Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubdivision (122) i TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR } PLANNING&ZONING COMMISSION o w" s e y APPLICATION FORM Q RECEIVED Application No: NUV 1 4 2001 Official Receipt Date: (I :0 0( Receipt No: SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DEPt, `14s��s cu�� APPLICANT: South Windsor Technologies Center, LLC (David A. Caron, member) ADDRESS: '112 Demi ncr St-_ P.O. Box 114 9 South Windsor CT 06074 Martin F. McGrath, Jr. OWNER OF RECORD ON LAND RECORDS: axerry Wood. Limited Partnership 32 Linnard Rd. , West Hartford, CT 06107 ADDRESS: 18 River St. , Woodstock, VT 05091 COMPLETE LOCATION OF PROPERTY: South of Patria & Schweir Road and Sullivan Avenue 97 6 ASSESSOR'S MAP # 109 PARCEL#8 War_t Al ZONE I & T — NAME, ADDRESS, TEL& FAX# OF PERSON TO WHOM INQUIRIES SHOULD BE DIRECTED: Peter R. DeMallie, Principal, Design Professionals, Inc., 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor CT 06074 Tel 291-8755, Fax 291-8757 THIS APPLICATION IS FOR: (Check all that apply): .' ns 0 ❑ Zone Change to (Public Hearing required and Certified-letter to abutters required) ❑ Subdivision/Resubdivision ❑ Open Space Subdivision (Public Hearing Required) ® Subdivision ❑ Minor .ZJ Major ❑ Resubdivision (Public Hearing Required) ❑Minor ❑ Major ❑ Conditional Approval ❑ Special Exception to Article (Public Hearing, Certified letter to abutters required) ❑ Site Plan of Development ❑ General Plan of Development ❑ Earth Filling (Sec. 15) and/or Earth Removal (Sec. 14 - Public Hearing required) ❑ Regulation Amendment: ❑Zoning ❑ Subdivision (Attach proposed amendment) Temporary and Conditional Permit for ❑ Major Home Occupation for ❑ Other (explain in detail) An Application Pending sign is required to be posted on the property for all applications ten (10) days prior to being heard by the Commissio A ent for amers S• ature of Applicant - Signature of Property Owner (See reverse side for additional information) DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers • planners • surveyors • gis • gps Abutter List DPI Project No. 99-1253 Caron/Patria Road (South Windsor Technologies Center) May/Lot No. Abutter(s)Name Mailine Address 97/7 KF Brick Co., Inc. 1440 John Fitch Blvd. South Windsor, CT 06074 98/1 Mitchell W. &Beverly J. Mazur 127 Panorama Drive Southington, CT 06489 99/1 Kenneth J. & Andrea L. Pudeler 201 West Road South Windsor, CT 06074 99/9 Dorothy Chuchro 111 West Road South Windsor, CT 06074 99/11 Albert D. Krivickas 165 West Road South Windsor, CT 06074 109/3 WFH, LLC 354 East St. Hebron, CT 06248 109/4 Robert W. &Barbara E. Lavey P.O. Box 101 East Windsor Hill, CT 06028 109/5 Dynamic Materials Corp. 551 Aspen Ridge Road Lafayette, CO 80026 109/6 David Burnett 47 Patria Road South Windsor, CT 06074 109/7 Clara 1. Clapp 1726 Main St. East Windsor Hill, CT 06028 110/1 Raymond L. & Clara M. Hawkes 305 Sullivan Ave. South Windsor, CT 06074 110115 Gerber Scientific, Inc. 83 Gerber Road South Windsor,-CT 06074 110/16 Gerber Scientific, Inc. 83 Gerber Road South Windsor, CT 06074 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, CT 06074 Telephone(860)291-8755 Fax(860)291-8757 • DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil en ' eers • planners • surveyors •gis gps 110/18 Kuhns Family Properties, LLC P.O. Box 797 South Windsor, CT 06074 110/19 Michael G. Economos 46 Schweir Road South Windsor, CT 06074 121/43 Dynamic Materials Corp. 551 Aspen Ridge Road Lafayette, CO 80026 122/9 Andre L. Charbonneau 10 Abbe Road South Windsor, CT 06074 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, CT 06074 Telephone(860)291-8755 Fax(860)291-8757 I.. i i, dMj f ; 14 i O i, l f ■ ■L�1 1, 1. - M, L � r � i i li i - alit -- f �� -- - - - ---- -f l - f May 30, 2001 To Whom It May Concern: Please be advised that Peter R.DeMallie and Design Professionals, Inc. is hereby authorized to sign any and all applications associated with the development of the Sperry Wood Limited Partnership's property on Sullivan Avenue in South Windsor, Connecticut. Sincerely, Sperry Wood Limited Partnership By!.. Bob Raymond 18 River Street Woodstock, VT 05091 Telephone: (802) 457-1355 September 19, 2001 To Whom It May Concern: Please be advised that Peter R.DeMallie and Design Professionals,Inc. is hereby authorized to sign any and all applications associated with the development of my 5f acre property easterly of the rail line, north of Redland Brick and south and west of the Sperry Wood Limited Partnership's tract near Sullivan Avenue in South Windsor, Connecticut. Sincerely, By: 4h4-� -I-)�) 0 Martin F. McGrath, Jr. 32 Linnard Road West Hartford, CT 06107 Telephone: (860)236-5356 DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers- planners-surveyors - gis - gps Narrative Statement South Windsor Technologies Center Sullivan Avenue(Route 194), South Windsor, Connecticut November 9, 2001 South Windsor Technologies Center is proposed to be Greater Hartford's newest state-of-the-art industrial park in suburban South Windsor. Located on the south side of State Route 194 (Sullivan Avenue),the site is approximately 8 minutes from the Buckland Hills Mall; 15 minutes from downtown Hartford;20 minutes from Bradley International Airport;25 minutes from downtown Springfield; and 10 minutes each from Interstates 84, 91 and 291. The 80-acre industrial park will feature forty(40)building lots and full utilities, including fiber-optic cable for data communications and telecommunications, natural gas, public sanitary sewer and public water. All cable utilities will be underground. The park will include frontage on Route 194, as well as extensions of Schweir Road(1,550 lineal feet) and Patria Road(2,000 lineal feet). These new streets will have an extra width(30 feet) and -enlarged cul-de-sacs(110-feet diameter)to accommodate commercial vehicles. Some lots have the potential for rail service. Twenty(20)to twenty-five(25)acres of open space is proposed,along with walking trails. The entire parcel is in the community's industrial zone. Anticipated uses are manufacturing, research and development, professional office, and industrial processing. The applicant is South Windsor Technologies Center, LLC, a South Windsor-based developer,of which David A. Caron is the managing member. Site engineering,planning, and land surveying is being performed by Design Professionals, Inc., a fifteen-person consulting firm based in South Windsor. Other design team members include Bubaris Traffic Associates of Woodbridge, Connecticut Ecosystems, LLC of West Hartford and Highland Soils of Storrs. Applications are being prepared for submission to various land use regulatory agencies, including the local Planning &Zoning Commission,Inland Wetlands Agency, and Water Pollution Control Authority. The developer has already received serious inquiries from prospective lot purchasers. In preparing the subdivision plans,the design team had numerous meetings with Town staff, including assistance from Town Manager Matthew Galligan. The project's timetable includes application submissions during the second week of November 2001, with construction anticipated to commence in February or March of 2002. The.infrastructure for the development's first phase is expected to be completed during the Summer or Fall of 2002. The developer and design team anticipate numerous lot consolidations, and project 15 to 20 buildings will be constructed, with build-out completed in 2007. The developer has other commercial and industrial land holdings in the Greater Hartford market,including South Windsor,and will be pursuing other developments in the near term. For further information, please contact Peter R. DeMallie, Principal, Design Professionals, Inc., 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, CT 06074, Tel: (860) 291-8755,Fax: (860)291-8757, Email: dpicivil@aol.com. 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor,CT 06074 Telephone(860)291-8755 Fax(860)291-8757 Stormwater Management Plan South Windsor Technologies Center South Windsor, Connecticut Prepared by Design Professionals,Inc. 165 South Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 DPI Project No. 99-1280 November 9, 2001 c)`;, e Sao 747 cr.: v it� N H1Ytg@Ai9BA�� Table of Contents: Page# Introduction 1 Proposed Development 1 Off-Site Analysis 1 Peak Runoff control 1 Nonstructural Drainage System 1 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 On-Site Storm Sewer Calculations 5 Conclusions 5 Appendices Site Location Map A TR-55 Existing Conditions to Railroad B TR-55 Existing Conditions to Bancroft Brook C Developed Conditions to Railroad D Developed Conditions to Basin 1 E Developed Conditions to Basin 2 F Developed Unchanged to Bancroft Brook G Basin 1 Design Data H Basin 2 Design Data I Detention Basin Routing Summaries J Pipe Drainage Calculations K Introduction: The site is located on the south side of Sullivan Avenue, Patria Road and Schweir Road in South Windsor, Connecticut, and contains a total of 80 Acres. The site is bordered by the railroad on the west, Bancroft Brook and the Gerber property on the east, and the KF Brick property on the south. The site is presently undeveloped. Portions of the site have been farmed in the past. There are two areas of wetlands on the site. Propoped Development: The proposed development of the site includes the construction of 3,500 feet of subdivision roadway to service a 40 lot industrial subdivision. The site will be serviced by public sanitary sewer and water. The sanitary sewer service will require the installation of a pump station. As part of the proposed subdivision development, two wetlands crossings will need to be made. The two wetland crossings are in the vicinity of the existing ends of Patria Road and Schweir Road, and are unavoidable. The Storm drainage system proposed for the development includes the installation of storm-sewers within the proposed roadways, vegetated drainage swales, a piped storm drainage system, and 2 water quality/Detention basins. The roadway storm drainage system has been designed to allow for connections from the lots as they are developed. In the vicinity of Patria road and Schweir Road, roadside vegetated drainage swales will be used for storm water control also. Two water quality/Detention basins have been integrated into the design to provide both stormwater detention and additional water quality treatment. The water quality basins have been sized to contain and discharge at a very slow rate(extended detention)the first 1.25"of runoff from the site. Flows from larger storms are detained in the basin to mitigate for any increase in runoff from the developed areas. Ott Site Analysis: The site presently drains offsite in two principal directions. The western side of the site drains southwest to a drainage ditch that runs adjacent to the railroad tracks. This ditch runs south to Bancroft Brook. The eastern end of the site drains directly to Bancroft Brook. The proposed detention basins on site have been designed to offset any increase in runoff from the developed areas of the site. The peak discharge from the site in both directions for post-developed conditions will be equal to or less than the existing peak runoff from the site. Peak Runoff Control: With the 2 detention basins as proposed, the peak discharge from the site in both directions for post developed conditions will be equal to or less than the existing peak runoff from the site. Nonstructural Drainage Systems: The site will make use of a number of nonstructural measures to help control, and to maintain the natural drainage patterns. -Two Detention/Water quality basins, which will contain the first 1.25" of runoff for extended detention, and up to the 100 year design strom for detention, will be constructed. In addition, swales will be used in the vicinity of the present cul-de-sacs on Patria Road and Schweir Road to control storm runoff in these areas. Riparian Buffers: A proposed Riparian Buffer strip of approximately 100' wide is proposed along Bancroft Brook. This Buffer will be in the form of a conservation easement, and will be used to maintain the slopes adjacent to Bancroft Brook in the their natural state. Erosion/Sedimentation Control Systems: An extensive erosion/sedimentation control plan has been developed as part of the subdivision 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/water quality basins during construction as sediment basins. 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 2 water quality/Detention basins that will contain the first 1.25" of runoff from the site for extended detention, and up to the 100-year design storm for regular detention. In addition the customary measures will be utilized including providing sumps within the catch basins. Conveyance System: The on-site conveyance system consists of a piped stormwater system discharging to the 2 Detention/water quality basins. The piped drainage system has been designed to accommodate the runoff from a 10 Yr design storm. The Detention/water quality basins have been designed to provide extended detention for the first 1.25" of runoff from the site, and shorter-term detention for storms up to the 100- year design storm. Discharge at the Natural Location: The site presently discharges in two directions. The western side of the site drains southwest to a drainage ditch that runs adjacent to the railroad tracks. This ditch runs south to Bancroft Brook. The eastern end of the site drains directly to Bancroft Brook. The Under developed conditions, the storm drainage system will discharge to two detention basins on site that will discharge to Bancroft Brook. Portions of the site will continue to drain overland to the southwest to the ditch along the railroad tracks. Maintenance and Operation: The following maintenance operations will be required to ensure the proper and efficient operation of the Storm Water System, and Detention/Water Quality Basins. 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 within each lot 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 each lot 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. Basin 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"= '. The maps showing the existing and developed conditions are included in the rear of this report. Floodplain Boundaries: There are 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 drainage piping on site was designed using the rational formula. The detention basins were sized using the Hydroflow Hydrograph program. Under existing conditions, the site drains in two principal directions. The western side of the site drains to the southwest to an existing ditch that runs along the Railroad. The eastern side of the site drains directly to Bancroft Brook. The existing drainage areas are shown on the existing conditions drainage area map contained in the rear of the report. The TR-55 calculations for the existing runoff to the southwest to the Railroad ditch are contained in appendix B. The TR-55 calculations for the existing runoff to the southeast to Bancroft Brook are contained in appendix C. The summary of the flows is as follows: Design Storm Existing to Railroad Ditch Existing to Bancroft Brook 2 10 5 10 23 14 25 31 20 50 39 25 100 46 31 Under Developed conditions, the site will continue to drain in the two principal directions, to the southwest to the Railroad ditch, and to the southeast to Bancroft Brook. The peak runoff to the southwest to the Railroad Ditch has been designed under developed conditions to be equal to or less than the peak runoff under existing conditions. This has been accomplished by diverting a portion of the developed area presently draining in this direction to the southeast directly to Bancroft Brook. Under existing conditions, 39.44 acre's drains to the Railroad ditch. Under developed conditions, 25.65 acres drains in this direction. The TR-55 analysis for the area draining to the southwest to the Railroad ditch under developed conditions is contained in appendix D. The summary of the peak discharge to the Railroad Ditch under existing and developed conditions is as follows: Design Storm Existing conditions Developed Conditions 2 10 8 10 23 17 25 31 22 50 39 27 100 46 31 The peak runoff to the southeast directly to Bancroft Brook has been designed under developed conditions to be equal to or less than the peak runoff under existing conditions. This has been accomplished by integrating two proposed detention basins into the site layout. The two detention basins will collect runoff from 43.65 acres of the developed site and discharge directly to Bancroft Brook. The TR-55 analysis for the drainage areas discharging to the two proposed detention basins under developed conditions are contained in appendices E and F. An additional 17.99 acre's of the site drains to Bancroft Brook directly without going through the detention basins under developed conditions (Wetlands unchanged draining to Bancroft Brook). The Tr-55 analysis for this area is located in appendix G. The total peak flow from the two detention basins and the area discharging directly to Bancroft Brook under developed conditions added together is equal to or less than the peak existing flow to Bancroft Brook. The summary of the detention basin design for Basins 1 and 2 are contained in appendices H and I respectively. The detention basin routing summaries for basins 1 and 2 are contained in appendix I The summary of the results is as follows: Design Storm Exist. Basin 1 Basin 2 Direct to B. Brook Total 2 5 .13 1 4 5.13 10 14 1.32 3.04 9 14.36 25 20 1.91 6.17 12 20.08 50 25 2.37 8.38 14 24.75 100 31 2.77 10.13 17 29.90 The Detention basins have also been designed as water quality basins. The bottom of the detention basins have been set lower than the outlet elevation to provide a permanent pool depth for water quality. In addition, the basins have been designed to provide for extended detention for a design storm with 1.25" of rainfall. On-Site Storm Sewer Calculations: The storm sewer calculations for the storm piping within the proposed roadway are included in appendix K. The storm sewer has been designed for a 10-year design storm utilizing the rational formula. Conclusions: The on-site stormwater system with the associated Detention/water quality basins will mitigate any potential water quality and quantity impacts from the development of the site. APPENDIX A APPENDIX B RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2.00 Project PATRIA ROAD EXISTING WEST SIDE User: GBS Date: 11-09-99 County HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAINING TO RAILROAD TRACKS Subarea : 1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) -------------------7----------------------------------------------------------- FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab. ) Urban Districts Avg $ impery Industrial 72 .85 (81) 1.86(88) 2.0 (91) - OTHER AGRICULTURAL LANDS Brush - brush, weed, grass mix fair - 9.2 (56) 1.19(70) 4.58 (77) Woods - grass combination fair - 8.19 (65) 4.36(76) 7.21(82) Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) .85 19.2 7.55 11.7 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBAREA: 1 TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: 39.44 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: 72* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2.00 Project : PATRIA ROAD EXISTING WEST SIDE User: GBS Date: 11-09-99 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAINING TO RAILROAD TRACKS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flow Type 2 year Length Slope Surface n Area Wp Velocity Time rain (ft) (ft/ft) code (sq/ft) (ft) (ft/sec) (hr) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - Sheet 3.2 100 .005 F 0.414 Sheet 200 .003 B 0.252 Shallow Concent'd 600 .005 U 0.146 Shallow Concent'd 1000 .01 U 0.172 Open Channel 700 1.5 0.130 Time of Concentration = 1.11* --- 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 : PATRIA ROAD EXISTING WEST SIDE User: GBS Date: 11-09-99 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: EXISTING CONDITIONS DRAINING TO RAILROAD TRACKS Data: Drainage Area 39.44 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 72 * Time of Concentration: 1.11 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area 3.45 Acres 8.7 % of Drainage Area ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- 1 Storm Number I 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 J 5 1 1----------------------J------1------J------1------1------1 Frequency (yrs) J 2 1 10 I 25 I 50 J 100 I I ► I I I I 1 24-Hr Rainfall (in) J 3.2 J 4.7 J 5.5 1 6.2 I 6.9 I I i I I I I I 1 Ia/P Ratio 1 0.24 10.17 1 0.14 10.13 1 0.11 1 I I 1 I I I I Runoff (in) 1 0.93 11.97 ( 2.59 ( 3.16 ( 3.74 1 I I I I I I I Unit Peak Discharge 10.389 10.416 10.425 10.431 10.435 1 (cfs/acre/in) I I I I I I I Pond and Swamp Factor) 0.72 1 0.72 1 0.72 ► 0.72 1 0.72 1 1 5.0% Ponds Used I I I I I I 1----------------------1------J------1------1------1------1 Peak Discharge (cfs) ( 10 J 23 i 31 1 39 1 46 1 ----------------------------------------------------------- * - Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines APPENDIX C RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2.00 Project : Patria Road Brancroft Brook User: RJA Date: 09-10-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Existing Conditions draining to Bancroft Brook --------------------------=---------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab. ) Urban Districts Avg % impery Industrial 72 - 1.00(88) 1.12 (91) - OTHER AGRICULTURAL LANDS Brush - brush, weed, grass mix good .88 (30) 13.4 (48) - .61(73) Woods - grass combination fair 5.96(43) 8.1(65) 5.93(76) 12.3(82) Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) 6.84 22.5 7.05 12.9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: 49.3 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: 64* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2.00 Project : Patria Road Brancroft Brook User: RJA Date: 09-10-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Existing Conditions draining to Bancroft Brook ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 .003 f 0.703 Shallow Concent'd 600 .004 u 0.163 Shallow Concent'd 900 .005 u 0.219 Open Channel 2200 0.70 0.873 Time of Concentration = 1.96* --- 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 : Patria Road Brancroft Brook User: RJA