Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20190098 Honda Storage Expansion - 4-10-19 SWPPP ILCm1 40 Long Alley p- •518-587-8100 The LA GROUP Saratoga Springs f 518-587-0180 NY 12866 wwmthelagroup.com Landscape Architecture'a Engineering P.C. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for: Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Owner/Operator(s): Saratoga Honda 3402 South Broadway Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 SWPPP Contact(s): The LA Group, PC 40 Long Alley Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 1-518-587-8100 1-518-587-0180 SWPPP Preparation Date: February 1, 2019 Revised April 8, 2019 Table of Contents 1.0 PERMIT OVERVIEW AND REQUIREMENTS 1 1.1 PERMIT OVERVIEW 1 2.0 SWPPP REVIEW,UPDATE 1 2.1 SWPPP REVIEW 1 2.2 SWPPP UPDATE 1 3.0 SITE ASSESSMENT, EVALUATION AND PLANNING 2 3.1 PROJECT LOCATION 2 3.2 PRE-DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS 2 3.3 PROJECT SCOPE 2 3.4 RECENING WATERS 2 3.5 HISTORIC PRESERVATION DETERMINATION/ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 2 3.6 SOILS 2 4.0 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL 3 4.1 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES 3 4.2 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL DRAWINGS 3 4.3 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE OF OPERATIONS 3 4.4 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICE MAINTENANCE 4 4.5 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL INSPECTION 4 4.6 CONTRACTOR SEQUENCE FORM 5 5.0 POST CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 6 5.1 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT CONTROLS 6 5.2 POST CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DRAWINGS 6 5.3 HYDRAULIC AND HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS 6 5.4 COMPARISON OF PRE AND POST CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER RUNOFF 6 5.5 WATER QUALITY VOLUME 7 5.6 RUNOFF REDUCTION VOLUME 8 5.7 CHANNEL PROTECTION VOLUME(CPV) 8 6.0 POST CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER MAINTENANCE 8 6.1 MECHANISM OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE 8 6.2 MAINTENANCE TO BE PERFORMED 8 7.0 CONSTRUCTION WASTE 9 8.0 TEMPORARY STABILIZATION FOR FROZEN CONDITIONS 10 9.0 SPILL PREVENTION PRACTICES 11 10.0 CERTIFICATIONS 15 11.0 DEFINITIONS 20 Appendices A HydroCAD Calculations and Storm Data B Soil Survey and Map Set — Location Map, Site Preparation and Demolition, Grading and Utility Plan C SWPPP Inspection Forms —SWPPP Inspection Report D Other SWPPP Forms — Construction Sequence, SWPPP Plan Changes, Spill Response Form, Stormwater Management Practice Maintenance Log E Historic Preservation/Endangered Species Documentation Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number-201240.01 1 .0 PERMIT OVERVIEW AND REQUIREMENTS 1.1 Permit Overview This Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) is prepared to inform the landowner and construction personnel of the measures to be implemented for controlling runoff and pollutants from the site during and after construction activities. The operator is responsible to maintain onsite in a secure location that is accessible during normal working hours to an individual performing a compliance inspection, the following information: ✓ the SWPPP, ✓ All inspection reports. Technical standards are detailed in the "New York State Standards and Specifications for Sediment and Erosion and Sediment Control (July 2016)", as well as illustrated on the Grading and Utility Plan. 2.0 SWPPP REVIEW, UPDATE 2.1 SWPPP Review City of Saratoga Springs requires preparation of a SWPPP for non-residential activities disturbing 0.1 acres or more. The project is proposed to disturb 0.78 acres. Project review will be conducted by the City of Saratoga Springs. 2.2 SWPPP Update The permittee identified in this SWPPP shall amend the SWPPP under the following conditions: ✓ Whenever the current provisions prove to be ineffective in minimizing pollutants in stormwater discharge from the site ✓ Whenever there is a change in design, construction or operation that could have an effect on the discharge of pollutants ✓ To address issues or deficiencies identified during an inspection by the qualified inspector, the Department or other regulatory authority ✓ To identify a new subcontractor or owner that will implement any part of the SWPPP. If modifications are required to the post-stormwater management practices the City of Saratoga Springs must be notified in writing of any planned amendments or modifications to the post-construction stormwater management practice component of the SWPPP. The LA GROUP Landscape nrzhdectu«&EnqiFleer,ngYi Page 1 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number-201240.01 3.0 SITE ASSESSMENT, EVALUATION AND PLANNING 3.1 Project Location The project is located at 3402 South Broadway in the City of Saratoga Springs, Saratoga County, NY 12866. The project site location is located at the corner of South Broadway and Crescent Avenue. 3.2 Pre-Development Conditions The site is currently a car dealership with associated paved parking lots. Stormwater runoff generally flows to the south into existing stormwater management practices. Surface conditions consist of grass and impervious driveway/buildings roofs. 3.3 Project Scope The project includes the construction of a 19,000 sq. ft. porous asphalt parking lot. The Project will disturb approximately +/- 0.78 acres. 3.4 Receiving Waters The closest NYSDEC mapped stream located in the project vicinity that the site drains to is an unnamed tributary to Geyser Creek. 3.5 Historic Preservation Determination/Endangered Species A letter from NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (OPRHP) dated April 9, 2014, indicates that the project will have no adverse impact on resources in or eligible for inclusion in the State and National Register of Historic Places (see Appendix E). The Project is within an area that will impact on any listed, proposed to be listed, threatened or endangered species, or a critical habitat. As part of the previous facility expansion site survey was completed by The LA Group's staff biologist and determined that the presence of the listed endangered species were not present onsite. Therefore this project will have no negative impact on listed, proposed to be listed, threatened or endangered species, or a critical habitat. The site survey report can be found in Appendix E. 3.6 Soils The USDA/NRCS soil survey map for this site shows Deerfield loamy fine sand. This soil is classified in the hydrologic soil group `A'. Soil information and test pit log results can be found in Appendix B. The LA GROUP Landscape nrzhdectu«&EnqiFleer,ngYi Page 2 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number-201240.01 Soil testing in the form of deep hole test pits were performed in the locations of the proposed stormwater management facilities to identify subsurface soil conditions. The testing was performed on November 12, 2012 by The LA Group and indicated a depth to groundwater that varies from 30" to 72". 4.0 EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL 4.1 Erosion and Sediment Control Practices Temporary Structural Practices ✓ Silt Fence ✓ Inlet Protection ✓ Dust Control ✓ Construction Entrance Permanent Structural Controls ✓ Asphalt pavement/concrete walks Temporary Stabilization Practices (including vegetative practices) ✓ Seed and mulch bare soil areas within 14 days of disturbance unless construction will resume in that area within 21 days. Permanent Stabilization Practices (including vegetative practices) ✓ Seed and mulch all disturbed areas. Slopes that are 3:1 or steeper should receive a Rolled Erosion Control Product (RECP), sodding, and or hydro- seeding a homogenous mixture of wood fiber mulch with tackifying agent. Refer to Construction Drawings for detailed information on each practice. 4.2 Erosion and Sediment Control Drawings Erosion and Sediment Control practices are shown on the Construction Drawings included in Appendix B. 4.3 Construction Sequence of Operations ✓ Temporary structural erosion controls will be installed prior to earthwork as per the attached plans. ✓ Areas to be undisturbed for more than 14 days will be temporarily stabilized by seeding. ✓ Disturbed areas will be reseeded and mulched immediately after final contours are re-established and no more than 14 days after the completion of construction at that site. ✓ Temporary erosion control devices will not be removed until the area served is stabilized by the growth of vegetation and the area is certified as being stabilized by the Erosion Control Inspector. The LA GROUP Landscape nrzhhectu«&EnqiFleer,ngYi Page 3 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number-201240.01 Construction Activities Start - Stop Sequence must include major items such as, but not limited to, excavation and grading, utility and infrastructure installation and any other activity resulting in soil disturbance. Include installation of erosion and sediment control practices and timing of installation. Install silt fence, construction fence and inlet protection prior to any site disturbance. Maintain erosion control measures for Week 1 duration of site disturbances. Excavate and grade in stormwater practices Weeks 1-3 Parking Lot Construction Week 3- completion Remove erosion and sediment control measures upon At completion stabilization of contributing areas. 80% Germination 4.4 Erosion and Sediment Control Practice Maintenance Temporary erosion and sediment control practices will need to be maintained frequently during construction. It is the responsibility of the operator to inspect, and maintain the temporary controls so that they are working efficiently. The operator needs to pay close attention to SWPPP Inspection Reports that will advise of needed maintenance. Captured sediment will have to be removed periodically from each practice in order for the control to function properly. Temporary erosion and sediment control practice maintenance needs are listed below: ✓ Silt fence — maintenance shall be performed as needed and material removed when "bulges" develop in the silt fence. ✓ Storm drain inlet protection — inspect after each storm event. Remove sediment when 50 percent of the storage volume is achieved. ✓ Stabilized construction entrance — entrance shall be maintained in a condition which shall prevent tracking. This may require periodic top dressing with additional aggregate. All sediment tracked onto or spilled on public rights of way shall be removed immediately. When necessary, wheels must be cleaned to remove sediment prior to entrance on public rights of way. When washing is required, it shall be done in an area stabilized with aggregate. 4.5 Erosion and Sediment Control Inspection The LA GROUP Landscape Arthhecture dY Engineering Pi Page 4 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number-201240.01 ■ A qualified inspector shall conduct an assessment of the site prior to the commencement of construction and certify in an inspection report that the appropriate erosion and sediment controls described in the SWPPP have been adequately installed to ensure overall preparedness of the site for commencement of construction. ■ This qualified inspector must be a Licensed Professional Engineer, Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control (CPESC), Registered Landscape Architect, or someone working under the direct supervision of, and at the same company as, the licensed Professional Engineer or Registered Landscape Architect, provided they have received 4 hours of Department endorsed training in proper erosion and sediment control principles from a Soil and Water Conservation District, or other Department endorsed entity. After receiving the initial training, the qualified inspector shall receive 4 hours of training every 3 years. ■ The day-to-day erosion control activities on the site will be monitored by the construction manager. The qualified inspector and his crews will make at least one inspection every seven (7) days of erosion control devices, and non-stabilized areas during construction. A maintenance inspection report will be completed by the qualified inspector after each inspection. The report form to be completed by the inspector is attached in Appendix C. Reports should be compiled and maintained on-site in the SWPPP 3-ring binder. ■ All measures will be maintained in good working order; if repair is necessary, it will be initiated within 24 hours of report. The qualified inspector shall take photographs of any needed repairs and also photograph when the repairs are completed. These photographs will be time and date stamped and attached to the weekly inspection report. ■ Seeded and planted areas will be inspected for bare spots, washouts, and healthy growth. If necessary, spot reseeding or sodding will be implemented. ■ A trained contractor will be an employee from the contracting company responsible for the implementation of the SWPPP. This person will be onsite when any soil disturbing activities are being conducted. The trained contractor must have received 4 hours of Department endorsed training in proper erosion and sediment control principles from a Soil and Water Conservation District, or other Department endorsed entity. After receiving the initial training, the qualified inspector shall receive 4 hours of training every 3 years. This trained contractor cannot conduct the regular SWPPP compliance inspections unless they meet the qualified inspector qualifications. 4.6 Contractor Sequence Form The operator shall prepare a summary of construction status using the Construction Sequence Form (included in Appendix D) once every month. Significant deviations to the sequence and reasons for those deviations (i.e. weather, subcontractor The LA GROUP Landscape Arthdecture dY Engineering Pi Page 5 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number-201240.01 availability, etc.), shall be noted by the contractor. The schedule shall be used to record the dates for initiation of construction, implementation of erosion control measures, stabilization, etc. A copy of this table will be maintained at the construction site and updated. 5.0 POST CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PRACTICES 5.1 Stormwater Management Controls The project is proposing the use of porous pavement and an infiltration basin to capture and treat runoff prior to discharge off site. 5.2 Post Construction Stormwater Management Drawings Post construction stormwater management controls are shown on the Construction Drawings included in Appendix B. 5.3 Hydraulic and Hydrologic Analysis The program utilized for quantifying stormwater runoff rates and volumes was HydroCAD software, produced by Applied Microcomputer Systems of Chocorua, NH. The SCS 24-hour Type II design storms for 1, 10, and 100-year frequency rainfall were analyzed (Appendix A). ✓ Hydrologic/hydraulic analysis for all structural components of the stormwater control system for the applicable design storms. ✓ Comparison of post-development stormwater runoff conditions with pre- development conditions. ✓ Dimensions, material specifications and installation details for each post- construction stormwater control practice. 