Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10-29P McDonalds Site Plan WITHDRAWN
TVWn ur'bUUTH WINDSOR PLANNING&ZONING COMMISSION APPLICATION FORM Application No: RECEIVED Official Receipt Date: 15' 1 I-,[ C7MAY 10 Receipt No: F SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DEPT, APPLICANT: 1049 John Fitch B1vd TLC PROJECT NAME: McDonald's Site Plan ADDRESS: 18-3 Arthur Dr. , ;South .Winer, `rm 06Q74 OWNER OF RECORD ON LAND RECORDS: Same gs Applicant ADDRESS: 18-3 Arthur Dri gip, Smith rT; .: rT n6074 COMPLETE LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 1049 John Fitch Bou evarr ASSESSOR'S MAP# 71 PARCEL# 21 ZONE RC - Restri cte i r..mmercial NAME, ADDRESS, TEL&FAX#.OF PERSON TO WHOM INQUIRIES SHOULD BE DIRECTED: Dorian R. Famiglietti, Attorney for Applicant Kahan Kerensky & Ca asse a rTn 45 Hartford Tnpk, Vernon, CT 06066 Estimated presentation time: 1 hr tle (860)646-1974 _ fax(860)647-8302 THIS APPLICATION IS FOR: (Check all that apply): ❑ Zone Change to (Public Hearing required and Certified letter to abutters required) ❑ Subdivision/Resubdivision ❑ Open Space Subdivision (Public Hearing Required) ❑ Subdivision ❑ Minor ❑ Major Fj Resubdivision (Public Hearing Required) [I Minor ❑ Major ❑ :Conditional Approval ❑ Special Exception to Article (Public Hearing, Certified,letter to abutters required) Site Plan of Development ❑.General Plan of Development El Earth Filling(Sec. 15) and/or Earth Removal (Sec. 14 - Public Hearing Required) ❑ Regulation Amendment ❑ Zoning ❑ Subdivision (Attach proposed amendment) (Public Hearing Required) - Temporary and Conditional Permit for (Public Hearing Required) ❑ In Law apartment/Accessory Apartment (Public Hearing Required) ❑ Major Home Occupation for (Public Hearing Required) ❑ Other (explain in detail) An Application Pending sign is required to be posted on the property,for all applications ten (10) days prior to being heard by the Commission. IrKgnature of Applicant 4ature of Property Owner RECEIVED 8,-0" JUN 0 12010 SOUTH MWSOR PMNG MPT, 30" ARCH 0 U 0 0 Lo co @ 0��0 RED PAN FORMED FACE 0 BRICK BASE AND __/ SURROUND (BY OTHERS) PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGN NOT TO SCALE RECEIVED la 1N 012010 SOUTH WINDSOR PLANhtlNG DEFT. $,_O„ 1 7_07, 6'-099 30" ARCH n 0 U 0 0 I I � --L�v co RED PAN FORMED FACE 0 BRICK BASE AND SURROUND (BY OTHERS) PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGN NOT TO SCALE JON 0 12010 500 WINDSOR PLANNING DEFT. $,_0„ 1 9_099 6,_0„ 30" ARCH 0 0 U 0 0 I I � Lo d co (TzsDO��� RED PAN FORMED FACE 0 I BRICK BASE AND --/ SURROUND (BY OTHERS) PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGN NOT TO SCALE RECOVED. 8'-0" JUN U ,1 2010 1 ,-0„ 6,-0„ 1 9-0» SOUTN WINDSOR PLANNING DEPT. 30" ARCH 0- 0 0 o a -LNVA @DO u 9 RED PAN FORMED FACE 0 BRICK BASE AND SURROUND (BY OTHERS) PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGN NOT TO SCALE Everbrite Fascia/Uniface Sign idenNty Systems Division Illumination: 4- F-84 T12 CW/HO 2 - F-36 T12 CW/HO t Electrical: 5.4 Amps 120V 60Hz T 27.1/2" 69.85 cm �`' • ➢' Ballast: 1- Universal MSB1048-816-5 18'-011 Ship Weight: 390 lbs. 548.2 cm Everbrite, LLC, 315 Marion Ave., South Milwaukee, Wi, 53172 P: 888-857-4078 F: 877-430-7363 www,everbrite.com y Eve1"hrRe Self Contained Illuminated Arch •': °�� Id811}ily$ySf8ft15 DMBkN'1. y' H 4a_ _ L `I Size: 42" H x 48"W 1 OW cm x 121,92 cm Illumination: Neon Electrical: 1.25 amps Transformer: 1 - 12/30 Ship Welght: 110 lbs. Everbrite, LLC, 815 Marion Ave., South Milwaukee, WI, 53172 P: 888-857-4078 F: 877-430-7363 www.everbrite.com RECEIVED HIAY i ei 2010 NARRATIVE OF APPLICATION SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING DEPT, May 10, 2010 Application: McDonald's Site Plan Approval Applicant: 1049 John Fitch Blvd, LLC Property Location: 1049 John Fitch Boulevard 1049 John Fitch Blvd, LLC (the "Applicant") seeks approval to construct certain improvements upon property at 1049 John Fitch Boulevard, South Windsor (the "Property"), in connection with the development of a 3,886 square foot McDonald's, with associated parking, utilities and other improvements, on the Property. The Property is zoned RC — Restricted Commercial. The proposed improvements are detailed on the attached site plans prepared by Bohler Engineering (the "Plans"), and include the proposed restaurant with drive- through facilities, all driveways and parking areas, all drainage and utility connections, all landscaping, lighting and signage as shown on the Plans. Access to and from the Property will be provided in three locations: (1) there will a driveway on John Fitch Boulevard that will provide for right-turn entries and right-turn exits to and from the Property; (2) there will be a split driveway on Governor's