C.T. Male.03.19.200403/19/2004 15:03 5187867299 CT MALE ASSOCIATES PAGE 02/03
C.1 MALE
50 Century Hill Drive, P.O.
518.786.7400 FAX 518.;
March 19, 2004
Mr. Craig Brown
Zoning Administrator,
Town of Queensbury
742 Bay Road
Queensbury, New York
Re: SP 13 - 2004
David Menter -
Dear Mr. Brown:
As requested, we have
submission package for
the Site Plan Review apj
Preliminary Stonnwate
Environmental Design I
following comments:
1. The project as prese
accordance with the
detention basins, the
pretreatment is requ
should be revised to
2. On Sheet No. 2, the p
area of the vrovosed
P.C,
727, Latham, New York 12110-0727
299 ctmale@ctmale.com
Compliance Officer
of Wakita Motel
reviewed the stormwater, grading and access components of the
he above referenced project The information we reviewed included
ication package, Plan Sheets 1- 6 of 6 (dated February 17, 2004), and a
Management Narrative. The documents were prepared by the
rtnershiv. LLP. Based on our review of these documents, we offer the
nted will require a stormwater permit and the design must be in
NYS Stormwater Management Design Manual. With regard to the
proposed method of treatment is infiltration. Per the design manual
red to remove sediments prior to infiltrating. The infiltration basins
ndude pretreatment.
an does not clearly show existing or proposed drainage patterns in the
access drive at Round Pond Road. Inverts are missing on the existing
culvert.
3. On Sheet No. 2, the proposed catch basins should be numbered.
4. On Sheet No. 2, the pipes that drain into the storm basins are steeply sloped. The pipe slope
should be reduced a+d the design of the rip -rap apron should be added to the stormwater
management report. !I
5. The drainage pipes shown on Sheet No. 2 do not correlate with the pipe system shown in
the stormwater manaizement narrative.
6. Pipe sizing calculatiotvs should be incorporated into the narrative/report.
7. On Sheet No. 4, the! use of straw bale dikes across a concentrated flow channel is not
recommended per th4 NYS Guidelines for Urban Erosion and Sediment Control. This sheet
should be revised to 4how alternative means of sediment control.
8. Sheet No. 4 should 4how the location of the temporary sedimentation basins noting that
they can not be locateId in areas slated for infiltration.
9. Sheet No. 4 should @how erosion and sediment control measures in the area where the
cabins will be removed, i.e. uphill from the existing motel to remain. This sheet should
show the proposed grading in this area.
10. Drainage in the area between the new access drive onto Route 9 and the existing motel is ill
defined.
Architecture & Building Systems Engineering • Civil Engineering • Environmental Services • Survey & Land Information Services
03/19/2004 15:03
C.T. MALE
March I9, 2004
Mr. Craig Broom
Page 2
5187867299
ASSOCIATES, P.C.
CT MALE ASSOCIATES
s
PAGE 03/03
11. On Sheet No. 4 the hatch basin sediment barrier detail is not applicable to paved areas in
contrast to what is s Iown on the plan.
12. Regarding the computer simulation runs, the use of "A" soils appears to significantly lower
the weighted curve j! number. It appears that the runoff from the impervious surfaces
without the perviouis areas would result in a much larger rate and volume of runoff.
Calculations should �e submitted to allow comparison of the results.
13. Regarding the emergency overflow spillway detail on Sheet No. 5, consideration should be
given to using turf reinforcing mats versus medium stone filling for aesthetic reasons.
14. The proposed acre:
the existing motel.
not clear where the
15. The required minir
Pond Road should
to obtain the minin
16. Some vehicle signa,
drives.
Miscellaneous
17. Regarding the water
building? Will the I
with the internal plc
18. Sheet No. 2, the size
If you have any
Sincerely,
drive onto NYS Route 9 is very close to the access drive that services
he plans should more clearly show what is proposed in this area. It is
:isting and proposed pavement limits are in this area.
in and proposed sight distance looking east while exiting onto Round
e added to Sheet No. 1. Some grading of the hillside may be required
n required.
appears to be warranted at the on -site intersection of the two entrance
rstem, should hydrants be provided on the east side of the proposed
[ding be sprinklered? The water service detail should be compatible
ping needs.
the sanitary sewer line should be shown on this plan.
related to our comments, feel free to call our office.
C.T. MALE ASSOCIATI S, P.C.
T. �-
T. ja4es Houston, P.E.
Senior Civil Engineer