5.4 Comparison of Pre and Post Construction Stormwater Runoff Stormwater Quantity. These calculations are based on the HydroCAD analysis. The design storms used for the pre-development versus post-development comparison were the 1, 10, and 100-year, 24-hour duration, SCS Type II events. The rainfall amounts for these storms are 2.15, 3.75, and 6.20 inches, respectively. Under pre-development conditions the portion of the site impacted by the proposed parking lot addition drains to existing infiltration basin and porous asphalt. Any offsite discharge leaves the site the south (AP-1). The existing infiltration basin that is to be relocated treats stormwater runoff from a portion of the existing building. The LA GROUP Landscape nrzhdectu«&EnqiFleer,ngYi Page 6 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number-201240.01 Post-development stormwater runoff will continue to discharge to the same analysis point as the pre-development conditions. The relocated infiltration basin will continue to treat the portion of the existing building, no new impervious area will be contributing to the relocated basin. All new impervious area will be treated via porous asphalt. The project proposes no increase in flow from the pre development conditions. Existing Conditions Versus Proposed Conditions Peak Discharge Rates Analysis AP-1 Point Existing Proposed Design Storm (cfs) (cfs) 10-Year 0.00 0.00 100-Year 0.13 0.13 5.5 Water Quality Volume The following formula was utilized to determine water quality volume: WQv= (P) (Rv)(A) 12 Where: WQv= Water Quality Volume (acre/feet) P = 90% Rainfall Event Rv = 0.05 + 0.009(1) where I is impervious cover in percent A = Subcatchment area in acres Water quality volume at the site will be managed though the use of porous pavement. Table 5-1 Water Quality Volume (WQv) Summary SMPT e Provided Type (ac-ft) SMP-1 Porous Pavement 0.040 Total 0.040 Stormwater runoff from the proposed parking lot will be captured within the porous pavement (SMP-1) and infiltrated into the native soil. The portion of the existing roof that discharges to the existing infiltration basin within the footprint of the proposed parking lot will now be treated by a new infiltration basin to be located to the west of the new parking lot. No new impervious area will be treated by the relocated infiltration basin. The LA GROUP Landscape Arthhecture dY Engineering Pi Page 7 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number-201240.01 5.6 Runoff Reduction Volume The project reduces 100% of the water quality volume through stormwater practices with runoff reduction capabilities. 5.7 Channel Protection Volume (CPv) Channel protection volume is reduced through proposed green infrastructure and infiltration systems. 6.0 POST CONSTRUCTION STORMWATER MAINTENANCE 6.1 Mechanism of Operation and Maintenance Saratoga Honda will be responsible for the long-term operation and maintenance of the stormwater management practices for the life of the site. 6.2 Maintenance to be Performed Post-construction maintenance for this project will consist of regular inspections of permanent stormwater management facilities. These maintenance procedures are essential to assure continual performance of the stormwater management practices on your site. During the inspection and any maintenance activity to the stormwater management practices, the responsible party should fill out an inspection and maintenance log (Appendix C) to record that it was done. 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. 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 land owners and recorded in the office of the County Clerk as a deed restriction on the property. Infiltration Basin • Clean trash and debris out of system as necessary. • Inspect trench after large storm events (greater than 0.5") to confirm trench is adequately dewatering. Remove and replace stone and separation fabric if system is not dewatering after 12 hours. • Flush underdrain and remove silt and sediment when accumulation is noted. The LA GROUP Landscape nrzhdectu«&EnqiFleer,ngYi Page 8 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number-201240.01 Porous Pavement • During the winter, the spreading of sand or other particles for traction cannot be done. If the area is to be plowed of snow, this should be done carefully so as not to upset the permeable pavement. • Areas that receive high volumes of sediment will require frequent maintenance activities, and areas that experience high volumes of vehicular traffic will clog more readily due to soil compaction. Typical maintenance activities for permeable paving are summarized in the table below: Typical Maintenance Activities Associated with Permeable Pavement Activity Schedule Ensure paving area is free of debris Monthly Ensure paving dewaters between storms Monthly and after storms >0.5" Ensure area is clean of sediments Monthly Mow upland and adjacent areas and seed As needed bare areas Vacuum sweep frequently to keep Typically 1 to 2 times a year surface free of sediments Inspect the surface for deterioration or Annually spalling ■ Generally, routine vacuum sweeping and high-pressure washing (with proper disposal of removed material and washwater) can maintain infiltration rates when clogged or crusted material is removed. Signs can also be posted visibly within a permeable paving area to prevent such activities as resurfacing, the use of abrasives, and to restrict truck parking. 7.0 CONSTRUCTION WASTE Waste Materials: All waste materials generated during construction will be disposed at a suitable landfill or transfer station. Hazardous Waste: The project will not be a generator of hazardous waste and it is not anticipated that any hazardous waste will be generated during construction. If there are any materials generated, a licensed hazardous waste carrier will be contracted to dispose the hazardous material at a suitable disposal site. If hazardous materials are discovered during construction, the work will be stopped until the issue is resolved. Waste: Portable sanitary facilities will be made available to construction personnel and will be serviced regularly. The LA GROUP Landscape Arthdecture dY Engineering Pi Page 9 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number-201240.01 8.0 TEMPORARY STABILIZATION FOR FROZEN CONDITIONS The following temporary stabilization measures MUST be performed when construction is occurring during winter/frozen ground conditions. The following requirements do not supersede any other requirements of this SWPPP as they apply to non-frozen ground conditions. 1. Perimeter erosion control MUST still be installed prior to earthwork disturbance as per this SWPPP. 2. Any areas that cannot be seeded to turf by October 1St or earlier will receive a temporary seeding. The temporary seeding will consist of winter rye seeded at the rate of 120 pounds per acre (2.5 pounds per 1,000 square feet) or stabilized as per the temporary stabilization for winter construction/frozen conditions. 3. Any area of disturbance that will remain inactive for a period of 14 consecutive days MUST be mulched. This includes any previously disturbed areas that are covered with snow. 4. Mulch MUST consist of loose straw applied at the rate of 2 to 3 bales (90 to 100 pounds) per thousand square feet. 5. Mulch MUST be applied uniformly over the area of bare soil or bare soil that is covered with snow. For the latter condition, mulch MUST be applied on top of snow. 6. Using a tracked vehicle, mulch MUST be crimped into the bare soil/snow. The tracked vehicle MUST be driven across the mulched areas in at least two directions to maximize crimping of mulch into the soil/snow. 7. If mulch gets blown off an area to a significant degree, the site inspector WILL require that an area be re-mulched in accordance with Items 2 through 5 above, and this area WILL be included on the inspection checklist for the next inspection. 8. If a particular area repeatedly experiences loss of mulch due to wind, then the inspector WILL require that an alternative method be used to secure the mulch in place. Such alternatives may include the use of netting, tackifier or other methods deemed appropriate by the inspector. 9. During periods when snow is melting and/or surface soils are thawing during daytime hours, mulched areas MUST be re-tracked (crimped) as per Item 5 above at least once every seven days, more frequently if directed by the inspector. Additional mulch may be required to obtain complete coverage of an area. Biodegradable erosion control matting may be required on steeper slopes. 10.Additional stabilization measures for non-frozen ground conditions described in this SWPPP WILL be implemented at the time deemed appropriate by the inspector. During the winter season, if a site has been stabilized and soil disturbing activities have been suspended for the winter, weekly inspections can be suspended. However, monthly The LA GROUP Landscape nrzhdectu«&EnqiFleer,ngYi Page 10 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number -201240.01 ■ Portable sanitary facilities, which contain chemical disinfectants (deodorants) will be located on-site, with the disinfectants held in the tank of the toilet. Hazardous Products These practices are used to reduce the risks associated with hazardous materials. ■ Products will be kept in original containers unless they are not re- sealable. ■ Original labels and material safety data sheets will be retained; they contain important product information. ■ If surplus product must be disposed of, manufacturers' or local and State recommended methods for proper disposal will be followed. Spill Prevention The following product specific practices will be followed on site. Petroleum Products: ■ Construction personnel should be made aware that emergency telephone numbers are located in this SWPPP. ■ The contractor shall immediately contact NYSDEC in the event of a spill, and shall take all appropriate steps to contain the spill, including construction of a dike around the spill and placing absorbent material over this spill. ■ The contractor shall instruct personnel that spillage of fuels, oils, and similar chemicals must be avoided and will have arranged with a qualified spill remediation company to serve the site. ■ Fuels, oils, and chemicals will be stored in appropriate and tightly capped containers. Containers shall not be disposed of on the project site. ■ Fuels, oils, chemicals, material, equipment, and sanitary facilities will be stored/located away from trees and at least 100 feet from streams, wells, wet areas, and other environmentally sensitive sites. ■ Dispose of chemical containers and surplus chemicals off the project site in accordance with label directions. ■ Use tight connections and hoses with appropriate nozzles in all operations involving fuels, lubricating materials or chemicals. ■ Use funnels when pouring fuels, lubricating materials or chemicals. ■ Refueling and cleaning of construction equipment will take place in parking areas to provide rapid response to emergency situations. ■ All on-site vehicles will be monitored for leaks and receive regular preventative maintenance to reduce the chance of leakage. Any vehicle leaking fuel or hydraulic fuel will be immediately scheduled for repairs and use will be discontinued until repairs are made. LC)M The LA GROUP Land scape h rc h ii eau re & E ng itieering V C Page 12 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number -201240.01 Fertilizers: ■ Fertilizer will be stored in its original containers on pallets with water resistant coverings. ■ Proper delivery scheduling will minimize storage time. ■ Any damaged containers will be repaired immediately upon discovery and any released fertilizer recovered to the fullest extent practicable. Paints: ■ All containers will be tightly sealed and stored when not required for use. ■ Excess paint will not be discharged to the storm water system or wastewater system, but will be properly disposed of according to manufacturers' instructions or State and local regulations. Concrete Trucks: ■ Concrete trucks will be allowed to wash out or discharge surplus concrete or drum wash water only at designated locations on site. Asphalt Trucks: ■ Asphalt trucks shall not discharge surplus asphalt on the site. Spill Control Practices In addition to the good housekeeping and material management practices discussed in the previous sections of this plan, the following practices will be followed for spill prevention and cleanup. The construction manager or site superintendent responsible for the day-to-day site operations will be the spill prevention and cleanup coordinator. He will designate at least three other site personnel who will receive spill prevention and cleanup training. These individuals will each become responsible for a particular phase of prevention and cleanup. The names of responsible spill personnel will be posted in the material storage area and in the onsite construction office or trailer. Manufacturers' recommended methods for spill cleanup will be clearly posted and site personnel will be made aware of the procedures and the location of the information and cleanup supplies. Any spill in excess or suspected to be in excess of two gallons will be reported to the NYSDEC Regional Spill Response Unit. Notification to the NYSDEC (1-800-457- 7362) must be completed within two hours of the discovery of the spill. Materials and equipment necessary for spill cleanup will be kept in the material storage area onsite. Equipment and materials will include but not be limited to absorbent pads, brooms, dust pans, mops, rags, gloves, goggles, activated clay, sand, sawdust, and plastic and metal trash containers specifically for this purpose. Lc)m The LA GROUP Land scape h rc h ii eau re & E ng itieering V C Page 13 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number -201240.01 ■ All spills will be cleaned up immediately after discovery. ■ The spill area will be kept well ventilated and personnel will wear appropriate protective clothing to prevent injury from contact with spilled substance. ■ Spills of toxic or hazardous material will be reported to the appropriate State or local government agency, regardless of the size LOM The LA GROUP Land scape h rc h ii eau re & E ng itieering V C Page 14 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number -201240.01 10.0 CERTIFICATIONS Preparer Certification of Compliance with Federal, State, and Local Regulations This Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan was prepared in accordance with the City of Saratoga Springs regulations. Name: Signature: Douglas Heller Title: Professional Engineer Company Name: The LA Group, PC Owner Pollution Prevention Plan Certification Date: 1 certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who are directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. 