Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Buckland Commons
� �/ N APR 3 0 l97 9 Of ficeV1 f the City Alandger 550 Mo?hS ,v�t,�H tford, Conn. 06103 $€ COUNCIL - MANAGER GOVERNMENT April 24, 1979 Dana S. Hanso'i/ Executive Director Capitol Region Council of Governments 97 Elm Street Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Dear Mr. Hanson: It has been brought to our attention that the Town of South Windsor has referred three proposed zone changes to CRCOG in accordance with Section 8-36, requirements. The changes are along the Manchester town boundary and have been requested by MAP Associates, who are the stated developers of the ':Buckland Commons" residential/office/shopping complex. The result of the proposed changes would be to facilitate construction of the South Windsor portion of that complex through: 1 ) the reduction of residential lot sizes from 30,000 to 20,000 square feet on 126.61 acres, 2) the change of 52.8 acres zoned "Rural Residential" to "General Commercial", and 3) changes in the General Commercial regulations from a maximum building height of two stories and forty feet to three stories and fifty- eight feet. As you are aware, Section 8-36 states that, "A regional planning agency receiving such a notice may transmit such notice to the Secretary of the Office of Policy and Management or his designee for comment." The proposed changes do not appear to be in accordance with the State Plan of Conservation and Development which designates the area as a combination of "rural" and "areas of environmental concern", i.e. "conservation areas." The development implications upon the specific acres proposed for such changes are considerable and would also do much to weaken federal, state, and regional emphasis upon urban development and conservation. W urgently request that CRCOG formally submit the proposed changes to the � eug tly q p P 9 E Office of Policy and Management o r their written comments and that such State comments be reflected in those submitted by CRCOG to South Windsor. Sincerely, ` Huebert Santos Acting City Manager cc: Court of Common Council Richard Goodman Bill Burns 4-30-79 Capitol Region Council of Governments 97 Elm ST., . Hartford, Ct. RE: South Windsor Zone Changes ATT: Ms. Nancy London The Pleasant Valley Neighborhood Association is deeply concerned about Map Associates application for the zone changes in South Windsor. We are a group of residents, homeowners, and taxpayers in the area interest— ed in preserving the quality of life and our environment. The serenity and peacefulness of this area is severay threatened if Map associates is allowed this zone change. There are several reasons for our dismay over the proposed zone changes. First and foremost, is the serious traffic . problems that will be created. Traffic traveling at a slower speed emmissions are greater and poses a , safety factor. The residents will be subjected to grievous harm, including shaking the foundatinns of homes and a tremendous increase in noise and atmospheric pollution. The environmental pollution inherent to lame amounts of traffic poses a health hazard for those. with respiratrry diseases. This modification will be a great disservice to our senior citizens, who expect and deserve a quiet, healtlyenviroment to spend their later years and they value the relative trareuil,ity of the neighborhood. Additionally, the increased traffic will be detrimental to our children. South Windsor zone changes of 178 acres is over two million square feet. Map Associates states- only 650,00 square feet wi11 be taxable. We feel the tax revenue from this project is not sufficient compensation for the slow and insidious destruction of the neighborhood. Our inservice must increase such as police, fire, and maintenance of roads. Addit+onal homes increase of children , will another sch_obl be needed? Our good fortune living in a ruralized society is being shattered by out— siders. These human outside pressures could leave us with multi--costly problemsc Is this change really necessary? We do have shopping centers close by.. We strongly urge you to prserve the quality of life, save our homes, and prot4ct the young and the olyd. (Mrs)Rose Pastula President, Pleasant VaDA r Neighborhood Association 889 Pleasant Valley► Rd., S.Vindsor,CT. RE: South Windso_ Zone Changes Page 2 of 2. local services, create great traffice snarls, and all too often are vast asphalt eyesores. Worse still,, by encouraging the exodus of boath shop- keepers and shoppers to the suburbs, they only hasten the decay of down- town areas." Mr. Richard Burrell Smith Street` South Windsor,CT. 4-30-79 Capitol Region,Council of Governments , 97 Elm St., Hartford,'_Conn. RE: South Windsor Zone Changes To Whom It May Concern; The following statements outline some ..of the reasons that the Capitol Region Council of Government review committee is urged to issue a nega- tive opinion regarding the request- to rezone 52 acres in our southern area of South Windsor to allow for the construction of The Buckland Commons Shopping Center: 1. The roads surrounding the proposed shopping center area are inadequate to handle the expected 10,000 cars per day that will flow into and out of the shopping center. 2. The increased air pollution caused by these cars Kill adversely affect the people living in the surrounding area. 3. The influx of 'crime and vandalism that will accompanyme shopping center will spill over into the residential areas causingeroblems for homeowners and local. police. 4. The removal of shoppers from the downtown Hartford area to the mall will serve to adversely affect the revitalization of the downtown shopp- ing district. 5. The property values of residential homes surrounding the mall will be adversUy affected causing personal hardship to many home owners. 6. The influx of 10,000 cars per day on local streets will create an extreme safety hazard to local children. In general the severe loss of the quality of life as it is now known to the residents of the southern part of South Windsor and the Buckland area of Manchester prompt this plea--for a negative opinion regarding the re- zoning of 52 acres of South Windsor land to allow the construction of the ' Buckland Commons Shopping Center. In summary the following_ quotation from Page 118 of the Nov.13, 19781 issue of Time Magazine summarizes the feelings of many citizens of the South Windsor and Manchester areas "Critics also note that malls are voracious consumers of electricity and because they can usually be reached only by azztanoble - of gasoline. They gobble up valuable farmland, pollute the environment, overtax Date May 1, 1979 To: The MRahers of C.R.C.O.G. From: Barbara. Mader, resident of 190 Northvitw Dfive, South Windsor The proposed Bucklaud rommons mall is regarded by my family and others as a prospective, lromendoufly foreboding monster trying to Rain access for reality in our residenial corner of town, thereby destroying our neighborhood. Safety, air quality, real estate value, and general quality of life — These everyday aspects of our neighbor— hood living would be diminished greatly by the construction of the proposed Buckland Commons wall. I have spoken with Dr. Richard K. Morris, chairman of the Cherry Hill Association in N ewingioa. The people of this assoeiatiox have already experienced such ill effects of a huge shopping mall, namely West Farms hall, built in a resideutsl area. This association has been instrumental in keeping Kimberley Road closed as an assess to Worst Farms 13all ix_ order to pr*serve their neighborhood. He remarked that with the opening of that wall traffic on their street increased from 700-900 ears/day to 4j 00 cars/day, 7,500 cars/ holiday. Without over—estimating there were tines residents had to wait 10-15 minutes ' is order to get out of their driveways. Also the residents of ibis street who own hoses averagiur 545,000 in ♦aloe, were told by a realtor that they. would stand to lose at least $6,000 in real estate Yalu* if that rasa were reoroued. Obviously, a similar feall thrust into our rtsideutal area would have a devastating sfftet on our nsirhbirhood. I hope to convince, our Town.Plauniar & ZoniNg Committee of this on ltay 15th and to ask thou not to rezone our area of town. Anything your souneil can do to help us with the prsservatiox of our Neighborhood would be greatly. approeisted. Afterthoughts Thor* must be many factions involved in trying to plan ersajivx of a RiaNt shopping mentor, and it stems rather obvious *k* drive behind the vhole ssON* is "dollars". Isn't it a shame $bat money takes prefersaee over quality of life? With tines as tbey aro, most larilies bays trouble payiup[ their bills and buying food. Ao already have plenty of surroundings areas, suds as Vernon Circle, Manchester, Fast Hartford, and Windsor to spend wha.tever' s left over afttr grocery store. :As far as tax dollars are eone*rNed, I he, a our to will sam— cider the possibility that we could be just as we�l of the building of homes on this already rosidestally—zoned laud as we could. be with. A. bugs -shopping mall wbish requires costly *OwN services, such as poked and fire protection. Who are we helping to grow richer? our town? our area? or big business men from out of state? Shoulds't we he looking for ways 40 improve our neip3b4rkeeds? hot tux$ ways $o . permit other people to drive, through than. _ - 2 - 2) residential and cornercial develonrient of this scale will act as both a traffic venerator and attractor. Construction of 2,000 dwellinjZ units will ?enerate anproxi mmatelit 14,000 trips per day. It is estimated that the shopping center trill generate as much traffic as the 'lest Farms "fall in blest Dartford. TRRMS PLAIN staff anticipates developmme.nt of this intensity and concentration will overload the existing local. road nettiork, primarily in South Windsor, even considering planned improvements for this area (I-291, widening of I-86, local road innrovements)l. - In addition, many of South Windsor's roads are old farm roads which will require complete rebuilding; should vmtnroverents or widening be necessary. Consideration should be g�.ewto use of the i%.1anchester rail line to serve this area. 3) An assessment should be made of the impact of development along t°,e South ltiindsor-?anchester Town Line tm-.th respect to: A. Air Quality B. Aquifers and wetlands on site C. Energy conservation D. Provision- of housing and employe-ont opportunities to lol-Ir and moderate i.ncone persons. l CRCOG is `in the process of con-ducti.n a detailed review of the "Buckland Cornons" development (update of the 1973 review, a copy of Odch is enclosed) . Incornorated in the reivew -11rill be a detailed analysis of potential traffic impacts on the road. net=.iTork. in south Windsor and 'sanchester. MCA receivecl. corrLments from the Ple?sant Iralley Nei.Rhhorhood Association, Barbara ''aden, "r. Richard Burrell and the City of Hartford (copies are enclosed) . In response to the City's concerns, the -95 Comm ittee chose to refer the proposed zone chances to the State of Connecticut's Office of Policy & i -an for review. Connen.ts received fronOP 1 will be forwarded to you prior to your public hearing:. )uestions concerning tits referral should be directed to Nancy K. London. In accordance with our procedures for reporting on routine referrals, no further action will be taken unless specifically requested by local officials or Regional Planning Commission representatives. The public hearing date is scheduled for ''ay 15, 1979. DISTRIBUTION Respectfully submitted, I ZC: S W1 'Z C: 9"1 / RF: S.j'T / CFO: S.W. Blanch. / Albert Boehm, Chairman CAO: S.1 . , ''anch. / Tottim Planner: Toim Clcrx:: S.W. I;rilliam Yario, Vice-Chairman Nancy K. London, Regional Planner q%IC L REGIOV GP crcog CAPITOL REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS z e - 97 ELM STREET—HARTFORD, CONN. 06106 C Tel. 203 522-2217 O�FRNAIENTS DCANA S. HANSON T01•;1 PLAI'TNING & ZONING C9,94ISSION DATE: '•-,1AY 11, 19!F�`_�ECUTIVE DIRECTOR To"ITNT OF Sl,a -r virrosom REP07T ON ZONING PEFERRALS ,0UT 1 ti'rI DSOR, CO-TIMCTICUT ,r 79/65, # 79/66 COl`'4ISSIO .RS Receipt is aclalowledged of the move-numbered referral. Notice of this Proposal was transmitted to the Planning Division of. the Capitol Region Council of Governments under the provisions of Section 8-3(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, as amended. These referrals involve do zone changes for a total of 179.4 acres located in the Toi.n of South Windsor, on the South '''indsor-11anchester ToTm,. Line. 11aprAssociates of t••Tanchester and Sou-0- 'Windsor have requested that 126.61 acres located east of Buckland 'load t1e zoned A-20 (20,600 sq. ft. lots) and 52.8 acres vest of Buckland "oac' be zoned general cornercial. T'MIOMAL GrTT"rt41T The t'.e!7.ional P1an of Develonment recornends t1_iat .the land in this area of South I'.indsor be utilized for r'edilm- density residential (one to sever farli.lies per acre), industrial, coTrercial or agricultural develorn.ent. 11bivelrer, it is a policy of CRCOG to encourage the preservation of agricultural land within the region. The Commission urges the ToT:n to consider Vie proposal in terms of the dutindling supply of food-supportive land in the region. The proposed zone change for residential development from AA-310 to A-20 (126.61 acres) , is consistent with densities identified in the regional Plan of DeveloprTent. MANS PLA14 is projecting a 13% groi=,th rate in Manchester (6,500 persons) a=id a 25% growth rate in South h1indsor (4,000 persons) . Residential development of this proportion is consistent with the Tt MNS PLAN projections. Although coTmrerciai development in "Suburban areas" is consistent with the Plan of Development, the A-95 Committee of the Regional Planning Commission has the following concerns relative to extensive commercial development at the 52.8 acre site: 1) According to the 1973 "Buclrland Cormtons" plan, a 1,000,000 sq. ft. shopping center wi?1 be constructed in the Town s of South t'rindsor and ,'anchester. The Conmittee questions the irmact a development of this size will have on local. co .ercial areas in the region, particularly in T`anchester, East j!artford, and ITernon and Hartford's Central Business District. It annears that the shorninn center will not be a net income generator, therefore dollars expended there will result in a decrease in business elseufiere. It is recoi-nendec! that the South 1`rindsor Planning �t %onina Commission analyze the innact of a center of similar size (i.e. , 11Test earns "-Tall) on commercial operations in that area. A VOLUNTARY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FORMED TO INITIATE AND IMPLEMENT REGIONAL PROGRAMS OF BENEFIT TO THE TOWNS AND THE REGION. -31- CODCL,USIOD Residential with a li.riited.cm-otint of ccrrnarcial land use could be constructed on this site and %xxAd serve as the best possible cevelorm nt for the site both in preserving natural areas ant r,eeting a den%istrated need for housing for both the iYxnns of Manchester a x1 South Windsor and the Region as a Vhole. The residential develor-rent as discussed in the Na-7 Neighborhood Summary brochure is designed to produce a net tax gain for the cotmmni.ty ivhile at the sa e tim r.uxumize effects on transportation system and public facilities anti institutions. 'iI-ie inclusion of ecrxmercial within the New Deighbodx)od concept is based on the idea of providing essential convenience goods to the residential area within very short distances, and to alleviate traffic on local streets. It is not intended to service areas nmch beyond ti`le fringe of the residential develops gent nor cor-pete with rcial operations which were clearly designed to serve wider geograjiiic areas. It is thexefore our conclusion that based on the reoormerations of the Regional Land Use Plan and on an evaluation of the data as presented above that the zone change from RR to CUD should be granted; that bhe zone change to Industrial should be granted; and the zone change fran RR to Business•III should be denied. f � t 7 i t t _ SOMERS o SUFFIELD. ENFiSLD f _ t � 1 i - � LOCKS _ { r _ ; =-LLINGTON ^ f - EAST W I NDSOR __ ! ` -i SOUTH WINDSOR TOLLANE VERNON a INDSOR r -29- 2. • The ccezmercial square footage arrI location are not in accordance with the Regional Land Use Plan. The reports written by Larry Smith, Inc. , presents suite %;ell the proposal as anticipated. Fauever, as previously des- cribed in an earlier section of this report, a ner shopping, center should not be constructed unless Population gra,tth warrant such construction already existing in a 2 to 4 rale radius of the Duc}:land site are some 918,000 square feet of both convenience and m- arison shopping dracrinv upon the existing and scire of the future buying parer of the area. See Figure 3. The r-egional LaxO. Use Plan remiiprends 50,000 to 200,000 square feet of oori::ercial develop rant on a neighborhood or co r=ity center scale. Already existing in the irr,ediate area is approxirately 100,000 square feet of e rmrercial space in the Caldor's Shopping Center. _nven with the na7 residential construction of scene 2000 dwelling units, only a small { increment in convenience facilities can be justified. 3. There is sorre question as to the affect of the project on the Environmental Quality. In the area of environmental considerations, `a copy of a report from the Soil Oonservation Service, U.S. Department of f Agriculture on Soil Conditions on the subject property is attached. The air quality inpli.cations of a development of this size mast also be considered. A report from the Deparb y--nt of Ehvirorurental Protection has been requested and trill be submitted at a later time. -28- Although the Traffic Analysis prepared by t?ilbur finith and Associates states in the introduction that I-291 is not a consideration in the traffic - survey, the Highway is referred to throughout the report as an accepted part of the interstate system. Obviously, x-hhen Buckland Cam-cm was originally conceived by the developer, I-291 was a major consideration in selecting this location for both a cne million square foot shopping center and a large residential oo mAmity. Hmever, even with the other road irprovc__:ents described by the Uil.bur Smith report and the c=letion of I-86 from. Glastonbury across to East Hartford, none of which are secure in their realization, the traffic volumes generated by one rullion square feet of camTtercial spaces, in addition to the lesser amount produced by the residential proposal cannot possibly be handled at a smooth flcxiing level during peak volume hours. t ( In addition a field chec}: indicated the heavy use of a ccnmutear parking lot adjacent to the existing Caldor shopping center some 100 yards from the proposed site. The lot was filled with a Droxi_mately 450 cars way beyond its originally planned capacity. This would indicate that the traffic flora during rush hour on I-86 is slow enough to force people to Tess transit. The proximity of the lot to the site wmild indicate that future residential construct-ion could be served by an increase in the present. ecrmter line. I?hereas an increase in shopper traffic follows a diverse pattern and could not use a busline of this sort, new residential coramnater traffic could be rare easily ace rrodated. Table 6 - SUbd1u15lor15 Dc5': ? and Revie�l For 5oufheas�ernit7 R PAS by T P. /, , Highway Type Arterials Major Collectors Minor Collectors Local Service X XX Service Category 3000 ADT to 600 DDHV 1500 to 3000 ADT 750 to 1500 ADT Under 750 ADT Control of Access Limited Access None None None Cross Road Treatment At Grade At Grade At Grade At Grade Railroad Crossing Grade Separated At Grade At Grade At Grade Design Basis Two Way Road Two Way Road Two Way Road Two Way Road Cun,aturc - Minimum 60 80 120 125'R Gradient - Maximum 4% 5% 8% 10°0 r Stopping Sight Distance 500' , 400' 300' 200' Rural* Urban** Rural Urban Rural Urban Rural Urbrin Minimum Right of Way 80 80 65 60 50 50 50 50 Pavement Width 40 60 36 36 26 30 26 30 Design Speed (M . P. H .) 45 30 40 30 30 30 25 25 X ADT - Two Way "Average Daily Traffic" 20 years after completion of construction XX DDI-IV - Two Way "Daily Design Hourly Volume" 20 years after completion of construction Mural - Areas of development density of equal to or less then 1 unit per 20 ,000 sq , ft. k* Urban - Areas of development density of greater than 1 unit per 2-0 ,000 sq . ft Table 7 STREET DESIGN C RITERIA from . THE CONIMMUNITY BUFLDERS HANDBOOK Jesion of Local Residential Streets Speed: Based on maximum of 25 m. p. h_ in accord with Uniform Vehicle Code recommendation. Recomme.idations will be reasonably satisfactory even if some speeds exceed 25 m_ p. h. a little. Sinaie-family Multi-fa*rily R-o-w Width: 50 feet 60 feet Pavement Width: 26 feet 32 feet Curbs: Straight or rolled curb Same Sidewalks: Width: -4 feet_ raLai ,Lua Sa ua Set-back: * 3 feet minimum if no trees , 7 feet mini_num Same with trees Horizontal Alignment: 200 feet minimum sight distance Same Vertical Alignment: 6-8 per cent maximum grade desirable; 3-4 Same per cent per 100 feet maximum rate of change Cul-de-sac 1000-1200 feet maximum length 400-500 feet 4 0-5 0 feet r-o-w Tum-arounds: 40 feet minimum curb radius without parking Same -- - - - 50 feet minimum curb radius with parking Same Pavement Surface: Non-skid with strength to carry traffic load Sams Desian of Collector or Feeder Streets R-o-w Width: 60 feet ' Pavement Width: 36 feet Curbs: Straight curb Sidewalks: Width: 5 feet minimum Set-bacti: 3 feet minimum if no trees 7 feet minimum with trees Horizontal Alignment Same as for local residential streets Vertical Alignment: Same as for local residential streets Pavement Surface: Same as for local residential streets S ` . w -25- drainage problems ant: one area is subject to constant erosion caused by runoff from periodic flooding during heavy rainstorr;s. Between the East .Hartford tam line and I-86 overpass, the road has three at-grade rail- road crossings with single syste:rs. Ttio areas in this section contain blind hills where traffic approaching from opposite directions are unable to see oncoming vehicles. The road surface is only fair with evidence O.L. constant minor repair. Other Secondary Poads ( 1inor Collectors) The site has access to the follor.-ina roams: Windsor Street, Eurnhart Street, Smith Street, Clark Street, Derrun Street, Buc':lancl Road, and Slater Street. All are approxi-aately 26 foot paved surfaces x:,ithout curbs or in ground drainage systazns. The paved surface is only fair and exhibits evidence of frost heaves. The follaring two tables indicate sores nationally recognized standards. that could be used to neasure the existing road system to deterrune its ability to accxmrxxlate the traffic flows within the general area fron, single family and. rmlti-f amily development. T.-bile standards should be used only as indicators, there is scr-e evidence that every road mentioned will require upgrading merely for the residential develogg-ent. The inprove- ments required will include reconstruction of Tolland Turnpike from the East Hartford tam line to the intersection of Tolland Turnpike and Eucklancl Road in addition to the rumor collector streets such as Dering and Clark will require irproverxnts. The Buckland Crarims site is adjacent to the proposed I-291, rero only recently frcar. the State of Connecticut Department of Transportation c3rarring boards by E>ncutive order. See attached statement of Governor r and minutes of Departrent of Transportation -Jjo s. -24- On the Manchester side, a shopping center of over 100,000 square feet abuts the zone change area. In South t?indsor, three new apartrent coal-- plexes of approximately 480 units are within half a rile of the site. Tarring . any large changes in land use, the area will continue to develop in a patcinx)rk Wanner during the next ten years. The planning division of the Capitol Ragion Council of Governnants has read and in scare cases re-read the reports and information provided by the developer. It is obvious why the site was chosen by a developer for a large regional shopping enter/residential oor-plex when looking at the population trend described earlier, the rise in family i.nca.e, the location of the 550 acres adjacent to an up-until-recently proposed Interstate higjv, y, and its availability due to the decline in agricultural land use. ik wever, toe cannot reccimerui the change as it i s presently submitted for the folla,;ing reasons: _ 1. The traffic circulation pattern is inadequate. The general area of the proposed site is serviced by a road pattern that, for the mist part, was evolved over a century or rare. Tolland Turnpike is the end result of the original road constructed for the horse-drawn mail and passenger coaches that existed in the late 1880`s. Other roads in the area such as Pleasant Valley 13>ad, and Deming, Street are paved versions of old dirt roads that connected the scatted farm within the areas. T.7ith one exception, the roads in the area of the site are not equipped with curbs ET &minage system. Tolland Turnpike (-Iajor Collector) Beginning at the Last Hartford tavn line, this road chances front a 36 foot paved road with curbs and drainage system to an appro>dxrately 26 foot 4 tide paved surface c•ri.th no curbs or drainwe. Several areas exhibit chronic - 23 - Both tams have experience population changes in total numbers, duelling units housing types, household size and incca)e R--jels. Table 6 lanchester South Windsor 1960 1970 b =1960 1970 ti Population 4.2,,102 47,994 14 9,460 15,553 64.4 Density/square mile 26.9 28.0 ilo. of housing Units 12,853 15,906 23.8 2,628 3,99E 52.1 Single 9,158 3,630 Iulti 6,743 42 208 5 kbbile 3 107 Other (i ligratory 2 1 Seasonal) - amer Occupied 9,539 3,643 Rental 5,920 291 Persons/Household 3.1 3.9 E Median Income f Families 12,356 14,155 Families & Unrelated 10,971 13,574 Per Capita Income 3,982 3,697 The overall character of the Duckland area on both the Manchester and South uindsor side can be described as predorunately residential and agricultural in land use. Sal squares of corTmercial., inuustrial ane! recreation land use dot the landscape. The area has been slarly developing and in a scattered fashion. -22- EUC;ar3 U) CQ Y Di?S Having revia7ed the proposal arr? the general land use reca:riendat.icns for the Buckland eons proposal, it is necessary to take a careful look at why such a proposal could be considered for this area, whether it is in conforrr-ance with the Regional Land Use Plan, and if not, what alternative land use might be considered. Hanchester is an old mill ta,m surrounded by rural residential land and covers 26.9 square rules. originally, the site of the large Cheney wool stills and n us tobacco farms, the ta,an has changed much during the past decade. 1ry*ricultural land is gradually disappearing having decreased fry 4418 acres to 1901 acres using the years 1960 to 1970. As the agriculture land turns into other uses, the 1970 estimates note a change in residential fra-1 3822 acres to 4944 acres and czam.)ercial 307 acres to � . 519 acres. The closing of the Cheney mills and their use as nonindustrial facilities is noted in the cecrease in industrial land since 1960 fmn 406 to 312 acres South Uindsor has changed in similar fashion.. Never a sub-regional center like Tianchester, South Windsor, covering 28 square miles, was predcminately a tobacco town. Since 1960 its agricultural land use has declined from. 8846 acres to 5572 acres, its residential use increased from. 2092 acres to 2746 acres and its industrial use is up approximately 48 acres to a total of 347 acres -21- centers and providing various types and densities in, proportion to estimated neec}s, an attempt has been made to relate the residential reoorzrendations of the regional plan to availability of utilities, the characteristics of topography and soils, the nearness to existing and proposed transportation, facilities, and relationship to place of work. In noting the topography of the area, the potential availability of public utilities and the nearness of highway facilities, this was a logical reccrirendation for the area in accordance with the previous by outlined residential standards; industrial land use below the Wilbur Cross Parla•7ay, again in accordance with f standards outlined above. i i - a small ccmmercial site of 50,000 to 200,000 square feet of retail space, again in accordance with the commercial standards, this size facility would directly serve the irarediate area and not detract freri existing sub-regional or regional centers. r -20- Table Sb NEW NEIGHBORHOODS DEVELOPMENT .MODEL n 5 ITS U2.ITS ACRES SHOPPING CENTER 60,000 sq_ ft. 5 Supermarket, Convenience " Shops and Services - RESIDE1-TI_4L High Rise 150 6 0-bedroom 80 1-bedroom 40 2-bedroom 30 - Carden Apartments 300 40 0-bedroom . 25 1-bedroom 100 2-bedroom 125 3-bedroom -50 Townhouses 450 60 t - 1-bedrpo� 50 2-bedroom 200 3-bedroom 150 4-bedroom 50 Detached Single-Family 300 80 2-bedroom 105 3-bedroom 120 4-bedroom 75 OPEN SPACE 80 PUBLIC RDADS 10 COI-firbi.ITY FACILITIES 19 1 health & Co=urity Center (10,000 sc?. ft.) 2 Eurseries ( 8,C00 ft.) 3 Pools { 3 Tennis Courts 4 Tot Lots This . totals .ou.t to a 1200 unit, 300 acre development. Table 5a new type of site size number street density community access in acres of units and utilities land use housing type/tenure per, acre community facilities financing single family; home- water, sewer, owners asso. maint. con- 30 min. to on-site residen- the open space awimming pool, ventional,. outer ring hartford treatment tial and and recreational tennis courts, 201 235 suburb cbd 100 to 120 200 possible . open space facilities; town 2 open space townhouses main.the public str. 25 min. to public water, condominium detached clubhouse, y' outer ring hartford sewer, frontage units,rental &condo. swimming pool, con- rapidly cbd on improved townhouses, & open tennis courts, ventional, �•/' growing 15 min. roads. pAckage resi- space owned by home- playground, tot 10% 235 area to major 150 300 treatment dential owners asso. roads 3-4 lotn, open space townhouses ---hixhway 1plants possible maint. by the c1t close to condominium convcn- .d tovn,cntr. public residen- single-family i LO nursery, tiona1,75 t near sewer, water, tial, con- and attached recreation center, un, state access frontage on venience townhouse units, "pool, tennis courtn, moderate t suburb to major 150 600 collector str. commercial rental townhouse 4 playground, tot or fhn —highway and garden n t.units lots,open space 236 major hwy. access public clubhouse, r near shop. sewer, water, 150 condominium pool, tennis courtb, inner ring center or frontage resi- 150 rental playground, tot all con-suburb developed 50-60 300 on a major dential townhounes 6 lotn, open apace ventional commercial thoroughfare A�La public resi- sale condominiums elem. school, health . sewer, water, dential, rental; detached clinic, nursery, ccn- ,,. ,�. 15 min, to transportation commercial, single-family, recreation center, ventional, inner ring hartford intersection of research, attached townhouse pools, tennis courts, fha. suburb cbd 300 1200 major arterial develop- garden apt., 7 playfield, playgrds, elderly A � and highway ment high rise I tot lots, oprn space 1 235 236 nursery, 10-13 public clubhouse, ;.�.; suburban min. to sewer, water, townhouse, tennis courts, con- or hartford transportation real- , garden apt.; playground, tot ventional, urban cbd 30 360 access dential rental 10 to 12 lots, open space ft,a 236 collector str. res - res. tower, health clinic, + public sewer, dential, apt" nursery, - con- t water; direct. retail garden apt., recreation center, ventional, access major com condominium, (ha 235 urban 65 1200 highway or mercial pools, tennis courts, g y + cooperative, rental 20 plsygrnunds, tot and 236 „i --thoroughfare] office lots_, oppn -18- To .allow the concept of now neighborhoods• to be utilizes: by all of the cmrunities within the Capitol Region, seven cleveloFment r odels were evolved which ranged from New Ieighborhoods that were suited to outer ring suburbs to a model that applied to the Urban core city of Hartford. I=x�del #5 shown in -Table 5 was developed for ca-z mi.ties within the inner ring suburbs which include the �rainities of South Windsor any' Manchester. Both the surcimary report of Vecl ITeighborhoods and the technical append ix trace Iodel s5 throughout the corplete develogental process. vihile the develoFmnt r5odel r5 is considered to be applicable to omrllunities like South Windsor and Manchester, it should not be considered to be the only develognent rmcel possible. It does serve, however, to illustrate certain ci and standards that could be errboc'.i.ed within any develogrent principals Icy Ideigjzborliood proposal Arri.thin this category. i liOIISTRI711L The Regional Land Use Plan recormtends that nat industrial areas be developed in sections lying outside the older job concentration areas such as Hartford but close to population concentration and in areas with public utilities. The report specifically recmnend-s the northwest corner of r;anchester as a potential industrial area. L71IM USE MM j ic3=ICtS FOR BUCICLAIM APEA Specifically, the Regional Plan recwT.er0ed that the Buckland Canons P.rea be used for: Medium density housinc,' of 2 to 8 units per acre north of t 7ilbur Cross Park w. The report states: Mille adhering to the linear concept of concentrating intense development in the Connecticut Valley, and '&ile conforr ng to the idea of clustering this development around -17- PL EED MUM! vs. UTIPLAITiMD GMMLI The Land Use Plan developed in the early sixties had anticipated a doubling of the regions population by the year 2020. The Preliminary Housing Plan had substantitated that projection and, in fact, indicated that the anticipated level of population would be reached a full decade earlier than predicted. r1lie critical question of has this gmith teas to be acecgTrcda,.ed taithout sacraficing the quality and the character of the Region, beca-ie of prime concern to both local and regional officials. Me region contained sufficient vacant land to acccFrrxiate the required residential develcrx ent. That it lacked was a develcgrental process that t:x)uld allow this new g=&h to be integrated within the existing develop- ment pattern of the region. She concept of the Planned Unit development it was felt, could be tailored to meet the needs of the Pegion. After one year of joint effort on the part of the Capitol Region Planning Agency and the Capitol Region Council of Governments, a planning concept known as "New Neighborhoods" tras evolved. L1ew Neighborhoods for the Capitol Region can be described in the physical sense as residential district built on undeveloped land with each area varying in 'size be been 60 and 300 acres and containing betwe-en 500 and 1200 housing units. Zhe neighborhood is the important unit of development; in both the physical snd social sense it is the basic building block of a vital c=uinity. The population size and physical scale of a neighbozizood is large enough to support basic institutional, oarmercial and recreational services such as schools and parks, yet small to prcmote a feeling of shared experience and c a-.mon concern among its residents. -16- in ehe categories of I edium Density to high Density. This projection is arplified by the increased oust Of construction, the decrease in available cheap subdivision lance and the decline in r1mber of Children per household permitting parents to d-.00se multi-family living over a many beC'rOaled single family house. It is therfore exrectecl! that the vast majority of near dr7elling units constructed over the next ten years will be contained 1•7ithin :U1ti-fancily structure. Table 3 Density and i.'Lr< r a2elling units Capitol Region 1970-80 Table Projected Expected Growth & Total Percent agf Density Class Lasses & Vacancy New Units of New (net density ranee) Replacerent Requirements Required Productioi + _ Very High (20 or rore units/acre) 2,000 2,000 4,000 5% High (12-20 units/acre) 13,000 7,000 20,000 26% i ioderate High (8-12 units/acre) 3,000 17,000 20,000 26$ I5edium (2-8 units/acre) 3,000 19,000 22,000 29 i 3ed iur.! Low and lox (under 2 units/acre) 1,000 10,000 11,000 14% Total Units 22,000 55,000 77,000 Table 4 Density Distribution of Dew Housing Production: 1970-10,E0 Table 10 Inner . 18 Outer IFS Suburbs Suburbs Very High 3,000 1,000 High 7,000 8,000 5,000 Ilo6erate High 3,000 10,000 7,000 Indium 9,000 13,000 low 5,300 5,700 N r . . . . ti 4 • w f • . . :`5► . rft . w • f r r r ■ ■ r • s'w w r ■ ■ ■ ■ • t r r ■ t ■ ■ r • ■�■ ■ w ■ • ■ v ■ ■ ■ w • } ■ f f 7 ••r�rgfr■"wr•"■"•"" ■".rate■■"■r }"■}r}■•■rirR"■■■Tatra■K� was ■ t ■ ■ ■ ■ • w " ■ w f ■ ■ ■ f3LQQ FIE1.[?1 . . . . • . . t / • . . ■ • SOUTH . . . . .r • / • ■ r ■ ■ ■ w ■ • R w • ■ t ■ f R ■ • ■ ■ ■ ■ } ■ ■I / • ■ • t • • • • • • • r • • r r • • R r rLn • ■ ■ ■ • ■ t ■�� .?. •faA I+"7"O'R�a�■+a"■"■"■+eft+f°'a • ■ ■ • r ■ • • • ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ • w ■ r ■ ■ ■ R 'a,r,f,r,f,■,•af,�; t ■ ■ ■ • • r�•M■AA•TNaCa ■ r t • n.m■ f! HARFAR ' • • • • • • • • . • �. .�•■"a"aft■■■rat■}""�,��" ■■tft"r■■■r■r■■"�7:�1f1?:1:' • ■ ■ r ■ ■ / w r • r ■ • ■ ! ■ • a w , f f r • ■ r ■ r ■ t r • r t ■ s o,w rrTf■$ a �•■"•"•r•r• "■"r"t"■■■•r■■��■,■a■■fa■•fr•i■"swr•■ P a ■ r f ■ • • • • • ■ a • ■ ■ ■ ■ • ■ r a'■ / u ■ ■ ■ ■ • a • }'At ry r • r ■ • ■ a f • ■ a a ■ • ■ • f ■ r w ■ ■ ■ r } 1 f • n ■ • ■ NEYY�'•'�.'FI�J-A;•. "'";• G1.ASTONRURY,R■"a•■■ � HARTFORD ■ t a ■ ► w . . . . . . •'■'■'•"■f■!r.a f ■ -HIL + . a . . l . . . . . ■1 ... . f 1 .folowass. . Mason r�LL 'r' 10 INNER SUBURBS % r k .d 18 OUTER SUBURBS Figure 2 { r -la- E E E one to two persons per household prising approximately 4310 of the total population, and an increase in the number of 3 to 4 person households. The latter is.the result of the decline in the extended family (m&:ta, papa and children plus grandpa and grandma) and the decreasing birth rate in the "baby boom" generation. Thus, the more mature and totally developed. suburban emmzuniti.es can expect a decline in the number of school age populations. The study also anticipates incane levels within the region to increase at a steady rate in the following decades with the greatest gains being made in the riddle incone ranges. This will amplify the regional demand for housing units in teens of both quality and quantity. Tbtal .1970 -1980 2000 30 Year Change Lager Inca-e 85,000 73,000 55,000 30,000 Pfiddle and High Income 129,000 189,000 205,000 +166,000 Total Households 214,000 262,000 350,000 +136,000 The greatest aromt of housing developTent within the Capitol Region is expected to occur within the 10 towns ecrnprising the inner suburbs which includes the toems of South Windsor and �?andiester. (See Figure 2.) T he total population of the ter. inner suburbs is a to increase from. the 1970 level of approximately 300,000 to about 400,000 by the year 1980. requiring the construction of over 30,000 new housing units. Table 3 and Table 4 frcm the Prel mnary Housing Plan indicate the projected develorz:,ent of the required units in five density categories ranging from Very High (20 or more units per acne) to Tledium Low to lc&y density (under two units per acre) . Over 80% of the housing is projected to fall in the --13- cedented population growth experienced in the period between 1960 and 1970 would continue into the next decade and on to the year 2000. Several critical factors were identified as directly contributing too the.grovi h, the najor factor being the block of population tagged as the "Eaby Dom" generation. By 1970 this generation had rratured into the 20 to 30 age grout, Were marrying, starting families and creating a substantial demand for housing of all types within the region. Even though the number of children produced by each neta rzby Boom generation fandly were fa-er, in ox.parison to the previous. generation, the volume of production was greater and tI%us the increased demand for housing units will not decline within the next decade. The Prelirunazy Housing report estimated that although the rate of population growth will be lower than the preceding decade, the Capitol i Region can expect a steady grck;U-i of around 15,000 nai residents per year with a population of 450,000 by the year 1990, and a doubling of 1970 population within the Region in 50 years. This increase in population j will produce approxiirately 4,500 to 5,000 new household units per year I within the region, each requiring adequate housing. Sheer nurbers of population give scope to the extent of the demand; however, it is important to have some ca cept of the size and inam a levels of the households requiring new housing units, the type and density of terse units and of the general area within the Region where the greatest amount of construction can be exrected. 'lie housing Study notes that an increase in the amount of households being formed by young adults, will force the average age of the household head to rapidly fall from the 1970 average of about 50 to the 33-37 year range by 1980. She size of the household will retain small, an average of -12- - - ----------_ __..__ .._ - -Table-..2 -- Recommended Residential Development Standards Averages Families Equivalent Lot Densi Per Acre Size (sq_ ft. Required Utilities High 8 or more 5 ,000 Public water and under & sewer Medium 2 - 8 5 ,000 Public water ` to 20,000- & sewer Public water & sewer r 20,000 or Public water & septic tanks Med• - Low 1 - 2 on good-drainage soils to 40 ,000 Individual wells & septic tanks Low 1 or less 40,000 Individual wells .& and over septic tanks The. Regional Plan states tzi.s quite clearly in concluding: Developuy-aunt of nsy and eh-pan(!xI earrnrcial centers drill, of course, depend priroarily on private enterprise. 1N 1 centers will not spring up over night, but uTill gradually appear as population growth warrants more oxmercial facilities. Great care, should be taken, hca;ever, to control tie location of ca-T,3ercial centers so that they riay be properly spaced and at the s.—Y-- time integrated wit' nei c)+ oring c?evelorraent. Coneexnil-G residential land use, the j Regional Land Use Plan set forth tx;o policies x ihich have guided its recc", )e-rxiations t'hrouah the Land Use Plan and t�;o subsequent reports. It recaitenied that residential land use: ?i xir.1ze the opportunity for a %ride range of choice - in residential livirri arrant-extents in general, and serve the varying housim. neec:s of the Region's population, in particular a variety of residential types, prices, and densities xri.th the Region; Build form and unity into ccr =i.ties within the Region rather than to permit a uniform sprawl ass the countryside. ... A series of housing densities based on the concept of sub-regional venters was set acxm to serve as a guide to the planning of m7 ccrmmities within the region. Table 2> In 1970, t:e Capitol Tegion Planning Fnency concluded a year.'-long stucay of housing tritnin the Capitol Region vrith the rublication of the Preliminary Housing Flan. -Le study was the result of a realization that the urge- -10- Following these stancarcls, Fartford %gas the obvious regional center serving a population of 546,545 in 1960 and 679,200 (est.) in 1973. Sub- regional centers were planned at central locations throughout the region. i;o specific locations x2 re selected for new centers but ex.i Sting centers mere identified. such as PRY)r ille a.*id P wain Street�iandlester; eadi could he pinpointed as having a c&.tral geographical location and serving as historic centers fcr Heir respec-Live ItEr7 D-1glarxl type tc%ms. other sites . v ere also recognized for their geographical and historic locations arO x•7ere chosen for neighborhood type facilities. hnerc specifically calls for careful planning based Oc�� i.al construction speci y on need.. arm population gmrth and not just the creation of competition. A shopping center in itself tines not generate nevi business. As each ne%, center opens, its business volume cares in part from the central business ( edstrict and in part frcM other suburban shopping areas. Until the in ' . creases in population and the reaujustrents in shopping habits eatdi up, additional retail facilities are justified only by actual in ererent s in population and purchasing rower. R new facility should not eonteTlate running the other fellow out of business. zYcarmles of over building are :�ocl�:ville and !lain Street, z;anchester. Flthough selected as sularecgional centers, the subsequent construction of two neza centers in theumediate area of each, form both older areas into a lesser roll and into difficult eco arac tisres. Men Vernon Circle and the T anchester Parkade were built, the camnercial buying Pam dial not exist at the tire to justify their size. Their clearly detrimental economic effect on t',odcville im and 25ain StreetA onchester can be easily repeated vri.th the =mtzuction of acditicnal square footage on the scale proposed. Table 1 COMMZ$CLAL CENTERS FOR THE CAPIIOL REGION Name& General Claractar Score Tyres Supporting P.aail Total Retail Location Map Sysbol Population Floor Area Land Ar±a REG=VAL the business sad multi-story 300,000 over over at u.tan center - CU4I'm cvlerral center of the department to over 1,000.000 100 of Region Region;ch -cterized stores and 1.000,000 sq. ft. acres con`luence of by concentration of horse of mjor transporta- 0 reail businesses, leading Una arteries 0111 a. theaters, specialty serving Region hotels,flnenclal shops and service- facilities SUB-REGIONAL untf ad cocaercial 1 or 2 dept. 80.000 400,000 40 4 -8 miles apart, CM; ER center off—tnq store branches to to to near intersections widest range of (or junior dept. 200,000 1,000,000 I00 of major roads srerchand &&and of stores) & satel- sq. ft. acres sarvi:as outside of lire stores regional centers COMMUNITY centralizes shop- variety store; 10,000 50,000 10 central to a CENTER ping for several several super- to to to residential com- nelgbborboods; markets plus a 40,000 200,000 30 munity; focal often integrated with limited range of sq. ft. acres points of Intra- civic centers- other shopping town transportation: facilities 2 4 miles apart. NEIGHBORHOOD small center doml- leading tenant 5,000 10,000 2 to 5 near Intersections CENTERR noted by food and is supermadcat or to 40,000 acres of collector local convenience or drug atone lass sq. ft. streets or (loot shown an stores:short trip secondary plan map) oriented _ ry roads re Note: Highway services (including motels, restaurants, auto and boat sales and services) and general commercial uses that serve all or part of the Region may also locate near planned commercial centers. Such uses should be clustered wherever possible,rather than parmitted to string out endlessly along major arterials. -8- will be• left in its natural state. It is quite clear when reviewing the proposal %-Athin confines of the zoning remilations that what is being built in Buckland is an entirely new cmumn itv or a New neighborhood with, in czrparison to existing zoning, an urban type density or as Tianchester calls it a CXorprehensive Urban reveloFri-ent. ME GICNAL LAID USE In reviewing a proposal of this nature, the first step is to cmpare it to the Regional Land Use Plan. The Regional Lane. Use Plan was adopted by the Capitol negion Planning Agency in 1965 and was nationally recognized as an outstanding example of cae cehensive planning by the American Institute of Planners. It reow.-- t - :ended that regional grm7th follai a linear pattern of develpFoent, ruin- taining and enhancing Hartford as a strong regional c=-iercial, governmental.,. and cultural center. Separate and distinct sub-regional centers were recam-ended but only so as to serve as facilities for m-; develognents without distracting from the existing regional center. mhe plan proposed specific criteria for c cmnesci.al development: See Table 1, -7- all totaling 1,064 dwelling units. 30 "of the site or 40 acres can be used for ccmT,ercial development. Although titled: cmraercial, the section of the regulation covering the remaining portion of the site inclu6es other uses such as retail business, offices, open space, parks and industry. bus, the 130+acres of CUD could be developed in recreation, open space, etc., and residential uses depending entirely on the regional shoFping center for cormercial facilities to service the housing units. In South Windsor, a nesa set of zoning regulations has been proposed to provide a similar type zone to the CUD. in :lanches ter. Although. not approved by the rLa;m Planning and Zoning Ccranission, the regulation would permit a design develoFraent type district in which the required site area would. be 100 acres with approximately five claellina units. Per acre. Ij Convenience cm nercial develoanent vx)uld be permitted but the regulation f does not specify any specific percentage of the site for this activity. Accordingly, usinc, the 127 acres which have been earr*orked Residential, approximately 635 dwelling units could be built on a portion of the site or fewer units with supporting convenience oarr.>ercial facilities. in addition to the residential acreage, 84 acres would be developed as eormercial permitting uses normally found in a cmnercial zone. Site coveraue pemitted is 25 to 30 0. permitindustrial regulations permit manufacturing truck terminals, eontractinn establishments and uses by special exception and would cover sane 500 of 47 acres. Scan° limited use is permitted on the remaining 40 acres of the site which has been set aside as wetland by the developer. However, since none of the active uses permtted by Public Act 155 are oaapatible with. the t n � oa:r>zuzity character of the site, it can.be anticipated that the land -6- buildin,s ..churches and religious institutions. • Special exceptions would pent restaurants, gas stations, autcsnobile agencies, carwashes and specially approved industrial uses. ' The CUD zone is a rather sophisticated zoning regulation and appears to have been vrritten with the intent of providing the develouTent of a total m ; 'ty. The opening portions of its statement of intent outline its purpose quite well: lb establish a land use and zone classification which is ocrprehensively urban in character and which shall contain mixes? ccrirercial and residential and other uses w4iich are suitable for a well balanced integrated ommmnity, and to ensure that the mixed uses shall develop in an orderly and Prescribed r nner. The regulation would permit the tract to be developed 50% multi-family, 10% duplex, and 10% single family with 30% of the site devoted to osr:raercial use. The CUD regulation does not establish new area, height and bulk requirements for the permitted uses. Rather it refers back to the separate use zone requirements except in single and duplex uses where the require- ments are not applicable. Acoording to the plans submitted, the developer plans to use this regulation to build the najority of the approximately 2,000 &-;ei 1;ng units east of Buchan& Road. Using the required percentages, it is possible to build 50% of the acres of site or 69 5/multi-family housing of garden aparbnents, townhouse or hi-rise constructions or cmbinations of the three. Both duplex and single family oonstruction would each covcr 10% of the site or 13.9 acres 1 -5- 'Under t,%e proposed zoninco the site would change in dzaracter aric in density. In flandhester, a 92+-acre tract would be rezoned to Business III,. which according to the zoning regulations would permit com ercial uses of the type normally permitted in the least restrictive zones in. addition to departrent stores, accessory uses, sales, repairs and storage of rx)tor vehicles by Special Exception from the Zoning Board of Appeals, apa.rtreents by Special Permit from, the Tam Planning and Zoning o`rmission plus other similar uses not en%pressly prohibited. Although this site appears to be the location of the proposed regional shopping ccrp1ex, it is always possible that, once the zone change is granted the developer could apply for a Special Pemit and use the land for apartr-ents. fie. regulations would permit a total of approximately 1,600 apartment units @ 2,500 square feet per &elling unit and. a site coverage of 25%. the In the portion of the site which iV subject of the industrial zone change, the lanchester Zoning Regulations permit cmrmercial and technical uses wliich include wholesale trade and storage, and research and offices f facilities. Junkyards, motor vehicle junkyards, bulk and storage and restaurants are permitted by special exception. The regulations contain no specifics as to lot coverage. A total of 38 acres have been set aside for industrial use in Duckland Ca-mon, a ten acre site north of I-84 adjacent to the multi-family housing and a separate 28 acre site south of I-84 for a research/office- park. The larcrest requested change in I Fanchester -is for the Ow.prehensive Urban DevelcPTIent zone covering scree 133+-acres. The raTulati:on would permit the development of single family, duplex, multi-family of both r garden and hi-rise varieties, parks, playgrounds, education and public -4- In review and study of the infon:iation provided, CEZOG has concen- trated its analysis and based its conclusions on the zoning ir.-lications, regional land use recocriendations, existing land develognent patterns, and the traffic, economic and environriental inpact on the area. zozii G At present, the portion of Buckland Cbrmon which lies in Manchester is zoned Rural Residential. Under the present regulations develop-ent is restricted mainly to large lot single family residences. . r.i '— lot size is 30,000 saua-re feet with a potential lot coverage of 30%. rLhe available 269 acres could support 333 to 393 units depending on mount of area used for road systems. . Using a standard-15% of total area for roads leaves 228.6 acres for actual residential aevelopment of 333 single units. South Windsor is presently zoned. for AA-30-Liriited Pesidentiat, RF.-F=al Pesid'.ential and RA-Restricted r'partments permitting the construction of AA-30: single family, eorz unity service facilities and other similar residential uses on lots of 30,000 square feet with 15% coverage: RR: very ccr7 rehensive rural uses: single family homes on a lot size of 40,000 square feet agricultural/truck gardens and special uses by special exception for the inul.titude of uses which usually exist in outlying areas; RA: apartr.-ent coa;plexes on sites of 15 contigous acres with an overall density of 8 units per acre and specific site regu renents to maintain residential and open character of zone. u ,'/C• y t �//''''!,',/ /'' ���,ffl'✓✓/i•..♦ 1 � t;�� i. �J`J,j �,?(, l ����a ;. C ,�'1 F,_ �1.-�Ai .'.`.��. � .•�.• ' r�l(� ! ( ' ''� /�.. / t�t� .,/) •..� , •�•b. ���Ibr ,• I,lr.���• ./•!I �t;, rr�/ l�- � J'' 1,.. 1,�`\'' N. V�`!y-''\ , \) .t1r \ (i ,d,. �,` � .. •.' Cat..' .I;� r • L� � , .t.�ly '..+.1 •. ;,. :� L..�{�•�,�;• -` (.1/r.(J - J ,iD .�lt ��.t/ ( ��;� �,G�\ �.• .,)� .�. ,t�,.1 `�, \ .,. `F.1+� � ��. /'��•�/• •t��, ��,!'•',�� 1,� /�/ �:'Z".• tl � ��i'�''/ �"'f'�• ,� !/%^/.r1'17f �•��;• tom' t� �....:y r- �,\S; 1• -...).•t� � t 11,�11 I'��' `•� �` `�111'/r�, 1� �' ` . •/.r' .�� 1 ,f'� h /' .��, ! ,g /,...•..�-�• i fr�� Y� '�, �' a 'C�'\� ��! l ). (' + 1 �. // ! r n' � . 't '`' �1,`� '. .f '!,' 'v ` f,".•• �. •i)y.,\ni� rr( / /J�•� ./. �„%,'p ~�� :r.�l 1 (�,, `: \`'.•\� I(f. .} .��♦�• �' ' �,! /�� .1/�, " ` Ji ' ��f�,`... M�•-/.! )/ / !� /gyp'1-, r� . .1. �artr»t �-( .� i r..\ /N—•'' t�� Si E ` ,, y j i. �ly� } •/�.;1Ji. •?;� -✓ ./ a,.•)w / , /.�►� ice ' �.. n r._. _ rr ���`,... _ y,�` V't '`\»'••"+�i.• ),•�t y '�i`' ` Afl i({ifto , t ,�/:\t, •..t., _ i", � � ,;►� i // . � ! �I � l /•�- + /t., .,-.�'�, �- ' .,�� ,�j� t u',•.^;, '+:','� '1''' -t _�: \,=,/,.r�' 1 �1�i �•',J���/,� �;..,�,y���J J � , //•` l !� ii � -/ ��� r' G •�•'1�•{,� `11 ' , r 1I � \ `. ' �'l�!•�1\' �' ,�'1 r1 � Q^�..�,1,-.� "��� '•� •.:.:�•y��•,. ��•-' ) r �!� •/�.� t- '' /.mot I �'�••�,/,.,_ 1 � � Q `��1 ;�.• jF1' `�\•.• ,1•^ � � �) (`;y• ��f,f�.� ���o../`'-y'•t.:•��1` �!" f'�1J 1t •n �' t _ /� ;� [� 11, '� � t `+. ,'f ' �.�t �'l -•..//���t{J.11•�t�/ 1 ' ,\'1 ��' +•-!a r��..�\ ' \ '1 tz J.!. `1 /rt \... �`\�I./r, j�;; �C�.,F...'✓�,�',`;i 1:.. .•�.L.�/ �\�`,1�:.�� CC!}!�/��~/ '��,i- �.i- ✓ ._� a� � ti.�..j•, �� rt `" 'l ,I ' *i\' .� I• �� .1 i-� .•-+ Jt�+ ,.'1/1�1.,f1`•�M���:1: ,. '«7�\^=i �'�/t. '1.\t.i�.... �\.�,/ ��.�\\ ��'�/ -��J�� \ •..�. 'l�'rrr'��.,`;�•ti'"' - ,;'�.: -'a , :!- �`���� 1."1. \.M 1 1(n•-�:; r: I \ FFt... `:��, \ r J 1\ 1 r a'r�� �. �.� .-� ' 1.: �:;.' r ;� �• f 1 7 CL "� r. j/.{(1� •' (� �� I '+••(,.,L• `�1/ lI I�' lji '1./y ft` w,� \ -., > ^ - �,("�\ ,. ` 'l{ . Ch r";) •. / '1 ( I;,,• `•y;.1 ` t I''• � � �r -!- _ �".—' �U�yj'/y�/ ' 1.�-1 :� n it /, 'j' 'E z 11r*• ,.. .: '��,,,�. 1y)1 � ��. I,i•it �/ };;�: �•� 1 •�r.•'re,: � 1 c,� `\+(1 ��,f fr/ •� •``_��y � ) � D/ � ": '_\ r1. .. �. •^ t .. it � 7, '��C,'\ „�� t 1/j/'�(�� 1y6•� n `L� `,_+ 'S •n/ \`• ` ; /, , ' - '+CC�,`:, t,�(n/ 1 rrr ,�(\��/1! (!'.� � ,���yttt,,,(((, J� � �'� •l; �,, - I ,, •t ,\ � \� �• ' !\� `,1 �<<�. L �S� �fi'j� � 0 1iy t� + /j/{/�`t, M (•�L,. ✓V ��! , ,' . _ _�, y �, tr - ^off, .� l,( r�'`\�� /.-� ✓/^'_ �'• /y /. L.tw` .a �'�....�` ( . 't' f, ,t•,,..� 't _ 2 _ As. subnu tted, plans for Buckland Ocrtmns.include: 1. A residential eonmunity of approximately 2,000 dwelling units of xvtdc i 90% are rcuiti-fanil-y developed over a six - year period fora 1974 to 1980. The residential cammity in iianchester will. cover 133 acres of land and include 1,OG4 d%,�ell..ing units. In South Windsor 970 units will cover 127 acres. 2. A lame cor ereial shopping ca olex x-Adch mill be con- structed in two stages: 700,000 square feet in Phase I in 1976 and an additional 300,000 square feet in Phase II in 1981. 3. A "first class" hotel facility of 400 roors to be built during Phase II (1983) . 4. OlEfice space and a researdi park of 350,000 square feet during Phase I and 650,000 in Phase II. ninety-bm acres will be rezoned to arrwrcial use and 38 for in- dmtrial in 11anchester while 75 acres are cet aside for occriercial, 47 for industrial and 48 acres will be left vacant due to soil condition and terrain in South .,Tindsor. the attached map indicates the areas of the zone change request. The question %Ardch appears to be of host i rrportanee in consideripg the Buckland Camm proposal or any develoment of this size is what kind and how rruch growth can :Sandiester/South r±indsor expect during the next decade? C l�t �-1C CAPITOL REGION COUNCJL OF GOVERNMENTr PLANNING DIVISION 97 ELM STREET—HARTFORD, .CONN. 061.06 . Tel. 203 522-2217 LEONARD D. TOLISANG CHIEF REGIONAL PLANNER 1-bva- er 5, 1973 Planning and Zoning Ccrmssion Report on ribc,m of i Ianchester zoning, referral 521/?A nanchester, ai 06040 Zone Ghange . Buckland Cmrlons Gentlemen: Ps recauested by Zbtan planning and coning Omission and. pursuant to the provisions of Section 8-3b of the Qbnnecticut General Statutes as arlendled, the Planning Division of the Capitol Rion Oouneil of Goats has reviewed the above-nunbered referral concerning a zone change apk l..i-' cation to penu.t the establishment of BudIdand Gxmi ns. r1he project as described in the r;anchester reports submitted to the Town Planning and Zoning ommission is for 260+ acres of a total encompassing 550 acre of former tobacco fame in a predominately residential neighborhood located north of I--86 in the ems of Manchester and South Windsor. teen oci pleted in 1984, this regional omplex will include: residential &elling units of %ddch 90% will be multi-fa*nily, retail space totaling 1,000,000 sere feet; 400 hotel units; and general and institutional office use plus a research park. Althoug_z at this tine only the Iianchester portion of the project is the subject of a zone change rawest, CIWG %rill review the entire project in order to provide a ocuprehensive reaviet-i of the irpact upon the su roundu xg cornrnn1ities and the region. The preparation of this report was financially aided through a- Federal grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. under the Urban Planning Assistant Program authorized by Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954. as amended; by a State Regional Planning Assistance grant administered by the Connecticut Office of State Planning; and by contnbulion from member municipalities of the Capitol Regional Council. of Governments. t; - -2- recommended for the general area is now located within a mile of the site. In 1970 the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester had in excess of 660 acres of Commercial Development. The proposed zone changes for Comprehensive Urban Development (primarily residen- tial development) of 139 acres and Industrial of 38 acres, are substantially in con- formance with the Regional Land Use Plan. The development pattern allowed under the Manchester Comprehensive Urban Development Zoning Regulations is very similar in nature to the:recommendation contained in the CRCOG New Neighborhoods study dealing with planned residential types of development. Both recommend mixtures of housing types that insure that adequate tax revenue is produced to offset municipal cost. Both are designed to promote sound environmental planning. A difference between the Manchester CUD regulations and the "New Neighborhoods" report is in the size of the commercial development. Commercial development suggested in the seven "New Neighborhoods" development models is designed to provide limited convenience commercial operations geared to the population size of the total development. The CUD regulations limit commercial operations to 30% of the land area of the site. However, this 30% also includes other community uses such as open space and the other supportive institutional services needed to serve the resident population. The proposed change of 92 acres to Business III is clearly contrary to the recommen- dations of the Regional Land Use Plan and the generally accepted standards of commercial development. In fact it is contrary to the stated purposes of the Manchester CUD regulation.- "to require that the land be developed proportionally to achieve a balanced urban environment. " It is difficult to justify a zone change abutting a CUD site which more than double the amount of commercial acreage per- mitted on the CUD portion of the site. In addition, the inadequacy of the highway system with the removal of I-291 from the State Department of Transportation drawing board severely handicaps the site as a potential regional shopping center. Recommendations It is the recommendation of the- Planning Division of the Capitol Region Council of Governments that the zone changes for the Comprehensive Urban Development zone and the Industrial Zones be granted. It is the recommendation of the Planning Division that the zone changes for Business III be deified on the basis that the change would permit the development of substan- tially more commercial retail floor space than is required and would create insur- mountable traffic congestion. The proposed change of 92 acres to Business III is clearly contrary to the standards recommended. in the Regional land Use Plan. Commercial development at that scale will severely impact existing commercial facilities in Manchester and the surrounding area in general. In addition, commercial development on such massive scale will { have a degrading effect on both the traffic and air quality conditions within the area. espectfuliy submitted ' hEONARI� D. TO AN Chief Regional Planner 1� i T� - �, CAPITOL REGION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT; Rr PLANNING DIVISION G 97 ELM STREET—HARTFORD, CONN. 06106 Tel. 203 522-2217 LEONARD D. TOLISANG CHIEF REGIONAL PLANNER November 5, 1973 Report on Planning & Zoning Commission Zoning Referral 521-MAN Town Hall Zone Change Manchester, Connecticut "Buckland Commons" Gentlemen: Receipt is acknowledged of the above-numbered referral. Notice of this proposal was transmitted to the Capitol Region Council of Governments, Planning Division, under the provisions of Section 8-3b of the Connecticut General Statutes, as amended. This section requires that zone changes within five hundred feet of a town line shall be submitted to the regional planning agency for review and comment. The law specifies that in its review the regional planning agency shall consider both the i - intertown and regional aspects of the proposed changes. The law also states that the report shall be advisory in nature. This report shall be considered a summary of comments, evaluations and recommen- dations of an Advisory Report submitted to the Manchester Planning and Zoning Commission. Proposed Changes ' The referral involves proposed zone changes for a total of 269 acres located on the Manchester town line, east and west of Buckland Road and north of the Wilbur Cross highway (I-86) The site is currently zoned Rural Residential (Single Family Residen- tial 30,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size). Five parcels of land are proposed for zone changes. One parcel of 139 acres to Comprehensive Urban Development Zone, two parcels of 7 acres and 85 acres to Business III and two parcels of 10 acres and 28 acres to Industrial. Conformance with Recommendations of Regional Land Use Plan The Regional Land Use Plan recommends that the land be used for'Medium Density Residential (two to eight families per acre) and Industrial. In addition, the Plan recommends that a commercial center of between 50,000 and 200,000sq.