Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSite Plan - Conservation (45) l TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR ,q SU O. " 'N . 1 INLAND WETLANDS, WATERCOURSES AND CONSERVATION APPLICATION 11�p Application # Date Received South Wndsor INSTRUCTIONS INLAND WETLANDS AGENCYI CONSERVATION COMMISSION 1. One application (1) with map and plans (2 copies)) shall be submitted together with the fee set forth in the Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations, Town of South Windsor...(See Regulations, Section VII -X) 2. The South Windsor Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations should be reviewed with respect to the standards and criteria for application Evaluation. (See Regulations, Sections VII -X) 3. The applicant understands that this application is to be considered complete only when all information and documents required by the Agency have been submitted. The applicant shall also complete the state filing form. A. Applicant's Name: K.F. Properties L.L.C. Address: 176 Smith Street, South Windsor, CT 06074 Phone: (home) (work) 644-5124 (fax) 644-2577 B. Legal owner's name: K F Properties L.L.C./ Walter P. & Lucyna Kebalo Address 176 Smith Street, South Windsor, Cr 06074 Phone (home) (work) 644-5124 (fax) 644-2577 (List additional owners, addresses, and phone numbers on back of application) C. If the applicant is not the owner of the subject property; a letter by the owner(s) authorizing the proposed regulated activity set forth in the application must accompany this form and will be part of the application. D. Project Name (if any) Wheeler Estates Senior .Residence Development/ Wheeler Estates Subdi- vision 1. Contact Person (if further information is needed) Peter R. Dd4allie, Principal (work) 291-8755 (fax) 291-8757 Design Professionals, Inc. E. The geographical location of the property which is to be affected by the proposed regulated activities including a description of the land in sufficient detail to allow identification of the property on the Inland Wetland and Watercourse Map. Assessor's map # 17 Parcel # 1 & 2 Zone A-20 7 F. .Names of all abutting property owners from records in Town Clerk's office. (use separate sheet if necessary) See attached sheet. G. Have you notified all abutting property owners (from records in Town Clerk's office) by certified letter that an application is pending before the Agency? Yes (you are required to supply ** (3' q a copy of the letter with the list of the names of the abutters).** Letter attached. H. Purpose and description of all proposed regulated activity(s) including amount of disturbance in square feet and types of fill and the time element involved: Total buffer disturbance is 0.11 acre,.or 5,08b sq. ft. No wetlands disturbance proposed. No watercourse disturbance proposed Buffer area disturbance consists of path, 55 l.f_ drainage pipe, rip rap, grading and a gazebo. Time element: 1-2 seasons. Propose 25 unit senior condo, 6 lot subdivision with associated streets, driveways, hcmes, utilities, landscaping, E&S controls,ocmmunity hall biofiltration and related I. A class A-2 map of the property drawn to 1" = 40', showin* earea'to be developed, extent of the wetlands and watercourses affected, topography, existing and proposed activities and names and locations of adjacent property owners must be submitted. Map appended hereto. J. Amount of regulated area disturbance and types of fill (including wetlands and regulated buffers). Wetlands area disturbance = 0. Buffer disturbance = 0.11 acre. see H. above for explanation of types of fill. K. Acreage of wetlands and watercourses in regulated areas to be altered: 0 L: Acreage of wetlands and watercourses to be created: To be determined. M. Lineal feet of proposed stream alteration: 0 N. Total land area of project and percentage which is wetlands: 11.9 acres, of which 0.71 acre is wetlands, or 5.9%. O. Identify all other permits or approvals that have been issued, applied for, or required with respect to the proposed activity set forth in this application. (These may include but not be limited to, local Planning & Zoning, Zoning Board of Appeals, D.E.P., F.E.M.A., D.O.T., The Army Corps of Engineers, and any other State, Local or Federal Permits.) _pzc. M?CA & npp P. The applicant (or designated representative) hereby attests that a sign will be posted at the following location(s) al= street frontage 8 By DPI Name Peter R. DeMal l;e on or before the fof wing date as directed by Town staff. Signature: / These signs must be displayed continuously for at least ten (10) days prior to scheduled meeting (see Regulations, Section 7.3a) The undersigned hereby applies for the regulated activities listed in paragraph H above, for a Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation permit for the property described herein and confirms that: j .. 1. She/he is familiar with the currently effective Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations of the Town of South Windsor. 2. She/he understands that at any time during the review period, the Agency may require the applicant to provide more information about the wetlands and/or watercourses in question and/or any proposed activity. 3. All information submitted in the application for review shall'be considered factual or in the case of anticipated activity, binding. A knowing failure of the applicant or any of her/his agents to provide correct information, or performance exceeding the levels of activity anticipated, shall be sufficient grounds for revocation of any permit under these regulations. 4. By making this application, the applicant gives permission to the Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Commission membersand/or its representative to enter the portions of the premises which are subject of the application for the purpose of inspection and investigation and otherwise evaluating the merits of the application both before and after a final decision has been issued. is :✓I�.PE_�2 Signature of Owner of Property Walter Kebalo/Managing Mwbez'Walter Mz alo / Iucyna o. -; Date Signature of Applicant Walter Kebalo/ Managing Meter Date 9 DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers . planners . surveyors . gis Transmitted via certified mail Dear Current Abutting Property:Owner June 30, 2000 Re: Wheeler Estates DPI Project No. 91-595 Smith Street South Windsor, Connecticut In accordance with regulations of the Inland Wetlands Agency and Planning& Zoning Commission,we are required to notiP you that applications have beer.filed on the property abutting yours and is subject to a hearing by the Planning&Zoning Commission and Inland Wetlands Agency. The application 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(s)to ask questions and,/or give comments,however,you are not required to attend. You may also submit written comments regarding the application(s)prior to the hearing if you so desire. For further information regarding the specific date this application(s) will be heard,please contact Debbie Wark, Recording Secretary or Michele Lipe, Deputy Planning Director or Jeff Folger, Wetlands Officer at the South Windsor Planning Department at 644-2511, ext. 253 or 252, or 229,respectively. Thank you. ShIcerply, D N PROFESSIONALS, INC. Ely- 4 4AWMA9 ' Peter R. eMallie Principal cc: I .F. Properties, L.L.C. Cummings&Lanza Richard Adams Jeffrey Folger Marcia Banach Galen B. Semprebon, P.E. 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860) 291-8755 •Fax: (860)291-8757 DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers . planners . surveyors . gis June 30,2000 Abutters List Wheeler Estates Smith Street DPI Project No, 91-595 1.) Redfield Homeowner's Association,P.O. Box 853, South Windsor, CT 06074-0853. 2.) Catholic Cemeteries Association of the Archdiocese of Hartford, Inc.,c/o Arnold J.Grant III, MAI, 100 Constitution Plaza, Hartford, CT 06103 3.) _ Margaret R. French, 198 Smith Street 4.) Rosal Conrado &Maria Perez, 6 Diggins Court 5.) Jillmarie Serbmese, 8 Diggins Court 6.) Dennis J. &Donna M. Churchill, 10 Diggins Court 7.) Divyesh&Heena Daial, 12 Diggins Court 8.) Jo-Anne Piazza, 14 Diggins Court 9.) Debra M. Javit, 16 Diggins Court 10.) Robert& Lori Wilson, 18 Diggins Court 11.) James &Adrienne Machowski, 14 Drake Court 12.) Vincent&Christine Dileone, 16 Drake Court 13.) Jennifer Tellan, 17 Drake Court 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860) 291-8755 • Fax: (860)291-8757 III. UNDERSTANDING AND IDENTIFYING WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES B. Watercourses 1. Understanding the Watercourse Definition The Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act distinguishes between wetlands and watercourses as follows: Watercourses means rivers,streams,brooks,waterways,lakes,ponds,marshes,swamps,bogs, and all other bodies of water,natural or artificial,public or private that are contained within or flow through the state.(Note:Tidal areas regulated under sections 22a-28 through 22a-35 of the CGS are excluded.) The broad"watercourse"definition allows regulation of watercourse areas,including artificial and intermittent, that may not be defined as wetlands and are quite distinct in appearance. Certain watercourses and waterways(rivers,streams,lakes,ponds,etc.)are obvious by the presence of water and hydrologic conditions. Swamps,marshes, and bogs, on the other hand, are areas more readily identified by the types of plants that grow there. In most cases, Connecticut's wetlands ando watercourses are identifiable by soil and hydrologic criteria. However, the upper reaches of watercourses(the zone of intermittent flow),disturbed areas(i.e.artificial excavations and artificial waterways),and areas where soil diagnostic characteristics are not present,require closer scrutiny to determine whether an area is subject to regulation.This section is meant to help with watercourse identification. The following conditions normally indicate the presence of a watercourse: -1. There is a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation that would suggest a swamp,marsh,or bog. (Note: If wetland soil characteristics are present,these boundaries should also be delineated.) 2. The area has hydrologic characteristics of a watercourse such as ponding of water;presence of scour developed by periodic flow of water; presence of a defined waterway, channel, alluvial deposits, or deposits of water-borne detritus. 3. An artificial waterway has been created or a natural waterway modified by human activities such that artificial conditions inhibit use of soil or vegetative indicators for delineation purposes. The following are examples of watercourse delineations using hydrologic and/or vegetative indica- tors: 1. Intermittent watercourses (those waterways characterized by non-persistent flow): a. The predominance of plants that are adapted to growth in a saturated area b. Ponded water c. Scour and erosion d. Deposits of waterborn debris e. Development of a defined channel as the result of moving water f. Deposits of recent alluvium 59 i III. UNDERSTANDING AND IDENTIFYING WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES B. Watercourses 2. Ephemeral or permanent ponds/bodies of water: a. Ponded water is present longer than the duration of a particular storm event.These areas may be identified on resource maps,aerial photographs,or by field observations.(Note:Areas ponded only when the ground is frozen do not qualify under this definition if other supporting criteria are not present.) 3. Swamp, marsh, or bog where vegetative indicators must be used. (Note: where no wetland soil characteristics are present.): a. While above conditions are relatively rare in Connecticut,the following description can be used as a guide to the characteristics of typical bog,marsh,or swamp.The descriptions are taken from Inland Wetland Plants of Connecticut by William Niering and Richard H. Goodwin, a 1983 publication prepared by the Connecticut College Arboretum in cooperation with the DEP Inland Wetlands Program. Swamps. Swamps are dominated by wetland trees and shrubs.Red maple is the most characteristic tree of the wooded swamps,with black gum and black ash as frequent associates. A conspicuous shrub understory of highbush blueberry, spicebush, sweet pepperbush, clammy azalea, and other wetland shrubs may develop.Arich diversity ofwildflowers,such as marsh marigold,skunk cabbage, jewelweed, violets, and cardinal flowers may also be present. Shrub swamps represent another swamp type where alders,willows,buttonbush,and other shrubs can form relatively pure or mixed stands.Occasionally,trees may be present.However,a high water table often favors certain shrubs, such as buttonbush,over trees.As in marshes,the underlying deposits are often relatively shalbwa and usually highly organic. Swamps may develop indirectly as woody species gradually inva e marshes, or directly as in poorly drained depressions. Marshes. These wetlands are characterized by the absence of trees and shrubs. The vegetation is composed of soft-stemmed herbaceous plants,some of which grow in moist soils of poorly drained wet meadows.In wetter conditions,plants such as cattails and pickerel weed grow with their stems and leaves partly in water(emergents).Others,like water-lilies and duckweed,float on the surface;while still others are completely submerged.In general,the silt and muck-type soils are relatively shallow, with the underlying glacial deposits being fairly close to the surface.The water table is at or above the surface throughout most of the year, but fluctuates seasonally.Areas of open water six inches or more in depth are common. Bogs. A distinctive wetlands type usually characterized by evergreen trees and shrubs, and underlain by deep peat deposits.Poor drainage usually leads to highly acidic conditions.The typical northern bog is easily recognized by the presence of black spruce and larch.In southern Connecticut the spruce and larch are replaced by southern white cedar or,in some cases,by red maple along with the typical swamp shrubs previously mentioned. In the absence of evergreens the deep underlying deposits help to identify a bog. Bogs frequently develop in former glacial depressions by gradually accumulating organic material. Typically a floating mat of vegetation advances out over the stagnant, acidic water. Peat deposits 20 to 40 feet deep are common. 60 Hydrograph Summary Report Page ■ Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Terse Time to Volume Return inflow Maxemen Maxirrmn Hydrograph No. type now interval peak period hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (am) (am) (wn) (acft) WS) (1t) (CUM 8 SCS Rurwtf 0.4 2 724 0.03 2 — B 23 tf 96-0 9 SCS Runoff 0.8 2 724 0.06 10 — — Bldg 2b3a 10 SCS Runoff 0.9 2 724 0.06 25 — — BkIg 2b3a 11 SCS Runoff 1.3 2 724 0.09 50 — Bldg 2b3a 12 SCS Runoff 1.5 2 724 0.10 100 — -- Bldg 263a 13 Reservoir 0.1 . 2 766 0.03. 2 8 92-43 547 Bfdg 2B-3A. 14 Reservoir 0.1 2 754 0.06 10 9 94.56 1145 Bklg 283A 15 Reservoir 0.1 2 740 0.06 .25 10 95A2 1280 Bldg 2R-3A 16 Reservoir 0.1 2 726 0.09 50 11 96.80 1936 Bldg 2B3A 17 Reservoir 0.1 2 724 010 100 12 97.C7 2353 Bldg 283A i Proj. file: BLDG2-3.GPW OF file:.SAMPLE.OF Run date: 06-29-2000 Hydrograph Summary Report Page s Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Tune Tore to Vohxne Rehm Inflow Maxknu m Maximisn Hydrograph No. type Now kdervad peak_ period hyd(sl etevatioa storage description (origin) (cis) (min) (min) (acfQ (yrs) (11( (CUM 8 SCS Runoff 0.3 2 724 002 2 — Bldg 1 M04.5 9 SCS Runoff 0.7 2 724 0.05 10 — Bldg#1 10 SCS Runoff 09 2 724 0.06 25 — Bldg#1 11 SCS Runoff 1.1 2 724 0.07 50 — Bldg#1 12 SCS Runoff 1.3 2 724 0.09 too — Bldg#1 13 Reservoir 00 2 776 0.02 2 8 10125 319 Bkdg 1 14 Reservoir 0.1 2 728 0:05 10 9 103.91 1009 Bldg f 15 Reservoir 0.1 2 724 Q06 25 10 1.04.37 1458 Bkg 1 16 Reservoir 0.1 2 720 0-07 50 11 t04:76 1864 Bldg 1 17 Reservoir O 1 2 715 0.09 100 12 105.14 2357 BkV 1 Proj_ file: BLDG1AGPW OF file: SAMPLE OF Run date: 06-29-2000 Hydrograph Summary Report Page Hyd. Hydrograph Peak 'rune Tatra to Vokmw Return Inflow Maximum► MaxwMM Hydrograph No. type flea interval peak period hyd(s) elevation storage description (wWn) (cfs} (min) ( ) (acft) (Yrs) PQ {can) 8 SCS Runoff 0.3 2 724 0.02 2 — B 1-2 ff 102.0 9 SCS Runoff 0.7 2 724 0.05 10 — — Bldg 1 b-2a 10 SCS Rurolf 0.9 2 724 a06 25 — Bldg lb-2a 11 SCS Runoff 1.0 2 724 0.07 50 — — — Bklg 1b-2a 12 SGS Runoff i.2 2 724 0.08 100 — Bldg lb-2a 13 Reservoir 0.0 2 774 002 2 8 99.41 414 Bklg-1 B-2A 14 Reserves 0.1 2 728 G.05 10 9 102.14 980 Bldg 1 B-2A 15 Reserve Q1 2 722 0.06 25 10 1.0263 1375 Bldg.1B-2A 16 Reservoir 0.1 2 72D 0.07 50 11 103.05 1754 Bldg IA-2B 17 Reservoir 0.1 2 716 008 100 12 103.M 2156 Bldg I&ZA Proj.-file: BLDG1-2.GPW OF file. SAMPLE.IDF j Run date: 06-29-2000 9���I��I�IIII�i11111 19��@I��I�IC�Ilillllll FZ-II - o LINE SEGMENT y o 0 0 o d ro TIME TO INLET Zc °' o o I 1 , TIME IN PIPE aIn 41 a 6 o + ACCUMULATED TIME o p p o o a Q FrAI ENTERING IQ CATCH BASIN a 0 O o o W a, 1 o SUM OF Al ab IN SYSTEM _ F'i v RAINFALL INTENSITY m 0 IN SYSTEM PIPE SIZE a v p �= a p LENGTH OF PIPE c d a e o � o - SLOPE a o 0 c c Q C o Sv N kn AVERAGE VELOCITY o O cf o 0o w FULL CAPACITY I E Z HEADWATER _ w c� 'n' �a •N 133NS AO a31173Ma AN1� ta3 kill S oo �< 9 31ra �t9 03N9IS30 l33rodd Z'Z wmoj N81630 "3116AS NvolS VOSONIM Hinos .40 NM01 �01��111111�1111111�1 STATION 13 OFFSET_ STATION --�_._.OFFS E T G STRUCTURE TYPE -4 o 0 q3 TOPOFQRATE ELEV.—:26 : m - 0 O DESIGNW.S.ELEV. R �{20! � r s- OUTLET STA. Q uT N OUTLET T.W.EL. -^ C OUTLET EL. •0 _ Qe 1,3. II El. EL. _ Os LENGTH (f5� LENGTH_11, EL. Q•b� EL Z SLOPE-�` SLOPE 'a. 4 2°Lp. (A INLET INLENT OUTLET CONTROL Nw N♦ A•-LE• SIZE T 0 TYPE n CONTROL HW OUTLET CONTROL NN •N + �• - LE• = SIZE MO1rROI • p o dC - -- TW he LS HW TYPE n 0 HMI Kp I de - =- TW he LS NW u = AV e.o13 d.�13 30 L H N fl =lf I STATION— OFFSET STATION_._ OFFSET__,_ c C STRUCTURE TYPE G x" �• I y' TOP OFORATE ELEV.— n o n m �S. ? DESIGN W.S. ELEV. 9 5', 80 N nl Z x V`,o g e r 0: `j• 9`j_.._. EL. 3 El. G 3. ? Qs S, 69 EL. EL. 2'�_L .< LENGTH ?oo LENGTH V < SLOPE I ,3 f o/o SLOPE INLET OUTLET CONTROL MW• N♦ A � SIZE CONTROL OUTLET CONTROL M1M • N � A•-Lt•INLET J q p CONTROL •-L�• O 1 TPE Nw •0 F = I TPE Mw Fc ; OOlb fl HW Kp H de TW he LS HW n HW K• H dp +p TW he LS; HW N = 0 141 N • 0 0 M C � N 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I STATION- OFFSET STATION-- S' �_...�OFFSET H a Ct3 STRUCTURE TYPE o r lO 6. 6 TOP OF GRATE ELEV. N ob:6 G OUTLET STA. DESIGN W.S.ELEV. IyO,6O JL t n0 In IL OUTLET T.W.EL. W C OUTLET EL. _ On EL. EL. 11 : � LENGTH MG ' LENGTH EL. .-So EL, SLOPE ors SLOPE INLET OUTLET CONTROL "WON * he - LE e INLET "► 0 SIZE CONTROL ; FSIZE CONTROL OUTLET CONTROL NW • N♦ he-L[e 3 TYPE n - HW Kc H do = TW ho LS HW = n HW Kc' H do - = TW he LS HW o z t � M 30 H N STATION OFFSET STATION_ OFfSET_�_ C STRUCTURE TYPE yl I c> '• TOP Of ORATE ELEV, n v n >Ic I p 1.56 DESIGN W.S. ELEV. .Q A (1 y (� Z D EL. EL. r p• EL._I o 0 0 AEL. p: i LENGTH ' T LENGTH u SLOPE 7D p SLOPE., u INLET I OUTLET CONT110L NW• N♦ be. INL[t J Jun CONTROL 111ECONTROL OUTLET CONTROL Mw • M Ae-Lee i TPE NW •o ~ z YPE r ; _ fl HW K H d NW •o s z -� c TW ho LS HW nl n HW Kc H do TW ho LS; HW � nl f • C O d :0 N :. W Stormwater Management Plan cV� 11 Wheeler Estates & Wheeler Subdivision V South Windsor, Connecticut ,UN S0 2000 South Windsor jNLANU wE-ILANDS AGENCY CONSERVATION COMMISSION epppaaaasyW C)ONry , � < t too N ara Prepared by Design Professionals,Inc. 165 South Satellite Road South Windsor,CT 06074 DPI Project No. 98-1110 June 15,2000 Table of Contents: Page# Introduction 1 Background 1 Proposed Development 1 Off-Site Analysis 2 Peak Runoff control 2- Riparian Buffers 2 Erosion/Sedimentation Control Systems 2 Storm-water Runoff Quality 2 Conveyance System 2 Discharge at the Natural Location 2 Maintenance and Operation 2 Topographic Contour Maps 3 Floodplain Boundaries 3 Drainage Design 3 Infiltration Basin Design 5 On-Site Storm Sewer Calculations 6 On-Site Water Quality Measures 6 Conclusions 6 Appendices Site Location Map A TR-55 (Existing) B TR-55 (Developed) C Hydrographs Developed to Basin D Detention Basin Design E Routing through Basin F TR-55 (Infiltration Basin) G Hydraflow—Drywell Impoundments H Drywell Impoundments Summary - I Storm Sewer Calculations J Drainage Area Maps Back of Report Introduction: The proposed development is to consist of a six-lot subdivision,and the development of 25 Senior Residences with a community building on approximately 11.9 acres of land. The site consists of two parcels, and is located on the north side of Smith Street in South Windsor, Connecticut. The site is located adjacent to the intersection of Wheeler road and Smith Street. A site location map is included in Appendix A. Background: The site presently consists of two parcels of land. There are presently two single-family homes,(one on each of the parcels). There are three driveways to Smith Street from the two sites. Also located on the site are an older barn, and a green house. To the rear of the site there is an open field, and forested areas. A stream runs through the northern end of the site, and generally the site drains from south to north to this stream. To the north and east of the site are undeveloped areas. To the west of the site is an existing residential development. Proposed Development: The proposed development of the site is to consist of the installation of a 600-foot cul-de-sac that would service 6 single-family lots, and would provide access to a twenty five-unit senior residence facility. The development of the senior residence facility would include installation of access driveways,parking areas, and a community building. The storm-water management system for the site will consist of a number of elements that in combination will mitigate the impacts of the development on the storm-water runoff from the site. The majority of the site will drain into a series of catch basins that will collect the runoff from the entrance road,parking and driveway areas, and a portion of the lawn and roofs of the senior residence units. The runoff that is collected in the catch basins will be discharged into a proposed detention basin that will discharge to the stream running through the northern end of the site. The proposed detention basin has been designed to detain the 2-100 year design storms at or below existing discharge rates. The basin will have a high level overflow for flows in excess of the 100-year storm event. The detention basin will outlet to the north through a 24"RC pipe,and impact basin. The peak discharge rates under developed conditions will be less than under existing conditions. The detention basin will also act as a water quality basin _Over half of the roofs of the senior residence units and some surrounding lawn areas will discharge into a series of drywell structures on the site. The drywells will provide recharge of the groundwater. Off-Site Analysis: The design of the proposed on-site storm-water drainage system has been completed with the goal of providing no increase in peak runoff from the site,and in providing infiltration of storm-water for groundwater recharge. As such,no negative impacts to off-site facilities is anticipated. Peak Runoff Control: The majority of the site development will drain to the'proposed detention basin. The basin will provide mitigation of peak storm-water flows. The design of the detention basin is outlined on pages 4 through 6 of this report. Riparian Buffers: Buffers consisting of natural and additional vegetative plantings will be maintained on the north,west, south, and east sides of the proposed senior residence development. Natural vegetation exists on the proposed 6 single-family building lots also. Erosion/Sedimentation Control Systems: An extensive erosion/sedimentation control plan has been developed as part of the subdivision and site plan design. These measures include the following: 1. Installation of silt fence down-slope of disturbed areas. 2. Installation of silt fence around stockpiled materials. 3. Installation of silt fence around catch basins. 4. Use of the detention basin during construction as a sediment basin. 5. Seeding and mulching disturbed areas as soon as practical during construction. 6. Limiting the areas of disturbance during construction. 7. Installation of construction entrance pads,and sweeping of roadways as needed. 8. Maintenance of the above measures. Stormwater Runoff Quality.A number of water quality measures have been integrated into the site design to provide for treatment of the stormwater runoff from the site. These include the installation of catch basin sumps,and the use of the proposed detention basin as a water quality basin. Conveyance System: The on-site conveyance system consists of a piped stormwater system discharging to a detention basin. The piped drainage system has been designed to accommodate the runoff from a 10 Yr design storm. The detention basin has been designed to handle the runoff from a 100-year design storm through the outlet,and larger storm events through the emergency overflow weir. Discharge at the Natural Location: The site discharge to the north will be to the existing stream channel. Maintenance and Operation: The following maintenance operations will be required to ensure the proper and efficient operation of the Storm Water Detention Basin System. The following maintenance schedule is intended to be a minimum guide,and additional. inspections and maintenance measures may be required following large storm events that could cause the deposition of excess debris in the system. Pipe Outlet Locations: The pipe outlets and associated riprap shall be inspected annually and cleaned of silt and or debris. The riprap shall be re-shaped and replenished as required. Catch Basins: The catch Basins shall be inspected annually. The sumps shall be cleaned when the depth of material within the sumps reaches 1'. Pavement Sweeping: The parking lots within the senior residence facility shall be swept at a minimum of twice per year. Once in the spring shortly after the end of the snow season, and once in the fall after the leaves have fallen. Outlet Structure: The detention basin outlet structure shall be inspected twice annually,and all debris and silt shall be removed. The discharge point from the outlet system shall be inspected also, and all silt and debris shall be removed. The riprap at the discharge shall be re-arranged and additional stone added as needed. All silt and debris shall be disposed of at a suitable location. Emergency Spillway: The stone spillway shall be inspected twice yearly. All large woody growth that may affect the flow of water or the stability of the spillway shall be removed. The spillway shall also be inspected after any flow passes through it. The riprap shall be re-arranged and added to as required to maintain the design as per the design plans. Topographic Contour Maps: Topographic contour maps have been provided showing the drainage areas for the site at a scale of 1"=100'. The maps showing the existing and developed conditions are included in the rear of this report. F000dplain Boundaries: There are no floodplain boundaries on the site. Drainage Design: The drainage design of the site has been completed utilizing a number of computer programs and generally accepted design methods. The runoff from the site under existing and developed conditions was developed utilizing the TR-55 computer program. The flood routing and detention and infiltration basins modeling was completed utilizing the Hydroflow Hydrographs for Windows computer program by Intelisolve. The drainage piping on site was designed using the rational formula. Under existing conditions, the site drains to the north. The TR-55 calculations for the existing runoff to the north are contained in appendix B. The summary of the results is as follows: Design Storm Peak Discharge(CFS) 2 year 3 10 year 9 25 year 13 50 year 17 100 year 20 Under developed conditions, the site was designed to drain to the north to the proposed detention basin The TR-55 analysis for the discharge to the basin is included in appendix C. Due to the inclusion of the infiltration basins, the area of runoff under developed conditions is less than under existing conditions. The summary of the existing, and developed conditions discharges to the detention basin are as follows for the 2-100-year storm event: Design Storm Exist. Peak Discharge(CFS) Developed Peak Discharge (CFS) 2 year 3 5 10 year 9 12 25 year 13 17 50 year 17 21 100 year 20 25 Appendix D contains the hydrographs for the runoff to the basin for the 2 through 100- year storm events. The detention basin has been designed to contain the 2-100 year storm events within the basin, and to discharge at a rate less than or equal to the peak rate of runoff to the north under existing conditions. Storm events up to and including the 100-year storm event will discharge from the basin through 2 orifices, and the outlet pipe. Storms in excess of the 100-year storm event would discharge through- a catch basin top on the outlet structure. In event that the outlet structure becomes clogged, or for very large storms, a riprap emergency spillway has also been provided. The design of the detention basin is included in appendix E. The hydrograph routings of the 2-100 year design storms through the detention basin are included in appendix F. A summary of the existing and post developed drainage discharges from the detention basin are as follows: Storm Event Existing Discharge(CFS) Developed Discharge(CFS) 2 year 3 2.1 10 year 9 8.6 25 year 13 11.5 50 year 17 14.3 100 year 20 20.5 Infiltration Basin Design: The on-site infiltration basins have been designed to contain and infiltrate the runoff from the selected portions of the site in a relatively short period of time. Runoff from portions of the roofs of the senior residence units and limited surrounding lawn areas will be directed into the infiltration basins.- Each of the infiltration basins consists of one or two pre-cast concrete drywells, and a surface impoundment area above the drywell. The volume of the drywell and surface impoundment has been designed to totally contain the runoff for up to the 100-year design storm. For the 100-year design storm, the longest duration of standing water above ground within the impoundment areas would be approximately 32 hours. The maximum depth of impoundment for a 100-year design storm is 2.3 feet. The infiltration areas have been designed based on information obtained from a series of deep hole test pits conducted on site. The soil conditions were determined including restrictive layers, indications of high water, and groundwater elevations at time of testing. Soil samples were taken in each of the test pits, and permeability tests were conducted on the soil samples. Based on this information, permeability rates were calculated for the soils on the site. The soils on site were found to have permeability rates ranging from 25 to 75 feet per day. A permeability rate of 25 feet per day was used for the analysis. In order to be conservative on these calculations, it was assumed that the groundwater - would only enter the ground through the drywell, and no water would percolate into the ground from the surface impoundments above the drywells. The runoff from each of the sub-areas draining to the'individual drywells and associated surface impoundment areas has been calculated using the TR-55 computer program. The results are included in appendix G. BLDG 1 includes the drainage from units 1, 2, and part of 3. Bldg lb-2a includes the remainder of unit 3, 4, 5, and part of.6. Bldg 2b-3a includes the remainder of 6, 7, 8, 9,.10, and part of 11. Bldy 6 includes part of unit 22, 23,24, and 25. All of the drywells collect runoff from some adjacent lawn areas also. The Hydroflow routing design for each basin are included in appendix H. The infiltration from the drywell impoundment areas was modeled in a similar fashion as a detention basin outlet would be modeled, and is based on the permeability rates calculated previously. The summary of the Hydroflow hydrographs for the infiltration from the drywells is included in appendix I. On-Site Storm Sewer Calculations: The storm sewer calculations for the storm piping within the proposed subdivision roadway are included in appendix J. The storm sewer has been designed for a 10-year design storm utilizing the rational formula. On Site Water Quality Measures: The site design encompasses a number of water quality design elements. The infiltration basins on site will provide direct recharge of storm-water into the ground and therefore lower the volume of runoff from the site. The detention basin has been designed to provide an additional 1' of storage volume below the outlet elevation. Based on the groundwater measurement at the test pit in this location, it is anticipated that the basin will remain wet during periods of the year. This wet basin area will provide water quality mitigation for runoff from the site Conclusions: The on-site stormwater system with the associated water quality and detention.basin is expected to mitigate any potential impacts from the development of the site both due to increase of runoff, and water runoff quality. The infiltration basins will provide infiltration of a portion of the runoff from the site. APPENDIX A ARRO / Pv!) EWNOMM: AD C ROATMO 30 ROAD \ A' BAR'.