovided on Sheet A5.02. TAT Response: The wall has beenremoved from the project. d.Proposed RetainingWall #4 is approximately 265feet longandislocatedon theeast side of theparcel approximately 5feet from thepropertyline. Sections of the wall are between 6 and 10feet high, thoughthe portionofthe wall that runsparallel tothe property line is lessthan3 feet high. CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. e.Proposed Retaining Wall #5 is approximately 112feet long and located to the east of Building 2, across the driveway from Wall #4. The entire wall appears to be only 1 foot high. CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. f.HW recommends that the Applicant confirms our description of the walls and documents any modifications it makes. CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. 14.Building Setbacks: The Applicant has included a Zoning Information table on the Site Plan, Sheet 4. a.InaccordancewithSection195-18.12oftheNorthAndoverZoningCode,anapplication foraproposedprojectlocatedwithinSubdistrictAmayeitherusethestandards inthe underlyingzoningdistrictintheirentirety, orthosestandardscontainedwithinPart2in their entirety.TheApplicant haslistedthethreezoning districts itresidesinandthe zoningwaiversrequestedperdistrict.As aComprehensivePermitis notrequiredtofully comply withthelocalzoningrequirementstheZBAmaychoosetoconsidertheintent of SubdistrictA: HistoricMillAreaandwhethertheproposedprojectis in linewiththe originalintent. CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. b.Building 1 is located 18.8feetfromthe westernpropertyboundaryalong Prescott Street. This appearstobethe closestfront yardsetback.The Applicanthas listedthefrontyard setbackas 20.2feet andhasrequested awaiver fromthe 30-footrequirement in a Residential 4 (R4)zoning district. HWrecommends thatthe Applicant confirmsthe minimumprovidedfrontyard setback. CDG Response: The Property is bisected by both the R-4 and Industrial-S Districts on Prescott Street which serves as a front setback for the Property. The closest front setback from the western property boundary along Prescott Street within the R-4 District is 18.8feet where30feet is required. The closest front setback from the eastern property boundary along Prescott Street within the Industrial-S District is 20.2,where30feet is required.The Zoning Information Table on the Site Plan has been updated, and the waiver list will be updated. 11 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com c.Building1is located16.5fromthesoutheastcorner of 39PrescottStreet.Afour-foot- highblack metalpicketfenceisproposedalongthepropertyboundary.TheexistingEast MillGarageis locatedapproximately 45feetfromthissamecorner. This appearstobe theclosestpointtoaresidentialproperty.ItwouldbebeneficialfortheApplicant toadd theadjacentbuildings including theresidentialgaragestotheplanset.TheApplicant has requestedawaiverfromthe 35-footsideyardsetbackrequiredfor anewbuildingin Subdistrict AwhentheSubdistrictA lineabutsaresidentialzoningdistrictlocated outsideSubdistrict A. TheApplicant is alsorequestingawaiverfromthe30-footfront yard setback required in a R4 district. CDG Response: The comment correctly notes that a waiver of the 35-foot setback under the Downtown Overlay District Subdistrict A is requested, and a waiver of the 30-foot front setback under the R-4 District is requested. Alocus plan has been added to the plan set that depicts the abutting home and garage. The approximate distances are shown on the plan. d.Building 2 is located 34.6 feet from the eastern property line adjacent to Meadow View Condominium whichis inaresidential5zoningdistrict.This areamay bedefinedasthe rearyardrequiring30feet of setbackfromtheR4andtheISdistrictsand35feetfrom SubdistrictA.Or itmay beconsideredasideyardrequiringa35-footsetback for anew buildinginSubdistrict AwhentheSubdistrictAlineabutsaresidentialzoningdistrict locatedoutsideSubdistrict A. TheApplicant hasnotrequestedawaiverfromtherear yardsetbacklinebuthasrequestedawaiverfromtheside yardsetbackline. HW recommendsthat adeterminationbemaderegardingthe area betweenthebuildingand theeasternproperty line. CDG Response: Based upon discussions with the Building Commissioner, it has been determined that the eastern property line adjacent to Meadow View Condominiumis a rear yard setback where the R-4 District and the Industrial-S District require a 30 foot setback and where34’-6” is provided. Moreover, a 34’-6” setback is providedalong this same lot line where a 35-foot setback is required for a new building in Subdistrict A when the Subdistrict A line abuts a residential zoning district located outside Subdistrict A. e.The highest proposedbuilding height is approximately54feet 7inches feet from the averagefinish grade. The Applicant isrequesting a waiver from themaximum height of 35 feet within anR4 district. TheISdistrict and Subdistrict A appear to allow a maximum height of 55feet byright. CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. f.The maximum lotcoverage calculated bythe Applicant is 34%. Themaximum allowable lot coverage within the IS district is 35%. The Applicant has requested a waiver. However, it is notapparent that one is needed. CDG Response: Acknowledged. If the final building layout yields a lot coverage under 35%, the final waiver list will be updated. 