1 am aware that false statements made herein are punishable as a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the Penal Law. 1 understand that SWPPP requires site inspections be conducted by a qualified professional once every seven (7) days. These inspections shall be performed by a qualified professional as defined in the SWPPP. The Owner/Operator will be held financially responsible for any and all fines related to work tasks that are not specified by the Contractors)/Subcontractor(s) below. Name: Signature: Company Name: LOM The LA GROUP Land scape h rc h ii eau re & E ng itieering V C Title: Date: Page 15 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number -201240.01 Contractor and Subcontractor Certification 1 hereby certify that 1 understand and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of the SWPPP and agree to implement any corrective actions identified by the qualified inspector during a site inspection. 1 also understand that the owner or operator must comply with the terms and conditions of the New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("SPDES') general permit for storm water discharges from construction activities and that it is unlawful for any person to cause or contribute to a violation of water quality standards. Furthermore, 1 understand that certifying false, incorrect or inaccurate information is a violation of the referenced permit and the laws of the State of New York and could subject me to criminal, civil and/or administrative proceeding. Name Signature Company Name Address City, State, Zip Phone Number SWPPP Components You Are Responsible For Name of Trained Individual Responsible for SWPPP Implementation Signature of Trained Individual Responsible for SWPPP Implementation LOM The LA GROUP Landscape Architecture & Engineering Y C Title Date 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Title Date Page 16 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number -201240.01 Contractor and Subcontractor Certification 1 hereby certify that 1 understand and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of the SWPPP and agree to implement any corrective actions identified by the qualified inspector during a site inspection. 1 also understand that the owner or operator must comply with the terms and conditions of the New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("SPDES') general permit for storm water discharges from construction activities and that it is unlawful for any person to cause or contribute to a violation of water quality standards. Furthermore, 1 understand that certifying false, incorrect or inaccurate information is a violation of the referenced permit and the laws of the State of New York and could subject me to criminal, civil and/or administrative proceeding. Name Signature Company Name Address City, State, Zip Phone Number SWPPP Components You Are Responsible For Name of Trained Individual Responsible for SWPPP Implementation Signature of Trained Individual Responsible for SWPPP Implementation LOM The LA GROUP Land scape h rc h ii eau re & E ng itieering V C Title Date 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Title Date Page 17 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number -201240.01 Contractor and Subcontractor Certification 1 hereby certify that 1 understand and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of the SWPPP and agree to implement any corrective actions identified by the qualified inspector during a site inspection. 1 also understand that the owner or operator must comply with the terms and conditions of the New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("SPDES') general permit for storm water discharges from construction activities and that it is unlawful for any person to cause or contribute to a violation of water quality standards. Furthermore, 1 understand that certifying false, incorrect or inaccurate information is a violation of the referenced permit and the laws of the State of New York and could subject me to criminal, civil and/or administrative proceeding. Name Signature Company Name Address City, State, Zip Phone Number SWPPP Components You Are Responsible For Name of Trained Individual Responsible for SWPPP Implementation Signature of Trained Individual Responsible for SWPPP Implementation LOM The LA GROUP Landscape Architecture & Engineering Y C Title Date 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Title Date Page 18 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number -201240.01 Contractor and Subcontractor Certification 1 hereby certify that 1 understand and agree to comply with the terms and conditions of the SWPPP and agree to implement any corrective actions identified by the qualified inspector during a site inspection. 1 also understand that the owner or operator must comply with the terms and conditions of the New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("SPDES') general permit for storm water discharges from construction activities and that it is unlawful for any person to cause or contribute to a violation of water quality standards. Furthermore, 1 understand that certifying false, incorrect or inaccurate information is a violation of the referenced permit and the laws of the State of New York and could subject me to criminal, civil and/or administrative proceeding. Name Signature Company Name Address City, State, Zip Phone Number SWPPP Components You Are Responsible For Name of Trained Individual Responsible for SWPPP Implementation Signature of Trained Individual Responsible for SWPPP Implementation LOM The LA GROUP Landscape Architecture & Engineering Y C Title Date 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Title Date Page 19 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number -201240.01 11.0 DEFINITIONS Construction Activity(ies) - means any clearing, grading, excavation, filling, demolition, or stockpiling activities that result in soil disturbance. Clearing activities can include, but are not limited to, logging equipment operation, the cutting and skidding of trees, tree removal, stump removal and/or brush removal. Construction activity does not include routine maintenance that is performed to maintain the original line and grade, hydraulic capacity, or original purpose of a facility. Construction Phasing Plan - a plan designed to construct particular portions of an individual project at different times. Phasing is often used when a project is very large to limit the disturbance at a single time to 5 acres per phase. Erosion and Sediment Control Practices — temporary measures installed prior to construction and maintained during construction to temporarily treat any stormwater runoff. Once construction is completed and post -construction stormwater management practices are installed and the site is stabilized, the erosion and sediment control practices are removed from the site. Final Stabilization - means that all soil disturbance activities have ceased and a uniform, perennial vegetative cover with a density of eighty (80) percent over the entire pervious surface has been established; or other equivalent stabilization measures, such as permanent landscape mulches, rock rip -rap or washed/crushed stone have been applied on all disturbed areas that are not covered by permanent structures, concrete pavement. Green Infrastructure — in the context of stormwater management, the term green infrastructure includes a wide array of practices at multiple scales to manage and treat stormwater, maintain and restore natural hydrology and ecological function by infiltration, evapotranspiration, capture and reuse of stormwater, and establishment of natural vegetative features. On a regional scale, green infrastructure is the preservation and restoration of natural landscape features, such as forests, floodplains and wetlands, coupled with policies such as infill and redevelopment that reduce overall imperviousness in a watershed or ecoregion. On the local scale green infrastructure consist of site and neighborhood specific practices and runoff reduction techniques. Such practices essentially result in runoff reduction and or establishment of habitat areas with significant utilization of soils, vegetation, and engineered media rather than traditional hardscape collection, conveyance and storage structures. Some examples include green roofs, trees and tree boxes, pervious pavement, rain gardens, vegetated swales, planters, reforestation and protection and enhancement of riparian buffers and floodplains. Impervious Area (Cover) - means all impermeable surfaces that cannot effectively infiltrate rainfall. This includes paved, concrete and gravel surfaces (i.e. parking lots, driveways, roads, runways, and sidewalks); building rooftops, and miscellaneous impermeable structures such as patios, pools, and sheds. LC)M The LA G Land scape h rc h ii eau re & E ng itieering V C Page 20 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number -201240.01 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer (MS4) — a conveyance or system of conveyances (including roads with drainage systems, municipal streets, catch basins, curbs, gutters, ditches, man-made channels, or storm drains): i. Owned or operated by a state, city, town, borough, county, parish, district, association, or other public body (created by or pursuant to State law) having jurisdiction over disposal of sewage, industrial wastes, stormwater, or other wastes, including special districts under State law such as a sewer district, flood control district or drainage district, or similar entity, or an Indian tribe or an authorized Indian tribal organization, or a designated and approved management agency under section 208 of the CWA that discharges to surface waters of the State. ii. Designed or used for collecting or conveying stormwater iii. Which is not a combined sewer iv. Which is not part of a Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) as defined at 40 CFR 122.2. Notice of Intent — a standardized format notification sent to the NYSDEC to inform them of the proposed activity to be sent after the SWPPP has been completed. Owner or Operator — means the person, persons or legal entity which owns or leases the property on which the construction activity is occurring; and/or an entity that has operational control over the construction plans and specifications, including the ability to make modifications to the plans and specifications. Post -Construction Stormwater Management Practices — permanent devices constructed or installed onsite to treat stormwater from a site when construction is completed. Qualified Inspector - a Licensed Professional Engineer, Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control (CPESC), Registered Landscape Architect, or someone working under the direct supervision of, and at the same company as, the licensed Professional Engineer or Registered Landscape Architect, provided they have received 4 hours of Department endorsed training in proper erosion and sediment control principles from a Soil and Water Conservation District, or other Department endorsed entity. After receiving the initial training, the qualified inspector shall receive 4 hours of training every 3 years. Regulated, Traditional Land Use Control MS4 - means a city, town, or village with land use control authority that is required to gain coverage under New York State DEC's SPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Municipal Separate Stormwater Sewer Systems (MS4s). Sequence of Operations — the individual steps and their specific order which are undertaken in order to construct a project or a given phase of a project from beginning to end. (i.e. clearing, grading, foundation work, landscaping, etc.) Lc)m The LA GROUP Land scape h rc h ii eau re & E ng itieering V C Page 21 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion Project Number -201240.01 State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) —means the system established pursuant to Article 17 of the Environmental Conservation Law (ECL) and 6 NYCRR Part 750 for issuance of permits authorizing discharges to the waters of the state. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) - a report that is compiled providing detailed information about the proposed activity and the specifics to how the stormwater will be managed during construction and after construction is completed. Surface Waters of the State - shall be construed to include lakes, bays, sounds, ponds, impounding reservoirs, springs, rivers, streams, creeks, estuaries, marshes, inlets, canals, the Atlantic Ocean, within the territorial seas of the state of New York and all other bodies of surface water, natural or artificial, inland or coastal, fresh or salt, public or private (except those private waters that do not combine or effect a junction with natural surface or underground waters), which are wholly or partially within or bordering the state or within its jurisdiction. Waters of the state are further defined in 6 NYCRR Parts 800-941. Temporary Stabilization — means that exposed soil has been covered with material(s) as set forth in the technical standard, New York Standards and Specifications for Erosion and Sediment Control, to prevent the exposed soil from eroding. The materials can include, but are not limited to, mulch, seed and mulch, and erosion control mats (e.g. jute twisted yarn, excelsior wood fiber mats). Trained Contractor —means an employee from a contracting (construction) company responsible for the day to day implementation of the SWPPP. The trained contractor must have received 4 hours of Department endorsed training in proper erosion and sediment control principles from a Soil and Water Conservation District, or other Department endorsed entity. After receiving the initial training, the qualified inspector shall receive 4 hours of training every 3 years. It can also mean an employee from the contracting (construction) company that meets the qualified inspector qualifications (e.g. licensed Professional Engineer, Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control (CPESC), Registered Landscape Architect, or someone working under the direct supervision of, and at the same company as, the licensed Professional Engineer or Registered Landscape Architect, provided they have received 4 hours of Department endorsed training in proper erosion and sediment control principles from a Soil and Water Conservation District, or other Department endorsed entity. LOM The LA GROUP Land scape h rc h ii eau re & E ng itieering V C Page 22 Appendix A HydroCAD Calculations and Storm Data