HomeMy WebLinkAboutResub/Site Plan/Withdrawn _ TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR
PLANNING &ZONING COMMISSION
APPLICATION FORM
Application No: 7wO _
Official Receipt Date:
Receipt No: = ~
APPLICANT: Wolf & Guerra, T,-L-C'_ , aka Wolf C-,uprra f T V
ADDRESS: 989 Ellington Rd_ , South Windsor, ('T 06074
OWNER OF RECORD ON LAND RECORDS: same
ADDRESS:
COMPLETE LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 250 & 280 Buckland Road
ASSESSOR'S MAP# 38 PARCEL#_9 ZONE rn
NAME, ADDRESS, TEL & FAX # OF PERSON TO WHOM INQUIRIES SHOULD BE DIRECTED:
Peter R_ DeMallie, Principal. resign ProfPssionalS, Tnr- 165_S Satellite Road,
South Windsor, CT 06074, 291-8755, fax 291-2752
THIS APPLICATION IS FOR: (Check all that apply):
❑ Zone Change to (Public Hearing required and Certified letter to abutters required)
❑ Subdivision/Resubdivision .. ❑ Open Space Subdivision (Public Hearing Required)
❑ Subdivision ❑ Minor ❑ Major
® Resubdivision (Public Hearing Required) ❑ Minor_E] Major
❑ Conditional Approval
❑ Special Exception to Article (Public Hearing, Certified letter to abutters required)
Site Plan of Development
❑ General.Plan of Development
❑ Earth Filling (Sec. 15) and/or Earth Removal (Sec. 14 - Public Hearing required)
❑ Regulation Amendment: ❑ Zoning ❑ Subdivision (Attach proposed amendment)
❑ Temporary and Conditional Permit for.
❑ Major Home Occupation for
❑ Other (explain in detail)
An Application Pending sign is required to be posted on the property for all applications ten (10) days
prior to being heard by the Commission.
Si ature of Applicant Signature of Property Owner
(See reverse side for additional information)
DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC.
civil engineers . planners . surveyors . gis
November 22, 1999
Executive Summary
250 &280 Buckland Corporate Center
South Windsor,Connecticut
Messrs. Arturo Guerra and Helmar Wolf,members of Wolf&Guerra,L.L.C., are
proposing the community's first Class A office park- "250&280 Buckland Corporate Center,"
on an 11.79 acre site east of Buckland Road and north of the Buckland Hills Mall. The site is
commercially zoned, fronts on a four-lane highway and is served by Interstates 84, 291 &384.
In the absence of public sewers in Buckland Road, the applicants propose to extend public
sewers southerly from Deming Street to the site, a distance of approximately 1/3 mile. Public
water service is available at the site.
The two office buildings will be three stories in height with a steel frame. The modern
exterior will feature brick and green tinted ribbon glass with decorative stone cornice and trim.
The design team includes: Design Professionals, Inc., of South Windsor(the project's
civil engineers, site planners and land surveyors); Bianco, Giolitto Weston of Middletown(the
project's architect); Planimetrics of Avon(the project's landscape architect); Traffic Engineering
Solutions of Glastonbury(the project's traffic engineer); and REMA Ecological Services of
Manchester(the project's environmental consultant).
Applications have been submitted to the local Planning&Zoning Commission and
Inland Wetlands Agency.
The tract will be subdivided into three parcels, one each for the new office buildings, and
a third parcel to the rear of the site for an as-yet undetermined development. A common
signalized access drive will serve all three lots.
250 Buckland Corporate Center will have in excess of 31,000 square feet of floor area
and 280 Buckland Corporate Center will have in excess of 22,000 square feet. Construction of
the 53,510 square feet complex is expected to commence in the spring of 2000.
For further information please contact: Peter R. DeMallie,Principal,Planning& GIS
Services,Design Professionals,Inc., 165 S. Satellite Road, South Windsor, CT 06074, Tel. (860)
291-8755,Fax 291-8757.
165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074
Tel: (860)291-8755.Fax: (860)291-8757
DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC.
civil engineers . planners . surveyors . gis
November 19, 1999
Abutters List
Wolf& Guerra,L.L.C.
250&280 Buckland Corporate Center
1.) Messiah Evangelical Lutheran Church, 296 & 300 Buckland Road, South
Windsor, CT 06074
2.) Bruce R. &Linda Cutler, 58 Sele Drive, South Windsor, CT 06074
3.) Johnny&Ann M. Jacques, 67 Ridge Road, South Windsor, CT 06074
4.) Helmar&Beverley G. Wolf, 99 Ridge Road, South Windsor, CT 06074
5.) Arlene C. Croteau, 240 Buckland Road, South Windsor, CT 06074
165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074
Tel: (860)291-8755 •Fax: (860)291-8757
DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC.
civil engineers . planners . surveyors . gis
Transmitted via certified mail
Dear Current Abutting Property Owner November 19, 1999
Re: Wolf& Guerra,L.L.C. DPI Project No. 98-1169
250 &280 Buckland Road
South Windsor, Connecticut
In accordance with Section 7.3b of the"Town of South Windsor Inland Wetlands,
Watercourses, and Conservation Regulations"and in accordance with regulations of the
Planning&Zoning Commission, we are required to notify you that applications have
been filed on the property abutting yours and are subject to hearings by the Inland
Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission and the Planning&Zoning Commission.
The applications and plans are on file with the South Windsor Planning Department in
the Town Hall.
As an abutting property owner you are invited to the hearing to ask questions and/
or give comments,however,you are not required to attend. You may also submit written
comments regarding the applications prior to the hearings if you so desire. For further
information regarding the specific date this application will be heard,please contact
Debbie Wark,Recording Secretary,Michele Lipe,Deputy Planning Director or Jeff
Folger,Zoning/Wetlands Enforcement Officer, at the South Windsor Planning
Department at 644-2511, ext. 253,252 or 229, respectively. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Design Pro sionals,Inc.
By:
Peter R. DeMallie
Principal
cc: Arturo Guerra
Helmar Wolf
Marcia Banach
Jeffrey Folger
165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074
Tel: (860)291-8755 .Fax: (860)291-8757
A
c�
MEMORANDUM
To: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning
From: Jerry C. Iazzetta, Town Engineer
Date: December 1, 1999
Re: Buckland Corporate Center/99-76P
We have reviewed the drawings dated November 5, 1999 and traffic analysis for
the proposed Buckland Corporate Center Site Plan/Resubdivision and have the following
comments:
Sheet 3 — Resubdivision Plot Plan
1. Monuments are required along the proposed streetline. Coordinates should be
provided.
2. A"DROW in favor of the Town of South Windsor" is shown.
a. Is this existing or proposed.
b. Easement must be identified completely with distances, bearings and a
distance from an established point.
3. An iron pin is required at intersection of N 800 08' 07"W and S 090 35' 15"W.
4. Note '"Original Lot Lines" shown with arrows pointing to proposed lines.
Sheet 4 — Resubdivision Topographic Plan
1. The symbol for regulated area should be changed as it looks like an existing 10-
foot contour line.
2. Wetland line should be made darker, it is difficult to see.
3. The note "N/F Mark D. and Gloria B. Ruben" and apparent property line is shown
on Lot 1, however these are not shown on the Resubdivision Plot Plan. Please
have applicant's consultant clarify.
Sheet 5 — Plot Plan
1. Several SNET poles are indicated to be moved. However they are not shown.
2. Why does the entrance driveway center island block left turns into Lot #2? If
this was the intent then the island should be made longer (toward Buckland) to
avoid vehicles trying to cut in front of the island.
3. A""Future Access Road" is shown on Lot #1. There should also be a "Future
Access Road" shown across Lots 3 and 2 to provide for access to properties to
the north.
r
4. "Access easement in favor of Lot 1 and 2" is indicated. However it is not
identified as to distances and bearings.
5. Part of the proposed streetline is not identified with distance and bearing.
6. It is apparent that an easement for the detention basin and rights to drain are
required between lots. The detention basin is on Lots 2 and 3 and all lots drain
into the basin.
7. Sidewalks are not shown along the frontage.
8. It appears that turning lanes are proposed, however none. are noted (see
comments for Sheet 8).
9. The proposed traffic light is not indicated
Sheet 6 — Grading & Utilities Plan
1. Symbol for regulated area should be changed as it looks the same as a proposed
contour line.
2. Wetland line should be shown darker.
3. Legend does not indicate what spot grades are existing or are proposed.
4. It appears that the storm pipe between EW3 and CB13 may have a clearance
problem under the "Future Access Road". Please have applicant address.
5. The pipe between the detention basin outlet structure and existing CB in
Buckland is not identified.
6. CB12 information is placed over property line information and neither can be
read clearly.
7. The detention outlet structure should be moved north to provide for a longer run
from EW #1.
8. Roof leaders are not addressed.
9. Test pit or boring data is required for this site especially in the area of the
detention basin as this area is very wet.
10. Intersection sight distance not indicated.
11. Catch basins should be placed on both side of driveways at intersection of drive
with Buckland Road
Sheet 7 — Improvement Location Map
1. `"Taking Line" is shown in several places. Is this the existing streetline that was
taken as part of Buckland Road reconstruction?
2. "Proposed Easement for Sewer" is shown — however the easement is not
identified as to ownership, distance and bearings.
3. Existing drainage should be shown darker.
4. Buildings and trees are shown in Buckland Road. These do not exist.
5. Why is the sanitary sewer run on the west side of Buckland? This requires
crossing the road twice — once at Deming and once at the site driveway.
Sheet 8 — Improvement Location Map
1. This drawing is titled ""New Turning Lane", however there is no information as to
lengths, widths, etc. — only some lines. There is no indication as to widening of
Y
4
Buckland Road nor is the extent identified. If the road is to be widened beyond
the frontage of Lots 1, 2 and 3, either additional rights of way are to be obtained
or a snow shelf easement is required. Also the traffic study does not address
any turning lane.
2. Storm drainage information should not be on this sheet.
3. Much information on the site is shown upside down.
4. A note "9" clay storm drain" is shown on a building to the north of this side.
What is this in reference to?
Sheet 9 — Sewer Profile Plan
1. Profile indicates that a drop inlet is proposed at MH #3. This should be an
outside drop and a detail provided.
Sheet 14 — Details
1. Typical roadway section shown is for a town road and does not match the
information on the plan sheets.
2. Permanent pavement and temporary pavement patch details do not match the
pavement section in Buckland Road. Subbase is a minimum of 12"with a
minimum of 4" of bituminous concrete.
Sheet L1
1. Trees are shown planted on the detention basin slopes. This is not acceptable.
It is recommended that the applicant revise these drawings and submit them
with sufficient time for a review prior to the public hearing.
]Cl/sfg
S:\ENGINEER\Prof.-P&Z Wetland Applications\Buckland Corp Ctr\Review Dec I.doc
DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC.
civil engineers + planners . surveyors . gis
RECEIVED
To: Elizabeth Warren, Chairperson December 2, 1999
DEC 6 1999
Inland Wetlands Agency
1540 Sullivan Avenue s0811 WI ?=N8 BEPT,
South Windsor, CT 06074
Dear Betty:
Re: Off-site Mitigation DPI Project No. 98-1169
Buckland Corporate Center
South Windsor,Connecticut
On behalf of my clients,Arturo Guerra and Helmar Wolf,I hereby request a site walk at
the Mill-on-the-River restaurant(989 Ellington Road)with a member or members of the Inland
Wetlands Agency and Jeffrey Folger. The purpose of this meeting is to evaluate the potential for
wetlands mitigation activities along the Podunk River. Please advise as to your preferred
meeting time so that I can arrange for George Logan's attendance. Thank you.
Sincerely,
DESIGN P 3FESSIONALS, INC.
A
By:
Peter R. DeMallie,Principal
cc: Messrs. Guerra&Wolf
George Logan
Rosemary Aldridge
Allen Cohn
Jeffrey Bianco
Denise Whitford
Jeffrey Folger
Marcia Banach
165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074
Tel: (860)291-8755 •Fax: (860)291-8757
MEMORANDUM
To: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning
From: Jerry C. Iazzetta, Town Engineer
Date: December 2, 1999
Re: Buckland Corporate Center/99-76P
We have reviewed the Traffic Impact_Study dated July 1999 for the proposed
Buckland Corporate Center and have the following comment, which is in addition to my
memorandum of December 1, 1999:
1. The traffic study, on page 8, states"The intersection sight distance of 535
available to drivers leaving the site will be less than the minimum ISO determined from
the ConnDOT reference". The consultant indicates that the speeds are expected to
decrease with increase in development in the area and therefore this sight distance
should be ok. When a site is developed it is prudent to account for future traffic
generation, however, an assumption that speed will decrease and make the
unacceptable site distance acceptable may not be prudent. It is our opinion that the
sight distance provided should at least meet the minimum based upon the 85th
percentile measured.
JCl/sfg
S:\ENGINEER\Proj.-P&z wetland Applications\Buddand Corp Ctr\Review Dec 2.doc
E
i
s
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
IN-HOUSE REFERRAL FORM
TO: Matt Galligan, Fred Shaw Michael Gantick, Thomas Field, Bill Lanning, John
Bond, Ray Favreau, ar Reichle, Mel Stead, John Collins, Bob Deptula
FROM: Marcia A. Banach, AICP, Director of Planning
The Planning & Engineering Departm ts have received plans for the following project:
Location:
® Site Plan i Subdiv # Acres Zone
❑ Industrial ❑ Commercial ❑ Residential # Lots/Units
Water: P Public ❑ Private Well Sewerage: Ef Public ❑ Septic system(s)
Project Description: S3, 571) 5 L�L
Future Town-owned property involved? ❑ Yes CKNo
❑ new street(s) ❑ new detention area
❑ new open space/recreation area_ ❑ active ❑ passive
Planning Department notes:
Please comment by �ZJ`° (feel free to use this form); return to Planning
Department. Thank you.
la, t7 c.
.. L�'-�- ✓J �L— ��� tc�J1 S�lu{-�t..ratti.�— a-�^-�
ti-S G s-�-S N---�J� ._C l-e.rts�-�b.i. rti--�— y-s.v,v.k..t�C.7��y' /✓IFtn--��'l. .�s`C-�lR-e-�d� Zv�L�1 �o W-P� ,
i � � i d
e
� , � � �
i � � � � � � 1
� I
� jl � I
� t � i �
� � � a � N
I � $ i � � �
� � � � � � � � a � j
I 10 � � f
a � s , 1
� i �
� m
a � j � � �
I
i � �
� � � �
a � i
e � � f � � � � � � i
� � � i � � � �
� I i � � � �
� � f �� l � �
� � I I E I
� ( �
� � i � � � � I
� , � � � � j j �
� '
� � � el i � I
` � �
f
� i � � � �
I j i i I � j
a � � � !
� i i
P i � ! I
� � � 1 � � � i
� �iI � � � � � � � � � i i � i
� � I � � 1 � , � � �
_ _ � t
1
IIII�
� ' � � � � j o
j i
i!
L I
f
-- - -- �- -- - --- - - : --- - -- - ----- --- -tdA49
- -- --
_
1-5
I
-AiL -
� -44
1 .ic
i �
1�1 I I
i
r -- —. ---------
I.
_
I ;
MEMORANDUM
To: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning
From: Jerry C. Iazzetta, Town Engineer
Date: December 28, 1999
Re: Buckland Corporate Center/99-7613
We have reviewed the Traffic Impact Study dated July 1999 for the proposed
Buckland Corporate Center and have the following comment, which is in addition to my
memorandums of December 1 and 2, 1999:
1. The design speed for Buckland Road should be used to determine sight
line requirements for this application. The reconstructed Buckland Road design speed is
45 MPH which when utilized to determine sight distance means that the minimum
intersection sight distances are met.
JCl/sfg
5:\ENGINEER\Prof.-Pu Wetland Applications\Buckland Corp Ctr\Review Dec 28.doc
1
767
Date 2, �;,i t t: pages
Post-it®Fax Note FromTO �_ L •�
Co.
Co./Dept. phone# 5_
t -'T ll
Phone#
Fax#
Fax#
E�1/11-3/200 C 23: 30 86065M625 TRAFFIC ENGINEER Pd1.a PHUE 02
Tt> ft rr"soon"*P.C.
193 .Lexington Road
Glastonbury, CT 06033
(860) 657-3579
I
January 3, 2000
Marcia A Banacti
Director of Plat nizig
Town of Soutb.Windsor
1540 Sullivan Avenue
South Wildsor, CT 06074
Dear Ms, Banach:
Traffic Engiaeariig Solutions, P.C. is pleased to forward the enclosed information as all
addendum to our July 1999 Traffic impact.Study for the proposed.2-SO & 280 Buckland Corlwrate
Center. The enclosed.information addresses comments received from Town Staff during their review of
the plans and traffic study and also includes additional infor..mation from the Connecticut Department of
Transportation which we.received subsequent to completing the July.Report.
The December 28, 1999 memorandum from Mr. Jerry lazzetta, Town Engineer, indicates that
the Design Speed of.45 miles per hour for Buckland Road should be used to determine the Intersection
Sight Distances (ISO) for drivers leaving the site. The minimum ISD required by ConnDOT design
criteria for 45 mph is 462 feet, The sight distance available to drivers leaving the site is 535 feet, or 73
feet greater than the minimum requirements presented in die ComDOT design guidelines. .A speed study
conducted for this project found that drivers are traveling Buckland Road at a rate that is greater than.the
Design Speed of the roadway, While the sight distance exceeds the minimum for the design speed,we
continue to.recommend the installation of a No Turn on.Red sign for drivers leaving the site until such
time as the actual travel speeds on Buckland Road are closer to the design speed_
A meeting attended by'Town Staff, representatives from ConnDOT and representatives from the
Design Team was held at Town Hall during July to review the proposed development. During the
meeting, ConnDOT recommended that a left turn lane be provided on Buckland Road to separate
vehicles turning onto the site from through traffic on Buckland Road. The left tum lane was shown on
the site plan submitted for review and was subsequently revised during the week of January, 3, 2000 in
response to a Town Staff request to provide a seven foot snow shelf along both sides of Buckland Road.
The revised site plan shows a snow shelf that is greater than seven.feet in most locations and up to 18
feet in areas along the site frmtage due to a dedication of right of way by the developer. However,the
right.of way in front of the properties that abut the site limit the area that can be used for a snow shelf.
The roadway has been located in the center of the available right of way to maximize the snow shelf
width, In no case is the proposed snow shelf less than six feet, The snow shelf widens quickly to seven
feet width a short di.stama.ce from the site property lines as the roadway tapers to match the existing
roadway.
C;\l�tisittPgg\C uer.Ta\UrOl0300.dvc-
01r03/2000 23: 30 8606590625 TRAFFIC EH6INEERINC3 PA(-E 0:,
The left turn lane shown on the plan is 100 feet long. Capacity and Queuing analyses were
completed for the signalized intersection., The attached Synchro Mlalyses indicate that the intersec600
will operate at Level of Service A during the moming;peak hour and LOS B during the afternoon,peak
period. The 95th percentile queue for the left.turns will be no greater than one vehicle during the moming
peak hour and less during the afternoon peak hour. The reason for the short queues during the r„ornurg,
peak is due to the signal operation with protected/permitted left turns (same operations as Deming Street
and at the new proposed Lowe's drive)and the low volume of traffic approaching:in the opposite
direction (321 vehicles per hour) During the afternoon,peak hour there will be a low volume of traffic
turning left onto the site (about 14 vehicles per hour).
During July 1999, we submitted a request to the State Traffic Commission to review the
proposed development to deteramine if it had significant impact on the State's roadway system and
whether a STC application would be required. The STC responded on August 3, 1999 that the site
generated traffic would not significantly impact the State highway traffic in the area and that a certificate
would not,be.required(copy of. STC letter is attached).