#. to service a residential population of between 10,000 to 40,0.00 be l located near or as part of the site. Over half of the recommended retail floor space The preparation of this report was financially aided through a Federal grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development, under the Urban Planning Assistance Program authorized by Section 701 of the Housing.Act of 1954. as amended; by a State Regional Planning Assistance grant administered by the Conne ticut office of State Planning; and by contribution from member munic,palitres of the Capitol Regional Council of Governments. NaNC-, CO Tpl NEGIG r n CO9 JVMENTS CRCOG 4DVNORY RCPORT Subject = Buckland commons [[! � -_ •sinus •ems r t•rlt 4e 1••r Oe•+ .w0• /� ' _ _ 'lOC•• ttUeeree � - ruwo• roue• e•eroe toes• E ruwo• mese •400.nno ♦vee rnr r•rr eennt ••rve•e- •nrwo r wro n•rreetoe ..rwnt rtr et.•. nuo •urreetttr toon .R4 rNM wtseet j November 1973 _p f { NO. 1 MARION EDLUND, ET ALS. SUPERIOR COURT • JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD/ { VS. NEW BRITAIN AT HARTFORD { SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING AND f ZONING COMMISSION, ET ALS. NOVEMBER 5, 1981 CITATION TO ANY PROPER OFFICER: By authority of the State of Connecticut, you are hereby commanded to summon the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor, of Hartford County, Buckland Associates, a partnership of 160 King of Prussia Plaza, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, Kravco, Inc. , a foreign corporation of 160 ring of Prussia Plaza, Ring of Prussia, Pennsylvania, Bernard G. Martin of 354 Buckland Street, Manchester, Connecticut, George, A. Gilbert of 307 Smith Street, South Windsor, Connecticut, The Hartman LAW OFFICES IR.CMARD M.RITTENSANO Tobacco Company of 1420 Blue Hills Avenue or �2 Wintonbury Mall, 1 734 ELLINGTON ROAD S'3 7+WiNOSOR•CONN,06074 Bloomfield, Connecticut and Harry Nair of 12 Brookside Drive, 1 (203)644.2456 � Tr: �� West Hartford, Connecticut, to appear before the Superior Court JURIS NO.50412 within and for the Judicial District of Hartford/New Britain at 95 Washington Street, Hartford, Connecticut on the fourth Tuesday of November, 1981 said appearance to be made by said defendants I I I -2 or their attorneys by filing written statement of appearance with the Clerk of said Court on or before the second day follow- ing said return date, then and there to answer unto the foregoing complaint (Appeal) of Marion Edlurd, 90 Buckland Road, Lorraine White, Reuben White and Gladys White of 302 Smith Street, Gladys K. Caved on and Alfred W. Cavedon, Sr, of 99 Ridge Road, Arlene H. Lumbra of 218 Buckland Road, Mildred L. Eliasson of 103 Buckland Road, J. Alden Harrison of 252 Buckland Road, Marjorie F. Hoyt of 251 Buckland Road, Mary A. Varrick and Charles Varrick of 15 Buck- land Road, Mitchell M. Slowick of 9 Buckland Road, James J Rice and Sandra A. Rice of 95 Buckland Road, Donald Hood of 500 Clark Street, Thomas L. Burgess and Margaret W. Burgess of 36 Ridge Roa' , Robert D. Croteau and Arlene C. Croteau of 240 Buckland Road, all of the Town of South Windsor, County of Hartford and State of Connecticut, by leaving with or at the usual place of abode of . LAW OFFICES the chairman or secretary of said South Windsor Planning and Zon- R;CHAT.D M.RITTGNSAND 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD ing Corramission and by serving upon said Buckland Associates, SOUTH WINDSOR.CONN.06074 (203)644.2456 Kravco, Inc. , Bernard G. Martin, ' George A. Gilbert, The Hartman JURIS NO.50412 Tobacco Company and Harry Nair in the manner prescribed by law, a true and attested copy of the foregoing- complaint (Appeal) , veri fication, bond and of this citation at least twelve days before • 1 E -3- the return date of the fourth Tuesday of November, 1981. The plaintiffs as principals and Marion W. Douglass of Robbin- Road, Thompson, Connecticut as surety are recognized in the sum of Two hundred and Fifty Dollars to prosecute this .appeal to effect and comply with the orders and decrees of this Court. Hereof fail not, but of this writ with your doings thereon make due service and return according to law. Dated at South Windsor, Connecticut this 5th day of November, 1981. Richard M. Rittenband' Commissioner of the Superior Cour- LAW OFFICES O� RICHARD M.RITTENBAND V 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD SOUTH WINOSOR.CONN.06074 r QV, ,IN15:,'{� (203)644-2456 JURIS NO.50412 i t Y R!"TURNI ABLE 4TH `1'UESDAY OF NOVEMBER, 1981 NO. MARION EDLUND, ET ALS. SUPERIOR COURT JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD/ VS. NEW BRITAIN AT HARTFORD SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, ET ALS. NOVEMBER 5, 1981 A P P E A. II To the Superior Court, to be held at 95 Washington Street, Hartford, Connecticut, in and for the County of Hartford and State of Connecticut and the Judicial District of Hartford/New Britain on the fourth Tuesday of November, 1981, come Marion Edlund, Lorraine White, Reuben White, Gladys White, Gladys K. Cavedon, Alfred. W. Cavedon, Sr. , Arlene H. Lumbra, Mildred L. Eliasson, J. Alden Harrison, Marjorie F. Hoyt, Mary A. Varrick, Charles Varrick, Mitchell M. Slowick, James J. Rice, Sandra A. Rice, LAW OFFtGES Donald Hood, Thomas L. Burgess, Margaret W. Burgess, Robert D. - RICHARD M.RITTENBAND 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD Croteau and Arlene C. Croteau, all of the Town of South Windsor, SOUTH WINDSOR,CONN.06074 (203)644-2456 County of Hartford and State of Connecticut, appealing from a JURIS NO.50412 f decision of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor', County of Hartford and' State of Connecticut approv- ing with conditions the application of Buckland Associates and Kravco, Inc. for a change of zone and general plan of development -2- from Rural Residential to Designed Commercial; and complain and says 1. On or about March 24, 1981, the defendants, Buckland Assoc - iates and Kravco, Inc.. , applied to the defendant, Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor for a change of zone from Rural Residential to Designed Commercial of certain prerni-ses in said Town bounded northerly by Smith Street, westerly by Wheeler, Road, southerly by Pleasant Valley Road and the Town Line and easterly by the rear yard of 1 Buckland Road, as more particularly described in said application. On said application, the owners of said premises. were listed as Bernard G. Martin, George A. Gilbert and The Hartman Tobacco Company, defendants in this appeal. On or about July 22, 1981, said The Hartman Tobacco Company was dissolved, and the defendant, Harry Nair, was appoint- ed to wind up it's affairs in dissolution. LAW OFFICES 2. On June 16 , 1981 , June 17 , 1981 and June 18 , 1981, a Pub- 1 i. R ICHARD MNGTON ROAD Hearing was held on said application by the defendant, Planning 1 734 ELLINGTON ROAD SOVTH WINDSOR,CONN.06074 and Zoning Commission. (203)644.2456 JURIS NO.50412 3. On October 20, 1981, said defendant, Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor approved said application with certain conditions, and published legal notice of said ap- proval with conditions on October 24 , 1981 in the Journal Inquire 4 •�:ra -3- a newspaper published in Manchester, Connecticut and having a substantial circulation in said Town of South Windsor. 4 . A petition was filed at said Public Hearing by owners of lots within five hundred feet in all directions of the subject property protesting such proposed zone change in accordance with Section 8-3 (b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, thereby re- quiring the change of zone not be adopted except by a vote of two-thirds of all of the members of the Commission. 5. The plaintiffs all own and/or reside on property which either abuts, is adjacent to, is within a radius of one hundred feet of, or is near the premises which are the subject of said zone change and are all taxpayers of the Town of South Windsor, and are aggrieved by said decision of the defendant Planning and Zoning Commission in that: As said owners and/or residents as aforesaid, plaintiffs LAW OFFICES will suffer from the adverse effects of said approval of zone RICWARD M.RITTENBAND 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD change, including, but not limited to, increased air and noise SOUT.WINDSOR.CONN.06074 pollution and increased traffic congestion and traffic hazards (203)644.2456 IUR.S NO.50412 on the streets "in the area, in particular the streets on which t their property is located. 6. The action of said Commission in approving said zone change application was arbitrary, capricious, in abuse of its discretion a f -4- and illegal in that: (a) . It.was contrary to the evidence submitted at the public hearing. (b) . It was based upon an erroneous application of the facts and the law. (c) . The reasons stated for said action were insufficient in violation. of Section 8-3 of the General Statutes. (d) . The project to be built on the subject premises will not have legal access to an arterial street as required by Sec- tion 4. 12.4c of the South Windsor Zoning Regulations. (e) . Said approval was not in accordance with the Compre- hensive Plan of Development of the Town of South Windsor. (f) . The approval was granted solely for the benefit of a private land owner and/or developer. (g) . The preliminary sketches of the Town Engineer men- LAW OFFICES tioned in subparagraph No. 2 of the Resolution approving the ap- RICHARD M.RITTENBAND 173A ELLINGTON ROAD plic4tlon were utilized by the Commission in its deliberations SGJTH W WDSOR,CONN,06074 — but were not available at the public hearing, thereby denying (203)644-2456 JURIS NO.50412 those in opposition to the application an opportunity to examine J said sketches' and comment on same at the public hearing. (h) . Said application was accepted from and approval giver. to applicants, Buckland Associates, a foreign partnership not. ) -5- registered in the Town of South Windsor or the State of Connecti- cut and Kravco, Inc. , a foreign corporation not licensed to do business in the State of Connecticut. M . Two of the votes in favor of granting the application were invalid, .namely the .vote of Commissioner Gay who attended sessions of the only two of the three/public hearing and the vote of Commissione Evans who attended none of the public hearing in that they were not sufficiently acquainted with the issues raised and evidence and arguments presented at the public hearing and, therefore, they did not exercise an informed judgment. Consequently, there. were only four allegedly valid votes in favor of the application, less than the two-thirds vote required under Section 8-3 (b) of the General Statutes. (j) . Said approval was based upon and conditioned upon road construction, modifications and improvements over which the LAW OFFICES defendant Planning and Zoning Commission has no control in that RIGHARD M.RITTENBAND 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD said construction, modifications and improvements and other nec- SOUTH WINDSOR.CONN.06074 (203)644-2456 essary road construction and improvements are dependent upon ac- JURIS NO.50412 tion by other agencies, namely those of the State of Connecticut, federal government and Town of South Windsor, and there is nothing in the record that. furnishes reasonable assurance or probabilit-, that such actions by such other agencies will be approved or taken. -6- (k) . The bond which is one of the conditions of the appro-% provides for costs for land acquisition by the Town of South Windsor; and should such acquisition require condemnation, such condemnation must fail because condemnation may not be used to benefit a private interest. (1) . There was no evidence before the Commission that a new condition had arisen which substantially altered the charactE of the area; and there was no proof before the Commission that there was some mistake in the original zoning or that the charac- ter of the neighborhood had changed to such an extent that a re- zoning of the premises should have been made. (m) . Said approval violates the requirements of Sections' 4. 12. 1, 4 . 12. 4, and 4. 12.5 of the South Windsor Zoning Regulation and Section 8-2 of the General Statutes in that said change of zone LAW OFFICES (1) . Does not conform with the general character of RICHARD M.RITTENBAND 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD the neighborhood. SOUTH WINDSOR.CONN.06074 (2) . Will adversely impact and affect traffic in the (203)644.2456 JURIS NO.50412 immediate neighborhood and surrounding area in that there will be -a substantial increase in traffic volume, congestion and hazards. (3) . Will result in an unreasonable increase in 4 -7- noise in the area. (4) . Will unreasonably increase air and noise pollu- tion in the area. (5) . Will adversely affect the general health, safe- ty and welfare of the residents of and the Town of South Windsor. (6) . Will increase the overcrowding of land and un- due concentration of population, and (7) . Will result in inadequate transportation in the area. (n) . No disclosure was ever made to the defendant, Plan- ning and Zoning Commission, of the identity of the principals of the defendant partnership, Buckland Associates, or the fact that The Hartman Tobacco Company had dissolved and the identity of the successors in title at dissolution to the land owned by The Hart- LAW OFFICES man Tobacco Company prior to its dissolution, all in violation of ?ICHARD M.RITTENBAND 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD the requirements of Section 8-7c of the General Statutes. SOUTM WINDSOR.CONN.06074 (203)644.2456 WHEREFORE, plaintiffs pray that the Court: JURIS NO.50412 1. Enter judgment sustaining this appeal. J 2. Reverse the decision (approval) of the defendant Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor. 3. Provide such other relief as is just and proper. } 1 S 8 Dated at South Windsor, Connecticut this 5th day of November, 1981. PLAINTIFFS/APPELLANTS If By: A. .J Richard M. Rittenband Their Attorney LAW OFFICES - RICHARD M.RITTENBAND �`� �•� 1.�GFj 3a�it4 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD C` Q� SOUTH WINDSOR.CONN.06074 (203)644-2456 JURIS NO.50412 _g_ PLAINTIFF MARION EDLUND Marion Edlund t STATE OF CONNECTICUT) ) ss : South Windsor this 5th day of COUNTY OF HARTFORD ) November, 1981 Personally appeared MARION EDLUND, a plaintiff, who certified that the foregoing was true and accurate to the best of her know- ledge and belief. ' Subscribed and sworn to before me. 52 Richard M. Rittenband Commissioner of the Superior Court LAW OFFICES RICHARD M.Ra-rENSAND 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD It SOUTH WINDSOR•CONN.06074 I (203)644-2456 ~� JURIS NO.50-412 F -10- BOND FOR COSTS OF APPEAL KNOW .ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS : That I, MARION EDLUND, of the Town of South Windsor, County of Hartford, and State of Connecticut, as Principal, and Marion W. Douglass , of the Town of Thompson, County of Windham and State of Connecticut, as Surety, are holden and firmly bound jointly and severally unto the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor, Buckland Associates, Kravco, Inc. , Bernard G. Martin, George A. Gilbert, The Hartman Tobacco Company and Harry Nair, Defendants in this action in the penal sum of Two Hundred Fifty ($250. 00) Dollars to making of which payment we hereby bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, firmly by the presents. The condition of this obligation is such that, whereas the said MARION EDLUND and other Plaintiffs herein have taken an ap- LAW OFFICES peal to the Superior Court in and for the Judicial District of RICHARDM.RITTENBAND 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD Hartfiord/New Britain at Hartford from the action of the Planning SOUTH WINDSOR.CONN.C6074 (203)644.2458 and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor in the grant- .1URIS NO.50412 ing of a change of zone for the Defendants, Buckland Associates, j and Kravco, Inc. as more particularly set forth in the writ, sum- mons and complaint to which this bond is annexed. 1 w -11- NOW, THEREFORE, if the Plaintiffs shall prosecute said Appeal to the full affect to comply with the orders and decrees of said Court, this bond shall be void, but otherwise shall remain in full force and affect. Dated at South Windsor, Connecticut, this 5th day of November, 1981. Marion Ediund Marion W. Doug , ss Principal Surety Taken and acknowledged before me in South Windsor, Connecticut, this 5th day of November, 19*81. / Richard M. Rittenband Commissioner of the Superior Court LAW OFFICES RICHARD M.RITTENBAND 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD l SOUTH WINDSOR.CONN.06074 (203)644.2456 rG%1"' \:�-•'t��� JURIS NO.50412 :Ji ) PEAK-HOUR FLOWS AND LEVELS OF SERVICE - BUCKLAND COMMONS - TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 1981 Existing 1985 - w/J.C. Penney(1 ) 1925 - w/J.C. Penney(' ) 1985 '- w/J.C. Penney(2) 1985 - w/J.C. Penney(2) Conditions & Industrial Park Ind. Park & Buckland Com. & Industrial Park Ind. Park & Buckland Com. Peak Level Peak Level Peak Level Peak Level Peak Level Flow Condition of Flow Condition of Flow Condition of Flow - Condition of Flow Condition of Street (VPH) Veh/Sec) Service (VPH) (Veh/Sec) Service (VPH) (Veh/Sec) Service (VPH) (.Veh/Sec) Service (VPH) (Veh/Sec) Service Plea oata Valley 345 1/10 B 390 1/9 B 505 1/7 C 265 1/13.5 A 280 1/13 A Chapel Road 345 1/10 A 650 1/5.5 C 685 1/5 C 325 1/11 A 340 1/10.5 A (upper Clark Street 55 1/65 A 410 1/9 C 525 1/7 C 280 1/13 A 330 1/11 B (upper Burnham Street limit) (west of Clark) 165 1/22 A 300 1/12 B 380 1/9.5 B 140 1/26 A 175 1/20.5 A Buckland Road 770 1/5 C 920 1/4 C 1 ,100 1/3 C 920 1/4 C 1 ,110 1/3 C LEVELS OF SERVICE(3) A - Free flow condition, low volumes and. fiigh speeds. Traffic density is low. Speeds controlled by driver desires, speed limits and physical roadway conditions. B - Stable flow Operating speeds becoming somewhat restricted by traffic conditions. Drivers have reasonable freedom to select .speed and lane of operation. C - Stable flow Operating speeds and maneuverability more closely controlled by higher volumes. Drivers restricted in freedom to select speed, change lanes or pass. f )Estimated peak-hour traffic volumes with anticipated revisions to I-86 without I-291 or connector road. All peak flows based on Traffic and Access Analysis - Buckland Commons Mall Report by Wilbur Smith and Associates. - (2)Estimated peak-hour traffic volumes with anticipated revisions to I-86 with I-291 and connector road. All peak flows based on Traffic and Access Analysis- Buckland Commons Mall Report by Wilbur Smith and Associates. S E A CONSULTANTS INC. April 1981 (3)Highway Capacity Manual 1965, Highway Research _Board, Special Report 87 NEIGHBORHOOD CONDITIONS - BUCKLAND COMMONS - TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 1985 ADT(l) 1985 ADT(' ) 1985 ADT(2) 1985 ADT(2) 1981 ADT w/J.C. Penney w/J.C. Penney w/J.C. Penney w/J.C. Penney w/o Volume & Ind. Park Volume Ind. Park Develop. Volume & Idd. Park Volume Ind. Park Develop. Volume Street Development Level De-velopment Level Buckland Commons Level development Level Buckland Commons Level P1easg Valley 3,500 Medium 3,911 Medium 5,000 Medium 2,645 Medium 2,800 Medium Clark Street 450 Light 555 Light 4,325 Medium 525 tight 2,750 Medium Chapel Road 2,350 Medium 4,289 Medium 4,600 Medium 2,145 Medium 2,300 Medium Burnham Street 11050 Light 1 ,872 Light 2,650 Medium 839 Light 1 ,150 Light Buckland Road 6,500 Medium 7,709 Medium 9,575 Medium 7,709 Medium 9,575 Medium (upper (upper limit) limit) VOLUMES LEVELS(3) Light traffic volume - few traffic problems _--- . 2,_000_vpd Medium traffic volume - reduction in neighors -visiting each other 2,000-10,000 vpd people .feel more confined safety concerns during _activity stops Heavy traffic volume - normal neighborhood activity stops 10,000 vpd major concern over safety, noise, stress, pollutants (' )Estimated average daily traffic (ADT) with anticipated revisions to I-86 without I-291 or connector road. (2)Estimated average daily traffic (ADT) with anticipated revisions to I-86 with I-291 and connector road. (3)'tiveable Urban Streets (Managing Au to uto Traffic in N �.9 9 e ghborhoods) ,U.S. Department of Transportation URAFT S E A CONSULTANTS INC. April 1981 BUCKLAND COMMONS - TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FIVE CORNERS INTERSECTION - .BUCKLAND ROAD CAPACITY PEAK FLOW(2) BUCKLAND ROAD (flowing S-N) CONDITION(' ) (VPH) LEVEL OF SERVICE Existing condition 525 B 1985/1986 w/J.C. Penney & Industrial Park 655 E 1985/1986 w/J.C. Penney Industrial Park & Buckland Commons 765 F LEVEL OF SERVICE(3) A - No .vehicle waits longer than one red indication. Turning movements are easy, nearly all drivers have freedom of operation. B - Stable operation. Drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted. . Suitable operation for rural conditions. C - Stable operation. Some drivers may have to wait through more than one red signal indication. Backups may develop behind turning. vehicles with most drivers feeling somewhat .restricted. D - Increasing restriction approaching a condition of instability. Delays to approaching vehicles maybe substantial during peak hours. E - Capacity of intersection is reached.- Delays may be up to several signal cycles. F -. Jammed conditions. Back-ups from locations downstream may restrict movement out of approach under consideration. Volumes carried are not predictable. 1 Intersection capacity for Buckland Road approach based on 15% right and 15% left turning conditions. (2)Peak flows based on Traffic and Access Analysis - Buckland Commons Mall Report by Wilbur Smith and Associates. (3)Highway Capacity_ Manual 1965, Highway Research Board, Special Report 87 S E A CONSULTANTS INC. April 1981 R A F I, C. t TI a EN COAAMEA/ 7-S REGARDING APPLICATION �* 631- --., '' B UCKI-AND COMMOIVSu SHOPPIA16, MALL ; 1 PR Z 51=NTED 7'0 THE 5OUTH WINDSOR PLAIVNIIV6 AIV® -2E ®AV1lVG COMA41551®oV M i4 Y 1 3-j / 9 7 7 1 ' hCPtt rco� b t� !a i Gh4 yrt p 6 u r rG !! 2LD S.ue�� S �- lA t A4 b c rs or B71 Pd 4AA -~ Vall Alo ' M 1 5 � o n� f t. i'r C'1`: }:' t t i ?D `J e i o rr7 e n j' 7 o t" ----h 4o ¢ 1 cu e— 1 0 111 y c:a%):..-l. 0.-7 co S J 4-�-.f-�r ei:e! r!) 0 r 5 6�a1._ i.' �,ti. o r I a ii J Cc f`A w) `a�-,o c-,r a i,� r::.a e L1 V-,cJ p d I _f off' 6 niCd Ctr �i 1. ( �" �. ) `.-re+4./ j i! 4 r, i.. n ' r .a t rn 1�kni Jv-n51 y (4wo mr erb: par, u c no n 1 bovt; .ot arc 1i►1 Rona an 4-he usAi-Ia1 develo9mcn an the. we5 �� = �. Podu >-, ;'� P\v or) f ro eG -6 t- an8 ro 5 r' r a on , ) IVorA F"u� '-►��.r Undo 4-he 5 4-to n ct ',�i� �1 Cc� i r��1 Cam 171 cr`:i ct P)an rct/ce7-is 1 - ..l i)�.1 -r i �t_ (� !/3 `�'a) ;' '�l i�.'� Z `.,:�`�;>�.4r"1 Y r e �..t:.• t� + _ ..� ,.,; 1 , C0m i n.,1 �` :>> ..r !� C�tj i 4- c w p.A fo hie- nfetA s o,- i �s own pope I c -ion " no )- c- red Iona1 or Scab reskono-k Corn rn erc o-1 -Cen �e,r- . FJ A Jional 5 Vucl s ina co-. ed -4-hCL-� ' Sough Windsor wouI8 nee,d.. 31H acmes o' Cornrne,rC.� o_1 are.CA- 4-0 5ad-i5�� 4-ke, PopuIcd on axp et,Pcr b� 198.5. The- area, ir, Ig68 Acj,-� . was coned- �-oi- ComYnt'rcia,\ usc. +-o � a.lI-ed.. 672 aere,5 in exce56 o 4 he pred� c4-►on5 b a lac-;korr off- 4-wo Vor a Pe-r-►c)d 1 -hen 17 ears c,V)e-ac. . rhe- p ian 5ru.r- her r-e om mended. 4-wo Commune I-ry shoPpi n� are-o-5 , Tlie- i r5 wa 5 c t- n S u\I% uo-n R u en Lve 0- w a s en a,\r ea.d ? r) f Ki S �e-nce Th 15 cLr-ea. was p1o,nned 4-0 con4-o.s rn J 2.0 f a qnA ( on�-ccx n g�e,n er•a 1 noL O��� C� t�.s�e 5, 7l,e Second.. and. Small er p )anncc . ■ Go rn m-e.r c.i o,\ Q.r e.c#- w as re.c.o m m ended. r I-on D 0,�,1 o n e.oL. off- Looap P 1 n� T h i s C e.n 1-e.r tA)0LA, c� cornpri5e aPpro oje-Iy SO acres . The. P)c n CdnC,1t.dts 44L�&4- 441e- ex\ 11 S T-I r1� CO m M C r G i o,l zo n� n q �1��G 1� e r` ��►g,r� G. I1UweA, 9ror 6M ac-reS Should be. dck1- back oL rn Ck ?-\ 3 3 D a c c-e-S wvl i C, t.o ct s 0-0 n s i d e r rd- acc�:e8 u al-e --�o r 4--h e, p\ar,n;n p e,c i o d. , �'he. SOt� \n VJ;n�Soc- @�C9.nnit, and. 2-0 n', n on V-o C,o n,P 1� w 1 re,co m m en do`4-i �-�� Compre,�,e�,s' ve. P\an off- 'DeueloPmen �- sand t`� jec�f 441,e. \ cad-' a pP �o n �--o r f--z,o n e: acre CC 3rom Rurc, 6f-nero.1 Comm,erciG�I 1 n 4,her j j i I I • Zb �at�-off asn lro +-� uap� say �-� ►. soap w,n ��p�aua -10� Ub( d atff -So uox�ro-fula L" wo?aj �t-f �-( !M ,road •e��no�s S u 011 -,)- u !voz Y) • -�a��o 00 �0 6 ►a �a �o u�os�o� ��------ - ---------- Tray��c._ ---- --- ------- --. - - - - - - ---- / --Via 5- - --b as-ed,- - e r--- 4-raS 7�- ---s kwc� _o n- a h-- - -- auc��l�lole -mc�rke f- o� 200, 000 _ . �eo� le - 7'h%5 5ma on --o- -1a_nche5es-- SocL4 - - -- (,�►n d s o�- ,-- -, o s� Lv nd s o r- 61 a s 4-o n b u jy --,E a r 4- a rd f om V on . .and Tolland, on y . No mar-keru�es�- ---�-' --U-)CA _ _Co n s i_d e red. -- - ►' s - -- aQprc)aC,�'� - w'�\\ _ �e mi n_', m i ze -he - -dumber- - - - ------ +-na --'- ---Can---b e---- ----- 2 \ha 5------- - _°�_ :� cn \a__r ----°�{? coca e - --5 5 er - ---+o - -- -�`o_Po s d - 6LA, anc --- 4-OA- 1S _ -- -m-o`"\©r - e x F re s s wcL_� - o,nd.-_ ._ evec-o.\_-- _res Aden BOA - s ree,}-5� - --- The.. numbers - ---- -- --- - 51 .oven -- - r-- -r-e-cL _ on rl�LL-e I -- aye --- f-cans crt-b fd_ ror)l -- -c- Lclumn_- o�- --4-le 1_976 - fro�� C - S-�-ud ShOLO -0ie -be ore---ctnOL -- - -a� We-:5f Farms Ma_II - on --- --5 -re. -S-- --- o -- 5 -- - cAr+7o-rd - P5- -Can - ---be ---Se-en - - -- -- --- ------ --- n - -- -- s- ------1------- 1�h ere - W°`is -- y) ► n c r e-as-e -_ e 5_ _ Aa n - y3 . _ o•nd mo5� f rcL CO",n,n S i nCc eased by mo�.e 4-�a..r 75 7he roads i rn We s f rcL 4-h C,� Co u1� b er co r,s,d eyed 5 t m t�c.r 4-o P I e a s a n f- iV c,\Ve- ( bAc, e-`- - anc- ---ClQc- K S--ree�S c.c-e - 5hepelyd- - - U-N,%-kch \-)o-d a n I n cr ea,5 e- 60 -----rr- pecAivelf , Rue, GA)c)Lu O�n nc'r-e4L-oe o -i3o- f- Nof4be - ----direct rLAr44�rmore- Rka e- Woo cli o- o me O'n d oLx�6---be- - bin -ar a San 006 had-an0 -- �-OLI n �41e_ may O)af clpearl� ttxi.-5 �.5 -.eves ---k P- Con n ee-,A I- - CLL� e e U r to m _:5 cL i:lo m pa r n C-vle- --Cou Ic j------- --,ae-en- --_o r- an V C,L L e ----Road V, - .C�YPT,01,\ rn o. e,1 -- --eer------60,-,�--WOLOA C.A.u f- ■ an In Crle-CL5f- 0 Sr ck Y,', rn c,�,e t� 15U 0/0 , c I ear I L� CLT\ -tll�,-r-lck-s -----o- +4)OL --- ---- ---OLJ r) 6 ,&o v- plOnni n cLnd ion i nA -C\-o-rn-m-j-55_1_0 n 1 5 "c% r Ow n I —0fjef, 4-o a 6 see �a' mpatJ -Propo6ecL r e-�5W-\ ----haves C, n Sod' M ' f Fit S' TV Ailerags Vehicular Counts Before and After Opening 6f Mall Aven"Waakday l Saturday► - .Traffic _ traffic 1 ,.C7 Route Location Before Agar %Incmm Befog Aftit %incresse ftauth Rd. East of Two Mile Rd. 3300. ,4300 30% 2600- . 'f5401; in,& �Iaorfruff Rd. North of South Rd. 850 1050k 24% f300 1206 60% iiout+e 71 At Nswington Town line 14fl00 13800 28% 9100 14500 54% _ Shapard Rd. East of Route 71 22W N00 14% 21M 3000 43% New CriWrl Ave. West of Berkshire Rd. 12100 14000 16% 119W 16900 43% 484- Usibourd off ramp to New Britain Ave. 3200 4600 44% 26M 49M 88% 1.84 Eastbound on ramp from " New Britain Ave. 4500 6100 360 4000 7100 . 18% 1.84 Westbound an ramp froip Rldg9*ood Rd. 24od 0400 W% 2100 - 4200 100% WesMzund off rs np.to ' M Ridgewood Rd. 5300 6ft 28% •4500 8000 78%Rldp=ood Rd. North of i${intardianpe 2600 5000 127% 2400 GM 183% 47250 g0 c 9L5 � C, of. D RO I 7 AJr J SORtNFIELD LL 5AN%I- CITY OF HARTFORD RATTERSON PARR W 1. % / SUN ADMAN \�� m4OOD Fo °N *to In `\ Z�� p BELGRES� \ t m Coo Y w u �0 0 g OCO' YAt- OAK Old U. dd O �� CD 0 `;WOODRIDGE..- IRCN NILL / i O DI LAKE ,` I -- GONp ..' .WOOD `, 5AN NgVIE� a FtUN GRE-Oft I Ele / POND R i Klk' O �IO® j % W\ R MItN O CONAR D D e � VftgpF K W p R A. 1 R O N \1 of F I(R / 1 ` I MIkES 5tAN IS D Z ` OD CONTROL N1 DIKE w YIRtsON O L.A. [IT. I yl OOO ITNO', ;pac i�/ OOOQONO RD SEEGN N yy it W U M,LOREO �e 9G y u w z ' NO., w 0 N �E C T/O A0 OF TOWN 6 F LA i W Dj � III a a r W FAO -79 e4 � .iU. �y► gt = / u LO/�t7 ELMFIEI-O __ /i-I Utf1.RD � O � U CORBINS D W CORNER L;R LCo� 3 • _ � I � � D I wgLR�L STDORRY I FO LEA OR Q i O I DRTpCE Z R W J I- AFt?,is / �OtNY -- W 0 I ~, H 4.. --- Itn RED l� W w 7 .�I I IFS < Z CLq_ ER I I ROCX EDGE Y. U . pARD �< RO BROOK �] ON 42 WO Z< Z GREENN�V_ 2 GLENN 4 �- m OR LA < I GRISSOM 71 I UPE O o ' vet U s r 1; � r Pv G! S U lam' / C� /t`N i�+ a r?�G{ O N/2 . O tit /k c G s � TIP,ri..Q O G,! ,�o r /r✓/ A 51 P� !Q l d e o � t r6 t O`1 d S Q 4^c e A Gt. A/t 0 A l�l D Alt e- NC k r ffig- UL'S U !t? e� � j' o pey f ilo / LeS 101' vq- lugs S w, i-e/ ��C � Lv �l I l e- © s G r � �r r.a U 5 U �vS C-A,t t— W ! 6( //1/G rei /7 S-6-� S l /H t I p k- one ce r-eG 5. Hd u euz-V Va W/ l /tic V-ea C9 A J/0- /rc- 9 1�- ; wl G/�Q r A oval' ;-e l�v A © G Diu ovt v'G r�- / �Q��5 15f'-or6k coou oti zxk. � ydp� ' _ l✓��v e5 w i�� 5 U re 1G Sty ,cry'- G-(y�.vGL Y'e_ YI o & rJ- ;-L" s Lir-r cj, c - V t z2 0 e4 i 'ev! Ale a" ai vr 7t 4p L) A vk e� l_ -11 Z)v e a- /V 6 U-e- 4 v o -tA, 151- roX , del it r1 (IPA t-e—e-o- AA /.-v v t—e,5 e-t- 0 C,t— C) 6-1 T /r- !5 e verel 0 tj e V- f) -e r-ed. G. 1"4-, tte- road bf-,,o q e— tA/C U le4 .17 tv c V- I /V e Lu/ .� urCN U CiI D � 2 �!®�cr pt U� �v !� s 1 Y '. !fit O_u S l - P1/ / O -.it - / Z�-D U-I AI , c,f 0., e.,t j Att ' /,-0/ t Che ! G l h / 5 de �,r5rvti U �i,u- � U f � Wr �"�. 5 �5��oG� j j r tV l/`2. G Q "U 5 Q Aj vofolPY.�c S d _ �h:Pyf'''. p 14- 1 � A 1 f1 -r UP.� Ale 0wr,� c �. 019P L to WtAxdSava 5ve-k as PleisaxJ- U4 `1,er Al-a rl� S a L-j 64L Wtnv saw {�la A/A Q G O NL tit 15 5 ra A.J �a •�� �d a /f o w l Q"Lai, COs'Lit tv O/IIs /Ka- �.2 /f 4- w� n Pw /o c 4 / (T© Q d 5 /N S o v k-O A4- /P Y-Ok lP.0 5 S A,c r �JG jv/, /q(6-0,v v re s a, Vat I q L l e, a/Lot 1/V m Y �-'a 't'r la -ev e Ge_ art w V 6-t e- / �l/�e✓ s�� 1 arm Q 13 U r N i'. 8 /V ia s�r,� S rec_s - 7-4 e, Gt, v o t 14 6 /le- &U C,Ory S 6- r U c — I-c rA a ! l ","v U lG� 0 AJ e- eZ C, VC S of 0 0 PriYC� l�v/ 661 �05 -`edl Onite, }tea V 1 SD U `�1 c 6U r,t} n t�'� SrS l cv 4 S �r SCeA,4 5 G lea k- �ji4 �" 3�•� =��� S /V d �a r q e, e Al o Gt✓ l/ ) pit, L 0 14 A/���� b Gt-G it e S .S o v t-� 6� U IA,' OF �h� �Q�GI� W ov IVO f Go/vG[uG to gelV'� rotiQ � s � o�� •� G�ti�e r• _ C P2 N/� a N� no tint/ iO `Vt /c- c s rep c� o u ., B yr R,1 Rio r�� �r'" �o / e // r eal,., et.S S h O t o AI 1/1J e p xtOle- �r r 5 vL �u. I urNey v�•�c Gc.. Moc �fG�w 5 �°,� !i l( 6 A O l t/�r> Ct keQ- 1 /N �� ire-� /d,V, producev, e a N r,�,., �u k-e, o `,,c._ /u U Cent-a 6;i, A. a P e C 1ewr- _ �o ex 15 6--/f� a k-e A s t v!l/ �c.o� �� v t ej- e �l� 1 5 > vivs 6 U dr� � �ssQ - GvS �o�c�5f et 1 .o o a s e irve- se Ve.r4,( nA.Q ) 5 i Al l0 s�. �o v`Qx eAA l - arc 5 ee, N l a b 2 re 1 u,, w,-,,v 16 or ' P 1 4-/N Al,//� a/1-Gl �`Z'®ti//t-#? om m Is s r aril S �QUGt��I� ' 4 i r0u rro � �e .5 vG��.� tvi �l c�tc tJr�- p # t /V tti �/ 1 S G o A! 5 r u c `'f� l • /� r a -� r o 6" _/ (4e"u v/ Yi/otv � J / •.tr za s�•t =41� ot� PARCEL ~2 IfpRlt 1 \ AR[A•46 25 ISOVTMMINOSOR) 5660 p1ANC14iT 11'f IJ�CR' L•„alpt00• 12 ti7 ACRES TOTAL ` ••"�• _ �!/{L TO'.N fN S t1IM vlNn • •••r F� sue- ' - •� MANCMESTER •t•t0 - — I�•a af- i ' r• MI \ lM•"o: I C hp�C • a: '4.,f I i ACRe5 ••w••ofeo' J f• A+tl'�7I4•r A.Itt..' LIt••H•W I \♦ T•It,{ � t'M•t,a tt• A•y)Op0' M p •y{,,..� t.T"V a I �� •. r o•' / ,7l t0' PARCEL 2 htl • •.;,r ,`J•..• AMA 0+PROP 'AK[•170AC sly,- � •} rJ � • •. _ ,..}a 9t .r bP'•� a,o 1 >fl. / �s3,•->o u. �.a•or.tt'. Asa•ts' .,.•� •� 117aM lit 8;/•\MAY STREET t. '�•� •: ,v.,,,ti 1,�-•tt�� —stl as-•. .{r.n-sr•t— o.. .•• t .. v '" _ '`� 1..•aY s• •.,.. PARCEL 3 = k •.+000�T'FAjwJ�/ � p �AREA • :2zTACRES n to �11//�/ A.•••ol.op• o . ` R.YU 00 ^/ CM•ta0s' • •• •• t • A+�• w w r i. l.AT j 46. OR ` • s I w j!'s• ,I � • 6 • Orrl �•' ♦ • pak •• i i Jl ,C o .t.a6wr E 4 A \'� �T•w7Vx r� � �•p.. I ♦ r t„ PARCE • • 1 / �taa•.!, v�-• AKA•0 z7 A:• I v .S 31454'-' v�a•i•,tt E•.c CWR A..p� .w - ' f • / ►AACCIM t .•,�• .., ... of AREA Of PROP tAttQ•gp60AC. S' \ P• , • ;,.o:i Y. PARCEL 3 i 1S J o\ i p'�':4J a• AREA a PPCM• TAKE• SI EQ AC � Y ��ti AY 1 V9 /// •r_s:of • - ..+t► tr.•.se r• - J ((( R��. + Ion • :� ;G. PARCEL ~2 _�- AREA t 46 25 ISOUTM WINOSOR) ' 566O (YANCNEITER) .t) 4 - f) Cr 7!•!0'•00° 8205 ACRES TOTAL f t f ff• ` fJ.j• ,lfa!, SOUTH it IN07 R A. E '•r•, P ' A.CMEST R ISa•0 s?•' "a a/' -� It•! hi ' \ IM ib7!! f C �pCC s"". • r A.7a•.er.00• i.. J 1 1. / /7CRF— `1 •• R•N!00' � P' l•/T 7AO0' A. 7ff.•' a•,t•df'.0•• - _ �p /t A. t0 00' R•tf•tt' •.MWO a•.•M..- A s•o1' •srro' PARCEL 2 :�•, -•u� � :..•rr... AREA Or PROP TAKE•ITOAC r Ad• • •r •.t,• f' a' y c••K se -4j'r�� �• •70•,• ?.♦ ,a,°It•pr � _1?J•.SO U w r•I/••lY.tt•• ,H•17' ., as >\� ..I al•K.fs• DIAVMAY - STREET Y.•. Y` ...0 _ 'i ••.. , ♦a•• —C 1 —lIP�•- • ,•.3/"-3l't..r G�Tl _ .t•., t..t!+ -. •� ••7f - \ it .• C. 24 3 .25• t "•. , PARCEL _ i �.• '2.fr••et-00• ; AJ,_a 21 2TACRES or A•ff•et'•oo• � '\ GN•2107' ,' to '`\ ��/ .•. • • ✓ r t i f ' lD f}cREs RA. _ 1 ReOr • ranl '� 1 l •�� `i w \•�A 6„ ez to' PARCEL• ato \ R6 Fit M.Tf;✓.arrays 1 PARCEL 1 a1. • 1`�± r. f)a .••:"t 1' "'A'REA'tw PROP TiYe Soso - !• >•�4, ot+y PARCEL S \ r�:t✓�• AREA p1 PROP TAKE• SI SO At K {,OAK 0 •. ..t as ,r•• - ` • i.•n•a �,•. ram:- �I ,•.a t•a tof SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE FOR BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR, CT APPLICANT: BUCKLAND ASSOCIATES 1 DEVELOPER: KRAVCO, INC . 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 J O FUSS&O'NEILL consulting engineers March 9, 1981 Planning and Zoning Commission Town of South Windsor South Windsor Town Halt South Windsor, CT 06074 RE: Zoning Application for Designed Commercial Zone Proposed Buckland Commons Mall Gentlemen: We are transmitting herewith 10 copies of a report and accompanying plans in support of a zone change application for the proposed Buckland Commons Development in the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester. The report and plans submitted address section 11 .2.3 of the regulations concerning an application for zone change as well as section 4. 12 - Designed Commercial Zone - General Plan of Development. The accompanying plans consist of the following drawings: Sheet No. 1 - Title Sheet and Area Map Sheet No. 2 - Zone Change Map Sheet No. 3 - General Plan of Development (Existing Conditions) Sheet No. 4 - General Plan of Development (Proposed Development) Should any additional information be required, please contact the applicant or the undersigned. Very truly yours, Walter S . Fuss, P.E. WSF/j Lz Enclosure 210 MAIN STREET / MANCHESTER, CONN. 06040 / TELEPHONE (203)646-2469 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT•WASTE WATER SYSTEMS•EROSION CONTROL•WATER SYSTEMS•HYDROLOGY and DRAINAGE SYSTEMS•SITE PLANNING HIGHWAYS and BRIDGES•SURVEYING•LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE•TRANSPORTATION and TRAFFIC•PUBLIC WORKS MANAGEMENT•HYDROGEOLOGY TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TRANSMITTAL TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION TITLE 1 GENERAL PROJECT DISCUSSION 1-1 2 DRAINAGE 2-1 3 WATER SUPPLY & FIRE PROTECTION 3-1 4 SEWERAGE 4-1 5 WASTE DISPOSAL 5-1 6 GAS, ELECTRIC AND TELEPHONE 6-1 7 BUFFER - OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE 7-1 8 SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL IMPACT STUDY 8-1 BY LARRY SMITH & COMPANY, INC. 9 SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY 9-1 BY WILBUR SMITH AND ASSOCIATES SECTION 1 GENERAL PROJECT DISCUSSION SECTION 1 GENERAL PROJECT DISCUSSION INTRODUCTION General The purpose of this submission is to request a zone change from Rural Residential to Designed Commercial Zone on 55± acres of Land Located in the Town of South Windsor generally bounded by Smith Street on the north, Wheeler Road on the west, the Manchester-South Windsor Town Line on the south and Buckland Road on the east. The attached Location plan (Figure 1-1) illustrates the general location graphically. The accompanying zone change map depicts the property location specifically. This proposed zone change would form a portion of the project area for the proposed Buckland Commons development to be located in the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester. The Manchester portion of the project consists of approximately 38 acres which has previously been zoned Business III. The total project area would encompass approximately 93 acres. Development Description The proposed development consists of a two Level shopping mall comprised of major department stores, satellite retail and supporting facilities having a maximum gross building area of 1 ,199,000 square feet and a gross Leas- able area of 1 ,000,000 square feet. The square footage division between Towns is proposed as follows: 1-1 N °F �R S O U T H W t H O S O R • LEGEND" PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Z k a t / I / 1 aM,rh STREET w,NO50R NCHEStER Eg84hT �A RHO mG �♦ NE � do �' �s� ZO` CRO FT OR- s� s o t 6URRHAM gEET • o � M A N C H E S T E R ♦ , ►ate_LINE ___�_--; ,i C Penny Co e onws Shopping Pk oo E LOCATION PLAN C P�K SCALES I"=10o0� c ``ANC ■ANCNliTEN, CONNlCTICUT FIGURE 1- 1 Maximum Town Gross Building Area South Windsor 724,000 square feet Manchester 475 000 square feet TOTAL 1 , 199,000 square feet The project as proposed conforms to the Town of South Windsor Com- prehensive Plan of Development as adopted by the Planning and Zoning Commission on November 18 1980 The project is to be constructed in a single phase. PROJECT LAYOUT Drawings The project layout is graphically illustrated on two accompanying plans entitled the "General Plan of Development". Sheet 3 generally indicates P 9 y the existing site conditions in terms of uses, soils, vegetation, topography and structures. Sheet 4 illustrates the proposed development in terms of maximum build- ing area proposed.. Shown on these plans is a line termed the "building 9 p P 9 envelope" which is intended to describe the limits of any building con- struction as may be determined during final design. The building shape shown on the plans is preliminary only and will change once negotiations are concluded with tenants that will occupy the facility. The maximum building areas for each Town, however, will not be exceeded. The required parking, buffer, open space and landscape areas will con- form to the regulations described for a Designed Commercial Zone. Commission approval is requested for a building height of 55 feet. The height in excess of 40 feet will be utilized only for utility housing. 1-2 Utilities Because of the preliminary nature of the plans, the principal utilities, i.e. drainage, water and sanitary sewer, are shown in schematic form to define concepts. Changes in the shape of the proposed malt will re- quire parking and utility changes, however, the concept and feasibility will not be altered. PHYSICAL SITE CONDITIONS Topography The topography of the site consists of Low relief gently rolling hills and valleys. Throughout most of the site, surface slopes are Less than o 0 8/o with most of the area being less than 3/0. Locally, slopes up to 15% do occur. These are found in the extreme northwest portion of the property near the intersection of Wheeler Road and Smith Street. Slopes of 8% also occur in the eastern portion of the property associated wit h a natural drainage swale in that area. This swale is discussed in more detail Later in this report. Existing Land Uses The topographyof the site has been altered b the tong-term y e use of the area for agricultural activity. The Land has been utilized for the grow- ing of tobacco and vegetables for many years. The regular cultivation " of the land has further Lowered the relief of the site and smoothed the transition from one topographic setting to the next. 1-3 A number of structures consisting of barns, storage sheds and residential buildings exist on site in support of the Long agricultural history of the area and its current open space and agricultural use. Geologic Description SurficiaL geologic deposits in the Buckland Commons area are reportedly composed of both Gtaciofluvial deposits, consisting of stratified sands and gravel and Deltaic deposits, consisting of gently dipping laminated sands, silts, and gravels. These sediments have filled a buried channel cut into the bedrock surface. This channel is up to 250 feet in depth and trends generally south to north through the west central portion of the proposed project area. West of the central portion of the channel, unconsolidated sediments thin to a depth of 120 feet. To the east, these sediments thin to about a ten foot depth at the edge of the development. The above materials fillingthe buried a e channel., are composed of fine to medium reddish sands with discontinuous clay Layers as inferred from well Logs in surrounding areas. The bedrock underlying these deposits is composed of red sandstone typical of the Connecticut River Valley the triassic red beds). The stratified drift valley through the center of the Buckland site receives groundwater flow from the areas both east and west of the project area. Within the stratified drift valley, the general groundwater flow is inferred to be . north towards discharge into the Plum Gulley Brook surface water 1-4 system. The groundwater flow largely mimics surface water drainage patterns. The water table is 30-40 feet below land surface at the cen- ter of the buried channel and slightly closer to the Land surface to the east and west. Wetlands and Watercourses There are presently no designated wetlands on site as one would expect from the inferred depth to the water table described above. There is a regulated watercourse in the northeast portion of the property. This watercourse is actually a surface swale conducting surface runoff north- ward to a tributary of Plum Gulley Brook. soils The soils which have formed on the stratified drift sediments in the pro- ject area consist of Enfield, Manchester and Merrimac soils groups. These soils are all similar in that they are well drained to excessively well drained soils which are generally excellent for development purposes. Because the water table is deep and their texture is generally medium to- coarse, they tend to be very droughty. The deep water table and coarse soil texture also serves to give these soils a Low susceptibility to frost action in paved areas. These soils should also function well in terms of recharge in open area or in areas of stormwater detention. 1-5 The Enfield soils, which have an upper mantle of wind-blown fine sand and silt, are subject to erosion on unprotected slopes. The areal dis- tribution of the soils are shown on Sheet No. 3, "General Plan of Develop- ment". 1-6 1 1 1 1 1 1 � SECTION z � DRAINAGE f 1 1 1 l 1 1 I 1 SECTION 2 DRAINAGE Design Criteria The proposed drainage system shown on the "General Plan of Development" is conceptual in nature. The following drainage criteria wilt be utilized in developing the final plan. On-Site Detention - Provide volume to accommodate a 100 year storm with a release capability of being equal to or less than being discharged presently for all storms of lesser frequency. Y Drainage System - 25 year recurrence frequency. ALL points of discharge will have appropriate control for erosion protection. Calculations to demonstrate feasibility and drainage area mapping have been submitted to the Town Engineer under separate cover. Zone Change Parcel A piped system will be provided to collect and dispose of surface water from roofs, pavement and Landscaped areas. A designated watercourse exists in the northeast corner of the parcel. Storm flows from the zone change parcel are to be carried in 5 drainage systems. The outfaLLs for 4 of the drainage systems are to existing or proposed detention basins. The detention basins will not have water surface elevations resulting in taiLwater conditions that will cause flooding of the parcel. Detention basins will also provide for recharge of the groundwat er system. The fifth outfall is to Whaples Brook. Water levels in the Brook will not cause flooding of the zone change parcel. Upstream Land Only very minor storm flows originate upstream of the zone change parcel because of natural topographic divides and there will be no restrictions to these flows, which will be provided for in the parcel drainage system. 2-1 Downstream Land Two of the five proposed drainage systems within the zone change parcel discharge to a proposed detention basin located at the northwest corner of the site at the intersection of Wheeler Road and Smith Street. This detention basin will be designed to limit the discharge to a peak flow no greater than existing flows with present land use. This detention basin will discharge into a storm drainage system proposed to be in- stalled on the southerly side of Smith Street from Wheeler Road to a point approximately 1 ,600 feet westerly. At this point, twin 48" pipes will discharge flow to Plum Gulley Brook. Downstream areas will be checked for erosion potential. The third drainage system discharges to a proposed detention basin to- cated mainly in the Town of Manchester on contiguous land of the appLi- cant. This basin also includes flows from a drainage system Located in the Town of Manchester. This detention basin will also be -designed to limit the outlet peak flows to Less than exists with present land use. The Town of South Windsor Inland Wetland map indicates a watercourse extending from Smith Street southerly (upstream) into land controlled by the applicant. This intermittent watercourse serves as the outlet for this drainage area at the present time. Over the years, the physical appearance of the watercourse has changed due to the residential .develo p- ment of properties on the south side of Smith Street and the cultivation i of fields in the upstream reaches of• this watercourse. A 24" RCP cut- Vert exists where this watercourse crosses Smith Street. 2-2 Alternate detention basin Location is o sh wn because it is uncertain Iat this time as to the exact configuration of the proposed mall. The detention basin in either location will meet the design objectives. The fourth drainage system discharges to an existing detention basin in the Town of Manchester at the intersection of Pleasant Valle o y Road and Croft Drive. This basin was designed to provide for these flows without increasing the downstream peak flows over the present flows. III This detention basin discharges directly p to Wha Les Brook. fif th ft_ t h drainage system discharges directly to Whaples Brook south of Pleasant Valley Road and east of Wheeler Road. This system adds some impervious area to the flow to Whaples Brook downstream of the Town of Manchester detention basin. However, the same area that would naturally flow to the discharge point is diverted to the detention basin. This diversion, in conjunction with the design of the detention basin and the culvert carrying Whaples Brook just downstream of the discharge 9 point, eliminates any downstream flooding caused by development of the zone change parcel. Summary The location of the zone change parcel within the affected watersheds, the existing and proposed detention basins and the design of the site drainage systems provide for stormwater flows so that there will not be any adverse drainage impacts upstream or downstream of the parcel and on the parcel itself. 2-3 SECTION 3 WATER SUPPLY FIRE PROTECTION SECTION 3 WATER SUPPLY & FIRE PROTECTION Service Options Because the proposed project is on the Town line between Manchester and South Windsor, there are two water utilities which must be considered in a service discussion. These are the Manchester Water Department and the Metropolitan District Commission. The Manchester Water Department's franchise is limited to the Town of Manchester in this area, and the MDC is the utility which would be expected to provide service in this portion of ' South Windsor should it so desire. Based on conversation with the two utilities, there appear to be two ser- vice options. These are: 1 . Service by the MDC in South Windsor and by the Manchester Water Department in Manchester and, 2. Service by the Manchester Water Department to the entire project, i.e. in both Manchester and South Windsor. The Town of Manchester has indicated its desire to fully serve the project (see Exhibit 3-1) and has further indicated that it has no desire to relinquish service responsibility in its franchise area. The MDC has been requested to provide a statement relative to its ability and desire to serve, but has not responded as yet. The District has indicated that there are policy de- cisions to be decided by the District Commissioners. 3-1 If the MDC were to decide to relinquish service in this portion of South Windsor to the Manchester Water Department, a written agreement, approved by the Division of Public Utilities Control, would have to be developed be- jtween the MDC and the Town of Manchester. Projected Water Demands Table 3-1 summarizes the estimated water requirements of the proposed development for commercial and fire flow demands. The requirements are separated in accordance with the utilities which are prescribed to serve in South Windsor and Manchester. Criteria utilized in the development of the projected demands are listed on the bottom of the Table. The average annual rate per square foot per day is based on demand rates provided by the developer for shopping centers of similar size and nature. Observation of the data indicates that the commercial rates, even on a maximum day flow rate basis, will be small relative to what a municipal system would ordinarily be able to provide. Fire flow rates, while seemingly large, are not extraordinary. Proposed Systems Shown on Figure 3-1 are the pertinent local water facilities of the two utilities in question. Extentions from these systems would provide service to the shopping center. A. Manchester Water Department The Manchester Water Department currently has a - p e y 16 Inch water main in Pleasant Valley Road from which service to the development area 3-2 M " mom mom TABLE 3-1 PROJECTED WATER DEMANDS Average Average Maximum Maximum Commercial Daily Day Day Day Development Demand Flow Rate Demand Flow Rate Fire Flow sq.ft. GPD GPM GPD GPM GPM Town of Manchester 475,000 Manchester Water W Department 38,000 40 57,000 59 3,500 CA) Town of South Windsor 724,000 Metropolitan District Commission 581$000 60 87,000 91 3,500 TOTALS 1 ,199,000 96,000 100 144.1000 150 3.1500 Notes: 1 . GPD means gallons per day 2. GPM means gallons per minute 3. Commercial demand is based on an average annual rate of 0.08 gallons per square foot per day 4. Maximum day demand equals average daily demand times a peaking factor of 1 .5 5. Average day and maximum day flow rates are based on demand over a 16 hour period Y. ®�®®®�® Town o �anc�ies e'/I STEPHEN S PENNY,DEPUTY MAYOR �t�®� ��®® � STEPHEN T.CASSANO,DEPUTY MAYOR 17 JAMES R. McCAVANAGH,SECRETARY ` DIRECTORS Manchester, Conn. 06040 GLORIA D.DELLAFERA WILLIAM J.DIANA,Esq. PETER DiROSA,Jr. ARNOLD M.KLEINSCHMIDT ROBERT B.WEISS,GENERAL MANAGER PETER C.SYLVESTER BARBARA WEINBERG March 10, 1981 Leonard P. Jahnke, Jr. Fuss & O'Neill Consulting Engineers 210. Main Street Manchester, Connecticut G6040 Dear Mr. Jahnke.z Buckland Commons South-'Windsor - Manchester, CT i have your letter of March 6, 1981, subject as above; and I concur with- your understanding of the Town of Manchester`s position..relative. to the provision. of water service to the Buckland Commons Shopping Center project, Very truly yours, Jay J. Giles Dire�ton)of`.Public Works JJG;hf 3-4 Exhibit 3-1 FUSS&O'NEILL consulting engineers March 6, 1981 Mr. Jay Giles Director of Public Works Town of Manchester 41 Center St. Manchester, CT 06040 RE: Buckland Commons South Windsor - Manchester, CT Dear Mr. Giles: Pursuant to our recent conversation relative to the subject project, we would like to let this letter serve as a confirmation of our under- standing of the Town of Manchester's position relative to provision of water service. We feel the Town's position is represented as follows: 1. The Town of Manchester has the ability to provide commercial and fire flows to the subject project in both the town of Manchester and the town of South Windsor. 2. The Town of Manchester desires to serve the subject project with water service both in the town of Manchester and in the town of 1 South Windsor. 3. Service by the Town of Manchester in the town of South Windsor would be contingent upon the Metropolitan District Commission relinquishing its rights to serve in that area. To clarify the needs relative to water service, we are enclosing a table which illustrates average-day, maximum-day and fire flow demands in both the town of Manchester and South Windsor. We understand that the Town of Manchester has the ability to provide such flows as stated in Item No. 1 above. i 210 MAIN STREET / MANCHESTER. CONN. 06040 / TELEPHONE -LE HONE (203)646 2469 SOLID WASTE MA%.GE%':%:•WASTE WATER SYSTEMS•EROSION CONTROL•WATER SYSTEMS•HYDROLOGY And DRAINAGE SYSTEMS•SITE PLANNING HIGHWAYS And BRIDGES•S 9 vVEYING•LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE•TRANSPORTATION And TRAFFIC•PUBLIC WORKS MANAGEMENT•HYDROGEOLOGY 3-5 Exhibit 3-1 Mr. Jay Giles foo March 9, 1981 FUSS&O'NBLL Page 2 We would appreciate receiving a confirmation or clarification as necessary of our understanding of the town's position at your earliest possible convenience. 1 Very truly yours, Leonard P. Jahnke, Jr. ' L PJ/el Enclosure 1 3-6 Exhibit 3-1 hI �FM c w I P�F4 c kT S 0 U T H t N D S 0 R - /e /� NoRT 0 O m y4,6 STREET CD � r s i r CLFr - 1 i / /• \ • a ` 0M. 4 `O O / y om M A N C H E S T E R Bt}RNtiAN! STREET .♦ rn POwr;t- LINE, _---- JCPenney Co � Burr Corners S,a PPM N t ic¢fl E A S T H A R T F 0 R ® W i ER FACILITIES WATER ml 0 'C'a� �� SCALE - 1"=1000* w VANCHES T ER, CCNVECTICUT J - _ - FIGURE -I would be obtained. The 16-inch main receives supply from the Manchester system for daily use and supply from the Town's storage tanks on Batson Road for peak usage and fire protection. This system is capable of pro- viding all commercial flows at substantial pressures (60-70 psi) and all peak and fire flows up to more than 4,000 gallons per minute at residual pressures in excess of 20 psi. These flows would be available whether the Manchester Water Department were to provide water service to Manchester only or Manchester and South Windsor together. Conversation with the appropriate Manchester fire marshall indicates that hydrants must be located at standard commercial-industrial spacing of 200-250 feet with final decisions relative to their location reviewed by the Town. All fire facilities are to be designed in accordance with the National Fire Protection Association and other applicable codes subject to approval by the Town. B. Metropolitan District Commission Service by the MDC would be provided by extension of the existing 12- inch main in Pleasant Valley Road and would include construction of ' 12-inch main on Pleasant Valley Road in the vicinity of Long Hill Road and Tudor Hill Road. The main would extend easterly to the develop- ment area and would circumscribe that portion of the building in South Windsor. . It may be necessary, depending on comment from the MDC to continue this main easterly to Buckland Road and then northerly on Buckland Road to the existing 12-inch main in the vicinity of Deming Street. 3-8 �t (� Z � O Q t- W U � W W (I) � � � � � w � � � � � � � � � � � � SECTION 4 SEWERAGE General The proposed sewerage for the Buckland Commons is based on an agreement as amended between the Towns of Manchester and South Windsor and the ' Eighth Utilities District dated October 12, 1978 (Exhibit 4-2). Said agree- ment provides for sewering to South Windsor, certain areas in Manchester, including the "Buckland Commons". Exhibit "A" of that agreement delineates the areas in both Towns covered by the agreement. ' Sewage Treatment The ability of the South Windsor treatment plant to adequately treat the flow from Manchester was integral to the original agreement and is further sup- ' ported by a Letter From DEP (Exhibit 4-1) dated September 10, 1979. Proposed Sewerage System ' The conceptual routing of sewers to serve the Commons is shown on. Sheet No. 41, "GeneraL Plan of Development". Sewage from areas in Manchester tributary to the Commons would flow through an easement and then in Wheeler Road and Smith Street to the intersection on Clark Street, thence northerly in Clark Street to the Clark Street Pump Station. The ' estimated ultimate peak flow from all tributary areas including South Windsor is 1 .7 cfs. The design capacity of the Clark Street station with one pump on standby is estimated to be 5.9 cfs. Present flows are estimated by ' 4-1 South Windsor staff to average less than 300,000 gpd (0.47 cfs). Initial Flows from the proposed Mall are estimated at 96,000 gpd average. Alternatives At the request of the South Windsor DPW, an alternative routing and plan ' was studied. The alternate routing consisted of a gravity sewer running due west from the Commons, along Whaples Brook to Clark Street from which point the entire flow would be pumped via a new pump station through the existing 16-inch force main to the gravity sewer at the intersection of Chapel and. Clark. This alternative proved to be more costly on both a capital and annual operating cost basis by $364,000 and $7,000 respectively. The ' South Windsor Engineering and Public Works Departments agreed with the proposed gravity routing to the Clark Street Pump Station. Design Criteria Town of Manchester, Public Improvement Specifications, Department of Public Works, Engineering Division; Revised January 1981 and design criteria to be approved by the Town of South Windsor Department of Public Works. South Windsor Sewer Commission Approval ' On Tuesday, March 3, 1981 , the proposed concept was presented to the Sewer Commission by the South Windsor Director of Public Works. The South Windsor Sewer Commission endorsed this conceptual plan after some ' discussion. Summary Conceptual plan for sewer service is a reflection of plans previously made by both ' communities. No adverse impacts are anticipated to the Towns' sewerage system. 4-2 ' STATE OF CONN CTI E CUT � N� DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION �-� STATE OFFICE BUILDING HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06115 ' September 10, 1979 4 Mr. John C. Pitts, Chairman Town of South Windsor Water Pollution Control Commission Sullivan Avenue - Town Hall South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 RE: South Windsor/Manchester Intermunicipal Sewerage Agreemant Dear Mr. Pitts: In accordance with your request, the intermunicipal sewerage agreement be- tween the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester has been reviewed by this unit. The agreement, as executed, is in conformance with the general practice of this ' department regarding keeping sewage in its natural drainage areas. The agreement is in accordance with the sewerage facilities planning reports for both communities. The South Windsor report, prepared by Minges Associates in 1963, addressed the fact that sewerage service areas are not necessarily limited by town lines. The report was the basis for the design of the existing water pollution control facility which included sewage flows from approximately 650 acres in Manchester and 650 acres in East Windsor. The design of the facility was also i based on a 1983 e r 9 3 s we ed population of 26,000 persons, which is approximately double the number of persons who are presently being served. ' Department records, as well as the recently completed sludge management re- port, substantiate the fact that the South Windsor facility is presently operating- at less than 50% of the 1983 design capacity. Therefore, the Town of South Windsor could readily accept the proposed average daily flow of 430,000 gallons from the Town of Manchester. ' The agreement is also important to the water quality of the Hockanum River. The net effect of the agreement results in the diversion of an average daily dis- charge of 245,000 gallons per day from the Hockanum River to the Connecticut River, ' Since the Hockanum River is Water Quality Limited, the associated reduced pollutant loading will benefit the ultimate water quality of the river. Section 25-26 of the Connecticut General Statutes as amended requires that all plans and specifications for extensions of sanitary sewer systems be approved by the Commissioner of Environmental Protection, I 4-3 Exhibit 4-1 2 - ' Mr. John C. Pitts, Chairman September 10, 1979 (Continued) ' Should the agreement be abrogated by either party, the installation of sewage pumping stations would be required to serve the areas in question. This ' approach is not only contrary to the approved facilities plans, it is neither a cost effective or environmentally desirable alternative. Any plans and specifications which depict routings other than those pre- dicated by the approved facility plans and confirmed by the executed agreement would not likely be approved by the Commissioner. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at 566-2373. ' Very truly yours, Robert J. Norwood Principal Sanitary Engineer Water Compliance Unit RJN:WCD: 'Jrs ' cc: Mayor Caffyn Mayor Penney R. Weiss A. Young J. Giles ' Exhibit 4-1 4-4 A G R E E M E N T This agreement made this/ t�V day of 4��4L-t,, 1978 between the Town of South Windsor, acting by its Sewer Commission and the Town of Manchester, acting by its Town Manager, concerning sanitary sewers in the Chapel Road, Clark Street area, hereby revoking a prior agreement between the parties relative to said area dated March 28, 1972. WITNESSETH : ' In exchange for mutual promises , covenants and consideration hereinafter contained the parties hereto agree as follows : 1. The Town of South Windsor shall own , maintain and service a sanitary sewer in the Town of Manchester located as follows : Commencing in Chapel Road at the South Windsor Town Line and proceeding easterly in Chapel Road to the intersection P g P of Chapel Road and Clark Street, thence proceeding northerly LAw OcsIC ES RICHARD M.RITTENBAND from said intersection along and In Clark Street to the 734 ELLINGTON ROAD - WINDSOR.CONN.0607A Manchester Town Line. Said sewer is further described on 12031644-2456 a map entitled "Exhibit A" attached hereto and made a JUI+IS NO 50412 part hereof, as "Chapel-Clark Sewer. " 2. The Town of South Windsor will accept into its sewerage system all sewage that will originate from the area of the Town of I Exhibit 4-2 4-5 ' Manchester shown as "S.W. " on a map attached hereto as "Exhibit A. " The Town of Manchester will accept into its sewerage system all sewage that will originate from the area of the Town of South ' Windsor shown as "M" on the aforementioned map entitled "Exhibit A. " The provisions of this paragraph are subject to conditions ' and limitations hereinafter specified. Both Towns agree to construct, maintain, and operate their sewerage systems to be ' able to adequately accept the other Town's sewage as provided and ' limited herein. Included in the area shown as "S.W. " is the western half of the proposed industrial park in Manchester shown as "Western -Half-Industrial Park" on said map; and the Town of Manchester shall -be permitted tb make gravity flow trunk or = lateral sewer connections from 'paid western half of the industrial ' park provided that the Town of Manchester, prior to discharging sewerage therefrom, replaces, at its expense, a portion oJF sani- 'LAW OFFICES tary sewer on Chapel Road, as shown on' "Exhibit B. " hCMARD M.RITTENDAND 41 4 ELL=NGTON ROAD • iut ,NDso".CONN.06074 _ 1203)644.2456 and make connection there- 'URIS NO.50412 of to the sewerage system from the areas in that Town from which the Sewage originates as shown on "Exhibit A. " All sewers mentioned in this agreement, except the "Chapel-Clark 1 Exhibit 4-2 4-6 7� =wl -3- Sewer," shall become the property of the Town in which it is located, and shall be maintained, serviced, and operated by said Town. Each Town shall be permitted to assess benefits against abutting properties within its own Town according to its particu- lar assessment formulas and rates, tut,may;-,nat-,not -benef t-s ag_ a122i�t,,.abut--tinq7p-f Qiit's- a:a s own _ 'Sc1'.igh: sa ' wn��',s .y", a._ . i-r�slt-,� �-_ sewe���: � e�=•o �' I4. All sewer installations shall be subject to the specifi- cations regulating such installation in effect at the time of installation, of the Town in which said sewers are installed; and the location of said sewers shall be subject to the approval of the Town in which they are installed, which approval will not be Iunreasonably withheld. 