Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05-31W Victory Outreach Mininstries
REC TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR APR 19 2005 SOLI lh'vV Iridsr INLAND WETLANDS, WATERCOURSES AND CONSERVATION APPLICATIONNSE Vt«_r;.allosf1 COMMISSION �/ J NSERVkTION CUMfa11SS10N Application# 0,5—�) VJ Date Received INSTRUCTIONS 1. Fifteen applications (15) with map and plans (2 copies) shall be submitted together with the fee set forth in the Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations, Town of South Windsor. (See Regulations, Section VII—X) 2. The South Windsor Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations should be reviewed with respect to the standards and criteria for application Evaluation. (See Regulations, Sections VII—X) 3. The applicant understands that this application is to be considered complete only when all information and documents required by the Agency have been submitted. The applicant shall also complete the state filing form. A. Applicant's Name: Victory Outreach Ministries, Inc. Address: 329 Scantic Road East Windsor, CT 06088 Phone: (home) 627-5907 (work) (fax) B. Legal owner's name: Same as Above Address Phone (home) (work) (fax) (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) 1. Contact Person(if further information is needed) Dana Steele J.R. Russo & Associates (work) 623-0569 (fax) 623-2485 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 # 143 Parcel# 6 & 7 Zone RR 7' R 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).** 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: Construct storm drainage outlet for new Active Adult Housing development in East Windsor. 5400 s.f. regulated area disturbance including 1200 s.f. wetlands disturbance. Only fill material is riprap scour hole at pipe outlet. I. A class A-2 map of the property drawn to I"=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). K. Acreage of wetlands and watercourses in regulated areas to be altered: 0.028 Ac. L. Acreage of wetlands and watercourses to be created: — M. Lineal feet of proposed stream alteration: N. Total land area of project and percentage, which is wetlands: N/A 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.) East Windsor IWC, Piz P. The applicant (or desi ated representative) by attests that a sign will be posted at the following location(s) -e 'c By Jr`�5 Name —�Z� 4�w on or before the following date April 22, 2005 8 9 Signature: These signs must be displayed continuously for at least ten (10) days prior to scheduled meeting (see Regulations, Section 7.3a) The undersigned hereby applies for the regulated activities listed in paragraph H above, for a Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation permit for the property described herein and confirms that: l. She/he is familiar with the currently effective Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations of the Town of South Windsor. 2. She/he understands that at any time during the review period, the Agency may require the applicant to provide more information about the wetlands and/or watercourses in question and/or any proposed activity. 3. All information submitted in the application for review shall be considered factual, or in the case of anticipated activity, binding. A knowing failure of the applicant or any of her/his agents to provide correct information, or performance exceeding the levels of activity anticipated, shall be sufficient grounds for revocation of any permit under these regulations. 4. By making this application, the applicant gives permission to the Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Commission 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 decision has been issued. Signature of wner of Property Date r Signat of Apolicant _ Date � ��� '-© 9 r DRAINAGE REPORT 44-Unit Active AduCt Housing Development Scantic Road, East Windsor, C9' Prepared for: Victory Outreach Ministries 329 Scantic Road East Windsor, CT 06088 April 18, 2005 Prepared by: J.R. Russo & Associates Land Surveyors&Professional Engineers 1 Shoham Road, East Windsor, CT 06088 Phone: (860) 623-0569, Fax: (860) 623-2485 PROJECT SUMMARY: Victory Outreach Ministries proposes to develop a portion of their 43.6t acre parcel on Scantic Road in East Windsor with a 44-unit Active Adult Housing Development. The parcel was formerly a U.S. military facility and is currently used as a religious use campus for Victory Outreach Ministries. The rear portion of the parcel (19.4t acres) is located in South Windsor and is currently undeveloped. The proposed development will include 11.4f acres of undeveloped land located in the southwest corner of the parcel in East Windsor. The development area will either be split or subdivided from the original parcel or defined by appropriate easements. Victory Outreach Ministries will retain ownership of the parcel and provide maintenance services for the residential development. The project area is bounded to the south by Schank Road, a private roadway owned by the applicant, providing access for several residential parcels to the south. The proposed residential units shall consist of mostly duplex and some single family structures services by a proposed stem and loop style roadway system. The roadway loop will incorporate a portion of Schank Road. The development will be services by public water and sewer service. A private sanitary sewer pump station is required to connect to the East Windsor sewer system in Scantic Road. Stormwater from the development will be collected in a proposed storm drainage system and discharged to the undeveloped portion of the parcel to the east in South Windsor. The parcel is bounded to the east and south by the Scantic River, which will receive the runoff from this development. A particle separator is proposed to provide treatment of stormwater runoff, and removal of large suspended solids prior to discharge to the wetland system associated with the Scantic River. Because of the projects close proximity to the Scantic River, stormwater detention is not advisable for this site. Delaying the discharge from the site would likely cause peak flows to coincide with peak flows from upstream watersheds thus creating greater impacts to down stream properties. HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS: According to the Hartford Soil Survey, the project area consists mostly of Windsor loamy fine sandy, Penwood loamy sand and Chesire fine sandy loam. The rear portion of the parcel in South Windsor, where the stormwater discharge will occur is predominately Elmwood sandy loam and Buxton silt loam. The soils delineations are shown on the attached Soils Map. The drainage area for the storm drainage system is 13.91 acres as shown on the attached Drainage Area Map. After development, the drainage area will include approximately 5.78 acres of impervious coverage. Assuming a runoff coefficient of 0.3 for pervious lawn areas, the weighted runoff coefficient is computed as follows: C= [8.13(.3) + 5.78(.9)]/13.91 = 0.55 The travel path for computing the time of concentration for this watershed is shown on the attached Drainage Area Map as a dashed line. The time of concentration (TJ of 15.9 minutes was computed using the NRCS method of combining sheet flow, shallow concentrated flow and open channel flow as shown on the attached T. calculation sheet. The corresponding rainfall intensity for each storm event were taken from Table B-2.1 of the CT DOT Drainage Manual. Using the Rational Method, the peak runoff rate for each storm event can be estimated as follows: Q10 =ACi10 = 13.91(0.55)(3.9) =29.8 cfs Q25 =ACi25 = 13.91(0.55)(4.5)= 34.4 cfs PIPE SIZING: The pipes for the proposed drainage system were sized to accommodate a 10-year design storm flowing full or less than full. The controlling pipe in the drainage outlet is the 30" CPEP-S, corrugated polyethylene pipe—Type S (smooth interior) @ 0.51%between DMH#1 and DMH#2 with a full flow capacity of 31.4 cfs. Therefore, all the outlet pipes are adequately sized. OUTLET PROTECTION: The discharge point for the storm drainage system will be armored with a preformed scour hole designed in accordance with the CT DOT Drainage Manual. A scour hole size of 15'x18'x1.5' was selected from Table 8-8.1 Riprap was sized for a 25-year storm event assuming a conservative tailwater depth of 0.5' as follows: Q25 =34.4 cfs Sp=Rp=36" d50=(0.0125R 2/TW p2 5 ( ) )( ( )2.5)1.33 (• p p )(Q25/R � )133' _ (0.0125 32/0.5 34.4/ 3 =0.64 1> 0.67 (int. ri rap) � r - 1 �' }�$` Ott - �10�➢� '� _3 �Skl�I. ® ._. �i U WWI F E f sY� 1 ti Aa MW--.tr y Irk ILI, 0A q�IV -- f$��3 �+ � s&/ �1 .. i33,1 � r�� �rf�"'�,'✓� i}G 1 �e s.- ,� �� sf `� �i �_..._"'_'�:=.•-.�-v�a 4�_� R `Y�l''z�-5"'' �iC .�t4������i.'r {t :�: ➢rye 1. � -. y f. `� k � s ,I i Ta ', �`� r'" -,.�'_- CC!i r "-,��t c.:_ y6"➢ -_> 1�' �: �� ... ,h.� . a, c �,- R .11 ME 1�VON, i s g p +1 FEZ lw Fit 33Y»' „�, fj. I� '• ���°e'�C" . .�''`�,"� � r'�- �'"L,air �`�'�.� "' '', !➢g ice. tt� _ .. _ .. � �y"b� � Vi���� �` Y �-Z 3 �� -s s victory outreach - Tc calculation sheet Flow Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Manning's n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.2400 Flow Length . . . 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall . . . . . . . . . . 3.2000 in Land slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0380 ft/ft Computed sheet flow time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 6.3402 min shallow Concentrated Flow ------------------------- Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . unpaved Flow Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90.0000 ft watercourse slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0350 ft/ft velocity . . . . . . . . . 3.0185 fps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Computed shallow flow time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 0.4969 min Channel Flow ------------ Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Grass lined swale Flow Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.0000 ft2 wetted Perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.0000 ft Flow Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335.0000 ft Channel slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0350 ft/ft Manning's n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0750 Hydraulic radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.4000 ft velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.0123 fps Computed Channel flow time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 2.7746 min sheet Flow Description Manning's n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0110 Flow Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall . . . . . . . . . . 3.2000 in Land slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0130 ft/ft Computed sheet flow time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 0.8268 min Shallow Concentrated Flow ------------------------- Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . unpaved Flow Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200.0000 ft watercourse slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0800 ft/ft velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5635 fps Computed shallow flow time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 0.7304 min Channel Flow ------------ Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Piped Flow Flow Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.8800 ft2 wetted Perimeter 2.3000 ft Flow Length 1650.0000 ft channel slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0080 ft/ft Manning's n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0120 Hydraulic radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3826 ft velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.8374 fps Computed channel flow time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 4.7110 min 4:q:d:'......q:ir$roY'r4r'rdr4r:r'ririr'r:r4r:ririr$r4r Total Time of Concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 15.8799 min Page 1 6.13-8 Hydrology RAINFALL INTENSITY in/hr DURATION DURATION 2 Yr 5 Yr 10 Yr 25 Yr 50 Yr 100 Yr min 5 0.08 4.6 5.5 6.0 6.7 7.3 7.8 6 0.10 I 4.4 5.2 I 5.8 6.5 I 7.0 I 7.5 7 0.12 I 4.2 I 5.0 I 5.5 I 6.2 I 6:8 I 7.2 8 I 0.13 I 4.0 I 4.8 5.3 I 6.0 I 6.5 I 7.0 9 0.15 I 3.8 I 4.6 5.1 I 5.7 I 6.2 6.7 10 0.17 I 3.6 I 4.3 I 4.8 I 5.5 I 6.0 I 6.5 11 I 0.18 I 3.4 4.2 I 4.7 I 5.3 5.8 I 6.3 12 0.20 I 3.3 4.0 I 4.5 I 5.1 5.6 I 6.1 13 I 0.22 I 3.1 3.8 4.3 I 5.0 I 5.4 I 5.9 14 I 0.23 I 3.0 I 3.7 4.2 I 4.8 ( 5.3 I 5.7 15 I 0.25 I 2.8 3.5 I 4.0 I 4.6 ( 5.1 I 5.5 16 I 0.27 I 2.8 I 3.5 I 3.9 I 4.5 I 5.0 5.4 17 0.28 I 2.7 3.4 I 3.8 I 4.4 4.9 I 5.4 18 0.30 I 2.7 3.3 I 3.8 I 4.4 4.8 I 5.3 19 I 0.32 I 2.6 ( 3.2 3.7 4.3 I 4.7 I 5.2 20 I 033 I 2.5 I 3.2 I 3.6 I 4.2 4.6 I 5.1 ,_.. 