12 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com g.The Applicant isrequesting a waiver from theMaximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and is proposing a FARof 1.70:1. Aratioof 1:1is allowed byright inSubdistrict A. Aratioof 0.5:1is allowed byright in anIS district. AFAR of upto 2:1 isallowed by Special Permit in Subdistrict A. CDG Response: Acknowledged. The Applicant has requested a waiver. 15.Design Criteria: a.The Applicant is using the same curb cuts as exists for the existing parking garage with a 25-foot-wide driveway. CDG Response:Acknowledged. No response required. b.It is not obvious if bike racks are proposed. HW recommends that the Applicant includes an interior storage location for bicycle accommodationin accordance with Section 195- 18.18. CDG Response:Bike racks are locatedinside the garage portion ofthe building. c.HW recommends that the Applicant consider a solid five-foot-high fence along the property of 39 Prescott Street or additionaltrees for screening. CDG Response: A5-foot-highfence has been added to the plans. d.The Applicant hasproposed twogenerators, onefor each building that arelocated near the surfaceparking spaces. Thesize of the generatorslooks small for thesize of the building. HW recommends that the Applicant confirm thesize and determine if additional screening or enclosure isnecessary. CDG Response: Based on our architect’s review of thebuilding code, the generator pads have been removedfrom the project. e.The Applicant hasprovided a PhotometricCalculation Plan, Sheet L3.0.The light candles appeartospill over ontotheMeadow View Condominiums andslightly ontotheproperty at 39Prescott.HW recommendsthatthe Applicant confirmthat the amount of spillover will not be anuisance for any abuttingresidents. CDG Response: The lightingand landscapeplan has been updated including placing shields oncertain lights to prevent light trespass. f.HW recommends that the Applicant includes a locus plan showing the names of abutters, land uses, and locations andwidth of alladjacent streets. CDG Response: A locus plan has been added. g.The Applicant is proposing one new fire hydrant. There is an existing hydrant on Prescott Street near 139Prescott and an existing hydrant on High Street at the intersectionwith Prescott Street. It appears that fire apparatus can reach three sidesof the proposedbuilding. HW recommendsthat the Applicant coordinate with the fire department to confirm that the hydrant locations are adequate and that they can access, circulate, and egress the site and buildingsafely. 13 4High Street, Suite 155 North Andover, MA 01845 C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Tel 978.794.5400 ENGINEERING. LAND USE. PLANNING. PERMITTING. www.cdgengineering.com CDG Response: The Applicant isin the process of coordinating with theFire Department. h.HW recommends that the Applicant confirm with the North Andover Department of Public Works that the municipal sewer and watersystems have adequate capacity toaccommodate an additional 296 residential units. CDG Response: The Applicant is in the process of coordinating with the Department of Public Worksand their peer reviewer. i.HW recommends that the Applicant add the depth of gravel subbase to the Typical Bituminous Pavement Detail, on Sheet 8. CDG Response: The dimensions for the detailper accidentally turned off. The subbase is 12inches. j.HW recommend that the Applicant confirms how trash andrecycling operations will beperformed by the residents. CDG Response: Trash and recycling will be stored within the garage and both will be wheeled out into the driveway on trash and recycle pick up day. This operation is similarto the residentialapartments recently constructed on the Mill campus. We trust the responses provided above and the enclosed plans and documentation sufficiently address the comments issued by the peer reviewer. Please feel free to contact our office if you have any questions or required further clarification. Sincerely, C IVIL D ESIGN G ROUP, LLC Philip R. Henry, P.E. Principal cc. Mr. David Steinbergh, RCG Mr. JohnSmolak, Esq. Enclosures 14