On August 24, 1999 the Town of South Wuidsor through the Legal Traffic Authority(Police
Chief)submitted a request to the State Traffic Comn.i,ssion for the installation of a traffic signal at the
intersection of Bucklan.d Road and the site drive. The STC responded ca October 27, 1999 that there
would be no objection to a traffic signal at the intersection. The STC indicated the Town would own the
traffic signal and that it.should only be installed nY conjunction with the proposed development.
If during the review of the enclosed material.,you have any questions,please call me.
Very truly yours,
TRAFFIC,' ENCYINEERING SOLUTIONS, P.C.
Bnxe A. Hilison, P,E.
Peter DeMalhe
f:;\hagux'9fi�l.rUet'Fd�LtY0.4113C)!).fat)i;
ill !i1;t"?IlF1H1 C1F:dd I?F,AF,F9rl1 'F, TR,4FFM FH(-=THFFF'1t-,1G F'AGF A4
STATE OF CONNECTICUT MEMBERS
STATE TRAFFIC COMMISSION Cotumtsaious, of Trtosportatioo
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION commissioner of .Public Safety
2800 13ERLIN TURNPIKE, P.O. .HOX 317546 Commlasioner of Motor Vchieles
NEWINGTON, CT 061314546
Phone: (860) 594-3020
August 3 , 1999
Mx , Bruce A, Hillson, P.E.
Traffic Engineering Solutions, P .C.
193 Lexington Road
Glastonbury, CT 06033
Dear Mr. Hillson:
Subject : 'Town of South Windsor
250 and 280 Buckland Corporate Center
Certificate Determination
The Division of Traffic Engineering has completed its review of.
your July 13, 1999 submission.
The conclusions of the investigation revealed that the site-
generated traffic will not significazitly impact the State highway traffic
in the area .
Therefore, a certificate will not be required pursuant to Section
14-311 of the General Statutes at this time. Any future expansion of the
development will require further determination of impact by the Stake
Traffic ComtTti seion.
Very truly yours,
Joseph Santaniello, P.E .
Executive Director
cc : Chief Gary Tyler
Mr, John R. Collins
An Gaual Opportunity Emplo,ver
01/,03/200F_t 05: 44 8606590625 TRAFFIC ENGIHEEFD,43 PAGE_ 05
STATE OF CONNECTICUT jMEM
STATE TRAFFIC COMMISSION Commissioner of Trsnaportation
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Commissioner of Public Safety
2800 BERLIN 'TURNPIKE, P,O. BOX 317546 Commissioner of Motor Vahiclas
NEWINGTON, CT 06131.7546
Phone: (860) 594-3020
October 27, 1999
Chief Gary K. Tyler.
South Windsor Police Department
151 Sand Hill. Road
South Windsor, CT 06074
Dear Chief Tyler
Subject: Town of South Windsor
Buckland Road
Traffic Signal
This is in response to your August 24, 1999 letter concerning a proposed .
traffic signal installation on Buckland Read which was received by this office
on September 10, 1999 ,
As discussed in a recent telephone conversation with Mr. Norman N.
Fi.erravanti of this office, there would be no objection to the signal
installation, it is understood that the signal would be owned, operated and
maintained by the Town of South 'Windsor, and only installed in conjunction with
the proposed site development ,
Two copies of the traffic: signal plan and a completed application for a
traffic signal permit should be submitted to this office for approval by the
State Traffic Commission. An application form is enclosed for your use .
Very truly yours ,
Joseph Santaniello, P.I .
Executive Director
Enclosure
cc: JUL.,-Bruce A, Hillson,�_.P .E.
An Equal Opporialwy EmpinvCr
P,ihf1d ah 1-I. d or r..—?d pap•,,
01/03/2000 05: 44 8606590625 I'F'AFFIC EPIGINEERR,IG PAGE 06
Buckland Road & Site Drive
Baseline 1/3/00
Lanes,Volumes,Timings _
Fz�� H N
Lane group ! EST WBT WBR SOL SOR
Lane ConfigurationsY,
Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12
Grade (%) 0% 0% 0%
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0
First Detector(it) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
Last Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9
Right Turn on Reds Yes Yes
Satd. Flow(prot) 1770 3725 3636 0 1770 0 1583
Fit Perm. 0.334 0.950
Satd, Flow(perm) 822 3725 3638 0 1770 0 1583
Volume (vph) 61 853 321 61 8 0 8
Confl. Peds. (#/hr)
Peak Hour Factor 0,90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0,90
Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 10wo 100%
Heavy Vehicles (%) 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%
Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Parking (#/hr)
Mid-Block Traffic(%) 0% 0% 0%
Lane Group Flow(vph) 88 995 446 0 9 0 9
Perm or Prot? Pm+Pt Perm Prot Pm+dv
Phase Number 5 2 0 4 4
Phase Lagging? Lead Lag
Can Lead or Lag?
Maximum Split (s) 13 49 36 11 11
Maximum Split (%) 22% 82% 60% 18% 18%
Minimum Split (s) 8 20 20 8 20
Yellow Time (s) 4 4 4 4 4
Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
g/c Ratio 0.77 0.77 0.55 0,13 0.30
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 668 2858 2000 236 475
V/C Ratio 0.10 0.35 0.22 0.04 0,02
WS Ratio Prot 0.02 0.01 0.00
V/S Ratio Perm 0.06 0,27 0,12 0,00
Critical LG? Yes Yes
Uniform Delay, dl 1.3 1.7 5,3 17,2 9.7
Actuated G/C Ratio 0.77 0.77 0.55 0.13 0,30
Actuated V/C Ratio 0,10 0,35 0.22 0.04 0.02
Percentile St Delay 1.3 1.7 5.3 17.3 9.8
Percentile LOS A A B C 8
Queue Length 50th (ft) 4 38 37 3 2
Queue Length 95th (ft) 9 53 57 14 10
Link Length (ft) 1828 1948 1880
50th Up Block Time%
95th Up Block Time %
Turn Bay Length (ft)
50th Bay Block Time %
Traffic Engtneering Solutions 250&280 Bucidand Road Office
AM Peak Year 2001 Page .t
traffl-L300
UIfU'-1 2UUU Ub: 44 UbUbbyUb'l"i r96E U;
Buckland Road & Site Drive
Baseline 1./3/00
Lanes,Volumes,Timings _
Une Stroup I& EST W8T Wei I SBT 38R
95th Bay Block Time %
Queuing Penalty(veh)
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 60
Natural Cycle: 50
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2-EBT and 6-WBT, Start of Green
Control Type: Pretimed
Lost Time: 6
Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.27
Intersection V/C Ratio; 0,30
Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 2.9
Intersection Percentile LOS, A
Splits and Phases: Buckland Road 3 Site Drive
2 _
4
f:;,e,:.,., .:�...,,• i u^i y;:.::..�6,.....•,,..�.... ....:......:..oar...,.,,�„��,. �".`."'' r.ii", i� h�ii';i7„o,i,i irfJ'iia.
UR
„
_ � n:•.,.:....e:,.i....•..gyp.!. �i f �:•��S';
i..i.,,.:;.:,..i;,,;.,ia::,rr,:.'...:, ., :.•.•...�... C�L�lia; Rio
Traffic Engineering Solutions 250&280 Buckland Road Offce
.AM Peak:Year 2001 Page 2
traf i-L300
01/A3/2000 05: 44 8606590625 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING PAGE. 08
Buckland Road & Site Drive
Baseline 1./3/M
Lanes,Volumes,Timings _ i _____�
Lane Gmttk EST WST WBR SSL SST SSIR
Lane Configurations ' f t f'k lv;
Ideal Flow(vphpi) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900
Lane Width (ft) 12 12 12 12 12 12 12
Grade (%) 0% 0% 0%
Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0
First Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
Last Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9
Right Turn on Reds Yes Yes
Satd, Flow(prot) 1770 3725 3718 0 1770 0 1583
Fit Perm. 0,111 0,950
Satd. Flow(perm) 207 3725 3718 0 1770 0 1583
Volume (vph) 14 815 107$ 14 70 0 70
Confl. Peels. (0/hr)
Peak Hour Factor 0,90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Growth Factor 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Heavy Vehicles(%) 2% 2% 2.% 2% 2% 2% 2%
Bus Blockages (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0
Parking (#/hr)
Mid-Block Traffic(%) 0% 0% 0%
Lane Group Flow (vph) 16 951 1275 0 78 0 78
Perm or Prot? Pm+Pt Perm Prot Pm+Ov
Phase Number 5 2 6 4 4
Phase Lagging? Lead Lag
Can Lead or Lag?
Maximum Split (s) 13 49 36 11 11
Maximum Split (%) 22% 82% 60% 18% 18%
Minimum Split (s) 8 20 20 8 20
Yellow Time (s) 4 4 4 4 4
Lost Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
g/c Ratio 0.77 0.77 0,55 0.13 0.30
Lane Grp Cap (vph) 419 2856 2045 236 475
V/C Ratio 0.04 0.33 0.62 0.33 0,18
V/S Ratio Prot 0.01 0.04 0.03
V/S Ratio Perm 0.02 0,26 0.34 0.02
Critical LG? Yes Yes Yes
Uniform Delay, d1 1.2 1.7 7.0 17.9 10.2
Actuated G/C Ratio 0.77 0.77 0.55 0.13 0,30
Actuated V/C Ratio 0.04 0,33 0,62 0.33 0,10
Percentile St Delay 1.2 1.7 7.2 18.2 10.3
Percentile LOS A A B C B
Queue Length 50th (ft) 1 35 141 28 19
Queue Length 95th (ft) 4 50 195 61 44
Link Length (ft) 1828 1948 1880
50th Up Block Time
95th Up Block Time %
Turn Bay Length (ft.)
50th Bay Block Time
Traffic Engineeri,zig Solut.Xo»s 250&230 Buckland Road Office
PM.Ptak:Year 2001 Page 1
traffi-L300
01/03/2000 05:44 i36065906 5 TRAFFIC Eh,.IGII,IEERIN;a PACE 09
Buckland Road & Site drive
1/3/f)tl
Baseline
Lanes,Volumes,Timings . _ - ---- --
E [S., DU E
Lane Qr WBT wBR 88L SOT WR
95th Bay Block Time
Queuing Penalty (veh)
Area Type: Other
Cycle Length: 60
Natural Cycle: 60
Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase Z-EBT and 6-WBT, Start of Green
Control Type: Pretimed
Lost Time: 9
Sum of Critical V/S Ratios: 0.41
Intersection V/C Ratio: 0.49
Intersection Percentile Stopped Delay: 5.4
Intersection Percentile LOS: B
8 lits and Phases: Buckland Road &Site Drive
Z--a- -�-- .4
,
xryy
....... .:.I':i .. ". '
,.�' 5 f— 6
Traffic Engineering Solutions 2:50&280 Buckland Road MM
PM Peak.Year 2001 Page 2
t.raffx-L300
i Y
MEMORANDUM
To: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning
From: Jerry C. Iazzetta, Town Engineer
Date: January 10, 2000
Re: Buckland Corporate Center
On December 27, 1999 at our request, Messrs. Peter DeMallie, Bob Arsenault,
and Rich Adams of Design Professionals met with members of the Town staff (Denise
Whitford, Fred Shaw, Jeff Folger, you and I) to discuss some of the concerns we had
about the proposed Buckland Corporate Center applications. The concerns discussed
were:
1. The width and length of the proposed widening of Buckland Road were not
clearly indicated or defined on the plans.
2. The proposed left turn lane on Buckland Road was not clearly defined on the
plans. Also the need for a left turn lane was not indicated in the traffic report.
3. The Town right of way for the proposed widening was not addressed the entire
length of the widening. There must be sufficient right of way for a snow shelf
and sidewalk (i.e. a minimum of 13 feet from edge of pavement).
4. Location of the sanitary sewer main. The plans show this on the west side of
Buckland while the proposed site is on the east side and at an elevation that
would not allow service for some properties to the south of the proposed site.
5. The size, location and need for the detention basin.
6. Provision of access to the curb cut and traffic light on Buckland from properties
to the north of the site.
7. Wetland impact issues.
8. My December 1, 1999 memo.
At the completion of the meeting most of these issues were left unresolved.
Town staff asked that these issues be resolved and addressed in revised drawings
before the scheduled public hearing on January 11, 2000. It was indicated by Design
Professionals that they would try. To date these have not been resolved.
Mr. Bruce Hillson's letter of January 3, 2000 indicated that the plans were revised
during the week of January 3, 2000 to address these issues, however we have not
received any revised drawings. In a verbal conversation with Mr. DeMallie on January
6, 2000, Michele Lipe, Assistant Director of Planning was advised that we would not be
receiving revised drawings before the January 11, 2000 meeting.
r
r
We understand that this January 11, 2000 Public Hearing will be continued. It is
our opinion that these outstanding issues should be resolved prior to reconvening the
public hearing of this application as they are of significant importance to the design of
any infrastructure improvements on Buckland and involves future usage of properties to
the south of this site.
JCl/sfg
5:\ENGINEER\Prof.-P&Z Wetland Applications\Buddand Corp Ctr\Review)an 10.doc
,`_ e a w
so `
W am ION r {t
in the,;portion of this site'' hich is bounded by..the south edge of the 'approved driveway
.. through the, property, the`e st -side .of Buckland;,Rgode,,.the property line: to..the north, , and a line
which is: parallel 'to the: eqs„ ,:street line;of Bucklapd, Road and ,approximately 450 feet' easterly
s thereof, the applicant agree to•grant a future nbn-exclusive 'vehicular and pedestrian` access l Q easement tort;and •from Buckand,Road :for the, benefit,,'af .the, current owners and any subsequent
i owners ,,o the parcels .know < ias, 116'-Buckland Road ar>d,'130 ;Buckland Road and the"owners of any';. .
parcel, lawfully subdivided :th refrorri�jhis,easement shall' be ;granted and, located and defined b
Y
J metes and, bounds; at the t e,of ;d¢velopment of.;`this;;land bother;:than . the driveway .itself•or,at the
�-- « time of the submission ofy:. developmenGplon to�theTown „;of .South,,, hdsbr for either 116.,
Buclland Rood or;13d BuGkl nd Road,.' Said, locot�c;n of„the peosernent;shall, be as approved by the
VE ET" ; 3
• r. Y ' F}
U: M BE R, :' 2
47
J.
' „ 4..y @ 4 M1 ,� is 3.�rW b; '�, ' .. r♦ r «s '.
' i a , ! 4 � d 7a ��,'#irk � � y 5' ;� � ""( �,�i �':zr' � ,� •� ,:�'
•y '� Z w y;Y1y"�
!
VPOr�
L ,1a1N. .�7f
T} 'c ,,'•,• Nw a `w tj y �N1v" ! A� �a.' i,'. {{�G�r� ip, d7.T i, ,
I" ➢ 5r 7 l it 0 �"' ~/ i ry Arr I t• ,
e,
N'
r 1.
. gil� 1 , � F r Pl ran.{.r•tl ;t. hl'S` A��r. r r `p, "
I'.Y
• i. w ... n.w..... .. 1. ff^^YY ' i '
tUTHERAN' IIIIIII III
Messiah Evangdwaf Lutheran Church
Philip J.Henselin,pastor
300 Buckland Street
South Windsor,CT 06074
(203)644-2110
January 11, 2000
Mr. Walter Mealy, Chairperson
Planning and Zoning Commission
1540 Sullivan Road
South Windsor, CT 06074
Dear Mr. Mealy,
This letter is to help define the position of Messiah Evangelical Lutheran Church with
regards to the proposed office building projects at 250 and 280 Buckland Corporate
Center on Buckland Road in South Windsor. The church has been in preliminary
discussions with the applicants. These conversations were held in late December and are
ongoing in order to best determine mutually beneficial aspects of our building projects.
Based on these preliminary discussions, Messiah Evangelical Lutheran Church is in
support of the application for these two office building complexes. This support is based
on the premise that there will be expanded and shared parking, necessary connections to
all utilities/public sewerage system and access to the proposed traffic light and other
considerations.
Please note,that as an active partner within the community, we plan to attend as many
meetings as possible regarding this project so that our input will be available to the town
and, also,to help us to better understand the approval process for our own project that
will come before your committee in the near future. Thank you for your assistance in this
matter.
Sincerely,
C.E. Vlisides,
Council Member of Messiah Evangelical Lutheran Church
Cc: Marcia Banach, Planning Director
Peter DeMallie, Design Professionals, Inc.
Jeffrey Folger, Wetlands Officer
Arturo Guerra, Applicant
Denise Whitford, Economic Development Coordinator
Buckland Corporate Center, PH 1-11-2000
ca - :Z�_)-d d C)
ffzFe.
t or esubd�vision�to'crea e threo a site pla app�eVlop
c struc
, fi uildings at 30 and 2 0 Wickland ad, ateway e I
\ �
2. Minimum lot size in the Gateway zone is three acres, minimum width is 200
feet. The parcel area is about 12 acres, to be divided into two 3-acre lots and
one 5.5-acre lot. Each lot has just over 200 feet of frontage. The building area
on Lot 3 is at the base of and into the ridgeline at the eastern side of the site.
3. Poe „-! e-lots-__isTroposed y ama-eom -ion_-dr_ivewa�o- 3, h--
s n _ nd-2. bot-- as the word-s`�`futurac-eessimd"
iay-uphe_lat,__fo At
turg intercoectioiz to-propertoxle seuth. We are
aware that the applicant is also diligently working with the property owner to
the north to allow future access. In order to satisfy the access management
requirements of the Gateway Zone regulations, we would like to see the access
rights both north and south more definitively included on the subdivision plan
that will be filed in the Town Clerk's office. A general easement area and note
such as that used on Lowe's subdivision plan would satisfy this requirement
without committing Buckland Corporate Center to exact locations at this time.
4. [-]T�h� ieafi�i retests-approvel-f-or-a-30,000'rsquar-e-foot-office-
C ._Maximum
impervious coverage allowed is 60%. Proposed impervious coverage on Lot 1
is 35%; 29% proposed on Lot 2. Proposed building height is 3 stories, about 36
feet. The maximum height allowed is 2 stories/30 feet at a 65-foot front yard
setback, or maximum 4 stories, 60 feet with a 125-foot front yard setback. Both
buildings are set back. at least 125 feet.
5. The Purpose section of the Gateway Zone notes that this zone "should foster
high-quality development...with careful attention to the appearance of
buildings and surrounding site...parking that is located to the rear of buildings-to the maximum extent possible, and professional landscaping. Access
management will be an integral part of site planning, with interior service drives
and limited curb cuts to facilitate traffic flow and safety...."
6. T4 r � -Fbbb�s cell-by—a-rw�w traffrc&gnal-which-liar--r-ec ed --
c,anesd ro fcr7'ffom thy= a `Ir The request for STC
approval of the traffic light at this location was submitted by the Town last
summer, since the proposed traffic light conformed to the Access
Management Plan and furthers our access management goals. The selected
location for the traffic light will also serve the Catholic Cemeteries property
on the west side of Buckland Road. S =TTaffrcen has rdie €ed
-th mSTC-::�C-ertif+eme-ls-not-r€gttrrd.
7. For the purposes of calculating required parking, the applicant has combined
the floor area of the two buildings. This results in a lesser parking requirement
of 4 spaces per thousand square feet of building, vs. 4.5 spaces per thousand
square feet if calc5ul�ted separately. We don't agree with the combining of the
two building sip nhicOy-that-someonewould-ark in Yoh'
_ houlevd=droway teaceess thet h •�' rrg. We do note that
the proposal to combine parking with the Messiah Lutheran Church next door
would be extremely beneficial to both sites, and is exactly the type of shared
access and parking envisioned by the access management program. This
arrangement would also improve the parking ratio. At this time, a waiver to
the number of spaces is needed. (39 space waiver if calculated at 4.5 per
thousand; 14 space waiver if calculated at 4 per thousand.)
8. Landscaping is required for 10% of the interior of a parking lot. The parking
lots as designed have no interior, thus no interior landscaping requirement.
Landscaping is shown in the islands at the corners of the buildings.