21 I 035 I 2.5 3.1 I 3.5 I 4.1 4.5 5.0 22 0.37 2.4 3.0 I 3.4 4.0 I 4.4 I 4.9 23 0.38 2.3 2.9 3.4 3.9 I 4.3 I 4.8 24 I 0.40 2.3 2.9 I 3.3 ( 3.8 I 4.2 I 4.7 25 ( 0.42 I 2.2 I 2.8 3.2 I 3.7 I 4.2 I 4.6 26 I 0.43 I 2.2 I 2.7 I 3.1 I 3.7 I 4.1 I 4.5 27 I 0.45 I 2.1 I 2.7 3.0 I 3.6 I 4.0 I 4.4 28 I 0.47 I 2.0 2.6 I 3.0 I 3.5 3.9 ( 4.3 29 I 0.48 2.0 2.5 I 2.9 3.4 3.8 4.2 30 0.50 1.9 2.4 2.8 1 3.3 1 3.7 4.1 Rainfall Intensity/Duration/Frequency Relationship for Connecticut(English Units) Table B-2.1 ConnDOT Drainage Manual October 2000 Culverts 8.7-11 OUTLET PROTECTION OUTLET VELOCITY>14 feet/sec or Length of Apron exceeds limits shown on Tables 8-6.1 and 8-7.1 Preformed Scour Hole PIPE DIAMETER in (See Figure 8-11) 12 15 18 1 24 1 30 1 36 1 42 1 48 1 54 1 60 Type 1 B 5 6 8 10 13 15 18 20 23 25 C 6 8 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 d Depends on riprap type(see Figure 8-11) 2SP 2.0 2.6 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 3SP 3.0 3.9 4.5 6.0 7.5 9.0 10.5 12.0 13.5 15.0 F=0.5 Sp 0.5 0.625 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 2.25 2.5 T e2 B 8 10 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 C 9 11 14 18 23 27 32 36 41 45 d Depends on riprap size(see Figure 8-11) 2SP 2.0 2.6 3.0 4.0 5.0 1 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 3SP 3.0 3.9 4.5 6.0 7.5 9.0 10.5 12.0 13.5 15.0 F=SP 1.0 1.3 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Table 8-8.1-Dimensions of Preformed Scour Hole(Feet) October 2000 ConnDOT Drainage Manual Culverts 8.7-5 C Empirical Preformed Scour Hole Equations: Type 1: Scour Hole Depression=one-half pipe rise, m(ft) d5o= (0.0276 Rp2/TW) (Q/RP2.5)1.333 ( d5o=(0.0125RP2/.I'W)(QW.5)1333 ) (8.13) Type 2: Scour Hole Depression= full pipe rise, m(ft) d50= (0.0181 D 2/TW)(Q/RP2.5)1333 (d50=(0.0082RP2/TW)(Q/RP2.)1.333) (8.14) d5o=median stone size required, m(ft) For variables Sp, Rp,TW and Q,see Section 8.7.5. Type 1 and 2 preformed scour hole dimensions(See Figure 8-11) C =3 Sp+6F Basin Length m(ft) B=2Sp+6F Basin Inlet and Outlet Width m(fl) (8.15) F =0.5Rp(Type 1)or Rp(Type 2) Basin Depression m(ft) Table 8-8 solves the above set of equations for Type 1 and 2 preformed scour holes for various pipe sizes. The type of riprap required is as follows: Modified d5o<0.13m(0.42 ft) Intermediate 0.13m(0.42 ft)<d5o<0.20m 0.67 ft Standard 0.20m 0.67 ft <d5o<0.38m 1.25 ft Special Design 0.38m(1.25 ft)<d5o Reference: Report No. FHWA-RD-75-508 ("Culvert Outlet Protection Design: Computer Program Documentation") 4 - October 2000 ConnDOT Drainage Manual CHANNEL LINING CALCULATION: The previously submitted drainage report for Victory Estates on Scantic Road in East Windsor, revised 5111105, included a capacity analysis of the watercourse channel receiving runoff from the proposed development. The analysis demonstrated that the channel has more than enough capacity to accommodate the increase in flow rate from the proposed development. Concerns were raised during South Windsor staff review with regard to potential erosion of the steeper portions of the channel. To address these concerns we are proposing to line the last 80 feet of the channel (the steepest portion) to provide a more stable channel surface. As described in the previous report, the existing flows to the channel include 14 acres with a time of concentration of 29 minutes and a 10-year peak flow of 10.2 cfs. The proposed development will utilize subsurface infiltration as much as possible to reduce runoff peaks rates and volumes. For channel analysis purposes,we have modeled this reduction by subtracting the roof areas from the project area's watershed. This reduces the watershed area and impervious coverage by 2.25 acres. The 10-year peak flow from the project area after infiltration is estimated as follows: AC = (8.13 ac. lawn)(0.3) + (5.78 ac. imp. —2.25 ac. roof)(0.9) = 5.62 i10=3.9 in/hr(16 min. time of concentration) Q10 =ACi10 =5.62(3.9) =21.9 cfs The time of concentration for the two drainage areas are not equal but since the project area is a significant distance from the channel, there will also be a travel time which will cause the two areas to coincide more closely. Therefore, we have conservatively assumed that both areas peak i7t the same time producing a combined peak flow as follows: Q10 =21.9 + 10.2 = 32.1 cfs The channel will be lined with a mixture of modified and intermediate riprap stone to provide a stable channel bottom and sides within the depth of flow. Coir logs are proposed along the banks above the riprap to provide additional bank protection during high flow events. Using this peak flow rate and the approximated channel dimension of 6' bottom, 1:1 left slope, 3:1 right slope, 15% average channel slope, and a roughness coefficient of 0.07 for the riprap lining, the velocity in the channel was calculated to be 5.8 f1/sec. According to the 2002 CT DEP Guidelines for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control, Figure PW-4, the maximum permissible velocity for waterways lined with modified riprap is 8 ft/sec. The proposed channel lining will provide additional stabilization to protect the channel from potentially erosive velocities. In our opinion, the proposed increase in flow in the channel will not adversely impact the channel or downstream properties. Victory Estates—Active Adult Housing Page 1 of 1 Scantic Road, East Windsor 5/26/05 victory Estates Channel calculator Given Input Data: shape . . . . Trapezoidal solving for Depth of Flow Flowrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.1000 cfs slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.1500 ft/ft Manning's n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0700 - Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0000 ft Bottom width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.0000 ft Left slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.0000 ft/ft (v/H) Right slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3300 ft/ft (v/H) Computed Results: Depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.7409 ft velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.7824 fps Full Flowrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443.4724 cfs Flow area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5513 ft2 Flow perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4119 ft Hydraulic radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.5898 ft Top width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.9859 ft Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36.1364 ft2 Perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.8158 ft Percent full . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24.6956 Critical Information Critical depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.8679 ft Critical slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0858 ft/ft Critical velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.7730 fps Critical area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.7253 ft2 Critical perimeter . . 9.9969 ft Critical hydraulic radius . . . . . . . 0.6727 ft Critical top width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4979 ft specific energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2605 ft Minimum energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3018 ft Froude number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2970 Flow condition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . supercritical Page 10 PermissibleFigure PW-4 Maximum, Velocity Riprap TypeSize Maximum Permissible ^ Modified d50 <0.42 feet = 8 ft./sec. Intermediate 0.42 feet<d50<0.67 feet 10 f,Aec. Standard 0.67 feet<-d50 14 ft./sec. r Riprap types as defined in DOT Standard Specifications. Other gradations may be designed which also met the d50 criteria. SOLIfCe: DOT Drainage A1ai�u�il 2� Design Example Given: Qd= 100cfs Sa(slope) = 1% Channel shape = Trapezoidal w/ 2:1 side slopes a Z= 2 (see Figure VW-14) Type of Lining = Concrete w/float finish n'. 0..013=0.017 (see Figure PW-7) Find: Channel Size and Depth of Flow Solution: Solve by trial and error. Using the Continuity Equation(Q= ATE, Manning's equation ( V= (1.49/n) x R 2\.3 x S 1\2) and the formulas in Figure PW-9. T - ry Bottom Width - 6 ft. Depth of Flow 1.4 ft. , Area A = bd + zd2 = 6x1.4 + 2x1.42 = 12.32 sq. ft. Hydraulic Radius R=A/wp where wp wetted perimeter R=( bd + zd2) /(b +2d(z2+1)1\2) = 12.32/ 12.26 = 1.004 use 1.0 Vd= (1.49/0.017)x 1,0,x 0.1 = 8.8 ft./sec. - Qa=,VA= 8.8 x 12.32 = 108.4 cfs > Qd of 100 cfs, OK. Use a minimum freeboard of 0.25 ft. if no out of bank damage would be expected. Increase freeboard in areas where high damage can be expected from out of bank flow, m x � Construction Dimensions: Side slopes = 2:1; Bottom Width = 6 ft.; Depth = 1.65 feet; Lining thickness = 4 inches; Concrete= 3000 psi (air entrained); Cement= Portland Type 1; Aggregate maximum size= 1-1/2 k inches; Use contraction joints every 15 feet; use 6 inches gravel bedding under all concrete. � I Note: For a riprap lined waterway, see Riprap measure. Y =�w:.�..:.,:,,,.:..�����c-.....:F. ..-.s.�a,-.-.w,.,..:�-.::.,..�.z�--......f�,n.-.,max,..Y.�ao,. ,_._._vt...a.M_xn.::.;�.•, �c�-_^v. ..,,:..s.<.x au,.s - ,�-��n-�' 2002 Connecticut Guidelines for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control MICHAEL F. GRAGNOLATI 45 North Street P.O.Box 3127 Windsor Locks,Connecticut 06096-3127 Tel/Fax 860-623-2588 April 19, 2005 Joseph Russo, P.E. J.R. Russo Associates 1 Shoham Road East Windsor, CT 06088 RE: Wetland Delineation Victory Outreach Ministry, Inc. 329 Scantic Road East Windsor/South Windsor, Connecticut Dear Mr. Russo: This letter is to confirm that in April 2005 I examined the southern portion of the above referenced parcel for the presence of wetlands and watercourses as defined by Connecticut State Statutes. My investigations were conducted utilizing a spade and auger. The wetland boundaries were marked with numbered blue flagging in the field to be located by your firm. The areas delineated are to the rear of the property along a dirt road. The only wetlands delineated were adjacent to the proposed work. Predominate soils within the area delineated are made land wet. They are the result of historic excavation of sands and gravel. The entire area delineated appears to have been altered by historic activity. The predominate vegetation consist phragmites, rushes and sedges. Predominate soils in the undisturbed area are Walpole sandy loams Walpole soils are very deep (>65 inches)poorly drained soils that form in water sorted glacial outwash and stratified drift. They have an apparent water table that is at or near the surface much of the year. Permeability of the Walpole soils is moderately rapid in the surface layer and subsoil and rapid or very rapid in the substratum. If you should have any questions, please call this office at your convenience. Sincerely; Michael F. Gragnolati Registered Professional Soil Scientist 05-010 April 19, 2005 Louis P. Chagnot P.O. Box 615 South Windsor, CT 06074 co 0 CERTIFIED MAIL Dear Property Owner: Re: Storm Drainage Outlet Victory Outreach Ministries, Inc. 329 Scantic Road East Windsor/South Windsor, CT In accordance with Section 7.3b of the "Town of South Windsor Inland Wetlands, Watercourses, and Conservation Regulations", we are required to notify you that an application has been filed on the property abutting yours and is subject to a hearing by the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission. The application and plans are on file with the South Windsor Planning Department. As an abutting property owner you are invited to the hearing to ask questions and/or give comments, however, you are not required to attend. You may also submit written comments regarding the application prior to the hearing if so desire. For further information regarding the specific date this will be heard please contact Jeff Folger, Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer,Planning