Highway near the southeasterly corner of the Properly that will provide for right-turn entries and right-turn exits to and from the Property; and (3) there will be a full access driveway on Governor's Highway near the southwesterly corner of the Property. A full traffic analysis prepared by the Applicant's traffic engineer, Bubaris Traffic Associates, is being submitted with this application and will be presented at the meeting when the Commission reviews this application. The Property will be served by public water and sewer. In order to manage stormwater on the site, two stormtech underground infiltration systems are proposed, one at the westerly end of the development and one at the easterly end of the development. The drainage system has been designed to maintain existing drainage patterns, mitigate peak post-development flows and volumes, and protect water quality. The incorporation of various best management practices will provide for the removal of over 80% of total suspended solids from the stormwater. A full copy of the Stormwater Management Report is being submitted with this application and will be presented by the Applicant's engineers, Bohler Engineering, at the meeting when the Commission reviews this application. As shown on the Sign Summary Table (sheet C-3 of the Site Plan), the Applicant proposes having building signs mounted on 3 sides of the building. Per Table 6.5.8A of the Zoning Regulations, building signs are permitted on the 2 sides of the building facing the abutting streets. Therefore, the Applicant requests a waiver of this section of the Zoning Regulations so as to allow building signs on 3 sides of the building. It should be noted that the aggregate area of all proposed building signs does not exceed the maximum area permitted under the regulations. 2 I RL IlLr6 ��Y ® ?.010 May 10, 2010 Kahan SOujHWjNUSOR?Lot* Kerensh Caposse a LLP Via Hand Delivery Marcia Banach, Director of Planning Stephen M.Bacon South Windsor Planning &Zoning Commission Michael A.Bars 1540 Sullivan Ave. Christopher T.Bowen South Windsor, CT 06074 William E.Breslau Joseph Capossela Re: Site Plan Approval— 1049 John Fitch Boulevard William J.Dakin Dorian Reiser Famiglietti Dear Marcia: Solomon Kerensky Michael J.Kopsick Enclosed herewith please find 3 copies of an application for a site plan approval Douglas K.Manion affecting land owned by 1049 John Fitch Blvd, LLC and located at 1049 John Justin L.Murphy Fitch Boulevard. Also enclosed are the following: Stephen F.Sutton Antoinette M.Webster Matthew E.Willis (1) 3 copies of a narrative briefly describing the application; Jeffrey M.Wmmck* (2) 3 copies of the site plan (additional copies to be submitted prior to meeting with revisions, if any); Of Counsel (3) 3 copies of detail sheets regarding the building mounted signage; Oliver S.Chappell (4) 3 copies of the Stormwater Drainage Report prepared by Bohler Robert F Kahan Engineering; (1922-1996) (5) 13 copies the Site Traffic Evaluation Study prepared by Bubaris *also admitted in MA Traffic Associates; - (6) 3 copies of the preliminary application for access to State highways (section 8.6.2.B.27) and 45 Hartford Turnpike (7) A check in the amount of$185 representing the application fee. P.O.Box 3811 Please review this application and should you have an Vernon,Cr 06066-2181 pp� y y questions or need additional information, please advise. It is my understanding that the Telephone Commission will receive this application at its meetingon May 11 2010 and (860) 646-1974 schedule it for review at its meeting on May 25, 2010 1 will plan on attending the Facsimile May 25, 2010 meeting with the applicant's consultants to make a full presentation (860) 647-8302 of the application at that time. 22 Professional Park Road Mansfield Professional Park Please note that details of the proposed free-standing sign will be submitted by P.O.Box 465 the Applicant at or prior to the Commission's review of this application on May Storrs,CT 06268 25, 2010. Telephone (860) 487-1842 Thank you for your attention to this matter. Facsimile (860) 487-1786 Vny truly y ` attorneys@kkc-law.com wwwkkc-lawcom rian R. Famigliet ' Enclosures cc: Bob Urso (w/encl) John Kucich, Bohler Engineering (w/encl) PERMITS/INSP PAYMENT RECPT#: 20407397 TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074 DATE: 05/10/10 TIME: 16:23 CLERK: mariadace DEPT: CUSTOMER#: 0 PARCEL: CHG: DEP DEP FEE 125.00 AMOUNT PAID: 125.00 PAID BY: PAYMENT METH: CHECK 89711 REFERENCE: A AMT TENDERED: 125.00 AMT APPLIED: 125.00 _ CHANGE: .00 FITZGERALD & HALLIDAY, INC. 72 Cedar Street, Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Tel.