9. u is ater a� sewex re r611i& .,�Wat�r Fall 'tip Co�ixolAutho i�y-
p �„
a i -fqui o�/ / �_:
has
10. There are no loading docks proposed. Each building has a dumpster on a
concrete pad with an 8' stockade fence enclosure.
11. The Architectural and Design Review Committee reviewed the application on
January 6 and generally felt the buildings are well designed and would be an
attractive addition to the Buckland Gateway zone. One member, however,-
had concerns that the elevations facing Buckland Road have long expanses of
wall that should be broken up.
The Committee provided the following input.
♦ pedestrian access throughout the site should be addressed;
♦ dumpster area should be evaluated for size adequacy and the stockade fence
screening upgraded to a more aesthetic fencing;
♦ details of the mechanical screening to be provided back to ADRC;,
♦ ADRC recommends that the signage be internally lit, with light letters on an
opaque background; and,
♦ sign location must be shown on the plans.
12. The Site Appearance Requirements note that the Wapping Center street trees
and landscaping theme shall generally be incorporated into landscaping plans.
I do see some London plane trees, but there does not appear to be much else
incorporated from the Wapping Center theme. The Commission might want to
suggest incorporating small entrance drive stone walls, cherry trees, zelkova
trees, Scarlet Meidiland roses and/or daylilies, all of which are strong themes
of Wapping Center.
13. A 75-foot buffer is required along the rear of Lot 3 where it abuts the
residential zone. Lot 3 building area is roughly adjacent to the Sele Drive area.
The area is currently wooded; but a walk through the site shows that there is
little mature tree growth along the property perimeter. There are some mature
hemlocks, but they appear to be infested with adelgid and are therefore
unreliable as future buffer trees. I recommend that Commissioners arrange a
site walk to view this site prior to the continuation of the public hearing.
14. Also, in the Gateway zone, buffers may be incorporated into required yard
setbacks, provided that the applicant demonstrates that the buffer provided
meets all performance standards set forth for buffers in Section 10.4. We
suggest at this time that the yards be shown outside the buffer on the -
subdivision and site plans. At such time as development is proposed on Lot 3,
and the applicant can demonstrate that the buffer meets all performance
standards, then the yards could be moved into the buffer if appropriate.
15. There are large areas of regulated wetlands on this site, and a fairly extensive
wetlands crossing is needed to access the proposed Lot 3. The application is -
pending with IWA/CC aud,4public hearing was held on January 5:1-- cv, n�
16. Staff had a concern regarding the appearance of the proposed detention basin
located between Buckland Road and the parking lot on Lot 2. The basin is
long and narrow, thus rather ditch-shaped. The basin bottom is likely to be
soggy due to high ground water, thus preventing maintenance in a neatly-
mowed manner. Staff s concern is that a ditch-like detention basin could
appear weedy and be a trash collector over time, thus detracting from the
appearance of the proposed Class A office buildings.
roXnatn .
den Buckla !d Road fret ge are r quir d and w'1l-rie d to be show
h applica t miglso a k'to consi er i kernal w lk yshe sites.
s
18. The site plan shows a future accessway to the south across Lot 1. The
accessway would be constructed at such time as the southerly site is
p(ul' V o developed. Similarly, there needs to be some sort of acknowledgment on the
pft ? site plan that there will be site interconnection between Lot 2 and the property
-c� to the north.
19. Signage design has not been provided as yet. Signage is subject to approval of
the Commission at such time as it is designed.
20. Approval conditions:
♦ Access is restricted to one driveway cut on Buckland Road for all three lots
♦ Revise data table to show correct maximum building height; show on plot
plan the required 125' setback for the 3-story building
♦ Provide a construction protection plan for existing trees to remain
YO
/
� l
Lit
M(frc.Gvti (j,
f
IJ-
�P 10
•NN Sf
rA
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074
AREA CODE 203/644-2511
SOR•CO
February 4, 2000
Wolf& Guerra,LLC
989 Ellington Road
South Windsor, CT 06074
RE: 250 & 280 Buckland Corporate Center
Buckland Road
SOUTH WINDSOR, CT
Dear Messrs. Wolf and Guerra:
The South Windsor Water Pollution Control Authority, at its regular meeting of February 1, 2000, gave conceptual
approval of a plan for the installation of a sewer line on the east side of Buckland Road as shown on plans entitled
"Resurvey prepared for- 250 &280 Buckland Corporate Center-for property located on Buckland Road-South
Windsor, Connecticut prepared by Design Professionals, Inc., South Windsor, CT,Job No. 981169, Drawings No.
6/14-11/14 dated November 5, 1999, revised 12/21/99 and 1/25/00, with the option for further consideration of
entering into a Developer's Agreement.
Very t y yours,
\ somas rman
Hindson, Chai
Watef.Pollution Control Authority
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
Peter DeMallie, Design Professionals
02/22/2000 15:49 8602918757 DPI PAGE 02
DESIGN V.-ROFESSIONALS, MI C.
` ' civil.englx Pl9'n"er-s a su.rveyar$ gls.
t
To: ", :bvldry 4;Baruch,-Planning Dixector
�ebruar, 14,2000
outh Windsor,'
Dui,-Avenue
snuth WWsor,:CT 06074
!":•', Re: F C'' pplicatior� DPI Project Inc,. 8-1 i69
Bu.*Iarsd.Corporate Center
&,',280 Diii*1and Ca 4rdtc -cater
Sot th'�Vixidsor,'Connecticut'
'06:behalf:of,rny c1lents, lHel=ir WOlf'8nd Arturo'CuerM I'.'hereby ant a 3,5•-da
:;` extetlaitid firm the drool.l.iinit #"air a.ciion by the'plarin n 2��liai +asxarrsi io�i, ' y
Di� IwT.PSIt7NALS,'II` t_',
B .
Peter R. DeMallie
pay n y yy 1
cc: Messrs. Guerra+& wolf
165 Swath Satellite Load,,South W.ipd bt- Connecticut 0607
Tcl: (860)29"1=055:«1~ ': S Uj 291-9757
}
MEMORANDUM
To: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning
From: Jerry C. Iazzetta, Town Engineer
Date: February 14, 2000
Re: Buckland Corporate Center/99-76P
We have reviewed the revised drawings dated January 25, 2000 for the proposed
Buckland Corporate Center Site Plan/Resubdivision and have the following comments:
Sheet 3 — Resubdivision Plot Plan
1. Additional monuments are required along the proposed streetline and
Coordinates of all monuments should be provided.
2. A"DROW in favor of the Town of South Windsor" is shown.
a. Is this existing or proposed.
b. Easement must be identified completely with distances, bearings and a
distance from an established point.
3. Note "Original Lot Lines" shown with arrows pointing to proposed lines.
4. The proposed street line should be fully identified with distances and bearings.
5. The area to be deeded to the Town should be fully identified with distances and
bearings.
Sheet 5 — Plot Plan
1. Same comments as for Sheet 3, Resubdivision Plot Plan.
2. It is apparent that an easement for the detention basin and rights to drain are
required between lots. The detention basin is on Lots 2 and 3 and all lots drain
into the basin.
Sheet 6 — Grading & Utilities Plan
1. Test pit or boring data is required for this site especially in the area of the
detention basin as this area is very wet.
2. Intersection sight distance not indicated.
3. Detail required for rip rap at EW #1 showing dimensions, etc.
4. "Taking Line" is shown in several places. Is this the existing streetline that was
taken as part of Buckland Road reconstruction? If so the note should be
removed.
5. Existing drainage should be shown darker.
Sheet 7 — Improvement Location Map
1. The ""optional sewer location" on the east side of Buckland is not identified with
pipe sizes, lengths, slopes nor any information on manholes. This location is the
preferred location and should have all of this indicated. Also any easements that
are required should be identified.
2. The sanitary main on the west side is also not identified with pipe and manhole
information.
3. Road widening/relocation should be clearly identified.
4. "Taking Line" is shown in several places. Is this the existing streetline that was
taken as part of Buckland Road reconstruction?
5. Existing drainage should be shown darker.
Sheet 8 — Improvement Location Map
1. Proposed traffic light is not shown on drawing.
2. The road widening/relocation should be clearly identified (existing edge of
pavement, new edge of pavement, etc.)
3. A left turn lane is indicated.
a) The length of the taper is not indicated.
b) The traffic study does not address this left turn lane. Applicant should
provide documentation that the length is sufficient, based on traffic
analysis.
c) Painted island are shown — should these be raised islands? Traffic
analysis should make recommendation.
d) There is a break in the proposed painted island (just opposite SNET 23).
What is this for?
4. What are widths of snow shelves on both sides of Buckland with proposed
alignments.
Sheet 9 & 10 — Sewer Profile Plan
1. Profile required for sanitary main on east side of Buckland.
Sheet 14 — Details
1. Permanent pavement patch detail should be removed — the Town will make all
permanent trench patches.
2. The temporary pavement patch detail should indicate '"9" minimum of compacted
processed stone; additions may be required as directed by the Town Engineer or
his representative."
3. ""Improvement to Existing Town Roads" detail must be revised to: 4" bituminous
concrete minimum or match existing; 18" minimum processed stone, or 6"
minimum stone and 12" processed gravel or match existing.
4. A detail is required for sidewalks along Buckland Road.
5. A detail is required for the relocation of catch basin at about station 10+80 on
Buckland Road.
JCl/sfg
\\TOWN_HALL\V0L2\ENGINEER\Prof.-P&Z Wetland Applications\Buckland Corp Ctr\Review Feb 14.doc
February 21, 2000 10:51 AM From: Traffic Engineering Solutions, Fax#: (860)659-0625 Page 3 of 3
Traffic Engineering Solutions,P.C.
193 Lexington Road
Glastonbury, CT 06033
(860)657-3579
January 3, 2000
Marcia A Banach
Director of Planning
Town of South Windsor
1540 Sullivan Avenue
South Windsor, CT 06074
Dear Ms.Banach:
Traffic Engineering Solutions,P.C. is pleased to forward the enclosed information as an
addendum to our July 1999 Traffic Impact Study for the proposed 250 &280 Buckland Corporate
Center. The enclosed information addresses comments received from Town Staff during their review of
the plans and traffic study and also includes additional information from the Connecticut Department of
Transportation which we received subsequent.to completing the July Report..
The December 28, 1999 memorandum from Mr. Jerry lazzetta,`town Engineer, indicates that
the Design Speed of 45 miles per hour for Buckland Road should be used to determine the Intersection
Sight Distances (ISD)for drivers leaving the site. The minimum ISD required by ConnDOT design
criteria for 45 rnph is 462 feet. The sight distance available to drivers leaving the site is 535 feet,or 73
feet greater than the minimum requirements presented in the ConnDOT design guidelines. A speed
study conducted for this project found that drivers are traveling Buckland Road at a rate that is greater
than the Design Speed of the roadway. While the sight distance exceeds the minimum for the design
speed;we continue to recommend the installation of a No Turn on Red sign for drivers leaving the site
until such time as the actual travel speeds on Buckland Road are closer to the design speed.
A meeting attended by Town Staff,representatives from ConnDOT and representatives from the
Design Team was held at Town Hall during July to review the proposed development. During the
meeting, ConnDOT rccomrnendcd that a left turn lane be provided on Buckland Road to separate
vehicles turning onto the site from through traffic on Buckland Road. The left turn lane was shown on
the site plan submitted for review and was subsequently revised during the week of January 3,2000 in
response to a Town Staff request to provide a seven foot snow shelf along both sides of Buckland Road.
The revised site plan shows a snow shelf that is greater than seven feet in most locations and tip to 18
feet in areas along the site frontage due to a dedication of right of way by the developer. However,the
right of way in front of the properties that abut the site limit the area that can be used for a snow shelf.
The roadway has been located in the center of the available right of way to maximize the snow shelf
width. In no case is the proposed snow shelf less than six feet. The snow shelf widens quickly to seven
feet width a short distance from the site property lines as the roadway tapers to match the existing
roadway.
The left turn lane shown on the plan is 100 feet long. Capacity and Queuing analyses were
completed for the signalized intersection. The attached Synchro Analyses indicate that the intersection
will operate at Level of Service A during the morning peak hour and LOS B during the afternoon peak
period. The 95"'percentile queue for the left turns will be no greater than one vehicle during the
C:\business\Guerra\Ltr010300.ctoc
February 21, 2000 10:51 AM From: Traffic Engineering Solutions, Fax#: (860)659-0625 Page 2 of 3
morning peak hour and less during the afternoon peak hour. The reason for the short queues during the
morning peak is due to the signal operation with protected/permitted left turns(same operations as
Deming Street and at the new proposed Lowe's drive)and the low volume of traffic approaching in the
opposite direction(321 vehicles per hour) During the afternoon peak hour there will be a low volume of
traffic turning left onto the site(about 14 vehicles per hour).
During July 1999,we submitted a request to the State Traffic Commission to review the
proposed development to determine if it had significant impact on the States roadway system and
whether a STC application would be required. The STC responded on August 3, 1999 that the site
generated traffic.would not significantly impact the State highway traffic in the area and that a
certificate would not be required(copy of STC letter is attached).
On August 24, 1999 the Town of South Windsor through the Legal Traffic Authority(Police
Chief)submitted a request to the State Traffic Commission for the installation of a traffic signal at the
intersection of Buckland Road and the site drive. The STC responded on October 27, 1999 that there
would be no objection to a traffic signal at the intersection. The STC indicated the Town would own the
traffic signal and that it should only be installed in conjunction with the proposed development.
If during the review of the enclosed material you have any questions,please call me.
Very truly yours,
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS, P.C.
Bruce A. Hillson,P.E.
Peter DeMallie
C:\business\Guerra\Ltro1 0300.doc
DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC.
civil engineers # planners + surveyors gis 20U0
S"LIT11i Vifl,' J
April 5,2000
Ms.Marcia Banach,Planning Director
Mr.Jeffrey Folger,Wetlands Officer
Town Of South Windsor
South Windsor,CT 06074
Dear Marcia&Jeff,
Re:250&280 Buckland Corporate Center
Buckland Road
South Windsor,Connecticut
DPI Project No.98-1169
On behalf of my client,Wolf&Guerra,LLC,I hereby withdraw the applications now pending
before the Inland Wetlands Agency and the Planning&Zoning Commission. These withdrawals
are necessary due to obligatory time constraints set forth in the state statutes.
Pending resolution of mitigation issues,I anticipate submission of new applications this spring.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
DESIGN ESSIONALS,INC.
BY:
Peter R De alli
Principal
Cc: Messrs. Guerra&Wolf
165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074
Tel: (860) 291-8755 • Fax: (860)291-8757
J 0
J Q
Q
� ¢ O
z z
O
z Z
J L J
LLJ
co tl*l`� Lo N V)
M M M
r �N to 534 0 ^ 12 (15) co 0 � 193 (145)
-- 258 -t— 828 (683) 828 (683) ul -w— 779 (604) M cq o -• 717 (456)
BUCKLAND 36 N/A N/A 6 (30) 148 (279)
STREET/ROAD '�j (�'� F
F
.- - - - - - J L
227 (939) 312--�- (939) 312--►� I (
(58) 33 ( (52) 24
____ / /
N A N A
h Q Q 867 2 —i- N r � (717) 197--�-- r, �
34 M N z z ' ) 69 N N 0 rn
z z (14) 10 T N (98) 15
v v D7 to
v N
Ld
J > Ld
F_
O
W Ld �
V 0
U Y
m O
m
250 & 280 BUCKLAND
' CORPORATE CENTER
xxx AM PEAK EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(XXX) PM PEAK
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS, P.C.
SUCKLAND.DWG
d
0
Z O Of z
Q z O
z
LLJ
a � W
U)
N 00
l M N (O N 0 n 00
550 (131) v
co 't Nin In 12 (15) n T 199 (149)
(� 266 (631) -+-- 853 (954) 853 (815) -.-- 803 (733) M 7 — 739 (514)
BUCKLAND .. L *J F— 37 (250) NIL (139) N/A I 6 (31) ( 152 287
STREET/ROAD
(884) 234 � � I (964) 321----+- I � (1078) 321— r
I (60) 34 � (99) 25 � r
(796) 266 0 174 NIL =� I
00 d 00 ( ) z z N/A (1005) 277--•-
M M N � � Q d ,� r to (784) 203—i►
N 0)(401) 35 .. \ z r o
M00 It z z (14) 10 N (123) 15 ._.
v CDton " O M
N N
v v
I
>
_J F
0 N 0
ow W
xz
0 O o
U Y
m O
I
xxx AM PEAK
(xxx) PM PEAK INCLUDES LOWE'S TRIPS 250 & 280 BUCKLANDCORPORATE CENTER
I * FRIDAY PM PEAK FROM LOWE'S STUDY
2001 NO BUILD TRAFFIC
IVOLUMES
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS, P.C.
BUCKLANDIDWG
i
o
� Q
� Q
Q 00
1 ZO
Z
cr O
Z C.�
' Z
Q' p J
w
1
M 00 e- `1 N .o C j 00.i M N 1 7 N M 00
co It rl to toN U" 12 (15) r 199 (149)
269 (654) -+-- 861 (1024) 853 (815) �.-- 854 (745) d N
I L
775 (522)
BUCKLAND L 39 (268) NIL (139) 61 (14) j 6 (31) I j 152 (287)
(884) 234 fSTREET/ROAD F
l_.,,. >�
I 1 (978) 382 I (1078) 321-
� (72) 35 � F
(105) 26F
(802) 292 --�- 0 Ln 174) NIL J 14 61
00 It ( z z ( ) °0 °D (1063) 284
(401) 35 "o o o N — (825) 208--�- M N
1 o `o .�. (14) 10 — (135) 16 c°'o N N
tf) M n r s- _ f N_
`-' N N
v
1
J > LLJ
t- Q
1 o N O
w w D:
> U) U
Z ry W li z
1 Y � O O
J Q
m O
1
1
250 & 280 BUCKLAND
1 CORPORATE CENTER
xxx AM PEAK 2001 BUILD TRAFFIC
1 (XXX) PM PEAK VOLUMES
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS, P.C.
1 BUCKLANDt.DWG
J �
J e(
>M O w
Z O Z O
VQ) Z 0
Lv m Z
CL W J
W
o 25%
o Vol
N +-- 20% a
BUCKLAND L
15% 60% 50% -•— 359
r
STREET/ROAD
25% ---i r 60%
10% --� 5�
� o r
� re se 50% --#- 357. —► S.
0 01070
o
J >
= W Lo W x
> to U 0
Z ry w � Z .
U OJ O Y
� Q
00 0
250 & 280 BUCKLAND
' CORPORATE CENTER
' TRIP DISTRIBUTION
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS, P.C.
' BUCKLAND4.DWG
J
o
0 O
Z 0 x Z
Lei Z ~O
1 Z
J
a � w
1-1
1
0 3 (29) ..
N O �
�-- 3 (23)
1
BUCKLAND L
2 (18) -..-- 8 (70) 61 (14) -+— 51 (12) .+---_ 36 (8)
STREET/ROAD
(6) 26 --�-� � (14) 61 (14) 61
1 12 1
,n co 00 (58) 7 ---► (41) 5 --_•.
1 o o (12) 1 o
v N
LLJ
1
> Q
1 J "-
U1 O
Li W
Z > CU
1 Yx 3: LL 1
0
�
Y
Q
m O
1
1
250 & 280 BUCKLAND
1 CORPORATE CENTER
xxx AM PEAK TRIP ASSIGNMENT
(XXX) PM PEAK
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS, P.C.
1 BUCKLANDIDWG
TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR CHECKLIST
REQUIRED INFORMATION SITE PLANS
APPLICANT wolf & u rra L C
PROJECT NAME 250 & 280 Buckland Corporate Center
This checklist must be signed by plan preparer (P.E./L.S.) declaring that all required information
is provided. Items 1-7 are required for all applications; items 8-11 required where appropriate.
Check mark for each item supplied.
