HomeMy WebLinkAboutPATTERSON STAFF COMMENT RESPONSE LETTER_11_10_17
November 10,2017
Liz Burdick,ZEO/WEO Thomas Cummings,P.E.
Colleen Bezanson,Asst.Planner CLA Engineers,Inc.
Town of Montville 317 Main Street
310 Norwich New London Tpke.Norwich,CT 06360
Uncasville,CT 06382
RE:Response to Staff Review Comments
Property Location:14 Enterprise Lane
Owner/Applicant:Patterson Brothers Properties,LLC
Boundaries LLC Job I.D.:17 2566
Dear Liz,Colleen and Tom
Please accept this correspondence and revised Site Development Plans as the Applicant’s response to review
comments provided by Vernon D.Vesey,II,Montville Building Official,Liz Burdick,Montville ZEO,and Thomas
Cummings,P.E.,Consulting Engineer.Review comments provided by staff appear below in plain font,and
Boundaries’response is shown immediately thereafter in bold font.
Building Official Comment #1:Need details for accessible route from accessible space to door,i.e.curb cut or
ramp onto sidewalk and slope.
Boundaries Response:The route from the proposed ADA Van Accessible parking space to the front entry
door is compliant with ADA requirements,and no new cuts or ramps are required.Spot elevations on the
existing bituminous concrete parking lot (266.70 and 266.75)and existing concrete sidewalk (266.60)have
been added to the plan to compliment the building finished floor elevation (266.71).
Zoning Official Comment #1:Revise Survey Note 5,Sheet 1 to “Map 2,Lot 5D”(eliminate ‘block’).
Boundaries Response:Survey Note #5 on Sheet 1/2 of the plan has been revised.
Zoning Official Comment #2:Revise Survey Note 9,Sheet 1 to delete sentences 3 &4.
Boundaries Response:Survey Note #9 on Sheet 1/3 of the plan has been revised.
Zoning Official Comment #3:Revise General Note 1,Sheet 2 to delete the word ‘greater’on line
Page 2
Boundaries Response:General Note #1 on Sheet 2/3 of the plan has been revised.
Zoning Official Comment #4:Revise Sheet 2 to identify existing lighting.
Boundaries Response:The one existing building mounted light fixture,located above the overhead door on
the front gable of the building,has been added to the plan.
Zoning Official Comment #5:Revise Detail Sheet to add dumpster pad screening.
Boundaries Response:The callout for the dumpster pad on Sheet 2/3 of the plan has been modified to
include the word “enclosure”,and the “Concrete Dumpster Pad Detail”on sheet 3/3 of the plan has been
replaced with a “Dumpster Enclosure Detail”that includes a visual screen.
Zoning Official Comment #6:Revise plan to add note “There shall be no on site storage of fuel tanks”.
Boundaries Response:General Note #4 on Sheet 2/3 has been added to the plan.
Zoning Official Comment #7:Revise plan to add note to Sheet 3:“After site construction is completed and
accepted by the Town,it shall be the responsibility of the Owner to maintain all drainage structures.In
addition,the following inspection and maintenance guidelines shall be the responsibility of the Owner,
beginning the first year period following construction completion and acceptance,and shall be followed each
year thereafter:(1)Drainage and/or other Paved Areas:Inspect on a regular basis not to exceed weekly for
litter and debris.If applicable,sweep at least twice a year,with the first 2 occurring as soon as possible after
first snowmelt and the second not less than 90 days following the first;(2)Drainage Structures (Sediment
Basin):Inspect semi annually and clean when one half full of silt and/or debris;and (3)Landscaped Areas
(Sediment Basin,Vegetated Swale):Inspect semi annually for erosion or dying vegetation.Repair and stabilize
any bare or eroded areas and replace vegetation as soon as possible.
Boundaries Response:Paragraph 2 of the “Stormwater Quality Measures Operation &Maintenance”
standards on Sheet 3/3 of the plan has been revised to incorporate the requested inspection and
maintenance requirements relative to the improvements that are being proposed.
Zoning Official Comment #8:Submit Soil Erosion &Sediment Control Bond estimate.
Boundaries Response:A Soil Erosion &Sediment Control Bond has been prepared and is attached to this
correspondence.
Zoning Official Comment #9:Please eliminate the word “possible”regarding 20’drainage easement.
Boundaries Response:The callout for the 20’wide drainage easement on Sheet 1/2 has been revised.
Consulting Engineer Comment #1:Additional spot grades must be added throughout the site In order to
define the grading and drainage.
Boundaries Response:Additional spot grades have been added to Sheet 2/3 of the plan.
Consulting Engineer Comment #2:Access to the front door from the handicap parking space must be defined
with spot grading demonstrating conformance with standards.
Page 3
Boundaries Response:See response to Building Official Comment #1,above.
