Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSite Plan - Conservation (81) TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR RECEIVED INLAND WETLANDS, WATERCOURSES AND CONSERVATION APPLICATION APR 2 2 2004 Application# Date Received igl5 ( South Windsor INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY INSTRUCTIONS CONSERVATION COMMISSION 1. One application (1) with map and plans (2 copies) shall be submitted together with the fee set forth in the Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations, Town of South Windsor. (See Regulations, Section VII—X) 2. The South Windsor Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations should be reviewed with respect to the standards and criteria for application Evaluation. (See Regulations, Section VII—X) 3. The applicant understands that this application is to be considered complete only when all information and documents required by the Agency have been submitted. The applicant shall ,9r also complete the state filing form. o' A. Applicant's Name: Corner Meadow, L.L.C. o�€� Address: 40 Windy Hill Drive, South Windsor, CT 06074 / lo d KI Phone: (home) 644-6524 (work) 644-2561 (fax) 644-4683 e V, o� B. Legal owner's name: Corner Meadow, L.L.C. &John J. Mitchell Address (both)40 Windy Hill Drive, South Windsor, CT 06074 Phone(home) 644-6524 (work) 644-2561 (fax)644-4683 (List additional owners, addresses, and phone numbers on back of application) C. If the applicant is not the owner of the subject property, a letter by the owner(s) authorizing the proposed regulated activity set forth in the application must accompany this form and will be part of the application. D. Project Name(if any)River Walk Senior Residence Development 1. Contact Person(if further information is needed) Karen M. Isherwood,P.E. @ Design Professionals, Inc. (work) 291-8755 (fax) 291-8757 E. The geographical location of the property which is to be affected by the proposed regulated activities including a description of the land in sufficient detail to allow identification of the property on the Inland Wetland and Watercourse Map. Assessor's map# 88 Parcel# 7 Zone RR&A-20 88 6 (partial) x .^ F. Names of all abutting property owners from records in Town Clerk's office. (use separate sheet if necessary) See attached sheet. G. Have you notified all abutting property owners (from records in Town Clerk's office) by certified letter that an application is pending before the Agency? Yes ®** (you are required to supply a copy of the letter with the list of the names of the abutters). letter attached H. Purpose and description of all proposed regulated activity(s) including amount of disturbance in square feet and types of fill and the time element involved: No filling nor excavation of on-site wetlands proposed. On-site wetlands disturbance consists of construction disturbance. Temporary off-site disturbance for 4751. ft. of 8" cross country sanitary sewer and manhole; propose construction of 18 unit SRD and related improvements. Time element: 2 f construction seasons. I. A class A-2 map of the property drawn to 1" = 40', showing the area to be developed, extent of the wetlands and watercourses affected, topography, existing and proposed activities and names and locations of adjacent property owners must be submitted. J. Amount of regulated area disturbance and types of fill (including wetlands and regulated buffers). 4,OOOf sq. ft. of on-site disturbance; 4,860± sq. ft. (temporary/off-site disturbance); 2.29f ac. upland review area disturbance. See above. K. Acreage of wetlands and watercourses in regulated areas to be altered: 4,000 sq. ft. (on-site); 4,860f sq. ft. (temporary/off-site) L. Acreage of wetlands and watercourses to be created: .20±acre M. Lineal feet of proposed stream alteration: 0 N. Total land area of project and percentage, which is wetlands: 12.20 acres/56.1% (6.84 ac.) O. Identify all other permits or approvals that have been issued, applied for, or required with respect to the proposed activity set forth in this application. (These may include but not be limited to, local Planning & Zoning, Zoning Board of Appeals, D.E.P., F.E.M.A., D.O.T., The Army Corps of Engineers, and any other State, Local or Federal Permits.)PZC; ZBA(approved), DEP/Corps of Engineers(to be determined). P. The applicant (or designated representative) hereby attests that a sign will be posted at the following location(s) 1235 Sullivan Avenue By--PP I Name Peter R. DeMal l ie on or before e following date as directed by Town staff Signature: S These signs must be displayed continuously for at least ten (10) days prior to scheduled meeting (see Regulations, Section 7.3a) The undersigned hereby applies for the regulated activities listed in paragraph H above, for a Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation permit for the property described herein and confirms that: 1. She/he is familiar with the currently effective Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations of the Town of South Windsor. 2. She/he understands that at any time during the review period, the Agency may require the applicant to provide more information about the wetlands and/or watercourses in question and/or any proposed activity. 3. All information submitted in the application for review shall be considered factual, or in the case of anticipated activity, binding. A knowing failure of the applicant or any of her/his agents to provide correct information, or performance exceeding the levels of activity anticipated, shall be sufficient grounds for revocation of any permit under these regulations. 4. By malting this application, the applicant gives permission to the Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Commission members and/or its representative to enter the portions of the premises which are subject of the application for the purpose of inspection and investigation and otherwise evaluating the merits of the application both before and after a final deci 'on has been issued. Signature of Owner of Property r Date ��/• d y Signature of Applicant Date 9 o=CEIVED (3 Qil7er CWd& APR 2 3 2004 Aft Active AduiL `:oi-mtsunity° SOUTH WINDSORPLANNMGDFT. 1235 Sullivan Avenue, South Windsor, CT 06074 April 24, 2004 Mr. & Mrs. Paul Roulier 1180 Strong Road South Windsor, CT. 06074 Re: River Walk SRD 1235 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT. / Dear Mr. and Mrs. Roulier, At the request of the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency and Planning & Zoning Commission, we wish to notify you that we have filed applications on the above noted property. We will be subject to a hearing or meeting by both agencies in the near future. The applications and plans are now on file with the South Windsor Planning Department at our Town Hall. As a neighboring property owner, we are pleased to invite you to the hearing(s) And ask any questions, or give comments, although you're not required to attend. You may also submit any written comments regarding our application(s) prior to the meeting, if you desire. Della and John Mitchell and Barbara (me) and Paul Barbour are the owners of this property. We would be very pleased to show you our plans for River Walk and elicit any ideas you may have to make this project one all of us will be proud of. Please feel free to call me (282-1751) to arrange a meeting. I will be out of town until the 5th of May, but really look forward to meeting with you both and any other homeowners in our area. In the meantime, for further information regarding the specific date this application(s) will be heard, please contact Kelli Koehler, Recording Secretary, Michele Lipe, Deputy Planning Director, or Jeff Folger, Environmental Planner at our Planning Department in South Windsor, 644-2511, ext. 253, 252, 229, respectively. Sincerely, Barbara Barbour, partner Corner Meadow, Ile Cc: Marcia Banach Jeff Folger RECEWLED DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. APR 2 6 2004 civil engineers ♦ planners ♦ surveyors gis ♦ gps ♦ landscape architects South Windsor INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY CONSERVATION COMMISSION Transmitted via certified mail Dear Current Abutting Property Owner April 21, 2004 Re: River Walk SRD DPI Project No. 02-1687 1235 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, Connecticut In accordance with regulations of the Inland Wetlands Agency and the Planning& Zoning Commission, we are required to notify you that applications have been filed on the property abutting yours and are subject to a hearing or meeting by the Planning&Zoning Commission and the Inland Wetlands Agency. 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(s)will be heard, please contact Kelli Koehler, Recording Secretary, Michele Lipe, Deputy Planning Director, or Jeff Folger, Environmental Planner at the South Windsor Planning Department at 644- 2511, ext. 253, 252, or 229, respectively. Thank you_ Sincerely, DESIGN WOFESSIONALS, INC_ By: A// Peter R_ DeMallie Principal cc: Corner Meadow,L.L.C_ Ralph Alexander, Esq. Karen M. Isherwood, P.E. Richard L. Boston,R.L.A. Jeffrey Folger ✓ Marcia Banach 165 South Satellite Road,South Windsor,Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860)291-8755•Fax: (860)291-8757 Email:dpicivil@aol.com RECEIVED MAY 0 5 2004 ,:oath Windsor April 22, 2004 INIL.AND WETLANDS AGENCY CONSERVATION COMMISSION 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 property at 1209 Sullivan Avenue in South Windsor, Connecticut. I further authorize the submission of land use applications associated with the development of this property for the River Walk SRD. Sincerely, By: kC Jo J. Mit hell 40 Windy Hill Drive South Windsor, CT 06074 Tel. 860-644-2561 Cc: Peter R. DeMallie Marcia Banach Jeffrey Folger Stormwater Management Plan River Walk Senior Residence Development South Windsor, Connecticut DECEIVED APR 2 2 2004 South Windsor INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY CONSERVATION COMMISSION Prepared by Design Professionals,Inc. 165 South Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 DPI Project No. 04-1687 o .G. April 21,2004NS %® 10INAL ���r�inmee®c➢'a°� Table of Contents: Page# Introduction I Proposed Development I Off-Site Analysis 1 Peak Runoff control 1 Nonstructural Drainage System 1 Riparian Buffers 1 Erosion/Sedimentation Control Systems 1 Conveyance System 2 Discharge at the Natural Location 2 Maintenance and Operation 2 Topographic Contour Maps 2 Floodplain Boundaries 2 Drainage Design 2 Water Quality 4 On-Site Storm Sewer Calculations 4 Conclusions 4 Appendices Site Location Map A TR-55 Existing Conditions B TR-55 Developed Conditions C Detention/Infiltration Basin Design D Detention/Infiltration Basin Routings E Storm Sewer Calculations F Introduction: The proposed River Walk Senior Residence Development consists of two adjacent sites located on the west side of Sullivan Avenue in South Windsor, Connecticut. The site consists of 11.91 acres of land presently owned by Corner Meadow, L.L.C. and will also include an additional 0.29 acres to be purchased from the abutting property owner to the north, John Mitchell. The site presently contains a vacant single family home. The site is traversed by the Podunk River, and has substantial wetland and floodplain areas associated with the Podunk River. Appendix A contains a site location map. Proposed Development: The proposed development of the site includes the construction of 18 units of senior housing contained within 7 buildings. As part of the development, an access roadway and driveways will be constructed with residences serviced by public sanitary sewer and water. The storm drainage system proposed for the development includes the installation of storm-sewers within the proposed access street and a piped storm drainage system. The drainage discharge from the development will be to a detention/infiltration basin which will discharge to the Podunk River. Off--Site Analysis: The site presently drains southwest directly to the Podunk River via overland flow. The Podunk River traverses the site from north to south. Peak Runoff Control: The intent of the design is to provide sufficient detention/infiltration on site to provide post development peak discharges at or below existing peak discharges. Nonstructural Drainage Systems: The site will make use of an Infiltration/Detention basin to help control the runoff on the site, and help treat the runoff prior to discharge. Riparian Buffers: Buffer areas will be maintained between the Podunk River and the proposed development. Erosion/Sedimentation Control Systems: An extensive erosion/sedimentation control plan has been developed as part of the site 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 temporary sediment basins during construction. 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. Conveyance System: The on-site conveyance system consists of a piped stormwater system discharging to the infiltration/detention basin. The piped drainage system has been designed to accommodate the runoff from a 10 yr. design storm. Discharge at the Natural Location: The site presently drains to the Podunk River, and will continue to under developed conditions. Maintenance and Operation: The following maintenance operations will be required to ensure the proper and efficient operation of the Storm Water System and Infiltration/Detention basin. 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 pavement areas shall be swept at a minimum of once per year, in the spring shortly after the end of the snow season. Infiltration/Detention Water Quality Basin: The water quality basin shall be inspected twice yearly. All large woody growth that may affect the flow of water or the stability of the basins or swale 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. Any erosion or other problems that may affect the proper operation of the water quality basin shall be repaired promptly. Topographic Contour Maps: A topographic contour map showing the drainage area at a scale of 1"=40' is 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/Infiltration basin was sized using a computer program by Hydrographs called Hydroflow. The program allows for the development of hydrographs representing the developed flows into the basin, and the modeling of the basin with elevation/storage/discharge curves to represent the basin. The program then provides the routing of the hydrograph through the basin, and provides peak discharge and storage information. The existing site was modeled using the TR-55 computer program. Only the portion of the site that will be developed as part of the proposed development was included in the calculations. Approximately 0.35 ac. of the developed site will not be routed through the basin, and therefore this area was treated separately under both existing and proposed conditions. The TR-55 calculations for existing conditions on the site are included in appendix B. The site was analyzed under developed conditions using the TR-55 computer program. Under developed conditions, there will be an increase in peak runoff from the site. The results of the TR-55 analysis are included in appendix C, and a summary of the existing and developed peak discharges(in cubic feet per second) follows: Storm Freq. Exist. Peak Discharge Developed Peak Disch. 2 0+ 1 1 0+6 6 10 0 +3 3 1 + 11 12 25 0+4 4 1 + 13 14 50 1 + 6 7 1 + 15 16 100 1 +7 8 2 + 18 20 The site will continue to discharge to the Podunk River. In order to mitigate for the peak flows, a detention/infiltration basin is proposed. The basin has been sized to provide sufficient detention for the 2-100 year storm events. The basin was sized to provide peak flows at or below existing conditions. The results are summarized below: Storm Freq. Exist. Peak Disch. Dev. Peak Disch. Dev. Peak Disch. Combined Dev. (Bypassing Basin) (Det. Basin) Peak Discharge 2 1 0 0.63 0.6 10 3 1 1.23 2.2 25 4 1 3.04 4.0 50 7 1 4.41 5.4 100 8 2 5.15 7.1 The proposed detention basin was modeled using the Hydrograph Hydroflo computer program. The basin design is included in appendix D. The Routing of the storm flows under developed conditions for the 2-100 year storm events were prepared, and are included in appendix E. As can be seen from the detention basin design,the discharge for the 2-100 year storm events is generally less than the existing peak discharge into the Podunk River. Water Quality: The infiltration/detention basin has been designed with a volume below the outlet discharge pipe that will provide capacity for the initial flush from the site. This volume exceeds the volume of runoff from the site for a 1.0"rainfall event. On-Site Storm Sewer Calculations: The storm sewer calculations for the storm piping within the proposed private roadways are included in appendix F. 