Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpecial Exception, Site Plan/Withdrawn TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ® } > APPLICATION FORM d Application No. : _ C/7-0 7f JAN 21 1997 Date Received: 22 Action/Public Hearing by : South Windsor Receipt No. Planning & Zoning Commission APPLICANT: Town of South Windsor(Public Building Commission) ADDRESS : 1540 Sullivan Avenue,South Windsor,CT 06074 OWNER OF RECORD ON LAND RECORDS Town of South Windsor ADDRESS : same COMPLETE LOCATION OF PROPERTY* 100 Arnold Way Map 67/Parcel 78; Map 66/Parcel 60;Map :66/Parcel 59 Assessor ' s Map # Parcel # Zone A-30 NAME, ADDRESS, & TELEPHONE # OF PERSON TO WHOM INQUIRIES SHOULD BE Daniel L. Weston,AIA,Principal, The S/L/A/M Collaborative, 80 Glastonbury DIRECTED: Boulevard, Glastonbury,CT 06033 Tel 657-8077 ,X Lt t THIS APPLICATION IS-`FOR: (Check all that apply) : _1 . Zone Change to (Public Hearing required) _2 . Subdivision/Resubdivision a. _ Subdivision Minor Major b. _ Resubdivision Minor Major (Public Hearing Required) C. _ Conditional Approval d. _ Open Space Subdivision (Public Hearing Required) x3 . Special Exception to Article 4.2.8 c (public Hearing Required) Public School x 4. Site Plan of Development _5 . General Plan of Development _6 . Earth Filling [Sec. 101 and/or Earth Removal [Sec. 91 (Public Hearing Required) _7 . Regulation Amendment: Zoning Subdivision _8 . Amendment to Town Plan of Development 9 . Temporary and Conditional Permit —10 . Other (explain in detail) : Applicant 'Property Owner (See reverse side for additional information) p TOWN OF SOUTI-I WINDSOR CHEgKLIST !A N 31 1997 REQUIRED INFORMATION SITE PLANS South Windsor APPLICANT 9vw,o cF �aJT►i ►�uocs� �et�4au �el► itiGn,Miicplanning & f r t;ommisiort PROJECT NAME_ t ; N SrownP MraD(fL,. L This checklist must be signed by plan prepare.r (P.E./L.S.)•declaring that all required information is provided. Items 1-7 are required for all applications; items..8-1��;;required where appropriate.' Check mark for each item supplied. 1. On each sheet for plans or maps, title block with the following information: a. Name, address and telephone of applicant. b. Name, address and telephone number of Land Surveyor or Professional Engineer. c. Name of Development. d. Date when drawings were made. 2. Key Map: An overall map drawn to a scale of 1 inch equals 200 feet, which can be used as an overlay on Metropolitan District Maps. Tliis map will show the overall design of the Development and surrounding property within 500 feet. a. Date block which gives needed zoning infonnation such as percentage of lot coverage, acreage of tract, number of apartment units, parking requirements, etc. b. Layout of buildings. ✓ c. Layout of streets and parking. d. Lines indicating proposed drainage system with direction arrows. e. Lines indicating sanitary sewer system with direction arrows. f. Names of surrounding property owners. WA g. Proposed open spaces and recreation areas. h. Driveway cuts on surrounding properties. ✓ 3. Architectural Elevations: See attached checklist for Architecture and Design Review. 651-wsr LN(ovi) 4. Plot Plan: A layout map of the proposed site drawn to a scale of 1 inch equals 40 feet on either of the following size sheets: (1) 24 x 36 with a 3/4 ruled margin; (2) 18 x 24" with a 1/2" ruled margin, containing the following data: .� a. Distance and bearings of all boundary lines and acreage of site. Iron pins required at all property angle points and shown on map. Nr'A. b. Proposed streets and street lines with center line station, curve data, and parking spaces. �. c. Building lines in accordance with zoning regulations. d. Proposed buildings and other structures, including signs, outside lighting, and dumpsters (on concrete pad and screened). NJA e. Easements, noting grantors, grantees, and purpose. f. Names of abutting property owners. N g. Monuments will be indicated at corners and angles of all streets and at all points of { curvature and tangency. In areas accessible to Metropolitan District Commission points, or other coordinated points, the monumented points within proposed site shall be coordinated. These coordinates shall appear in tabular form on the plot plan. The accessibility of these MDC points shall be determined by the Town Engineer. { W/A h. All open space or other common or public land uses shall be indicated. i. A-2 certification; P.E./L.S. Seal. ✓ 5. Topographic Map: A map drawn to a scale of 1 inch to 40 feet on sheets not exceeding r 24 inches by 36 inches, including ruled margins shall in addition to the requirements of the plot plans show the following: a. All existing-and proposed buildings. E b. Curb Lines and pavement width, sidewalks. c. Existing and proposed sanitary sewers. d. Existing and proposed water and gas main systems. ✓ e. Present wooded area indicated by foliage lines. Any individual trees to be saved should be shown. f. Existing and proposed contours shall be shown in not less than two-foot intervals, but in cases of relatively level land, the contours shall be one-foot intervals and spot elevations. g. Regulated wetlands and 100-year floodplain or note that none are present. h. Proposed storm drainage system, showing all catch basins, endwalls, manholes, lengthsand sizes of pipes. Maximum di stance p pe ( between catch basins shall be 300 feet and minimum size of storm drain lines shall be 15 inches. t N/A i. Connections of all springs into proposed storm drainage system as needed. WIA j. Location and indications of existing brook channels, and 100-year flood limits. k. A-2 Certification; P.E./L.S. Seal. 6. Landscaping plan: c '' ✓ 7. Drainage calculations: - Zero Runoff Increase per attached guidelines. 