Consulting Engineer Comment #3:Dimensions must be added to the plans to define location and size of
modifications.
Boundaries Response:Additional dimensions have been added to Sheet 2/3 of the plan.
Consulting Engineer Comment #4:The slopes along the east and west perimeter of the rear equipment
storage area are steep.Railings must be added to the plans.
Boundaries Response:The small areas of 2H:1V slopes on the east and west sides of the rear
parking/laydown area have been revised to 3H:1V.Based on the height of the embankment and the revised
fill section slope,Comparative Risk Warrants for Embankments (Figure 13 3A in the CT DOT Highway Design
Manual)indicates that a barrier is not warranted.
Consulting Engineer Comment #5:The grading appears to concentrate stormwater to the northerly corners of
the rear equipment storage area.The drainage must be defined and calculations provided to back up the
approach described in the stormwater letter and shown on the plans.
Boundaries Response:The material storage bins have been relocated to the westerly side of the rear
parking/laydown area where they will not impede the sheet flow of stormwater in a northeasterly direction
to the proposed stormwater treatment area,nor concentrate stormwater flow to the northerly corner of
said area.The objective of the proposed stomwater management system and site grading is to maintain
existing sheet flow runoff patterns post development to the maximum extent practicable while also
providing treatment of stormwater runoff.Pre development vs.post development peak flow rate analysis
has been completed and is presented in the table below.As demonstrated,the proposed improvements
result in a minimal increase in peak flow rates that will not have a negative impact on the downgradient
property.
Storm Event Pre Development Post Development
2 year 1.9 CFS 2.1 CFS
10 year 3.5 CFS 3.7 CFS
25 year 4.3 CFS 4.5 CFS
50 year 4.9 CFS 5.1 CFS
100 year 5.7 CFS 5.9 CFS
Consulting Engineer Comment #6:The location of the proposed trench drain at the bottom of the slope in the
rear of site,it likely will have a short term use.A ponded area may be more appropriate.
Boundaries Response:The use of a shallow water quality basin was initially evaluated for the treatment of
stormwater runoff from the proposed gravel surfaces,however due to the high groundwater elevations
encountered during soils testing,the slope of the site towards the abutting property,and the lack of a
location for a point source discharge,the collection of stormwater runoff was determined to be
undesirable.In order to provide adequate separation between the bottom of the water quality basin and
the seasonal high groundwater surface elevation,the downgradient embankment would be immediately
adjacent to the abutting property line,resulting in the concentrated discharge of stormwater runoff onto
the abutting property.The use of a pea gravel filter diaphragm,which acts as an at grade stone level
spreader as opposed to a trench drain,is intended to provide treatment of stormwater and the interruption
Page 4
of concentrated flows so that the downgradient property is not negatively impacted by the proposed site
improvements.The two 5%grade vegetated filter strips and the vegetated 3H:1V slope are proposed to be
stabilized with a temporary erosion control blanket and seeded with a wildlife/conservation seed mix that
will result in a dense,fast growing stand of vegetation that will not be mowed.The dense vegetation will
disrupt flow patterns and is intended to result in the deposition of sediment before reaching the pea gravel
filter diaphragm.Due to the herein referenced site limitations,the proposed stormwater management
system has been selected as the preferred method for treating runoff while minimizing the potential for
impacts to the abutting property,and we propose no change to the design as submitted.
Consulting Engineer Comment #7:The "possible"drainage easement at the rear of the site would appear to
have no practical use,certainly not to the Town.It should be abandoned.
Boundaries Response:See response to Zoning Official Comments #2 and #9,above.
Consulting Engineer Comment #8:Referenced to CT DOT Form must be 817 in lieu of 816.
Boundaries Response:The 2 references to Form 816 have been changed to Form 817.
Consulting Engineer Comment #9:The detail for the bituminous concrete pavement detail must show its
proposed joint with the existing pavement.
Boundaries Response:A “Typical Cross Section for Matching Existing and Proposed Pavement”has been
added to Sheet 3/3 of the plan.
Consulting Engineer Comment #10:The proposed second driveway must be coordinated with and approved
by the Director of Public Work.
Boundaries Response:Acknowledged.
Please note that “Sanitary Notes”have been added to Sheet 2/3 of the plan set to incorporate the B100a
review comments received from Michael J.Kirby,R.S of the Uncas Health District dated November 6,2017.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this correspondence or the materials submitted herewith,
please contact the undersigned at your convenience.We look forward to presenting the application to the
Montville Planning &Zoning Commission on Tuesday 11/14/17.
Sincerely,
Demian A.Sorrentino,AICP,C.S.S.David C.McKay,P.E.
Certified Planner &Soil Scientist Project Engineer
Boundaries LLC Boundaries LLC
for Patterson Brothers Properties,LLC for Patterson Brothers Properties,LLC
C:File
Attachments