Date: 09-10-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Existing Conditions draining to Bancroft Brook Data: Drainage Area 49.3 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 64 * Time of Concentration: 1.96 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area 3.5 Acres 7.1 % of Drainage Area ------------------ Storm Number 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 ► 5 1 1----------------------1------1------1------1------1------1 Frequency (yrs) I 2 1 10 1 25 1 50 ► 100 1 I I I I I I I 1 24-Hr Rainfall (in) 1 3.2 ► 4.7 1 5.5 1 6.2 1 6.9 1 I I I I I I I Ia/P Ratio 1 0.35 1 0.24 ► 0.20 1 0.18 1 0.16 1 I I I I I I I Runoff (in) 10.56 1 1.39 1 1.91 1 2.41 1 2.93 1 1 I I I I I I Unit Peak Discharge 10.247 10.283 10.292 10.297 10.302 1 1 (cfs/acre/in) i I I I I I I 1 Pond and Swamp Factors 0.72 1 0.72 1 0.72 1 0.72 1 0.72 1 1 5.0% Ponds Used I I 1 I I I 1----------------------1------1------1------1------I------1 1 Peak Discharge (cfs) 1 5 1 14 1 20 1 25 1 31 I -------------- - * - Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines APPENDIX D RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2.00 Project : Patria Road developed to RR User: RJA Date: 09-10-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Developed & Wetlands Draining to Railroad Tracks ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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% - 1(61) - - Urban Districts Avg %- impery Industrial 72 1.0(81) 3.76(88) 3.0(91) - OTHER AGRICULTURAL LANDS Brush - brush, weed, grass mix good - 1.62 (48) 1.19(65) 4.58 (73) Woods - grass combination good - 1.56(58) .73(72) 7.21 (79) Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) 1 7.94 4.92 11.7 ------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: 25.65 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: 76* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2.00 Project : Patria Road developed to RR User: RJA Date: 09-10-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Developed & Wetlands Draining to Railroad Tracks ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flow Type 2 year Length Slope Surface n Area Wp Velocity Time rain (ft) (ft/ft) code (sq/ft) (ft) (ft/sec) (hr) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sheet 3.2 100 .005 f 0.414 Sheet 200 .01 a 0.046 Shallow Concent'd 600 .005 u 0.146 Shallow Concent'd 1000 .007 u 0.206 Open Channel 1200 .7 0.476 Time of Concentration = 1.29* --- 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 : Patria Road developed to RR User: RJA Date: 09-10-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Developed & Wetlands Draining to Railroad Tracks Data: Drainage Area 25.65 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 76 Time of Concentration: 1.29 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area 3.45 Acres 13.5 % of Drainage Area Storm Number ( 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 I 5 1 i----------------------1------1------1------1------1------1 Frequency (yrs) I 2 1 10 1 25 1 50 1 100 1 1 1 I I I I i 1 24-Hr Rainfall (in) i 3.2 1 4.7 1 5.5 1 6.2 1 6.9 1 1 f I I 1 I I Ia/P Ratio 1 0.20 1 0.13 1 0.11 1 0.10 ► 0.09 1 I I I I I I I Used 1 0.20 1 0.13 1 0.11 1 0.10 1 0.10 1 I I I I I I I Runoff (in) 1 1.15 1 2.29 1 2.95 1 3.55 1 4.17 1 I I I I I I I 1 Unit Peak Discharge 10.374 10.394 10.400 10.404 10.405 (cfs/acre/in) I I I I I I i i Pond and Swamp Factorl 0.72 1 0.72 1 0.72 1 0.72 1 0.72 1 1 5.0% Ponds Used I I I I I I 1----------------------i------1------1------1------1------I 1 Peak Discharge (cfs) 1 8 1 17 1 22 I 27 1 31 1 * - Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines APPENDIX E RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2.00 Project : Caron Patria Road User: rja Date: 08-27-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Developed Industrial Park to Basin #1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) -------------------------------------------------------7----------------------- FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab. ) Open space (Lawns,parks etc. ) Good condition; grass cover > 75% - 2 (61) - - Urban Districts Avg % impery Industrial 72 - 5.96(88) - - Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) 7.96 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: 7.96 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: 81 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2.00 Project Caron Patria Road User: rja Date: 08-27-99 County Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Developed Industrial Park to Basin #1 --------------------------------------------------------7----------------------- 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 .03 f 0.280 Shallow Concent'd 200 .01 p 0.027 Open Channel 700 2.0 0.097 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 GRAPHICAL PEAK DISCHARGE METHOD Version 2.00 Project Caron Patria Road User: rja Date: 08-27-99 County Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Developed Industrial Park to Basin #1 Data: Drainage Area 7.96 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 81 * Time of Concentration: 0.40 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area NONE Storm Number i 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 1----------------------►------1------1------i------1------I------1 Frequency (yrs) I 1 I 2 1 10 1 25 I 50 1 100 I 1 I i I I I I I 1 24-Hr Rainfall (in) 1 1.25 ( 3.2 I 4.7 1 5.5 1 6.2 ( 6.9 1 I I I I I I I I ( Ia/P Ratio 1 0.38 1 0.15 10.10 1 0.09 ( 0.08 1 0.07 I I I I I I I I i Used i 0.38 1 0.15 1 0.10 10.10 10.10 10.10 I 1 I I I I I I 1 Runoff (in) 1 0.20 1 1.47 1 2.72 13.43 14.07 14.71 I I I I I i I I I Unit Peak Discharge 10.500 10.676 10.702 10.702 10.702 10.702 1 1 (cfs/acre/in) 1 I I I I I I I 1 Pond and Swamp Factorl 1.00 1 1.00 1 1.00 1 1.00 1 1.00 11.00 1 0.0% Ponds Used I 1----------------------1------1------1------1------1------1------1 1 Peak Discharge (cfs) I 1 1 8 1 15 1 19 i 23 1 26 1 * - Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines APPENDIX F RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2.00 Project : Caron Patria Road User: rja Date: 08-27-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Developed Industrial Park to Basin #2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) -------------------7------------------------------------------------------ FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab. ) Open space (Lawns,parks etc.) Good condition; grass cover > 75% - 2.85(61) 4.5 (74) - Urban Districts Avg % impery Commercial & business 85 - 5.38 (92) - Industrial 72 - 14.1(88) 4.56(91) - OTHER AGRICULTURAL LANDS Brush - brush, weed, grass mix good .88 (30) - - - Woods - grass combination good 1.92 (32) - - 1.5 (79) Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) 2.8 22.3 9.06 1.5 --------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: 35.69 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: 80* -------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2.00 Project : Caron Patria Road User: rja Date: 08-27-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Developed Industrial Park to Basin #2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 .03 f 0.280 Shallow Concent'd 200 .01 p 0.027 Open Channel 1400 2.0 0.194 Time of Concentration = 0.50* --- 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 : Caron Patria Road User: rja Date: 08-27-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Developed Industrial Park to Basin #2 Data: Drainage Area 35.69 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 80 * Time of Concentration: 0.50 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area NONE Storm Number 1 1 1 2 I 3 ( 4 1 5 1 6 1 ----------------------1------1------1------1------I------1------► Frequency (yrs) I 1 1 2 1 10 1 25 I 50 i 100 I I I I I I I I I 124-Hr Rainfall (in) 11.25 1 3.2 ( 4.7 I 5.5 ( 6.2 I 6.9 I I I I i I I I I i Ia/P Ratio 10.40 1 0.16 10.11 ( 0.09 10.08 10.07 I I I I I I I I Used 10.40 10.16 1 0.11 10.10 1 0.10 10.10 I I I I { I I I Runoff (in) 10.17 11.40 12.63 13.33 13.96 ( 4.60 I I I I I I i I I Unit Peak Discharge 10.428 10.613 10.639 10.642 10.642 10.642 1 1 (cfs/acre/in) I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I i Pond and Swamp Factor[ 1.00 11.00 11.00 i 1.00 11.00 1 1.00 I 1 0.0% Ponds Used I I I I I I I I----------------------i------1------i------1------1------1------I 1 Peak Discharge (cfs) I 3 ( 31 I 60 1 76` 1 91 1 105 1 * - Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines APPENDIX G RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2.00 Project : Patria Road Brancroft Brook User: RJA Date: 09-10-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Wetlands unchanged draining to Bancroft Brook ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab. ) Urban Districts Avg % impery Industrial 72 - 1.00(88) 1.12 (91) - OTHER AGRICULTURAL LANDS Woods - grass combination poor .75(57) - - - good .78 (32) 1.58 (58) 1.86(72) 10.9(79) Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) 1.53 2.58 2.98 10.9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: 17.99 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: 75* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2.00 Project : Patria Road Brancroft Brook User: RJA Date: 09-10-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Wetlands unchanged draining to Bancroft Brook ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 .003 f 0.703 Shallow Concent'd 600 .004 u 0.163 Shallow Concent'd 900 .005 u 0.219 Open Channel 2200 .7 0.873 Time of Concentration = 1.96* --- Sheet Flow Surface Codes --- A Smooth Surface F Grass, Dense --- Shallow Concentrated --- B Fallow (No Res. ) G Grass, Burmuda --- Surface Codes --- Cultivated < 20 % Res. H Woods C Cul 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 7 GRAPHICAL PEAK DISCHARGE METHOD Version 2.00 Project : Patria Road Brancroft Brook User: RJA Date: 09-10-99 County : Hartford State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: Wetlands unchanged draining to Bancroft Brook Data: Drainage Area 17.99 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 75 * Time of Concentration: 1.96 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area 3.5 Acres 19.5 % of Drainage Area i Storm Number I 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 ----------------------I------I------I------I------I------I Frequency (yrs) I 2 1 10 I 25 I 50 I 100 I I I I I I I I 24-Hr Rainfall (in) 1 3.2 1 4.7 1 5.5 1 6.2 1 6.9 1 I I I I I I I I Ia/P Ratio i 0.21 10.14 10.12 10.11 10.10 I I I I i I I I Used 10.21 10.14 l 0.12 10.11 10.10 i I I I I I i I Runoff (in) 11.09 i 2.21 12.86 13.45 i 4.06 l I I I I I I I i Unit Peak Discharge 10.291 10.307 10.312 10.315 10.317 1 I (cfs/acre/in) I I I I I I I I I I I I I Pond and Swamp Factorl 0.72 1 0.72 1 0.72 1 0.72 1 0.72 1 i 5.0% Ponds Used I I I I I I ----------------------I------I------1------I------I------I l Peak Discharge (cfs) I 4 1 9 1 12 I 14 I 17 I * - Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines APPENDIX H Reservoir Report Page 1 Reservoir No. 2 - basin 1 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Pond Data Pond storage is based on known contour areas.Average end area method used. Stage/Storage Table Stage(ft) Elevation(ft) Contour area(sgft) Incr.Storage(cult) Total storage(cult) 0.00 70.00 10,640 0 0 2.00 72.00 13,175 23,815 23,815 4.00 74.00 15,865 29,040 52,855 6.00 76.00 18,710 34,575 87,430 8.00 78.00 21,715 40,425 127,855 10.00 80.00 24,875 46,590 174,445 Culvert/Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [Cl [D] [A] [B] [C] [D] Rise in = 24.0 2.0 8.0 0.0 Crest Len ft = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Span in = 24.0 2.0 8.0 0.0 Crest El.it = 79.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 No.Barrels = 1 1 1 0 Weir Coeff. = 2.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 Invert El.it = 71.00 71.00 73.00 0.00 Weir Type = Broad - - - Length it = 100.0 10.0 10.0 0.0 Multi-Stage = No No No No slope% = 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 N Value = .013 .013 .013 .000 Orif.Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.00 Multistage = n1a Yes Yes No Exfiltration Rate = 0.00 in/hr/sgft Taitwater Elev.= 0.00 ft Note:All outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control. Stage/Storage/Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation Clv A Clv B Clv C Civ D Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Exfil Total it cuft it cis cis cis cis cis cis cis cis cfs cis 0.00 0 70.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - 0.00 - - - - 0.00 2.00 23,815 72.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 - 0.00 - - - - 0•09 4.00 52,855 74.00 1.50 0.12 1.37 - 0.00 - - - - 1.49 6.00 87,430 76.00 2.93 0.18 2.74 - 0.00 - - - - 2.93 8.00 127,855 78.00 3.87 0.23 3.63 - 0.00 - - - - 3.86 10.00 174,445 80.00 4.62 0.28 4.34 - 9.19 - - - - 13.81 basin, 1 10- ------ Total 8 ■ Culy A .1 ♦ Culy. B a� 6 • CUIv C Cu o Culy D cn 4 ❑ Weir A o; Weir B 2 o Weir C ♦ Weir D 00 2 4 6 8 10 ■ Exfiltration Discharge (cfs) APPENDIX I Reservoir Report Page , Reservoir No. 1 - pond 2 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Pond Data Pond storage is based on known contour areas. Average end area method used. Stage/Storage Table Stage(ft) Elevation(ft) Contour area(sgft) Incr.Storage(cult) Total storage(cult) 0.00 67.00 19,205 0 0 2.00 69.00 24,275 43,480 43,480 4.00 71.00 29,035 53,310 96,790 6.00 73.00 33,950 62,985 159,775 8.00 75.00 39,030 72,980 232,755 10.00 77.00 44,270 83,300 316,055 12.00 79.00 49,670 93,940 409,995 14.00 81.00 55,235 104,W5 514,900 Culvert/Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D] Rise in = 24.0 2.0 8.0 12.0 Crest Len It = 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Span in = 24.0 2.0 8.0 12.0 Crest El.it = 80.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 No.Barrels = 1 1 1 1 Weir Coeff. = 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Invert El.It = 67.00 67.00 72.00 75.00 Weir Type = Broad - - - Length It = 100.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Multistage = No No No No Slope% = 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 N Value = .013 .013 .013 .013 Orif.Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 Multistage = n/a Yes Yes Yes EAltration Rate = 0.00 in/hr/sgft TaiNvater Elev.= 0.00 ft Note:All outflows have been analyzed under inlet and outlet control. Stage/Storage/Discharge Table Stage Storage Elevation CIv A Clv B Clv C Civ D Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Exfil Total lt cult It cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cis cfs cfs cfs 0.00 0 67.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 - - - - 0.00 2.00 43,480 69.00 0.15 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 - - - - 0.13 4.00 96,790 71.00 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 - - - - 0.20 6.00 159,775 73.00 1.58 0.21 1.37 0.00 0.00 - - - - 1.58 8.00 232,755 75.00 3.00 0.28 2.74 0.00 0.00 - - - - 3.00 10.00 316,055 77.00 8.55 0.29 3.63 4.63 0.00 - - - - 8.55 12.00 409,995 79.00 11.74 0.32 4.34 7.07 0.00 - - - - 11.74 14.00 514,900 81.00 14.17 0.35 4.95 8.87 10.61 - - - - 24.77 pond 2 15 ♦ Total ■ Culy A 10 • Culy B 0000001 $ ♦ Culy C o Culy D 49 u) 5 ❑ Weir A o Weir B o Weir C ♦ Weir D 00 5 20 ■ Exfiltration 10 15 Discharge (cfs) pond 2 15 $ 10 0000 a� m `n 5 00 100000 200000 300000 400000 500000 600000 Storage (cuft) APPENDIX J Hydrograph Summary Report Page! Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Tune Time to Voltow Inflow Maximum Maxim m Hydrograph No. type flow interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuff) (ft) (cult) 2 SCS Runoff 29.80 6 744 174,144 — — developed to basin 2 3 Reservoir 1.00 6 1266 119,741 2 72.55 145,632 route through basin 2 4 SCS Runoff 8.09 6 738 42,447 — drainage area to basin 1 5 Reservoir 0.13 6 1452 29,928 4 72.93 37,293 route through basin 1 Proj. file: 1253.gpw Return Period: 2 yr Run date: 11-09-2001 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hydrograph Summary Report Paget Hyd. Hydrograph Beak rane Time to Volume Inflow MaxiTnsn Maximum Hydrograph No. type now interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuff) (ff) (cuft) 2 SCS Runoff 56.84 6 744 327,046 — — — developed to basin 2 3 Reservoir 3.04 6 1026 267,291 2 75.03 233,985 route through basin 2 4 SCS Runoff 15.15 6 738 78,647 — drainage area to basin 1 5 Reservoir 1.32 6 894 65,949 4. 73.85 50,614 route through basin 1 Proj. file: 1253.gpw Return Period: 10 yr Run date: 11-09-2001 Hydratlow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hydrograph Summary Report Paget Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Tom Time to Volume Inflow Maximum Maxkmxn Hydrograph No. type flow interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft) (ft) (cult) 2 SCS Runoff 71.92 6 744 414,060 — developed to basin 2 3 Reservoir 6.17 6 924 353,200 2 76.00 274,456 route through basin 2 4 SCS Runoff 19.06 6 738 99,141 — drainage area to basin 1 5 Reservoir 1.91 6 858 86,426 4 74.46 60,875 route through basin 1 Proj. file: 1253.gpw Return Period: 25 yr Run date: 11-09-2001 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisoive Hydrograph Summary Report Paget Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Volume Inflow Maximum Maximum Hydrograph No. type now interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cls) (min) (min) (cult) (ft) (cult) 2 SCS Runoff 85.29 6 744 492,176 — — developed to basin 2 3 Reservoir 8.38 6 888 430,832 2 76.91 312,462 route through basin 2 4 SCS Runoff 22.52 6 738 117,499 — drainage area to basin 1 5 Reservoir 2.37 6 846 104,766 4 75.08 71,448 route through basin 1 Proj. file: 1253.gpw Return Period: 50 yr Run date: 11-09-2001 Hydratlow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hydrograph Summary Report Page Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Tane Time to Volume Inflow Maximum Maxenurn Hydrograph No. type flow interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cfs) (rnin) (min) (cam) lrtl (curt) 2 SCS Runoff 98.76 6 744 571,681 — — developed to basin 2 3 Reservoir 10.13 6 876 509,895 2 77.90 358,505 route through basin 2 4 SCS Runoff 26.00 6 738 136,155 — drainage area to basin 1 5 Reservoir 2.77 6 840 123,400 4 75.73 82,742 route through basin 1 Proj. file: 1253.gpw Return Period: 100 yr Run date: 11-09-2001 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve APPENDIX K Storm Sewer Inve tory Report Page 1 Line Line ID DnStr Defi Line Line Line Line Drng Runoff Inlet Known invert Invert N Junction J-Loss Natural Dn # line angle length size type slope area coeff time Q El do El up value type coeff grnd line # (deg) (ri) (in) (9G) (ac) (C) (min) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (JLC) (ft) # 1 cb1-out 0 0 160 36 Circular 1.50 0.24 .75 10 0.0 63.70 66.10 .015 Grate 1.0 72.50 Off 2 cb2-1 1 0 26 36 Circular 1.00 0.25 .68 12 0.0 66.10 66.36 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 1 3 cb3-2 2 -75 86 30 Circular 0.50 0.75 .76 16 0.0 66.86 67.29 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 2 4 cb4-3 3 -90 26 15 Circular 0.50 0.66 .70 15 0.0 69.00 69.13 .015 Grate 1.0 79.00 3 5 cb5-3 3 10 86 24 Circular 0.50 0.78 .76 16 0.0 67.79 68.22 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 3 6 cb6-5 5 -90 26 15 Circular 0.50 0.66 .70 16 0.0 69.00 69.13 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 4 7 cb7-5 5 10 151 24 Circular 0.50 0.79 .76 17 0.0 68.22 68.97 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 5 8 cb8-7 7 -90 40 15 Circular 1.00 0.66 .70 17 0.0 69.00 69.40 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 7 9 cb9-8 8 60 60 15 Circular 0.50 1.39 .77 22 0.0 69.40 69.70 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 8 10 cb10-8 7 20 60 15 Circular 0.50 1.15 .78 22 0.0 69.75 70.05 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 7 11 cb11-2 2 80 78 36 Circular 0.60 0.29 .67 15 0.0 66.36 66.83 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 2 12 cb12-11 11 90 26 15 Circular 0.50 1.21 .76 18 0.0 68.57 68.70 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 11 13 cb13-11 11 -10 131 36 Circular 0.50 0.48 .75 15 0.0 66.83 67.48 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 11 14 cb14-13 13 90 26 15 Circular 1.00 1.83 .79 22 0.0 69.23 69.49 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 13 15 cb15-13 13 -10 161 36 Circular 0.50 1.48 .71 18 0.0 67.48 68.29 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 13 16 cb16-15 15 90 26 15 Circular 1.00 1.62 .78 22 0.0 69.00 69.26 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 15 17 cb17-15 15 -10 214 36 Circular 0.50 2.65 .71 25 0.0 68.29 69.36 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 15 18 cb18-17 17 90 34 18 Circular 0.75 0.76 .69 17 0.0 69.36 69.61 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 17 19 019-18 18 -90 44 18 Circular 0.50 0.78 .68 17 0.0 69.62 69.84 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 18 20 cb20-19 19 90 272 15 Circular 0.60 0.46 .69 17 0.0 69.84 71.47 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 19 21 cb21-20 20 90 26 15 Circular 0.50 1.08 .71 15 0.0 73.60 73.73 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 20 22 cb24-17 17 -10 185 30. Circular 0.50 1.23 .74 20 0.0 69.86 70.79 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 17 PROJECT FILE: BAS2.STM t-D-F FILE: HARTFORD.IDF TOTAL NUMBER OF LINES: 29 RUN DATE: 11-12-2001 DESIGN CODES: Min.Pipe Size= 12 in; Max.Pipe Size= 96 in; Min.Slope= .2 %; Min.Cover= 4 ft; Inlet N-Values= .016; Average Inlet Throat Height= 6 in Storm Sewer Inve tory Report Page 2 Line Line ID DnStr Deft Line Line Line Line Drng Runoff Inlet Known Invert Invert N Junction J-Loss Natural Dn # line angle length size type slope area coeff time Q El do El up value type coeff grnd lino # (deg) (ft) (in) (°h) (ac) (C) (min) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (JLC) (ft) # 23 cb25-24 22 90 26 15 Circular 0.50 0.82 .69 17 0.0 71.78 71.91 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 22 24 cb26-25 22 -10 217 24 Circular 0.50 0.78 .68 16 0.0 71.28 72.36 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 23 25 cb27-26 24 90 26 15 Circular 0.50 1.42 .72 22 0.0 73.11 73.24 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 24 26 cb28-26 24 -10 117 18 Circular 0.75 1.17 .71 19 0.0 72.86 73.74 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 24 27 cb29-28 26 90 26 15 Circular 0.50 0.73 .71 15 0.0 73.74 73.87 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 26 28 cb30-28 26 -10 194 15 Circular 0.50 0.51 .65 15 0.0 73.74 74.71 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 26 29 031-30 28 90 26 15 Circular 0.50 0.75 .70 17 0.0 74.71 74.84 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 28 -T- PROJECT FILE: BAS2.STM I-D-F FILE: HARTFORD.IDF TOTAL NUMBER OF LINES: 29 RUN DATE: 11-12-2001 DESIGN CODES: Min.Pipe Size= 12 In; Max.Pipe Size= 96 in; Min.Slope= .2 %; Min.Cover= 4 ft; Inlet N-Values= .016; Average Inlet Throat Height= 6 In Storm Sewer Tabulation Page 1 Line Line ID Incr. Rnoff Incr. Sum Tc Rnfal Total Add. Total Capac Line Line Line Veloc. Veloc. NG NG Invert Invert Dns # Area coeff CA CA Inten runoff flow flow @ full size length slope up down up down up down line (ac) (C) (min (in/hr (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (in x In) (ft) N (ft/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) # 1 cbt-out 0.24 0.75 0.18 19.96 28.4 2.78 55.6 0.0 55.6 70.8 36 c 180 1.50 11.0 11.0 72.50 0.00 66.10 63.70 0 2 cb2-1 0.25 0.68 0.17 19.78 28.2 2.79 55.2 0.0 55.2 57.8 36 c 26 1.00 7.8 7.8 80.00 72.50 66.36 66.10 1 3 cb3-2 0.75 0.76 0.57 5.12 23.9 3.06 15.7 0.0 15.7 25.1 30 c 86 0.50 3.2 3.2 80.00 80.00 67.29 66.86 2 4 cb4-3 0.66 0.70 0.46 0.46 15.0 3.90 1.8 0.0 1.8 4.0 15 c 26 0.50 1.5 1.5 79.00 80.00 69.13 69.00 3 5 cb5-3 0,78 0.76 0.59 4.08 23.4 3.10 12.7 0.0 12.7 13.9 24 c 86 0.50 4.0 4.0 80.00 80.00 68.22 67.79 3 6 cb6-5 0.66 0.70 0.46 0.46 16.0 3.78 1.7 0.0 1.7 4.0 15 c 26 0.50 1.4 1.4 80.00 80.00 69.13 69.00 5 7 cb7-5 0.79 0.76 0.60 3.03 22.6 3.16 9.6 0.0 9.6 13.9 24 c 151 0.50 3.0 3.0 80.00 80.00 68.97 68.22 5 8 cb8-7 0.66 0.70 0.46 1.53 22.3 3.18 4.9 0.0 4.9 5.6 15 c 40 1.00 4.0 4.0 80.00 80.00 69.40 69.00 7 9 cb9-8 1.39 0.77 1.07 1.07 22.0 3.20 3.4 0.0 3.4 4.0 15 c 60 0.50 2.8 2.8 80.00 80.00 69.70 69.40 8 10 cb10-8 1.15 0.78 0.90 0.90 22.0 3.20 2.9 0.0 2.9 4.0 15 c 60 0.50 2.3 2.3 80.00 80.00 70.05 69.75 7 11 cb11-2 0.29 0.67 0.19 14.49 27.8 2.82 40.8 0.0 40.8 44.8 36 c 78 0.60 5.8 5.8 80.00 80.00 66.83 66.38 2 12 cb12-11 1.21 0.76 0.92 0.92 18.0 3.56 3.3 0.0 3.3 4.0 15 c 26 0.50 2.7 2.7 80.00 80.00 68.70 68.57 11 13 cb13-11 0.48 0.75 0.36 13.37 27.1 2.86 38.2 0.0 38.2 40.9 36 c 131 0.50 5.4 5.4 80.00 80.00 67.48 66.83 11 14 cb14-13 1.83 0.79 1.45 1.45 22.0 3.20 4.6 0.0 4.6 5.6 15 c 26 . 