5. The Town receiving sewage- shall be permitted to charge Iconnecting properties from which said sewage originates all pre- LAW OFFICES Op. vailing connection (outlet) charges of said Town in effect at the Ic.. RD M.RITTENBAND 1734 EIIING'FON ROAD time of such connection; and said Town receiving sewage shall be lUl^rIN DSOR.CONN 06074 Apermitted to charge use charges , which .shall include industrial Q031 644.2456 JURIS NO 50412 cost recovery charges , against any such properties in accordance with its prevailing use and industrial .cost recovery charge Ischedules and as they may be changed from time to time. Said charges by said Town shall be the same as that charged against l properties in its Town. All such charges shall be levied by Exhibit 4-2 4-7 'iF l 9. The quantity of sewage that may be discharged into and ' accepted by the Manchester sewage system from areas delineated on "Exhibit A" as "M" will be limited to an average of 183,000 gallons per day with a maximum peak flow of 732,000 gallons per day' 10. The sewage discharged into each system. shall meet the quality standards as set forth by the rules and regulations regarding such discharges in effect at the time of discharge, of the Town accepting said sewage, provided said rules and regula- tions shall be the same for sewage originating in both Towns. ' 11. This agreement shall remain in effect indefinitely. However, it may be terminated by either party in the event of a 1 material breach of this agreement by the other party, upon two (2) years ' written notice• to the party committing the breach. 12. Anything to the contrary notwithstanding, the Town of Manchester will pay to the Town of South Windsor,' in a lump sum, Aw OFFICES CI.-_ a M.R1n ENBAND the connection (outlet) charge specified in paragraph 5 hereof on 1734 ELL04GTON ROAD T NOSOR,CONK.06074 all of the acreage in the- western half of the Manchester Industria 1203)644-2456 R,s No 50412 Park, a < U , at the time of the initial connection of-.any sewer line in or from Manchester to ' the Chapel-Clark sewer. �>• r� he ' 4-9 Exhibit 4-2 -ZW - - --— -6- UDated at Manchester, Connecticut this /Z/I day of �C� , 1978. WITNESSED BY: TOWN OF MANCHESTER Y Ro ert D. Weiss General Manager Duly Authorized Dated at South Windsor Connecticut this 3��, day of OCAS , 1978. WITNESSED BY: TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR By ,!7 Richard Reeves , Chairman South Windsor Sewer Commission Duly Authorized LAW OFFICES ' MARO M.R=ENBANO 34 ELLINGTON ROAD 1 WINDSOR.CONN 06074 1203)644.2456 JURIS NO 50412 - e Exhibit 4-2 4-10 ,t _ !_ - i _�- ,•` ! =f fvJf€ ) '• /— .�``'. \ l\ „moo \,. }• , :J V�F i , ' `i it�\..._ .._�t ,'\'\\ • --_ .i'`_ /. j r , �^ � � � r .. � 'j' , ' ` -'_ j_ �a-� ,t �' �`.`\ . 250 Tc ro HIM Qs j' `/ ' ` •�\ � 'i,-.- �_-- �' �I �.-_-JAL, � ',1/ 1 \ �� �_-✓ `''� y � �-C \a.,da `.�`_s�=-e` • _ •. � Sf � mot/ _ t—---T�---�•: i t f 7 ! \ 'YO \ • � � //�� _ J •S �. � �,�t !!!� _!� i.{ 1 7 1 •Z 1 I x' \ � _ C � /r,.r/ , s��U ,i / ` � � j \ . ,_�'`; •rZ: _ 'ii i / '� - i O __i 's /� l: C I EL - C L ARK •/� "' _��� - / '� `. ( �, '`� J;. • \ _ � c. �—s► °�-ij�.t a n a //• - , .�/ ^/-""�.. ` •\e, - Yr-may==a`.'..�-`f s �t' / � � � D �x-�- ',f\ �� '1 t�� ! ® :s .'ti // � �:=y. �s�•"ram..�-', •�' \ -� ���. -'` tJ ` J _s'""""��� � \•�� 0� A t " ' •'r ". _ Fir jA ` IN. J� _- _ _ �; • 't O �_. `'„ _ems✓-=� s.L � � / .-,� � � �. ____ � � ,•� � •` is 'oo"oll P ts at //C) _ Ile) - ) LEGEND - a r y` _L� S.Vt.- AREA TO FLOW TO SOUTH WINDSOR lljj�,\ - l1 AVE. DAILY = 430,ODO GALLONS ATE ��`�� 'ram , ¢:=_-' c �Y: MAX. DAILY = 1,616,000 GALLONS �: fir" '�"_ � �t - \\ �_�,^.- � r - F T MANCHE TER ,' r -� ;�'.5�,, , . ' < - �" / � / � \+ ' _ �> _ � —. __ • _ M AREA TO FLOW 0 S � 1 � j - i � j ;• i_� � t . . •• AVE_ DAILY 163,000 GALLONS MAX. DAILY = 732,000 GALLONS t_ i � �,\� � r � �; ;�• . , � ,- �_ _ i j ,-�_ "'�. M - - _ _ AVE.DAILY IS TO 6 SASED ON THE �' � '_ , 1 ` \ &* f - :: �,� � �✓ ;` - PAN TOTAL YEARLY FLOW DIVIDED BY w J — CEfV 7Ri 365 DAYS t _ ( - S0. W i NCSR _ MANC H ESTtR 3 C fit' � ,� 1~ 1.*- t. i ; I � • � - �-=-�/ ! , ?jl i�il ifl �. ' ri. ` Q _ E% E NSANI_An SEYF' R GR ! FOR I,`�-.-,- `-f ;' ilf� �• �.� \ �,,�' �+•.� _ •- i • ���' "� '�, -- ----- - i t^ — a tt -- — --- 1sr ' i..�r iri rsl aria oommiglow, mum& AwI NOTES SEWER TO BE REPLACED -580 FT. EXIST. 27" SEWER PROPOSED TO BE REPLACED WITH 36 SEWER. r "CLARK ST. PUMP STATION 1 S4117-H ST � �0 4CZFY . J N / R�QID P�� M. H. STA. 6t0 c�Q� EXIST. CAP, 7,3 CFS DESIGN CAP. 8.4 CFS PO4 z � 00 M. H. STA. 9+61 o M.H. STA. 11 + 80 EXIST CAP. 6.6 CFS x . DESIGN CAP 8.4 CFS 07 gTREET .. MANCHESTER rr INDUSTRIAL PARK N BURNHA� tn� H WINpS�R ~' 500 .� p,R�CFORD NP SOUTH WINDSOR-MANCHESTER -A C� SANITARY SEWER AGREEMENT EXHIBIT " B" f -2- �..rOtic TilStriC ' and ex-o t; L, p nor � :e provzs c:.s of �Ur Grii G`-7Y'i n er 12 . oar - ;G�_2' i.0 hercin S;:c,l.'i be cc-—Ls` -Led as reliev=L= i' +1 e �`G17n Ci 1.alic a,:`.er rom any o-c its OaliC�at G:1S speC�,f1ed In b. ` D� --r; r; , - , r �� _ct c - - per.:i."tt the installation of sewers by y; -a wn Of Sou-h Windsor, 1-s duly au—I'Lorized agents, assigns or t Gesic n2eS wit - r - s. _ ■-'n t r ° , - he area now o� �.er�i:.a�ter -desi gnated gna�ec as said I,✓� .tiiCt c'crtC. :{r.._ _ per= it uti 2, =,{ _i 4�icr. o� and connection to SeW2rS I ' f t�:c:, ex st n w` .in Said �.i strict by the Town of South Windsor, agents, a:;Sig"f_S Or 82S_c:22j i 0 carry sewerc',gc t0 t11e MaI1Ci:2St %cLit the area i South W:..:dsor des4 L-L _.;nated 1n Said man 2 . t ,e Town Of IMIanchester is ble tc una accep�. 1.,L0 i�S 1� t'Jl;•:i,.:.."C.�!l, LrbG •ciQ.c.. -ant Jt:•`ar ♦ T t L aye ori;-nating zro«< the Tow.-, o�. Sou; 6.i n: sc as ces' mated =.. Said agreement as a ended in accordance j�W= =. :t:. O,Di'ca'�_or s Under t_e:" y ?Ici ayr•' "en- as amended because of ,+CG:.•r C act-on, -n a Cie orwctc CG`c.c��..y of sa'd -0 ' an�-'' Fede ral 2rca1 Or Stave .'7reac.i of said agreement as a.-Mended by eat hE the Gw i O:f iviancheSter Or the Town f. xlanch r will be a � DiS�r1Ct� � O� r- eSte 1, . . reC;::?=23, 1'!1 aCidi�.i0:1 -,CO any other damages to the lOW. of South- t ' :: O_ for w'flich it may be ! able, to desJ an acquire, construct, bpe_ate and .:iain ta-Ln - u.-i�i� - - p Pumping s;.airion and forced rain and any othe i j'facilities and/or. sewerli.n es necessary 'or Said Sewera5e that It !,cannot_ accept tG f10W into the South Windsor sewerage System to the Sou-`- lndsor ireau::en PiGi,- A,nd similaril if t" South t. y, t. a lcwr. o� Sough Windsor is unable to/ .. • Exhibit 4-2 4-14 3 1 1.�� y•„J bc;�•i�...,.�E: _�•= .JAG:.I. Vri ciyi•G...iics 11 G:.1 the ! _vY7.1 Of a.4.1C:eS', c = or :J _i Ct. as _n sa d a�ree.me.aL- as ame nC:ed in accordance %•7_th its said ac;reeMenL_ +i be cause Of Court _;ct-yO_, lnade uFt . capacl ty of the plant, Federal 1; or Szatz governmental order, or breach Of said a reea.:ent as amended _ �� by taae Town of South. h�i=G' G_, thc- mc:•�n o� South t1'lydsor will be i rcC-°.?ir:'f�, inaddi ti0i1 t0 ` y Other G. .:�a�2S for which IL. May be �:1 r ZOic to i he Town of :1ancl es-er Or zh.e District, to design, acquit e j; CG _str:ICt, or.eiati=, and G_':�ai4 c r. ,� S: itiO;a 4n d L -_r eG Itiain tf Gnv any O"Cher J"nCilii;.les and/or s2:iar lines necessary for Sald H) '! sewerage itcannot- accept 'Co flow _._to -*Lhe District and/or Ma n- f ;i I' !! Chest-er to the Mann cs-Cer `!'-eat:::ent- Plan-C. 1 it The a.'._s paragraph are in acdltlo^• 1 to any other remedies El:e -�&rties ;,;4,� ;auve uiiCi2r 4. the terms Oi the j` , ! agreement as aozended. ; La.v 07c.Ci..S f 3. The ivw:i Qi; i ancheste,:, she D-Ls tri C'- Or their duly I °� authoriZed agenL_s or desiCjn ees, shall install at th `r �' expense'�.a�e1 G��:1 � any gravity flow trunk or Lateral co.nnect:L'ng sewers v,,;.thin the �•stip.50412 Io;dn O South t� .ndsor necessary to Carry sewerage Ori,�in* ating zcroM 1 !' i Town " 11.1a �_ v L J-� '; the areas Of the lo4t'n OT, aSGal CheS per a.•Q Distrl.c+.. GP_Sl�;c:'Ced iil l.aael j: acree:nent as aMai:ded to the SGL'th I'11T14aG : Sc'i.zerage trea irte-nt plant• 1 'i and mate any connection there-o at their oc•7. expense, and in no i I '1 t Exhibit 4-2 4-15 j i ! t; �i event shall any Of Said COS:, of _.,. LaliatiOn Or connection be borne by the now,: of South WIndsor. i.owever, the Town of Manches t :1 the District, or their daly Gu--ho-rmzeci agents or designees may., .i Co,r the said Purpose of Carry;ng sewerage iron i:,12 sa-G areas Of • L - th :aindsor treatment plant Va7lC,`.eS�.er a:.c. :.�'le Di3tr_Ct LO t.:e ...0�:� .i Utilize Se...,a " '' isti i G w- - he Town of South W-4 ndso at ' - s o and may i� the time. said sewerage i ..o b... so carried, ia a y connect there , at their ownexp-anse. kdditio-naily, -nothing herein sh all be con- ij 'i S-t-rued as rel- —! ly .e_ Town Of m.anche`�ter Of its Obl.igat:iOT`, to is _ _ — - , 1 pay for a i..Stal. at i0% Of sewer si;.cS and tll2 making 0= COnrieCt- !i ^ �t s from : e western half Oi t�.e i7:dl�Strial park and re�.iaC;nCi, i at i S own expense, a porti.On Of sa%itary Sewer on Chapel Road, - _ eG i:: parc^:Crc.�.:i 2 GL tl;e ag ee-Merit Of OCt0.�2r 2, a'.. as spec ;1 1976. :s or Town Of vouti. Fiyndsor,/i t;S duly authorized agents or 1 (' L4Y. d2s.�ar.ecs, ^all install at their own expense any gravity flow ;,...�_. - t� S..G t� -.C}iAH:i 1.:.'n'.'r z'N LAN6 I - `:: , :�,;�__: .*:,:.�,�.:.� i trunk or lateral COi1::2Ct1rig Sewers w:Lti'liri the Town Oi tiic;T'iC::eS ter --- H or the District necessary to carry sewerage originating from the area Of SOu.i. �ri3sor —the agree::ent as amended to j� .. F 'i=Yi2 -XailC.1e5t2r SeWc''raGc'' treatment plant and Alc.•IC@ any COY"iT'i2Cii0;l thereto at their own eY_pe rise, and in no event shall any of said j� 1, Cost Gf i:1Stc:liation Or connection be borne- by the TQ�nIT'. O�, MariChc ci �f Exhibit 4-2 4-16 ;I t� i is • Gr -he D.3trict. However, the Town of South Windsor, its duly e� i 1 i f j authorized agents or designees may, -,.or the sald purpose of carry- ing sewerage `rom1 the said area of South ► ,!L ndSor to the Manchester` tj trC-atmen t plant, utilize sewer Lines exisiing within the District + �{ or Town O'i i.0 C�2eStcr at the time said sewerage is to be so carrieC and :ray connect whereto cis +-heh own ex ense. . t !i All ot.:er t2=: s a,.Q COi:Q•�ulo:7J O1 the agreer:en t dated ! ,f October 17, 1�7a sL,aII re=� a-Ln, in full force and effect. it , 1; Dated aLt _M.ancheste.:, Con.neCLicuL this day of ,1979: t 't . f 1 _ riTi tr:esse y• TOTn1 O? 112" CHESTER i ! By: Hobert D. Weiss General Manager Duly Authorized Dated at , Co:�r,ecticut t,is day of ,1979 :t t 1; Witnessed By. TO"v.7N OF SOUTH WI\DSOR BY: ' John Pitts , Chairman LAVl vim.-.�z� �� Sewer Coitu-nission of South Wind: Duly Aut iorized Dated at Manchester, Connecticut th.iLs day of ,1979 t ii t205i o�� _..A.>NO.sc4,2 ,iWi'.nessed By . THE EIGHTH UTILITIES DISTRICT i t ;3 ! By: i Its President, j Duly Authorized � . Director i I f s Exhibit 4-2 ' '. 4-17 i a: Director Director ! Director is Director Director DUyY c�U;i:.0:Z12i%.D f' �j 4-18 Exhibit 4-2 J Q O i LO U W W U) U) Q SECTION 5 WASTE DISPOSAL Waste generation for the project wilt average at about 1 000 cubic yards J g � per month of mixed refuse with the peak of 1 ,200 cubic yards occurring during the Christmas shopping season. The refuse will be stored and com- pacted in 40 cubic yard containers and has a resultant weight of about 800 lbs/cubic yard. The paper products portion of the mixed refuse would vary between 80% and 85% and a large portion of this would be recovered for reuse. In particular, the cardboard fraction of the waste stream would be recycled. As costs for waste disposal increase, the amount of material recycling will also increase. The hauling and disposal of wastes would be accomplished by utilizing pri- vate contractors. It is anticipated that disposal would take place at regional sanitary landfills such as the NORCAP facility in East Windsor or the newly planned CRRA-MDC resource recovery facility in the South Meadows area of Hartford. Due to .the mixing of refuse and bulky wastes, no significant quantity of bulky wastes will be generated. As a result, the Towns bulky waste facility on Strong Road will not be impacted. The Town has no permitted disposal site for mixed refuse, therefore, all of the generated waste materials will be disposed of outside of South Windsor as discussed above. 5-1 " SECTION 6 r GAS, ELECTRIC AND TELEPHONE i� k t SECTION 6 GAS, ELECTRIC AND TELEPHONE Because of the preliminary nature of the project, it is not possible at this time to furnish schematic layouts of gas, electric and telephone systems. Discussions have been held with all utilities to ascertain their ability to provide service. The type of heating and cooling systems to be utilized would be determined at the time of project design. All site utilities would be placed underground. The following is a brief synopsis of discussions held with various utility__ officials: Electric If the facility were to utilize electricity as its prime energy source for all required needs, 32 to 35 million KWH would be required annually. Discus- sions were held with the Energy Management Services Unit of=:.Northeast Utilities to determine whether this service would be provided by .or ne6tLeut_ Light and Power or the Hartford Electric Light Company. Both of these companies have service capabilities in the area of the project and are members of the Northeast Utilities consortium. No specific determinations could be made at this particular time because of the preliminary nature of the project. The ability to serve, however, is not in question. 6-1 Gas It is possible that gas service could be utilized as the energy source for heating and cooling. The utilization rate for this purpose would be about 5002000 therms annually. Discussions relative to this service were held with Mr. N. H. Thompson, Natural Energy Consultant, Marketing Services of the Connecticut Natural Gas Corporation. Here again, because of the preliminary nature of the project, long-term commitments cannot be make. It appears, however, that adequate supplies will be available should this energy source be utilized. The existing gas distribution system is located in the immediate vicinity of the project. A letter summarizing discussions relative to application for services is attached as Exhibit 6-1 . Telephone Telephone service would be provided by the Southern New England Telephone iCompany through its South Windsor Central office. A letter confirming discussions with Mr. P. W. Liner, Manager, NDS, is attached as Exhibit 6-2. 6-2 c9pCONNECTICUT NATURAL GAS CORPORATION • P.O. BOX 1500 • HARTFORD, CONK. 06144 • (203) 727-3000 February 12, 1981 Mr. Glenn Mirtl Fuss and O'Neil Consulting Engineers 210 Main Street Manchester, Connecticut 06040 Dear Mr. Mirtl: Re: Buckland Commons Tolland Turnpike, Manchester I am confirming acceptance of your application to use natural gas at the above project. This commitment to supply gas will expire on March 1, 1982, if con- struction of the project has not been started. We are plannin to serve you from our high pressure distribution system at a nominal pressure of 6" W.C. measured at our metering station. Please inform us if you will have appliances that require in excess of 5.5" W.C. This will also confirm that CNG has contracted for and expects to obtain suf- ficient supplies of natural gas from its pipeline suppliers and substitutes for natural gas from other sources to meet your requirements. Paragraph 12 of the Rules and Regulations provides that CNG is not responsible for interruptions in service to you by reason of factors beyond CNG's control, including governmental regulation. Under present "end use control" policies of the Federal Power Commission, deliveries of natural gas to CNG pursuant to contracts with our pipeline suppliers are subject to curtailment depending upon the end use. Although this system is presently in effect, and CNG has experienced curtailment in deliveries from pipeline suppliers as a result, CNG has been able to serve, and expects to continue to serve, all of the needs of its firm customers. Obviously CNG cannot guarantee that actions by govern- mental agencies, which could significantly increase curtailment of CNG's supplies of natural gas, will not at some point have an adverse effect upon the ability of CNG to serve its firm customers. We can assure you that we are taking every action possible to prevent such an occurrence. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, 2. Natural Energy Consultant Marketing Services NHT/mmh 6-3 Exhibit 6-1 Southern New England ■ Telephone 40 Brainard Road Hartford, CT 06114 1 February 18, 1981 Fuss & O'Neill Consulting Engr. 210 Main Street Manchester, CT 06040 Dear Mr. Mirtl : The Southern New England Telephone Company will provide telephone service to the Buckland Commons Shopping Center located off . Buckland Road, between Smith Street and Pleasant Valley Road, from our South Windsor Central Office. This central office is in the Manchester Exchange and is referred to as the "Wapping" office. We would like to discuss the underground service to and within the mall when you reach that planning stage. Jim Pellegrini of our office will be avail.able to ansL-er any questions you may have regarding this matter. He can be reached at 527-6373, X-1302. Very truly yours, P. W. Liner Manager, N.D.S. PWL/eb 6-4 Exhibit 6-2 f SECTION 7 BUFFER - OPEN SPACE MAINTENANCE I) 1! �I (l 4. I In the following table, costs and benefits are presented in future dollars by ' utilizing the mean inflation rate of 7% and 10% compounded annually. By 1985, Buckland Commons will produce a surplus of approximately $836,241 in future dollars at a 7% inflation rate. At a 10 % inflation rate, Buckland Commons will produce a surplus of approximately $960,231 in Future dollars. Summary of Benefits and Costs - South Windsor Future Dollars Commercial 1980 1985 1985 @) 7% @) 10% Inflation Inflation Benefits Land $11810 Real Property $765,092 $878,533 Personal Property 1923,984 221 ,598 Total Benefits $958,076 $1 3 100 2 131 Costs Service to Commercial ($121 ,835) ($139,900) Surplus to South Windsor $13,810 $836,241 $960,231 A further benefit to both the Town and the region is the substantial employ- ment base that can be anticipated. Excluding employment in the various construction trades, the proposed Buckland Commons development will gener- ate approximately 2,500 full-time and part-time jobs and .500 seasonal jobs by 1985. Typically, these jobs are filled by local residents. 8-2 SECTION 9 SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC STUDY BY WILBUR SMITH AND ASSOCIATES SECTION 9 SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC STUDY BY WILBUR SMITH AND ASSOCIATES The scope of work associated with these analyses includes a detailed field reconnaissance of existing roadways and traffic operations; collation of available data traffic volume and u e a roadway improvements; meetings with Town- and State personnel; development of an approach distribution for site generated traffic of a one- million square foot regional shopping center; estimations of generated traffic volumes; estimation of combined 1985/ 1986 traffic volumes; and an assessment of roadway adequacy for satisfying combined 1985/1986 volumes. In determining the adequacy of the area roadways for the design year, two basic alternative plans were studied: 1 . Completion of Interstate Route 86 and Buckland Road reconstruction without construction of Interstate Route 291 and the connector road- way; and, 2. Completion of Interstate Route 86 and Buckland Road Interstate Route 291 , and the connector roadway. For South Windsor roadways, adequate roadway capacity exists on the various approach roadways to safely and efficiently satisfy estimated com- bined volumes. The proposed Interstate Route 86 improvement and its interchange at Buckland Road are important to distributing generated traffic between the Buckland Commons Mall and the regional highway system. 9-1 The proposed Interstate Route 291 or its alternative together with a con- nector roadway linking Pleasant Valley Road should substantially relieve the Local east-west streets in South Windsor and keep traffic at its present level. As an alternative to the construction of a facility in the I-291 cor- ridor, provision of just a connector roadway between Pleasant Valley Road and Burnham Street in the vicinity of Chapel Road should also relieve east- west traffic. It is important to note that even if I-291 and its connector roadway are not in place before the center opens, there is adequate capacity on the existing South Windsor arterial roadway system to accommodate estimated 1985/1986 traffic volumes. Of course, limited roadway improvements will be required on the roadways abutting the site. ' 9-2 ANALYSIS SUMMARY OF PROJECTED 1985/1986 TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON EXISTING SOUTH WINDSOR ROADS (WITHOUT IMPROVEMENTS) Buckland Commons Traffic Estimated 1985/1986 As Percentage of Total Two-Way Traffic Estimated 1985/1986 Traffic Average Level Daily Peak Hour of Peak Hour Location Traffic 5-6 p.m. Service 5-6 p.m. Burnham Street West of Clark Street 21700 385 "B" 22% 1 Chapel Road West of Clark Street 4,600 695 "B" 6% Clark Street South of Pleasant Valley Road 4,450 540 "B" 24% Pleasant Valley Road West of Clark Street 5, 100 500 "B" 22% Pleasant Valley Road East of Clark Street 9,350 960 "C" 25% Buckland Road North of Smith Street 9,775 1 ,120 Vic it 18% Wilbur Smith and Associates, Inc. March 6, 1981 LEVEL OF SERVICE Level of Service is the national design standard for analyzing traffic flow ' and the capacity of any roadway. The general design standard for level of service is in the range of "C" to "D". The various levels of service are described below: ' Level of Service "B" - within the zone of stable flow, but speed somewhat ' restricted due to traffic conditions. There is reasonable freedom for drivers to select their speed and lane of operation, and probability of restricted flow is low. Average overall speed of 25 mph is provided. ' Level of Service "C" - within the zone of stable flow, but speed and maneu- verability closely controlled by relatively high volumes. Drivers are re- stricted in their freedom to select their own speeds, change lanes and/or pass. Satisfactory operating speed is obtained, with service volumes suit- able for design practices. Average overall speed of 20 mph is provided. ' Level of Service "D" - approaching unstable flow but still maintaining tolerable operating speeds - 15 mph. Drivers have little freedom to maneu- ver; comfort and convenience become more restricted. Conditions are toter- able for short periods of time and delays at intersections may become ex- tensive with some cars waiting two or more cycles. Level of Service "E" - usually defined as "Capacity" of the roadway. A ' typical speed is approximately 15 mph. The flow may be somewhat unstable with ' momentary stoppages necessary, and backup on approaches to intersections. ' 9-4 ' PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION For purposes of this particular analysis, no use of present transit facilities was assumed, although it should be noted that provision for separate carpool ' and bus transit service is being designed as an integral part of the I-86 improve- ment. Separate carpool and bus lanes are to be provided in the median of I-86 with access permitted at BuckLand Street. In addition, a five hundred space commuter lot is proposed in the northwest quadrant of the I-86/Buck- ' land Street Interchange. Therefore, while no particular reduction in vehicu- lar generation has been assumed in the analysis to account for public transit/ carpool usage, in all likelihood, some use will be made of these existing ' and expanded facilities by employees of the .retail complex and shoppers at the Malt. Public transit connecting the major travel corridors in the trade area to the retail complex should be encouraged. It is recommended that Buckland Commons Mall be designed to accommodate bus traffic with designated bus stops in the complex. 9-5 � SUMMARY REPORT 1 1 1 BUCHtAnD c ommons ' BUCKLAND COMMONS ' Table of Contents Page ' Project Facts and Trade Area Summary 1 Municipal Impact Study 2 ' Development Potential Summary 3 ' Traffic Study Summary 4 The Planning Process 7 ' Environmental Assessment Summary 8 Engineering Summary 9 BUCKLAND COMMONS PROJECT FACTS Manchester South Windsor Total Acres - Commercial 60 52 112 Size - Commercial Gross Leasable Area 375,000 sq. ft. 375,000 sq. ft. 750,000 sq. ft. (1 ) DEMOGRAPHICS TRADE AREA Year 1950 1960 1970 1979 1984 1989 Population (2) 103,000 154,000 207,000 220,000 231 ,000 243,000 Per Capita Income------------------- -----------------------------$ 7*000-------------------------------------- FamilyIncome----------------------------------------------------$22,000-------------------------------------- Year 1973 1975 1979 1984 1989 RETAIL TRADE Department Store Type Merchandise-Potential $167 Mil . $180 Mil . $225 Mil . $255 Mil . $289 Mil . Projected Potential to Project - Dept. Stores - - - $ 55 Mil . $ 63 Mil . Percent-Buckland Commons Share of Dept. Store Sales - - - 22% 22% (1 ) Exclusive of enclosed mall - 80,000 sq. ft. (2) Includes Manchester, South Windsor, East Hartford, East Windsor, Ellington, Vernon, Tolland, Glastonbury, Bolton, Coventry and Andover. ' SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL IMPACT STUDY y ' LARRY SMITH & COMPANY, INC. Buckland Commons will be a substantial financial asset to the Town of South Windsor. After careful examination of the likely sources of tax revenues and consumption of public services at Buckland Commons, a substantial surplus remains to augment the public treasury. The following table summarizes the gross annual benefitcost situation resulting from the commercial development at Buckland Commons. ' Summary of Benefits and Costs - South Windsor ' Commercial 1979 1981 1982 1985 Benefits Land $1 ,665 $1 ,665 $1 ,665 ' Real Property $321 ,750 Personal Property $ 87,531 Total Benefits $409,281 ' Costs Services to Commercial ($ 59,243) ' Surplus to South Windsor $1 ,665 $1 ,665 $1 ,665 $350,038 In 1985 the commercial center will generate $409,281 through tax revenues ' while an estimated $59,243 is encumbered by the town for services provided to the new center. This produces a surplus of $350,038 which may be -desig- nated to other uses by the town. In the following table costs and benefits are presented in future dollars by utilizing the mean inflation rate from 1974 to 1978. All figures are ' inflated by 7% compounded annually. By 1985, Buckland Commons will produce. a surplus of approximately $525,057 in future dollars. Summary of Benefits and Costs - South Windsor Future Dollars Commercial 1979 1981 1982 1985 Benefits Land . $1 ,665 $1 ,906 $2,039 ' Real Property $482,625 Personal Property $131 ,297 Total Benefits $613,922 Costs Services to Commercial ($ 88,865) Surplus to South Windsor $1 ,665 $1 ,906 $2,039 $525,057 ' A further benefit to both the town and the region is the substantial employment base that can be anticipated. Excluding employment in the ' various construction trades, the proposed Buckland Commons development will generate approximately 900 full-time jobs, 1100 part-time jobs and 500 seasonal jobs by 1985. Typically these jobs are filled by local residents. ' -2- SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT "POTENTIAL STUDY by LARRY SMITH & COMPANY, INC ' Larry Smith & Company, Inc., land economists and real estate consultants, were responsible for analyzing the development potential for Buckland Commons. The Buckland site is well suited for development by virtue of its strong regional location, proximity to major arterial highways, topography, the need for a major retail shopping complex east of the river and the substantial growth occurring in the area's population, income levels and employment base. ' Presently, because of the absence of a first-class shopping complex, trade area residents are forced to travel a fair distance to find comparable shopping . .. Enfield Mall is over 16 miles away and West ' Farms Mall over 17 miles. A shopping center offering department store type merchandise (DSTM) at the Buckland location would serve as the hub of the trade area east of the Connecticut River which is anticipated to attain a population of about 231 ,000 persons by 1984 and 243,000 persons by 1989. Taking into consideration the income level of the population of the trade area and expenditure patterns, it is anticipated that the DSTM potential available to the Buckland project in 1984 would be about $255 ' million, an increase of $30 million over current expenditures. After making allowances for the retail competition which affects the Buckland trade area, it is estimated that by 1984 Buckland Commons will generate ' about $55 million in sales for three department stores in the center. The size of the project which would be warranted on the basis of the ' trade area potential is estimated to be about 800,000 square feet by 1984. Buckland Commons- projected share of department store sales amount to ' approximately 22% of the total department store sales for the trade area east of the Connecticut River. ' -3- SUMMARY OF TRAFFIC STUDY by WILBUR SMITH AND ASSOCIATES The scope of work associated with these analyses include a detailed field reconnaissance of existing roadways and traffic operations; ' collation of available data, traffic volume and roadway improvements; meetings with Town and State personnel ; development of an approach distribution for site generated traffic; estimations of generated ' traffic volumes; estimation of combined 1985 traffic volumes; and an assessment of roadway adequacy for satisfying combined 1985 volumes. In determining the adequacy of the area roadways for the design year, ' two basic alternative plans were studied:- . 1 . Completion ofInterstate Route 86 and Buckland Road recon- struction without construction of Interstate Route 291 and the connector roadway; and, 2. Completion of Interstate Route 86 and Buckland Road, Inter- state Route 291 , and the connector roadway. Adequate roadway capacity exists on the various approach roadways to ' safely and efficiently satisfy estimated combined volumes. The proposed Interstate Route 86 improvement and its interchange at Buckland Road are important to distributing generated traffic between the Buckland Commons ' project and. the regional highway system. The proposed Interstate Route 291 or its alternative together with a connector roadway linking Pleasant' Valley Road should substantially relieve the local east-west streets in South Windsor and keep traffic at its present level . As an alternative to the construction of a facility in the 1-291 corridor, provision of just a connector roadway between ' Pleasant Valley Road and Burnham Street in the vicinity of Chapel Road should also relieve east-west traffic. ' It is important to note that even if I *291 and its connector roadway are not in 1p ace before the center opens, there is Adequate capacity on the existing South- Windsor arterial roadway system to 'accommodate estimated ' 1985 traffic volumes. Of course, limited roadway improvements will be requires—the roadways abutting the site. -4- ANALYSES SUMMARY OF PROJECTED 1985 TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON EXISTING SOUTH WINDSOR ROADS (WITHOUT IMPROVEMENTS) BUCKLAND COMMONS TRAFFIC Estimated 1985 AS PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL Two-Way Traffic ESTIMATED 1985 TRAFFIC Average Level Daily Peak Hour of Peak Hour LOCATION Traffic 5-6 p.m. Service (1 ) 5-6 p.m. Burnham Street West of Clark Street 2,800 395 "B" 16% Chapel Road West of Clark Street 4,600 690 "B" - "C" 5% Clark Street South of Pleasant Valley Road 4,600 550 "B" - "C" 18% ' Pleasant Valley Road West of Clark Street 5,200 515 "B" 17% Pleasant Valley Road East of Clark Street 9,600 965 "C" 19% Buckland Road North of Smith Street 9,400 1 ,075 "C" 14% (1 ) For definition of level of service refer to Page 6. LEVEL OF SERVICE Level of Service is the national design standard for analyzing traffic flow and the capacity of any roadway. The general design standard for level of service is in the range of "C" to "D" . The various levels of ' service are described below: Level of Service "B" - within the zone of stable flow, but speed somewhat restricted due to traffic conditions. There is reasonable freedom for ' drivers to select their speed and lane of operation, and probability of restricted flow is low. Average overall speed of 25 mph is provided. ' Level of Service "C within the zone of stable flow, but speed and maneuverability closely controlled by relatively high volumes. Drivers are restricted in their freedom to select their own speeds, change lanes ' and/or pass. Satisfactory operating speed is obtained, with service volumes suitable for design practices. Average overall speed of 20 mph is provided. ' Level of Service "D" - approaching unstable flow but still maintaining tolerable operating speeds - 15 mph. Drivers have little freedom to maneuver; comfort and convenience become more restricted. Conditions ' are tolerable for short periods of time and delays at intersections may become extensive with some cars waiting two or more cycles. ' Level of Service "E" - usually defined as "Capacity" of the roadway. A typical speed is approximately 15 mph. The flow may be somewhat unstable with momentary stoppages necessary, and- back up on approaches to intersections. -6- ' SUMMARY OF THE PLANNING PROCESS by EVANTASH ASSOCIATES Evantash Associates are involved in a comprehensive range of architectural and planning commissions throughout the nation. ' Evantash Associates' planning approach is to analyze the needs, oppor- tunities and spirit of each project and, through active client involvement and intensive knowledge of the site, generate the appropriate planning ' to reflect an architectural design which is compatible with the surrounding community. ' The elements of the proposed plan cover a broad spectrum of land and public functions which create a segment of the complete community. In planning the pattern of Buckland Commons, a wide range of diverse ' specialists provided input to the planning process ranging from early land use studies to construction planning. Soil characteristics were studied relative to soil types, water table levels, erosion characteristics, water sheds, depth to bed rock, and slopes. The planning process was to relate general land uses to the site's most prominent characteristics. The designation of areas west of ' Buckland Road for commercial use is clearly dictated by topography and access. The property adjacent to I-86 is relatively flat and open and composed of well drained soil and has a high degree of visibility and ' access capability. Once the broad planning parameters had been established, a number of important factors were critical in the detail planning process. The ' location of a political boundary bisecting the property made it desirable that each town share the shopping center. ' Our architectural plan envisioned a shopping center combining stores, restaurants, boutiques and theatres within an overall design theme - where light, landscaping and plazas within a climate controlled environ- ment would make it a true "community center" for shopping and recreation. -7- ' SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STUDY by ' DONALD A. YONIKA; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER ' Donald A. Yonika has carried out an extensive multidisciplinary environ- mental assessment of the site of the proposed Buckland Commons development. Detailed data were gathered on physiography, geology, soils, the aquatic . ' ecosystem, vegetation and wildlife. These data were then analyzed and interpreted to identify environmentally sensitive areas on the site and to guide the designers of the project in the wise and sound uses of the site. Since no wetlands exist on the shopping pp g center property,. the results of this study indicate that the major environmental concerns in the area ' are the surface water features. 'Thus, the development must minimize effects upon surface water quantity (runoff) and surface water quality. ' The stream on the site drains into Podunk River and, hence, to the Connecticut River. The Podunk supports a substantial "put and take" trout fishery, stocked by the Connecticut Department of-Environmental ' Protection. Studies were made to minimize impacts to the aquatic environments which center about the control of runoff and erosion and the maintenance of water quality. ' Runoff and erosion can be controlled by use of design and construction techniques which are sensitive to the potential problems. Amelioration of peak-runoff volumes from the property occurs at several levels. ' First, the minimization of hard paved surfaces and the interspersion of natural areas with hard surfaces will allow the runoff to infiltrate into the soil . Second, the use of retention basins can contain on-site runoff during storms until downstream flood peaks have passed. The use ' of retention basins will also aid in the control- of erosion. The soil and geology studies indicated that most of the site has only slight to moderate potential for erosion. ' Maintenance of water quality can be controlled by the use of retention basins, and' gross particle separators will settle out solids in runoff waters. Induced infiltration into the soil will eliminate many of the pollutants associated with storm water runoff. It should be noted that, because of the current agricultural usage of ' much of the site, erosion, water quality and biological impacts are currently occurring. Planned development can improve ambient conditions of erosion, improve downstream water quality and amplify the biological diversity of the site. -8- THE SUMMARY OF ' PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING STUDY by FUSS & O'NEILL, INC. The principal emphasis of services by Fuss & O'Neill , Inc. for Buckland ' Commons was in the area of public works engineering, that is, sewerage, water supply, drainage, highways, solid waste, and other utilities. ' SEWERAGE SYSTEM The topography of the Buckland Commons site is such that a ridge line exists just east of Buckland Road with the area east of this ridge ' draining into the Town of Manchester and the area on the westerly side of this ridge draining generally into the Town of South Windsor. The most environmentally sound and most economical sewage collection system, both from the standpoint of initial construction and future maintenance, ' would be on the basis of topography and natural flow, with no concern as to the Town boundaries. Because of jurisdictional problems, the plan presented henceforth respects the Town boundaries; however, it would be ' the intention of the developer to pursue the above concept to a greater degree once final design is undertaken. The present plans for sewage disposal involve the portion of the development in South Windsor and that portion of the. deveTopment in Manchester as being serviced by each ' of the two towns. With the proposed commercial area west of Buckland Road, the buildings ' would be located in the high area of the property in South Windsor which would require- gravity sewers only. A sewer connection would be made to a proposed gravity sewer in Smith Street which would flow in a westerly ' direction .to a point at which it would then flow northerly to and along. Clark Street to the existing Plum Gulley pump station which has a design capacity of 5.68 million gallons and has been sized to service the area being discussed. ' The commercial development would drain into a Town treatment plant which p has a design capacity of 3.75 million gallons per day and is presently being underutilized. Treatment plant improvements are currently being made so as to bring the facility up to State of Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection standards. ' The sewer service to be provided within the Town of Manchester would be under the jurisdiction of the Eighth Utilities District. The commercial area would be serviced by a pump station and gravity sewers which would flow southerly and join the residential area service in Buckland Road. From this point a trunk sewer would be constructed along Buckland Road which would connect to a major trunk sewer presentlybeing installed by ' the Town of Manchester in Tolland Turnpike. The sewer being installed in Tolland Turnpike is an extension of the North Manchester interceptor which flows directly to the Town of Manchester sewage treatment plant located west of Love Lane. The interceptor and the trunk sewer under construction have been sized to service the area under discussion and it has been reported. by the Town of Manchester Director of Public Works that the treatment plant is of adequate capacity to handle all flow that will be emanating from this area. The sewage flow from the area under ' the juridiction of the Eighth Utilities District would be metered prior to its connection with the. Town of Manchester system located at Tolland --------- -- ---Turnpike and Adams Street. ' The Town of Manchester has recently received a Federal grant for the upgrading of the facilities at the sewage treatment plant and final design is currently taking place. WATER SUPPLY Water supply is complicated because three utility companies serve the ' project area. The Connecticut Water Company generally services the area north of the Manchester Town Line and east of Buckland Road, while the Metropolitan District Commission -has a planned service area north of the ' Manchester Town Line and west of Buckland Road. The Town of Manchester, on the other hand, services all areas within the Town of Manchester. All water companies indicate that they have ample supply to provide service (including fire protection) to the project area. ' Preliminary plans call for the Connecticut Water Company to provide for the extension of a 12-inch line on Foster Street to feed into the ' project area. The Foster Street line is connected to a 2.3 mg water storage tank and would provide ample fire protection. ' In the Metropolitan District Commission's proposed service area, a large diameter main is to be extended on Pleasant Valley Road into and through the project area to eventually connect with an existing large diameter main to be constructed in Buckland Road south of Wapping. These lines ' are fed by large transmission mains located in Route 5. The Town of Manchester would service its portion of the project by way ' of an extension of its existing main on Buckland Road. The Town of Manchester has recently passed a 20 million dollar referendum for improvements to its water distribution and treatment systems. The shopping center would be serviced by the New State Road well system in conjunction with two 900,000 gallon water storage tanks presently under construction in the Buckland Industrial Park. ' DRAINAGE The Buckland Commons area drains to the Podunk River by way of Plum Gulley Brook and Whaples Brook. Between the Podunk River and these two ' brooks is Vinton's Mill Pond which has been designated as a "Wildlife Preserve. In order to avoid siltation .and minimize downstream ecological impact, the project incorporates the use of silting basins coupled with ' detention_basins. The silting basins will provide for the capture of any erosion that may occur during construction. The detention basins will be a permanent feature of the project designed to outlet the approximate same amount of water as is presently flowing from the ' project area, thereby preventing the overloading of existing downstream drainage facilities. ' -10- Discussions have been held with officials of the Department of Transportation ' relating to the drainage system proposed for the expansion of I-86. Coordination will have to take place between engineers of the Buckland Commons project and that of the State to develop the most suitable and ' environmentally sensitive drainage scheme in the Areas of I-86 and the project interface. SOLID"WASTE ' The Town of Manchester currently has a sanitary landfill located northerly of Olcott Street which has a projected life of approximately 20 years. Recent studies undertaken for major landfill expansion have received favorable comment from the controlling State agencies and approval is expected in the near future. ' The Town of South Windsor disposes of solid waste in the NORCAP regional landfill -located in the Town of East Windsor which has a long-term capacity. The Town of South Windsor's present contract with NORCAP was recently entered into for a period of three years. The Connecticut i Resources Recovery Authority, in conjunction with the Metropolitan District Commission, is presently conducting extensive studies for the construction of a 2,400 ton resource recovery facility in the South ' Meadows of Hartford which will eventually be expected to service, in part, South Windsor. ' It is anticipated that the bulk of collection in both the Towns of Manchester and South Windsor as they relate to commercial development will be carried out by private collection.. ELECTRICAL POWER Currently, Connecticut Light & Power Company serves in the Town of South Windsor and Hartford Electric Light Company serves in the Town of Manchester. ' Recent conversations with these utilities indicate that they both have the ability to serve the development area, but that the service would be provided- on the basis of which of these could do so more conveniently. ' TELEPHONE Telephone service will be supplied by the Southern New England Telephone Company. The proposed development is within two telephone exchange ' areas, i .e. , Manchester and South Windsor. Indications are that it may be possible to serve the entire development through one exchange; however, this can only be determined at the time more definitive plans for the ' project are proposed and when a more well- defined time schedule is developed. ' NATURAL GAS As wit electrical service, two utilities provide service to the develop- ment area. Connecticut Light & Power Company serves in South Windsor ' and Connecticut Natural Gas Corporation serves in the Town of Manchester. Also similar to electrical service is the fact that there is ample gas - to serve the development, and that Connecticut Light and Power Company and Connecticut Natural Gas Corporation would probably have an agreement by which one of the utilities would serve the total project. -ll- SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION i PROPOSED ZONE CHANGE FOR BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR, CT APPLICANT: BUCKLAND ASSOCIATES ' DEVELOPER: KRAVCO, INC. FUSS&O'NEILL 1 i iA. Solid Waste The Buckland Commons development is committed to managing its ' solid waste separate from the Town of South Windsor. The preferred idisposal solution is the use of an existing, permitted regional landfilL until the Mid-Connecticut Resources Recovery project comes on line. At that time, the waste from this development could go to that facility. A summary of the waste options available to the developer are as fo L Lows: 1 1 . Recent investigations by the CRRA have shown that the NORCAP Landfill in East Windsor will have regional capacity available until ' at least 1990. This site is available to mixed refuse, as would be generated by the Buckland Commons project on a tipping fee basis. ' Hauling of waste to this facility would be the responsibility of the Buckland Commons project. 2. The ultimate method of waste disposal in this area will be the Mid-Connecticut project which is a proposed energy recovery ' facility to be built in Hartford by a joint venture between the CRRA and the MDC. This facility wilt have a 2000 TPD capacity and will begin operation between 1985 and 1987 at an initial tonnage of 1 1400 TPD . The facility will operate for at least 20 years in ' accordance with the financing plan and the statewide solid waste plan. FUSS&O'NEILL -1- 1 3. Other solid waste options include the Yaworski regional landfill in Canterbury which has 5-6 years of projected remaining capacity, the SCA landfill in New Milford which has 12 years of projected remaining capacity and the Refuse Gardens landfill in Ellington which has 5 years of projected remaining capacity. B. Hydrogeologic Report 1 . Geologic Description 1 Surficial geologic deposits in the Buckland Commons area are composed of both Glaciafluvial deposits, consisting of stratified sands and gravel and Deltaic deposits , consisting of gently dipping laminated sands, silts, clays and gravels. These sediments have filled a buried channel cut into the bedrock surface. This channel is up to 220 feet in depth and trends generally south to north immediately west of the J ro project area. West of proposed P the central portion of the channel, unconsolidated sediments thin to a depth of 120 feet. To the east, within 1 .000 feet of Buckland Street these sediments thin to about u a ten foot depth at the edge of the development. The above materials, filling the buried channel, ' are composed of fine sand, silt and discontinuous clay layers as inferred from boring and well logs along Smith Street and in the ' surrounding areas as well as a 55' deep boring completed in the center of the project. The bedrock underlying these deposits is composed of red sandstone typical of the Connecticut River Valley ' (the Triassic red beds). FUSS&O'NEILL -2- ' 2 . Groundwater Discussion Surface drainage from this site flows toward the northwest, ultimately to Plum Gulley Brook and the Podunk River. A tributary of Plum ' Gulley Brook flows through the Buckland site. ' The stratified drift valley through the center of the Buckland site ' receives groundwater flow from the areas both east and west of the project area. Within the stratified drift valley, the general ground- water flow is inferred to be north towards discharge into the Plum Gulley Brook surface water system. The groundwater flow largely mimic's surface water drainage patterns. The water table is 30-40 ' feet below land surface at the center of the buried channel and 1 slightly closer to the land surface to the east and west. The boring completed on site encountered the water table at a depth of 40 feet. 3. Groundwater Supply Potential The water supply potential of the area in and around the proposed ' Buckland Commons Development is a function of the saturated thick- ness of the unconsolidated materials and the permeability of those deposits. Secondary factors influencing well yield potentials are the presence of recharge boundaries, such as large surface water features, and impervious flow boundaries. Finally, the most important supply consideration is the water quality of the groundwater in the potential supply area. A number of wells 1 have been completed near the project area which give insite into the above considerations. FUSS&O'NEILL -3- ' As previously discussed, a narrow buried valley exists in the pro- posed project area. Saturated thicknesses in excess of 150 feet at the deepest portion of this valley likely exist. The saturated ' thickness of these materials thin to both the east and west as bedrock and clay boundaries influence the distribution of stratified drift. The texture (an indication of permeability) of the underlying material ' is principally fine grained consisting of fine sand, silt and clay. This suggests that high water-yielding materials do not exist through- out the development area. The reported fine grained materials largely preclude the development of high yield well supplies from ' the unconsolidated sediments. In fact, the domestic well supplies in the area have cased off from 15 to more than 150 saturated feet of fine sand, silt and clay and have extended their wells into the underlying bedrock. Yield from these bedrock wells reportedly range from 2 to 25 gpm. As stated, the boring completed on site encountered 55 feet of fine to very fine sand and silt. ' In terms of secondary water supply factors relating to the uncon- solidated sediments, impervious flow boundaries exist to both the east and west. To the east, the bedrock rises forming the ridge line adjacent to Buckland Road. To the west glacial lake sedi- ments consisting of layered silts and clays form a flow boundary. -4- FUSS&O'NEILL rNo major surface water features exist in the area to serve as ' induced recharge sources. Therefore, well yields must depend entirely upon natural recharge for their supply. The final factor ' relating to aquifer potential is the natural water quality. An historic analysis of an irrigation well south of the project area reportedly had a nitrate (NO3) concentration of 86 mg/1 (19. 1 mg/l as N). That concentration is probably the result of exten- sive fertilization in the area. These same quality impacts likely exist beneath all areas which have had a long-term historic agri- cultural use. In addition to the nitrate impacts, potential quality impacts from historic applications of pesticides and herbicides may also inhibit groundwater development in this area. These quality ' problems would be most severe in the upper situated portion of P PP ' the groundwater system and would diminish with depth. The boring completed on site encountered the water table at a depth of 40 feet. A sample of formation water taken in May 1981 indicates that groundwater in this area has a nitrate nitrogen concentration of 17. 1 mg/l .and a nitrite nitrogen concentration of .08 mg/l. Both of these parameters ' exceed the maximum drinking water standards of 10 and .005 mg/1 re- ' spectively. A copy of the complete analysis for those groundwaters is attached as well as the boring logs for the completed installation. 4. Buckland Commons Impact on the Groundwater Resource The proposed development entails about 92 acres in both South Windsor. and Manchester. Of this total, about 67 acres consist of ' FUSS&O'NEILL -5- impervious surfaces composed of 13.7 acres of roof area and 53.0 acres of paved surfaces. Normal recharge on these impervious ' surface areas equals about 134 acre-feet of water per year. This represents about 3.3 percent of the total recharge to the ground- water system in question which extends south to the Hockanum River and north beyond Wapping Center. The loss of recharge will be mitigated to a significant degree by the use of dry well basins to introduce clean roof water into the ' ground and by recharge of parking lot runoff which will occur during and following a storm event in the detention basins which surround the property. It is proposed to use dry well type structures with a positive over- flow to the parking lot storm system for the roof storm water.water. These dry wells will be capable of recharging a significant portion of the ' runoff from the 6001000 square feet of roof area. In fact, a system would be designed to accommodate the runoff from a storm event con- sisting of 1 .0" of precipitation with a runoff of 0.8". This can be accomplished utilizing approximately 12 normal sized dry well struc- tures. It is estimated that more than 27.4 acre-feet of water per year can be recharged from the roof area. Parking lot water will be contaminated to a small degree by oils and greases (floatables) and heavy metals, in particular, lead. For this reason, recharge of these waters should occur only after passing through a sedimentation chamber or gross particle separator. 1 FUSS&O'NEILL -6- The entire parking lot runoff will pass through such a structure, which will remove the coarser sediments as well as a fraction of the metals which often become associated with sediment. These structures will also be utilized to collect the ftoatable fraction from the stormwater flow. The use of such structures will Largely elimin- ate the ftoatable contaminants providing the basins are periodically cleaned to remove accumulated materials. Alt of the parking lot ' runoff will ultimately reach the surrounding detention basins. Re- charge to the groundwater wilt occur in these basins while the storm event is in progress and for a period of time afterward. It is ' estimated that about 10% of the runoff which reaches these basins 1 will ultimately recharge the local groundwater. This represents about 24.5 acre-feet of water per year. The net recharge from ' the impervious areas after development is estimated to be 52 acre- feet per year versus an existing rate of about 134 acre-feet per ' year. This represents a loss of 82 acre-feet per year or about 2% of the total recharge to the groundwater system. The long Island USGS has been monitoring the fate of heavy metal and ftoatable pollutants from a large parking area in a basin de- signed to recharge all of the stormwater. Water quality data on this project has just begun to be collected in October 1980. While the data is not available to the public yet, ' Henry Ku, the principal investigator, reports that the preliminary -7- FUSS&O'NEILL data indicates the recharge process renovates the quality of the stormwater to a significant degree. The principal contaminate was found to be lead. Lead concentrations on the order of 0. 1 to 1 .0 ' mg/l have been reported in the influent water. No lead or other ' heavy metals have been detected in the groundwater beneath the basin. Presumably, the lead and other metals are being removed by the ' soil or sediment mat in the bottom of the basin. This renovation has not yet been quantified and will not be fully evaluated until next year. The basin being studied is different than those which exist and are proposed near the Buckland project. The basins in Long Island are designed specifically to recharge stormwater, whereas those in South Windsor only detain the flow to control peak runoff. Recharge will occur duringthe storm event and for a short period afterward ' in the South Windsor project. On Long Island, the stormwaters are 1 ponded to maximize recharge to the groundwater system. For this reason, it is expected that the potential for groundwater quality 1 impact from the detention facilities in and around the Buckland ' Commons project will not be major sources of road runoff con- taminants to the groundwater system. The final potential impact to the groundwater quality is that which might occur from the dissolved deicing salts resulting from winter ' parking lot maintenance. This is not anticipated to be a significant problem because use of road salts on parking lots is not a normal 1 FUSS&O'NEILL i ' procedure and is only employed to control ice build-up on the parking and traffic surface in extreme circumstances. The normal procedure utilized is physical control of snow and ice by plowing ' and removal. In addition, sanding of the traveled surface is often ' employed. Calcium chloride will be utilized to control hazardous conditions on pedestrian walkways and at critical travel areas. 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 I 1 ' FUSS&O'NEILL -9- WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS ' PROPOSED BUCKLAND COMMONS DEVELOPMENT SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT iDate Sampled: May 22, 1981 Parameter Results Recommended Limits pH 7.2 5.7-8.0 Alkalinity 60 mg/l ' Hardness 163 mg/l 120 Chloride 13.7 mg/l 250 Sodium 13.8 mg/l 20 ' Nitrate as N 17. 