Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1-3-2023 - Engineering Review - Subdivision 827 Def Plan 1-3-23 The Town of Barnstable Department of Public Works 382 Falmouth Road, Hyannis, MA 02601 508.790.6400 Daniel W. Santos, P.E. Robert R. Steen, P.E. Director Assistant Director MEMORANDUM To: Planning Board Via: Karen Herrand, Principal Assistant, Planning & Development From: Griffin Beaudoin, P.E., Town Engineer Date: January 3, 2023 Subject: Review of Definitive Subdivision Application for Subdivision Number 827 I have completed a review of the application materials provided for the above referenced definitive subdivision application which included the following documents:  Form C dated 12-12-2022  Plan Entitled “Definitive Subdivision Plan of Land on Old Stage Road and Parker Lane in Barnstable, MA”, prepared by Gallagher Engineering, dated 10-26-22. Referred to herein as “Plan”.  Waiver request letter prepared by Gallagher Engineer , dated December 1, 2022  Drainage Report prepared by Gallagher Engineering, dated December 1, 2022  Test Pit Letter from Gallagher Engineering, dated December 1, 2022.  Deed (Book 34278, Page 299)  Two Easements (unrecorded)  Record of taxes The aforementioned documents were reviewed for compliance with the Town of Barnstable Subdivision Regulations and best engineering practices. My comments on this application have been provided below. General 1. Form C has not been signed by the owner. Additionally, no authorized applicant was listed on the form. 2. Evidence of right of access over private way providing frontage/access: The documents provided appear to be insufficient. Easement documents have been provided, however Engineering Department Review of Definitive Subdivision Application for Subdivision Number 827 January 3, 2023 Page 2 the documents provided have not been recorded at the Registry of Deeds, so it is unclear if rights of access over Parker Road exist. 3. The deed provided does not appear to match the boundary as depicted on the plan. The deed provided defines the property as 7.53 acres, but the plan defines the property as 4.26 acres. Upon further research, Plan Book 691, Page 22 appear to show the property was subdivided in 2021 and this appears to reflect the boundary presented on the plan. It should be noted that a portion of the property is shown as “Not a Buildable Lot” (Lot 3 as shown on Plan Book 691, Page 22). A deed reflecting the property boundary should be provided for the file. 4. Per Section 501-5(D), maintenance, including snow plowing, will be the responsibility of the owners of the land within the subdivision. 5. A Stormwater Operation and Maintenance Plan should be provided. 6. Section 801-24.A(1)(a)[1] requires a profile drawing be provided with the application. 7. The test pit logs were not included in the application materials I received and reviewed. Plan Comments 1. Metes and bounds of the portion of Parker Lane between the locus property and Service Road should be provided on the plan. 2. A boundary line should be added across the proposed Parker Lane Right of Way in the southeastern portion of the property to accurately define the limits of the proposed Right of Way. 3. There are multiple locations labeled “Area of Trees to Remain”. Is the intent for these areas to be reserved open space buffer? If so, open space restrictions should be provided. Why were similar buffers not provided along the westerly boundary? 4. The plan does not appear to provide monuments in accordance with Section 801-52. 5. The roadway cross section should provide the roadway foundation (gravel) specification in accordance with Section 801-44. 6. A drainage easement should be defined for the stormwater management area within Lot 3A. 7. The proposed catch basin and leaching structure should be installed within the private roadway and not within the public right of way of Service Road. 8. A detail should be provided to clarify how stormwater within the proposed drainage swale will be conveyed across/under the existing drive at 630 Parker Lane and future driveways along Parker Lane. 9. No elevations are provided on the proposed catch basin and leaching structure. 10. Specify the size and material of the proposed pipe between the catch basin and leaching structure. 11. Confirm that the side slopes of the stormwater basin on Lot 3A are not steeper than 4:1. 12. It is recommended that plans be separated into a minimum of a two sheet plan set for clarity. Recommend one sheet depicting the subdivision of land only (including metes Engineering Department Review of Definitive Subdivision Application for Subdivision Number 827 January 3, 2023 Page 3 and bounds, proposed monuments, etc) and one sheet depicting the construction design plan (topography, utilities, roadway profile, construction details, etc.). Drainage Report Comments 1. The drainage analysis appears to only account for the gravel surface of the proposed roadway in the sizing of the infiltration systems. However, there appears to be additional contributing area outside of the roadway that should be accounted for. A watershed plan should be provided to identify the contributing areas and the calculations should be updated accordingly. 2. Provide sizing calculations for the proposed drainage swale. 3. The Hydrograph Summary Report was not provided for the 100 year storm event. 4. The drainage narrative indicates that the infiltration practices have been sized for the 100 year storm event, however the volumes presented are from the 10-year hydrograph summary report. The stormwater basin should be designed for the 100-year storm event to prevent the possibility of flooding to abutting properties. The 100-year peak elevation should be provided. Review of Waiver Requests 1. Appendix A Minor Road B Cross Section: a. Right of way width 40 feet to allow 33 feet wide: No objection. b. Depth of gravel base: The applicant has requested a waiver to allow a 9 inch gravel base. The standard cross section requires 12 inches of gravel base plus 3 inches of bituminous concrete. It is recommended that a minimum 12 inch gravel base be provided. If no asphalt is provided, it is recommended that the gravel cross section be increased to 15 inches. c. Roadway surface: No objection to the request for a gravel roadway with no pavement. However, if Parker Lane is extended in the future to serve additional properties, the Board may want to reconsider at that time. 2. 801-24.A.1.(a)[13] Soil Borings: The applicant states that the test pits that were performed showed consistent soil type and depth to groundwater. However, the test pits logs were not provided in my application materials for review. Assuming the test pit logs reflect consistent soil type and depth to groundwater, a waiver from this requirement could be considered. However, it is recommended that least two test pits be per formed within the proposed roadway. Further, it is recommended that at least one test pit be performed at each drainage system location to at least 4’ below the proposed bottom of the infiltration system. 3. 801-24.A.1.(a)[16] Environmental Analysis Report: No objection. However, the plan should provide a statement as to the location of the property relative to those areas defined in Section 801-24.B(3)(k). Engineering Department Review of Definitive Subdivision Application for Subdivision Number 827 January 3, 2023 Page 4 4. 801-24.E(6-9) Review by Other Officials: No objection 5. 801-24.J(5) Binder course: If the board grants the requested waiver to not pave the roadway, then this provision would not be applicable as written. However, the Board may want to consider modifying this provision to require that the gravel roadway be completed in its entirety to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer prior to issuance of occupancy permit. 6. 801-24.N.(3)(a.) - Hydrant System : Defer to the Fire Chief’s recommendation. 7. 801-27 – Drainage: I do not recommend a waiver of all requirements within 801-27. Not all subsections are applicable to the stated reason for the waiver. The applicant should reference specific subsections that waivers are being requested from. Further comments on the drainage design and analysis have been provided above. 8. 801-29 – Sidewalks: No objection 9. 801-30 – Curbing and Berms: No objection 10. 801-41 – Drainage: Waiver not recommended. While a majority of the project features a drainage swale along the roadway, the project does incorporate a catch basin, piping and leaching structure which should be constructed in accordance with these requirements. 11. 801-44 – Roadway Foundation: See Comment 1B. 12. 801-45 – Roadway Surface: See Comment 1C. 13. 801-46 – Sidewalks: See Comment 8. 14. 801-47 – Curbing and Berms: See Comment 9. 15. 801-49 – Street Trees: No objection. However, it is recommended that the areas identified as “Area of Trees to Remain” be considered to be protected as open space easements.