`� i'...�...1 � bvAW r G��NG GRANDVIEW tERRACE op r� a NES�) *µ. Nt • 'CRY J � Qy �l /•� A l sf (A UR E •• SITE E couRr '\ AYot � purl � �� ••�� DOWN �, ,I•' ��) COURT �... D� na.` if Ifi� � pk�pO PFI� MET �...�•. f DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. LOCATION PLAN APPENDIX B RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2 . 00 Project : KEBALO User: GBS Date: 06/13/99 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: EXISTING Subarea : 1 Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab. ) Open space (Lawns,parks etc. ) Good condition; grass cover > 75% — 2 .07(61) — - Impervious Areas Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways — .58(98) -- - OTHER AGRICULTURAL LANDS Pasture, grassland or range fair — 3.3(69) — — Woods — grass combination fair — 1.3(65) -- - Woods good — 3.2(55) — — Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) 10.4 SUBAREA: 1 TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: 10.45 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: 64* * — Generated for use by GRAPHIC method TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2 .00 Project : KEBALO User: GBS Date: 06/13/99 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: EXISTING Flow Type 2 year Length Slope Surface n Area Wp Velocity Time rain (ft) (ft/ft) code (sq/ft) (ft) (ft/sec) (hr) Sheet 3.2 150 .024 F 0.306 Shallow Concent'd - 880 .028 U 0.091 Time of- Concentration = 0.40* Sheet Flow Surface Codes A Smooth Surface F Grass, Dense Shallow Concentrated B Fallow (No Res . ) G Grass, Burmuda Surface Codes C Cultivated < 20 % Res. H Woods, _Light P Paved D Cultivated > 20 % Res. I Woods, Dense U Unpaved E Grass—Range, Short J Range, Natural * — Generated for use by GRAPHIC method I GRAPHICAL PEAK DISCHARGE METHOD Version 2 . 00 Project : KEBALO User: GBS Date: 06/13/99 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: EXISTING Data: Drainage Area 10.45 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 64 Time of Concentration: 0.40 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area NONE Storm Number 1 2 3 4 5 Frequency (yrs) 2 10 25 50 100 24-Hr Rainfall (in) 3.2 4 .7 5.5 6 .2 6.9 Ia/P Ratio 0. 35 0.24 0.20 0. 18 0. 16 Runoff (in) 0.56 1.39 1.91 2 .41 2 .93 Unit Peak Discharge 0.532 0.626 0.645 0.657 0.667 (cfs/acre/in) Pond and Swamp Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.0% Ponds Used Peak Discharge (cfs) 3 9 13 17 20 * - Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines - - APPENDIX C RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2 .00 Project : PROPOSED CONDITIONS User: GBS Date: 06-22-99 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: TO DETENT. BASIN Subarea : 1 Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab. ) Open space (Lawns,parks etc. ) Good condition; grass cover > 75% — 2 .28(61) —. Impervious Areas Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways — 2 .32(98) — — Residential districts Avg % impery (by average lot size) 1/2 acre 25 — 3. 0(70) — — OTHER AGRICULTURAL LANDS Brush — brush, weed, grass mix . good — 0.69(48) — — Woods good — 1.00(55) — — Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) 9.29 SUBAREA: 1 TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: 9 .29 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: 72* * — Generated for use by GRAPHIC method TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2 .00 Project : PROPOSED CONDITIONS User: GBS Date: 06-22-99 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: _ Subtitle: TO DETENT. BASIN Flow Type 2 year Length. Slope Surface n Area Wp Velocity Time rain (ft) ( ft/ft) code (sq/ft) (ft) ( ft/sec) (hr) Sheet 3.2 50 .02 A 0.012 Sheet 150 .024 F 0 .306 Shallow Concent'd 180 .028 U 0.019 Open- Channel 750 4 .5 0._046 Time of Concentration = 0:38* Sheet Flow Surface Codes A Smooth Surface F Grass; .Dense Shallow Concentrated B Fallow (No Res. ) G Grass, Burmuda Surface Codes C Cultivated < 20 % Res. H Woods, Light P Paved D Cultivated > 20 % Res. I Woods, Dense U Unpaved E Grass—Range, Short J Range, Natural * — Generated for use by GRAPHIC method GRAPHICAL PEAK DISCHARGE METHOD Version 2 .00 - .. .............-- Project : PROPOSED CONDITIONS User: GBS Date: 06-22-99 County HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: TO DETENT. BASIN Data: Drainage Area 9.29 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 72 Time of Concentration: 0.38 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area NONE Storm Number 1 2 3 4 5 Frequency (yrs) 2 10 25 50 100 24—Hr Rainfall (in) 3.2 4 .7 5 .5 6.2 6 .9 Ia/P Ratio 0.24 0. 17 0 . 14 0. 13 0. 11 Runoff (in) 0.93 1. 97 2 .59 3. 16 3.74 Unit Peak Discharge 0.637 0.679 0.693 0.702 0.709 (cfs/acre/in) Pond and Swamp Factor 1. 00 1. 00 1 .00 1.00 1.00 0.0% Ponds Used IPeak Discharge (cfs) 5 12 17 21 25 * — Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines APPENDIX D T y 6 - SCS Runoff - 2 Yr - Qp = 5.33 cfs ii 41 j � Ot �i ilk ! ! U0 5 10 -15 20 25 Time(Hrs) i i i 7 - SCS Runoff - 10 Yr - Qp = 12." cfs i 151 I ! j 101 i i Ill ! lout , U0 5 10 .15 20 25 Time pxs) 8 - SCS Runoff - 25 Yr - Qp = 16.89 cfs i 20i i 151 I 1 Q 101 / out 5 i 1 U0 5 10 15 20 25 Time(Hrs) 9 - SCS Runoff - 50 Yr - Qp = 20.45 cfs j 25, ' i ,7nI �. I � i vl I i 15 ' I 10 out 5I I 00 5 10 .15 20 25 iTime(Hrs) Y 10 - SCS Runoff - 100 Yr - Qp = 24.92 cfs i I 25 Q 15 al I � � t i 101 i I i � Out � 5I III U0 5 10 - 15 20 25 Time(Hrs) i APPENDIX E i Reservoir Report Page 1 Reservoir No. 2 Kabelo Lower Culvert/Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [A] [B] [C] Rise(in) = 24.0 6.0 18.0 Crest Len(ft) = 6.0 0.0 0.0 Span(in) = 24.0 6.0 18.0 Crest El.(ft) = 88.50 0.00 0.00 No.Barrels = 1 1 1 Weir Coeff. = 3.00 3.00 3.00 Invert El.(ft) = 83.00 83.00 85.80 Eqn.Exp. = 1.50 1.50 1.50 Length (ft) = 100.0 1.0 1.0 Multi-stage = Yes No No Slope(%) = 1.00 1.00 1.00 N-Value = .013 .013 .013 Orif.Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 Multi-stage = - Yes Yes Tailwater Elevation = 0.00 ft Note:All outflows have been analyzed 4ndw inlet and o"control. Stage/Storage i Discharge Table Stage storage Elevation Cuiv.A Cuiv. B Cuiv.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Discharge _ (ft) (cuft) (ft) (ifs) (cfs) (cft) (cfs) (cfs) (ifs) (cfs) 0.0 00 83.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - --- 0.00 0.1 180 83.10 3.38 0.13 0.00 0.00 -- - 0.13 0.2 359 83.20 4.78 0.30 0.00 0.00 - - 0.30 0.3 539 83.30 5.86 0.37 0.00 0.00 - 0.37 0.4 719 83.40 6.76 0.42 0.00 0.00 - 0.42 0.5 899 83.50 7.56 0.47 0.00 0.00 - - 0.47 0.6 1,078 83.60 8.29 0.56 0.00 0.00 - - 0.56 0.7 1,258 83.70 8.95 0.57 0.00 0.00 - - 0.57 O.0 1,438 83.80 9.57 0.70 0.00 0.00 - 0.70 0.9 1,617 83.90 10.15 0.76 0.00 0.00 - - 0.76 1.0 1,797 84.00 10.70 0.82 0.00 0.00 -- - 0.82 1.2 2,432 84.20 11.72 0.92 0.00 0.00 - - 0.92 1.4 3,066 84.40 12.66 1.01 0.00 0.00 - 1.01 1.6 3,701 84.60 13.53 1.10 0.00 0.00 - - 1.10 1.8 4,335 84.80 14.35 1.18 0.00 0.00 - - 1.18 2.0 4,970 85.00 15.13 1.25 0.00 0.00 -- - 1.25 2.2 5,604 85.20 16.57 1.32 0.00 0.00 -- 1.32 2.4 6,239 85.40 17.90 1.39 0.00 0.00 --- 1.39 2.6 6,873 85.60 19.13 1,45 0.00 0.00 - - 1.45 2.8 7,508 85.80 20.29 1.51 0.00 0.00 - - 1.51 3.0 8,.142 86.00 21.39 1.57 1.15 0.00 - - 2.72 3.2 9,022 86.20 22.43 1.62 3.81 0.00 - - 5.43 3.4 9,901 86.40 23.43 1.68 4.66 0.00 - - 6.34 3.6 10,781 86.60 24.39 1.70 5.38 0.00 - - 7.08 3.8 11,660 86.80 25.31 1.73 6.02 0.00 - - 7.75 4.0 12,540 87.00 26.20 1.76 6.59 0.00 - - 8.35 Continues on next page... Kabelo Lower Page 2 Stage/Storage/ Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Culy.A Culv. B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Discharge (ft) (cuft) (ft) (cfs) (cis) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cis) (cfs) 4.2 13,419 87.20 27.06 1.79 7.12 0.00 - - 8.91 4.4 14,299 87.40 27.89 1.82 7.84 .0.00 - - 9.66 4.6 15,178 87.60 28.70 1.84 8.72 0.00 - - 10.56 4.8 16,058 87.80 29.48 1.85 9.51 0.00 - - 11.36 5.0 16,937 88.00 30.25 1.86 9.70 0.00 - - 11.56 5.2 18,087 88.20 31.00 1.90 10.93 0.00 - - 12.83 5.4 19,236 88.40 31.73 1.88 11.57 0.00 - 13.45 5.6 20,386 88.60 32.44 1.89 12.18 0.57 - - 14.65 5.8 21,535 88.80 33.14 1.87 12.76 2.96 - - 17.59 6.0 22,685 89.00 33.82 1.80 13.32 6.36 - - 21.49 6.2 23,834 89.20 34.49 1.69 13.85 10.54 - 26.08 6.4 24,984 89.40 35,15 1.47 13.25 15.37 -- -- 30.09 6.6 26,133 89.60 35.79 1.21 10.90 20.77 - - 32.87 6.8 27,283 89.80 36.43 0.98 8.82 26.68 - --- 36.43 7.0 28,432 90.00 37.05 0.00 0.00 33.07 - 33.07 i Stage / Storage i 8 .. 61 1 Stage(ft) 4 00 5000 10000 15000 20000 25M 30000 Storage(cult) APPENDIX F Hydrograph Report Page w Hyd. No. 38 2 YR DESIGN Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 2.12 cfs Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time interval = 2 min Inflow hyd. No. = 6 Reservoir name = Kabelo Lower Max. Elevation = 85.90 ft Max. Storage = 7,828 cuft Storage MAcation method used. Total Volume=27,361 cult,0.628 acft Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation CUIv.A CUIv.B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C . Outflow (hrs) (cfs) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 12.23 5.11 84.38 12.55 1.00 - - - - 1.00 12.27 5.29 84.54 13.25 1.07 --- - 1.07 12.30 5.33<< 84.69 13.92 1.14 - - - 1.14 12.33 5.30 84.85 14.65 1.20 - - - - 1.20 12.37 5.20 85.00 15.16 1.25 - - --- --- 1.25 12.40 5.05 85.15 16.20 1.30 - - - 1.30 12.43 4.85 85.29 17.14 1.35 - - - - 1.35 12.47 4.59 85.41 17.98 1.39 - - - - 1.39 12.50 4.29 85.53 18.69 1.43 - - -- 1.43 12.53 3.95 85.63 19.30 1.46 --- - - - 1.46 12.57 3.59 85.72 19.81 1.48 - - - 1.48 12.60 3.23 85.79 20.23 1.51 - - - ----- 1.51 12.63 2.90 85.84 20.53 1.52 0.25 - - - 1.77 12.67 2.62 85.88 20.71 1.53 0.44 - - --- 1.97 12.70 2.38 85.89 20.81 1.54 0.54 - - 2.08 12.73 2.17 85.90 a< 20.85 1.54 0.58 - - - 2.12 12.77 1.98 85.90 20.84 1.54 0.57 - - ----- 2.11 12.80 1.82 85.89 20.80 1.54 0.53 - - - 2.07 12.83 1.69 66.88 2U.74 1.53 6.47 - - - 2.00 12.87 1.57 85.87 20.67 1.53 0.40 - - - 1.93 12.90 1.47 85.86 20.60 1.53 0.32 - - ---- 1.84 12.93 1.39 85.84 20.52 1.52 0.24 - - - 1.76 12.97 1.32 85.83 20.44 1.52 0.16 ---- - - 1.68 13.00 1.27 85.81 20.37 1.51 0.09 - -- 1.60 13.03 1.22 85.80 20.31 1.51 0.02 - --- - 1.53 13.07 1.18 85.79 20.24 1.51 - - - - 1.51 13.10 1.15 85.78 20.16 1.50 - ---- - ----- 1.50 13.13 1.12 85.76 20.08 1.50 - - - - 1.50 13.17 1.09 85.75 20.00 1.49 - -- - - 1.49 13.20 1.06 85.73 19.90 1.49 - ---- ----- -- 1.49 13.23 1.03 85.72 19.81 1.48 ----- ----- - 1.48 13.27 1.01 85.70 19.71 1.48 - - ---- - 1.48 13.30 0.99 85.68 19.60 1.47 - - - - 1.47 13.33 0.97 $5.66 19.49 1.47 1.47 _-- ----- 13.37 0.95 85.64 19.38 1.46 - - - ---- 1.46 13.40 0.94 85.62 19.27 1.46 - - --- - 1.46 13.43 0.93 85.60 19.16 1.45 - - - - 1.45 13.47 0.91 85.58 19.03 1.44 - - - 1.44 Continues on next page... 2 YR DESIGN Page 2 Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Culv.A Culy. B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hrs) (Cfs) (ft) WS) WS) WS) (Cfs) (Cfs) (Cfs) WS) 13.50 0.90 85.56 18.91 1.44 - - - - 1.44 13.53 0.89 85.54 18.78 1.43 --- - - -- 1.43 13.57 0.89 85.52 18.66 1.43 - =-- - 1.43 13.60 0.88 85.50 18.53 1.42 - - ---= - 1.42 13.63 0.87 85.48 18.41 1.41 - - 1.41 13.67 0.86 85.46 18.28 1.41 - - - - 1.41 13.70 0.85 85.44 18.15 1.40 - - - - 1.40 13.73 0.84 85.42 18.02 1.39 - - - 1.39 13.77 0.83 85.40 17.89 1.39 - - - - 1.39 13.80 0.82 85.38 17.75 1.38 - - - - 1.38 13.83 0.81 85.36 17.61 1.37 - - - 1.37 13.87 0.80 85.34 17.47 1.37 - -- - - 1.37 13.90 0.80 85.32 17.33 1.36 - - - - 1.36 ---- ----- - 13.93 0.79 85.29 9 7.19 9.35 - - - - 1.35 13.97 0.78 85.27 17.05 1.34 -- - - - 1.34 14.00 0.77 85.25 16.91 1.34 ---- - - - 1.34 14.03 0.76 85.23 16.76 1.33 --- - - 1.33 14.07 0.75 85.21 16.62 1.32 - - -- - 1.32 14.10 0.74 85.19 16.46 1.32 - - - - 1.32 14.13 0.73 85.16 16.31 1.31 -- _- _-- 1.31 14.17 0.72 85.14 16.15 1.30 - - - - 1.30 14.20 0.71 85.12 15.99 1.29 ----- - - 1.29 14.23 0.70 85.10 15.83 1.28 ---- - - - 1.28 14.27 0.70 85.08 15.67 1.28 - - - -- 1.28 14.30 0.69 85.05 15.52 1.27 - - - - 1.27 14.33' 0.68 85.03 15.36 1.26 -- - - - 1.26 14.37 0.68 85.01 15.20 1.25 --- - - - 1.25 14.40 0.67 84.99 15.08 1.25 - - - - 1.25 1.4.43 0.67 84.97 15.00 1.24 ---- 1.24 ---- _ 1.24 ----- ----- 14.47 0.66 84.95 14.91 1.23 - ---- ----- - 1.23 14.50 0.66 84.92 14.83 1.22 --- - - 1.22 14.53 0.65 84.90 14.75 1.21 - - --- - 1.21 14.57 0.65 84.88 14.67 1.21 - ----- ----- ----- 1.21 14.60 0.64 84.86 14.58 1.20 -- - - - 1.20 14.63 0.64 84.84 14.50 1.19 - - - - 1.19 14.67 0.63 84.82 14.42 1.18 ---- - - - 1.18 14.70 0.63 84.80 14.34 1.18 -- - - - 1.18 14.73 0.62 84.78 14.26 1.17 ----- - - - 1.17. 14.77 0.62 84.76 14.17 1.16 ----- - -- 1.16 14.80 0.62 84.74 14.09 1.15 --- - - - 1.15 14.83 0.61 84.72 14.01 1.14 - - --- 1.14 14.87 0.61 84.70 13.92 1.14 - - - - 1.14 14.90 0.60 84.68 13.84 1.13 ---- - - - 1.13 14.93 0.60 84.66 13.76 1.12 ---- - - -- 1.12 14.97 0.59 84.64 13.68 1.11 - - - ----- 1.11 15.00 0.59 84.62 13.60 1.10 - - - 1.10 15.03 0.58 84.60 13.52 1.10 --- - - ---- 1.10 15.07 0.58 84.58 13.43 1.09 - - - ----- 1.09 15.10 0.57 84.56 13.35 1.08 - - - - 1.08 15.13 0.57 84.54 13.26 1.07 - - - - 1.07 Continues on next page... 2 YR DESIGN Page 3 Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Cult'.A Cult'.B Cult'.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hrs) (cfs) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (CIS) (cfs) 15.17 0.56 84.52 13.18 1.06 ---- - - - 1.06 15.20 0.56 84.50 13.10 1.06 - - - - 1.06 15.23 0.55 84.48 13.02 1.05 - - - --- 1.05 15.27 0.55 84.46 12.93 1.04 - - - - 1.04 15.30 0.54 84.44 12.85 1.03 - - --- - 1.03 15.33 0.54 84.43 12.77 1.02 - - - - 1.02 15.37 0.53 84.41 12.69 1,02 - - - - 1.02 15.40 0.53 84.39 12.61 1.01 - - ----- - 1.01 15.43 0.52 84.37 12.52 1.00 - - - - 1.00 ...End Hydrograph Report Page Hyd. No. 39 10 YR DESIGN Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 8.56 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time interval = 2 resin Inflow hyd. No. = 7 Reservoir name = Kabelo Lower Max. Elevation = 87.08 ft Max. Storage = 12,869 cult Storage Indication memos used. Total Volume=59,920 cuff,1.376 acft Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation CuIv.A Culv.B CuIv.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hm) (cfs) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 12.00 4.93 84.41 12.71 1.02 - - ---- - 1.02 12.03 5.96 84.58 13.44 1.09 - - - - 1.09 12.07 7.13 84.78 14.28 1.17 - - - 1.17 12.10 8.36 85.03 15.35 1.26 ----- - ----- - 1.26 12.13 9.57 85.32 17.37 1.36 - - ---- - 1.36 12.17 10.70 85.65 19.42 1.46 - - - --- 1.46 12.20 11.64 85.99 21.36 1.57 1.12 - - - 2.68 12.23 12.23 86.21 22.48 1.63 3.85 - - - 5.48 12.27 12.44 << 86.39 23.30 1.07 4.60 - - - 6.27 12.30 12.37 86.55 24.13 1.70 5.19 - - ---- 6.88 12.33 12.12 86.69 24.78 1.72 5.65 - -- - 7.37 12.37 11.76 86.80 25.33 1.73 6.03 - - - 7.76 12.40 11.28 86.90 25.77 1.75 6.31 - -- - 8.06 12.43 10.71 86.98 26.11 1.76 6.53 - - - 8.29 12.47 10.03 87.03 26.35 1.77 6.68 - 8.45 12.50 9.28 87.07 26.48 1.77 6.77 - - ----- 8.54 12.53 8.45 87.08 26.52 1.77 6.79 --- - - 8.56<< 12.57 7.60 87.06 26.46 1.77 6.75 - - - 8.52 12.60 6.77 87.03 26.31 1.77 6.66 - - - 8.42 12.63 6.03 86.97 26.08 1.76 6.51 - - - 8.27 12.67 5.41 86.91 25.78 1.75 6.32 - - - 8.07 12.70 4.89 86.83 25.44 1.74 6.10 - - ----- 7.84 12.73 4.45 86.75 25.06 1.7-2 5.85 - - 7.57 12.77 4.06 86.66 24.66 1.71 5.57 - - 7.28 12.80 3.72 86.57 24.25 1.70 5.28 ----- ----- --= 6.98 12.83 3.43 86.48 23.83 1.69 4.96 -- ----- - 6.65 12.87 3.18 86.40 23.41 1.67 4.64 - - - 6.32 12.96 2.98 86.31 23.00 1.65 4.29 -- - - 5.94 12.93 2.81 86.23 22.61 1.63 3.95 - - --- 5.59 12.97 2.66 86.17 22.25 1.61 3.35 - - - 4.96 13.00 2.55 86.11 21.97 1.60 2.63 - ---- - 4.23 13.03 2.45 86.07 21.76 1.59 2.10 ---- - 3.69 13.07 2.37 86.04 21.61 1.58 1.71 - - - 3.29 13.10 2.29 86.02 21.49 1.57 1.42 _----- _-- 2.99 13.13 2.23 86.00 21.41 1.57 1.19 - - - 2.76 13.17 2.16 85.99 21.31 1.56 1.07 - ---- - 2.63 13.20 2.11 85.97 21.22 1.56 0.97 - - - 2.53 13.23 2.05 85.95 21.13 1.55 0.88 - - - 2.44 Continues on next page... 10 YR DESIGN Page 2 Hydrograph Discharge Table TY Time Inflow Elevation Culy.A Culy. B CuIv.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hm) (cfs) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cts) (cfs) 13.27 2.00 85.94 21.06 1.55 0.80 - - - 2.35 13.30 1.96 85.93 20.99 1.55 0.73 - - - 2.28 13.33 1.92 85.92 20.93 1.54 0.66 =---- - - 2.21 13.37 1.89 85.91 20.87 1.54 0.61 - -_ - 2.15 13.40 1.86 85.90 20.82 1.54 0.55 - - - 2.09 13.43 1.83 85.89 20.77 1.53 0.50 - - - 2.04 13.47 1.81 85.88 20.73 1.53 0.46 ---- ---- ---- 1.99 13.50 1.78 85.87 20.70 1.53 0.42 - - - 1.95 13.53 1.76 85.87 20.66 1.53 0.39 - _---- 1.92 13.57 1.74 85.86 20.63 1.53 0.36 - - ---- 1.88 13.60 1.73 85.86 20.60 1.53 - 0.33 - - - 1.85 13.63 1.71 85.85 20.58 1.52 0.30 - - -- 1.82 13.67 1.69 85.85 20.55 1.52 0.28 - - - 1,80 13.70 1.67 85.84 20.53 9.52 0.25 ---- ----- -- 1.77 13.73 1.65 85.84 20.51 1.52 0.23 - --- - 1.75 13.77 1.63 85.84 20.49 1.52 0.21 - - - 1.73 13.80 1.61 85.83 20.47 1.52 0.19 --- ----- - 1.71 13.83 1.59 85.83 20.45 1.52 0.17 - ---- 1.69 13.87 1.57 -85.83 20.43 1.52 0.15 - - - 1.66 13.90 1.55 85.82 20.41 1.52 0.13 _- _-- 1.64 13.93 1.53 85.82 20.40 1.51 0.11 - ---- -- 1.62 13.97 1.52 85.82 20.38 1.51 0.09 - - 1.60 14.00 1.50 85.81 20.36 1.51 0.07 - - - 1.58 14.03 1.48 85.81 20.34 1.51 0.05 - --- - 1.56 14.07 1.46 85.81 20.32 1.51 0.03 ----- ---- - 1.54 14.10 1.44 85.80 20.30 1.51 0.01 - - - 1.52 14.13 1.42 85.80 20.29 1.51 ---- -- - -- 1.51 14.17 1.40 85.80 20.26 1.51 - - - 1.51 14.20 1.38 85.79 20.24 1.51 ----- _----- _---- 1.51 14.23 1.37 85.79 20.21 1.51 ---- ---- ----- ---- 1.51 14.27 1.35 85.78 20.18 1.50 --- -- --- ---- 1.50 14.30 1.34 85.77 20.14 1.50 ----- -- - - 1.50 14.33 1.33 85.77 20.11 1.50 - - - --- 1.50 14.37 1.31 85.76 20.07 1.50 -- - - 1.50 14.40 1.30 85.75 20.03 1.50 - ' - - - 1.50 14.43 1.29 85.75 19.98 1.49 - - ---- - 1.49 14.47 1.28 85.74 19.94 1.49 - ---- - 1.49 14.50 1.27 85.73 19.89 1.49 --- --- ----- ---- 1.49 14.53 1.26 85.72 19.84 1.49 - - - -- 1.49 14.57 1.25 85.71 19.79 1.48 ---- - ___- 1.48 14.60 1.24 85.70 19.74 1.48 - - -- - 1.48 14.63 1.23 85.70 19.68 1.48 - - - 1.48 14.67 1.22 85.69 19.63 1.48 ---- - - - 1.48 14.70 1.21 85.68 19.57 1.47 - ---- ----- 1.47 14.73 1.20 85.67 19.52 1.47 - - --- ---- 1.47 14.77 1.19 85.66 19.46 1.47 - - - - 1.47 14.80 1.18 85.65 19.40 1.46 ----- ----- - - 1.46 14.83 1.17 85.64 19.33 1.46 ----- - ----- - 1.46 14.87 1.16 85.62 19.27 1.46 - - - - 1.46 14.90 1.16 85.61 19.21 1.45 - - - - 1.45 Continues on next page... 10 YR DESIGN Page 3 Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Culy.A Culy. B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hrs) (Cfs) (ft) WS) (Cfs) (Cfs) WS) (Cfs) (Cfs) (cfs) -- 14.93 1.15 85.60 19.14 1.45 - - - - 1.45 14.97 1.14 85.59 19.07 1.45 - - - - 1.45 15.00 1.13 85.58 19.00 1.44 - =--- -- - 1.44 15.03 1.12 85.57 18.92 1.44 - - -= - 1.44 15.07 1.11 85.55 18.85 1.43 1.43 16.10 1.10 86.54 18.77 1.43 - - - - 1.43 15.13 1.09 85.53 18.69 1.43 - - - - 1.43 15.17 1.08 85.52 18.61 1.42 ---- - - - 1.42 15.20 1.07 85.50 18.63 1.42 -- - - - 1.42 15.23 1.06 86.49 18.45 1.41 - - - - 1.41 15.27 1.05 85.48 18.36 1.41 - - - - 1.41 15.30 1.04 85.46 18.28 1.41 -- -- - - 1.41 15.33 1.03 85.45 18.19 1.40 - - - - 1.40 I5.37 9.02 85.43 18.10 1'46 - - - - 1.40 15.40 1.01 85.42 18.01 1.39 --- - - - 1.39 15.43 1.00 85.40 17.92 1.39 - - - - 1.39 15.47 0.99 85.39 17.83 1.38 --- -- - - 1.38 15.50 0.98 85.37 17.73 1.38 - - - - 1.38 15.53 0.97 85.36 17.62 1.37 - - - - 1.37 15.57 0.96 85.34 17.52 1.37 _- - ----- 1.37 16.60 0.95 85.33 17.42 1.36 - - - - 1.36 15.63 0.94 85.31 17.31 1.36 - - - - 1.36 15.67 0.93 85.30 17.21 1.35 - - - - 1.35 15.70 0.92 85.28 17.10 1.35 - - --- - 1.35 15.73 0.91 85.26 16.99 1.34 - - - - 1.34 15.77 0.90 85.25 16.88 1.34 - - - 1.34 15.80 0.89 85.23 16.77 1.33 - - - - 1.33 15.83 0.87 85.21 16.66 1.32 - -- - - 1.32 15.87 0.86 85.20 16.54 1.32 ------ 1.32 15.90 0.85 85.18 16.42 1.31 - - - - 1.31 16.93 0.84 85.16 16.29 1.31 - - - - 1.31 15.97 0.83 85.14 16.17 1.30 - - --- --- 1.30 16.00 0.82 85.13 16.04 1.29 - - - - 1.29 16.03 0.81 85.11 15.91 1.29 - - - - 1.29 16.07 0.80 85.09 15.78 1.28 - - - - 1.28 16.10 0.79 85.07 15.65 1.28 1.28 16.13 0.78 85.05 15.51 1.27 --- - - - 1.27 16.17 0.77 85.04 15.38 1.26 - --- - - 1.26 16.20 0.76 85.02 15.25 1.26 - - - 1.26 16.23 0.76 85.00 15.12 1.25 - - - - 1.25 16.27 0.75 84.98 15.05 1.24 - ---- - - 1.24 16.30 0.74 84.96 14.97 1.24 - - - - 1.24 16.33 0.74 84.94 14.90 1.23 - - 1.23 16.37 0.73 84.92 14.83 1.22 - - --- --- 1.22 16.40 0.72 84.90 14.76 1.22 - - --- ---- 1.22 16.43 0.72 84.89 14.69 1.21 - - ---- 1.21 16.47 0.71 84.87 14.61 1.20 - - - -- 1.20 16.50 0.71 84.85 14.54 1.20 - - --- 1.20 16.53 0.70 84.83 14.47 1.19 - - - - 1.19 16.57 0.70 84.81 14.40 1.18 - - - -- 1.18 Continues on next page... 10 YR DESIGN Page 4 Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Culy.A Culv. B Cuiv.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hrs) (cfs) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 16.60 0.69 84.79 14.33 1.17 - - - - 1.17 16.63 0.69 84.78 14.25 1.17 - - --- - 1.17 16.67 0.69 84.76 14.18 1.16 - =---- - - 1.16 16.70 0.68 84.74 14.11 1.15 - - _ - 1.15 16.73 0.68 84.72 14.03 1.15 ----- ---- - - 1.15 16.77 0.67 84.70 13.96 1.14 ---- -- - - 1.14 16.80 0.67 84.69 13.89 1.13 --- - - ----- 1.13 16.83 0.66 84.67 13.81 1.13 - - - - 1.13 16.87 0.66 84.65 13.7-4 1.12 - - - 1.12 16.90 0.65 84.63 13.67 1.11 ---- - - - 1.11 16.93 0.65 84.62 13.60 1.11 - - - 1.11 16.97 0.64 84.60 13.53 1.10 -- ----- -- --- 1.10 17.00 0.64 84.58 13.46 1.09 - - - - 1.09 17.03 0.64 84.57 13.38 1.08 - - - - 1.08 17.07 0.63 84.55 13.31 1.08 -- - --- - 1.08 17.10 0.63 84.53 13.23 1.07 - - ---- -- 1.07 17.13 0.62 84.52 13.16 1.06 ----- - - - 1.06 17.17 0.62 84.50 13.09 1.06 - ---- - - 1.06 17.20 0.61 -84.48 13.02 1.05 -- - ---- - 1.05 17.23 0.61 84.47 12.94 1.04 - ----- _- 1.04 17.27 0.60 84.45 12.87 1.03 - - - 1.03 17.30 0.60 84.43 12.80 1.03 - - --- ---- 1.03 17.33 0.59 84.42 12.73 1.02 - - - - 1.02 17.37 0.59 84.40 12.66 1.01 1.01 17.40 0.59 84.39 12.59 1.01 - - -- ---- 1.01 ...End Hydrograph Report -- Page 1 Hxd. No. 40 - 25 YEAR DESIGN Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 11.53 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time interval = 2 rain Inflow hyd. No. = 8 Reservoir name = Kabelo Lower Max. Elevation = 87.98 ft Max. storage = 16,835 cult Storage Indication meUiod used. Total Volume=80,440 cuft,1.847 adft Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation CuIv.A Cuter. B Cuter.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hrs) (cfs) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 12.10 11.65 85.92 20.96 1.54 0.70 ---- - - 2.24 12.13 13.25 86.18 22.34 1.62 3.56 - - - 5.18 12.17 14.74 86.41 23.46 1.68 4.68 - - ---- 6.36 12.20 15.94 86.64 24.57 1.71 5.51 - - 7.22 12.23 16.67 86.88 25.65 1.74 6.24 - - 7.98 12.27 16.89<< 87.11 26.66 1.78 6.88 - - - 8.65 12.30 16.73 87.32 27.56 1.81 7.56 - ---- ----- 9.37 12.33 16.34 87.51 28.32 1.83 8.31 - - - 10.14 12.37 15.79 87.66 28.93 1.84 $.95 - ---- - 10.79 12.40 15.11 87.78 29.40 1.85 9.43 - - - 11.28 12.43 14.29 87.87 29.75 1.85 9.58 - - - 11.43 12.47 13.35 87.93 30.00 1.86 9.64 - - 11.49 12.50 12.31 87.97 30.14 1.86 9.67 - --- 11.53 12.53 11.18 87.98 30.16 1.86 9.68 --- ---- ---- 11.53 << 12.57 10.02 87.95 30.06 1.86 9.65 - - --- 11.51 12.60 8.90 87.90 29.85 1.85 9.60 - - ----- 11.46 12.63 7.92 87.81 29.54 1.85 9.53 ---- -- - 11.37 12.67 7.09 87.71 29.14 1.84 9.17 - - - 11.01 12.70 6.46 87.60 28.71 1.84 8.73 - - - 10.57 12.73 5.81 87.49 28.25 1.83 8.23 - - - 10.06 12.77 5.29 87.37 27.77 1.82 7.74 -- - - 9.56 12.80 4.85 87.26 27.29 1.80 7.32 - - --- 9.12 12.83 4.47 87.14 26.80 1.78 6.96 - - - 8.74 12.87 4.14 87.02 26.29 1.77 6.65 - - 6.42 12.90 3.87 86.91 25.78 1.75 6.32 - -- 8.07 12.93 3.65 86.79 25.28 1.73 6.00 -- - - 7.73 12.97 3.46 86.68 24.78 1.72 5.65 - ---- - 7.37 7.01 13.03 3.18 86.48 23.83 1.69 4.96 - -- ---- 6.65 13.07 3.07 86.39 23.39 1.67 4.63 - - 6.30 13.10 2.98 86.31 22.97 1.65 4.27 - ---- 5.92 13.13 2.89 86.23 22.59 1.63 3.94 - ---- - 5.57 13.17 2.80 86.17 22.25 1.61 3.34 - - - 4.95 13.20 2.73 86.11 21.99 1.60 2.67 -- 4.27 13.23 2.66 86.08 21.80 1.59 2.19 ---- - -- 3.78 13.27 2.59 86.05 21.66 1.58 1.84 - - - 3.42 13.30 2.64 86.03 21.66 1.66 1.68 ---- - 3.15 13.33 2A9 86.02 2-1.48 1.57 1.38 - --- - 2.95 Continues on next page... 25 YEAR DESIGN Page 2 Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Culy.A Culy. B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hm) (cfs) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 13.37 2.44 86.01 21.42 1.57 1.23 - - - 2.80 13.40 2.40 86.00 21.37 1.57 1.13 --- - - 2.70 13.43 2.37 85.99 21.31 1.56 1.07 =--- - -- 2.63 13.47 2.33 85.98 21.26 1.56 1.01 - --- - 2.57 13.50 2.31 85.97 21.21 1.56 0.96 - - - 2.52 13.53 2.28 85.96 21.17 1.56 0.92 - ---- - 2.47 13.57 2.25 85.95 21.13 1.55 0.88 - - - 2.43 13.60 2.23 85.95 21.09 1.55 0.84 - -- - 2.39 13.63 2.20 85.94 21.06 1.55 0.81 - - - 2.36 13.67 2.18 85.93 21.03 1.55 0.77 - - - 2.32 13.70 2.15 85.93 21.00 1.55 0.74 - - 2.29 13.73 2.13 85.92 20.97 1.55 0.71 - - -- 2.26 13.77 2.10 85.92 20.95 1.54 0.69 --- - - 2.23 9 3.86 168 85.91 26.62 1.64 6.66 --- ---- - 2.20 13.83 2.05 85.91 20.89 1.54 0.63 - - - 2.17 13.87 2.03 85.91 20.87 1.54 0.61 - - - 2.15 13.90 2.00 85.90 20.85 1.54 0.58 - ---- - 2.12 13.93 1.98 85.90 20.82 1.54 0.55 - - -- 2.09 13.97 1.95 85.89 20.80 1.54 0.53 - -- - 2.07 14.00 1.92 85.89 20.77 1.53 0.50 --_ _- 2.04 14.03 1.90 85.88 20.75 1.53 0.48 - - - 2.01 ...End Hydrograph Report Page 1 Hyd. No. 41 - -- 50 YR DESIGN Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 14.31 cfs Storm frequency = 50 yrs Time interval = 2 min Inflow'hyd. No. = 9 Reservoir name = Kabelo Lower Max. Elevation = 88.54 ft Max. Storage = 20,062 cuft Storage Indk-lion method used. Total Volume=96,963 cuff,2.226 acft Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Culy.A Culy. B -Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hrs) (ofs) (ft) tom) (oft) (off) (ofs) (efs) WS) (oft) 8.90 0.04 83.01 0.31 0.01 - - - - 0.01 8.93 0.05 83.01 0.38 0.01 - - - - 0.01 8.97 0.05 83.01 0.46 0.02 - - - - 0.02 9.00 0.06 83.02 0.55 0.02 - - - - 0.02 9.03 0.07 83.02 0.64 0.02 - - - - 0.02 9.07 0.08 83.02 0.75 0.03 -- -- --- - 0.03 9.10 0.08 83.03 0.86 0.03 - ---- - - 0.03 9.13 0.09 83.03 0.98 0.04 - - - - 0.04 9.17 0.10 83.03 1.10 0.04 - - - - 0.04 9.20 0.11 83.04 1.23 0.05 - - - - 0.05 9.23 0.11 83.04 1.37 0.05 - - - - 0.05 9.27 0.12 83.04 1.52 0.06 - - - - 0.06 9.30 0.13 83.05 1.67 0.06 ---- - -- - 0.06 9.33 0.14 83.05 1.83 0.07 - - - - 0.07 9.37 0.15 83.06 1.99 0.07 - - - --=- 0.07 9.40 0.16 83.06 2.17 0.08 - - --- - 0.08 9.43 0.17 83.07 2.34 0.09 - - - - 0.09 9.47 0.18 83.07 2.53 0.09 - - - - 0.09 9.50 0.19 83.08 2.71 0.10 - - - - 0.10 9.53 0.20 83.09 2.91 0.11 = - - - 0.11 9.57 0.21 83.09 3.11 0.12 - - - - 0.12 9.60 0.22 83.10 3.32 0.12 - - - - 0.12 9.63 0.23 83.10 3.44 0.13 - - - -- 0.13 9.67 0.24 83.11 3.53 0.14 - - - - 0.14 9.70 0.25 83.12 3.61 0.15 - - - - 0.15 9.73 0.26 83.12 3.70 0.16 - - - ---- 0.16 9.77 0.27 83.13 3.79 0.18 - - - - 0.18 9.80 0.28 83.14 3.87 0.19 =- - - - 0.19 9.83 0.29 83.14 3.96 0.20 - - - - 0.20 9.87 0.30 83.15 4.05 0.21 - - - - 0.21 9.90 0.31 83.15 4.14 0.22 - - - - 0.22 9.93 0.33 83.16 4.23 0.23 - - - - 0.23 9.97. 0.34 83.17 4.32 0.24 - - - - 0.24 10.00 0.35 83.17 4.41 0.25 - - - - 0.25 10.03 0.36 83.18 4.50 0.26 - - - - 0.26 10.07 0.38 83.19 4.59 0.28 - - -- - 0.28 10.10 0.39 83.19 4.69 0.29 - - - - 0.29 10.13 0.40 83.20 4.78 0.30 - - ---- 0.30 Continues on next page... 50 YR DESIGN Page 2 Hydrograph Discharge Table w Time Inflow Elevation Culv.A Culy. B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hrs) (cfs) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 10.17 0.42 83.21 4.86 0.30 - - - - 0.30 10.20 0.43 83.21 4.94 0.31 - - - - 0.31 10.23 0.44 83.22 5.03 0.31 - - - - 0.31 10.27 0.46 83.23 5.13 0.32 - - _ - 0.32 . 10.30 0.48 83.24 5.23 0.33 - - - - 0.33 10.33 0.49 83.25 5.35 0.33 - - - - 0.33 10.37 0.51 83.26 5.46 0.34 - - - --- 0.34 10.40 0.53 83.28 5.59 0.35 - - - - 0.35 10.43 0.55 83.29 5.72 0.36 - - - - 0.36 10.47 0.57 83.30 5.86 0.37 - - - - 0.37 10.50 0.59 83.31 5.99 0.37 - --- - 0.37 10.53 0.61 83.33 6.12 0.38 - - - ---- 0.38 10.57 0.63 83.34 6.26 0.39 - - - - 0.39 10.60 0.65 83.36 6.41 0.40 - - - - 0.40 10.63 0.67 83.38 6.57 0.41 - - - - 0.41 10.67 0.70 83.40 6.73 0.42 - - - - 0.42 10.70 0.72 83.41 6.88 0.43 - ----- ---- - 0.43 10.73 0.74 83.43 7.04 0.44 - - - - 0.44 10.77 0.77 83.46 7.20 0.45 - - - - 0.45 10.80 0.79 83.48 7.38 0.46 - - - - 0.46 10.83 0.81 83.50 7.56 0.47 -- -- - -- 0.47 10.87 0.84 83.52 7.72 0.49 - - - - 0.49 10.90 0.86 83.55 7.89 0.51 - - - --- 0.51 10.93 0.89 83.57 8.06 0.53 - - - - 0.53 10.97 0.92 83.59 8.24 0.55 - - - - 0.55 11.00 0.94 83.62 8.40 0.56 - - - - 0.56 11.03 0.97 83.64 8.58 0.57 - - - - 0.57 11.07 1.00 83.67 8.76 0.57 - - - - 0.57 11.10 1.03 83.70 8.96 0.58 - - - - 0.58 11.13 1.06 83.73 9.14 0.61 - - - - 0.61 11.17 1.10 83.76 9.33 0.65 - -- - -- 0.65 11.20 1.14 83.79 9.51 0.69 - - - - 0.69 11.23 1.18 83.82 9.70 0.71 - - - - 0.71 11.27 1.23 83.85 9.88 0.73 -- - - - 0.73 11.30 1.29 83.89 10.08 0.76 - - - -- 0.76 11.33 1.34 83.93 10.29 0.78 - - - - 0.78 11.37 1.41 83.97 10.50 0.80 - - - - 0.80 11.40 1.47 84.00 10.72 0.82 - - - - 0.82 11.43 1.55 84.03 10.85 0.83 - -- - - 0.83 11.47 1.62 84.06 10.99 0.85 - - - --- 0.85 11.50 1.70 84.09 11.15 0.86 - - - ----- 0.86 11.53 1.78 84.12 11.31 0.88 - - - - 0.88 11.57 1.88 84.16 11.50 0.90 - - - - 0.90 11.60 2.01 84.20 11.70 0.92 ----- - - - 0.92 11.63 2.17 84.24 11.90 0.94 - - - - 0.94 11.67 2.37 84.29 12.14 0.96 - - - - 0.96 11.70 2.63 84.35 12.41 0.99 ----- - - - 0.99 11.73 2.95 84.42 12.72 1.02 - -- -- 1.02 11.77 3.35 84.50 13.07 1.05 - - - -- 1.05 11.80 3.82 84.59 13.49 1.09 - - - - 1.09 Continues on next page... 50 YR DESIGN Page 3 Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Culy.A Culy. B CuIv.