1 mg/l 10.0 Nitrite as N .08 mg/l 0.005 ' Ammonia as N <.05 mg/l 0.05 ' Detergents (MBAS) <0.5 mg/l (trace) 0.5 Iron 0.35 mg/1 0.3 Manganese 0.85 mg/L 0.05 Odor 0-5 2 (Faint) 3 Color (TRUE) NTU 10 15 -10- FUSS&O'NEILL i The conclusion of the groundwater portion of the above report can be summarized as follows: ' a. The stratified drift sediments, while having significant depth, do not appear to have significant water supply potential due to their Fine- grained texture. b. Recharge to the groundwater system may be reduced by less than ' 2% as a result of the development. The preliminary development plan is to maximize recharge of roof stormwater and to minimize the re- charge of parking lot runoff. C. The excessive nitrate and possibly pesticides and herbicides which exist locally, will, over time, decrease in concentration by both in- ground dilution and by soil attenuation due to the elimination of the ' intense agricultural use by the proposed development. d. While small quality impacts from local recharge of the existing and ' proposed detention basins will occur, the overall groundwater quality 9 q Y will certainly improve. e. All wells identified in the area are bedrock supply wells. These wells will be unim acted in terms of quality and quantity of supply b P q Y q Y PP Y Y the proposed development. -� 1- FUSS&O'NEILL CLIENT Buckland Commons DATES May 22, 1981 BORING NO. B-1 IROJECT 79-311 DRILLER Conn. Test Borings LOCATION South Windsor, Conn. INSPECTOR Hamel [ROUND ELEVATION SHEET NO. 2 OF 2 _ BLOWS SAMPLE BLOWS DEPTH ON ON SOIL CLASSIFICATION REMARKS O CASING DEPTH SPOON 5 45- 7-10-14 Red brown fine-very fine sand, trace 1 46.5 si Lt Wet screen 0 50- 6-7-9 Red brown fine-very fine sand, trace 51 .6 silt Wet 5 55- 6-6-7 Red brown fine-very fine sand,- Little i 56.5 silt BOB - 55' 0 44.5 PVC I 10' screen 1 1/4" 44.5-54.5' 1 5 1 70 1 5 0 GROUNDWATER DATA METHOD OF ADVANCING BORING DEPTH PTH HOUR DATE HOUR AFTER TO COM PLETI ON tT 1 2 5/22 .0 p ES: O FUSS&O'NEILL 00400CMEETER. CONNECTICUT U"AFT TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL PLANNING AND ZONING COMMMION SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT MAY 1981 r :f 1 ' a ° 4 .H s S E A CONSULTANTS INC. Engineers/Planners { lioston, Massachusetts Portland Maine 2' Z ' i f SUMMARY OF STUDIES Since 1977, a series of traffic studies have been developed for the southern part of the town of South Windsor. The traffic impact caused by the full utilization of the J. C. Penney facility and the Manchester Industrial Park has been addressed in several reports. An additional factor is the possible construction of the Buckland Commons Mall which has also been the focus of.various studies. { The "Burnham Street Traffic Study" prepared by Close, Jensen, and Miller in 1978 discusses the' traffic impact of the J. C. Penney facility and the Manchester f Industrial Park. Both the average daily traffic (ADT) and peak hour trip distribution generated by the complex were addressed. In addition, the existing traffic conditions along with the 1980 projected traffic flows were presented. x i i The additional traffic which would be generated by the Buckland Commons Mall i is discussed in the "Traffic and Access Analysis - Buckland Commons Mall" report 6 prepared by Wilbur Smith and Associates. The 1981 existing traffic volumes along ' key roadways within South Windsor and Manchester are presented. Since the future E of 1-291 and the connector road are uncertain, the report's traffic analysis is completed both with and without their construction. The 1985/1986 base flows were developed along with projected traffic generated by the J. C. Penney/Industrial r Park which were based on the "Burnham Street Traffic Study." Current street conditions and capacities were also discussed. t{ F � y Through conversations with the Connecticut DOT, the current status of 1-86, I-291- Ii and the connector road were determined. Presently, I-86 is in the design stage with construction bids projected for the middle of 1982. Since no.specific obstacles are anticipated, the following analyses assume that the intended revisions to 1-86 x will be completed. On the other hand, the future of 1-291 and the connector road Y is questionable. Currently, the state is awaiting a decision on the I-291 Environ mental. Impact Statement (EIS). If a favorable opinion regarding construction is given, a further delay may be caused by a possible court challenge. In addition, although federal funding is currently available, a problem could arise retarding the availability of state matching funds. Due to the uncertainty of the situation, re the following analysis addresses the traffic conditions with and without the con- struction of I-291 and the connector road. The traffic volumes for the various conditions described within this report are based on the flows generated within the "Traffic and Access Analysis - Buckland Commons Mall" and the "Burnham Street Traffic Study." Traffic Impact on Motorists The impact on motorists by an increase or decrease in traffic volume can best be described in terms of the roadway level of service. Ranging from A through F, each level of service is associated with specific driving conditions as shown in Table 1. Table 1. Operation Conditions for Levels of Servicel Level of Service Description A Free flow condition, low volumes and high speeds. Traffic density is low, speed controlled by driver desires, speed limits and physical conditions. B Stable flow. Operating speeds becoming somewhat restricted by traffic condi- tions. Drivers have reasonable freedom to select speed and lane of operation. C Stable flow. Operating speeds and ma- neuverability more closely controlled by higher volumes. Drivers restricted in freedom to select speed, change lanes or pass. a D Approaching unstable flow. Tolerable operating speeds. Drivers have little fre-edom to maneuver. E Unstable flow. May be momentary stops. Volumes at/or near capacity. F Forced flow. Operation at low speeds. Stoppages may occur for short or long periods of time due to downstream con- gestion. { 1Highway Capacity Manual 1965, Highway Research Board, Special Report 87 page 78. The maximum capacity for a roadway is affected by various factors including lane width, lateral clearance, width of the shoulder, the presence of auxiliary lanes, parking lanes, etc. By using an adjustment factor for each condition an estimate of the maximum capacity may be made. i The traffic volume associated with the various levels of service may.'be estimated as percentages of this maximum capacity. As shown in Table 2, the peak hour flows have been used to determine the levels of service for various roadways in South Windsor. Four possible conditions along with the existing status are shown. The 1985/1986 peak hour flows and levels of service are shown assuming the full utilization of the J. C. Penney Warehouse and Manchester Industrial`Park in addition to the traffic generated by the Buck-land Commons Mall. The=:_same development conditions are then addressed assuming I-291 and the connector road have been completed. Traffic impact-i'Iotorists Clark Street Clark Street is presently free flowing with a low traffic volume and speeds i controlled by the driver's desires, speed limits and physical roadway conditions. As shown in Table 2, assuming I-291 and the connector road are not constructed, either of the 1985 development possibilities would produce an operating service level of C. Although there would be stable flow, operating speeds and maneuver- ability would be more closely controlled by the higher volumes. Drivers could be k restricted in their freedom to choose their speed, change lanes or pass. With the construction of I-291 and the connector road, the level of service would improve. Even with the additional traffic generated by J. C. Penney and the Manchester Industrial Park, Clark Street would return to its present level of service although a somewhat higher traffic volume would be present. The construction of Buckland Commons Mall would have a modest effect .upon the freedom of the drivers and operating speeds. Chapel Road Under present roadway conditions, Chapel Road has a relatively free flowing condition. a 1 With the complete use of the J. C. Penney Warehouse and Manchester Industrial Park alone, or in conjunction with the construction of Buckland Commons Mall, a condition of stable flow would exist. However, operating speeds and maneuverability would be controlled by the higher traffic volumes and the drivers would feel somewhat restricted. A review of 1978/1980 accident data shows `relatively few collisions along Chapel Road. However, at numerous intersections along the roadway, such as at Long Hill Road, Route 30 and" Route 5, accident levels are greatly increased. With the existing intersection. conditions, and an increase in traffic volume, it must be F recognized that the frequency of accidents will also increase. Projected traffic volumes on Chapel Road would be relieved by the construction of I-291 and the connector road as shown in Table 2. The peak hour floes would be slightly reduced from the present flows and conditions would remain basically the same. t i5 +i i i Burnham Street i A free flow condition presently exists on Burnham Street west of Clark Street. i i 4 As shown in Table 2, without the construction of 1-291 or the connector road, the i 1985 traffic conditions will be somewhat restricted by the higher volumes, yet, drivers would still have reasonable freedom when selecting their speed and lane r of operation. i tThe change in operating level due to the traffic volume generated by either development would be eliminated by the construction of I--291 and the connector road. There would again be a free flow condition with considerable freedom for the driver. i Buckland Road North of Smith Street to Deming`Road, the present condition along Buckland Road is one of stable flow with drivers being restricted by the high volumes of traffic. The 1978/1980 accident records show that this section of roadway is extremely susceptible to collisions. Although the level of service remains the same with the r additional traffic volume generated by the J. C. Penney/Industrial Park, the peak hour volume, does increase from approximately 940 vph to 1,105 vph. With the construction of Buckland Commons Mall, the traffic is approaching an unstable flow. Drivers would have little freedom to maneuver. Care must also be taken to analyse the effect these increases could have on the already numerous accidents. t Since Buckland Road. is a major north-south roadway, the construction of I-291 or the connector road: ,does little to alleviate its traffic conditions. However, the construction of I-86; particularly the Buckland Road interchange, would directly increase the traffict volume along Buckland Road. Without the development of the complete industrial park and/or Buckland Commons Mall, the traffic flow along Buckland Road would still increase due to the completion of I-86. r t A subsequent impact due to the increased traffic volume along Buckland Commons Road would be felt at the Five Corners Intersection. Presently, the intersection z is very busy during peak hours. The effect which additional traffic will have upon the accident rate at this intersection will be discussed later in this report. Pleasant Valley Road Drivers travelling on Pleasant Valley Road - east of Clark Street presently have freedom to select their speed and lane of operation, with a free flow condition. In 1985, congruent with the full utilization of the J. C. Penney Warehouse and Manchester Industrial Park, the traffic condition will become.stable with operating speeds becoming somewhat restricted. If Buckland Commons Mall is constructed, without 1-291 and the connector road being completed as previously assumed, the flow would remain stable. However, drivers would feel restricted in their freedom to select their own speed, change lanes or pass. The higher volumes which would be present would closely control vehicle maneuverability and speed. The accident reports along Pleasant Valley Road show numerous collisions along the roadway in addition to major trouble spots at various intersections. With increased traffic volume these intersections may- cause a serious safety problem. The construction of 1-291 and the connector road greatly improves the conditions along Pleasant Valley Road. Being a major east-west route, I-291 and the connector road would carry many of the vehicles previously using Pleasant Valley Road. As seen in Table 2, a condition of free flow and freedom for the. driver would exist with either the full operation of the J. C. Penney Warehouse and Manchester Industrial Park alone or with the construction of Buckland Commons Mall. Traffic Impact on Neighborhoomis _ The effect upon a neighborhood, which an increase in traffic produces, is difficult to quantify, yet, quickly felt by the residents. One method to estimate the neighborhood condtions alone- various roadways utilizes the ex'y istin- , and future Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes. Studies of existing roadways and their respective traffic volumes have produced general standards. From these, typical neighborhood conditions in response to their projected traffic volumes may be a estimated. F �i t '( Table 2. Peak-Hour Flows and Levels.of Service — Buckland Commons — Traffic Impact Study 1985 - w/J.C. Penney 1985 - w/J.C. Penney 1981 Existing 1985 - w/J.C. Penneyl Industrial Park 1985 - w/J.C. Penney2 Industrial Park Conditions do Industrial Park & Buckland Commons & Industrial Park do Buckland Commons Peak Level Peak Level Peak Level Peak Level Peak Level ! Flow Condition of Flow Condition of Flow Condition of Flow Condition of Flow Condition of I Stree: (VPH) (Veh/Sec) Service (VPH) (Veh/Sec) Service (VPH) (Veh/Sec) Service (VPH) (Veh/Sec) Service (VPII) (Veh/Sec) Servic< 1 t Pleas:_nt VaLey Road ( J (Bast o.` Clark) 330 1/11 A 720 1/5 B 940 1/4 C 470 1/7.5 A 530 1/7 A 4 i Chap=_1 Road 345 1/10 A 650 1/5.5 C 685 1/5 C 325 1/11 A 340 1/10.5 A i Chu Sweet 55 1/65 A 410 1/9 C 525 1/7 C 280 1/13 A 330 1/11 B i Burn'am Street (nest of Clark) 165 1/22 A 330 1/12 B 380 1/9.5 B 140 1/26 A 175 1/20.5 A i i Buckl nd Road3 (Sort of Smith) 940 1/4 C 1,105 1/3 C 1,272 1/2.B D 1,105 1/3 C 1,272 1/2.8 D ) Levc's of Service f A - Free flow condition, low volumes and high speeds. Traf`ie density is totv. ` Speeds controlled by driver desires, speed limits and physical roadway conditions. a B - Stable flow. i Operating speeds becoming somewhat restricted by traffic conditions. Drivers have reasonable freedom to select speed and lane of operation. 1 C - Stable flow. Operating speeds and maneuverability more closely controlled by higher,volumes. g r 9 Drivers restricted in freedom to select speed, change lanes or pass. D - '.pproaching unstable flow. _ Tolerable operating speeds. 3 & ;rivers have little freedom to maneuver. 0 ° t! :ed peak-hour traffic volumes witlranticipated revisions to I-86 without I-291 .or connector road. All peak flows based on "Traffic and Access Analysis and Commons Mall" Report by Wilbur Smith-and Associates. F a ed peak-hour traffic volumes with anticipated revisions to 1-86 with I-291 and connector road. All peak flows based on "Traffic and Access Analysis -- ad Cornmons Mall" Report by Wilbur Smith and Associates. s 'ra •'•' flows updated from recent Connecticut Department of Transportation, peak traffic counts. 1 -s { Inr ilv 111... 19W., 1111;1,Wny It—mAroh Iluunl, :;1:uih�l nulnnl tl'!. i i L ( a l y l Traffic flows can be categorized into three groups: light, medium and heavy, with each level corresponding to an ADT range of 0 to 22000 vpd; 2,000 to 10,000 vpd and greater than 10,000 vpd respectively. In addition, each volume level represents a particular neighborhood environment as shown in Table 3. Table 3.. Neighborhood Conditions for Volume Levels 2 Volume Traffic Level Flow Condition light 0 to 2,000 vpd Few traffic problems medium 2,000 to 10,000 vpd Reduction in neighbor's visiting each other, People feel more confined, safety concerns during peak hours heavy greater than 10,000 vpd Normal neighborhood activity stops, major concerns over safety, noise, stress and pollutants The neighborhood conditions along the major roads encompassing the J. C. Penney/- Industrial Park and the proposed site for the Buckland Commons Mall ere presented in Table 4 for several sets of circumstances. n 2Liveable Urban Struts (Managing Auto traffic in Neiahborhoods)'i, U.S. Department of Transportation a r i F to C c a. . r fTable 4. Neighborhood Conditiors — Buekland Comr.-Wns — Traffic Impact Study 1995 ADTI 1985 ADT 1985 r1U'r2 1935 AD'1.2 + t981 A D'r w/J.C. Penney w/J.C. Penney w/J.C. Penney w/J.C. Penney 9 9 w/o Volume & Ind. Park Volume Ind. Park Develop. Volume & Ind. Park Volume Ind. Park Develop. Volume Development Level Development Level Duckland Commons Level Development Level Backhand Commons Leve.! r:casant Valley Road r I -st of Clar:J 3,300 Medium 5,400 Medium 9,100 Medium 3,600 Medium ,2' Medium 4 I 5_00 •�,rk Street 450 Light 1,655 Light 4,325 Medium 830 Light g 2,750 Medium E C..,,:,el Road 2,350 Medium 4,289 Medium 4 8U0 I , Medium 2,145 Medium 2,300 Medium 3.:rnha m Street 1,050 Light 1,872 Light 2,650 Medium 839 Light 1150 Light �r cklarid Road t'•cr:h of Smith) 9,600 Medium 10,300 Heavy j} Y 12,200 Heavy 10,300 heavy 12,200 Heavy 0 :r:ies Levels 3 i t traffic volume - Few traffic problems 0 - 2,000 vpd 1 S R ' traffic volume - Reduction in neighbors visiting each other v `• 2,000 - 10,000 vpd CCC¢ People feel more confined Safety concerns during peak hours `[rYt 4 ! - � �� -:•; traffic volume Normal neighborhood activity stops ' 10,000 vpd Major concern over safety, noise, stress, pollutants t� i & daily traffic (ADT) with anticipated revisions to I-86 without I-291 or conne fa ctor road. All ADT flows based on "Traffic and :1c Co,trtora ll" Report by Wilbur Smith and Associates. cuss Analysis- k 3 ::vere:- c ly trefirc (ADT) with anticipated revisions to I-56 •vith I-291 and connector road. All ADT flows based"on-"Trafiic and Acce,s Arta] si.,- t il Corrfn ;s :,I,Il" Report p`�r't by Wilbur Smith and Associates. Y f Str -eI, (?,i=:.^,:rr•r^ Auto ,o• s ire,ttc in Neighborhood,)", U.S. Department of Transportation. e` n Clark Street The present traffic along Clark Street is rather light with approximate volume of 450 vpd. In 1985, in response to the full utilization of the J.C. Penney Warehouse and Manchester Industrial Park the traffic volume would increase to 830 vpd with the I-291 connector construction or 1,650 vpd without that construction. Since n these volumes all fall under the "light traffic level," neighborhood conditions should r not change drastically from the present situation when the industrial park reaches its full potential. After the construction of Buckland Commons Mall, neighborhood conditions would k reflect a medium volume level, with or without the construction of I-291 and the I connector road. Therefore, there would be a reduction in neighborhood visiting with an increase in safety concerns during peak hours. I f Chapel Road Chapel Road is presently considered a medium volume roadway. As shown in Table 4, with the development of either the J. C. Penney/Industrial Park alone or with r the Buckland Commons Mall, the traffic volume would increase within the medium range, without the construction. of 1-291 or the connector road. Since the roadway rF would remain within the medium volume level, residents should not feel a dramatic impact due to either development, though change would be obvious. j With the construction of 1-291 and the connector road, the traffic conditions would improve from the present situation, although still remain within the medium traffic range. Burnham Street Presently, Burnham Street has few traffic problems with a light traffic volume of approximately 1,050 vpd. Table a shows that the full utilization of the J. C. a_ Penney Warehouse and Manchester Industrial* Park in 1985, with or without the construction of I-2.91 and the connector road, will allow the traffic volume to remain limit. However, upon the completion of Buckland Commons Mall, the traffic volume would reach the medium level, if 1-291 or the connector road were not u built. In this case,. the residents may have safety concerns during peak hours. If, S d however, I-291 or the connector road were constructed, the traffic volume would again be light, producing no broad changes in the neighborhood conditions. 4 Buckland Load The traffic flow along Buckland Road varies as intersections w" -with mayor east west roadways allow for the influx and exit of vehicles. The heaviest travelled section occurs from Smith Street to the intersection of Buckland and Deming. Therefore, it is this section that will be addressed below. i As shown in Table 4, Buckland Road is presently a medium volume roadway, although close to the upper limit of 10,000 vpd. Therefore, there is curren tly a reduction in neighborhood visiting with residents having some concerns during peak hour traffic and feeling somewhat confined. With the additional traffic generated by the full use of the J. C. Penney facility and the Industrial. Park, the volume level increases to heavy traffic condition. This condition would be compounded by the construction of the Buckland Commons Mall. With a heavy traffic volume, getting still heavier, normal neighborhood activity would cease and residents would ' now have a major concern over ll and stress safety, noise, , Pollutants. Since Buckland 5' =: 63 Road is a major north-south roadway, the construction of I-291 and the connector � road would ease very little of the impact. { k �8 Pleasant Valley Road t As with Buckland Road, the traffic volume along Pleasant Valley Road varies due s 3 to several intersections allowing the influx and exit of traffic. The section with +� the heaviest flow is east of Clark Street and will, therefore, be addressed below. A As shop,>an in Table 4, with a traffic volume of 3,300 vpd, Pleasant Valley Road � is presently a medium volume roadway. If 1-291 and the connector read are not constructed, the traffic volumes, although increased, would remain within the m cdiurn___level, with either the full utilization of the industrial park alone or with the cons tr..ctlon of Buckland Commons Mall. Therefore, the residents along Pleasant z Valleyy IN, would not experience a rtidical che111ge With regard to either level- oPment. Since 1-291 and the connector road would alleviate east-west traffic, there roUid be a .reduction in the impact felt along Pleasant Valley Road with that 4 a' I I i improvement. As seen in Table 4, with the construction of either development the traffic volume would remain within the medium traffic level. E Five Corners Intersection M The effect which an increase in traffic along Buckland Road will have on the Five Corners Intersection is of concern. The traffic conditions at an intersection may be described using various levels of service. Many factors affect an intersection's capacity such as the approach width, parking condition, traffic light sequences and turning movements. As shown in Table 5, levels of service range from A through F, with Level A representing a condition of free movement and Level F being one of jammed conditions. At Level B, the existing condition at Five Corners for vehicles travelling south to north along Buckland Road is one of stable operation. However, drivers feel somewhat restricted. By 1985/1986. with the full utilization of the J. C. Penney/Industrial Park there may be substantial delays during peak hours. The condition of the intersection is approaching a state of instability. With the additional traffic generated by Buckland Commons Mall, the capacity will be reached, and drivers may find delays Lip to several signal cycles. As the Five Corners Intersection becomes more and more congested, there would V most likely be an increase in vehicle turns onto Deming Street. This would allow drivers to circumvent any delays or frustrations which would be encountered at the intersection, but—would alter conditions on Deming Street. Intersection capacities may be increased by various modifications. Further study should be performed to determine possible alternatives for the Fiver Corners Intersection, as it could become a major traffic problem in the future. Some evidence of that is present now. f Table 5. Buckland Commons - Traffic Impact Study Fiver Corners Intersection - Buckland Road Capacity Peak Flow(2) Buckland Road (flowing S-N) Condition (1) (VPH) Level of Service Existing 553 g 1985/1986 with J. C. Penney/ Industrial Park 650 D 1985/1986 with J. C. Penney/ Industrial_Park and Buckland Commons 750 E Level of Service(3) A No vehicle waits longer than one red indication. Turning movements . ` are easy, nearly all drivers have freedom of operation. B Stable operation. Drivers begin to feel somewhat restricted. Suitable i operation for rural conditions. fC Stable operations. Some drivers may have to wait through more than one red signal indication. Backups may develop behind turning vechicles with most drivers feeling somewhat restricted. D Increasing restriction approaching a condition of instability. Delays to approaching vehicles may be substantial during peak hours. E Capacity of intersection is reached. Delays may be up to several signal ; cycles. j F Jammed conditions. Back-ups from locations downstream may restrict t movement out of approach under consideration. Volumes carried are not predictable. f l F: � rk� (1)Intersection capacity for Buckland Road approach based on 20 percent right and 10 percent left turning conditions. t p Peak flows based on Traffic and Access Analysis - Buckland Commons IMall t, Report by Wilbur Smith and Associates. F; (3) ` Clio;tvay Capacity P/Ianual. 1965, IIia -way Research t3oard, Special Report 87. E t 's 2 Alternative Developments Development alternatives for both the J. C. Penney Warehouse and the proposed Buckland Mall site are of obvious interest. b I Presently, there is some uncertainty as to whether J. C. Penney will occupy its constructed warehouse. Possible future plans for the approximately 40 acre facility include, but are not limited to use by a general industry, the conversion to an office building or raquetball club. Al With each alternative, both the peak-hour and average daily flows must be determined. The peak hour flows generated by a light industry or raquetball club are below the 1,150 vph which would have been generated by the J. C. Penney `sc warehouse use. 6. However, a general office building would generate a peak flow of approximately 1,600 vph. The greatest impact caused by this alternative would be felt by Chapel Road which carries 16 percent of the flow or an additional 80 vph. Buckland Road and Burnham Street (west of Clark Street) would each carry an additional 35 v,h. With the additional flow, the driving conditions along Chapei.Road would deteriorate slightly. The worst impact would be felt if Buckland Commons Mall were constructed without the I-291 or the connector road. In this case a condition approaching unstable flow with temporary restrictions could occur. The driving conditions along Burnham Street and Buckland Road would remain virtually unchanged carrying only slightly higher volumes. The average daily traffic generated by the raquetball club and/or a general office building would both be greater than the original use flows. The worst of the two conditions would again be the traffic generated by an office building at the Penney - facility. The increase in ;flow .would be distributed using the same percentages ' used previously. With an increase of approximately 1,100 ADT along Chapel Road, the neighborhood conditions would remain within the "medium volume level." Along 34 Buckland Road, .the neighborhood conditions, which as shown in Table 4 would have been poor, would continue to deteriorate. The residents along Burnham Street lit t, 3 would riot observe a drastic change within their neighborhoods although there may be a further reduction in neighborhood visiting, along with a slightly stronger feeling of confinement. i The use of proposed Bck nd Commons Mall site for other development uses would u la most likely reduce the future traffic volumes. The trip generation for a shopping mall of this size would generate approximately 31,100 ADT and a peak hour flow of 3,180 vph. These are greater than most alternative developments. The above analysis shows that the roadway conditions felt both by the motorist j and residents may vary depending on the use of the land. f 1 1 i j 1 F j E I j i i CONCLUSIONS AND RECOIdM:ENDATIONS Conclusions 1. With the full utilization of the J. C. Penney warehouse and Manchester Industrial Park, without the construction of I-291 and the connector road, neighborhood conditions along all the roadways, except Buckland Road, would remain generally within the same.volume levels. The traffic volume along Buckland Road, north of Smith Street to Deming Street, would increase to a heavy level, with normal neighborhood activity stopping. 2. With the additional completion of Buckland Commons Mall, without the construction of I-291 and the connector road, Clark Street and Burnham Street would change from a li ht to a medium traffic volume level. A reduction in neighborhood visiting and an increase in safety concerns during peak hours would occur. The traffic volume along Pleasant Valley, Chapel and Buckland _Roads would increase. 3. The construction of 1-291 and the connector road would alleviate the traffic impact along major east-west roadways including Pleasant Valley Road, Chapel Road, Burnham Street, and to a lesser degree Clark Street. Buckland Road would remain relatively unaffected by I-291. 4. With the full utilization of the J. C. Penney Warehouse and the Industrial . Park, without the construction of I-291 and the connector road, the following travelling conditions would be expected to occur. Chapel Road and Clark Street would change from a state of free flow to one of stable flo��, with operating speeds closely controlled by the higher volumes_. Burnham Street and Buckland Road would remain within their present day levels of service. Pleasant Valley Road would change from a free flow condition to one of stable flow. 16 5. With the additional completion of Buckland Commons Mall, without the construction of I-291 and the connector road, Pleasant Valley Road, Chapel Road and Clark Street woud have stable flow with drivers restricted in their freedom to select speed, change lanes or pass. Buckland Road, north of Smith Street to Deming Street would approach unstable flow with tolerable operating speeds. Burnham Street, west of Clark Street, would continue to have stable flow. f f 6. The Five Corners Intersection is presently somewhat congested during i peak hours. Additional flows from the Buckland Commons Mall and/or 1 the Industrial Park would only further aggravate the present condition. 7. Due to the increased congestion at the Five Corners Intersection there may be an increase in vehicle turnoffs onto Deming Street. Recommendations 1. Progress of I-291 and the connector road should be closely monitored since their construction would alleviate* a large portion of the traffic impact. 2. The traffic impact generated by additional residential developments Windsor alongSouth rtiindsor roadways should be studied. Their effect upon Y p future volumes should be taken into account. 3. Additional study of the Five Corners Intersection should be performed to determine alternative methods of increasing the capacity. s i � s MEMORANDUM June 9, 1981 To: Planning and Zoning Commission Re: Transportation Study/Buckland Commons Mall Pursuant to your request of May 5, the Planning Department has prepared this report concerning the status of transportation improvements in the vicinity of the proposed Buckland Commons Mall, and other relevant traffic accident and volumes data developed under the Town Transportation Study. A number of visual aids are appended for your use. TRAFFIC VOLUMES-* - The following chart depicts average daily traffic (ADT) volumes (two-way traffic) for roads in the vicinity of the Buckland Commons zone change site. With the exception of I-86 and Buckland Road, all roads are currently handling relatively low traffic volumes. Historical counts are given where available. Volume classifications are: Light (0-2000 ADT); Medium (2001-9999 ADT) ; Heavy (10,000+ ADT) . Most Recent Historical % Current Volume Street Count Count Change Classification Buckland Road 7300 (1979) 4700 (1970) 35. 6% Medium (middle range) Chapel Road 3350 (1981) 2300 (1978) 45. 7% Medium (lower end) Clark Street 800 (1981) 400 (1978) 100.0% Light (middle range) Pleasant Valley Road 3300 (1978) Unavailable - Medium (lower end) Smith Street 100 (1981) Unavailable - Light (lower end) 1-86 58, 100 (1978) 46,000 (1970) 19. 28% Heavy "'Additional counts, including vehicles per hour (VPH) , i.e. , peak hour, and maps portraying same are available at the South Windsor Planning Department. STATUS OF HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS Buckland Road - The most critical section of Buckland Road in need ot improvement has been the one-quarter mile stretch between the Plum Gulley Brook and Ellington Road. This project is now essentially complete. Within the project' s parameters, the road has been widened to a full thirty-six feet. As one now approaches the Five Corners intersection in a northbound direction, there are two travel lanes. Southbound remains at one travel lane. The road' s geometry has been considerably improved, and it is now among the widest stretches of highway in South Windsor. This improvement should aid in reducing congestion and the number and rate of recorded traffic accidents at the Five Corners cluster. (See Buckland Road accident cluster map) . The intersection of Deming Street and Buckland Road was originally scheduled to be improved with town funds during this next fiscal year; however, it was dropped from the budget during the final round of cuts. The project is expected to be proposed once again next year. As an element of the I-86 reconstruction pro ect, Buckland Street in Manchester will be widened to four lanes ktwo lanes in each direction) up to Pleasant Valley Road. This improvement should be completed by 1985. The Buckland Commons Mall applicants have indicated their intent to widen Buckland Road between Pleasant Valley Road (i.e. , the limit of the I-86 widening) , and Smith Street. Clark Street - No significant highway improvements are currently propose or Clark Street. Chapel Road - Under the Interstate Trade-In program, by 1985/1986 Chapel Road will be reconstructed its entire length between John Fitch Boulevard and the Manchester Town Line. By virtue of special bonding authorizations of the Connecticut General Assembly (Special Acts 78-81 and 81-13) , the entire Town share (15%) of project costs will be borne by the State. The same bonding authorization paid for the Town' s share of the Buckland Road reconstruction project. The Town Council has authorized the Town Manager to execute this project' s state/town agreement (the State administers the project on behalf of the U. S. Department of Transportation) . This agree- ment is expected to be signed during this next federal fiscal year (after October 1) . A recent communication from the ConnDOT official responsible for supervising the project indicates that he will request the project be initiated as soon as federal funds become available, and further that the State funds be in place with the receipt of federal monies. In sum, this project is in its advanced stages prior to commencement of design work. -2- Connector Road - As with Chapel Road, the Connector Road is proposed to be built under the Interstate Trade-In program. It will cover a distance of 2.6 miles with termini at Pleasant Valley and Wheeler Roads (easterly) and State Route 30 (westerly) . It would be a two-lane highway, i.e. , one travel lane in each direction. The Connector Road has been endorsed by two neighborhood associations (Pleasant Valley and Cinnamon Springs) , the Town Council, the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Mass Transit and Highway Advisory Commission, and the region' s metropolitan planning organization - CRCOG. It is now listed on the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) , and in March was added to the urban systems network by the Federal Highway Administration. These latter actions make the project eligible for federal funding. On May 7, 1981, Governor William O'Neill signed Special Act 81-13 which amends a 1978 bond authorization to make State funds available for the Town share (15%) of project costs. This authorization, amounting to $900,000, however, is to be shared among the Buckland, Chapel and Connector Road projects. ConnDOT has informed us (June 8, 1981 communication) that an August 1981 "concept meeting" will be scheduled. This is the principal state/town meeting At which the scope of the project is defined. Interstate 291 is a new, limited access, four-lane highway proposed to be constructed between I-86 in Manchester and I-91 in Windsor. The project' s Environmental Impact Statement, which constitutes the only tangible obstacle to initiation of engineering design work, is now in Washington awaiting final approval of Drew Lewis, Secretary of Transportation. If this approval is handed down, construction is not expected to be completed prior to 1991. Thus, this project has little or no relationship to the proposed Buckland Commons Mall, which according to its developers, is projected to open in 1985 or 1986, if all required approvals -are secured. A half interchange would be built in the vicinity of Burnham Street and Clark Street, affording access westbound and egress eastbound. A similar half interchange would be built on Tolland Turnpike, and a full interchange at Route 5. Interstate 86 is scheduled to undergo complete redesi n and recon- struction near and including Interchange 93 (Buckland), with construction to be completed by 1985 and 1986. This will involve the interchange' s relocation from Tolland Turnpike to Manchester' s Buckland Street (eastbound exit and entrance) and Pleasant Valley Road (westbound exit and entrance) . Unlike the I-291 project, the reconstruction of I-86 will have a direct relationship to the proposed Buckland Commons Mall, in that the westbound exit and entrance ramps will be immediately in front of the mall site, and eastbound movements will be close at hand as well. This project should commence in 1983. -3- t Pleasant Valley Road - Pleasant Valley Road had previously been smoteT or complete reconstruction between Route 5 and the Manchester Town Line. This project has since been abandoned in favor of the proposed Connector Road. Funds earmarked for the Pleasant Valley project have been reassigned to the Connector Road. The Buckland Commons Mall applicants have indicated ("suggested") that Pleasant Valley Road should be widened to four lanes (two in each direction) between Buckland Street in Manchester and Wheeler Road in South Windsor. Smith Street - No improvements are proposed at this time for Smith treet; however, there has been some discussion regarding the benefits of closing the street either at its midpoint or at Buckland Road. Wheeler Road - No improvements are scheduled for Wheeler Road; however, the Buckland Commons Mall applicants have proposed cul-de-lacing the road just south of Smith Street, subject to Town approval. Peter R. DeMallie Director of Planning PRD/ml -4- ez- R-.r\x\J'] •.., i � !� ` ` �� `\(\ter •I L L I N G 7 0 N N�� i .. ' aWe ' "J MILLER ![off gv w t• e r Cct Vq a� a _ At I e cp- DgRT f RD. cc � \,' •,,,tip_... ^; Rr { eF jl``��_-� , •� 1'91 Alt SR HONO q ,-i),t�»� r � �•�`�y.� y\`�o�o� �li''�\7�^'``,,� .... ,°r, � � I r 3 SS �� ))• q S d•..,,y R�t:� 'wd 1^h, t SAND HFLL R C '�". 6 •J �it 2 ���J/ •`� (may'/ _ 1� �, gop �',�\�rs, i �` �:'•. � "s°'— �� k, a "{w., I awl. �//nl f�,, r'�` :l� .��pj7 �,_ RLL INOTON RD. "Y""'C`h .IO,.�. `{!:�n/1�•t t`�a ^^wit 1!i" .(LI !` C^ �'t. .�1� ` A.� i N, �cw,»H„+.� AT. 50 \ l�()t i a KE LY RD. ~ t: ,Fq g'®M/✓< dig G�•YA tj •,' Og44 /••' ti t �. 3, a ' Ate/{h ..a. '� j SLATER aST` `1 2gt y�\ao °yqa �'»a 1tk �4n u amp ftft OPOSED w u c�E�DR R� I ' TJK'N OF SJUTH W/NOSOR,CONI✓ECT�CUT T F 0 R D E A S T . - ... , . • K� i URBAN SYSTEMS NETWORK SOUTH WINDSOR (CT) TRANSPORTATION STUDY SOURCES: CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,1981, I SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT, 1981 ' . .. _t._._ ..s H. E.S. ACCIDENT CLUSTERS (1978-1980) ° - Type .of Accid.ent..... _._. Cluster Location A B C D E Total Rank Sullivan Ave. at Shopping Centers Z 72 5 77 1 Route 5 at Rt. 30 and 0.1 mile north 52 20 72 2 Route 30 at Pleasant Valley Rd. 34 9 43 3 Route 5 at Sullivan Ave. 28 8. 36 4 Sullivan Ave. at Sand Hill Rd. 20 9 29 5 Route 5 at Colony Rd. and Newberry Rd. 16 11 27 6 Five Corners (Buckland Rd., Rt. 30, Rt. 74, and Rt. 194) 23 4 27 7 Route 30 at Chapel Rd. 19 5 24 8 Sullivan Ave. at Troy Rd. and 0.1 mile east 16 6 22 9 Route 30 from Quarry Brook Dr. to Beldon Rd. 10 9 19 10 Route 5 at Chapel Rd. 11 8 19 11 Sullivan Ave. at Hillside Rd. 12 6 18 12 Rye St. at Troy Rd. and 0.15 mile east 15 3 18 13 Route 5 At Burnham St. 11 6 1 17 14 Route 5 at Pleasant Valley Rd. 11 4 1 16 15 Route 30 at Felt Rd.. 11 4 15 16 Route 5 at Governor's Hwy. 9 5 14 17 Route 5 at Strong Rd. 9 5 14 17 Strong Rd. from Pierce Rd. to the Podunk River Bridge 10 4 14 19 Route 30 at Foster St. 11 2 13 20 Rye St. at Sullivan Ave. 7 4 11 21 Sullivan Ave. between Troy Rd. and Hillside Rd. 7 3 1 11 21 South Windsor High School Parking Lot 10 0 1 11 23 Sullivan Ave. at Ayers Rd. 6 4 10 24 Buckland Rd. at Deming St. 6 3 9 25 Graham Rd. at Hayes Rd. 7- 2 9 26 Chapel Rd. at Long Hill Rd. 8 1 9 27 Dart Hill Rd. at Route 74 6 2 g 28 Clark St. at Route 30 7 1 8 29 Dart Hill Rd. at the Hairpin Curve 7 1 8 2.9 Graham Rd. at Nevers Rd. 3 4 7 31 Sullivan Ave. at Strong Rd. 3 4 7 31 Pleasant Valley Rd. at Long Hill Rd. 2 4 6 33 Avery St. at Beelzebub Rd. 4 2 6 34 Sullivan Ave. at Graham Rd. 4 2 6 34 Avery St. at Orchard Hill Dr. 5 1 6 36 Dart Hill Rd. at Vernon Town Line 2 3 5 37 Nevers Rd. at Sand Hill Rd. 2 3 5 37 Buckland Rd. at Smith St. 3 2 5 39 Griffin Rd. at Brookfield St. 3 2 5 39 Route 30 at Long Hill Rd. 4 1 5 40 Accident Type A - Property Damage Only B - Personal Injury C - Fatality D - Pedestrian Involvement E - Bicycle 1. Rank reflects absolute number of accidents only. The relative safety of the inter- sections is a function of other variables such as, turning movements and traffic volumes which were not addressed in this table. Accident Clusters Page 2 2. Includes accidents in both shopping centers and on Sullivan Avenue. For these three years there were 40 accidents in the Colony Shopping Center and 17 accidents on Sullivan Avenue at the Shopping Centers. South Windsor (CT) Transportation Study Sources: South Windsor Police Department, 1981 South Windsor Planning Department, 1981 0 R i \\ jN OR TN E L ` L / N G T O N °F -_— �OLCNY• •3 wy M0.LN°M •~� l7 t SMG»PIK CENT[R• s �+e ? l ��� ��— f Al 2-4 LLI .! ' i .` ®.Nr ww• v4 yVVV etMt�h �1•z,.J� �N I 2 �\ \'Cy" T�'y� Oy 'l d.Q'0. 1 r• "a.P M - a , a•_• - _ 7�rli s i T'F° ��� M TRAFFIC ACCI®EN•-• - TS IN 1980'. T_, T .-• TOW N• OF SO a-■ — UTH H'lNOSOR,CON _• c--" NECT Icur E A S T A° R T F 0 R D �-• � ropMp16 T LEGEND , 'rorALs' PROPERTY b—E.- 331 PERSONAL RWRY ' • FATALITY 136 PEOESTgAN NvoLYENETIt 2 • BICYCLE T All"f QLLE. • TOTAL—MENTS 22 313 UkMI Wm090R »LAI OEMRfYENT ' •4KJ1,„T�NRTAiION LTlpy E A 5 T E L L ! N G T 0 N• � ern "•7 0� � \ � f DJLDNT 2-4 s , at AU A O • l z f �-a M d iaxooWln�u � O- y � ��\ swSa� � ♦e' � a �• , un(,yea •-r • _ ,,, .-• � _ -BEN a - - s z � a,M l a � j I•, -/�P N 'emu i- M TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS IN 1979 o � , +�- TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR,CON NECTjCUT u ' ' E A S T .:A• R T F 0 R . LEGEND TOTALS' • • • PROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY 403 ■-I • PERSONAL INJURY 13B t FATALITY 3 ♦ PEDESTRIAN PNCLVEMENT 2 • ♦ BICYCLE T MOTORCYCLE° 20 • aDUTN WINDSDR PtAN11N0 RDNTMENT ARCawRK ;wvapoR;arwN arum r 1 ,, TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS 1978-- 1980 BUCKLAND RD. FIVE CORNERS ®- 23 ® ® 4 DEMING ST. ® - g ® - 3 Q 1000 ft. LEGEND SCALE ® PROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY ® PERSONAL INJURY 0 - 3 X FATALITY ® - 2 SMITH ST. i / SOURCE: S.W. POLICE DEPT. PREPARED BY: SOUTH WINDSOR(CT) PLANNING DEPT. 4/81 HES TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS I JCS 1980 ROUTE 5 CHAPEL. ' R-D. ® - II ® " 8 ROUTE 30 • - IJ 0 - 5 LONG HILL RD. LEGEND • PROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY _ ® PERSONAL INJURY 8 0 1000 ft. SOURCE' S.W. POLICE DEPT. _ - - SCALE PREPARED BY. SOUTH WINDSOR (CT) MANCH SE TER PLANNING DEPT. 4/81 HES TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS 1978 - 1980 ® -7 ® -2 C LARK ST 0 1000 ft. SCALE LEGEND ry ® PROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY ® PERSONAL INJURY PLEASANTA PEDESTRIAN INVOLVEMENT VALLEY RD. SOURCE: S.W. POLICE DEPT. PREPARED BY: SOUTH WINDSOR (CT) G�'Ble PLANNING DEPT. 4/81 Mp,N HES TH"o"AFFIC, Ts . 1978 19 so PLEASANT VALLEY RD. 8- 4 ® - 1 ROUTE 5 LEGEND ;`ROUTE 30 LONG HILL RD 0 PROPERTY DAMAGE ' ONLY `! J PERSONAL INJURY ® PEDESTRIAN INVOLVEMENT ® -34 0- 2 z ® BICYCLE ®I - 9 ® 4 U FATALITY 0 1000 ft. SCALE SOURCE: S.W. POLICE DEPT. PREPARED BY: SOUTH WINDSOR (CT) PLANNING DEPT. 4/81 SHEET I OF 2 . PLEASANT ,. VALLEY RD, N k , J Z , / PNG�ES'CER M � sw, ( f TREET ,tee sou -'ANGH sTER M I � pROppSEb 8 WAS. HpO0r< ` 4yd to PO CROFT DRIVE 9 Z � O V Pt-t'EY - � REST �P a• >a ST _J f O 'Q EX,ST. -- Co' 3 penneY �o 4USTRIAL PARK /� o ® v ®J4 CALUOtt 1 � 0137/y6 3PQq IL Tulf"PIKE tOLLPND a D Al O a 00 P a 1p as 1\ \� 3 SOUTH WINDSOR (CT) TRANSPORTATION STUDY J �co SOURCES: FUSS & O�NEILL ENGINEERS, 1981 SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DEPT, 1981 - t �t ♦ w. _G MEMORANDUM- TO: Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Peter R. DeMallie, Director of Planning DATE: July 10, 1980 RE: Policy Analysis - Wapping I. Introduction The purpose of this report is to initiate the planning process in order to establish a growth policy for the Wapping area. Previous planning efforts have simply become antiquated over time, in particular the twelve year old Town Plan of Development. As for background, the catalyst for this study was the submission of a zone change proposal which, if granted, would lead to the development of 120 residential condominiums at the southwest corner of Sand Hil•1 and Ellington Roads. Prior to rendering a decision on this application, the Commission requested this report concerning the parcel in question and the Wapping area in general. The report is organized into three sections : 1)existing conditions and limitations, including land use, zoning, development constraints, traffic volumes and accidents, and utility infrastructure. Maps portraying this information are included ; 2) prior planning efforts including how the 1968 Town Plan relates to the area,and the Plum Gulley Park plan; 3) the report concludes with a concept land use plan. Again, the purpose of this report is to initiate the process of developing a new growth policy for the Town's center. The concept plan's function is to start a dialogue concerning the best use of this land and to identify desirable and necessary improvements. I expect that this dialogue will continue into the fall. II. Existing Conditions/Limitations a) . Existing Land Use (see attached map) Presently the Wapping area is characterized by: Commercial uses along Route 30 and Buckland Road; religious institutions at the 5 corners and on Sand Hill Road near Sullivan; vast acreage in crops and hayfields; scattered single-family along existing road frontages as well as fully developed subdivisions; and the Town's Ayer Road Community Center, outdoor sports fields/tennis courts, the high school, and the Town Hall complex. The bottom line, however, is that the bulk of the land is vacant. b) . Zoning (see attached map) Zoning in the study area includes: RC on the southerly side of Route 30 and on the northerly side of Route 30 to the west of Community Road ; RO for a small area at the corner of Sand Hill and Sullivan; A-20 in the vicinity of the high school; A-30 on the westerly side of Ellington Road north of Sand Hill Road; AA-30 on the easterly side of Route 74 beyond the initial row of lots; with the vast majority of land designated RR. c). Ownership As portrayed on the attached Land Ownership and Property Line Base maps, the Town of South Windsor possesses the largest land acreage within the study area. This land includes the Town Hall complex, a vacant five acre tract near the intersection of Sand Hill and Nevers Roads, a largely undeveloped eighty acre tract on the easterly side of Nevers Road, and -the - educational/town/recreational complex off Ayers Road. Much of the remaining acreage is in large privately owned tracts including several owned by CL&P for electrical transmission lines. Given the relatively undivided nature of the acreage, now is the time to influence its development pattern. d) . Developmental Constraints Steep slopes within the interior of the triangular area formed by Sand Hill, Ellington, and Sullivan poses one limitation to development, particularly for single family subdivisions. Regulated wetlands areas are linear in form, following Plum Gulley Brook and a small watercourse to its east. The 100 year flood limits follow Plum Gulley Brook but do not effect the separate watercourse to its east. The CL&P transmission line corridor is in part owned fee simple by the utility. It is unlikely that this land would be made available for any use. The balance over which CL&P has only an easement might be utliized for gardens or some recreational uses, however, building development would be precluded. Public water service is available to virtually the entire study area, although lines have not been installed along Ellington Road south of Sand Hill Road. Public .sewers have not been installed along Sullivan Avenue, d). Developmental Constraints cont'd Nevers Road, nor Sand Hill. Given topographical featuresand facility proximity, gravity flow sewering of the entire area is within the realm of possibility. e) . Transportation 1) . Traffic Volumes Traffic counts in the study area are available from two sources. First is the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT), which conducted its counts in 1977. Second is Fuss & O'Neill Consulting En- gineers of Manchester. Fuss & O'Neill took counts in 1979 on behalf of their clients, Urso and Mitchell. ConnDOT's monitoring of Sullivan Avenue recorded 10,100 two-way trips in front of the Town Hall complex, and 12,400 trips just north of the Strong Road intersection. These volumes indicate Sullivan Avenue func- tions as a major arterial. Indeed, the roadway handles the second high- est traffic volume of the town's at-grade highways permitting direct access to abutting parcels. Route 5 is the volume leader with 21,200 trips recorded near the junction with Chapel Road. With the advent of J.C. Penney's, Buckland Commons, and the Man- chester Industrial Park, all of which could be generating traffic by 1985 or 1986, if not before, Sullivan Avenue's counts can be expected to in- crease appreciably. This underscores the necessity for minimizing the number of new curb cuts added to this stretch of road. On the other side of the Town Hall, Ellington Road had a volume of 3,800 trips in 1977. This figure was updated by Fuss & O'Neill to 4,100 trips for 1979. Thus at this location Ellington Road, a State highway, carries only 38% of the volume traveling Sullivan Avenue. To the north of the Sand Hill Road junction, however, Ellington Road adds another 3,300 vehicles, primarily traffic from or destined for Sand Hill Road. At this time the road could be termed a collector, or "through street". Its function can be expected to alter to more of an inter-town arterial when it begins to serve as a connector between the communities of South Windsor, Ellington, Vernon, and Somers, and the three aforementioned projects in Buckland sometime during the mid-1980's. Fuss & O'Neill's 1979 counts recorded 4,400 trips on Sand Hill Road. When these figures are compared to those counts on Sullivan Avenud end Ellington Road north and south of the Sand Hill junction, it is quite evi- dent that Sand Hill serves as a direct connection between Sullivan and Ellington for thousands of trips each day. No current traffic counts are available for Community Road nor Nevers Road. Valley View has approximately 1,600 trips each day. Abbe Road Extension is impassible. 2) . Traffic Accidents* The intersection of Sand Hill and Ellington Roads was one of the few intersections in South Windsor with no reported traffic accidents for ca- lendar year 1979. Other intersections within the study area with traffic safety problems, as evidenced by accidents, were: Nevers and Sand Hill (2 property damage, 2 personal injury) ; and the five corners (7 property, 3 personal injury). This latter intersection has one of the highest accident counts in town, exclusive of multiple intersections on Route 5. *See map entitled "Traffic Accidents/Volumes". 3 . Road & Intersection Conditions Sullivan Avenue is of adequate width in most sections, however, paved shoulders are absent or in need of repair. This is critical in view of the peak hour traffic loads. The road's traveled way is in need of selected resurfacing. Sullivan Avenue's most outstanding problem is the alignment of the S curve beginning at Sand Hill. The accident rate at this location is unacceptably high, demonstrating the need for realign- ment, and, where feasible, geometrical improvements for intersecting streets. Ellington Road, like Sullivan Avenue a state road, has multiple prob- lems: It too needs selected resurfacing and shoulder improvements. The curve midway between Sand Hill and Oakland Roads has vertical and horizontal line-of-sight problems and thus should be reconstructed and realigned. Sand Hill Road has a reconstructed bituminous concrete pavement structure recently overlayed by oil. It is of adequate width. The inter- section with Ellington Road needs limited improvements, although the absence of traffic accidents might indicate that more important improvements may be found in other areas. The road's intersection with Sullivan Avenue should be improved along with the eventual realignment of the Sullivan Avenue S curve. Abbe Road Extension exists only as a paper street. It appears to have a fifty foot right-of-way. 4 Plans Two basic planning documents influence roadway improvements in the project area - CRCOG's Transportation Improvement Program and the 1968 Town Plan of Development. The only projects dealt with in the TIP concern the reconstruction of Buckland Road from the 5 corners down to Plum Gulley Brook, and the re- alignment of the Sullivan Avenue S curve from .1 mile south of Sand Hill to .1 mile north of Pierce Road. The former project has been designed and should go out to bid shortly. The latter was dropped from the TIP for FY81 along with similar projects in Vernon and Manchester in order not to jeopardize higher priority urban systems projects. The 1968 Town Plan of Development recommended the following improve- ments* in the Wapping area: - Improve Route 74 (Ellington Road) - Construct a new Wapping bypass road between Ellington Road just south of Sand Hill and Ellington Road just west of Clark Street. - Improve Buckland Road - Improve Sullivan Avenue S curve - Build Abbe Road Extension from Sand Hill to Lake Street Indications are that the State will be improving the intersection of Sand Hill and Ellington Roads in the near term. No plans for improving transit services are known at this time. *Only those improvements which have not been constructed are listed III Prior Planning Efforts a) . 1968 Town Plan of Development The 1968 Town Plan of Development conveyed a number of development policies for the Wapping area. It recommended that the eightyacre town-owned tract on Nevers Road become the site of a new high school/park. It sug- gested that the high school might contain certain on-site community facilities such as an indoor/outdoor swimming pool (they didn't use the term natatorium!) . The Plan also recommended transportation improvements, as overviewed in the transportation section of this report. And finally, it recommended a trail along the utility corridor, and streambelt protection along a small portion of Plum Gulley Brook to the north of the Town Hall. No specific reference was made to expanding sewer service into the study area. b). Plum Gulley Park Plan A number of years ago the South Windsor Parks and Recreation Commission proposed a plan for the study area known as the Plum Gulley Park Plan. Insofar as funding was defeated by referendum, the plan was aborted. Evidently the Planning & Zoning Commission had not taken an official position on the pro- posal. As portrayed on the large map entitled "Plum Gulley Park", drawn by G.L. Montana & Assoc., the plan has a number of ideas which may very well be applicable today. The attached "Schematic Town Center" map showns many of the plan's concepts. Regarding the eighty acre town-owned tract along Nevers and Sand Hill Roads, the Plum Gulley Plan recommended a recreation complex situated in the center of the tract composed of such facilities as a pavillion, swimming pool, and hockey rink, as well as four ballfields along Sand Hill Road. The smaller schematic town center map also portrayed a future school site (con- sistent with the 1968 Town Plan) , another ballfield in the northwest corner, and nature trails through the site's wooded northeast corner. South of Sand Hill Road it proposed a library opposite Nevers Road, and elderly housing along the Ellington Road frontage. The schematic map also suggested a fire station northeast of the Town Hall, a police station northwest of the Town Hall, church and office uses along Sullivan Avenue on the north side of the CL&P easement, and a linear park with pedestrian trails between the library and Town Hall complexes. tV . POLICY ANALYSIS WAPPING LAND USE 4 BALLFIEL'0 ,. aY .. R D. FOOT- • • `J TENNIS BALL w ' W J CROPS - ♦ W Y W F C LL • • • 49 • S.W. • • • SOCCER • • • = CROPS CROPS • N CROPS a0 ^ OPEN CROPS FIELD CROPS Q • _—__� .. O• _ Q , 4f OPEN WOODS 4v OPEN FIELD cc FIELD ,'C1 OPEN L:i HEDGEROW A FIELD Z OPEN L? -HAY- FIELD FIELD • • • • S ND • • HILL '=' • • h` CHURCH CROPS D- ' • . p 4 P • CROP OPEN i- - E�w ♦ • • • • • _}- G FIELD- > CL&P Q�t* • ...,•. _ - CROPS O. CROPS CLg P' - OPEN c E ��Vp '�O• K o Oe ASEMENT v • _- FIELD JP G HAYFIELD • • TOW • • ALL �� • • P.O. B C7 • LISRAR J SINGLE FAMILY COMMERCIAL/BUSINESS . • `P�� t CEMETERY BASEBALL FIELD T. .3 CARTPATH WOODS (VACANT) WOODS • (VACANT) r • o • 1000 0 1000 SCAE_E SOUTH %llll`49SCR__PLANWN is nFPAF?T!.i;:vT II II Y. 19RC) �tss POLICY ANALYSIS -- WAPPING ZONING A-30 AYER R D. A-20 o R R °• m A 30 S ND HILL o RR L AA--30 J �T. 3 �j c RC RC 0 AA-30 1000 0 1000 SCALE SOUTH YlINDSOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT JULY, 1980 RES. Iv POLICY ANALYSIS -- WAPPING LAND OWNERSHIP 4--iLJ TOWN OF - 8OUTH. WINDSOR SLUZKANI8, AY ER R D. TOWN OF HEDWINA a SOUTH WILLIAM WINDSOR - TOWN OF LEICHTNER, MARTIN, J. F. COLLINS, L. Q - Q• cc co SOUTH CLBP COLLINS, P. Eli - - Z WINDSOR CONN. MISSIONARY TOWN HILL - - WATER N OF ©_ CO, SOCIETY SOUTH OF THE WINDSOR .SOCIETY DIOCESE GUACHIONE, REISTER, F. OF CONN, D. CL6 P FOR PRIEST,N. SAVINGS CL8 P 2 �� `O• KUPCHUNOS , RUSSO HILLS,T. REVEL. PRIEST, N. _ �L CORP, BROTHERS TOWN OF SOUTH �O P.O. WINDSOR Sru@F INC. Vbgq�Ch CH R. NS EN, M. T. 3 JARVIS' C • n ENTERPRISES r- aNC. 1000 0 1000 SCALE m SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT JULY, 1980 HES. POLICY ANALYSIS WAPPING PROPERTY LINE . BASE MAP i----+--L.J 14.0 ACRES . AYER R D. 58.5 ACRES 46.7 ACRES '5.26 - - 18.0 ACRES ACRES - - 25.5 ACRES - - - - cc 79.77 ACRES 15.3 . ACRES Eu D 22.78 ACRES Q _ SAND HILL 10.1 5.31 - D. ACRES ACRES 10.5 < ACRES 8.1 9.5 ACRES ACRES 19.25 _. ACRES 12.9 ACRES `O 19.5 ACRES 72.6 10.0 ACRES �L 39.8 ACRES ACRES 13.93 /<O ACRES 13.0 9.5 ACRES ACRES 19.48 6.5 ACRES AC. T. 3 6.7 C 9.2 , ACRES ACRES 1000 0 1000 SCALE SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DEPARTMFNT itil Y_ 1980 HES. POLICY ANALYSIS WAPPING UTILITIES AYe-rs • R d. / • z. tr � _gin d i 11 It • ���`r� o �r ao F i I.v v~ C Q 0---0--0---► EXISTING SANITARY SEWERS ARROWS INDICATE THE Community DIRECTION OF FLOW Rd. —" —_ WATER LINES Rt 30 - - M.D.C. HYDRANTS �~ • CONN. WATER HYDRANTS i 1000 0 1000 Sr A. SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DFPART!,IFNT .1111 Y- 1.9A0 PFC N •- POLICY ANALYSIS -- WAPPING TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS/ VOLUMES AYE. D A 12,400 0 > m EU m Z 4400 Q 7400 SAND HILL D. 5- 3- � 4100 1600 TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS TOTALS 37- • PROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY 17 , PERSONAL INJURY 10,100 _3800 TRAFFIC VOLUMES - ADT I - e PEDESTRIAN INVOLVEMENT 4- f- CONNDOT TRAFFIC 55 3-■ COUNTS- 1977 E--8400 FUSS & ONEILL- 1979 T. 3 7400 7600 0 1000 0 1000 I t I SCALE SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DEPARTMENT JULY, 1980 H.ES. IV Proposed Concept Plan (see attached map) After digesting the information discussed above concerning; transpor- tation, existing land use, zoning, land ownership, infrastructural possibilities and constraints, natural features, likely future development, and previous planning efforts, the following concept land use plan for the Wapping study area was formulated: a). Transportation Improvements The following transportation improvements are recommended: - As a first priority, the realignment of the Sullivan Avenue S curve. - As a second priority, make line-of-sight improvements to the curve on Ellington Road to the north of the Town Hall entrance. - Installation of paved shoulders on Sullivan Avenue and Ellington Road. - Realign the intersection of Sand Hill and Ellington Roads. - Install sidewalks along all through streets concurrent with de- velopments. - Construct pedestrian and bicyclist paths adjacent to Plum Gulley Brook and the other unnamed watercourse to its east, such to inter- lin k the residential commercial, is and institutional uses. - Institute transit services as supporting population densities and transportation nodes materialize. - Minimize the number of new curb cuts on all streets, especially Sullivan Avenue and Ellington Road. b) . Commercial Establish commercial uses on the Vacant 9.2 acre parcel fronting on Route 30, as well as a small neighborhood commercial (e.g. , small grocery/ convenience store) area along the easterly side of Sullivan Avenue in order to serve the future adjoining residential population. It is important that this latter use be sited within pedestrian proximity of the proposed housing, especially housing for the elderly. c) . Residential Single-family residential uses are proposed for the large privately owned parcels: 1) to the north of Sand Hill Road, 2) to the east of Route 74 (Ellington Road) , and 3) to the west of Sullivan Avenue. The second site in particular is best suited for single-family residential uses insofar as it is abutted on three sides by similar uses and any other use might be in- compatible with these existing developments. Cost limitations might arise for the provision of public sewerage for the first and third sites insofar as sewer lines have not been installed in Nevers or Sand Hill Roads, nor Sullivan Avenue. Multi-family housing exclusively for the elderly is proposed for the two sites on either side of Plum Gulley Brook to the north of the Town Hall. This would provide locations near plenty of activity, abutting parks for daily walks, within easy pedestrian access of the library, town hall fa- cilities, post office, at least one church, and the proposed neighborhood commercial. POLICY ANALYSIS - WAPP.ING CONCEPT PLAN AYF�, •. RD. OK BRO v . J Qv - SINGLE - MAJOR AMILY SINGLE ROAD _ o . REALIGNMENT FAMILY tr cc TOWN Q MINOR. ROAD SINGLE FACILITIES/ FAMILY Eup - REALIGNMENT _ 4 Z PARK 3 - RESOURCE �f RECOVERY J , STATION / S N HILL COMMUTE D. PARKING 10 QQ' MF- (NEIGHBORHOOD FAMILY •• - COMMERCIA GARDENS MF- LL -.. SINGLE FAMILY ELDERLY a vv Cn °• 5`� CURVE IMPROVEMENT C� cz ... T 3 COMMERCIAL OFFICES/ •• RETAIL D ,:. 1000 0 1000 SCALE - _ _RnlITH unXlnenu DI AmwING nt7otzTMCAIT filly IC180 c TRAFFIC AND ACCESS � ANALYSIS � BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL � South Windsor-Manchester, Connecticut. 1' Prepared Far M Kravco, Inc. and Arthur M. Fischer, Inc. 1 By 1 Wilbur Smith antAsso New Haven, Connecticut March, 1981 wiliur SmX and Aijociatej CABLE WILSMITH 155 WHITNEY AVENUE TELEX 57-3439 M J' P.O.BOX 78119 //aw ,W.en-, (fn onn. . 06507 PHONE (203) 865-2191 March 30, 1981 KRAVCO, Inc. 160 King of Prussia Plaza P.O. Box 135 King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Dear Sirs : I' We are pleased to submit this report entitled, '.'Traffic and Access Analysis, Buckland Commons Mall, South Windsor - Manchester, Connecticut . " The report presents findings relative to traffic implications for the proposed one million square-foot regional shopping center development . The scope of the study included an inventory of roadway and traffic characteristics, an analysis of combined traffic volumes for the 1985/1986 design year, and the development of traffic engineering recommendations. Since the findings of this report are to assist in obtaining necessary zoning in South Windsor, we have concentrated our attention on those roadways and impacts in South Windsor . The study indicated the required roadway improvements due to the proposed development for two basic conditions : 1. The upgrading of Interstate Route 86 without the construction of Interstate Route 291; and, 2 . The completion of the Connecticut Department of Transportation proposed expressway network including Interstate Route 291 and its connection to Buckland Commons Mall. It is our hope that this report will be of assistance to you in obtaining the necessary zoning in the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut . Respectfully submitted, P Y WILBUR SMITH AND ASSOCIATES, INC . E . M. Whitlock Senior Executive Vice President EMW/db Registered Professional Engineer Connecticut No. 6739 ALLIANCE,OH-BRISBANE-CAMDEN,NJ-CHARLESTON,SC-COLUMBIA,SC-DENVER-FALLS CHURCH,VA-HONG KONG-HOUSTON-KNOXVILLE-LANSING-LEXINGTON,KY LOS ANGELES-MELBOURNE-MIAMI-NEW HAVEN-NEW YORK-PERTH-PITTSBURGH-RALEIGH.NC-RICHMOND-SAN FRANCISCO-SINGAPORE-TORONTO-WASHINGTON.OC CONTENTS PART PAGE i' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I INTRODUCTION 1 Scope of Study 1 Site Location 2 Project Description 2 II ROADWAY AND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS 3 Roadways 3 Expressways 4 Major Arterials 6 Collector Roadways 7 Existing Highway Traffic Volumes 8 III ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC 11 Anticipated Site Traffic 11 Anticipated Approach Distribution 12 Future Highway Traffic Volumes 15 Combined Traffic Volumes 16 Public Transportation 20 IV ROADWAY AND ACCESS CONSIDERATIONS 21 Programmed Roadway Improvements 21 State Highway Improvements 21 Town Highway Improvements 23 Buckland Commons Mall Site Plan 25 South Windsor Roadways 26 South Windsor Roadways 28 Pleasant Valley Road 28 Chapel Road 29 Burnham Street 29 Clark Street _ 29 Buckland Road 30 Manchester Roadways 30 Buckland Street 30 Pleasant Valley Road 31 Interstate Route 86/Buckland Street Interchange 31 Conclusions 31 ILLUSTRATIONS FOLLOWS FIGURE PAGE 1 Regional Setting 1 2 Site Environs 1 3 Commercial Site Traffic Approach Distribution 14 TABULATIONS TABLE PAGE 1 Existing Highway Traffic Volumes - 1981 10 2 Estimated Traffic Generation 13 3 Approach Distribution of Generated Traffic 14 4 Estimated 1985/1986 Combined Traffic Volumes 17 5 Estimated 1985/1986 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 18 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Summary of Traffic Study for Buckland Commons Mail The scope of work associated with these analyses includes a detailed field reconnaissance of existing roadways and traffic operations; collation of available data, traffic volume and roadway improvements; meetings with Town and State personnel; development of an approach distribution for site generated traffic of a one million square-foot regional shopping center; estimations of generated traffic volumes; estimation of com- bined 1985/1986 traffic volumes ; and an assessment of roadway adequacy for satisfying combined 1985/1986 volumes. In determining the adequacy of the area roadways for the design year, two basic alternative plans were studied: 1. Completion of Interstate Route 86 and Buckland Road re- construction without construction of Interstate Route 291 and the connector roadway; -and, 2 . Completion of Interstate Route 86 and Buckland Road, Interstate Route 291, and the connector roadway. For South Windsor roadways, adequate capacity exists on the various approach roadways to safely and efficiently satisfy estimated combined volumes. The proposed Interstate Route 86 improvement and its interchange at Buckland Road are important to distributing generated traffic between the Buckland Commons Mall= project and the regional highway system. This future road- way network can be adapted to safely and efficiently satisfy an- ticipated 1985/1986 site and highway traffic volumes. ES-1 The proposed Interstate Route 291 or its alternative, to- gether with a connector roadway linking Pleasant Valle Road, g Y g Y should substantially relieve the local east-west streets in South ' Windsor and keep traffic at its present level. As an alternative to the construction of a facility in the Interstate Route 291 corridor, provision of just a connector roadway between Pleasant Valley Road and Burnham Street in the vicinity of Chapel Road should also relieve east-west traffic. It is important to note that even if Interstate Route 291 and its connector roadway are not in place before the center opens, there is adequate capacity on the existing South Windsor arterial roadway system to accommodate estimated 1985/1986 traffic volumes. of course, limited roadway improvements will be required on the roadways abutting the site. ES-2 ANALYSES SUMMARY OF PROJECTED 1985/1986 TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON EXISTING SOUTH WINDSOR ROADS (WITHOUT INTERSTATE ROUTE 291 IMPROVEMENTS OR CONNECTOR ROAD) ESTIMATED 1985/1986 ESTIMATED BUCKLAND COMMONS TWO-WAY TRAFFIC MALL TRAFFIC DURING PEAK HOUR Average LEVEL (5: 00-6: 00 P.M. ) Daily Peak Hour OF Percent of LOCATION Traffic 5:00-6: 00 P.M. SERVICE Vehicles Total Traffic (ve is es) (vehicles Burnham Street West of Clark Street 2,650 380 "B" 80 21 Chapel Road West of Clark Street 4,600 685 "B" 35 5 Clark Street South of Pleasant Valley Road 4, 325 525 "B" '115 22 td Ei Pleasant Valley Road West of Clark Street 5, 000 505 "B" 115 23 Pleasant Valley Road East of Clark Street 9, 100 940 11cle220 23 Buckland Road North of Smith Street 9, 575 1, 110 "C" 190 17 LEVEL OF SERVICE Level of Service is the national design standard for analyzing traffic flow and the capacity of any roadway. The general design standard for level of service is in the range of "C" to "D" . The various levels of service are described below: Level of Service "B" - within the zone of stable flow, but speed somewhat restricted due to traffic conditions . There is reasonable freedom for drivers to select their speed and lane of operations, and probability of restricted flow is low. Average overall speed of 25 miles per hour is provided. Level of Service "C" - within the zone of stable flow, but speed and maneuverability closely controlled by relatively high volumes. Drivers are restricted in their freedom to select their own speeds, change lanes and/or pass. Satisfactory operating speed is obtained, with service volumes suitable for design practices . Average overall speed of 20 miles per hour is provided. Level of Service "D" - approaching unstable flow but still maintaining tolerable operating speeds - 15 miles per hour . Drivers have little freedom to maneuver ; comfort and convenience become more restricted. Conditions are tolerable for short periods of time and delays at intersections may become extensive with some cars waiting two or more cycles . Level of Service "E" - usually defined as "Capacity" of the roadway . A typical speed is approximately 15 miles per hour . The flow may be somewhat unstable with momentary stoppages necessary, and back up on approaches to intersections. ES-4 57 14 57 57 Longmeadow 159 - - - - - -- -- 10 MASSACHUSETTS 83 202 CONTICUT 5 _ MASSACHUSETTS NEC 20 .i I CONNECTICUT 186 179 I 75 32 19 L 91 17920 189 190 Enfield 191 219 Granby 20 15 Stafford 83 Springs Windsor I i 44 10 187 Locks 2 I 32 0 191 30 315 Bloomfield 75 Simsbury 5 SITE 74 74 179 West Simsbury 18 19 Rockville 15 44 16 Windsor 194 74 83 30 195 1 178 o South Bloomfield 17 15 Windsor 2 30 31 32 85 Coventry 17 ♦ 44A 44 91 83 Bolton Notch 195 167 10 I 44 6 31 202 W.Hartford ♦ anchester Covventry 4 HART ORD Hartford 4 83 32 I 8 173 3 6 ethmfi Id losionbury 94 b a 17 2 I6 91 Bristol . mew Britain 85 66 87 Io 72 S.Glastonbury I ocky Hill 71 7 3 71 �wi 99 17 0 7 66 85 15 2 - 16 7A I� 9 71 1 72 Colchester 2 66 Meriden 21 Middletown 16 149 66 17 9 1 85 10 15 151 3 If �o 82 68 14 A BI 42 68 ' I51 14 s 91 IS IS 17 n BI 82 LEGENO MINE PROPOSED ROADWAY 0 2 4 6MILES _EXISTING ROADWAY REGIONAL SETTING BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL SOUTH WINDSOR-MANCHESTER, CONNECTICUT wilL, FIGURE I m Imo Im us vas an n'! so an RD SANDHILL 74 . RO 194 4`O C �oSTE`` U 9 • �F9 a m v✓v FRS Hkp ELLINGTON 30 RD. BELDON 30 RD. o y 0 cq �� H � h Vp(i 'PpA a 5 G OFM/NC j� pLFA o � ST � Sou1M�h�sler, 4 cY a MiipG tvP 30 m N Sj 30 PopO � vA<LF S SITE �� D TD oz Cy J Y co MiTN //, ��. W 44 CLAN TAYIAR ST- RSDGE ADFL w�.e:s`i; -'_ST -- a •( O••..:...: :::::.... en 15 86 83 South Windsor BURNHAM — LEWND- East Hartford p�0 Q oQ \scp ADAMS ST NORTH Mp�N ST $ \\ NRNP\xE e W \ Q 3 ix PROPOSED INTERCHANGE I-86 & BUCKLAND ST. z V's� W ti t \\ co WOODLAND m ,n 2 83 z jPKE, o aF Tp E WEST SPK tOyLpNp - 44 4•F MIDDLE i l f ' NEW STATE RD. 0 1600 3200 4800FEET SITE ENVIRONS BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL wil&„Sal a d SOUTH WINDSOR-MANCHESTER,CONNECTICUT FIGURE 2 3 . Recommendations - Based on the analyses of estimated combined traffic volumes, the ade- quacy of the external roadway system was evaluated. Site Location The proposed site of this commercial development is an approximate 111-acre parcel of land situated in the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester, Connecticut . Figure 2 shows the site in relation to the town boundaries and roadway network. The land was formerly a tobacco farm owned by the Hartman Tobacco Company and used for agricultural purposes. Land use - in the im- mediate site vicinity is predominantly residential with the Buckland Industrial Park abutting the southern boundary. Pro-ject Description Buckland Commons Mall will be a regional commercial center scheduled to be completed by 1985 . This commercial center will consist of approximately 1, 000, 000 square feet of gross leaseable area anchored by four major department stores . Buckland Commons Mall is generally bounded by Smith Street to the north, Buckland Street to the east Pleasant P an Valley Road to the south, and Wheeler Road to the west . -2- 1 Part II ROADWAY AND TRAFFIC CONDITIONS The existing and future roadway network was studied to determine roadway and traffic conditions. A field reconnaissance was undertaken to determine the functional classification, lane delineation, pavement width, and surface conditions of the exist- ing roadway network. Existing traffic count data were obtained from the Connecticut Department of Transportation and selected reports from Manchester and South Windsor . The scheduling and detailing of future roadway improvements were obtained from State and Town officials . Roadways The existing and future roadway networks, illustrated in Figures 1 and 2, can be divided into three functional classi- fications : 1. Expressways - This system serves the major activity centers of a metropolitan area and the highest traffic volume corridors . The system serves the major portion of trips entering and exiting the urban area, as well as the majority of through movements bypassing the central city . Interstate Routes 84, 86, and 91 are classified as expressways .. 