8. Traffic Report: F - S - 2 - tJ/9� 9. Plans and Profiles: A plan and profile of the proposed streets drawn on plan/profile paper of scales 1 inch to 40 feet horizontally, and 1 inch to 4 feet vertically on sheets not exceeding 24 inches by 36 inches, including ruled margins and containing the following: Y _ a. Layout of streets in sections coordinated by stations with the profile. b. Street plan showing roadways and drainage. c. Sight line at driveway & street intersections. d. Profile of roadway showing existing and finished grades. Roadway profile will show all tangent grade and all vertical curve information. _ e. Profile will show all catch basins and all drainage lines between catch basins with all ,{ invert and top of frame elevations. Drainage lines will be shown and described as to material. f. Where any storm drainage line discharges into an existing brook sufficient profile of this brook will be shown to determine conditions. g. Metropolitan District Commission datum shall be used on all sites accessible to these controls. The Town Engineer shall, based on standard engineering practices, determine the accessibility of these controls. h. Profiles shall show all sanitary sewer lines and manholes, including elevations, sizes, ` lengths, and slopes of pipes. Top of foundation elevations for building shall be shown. d ` NIA 10. open Space Site Improvement Plans: For sites which require or include a provision for open spaces, a plan which contains data for site improvement may be required. This map shall be drawn to a scale of 1 inch equals 40 feet. 11. Sanitary Report: Where individual sanitary sewage disposal systems are proposed, the + final plans shall include a Sanitary Report certified by a Professional Engineer. The report shall demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed individual systems; the report should deal with the area as a whole, discussing the following points: a. General nature and development of surrounding area. b. Topography and natural drainage pattern. — c. Subsurface conditions as shown by subsurface investigation, including soil absorption s characteristics, ground water level conditions, ledge rock, and general nature of soil. f= d. General description of type of development contemplated. F e. Detailed description of proposed sanitary sewage disposal facilities, indicating sizes ' for various ground conditions, materials to be used, and the general layout pattern to be used, etc. f. Special precautions that may be necessary to provide proper functioning of the F proposed disposal systems. g. map of general area with locations of all tests shown on proposed layout. h. Flood heights of any nearby streams, brooks, or rivers. ,t - 3 - Y i. Test results and engineering evaluation per Section 4.13.5. All information required above is included in this application at the time of submission. PL PUPA R P . L.S. I' May 17, 1995 o,47- 4:-, I_ t i 9 2 - 4 - STANDARD APPROVAL MODIFICATIONS FOR SITE PLAN (rev. 2/7/89) PROJECT,Ylq ()k F,1w i-zUje �U.f 1�r� APPL. NO. / 7-d 7/0 ENGINEER/ARCHITECT PROJ. NO. DWG. NO. DATE REV. DATE SUBMIT MYLARS OF SHEETS . . . Prior to commencement of an site work a meeting must be �1 • Y � g held with Town Staff. 2 . No building permit will be issued until the final mylars have been filed in the Town Clerk's Office. 3. This application is subject to the conditions of approval of the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission, including a bond in the amount of $- c)0 17 4-4 . An as-built plan is required prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy per Section 4. 13 .10 of the Zoning Regulations. 5 . Footing drains are required if the building has a basement. 6 . A landscape bond in the amount of $ is required and must be submitted prior to filing of mylars . 7 . All plans used in the field by the developer must bear the stamp and authorized signature of the Town of South Windsor. Black and white transparent mylars of Sheets # with the above modifications, together with three blueprint copies of -the entire set of plans must be submitted to this Commission within 30 days to be stamped and signed. The letters of approval of this Commission, as well as the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation (;Ommission-+ must be,repro4uce on the mylars. pe6(aj f K C�I-�-o f z,,t ti-4. _ l.f�? After the mylars have been signed by the Commission, they will be returned to you for filing in the Office of the Town Clerk within 90 days . After filing these plans, a copy of the receipt must be / submitted to the Planning Department. d;aItt hC E.O t d[.c l-Pcf f l lZ l� I Se C�f 47 Ca X r/,,� �/-('i a�e'K i �!! 4,''z! E!t/ (UT ypr,�.�,�� - ovt1-2— '�v✓a-�� �- �,r� � � �x��� ����� ✓e dt NUJ r �� ��-- v ls� v� Yb �� f ►� G% 9 eQ-) t � �cAs n-� 7� 49 1 • w t _ 411 t. ZIA �i 4 �ri k ♦ t - - 4 fs9 :.1! - 2LA=ga b-44-L 61 f � _ PnP 2 ----- -- - - - -----��I= -��- -- ------ 22 -- -- f4-0 4 JeFF /--OLC-,Cr - -- --------- i ji �j 'ice �I -- - J''.�ET f ------------ - - �--- - - -0 J-ax� L- - - - - �- tJ -- - -- - ---- - - -- --- _ - , ---- - Zv eelt d LOIy _ Ley __— --- ` — — . a ----- — _— — - ---- ---- i a-7 al �el )W� ne- klz ✓ r SOWN Se4 � p m 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 4f�oSOR,cor� AREA CODE 860/644-2511 February 5, 1997 Mr. Joseph Perna Design Professionals, Inc. 165 South Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 RE: Timothy Edwards Middle School 100 Arnold Way SOUTH WINDSOR,CT Dear Mr. Perna: The South Windsor Water Pollution Control Authority, at its regular meeting of February 4, 1997, gave approval for the connection to the Town's sewerage system of the Timothy Edwards Middle School Addition at 100 Arnold Way, as more specifically shown on plans entitled "Timothy Edwards Middle School - 100 Arnold Way - South Windsor," Project No. 95040, Drawing No. C-2 as prepared by Design Professionals, Inc. of South Windsor, CT and S/L/A/M Collaborative of Glastonbury, CT, dated Jan. 21, 1997, no revisions, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Technical approval of the Town Engineer. 