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hrs) WS) (ft) (Cft) (Cft) WS) (Cfs) (ifs) (ifs) (efs) 11.83 4.36 84.70 13.95 1.14 - - - - 1.14 11.87 4.97 84.83 14.49 1.19 - - - - 1.19 11.90 6.65 84.99 15.09 1.25 - - - - 1.25 11.93 6.45 85.17 16.36 1.31 -- - = - 1.31 11.97 7.47 85.38 17.78 1.38 - - - - 1.38 12.00 8.83 85.64 19.35 1.46 - --- - - 1.46 12.03 10.51 85.93 21.02 1.55 0.76 - - 2.31 12.07 12.40 86.16 22.25 1.61 3.33 - - - 4.95 12.10 14.34 86.38 23.32 1.67 4.56 - - - 6.23 12.13 16.25 86.61 24.44 1.71 5.42 - - - 7.12 12.17 18.00 86.87 25.63 1.74 6.23 - - - 7.97 12.20 19.41 87.16 26.86 1.78 7.00 - - - 8.79 12.23 20.24 87.44 28.06 1.82 8.03 - - - 9.85 12.27 20.46<< 87.71 29.14 1.84 9.17 - - - 11.01 12.30 20.22 87.96 30.10 1.86 9.66 - - - 11.52 12.33 19.69 88.14 30.76 1.89 10.54 - - - 12.42 12.37 18.99 88.27 31.27 1.89 11.17 - - - 13.06 12.40 18.13 88.39 31.67 1.88 11.52 - - - 13.41 12.43 17.11 88.47 31.97 1.89 11.78 0.20 - - 13.86 12.47 15.96 88.52 32.16 1.89 11.94 0.35 - -- 14.18 12.50 14.68 88.54<< 32.24 1.89 12.01 0.41 - - 14.31 << 12.53 13.31 88.54 32.22 1.89 11.99 0.39 -- -- 14.27 12.57 11.91 88.50 32.10 1.89 11.89 0.30 - -- 14.08 12.60 10.56 88.45 31.90 1.88 11.72 0.14 - - 13.75 12.63 9.38 88.37 31.63 1.88 11.49 - - - 13.37 12.67 8.39 88.28 31.30 1.89 11.20 - ---- - 13.09 12.70 7.57 88.18 30.92 1.89 10.81 - - - 12.70 12.73 6.86 88.07 30.52 1.87 10.15 - - - 12.02 12.77 6.25 87.95 30.07 1.86 9.65 - - - 11.51 12.80 5.72 87.80 29.50 1.85 9.52 - -- - 11.37 12.83 5.26 87.65 28.90 1.84 8.93 - - - 10.77 12.87 4.88 87.51 28.32 1.83 8.31 - - - 10.14 12.90 4.56 87.37 27.75 1.81 7.72 - - -- 9.54 12.93 4.29 87.23 27.20 1.80 7.24 -- - - 9.04 12.97 4.07 87.11 26.65 1.78 6.87 - -- - - 8.65 13.00 3.89 86.98 26.12 1.76 6.54 - - - 8.30 13.03 3.74 86.87 25.60 1.74 6.21 ----- - - 7.95 13.07 3.61 86.75 25.10 1.73 5.87 - - - 7.60 13.10 3.50 86.65 24.61 1.71 5.54 - - - 7.25 13.13 3.39 86.55 24.15 1.70 5.20 -- - - 6.90 13.17 3.29 86.46 23.71 1.68 4.87 - - - 6.55 13.20 3.20 86.37 23.29 1.67 4.54 - - - 6.21 13.23 3.12 86.29 22.90 1.65 4.21 - - - 5.85 13.27 3.04 86.22 22.55 1.63 3.90 - - 5.53 13.30 2.98 86.16 22.24 1.61 3.30 - - - 4.91 13.33 2.92 86.12 22.00 1.60 2.70 - - ---- 4.30 13.37 2.87 86.08 21.83 1.59 2.27 - - - 3.86 13.40 2.82 86.06 21.71 1.58 1.96 - - - 3.54 13.43 2.78 86.04 21.62 1.58 1.73 - - - 3.31 13.47 2.74 86.03 21.55 1.58 1.56 - - - 3.14 Continues on next page... Hydrograph Report Page Hyd. No. 42 100 YR DESIGN Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 20.51 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time interval = 2 -'rain Inflow hyd. No. = 10 Reservoir name = Kabelo Lower Max. Elevation = 88.95 ft Max. Storage = 22,396 cult Storage Indication mettwd used. Total Volume=117,892 cult,2.706 acft Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Cuiv.A Culv. B CUIv.C Weir A Weir B Weir C- Outflow (hrs) (cfs) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 11.50 2.22 84.40 12.66 1.01 - - - - 1.01 11.53 2.32 84.45 12.87 1.03 - - ----- - 1.03 11.57 2.45 84.50 13.09 1.06 -- - - - 1.06 11.60 2.61 84.55 13.33 1.08 --- - - - 1.08 11.63 2.81' 84.62 13.59 1.10 - - - - 1.10 11.67 3.06 84.68 13.87 1.13 - --- - - 1.13 11.70 3.38 84.76 14.20 1.16 - - - - 1.16 11.73 3.79 84.85 14.56 1.20 - -- - - 1.20 11.77 4.28 84.96 14.97 1.24 ---- - --- 1.24 11.80 4.87 85.09 15.74 1.28 - - - 1.28 11.83 5.54 85.23 16.79 1.33 - - - - 1.33 11.87 6.30 85.41 17.93 1.39 - - - - 1.39 11.90 7.14 85.61 19.17 1.45 - - - ----- 1.45 11.93 8.13 85.83 20.48 1.52 0.20 - - - 1.72 11.97 9.38 86.05 21.65 1.58 1.81 - - - 3.40 12.00 11.02 86.21 22.47 1.63 3.84 - -- - 5.46 12.03 13.07 86.38 23.31 1.67 4.56 - ---- - 6.23 12.07 15.35 86.58 24.31 1.70 5.32 - - - 7.02 12.10 17.70 86.83 25.45 1.74 6.11 ---- - -- 7.84 12.13 19.99 87.12 26.71 1.78 6.91 - --- - 8.69 12.17 22.09 87.44 28.06 1.82 8.02 - - - 9.85 12.20 23.75 87.78 29.40 1.85 9.43 ---- - 11.27 12.23 24.71 88:09 30.59 1.88 10.26 - 12.14 12.27 24.92<< 88.34 31.52 1.89 11.39 ----- ----- --- 13.28 12.30 24.58 88.57 32.34 1.89 12.10 0.49 ----- ---- 14.48 12.33 23.90 88.75 32.96 1.88 12.62 2.37 -- --- 16.87 12.37 23.01 88.87 33.37 1.85 12.95 4.10 - ----- 18.90 12.46 21.93 88.93 33.58 1.83 1 U 2 5.96 12.43 20.67 88.95 33.65 1.82 13.18 5.51 - ---- 20.51 << 12.47 19.24 88.94 33.62 1.83 13.15 5.34 --- 20.32 12.50 17.68 88.91 33.51 1.84 13.06 4.79 -- -- 19.69 12.53 16.00 88.86 33.34 1.85 12.92 3.95 - - 18.73 12.57 14.29 88.80 33.12 1.87 12.75 2.91 - ---- 17.53 12.60 12.66 88.72 32.87 1.88 12.54 2.03 _____ _____ 16.45 12.63 11.22 88.64 32.58 1.89 12.30 1.06 ---- ---- 15.25 12.67 10.04 88.55 32.27 1.89 12.04 0.44 - - 14.37 12.70 9.04 88.46 51.94 1.89 11.75 0.17 - - 13.80 12.73 8.20 88.36 31.56 1.89 11.43 - - - - 13.31 Continues on next page... 100 YR DESIGN Page 2 Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Cuiv.A Cuiv. B Cuiv. C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hrs) (Cfs) (ft) (Cft) (Cfs) WS) (Cfs) WS) WS) (off) - 12.77 7.46 88.24 31.16 1.89 11.07 --- - - 12.97 12.80 6.82 88.13 30.73 1.88 10.49 - - --- 12.38 12.83 6.28 88.02 30.31 1.86 9.79 =--- - - 11.65 12.87 5.82 87.87 29.75 1.85 9.58 ---- ---= --- 11.43 12.90 5.43 87.72 29.16 1.84 9.18 - - -- 11.03 12.93 5.11 87.57 28.57 1.84 8.58 - - 10.41 12.97 4.85 87.43 28.00 1.82 7.97 - - - 9.79 13.00 4.63 87.30 27.46 1.81 7.47 - - ---- 9.28 13.03 4.45 87.17 26.95 1.79 7.05 - - --- 8.84 13.07 4.29 87.06 26.44 1.77 6.74 ---- - - 8.51 13.104.16 86.94 25.95 1.75 6.43 - - 8.18 13.13 4.03 86.84 25.47 1.74 6.12 -- ----- -- 7.86 13.17 3.92 86.74 25.01 1.72 5.81 - --- - 7.54 11.20 IV 86.64 24.57 1.71 5.51 - - --- 7.22 13.23 3.71 86.55 24.15 1.70 5.20 - - - 6.90 13.27 3.62 86.47 23.75 1.68 4.90 - - - 6.58 13.30 3.54 86.39 23.37 1.67 4.61 -- - --- 6.28 13.33 3.47 86.32 23.01 1.65 4.30 - - - 5.96 13.37 3.40 86.25 22.69 1.64 4.03 - - - 5.66 13.40 3.35' 86.19 22.40 1.6.2 3.72 __-- __-_- -_-__ 5.34 13.43 3.30 86.15 22.16 1.61 3.10 - ---- - 4.71 13.47 3.25 86.11 21.98 1.60 2.66 ---- ---- ---- 4.26 13.50 3.21 86.09 21.86 1.59 2.35 --- ---- -- 3.94 13.53 3.17 86.07 21.77 1.59 2.12 ---- --- ---- 3.70 13.57 3.13 86.06 21.70 1.58 1.95 - ----- - 3.53 13.60 3.10 86.05 21.65 1.58 1.82 ----- - ---- 3.40 13.63 3.06 86.04 21.61 1.58 1.72 - --- - 3.30 13.67 3.03 86.04 21.58 1.58 1.64 ---- - ---- 3.22 13.70- 2.99 86.03 21.56 1.58 1.58 ----- 3.15 13.73 2.95 86.03 21.54 1.58 1.52 ---- ----- ----- 3.10 13.77 2.92 86.02 21.52 1.57 1.47 ---- - - 3.05 13.80 2.88 86.02 21.50 1.57 1.43 - - - 3.00 13.83 2.85 86.02 21.48 1.57 1.39 - --- ----- 2.96 13.87 2.81 86.01 21.47 1.57 1.35 ---- ----- -- 2.92 13.90 2.78 86.01 21.45 1.57 1.31 ' - - - 2.88 13.93 2.74 86.01 21.44 1.57 1.27 - - 2.84 13.97 2.70 86,01 21.42 1.57 1.23 -- --- 2.80 14.00 2.07 86.00 21.41 1.57 1.20 ---- - - 2.77 14.03 2.63 86.00 21.39 1.57 1.16 - - - 2.73 14.07 2.59 86.00 21.37 1.57 1.14 ---- --- 2.70 14.10 2.56 85.99 21.35 1.57 1.11 - -- -- 2.68 14.13 2.53 85.99 21.33 1.56 1.08 -- -- -- 2.65 14.17 2.49 85.98 21.30 1.56 1.06 - - 2.62 14.20 2.46 85.98 21.27 1.56 1.03 ---- ---- 2.59 14.23 2.43 85.97 21.25 1.56 1.00 - --- - 2.56 14.27 2.40 85.97 21.22 1.56 0.97 - - - 2.53 14.30 2.38 85.96 21.19 1.56 0.95 - - - 2.50 14.33 2.36 85.96 21.17 1.56 0.92 ---- -- - 2.47 14.37 2.33 85.96 21.14 1.55 0.89 - ---- ---- 2.45 14.40 2.31 85.95 21.12 1.55 0.87 - - - 2.42 Continues on next page... 100 YR DESIGN Page 3 Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Culy.A Culy. B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Outflow (hrs) (Cft) (ft) (o%) (Cfs) (ifs) WS) (ifs) WS) (cfs) - 14.43 2.29 85.95 21.10 1.55 0.84 - ----- 2.40 14.47 2.27 85.94 21.08 1.55 0.82 - - 2.37 14.50 2.25 85.94 21.05 1.55 0.80 -- -- -- 2.35 14.53 2.23 85.94 21.03 1.55 0.78 - - - 2.33 14.57 2.22 85.93 21.02 1.55 0.76 - - - 2.31 14.60 2.20 85.93 21.00 1.55 0.74 - - - 2.29 14.63 2.18 85.93 20.98 1.55 0.72 - ----- 2.27 14.67 2.16 85.92 20.96 1.54 0.70 - - - 2.25 14.70 2.15 85.92 20.94 1.54 0.68 ----- - ----- 2.23 14.73 2.13 85.92 20.93 1.54 0.67 ----- - - 2.21 14.77 2.11 85.91 20.91 1.54 0.65 - - -- 2.19 14.80 2.09 85.91 20.89 1.54 0.63 --- --= - 2.17 14.83 2.08 85.91 20.88 1.54 0.61 - - - 2.15 14.87 2.06 85.90 20.86 C64 0.60 ----- - ----- 2-14 14.90 2.04 85.90 20.84 1.54 0.58 - - - 2.12 14.93 2.02 85.90 20.83 1.54 0.56 - -- - 2.10 14.97 2.00 85.89 20.81 1.54 0.55 ----- -- - 2.08 15.00 1.99 85.89 20.80 1.54 0.53 - - - 2.06 15.03 1.97 85.89 20.78 1.54 0.51 -- - 2.05 15.07 1.95 85.89 20.76 1.53 0.49 ____ 2.03 15.10 1.93 85.88 20.75 1.53 0.48 - - - 2.01 15.13 1.92 85.88 20.73 1.53 0.46 - -- 1.99 15.17 1.90 85.88 20.72 1.53 0.44 - - --- 1.98 15.20 1.88 86.87 20.70 1.53 0.43 - - 1.96 15.23 1.86 85.87 20.68 1.53 0.41 - -- - 1.94 15.27 1.84 85.87 20.67 1.53 0.39 - - - 1.92 15.30 1.83 85.87 20.65 1.53 0.38 - - - 1.90 15.33 1.81 85.86 20.63 1.53 0.36 - ---- - 1.89 15.37 1.79 $5.86 20.62 1.53 0.34 ------- ---- 1.87 15.40 1.77 85.86 20.60 1.53 0.32 - - ---- 1.85 15.43 1.75 85.85 20.59 1.53 0.31 - ---- 1.83 15.47 1.74 85.85 20.57 1.52 0.29 - -- - 1.81 15.50 1.72 85.85 20.55 1.52 0.27 - - -- 1.80 15.53 1.70 85.84 20.54 1.52 0.26 - -- - 1.78 15.57 1.68 85.84 20.52 1.52 0.24 - ---- 1.76 15.60 1.66 85.84 20.50 1.52 0.22 - - - 1.74 15.63 1.64 85.84 20.49 1.52 0.20 - - 1.72 15.67 1.63 85.83 20.47 1.52 0.19 - 1.71 15.70 1.61 85.83 20.45 1.52 0.17 ---- - 1.69 15.73 1.59 85.83 20.44 1.52 0.15 - - 1.67 15.77 1.57 85.82 20.42 1.52 0.13 - - - 1.65 15.80 1.55 85.82 20.40 1.52 0.12 - - - 1.63 15.83 1.53 85.82 20.39 1.51 0.10 ---- - ---- 1.61 15.87 1.52 85.81 20.37 1.51 0.08 - - ----- 1.60 15.90 1.50 85.81 20.35 1.51 0.06 - - ----- 1.58 15.93 1.48 85.81 20.34 1.51 0.05 ---- - ---- 1.56 15.97 1.46 85.81 20.32 1.51 0.03 - - - 1.54 16.00 1.44 85.86 26.30 1.51 6.61 - - ----- 1.52 16.03 1.42 85.80 20.29 1.51 - - - - 1.51 16.07 1.41 85.80 20.27 1.51 - - - - 1.51 Continues on next page... APPENDIX G TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2 .00 Project : Kabelo User: 0002 Date: 06-15-99 County : Bart State: ct Checked: Date: Subtitle: Bldg 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flow Type 2 year Length Slope. Surface n Area. Wp Velocity Time rain . (ft) (ft/ft) code - (sq/ft) (ft) (ft/sec) (hr) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sheet 3 .2 50 .07 F -O:fl83 Time of Concentration = 0.08* Shallow Concent'd 50 .008 U 0.010 Open Channel 150 0.51 0.073 Travel Time = 0.08* --- Sheet Flow Surface Codes --- A Smooth Surface F Grass, Dense --- Shallow Concentrated --- B Fallow (No ices. ? G Grass, Burmuda --- Surface Codes --- * Cultivated < 20 % Res. H Woods, Light P Paved D Cultivated > 20 a Res. I Woods, Dense U Unpaged R Grasa-Range, Short J Range, Natural * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method y RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2 .00 Project Kabelo User: 0002 Date: 06-15-99 County dart State: ct Checked: Date: Subtitle: Bldg 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg .Estab.) Open spice {Lawns,parks etc. ) Good condition, grass cover > 75W - .168 (6.1) - - Impervigus Areas Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways - .078 (98) - - Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) .246 TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: .246 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: -73* -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC. method GRAPHICAL PEAK DISCHARGE METHOD Version 2 .00 Project : Kabelo User: 002 Date: 06-29-99 County Hart State: ct Checked: Date: Subtitle: Bldg lb-2a Data: .Drainage Area _ .256 * Acres Runoff .Curve Number 76 Time of Concentration: 0.09 * Hours, Rainfall. Type Pond and Swamp Area NONE Storm Number 1 2 3 4 5 Frequency (yrs) 2 10 25 S0 100 24-Hr Rainfall (in) 3 :2 4.7 5.5 6.2 . 6.9 Ia/P Ratio 0.20 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.09 Used 0 .20 0.13 0.11 0.10 0.10 Runoff (in) 1.15 2.29 2 .95 3 .55 4 .17 Unit Peak Discharge 1.028 1.057 1.065 1..071 1.072 (cfsf acre/in) Pond and Swamp Factor .1-00 1.00 1_00 1..00 1_00 0.0# -Ponds Used - - --- Peak Discharge (cfs) 0 1 11 ---- - * - Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2 .00 Project Kabelo User: 002 Date: 06-29-99 County Hart State: ct Checked: Date: Subtitle: Bldg lb-2a Flow Type 2 year Length Slope Surface n Area � +Velocity Time rain (ft) (ft/ft) code (sq/ft) (ft) (ft/sec) (hr) Sheet 3 .2 50 .07 �` --------- ----------- 0.083 Time. of. Concentration = 0.08* Shallow Concent'd 50 :008 U 0.010 Open Channel 150 0 .57 0.073 Travel Time = 0 .0:8* --- Sheet Flow Surface Codes -.-- A Smooth Surface F Grass, Dense --- Shallow Concentrated --- B Fallow (No Res, } G .Grass, Burmuda --- Surface Codes -- C Cultivated < 20: -1 Res. H woods, Light P "Paved D Cultivated > 2.0 W Res. I woods, Dense U Unpaved E Grass-Range, Short J Range, Natural . *. Generated.. for use. by GRAPHIC method RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2 .GO "Project : Kabelo User: 002 Date: 06-29-99 County : Hart State: ct Checked: Date: Subtitle: Bldg lb-2a ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CAI) ----------------------------------------------------------:--------------------- FULLY DyF" EL-OPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Bstab. ) .Open space (Lawns,parks etc. 1 . Good condition.; grass cover > 75t - .151(61) - .. Impervious Areas Paved parking lots, roofs, .driveways - .105 (98) - - -Total .Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) .256 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: .256. Acres WEIGHTED CUB NUMBER: 7-6* ..------r----------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method GRAPHICAL PEAR DISCHARGE METHOD Version 2 .00 Project Rabelo User: 0002 Date: 06-15-99 County Dart State: ct Checked: Date: Subtitle: Bldg 2b-3a Data: II3�ainage Area .301 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 78 * - Time of -Concentration: 0.08 * -Hours Rainfall Type III - Pond and Swamp Area NONE Storm Number 1 2 3 4 5 Frequency (errs) 2 10 25 50 100 24-Hr Rainfall (in) 3.2 4.7 5.5 6.2 6.9 Ia/P Ratio 0.18 0.12 0.10 G.G9 0.08 Used 0.18 0.12 0.10 0 .10 0.10 Runoff lin) 1.27 2 .46 3 .14 3 .76 4.38 Unit Peak Discharge 1.038 1.063 1.071 1.072 1.072 (cfs/acre/i.n) Pond and Swamp Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.0% Ponds Used Peak Discharge (cfs) 0 1 1 1 1 ------------- * - Values) provided from TR-55 system routines TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2 .OQ Project Rabelo User: 0002 Date: 06-15-99 County Hart State: ct Checked: Date: Subtitle: Bldg 2b-3a ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flow Type 2 year. Length Slope Surface n Area _Wp "Velocity Time rain - (ft) (€t/ft} code- - (sg/ft) UO (€t/sec) . (hr} -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sheet 3 .2 50 .07 F 0.0$3 Time of Concentration = 0 .08* Shallow Concent'd 50 _008 U 0_010 Open Channel 150 0.57 0.073 Travel Time = 0 f}S* --- Sheet Flow Surface Codes --- A Smooth Surface F Grass, Dense --- Shallow Concentrated --- B Fallow (No Res. ) G Grass, Burmuda --- Surface Codes --- C Cultivated < 20 t Res. H Woods, Light P Paved D Cultivated > 20 % Res. I .Woods, Dense U Unpaved E Grass-Range, Short J Range, Natural * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2.00 Project Kabelo User: 0002 Date: 06-15-99 County dart State: ct Checked: Date: Subtitle: Bldg 2b-3a ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) -------------------------------------------------T----------------------------- FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab. ) Open space (Lawns-,parks etc_) Good condition; grass cover > 75% - .161(61) - - Impervigus Areas Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways - .140 (98) - - Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) .301 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA; ...301 .Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER; 78* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method GRAPHICAL PEAK DISCHARGE METHOD Version 2 .00 Project : Kabelo 'User: 0002 Date: 06-15-99 County : Hart State: ct Checked: Date: Subtitle: Bldg 6 Data: Drainage Area _ _359 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 73 * Time of Concentration: 0.08 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area NONE Storm Number 1 2 3 4 5 Frequency (yrs) 2 10 25 50 100 24-Hr Rainfall (in) 3_2 4.7 5.5 6.2 6.9 Ia/P Ratio 0_23 0.16 0.13 0.12 0.11 Runoff (in) 0.98 2.05 2 6.8 3.2-6 3.85 Unit Peak Discharge 1.013 1.046 1.057 1.Qf3 1.069 . (cfs/acre/in) Pond and Swamp Factor 1.00 - 1.00 _ 1.00 1.00 .1.00 0.01 Ponds Used Peak Discharge (cfs) 0 1 1 1 1 * - Value (s) provided from TR-55 system routines TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2 .0.0 Project : Kabelo User: 0002 Date: 06-15-93 County : Bart State: ct Checked: Date: Subtitle: Bldg 6 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flow Type 2 year Length Slope Surface n Area Wp Velocity Time rain _ (ft) (ft/ft) code - (sq/ft) (ft) (ft/sec) (hr) Sheet 3 .2 50 .07 F 0.083 Time of Concentration = 0.08* Shallow Concent'd 5D .008 U 0.010 Open Channel 150 0.57 0_.€.73 Travel Time. = 0.08* . --- Sheet Flow Surface Codes --- A Smooth Surface F Grass, Dense --- Shallow Concentrated -- B Fallow (No Res.) .: G Grass, Burmuda --- Surface Codes --- C Cultivated < 20 o Res. H Woods, Light P Paved D Cultivated > 20 t Res. I Woods, Dense U Unpaved E Grass-Range, Short J Range, Natural * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2 .00 Project : -Kabeio Tlser: 0002 Date: -ID6-15-99 County Hart State: ct Checked: Date: Subtitle: Bldg 6 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab_) Open space �Lawnsvparks etc_) Good condition; grass cover > 75% - _245 (61) - - Impervious Areas Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways - .114 (98) - Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) .359 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: .359 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER 73* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method APPENDIX H Reservoir Report Pa" Reservoir No. 2 BLDG 1 Culvert/ Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [A] [B] [C] Rise(in) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crest Len(ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Span(in) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crest El.(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 No.Barrels = 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Invert El.(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Eqn.Exp. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Length(ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Muni-Stage - Slope(%) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 N Value = .0()0 .000 .000 Orif.Coeff. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = - Tailwater Elevation = 0.00 fit Note:All outflows have been analyzed wider inlet and mtkt control. Stage f Storage[Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Culy.A Culy.B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir G Discharge (ft) (cult). M (cfsl (ifs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cam). (cfs) 0.0 00 99.00 - - - - - - 0.00 0.1 14 99.10 - - - - - 0.00 0.2 28 9920 - - - - - 0.00 0.3 43 99.30 - - - - - - 0.00 0.4 57 99.40 - - - - - - 0.00 0.5 .71 99.50 - - - - - - 0.00 0.6 85 99.60 - - - - - 0.01. 0.7 99 99.70 - - - - - - 0.01 0.8 114 99.80 - - - - - - 0.01 0..9 128 99..90 - - - - - - 0.01 1.0 1.42 100.00 - - - - - - 0.01 1.1 156 100.10 - - - - - - 0.01 1.2 170. 100.20 - - - - - - 0.01 1.3 185 100.30 - - - - - - 0.02 1.4 199 100.40 . - - - - 0.02 1.5 213 100.50 - - - - - - 0.02 1.6 227 100.60 - - - -- - 0.02 1.7 241 100.70 - - - - - - 0.02 1.8 256 100.80 - - - - - - 0.03 1.9 270 100.90 - - - - - - 0.03 2.0 284 101.00 - - - - - - 0.03 2.1 298 101.10 - - - - - - 0.03 2.2 312 10120 - - - - - - 0.03 2.3 327 101.30 - - - - - - 0.03 2.4 341 101.40 - - -- -- - - 0.03 2.5 355 101.50 - - - - - 0.03 Continues on next page... BLDG 1 Page 2 Stage I Storage I Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation CuIv.A Cult'.B CuIv.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Discharge (ft) (CUM (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 2.6 369. 101.60 - - - - 0.04 2.7 383 101.70 - - - - 0.04 2.8 . 398 101.80 - - - - 0.04 2.9 412 101.90 - - - - - 0.04 3.0 426 102.00 - - - - - - 0.04 3.1 440 102.10 - - - - - - 0.04 3.2 454 102.20 - - - - - - 0.04 3.3 469 102.30 - - - - - - 0.04 3.4 483 102.4.0 - - - - - - 0.04 3.5 497 102.50 - - - - - 0.05 3.6 511 102.60 - - 0.05 3.7 525 102.70 - - 0.05 3.8 540 102.80 - - 0.05 3.9 554 102.90 - - 0.05 4.0 568 103.00 - - 0.05 4.1 585 103.05 - - 0.05 4.1 603 103.10 - - 0.05 42 620 103.15 - - 0.05 4.2 637 103.20 - - 0.05 4.3 654 103.25 - - 0.05 4.3 672 103.30 - - 0.05 4.4 689 103.35 - - 0.05 4.4 706 103.40 - - 0.05 4.5 724 103.45 - - 0.05 4.5 741 103.50 - 0-05 4.6 774 103.55 - 0.05 4.6 806 103.66 - 0.05 4.7 839 103.65 - 0.05 4,7 872 103.70 - 0.05 4.8 905 103.75 - 0.05 4.8 937 103.80 - 0.05 4.9 970 103.85 - 0.05 4.9 1,003 103.90 - Obs 5.0 1,035 103.95 - - 0.05 5.0 1,068 . 104.00. - - - 0.05 5.1 1,173 104.10 - - - - 0.05 5.2 1,278 104.20 - - - - 0.05 5.3 1,383 104.30 - - - - - - 0.05 5.4 1,488 104.40 - - - - - - 0.05 5.5 1,593 104.50 - - - - - - 0.05 5.6 1,698 104.60 - - - - - - 0.05 5.7 1,803 104.70 - - - - - - 0.05 5.8 1,908 104.80 - - - - - - 0.05 5.9 2,013 104.90 - - - - - - 0.05 6.0 2,118 105.00 - - - - 0.05 6.1 2,286 105.10 - - - - 0.05 62 2,453 105.20 - - 0-05 6.3 2,621 105.30 - - 0.05 6.4 2,789 105.40 - - 0.05 6.5 2,956 105.50 - - 0.05 Continues on next page BLDG 1 page 3 Stage/ Storage I Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation CuFv.A Culv.B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Discharge (ft) (cuft) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cis) (cfs) (cfs) 6.6 37124 105.60 - - - - - - 0.05 6.7 3,292 105.70 - - - - -. - 0.05 6.8 . 3,460 105.80 - - - - - - 0.05 6.9 3,627 105.90 - -- - - - - 0.05 7.0 3,795 106.00 - - - - - - 0.05 7.1 4,035 106.10 - - - - - - 0.05 7.2 4,275 106.20 - - - - - - 0.05 7.3 4,516 106.30 - - - - - 0.05 7.4 4,756 106A0 - - - - 0.05 7.5 4,996 106.50 - - - - - - 0.05 7.6 5,236 106.60 - - - - - . - 0.05 7.7 5,476 106.70 - - - - - - 0.05 7.8 5,717 106.80 - - - - - - 0.05 7.9 5,957 106.90 - - - - - - 0.05 8.0 6,197 107.00 - - - - - - 0.05 Reservoir Report Page Reservoir No. 3 BLDG 1 b-2a Culvert/Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [A] [B] [C] Rise(in) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crest Len(ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Span(in) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crest El.(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 No.Barrels = 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Invert El.(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Eqn.Exp. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Length(ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Multi-Stage - Slope(010) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 N Value = .000 .000 .000 Orif.Coeff. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = - Tailwater Elevation = 0.00 It Note.All outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control. Stage!Storage 1 Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Culy.A Culv.B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Discharge (ft) (cuft) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cis) (cfs) 0.0 00 96.50 - - - - - - 0.00 0.1 14 96.60 - - - - - - 0.00 0.2 28 96.70 - - - - - - 0.00 0.3 .43 96.80 - - - - - - 0.00 0.4 57 96.90 - - - - - - 0.00 0.5 71 97.00 - - - - - - 0.00 0.6 85 97.10 - - - - - - 0.01 0.7 . 99 97.20 - - - - - - 0.01 0.8 114 97.30 - - - - - - 0.01 0.9 128 97.40 - - - - - - 0.01 1.0 142 97.50 - - - - - - 0.01 1.1 156 97.60 - - - - - - 0.01 1.2 170 97.70 - - - - - - 0.01 1.3 185 97.80 - - - - - - 0.02 1.4 199 97.90 - - - - - 0.02 1.5 213 98.00 - - - - - - 0.02 1.6 227 98.10 - - - - - - 0.02 1.7 241 98.20 - - - - - - 0.02 1.8 256 98.30 - - - - - - 0.03 1.9 270 98.40 - - - - - - OM 2.0 284 98.50 - - - - - - 0.03 2.1 298 98.60 - - - - - - 0.03 2.2 312 98.70 - - - - - - 0.03 2.3 327 98.80 - - - - - 0.03 2.4 341 98.90 - - - - - - 0.03 2.5 355. . 99.00 - - - - - - 0.03 ConSnues on next page... BLDG 1b-2a page 2 Stage/Storage! discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Cufv.A Cuty.B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Discharge (ft) (cuft) (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 2.6 369 99.10 - - - - - - 0.04 2.7 383 99.20 - - - - - - 0.04 2.8 398 99.30 - - - - - - 0.04 2.9 412 99.40 - - - - - - 0_04 3.0 426 99.50 - - - - - - 0.04 3.1 440 99.60 - - - - - - 0.04 3.2 454 99.70 - - - - - 0.04 3.3 469 99.80 - - - - - - 0.04 3.4 483 99.90 - - - - - - 0.04 3.5 497 100.00 - - - - - - 0.05 3.6 511_ 100.10 - - - - - . - 0.05 3.7 525 10020 - - - - - - 0.05 3.8 540 100.30 - - - - - - 0:05 3.9 554 100.40 - - - - - - 0.05 4.0 568 100,50 - - - - --- - 0.05. 4.1 572 100.55 - - - - - - 0.05 4.1 576 100.60 - - - - - - 0.05 4.2 580 100.65 - - - - - 0.05 4.2 584 100.70 . - - - - - - 0.05 4.3 588 100.75 - - - - - - 0.05 4.3 591 100.80 - - - - - - 0.05 4.4 595 100.85 - - - - - - 0.05 4.4 599 100.90 - - - - - - 0.05 4.5 603 100.95 - - - - - - 0.05 4.5 607 101.00 - - - - - - 0.05 4.6 633 101.10 - - - - - - 0.05 4.7 658 10120 - - - - - - 0.05 4.8 684 101.30 - - - - - - 0.05 4.9 710 101.40 - - - - - - 0.05 5.0 736 101.50 - - - - - - 0.05 5.1 761 101.60 - - - - - - 0.05 5.2 787 101.70 - - - - - - 0.05 5.3 813 101.80 - - - - - - 0.05 5.4 838 101.90 - - - - - - 0.05 5.5 864 102.00 - - - - - - 0.05 5.6 945 102.10 - - -- - - - 0.05 5.7 1,025 1.02.20 - - - - - - 0.05 5.8 1,106 102.30 - - - - - 0.05 5.9 1,187 102.40 - - - - - 0.05 6.0 1,267 102.50 - - - - - - 0.05 6.1 1,348 102.60 - - - - - - 0.05 6.2 1,429 102.70 - - - - - - 0.05 6.3 1,510 102.80 - - - - - - 0.05 6.4 1,590 102.90 - - - - - 0.05 6.5 1,671 103.00 - - - - - - 0.05 6.6 1,842 103.10 - - -- - - - 0.05 6.7 2,012 103.20 - - - - - - 0.05 6.8 2,183 103.30 - - - - - - 0.05 6.9 2,353 103.40 - - - - - - 0.05 7.0 2,524 103.50 - - - - - - 0.05 Continues on next page... BLDG 1b-2a Page 3 Stage/Storage/ Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Culy.A Cult'.B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Wgir C Discharge (ft) (cult). (ft) . (cfs). (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 7.1 2,694 103.60 — — — — — — 0.05 7.2 2,865 103.70 — — — — — — 0.05 7.3 . 3,035 103.80 — — — — — — 0A5 7.4 3,206 103.90 — — — — — — 0.05 7.5 3,376 104.00 — — — — — — 0.05 Reservoir Report Page Reservoir No. 4 BLDG 2b-3a Culvert/Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [13] [C] [A] [B] [C] Rise(in) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crest Len(ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Span(in) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crest El.(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 No.Barrels = 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Invert El.(fit) = 0.00 0.00 0:00 'Eqn.Exp. = 0.00 0.00 0:00 Length(ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Multistage = Slope(°A) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 N Value = .000 .000 000 Orif.Coeff. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Multi-Stage = - Tailwater Elevation = 0.00 ft Note:All outflows have been anatyz under inlet and outlet control. Stage 1 Storage 1 Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Culv.A Cult'.B Cult'.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Discharge (ft) (cuff)_ (ft) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs). (cfs) (cfs) . . (cfs) 0.0 00. 90.50 - - - - - - 0.00 0.1 28 90.60 - - - - -- - 0.00 0.2 57 90.70 - - - - - - 0.00 . 0.3 85 90.80 - - - - - - 0.01 0.4 1.14 90.90 - - - - - - 0.01 0.5 142 91.00 - - - - - - 0.01 0.6 170 91.10 - - - - 0.01. 0.7 199 91.20 - - - - - - 0.01 0.8 227 91.30 - - - - - - 0.02 0.9 256 91.40 - - - - - - 0.02 1.0 284 91..50 - - - - - = 0.02 1.1 312 91.60 - - - - - - 0.02 1.2 341. 91.70 - - - - - - 0.03 1.3 369 91.80 - - - - - - 0.03 1.4 398 91.90 - - - - - 0.04 . 1.5 426 92.00 - - - - - - .0.04 1.6 454 92.10 - - - - - 0.04 1.7 483 92.20 --- - - - - - 0.05 1.8 511 92.30 - - - - - - 0.05 1.9 540 92.40 - - - - - - 0.06 2.0 568 92.50 - - - - - - 0.06 2.1 596 92.60 - - - - - - 0.06 2.2 625- 92.70. - - - - - 0.06. 2.3 653 92.80 - - - - - - 0.07 2.4 682 92.90 - - - - - - 0.07 2.5 710. 93.00 - - - - - - 0.07 Continues on next page... BLDG 2b3a Page 2 Stage/Storage/ Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Cult'.A Cuiv.B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Discharge (ft) (cuft) (ft) (cfs). (cfs) (cis) (as) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) 2.6 738. 93.10 - - - - - 0.07 2.7 767 9320 - - - - - - 0.07 2.8 795. 93.30 - - - - - 0.08 '219 824 '93.40 - - - - - -0.08 3.0 852 93.50 0.08 3.1 880 93.60 - - - - - - 0.08 3.2 909. 93.70. - - - - - - 0.08 3.3 937 93.-80 - - - - - - AM 3.4 966. . 93.90 . - - - - - - 0.09 3.5 994 94.00 - - - - - - 0.09 3.6 1,022 94.10 - - - - - 0.09 3.7 1,051 94.20 - - - - - - 0.09 3.8 1,079 94.30 - - -- - - - 0.10 3.9 1,108 94.40 - - - - - - 0.10 4.0 1,136 94.50 - - - - - - 0-10 42 1,159 94.65 - - - - - - 0.10 4.3 1,183 94.80. - - - - - - 0..10 4.5 1,206 94.95 - - - - - - 0.10 4.6 1,230 95.10 - - - - - - 0.10 4.8 1,253 9525 - - - - - - 0.10 4.9 1,276. 95.40 - - - - - - - 0.10 5.1 1,300 95.55 - - - - - - 0.10 5.2 1.,323. 95.70 - - - - - - 0.10 5.4 1,347 95.85 - - - - - - 0.10 5.5 1,370. . 96.00 - - - - - - 0.10 5.6 1;389 96.05 - - - - - -- 0.10 5.6 1,408 96.10 - - - - - - 0.10 5.7 1,426 96.15 - - - - - - 0.10 5.7 1,445. 96.20 - - - - - - 0.10 5.8 1,464 96.25 - - - - - - 0.10 5.8 1,483 96.30 -- - - - - 0.10 5.9 1,502 96.35 - - - - - - 0.10 5.9 1,520. 96.40 - - - - - - 0.10 6.0 1,539 96-45 - - - - - - 0.10 6.0 1,558. . 96.50. - - - - - - 0.10 6.1 1,621 96.55 - - - - - - 0.10 6.1 1,683 96.60 - - - - - - 0.10 6.2 1,746 96.65 - - - - - 0.1D 6.2 1,809.. 96.70 - - - - - - 0.10 6.3 1,871 96.75 - - - - - - 0.10 6.3 1,934 96.80. - - - - - - 0.10 6.4 1,997 96.85 - - - - - - 0.10 6.4 2.1060 96.90 - - - - - - 0.10 6.5 2,1.22 96.95 - - - - - - 0.10 6.5 2,185 97.00. - - - - - - 0.10 6.6 Z435 97.10 - - - - - - 0.10 6.7 21685 9720. - - - - - - 0.10 6.8 2,935 97.30 - - - - - - 0.10 6.9 3,185 97.40 - - - - - - - 0.10 7.0 3,436 97.50 - - - - - - 0.10 Continues on next page... BLDG 2b3a Page 3 Stage!Storage/ Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Culy.A Cuts.B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Discharge (ft) (cuff) (ft) (cfs). (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs). (cfs) (cfs) 7.1 3,686 97.60 — — — — -- — 0.10 7.2 3,936 97.70 — — — — — — 0.10 7.3 4;1.86 97.80 — — — — — — 0.10 7.4 4,436 97.90 — — — — — 0.10 7.5 4,686 98.00 — — — — — — 0.10 Reservoir Report Page Reservoir No. 5 BLDG b Culvert f Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [Bl [C] IA] 1131 [C] Rise(in) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crest Len(ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Span(in) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Crest El.(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 No.Barrels = 0 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Invert El.(ft) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Eqn.Exp. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Length(ft) = 0.0 0.0 0.0 Multi-Stage = Slope r/e) = 0.00 0.00 0.00 N Value = .000 .000 .000 Orif.Coeff. = 0.00 0.00 0.00 Muni-Stage = - Tailwater Elevation = 0.00 ft Notes Ail ou(flows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control. Stage I Storage I Discharge'Table Stage. Storage Elevation Cult'.A Culy.B Culy.C Weil A Weir B Weir C Discharge (ft) (cuff). (ft) (cfs) (cis) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs). (cfs) 0.0 00_ 101.00 . - - - - - - 0.00 0.1 14 101.10 - - - - - - 0.00 0.2 28 101.20 - - - - - - 0.00 0.3 43 101.30 - - - - - - 0.00 0.4 57 1 E AO - - - - - 0.€ 0.5 71 101.50 - - - - - - 0.00 0.6 85 101.60 -. -- - - - 0.01 0.7 99 101.70 - - - - - - - 0.01 0.8 114 1c3 A& - - - - - 0.01 0.9 128 101.90 - - - - - - 0.01 1.0 142 102.00 - -- - - - - 0.01 1.1 1.56 102.10 - - - - - - 0.01 1.2 WO 102:20 - - - - 0.01 1.3 185 102.30 - - - - - 0.02 1.4 199. 