HYDROCAD CALCULATIONS PRE DEVELOPMENT 1.1S S cat 5S ce AP -1 SMP1.1 SMP1 S3 C3 3.2S AP -1 Infiltration Pocket Pond Swale Culvert ROOF 3.3S 3.1S Subcat 3.3S Subcat 1.1 S 1.2S Subcat 3S Subcat Reach Aon Link Routing Diagram for Pre -Development Prepared by The LA Group, Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pre -Development Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (sq -ft) (subcatchment-numbers) 941196 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A (1.1S, 1.2S, 3.1S, 3.3S) 16740 98 Paved parking, HSG A (3.1 S, 3.2S, 3.3S) 531471 30 Woods, Good, HSG A (1.1 S, 1.2S, 3.3S) 164,406 42 TOTAL AREA Pre -Development Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Soil Listing (all nodes) Area Soil Subcatchment (sq -ft) Group Numbers 1641406 HSG A 1.1 S, 1.2S, 3.1 S, 3.2S, 3.3S 0 HSG B 0 HSG C 0 HSG D 0 Other 164,406 TOTAL AREA Pre -Development Prepared by The LA Group HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Printed 4/10/2019 Page 4 Ground Covers (all nodes) HSG -A HSG -B HSG -C HSG -D Other Total Ground Sub (sq -ft) (sq -ft) (sq -ft) (sq -ft) (sq -ft) (sq -ft) Cover Nun 94,196 0 0 0 0 947196 >75% Grass cover, Good 16740 0 0 0 0 16740 Paved parking 53471 0 0 0 0 53471 Woods, Good 164,406 0 0 0 0 164,406 TOTAL AREA Pre -Development Type 11 24 -hr 1 -yr Rainfall=2.15" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 961 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1.1 S: Subcat 5S Runoff Area=2.041 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00" Flow Length=260' Tc=43.2 min CN=34 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0 cf Subcatchment 1.2S: Subcat 3S Runoff Area=0.590 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00" Flow Length=147' Slope=0.0150 '/' Tc=13.1 min CN=38 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0 cf Subcatchment3.1 S: Subcat 1.1 S Runoff Area=0.179 ac 41.56% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.16" Tc=6.0 min CN=64 Runoff=0.02 cfs 103 cf Subcatchment3.2S: ROOF Runoff Area=0.310 ac 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.92" Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=0.90 cfs 2,163 cf Subcatchment3.3S: Subcat 3.3S Runoff Area=0.654 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00" Flow Length=335' Tc=12.0 min CN=39 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0 cf Reach S3: Swale Avg. Flow Depth=0.28' Max Vel=1.07 fps Inflow=0.91 cfs 2,265 cf n=0.035 L=190.0' S=0.0050'/' Capacity=10.69 cfs Outflow=0.86 cfs 2,265 cf Pond C3: Culvert Peak EIev=307.84' Inflow=0.90 cfs 2,163 cf 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.013 L=85.0' S=0.0100'/' Outflow=0.90 cfs 2,163 cf Pond SMP1: Pocket Pond Peak EIev=305.10' Storage=1,722 cf Inflow=0.86 cfs 2,265 cf Outflow=0.80 cfs 2,265 cf Pond SMP1.1: Infiltration Peak EIev=304.01' Storage=14 cf Inflow=0.80 cfs 2,265 cf Outflow=0.79 cfs 2,265 cf Link AP -1: AP -1 Inflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Total Runoff Area = 164,406 sf Runoff Volume = 2,265 cf Average Runoff Depth = 0.17" 89.82% Pervious = 147,667 sf 10.18% Impervious = 16,740 sf Pre -Development Type 11 24 -hr 10 -yr Rainfall=3.75" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 0 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 961 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1.1 S: Subcat 5S Runoff Area=2.041 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00" Flow Length=260' Tc=43.2 min CN=34 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0 cf Subcatchment 1.2S: Subcat 3S Runoff Area=0.590 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.01" Flow Length=147' Slope=0.0150 '/' Tc=13.1 min CN=38 Runoff=0.00 cfs 30 cf Subcatchment3.1 S: Subcat 1.1 S Runoff Area=0.179 ac 41.56% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.84" Tc=6.0 min CN=64 Runoff=0.24 cfs 543 cf Subcatchment3.2S: ROOF Runoff Area=0.310 ac 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.52" Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=1.60 cfs 3,954 cf Subcatchment3.3S: Subcat 3.3S Runoff Area=0.654 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.02" Flow Length=335' Tc=12.0 min CN=39 Runoff=0.00 cfs 56 cf Reach S3: Swale Avg. Flow Depth=0.41' Max Vel=1.31 fps Inflow=1.83 cfs 4,497 cf n=0.035 L=190.0' S=0.0050'/' Capacity=10.69 cfs Outflow=1.71 cfs 4,497 cf Pond C3: Culvert Peak EIev=308.03' Inflow=1.60 cfs 3,954 cf 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.013 L=85.0' S=0.0100'/' Outflow=1.60 cfs 3,954 cf Pond SMP1: Pocket Pond Peak EIev=305.16' Storage=1,819 cf Inflow=1.71 cfs 4,497 cf Outflow=1.62 cfs 4,497 cf Pond SMP1.1: Infiltration Peak EIev=304.03' Storage=65 cf Inflow=1.62 cfs 4,554 cf Outflow=1.43 cfs 4,536 cf Link AP -1: AP -1 Inflow=0.00 cfs 30 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 30 cf Total Runoff Area = 164,406 sf Runoff Volume = 4,584 cf Average Runoff Depth = 0.33" 89.82% Pervious = 147,667 sf 10.18% Impervious = 16,740 sf Pre -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 0 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 1 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 961 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1.1 S: Subcat 5S Runoff Area=2.041 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.25" Flow Length=260' Tc=43.2 min CN=34 Runoff=0.07 cfs 1,831 cf Subcatchment 1.2S: Subcat 3S Runoff Area=0.590 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.45" Flow Length=147' Slope=0.0150 '/' Tc=13.1 min CN=38 Runoff=0.13 cfs 960 cf Subcatchment3.1 S: Subcat 1.1 S Runoff Area=0.179 ac 41.56% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.41" Tc=6.0 min CN=64 Runoff=0.75 cfs 1,566 cf Subcatchment3.2S: ROOF Runoff Area=0.310 ac 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.96" Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=2.66 cfs 6,705 cf Subcatchment3.3S: Subcat 3.3S Runoff Area=0.654 ac 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.50" Flow Length=335' Tc=12.0 min CN=39 Runoff=0.20 cfs 1,197 cf Reach S3: Swale Avg. Flow Depth=0.57' Max Vel=1.56 fps Inflow=3.40 cfs 8,270 cf n=0.035 L=190.0' S=0.0050'/' Capacity=10.69 cfs Outflow=3.14 cfs 8,270 cf Pond C3: Culvert Peak EIev=308.34' Inflow=2.66 cfs 6,705 cf 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.013 L=85.0' S=0.0100'/' Outflow=2.66 cfs 6,705 cf Pond SMP1: Pocket Pond Peak EIev=305.25' Storage=1,958 cf Inflow=3.14 cfs 8,270 cf Outflow=3.06 cfs 8,270 cf Pond SMP1.1: Infiltration Peak EIev=304.38' Storage=1,016 cf Inflow=3.23 cfs 9,467 cf Outflow=1.57 cfs 9,386 cf Link AP -1: AP -1 Inflow=0.13 cfs 2,791 cf Primary=0.13 cfs 2,791 cf Total Runoff Area = 164,406 sf Runoff Volume = 12,259 cf Average Runoff Depth = 0.89" 89.82% Pervious = 147,667 sf 10.18% Impervious = 16,740 sf Pre -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Summary for Subcatchment 1.1S: Subcat 5S Runoff = 0.07 cfs @ 13.16 hrs, Volume= 1,831 cf, Depth= 0.25" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Area (ac) CN Description 0.915 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 1.126 30 Woods, Good, HSG A 2.041 34 Weighted Average 2.041 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 36.3 100 0.0070 0.05 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.60" 6.9 160 0.0060 0.39 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Woodland Kv= 5.0 fps 43.2 260 Total Summary for Subcatchment 1.2S: Subcat 3S Runoff = 0.13 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 960 cf, Depth= 0.45" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Area (ac) CN Description 0.096 30 Woods, Good, HSG A 0.494 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 0.590 38 Weighted Average 0.590 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.2 100 0.0150 0.14 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.60" 0.9 47 0.0150 0.86 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 13.1 147 Total Summary for Subcatchment 3.1 S: Subcat 1.1 S Runoff = 0.75 cfs @ 11.98 hrs, Volume= 1566 cf, Depth= 2.41" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Pre -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 0 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Area (ac) CN DescriDtion 0.074 98 Paved parking, HSG A 0.105 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 0.179 64 Weighted Average 0.105 58.44% Pervious Area 0.074 41.56% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 3.2S: ROOF Runoff = 2.66 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 6,705 cf, Depth= 5.96" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Area (ac) CN Description 0.310 98 Paved parking, HSG A 0.310 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 3.3S: Subcat 3.3S Runoff = 0.20 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 1,197 cf, Depth= 0.50" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Area (ac) CN Description 0.005 30 Woods, Good, HSG A 0.000 98 Paved parking, HSG A 0.649 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 0.654 39 Weighted Average 0.654 100.00% Pervious Area 0.000 1.1 235 0.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.9 100 0.0200 0.15 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.60" 1.1 235 0.0600 3.67 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Grassed Waterwav Kv= 15.0 fps 12.0 335 Total Pre -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 0 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Reach S3: Swale Inflow Area = 21,300 sf, 78.59% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.66" for 100 -yr event Inflow = 3.40 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 8,270 cf Outflow = 3.14 cfs @ 12.02 hrs, Volume= 8,270 cf, Atten= 8%, Lag= 3.5 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Max. Velocity= 1.56 fps, Min. Travel Time= 2.0 min Avg. Velocity = 0.40 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 7.9 min Peak Storage= 400 cf @ 11.99 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.57' Bank -Full Depth= 1.00' Flow Area= 5.0 sf, Capacity= 10.69 cfs 2.00' x 1.00' deep channel, n= 0.035 Earth, dense weeds Side Slope Z -value= 3.07' Top Width= 8.00' Length= 190.0' Slope= 0.00507' Inlet Invert= 306.80', Outlet Invert= 305.85' Inflow Area = I nflow = Outflow = Primary = Summary for Pond C3: Culvert 13,495 sf,100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.96" for 100 -yr event 2.66 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 6,705 cf 2.66 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 6,705 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min 2.66 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 6,705 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 308.34' @ 11.96 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 307.35' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 85.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 307.35'/306.50' S=0.0100'/' Cc= 0.900 n=0.013 Corrugated PE, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.79 sf Primary OutFlow Max=2.61 cfs @ 11.96 hrs HW=308.32' (Free Discharge) Ll =Culvert (Inlet Controls 2.61 cfs @ 3.35 fps) Summary for Pond SMP1: Pocket Pond Inflow Area = 21,300 sf, 78.59% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 4.66" for 100 -yr event Inflow = 3.14 cfs @ 12.02 hrs, Volume= 8,270 cf Outflow = 3.06 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 8,270 cf, Atten= 2%, Lag= 1.4 min Primary = 3.06 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 8,270 cf Pre -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 0 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 305.00' Surf.Area= 1,510 sf Storage= 1,566 cf Peak Elev= 305.25' @ 12.05 hrs Surf.Area= 1,679 sf Storage= 1,958 cf (392 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= 147.7 min calculated for 6,697 cf (81 % of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 4.9 min ( 772.6 - 767.7 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 303.00' 3,433 cf Custom Stage Data (Irregular)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (sq -ft) (feet) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) (sq -ft) 303.00 250 85.0 0 0 250 304.00 730 145.0 469 469 11354 305.00 15510 175.0 15097 15566 25135 306.00 25250 200.0 15868 35433 25904 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 305.00' 10.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 Primary OutFlow Max=3.04 cfs @ 12.05 hrs HW=305.24' (Free Discharge) Ll =Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 3.04 cfs @ 1.24 fps) Summary for Pond SMP1.1: Infiltration Inflow Area = 49,791 sf, 33.62% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 2.28" for 100 -yr event Inflow = 3.23 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 9,467 cf Outflow = 1.57 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 9,386 cf, Atten= 51%, Lag= 7.9 min Discarded = 1.57 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 9,386 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs / 2 Peak Elev= 304.38' @ 12.18 hrs Surf.Area= 2,831 sf Storage= 1,016 cf Plug -Flow detention time= 8.4 min calculated for 9,376 cf (99% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 2.8 min ( 799.0 - 796.2 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 304.00' 2,929 cf Custom Stage Data (Irregular)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (sq -ft) (feet) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) (sq -ft) 304.00 25550 185.0 0 0 25550 305.00 35325 210.0 2,929 25929 37360 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 304.00' 24.