2. Final Authority approval and acceptance of the sanitary sewerage connection will be given once the sewer line has been installed and inspected by the Town staff, and based upon the written verification of the Town staff that said sanitary sewer line was installed in substantial conformance with the design plans previously approved by the Authority, and meeting all Town regulations and appropriate technical specifications relating to sanitary sewer construction. 3. A 1,000-gallon grease separator shall be provided in a location downstream from the cafeteria. r Mr. Joseph Perna - 2 - February 5, 1997 4. This approval letter must be superimposed on the final approval plans. Very truly yours, ------ ------- Jose J. Carino, Chairman Water Pollution Control Authority JJC:rt cc: Matthew Galligan, Town Manager Michael J. Gantick, Director of Public Works Jerry Iazzetta, Town Engineer Marcia Banach, Director of Planning John Collins, Chief Building Inspector - - --Q—cIAILCte -- --=--— ------- — — February 24, 1997 TO: Mr. Russell G. Levack, Chairman Town of South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission RE: Timothy Edwards Middle School Expansion Architectural and Design Review Committee (ARDC) Comments for Zoning Public Hearing Dear Mr. Chairman: The architects representing the school system presented their revisions and progress of the proposed school expansion at the February 20, 1997 meeting of the Architectural and Design Review Committee to further address comments and/or concerns from the previous January design meeting. The Thursday meeting addressed the exterior landscape and signage. The drawings appear to be in accordance with Section 9.1 of the Zoning Regulations and have demonstrated or addressed all eight items of the ARDC checklist. As a Committee, we have the following comments: 1. The drawings should reflect the architects' design consideration for the use of either black or bronze colored light fixtures and poles in powder coat or another highly durable exterior finish. Fixture heights and locations shall meet the needs of the school in parking as well as walks, minimizing any spillage of light into adjacent properties. 2. Review of the wetlands portion of the landscape was deferred to the Wetlands Commission for their appraisal of the mitigation plantings. 3. The design of the entrance identification sign or"ceremonial signage" presented to our Committee was not completed. The proposed brick seatwall and signage detail should come back before this Committee for review along with its proposed lighting system. 4. The proposed brick seatwall for the"ceremonial signage" will match the school's brick. Although not reflected on the drawings this Committee reviewed, we were informed that seatwalls will also be adjacent to each schools' entrance walk with the fianl design. AD SECRETTI.B 0224A.WPD Corres. Mr. Russell G. Levack, Chairman February 24, 1997 Page 2 5. The landscape planting schedule and quantities as shown are incomplete and the ARDC would like a further opportunity to review the landscape plan upon completion. 6. The fire pump structure noted on the plans should be looked at further to determine and demonstrate to the Zoning Commission that its size, color and composition of material is computable with the rest of the design and blends into the landscape. 7. The existing trees of the orchards on the Orchard Hill Elementary School side of the access road should be saved, protected or replaced. 8. The ARDC would find no objection should the architects elect to pave the island in front of the bus drop off provided tree pits with grates are implemented. This report is respectfully submitted on behalf of the Architectural and Design Review Committee and its Chairman, Ronald Johnson. Richard L. Boston, Aember c: Marcia Banach, Director of Planning ADSECRET\RLB0224A.WPD Comes. Timothy Edwards Construction Concerns of Tree Warden/Superintendent of Parks & Grounds Presented to P & Z 2/25/97 1. Landscape plan needs to have plantings identified to be able to evaluate. Just shows circles. 2. Tree removal plan. 3. Landscape sequence vs. building, i.e. tree planting last, after lawn seeded. 4. Smaller tree size, 1 '/2" - 2" instead of 2 '/2 - 3". $10 tree, $50 hole theory. 5. Planting beds mulched entire bed. No grass in center islands. 6. Spec's for ballfield fences, detention basin fences, soccer field construction. 7. Irrigation for planting areas next to school. 8. Utilities vs. Plantings. J, TIMOTHY EDWARDS MIDDLE SCHOOL PH 2/25/97 L Application for a special exception to Article 4.2.8.c of the zoning regulations and site plan approval for expansion of Timothy Edwards Middle School, A- 30 zone. This application includes temporary relocation of the existing portable classrooms to a new location behind the school. 2. The expanded building will be just over 215,000 square feet. Building coverage will be 12%, 15% allowed; impervious coverage will be 30%; 3 5% allowed. Building height will be at the maximum allowable 30 feet. The expansion includes relocation and reconstruction of athletic playing fields and will result in the loss of much of the existing orchard. 3. Our parking formula would require 860 parking spaces for the expanded building. The applicant is requesting waivers to provide 405 parking spaces and to reduce the size of the parking spaces from 10 x 20 feet to 9 x 18 feet. 4. There are regulated areas on site. The Inland Wetland Agency/Conservation Commission is in the process of hearing this application now. The IWA/CC is ''Y� ' working with the applicant to provide water quality renovation from stormwater-borne pollutants associated with impervious surface areas. This is being done by establishing wetland plant communities at the bottom of the two proposed detention basins to be used as biofilters. 