From: 	Lauren Swett <lswett@woodardcurran.com>
To:	Jean Fraser <JF@portlandmaine.gov>, Jeff Tarling <JST@portlandmaine.gov>...
CC:	Camille Alden <CALDEN@portlandmaine.gov>, Nathaniel Smith <NHS@portlandm...
Date: 	2/21/2014 1:46 PM
Subject: 	RE: Clar needed RE:  Rockland Ave Outfall		
Attachments:	Rockland Street View Existing.jpg; Rockland Street View Proposed.jpg; IMG_2113.jpg

Hi Jean,

To help further clarify what we are proposing, attached are a couple of images that show the existing and proposed condition at Rockland Avenue. The proposed image shows two strips of gravel that will serve as the reinforced wheel paths for a maintenance vehicle accessing the stormwater treatment unit, located beneath the group of three manhole covers. Throughout the public process on this project, there haven't been concerns expressed about adding landscaping in this area. As has been mentioned previously, there is significant stormwater and sewer infrastructure in this area, and adding and maintaining landscaping here would be a challenge. We will be improving the existing rough gravel area at the entrance, and we'll maintain the fences and vegetation on the neighbors' properties.

I've also attached a photo of an example maintenance access drive located near another stormwater treatment unit at the end of Lloyd Avenue in Portland. A similar driveway was also used for the Westside Interceptor sewer replacement project in 2010, specifically where the sewer easement and an established Portland Trails' trail crosses Frost Street. The intent is to make the access drive unobtrusive, while still providing dedicated space for maintenance vehicles to drive to the stormwater treatment unit.

Let us know if there are any additional questions.

Thanks,
Lauren

From: Lauren Swett
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 11:24 AM
To: 'Jean Fraser'; Jeff Tarling; William Clark
Cc: Camille Alden; Nathaniel Smith; William Scott; David Senus
Subject: RE: Clar needed RE: Rockland Ave Outfall

Hi Jean,

We are creating a figure to clearly show the proposed conditions at the site to help address your original questions about the site plan. We can show more clearly what the reinforced maintenance access way will look like on the plan. Per the detail on sheet C‑301, there will be 3' strips of gravel wearing course, with loam and seed to surround those gravel areas. The intent is not for the maintenance access to be overly intrusive. There will be a gravel subgrade beneath the gravel strips and the loam and seed so that trucks can drive over the area to access the stormwater treatment unit.

The 1993 survey figures that you reference are included as Appendix B in the complete permit application pdf that was provided. I've attached the two separate files for ease of people reviewing over email. The City has been working on providing an updated boundary sheet for the area, but with all the snow this winter, it's been difficult to complete.

For the plans you attached, sheet C‑201 is the landscaping plan. The rendering pdf was a visual representation created for use at some of the public meetings, and is not intended to serve as an official landscaping plan.

Let me know if there are any other questions, and we'll be in touch with a figure of proposed conditions.

Thanks,

Lauren

From: Jean Fraser [mailto:JF@portlandmaine.gov]
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2014 11:03 AM
To: Jeff Tarling; William Clark
Cc: Camille Alden; Nathaniel Smith; William Scott; Lauren Swett
Subject: Clar needed RE: Rockland Ave Outfall

Bill and Jeff

If we have a sewer easement there, why can't there be some planting.  Its 60 ft across so there must be some room outside the other pipes.

However, I have the submitted paper copy of 1993 Plan that suggests the paper street status with no mention of an easement (for some reason this plan was not included electronically so I only have a paper copy and Jeff has not been able to view it).  The paper street appears to be 60 ft wide so why can't there be some planting along the east edge?  The application says that an updated version of this plan will be forthcoming but I have not received it.

Jeff‑  maybe you could call me and explain why we don't want to include some softening of the new maintenance access?  If this was a private development I think we would request some screening.

I still would like a plan showing the final conditions (including at the end near the houses) showing the final location of the trail and the final new planting, as that is what any approval relates to.

I understand there is considerable public interest in this project‑  and I am sure anything here is an improvement re the actual outfall area.  However, the maintenance access appears quite out of keeping with the area and I would like to see the trail reinstatement clearly.

thanks
Jean
PS There are two different Landscape Plans (see attached) ‑ which is final and which has Jeff has approved?

>>> William Clark 2/20/2014 8:57 AM >>>
Hi Jeff,

Come by with a plan to look at.  Camille has been doing the survey and would know more.

Thanks,

Bill

>>> Jean Fraser February 19, 2014 4:51 PM >>>
Jeff

I am out of the office tomorrow but if the City does not own the land thats even more reason why they should not be putting down a widened paved area with no landscape.

Please have Bill Clark confirm that the city don't own the land as if we don't own I will need to ask for copy of the easement that we presumably have.

I appreciate its not a huge deal but the only doc I have (its in e‑plan) shows that the City owns it.  I will follow up on Friday.

Thanks
Jean

>>> Jeff Tarling 2/19/2014 3:52 PM >>>
Hi Jean ‑

I did check this area and the city does not own the land.

And the underground pipes are close.

Jeff

>>> Jean Fraser 2/19/2014 3:15 PM >>>
I believe the City already owns this area‑  I am waiting for applicant or someone to confirm but the survey appears to show it as City land.  So I would prefer something on the plan since its near public areas and abutting the trail (City should be treated as we treat other applicants).

>>> Jeff Tarling 2/19/2014 3:04 PM >>>
Hi Jean ‑

After a closer review of underground utilities, stormwater and sewer mains along
with unexcepted street information, the landscape plan is acceptable as shown
for the Rockland Avenue / Capisic Pond project. (we don't have the room
or easement to plant additional landscape in the area we discussed)

I would encourage the city to acquire the unexcepted Rockland Avenue street
right of way that serves as entrance to the park and the location of significant
underground stormwater & sewer utilities into Capsic Pond Park.  Once we
have ownership we could provide a more robust landscape screening if needed.
We also have some flexibility to slightly "adjust" landscape elements once the project
is completed.  This served us well with the recent Capsic Stormwater project.

Thanks,

Jeff

>>> Jean Fraser 2/18/2014 4:10 PM >>>

Lauren

A few things have come up where further information would be helpful:

  *   Section 3 of the application booklet, RTI‑  is there an updated "boundary page" (as mentioned);
  *   Since the access is going to be permanently upgraded, is some kind of easement or permission from abutters needed‑  the City's land is very close to the existing house and I would have thought there would be some restrictions on use of the land  (DPS may have documentation so have copied Doug)
  *   The site plan is confusing as it shows existing, interim (temporary) and final all on one plan‑  so raises questions:
     *   Presumably the reinforced maintenance access is permanent, so where will the trail be after its temporary location during construciton?
     *   Why isn't there any landscaping shown where the wider paved area is being introduced (where does not exist now) in close proximity to homes and the trail?
     *   Although I am waiting for Jeff to confirm his comments on the proposals, I would like either another site plan or the landscape plan to show just the final condition, with the trail shown and labeled and what is happening (landscape wise)  around the new maintenance access and treatment unit (I know its underground but there will be disturbance and round man made features showing above ground I believe.)
Thanks and apologies for the delay in getting back to you with these questions.

Jean
874 8728

Notice: Under Maine law, documents ‑ including e‑mails ‑ in the possession of public officials or city employees about government business may be classified as public records. There are very few exceptions. As a result, please be advised that what is written in an e‑mail could be released to the public and/or the media if requested.