Faden response to Chazen Engineering comments 245P STATE ROUTE 9
301
LAIM931FMG ENGINEERING, P C MIY
44-TA�1�,SUITE 12020
r(5io)B99-5243
F(516)699-!5,-!45
February 22,2016
Mr. Craig Brown
Zoning Administrator and Code Compliance Officer
Town of Queensbury
742 Day Road
Queensbury NY 12804
RE: Emden Enterprises—7.5-79 Main Street Site Plan-Town of Qqeensbury
Dear Mr.Brown:
Lansing Engineering is pleased to submit this letter in response to the February 10,2016 comment letter
prepared by Ch Companies regarding the above noted project. The following summarizes the
comments followed by our response.
Stormwater Management&Erosion and Sediment Control:
1) Comment: It,appears that the proposed site improvements disturb less then one(1)acre,and thus
the project is not required to obtain coverage under the SDEC SPDES General Permit for
Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activity(GP-0-15-002).Comments related to the
proposed stormwater management and erosion and sediment control features proposed for the site
are offered below:
Response:Comment Noted.
2.) Comment. It appears fiom the phasing plan(PP-1)that the project will he built in three phases,
The Site Plan Review application states a total land disturbance of 0.9 acres. The Applicant shall
clarify if the total land disturbance of 0.9 acres includes all three phases. It appears from the Site
Plan Review application that all three phases of the project are included in this application.
However,the phasing plan table depicts"storm!'as not applicable for Phase 2 and 3.The
Applicant to clarify that all three phases of construction are included in this application,
Response.-The total land disturbance of 0.9 acres includes all three phases of the project.
The intent of the phasingplait is to oudine to the Town what Would be constructed at this
time.
3) Comment:The Applicant should depict the total hinits of disturbance on the site plans,
Responses Th e plans have,been revised to show the total lhisits of disturbanrnce,
4.) Comment: It does not appear that stonnwater calculations were provided.The Applicant should
provide basis-of-design stormwater calculations to substantiate the design,of the storniwater
facilities.
Response:Attached are the storntwater calculadonsforyou review.
1
5.) Comment: It does not appear that building downspouts are depicted on the site plans.The
Applicant shall depict the downspouts on the site plans in order,to show where the building
stormwater runoff is directed to,
Retsponse:The plans have been res4sed to shown the building downspouts.
6.) Comment: It is difficult to discern howstormwater runoff from the areas consisting of the
entrances and exits of the site will be managed.These areas are graded towards Main Street and
Pine Street and it appears that the stormwater runoff is not intended to be managed on site.
Applicant to clarify.
Response: The existing conditionsfor the entrances by Main Street and Pine Street include
drainage areas that convey runoff to the exissingstorinwater inanagentent systents in the
respective streets. The proposed conditions and drainage dhwltarge points are proposed to
resnain consistent and a portion of tire site runoff will continue to drain awayfrom the site
entraitces to the,existing storms water infrastructure.
7.) Comment:The Applicant depicts a construction entrance at the northern entrance to Pine Street,
The Applicant should clarify if the other two entrances/exits,will be blocked during construction
ensuring that all construction traffic uses the construction entrance.
Response.- Tito plans have been revised tospecid the Pine Street entrance as thepriftsary
construction entrance. The other entrances will he blocked during construction.
Comment- Section 6.3.1 of the NYS SMDM states that the bottoin of infiltration facilities shall
be located at least 3 feet above the seasonally high groundwater table. It does not appear that soil
testing was performed. Soil testing should be performed to confirm adequate separation from
seasonally high groundwater.
Response.- The plans have beets revised to show test pit information that confirins 3 feet of
separation bemwen seasonally high groundwater and the bottons of the infiltration facilities.
