HomeMy WebLinkAbout20171240 Henry St Condos Engineers jComments 8-16-19 The LA GROUP
Landscape Architecture&.Engineering P.C_
Peop4.Purpose.Place.
40 Long Alley
Saratoga Springs
NY 12866
p:518-587-8100
518-587-0180
www,thelagroup.cor
August 15, 2019
Susan Barden
Senior City Planner
City of Saratoga Springs
474 Broadway
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
RE: Henry Street Condominiums(PB#17.080)
Dear Ms. Barden:
This letter is a response to the comments from the Chazen Companies, dated July 22, 2019.The following are responses
to the comments.
Site Plans:
Comment 4: The SWPPP identifies that inlet protection measures will be employed for the project however none are
shown on the site plans. Please add these to the plan to protect the public storm sewer system near the
project site.
Though inlet protection has been added, the plans still show storm water structures on Henry Street that
are absent of inlet protection. Please add additional inlet protection to adequately protect the storm
sewer system.
Response 4: Inlet protection has been added to Sheet L-1.
Comment 6: Please indicate proposed dimensions of the modified parking spaces on the north side of the Four
Seasons lot and confirm that they will meet parking space dimensions required by City Code.
a. The parking spaces appear to be less than 18'.
b. Also,the two-way drive is only 19'when 24' is required.
c. Please provide a maneuvering plan showing how the reduction in the drive width allows delivery
trucks to access the existing loading dock.
The applicant has indicated that the parking spaces will be 15'and the deficiencies identified are
preexisting conditions resulting from the approved subdivision. The intent of subdivision approval is not
to permit the creation of code violations where they previously did not exist, as is the case with the
parking space dimensions. The parking on the Four Seasons lot must remain compliant with City
parking requirements;please revise. The driveway width may be considered a preexisting condition if it
is not further reduced by this project, however, the applicant is still encouraged to examine the driveway
width and maneuvering provisions on the Four Seasons lot and look for opportunities to achieve
compliance with this project.
Response 6: The parking spaces and drive aisle on the adjacent property are outside this project and are part
of the approved subdivision plan.The parking spaces for the adjacent parcel have been
reviewed with the owner, planning board, and City staff at length during the subdivision portion
of the project.The adjacent parcel tenant did not want to modify aspects of the site to
accommodate either a larger drive aisle or parking space length. The maneuvering plan was
shown to the owner during the subdivision phase of the project and agreed that there was
sufficient room to maneuver a delivery truck into position for delivery. Additionally there is an
existing loading zone on Henry Street, adjacent to the project area which is stripped and signed
for deliveries. It is thought that eventually the delivery services will start using this loading zone
for deliveries into the adjacent property business.
Comment 16: It appears that construction easements will be necessary to accommodate grading on the neighboring
property owned by McTygue (to the north). Please provide.
The applicant has indicated that construction easements will not be required, however, the grading plan
shows contours directly abutting the property boundary and this work, as shown, will require a
construction easement.
Response 16: Proposed grading has been pulled away from the property line to provide a buffer between the
grading operations and existing property lines.
Comment 19: Please provide a Lighting Illumination Plan.
The applicant indicated that a Lighting Plan has already been reviewed extensively by the City during
the SEQRA process. Chazen has not received a copy of the Lighting Plan. Please provide a copy so
that we can complete our review.
Response 19: A lighting illumination plan is included in this submission.
Comment 21: Accessible parking space details must be included in the plans and submitted for review(striping,
signage, parking and loading zone dimensions, etc.).
The applicant has indicated that the accessible parking spaces will be reviewed and accepted as part of
the building permit application, as they are inside the building. The plan set is currently absent of
sufficient detail for anyone to review accessible parking space striping, signage, etc. Please add the
requested detailing.
Response 21: The accessible parking spaces are shown inside the parking structure. A detail has been
included providing construction information regarding space size,signage,and stripping on
sheet L-2.
Water Services Connection Agreement:
Comment 26: The estimated water generation for the project must be added to the Water Services
Connection Agreement and the agreement must be signed.
Although the estimated water generation was added to the document, the agreement is still absent of
any signature. Please sign.
Response 26: Signed Water Service Connection Agreement is included in this submission.
SWPPP:
Comment 28: The applicant also requests a waiver from maintaining or reducing 10-year and 100-year storm peak
rates of runoff.
The submitted HydroCAD model analyzes the green roof as a subcatchment rather than a storage area,
so any storage in this system is not accounted for in the calculations.
The model should be updated to account for the storage afforded by the green roof system. If the green
roof system does not adequately attenuate peak flows, a supplemental detention system such as an
underground detention system could be constructed within the parking garage or elsewhere. Please
revise the SWPPP accordingly.
The applicant has indicated that modeling the green roof with storage does not substantially improve
runoff rates for the site. The applicant has indicated that they have presented downstream analysis in
accordance with Section 4.10 of the Storm water Management Design Manual(SMDM)in lieu of
maintaining or reducing rates. Per Section 4.10 of the SWMDM, the exemption of extreme flood
requirements can be waived by the results of a downstream analysis only if peak flow rates increase
by less than 5%of the pre-developed condition for the design storm and if all downstream structures
have been evaluated for capacity. The submitted SWPPP reflects post-development peak flow rates
that are substantially greater than 5%of the pre-development rates.Additionally, no evidence has
been submitted substantiating that the downstream twin box culverts have sufficient capacity to handle
the projected increase in flow.
There are no obvious site constraints that prevent the implementation of a supplemental detention
system designed to attenuate peak flows. Please revise the SWPPP to include such a practice or
otherwise achieve compliance with the SMDM.
L
e 28: Green roof design has been revised to provide a flow restricting layer. The flow restriction limits
outflow rate to 0.1 cfs from the green roof. Additional existing conditions have been field
verified and the pre-development model revised accordingly. The proposed design will
decrease the 10-year and 100-year peak flow rates. The SWPPP has been revised accordingly
and documentation on the green roof flow rate is provided in the SWPPP in Appendix A.
,
'P/Zec
Brobston, RLA
n@thelagroup.com
17\2017017Response
019.docx