5. The school is served by public water_ and sewer. The Water Pollution Control Authority-approved the sewer plans for the addition-on February 5: 6. Site circulation is an item with which Town staff do not have a high comfort level. We understand the concept of the separation of school buses and passenger vehicles dropping off students, but it does make for an awkward circulation pattern, with the buses having to make awkward turning movements to exit the bus parking lot. The traffic study indicates that the traffic engineer provided recommendations to the site architect for modifications to roadway widths and corner radii within the site to accommodate bus turns. Town staff would like to see the recommended modifications and also receive some assurance from the applicant that the traffic engineer's modifications are included in the plan. The radii are �. c ►n j d G✓ C' (rc Iv 2— ! a Y� d oy — at l vas-Ae �-d nt a� ve (% 6- c`4 S� �r a V`e!/ ccr b CL l�f -��1'�� a�z�� C,��vI►'l�/� ""7� YeO��`-�'�� -flit t a'� important so that buses turning corners are able to remain in their own lane rather than having to encroach onto the oncoming traffic lane. 7. The traffic study also includes recommendations for sight line improvements at the intersection of Avery Street and Gray Road, and at the intersection of Foster Street and the school entrance drive, plus a recommendation for a corner radius improvement on Gray Road. Staff suggests that these recommendations be incorporated as approval conditions if this project is approved. 8. The Town's Recreation Department suggests that athletic fields be brought back on-line as quickly as possible to minimize disruption to athletic programs and clubs; this disruption would place further demands on already- oversubscribed fields at other locations. P UV 9. The applicant has met with the Architecture and Design Review Committee on ,�. two occasions, in January prior to application submittal, and on February 20. "l A representative-ftomxlaat-.o.mmittee inhere-tonight-to-present--their-findii gs. l ' 10. There are dumpsters proposed,which will need to be on concrete-pads-with a-�s e , screening. -- p. ,•r�pill, 11. If this application is approved, the Planning Dept. requests the following modifications: • Key map needs to be completed to be in conformance with requirements • Existing and proposed water lines need to be shown • Landscaping plan needs to be completed, with plantings identified. The- modified tree line should be_shown also in areas-where-existing-trees wffNx-disturbed. We anticipate that these details would be finalized prior to the work session on this application. A-A ivI ----------------------- Ike!G� I G ti pet IV MEMORANDUM TO: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning FROM: Jerry C. Iazzetta, Town Engineer DATE: February 25, 1997 RE: TIMOTHY EDWARDS MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE PLAN - 97-07P We have reviewed the revised drawings dated 2-19-97 for the Timothy Edwards Middle School Site Plan and have the following comments : Traffic Analysis 1 . The traffic analysis indicates that the traffic engineer provided recommendations to the Architect concerning the site plan, however these were not indicated. We would ask that these be provided. 2 . There were several areas indicated that would facilitate traffic flow to this site. We would suggest that these be incorporated in the site work for this project . 3 . The bus maneuver plan apparently shows busses parked against the curb such that they must back up to be able to leave their spaces. This conflicts with verbal information given. It appears that if busses park away from the curb such that the would not back up, then a bus would not be able to park between two busses already parked. Drainage Analysis 1 . The slopes for pipes from YD1 to PCB14, PCB14 to YD3, YD3 to PCB15, PCB15 to PC317 were reduced from those shown in the storm sewer design, as we were concerned about the high velocities in these pipes . New calculations for these should be provided as the velocities may still be too high for the sedimentation structure to function properly. General 1 . The planting plan should be screened over the utility plan or vice versa to avoid conflicts that are still present . Without this direct relationship and the extensive planting plan proposed, additional conflicts will not be noticed. 2 . A lawn sprinkler system should be installed to facilitate growth of the extensive landscaping proposed. 3 . The existing orchard limits and proposed orchard limits should be shown. RE: TIMOTHY EDWARDS MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE PLAN - 97-07P February 25, 1997 Page 2 . General 4 . Construction limits and grading limits should be shown on drawings . 5 . New light poles are shown in various locations under new tree canopies . Will these cause problems later? 6 . All beds around tree groupings, shrub groupings and in island areas should be mulched for ease of maintenance. 7 . Water line should be shown on drawings . 8 . Tree removal plan should be provided. 9 . It should be indicated on the drawings that all disturbed areas are to be seeded. This is to avoid conflicts like that on sheets C1 and L5 . Site Lavout Plan L-1 1 . If passenger vehicles traffic is two way in parking lots A & B, stop signs should be placed at all exits . 