Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20200083 South Broadway Hotel Engineers response 7-6-20 The LA GROUP Landscape Architecture Gi Engineering P People.Purpose!Place. 40 Long Alley Saratoga Springs NY 12866 p.5113-587-8100 518-587-0180 ;eV!w Ihelagroup.com July 6, 2020 Ms. Susan Barden, AICP City Principal Planner City of Saratoga Springs 474 Broadway Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 RE: South Broadway Hotel Site Plan Application Dear Ms. Barden: The LA Group is in receipt of comments from the Chazen Companies, dated June 11, 2020. The following are responses to the comments. Update plans and documents are included with this submission. Water/Sewer Engineering Report Comment 3: The report should include a discussion regarding the system, capacity and adequacy of the downstream collection, conveyance and treatment systems (up to and including the wastewater treatment plant) to handle the increase in flow resulting from this project. Please revise accordingly and provide an ability to serve letter form the WWTP operator. The updated Engineering Report is still silent as to the capacity of the downstream collection system. The applicant also indicated that they would provide a letter from the sewer district; the letter should be submitted to the City. Response 3: A letter from the Saratoga County Sewer District stating the downstream collection system has the available capacity to handle the projected design flow from the project has been included with this comment response letter. Comment 5: The hydrants tested do not appear to be the closest hydrants to the site as there appears to be an existing hydrant located immediately adjacent to the proposed hotel. Further these hydrants were tested on March 27, 2018. It is recommended that new hydrant tests be performed on the hydrant located adjacent to the site and because the tests are over 2-years old. Typically, hydrant flow testing shall be no older than six (6) months unless it has been deemed that no changes to the supply or transmission of water within that area have occurred since the test was performed. Our office does not take exception to hydrant flow tests being conducted in support of building permit application, so long at the City does not take exception. The fire code official shall be notified prior to the water supply test. Further, our office understands that a full review of the sprinkler system and NFF will occur during the building permit application. The applicant has indicated that there have been no significant changes to the supply or transmission of water in the area since the test. Still, the additional testing described above is recommended. Response 5: No additional hydrant flow testing is proposed at this time. If required by the city of Saratoga Springs, an additional flow test will be completed. Site Plans Comment 7: Please provide a signed and sealed copy of the boundary, topographic and utility survey prepared by CHA Consulting. Response 7: A signed a sealed copy of the survey will be provided to the city upon site plan approval. Comment 11: It appears, based on the location of the construction entrance, that construction traffic will be directed to use Todd Street to enter and exit the site. It appears that only a portion of Todd Street is to be re-paved following construction. The City should consider requiring the Applicant to re-pave the full width of Todd Street since it will be significantly affected by construction traffic? No response from applicant; City to advise if required. Response 11: City to provide determination if pavement restoration is required. Comment 12: Further, the Todd Street intersection with South Broadway appears to have a small turning radius. It is assumed that concrete trucks will use Todd Street (based on the location of the construction entrance). Please submit vehicular maneuvering plans showing construction vehicles can be accommodated at this entrance. The applicant has responded that the turning radius at the intersection of Todd Street and South Broadway is existing and has not evaluated this intersection further. However, as the applicant proposes other modifications to Todd Street and proposes to use Todd Street as the route for construction vehicle ingress/egress, the applicant should evaluate maneuverability through this intersection. Please submit the requested vehicle maneuvering plans. Response 12: The vehicle maneuvering for a truck/fire truck has been added to sheet L-2.0. Comment 14: The Applicant shall provide the plans and engineering report to the Fire Department for review and comment. Please submit for the record a letter from the Fire Department indicating that they can adequately service the proposed use. The applicant has responded that the City's planning department typically sends the submission to the fire department for review and comment. The City should advise if they would like the Applicant to send the documents directly to the Fire