Attached is a copy of the revised site plans for your review and approval. Please do not hesitate to
contact me at(5 18)999-5243 extension 104 if there are any questions or if any additional information is
needed.Thank you,
Sincerely,
LANSING ENGINEERING, PC
Yate cott L�wisingg, PE., CPESQ :p Wt;
cc: Russell Faden (Owner/Applicant)
Sean Doty (chazen)
2
q
2s
IN,
$ Jf
(new Rear
(wpb-bat a tali, C1 4Drainago Diagra,r"n for i� PO C� O NDITION chambe
Prepared by(enter your company name here) 212MO1 N
HydroR ADO 7,06 sPn 000927 0 19W.2003 ApapRted MicrMompulcur Systems
PROPOSED CONDITIONS 6hambers Type //24-hr 50-year Rairifall=5.24
Prepared by{enter your company name here) Page 2
HydroCADO 7.00 s/n()00027 0 lied l ill rwa urrw ut Dr a terns
Time span=5.00-20.00 hts, dt=0.05 hrs, 301 points
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS
Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Star-Ind method
Subcatchment IS: Runoff Area=0,400 ac Runoff Depth=4.59"
Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=2,90cfs 0.153 of
Subcatchment 2S- Runoff Area=0.190 ac Runoff De'pt,h=4,59"
Tv--6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=1.38 efs 0.073 of
Reach IR: (now Reach) Inflow=0.00 cfs 0.000 of
Outtlow=0.00 efs 0=0 of
Pond DW1: Peak Elev=97.28' Storage-3,932 cf lnflow=4,28 cfs 0.225 of
Discarded=0.32 efs 0,225 of Secondary=0.00 cfs 0.000 of outflow=0.32 cfs 0.225 of
Total Runoff Area=0.590 ac Runoff Volume=0.225 of Average Runoff Depth =4.5911
PROPOSED CONDITIONS chambers Type //24-17r 50-year Rainfall=5.24"
Prepared by{enter your company name here) Page 3
FlLdroGADV 7.00 s/n 000927 0 1986-2003 ADDIled Microcomputer Systems
Subcatchment IS:
Runoff 2.90 of @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 0.153 af, Depth= 4.59"
Runoff by SC,S TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type 1124-hr 50-year Rainfall=5.24'"
0.210 98 Paved parking & roofs
0.100 98 Roof
0.400 98 Weighted Average
To Length Slope Velocity, Capacity Description
min), (feet)
6.0 Direct Entry,
Subcatchment 2S*.
Runoff 1.36 cts @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 0.073 af, Depth= 4.59"
Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH SC Time Span= 5,00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Type 11 24-hr 50-year Rainfall=5.24®"
Area (ac) QN DqsKeription
0.190 98 Paved parking& roofs
To Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description
(min) (feet) '(ft/ft) (fVsee) (cfs)
6.0 Direct Entry,
Reach I R: new Reach)
Inflow Area 0.690 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.00" for 50-year event
Inflow 0.00 cfs @ 6.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 of
Outflow UO ofs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0.000 af, Man=0%, Lag= 0.0 min
Routing by, tor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 5.00-20.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs
Pond DWI:
Inflow Area = 0.590 ac, Inflow Depth = 4.59" for 50-year event
Inflow 4.28 cfs @ 11.96 hrs, Volume= 0.225 of
Outflow 0.32 cfs @ 11.45 hrs, Volume= 0.225 af, Atten= 93%, Lag= 0.0 min
Discarded 0.32 cfs @ 11.45 hrs, Volume= 0.226 of
Secondary 0.00 cfs @ 5.00 hrs, Volume= 0,,000 at
Routing by Star-Ind method, Time Span= 5,00-20.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs/3
Peak Elev= 97.28' @ 12.53 hrs Surf.Area= 1,142 sf Storage= 3,932 of
Plug-Flow detention time=87.3 min calculated for 0.224 of(100%of inflow)
Center-of-Mass det, time= 86.5 min ( 816.3- 729.8 )
PROPOSED CONDITIONS chambers Type//24-hr 50-yeat Rainfall=5.24
Prepared by(enter your company name here) Page 4
# Invert Avail.
1 91.98, 158 cf Custom Stage Data(Prismatic) Listed below x 2
1,073 of Overall-679 of Embedded= 394 of x 40.0%Voids
2 91.98, 679 of Custom Stage Data(Prismatic)Listed below x 2 Inside#1
3 91.93' 1,910 cf Custom Stage Data (Prismatic) Listed below
6,731 of Overall- 1,955 cf Embedded 4,775 cf x 40.07 Voids
4 92.69' x 17 Inside#3
4,702 of Total Available Storage
Elevation Surf.Area lnc.Store Gum.Store
flet � -ft cubic-feet ubic�fee�
91.98 79 0 0
98.77 79 536 536
Elevation Surf.Area lnc.Store Cum.Store
(feet) (cublo-feet) (cubic-feel)
91.98 50 0 0
98.77 50 339 339
Elevation Surf.Area lne.Store Cum.Store
(feet) rs -
(cubic-feet)
91.93 984 0
98.77 984 6,731 6,731
# Routing Invert Outlet Devices
I Discarded 0.00' 0.0167DD fpm EAltration over entire Surface area
2 Secondary 98.77' 10.0'long x 8.0" breadth Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir
Head (feet) 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20 1.40 1.501 1.80 2.00 2.50
100 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 5.50
Coef. (English) 2.43 2.54 2.70 2.69 2.68 2.68 2.66 2.,64 2.64 2.64 2.65
2.65 2.66 2.66 2.68 2.70 214
�scarded OutF(ow lila =p.;32 cis @ 11,45 hrs HW=91.98' (Free Discharge)
1=EAltration (E filtration Controls 0.32 cts)
econdary OutFla w Max=0H
.00 cf @ 5.00 hrs W=91.93' (Free Discharge)
�I=Broad-Crested Rectangular Weir ( Controls 0.00 cfs)