2 . A stop sign should be placed for parking lot E where it intersects with parking lot D. 3 . Will there be any handicap parking spaces in parking areas B and A for passenger vehicles? Site Planting Plan L-5 1 . There is a possible sight distance problem looking north from the northerly exit from parking area C because of trees . 2 . There appears to be a conflict with trees planted over the inlet pipe to the detention basin. Site Lavout Plan L-6 1 . Plan shows new light poles along south end of building. These appear to be directly over the proposed sanitary sewer. 2 . Several conflicts exist with trees and shrubs either over the proposed gravel access road, or trees within the detention basin or trees over the storm pipes into and out of detention basin. e . RE: TIMOTHY EDWARDS MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE PLAN - 97-07P February 25, 1997 Page 3 . 3 . It would be appropriate to show the fence around the detention basin. Grading Plan C-1 1 . The new soccer field should have some spot elevations in center areas of field to indicate the grading of the field and at the west goal . 2 . Spot elevations are needed in bus parking areas on both sides of center island. Site Grading Plan C-1 3 . The riprap pad at end of inlet pipe to the detention basin should be dimensioned. 4 . The note at outlet of the detention pond indicates "Remove Ex. Grates and Build MH to Grade" . Plan indicates three grates . Will all three be removed? If so, how will structure be covered? Plan shows only one manhole cover. Please have applicant provide a detail for this work. Site Grading Plan C-2 1 . Riprap pad at end of inlet pipe to detention basin should be dimensioned. 2 . Existing transformer pad is shown. Is this to be removed. 3 . What is status of "Ex. Propane Fill" and Ex. Oil Fill"? Will these remain when area is paved? 4 . Roof drainage for the temporary classrooms is not addressed. 5 . Spot elevations are needed in Staff Parking and pavement area in rear of building. Site Utilities Details Sheet C-1 1 . General note #5 South is misspelled. 2 . General note #10 should indicate that stump chips are not to be buried. 3 . Underdrain In Detention Basin should be labeled Curtain Drain In Detention Basin. 4 . Double Grate Catch Basin Type 1 detail should show application of grade and leveling courses . r w , RE: TIMOTHY EDWARDS MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE PLAN - 97-07P February 25, 1997 Page 4 . 5 . The notes for the catch basins should be the same for all catch basins and should be so noted. 6 . Leveling bricks should be indicated as "concrete bricks" . Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan - Sheets C-8 & C-9 1 . The "Temporary Topsoil Stockpile" is shown encroaching on the relocated soccer field. This should be moved off of soccer field. Erosion Control Details - Sheet C-11 1 . Detail is required for the riprap pads . 2 . Details for outlet structures indicates "See Detail All , however, this is not shown. 3 . Sedimentation structure should indicate "concrete" bricks for leveling courses . Erosion Control Details - Sheet C-11 4 . Sequence of Construction a. Phase 1 Work. We have a concern about the detention basin construction (note 5) . Stabilizing this basin will be a problem as stormwater will be placed into it whenever it rains . We would ask that the applicants engineer provide a plan to accomplish this stabilization of the basin. Some possible suggestions : placing erosion control blankets; placing a temporary pipe from the inlet pipe to the outlet structure. b. Phase 2 Work - Note 1 . The detention basin is to be stabilized prior to any stormwater being placed in it . This should be noted. JCl/j sv JC797/MABMEMOS/fE2-25 March 3, 1997 © rit, � Mr. Russell Levack MAR 4 1997 Chairman, Planning and Zoning South Windsor Town Hall South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue Planning & Zoning Commission South Windsor, CT 06074 Dear Mr. Levack: I am unable to attend the March 11, 1997 Planning &Zoning hearing regarding the expansion project at the Timothy Edwards School property, however, I would like the following concerns to be put on record. My property, 19 High Ridge Road, does not directly abut up to the school's property but backs up to the adjacent town property. The southwest corner of my property is within a few feet of the northeast corner of the soccer field. My understanding is that the existing soccer field will be made into a parking lot and that the northeast area(closest to my property) will be used as a containment area for water flow. The following are two concerns for me as a homeowner: 1. water drainage into my property; 2. disturbance from night-time activity (unauthorized) on the school premises. My backyard is in a sloping direction from the school and water drainage does periodically cause water leakage in my basement despite various efforts made to stop this problem. Many years prior to my purchase of this home, the town apparently installed a drainage pipe in the back portion of my yard which feeds into the town sewer system. I am concerned that the creation of the containment area may add to my yard's water drainage problem, and I would appreciate that measures be taken to avoid this situation. Also, I would like to know if it is possible to check the existing pipe for leaks as it does not appear to be very effective. Regarding the disturbance issue, I have owned this property since 1989 and have been aware of high-school age kids gathering by the tennis courts during summer nights well into the morning hours. On one occasion I had to call the police due to a male that had "passed out" on my back patio. I am concerned that the parking lots will attract these gatherings, bringing the noise and activity level that much closer. appreciate any action you can take on my behalf. Please do not hesitate to contact me at(860) 644-4770 to discuss further. Sincerely, Mona G. Estey 19 High Ridge Road 4 South Windsor, CT 0607 U� March 6, 1997 CERTIFIED MAIL Town of South Windsor Public Building Commission 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Dear Madam/Sir: Re: Appl #97-07P, Timothy Edwards Middle School Expansion At the March 5, 1997 regular meeting, the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission approved application#97-07P, IWA/CC permit for the construction of an addition to Timothy Edwards Middle School located at 100 Arnold Way, A-30 zone (Assessor's map #67, parcel 78) as shown on plans prepared by S/L/A/M/ Collaborative, Project Number 95040.00 and dated March 3, 1997. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. One blueprint copy of the entire set of plans and this letter reproduced thereon, must be submitted to this Commission. This must be completed within 65 days of approval prior to any construction activity on the site. 2. Construction activities shall be subject to the approval of the Town Engineer. 3. The application shall indemnify and hold harmless the Town of South Windsor against any liability which might result from the proposed operation or use. 4. The permit is valid for five years and shall expire on March 4, 2002. It has been IWA/CC's policy to notify landowner(s)/applicant(s) of expiring wetland permits. However, it is the landowner(s)/applicant(s) responsibility to track expiration dates and notify the Commission of a renewal request at least 65 days prior to expiration. 5. All approvals required must be obtained and submitted prior to any activity on the site. 6. A contact person shall be identified on the plans. 7. We recommend a bond in the amount of$5,000 to be submitted to the Planning and Zoning Commission to ensure compliance with the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Measures. 8. Fencing placed around the detention basin shall be at the approval of the Zoning/Wetlands Enforcement Officer. 9. Maintenance schedule for inspection and cleaning of the detention basin and the catch basins shall be shown on the final plans. Very truly yours, INLAND WETLAND AGENCY/ CONSERVATION COMMISSION Susan Smith Vice Chairman SS/pmm cc: Planning & Zoning Commission Chief Building Official Town Engineer Design Professionals, Inc. S/L/A/M Collaborative, 80 Glastonbury Blvd, Glastonbury 06033 ARCHITECTURAL & DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES March 6, 1997 Members present: Chairman Ron Johnson, Gerald Skolnick, Eileen Marchessault, Richard Boston, Tim Friend. Staff present: Marcia Banach, Director of Planning Appl. #97-07P, Timothy Edwards Middle School Expansion. Henry Thomas, Landscape Architect with S/L/A/M Collaborative, represented the applicant. At previous meetings with ADRC, Thomas had presented architectural elevations and landscaping general concepts. Thomas had the completed landscape plan for this meeting. Street/edge trees are Norway maple. Interior trees are red maple, sycamore, sweet gum,beech, linden. Trees have been grouped into bed areas as much as possible to simplify maintenance. Thomas noted a change from the original plans in the design of the "seat wall"originally proposed for the center island at the main entrance. Pedestrian access has been eliminated from the center island, so the originally-planned seat wall is now a low wall with the originally-planned sign but no seat. There are rear building foundation plantings, including English ivy and daffodils. Adjustments were made to trees right behind the school to eliminate conflicts with plantings and site utilities. The design of the fire pump box near the roadway has not been finalized yet, but screening plantings have been added. ADRC requested that the final design of the fire pump box be submitted to staff for review by ADRC. The detention basin is planned to have chain link fence for 3/4 of the perimeter; the remaining 1/4 is to be planted in"unfriendly"plants such as thorny bushes, to discourage children from accessing the detention pond. It was noted by both the architect and ADRC that perhaps dense bushes would be preferable to thorny bushes since children are involved. The light pole color has been changed to either black or bronze anodized, as requested by ADRC at the previous meeting. ADRC was concerned about the extent of mulch beds around trees,with the primary concern that the mulch beds would begin to look unkempt over time,presenting a long- term maintenance problem. The mulch beds are in response to the Town's Parks and Grounds Superintendent's request to facilitate day-to-day maintenance. ADRC indicated that they appreciate the Town's personnel limitations for grounds maintenance,but that they would prefer to see a non-mulch alternative, such as no-mow grass, if that can be worked out. ADRC 2 March 6, 1997 ADRC indicated that overall they are satisfied with the plans. 