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 infiltration/detention basin will mitigate any potential water quality and quantity impacts from the development of the site. APPENDIX A CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROT Statewide Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Activity Reporting Fog,,, 2 2 2004 or n accordance with the requirements of Section 22a-39-14 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies,this form is to be comple��vfot ��CO ouch VVipds �oN by an inland wetlands agency established pursuant to Section 22a-42 of the Connecticut General Statutes. Use a separate form to report each action take�VAMMISn by the agency. It is recommended that this form be made part of the application package. Inland wetlands agencies are responsible for verifyjng that the information provided below is accurate and that it reflects the final action of the agency. 1. TOWN IN WHICH THE ACTION IS OCCURRING- ` Does this project cross municipal boundaries? Yes No If so,please list the other towns in which the action is occurring: 2. LOCATION: USGS Quad Map name: �lawce s t ti' Cs, AND Number: $ Attach a dean 8 '/z "x 11"original scale photocopy of the USGS Quad Map with,in red ink, the boundary of the project site outlined(where possible)or the project site pinpointed with an arrow. Do not circle the"general vicinity"of the site_ In the lower right-hand comer of each USGS Quad Map there is an identifying name,write the name from the corresponding map in the space provided above. Quad numbers are found on the Connecticut Town and Quadrangle Index Map (the directory to all USGS Quad Maps). Please provide the number in the space provided above. Do not attach a copy of the National Wetlands Inventory Map_ Do Not attach a copy of the Connecticut Town and Quadrangle Index Map. 3. NAME OF APPLICANT,VIOLATOR OR PETITIONER: ('n f�J�*d )19 rJ&�.ud (_.L. C Supply the name of the person applying for a permit,petitioner for a map amendment or jurisdictional ruling,or recipient of the enforcement action. c 4. NAME FOR PROJECT SITE: _ t d-ef (,t;7t( (,< _, Supply the name given to the project,or the name by which the project site is generally known_ Briefly describe the project: + .r T r yF et5 fly w ✓T 5. ACTIVITY TYPE CODE: �11 Provide the code or codes which best characterize the activity being reported. A maximum of 4 codes may be entered. For example, locating a driveway in a buffer/upland review area would be code "9"and code"12"(code "7"is not used). The construction of a house in the buffer/upland review area would most likely be codes "2"for excavation,"9"For driveway construction,and"12"for buffer/upland review area. Construction of a parking lot in a buffer/upland review area may be codes"1", "7". "10",and "12". 1 ... Filling 7 . .. . Culverting(not for roadways) 2 ... Excavation 8 . ... Underground Utilities (no other activities) 3 ... Land Clearing/Grubbing(no other activity) 9 .___ Roadway/Driveway Construction 4 _.. Stream Channeluation 1.0 -_- Drainage Improvements S ... Stream Stabilization 11 _ ._ Pond Dredging/Dam Construction 6 . .. Stream Clearance (removal of debris only) 12 . .. Activity in Buffer/Upland Review Area 6. ACTIVITY PURPOSE CODE: C. Enter only one code letter which best characterizes the activity_ ALLSTATE AGENCY PROJECTS MUST ONLY CODE "N".' A _ . . Residential Improvement by Homeowner I . . . Storm Water/Flood Control B _ .. New Residential Development for Single Family Units J . .. Erosion/Sedimentation Control C _ .. New Residential Development for Multi-Family/Condos K ... Recreation/Boating/Navigation D . .. Commercial/Industrial Uses L . . . Routine Maintenance E _ . . Municipal Project lit ._ Map Amendment F - .. Utility Company Project ON... State Agency Project G • •.Agriculture,Forestry or Conservation P _. , Other H. .. Wetland Restoration,Enhancement,Creation REVISED 1198 .r- .. J ` II 1.1 , ,r'Q- -` ,.y,�J r c7 :- jam- _•\': \ � )�, :.r;•� / .� i/ -� 1�/ _ _�.. -�=yl /, � � � I rA < �G �`���.��� cJ' r(. ��.�•� '� :. ��`\� �� - (� `-APO /- ,� ��'.'-\� ///� ;\ ,�e, tom. �• N I �, ��; � ;�_ •.� � <�• : . ��•s�� ��\ V .,��_�!-"�/ /I �:' � ��� ' � C� . I,.` •,�� •,fit--�:• - `_o/ � ,�- �� J • 3 "L / � "'`�. 4 t'� �J 'C r�' \_ter' :�:'• - � _ _ \ •.,1^p 0 \�"�� l � �1\ � r. 0 \,© `� r•. �� .�.,•" .moo - �°'� � oor � �� ( � ��. �� �"_-' �r/ �� °�,/� ) r , I it J ' o � Ir : IJ C� / 1 O I�' I 1''< U � �, !I . .1ll•• � � v I � �a� ��'N, ��\:. ` / iIlil\ r��l`\ �� r O � °1 / rp/i 'i R_.I II._..,I, i a I i"���J � � 4l �• "'u� �r �. it it iI' eS 0 ��, L`"y'r: r r d`+y 6 r l_.... '•• �'+. q ' JI' .:III �:,� .i. t.,1� `�' ••v�' •�� 4" w n�',i rr � 1 •�• ,!lt 1f q \ � I ;�' `��i •• At lI rr �� �•® 0 i I'I' ,,,{I i'�II I � �I itIt �/ I�', � �i� '' li' •�d'� '-` •�r��'�y�: �p�e ( U 0 • OG9/ ..:..•..J "I✓ r II I '�� _Y` C w'.r �0 0 • Z %�� '-. _,�, 0.5�� //// , 0 0 /` I� -�1 --/ '.I V �n�d,e r ,• � � /, �-.. O, -y/ 2 617 I�11 i / �p O ... \�_- ��l.l I��/I' � T \„ I � �' 1Y° A4�r ..r y� •,�'• •C• �j _ ! •)��` UU i ..i��/ �,.:r �j � o \ N� � �7 5�1 ,1. 1 \ 1' i t -0 L w r »r �,. `•� L 3.�f; _ Oa l '��_ 1'f/i%/ � \" \ � ' r��{I �I �':6 . 0 � n .,.� y',4 .. "..,,�.�'�!t#� •. _-`. •�•'••�'v �k�Li� 100• -.- _... .._ APPENDIX B RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2.00 Project RIVER WALK User: KMI Date: 03-31-04 County HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: EXISTING CONDITIONS Subarea : EXIST ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab.) Impervious Areas Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways - .06(98) - - OTHER AGRICULTURAL LANDS Pasture, grassland or range good - 3.71 (61) - - Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) 3.77 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBAREA: EXIST TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: 3.77 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: 62* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2.00 Project : RIVER WALK User: KMI Date: 03-31-04 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: EXISTING CONDITIONS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flow Type 2 year Length Slope Surface n Area Wp Velocity Time rain (ft) (ft/ft) code (sq/ft) (ft) (ft/sec) (hr) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sheet 3.2 50 .20 F 0.054 Sheet 250 .06 F 0.319 Shallow Concent'd 280 .06 U 0.020 Time of Concentration = 0.39* --- 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 : RIVER WALK User: KMI Date: 03-31-04 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: EXISTING CONDITIONS Datd: Drainage Area 3.77 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 62 * Time of Concentration: 0.39 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area NONE I Storm Number 1 1 I 2 1 3 l 4 1 5 1 1----------------------I------1------1------►------1------1 l Frequency (yrs) 1 2 1 10 1 25 1 50 1 100 i I I I I I I i 24-Hr Rainfall (in) i 3.2 i 4.7 1 5.5 I 6.2 1 6.9 1 I I I I I I I 1 Ia/P Ratio i 0.38 1 0.26 1 0.22 1 0.20 1 0.18 l I I I I I I I l Runoff (in) i 0.48 1 1.26 1 1.76 l 2.23 l 2.73 1 I I I I I I i I Unit Peak Discharge 10.494 10.620 10.641 10.655 10.666 1 1 (cfs/acre/in) I I I I I I 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 1 1 0.0% Ponds Used I I I I I I 1----------------------1------1------1------1------1------1 1 Peak Discharge. (cfs) I 1 1 3 1 4 1 6 1 7 1 ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- * - Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2.00 Project : RIVER WALK User: KMI Date: 03-31-04 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: EXISTING CONDITIONS - AREA BYPASS BASIN Subarea : EXIST ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- OTHER AGRICULTURAL LANDS Pasture, grassland or range good - 0.35(61) - - Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) .35 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBAREA: EXIST TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: .35 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: 61* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2.00 Project : RIVER WALK User: KMI Date: 03-31-04 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: EXISTING CONDITIONS - AREA BYPASS BASIN -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flow Type 2 year Length Slope Surface n Area Wp Velocity Time rain (ft) (ft/ft) code (sq/ft) (ft) (ft/sec) (hr) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sheet 3.2 150 .06 F 0.212 Time of Concentration = 0.21* --- 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 o 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 : RIVER WALK User: KMI Date: 03-31-04 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: EXISTING CONDITIONS - AREA BYPASS BASIN Data: Drainage Area .35 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 61 * Time of Concentration: 0.21 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area NONE Stofm Number 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I ----------------------1------I------1------!------i------I Frequency (yrs) ! 2 ! 10 I 25 I 50 I 100 I I I I I I I I 1 24-Hr Rainfall (in) ► 3.2 I 4.7 1 5.5 I 6.2 ! 6.9 ! 1 I I I I I I Ia/P Ratio 1 0.40 ! 0.27 1 0.23 ! 0.21 ( 0.19 I I I I i I I I ! Runoff (in) 1 0.44 1 1.19 11.68 1 2.14 1 2.63 I I I I I I I I Unit Peak Discharge 10.584 10.769 10.792 10.808 10.820 ! ! (cfs/acre/in) I I I I I I I Pond and Swamp Factor! 1.00 11.00 1 1.00 ( 1.00 11.00 1 1 0.0% Ponds Used I I I I I I 1----------------------1------1------I------I------!------I Peak Discharge (cfs) I 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 I 1 1 * - Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines 1 APPENDIX C RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2.00 Project : RIVER WALK User: KMI Date: 03-31-04 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: PROPOSED CONDITIONS - BASIN Subarea : PROP. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) --------=---------------------------------------------------------------------- FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab. ) Open space (Lawns,parks etc. ) Fair condition; grass cover 50% to 75% - 1.49(69) - - Impervious Areas Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways - 2.28 (98) - - Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) 3.77 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBAREA: PROP. TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: 3.77 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: 87* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2.00 Project RIVER WALK User: KMI Date: 03-31-04 County HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: PROPOSED CONDITIONS - BASIN ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flow Type 2 year Length Slope Surface n Area Wp Velocity Time rain (ft) (ft/ft) code (sq/ft) (ft) (ft/sec) (hr) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sheet 3.2 50 .20 E 0.037 Sheet 100 .02 E 0.163 Shallow Concent'd 60 .01 P 0.008 Time of Concentration = 0.21* --- 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 : RIVER WALK User: KMI Date: 03-31-04 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: PROPOSED CONDITIONS - BASIN Data: Drainage Area 3.77 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 87 * Time of Concentration: 0.21 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area NONE ! Storm Number ( 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 ] 1----------------------1------I------1------1------1------] Frequency (yrs) ] 2 1 10 1 25 1 50 1 100 1 I I I I I I I ] 24-Hr Rainfall (in) ( 3.2 ! 4.7 i 5.5 ] 6.2 ( 6.9 1 I I I I I I ! Ia/P Ratio 1 0.09 1 0.06 1 0.05 1 0.05 1 0.04 1 I I I I I I I Used ] 0.10 ► 0.10 1 0.10 1 0.10 1 0.10 ] I I I I I I I Runoff (in) ! 1.91 ] 3.29 ! 4.04 1 4.71 1 5.38 I I I I I I I Unit Peak Discharge ► 0.871 10.871 10.871 10.871 10.871 1 I (cfs/acre/in) I I i I I I I 1 Pond and Swamp Factor] 1.00 ] 1.00 ! 1.00 1 1.00 ] 1.00 1 ] 0.0% Ponds Used I ]----------------------1 ------1------1 ------1------1------1 1 Peak Discharge (cfs) 1 6 1 11 1 13 1 15 ! 18 1 ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- * - Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines RUNOFF CURVE NUMBER COMPUTATION Version 2.00 Project : RIVER WALK User: KMI Date: 03-31-04 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: PROPOSED CONDITIONS - AREA BYPASS BASIN Subarea : PROP. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hydrologic Soil Group COVER DESCRIPTION A B C D Acres (CN) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FULLY DEVELOPED URBAN AREAS (Veg Estab. ) Open space (Lawns,parks etc. ) Fair condition; grass cover 50% to 75% - .20 (69) - - Impervious Areas Paved parking lots, roofs, driveways - .15(98) - - Total Area (by Hydrologic Soil Group) .35 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBAREA: PROP. TOTAL DRAINAGE AREA: .35 Acres WEIGHTED CURVE NUMBER: 81* ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * - Generated for use by GRAPHIC method TIME OF CONCENTRATION AND TRAVEL TIME Version 2.00 Project : RIVER WALK User: KMI Date: 03-31-04 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: PROPOSED CONDITIONS - AREA BYPASS BASIN ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flow Type 2 year Length Slope Surface n Area Wp Velocity Time rain (ft) (ft/ft) code (sq/ft) (ft) (ft/sec) (hr) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sheet 3.2 100 .06 E 0.105 Sheet 60 .20 E 0.043 Time of Concentration = 0.15* --- 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 : RIVER WALK User: KMI Date: 03-31-04 County : HARTFORD State: CT Checked: Date: Subtitle: PROPOSED CONDITIONS - AREA BYPASS BASIN Data: Drainage Area .35 * Acres Runoff Curve Number 81 * Time of Concentration: 0.15 * Hours Rainfall Type III Pond and Swamp Area NONE ----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------- Storm Number 1 1 1 2 1 3 l 4 1 5 1 1----------------------1------1------i------1------1------1 Frequency (yrs) 1 2 1 10 l 25 1 50 i 100 I I 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 I I I I I I I Ia/P Ratio 1 0.15 l 0.10 i 0.09 1 0.08 ► 0.07 l I Used 1 0.15 1 0.10 1 0.10 1 0.10 1 0.10 I I 1 I I I I 1 Runoff (in) 1 1.47 l 2.72 l 3.43 1 4.07 1 4.71 i I I I I I I 1 Unit Peak Discharge 10.924 10.951 10.951 10.951 10.951 1 (cfs/acre/in) I I I I I I 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 1 I 0.0% Ponds Used I I I I I I 1----------------------1------1------I------1 ------1------I 1 Peak Discharge (cfs) l 0 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 * - Value(s) provided from TR-55 system routines APPENDIX D Reservoir Report Page 1 Reservoir No. 3 - 2.5:1 POND f-lydraflow HWrographs by IntelisoKe Pond Data Pond storage is based on known contour areas. Average end area method used. Stage 1 Storage Table Stage(ft) Elevation(ft) Contour area(sgft) Incr.Storage(cult) Total storage(cult) 0.00 71.40 9,542 0 0 1.00 72.00 10,220 9,881 9,881 3.00 74.00 12,590 22,810 32,691 5.00 76.00 15,120 27,710 60,401 Culvert/Orifice Structures Weir Structures [A] [B] [C] [D] [A] [B] [C] [D] Rise in = 12.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 Crest Len ft = 3.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 Span in = 12.0 6.0 0.0 0.0 Crest El.ft = 73.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 No.Barrels = 1 1 0 0 Weir Coeff. = 3.33 3.33 0.00 0.00 Invert El.ft = 71.40 71.40 0.00 0.00 Weir Type = Rect - - - Length ft = 20.