Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stormwater Drainage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Engineer says Laramie Farms drainage will meet state AOT standards; neighbors press for guarantees
Summary
Developer representatives told the Enfield Planning Board the Laramie Farms preliminary design shows wet ponds, infiltration and a treatment train that will meet New Hampshire AOT standards and preserve pre‑development flow characteristics. Neighbors asked for stronger assurances and monitoring for Maple Street properties.
The Enfield Planning Board heard a detailed presentation on stormwater plans for the proposed Laramie Farms development on Nov. 19, as the project team emphasized that the preliminary design already includes grading, wet ponds and a treatment train intended to meet New Hampshire Alteration of Terrain (AOT) standards.
"We're predesigning several wet ponds and the entire stormwater treatment train," said Carl Dube, the project's presenter, describing measures from rooftops and parking areas through to recharge facilities and outlet controls. Dube said the application will be conditioned on receiving required AOT permits and that state reviewers and town third‑party engineers will scrutinize calculations in the final design phase.
Why it matters: Residents who live downhill on Maple Street pressed the applicant to guarantee that post‑development runoff would not increase flood or salt impacts to their properties. Several asked whether the development could make long‑standing drainage problems worse.
Board questions and developer answers focused on modeling and treatment. Dube said the team models pre‑ and post‑development flow rates at multiple design points, and that the goal is to maintain existing off‑site flow characteristics: "We can't just increase drainage and let it go," he said. "We capture that water, treat it, and discharge it at the same rate that it was before."
Residents asked how treatment will remove oils, salts and sediments from parking and garage runoff. The team described a series of pretreatment devices — catch basins with hoods and deep sumps, isolator rows and under‑pavement recharge or StormTech systems — followed by wet ponds and controlled outlets. "Those petroleum products are considered floatables," the presenter said; absorbent materials, hoods and isolator rows would be part of normal maintenance and removal under the project's operations plan.
Several abutters said they wanted more than modeling. "There are no guarantees," one neighbor told the board, referencing the developer's comments about extreme events; others urged monitoring or contractual guarantees to hold the developer accountable if downstream flooding worsens.
The board and the applicant repeatedly noted that final design and permitting — including third‑party town review and state AOT authorization — will produce the technical evidence and enforceable conditions the board can require at final approval.
Next steps: The board closed the design‑review hearing and instructed that final design materials and third‑party review responses be provided with the formal final application. The developer said those final plans will include the full drainage calculations and the permit applications necessary to secure AOT approval.