X 1. On each sheet for plans or maps, title block with the following information:
x a. Name, address and telephone of applicant.
x b. Name, address and telephone number of Land Surveyor or Professional
Engineer.
x c. Name of Development.
x d. Date when drawings were made.
x 2. Key Map: An overall map drawn to a scale of 1 inch equals either 100 feet or
200'feet. This map will show the overall design of the Development and
surrounding property within 500 feet.
X a. Data block which gives needed zoning information such as percentage of
lot coverage, acreage of tract, number of apartment units, parking
requirements, etc.
X b. Outline of buildings.
N/A c. Layout of streets.
x d. Surrounding property boundaries-within 500 feet.
e. Names of abutting property owners.
N/A f. Proposed open spaces and recreation areas.
x g. Driveway cuts on abutting properties and any properties across from
proposed site.
X h. Distance to and name of nearest intersection street.
3. Architectural Elevations: See attached checklist for Architecture and Design
Review.
X 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:
X a. Distance and bearings of all boundary lines and acreage of site. Iron pins
required at all property angle points and shown on map.
X b. Proposed streets and street lines with center line station, curve data, and
parking spaces.
X c. Building lines in accordance with zoning regulations.
X d. Proposed buildings and other structures, including signs, outside lighting,
and dumpsters (on concrete pad and screened).
X e. Easements, noting grantors, grantees, and purpose.
_X f. Names of abutting property owners.
g. Monuments will be indicated at corners and angles of all streets and at all
points of curvature and tangency. The monumented points within
proposed site shall be coordinated. These coordinates shall appear in
tabular form on the plot plan. The accessibility of these CGS points shall
be determined by the Town Engineer.
_N/A h. All open space or other common or public land uses shall be indicated.
X i. A-2 certification; P.E./L.S. seals and signatures.
X 5. Topographic Map: A map drawn to a scale of 1 inch to 40 feet on sheets not
exceeding 24 inches by 36 inches, including ruled margins shall in addition to
the requirements of the plot plans show the following:
X a. All existing and proposed buildings.
X b. Curb Lines and pavement width, sidewalks.
X c. Existing and proposed sanitary sewers.
_X d. Existing and proposed water and-all existing utilities.
X e. Present wooded area indicated by foliage lines. Any trees to be saved
should be shown.
r
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.
X h. Proposed storm drainage system, showing all catch basins, endwalls,
manholes, lengths and sizes of pipes and elevations of structures.
(Maximum distance between catch basins shall be 300 feet and minimum
size of storm drain lines shall be 15 inches, within Town ROW.) If
plan/profile sheet is provided all of this does not need to be shown. Only
top of frame elevations and inverts of open discharge pipe shall be shown
on this plan.
X i. Connections of all springs into proposed storm drainage system as
needed.
X j. Location and indications of existing brook channels, and 100-year flood
limits.
X k. A-2 &T 2 Certification; P.E./L.S. seals and signatures.
X 6. Landscaping plan:
X 7. Drainage calculations: - Zero Runoff Increase per attached guidelines.
_X 8. Traffic Report:
X 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:
N/A a. Layout of streets in sections coordinated by stations with the profile.
N/A b. Street plan showing roadways, drainage, sanitary sewer (including house
sewer), foundation drains, lot lines, buildings including all utilities with
elevations (top frame and inverts), size, type, length, slopes of pipes.
N/A . c. Sight line at driveway&street intersections.
N/A d. Profile of roadway showing existing and finished grades. Roadway profile
will show all tangent grade and all vertical curve information.
NSA e. Profile will show all catch basins and all drainage lines between catch
basins with all invert and top of frame elevations, sizes, lengths and
slopes of pipes.
i
N/A f. Where any storm drainage line discharges into an existing brook
sufficient profile of this brook will be shown to determine conditions.
x g. CGS 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.
X h. Profiles shall show all sanitary sewer lines and manholes, including
elevations, inverts, top of frame, sizes, lengths, and slopes of pipes. Top
of foundation elevations for building shall be shown.
N/A 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.
N/A 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.
11/19/99
JEPAR (P. ./ .) DATE
June 23, 1998
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
for
250 & 280 BUCKLAND CORPORATE
CENTER
PROPOSED FOR BUCKLAND ROAD
in
SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT
Prepared By
Traffic Engineering Solutions
193 Lexington Road
Glastonbury, Connecticut
' (860) 657-3579
July 1999
Table of Contents
ExecutiveSummary................................................................................................1
Introduction .............................................................................................................2
ExistingConditions.................................................................................................3
Roadways............................................................................................................3
Intersections........................................................................................................4
1999 Traffic Volumes..........................................................................................5
Accidents.............................................................................................................6
Project Generated Traffic.......................................................................................6
SiteAccess..............................................................................................................7
CapacityAnalyses...................................................................................................9
Conclusions...........................................................................................................11
List of Tables
Table 1 Trip Generation 55,000 Square Foot Office Building..............................7
Table 2 Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis ...........................................10
CAB USINESS\GUERRA\REPO RT.DOC I
Executive Summary
' The 250 &280 Buckland Corporate Center is proposed with three lots
having a total area of approximately 11.8 acres. At this time two office
' buildings with 50,000 to 55,000 square feet are proposed for Lots 1 and 2.
These lots combined have an area of approximately 6.2 acres. The project
site is located along the east side of Buckland Road about 1,400 feet south
of Deming Street in South Windsor, Connecticut. The land is currently
' undeveloped. Entrance to the site will be provided by a single signalized
drive located at the center of the site frontage along Buckland Road. A 232-
acre commercially zoned parcel along the opposite side of Buckland Road
will also have access through this signalized intersection.
New trips to the roadway system were computed from trip generation rates
I established by the ITE Trip Generation reference. The capacity analyses
indicate that the signalized intersections of Buckland Road at Ellington
Road, Buckland Road at Deming Street, and Buckland Street at Pleasant
Valley Road (in Manchester) will continue at the same Level of Service for
rthe Year 2001 Build traffic volumes with the 55,000 square foot office
development as is expected for the Year 2001 No-Build traffic volumes
which includes traffic generated by the previously approved Lowe's Home
' Improvements Center. The Year 2001 Levels of Service with and without
the office development will be LOS B during the morning and afternoon
peak hours at the Deming Street intersection, LOS C (morning) and LOS E
(afternoon) at the Ellington Road intersection, and LOS D (morning) and
LOS F (afternoon) at the Pleasant Valley Road intersection. With timing
revisions to the traffic signal at Ellington Road, the Level of Service can be
' improved to LOS D during the afternoon peak hour. Roadway
improvements proposed by Lowe's for the Pleasant Valley Road intersection
will allow that intersection to operate at LOS D during the morning and
' afternoon peak hours. The signalized drives to Lowe's and the office
development will operate at LOS A during the morning and afternoon peak
hours.
No off site roadway improvements beyond the intersection improvements
and signalization at the site drive are suggested as trips generated by the
proposed 55,000 office development are not expected to cause changes in
1 operating Levels of Service from the Levels of Service expected for the Year
2001 No-Build traffic volumes. Revisions to the signal timing at the Ellington
Road intersection are suggested to achieve Level of Service operations
' during the afternoon peak hour. This study also recommends installation of
a "no Turn on Red sign along the site drive serving the office development.
These recommendations in conjunction with the improvements proposed by
' Lowe's for the Pleasant Valley Road intersection in Manchester will allow
traffic to flow safely and at acceptable Levels of Service throughout the
area.
CABUSINESS\GUERRA\REPORT.DOC 1
Introduction
The 250 &280 Buckland Corporate Center is proposed with three lots
having a total area of approximately 11.8 acres. At this time two office
buildings with 50,000 to 55,000 square feet are proposed for Lots 1 and 2.
These lots combined have an area of approximately 6.2 acres. The project
site is located along the east side of Buckland Road about 1,400 feet south
of Deming Street in South Windsor, Connecticut. This report was prepared
by Traffic Engineering Solutions to address the traffic impact on roadways
and intersections surrounding the project. Following is a summary of the
scope of work included in this study:
® Making turning movement counts during the morning (7:00 AM to 9:00
AM) and afternoon (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) peak periods at the following
intersections:
0 Buckland Road at Deming Street;
0 Buckland Road at Ellington Road/Oakland Road (Route 30);
0 Buckland Road at Buckland Hills Drive and Pleasant Valley
Road (AM Peak only);
■ Obtaining afternoon traffic counts for the intersection of Buckland
Road and Buckland Hills Drive/Pleasant Valley Road from the recently
completed Traffic Study for Lowe's Home Improvements Center;
■ Making 24-hour directional traffic counts and a speed study for
Buckland Road in the vicinity of the proposed site access drive;
■ Obtaining from ConnDOT traffic accident data for the latest three year
period for Buckland Road between the Manchester Town Line and
Deming Street;
■ Obtaining from ConnDOT and the Town of Manchester, copies of the
traffic signal plans for the intersections included in this study.
Information for the Deming Street traffic signal was obtained form field
observations as the Town of South Windsor was unable to provide a
copy of the traffic signal plan;
■ Making visual observations of roadways and land use conditions
along Buckland Road in the vicinity of the site;
e Determining the number of trips expected to be added to the roadway
system by the proposed office development with 55,000 square feet;
o Reviewing the Traffic Impact Report prepared for the previously
approved-Lowe's Home Improvements Center(south of the site) and
incorporating traffic data and trip generation information from the
report. The Traffic Impact Report for the proposed Super Stop &
Shop was also reviewed but information from that report was not
incorporated into this study as the Super Stop & Shop application was
denied at the May 25, 1999 Planning and Zoning Commission
Meeting;
■ Completing morning and afternoon peak hour capacity analyses for
the intersections listed above and for the site drive intersection with
Buckland Road to determine existing operating Levels of Service
(LOS) and the anticipated LOS for the traffic volumes expected upon
C:\BUSINESS\GUERRA\REPORT.DOC 2
completion of the office buildings. Traffic from the previously
approved Lowe's development was included in the 2001 No-Build
traffic volumes;
■ Field measuring the sight distances (looking north and south)
available for drivers entering and leaving the site at the site drive and
compare these distances with the Connecticut DOT Guidelines for
Intersection Sight Distances for the 85th percentile speed determined
from the speed study made in the vicinity of the site access drive;
Existing Conditions
A 50,000 to 55,000 square foot office park is proposed for Lots 1 and 2 in
the 250 &280 Buckland Corporate Center located along the east side of
Buckland Road about 1,400 feet south of Deming Street. The combined lots
(1 &2) have a total area of approximately 6.2 acres. The land is currently
undeveloped. Entrance to the site will be provided by a single signalized
drive located at the center of the site frontage along Buckland Road. Visual
observations were made, traffic counts were obtained for the roadways and
intersections surrounding the site, and travel speeds along Buckland Road
were determined.
Roadways
Buckland Road runs in the north to south direction in the vicinity of the site.
The typical width of Buckland Road is 52 feet with two 12-foot lanes of travel
in each direction. Added turn lanes are provided at the signalized
intersections of Buckland Road at Deming Street, Buckland Road at
Ellington Road (Route 30) and Buckland Street at Pleasant Valley
Road/Buckland Hills Drive. The proposed drive to Lowe's will be signalized
and will provide a southbound left turn lane along Buckland Road in addition
to the two through lanes in each direction. There is a double yellow center
line in the center of the road to separate the two directions of travel. The
two travel lanes in each direction are delineated by white lane lines and
there is a two foot shoulder along both sides defined by a solid white edge
line. The posted speed limit on Buckland Road is 40 miles per hour. Traffic
at the three existing intersections included in this study is controlled by traffic
signals. There are no sidewalks along either side of Buckland Road in the
vicinity of the site. Development in the area is mixed with residential, retail,
commercial, and farming. The site is presently undeveloped as is the
property along the opposite side of Buckland Road. A major mixed retail
and office development is contemplated on a 232-acre commercially zoned
parcel on the opposite side of Buckland Road. Access to that development
is anticipated at the signalized intersections proposed at the Lowe's drive
and as the fourth leg to the signalized intersection created by the drive
serving 250 &280 Buckland Corporate Center.
Deming Street runs in the northwest to southeast direction and typically
provides one lane of travel in each direction. The west leg widens at the
intersection with Buckland Road to provide an exclusive right turn lane and a
combination left turn and through lane. Deming Street begins at a 'T"
C:\BUSINESS\GUERRA\REPORT.DOC 3
intersection with Clark Street at its westerly end and continues past
Buckland Road through a "Y" intersection with Oakland Road (Route 30),
toward the southeast to Tolland Turnpike. Development along Deming
Street from Buckland Road to Oakland Road is residential. West of the
intersection with Buckland Road is a mixture of residential, farming and
commercial uses with the new Postal facility being located near the
intersection of Deming Street and Clark Street.
Intersections
Buckland Road at Denning Street Is a four legged signalized intersection.
The two Buckland Road legs provide three lanes entering and two lanes
leaving the intersection. There are two through lanes (right turns are made
from the outside lane) and an exclusive left turn lane along both Buckland
Road approaches. The west leg of Deming Street provides two lanes
approaching the intersection, an exclusive right turn lane and a combination
left turn and through lane. The east leg of Deming Street has a single lane
approaching the intersection. The traffic signal phasing at this location
provides three phases for vehicular movement with protected/permitted left
turns in both directions on Buckland Road. During the first phase, the
northbound and southbound left turns are allowed to proceed through the
intersection with no other vehicles being allowed to proceed during this
phase (protected left turns). Phase two allows all movements in both
directions along Buckland Road, including the left turns, to proceed through
the intersection (permitted left turns). The third phase allows both Deming
Street approaches to proceed through the intersection. This intersection
operates as an isolated intersection and is not included in a signal system to
coordinate traffic flow between intersections.
Buckland Road at Ellington Road/Oakland Road/Sullivan Avenue is a
four legged signalized intersection. There are three lanes approaching the
intersection and two lanes leaving the intersection along each leg. The
three lanes entering the intersection include an exclusive left turn lane and
two through lanes with right turns being made from the outside lane along
each approach. The traffic signal phasing at this location provides a full-
quad operation. This allows several combinations of non-conflicting traffic
movements to flow at the same time in the north/south direction (Buckland
Road and Sullivan Avenue) and east/west direction (Ellington Road and
Oakland Road). These combinations include the opposing left turns when
vehicles are present in both turn lanes; if the left turning volume in one
direction is nonexistent or lower than the opposite direction, the heavier left
turn is allowed to continue in combination with the through movement along
the same approach; once the protected left turn phases have reached their
maximum timing, the through movements in conjunction with the left turns in
both directions (permitted left turns) are allow to proceed. This intersection
is included in a coordinated signal system with several other intersections
along Ellington Road and Sullivan Avenue.
Buckland Street at Pleasant Valley Road and Buckland Bills Drive Is a
four legged signalized intersection located just south of the South Windsor
Town Line in the Town of Manchester. This intersection is a major
CAB USINESS\GUERRA\REPORT.DOC 4
intersection serving traffic destined to South Windsor, the Buckland Hills
Mall, and 1-84 and 1-384. Each leg has four or five lanes approaching the
intersection, including one or two left turn lanes, two through lanes and an
exclusive right turn lane. The traffic signal provides a full-quad operation
similar to the operation at the Buckland Road/Sullivan Avenue/Oakland
Road/Ellington Road intersection. The one difference in signal operations at
this intersection is the left turns are protected only. According to the traffic
signal plan, this intersection is incorporated into a signal system with other
signalized intersections along Pleasant Valley Road and Buckland Street to
the south.
Buckland Road at Lowe's Drive (future intersection to be created by
Lowe's Home Improvements Center)will be a three legged intersection to
serve access to the Lowe's site. In the future, the intersection is expected to
become a four legged intersection as development on the 232-acre
commercially zoned parcel along the west side of Buckland Road occurs.
Lowe's proposes to add a southbound left turn lane and install a traffic
signal at this new intersection. The traffic signal will operate with three
phases. During the first phase, the southbound approach will be allowed to
travel through the intersection with left turns onto the site being protected
during this phase. During the second phase, traffic in both directions will be
allowed to proceed, including the southbound left turns. The third phase will
allow traffic on the Lowe's drive to enter the intersection.
1999 Traffic Volumes
Twenty-four hour automatic traffic recorder(ATR) counts were obtained
from the Connecticut DOT for Buckland Road in the vicinity of the site. The
ConnDOT counts were made in March 1995. These machine counts were
supplemented by machine counts on Buckland Road in front of the site, and
morning (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and afternoon (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) peak
period turning movement counts made during April 1999 for this study. The
turning movement counts were made at the intersections of Buckland Road
1 at Deming Street, Buckland Road at Route 30 (Ellington Road) and
Buckland Street at Pleasant Valley Road.
According to the ConnDOT counts, the daily traffic volume on Buckland
Road in 1995 was 16,500 vehicles per day (vpd). The 24 hour machine
counts made for this study indicate that the daily traffic volume on Buckland
Road during April 1999 was 17,400 vpd. The turning movement counts
indicate that the morning peak hour occurs between 7:00 AM and 8:00 AM
when 1,163 vehicles travel Buckland Road in the vicinity of the site (312
vehicles northbound and 851 vehicles southbound). During the afternoon
peak hour(4:15 PM-to 5:15 PM) 1,622 vehicles travel Buckland Road (939
vehicles northbound and 683 vehicles southbound). The machine counts
made for this study also included a speed study to determine the 85"'
percentile speed (the speed at which 85 percent of all drivers travel at or
less than) for Buckland Road in front of the site. The speed study found that
the 85�' percentile speeds were 52.6 miles per hour (mph) for vehicles
traveling northbound and 52.4 mph for vehicles traveling southbound on
C:\BUSINESS\GUERRA\REPORT.DOC 5
L Buckland Road. The April 1999 turning movement counts are included in
P 9
the Appendix to this report.
Accidents
The Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) Bureau of
Planning and Research compiles records of accident data reported by
investigating police authorities. Accidents which result in death, injury, or
property damage in excess of$1,000 are required to be reported. Accident
data was obtained for Buckland Road from 1,000 feet north of Deming
Street to the Manchester Town Line. The accident data covered the latest
three-year period for which records are available, January 1, 1995 to
December 31, 1997. During the three years covered by the ConnDOT
accident data a total of 10 accidents were reported along the 2,000 foot
section of Buckland Road.
The ConnDOT Bureau of Planning and Research also assembles the
reported accidents on State roadways and compiles the accidents in a report
entitled Traffic Accident Surveillance Report (TASK). The TASR is used to
prioritize accident sites statewide. A second list, the Suggested List of
Surveillance Study Sites (SLOSSS), is a listing of locations which offer the
greatest promise of accident reduction resulting from implementation of
corrective action. The most recent TASR and SLOSSS cover the period
from 1994 to 1996. Buckland Road is not included on these lists, but the
low number of accidents along this roadway in South Windsor would
indicate that it is not a candidate for further review.
Project Generated Traffic
New trips to the roadway system generated by the proposed 50,000 to
55,000 square foot office park were determined from the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) reference, Trip Generation'. The ITE
reference has established mathematical relationships based on studies of
various land uses nationwide to determine their trip generation rates. These
trip generation relationships have been standardized and published in the
Trip Generation reference.
The ITE reference contains trip generation information for General Office
Buildings and Single Tenant Office Buildings. Both land uses were reviewed
and found to provide similar results for new trips to the roadway system.
The General Office Building was found to yield slightly higher numbers of
new trips; hence, trip generation estimates were calculated for the 55,000
square foot office park based on ITE Land Use Code 710—General Office
Building. The following trip generation relationships were used to determine
the number of daily trips, and morning and afternoon peak hour trips that
would be generated by the proposed 55,000 square foot office park. The
results are summarized in Table 1.
Trip Generation Sixth Edition published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997.