Department, 644-2511, ext. 253. Sincerely, Bishop Ralph Saunders Victory Outreach Ministries, Inc. 329 Scantic Road East Windsor, CT 06088 Inland Wetlands Application for Victory Outreach Ministries, Inc. Names & Addresses of Abutting Property Owners Rose Mary&Gregory T. Mulka, III Geoffrey B. Walker 337 Scantic Road 339 Scantic Road East Windsor, CT 06088 East Windsor, CT 06088 Gregory&Kathleen Bilodeau Alfred Lovett 343 Scantic Road P.O. Box 73 East Windsor, CT 06088 East Windsor Hill, CT 06028 Michael &Tina Fauteux Robin&Rebecca Schanck 347 Scantic Road ' 6 Schanck Road East Windsor, CT 06088 East Windsor, CT 06088 Erma Schanck Ellen B. &Arthur Sias, Jr. 8 Schanck Road P.O. Box 230 East Windsor, CT 06088 Broad Brook, CT 06016 Carlos &Manuel Cristovao Sandra&Edmund LaFlemme 12 Schanck Road 219 Podunk Road East Windsor, CT 06088 East Brookfield,MA 01515 Richard& Sharon Skowron Gary& Susan Levasseur 319 Scantic Road 325 Scantic Road East Windsor, CT 06088 East Windsor, CT 06088 Estate of Stella Schanck Louis P. Chagnot C/o Alfred Lovett P.O. Box 615 P.O. Box 73 South Windsor, CT 06074 East Windsor Hill, CT 06028 South Windsor Land Cons. Trust, Inc. James B. McGrath&Anne M. Doran P.O. Box 415 443 Rye Street East Windsor Hill, CT 06028 South Windsor, CT 06074 William H. &Cira M. Conley Gerald&Marie F. Saucier 235 Farnham Road 234 Farnham Road South Windsor, CT 06074 South Windsor, CT 06074 Louise E. Ferreira 201 Scantic Meadow South Windsor, CT 06074 CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION GIS CODE#: — — — — 79 Elm Street For 0Ea use only — — — Hartford,CT 06106-5127 Arthur J.Rocque,Jr.,Commissioner Statewide Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Activity Reporting Form Please complete this form in accordance with the instructions. Please print or type. PART I: To Be Completed By The Inland Wetlands Agency Only 1. DATE ACTION WAS TAKEN: Year Month 2. ACTION TAKEN: 3. WAS A PUBLIC HEARING HELD? Yes No 4. NAME OF AGENCY OFFICIAL VERIFYING AND COMPLETING THIS FORM: (print) (signature) PART If: To Be Completed By The Inland Wetlands Agency Or The Applicant 5. TOWN IN WHICH THE ACTION IS OCCURRING: South Windsor Does this project cross municipal boundaries? Yes % No If Yes, list the other town(s)in which the action is occurring.. East Windsor 6. LOCATION: USGS Quad Map Name: Manchester AND Quad Number: 38 Subregional Drainage Basin Number: 4200 7. NAME OF APPLICANT,VIOLATOR OR PETITIONER: Victory Outreach Ministries, Inc. 8. NAME&ADDRESS/LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: 329 Scantic Road East Windsor Briefly describe the action/project/activity: Drainage outlet for Active Adult Housing Development 9. ACTIVITY PURPOSE CODE: C 10. ACTIVITY TYPE CODE(S): 10 2 14 12 11. WETLAND/WATERCOURSE AREA ALTERED[must be provided in acres or linear feet as indicated]: Wetlands: 0.028 acres Open Water Body: — acres Stream: linear feet 12. UPLAND AREA ALTERED[must be provided in acres as indicated]: 0.194 acres 13. AREA OF WETLANDS AND/OR WATERCOURSES RESTORED, ENHANCED OR CREATED: — acres [must be provided in acres as indicated] .- ,. CORfEC 3r REV.5/2001 UNITED STATES RTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SUIRVEY THOMPSONVILLE 8 ML 64671 NE 698000m.E 32 M!. TO INTER TATE 9! 700 35' �Ol f,BROA-D BRO( 1 -`� \ • ./}'ram O -o''i --_ _ pro o D ll� • _ So #y • -t 0 n arr 0 0 � II o o �' 50 \ o •.. r� p M7). ♦ \ a- - a u \� o i °°• B o ti •° u wo 0 1, oc o x u 94 II East Win So %�• •" �.� // < 4 a _ 90 q �y 90 o �RON� � 0�• __ 60 � 8(off-- �_- - •" e ���c.€ `� , ow -_• rick] - j �tio •.• a • o j •F n •le ar O me titute Claypl J .� .° (• tf d Gr state Cen i ��o _ Bo Eton BM 42 / �� ._� _ • \ _ - - W to o ' -AV of Vf to Cem' qffA - . r OW♦ �0Lc 5 - AN o p o - o ` ♦ ♦ R Q •Io ? _ - o -3 PROJECT SUMMARY: Victory Outreach Ministries proposes to develop a portion of their 43.6± acre parcel on Scantic Road in East Windsor with a 44-unit Active Adult Housing Development. The parcel was formerly a U.S. military facility and is currently used as a religious use campus for Victory Outreach Ministries. The rear portion of the parcel (19.4± acres)is located in South Windsor and is currently undeveloped. The proposed development will include 11.4f acres of undeveloped land located in the southwest corner of the parcel in East Windsor. The development area will either be split or subdivided from the original parcel or defined by appropriate easements. Victory Outreach Ministries will retain ownership of the parcel and provide maintenance services for the residential development. The project area is bounded to the south by Schank Road, a private roadway owned by the applicant,providing access for several residential parcels to the south. The proposed residential units shall consist of mostly duplex and some single family structures services by a proposed stem and loop style roadway system. The roadway loop will incorporate a portion of Schank Road. The development will be services by public water and sewer service. A private sanitary sewer pump station is required to connect to the East Windsor sewer system in Scantic Road. Stormwater from the development will be collected in a proposed storm drainage system and discharged to the undeveloped portion of the parcel to the east in South Windsor. The sandy nature of the site's upper stratum make the site conducive for infiltration of roof runoff. This methodology will be incorporated into the detailed site design to be prepared for application to the Town of East Windsor. The parcel is bounded to the east and south by the Scantic River, which will receive the runoff from this development. The proposed drainage outlet includes a water quality biofilter as requested by the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Commission. The biofilter includes a vegetated flat serpentine swale intended to increase travel time for the first 1" of runoff from the site, commonly referred to as the"first flush". A baffled drainage manhole provides a bypass for larger storm events which discharge to an pre-formed scour hole near an existing pond. The pond is an impoundment caused by the presence of an existing dirt road accessing the eastern portion of the parcel. The pond currently overflows to an existing watercourse on the subject parcel which drains to the northeast across the abutting property in East Windsor and into floodplains of the Scantic River. Because of the projects close proximity to the Scantic River, stormwater detention is not advisable for this site. Delaying the discharge from the site would likely cause peak flows to ' coincide with peak flows from upstream watersheds thus creating greater impacts to down stream properties. HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS: ' According to the Hartford Soil Survey, the project area consists mostly of Windsor loamy fine sandy, Penwood loamy sand and Chesire fine sandy loam. Windsor and Penwood soils are classified as type A soils while Chesire soils are a type B soil. The rear portion of the parcel in South Windsor, where the stormwater discharge will occur is predominately Elmwood sandy loam and Buxton silt loam, type_C soils. The soils delineations are shown on the attached Soils Map. The drainage area for the storm drainage system is 13.91 acres as shown on the attached Drainage Area Map. After development, the drainage area will include approximately 5.78 acres of impervious coverage. Assuming a runoff coefficient of 0.3 for pervious lawn areas and 0.9 for impervious areas, the weighted runoff coefficient is computed as follows: C = [8.13(.3) +5.78(.9)1/13.91 =0.55 The travel path for computing the time of concentration for this watershed is shown on the attached Drainage Area Map as a dashed line. The time of concentration.(TJ of 15.9 minutes was computed using the NRCS method of combining sheet flow, shallow concentrated flow and open channel flow as shown on the attached T, calculation sheet. The corresponding rainfall intensity for each storm event were taken from Table B-2.1 of the CT DOT Drainage Manual. Using the Rational Method, the peak runoff rate for each storm event can be estimated as follows: Q10=ACilo= 13.91(0.55)(3.9) =29.8 cfs Q25=ACi25= 13.91(0.55)(4.5) =34.4 cfs These rates will be somewhat reduced by the use of infiltration practices to be incorporated in the detailed design of the project area in East Windsor. PIPE SIZING: The pipes for the proposed drainage system were sized to accommodate a 10-year design storm flowing full or less than full. The controlling pipe in the drainage outlet is the 30"CPEP-S, corrugated polyethylene pipe-Type S (smooth interior) @ 0.51%between DMH#1 and DM11#2 with a full flow capacity of 31.4 cfs. Therefore, all the outlet pipes are adequately sized. BIOFILTER DESIGN: The proposed biofilter was designed to treat the first 1"of runoff from the site co mmonly referred to as the"first flush The rate of water corresponding to this design criteria,referred to as the water quality flow (WQF), was determined using the methodology described in section 7.4.2 and Appendix B of the 2004 CT Stormwater Quality Manual. The water quality flow is the peak flow rate associated with the water quality design storm (1"of rainfall)with a runoff volume referred to as the water quality volume (WQV). WQV = (1")(R)(A)/12 where: WQV = wa ter ater quality volume (ac ft) . R = volumetric runoff coefficient(0.05+0.009(I)) I = percent impervious cover(%) A = area of the site(acres) The drainage area of the site is 13.91 acres. There will be approximately 5.78 acres of impervious surfaces within this drainage area, or 41.6%. Therefore, the WQV is computed as follows: WQV = (1)(0.05+0.009(41.6))(13.91)/12=0.5 acre-ft Appendix B of the Stormwater Quality Manual recommends using the TR-55 Graphical Peak Discharge Method to compute the WQV. The runoff curve number(CN) associated with the first 1"of rainfall is computed as follows: CN = 1000/[10+5P+IOQ-10(Q2+1.25QP)0.5] where: P = design precipitation, in. (1") Q = runoff depth(in watershed inches)=WQV/A 0.5 ac-ft (12"/ft)/l3.91 ac. =0.43" CN = 1000/[10+5(1)+l0(0.43)-10(0.432+1.25(0.43)(1))0.5] =93 The attached TR-55 Graphical Peak Discharge printout computed the peak discharge to be 4.9 cfs. A 15"pipe was selected to convey the water quality flow to the biofilter. The attached Manning's Pipe Calculator indicates that the depth of flow in the 15"pipe will be 1 ft. Therefore, the bypass weir elevation was set 1 ft. above the 15" flowline. The 4' diameter manhole provides a weir width of 4' which will minimize the effects of surcharge on the biofilter during larger storm events. OUTLET PROTECTION: The discharge point for the storm drainage system will be armored with a preformed scour hole designed in accordance with the CT DOT Drainage Manual. A scour hole size of 15'xl8'xl.5' was selected from Table 8-8.1 Riprap was sized for a 25-year storm event assuming a conservative tailwater depth of 0.5' as follows: T y Q25 =34.4 cfs Sp =Rp=369) d50=(0.0125R 2/TW p2 5 1 33 ( )2 )( ( )2.5)1.33 ( p r )(Q2s� � ) ' _(0:0125 3 /0.5 34.4/ 3 =0.64 > 0.67 int. ri rap) The outlet to the biofilter is armored with a type C riprap apron (defined channel downstream). The length(La)of 10 feet was selected from the attached table 8-7.1 from the CT DOT Drainage Manual. Modified riprap was selected based on the attached table 8.5, since velocities in the flat swale will certainly be less than 8 fps. DOWNSTREAM CAPACITY: The existing drainage area contributing to the on-site pond which overflows to the watercourse to the north is approximately 14 acres of mostly undeveloped land. The delineated drainage area is shown on the attached Manchester Quadrangle map. The time of concentration for this drainage area was computed using the SCS method of combining sheet flow, shallow concentrated flow and open channel flow. The computed Tc is 29 minutes, as shown on the attached calculation sheets. A runoff coefficient of 0.25 was assumed for the mostly wooded steep slopes. Using the Rational Method, the existing peak flows to the water course were computed as follows: Q10=ACi10= 14(0.25)(2.9) = 10.2 cfs Q1oo=ACi100= 14(0.25)(4.2) = 14.7 cfs The proposed development adds an additional 13.91 acres to this drainage area. Assuming conservatively that the Tc from both areas are approximately equal,the total post-development flow in the watercourse will be: Q1o = 10.2 +29.8.