2 . Major Arterials - The arterial system serves relatively large volumes of traffic making both long and short trips. The system serves adjacent land uses and provides an intracommunity continuity. Routes 5, 30, and 44 are classified as arterial road- ways. -3- Collector Roadways - The collector system connects the arterial system and feeds local streets . Col- lector roadways provide land access service for residential neighborhoods, commercial, and industrial areas . In the site environs, roadways such as Buckland Street and Pleasant Valley Road function as collector roadways. Expressways - The existing expressway system provides good regional access to the site (see Figure 1) . The proposed express- way network will increase the accessibility of points west and south of the site. Expressways of prime importance to the site include Interstate Rcutes 84, 86, and 291, described as follows : Interstate Route 84 - This limited access facility links Westchester County, New York, to the city of Hartford, Connecticut . Upon completion, it will extend from Hartford east to Rhode Island. In the site environs, the six-lane facility connects downtown Hartford to Interstate Route 86 in East Hartford . The expressway then continues east, bypassing the Manchester town center, to Bolton Notch. A small section of roadway between Interstate Route 86 and Spencer Street in Manchester is incomplete. Interstate Route 86 This limited access facility links -Interstate Route 84 in East Hartford with the Massachusetts Turnpike (Interstate Route 90) . In the site environs, the facility interchanges with Middle Turnpike (U.S. Route 44) , Tolland Turnpike, and Deming Street (Connecticut Route 30) . The facility is scheduled for widening by the Connecticut Department of Transpor- tation to a six-lane divided facility with exclusive high- occupancy lanes. -4- The proposed improvement of Interstate Route 86 (State Project ##76-88) is to upgrade the expressway from the vicinity of the Hockanum River east to just east of Slater Street, a distance of 3 .4 miles, in the immediate vicinity of the Buckland Commons Mall site. The current schedule is as follows : - Design completion : early 1982 ; - Construction advertising: July, 1982 ; - Construction initiation : Fall, 1982 ; and, - Construction completion: .,Fall/Winter, 1985. Approximately 50 percent of the design work has been completed. A 500-space commuter parking lot is also proposed west of Buckland Street and east of the proposed westbound off-ramps from Interstate Route 86 . Interstate Route 291 - Interstate Route 291 (State Project #k132-78) is a proposed new expressway connecting Interstate Route 91 in Windsor and Interstate Route 86 in Manchester via the existing Bissell Bridge which crosses the Connecticut River. It is planned as a four-lane divided highway with grade-separated interchanges . on the east side of the Connecticut River, full interchanges are planned with U.S. Route 5 , the Tolland Turnpike, and Interstate Route 86 . At the intersection of Burnham and Clark Streets, a half-diamond interchange with Interstate Route 291 may be provided, permitting access to and egress from Tntei�state._.Route 2.91 ..west. The development schedule for Interstate Route 291 has not been established, as Federal approvals have not yet been received. The State has submitted an Environmental -5- Impact Statement (EIS) for Interstate Route 291 to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for their review and comments. No comments have been received to date. In addition, a Community Impact Analysis is being undertaken by the U.S . Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) . The Final Report is now being prepared. HUD' s decision on the project is expected to be announced this spring. Ma'ior Arterials - Arterials serving the site include Connecticut Route 30 and the Tolland Turnpike. A description of these arterials follows : Connecticut Route 30 - This arterial connects U.S. Route 5 to Connecticut Route 190. Route 30 in the vicinity of the site is a two-lane roadway varying from 24-30 feet in width with good surface condition. The posted speed limit on this roadway varies between 35 and 45 miles per hour . Tolland Turnpike - This facility connects U.S. Route 44 near U.S. Route 5 in East Hartford to Connecticut Route 30 near Oakland Street in Manchester . The two-lane roadway varies between 24-30 feet without shoulders . Surface conditions are generally good and speed limits are posted between 30 and 35 miles per hour . Recently, the Tolland Turnpike/Interstate Route 86 interchange has been upgraded to provide four lanes of through traffic on the Tolland Turnpike from the entrance to J.C. Penney ' s Distribution Center to just east of Interstate Route 86 . In addition, traffic signals and turning lanes have been installed at the Interstate Route 86 on/off ramps. The intersection with Buckland Street also is to be improved with signalization and turning lanes. -6- Collector Roadways - There e several are s v ral collector roadways connecting the arterial and expressway system. These include Buckland Street, Burnham Street, Clark Street, and Pleasant Valley Road-Windsor Street . Buckland Street - This north-south collector facility links Connecticut Route 30 .to Tolland Turnpike and serves adjacent residential areas . In South Windsor its name changes to Buckland Road. The two-lane roadway does not have shoulders and varies in width from 20 to 30 feet . The posted speed limit is 35 miles per hour . This collector has a generally rolling alignment with fair to good surface condition. 1 As part of the I-86 improvement and its interchange with Buckland Street, the facility will be improved to a four-lane roadway, 52 feet in width between Tolland Turnpike and Pleasant Valley Road . Burnham Street - This two-lane street serves as an east-west link between U.S . Route 5 and Chapel Road , and dead ends just east of Chapel Road. The roadway surface varies in pavement width from 20 to 30 feet and is in fair to poor condition. (This street will be eliminated with the new Interstate Route 86 interchange. Windsor Street - This north/south roadway connects the new section- of Pleasant Valley Road with the Tolland Turnpike . The roadway surface varies in pavement width from 20 to 30 feet, and is in fair to poor condition. This street will be eliminated with the new Interstate Route 86 interchange. Chapel Road - This east-west roadway runs approximately parallel to and south of Pleasant Valley Road from U.S. Route 5 to Burnham Street. In this area, the roadway -7- is 24 to 30 feet wide with poor shoulders . In Manchester, from the Burnham Street intersection to the Tolland Turnpike, Chapel Road recently has been upgraded to a four-lane divided roadway in order to serve the Buckland Industrial Park. Clark Street - Clark Street is a two-lane north- south collector linking Burnham Street to Connecticut Route 30. The facility is approximately 20 feet wide with no shoulders and a good pavement surface . The roadway serves adjacent residential uses including the Cinnamon Spring Condominiums and Pleasant Valley Apartments at the intersection of Clark Street and Pleasant Valley Road. Pleasant Valley Road - This roadway is an east-west collector serving local trips between U.S. Route 5 and Tolland Turnpike via Windsor Street and Buckland Street . In South Windsor, the two-lane street has approximately 20 to 24 feet of pavement width without shoulders and a 30 to 35 mile-per-hour speed limit . Traffic flow on this street is controlled by frequent "STOP" signs and several traffic signals . In Manchester, this facility recently has been relocated approximately 500 feet to the northeast of its former site . This new section of Pleasant Valley Road is 30 feet wide with curbs in place . Existing Highway Traffic Volumes Traffic volumes were obtained from the Connecticut Depart- ment of Transportation and other traffic studies completed for the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester, and updated to the -8- year 1981. Table 1 indicates two-way daily and afternoon peak- hour traffic volumes on selected roadways in the site environs . The highest traffic volume occurs on Interstate Route 86 . Traffic volumes along this corridor range between 83, 200 vehicles per day south of Middle Turnpike to 56, 900 vehicles per day east of Deming Street . Tolland Turnpike just east of Interstate Route 86 has an average daily volume of 8,200 vehicles per day. The collector roadways have somewhat lower traffic volumes . Buckland Road has a volume of approximately 6, 500 vehicles per day south of Smith Street, and Pleasant Valley Road has a volume of 3, 300 vehicles per day east of Clark Street . -9 Table 1 EXISTING HIGHWAY TRAFFIC VOLUMES - 1981 Buckland Commons Mall South Windsor-Manchester, Connecticut TWO-WAY VOLUMES Average Daily Peak ROUTE LOCATION Traffic Hour (1) Interstate South of Middle Turnpike 83 ,200 7 ,850 Route 86 Between Middle Turnpike and Tolland Turnpike 61,500 6 ,065 Between Tolland Turnpike and Deming Street 60 ,800 5 ,770 Between Deming Street and Connecticut Route 83 56 ,900 5 ,350 Tolland Turnpike East of Interstate Route 86 8 ,200 ,7.80 West of Interstate Route 86 4 ,500 660 East of Deming Street 11 ,000 950 Deming Street West of Avery Street 8 ,800 775 Buckland Road North of Tolland Turnpike 10 ,000 1,035 South of Smith Street 6 ,500 740 North of Deming Street 8 ,000 770 Clark Street South of Pleasant Valley Road 450 55 Pleasant Valley Road East of Clark Street 3 ,300 330 East of Route 5 3 ,500 345 Burnham Street West of Clark Street 1,050 165 Chapel Road West of Clark Street 2 ,350 345 (1) Afternoon peak hour 5 :00 - 6 :00 P .M. SOURCE: Updated from 1979 data compiled by Wilbur Smith and Associates , based on 1977-1979 data from the Connecticut Department of Trans- portation, a study conducted for the Town of South Windsor by Close Jensen and Miller entitled "Burnham Street Traffic Study - October, 1978 , " a traffic study conducted for the Town of Manchester by F.A. Hesketh and Associates - January, . 1977 , and data for the air quality analysis conducted by Fuss and O'Neill for J .C. Penney Company. -10- ' Part III ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC The anticipated number of vehicular trips generated by the proposed development was estimated. Combined future volumes for the period 1985/1986 were estimated,based on existing volumes ' factored to account for normal growth, and the addition of generated traffic from Buckland Commons Mall and the Buckland Industrial Park including the J. C. Penney ' s distribution center. Site- generated volumes were estimated based on studies conducted ' by the Consultant and several research agencies . Other source materials included studies done for the Towns of Manchester and South Windsor, and by the Connecticut Department of Transportation. Anticipated Site Traffic In developing estimated combined traffic volumes, consider- ation has been given to Buckland Commons Mall and the Buckland Industrial Park (BIP) . Traffic generation characteristics for the BIP have been obtained from a study for the Town of South Windsor . (') Normal growth in area traffic has been assumed at one and one-half percent per year consistent with other work under- way by the Connecticut Department of Transportation. Generation for the Buckland Commons Mall project has been determined by Wilbur Smith and Associates, based on the type -of development proposed and generation characteristics of similar type develop- ments. (1) Burnham Street Traffic Study prepared for the South Windsor Department of Public Works by Close, Jensen and Miller, October, 1978. -11- The number of dailyvehicles generated b the proposed g Y P P development was estimated for the design year of 1985/1986. It is -estimated that the commercial development will generate approxi- mately 15, 590 two-way vehicle trips per day (See Table 2) . Analyzing the various hourly traffic generation flows for Buckland Commons Mall, it was determined that the total combined traffic volumes are expected to be greatest in the hour between 5:00 and 6: 00 P.M. on a typical weekday. Therefore, the estimated evening peak highway hour volumes have been used in further analysis within this study. r Anticipated Approach Distribution The peak-hour approach distribution for retail traffic was estimated based on data and analysis contained in a recently completed market study. (2) Based on the expected percent of total sales in the 11-town primary and secondary trade area, generated traffic was assigned to the approach roadwaysrbased on minimum time paths. Table 3 and Figure 3 summarize the results of this analysis . It should be noted that.the analysis has been undertaken with and without a major transportation facility in the Interstate Route 291 corridor . The highest site traffic corridor is Interstate Route 86 with the largest percentage of traffic approaching from south of the site (see Figure 3) . Approximately 49 percent of the approaching Buckland Commons Mall traffic is expected to approach (2) Comparison Goods Sales Potential Analysis-Buckland Commons, prepared for Arthur M. Fischer, Inc . and Kravco, Inc. , by Larry Smith and Company, Ltd . , April, 1979. -12- Table 2 ESTIMATED 'TRAFFIC GENERATION rBuckland Commons Mall South Windsor-Manchester, Connecticut , NUMBER OF VEHICLES TIME PERIOD FOR TYPICAL WEEKDAY (1) Peak Highway Hour (2) Enter 1, 370 Exit 1,810 Peak Shopper Hour (3) Enter 2, 330 Exit 1, 970 Peak Exiting Hour (4) Enter 1, 080 Exit 2, 700 ' All Day Enter 15, 500 Exit 15, 500 (1) Based on shopping mall having 1 ,000 ,000 square-feet of gross leaseable area. ' (2) Afternoon peak hour - 5 :00 - 6 :00 P .M. (3) Peak shopper hour - 7 :00 - 8 :00 P.M. (4) Peak exiting hour - 9 :00. - 10 :00 P .M. SOURCE: Wilbur Smith and Associates, Inc. , based on Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation for Shopping Centers, dated 1979 . r -13- Table 3 APPROACH DISTRIBUTION OF "GENERATED TRAFFIC Buckland Commons Mall South Windsor - Manchester, Connecticut PERCENT OF RETAIL APPROACH APPROACH ROADWAY LOCATION GENERATED TRAFFIC Interstate Route 86 North of Site 22 .5 South of Site 49 .0 Tolland Turnpike West of I-86 5 .5 ' Deming Street East of Slater Street --- Buckland Street North of Site- 6 .0 New State Road South of Tolland Turnpike 5 .0 North Main Street East of New State Road 5 .0 Pleasant Valley Road West of Site 3 .5 (0 .5) (1) Chapel Road West of Site 1 .0 (0 .5) (1) Burnham Street West of Site 2 .5 (1 .0) (1) Interstate Route 291 West of Site 0 .0 (5 .0) (1) TOTAL 100 .0 ' (1) Values in parentheses indicate estimated percent of approaching generated traffic on a particular roadway with Interstate Route 291 or its alternative in operation. SOURCE: Wilbur Smith and Associatesobased on analysis of market study ' prepared by Larry Smith and Company, Ltd. , dated April , 1979 . -14- SrR� �? S4 ILL 74 e RD. Ro 194 e F �pSTEe y Lu a S/fjl.Y ELLINGTON � R D. BELOON RD. 30 o p�FA3 Sr SoylA viibe nd 3.5 3" (0.5) SITE L'qC / TO o c �Ey y, SM/Ty 6.0 "/ 44 1011AN0 TA(LOR ST. Bah 1.0 we.":ii' 's t;:ST. "yam" a � 86 93 3.::::Ett: ::....•�...:.:....... `` 4 NNE�� .... ::::'.'........• 0.0 o;�� 22.5 ��� Sou/A Windsa BURNHAM to Eo3l/hr/ford �\ •LEGEND• 2.5 0 0-0) 1 `\�O �p�� r SITE TRAFFIC, e1 \� 0.0 %WITHOUT I-291 \;O ADAMS ST.. �RTH 5.O Mp`N sr AND CONNECTOR ROAD SUS SITE TRAFFIC, \ (00) %WITH I-291 4° \ AND CONNECTOR ROAD PROPOSED INTERCHANGE I-86 d BUCKLAND ST. i _ pN \� a r Itom" z 5.5 5.0 ST. 1 `\\ WOODLAND 49.0 c 3 r 2. B3 z M/� TpK6 o p T WEST �LpNO 44 jOJYF MIDDLE jPKE Z f I ' NEW STATE RD. SITE TRAFFIC APPROACH DISTRIBUTION D 1600 3zoo �BOOFEET WIL,-S ad a,d—4.i b, BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL SOUTH WINDSOR-MANCHESTER.CONNECTICUT FIGURE 3 1 , r ' the site from the south via Interstate Route 86. Buckland Street south of Interstate Route 86 is expected to satisfy approximately ' 1.5. 5 percent of approaching traffic from the south, east, and. west (Manchester and East Hartford) and from north of the site about ' 6 percent (South Windsor, East Windsor and Ellington) . A trans- portation imporvement in the Interstate Route 291 corridor con- structed either as an Interstate or arterial facility is expected to provide substantial relief to Pleasant Valley and Chapel Roads and Burnham Street. For example, 'the percentage of approach ' traffic on Pleasant Valley Road is expected to decrease from an estimated 3 .5 percent to 0.5 percent with a facility in the ' Interstate Route 291 corridor. ' Approach distribution for the BIP-generated traffic has been obtained from the earlier-referenced study conducted for the Town of South Windsor . ' Future Highway Traffic Volumes Future highway traffic volumes were estimated for the design year 1985/1986. The background traffic estimates are based on available existing 1979 traffic volumes projected to 1985/1986 , assuming an annual growth rate of 1.5 percent . Additionally, the anticipated volumes reflect the expected revisions to the roadway network, including the reconstruction of Interstate Route 86 ; and the relocation of Interstate Route 86 Exit 93 from Tolland ' Turnpike to Buckland Street . Future highway traffic volumes were developed both with and without the existence of a trans- portation facility in the Interstate Route 291 corridor. `1 1 ' -15- 1 . ' Combined Traffic Volumes ' Anticipated roadway traffic volumes generated by the Buckland Industrial Park and Buckland Commons Mall, were assigned to the roadway network and combined with the anticipated 1985/1986 highway base volumes to establish 1985/1986 combined ' traffic volumes . Anticipated 1985/1986 combined average daily traffic volumes are summarized in Table 4. Anticipated 1985/1986 ' combined traffic volumes. during the peak hour of travel (5 :00- 6 :00 P.M. ) are summarized in Table 5. The peak-hour combined traffic volumes are illustrated by direction and are divided into ' ' 1985/1986 base traffic and traffic generated by the anticipated developments. The greatest increases in daily and peak-hour traffic volumes are anticipated along Buckland Street and Pleasant Valley Road in the vicinity of the relocated Interstate Route 86 inter- change. These increases are due to the diversion of existing traffic to the relocated interchange and the extensive use of the interchange by traffic generated by the anticipated developments . Smaller traffic increases are anticipated along ' Buckland Road to the north and Pleasant Valley Road, Clark Street, Burnham Street, and Chapel Road to the west. Upon the completion of a transportation facility in the -:Interstate Route 291 corridor, increases in traffic anticipated along the roadways to the west are significantly reduced, due to the diversion of base traffic ' as well as traffic generated by the anticipated developments , from the local roadways to the regional highway. The anticipated 1985/1986 combined peak-hour traffic volumes on specific South Windsor roadways are discussed :herein. Table 4 ESTIMATED 1985/1986 COMBINED TRAFFIC VOLUMES ' Buckland Commons Mall South Windsor-Manchester, Connecticut ' TWO-WAY VOLUMES AVER LOCATION AGE DAILY TRAFFIC (1) ' Burnham Street West of Clark Street 2,650 (1,150) (2) Chapel Road West of Clark Street 4 ,600 ' (2 ,300) Pleasant Valley Road West of Clark Street 5, 00 ' (2 ,800) Pleasant Valley Road East of Clark Street 91100 (5, 250) Pleasant Valley Road East of Wheeler Road 6, 550 Pleasant Valley Road West of Buckland Street 17,400 ' Buckland Road North of Smith Street 9, 575 Buckland Street North of I-86 30, 025 Buckland Street South of I-86 17,950 ' Clark Street South of Pleasant Valley Road 4,325 (2,750) (1) Based on combined 1985/1986 dailybase traffic and the daily y generation and distribution of traffic from the Buckland In- dustrial Park, and Buckland Commons Mall . (2) Values in parentheses indicate estimated daily traffic volumes on a particular roadway location with Interstate Route 291 or its ' alternative in operation. SOURCE: Wilbur Smith and Associates, Inc. , } -17- Table 5 ESTIMATED 1985/1986 PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES Buckland Commons Mall South Windsor-Manchester, Connecticut PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC (VEHICLES PER HOUR) (1) 1985/ Buckland Buc an LOCATION 1986 Base Industrial Commons DIRECTION Traffic(2) Par_k (3) Mall(4) Total Burnham Street West of Clark Street Eastbound 145 --(5) (70) (�) 35 180 (15)Westbound 35 120 (85) 45 200 (20) (50) (20) (90) ' Chapel Road West of Clark Street Eastbound 285 15 300 (140) (--) (5) (145) Westbound 85 280 20 385 • (45) (140) (10) (195) Pleasant valley Road West of Clark Street Eastbound 190 -- 50 240 (130) (--) (5) (135) Westbound 180 20 65 265 ' (125) (10) (10) (145) Pleasant Valley Road East of Clark Street Eastbound 415 -- 95 ' (290) (--) (25) 510 (315) Westbound 245 60 125 430 (150) (30) (35) (240) Pleasant Valley Road East of ' Wheeler Road Eastbound 410 -- 25 435 Westbound 230 60 30 320 Pleasant Valley Road West of. Buckland Street Eastbound 380 215 450 1,045 westbound 320 685 11005 Buckland Road North of Smith Street Northbound 330 125 110 765 Southbound 265 -- 80 345 Buckland Street North of Interstate Route 86 ' Northbound 735 -- 885 1,620 Southbound 535 90 690 1,315 Buckland Street South of Interstate Route 86 Northbound 760 50 215 1,025 Southbound 750 -- 280 1,030 Clark Street South of Pleasant Valley Road Northbound 285 5 50, 340 (200) (5) (20) (255) ' Southbound 75 45 65 185 (55) (20) (30) (105) Proposed Interstate Route 291 1 Corridor Eastbound (N/Af6} (--) (70) (N/A) Westbound (N/A) (220) (90) (N/A) ' Evening peak hour - 5:00 - 6:00 P.M. Values in parentheses indicate estimated peak-hour traffic volumes on a particular roadway location with Interstate Route 291 or its alternative in operation. (2). Based on existing 1979 volume projected at 1.5 percent per annum growth and the anticipated ' revisions to the roadway network. (3) Buckland Industrial Park volumes based on peak hour traffic generation and distribution ob- tained from Burnham Street Traffic Stud by Close Jensen and Miller, October, 1978, prepared for the Town o South Win .Traffic (4) Based on 1,000,000 square feet of gross leaseable area and distribution summarized in Tables 2 and 3 and Figure 3. (5) - represents negligible volume. (6) XYA represents traffic volumes not available. SOURCE: Wilbur Smith and Associates, Inc., ' -18- ' Pleasant Valley Road - East of the Clark Street intersection, the anticipated 1985/1986 two-way peak-hour traffic volume on ' Pleasant Valley Road is 940 vehicles. The flow of traffic consists of 510 vehicles eastbound (54 percent) and 430 vehicles westbound (46 percent) . Projected base traffic is 660 vehicles, about 70 percent of the total traffic. The Buckland Industrial ' Park is anticipated to generate 60 vehicles (7 percent of the total traffic) , and Buckland Commons Mall 220 vehicles (23 per- cent) . Upon the completion of a transportation facility in the ' Interstate Route 291 corridor, the 1985/1986 total anticipated peak-hour traffic is 555 vehicles . West of the Clark Street intersect.ion, the anticipated two-way 1985/1986 combined peak-hour traffic volume is 505 vehicles . The flow of traffic . is almost evenly balanced between ' the directions of flow. Projected 1985/1986 base traffic is 370 vehicles, about 73 percent of the total traffic. The Buckland Industrial Park is anticipated to generate 20 vehicles (4 percent of the total traffic) and Buckland Commons Mall, 115 vehicles (23 percent) . ' Upon the completion of a transportation facility ' in the Interstate Route 291 corridor, the 1985/1986 total anticipated peak-hour traffic is 280 vehicles. Clark Street - South of the Pleasant Valley Road intersec- tion, the anticipated 1985/1986 two-way peak-hour traffic volume on Clark Street is 525 vehicles . The northbound flow of traffic ' is 340 vehicles. (65 percent) while the southbound flow is 185 vehicles (35 percent) . Projected 1985/1986 base traffic is 360 ' vehicles, about 68 percent of the total traffic. The Buckland Industrial Park is anticipated to generate 50 vehicles ( 10 per- cent of the total traffic) , and Buckland Commons Mall 115 vehicles (22 percent) . Upon the completion of a transportation facility in the Interstate Route 291 corridor, the 1985/1986 total anticipated 1 peak-hour taaffic is 330 vehicles. -19- r ' Burnham Street - West of the Clark Street intersection, the anticipated 1985/1986 two-way - peak-hour traffic volume on Burnham ' - Street is 380 vehicles . The flow of traffic is almost evenly balanced between the directions of flow. Projected 1985/1986 base traffic is 180 vehicles, about 47 percent of the total traffic. ' The Buckland Industrial Park is anticipated to generate 120 vehicles (32 percent of the total traffic) , and Buckland Commons ' Mall, 80 vehicles (21 percent) . Upon completion of a transpor- tation facility in the Interstate Route 291 corridor, the 1985/ ' 1986 total anticipated peak-hour traffic is 175 vehicles. ' Chapel Road - West of the Clark Street intersection, the anticipated 1985/1986 two-way peak-hour traffic volume on Chapel Road is 685 vehicles. The flow of traffic consists of 300 vehicles eastbound (44 percent) and 385 vehicles westbound (56 percent) . Projected 1985/1986 base traffic is 370 vehicles, about 54 percent of the total traffic. The Buckland Industrial Park is anticipated to generate 280 vehicles (41 percent of the ' total traffic) , and Buckland Commons Mall 35 vehicles (5 percent) . Upon the completion of a transportation facility in the Inter- state Route 29 corridor, the 1985/1986 total anticipated peak- hour traffic is 340 vehicles. ' Public Trans ortation ' Public transit connecting the major travel corridors in the trade area to the retail complex should be encouraged. It is ' recommended that Buckland Commons Mall be designed to accommodate bus traffic with designated bus stops in the complex. It should be noted that provision for separate carpool and ' bus transit service is being designed as an integral part of the Interstate Route 86 improvement. Separate carpool and bus lanes -20- r r rare to be provided in the median of Interstate Route 86 with access permitted at Buckland Street. In addition, a 500-space ' commuter lot is proposed in the northwest quadrant of the Interstate Route 86/Buckland Street interchange. rTherefore, while no particular reduction in vehicular generation of Buckland Commons Mall has been assumed in the '• r analysis to account for public transit/carpool usage, in all likelihood some tBe will be made of these existing and expanded rfacilities by employees of the retail complex and shoppers at the mall. ' r 1 r r r r r r 1 r -21- r i Part IV ROADWAY AND ACCESS CONSIDERATIONS rThis part of the report presents results of analyses concerned with the estimated combined traffic volumes and their impacts on- the ' existing and proposed roadway networks. Programmed Roadway Improvements The programmed roadway improvements for the site environs include several State and Town improvements. State Highway Improvements - Programmed improvements were obtained from the Connecticut Master Transportation Plan, 1980, and from discussions with. off-icial.s of the. Connecticut.. .De.partment of Transportation .Programed._highway_ --impr•.ov-ements :are, outlined ' below: 1. Interstate Route 86 - The expressway is programmed to be upgraded to six lanes between the Hockanum ' River in East Hartford to Dobson Road at the Willington-Ashford town line, a distance of approxi- mately 6 .3 miles. This includes new or reconstructed r interchanges at Middle Turnpike, proposed Interstate r Route 291, Buckland Street, and Connecticut Route 30. A one-way frontage road system will be constructed between Middle Turnpike and Buckland Street . Con- necticut Department of Transportation Project 76-89 extends approximately 2 .9: miles between Slater Street and Dobson Road. Initiation of construction . commenced in the winter of 1979/198.0 .with opening to ' traffic in the winter of 1982/.1983-. Connecticut Department -22- r t of Transportation Project 76-88 extends approximately 3.4 miles between Slater Street and the Hockanum River. Initiation of construction is scheduled for the fall of 1982 with opening to traffic in - ;ate = 1985. As part of Project 76-88, a new interchange is proposed at Buckland Street (See layout in Figure 3) replacing the present one at the Tolland Turnpike. ' Provisions in the design of Interstate Route 86 are being made for the possibility of an Interstate Route 291 interchange at a later date. In general, the improvement of Interstate Route 86 is being designed to accommodate three lanes in each direction with one to two-lane one-way frontage roads between Middle Turnpike and Buckland Street . All traffic movements are proposed at the Interstate Route 86./Buckland Street interchange. Al.s_o.,-..there is provision for a 500-space commuter , parking lot north of Interstate Route 86 and west of Buckland Street . Separate carpool/express bus lanes are also proposed from Buckland Road southerly to Hartford. 2 . Interstate Route 291 - This proposed expressway is planned to link Interstate Route 91 in Windsor to ' Interstate Route 86 .in Manchester, a distance of approximately five and one-half miles . An existing portion of the facility between Interstate Route 91 and Route 5, including the Bissell Bridge,. is proposed to be upgraded . A new section of expressway is proposed between Route 5 and Interstate Route 86 in Manchester . Although design is underway-=on.-this ,projeot through the Connecticut Department of Transportation, it is understood .that, based on -dicus.sions with several of-the effected towns - the .possibi-lity.�of a.lower -design, €acility -23- with limited access control ma-y-be .mare 'acceptable. In meeting with Connecticut Department of Transportation personnel, it is understood a transportation facility (either expressway or high-grade arterial) will be constructed in the Interstate Route 291 corridor but no firm schedule has been established. In the planning and design completed to date, partial interchanges to and ' from the west with the BIP industrial road in Manchester and Burnham Street in South Windsor, and a full inter- change with Interstate Route 86, are proposed. ' 3 . Interstate Route 84 - Sections of this facility in East Hartford will be upgraded to accommodate the Interstate Route 86 interchange. An environmental impact statement has been completed for the construction of the 2.5-mile section of Interstate Route 84 between Spencer Street and Interstate Route 86. Construction of this section is scheduled for the 1982-89 time period. 4. Interstate Route 284 - This 2 .9 mile section of highway 1 links Interstate Route 84 in East Hartford to Inter- state Route 291 in South Windsor in the area between Route 5 and the Connecticut River . According to the Connecticut Department. of Transportation this roadway is scheduled for construction in the 1982-89 time period. Town Highway Improvements - Planned or programmed highway improvements in the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester include the following: 1. Interstate Route 291 Connector Roadway - A connector I roadway-linking Interstate Route 291 in the vicinity of Burnham Street and extending approximately 0.9 miles -24- 1 r rto Pleasant Valley Road at Wheeler Road is being con- sidered by the Town of South Windsor . This connecting roadway would permit a direct connection to Interstate Route 291 for the Buckland Commons Mall -_project -as. ,well as the J.C. Penney ' s distribution Center thereby signi- ficantly reducing east-west traffic along Pleasant Valley and Chapel Roads, and Burnham Street in South ' Windsor. 2 . Buckland Street - The roadway is programmed for widening to a four-lane roadway between Tolland Turnpike and rrelocated Pleasant Valley Road . Although this improve- ment is an integral part of the previously mentioned Interstate Route 86 improvement, it is understood con- struction will be advanced separately from the Inter- state Route 86 project . Closely linked to this Buckland Street improvement is the intersection up- grading of Buckland Street, Tolland Turnpike and New State Road. 3 . Buckland Road - Pleasant Valley Road - Chapel Road - Reconstruction of these roadways is presently programmed through the Urban Systems program. It is understood through discussions with the Town of South Windsor ' personnel, that reconstruction would consist of improve- ments to drainage, minor pavement widening, subbase stabilization, sidewalks and curbing. Further, there is discussion whether all of these reconstruction pro- jects should be advanced if Interstate Route 291 and rthe connector roadway are constructed. r ' -25- 1 Buckland Commons Mall Site Plan As part of the site planning presently underway for Buckland Commons Mall, access points to the adjacent local roadway network are proposed to satisfy the major approaching traffic while minimizing out-of-direction travel on the local roadways . A review of the site planning completed to date indicates major vehicular access to Buckland Commons Mall will be located on Buckland Road and Pleasant Valley Road. A four-lane divided roadway is suggested for Pleasant Valley Road between Wheeler Road and Buckland Road. West of Wheeler Road, Pleasant Valley Road would transition to its present two-lane section. ' Buckland Road is also suggested for widening between the limits of the Buckland Street improvement northerly to Smith Street . ' Along Pleasant Valley Road, four access points are suggested to Buckland Commons, the major one being directly opposite the ' proposed wes:tbound. .off/on -ramps--of-1riterstate Route 8.6. Along Buckland Road one access point is suggested approximately mid- way between Smith Street and relocated Pleasant Valley Road. Secondary access is suggested at two locations along Wheeler Road. No access is proposed from Smith Street due to the resi- dential character of this street . 1 Internal roadways linking these access locations would all be connected by a "ring" road providing circulation to the sur- rounding parking areas . This ring road permits efficient on= site circulation without affecting the adjacent local roadways. Roadway Adequacy A review of estimated combined peak-hour traffic volumes for the 1985/1986 design. year was undertaken to determine roadway -26- adequacy. In this review, the following roadway network improve- ments were assumed to be in place : 1. Interstate Route 86 widening and interchange with ' Buckland Street ; and, 2 . Buckland Street widening between Tolland Turnpike and ' Smith 'Stre-et. As noted in Part III , estimated combined volumes include Buckland Commons Mall, full development of the Buckland Indus- trial Park, and normal highway growth of existing traffic. Al- though the prime objective of this study is the evaluation of traffic impact on roadways in South Windsor, review has also been undertaken for selected roadways and intersections in Manchester . To evaluate adequacy of the area roadways, a comparison of ' estimated combined volumes is made to the traffic carrying ability of a- roadway expressed as a "capacity" in vehicles per hour for a given level of service. The technique for computing capacity is described in the 1965 Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 87, issued by the Highway Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, as well as other reference textbooks. A ' calculation of roadway capacities for Burnham and Clark Streets and Pleasant Valley Road is presented in the previously mentioned report,Burnham Street Traffic Study,prepared by Close, Jensen iand Miller . It should be noted that adjustments to the calcu- lated capacity values noted in this report have been made for ' purposes of this present analysis . The capacity of a roadway is defined as "the maximum number of vehicles which .haveto zeasonable.expectation -of passing -27- ' over a given section of a lane or roadway during a given time period .under prevailing roadway and traffic conditions. " Pre- vailing conditions refer to physical and operating conditions and traffic characteristics. Specific variables which affect capacity include roadway alignment, number and width of lanes, ' one-way or two-way operations, shoulders, type of traffic control measures, turning movements, percentages of truck and bus ttraffic, metropolitan area size, traffic peaking characteristics, and parking regulations . A study of capacity is important in determining the ability of the specific roadway to accommodate traffic under various "levels of service. " Level of service is a qualitative measure describing driver satisfaction with a number of factors influencing the degree of traffic congestion. These factors include speed and travel time, traffic interruption, freedom to maneuver, ' safety, driving comfort and convenience, and delays. There are six levels of service describing traffic flow. The highest is ' Level of Service A, describing a free-flow condition. The lowest, Level of Service F, is described as forced flow, and is characterized by volumes greater than the roadway capacity as complete congestion occurs, and in the extreme case, the volume ' passing a given point drops to zero. ' Level of Service C describes a stable condition of traffic operation. It has a somewhat restricted movement due to higher traffic volumes, but the flow conditions are not objectionable ' to most motorists and is normally utilized for roadway design purposes. It is this level of service which has been utilized ' in evaluating roadway and intersection adequacy in this analysis. 1 ' -28- ' South Windsor Roadways ' In Part III, estimates of combined peak-hour volumes are discussed for Pleasant Valley and Chapel Roads, and Burnham and Clark Streets . In addition, the impact of Interstate Route ' 291 and its connector road- is indicated. ' From the average daily traffic volumes presented in Tables 1 and 4, it is noted volumes on roadways in the southwest portion ' of South Windsor are expected to increase in the future . For analysis purposes, estimated combined evening peak-hour roadway ' volumes are the basis for comparison to a roadway capacity. Roadway volumes have been evaluated since existing traffic data ' do- not include turning movements at individual intersections. Table 5 and Figure 4 in Part III present a detailed breakdown of the particular elements contributing to total roadway volumes. Pleasant Valley Road - Combined 1985/1986 evening peak-hour ' volumes are estimated to range from 505 vehicles per hour west of Clark Street to 940 vehicles per hour between Clark Street and Wheeler Road. With Interstate Route 291 and the connector road in place, these combined volumes are expected to be reduced ' to 280 and 555 vehicles per hour, respectively. Since the road- way geometry along Pleasant Valley Road varies throughout its ' length, separate estimates of roadway capacity have been determined east and west of Clark Street . West of Clark Street, Pleasant Valley Road has a pavement width of approximately 22 feet, a ' 30-mile per hour speed limit, and a rolling vertical alignment . Roadway capacity at Level of Service C is estimated to range ' between 700 and 800 vehicles per hour . East of Clark Street, Pleasant Valley Road has a pavement width of 24 to 30 feet, ' a 35 mile per hour speed limit, and a relatively flat vertical alignment . Roadway capacity at Level of Service C in this -29- ' section is estimated to be approximately 1, 000 vehicles per hour . Therefore, estimated volumes on this road are expected to be within capacity at Level of Service C. Provision of the ' cbnnector road will result in either greater capacity along Pleasant Valley Road or lower volumes due to shifting travel ' patterns. ' Chanel Road - Combined 1985/1986 evening peak-hour volumes are estimated at 685 vehicles per hour west of Clark Street . With Interstate Route 291 and the connector road in place, volumes are expected to be reduced to 340 vehicles per hour . ' Roadway capacity at Level of Service C is estimated to range between 750 and 850 vehicles per hour based on present roadway geometry . Therefore, estimated volumes either with or without ' Interstate Route 291 and the connector road are within acceptable levels. Burnham Street - Combined 1985/1986 evening peak-hour volumes ' are estimated at 380 vehicles per hour west of Clark Street . With Interstate Route 291 and the connector road in place, volumes are expected to be reduced to 175 vehicles per hour . Should only the connector road be in place without Interstate Route 291, then it is estimated 100 to 125 vehicles per hour would be added to Burnham Street for a total of approximately 505 vehicles per hour . Roadway capacity at Level of Service C is estimated to ' range between 600 and 700 vehicles per hour based on present roadway geometry . Therefore, estimated volumes are within ' acceptable levels. ' Clark Street - Combined 1985/1986 evening peak-hour volumes are estimated at 525 vehicles per hour between Pleasant Valley ' and Chapel Roads. With Interstate Route 291 and the connector road in place, volumes are expected to be reduced to 330 vehicles P ' -30- per hour . Roadway capacity at Level of Service C is estimated to range between 600 and 650 vehicles per hour based on present ' roadway geometry. Therefore, estimated volumes are within capacity at Level of Service C. ' Buckland Road - Combined 1985/1986 evening peak-hour volumes are estimated at 1, 110 vehicles per hour north of Smith Street . ' Roadway capacity at Level of Service C is estimated/ to range between 1, 100 and 1,200 vehicles per hour based on the present ' roadway geometry. Therefore, estimated volumes are within acceptable levels. ' Manchester Roadways w s ' Although the emphasis of this report is directed to South ' Windsor roadways, significant amounts of generated traffic are expected to use roadways linking Interstate Route 86 in Man- chester . The roadways include Buckland Street.and-P1easant .Valley ' Road, and the Interstate Route 86 ramps at the Buckland Street interchange. Presently, the Connecticut Department of Trans- portation is evaluating and designing the expressway ramp system with Buckland Street and Pleasant Valley Road. Buckland Street - Combined 1985/1986 peak-hour traffic ' volumes are estimated to range from 2, 055 vehicles per hour north of Tolland Turnpike to 2,935 vehicles per hour south of ' Pleasant Valley Road. As part of the Interstate Route 86/ Buckland Street interchange improvement discussed earlier in ' this part, Buckland Street will be widened to four lanes be- tween Tolland Turnpike and Pleasant Valley Road. This proposed roadway improvement should be adequate to satisfy expected traffic volumes at an acceptable level of service. Signalization and minor roadway geometry to accommodate turning movements may ' be required at the intersections with the Interstate Route 86 eastbound ramps and Pleasant Valley Road. -31- r r rPleasant Valley Road - As part of the site planning underway for the Buckland Commons Mall, Pleasant Valley Road is proposed as a four-lane median-divided facility between Buckland Street r in Manchester and Wheeler Road in South Windsor. Major inter- sections would be signalized and separate turning lanes provided. rCombined 1985/1986 peak-hour traffic volumes are estimated to range from 755 vehicles per hour east of Wheeler Road to 2, 050 rvehicles per hour west of Buckland Street. The proposed roadway improvement should be adequate to satisfy expected combined volumes rat an acceptable level of service. rConclusions rThe proposed Buckland Commons Mall will provide a portion of the future retail needs of the Manchester-South Windsor area. ' Although the traffic volumes expected to be generated by the Buckland Commons Mall and Buckland Industrial Park developments ' are significant, the proposed roadway network can be adapted to safety and efficiently satisfy these volumes. rThe proposed Interstate Route 86 improvement and its interchange with Buckland Street/Pleasant Valley Road will ' effectively=_distribute generated traffic between -Buckland Commons . Mall and the regional highway system. The proposed Interstate Route 291 (or an arterial highway) together with a connector roadway linking it to Pleasant Valley Road should substantially rrelieve the local east-west streets including Pleasant Valley and Chapel Roads and Clark and Burnham Streets. As an alternative i 1 r -32- r to the construction of a facility in the Interstate Route 291 ' corridor, provision of a connector roadway between Pleasant Valley Road and Burnham Street in the vicinity of Chapel Road should also relieve east-west traffic on Pleasant Valley Road and Clark Street. Construction of this connector roadway will permit the local roadways to operate within acceptable levels. As this project proceeds into more detailed planning and design, close coordination should be maintained with the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester, and the Connecticut Department of Transportation. This will ensure the development of a roadway network to not only satisfy Buckland Commons Mall traffic but also ' other generated traffic in both South Windsor and Manchester. ' -33- MEMORANDUM June 9, 1981 To: Planning and Zoning Commission Re: Transportation Study/Buckland Commons Mall Pursuant to your request of May 5, the Planning Department has prepared this report concerning the status of transportation improvements in the vicinity of the proposed Buckland Commons Mall, and other relevant traffic accident and volumes data developed under the Town Transportation Study. A number of visual aids are appended for your use. TRAFFIC VOLUMES-,,- The following chart depicts average daily traffic (ADT) volumes (two-way traffic) for roads in the vicinity of the Buckland Commons zone change site. With the exception of I-86 and Buckland Road, all roads are currently handling relatively low traffic volumes. Historical counts are given where available. Volume classifications are: Light (0-2000 ADT); Medium (2001-9999 ADT) ; Heavy (10,000+ ADT) . Most Recent Historical % Current Volume Street Count Count Change Classification Buckland Road 7300 (1979) 4700 (1970) 55. 3% Medium (middle range) Chapel Road 3350 (1981) 2300 (1978) 45. 7% Medium (lower end) Clark Street 800 (1981) 400 (1978) 100.0% Light (middle range) Pleasant Valley Road 3300 (1978) Unavailable - Medium (lower end) Smith Street 100 (1981) Unavailable - Light (lower end) I-86 58,100 (1978) 46,000 (1970) 26. 3/o Heavy -',Additional counts, including vehicles per hour (VPH) , i.e. , peak hour, and maps portraying same are available at the South Windsor Planning Department. STATUS OF HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS Buckland Road - The most critical section of Buckland Road in need ot improvement has been the one-quarter mile stretch between the Plum Gulley Brook and Ellington Road. This project is now essentially complete. Within the project' s parameters, the road has been widened to a full thirty-six feet. As one now approaches the Five Corners intersection in a northbound direction, there are- two travel lanes. Southbound remains at one travel lane. The road' s geometry has been considerably improved, and it is now among the widest stretches of highway in South Windsor. This improvement should aid in reducing congestion and the number and rate of recorded traffic accidents at the Five Corners cluster. (See Buckland Road accident cluster map) . The intersection of Deming Street and Buckland Road was originally scheduled to be improved with town funds during this next fiscal year; however, it was dropped from the budget during the final round of cuts. The project is expected to be proposed once again next year. As an element of the I-86 reconstruction pro ect, Buckland Street in Manchester will be widened to four lanes itwo, lanes in each direction) up to Pleasant Valley Road. This improvement should be completed by 1985. The Buckland Commons Mall applicants have indicated their intent to widen Buckland Road between Pleasant Valley Road (i.e. , the limit- of the I-86 widening) , and Smith Street. Clark Street - No significant highway improvements are currently propose for Clark Street. Chapel Road - Under the Interstate Trade-In program, by 1985/1986 Chapel oad will be reconstructed its entire length between John Fitch Boulevard and the Manchester Town Line. By virtue of special bonding authorizations of the Connecticut General Assembly (Special Acts 78-81 and 81-13) , the entire Town share (15%) of project costs will be borne by the State. The same bonding authorization paid for the Town' s share of the Buckland Road reconstruction project. The Town Council has authorized the Town Manager to execute this project' s state/town agreement (the State administers the project on behalf of the U. S. Department of Transportation) . This agree- ment is expected to be signed during this next federal fiscal. year (after October 1) . A recent communication from the ConnDOT official responsible for supervising the project indicates that he will request the project be initiated as soon as federal funds become available, and further that the State funds be in place with the receipt of federal monies. In sum, this project is in its advanced stages prior to commencement of design work. -2- Table A ANTICIPATED VOLUME - CAPACITY RELATIONSHIPS Chapel Road and Pleasant Valley Road Buckland Commons Mall South Windsor, Connnecticut CHAPEL ROAD WEST OF CLARK STREET Estimated PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD WEST OF CLARK STREET Estimated Total Estimated Mall Capacity at Estimated Estimated Total Estimated Mall Estimated Estimated Peak Hour Volume Peak Hour Volume Level of Level of Peak Hour Volume Peak Hour Traffic Capacity at Level Level of YEAR CONDITION (5:00-6:00 P.M.) (5:00-6:00 P.M. Service "C" Service (5:00-6:00 P.M.) (5:00-6:00_P.M.)'of Service "C" Service (two-way vehicles) (two way vehicles) (two-way) (two-way vehicles) (two-way vehicles) (two-way) 1981 Existing 345 - 850 A 345 - 800 A 1985 Normal Growth 370 - 850 A 370 - 800 A 1985 Normal Growth/ 650 - 850 B 390 - 800 A Industrial Park/ JC Penney 1985 Normal Growth/ 685 35 850 B 505 115 800 B Industrial Park JC Penney/Mall, Without I-291 and Connector Road 1985 Normal Growth/ 740 60 850 B 450 90 800 A JC Penney Industrial Park/Man, Without I_291with Connector Roaa 1985 Normal Growth/ 340 15 850 A 280 15 800 A JC Penney Industrial Park/Mall, with I-291 and Connector Road SOURCE: Wilbur Smith and Associates. z SU1 midNS SUPERIOR COURT CIVIJ. (except family actions) JD-611-1 REV. 1-80 GE',.S-AT.5_- PR.eK ._ INSTRUCTIONS 1: Prepare on . ryne✓.niter; sign original summons (top sheetj and conform copies o/the summons (sheets 4 and S). 2. if there ;s mc;r9 than one defendant. prepare or photocopy conformed summons for each additional defendant. 3. Atraco the c ;:?mai suromor,s. .vith computer sheets attached(peges 2 and 3), to the original complaint. and attaclr copy of the e_•;nmons to each copy of the compiaint. A,'so,it there are more than 2 plaintiffs or 4 defendants prepare form .iC-C'J-2 and attach it to tha original and all copies of the complaint. 4. After se .ice cas been mace oy officer, file cricdna! papers and officer's return with the clerk cf fhe court. 5 The par;; re o;nized to pay c,ass must appaar personally batore tr"e-authority taking the rercg-;zance. E Do not `nrm for actions rn .which an attachm nt, ca mshmenr or replevy is being sought. See Practic= Boor n :Sectio _ "err exceptions. T O: Any Proper officer A•.:TFIOt�ITY OF THIE STA.T- OF CONNECTIC�IT, you are hereby commanded to make due and legal Service of this Summons and & :ached Co mulalnt. 01.5. . � pt- T r�. ,.: ,p.;•c- Csn s a :. ,,� -- RETURN DATE _, ..v.y'J � �t �••7Q�: ::PEES GF�'LERK OF C. •?`,+ _ ,.- - D OTHER o ALL SE FiLED - - 1 CASE TYPE From-cc;1 Dept.code ts Q — Major Minor LTV No rE. -d�nd�a.s,Vanas - :D•CV-2 �Aa �ES - NAME AND ADDRESS OF EACH PARTY Forrn I {� --_ Last,Frr•. +1avd;e lrrtial - - I lJ attached - FIRST NAIAED PLAINTIFF XiM of ftussla pt Additional PA Plaint" FIRST NAMED ,DEFENDANT.-.i-- .fix 'a fat � * 4WSIM � 'W �� ` �,, rICT ""'I defendant kompa vwa..AhJ ommir o, 42 1vSlatImbury-MmU r-Bloa4Sf iel'',w.p c defer,C —r—_I 1 .-IRMo_SMWQ .G., 3 B-��C�.Z AddlT.c,111,j lI 7 t{ -Valleal- SOUL NOTICE to each DEFENDANT You are being s_Ied. o. The"Appearance" form may be obtained at the above Court 2. This paoer is a Summons in a lawsuit. address. The C')nlpla;nt a:iacf`:ed t0 `-ose papers States the Claims that each Piaa'ntiff is mai<ir-•g a '?Ir,st you in this :a`.vsult. 7. If you believe that you have insurance that t',^;a.y cover the claim TO r e s n o n d :O `^ S S,;mr' .!rs, or to be ir'crrned of further that IS being glade against you In this !a',":Suit, you Should roC�swirlgs, v.;u or +e r a :=;rney rrlL..;i "le a form . a!ied ail ,,med1a'-.1y take the S_n;mons and Complaint to your in- fe)p`-:ance' " c r 4r Ci the ub0` icT Cc.rt a. ! SU 3nCP representative. ai "ave Court address on Or _e`Ore ti'"i.- second day aT:er tor; a'.-;eve r eturn D- e3 fyou have questions about the Summws and Complaint, you C II : ,.,our a orn ei do �C, !:� a writer Appearance" form snould consult an attorney promptly. The Clerk--.of Court is ,'r..., a jud r^en nr ay v7, tered aga rst you by L..Efauit. ri permitted to give advice on legal qUE?scions. I TYPE IN NAME OF PERSON SIGNING AT LEFT psq r missloner of Superior Co n I �� t \�' #3. r n. Clerk rt ;r-(_ �AiidTlFt- .7j ,",`: `' LAi+ �IP'i�•"t,`,.. H.n,, pry sal ~i ELEPHONE N0.-��-I JURIS N0. ;t a:ro•--y ;aw hrm) i. ri�f'y /'�` r� �� �+ 1 3 ^ r he 30N +': r C- of i �e 1>.C. Vf. � iJ+r.�.? __ _ _ � !---- ------- -- -- -- —I- — �• .IF. AND ADDRtSS C. _ SUfv=. __. _ :O PROSE',UTE .THE AMOuN:T OF S250 I SIGNATURE OF P_A`:TIFF IF PRO SE. ' •.- ? iY•./ ;�:!..�� /�,c a nc racopnz ..:�..:rc' hcz) y —�—~-_-�—i f I FO'Court Use Commissioner o, Superior Cou,t - r s RECEIPT NO uy -s;stant Clerk --=-- -^.. No 1 'k ❑ Fee. IF THIS SUNINIONS IS SIGNED by a CLERK: V y FILEEDD�ATF a. The Signing has been done so that the Plain- advice in connection with any lawsuit. Ct/�-e'� tiffs) will not be denied access to the courts. d The Clerk signing this Summons at the re- b. It is the responsibility of the Plaintiffrsj to quest of the Plaintiff(s) is not responsible see that service is made in the manner pro- in any way for any errors or omissions in vided by law. the Summons, any allegations contained in 6 c. The Clerk is not permitted to give any legal the Complaint,or the service thereof. I hereby certify I have read S' •Eu 'ro se p;,+ Dr.TE SIrNED DOCKET NO. and understand the above: SUMMONS, Civil COPY r RET. 1ST TUES. OF DECEMBER, 1981 SUPERIOR COURT BUCKLAND ASSOCIATES JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD/ NEW BRITAIN N N V. AT HARTFORD 0 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR, 0 ET AL. NOVEMBER 6, 1981 e N ' 3 5 o TO THE SUPERIOR COURT to be held at Hartford in and for the M- N W N Judicial District of Hartford/New Britain on the 1st Tuesday of Z 0 k December, 1981 , comes BUCKLAND ASSOCIATES, a limited partnership ei Z organize❑ under the laws of the State of Connecticut appealing from the a Z 0 LL Z decision of the PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF SOUTH W q 00 W WINDSOR granting its, application for a change of zone with conditions Z Z W and it complains and says : a = 1. The plaintiff-appellant Buckland Associates (hereinafter called "Buckland" ) is a limited partnership organized under the laws of the U a N State of Connecticut . CD x 2. The defendants the Hartman Tobacco Company , Bernard G. Martin 0 d and George A. Gilbert are each the owner of a parcel of land located i the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut in the vicinity of Pleasant Valley Road. All three parcels together total approximately fifty-fiv (55) acres of land , which are more fully described on Schedule A attached hereto (hereinafter called "the Land" ) . r 8. On or about October 24, 1981 , the Commission caused notice of its decision approving the change of zone for the Land to be published in the Manchester Journal-Inquirer. N O in 9. In making the change of zone 'for the Land subject to the 0 M Conditions, the Commission acted illegally , arbitrarily and in abuse of the discretion vested in it by law in that: co N a. contrary to the overwhelming evidence presented at the FN public hearing , including extensive traffic studies, that the roads a . W W providing access to the Land were adequate for the proposed use it o k contemplated by the change of zone , the Commission nevertheless voted a Z to impose the Conditions ; d z 0 b. contrary to the Commission' s finding that the proposed LL 0 W change of zone as approved would not have an adverse impact on traffic z z a i in the neighborhood surrounding the Land , the Commission voted to g W U) W a _ impose the Conditions, which require reconstruction of roads in the neighborhood surrounding the Land ; N c. the Conditions are vague and meaningless and therefore a m X impossible to comply with because although they purport , in part , to 0 W require only that Buckland post a bond , the intent and effect of the Conditions is to require Buckland to make road improvements which are not described or specified ; -3- a , N � 10. The plaintiff Buckland Associates is aggrieved by the decision of the Commission and is injuriously affected in its property rights in the Land as set forth in Paragraph 3 above in that: LA a. its application for a change of zone for the Land was 6 N granted subject to the Conditions, which are illegal and beyond the authority of the Commission; M CD b. the vagueness of the Conditions makes it impossible for N b N Buckland to take any action with confidence that it is in compliance a . W 0 with the Conditions ; Ir 0 k c . the Conditions are excessive and unnecessary in light of a � ci Z the testimony presented at the public hearing and the Commission' s own a Z 0 LL W finding with respect to the impact on traffic in the neighborhood a °a surrounding the Land ; and W z z 4 � d . the prohibitive and open-ended cost of the acouisition of W U) c land and the road construction reouired by the Conditions will cause U Buckland to bear substantial and unnecessary expense or, in the v v N alternative , to abandon its plans for the development of the Land. a w X WHEREFORE , the plaintiff seeks : 0 m . - 0 1. That this appeal be sustained and that approval by the a Commission of the zone change be upheld but the Conditions to the change of zone be ruled to be illegal and therefore null and void; -5- 5 i i I SCHEDULE A Approximately 55 acres of land bounded on the north by Smith Street, on the west by Wheeler Road, on the south by Pleasant Valley Road and the Town line, and on the east by the rear yard of 1 Buckland Road, more particularly described as follows: Starting at the intersection of Wheeler Road and Smith Street; thence proceeding in an easterly direction for approximately 1,376 feet, more or less, to a parcel known as 291 Smith Street; thence turning southerly along the boundary of 291 Smith Street for approximately 236 feet, more .or less; thence turning easterly along the rear southerly boundary of 291, 319, 307, 331, 345, 357, 367, 377 and 383 Smith Street for approximately 1, 369 feet, more or less; thence turning southerly along the rear boundary of 1 Buckland Road; thence turning westerly. { along the Manchester/South Windsor Town line for approximately 2,673 feet, more or less; thence following the northerly boundary of Pleasant Valley Road for approximately 653 feet to the intersection of Pleasant Valley Road and Wheeler Road; thence turning northerly for approximately 1,362 feet more or less along the Boundary of Wheeler Road to the point of beginning. Said parcel containing 55 acres, more or less. BUCKLAND ASSOCIATES, PRINCIPAL BY MAP ASSOCIATES OF M. & S. W, GENERAL PARTNER Ln in 94 BY 6 ALLEN H. DUFFY z a I - N- AC o AEL S , SURETY N Taken and acknowledged at New Haven, Connecticut on the day of < J N No November, 1981 , before me, a om�missioner of the Superior Court W to C o k 4SSNER OF THE UPERIO COURT U U i b z } o 4. U IL < 4r / � C 0 = z c W C W N �G U C I U v Cl) N a w 0 x O m 6 d Hereof fail not but of this writ with your doings thereon due service and return make. TV— Dated at New Haven, Connec cut this day of November, 1981. E N 0 S !