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=1.57 cfs @ 12.18 hrs HW=304.37' (Free Discharge) L1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 1.57 cfs) Pre -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Summary for Link AP -1: AP -1 Inflow Area = 114,616 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.29" for 100 -yr event Inflow = 0.13 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 2,791 cf Primary = 0.13 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 2,791 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs HYDROCAD CALCULATIONS POST DEVELOPMENT 1.1S Su cat 5S cB SMP -1.1 SMP -1 � S3 C3 3.2S Stormwater Disposal Pocket Pond Swale Culvert ROOF Area /SM\P-2 3.45 Permeable Pavement Subcat 3AS AP -1 1 R 3.3S 3.1S AP -1 Swale Subcat 3.3S Subcat 1.1 S 1.2S Subcat 3S Subcat Reach 4on Link Routing Diagram for Post -Development Prepared by The LA Group, Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Post -Development Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Area Listing (all nodes) Area CN Description (sq -ft) (subcatchment-numbers) 851250 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A (1.1S, 1.2S, 3.1 S, 3.3S, 3.4S) 35,835 98 Paved parking, HSG A (1.1 S, 3.1 S, 3.2S, 3.3S, 3.4S) 431279 30 Woods, Good, HSG A (1.1 S, 1.2S, 3.1 S) 164,364 49 TOTAL AREA Post -Development Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Soil Listing (all nodes) Area Soil Subcatchment (sq -ft) Group Numbers 1641364 HSG A 1.1 S, 1.2S, 3.1 S, 3.2S, 3.3S, 3AS 0 HSG B 0 HSG C 0 HSG D 0 Other 164,364 TOTAL AREA Post -Development Prepared by The LA Group HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Printed 4/10/2019 Page 4 Ground Covers (all nodes) HSG -A HSG -B HSG -C HSG -D Other Total Ground Sub (sq -ft) (sq -ft) (sq -ft) (sq -ft) (sq -ft) (sq -ft) Cover Nun 85,250 0 0 0 0 857250 >75% Grass cover, Good 35, 835 0 0 0 0 35, 835 Paved parking 43,279 0 0 0 0 43,279 Woods, Good 164,364 0 0 0 0 164,364 TOTAL AREA Post -Development Type 11 24 -hr 1 -yr Rainfall=2.15" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 961 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1.1 S: Subcat 5S Runoff Area=70,598 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00" Flow Length=205' Tc=40.8 min CN=34 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0 cf Subcatchment 1.2S: Subcat 3S Runoff Area=25,710 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00" Flow Length=147' Slope=0.0150 '/' Tc=13.1 min CN=38 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0 cf Subcatchment3.1 S: Subcat 1.1 S Runoff Area=18,115 sf 17.92% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00" Tc=6.0 min CN=49 Runoff=0.00 cfs 1 cf Subcatchment3.2S: ROOF Runoff Area=13,495 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.92" Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=0.90 cfs 2,163 cf Subcatchment3.3S: Subcat 3.3S Runoff Area=17,354 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00" Flow Length=125' Tc=11.2 min CN=39 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0 cf Subcatchment3.4S: Subcat 3.4S Runoff Area=19,093 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.92" Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=1.28 cfs 3,060 cf Reach 1 R: Swale Avg. Flow Depth=0.00' Max Vel=0.00 fps Inflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf n=0.150 L=390.0' S=0.0029'/' Capacity=4.70 cfs Outflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Reach S3: Swale Avg. Flow Depth=0.26' Max Vel=1.19 fps Inflow=0.90 cfs 2,163 cf n=0.030 L=190.0' S=0.0050'/' Capacity=30.61 cfs Outflow=0.85 cfs 2,163 cf Pond C3: Culvert Peak EIev=307.84' Inflow=0.90 cfs 2,163 cf 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.013 L=85.0' S=0.0100'/' Outflow=0.90 cfs 2,163 cf Pond SMP -1: Pocket Pond Peak EIev=305.10' Storage=1,835 cf Inflow=0.85 cfs 2,163 cf Outflow=0.78 cfs 2,163 cf Pond SMP -1.1: Stormwater Disposal Area Pond SMP -2: Permeable Pavement Link AP -1: AP -1 Peak EIev=304.10' Storage=101 cf Inflow=0.78 cfs 2,163 cf Outflow=0.58 cfs 2,147 cf Peak EIev=306.01' Storage=44 cf Inflow=1.28 cfs 3,060 cf Outflow=1.27 cfs 3,060 cf Inflow=0.00 cfs 0 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 0 cf Total Runoff Area = 164,364 sf Runoff Volume = 5,223 cf Average Runoff Depth = 0.38" 78.20% Pervious = 128,529 sf 21.80% Impervious = 35,835 sf Post -Development Type 11 24 -hr 10 -yr Rainfall=3.75" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 0 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 961 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1.1 S: Subcat 5S Runoff Area=70,598 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.00" Flow Length=205' Tc=40.8 min CN=34 Runoff=0.00 cfs 0 cf Subcatchment 1.2S: Subcat 3S Runoff Area=25,710 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.01" Flow Length=147' Slope=0.0150 '/' Tc=13.1 min CN=38 Runoff=0.00 cfs 30 cf Subcatchment3.1 S: Subcat 1.1 S Runoff Area=18,115 sf 17.92% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.23" Tc=6.0 min CN=49 Runoff=0.05 cfs 348 cf Subcatchment3.2S: ROOF Runoff Area=13,495 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.52" Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=1.60 cfs 3,954 cf Subcatchment3.3S: Subcat 3.3S Runoff Area=17,354 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.02" Flow Length=125' Tc=11.2 min CN=39 Runoff=0.00 cfs 34 cf Subcatchment3.4S: Subcat 3.4S Runoff Area=19,093 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.52" Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=2.27 cfs 5,594 cf Reach 1 R: Swale Avg. Flow Depth=0.02' Max Vel=0.03 fps Inflow=0.00 cfs 34 cf n=0.150 L=390.0' S=0.0029'/' Capacity=4.70 cfs Outflow=0.00 cfs 34 cf Reach S3: Swale Avg. Flow Depth=0.36' Max Vel=1.42 fps Inflow=1.62 cfs 4,302 cf n=0.030 L=190.0' S=0.0050'/' Capacity=30.61 cfs Outflow=1.51 cfs 4,302 cf Pond C3: Culvert Peak EIev=308.03' Inflow=1.60 cfs 3,954 cf 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.013 L=85.0' S=0.0100'/' Outflow=1.60 cfs 3,954 cf Pond SMP -1: Pocket Pond Peak EIev=305.15' Storage=1,920 cf Inflow=1.51 cfs 4,302 cf Outflow=1.44 cfs 4,302 cf Pond SMP -1.1: Stormwater Disposal Area Pond SMP -2: Permeable Pavement Link AP -1: AP -1 Peak EIev=304.47' Storage=530 cf Inflow=1.44 cfs 4,302 cf Outflow=0.71 cfs 4,313 cf Peak EIev=306.01' Storage=77 cf Inflow=2.27 cfs 5,594 cf Outflow=2.23 cfs 5,594 cf Inflow=0.00 cfs 65 cf Primary=0.00 cfs 65 cf Total Runoff Area = 164,364 sf Runoff Volume = 9,960 cf Average Runoff Depth = 0.73" 78.20% Pervious = 128,529 sf 21.80% Impervious = 35,835 sf Post -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 0 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 1 Time span=0.00-48.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 961 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment 1.1 S: Subcat 5S Runoff Area=70,598 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.25" Flow Length=205' Tc=40.8 min CN=34 Runoff=0.06 cfs 1,454 cf Subcatchment 1.2S: Subcat 3S Runoff Area=25,710 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.45" Flow Length=147' Slope=0.0150 '/' Tc=13.1 min CN=38 Runoff=0.13 cfs 960 cf Subcatchment3.1 S: Subcat 1.1 S Runoff Area=18,115 sf 17.92% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.17" Tc=6.0 min CN=49 Runoff=0.76 cfs 1,763 cf Subcatchment3.2S: ROOF Runoff Area=13,495 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.96" Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=2.66 cfs 6,705 cf Subcatchment3.3S: Subcat 3.3S Runoff Area=17,354 sf 0.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=0.50" Flow Length=125' Tc=11.2 min CN=39 Runoff=0.13 cfs 729 cf Subcatchment3.4S: Subcat 3.4S Runoff Area=19,093 sf 100.00% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.96" Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=3.77 cfs 9,485 cf Reach 1 R: Swale Avg. Flow Depth=0.12' Max Vel=0.12 fps Inflow=0.13 cfs 729 cf n=0.150 L=390.0' S=0.0029'/' Capacity=4.70 cfs Outflow=0.04 cfs 729 cf Reach S3: Swale Avg. Flow Depth=0.53' Max Vel=1.75 fps Inflow=3.37 cfs 8,467 cf n=0.030 L=190.0' S=0.0050'/' Capacity=30.61 cfs Outflow=3.12 cfs 8,467 cf Pond C3: Culvert Peak EIev=308.34' Inflow=2.66 cfs 6,705 cf 12.0" Round Culvert n=0.013 L=85.0' S=0.0100'/' Outflow=2.66 cfs 6,705 cf Pond SMP -1: Pocket Pond Peak EIev=305.24' Storage=2,090 cf Inflow=3.12 cfs 8,467 cf Outflow=3.02 cfs 8,467 cf Pond SMP -1.1: Stormwater Disposal Area Peak EIev=305.23' Storage=1,710 cf Inflow=3.02 cfs 8,467 cf Outflow=1.01 cfs 8,446 cf Pond SMP -2: Permeable Pavement Peak EIev=306.10' Storage=728 cf Inflow=3.77 cfs 9,485 cf Outflow=2.21 cfs 9,505 cf Link AP -1: AP -1 Inflow=0.13 cfs 3,143 cf Primary=0.13 cfs 3,143 cf Total Runoff Area = 164,364 sf Runoff Volume = 21,096 cf Average Runoff Depth = 1.54" 78.20% Pervious = 128,529 sf 21.80% Impervious = 35,835 sf Post -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Summary for Subcatchment 1.1S: Subcat 5S Runoff = 0.06 cfs @ 13.09 hrs, Volume= 1,454 cf, Depth= 0.25" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Area (sf) CN Description 325900 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 371698 30 Woods, Good, HSG A 0 98 Paved parking, HSG A 705598 34 Weighted Average 705598 100.00% Pervious Area 0 0.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 36.3 100 0.0070 0.05 Sheet Flow, Woods: Light underbrush n= 0.400 P2= 2.60" 4.5 105 0.0060 0.39 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Woodland Kv= 5.0 fps 40.8 205 Total Summary for Subcatchment 1.2S: Subcat 3S Runoff = 0.13 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 960 cf, Depth= 0.45" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Area (sf) CN Description 45184 30 Woods, Good, HSG A 211526 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 251710 38 Weighted Average 255710 100.00% Pervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.2 100 0.0150 0.14 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.60" 0.9 47 0.0150 0.86 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 13.1 147 Total Summary for Subcatchment 3.1 S: Subcat 1.1 S Runoff = 0.76 cfs @ 11.99 hrs, Volume= 1,763 cf, Depth= 1.17" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Post -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 0 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Area (sf) CN Description 11398 30 Woods, Good, HSG A 31247 98 Paved parking, HSG A 135470 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 185115 49 Weighted Average 145868 82.08% Pervious Area 31247 17.92% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 3.2S: ROOF Runoff = 2.66 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 6,705 cf, Depth= 5.96" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Area (sf) CN Description 135495 98 Paved parking, HSG A 131495 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Subcatchment 3.3S: Subcat 3.3S Runoff = 0.13 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 729 cf, Depth= 0.50" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Area (sf) CN Description 0 98 Paved parking, HSG A 171354 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 171354 39 Weighted Average 175354 100.00% Pervious Area 0 0.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.9 100 0.0200 0.15 Sheet Flow, Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 2.60" 0.3 25 0.0500 1.57 Shallow Concentrated Flow, Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 11.2 125 Total Post -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 0 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Summary for Subcatchment 3AS: Subcat 3AS Runoff = 3.77 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 9,485 cf, Depth= 5.96" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type II 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Area (sf) CN Description 0 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 191093 98 Paved parking, HSG A 191093 98 Weighted Average 0 0.00% Pervious Area 195093 100.00% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Reach 1R: Swale Inflow Area = 17,354 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.50" for 100 -yr event Inflow = 0.13 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 729 cf Outflow = 0.04 cfs @ 13.62 hrs, Volume= 729 cf, Atten= 72%, Lag= 91.7 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Max. Velocity= 0.12 fps, Min. Travel Time= 54.0 min Avg. Velocity = 0.05 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 121.6 min Peak Storage= 115 cf @ 12.72 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.12' Bank -Full Depth= 1.50' Flow Area= 9.8 sf, Capacity= 4.70 cfs 2.00' x 1.50' deep channel, n= 0.150 Side Slope Z -value= 3.07' Top Width= 11.00' Length= 390.0' Slope= 0.00297' Inlet Invert= 307.00', Outlet Invert= 305.85' Inflow Area = I nflow = Outflow = Summary for Reach S3: Swale 315610 sf, 52.96% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.21" for 100 -yr event 3.37 cfs @ 11.97 hrs, Volume= 8,467 cf 3.12 cfs @ 12.02 hrs, Volume= 8,467 cf, Atten= 7%, Lag= 3.0 min Post -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 0 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Max. Velocity= 1.75 fps, Min. Travel Time= 1.8 min Avg. Velocity = 0.47 fps, Avg. Travel Time= 6.8 min Peak Storage= 357 cf @ 11.99 hrs Average Depth at Peak Storage= 0.53' Bank -Full Depth= 1.50' Flow Area= 9.8 sf, Capacity= 30.61 cfs 2.00' x 1.50' deep channel, n= 0.030 Side Slope Z -value= 3.07' Top Width= 11.00' Length= 190.0' Slope= 0.00507' Inlet Invert= 306.80', Outlet Invert= 305.85' Inflow Area = I nflow = Outflow = Primary = Summary for Pond C3: Culvert 13,495 sf, 100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.96" for 100 -yr event 2.66 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 6,705 cf 2.66 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 6,705 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min 2.66 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 6,705 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 308.34' @ 11.96 hrs Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Primary 307.35' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 85.0' Ke= 0.500 Inlet/ Outlet Invert= 307.35'/306.50' S=0.0100'/' Cc= 0.900 n=0.013 Corrugated PE, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.79 sf Primary OutFlow Max=2.61 cfs @ 11.96 hrs HW=308.32' (Free Discharge) Ll =Culvert (Inlet Controls 2.61 cfs @ 3.35 fps) Summary for Pond SMP -1: Pocket Pond Inflow Area = 315610 sf, 52.96% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.21" for 100 -yr event Inflow = 3.12 cfs @ 12.02 hrs, Volume= 8,467 cf Outflow = 3.02 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 8,467 cf, Atten= 3%, Lag= 1.6 min Primary = 3.02 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 8,467 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Starting Elev= 305.00' Surf.Area= 1,590 sf Storage= 1,672 cf Peak Elev= 305.24' @ 12.05 hrs Surf.Area= 1,843 sf Storage= 2,090 cf (418 cf above start) Plug -Flow detention time= 156.9 min calculated for 6,788 cf (80% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 5.2 min (783.6 - 778.4 ) Post -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 0 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs / 2 Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description Peak Elev= 305.23' @ 12.22 hrs Surf.Area= 1,812 sf Storage= 1,710 cf #1 303.00' 3,814 cf Custom Stage Data (Irregular)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (sq -ft) (feet) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) (sq -ft) 303.00 190 150.0 0 0 190 304.00 840 175.0 476 476 857 305.00 15590 200.0 15195 15672 15626 306.00 25746 350.0 2,142 35814 87197 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices 305.00 15650 175.0 15306 11306 #1 Primary 305.00' 10.0' long x 10.0' breadth Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.60 Coef. (English) 2.49 2.56 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.69 2.67 2.64 Primary OutFlow Max=3.00 cfs @ 12.05 hrs HW=305.24' (Free Discharge) #1 Discarded 304.00' 24.