102.40 - - - - - - 0.02 1.5 213 102.50 - - - - - - 0.02 1.6 227 102.60 - - - - - - 0.02 1.7 241 102.70 - - - - - - 0.02 1.8 256. 102.80 - - - - - - 0.03 1.9 270 102.90 - - - - - - 0.03 2.0 284.. 103.00 - - - - - - 0.03 . 2.1 298 103.10 - - - - - - 0.03 2.2 312 103.20 - - - - - - 0.03 2.3 327 103.30 - - - - - - 0.03 2.4 341 103AO - - - - - - 0.03 2.5 355 103.50 - - - - - - 0.03 Continues on next page... BLDG 6 Page 2 Stage I Storage I Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Cult'.A Culy.B Culy.C Weir A Weir B Weir C Discharge (1t) (cuff) (ti) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs} 2.6 369 103.60 - - - - - - 0.04 2.7 383 103.70 - - - - - - 0.04 2.8 398 103.80 - - - - - - 0.04 2.9 412 103.90 - - - -- - - 0.04 3.0 426 104.00 - - - - - - 0.04 3.1 440 104.10 - - - - - - -0.04 3.2 454 10420 - - - - - - 0.04 3.3 469 104.30 - - - - - - 0.04 3.4 483 104.40 . - - - - - - O.Q4 3.5 497 104.50 - - - - - - 0.05 3.6 511 104.60 - - - - - O:95 3.7 525 104.70 - - - - - - 0.05 3.8 540 104.80 - - - - -- - 0.05 3.9 554 104.90 - - - - - - 0.05 4.0 568 105.00 - - - - - - 0.05 4.1 585 105.05 - - - - - -- 0.05 4.1 601 105-10 . - - - - - - 0.95 42 618 105.15 - - - - - - 0.05 4.2 634 105.20 - - - - - - 0.05 4.3 651 105.25 - - - - - - 0.05 4.3 667 105.30 . - - - - - - 0.05 4.4 684 105.35 - - - - - - 0.05 4.4 700 105.40 - - - - - - 0:05 4.5 717 105.45 - - - - - - 0.05 4.5 733 105.50 . - - - - - - 045 4.6 773 105.55 - - - - - - 0.05 4.6 812 105.60 - - - - - - 0:¢5 4.7 852 105.65 - - - - - - 0.05 4.7 891 105.70 - - - - - 0.05 4.8 931 105.75 - - - - - - 0.05 4.8 970 105-OD - - - - - - 0.05_ 4.9 1,010 105.85 - - - - - - 0.05 4.9 1,049_ f05.90 - - - - - - 0.05 5.0 1,089 105.95 - - - _ - - - 0.05 5.0 1,128 106.00 - - - - -- - 0.95 5.1 1,299 106:10 - - - - - - 0.05 5.2 1,470 10620 . - - - - - - 0.05 5.3 1,641 106.30 - - - - - 0.05 5.4 1,812 . 106-40 - - - - - - 0.05 5.5 1,983 106.50 - -- - - - - 0.05 5.6 2,154 106.60 - - - - - - 0.05 5.7 2,325 106.70 - - - - - - 0.05 5.8 2,496 106.80 - - - - - - 0.05 5.9 2,667 106.90 - - - - - - 0.05 6.0 2,838_ 107.00 - - - - - - 0.05 6.1 '3,096 107.10 - - - - - - 0.05 6.2 3,354 107.20 - - -- - - - 0.05 6.3 3,612 107.30 - - - - - - 0.05 6.4 3,870 107.40 - - - - - - 0.05 6.5 4,128 107.50 - - - - - - 0.05 Continues on next page... BLDG 6 Page 3 Stage/ Storage/ Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Culy.A Cult'.B CuIv.4 Weir A weir li Weir C Discharge (ft) (CUM (ft) (cfs) (cf.$) (cam) (cfs) {cis) (cftr (cam) 6.6 4,386 107.60 — — — 6.7 4,644 107.70 — — — — — — 0.05 6.8 . 4,902 107:80 — — — — — — 0.05 6.9 5,160 107.90 — — — — — — 0.05 7.0 5,418 108.00 — — — — — — 0.05 APPENDIX 1 Hydrograph Summary report Page ■ Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Tkne TuMto Volum. Return Inflow MaxNM--n Max■.ssAnn Hydrograph No. type flow irrter ! peak period hyd(s) elevation 8 SCS Runoff 0.4 2 724 f 0.03 f 2 — B 6 ff 106.5 9 SCS Runoff. 0.8 2 724 0.06 10 — — Bldg 6 10 SCS Runoff 1.1 2 724 0.08 25 — — Bldg 6 11 SCS Runoff 1.3 2 724 0.09 50 — — Bldg 6 12 - SCS Runoff 1.6 2 724 0.11 100 — . — - 8tdg 6 13 Reservoir 0.0 2 782 0.03 2 8 104.36 478 Bldg 6 14 Reservoir 0.1 2 726 0.06 10 9 106.10 1292 Blkj 6 15 Reservoir 0.1 2 720 0.08 25 10 106.43 1869 Bldg 6 16 Reservoir 0.1 2 716 0.09 50 11 106.75 2416 Bldg 2A-3B 17 Reservoir 0.1 2 712 0.11 100 12 10TO6 2992 Bldg 6 Proj. file: BLDG6.GPW OF fie: SAMPLE.IDF Run date: 06-29-2000 APPENDIX J JOB P%ign S1;EEl NOOV ressionals, inc. CALCM.ATED 11v DATE DESIGN STORM FREQUENCY Card oivilengineers •planners • surveyors•gis .CHECKED BY_ _....... ...... DATE .... .._._......_................_ Run tn�rsnsent A x C T.Co' i Q PIPE From To A C Incr. o min. 1 r ch D t.,., S; : Q f v t NOTE I O Ls o,'5 i IS I, 0.3 - s .0 6. p•n o.66 �� 15'`� o' I � • o, � oo ' o. 0,11 0. IT ct 'c ,s I55 3 OE13 0 F:> .3 0.8 0,�6 0 1 60' 0 . r� DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers . planners . surveyors . gis Transmitted via certified mail Dear Current Abutting Property Owner June 30, 2000 Re: Wheeler Estates DPI Project No. 91-595 Smith Street ' South Windsor, Connecticut In accordance with regulations of the Inland Wetlands Agency and Planning& Zoning Commission,we are required to notify you that applications have been filed on the property abutting yours and is subject to a hearing by the Planning&Zoning Commission and Inland Wetlands Agency. The application 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(s)to ask questions and/or give comments,however,you are not required to attend. You may also submit written comments regarding the application(s)prior to the hearing if you so desire. For further information regarding the specific date this application(s)will be heard,please contact Debbie Wark, Recording Secretary or Michele Lipe,Deputy Planning Director or Jeff Folger, Wetlands Officer at the South Windsor Planning Department at 644-2511, ext. 253 or 252, or 229,respectively. Thank you. Since ly, D N PROFESSIONALS, INC. By: Peter R. eMallie Principal cc: K.F. Properties, L.L.C. Cummings&Lanza Richard Adams Jeffrey Folger Marcia Banach Galen B. Semprebon, P.E. 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860)291-8755 -Fax: (860)291-8757 DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers • planners • surveyors • gis June 30,2000 Abutters List Wheeler Estates Smith Street DPI Project No, 91-595 1.) Redfield Homeowner's Association,P10. Box 853, South Windsor, CT 06074-0853. 2.) Catholic Cemeteries Association of the Archdiocese of Hartford,Inc.,c/o Arnold J. Grant III,MAI, 100 Constitution Plaza, Hartford,CT 06103 3.) Margaret R. French, 198 Smith Street 4.) Rosal Conrado &Maria Perez, 6 Diggins Court 5.) Jillmarie Serignese, 8 Diggins Court 6.) Dennis J. &Donna M. Churchill, 10 Diggins Court 7.) Divyesh&Heena Dalai, 12 Diggins Court 8.) Jo-Anne Piazza, 14 Diggins Court 9.) Debra M. Javit, 16 Diggins Court 10.) Robert&Lori Wilson, 18 Diggins Court 11.) James&Adrienne Machowski, 14 Drake Court 12.) Vincent& Christine Dileone, 16 Drake Court 13.) Jennifer Tellan, 17 Drake Court 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860)291-8755 •Fax: (860)291-8757 �i �o•NN Sf,<� C slo� V&U&iat y ` 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 �A OR COS AREA CODE 860 / 644-2511 �dS To: Design Professionals 165 So. Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner, Town of South Windsor Date: July 3, 2000 Re: App. #00-28P - Review of the proposed Wheeler Estates Subdivision and SRD - Plans dated 6/9/00. I have reviewed the proposed plan with the following initial comments: The sequence of construction should mention directly that the detention basin should be constructed first and stabilized prior to construction of additional stormwater structures. Topography should be added to the bottom of the proposed detention basin to maximize travel time of water through the basin. A specific detail of the detention basin should be drawn showing proposed micro-topography. E&S controls should be shown at the beginning and the end of the proposed outlet of the detention basin. A sediment fore-bay should be incorporated into the detention basin design for initial storage of sediment. The proposed basin as planned will have 1-foot of standing water in the bottom. Will the proposed"wet grass" mix be compatible with the anticipated water depth? The distance the proposed house unit#12 is only 25 feet from the top of the proposed detention basin. This distance should be significantly increased to minimize potential conflicts between future adjacent homeowners and the detention basin. The proposed catchbasins should show 4-foot sumps to maximize the storage capacity of sediment and road sand. A maintenance schedule should be drafted and included on the plans addressing the periodic removal of accumulated sediment from the basins. This schedule should be made clear to the homeowner's association to be developed. Proposed soil stockpiles should be shown on the plans with appropriate E&S measures. The limit of clearing should be shown on the topographic plan sheet. Vegetative clearing adjacent to the wetland areas should be minimized to the extent possible. The sediment and erosion control plan should show proposed grading, wetlands and watercourses, and drainage details on the same sheet. 'I �SpwN Sf+tTawn O-P s ` 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 AREA CODE 860/644-2511 �pSOR Cott To: Design Professionals 165 So. Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner, Town of South Windsor Date: July 24, 2000 Re: Appl. #00-28P - Review of the proposed Wheeler Estates Subdivision and SRD - Plans dated 6/9/00. The areas on the site plan designated as wetlands meet the definition of a swamp (areas with soils that exhibit aquic moisture regimes and are dominated by wetland trees and shrubs) and are therefore considered a watercourse. The upland review area associated with a watercourse is 80 feet. This 80-foot boundary must be shown on the site plan. All wetland flag numbers should be shown on the plan. The consulting soil scientist should sign the plan verifying that the regulated area boundaries shown on the plan are an accurate depiction of what was flagged in the field. i 041% 84r,4 U y ` 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 w AREA CODE 860 / 644-2511 f�OSOR•CO�� To: Design Professionals 165 So. Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 From: Jeffrey H. Folger Environmental Planner, Town of South Windsor Date: August 7, 2000 Re: Appl. #00-28P - Review of the proposed Wheeler Estates Subdivision and SRD - Plans dated 7/24/00. The latest revision does not show a detail (10 or 20 scale) of the proposed detention basin. This needs to be submitted. The detail should include the depth and type of top soil proposed. (_EVAA) �110 •NN Sf•,(co C s ` 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 e•c AREA CODE 860 / 644-2511 To: Design Professionals 165 So. Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner, Town of South Windsor Date: August 8, 2000 Re: Appl. #00-28P - Review of the proposed Wheeler Estates Subdivision and SRD - Plans dated 7/24/00. How does the estimated time of concentration of the proposed detention basin compare with the time of concentration of the detention basin at Redfield Estates? The Wheeler Estates basin must discharge its peak after the Redfield basin. 61 1 7J�) 0 7au� ap slau� V&U&Iot s ` 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 AREA CODE 860 / 644-2511 S0R•COS� To: Design Professionals 165 So. Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner, Town of South Windsor Date: August 9, 2000 Re: Appl. #00-28P - Review of the proposed Wheeler Estates Subdivision and SRD - Plans dated 7/24/00. Additional comments: Due to the fact that the majority of the site slopes down to the north towards the watercourse, I would recommend that perimeter erosion controls proposed for the northern limit of clearing include an earthen berm just south of the proposed silt fence. Topsoil stockpiles can be used for this structure and immediately seeded. This type of a structure will intercept and contain runoff prior to the sensitive areas on-site. ti DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers • planners • surveyors . gis R E C I V E August 28, 2000 AUG 28 2000 Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Ave. South Windsor, CT 06074 SOUTH WINOSOR PLANNING DPI, Attn:Marcia Banach ,{ Director of Planning RE: Wheeler Estates,00-28P DPI Proj. #`595 Dear Marcia We are submitting revised plans in response to comments made by Jerry Iazzetta dated 8-8-00,and 8-9-00, and by Jeff Folger dated 8-7-00, 8-8-00,and 8-9-00. Our like numbered responses to their comments are as follows: Jeff Folger's comments of 8-7-00 A detail of the proposed detention basin has been added to the detail sheet. Jeff Folger's continents of 8-8-00 The town's requirements for site development state that there will not be any increase in runoff from the site When we reviewed the drainage from the site,we determined that there would be an increase in peak runoff from the site due to the development of the site, and therefore have included a detention basin in the site design. In looking at the comparative times for discharge of detention basin, such as ours verses Redfields,the entire drainage basin that the receiving stream serves would need to be investigated. This would require a watershed analysis of the entire basin which is beyond the scope and requirements for any particular site development. In addition,to the entire watershed basin being investigated,a watershed management plan would need to be completed to determine the needs of the watershed. After these two components have been completed,could recommendations be made as to the timing of basin discharges. In other words,without a watershed management plan,there is no available information that indicates at what time would it be most advantageous to discharge storm runoff from our site verses the Redfield site. Jeff Folger's comments of 8-9-00 We have included a double row of silt fence and staked haybales on the down slope side of the site to help protect the wetlands. It would be impractical to install a berm in this area,and would tend to lead to problems with drainage around the foundations and units in the future. Jerry Iazzetta's comments dated 8-8-00: General 1. The topographic plan has been revised to be made more readable. 2. Stormwater report has been revised. 3. The concept for the sanitary sewer running from this site into the private sewer in the adjacent site has been reviewed on a preliminary level by the WPCA previously. 4. WPCA approval is required. DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers • planners • surveyors • gis Plot Plan—Sheet 3 1. We revised the previous concept plan to provide for one entrance onto Wheeler road prior to the cul-de- sac,and two private drives onto the cul-de-sac. The towns subdivision regulations allow for up to 3 driveways onto a cul-de-sac, and do not preclude two private roadways from entering'the cul-de-sac. The proposed site layout and site shape preclude an acceptable layout with only one entrance on the cul-de-sac. 2. The intersection sight distance have been added to the plan. A traffic report has been prepared and will be submitted addressing the sight line issue. 3. The north property line is not in dispute. The same property line was held for both the Redfield development and the Wheeler Estates development. 4. Smith street intersects with Wheeler at two different angles. The site roadway has been designed to be at 90 degree angle with the western leg of Smith street. 5. The road centerline data has been included on the plans. 6. Based on our template, a WB-50 truck can negotiate around Kebalo lane. 7. The radius of the cul-de-sac has been included on the plan. 8. The sanitary easement has been removed from the plans, and a right to discharge to the town added. 9. The drainage easement has been removed from the plans, and a right to discharge to the town added. 10. Upside down information has been flipped upright. 11. The utility and tree easements have been added to the plans. Topographic Plan—Sheet 4 1. Sanitary sewer and lateral tables added to this plan. 2. Smith Street in the vicinity of the proposed roadway is at a high spot. There will be very little runoff from Smith Street entering the site,and therefore no need for catch basins at this intersection. 3. Based on the gutter flow analysis,there is no need for these two catch basins. 4. Inverts at the drywells added. 5. There is a concern with putting the drainage from the community hall into the detention basin. When the basin is full,water backing up from the detention basin could cause the basement of the community hall to flood. 6. Additional test pits to be done prior to or as part of construction to confirm design of roadway,etc. 7. The plans have been revised accordingly. 8. The note was on original survey plans for the project. 9. The chart has been labeled. 10. Symbol added to legend. Plan and Profile—Sheet 5 1. Plan revised to contain information referenced. 2. Note added to state same. 3. Inverts shown on plan. 4. Footing drains shown on plan. 5. Sanitary laterals revised to be consistent. 6. Table revised accordingly. 7. Lot#1 contains the Kebalo electric buisiness. 8. Plan revised accordingly. 9. Plan revised accordingly. Details Sheet 1 —Sheet 7 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860) 291-8755 - Fax: (860) 291-8757 DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers . planners • surveyors . gis 1. Plan revised accordingly. 2. Plan revised accordingly. 3. Plan revised accordingly. 4. The interior slopes of the detention basin are proposed to be 2:1. Detail Sheet 2—Sheet 8 1. Plan revised accordingly. 2. Plan revised accordingly. 3. Plan revised accordingly. Jerry Iazzetta's comments dated 8-9-00: General 1. Once all comments are received,the overall Stormwater Management Plan will be revised. 2. A note has been added to the plans addressing this. Infiltration Basin Design 1. The missing pages are included herein. Please note that the building 2B-3A address both drywells 3 and 4. 2. Permeability samples were taken at all locations during the test pits. Mottling observed during the test pits was very questionable and to location,and do not appear to be substantiated based on the permeability sampling. Based on this,it appears that the actual water tables are lower than anticipated. The permeability calculations used in the analysis are very conservative based on the sampling. In addition, for conservative analysis,no infiltration was assumed out of the bottom of the drywells. 3. See response for#2 above. Detention Basin Design. See response to Jeff Folgers comments dated 8-8-00 above. On Site Storm Sewer 1. Gutter flow analysis for public road included herein. 2. Hydraulic analysis revised accordingly. 3. Water surface analysis provided for worst case location. Please note that the majority of the storm drainage on the site is 6-8 feet deep. 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860) 291-8755 . Fax: (860) 291-8757 DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers • planners • surveyors • gis Please review the enclosed revised plans, and feel free to call with any questions or comments. Sincerely. u� e� Galen SempreboARE., CC- errs Iazzetta Jeffrey Folger Enclosures: 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860) 291-8755 9 Fax: (860) 291-8757 �SO•NN Sf'`� C To� op Sau V&U140t S ` 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 sox•co AREA CODE 860 / 644-2511 To: Design Professionals 165 So. Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner, Town of South Windsor Date: August 30, 2000 Re: Appl. #00-28P - Review of the proposed Wheeler Estates Subdivision and SRD - Plans dated 8/24/00. Additional comments: Concerning the proposed detention basin: The areas at elevation S3 should have a wetland meadow mix applied as a seeding. v The detail showing the proposed plantings at elevation 82.5 should read cattails and fox sedge. To increase the plant diversity in this area you should include two to three additional plant species. Soft rush, giant bur-reed, soft stem bulrush, wool sedge, and blue-flag iris are some possible choices for additional species. The plantings should be distributed throughout the area in a random fashion but at a higher density than the proposed 8-foot on center. For this site the proposed double silt fence/haybale perimeter protection is acceptable. ' 270 Amity Road D M Q Q M 8OF PLANNING Woodbridge,Connecticut 06525 FENGINEERING QOQ AND DESIGN Telephone: (203)397-3600 Telecopier: (203)397-3642 August 31, 2000 Ms. Marcia Banach E Director of PlanningR E C IV ED ' Town of South Windsor SEP 20� 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 ' RE: SITE TRAFFIC EVALUATION STUDY SOi1TH W�N�SOR PLAH1�1��G CEPS. 1140 PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD ' WHEELER ESTATES SENIOR RESIDENCE DEVELOPMENT SMITH STREET OPPOSITE WHEELER ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT ' Dear Ms. Banach: ' Reference is made to the proposal to develop the parcel located on the north side of Smith Street, opposite Wheeler Road, to provide six residential building ' lots and a 25-unit senior residence development. The parcel currently contains two building units, of which one is a home, and the other is used by an electrical contractor. It is planned for the parcel to be served by a two-way site drive ' intersecting Smith Street opposite Wheeler Road, which will extend northerly into the site and end at a cul-de-sac. ' Please refer to Exhibit 1 of the Appendix that locates this site with respect to the surrounding roadway network. Defined Study Area For purposes of this site traffic evaluation study, the defined study area includes the following four intersections: ' 1. Smith Street at Wheeler Road and proposed site drive: This is currently a three-way intersection, with Smith Street running east-west and Wheeler Road intersecting the south side of Smith Street opposite the subject parcel. The Wheeler Road northbound approach to the intersection is controlled by a stop sign. Plans are to locate the site drive for the subject development on ' the north side of Smith Street opposite Wheeler Road, and to control the southbound approach with a stop sign. ' 2 2. Clark Street at Smith Street: This is a three-way intersection, with Clark ' Street running north-south and Smith Street intersecting the east side of Clark Street. The Smith Street westbound approach to Clark Street is controlled by a stop sign. 3. Pleasant Valley Road at Clark Street: This is a four-way intersection, with Pleasant Valley Road running east-west, and Clark Street running north- south. There is currently a dogleg (i.e., offset) between the two Clark Street legs of this intersection. This intersection has one-lane approaches on all four legs, and is controlled by stop signs on all four approaches. The Town is tcurrently designing an improvement of this intersection that includes the removal of the dogleg to create a normal four-way intersection, and the addition of a right-turn lane on the Clark Street northbound approach to accommodate the relatively heavy turning movement. 4. Pleasant Valley Road at Wheeler Road: This is a three-way intersection, with Pleasant Valley Road running east-west and Wheeler Road intersecting the north side of Pleasant Valley Road. The Wheeler Road southbound approach to Pleasant Valley Road is controlled by a stop sign. The Town is currently designing an improvement of this intersection to improve sight lines from the Wheeler Road approach. Existing Conditions Smith Street is a bi-directional, Town road running east-west in front of the site. The eastern end terminates at a cul-de-sac west of, and with no connection to, ' Buckland Road. The western end terminates at a T-intersection at Clark Street. The subject site is located on the north side of Smith Street opposite the Wheeler Road intersection. Smith Street is basically straight on each side of Wheeler Road, undergoing a slight reverse curve in its horizontal geometry in the vicinity of Wheeler Road. Smith Street is basically flat on each side of Wheeler Road. Smith Street is about 18 feet wide east of Wheeler Road, and ' about 22 feet wide west of Wheeler Road. Wheeler Road is 30 feet wide south of Smith Street. The site currently contains a home and an electrical contractor's facility that generate very low traffic volumes. In fact, the counts conducted at the Smith Street and Wheeler Road intersection showed no vehicles traveling in or out during those time periods. ' 3 ' Background Traffic Manual turning movement counts were recently conducted at the four intersections within the defined study area to develop weekday am and pm peak hour traffic volumes for the operations analyses that follow. These counts were taken between the hours of 7:00 and 9:00 am, and between 4:00 and 6:00 pm, and then balanced to represent the study area taken as a whole. Please refer to Exhibits 2 and 3 of the Appendix that graphically summarize the 2000 existing am and pm peak hour traffic volumes for the defined study area. It is anticipated that the subject development will be open for use by 2001. Please refer to Exhibits 4 and 5 of the Appendix that graphically summarize the 2001 background (i.e., no-build) am and pm peak hour traffic volumes that were ' developed utilizing a 2 percent growth factor to expand existing volumes to future volumes. Site-Generated Traffic For the purpose of developing site-generated traffic estimates for the subject facility, we utilized the trip generation data made available in Trip Generation Report, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), sixth edition, 1997. ' The development consists of two components. One component includes the six dwelling units assumed to be single-family dwelling units. The second component includes 25 senior residence units "similar to apartments and condominiums, but restricted to senior citizens". In the case of the single-family units, we utilized the trip generation estimates provided by ITE land use code #210 for single family dwellings as computed in Exhibit 6 of the Appendix. In the ' case of the senior residence component, we compared the trip generation estimates provided by ITE land use code #250 for retirement communities and ITE land use code #253 for elderly housing as computed in Exhibits 7A and 713, ' respectively, of the Appendix, and found the "retirement community" category to be comparable, although slightly higher. Please refer to Table 1 on the next page of this study that summarizes the trip generation estimates for the subject development based on the calculations from 1 Exhibits 6 and 7A of the Appendix. A review of the Table 1 indicates that the proposed development will generate relatively low peak hour traffic volumes, ranging from 13 to 18 vehicles per hour during the weekday am and pm commuter peaks, and about 23 vehicles per hour during the Saturday midday peak. TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS WHEELER ESTATES SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT ' � ,, ��sr -< , .ayF,.,: ..,t. ,,.,..,;,,�5�► ..�, ?: ,t,4t .: ,. �,, i. ,tn,: ;'��`;., -� ;',.�' r, � .�L ' ��.,. ",:���...i � ,� )�;,`t AVERAGE WEEKDAY 39 39 78 41 41 83 80 80 161 PEAK HOUR 7TO9AM 3 10 14 2 2 4 1 PEAK HOUR 4T06 PM 5 3 9 2 2 4 SAT. PEAK HOUR OF GENERATOR 9 8 16 3 3 7 12 11 23 Bubaris Traffic Associates August 2000 4 For purposes of the analyses that follow, it has been assumed that site- generated traffic will be distributed on the surrounding roadway network in ' proportion to the existing traffic patterns on the surrounding roadway network as follows: To and from the north via Clark Street: 20% To and from the west via Pleasant Valley Road: 25% To and from the south via Clark Street: 15% To and from the east via Pleasant Valley Road: 40% ' Please refer to Exhibit 8 of the Appendix that graphically depicts the foregoing site-generated traffic distributions. Please refer to Exhibits 9 and 10 of the Appendix that graphically summarize the estimated site-generated am and pm peak hour traffic volumes for the proposed development. Exhibits 9 and 10 were derived by multiplying the site-generated traffic estimates in Table 1 by the site-generated traffic distributions summarized above and in Exhibit 8 of the Appendix. Evaluation The 2000 existing peak hour analyses are based on the am and pm peak hour ' traffic volumes shown as Exhibits 2 and 3 of the Appendix. The 2001 background (i.e., no-build) peak hour analyses are based on the am and pm peak hour traffic volumes shown as Exhibits 4 and 5 of the Appendix. The 2001 combined (i.e., build) peak hour analyses are based on the am and ' pm peak hour traffic volumes shown as Exhibits 11 and 12 of the Appendix. Exhibits 11 and 12 were derived by combining the 2001 background peak hour traffic volumes shown in Exhibits 4 and 5, with the respective site-generated ' peak hour traffic volumes shown in Exhibits 9 and 10 for the subject development. ' Intersection capacity analyses were performed for the four study intersections utilizing the methodology described in the latest edition of Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, 1985, updated to ' 1995. Application of this methodology was facilitated by use of Highway Capacity Software, developed by the Federal Highway Administration, 1988, updated to 1998. Capacity analyses are utilized to determine a Level of Service ' (LOS) for a given intersection operating under either signalized or unsignalized control. ' TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF CAPACITY ANALYSES ' WHEELER ESTATES SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT ' PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD AT WHEELER STREET ' 2000 2001 2001 EXISTING BACKGROUND COMBINED AM PM AM PM AM PM SOUTHBOUND B B B B B B EASTBOUND A A A A A A V/C RATIO 1.4 0.6 1.4 0.7 1.5 0.7 PC FILE 981 982 983 984 985 986 ' PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD AT CLARK STREET ' 2000 2001 2001 EXISTING BACKGROUND COMBINED AM PM AM PM AM PM NORTHBOUND A C A C A C ' SOUTHBOUND B A B A B A EASTBOUND A A A A A A WESTBOUND A B A B A B ' V/C RATIO 3.9 7.8 4 8.1 4.1 8.1 PC FILE 987 988 989 990 991 992 CLARK STREET AT SMITH STREET 2000 2001 2001 EXISTING BACKGROUND COMBINED ' AM PM AM PM AM PM SOUTHBOOUND A A A A A A WESTBOUND A A A A A A ' V/C RATIO 0.8 0.6 0.8 0.6 0.9 0.6 PC FILE 993 994 995 996 997 998 SMITH STREET AT WHEELER ROAD/SITE DRIVE ' 2000 2001 2001 EXISTING BACKGROUND COMBINED ' AM PM AM PM AM PM NORTHBOUND A A A A A A SOUTHBOUND --- --- --- --- A A EASTBOUND --- --- --- -- A A ' WESTBOUND A A A A A A V/C RATIO 1.2 1.9 1.2 1.9 1.6 2 PC FILE 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 ' Bubaris Traffic Associates August 2000 1 5 1 In the case of unsignalized intersections, Level of Service (LOS) is based on the average total delay for each vehicle on the approach or for the movement evaluated, and includes the delay associated in moving from the end to the beginning of the queue, as well as the delay in entering or crossing the competing traffic stream. For unsignalized intersections, all approaching ' movements from the minor street and only the left-turn movements from the major street are evaluated. A LOS is computed for each movement, as well as an average delay per vehicle for the entire intersection. LOS A means virtually ' no delay, LOS C means average delay, and LOS F means extreme delay which usually cannot be avoided when a minor street, even if a low traffic generator, intersects a relatively heavily traveled major street. Please refer to Exhibit 13 in 1 the Appendix, which provides details on the definitions of Levels of Service for unsignalized intersections. ' The results of the capacity analyses, which compare 2000 existing, 2001 background no-build, and 2001 combined build conditions, are summarized in ' Table 2 on the next page of this study. The computer-generated worksheets for these capacity analyses are included as Exhibits 14 through 17 in the Appendix as follows: • Exhibit 14 - Pleasant Valley Road at Wheeler Road ' • Exhibit 15 - Pleasant Valley Road at Clark Street • Exhibit 16 - Clark Street at Smith Street • Exhibit 17 - Smith Street at Wheeler Road and proposed site drive A review of Table 2 indicates that all of the study intersections, including the intersection of Pleasant Valley Road at Clark Street once improved by the Town, ' will exhibit, and continue to exhibit, satisfactory levels of service A through C with or without the low traffic volumes to be added by the proposed development. 