=40.0cfs Q100= 14.7+ 13.91(0.55)(5.4)=56.0 cfs The capacity of the watercourse was estimated using the available aerial topography. Dimensions for trapezoidal channels approximating the channel geometry at four different cross sections were used to compute the full flow capacity of the channel. The cross sections shown on the attached 40-scale plan were dimensioned as follows: X1 X2 X3 X4 Top width(T)=60' T=50' T=30' T=30' depth(d)= 1.2' d= 1.8' d= 1.8' d= 1.5' bottom width(b)= 12' b = 12' b=6' b = 10' channel slope (s)=5% s= 10% s = 15% s= 11% The attached Manning's Channel Calculations demonstrate that the cross-section controlling capacity is X4 with a full flow capacity of 170 cfs. This is approximately 3 times the 100-year flow rate under post-development conditions. The flow velocity in the channel during the 10- year design storm is 6.5 fps. Based on these calculations and our observations of the channel condition, it is our opinion that the proposed increase in flows in the channel will not produce erosive velocities. CONCLUSION: In our opinion,stormwater runoff from the proposed development will not adversely impact downstream properties. Stormwater infiltration will be utilized as much as possible at the project area in East Windsor to reduce runoff volumes. A biofilter has been proposed in cooperation with the South Windsor wetland agent and the Inland Wetlands Commission to address water quality concerns. The storm drainage discharges to an existing man-made pond on the property which overflows to an existing watercourse on the subject parcel. The watercourse channel has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional flows and will not result in excessive velocities. I � t0AN sF� 710v 0 � y r. 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074 '�OsoR.co TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511 Date: April 27, 2005 To: J.R. Russo &Associates 1 Shoham Road East Windsor, CT 06088 From: Jeffrey H. Folger Environmental Planner Town of South Windsor Re: Appl#05-31 W—Victory Ministries Active Adult Housing, Scantic Road. - Plans dated 4/18/05. I have reviewed the site plans for the proposed Victory Ministries Active Adult Housing site plan with the following initial comments: 1. A biofilter structure should be included in the stormwater system to address water quality concerns. Specific details concerning grading, planting, residence time within the structure should be included. 2. The proposed project should incorporate 4-foot sumps in the stormwater catchbasins to provide additional storage for sediment. 3. The water table should be determined at the residence site and at the site of the biofilter. 4. An erosion and sedimentation plan for the site should include all grading to determine impacts to downslope areas. 5. A wetland biologist report should be submitted that evaluated the function and values of wetlands on the site. Estimated impacts to these functions must be evaluated as well to determine if the proposed activities offer any feasible and prudent alternatives. 6. What is the fate of the existing farm road? Will any improvement to the road be planned in the future. Runoff seems to be channeled along the road and achieves velocities that are erosive. Waterbars installed at intervals are needed to slow the velocity of runoff and divert it into less erosive areas. 7. The flow of stormwater to the north involves passage along an existing watercourse exiting the pond and flowing to the Scantic River. While the channel bottom is comprised of cobbles and "hardened material"there is some evidence of lateral movement of the channel into the side slopes. The flow line in these areas must be protected from further scour. These portions of the channel are not on the subject property. Permission and an easement to perform improvements to the channel must be acquired. If permission cannot be obtained, then pre and post development volumes must be balanced through infiltration. 8. Roof surfaces must be allowed to drain onto the surface to minimize volume increases to the stormwater system. cc. Town Engineer Town Planner IWA/CC DRAINAGE REPORT 1 1 . actor estates 44-Unit Active Adua Housing DeveCopment Scantic Road; East Windsor, CT Prepared for: Victory Outreach Ministries t 329 Scantic Road East Windsor, CT 06088 1 . Revised May 11, 2005 Prepared by: J.R. Russo & Associates ' Land Surveyors&Professional Engineers 1 Shoham Road, East Windsor, CT 06088 Phone: (860) 623-0569, Fax: (860) 623-2485 ' PROJECT SUMMARY: ' Victory Outreach Ministries proposes to develop a portion of their 43.6± acre parcel on Scantic Road in East Windsor with a 44-unit Active Adult Housing Development. The parcel was formerly a U.S. military facility and is currently used as a religious use campus for Victory ' Outreach Ministries. The rear portion of the parcel (19.4f acres) is located in South Windsor and is currently undeveloped. The proposed development will include 11.4± acres of undeveloped land located in the southwest corner of the parcel in East Windsor. The development area will either be split or subdivided from the original parcel or defined by appropriate easements. Victory Outreach Ministries will retain ownership of the parcel and provide maintenance services for the residential development. The project area is bounded to the south by Schank Road, a private roadway owned by the applicant,providing access for several residential parcels to the south. The proposed residential ' units shall consist of mostly duplex and some single family structures services by a proposed stem and loop style roadway system. The roadway loop will incorporate a portion of Schank Road. The development will be services by public water and sewer service. A private sanitary ' sewer pump station is required to connect to the East Windsor sewer system in Scantic Road. Stormwater from the development will be collected in a proposed storm drainage system and discharged to the undeveloped portion of the parcel to the east in South Windsor. The sandy nature of the site's upper stratum make the site conducive for infiltration of roof runoff. This methodology will be incorporated into the detailed site design to be prepared for application to ' the Town of East Windsor. The parcel is bounded to the east and south by the Scantic River, which will receive the runoff from this development. The proposed drainage outlet includes a water quality biofilter as requested by the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Commission. The ' biofilter includes a vegetated flat serpentine swale intended to increase travel time for the first 1" of runoff from the site, commonly referred to as the"first flush". A baffled drainage manhole provides a bypass for larger storm events which discharge to an pre-formed scour hole near an ' existing pond. The pond is an impoundment caused by the presence of an existing dirt road accessing the ' eastern portion of the parcel. The pond currently overflows to an existing watercourse on the subject parcel which drains to the northeast across the abutting property in East Windsor and into floodplains of the Scantic River. ' Because of the projects close proximity to the Scantic River, stormwater detention is not advisable for this site. Delaying the discharge from the site would likely cause peak flows to ' coincide with peak flows from upstream watersheds thus creating greater impacts to down stream properties. ' HYDROLOGIC ANALYSIS: ' According to the Hartford Soil Survey, the project area consists mostly of Windsor loamy fine sandy, Penwood loamy sand and Chesire fine sandy loam. Windsor and Penwood soils are ' classified as type A soils while Chesire soils are a type B soil. The rear portion of the parcel in South Windsor, where the stormwater discharge will occur is predominately Elmwood sandy loam and Buxton silt loam, type C soils. The soils delineations are shown on the attached Soils ' Map. The drainage area for the storm drainage system is 13.91 acres as shown on the attached ' Drainage Area Map. After development, the drainage area will include approximately 5.78 acres of impervious coverage. Assuming a runoff coefficient of 0.3 for pervious lawn areas and 0.9 ' for impervious areas, the weighted runoff coefficient is computed as follows: C = [8.13(.3) + 5.78(.9)]/13.91 = 0.55 ' The travel path for computing the time of concentration for this watershed is shown on the attached Drainage Area Map as a dashed line. The time of concentration (TJ of 15.9 minutes ' was computed using the NRCS method of combining sheet flow, shallow concentrated flow and open channel flow as shown on the attached Tc calculation sheet. The corresponding rainfall intensity for each storm event were taken from Table B-2.1 of the CT DOT Drainage Manual. ' Using the Rational Method, the peak runoff rate for each storm event can be estimated as follows: Qio=ACilo= 13.91(0.55)(3.9) =29.8 cfs Q25=ACi25 = 13.91(0.55)(4.5) =34.4 cfs These rates will be somewhat reduced by the use of infiltration practices to be incorporated in the detailed design of the project area in East Windsor. PIPE SIZING: ' The pipes for the proposed drainage system were sized to accommodate a 10-year design storm flowing full or less than full. The controlling pipe in the drainage outlet is the 30" CPEP-S, ' corrugated polyethylene pipe—Type S (smooth interior) @ 0.51%between DMH#1 and DMH#2 with a full flow capacity of 31.4 cfs. Therefore, all the outlet pipes are adequately sized. BIOFILTER DESIGN: ' The proposed biofilter was designed to treat the first 1"of runoff from the site, commonly referred to as the "first flush". The rate of water corresponding to this design criteria, referred to ' as the water quality flow (WQF), was determined using the methodology described in section 7.4.2 and Appendix B of the 2004 CT Stormwater Quality Manual. The water quality flow is the peak flow rate associated with the water quality design storm(1" of rainfall) with a runoff volume referred to as the water quality volume (WQV). ' WQV = (1")(R)(A)/12 where: WQV = water quality volume (ac-ft) ' R = volumetric runoff coefficient(0.05+0.009(I)) I = percent impervious cover(%) A = area of the site (acres) ' The drainage area of the site is 13.91 acres. There will be approximately 5.78 acres of impervious surfaces within this drainage area, or 41.6%. Therefore, the WQV is computed as follows: WQV = (1)(0.05+0.009(41.6))(13.91)/12 = 0.5 acre-ft ' Appendix B of the Stormwater Quality Manual recommends using the TR-55 Graphical Peak Discharge Method to compute the WQV. The runoff curve number(CN) associated with the first 1"of rainfall is computed as follows: CN = 1000/[10+5P+IOQ-10(Q2+1.25QP)"'] where: ' P = design precipitation, in. (1") Q = runoff depth (in watershed inches)=WQV/A = 0.5 ac-ft(12"/ft)/13.91 ac. =0.43" ' CN = 1000/[10+5(1)+10(0.43)-10(0.432+1.25(0.43)(1))°'S] =93 ' The attached TR-55 Graphical Peak Discharge printout computed the peak discharge to be 4.9 cfs. A 15"pipe was selected to convey the water quality flow to the biofilter. The attached Manning's Pipe Calculator indicates that the depth of flow in the 15"pipe will be 1 ft. ' Therefore, the bypass weir elevation was set 1 ft. above the 15" flowline. The 4' diameter manhole provides a weir width of 4' which will minimize the effects of surcharge on the biofilter during larger storm events. OUTLET PROTECTION: The discharge point for the storm drainage system will be armored with a preformed scour hole designed in accordance with the CT DOT Drainage Manual. A scour hole size of 15'xl8'xl.5' was selected from Table 8-8.1 Riprap was sized for a 25-year storm event assuming a conservative tailwater depth of 0.5' as ' follows: ' Q25 =34.4 cfs Sp =Rp=3699 d50 = (0.0125R 2/TW p2.5)1.33 ( ( )2 )( ( )2.5)1.33 , i ( p ' p )(Q2s/R = 0:0125 3 /0.5 34.4/ 3 =0.64 > 0.67 (int. riprap) The outlet to the biofilter is armored with a type C riprap apron(defined channel downstream). The length(La) of 10 feet was selected from the attached table 8-7.1 from the CT DOT Drainage ' Manual. Modified riprap was selected based on the attached table 8.5, since velocities in the flat swale will certainly be less than 8 fps. DOWNSTREAM CAPACITY: ' The existing drainage area contributing to the on-site pond which overflows to the watercourse to the north is approximately 14 acres of