� Z VZBeS_TINE S. VERT UILL 0 COMMISSIONER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 0 n d m 3 � F Q m r m 0z ID A - ¢ c Q U U z c z o U � WIr o y3i Z Z Q � W N C � N U) = U C S U a M N a m x O E1 d COMMISSIONERS: PLEASE READ THE BUCKLAND COMMONS MINUTES AND APPROVAL LETTER. COPIES HAVE NOT BEEN GIVEN TO ANYONE ELSE - IF YOU HAVE ANY CHANGES OR ANYTHING YOU WANT ADDED, PLEASE CALL NE! WE SHOULD GET THE MINUTES APPROVED TUESDAY, AND ON FILE. GINNY DRAFT OF LETTER RE: BUCKLAND COMMONS Edwin Lassman, Esq. 111 Pearl St. Hartford, Conn. 06103 Dear Sir: Re App. #803 - Buckland Associates, Owner, Kravco, Inc., Developer Please be advised that the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Towa of South Windsor voted to approve the application of Buckland Associates and Kravco, Inc. for a change of zone and General Plan of Development (as modified) for the property described on Exhibit A attached hereto ("the"premises") from Rural Residential to Designed Commercial. The approval is subject to the terms hereinafter set forth. This change is approved after consideration of the testimony and evidence submitted at the public hearings held on June 16, 17 and 18, 1981. This approval is made subject to the following terms: 1. The applicant must apply to this Commission for approval of a detailed site plan in accordance with Sections 4.12.7 and 4.13 of the Zoning f- Regulations. 2. The applicant shall post a performance bond in form acceptable to this .Commission and the Town Attorney as hereafter described. The bond will secure the payment by the applicant of the cost of the following improvements to the roads as shown upon the preliminary sketches of the Town Engineer: (a) The construction of a connector road with a sixtv foot (601) right-of-way and thirty-six foot (361 )pavement width between the Premises and the relocated Burnham Street at Chapel Road, including improving the Clark Street and Chapel Road intersection and terminating Clark Street at the Connector Road by means of a "T" intersection. (b) Route Pleasant Valley Road into Wheeler Road. (c) Cul-de-sac Smith Street at Buckland Road. (d) Improve Buckland Road/Deming Street intersection, including Buckland Road to Plum Gulley Brook. 3. The General Plan of Development shall be modified to reflect the road improve- ments specified in subparagraph--2, above. i I� -2- 4. The performance bond for road improvements shall be in a sum not less than Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000.00) in favor of the Town of South Windsor and shall be either a surety or cash bond. Said sum is sufficient' to ensure that land acquisition costs are covered as well as construction costs if the Commission must proceed pursuant to its statutory powers upon the failure or inability of the applicant to complete the road improvements. When a site plan application is suBmitted it shall include modifications of the intersection of Ellington Road, Oakland Road, Buckland Road and Sullivan Avenue, satisfactory to this Commission. I; Within ninety (90) days from the date of approval (by January 18, 1982) the following plans must be filed in the Town Clerk's Office after being stamped and signed by this Commission: N 1. A Zone Change map, prepared in accordance with Sections 11.2.3 g and h of the Zoning Regulations, and drawn to a scale of one inch equals forty feet (11' = 401), conforming to A-2 standards, showing the distance and bearings of all boundary lines and acreage of the land where the zone change was granted. 2. The General Plan of Development, consisting of sheets 1 and 4 of plans prepared by Fuss & O'Neill, dat d 3/l0/8l, entitled Proj. No. 79-311 A. f. - � t The effective date of the appro'tred z ne change is the date the plans are filed. The Commission voted also to approve a forty foot (401) building height, plus an additional fifteen feet (15') for mechanicals and utility structures on the roof, to be specified in the site plan, as requested in the application because, in the judgment of the Commission, such a height is in keeping with the purpose and intent of these regulations and is necessary for the applicant to properly and economically construct and house utilities and structures on the roof of the proposed building. VPY attach. SCHEDULE A Approximately 55 acres of land bounded on the north by Smith Street, on the west by Wheeler Road, on the south by Pleasant Valley Road and the Town line, and on the east by the rear yard of 1 Buckland Road, more particularly described as follows: Starting at the intersection of Wheeler Road and Smith Street; thence proceeding in an easterly direction for approximately 1,376 ft. more or less, to a parcel known as 291 Smith Street; thence turning southerly along the boundary of 291 Smith Street for approximately 236 ft. more or less; thence turning easterly along the rear southerly boundary of 291, 319, 307, 331, 345, 357, 367, 377 and 383 Smith Street for approximately 1,369 ft. more or less; thence turning southerly along the rear boundary of 1 Buckland Road; thence turning westerly along the Manchester/ South Windsor Town line for approximately 2,673 ft. more or less; thence following the northerly boundary of Pleasant Valley Road for approximately 653 ft. to the intersec- tion of Pleasant Valley Road and Wheeler Road; thence turning northerly for approximately 1,362 ft. more or less along the boundary of Wheeler Road to the point of beginning. Said parcel containing 55 acres, more or less. • 4 � TO: South Windsor .Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Leo A. Gauthier 395 Smith Street South Windsor, CT 06074 DATE: June 28, 1979 Regarding zone change to GC requested by MAP Associates for property bounded by Smith Street, Wheeler Road, etc. The following report is the result of several years of following MAP's activities both in :Manchester and South Windsor. I was involved with a citizen' s group of Burnhn.m Street-Croft Drive residents prior to the zone change being granted in ;Manchester. I was a member of the Buckland Commons Study Committee in South Windsor. I have spent many hours in discussion with my neighbors and other residents of South Windsor as well as people who live in Windsor, Bloomfield or use West Farms Mall. I am neither for nor against MAP developing in South Windsor. Whether or not to grant the zone change is the commission' s decision to make. My purpose in making this report is to try to ensure that all possible ' safeguards are taken to protect those people most likely to suffer the adverse effects of whatever decision you make. Sincerely, Leo A. Gauthier A Although this report raises questions concerning the accuracy of the developers ' assumptions and projections, resource limita- tions did not allow for compiling of scientific study data with which to refute the "expert" testimony provided by the developer. Rather, the report attempts to place before the Commission the vari- ous factors of concern to the entire town of South Windsor as well as an analysis of those factors . This section lists these factors, gives a summary and a brief recommendation for action or study by the Zoning Commission. Following sections include the discussions on each factor in more ( detail. The final section is the recommendation resulting from these efforts. The following factors appear to be the more salient for discussion at this time : 1. Economic benefit to the community as a whole . 2. Economic impact on the residential areas in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development. This is generally the Southwest quadrant of South Windsor, more specifically, residences within sight of the proposed commercial development . 3 . Environmental impact on the residences within sight of the proposed commercial development. (air, water, noise and light pollution) . 2A 4. Traffic considerations for the south west quadrant of South Windsor, more specifically, Buckland, Deming, Pleasant Valley, Chapel, Clark, Smith and Northview Drive. 5. Protections of water sources and handling of surface water problems. 6. Sewage disposal problems. 7. Public safety matter, fire-police. Factors 1 & 2 Economic -impast to the community and residents in the immediate vicinity. Summary : 1. The economic benefit to the town as a whole is rather small and cannot be guaranteed under present zoning, regulations, 2. The economic benefit to the southwestern portion of town is questionable due to lack of a firm traffic con- trol plan. 3. The economic disadvantage to the residences within sight of the complex are likely to occur in any event. The recommendation is that the zone change cannot be justified on economic grounds . The developer should be invited to return once the traffic problems are firmly resolved, and more comprehensive zoning regulations- are drawn up and approved. r 3A Factor 3 Environmental impact on nearby residential areas. Su.:nmary Environmental impact can, at best , be maintained by a firm plan for traffic diversion and comprehensive zoning controls. Recommendation: The zone change should be rejected on environmental -rounds. The developer should be invited to return once a firm plan for traffic flow is reached and comprehensive zoning regulations are drawn up and approved. ( Factor 4 Traffic considerations for Southwest quadrant of South Windsor. Summary : 1. The developers ` opinions on market area and traffic flow are in doubt . 2. No firm plan for I291 or an alternative have been reached. 3. No firm plan for an access road have been reached. 4. i hoot 2 and 3 above the traffic effect on South Windsor' s southwest quadrant would be very detrimental. 5. Nothing has been done to solve the problem of Smith Street. Recommendation : The zone change should be rejected due to insufficient plans on traffic flow problems. The developer should be invited to return once. these questions have been resolved. 4A Factor 5 Protection of private water sources and handling of surface water runoff problems. Summary : Considerable concern exists pertaining to future protection from improperly designed water handling systems . Recommendation: Zone change, if granted, should be conditional on proper water handling systems with some sort of safeguard for residences which could be affected in the future. Factor -6 Sewage disposal problems. F Summary : No means of insuring adequate protection for nearby homeowners from failure of private systems due to improper design of water- handling systems is included in our present zoning regulations or town ordinances. Recommendation: Zone change, if granted, should be conditional on proper :eater handling systems with some sort of safeguard for residences whose septic systems might be affected in the future by improper design. Factor 7 Public Safety :Matters Fire - Police. 5A Summary : There are unanswered questions about adequacy of fire and police protection and formal agreements concerning these between Manchester and South Windsor. Nothing in our zoning regulations protects nearby residences from the increase of crime and vandalism which accompany the type of development being proposed. Recommendation : Formal questions should be asked of and answers received From the agencies concerned before a zone change is granted. Provisions should be made for the protection of nearby residences from the depredations of increased crime and vandalism. Such provisions should be made to apply to the property whether MAP associates is the ultimate developer or not . C 1 Economic, Factors 1 & 2 Discussion: According to the developers figures, the economic advantage to the town of South livindsor would equate 'to approximately 1 mil, savings in the tax rate. The economic impact on the immediate vicinity appears to be largely a matter of opinion, clouded by semantics such as the distinction between "value" and "price" . The advantage or disadvantage seems to depend on intended use by present owners . It is the opinion of this report that if traffic problems can be overcome; residences not .within sight of the development will receive an advantage ( Residences within sight of the development will be disadvantaged, unless their land is someday rezoned for commercial use, or a residential buyer can be found who feels that living near a shopping center is attractive. With some exceptions a. zone change to commercial is an unlikely event since there are few blocks of land large enough, individually, to support commercial establishments. Common sense would indicate that since there would be restrictions on sale of residential properties that do not exist now, the zone change would result in a disadvantage to nearby homes . If traffic problems cannot be overcome, then the entire southwest part of South Windsor will be disadvantaged. The developer has stated that the commercial development "could" be built entirely in Manchester leaving South Windsor with all of the disadvantages and none of the advantages . Whether the i 2 developer "would" or not does not seem to be very important at this time. It is the opinion of this report that since Hartmann Tobacco has decided to sell and since Manchester has °already- granted a zone change , it is only a •matter of time before some sort of development takes place iri Manchester. If MAP is dissuaded from their plans an even more undesirable development might occur. It would appear from the preceding paragraph that the zone change should be granted. Unfortunately, once the zone change is granted our present zoning regulations do not provide adequate controls over the developers ' plans. The developer could sell to some less desirable venture, or he could build the complex entirely in. Manchester. It does not appear that the "site plan or development" provisions in the South Windsor zoning regulations provide the town with adequate controls once a General Commercial zone change has been granted :for a tract of the size presently being considered. Summary : 1. The economic benefit to the town as a whole are rather small and cannot be guaranteed ender present zoning regulations.. 2 . The economic benefit to the southwestern portion of town is questionable due to lack of` a firm traffic control plan. 3. The economic disadvantage to the residences within sight of the complex are likely to occur in any event. i 3 t The recommendation is that the zone change cannot be justified on economic grounds. The developer should be invited to return once the traffic problems are firmly resolved, and adequate zoning regulations are drawn up and approved. ( -4 Factor 3 Environmental impact on the residences within sight of the proposed commercial development. ( air, noise and light pollution; Discussion: There seems to be no responsible opinion which would suggest that the environmental impact on residences within sight of the development would not be disastrous . It is generally accepted that this type of development would have a negative impact on the entire region. This report will leave regional problems to people responsible for them and confine itself to residences in the imme- diate vicinity and within sight of the complex. Unless traffic problems are resolved, -the southwestern portion of` town would certainly receive a. negative impact due to increased air , noise and. light pollution. The impact of noise and light pollution might be minimized by exercising more stringent controls over buffer areas and lighting regulations . Tt does not appear- that the "site plan of develop- ment" provisions of our zoning regulations affords the proper protection. Such artificial devices as granting zone changes which exclude a. strip along the perimetE}r of the development might help but would far solve the problem. What protection do we have during construction? Can we require a berm to be constructed? Can we restrict the amount of noise and times of operation? These questions should be answered satisfactorily before any .'gone change can be granted. The Protection should exist for the life of the zone change or be required of any future developer should the pre- sent developers decide to change their plans or sell to some other venture. Summary: Environmental impact can, at best , be minimized by a firm plan for traffic diversion and adequate controls. Recommendation: The zone change should be rejected on environmental grounds . The developer should be invited to return once a firm plan for traffic flow is reached and adequate zoning regulations are drawn up and approved. 6 Factor 4 : Traffic Considerations Discussion: It is the opinion of this report that since Hartmann Tobacco has decided to sell , and since the zone chanve has been granted in "Janchester , some sort of commercial venture will occur in the area. This will cause an increase in traffic in the south- western portion of South Windsor . If the development is of the scope being proposed by MAP Associates ' , it would appear that justification of the "so-called" I291 or a scaled down version of it along with a connector directly into the proposed development would be easier to prove . If the development occurs in Manchester only, or is some scaled down venture in :Manchester and South vindsor, then it is unlikely that th6 required roadway an". interchanges would ever he built. Plans for. I291 or an industrial road with connector are at this time, speculative at best . Without it the traffic impact on Pleasant Valley , Clark, i.orthview, Buckland and Chanel can only be negative. The traffic statistics and projections provided by the developer are based on their projections of market area and their opinion on routes people would prefer to follow. The market area does not include. anything west of the Connectic ut river. This report does note"concur on simple common sense grounds. People from South Windsor shop in Windsor, Bloomfield, West Farms Mall, Enfield Mall, etc. It is illogical to assume that people from Windsor, Bloomfield, etc. would not cross the river over the lightlytrafficked affi cked Bissel e to Bridge get to a cen ter such as is being proposed. This report does not agree with the developer's opinion on ro ute selection by customers of the mall . Based on several discussions with various townspeople it is my opinion that most of the shoppers trips originating in South Windsor or East Windsor would use Buckland, Clark or Northview - Pleasant Valley. Anyone starting g from the Northeast section of East Hartford would use Ellington Road and Chapel unless there is an interchange with Ellington Road and the proposed I291. If there were an I291 without an access road, to Buckland Commons, they would prefer Ellington Road to Chapel . Discussions with people from west of West Farms Mall indicate that many of them prefer to use South Road, a residential street with many stop signs, than to use the I-84. The exit from the west to West Farms :Ball is similar in configuration to the route the s developer' s experts claim will be used by shoppers coming from the west using I-291 without the access road into Buckland Commons . A word about Smith Street. Should the zone change be granted with the proposed roadways and traffic controls , it is our opinion the Smith Street would be devastated. The developers ' ;plans call for widening Buckland Street in Manchester to a four lane roadway just prior to their access road from Buckland Street in 11aanchester. This would be a major access point . An earlier proposal , when they were applying in Manchester, showed traffic lights at Smith Street and Buckland Road, and another set of traffic lights complete with left turn lanes at the intersection of their access road and Buckland Street . Estimated trips on Buckland Road in 1935 is 30 , 000. It is our opinion that, with another access road at Wheeler and Smith, anyone coming south on Buckland going o the mall , or returning to north on Buckland from the mall , will want to use Smith Street in order to avoid the complex interchange at the access road and Buckland Street . That would appear to be something on the order of 5, 000 . trips on Smith S4-.1, The develope.rs' representatives have stated that it would be agree- able to them to have Smith Street closed at its intersection with Buckland Road. We do not know that it would be agreeable to the people on Smith Street. 9 Summary : 1. The developers ' opinions on market area and traffic flow are in doubt . 2 . No firm plan for I-291 or an alternative have been reached. 3. No firm plan for an access road have been reached. 4. Without 2 & 3 above the traffic effect on South Windsor 's southwest quadrant would be very detrimental . Recommendation : The zone change should be rejected due to insufficient plans on traffic flow problems . . The developers should be invited to return once these questions have been answered. 10 Factor 5: Protection of water sources and handling of surface water problems . Discussion: The developer has indicated detention basins will be used to control surface water runoff . Since that has been a problem in the past to several homes on Smith Street, it appears that properly designed basins might be advantageous . Design of basins will be a matter of engineering opinion. South Windsor has had several well publicized examples of poor planning for water handling. It is our concern that we have inadequate protection from poorly planned water handling schemes. There is no provision for penalty , or redesign in our zoning regulations. It appears that if MAP' s design were poor, or they sold out to some future developer, which might be worse, the residents of Smith Street would have to resort to private lawsuits , courts, etc, to have poor systems redesigned. Improper design of surface water systems might also effect water sources in the area. Wells might run dry or they may become polluted. There is not protection for residences thus affected by improperly designed water systems . Summary : Considerable concern exists pertaining to future protection from improperly designed water handling systems . ` 11 Recommendation: Zone change, if granted, should be conditional on proper water handling systems with some sort of safeguard or permanent bond for the protection of residences which could be affected in the future. i 12 Factor 6 : Sewage Disposal Problems ' Discussion : Despite the fact that the Sewer Commission has determined our capacity to be adequate, some questions remain as to adequate safeguards for residences in the area who presently use septic systems . The developer has proposed detention basins for handling surface water runoff . If these basins are improperly designed - it could very well have a detrimental effect on septic systems in the area. Sewering plans for Buckland Road are several years away. The Sewer Commission has no plans for severing Smith Street. Summary: Some means of insuring adequate protection for nearby homeowners should be part of zoning regulations or town ordinances. Recommendations : Zone change , if granted, should be conditional on proper water handling systems with some sort of safeguard for residences whose septic systems might be affected by improper design in the future. The developer might be asked to sewer Smith Street and several houses on Buckland Road at no cost to homeowners. 13 Factor 7: Public Safety flatters; Fire - Police Discussion : There seems to exist some confusion as to fire coverage responsibilities for the proposed commercial development To the best of our knowledge, no' formal request has been made of the Fire or Police Departments for an evaluation of the impact on those departments. No formal agreements, concerning these matters as they apply to Buckland Commons, have been reached between Manchester and South Windsor. Crime rates invariably increase as a result -of developments of this type. Not only . in the development itself, but also in adjoining areas. The thieves use the parking lots as "jumping off" points, make their way through buffer zones and burglarize adjacent properties. Nothing in the "site plan of development" provisions of our zoning regulations would provide for protection from this type of activity. Summary : There are unanswered questions about adequacy of fire and police protection and formal agreements concerning these between ;Manchester and South Windsor. Nothing in our zoning regulations protects nearby residences from the increase of crime and vandalism which accompany the type of development being proposed.. i 24 Recommendations: Formal questions should be asked of and answers received from the agencies concerned before a zone change is granted. Provisions should be made for the protection of nearby residences from the depredations of increased crime and vandalism. Such provisions should be made to apply to the property receiving the zone change whether XTAP Associates is the ultimate developer or not . 15 Recommendation: Conclusions : South Windsor' s zoning regulations do not provide adequate controls on such a large parcel of land once a GC zone change has been granted. The present developer could change his plans or sell to an entirely different developer or developers . Plans for I-291, a substitute for 1-291 and an access road from I-291 are very uncertain at this time. A zone change has already. been granted :in Manchester which will undoubtedly lead to some sort of commercial development . MAP Associates appears to be a desirable develops f.or South Windsor. f Due to the inability of the zoning commission to exercise adequate controls arc:/or due to the .extreme uncertainty of traffic plans, the commission should reject the zone change request. The developer should be invited to re-submit an application under a more compre- hensive zoning regulation which should be drawn up at the earliest possible time . The town council should undertake to resolve those problem areas over which they exercise control , i . e. , traffic problems ; etc. BUCKLAND COMMONS STUDY COMMITTEE June 27, 1979 PREFACE Buckland Commons is a proposed regional shopping area of approximately 750,000 square feet. M.A.P. Associates , the developer, is considering construction of this project in one of two locations. One possibility calls for construction of the center entirely in the Town of Manchester in an area that is currently zoned for commercial use. The other would . place the center partially in Manchester and partially in South Windsor. For the latter to occur, approximately 52.8 acres that is presently classified as rural residential property .would have to be rezoned as commercial land. The proposed site is located in the southern portion of South Windsor and is bounded by Wheeler Road, Smith Street, Buckland Road and Pleasant Valley Road. This is the final report of the Buckland Commons Study Committee . The committee was established by resolution of the South Windsor Town Council, on March 19, 1979, to "study the impact of Buckland Commons on the Town of South Windsor". The committee held many meetings to investigate and discuss the impact of this proposed development on South Windsor. Meetings were held, at the committee 's invitation, with the developer and the developer 's attorney. Various members of the study committee provided it with relevant areas of expertise; the committee in- cluded members of the Sewer Commission and the Mass Transit Commission. After much discussion, we were unable to reach a majority decision as to whether to present a favorable or unfavor- able report. Because of this even division of opinion, it was decided to set forth both the positive and negative attributes of the proposed center without deciding which was the stronger argument. It should be emphasized that the proposed shopping center would serve as a regional mall, much in the same way as Westfarms Mall draws shoppers from a variety of towns . Inasmuch as M.A.P. Associates proposes to build the project entirely in Manchester if it is unable to obtain the necessary zone change in South Windsor, refusal by South Windsor to accommodate- the developers may not isolate the Town from the impact of Buckland Commons. We have nevertheless based our report, except as noted, on the presumption that the center will be built as currently proposed in both South Windsor and Manchester. L. POSITIVE RESULTS OF BUCKLAND► COMMONS There seems little doubt that construction of Buckland Commons will result in additional net tax revenue to the Town of South Windsor. M.A.P. Associates claims that South Windsor will receive approximately $277,000 in additional taxes after deducting the cost of increased services to the mall, exclusive of personal property. The committee was unable to determine what the actual net tax revenue will be , but accepts the fact that there i11 e som""ne increase in tax revenue. This would, of course, r su in a lower mill rate or a smaller in- crease in the rate than could otherwise be expected . South Windsor residents would gain improved shopping con- venience. The number and variety of stores in a project of Buckland Commons ' size would give local residents both an in- creased choice of retail goods and services and a greater effici� e�ncy"off ime Most residents would spend less time . ra E?T�ng yy a o�mobile to shopping centers in other areas ; this would undoubtedly reduce gasoline consumption and wear and tear on local vehicles . The development of Buckland Commons would also result in increase emp oymen opportunities . M.A.P. Associates esti- mates tat Me shopping mall would (create if teen un ne jobs ; some of these would be fille )r rest ents . The large number of new part-time jobs created by a large retail - 2 - complex �OU�demploy many ocal youths who currently face a real shortage ype. o posi ion., his effect would be enhanced by the resulting growth in some existing businesses generated by mall traffic and by the additional commercial enterprises attracted by the mall 's proximity. The relative scarcity of retail competi- tion in South Windsor shou prev signs scant adverse impac on existing businesses . The increased automobile traffic brought to South Windsor by the center will create a greater likelihood of money and attention being spent o ti to roads gra leading to their up in Increased traffic flow on local roads would also zntens i y the need for con- struction of the by-pass road in the 1-291 corridor or some alter- nate "connector" road from Bissell Bridge to Manchester Industrial Park and Buckland Commons. such a road is built, local traffic would be reduced on Chapel Road, Clark Street'�P acant Halley Road and Burnham Street, provided that an access road leading from M.A.P.- ,complex to the connector road is built. Buckland Commons would also encourage the greater use of commuter bus terminals, which would also serve to reduce some traffic flow and to promote energy conservation. Although the construction of this project would undoubtedly bring more traffic into the area, these factors would help to restrain projected increases . t Finallv. the construction of Buckland Commons-__wouldincrea`sZ'j comme arid industrial property value rcial in South Windsor, is increase wou e e c proper y already zoned for commercial and industrial development as well as that proposed for reclassifica- tion. The concentration of commerce in a project of Buckland Commons ' size and the large numbers of consumers attracted to a facility of this type would increase the demand for supporting services such as restaurants and gasoline stations , although the latter may be a poor example at this time . The area of land zoned for commercial development and not utilized by M.A.P. Associates would undoubtedly show .a sharp increase in value and . a corresponding increase in taxes assessed . II. NEGATIVE RESULTS OF BUCKLAND COMMONS There seems little doubt tha enomenal increases in auto- o ould be generated by the sss opping mall on some 3 _ South Windsor roads which are not designed for heavy traffic. If an alternate roadway is not built in the 1-291 corridor with an access road to Buckland Commons, many local roads in Buckland Commons ' vicinity would experience heavy traffic volume and ' in- creased maintenance costs . Even if a connector road is built, there will be increased traffic on some local arteries. Present plans call for access to and from the center on Pleasant Valley Road, Wheeler Road , Burnham Street and Buckland Road 30, with major entrances on the latter two roads . oppers coming Trom areas . --the north and eas-E--ot the nr e wouU6 undoubtec y choose local roads as primary access routes . The plan of development., as shown, would make Smith Street serve as a "shortcut". The heaviest volumes of traffic could be expected during evening hours and on weekends. This would increase the impact of traffic growth on surrounding residential neighborhoods. The reclassification of the land in question as commercial property would infringe on those South Windsor residents who bought homes in reliance on the Town's comprehensive plan of development. The necessity for a study committee of this type highlights the variation between the Buckland Commons project and the existing plans for the orderly development of South Windsor. In addition, the change in zone alone will allow open ended commercial development in this area whether Buckland Commons is built or not. This change may lead to additional applications for changes in zones from residential to commercial in the adjacent areas and local arteries leading to the Buckland Commons ' site. The committee felt that this area of South Windsor has been significantly impacted by changes in land use and development in the past and that Buckland Commons will only serve to further aggravate the problem. Those who have invested in homes in this area with the expectation that it would remain rural residential in character will undoubtedly be severely dis appointed . Construction of Buckland Commons will also have a negative, environmental impact on the area. This impact would include adverse effects on the quality of life in surrounding neighbor- hoods as well as increased air pollution and rubbish disposal problems . Increased traffic will generate increased crime; car theft- vandalism would ro a v e two of the most fre- quent problems. olree c rs will mean more vehicle emmiss ions 4 y and the large number of stores and their clientele will produce significant amounts of fitter III. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS The area that would be occuR ied by Buckland Commons has a - history of rain ge problems. /If the project is built-,,'. it will - important eespecially important to require careful review of proposed methods of surface drainage. If the design of the developer 's surface drainage system were to prove faulty, the results are potentially catastrophic. Lar e amounts of surface water could flood septic_ fields ,..wells . houses ___cellars a-nd ay_rds . ,""s'uTtace water contaminated by waste or by chemicals used for snow removal would have to be satisfactorily drained away from residential areas. It should also be considered that large shopping malls are voracious consumers of energy. Although this issue does not effect South Windsor differently than other towns , construction of large energy users cannot be viewed inthe same light as it might have been ten years ago. (-As noted earlier, however, energy conservation promoted by such factors as increased effi- ciency and decreased travel must be weighed against the energy demands of the shopping mall itself. In conclusion, it should be noted that disapproval of the proposed zone change in South Windsor may only cause the project to be located entirely in Manchester. Many of the positive and negative impacts of Buckland Commons on South Windsor will result even if the shopping mall is not built within the Town. If Buckland Commons is built partially in South Windsor, the Town will have some control over the way the project is designed and �bui� It should be noted that a PUD type zone may a ord greater control. A number of people in the community feel, however, that denial of the zone change will effectively prevent construction of Buckland Commons. In order to build a shopping mall of any size entirely in Manchester, Burnham Street would have to be relocated further south at great expense. Further- more, if the center could have been built entirely in Manchester it seems logical to suppose that M.A.P. Associates would not waste time seeking a zone change in South Windsor. No one should feel intimidated into approving this zone change strictly because of a belief that construction of the project is inevitable. - 5 _ The Buckland Commons Advisory Committee wishes to make the k following recommendation to the Town Council, Town Manager, and any other interested town agencies: After discussion of I-291 highway, it was agreed that South Windsor does not need a full expressway such as I-291 and that the full building of such a highway could be years away. It is suggested , therefore,- that there be a trade-in s ub- stitute proposal in which I-291 should be traded in and in place. of a lesser facility, boulevard type road., be built to connect from the Bissell Bridge and Route 5 to the industrial road at Tolland Turnpike. The town should also take whatever steps are necessary to construct a connector road. from this proposed boulevard to the Buckland Commons area if a zone change is granted. It is not to be inferred that the Advisory Committee is suggesting that a zone change be granted. - 6 - Management of Resources and the Environment it t BUCKLAND COMMONS Air Quality Impact Analysis Prepared for: Beck & Pagano Attorneys at Law 447 Center Street_ Manchester, CT 06040 Prepared by: Management of Resources and the Environment (:IRE) 41C New London Tpke. Glastonbury, CT 06033 (20 3) 6 33-35 71 J Management of Resources and the Environment r - rI. INTRODUCTION rThis report provides a quantitative assessment of air quality changes occurring as a result of the proposed Buckland Commons Mall and Industrial Complex. The ' analysis was performed using the EPA air quality model MOBILE 2. ' The study quantifies emission burden changes using existing traffic projected �. to 1985 as baseline and compares baseline data to- emission burdens resulting r from increased traffic load occurring as a result of the Buckland Commons Mall and Industrial Complex. Burdens are quantified on an average daily basis and for peak hour. Additionally, estimates have been made for air quality standard ' violations as a result of the project. ' A. Project Description rThe proposed project is the development of a 1.2 million square foot retail shopping area located on 93 acres of undeveloped farmland in the towns of r Manchester and South Windsor. The site itself is bounded by Smith Street to the north, Pleasant Valley Road and Burnham Street to the south, Buckland Road to the east, and Wheeler Road to the west. r Residential, commercial and industrial developments line the roads, while sur- rounding areas to the north and east are primarily undeveloped. The Buckland Industrial complex is found to the south of the site. i r 1 r 1 r , Management of Resources and the Environment II. IMPACTS ' A. Area Burdens/Day In 1985 an additional 15,000 cars per day in the study area attributable to mall* operations will increase the burdens of HC, CO, NOx, by 61.6% 63.8% and 27.1% respectively. (Table l provides a description of the study ' area, Table 2 provides absolute pollutant burdens) . I-86 will contribute 65%, b77,, and 81% of HC, CO, and NOx respectively of the 1985 travel related pollutant burdens in the study area(without the mall) . ' Calculations of these burdens employed the following methodology and assump- tions. (1) The EPA model MOBILE 2 was used with Jul 1 1985 is y registration tration and all default parameters except that cold start emissions were assigned ' to the Study Area rather than apportioned by VMT as in MOBILE 2. (2) Ambient temperature was 690F, mean for Brainard Field for 1931-60, July 1 15 - Sept. 15. (3) Speed correction was made at the posted speeds on the route links. ' (4) Where specific link VMT was not provided in the "traffic study" for base 1985, Mall VMT was decremented by the average percent increase in VMT attributable to Mall traffic or other links and used as base 1985. (5) Catalyst equipt vehicles made 90% of the trips to the Mall.- (6) 99% .of Mall trips lasted at least one hour. ' (7) 66% of .non-Mall trips were made by cars operating in cold operation mode. ' (8) 93.3% of Mall trips originated outside of the Study Area. (9) 5% of non-Mall trips originating outside of the Study Area had the Study Area as their destination; their parking duration was 3 hours. (10Y For Mall trips originating ifi'the Study Area, parking duration in the Study Area was 24 hours. ' (11) For non-Mall trips 12 500 on ( ) originating ng in the Study Area (33.3%), 75% had a destination outside the Study Area and 15 hours parking time was assigned to the ' Study Area; the remaining 25% made non-Mall trips within the Study Area and 24 hours parking time was.assigned to the Study Area. * Mall operations include industrial complex TABLE 1 ' TRAFFIC 1985/1986 i LENGTH SPEED ROAD LINK (MILES) (MPH) 1 BURNHAM STREET WEST OF CLARK ST. 1 2. 27 25 CHAPEL ROAD WEST OF CLARK ST. 2 1.82 25 PLEASANT VALLEY RD, WEST OF CLARK ST. 3 1.88 25 INTERSTATE 86 SOUTH OF SITE 4 1. 36 55 BUCKLAND ROAD NORTH OF SMITH ST. 5 1. 27 20 1-86, NORTH OF SITE 6 1. 72 55 ' TOLLAND TPKE, WEST OF I-86 7 1.36 35 BUCKLAND RD, NORTH OF I-86 8 . 26 35 ' BUCKLAND RD, SOUTH OF I-86 9 .49 35 CLARK ST. SOUTH OF PLEAS, VALLEY RD. 10 .58 25 t PLEASANT VALLEY RD, WEST OF BUCKLAND KL ND RD. 11 . 58 30 ' PLEASANT VALLEY RD. EAST OF WHEELER RD. 12 . 16 30 PLEASANT VALLEY RD . EAST OF CLARK ST. 13 .41 30 ' NORTH MAIN ST. WEST OF OAKLAND ST. 14 1. 36 35 1 1 ' 2. 1 TABLE 1 (CON T) 1 BASE BASE+INDUSTRIAL ROAD ADT# PEAK COMPLEX MALL BASE+IND+MALL LINK (VEH/DAY) (VEH/HR) ADT PEAK ADT PEAK ADT( 1) PEAK 1 1050 180 2263 300 387 80 2650 380 ' 2 2350 370 4445 650 155 35 4600 685 3 3500 370 4630 390 370 115 5000 505 4t 61500 6065 NA NA 15190 779 69065 6844 5 6500 795 8645 920 930 190 9575 1110 6t 60800 5770 NA NA 6975 358 64288 6128 7t 4500 660* NA NA 1705 87 5353 747 ' 8 6500 1270 29095 1360 930 1575 30025 2935 9 10000 1510 NA 1560 NA 495 17950 2055 10 450 360 NA 410 NA 115 4325 525 1 11 3300 700 NA 915 NA 1135 17400 2050 12 3300 640 NA 700 NA -55 6550 755 13 3300 660 NA 720 NA 220 9100 940 14t 13600 1007* NA NA NA 80 14375 1087 1981 DATA NA-DATA NOT AVAILABLE ' t -FIGURES FOR BASE AND INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX AND MALL DO NOT INCLUDE TRAFFI C GENERATED BY THE INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, FIGURES WERE EXTRAPOLATED USING APPROACH DISTRIBUTION FACTORS MULTIPLIED BY BASE 1981 DATA. ( 1.)BASED ON COMBINED 1985/1986 DAILY BASE TRAFFIC AND DAILY GENERATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF TRAFFIC FROM THE BUCKLAND INDUSTRIAL PARK AND THE BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL. SOURCE : WILBUR SMITH AND ASSOCIATES : "TRAFFIC AND ACCESS ANALYSIS. BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL., SOUTH WINDSOR - MAN.CHESTER, CT, " ' 2.2 Management of Resources and the Environment TABLE 2 Burdens (Kg) of HC, CO and NOx in the Study Area with and without the Buckland Mall. HC CO NOx ' WITHOUT THE MALL 325.6 3627.8 589.4 WITH THE MALL 526.2 5941.7 798.9 ' 0% +61.6 +63.8 , +27.1 B. Peak Hour CO Burdens Estimates of peak hour CO burdens were analyzed along two main mall access ' routes; Pleasant Valley Road west of Buckland Road (Link 11) and Buckland Road north of I-86 (Link 8) were chosen as these are links in the ' study area that will receive the large incremental increases of Mall traffic. Burdens of CO along these routes will increase % 193% and 130 respectively between 5 and 6 pm due to Mall traffic. ' Table 2 provides specific information. Again, MOBILE 2 was employed with July 1, 1985 registration and all ' other defaults concerning operation emissions except that cold/ stable operation modes were set at 25%/75% and start-up emissions were not considered. TABLE 3 Estimates of CO Burdens at Peak Hour Traffic Along Two Main Mall Access Routes Link 11: Pleasant Valley Road west of Buckland Road Link 8: Buckland Road north of I-86 ' Link# Length Speed'* Vehicles/Hour CO Burdens (Kg) 8 0.26 30 1270 without Mall 7.9 8 0.26 30 2935 with Mall 18.2 ' 0% +130 11 0.58 25 700 without Mall 11.8 ' 11 0.58 25 2050 with Mall 34.6 0% +193 ' * Speeds at peak hour traffic assumed 5mph less than posted speed 3 Management of Resources and the Environment C. - Estimates of Air Quality Standard Violations Associated with Increased ' Pollutant Burdens from Buckland Commons Traffic ' Within the Buckland Commons Study Area, MRE has projected increased burdens of the traffic pollutants, HC, CO, and NOx, of 61.6%, 63.8% and 27. 1% respectively. Because of the highly reactive nature of HC and NOx, an analysis of burden concentration relationships would involve significant monitoring and meteorolo- gical data and modelling. CO, though, is unreactive and its burden should effect the ambient CO concentration. Assuming a one ppm background for CO in the Study Area (ERT Report assumption), the burden increase (63.8%) due to Buckland Commons ' traffic does not result in any 8 hour standard (9 ppm) exceedances. However, only through site monitoring can accurate background concentrations be determined. ' Even alongPleasant a t Valley and Buckland Roads, where CO levels are predicted ' to increase 193% and 131% respectively there will not be standard exceedances. This is demonstrable by assuming (1) a logarithmic distribution of CO values and (2) using summary statistics on CO data from the Hartford area to calculate ' the highest CO given a certain mean concentration. For a mean of 3 ppm, the highest expected value is less than 5 ppm; this is below the 8 hour standard of 9 ppm. 4 iwanagemenior mesources anathe environment APPENDIX A Comparison of -MRE Buckland Auto Emissions Report with that of the ERT These two reports differ in two basic areas which preclude direct comparison: (1) different VMT accrued by auto trips within the area of Buckland ' Commons; and (2) different emission rates were applied to autos making these trips. Differences between projected VMT and trips lie in .data sources and assumptions ' concerning trip distribution and shopping demand at the Mall. These differences are arguable but resolution is difficult and will not be attempted here. Differences between emission rates employed are quite easily evaluated. The ' ERT report employed emission rates from the model, EPA MOBILE 1 . The MRE Report employed the model MOBILE 2, an updated version of MOBILE 1, which has replaced MOBILE 1. Therefore, it is possible to "compare" the reports by substituting MOBILE 2 emission rates in the ERT calculations and evaluating the changes in ERT percent changes in emissions (ERT Report Table VI-E) . ' Table A compares the MOBILE 1 emission rates employed by ERT and the applica- ble MOBILE 2 emission rates. Substituting MOBILE. 2 factors into the ERT Report calculations of Tables ' VI C and D and the Summary Table VI E results in percent changes in emissions of• + 83%, and 84%. and 78% of HC, CO and NOX, respectively rather than the reported +89%, and 85% and +76% changes. ' In conclusion, the MRE and ERT Reports predict - 60% and - 80% increases respec- tively,in HC and CO with the mall inplace; comparable increases in NOX are 27 and 78%. Because the ERT Report used higher VMT 's, the burdens of pollutants ' that ERT predicts are more than twice those predicted by MRE. t A-1 Managementof Resources and the Environment 1 TABLE A MOBILE. 1 Emission Rates employed by ERT and comparable MOBILE Emission Rates ' Emission Source and Compound MOBILE 1 MOBILE 2 (g/mi) (g/mi) Start up Factors ' HC 5.6 approximately equal CO 55.7 86.4 NO 1.9 2.7 Auto Travel Factors HC 0.8 1.6 CO 11.1 20.6 NOx 1.6 1.8 ' The remaining differences between the MRE and ERT Reports are due to differ- ences between VMT and trips used in the analyses. A-2 Management of Resources and the Environment APPENDIX B RESUMES KENNETH A. MACGREGOR POSITION Principal EDUCATION University of Connecticut, 1963 Bachelor of Science in Civil Engi- neering University of Hartford Masters of Public Administration, ' 1974 . Local and Regional Planning Georgia Institute of Technology Urban Transportation Planning and Analysis U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Storm and Combined Sewer Section Application of Stormwater Manage- ment Models PROFESSIONAL American Institute of. Planners SOCIETIES American Society of Civil Engineers ' REGISTRATION Professional Engineer Connecticut No. 9050 ' EXPERIENCE ' Mr. MacGregor's expertise is in the field of local and regional planning supported by a broad background of civil engineering and construction experience. His formal education and diversity of experience enables him to integrate the two disciplines of planning and engineering providing ' realistic solutions to environmental management problems. As the Principal of the firm he has the responsibility of coordinating ' the input of a diverse group of other professionals. He has the primary task of assuring that project objectives are met to the satisfaction of client's needs and budget constraints. As a key team member, Mr. Mac- Gregor leads in the concept design of many of the studies and feels strongly that creative planning/design can insure that environmental integrity is maintained for all of the firm's projects. ' ,His earlier background in field construction and engineering design work allows him to realistically evaluate the ramifications of many environ- mentally sensitive projects, quantify real costs associated with phy- sical improvements and be knowledgeable about latest technological concepts. Mr. MacGregor has been involved in the field of environmental management since the inception of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and has acquired knowledge and expertise through his participation in the preparation of environmental impact statements, plans of development, preliminary design of physical improvements such as highways, marinas, industrial parks; noise, air pollution and stormwater modeling; regional and local planning such as solid waste management, marine related im- provement projects, transportation facilities, residential complexes; research studies, data gathering and 'Long terra ulonituring programs. Management of Resources and the Environment JOHN M. CROOM POSITION Quantitative Analyst . EDUCATION Emory University, Department of ' Biology, 1978. Ph.D. Emory University, Department of Biology, 1972. Masters Degree ' Davidson College (North. Carolina) Department of Biology, 1969. Bachelor of Science EXPERIENCE ' Mr. Croom holds a Ph.D. in Ecology and has worked as a consultant in quantitative science for 6 years. He has a wealth of experience in applied environmental problems and particular expertise in ecological modeling. With a strong background in statistics, he is knowledgeable in the areas of Fortran and BASIC computer programming language, as well as in simulation languages, statistical packages, graphics package, and data base management systems. ' Mr. Croom has acted as a technical witness and technical advisor for various ecological -studies performed for industry. These have included ' mathematical analyses of Hudson River population dynamics; studies of Hudson River invertebrates; studies of the relative contribution of three eastern estuaries to the Atlantic striped bass fishery; and statis- tical methodology used in Hudson River Ecological Study reports. He ' also has experience in evaluating experimental design and statistical analysis and ecological models of the Hudson River. ' Mr. Croom has also held advisor responsibilities for industry in the areas of review of sampling design; consultation with report authors on analysis and interpretation; and senior staff review of reports. ' Also for industry, Mr. Croom's .responsibilities have included acting as a group leader in the supervision of two Ph.Ds. and two Masters level people- in gathering data on past Hudson River 'studies to examine ecosystem function and regulation. For Management of Resources and the Environment, Mr. Croom has developed the environmental modeling methodology for the Technology Assessment of Productive Conservation in Urban Transportation (TAPCUT) , which is being ' conducted for the Office of Technology Impacts of the Department of Energy. This project involves assessing the impact of changing urban transportation policy on environmental quality through the year 2000. The basic methodology ' used EPA's MOBILE 2 and an accounting model to predict changes in air quality inthe central business district, urban, suburban and exurban areas of three prototypica.l •cities. In addition noise, water and toxic pollutants impacts will be measured. 19. CIO �\ - S � 0° \ ems.... .,.:,�-•w,�+.iAlt { ,�•`i r` cz �• ,_ J' �,' �,- '�,1: '"iv '•'iw+6`,'.,.w'."'• �Y" a M +,�k U \�J s!-. �.- !' �"W�" �� '�i'+4`���nt +..e!-_ik�:ea.....dac.v �a!✓�:'fiwrr.rq*�r�e {' •� s L?r.-r�•:•' sr�>.r �: _ -. '!`°�ra••••e��< r + ;a`..�..._.. .. _...., ,���"'+�sas�°^,�^m��•'- t t ra tN1,� � ��„2�x ^l oif++}� ..•, . 'r. ^` ti`_�att ;mi. '�^°rt d , . . ....,r+.w,.r..::....,wx7J.J.4_:,;ksv f L•}F t?vi°�xAt. Ll.i �' #,:. �y° � ,r,'�•J 'J°,rw.'� p .T p_,. .:er.�._._...-er?-.' � z f�f, GGI.',: •^� 7Tjt .:, 4 �f :..°. rJr� h�� .`.. ...•. -^... ��t�A.�i��rt` (-- �� l kr .' 1 y{y ``• .-. ., mot , Ll i'f YyycJ1{�7►..t[ .r `.`�iZj - w:A * s �� ° .i# •,, ,f'° ;•� •L,{v�.,7+c w,;, ti:.miy.. _..���q• .a.r•.. "�'"'"� r '"'k{kn ttir.' C:) r"CA'} •i CIO CM CIO ,,,�J[�`r ,,,�'�'• �`c �.1...�Y.�'.7- 2s � °.�..t.} • '�`��,.i�.„,q�5�r�ayy;�,ks, � y„� �j'75'�7�;a! ,�. L�l r Cr t tii ]... "1. p Tr Y p 1 1 1 Aso ®/•� � . ".9:=•. " ��. ��'a r,tk7B'�."..+`�'�tiM.�t��j ,j �w�e..r"ra..7+.�^ ,fi r.r,y,,,r�N y ���j�T5�1!"�') � 4�f !a W � C/ t a.. p ..• f'r k' a•y ' •Se• 1C�n rt..al.-,u e s�'„}�.-s�Y v SY� �'tkc�< ��j•+-fir. .^is ,� .a,' �':t ;.c,; � :'.�..•.r„�.- �v '" r`�<.x��5 ..w..a.m. tT ytpy p--a .�'":r i..t•.��yS�•��'� /•S a re �...t u U%;i,,i+. "' �,�` " a.,.:a�-wwd.,4�.�ik'."",�,... .e..a'.K,R.d, 'r �7 � � _� '�,�,,T}I V) .. •. f m 1 � tia t 3.. .r .a r .r}:.w� y •k<,,tt.��.�! (..) Lij CD .��. .. • :� � n. fir a •� �`1da'i��t �� ' n ie• y.�•.'�y`�� t!' ��_ .C.=.; smt:m..yy .u.a.3,.rLy„ ��!r h.. a• '�+,ry����`"�� •g� .}��.'rt;•;' U ��° �fd i it'SJ� •", �� n ,�,,d.>~.'::au�at,<•� d�;fiat f 7ti ���"� �r, � �%r. 1� +e � u:�w'�,. tr � •fi �_..J °.°�f °••° • Y „�G.. `.+...ems. 'Isar' V) (�^'•^��) •:t it��.� o �L' 1� �� •�ph' '� � fir: 3: • y. CL F— a iL •• a}•+•?�'T�'� `'' e_�� �°�� ,f � wi. LLICD wry � : •rM s a a„, r t�, it :%.. sr.. � ^t�} o.e• .s....m ��A.,r,.i I ;:t� •t rt�'• � .x�� h .tea � .tiafi"%•+�ns�t. ,�irw :� lkk i ti• 1 1 Environmental Review Team 1 Report - on Buckland Commons Mail 1 South Windsor/Manchester , Connecticut 1 April 1981 i 1 1 1 1 L'a jo�•.•'"ie B 1 eastern connecticut resource conservation & development area environmental review team ' 139 boswell avenue norwich , connecticut 06360 1 P -- Location of Study Site BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL "� SOUTH WINDSOR/MANCHESTER, CONNECTICUT »-+. S T F� ..::::::..... _ - ems., `y."r•'";LS`:: .. - - - - --- sue` `• ' j e ,rra r E Rc r l h�E 93 M A S S A C M U S E T T 8 SOMERS STAFFORD i UNION WOODSTOCK It THOMPSON ENFIELD e I r 1 l _ - -►-tee_- �----'---�-____. I 1 1 ---- -- - ' - - � ELLNiGTON_-`_..--`•� I I` --------" PUTNAM A EAST i t i WILLING ASHFORU�EAST 1 POMFRET I� Z WINDSOR i TOLLAND -TON I \FORD f KILLINGLY IVERNON' I --__a SOUTH I T---- --iCtl4Ptlti —,—,�, ` WIND I t-`'- I 'I--1 MANSFI€LD I INAMPTOF!- %COVENTRY-` I I 1 BROOXLYN , EAST tMANERES I I \` 1 I I r- --i--� m ART- ; TUfVi- FORD c WNtDHAM'- ' I SCOT CANTER r PLAINFIELOTERIL� COLUMat; -LAND, -BURY', I -IN3 , GLASTONBURT r HEBRON j'MARL=% ��.'� LEBANON _---I"i-- _--�` ,8OROUGi4�r rFRANK�; �1S80t}: � IiJ ;CRO#IWELLPORTLANO �` �-` -LIN GRISWOLD I r HAMPTO4, COLEHc'STER � _v+NOR'NIC►j`- ~`� r=BOZRAHr r_- 1 O \,MIDDLETOWN �` PRESFON �-FIE LDi _ i SALE►h �r j. NORT#i -_ S1' EAST-HADDAM.- I -I_- __ I f r MONTVILLE _ 4 STONINGTOTF ' I DURHAM I HADDAM 1 I I - - l �� I LEDYARD i WATERFORD I KILLING CI-ESTER LYME ; EAST -------.STONINGTON ) ' II LYME t GROTON -WORTH _-� - L �1d00 DEEP RIVER` - 1 �ESSEX `L__ OLD LYMEI , 1 I I EST--'C)LD l` W I ' CL INTC'W78ROOK` EASTERN CONNECTICUT WS(Ma CC?MYATO AM DMLtA WNT PMCT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW TEAM REPORT ON BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT This report is an outgrowth of a request from the South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission, to the Hartford County Soil and Water Conservation District (S&WCD) . The S&WCD referred this request to the Eastern Connecticut Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D) Area Executive Committee for their consideration and approval as a project measure. The request was approved and the measure reviewed by the Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team (ERT) . The soils of the site were mapped by a soil scientist of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) , Soil Conservation Service (SCS). Reproductions of the soil survey map as well as a topographic map of the site were distributed to all ERT participants prior to their field review of the site. The ERT that field-checked the site consisted of the following personnel : ' Michael Zizka, Geologist, State Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) ; Dwight Southwick, Engineer, SCS; Vern Anderson, District Conservationist, SCS; Thom Hooper, Air Quality Planner, Capital Region Council of Governments, and ' Jeanne Shelburn, ERT Coordinator, Eastern Connecticut RC&D Area. The Team met and field-checked the site on Thursday, April 2, 1981 . Reports from each Team member were sent to the ERT Coordinator for review and summariza- tion' for the final report. This report is not meant to compete with private consultants by supplying ' site designs or detailed solutions to development problems. This report identifies the existing resource base and evaluates its significance to the proposed development and also suggests considerations that should be of concern ' to the developer and the Town of South Windsor. The results of this Team action are oriented toward the development of a better environmental- quality and the long-term economics of the land use. The Eastern Connecticut RC&D Project Committee hopes you will find this report of value and assistance in making your decisions on this particular site. -' If you require any additional information, please contact: Ms. Jeanne Shelburn, Environmental Review Team Coordinator, Eastern Connecticut RC&D Area, 139 Boswell Avenue, Norwich, Connecticut 06360, 889-2324. Topography �. Site Boundary scale 660 N •see• uu • /00 Noumea 0 ® ® -f ti1 Mesa gas ® ® Ii Ileum , s s s 11 ti MM ssese ® es it IRNHAOQ 1!0 Oil !