C:\BUSINESS\GU ERRA\REPORT.DOC 6
Average Weekday Trips Ln(T) = 0.768Ln(X) + 3.654
Morning Peak Hour Ln(T) = 0.797Ln(X) + 1.558
Afternoon Peak Hour T = 1.121(X) + 79.295
where T is the number of trips and X the office building size in
thousands of square feet
Table 1 -Trip Generation for 55,000 Square Foot Office Building
Trips Entering Trips Leaving
Daily 419 419
Morning Peak Hour 102 14
Afternoon Peak Hour 24 117
Access to the site will be provided along Buckland Road near the center of
the site, approximately 1,400 feet south of Deming Street. Trip Distribution
for the office trips is expected to be split evenly in each direction along
Buckland Road. To assure that variations in this expectation are accounted
for, 60 percent of the generated trips were assume to travel in each direction
along Buckland Road when approaching and leaving the office site. A Trip
Distribution Diagram is included with the Traffic Flow Diagrams in the
Appendix to this Report.
Site Access
Access to the site will be provided by a single drive located about 1,400 feet
south of Deming Street. The developer proposes that this new intersection
become the second major intersection along Buckland Road between
Deming Street and the South Windsor/Manchester Town Line. Accordingly,
this intersection is proposed to be signalized. Future development on the
232-acre commercially zoned parcel along the west side of Buckland Road
will have access opposite the proposed office drive in order to take full
advantage of the proposed signalization.
Intersection sight distances (the distance drivers leaving the site will be
able to see in either direction along Buckland Road)were measured
from 10 feet off the edge of Buckland Road at the site drive in
accordance with ConnDOT Standards for determining Intersection
Sight distances. Drivers leaving the office park will have an
intersection sight distance of 535 feet when looking toward the left
(south) and more than 1,100 feet looking toward the right(north). The
intersection sight distance looking toward the left is actually much
greater than 1,100 feet, but a dip in the road causes vehicles traveling
northbound along Buckland Road to briefly disappear from the view of
drivers looking left from the site drive. These northbound vehicles on
Buckland Road reappear approximately 535 feet south of the site drive.
C:\BUSINESS\GUERRA\REPORT.DOC 7
The posted speed limit on Buckland Road in the vicinity of the site is 40
miles per hour(mph). The speed study completed on April 14 through
16 for this office development found that the 85th percentile speeds
(the speed at which 85 percent of all vehicles travel at or below) are
52.6 mph (84.6 kilometers per hour) northbound and 52.4 mph (84.3
kph) southbound. The Connecticut DOT presents minimum and
desirable standards for intersection sight distances (ISD) in their
January 1999 Guidelines for Highway Design. The new ConnDOT
Guidelines are presented in metric, which required that the prevailing
speeds be converted to kilometers per hour. Figure 11-2D of the
ConnDOT Guidelines presents ISD information for each 10 kph
increment for speeds between 40 and 100 kph. Using Figure 11-2D
the desirable ISD for speeds of 85 kph (the 85th percentile speed)was
interpolated and found to be 308 meters (1,015 feet). The intersection
sight distance looking toward the right is greater than the desirable ISD
determined from the ConnDOT reference. The minimum ISD looking
toward the left was interpolated for the 85 kph speed and found to be
194 meters (640 feet). The intersection sight distance of 535 available
to drivers leaving the site will be less than the minimum ISD determined
from the ConnDOT reference. The 535 foot ISD will meet the minimum
ISD for 85th percentile speeds of 78 kph (48.46 mph). As development
in the area continues and traffic volumes on Buckland Road increase,
the 85th percentile speeds are expected to decrease and at some
future date be in the vicinity of 48 mph (8 mph above the posted speed
limit). The traffic signal proposed for the site drive will allow drivers to
safely leave the site during the signal phase for the site drive. During
this phase, traffic in both directions on Buckland Road will be required
to stop. Because the ISD looking toward the south will be less than the
minimum ISD for the present 85th percentile speeds, it is proposed that
the drive be posted for"No Turns on Red". This will allow drivers to
leave the site only when they have the green indication and all traffic
on Buckland Road is required to stop.
A second sight distance measured for this study is the stopping sight
distance along Buckland Road for drivers turning left onto the site and for
drivers approaching from both directions along Buckland Road to observe
these left turning vehicles. This sight distance allows the driver making the
left turn to decide if there is time to initiate and complete the turn before a
vehicle approaching from the opposite direction would present a risk. For
vehicles approaching from the opposite direction along Buckland Road, the
sight distance should be adequate to allow them to proceed at their current
speed without endangering themselves or passengers in the turning vehicle,
and if necessary, provide them with the time to recognize the need to stop,
react to that need, and stop before encountering the problem. Similarly, it is
important to provide adequate sight distance for vehicles approaching the
left turning vehicle from the rear to allow them to stop before reaching the
turning vehicle. The 1999 ConnDOT Guidelines for Highway Design
includes a new sight distance information for"Stopped Vehicles Turning Left
Across Oncoming Traffic". According to Figure 11-2F of the ConnDOT
Guidelines, vehicles turning left from Buckland Road onto the site should be
C:\BUSINESS\GUERRA\REPORT.DOC 8
able to see 140 meters 465 feet to a vehicle approaching from the
( ) PP 9
opposite direction. Since the sight distance to and from the south is 535
feet and the sight distance to and from the north is more than 1,100 feet, the
available sight distance to turn left from Buckland Road onto the site
exceeds the distances presented in the ConnDOT Reference. Vehicles
turning left onto the site will be able to safely enter the site during the
permitted left turn operation as well as the protected left turn phase.
Capacity Analyses
Capacity Analyses were done to determine the existing and anticipated
quality of traffic operations at intersections and roadways surrounding the
site. Letter designations from A to F are used to represent the Levels of
Service (LOS) for the traffic operation at each intersection or roadway, with
LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst.
Typically, LOS D is considered acceptable by ConnDOT for design peak
hour conditions.
The Level of Service is determined differently for signalized intersections,
unsignalized intersections with multi-way STOP, and unsignalized
intersections with STOP control on the minor street approaches. For
signalized intersections and unsignalized intersections with multi-way STOP
control, the analysis considers the operation of all traffic entering the
intersection and the LOS is determined for the overall conditions at the
intersection. For unsignalized intersections with STOP control on the minor
street, the analysis assumes that through and right-turning traffic on the
major street is not affected by traffic on the side streets. Hence, the LOS is
determined for the movements on the side street and the left-turn movement
from the major street onto the side street. Levels of Service are defined by
the average delay per vehicle as indicated below.
Signalized Intersections
Level of Service Avg. Delay/Vehicle (in Seconds)
LOS A < 10.0
LOS B > 10.0 and < 20.0
LOS C > 20.0 and < 35.0
LOS D > 35.0 and.< 55.0
LOS E > 55.0 and < 80.0
LOS F > 80.0
Unsignalized Intersections
Level of Service Avg. Delay/Vehicle (in Seconds)
LOS A < 10.0
LOS B > 10.0 and < 15.0
LOS C > 15.0 and < 25.0
LOS D > 25.0 and < 35.0
LOS E > 35.0 and < 50.0
LOS F > 50.0
C:IBUSINESS\GUERRAXREPORT.DOC g
The 55,000 office complex is expected to be completed and
proposed
occupied by the year 2001. Level-of-service capacity analyses were
completed for the 1999 Base Year, 2001 No-Build (which included traffic
from Lowe's Home Improvements Center), and 2001 Build conditions for the
signalized intersections of Buckland Road at Ellington Road, Buckland Road
at Deming Street, Buckland Road at Lowe's Drive, and Buckland Street at
Pleasant Valley Road in Manchester. Capacity analyses were also done for
the site drive intersection Buckland Road for the 2001 Build conditions. The
2001 No Build traffic volumes were determined by applying a one and one-
half percent annual growth factor to the 1999 traffic volumes to account for
growth that may occur in the area, and adding the trips generated by the
previously approved Lowe's Home Improvements Center. The 2001 Build
traffic volumes were determined by adding the site generated traffic
presented in Table 1 to the 2001 No Build traffic volumes. The results of the
signalized intersection capacity analyses are presented in Table 2.
Table 2: Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis
1999 2001 2001
Base Year No Build Build
Location Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
Hour
Buckland Rd at AM 30.1 C 31.0 C 32.1 C
Ellington Road PM 51.1 D 58.1 E 57.3 E
Buckland Rd at AM 16.0 B 16.2 B 16.6 B
Deming Street PM 16.4 B 17.5 B 17.9 B
Buckland Rd at AM == �- 5.3 A
Office Drive PM 8.7 A
Buckland Rd at AM == _= N/A N/A N/A N/A
Lowe's Drive PM 9.3 A 9.2 A
Buckland St at AM 41.4 D 42.6 D 42.4 D
Pleasant Valley3 PM -- -- 125.1 F 136.5 F
NOTES:
Indicates a saturated condition.
Delay = Average delay, in seconds, to all vehicles entering the intersection.
LOS = Level of Service
2 LOS D is achieved during the afternoon peak hour with timing changes
3 Timing Revisions required to achieve morning peak hour Levels of Service for existing and Year
2001 No-Build traffic volumes. Lowe's proposes improvements at the intersection which will provide
LOS D during the morning and afternoon peak periods.
CABUSINESS\GUERRA\REPORT.DOC 10
Table 2 indicates that the three existing signalized intersections presently
operate at LOS D or better during the morning peak hour with the Deming
Street intersection operating at LOS B, the Ellington Road intersection
operating at LOS C and the Pleasant Valley intersection operating at LOS D.
During the afternoon peak hour the Deming Street intersection presently
operates at LOS B and the Ellington Road intersection operates at LOS D.
Since traffic counts from the Lowe's study were used for the PM peak period
for the Pleasant Valley Road intersection and no existing condition traffic
volumes for that intersection were included in the Lowe's report, the analysis
for the afternoon existing conditions was not completed. For the Year 2001
No-Build traffic volumes, there will be no changes in the operating Levels of
Service during the morning peak hour. However, the background growth
and the addition of Lowe's traffic will cause the Ellington Road intersection
to become LOS E. The Pleasant Valley Road intersection will operate at
LOS F for the 2001 No-Build conditions. The Deming Street intersection will
remain at LOS B during the afternoon peak hour for the 2001 No-Build traffic
volumes. There will be no change in operating Levels of Service from the
2001 No-Build Levels of Service when the trips generated by the 55,000
square foot office complex are added to the No-Build traffic volumes. The
Lowe's site drive and the office site drive will operate at LOS A for the Year
2001 Build traffic volumes. Improvements to the afternoon Level of Service
at Ellington Road can be realized by revising the signal timing at this
intersection. In recognition of the low Level of Service at the Pleasant Valley
Road intersection with the addition of Lowe's traffic, the Town of Manchester
approved the Lowe's project with improvements at the Pleasant Valley
intersection to improve the operating LOS. These improvements will allow
the intersection to operate at LOS D during the afternoon peak hour for the
2001 Build traffic volumes.
Conclusions
The 250 &280 Buckland Corporate Center is proposed with three lots
having a total area of approximately 11.8 acres. At this time two office
buildings with 50,000 to 55,000 square feet are proposed for Lots 1 and 2.
These lots combined have an area of approximately 6.2 acres. The project
site is located along the east side of Buckland Road about 1,400 feet south
of Deming Street in South Windsor, Connecticut. The land is currently
undeveloped. Entrance to the site will be provided by a single signalized
drive located at the center of the site frontage along Buckland Road. A 232-
acre commercially zoned parcel along the opposite side of Buckland Road
will also have access through this signalized intersection.
New trips to the roadway system were computed from trip generation rates
established by the ITE Trip Generation reference. The capacity analyses
indicate that the signalized intersections of Buckland Road at Ellington
Road, Buckland Road at Deming Street, and Buckland Street at Pleasant
1 Valley Road (in Manchester) will continue at the same Level of Service for
the Year 2001 Build traffic volumes with the 55,000 square foot office
development as is expected for the Year 2001 No-Build traffic volumes
which includes traffic generated by the previously approved Lowe's Home
C:\BUSINESS\GU ERRA\REPORT.DOC 11
Improvements Center. The Year 2001 Levels of Service with and without
the office development will be LOS B during the morning and afternoon
peak hours at the Deming Street intersection, LOS C (morning) and LOS E
(afternoon) at the Ellington Road intersection, and LOS D (morning) and
LOS F (afternoon) at the Pleasant Valley Road intersection. With timing
revisions to the traffic signal at Ellington Road, the Level of Service can be
improved to LOS D during the afternoon peak hour. Roadway
improvements proposed by Lowe's for the Pleasant Valley Road intersection
will allow that intersection to operate at LOS D during the morning and
afternoon peak hours. The signalized drives to Lowe's and the office
development will operate at LOS A during the morning and afternoon peak
hours.
No off site roadway improvements beyond the intersection improvements
and signalization at the site drive are suggested as trips generated by the
proposed 55,000 office development are not expected to cause changes in
operating Levels of Service from the Levels of Service expected for the Year
2001 No-Build traffic volumes. Revisions to the signal timing at the Ellington
Road intersection are suggested to achieve Level of Service operations
during the afternoon peak hour. This study also recommends installation of
a "no Turn on Red sign along the site drive serving the office development.
These recommendations in conjunction with the improvements proposed by
Lowe's for the Pleasant Valley Road intersection in Manchester will allow
traffic to flow safely and at acceptable Levels of Service throughout the
area.
I
C:\BUSINESS\GUERRA\REPORT.DOC 12
x
a
z
W
a.
CL
m
t
1
1
1
1
1
' 1999 TRAFFIC VOLUMES
INTERSECTION DIAGRAM
Intersection: Pleasant Valley Road and Buckland Street
Time period: AM Peak
Buckland Street
Volumes 27
SB Total
828
335 WB Total
1 1 1 1 < 731
369
< v > �-
534 258 36 v
v v
Legend
[X] = Level of Service ^
# = No. of Lanes ^
< 1 1
D—J = De facto Turn
<-i-- 1
v
---------------- ---- F 2
^
v
1 ---------------------
1 � >
1 >
Pleasant Valley Road
1 --�
v ^ ^
43i <I227 258 34
1 EB Total 74
289 > 2 1 1 1
172 519
NB Total
v
INTERSECTION
C ON DIAGRAM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Intersection: Deming Street and Buckland Road
Time period: AM Peak
Buckland Road
Volumes 16
SB Total t
797
11 WB Total
1 1 1 < 49
22
< V >12 779 6 F-
v
v v
Legend
[X] = Level of Service
#—� = No. of Lanes
D—J = De facto Turn <-f--- 1
--------------------- v
---------------------
1 1 >
v Deming Street
7 33 269 10
<I [>
EB Total 5
62 > 1 1 1
50 312
--t NB Total
v
INTERSECTION DIAGRAM
Intersection: Deming Street and Buckland Road
Time period: PM Peak
Buckland Road
Volumes 12
SB Total i
649
13 WE Total
1 1 1 < 36
11
< v > 1 -
15 604 30 v
v v
Legend
[XI = Level of Service
#-1 = No. of Lanes
D-J = De facto Turn < 1 1
v
---------------------
---------------------
1 i >
1 --�
v Deming Street
12^ 58 867 14
EB Total 16
96 > 1 1 1
68 939
--1 NB Total
v
INTERSECTION DIAGRAM
Intersection: Ellington Road and Buckland Road
Time period: AM Peak
Buckland Road
Volumes 196
SB Total
1058
207 WB Total
1 1 1 < 460
57
193 717 148 v
v v
Legend
[X] = Level of Service
#-J = No. of Lanes <
D-J = De facto Turn <T-- 1
v
r— 1
--------------------- v
t ---------------------
1 --�-> Ellington Road
v
108^ 24 197 15
<I [>
EB Total 120
264 > 1 1 l
36 236
—� NB Total
v
INTERSECTION DIAGRAM
Intersection: Ellington Road and Buckland Road
Time period: PM Peak
Buckland Road
Volumes ^ 230
SB Total
880
195 WE Total
1 1 1 < 495
70
< v >
145 456 279 v
v v
Legend
[X] = Level of Service
#-1 = No. of Lanes < 1 1
^
' D—J = De facto Turn <7— 1
v
r— 1
--------------------- v
---------------------
1 �
1 1 >
1 7> Ellington Road
v
378^ 52 717 98
EB Total 327
763 > 1 1 1
58 867
—� NB Total
1 v
6/99 AMERICAN TRAFFIC INFORMATION, INC. Page: 7
; : 27 : 34 1877 CLOVE ROAD
STATEN ISLAND, NY 10304
718-447-5161 FAX: 718-447-7995
E-MAIL: ATIERIC@AOL.COM
-------- -- -- ---------------
GRAND TOTALS
* **** * * * LANES #1 , & #2 FINAL ** * * *
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16
0- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- 80- 85-
19.9 24.9 29.9 34.9 39.9 44.9 49.9 54.9 59.9 64.9 69.9 74.9 79.9 84.9 89.9 Other Error Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lane 1 24 6 20 125 985 3513 3786 1320 126 30 3 0 0 0 0 0 191 10129
Lane 2 52 2 6 21 166 1017 2387 1784 586 109 21 9 3 0 0 0 714 6877
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ------
FINAL 76 8 26 146 1151 4530 6173 3104 712 139 24 9 3 0 0 0 905 17006
cnt Lane 1 0% 0% 0% 1% 10% 35% 37% 13% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 60%
Lane 2 1% ---0% ---0% ---0% -- 2% --15% --35% --26% ---9% ---2% ---0% ---0% ---0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 40%
----- ----- ----- ----- -----
PERCENT 0% 0% 0% 1% 7% 27% 36% 18% 4% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5%
r Lane 1 0 0 0 2 18 67 72 25 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 194
Lane 2 1 0 0 0 3 19 45 34 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 132
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ------
f
GE HOUR 1 0 0 2 22 87 118 59 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 327
ane 1 10129 ( 59.6%)
Lane 2 6877 ( 40.47.)
----------------
D TOTAL 17006
ILane 1 2.17
Lane 2 2.17
�OMBINED 2.17
Lane 1 4675
Lane 2 3174
ADT 7849
d Lane 1: 45.Omph
Lane 2: 48.5mph
AVERAGE 46.3mph
Rd Lane 1: 50.Omph 50% Spd Lane 1 : 45.2mph
Lane 2: 54.4mph Lane 2 48.8mph
' FINAL 52.4mph FINAL 46.6mph
/99 AMERICAN TRAFFIC INFORMATION, INC. Page : 7
00 : 24 1877 CLOVE ROAD
STATEN ISLAND, NY 10304
718-447-5161 FAX: 718-447-7995
E-MAIL: ATIERIC@AOL.COM
GRAND TOTALS
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
�x* * * * * **** * LANES #1 , & #2 FINAL *** * * *
' #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16
0- 20- 25- 30- 35- 40- 45- 50- 55- 60- 65- 70- 75- SO- 85-
19.9 24.9 29.9 34.9 39.9 44.9 49.9 54.9 59.9 64.9 69.9 74.9 79.9 84.9 89.9 Other Error Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
�Lane 1 10 8 12 77 699 2768 3084 1121 259 54 6 2 0 0 0 0 57 8157
Lane 2 33 6 6 22 241 1712 3320 1962 532 101 13 3 0 1 2 0 305 8259
FINAL 43 14 18 99 940 4480 6404 3083 791 155 19 5 0 1 2 0 362 16416
nt Lane 1 0% 0% 0% 1% 9% 34% 38% 14% 3% 1% 0% 0.% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 50%
Lane 2 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 21% 40% 24% 6% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 50%
----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ---- ----- ----- -----
ERCENT 0% 0% 0% 1% 6% 27% 39% 19% 5% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2%
Lane 1 0 0 0 1 13 53 59 21 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 156
Lane 2 0 0 0 0 4 32 63 37 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 158
---- ----- ----- ----- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- --- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ------
�GE HOUR 0 0 0 1 18 86 123 59 15 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 315
1 Lane 1 8157 ( 49.7%)
ane 2 8259 ( 50.37.)