mostly undeveloped land. The delineated drainage area is shown on the attached Manchester Quadrangle map. The time of concentration for this drainage area was computed using the SCS method of combining sheet flow, shallow concentrated flow and open channel flow. The computed Tc is 29 minutes, as shown on the attached calculation ' sheets. A runoff coefficient of 0.25 was assumed for the mostly wooded steep slopes. Using the Rational Method, the existing peak flows to the water course were computed as follows: ' Q10=ACi10= 14(0.25)(2.9)= 10.2 cfs Q1oo=ACiloo= 14(0.25)(4.2)= 14.7 cfs The proposed development adds an additional 13.91 acres to this drainage area. Assuming conservatively that the Tc from both areas are approximately equal, the total post-development flow in the watercourse will be: ' Q1o= 10.2 + 29.8 =40.0cfs Q100= 14.7 + 13.91(0.55)(5.4) = 56.0 cfs The capacity of the watercourse was estimated using the available aerial topography. Dimensions for trapezoidal channels approximating the channel geometry at four different cross ' sections were used to compute the full flow capacity of the channel. The cross sections shown on the attached 40-scale plan were dimensioned as follows: X1 X2 X3 X4 Top width(T) =60' T=50' T=30' T=30' depth (d) = 1.2' d= 1.8' d= 1.8' d= 1.5' ' bottom width (b) = 12' b = 12' b =6' b = 10' channel slope (s) = 5% s = 10% s = 15% s= l l% The attached Manning's Channel Calculations demonstrate that the cross-section controlling capacity is X4 with a full flow capacity of 170 cfs. This is approximately 3 times the 100-year flow rate under post-development conditions. The flow velocity in the channel during the to- year design storm is 6.5 fps. Based on these calculations and our observations of the channel 1 1 condition, it is our opinion that the proposed increase in flows in the channel will not produce erosive velocities. 1 CONCLUSION: 1 In our opinion, stormwater runoff from the proposed development will not adversely impact downstream properties. Stormwater infiltration will be utilized as much as possible at the project 1 area in East Windsor to reduce runoff volumes. A biofilter has been proposed in cooperation with the South Windsor wetland agent and the Inland Wetlands Commission to address water quality concerns. The storm drainage discharges to an existing man-made pond on the property 1 which overflows to an existing watercourse on the subject parcel. The watercourse channel has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional flows and will not result in excessive velocities. 1 � i 1 1 i i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 k ! T �. J •l ° r. CA �. c Ste - F t��` �'<�•��� ,� �aid �� i Nalft toy 11 �R Ail S IN • �- L W Ir r Y tom? �•a �'� 't tt. ,, '`fie �'� 1 1 K FR a r'+ e INT, � SO ya ' WIN � � �rots. ka; • `rr jam_ �,..a 2 -e" ?� , a e.� �/A • ��1�tR r fig, Sf � R *.�d yya. ffi iymi �F�x f� �f t `+a `" �� �1„��-+" +'�-"► P�� r ''pl�"�^ic���rt_��r'°'�g'�� ..• 'Si'� `�,+C -. 3t� pk? � .1 f - y�. ! a^ i- � �A�• \ _ -� 1 ��i�w zF+r� •, • �� �� �. s s,. it t victory Outreach - Tc calculation ' Sheet Flow ---------- Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Manning's n 0.2400 Flow Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall . . . . . . . . . . 3.2000 in ' Land slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0380 ft/ft computed sheet flow time .> 6.3402 min shallow concentrated Flow ' ---Description surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . unpaved Flow Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90.0000 ft watercourse slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0350 ft/ft ' velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0185 fps computed shallow flow time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 0.4969 min channel Flow ------------ Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Grass lined swale Flow Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.0000 ft2 wetted Perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.0000 ft Flow Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335.0000 ft channel slope 0.0350 ft/ft Mannin 's n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0750 Hydraulic radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.4000 ft ' velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2.0123 fps computed channel flow time .> 2.7746 min sheet Flow ' ---Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Manning's n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0110 Flow Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50.0000 ft ' Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall . . . . . . . . . . 3.2000 in Land Slope . . 0.0130 ft/ft computed sheet flow time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 0.8268 min ' Shallow concentrated Flow ------------------------- Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . unpaved ' Flow Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200.0000 ft watercourse slope 0.0800 ft/ft velocity . . . . . . . . 4. 5635 fps computed shallow flow time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 0.7304 min ' channel Flow ------------ Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Piped Flow ' Flow Area . . . . . . . 0.8800 ft2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . wetted Perimeter 2.3000 ft Flow Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1650.0000 ft channel slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0080 ft/ft ' Manning' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .s n . . . . 0.0120 Hydraulic radius 0. 3826 ft velocity . . . . . 5.8374 fps computed channel flow time .> 4.7110 min Total Time of concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 15.8799 min Page 1 6.13-8 Hydrology 1. RAINFALL INTENSITY in/hr ' DURATION DURATION 2 Yr 5 Yr 10 Yr 25 Yr 50 Yr II II III II (II 100 Y r min 5 0.08 4.6 5.5 6.0 6.7 7.3 7.8 6 0.10 4.4 5.2 5.8 6.5 7.0 7.5 7 0.12 4.2 5.0 5.5 6.2 6.8 7. 8 0.13 4.0 4.8 5.3 6.0 6.5 9 0.15 I 3.8 I 4.6 I 5.1 5.7 I 6.2 I 6.7 10 0.17 I 3.6 I 4.3 I 4.8 5.5 I 6.0 I 6.5 ' 11 0.18 I 3.4 I 4.2 I 4.7 I 5.3 5.8 I 6.3 12 0.20 I 3.3 I 4.0 I 4.5 I 5.1 5.6 I 6.1 ' 13 I 0.22 I 3.1 I 3.8 I 4.3 I 5.0 I 5.4 I 5.9 14 I 0.23 I 3.0 I 3.7 I 4.2 I 4.8 I 5.3 I 5.7 15 0.25 I 2.8 I 3.5 I 4.0 I 4.6 I 5.1 I 5.5 16 0.27 I 2.8 3.5 I 3.9 I 4.5 I 5.0 I 5.4 17 0.28 I 2.7 3.4 I 3.8 4.4 4.9 I 5.4 ' 18 0.30 2.7 I 3.3 I 3.8 4.4 4.8 I 5.3 19 I 0.32 2.6 I 3.2 I 3.7 I 4.3 4.7 I 5.2 20 I 0.33 I 2.5 3.2 I 3.6 I 4.2 4.6 I 5.1 ' 21 0.35 2.5 3.1 3.5 4.1 4.5 5.0 ' 22 0.37 2.4 3.0 I 3.4 4.0 I 4.4 4.9 23 0.38 2.3 2.9 I 3.4 3.9 I 4.3 4.8 24 I 0.40 2.3 2.9 I 3.3 I 3.8 4.2 I 4.7 25 I 0.42 I 2.2 2.8 I 3.2 3.7 I 4.2 I 4.6 26 I 0.43 I 2.2 I 2.7 I 3.1 I 3.7 I 4.1 I 4.5 ' 27 0.45 I 2.1 2.7 I 3.0 I 3.6 I 4.0 I 4.4 28 0.47 I 2.0 I 2.6 I 3.0 3.5 3.9 I 4.3 29 I 0.48 I 2.0 I 2.5 I 2.9 3.4 3.8 I 4.2 ' 30 0.50 1.9 2.4 2.8 3.3 3.7 4.1 ' Rainfall Intensity/Duration/Frequency Relationship for Connecticut(English Units) Table B-2.1 ' ConnDOT Drainage Manual October 2000 victory Estates Graphical Peak Discharge method (Wd - E ' Given Input Data: Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . water Quality Flow Calculation for victory Estates ' Rainfall distribution . . . . . . . . . . . Type III Frequency 1 year Rainfall , P (24-hours) . . . . . . . . . . 1.0000 in Drainage area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.9100 ac Runoff curve number, CN . . . . . . . . . 93 ' Time of concentration, Tc . . . . . . . 16.0000 min Pond and swamp Areas 0.0000 % of Area computed Results: . . . . . . . . . Initial abstraction, Ia 0.1505 in Ia/P . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.1505 unit peak discharge, qu 499.2412 csm/in Runoff, Q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.4504 in Pond and swamp adjustment, FP . . . 1.0000 Peak discharge, qp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.8870 cfs , ' Page 1 Victory Estates Manning Pipe calculator � � ' Given Input Data: Shape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . circular solving for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Depth of Flow ' Diameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.8870 ft Flowrate 4.8870 cfs slope . . 0.0050 ft/ft Manning's n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0120 ' computed Results: Depth 1.0107 ft Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2272 ft2 wetted Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.0631 ft2 ' wetted Perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.7950 ft Perimeter 3.9270 ft velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.5968 fps Hydraulic Radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.3804 ft ' Percent Full 80.8599 Full flow Flowrate 4.9484 cfs Full flow velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.0323 fps ' Page 2 Culverts 8.7-11 ' Ou-iL-Er o P w ' OUTLET PROTECTION OUTLET VELOCITY>14 feet/sec or Length of Apron exceeds limits shown on Tables 8-6.1 and 8-7.1 Preformed Scour Hole PIPE DIAME in (See Figure 8-11) 12 1 15 18 24 30 1 C36 42 1 48 1 54 1 60 Type I B 5 6 8 10 13 15 18 20 23 25 ' C 6 8 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30 d Depends on riprap type(see Figure 8-11) ' 2SP 2.0 2.6 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 3SP 3.0 3.9 4.5 6.0 7.5 9.0 10.5 12.0 13.5 15.0 F=0.5 Sp 0.5 0.625 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 2.25 2.5 Type 2 ' B 8 10 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 C 9 11 14 18 23 27 32 36 41 45 d Depends on riprap size(see Figure 8-11) ' 2SP 2.0 2.6 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 3SP 3.0 3.9 4.5 6.0 7.5 9.0 10.5 12.0 13.5 15.0 F=S P 1.0 1.3 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 1 3.5 1 4.0 4.5 5.0 Table 8-8.1-Dimensions of Preformed Scour Hole Feet October 2000 ConnDOT Drainage Manual Culverts 8 7-5 Empirical Preformed Scour Hole Equations: ' Type 1: Scour Hole Depression= one-half pipe rise, m(ft) d5o= (0.0276 RP2/TW) (Q/RP2.5)1.333 ( d50=(0.0125RP2/TW)(Q/RP2.5)1.333 ) (8.13) Type 2: Scour Hole Depression= full pipe rise, m(ft) d50= (0.0181 RP2/TW)(Q/RP2.5)1.333 !d50=(0.0082R 2[ /R 2.5 1 .'J l P �(Q P ) .333) (8.14) ' d50=median stone size required, m(ft) For variables Sp, RP,TW and Q, see Section 8.7.5. Type 1 and 2 preformed scour hole dimensions(See Figure 8-11) ' C =3SP+6F Basin Length m(ft) B=2SP+6F Basin Inlet and Outlet Width m(ft) (8.15) F =0.5RP(Type 1)or RP(Type 2) Basin Depression m(ft) Table 8-8 solves the above set of equations for Type 1 and 2 preformed scour holes for various pipe sizes. a The type of riprap required is as follows: Modified I d5o<0.13m 0.42 ft) Intermediate 0.13m(0.42 ft)<d5o<0.20m 0.67 ft Standard 0.20m 0.67 ft <d50<0.38m 1.25 ft Special Design 0.38m(1.25 ft)<d5o Reference: Report No. FHWA-RD-75-508 ("Culvert Outlet Protection Design: Computer am � P Program Documentation") ' October 2000 ConnDOT Drainage Manual OUTLET • 1 • • • SPAN(in) -';17 h &,1;z.5z¢s. i • I ' +...�fvE n'�Ls '"Elm • i�.� a9 ,.t3^.?v° • I s �, .r-,�rsx .ca?, �v- -57;_''�,�' mL,�,.�m.d��'`��afty ?;fir ®^ . =,..���i--- �J h.==='"- ==7sE1 fas�.�,c�'`�. WME",'� �.M4;. 1 6 ,t.:.6i Sr �1� �I? L h ca> �. ...''z�T: • • tw..v�j,>..X.`fr X F'c�; .Y. >vo.:: '*� y • �.<.5 >.n..�" -��.�,w�.z7i a.�..s F �Y:�,r`§.r _u.:„4 Y.-.s`-p�iu� • • r��:i���._ *'^•^"t'�n�"T^ydI t Y. i C��"�sRG^^���'.1 E �`,:,I`i�' • t-- -�''.+' '�,{• }{�` Ts1 � kt x r*,;5�� aa..:�.X:,a f�a7`:. 1 �.•mrr-•��'-r -c��yy, �-� ter^ ®®®® T P • {"a �a g�`"S'igv„��-�3,..h r,i'�i � rag 1Jcf,�' g<t�''. 1,7 PKIE- I • ,� � ,y � t t n �r ...r w r;��.`,.a,-r -+i' ��'i�.`��✓�'�' �,� '� z ,3ira� 3, ��®® r f.z.- F raE w. °pa IF � z5��.�E 4+::�:�.Y c. =1,:.-7 �.' Eix�.., ar "'�'>-•t r fir- .d "�d }a.�t ,4. g` a ,y.. S -"T.4,'�..