Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20230008 Duplainville Site Plan Response to Comments 2023 06 27 Verity Engineering, D.P.C. P.O. Box 474 Troy, New York 12181 518.389.7200 | verityeng.com 1 EngineeringVerity June 28, 2023 Ms. Kate Halliday Administrative Assistant - Engineering City of Saratoga Springs 474 Broadway Saratoga Springs, New York 12866 Re: Response to Comments 00 Duplainville Site Plan 20230008: Site Plan Review Ms. Halliday: On May 25, 2023 via email, we received a series of comments prepared by Laberge Group regarding our previous submission. Our responses are below: Site Plan Application and Review Submittal Checklist 1. Stockade screening fence along south property line should match Saratoga Springs standard detail F-01. If a different type of fence is desired, a detail should be provided. The detail has been revised to match F-01. 2. Pavement section detail: NYSDOT asphalt mixtures referenced are 404 series, which are warm mix asphalt (WMA). Applicant should utilize hot mix (HMA) or replace detail with Saratoga Springs Standard. We have provided the Saratoga Springs standard detail. 3. The applicant should confirm that the City standard specification for concrete (detail SS-07) is being met or exceeded for this project. The City’s concrete specifications have been added to sheet C-501. Details 03, 05, & 11 on this sheet have been revised to reference this specification. 4. The stormwater catch basin detail references the plan for dimensions. However, in many instances the plan view does not indicate a size and some are shown to be rectangular but are noted with diameters, implying a round structure. The applicant should clarify inlet sizes and be sure to include any applicable City standard detail ST-04 minimum dimensions or references when making adjustments. Plans have been revised to provide sizing of structures and grates/covers. Site Plan Drawings 5. Sheet C-121: Although all stormwater management will rely on infiltration, each infiltration basin should include an overflow with an armored outlet channel to direct potential overflows to a location that does not impact infrastructure. Further comment: Although it is unlikely the overflow from Infiltration Basin (IB) #4 will be utilized, it is currently directed to the neighboring property to the west. The applicant should assess the offsite impacts that will result from potential severe storm overflow, or from storm events when the ground is frozen. In addition, the applicant should confirm that the HDPE pipe shown to be installed beneath the railroad track will have sufficient strength to resist the potential train weight. 2 V In the unlikely event that Infiltration Basin #4 exceeds it’s 100-year peak elevation of 325.68’ by more than two feet and discharges over the spillway provided, flows would be directed to an existing off-site depression. This area is visible in the top-right corner of the grading plan. This area is located hundreds of feet from any existing structure. We can confirm that the HDPE pipe shown has sufficient strength to be located under the future railroad tracks. Traffic Report 1. Although the report concludes that impacts at Geyser Road will not need further analysis, the impacts on the level of service of other roads within the industrial park such as Duplainville Road and Cady Hill Blvd. should be considered. Further comment: It is understood that the project, on an individual basis, does not meet the threshold requirement for further analysis of the receiving roads. However, the City should keep track of the cumulative impacts on those roads caused by this and other nearby, future projects to develop their own understanding of when the threshold will be met. Acknowledged. We trust you will find this material to be in order. Once you have reviewed the material, should you have any questions, please contact our office. Respectfully, Aaron J. Vera, P.E. Principal Engineer Verity Engineering, D.P.C. Cc: CLIENT FILE