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Ll =Broad -Crested Rectangular Weir (Weir Controls 3.00 cfs @ 1.23 fps) Summary for Pond SMP -1.1: Stormwater Disposal Area Inflow Area = 311610 sf, 52.96% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.21" for 100 -yr event Inflow = 3.02 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 8,467 cf Outflow = 1.01 cfs @ 12.22 hrs, Volume= 8,446 cf, Atten= 67%, Lag= 10.4 min Discarded = 1.01 cfs @ 12.22 hrs, Volume= 8,446 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs / 2 Peak Elev= 305.23' @ 12.22 hrs Surf.Area= 1,812 sf Storage= 1,710 cf Plug -Flow detention time= 10.7 min calculated for 8,437 cf (100% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 9.0 min ( 792.6 - 783.6 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 304.00' 3,319 cf Custom Stage Data (Irregular)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Perim. Inc.Store Cum.Store Wet.Area (feet) (sq -ft) (feet) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) (sq -ft) 304.00 990 150.0 0 0 990 305.00 15650 175.0 15306 11306 15657 306.00 25400 200.0 25013 35319 25426 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 304.00' 24.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=1.00 cfs @ 12.22 hrs HW=305.23' (Free Discharge) L1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 1.00 cfs) Post -Development Type 11 24 -hr 100 -yr Rainfall=6.20" Prepared by The LA Group Printed 4/10/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 00439 0 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Summary for Pond SMP -2: Permeable Pavement Inflow Area = 19,093 sf, 100.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 5.96" for 100 -yr event Inflow = 3.77 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 9,485 cf Outflow = 2.21 cfs @ 11.90 hrs, Volume= 9,505 cf, Atten= 41 %, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded = 2.21 cfs @ 11.90 hrs, Volume= 9,505 cf Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 306.10' @ 12.05 hrs Surf.Area= 19,091 sf Storage= 728 cf Plug -Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 1.3 min (741.8 - 740.5 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 306.00' 7,636 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic)Listed below (Recalc) Elevation Surf.Area Voids Inc.Store Cum.Store (feet) (sq -ft) (%) (cubic -feet) (cubic -feet) 306.00 191091 0.0 0 0 307.00 195091 40.0 71636 75636 Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 306.00' 5.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=2.21 cfs @ 11.90 hrs HW=306.02' (Free Discharge) L1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 2.21 cfs) Summary for Link AP -1: AP -1 Inflow Area = 113,662 sf, 0.00% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 0.33" for 100 -yr event Inflow = 0.13 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 3,143 cf Primary = 0.13 cfs @ 12.13 hrs, Volume= 3,143 cf, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Primary outflow = Inflow, Time Span= 0.00-48.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Appendix B Soil Survey and Map Set USDA United States Department of - Agriculture N RCS Natural Resources Conservation Service A product of the National Cooperative Soil Survey, a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local participants Custom Soil Resource Report for Saratoga County, New York January 29, 2019 Preface Soil surveys contain information that affects land use planning in survey areas. They highlight soil limitations that affect various land uses and provide information about the properties of the soils in the survey areas. Soil surveys are designed for many different users, including farmers, ranchers, foresters, agronomists, urban planners, community officials, engineers, developers, builders, and home buyers. Also, conservationists, teachers, students, and specialists in recreation, waste disposal, and pollution control can use the surveys to help them understand, protect, or enhance the environment. Various land use regulations of Federal, State, and local governments may impose special restrictions on land use or land treatment. Soil surveys identify soil properties that are used in making various land use or land treatment decisions. The information is intended to help the land users identify and reduce the effects of soil limitations on various land uses. The landowner or user is responsible for identifying and complying with existing laws and regulations. Although soil survey information can be used for general farm, local, and wider area planning, onsite investigation is needed to supplement this information in some cases. Examples include soil quality assessments (http-//www.nres.usda.gov/wps/ portal/nres/main/soils/health/) and certain conservation and engineering applications. For more detailed information, contact your local USDA Service Center (https-//offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app?agency=nres) or your NRCS State Soil Scientist (http-//www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/contactus/? cid=nres142p2_053951). Great differences in soil properties can occur within short distances. Some soils are seasonally wet or subject to flooding. Some are too unstable to be used as a foundation for buildings or roads. Clayey or wet soils are poorly suited to use as septic tank absorption fields. A high water table makes a soil poorly suited to basements or underground installations. The National Cooperative Soil Survey is a joint effort of the United States Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies, State agencies including the Agricultural Experiment Stations, and local agencies. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) has leadership for the Federal part of the National Cooperative Soil Survey. Information about soils is updated periodically. Updated information is available through the NRCS Web Soil Survey, the site for official soil survey information. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require 2 alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. 3 Contents Preface.................................................................................................................... 2 HowSoil Surveys Are Made..................................................................................5 SoilMap.................................................................................................................. 8 SoilMap................................................................................................................9 Legend................................................................................................................10 MapUnit Legend................................................................................................ 11 MapUnit Descriptions.........................................................................................11 SaratogaCounty, New York............................................................................13 DeA Deerfield loamy fine sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes..............................13 DeB Deerfield loamy fine sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes..............................14 References............................................................................................................17 4 How Soil Surveys Are Made Soil surveys are made to provide information about the soils and miscellaneous areas in a specific area. They include a description of the soils and miscellaneous areas and their location on the landscape and tables that show soil properties and limitations affecting various uses. Soil scientists observed the steepness, length, and shape of the slopes; the general pattern of drainage; the kinds of crops and native plants; and the kinds of bedrock. They observed and described many soil profiles. A soil profile is the sequence of natural layers, or horizons, in a soil. The profile extends from the surface down into the unconsolidated material in which the soil formed or from the surface down to bedrock. The unconsolidated material is devoid of roots and other living organisms and has not been changed by other biological activity. Currently, soils are mapped according to the boundaries of major land resource areas (MLRAs). MLRAs are geographically associated land resource units that share common characteristics related to physiography, geology, climate, water resources, soils, biological resources, and land uses (USDA, 2006). Soil survey areas typically consist of parts of one or more MLRA. The soils and miscellaneous areas in a survey area occur in an orderly pattern that is related to the geology, landforms, relief, climate, and natural vegetation of the area. Each kind of soil and miscellaneous area is associated with a particular kind of landform or with a segment of the landform. By observing the soils and miscellaneous areas in the survey area and relating their position to specific segments of the landform, a soil scientist develops a concept, or model, of how they were formed. Thus, during mapping, this model enables the soil scientist to predict with a considerable degree of accuracy the kind of soil or miscellaneous area at a specific location on the landscape. Commonly, individual soils on the landscape merge into one another as their characteristics gradually change. To construct an accurate soil map, however, soil scientists must determine the boundaries between the soils. They can observe only a limited number of soil profiles. Nevertheless, these observations, supplemented by an understanding of the soil -vegetation -landscape relationship, are sufficient to verify predictions of the kinds of soil in an area and to determine the boundaries. Soil scientists recorded the characteristics of the soil profiles that they studied. They noted soil color, texture, size and shape of soil aggregates, kind and amount of rock fragments, distribution of plant roots, reaction, and other features that enable them to identify soils. After describing the soils in the survey area and determining their properties, the soil scientists assigned the soils to taxonomic classes (units). Taxonomic classes are concepts. Each taxonomic class has a set of soil characteristics with precisely defined limits. The classes are used as a basis for comparison to classify soils systematically. Soil taxonomy, the system of taxonomic classification used in the United States, is based mainly on the kind and character of soil properties and the arrangement of horizons within the profile. After the soil 5 Custom Soil Resource Report scientists classified and named the soils in the survey area, they compared the individual soils with similar soils in the same taxonomic class in other areas so that they could confirm data and assemble additional data based on experience and research. The objective of soil mapping is not to delineate pure map unit components, the objective is to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. Each map unit is defined by a unique combination of soil components and/or miscellaneous areas in predictable proportions. Some components may be highly contrasting to the other components of the map unit. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The delineation of such landforms and landform segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. Soil scientists make many field observations in the process of producing a soil map. The frequency of observation is dependent upon several factors, including scale of mapping, intensity of mapping, design of map units, complexity of the landscape, and experience of the soil scientist. Observations are made to test and refine the soil -landscape model and predictions and to verify the classification of the soils at specific locations. Once the soil -landscape model is refined, a significantly smaller number of measurements of individual soil properties are made and recorded. These measurements may include field measurements, such as those for color, depth to bedrock, and texture, and laboratory measurements, such as those for content of sand, silt, clay, salt, and other components. Properties of each soil typically vary from one point to another across the landscape. Observations for map unit components are aggregated to develop ranges of characteristics for the components. The aggregated values are presented. Direct measurements do not exist for every property presented for every map unit component. Values for some properties are estimated from combinations of other properties. While a soil survey is in progress, samples of some of the soils in the area generally are collected for laboratory analyses and for engineering tests. Soil scientists interpret the data from these analyses and tests as well as the field -observed characteristics and the soil properties to determine the expected behavior of the soils under different uses. Interpretations for all of the soils are field tested through observation of the soils in different uses and under different levels of management. Some interpretations are modified to fit local conditions, and some new interpretations are developed to meet local needs. Data are assembled from other sources, such as research information, production records, and field experience of specialists. For example, data on crop yields under defined levels of management are assembled from farm records and from field or plot experiments on the same kinds of soil. Predictions about soil behavior are based not only on soil properties but also on such variables as climate and biological activity. Soil conditions are predictable over long periods of time, but they are not predictable from year to year. For example, soil scientists can predict with a fairly high degree of accuracy that a given soil will have a high water table within certain depths in most years, but they cannot predict that a high water table will always be at a specific level in the soil on a specific date. After soil scientists located and identified the significant natural bodies of soil in the survey area, they drew the boundaries of these bodies on aerial photographs and 0 Custom Soil Resource Report identified each as a specific map unit. Aerial photographs show trees, buildings, fields, roads, and rivers, all of which help in locating boundaries accurately. 7 Soil Map The soil map section includes the soil map for the defined area of interest, a list of soil map units on the map and extent of each map unit, and cartographic symbols displayed on the map. Also presented are various metadata about data used to produce the map, and a description of each soil map unit. 0 00 O 598670 430 3' 32" N 1145— CD — 0 P P2 2 — rz: — 598710 1 598750 Custom Soil Resource Report Soil Map 598790 59&330 0 rz Soil Map rn,ay not be valid at this scale. 430 3' 19" N 598670 5%710 598750 598790 598830 CO Map Scale: 1:1,850 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Meters N 0 25 50 100 150 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Map projection: Web Mercator Comer coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 18N WGS84 9 598870 1 1 598870 598910 Ln +� 0 430 332" N 0 ti i.