� 40 10 ©'A ' \ 0 i Q \ — ' -2- ' INTRODUCTION The Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team was asked to prepare an ' environmental assessment for the proposed Buckland Commons Mall in the towns of South Windsor and Manchester. The project area is approximately 93 acres in size. It straddles the South Windsor-Manchester town line. Fifty-five ' acres of the parcel lie in South Windsor, while the remaining acreage is in Manchester. The town of South Windsor is in the process of reviewing this property for a zone change- to accommodate the proposed mall . Acreage in Manchester is appropriately zoned at present. The property is currently in ' the private ownership of the Hartman Tobacco Company and is being used for agricultural purposes. The preliminary development plans have been prepared by Buckland Associates of King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. ' Preliminary plans show development of a. regional shopping mall of approx- imately 1 .2 million square feet of gross floor area (± 30 acres) . The remaining ' portions of the site would be paved for parking area. Stormwater management systems would tie in with those of the J.C. Penney warehouse on a neighboring site, as well as establishment of additional detention basins on the project site. Public sewer and water are available to the site. ' The site was recently used for vegetable crops, remnants of this vegetation were apparent on the' day of the field review. Several large tobacco sheds or ' warehouses are presently established on the site. Topography is generally gently sloping on the major section of the parcel . Soils typical of the site include the Enfield series, the Manchester series, and the Merrimac series. Each of these soils is noted for their agricultural importance by the USDA, Soil Conservation Service. The Team is concerned with the effect of the proposed development on the natural resource base of this site-. The town of South Windsor was specifically concerned with the impact of this proposal on the soils , hydrology, water quality and air quality of the site and surrounding area. These issues are addressed in detail in the following sections of this report. Generally, the Team has found that the proposal will result in slight in- creases in the carbon monoxide (CO) levels in the air in the immediate area; there should be adequate consideration given to the highly erosive nature of the soils on site, by both water and wind, and precautions for minimizing erosion and subsequent sedimentation should be taken during the construction of ' this project; the effect on the water quality of the underlying aquifer will be questionable and the Team recommends additional consultation with the Long Island office of the United States Geological Survey. The aquifer itself is ' composed primarily of fine grained sediments which generally are not suitable for large scale water supply development, however, it should be noted that the Manchester Water Company's well fields have been developed in an area consisting primarily of fine grained sands. -3- J ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT GEOLOGY The site proposed for the new shopping pp g mall is located in an area encompassed by the Manchester topographic quadrangle. A geologic map of the quadrangle, Prepared in 1965 by R.B. Colton, has been published by the U.S. Geological Survel (Map GQ-433). Colton identified the surficial geologic materials on the site as a combination of glaciofluvial and glacial deltaic sediments. Glaciofluvial sediments consist of materials that were- deposited by streams of glacial melt- water. These are usually coarse-grained sediments, primarily sand and graver. ' The deltaic sediments were deposited in a -Former glacial lake by an aggrading meltwater stream or streams. These sediments are usually finer-grained, con- sisting primarily of sand, silt, and gravel . ' Geological logs of several wells and test borings- in the vicinity of the site Piave- provided some information about the nature of the subsurface geology- These These logs indicate that bedrock is within 20 feet of the surface at the eastern boundary of the tract (Buckland Street in Manchester) , but that it is as much as or more than 200 feet below the surface at the western boundary in Windsor). The logs also indicate that the bedrock is within 100(feetlof er thed , surface in the Burnham Street-Croft Drive area. Evidently, glacial sediments have filled a deep bedrock valley whose axis passes north-northwest to south- southeast beneath the western section of the tract. The site forms part of a ' fairly extensive plain in the Buckland area. The plain can be traced southward from Smith Street for a distance of more than a mile; it terminates at an escarpment just south of the Penn Central railroad in Buckland. An examination of the scarp face showed a few feet of coarse sand and gravel at the surface, overlying horizontally bedded fine sands, very fine sands, silt, and clay. This stratigraphy is probably fairly consistent throughout most of the plain, includini the western section of the proposed mall site. The fine-grained nature of the sediments and the horizontal layering tend to confirm the prior existence of a glacial lake in the area, into which streams from wasting ice blocks carried a tremendous load of shattered rock particles. Although most glacial lake sediment in the area are fine-grained, coarser layers, which would indicate periods of expecially rapid glacial streamflow, are probably interbedded to some extent (well logs in the Croft Drive-Windsor Street area reported up to 80 feet of "sand ' and gravel " over bedrock). The local bedrock is sedimentary, consisting largely of sandstone, s.iltstone,' and shale. These rocks were formed during the early Jurassic Period, about 180 million years- ago. Outcrops of the rock occur east of the site near Buckland Road.. Till , another. type of glacial sediment that is most commonly known as "hardpan," covers the bedrock in most areas east of Buckland Road for a distance , of approximately one-half to one and one-half miles. Till was .deposited directly from the ice, rather -than by meltwater streams; consequently, till is non-sorted and contains particles of all sizes from clay to boulders. It seems likely that , till , generally less than 15 feet thick, directly overlies bedrock beneath the proposed mall site. Well logs along Smith Street do not contain completely con- sistent geological descriptions , but the various designations of "clay, "hardpan,' Of and so forth are probably due more to different usages among well drillers ' than to actual differences in geology. The General trend of the descriptions still implies that a thin layer of coarse sand and gravel overlies fine-grained lake sediments and till . ' -4- HYDROLOGY ' A major concern of the town f i� c o South Windsor appeared to be the possible effects of the proposed mall on a prospective water-supply aquifer under and in ' the vicintiy of the site. The term "aquifer" does not refer to any specific geologic deposit, but merely is applied to any earth material that is capable of supplying useful quantities of groundwater. In effect, all of Connecticut is ' an aquifer, since the underlying bedrock is itself a common source of water supply. Bedrock, however, generally will not supply yields of more than 30 gallons per minute (higher yields can be obtained in some places, but such yields are rare) . Coarse-grained glaciofluvial sediments , on the other hand, may supply several hundred gallons per minute, depending upon the thickness of the saturated zone and the areal extent of the deposit. Consequently, areas known to be under- lain by stratified drift deserve the closest examination. ' Although there are thick stratified drift (glacial meltwater) deposits beneath the proposed mall site and surrounding areas, subsurface data shows that most of these sediments are fine-grained. It is therefore not as likely that the surficial material (the overburden) would be suitable for large-scale water supply development. This does not mean , however, the the deposits are necessarily unsuitable. Even fine sand has proven to be a valuable groundwater-supply source where the saturated section is thick. It is known that wells near the western section of the site have penetrated more than 200 feet of overburden; hence, the possibility of at least a moderate yield from the stratified drift ' on the site cannot be dismissed. It should be noted in this regard that the Manchester Water Company's well field off New State Road is located in sediments that were logged as consisting -predominantly of fine sand. The question of existing water quality is even more problematic. A chemical analysis from a stratified drift well near the site showed levels of nitrate that were much higher than the recommended maximum for drinking-water. However, the analysis was dated July, 20, 1954. It is not known whether this analysis re- presented an isolated occasion of elevated nitrate levels or whether it was symptomatic of a continuing problem. Since the reading was taken in a period ' when fertilizer applications may have been particularly heavy and when recent recharge from precipitation may have been low, and also because of the substantial lapse of time since the reading, the reported chemical data is of questionable ' value. More recent chemical data would be helpful . It may be presumed, however, that the historical usage of the area for agricultural purposes has affected the local groundwater to some extent. The effects would be expected to decrease with ' depth.. As to the potential impact of the shopping mall itself, it seems clear that the principal source of possible groundwater contamination would be runoff from the parking lots. Most of the surface runoff from the mall would be directed to detention basins, which would have permeable bases . Contaminants from the paved areas could percolate down to the water table from these basins. The ' town may wish to consult the Long Island branch of the U.S. Geological Survey to discuss this matter. The Survey has considerable experience in this type of situation: drainage from many commercial centers on Long Island was returned ' to the ground via retention pits in order to assure sufficient recharge to the groundwater. The Survey has monitored the groundwater in some of these areas for many years and would be able to offer pertinent information about the effects of the artificial recharge. Since the total amount of paved area contributing ' to the basins in Buckland Commons would be large (approximately 150 acres , including the J.C. Penney facility) , the Team recommends that the Long Island ' USGS office be consulted. The large area of land that would be covered by impermeable surfaces, in- ' cluding the Penney facility, would have some effect on groundwater recharge. If none of the rainfall reaching the impermeable surfaces were returned to the ground, the loss of recharge would probably be in the range of 50 million to , 100 million gallons of water per year. This volume of groundwater could sustain a well with a continuous yield of about 95 to 190 gallons per minute. Actually, some of the surface water would be transmitted through the ground, either through the bottoms of the detention- basins or through the bases of local stream channels,' but it seems Tikely that most of the natural recharge from the covered area-would be- lost. The general effect of this loss would be to lower the average elevation of the water table underneath and in the vicinity of the mall site. The domestic ' wells surrounding the site appear to be generally deep and within the underlying bedrock. These wells should not be noticeably affected by- the loss of recharge__ If- there are wells in the vicinity that tap only the upper 10 feet or so of the saturated zone of stratified drift, they may be adversely affected, but the Team ' has no information to suggest that this type of well does exist near the site. The loss of recharge entailed in the development of the mall should not ' have serious repercussions in terms of the quantity of groundwater available unless plans were ultimately finalized for a public-supply well in the vicinity of the site. As discussed above, the local overburden appears to be predominantly ' fine-grained and may not be suitable for such a well . In addition, public water mains are available to serve the area. Nevertheless , the Buckland area has undergone and will probably continue to undergo substantial growth and the long- ' range needs of the area must be considered. In particular, the proposed mall should not be regarded solely by itself; it should be related to other future developments that seem likely to occur. For example, it has been stated that the impervious area associated with the mall would account for only a small per- ' centage of the available recharge to the groundwater. The same argument may have been made for the Penney complex or may be made for future developments. Ultimately, a series of developments, each by itself accounting for only a small ' percentage, can block out a substantial portion of recharge area. Also, the actual area of recharge for a well placed on the site or nearby depends to some extent upon the level of the saturated zone that it taps; the higher the tap, ' in general , the smaller the recharge area. Since a productive groundwater well field is likely to be more reliable than surface water supplies, as recent drought conditions in the state have made clear, the possibility of utilizing the stratified drift on or rear the proposed mall site should not be dismissed unless the town is convinced it has ample Supply potential to meet projected long-range demands. Perhaps one or two_ ' test- wells could be drilled on the site.- If the deposits are shown to have some useful potential , this would not rule out the mall but it could suggest that more detailed work should be done on determining the boundaries of the local groundwater system and on the effects of both loss of recharge and the ' possible contamination resulting from the absorption of parking lot runoff. Again, the Long Island branch of the U.S. Geological Survey would be a useful source of information in this process. ' Another hydrologic concern relating to the proposed mall is the effect on runoff and local peak streamflows. Rainfall that is no longer able to penetrate ' -6- .d . a the ground will run off to artificial or natural basins or streams. The soils on the site (i .e. , the upper portion of the overburden) are coarse-grained and are consequently more absorptive than most other types of soil in the state. ' As a consequence, the increase in surface runoff from the areas made impervious would be maximal . On the other hand, because the existing use of the land is agricultural , the runoff increase would be smaller than if the site were presently ' forested. As an example of the expected increases, it may be estimated that the site would generate approximately 1 .77 inches of runoff during a 2-inch rainfall after development, whereas it would generate less than 0.2 inch under present. conditions. The developers have recognized the need for runoff controls and ' have prepared plans for a drainage system that will serve to maintain peak flows at present levels for all storms up to the 100-year frequency storm. This system will be effected by detention basins with multiple outlets. The developers ' ' design in this regard appears to address the problem in a more-than-adequate fashion. The design would require the burial of an intermittent drainage swale in the eastern section of the tract. Runoff through the swale is presently ' creating problems for a homeowner on Smith Street; the new system would alleviate this problem while simultaneously taking over the natural function of the swale. Burial of the swale should not have adverse consequences. ' A concern was expressed about possible effects of runoff on a wetland just north of Smith Street and the proposed mall site. Since the detention basin upstream from the wetland would control peak flows, any impact would most likely ' be related to sediment or other foreign substances derived from the parking lots. Much of the sediment would undoubtedly be trapped in the basin. Dissolved salts, oils, or other liquid contaminants would be of greater concern. The ' developer has addressed this concern to some extent. It is difficult to evaluate the degree of risk involved since so much depends upon the nature and success of the mitigative measures that are employed. ' SOILS ' A detailed soils map of this site is included in the Appendix to this report, accompanied by a chart which indicates soil limitations for various urban uses. As the soil map is an enlargement from the original 1 ,320'/inch scale to 660'/inch, ' the soil boundary lines should not be viewed as absolute boundaries, but as guidelines to the distribution of soil types of the site. The soil liMitation chart indicates the probable limitations of eachof the soils for on-site sewage disposal , buildings with basements, streets and parking, and landscaping. How- ever, limitations, even though severe, do not preclude the use of the land for development. If economics permit large expenditures for land develop: tent and the intended objective is consistent with the objectives of local and recional ' development many soils and sites with difficult problems can be used. The soils map, with the publication Soil Survey: Hartford County, Connecticut, car. aid in the identification and interpretation of soils and their uses on thi_ rite. Know ' Your Land: Natural Soil Groups For Connecticut can also give insight to the development potentials of the soils and their relationship to the sur=icial geology of the site. ' A shopping mall is proposed to be located on 28 acres of this 93-acre parcel . A total of 55 acres is located in South Windsor and 38 acres in Manchester. Most of the remaining acreage will be parking area. All of the 93 acres, except for a total of 18 acres in three small parcels ' on steeper slopes, is "prime farmland. " The remaining 18 acres i-s considered "important farmland," as defined by the USDA, Soil Conservation Service. The present use is for agricultural crops. J.C. Penney Warehouse exists to the south. , Much of the remaining area around the site is residential . Generally, three different soils exist on the parcel . These sc1 ' s vary in degree of steepness and are well drained to excessively drained. ' The Enfield Series (EsA,- EsB, EsB2, EsC2) consists of deep, well -drained soils on terraces. They formed 'in silt-mantled outwash mate_ri_al . Typically, ' these soils have a dark brown silt loam surface layer eight inches thick_ The subsoil layers, from eight to twenty-four inches, are yellowish-brown and brown silt loam. The substratum, from 24 to 60 inches, is reddish-brown stratified sand and gravel . Slopes range from 0 to 5 percent. The Merrimac Series (MrA) consists of deep, somewhat excessively drained soils on outwash plains, valley trains, kames , eskers and high terraces. ' They formed in water-sorted material . Typically, these soils h�_:e very dark grayish brown fine sandy loamy surface layer 10 inches thick. The subsoil layers from 10 to 26 inches are brown fine sandy loam, dark yellowish ' brown sandy loam and dark yellowish brown gravelly loamy sand. The sub- stratum from 26 to 60 inches is dark grayish brown stratified sand and gravel . Slopes range from 0 to 35 percent. ' The Manchester Series (MgC, MhC) consists of deep, excessively drained soils on terraces. They formed in glacial outwash deposits. Typically these soils have a reddish brown gravelly sandy loam surface layer 6 inches thick. The yellowish red subsoil from 6 to 10 inches is gravelly sandy loam, and from 10 to 16 inches is gravelly loamy sand. The substratum from 16 to -.,, inches is reddish brown stratified sand and gravel . Slopes range from. _o 45 ' percent. There are no inland-wetland soils located on the property. An inland-wet- ' land is not delineated on Soil Survey Maps if the area is generally less than one acre in size. Erosion and Sedimentation Controls The Enfield silt loam soils are highly erosive and will erode e -lv during ' and after rains if left unvegetated. The Manchester and Merrimac sells will also erode easily during peak runoffs , if left unprotected. All soils on this site will move easily by wind act ion when no u zetation ' is covering the soil surface. Soil movement by wind will be a 'major 'concern during the fall , winter and spring months. A spring or fall temporary cover is either 3 1j2 bushels of rye Der acre or 60 pounds of perennial ryegrass per acre broadcast or drilled over tre disturbed areas. A good summer seeding is three bushels of oats broadcast over !.he un- , vegetated areas. A permanent grass mix to use for areas not needing high maintenance is 25 ' pounds of Kentucky 31 Tall Fescue and 25 pounds of Creeping Red Fescue _er acre. -8- ' For areas to be frequently mowed, a mix of 25 pounds Kentucky Bluegrass and 25 pounds Creeping Red Fescue per acre .can be used. A mix of 35 pounds Fescue to 15 pounds Kentucky Bluegrass per acre in the droughtier soils areas would be appropriate. Apply 600 pounds of 10-10-10 fertilizer per acre to all areas before ' seeding. Also apply 2 tons of lime per acre before seeding. A hay or straw mulch can be applied to steeper areas after seeding at 1 1/2 to 2 tons per acre. Consideration should be given to using a hydroseeder, especially when seeding the slopes. WATER COURSES AND WETLANDS J.C. Penney Company and Buckland Industrial Park are the major developments_ located. to the: sough of the site in the. town of Manchester. Much earth moving was done in this area prior to and during construction. The natural drainage areas have been altered. At least a portion of this development area now drains into Quarry Brook. Much of the acreage of the proposed shopping mall will also be enptied into Quarry Brook. Most of the watershed drains eventually into Mill Pond on the Podunk River. A delicate inland-wetland area exists in the drainage area between Mili *Pond and the proposed development. With precautionary measures during construction of this project and future developments within the Podunk River Watershed, the wetland area of the watercourse basin can generally be protected to maintain its existing natural vegetation and wildlife habitat. The inland-wetlands of the Plum Gully Brook branch and Quarry Brook begins a distance downstream from the property. Any increased water flow or polluted runoff water can change the vegetation and use of this wetland area significantly. It will be important to install properly designed basins for stormwater manage- ment and control of downstream sediment runoff if the wetlands are going to be ' protected to any degree. Prior to construction, consider the effect of soil sedimentation to the brooks, the pond on the Plum Gully Brook branch and to Mill Pond on the Podunk River. Evaluation of the effect of parking lot runoff to the downstream water- courses is also important. FLOOD BOUNDARIES/STORMWATER RUNOFF The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development flood boundary maps of 5/1/80 show the fifty and one hundred year flood boundaries for Quarry Brook and Plum Gully Brook. The study does not show any flood lines of the brooks ' on or immediately off the property. It can be assumed that there will be increased downstream stormwater runoff flows as the watershed acreage becomes developed. The storm runoff water of the proposed shopping mall will be directed into new detention basins and the existing basins of J.C. Penney Company. Detention basins and other measures for stormwater -9- WATERCOURSES IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPOSED' BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL v q LVT^ p A� Ism i BWANHAM Lk 0 2,000' scar -10- .y ' storage will be essential to help alleviate downstream flooding. The use of dry wells will also aid in stormwater control . The dry wells will work es- pecially well in the excessively drained deep sands. Whenever water is discharged into the ground there is a possibility of groundwater pollution. Detention basins, sediment basins and dry wells can ' contribute to groundwater pollution. It is therefore important to control the possible contaimination of runoff waters from storms. Oil films from the parking areas along with sands and salts applied during winter months are possible pollutants. f AIR QUALITY/TRANSPORTATION The proposed development is a 1 .2 million square foot retail shopping area located on 93 acres of undeveloped farmland in the towns of South Windsor and Manchester. In order to full evaluate the air quality consequences of such a large development, site specific and detailed traffic data would be required. The need of this site specific information arises due to the inherent nature of transportation related air pollutants. There are three primary pollutants associated with the operation of a motor vehicle: Non-Methane Hydro- carbons (HC), Carbon Monoxide (CO) , and Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx). One of these mobile source pollutants, CO, is an extremely localized phenomenon associated with congested roadways and the slow operating speeds of motor vehicles. The physical properties of CO also contribute to its overall significance in this analysis. Because carbon monoxide is a primary product of combustion, relatively inert, and released near the ground, the highest ambient concentrations are typically found in the immediate vicinity of the emission source. ' Hence, studies of CO problems. must focus on local analyses with site specific data rather than areawide analyses of the type undertaken for other pollutants like HC and NOx. Since CO is of a localized nature, and produced by the in- efficient operation of the transportation system, it is the pollutant of most concern during the analysis of the proposed shopping center. While CO will be the primary concern, it would be inappropriate for the analysis to be undertaken without the inclusion of the pollutants HC and NOx. With extensive site specific data, numerous computer generated analyses and programmable calculator methods could be utilized in the investigation of the Buckland Commons development. Unfortunately, at this stage of the development proposal , most of this information has yet to be developed. While the information presented is adequate to evaluate the overall merits of most of the development criteria normally required, specific items essential to the air quality analysis are unavailable. While this might preclude the more sophisticated/technical analysis techniques, other methods are available which can give us some gross emission figures for the purposes of estimating the effect of the proposed shopping center on the location's air quality. Based on the description of the proposed retail development and a past study of the Buckland Commons development conducted by CRCOG (Capitol Region Council ' of Governments) in April , 1980, travel impacts associated with the shopping area were calculated. Table I summarizes the effect of developing the current site as proposed on the region 's automobile trips. -11- TABLE I ' TOTAL DAILY TRIPS Base Buckland District Condition Attractions Change ' Buckland Common 34,600 76,205 41 ,605 Mnch. Vernon,. S.W. 206,600 177,700 28,900 WT. , W.L. , Suff. , EnfId. 289,500 289,850 350 - Blm. , Gr. , E Gr. , Sims. 168,900 168,550 -350 Htfd. , W.H. , Ave. , Cant. 610,100 607,750 -2,350 ' Farm. , Plnvl . , N.B. 417,900 417,200 -700 "Nwgt. , Rcky. Hill ,; Weth. 236,100 235,400 -700 Glas. , Marl. , Hebron- 91,300 89,900 -1 ,400 Bolton, Andover 10,800 10,600 -200 ' Ell . , Tolland, Somers, Coventry, Stafford 110,600 111 ,800 1 ,200 CAPITOL REGION 2,176,400 2,184,955 8,555 (Adjusted) The proposed retail development would result in a projected increase of 41 ,605 vehicle trips to the Buckland Commons area if developed. While the develop- ment would attract a substantial amount of trips over the base condition, not all of the identified trips would be induced entirely by the shopping center. What is inferred from Table I is that a substantial number of the trip attractions ' would be diverted from other areas of the region. In reality, only 8,555 trips out of the projected total of 41 ,605 would be "new" trips destined for the development. Based on this finding, forecasts for the other nine districts were adjusted ' to reflect the increased growth in the development area. With the development of the Buckland Commons area, a 14% decrease in travel to other areas in the ' Manchester, Vernon and South Windsor district would result. Given the sensitivity of the analysis techniques, the impact of the shopping center on travel attractions to other districts would be minimal . Additional forecasts were necessary to obtain a work- trip/non-work trip split for inclusion in the analysis. The results of this studyare summarized in. Table II. TABLE II Trip Attractions to Buckland Commons ' Trip Purpose Base Condition Developed Condition_ Work trip 2,500 11 ,000 Non-work trip 32,100 30,605 Total : 34,600 41 ,605 _ -12- ' Transportation related pollution concentrations occurring in the immediate vicinity of a major development are generally considered to be comprised of two components, including (1 ) a concentration directly attributable to the nearby development, and (2) a background component that is attributable to all other emission sources. Further refinements are required to the transportation related emissions generated by the development. Total vehicle emissions are comprised of both the emissions generated by the moving vehicle and the start-up and ' evaporative emissions produced by the vehicle. Utilizing the travel data developed in Tables I and II as well as standard air quality related assumptions suited for the Capitol Region, emission estimates for the three pollutants were developed. ' The accompanying worksheets document the emission forecasts for- both the base alternative and the developed condition. Worksheet VI-C is used to estimate the start-up and evaporative emissions while worksheet VI-D calculates the auto travel emissions. Sheet VI-E combines these estimates to develop the total emissions of each condition and the fore- casted changes due to the proposed shopping center. While the specific develop ' ment area was utilized for this analysis, a total regionwide change was also developed to place the target area forecasts in the correct perspective. Table III was developed to summarize the results identified on worksheets VI-C, VI-E and VI-D for the Buckland Commons area while Table IV represents the Capitol Region. TABLE III Projected Changes in Air Quality for the Buckland Commons Area* Base Emissions Revised Emissions Total Emissions % Change CO 6,997,700 6,011 ,922 13,009,622 +85 ' HC 559,200 499,260 1 ,058,460 +89 NOx 796,620 611 ,593 1 ,508,213 +76 ' TABLE IV Projected Changes in Air Quality For the Capitol Region* Base Emissions Revised Emissions Total Emissions % Change CO 216,470,000 1 ,236,195 217,706,195 +.571 HC 15,837,000 102,658 15,939,658 +.648 NOx 44,127,000 125,765 44,252,765 +.285 * Grams/Day Based on the estimates obtained utilizing the preceeding information , an ' approximate increase in carbon monoxide for the Buckland Commons area of 85% can be expected. An increase as large as this can be jusvified when one considers the current state of development of the site. -13- VI-C. AUTO START-UP AND EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS (�Base Alternative Revised Altvi ;; itive Policy: -01ACKL10*00 0_om,notL5 Forecast Yearq 1 9 S-7 0 Temperature: Q Work Trips Non-Work Trips (1) (2) (3) M (4) (5) (6) (7) (a) (9) 1 Cold Population Tripn rq o Start-Up Emissions - 7. Cold Trips Subgroup Starts Start-Up Emissions • l (IV-A) o C w ro Factors Col. 3 X Col. 4 Starts a (VI-A) Factors Col. 3 X Col. 4 (grams) (VI-B) (grams) �ucnuo o C(c) D.3 5.6 / 40oo SCE /79760 CcM.raus 3 �o 50 CO(c) D.4 cGs. - 13 9� Sa 135% S5. 7 7 /7F�79D A2cA NOx(c D.S �. 9 y7 s� !.9 6o qqo IIC(h) D.6 IIC(c) D.3 OW D.4 NOx(c D.5 IC(h) D.6 11C(c) D.3 O(c) D.4 Ox(c D.5' IC(h) D.6 tIC 1411000 I nC /7q1 -740 M3.760 TOTALS TOTALS CO v q }`D CO 7�7 �/ d ., 917,Z Z O Subgroups NOx 7S V I 6 �yo Subgroups NOx 6o O lScurce Worksheets are indicated in parentheses Work Trip Start- Non-Work Trip Total Start-Up where applicable Up Emissions ' Start-UI; Emissions (grams) 2 Emissions (prams) (c) indicates cold start factor (grams) (h) indicates hot soak factor 3both work and non-work start-up factors obtained from the indicated tables VI-C. AUTO START-UP AND EVAPORATIVE EMISSIONS Base Alternative Revised Alternative Policy: V(AGKC.A)-s0 �0mr'01A5 Forecast Year: Temperature: Jr 0 p F Work Trips Non—Work Trips (1) (Z) (3) (4) (S) (6) (7) (8) (9) 0 Population X Cold Trips N4j o A Start—Up Emissions X Cold Trips Start—Up Emissions Subgroup Starts l (IV—A) o a to. 1-4Factors Col. 3 X Col. 4 Starts (VI—A) Factors Col, 3 X Col. A � (VI—A) a. W w H (grams) (VI-B) (grams) Bum agotic(c) D.3 5,6 6/ 6ao S G /7J 3?e C c>,Nojl 5 j!5% Jl�0000 O(c) D.4 7 col� Ob 35 0�O 3Q�®tJ' SS>� J O can A2EA Ox(c D.S `1 1 U 900 1 ic(h) D.6 ��ilvL 11C(c) D.3 S6 /a 6L/ _S.6 3(; �y6 V7 ?07 Qcr'100 3-5 a/'o ��6J O(c) D.4 5s,7 /Os 937 35 ��a qy S5. 7 �,so 57S = y76S/Z Nox(c D.s 3 iC(h) D.6 IC(c) D.3 O(c) D.4 Ox(c D.5 iC(h) D.6 tic 5/ Gob "c /7/ TOTALS TOTALS CO fold fie' CO / 7�y 698' = r7 39Fr 1 Subgroups Nox QO ybD Subgroups Nox S0 y 7 el Uq Y 1 Source Works Work Trip Start- Non-Work Trip Total Start-Up iiee[s are indicated in parentheses Up Emissions Start-Up Emissions where applicable (grams) Emissions (grams) Z(c) indicates cold start factor (grams) (h) indicates hot soak factor 3both work and non—work start—up factors obtnined from the indicated tnbles a VI-D. AUTO TRAVEL EMISSIONS Base Alternative Revised Alternative Policy : — �tnCK�A�Jp �---.omr-no►aS Forecast Year: g 7 Work Tripe Non-Work Tripe (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Population Average VMP 1 Auto Travel Emissions Average VMT Auto Travel Emissions Subgroup Speed (VI-A) Factors Col. 3 X Col. 4 Speed (VI-A) Factors Col, 7 X Cola 8 (Table D.7) (grams) (Table A,7) (grams) x��K�auo tic /6d000 tic . �2o_,yyo Cnm�^a �� m� 2ov000 co r�, I D 2� i--1 o a� a b& A¢Cc, a I CO /BYO NOx I,�o 3�'ZC�C�OC� NOx HC tic CO CO NOx NOx t tic tic i CO co NOx NOx 11C tic c0 j CO NOx NOx He tic c0 co NOx NOx tic tic Co Co NOx Nox tic /60 00o tic Zi 0 3 6S yo TOTALS co 2 o boo co 1.2 9.Sp y?v = s o 70 eV?o Subgroups NOx 3�p pp0 Subgroups NOx �//0 ' p 73 C7Ff�'Q Work Trip Travel Non-Work Trip Total VMT Travel ISource Workaheets are indicated in Emissions Travel Emissions Emissions parentheses where applicable (grams) (gram) (grams) VI-D. AUTO TRAVEL EMISSIONS Base Alternative Devised Alternative Policy: LAC_KLA00 COMMOus Forecast Year: 19�r7 Work Trips Non-Work Trips (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Population Average VMT Auto Travel Emissions Average VMT Auto Travel Emissions Subgroup Speed (VI_A) Factors Col. 3 X Col. 4 Speed (VI-A) Factors Col, 7 X Col. 8 (Table D.7) (grams) (Table D.7) (grams) �uC CLn.ilp tic - /O yOd HC . ?, /95 87Q Com mis �26 mP,4 ()D° co 115 974 80o a6 tnPW P Nye?qo co /w 717,72 Ll AgEq Nox NOx J,b .3q► I 7y`/ _ tic & /y 70 tic , $ o a�! Sy 7sl CAP�� co 1�•1 .2C,a 7 76 a6r*�wd Sb,3 2 Co 11. 1 5.T? qo7 = 759,��3 V tZtGio� 2G. rr•Py 18,oFs�' Nox /,6 u 9vq Noi tic tic co CO NOx Nox tic tic CO i co NOx NOx ` tic tic co Co NOx NOx tic tic co _ Co NOx Nox _ tic 70 yoo tic /cl:5 8?7 z TOTALS E co yob �roo Co i7 .2 3 y ct/ SubgroupsNox /y0 F500 Subgroups ND" ��� 7 �yy y S32 Work Trip Travel Non-Work Trip Total vnr Travel Emissions Travel Emissions Emissions lsource Worksheets are indicated in (grams). (grams) (grams) parentheses where applicable VI-E. SUMMARY OF CHANGES IN EMISSIONS o Revised Alternative Policy: 3CACKL.AN1D �' orv�rno►15 Forecast Year 19 S'F (1) Base Emissions Rev is mi (8) (9) 3 (4) (5) Percent (6) `7) Change in Population Trip-Related Travel Total rp-Related Total Emissions i Subgroup (VI-C)1 (VI-D) Travel Total Emissions (Co1. 8kb L,) (Co1.2+Co1.3) (VI-C) (VI-D) CoL5+CoL 6) Col.4+COL 7 x 100 3UCKL�,,,O HC J93 760 3bs yyo Ss9 boo �3� SS 6 .07Q p + F�9 Com*hous CO 927 '220 S"07o Ft0 9G7 700 a 17 3q� 3 q 6 01/ 9 /3 0C 6.2 + Sr S �2LA NOx S 7 O 730 a,90 y He 96 79 61 s9 V08 013 + 76 700 17,907 /0 CAPtTC3t_ + .6 v8 (ZEc�ipu C0 21� 4170 coo 10 6 s1a s9 3 �36 s 1.77�GJ S + . g 7/ Nam` Q 7 0oo 3 /09 .57a .2576 yyz 7S + fS5 sic co NOx H CO NO HC HC TOTALS co Co NOx NOx Sub- Total Base Sub- Total Change Percent groups Emissions groups in Emissions Chan (grams) (grams) Totale, • 1Source Worksheets are indicated in parentheses where applicable Emissions At first, an increase for the pollutant carbon monoxide of 85% would appear ' to be significant. Upon further investigation, the increase has been shown to be only minimal at best. As stated earlier, the calculation of air pollution ' emissions from a development such as this is comprised of two components: (1 ) concentrations directly attributable to the site, and (2) a background concen- tration attributable to all other emission sources. ' For the purpose of this analysis , recent Connecticut Department of Trans- portation air quality monitoring for CO of a comparable location which revealed an average background concentration of approximately one part per million (PPM) ' was used. It is believed that a one PPM concentration is representative of a semi-rural to rural area in the Capitol Region. For comparison sake, recent analyses conducted in the State utilized an average concentration of 2.9 PPM for urbanized areas such as downtown Hartford. ' Using one PPM as the background or base emission level and adding the pro- jected 85% increase in CO levels, would result in approximate CO level of 1 .85 ' PPM (for our purposes we will call it 2 PPM) . The current eight hour standard for the pollutant CO is 9 PPM which is significantly higher than the projected 2 PPM from the Buckland Commons area. To reinforce this minimal increase, the ' entire Capitol Region would expect to gain only .571% in its CO inventory. While the consequences of developing this farm property as a shopping mall would increase the area's CO burden by some 85%, only a minor degradation in the ' air quality inventory would result. This fact is even more evident when one considers the pollutants HC and NOx. ' With roughly the same increase projected based on the development proposal , it is estimated that the real increase of these two pollutants would be less than that for CO. These results are brought about due to the characteristics of the ' particular pollutants. While CO is a relatively stable pollutant and a localized problem, HC and NOx are highly reactive and regionwide in nature. Therefore, emissions of HC and NOx will not be concentrated in the development site as CO tends to be, but these emissions will be spread out over the region. ' It would be inappropriate to estimate the concentrations of HC and NOx at the Buckland site as was done for CO precisely due to this difference in the pollutants ' characteristics. It would be safe to assume that for the pollutants HC and NOx only a marginal increase for the "area" could be expected. Based on the above analysis, a significant (85%) increase in CO emissions might be expected at the Buckland Commons site should it be developed as proposed. Although such a large increase might be expected, in reality only a marginal increase in the CO inventory would result. This increase in CO might cause some ' health problems to individuals with acute health problems exposed to the emissions on a daily basis, but should pose very few problems to most individuals. With a projected concentration of approximately 2 PPM, major emission increases in ' the area could be accommodated before the 9 PPM standard would be approached. With the further design of the proposed development and the surrounding roadway system, positive measures could and should be made which would mitigate most of the projected air quality problems . It would be the responsibility of the towns of South Windsor and Manchester to monitor these continued design features closely so that every attempt possible is made to provide for an efficient transportation system, thereby reducing the negative air quality effects of the ' development. The pollutants of HC and NOx on the other hand should be of very little ' concern in the evaluation of this proposal. in r N z' •F soils o 660' 1 SCaLE N i i 1 iST A Ag MrA MhC N®C ��% 1 ESA Es EsB B2 1 MrB MrA EsB / / Q i� EsA EsA 1 MrB Es 2 EsA AfA T'g / MgC Mg Es 1 HAM %>U 1 1 1 1 ' -22- k ,b L I M ITATIONS FOR '-1 N UI CD u Co Ca 0 � 0 to 3 � •ro u N tll P r-1 O rl .a Q1 0-! �> W Wq to '-t N 10 CO H EEn p; H� r=1 W En cn Cn (' x Co Co W K+ a o 14 n Cd ra Enfield-silt 0-3% yes - " High Slight " Moderate Slight Moderate loam Frost actioi Enfield-silt 3-8% yes loam 2 Enfield-silt 11 yes loam eroded :2 Enfield-silt 8-15% no yes " " moderate IT moderate moderate severe loam eroded (slope) (slope (slope) (slope) frost action) Manchester 3-15% no yes A low to slight to " slight to severe slight to gravelly sandy medium moderate moderate (droughty) moderate loam Manches ter 3-15% no yes " " IT IT " IT it loamy sand Morrinuic-fIiie 0-3% ( yes -- " 11 9ev01r.e " slight: slight Slight ri°ti1dy loiim (Poor. f1.lter) ° 3-8 yes - ti n n n n °► moderate SOIL INTERPRETATIONS FOR URBAN USES The ratings of the soils for elements of community and recreational develop- ment uses consist of three degrees of "limitations : " slight or no limitations; moderate limitations; and severe }imitations. In the interpretive scheme various physical properties are weighed before judging their relative severity of limita- tions. The user is cautioned that the suitability ratings , degree ree of limitations and other interpretations are based on the typical soil in each mapping unit. At ' any given point the actual conditions may differ from the information presented here because of the inclusion of other soils which were impractical to map separately at the scale of mapping used. On-site investigations are suggested ' where the proposed soil use involves heavy loads, deep excavations , or high cost. Limitations, even though severe, do not always preclude the use of land for devel- opment. If economics permit greater expenditures for land development and the intended land use is consistent with the objectives of local or regional develop- ment, many soils and sites with difficult problems can be used. ' Slight Limitations Areas rated as slight have relatively few limitations in terms of soil suit- ability for a particular use. The degree of suitability is such that a minimum of time or cost would be needed to overcome relatively minor soil limitations. Moderate Limitations In areas rated moderate, it is relatively more difficult and more costly to ' correct the natural limitations of the soil for certain uses than for soils rated as having slight limitations. Severe Limitations Areas designated as having severe limitations would require more extensive and more costly measures than soils rated with moderate limitations in order to overcome natural soil limitations. The soil may have more than one limiting characteristic causing it to be rated severe. -24- �i 1 About the Team The Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team (ERT) is a group of profes- sionals in environmental fields drawn together from a variety of federal , state, r and regional agencies . Specialists on the Team include geologists, biologists, foresters, climatologists , soil scientists, landscape architects, archeologists, recreation specialists , engineers and planners. The ERT operates with state fund- ' ing under the supervision of the Eastern Connecticut Resource Conservation and Development (RC&D) Area. The Team is available as a public service at no cost to Connecticut towns. r PURPOSE OF THE TEAM , The Environmental Review Team is available to help towns and developers in the review of sites proposed for major land use activities. To date, the ERT has r been involved in reviewing a wide range of projects including subdivisions , sani- tary landfills, commercial and industrial developments, sand and gravel operations, elderly housing, recreation/open space projects, watershed studies and resource inventories. ' Reviews are conducted in the interest of providing information and analysis that will assist towns and developers in environmentally sound decision-making. r This is done through identifying the natural resource base of the project site and highlighting opportunities and limitations for the proposed land use. REQUESTING A REVIEW r Environmental reviews may be requested by the chief elected officials of a , municipality or the chairman of town commissions such as planninq and zoning, con- servation, inland wetlands, parks and recreation or economic development. Requests should be directed to the Chairman of your local Soil and Water Conservation Cis- r trice. This request letter should include a summary of the proposed project, a - 1ocation map of the project site, written permission from the landowner allowing . the Team to enter the property for purposes of review, and a statement identifying i r the specific areas of concern the Team should address.- When this request is -ap- proved by the local Soil and Water Conservation District and the-Eastern- Connecti- cut RC&D Executive Council, the Team will undertake the review on a priority basis. For additional information regarding the Environmental Review Team, please r contact Jeanne Shelburn (889-2324) , Environmental Review Team. Coordinator, Eastern Connecticut RC&D Area, 139 Boswell Avenue, Norwich, Connecticut 06360. r r ' ■ _ 534 Boston Post Road, inter disciplinap y envvonmental planning P.O. BOX 438 Wayland, Mass. 01778 617.358.5156 I c 617.899.7066 File 936 ' w it ' WILDLIFE HABITAT EVALUATION BUCKLAND COMMONS SOUTH WINDSOR and MANCHESTER, CONNECTICUT For: ' BUCKLAND ASSOCIATES KRAVCO, INC. ' June 1981 Ic? ' INTRODUCTION ' As per your request, IEP, Inc. has examined the Buckland Commons proposed development site and the adjacent wetlands influenced by drainage from that site, located in South Windsor and Manchester, Connecticut. This ' report follows an on-site visit of Thursday, May 28, 1981 with Christie Myrabo from IEP and Mr. Walter Fuss in attendance. A meeting with Mr. ' Buck Page from the South Windsor Conservation Commission preceded that site visit. The purpose of the site visit was to provide an understanding ' of the existing conditions pertaining to past, present and proposed con- struction in the Hartman Tobacco Company Property area. Emphasis was on conditions relative to wetlands and runoff issues and their relationship to the wildlife habitat of Plum Gulley Brook, Whaples Brook, Quarry Brook, Vintons Millpond and Podunk River. SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION A review was made of the Phase I and II Report, Environmental Inventory and Analysis, prepared by Jason M. Cortell and Associates, 1973; Environ- mental Review Team Report, April 1981, the 800 ft. scale wetlands map prepared for that area; the Proposed Connector Road Concept Plan, dated ' March 22, 1979, prepared by Fuss and O'Neil , and the revised drainage plan for this development provided by maps and our discussion at the time ' of the site visit. Contact by telephone on June 1, 1981 was made with Mr. Bo Davies, Deputy Town Engineer for South Windsor, to determine any special concerns relating to the wetlands in this area. This report ad- dresses directly concern No. 5: "Environmental impact on adjacent areas regarding wildlife, flora and fauna," of the memorandum dated May 19, ' 1981, from the Conservation Commission of South Windsor to the Planning and Zoning Commission. ' The areas of concern are divided into four locations designated by the letters (A, B, C, D) and correspond to site-specific habitat inventories ic? -2- taken at each location. These are shown on Figure 1. The areas repre- sent each of the wetlands-streams-ponds, etc. that will be accepting runoff ' from the proposed development. An inventory was made of vegetation; its type, structure, diversity, interspersion, density and juxtaposition relative to adjacent habitat. An evaluation of potential wildlife habitat was made for each location, considering the ecological interconnections of wetlands with uplands and with fields presently in agricultural use. The type and extent of vegetative cover for shelter and for protection from predators; the abundance and proportion- of wildlife food plants; ' and their proximity to water, were the parameters used to determine the potential wildlife habitat in each location. ' An evaluation was made of the potential impact from runoff from the site ' especially considering urban runoff pollutants, increased water tempera- tures, and water level changes in adjacent water courses. Special con- sideration was given to the potential for the detention ponds and ' existing wetlands to act as filtering systems for the introduced nutrients, thereby improving the quality of the water entering them. The existing ' vegetative types and estimated peat depths within the wetlands were examined . for their potential renovating qualities. The detention ponds were assessed ' for the types of vegetation expected to colonize them, along with the potential .for formation of organic mats as a substrate. Other impacts such as noise and siltation during construction, and impact on the fish- eries resources along the brooks and within the millpond were addressed for each location. The possible presence of rare, threatened or endangered ' fauna and flora was investigated. No species of endangered plants have been confirmed in this area at the present time. WILDLIFE AND VEGETATION ' The following assessment has been made for each location of concern: Location A ' This location concerns the wetland and upland areas associated with Plum Gulley Brook as it flows north of Smith Street and as it flows under Clark Ic? -3- ' Street at the pump station. The proposed drainage plan shows the runoff water will drain out of a detention pond on the site, flow through pipes to an open ditch on Smith Street, which was dry at the time of inspection. This ditch contained streamside vegetation, primarily seed and berry pro- ducing plants such as brambles (Rubus sp. ) and meadowsweet (S irea latifolia) , along with Manna grass (Glyceria sp. ) and goldenrod (Solidago ' sp. ). Blackberries, raspberries etc. rank at the very top of summer foods for wildlife. Locally, these berries are important to some gamebirds ' such as grouse, ring-necked pheasant, and bob-white quail . Among the songbirds, principal users include catbird, cardinal , robin, brown thrushes and towhees. Fruits are eaten by chipmunks and squirrels. Often the thorny brambles make impenetrable thickets for birds, rabbits and small rodents. The seeds of the Goldenrods are used primarily by the common ' goldfinch and other songbirds , and the ,foliage is a food of some upland gamebirds and small mammals. The wooded swamp associated with this wet- land system that runs all the way to Vintons Millpond is a dense, and diverse red maple (Acer rubrum) swamp. The tree layer contains Ash (Fraxinus sp. ) as well , and the shrub layer is dominated by red-osier dogwood (Corpus stolonifera) and arrowwood (Viburnum reco nitum). The herb layer is represented by skunk cabbage (Symplocarpus foetidus) , ' jewelweed (Impatiens capensis) and sedge (Carex sp.).. The interspersion of open ditch, wooded swamp, small pond and marshes associated with Vin- tons Millpond provides an excellent habitat for a variety of wildlife. Many species of warblers, flycatchers, woodpeckers and thrushes breed ' in these wetlands, along with nuthatches, vireos, rose-breasted grosbeaks, hawks, owls, grackles and others. Wooded swamps located along streams or near marshes are often valuable breeding areas for wood ducks, black ducks, and mallards. ' Location B This location concerns the wetland and upland areas associated with the open ditch that runs north of Smith Street and drains under Clark Street ob �G qy �, Sand and`Clr� �� o - 1 �• , ,% ma •O� c1 t ( v .:.�.c- .ROAD �-_. ','� .0 - r W ��Q.��� � f ••• � �• 350• J<O I a a - Wao in C� �) brcherA • °Oe•• .87 LINO ON ` • / \� \ •30• 10 sm -a r, �.r`�:• �g b 4� j� $ =� \\ �'�S� i •gyp PO /-` 50 ti 10o a 'f J/ ` � "'''� x� \� �c-,��o •/i''�/ � 4� '/ ����\'\\\ NTE\�'CHAtJf a � ••. V `;, •• � - �,�, �� d J�• '�b4a'/ SM/T'�e =+''3- ;5 PROJECT SITE ,. ., .� 8 rig �� � �--,_ _• _,�J" � s�.. a • � . , .' r I \. • •PQ��. ` iJ \� K/._��_ ,..� Ul \ ,T. \� �'� /� Gips • AFlru // '\-- /CCJJ n \� � r I .�• 1N • � � �\ • ` �. � 0 O \-, { _�.,��''" +l •,•� ', �1`n lu�`J \�1/ �:/ [�'_ \�) � �fI('..^ �V S�• .' (./S •C;�rT /, 000, f��••1.C' r IOU .Nor• l •I; ��f- . l ; 8.I ai121�irivrl v IMr. •S STREET 0 - / �P11s/ �r•!; •II•• •Ir• � .C' s�•. q � •1` /_._ 0 `� r.rsA�l 1` /' � �� p .'w._�!' x i I • �I -�•;;:�• '. I_�� � �\ ` NTERCHA GE 9 _ '}�j`�� q ✓ ,.��' i .. ����r Tily r 1i.IP• • V � 1 I �� _ �� ,. \ •,n C orlhwe� � '' .�'.1.� FIGURE 1 �`�; � �� �• - Habitat Inventory Locations • u C ))urse .v "f -'J u~� ,J Portion of 1 31 ,;; Manchester, Conn. �. "'' � U.S.G.S. uadrangle • T J.\ y..ti �/ r �/a 3 O � z �` • i e� �� �W ='•�l, � Scale 1 .2 000 1 1 ic -4- 1 into wetlands associated with Whaples Brook. The ditch also discharges into Plum Gulley Brook. The proposed drainage plan shows runoff water to be _collected in a detention pond at the corner of Wheeler Road and Smith Street and then to be drained to the open ditch. A small stream ' drains out of a wooded swamp dominated at the tree layer by red maple. The shrub layer is dominated by red-osier dogwood and winterberry holly (Ilex verticillata). The following herbs represent the dense, lush 1 herbacious layer: skunk cabbage, horsetail (Equisetum sp.) , royal fern (Osmunda regalis) , cinnamon fern (Osmunda cinnamomea) , meadow rue 1 (Thalictrum pol amum) and various sedges. This wooded swamp opens out into a meadow-streamside area, dominated by skunk cabbage, fox grape 1 (Vitus labrusca), goldenrod and brambles and was bordered on both sides by open fields. The entire upland/wetland system is comparatively small , 1 but contains many ecotone areas, the "edge" created between two vegetative types. This ecotone provides valuable habitat for a large variety of 1 wildlife. The availability of water adjacent to open fields increases the likelihood of use by migrating waterfowl in fall and spring. 1 Location C This location concerns the wetland and upland areas associated with Quarry 1 Brook located on-site near Pleasant Valley Road, off-site with Whaples Brook as it flows under Clark Street and again at Pleasant Valley Road ' as it flows into the wetland associated with Vintons Millpond. The proposed drainage plan shows the runoff water to drain first into gross particle 1 separators, functioning as sediment traps for oil and grease as well as other pollutants before entering the detention ponds now existing on the J. C. Penney Co. site. The water is proposed to flow through a semi- permeable dike, filtering through sand, gravel and filter cloth and then allowed to exit slowly through large stone blocks. The run off will then 1 flow through the presently dry stream bed of Quarry Brook, then into Whaples Brook and into Vintons Millpond which feeds the Podunk River. 1 Whaples Brook is presently receiving runoff through a large detention pond and wetland systems from the Manchester Industrial Park. The 1 1 -5- Ic? ' wetlands associated with Quarry Brook (Whaples Brook) directly down stream from the detention ponds is a moderately dense wooded swamp. The tree ' layer is dominated by red maple and beech (Fagus grandifolia). The most predominate shrub is arrowwood, and the herbacious layer is moderately ' dense with cinnamon fern and Massachusetts fern (Thelypteris simulata) dominating. This narrow wetland is adjacent to an upland meadow of pre- dominantly sumac (Rhus sp. ) , blackberries and milkweed (Asclepias sp_.) . ' These associated communit ies provide excellent wildlife habitat. The ' clusters of fruit on the sumac provide important winter sustenance for many bird species here in the East. Several of our most important game- birds rely on sumac as a winter. food and so do some of the songbirds which winter in the north. Blackberries, as well as being an important summer food for a variety of birds as discussed previously, are used by mammals ' also. In winter, cottontails feed on the stems of these plants while also obtaining protective cover from them. Blackberry patches are a common ' site for the nests of small birds as well . This wooded swamp wetland continues to follow the dry stream bed of Whaples ' Brook. Here the stream bed intersects the water table and flows under Clark Street. Along with wooded swamp vegetation, there are small patches ' of broad-leaved shallow marsh vegetation along the stream. This area of this wetland system is adjacent to wheat fields and vegetable cropland. Wheat (Triticum aestivum) is -one of the most valuable and useful wildlife food crops. It is used in significant proportion by waterfowl , upland gamebirds, songbirds, fur and game mammals, small mammals and hoofed ' browsers. Wheatfields serve as an important nursery for another important wildlife crop, common ragweed. This wetland/upland plant community asso- ciation provides needed water, food, cover and shelter for wildlife. This wooded swamp wetland continues to follow Whaples Brook through a diverse ' and dense system of various wetland classes and enters Whaples Brook through a shrub swamp. The drainage areas associated with both the Plum Gulley ' Brook and Whaples Brook have been enhanced for wildlife by the construction N �I? - - Ic 6 ' of powerlines through the region. These cut and maintained strips provide important ecotone and breeding habitat for wildlife. ' Location D This location includes the wetland and upland areas associated with ' Vintons -Millpond. The pond has inlets from Plum Gulley Brook and Whaples Brook and an outlet into the Podunk River. The pond is bordered by wet- land and upland vegetation of various plant forms and diversity. Bor- dering the pond, black birch (Betula lenta) , ash (Fraxinus sp. ) , beedh ' (Fagus grandifolia) dominate the tree layer. In the wet soils of the coves, red maple, speckled alder (Alnus rugosa) , skunk cabbage and jewelweed dominate. The adjacent plant communities include an oak/aspen/ black birch upland with a sumac understory; a dense wooded swamp wetland with a highbush blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) , sweetpepper bush ' (Clethra alnifolia) , clammy azalea (Rhododendron vicosum) , understory and a marsh fern (Onoclea sensibilis) herb layer; and a hardwood-softwood mixed forest. At this time of the year there were large mats of blooming spatterdock (Nuphar 'sp. ) on the pond. An open water pond adjacent to mast crop producing uplands, i .e. oak, beech etc. , shrub swamp and deep and shallow marshes supports a wide range of bird species from waterfowl , ' to songbirds. In the marshes good breeding habitat exists and the open water provides a resting and feeding site for migrating ducks and geese. This pond can be expected to support -a population of warm water- fish in- cluding carp, bass, pickerel , perch and sunfish. ' DETERMINATION OF IMPACT The pollutants associated with buildings, parking facilities and automobiles ' carried by runoff water, `significant changes in water level and increases in water temperature present the most important potential impact of this ' proposed construction. The four detention ponds (2 existing, 2 proposed) allowed to revegetate, the use of open ditches instead of pipes, the ' separators and permeable dike arrangement should mitigate the majority Ic? of these concerns. The detention ponds as they are designed will have a tendency to revegetate into a fringe of deep and shallow marshes allow- ing the types of vegetation most suitable for pollution attenuation to grow. Many of the plants listed on Table 1, along with their chemical ' absorption rates, can be expected to be supported in these ponds and are found existing presently in the associated wetlands. The streams and ' drainage ditches that will receive the runoff will not overflow and thus the adjacent wetlands should not be affected by the increase in flow. Siltation can be expected to be controlled and the impact mitigated by ' following the USDA Soil Conservation Service Guidelines for soil erosion and siltation. The impact of noise generated during construction will ' not be at a level high enough to impact the breeding success of the local adaptable bird populations .with .the area of study. ' In a conversation with Mr. Charles Phillips, Fisheries Biologist, Department of Environmental Protection, Connecticut, the fisheries ' resources for the associated water courses were determined. The State stocks the Podunk River, below Vintons Millpond, on a put-and-take basis with either brown or brook trout. Adults are stocked, so the length of time the majority of the fish stay in the river is relatively short con- sidering active fishing activity in the area. The Plum Gulley Brook is stocked between the proposed construction site and the millpond. This ' brook is stocked with yearling trout, some of which are fished out in one season and some remain into the next year. The impact of most concern is the increase in water temperature in these streams. Since these areas ' are the only state supported fishing recreation in this town, and this is a heavily supported activity, maintenance of proper trout habitat is ' important. Due to lack of data, the stability and success of the trout population existing under present conditions is impossible to determine. ' Therefore, it would be difficult to state what effect possible increased temperatures would have. It is also impossible to predict what the ' temperature changes, if any, would be as the runoff waters are diluted TABLE I ABSORPTION OF CHEMICALS BY VARIOUS MACROPHYTES Uptake figures given in mg/kg dry weight and mg/m2 growth areas (K. Seidel , "Reinigung von Gewassern durch hohere Pflanzen," Naturwissenschaften 53(1966:289-97) Cu Co Zn Ni Mo Mn B mu/hu mg/ml mg/kg mg/m, mg/kg mwnO mykg miyo m(yhg mg/m, mwkU n1Wm' mglhg mgml' Scirpus Incustrls 4.8 16.13 5.63 2.28 50 168.00 1.71 5.75 0,55 1.85 1200 4032.00 14.6 49.6 carex strlcte 5.6 15,23 6.72 1.96 63 171.36 2,46 6,69 0.29 0.79 970 2638,4 21.4 58,21 Irispseudacorus 5.7 14,14 1.11 2,75 50 124.0 1.75 4.34 0.33 0.93 302 947.30 10,3 25.41 Typhs angustiloua, 4.7 6,77 0.44 0,63 43 62.92 1.06 2,68 0.30 0,43 779 1121,76 24.6 35,28 Glycerla squauca 5:6 11.65 0.48 0.99 73 151.84 1,99 4.14 0,24 0,49 506 1210.80 15.0 31.20 Phragmltes communls 4.2 18.82 0.62 2.78 37 165.76 1.53 6.85 0,26 1.16 166 743.68 8.2 36.74 Acorusca/emus 4.1 6.50 0.53 0,85 38 60.8 1.08 1.73 0.30 0.48 303 612.8 56,9 91,04 Sparganlumareclum 5.6 7.17 1.07 1.37 76 97.28 2.27 2.91 0.24 0.31 604 773,12 40,2 51.46 Myosollspalustrls 12.2 3,90 1.44 6.46 104 33.28 3.19 1.02 0.53 0.17 2000 640,0 30.8 9,00 Mentha aquauca 8.5 14.28 0.54 0.91 78 131.04 2.03 3.41 0,47 0,79 301 640.1 38,3 64.34 Ca Mg P K Na Fu sl (ykg g/m° g/kg glrW (ykg 00 glkg 9/m' glkg (ym' 0/kg Uhn' g/kg glen' Sclrpuslacustrls 3.95 12.17 0.98 3.29 2.00 6.72 10.30 34;61 6,30 21,17 0.70 2.62 12.60 43,34 Gerexstrlcts 4,84 13.16 2.06 6.60 2,20 5.93 13.90 38.31 2,20 5.58 3,60 10.34 17.60 47.87 Iris pseudacorus 16.97 42.09 2.58 6.39 2.50 6.20 35.40 87.79 1.70 4.22 1.30 3.22 4.30 10.46 Typha angustilolia 14.36 22.48 1.49 2,29 2.20 3.17 14.10 20.30 12.20 17.57 1.10 1.58 3.70 5,33 Glycerla aquauca 4.79 9.90 1.46 3.04 2.50 5.20 26.00 54.00 1.20 2,50 1,30 2.70 14,80 30.78 Phragmiles communis 1.70 7.62 0.82 3.90 1,40 6.27 8.10 36,29 1,10 4.93 0,92 4.12 21.70 07.22 Acorus calamus 12.33 19.73 1.84 2.94 2,90 4.64 20.00 32.00 4,10 6,56 0.97 1.55 3.30 5,26 Sperganlum crectum 10.11 12,94 2.10 2.69 3.90 4.99 24.80 31.74 6.80 8.70 3.60 4,61 6.80 8.70 .Myosolispalustls 9,13 2,92 1.50 0,48 2.00 0.64 42,50 13.60 5.00 1.60 10.20 3.26 8,30 2,66 Menthe aquauca 16.95 28.48 1.58 2,75 2.20 3,70 10.50 17.64 6,90 11.59 3.10 5.21 4.10 6.89 IC? 1 with cooler water already flowing in the stream. Because of this dilution it is very possible that there would be no temperature change 1 of the water that eventually reaches the trout habitat. Further study would have to be undertaken to resolve this issue. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 Christie Eckes-Myrabo ' Ecologist EDUCATION Framingham State College B.S. in Biology, Wildlife Concentration, 1980 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE IEP, Inc., 1980 to present Terrestrial Ecologist ' •Conduct field inventories, botanical analyses,mapping of vegetation and ecological assessments of wetland systems in New England. •Evaluate wetland statutory values—their biological functions of pollution prevention and wildlife habitats. •Provide recommendations for the biological management of wetlands;enhancement of wetlands for renovation of water supplies and wetland restoration techniques. Massachusetts Audubon Society, Lincoln, Massachusetts, 1976-1980. Researcher, Environmental Education Coordinator ' •Conducted research in conjunction with Framingham State College in evaluating a flooded timber impoundment within the Waseeka Wildlife Sanctuary, to be used to evaluate waterfowl utilization and aid in future management of this sanctuary. •Designed curriculum and instructed courses and workshops in natural history, farm related subjects and animal ' husbandry. Torrey Pines State Park, San Diego, California, 1973-1976. Interpretive Naturalist •Development of an interpretive program including tours with emphasis on local archaeology and native Indian history. ' •Assisted research biologists and archaeologists in the study of the native Diegeno Indians and their use of plants and animals at Torrey Pines, California. •Developed curriculum for the study of salt marsh lagoon and sonoran desert environments located on the southern ' California coast. RELATED EXPERIENCE •Assisted Fisheries Biologists from the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife in a population analysis using electro-fishing techniques; 1979. ' •Wildlife Rehabilitation Center,Upton,Massachusetts:Assisted with experiments in domestic animal and wild waterfowl feeding and management; 1976-1980. GUEST LECTURES Massachusetts Audubon Society Cooperative Extension Service, University of Massachusetts—Amherst Framingham State College Sierra Club ' PROFESSIONAL SOCIETY MEMBERSHIP Wildlife Society j 1 ♦ r ! / Q`tpl REG%, - G� Cr'C®g CAPITOL RE ION COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS o Ai,,.", TREET— HARTFORD, CONK. 06106 �e Tel. 203 522-2217 "IMENTS 5� DANA S. HANSON r �Q� EXECUTWE DIRECTOR TOWN PLANNING AND ZONING C SCION �J `� P,����ON ZONING REFERRAL #84/197 TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR `a Vvember 9, 1984 co '6 Commissioners: .\% Q Receipt is acknowledged of the above-numbered referral . Notice of this proposal was transmitted to the Planning Division of the Capitol Region Council of Governments under the provisions of Section 8-3(b) of the Connecticut General Statutes, as amended. ;! This referral involves a zone map change from RR to Designed Commercial designation for a I!: 57 acre parcel bounded by Wheeler Rd. , Pleasant Valley Rd. , Smith St. , and the Manchester I town line. Comments: I The Regional Planning Commission of the Capitol Region Council of Governments has reviewed this referral and wishes to offer the following comments on the relationship of the pro- posed zone change to the Regional Plan of Development and on the concerns of neighboring 1{ towns. r The Regional Plan of Development consists of a series of guidelines for the future physical development of the region which are presented in narrative goals and policies and a Devel- opment Plan map. The Regional Plan recognizes that region-wide development patterns are f greatly influenced by the presence or lack of infrastructure (such as water, sewer, roads, transit) and facilities. It also recognizes that certain types of land within the Region serve environmental , natural resource, recreational or economic functions and should, in the interests of the general pbulic, continue to serve those functions. �± The proposed site falls within the "suburban" classification of I' the Regional Plan of Development. The recommended land uses include: primarily residential with a density of 1-7 families per acre, industrial, commercial and agricultural . The proposed zone change would permit commercial use. I' The proposed zone change from Rural Residential to Designed Commercial is consistent with the regional goal of encouraging high density development at the center of the region, along developing corridors and along corridors that lend themselves to growth in order 3 to maximize energy conservation, minimize sprawl , and balance the Region' s environmental needs. A supporting policy statement encourages concentrated centers of mixed use development along major transportation corridors. The proposed development lies within y the 1-86 corridor, a major transportation corridor which has already generated substantial development including condominium development in South Windsor and commercial/industrial 3 development in Manchester. In addition, the availability of public sewer and water and favorable site conditions make this area appealing for future development. The Regional Plan,acknowledges that it is within the suburban area that preservation areas, such as agricultural land, will be subject to the greatest amount of pressure for development. \�`__ __ A VOLUNTARY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS FORMED TO INITIATE AND IMPLEMENT REGIONAL PROGRAMS OF BENEFIT TO THE TOWNS AND THE REGION. ` II ------------ ----- •r Zoning Referral #84/197 South Windsor - Pg. 2 Transportation policies of the Regional Plan of Development include encouraging land use patterns which support regional transit systems and encouraging reverse commutation. In general, intense uses such as the one proposed support transit service. Connecticut Transit' s "H" and "Z" routes and the Burr Express are proximate to the site and could probably be altered to serve the mall and office buildings. The Regional Plan ' s policies also support decreased reliance on the automobile as the primary mode of transportation. The proposed development will most likely have a neutral effect on mode choice in the region but will probably tend to decrease travel costs, energy consumption, and travel time for persons seeking the sort of shopping opportunity that a regional mall offers. In addition to the issues discussed above, the Regional Planning Commission wishes to express the following comments relative to the mall/office development proposed for this site: 1 ) A development of this scale is likely to have a negative impact on the regional policy of encouraging land use patterns and transportation systems aimed at revitalization of central business districts and town centers. In particular, the development could have a negative impact on commercial/retail businesses in downtown Manchester, Windsor, downtown Hartford, East Hartford, Vernon Circle and Rockville due to the fact that these retail facilities will all be operating within the same market area. As was noted previously, however, the 1 -86 transportation corridor and the availability of public water and sewer service has already spurred development of a variety of land uses within this area. Specific comments regarding the likely negative impact on commercial/retail businesses in Windsor which were adopted by the Windsor Town Planning and Zoning Commission are attached for your consideration. The Hartford Regional Planning Commission Represen- tative also referenced a Regional Shopping Mall Study prepared by the Hartford City Plan Department (May, 1981 ) as documentation that the construction of the proposed mall would cause existing retail businesses in Hartford and other area towns to suffer sig- nificant sale losses. 