The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About20220236 131 Excelsior North Spring Run Site Plan Other (2) December 9, 2022 Ms. Debbie LaBreche City of Saratoga Springs 474 Broadway Saratoga Springs, NY 12866 RE: North Spring Run – 131 Excelsior Avenue City of Saratoga Springs, Saratoga County, New York Dear Ms. LaBreche: The following comments pertain to the site plan package for North Spring Run. A comment letter was received on May 12, 2022 from Barton & Loguidice. The responses below are related to that letter. General Comments Comment 1: The plan seems well designed and balanced. We suggest careful attention is paid to executing signage location and landscaping away from ingress and egress pavement and Excelsior Avenue to avoid impacting site distance. Response 1: Comment noted. Comment 2: Are there any demolition wastes requiring special environmental attention like transformers or other sensitive materials? We suspect that brewery operation did not have many materials of concern if any. Incorporate any requirements in plan notes involving certified personnel for removals if applicable. The same notes that address this in the SWPPP could be repeated on the plans where contractors are more likely to see. Response 2: A pre-demolition regulated building material inspection was completed by LaBella that determined small traces of asbestos-containing materials and lead-based paint are present within the building. Proper abatement and removal of these materials will be reviewed and regulated by the City Building Department and demolition permit. An additional note has been added to Sheet L-1.0, Removals Note 6 stating that hazardous material shall be removed and disposed of by a licensed hazardous waste carrier. Comment 3: How many bicycle storage spaces are available inside the structures? Response 3: The project proposed up to 56 bike storage spaces. Comment 4: Was a green roof considered for part of the rooftop areas? The stormwater planters provide RRv for the project but rooftop greenery and green infrastructure could appeal to much of the environmentally minded clientele likely to dwell here. Response 4: A green roof was considered but was determined to not be economically feasible for the project. Comment 5: Given the urban setting we recommend another two EV stations for a total of six or at least the conduit and service accommodations to provide more easily in the future and not require disturbed pavement. Response 5: The project proposes four (4) EV parking spaces with corresponding stations. The new City UDO, which this project isn’t required to conform to, requires at least 2% of required parking spaces be EV installed. The current design exceeds UDO requirement of 3 parking spaces (153 x 2%). Based on the applicant other facilities they feel that (4) EV spaces would adequately service their site. SEAF Comment 1: No comments. Water and Sanitary Sewer Comment 1: Confirm number of connections to the Excelsior Avenue 12-inch water main. The plans indicate one six- inch service and did not seem to have a tap for the easterly building or a connecting pipe between the buildings. Please clarify. Response 1: Water will be distributed to the easterly building via the connected pedestrian bridge, and therefore only one service is required. Comment 2: We recommend a secondary means of thrust restraint on the 6-inch water main service with two 45 degree bends because that area may be disturbed by other future utility maintenance or subsurface operations. Thrust blocks in such areas would benefit by either retainer glands or restrained joint pipe and fittings in addition to the thrust blocks. Static pressure is pretty high at this location. A significant leak near the building(s) is worth the added restraint. Response 2: Detail 6 on Sheet L-7.3 has been modified to indicate minimum length of restrained pipe for bends and tee’s. All bends are proposed to have thrust blocks and restrained fittings. Comment 3: Coordinate fire protection system design with city building and fire services. Response 3: Comment noted. The fire department was provided with the plans for their review. Cost Estimate for Line of Credit Comment 1: With quantity of striping we recommend a higher unit cost for crosswalks, parking areas and related. Response 1: The unit cost for striping has been increased. Comment 2: Confirm light pole costs incorporate large concrete piers. Unit cost plus the decorative fixtures seems low. Response 2: The unit cost for the decorative light fixtures and light poles have been increased based on recent price increases and includes the piers. Comment 3: The unit cost for the two dumpsters seems low as a concrete slab and enclosure is also included. Response 3: This cost does not include the cost of the dumpsters or the concrete pad. Concrete pads are included in the concrete sidewalk cost. Unit cost has