1.00 3.8 3.8 80.00 80.00 69.49 69.23 13 15 cb15-13 1.48 0.71 1.05 11.57 26.2 2.91 33.7 0.0 33.7 40.9 36 c 161 0.50 4.8 4.8 80.00 80.00 68.29 67.48 13 16 cb16-15 1.62 0.78 1.26 1.26 22.0 3.20 4.0 0.0 4.0 5.6 15 c 26 1.00 3.3 3.3 80.00 80.00 69.26 69.00 15 17 cb17-15 2.65 0.71 1.88 9.25 25.0 2.99 27.7 0.0 27.7 40.9 36 c 214 0.50 3.9 3.9 80.00 80.00 69.36 68.29 15 18 cb18-17 0.76 0.69 0.52 2.14 18.8 3.48 7.5 0.0 7.5 7.9 18 c 34 0.75 4.2 4.2 80.00 80.00 69.61 69.36 17 19 cb19-18 0.78 0.68 0.53 1.61 18.5 3.51 5.7 0.0 5.7 6.4 18 c 44 0.50 3.2 3.2 80.00 80.00 69.84 69.62 18 20 cb20-19 0.46 0.69 0.32 1.08 17.0 3.66 4.0 0.0 4.0 4.3 15 c 272 0.60 3.2 3.2 80.00 80.00 71.47 69.84 19 21 cb21-20 1.08 0.71 0.77 0.77 15.0 3.90 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 15 c 26 0.50 2.4 2.4 80.00 .80.00 73.73 73.60 20 22 cb24-17 1.23 0.74 0.91 5.23 23.3 3.10 16.2 0.0 16.2 25.1 30 c 185 0.50 3.3 3.3 80.00 80.00 70.79 69.86 17 PROJECT FILE: BAS2.STM I-D-F FILE: HARTFORD.IDF TOTAL NUMBER OF LINES: 29 RUN DATE: 11-12-2001 NOTES: c=circular; e=elliptical; b=box; Intens4= 27.15295/(Tc+ 4,699998)A .6508044; Return period= 10 Yrs. Storm Sewer Tabulation Page 2 Line Line ID Incr. Rnoff incr. Sum Tc Rnfal Total Add. Total Capac Line Line Line Veloc. Veloc. NG NG Invert Invert Dns # Area coeff CA CA Inten runoff flow flow @ full size length slope up down up down up down line (ac) (C) (min (in/hr (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (in x in) (ft) (°/,) (ft/s) (ft/s) VQ (ft) (ft) (ft) # 23 cb25-24 0.82 0.69 0.57 0.57 17.0 3.66 2.1 0.0 2.1 4.0 15 c 26 0.50 1.7 1.7 80.00 80.00 71.91 71.78 22 24 cb26-25 0.78 0.88 0.53 3.76 22.1 3.19 12.0 0.0 12.0 13.9 24 c 217 0.50 3.8 3.8 80.00 80.00 72.36 71.28 22 25 cb27-26 1.42 0.72 1.02 1.02 22.0 3.20 3.3 0.0 3.3 4.0 15 c 26 0.50 2.7 2.7 80.00 80.00 73.24 73.11 24 26 cb28-26 1.17 0.71 0.83 2.21 19.0 3.46 7.6 0.0 7.6 7.9 18 c 117 0.75 4.3 4.3 80.00 80.00 73.74 72.86 24 27 cb29-28 0.73 0.71 0.52 0.52 15.0 3.90 2.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 15 c 26 0.50 1.6 1.6 80.00 80.00 73.87 73.74 26 28 cb30-28 0.51 0.65 0.33 0.86 17.1 3.65 3.1 0.0 3.1 4.0 15 c 194 0.50 2.5 2.5 80.00 80.00 74.71 73.74 26 29 cb31-30 0.75 0.70 0.52 0.52 17.0 3.66 1.9 0.0 1.9 4.0 15 c 26 0.50 1.6 1.6 80.00 80.00 74.84 74.71 28 ------r PROJECT FILE: BAS2.STM I-D-F FILE: HARTFORD.IDF TOTAL NUMBER OF LINES: 29 RUN DATE: 11-12-2001 NOTES: c=circular; e=elliptical;.b=box; Intensity= 27.15295/(Tc+ 4.699998)" .6508044; Return period= 10 Yrs. Storm Sewer Inventory Report Page Line Line ID DnStr Defl Line Line Line Line Drng Runoff Inlet Known Invert Invert N Junction J-Loss Natural Dn # line angle length size type slope area coeff time Q El do El up value type coeff grnd lino # (deg) (ft) (in) (%) (ac) (C) (min) (cfs) (ft) (ft) (JLC) (ft) # 1 CB 33 outle 0 0 40 24 Circular 1.30 0.09 .90 10 0.0 68.20 68.72 .015 Grate 1.0 77.14 Off 2 CB 34-33 1 0 26 24 Circular 1.00 0.49 .61 15 0.0 68.74 69.00 .015 Grate 1.0 78.00 1 3 CB 43-34 2 -90 219 18 Circular 0.50 1.25 .66 19 0.0 69.00 70.10 .015 Grate 1.0 79.00 1 4 CB 44-43 3 -90 26 15 Circular 0.50 1.41 .73 17 0.0 70.10 70.23 .015 Grate 1.0 79.00 3 5 CB35-34 2 70 180 24 Circular 0.50 0.20 .72 15 0.0 69.00 69.90 .015 Grate 1.0 79.00 1 6 CB 36-35 5 90 26 15 Circular 0.50 0.44 .74 12 0.0 70.00 70.13 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 5 7 CB 37-35 5 -20 118 24 Circular 0.50 0.60 .70 17 0.0 69.90 70.49 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 5 8 CB 38-37 7 90 26 15 Circular 0.50 0.60 .60 15 0.0 71.00 71.13 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 7 9 CB 39-37 7 -20 130 24 Circular 0.50 0.75 .70 18 0.0 70.50 71.15 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 8 10 CB 40-39 9 90 26 15 Circular 1.00 1.66 .77 17 0.0 71.65 71.91 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 9 11 CB 41-39 9 -20 177 15 Circular 0.50 0.15 .70 10 0.0 71.80 72.68 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 9 12 CB 42-41 11 90 26 15 Circular 0.50 0.76 .71 5 0.0 72.68 72.81 .015 Grate 1.0 80.00 11 PROJECT FILE: BASI.STM I-D-F FILE: HARTFORD.IDF TOTAL NUMBER OF LINES: 12 TRUN DATE: 11-12-2001 DESIGN CODES: Min,Pipe Size= 12 in; Max.Pipe Size= 96 in; Min.Slope= .2 %; Min.Cover= 4 ft; Inlet N-Values= .016; Average Inlet Throat Height= 6 in Storm Sewer Tabulation Page 1 Line Line ID Incr. Rnoff Incr. Sum Tc Rnfal Total Add. Total Capac Line Line Line Veloc. Veloc. NG NG Invert Invert Dns # Area coeff CA CA Inten runoff flow flow @ full size length slope up down up down up down line (ac) (C) (min (in/hr (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (cfs) (in x in) (ft) N (f/s) (ft/s) (ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) # 1 CB 33 outlet 0.09 0.90 0.08 5.93 20.5 3.32 19.7 0.0 19.7 22.3 24 c 40 1.30 6.3 6.3 77.14 0.00 68.72 68.20 0 2 CB 34-33 0.49 0.61 0.30 5.85 20.4 3.34 19.5 0.0 19.5 19.6 24 c 26 1.00 6.2 6.2 78.00 77.14 69.00 68.74 1 3 CB 43-34 1.25 0.66 0.83 1.85 19.0 3.48 6.4 0.0 6.4 6.4 18 c 219 0.50 3.6 3.6 79.00 78.00 70.10 69.00 2 4 CB 44-43 1.41 0.73 1.03 1.03 17.0 3.66 3.8 0.0 3.8 4.0 15 c 26 0.50 3.1 3.1 79.00 79.00 70.23 70.10 3 5 CB35-34 0.20 0.72 0.14 3.70 19.4 3.42 12.7 0.0 12.7 13.9 24 0 180 0.50 4.0 4.0 79.00 78.00 69.90 69.00 2 6 CB 36-35 0.44 0.74 0.33 0.33 12.0 4.35 1.4 0.0 1.4 4.0 15 c 26 0.50 1.2 1.2 80.00 79.00 70.13 70.00 5 7 CB 37-35 0.60 0.70 0.42 3.23 18.7 3.49 11.3 0.0 11.3 13.9 24 c 118 0.50 3.6 3.6 80.00 79.00 70.49 69.90 5 8 C B 38-37 0.60 0.60 0.36 0.36 15.0 3.90 1.4 0.0 1.4 4.0 15 c 26 0.50 1.1 1.1 80.00 80.00 71.13 71.00 7 9 CS 39-37 0.75 0.70 0.52 2.45 18.0 3.56 8.7 0.0 8.7 13.9 24 c 130 0.50 2.8 2.8 80.00 80.00 71.15 70.50 7 10 CB 40-39 1.66 0.77 1.28 1.28 17.0 3.66 4.7 0.0 4.7 5.6 15 c 26 1.00 3.8 3.8 80.00 80.00 71.91 71.65 9 11 CB 41-39 0.15 0.70 0.11 0.64 10.0 4.72 3.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 15 c 177 0.50 2.5 2.5 80.00 80.00 72.68 71.80 9 12 CB 42-41 0.76 0.71 0.54 0.54 5.0 6.19 3.3 0.0 3.3 4.0 15 c 26 0.50 2.7 2.7 80.00 80.00 72.81 72.68 11 --fPROJECT FILE: BASI.STM I-D-F FILE: HARTFORD.IDF TOTAL NUMBER OF LINES: 12 RUN DATE: 11-12-2001 NOTES: c=circular; e=elliptical; b=box; Intensity= 27.15295/(Tc+ 4.699998)A..6508044; Return period= 10 Yrs. DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. RE CIF I ED NUV 1 � 2001 civil engineers .planners . surveyors . gis SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DEPL LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: Marcia Banach, Director of Planning DATE: November 13, 2001 Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 RE: South Windsor Technologies Center DPI PROD. NO. 99-1253 Patria Road& Schweir Road South Windsor, Connecticut WE ARE SENDING YOU: ❑ for your use ❑ at your request ® for approval by PZC ❑ for your files ® for review and comment ❑ other THE FOLLOWING: Nine (9) sets of plans;two (2) sets of drainage computations;two (2) copies of the subdivision checklist; one (1) copy of the application form; application fee(check#1407 in the amount of$3,010.00); and abutter letter and listing. A traffic report will be submitted under separate cover by Bubaris Traffic Associates. Please observe that the 49-acre Sperry Wood L.P. parcel, easterly of Bancroft Brook, is being created via a statutory division, and therefore is not subject to subdivision approval. Kindly apprise us of any staff comments and of the anticipated hearing date. Thank you. DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. By: 4" cc: David A. Caron Peter R. DeMallie Thomas Sheridan, Esq. Principal Galen B. Semprebon, P.E. Richard Adams Matthew Galligan 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860) 291-8755 • Fax: (860) 291-8757 DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers•planners• surveyors• gis • gps Transmitted via certified mail Dear Current Abutting Property Owner November 9, 2001 Re: South Windsor Technologies Center DPI Project No. 99-1253 Patria Road& Schweir Road South Windsor, Connecticut In accordance with regulations of the Inland Wetlands Agency and the Planning &Zoning Commission, we are required to notify you that an application has been filed on the property abutting yours and is subject to a hearing(s) by the Inland Wetlands Agency and Planning &Zoning Commission. The applications and plans are on file with the South Windsor Planning Department in the Town Hall. As an abutting property owner you are invited to the hearing(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 meeting if you so desire. For further information regarding the specific date this application will be heard, please contact Kelli Gaetano,Administrative Secretary, Jeffrey Folger, Environmental Planner, or Michele Lipe,Deputy Planning Director, at the South Windsor Planning Department at 644-2511, ext. 253, 229 or 252, respectively. Thank you. Sincerely, DESIGN P ESSIONALS, INC. By: Peter R. DeMallie Principal cc: Jeffrey Folger Marcia Banach David A. Caron Galen A. Semprebon, P.E. 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, CT 06074 Telephone(860)291-8755 Fax(860)291-8757 PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN-HOUSE REFERRAL FORM TO: Matt Galligan, Fred Shaw,Michael Gantick, Thomas Field,Bill Lanning,Kris Lindstrom, Ray Favreau, Karl Reichle,Mel Stead,John Collins,Bob Deptula,Jeff Doolittle FROM: Marcia A. Banach, AICP,Director of Planning The Planning&Engineering Departments have received plans for the following project: Location: Ax— or U O Site Plan Subdivision No.Acres_ 35 � Zone .� Industrial O Commercial O Residential No. Lots/Units Water. .Public O Private Well Sewerage: ;kPublic O Septic system(s) Project Description: L1) ,fie yk d� Wdz4K]L �n ace Future Town-owned property involved? %Yes O No /10 new street(s) 0 new detention area O new open space/recreation area O active O passive Planning Department notes: Please comment by 'Q�/�, and return to the Planning Department. C. �Y try a 6 V-� 6� g��e-c� a MEMORANDUM To: South Windsor Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission. From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Date: January 11, 2002 Re: Appl. 01-52P—Technologies Center LLC, Industrial subdivision. Plans dated 12/24/01 The project is to construct a 41-lot industrial subdivision on 129.03 acres. The proposal would create a connecting loop road from Patria Road to Schweir Road, and to create a cul-de-sac off of that road to the southeast. Two wetland crossing are proposed for the road to extend from both Patria and Schweir. The stormwater structures and many of the lots would have significant portions of the area occurring with in the Upland Review Area(URA). Direct wetland disturbances area estimated to be 23,185 sqft or .53 acres. Disturbance within the URA is estimated at 66,700 sqft or 1.53 acres. Proposed wetland creation is estimated to be 53,920 sqft or 1.23 acres. Site: The site is located in the Bancroft Brook watershed. The total parcel area is 129.03 acres. The subdivision is proposed to occur on 80 acres in the northwest portion of the property. Flagged wetlands/watercourses are shown along large portions of the northern, central and southern property boundaries. The boundaries shown appear to be accurate. Numbered wetland flags are present in the field. The cover types present on the site would be classified as hardwood forest and an abandoned 18-acre agricultural field in the early successional forest stage of development. The northern third of the site is forested, the middle third is field, and the southern third is forested. A smaller field(4.5 ac.) is located in the extreme southwestern portion of the property. Regulated areas on the site consist of two large forested wetlands located in the northwestern and north central portion of the property, and the Bancroft Brook stream corridor, which diagonally bisects the property from northeast to southwest. South of the stream corridor there is additional land(40+acres)that are not a part of this application. The northern wetland consists of red maple in the overstory with a well developed understory of spice bush, summer sweet, and highbush blue berry. The western portion starts in the field and extends north to the property line. It contains several vernal pools. The wetland connects to the central wetland in the northern portion of the site adjacent to the Patria Road cul-de-sac by a relatively thin band. The central wetland is bordered on the west by a linear drainage ditch approximately three feet in depth. This forested wetland extends from the northern property boundary south into the agriculture field. Wetland Functions: Major functions of the northern wetland would be ecological integrity, stormwater flow attenuation, and detention(due to lack of any appreciable slope), sediment and nutrient retention, wildlife habitat, and groundwater recharge. The transition area adjacent to the wetland boundaries (within the URA) has a higher percentage of the understory component comprised of highbush blueberry compared to understory within the wetland, making this area a valuable food source to wildlife in and around the wetland. The second major wetland on the site is the Bancroft Brook stream corridor. This corridor is bounded on either side by terraces similar in configuration to the terrace escarpments that occur in the Scantic River corridor. Highly erodable fine and medium sand overlay varved(layered)clays. To the north of this corridor is a diverse,mature upland hardwood forest. This forest extends to the top of the terrace slope. Several small erosion scars are present where runoff from the field flows to the stream. The stream channel configuration is sinuous as it meanders through the 50-foot wide flood.plain. The stream measures 3 to 6 feet in width and 1 to 3 feet in depth. Finfish are present in the channel. The stream bottom is sandy. The mature tree canopy adjacent to the stream corridor provides shading to the watercourse regulating the temperature during warm months. Major functions of the watercourse corridor would be similar to the above-mentioned wetland with the addition of finfish habitat for those species adapted to sandy channel conditions, and shoreline stabilization along the channel banks. The ecological integrity of the forested riparian area adjacent to the stream is high due to relative undisturbance of the area except for past farming activities hundreds of feet away. Impacts: Sedimentation: The upland soils on the site are mapped as Sudbury (SsA) 0-5% slopes, and Merrimac (MvA) 0-5% slopes. The wetland soils are mapped as Walpole (WdA). All of these soils have an erosion potential listed as low. Due to the flat topography on the site and sandy composition of the soil, standard E&S controls as shown on the plans should be adequate to contain migrating sediments generated by construction activities associated with the road. The proposed stormwater outfalls are planned to be installed through the terraces to the streambed. This area does have a high potential to erode and cause sediment impacts to the watercourse. The outfalls must be placed where the discharge will enter the stream with a velocity less than l cfs. Outfalls must therefore be placed where the slope within the flood plain is the flattest possible. Elevations of the flood plain have not been shown for the western-most basin, so it is not possible to evaluate the stability of the proposed outfall. Stormwater Quality: Stormwater quality is proposed to be addressed with the use of gross particle separators and planted biofilter detention basins. The gross design should provide a high level of pollutant removal from stormwater runoff. Details of microtopography within the basins have not been shown, so an evaluation of the runoff path through the basin is not possible. Stormwater Quantity: Extended peak flows from the storm runoff due to increased impervious ground cover can alter the shape of the downstream watercourses by increasing streambank and streambottom erosion. Increased volumes of runoff and the stability of the downstream watercourse channel must be taken into consideration to insure that extended peak flows and increase runoff volumes do not negatively impact the stream channel. Wildlife: Many of the proposed building lots will incorporate large portions of the upland review area within them. If approved in it's current configuration, many of the future site plan proposals will undoubtedly request that large portions of the URA be altered from it's present state as a productive wildlife resource. This includes the riparian area adjacent to the terrace slopes and the stream corridor. The construction of the through road and the development of the proposed lots will fragment habitat types within the existing site. The proposed configuration of the lots will result in a corridor of open space remaining that will include the northeastern wetland. The presence of lots 35 and 27 will significantly reduce the connectivity of the proposed corridor to Bancroft Brook by reducing the width of the corridor at the proposed road crossing. The inclusion of this portion of the site in the corridor would significantly improve the viability of the corridor to be used as a wildlife conduit. Mitigation: A mitigation area in the form of wetlands creation is proposed in the western portion of the site. 1.23 acres are proposed to be created to form a shallow marsh/wet meadow. Additionally, the proposed stormwater basin bottoms are proposed to be planted with a wet marsh seed mix. Wildlife shrub plantings are proposed to be planted along the top and sides of the basins. To: Design Professionals 165 So. Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Date: January 112002 Re: App. #00-47P -Review of the proposed Technologies Center LLC. Industrial subdivision- Plans dated 12/24/2001. I have reviewed the proposed plan with the following additional comments: 1. The landscaping plan shows the use of Tartarian Honeysuckle and Japanese Barberry as shrub plantings adjacent to the proposed detention basins. These species are considered invasive exotics by DEP and should be substituted with native indigenous species. Cc: IWA/CC Town Engineer Dir. of Planning Jan 16 02 11s10a 860-291 -8757 p. 2 DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers • Planners . surveyors . gis +gps January 16, 2002 Marcia Banach,Director of planning Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Ave. South Windsor,CT 06074 RE: South Windsor Technologies Center DPI Proj.No. 99-1253 Patria Road South Windsor,Connecticut Dear Marcia: On behalf of my client,South Windsor Technologies Center,I.LC,I hereby grant a 45-day extension for the above-referenced Planning&Zoning Commission application. ''hank you. Sincerely, DESIGN PROFESSIONALS,INC. By: e Peter R. DeMal ie Principal cc: David Caron 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor,Connecticut 06074 Tel:(860)291-8755 *Fax: (860)291-8757 a q MEMORANDUM To: Marcia Banach, Director of Planning Jeff Folger, Environmental Planner From: Jeffrey B. Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer Date: 1/31/02 RE: App 01-47P, South Windsor Technology Center. I have reviewed the plans for the proposed development for the South Windsor Technology Center at the end of Patria Road, and have the following comments: Please call me (x 245) if you have any questions. 1. A Facility Plan and Details need to be included for the proposed sanitary sewers and any proposed new or modified pump stations. This should include flows expected, pipe sizes, slopes, pump station details and other information needed to evaluate the sanitary sewers proposed on this site. 2. Alternatives for the end location of the sanitary sewers need to be analyzed and evaluated. One is to run a gravity sewer line all the way to the existing Route 5 pump station and modify this pump station as necessary to handle the flows. The second is to construct a new pump station on this site with a force main to the existing sewer main in Sullivan Avenue. Both of these alternatives need to be analyzed based on their life cycle costs. This includes capital costs as well as the present worth of operational and maintenance costs over a 20 year period. 