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 Multi-Stage = Yes No No No Slope% = 0.50 1.00 0.00 0.00 N-Value = _013 .013 .000 .000 Orif.Coeff. = 0.60 0.60 0.00 0.00 Multistage = n/a Yes No No Exfiltration Rate = 0.00 in/hr/sgft Tailwater 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 Clv D Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Exfil Total ft cuft ft cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cis cfs 0.00 0 71.40 0.00 0.00 - -- 0.00 - -- -- -- 0.00 1.00 9,881 72.00 0.61 0.37 --- - 0.00 - -- -- -- 0.37 3.00 32,691 74.00 5.37 0.27 - - 5.11 - - - - 5.37 5.00 60,401 76.00 7.65 0.09 - - 7.53 - - - - 7.62 I APPENDIX E Hydrograph Summary Report Page Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Volume Inflow Maximum Maximum Hydrograph No. type flow interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cuft) (ft) (cuft) 1 SCS Runoff 6.30 1 729 23,626 — — PROP.STORM THRU BASIN 2 Reservoir 0.63 1 1122 20,346 1 72.30 12,413 THRU 2.5:1 BASIN Proj. file: 1687-DRAINAGE.gpw Return Period: 2 yr Run date: 04-20-2004 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hydrograph Summary Report Page Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Volume Inflow Maximum Maximum Hydrograph No. type flow interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) WS) (min) (min) (cult) (ft) (cuft) 1 SCS Runoff 11.00 1 729 41,571 — PROP.STORM THRU BASIN 2 Reservoir 1.23 1 785 33,276 1 73.06 22,017 THRU 2.5:1 BASIN Proj. file: 1687-DRAINAGE.gpw Return Period: 10 yr Run date: 04-20-2004 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hydrograph Summary Report Pagel Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Volume Inflow Maximum Maximum Hydrograph No. type flow interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cis) (min) (min) (cult) (ft) (cuft) 1 SCS Runoff 13.54 1 729 51,538 — PROP.STORM THRU BASIN 2 Reservoir 304 1 757 41,838 1 73.34 25,157 THRU 2.5:1 BASIN Proj. file: 1687-DRAINAGE.gpw Return Period: 25 yr Run date: 04-20-2004 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hydrograph Summary Report Pagel Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Volume Inflow Maximum Maximum Hydrograph No. type flow interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cis) (min) (min) (cult) (ft) (cuft) 1 SCS Runoff 15.77 1 729 60,396 — PROP.STORM THRU BASIN 2 Reservoir 4.41 1 753 50,143 1 73.58 27,881 THRU 2.5:1 BASIN Proj. file: 1687-DRAINAGE.gpw Return Period: 50 yr Run date: 04-20-2004 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hydrograph Summary Report Pagel Hyd. Hydrograph Peak Time Time to Volume Inflow Maximum Maximum Hydrograph No. type flow interval peak hyd(s) elevation storage description (origin) (cfs) (min) (min) (cult) (ft) (cult) 1 SCS Runoff 18.00 1 729 69,349 — PROP.STORM THRU BASIN 2 Reservoir 5.15 1 752 58,553 1 73.87 31,189 THRU 2.5:1 BASIN Proj. file: 1687-DRAINAGE.gpw Return Period: 100 yr Run date: 04-20-2004 Hydraflaw Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hydrograph Report Pagel Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 2 THRU 2.5:1 BASIN Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 0.63 cfs Storm frequency = 2 yrs Time interval = 1 min Inflow hyd. No. = 1 Reservoir name = 2.5:1 POND Max. Elevation = 72.30 ft Max. Storage = 12,413 tuft Storage Indication method used. Outflow hydrograph volume=20,346 cult Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Clv A Clv B Clv C Clv D Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Exfll Outflow (hrs) cfs ft cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs 12.25 5.17 72.24 0.60 0.59 - - - - - - - 0.59 12.27 4.88 72.27 0.62 0.61 - - - - - - - 0.61 12.28 4.59 72.29 0.64 0.62 - - - - - - - 0.62 18.63 0.15 72.24 0.61 0.60 ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 0.60 18.65 0.15 7Z26 0.62 0.60 ----- ----- ----- ---- ---- ----- ---- 0.60 18.67 0.15 72.27 0.63 0.61 ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 0.61 18.68 0.15 72.28 0.64 0.62 - - - - - - 0.62 18.70 0.15 72.30 << 0.65 0.63 - - - - - - - 0.63 18.72 0.15 72.30 0.65 0.63 - - - -=-- - - - 0.63 18.73 0.15 72.29 0.64 0.62 ----- ----- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- 0.62 18.75 0.15 72.29 0.64 0.62 ---- ----- ---- ---- ---- ----- ----- 0.62 18.77 0.15 72.29 0.64 0.62 ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 0.62 18.78 0.15 72.29 0.64 0.62 - - - - - - - 0.62 18.80 0.15 72.28 0.63 0.62 - - - - - - - 0.62 18.82 0.15 72.28 0.63 0.62 - - - - - - - 0.62 18.83 0.15 72.28 0.63 0.61 ----- ----- ---- ---- ----- ----- ----- 0.61 18.85 0.15 72.27 0.63 0.61 -- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 0.61 18.87 0.15 72.27 0.63 0.61 ----- ----- ----- ----- ---- ----- ----- 0.61 18.88 0.15 72.27 0.62 0.61 - - - - - - 0.61 18.90 0.15 72.27 0.62 0.61 - - - - - - - 0.61 18.92 0.15 72.26 0.62 0.61 - - - - - - -- 0.61 18.93 0.15 72.26 0.62 0.61 ----- ----- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- 0.61 18.95 0.15 72.26 0.62 0.60 ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 0.60 18.97 0.15 72.26 0.61 0.60 ----- ----- ----- ----- --- ----- ----- 0.60 18.98 0.15 72.25 0.61 0.60 - - - - - ---- - 0.60 19.00 0.15 72.25 0.61 0.60 - - - - - - - 0.60 19.02 0.15 72.25 0.61 0.60 - - - - - - - 0.60 19.03 0.15 72.24 0.61 0.60 ---- ----- ---- ---- -- ----- ---- 0.60 19.05 0.15 72.24 0.60 0.60 ----- ---- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- 0.60 ...End Hydrograph Report Page Hydraflow Hydrographs by IntelisoKfe Hyd. No. 2 THRU 2.5:1 BASIN Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 1.23 cfs Storm frequency = 10 yrs Time interval = 1 min Inflow hyd. No. = 1 Reservoir name = 2.5:1 POND Max. Elevation = 73.06 ft Max. Storage = 22,017 cult Storage Indication method used. Outflow hydrograph volume=33,276 tuft Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Clv A Clv B CIv C Clv D Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Exfil Outflow (hrs) cfs ft cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs 12.85 1.53 73.05 1.17 0.90 - - 0.27 - - - - 1.17 12.87 1.51 73.05 1.18 0.90 - - 0.28 - - - - 1.18 12.88 1.49 73.06 1.19 0.90 - - 0.29 - - - - 1.19 12.90 1.47 73.06 1.20 0.90 ---- ----- 0.30 ----- ----- ----- ----- 1.19 12.92 1.44 73.06 1.20 0.90 ----- ---- 0.30 ---- ----- ----- ----- 1.20 12.93 1 A2 73.06 1.21 0.90 ----- ----- 0.31 ----- ----- ----- - --- 1.21 12.95 1.40 73.06 1.21 0.90 - - 0.31 - - - 1.21 12.97 1.38 73.06 1.22 0.90 - - 0.32 - - - - 1.22 12.98 1.35 73.06 1.22 0.90 - - 0.32 - - - - 1.22 13.00 1.33 73.06 1.22 0.89 ---- ----- 0.33 ---- ----- ----- ----- 1.22 13.02 1.31 73.06 1.23 0.89 ----- ----- 0.33 ----- ----- ---- ----- 1.22 13.03 1.29 73.06 1.23 0.89 ----- ----- 0.33 ----- ----- ---- ----- 1.23 13.05 1.26 73.06 1.23 0.89 - - 0.33 - - - - 1.23 13.07 1.24 73.06 1.23 0.89 - - 0.33 - - - - 1.23 13.08 1.22 73.06<< 1.23 0.89 - - 0.33 - - - - 1.23<< 13.10 1.20 73.06 1.23 0.89 ----- ----- 0.33 ----- ----- ----- ----- 1.23 13.12 1.18 73.06 1.23 0.89 ----- ---- 0.33 ----- ----- ----- ----- 1.23 13.13 1.17 73.06 1.23 0.89 ----- ----- 0.33 ----- ----- ---- ----- 1.23 13.15 1.15 73.06 1.23 0.89 - 0.33 - - - - 1.22 13.17 1.14 73.06 1.22 0.89 - - 0.33 - - - - 1.22 13.18 1.13 73.06 1.22 0.89 - - 0.32 - -- - - 1.22 13.20 1.12 73.06 1.22 0.90 ---- ---- 0.32 ----- ----- ----- --- 1.22 13.22 1.11 73.06 1.22 0.90 ----- ----- 0.32 ----- ----- ----- ----- 1.21 13.23 1.10 73.06 1.21 0.90 ----- ----- 0.32 ----- ----- ----- ----- 1.21 13.25 1.09 73.06 1.21 0.90 - 0.31 - - - - 1.21 13.27 1.08 73.06 1.21 0.90 - - 0.31 - - - 1.21 13.28 1.08 73.06 1.21 0.90 - - 0.31 - -- - 1.20 13.30 1.07 73.06 1.20 0.90 ----- ----- 0.30 ---- ----- ----- 1.20 13.32 1.06 73.06 1.20 0.90 --- ----- 0.30 ---- ---- ---- ---- 1.20 13.33 1.06 73.06 1.20 0.90 ----- ----- 0.30 ----- ----- ----- ----- 1.19 13.35 1.05 73.06 1.19 0.90 - - 0.29 - - - - 1.19 13.37 1.05 73.06 1.19 0.90 - - 0.29 - - - - 1.19 13.38 1.04 73.05 1.19 0.90 - - 0.28 - - - - 1.18 13.40 1.03 73.05 1.18 0.90 ----- ----- 0.28 ---- ----- ----- ----- 1.18 13.42 1.03 73.05 1.18 0.90 ---- ----- 0.28 1.18 13.43 1.02 73.05 1.18 0.90 ---- ----- 0.27 ----- ----- ----- ---- 1.17 13.45 1.02 73.05 1.17 0.90 - - 0.27 - - - - 1.17 ...End Hydrograph Report Pagel Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 2 THRU 2.5:1 BASIN Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 3.04 cfs Storm frequency = 25 yrs Time interval = 1 min Inflow hyd. No. = 1 Reservoir name = 2.5:1 POND Max. Elevation = 73.34 ft Max. Storage = 25,157 cuft Storage Indication method used. Outflow hydrograph volume=41,838 cult Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation CIv A CIv B CIv C CIv D Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D EXHI Outflow (hrs) cfs ft cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs 12.53 4.07 73.33 2.94 0.68 - - 2.25 - - - - 2.94 12.55 3.82 73.33 2.98 0.68 - - 2.30 - - - - 2.98 12.57 3.58 73.34 3.01 0.67 - - 2.34 - - - - 3.01 12.58 3.35 73.34 3.03 0.67 ----- ----- 2.36 ---- ----- ----- ----- 3.03 12.60 3.14 73.34 3.04 0.67 ----- ----- 2.37 ----- ----- ----- ---- 3.04 12.62 2.95 73.34 << 3.04 0.67 ----- ---- 2.37 ----- ----- ----- ----- 3.04 << 12.63 2.77 73.34 3.03 0.67 - - 2.36 - -- - 3.03 12.65 2.62 73.34 3.02 0.67 - - 2.35 - - - --- 3.02 12.67 2.49 73.33 3.00 0.68 - - 2.32 - ----- - - 3.00 12.68 2.37 73.33 2.97 0.68 ---- ----- 2.30 ----- ----- ----- ----- 2.97 12.70 2.28 73.33 2.95 0.68 ---- ----- 2.26 ----- ----- ----- ----- 2.94 12.72 2.19 73.32 2.91 0.68 ----- ---- 2.23 ----- ----- ----- ----- 2.91 ...End Hydrograph Report Pagel Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 2 THRU 2.5:1 BASIN Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 4.41 cfs Storm frequency = 50 yrs Time interval = 1 min Inflow hyd. No. = 1 Reservoir name = 2.5.1 POND Max. Elevation = 73.58 ft Max. Storage = 27,881 cult Storage Indication method used. Outflow hydrograph volume=50,143 cult Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation CIv A CIv B CIv C CIv D Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D EMI Outflow (hrs) cfs ft cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs 12.43 6.47 73.54 4.22 0.49 - - 3.73 - - - - 4.22 12.45 6.18 73.55 4.27 0.48 - - 3.79 - - - - 4.27 12.47 5.88 73.56 4.32 0.47 - - 3.84 - - - - 4.32 12.48 5.58 73.57 4.35 0.47 ----- ----- 3.89 ----- ----- ----- ----- 4.35 12.50 5.28 73.57 4.38 0.46 ----- ----- 3.92 ---- ---- ----- ----- 4.38 12.52 4.98 73.58 4.40 0.46 ----- ----- 3.94 ----- ----- ----- ----- 4.40 12.53 4.69 73.58 4.41 0.46 - - 3.95 - - - 4.41 12.55 4.40 73.58 << 4.41 0.45 - - 3.96 - - - - 4.41 << 12.57 4.12 73.58 4.41 0.46 - -- 3.95 - - ---- - 4.41 12.58 3.86 73.58 4.40 0.46 ----- ----- 3.94 --_ _____ ____ ____ 4.40 12.60 3.62 73.57 4.38 0.46 ---- ----- 3.92 ----- ----- ----- ----- 4.38 12.62 3.39 73.57 4.36 0.46 ----- ----- 3.90 ----- ----- ----- ----- 4.36 12.63 3.19 73.56 4.33 0.47 - - 3.86 - - - - 4.33 12.65 3.02 73.56 4.30 0.47 - - 3.83 - - - - 4.30 12.67 2.86 73.55 4.27 0.48 - -- 3.79 - - - ---- 4.27 12.68 2.73 73.54 4.23 0.49 --- ---- 3.74 ----- ----- ----- ----- 4.23 12.70 2.62 73.53 4.19 0.50 ----- ----- 3.70 ----- ----- ----- ----- 4.19 ...End Hydrograph Report Page 1 Hydraflow Hydrographs by Intelisolve Hyd. No. 2 THRU 2.5:1 BASIN Hydrograph type = Reservoir Peak discharge = 5.15 cfs Storm frequency = 100 yrs Time interval = 1 min Inflow hyd. No. = 1 Reservoir name = 2.5:1 POND Max. Elevation = 73.87 ft Max. Storage = 31,189 cult Storage Indication method used. Outflow hydrograph volume=58,553 cult Hydrograph Discharge Table Time Inflow Elevation Clv A Clv B Clv C Clv D Wr A Wr B Wr C Wr D Exfil Outflow (hm) cfs ft cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs cfs 12.37 8.93 73.77 4.95 0.35 - - 4.60 - - - - 4.95 12.38 8.46 73.79 5.00 0.34 - 4.66 - - - - 5.00 12.40 8.05 73.80 5.04 0.33 - - 4.71 - - - - 5.04 12.42 7.68 73.82 5.07 0.33 ----- ----- 4.74 ----- ----- ----- ----- 5.07 12.43 7.33 73.83 5.09 0.32 ----- ----- 4.76 ----- ----- ----- ---- 5.09 12.45 7.00 73.84 5.11 0.32 ----- ----- 4.79 ----- ----- ----- ----- 5.11 12.47 6.66 73.85 5.12 0.32 - - 4.80 - - -- - 5.12 12.48 6.32 73.86 5.13 0.32 - - 4.82 - - - - 5.13 12.50 5.98 73.86 5.14 0.31 - - 4.83 - - - --- 5.14 12.52 5.64 73.87 5.15 0.31 ----- ---- 4.84 ---- ----- ----- ----- 5.15 12.53 5.31 73.87<< 5.15 0.31 ----- ----- 4.84 ----- ----- ----- ----- 5.15 << 12.55 4.98 73.87 5.15 0.31 ----- ----- 4.84 ----- ----- ----- ----- 5.15 12.57 4.67 73.87 5.15 0.31 - - 4.84 - - - - 5.15 12.58 4.37 73.86 5.14 0.31 - - 4.83 - - - - 5.14 12.60 4.09 73.86 5.14 0.31 - - 4.82 - - - - 5.13 12.62 3.84 73.85 5.13 0.32 ----- ----- 4.81 ----- ----- ----- ----- 5.12 12.63 3.61 73.84 5.11 0.32 ----- ----- 4.79 ----- ----- ----- ---- 5.11 12.65 3.41 73.84 5.10 0.32 ----- ----- 4.78 ----- ----- ----- ----- 5.10 12.67 3.24 73.83 5.08 0.33 - -- 4.76 - - -- - 5.08 12.68 3.09 73.82 5.07 0.33 - -- 4.74 -- - - - 5.07 12.70 2.96 73.81 5.05 0.33 ---- - 4.72 - - - - 5.05 12.72 2.85 73.80 5.02 0.34 ---- ----- 4.69 ----- ---- ----- ----- _ 5.02 12.73 2.76 73.78 4.99 0.34 ----- ----- 4.65 ----- ---- ---- ---- 4.99 12.75 2.68 73.77 4.96 0.35 ----- ----- 4.61 ----- ----- ----- ----- 4.96 12.77 2.62 73.76 4.93 0.35 - - 4.58 - - - - 4.93 12.78 2.57 73.75 4.90 0.36 - - 4.54 - - - - 4.90 ...End APPENDIX F MEMORANDUM To: South Windsor Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission. From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Date: May 11, 2004 Re: Appl#04-33P -Review of the proposed River Walk Senior Residence Development complex. Plans dated 04/18/04. The project is to create an 18 unit Senior Residence Development on a 12-acre site. Activities within the upland review areas(URA) include dwellings, a private road, and installation of a stormwater management system including a bioretention basin, vegetative plantings, and catchbasins with 4' sumps. Activities proposed within regulated areas include a water quality basin, grading for rear yards, and a cross-country sanitary sewer line. Erosion controls are proposed during construction. Site: The site is located in the Podunk River watershed. Historically,the site has been used as a farmstead and livestock holding area. The site slopes moderately to the west into a wetland system that comprises the Podunk River drainage. Upland soils occurring on the site are disturbed as a result of the historical agricultural activities. The wetland area originates from subsurface water and runoff from the adjacent upland areas surrounding it. The wetland boundaries appear to be accurate. The wetlands on the property are comprised of a wet meadow that serves as the riparian buffer for the main stem of the Podunk River. As the wetlands head toward the Podunk,they become more saturated, with an abundance of shrubs and emergent,herbaceous vegetation leading toward the stream channel. Major functions of wetland area would be nutrient and sediment trapping; stormwater attenuation, and flood storage; a high value for wildlife habitat due to the diversity of cover, available food, and wetland types present; ecological integrity; esthetics; and limited groundwater recharge. Impacts: I have been informed by the design engineer that portions of the wetland area adjacent to buildings 16-18 and 15/14 will be permanently altered during the construction of the proposed dwellings. This Stormwater quality is proposed to be managed by the installation of a bioretention basin, and four-foot catch basin sumps in the driveway/parking lot area. HIGHLAND SOILS LLC April 26,2004 Karen Isherwood Design Professionals,Inc. l C f 65 South Satellite Road �,0/E® South Windsor, CT 06074 MAY 2 6 2004 RE: RIVER WALK C NgER't'h N p a Ge 1235 SULLIVANAVENUE "coMM,ss oM SOUTH WINDSOR, CT Dear Karen: The inland wetland boundaries on the above-referenced property were field delineated on March 19,2003,June 16,2003 and March 25,2004. The wetlands were field delineated in accordance with the standards of the National Cooperative Soil Survey and the definition of wetlands as found in the Connecticut General Statutes, Chapter 440, Section 22A-38. I have reviewed the plans prepared by your office(sheet 2/10 dated April 20, 2004)and have found the representation of the field delineated wetlands to be substantially correct. If you have any questions,or require additional information,please call me at(860) 742-5868. 1 ours Very truly yours, `7ohn P. Ianni Professional Soil Scientist CPESC I cAdocuments and settings\highland soi1s\1et2004\58.doc P.O. Box 337,Storrs,Connecticut 06268 (860)742-5868 Roy C. J. Normen 158 Homestead Drive, South Windsor, CT 06074 Tel. 860-644-9029 May 18, 2004 South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Dear Commission Members, I have looked over the plans for River Walk Senior Condominiums at Sullivan Avenue and Pierce Road. It appears there is an opportunity to set aside a significant amount of designated wetlands contiguous with the Town owned Donnelly Preserve. The wetland areas no doubt have been significantly disturbed over the years by farming activity. The proposed development will not likely have any greater impact, but much less, allowing the wetland areas to continue to function and support the Podunk River. The plan as proposed does provide for water retention and wildlife habitat as a part of the Podunk River Corridor or Greenway. The future owners should be permitted to maintain the meadow habitat rather than allowing natural succession growth of brush and trees. The proposed walking path will provide compatible passive recreation. Since—[-, xK(C. J, or(nen n. ° M..a8 18 .-04 08-:08a Design 'P`r&fessionalss•' - 860-291 -8757" P._3_ \ M734'4rW 7- ZZ .� 3+00 \' O ��� x,f rn QOlNV:87.2 _..�S 8 '1. WU 13M S.F.UNIT � � COX SL I,F SINV-82.40 85.7 1794&F UN1T 1% OPE i FF. 87.17 PSMH P +6 12 40 O r BSMT: 7 FL•8 90 1399 SF. Nr7 . 85 1399 S.F.UHT - -$ 7 ;.0 1790 SX.UMT BS I 1 92 i INV.$2. + 7• t3/ i� —S, 1399 S L"7 1399 SF. UNIT 'M.82.6 88 2 FF: 97.42 3%SL GBWT:88685 .00 1"4 SF.UMT 5 INV.82.40 4.75 11 r 13"SF.UNIT X , % r�y4 yr.. ® a .Q ,vk �NV'y65o tB6.5 •w� � j �+o 5 PSMH- TF.89. 