TOTAL 16416
Lane 1 2.17
Lane 2 2.17
fM BINED 2.17
Lane 1 3765
Lane 2 3812
ADT ---7577
Lane 1: 45.6mph
Lane 2: 47.8mph
AVERAGE 46.7mph
d Lane 1: 50.9mph 50% Spd Lane 1 45.6mph
Lane 2: 53.5mph Lane 2 48.Omph
FINAL 52.6mph FINAL 46.8mph
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
� TRAFFIC FLOW DIAGRAMS
1
� SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
1
� CAPACITY ANALYSES
� EXISTING CONDITIONS
1
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
Iter: CitY/St: South Windsor, CT
analyst: BAH Proj #:
la,te: 6/7/99 Period: AM Peak Existing Conditions
ta
St: Ellington Rd/Oakland Rd NIS St: Buckland Rd/Sullivan Ave
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound ► Westbound ► Northbound Southbound ►
I L T R I L T R I L T R ► L T R ►
► I I 1 I
11Lanes ► 1 2 0 ( 1 2 0 ► 1 2 0 1 2 0 ►
--onfig ► L TR L TR ► L TR ► L TR
Tolume 1108 120 36 ► 57 207 196 124 197 15 1148 717 193
I
te Width 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 ►
R Vol 1 0 ► 0 1 0 ► 0
ation 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
' ase Combination 1 2 3 4 ( 5 6 7 8
Left A P ► NB Left A A
Thru P ► Thru A
Right P ► Right A
Peds ► Ped
Left A P ► SB Left A A
Thru P ► Thru A
Right P ► Right A
ifPeds ► Ped
Right ► EB Right
B Right ► WB Right
tiow
en 15. 0 16. 0 12 . 0 31 . 0
3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3. 0
,11 Red 0.0 2 . 0 0. 0 2 .0
_le Length: 90 . 0 secs
Intersection Performance Summary
Spr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Jane Group Flow Rate
Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
,astbound
384 0 .30 0 . 378 19. 8 B
607 3416 0.27 0. 178 33. 1 C 27 . 6 C
Testbound
500 0 . 12 0. 378 18 .2 B
583 3281 0 .73 0 . 178 43 . 0 D 40 . 0 D
rthbound
319 0 . 08 0. 511 14 . 1 B
'R 1206 3501 0 . 18 0. 344 20 .7 C 20 . 1 C
luthbound
615 0 .25 0. 511 12 . 1 B
1180 3427 0 . 81 0. 344 31 . 4 C 28 .7 C
Intersection Delay = 30 . 1 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
affic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
3 Lexington Road
,lastonbury, Connecticut 06033
lone: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
-Mail :
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
=ntersection:
#'' t ay/State: South Windsor, CT
lyst: BAH
'roject No :
e Period Analyzed: AM Peak Existing Conditions
e: 6/7/99
,-st/West Street Name: Ellington Rd/Oakland Rd
rth/South Street Name: Buckland Rd/Sullivan Ave
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
t-er: City/St: South Windsor, CT
,nalyst: BAH Proj #:
tee: 6/8/99 Period: AM Peak Existing Conditions
nt St: Deming Road NIS St: Buckland Road
_SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
Eastbound I Westbound i Northbound i Southbound 1
I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R 1
I 1 1 I I
Lanes 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 2 0 I
onfig 1 LT R I LTR ► L TR I L TR I
Tolume 17 5 50 122 11 16 133 269 10 16 779 12 I
e Width I 12 . 0 14 . 0 { 17 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 .0 I
R Vol ► 0 I 0 1 0 I 0 ►
Iration 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
?hase Combination 1 2 3 4 ► 5 6 7 8
Left A I NB Left A P
Thru A I Thru P
Right A ► Right P
Peds I Ped
Left A I SB Left A P
Thru A ( Thru P
Right A I Right P
Peds I Ped
Right ► EB Right
jRight I WB Right
een 20.0 10 . 0 45. 0
slow 3 .0 3 . 0 4 . 0
kll Red 2 . 0 1 . 0 2 . 0
cle Length: 90. 0 secs
Intersection Performance Summary
Dr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
,ane Group Flow Rate
;, D Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
;astbound
370 1663 0. 04 0 .222 27 .5 C 28 .2 C
375 1689 0.15 0 .222 28 .3 C
lestbound
;AM� 369 1661 0. 15 0 .222 28 . 3 C 28 . 3 C
t �thbound
421 0. 09 0 . 656 7 . 0 A
'R 1760 3520 0 . 18 0 .500 12 . 6 B 12 . 0 B
,u hbound
716 0 . 01 0 . 656 5. 5 A
1766 3531 0 . 50 0 .500 16. 0 B 15. 9 B
Intersection Delay = 16. 0 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
' ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
P3 Lexington Road
71astonbury, Connecticut 06033
Ine: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
-Mail:
' 4 OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
� i
_ntersection:
? '�ty/State: South Windsor, CT
falyst: BAH
?roject No:
12me Period Analyzed: AM Peak Existing Conditions
,ate: 6/8/99
'ast/West Street Name: Deming Road
\Tnirth/South Street Name: Buckland Road
Intersection Performance Summary
Wr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
ane Group Flow Rate
ICapcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
astbound
376 1692 0 .08 0 .222 27 . 8 C 28 . 5 C
375 1689 0 .20 0 .222 28 . 8 C
estbound
t - 386 1738 0 .10 0.222 28 . 0 C 28 . 0 C
thbound
501 0 . 13 0. 656 6.4 A
R 1766 3531 0 . 55 0 . 500 16. 8 B 16.2 B
tthbound
384 0 . 09 0. 656 7 .5 A
1763 3526 0 .39 0. 500 14 . 6 B 14 . 3 B
Intersection Delay = 16. 4 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
HCS: Signals Release 3. 1a
ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
lastonbury, Connecticut 06033
Ine: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
-Mail:
91 OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
ntersection:
y/State: South Windsor, CT
lyst: BAH
roject No:
e Period Analyzed: PM Peak Existing Conditions
.e : 6/8/99
t/West Street Name: Deming Road
nth./South Street Name: Buckland Road
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
ler: City/St: Manchester, CT
nalyst : BAH Proj #:
e: 6/8/99 Period: AM Peak Existing Conditions
St: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills N/S St: Buckland Street
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
► Eastbound ► Westbound I Northbound ► Southbound I
► L T R { L T R J L T R ► L T R I
I I I I I
'1Lanes I 1 2 1 1 2 2 0 ► 2 2 0 1 1 2 1 I
:.onf i g I L T R I L T I L T I L T R I
.olume 143 74 172 1369 335 1227 258 136 258 534 1
te Width 112 . 0 12 . 0 12 .0 111 . 0 11 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 ►
Vol I 0 1 I 1 0 1
t
ation 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
,hase Combination 1 2 3 4 { 5 6 7 8
Left A 1 NB Left A A
Thru A ► Thru A P
Right A I Right A P
Peds 1 Ped
Left A I SB Left A
Thru A J Thru P
Right I Right P
Peds I Ped
Right 1 EB Right A A
;B Right A J WB Right A
1 men 11 . 6 22 . 4 14 . 0 11 . 6 40 . 4
llow 3 . 0 3 .0 3. 0 3. 0 3 . 0
,11 Red 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0
�le Length: 120. 0 secs
�V
r
r
r
� SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
� CAPACITY ANALYSES
M
I 2001 NO BUILD
1
I
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
it er: City/St: South Windsor, CT
analyst: BAH Proj #:
te: 6/7/99 Period: AM Peak 2001 No-Build
St: Ellington Rd/Oakland Rd NIS St: Buckland Rd/Sullivan Ave
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
Eastbound ► Westbound I Northbound I Southbound
I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R 1
I I i I 1
tLanes 1 1 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 2 0 1
onfig I L TR I L TR I L TR I L TR 1
rolume 1111 124 37 159 213 202 125 203 15 1152 739 199
Oe Width 112.0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112. 0 12 . 0
R Vol 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 �
ration 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
'base Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
Left A P 1 NB Left A A
Thru P i Thru A
Right P 1 Right A
Peds 1 Ped
Left A P ( SB Left A A
Thru P 1 Thru A
Right P Right A
Peds Ped
Right 1 EB Right
3B Right WB Right
Leeow
n 15, 0 16. 0 12 . 0 31 . 0
3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0
M Red 0 . 0 2 . 0 0 .0 2 . 0
tle Length: 90. 0 secs
I
_Intersection Performance Summary
r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
pane Group Flow Rate
Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
stbound
379 0 . 31 0. 378 19. 9 B
607 3417 0 .28 0. 178 33.2 C 27 . 7 C
estbound
497 0 . 12 0 . 378 18 . 3 B
583 3280 0 . 75 0 . 178 44 .2 D 40 .9 D
t thbound
319 0. 08 0.511 14 .3 B
'R 1206 3502 0 . 19 0. 344 20. 8 C 20 . 1 C
tthbound
610 0 .26 0.511 12 .2 B
1180 3427 0 . 84 0 .344 32 .9 C 30 .0 C
Intersection Delay = 31 . 0 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
,lastonbury, Connecticut 06033
tne: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
-Mail :
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
ntersection:
ty/State: South Windsor, CT
lyst: BAH
roj ect No.
me Period Analyzed: AM Peak 2001 No-Build
te: 6/7/99
st/West Street Name: Ellington Rd/Oakland Rd
forth/South Street Name: Buckland Rd/Sullivan Ave
I
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
Iter: City/St: South Windsor, CT
�n:alyst: BAH Proj #:
te: 6/7/99 Period: PM Peak 2001 No-Build w/Lowe 's
W St: Ellington Rd/Oakland Rd N/S St: Buckland Rd/Sullivan Ave
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound { Westbound I Northbound I Southbound 1
■ I L T R 1 L T R 1 L T R I L T R {
I I I I I
Lanes 1 1 2 0 1 1 2 0 { 1 2 0 1 1 2 0 {
Config { L TR 1 L TR { L TR I L TR 1
7olume 1389 337 104 194 201 237 199 784 123 1287 514 149 1
one Width 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 1
NOR Vol 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 {
ration 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
?hale Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
Left A P P 1 NB Left A A
Thru P P 1 Thru A
Right P P ) Right A
Peds 1 Ped
Left A P 1 SB Left A A
Thru P 1 Thru A
Right P 1 Right A
Peds { Ped
Right I EB Right
3B Right 1 WB Right
Ieen 5. 0 7 . 0 16. 0 12 . 0 31 . 0
llow 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3. 0 3 . 0
�11 Red 0. 0 0 . 0 2 . 0 0 . 0 2 . 0
le Length: 90.0 secs
t
s
i
1
1
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
ter: City/St: South Windsor, CT
nalyst: BAH Proj #:
e: 6/8/99 Period: AM Peak 2001 No-Build
St: Deming Road N/S St: Buckland Road
_SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound Westbound J Northbound I Southbound
L T R I L T R L T R { L T R I
I I I I I
Lanes ( 0 1 1 ► 0 1 0 ( 1 2 0 I 1 2 0 {
onfig I LT R I LTR I L TR J L TR
.plume 17 5 52 123 11 16 134 277 10 16 803 12
e Width I 12 . 0 14 . 0 J 17. 0 I12 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0
R Vol I 0 0 1 0 I 0
i
ation 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
'hase Combination 1 2 3 4 ( 5 6 7 8
Left A I NB Left A P
Thru A ( Thru P
Right A I Right P
Peds I Ped
Left A I SB Left A P
Thru A Thru P
Right A I Right P
Peds i Ped
Right I EB Right
;B Right WB Right
en 20 .0 10 . 0 45. 0
low 3 . 0 3. 0 4 . 0
,11 Red 2 . 0 1 . 0 2 . 0
tle Length: 90. 0 secs
l
1
1
Intersection Performance Summary
1[r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
ane Group Flow Rate
Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
itbound
369 1662 0 . 04 0 .222 27 .5 C 28 .2 C
375 1689 0. 15 0 .222 28 . 4 C
estbound
367 1652 0 . 15 0 .222 28 .4 C 28 .4 C
thbound
411 0 . 09 0 . 656 7 . 1 A
R 1761 3521 0 .18 0 . 500 12 . 6 B 12 . 0 B
Ithbound
710 0 . 01 0 . 656 5. 5 A
1766 3532 0 . 51 0 . 500 16.2 B 16. 1 B
Intersection Delay = 16.2 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
lastonbury, Connecticut 06033
Ine. (860) 657-3579 Fax:
-Mail:
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
ntersection:
y/State: South Windsor, CT
lyst: BAH
roject No:
e Period Analyzed: AM Peak 2001 No-Build
e: 6/8/99
t/West Street Name : Deming Road
orth/South Street Name: Buckland Road
i
I
HCS: Signals Release 3.1a
ter: City/St: South Windsor, CT
,n.alyst: BAH Proj #:
te: 6/8/99 Period: PM Peak 2001 No-Build w/Lowe' s
St: Deming Road N/S St: Buckland Road
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
{ Eastbound { Westbound Northbound ( Southbound
{ L T R I L T R ( L T R ( L T R {
I I I l I
tLanes ► 0 1 1 ( 0 1 0 ( 1 2 0 1 2 0 {
onfig ( LT R ( LTR { L TR L TR
rolume 112 16 70 ill 13 12 160 1005 14 131 733 15 1
e Width ( 12. 0 14 . 0 ► 17 .0 112. 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0
R Vol ( 0 ( 0 ( 0 { 0 {
Iration 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
ITTase Combination 1 2 3 4 ( 5 6 7 8
Left A ( NB Left A P
Thru A { Thru P
Right A ( Right P
Peds ( Ped
Left A SB Left A P
Thru A ( Thru P
Right A Right P
Peds ► Ped
Right ( EB Right
>B Right WB Right
en 20 . 0 10 . 0 45. 0
low 3. 0 3 .0 4 .0
�11 Red 2 . 0 1 . 0 2 . 0
tle Length: 90 . 0 secs
Intersection Performance Summary
r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
ane Group Flow Rate
ICapcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
astbound
376 1692 0. 08 0 .222 27 . 8 C 28 . 5 C
375 1689 0 .21 0 .222 28 . 8 C
estbound
t386 1738 0. 10 0 .222 28 . 0 C 28 . 0 C
�thbound
439 0. 15 0 . 656 7 . 0 A
R 1766 3532 0 . 64 0 . 500 18 . 4 B 17 .7 B
ithbound
336 0 . 10 0 . 656 8 . 6 A
1764 3528 0 . 47 0 . 500 15 . 6 B 15. 3 B
Intersection Delay = 17 . 5 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
lastonbury, Connecticut 06033
tne: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
-Mail :
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
ntersection:
y/State: South Windsor, CT
lyst: BAH
'roj ect No:
e Period Analyzed: PM Peak 2001 No-Build w/Lowe ' s
e: 6/8/99
t/West Street Name: Deming Road
tth/South Street Name: Buckland Road
HCS : Signals Release 3 . 1a
ter: City/St: South Windsor, CT
nalyst: BAH Proj #:
e: 6/8/99 Period: PM Peak 2001 No-Build w/Lowe' s
7 St: Lowe' s Drive NIS St: Buckland Road
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
{ Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound { Southbound I
I L T R I L T R I L T R { L T R
I I { { I
l Lanes I 0 0 0 I 1 0 1 ( 0 2 1 ( 1 2 0 I
onfig I 1 L R 1 T R I L T
.olume I 1184 147 { 964 174 1139 954 I
e Width ► 112 . 0 12 . 0 { 12 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12. 0 I
R Vol ► 1 0 I 0
)cation 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
,base Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
Left 1 NB Left
Thru 1 Thru P
Right J Right P
Peds 1 Ped
Left A I SB Left A P
Thru 1 Thru A P
Right A 1 Right
Peds I Ped
Right 1 EB Right
;B Right 1 WB Right
en 10 . 0 5. 0 34 .0
low 3. 0 3. 0 3. 0
L11 Red 1 . 0 0 . 0 1 . 0
tle Length: 60 . 0 secs
j
1
t
1
i
1
1
Intersection Performance Summary
r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
,ane Group Flow Rate
Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
stbound
estbound
1 301 1805 0 . 68 0. 167 29. 7 C
28 . 5 C
269 1615 0 . 61 0 . 167 27 . 1 C
�thbound
2046 3610 0. 52 0.567 9. 0 A 8 . 7 A
915 1615 0.21 0 . 567 6. 9 A
tthbound
363 0 . 42 0. 700 5. 4 A
2527 3610 0 . 42 0. 700 3. 9 A 4 . 1 A
Intersection Delay = 9. 3 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = A
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
Glastonbury, Connecticut 06033
tne: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
-Mail .