3. Referring to the Test Pit information shown on Sheet 37: The dates these were dug needs to be included on this sheet. The information for Pit 18 shows mottling but no depth to water. What was the depth to water in this pit? Is Pit 21 shown on the plans mislabeled as Pit 23 on Sheet 37? The location (road and station) and ground elevation for each test pit needs to be included. It would also be beneficial to show the test pits on the profile sheets with the depth marked for water, clay, and other significant features. 4. The test pit information shows shallow ground water at a depth of less than 3 feet in many locations. Because of the shallow ground water, underdrains need to be included on both sides of these roads to collect the ground water and protect the road base structure. The underdrains will tie into the catch basins. 5. There are a few locations where the shallow groundwater may be into the road base or subbase. This is most apparent, on Patria Road at Sta. 12+0 and Sta. 20+0. The shallow groundwater will adversely affect the road structure which is why underdrains are required. However, underdrains may lower the groundwater level which would adversely impact the adjacent wetlands. Therefore, I think these roads need to be raised (possibly a few feet) to get the base and subbase out of the groundwater, to protect the wetlands and to reduce the amount of cut necessary for these roads. 6. The test pit information also appears to show that the bottom of the proposed detention basins will be below the groundwater elevation. If this is the case it needs to be shown on the plans. 7. 1 appreciate that the road grading was stretched out so there are less short sections between changes in grade. There are a few areas remaining where there the distance between vertical curves needs to be lengthened to at least 100 feet. These are on Patria Road at Sta 2+98.9, and Schweir Road at Sta. 1+00 and Sta. 2+64.31. The Town Standard includes a minimum 100 foot tangent section on Vertical Curves. 8. The proposed contours and existing contours need to be labeled more. The elevations proposed for the two detention basins are not clear. 9. The elevations of the inlets and outlets from the two proposed detention basins should be clearly shown on the plans. Additional details may be needed for the outlet structures. 10.All easements that are required for sanitary sewers, storm drainage, utilities, street trees, or other uses must be shown on the plans. 11.Anti-Tracking pads at least 50 feet long need to be shown on the Sediment and Erosion Control plans where the proposed extensions of Patria Road and Schweir Road begin. 12.The drainage report mentions grassed swales to drain water which collects by the existing cul-de-sac ends of Patria Road and Schweir Road. These need to be clearly shown on the plans. 13.Show the proposed location for Cape Cod Curb on the plans and a detail for this curb. 14.The proposed sidewalks need to begin where the proposed extensions of Patria Road and Schweir Road begin. These should be clearly shown on the plot plans, the topographic plans and profile plans with a ramp to the road provided at the beginning of each sidewalk. 15.Catch basins should not be located in driveways. The Proposed CB1 needs to be moved to the tangent point of the radius of the pump station driveway. 16. What is the size and slope of the pipe crossing Patria Road at about Sta. 1+25? 17.The storm drain trench detail needs to be modified slightly so the installation requirements for plastic pipe are clear. I will call the Engineer about this. 18. 1 have some questions on the drainage report. I will call the Engineer about these. IVED MEMORANDUM RECE FEB 5 2002 To: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DEPT Date: February 4, 2002 Subject: South Windsor Technology Center Per our recent meeting please be advised that from an operations and maintenance perspective (snow removal operations in particular) a road layout that avoids long cul- de-sac roads is preferred. Interconnection of the extensions of Patria Road and Schweir Road would provide greater access flexibility during snow removal operations or if emergency situations make any section of the road impassable. Very truly yours, Michael J. Gantick, P.E., Director of Public Works cc: Melvin C. Stead, Jr., Supt. of Street Services Jeffrey B. Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer C. Fred Shaw, Superintendent of Pollution Control MTG/cm engineering/molloy/cathy/mike/South Windsor Technology Center memo banach Marcia Banach SW Technologies Center From: Tom Field To: Marcia Banach Date: 2/5/02 10:53AM Subject: SW Technologies Center Good Morning, Peter DeMallie stopped by yesterday and we went over the roadway plan for Patria and Schweir Roads. I like the access off of both roadways for safety and patrol reasons. We can check the businesses and respond to each call in the area better. Sgt. Thomas Field CC: Jeff Folger Feb 05 02 01 : 42p p, 2 MEMO February 5,2002 To; : Marcia Banach, Dir d rofPlannmg 1.640 S.0 Nam: ve So Windsor, Ct.:D6074. From Vlfillia.m R tanrnng, Fire-Chief Warshai On February 4, I reviewed the subdivision plan for the South Windsor Technologies Center industrial park. I request the following: 1. Schweir Road be extended to Patria Road. 2. Patria Road be extended to a full size industrial cul-de-sac. The future industrial building could propose a high degree of fire hazard, and therefore it is important to have a through street pattern to provide for full emergency vehicle access. Water main size and hydrant locations to be determined at a future date by the Connecticut Water Company and the Fire Marshal. cc: Jeffrey Folger Sgt. Thomas Field South Windsor Technologies Subdivision 2-5-02 1. pp ' do r a 40 su division on pproxiTately}130 acmes, located so th P tri an Sc eir Ro d, e erly o Ro 5, I one. e pro posA is to e `teno.- --- Pa a and we r oad and the new lots wi ave fro to on Patria(axfd Schwe rad. 2. s6;400`s f; ti fi6( fet4of .:. f:r-onage T -.l.otsiz,es4R-tk� rb i`t�on range f;-O approx -20,000-sq ft-up to in.excess: - of 44+ 'es. -It -rl T L 1 Gt T vr�vv�p� �j y �'Sian elf �}y..:,R®P'�r� f d jW 6 0,4W4'r ar-f- Th e is a 40+ acre p cel whi has b n left a ` of a bu�' , i g lot"- is parcel is ein a as a dlock arcel• ref e p ann' g d artm fit re s tha the" ~'- inin 1 d e de a s of a utting operty. 4. n err i le t s' WPCA approval is required,, Fred Shaw, Sup't of Po ution Control, has indicated that detailed information is needed regarding the pump station. The engineer must ewe(do a present worth analysis)comparing the two alternatives for pumping— 1) connect project to existing Route 5 pump station; 2) connect to smaller station as proposed by developer. Estimated project flows are needed as well. 5:_ T re is,a �ignificarlt mount regulat d wetl son the o erty. T�e appli tion pe di w' h I �teb C: Th publi Hearin w ope ed by el A/C o J wi e ntinu 6. kVqidwalk ' be° g ro s d one of e e�,4,r�e-+'- 7. The proposed road design incorporates interconnections between Patria and Schweir Roads. The Director of Public Works and Fire Marshal have submitted memos supporting an interconnection rather than long cul-de-sacs: READ MEMOs 8. The Police Department has reviewed the plans and has no comments on the proposal. 'tted. t eP �nts-ce �p-t�66;69 o�roe, ° c �ctivi�es-�r�d--�ill~-have„in-excess-of 300parkingbspaces. L kdar meErring-and—even--ng-eommut,e-r-peakperiods.:.-. 9. ThWaffingine s co usion n icate,th t it '-g t be c ssary%lo�cons - t a,,b -passat eh r Pa 'a o S liwi ad r bth). Kis who s uj�ect S C r v1. 10. There is no requirement for open space in an industrial subdivision. erg- rrdi°+eet-txee ry --M��* � � *� _thy s �t,t �s�t •b arr�ec -an easement-granted-ter»the 'p©wffr-an i-s-e-ase,ment shoal&be-shown-orgy the-plat-plans CKa Reich ,&eys��ckle War en, ha co s th th orway aple as a street ee b ause � th�eirs"�al ° t� sterffs; c n rn e ock ei g pla xo d d' ea d at an and J anes arb rry d their i v ve re. 12. Site plan approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission is required on all lots prior to use or construction on the lot. 13. If this application is approved, the Planning Department requests the following modifications: 1. key map must reflect the accurate lot configurations 2. street tree easement is required - �'lq vt.e`k 64,1 yk. pl-G Mar 15 02 12: 17p 860-291 -8757 p. 2 DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers + planners + surveyors • gis •gps March 15, 2002 Marcia Banach, Planning Director Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Ave. South Windsor, CT 06074 RECUIVED RE: South Windsor Technologies Center MAR 1 5 HUH Patria Road South Windsor, Connecticut SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DEPT, Dear Marcia: As per your request of this morning, we hereby grant a 15-day extension of the time frame for action on the above-referenced PZC application, Thank you. DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. By: Peter R.DeMallie Principal cc: David Caron Tom Sheridan, Esq. Galen B. Semprebon, P.E. Richard Adams,Project Engineer 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860)291-8755 9 Fax: (860) 291-8757 DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers . planners . surveyors . gis . gps March 21, 2002 Marcia Banach, Planning Director Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Ave. South Windsor, CT 06074 RE: South Windsor Technologies Center LIAR 2 .2 2001 Patna Road SOUTH VVINDSOR PbliNNfN�, South Windsor, Connecticut Dear Marcia: As per your request of this morning, we hereby grant a second 15-day extension of the time frame for action on the above-referenced PZC application. Thank you. DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. By: > Peter . DeMallie Principal cc: David Caron Tom Sheridan, Esq. Galen B. Semprebon, P.E. Richard Adams, Project Engineer 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860)291-8755 .Fax: (860) 291-8757 DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers .planners • surveyors . gis .gps April 8, 2002 Marcia Banach, Director of Planning Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Ave. South Windsor, CT 06074 RE: South Windsor Technologies Center DPI Proj. No. 99-1253 Patric Road South Windsor, Connecticut Dear Marcia: On behalf of my client, South Windsor Technologies Center, LLC, I hereby withdraw the above-referenced subdivision application. My client previously withdrew his wetlands application, insofar as the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency was reluctant to combine or modify several lots of the forty proposed. I anticipate submitting new subdivision and wetlands applications in the near term in order to allow this application to proceed, i.e., South Windsor's first major industrial park in more than a decade. Thank you. Sincerely, DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. All- By: ,. r` Peter R. eMallie Principal cc: David Caron Thomas Sheridan, Esq. Barry Guliano, Esq. Marjorie Anthony, EDC Anne Flint, Chamber of Commerce RECEIVED Matthew Galligan APR 9 2002 South Windsor INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY CONSERVATION COMMISSION 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860) 291-8755 • Fax: (860) 291-8757 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NEW ENGLAND DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 696 VIRGINIA ROAD + CONCORD, MASSACHUSETTS 01742-2751 March 10, 2003 REPLY TO: ATTENTION OF: Regulatory Division P CENAE-R-200201884 �c�/V � MAR � 42003 South Windsor Technologies Center, LLC SOUTIyWINDSORp�NN�G Attn: David A. Caron OfpT 312 Deming Street P.O. Box 1149 South Windsor, CT 06074 Dear Mr. Caron: The Corps received notice from the Connecticut State Historic Preservation Office (copy attached) regarding the potential presence of historic or prehistoric archaeological resources on the proposed site. Activity on the site includes two access roads, one on the Patria Road cul-de-sac extension and the other on Schweir Road cul-de-sac extension, to allow for the development of the industrial park and subdivision. Of this 80 acres, 0.53 acre of wetland habitat, would be currently impacted. There is the possibility of a total of 8.3 acres wetland fill requiring a Corps permit. 33 CFR Part 325, App. C 2. A. states that " The district engineer will take into effect, if any, of proposed undertakings on historic properties both within and beyond the waters of the U.S." when the structures are considered to be within the permit area. In coordination with our staff archeologist we have decided that the permit area is all the developable land, to include, the mitigation area, the roads, and the detention basins as shown on your site plan and excluding the conservation easements in favor of Town of South Windsor, entitled "South Windsor Technologies Center, LLC, Sullivan Avenue" sheet number 1 of 1, dated "11/01". Before we can make a final decision on your application, we need the results of professional reconnaissance survey of the permit area. f If you have any questions please feel free to contact Zina Cassulo- Henderson at (978) 318-8382. Sincerely, Robert J. DeSista Chief Permits Sv Enforcement Branch Regulatory Division Attachment Copies furnished: Design Professionals Attn: Peter DeMallie 165 South Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers ♦ planners ♦ surveyors gis ♦ gps ♦ landscape architects April 4, 2003 � Marcia Banach, Director of Planning d Town of South Windsor RECEIVED 1540 Sullivan Ave. South Windsor, CT 06074 APR 0 2��3 RE: South Windsor Technologies Center SOUTH wINUKP,PANINbW Proj.No. 99-1253 Patria& Schweir Road South Windsor, Connecticut Dear Marcia: On behalf of my client, South Windsor Technologies Center, LLC, I hereby request conditional approval for the above-referenced 38-lot industrial subdivision. The original final approval of this application was granted by the PZC last year, and expires on Saturday,April 19, 2003. Subsequent to the Commission's approval,there was a lengthy approval process at the STC, which requires substantial improvements to Sullivan Avenue. This was followed by an even longer application review period with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which is now requiring a lengthy and expensive archaeological investigation of the entire site, and not just the areas in and around the two wetlands crossings. Your conditional approval process, which I have not previously utilized, gives an applicant up to three years to undertake the subdivision improvements prior to posting of the performance bond. It allows an applicant to record the approved subdivision mylar,but does not allow the sale of lots until the performance bond is posted and the PZC grants final subdivision approval. Essentially,the subdivision approval process becomes two-step,rather than the normal one step. Under separate cover,we have submitted a bond estimate If everything comes together prior to Friday,April 18, including securing a full performance bond,my client may choose to record the previously approved final mylars,however, that is unlikely at this juncture and thus necessitates this request for conditional approval. Thank you. Sincerely, DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. By: y Peter R. eMallie Principal cc: David Caron Tom Sheridan Galen B. Semprebon,P.E. 165 South Satellite Road,South Windsor,Connecticut 06074 Tel:(860)291-8755•Fax:(860)291-8757 Email:dpicivil@aol.com PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN-HOUSE REFERRAL FORM TO: Matt Galligan,Fred Shaw,Michael Gantick, Thomas Field,Bill Lanning,Kris Lindstrom, Ray Favreau,Karl Reichle, Mel Stead,John Collins,Bob Deptula,Jeff Doolittle FROM: Marcia A. Banach, AICP,Director of Planning The Planning&Engineering Departments have receive&plans for the following project: Location: 0 Site Plan 0 Subdivision No. Acres Zone 0 Industrial Commercial 0 Residential No. Lots/Units Water: 4-Public 0 Private Well Sewerage: 2Public 0 Septic system(s) Project Description: &44.ky, IAJ-6491�14-- Future Town-owned property involved? 0 Yes WNO O new street(s) O new detention area 0 new open space/recreation area 0 active O passive Planning Department notes: Please comment by y(3� io I and return to the Planning Department. 6-0 ^ �'�'�e^rd�` /hr��� mess ! Acr�st �rt,,. � i 6� icy, , RECEIVE® APR % 3 200Z SOUTH WINDSOR ENGINEERING DEPT, OWN Sf4 co . x Town O-PsotdA ?dt o m � w� 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074 SOR-CO TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511 June 24, 2004 Mr. David Caron South Windsor Technologies Center, LLC 312 Deming Street P.O. Box 1149 South Windsor, CT 06074 Re:Preconstruction Meeting—Appl 02-18P, South Windsor Technologies Center Dear Mr. Caron: IN ATTENDANCE Jeff Doolittle TOSW 1540 Sullivan Avenue 860 644-2511 x245 Bernie Drabek TOSW 1540 Sullivan Avenue 860 644-2511 x241 Jeff Folger TOSW 1540 Sullivan Avenue 860 644-2511 x229 Michele Lipe TOSW 1540 Sullivan Avenue 860 644-2511 x252 Christopher Dougan TOSW 1540 Sullivan Avenue 860 644-2511 x232 Mel Stead TOSW 157 Burgess Road 860 648-6366 Galen Semprebon DPI 165 South Satellite Road 860 291-8755 Peter DeMallie DPI 165 South Satellite Road 860 291-8755 David Caron Caron Const. P. O. Box 1149 860 573-1406 The following is a brief summary of points discussed during the meeting: Erosion and Sedimentation Control 1. All erosion and sedimentation control measures are to be in place prior to earth moving operations in each area and maintained/cleaned out during construction. Call Jeffrey Folger, Zoning/Wetlands Enforcement Officer for inspection when measures are in place, prior to commencement of site work or if any problems/concerns arise during construction. 2. All topsoil stockpile areas to be protected (ringed with haybales or equal). 3. During construction of the road/driveway a crushed stone tracking pad is to be installed and maintained to minimize tracking of dirt/gravel on to Schweir & Patria Roads. Calcium chloride or water is to be used for dust control as required. 12. All pipe and structures to be backfilled with free draining material, compacted in maximum one foot lifts with approved compaction equipment or approved equal if deep trench is encountered. Any pipe or structure work requires inspection prior to backfilling. 13. Any problems and/or questions regarding construction of this project will be directed to Dave Caron in the field at cell phone number 573-1406. 14. All filling to be done in accordance with Department of Transportation specifications. To be compacted in maximum lifts and tested as necessary. 15. Job meetings will be held as needed, and can be called by the developer or Town. 16. Seventy-two (72)hours' notice needed for certificate of occupancy inspection. 17. Any proposed changes are to be presented to the Engineering or Planning Department prior to implementation on change order form in quadruplicate with 4 copies of the drawing. Town will attempt to turn around within 24 hours. 18. Normal hours of operation 7:00 a.m.—5:00 p.m., no work on Sunday. 19. DOT permit needed for all work within state road. Copy must be given to the Engineering Department. 20. No paving after October 15 or before April 15 without written approval from Director of Public Works. 21. Maintain flow through existing tile drains where possible. 22. A street cut permit is required for the extension of both Schweir and Patria Roads. 23. A drain layers permit must be taken out by a licensed drain layer for the construction of the sanitary sewers. 24. Town requirements for testing of road construction and sewer construction must be followed. 25. Extra care must be taken when compacting around structures such as catch basins and manholes. These spots often become problem areas in the future due to settling,therefore, the town staff/inspectors will be requesting additional compaction tests in these areas. 26. Inspection of gravel access roads required prior to placement of topsoil. 27. Sanitary lateral locations should be tied down to existing structures and shown on the progress as-builts. Barns, garages, and outbuildings, which are located on the same premises as a numbered structure, are excluded. 3. Erect temporary sign on the site during construction identifying the project. 