� CD — ti z 1 598910 0 140 -� 430 3' 19" N 598950 Ln O O Q N ry N U L. O N ry O E O cn U O _ O LO O m L �� � U 0� O L) U) L U) m a) L N m cn N 0 O 0^ U (n L m U 'L O N E m O p L E E 9 m Z m aj Cm U c� ' a O � o 4 0 Ln m-0 " o �_ o M 0 0- " U) E L C Nm o N N O M��� > M L �. �Ma)�� o� o � -,.s C: �� W a (D E 0 o 0� � O 0- (. a) V � cn L�� �,�a) Z a IK - o �N N cn o E w� �o�> L o is Uw N cn 5 M M M o Z co O � N � ,� �� m am Q m 0 O 0 NEn E (n U N p 0 p� N � � }' o U � o� Q >' O o >+ > o m O O 0 m L m � U M }' O � •p � o (n O co m cn o o ui M� LL Z oC: cnm O i (6 0 M m O N cn (� • L E }' � O N Q� O U o U O N j �� � � 0)O M 'cn N (a M N 0 Cl) a O U >, m 0 m O � � � U O L L � J L U '� � � � ' C O �• (n � L N � � ) O � O L Q � - � O m O z E Q Q U O .--. C 0) O --� +r O i= �� O 0 0 0 ��.., is 0 L L O (� }N—, -0' O .� �_ O-0 � n > �+ L O O M: � O m Q i O (n is N (n N j O O U) (/) +r t6 O 4-0 U. o O +-� _ C L � 0 m DL cn 0 _cn O 1 M U U N � > o m O N _ O O Q O �70 m 1 O m m N .� L cn O N S cn >, U) > O O N O �+ N 0 '� C O U W U cn N o o- E 0 o 0 m O c v 0- m � O p (n (n p (nom M pj DN o c) cn � cn m m Li U m L- a ) m � cm o o mo n Q L O ma o L a0) �o _ Q O (n cn > Q) N F- O cn cn r_ m o m L- p Q) Q Z LL °a o L C7 m J a a = 00 p a)_ o L O CIL `-' j O 0-J �• O �� �• N En 4- E L:3 L cn Q) Q Q) O o c c6 C L }, a ca m Q❑ a >, o o — O m — � 0 (n Q OL U) a) +r C) a 2 — 2 2 LL o o — — U) >, � a) a) a) U) > > � � O � a) m � U m a) Q) L O Y a� U cn4-1 i Q 0 (n 0 0 = 0 O fn (n 'F) m m m U 0 L- � U CD CD c J J (1) 0- O (6 0� (n ca (1) w w w w O w c IL 0•� L � 'L) O ❑ El cn a Cl) O Custom Soil Resource Report Map Unit Legend Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, 11 Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI DeA Deerfield loamy fine sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes 10.5 78.5% DeB Deerfield loamy fine sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes 2.9 21.5% Totals for Area of Interest 13.4 100.0% Map Unit Descriptions The map units delineated on the detailed soil maps in a soil survey represent the soils or miscellaneous areas in the survey area. The map unit descriptions, along with the maps, can be used to determine the composition and properties of a unit. A map unit delineation on a soil map represents an area dominated by one or more major kinds of soil or miscellaneous areas. A map unit is identified and named according to the taxonomic classification of the dominant soils. Within a taxonomic class there are precisely defined limits for the properties of the soils. On the landscape, however, the soils are natural phenomena, and they have the characteristic variability of all natural phenomena. Thus, the range of some observed properties may extend beyond the limits defined for a taxonomic class. Areas of soils of a single taxonomic class rarely, if ever, can be mapped without including areas of other taxonomic classes. Consequently, every map unit is made up of the soils or miscellaneous areas for which it is named and some minor components that belong to taxonomic classes other than those of the major soils. Most minor soils have properties similar to those of the dominant soil or soils in the map unit, and thus they do not affect use and management. These are called noncontrasting, or similar, components. They may or may not be mentioned in a particular map unit description. Other minor components, however, have properties and behavioral characteristics divergent enough to affect use or to require different management. These are called contrasting, or dissimilar, components. They generally are in small areas and could not be mapped separately because of the scale used. Some small areas of strongly contrasting soils or miscellaneous areas are identified by a special symbol on the maps. If included in the database for a given area, the contrasting minor components are identified in the map unit descriptions along with some characteristics of each. A few areas of minor components may not have been observed, and consequently they are not mentioned in the descriptions, especially where the pattern was so complex that it was impractical to make enough observations to identify all the soils and miscellaneous areas on the landscape. The presence of minor components in a map unit in no way diminishes the usefulness or accuracy of the data. The objective of mapping is not to delineate pure taxonomic classes but rather to separate the landscape into landforms or landform segments that have similar use and management requirements. The delineation of such segments on the map provides sufficient information for the development of resource plans. If intensive use of small areas is planned, however, 11 Custom Soil Resource Report onsite investigation is needed to define and locate the soils and miscellaneous areas. An identifying symbol precedes the map unit name in the map unit descriptions. Each description includes general facts about the unit and gives important soil properties and qualities. Soils that have profiles that are almost alike make up a soil series. Except for differences in texture of the surface layer, all the soils of a series have major horizons that are similar in composition, thickness, and arrangement. Soils of one series can differ in texture of the surface layer, slope, stoniness, salinity, degree of erosion, and other characteristics that affect their use. On the basis of such differences, a soil series is divided into soil phases. Most of the areas shown on the detailed soil maps are phases of soil series. The name of a soil phase commonly indicates a feature that affects use or management. For example, Alpha silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is a phase of the Alpha series. Some map units are made up of two or more major soils or miscellaneous areas. These map units are complexes, associations, or undifferentiated groups. A complex consists of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas in such an intricate pattern or in such small areas that they cannot be shown separately on the maps. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar in all areas. Alpha -Beta complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes, is an example. An association is made up of two or more geographically associated soils or miscellaneous areas that are shown as one unit on the maps. Because of present or anticipated uses of the map units in the survey area, it was not considered practical or necessary to map the soils or miscellaneous areas separately. The pattern and relative proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas are somewhat similar. Alpha -Beta association, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. An undifferentiated group is made up of two or more soils or miscellaneous areas that could be mapped individually but are mapped as one unit because similar interpretations can be made for use and management. The pattern and proportion of the soils or miscellaneous areas in a mapped area are not uniform. An area can be made up of only one of the major soils or miscellaneous areas, or it can be made up of all of them. Alpha and Beta soils, 0 to 2 percent slopes, is an example. Some surveys include miscellaneous areas. Such areas have little or no soil material and support little or no vegetation. Rock outcrop is an example. 12 Custom Soil Resource Report Landform: Kame terraces, outwash terraces, outwash plains, outwash deltas Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape. Convex, linear, concave Across -slope shape. Concave, linear, convex Hydric soil rating. No Wareham Percent of map unit. 5 percent Landform: Depressions, drainageways Down-slope shape. Concave Across -slope shape. Concave Hydric soil rating. Yes Sudbury Percent of map unit. 2 percent Landform: Outwash terraces, outwash deltas, kame terraces, outwash plains Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape. Convex, linear, concave Across -slope shape. Concave, linear, convex Hydric soil rating. No Ninigret Percent of map unit. 1 percent Landform: Outwash terraces, outwash plains, kame terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape. Linear, convex Across -slope shape. Concave, convex Hydric soil rating. No DeB—Deerfield loamy fine sand, 3 to 8 percent slopes Map Unit Setting National map unit symbol. 2xfg9 Elevation. 0 to 1,190 feet Mean annual precipitation. 36 to 71 inches Mean annual air temperature. 39 to 55 degrees F Frost -free period. 145 to 240 days Farmland classification: Farmland of statewide importance Map Unit Composition Deerfield and similar soils: 85 percent Minor components: 15 percent Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit. Description of Deerfield Setting Landform: Kame terraces, outwash plains, outwash terraces, outwash deltas Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape. Convex, linear, concave Across -slope shape. Concave, linear, convex 14 Custom Soil Resource Report Parent material. Sandy outwash derived from granite, gneiss, and/or quartzite Typical profile Ap - 0 to 9 inches: loamy fine sand Bw - 9 to 25 inches. loamy fine sand BC - 25 to 33 inches. fine sand Cg - 33 to 60 inches. sand Properties and qualities Slope. 3 to 8 percent Depth to restrictive feature: More than 80 inches Natural drainage class. Moderately well drained Runoff class: Very low Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat): Moderately high to very high (1.42 to 99.90 in/hr) Depth to water table. About 15 to 37 inches Frequency of flooding: None Frequency of ponding: None Salinity, maximum in profile: Nonsaline (0.0 to 1.9 mmhos/cm) Sodium adsorption ratio, maximum in profile: 11.0 Available water storage in profile. Moderate (about 6.5 inches) Interpretive groups Land capability classification (irrigated). None specified Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 2w Hydrologic Soil Group: A Hydric soil rating. No Minor Components Windsor Percent of map unit. 7 percent Landform: Outwash deltas, kame terraces, outwash plains, outwash terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape. Linear, concave, convex Across -slope shape. Concave, linear, convex Hydric soil rating. No Wareham Percent of map unit. 5 percent Landform: Depressions, drainageways Down-slope shape. Concave Across -slope shape. Concave Hydric soil rating. Yes Sudbury Percent of map unit. 2 percent Landform: Outwash deltas, kame terraces, outwash plains, outwash terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape. Linear, concave, convex Across -slope shape. Concave, linear, convex Hydric soil rating. No Ninigret Percent of map unit. 1 percent Landform: Outwash terraces, outwash plains, kame terraces Landform position (three-dimensional): Tread Down-slope shape. Linear, convex 15 Custom Soil Resource Report Across -slope shape. Concave, convex Hydric soil rating. No 16 References American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2004. Standard specifications for transportation materials and methods of sampling and testing. 24th edition. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 2005. Standard classification of soils for engineering purposes. ASTM Standard D2487-00. Cowardin, L.M., V. Carter, F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of wetlands and deep -water habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. Federal Register. July 13, 1994. Changes in hydric soils of the United States. Federal Register. September 18, 2002. Hydric soils of the United States. Hurt, G.W., and L.M. Vasilas, editors. Version 6.0, 2006. Field indicators of hydric soils in the United States. National Research Council. 1995. Wetlands: Characteristics and boundaries. Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil survey manual. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 18. http-//www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_054262 Soil Survey Staff. 1999. Soil taxonomy: A basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys. 2nd edition. Natural Resources Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 436. http:// www. nres. usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053577 Soil Survey Staff. 2010. Keys to soil taxonomy. 11 th edition. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. http:// www. nres. usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/?cid=nres142p2_053580 Tiner, R.W., Jr. 1985. Wetlands of Delaware. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Wetlands Section. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers wetlands delineation manual. Waterways Experiment Station Technical Report Y-87-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National forestry manual. http-//www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/soils/ home/?cid=nres142p2_053374 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National range and pasture handbook. http-//www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/ detail/national/landuse/rangepasture/?cid=stelprdb1043084 17 Custom Soil Resource Report United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. National soil survey handbook, title 43041. http-//www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/ n res/deta i I/soi Is/scientists/?cid= n res 142 p2_054242 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2006. Land resource regions and major land resource areas of the United States, the Caribbean, and the Pacific Basin. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 296. http-//www.nres.usda.gov/wps/portal/nres/detail/national/soils/? cid= n res 142 p2_053624 United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. 1961. Land capability classification. U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook 210. http:// www.nres.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/nresl42p2_052290.pdf 18 Q Q) U TU1 t0 00 Z5 ' a 2 ,l O ° N = dOG SAN Aq papinoid �(aa6ewiogjjo oz o C U - J I CL r o ra rm -Eo dew ej!S leiaab N o (0� Q Q�' ooa ��� 2. , o N 13-1 m} inin ro-o .0 N 8 1 O a) ate' �� 0- LL �I�.l o 0 N s o Q Q JOA MGN `Aluno0 ebojeaeS `sbuudS e6oleaeS;o AlIO a L` L U y 8puoH 860I �S L f0 O the LA group Landscape Architecture ,and Engineering, P. MEMO TO: Mike Ingersoll FROM: Rob Fraser DATE: November 19, 2012 RE: Deep Hole Test Pits at the Saratoga Honda Site 40 Long Ailey P 518/587-8100 Saratoga Springs F 5181587-0180 New York 12566 wwwAhela roup.com During the week ending 11-16-12 I observed eight deep hole test pits on and adjacent to the Saratoga Honda property. Test pits TP# 1 and TP#2 are located on Saratoga Honda's property located at the SE corner of Route 9 and Cresent Avenue. Test pits TP #3 - TP #8 are located on a vacant lot bordering the south side of Saratoga Honda's property and the west side of the Four Winds Hospital property. Test Pit 1 This pit is located in a gravel parking lot east of Saratog Honda's service garage, approximately 40 feet west of wooden fence. 