1 i 1 ' 6 Sight Line Analysis ' A review of the Smith Street at Wheeler Road intersection showed that the frontage of the property will need to be cleared of some low-lying vegetation and a fence to improve sight lines. There is also a line of mature pine trees along ' the parcel's frontage to the west of the proposed site drive that will need to be trimmed to improve sight lines. There is also vegetation to the east of the parcel, on the north side of Smith Street, in front of the abutter's property, but ' apparently within the Town's right-of-way, that will also need to be trimmed back to improve sight lines. Finally, there is also a sight line restriction from the Wheeler Road northbound approach to Smith Street in looking to the east. Here again, vegetation needs to be cleared away within what appears to be the Town's right-of-way on the south side of Smith Street, east of Wheeler Road. After consultation with Design Professionals, Inc., it has been estimated that with the clearing of vegetation and obstructions within the available rights-of-way on each side of Smith Street, sight line distances of 600 feet to the west and 500 feet to the east can be achieved from the proposed site drive southbound approach to Smith Street, and a sight line distance of 480 feet to the east can be achieved from the Wheeler Road northbound approach to Smith Street. From travel speed runs through this intersection, we estimate that approaching speeds on Smith Street are in the range of 30 to 40 miles per hour, requiring minimum sight line distances of 230 to 365 feet. Therefore, the available sight line distances can be improved to achieve the required minimums for the approaching speed of traffic in the vicinity of this site. Conclusions ' It is the professional opinion of Bubaris Traffic Associates that the proposed Wheeler Estates development, to consist of six residential building lots and 25 ' senior residence units, to be located on the north side of Smith Street opposite Wheeler Road, should not adversely impact traffic operations on the surrounding roadway network. ' The development will be a relatively low traffic generator, ranging from 13 to 18 ' vehicles per hour during the weekday am and pm commuter peaks, and about 23 vehicles per hour during the Saturday midday peak. Capacity analyses demonstrate that the project will have a negligible impact on the traffic operations that would otherwise exist on the surrounding roadway network. i ' 7 ' It appears that sight line restrictions, both from the Wheeler Road northbound approach to Smith Street, looking east, and from the proposed site drive ' southbound approach to Smith Street, looking both ways, can be improved via the trimming of vegetation along the site's frontage and within the Town's right- of-way on both sides of Smith Street east of Wheeler Road, to achieve the ' minimum suggested sight line distances. Very truly yours, /' ' James G. Bubaris, P.E. Conn. Reg. No. 9203 Principal ' Bubaris Traffic Associates ' cc: Mr. Walter Kebalo 4 CON Iva 176 Smith Street �3° �6.81 South Windsor, CT a �,�A Galen Semprebon, P.E. Design Professionals, Inc. � j ell ' 165 South Satellite Road +nNA, South Windsor, CT 06074 t ' SITE TRAFFIC EVALUATION STUDY WHEELER ESTATES SMITH STREET OPPOSITE WHEELER ROAD ' SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT APPENDIX TABLE OF CONTENTS ' Exhibit 1 — Location Map ' Exhibit 2 —2000 Existing AM Peak Hour Volumes Exhibit 3 —2000 Existing PM Peak Hour Volumes Exhibit 4—2001 Background AM Peak Hour Volumes ' Exhibit 5—2001 Background PM Peak Hour Volumes Exhibit - 6 — Summary of Site-Generated Traffic Calculations ' Wheeler Estates (6 Dwellings) Single Family Dwellings — ITE Code#210 ' Exhibit 7A— Summary of Site-Generated Traffic Calculations Wheeler Estates (25 Units) Retirement Community— ITE Code #250 ' Exhibit 7B.— Summary of Site-Generated Traffic Calculations Wheeler Estates (25 Units) ' Elderly Housing — ITE Code #253 Exhibit 8 — Site-Generated Peak Hour Traffic Distributions ' Exhibit 9 —AM Peak Hour Site-Generated Volumes ' Exhibit 10— PM Peak Hour Site-Generated Volumes Exhibit 11 —2001 Combined AM Peak Hour Volumes ' Exhibit 12 —2001 Combined PM Peak Hour Volumes ' Exhibit 13 — Definitions of Levels of Service Unsignalized Intersections (continued) Exhibit 14— Capacity Analysis Worksheets ' Pleasant Valley Road at Wheeler Street Exhibit 15— Capacity Analysis Worksheets ' Pleasant Valley Road at Clark Street Exhibit 16 - Capacity Analysis Worksheets Clark Street at Smith street Exhibit 17— Capacity Analysis Worksheets ' Smith Street at Wheeler Street and Site Drive 1 0 Z W CL Q SIR N a Bey EVER ,ba SMITH r SITE STREET R13AD 0 � � N EXHIBIT 1 LOCATION MAP WHEELER ESTATES SMITH STREET OPPOSITE WHEELER ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT CLARK STREET SITE 0 144 3 ! 54 0 0 4-, 6 SMITH STREET 26 3 1-p- 20 0 1 39 W N H E E I NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE LE R S T R E E - 10 T 15 99 37-4-- 84 27 74 1 - 127 T 20 218 PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD 6� I ♦ 10---t 96 /' 4 12 45 231-11110' 7-� CLARK STREET EXHIBIT 2 2000 EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES CLARK STREET SITE 0 85 22 13 0 0 8 15 ♦I 1 1 3 • • SMITH STREET 1 o--� 138 31 5-p- -/ 37 0 5 27-� W N H E E L NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE E R S T R E E A r - 55 21 33 47 4--- 124 8 38 I 78 I 80 8 26--� t 12--�k 169-0' 21 118 252 7--� CLARK STREET EXHIBIT 3 2000 EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES CLARK STREET SITE 0 147 3 55 0 0 0 -- 6 7 4 � ♦ SMITH STREET 1 0 4 t [* 27 3 1 20 0 1 40 W N H E E L NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE E R S T R E E J -- T - 10 15 101 38 86 28 75 1 - 130 20 PLEASANT 6 t 10 98 4 12 46 236 -� 7 CLARK STREET EXHIBIT 4 2001 BACKGROUND AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES CLARK STREET SITE 0 87 22 13 0 0 0 -- 8 15 l 3 SMITH STREET 0 4- t 141 32 5 38 0 5 28 W N H E E L NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE E R' S T R E E T 56 21 34 48 4-- 126 8 39 - 80 82 27 t� 12 -4- 287 PLEASANT VALLEY 90AD 172 21 120 257 321 -� 7 CLARK STREET EXHIBIT 5 2001 BACKGROUND PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ' 07/31/00 ' HOMES-LESS THAN 300 ******************** (1997) EXHIBIT 6 SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS ' SOURCE:TRIP GENERATION REPORT,INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, 1997 LAND USE: SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS-CODE#210 PROJECT: WHEELER ESTATES ' SOUTH WINDSOR,CONNECTICUT NUMBER OF SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING UNITS: 6 TOTAL TIME PERIOD ITE TRIP GENERATION EQUATION TRIPS INBOUND OUTBOUND AVERAGE LN(T)=0.920 LN(X)+2.707 78 39 39 ' WEEKDAY 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND PEAK HOUR T=0.700(X)+9.477 14 3 10 ' 7 TO 9 AM 25%INBOUND*75%OUTBOUND PEAK HOUR LN(T)=0.901 LN(X)+.527 9 5 3 ' 4 TO 6 PM 64%INBOUND*36%OUTBOUND ' AM PEAK HOUR T=0.704(X)+12.09 16 4 12 OF GENERATOR 25%INBOUND*75%OUTBOUND ' PM PEAK HOUR LN(T)=0.887 LN(X)+0.605 9 6 3 OF GENERATOR 64%INBOUND*36%OUTBOUND ' AVERAGE LN(T)=0.956 LN(X)+2.540 70 35 35 SATURDAY 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND ' SAT. PEAK HOUR T=0.886(X)+ 11.065 16 9 8 OF GENERATOR 54%INBOUND*46%OUTBOUND ' AVERAGE T=8.832(X)-11.604 42 21 21 SUNDAY 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND SUN PEAK HOUR T=0.756(X)+23.815 28 15 13 OF GENERATOR 53%INBOUND*47%OUTBOUND ' 08/07/00 ' RETIREMENT COMMUNITY (1997)* ' EXHIBIT 7A ******************** SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS ' SOURCE:TRIP GENERATION REPORT,INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, 1987, 1997 LAND USE: RETIREMENT COMMUNITY--CODE#250 ' COMPOSITE OF AVAILABLE DATA: SOURCE 1: ITE LAND USE#250-RETIREMENT COMMUNITY(TRIP GENERATIOI SOURCE 2: ITE LAND USE#230-RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS(TRIP DISTRIBI PROJECT: WHEELER ESTATES__- SOUTH WINDSOR,CONNECTICUT ' ---------------------_____--- NUMBER OF OCCUPIED DWELLINGS: 25 ' TOTAL TIME PERIOD ITE TRIP GENERATION EQUATION TRIPS INBOUND OUTBOUND ' AVERAGE T=3.3(X) 83 41 41 WEEKDAY 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND PEAK HOUR T=0.170(X)-.355 4 2 2 7 TO 9 AM 45%INBOUND*55%OUTBOUND PEAK HOUR T=0.269(X)-2.514 4 2 2 ' 4 TO 6 PM 56%.INBOUND*44%OUTBOUND AM PEAK HOUR T=0.307(X)-9.806 -2 -1 -1 OF GENERATOR 51 %INBOUND*49%OUTBOUND ' PM PEAK HOUR T=0.334(X)+0.784 9 5 4 OF GENERATOR 56%INBOUND*44%OUTBOUND ' SATURDAY PEAK T=0.27(X) 7 3 3 HOUR OF GEN 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND ' SUNDAY NO AVAILABLE DATA PEAK HOUR ' 08/07/00 ' ELDERLY HOUSING* (1997) xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx EXHIBIT 713 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS ' SOURCE: TRIP GENERATION REPORT,INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS,1997 LAND USE: ELDERLY HOUSING--CODE#253 PROJECT: WHEELER ESTATES SOUTH WINDSOR,CT ------------------------------------ --- NUMBER OF ELDERLY HOUSING.UNITS: 25 TOTAL TIME PERIOD ITE TRIP GENERATION EQUATION TRIPS INBOUND OUTBOUND ' AVERAGE T=3.48(X) 87 44 44 WEEKDAY 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND PEAK HOUR T=0.07(X) 2 1 1 7 TO 9 AM 63%INBOUND*37%OUTBOUND PEAK HOUR T=0.10(X) 3 1 1 4 TO 6 PM 59%INBOUND*41 %OUTBOUND WEEKDAY AM T=0.06(X) 2 1 1 PEAK HOUR 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND OF GENERATOR WEEKDAY PM T=0.11 (X) 3 1 1 PEAK HOUR 53%INBOUND*47%OUTBOUND ' OF GENERATOR AVERAGE T=2.51 (X) 63 31 31 ' SATURDAY 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND SATURDAY T=0.30(X) 8 4 4 PEAK HOUR 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND ' AVERAGE T=2.70(X) 68 34 34 SUNDAY 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND ' SUNDAY T=0.55(X) 14 7 7 PEAK HOUR 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND CLARK STREET SITE (20%) 20% 50% 50% �-- o _ ♦ � 30,6 ♦ � �, SMITH STREET 1-01 (30%) (50%) W N H E E L NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE E R NOTE XX EQUALS OUTBOUND VEHICLES S (YY) EQUALS INBOUND VEHICLES T R E E �► T 15% 15% -4— 10% 10% 40% —(40%) PLEASANT 1 (15%) —� CLARK STREET EXHIBIT 8 SITE GENERATED TRIP DISTRIBUTIONS CLARK STREET SITE (�) 2 6 6 �- 4 �. ,SMITH STREET (3) 1 �► (2) -♦ (2) W N H E E L NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE E R NOTE XX EQUALS OUTBOUND VEHICLES S (YY) EQUALS INBOUND VEHICLES T R E E �► T 2I 2 /-- 1 1 5 PLEASART VALLEY ROAD CLARK STREET EXHIBIT 9 SITE GENERATED AM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES CLARK STREET SITE 1 3 3 �1- 2 ♦ SMITH STREET tF* (3) �' •- T (2) (4) W 1V H E E L NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE E R NOTE XX EQUALS OUTBOUND VEHICLES S (YY) EQUALS INBOUND VEHICLES T R E E T 1 2 PLEASANT CLARK STREET EXHIBIT 10 SITE GENERATED PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES CLARK STREET SITE 0 147 4 57 6 6 0 6 11 � 4 ♦ SMITH STREET 3 27 5 1 20 2 1 40 W N H E E L NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE E R S T R E. E T --- 10 17 103 38 4- 87 29 80 1 - 130 ! 22 PLEASANT VALLEY 7 * 10 98 4 13 46 236 -�1 7 CLARK STREET EXHIBIT 11 2001 COMBINED AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES CLARK STREET SITE 0 87 23 14 3 3 0 -- 8 ♦ 17 ♦ ,l ♦ 3 SMITH STREET A-1 t 3 J 141 34 5 38 4 5 28 W N H E E L NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE E R S T R E E T 56 22 35 48 -- 126 9 41 - 80 85 �- 4- 287 PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD 28 --- 13 173 21 121 257 321 -� 7 CLARK STREET EXHIBIT 12 2001 COMBINED PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ' EXHIBIT 13 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS ' SOURCE: HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL HCM), 1994 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD ' Level of Service for unsignalized intersections similar to the study intersections is defined in terms of the average total delay for the approach or ' movement evaluated. Total delay is defined as the total elapsed time from when a vehicle stops at the end of a waiting queue until this vehicle departs from the stop line. This total delay includes the time required for this vehicle to travel ' from the last-in-queue position to the first-in-queue position. In the case of unsignalized intersections, all approaching movements from the ' minor street and the left-turn movements from the major street are analyzed, and a Level of Service is computed for each movement. ' Levels of Service (LOS) for unsignalized intersections are defined as follows: LEVEL OF SERVICE AVERAGE DELAY PER CONDITION VEHICLE (SECONDS) ' LOS A < 5.0 LITTLE OR NO DELAY LOS B 5.1 TO 10.0 SHORT DELAY LOS C 10.1 TO 20.0 AVERAGE DELAY ' LOS D 20.1 TO 30.0 LONG DELAY LOS E 30.1 TO 45.0 VERY LONG DELAY LOS F > 45.0 EXTREME DELAY ' In today's environment, Levels of Service D to F are common and are often experienced on minor street approaches to major streets carrying relatively high traffic volumes. (1) HCM, Table 10-3. EXHIBIT 14 ' CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD AT WHEELER STREET ' SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000981.HC0 Page 1 ----------------------------------------------=------------------------ ' BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 ' Streets (N-S) WHEELER STREET - (E-W) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD Major Street Direction. . . . SW ' Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) Analyst . BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2000 E XISTING AM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R --- - - - ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 0 0 1 < 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 10 231 218 20 74 27 ' PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 .9 Grade 0 0 0 MC ' s (%-) SU/RV' s (o) ' PCEss (�) 1 . 10 1 .10 1 .10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ' Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 ' Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 .1g 00000981 .HC0 Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 253 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1031 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1031 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 97 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 264 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1283 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1283 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of' Queue_ -Queue-Free State: 099 ------------------------------- _ P Ste 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 521 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 529 Major LT, Minor TH ' Impedance Factor: 0 . 99 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 99 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 99 ' Movement Capacity: (pcph) 523 -------------------------------------------------------- ' Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 950 ' Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ ------- ------- ----- --------- SB L 90 523 > . 603 7 .5 0 .9 B 7 .5 SB R 33 1031 > ' EB L 12 1283 2 . 8 0 . 0 A 0 . 1 ' Intersection Delay = 1 .4 sec/veh ' HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000982 .HC0 Page 1 ---------------------------------------------- ' BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 Streets : (N-S) WHEELER STREET (E-W) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD Major Street Direction. . . . EW ' Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) Analyst . BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2000 E XISTING PM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection ---------------------- Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 0 0 1 < 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 12 315 281 80 38 8 ' PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 .9 .9 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (%-) ' SU/RV' s (o) CV' s (o) PCE ' S 1 . 10 1. 10 1 .10 -------------------------------------------------_ ---------------------- ' Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 ' Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 . 30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000982 .HC0 Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 356 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 914 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 914 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB ----------------------------------- --------------------- ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 401 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1104 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1104 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 ' TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. ' of Queue-Free State: 0 . 98 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 720 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 405 Major LT, Minor TH ' Impedance Factor: 0 . 98 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 98 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 98 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 399 -------------------------------------------------------- ' Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 950 ' Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) ' -------= ------ ------ --- -- ------- ------- ----- --------- SB L 46 399 > 444 9 .3 0 .4 B 9 .3 SB R 10 914 > EB L 14 1104 3 .3 0 . 0 A 0 . 1 ' Intersection Delay = 0 . 6 sec/veh ' HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1 000009 3 g 8 .HCO Page 1 ------------------------------------------------- ------------- ' BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 ' Ph: - (203) -397_3600--------------------- -------------------- Streets : (N-S) WHEOLER STREET (E-W) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD ' Major Street Direction. . . . EW Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) Analyst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 ' Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 B ACKGROUND AM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection ' Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ----' ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 0 0 1 < 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 10 236 222 20 75 28 ' PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (%) ' SU/RV' s (W) CV' s (%-) PCE ' s 1 .10 1.10 1. 10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ' Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ ' Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 . 50 2 . 60 ' Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000983 .HC0 Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1 : RT from Minor Street --NB---_-------SB --------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 258 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1025 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1025 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 97 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 2 : LT from Major Street WBEB ----------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 269 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1276 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1276 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 ' TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .99 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB ----------------------=------------------------=-------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 531 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 522 Major LT, Minor TH ' Impedance Factor: 0 . 99 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 99 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 99 ' movement-Capacity: _- (pcph) ----------------------------516 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 950 ' Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ ------- ------- ----- --------- ' SB L 91 516 > 597 7 . 6 0 . 9 B 7 . 6 SE R 34 1025 > 1 EB L 12 1276 2 . 8 0 . 0 A 0 . 1 1 ' Intersection Delay = 1 .4 sec/veh 1 HCS : Unsi nalized Intersections Release 2 . 1 00000984 .HCO Page 1 g g g 1 BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 1 Ph: (203) _397_3600________________________ Streets : (N-S) WHEOLER STREET (E-W) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD Major Street Direction. . . . EW 1 Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) Analyst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 ' Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 B ACKGROUND PM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection 1 Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ----1 ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 0 0 1 < 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 12 321 287 82 39 8 1 PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s 06) 1 SU/RV' s (o)CV' s (%-) PCE ' s 1 . 10 1 .10 1 .10 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Adjustment Factors 1 Vehicle Critical Follow-up 1 Maneuver Gap- ------------(tg) Time- (tf) --------------------------------------- Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 1 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 1 1 1 1 1 1 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000984 .HC0 Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1 : RT from Minor Street -------------NB-----------SB ------------------------ Conflicting Flows : (vph) 364 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 906 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 906 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .99 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 410 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1093 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1093 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 ' TH Saturation Flow Rate : (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate : (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. ' of Queue-Free State: ----------------0_98 Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 734 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 398 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0. 98 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 98. Capacity Adjustment Factor ' due to Impeding Movements 0 .98 Movement- -Capacity: 392 ---------------------------- ' Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95%_ ' Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ ------- ------- ----- --------- SB L 47 392 > 435 9 .5 0 .5 B 9 .5 SB R 10 906 > ' EB L 14 1093 3 .3 0 . 0 A 0 . 1 Intersection Delay = 0 .7 sec/veh HCS: Unsi nalized Intersections Release 2 . 1 000009 5 .H 5 g 8 CO Page 1 ' BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 ' Ph:- (203) -397=3600_____________________________________________________ Streets: (N-S) WHEOLER STREET (E-W) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD ' Major Street Direction. . . . EW Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) Analyst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis. . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 ' Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S. WINDSOR, CT- 2001 C OMBINED AM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection ' Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ----' ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --- No. Lanes 0 > 1 0 0 1 < 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 10 236 222 22 80 .29 ' PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (%-) ' SU/RV' S ($) CV' s W PCE ' s 1 . 10 1 . 10 1 . 10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ' Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up ' Maneuver Gap (tg) Time- (tf) ------ - ----_------- Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000985 .HC0 Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 259 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1024 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1024 Prob. of. Queue-Free State: 0 . 97 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB --------------------------------------------------_------ ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 271 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1273 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1273 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 ' .TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major- LT Shared Lane Prob. ' of-Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 - -------------------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB ----------------------------------------------------- -- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 532 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 521 Major LT, Minor TH ' Impedance Factor: 0 . 99 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 .99 Capacity Adjustment Factor ' due to Impeding Movements 0 .99 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 515 -------------------------------------------------------- ' Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95%_ Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) SB L 98 515 > 593 7 . 8 1 . 0 B 7 . 8 ' SB R 35 1024 > EB L 12 1273 2 . 9 0 . 0 A 0 .1 ' Intersection Delay = 1 .5 sec/veh HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000986 .HCO Page 1 BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 ---------------- ------------------------------------ Streets : (N-S) WHEOLER STREET (E-W) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD ' Major Street Direction. . . . EW Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) Analyst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 ' Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 C OMBINED PM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 0 0 1 < 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 13 321 287 85 41 9 ' PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 .9 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s O ' SU/RV' s (o) CV' s (o) PCE ' s 1 . 10 1. 10 1 .10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ' Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000986 .HC0 Page 2 ------------------------------------------------------------- Worksheet for TWSC Intersection -------------------------------------------------------- Step 1 : RT from Minor-Street -------------NB-----------SB ------------------ Conflicting Flows : (vph) 366 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 903 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 903 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 413 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1090 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1090 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate : (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. ' of Queue-Free State: - 0_98 ----- ---------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 737 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 396 Major LT, Minor TH ' Impedance Factor: 0 . 98 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 98 Capacity Adjustment Factor ' due to Impeding Movements 0 . 98 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 389 -------------------------------------------------------- ' Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 9 5`s Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) --------- ------ ------ ------ ------- ------- ----- SB L 51 389 > 433 9 . 7 0 .5 B 9 .7 SB R 11 903 > ' EB L 15 1090 3 .3 0 . 0 A 0 .1 ' Intersection Delay = 0 .7 sec/veh I ' EXHIBIT 15 CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD AT CLARK STREET ' SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT i ' HCS : Unsi nalized Intersections Release 2 . 1 00000987 .HC0 Page 1 g g g BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 ' Ph: - (203) -397=3600_____________________________________________________ Streets : (N-S) CLARK STREET (E-W) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD Analyst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRAFFIC Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 713110 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2000 E XISTING AM PEAK HOUR ' All-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R - L. T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 1 0 > 1 < 0 Volumes 6 96 7 127 84 10 4 12 45 37 99 15 PHF --------------9----9----9----9----9----9--- 9----9----9----9----9----9 Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet EB WE NB SB ----------------------------------------------------------------------- LT Flow Rate 7 141 4 41 RT Flow Rate 8 11 50 17 Approach Flow Rate 122 245 67 168 Proportion LT 0 . 06 0 .58 0 . 06 0 .24 ' Proportion RT 0 . 07 0 . 04 0 . 75 0 . 10 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 245 122 168 67 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 235 235 367 367 ' Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0 .20 0 .41 0 . 11 0 .28 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0 .41 0 .20 0 .28 0 . 11 Lanes on Subject Approach 1 1 2 1 Lanes on Opposing Approach 1 1 1 2 ' LT, Opposing Approach 141 7 41 4 RT, Opposing Approach 11 8 17 50 LT, Conflicting Approaches 45 45 148 148 ' RT, Conflicting Approaches 67 67 19 19 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0 .58 0 . 06 0 . 24 0 . 06 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0 . 04 0 . 67 0 . 10 0 . 75 ' Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0 . 19 0 . 19 0 .40 0 .40 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0 .29 0 .29 0 . 05 0 . 05 Approach Capacity 452 673 448 383 ------------------------------------_-------------- Intersection Performance Summary ' Approach Approach V/C Average Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS ---------- ---------- --------- ------- ----------- ---- ' EB 122 452 0 . 27 2 . 8 A WB 245 673 0 .36 4 . 0 A NB 67 448 0 . 15 1 . 8 A ' SB 168 383 0 .44 5 .3 B Intersection Delay = 3 .9 Level of Service (Intersection) = A HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 .1g 000009889 .HC0 Page 1 ' BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 ' Ph: _ (203) _397=3600_____________________________________________________ Streets : (N-S) CLARK STREET (E W) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD Analyst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRAFFIC ' Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2000 E XISTING PM PEAK HOUR All-way_Stop-controlled-Intersection ------------------------------- Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 1 0 > 1 < 0 Volumes 26 169 7 78 124 55 21 118 252 47 33 21 ' PH-------------9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----- Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet EB WB NB SB ----------------------------------------------------------------------- LT Flow Rate 29 87 23 52 , RT Flow Rate 8 61 280 23 Approach Flow Rate 225 286 434 112 Proportion LT 0 .13 0 .30 0 . 05 0 .46 ' Proportion RT 0 . 04 0 .21 0 . 65 0 .21 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 286 . 225 112 434 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 546 546 511 511 ' Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0 .21 0 .27 0 .41 0 . 11 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0 .27 0 .21 0 . 11 0 .41 Lanes on Subject Approach 1 1 2 1 Lanes on Opposing Approach 1 1 1 2 ' LT, Opposing Approach 87 29 52 23 RT, Opposing Approach 61 8 23 280 LT, Conflicting Approaches 75 75 116 116 ' RT, Conflicting Approaches 303 303 69 69 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0 .30 0 . 13 0 .46 0 . 05 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0 .21 0 . 04 0 . 21 0 . 