4. If an alarm is to be installed contact Police Services. Building Department 1. Plan review with Building Official/Fire Marshal required prior to application for building permit. Coordinate with Chief Building Official. Sincerely, Michele R. Lipe, AICP Assistant Director of Planning MRL/kak cc: Jeff Doolittle, Town Engineer Karl Reichle, Public Works Mel Stead, Public Works Christopher Dougan, Chief Building Official Fred Shaw, Superintendent of Pollution Control CL&P SNET DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY NEW ENGLAND DISTRICT,CORPS OF ENGINEERS 696 VIRGINIA ROAD CONCORD,MASSACHUSETTS 01742-2751 REPLY TO • ATTENTION OF December 9,2003 Regulatory Division CENAE-R Permit Number: 200201884 South Windsor Technologies Center,LLC Attn: Peter R. De Mallie 312 Deming Street, P.O. Box 1149 South Windsor, CT 06074 Dear Mr. De Mallie: This is to inform you that we have reviewed your application to place fill in approximately .54 acres of wetland in conjunction with construction of the South Windsor Technologies Center. Work will include two wetland crossings in the vicinity of the ends of Patria Road and Schweir Road, installation of storm sewers, vegetated drainage swales, a piped storm drainage system, and detention basins off Route 194 in South Windsor, CT. Based on our review of the information provided to us as shown on the plans, entitled, " SOUTH WINDSOR TECHNOLOGIES CENTER, SITE PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT, PATRIA ROAD, SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT", we have determined that your project will have minor individual or cumulative impacts on waters and/or wetlands. Therefore, this work is authorized under the attached Federal permit, Connecticut Programmatic General Permit(CT PGP, Permit No. 41)when performed in compliance with all the terms and conditions of the attached CT PGP and the conditions contained in the attached November 25th letter from the CT DER Please review these documents carefully to thoroughly familiarize yourself with their contents. You may wish to discuss the attached conditions with your contractor to ensure that the work can be accomplished in a manner that conforms to all requirements. The time limit for completion of this work is five years from the date of this letter. The CTDEP has issued a Water Quality Certification(WQC) for this project based on their review at our Federal/State Screening Meeting. Therefore, a separate application to the CTDEP for WQC is not required. If you change the plans or construction methods for work within our jurisdiction, please contact us immediately to discuss modification of this authorization. This office must approve any changes before you undertake them. Also,this permit requires you to notify us before beginning work and allow us to inspect the project. Hence, you must complete and return the attached Work Start Notification Form to this office no later than two weeks before the anticipated starting date -2- r Also note that this determination does not constitute an authorization to proceed until all other applicable federal, state and local permits are obtained. Performing work not specifically authorized by this permit, starting work without obtaining other required approvals, or failing to comply with the permit conditions may subject you to the enforcement provisions of our regulations. If you have any questions,please contact Zina Cassulo-Henderson, of my staff at (978� 318-8382. Sincerely, r�J - mas L. omng Colonel, Corps of Engineers Enclosures District Engineer Copies furnished: Bob Gilmore State of Connecticut DEP-IWRD Bureau of Water Management 79 Elm Street Hartford, CT 06106-5127 Design Professionals, Inc. 165 south Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 04 ember'-,2003 ropert DeSista,Chief I:ebnllatory and Enforcement Branch U.S. Army Corps of Engineers New England District 696 Virginia Road Concord,MA 01742-2751 Re-- Programmatic General Permit(PGP)Screening Section 401 Water Quality Certification ACOE-200201884—South Windsor Technologies Center LLC South Windsor Dear Mr.DeSista: The above referenced application for coverage under Category 11 of the Connecticut Programmatic General Permit(GP-41)has been reviewed by staff of the DEP Inland Water Resources Division(the"Division 7. The construction of the roadways and the subsequent development of the individual numbered lots within the bounds of the South Windsor Technology Center are inextricably linked and are therefore considered by the Connecticut DEP to constitute a sulgle and complete project_ The Division has determined that the construction of the roadway,detention basin#1 and detention basin#2 are eligible for section 401 water quality certification under Category H of the PGP subject to the following conditions: L The roadway portion of the project is constructed as shown on plans filed under the cover sheet entitled_ "South Windsor Technologies Center,Site Plan of / Development,Patria Road,South Windsor,Connecticut",dated November 2001, rev.through September 24,2003,including plan sheets no_ 2/41 through 6/41 rev_ through 9/24/03,-8/41 through 17/41 rev. through 9/23/03,18/41 through 2/41 rev. through 11/11/03, 23/41 rev_through 8/4/03,24/41 through 29/41 rev. through 11/12/03,30/41 rev_ through 11/11/03,31/41 rev._through 11/12/03, 32/41 rev. through 11/11/03,33/41 through 34/41 rev. through 10/9/03,35/41 rev_ through 11/11/03,36/41 through37/41 rev. through 10/9/03,38/41 rev. 11/11/03, 39/41 through 40/41 rev. through 9/24/03,41/41 rev. through 9/23/03 prepared by (Printed on Rccycicd Paper) 79 Elm Street • Hartford, CT 06106-5127 http_//dep_state,ct-us An Equal Opporru,.ir_v Employer • Pro,,zammatic General Permit Screening South Windsor Technologies Center,LLC Page 2 of 3 Design Professionals,Inc.;and LI/L6 through L6/L6_dated November 2001,rev. through fanuary 28,2002,prepared by Robert C_Schechinger,fr.ASLA. 2_ Any additional or future construction including any excavation,grading,placement of fill,construction of impervious surfaces or structures proposed within the 80' wetland buffer shown on the above cited plan sheets shall be subject to section 401 water quality certification screening by the Connecticut DEP as a part of the single and complete project under the provisions of Condition 5 of the PGP and under the conditional certification of PGP Category II activities previously issued on May 21, 2003_ Plans for such proposed constructions activities shall be submitted to the Connecticut DEP for screening and approval prior to initiating any construction activities on,any portion of any individual numbered lot or combination of numbered lots shown on the above cited project plans_ The approval of water quality certification for the roadway portion of the South Windsor Technology Center development project does not assure waterquality certification under Category II of the PGP for additional or future construction or development activities on any individual numbered lot or combination of numbered lots within the boundaries of the South Windsor Technology Center_ If you have any questions or need additional information,please call Bob Gilmore at the Inland Water Resources Division at(860)424-3866- R � Acting Director,Inland Water Resources Division Bureau of Water Management DRBMG CC_ Greg Manesto,US Fish and Wildlife Service Michael Marsh,US Environmental Protection Agency Peter R DeiMallie,Design Professionals,Inc. South Windsor Technologies Center,LLC ' nn _ 270 Amity Road v Q \ F PLANNING Woodbridge,Connecticut 06525 IF ENGINEERING Q O Q \_I A N D DESIGN Telecop er: (203)397-3642 ' RECEIVED December 6, 2001 Ms. Marcia Banach JAIV 2 9 ZOOZ Director of Planning SOUTH WINDSOR PLAWNG DEPT, Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue ' South Windsor, CT 06040 RE: SITE TRAFFIC EVALUATION STUDY SOUTH WINDSOR TECHNOLOGIES CENTER SULLIVAN AVENUE (ROUTE 194)AT PATRIA ROAD AND SCHWEIR ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT Dear Ms. Banach: ' Reference is made to the proposal to develop an industrial park on the 80-acre parcel of land located on the south side of Sullivan Avenue, south of the ' southern termini of Patria Road to the west and Schweir Road to the east, in the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut. ' Introduction The parcel of land located to the south of the existing termini of Patria Road and ' Schweir Road will be subdivided to allow the development of a series of office, warehousing, and light-industrial buildings within an industrial park setting. It is estimated that the entire development will be phased over a 5-year period, and ' that groups of lots will be combined to develop a number of buildings and parking areas. In total, it is estimated that the total development will consist of 200,000 square feet of building area and 305 parking spaces. ' Access and egress for this development will be provided via the extension southerly of two existing roads now ending in cul-de-sacs and serving light- industrial facilities. The west road, known as Patria Road, will be extended southerly down the center of the parcel, ending in a new cul-de-sac near the southwestern corner of the parcel. The east road, known as Schweir Road, will ' be extended southerly to intersect the extended Patria Road at about the middle of the parcel at a new T-intersection. Section 13-311 of the Connecticut General Statutes stipulates that all developments that either abut or materially impact a State highway, and that have development parameters that either exceed 100,000 square feet of building area or 200 parking spaces, require the issuance of a Certificate of Operations from the State Traffic Commission (STC). ' 2 ' Although the subject development does not directly abut a State highway, its site-generated traffic will directly impact Sullivan Avenue, which is Connecticut Route 194, and its development parameters of 200,000 SF of building area and ' 305 parking spaces exceed the STC thresholds, a Certificate Application, with the required supporting data, will be submitted to the State Traffic Commission for its review and approval ' Plans are to begin construction of this development in 2002 and to have it fully developed and occupied by 2007, or 5 years hence. ' Please refer to Exhibit 1 of the Appendix that locates this site with respect to the surrounding roadway network. Background Conditions � ' Given the nature of this development and the manner in which it will interface with the surrounding roadway network, the selected study area for the proposed ' development consists of the following intersections in the location map shown as Exhibit 1 of the Appendix: ' • U.S. Route 5 (John Fitch Boulevard) at Route 194 (Sullivan Avenue): This is a 4-way, signalized intersection with Route 5 running north-south, Sullivan Avenue as the west leg, and Route 194 (Sullivan Avenue) as the east leg. ' The Route 5 northbound approach is four lanes wide, with one left turn lane, two through lanes, and a right turn lane. The Route 5 southbound approach is four lanes wide, with two left turn lanes, a through lane, and a combination through and right turn lane. The Sullivan Avenue eastbound approach is one ' lane wide. The Route 194 (Sullivan Avenue) westbound approach is three lanes wide, with one left turn lane, one combination left turn and through ' lane, and one right turn lane. The traffic signal is part of an interconnected signal system operating along U.S. Route 5 to provide synchronized signal operation along the corridor. The traffic signal at this intersection provides four vehicular phases. The first phase is a northbound/southbound phase on Route 5 to move the left turns onto both legs of Sullivan Avenue. The second phase moves all the through and right turn movements from the northbound ' and southbound approaches of Route 5. The third phase moves the Route 194 (Sullivan Avenue) westbound approach which has a double left turn movement onto Route 5. The fourth phase moves the Sullivan Avenue ' eastbound approach. All approaches are vehicular-actuated. 3 ' • Route 194 (Sullivan Avenue) at Commerce Way: This is a 3-way, unsignalized intersection with Sullivan Avenue running east-west and ' Commerce Way as the north leg. The Sullivan Avenue eastbound approach is two lanes wide, with one lane for left turns, and the other lane for through movements. The Sullivan Avenue westbound approach is two lanes wide, with one lane for through movements, and the other lane for right turns. The Commerce Way southbound approach is one lane wide and is controlled by a ' Stop sign. • Route 194 (Sullivan Avenue) at Rye Street: This is a 3-way, unsignalized ' intersection with Sullivan Avenue running east-west and Rye Street intersecting at a skew as the north leg. Both the Sullivan Avenue eastbound and westbound approaches are one lane wide, as is the Rye Street ' southbound approach to the intersection. The Rye Street approach is controlled by a Stop sign. ' • Route 194 (Sullivan Avenue) at Patria Road: This is a 3-way, unsignalized intersection with Sullivan Avenue running east-west and Patria Road as the south leg. Both the Sullivan Avenue eastbound and westbound approaches ' are one lane wide, as is the Patria Road northbound approach to the intersection. The Patria Road approach is controlled by a Stop sign. • Route 194 (Sullivan Avenue) at Schweir Road: This is a 3-way, unsignalized intersection with Sullivan Avenue running east-west and Schweir Road as the south leg. Both the Sullivan Avenue eastbound and westbound approaches ' are one lane wide, as is the Schweir Road northbound approach to the intersection. The Schweir Road approach is controlled by a Stop sign. • Route 194 (Sullivan Avenue) at West Road: This is a 3-way, unsignalized intersection with Sullivan Avenue running east-west and West Road as the south leg. Both the Sullivan Avenue eastbound and westbound approaches ' are one lane wide, as is the West Road northbound approach to the intersection. The West Road approach is controlled by a Stop sign. ' • Route 194 (Sullivan Avenue) at Troy Road: This is a 3-way, signalized intersection with Sullivan Avenue running east-west and Troy Road as the north leg. The Sullivan Avenue eastbound approach is two lanes wide, with one left turn lane and one through lane. The Sullivan Avenue westbound approach is one lane wide and serves as a combination through and right turn lane. The Troy Road southbound approach is one lane wide for both left ' turns and right turns. The traffic signal provides three vehicular phases. The first phase is an eastbound advance to allow Sullivan Avenue left-turning ' 4 ' traffic an opportunity to turn onto Troy Road. The second phase moves all movements eastbound and westbound on Sullivan Avenue. The third phase moves Troy Road southbound approach traffic onto Sullivan Avenue. All approaches are vehicular-actuated. Background Traffic Volumes ' A review was made of information provided by the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) to determine the latest recorded traffic volumes on ' roadways within the defined study area as shown below in Table 1 for 2001. Table 1 ' Summary of Traffic Volumes ConnDOT, 2001 Roadway AM Peak PM Peak Average ' Segment Hour Hour Daily Sullivan Avenue east of Troy Road: 962 1,244 14,000 Sullivan Avenue west of Troy Road: 900 1,124 12,300 ' Sullivan Avenue east of Rye Street: 795 990 11,100 Sullivan Avenue east of U.S. Route 5: 1,059 1,236 13,800 Sullivan Avenue west of U.S. Route 5: 102 183 1,700 U.S. Route 5 north of Sullivan Avenue: 1,783 1,618 17,100 U.S. Route 5 south of Sullivan Avenue: 1,739 1,558 16,100 Manual turning movement counts were recently taken at all of the study intersections in late-August/early-September 2001 for the purpose of developing background traffic volume and traffic distribution estimates. The weekday commuter am peak counts were conducted from 7:00 am to 9:00 ' am, and the weekday pm peak counts were conducted from 4:00 to 6:00 pm, at each location. ' These counts were then balanced to represent the study area taken as a whole, and were then projected to full-build year 2007 for the subject development. A review was made of traffic count data for the defined study area as provided by ' ConnDOT and summarized in Table 2 on the next page to determine appropriate growth factors for expanding existing traffic volumes to the full-build year. Although there was actually no growth in recent years on Sullivan Avenue ' between Rye Street and Troy Road in the vicinity of the subject development, a growth factor of 1.25 percent per year for each of 5 years, or a total of 7.5 percent, was utilized based on a review of the entire study area. TABLE 2 SUMMARY OF VEHICULAR GROWTH U.S. ROUTE 5 AND ROUTE 194 SOUTH WINDSOR TECHNOLOGIES CENTER SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT ROUTE 194 CUM CUM 1995 1996 1998 2001 PERCENT FROM MILES TO MILES ADT ADT ADT ADT CHANGE U.S. ROUTE 5 0 RYE STREET 0.28 11,600 --- 12,600 13,800 2% RYE STREET 0.28 TROY ROAD 1.68 13,800 11,500 11,700 12,300 0% U.S. ROUTE 5 CUM CUM 1995 1996 1998 2001 PERCENT FROM MILES TO MILES ADT ADT ADT ADT CHANGE PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD 39.75 ROUTE 194 42.49 15,300 15,200 15,800 16,100 1% ROUTE 194 42.49 S.WINDSOR/E.WINDSOR TOWN LINE 43.22 16,100 16,000 16,300 17100 1% ***GROWTH FACTOR USED: 1.25% PER YEAR*** Bubaris Traffic Associates December 2001 ' 5 ' Reference is made to Exhibits 2 and 3 of the Appendix which graphically depict the 2001 Existing AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes for the subject study ' area. Reference is also made to Exhibits 4 and 5 of the Appendix which graphically depict the 2007 Background (i.e., no-build) AM and PM Peak Hour Traffic ' Volumes for the subject study area in the year when full development is expected, but without site-generated traffic associated with the subject development. Exhibits 4 and 5 showing 2007 peak traffic volumes were derived ' by expanding Exhibits 2 and 3 showing 2001 peak traffic volumes by a factor of 1.075, or an increase of 7.5 percent. Site-Generated Traffic It is estimated that the subject development will consist of about 200,000 square feet of building area in an industrial park setting consisting of a combination of office, warehousing, and light-industrial activities. For the purpose of estimating the trip generation potential of the proposed development, we utilized the data made available for this purpose in the latest edition of Trip Generation Report, 1997, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), sixth edition. This data source provides trip generation data for many land uses, including that for industrial parks similar to the proposed development. ITE Land Use Code #130 defines industrial parks as "areas containing a number of industrial or related facilities. They are characterized by a mix of manufacturing, service, and warehouse facilities with a wide variation in ' the proportion of each type of use from one location to another. Many industrial parks contain highly diversified facilities...some with a large number of small businesses and others with one or two dominant industries." Reference is made to Table 3 below that summarizes the trip generation estimates for the subject industrial park development. A trip is defined as a one- way vehicular movement traveling either to or from the site. The actual trip generation calculations based on ITE data are contained in Exhibit 6 of the Appendix. ' Table 3 Summary of Trip Generation Estimates South Windsor Technologies Center ' Average Weekday AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Inbound: 870 158 39 Outbound: 870 34 149 Total: 1,740 192 188 6 A review of Table 3 indicates that the proposed industrial park will generate from 188 to 192 trips per hour during the weekday commuter am and pm peaks. For the purpose of estimating the likely distribution of site-generated traffic for ' the subject industrial park, it has been assumed that employees working in the subject development will follow the same distribution patterns as existing employees working in other South Windsor developments. Information made ' available in Connecticut Town Profiles, by the State of Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development (ConnDECD), 1998-99, was utilized to estimate the journey-to-work patterns for South Windsor employees. ' Reference is made to Table 4 on the following page of this study that summarizes the ConnDECD employment data for the town of South Windsor. ' A review of Table 4 indicates that if the journey-to-work patterns for employees working in South Windsor as a whole are applied to the subject industrial park development, then site-generated trips would be distributed on the surrounding roadway network as follows: • To and from the east of the site via Sullivan Avenue: 56% • To and from the south of the site via U.S. Route 5: 38% • To and from the north of the site via U.S. Route 5: 6% Reference is made to Exhibit 7 of the Appendix that graphically depicts the site- generated traffic distributions associated with the subject industrial park development based on Table 4. Reference is made to Exhibits 8 and 9 of the Appendix that graphically summarize the estimated site-generated weekday AM and PM peak site- generated traffic volumes for the subject industrial park development. These were developed by multiplying the site-generated peak hour traffic volumes summarized in Table 3 by the site-generated traffic distributions shown in Exhibit 7. 1 Operations Analysis 2001 Existing AM and PM Peak Hour analyses, representing existing conditions, are based on the peak hour traffic volumes shown as Exhibits 2 and 3 of the Appendix. 2007 Background AM and PM Peak Hour analyses, representing the no-build condition in the year when full development is expected to be completed, are based on the peak hour traffic volumes shown as Exhibits 4 and 5 of the Appendix. TABLE 4 JOURNEY TO WORK DATA FROM 1990 CENSUS SOUTH WINDSOR TECHNOLOGIES CENTER SULIVAN AVENUE SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT TO/FROM TO/PROM TO/FROM PERCENT EAST SOUTH NORTH NUMBER OF OF VIA VIA VIA FROM DESTINATION VEHICLES TOTAL ROUTE 194 ROUTE 5 ROUTE 5 SOUTH WINDSOR SOUTH WINDSOR 2281 28.9% 21.9% 7.0% VERNON SOUTH WINDSOR 972 12.3% 12.3% EAST HARTFORD SOUTH WINDSOR 966 12.2% 12.2% MANCHESTER SOUTH WINDSOR 871 11.0% 11.0% HARTFORD SOUTH WINDSOR 639 8.1% 4.1% 4.1% ENFIELD SOUTH WINDSOR 633 8.0% 8.0% MASSACHUSETTS SOUTH WINDSOR 546 6.9% 6.9% EAST WINDSOR SOUTH WINDSOR 334 4.2% 4.2% ELLINGTON SOUTH WINDSOR 327 4.1% 2.1% 2.1% TOLLAND SOUTH WINDSOR 320 4.1% 4.1% TOTAL 7889 100.0% 55.5% 38.2% 6.3% CALL: 56.0% 38.0% 6.0% SOURCE: "CONNECTICUT TOWN PROFILES" BY STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, 1998-1999 Bubaris Traffic Associates December 2001 7 2007 Combined AM and PM Peak Hour analyses, representing the build condition with the full development in place, are based on the peak hour traffic volumes shown as Exhibits 10 and 11 of the Appendix. Exhibits 10 and 11 were developed by combining the Background Traffic Volumes from Exhibits 4 and 5 with the Site-Generated Traffic Volumes from Exhibits 8 and 9. Intersection capacity analyses were performed for the study intersections utilizing the methodology described in the latest edition of Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, 1985, updated to 2000. Application of this methodology was facilitated by use of Highway Capacity Software, developed by the Federal Highway Administration, 1988, updated to 2000. Capacity analyses are utilized to determine a Level of Service (LOS) for a ' given intersection operating under either signalized or unsignalized control. In the case of unsignalized intersections, Level of Service (LOS) is defined in terms of the average control delay for the approach or movement evaluated. Control delay involves movements at slower speeds and stops on intersection approaches as vehicles move up in the queue or slow down upstream of an intersection. The delay experienced by a motorist is comprised of factors that relate to control, geometrics, traffic, and incidents. Total delay is the difference between the travel time actually experienced and the reference time that would result during base conditions in the absence of incident, control, traffic, or geometric delay. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move- up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. At two-way stop-controlled and all-way stop-controlled intersections, control delay is the total elapsed time from a vehicle joining the queue until its departure from the stopped position at the head of the queue. The control delay also includes the time required to decelerate to a stop and to accelerate to the free-flow speed. Level of Service for a two-way stop-controlled intersection is determined by the computed or I measured control delay and is defined for each minor movement. LOS for a two- way stop-controlled intersection is not defined for the intersection as a whole. 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. Please refer to Exhibit 12 in the Appendix, which provides details on the definitions of Levels of Service for unsignalized intersections. In the case of signalized intersections, Level of Service (LOS) is defined in terms of control delay, which is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, increased fuel consumption, and lost of travel time. The delay experienced by a motorist is comprised of a number of factors that relate to control, geometric, traffic, and incidents. Total delay is the difference between the travel time actually experienced and the reference travel time that would result during base conditions in the absence of traffic control, geometric delay, any incidents, and any other vehicles. Specifically, LOS criteria for traffic signals are stated in terms ' 8 ' of the average control delay per vehicle, typically for a 15-minute analysis period. Delay is a complex measure and depends on a number of variables, including the quality of progression, the cycle length, the green ratio, and the volume-to- capacity (v/c) ratio for the lane group. In the case of signalized intersections, the Level of Service for each approach is computed, and an overall Level of Service for the entire intersection is determined. In today's environment, Levels of ' Service C to D are considered acceptable, and Levels of Service A to B are seldomly achieved at signalized intersections. Please refer to Exhibit 13 in the Appendix, which provides details on the definitions of Levels of Service for unsignalized intersections. The results of the capacity analyses, which compare 2001 existing, 2007 background (no-build), and 2007 combined (build) conditions, are summarized in Table 5 on the next page of this study. The computer-generated worksheets for these capacity analyses are included as Exhibits 14 through 20 of the Appendix as follows: • Exhibit 14—Sullivan Avenue at Troy Road • Exhibit 15—Sullivan Avenue at West Road • Exhibit 16— Sullivan Avenue at Schweir Road • Exhibit 17 —Sullivan Avenue at Patria Road • Exhibit 18—Sullivan Avenue at Rye Street • Exhibit 19 —Sullivan Avenue at Commerce Way • Exhibit 20 — U.S. Route 5 at Sullivan Avenue/Route 194 A review of Table 5 shows that levels of service in the year 2007 when full development is expected to be completed will remain at the same levels as would otherwise exist without this development. The signalized intersection of Route 5 at Sullivan Avenue/Route 194 will remain at overall levels of service C to D, which are average to fair levels of service, but ' satisfactory given the magnitude of traffic processed by this intersection. The signalized intersection of Sullivan Avenue at Troy Road will remain at overall levels of service B, which are very good levels of service. All but one of the unsignalized intersections within the defined study area, including the two which will provide direct access/egress to the surrounding roadway network (i.e., Sullivan Avenue at Patria Road and Sullivan Avenue at Schweir Road), will remain at levels of service ranging from LOS A (considered very good) to LOS C (considered average) for the critical movements associated with unsignalized traffic control. The unsignalized intersection of Sullivan Avenue at Rye Street will iexperience critical movement levels of service ranging from LOS A (considered very good) to LOS D (considered fair). ' TABLE 5 SUMMARY OF CAPACITY ANALYSES SOUTH WINDSOR TECHNOLOGIES CENTER SOUTH WINDSOR,CONNECTICUT ROUTE 5 AT SULLIVAN AVENUE AND ROUTE 194 2001 2007 2007 EXISTING BACKGROUND COMBINED AM PM AM PM AM PM EASTBOUND D D D D D D WESTBOUND C C D C D C ' NORTHBOUND C D C D C D SOUTHBOUND C C C C C C OVERALL C C C D C D DELAY 30.2 31.7 31.7 35.1 32 35.1 PC FILE 1641 1642 1643 1644 1645 1646 SULLIVAN AVENUE AT COMMERCE WAY 2001 2002 2002 EXISTING BACKGROUND COMBINED AM PM AM PM AM PM SOUTHBOUND C B C B C B EASTBOUND A A A A A A DELAY 17.3 11.7 17.7 12.2 18.7 12.9 ' PC FILE 1647 1648 1649 1650 1651 1652 SULLIVAN AVENUE AT RYE STREET 2001 2002 2002 ' EXISTING BACKGROUND COMBINED AM PM AM PM AM PM SOUTHBOUND C A D C D C EASTBOUND A C A A A A DELAY 22.3 16.9 28.3 19.2 31.7 22 PC FILE 1653 1654 1655 1656 1657 1658 SULLIVAN AVENUE AT PATRIA ROAD 2001 2007 2007 ' EXISTING BACKGROUND COMBINED AM PM AM PM AM PM NORTHBOUND B B B C C C WESTBOUND A A A A A A DELAY 12.6 14.6 13.1 15.5 18.6 23.9 PC FILE 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 SULLIVAN AVENUE AT SCHWEIR ROAD 2001 2007 2007 ' EXISTING BACKGROUND COMBINED AM PM AM PM AM PM NORTHBOUND B C B C B C WESTBOUND A A A A A A ' DELAY 13 15.9 13.2 17.1 14.3 18.9 PC FILE 1665 1666 1667 1668 1669 1670 SULLIVAN AVENUE AT WEST ROAD 2001 2007 2007 EXISTING BACKGROUND COMBINED AM PM AM PM AM PP NORTHBOUND B C C C C C ' WESTBOUND A A A A A A DELAY 14.5 17.9 15.4 20 17 23.2 PC FILE 1671 1672 1673 1674 1675 1676 SULLIVAN AVENUE AT TROY ROAD ' 2001 2007 2007 EXISTING BACKGROUND COMBINED AM PM AM PM AM PM SOUTHBOUND C C D C D C WESTBOUND B B B B B B EASTBOUND A A A A A A OVERALL B B B B B B DELAY 13.9 12.4 14.6 13.2 16 13.8 ' PC FILE 1677 1678 1679 1680 1681 1682 Bubaris Traffic Associates December 2001 9 Queuing Analysis Analyses were also conducted to evaluate the queuing characteristics of the two ' (2) signalized study intersections to determine the storage capacities of individual turning lanes in 2007 with the proposed industrial park development in place. The methodology employed was the "Ausi-Q" method sanctioned by the ' Connecticut Department of Transportation Traffic Engineering Division. This methodology computes several queuing parameters including: (1) the back of queue, (2) the maximum back of queue, and (3) the critical queue. ' The results of the queuing analyses are summarized in Table 6 on the next page q 9 ' of this study. The computer-generated queuing analyses are included as Exhibits 21 and 22 of the Appendix as follows: • Exhibit 21 —Sullivan Avenue at Troy Road ' • Exhibit 22 — U.S. Route 5 at Sullivan Avenue and Route 194 A review of Table 6 indicates that the available storage capacities of the various ' turn lanes are adequate to accommodate the maximum computed queue and the theoretical critical queue that will result with the proposed industrial park development. Accident Evaluation A review was made of the most recent three-year accident experience summary for the subject study area as compiled by the Connecticut Department of Transportation from January 1998 through December 2000 as summarized in Exhibit 23 of the Appendix. A review of Exhibit 23 shows that all locations within the defined study area, with ' the possible exception of Route 5 at Route 194, have experienced favorable accident experiences, with no recurring problems requiring correction, or that may be exacerbated by the proposed development. There have been no reported accidents on either Patria Road or Schweir Road, and only one accident on the section of Sullivan Avenue between these two ' roads other than one accident at the intersection of Sullivan Avenue at Patria Road. iTABLE 6 SUMMARY OF QUEUING ANALYSES SOUTH WINDSOR TECHNOLOGIES CENTER ' SOUTH WINDSOR,CONNECTICUT TIME PC DESIGN MAXIMUM CRITICAL INTERSECTION MOVEMENT PERIOD FILE CAPACITY VOLUME LANES GREEN CYCLE QUEUE QUEUE ' SULLIVAN AVENUE AT SB LT/RT AM Q-SWTC1 328 152 1 15 80 75 160 TROY ROAD PM Q-SWTC2 332 151 1 15 80 75 150 ' WB TH/RT AM Q-SWTC1 774 696 1 45 80 426 526 PM Q-SWTC2 1037 599 1 45 80 225 325 EB LEFT AM Q-SWTC1 30 27 1 37 80 50 100 ' PM Q-SWTC2 520 77 1 37 80 25 50 EB THRU AM Q-SWTC1 372 335 1 45 80 175 300 PM Q-SWTC2 1330 808 1 45 80 400 450 ' SULLIVAN AVENUE AT EB L/T/R AM Q-SWTC3a 223 59 1 11 80 25 50 ROUTE 5 PM Q-SWTC4a 187 67 1 10 80 25 75 WB LEFT AM Q-SWTC3a 542 219 1 27 80 100 176 PM Q-SWTC4a 501 129 1 25 80 50 100 WB LT/TH AM Q-SWTC3a 570 219 1 27 80 100 175 PM Q-SWTC4a 528 129 1 25 80 50 100 ' WB RIGHT AM Q-SWTC3a 574 266 1 27 80 125 200 PM Q-SWTC4a 538 224 1 25 80 100 175 NB LEFT AM Q-SWTC3b 100 10 1 5 80 0 0 PM Q-SWTC4b 100 10 1 5 80 0 0 NB THRU AM Q-SWTC3b 682 299 2 17 80 75 125 ' PM Q-SWTC4b 802 662 2 20 80 200 325 NB RIGHT AM Q-SWTC3b 861 164 1 17 80 75 150 PM Q-SWTC4b 874 262 1 20 80 125 225 ' SB LEFT AM Q-SWTCW 739 258 2 5 80 75 125 PM Q-SWTC4b 739 416 2 5 80 125 225 SB THRU AM Q-SWTC3c 1243 777 2 31 80 175 275 ' PM Q-SWTC4c 1364 360 2 34 80 75 125 SB RIGHT AM Q-SWTC3c 556 18 1 31 80 0 0 PM Q-SWTC4c 610 12 1 34 80 0 0 Bubaris Traffic Associates December 2001 ' 10 ' Sight Line Evaluation From information obtained from the Connecticut Department of Transportation ' (ConnDOT), the following traffic speed data have been compiled from radar studies along Sullivan Avenue: ' Sullivan Avenue, Sullivan Avenue, Speed Parameter at Rye Street at West Street Average Speed: 45 mph 42 mph ' 85th Percentile Speed: 50 mph 46 mph Posted Speed: 40 mph 40 mph ' From the foregoing, it is estimated that 85th percentile speeds are within the range of 45 to 50 miles per hour on Sullivan Avenue in the vicinity of Patria Road and Schweir Road. Utilizing the guidelines set forth by the Connecticut Department of Transportation for evaluating available sight line distances from side streets or site drives, ' observations were made from both the Patria Road and Schweir Road approaches to Sullivan Avenue. In each case, available sight lines extend to the ' west as far as U.S. Route 5, a distance over 2,000 feet from Patria Road, and as far east as Troy Road, a distance close to 4,000 feet from Schweir Road. Therefore, available sight lines are excellent and well beyond the minimum recommended for approach speeds over 60 miles per hour (i.e., 835 feet), whereas 85th percentile speeds, from above, are estimated between 45 and 50 miles per hour. Review of Need for By-Pass Area An evaluation was made to determine whether a by-pass area will be required on Sullivan Avenue at either the Patria Road or Schweir Road intersections to enable westbound through traffic to travel around vehicles that are either ' stopped or slowing down to make a left-turn into these streets and/or the proposed development. ' A review of Exhibits 10 and 11 of the Appendix show that the entering left-turn movements into these two streets will range from 34 to 97 vehicles per hour during the am peak, and from 10 to 19 vehicles per hour during the pm peak. ' 11 ' A comparison of these entering left turn volumes versus opposing eastbound through volumes was made utilizing the guidelines suggested by the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) as summarized in Exhibit 24 of the ' Appendix, and this exercise suggests that by-pass areas are required at both the Sullivan Avenue at Patria Road and the Sullivan Avenue at Schweir Road intersections. ' Since Sullivan Avenue is a State highway and the subject project will be reviewed as part of the STC Certificate Application process, ConnDOT will review the feasibility of, and need for, the provision of one or two by-pass areas, and if deemed warranted, will condition the Certificate to be issued accordingly. Conclusions It is the professional opinion of Bubaris Traffic Associates that the proposed ' industrial park development, to be located to the south of Sullivan Avenue with access/egress via Patria Road and Schweir Road, should not adversely impact traffic operations on the surrounding roadway network in the year 2007 when full ' development of the parcel is expected to be completed and occupied. The proposed development will consist of a series of office, warehousing, and ' light-industrial buildings within an industrial park setting. It is estimated that the entire development will be phased over a 5-year period, and that groups of lots will be combined to develop a number of buildings and parking areas. In total, it ' is estimated that the total development will consist of 200,000 square feet of building area and 305 parking spaces. ' It is estimated that the proposed development will generate from 188 to 192 trips during the weekday morning and evening commuter peak periods. ' Capacity analyses and queuing analyses indicate that the proposed development will not alter the satisfactory levels of service that would otherwise be in place without introduction of site-generated traffic traveling to and from this ' site. Available sight lines from the two access/egress points on Sullivan Avenue at ' Patria Road and Schweir Road are excellent. The accident experience for the subject study area is satisfactory, with no ' recurring problems that need to be corrected, or that may be exacerbated by the proposed development. Improvements in either geometrics or traffic control are not deemed necessary to accommodate the site-generated traffic volumes to be added to the surrounding ' roadway network by the proposed development, with the exception of the possible construction of by-pass areas on Sullivan Avenue at either Patria Road, Schweir Road, or both, following a review of this project by the State Traffic Commission as part of its Certificate Application approval process. Very truly yours, BUBARIS TRAFFIC ASSOCIATES James G. Bubaris, P.E. ' Conn. Reg. No. 9203 Principal ' cc: Mr. David A. Caron 312 Deming Street South Windsor, CT 06074 Mr. Peter DeMallie ,aQ. 9aos Design Professionals, Inc. ' 165 South Satellite Roadg�� South Windsor, CT 06074 1 W CL Q SITE TRAFFIC EVALUATION STUDY SOUTH WINDSOR TECHNOLOGIES CENTER SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT APPENDIX ' TABLE OF CONTENTS ' Exhibit 1 — Location Map Exhibit 2 —2001 Existing AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' Exhibit 3—2001 Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 4—2007 Background AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 5—2007 Background PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 6—Summary of Trip Generation Calculations Industrial Park - ITE Code# 130 ' Exhibit 7 —Site-Generated Traffic Distributions ' Exhibit 8—Site-Generated AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 9—Site-Generated PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' Exhibit 10—2007 Combined AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' Exhibit 11 —2007 Combined PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 12 — Definitions of Levels of Service ' Unsignalized Intersections Exhibit 13— Definitions of Levels of Service iSignalized Intersections Exhibit 14 —Capacity Analysis Worksheets ' Sullivan Avenue at Troy Road Exhibit 15 —Capacity Analysis Worksheets Sullivan Avenue at West Road Exhibit 16—Capacity Analysis Worksheets Sullivan Avenue at Schweir Road -Continued- ' -Continued- 1 Exhibit 17—Capacity Analysis Worksheets Sullivan Avenue at Patria Road ' Exhibit 18 — Capacity Analysis Worksheets Sullivan Avenue at Rye Street ' Exhibit 19—Capacity Analysis Worksheets Sullivan Avenue at Commerce Way rExhibit 20 — Capacity Analysis Worksheets U.S. Route 5 at Sullivan Avenue and Route 194 Exhibit 21 — Queuing Analysis Worksheets Sullivan Avenue at Troy Road Exhibit 22 —Queuing Analysis Worksheets U.S. Route 5 at Sullivan Avenue and Route 194 Exhibit 23—Summary of Accident Experience January 1, 1998 through December 31, 2000 ' Exhibit 24 — Evaluation of Need for By-Pass Areas Sullivan Avenue at Patria Road ' Sullivan Avenue at Schweir Road ww ww iw w ww �w �w ww ww w w w w ww ww ww ww ww ww W r� s� 9� East Windsor ti Hill �tf�av yqr �r 19 A u N �Clp� S , � T AQ: , C� aA� yBERLY a warm --� PDXD EXHIBIT 1 LOCATION MAP SOUTH WINDSOR TECHNOLOGIES CENTER SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT r SULLIVAN AVENUE r 17 11 27 17 723 232 ROUTE 5 �r ♦ I ♦ ROUTE 5 9 I I ' 278 374 21 307 136 COMMERCE WAY 369 27 9 8 327 50 223 ' 1 25 -� ♦ RYE STREET 694 17 t r 489 20 13 339 PATRIA ROAD 4-I r 2 5 17 484 SITE 14 330 SCHWEIR ROAD ♦ 4 I N 8 � 23 480 ' NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE 6 2998 rWEST ROAD _ 12 ' 21 66 512 294 25 52 89 TROY ROAD 526 40 SULLIVAN AVENUE r EXHIBIT 2 2001 EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES 1 SULLIVAN AVENUE �` 11 0 9 52 335 ROUTE 5 7 385 ROUTE 5 616 157 30 252 291 COMMERCE WAY 678 3 � 21 7 465 220 83 - 1 13 -� � -� ♦ RYE STREET I 419 6 t 342 59 4 474 PATRIA ROAD 10 t 17 -1 6 391 SITE ' 2 489 ' SCHWEIR ROAD 14 10 � 1 383 NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE 9 670 WEST ROAD 8 t ' 76 � 30 431 674 72 34 106 TROY ROAD 416 121 SULLIVAN AVENUE EXHIBIT 3 2001 EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES SULLIVAN AVENUE ' 18 12 29 18 777 249 ROUTE 5 ♦ • ROUTE 5 - 10 � I t ♦ _ 299 402 23 330 146 j COMMERCE WAY 397 29E61 352 54 240 27 RYE STREET �7 I 526 22 14 364 PATRIA ROAD 2 I I 5 18 520 SITE 15 3555 �I SCHWEIR ROAD 9 � 25 516 NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE 6 320 WEST ROAD ' 23 71 550 316 27 56 96 h TROY ROAD 565 43 ' SULLIVAN AVENUE ' (ROUTE 194) EXHIBIT 4 2007 BACKGROUND AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES SULLIVAN AVENUE �- 12 0 9- 56 - 360 414 ROUTE 5 �� I ROUTE 5 i o ? t I♦ ' 662 -11110- 169 32 271 313 729 3 23 COMMERCE WAY � 8 500 237 89 1 1 14 ♦ ♦ -� ♦ RYE STREET I 450 6 t 368 63 4 510 PATRIA ROAD 18 -1 6 420 SITE ' 2 525 ' SCHWEIR ROAD 11 � 1 412 ' NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE 10 720 WEST ROAD ♦I �- 9 --t 4-1t 82 � 29 418 725 77 37 1 1 114 TROY ROAD t 447 130 SULLIVAN AVENUE EXHIBIT 5 2007 BACKGROUND PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ' 12/06/01 INDUSTRIAL PARK (1997) - EXHIBIT 6 SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS SOURCE:TRIP GENERATION REPORT,INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS,1997 LAND USE:INDUSTRIAL PARK-CODE#130 PROJECT: SOUTH WINDSOR TECHNOLOGIES CENTER SOUTH WINDSOR,CONNECTICUT NUMBER OF 1,000'S SQUARE FEET AREA: 200.0 TOTAL TIME PERIOD ITE TRIP GENERATION EQUATION TRIPS INBOUND OUTBOUND AVERAGE T=4.963(X)+747.746 1,740 870 870 WEEKDAY 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND PEAK HOUR LN(T)=0.822 LN(X)+0.9 192 157 34 7 TO 9 AM 82%INBOUND*18%OUTBOUND PEAK HOUR LN(T)=0.854 LN(X)+0.712 188 39 149 4 TO 6 PM 21 %INBOUND*79%OUTBOUND AM PEAK HOUR T=0.660(X)+76.265 208 179 29 OF GENERATOR 86%INBOUND*14%OUTBOUND PM PEAK HOUR T=0.729(X)+59.621 205 43 162 OF GENERATOR 21 %INBOUND*79%OUTBOUND - ' AVERAGE T=2.253(X)+99.262 550 275 275 SATURDAY 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND SATURDAY T=0.35(X) 70 22 48 PEAK HOUR 32%INBOUND*68%OUTBOUND OF GENERATOR AVERAGE T=0.647(X)+36.701 166 83 83 SUNDAY 50%INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND SUNDAY T=0.07(X) 14 6 8 PEAK HOUR 46%INBOUND*54%OUTBOUND OF GENERATOR SULLIVAN AVENUE t ' ROUTE 5 I ♦ ROUTE 5 -� 38% 6% (38%) (44%) RYE STREET I 44% (34%)(10% PATRIA ROAD 34% t 10% - (10%) 10% NOTE SITE XX EQUALS OUTBOUND VEHICLE (YY) EQUALS INBOUND VEHICLES ' (10%) 100% �I ' SCHWEIR ROAD 10% 46% (46%)(10%) ' NOTEMRAWING NOT TOO SCALE 566% WEST ROAD • t (56%) 56% 1 i TROY ROAD I♦ (56%) SULLIVAN AVENUE EXHIBIT 7 SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC DIS TRIBUTIONS SULLIVAN AVENUE ROUTE 5 �I I ♦ ROUTE 5 -� 13 2 (60) (69) RYE STREET I 15 (53) (116) PATRIA ROAD �I • 12 I t r3 -1 (16) 3 NOTE SITE ♦ XX EQUALS OUTBOUND VEHICLE (YY) EQUALS INBOUND VEHICLES ' (16) 3 -) I SCHWEIR ROAD 3 I rr 16 (72) (16) NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE 19 WEST ROAD ♦I t (88) - 19 TROY ROAD 1 T i♦ (88) SULLIVAN AVENUE EXHIBIT 8 SITE GENERATED AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES SULLIVAN`AVENUE ! I 1 (2) (000� . ROUTE 5 �I � ♦ ROUTE 5 -� 57 9 (15) (117) RYE STREET ' 66 (13) (4) ' PATRIA ROAD 51 ' 15 1 (4) 15 NOTE SITE ♦ XX EQUALS OUTBOUND VEHICLE (YYf EQUALS INBOUND VEHICLES ' (4 15 SCHWEIR ROAD 15 68 (18) (4) NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE 83 WEST ROAD �I y (22) 83 1 TROY ROAD 1 T i♦ (22) ' SULLIVAN AVENUE (ROUTE 1941 EXHIBIT 9 SITE GENERATED PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES 1 - SULLIVAN AVENUE 1# 18 12 29 18 - 777 - 1 258 _ ROUTE 5 ♦ ROUTE 5 10 1 299 415 23 332 206 1 COMMERCE WAY 467 29 � 10 � - 9 421 54 240 1 i 27 -� RYE STREET 1 761 18 t 541 22 67 380 1 PATRIA ROAD �I 14 I t 1 8 -1 34 523 SITE 1 31 358 1 SCHWEIR ROAD - 7 25 � 97 532 1 NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE 6 339 � 1WEST ROAD 13 1 23 71 638 56 1 335 27 96 TROY ROAD 1 T i♦ 653 43 1 SULLIVAN AVENUE (ROUTE 1941 EXHIBIT 10 2007 COMBINED AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES 1 - - SULLIVAN AVENUE ' 1 12 0 9 56 360 416 ROUTE 5 ♦ I ROUTE 5 10 ' 662 226 32 280 328 ' COMMERCE WAY 746 3 23 Tt 8 517 237 89 ' ,j, 14 -� , ♦ RYE STREET 516 6 I ' 434 63 17 514 ' PATRIA ROAD 4- 62 t ' 33 1 10 435 SITE ' 6 540 ' SCHWEIR ROAD t 30 t N 79 � 19 416 NOTE:DRAWING NOT TOO SCALE 10 803 ' WEST ROAD 9 --t 1 ' 82 29 440 808 77 37 ' 114 TROY ROAD t 469 130 ' SULLIVAN AVENUE (ROUTE 1941 EXHIBIT 11 2007 COMBINED PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES ' EXHIBIT 12 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA i ' UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS SOURCE: HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL (HCM), 2000 ' TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD (1) Level of Service for unsignalized intersections similar to the study intersections is defined in terms of the average control delay for the approach or movement evaluated. Control delay involves movements at slower speeds and stops on intersection approaches as vehicles move up in the queue or slow down upstream of an intersection. ' The delay experienced by a motorist is comprised of factors that relate to control, geometrics, traffic, and incidents. Total delay is the difference between the travel time ' actually experienced and the reference time that would result during base conditions in the absence of incident, control, traffic, or geometric delay. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. At two-way stop-controlled-controlled and all-way stop-controlled intersections, control delay is the total elapsed time from a vehicle joining the queue until its departure from the stopped ' position at the head of the queue. The control delay also includes the time required to decelerate to a stop and to accelerate to the free-flow speed. ' Level of Service (LOS)for a two-way stop-controlled intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay and is defined for each minor movement. LOS is not defined for the intersection as a whole. ' Level of Service (LOS) for an all-way stop-controlled intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay and is defined for all movements. A LOS is then ' defined for the intersection as a whole. Levels of Service (LOS)for unsignalized intersections are defined as follows: LEVEL OF SERVICE AVERAGE CONTROL DELAY CONDITION PER VEHICLE SECONDS LOS A 0 TO 10 LITTLE OR NO DELAY ' LOS B > 10 TO 15 SHORT DELAY LOS C > 15 TO 25 AVERAGE DELAY LOS D > 25 TO 35 LONG DELAY LOS E > 35 TO 50 VERY LONG DELAY LOS F > 50 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, Exh ibits 17-2 and 17-22. r ' EXHIBIT 13 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS SOURCE: HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL (HCM), 2000 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD (1) Level of Service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of control ' delay, which is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, increased fuel consumption, and lost travel time. The delay experienced by a motorist is comprised of a number of factors that relate to control, geometric, traffic, and incidents. Total delay is the difference between the travel time actually _ experienced and the reference travel time that would result during base conditions in the absence of traffic control, geometric delay, any incidents, and ' any other vehicles. Specifically, LOS criteria for traffic signals are stated in terms of the average control delay per vehicle, typically for a 15-minute analysis period. Delay is a complex measure and depends on a number of variables, including ' the quality of progression, the cycle length, the green ratio, and the volume-to- capacity (v/c) ratio for the lane group. ' In the case of signalized intersections, the Level of Service for each approach is computed, and an overall Level of Service for the entire intersection is determined. ' Levels of Service (LOS) for signalized intersections are defined as follows: ' LEVEL OF SERVICE CONTROL DELAY PER CONDITION VEHICLE SECONDS LOS A < 10 LOW DELAY LOS B > 10 TO 20 SHORT DELAY LOS C > 20 TO 35 AVERAGE DELAY LOS D > 35 TO 55 CONGESTION ' NOTICEABLE LOS E > 55 TO 80 LIMIT OF ACCEPTABLE DELAY LOS F > 80 UNACCEPTABLE In today's environment, Levels of Service C to D are considered acceptable, and Levels of Service A to B are seldomly achieved at signalized intersections. (1) HCM, Exhibit 16-2. Exhibit 14 Capacity Analysis Worksheets Sullivan Avenue at Troy Road r r � rr rr w� rr it r� rr rr �r �r rr r� rr r rr r Short Report Page 2 of 2 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB 02 03 04 SB Only NS 07 08 . Only Perm G - G = G = G = G = G = G = G = Timing 15.0 8.0 45.0 IY = 771Y = Y = Y = Y = 3 Y = 5 Y = Y = Duration of Analysis Cycle Length C - 80.0 hrs = 1.00 Lane Group Ca aci , Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SIB d'. flow rate 157 628 28 327 Lane group cap. 328 1059 536 1330 /c ratio 0.48 1 0.59 10.05 0.25 Green ratio 0. 19 0.56 10.70 0.70 Unif. delay dl 29.0 11.5 5.2 4.3 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 5.0 2.5 0.2 0.4 PF factor 1 1.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 Control delay 34.0 14.0 5.4 4.8 Lane group LOS C I B A A rch. delay 34.0 14.0 4.8. Approach LOS C B A Intersec. delay 13.9 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file:HC:\WINDOWS\TEMP\s2k7279.TMP 12/6/01 Short Report Page 1 of 2 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst Agency or BUBARIS TRAFFIC Intersection Co. ASSOCIATES rea Type All other areas Date 1216101 Jurisdiction SOUTH WINDSOR Performed Analysis 2001 Time Period 2001 EXISTING PM Year PEAK HOUR Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SIB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LR TR LL T Volume v h 106 34 416 121 72 674 % Heavyveh 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ctuated P/A P P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 rrival type 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR 0 0 0 0 0 olume Lane Width 12.0 1 12.0 112.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus sto s/hr 0 0 0 0 file:HC:\WINDOWS\TEMP\s2kF039.TMP 12/6/01 Short Report Page 2 of 2 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB 02 03 04 SB Only NS 07 08 Only Perm G G = G = G = G = G = G = G = Timing 15.0 8.0 45.0 Y = Y = Y = Y = Y = 3 Y = 5 Y = Y = Duration of Analysis hrs 1.00 Cycle Length C - 80.0 Lane Group Ca aci , Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SIB d'. flow rate 156 596 80 749 Lane group cap. 332 1036 553 1330 /c ratio 1 0.47 0.58 0.14 0.56 Green ratio 0.19 1 0.56 0.70 0.70 Unif. delay dl 29.0 11.3 5.3 5.9 Delay factor k 0.50 1 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 4.8 2.3 0.6 11.7 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 33.7 1 13.7 5.8 7.7 Lane group LOS C B A A Apprch. delay 33.7 13.7 7.5 ApproachLOS C B A Intersec. delay 12.4 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file:HC:\WINDOWS\TEMP\s2kF039.TMP 12/6/01 Short Report Page 1 of 2 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst Agency or BUBARIS TRAFFIC Intersection Co. ASSOCIATES rea Type All other areas Date 1216101 Jurisdiction SOUTH WINDSOR Performed 2007 Analysis 2007 Time Period BACKGROUND AM Year PEAK HOUR Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LR TR I L T Volume v h 96 56 565 43 27 316 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P Startup Lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr fi1e:HC:\WIND0WS\TEMP\s2k607A.TMP 12/6/01 Short Report Page 2 of 2 Bus sto s/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB 02 03 04 SB Only NS 07 08 Onl Perm G = = = G - G G G G - G = G - iming 15.0 8.0 45.0 - Y = Y = Y 1 Y IY = 3 Y = 5 Y = Y = Duration of Analysis hrs 1.00 Cycle Length C - 80.0 Lane Group Ca aci , Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB d'. flow rate 169 676 30 351 Lane group cap. 328 1059 515 1330 /c ratio 0.52 1 0.64 0.06 0.26 Green ratio 0.19 0.56 10.70 0.70 Unif. delay dl 29.2 11.9 5.4 4.4 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0;50 Increm. delay d2 5.8 1 3.0 10.2 0.5 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 35.0+ 14.9 5.6 4.9 Lane group LOS D B A IA p rch. delay 35.0+ 14.9 5.0 ffIntersec. oach LOS D B A delay 14.6 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file:HC:\WINDOWS\TEMP\s2k607A.TMP 12/6/01 Short Report Page 1 of 2 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information nalyst Agency or BUBARIS TRAFFIC Co. ASSOCIATES Intersection Date rea Type All other areas Performed 1216101 Jurisdiction SOUTH WINDSOR Time 2007' Analysis 2007 Period BACKGROUND PM PEAK HOUR Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LR TR L T Volume v h 114 37 1447 130 77 1725 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR Volume 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 10 N N 0 N Parking/hr file:HC:\WINDOWS\TEMP\s2kA34B.TNU 12/6/01 Short Report Page 2 of 2 Bus sto s/hr 0 0 0 0 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB 02 03 04 SIB Only NS 07 08 Only Perm G G = G = G = G G = = Timing 15.0 8.0 45.0 G = G = Y = Y = Y = Y = Y = 3 Y = 5 Y = Y = Duration of Analysis Cycle Length C = 80.0 hrs = 1.00 Lane Group Ca aci , Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SIB d'. flow rate 168 641 86 806 Lane group cap. 332 1036 531 1330 /c ratio 0.51 0.62 10. 16 0.61 Green ratio 0.19 0.56 0.70 0.70 Unif. delay dl 29.2 11.7 5.5 6.3 'Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 5.5 2.8 10.7 2.1 PF factor 1.000 1.000 11.000 1.000 Control delay 34.7 14.6 6.1 8.3 Lane group LOS C B A A p rch. delay 34.7 14.6 8. 1 Approach LOS I C B I A Intersec. delay 13.2 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file:HC:\WINDOWS\TEMP\s2kA34B.TMP 12/6/01 Short Report Page 1 -of 2 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst Agency or BUBARIS TRAFFIC Intersection Co. ASSOCIATES Area Type All other areas Date 1216101 Jurisdiction SOUTH WINDSOR Performed Analysis 2007 Time Period 2007 COMBINED Year AM PEAK HOUR Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LR TR L T Volume v h 96 56 1653 43 27 335 % Heavy veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 10.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension . 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking/hr Bus sto s/hr 0 0 0 0 file:HC:\V;INDOWS\TEMP\s2k72DA.TMP 12/6/01 Short Report Page 2 of 2 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB 02 -03 04 SIB Only NS 07 08 Only Perm G - G = G = G = G = G = G = G = Timing 15.0 8.0 45.0 Y = Y = Y = Y = Y = 3 Y = 5 Y = Y = Duration of Analysis Cycle Length C - 80.0 hrs = 1.00 - Lane Group Ca aci , Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SIB d'. flow rate 169 1774 30 372 Lane group cap. 328 1060 1474 1330 /c ratio 0.52 0.73 10.06 0.28 - Green ratio 0.19 1 0.56 0.70 0.70 Unif. delay dl 29.2 13.0 5.8 4.5 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Increm. delay d2 5.8 4.6 10.3 0.5 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 35.0+ 17.5 6.0 5.0 Lane group LOS I D B A A Apprch. delay 35.0+ 17.5 5.1 Approach LOS D B A Intersec. delay 16.0 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\s2k72DA.TNU 12/6/01 Short Report Page 1 of 2 SHORT REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst Agency or BUBARIS TRAFFIC Intersection Co. ASSOCIATES Area Type All other areas Date 1216101 Jurisdiction SOUTH WINDSOR Performed Analysis 2007 Time 'Period 2007 COMBINED Year PM PEAK HOUR Volume and Timin 'An ut EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Num. of Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 Lane group LR TR L T Volume v h 114 37 469 130 177 808 Heav veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Actuated P/A P P P P P P Startup lost time 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ext. eff. green 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 1 3.0 3.0 Ped/Bike/RTOR 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0. . 12.0 . Parking/Grade/Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N ' 0 N Parking/hr Bus sto s/hr 0 0 0 0 file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\s2k112C.TMP 12/6/01 Short Report Page 2 of 2 Unit Extension 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Phasing WB 02 03 04 SB Only NS 07 08 Only Perm G = G G G = G = G = G = G = Timing 15.0 8.0 45.0 Y = Y = Y = Y = Y = 3 Y = 5 Y = Y = Duration of Analysis Cycle Length C - 80.0 hrs = 1.00 Lane Group Capaci , Control Delay and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB d'. flow rate 168 665 86 898 Lane group cap. 332 1037 520 1330 /c ratio 0.51 0.64 10.17 0.68 Green ratio 0. 19 0.56 0.70 0.70 Unif. delay d1 29.2 12.0 5.6 6.8 Delay factor k 0.50 0.50 0.50. 0.50 Increm. delay d2 5.5 1 3.1 10.7 2.8 PF factor 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Control delay 34.7 15.1 6.3 9.6 Lane group LOS C B A A Apprch. delay 34.7 15. 1 9.3 Approach LOS C B A Intersec. delay 13.8 Intersection LOS B HCS2000TM Copyright C 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1 a file://C:\V;IND0WS\TEMP\s2k112C.TMP 12/6/01 t ' Exhibit 15 Capacity Analysis Worksheets Sullivan Avenue at West Road Two-Way Stop Control Pagel of 2 ' TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information ' _nalyst _ BUBARIS Intersection ' gency/Co. TRAFFIC Jurisdiction SOUTH ASSOCIATES WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 12/6/01 nalysis Year 2001 Analysis Time 2001 EXISTING Period AM PEAK HOUR Project Description ' North/South Street: SULLIVAN EastNMest Street: WEST ROAD VENUE ' Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 South ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound ' Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 66 512 0 0 298 6 ' Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF ' Hourly Flow 73 568 0 0 331 6 Rate, HFR Percent Heavy 0 -- -- 0 -- -- ehicles Median Type Undivided ' RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT 1 . TR ' Upstream Signal 0 1 - I 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound ' Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ' Volume 0 0 0 12 0 21 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 . - 0 13 0 23 Rate, HFR 0 1 file://C:\WIND0WS\TEMP\u2k8245.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 F ercent Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' ehicles Percent Grade 0 0 ' Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ' Lane LT LR Configuration v h 73 36 ' C m v h 1234 416 /c 0.06 0.09 ' 95% queue 0.19 0.28 length Control Delay 8.1 114.5 ' LOS A 8 Approach 14.5 ' Delay Approach LOS -- -- B > HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a r file://C:\V4NDOWS\TEMP\u2k8245.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 ,. TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information F : Analyst _ BUBARIS Intersection gency/Co. TRAFFIC Jurisdiction SOUTH ' ASSOCIATES WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 1216101 Analysis Year 2001 ' Analysis Time 2001 EXISTING Period PM PEAK HOUR Project Description East/West Street: WEST ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN VENUE I ' Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 South ■ Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments ■ Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 ' L T R L T R Volume 30 431 0 0 670 9 ' Peak-Hour 0.90 - 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF ' Hourly Flow 33 478 0 0 744 10 Rate, HFR Percent Heavy 0 __ __ 0 ' Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 ' Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 IM onfi uration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 -inor Street Westbound Eastbound ' Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 8 0 76 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ' Hourly Flow 0 - 0 0 8 0 84 Rate, HFR file://C:\WM0WS\TEMP\u2k8245.TMP 12/6/01 1 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 Percent Heavy 0 0 - 0 0 0 0 ehicles Percent Grade 0 0 o . /o Flared Approach N N Storage . 0 J. 0 ' RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Config uration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service roach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane LT LR Configuration v h 33 92 C m v h 865 370 lc 0.04 0.25 95% queue 0.12 0.99 length Control Delay 9.3 117.9 ' LOS A C r pproach 17.9 ela roach LOS -- -- C HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file:HC:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k8245.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information ' Analyst _ BUBARIS Intersection Agency/Co. TRAFFIC SOUTH ASSOCIATES Jurisdiction WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 1216101 Analysis Year 2007 Analysis Time 2007 Period BACKGROUND AM PEAK HOUR ' Project Description East/West Street: WEST ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN VENUE ' Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound ' Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 71 550 0 0 320 6 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF ' Hourly Flow 11 0 0 355 6 Rate, HFR 78 6 Percent Heavy - ehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 ' Confi uration LT TR U stream Si nal 0 1 0 tMinor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 ' L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 13 0 23 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90. 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 14 0 25 Rate, HFR file:HCAVWM0WS\TEMP\u2k8245.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 Percent Heavy 0 -0 0 0 0 0 ' ehicles Percent Grade F0 0 [Storage lared Approach N N 0 0 . RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service ' Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ' Lane LT LR Configuration NO) 78 39 m v h 1209 384 lc 0.06 0. 10 t 95% queue 0.21 0.34 length Control Delay 8.2 115.4 LOS A C r pproach 15.4 ela roach LOS -- -- C HCS200OTM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k8245.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst _ BUBARIS Intersection Agency/Co. TRAFFIC SOUTH ASSOCIATES Jurisdiction WINDSOR CT Date Performed 1216101 ' 2007 nalysis Year 2007 Analysis Time BACKGROUND Period PM PEAK HOUR Project Description East/West Street: WEST ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN ' VENUE Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R ' Volume 29 418 0 0 720 10 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 32 464 0 0 800 11 Rate, H F R Percent Heavy 0 __ __ 0 Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0. 1 0 ' Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ' Volume 0 0 0 9 0 82 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ' Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 10 0 91 ' Rate, HFR file://C:\VaNDOWS\TEMP\u2k8245.TMP 12/6/Ol Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 1 Percent Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 ehicles Percent Grade - 0 0 Flared Approach N N 1 Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane IT LR Configuration v h 32 101 m v h 824 340 lc 0.04 0.30 ' 95% queue 0.12 1.25 length Control Delay 9.5 20.0 ILOS A C pproach 20.0 rela roach LOS -- -- C HCS200d M Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a I ' I S I file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k8245.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Pagel of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL- SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst _ BUBARIS Intersection ' gency/Co. TRAFFIC Jurisdiction SOUTH ASSOCIATES WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 1216101 Analysis Year 2007 Analysis Time 2007 COMBINED Period AM PEAK HOUR Project Description ' East/Vl/est Street: WEST ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN VENUE ' Intersection Orientation: North-, Study Period (hrs): 1.00 South ' Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 71 638 0 0 339 6 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 78 708 0 0 376 6 Rate, H F R Percent Heavy 0 0 -- -- Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR U stream Signal Signall 0 1 1 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ' Volume 0 0 0 13 0 23 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 14 0 25 Rate, H F R file:HC:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k8245.TMP 12/6/O1 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 Percent Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vehicles. Percent Grade 0 0 ■ Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 _ ' RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 -0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 1 11 12 Lane LT LR Configuration v h 78 39 C m v h 1188 340 lc 0.07 0. 11 95% queue 0 21 0.39 length Control Delay 8.2 117.0 ILOS A C pproach 17.0 EDelay roach LOS -- -- C HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a i file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k8245.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 ' TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst BUBARIS Intersection gency/Co. TRAFFIC Jurisdiction SOUTH ' ASSOCIATES WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 1216101 Analysis Year 2007 Analysis Time 2007 COMBINED Period PM PEAK HOUR Project Description East/West Street: WEST ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN VENUE tIntersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 South ' ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 29 440 0 0 803 10 ' Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 32 488 0 0 892 11 Rate, H F R Percent Heavy 0 __ __ 0 Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT - TR U stream Signal — 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 9 0 82 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 10 0 - 91 Rate, HFR file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k8245.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 ' Percent Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 ehicles Percent Grade _- 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 - RT Channelized 0 0 ' Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ' Lane LT LR Configuration v h 32 101 C m v h 761 299 lC 0.04 0.34 95%° queue 0.13 1.51 length Control Delay 9.9 23.2 LOS A C Approach 23.2 ' Delay roach LOS -- -- C HCS2000"4 Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k8245.TNW 12/6/01 i ' Exhibit 16 Capacity Analysis Worksheets Sullivan Avenue at Schweir Road Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 1 ' TWO-WAY STOP PONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information ' nalyst _ BUBARIS Intersection ' gency/Co. TRAFFIC Jurisdiction SOUTH _ ASSOCIATES WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 1216101 nalysis Year 2001 ' Analysis Time 2001 EXISTING Period AM PEAK HOUR Project Description East/West Street: SCHWEIR ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN VENUE Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound ' Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 23 480 0 0 330 14 ' Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF ' Hourly Flow 25 533 0 0 366 15 Rate, HFR Percent Heavy 0 __ __ 0 ' Vehicles Median Type Undivided ' RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Confi uration LT TR U stream Signal 1 0 L 1 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound ' Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ' Volume 0 0 0 4 0 8 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 4 0 8 file:HC:\V;INDOWS\TEMP\u2k82C3.