<' �?we�1 ,f'" "r$ s'dk 8.7-2 Culverts ' 8.7.3 Design Criteria ' The design of riprap outlet protection applies to the immediate area or reach downstream of the pipe outlet and does not apply to continuous rock linings of channels or streams. For pipe outlets at the top of exit slopes or on slopes greater than 10%, the designer should assure that ' suitable safeguards are provided beyond the limits of the localized outlet protection to counter the highly erosive velocities caused by the reconcentration of flow beyond the initial riprap apron. Outlet protection shall be designed according to the following criteria: • Riprap outlet protection shall be used at all outlets not flowing over exposed rock or into deep watercourses and ponds. ' • In situations not covered by the above noted criteria and where the exit velocity is <4.27 raps (14 fps), a riprap apron shall also be used. For Type A and B riprap aprons, the type of riprap specified is dependent on the outlet velocity(see Section 8.6.6) and can be determined ' from Table 8.5. For Type C aprons, the type of riprap specified is determined by the procedures in HEC-15 and HEC-11 depending on the design discharge. See Chapter 7, Channels. • The type of riprap apron and dimensions are determined by the guidelines outlined in Sections 8.7.2 and 8.7.5, respectively. • When the outlet velocity is>4.27 mps(14 fps), the designer should first investigate methods to reduce the outlet velocity. This may be accomplished by any one or combination of the ' following: increasing the pipe roughness, increasing the pipe size and/or decreasing the culvert slope. When this is not possible or economical, a number of outlet protection or energy dissipation design options are available. These are presented in detail in HEC-14. In most instances, however, a preformed scour hole design should be used, as it generally can provide _. ' the necessary degree of protection at an economical cost. The design of a preformed scour hole is presented in Section 8.7.6. The design criteria of this section should be applicable to most outlet situations. However, recognizing that design and site conditions can vary significantly depending on the project or ' location on a particular project, it is the responsibility of the designer to ensure that the criteria is suitable to the site or to provide an alternate design which will adequately protect the outlet area from scour and erosion. These situations should be documented in the ' drainage design report. Table 8.5 Allowable Outlet Velocities for Type A and B Riprap Aprons Outlet Velocity -m s s Riprap Specification 0-2.44 0-8 Modified ' 2.44-3.05 8-10 Intermediate 3.05-4.27 10-14 Standard ' 8.7.4 Tailwater Depth The depth of tailwater immediately at the pipe outlet is required for the design of outlet ' protection and must be determined for the design,flow rate. Manning's equation may be used to determine tailwater depth See Sections 8.3.5 and 8.3.6 for additional information on how to determine the tailwater depth. ConnDOT Drainage Manual October 2000 { AmcgesWr... o�ti UNITED STAT S cb,uppr� Est ! �o DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR o��J GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 72°37`30" 6 OOOm. THOMPSONVILLE 8 Mi. 7 ' 98 E. .3.2 Mi. TO INTERZITAtE 9/ \\ I 00 35 � ZO „ 4638000m.N. � � � _ SGP. x o U1 4 - { ' ,,yytt gyp`l�qF (/�r �Aj \` �o,/ •• __— � " CR 14 f E� \O �`O I. 7 S a •57• OO SO_ o T`_ar.r• asg� � ii soFR II / o ♦ ' () /•o h M77 • �1\ ryp I °O• •0 8 if II w V` it 94 ° I 11 East Windso %r ; o ���� A. II o I •• ' 4636if /// ONG / OlS• - 50 8` o� -- rickya ._✓ . 846. d ♦ ry 4635 o /: •h f 0 :I: - - • n leer m titute Claypl 0 -�- ,�. ( tf d Gr uate Cen II y- 80 • d.. o' _ 1 ,� �stat's STRQN6 eM z0(1 ' 41134 0 0 Mill —_- 3 to Cem•+ rG o y h I I ' �•°•• • 1 4T1 oROAO ILI • c' • ��o 8 4633 0 o r.o. `. 8 o s �x :SOU COA R victory Estates �•- ' �� sheet Flow ---Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L-(�11� ' Manning's n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.1500 Flow Length . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 200.0000 ft Two Yr, 24 hr Rainfall . . . . . . . . . . 3.2000 in ' Land slope . . . 0.0500 ft/ft Computed sheet flow time . .> 11.8245 min shallow Concentrated Flow ' ---Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . surface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . unpaved Flow Length . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 200.0000 ft ' watercourse slope 0.1000 ft/ft velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1022 fps computed shallow flow time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 0.6533 min ' channel Flow - Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flow Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.0000 ft2 ' wetted Perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.0000 ft Flow Length 700.0000 ft Channel slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0600 ft/ft Manning's n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0750 Hydraulic radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.2000 ft ' velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6598 fps . . . . . . . . . . . • . . Computed Channel flow time .> 7.0290 min Channel-Flow Description Piped Flow Flow Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.0000 ft2 wetted Perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.0000 ft ' Flow Length . . 250.0000 ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .channel slope 0.0100 ft/ft Manning's n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0750 Hydraulic radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.1000 ft ' velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0.4269 fps computed Channel flow time .> 9.7611 min ' Total Time of Concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .> 29.2679 min Page 7 1 LX ZAI S4,ryQ Apao "otiwHD I 1 ' victory Estates channel calculator CQGC (L ' Given Input Data. shape . Trapezoidal solving for Flowrate slope 0.0500 ft/ft manning.s n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0500 Depth 1.1400 ft Height 1.2000 ft Bottom width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.0000 ft ' Left slope . 0.0500 ft/ft (v/H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Right slope 0.0500 ft/ft (v/H) computed Results: Flowrate 205.4815 cfs velocity 5.1795 fps Full Flowrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230.4712 cfs Flow area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39.6720 ft2 ' Flow perimeter . . 57.6570 ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Hydraulic radius 0.6881 ft Top width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57.6000 ft Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43.2000 ft2 ' Perimeter . . 60.0600 ft Percent full 95.0000 critical information ' critical depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1933 ft critical slope 0.0408 ft/ft critical velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.8013 fps critical area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42.7969 ft2 ' critical perimeter . . : . . . . . . . . . . 59.7903 ft critical hydraulic radius 0.7158 ft critical top width 59.7307 ft specific energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5569 ft Minimum energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1003 ft Froude number 1.1003 Flow condition supercritical Page 3 ' victory Estates channel calculator ' Given Input Data: shape Trapezoidal solving for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flowrate slope 0.1000 ft/ft Manning�s n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0500 Depth 1.4000 ft Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.8000 ft Bottom width 12.0000 ft ' Left slope . 0.0950 ft/ft (v/H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Right slope 0.0950 ft/ft (v/H) computed Results: ' Flowrate 327.8479 cfs velocity 8.7586 fps Full Flowrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 562.1484 cfs Flow area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.4316 ft2 Flow perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41.6064 ft ' Hydraulic radius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.8997 ft Top width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41.4737 ft Area 55.7053 ft2 ' Perimeter : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 50.0654 ft Percent full 77.7778 critical Information ' critical depth 1.7840 ft Critical slope 0.03540354 ft/ft critical velocity 5.9706 fps critical area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54.9100 ft2 ' critical perimeter : : : : : : : : : : : : : 49.7271 ft critical hydraulic radius 1.1042 ft critical top width 49.5580 ft specific energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 5922 ft ' Minimum energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6254 ft Froude number .654 Flow condition supercritical Page 4 ' victory Estates channel calculator se-C "7 C ' Given Input Data. Shape Trapezoidal Solving for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flowrate slope 0.1500 ft/ft ' Manning:s n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0500 Depth 1.3000 ft Height 1.8000 ft Bottom width 6.0000 ft ' Left slope . 0.1500 ft/ft (v/H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Right slope 0.1500 ft/ft (v/H) computed Results: ' Flowrate 190.7678 cfs velocity 10.0053 fps Full Flowrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390.2494 cfs Flow area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.0667 ft2 ' Flow perimeter 23.5272 ft Hydraulic radius 0.8104 ft Top width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23.3333 ft Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.4000 ft2 ' Perimeter . . 30.2685 ft Percent full 72.2222 critical Information critical depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.7990 ft critical slope 0.0359 ft/ft critical velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.8933 fps critical area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.3701 ft2 ' critical perimeter . . I . . . . . . . . . " 30.2551 ft critical hydraulic radius 1.0699 ft critical top width 29.9867 ft Specific energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.8557 ft ' Minimum energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.9513 ft Froude number 1.9513 Flow condition Supercritical Page 5 ' victory Estates Channel calculator CS�CIn`l Given Input Data: . Shape Trapezoidal Solving for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flowrate slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.1100 ft/ft Manning's n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0.0500 Depth 1.1400 ft Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5000 ft Bottom width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.0000 ft ' Left slope . 0.1500 ft/ft (v/H) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Right slope 0.1500 ft/ft (v/H) Computed Results: Flowrate : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 169.1324 cfs velocity 8.4296 fps Full Flowrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294.2490 cfs Flow area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.0640 ft2 ' Flow perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.3700 ft Hydraulic radius 0.7909 ft Top width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25.2000 ft Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30.0000 ft2 Perimeter . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . 30.2237 ft ' Percent full . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76.0000 Critical Information ' critical depth 1.4952 ft Critical slope 0.03680368 ft/ft Critical velocity 5.6647 fps Critical area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29.8573 ft2 ' Critical perimeter : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 30.1595 ft Critical hydraulic radius 0.9900 ft Critical top width 29.9365 ft Specific energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2443 ft Minimum energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2429 ft Froude number . 1.6655 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Flow condition Supercritical Page 6 victory Estates channel Calculator Given Input Data: ' shape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Trapezoidal solving for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Depth of Flow Flowrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40.0000 cfs ' slope . . . . . . 0.1500 ft/ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . manning's n 0.0500 Height . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.8000 ft Bottom width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.0000 ft ' Left slope 0.1500 ft/ft (v/H) Right slope 0.1500 ft/ft (v/H) Computed Results: ' Depth 0.6071 ft velocity 6. 5576 fps -- V,p Full Flowrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 390.2494 cfs Flow area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.0998 ft2 ' Flow perimeter . . 