Applicant response - 332 Turkey Hill RoadCarolyn Misch <cmisch@northamptonma.gov>
332 Turkey Hill Road
Terrence Reynolds P.E. <terry@treynoldsengineering.com>Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 5:04 PM
Reply-To: terry@treynoldsengineering.com
To: Carolyn Misch <cmisch@northamptonma.gov>
Cc: Sarah LaValley <slavalley@northamptonma.gov>, Douglas McDonald <dmcdonald@northamptonma.gov>
Hi Carolyn,
Attached are the revised site plans and wetland report for 332 Turkey Hill Road. Below are my responses to your comments.
Best,
Terry
Terrence R. Reynolds, P.E.
T Reynolds Engineering
Civil Engineers-Planning, Design and Permitting Services
152 Maplewood Terrace
Florence, MA 01062
Phone: (413) 387-8078
e-mail: terry@treynoldsengineering.com
www.treynoldsengineering.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:
The information contained in this e-mail, including any attachment(s), is confidential information that may be privileged and exempt
from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or if you received this message in
error, then any direct or indirect disclosure, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
message in error, please notify Terrence Reynolds P.E. immediately by calling (413) 387-8078 and by sending a return e-mail;
delete this message; and destroy all copies, including attachments.
From: Carolyn Misch <cmisch@northamptonma.gov>
Sent: Friday, June 23, 2023 4:14 PM
To: terry@treynoldsengineering.com
Cc: Sarah LaValley <slavalley@northamptonma.gov>; Douglas McDonald <dmcdonald@northamptonma.gov>
Subject: Re: 332 Turkey Hill Road
Terry,
We need some changes to the NOI submission before we can co-sign the applica on
-The stormwater analysis should include comparison to existing permit for which an amendment is being sought, this
only addresses undeveloped condition.
As we discussed in our meeting, this had previously been coordinated with Doug. Because of the complexity of the previous
submissions, it was agreed that an overall evaluation of the project was best that looked at the initial condition from 2007 (when the
permit was issued) and the current proposed project. This was done this way because the stormwater permit is being amended and
the evaluation needs to look at the project from the 2007 pespective.
When addressing the permit as a whole, I think the next two items can be accommodated by dealing with overall
maintenance addressing the build out of the condo lot and your client's lot.
-The parking area appears to sheet flow into resource area, grading should be shifted to drain to stormwater systems
We discussed this in our meeting and agreed that the current design with the water quality swale and infiltration area made the most
sense. Appropriate labeling has been added.
-The O&M plan assigns responsibility to the City for street sweeping, twice per year. Not only is this a small paved
section after a gravel road section, and it is outside the road ROW, the city will not commit to this responsibility. You
will need to find other ways to meet stormwater standards.
An O&M plan has been added specifically for the City lot that has simple maintenance of the water quality swale and infiltration
area.
The City will not assume responsibility for the parking area until the close out of the order of conditions for your client's
lot. The City will determine to what level maintenance of the parking area will be kept, but it should be made clear in
maintenance plans for your client that snow cleared from the driveway shall not be placed in the parking area. Noted.
My clients plan to plow both the parking lot and their driveway.
-Stormwater report, page 16 indicates 'There are no septic systems on-site. City sewer is be utilized for the building.'
This looks like a holdover from a prior template. Generally, this section of the report should be cleaned up to be specific
to the site. – This note has been revised to reflect standard septic system care.
-Plans indicate painting' Fire lane no parking' on the driveway, within the open space parcel. The driveway is not a fire
lane and cannot be striped as such. Once the striping defines the parking spaces, there will likely not be an issue with
parking in the driveway. – This has been revised to say “Private Drive, No Parking”
-A concrete headwall and riprap pad are proposed within the open space parcel as an infiltration trench overflow. This
needs to be pulled back outside the city parcel.
The outfall has been revised to be on 230 Turkey Hill property.
-How was the area calculation of degraded RFA determined? Please show this area on plans
200’ offsets within the subject properties were created from the riverbank limit and a subsequent area was determined. The areas are
shown on the Planting plan Sheet 8.
-The NOI indicates more than six acres of RFA as being present within the project area. Is this accurate? – This is
accurate
-Delineation information is needed
Delineation information is included.
[Quoted text hidden]
[Quoted text hidden]
2 attachments
Site Plans 7-19-23.pdf
13092K
Wetland Assessment Letter Report_final_041023_submitted.pdf
761K