(860)247-7200 Fax(860)247-7206 MEMORANDUM Proposed McDonalds Development, To: Ms. Marcia Banach Project: John Fitch Boulevard, S.Windsor, CT From: Susan VanBenschoten,PE Date: June 8, 2010 Subject: Transportation Peer Review for Proposed McDonalds Restaurant; John Fitch Boulevard, South Windsor, CT This memorandum presents the results of a peer review of the traffic study, site plan, and access plans completed for the proposed McDonalds Restaurant on John Fitch Boulevard in South Windsor, CT. This review has been completed by Fitzgerald and Halliday, Inc. at the request of the Town of South Windsor to ensure that the subject de- velopment is designed in a manner to provide safe and efficient access and flow to and within the site and that all other transportation considerations have been taken into ac- count in the site's design and with any off-site improvements intended to mitigate project impacts. The following documents have been reviewed: • Site Traffic Evaluation Study for Proposed McDonald's Restaurant and Bank De- velopment; May 5, 2010; prepared by Bubaris Traffic Associates. • Site Plan, Sheet C-3 for Proposed McDonald's Restaurant; May 5, 2010; pre- pared by Bohler Engineering. Proposed Development 1049 John Fitch Boulevard, LLC proposed to develop a McDonald's Restaurant with a drive-thru window operation on the southern portion of the vacant parcel located at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of John Fitch Boulevard (Route 5) at Governors Highway in the Town of South Windsor, CT. The proposed restaurant development would include a 3,900 square foot building, a two-station drive-thru facility, and 79 park- ing spaces and would be situated with frontage on both Route 5 and Governors High- way. Access is proposed to be provided in three locations including: a right-in/right-out driveway on Route 5 (a shared driveway serving both the proposed restaurant and fu- ture bank development), a right-in/right out driveway on Governor's Highway approxi- mately 100 feet from the Route 5 intersection, and a full access driveway on Governor's Boulevard approximately 400 feet from the Route 5 intersection (also a shared driveway serving both the proposed restaurant and future bank development). ..................-......-..........................._.................._..---..........._............. ......... .................-...-............_......—-------..........------.....---.........__.........._...-..........._................_..........----........._......_...... Fitzgerald&Halliday, Inc. • Planning Consultants Page 1 _..--..._..._......._......_.....-.........--................_...........................---................._.—.._._. February 2009 _..............�.__......_..._..........---..__...................— —..........--- ._.................... _ _.._ry......__.. estimate the "real' parking demand for the establishment and consider removing excess parking (placing in reserve if needed at a later date). 3. Loading activity It is not clear where loading activity will take place on site. Please provide clarification on proposed loading location, anticipated frequency and times of deliveries, and truck size. Given the narrow circulation lanes and the one-way pattern proposed, loading ac- tivities will be a challenge to efficiently accommodate. Recommendations 1. Based on the results of the drive-thru queuing analysis, parking demand calcula- tion, and loading requirement, please adjust site design to best address the situa- tion. 2. Eliminate right-in/right-out driveway on Governor's Highway that is proposed 100 feet from the Route 5 intersection. This driveway does not appear necessary for site circulation and introduces unnecessary on-site conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians. This proposed driveway also has the potential to introduce safety concerns (rear ending)for vehicles making quick turn into driveway after travelling through intersection. The site circulation is already complex and poten- tially confusing for patrons and elimination of this driveway will simplify site ac- cess and circulation lessoning confusion and potential accidents. 3. With this driveway eliminated, there is the potential to use this space for addi- tional parking closer to the front door(it appears that about 6 spaces can be relo- cated to this corner). 4. Remove these 6 parking spaces from the parking bay closest to drive-thru (near . handicapped spaces) to account for any drive-thru queuing that has the potential to block these spaces. 5. Extend proposed sidewalk on north side of building to drive-thru lane with a tex- tured or raised crosswalk across drive-thru lane and walkway across island. 6. Provide sidewalk along west side of building for access by pedestrians from park- ing on southwest side of the site—this also requires a textured or raised cross- walk across the drive-thru lane prior to the pick up windows (note: it is not clear on the site plan what mechanical equipment will be behind the building and if such a sidewalk is feasible). 