2. Appl. #97-11P,Ferraina Site Plan. Skip Alford,P.E.,represented the applicant. At the previous ADRC meeting,this site plan had been presented. ADRC had requested that a landscape professional be retained to design a landscape plan to mitigate the somewhat stark appearance of the building and grounds as originally presented. Alford indicated that this had been done, and also that the applicant had incorporated some of the ADRC's suggestions for building facade improvement. Facade improvements include some relief on the building front and a shet roof over the door for interest. Rosemary Aldrich, Landscape Architect with Planimetrics,Inc.,presented a landscape plan. She noted that she had moved the proposed sidewalk away from the building to achieve more planting room. Her planting plan accentuates the front door and fills in some of the previously-sparse areas. Plants used include blue rug juniper, azaleas, alberta spruce. A Siberian crab tree was added at the end of the walk as a focal point. Arbor` vitaes and PJM rhododendrons have been wrapped around the corners of the building for height and to break up the appearance of the long walls. Winterberry was added for winter color. ADRC me mbers noted that this plan was much improved over the previously-presented plan, and now contains good plant variety. ADRC suggested that, since the front door has been made a focal point,the door itself would be much more attractive if it was not just a plain steel door. The applicant indicated that a raised panel door could be used instead. Overall, ADRC was more satisfied with the revised plan than with the original plan. Respectfully submitted, Marcia A. Banach, AICP Director of Planning M R. LE'vac�: Chairman . Planning & Zoning Commission MAR 10 19W Town of Couth 6J i n 'Jot South Windsor March 10 , 1997 planning & Zoning Cammiss'on Dear Mr . Chairman ; My wife and I live at 151 Clinton Drive . t_jur property is abutted at the -Y rear by the Timothy Edwards Miccile School. proper1:y . T ,e intent o"'` this .e"i ter iS to apprise you and your several That we C_JnSider- import nt -elatl-ve to the Planned expansloi"I Of the M' r=idle Schoo . expect the expansion to be a gross visual nuiSance . The aciditiort wall be 50% closer to our house than the present building . In addition , any privacy screen (scrub trees and brush) now in existance will be eliminated . We urge you to consider the irrstallati_on of a significant privacy ,cr-ee .r it the new construction . 2 . The present building is a sounding board . Designed of brick and ;Lass , t ref-lects SOUnd directly' into our-- t"OUSe . The r:ev. addition will or"rly aggravate this condition . Please determine how this can be modified/corrected while the building i.s still in the pl .nni.rlg st.agle 3 . The detention basin planned for just outside: our property l. -i r;e iviil effectively destroy the existing vietlands/ wildl __e area, T_ have bee;-1 informed at the Wetlands meeting of March 5 that during peak runoff times , water- level in the new basin will 1.jF- between 2 and 5 feet for' an extended period of time ! That constitutes an attractive nusciance to us . I. strongly urge yOUr par"liel to demand that the Jasin be entirely surrou -ided by i"Enl ir-" to prevent small children from disaster . The Wetlands Group is considering only partially fencing the basin to allot-v riildli...e access to the grater . 4) fallback position would be a living hedge of briar plants . Neither solution is acceptable f;o us . I have spoken to Roger Cottle , a member of your Group , on these items and he can comment further , if necessary . Thank you for your consideration of the above . If needed , we can appear before the Commission for further clarification . in addition . we welcome you and your Commission to visif US and experience first hand what we are facing . S1nA,cii 1 ;r"Ol.tr-"S , e Fra ane ,J 151 clinton DriveA(f �nS , South Windsor , CT 644-:1659 CC : H. Fitts, R . Cottle , J. Muller . W. Sullivan -C� Y , MEMORANDUM TO: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning FROM: Jerry C. Iazzetta, Town Engineer DATE: March 11, 1997 RE: TIMOTHY EDWARDS MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE PLAN - 97-07P We have reviewed the revised drawings dated 3-6-97 for the Timothy Edwards Middle School Site Plan and have the following comments : Traffic Analysis 1 . The traffic analysis indicates that the traffic engineer provided recommendations to the Architect concerning the site plan, however these were not indicated. A plan was presented at the February 25, 1997 Planning and Zoning meeting showing these, however several recommendations are not shown on the revised drawings . 2 . There were several areas indicated that would facilitate traffic flow to this site . We would suggest that these be incorporated in the site work for this project . 3 . The bus maneuver plan apparently shows busses parked against the curb such that they must back up to be able to leave their spaces . This conflicts with verbal information given. It appears that if busses park away from the curb such that they would not back up, then a bus would not be able to park between two busses already parked. 4 . The plan presented showing bus turning movements indicates that busses will be into the opposing traffic lanes when turning out of their parking area. General 1 . A lawn sprinkler system should be installed to facilitate growth of the extensive landscaping proposed. 2 . The existing orchard limits and proposed orchard limits should be shown. RE: TIMOTHY EDWARDS MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE PLAN - 97-07P March 11, 1997 Page 2 . General 3 . Construction limits and grading limits should be shown on drawings . 4 . New light poles are shown in various locations under new tree canopies . Will these cause problems later? 5 . All beds around tree groupings, shrub groupings and in island areas should be mulched for ease of maintenance. 6 . Tree removal plan should be provided. 7 . It should be indicated on the drawings that all disturbed areas are to be seeded. This is to avoid conflicts like that on sheets C1 and L5 . Site Layout Plan L-1 1 . If passenger vehicles traffic is two way in parking lots A & B, stop signs should be placed at all exits . 2 . A stop sign should be placed for parking lot E where it intersects with parking lot D. 3 . Will there be any handicap parking spaces in parking areas B . and A for passenger vehicles? Site Planting Plan L-5 1 . There is a possible sight distance problem looking north from the northerly exit from parking area C because of trees . 