65 Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0 .14 0 .14 0 .23 0 .23 ' Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0 .55 0 .55 0 . 14 0 . 14 Approach Capacity 579 613 659 479 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ' Intersection Performance Summary Approach Approach V/C Average ' Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS ---------- ---------- --------- ------- ----------- ---- EB 225 579 0 .39 4 .4 A ' WB 286 613 0 .47 5 .9 B NB 434 659 0 . 66 12 .2 C SIB 112 479 0 .23 2 .4 A ' Intersection Delay = 7 . 8 Level of Service (Intersection) = B 1 ' HCS : Unsi nalized Intersections s Release 2 . 1g 00000989 .HC0 Page 1 ' BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 ' Ph: (203) 397-3600 -------------------------------------------------- Streets : (N-S) CLARK STREET (E-W) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD ' Analyst . . . . . . . . . . : : : : : : : . : BUBARIS TRAFFIC Date of Analysis . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 B ACKGROUND AM PEAK HOUR ' All-way Stop-controlled Intersection ------------------------------------------ Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound ' -L-- T R -L- T R -L-- T R -L-_ T R -- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 1 0 > 1 < 0 ' Volumes 6 98 7 130 86 10 4 12 46 38 101 15 PHF--- ---------9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9 Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet EB WB NB SB ' ----- -------4------42 LT Flow Rate 7 144 RT Flow Rate 8 11 51 17 Approach Flow Rate 124 251 68 171 Proportion LT 0 . 06 0 .57 0 . 06 0 .25 ' Proportion RT 0 . 06 0 . 04 0 . 75 0 . 10 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 251 124 171 68 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 239 239 375 375 ' Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0 . 20 0 .41 0 .11 0 .28 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0 .41 0 .20 0 .28 0 . 11 Lanes on Subject Approach 1 1 2 1 ' Lanes on Opposing Approach 1 1 1 2 LT, Opposing Approach 144 7 42 4 RT, Opposing Approach 11 8 17 51 LT, Conflicting Approaches 46 46 151 151 ' RT, Conflicting Approaches 68 68 19 19 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0 .57 0 . 06 0 .25 0 . 06 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0 . 04 0 . 06 0 . 10 0 . 75 ' Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0 . 19 0 . 19 0 .40 0 .40 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0 .28 0 .28 0 . 05 0 . 05 Approach Capacity 452 674 446 383 ------------------In---------------------------------------------------- tersection Performance Summary ' Approach Approach V/C Average Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS ---------- ---------- - --------- ------- ----------- ---- ' EB 124 452 0 .27 2 . 8 A WB 251 674 0 .37 4 . 1 A NB 68 446 0 . 15 1 .8 A ' SB 171 383 -0 .45 5 .5 B Intersection Delay - 4 . 0 Level of Service (Intersection) = A HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000990 .HC0 Page 1 ' BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 ' Ph: - (203) -397=3600_____________________________________________________ Streets : (N-S) CLARK STREET (E-W) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD ' Analyst . . . . . . . . . . - . BUBARIS TRAFFIC Date of Analysis . • • • a Q . e 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 B ACKGROUND PM PEAK HOUR ' All-way Stop-controlled Intersection ---------------------------- Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound -L-- T -R-- L T R -L-- T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- --- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 1 0 > 1 < 0 Volumes 27 172 7 80 126 56 21 120 257 48 34 21 PHF-- --------9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9 Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WE NB SB ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ' LT Flow Rate 30 89 23 53 RT Flow Rate 8 62 286 23 Approach Flow Rate 229 291 442 114 Proportion LT 0 . 13 0 .31 0 . 05 0 .46 ' Proportion RT 0 . 03 0 .21 0 . 65 0 .20 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 291 229 114 442 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 556 556 520 520 ' Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0 .21 0 .27 0 .41 0 .11 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0 .27 0 .21 0 . 11 0 .41 Lanes on Subject Approach 1 1 2 1 Lanes on Opposing Approach 1 1 1 2 LT, Opposing Approach 89 30 53 23 RT, Opposing Approach 62 8 23 286 LT, Conflicting Approaches 76 76 119 119 ' RT, Conflicting Approaches 309 309 70 70 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0 .31 0 .13 0 .46 0 . 05 Proportion RT, opposing Approach 0 .21 0 . 03 0 .20 0 . 65 ' Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0 .14 0 . 14 0 .23 0 .23 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0 .56 0 .56 0 .13 0 . 13 Approach Capacity 579 613 658 479 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ' Intersection Performance Summary ' Approach Approach V/C Average Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS ---------- ---------- --------- ------- ----------- ---- ' EB 229 579 0 .40 4 .5 A WE 291 613 0 .47 6 . 1 B NB 442 658 0 . 67 12 .8 C SB 114 479 0 .24 2 .5 A Intersection Delay = 8 .1 Level of Service (Intersection) = B HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000991 .HC0 Page e 1 ' BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 ' Ph: _ (203) -397=3600_____________________________________________________ Streets : (N-S) CLARK STREET (E-W) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD Analyst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRAFFIC ' Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 C OMBINED AM PEAK HOUR ' All-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound -L-- T -R-- L -T-- R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 1 0 > 1 < 0 Volumes 7 98 7 130 87 10 4 13 46 38 103 17 ' PH-------------9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9 Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet EB WB NB SB ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ' LT Flow Rate 8 144 4 42 RT Flow Rate 8 it 51 19 Approach Flow Rate 125 252 69 175 Proportion LT 0 . 06 0 .57 0 . 06 0 .24 ' Proportion RT 0 . 06 0 . 04 0 . 74 0 .11 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 252 125 175 69 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 244 244 377 377 ' Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0 .20 0 .41 0 . 11 0 .28 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0 .41 0 .20 0 .28 0 .11 Lanes on Subject Approach 1 1 2 1 Lanes on Opposing Approach 1 1 1 2 ' LT, Opposing Approach 144 8 42 4 RT, Opposing Approach it 8 19 51 LT, Conflicting Approaches 46 46 152 .152 ' RT, Conflicting Approaches 70 70 19 19 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0 .57 0 . 06 0 .24 0 . 06 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0 . 04 0 . 06 0 .11 0 . 74 Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0 . 19 0 . 19 0 .40 0 .40 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0 .29 0 .29 0 . 05 0 . 05 Approach Capacity 452 670 452 384 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ' Intersection Performance Summary ' Approach Approach V/C Average Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS ---------- ---------- --------- ------- ----------- ---- ' EB 125 452 0 .28 2 . 9 A WB 252 670 0 .38 4 . 2 A NB 69 452 0 . 15 1 . 8 A SB 175 384 0 .46 5 . 7 B ' Intersection Delay = 4 .1 Level of Service (Intersection) = A ' HCS : Unsi nalized Intersections Release se 21 g 00000992 .HC0 Page 1 ' BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 ' Ph: (203) 397-3600 ---------------- -------------------_ Streets : (N-S) CLARK STREET (E-W) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD ' Analyst . . . . . . . . . . : : ' : : : : : : BUBARIS TRAFFIC Date of Analysis . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 C OMBINED PM PEAK HOUR ' All-way Stop-controlled Intersection ------------------------------------- Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound ' -L-- T -R-- -L T R L T - R L T R No. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 1 0 > 1 < 0 Volumes 28 173 7 80 126 56 21 121 257 48 35 22 PHF ---------------9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9----9 Volume Summary and Capacity Analysis WorkSheet ----------------------------------------------------------------------- EB WB NB SB ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ' LT Flow Rate 31 89 23 53 RT Flow Rate 8 62 286 24 Approach Flow Rate 231 291 443 116 Proportion LT 0 . 13 0 .31 0 . 05 0 .46 ' Proportion RT 0 . 03 0 . 21 0 .65 0 .21 Opposing Approach Flow Rate 291 231 116 443 Conflicting Approaches Flow Rate 559 559 522 522 ' Proportion, Subject Approach Flow Rate 0 .21 0 .27 0 .41 0 . 11 Proportion, Opposing Approach Flow Rate 0 . 27 0 . 21 0 . 11 0 .41 Lanes on Subject Approach 1 1 2 1 ' Lanes on Opposing Approach 1 1 1 2 LT, Opposing Approach 89 31 53 23 RT, Opposing Approach 62 8 24 286 LT, Conflicting Approaches 76 76 120 120 ' RT, Conflicting Approaches 310 310 70 70 Proportion LT, Opposing Approach 0 .31 0 . 13 0 .46 0 . 05 Proportion RT, Opposing Approach 0 .21 0 . 03 0 .21 0 . 65 ' Proportion LT, Conflicting Approaches 0 . 14 0 . 14 0 .23 0 .23 Proportion RT, Conflicting Approaches 0 . 55 0 . 55 0 .13 0 .13 Approach Capacity 579 611 660 479 ----------------------------=------------------------------------------ ' Intersection Performance Summary ' Approach Approach V/C Average Movement Flow Rate Capacity Ratio Total Delay LOS ---------- ---------- --------- ------- ----------- ---- ' EB 231 579 0 .40 4 . 6 A WB 291 611 0 .48 6 . 1 B NB 443 660 0 . 67 12 . 8 C ' SB 116 479 -0 .24 2 .5 A Intersection Delay - 8 .1 Level of Service (Intersection) = B ' EXHIBIT 16 CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS CLARK STREET AT SMITH STREET SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000993 .HC0 Page 1 ' BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 ' Ph: _ (203) -397=3600_____________________________________________________ Streets : (N-S) CLARK STREET (E-W) SMITH STREET Major Street Direction. . . . NS ' Length of Time Analyzed. .. 60 (min) Analyst. BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2000 E ' XISTING AM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection ' Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ' No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 26 3 3 144 7 54 ' PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 .9 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (%-) SU/RV' s {�) PCEss (�) 1 . 10 1 . 10 1 . 10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 . 50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 . 50 3 .40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000993 .HC0 Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1: RT from Minor Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 30 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1337 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1337 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 95 Step 2 : LT from Major Street SB NB -------------------------------------------------------- ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 32 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1655 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1655 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 ' TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. ' - -ofQueue_ -Queue-Free State: 100 ------------------ _ - Step 4 : LT from Minor Street WB EB ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 194 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 817 Major LT, Minor TH ' Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 Capacity Adjustment Factor ' due to Impeding Movements 1 . 00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 815 --------------------------------------------------------- ' Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 950 ' Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) - ------ ------ ------ ------ ------- ------- ----- --------- WB L 9 815 > 1242 3 . 1 0 . 1 A 3 . 1 ' WB R 66 1337 > SB L 3 1655 2 .2 0 . 0 A 0 . 0 ' Intersection Delay = 0 . 8 sec/veh HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000994 .HC0 Page 1 BUBARIS=TRAFFIC=ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 ' Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 Streets : (N-S)(N-S) CLARK STREET - (E-W) SMITH STREET ' Major Street Direction. . . . NS Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) Analyst . . . . BUBARIS TRRAFFI ' Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2000 E XISTING PM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound ' -L-- T -R-- L T R L -T-- -R-- L -T-- R No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N ' Volumes 138 31 22 85 15 13 PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 Grade 0 0 0 ' MC' s (%-) SU/RV' s (%) CV' s (%) PCE ' s 1 . 10 1. 10 1 .10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ' Adjustment Factors ' vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 ' HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000994 .HC0 Page 2 ' ------_ - - WorksheetforTWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------------- ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 170 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1136 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1136 Prob. of Queue-Free State- 99 -------------0_ -------- Step 2 : LT from Major Street SB NB -------------------------------------------------------- ' Conflicting Flows: (vph) 187 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1396 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1396 ' Prob. of Queue-Free' State: 0 .98 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) ' Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 .98 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 288 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 721 ' Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 . 98 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 98 ' Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 98 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 707 --------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95a Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ ------- ------- ----,- --------- WB L 19 707 > 848 4 .4 0 . 0 A 4 .4 ' WB R 15 1136 > SB L 26 1396 2 . 6 0 . 0 A 0 .5 ' Intersection Delay = 0 . 6 sec/veh HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000995 .HC0 Page 1 BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 ' Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 ------------------------------------- ' Streets : (N-S) CLARK STREET (E-W) SMITH STREET Major Street Direction. . . . NS Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) ' Analyst . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis . s • • • 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 B ACKGROUND AM PEAK HOUR ' Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection ------------------------------ Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound ' L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 co Stop/Yield N N ' Volumes 27 3 3 147 7 55_ PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 Grade 0 0 0 ' MC ' s (�) SU/RV' s (%) CV 1 s (%) ' PCE ----------------------1-10--------------------------1-10 1 . 10 ------ - --- J Adjustment Factors vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 ' Right Turn Minor Road 5 . 50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 . 30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 . 50 3 .40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000995 .HC0 Page 2 ' Worksheet for TWSC Intersection ----------- ------------------------------------- Step 1 : RT from Minor Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------------- ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 32 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1334 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1334 ' Prob. of Queue-Free State: ------------0_95- --------------------------- ------------ Step 2 : LT from Major Street SB NB ---------- --------- ---------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) --h) 33 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1653 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1653 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl). ' Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT-from-Minor-Street -------------WB EB -------- ------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 198 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 813 ' Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1. 00 ' Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1. 00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 811 -------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95%- Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay ' Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) WB L 9 811 > 1239 3 . 1 0 . 1 A 3 . 1 WB R 67 1334 > SB L 3 1653 2 .2 0 . 0 A 0 . 0 ' Intersection Delay = 0 . 8 sec/veh HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000996 .HC0 Page 1 BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 ' Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 ------------------------------ ' Streets : (N-S) CLARK STREET (E-W) SMITH STREET Major Street Direction. . . . NS Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) ' Analyst . . . . . . . . . . o . e . - . BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis . . . . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S. WINDSOR, CT- 2001 B ACKGROUND PM PEAK HOUR ' Two-way-Stop-controlled-Intersection --------------------------�-------- Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound -L-- T R -L-_ T R -L-- -T-- R L -T-- R ---- ---- ---- ---- --- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 141 32 22 87 15 13 PHF . 9 .9 . 9 . 9 .9 . 9 Grade 0 0 0 ' MC' s (%-) SU/RV' s (�) CV' s (%-) ' PCE ----------------------1-10--------------------------1-1- 1 . 10 ------ - --- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 . 50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 ' HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000996 .HC0 Page 2 ' Worksheet-for-TWSC-Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street WB EB -----------------------------------I--------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 175 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1129 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1129 ' Prob. of Queue-Free State: O . 99 ------------ -- Step 2 : LT from Major Street SB NB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 193 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1387 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1387 ' Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 98 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. ' of Queue-Free State: 0 . 98 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street WB EB -------- ----------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 296 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 714 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 .98 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 .98 ' Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 98 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 700 -------------------------------------------------------- ' Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95%- Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ ------- ------- ----- --------- WB L 19 700 > 841 4 .5 0 . 0 A 4 .5 WB R 15 1129 > SB L 26 1387 2 . 6 0 . 0 A 0 .5 ' Intersection Delay = 0 . 6 sec/veh HCS_-Unsignalized-Intersections ---Release-2 . 1g----00000997 .HC0---Page-1 BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 ' Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 ' Streets : (N-S) CLARK STREET (E-W) SMITH STREET Major Street Direction. . . . NS Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) Analyst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRRAFFI ' Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 C OMBINED AM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound ' L T R L T R L T R L T R - -- - -- - -- - _- - -- No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N ' Volumes 27 5 4 147 11 57 PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (%-) SU/RV' s (a) CV' s (�) PCE ' s 1. 10 1.10 1. 10 `---------------------------------------------------------------------- ' Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 ' Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 i ' HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000997 .HC0 Page 2 ' -----------Worksheet for TWSC Intersection ------------------------------------- Step 1 : RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 33 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1332 ' Movement-Capacity- -(pcph) 1332 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 95 Step 2 : LT from Major Street SB Ng Conflicting Flows : (vph) 3.6 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1648 ' Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1648 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street WB EB -------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 200 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 811 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 Capacity Adjustment Factor ' due to Impeding Movements 1 . 00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 809 -------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary ' Avg. 950 Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay ' Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) ----- (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ ------- ------- --------- WB L 13 809 > 1208 3 . 2 0 . 1 A 3 .2 WB R 69 1332 > SB L 4 1648 2 .2 0 . 0 A 0 .1 ' Intersection Delay -- 0 . 9 sec/veh 1 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000998 .HC0 Page 1 BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 ' Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 ' Streets: (N-S) CLARK STREET (E-W) SMITH STREET Major Street Direction. . . . NS Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) ' Analyst. . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 C OMBINED PM PEAK HOUR ' Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection -----------------------------=--------- Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound L- -- T R -L-- T R L T R -L-- T R No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N ' Volumes 141 34 23 87 17 14 PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 9 . 9 .9 Grade 0 0 0 ' MC' s (�) . SU/RV' s (�) CVIS (o) ' PCE ----- ------------------1-10---------------------------� 10 j --------1_ ' Adjustment Fa ctors actors . .. ' vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ ' Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 .10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 ' HCS__Unsignalized_Intersections ---Release-2 . 1g--_-00000998_HCO_--Page_2 WorksheetforTWSC Intersection ------- - - Step 1 : RT from Minor Street WE EB -------------------------------------------------------- ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 176 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1128 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1128 Prob. of-Queue_Free-State--------------0_98 --- ------- --------- Step 2 : LT from Major Street SB NB -------------------------------------------------------- ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 195 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1384 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1384 ' Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 98 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) ' Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 98 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street WE EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 299 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 711 ' Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 . 98 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 98 ' Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 98 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 695 --------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary ' Avg. 950 Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length _ LOS Delay ' Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) WB L 21 695 > 845 4 .5 0 . 0 A 4 .5 WE R 18 1128 > SB L 29 1384 2 . 7 0 . 0 A 0 . 6 ' Intersection Delay = 0 . 6 sec/veh 1 EXHIBIT 17 CAPACITY ANALYSIS WORKSHEETS ' SMITH STREET AT WHEELER STREET AND SITE DRIVE SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00000999 .HC0 Page 1 BUBARIS TRAFFIC=ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 ' Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 - ------------------------------------------------------------------- Streets : (N-S) WHEELER ST/SITE DR (E-W) SMITH STREET Major Street Direction. . . . EW Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) Analyst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRRAFFI ' Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2000 E XISTING AM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 > 0 < 0 0 0 0 _ Stop/Yield N N ' Volumes 1 39 4 6 20 1 PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (o) SU/RV' s (%) CV' s (%-) PCE ' s 1.10 1 . 10 1. 10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up ' Maneuver------------------------------Gap (tg) ------------Time- (--- Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 ' Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 ' HCS__Unsignalized-Intersections __-Release_2_lg__--00000999_HCO__-Page-2 ' WorksheetforTWSCIntersection -- - - - Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 22 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1350 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1350 ' Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB --------------------`------------------------------------ ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 44 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1633 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1633 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 TH Saturation Flow Rate : (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane- Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB ------------- ----------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 34 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1012 ' Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1. 00 ' Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1 . 00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1010 ' ---------------------=--------------- Intersection Performance Summary ' Avg. 9596 Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------- ------- ----- --------- NB L 24 1010 > 1020 3 . 6 0 . 0 A 3 . 6 ' NB R 1 1350 > WB L 4 1633 2 .2 0 . 0 A 0 . 9 ' Intersection Delay = 1 .2 sec/veh ' HCS_-Unsignalized-Intersections ---Release 2 . 1g OOOO1000 .HC0 Page 1 BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 ' Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 ' Streets : (N-S) WHEELER ST/SITE DR (E-W) SMITH STREET Major Street Direction. . . . EW Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) ' Analyst . . . . . . . . . . : : : e e BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis . e7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2000 E XISTING PM PEAK HOUR ' Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection ------------------------------------ Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound -L-- T -R-- L T R L T R -L-- T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 > 0 < 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N ' Volumes 5 27 3 8 37 5 PHF . 9 . 9 9 . 9 .9 . 9 Grade 0 0 0 ' MC' s (%) SU/RV' s (o) CV' s (%-) . 10 PCE ' -----------------------1--------------1-10------1-10--------------- 7 ' Adjustment Factors ' Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 ' Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 ' HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00001000 .HC0 Page 2 ' WorksheetforTWSCIntersection - - - Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 21 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1351 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1351 ' Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 36 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1648 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1648 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) ' Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 33 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1013 ' Major LT., Minor TH Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 ' Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1 . 00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1011 -------------------------------------------------------- Intersection Performance Summary ' Avg. 95. Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay ' Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) ----- (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ ------- ------- ------ NB L 45 1011 > 1046 3 . 6 0 . 0 A 3 . 6 ' NB R 7 1351 > WB L 3 1648 2 . 2 0 . 0 A 0 . 6 ' Intersection Delay = 1 .9 sec/veh ' HCS :-Unsignalized-Intersections ---Release 2 . 1g 00001001 .HCo Page 1 BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 ' Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 --------------------------- ----------------------- ' Streets : (N-S) WHEELER ST/SITE DR (E-W) SMITH STREET Major Street Direction. . . . EW Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) Analyst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRRAFFI ' Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 B ACKGROUND AM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection ----------------------------------------- Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound -L-- T R -L-- T R -L-- T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- -- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 > 0 < 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 1 40 4 6 20 1 PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (%-) SU/RV' s (o) CV' s (%�) ' ---------------------------1-10-----------1-10------1-10--------------- Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 ' HCS: Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00001001.HC0 Page 2 ' -----------Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB ' - ----------------- ------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 23 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1348 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1348 ' Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 2 : LT from Major Street WE EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 45 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1632 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1632 ' Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) ' Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 -------------------------------------------------------- ' Step 4_ LTfromMinorStreet NB SB ------------- - - - - - ------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 34 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1012 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 ' Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1 . 