17"S.F.UNIT 8&17 1650 I r GAfB 86.7.5 BSMT: 79.50 1910 Sr. UNIT 85.0 9A LIMIT OF 81::' IN D AN S ..IPLAMD EVIE IA • N/F ah �9N� � �� yi MARILYN M. M{:RRISON "Mai 18 04. 08: 08a Des i'Cb Prof ess i otia l s'- E MARILYN od 00 d is /. . '. .. d� . �� N/F � DAVID R. SCHMED)ING, MARGARET E. SCHhYi=DDING JENNIE A. MILLI,::EN / . N/F / JOSEPH MARK MILLWARD & MEREDITH SUSAN MILLWARD ULIER & \ :000ER \ 1%6o. q d Public Water Supply Aquifer Area Project Notification Form Requirement: All applicants before a municipal Planning and Zoning Commission, Inland Wetland Commission or Zoning Board of Appeals for any project located within a public water supply aquifer area are required by Sections 8-31 of the CT General Statutes to notify the affected water utility by certified mail within 7 days of the date of the application. General Information: 1. Location map of the project site(please show enough information to locate site). 2. Site plans including soil erosion and sediment control plan which have been submitted to the town commission for review. 3. Project address 12-35 SUWNCkn Avenut✓�SOUth 1►�li►�dSI�Y; C—T 4. Total acreage of project site O.G 5_ Existing land use KP �I 1 rA1 �Lb U"St -� �-1 n -6. Project description(include propose uses) Ct7YlS�(t1�C.ia0Y1 Q� 0. Zl L111(� �►,'1,i0r �����q`��'�_1`�c�Y1.P rlfi C1YCUtCCh0Y1 ��f-t�'�., rn�LWO,"S : and �O uR cA i nbk— u InSWIa�.c�� --- 7. Acreage of are to be disturbed including structures, additions,paving, and soil disturbance 8. Type of sanitary system(circle one)- septic s stem/ ub=sewe, /other/none 9. Number of existing or proposed floor kin and their point of discharge e.g. sanitary sewer,holding tank, or ground IA 10. Water accessed by(circle one)-private wel ublic Ovate /other/none; If other,please specify rr'' 11.Distance of site disturbance to nearest watercourse or wetland t-t + ��L&1i FLA66-i nl Cr r 12. Brief description of existing or proposed stormwater management system, including roof drainage,paved areas etc_, and discharge points e.g. municipal sewers, drywells, streams,vegetated areas, detention basins etc. I ar x� 411UMA-hOn A k A[ S, GYDU WW Ck4 k, �Siarm i,Wk_t- Yuncff To t�LyLw to " Into Geer�y bE I RS m VYD OW S-k fl - hM fbukA -tD 6USay q ink, 1� -liDy �Mlyl "11-e. before I�rin -weflar. 13. Type of heat for facility 14. List of existing and proposed underground or above-ground storage tanks including age, capacity and contents 15. List of potentially harmful chemicals stored or used on property(existing and proposed) and typical onsite volumes, including but not limited to petroleum products, Iubricants, solvents, detergents and pesticides_10 16. Describe any wastes generated and their means of disposal t 17. Date application will be heard by Planning and Zoning Commission J" ZS-C- 18. Date application will be heard by Zoning Board of-Appeals 9-14-04- 19. Date application will be heard by Inland Wetlands Commission 20.Name, address and telephone number of contact person for the project f f cA �So. tYA6cs Y CT Com Name of p rson comp eting form ignature Date HIGHLAND SOILSLLC May 24,2004 Karen Isherwood Design Professionals,Inc. 165 South Satellite Road South Windsor,CT 06074 RECEIVEO RE: RIVER WALK MAY 2 6 1235 SULLIVANA VENUE 2004 SOUTH WINDSOR, CT Outh INLANSO Windsor CONSER AT ON CO MISS CY ION Dear Karen: The inland wetland boundaries on the above-referenced property were field delineated on March 19,2003,June 16,2003 and March 25,2004. The wetlands were field delineated in accordance with the standards of the National Cooperative Soil Survey and the definition of wetlands as found in the Connecticut General Statutes,Chapter 440, Section 22A-38. I have reviewed the plans prepared by your office(sheet 2/10 dated April 20, 2004)and have found the representation of the field delineated wetlands to be substantially correct. The soils in the uplands were identified as belonging to the moderately well drained Elmridge Series. These soils overlay loamy and clayey soils derived from glaciolacustrine deposits. The soils around the house and former barn were disturbed and classified as Udorthents or man-made soils. The wetlands soils along the Podunk River and it floodplain were identified as belonging to the poorly drained Limerick Series. Along Strong Road and in other wetlands not associated with the Podunk River the wetlands soils were identified as belonging to the poorly drained Shaker Series. If you have any questions,or require additional information,please call me at(860) 742-5868. Very truly yours, JJQ. John P.Ianni Professional Soil Scientist CPESC Cc: B.Barbour c:\documents and se"s\�ii�hyI �ils\sl t0004\5a c�c� orr , onne Icu 6268 (860)742-5868 MEMORANDUM To: South Windsor Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission. From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Date: May 11, 2004 Re: Appl#04-33P -Review of the proposed River Walk Senior Residence Development complex. Plans dated 04/18/04. The project is to create an 18 unit Senior Residence Development on a 12-acre site. Activities within the upland review areas (URA) include dwellings, a private road, and installation of a stormwater management system including a bioretention basin, vegetative plantings, and catchbasins with 4' sumps. Activities proposed within regulated areas include a water quality basin, grading for rear yards, and a cross-country sanitary sewer line. Erosion controls are proposed during construction. Site: The site is located in the Podunk River watershed. Historically, the site has been used as a farmstead and livestock holding area. The site slopes moderately to the west into a wetland system that comprises the Podunk River drainage. Upland soils occurring on the site are disturbed as a result of the historical agricultural activities. The wetland area originates from subsurface water and runoff from the adjacent upland areas surrounding it. The wetland boundaries appear to be accurate. The wetlands on the property are comprised of a wet meadow that serves as the riparian buffer for the main stem of the Podunk River. As the wetlands head toward the Podunk,they become more saturated,with an abundance of shrubs and emergent, herbaceous vegetation leading toward the stream channel. Major functions of wetland area would be nutrient and sediment trapping; stormwater attenuation, and flood storage; a high value for wildlife habitat due to the diversity of cover, available food, and wetland types present; ecological integrity; esthetics; and limited groundwater recharge. Impacts: I have been informed by the design engineer that portions of the wetland area adjacent to buildings 16-18 and 15/14 will be permanently altered during the construction of the proposed dwellings. This Stormwater quality is proposed to be managed by the installation of a bioretention basin, and four-foot catch basin sumps in the driveway/parking lot area. The basin will serve to attenuate peak flows to as well. The outlet structure is fitted with a 6-inch orifice so that stormwater stored in the basin will be metered out slowly. This will help to mitigate the expected increase in volume leaving the site by the increased impervious surface. Short-term impacts during construction are a major concern. The soils identified on the site,Elmwood(EoB)has an erosion hazard of low to medium. Interior erosion controls will need to be developed to contain sediments on site. Portions of the wetlands will be directly impacted by the construction of buildings and the detention basin. The proposed close proximity of the buildings to the wetlands will make wetland impacts unavoidable. Construction equipment will compact the soil in the wetland areas. The resulting impacts will reduce the capacity of the wetlands to recharge groundwater, attenuate flooding and stormwater flows, and trap sediments. The impacts to construct the sanitary sewer line will most likely be temporary in nature. Care will have to be taken to insure that the physical functions and characteristics of wetlands will be restored. The upland wildlife habitat in the eastern portion of the site will be impacted by the project. The project will result in most of the"old field"portion of the site being removed. Temporary impacts within the upland review area(URA)to accommodate the detention basin and swale will not significantly affect wildlife usage on the site. After the basins are established, diversity in wetland plants in the area will be increased. Landscape plantings proposed have duel usage as food plants for birds. 10 N Sf4 C c y 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074 �f�QSox-co TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511 To: Design Professionals 165 So. Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Date: May 11, 2004 Re: App. #04-33P - Review of the proposed River Walk SRD—Plans dated 4/20/04. I have reviewed the proposed plan with the following initial: Proposed catch basins should have 4-foot sumps incorporated to maximize sediment retention prior to the detention basin. Trap hoods should be installed on all catchbasins receiving runoff from asphalt.. A detailed planting plan for the proposed detention basin should be submitted. This should include planting bed composition,plant types, and a specification for the proposed seed mix. Please provide elevations for pools within the proposed basin. A soil report has not been received showing soil types present on the site. This should include both upland and hydric soil types. A report on the wetland functions and values should be submitted evaluating the project's potential impacts to wetland function and water quality. Move the proposed soil stockpile outside of the Upland Review Area. Annual rye should be specified as a temporary seed type for the basin,not winter rye. Please determine the existing ground water levels in the vacinity of the proposed basin. Please show the anticipated disturbance to the wetland on the plan. The construction of units 16 through 18 and 14-15 cannot occur without disturbing the adjacent wetlands. CC. Town Engineer Director of Planning RECEIVE® Pile Jim MAY 1 2004 ISU2 ✓ W.land Ofl iue Sea& `1(Jindaon, eg" C6074 South Windsor 18, 2AN INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY CONSERVATION COMMISSION 31[t(lnd Weitandd gown of SO"&2(&U60n 154C Suffi uuz a uw Sou&`tUindaon, Cg. W74 Re: Conners Meadow BW ap pUcactiaa f ou JUvm `lllat 9 ewe on.Mid fond Dum and after duce 6#w.fww tfw planned 9hu % `IUatk active adult candoz aae apptying to cows ag wc#An appwud. Ym in tau" of MU6 dewtopment ab .7 tfibA it is neceaaay*to Ptaue mane aenion acdult ftomea in Soud `tU"o.%. J Pce*ace owing tP 6 Qacnd in a vet w6 pomib&umv, temw4 the.back pontiaa f"eves V=6 mewing enpyr wd as well as pwowin#ita natural atate. 3&peftW#Vaun conuniaaion will give ita appwv,d- 96ank y4uuc. Sinc , YU&13 t Dan Rys,Jr. zo Joseph Lane South Windsor, Conn. o6o74 May 16, 2004 Soul-lvW 6n,d4or Inland Wetland-,4#e cy 1540 SuR4l va*v Avenuue, SoutivWind,sar, CT 06074 Rex, Rover walk. Dear Strrs; The,above,vne*Wwvw&Inalding,project Ck now before yow for approvat. I w(4kto-vote my wpport far thi*endeavor ak I bet+:eve X wilt benefit the areal anct provide homek for our act-we, adults-that want Ur rema w i*vSo-advW Cnd4or but cm-(, of conti nue to-take-care-of t he4k p resent hom ek Al4a; the, appLic�have made every effort to-create avv attractwe as- welt ak fuf wftoytall liv"tg,a rww&nm.ent for itY f ture ownerk Mey h.awe put a.,lot of of fort into- seZectt*wj,pla*tt-k that wall compU rent the natural e Ywirovwne nt an&not overly d4s-tu-rb- thel waUwAk area.( Plead accept th.k proposat,. rr ym ws, t Da yvRyk Ralph Mosher 308 Sandstone Dr. S. Windsor, CT 06074 May 18,2004 South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Application of River Walk Dear Agency Members: The Corner Meadow, LLC application for River Walk is now before your Agency. I wholeheartedly support this over 55 adult condominium project. The Sullivan Avenue and Pierce Road site is an ideal transition from single family homes to the Mitchell Fuel business. There are far two few places in South Windsor for those wanting to downsize. The project size fits well in the meadow area and offers outstanding vistas to the future owners. As the back land wouldn't be disturbed,that portion will also provide added value to the Major Donnelly Preserve and the neighboring homes overlooking the Podunk River. The owners have hired architects,planners,traffic consultants and others to insure their project will be built properly and meet the town regulations. This is a responsible,well thought out and nicely designed addition to our town. � tiffs ph Mosher Robert ignagni 307 Sandstone Dr. South Windsor, CT 06074 May 18, 2004 South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Application of River Walk Dear Agency Members: I wish to support the above named proposal for the adult condominium project called River Walk to be built at the corner of Sullivan Avenue and Pierce Road. I have studied their plans and find the project to be well thought out and very eye appealing. The project size fits the area and will blend in well with the character of the neighborhood. The owners have retained soil scientists,design planners,architects and other professionals to insure they minimize any disturbance of the wetlands. Very few locations in South Windsor offer this natural picturesque environment. cere , R er 14 gni Ms. Jennifer Dolan 307 Sandstone Drive South Windsor, CT 06074 May 18, 2004 South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Application of River Walk Dear Agency Members: I'm in favor of the River Walk proposal for the active senior condominium project to be built at the corner of Pierce Road and Sullivan Avenue in South Windsor. I've seen their plans and feel they are creating an appealing neighborhood of 18 units that will not impact the wetlands. The homes fit the area well and they have left more than half of the acreage undisturbed. The owners are using professionals in the fields of soil science, design and traffic to insure they minimize any disturbance of the wetlands as well as negative impact to the general area. Very few locations in South Windsor offer this natural picturesque environment. Yours trul , Jennifer D Robert Fleet 21 Appletree Lane South Windsor, CT 06074 May 18,2004 South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor,CT 06074 Re: River Walk Condominium Application Gentlemen: I recently reviewed the above application and wish to voice my approval of this project. They have made every effort to maintain the ecological balance while providing a most beautiful vista for the future owners. This development will reinforce the neighborhood's residential character,and not leave raw land open to possible commercial use in the future. The owners are residents of South Windsor and I believe will build a quality project. Thank you. Sincerely, Bob Fleet Mrs. Porter Collins 8 Collins Lane South Windsor, CT 06074 May 10, 2004 Inland Wetlands Agency Town of South Windsor Town Hall 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Gentlemen: I live on Collins Lane, close to where the planned River Walk active adult condos are going to be built. I'm in favor of this development as I think it is necessary to provide for more adult communities in South Windsor. Hopefully your commission will give its approval. Sincerely, Mrs. Porter Collins Lawrence M Murphy 133 Greenwood Drive South Windsor, CT. 06074 May 19, 2004 South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT. 06074 Gentlemen: I am in favor of the River Walk Senior Condo project planned for the corner of Pierce Road and Sullivan Avenue. I feel that this type of housing offers the seniors in this town another option to a quality low maintenance living alternative, without leaving the borders of their existing community. This type of growth is not only needed, but is desirable as a means to balance the needs of the town without putting further demands on our schools. Thank you for your time and consideration for this project. Sincerely, G Lawrence NI Avi�yn Kenneth F. Sarpu Ann T. Sarpu i 18 Berle Road South Windsor, CT o6o74 May 19, 2004 South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency South Windsor, CT o6074 Re: River Walk Dear Sir or Madam: We are in favor of the River Walk Active Adult Community project. We believe the development will enhance the location and benefit the Town as well as the surrounding community. As our population ages, quality projects such as the River Walk offers senior citizens a location they can feel proud of and a community that is safe to live in. Sincerely, -----------------J------------- Kenneth F.Sarpu ---------------------------------------- Ann T.Sarpu Cc: South Windsor Planning&Zoning Roy C. J. Normen 158 Homestead Drive, South Windsor, CT 06074 Tel. 860-644-9029 May 18, 2004 South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Dear Commission Members, I have looked over the plans for River Walk Senior Condominiums at Sullivan Avenue and Pierce Road. It appears there is an opportunity to set aside a significant amount of designated wetlands contiguous with the Town owned Donnelly Preserve. The wetland areas no doubt have been significantly disturbed over the years by farming activity. The proposed development will not likely have any greater impact, but much less, allowing the wetland areas to continue to function and support the Podunk River. The plan as proposed does provide for water retention and wildlife habitat as a part of the Podunk River Corridor or Greenway. The future owners should be permitted to maintain the meadow habitat rather than allowing natural succession growth of brush and trees. The proposed walking path will provide compatible passive recreation. Since r , F C t o C. J, or en W " MEMORANDUM To: Marcia Banach, Director of Planning RECEIVED Jeff Folger, Environmental Planner From: Jeffrey B. Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer/ MAY 19 2004 South Windsor Date: 5/19/04 INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY CONSERVATION COMMISSION RE: App 04-31 P, May Department Stores Co. I have reviewed the site plan application for the May Department Stores Co. Trailer Storage Yard at 319 Nutmeg Road and I have the following comments: 1. Specify how the existing catch basins and drainage pipes are to be abandoned. Are they to be removed or crushed or filled and plugged? 2. :Are the existing shubbery in the front of the building and along Nutmeg Road being removed or remaining? Please label accordingly. 3. Is the CB on the south west comer of this lot really located directly over the sanitary sewer main? If not please correct the plans. 4. Please show the sanitary sewer ROW to the Town of South Windsor on the proposed site plans for reference. 5. There appears to be a flat spot at elevation 100 by the proposed driveway from Nutmeg Road at the south east comer of the site. Check this and include additional grades as necessary. 6. The proposed light poles in the middle of the parking lot are not on the latest plans. 7. The plans show three existing storm drainage pipes with reverse slopes. Please check this and correct these pipe slopes as necessary as part of this site plan and revise the drainage analysis accordingly. Include any needed field corrections on the plans. 8. Label the invert and top of frame elevation of the outlet structures from the detention basin. Show details for any proposed modifications to the outlet structure 9. Additional information is needed in the Drainage report. This includes analysis of the existing and proposed flow off site and proposed water elevation in the detention basin for the 10yr, 25yr, 50yr, and. 100yr storms. A summary table should be included with these results along with the detailed analysis. There should be no increase in storm r r water discharge from the site for any of these storms unless it can be shown that the increase will not have any deleterious downstream effects. The detention basin shall have at least 1 foot of freeboard during the 100 year storm. Include a map of the stormwater system with the structures labeled as they are referred to in the storm drainage analysis. Label the tables included from the TR-20 analysis and provide clear copies that are not cut off at the top, bottom or sides. Show that the proposed detention basin will retain the first 1.25 inches of rain or the 90% storm event for water quality treatment. Explain where and to what extent the yard may experience "minor flooding" during 10 year or greater storm events if this will occur. 10.An operations and maintenance plan for this property that addresses stormwater runoff and structures (CB's, detention basin, pipes, etc.) needs to be included in the plans. This needs to comply with the Phase 2 stormwater requirements. Please let me know if you have any questions. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC • Weiland Delineation • Wetland &Aquatic Evaluation - Mitigation _'Irw • Natural Resource Inventory • Permit Assistance • Expert Testimony May 20, 2004 ECEIVE4 South Windsor Inland Wetland Commission MAY 2 4 2004 South Windsor Town Hall South Windsor INLAND WETLANDSAGENCY 1540 Sullivan Avenue CONSERVATION COMMISSION South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: River Walk CE Job# 04--768 Dear Inland Wetland Commissioners: It has come to my attention that there may have been some confusion regarding my testimony at the May 19, 2004 public hearing for the above-referenced application. My testimony with respect to Feasible and Prudent alternatives pertained to the various alternate routes that the design team considered for the walking trail. My remarks did not refer to alternate building locations. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding this correspondence. Very truly yours, Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Edward M. Pawlak Registered Soil Scientist Certified Professional Wetland Scientist cc: Mrs.Barbara Barbour W.Peter DeMallie 38 Westland Avenue - West Hartford, CT 06107 Phone (860) 561-8598 • Fax (860) 561-0223 - email ecosys@comcastnet HIGHLAND SOILS LLC May 24,2004 Becky Meyer Design Professionals,Inc. f 65 South Satellite Road South Windsor, CT 06074 RE. VISION'S SALON&SPA 207 BUCKLAND ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR, CT Dear Becky: The inland wetland boundaries on the above-referenced property were originally 03 the wetlands field delineated in 2001 for the Evergreen Walk project. On March 29,2003 on the north side of the property were remapped in the exact same locations. The wetlands were field delineated in accordance with the standards of the National Cooperative Soil Survey and the definition of wetlands as found in the Connecticut General Statutes,Chapter 440, Section 22A-38. I have reviewed the plans prepared by your office and have found the representation of the field delineated wetlands to be substantially correct. The wetlands to the north of the property were identified based on the watercourse definition of wetlands. This area is a well defined channel fed in part by storm water runoff and ground water seepage or exfiltration. The upland soils were identified as belonging to the moderately well drained Ludlow Series. Areas in the yard and around the house were previously disturbed and were identified as Udorthents or man-made soils. The wetlands to the south of the property are man-made and are associated with a drainage path. The soils were identified as Aquents or wet man-made soils. If you have any questions,or require additional information,please call me at(860) 742-5868. Very truly yours, 131A _ _J John P. Ianni Professional Soil Scientist CPESC cAdocuments and settings\highland soi1s\1et2003\48.doc P.O. Box 337, Storrs, Connecticut 06268 • (860) 742-5868 MEMORANDUM To: South Windsor Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission. From: Jeffrey H. Folger—Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Date: May 25, 2004 Re: Appl#04-33P -Review of the proposed River Walk Senior Residence Development complex. Plans dated 04/18/04. (Revised) The project is to create an 18 unit Senior Residence Development on a 12-acre site. Activities within the upland review areas (URA)include dwellings, a private road, and installation of a stormwater management system including a bioretention basin, vegetative plantings, and catchbasins with 4' sumps. Activities proposed within regulated areas include a water quality basin, grading for rear yards, and a cross-country sanitary sewer line. Erosion controls are proposed during construction. Disturbances within the regulated areas equal 4000 sqft of permanent disturbance and 4000 sqft of temporary disturbance. Activities within the URA equal 2.29 acres or 99,752 sqft. Site: The site is located in the Podunk River watershed. Historically,the site has been used as a farmstead and livestock holding area. The site slopes moderately to the west into a wetland system that comprises the Podunk River drainage. Upland soils occurring on the site are disturbed as a result of the historical agricultural activities. The wetland area originates from subsurface water and runoff from the adjacent upland areas surrounding it. The wetland boundaries appear to be accurate. The wetlands on the property are comprised of a wet meadow that serves as the riparian buffer for the main stem of the Podunk River. As the wetlands head toward the Podunk, they become more saturated,with an abundance of shrubs and emergent,herbaceous vegetation leading toward the stream channel. Major functions of wetland area would be nutrient and sediment trapping; stormwater attenuation, and flood storage; a high value for wildlife habitat due to the diversity of cover, available food, and wetland types present; ecological integrity; esthetics; and limited groundwater recharge. Impacts: I have been informed by the design engineer that portions of the wetland area adjacent to buildings 16-18 and 15/14 will be permanently altered during the construction of the proposed dwellings. This will result in a compaction of the soil where equipment is moving over the wetland areas. Compaction of wetland soils inhibit physical functions of wetlands such as groundwater recharge and surcharge, flood storage, and stormwater attenuation. Stormwater quality is proposed to be managed by the installation of a bioretention basin, and four-foot catch basin sumps in the driveway/parking lot area. The basin will serve to attenuate peak flows to as well. The outlet structure is fitted with a 6-inch orifice so that stormwater stored in the basin will be metered out slowly. This will help to mitigate the expected increase in volume leaving the site by the increased impervious surface. Short-term impacts during construction are a major concern. The soils identified on the site, Elmwood(EoB)has an erosion hazard of low to medium. Interior erosion controls will need to be developed to contain sediments on site. The construction of buildings and the detention basin will directly impact portions of the wetlands. The proposed close proximity of the buildings to the wetlands will make wetland impacts unavoidable. Construction equipment will compact the soil in the wetland areas. The resulting impacts will reduce the capacity of the wetlands to recharge groundwater, attenuate flooding and stormwater flows, and trap sediments. The impacts to construct the sanitary sewer line will most likely be temporary in nature. Care will have to be taken to insure that the physical functions and characteristics of wetlands will be restored. The upland wildlife habitat in the eastern portion of the site will be impacted by the project. The project will result in most of the"old field"portion of the site being removed. Temporary impacts within the upland review area(URA)to accommodate the detention basin and swale will not significantly affect wildlife usage on the site. After the basins are established, diversity in wetland plants in the area will be increased. Landscape plantings proposed have duel usage as food plants for birds. No compensatory mitigation has bee offered 05/25/2004 TUE 09:17 FAX 860 644 7280 South Windsor Town Hall 2001 ********************* *** FAX TX REPORT *** ********************* TRANSMISSION OK JOB NO. 1726 DESTINATION ADDRESS 92918757 PSWD/SUBADDRESS DESTINATION ID ST. TIME 05/25 09:17 USAGE T 00' 31 PGS. 1 RESULT OK <0WN Sf4 02 , 0 ` etc w° 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE• SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074 01t. � TELEPHONE(860)644.2511 To: Design Professionals 165 So. Satellite Road South Windsor,CT 06074 From:Jeffrey H.Folger—Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Date:May 25,2004 Re:App.#04-33P-Review of the proposed River Walk SRD—Plans dated 4/20/04. Z have reviewed the proposed plan with the following additional comments: How will the proposed gazebo be constructed onsite without further disturbance to the wetland? How will the proposed development impact groundwater contribution to the adjacent wetlands. Please provide information on the groundwater elevation in this area. Please-demonstrate that the proposed development presents the most feasible and prudent alternative to disturbing the wetlands. Please comment on the effects of soil compaction on wetland soils and its impact to the wetlands adjacent to units 13 through 18. CC. Town Engineer Director of Planning 1WA/CC f DESIGN PROFESSIONALS, INC. civil engineers •planners . surveyors . gis May 28,2004 RECEIVED Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Ave. S 2004 South Windsor,Ct 06074 SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DEPT. Attn:Ms.Marcia Banach Senior Planner Re:River Walk Dear Marcia We have revised the plans to address comments made by Michele Lipe dated 5/20/04,Jeffrey Doolittle dated 5/21/04,and Jeffrey Folger dated 5/25/04. Our like numbered replies are as follows: Michele Lipe's comments dated 5/20/04 1. The zoning data table has been revised accordingly. 2. The yard setbacks and buffer lines have been revised accordingly. 3. The proposed site design has been completed to take into account the coterminous buffer and side yard as proposed. The units 6 and 7 close to the southern property line are lower in elevation than the abutting property by approximately 2-6'. This will significantly reduce visibility to the neighbor. In addition, landscaping in accordance with the town requirements will be installed in this area. On the northern side of the site,the 25'coterminous side-yard and buffer is proposed in coordination with the proposed development on the Mitchell fuel site. 4. The design has been adjusted to insure that there is a minimum of 20'between the garage and the sidewalks on each unit. 5. Note 2 has been revised accordingly. 6. A traffic study has been submitted as part of the proposed development. The connection to the Mitchell Fuel site is being provided as a second access to this site. This will allow for easier maneuvering within the Mitchell Fuel site for large delivery trucks. The normal Mitchell fuel delivery truck and vehicle traffic into and out of the Mitchell Fuel site is expected to continue to use the Mitchell Fuel site curb cut directly onto Sullivan Avenue. As such,the traffic impact of having the Mitchell curb cut onto the site entrance road will be insignificant. 7. _ An easement chart has been added to the plans. There is a proposed cross travel easement and sanitary easement to be granted to John J.Mitchell. 8. A site plan application for the Mitchell fuel site will be submitted on 5/28/04. 9. A demolition plan has been added to the plans. 10. Connecticut Water notification has been completed,and a copy of the notification is enclosed. ADRC Requested modifications. 1. Applicant is exploring the replacement of louvers on the side of the building with ridge vents. 2. Some additional screening has been added to the plans to provide privacy between units in the rear of the units. Jeffrey Doolittle's comments dated 5/21/04 1. A demolition plan has been added to the set of plans. 2. A bypass lane on the northbound lane of Sullivan Avenue is proposed,(see sheet 7). 3. A street sign has been shown at the proposed intersection on Sullivan Avenue. We have also added stop sign control within the site. 4. The plans have been revised accordingly. 5. The plans have been revised accordingly. 6. The sign at the tee intersection has been relocated. 7. A minimum of 20'has been provided between the garages and the sidewalks. 8. Additional grading details have been included on the plans. 9. There are no specific requirements for snow shelf width on private roadways. The 3'wide minimum grass shelf between the sidewalk and curb has been provided for both as a snow shelf and for aesthetics. The snow clearing and maintenance of the internal roadway and sidewalks will be the responsibility of a private contractor. We would expect during snow events,that the snow would be cleared from the roadway first,and then from the sidewalks. 10. The storm and sanitary pipes have been adjusted to provide sufficient clearance in our opinion to allow for construction and maintenance of these facilities. 11. A note has been added to the plans indicating that the roof leaders will discharge to splash pads. 12. The cross-walk will be striped in accordance with the latest standards at time of construction. 13. The wall behind unit 16 is not a retaining wall. It is simply a 2'high stone wall to provide a barrier to help prevent encroachment into the wooded areas immediately adjacent. 