14.1853 ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hydraulic radius 0.4300 ft Top width . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.0947 ft Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.4000 ft2 ' Perimeter . . 30.2685 ft Percent full 33.7280 Critical Information ' Critical depth 0.8228 ft Critical slope 0.04470447 ft/ft Critical velocity 4.2327 fps Critical area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.4501 ft2 ' Critical perimeter 17.0934 ft Critical hydraulic radius 0.5529 ft Critical top width 16.9707 ft specific energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2754 ft Minimum energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2342 ft ' Froude number 1.7574 Flow condition supercritical 1 1 Page 8 J.R. RUSSO & ASSOCIATES Land Surveyors & Professional Engineers May 12, 2005 Jeffrey H. Folger Environmental Planner Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Appl# 05-31 W—Victory Outreach Ministries Victory Estates—44 Unit Active Adult Housing 329 Scantic Road, East Windsor Dear Jeff: Thank you for your comments dated April 27, 2005. We have revised our plans and calculations to address your concerns. The enclosed plans and drainage report dated 5111105 reflect these changes. Specifically,we have addressed the following: 1. A biofilter has been proposed with an 8-foot wide serpentine channel designed to accommodate the first 1" of runoff from the site. The channel includes over 250 linear feet of travel distance through a wetland bottom consisting of cattails and a wetland seed mixture. You asked for residence time computations,but the DEP Stormwater Quality Manual recommends designing based on a water quality flow (WQF)rather than a particular residence time. This information is included in the revised drainage report. 2. A catch basin detail was added to sheet 6 showing a 4' sump as requested. 3. Test Pits were dug on 5/9/05 to determine the soil conditions and water table at the residence site(TP#1 ) and at the biofilter(TP#3). The results show that the residence site contains an upper stratum of sandy material which is suitable for infiltration. The final design of the project in East Windsor will incorporate infiltration measures as much as possible to reduce runoff volumes to South Windsor. The biofilter area has a water table at 40"with a restrictive silty layer at 60". The proposed biofilter will effectively intercept the water table providing the necessary hydration for the vegetated swale bottom. Page 1 of 2 1 Shoham Road • East Windsor, CT 06088 • TEL: (860) 623-0569 • FAX: (860) 623-2485 Re: Appl# 05-31 W—Victory Outreach Ministries Victory Estates—44 Unit Active Adult Housing 329 Scantic Road, East Windsor 4. The site plan has been revised to include additional erosion control measures including water bars at approximate 100' intervals across the existing access road and hay bale check dams in the newly proposed grass-lined channel along the roadway. 5. Michael Gragnolati has prepared a function and values report addressing the impacts of the proposed activities on the wetlands and demonstrating that the proposed alternative is the most prudent and feasible option. This report will be submitted under separate cover. 6. Due to concerns raised about the condition of the existing farm road, the applicant has elected to reconstruct the road to a 15-foot width with a compacted gravel travel surface. The gravel road will be crowned to keep water off the road and utilize the filtering features of the roadside vegetation. 7. The existing watercourse discussed in your report is located on the abutting property in the Town of East Windsor. The drainage report has been revised to include a capacity analysis and flow velocity estimate for evaluating the effect of the proposed increase in runoff on the existing watercourse in East Windsor. We will coordinate with East Windsor regarding their requirements for easements and channel improvements. In our opinion,the existing channel has sufficient capacity and the proposed flows will not produce excessive velocities. This information is included in the revised drainage report. 8. A note#4 has been added to the 40-scale plans indicating that the runoff from the proposed roof surfaces in East Windsor will be discharged to the lawn surface or to subsurface infiltration systems to encourage infiltration and reduce runoff volumes to the stormwater system. If you have any questions regarding these changes,please contact our office at 623-0569. Dana Steele, P.E. - -- - - - -J.R.Russo &Associates cc: File#2004-094 Page 2 of 2 ` Ma!jj17 05 11 : 55a J R Russo Assoc 8606232485 p. 2 MIC HA.EL F. GRAGNOLATI 45 North Street P.O.Box 3127 Windsor Locks,Connecticut 06096-3127 Tel/Fax 860-623-2588 May 16, 2005 Joseph Russo, P.i;. REGEIVED J.R. Russo Associates 1 Shoham Road MAY 17 2005 I'?ast Windsor, CT 06088 south Windsor INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY RE: Wetland punctiorts CONSERVATION COMMISSION Victory Outreach Ministry, Inc. 329 Scantic Road East Windsor/South Windsor, Connecticut Dear Mr. Russo: This letter is to supplement my April 19, 2005 letter to you about the above relcrcnced project. As stated in my previous letter the:majority oNlic wetlands to the north of the area delineated were created by the removal of sandy material on the surface. The area was excavated to a point where the underlying materials are finer textured and more compact. Over time hydrophytic vegetation grew in this area developing;conditions that qualify this area as wetlands. Vegetation is dominated by common reed(Plhrag;mitcs austrUES) and various rushes(Juncus spp.) and sedges (Gare:x.vpf;.). Throughout the area are piles of soil material that were left Lifter the extraction procedure was completed or abandoned. At the base of the hill is an area in the wetland that ponds water. Water flows out of this ponded area to the east where it eventually!lows into the Scantic River. To the west of the ponded area is an old thrm road that is the access to a large field to the south of the property. Vegetation along both intermittent waterways consists of red maple (Acer rubrum)silky dogwood (C..'ornus atnonmin) and skunk cabbage(Sjtnplocarpus,fr etl(lus). Both areas flow into the Scantic River. Wetland functional values provided by the wetland area are ground water recharge, flood flow alteration, sediment retention, nutrient retention, and wildlife habitat. Most of these ibnctions arc provided by the wetlands at the base of the slope because they are nearly level to gently sloping. Wetlands of all types provide wildlife habitat to some degree. Wetlands on site provide a moderate to law level of wildlife habitat due to the invasive species that have taken over the disturbed portions and past activities that have impacted the wetlands 1.0 various degrees. May 17 05 11 : 55a J R Russo Assoc 8606232485 p. 3 Joseph Russo, P.B. ,1.R. Russo Associates May 16,2005 Paige 2 Plans for the treatment of storrnwater runoff include a rip rapped plunge pool tit the pipe outfall. After the plurige pool there will be a relatively flat sinuous grass swale that will detain and cleanse the storm warier. The water will then flow into a grass swine that will rein along an existing farm road to a point where it will enter the wetland at the base of the slope. This type of water treatment in conjunction with other proposed storm treatment systems shown on the plans should moderate the temperature and cleanse;the stormwater prior to entering the wetland system. As part of my review of the plans 1 was shown a preliminary plan which showed piping the stormwater to an outfall adjacent to the wetland. That alternative would not allow for the rejuvenation of the storinwa tur as the present plan does. It is my beliel'that the applicant's engineer has chosen the most pnident and feasible alternative. In summary, based on my site visit and a review of the proposed plans I am of'tlhe opinion that the proposed work will have a negligible impact on the. functions presently provided by the wetlands. If you should have any questions,ploase call this office at your convenience. Sincerely; 4ij Ir Michael F. Gragnola Registered Professional Soil Scientist Aj tOVIN 8f7 v `� 4 . T � � .�sou ?d&U&Ot 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074 ��Osoe.coN�� TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511 Date: May 17, 2005 To: J.R. Russo &Associates 1 Shoham Road East Windsor, CT 06088 From: Jeffrey H. Folger Environmental Planner Town of South Windsor Re:. Appl#05-31 W—Victory Ministries Active Adult Housing, Scantic Road. -Plans dated 5111105. I have reviewed the site plans for the proposed Victory Ministries Active Adult Housing site plan with the following additional comments: 1. The biofilter plantings should be 4 feet on center to provide a denser initial planting. 2. The topsoil in the biofilter should be amended with leaf compost, 30%by volume to increase the organic component. 3. Four 10-foot wide cattail plantings should be added along the grassed Swale at 50-foot intervals. 4. Due to the silty composition of the subsoil, Floc Logs should be incorporated into the - erosion/sediment control plan. This new technology can effectively capture the fine colloidal fraction of the sediment profile. 5. The wetland biologist report still has not been submitted. 6:, Coir logs will be required to be installed along the watercourse at the flow line to prevent further lateral cutting the anticipated increase in volume. .7. Please change the haybale check dams to gravel check dams in#7 of the construction narrative. cc. Town Engineer Town Planner IWA/CC ;' .E D MAY 1_ 605 MEMORANDUM INLAND 1'd Nrw rc.-.r�C;Y GON58RVASIOid CGMb115510N To: Marcia Banach, Director of Planning Jeff Folger, Environmental Planner From: Jeffrey B. Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer Date: 5/18/05 RE: App 05-31 W—Victory Estates, 329 Scantic Road I have reviewed the Drainage report and plans for the Victory Estates 44-unit Active Adult Housing Development at 329 Scantic Road in East Windsor, and I have the following comments: 1. The proposed drainage system discharges into an existing on-site pond which outlets to a drainage channel that runs off-site down a long hill to the floodplain of the Scantic River. The existing 10 year design flow to the pond and drainage channel is 10 cfs. The proposed 10 year design flow in this channel is 40 cfs which will result in a velocity of 6.5 ft/sec. The drainage report states an opinion that the increase in flows in this channel will not produce erosive velocities. I am concerned that the increase in flow and proposed flow velocity and duration will cause erosion of this channel. According to the 2002 Connecticut Guidelines for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control the maximum permissible velocity in a channel with heavier clay soils and a good vegetative condition is 5.0 ft/sec. This channel has sandy/gravel soils and a fair vegetative condition. The maximum permissible velocity for this condition is 2.5 ft/sec. Both these values are significantly less than the proposed design velocity in this channel. Based on this information I think this channel bottom and lower sides need to be armored with stone (modified rip rap) to prevent erosion due to the increase in flows. I need to see further calculations and documentation from the design engineer as to the need to armor this channel with stone. Please call me if you have any questions. t�wN aft �i •+ u' �� 011 •. 