2 . This plan has several conflicts with trees planted over storm pipes and on the gravel access road to the detention basin. Site Layout Plan L-6 1 . Plan shows new light poles along south end of building. These appear to be directly over the proposed sanitary sewer. 2 . Several conflicts exist with trees and shrubs planted over the new sanitary sewer pipe and over storm pipe. RE: TIMOTHY EDWARDS MIDDLE SCHOOL SITE PLAN - 97-07P March 11, 1997 Page 3 . Site Grading Plan C-2 1 . Roof drainage for the temporary classrooms is not addressed. JC I/j sv JU97/MABMEMOS/PE2-25 n o TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 FAX COVER SHEET DATE: March 13, 1997 TIME: 11:26 AM TO: Dan Weston, SLAM PHONE: Peter DeMallie, DP FAX: FROM: Marcia A. Banach PHONE: 644-2511, ext. 253 Director of Planning FAX: 644-3781 RE: Timothy Edwards Middle School CC: Number of pages including cover sheet: Message Here is a list of the items the Planning &Zoning Commission had concerns about. 1. Bus circulation—needs to be improved 2. Town Engineer's review comments to be addressed 3. Stormwater velocities too high-should be reduced to less than 10 cfs; also, duration of various stormwater depths in the detention basin 4. Missing items: tree removal plan, ballfield and fence specifications t V" 6 ,OW N SF4 Cl)�- MAR 2 1 1997 C 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 0(amth Windsor 1�dsox•CO AREA CODE 203/644-25 .�j�} liliiS March 21, 1997 Ms Marcia Banach, Town Planner Town Hall 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, Ct. 06074 Dear Marcia: Please accept this letter as notification to the Planning & Zoning Commission of withdrawal of the application regarding additions and renovations to the Timothy Edwards Middle School. Very truly yours, ,r r Howard E. Fitts, Chairman Public Building Commission C w H V 7-awn / Soad, ?dz�� .'7 � ti s wQ 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 �j'IOSOR-CO AREA CODE 203/644-2511 September 22, 1998 Mr. Peter S. Sobin SLAM Collaborative 80 Glastonbury Boulevard Glastonbury, CT 06033 re: Timothy Edwards Middle School Arnold Way South Windsor, CT 06074 Dear Mr. Sobin: The South Windsor Water Pollution Control Authority, at its regular meeting of September 15, 1998,gave approval for a proposed revision to the sewer at the south side of the Timothy Edwards Middle School as shown on plans entitled"Site Utilities Plan --Timothy Edwards Middle School --Foster Street-- South Windsor--Connecticut'prepared by Design Professionals,Inc., South Windsor, Connecticut, Sheet C-5 dated Jan. 21, 1997,revised Feb. 14, 1997, March 6, 1997, and March 27, 1997; and also in accordance with a marked-up portion of the same drawing labeled 'Revised Layout --Dwg. C201 -- 9/4/98"; and subject to the following conditions: 1. Technical approval of the Town Engineering Department. 2. Final Authority approval and acceptance of the sanitary sewerage connection will be given once the sewer line has been installed and inspected by the Town staff, and based upon the written verification of the Town staff that said sanitary sewer line was installed in substantial conformance with the design plans previously approved by the Authority, and meeting all Town regulations and appropriate technical specifications relating to sanitary sewer construction. 3. This approval letter must be superimposed on the final approval plans. Very truly yours, ThomasRndson, Chairman Water Pollution Control Authority TH:rt cc: Matthew Galligan,Town Manager Michael J. Gantick,Director of Public Works Jerry Iazzetta,Town Engineer Marcia Banach, Director of Planning John Collins, Chief Building Inspector �towm sF, •• � U� 6& 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE• SOUTH WINDSOR,CT 06074-2786 ��Osoe.co � AREA CODE 860/644-2511 FAX 860/644-3781 October 1, 1998 Mr. Kenneth Fitzgerald, Chairman Public Building Commission Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Timothy Edwards Detention Basin Dear Mr. Fitzgerald: I have received a phone call from Mr. Charles Mischel of 11 Glenwood Road, South Windsor expressing his concern about the detention basin near parking Lot D. He feels that this is a safety hazard for children who see it as an adventure. He asks that a fence be placed around the basin to prevent children from entering the basin. I indicated to Mr. Mischel that the fence was not part of the approved plan, that any changes must go through the Public Building Commission and that I would forward his concerns in writing to the Public Building Commission. Very truly yours, 6Je C. etta, n Engineer JCl/sfg cc: Michael J. Gantick, Director of Public Works Jeffrey H. Folger, Zoning/Wetlands Enforcement Officer Mr. Charles Mischel \ \u 330 LIGHTING KEY , \ 3. \ Symbol Single head fixtures on 14' poles far \ �\ all walkways and pedestrian areas. . �(100 W Metal Halide lamp) dingle head fixtures on 20' poles for aX( roadways and parking areas \ (25� W Metal Halide lamp) Doubt headed fixtures on 20 pole for ` \ all roadway and parking areas \ (250 W Metal f�id� lamp) 's Z4'T (DIMENSION ACROSS CURVED WALL SECTION) RAISED GALVANIZED STEEL SIGN BOX (7'X 12"3/16 P*M RATE'WOUNT ON S-I.W DIA DOWELS) �. RAISED STAINLESS STEEL LETTERS(4'HT.RUSH TO FACE) , PRECAST CONCRETE CAP(SEAIW SURFACE) BRIO(WALL BASE(11 DEEP) l Timothy Edwards Middle School Grid(seat wet and identification Sti�n DRAFT COPY IN loll long tIn 0 N U Ron m E IR A PP" 7. € I y �. �. l 24'-0' (DIMENSION ACROSS CURVED WALL SECTION) 10,-0* • RAISED GALVANIZED STEEL SIGN BOX (3'X 12% 3/16 THICK PLATE; MOUNT ON 5- 1.25"DIA. DOWELS) RAISED STAINLESS STEEL LETTERS(4-HT. FLUSH TO FACE) -1A I PRECAST CONCRETE CAP(SEATING SURFACE) BRICK WALL BASE( IS-DEEP) Timothy Edwards Middle School C) Brick Seat wal and Identification ' r - yta DRAFT COPY r