0"-18" crushed stone & fine sand (crusher run) w/ fragments of geotextile fabric. 1811— 40" (10 YR 3/3) wet dark brown, fine sandy loam 4011— 72" (10 YR 4/2) dark grayish brown, fine sandy loam, standing water at 40" Boundary condition @ 18 inches, seasonal high water table Prolonged water table @ 40 inches Falling Head Permeability Test 00:02:30 @ 30" Consistent with Deerfield Soil Series, Hydrologic Group A Approximately 2 — 3 feet of the upper layers of native soil in this area appear to have been stripped and replaced with 16 to 18 inches of crusher run. The topography is concave and the existing material is significantly disturbed and compacted. As a result, runoff accumulates on the surface. Please see the attached photo TP -91. Test Pit 2 This pit is located in a landscaped area of Saratoga Honda's property approximately 100 feet south of Cresent Ave. 0"- 12" (10 YR 3/2) dark grayish brown, fine sandy loam 1211- 60" (1 OYR 4/6) dark yellowish brown, fine sandy loam 6011— 80" (10 YR 4/2) dark grayish brown, fine sand, saturated at 72" Boundary condition @ 72 inches, seasonal high water table Falling Head Permeability Test 00:00:45 @ 30" Consistent with Deerfield Soil Series, Hydrologic Group A the LA group Landscape Architecture ,and Engineering, P. 40 Long Ailey P 518/587-8100 Saratoga Springs F 5181587-0180 New York 12566 wwwAhela roup.com Old bottles were uncovered at approximately 40 inches. Evidence that the soil in this area was previously disturbed. tPit 3 pit is located in the NW quadrant of the vacant lot, approximately 150 south of the aeaiership's existing service enterance. 0"- 8" (10 YR 3/2) dark graish brown fine sandy loam 8" - 60" (10 YR 4/4) dark yellowish brown, fine sandy loam, mottles ( 7.5 YR 4/6) at 46" 60" — 84" (10 YR 5/3) mottled brown sandy loam, saturated at 72" Boundary condition @ 46 inches, seasonal high water table Falling Head Permeability Test 00:02:06 @ 30" Consistent with Deerfield Soil Series, Hydrologic Group A Test Pit 4 This pit is located in the SW quadrant of the vacant lot, adjacent to west side of a mature stand of Aspen. 0"- 8" (10 YR 3/2) dark graish brown fine sandy loam 12" - 48" (10 YR 4/4) dark yellowish brown, fine sandy loam, mottles ( 7.5 YR 4/6) at 30" 4811— 84" (10 YR 5/3) mottled brown sandy loam, saturated at 48", strong seeps at 72" Boundary condition @ 30 inches, seasonal high water table Falling Head Permeability Test 00:02:00 @ 30" Consistent with Deerfield Soil Series, Hydrologic Group A Test Pit 5 This pit is located near the NE corner of the vacant lot approximately 50 feet from the west end of an existing aphalt basketball court. 011-1611 10 YR 3/3 dark brown fine sandy loam 1611-6511 10 YR 4/4, dark yellowish brown, fine sandy loam, Mottled (7.5 YR 4/4) at 45" 6511-8411 10 YR 5/3, mottled brown sandy loam Saturated at 72" Boundary condition @ 45 inches, seasonal high water table Falling Head Permeability Test 00:02:15 Consistent with Deerfield Soil Series, Hydrologic Group A the LA group Landscape Architecture ,and Engineering, P. t Pit 6 40 Long Ailey P 518/587-8100 Saratoga Springs F 5181587-0180 New York 12566 wwwAhela roup.com pit is located near the SE corner of the vacant lot, approximately 50 feet west of an existing baseball backstop. 011-1611 10 YR 3/3 16" — 65" 10 YR 4/4, Mottled (7.5 YR 4/4) at 45" 6511-8411 10 YR 5/3, Strong Seeps at 72" Boundary condition @ 45 inches, seasonal high water table Falling Head Permeability Test 00:02:15 Consistent with Deerfield Soil Series, Hydrologic Group A Test Pit 7 This pit is located in the SE quadrant the vacant lot, approximately 50 feet from an existing fence that extends north and south, east of forested area. 011- 8" (10 YR 3/2) dark graish brown fine sandy loam 12" - 48" (10 YR 4/4) dark yellowish brown, fine sandy loam, mottles ( 7.5 YR 4/6) at 36" 4811— 84" (10 YR 5/3) mottled brown sandy loam, saturated at 48" and strong seeps at 72" Boundary condition @ 36 inches, seasonal high water table Falling Head Permeability Test 00:02:30 @ 30" Consistent with Deerfield Soil Series, Hydrologic Group A Test Pit 8 This pit is located in the NE quadrant of the vacant lot approximately 50 feet from the sw corner of the Four Winds rectangular shaped asphalt parking lot. 011- 8" (10 YR 3/2) dark graish brown fine sandy loam 8" - 60" (10 YR 4/4) dark yellowish brown, fine sandy loam, mottles ( 7.5 YR 4/6) at 36" 60" — 84" (10 YR 5/3) mottled brown sandy loam, saturated at 72" Boundary condition @ 36 inches, seasonal high water table Falling Head Permeability Test 00:02:20 @ 30" Consistent with Deerfield Soil Series, Hydrologic Group A Appendix C SWPPP Inspection Form Saratoga Honda Parking Lot Expansion WEEKLY SWPPP INSPECTION REPORT Inspector Name: Date: Signature (required): Time: Weather: inspection #: Soil Conditions (dry, saturated, etc): Note: Digital photos, with date stamp required for all practices requiring corrective action, before and after, to be attached to the inspection report. YES NO N/A 1. ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Routine Inspection. Date of last inspection: Inspection following rain event. Date/time of storm ending: Rainfall amount: Recorded by: 3. ❑ ❑ ❑ Is this a final site inspection? 4. ❑ ❑ ❑ Has site undergone final stabilization? ❑ ❑ ❑ If so, have all temporary erosion and sediment controls been removed? Site Disturbance (Indicate Locations on Plan) YES NO N/A 1. ❑ ❑ ❑ Areas previously disturbed, but have not undergone active site work in the last 14 days? 2. ❑ ❑ ❑ Areas disturbed within last 14 days? 3. ❑ ❑ ❑ Areas expected to be disturbed in next 14 days? 4. ❑ ❑ ❑ Do areas of steep slopes or complex stabilization issues exist? If "YES" explain: 5. ❑ ❑ ❑ Are there currently more than 5 acres of disturbed soil at the site? If so make sure there is an approval letter from NYS DEC. Additional Comments: Inspection of Erosion and Sediment Control Devices Type of Control Device Accumulation (if any) in % Repairs/Maintenance Needed 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Stabilization/Runoff YES NO N/A 1. ❑ ❑ ❑ Are all existing disturbed areas contained by control devices? Type of devices: 2. ❑ ❑ ❑ Are there areas that require stabilization within the next 14 days? Specify Area: 3. ❑ ❑ ❑ Have stabilization measures been initiated in inactive areas? 4. ❑ ❑ ❑ Is there current snow cover or frozen ground conditions? 5. ❑ ❑ ❑ Rills or gullies? 6. ❑ ❑ ❑ Slumping/deposition? 7. ❑ ❑ ❑ Loss of vegetation? 8. ❑ ❑ ❑ Lack of germination? 9. ❑ ❑ ❑ Loss of mulching? Receiving Structures/Water Bodies (Indicate locations where runoff leaves the project site on the site plan) YES NO N/A 1. ❑ ❑ ❑ Surface water swale or natural surface waterbody? If natural waterbody: Is waterbody located ❑ onsite, or ❑ adjacent to property boundary? Description of condition: 2. ❑ ❑ ❑ Municipal or community system? Inspect locations where runoff from project site enters the receiving waters and indicate if there is evidence of: a. ❑ ❑ ❑ Rills or gullies? b. ❑ ❑ ❑ Slumping/deposition? c. ❑ ❑ ❑ Loss of vegetation? d. ❑ ❑ ❑ Undermining of structures? e. ❑ ❑ ❑ Was there a discharge into the receiving water on the day of inspection? f. ❑ ❑ ❑ Is there evidence of turbidity, sedimentation, or oil in the receiving waters? Additional Comments: Inspection of Post -Construction Stormwater Management Control Devices Type of Control Device Phase of Construction Repairs/Maintenance Needed 1. 2. 3. 4. General Site Condition YES NO N/A 1. ❑ ❑ ❑ Have action items from previous reports been addressed? 2. ❑ ❑ ❑ Does routine maintenance of protection components occur on a regular basis? 3. ❑ ❑ ❑ Does cleaning and/or sweeping affected roadways occur, at minimum, daily? 4. ❑ ❑ ❑ Is debris and litter removed on a monthly basis, or as necessary? 5. ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the site maintained in an orderly manner? Describe the condition of all natural waterbodies within or adjacent to the project that receive runoff from the site: Contractors progress over last 7 days: Anticipated work to be begun in the next 7 days: Additional Comments: Visual Observations YES NO N/A 1. ❑ ❑ ❑ All erosion and sediment control measures have been installed/constructed? 2. ❑ ❑ ❑ All erosion and sediment control measures are being maintained properly? SUMMARY OF ACTION ITEMS TO REPAIR/REPLACE/MAINTAIN/CORRECT DEFICIENCIES Action Reported To (no signature required): Company: Appendix D Other SWPPP Forms Construction Sequence SWPPP Plan Changes Spill Response Form Stormwater Management Practice Maintenance Log STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN PLAN CHANGES, AUTHORIZATION, AND CHANGE CERTIFICATION CHANGES REQUIRED TO THE POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN: REASONS FOR CHANGES: REQUESTED BY: DATE: AUTHORIZED BY: DATE: CERTIFICATION OF CHANGES: certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that false statements made herein are punishable as a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to Section 210.45 of the penal code. SIGNATURE: DATE: SPILL RESPONSE REPORT Within 1 hour of a spill discovery less than 2 gallons in volume the following must be notified: Tim Higgins (518)587-9300 Within 1 hour of a spill discovery greater than 2 gallons the following must be notified: Tim Higgins NYSDEC Spill Response Hotline 1-800-457-7362 Spill Response Contractor Material Spilled: Approximate Volume: Location: Distance to nearest down gradient drainage: Distance to nearest down gradient open water: Temporary control measures in place: Appendix E Historic Preservation/Endangered Species Documentation a ,v,sAT10N.'y\ u. Lu NEWYORK STATE New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Iiistoric Preservation Division for Historic Preservation P.O. fox 189, Waterford, New York 12188-0189 -287-8648 Edward V. Curtin, President Curtin Archaeological Consulting, Inc. 61 Rowland St Ballston Spa, New York 12020 beat- Mr. Curtin: Apt -11 09,2014 Re: DEC, SARA Saratoga. Londa Expansion 3402 LAS Saratoga Springs, Saratoga County 14PROO823 Andrew M. Cuomo Governor Rose Harvey Commissioner Thanyou for• requesting the eom meats o f the Office ofParks, Re r ation and Hist rle Preservation PRHP . We have reviewed the project in accordance with the New Yoi,k State Historic Preservation Act of 1980 (Section 14.09 of the New York Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law). These comments are those, ofthe ivisi n for Historic Preset-vati n and relate only to Hist nc/Cultural resources. They do not include potential environmental impacts to New Yoi-k YorkState Parkland that may be involved in or near your project. Such impacts must be considered as part of the environmental review ofile project pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (New Fork Environmental Conservation Law Article 8 and its implementing regulations 6 NYCRR Part 617). Based upon this review, it is the OPRIP opinion that your project will have No Adverse Inipaet on resources in or eligible fej- inclusion in the State and National Register of Historic Places. If fitrther correspondence is required regarding this project, please be sure to refer to the PRHP Project Review PR number noted above. Sincerely, "�u Ruth L. Pierpont Deputy Commissioner for Historic Pi-eservation RLPJw An Equal Opportunit /Affirm tivo Action Agency 0 printed on recycled paper wwanysp rks. om the LA group Landscape Architecture and Engineering. PC. MEMO TO: Mike Ingersoll FROM: Rich Futyma DATE: December 19, 2012 40 Long Alley P 518/587-8100 Saratoga Springs F 5181587-0180 New York 12866 w vw.thelagroup.com RE: Survey of the Saratoga Honda site for Karner blue butterfly habitat This afternoon, I visited the Saratoga Honda site with Kelly Holzworth to determine whether it contains potential habitat for Kamer blue butterflies. This was a follow-up of a site walk by Kelly on June 18, 2012. The site lies on the east side of US Route 9, immediately south of the existing Saratoga Honda car dealership, and about 1/4 mile south of a known Kamer blue butterfly colony in Saratoga Spa State Park. Potential Kamer blue butterfly habitat would be indicated by the presence of the wild lupine (Lupinus perennis), which is the only food plant used by the larvae of the Kamer blue. Given that living lupines would not be visible at this time of year, and that their dead remains would be difficult to identify, we were looking for other plants that are typically found growing with lupines and for sandy, disturbed soil, which is preferred by lupines In the report on her visit to the site on June 18, Kelly accurately described the vegetation of the parcel. Most of the eastern half of the parcel, as well as a portion lying adjacent to Route 9, is mowed regularly and maintained as turf. Although lupines prefer open, sunny areas, the maintenance of those parts of the site would not be favorable to the establishment of any wild lupines. Immediately east of the mowed area next to Route 9 is an area of herb -dominated successional old field vegetation, much of it occupied by Canada goldenrod (Solidago canadensis). That area also contains a few plants typically associated with wild lupines, namely little bluestem (Schizachyrium scoparium) and northern dewberry (Rubusflagellaris). However, this area of old field vegetation did not appear to be favorable to growth of wild lupines because the goldenrods would tend to shade out the lupines, and the lower growing dewberries area growing too densely to allow establishment of lupine seedlings. Occupying the middle of the parcel is a relatively young woodland composed mainly of quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) and bigtooth aspen (Populus grandidentata), along with some black oak (Quercus velutina), cherry (Prunus sp.), and shrub honeysuckle (Lonicera morrowii). This woodland does not constitute good Kamer blue butterfly habitat because its shaded floor would not be favorable to the growth of sun -loving wild lupines. A disturbed area where a test pit had been dug indicated that the soil in this area is a fine sandy loam of the sort favored by wild lupines. The local soil map classifies the soil on this site as Deerfield loamy fine sand. This is the same soil as at the Karver blue butterfly colony 1/4 mile to the north. Generally, lupines prefer to grow in places where the vegetation cover is somewhat sparse, leaving open patches of bare, sandy soil. I did not see any such patches of bare soil on this site. On the basis of my 20+ years of experience examining Karver blue butterfly habitat, my opinion is that wild lupines are highly unlikely to exist on this site. At most, there might be a few scattered individuals, but they would not constitute a patch dense enough or large enough to support a colony of Karver blue butterflies or provide a refuge area for them. G:\Prof-2012\201240_Saratoga_Honda_Consulting\201240Enviro\SHPO - NHP\201240 RPF memo KBB habitat 2012-12-19.docx