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074 oe-c° TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511 CERTIFIED MAIL April 22, 2045 7004 2510 0003 9804 5158 Town Clerk Town of East Windsor 11 Rye Street Broad Brook, CT 06016 Re: Notice to Adjoining Municipalities Dear Madam/Sir: In accordance with Connecticut General Statutes concerning notification to municipalities regarding Planning&Zoning Commission applications that could affect the abutting town, we hereby notify you of the application#05-31 W submitted by Victory Outreach Ministries, Inc., 329 Scantic Road, East Windsor, CT 06088. The applicant's request is for regulated activities in connection with the construction of a 44 unit Active Adult Housing Development stormwater system on property located southerly of Scantic Road. Rural Residential Zone. This application is tentatively scheduled to be heard by the Planning&Zoning Commission on Wednesday, May 4, 2005 at 7:15 p.m. in the Madden Room of the Town Hall. If you have any question,please feel free to contact the Planning Department at 644-2511, ext. 253. Very truly yours, 4f�l"t Jeffrey H. Folger Environment Planner/Conservation Officer JHF/kak MEMORANDUM To: South Windsor Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission. From: Jeffrey H. Folger-Zoning/Wetland Enforcement Officer Date: April 26 2005 Re: App. #05-31 W—Review of the Victory Outreach Ministries Active Adult Housing-Plans dated 4/18/05. The project is to build a 40-unit Senior Residence Development(SRD)on approximately 12 acres. Proposed regulated activities include construction and grading of a water quality basin within the regulated area and the upland review area. Site: The site is located in the Scantic River watershed. The parcel is a rectangular piece oriented east to west. The site is mostly open with 3/ of the site historically used as an agricultural field. Relief on the moderately slopes to the south in the western portion of the property and moderately slopes to the east in the eastern portion of the property. The total site is comprised of approximately 61 acres. The portion of the property in South Windsor equals approximately 27 acres. Wetlands on the property are associated with the terrace slopes heading to the Scantic River to the east. They are situated as a band along the lower%2 of the slopes heading down to the Scantic River. The western portion of the wetland is a seepage wetland where ground water is breaking out along the slope saturating the soil. This area has been disturbed in the recent past. A significant portion of the slope has been colonized by phragmites. A farm access road heading toward the River bisects the wetland. As the slope levels out to the east the wetland north of the road becomes a small pond that flows to the north to the Scantic River via a small watercourse. This watercourse is relatively stable in that the channel bottom would be characterized as a cobble bottom, not the typical clay bottom. There is minor lateral cutting along the sides of the watercourse. The road is built on a sub-watershed divide so the wetland south of the road flows to the south to the Scantic. This channel is more typical of drainage ways in this area. The clay channel bottom is evident and there is significant head cutting of the channel as it empties into the river. The wetlands would be characterized as forested wetland that has been disturbed. There is no evidence of any vernal pool morphology. The wetlands occur at the edge of the historically cultivated field. The wetlands are populated by numerous plants in the disturbed slope area. Sedges and rushes comprise the native plant component. Phragmites have colonized the northwest portion of the wetland. Major functions of this wetland area would be groundwater discharge, stormwater conveyance, sediment trapping, nutrient assimilation and wildlife habitat. Impacts: The soils are mapped as Windsor loamy fine sand 3 to 8% slope(WvB) , erosion hazard low, Windsor loamy course sand(WuC) 8 to 15% slopes, erosion hazard low, at the location of the dwellings. Soils on the slope that are the subject of this application are mapped as Elmwood sandy loam(EnB) 3 to 8% slops, erosion hazard low, and Buxton silt loam(BxC) 8 to 15% slopes, erosion hazard, high. Depending on the outcome of the test pits, additional erosion controls should be added to prevent fine particles from migrating to the south. The likelihood of cloudy water being generated from fine soil particles is good if the biofilter bottom intercepts the clay layer. There is new technology available that can capture fine soil particles like silts and clays called a"floc log". It is a semi-solid polymer that attracts and captures the fines. This material should be used along with standard erosion controls. The stormwater system is proposed to be directed through a pipe to a plunge pool located adjacent to the small pond to the south. A gross particle separator was proposed to be installed to capture sediment for water quality. I have communicated with the design engineer that this is inadequate. A biofilter of sufficient size to treat the expected runoff volume is required. The applicant has agreed to design this type of structure adjacent to the access road mid-slope. The discharge from the storm system will enter the small pond and flow north toward the Scantic along an existing watercourse. There is a concern that increased water volume will extend the duration of the peak storm flow. The bottom of the watercourse is uncharacteristically stable with a stone bottom. Some minor reinforcing to the sides of the channel will be needed. The portion of the channel that would need reinforcing is not on the applicant's property. Permission and possibly an easement will be needed to accomplish the necessary work to the channel. If permission cannot be obtained, the applicant will have to infiltrate onsite the balance between pre and post construction volumes. I have mentioned to the applicant that an appropriate mitigation measure would be to eliminate the phragmites from the wetland slope. MEMORANDUM To: Marcia Banach, Director of Planning MAY .t � ZQQ5 Jeff Folger, Environmental Planner From: Jeffrey B. Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer SOUTHVV1hJ'SORP' IVINGDEpr Date: 5/18/05 RE: App 05-31 W—Victory Estates, 329 Scantic Road I have reviewed the Drainage report and plans for the Victory Estates 44-unit Active Adult Housing Development at 329 Scantic Road in East Windsor, and I have the following comments: 1. The proposed drainage system discharges into an existing on-site pond which outlets to a drainage channel that runs off-site down a long hill to the floodplain of the Scantic River. The existing10 design year g flow to the pond and drainage channel is Po g 10 cfs. The proposed 10 year design flow in this channel is 40 cfs which will result in a velocity of 6.5 ft/sec. The drainage report states an opinion that the increase in flows in this channel will not produce erosive velocities. I am concerned that the increase in flow and proposed flow velocity and duration will cause erosion of this channel. According to the 2002 Connecticut Guidelines for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control the maximum permissible velocity in a channel with heavier clay soils and a good vegetative condition is 5.0 ft/sec. This channel has sandy/gravel soils and a fair vegetative condition. The maximum permissible velocity for this condition is 2.5 ft/sec. Both these values are significantly less than the proposed design velocity in this channel. Based on this information I think this channel bottom and lower sides need to be armored with stone (modified rip rap) to prevent erosion due to the increase in flows. I need to see further calculations and documentation from the design engineer as to the need to armor this channel with stone. Please call me if you have any questions. l ... .... ... ... ....... ....... ....... ... _�.a•-c,_.__r,�,ls� �-sk�.t�__al��,.'� c cL`s,c�,r-1c�.���__ qOw M 8E� F �-� Sou. V&Uaot 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074 soe•co�'�� TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511 June 10, 2005 Certified #70020460000197444101 J.R. Russo &Associates Attn: Dana Steele 1 Shoham Road East Windsor, CT 06088 RE: Appl. #05-31W—Victory Outreach Ministries, southerly of Scantic Road. Rrual Residential zone Dear Mr. Steele: At the June 1, 2005 regular meeting, the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission approved application #05-31 W —Victory Outreach Ministries —329 Scantic Road — Inland Wetland/Conservation Commission — application for regulated activities in connection with the construction of a 44 unit Senior Residence Development (SRD), stormwater system on property located southerly of Scantic Road. Rural Residential zone. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. One blueprint copy of the entire set of plans and this letter reproduced thereon, must be submitted to this Commission. This must be completed within 65 days of approval prior to any construction activity on the site. Plans submitted to Planning & Zoning Commission shall be considered having met this requirement. 2. The application shall indemnify and hold harmless the Town of South Windsor against any liability, which might result from the proposed operation or use. 3. The permit is valid for five years and shall expire on June 1, 2010. It is the landowners)/applicant(s) responsibility to track expiration dates and notify the Commission of a renewal request at least 65 days prior to expiration. 4. All approvals required must be obtained and submitted prior to any activity on the site. 5. A contact person shall be identified on the plans. Victory Outreach Ministries June 7, 2005 Page 2 6. Town staff to review and approve the details of the bedding for the riprap that will be used in the outlet channel. 7. Town staff to review and approve the length of the riprap used in the outlet channel. 8. We recommend a bond in the amount of$10,000 be submitted to the Planning & Zoning Commission to ensure compliance with the erosion and sediment control measures. 9. We recommend a bond in the amount of$10,000 be submitted to the Planning & Zoning Commission to ensure the establishment of the stormwater structures. Very truly yours, Eliza A. Warren, Chairperson INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY/ CONSERVATION COMMISSION EAW:dr cc: Attorney Antonette Webster RECEIVE Kahan1,KeYenSh Jeffrey FolgeixY i February 25, 2011 Environment I Planner Caposse a LLP Town of Sou Wind WEPT Town Hall • ' 1540 Sullivan Ave. South Windsor, CT. 06074 Stephen M.Bacon Re: 329 Scantie Road, South Windsor/East Windsor Michael A.Bars Christopher T.Bowen Dear Jeff: William E.Breslau Joseph P.Capossela This office represents Rockville Bank in connection with property located at WilliamJ.Dakin 329 Scantic Road in East Windsor and South Windsor (formerly owned by Victory Dorian Reiser Famiglietti Outreach Ministries). Rockville Bank recently completed a foreclosure of the property Solomon Kerensky and is the current owner. Michael J.Kopsick Douglas K.Manion On June 1, 2005 the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency approved Justin L.Murphy application #05-31 W which had been filed by Victory Outreach in connection with the Stephen F Sutton construction of a 44 unit residential development on the East Windsor portion of the Antoinette M.Webster property. The letter of approval dated June 10, 2005 states "The permit is valid for Matthew E.Willis five years and shall expire on June 1, 2010." Jeffrey M.Winnick* Of counsel As you may be aware, construction of the proposed development was never Oliver S.Chappell commenced and the site remains in the same condition that it was when the permit Robert F Kahan was granted in 2005 (1922-1996) Please take this letter as a request for a 5 year extension of the permit. I am also admitted in MA sure that you and the members of the Wetlands Agency are fully aware of the economic climate since 2005 and, more specifically, the downturn in the real estate market. It is those market conditions that have caused the proposed development to 45 Hartford Turnpike remain stalled. The Bank is actively seeking a capable builder to complete this P.O.Box 3811 development but in order to do so an extension of the wetlands permit is required. Vernon,CT 06066-2181 Telephone Please take this matter up with the Wetlands Agency at their next meeting (860) 646-1974 and advise me whether my presence at that meeting will be required or helpful. Facsimile (860) 647-8302 Thank you for your attention to this matter and should you have any 22 Professional Park Road questions or need any additional information, don't hesitate to contact me. Mansfield Professional Park P.O.Box465 Ve trul urs, Storrs,CT 06268 Telephone (860) 487-1842 Facsimile Jo p P. Ca Sela (860) 487-1786 attorneys@kkc-lawcom cc: William DeMore, V.P. Rockville Bank wwwkkc-lawcom Jay Ussery, J.R. Russo &Assoc. L:\\/\Victory Outreach Ministries,Inc.#8608\East Windsor Active Adult Housing#8608-001\Jeffrey Folger Request For Wetland Extension 2011february 25.Docx