been increased based on recent cost increases. Comment 4: The unit cost for sanitary sewer installed seems low as it includes imported backfill materials. Response 4: The unit cost for the sanitary sewer has been increased accordingly. Comment 5: The unit cost of the hydrodynamic separator seems low and should include installation, imported materials. Response 5: The unit cost for the hydrodynamic separator is based on manufacturer costs plus installation, but has been increased based on recent cost increases. Comment 6: Construction unit costs have been impacted by elevated inflation and some unit costs seem low by 15- 20% due to recent trends. Response 6: Pricing for storm, sanitary, and water line have been increased due to inflation. Additionally, the cost for concrete curb and yard drains have been increased. SWPPP Comment 1: The system for stormwater management includes stormwater planters, underground pipe detention and a hydrodynamic separator, Discharge is to existing stormwater infrastructure and conveyances. Response 1: Comment noted. Comment 2: Confirm hydrodynamic separator unit selected can treat peak inflow rate of water quality storm and has an internal bypass capacity to pass the 100 year peak inflow rate. Response 2: The 100-year storm event requires a bypass flowrate of 6.77 cfs. The DVS-48C separator has a maximum bypass flowrate of 9.0 cfs and therefore has the capacity to pass the 100 year storm event. Plans Survey Sheet by Northeast Comment 1: This plan seems to not include the area being developed and covers land west of the site. Response 1: An updated survey has been included in the site plans. L-1.0-Site Preparation, Erosion & sediment Control Plan Comment 1: Show short term demolition and soil stockpiling for prompt removals and stabilization, respectively. Consider wind erosion of piles with notes for covering or temporary seeding. Response 1: A demo and soil stockpile has been added to the Site Preparation, Erosion & Sediment Control Plan, sheet L-1.0. Note 11 under Erosion and Sediment Control Notes directs the contractor to the SWPPP for temporary and permanent stabilization measures, which would include stockpile areas. An additional note has been added to the Temporary Stockpile detail on Sheet L-7.0 regarding mulching, seeding, or use of matting on stockpiles. L-2.0- Layout and Materials Plan Comment 1: Consider adding two additional EV stations. See general notes. Response 1: See previous response. L-3.0-Grading and Drainage Plan Comment 1: Show line of north finished floor elevation across building representing 272.50. Response 1: This line has been added to sheet L-3.0 and called out as “FFE ELEVATION CHANGE”. Comment 2: We recommend moving the discharge structure closer to CB-3 and pipe to CB-3 in lieu of the wye connection to allow easier cleaning if ever necessary. Response 2: The stormwater planter yard drain (YD-1) has been moved and the 6” outlet pipe has been connected to CB-3. Comment 3: The easterly slope could likely be graded to droughty sands. A deeper depth of topsoil and premium tackifier with hydroseed and/or other stabilization means will help reduce erosion/rills and repairs during emergent period of vegetation establishment. Existing and undisturbed vegetated areas that are sparse may need fertilization to blend with new landscaping. Response 3: Rolled erosion control matting has been added to the site plans to ensure stabilization of the slope and is shown sheet L-1.0. Comment noted about existing undisturbed vegetated areas. Per site visit current slopes appear stabile but will be reanalyzed during construction and recommendations provided if additional measures are required to stabilize slopes. L-4.0 Site Utilities Plan Comment 1: How is easterly building served with water, see general comments. Response 1: The water connecting to the easterly building will be routed through the pedestrian bridge. Comment 2: See previous comments regarding truck traffic and pavement thickness. Response 2: Proposed pavement thickness is based off Geotech recommendations for the site. Comment 3: A detail for an asphalt curb is shown but could not find where applied on the plans. Response 3: An asphalt curb detail is not included on the site plans. All curbing is to be cast-in-place concrete. L-7.1 –Site Details Comment 1: We recommend addition of protective coating such as bitumastic or equivalent as a barrier between aluminum posts in fence detail and concrete where embedded. Aluminum reacts in contact with concrete. Response 1: The dumpster enclosure detail has been updated to galvanized poles with PVC vinyl coating and metal chain link fencing with vinyl privacy slats. Sincerely, Douglas B. Heller, PE Principal/Civil Engineer dheller@thelagroup.com G:\Proj-2019\2019013_Excelsior_Brewery_Mixed_Use\2019013Admin\01Correspondence\2.7Review_Comments\22-05-13_Comment Response Ltr.docx