2) The Regional Planning Commission opinion was divided on the issue of whether another major mall is needed in the Region , and also the issue of whether the net regional economic impact of this development would be positive, negative, or neutral . The Regional Planning Commission also noted that the South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission should consider the effect which future competing mall development could have on the long-term economic benefits projected for this project. 3) The Regional Plan encourages a regional development pattern that minimizes adverse effects on wetlands and aquifer water supply areas. The development plans for this site are consistent with this policy in that they include measures to protect off- site wetlands located in the Quarry Brook watershed and to promote groundwater re- charge. The effect of artificial recharge on groundwater quality has not been studied. There are, however, no public water supply wells planned for the vicinity of this site. 4) This site is considered prime and important farmland. The Regional Plan encourages that development proposals using food supportive land be evaluated on a case by case basis to balance economic and preservation goals. If the South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission approves this zone change, the Regional Planning Commission recommends that the Town of South Windsor give serious consideration to preserving farmland else- where in the community to counteract the loss of this important farmland parcel . Zoning Referral #84/197 r South Windsor - Pg. 3 5) The proposed development will undoubtedly be a large generator of highway traffic. Fortunately, the peaking characteristics of shopping malls do not usually coincide with those of the surrounding highway system. Malls generate the most traffic on Saturdays. Weekday peak hours usually occur in the evenings after the peak hour of the adjacent roadways. On the other hand, the peak traffic hour for the office complexes is expected to coincide with that of the surrounding highway network. The office buildings will generate less than 10% of the traffic of the entire development. 6) The developers estimate that nearly 40,000 weekday vehicle-trips and about 46,000 Saturday vehicle-trips will be generated. Most of these trips will approach or leave the site via 1-86. 1 -86 is presently being reconstructed in the vicinity of the site and construction should be completed before mall construction is completed. Westbound on- and off- ramps will touch down on Pleasant Valley Road across from the Winchester site. Eastbound on- and off- ramps will end at Buckland Street which is being widened between Tolland Turnpike and Pleasant Valley Road. This interchange will replace the present one at Tolland Turnpike. 7) A number of local streets can be expected to have traffic volumes increase as a result of Winchester' s construction, particularly prior to the construction of 1-291 from I -91 in Windsor to 1-86 in Manchester. In particular, Buckland Road, Burnham Street, Chapel Road, and Pleasant Valley Road will be affected by traffic from the north and northwest. The intersection of Routes 30, 194 and 74 and Buckland Road in South Windsor presently experiences problems and the Town of South Windsor has proposed a solution to solve them. 8) If the proposed change is approved, the Regional Planning Commission recommends that special attention be given to establishing buffer areas adequate to protect adjacent residential development. The letter presenting the comments of the Windsor Town Planning and Zoning Commission are attached for your consideration. This letter states the reasons why the Windsor Town Planning and Zoning Commission cannot recommend the proposed zone change. Questions concerning this referral should be directed to Mary Ellen Kowalewski . In accordance with our procedures this letter will constitute final CRCOG action on this referral . The public hearing date is schgduled for November 13, 1984. DISTRIBUTION: Respectfully submitted, TPZC: S. Windsor Barbara Surwilo, Chairman Planner: S. Windsor, Manchester Frank Dzurenda , Vice-Chairman Regional Planning Commission Clearinghouse Representative r f 4 • t .t toW179/ YZ dsor � • W/NOSDA CONN G1509S • PyONE 699-.J67S • 7HE F/AST TOWN/N THE S/AlE COUNCIL .MANAGER GONERN.NEN! - November 7, 1984 Ms. Mary Ellen Kowalewski Director of Community DevelopTient Capitol Region Council of Governments 214 Main Street Hartford, CT 06106 Dear Ms. Kowalewski: At its meeting of NoveTrber 7, 1984, the Windsor Town Planning and Zoninq Camnission considered your letter of October 31, 1984 requesting caments on tree proposed zone change in South Windsor, ana voted to approve the following for Regional Planning Camission consideration. The development that would result from the proposed rezoning is in conflict with the Capitol Region Plan of 1978 and with State of Connecticut Conservation and Develo because the developmrent is inc pTent Policies Plan (1982-1985) incompatible with the uses recommended in these plans and would cause negative impacts on existing comiercial/retail areas in surrounding towns including Windsor. The following is an evaluation of the pertinent sections of the Regional and State plans, as they relate to the proposed rezoning and development. The Regional Plan 1. The area involving the zone change is in the "Suburban" area classification. Lands with the Suburban classification are intended primarily for preservation (e.a., agri- cultural ), residential development and for limited industrial ar'a%,th out not for the type of intensive retail/caTmrercial development proposed for the rezoning site (see attached p. 14 of the Plan). 2. In addition to the potential for negative impacts on existing cammercial/retail busi- nesses in downtown Manchester, downtown Hartford, East Hartford, Vernon Circle and Rockville outlined in your staff report, carmercial/retail businesses in Windsor would also be similarly impacted. The Windsor areas that would be impacted, including the Windsor Shopping Center, are within the Fully Suburban area category of the Regional Plan in which continued growth and vitality is encouraged by this Plan (see attached p. 14 of the Plan). The viability of the Windsor Shopping Center (an older parkade- type center of some 170,000 square feet, located adjacent to proposed I-291) would be threatened by a development of the type permitted if the proposed rezoning is approved. The Windsor Shopping Center is located only 6.5 miles from the proposed Winchester (formerly Buckland Cormons) site. . The construction of I-291, which would create a direct link bet*en the existing center in Windsor and the proposed Winchester development in South Windsor is likely to result in an excessive siph oning of business from the Windsor Shopping Center to the one proposed in South Windsor. This would t - f T` v Novanber 7, 1984 Ms. Nary Ellen Kowalewski Page 2 seriously reduce the likelihood of reinvestTent and curtail growth, thus causing decline, in the Windsor commercial area. This conclusion is substantiated by find- ings in a study done for the United States Department of Housing and Urban Develop- ; ; ment by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in 1981 (see the attached copies of p. 161 and 162 of this study). These outcan`s would be inconsistent with the goals of the Regional Plan. The State Plan I. The site in question is in the area classified as "Conservation Area" and as "Rural" in this Plan. The strategy in the State Plan for these lards is as follows: Areas within the Conservation classification " . plan and manage for the long-term public benefit for lands contributing to the State's need for food, fiber, water and other resources, open space, recreational and envirormentai quality, and ensure that changes in use are compatible with the identified conservation values"; areas within Vie Rural classification . . . "Avoiding support of structural development forms and intensities which exceed on-site carrying capacity for water supply and sEwage dispos- al on a permanent basis, which are inconsistent with open rural character or-conser- vation values of adjacent areas and which are mere appropriately located in Rural Community Centers." An extremely intensive use such as that proposed for this site is not within the intent of these guidelines. 2. The State Plan designates the area of Windsor in which the Windsor Shopping Center is located as being within the "Urban Growth Area." The policy governing these lands is defined as follows . . . "High priority and affirmative support toward con- centration of new urban growth which occurs outside of Urban Centers into specified areas capable of supporting large-scale, mixed uses and densities in close relation- ship to the Urban Centers." The proposed rezoninq would result in a development which not only would prevent growth but cause decline in an area of Windsor (and other towns) situated within the Urban Growth category of the State Plan (see copies of p. 161 and 162 of the MIT study). For the above-reasons the Windsor Town Planning and Zoning Commission cannot recommend the proposed zone change. Thank you and the Regional Planning Commission for your consideration of this matter. Respectfully, -- -_ Frank Dzurenda, ealman Town Planning and Zoning Commission Enclosures MZ/hd . IT - i THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN The Goals and Policies identify a series of guidelines for the future physical development of the region. � Ft_LL1� URBANIZED AREA These guidelines were interpreted into a map en- This portion of the region offers the highest titled the "Regional Plan of Development". Simply potential for ne%% development. It contains a stated, the Plan identifies where in the Region full range of public services and transit growth should aril should not occur. The Develop- 'nodes. anj ,s the prime emplovment sector of the region. In addition to new ,nst:z'.r ment Plan is not a detailed land-use plan but rather tional, commercial, industrial and residential a schematic to guide a future regional development uses this area would be greatly enhanced by pattern. it recognizes that, while individual land neighborhood revitalization and rehabilita- development decisions are the result of lion through both public and private efrors private!iocal government action, region-wide In selected !ocations, redevelopment could development patterns are greatly influenced by the produce additional land for public or prr%ate presence or tack of publicly-financed infrastructure im estment. The infrastructure in this area. (such as water, sewer, roads, transit) and facilities, it including utilities and transit service, could also recognized that certain types of land within the he expanded at the least public cost and , Region serve environmental, natural resource, pro"de the greatest benefit to the region. 1 recreational or economic functions and should, in ' FULLYS[ 6C:R8AtiIZED AREA the interests of the general public, continue to serve B"rderrr^ the fuI!� urbanized area. t;,e,E ! those functions. '.Inds c or,tam much of the residential, corn,_ menial and industrial growth that has occur- Through what is known as the extractive process, land classified as flood plain, wetland, ridgeline, red w thin the region the last thin} yeas Continued growth in this area would maxi- water supply areas and active agriculture has been mrze the use of existing public identified for preservation. These areas have been provide se ide additional oppportunity f o roes ate, or exnan- extracted from land suitable for development. They sror, or a variety of land uses. It is anticipated are recommended for preservation in each com- that a transition from a fully suburbanized munity of the Region and give shape and form to state to a fully urbanized state ,vill take the general development pattern. h•ace particularly on the fringes of the iu; •. urbanized area. This pattern is then classified further as discussed 3 SUBURBAN .AREA below. The suburban area contains sufficient le�e:s 1. GROWTH AREA of infrastructure to accommodate expancec residential growth at a \anety of den.rties A. Generalized Urban Area and new industrial growth especially in plan_ The generalized urban area was defined ned locations compatible with the transit network. It is within the suburban area that I through an analysis of a series of regional lands identified for preservation through the factors which contribute to a concentration extractive pse"bs will be subieet�e of intensive development. The generalized greatest amount of pressure for develoD- urban area encompasses factors such as the - ment. Agricultural land will be particularly F Federal Highway Administration urban vulnerable to this pressure. areas, the public server and water service area, and the local transit netvvork. In addr- B. Town Centers tion, the bulk of the intensive land uses in Scattered throughout the less developed the Region is included within this area. towns of the region are points which pro- Known as the "red line"area, this part of the vide for clustered residential, commercialand light industrial growth. The growth po- region contains three sub categories. tential of the 16 town centers varies depen- 4 l 1 r will be primarily w1ute-collar jobs along with supporting clerical and office positions. While some of these jobs may go to Windsor residents , more are expected to go to icy ` Manchester and Vernon residents. Y , Retail: The improvement oif I-91, the construction of I-291 and the building of Buckland Cor.�.nons l.all will threaten the viability of some retail businesses in Windsor. The Proposed new development will be nearly si-x times the size of the existing 11insor Shopping Center. Buckland Commons t I Mall will be an enclosed structure with a wide variety of stores . It will provide an attractive environment for I customers with a wide variety of purchasing needs . The � J Windsor 1lalls , on tl,e other hand, are older and not enclose ' i The Enfield 11all , nearly 10 miles from Windsor Center and currently the only encloser: 'fall in the region, has for ' I several years generated strong cor::petition for llindso_ Ce- The construction of Buckland Commons , which would be only ' 6. 5 miles -from ;,]incsor and easily accessible by the nei,:1%7 constructed I-291 , is sure to offer even greater comae ti=i, i for Windsor businessmen. i Further exacerbating the situation for Windsor resi:� [ f { is that I-291 will not only Provide easy access to Buckl=:- Commons :,:all , but to smaller 'falls in the area as well , s . as Charter Oak :fall, Burris Corner Mall and K-dart Plaza . { The difficulty of travelling west from Windsor to Manche. . 162 : r has, in the past, -minimized the impact of that 1~ia l l on the _Windsor Shopping Center, The construction of I-291 and the added lure of Buckland Cor=ons will increase th Of these retail activities creating stille exposure greater cor„petition i for retailers in ;�lindsor, Fiscal impacts : The Windsor Shopping Center generates rare than $100,000 in Property II �-aX revenue each year, Private reinvestment may r y decline in Windsor if the competi- tion frOn Buckland Commons i,; too great. This would the local pro ert cause P y tax base to erode While the cost of nub services continues to increase. A movement of -residents lic t out Of Windsor could also result in a decrease in motor u. excise tax collections, vehicle I F. i �F Environmental Ir,;cacts Windsor will experience no adverse environmental impacts from the construction of i Buckland Coraons 1 1 i i I I • ,It� AIR QUALITY STUDY FOR THE PROPOSED BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL SOUTH WINDSOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS, INC. Prepared by; Richard S. Marker Stephen W. Connelly Project Manager Project No: 1700-T90-00 June 9, 1981 125 SILAS OEANE HIGHWAY WETH E RSFI EL O CONNECTICUT 06109 (203) 563-1431 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2.0 CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.0 MICROSCALE ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1 Background and Objectives . . . . . . . 5 3.2 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.0 MESOSCALE ANALYSIS. . . . . 12 4.1 Methodology . . . . . . 12 4.2 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 5.0 MONITORING RESULTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 6.0 REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 APPENDIX A FIGURES 1 Map of the Buckland Commons Mall Region 2 Microscale Results for South Windsor 3 Mesoscale Results for Buckland Commons Mall Region B RESUME C LETTERS 1 Leonard Bruckman, Department of Environmental Protection 2 Douglas Lloyd, State Health Department LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE A Microscale Analysis Results for Peak 1-Hour Traffic Volumes - Predicted Ambient Concentrations of Carbon Monoxide (Parts per Million) . . . . . . . . 8 B 1981 Existing Traffic Characteristics for the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester . . .. . . . . . . . 14 C 1986 Projected Traffic Characteristics for the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester . . . . . . . . . . 15 D Traffic Characteristics Generated by the Buckland Commons Mall within the Mesoscale Region of South Windsor and Manchester assuming an Average Daily Shopping Volume of 31,000 Vehicles in 1986. . . . . 17 E Summary of Mesoscale Analysis Results . . . . . . . . 19 -ii- 1.0 INTRODUCTION TRC - Environmental Consultants, Inc. was retained by Buckland Associates (through Susman and Duffy) to perform air quality impact assessments for the proposed Buckland Commons Mall to be located in the towns of South Windsor and Manchester, Connecticut (see Figure 1 in Appendix A). The objective of the study is to address the air quality issues raised by various town officials and opponents to the project from the South Windsor area; specifically, the air pollution generated by transportation sources moving to and from the Mall. Stephen Connelly is the project manager for this work. His resume appears in Appendix B. Included in the assessment are direct and indirect sources of air pollu- tion. Direct sources include point sources burning coal or fuel oil, such as power plants or incinerators. Indirect sources include air pollution gener- ated by transportation vehicles to and from the Mall. In reviewing the plan it was determined that no point sources exist in the present Mall configura- tion. Space heating would be generated from either electricity or natural gas at the facility and would not result in increased air pollution. Questions concerning the State's Indirect Source Permit Program were addressed to Leonard Bruckman, Director of the Air Compliance Unit for the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection. His responses are contained in a letter in Appendix C. The air quality impact assessment was performed on two levels. A micro- scale analysis evaluated the concentration of air pollution along the roads in the transportation network. A mesoscale analysis addressed the projection of the total pollution burden as derived from total emissions of the transporta- tion network on a regional .scale. The mesoscale region is confined to the towns of South Windsor and Manchester. -1- In preparation for these air quality analyses, TRC was given a copy of the report, "Buckland Commons Mall South Windsor/Manchester, Connecticut" prepared by the Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team (ERT).1 The air qual- ity portion of this study was- prepared by Mr. Thomas Hooper of the Capitol Region Council of Government (CRCOG) . As a basis for his work, Mr. Hooper used a study prepared by CRCOG, the TRANSPLAN Study. This study involves a regional traffic assessment that projects traffic factors to 1995 for the transportation network of the Capitol Region. The study included several assumptions concerning improvements to the transportation network. For this project, it -involved the I-291. connection from the Bissell Bridge to I-86 in Manchester. Mr. Hooper performed his analyses according to the methods described in the EPA document "Transportation Air Quality Analysis, Volume I and II", de- signed for regional planning studies. In his analyses, Mr. Hooper makes ref- erence to projected changes in air quality on two scales: the Buckland r Commons Area (the area around the proposed Mall and the J.C. Penney facility to the interchange at I-86) (Table III), and the Capitol Region (Hartford County) (Table IV). Air quality impacts are assessed on a regional basis for both areas since site specific data and computer generated analyses were lacking. The analyses were performed to assess carbon monoxide, nonmethane hydrocarbon and oxides of nitrogen emissions. The findings indicate that on a Capitol Region basis the impact on total emissions was less than 1 percent. On a more site specific basis, the emissions increased approximately 85 per- cent. However, Mr. Hooper acknowledges that the study area as it exists today is primarily farmland and suburban in nature; therefore, any development would significantly increase air pollutants. He goes further in relating the total pollution burden projections to concentration levels near the proposed Mall, -2- making comparison with the 8-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for carbon monoxide (CO) of 9 ppm. In his assessment, he projects a total concentration of CO equal to 2 ppm for an 8-hour period (using 1 ppm as background); noting that this is significantly less than the 8-hour standard. The analyses performed by TRC are intended to elucidate the air quality impact of increased traffic on the transportation network in and around the proposed Mall; by describing the concentrations (ppm) of carbon monoxide along specific local roadways in a microscale evaluation, and through a regional analysis on a scale quantifying the increased traffic impact over the towns of South Windsor and Manchester. -3- i 2.0 CONCLUSIONS The air quality impact study for the proposed Mall assesses maximum am- bient concentrations resulting from the emissions of indirect (transportation- related) sources of air pollution in the town of South Windsor, Connecticut. The two principal components of the study were a microscale and a mesoscale analysis that considered project alternatives. A summary of the findings is presented below. o The independently prepared ERT report is favorable to and supports the development of the proposed Mall. The conclusions reached by this air r quality planning study agree with and confirm 1) the work contained in the TRC air quality report, and 2) the traffic and air quality analyses performed by Wilbur Smith and Associates. o The total air quality impact of the proposed Mall on a microscale and regional basis will be insignificant. o Maximum 1-hour carbon monoxide concentrations resulting from worst-case meteorological conditions are predicted by dispersion modeling to be in the range of 1 to 2 ppm along affected roadways in South Windsor. The highest concentration for any impact location in South Windsor is pre- dicted to occur in the Mall area, near the intersection of Wheeler and Pleasant Valley Roads, where a maximum 1-hour level of approximately 3 ppm is calculated to occur as a result of worst-case conditions. These 1-hour average worst-case concentrations (when added to a background concentration of 1 ppm) are far below the 1-hour primary carbon monoxide standard of 35 ppm (a level based on scientific criteria) , which was designed to provide the margin of safety and more than ade- quately protect 99 percent of those persons susceptible to the effects of Co.2,_ 3, " Furthermore, worst-case meteorological conditions, con- sisting of an E stability with a 1 m/sec wind speed, were found to occur in the Mall area on an annual average basis approximately 4.8 percent of the time, but seldom did they coincide with peak traffic conditions. The microscale impacts obtained by using a more probable set of meteorological conditions were about half those predicted for worst-case conditions. o The mesoscale analysis estimated regional emissions and vehicle miles travelled for the years 1981 and 1986. The results of this analysis indicate a significant general reduction in the total pollution burden for the towns of South Windsor and Manchester between these 2 years, as 1) older cars are taken out of service, and 2) control strategies, con- sisting of inspection/maintenance programs for mobile sources, are in- stituted. When the increased traffic generated by the Mall alternative is considered, base 1986 emission levels for carbon monoxide, hydro- carbons and nitrogen oxides increase by only 3 to 4 percent within the area of the two towns. The resulting total emission levels for CO and HC are still well below (approximately 40 percent) those predicted for 1981. NOx is unchanged. -4- 3.0 MICROSCALE ANALYSIS 3.1 Background and Objectives Air quality impacts on specific roadways in South Windsor, in the vicinity of the proposed Mall, have been determined by dispersion modeling as part of a microscale analysis. The primary pollutant of concern for this analysis is CO because of its potential deleterious effect on health. Motor vehicle emis- sions contain a wide variety of other air pollutants besides CO, including I substantial: amounts of nitrogen oxide (NOx) and hydrocarbons (HC) . Micro- scale ambient air quality impacts for NO and _ HC, however, cannot be addressed. directly through dispersion modeling because these substances under- go chemical reactions and transformations in the atmosphere. One major reason for concern with HC and NO is their potential contri- bution to ozone (a photochemical oxidant) formation. The 3-hour hydrocarbon "standard" of 0.24 ppm is specifically intended as a Federal guideline per- taining to oxidant-formation, not as an air quality standard relating directly to health effects. Since ozone formation involves a series of photochemical reactions over a period of several hours, the impact of HC and NO emissions must be evaluated on a regional basis in the mesoscale analysis. Unlike NO and HC which are two reactive pollutants, CO is nonreactive and as such occurs in highest concentrations in the immediate vicinity of a roadway where vehicle emissions have their greatest direct impact, and can produce ambient levels comparable to air quality standards. The Federal NAAQS for carbon monoxide are summarized as follows: Pollutant Primary Standard Secondary Standard Carbon Monoxide maximum 8-hour average* g ppm maximum 1-hour average* 35 ppm --- * Not to be exceeded more than once a year. -5- The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established NAAQS in response to the 1970 Clean Air Act which specified the creation of "primary" and "secon- dary" standards based on scientific criteria related to the level to be at- tained to adequately protect public health and welfare.' Specifically, national standards for CO have been designed to provide a great margin of safety for those sensitive population groups potentially susceptible to any adverse CO effects (i.e., persons suffering from cardiovascular diseases, pregnant women, anemics and persons on certain medications) .' A secondary standard related to.welfare effects was-.deemed inappropriate for CO since en- - vironmental effects .have been observed only at relatively high CO concen- trations. In this study microscale CO impacts within South Windsor, corresponding to peak 1-hour traffic volumes, were calculated for the current year (1981) and .for the year 1986, designated as the date of completion of the Mall. 1986 calculations were conducted for three project traffic scenarios: 1) assuming no Mall, 2) the Mall in place without project roadway improvements, and 3) the Mall in place with roadway improvements. The resulting 1-hour average concen- trations were then compared with applicable CO air quality standards. 3.2 Methodology The- microscale analysis consisted of two primary tasks: a prediction of CO emissions from individual roadway segments, and dispersion modeling to determine the impact of these emissions on ambient downwind concentrations. The prediction of emissions requires traffic volumes and conditions (for example, average traffic speeds) for roadway links in the vicinity of the pro- posed Mall. These traffic projections were developed by Wilbur Smith and Associates in their report which provides all the information necessary to -6- determine CO emission factors using the EPA computer program MOBILE2.3, e Emission factors contained in the MOBILE2 program are based upon the Federal Test Procedure (FTP) , a series of tests which have been used to determine ve- hicle emission rates for a variety of operating conditions including varia- tions in average speed, temperature and "warmed-up" versus "cold-start" per- formance. Tables of projected emission factors are presented by vehicle type (cars, light and heavy-duty trucks, motorcycles, etc.) corresponding to one set of operating conditions. Dispersion modeling was performed using the EPA computer model HIWAY2.7 HIWAY2 was developed to determine nonreactive pollutant concentrations at re- ceptor locations downwind of "at-grade" and "cut-section" roadways in non- complex terrain. The region surrounding the proposed Mall is appropriate for this model, since the terrain is relatively uncomplicated and .few obstructions to the horizontal wind flow are present. For at-grade road segments which were evaluated in this study, each lane of traffic has been modeled as though it were a finite, uniformly emitting line source of pollutant. The air pollu- tion concentration representative of hourly averaging times at a downwind re- ceptor location is found by a numerical integration along the length of each lane and a summing of the contributions from each lane. The receptors for which ambient CO concentrations are predicted (Table A) include an array of points located 10, 20 and 50 meters from the roadway edge at various locations along the Mall corridor in South Windsor. Seven loca- tions, including an area adjacent to the intersection of Wheeler and Pleasant Valley Road on the property of the Mall, were selected to evaluate microscale CO impact levels. In applying the dispersion model, meteorological conditions were chosen following Federal EPA guidelines. These guidelines recommend a Class E -7- TABLE A MICROSCALE ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR PEAK 1-11OUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES PREDICTED AMBIENT CONCENTRATIONS OF CARBON MONOXIDE (PARTS PER MILLION) 1981-EXISTING 1986 PROJECTED-WITHOUT MALL STABILITY/WIND SPEED (m/s) STABILITY/WIND SPEED (m/s) E/1.0 D/3.0 E/1.0 D/3.0 IMPACT DISTANCE FROM WIND FLAW/ROADWAY ANGLE (DEC) WIND FLOW/ROADWAY ANGLE (DEG) LOCATION ROADWAY(MET9RS) 90 45 30 90 45 ' 30 90 45 30 90 45 30 Pleasant Valley Road 10 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.4 1.1 1.4 1.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 (East of Clark Street) 20 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.3 1.0 1.2 1.0 0.3 0.4 0.4 50 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 Pleasant Valley Road 10 0.8 1.0 1.0 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.3 (West of Clark Street) 20 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 50 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 Clark Street 10 0.1 0.1 0.1 * * * 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.3 0.3 (South of Pleasant 20 0.1 0.1 0.1 * * * 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 Valley Road) 50 0.1 0.1 * * * * 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 I 00 Chapel Road 10 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.3 (West of Clark Street) 20 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 50 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 Pleasant Valley/ 10 1.0 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.3 * 1.7 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.4 0.2 Clark Intersection 20 0.9 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.2 * 1.5 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.2 50 0.7 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 * 1.2 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 Buckland Road 10 1.5 1.7 1.6 0.5 0.5 0.6 1.2 1.5 1.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 (North of Smith Street) 20 1.3 1.5 1.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.1 1.2 1.1 0.3 0.4 0.4 50 0.9 1.0 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.2 Buckland Commons Mall Area 10 Near Intersection of Wheeler Worst-Case Most Probable and Pleasant Valley Roads 1.3 0.5 * Concentrations less than 0.1 ppm TABLE A (Continued) MICROSCALE ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR PEAK 1-HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES PREDICTED AMBIENT CONCENTRATIONS OF CARBON MONOXIDE (PARTS PER MILLION) 1986 PROJECTED-WITH MALL 1986 PROJECTED WITH MALL WITHOUT I-291 IMPROVEMENTS WITH I-291 IMPROVEMENTS STABILITY/HIND SPEED (m/s) STABILITY/WIND SPEED (m/s) E/1.0 D/3.0 E/1.0 D/3.0 IMPACT DISTANCE FROM WIND FLOW/ROADWAY ANGLE (DEG) WIND FLOW/ROADWAY ANGLE (DEC) LOCATION ROADWAY(METERS) 90 45 30 90 45 30 90 45 30 90 45 30 Pleasant Valley Road 10 1.7 2.2 2.0 0.7 0.7. 0.9 1.0 1.3 1.2 0.4 0.4 0.5 (East of Clark Street) 20 1.5 1.8 1.6 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.9. 1.1 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.4 50 1.0 1.1 0.9 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 Pleasant Valley Road 10 1.0 1.2 1.2 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 (West of Clark Street) 20 0.9 1.1 1.0 0.3 . 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 50 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 Clark Street 10 1.0 1.2 1.2 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.7 0.7 0.2 0.3 0.3 (South of Pleasant 20 0.9 1.1 1.0 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 Valley Road) 50 0.6 0.7 0.5 0.2 U.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 I Chapel Road 10 1.0 1.3 1.3 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 (West of Clark Street) 20 0.9 1.2 1.0 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.2 50 0.6 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 Pleasant Valley/ 10 2.7 1.5 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.4 1.4 0.8 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.2 Clark Intersection 20 2.4 1.2 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.3 1.3 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 50 1.9 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.2 1.0 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 Buckland Road 10 1.8 2.1 1.9 0.6 0.6 0.7 1.8 2.1 1.9 0.6 0.6 0.7 (North of Smith Street 20 1.6 1.8 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.6 1.8 1.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 50 1.1 1.2 1.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 1.1 1.2 1.0 0.3 0.3 0.3 Buckland Commons Mall Area 10 Near Intersection of Worst-Case Most Probable Worst-Case Most Probable Wheeler and Pleasant Valley 2.8 1.2 2.5 1.0 Roads " stability with a 1 m/sec wind speed to represent the worst meteorological con- ditions expected to occur with peak hour traffic, and a Class D stability with a 3 m/sec wind speed for most probable meteorological conditions. The worst- case dispersion conditions of low wind speed (1 m/sec) and limited vertical mixing (E stability) cause pollutants to disperse more slowly and leads to a larger HIWAY model prediction of ambient CO. i 3.3 Results The results of the microscale analysis are presented in Table A. The im- pacts listed are those predicted based on traffic modeling and do not include the additional contributions from regional traffic or other sources that could comprise a background concentration for CO. Background concentrations for the area are referenced in the ERT report as equal to approximately 1 ppm. Moni- toring conducted by the firm of Interdisciplinary Environmental Planning (IEP) (see Section 5) at the Mall site confirmed this value. Figure 2 (Appendix A) is a graphical presentation of the worst-case re- sults at the 10-meter receptor in Table A (including background) . In re- viewing the figure, it can be seen that worst-case concentrations of CO pre- dicted for the noted impact locations in South Windsor are well below the 1-hour NAAQS of 35 ppm. The highest concentration for any impact location is predicted to occur in the Mall area, near the intersection of Wheeler and Pleasant Valley Road, where a worst-case 1-hour maximum of 2.8 ppm is cal- culated for the 1986 Mall, without improvements alternative. In analyzing the results in Table A and Figure 2 (Appendix A) , it should be noted that meteorological data were reviewed to determine the appropriate- ness of the specified worst-case conditions. Data includes a stability wind- rose constructed from 5 years of National Weather Service (NWS) meteorological -10- f f measurements at Bradley Airport in Windsor Locks.8 Wind speeds of 1 m/sec with stability E were found to occur on an annual average basis about 4.8 per- cent of the time, generally at night and seldom coinciding with peak traffic conditions. More probable meteorological conditions (D stability with a 3 m/sec wind) were responsible for reducing predicted air quality impacts by about half as shown in Table A. In Figure 2 a dashed line has been drawn to indicate the 1- and 8-hour CO standards. . This has been done to further emphasize the potential health- related aspects of the predicted CO concentrations. The 8-hour standard, as the controlling standard, is more effectively stringent (more difficult to meet) than the 1-hour standard. The standards were designed in this fashion because the human body, as an integrator of CO, takes approximately 8 hours to achieve equilibrium once CO enters the body. However, even if maximum concen- trations, Figure 2, were sustained for 8 hours (an extremely unlikely situa- tion since peak 1-hour traffic shopping patterns would not persist for that period), the 8-hour standard of 9 ppm would not be approached. The CO levels prescribed by the standards, even at attainment, were designed to protect the vast majority (99 percent) of the sensitive population group." Other comments relating to health impact aspects are addressed in a letter in Appendix C from Dr. Douglas Lloyd, Commissioner of Health for the State Health Department. -11- 4.0 MESOSCALE ANALYSIS 4.1 Methodology The mesoscale analysis presents a comparison of the impacts of different alternatives in terms of traffic levels and pollutant emissions on a regional scale. This analysis is used to show whether one alternative produces more or less pollutant relative to another alternative. The analysis takes into account all major roadways directly affected by the proposed Mall project. In this study the mesoscale region has' been confined to South Windsor and Manchester so that the major roadways considered reside entirely within these two towns. Traffic levels and pollutant emissions have been evaluated for three al- ternatives in this mesoscale (or total burden) analysis: 1) 1981 Existing Traffic 2) 1986 Projected Traffic Assuming No Buckland Commons Mall 3) 1986 Projected Traffic Including Impacts Generated by the Buckland Commons Mall Emissions were computed based upon 24-hour average (or daily) traffic volumes for CO, NO and HC. Results of the analysis are useful in evalu- ating nonmethane HC and NOx in that these pollutants act as precursors to the formation of ozone. Ozone is not directly released into the air but is E r formed as a result of chemical reactions in the atmosphere due to precursor f� (NOx and HC) levels and light intensity. CO levels, on the other hand, are f directly proportional to the vehicle emission rate; that is, the more CO 4 emitted, the higher the ambient concentration. As previously shown, the l microscale analysis provides estimates of ambient CO in the immediate vicinity of specified roadways. The mesoscale approach indicates emission levels on a regional scale. -12- C . . The methodology of the mesoscale analysis is straightforward, involving two key parameters. The first is a determination of vehicle miles travelled (VMT) by road type (expressway and nonexpressway) and speed. The second para- meter is an emission factor for motor vehicles. VMT data, broken down by road type and speed, for the 1981 existing traf- fic alternative and the 1986 projected traffic alternative (assuming no Mall) , were determined with the assistance of the Connecticut Department of Transpor- tation (CONNDOT) . CONNDOT provided TRC witb . VMT data contained in the I-86 Project Report 76-89, which included total VMT's b road Y type and speed for . the years 1980, 1985 and 1990 estimated to occur .within the towns of South Windsor, Manchester and Vernon.' Through linear interpolation, these VMT . values were adjusted either up or down to depict calendar years 1981 and 1986. In order to properly characterize the mesoscale area of interest (South ! Windsor and Mancbester) , in terms of traffic and pollution levels, it was nec- essary to factor out Vernon VMT's from the I-86 Project Report tables. CONNDOT supplied TRC with the town of 'Vernon s 1980 and projected 1987 total VMT (VMT for 1980 equalled 462,871; for 1987 - 497,163) . These values were linearly adjusted to 1981 and 1986 and then apportioned to and subtracted from the total VMT figures by road type and speed contained in the 76-89 Report. The remaining VMT numbers reflected just the towns of South Windsor and Manchester (see Tables B and C, column 1) . They are broken down by road type and average travelling speed (column 2) . Emission factors used in this analysis were determined using the most re- cent EPA factors as supplied by .EPA computer program MOBILE2. The use of this method requires the specification of various traffic characteristics including: 1. Temperature - 50OF for CO 75OF for NOx and HC These temperatures represent a seasonal average for the oxidant pre- cursors and an annual average for CO (specified by CONNDOT) . -13- TABLE B 1981 EXISTING TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS FOR THE TOWNS OF SOUTH WINDSOR AND MANCHESTER TRAVEL EMISSION FACTORS DISTANCE (VMT) AVERAGE FROM MOBILE2 SPEED (grams per vehicle mile) EMISSIONS (103 Vehicle Miles) (mph) CO NOx HC GO NOx HC (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) Tons * Tons * Tons A. EXPRESSWAY 444.5 55 23.0 4.4 2.4 11.2 (10,179) 2.2 (1999) 1-2 (1091) 64.1 45 24.0 3.8 2.6 1.7 (1545) .3 (273) .2 (182) 40.6 32.5 31.3 3.5 3.1 1.4 (1272) .2 (182) .1 (91) 14.6 30 34.2 3.4 3.3 .6 (545) .1 (91) .1 (91) 14.6 20 51.0 3.2 4.4 .8 (727) .1 (91) .1 (91) 14.6 10' 94.3 3.1 7.1 1.5 (1363) ,1 (91) .1 (91) B. NON EXPRESSWAYS 94.7 45 27.2 4,6 2.7 2.8 (2545) .5 (454) .3 (273) 111.6 40 28.8 4,4 2.9 3.5 (3181) .5 (454) ,4 (364) 108.2 35 32.4 4.3 3.1 3.9 (3544) .5 (454) ,4 (364) 135.5 30, 38.4 4.1 3.5 5.7 (5180) .6 (545) ,5 (454) 49.8 27 43.0 4.0 3.7 2.4 (2181) .2 (182) ,2 52.1 (182) 22 52.6 3.9 4.3 3.0 (2726) .2 (182) ,2 19.9 17 (182) 65.7 3.7 5.1 1,4 (1272) .1 (91) 1 (91) 7.0 15 73.0 3.7 5.6 .6 (545) _ _ 34.9 10 104.9 3.7 7.5 4.0 (3635) ,1 (91) 3 (273) 34.9 5 200.1 3.9 12.9 7.7 (6998) 1 (91) .5 (454) * a grams x 103 TABLE C 1986 PROJECTED TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS FOR THE TOWNS OF SOUTH WINDSOR AND MANCHESTER TRAVEL EMISSION FACTORS DISTANCE (VMT) AVERAGE FROM MOBILE2 EMISSIONS SPEED (grams per vehicle mile) (103 Vehicle Miles) (mph) CO NOx IIC CO NOx HC (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Tons * (8) _ Tons * Tons A. EXPRESSWAY 589.8 55 12.6 3.4 1.1 8.2 (7452) 2.2 (1999) .7 (636) 204.0 52 13.1 3.2 1.1 2.9 (2636) .7 (636) .2 (182) 24.1 45 13.0 2.9 1.1 .3 (273) .1 (91) - _ 33.8 32.5 16.4 2.7 1.4 .6 (545) .1 (91) .1 (91) B. NON EXPRESSWAYS 101.2 45 14.2 3.5 1.2 1.6 (1454) .4 (364) .1 (91) 114.0 40 14.8 3.4 1.2 1.8 (1636) .4 (364) ,2 (182) ~ 117.7 35 16.5 3.3 1.4 2.1 (1908) .4 (364) ,2 (182) Ln 140.6 30 19.6 3.2 1.5, 3.0 (2726) .5 (454) ,2 (182) 50.1 27 22.0 3.1 1.7 1.2 (1091) .2 (182) .1 (91) 37.8 22 26.8 2.9 2.0 1.1 (1000) .1 (91) .1 (91) 27.0 17 33.2 2.8 2.4 1.0 (909) .1 (91) .1 (91) 6.2 15 36.5 2.8 2.6 .2 (182) - _ - - 43.8 10 50.6 2.8 3.4 2.4 (2181) .1 (91) .2 (182) 43.8 5 91.9 3.0 5.8 4.4 (3999) .1 (91) .3 (273) * grams x 103 i - 2. Hot/Cold Mix - 0/0 Expressway .273/.206 Non-Expressway These figures represent acceptable national averages, and assume that the percent catalyst operation equals the percent noncatalyst opera- tion (specified by CONNDOT) . 3. Vehicle mix/model year mix (by vehicle type) . The national averages were used (CONNDOT approved) , as follows: Light Light Light Heavy Heavy Duty Duty Duty Duty Duty Vehicles Truck 1 Truck 2 Gas Diesel Motorcycle 1981 .777 .082 .046 .042 .033 .009 1986 .741 .078 .046 .042 .033 .099 4. Average Travel Speed as listed in Tables B,• C and D (column 5)-. 5. Inspection and Maintenance features. Information concerning the anticipated inspection/maintenance program for motor vehicles was provided by CONNDOT. CONNDOT specified a 20 percent stringency factor (failure rate) with a mechanics training program starting in 1983 and insp ection of vehicles for all model years 1968 through 2020. A total of 92 different emission factors were used in the mesoscale analysis (columns 3, 4 and 5 in Tables B and C; columns 6, 7 and 8 in Table D) . Total pollutant burdens were calculated by multiplying VMT data by the appropriate emission 'factor. For example (Table B) , multiplying 44.5 x 103 VMT (column 1) ' by 23.0 (emission factor for CO, column 3) results in 10,179 x 103 grams of CO (column 6) produced during a 24-hour period. - Characteristics that quantify the impacts of traffic�- generated by the Mall appear in Table D. Information shown in this table was developed from data I contained in the Wilbur Smith and Associates report s Precluding the existence of I-291 and its associated proposed connector Eroad, nine distinct approach routes are identified in the report as providing i access, on an average daily basis, for an estimated 31,000 vehicles expected -16- TABLE D T TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS GENERATED BY THE BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL WITHIN THE MESOSCALE REGION OF SOUTH WINDSOR AND MANCHESTER ASSUMING AN AVERAGE DAILY SHOPPING VOLUME OF 31,000 VEHICLES IN 1986 DISTANCE OF AVG.DLY. EMISSION FACTORS APPROACH NUMBER OF TRAVEL APPROACH AVG. FROM MOBILE2 ROUTE VEHICLES DIST.(VMT) SPEED EMISSIONS ROUTE q (grams per vehicle mile) (MILES) PER APPROACH (10.Veh.Mi.) (mph) CO NO HC CO 1 2 3 x NOx HC A. EXPRESSWAY (4 (5) 6) (7 (8) (9) (10) (11) 1. I-86 from East Hartford 2.5 15,190 38.0 g0 Tons * Tons * Tons East to Buckland Street 13:1 3.1 1.1 .55 (500) .13 (118) .05 (45) 2. I-86 from Vernon West to 3.0 6975 20.9 50 Buckland Street 13.1 3.1 1.1 .30 (273) 07 (64) 03 (27) B. NON EXPRESSWAY 1. I-86 East at Buckland 0.4 15,190 6.1 25 23.9 3.0 1.8 .16 Street to Site (145) .02 (18) .01 (9) 2. I-86 West at Buckland 0.4 6975 2.8 25 Street to Site 23.9 3.0 1.8 .07 (64) .009 (B) 006 (5) 1 3. Burnham Street from Route 5 3.1 775 2.4 25 ~ to Site 23.9 3.0 1.8 .06 (55) .008 (7) .005 (5) v I 4. Chapel Road from Route 5 2.9 310 0.9 25 to Site 23.9 3.0 1.8 .02 (18) 003 (3) 002 (2) 5. Pleasant Valley Road from Route 5 to 5.9 1085 6.4 25 Site (incl. RT.5 from E. Windsor to 23.9 3.0 1.8 .16 (145) .02 (18) .01 (9) Pleasant Valley) 6. Buckland Road from Five Corners to 4.9 1860 9.1 25 Site (incl. RT.74 from Ellington) 23.9 3.0 1.8 .24 (218) .03 (27) .01 (9) 7. North Main Street from RT 83 to 6.1 1550 Site (including RT 83 from 9.5 25 23.9 3.0 1.8 .25 (227) .03 G (27) 02 (18)Glastonbury) 8• New State Road from I-84 to 2.3 1550 Buckland Street to Site 3.6 25 23.9 3.0 1.8 .09 (82) 01 (9) 008 (7) 9. Tolland Turnpike from East Hartford 2.5 1705 4.3 to Buckland Street to Site 25 23.9 3.0 1.8 .11 (100) .01 (9) .009 (8) TOTAL 31,000 * grams x 103 to travel through the mesoscale region (South Windsor and Manchester) to the Mall site. These are noted in column 1 of Table D. To be conservative in comparing the impact of the Mall on pollutant levels in 1986 with the 1986 alternative that excludes it, the lengths of the approach routes (column 2) include (where appropriate) the distance of a major connecting roadway that extends the approach route to the border of the defined mesoscale region (South Windsor or Manchester town line) . For example, the North Main Street approach has been set equal to 6.1 miles. This includes the 4 miles from the Glastonbury border along Route 83 to North Main ,Street. Besides resulting in greater VMT's and, therefore, higher emission levels, this method maintains the integrity of the mesoscale region when comparing alternatives, and brings traffic to the site from all eight surrounding major compass points. Emission levels in columns 9, 10 and 11 (Table D) were arrived at in the same manner as described for Tables B and C. VMT numbers (column 4) are mul- tiplied by the appropriate emission factors (columns 6, 7 and 8) . The resul- tant emission levels represent the additional pollutant burdens generated by the 31,000 vehicles travelling to and from the Mall in 1986. It should be noted that the number of vehicles for each approach (column 3) was determined from percentages listed in the Wilbur Smith report typifying the average daily travelling distribution of the 31,000 vehicles along the identified access roadways in South Windsor and Manchester. It should also be noted that the average speeds (column 5) used in Table D (50 and 25 mph, respectively, for expressway and nonexpressway) for determining emission factors were conservative, based on 1986 CONNDOT data. 4.2 Results Summary mesoscale analysis results are presented in Table E and graphi- cally in Figure 3 (Appendix A) . Estimated travel and emissions for both road -18- TABLE E r SUMMARY OF MESOSCALE ANALYSIS RESULTS EMISSIONS FROM AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC IN THE TOWNS OF SOUTH WINDSOR AND MANCHESTER ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 1986 PROJECTED TRAFFIC 1986 PROJECTED TRAFFIC 1981 EXISTING WITHOUT BUCKLAND COMMONS INCLUDING BUCKLAND COMMONS TRAVEL TRAVEL TRAVEL EMISSIONS EMISSIONS EMISSIONS DISTANCE (VMT) Tons* DISTANCE (VMT) Tons DISTANCE (VMT) Tons ROAD TYPE (103 Vehicle Miles) CO NOx HC (103 Vehicle Miles) CO NO HC (103 Vehicle Miles) CO NO HC (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) EXPRESSWAY 592.9 17.2 2.8 1.7 851.8 12.0 3.1 1.0 910.7 12.9 3.3 1.1 (15,631)(2545) (1545) (10,906)(2817) (909) (11,724) (2999) (1000) NON EXPRESSWAYS 649.2 35.0 2.8 2.9 682.2 18.8 2.3 1.5 727.3 19.0 2.3 1.5 (31,808)(2545) (2636) (17,085)(2090) (1363) (17,267) (2090) (1363) N 0 TOTAL 1242.1 52.2 5.6 4.6 1534.0 30.8 5.4 2.5 1638.0 31.9 5.6 2.6 (47,439)(5089) (4180) (27,991)(4908) (2272) (28,991) (5089) (2363) * Values in parenthesis are in units of grams x 103 types are shown for each alternative for all pollutants, together with the totals for the entire mesoscale project region. The greatest combined (expressway and nonexpressway) CO and nonmethane HC emissions are produced in Alternative 1, with 1981 existing traffic data. Reductions of 41 and 46 percent are predicted for these two pollutants in the base year 1986, alternative 2, without Mall traffic. This is accounted for by the reduction o greater than 50 percent to be found in the appropriate emis- sion factors in Tables B and C, which more than offsets the 23.5 percent in- crease in VMT's that occurs between the two alternatives (1534 x 103 versus- 1252 x 103j . Combined NOX, on --:the other hand, declines only neglig-ibly between alternatives 1 and 2, owing to a much smaller drop in emission factors between 1981 and 1986 in combination with an 'increase in vehicle miles tra- velled. These results are clearly shown in Figure 3 (Appendix A) . Alternative 3 in Table E (columns 9-12) summarizes the impact of the Mall on projected regional pollutant levels in 1986. These results can be compared to alternative 2, the base projected 1986 case without the Mall. The rela- tionship of expressway to nonexpressway traffic levels is indentical between the two alternatives (see Figure 3) . Total VMT in the mesoscale region with the Mall is predicted to be 6.8 percent greater than without the Mall (1638 x 103 compared to 1534 x 103) . Most importantly, regional pollutant burdens for CO, NO and HC are increased only 3.6, 3.7 and 4.0 percent, respective- ly, between the Build and No Build situation in 1986. While combined NO x emissions with the Mall in 1986 are equal to existing 1981 levels, CO and HC are still 39 and 43.5 percent less than their respective pollutant burdens predicted for 1981. The general regional pattern which emerges when Table E and Figure 3 re- sults are reviewed indicates that in 1986 the pollutant emissions decrease -20- from the present conditions in 1981. This is due to an improvement in the emission controls on vehicles travelling the roadways as older vehicles are removed from service. The potential impact of the Mall on regional air qual- ity levels is insignificant. The potential impact of the different alternatives upon regional ozone levels is difficult to quantify in the absence of reliable photochemical models.. Although both HC and NO are generally recognized as contributing to ozone formation, nonmethane hydrocarbons are regarded as the principal pol- lutant precursor in the formation of ozone. In this context, 1981 predicted emissions would be regarded as contributing the most to regional ozone pollu- tion since its HC emissions are the greatest. Therefore, although the meso- scale results do not show any one alternative to be clearly preferable in terms of its impact on ozone formation, considered in the context that re- gional HC emissions are expected to decrease, some regional improvement in ozone air quality should also occur due to reduced vehicular emissions. In- k ' creased traffic projected for the Mall in the Manchester/South Windsor region will not affect this improvement. -21- 5.0 MONITORING RESULTS The principal objectives of a monitoring program associated with an air quality study of this type are to obtain estimates for existing background CO levels in the project region. Air quality in the project region should be quantified to provide a framework for assessing project impacts. Toward this end, representatives of IEP conducted a 1-day CO monitoring I study using an Energetic Science Ecolyzer. Meteorological instrumentation included a hand-held anemometer. Monitoring was performed at the Buckland Commons site in South Windsor, Connecticut, on June 1, 1981, about 100 feet in from the intersection of Wheeler and Pleasant Valley Roads on what is pres- ently a tobacco field. Roadway traffic at the location was light. The re- corded data were as follows: Monitoring Period 1, 2:00 - 2:30 p.m. , XCO = 0.22 ppm Monitoring Period 2, 4:45 - 5:30 p.m., XCO = 0.78- ppm Meteorology during both periods: ti Wind: SSW, 5-15 mph, gusty Temp: 680-73OF Cloud Cover: 2/10 high cumulus Stability Class: B The results confirmed the use of 1 ppm as a conservative approximation to background air quality at the Mall site. -22- 6.0 REFERENCES 1. "Environmental Review Team Report on Buckland Commons Mall, South Windsor/Manchester, Connecticut", Eastern Connecticut Resource Conser- vation and Development Area, April 1981. 2. "Air Quality Criteria for Carbon Monoxide", U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, Environmental Health Service, National Air Pollution Control Administration, Washington, D.C., AP-62, March 1970. M 3. "Carbon Monoxide: Proposed Revisions to the NAAQS", Federal Register, Volume 45, No. 161, August 18, 1980. pp. 55066-55083. 4. "Air Quality Criteria for Carbon Monoxide", EPA 600/8-79-022, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1979. 5. "Traffic and Access Analysis - Buckland Commons Mall - South Windsor/ Manchester, Connecticut", Wilbur Smith and Associates, March 1981. 6. "MOBILE2: - Mobile Source Emission Factors", U.S. Environmental Pro- tection Agency, Office of Air and Noise and Radiation, Emission Con- trol Technology Division, Test and Evaluation Branch, November 1980. 7. "A Highway Air Pollution Model", U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, User's Guide for HIWAY2, EPA-600/8-80-018, May 1980. 8. "Annual Wind Distribution by Stability Class", U.S. Department of Com- merce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Environmental Data Service, January 1968-December 1972. 9. "Application for an Indirect Source Construction Permit - I-86 Ex- pressway Manchester/Vernon", State of Connecticut, Department of Transportation, November 1978. -23- c I APPENDIX A FIGURES SANDtOLL 74 9, "°• (� �oSTfQZ Yt S BELOON ELLINGTON m RD. RD. !0 30 & oy m 3 d„PPE q �y W �� p�fgSgNl � � Sr v SouIM wD�ur- E oot 4 30 s S N--'�'-- r — o >b � �. M�tN S I T E — j04lANO TAYIAR Si. rw ... B7 SoufA WinAsor "NNAM foss/Mrllor/ i 1 ADAMS ST. 4fpRrN �A1N r GIB \ W� o- VA. a ti ST. go NppQLpNO \ 3 W r e� E 44 A f MIDDLE 1Pr<E WEST 1600 3200 460orEET FIGURE 1s MAP OF BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL REGION. OFF- LEGEND MAXIMUM PREDICTED ONE-HOUR CARBON MONOXIDE. 0 1981 1988 WITH MALLA WITHOUT CONCENTRATIONS AT A DISTANCE OF TEN METERS ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS FROM AFFECTED ROADWAYS FOR WORST-CASE 1986 WITHOUT MALL 1986 WITH MALL & METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS 36 (INCLUDING A BACKGROUND OF 1 ppm) ONE-HOUR CO STANDARD EQUAL TO 35 ppm 33 1-HOUR CO ---- ---- STANDARD 30 27 c 24 8 21 m a 18 0 15 a 12 O V 9 -- --_--- ---- _.8-HOUR CO ---- ----- STANDARD -" — 3 CHAPEL RD. CLARK ST., PLEASANT PLEASANT PLEASANT BUCKLAND RD. BUCKLAND South of VALLEY RD. VALLEY RD. VALLEY/ West of West of East of COMMONS Clark St. Pleasant Clark St. CLARK North of MALL Valley Rd. Clark St, INTERSECTION Smith St, pleasant Valley and Wheeler FIGURE 2: MICROSCALE RESULTS FOR SOUTH WINDS OR i i EMISSIONS PER DAY BASED ON AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES i 50 co NON EXPRESSWAY 40 EXPRESSWAY 0 30 c0 co o z N 20 o 10 s 6 ' He NO NOx NOx 4 . H cm He 2 1981 1986 1986 WITHOUT MALL WITH MALL FIGURE 3: MESOSCALE RESULTS FOR BUCKLAND COMMONS MALL REGION r APPENDIX B RESUME APPENDIX C LETTERS STATE OF CONNECTICUT � DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Q STATE OFFICE BUILDING HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06115 r, 203/566-4030 June 11 , 1981 Mr. Stephen W. Connelly Manager, Atmospheric Services TRC Environmental Consultants , Inc. 125 Silas Deane Highway Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109 Dear Mr. Connelly: I am glad to provde you with the information you requested regarding the proposed Buckland Commons Mall and the State 's Indirect Source Permit Program. Experience with State regulations concerning the location of major private developments that generate significant traffic (for example, the original version of DEP' s Indirect Source Permit Program, adopted by the State in 1974 , addressed the automotive pollution produced by so-called "trip generators") proved such an approach to be unworkable . Regulatory control over land use is traditionally a local function and State regulatory involvement generated unnecessary conflict . The original Indirect Source Permit Program, which was developed in response to a federal mandate, inappropriately placed an implicit responsibility for changing development patterns on individual private developers rather than with the appropriate governmental authority. Consequently, the Indirect Source Permit Program was modified in 1977 to address mobile source air pollution generated by only highways and airports , thus exempting other types of trip generators , such as shopping malls and industrial parks . This modified version of the program also left something to be desired in that its review of highway-generated pollution occurred too late in the transportation planning process to be fully effective. Furthermore , the permit criteria were ambiguous and there was much controversy over which road projects did or did not require a permit . The DEP modified this program a second time in 1980 such that the Indirect Source Permit will now become an integral part of the overall transportation planning process at a much earlier and more meaningful stage. Actually, a three-tier review process has been proposed. The first stage will be a systems-level review requiring that the road project be Stephen W. Connelly June 11 , 1981 Leonard Bruckman -2 part of an approved transportation plan. The second stage will be a corridor review which is designed to coincide with the federally required Environmental Impact Statement . The third stage is a project-level review which will be a detailed micro-scale carbon monoxide analysis . The DEP' s current Indirect Source Permit regulations (i.e. , Section 19-508-100 of The Re ulations of Connecticut State Agencies for the Abatement of Air Pollution) do not require an Indirect Source Permit for t e proposed mall . The Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) is in _ the process of modifying Interstate I-86 (I-86) to increase _ its transportation capacity and efficiency in this area and has applied for an indirect source permit. Any increases in air pollution caused by increased automobile usage as a result of this transportation project will be evaluated as part of DEP' s review of ConnDOT's I-86 permit application. Let me say again that the mall itself does not require an Indirect Source Permit . I trust that this response will be of some assistance to you. Sinc el ou rA*rCom ruckman r /bgm nce U nit e STATE Or CONNECTICUT l` DEPARTAIENT OF HEALTH .SERi"ICI S OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER June 11, 1981 Mr. Stephen W. Connelly, Manager Atmospheric Sciences TRC Environmental Consultant, Inc. 125 Silas Deane Highway Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109 Dear Mr. Connelly: Thank you for your request for information concerning health effects of increased ambient concentrations of carbon monoxide. I understand that TRC is presently reviewing plans for a shopping mall to be con- structed in a semi.-rural area of Connecticut. The increased traffic generated by this mall will apparently result in slight increases in carbon monoxide levels. The critical parameters to consider in carbon monoxide toxicity are the concentrations present in the air, the exposure time, and character- istics of the exposed individual (including metabolic rate, cardio- vascular health, smoking history). Thus, individuals exposed to given carbon monoxide levels in the air they are breathing can show widely varying carboxyhemoglobin levels. Individuals who are exerting them- selves and are exposed to outdoor air for longer periods of time, and are smoking, will have higher levels than resting, non-smoking individuals exposed for shorter periods of time. All these factors must be considered in predicting health effects following ' exposure to various concentrations. Exposure to the one hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for carbon monoxide (35 ppm) should not result in carboxyhemoglobin (COHb) levels in excess of 10% in healthy non-smokers, hence no apparent symptoms should result. Impairment of sensory response can be seen at the level of 35 ppm. An exposure of 7 to 8 ppm will have negligible effects on most populations, again depending on the factors stated above. Therefore, it is unlikely that there will be any significant health effects from maximum one hour carbon monoxide levels of 7 or 8 ppm or long term levels of 1 to 3 ppm. If you have any additional questions feel free to contact my office or Alan J. Siniscalchi of our Toxic Hazards Section (telephone 566-8166/8167. Sincerely, 01 Douglas S. Lloyd, M.D. , M.P.H. Commissioner DSL:mlp Telephone 566-2279 79 Elm St. Ilartford, Ct. 05115 An Equal Opportunity Employer