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 1 Percent Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' ehicles Percent Grade 0 0 ' Flared Approach N N ' Storage 0 0 _ RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service ' Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane LT LR Configuration v h 25 12 C m NO) 1189 462 lc 0.02 0.03 ' 95% queue length 0.06 0.08 ' Control Delay 8.1 13.0 LOS A B IA pproach 13.0 ' Delay roach LOS -- -- B > HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k82C3.TMP 12/6/01 1 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 -TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information ' Analyst _ BUBARIS Intersection Agency/Co. TRAFFIC Jurisdiction SOUTH ASSOCIATES WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 1216101 Analysis Year 2001 ' Analysis Time 2001 EXISTING Period PM PEAK HOUR Project Description East/West Street: . SCHWEIR ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN VENUE Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 South ' ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound ' Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 - L T R L T R Volume 1 383 0 0 489 2 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF ' Hourly Flow 1 425 0 0 543 2 Rate, HFR Percent Heavy 0 __ __ 0 Vehicles Median Type Undivided ' RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Ionfi uration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 inor Street Westbound Eastbound ' Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 14 0 10 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ' Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 15- 0 11 Rate, HFR file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k82C3.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 Percent Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' ehicles I 1 1. Percent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach N N ' Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 j 0 j 0 Configuration I LR Delay, Queue Len th, and Level of Service ' Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ' Lane LT LR Configuration v h 1 26 ' C m v h 1034 355 lc 0.00 0.07 II ' 95% queue 0.00 0.24 length Control Delay 8.5 15.9 LOS A C r pproach 15.9 ela roach LOS -- -- C HCS200drm Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a ' file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k82C3.TW 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 ' TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information ' JAnalyst BUBARIS Intersection Agency/Co. TRAFFIC SOUTH ASSOCIATES Jurisdiction V1/INDSOR, CT Date Performed 1 V6101 nalysis Year 2007 Analysis Time 2007 Period BACKGROUND AM PEAK HOUR Project Description East/West Street: SCHINEIR ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN ' VENUE Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 25 516 0 0 355 15 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ' Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 27 573 0 0 394 16 Rate, H F R Percent Heavy 0 __ __ 0 -- -- Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 IN onfi uration LT TR stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 4 0 9 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 4 0 10 Rate, H F R I I - file:HC:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k82C3.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 r ercent Heavy 000 0 0 0 ehicies . ..ercent Grade 6 0 ' Flared Approach N- N Storage 0 - 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ' Lane LT LR Configuration NO) 27 14 C m v h 1160 452 /c 0.02 0.03 95% queue 0.07 0.10 length Control Delay 8.2 13.2 ILOS A B ' rpproach 13.2 ela roach LOS -- -- 8 HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k82C3.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Pagel of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information _- Analyst BUBARIS Intersection gency/Co. TRAFFIC SOUTH ASSOCIATES Jurisdiction WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 1216101 nalysis Year 2007 nalysis Time 2007 Period BACKGROUND PM PEAK HOUR Project Description East/West Street: SCHWEIR ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN VENUE Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 ' South ehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T. R Volume 1 412 0 0 525 2 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ' Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 1 457 0 0 583 2 Rate, HFR Percent Heavy 0 __ __ 0 Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes - 0 1 0 0 1 0 1onfi uration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 !nor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 �. L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 15 0 11 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 16 0 12 Rate, HFR file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k82C3.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 1 Percent Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 ehicles Percent Grade 0' 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane LT LR Configuration NO) 1 28 m v h 1000 326 lc 0.00 0.09 95% queue 0.00 0.28 length Control Delay 8.6 17.1 LOS A C Approach 17.1 Delay Eroach LOS -- -- C. > HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k82C3.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst BUBARIS Intersection gency/Co. TRAFFIC' SOUTH ,ASSOCIATES Jurisdiction WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 1216101 Analysis Year 2007 Analysis Time 2007 COMBINED Period AM PEAK HOUR Project Description Street: SCHWEIR ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN East/West VENUE Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 97 532 0 0 358 31 ' Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 107 591 0 0 397 34 Rate, HFR Percent Heavy 0 __ __ 0 Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 [Upstrea onfi uration LT TR m Si nal 0 0inor Street Westbound Eastbound ' Movement 7 - 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 7 0 25 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 7 0 27 Rate, H F R ' file:HC:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k82C3.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 r ercent Heavy 00 0 0 0 0 ehicles - ercent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage - - 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service roach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane LT LR Configuration v h 107 34 C m v h 1139 423 lc 0.09 0.08 ' 95% queue 0.31 0.26 length Control Delay 8.5 1 14.3 LOS A 8 r pproach 14.3 ela roach LOS -- -- 8 HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k8 2C3.TMP 12/6/01 i 1 Exhibit 17 Capacity Analysis Worksheets Sullivan Avenue at Patria Road Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 ' TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information nalyst BUBARIS Intersection Agency/Co. TRAFFIC Jurisdiction SOUTH ASSOCIATES WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 1216101 nalysis Year 2007 ' Analysis Time 2007 COMBINED Period PM PEAK HOUR Project Description I, I � North/South Street: SULLIVAN Easf/West Street: SCHWEIR ROAD VENUE � Intersection Orientation: North- hrs : 1.00� Study Period ( ) South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma jor Street Northbound Southbound Movem ent 1 2 3 4 5 6 III, L T R L T R Volume 19 416 0 0 540 6 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 21 462 0 0 600 6 Rate, HFR Percent Heavy 0 __ __ 0 Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR U stream Si nal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 30 0 79 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 33 0 87 Rate, HFR 0 0 0 file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k82C3.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 rP ercent Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 ehiclesercent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Len th, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane LT LR Configuration v h 21 120 C m v h 982 1379 lc 0.02 0.32 ' 95% queue 0.07 1.38 length Control Delay 8.7 118.9 LOS A C Approach 18.9 Delay Approach LOS -- -- C HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k82C3.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Pagel of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY = General Information Site Information nalyst _ BUBARIS Intersection Agency/Co. TRAFFIC Jurisdiction SOUTH ASSOCIATES WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 12/M/01 Analysis Year 2001 Analysis Time 2001 EXISTING Period AM PEAK HOUR Project Description ' East/West Street: PATRIA ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN VENUE Intersection Orientation: North- South I Study Period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T 'R Volume 17 484 0 0 339 13 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 18 537 0 0 376 14 Rate, HFR Percent Heavy 0 __ __ 0 Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 ' Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 2 0 5 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 2 0 5 Rate, HFR ' file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k1 C4.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 1 Percent Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' ehicles Percent Grade 0 Flared Approach M N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuratio—n—T I LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service ' Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane LT LR Configuration v h 18 7 C m v h 1180 483 /C 0.02 0.01 95% queue 0.05 0.04 length Control Delay 8. 1 12.6 LOS A B Approach 12.6 r E ela roach LOS -- -- B HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kl C4.TMP 12/6/01 1 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY. General Information Site Information ' nalyst _ BUBARIS Intersection ' gency/Co. TRAFFIC Jurisdiction SOUTH ASSOCIATES WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 1216101 Analysis Year 2001 Analysis Time 2001 EXISTING Period PM PEAK HOUR Project Description ' PATRIA ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN East/West Street: VENUE ' Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 ' L T R L T R Volume 6 391 0 0 474 4 ' Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF ' Hourly Flow 6 434 0 0 526 4 Rate, H F R Percent Heavy 0 0 ' Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 I ' Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Confi uration LT TR U stream Si nal 0 0 1 . Minor Street Westbound Eastbound ' Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ' Volume 0 0 0 10 0 17 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ' Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 11 0 18 Rate, HFR file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2kl C4.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 Percent Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' ehicles Percent Grade _ 0 0 Flared Approach N N ' Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration I LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service ' pproach . NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ' Lane LT LR Configuration v h 6 29 C m v h 1048 404 /c 0.01 0.07 ' 95% queue 0.02 0.23 length Control Delay 8. 1 14.6 LOS A B Approach, 14.6 V ela roach LOS -- -- B > HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file://C:\VVMOWS\TEMP\u2k1 C4.TMP 12/6/01 1 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information ' nalyst _ BUBARIS Intersection Agency/Co. TRAFFIC SOUTH ASSOCIATES Jurisdiction W/NDSOR, CT Date Performed 12/6/01 Analysis Time 2007 nalysis Year 2007 Period BACKGROUND AM PEAK HOUR Project Description East/West Street: PATRIA ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN VENUE Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period hrs . 1.00 South 1Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R ' Volume 18 520 0 0 364 14 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 20 577 0 0 404 15 Rate, H F R ' Percent Heavy 0 __ __ 0 Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 ' Confi uration LT TR U strea 1 0 0 ' Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 2 0 5 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ' Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 2 0 5 r Rate, HFR file://C:\VaNDOWS\TEMP\u2k1 C4.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 Percent Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' ehicles Percent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach N N ' Storage - 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 ' Configuration LR Delay, Queue Len th, and Level of Service ' Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ' Lane LT LR Configuration v h 20 7 C m v h 1151 449 We 0.02 0.02 ' 95% queue 0.05 0.05 length Control Dela 8.2 13.1 ' LOS A 8 Approach 13.1 ' Delay roach LOS -- -- 8 HCS2000TM Copyright©2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved Version 4.1a file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k1 C4.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 1 . TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information ' Analyst _ BUBARIS Intersection ' Agency/Co. TRAFFIC SOUTH - ASSOCIATES Jurisdiction WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 1216101 nalysis Year 2007 ' Analysis Time 2007 Period BACKGROUND PM PEAK HOUR ' Project Description East/West Street: PATRIA ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN ' VENUE Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 ' South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 6 420 0 0 510 4 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF HourlyFlow 6 466 0 0 566 4 Rate, HFR Percent Heavy 0 Vehicles 0 Median Type Undivided ' RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 ' Confi uration LT TR Upstream Signal 0 0 ' Minor Street Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 ' L T R L T R Volume 0 0 0 11. 0 18 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ' Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 12 0 20 r Rate, HFR file://CAWIND0WS\TEMP\u2klC4.TMP 12/6/01 i Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of 2 [Flared ercent Heavy 0 0 0 0 0 0 ehicles ercent Grade 0 0 Approach N N torage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Configuration LR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 ' Lane LT LR Configuration v h 6 32 C m v h 1013 374 Ic 0.01 0.09 95% queue 0.02 0.28 Ien th ' Control Delay 8.6 15.5 LOS A C Approach 15.5 t Delay Approach LOS -- -- C HCS2000TM Copyright 0 2000 University of Florida,All Rights Reserved - Version 4.1a ' file://C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\u2k1 C4.TMP 12/6/01 Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 2 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information ite Information ' lAnalyst _ BUBARIS Intersection gency/Co. TRAFFIC- Jurisdiction SOUTH ASSOCIATES WINDSOR, CT Date Performed 1216101 Analysis Year 2007 ' nalysis Time 2007 COMBINED Period AM PEAK HOUR Project Description TRIA ROAD North/South Street: SULLIVAN East/West Street. PA VENUE Intersection Orientation: North- Study Period (hrs): 1.00 South Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 34 523 0 0 380 67 ' Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 37 581 0 0 422 74 Rate, HFR Percent Heavy 0 __ __ 0 Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized 0 0 ' Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 Configuration LT TR U stream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Westbound Eastbound ' Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ' olume 0 0 0 14 0 8 Peak-Hour 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ' Factor, PHF Hourly Flow 0 0 0 15 0 8 Rate, HFR 12/6/O 1 file..//CAWINDOWS\TEMP\u2k1 C4.TMP QUEUE AND STORAGE LENGTH 'Overflow Queue: Each formulae below can be considered to have a uniform and overflow component.Average overflow queue is the average number of vehicles left in the queue at the beginning of the green period.Even if the the arrival rate flow rate is,on average,less than the capacity,(i.e.the degree of saturation X<1)there are some oversaturated cycles because of random fluctuations in arrival flow rates. The following approximate expression has been derived for predicting average overflow queues in both undersaturated(X<1)and over saturated(X>1)conditions at isolated fixed time signals. INTERSECTION: QSWTC4c-SULLIVAN AVENUE AT ROUTE 5 ANALYSIS PERIOD: 2007 COMBINED PM PEAK HOUR APPROACH: SB THRU SB RIGHT DATA INPUT: Q=if known capacity 1,364 610 n =number of lanes n= 2 1 S=cruising speed,MPH S= 35 35 g=effective green g= 34 34 C=cycle length C= 80 80 V=Flow rate in Tf(usually in VPH) V= 360 12 j=average space per vehicle(feet) j= 25 25 Tf=flow period of demand V a.aa hrs. Tf= 1.00 1.00 ARY OF ANSWERS rounded to nearest vehicle): N=The ave.no.of vehs in the queue at the start of green. N=1 TOT.VEHS 5 0 ERR ERR Nb=The beck of the queue,based on uniform flow. Nb= TOT.VEHS 5 0 ERR ERR Nm=The maximum back of queue,reached Nm= TOT.VEHS 5 0 ERR ERR after the start of green. VEH/LANE 3 0 ERR ERR FTILANE 75 0 ERR ERR Nc=The critical queue length or 2(Nb). Nc= TOT.VEHS 9 0 ERR ERR VEH/LANE 5 0 ERR L ERR FT/LANE- 125 0 ERR ERR OVERFLOW QUEUE:No The ave.overflow queue(total veh.all lanes)can be calculated from: No= 0.00 0.00 ERR ERR No=(Q*Tf/4)*(z+(z^2+12(X-Xo)/Q*Tf)^.5)forX>Xo,otherwise No=O VEHICLES VEHICLES VEHICLES VEHICLES where: s=saturation flow veh per second per lane 1620.00 /3600= s= 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.45 Q=capacity in veh.per hr. Q= 1364 610 0 0 q=flow rate in vps;V/Tf or V/3600 q= 0.10 0.00 ERR ERR QTf=throughput,i.e.the max.number of veh.discharged in period Tf QTf= 1364 610 0 0 X =V/Qtf,degree of saturation X= 0.26 0.02 ERR ERR z =X-1 (note this has a negative value for X<1:also zQ=q-Q) z= -0.74 -0.98 ERR ERR Xo =deg.sat below which ave.overflow queue is approx.zero and given Xo= 0.70 0.70 0.67 0.67 by:Xo=0.67+sg/600; where s=sat.flow vps,g=eff.green X-Xo= -0.43 -0.68 ERR ERR QUEUE LENGTH:N The ave.number of vehicles in the queue at the start of the green period N= 4.60 0.15 ERR ERR can be calculated from:N=qr+No VEHICLES VEHICLES VEHICLES VEHICLES iwhere: q=arrival demand rate in vps or veh/cycle q= 0.10 0.00 ERR ERR r=C-G=effective red.time,qr in veh C= 80 80 C=cycle time in seconds G= 34 34 r= 46 46 0 0 BACK OF THE QUEUE:Nb The back of the queue,in vehicles,can be calculated from Nb= 4.71 0.15 ERR ERR Nb=N/(1-6/v)gL) VEHICLES VEHICLES VEHICLES VEHICLES where: N=the stop-line queue,in vehicles N= 4.60 0.15 ERR ERR qL=lane flow,in vehicles per second(total movement flow divided by qL= 0.05 0.00 ERR ERR the number of lanes as a first approximation) j=average queue space per vehicle in feet j= 25 25 v=normal cruising speed in feet per second(hence j/v=time to travel v= 51.45 51.45 0.00 0.00 one vehicle space at cruising speed). MAXIMUM BACK OF QUEUE:Nm rMaximum back of queue,Nm,reached after the start of green is given by: Nm= 5.18 0.15 ERR ERR Nm=N/(1-y) VEHICLES VEHICLES VEHICLES VEHICLES where: N =qr+No N= 4.60 0.15 ERR ERR y =flow-ratio q ave.vps/(sat.flow X no.of lanes) y= 0.11 0.01 ERR ERR q =arrival vps,VPH/3600 q= 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 r =c-g=effective red r= 46 46 0 . 0 No =ave.overflow queue(total veh.all lanes) No 0.00 0.00 ERR ERR CRITICAL QUEUE LENGTH:Nc Nc=2Nb Nc= 9.43 0.31 ERR ERR VEHICLES VEHICLES VEHICLES VEHICLES r r r r r Fxhibit 23 Summary of Accident Experience January 1, 1998 through December_ 1, 20Q0 r i 1 r r r 1 - - EXHIBIT 23 SUMMARY OF ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE SOUTH WINDSOR TECHNOLOGIES CENTER Y SOUTH WINDSOR,CONNECTICUT JANUARY 1,1998 TO DECEMBER 31,2000 SECTION1 M.P. 42.49 TO 42.51 (INTERSECTION OF ROUTE 5 AND ROUTE 194) SECTION2 M.P. 0 TO 0.02 (INTERSECTION OF ROUTE 194 AND ROUTE 5) SECTION3 M.P. 0.07 TO 0.1 (INTERSECTION OF ROUTE 194 AND COMMERCE WAY) SECTION4 M.P. 0.11 TO 0.26 (ROUTE 194 BETWEEN COMMERCE WAY AND RYE STREET) SECTION5 M.P. 0.27 TO 0.27 (INTERSECTION OF ROUTE 194 AND RYE STREET) SECTION6 M.P. 0.28 TO 0.52 (ROUTE 194 BETWEEN RYE STREET AND PATRIA ROAD) SECTION7 M.P. 0.53 TO 0.53 (INTERSECTION OF ROUTE 194 AND PATRIA ROAD) SECTION8 M.P. TO (INTERSECTION OF ROUTE 194 AND SCHWEIR ROAD) SECTION9 M.P. 0.83 TO 1.54 (ROUTE 194 BETWEEN SCHWEIR ROAD AND WEST ROAD). SECTION10 M.P. 1.55 TO 1.57 (INTERSECTION OF ROUTE 194 AND WEST ROAD) SECTION11 M.P. 1.65 TO . 1.75 (INTERSECTION OF ROUTE 194 AND TROY ROAD) SECTION12 M.P. TO (RYE STREET-ENTIRE LENGTH) SECTION13 M.P. TO (TROY ROAD-ENTIRE LENGTH) SECTION14 M.P. TO (WEST ROAD-ENTIRE LENGTH) SECTION15 M.P. TO (SCHWEIR ROAD-ENTIRE LENGTH) SECTION16 M.P. TO (PATRIA ROAD-ENTIRE LENGTH) S-1 I S-2 I S-3 I S-4 I S-5 I S-6 1 5-7 S-8 I S-9 I S-10 I S-11 S-12 I S-13 I S-14 I S-15 I S-16 1, TOTALS DRIVER UNABLE TO COPE WITH CONDITIONS 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 71 T 2 1 1 5 DRIVER FOLLOWING TOO CLOSELY 8 12 1 N 4 2 1 N 8 2 8 N N N N 46 VEHICLE CHANGED LANES IMPROPERLY 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 DRIVER VIOLATED TRAFFIC CONTROL 5 2 1 8 DRIVER FAILED TO GRANT RIGHT OF WAY 6 3 1 A A 2 A A A A 12 IMPROPER PASSING MANEUVER C C 1 1 C C C C 2 UNSAFE RIGHT TURN ON RED 1 C C C C C C 1 DRIVERLESS VEHICLE 1 I 1 DRIVER ON WRONG SIDE OF ROAD 1 D D D D D D 1 DRIVER UNDER THE INFLUENCE 1 E E 2 E E E E 3 VEHICLE ILLEGALLY PARKED N N 1 N N N N 1 ABNORMAL ROAD CONDITIONS 1 T T - T T T T 1 DRIVERS VIEW OBSTRUCTED S S 1 S S S S 1 DRIVER FELL ASLEEP 1 1 DRIVING TOO FAST FOR CONDITIONS 7 1 1 1 1 11 TOTALS: 29 21 4 0 6 4 1 0 17 3 9 1 0 0 2 0 0 96 t I, Exhibit 24 Evaluation of Need for By-Pass Areas Sullivan Avenue at Patria Road Sullivan Avenue at Schweir Road ` U0b% � \�/PLANNING SHEET NO. of W e � /ENGINEERING Q 8 O 6 0 AT E 8 \ WAND DESIGN CALCULATED BY DATE CHECKED BY DATE SCALE .. ......LAA % ` � Yc . :. S: 1 .... __. . = .--_ o v� �-J 1 ' j ... ................. j_ ... ..:.........:........... vie 43' IS i'T► ..... �. D, ... y � 415 1 ... 1 ' o V o Q W JOB ET R A F M I �OF W E N G I PLANNING N G SHEET NO. OF lLffUU e � /ENGINEERING Q O 6 Q,� AND DESIGN CALCULATED sv DATE CHECKED BY DATE SCALE { Aviv"tje az�.. 5ca�we�r �c�-c�P 1 57 H .....' o wt ............. 3 S8 _ y� _ 2 . .. _ .. Ltd . Pw1 • 41 �FIku g 575 .