14. Construction depending upon the care and techniques employed can generally be limited from areas of particular concern. Barriers such as silt fence,construction fencing etc.can be erected to help define limits of construction,and to help prevent undesired incursions. 15. In reviewing sidewalk construction throughout the town of South Windsor,and in particular at low points in sidewalks,we have not observed installation of leak-offs as being a common practice. We see no need for the installation as requested. 16. Labels for proposed curbing have been added to the plans. 17. No borings or test-pits have been conducted on the site at this time. Soil information based on the soil survey has been added to the plans. 18. The plans have been revised accordingly. 19. The plans have been revised accordingly. 20. The plans have been revised accordingly. 21. No comment. 22. Typically,the gazebos are pre-constructed units that are delivered to the site and slid off the trailer into place. Beyond the operation to accomplish this,we would not anticipate any further disturbance. 23. The plans have been revised accordingly. 24. The Wildlife trail roadway is a local access to the proposed units and the adjacent Mitchell fuel site. As such,the traffic volumes on this roadway are very low. The travel speed within the complex on the roadways will also be very low. Due to the low speeds,and working with the terrain of the land,the proposed profile has been optimized to provide access to the site,and minimize disturbance to the land in particular adjacent to the wetland areas. 25. The plans have been revised accordingly. 26. The plans have been revised accordingly. 27. The catch basin and outlet detail have been revised to show galvanized frames and grates. The manhole detail has not been changed to show a galvanized frame and grate. 28. The plans have been revised accordingly. 29. The plans have been revised accordingly. 30. The site has been designed to meet the town regulations regarding density,net buildable acreage, impervious coverage,lot coverage,and any other related density requirements. It is irrelevant what other recently-approved-developments had for density. In any development,construction practices must be adapted for the site conditions. Construction practices in city centers are different than in rural areas,and the contractor will need to adapt his construction practices to meet the site requirements. 31. The plans have been revised accordingly. 32. The plans have been revised accordingly. 33. The plans have been revised accordingly. 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860)291-8755 • Fax: (860) 291-8757 34. The proposed sanitary sewer is proposed to be 0.5%minimum. 35. A sanitary sewer lateral is being provided for the property to the north(Mitchell Fuel site). A corresponding easement is being provided. Any manhole installation or easement for inspection of the manhole will need to be on the Mitchell Fuel site,and would not be part of this application. 36. An application to the WPCA will be made once all other local approvals are obtained. Jeffrey Folger's Comments dated 5/25/04. 1. Typically,the gazebos are pre-constructed units that are delivered to the site and slid off the trailer into place. Beyond the operation to accomplish this,we would not anticipate any further disturbance. 2. The project as designed is expected to have an insignificant impact on the groundwater contribution to the neighboring wetlands. The adjacent wetlands are part of a large wetland that is associated with the Podunk River. The site through the installation of foundation drains will result in localized dewatering of the subsurface. Typically the impact of foundation drains extend only approximately 10-20'from the foundation to any appreciable degree. With the installation of the proposed water quality basin with the permanent pool,much of the water removed from the ground via the foundation drains will be replaced. The roof runoff from the units will be discharged to splash pads,and therefore will have the ability to infiltrate as the site soils allow. Runoff from east sides of the upper units(units 1-7)in addition to the rear roof leaders will be directed via a swale to drain directly to the small wetland finger located between units 7 and 14. No subsurface soil testing has occurred on the site at this time. We expect that the site is similar to the Strawberry Fields site located just north of this site. 3. Additional information will be presented regarding addressing the feasible and prudent alternatives. 4. The intent of the construction of units 14-18 is to limit the impacts to that shown on the plans. We do not anticipate any compaction of wetland soils beyond the permitted extent.Should the contractor need to expand the limit of impact,temporary measures such as the creation of a stone pad on a geo-textile could be considered. Once the work is complete,the stone and Fabric would be removed,and the vegetation replaced. We are not proposing any measures for additional impact to the wetlands as being required. The contractor will need to make the necessary adjustments to their methods of construction to prevent further impacts beyond the proposed. In general we would believe that compaction of the wetland soils if it were to occur in locations would be a short term impact. The natural processes would tend to mitigate any impact to the soils,and the soils would tend to expand once the source of compaction is removed. Please review the enclosed,and feel free to call with any questions or comments. Sincerely, Karen I herwood,P.E. Enclosures: 165 South Satellite Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel: (860)291-8755 • Fax: (860) 291-8757 ;aNQ-- _==fsZ�' � � ;, \ Cam/ '1�' ,� I�� k{' �• � . �`�•- m ..% /" ✓� <r%�� 00 .�`(..� •� _ �r� •• , a�'�,'» Da� I� 'I �' ,I':I 1 Ir�• _ ;lid eS' o c.. � � "� r f it per+.. w_ •o OS `! loo 1tt`/ w •,� *. ,fir• � �� �I '��• •.�\..-.--1 '"rye �!� ° •o ' IF d` y� �:' li�l � : .5�� u� w ••-s1< h a I I� Ir I�.O Lr � A ���. III'�I �, , ��� // is ♦•�• ,a•i°wr�r�e s yra �' �� l��( •'�° o Q � I; C.�., i/ I 'I � � � ' /I •}�:� ,?'; ,+1 �;r.:••n°•� �r/./"� l,a I dF q i '1= , 13 •-�IF��� d J ;j., a� f • .fig' Oa � _�°� cq it �r I 4 ,I�f.1 II'' � e�0 '� 7YY St.., � `�• _�W= —1�� ,t! � / C, i'I i I I�'ltti�If V'� �, �F II.. �`II'� / �p y° O •,�i�. k pf k �...��,',�,,,. I' -•�� ;�Ir, �' o o .`� r!I;; ! Air ••a� I ,�I L/ 1 / V;G,' °1 b _ 0. It It of \/( � 'I' � OI `�`�= OP/ERCE. .I'. i`� C-��� Z li,'f-�'1.-/•�� � �� �x ."t�+alYro$dwPa'�k 'I :I:I _\ .•„ •�'... •'� p � �/ `7� . �0 0 o fl .f; /: I '� a+4et,. t Vr' .',:�` ' a �".I� �� -.\\ \ ° / i O • ! f ` " ° /00• -i-o•..-/..— •6���1\ e.:. 004 G RA A'�1•,�..•,,�� TY' a 4•, r, r .\� 1 go p _ O I\ '� ��,, � - •/�: a,..=.ter.' I ���-�• -....- :�• �• ��. CC.. / ... _..r- . _.- _ -. :.. � /'`w_ • - � %n ii—���.;,�.'C../(�`���i. -.G"�ir� :�-2i rr�:�il.l II ��!! )\�� 10 O4 00:00m ` Design Pr6fessionals-'- `^ ` ` 060-291 -875711" l000 I,F INV,.82.40 85.7 1794 S.F.MIT CAR: 96.00 Ix SLOPE 8 - 88.17 BSMT. 79.50 , N, LIMIT' 0 8C EVIE CRRISON MARILYN M. M `~ -------�������� -----' -------- ----- I N vP9- L nj6INV:E \ 1794 S.F.UNIT A(LC-AS OF l)ZJ t UykPANCC- FP: 87 BSMT: D 7s,00 x 1790 SF.UNIT lJ7 INV:E N 00 i I O 1794 S.F. UNIT INV:E .� licr� '1a9 PROP. DETENTION BASIN � (SLOPE 2.5:i) C ' N 71 x �� ;� •TOP•efRM.•74.9 L 0 o N/F m WILLIAM E. AMAN �' MARTHA M. AMAN Connecticut Ecosystems LLC - Wetland Delineation - Wetland &Aquatic Evaluation - Mitigation - Natural Resource Inventory - Permit Assistance - Expert Testimony WETLANDS REPORT RECEIVED MAY 19 2004 RIVER WALK South Win INLAND WETLAND8dsordSOrY CONSERVATION COMAGENCMISSION South Windsor, Connecticut May 18, 2004 CE Project 04-768 File c:\projects 2004\04-768\report.doc 38 Westland Avenue - West Hartford, Cr 06107 ' Phone (860) 561-8598 - Fax(860) 561-0223 - email ecosys@comcastnet LIST OF TABLES Following Table Description Page I Wetland Summary 2 2 Stormwater Treatment Practices 5 3 Percent Pollutant Removal by Stormwater 5 Wetlands 4 Basin Plantings 6 LIST OF FIGURES I Site Location Map 1 2 Aerial Photograph 1 LIST OF APPENDICES I Vegetative Inventory --- 2 Wildlife Invento 3 Wetland Assessment Data Sheets --- 4 DEP Natural Diversity Data Base --- 5 Turf Management Plan --- 1 Connecticut Ecosystems LLC _sue Y>L - Photo 1. Looking west across Podunk River floodplain wetland Photo 2. Podunk River floodplain wetland I Photo Proposed gazebo site OS GG 2GG4 Photo4 Location , proposed sewer River Walk Wetlands Report Page I South Windsor, CT 511812004 1.0 INTRODUCTION The construction of River Walk , an active adult residential community, is proposed on a 12.2-acre parcel of land in South Windsor, CT. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC was retained to conduct a site plan review, the results of which are presented in this report. Mr. Edward M. Pawlak, Registered Soil Scientist and Certified Professional Wetland Scientist, inspected the subject property on April 27 and May 5, 2004 to collect biological data. Prior to the biological inspections the site plans prepared by Design Professionals, Inc. and dated April 20, 2004 were reviewed. 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The 12.2-acre subject property is located in the RR and A 20 Zones(Figure 1). It is bordered to the north by town-owned and private property, to the east by Sullivan Avenue, to the south by single family residences along Pierce Road and Strong Road, and to the west by undeveloped land(Figure 2). Slopes on the property are very gentle. Elevation varies from 70 to 106 feet. A vacant house lies on the eastern end of the property, near Sullivan Avenue. 3.0 LANDSCAPE CONTEXT The property is part of a large landscape block that is bordered by Sullivan Avenue to the east and north, Strong Road to the south and West Road to the west (Figures 1 and 2). This landscape block is lightly developed along its edges, and consists largely of the Podunk River floodplain system(Figure 2). 4.0 SOILS Accordingto the Hartford County Soil Survey, soils on the property developed from t3' Y� p P Y p glaciolacustrine parent materials. The Soil Survey depicts moderately well drained Elmwood fine sandy loam, moderately well drained Buxton silt loam, poorly drained Scantic silt loam, and very poorly drained Biddeford silt loam soils on the property. 5.0 UPLAND COVER TYPE Whitlock et al. (1994) define"cover type" as"a portion of a wetland or upland system that contains a uniform plant community composition and structure or that is influenced by one hydrologic regime." Below is a description of the upland cover type found on the property. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC + • � L �N. 14 • ••i i ■ i � ••• i r. • 90 O■ "71r^ f • ppi - ,.. ■y arr • y,.OF i 40 33 i". '_mil �' �� — � r • .. s f s� ! '�,yr -'�►� .� � � G �r� � ! •i sue~ • ♦ r • e` • r i r ■ r Vl • 1,.T t V. n •� IY � 1 • 4 `—J a a• a i • / � ,yo !. , � .ram .,T ��• � be!y � • r .i.. 6V Flo f '�'~i"--��'. _-.r�-:1 i .+y -.' '_,. ♦,f3 V ,. /^�. - :. i � - i T+, ii4a ,''q.� - 4� � •�.�T "_ter" Printed from TOPO!@1998 Wildf7aurer Productions(www.tapo.com) Figure 1. Site Location Map Corner Meadow,LLC South Windsor, CT Connecticut Ecosystems LLC April 2, 2004 Manchester, CT Quadrangle Map Scale 1"=1000'+ River Walk Wetlands PageRe ort 2 P South Windsor, CT 511812004 ---------------- -------- ---- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5.1 Meadow(Ul) The non-wetland portion of the property includes a meadow/field that contains forbs and grasses. In the vicinity of the vacant house, upland soils are bare due to a recent disturbance. 6.0 WETLAND COVER TYPES In this section of the report the following information is provided for each on-site wetland: • Description of wetland cover type(s) •Description of 80-foot wide Upland Review Area(URA), as defined by the Town of South Windsor Inland Wetland Regulations • Discussion of the principal functions associated with each on-site wetland. A modified version of the"Highway Methodology", developed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, was used to assess wetland functions and values(Appendix 3). Table 1 lists the principal functions and values associated with the on-site wetland. 6.1 Wetland 1 (Wl) 6.1.1 Wetland Description Wetland 1 consists largely of the densely vegetated Podunk River floodplain, which extends far of site to the north(Figure 2). This very large wetland system contains deciduous wooded swamp, shrub swamp, shallow marsh, open water and wet meadow components (Photo 1). The slope of the wetland is very gentle to nearly level. On April 27, 2004 extensive out-of-channel flooding was observed across the floodplain wetland (Photo 2). Avians(especially red-winged blackbirds)were abundant in the wetland on both inspection dates. Thedominant cover e of Wetland 1 is shallow mars dominated b dense stands of do a t co e type h, y broadleaf cattail, purple loosestrife and reed canary grass(Appendix 1). Shrub thickets (silky dogwood, multiflora rose)are scattered across the marsh. Wet meadow communities occur along the drier margins of the wetland. 6.1.2 URA Description The URA associated with Wetland 1 is a gently sloping, lightly vegetated meadow/field. The scarcity of woody vegetation limits the visual screening provided by the URA. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Table 1.Wetland Summa Wetland Principal Functions/Values 1 Groundwater Recharge P Groundwater Discharge P Flood ow Alteration P Fish &Shell sh Habitat -Ponds&Lakes NA -Streams&Rivers P Pollutant Removal P Production Export P Recreation P Wildlife Habitat P EducationalIScienti c Value P Uni ueness/Herita e P WETLAND DATA Type(*) DWS, BSS,SM, WM, OW Water Regime( } PF, SEF, SS Soil Parent Material(*** G,F Note:P Principal Function, NA NotApplicable, see Appendix 3 for data sheets (*)DWS=deciduous wooded swamp, CWS=coniferous wooded swamp, BSS=bushy shrub swamp, SSS=sapling shrub swamp, SM=shallow marsh, DM deep marsh, WM=wet meadow, OW=open water (**) Water Regimes based upon Cowardin et al. (1979)and Golet et al. (1993): Water RWme Definition Permanently flooded(PF) Water covers surface throughout the year, in all years. Intermittently exposed(IE) Surface water present through the year, except during extreme drought. Semipermanently flooded(SF) Surface water persists throughout the growing season in most years. Seasonally flooded(SEF) Surface water present for extended periods, especially early in growing season. Seasonally saturated(SS) Soil saturated to surface, especially early in growing season, but water table usually well below surface for most of season. Temporarily flooded(TF) Surface water present for brief periods of growing season, but water table lies far below surface for most of the season. Intermittently flooded(IF) Substrate usually exposed, but surface water present for variable periods. (***) T=glacial till O=outwash G=glaciolacustrine F floodplain 1 Connecticut Ecosystems LLC River Walk Wetlands Report Page 3 �f South Windsor, CT 511812004 However, in some areas dense thickets of multiflora rose, silky dogwood and gray dogwood offer visual breaks between the URA and wetland. 6.1.3 Wetland Functions&Values Wetland 1 is associated with the following principal functions: Groundwater Recharge and Discharge, Floodflow Alteration, Finfish Habitat, Pollutant Removal, Production Export, Recreation, Wildlife Habitat,Educational/Scientific Value, and Uniqueness Heritage(Table 1, Appendix 3). The rationale and criteria for this assessment are provided in the data sheets in Appendix 3. 7.0 DEP NATURAL DIVERSITY DATA BASE J� The DEP Natural Diversity Data Base(NDDB)was contacted to determine whether there are records of any State-or Federal-listed flora or fauna on the subject property, and the reply letter is included in Appendix 4. According to the NDDB there is an historic record (1970)of the State Threatened horned lark(Eremophilia alpestris)in the vicinity of the subject property. The horned lark favors sparsely vegetated open areas (DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001). In Connecticut confirmed breeding sites occur along the coast, and in large grasslands(Bevier 1994). Suitable breeding habitat for the horned lark is not found on the subject property, and it is very unlikely that it currently breeds or occurs there. An adult great egret, a Threatened species, was observed flying over the Podunk River wetland system on one occasion. However,there was no evidence that this bird utilizes Wetland 1 for breeding, feeding or other activity. No other listed species were observed during the site inspections. 