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
ntersection:
ty/State: South Windsor, CT
lyst: BAH
Iroj ect No :
' e Period Analyzed: PM Peak 2001 No-Build w/Lowers
te: 6/8/99
t/West Street Name: Lowe' s Drive
forth/South Street Name: Buckland Road
r
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
ter: City/St: Manchester, CT
malyst: BAH Proj *:
te: 6/8/99 Period: AM Peak 2001 No-Build
St: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills NIS St: Buckland Street
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound I Westbound ► Northbound I Southbound I
I L T R I L T R I L T R { L T R {
I I 1 I 1
tLanes I 1 2 1 ( 2 2 0 1 2 2 0 ( 1 2 1
onfig 1 L T R I L T ► L T 1 L T R 1
Tolume 144 76 177 1380 345 1234 266 137 266 550 1
e Width 112.0 12 . 0 12 . 0 111 . 0 11 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 {
R Vol ► 0 1 1 1 0 I
ation 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
Left A ( NB Left A A
Thru A 1 Thru A P
Right A 1 Right A P
Peds i Ped
Left A 1 SB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru P
Right 1 Right P
Peds 1 Ped
Right { EB Right A A
;B Right A 1 WB Right A
en 16 .6 22 . 4 14 . 0 11 . 6 35. 4
low 3 . 0 3 . 0 3. 0 3. 0 3 . 0
,11 Red 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0
tle Length: 120. 0 secs
I
Intersection Performance Summary
pr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
.jane Group Flow Rate
p Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
stbound
245 1770 0.20 0. 138 46.2 D
661 3539 0. 13 0. 187 40.7 D 29. 0 C
739 1583 0.27 0. 467 19. 7 B
Vestbound
473 3418 0 .89 0 . 138 74 .2 E
658 3524 0. 58 0. 187 45. 9 D 60 .7 E
rthbound
847 3433 0. 31 0. 247 37 . 0 D
C 1504 3539 0.20 0 . 425 21 . 7 C 28 .9 C
�uthbound
207 1770 0.20 0. 117 48 . 4 D
1044 3539 0 .28 0.295 33 .2 C 35.7 D
739 1583 0 .83 0 .467 36. 1 D
Intersection Delay = 42 . 6 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = D
HCS: Signals Release 3. 1a
affic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
L 3 Lexington Road
31astonbury, Connecticut 06033
lone: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
-Mail :
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
Intersection:
ty/State: Manchester, CT
alyst: BAH
?roject No:
li-me, Period Analyzed: AM Peak 2001 No-Build
te: 6/8/99
st/West Street Name: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills
forth/South Street Name: Buckland Street
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
Iter: City/St: Manchester, CT
�n.alyst: BAH Proj *:
te: 6/8/99 Period: PM Peak 2001 No-Build w/Lowe' s
St: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills N/S St: Buckland Street
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
1 Eastbound 1 Westbound ► Northbound ( Sorhthbound I
1 L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R 1
I I I I I
Lanes 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 0 1 2 2 0 1 1 2 1
Config L T R I L T 1 L T 1 L T R 1
Tolume 1211 385 329 1250 631 1884 796 1250 631 131 1
e Width 112 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 111 . 0 11. 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 1
R Vol 1 0 1 1 1 0 I
ration 1. 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
?hase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
Left A 1 NB Left A A
Thru A 1 Thru A P
Right A J Right A P
Peds 1 Ped
Left A 1 SB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru P
Right 1 Right P
Peds 1 Ped
Right 1 EB Right A A
iB Right A 1 WB Right A
Ieen 16.6 22 . 4 14 . 0 11 . 6 35.4
llow 3 . 0 3. 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0
�11 Red 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 .0 1 . 0
Icle Length: 120 . 0 secs
I
1
Intersection Performance Summary
r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
,ane Group Flow Rate
7 Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
tbound
245 1770 0 .91 0 . 138 98 .2 F
J
661 3539 0 . 61 0 . 187 46.5 D 49.7 D
739 1583 0 . 47 0 . 467 22 .3 C
destbound
473 3418 0 . 56 0. 138 49.7 D
658 3524 1 . 01 0 . 187 128 . 0 F 105. 8 F
t thbound
847 3433 1 . 10 0.247 244 . 8 F
1504 3539 0 . 56 0 . 425 26. 5 C 141 . 4 F
tthbound
207 1770 1 .27 0 . 117 577 .8 F
1044 3539 0 . 64 0 .295 39.7 D 169. 9 F
739 1583 0 . 19 0. 467 18.8 B
Intersection Delay = 125. 1 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = F
HCS: Signals Release 3. 1a
ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
Glastonbury, Connecticut 06033
lone: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
-Mail:
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
:ntersection:
Oty/State: Manchester, CT
alyst: BAH
oject No:
me Period Analyzed: PM Peak 2001 No-Build w/Lowe' s
tst/West
e: 6/8/99 Street Name: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills
Torth/South Street Name: Buckland Street
I
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
� CAPACITY ANALYSES
' 2001 WITH 55,000 S.F. OFFICE
' HCS: Signals Release 3 .1a
ter: City/St: South Windsor, CT
alyst: BAH Proj #:
Date: 6f7/99 Period: AM Peak 2001 Build
1 St: Ellington Rd/Oakland Rd NIS St: Buckland Rd/Sullivan Ave
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
► Eastbound I Westbound ► Northbound I Southbound ►
I L T R ► L T R I L T R ► L T R 1
I ► I I I
C� Lanes I 1 2 0 ► 1 2 0 ► 1 2 0 ► 1 2 0 ►
Config 1 L TR ► L TR I L TR ► L TR ►
Volume 1111 124 42 169 213 202 126 208 16 1152 775 199 1
ne Width 112. 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 .0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 I
OR Vol 1 0 1 0 1 0 ► 0 ►
ration 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
-lase Combination 1 2 3 4 ( 5 6 7 8
EB Left A P 1 NB Left A A
Thru P 1 Thru A
Right P 1 Right A
Peds 1 Ped
Left A P ► SB Left A A
Thru P 1 Thru A
Right P 1 Right A
Peds 1 Ped
Right 1 EB Right
3B Right ► WB Right
" een 15. 0 16. 0 12 .0 31 . 0
llow 3 . 0 3. 0 3 . 0 3 . 0
1 Red 0 . 0 2 .0 0 . 0 2 . 0
" cle Length: 90. 0 secs
Intersection Performance Summary
r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
e Group Flow Rate
.rp Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
i
tbound
379 0 . 31 0 . 378 19.9 B
606 3406 0 .29 0. 178 33.3 C 27 . 9 C
estbound
494 0 . 15 0. 378 18 . 4 B
583 3280 0 . 75 0 . 178 44 .2 D 40 . 5 D
thbound
319 0 . 08 0. 511 14 .7 B
1206 3501 0 . 20 0 .344 20 . 8 C 20 . 2 C
thbound
607 0 .26 0. 511 12 .2 B
R 1182 3431 0 . 87 0 . 344 35.2 D 32 . 1 C
Intersection Delay = 32 . 1 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C
' HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
lastonbury, Connecticut 06033
ne: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
ail:
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
lersection:
ity/State: South Windsor, CT
tlyst: BAH
j ect No:
ime Period Analyzed: AM Peak 2001 Build
e : 6/7/99
t/West Street Name: Ellington Rd/Oakland Rd
orth/South Street Name: Buckland Rd/Sullivan Ave
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
er: City/St: South Windsor, CT
lyst: BAH Proj #:
)ate: 6/7/99 Period: PM Peak 2001 Build
,� St: Ellington Rd/Oakland Rd N/S St: Buckland Rd/Sullivan Ave
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound 1 Westbound 1 Northbound ► Southbound 1
I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R 1
I I I I 1
tl
Lanes 1 1 2 0 ► 1 2 0 ( 1 2 0 1 1 2 0onfig ► L TR 1 L TR 1 L TR ► L TRoume 1389 337 105 196 201 237 1105 825 135 1287 522 149 1
ne Width 112 .0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 .0 12 . 0 ►
F
Vol 1 0 1 0 1 0 I 0 I
)urati.on 1 .00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
se Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
;B Left A P P 1 NB Left A A
Thru P P ► Thru A
Right P P 1 Right A
Peds I Ped
Left A P I SB Left A A A
Thru P 1 Thru A A
Right P 1 Right A A
Peds 1 Ped
Right 1 EB Right
;B Right 1 WB Right
yen 5. 0 7 . 0 16.0 5. 0 4 . 0 31 . 0
llow 3. 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3. 0 3 . 0
L l Red 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 . 0 0 . 0 0. 0 2 . 0
cle Length: 90 . 0 secs
1
Intersection Performance Summary
r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
e Group Flow Rate
�r Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
tbound
378 1 . 08 0 . 378 226.3 F
986 3413 0. 47 0 .289 28 . 0 C 120. 7 F
westbound
258 0 . 39 0.233 29. 0 C
578 3252 0 . 80 - 0 . 178 47 . 3 D 44 . 0 D
—thbound
332 0. 33 0. 400 17. 9 B
1194 3465 0 . 85 0 . 344 33. 4 C 31. 9 C
4 uthbound
319 0. 95 0 . 511 81 . 2 F
'R 1444 3421 0 . 49 0 .422 19. 2 B 37 . 8 D
Intersection Delay = 57 . 3 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = E
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
affic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
3 Lexington Road
31astonbury, Connecticut 06033
one: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
,-Mail .
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
Ittersection:
,ity/State: South Windsor, CT
Ulectyst: BAH
No:
lime Period Analyzed: PM Peak 2001 Build
te: 6/7/99
t/West Street Name: Ellington Rd/Oakland Rd
lorth/South Street Name: Buckland Rd/Sullivan Ave
HCS: Signals Release 3. 1a
er• City/St: South Windsor, CT
lyst: BAH Proj *:
)ate: 6/8/99 Period: AM Peak 2001 Build
St: Deming Road NIS St: Buckland Road
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
► Eastbound I Westbound { Northbound I Southbound I
L T R I L T R ► L T R I L T R I
{ ► I { 1
f Lanes ► 0 1 1 ► 0 1 0 I 1 2 0 ► 1 2 0 I
onfig I LT R 1 LTR I L TR ► L TR I
' 'olume 17 5 62 123 11 16 135 284 10 16 854 12
e Width 1 12 . 0 14 .0 1 17 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 I
R Vol { 0 ► 0 I 0 I 0 I
) , ation 1. 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
tse Combination 1 2 3 4 { 5 6 7 8
:j I Left A 1 NB Left A P
Thru A { Thru P
Right A I Right P
Peds 1 Ped
Left A ► SB Left A P
Thru A ► Thru P
Right A ► Right P
Peds ► Ped
f Right I EB Right
;B Right I WB Right
; en 20 . 0 10 . 0 45. 0
low 3 . 0 3. 0 4 . 0
l Red 2 .0 1 . 0 2 . 0
le Length: 90. 0 secs
r
_Intersection Performance Summary
lr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
e Group Flow Rate
Tr Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
tbound
369 1662 0 . 04 0 .222 27 .5 C 28. 4 C
375 1689 0. 18 0.222 28 . 6 C
festbound
,t 367 1652 0 . 15 0.222 28 .4 C 28 . 4 C
f thbound
390 0 . 10 0 . 656 7 . 4 A
1761 3521 0 .19 0 . 500 12 . 6 B 12 . 1 B
;thbound
704 0 . 01 0 . 656 5. 5 A
' 1766 3532 0 .54 0 . 500 16. 7 B 16. 6 B
Intersection Delay = 16. 6 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
,lastonbury, Connecticut 06033
tne: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
=Mail .a
so OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
tersection:
:ity/State : South Windsor, CT
tlyst: BAH
- ject No:
'ime Period Analyzed: AM Peak 2001 Build
e: 6/8/99
t/West Street Name: Deming Road
forth/South Street Name: Buckland Road
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
ter: City/St: South Windsor` CT
lyst: BAH Proj *:
Date: 6/8/99 Period: PM Peak 2001 Build
St: Deming Road NIS St: Buckland Road
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
f Eastbound ► Westbound ► Northbound ► Southbound I
► L T R ( L T R ► L T R L T R
I I I I I
f Lanes f 0 1 1 ► 0 1 0 ► 1 2 0 1 2 0 ►
onfig LT R ( LTR ► L TR ► L TR ►
To ume 112 16 72 ill 13 12 172 1063 14 131 745 15
e Width i 12 . 0 14 . 0 ► 17 .0 112 . 0 12 .0 112 . 0 12 . 0 ►
: R Vol ► 0 0 ► 0 ( 0
ation 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
)) se Combination 1 2 3 4 ► 5 6 7 8
:i, Left A ► NB Left A P
Thru A ( Thru P
Right A ► Right P
Peds ( Ped
Left A ► SB Left A P
Thru A ( Thru P
Right A ► Right P
Peds Ped
Right ► EB Right
Right ( WB Right
en 20 . 0 10 . 0 45. 0
low 3 . 0 3. 0 4 . 0
Red 2 .0 1 . 0 2 . 0
cle Length: 90 .0 secs
I
Intersection Performance Summary
T1,pr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Srp Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
E__:stbound
L-? 376 1692 0 . 08 0 .222 27 . 8 C 28 . 6 C
E 375 1689 0.21 0 . 222 28 . 9 C
Restbound
IJR 386 1738 0 . 10 0 .222 28 . 0 C 28 . 0 C
v-rthbound
I 434 0 . 18 0 . 656 7 .2 A
i, 1766 3532 0 . 68 0 . 500 19 .2 B 18 .4 B
uthbound
L 318 0 . 11 0 . 656 9. 1 A
IR 1765 3529 0.48 0 . 500 15. 7 B 15 . 5 B
r Intersection Delay = 17 . 9 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
11affic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
3 Lexington Road
Glastonbury, Connecticut 06033
E - one: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
-Mail:
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
h'tersection:
lity/State: South Windsor, CT
jalyst: BA H
oj ect No :
Time Period Analyzed: PM Peak 2001 Build
Ite: 6/8/99
st/West Street Name: Deming Road
`gorth/South Street Name: Buckland Road
I �
I
Intersection Performance Summary
r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
e Group Flow Rate
3rp Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
19
tbound
i
Westbound
211 1805 0 . 04 0. 117 23. 6 C
23 . 6 C
Z 188 1615 0. 05 0 .117 23. 6 C
thbound
1762 3523 0 . 24 0 .500 8 . 9 A 8 . 9 A
11thbound
,T 2515 3509 0. 40 0 .717 3 .5 A 3. 5 A
Intersection Delay = 5.3 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = A
HCS : Signals Release 3 . 1a
ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
;lastonbury, Connecticut 06033
kne: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
ail:
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
tersection: Buckland Road at Office Drive
'ity/State: South Windsor, CT
tlectyst: BAH
No:
'ime Period Analyzed: AM Peak 2001 Build
e: 6/9/99
t/West Street Name: Office Drive
forth/South Street Name: Buckland Road
IHCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
Iter: Buckland Road at Office Drive City/St: South Windsor, CT
lyst: BAH Proj #:
Date: 6/9/99 Period: PM Peak 2001 Build
n7 St: Office Drive N/S St: Buckland Road
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
► Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound i Southbound I
L T R ( L T R ► L T R I L T R I
i I I ► I
Lanes ► 0 0 0 ► 1 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 ►
Config ► ► L R 1 TR I LT I
Tolume 1 170 70 1 1078 14 114 815 I
e Width ► 112 . 0 12 . 0 ► 12 . 0 I 12 . 0 I
R Vol I I 0 I 0 ► I
)-ration 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
ase Combination 1 2 3 4 ► 5 6 7 8
EB Left I NB - Left
Thru 1 Thru P
Right ► Right P
Peds 1 Ped
_ Left A I SB Left A P
Thru I Thru A P
Right A I Right
Peds ( Ped
Right ► EB Right
3B Right 1 WB Right
"jeen 7 . 0 7 . 0 33 . 0
1low 3 . 0 3 . 0 4 . 0
1 Red 1 . 0 0 . 0 2 . 0
" le Length: 60 . 0 secs
t
s
I
_ Intersection Performance Summary
An-r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
-Arne Group Flow Rate
Jrp Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
stbound
gestbound
211 1805 0 . 37 0 . 117 25. 6 C
25. 8 C
188 1615 0 . 41 0 . 117 26. 1 C
rthbound
1982 3603 0. 61 0 .550 10 . 6 B 10 . 6 B
tthbound
-jT 2415 3370 0 . 38 0 .717 3 .4 A 3. 4 A
Intersection Delay = 8 . 7 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = A
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
affic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
3 Lexington Road
astonbury, Connecticut 06033
ne: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
ail :
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
Itersection: Buckland Road at Office Drive
:ity/State: South Windsor, CT
tlyst: BAH
ject No :
'ime Period Analyzed: PM Peak 2001 Build
tt/West
e: 6/9/99
Street Name: Office Drive
Torth/South Street Name: Buckland Road
HCS: Signals Release 3. 1a
ter: City/St: South Windsor, CT
alyst: BAH Proj *:
Date: 6/8/99 Period: PM Peak 2001 Build
W St: Lowe ' s Drive N/S St: Buckland Road
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
1 Eastbound I Westbound 1 Northbound 1 Southbound 1
L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R 1
I 1 I I I
Lanes I 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 1 2 0 1
Config I 1 L R 1 T R 1 L T 1
plume I 1184 147 1 978 174 1139 1024
Ine Width 1 112 . 0 12 . 0 1 12 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0
OR Vol 1 1 0 I 0 I I
Duration 1 .00 Area Type: All other areas
11 Signal Operations
Vase Combination 1 2 3 4 ► 5 6 7 8
EB Left I NB Left
Thru I Thru P
Right 1 Right P
Peds I Ped
1 Left A 1 SB Left A P
Thru 1 Thru A P
Right A 1 Right
Peds I Ped
Right I EB Right
Right 1 WB Right
0" een 10 . 0 5. 0 34. 0
llow 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0
z 1 Red 1 . 0 0 . 0 1 . 0
� rcle Length: 60. 0 secs
Intersection Performance Summary
l r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
e Group Flow Rate
7rp Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
tbound
I
lestbound
301 1805 0. 68 0 . 167 29. 7 C
28 . 5 C
269 1615 0. 61 0. 167 27 . 1 C
f thbound
' 2046 3610 0. 53 0 .567 9 . 1 A 8 .7 A
915 1615 0.21 0 .567 6. 9 A
thbound
357 0. 43 0 . 700 5. 6 A
' 2527 3610 0 .45 0 .700 4 . 1 A 4 .2 A
Intersection Delay = 9.2 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = A
HCS : Signals Release 3 . 1a
ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
Glastonbury, Connecticut 06033
ne: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
fail:
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
Wersection:
'ity/State: South Windsor, CT
Itlyst: BAH
ject No:
'ime Period Analyzed: PM Peak 2001 Build
le : 6/8/99
t/West Street Name: Lowe` s Drive
orth/South Street Name: Buckland Road
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
�er: City/St: Manchester, CT
L_alyst: BAH Proj #:
)ate: 6/8/99 Period: AM Peak 2001 Build
7 St: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills N/S St: Buckland Street
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I Sorthbound 1
I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I
1 1 I 1 I
i--a. Lanes 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 0 i 2 2 0 1 1 2 1 1
'�onfig 1 L T R 1 L T I L T ( L T R 1
'olume 164 76 177 1380 345 1234 292 139 269 553 1
l ane Width 112 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 111 . 0 11 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0_ 112 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 1
R Vol I 0 I I I 0 I
)oration 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
.1 se Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
:B Left A I NB Left A A
J Thru A 1 Thru A P
r Right A 1 Right A P
Peds I Ped
11 Left A I SB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru P
Right ( Right P
Peds I Ped
i � Right I EB Right A A
>B Right A I WB Right A
reen 16 . 6 22 . 4 14 . 0 11 . 6 35. 4
flow 3. 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 .0 3. 0
iil Red 1. 0 1 . 0 1 .0 1 . 0 1 . 0
:Vcle Length: 120 .0 secs
I �
i
I �
HCS: Signals Release 3. 1a
ter: City/St: Manchester, CT
alyst: BAH Proj *:
Date: 6/8/99 Period: PM Peak 2001 Build
St: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills N/S St: Buckland Street
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
1 Eastbound 1 Westbound I Northbound Southbound
J L T R J L T R J L T R I L T R I
I I I I I
Lanes I 1 2 1 ► 2 2 0 I 2 2 0 J 1 2 1 ►
Config J L T R ► L T ( L T ( L T R 1
plume 1216 385 329 1250 631 1884 802 1268 654 160 1
toR
e Width 112 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 111 . 0 11 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 .0 12 . 0 12 . 0
Vol ► 0 ► 1 = J 0
Duration 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
. -ase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
i�B Left A 1 NB Left A A
Thru A 1 Thru A P
Right A J Right A P
Peds I Ped
Left A ► SB Left A
Thru A ( Thru P
Right I Right P
Peds I Ped
Right I EB Right A A
3 Right A 1 WB Right A
$een 16. 6 22 . 4 14 . 0 11 . 6 35. 4
flow 3 . 0 3 . 0 3. 0 3 . 0 3 . 0
1 Red 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0
cle Length: 120 . 0 secs
Intersection Performance Summary
r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
e Group Flow Rate
irp Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
tbound
245 1770 0.93 0 . 138 108 . 3 F
661 3539 0. 61 0 . 187 46.5 D 52 . 3 D
739 1583 0 .47 0. 467 22 .3 C
festbound
473 3418 0 .56 0 . 138 49.7 D
658 3524 1 . 01 0 .187 128 . 0 F 105. 8 F
thbound
847 3433 1. 10 0 .247 244. 8 F
' 1504 3539 0. 56 0. 425 26.5 C 141 . 0 F
thbound
207 1770 1 . 36 0 . 117 736. 4 F
' 1044 3539 0 . 66 0 .295 40 .3 D 209 . 7 F
739 1583 0 .23 0 . 467 19.2 B
Intersection Delay = 136. 5 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = F
HCS : Signals Release 3 . 1a
ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
astonbury, Connecticut 06033
ne: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
tail :
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
lersection:
ity/State: Manchester, CT
1lyst: BAH
ject No:
ime Period Analyzed: PM Peak 2001 Build
Ie: 6/8/99
t/West Street Name: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills
orth/South Street Name: Buckland Street
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION
CAPACITY ANALYSES
2001 WITH 55,000 S.F. OFFICE
WITH INTERSECTION/TIMING
REVISIONS
I
HCS: Signals Release 3 .1a
er: City/St: South Windsor, CT
lyst: BAH Proj #:
)ate: 6/7/99 Period: PM Peak 2001 Build w/Time Rev
fSt: Ellington Rd/Oakland Rd NIS St: Buckland Rd/Sullivan Ave
SIGNALLED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
1 Eastbound ► Westbound 1 Northbound 1 Southbound I
► L T R I L T R ► L T R I L T R ►
I I I I i
fr Lanes 1 1 2 0 ► 1 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 2 0 I
J . onfig ► L TR 1 L TR ► L TR ► L TR ►