00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1010 -------------------------------------------------------- ' Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 955k Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay ' Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) -------- ------ ------ ------ ------- ------- ----- --------- NB L 24 1010 > 1020 3 . 6 0 . 0 A 3 . 6 ' NB R 1 1348 > WE L 4 1632 2 .2 0 . 0 A 0 .9 ' Intersection Delay = 1 .2 sec/veh 1 ' HCS : -Unsignalized-Intersections ---Release-2 . 1g----00001002_HCO---Page-1 BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 ' Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) .397-3600 ' Streets : (N-S) WHEELER ST/SITE DR (R-W) SMITH STREET Major Street Direction. . . . EW Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) Analyst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRRAFFI ' Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 B ACKGROUND PM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled .Intersection ------------------------------------ Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound ' -L-- T R -L-- T R -L-- T R -L-- T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1 < 0 0 > 1 0 0 > 0 < 0 0 0 0 Stop/Yield N N ' Volumes 5 28 3 8 38 5 PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 Grade 0 0 0 ' MCIs (o) SU/RV' s (�) CV' s (�) ' PCE --------------------------10-----------1-10------1-10--------------- ' Adjustment Factors J ' Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ ' Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 .10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 1 1 ' HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00001002 .HC0 Page 2 ' Worksheet for TWSC Intersection --- Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB --------------------------------------------------------- ' Conflicting Flows : (vph) 22 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1350 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1350 ' Prob. of Queue-Free State: 0 . 99 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 37 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1646 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1646 ' Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate : (pcphpl) ' Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows: (vph) 34 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1012 ' Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 ' Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1 . 00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1010 -------------------------------------------------------- ' Intersection Performance Summary ' Avg. 95%_ Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay ' Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 46 1010 > ' 1045 3 . 6 0 . 0 A 3 . 6 NB R 7 1350 > WB L 3 1646 2 .2 0 . 0 A 0 .6 Intersection Delay = 1.9 sec/veh t ' HCS_-Unsignalized-Intersections ---Release-2_lg----00001003_HCO---Page-1 BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 ' Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 ' Streets : (N-S) WHEELER ST/SITE DR E-W SMITH STREET Major Street Direction. . . . EW Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) ' Analyst . . . . . . . . . . e : e .. ... BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 C OMBINED AM PEAK HOUR ' Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound ' -L-- T R -L-- T R -L-- T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 3 1 40 4 6 0 20 2 1 0 6 6 PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 .9 . 9 .9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 .9 .9 Grade 0 0 0 0 ' MC ' s (%-) SU/RV' s ($) CV' s (%-) PCE ' s 1 . 10 1 .10 1 . 10 1 .10 1 . 10 1.10 1 . 10 1. 10 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ' A djustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 : 50 3 .40 ' HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00001003 .HC0 Page 2 ' -----------Worksheet for TWSC Intersection ------------------------------------ Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 23 7 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1348 1373 ' Movement-Capacity: (pcph) 1348 1373 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 0 . 99 ----------------------------------- Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 45 7 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1632 1701 ' Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1632 1701 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 1 . 00 1 . 00 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 1700 ' RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 1700 Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State. 1. 00 1 . 00 --------------------------------------------------------- Step 3 : TH from Minor Street ND-----------SB ---------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 37 59 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1043 1016 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1 . 00 1. 00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1039 1012 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 0 . 99 ----------------I---------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows: (vph) 44 38 Potential Capacity.: (pcph) 998 1007 Major LT, Minor TH ' Impedance Factor: 0 . 99 0 . 99 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 99 1 . 00 Capacity Adjustment Factor ' due to Impeding Movements 0 . 98 0 . 99 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 983 1002 -------------------------------------------------------- ' HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00001003 .HC0 Page 3 ' Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95$ ' Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) ' --L--- ---24 >- ------ - 983 ------ ------- ------- -- -- --------- NB NB T 2 1039 > 997 3 . 7 0 . 0 A 3 . 7 NB R 1 1348 > SB L 0 1002 > SB T 8 1012 > 1165 3 . 1 0 . 0 A 3 . 1 ' SB R 8 1373 > EB L 3 1701 2 . 1 0 . 0 A 0 .1 ' WB L 4 1632 2 .2 0 . 0 A 0 . 9 Intersection Delay = 1 . 6 sec/veh HCS :-Unsignalized-Intersections ---Release-2_1g----00001004_HCO-- Page 1 BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES 270 Amity Road, Suite 130 ' Woodbridge, CT 06525-2236 Ph: (203) 397-3600 Streets : (N-S) WHEELER ST/SITE DR (E-W) SMITH STREET Major Street Direction. . . . EW Length of Time Analyzed. . . 60 (min) ' Analyst . . . . . . . . . . BUBARIS TRRAFFI Date of Analysis . . . . . . . . . . 7/31/0 Other Information. . . . . . . . . WHEELER ESTATES, S . WINDSOR, CT- 2001 C OMBINED PM PEAK HOUR ' Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound ' -L-- T R -L-- T R -L-- T -R-- L T R ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 Stop/Yield N N ' Volumes 3 5 28 3 8 0 38 4 5 0 3 3 PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 .9 Grade 0 0 0 0 ' MC ' s (%-) SU/RV' s (o) CV' s (o) 1 . 10 10 10 PCE ' s10 ----------------------1�-------------1�---1_10-1_10--�----10 �---10 1�-- J Adjustment Factors ' vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) ------------------------------------------------------------------ Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 .10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 .50 2 .60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 .30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 .50 3 .40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 .1g 00001004 .HC0 Page 2 ' ----------- - Worksheetfor TWSC Intersection ----------------------------------- Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 22 9 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1350 1370 ' Movement Capacity: - (pcph) 1350 1370 Prob. of Queue-Free State: ------------0_99---------1_00 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB ------------------------------------------------- ------ Conflicting Flows : (vph) 37 9 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1646 1697 ' Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1646 1697 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 1. 00 TH Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 1700 RT Saturation Flow Rate: (pcphpl) 1700 1700 ' Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 1. 00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 3 : TH from Minor Street NB SB -------------------------------------------------------- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 36 52 ' Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1044 1024 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1 . 00 1 . 00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1040 1020 ' Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 1 . 00 -------------------------------------------------------- Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 40 42 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1004 1001 ' Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 . 99 0 .99 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 99 0 . 99 Capacity Adjustment Factor ' due to Impeding Movements 0 . 99 0 . 99 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 997 990 -------------------------------------------------------- ' HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1g 00001004 .HC0 Page 3 ' Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 950 Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) ' --L--- ---4 997 >-- - ------ ------- ------- ----- --------- NB NB T 4 1040 > 1033 3 . 7 0 . 0 A 3 . 7 NB R 7 1350 > SE L 0 990 > SB T 3 1020 > 1169 3 . 1 0 . 0 A 3 .1 ' SIB R 3 1370 > EB L 3 1697 2 . 1 0 . 0 A 0 .2 WB L 3 1646 2 .2 0 . 0 A 0 . 6 ' Intersection Delay = 2 . 0 sec/veh i 09/19/2000 14:29 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 02 Connecticut Ecosystems uC - Wetlond Dellneation - WOW & Agnatie Evaluation Niteroi ResoatEe Inventories • Mitigation - Project Planning Permit AWstaw • Expert Teamooy September 19, 2000 i Design Professionals, Inc. Attn.: Mr. Peter DeMallie 165 South Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Wheeler Estates Subdivision Wheeler Road di Smith Street South Windsor, CT CE Jvb#00-353 Dear Peter: i At your request I-have conducted a site plan review of the above-referenced project. As part of this review I examined the following materials: • "Wheeler Estates Subdivision Site Plan" dated August 24, 2000, prepared by your office - USGS topographic map (Manchester, CT quadrangle) • 1995 aerial photograph of site • DEP Natural Diversity Data Base map • Wetland Commissioner's Handbook i I inspected the site on September 14, 2000 in order to collect data for this review. Site Description I The 11.9-acre property is located along the north side of Smith Street in South f Windsor, CT (Figure 1). It is bordered to the south by Smith Street, to the west by a cluster residential development("Redfield", see Photo 2), to the north by an agricultural field, and to the east by undeveloped land(Figure 2). The majority of the property has been used in the past for agricultural purposes. A large mowed field, two houses, and an old tobacco barn are located at the west end of the property (Photo 1). The mowed field slopes gently to the north. A dense C 38 Westland Aveme • West Hartford, CT 06107 • Phone & Fax (860) 561.9598 0 email emy1ftonnko.net 09/19/2000 14:29 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 03 i Design Professionals, Inc. Rage 2 Re: Wheeler Estates,Subdivision South Windsor, CT 09119100 stand of young second growth mixed hardwoods occurs on the easterly portion of the site. i A steepbut short terrace escarpment arpment overlooks a wetland corridor located at the north end of the site. This wetland is described in detail below. Soils on the property were formed from a sandy glacial outwash parent material. Wetland Description A deciduous wooded swamp is located at the north end of the site(Photo 3). This is a small part(0.71 acre) of a 4,500+ foot long wetland corridor that stretches from Smith Street to the east to Clark Street to the west(Figures 1 and 2). The boundary of the on-site wetland occurs at the base of a steeply sloping terrace escarpment. The canopy of the swamp varies from fully to partly open. As a result, the shrub stratum ranges from extremely dense to sparse. The herbaceous stratum is locally dense in areas of the swamp characterized by an open canopy. Red maple, northem arrowwood, speckled alder, skunk cabbage, and jewelweed are the dominant flora in the wetland (Appendix 2). Soils in the swamp were very soft and saturated on the site inspection date. Ground water springs were observed near wetland flags 16, 25 and 36. Each of these springs was producing a low flow discharge on the inspection date. An unnamed watercourse flows in a westerly direction through the center of the wetland. This first-order stream originates south of Smith Street, and is tributary to Plum Gulley Brook west of the site (Figure 1). The watercourse channel is 34 feet wide, and contains a thick deposit of sandy sediments(Photo 4). A low flow (3 inches deep)of clear water was present in the channel on the site inspection date. No erosion was observed in the moderately sinuous channel. A variety of wildlife species was observed in and near the on-site wetland (Appendix 3). Ibis inventory would undoubtedly be larger if field work were conducted in the spring and summer, and would likely include species such as common yellowthroat, yellow warbler, wood thrush, green heron, American toad, green frog, garter snake, and opossum. No State-listed species were observed on the site, and the DEP Natural Diversity Data Base contains no records of any listed species occurring on or near the site. I f Connecticut Ecasystems LLC i 09419/2000 14:29 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 04 Design Professionals, Im. Page 3 , Re. Wheeler"4tes Subdivision South Windsor, CT 09119100 Wedarnd or Watercourse? i It is my understanding that there has been discussion about whether the on-site swamp should be regulated as a wetland or watercourse. The Connecticut Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act defines wetlands as follows: "Wetlands means land, including submerged land not regulated pursuant to sections 224-28 to 22a-35, inclusive, which consists of any of the soil types designated as poorly drained very poorly drained,floodplain, or alluvial by the National Cooperative Soil Survey, as amended from time to time, of the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture. " The Act defines watercourses as follows: i "Watercourses means rivers, streams, brooks, waterways, lakes,ponds, marshes, swamps, bogs and all other bodies of water, natural or artificial, vernal or intermittent, public or private, which are contained within,,low through or border upon this state or any portion thereof, not regulated pursuant to sections 22a--28 to 22a-35, inclusive. " The "wetlands" definition is straightforward and is based upon a national soil classification system. The"watercourse"definition, however, can be puzzling at first, It begins with colloquial watercourse terms (i.e., rivers, streams, brooks, waterways, takes, ponds). However, these are followed by 3 very familiar wetland types(i.e., marshes, swamps, bogs). It would appear that the Act has mixed "apples and oranges." The"Wetland Commissioner's Handbook" (DEP 1994) sheds some light upon this matter. On page 59 it explains, "The broad "watercourse"definition allows regulation of watercourse areas, including artificial and intermittent, that may not be defined as wetlands and are quite distinct in appearance." The Handbook goes on to explain that this includes the upper reaches of watercourses, disturbed areas, and areas where soil digoostic characteristics are not present. On page 60 this publication notes that vegetative indicators must be used to delineate a swamp, marsh or bog where no wetland soil characteristics are present. From the above discussion it is clear that the reason that wetland terms are included in the watercourse definition is to allow for regulation of areas where there is a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, but an absence of wetland soils. The Handbook states, and I agree, that these conditions are relatively rare in Connecticut. Connecticut Ecosystems Lic I 09/19/2000 14:29 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 05 Design Professionals,Inc, ---------------- ------- Page 4 Re., Wheeler Estates Subdivision South Windsor, CT 09/19100 - - �. 11961 Mr. John Ianni, the Professional Soil Scientist who delineated the wetland boundaries on the subject property, informed me that the on-site wooded swamp is _ most definitely characterized by wetland soils. Thus, it would be inappropriate to regulate the swamp as a watercourse. Rather, the swamp should be regulated as a wetland. The presence of poorly drained soils in the swamp satisfies the characteristics of a wetland that are contained in the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act. This is clearly not the exception to the rule cited above(i.e., a predominance ofhydrophytic vegetation, but a lack of wetland soils.) It should be noted that a watercourse with a defined channel flows through the center of the wetland. This watercourse channel is identified on the site plans. Upland Review Area (URA) The South Windsor Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Regulations define 40-foot and 80-foot wide URAs around wetlands and watercourses, respectively. Activities within the URA are regulated by the South Windsor Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission. j The LIRA on the subject property is entirely wooded, and supports mixed hardwood trees ranging in size from 12 to 30 inches diameter at breast height (DBH) (Appendix 2). There is a narrow break in the URA.near wetland flag 33. Southeast of this point the shrub stratum of the URA is extremely dense, consisting mostly of multiflora rose. Northwest of this point the U12A shrub stratum is rather sparse(Photo 6). Discarded materials (e.g., cut logs, branches, pallets, boards, wood chips) in the URA provide structural habitat features(cover) for a variety of small mammals and reptiles(Photo 5). Project Description The applicant proposes to construct a 25-unit senior condominium and community hall, 6-lot residential subdivision, and associated streets, driveways and utilities. A detention basin will be constructed to control peak flow rates and improve the quality of the=off draining from developed areas of the property. Regulated ,Activities The project will not disturb any wetlands or watercourses on the property. Connecticut&vsystenrs LLC 09/.19/2000 14:29 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 06 i Design Professionals,mc. Page S Re_ Wheeler Estates SuMvision South Windsor, CT 09119100 There will be a small disturbance(5,o80 square feet)to the URA,due to the construction of the community hall and grading behind several condo units and the detentions basin. This small URA disturbance will be mitigated by the planting of 835 trees and shrubs across the property, primarily along proposed tree line edges. Transplanted on-site plant materials will supplement the landscape plan. i Development Impacts ' By avoiding activities within the on-site wetland and watercourse and preserving a 40-foot wide wooded upland area adjacent to the wetland, the design team has minimized the potential for impacting the functional value of these regulated areas. Wildlife that currently utilize the on-site wetland will continue to do so post-development, Wildlife movement along the wetland corridor will be unimpeded, since the wetland will not be crossed by a road. i Approximately one-half of the URA adjacent to the wetland is very well screened i due to a very dense thicket of multiflora rose. Supplemental landscape plantings in the remainder of the URA will increase its screening capacity. The location of the wetland at the base of the steeply sloping terrace escarpment provides a vertical separation between the proposed development and any wildlife that utilize the wetland. This vertical separation pare non will reduce visual and auditory disturbances resulting from the development. The potential for water quality degradation will be mitigated by infiltration of rooftop drainage and a detention basin that is designed for renovation of runoff. Design elements that will help achieve this include a sediment forebay, low-flow sinuous channel, extended detention zone, and the establishment of emergent and wet meadow vegetation. Water Quality i The volume of surface runoff generated by the development will be reduced by directing a portion of the rooftop drainage into 4 drywells. This will produce an added benefit of recharging ground water on the site. The sandy outwash soils on the site are suitable for this method of ground water infiltration. The detention basin is designed to provide a water quality renovation function. A sediment forebay will be constructed near the inlet pipe. A 5-foot wide, 0.5-foot deep sinuous low flow channel will be created through the center of the basin. The bottom of the channel will be 1 foot below the invert of the outlet structure. Thus, storm water will be retained in and near the channel for extended treatment. i E i Connecticut Ecosymenn LLC 1 09/19/2000 14:29 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 07 L)eORM Professionals, Inc. Page 6 Re., Wheeler Estates Subdivision South Windsor, CT 09119100 The basin will be lined with 12 inches of compost-amended topsoil, and will be planted with cattail and fox sedge. Areas of the basin above the invert of the outlet pipe will be planted with a wet meadow mix.. Water from the basin will be discharged adjacent to the on-site wetland via a rip-rap energy dissipator. i Additional Comments i i The screening capacity of the URA west of wetland flag 33 can be increased by plantings of white pine, mountain laurel, or similar species within the understory of the wooded URA. White pine shrubs that have become established in the URA near wetland flag 19 provide excellent screening(Photo 7). i Please do not hesitate to contact roe if you have any questions regarding this correspondence. Very truly yours, Connecticut Ecosystems LLC I Edward M. Pawlak Registered Soil Scientist Certified Professional Wetland Scientist i i i i i i i Cbnnecticat Eedsystrms LLC i 09/19/2000 14:29 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 08 a REFERENCES DER 1994. Wettand Commissioner's Handbook. f i f t 1 I 1 f I I a i i • I I i l f I I •I I f i I l Connecticut Ecosystems LLC i 09/.19/2000 14:29 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 09 i I I i II f I I i I I i I I f f i � i f I J APPENDIX I. PROFESSIONAL RESUME i i I� I i i i I i i i E I i Connecticut Ecosystems LLC I 09/19/2000 14:29 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 10 I i I Professional Resume Edward M. Pawlak 38 Westland Avenue West Hartford, CT 061,07 (860) 56 a-8598 ' I EDUCATION ■ New England Regional Soil Science Certificate Program, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, 1998 ■ M.S., Silviculture, SUNY College of Environmental Science & Forestry, Syracuse, NY, 1983, ■ B.A., Biology&Secondary Education, State University College at Oswego, Oswego, NY, 1977. i EXPERIENCE i 1996-present Connecticut Ecosystems ,L LC 58 Westland Avenue West Hartford, CT 06107 I I Owner of environmental consulting company. Provides professional wetland and aquatic consulting services to private and municipal clients. Professional services include: ■ Inland and coastal, State and Federal wetland boundary delineations • Wildlife and vegetative inventories ■ Environmental reports ■ Permit assistance ■ Wetland mitigation ■ Aquatic studies ■ Expert testimony 1989-1995 Soil Science & Environmental Services, Inc. 545 Highland Avenue Cheshire, CT 06410 i Senior Wetland Scientist - Managed nearly one hundred projects for private and municipal clients. ' i 1984-1989 Bristol-Myers Company Syracuse, NY & Wallingford, CT Statistical Programmer- Prepared analysis tables and graphics for statistical and medical staff in support of New Drug Applications. i i I I I i I 09/19/2000 14:29 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 11 I Professional Resume Page Edward M.Pswlak i Supervisor of Statistical Programmers- Supervised Statistical Programmers in the Oncology Therapeutic Area. i I 1979-1981 Paul.V. Moore High School Central Square, NY ! Science Teacher-Taught Regents Biology and non- i Regents Chemistry lecture and laboratory classes. 1 1977-1979 Franklin Junior High School Reisterstown, MI) Science Teacher-'Vaught seventh and ninth grade General Science. i I ,PROFESSIONAL Certifications , i AFFILI.ATION'S ■ Professional Wetland Scientist, Society of Wetland Scientists i i Memberships { ■ Society of Soil Scientists of Southern New England (SSSSNE) ■ Connecticut Association of Wetland Scientists (President) ■ Hartford Audubon Society ■ Connecticut Botanical Society i ■ Society of Wetland Scientists ■ Association of Massachusetts Wetland Scientists i i PAPERS& 0 Pawla�E. 199.9. T'oum of Hadd4m Vernal Pool Study. POSTERS Presented at Vernal Pool Workshop,Wesleyan. University, May 1999. ■Pat lah, E. 1999. Criteria for Vernal Pool Identification and Inventory. Presented at NY State Wetlands Forum, Inc. Fifth Annual Meeting, Syracuse, NY. ■ Pawlak E. 1998. Town of Columbia Wetland Study. Presented at CAWS First Annual Meeting, "Selecting a Wetlands Evaluation Method", Cromwell, CT. i k r ,Pawlak, E. 1997. Town of Haddam Vernal,Pool Study. Presented at Vernal Pool Workshop, Wesleyan University, November 1997. i 09,/19/2000 14:29 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 12 I i i F�rot+essional Resume Edward M.Paw&* Page 9 ■ Pawlaly E. 1997 hTaddam, CT x'oum-Wide Vernal Pool Study Presented at the Poster Session at the Annual Meeting of CT Association of Conservation and Inland Wetland Commissions, November 1.997. ■ Pawlal- E. 1996 F1'addM CT Town-Wide Vernal Pool Study. Presented at the Poster Session at the Annual Meeting of CT Association of Conservation and Inland Wetland Commissions, November 1996, ■ Pawla�E. and G. T f Logan. 199.5. Draft C�amwe ll Wetland Buffer Designation Methodology. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society of Wetland Scientists, Cambridge, MA, May 1995. I ■ Pawlak E. and G. T. Logan_ 1994. Draft Cromwell Xedand Buffer Designation Methodology. Presented at the Poster Session of the "Wetland Buffer Conference" sponsored b Ponsore y the Society of Soil Scientists of Southern New England, Stockbridge, MA, November 199c WORKSHOPS& ■ Member of DEP Vernal Pool Model Regulations CONFERENM Committee. September-October 1999. ■ Hydric Soils Workshop. SSSSNE. Brooklyn, CT. July 1999. i ■ Floodplain Wetlands Workshop. AMWS. Amherst, MA. July 1999. ■ Winter botany. AMWS. Boylston, MA.January 1999 ■ Vernal Pool Policy Workshop. Yale University. May I9s8 ■ Vernal Pool Field 'Trip Leader. DEP Vernal Pool Workshop. April 1998 ■ Vernal Pools_ Wesleyan University. November 1997 & January 1998 ; ■ Vernal Pool Ecology. Tufts University. Spring 1997 ■ Tidal Wetland Botany. IWEER. Fall 1996 ■ Systematics Workshop: Carex Section Ovales. UCon,n, Summer 1996 ■ Identification of Grasses, Sedges & Rushes. XWEER. Summer 1996 i ■ Systematics Workshop: Scirpus. UConn, Summer 1995 ■ Wetland Buffer Conference, SSSSNE, Stockbridge, MA, Fall 199+ ■ 17th Annual Conference of the New England Association of Environmental Biologists, Spring 1993 I I i I 09,/19/2000 14:29 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 13 i JIMfessionsi Resume Page Edward M.JPaw1s* i CONTINUING 0 Wetlands Assessment & Field 'Techniques. UMass at EDUCATION Amherst, Spring 1999 ■ Field Ornithology - SCSU, Spring 1998 ' ■ Soil Physics - UMass at Amherst, Fall 1997 ' ■ Wetland Delineation - UMass at Amherst, Summer 1997 ' ■ Soil Formation & Classification UMass at Amherst, Spring 1997 ■ Soil Morphology & Mapping-UMass at Amherst, Spring 1996 i r Hydric Soils - UMass at Amherst, Fall 1994 ■ Aquatic Insect Ecology & Systematics -SCSLJ, Spring 1993 I ■ Aquatic Entomology- SCSU, Fall 1992 ■ Limnology- CCSU, Fall 1991 ■ Herpetology- SCSU, Spring 1990 I 1 c i i 09%19/2000 14:39 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 01 i I I i i 1 a I a i s a I i i 1 ff 1 I Ii i i APPENDIX 2. VEGETATIVE INVENTORY i I i I i Conhectiew Eco33we►m LLC 9 I a m LO Lo N m m m I- A WHEELER ESTATES VEGETATIVE INVENTORY LO Indicator UplandIli Scientific Name Common Name Status * Wetland Review Area CD TREESlSAPLINGS CO CA Acer rubrum Red maple FAC + + 00 Acer saccharum Sugar maple FACU + gaTinus camliniana Musclewood FAC + Proms serotm Black LhM FACU + Quercus alba White oak FACU + r+cus rubra Red oak FACU- + D SHRUBS Anus ru osa Sp2ckled alder OBL + m d Berberis thunbepanese barberry FACU + DD Comus amomum Sjk dogwood FACW + d Ilex verticillata Winterbe FACW+ + 3 Lindera benzoin S ieebush FACW + Pinus strobes Eastern white pine FACU + D Rosa multi flora Multiflora rose FACU D Rubus! l!, henierrsis Black FACU- + Su1ix s . Willow --- + Viburnum recognuum Arrowwood FACW- D + HERBS Aster s . Aster - + Carex stricta Tussock sedge OBL + -o D Conmeetieur Ecosystems LLC m m Notes: D--domimmt +resent N See accompanying text for c 0anation of"Indicator Status"codes, CD LD m WHEELER ESTATES VEGETATIVE INVENTORY A Indicator Upland LO Scientific Name Common Name Status * Wettand Review Area Lh�ywpteds_sp Wood fern FACW + EupaCD torium maculatum Joe- a-weed FACW + LTI ICP errs c nsis Jewelweed FACW + CO Iris versicolor Blue ft iris OBL + Ln Osmurula cinnamomea Cinnamon fern FACW + Poftonum arifblium Halberd-leaved OBL + tearthumb Polystichum Christmas fern FACU + acrostichoides S ha urn s • Sph=um moss OBL + S ocqrpus oetfdus Skunk cabbage OBL D m Otis s . Ora -- + d 3 D E r D C©nnnecticut Ecosystems LLC m Notes.D=dminant +--present W Sae accompanying text for vgoanadon of"lndicauw Status"codes. 09/19/2000 14:39 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 04 1 . d { 3 NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY i Wetland Plants List for the State of Connecticut gu i Freaneney Indies-tor: Represents the frequency of occurrence in wetlands versus nonwetlands in the northeast region of the country. For example,a frequency of 67%-99%(Facultative Wetland)means that 671/6-990/9 of all individuals of species that occur in the region occur in wetlands, Obli OBL : Always ways found in wetlands under natural (not planted)conditions(frequency greater than 9Wa),but may persist in nonwetlands if planted there by man or in wetlands that have been drained, filled, or otherwise transformed into nonwetlands. 3 Facultative Wetland(FACW): Usually found in wetlands(676/a-99%frequency), but j occasionally found in nonwetlands. 9 Facultative(F;AC): Sometimes found in wetlands (340/6-66%frequency)but also occurs in nonwetlands. 