Department. Response 14: A meeting regarding this project was attended by The LA Group and the fire department regarding the requested access locations into and thru the site. Correspondence was provided to the city regarding this meeting and the fire department has agreed to the access points and maneuvering plan we provided them for review. Comment 15: Please provide a fire truck maneuvering plan, using the largest responding emergency vehicle as prescribed by the responding fire department, showing access through the site. Section D105.1 of the 2015 Fire Code states "Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet (9144 mm), approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided. For purposes of this section, the highest roof surface shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of the roof to the exterior wall, or the top of parapet walls, whichever is greater." Section D105.2 of the 2015 Fire Code states "Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet (7925 mm), exclusive of shouldersin the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof." The cover sheet indicates the building will be 4-stories and 49 feet high. The side of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. The Applicant to provide which side of the building once determined by the fire code official. Conformance to the Fire Code will be reviewed once an answer is provided. The applicant has indicated that Todd Street and South Broadway would be used as the fire apparatus access roads. The applicant is still requested to provide a fire truck maneuverability plan through the site so that the fire department can be made aware of the ability to access the site from the proposed ingress/egress routes. Response 15: See Response 14 for details regarding the fire department meeting. The maneuvering plan agreed to by the fire department is depicted on Sheet L-2.0. Comment 16: Detail 5 Sheet L-6.4 does not conform to the City of Saratoga Springs standard details. The specified pipe zone backfill should be "well graded sand with 3/-inch maximum particle size and not more than 10% passing#200 sieve...". The plans indicate NYSDOT Size 1 &2 crushed aggregate for pipe zone backfill which has a larger gradation than the City standard. Please revise and cross reference all details to ensure conformance with City standards. The applicant has responded that the proposed detail is in close conformance with the City standards. The City should advise as to whether the proposed detail is acceptable. Response 16: No response required. City to advise if detail is acceptable. Comment 20: It appears that there will be a permanent shared access and parking with both the neighboring parcels located at the southeast corner of the Lincoln Avenue and S. Broadway intersection. Please submit a copy of the agreements with these two parcel owners for the City's records— please note that these agreements will need to be filed in the County Clerk's office for all properties involved. Also please depict the limits of the proposed easement on the plans. The applicant has responded that a shared access and parking agreement is proposed and will be provided to the City and filed with the clerk. Please submit the proposed agreement for the record. Also, the limits of the easement are not shown on the plans; please revise the plans to show the limits of the easements. Response 20: The shared access easement location has been added to Sheet L-2.2 as well as the location for the shared parking spaces per the agreement. The final easement layout and instrument number will be depicted on the final as-built per City requirements for the final As-Built drawings. The parking agreement will be provided to the City for review and acceptance once finalized with the adjacent landowners. SWPPP Comment 31: Please provide pre-treatment calculations for the isolator row that indicates it meets the requirements of the NYS Stormwater Management Design Manual (SMDM). The applicant has provided a pretreatment calculation in their response based on peak flow during the 90% rainfall event. The SMDM requires a minimum pretreatment volume of 100% of the WQv for infiltration practices in soils with an underlying infiltration rate of 5 inches per hour or greater. It is unclear how the calculation provided verifies the pretreatment volume. The required WQv is 2906 ft3, so the required pretreatment volume is the same. Please provide the appropriate supporting calculation. a. Please revise the model such that the isolator row is a standalone pond that overflows into the remaining infiltration chambers at elevation 311.55' to document that the required pretreatment WQV of 2,906 cf is captured and treated. b. Also please indicate the piping that connects the 10 chambers that share the same row as the 3 pretreatment chambers or the balance of the infiltration system. c. An inspection/cleanout port should be provided within the isolator row; please revise. II Response 31: a. The pretreatment sizing for the isolator row chambers has been done in accordance with the manufacturer treatment rate of 0.2 cfs/chamber. The isolator row has been increased to seven (7) chambers to provide a total treatment capacity which is capable of treating a flow rate of 1.40 cfs. A subcatchment has been added to the HydroCAD model to mimic the WQv entering the diversion structure (2,903cf). The rate entering the isolator row 15" pipe is 1.27 cfs which is less than the treatment capacity of the chambers (1.40 cfs). The peak elevation of the isolator row inlet pipe for the WQv is 311.31'which proves that the entire WQv is captured and treated by the isolator row and does not reach the inlet pipe of the remainder of the system at elevation 311.54'. Page 9-7 of the NYSDEC Stormwater Design Manual states that the TAPE and TARP evaluation systems is the basis for NYSDEC approval. The test ran on the isolator row satisfied both the TARP and TAPE evaluation protocols. In addition, per the NYSDEC, all proprietary practices accepted for redevelopment applications can also be used for pretreatment. The plans have been revised to show the seven isolator row chambers. The model has not been revised to separate out the isolator row as the chamber system acts as one system that is hydraulically connected. There is no accurate way to model an isolator row and separate isolator chambers that are hydraulically connected by the stone subbase and surrounding stone. b. The chambers that share a row with the isolator row chambers are connected to the rest of the system via the header pipe at the north end of the system. Additionally, all chambers are hydrologically connected via the stone subbase below the chambers. c. An inspection port has been added to the isolator row. Comment 32: All of the structures in the stormwater treatment system need to be modeled, specifically the diversion structure and outlet control structure. Please revise the SWPPP accordingly. The diversion structure is now modeled with a 15" outlet at invert 311.55', while the plans show a 12" outlet at that elevation. Please revise. Response 32: The plans have been revised to show a 15"entering the isolator row chambers. Comment 33: It is unclear how all portions of subcatchment 10 will discharge to catch basin 3. Please clarify and revise the SWPPP accordingly. The applicant has revised the SWPPP to show Subcatchment 10 discharging to CB2, which then discharges to CB3. However, Subcatchment 10 includes a portion of the commercial driveway which does not appear to drain to CB2 based on the Grading and Drainage plan; rather, this driveway appears to drain towards Todd Street. Please clarify and revise accordingly. Response 33: Subcatchment 10 is the roof drainage for the proposed building. The commercial drive within this subcatchment does not have runoff as it is a covered drive. Comment 34: It is unclear how all portions of subcatchment 9 will discharge to catch basin 2. Please clarify and revise the SWPPP accordingly. Subcatchment 9 also includes a portion of the commercial driveway. See Comment 33 above. Response 34: Subcatchment 9 is the roof drainage for the proposed building. The commercial drive within this subcatchment does not have runoff as it is a covered drive. Comment 35: City Code Chapter 242 requires long-term maintenance of the stormwater management practices. The following notes need to be added to each SWPPP under Post-Construction Operation and Maintenance of Stormwater Control Devices: a. "All post-construction stormwater management facilities must be inspected annually by a qualified professional, a report prepared and submitted to the City Engineer documenting the inspections as well as the maintenance activities that were completed during the prior year." b. "The City of Saratoga Springs shall approve a formal maintenance and inspection agreement in accordance with City Code Chapter 242 for stormwater management facilities to ensure the practices will be properly operated and maintained in accordance with the long- term operation and maintenance plans. This agreement shall be binding on all subsequent landowners and recorded in the office of the County Clerk as a deed restriction on the property." The applicant has indicated that a draft maintenance agreement will be provided. Please submit to the City to address this comment for the record. Response 35: The above language can be found in sections 1.1 and 6.1 of the SWPPP. City of Saratoga Springs maintenance agreement can be found in Appendix I of the SWPPP. Comment 36: The HydroCAD model includes a practice 10P which appears to be a duplicate of SMP1. Please revise the model accordingly. Response 36: Node 10P has been removed from the model. Sincerely, Brett C. Strom, PE Civil Engineer bstrom©thelagroup.com G:\Proj-2016\2016144_Turf_N_Spa_ W_LarkinSouth_Broadway\2016144Admin\01 Correspondence\2.7Review_Comments\2020 06-15 Comment Response Ltr. Site Plan App_SPPP Review-hafrev1.docx