8.0 WILDLIFE A total of 32 wildlife species were identified on the property, including 26 avians, 3 amphibians, 1 reptile and 2 mammals (Appendix 2). Among these, the great egret is a listed species(Threatened). As noted above, there was no evidence that this bird utilizes Wetland 1 for breeding, feeding or other activity. 9.0 REGULATED ACTIVITIES 9.1 Wetlands &Watercourses The applicant proposes to disturb a total of 4,000±square feet of inland wetland soils during the construction of the detention basin and grading for several units. Approximately 1,460 square feet of this disturbance will be temporary, and will occur during grading for basin construction. It is recommended that this disturbed wetland area be restored by seeding with New England WetMix,then hay mulching. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC River Walk Wetlands Report Page 4 South Windsor, CT 511812004 The permanent wetland disturbance will occur along the edge of the resource, where soils and the vegetative community are transitional. This activity is not expected to significantly diminish the principal functions provided by the wetland(Table 1). The most valuable interior portions of the wetland will not be disturbed. The construction of a gazebo is proposed in a wetland grass area that lies at the end of an g p P upland peninsula(Photo 3). The gazebo, which will lie at the end of a walking trail, will be built on piers, which will not require any grading or shrub removal. This will provide an ideal location for residents to view the aesthetics of the Podunk River wetland system. The applicant proposes to temporarily disturb an additional 4,450±square feet of wetland soils in order to connect to a sanitary sewer line along Strong Road(Photo 4). The excavated soils will be stockpiled next to the dug trench, then replaced at grade. It is recommended that the disturbed area be seeded with New England WetMix. The area will also be quickly colonized by seed from the densely vegetated wetland. No long-term impact to wetland functions and values is anticipated due to this regulated activity. 9.2 Upland Review Area The South Windsor Inland Wetland Regulations define an Upland Review Area(URA) that extends 80 feet from the edge of wetlands. The intent of the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act is to protect the functions and values of wetlands, not Upland Review Areas. According to Mr. Steve Tessitore of the Connecticut DEP, wetland commissions regulate activities in the in upland areas that are likely to affect wetlands or watercourses; they do not regulate the URA itself. Importantly, development within a URA does not necessarily affect or impact the functions of the associated wetland or watercourse. The URA is a zone of more or less arbitrary width in which the Commission has decided an activity may result in an indirect impact to an adjacent wetland or watercourse. However, it is necessary to evaluate the site-specific functions of the wetland or watercourse in question, the physical features of the associated URA(soils, slope, vegetation), and the details of the site plan to assess the likelihood of any impacts to wetlands or watercourses. The applicant proposes to disturb a total of 99,700 square feet(2.29 acres)of URA in order to construct the project. It is not feasible to avoid activity within the URA, given that much of the non-wetland portion of the property is URA. Most of the URA consists of meadow habitat, with few shrubs. Where they exist, shrub thickets have been identified on site plans and will be preserved. Proposed landscaping will increase the amount of shrub growth in the URA. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC River Walk Wetlands Report Page S South Windsor, CT --+___---�511812004 10.0 STOPBIWATER QUALITY 10.1 Introduction The potential impact of stormwater runoff to wetlands and watercourses, if not addressed in site plans, has been demonstrated by many scientific studies over the past several decades. Numerous Best Management Practices(BMPs)have been developed to prevent the pollution of receiving resources. Many of these are documented in the draft "Connecticut Stormwater Quality Manual"prepared by the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection(DEP 2003). Unless otherwise indicated,the information presented in this section was obtained from this draft manual. 10.2 Water Quality Volume As defined in the draft manual, the Water Quality Volume (WQV) is"the amount of stormwater runoff from any given storm that should be captured and treated in order to remove a majority of the stormwater pollutants on an average annual basis." The manual defines the WQV as the runoff produced by a one-inch rainfall event, which accounts for approximately 90 percent of the storms in an average year in the northeastern United States. The goal is to treat the runoff from small, frequent storms, which produce the majority of the pollutant load(Horner et al. 1994),while bypassing larger, infrequent storms that generate a small percentage of the pollutant load. Project engineers have designed a detention basin to fully retain the WQV(13,000+cubic feet)that will be generated by the project. 10.3 Stormwater Treatment Practices 10.3.1 Primary The draft manual notes that when properly selected, sized, designed, constructed and maintained, Primary Stormwater Treatment Practices can: • capture and treat the design WQV •remove at least 80%of the average annual total suspended solids(TSS)load • remove at least 80%of floatable debris(e.g., oil/petroleum products) The manual lists five groups of Primary Stormwater Treatment Practices(Table 2). The Primary Treatment Practice for the River Walk project is a shallow wetland, which will be constructed within the detention basin. Pollutant removal efficiencies of stormwater wetlands as reported in the literature are presented in Table 3. Removal rates are Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Table 2. Stormwater Treatment Practices Type Category Treatment Practices Primary Stormwater Ponds Wet pond Micro pool extended detention pond Wet extended detention pond Multiple ponds stem Stormwater Wetlands Shallow wetland Extended detention wetland Pond/wetland system Infiltration Practices Infiltration trench Infiltration basin Filtering Practices Surface sand filter Underground sand filter Perimeter sand filter Bioretention Water Quality Swales Dry swale Wet swale Secondwy Conventional Practices Dry detention ponds Underground detention facilities Deep sump catch basins Conventional oil/particle separators Dry wells Permeable pavement Vegetated filter strips level g ps& eve spreaders Grass drainage channels Innovative/Emerging Catch basin inserts Technologies Hydrodynamic separators Media filters Underground infiltration systems Advanced treatment Note:From Draft Connecticut Stormwater Quality Manual Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Table 3. Percent Pollutant Removal by Stormwater Wetlands Schueler and Strecker et al. Parameter Winer(2000) Holland(2000) (1992) EPA(1993) TSS 83 --- 80.5 65 Total Phosphorus 43 --- --- 25 Soluble Phosphorus 29 ___ 58 Total Nitrogen 26 20 Ammonia Nitrogen --- --- 44.5 --- Nitrate&Nitrite 73 --- --- --- Nitrogen Bacteria --- 78 --- --- Hydrocarbons --- 85 Copper 33 40 --- --- Zinc 42 44 42 35 Lead f --- 68 1 83 65 Note:EPA(1993)data are average values,all others are median values. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC River Walk Wetlands Report Page 6 South Windsor,CT 511812004 --- --__________------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- typically high for suspended solids and attached pollutants, and lower for dissolved constituents(EPA 1993). It is recommended that the basin be final graded with six inches of topsoil, then planted g p with hydrophytic vegetation(Table 4)to complement the volunteer plants(e.g., cattail, purple loosestrife)that will likely colonize the basin. 11.0 TURF MANAGEMENT PLAN It is recommended that a Turf Management Plan be implemented to restrict the type, amount and frequency of lawn treatments on the River Walk property(Appendix 5). This will limit the runoff of lawn chemicals into the adjacent wetland. 12.0 FEASIBLE AND PRUDENT ALTERNATIVES The State of Connecticut general statutes define"feasible and prudent alternative" as follows: ""a feasible alternative is one that is "able to be constructed or implemented consistent with sound engineering principles" The term `prudent"means "economically and otherwise reasonable in light of the social benefits to be derived from the proposed regulated activity provided cost may be considered in deciding what is prudent, and further provided that a mere showing of expense will not necessarily mean an alternative is imprudent. "" The project team considered numerous alternatives during the design process. One series of alternatives involved the location of a walking path. Plans to route the path through the wetland were abandoned due to extreme soil wetness and concerns over vegetation clearing that would be required. Locating the path in an upland peninsula at the north end of the site was also considered(Photo 5). However, this was rejected due to the wildlife habitat value of this upland area, in juxtaposition with the wetland. The final trail layout skirts the detention basin, and terminates at a gazebo that offers a stunning vista of the Podunk River wetland system. 13.0 CONSERVATION EASEMENTS It is recommended that a Conservation Easement be placed on wetland and upland habitats so that they will be preserved in perpetuity. This would expand the amount of preserved open space in the area, linking with a large block of town-owned open space to the north. 14.0 CONCLUSION The property contains a significant wetland resource, the Podunk River floodplain system. The vast majority of this wetland system will not be disturbed by the Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Table 4.Basin Plantin s Zone Scientific Name Common Name Number --- New England Wetmix --- Shoreline 10 Wet Meadow Edge(0-) Cornus sericea Red-osier dogwood 10 Sambucus canadensis Common elderberry 10 Spiraea latifolia Meadowsweet 10 Viburnum lentago Nannyberry 60 Wet Meadow(0-6") Alisma plantago-aquatica Water plantain Acorus calamus Sweetflag 60 Aster novae-angliae New England aster 60 Carex stricta Tussock sedge 60 Eleocharis palustris Spike rush 60 Eu atorium maculatum Joe- a-weed 60 Iris versicolor Blue flag iris 60 Juncus canadensis Canada rush 60 Scirpus validus Softstem bulrush 60 Verbena hastata Blue vervain 60 Vemonia noveboracensis New York ironweed 60 Deep Marsh (6-18') Peltandra virginica Arrow arum 60 Pontederia cordata Pickerelweed 60 Saggitaria lati olio Arrowhead 60 Sparganium americanum Burreed 60 Notes 1.On-center spacing: shrubs-10',herbs-3'. 2.Plants and seed mix available from New England Wetland Plants(413)256-1752 i Connecticut Ecosystems LLC River Walk Wetlands Report Page 7 South Windsor, CT 511812004 development. The proposed regulated activities are not expected to significantly impact the functions and values of this wetland. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC REFERENCES Ammann, A.P., Franzen, R.W. and J.L. Johnson. 1991.Method for the Evaluation of Inland Wetlands in Connecticut: A Watershed Approach. CT DEP Bull. No. 9. Bevier. L.R. (ed.). 1994. The Atlas of Breeding Birds of Connecticut. CT DEP Bulletin No. 113, Calhoun, A.J.K. and M.W. Klemens 2002. Best development practices: Conserving pool- breeding amphibians in residential and commercial developments in the northeastern United States. MCA Technical Paper No. 5, Metropolitan Conservation Alliance, Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, New York. Cowardin, L.M., V.C. Carter,F.C. Golet and E.T.LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Fish and Wildlife Service FWS/OBS-79/31. DeGraaf, R.M. and M. Yamasaki. 2001. New England Wildlife: Habitat,Natural History, and Distribution. University Press of New England. DEC 2003. New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. DEP 2003. Connecticut Stormwater Quality Draft Manual. Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. EPA 1993. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 840-B-92- 002. Golet, F.C., Calhoun, A.J.K., DeRagon, W.R., Lowry, D.J. and A.J. Gold. 1993. Ecology of Red Maple Swamps in the Glaciated Northeast: A Community Profile. U.S. Department of the Interior Fish&Wildlife Service. Biological Report No. 12. Homer, RR., J.J. Skupien, E.H. Livingston and H.E. Shaver. 1994. Fundamentals of Urban Runoff Management: Technical and Institutional Issues. Terrene Institute, Washington, D.C. Klemens, M.W. 1993. Amphibians and Reptiles of Connecticut and Adjacent Regions. g CT DEP Bulletin No. 112. Magee, D.W. and G.G. Hollands. 1998. A Rapid Procedure for Assessing Wetland g � P g Functional Capacity. Association of State Wetland Managers. Merritt J.F. 1987. Guide to the Mammals of Pennsylvania. University of Pittsburgh Y Y g Press. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Strecker,E.W., J.M. Kersnar, E.D. Driscoll, and R.R. Horner. 1992. The Use of Wetlands for Controlling Stormwater Pollution, U.S.Environmental Protection Agency. Schueler. T.S. 1987. Controlling Urban Runoff: A Practical Manual for Planning and Designing Urban BMPs. Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. Schueler, T.S. and H.K. Holland. 2000. The Practice of Watershed Protection. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD. United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1995. The Highway Methodology Workbook Supplement. USACOE New England Division. Waltham, MA. Whitlock, A.L., N.M. Jarman, J.S. Larson, and P.W. Shuldiner. 1994. WEThings- Wetland Habitat Indicators for NonGame Species. The Environmental Institute. Univ. of Mass. Amherst, MA. Winer, R. 2000.National Pollutant Removal Performance Database. Center for Watershed Protection. Ellicott City, MD. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC RIVER WALK WETLAND VEGETATIVE INVENTORY Indicator Wetland Scientific Name Common Name Status * 1 SHRUBS Alnus ru osa Speckled alder FACW+ D Cornus amomum Silky dogwood FACW + Cornus racemosa Gray-stem do ood FAC + Rosa multi ora Multiflora rose FACU D HERBS Carex s . Sedge OBL + E ilobium coloratura Purple willow herb OBL + Impatiens ca ensis Jewelweed FACW D Juncus effusus Soft rush FACW+ + L thrum salicara i Purple loosestrife FACW+ D Phalaris arundinacea PI Reed canary grass FACW+ + S m locar us oetidus Skunk cabbage OBL + T ha lati olia Broadleaf cattail OBL D Verbena hastata Blue vervain FACW+ + Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Notes:D=dominant +=present See accompanying text for explanation of"Indicator Status"codes. WI="Widespread&Invasive" RW'Restricted&Invasive" PI="Potentially Invasive"from the publication:Mehrhoff,L.J.,K.J.Metzler,and EE Corrigan. 