1 Facultative Upland (FACU): Seldom found in wetlands(1%-33%frequency)and usually occurs in nonwetlands. Nonwetland (UPL): Occurs in wetlands in another region,but not found(<1%frequency) in wetlands in the region specified. if a species does not occur in wetlands in any region, it is not on the list. 3 Drawdown(DRU Typically associated with the drier stages of wetlands,such as mudflats, vernal pools,and playa lakes. A positive(+)or negative(-)symbol was used with the Facultative Indicator categories to more specifically define the regional frequency of occurrence in wetlands. The positive symbol indicates a frequency toward the higher end of the category(more frequently found in wetlands),and a negative symbol indicates a frequency toward the lower end of the category (less frequently found in wetlands). NA indicates that no agreement was reached by the regional panel. NC indicates that the species was not considered by the panel. a From: Reed, Porter B. Jr. 1986 Wetland Plan Lilt,Connecticut. ' U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, WELU"T-86/W12.07 May 1986. i r E 05/19/2000 14:39 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 05 i �i I f I i I I i I S 7 �I I i ! APPENDIX 3. WILDLIFE INVENTORY 1 I i I I I 7 I a I 1 a 1 i Connedksa E'co"enn LLC a 09-/19/2000 14:39 2035618598 EDWARD M. PAWLAK PAGE 06 l I i t' i I i WIIEELER ESTATES WILDLIFE INVENTORY i Group Species i Avians Northem cardinal Blue 'a American oldfinch Mourning dove Wild turlc Common okle Tufted titmouse Ampkibians S Mammals White-tailed deer Gray uirrel raccoon ,i 1 1 J q� I J !I } i Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Connecticut Ecosystems «c • Wetland Delineation • Wetland & Aquatic Evaluation • Natural Resource Inventories • Mitigation • Project Planning • Permit Assistance • Expert Testimony September 19, 2000 Design Professionals, Inc. Attn.: Mr. Peter DeMallie 165 South Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Wheeler Estates Subdivision Wheeler Road& Smith Street South Windsor, CT CE Job#00-353 Dear Peter: At your request I have conducted a site plan review of the above-referenced project. As part of this review I examined the following materials: • "Wheeler Estates Subdivision Site Plan" dated August 24, 2000, prepared by your office • USGS topographic map (Manchester, CT quadrangle) • 1995 aerial photograph of site • DEP Natural Diversity Data Base map • Wetland Commissioner's Handbook I inspected the site on September 14, 2000 in order to collect data for this review. Site Description The 11.9-acre property is located along the north side of Smith Street in South Windsor, CT (Figure 1). It is bordered to the south by Smith Street, to the west by a cluster residential development ("Redfield", see Photo 2), to the north by an agricultural field, and to the east by undeveloped land (Figure 2). The majority of the property has been used in the past for agricultural purposes. A large mowed field, two houses, and an old tobacco barn are located at the west end of the property (Photo 1). The mowed field slopes gently to the north. A dense 38 Westland Avenue • West Hartford, CT 06107 • Phone & Fax (860) 561.8598 • email ecosys@connico.net '9` \e � , '' ,� ■ � _ \:) / **-j ,r,t 1, �l + ram-=.. '♦ 'r � a :� ' j� i ('� ■ ■■ 77 O LX ,! ■ p ♦ w ■ Site ♦ '•'• V 100 I �t� r ! a .a -■ ■.{� ■ r .rw , ;r loot 14 Figure 1. Site Location Map Wheeler Estates Subdivision South Windsor CT 0° Connecticut Ecosystems LLC _- September 15, 2000 • ' `l �' j �'� ��� tip '�-�,•. 1"=1000' ■••• ' ■-- _ _= `' ,,rye.._.. I a tY fit„ � .�� � y?` •`�,�,�� -' ��� a..�� �'� r . A Ow XX 44 � J 41, 'Figure 2. 1995 Aerial Photograph 'Wheeler Estates Subdivision ��- •� �'� f South Windsor, r - _ ,Connecticut Ecosystems - ) / j 4• j 'September 2000 , H §. 9 X x r •.� sue .a, a M W -r.' ♦ ow At �.,�•'.�„� w i �`T yr: � J f� I -�'- I±� ! - � '�'y¢ •.arm 4� � <r -� ,,..-I { . a �'�_ .. ° � �'�ru• }� � � r[' may. . ' .1�• ,� F 1„ .w'i�s; � jf lay -01 Sl1 Y ■ y ` •S _� Jt .'� � y f 44 16 i - 'y.'" _ ♦p ..•lam'•• --�.- r Photo 7. White pine shrubs provide screening in the Upland Review Area. Design Professionals,Inc. Page 2 Re: Wheeler Estates Subdivision South Windsor, CT 09119100 stand of young second growth mixed hardwoods occurs on the easterly portion of the site. A steep but short terrace escarpment overlooks a wetland corridor located at the north end of the site. This wetland is described in detail below. Soils on the property were formed from a sandy glacial outwash parent material. Wetland Description A deciduous wooded swamp is located at the north end of the site(Photo 3). This is a small part(0.71 acre) of a 4,500±foot long wetland corridor that stretches from Smith Street to the east to Clark Street to the west(Figures 1 and 2). The boundary of the on-site wetland occurs at the base of a steeply sloping terrace escarpment. The canopy of the swamp varies from fully to partly open. As a result, the shrub stratum ranges from extremely dense to sparse. The herbaceous stratum is locally dense in areas of the swamp characterized by an open canopy. Red maple, northern arrowwood, speckled alder, skunk cabbage, and jewelweed are the dominant flora in the wetland(Appendix 2). Soils in the swamp were very soft and saturated on the site inspection date. Ground water springs were observed near wetland flags 16, 25 and 36. Each of these springs was producing a low flow discharge on the inspection date. An unnamed watercourse flows in a westerly direction through the center of the wetland. This first-order stream originates south of Smith Street, and is tributary to Plum Gulley Brook west of the site(Figure 1). The watercourse channel is 3-4 feet wide, and contains a thick deposit of sandy sediments (Photo 4). A low flow (3 inches deep) of clear water was present in the channel on the site inspection date. No erosion was observed in the moderately sinuous channel. A variety of wildlife species was observed in and near the on-site wetland (Appendix 3). This inventory would undoubtedly be larger if field work were conducted in the spring and summer, and would likely include species such as common yellowthroat, yellow warbler, wood thrush, green heron, American toad, green frog, garter snake, and opossum. No State-listed species were observed on the site, and the DEP Natural Diversity Data Base contains no records of any listed species occurring on or near the site. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Design Professionals,Inc. Page 3 Re: Wheeler Estates Subdivision South Windsor, CT 09119100 Wetland or Watercourse? It is my understanding that there has been discussion about whether the on-site swamp should be regulated as a wetland or watercourse. The Connecticut Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act defines wetlands as follows: "Wetlands means land, including submerged land, not regulated pursuant to sections 22a-28 to 22a-35, inclusive, which consists of arty of the soil types designated as poorly drained, very poorly drained,floodplain, or alluvial by the National Cooperative Soil Survey, as amended from time to time, of the Natural Resources Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture. " The Act defines watercourses as follows: "Watercourses means rivers, streams, brooks, waterways, lakes,ponds, marshes, swamps, bogs and all other bodies of water, natural or artificial, vernal or intermittent, public or private, which are contained within,flow through or border upon this state or any portion thereof, not regulated pursuant to sections 22a-28 to 22a-35, inclusive. " The "wetlands" definition is straightforward and is based upon a national soil classification system. The "watercourse" definition, however, can be puzzling at first. It begins with colloquial watercourse terms (i.e., rivers, streams, brooks, waterways, lakes, ponds). However, these are followed by 3 very familiar wetland types (i.e., marshes, swamps, bogs). It would appear that the Act has mixed "apples and oranges." The "Wetland Commissioner's Handbook" (DEP 1994) sheds some light upon this matter. On page 59 it explains: "The broad "watercourse" definition allows regulation of watercourse areas, including artificial and intermittent, that may not be defined as wetlands and are quite distinct in appearance." The Handbook goes on to explain that this includes the upper reaches of watercourses, disturbed areas, and areas where soil diagnostic characteristics are not present. On page 60 this publication notes that vegetative indicators must be used to delineate a swamp, marsh or bog where no wetland soil characteristics are present. From the above discussion it is clear that the reason that wetland terms are included in the watercourse definition is to allow for regulation of areas where there is a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, but an absence of wetland soils. The Handbook states, and I agree, that these conditions are relatively rare in Connecticut. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Design Professionals, Inc. Page 4 Re: Wheeler Estates Subdivision South Windsor, CT 09119100 Mr. John Ianni, the Professional Soil Scientist who delineated the wetland boundaries on the subject property, informed me that the on-site wooded swamp is most definitely characterized by wetland soils. Thus, it would be inappropriate to regulate the swamp as a watercourse. Rather, the swamp should be regulated as a wetland. The presence of poorly drained soils in the swamp satisfies the characteristics of a wetland that are contained in the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act. This is clearly not the exception to the rule cited above (i.e., a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, but a lack of wetland soils.) It should be noted that a watercourse with a defined channel flows through the center of the wetland. This watercourse channel is identified on the site plans. Upland Review Area (URA) The South Windsor Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Regulations define 40-foot and 80-foot wide URAs around wetlands and watercourses, respectively. Activities within the URA are regulated by the South Windsor Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Commission. The URA on the subject property is entirely wooded, and supports mixed hardwood trees ranging in size from 12 to 30 inches diameter at breast height (DBH) (Appendix 2 . There is a narrow break in the URA near wet PP ) land flag 33. Southeast of this point the shrub stratum of the URA is extremely dense, consisting mostly of multiflora rose. Northwest of this point the URA shrub stratum is rather sparse (Photo 6). Discarded materials(e.g., cut logs, branches, pallets, boards, wood chips) in the URA provide structural habitat features (cover) for a variety of small mammals and reptiles (Photo 5). Project Description The applicant proposes to construct a 25-unit senior condominium and community hall, 6-lot residential subdivision, and associated streets, driveways and utilities. A detention basin will be constructed to control peak flow rates and improve the quality of the runoff draining from developed areas of the property. Regulated Activities The project will not disturb any wetlands or watercourses on the property. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Design Professionals, Inc. Page 5 Re: Wheeler Estates Subdivision South Windsor, CT 09119100 There will be a small disturbance (5,080 square feet)to the URA due to the construction of the community hall and grading behind several condo units and the detention basin. This small URA disturbance will be mitigated by the planting of 835 trees and shrubs across the property,primarily along proposed tree line edges. Transplanted on-site plant materials will supplement the landscape plan. Development Impacts By avoiding activities within the on-site wetland and watercourse and preserving a 40-foot wide wooded upland area adjacent to the wetland, the design team has minimized the potential for impacting the functional value of these regulated areas. Wildlife that currently utilize the on-site wetland will continue to do so post-development. Wildlife movement along the wetland corridor will be unimpeded, since the wetland will not be crossed by a road. Approximately one-half of the URA adjacent to the wetland is very well screened due to a very dense thicket of multiflora rose. Supplemental landscape plantings in the remainder of the URA will increase its screening capacity. The location of the wetland at the base of the steeply sloping terrace escarpment provides a vertical separation between the proposed development and any wildlife that utilize the wetland. This vertical separation will reduce visual and auditory disturbances resulting from the development. The potential for water quality degradation will be mitigated by infiltration of rooftop drainage and a detention basin that is designed for renovation of runoff. Design elements that will help achieve this include a sediment forebay, low-flow sinuous channel, extended detention zone, and the establishment of emergent and wet meadow vegetation. Water Quality The volume of surface runoff generated by the development will be reduced by directing a portion of the rooftop drainage into 4 drywells. This will produce an added benefit of recharging ground water on the site. The sandy outwash soils on the site are suitable for this method of ground water infiltration. The detention basin is designed to provide a water quality renovation function. A sediment forebay will be constructed near the inlet pipe. A 5-foot wide, 0.5-foot deep sinuous low flow channel will be created through the center of the basin. The bottom of the channel will be 1 foot below the invert of the outlet structure. Thus, storm water will be retained in and near the channel for extended treatment. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Design Professionals, Inc. Page 6 Re: Wheeler Estates Subdivision South Windsor, CT 09119100 The basin will be lined with 12 inches of compost-amended topsoil, and will be planted with cattail and fox sedge. Areas of the basin above the invert of the outlet pipe will be planted with a wet meadow mix. Water from the basin will be discharged adjacent to the on-site wetland via a rip-rap energy dissipator. Additional Comments The screening capacity of the URA west of wetland flag 33 can be increased by plantings of white pine, mountain laurel, or similar species within the understory of the wooded URA. White pine shrubs that have become established in the URA near wetland flag 19 provide excellent screening(Photo 7). Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding this correspondence. Very truly yours, Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Edward M. Pawlak Registered Soil Scientist Certified Professional Wetland Scientist Connecticut Ecosystems LLC REFERENCES DER 1994. Wetland Commissioner's Handbook. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC APPENDIX 1. PROFESSIONAL RESUME Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Professional Resume Edward M. Pawlak 38 Westland Avenue West Hartford, CT 06107 (860) 561-8598 EDUCATION ■ New England Regional Soil Science Certificate Program, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, 1998 ■ M.S., Silviculture, SUNY College of Environmental Science & Forestry, Syracuse, NY, 1985. ■ B.A., Biology & Secondary Education, State University College at Oswego, Oswego, NY, 1977. EXPERIENCE 1995-present Connecticut Ecosystems LLC 38 Westland Avenue West Hartford, CT 06107 Owner of environmental consulting company. Provides professional wetland and aquatic consulting services to private and municipal clients. Professional services include: ■ Inland and coastal, State and Federal wetland boundary delineations ■ Wildlife and vegetative inventories ■ Environmental reports ■ Permit assistance ■ Wetland mitigation ■ Aquatic studies ■ Expert testimony 1989-1995 Soil Science & Environmental Services, Inc. 545 Highland Avenue Cheshire, CT 06410 Senior Wetland Scientist -Managed nearly one hundred projects for private and municipal clients. 1984-1989 Bristol-Myers Company Syracuse, NY & Wallingford, CT Statistical Programmer- Prepared analysis tables and graphics for statistical and medical staff in support of New Drug Applications. Professional Resume Page Q Edward M. Pawlak Supervisor of Statistical Programmers - Supervised Statistical Programmers in the Oncology Therapeutic Area. 1979-1981 Paul V. Moore High School Central Square, NY Science Teacher-Taught Regents Biology and non- Regents Chemistry lecture and laboratory classes. 1977-1979 Franklin Junior High School Reisterstown, MD Science Teacher-Taught seventh and ninth grade General Science. PROFESSIONAL Certifications AFFILIATIONS ■ Professional Wetland Scientist, Society of Wetland Scientists Memberships ■ Society of Soil Scientists of Southern New England (SSSSNE) ■ Connecticut Association of Wetland Scientists (President) ■ Hartford Audubon Society ■ Connecticut Botanical Society ■ Society of Wetland Scientists ■ Association of Massachusetts Wetland Scientists PAPERS& ■ Pawlak E. 1999. Toum of Haddam Vernal Pool Study. POSTERS Presented at Vernal Pool Workshop, Wesleyan University, May 1999. ■Pawlak,E. 1999. Criteria for Vernal Pool Identification and Inventory. Presented at NY State Wetlands Forum, Inc. Fifth Annual Meeting, Syracuse, NY. ■ Pawlak E. 1998. Town of Columbia Wetland Study. Presented at CAWS First Annual Meeting, "Selecting a Wetlands Evaluation Method", Cromwell, CT. ■ Pawlak,E. 1997. Town of Haddam Vernal Pool Study. Presented at Vernal Pool Workshop, Wesleyan University, November 1997. Professional Resume Page 8 Edward M.Pewlak ■ Pawlak E. 1997 Haddam, CT Town-Wide Vernal Pool Study. Presented at the Poster Session at the Annual Meeting of CT Association of Conservation and Inland Wetland Commissions, November 1997. ■ Pawlak,E. 1996. Haddam, CT Town-Wide Vernal Pool Study. Presented at the Poster Session at the Annual Meeting of CT Association of Conservation and Inland Wetland Commissions, November 1996. ■ Pawlak E. and G. T Logan. 1995. Draft Cromwell Wetland Buffer Designation Methodology. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society of Wetland Scientists, Cambridge, MA, May 1995. ■ Pawlak,E. and G. T. Logan. 1994. Draft Cromwell Wetland Buffer Designation Methodology. Presented at the Poster Session of the "Wetland Buffer Conference" sponsored by the Society of Soil Scientists of Southern New England, Stockbridge, MA, November 1994. WORKSHOPS & ■ Member of DEP Vernal Pool Model Regulations CONFERENCES Committee. September-October 1999. ■ Hydric Soils Workshop. SSSSNE. Brooklyn, CT. July 1999. ■ Floodplain Wetlands Workshop. AMWS. Amherst, MA. July 1999. ■ Winter Botany. AMWS. Boylston, MA. January 1999 ■ Vernal Pool Policy Workshop. Yale University. May 1988 ■ Vernal Pool Field Trip Leader. DEP Vernal Pool Workshop. April 1998 ■ Vernal Pools. Wesleyan University. November 1997 & January 1998 ■ Vernal Pool Ecology. Tufts University. Spring 1997 ■ Tidal Wetland Botany. IWEER. Fall 1996 ■ Systematics Workshop: Carex Section Ovales. UConn, Summer 1996 ■ Identification of Grasses, Sedges & Rushes. IWEER. Summer 1996 ■ Systematics Workshop: Scirpus. UConn, Summer 1995 ■ Wetland Buffer Conference, SSSSNE, Stockbridge, MA, Fall 1994 ■ 17th Annual Conference of the New England Association of Environmental Biologists, Spring 1993 Professional Resume Page Edward M. Pawlak CONTINUING ■ Wetlands Assessment & Field Techniques. UMass at EDUCATION Amherst, Spring 1999 -- ■ Field Ornithology- SCSU, Spring 1998 ■ Soil Physics - UMass at Amherst, Fall 1997 ■ Wetland Delineation- UMass at Amherst, Summer 1997 ■ Soil Formation & Classification - UMass at Amherst, Spring 1997 ■ Soil Morphology & Mapping- UMass at Amherst, Spring 1996 ■ Hydric Soils - UMass at Amherst, Fall 1994 ■ Aquatic Insect Ecology & Systematics - SCSU, Spring 1993 ■ Aquatic Entomology- SCSU, Fall 1992 ■ Limnology- CCSU, Fall 1991 ■ Herpetology- SCSU, Spring 1990 APPENDIX 2. VEGETATIVE INVENTORY Connecticut Ecosystems LLC WHEELER ESTATES VEGETATIVE INVENTORY Indicator Upland Scientific Name Common Name Status * Wetland Review Area TREES/SAPLINGS Acer rubrum Red maple FAC + + Acer saccharum Sugar maple FACU + Car inus caroliniana Musclewood FAC + Prunus serotina Black cherry FACU + uercus alba White oak FACU + uercus rubra Red oak FACU- + D SHRUBS Alnus ru osa Speckled alder OBL + Berberis thunber ii Japanese barbeny FACU + Cornus amomum Silky dogwood FACW + Ilex verticillata Winterbe FACW+ + Lindera benzoin S icebush FACW + Pinus strobus Eastern white pine FACU + Rosa multi flora Multiflora rose FACU D Rubus alle heniensis Blackberry FACU- + Salix s . Willow --- + Viburnum recognitum Arrowwood FACW- D + HERBS Aster s . Aster --- + Carex stricta Tussock sedge JOBL + Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Notes: D=dominant +=present See accompanying text for explanation of"Indicator Status"codes. WHEELER ESTATES VEGETATIVE INVENTORY Indicator Upland Scientific Name Common Name Status * Wetland Review Area Dryopteris s . Wood fern FACW + Eu atorium maculatum Joe- a-weed FACW + Impatiens ca ensis Jewelweed FACW + Iris versicolor Blue flag iris OBL + Osmunda cinnamomea Cinnamon fern FACW + Polygonum arifolium Halberd-leaved OBL + tearthumb Polystichum Christmas fern FACU + acrostichoides Sphagnum s . Sphagnum moss OBL + S m locar us oetidus Skunk cabbage OBL D ' Vitis s . Grapes --- + r Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Notes:D=dominant +=present See accompanying text for explanation of"Indicator Status"codes. NATIONAL WETLANDS INVENTORY Wetland Plants List for the State of Connecticut Frequency Indicator: Represents the frequency of occurrence in wetlands versus nonwetlands in the northeast region of the country. For example, a frequency of 67%-99% (Facultative Wetland) means that 67%-99%of all individuals of a species that occur in the region occur in wetlands. Oblimate(OBU Always found in wetlands under natural(not planted)conditions (frequency greater than 99%),but may persist in nonwetlands if planted there by man or in wetlands that have been drained, filled, or otherwise transformed into nonwetlands. Facultative Wetland (FACW): Usually found in wetlands(67%-99%frequency),but occasionally found in nonwetlands. Facultative(FAC): Sometimes found in wetlands (34%-66% frequency)but also occurs in nonwetlands. Facultative Upland (FACU): Seldom found in wetlands (1%-33%frequency)and usually occurs in nonwetlands. Nonwetland (UPL): Occurs in wetlands in another region,but not found(<1% frequency) in wetlands in the region specified. if a species does not occur in wetlands in any region, it is not on the list. Drawdown (DR4): Typicallv associated with the drier stages of wetlands, such as mudflats, vernal pools, and playa lakes. A positive(+) or negative(-) symbol was used with the Facultative Indicator categories to more specifically define the regional frequency of occurrence in wetlands. The positive symbol indicates a frequency toward the higher end of the category(more frequently found in wetlands), and a negative symbol indicates a frequency toward the lower end of the category (less frequently found in wetlands). NA indicates that no agreement was reached by the regional panel. NC indicates that the species was not considered by the panel. From: Reed, Porter B. Jr. 1986 Wetland Plant List, Connecticut. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. WELUT-86/W12.07 May 1986. APPENDIX 3. WILDLIFE INVENTORY Connecticut Ecosystems LLC WHEELER ESTATES WILDLIFE INVENTORY Group Species Avlans Northern cardinal Blue jay American goldfinch Mourning dove Wild turkey Common grackle Tufted titmouse Amphibians Spring peeper Mammals White-tailed deer Gray squirrel raccoon Connecticut Ecosystems LLC y L ATTACHMENT B MEMORANDUM To: South Windsor Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission. From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Date: September 27,2000 Re: Review of the proposed Wheeler Estates subdivision. Plans dated 9/25/00. l. Details have been added to the plan depicting the temporary outfall protection for the detention basin, and plantings for the detention basin. Both are acceptable. 2. The outlet from the detention should be relocated to avoid the removal of a copse of large oaks. The area between wetland flag numbers 10 and 11 would avoid the trees and provide a stable area for the outlet pipe and energy dissipater. 3. The appropriate 80-foot upland review area has been shown on the plans. 4. The proposed community center location is shown accurately in relation to the existing tree line. Approximately 8 trees would have to be removed in order to accommodate the activity center. I don't feel that the removal of these trees would constitute a significant impact to the wetland area or to the integrity of the corridor given the amount of plantings proposed. I would recommend the addition of evergreens such as upright junipers in the understory edge to add an additional layer to the habitat. If the proposed gazebo and trails are approved as shown,any clearing to accommodate them should be minimal and be allowed to naturalize after installation. A wood chip surface should be considered. 5. I would recommend that a bond$5000.00 be placed to ensure installation and maintenance of erosion controls and a bond of$5000.00 for the construction and planting of the detention basin. The latter to be held for one growing season after planting. E C V _ W OCT2000 LAW OFFICES l+1 IUUU CUMMINGS,LANZA AND PURNIIAGEN,L.L.C. 1610 ELLINGTON ROAD POST OFFICE BOX667 SOUTH WINDSOR,CONN.06074-0667 (860)644-3473 FAX(860)644-3347 HAROLD R.CUMMINGS EDWARD R.KUEHN MICHAEL J.LANZA. OF COUNSEL VINCENT J.PURNHAGEN October 10, 2000 Mr. Jeffrey Folger Inland Wetlands Enforcement Officer Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT. 06074 RE: Wheeler Estate Subdivision and Senior Residence District application Dear Jeff: As I am sure you know, the Inland Wetlands agency approved the application of the Kebalo family for the Wheeler Estate Subdivision and 25 unit Senior Residence Development. As one of the conditions of approval, the Commission requested that, and my client agreed to, execute a restricted use easement on the northerly portion of the property containing the wetlands area and the uplands review area. While there was a general consensus between the Commission members and my clients as to the concept of the easement, the Commission left it to you, Attorney Guliano and myself on behalf of my clients, to sit down and work out a proposed draft of the easement to submit to the Commission for it's review and approval. My understanding is that the Commission does not want to have the "standard" conservation easement which has been used in the past. My understanding, from the discussion among several Commission members was that the existing conservation easement was unduly restrictive. My understanding is that the Commission members want an easement that would allow for appropriate forest management activities as well as for wildlife management. I would appreciate your giving me a call at your convenience. I would like to set up a meeting, in the very near future, with you and Barry so that we could wor on the draft of the easement document. As I am sure you can appreciate, I would like to get is resolved in the near future. Sincerely y urs, Ha ummings HRC/lr Enclosure cc: Attorney Barry Guliano, Joseph Luczka, CPA, Walter and Andrew Kebalo � O•NN Sf,t� 0 C � y ` 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 soR•co�'�� AREA CODE 860 /644-2511 October 18, 2000 Certified #P462498131 Design Professionals, Inc. Attn: Peter DeMallie 165 South Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 RE: Appl. #00-28P, K.F. Properties Dear Mr. DeMallie: At the October 4, 2000 regular meeting, the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission approved application #00-28P - K.F. Properties - Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission application for the construction of a six-lot residential subdivision, a 25-unit senior residence development, associated stormwater structures, and infrastructure improvements on property located northerly of Smith Street and Wheeler Road (Assessor's map #17, parcels #1 & 2) A-20 residential zone. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. One blueprint copy of the entire set of plans and this letter reproduced thereon, must be submitted to this Commission. This must be completed within 65 days of approval prior to any construction activity on the site. Plans submitted to Planning & Zoning Commission shall be considered having met this requirement. 2. The application shall indemnify and hold harmless the Town of South Windsor against any liability, which might result from the proposed operation or use. 3. The permit is valid for five years and shall expire on October 4, 2005. It is the landowner(s)/applicant(s) responsibility to track expiration dates and notify the Commission of a renewal request at least 65 days prior to expiration. K.F. Properties October 18, 2000 Page 2 4. All approvals required must be obtained and submitted prior to any activity on the site. 5. A contact person shall be identified on the plans. 6. We recommend a bond in the amount of$5,000 be submitted to the Planning & Zoning Commission to ensure compliance with the Erosion and Sedimentation Control Measures. 7. We recommend a bond in the amount of$5,000 be submitted to the Planning & Zoning Commission for the establishment of the detention basin. The bond will be released after one growing season after ensuring proper establishment of plants. 8. The debris pile containing wooden pallets must be removed. 9. The walking paths are to have a woodchip surface. 10. An easement to.preserve the northeast corner of the property from further development is to be placed on the property. Town staff and the applicant will draft the easement which will allow wildlife management and will be subject to approval by the IWA/CC. 11. Approval contingent upon all items in the September 27, 2000 memo from Jeff Folger be met, (Attached). Very truly yours, Ph eth Warren, Chairperson INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY/ CONSERVATION COMMISSION EW:dr cc: Chief Building Official Town Engineer K.F. Properties MEMORANDUM To: South Windsor Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission. From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Date: September 27, 2000 Re: Review of the proposed Wheeler Estates subdivision. Plans dated 9/25/00. 1. Details have been added to the plan depicting the temporary outfall protection for the detention basin, and plantings for the detention basin. Both are acceptable. 2. The outlet from the detention should be relocated to avoid the removal of a copse of large oaks. The area between wetland flag numbers 10 and 11 would avoid the trees and provide a stable area for the outlet pipe and energy dissipater. 3. The appropriate 80-foot upland review area has been shown on the plans. 4. The proposed community center location is shown accurately in relation to the existing tree line. Approximately 8 trees would have to be removed in order to accommodate the activity center. I don't feel that the removal of these trees would constitute a significant impact to the wetland area or to the integrity of the corridor given the amount of plantings proposed. I would recommend the addition of evergreens such as upright junipers in the understory edge to add an additional layer to the habitat. If the proposed gazebo and trails are approved as shown, any clearing to accommodate them should be minimal and be allowed to naturalize after installation. A wood chip surface should be considered. 5. I would recommend that a bond$5000.00 be placed to ensure installation and maintenance of erosion controls and a bond of$5000.00 for the construction and planting of the detention basin. The latter to be held for one growing season after planting. DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. l civil engineers .planners . surveyors . gis CEIVED Noy "') 2000 November 1,200( Qu� � ��1 OR p����yt�� � �• Marcia Banach,Planning Director Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor,CT 06074 Dear Marcia: Re: Wheeler Estates-Subdivision Smith Street&Wheeler Road South Windsor,Connecticut DPI Proj No. 91-595 My client,K.F.Properties,LLC hereby requests Planning and Zoning Commission approval for two model homes for the above-referenced subdivision project. Each model will be a different style home, and is expected to incorporate design themes of the adjacent SRD project. Thank you. Design Pr fessionals,Inc. By: eter R.DeMallie Principal cc: Walter Kebalo,Member Al� 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860) 291-8755 •Fax: (860) 291-8757