o ume 1389 337 105 196 201 237 1105 825 135 1287 522 149 ►
la e Width 112 .0 12 .0 112 . 0 12 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0._ 112. 0 12 . 0 1
.j F Vol 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
)oration 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
se Combination 1 2 3 4 ► 5 6 7 8
B Left A P P 1 NB Left A A
Thru P P 1 Thru A
Right P P ► Right A
Peds 1 Ped
Left A P I SB Left A A A
Thru P 1 Thru A A
Right P 1 Right A A
Peds 1 Ped
Right ► EB Right
13 Right I WB Right
r en 5. 0 10 . 0 16. 0 5 . 0 5. 0 27 . 0
low 3. 0 3 . 0 3 .0 3 . 0 3. 0 3 . 0
.-LRed 0. 0 0 . 0 2 . 0 0 . 0 0 . 0 2 . 0
ycle Length: 90 . 0 secs
'I
I �
`i �
IHCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
ter: Buckland St at Pleasant Valley City/St: Manchester, CT
lyst: BAH Proj #:
)ate: 6/8/99 Period:
1 St: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills N/S St: Buckland Street
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
1 Eastbound ► Westbound I Northbound 1 Southbound I
L T R I L T R ► L T R ► L T R 1
I I I I I
t
Lanes ► 1 2 1 ► 2 2 0 ► 2 2 0 ► 1 2 1onfig 1 L T R 1 L T 1 L T 1 L T Rume 143 74 172 1369 335 1227 258 136 258 534 1
lane Width 112 .0 12 . 0 12 . 0 111 . 0 11 . 0 112. 0 12 . 0-_ 112. 0 12 . 0 12 .0
tR Vol ► 0 ( ( I 0 I
)uration 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
i Signal Operations
se Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
;B Left A 1 NB Left A A
Thru A ► Thru A P
Right A ► Right A P
Peds ( Ped
Left A ► SB Left A
Thru A ► Thru P
Right 1 Right P
Peds ► Ped
Right 1 EB Right A A
Right A I WB Right
teen 16. 6 22 .4 14 . 0 11 . 6 35. 4
low 3. 0 3 . 0 3 .0 3 . 0 3 .0
Red 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0
cle Length: 120 . 0 secs
r
Intersection Performance Summary
r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
e Group Flow Rate
3rp Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
tbound
245 1770 0 .20 0 . 138 46.2 D
661 3539 0 . 12 0 . 187 40 .7 D 29. 0 C
739 1583 0 .26 0 . 467 19 . 6 B
destbound
473 3418 0 . 87 0 . 138 68 . 9 E
658 3524 0 .57 0 . 187 45. 5 D 57 .8 E
I thbound
t 847 3433 0 . 30 0 . 247 36. 9 D _
1504 3539 0 . 19 0 . 425 21 .7 C 28 . 8 C
thbound
207 1770 0. 19 0 . 117 48 . 4 D
1044 3539 0 .27 0.295 33 . 1 C 34 . 3 C
739 1583 0 . 80 0 . 467 34 . 0 C
Intersection Delay = 41 . 4 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = D
HCS: Signals Release 3. 1a
' ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
7 astonbury, Connecticut 06033
ne: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
tail :
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
tersection: Buckland St at Pleasant Valley
'ity/State: Manchester, CT
tlyst: BAH
j ect No:
'ime Period Analyzed:
te: 6/8/99
t/West Street Name: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills
orth/South Street Name: Buckland Street
IHCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
_ ter: Buckland St at Pleasant Valley City/St: Manchester, CT
alyst: BAH Proj #:
)ate: 6/8/99 Period: AM Peak 2001 Build w/Lows Rev
tSt: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills N/S St: Buckland Street
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
1 Eastbound 1 Westbound 1 Northbound I Sorthbound J
I L T R J L T R J L T R J L T R 1
I I I I I
1Lanes ► 2 2 1 1 2 3 0 ► 2 2 0 1 1 2 1 1
Config i L T R ► L TR 1 L T ( L T R J
1*ume 164 76 177 1380 345 43 1234 292 139 269 553 1
te Width 112 . 0 12 . 0 12 .0 111 .0 11 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0=__ 112 . 0 12. 0 12 . 0 1
R Vol 1 0 1 0 1 - 1 0 I
)uration 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
ase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
;B Left A 1 NB Left A A
Thru A ► Thru A P
Right A 1 Right
Peds J Ped
Left A 1 SB Left A
Thru A J Thru P
Right P 1 Right P
Peds I Ped
Right ( EB Right A A
Right A ► WB Right
een 19. 6 22 . 4 14 . 0 8 . 6 35 . 4
tilow 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3. 0
-
Red 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0
cle Length: 120 .0 secs
Intersection Performance Summary
r/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
e Group Flow Rate
1rp Capcity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
,Mstbound
561 3433 0. 13 0. 163 43. 0 D
661 3539 0 .13 0 . 187 40 . 7 D 30. 5 C
Itbound699 1583 0.28 0 . 442 21 . 6 C
558 3418 0 . 76 0. 163 54 . 0 D
' 929 4979 0 . 46 0 . 187 43 . 8 D 48 . 9 D
lorthbound
761 3433 0. 34 0 .222 . 39. 6 D ,-
1416 3539 0 .23 0 . 400 23 . 9 C 30. 9 C
Ithbound
207 1770 0.21 0 . 117 48 .5 D
' 1044 3539 0.29 0 .295 33 . 3 C 32. 5 C
778 1583 0.79 0. 492 31 . 1 C
Intersection Delay = 38 .7 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = D
HCS: Signals Release 3 . Ia
ffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
Lexington Road
astonbury, Connecticut 06033
' ne: (860) 657-3579 Fax:
tail :
OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS
tersection: Buckland St at Pleasant Valley
ity/State : Manchester, CT
11lyst: BAH
ject No:
ime Period Analyzed: AM Peak 2001 Build w/Lows Rev
Ie: 6/8/99
t/West Street Name: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills
orth/South Street Name: Buckland Street
HCS: Signals Release 3 . 1a
C -;ter: Buckland St at Pleasant Valley City/St: Manchester, CT
' alyst: BAH Proj #:
Date: 6/8/99 Period: PM Peak 2001 Build w/Lowes Rev
_. "W St: Pleasant Valley/Buckland Hills N/S St: Buckland Street
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound I Westbound 1 Northbound 1 Southbound 1
1 L T R ► L T R ► L T R ► I. T R 1
I I I I I
1n;. Lanes { 2 2 1 1 2 3 0 1 2 2 0 ( 1 2 1 ►
Config 1 L T R ► L TR ► L T ► L T R ►
lulume 1216 385 329 1250 631 135 1884 802 1268 654 160 1
pane Width 112 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 111 . 0 11 . 0 112 . 0 12 . 0_ 112 . 0 12 . 0 12 . 0 1
� ,bR Vo l ► 0 I 0 I I 0
11
)uration 1 . 00 Area Type: All other areas
;I Signal Operations
se Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
;B Left A ► NB Left A A
Thru A ► Thru A P
Right A ► Right
Peds 1 Ped
I� ILeft A 1 SB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru P
Right P ► Right P
Peds i Ped
i Right 1 EB Right A A
;n Right A 1 WB Right
ireen 14 . 6 24 .4 25 . 0 7 . 6 28 .4
,:Jlow 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0 3 . 0
Red 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0 1 . 0
.ycle Length: 120 . 0 secs
'moo
STATE OF CONNECTICUT MEMBERS
STATE TRAFFIC COMMISSION Commissioner of Transportation
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Commissioner of public safety
�'•• •<„°"�• 2800 BERLIN TURNPIKE, P.O. BOX 317546 Commissioner of Motor vehicles
NEWINGTON, CT 06131-7546
Phone: (860) 594-3020
July 16, 1999
Mr. Bruce A. Hillson, P.E.
Traffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
193 Lexington Road
Glastonbury, CT 06033
Dear Mr. Hillson:
Subject: Town of South Windsor
250 and 280 Buckland Corporate Center
Certificate Determination
This is to confirm receipt of your July 13, 1999 letter and copy of the
traffic data.
The submission will be reviewed by the Department' s Bureau of Policy
and Planning and the Division of Traffic Engineering to determine if the site
generated traffic will substantially affect state highway traffic.
A copy of the traffic data submitted to this office should be furnished
to Police Chief Gary Tyler, the Legal Traffic Authority for the Town of South
Windsor.
Upon completion of the review, you will be advised by this office if a
Certificate will be required pursuant to Section 14-311 of the General
Statutes, as revised.
Very truly yours,
Joseph Santaniello, P.'E.
Executive Director
cc: Chief Gary Tyler
Mr. John R. Collins
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Printed on recycled or recovered paper
M �
Traffic Engineering Solutions,P.C.
193 Lexington Road `
Glastonbury, CT 06033 ;; yxa a a
(860)657-3579
July 7, 1999
Joseph Santaniello, P.E.
Executive Director
State Traffic Commission
Connecticut Department of Transportation
2800 Berlin Turnpike
P.O. Box 317546
Newington, CT 06131 - 7546
Dear Mr. Santaniello:
Traffic Engineering Solutions is pleased to submit the following information for review by
the State Traffic Commission for the proposed 55,000 square foot office development at 250 and
280 Buckland Road in South Windsor. The information is being submitted for your determination
if the proposed development has significant impact on the State Roadway System. The site is
located approximately 1,500 feet south of Deming Street and approximately 1,700 feet south of the
proposed Stop &Shop Super Food Store which was determined not to have significant impact on
the State Roadway System.
• A site location map;
• Four(4)copies of the Traffic Impact Study which includes traffic counts, capacity
analyses, and traffic flow diagrams;
• Four(4)copies of the Site Plan;
If during the review of the enclosed material you have any questions,please call me.
Very truly yours,
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS, P.C.
� �4
Bruce A. Hillson, P.E.
Cc: Arturo Guerra w/encl.
-Peter DeMallie w/encl.
C:\business\Guerra\1trstc.doc
STATE OF CONNECTICUT MEMBERS
STATE TRAFFIC COMMISSION Commissioner of Transportation
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Commissioner of public Safety
�'•• •,,;°• 2800 BERLIN TURNPIKE, P.O. BOX 317546 Commissioner of Motor Vehicles
NEWINGTON, CT 06131-7546
Phone: (860) 594-3020
August 3, 1999
Mr. Bruce A. Hillson, P.E.
Traffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.
193 Lexington Road
Glastonbury, CT 06033
Dear Mr. Hillson:
Subject : Town of South Windsor
250 and 280 Buckland Corporate Center
Certificate Determination
The Division of Traffic Engineering has completed its review of
your July 13, 1999 submission.
The conclusions of the investigation revealed that the site-
generated traffic will not significantly impact the State highway traffic
in the area.
Therefore, a certificate will not be required pursuant to Section
14-311 of the General Statutes at this time. Any future expansion of the
development will require further determination of impact by the State
Traffic Commission.
Very truly yours,
(9.U"4 s �
Joseph Santaniello, P.E.
Executive Director
CC: Chief Gary Tyler
Mr. John R. Collins'
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Printed on recycled or recovered paper
Q i
SOUTH WINDSOR POLICE SERVICES
GARY K. TYLER
CHIEF OF POLICE
August 24, 1999
Joseph Santaniello,P.E.
Executive Director
State Traffic Commission
Connecticut Department of Transportation
2800 Berlin Turnpike
P.O.Box 317546
Newington, CT 06131-7546
Dear Mr.Santaniello:
The Town of South Windsor is requesting approval by the State Traffic Commission to install a traffic
signal at the intersection of Buckland Road and access roads serving proposed developments on either side
of Buckland Road. The new intersection will be located approximately 1,400 feet south of the Deming
Street intersection with Buckland Road and approximately midway between the existing traffic signal at
Deming Street and the proposed traffic signal at the drive to Lowe's Home Improvement Center.
Background
The Town recently completed a corridor study for Buckland Road,Sullivan Avenue,and Ellington Road.
The study addressed existing conditions and identified the transportation needs along these roadways to
serve the anticipated future conditions with continued development of vacant properties under existing
zoning. The corridor study also included sections relating to access management to assure that drives to
new development are located at ideal locations to minimize impact on traffic flow along the roadways in
the study area,and to assure proper spacing of traffic signals along each corridor. Specific
recommendations of the study included the installation of two traffic signals along Buckland Road. One
signal was recommended in the vicinity of the proposed drive to Lowe's Home Improvement Center and
the second signal was recommended for a location midway between the Lowe's drive and Deming Street.
The installation of the traffic signal at the Lowe's drive is being reviewed with that development's
application as a Major Traffic Generator. The second traffic signal is the subject of this letter.
Proposed Signalization
At this time,the Town is requesting review by the State Traffic Commission for installation of a traffic
signal located approximately 1,400 feet south of Deming Street. This location is consistent with the
Corridor Study's recommendation for installing a traffic signal midway between Deming Street and the
Lowe's drive. The location also corresponds with the proposed access drive serving the office park at 250
&280 Buckland Road. The Town anticipates that application for this development will be made before the
end of summer once the traffic signal has been approved for this location. The Town has advised the
developers of the 250&280 Office Park that a condition of approval will be that other developments on
adjacent properties will be granted an easement for access through the signalized intersection and along the
office park access drive. During initial discussions with ConnDOT Staff,it was suggested that the access
151 SAND HILL ROAD - SOUTH WINDSOR,CONNECTICUT 06074 - (860)644-2551 - FAx(860)644-0515
drive be designed to accommodate three lanes leaving the site to allow construction of a double left turn if
it becomes necessary with other developments using the access drive. The latest site plan provides for this
eventuality. A further consideration for locating the traffic signal at the drive serving 250&280 Buckland
Road is the development of 232 commercially zoned acres along the opposite side of Buckland Road. This
large property is presently owned by Catholic Cemeteries Association of the Archdiocese of Hartford,Inc.,
and plans are underway to develop the parcel. The 232 acre parcel has frontage along Buckland Road
opposite Lowe's drive and opposite the proposed drive to the 250&280 Buckland Road Office Park. The
232 acre parcel does not have additional frontage along Buckland Road in the general vicinity of the
proposed traffic signal.
The Town views the proposed location for signalization(approximately 1,400 feet south of Deming Street)
as being consistent with the findings and recommendations of the Corridor Study while being located to
best serve the access needs of large developments along both sides of Buckland road. The proposed traffic
signal would be the third of three equally-spaced traffic signals along Buckland Road from Deming Street
to the Lowe's drive and would lend itself to coordination with the other two signals along this roadway.
Locating the traffic signal in advance of major development along either side of Buckland Road will define
the access points for development along both sides,while assuring the optimum spacing between traffic
signals along the roadway.
If you have any questions,or.require further information,please do not hesitate to contact me.
V ly yours,
K.T le
Chief of oli
GKT:cal
enclosure
Traffic Engineering Solutions,P.C.
193 Lexington Road
Glastonbury, CT 06033
(860) 657-3579
August 19, 1999
Joseph Santaniello, P.E.
Executive Director
State Traffic Commission
Connecticut Department of Transportation
2800 Berlin Turnpike
P.O. Box 317546
Newington, CT 06131 -7546
Dear Mr. Santaniello:
The Town of South Windsor is requesting approval by the State Traffic Commission to
install a traffic signal at the intersection of Buckland Road and access roads serving proposed
developments on either side of Buckland Road. Traffic Engineering Solutions, P.C.was requested
to provide information relating to the traffic volumes anticipated on the access roads serving the
two development sites and to complete a Warrant Analysis to demonstrate that signalization will be
require to serve these developments.
The traffic signal will be located at the proposed and fiiture access drives serving large
development activity in the Buckland Gateway Zone in South Windsor. This zone allows
development of office, commercial,light industrial and institutional uses. An office park
development located at 250&280 Buckland Road is expected to be submitted for Town review
before the end of Summer. This development includes 55,000 square feet of office space. The
owners have been advised that the Town will require easements to allow developments on adjacent
properties the right to use the proposed signalized access drive serving the office park. On the
opposite side of Buckland Road is a 232-acre commercially zoned parcel owned by Catholic
Cemeteries Association of the Archdiocese of Hartford,Inc. Catholic Cemeteries is presently
working with a developer to prepare a master plan for development of this site. At this time it is
not certain the specific type and magnitude of development that will be proposed on the 232 acre
parcel. An earlier plan indicated a mixed-use development of office and retail space having a total
of 1.5 million square feet. For the purpose of providing the State Traffic Commission with
information to determine if signalization is Warranted,the Warrant Analysis assumed that the 232
acres would be developed with one million square feet of Light Industrial use. Two-thirds of the
site trips were assumed to use the drive opposite the drive serving Lowe's Home Improvements
Center and the remaining one-third of the site generated trips were assumed to use the drive at the
signalized intersection being proposed by the Town of South Windsor. The magnitude of
development assumed by the Warrant Analysis is considerably less than the 1.5 million square feet
envisioned by an earlier plan and is likely much less than will be proposed by Catholic Cemeteries
when they complete their master plan for the site. Light Industrial use was assumed for the site
C:\business\Guerra\STCSignali.doc
because it provides the lowest trip generation during the peak hours and on a daily basis of the
various land uses permitted in the Buckland Gateway Zone(Office use would generate nearly twice
the number of new trips each day). Using the very conservative development scenario for the 232-
acre site and seventy percent of the required traffic volumes (85&percentile speeds exceed 52 mph
in each direction on Buckland Road),the traffic volumes leaving the site would meet the
requirements for signalization under Warrant 2—Interruption of Continuous Traffic. A greater
intensity of development(approaching the 1.5 million square feet of mixed use previously
envisioned)or a land use with a greater trip generation rate(office use)would result in traffic
volumes that would be far greater than the traffic volumes required by Warrant No. 2. A summary
of the hourly traffic volumes with one million square feet of light industrial use is presented in the
attached Table.
The location and need for a traffic signal at this location is consistent with the recommendations
of the corridor study recently completed by the Town and the Warrant Analysis completed by Traffic
Engineering Solutions,P.C. indicates that signalization will be warranted with development along both
sides of Buckland Road.
If during the review of the enclosed material you have any questions,please call me.
Very truly yours,
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS, P.C.
��'-��?��G�i ✓��e�%riili���
Bruce A.Hillson, P.E.
Cc:Arturo Guerra w/encl.
Peter DeMallie w/encl.
C:\bttsiness\Guerra\STCSignall.doc
Buckland Road at Access Road to 250 & 280 Corporate Center and Access Road to 232 Acre Site—Warrant No. 1
6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 10-11 11-12 1271 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8
Buckland Road 3fr
250& 280 Corp Nil 11 14 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 94 117 Nil Nil
232 Acre Site Nil 31 44 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 260 372 Nil Nil
Buckland Road at Access Road to 250 & 280 Corporate Center and Access Road to 232 Acre Site—Warrant No. 2
6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 10-11 11-12 12-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8
Buckland Road 708 .., ..: �.. ..; „ ,' 11NN �,. .": ... ! .... ,.°...,: �5;.:r
250 &280 Corp Nil 11 14 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 94 117 Nil Nil
232 Acre Site Nil 31 44l "r ,.. 7#1.,° .,., ,. Nil Nil
The 85th percentile speed along Buckland Road is 52 miles per hour(mph)in both directions. Therefore the reduced(70%of the required volumes)
traffic volume requirements were used for the Warrant Analysis. For Warrant No. I the minimum traffic volume for Buckland Road(both
directions)is 70%of 600 or 420 vehicles per hour. The minimum traffic volume for either site access road is 70%of 200 or 140 vehicles per hour.
For Warrant No. 2 the minimum traffic volume for Buckland Road(both directions)is 70%of 900 or 630 vehicles per hour. The minimum traffic
volume for either site access road is 70%of 100 or 70 vehicles per hour. The shaded boxes indicate the hours which meet the minimum traffic
volumes for each Warrant. Trips leaving the 232 acre site were determined from ITE Trip Generation by subtracting 170%of the morning and
afternoon peak hour trips from the daily trips and distributing these remaining trips equally to the eight hours between the peaks (half entering and
half leaving). The 170%assumes that the second hour of each peak period would have 70%of the peak hour trips.