2003.Non-native and potentially invasive vascular plants in Connecticut. Center for Conservation and Biodiversity,University of Connecticut, Storrs. APPENDIX 2.WILDLIFE INVENTORY Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Wildlife Inventory Introduction The wildlife inventory was compiled by direct sightings, songs/calls,tracks,scat,and/or browse. Also included in the inventory are species that potentially breed on or use the subject property. The latter was determined by published range maps and species habitat preferences(Bevier 1994;Klemens 1993;DeGraaf and Yamasaki 2001;Merritt 1987). Species are included in the latter group based upon the experience and professional judgment of the author. Key References Included next to each species name are two parenthetical numbers. These represent page numbers from the following references: Group 1-t Reference 2.d Reference Avians Bevier(1994) DeGraaf and Yamasaki(2001) Amphibians Klemens(1993) DeGraaf and Yamasaki(2001) Reptiles Klemens(1993) DeGraaf and Yamasaki(2001) Mammals Merritt(1987) DeGraaf and Yamasaki(2001) Listed Species — Bolded parenthetical symbols identify listed species: E=Endangered T=Threatened SC=Species of Special Concern ' Wetland Dependence This indicates the degree to which a species depends upon wetlands to complete its life cycle: OBL=obligate(requires wetland habitats during one or more stages of its life cycle) FAC=facultative(uses wetland and non-wetland habitats,and is not dependent upon wetlands to complete its life cycle) General Habitat Preferences These are obtained from the references listed above,and the author's experience: Wetland Habitats Non-Wetland Habitats DWS=deciduous wooded swamp DF=deciduous forest CWS=coniferous wooded swamp CF=conifer forest SS=scrub-shrub swamp MF=mixed forest FM=freshwater marsh ST=sa ling/shrub thicket SM=salt marsh M= ss/forb meadow BM=brackish marsh WM=wet meadow FE--fen RI=river/stream PO--Wnd/lake FP=floodplain VP—vernal pool Connecticut Ecosystems LLC River Walk Wildlife Invento Wetland General Habitat Group Species Dependence Preferences Notes AVIANS Ardeidae Ardea herodias(46,85) OBL FM,PO Uncommon migratory breeder. (Bitterns,herons) (great blue heron) Often nest in snags. Casmerodius albus(48,86) OBL FM, SM,PO Typically nest on isolated (great egret)(T) islands. Anatidae Cygnus olor(66,94) OBL PO,FM Nests in small freshwater or (Swans,geese,ducks) (mute swan) brackish ponds with dense aquatic ve etation. Branta canadensis(68,93) OBL FM,PO,M Island nest sites preferred. (Canadagoose) Anas platyrhynchos(76,99) OBL PO,RI,FM,WM, Ubiquitous,avoids saltwater. (mallard) DWS Phasianidae Meleagris gallopavo(112,126) FAC DF,AF,MF,CF Require mast-producing trees. (Pheasants,grouse,turkeys,quail) (wild turke ) Columbidae Zenaida macroura(158,142) --- Farms,suburbs, Requires open country with (Pigeons,doves) (mourning dove) open habitats seed-producing vegetation. Picidae Melanerpes carohnus(188,159) --- DF Suburban&rural open woods. (woodpeckers) (red bellied woodpecker) Picoides pubescens(192,161) FAC DF,MF Cavity nester.Wide variety of (downy woodpecker) habitats,rural&suburban. Colaptes auratus(196,164) FAC Open woodlands, Cavity nester. (northern flicker) areas with large trees. Tyramudae Sayornis phoebe(212,171) OBL DF,edges Nests on sheltered ledged near (Tyrrant flycatchers) (easternphoebe) water. I irundinidae Tachycineta bicolor(222,186) OBL M,FM, SM, Open areas,usually near water. (swallows) (tree swallow) forest edges Cavity nester. Muscicapidae Turdus migratorius(272,208) --- MF,DF,edges, Ubiquitous. (Kinglets,gnatcatchers,thrushes) (American robin) suburban yards Mimidae Dumetella carolinensis(274,209) FAC ST Often near water or wetlands, (Mockingbirds,thrashers) (gray catbird) absent from dense woods. Mimus polyglottos(276,210) --- AF,edges,parks Low dense woody vegetation. (northern mockingbird) Vireonidae Vireo gilvus(290,178) FAC DF edges Forest edges,often near water. (Vireos) (warbling vireo) Parulinae Dendroica petechia(304) FAC ST Shrub swamps,brushy thickets (wood-warblers) (Yellow warbler) Geothly is trichas(340,238) 1 FAC SS, ST Sites often wet or moist.Dense Connecticut Ecosystems LLC River Walk Wildlife Invento Wetland General Habitat Group Species Dependence Preferences Notes (common ellowthroat) herbaceous K shrub vegetation. Cardinalinae Cardinalis cardinalis(350,255) --- ST Forest edges.Requires thick (Cardinals,grosbeaks,buntings) (northern cardinal) brushy understory. Emberizinae Melospiza melodia(372,250) --- ST Moist open areas with brush. (Towhees, sparrows) (song sparrow) Zonotrichia albicollis(376,252) --- DF,MF,CF Northwest CT breeder.Brushy (white-throated sparrow) forest clearings. Icterinae 4gelaius phoeniceus(382,259) OBL FM,grass fields Nest in grassy fields near (Blackbirds,orioles) (red-winged blackbird) marshes. Quiscalus quiscula(386,262) OBL AF,PO Nests in open areas near open (common grackle) water. Molothrus ate?,(388,262) --- M Open fields with low vegetation, (brown-headed cowbird) forest edges.Nest parasite. Icterus galbula(392,264) --- M Nests in open areas with tall (Baltimore oriole) trees. Fringillidae Carduelis tristis(400,270) FAC M,FM Nests in early successional (Finches) (Americangoldfinch) habitats. AMPHIBIANS Bufo a. americanus(97,38) FAC RI,FM,WM,PO Breeding wetland sites often Bufarudae (eastern America toad) open,lackin dense vegetation. Pseudacris c. crucifer(110,40) OBL DWS,FM,WM, Breeds in permanent or H lidae (northern s rin peeper) SS,DF temporary water. Rana clamitans melanota OBL PO,DWS,FM, Wide variety of aquatic habitats. Ranidae (green fro )(126,42) RI,WM, SS REPTILES Thamnophis s. sirtalis --- Wide variety Ubiquitous. Colubridae (eastern garter snake)(263,58) MAMMALS Sylvilagus floridanus(121,318) --- ST,M Common.Forest edges,brush Le oridae (eastern cottontail) piles.Avoids dense woods. Odocodeus virginianus(316,357) FAC DF,M,DWS,CF, Forest edges. Cervidae (white-tailed deer) FM Connecticut Ecosystems LLC r r r r r r r r r APPENDIX 3.WETLAND ASSESSMENT DATA SHEETS i 1 r r r r r r ' Connecticut Ecosystems LLC r Project Wetland Data Sheet +�d►� lti/a l k Y i u Date Y��?7� � yWetland# Weather T3tne Mart Stop Recent Precipitation: Below average Ave a Above average wil-dIffe Investigation Metho ver Dip netting A Tory songs/ is S rac Minnow traps Wetland T s (Golet 1973 classification) Class Subclass Open Water Vegetated (Non-vegetate Deep Marsh Dead woody Shrub Sub-shrub Robust -leaved Broad-leaved Shallow Marsh b Narrow-leaved Broad-leaved Floating-leaved Seasonal[y Flooded Flats En= =t Shrub Wet Meadow Grazed Shrub Swanl P SUIMMt, ue2 Compact Aquatic Wooded Swa ecidu Everjveen Bo9 C—ompant shrub Bushy shrub Wooded Emergent W �gme s) %ammwwa l Floo_aXwater covers land surface throughout year in all years) Intermittently F,xlwsed(surface water present throughout year except in years of extreme drought) Ce ==(surfi= ' looded(surface water persists throughout growing season in most years) ' water present for extended periods, especially early in growing season,but is season in m=toSeasonaUy Saturat soils surface,especially early in growing season,but are unsaturated by ' end of season in most years;surface water absent except for ground water seepage and overland flow) Temporarily Flooded(surface water present for brief periods during growing season,but water table usually lies well below soil surface for most of the season) Intermittently Flooded(substrate usually exposed,but surface water is present for variable periods without detectable seasonal periodicity) Artificially Flooded(amount/duration of flooding controlled by dikes,dams,pumps,etc.) Hydrology Groundwater dischargespresent? yes no Surface water,depth: "average "maximum O'15 Soils Drainage Class(es): Well Moderately Poorl Parent Material(s): Glacial till Outwash Glaciolacustrin Alluvial Organic Slope l�Iev Gent Moderate Steep ' Upland Review Area ) Slope: Nearly level !%W Moderate Steep Cover Type(s): Mature forest Sapling forest Shrub thicket end Mowed lawn Farm ' Vegetation density: Trees Saplings Shrubs Herbs 14 Grass Leaf litter: Well-develwed Moderately well-developed Abs t Evidence of erosion? No Yes(explain) Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Wetland#: Project: �' vf{ �`" Photograph(s): Inspection Date: yla-7 Weather: Inspector: E.M. Pawlak GROUNDWATER RECHARGE (Excludin Condition:Slope Wetland) Criteria + Comments Soils sand/ vel outwash hardpar(tight fine- ed so s,shallow ledge Wetland associated with es no perennial or seasonal watercourse? slope entl moderate or steep I CIPAL FUNCTION? es GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE Criteria + Comments Soils hardpan,shallow ledge Seeps,springs observed? yes no Wetland microrelief well develo o n e/ rl develo Wetland contains an outlet tjg4o inlet? yes no PRINCIPAL FUNCTION es no FLOODFLOW ALTERATION xchiding Condition: SlopeWetland Criteria + Comments Area of wetland is relatimoy Oarw s Amount of impervious surface in wetland watershed Wetland slo steep ' Wetland characterized by variable water level? no Wetland in flood lain of adjacent watercourse? no Valuable properties,structures or resources located in yes no or near flood lain downstream from wetland? Watershed has a history of economic loss due to yes no flooding? Wetland outlet constricted? no vt Wetland vegetation density chdw low Wetland miarorelief well developed nonelpoorly developed +Mo PRINCIPAL FUNCTION es FINFISH HABITAT: PONDS/L + (Excluding Condition Wetland not associa ted with a pondd or lake Criteria Dominant land use adjacent to waterbody forest,shrub,meadow lawn Shallow littoral zone with emergent vegetation yes no resent? Waterbody at least 10' ? yes no %of pond covered by submerged or emergent 15-40% other ve etation Direct stormwater discharge via culvert? no res Sandbar resent at inlets no Water hi Significant nutrient sources(fertilizers,waterfowl) no resent in watershed? Pond size>0.5 acre? I yes no Pond experiences dense algal blooms,nuisance no yes a uatic vegetation,or duckweed? PRINCIPAL FUNCTION?yes no ' Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Wetland#: FINFISH HABITAT: STREAMS/RIVERS xcluding Condition:Wetland not associated withperennial stream) Criteria + Comments Channel shaded by riparian trees and/or shrubs? Yes Gravel§pawmng areaspresent? es no Barriers to anadromous fish(dams,high culverts)present in no yes stream reach? Dominant bottom substrategravel/cobbles Substrate eml>eddednessby sand Mfit low Instream habitat diversi riff! 1,shallow,deep) high Channel alterations channelization,islands or point bars) WawO or few numerous Bank stability unstable,erodin Bank vegetative cover ees,shrubs) low f S Cover objects(fallen logs,boulders,undercut banks) man or few Riparian zone narrow M Watershed development high Water quality ood poor Pollution tolerance of bentluepacroinvertebrate tau most!y intolerant mostly tolerant PRINCIPAL FUNCTION es no SEDEMNT,POLLUTANT& NUTRIENT REMOVAL Criteria - Comments Duration of water retention in wetland _.LOV9I short Wetland edge broad&intermittent!y aerobic? no Drainage ditches constructed in wetland? es Water flow through wetland chhqgelizdd Vegetation density low Evidence of sediment trappingin wetland? no 1 Ponded water present in wetland? no Alluvial soils resent? a no Soil type o cla sand/gravel Wetland basin topographic gradient to high Wetland microrelief well developed n none! rl developed PRINCIPAL FUNCTION? es no PRODUCTION EXPORT(Excluding Condition:No outlet) Criteria + - Comments Wildlife food sources in wetland Bfguwi&t few Vegetation density low Nutrients flushed out of wetland into watercourse? no Evidence of wildlife use in wetland? , no ' Fish or shellfish develo in wetland? no PRINCIPAL FUNCTIO ?yk no RECREATION Criteria + Comments Wetland is part of a recreation area,park,refuge,etc. n Fishing is available in or from the wetland w no . Hunting is pennitted in wetland yes Mkipg occurs or has potential to occur in wetland e n Wetland is a valuable wildlife habitat no Wetland has high visuWaesthetic qualitya no Boatin or canomn feasible m wetland es no Off-road public parldng near wetland available a no ' Safety hazards(if present ' . them) PRINCIPAL.FUNCTIO es no ' Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Wetland#: WILDLIFE HABITAT Criteria + - Comments Wetland degradation by human activity little o moderate to high Wetland fragmentation by development little moderate to high Buffer(F=fo M S=sapling/shrub thicket L=1awn A=a tural ✓ n 0 v r Buffer width V/' Connect vi with other wetlands V Size of landscape block in which wetland is located ' Wildlife food sources in wetland few Interspersion of vegetation&open water hiii low Upland islands t We lass dive, coded amp S shrub hi low sw M reteado O n water) Vegetation density low getation stra S=sapling LHhhrub V=vine ' herbaceous —leaf litter Wetland plant species diversity hi gh Vernal l? Yes ' Edge diversity(list qjxs,including upland cover s) S✓n Sm Ow Snr ,.v1 Water regime ett drier, Habitat features S=sna L=fallen logs SE=EMLspnn Abundance of invasive exo' flora?(give examples) none/low bow PRINCIPAL FUNCTION es no EDUCATIONAL/SCIENTIFIC VALUE ' Criteria + - Comments Wetland contains listed species yes n Wetland Provides valuable wildlife habitat no ' Wetland class diversity Adjacent upland cover types(F=forest eadow high S=sa lin shrub thicket A=a 'cultural Off-road parking near wetland available no Proximi to schools Wetland contains perennial watercourse no Wetland containsPond/lake yes Wety hazards(if present list them) V (c�a Site currently used for educational/scientific purposes yes PRINCIPAL FUNCTIO no UNI UENESS/HERITA Q GE Crites + - Comments Wetland contains listed species s Wetland identified is a natural communi a no Wetland locall /re 'off si cant(e lain PRINCIPAL LUNC'TiO. es no Notes Connecticut Ecosystems LLC ' APPENDIX 4.DEP NATURAL DIVERSITY DATA BASE ' Connecticut Ecosystems LLC STATE OF, CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DU'iRANdiU(ITgt,N�S ENVIRONMENTAL&GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION CENTER 4iD ' 79 Elm Street, Store Level Hartford, CT 06106 Natural Diversity Data Base ' May 3, 2004 Mr. Edward Pawlak Connecticut Ecosystems,LLC ' 38 Westland Avenue West Hartford, CT 06107 re:Proposed Age Restricted Development know as "Corner Meadow" in South Windsor, Connecticut Dear Mr. Pawlak: I have reviewed Natural Diversity Data Base maps and files regarding the area delineated on the map you provided for the proposed Corner Meadow age-restricted development in South Windsor, Connecticut. According to our information, there are historic records (last observed in 1970) of State Threatened ' Eremophilia alpestris (horned lark) from the vicinity of this project site. I have sent your letter to Jenny Dickson(DEP-Wildlife; 860-675-8130) for further review. Ms. Dickson will write to you directly with her comments. ' Natural Diversity Data Base information includes all information regarding critical biological resources available to us at the time of the request. This information is a compilation of data collected over the years by ' the Natural Resources Center's Geological and Natural History Survey and cooperating units of DEP,private conservation groups and the scientific community. This information is not necessarily the result of comprehensive or site-specific field investigations. Consultations with the Data Base should not be substitutes for on-site surveys required for environmental assessments. Current research projects and new contributors continue to identify additional populations of species and locations of habitats of concern,as well as,enhance existing data. Such new information is incorporated into the Data Base as it becomes available. Please contact me if you have further questions at 424-3592. Thank you for consulting the Natural Diversity Data Base. Also be advised that this is a preliminary review and not a final determination. A more detailed review may be conducted as part of any subsequent environmental permit applications submitted to DEP for ' the proposed site. Sincerely, Dawn McKay Biologist/Environmental lyst 3 Cc: Jenny Dickson,NDDB # 13197 ' (Printed on Recycled Paper) 79 Elm Street • Hartford, CT 06106-5127 An Equal Opportunity Employer APPENDIX 5. TURF MANAGEMENT PLAN ' Connecticut Ecosystems LLC Turf Management Plan ' 1. Soil Testing A composite soil sample from the subject property will be collected and delivered to a University of Connecticut Cooperative Extension office for testing of soil nutrient levels (i.e., pFL nitrogen, phosphorus, calcium, magnesium, potassium)prior to a fertilizer ' application. The Extension office will recommend a fertilizer application rate based upon these test results. The actual fertilizer application rate will follow this recommendation. This will ensure against an excessive fertilizer application,which could lead to chemical ' leaching or export. 2. Slow-Release Fertilizers ' Slow-release fertilizers will be applied to lawns, planted trees and shrubs. These can include, but are not limited to, organic-based fertilizers. A variety of commercial slow- release nitrogen fertilizer products are available(e.g.,Milorganite, isobutylidene diurea, coated ureas, etc.). Advantages of slow-release fertilizers include the supply of a steady nitrogen source, and reduced nitrogen leaching. By combining small amounts of soluble ' nitrogen sources with slow release nitrogen products, nitrogen availability can be extended without a threat of leaching. ' 3. Fertilizer Application Schedule ' Fertilizer will be applied three times annually to the subject property, early to late May (after the threat of cool, wet weather has passed), late August to early September, and mid-September to mid-October. If the soil test indicates a need for lime, it will be ' applied at the last fertilization date. 4. Integrated Pest Management(IPA IPM is an integrated, preventative approach to maintaining healthy turf and landscape plants. IPM recognizes that, although chemicals are an important component of a turf ' management plan, other strategies are available to maintain a healthy lawn. A central premise of IPM is to treat pest problems as they arise on an as-needed basis only, using a variety of biological (e.g., natural predators), chemical and cultural(e.g., disease- resistant seed) practices. To be successful, IPM requires periodic monitoring by an experienced practitioner to ' detect pest problems at an early stage and develop an effective, environmentally responsible action plan. It is recommended that the contractor that is hired to maintain the grounds have training and experience in the practice of IPM. Connecticut Ecosystems LLC