7. Ensure buses, trucks, and emergency response vehicles can maneuver all driveway curves. It appears that the "S"-curve shaped driveway on Route 5 will be challenging for larger vehicles and that shifting the driveway farther north could allow for a short tangent section of driveway between the two curves. Also, the proposed scoured concrete island should be slightly raised to prohibit tempt- ................—_......... .... .............................--....................._.._.—.......-...-.........__.......__._.._..__.......---......-............._..........._........._....I....._....... _...-- Fitzgerald&Halliday, Inc. • Planning Consultants Page 3 February 2009 -.....--...----....................._..—----..............._ . _.. Summary of Peer Review The traffic impact study and site design have been completed in a professional manner and the analysis methods are consistent with standard traffic engineering practices. FHI has reviewed the Site Traffic Evaluation Study and concurs that: • Trip generation and intersection operational impacts are minimal and that level of service at proposed driveways and the adjacent signalized intersection (Route 5 at Governor's Highway)will remain at high levels and not degrade as a result of the project. It is noted that the applicant took no pass-by credit in their trip gen- eration analysis when in fact a significant amount of traffic visiting these types of establishments tend to be traffic already on the adjacent roadway network. As a result, the trip generation estimates are conservative (higher than is likely). • The queuing analysis and presentation adequately demonstrates that the 95% queue will not exceed the available storage capacity on all approach lanes to the signalized intersection as well as driveways. • The review of accident history indicates no recurring pattern that indicates a safety deficiency in the current roadway design. However, there are a few remaining questions that were not addressed in the study and some recommendations that result from our review. These include: Questions 1. Drive-thru operations and queuing analysis The applicant does not explain how the drive-thru operation will function. Please de- scribe how the double stations will work. Will both be open at all times or will it depend on volume? What is the threshold for operating both stations and how will the man- agement ensure that enough staff is available to operate both stations? The purpose for questioning the drive-thru operation is to ensure that queuing at the drive-thru does not adversely impact safe and efficient site circulation and parking ma- neuvers. Please provide a queuing analysis for the drive- thru factoring in expected peak hour demands, arrival patterns, and average dwell time per patron. 2. Parking demand It is recommended that the applicant conduct a parking demand analysis and show the parking needs throughout the day taking into account the trip generation, average length of stay per patron, number of staff parking spaces required, and the reduction in parking demand associated with the drive-thru function. 79 spaces are proposed based on the Town's requirements, however the Town has a provision to provide less parking if it is illustrated that less parking is needed (South Windsor Zoning Regulations; Section 6.4.9 Modification of Minimum Required Parking Spaces). 79 spaces appears to be ex- cessive when considering that the maximum trip generation (Saturday midday) is 118 vehicles and a significant percentage of these vehicles will not park (drive-thru patrons) and that the average turnover for a parked customer is probably about Y2 hour. Please ..........--..._.........._......._....................---................_....__.......__...--.......................................................—._ --...................._..._............................._.........._.......................----._.._.._..—.......-...-...... _ Fitzgerald&Halliday, Inc. • Planning Consultants Page 2 ................................ ............................................................................................... ......................................................................... ..........................................—February 2009 .......... ............. ing through movements and wrong-way travel (to park close to the front door) but still allow large vehicles' wheels to mount island if necessary (truck apron con- cept). 8. Similarly, at the full access (rear) drive entrance to the McDonald's site, the pro- posed painted island may not be enough to discourage wrong-way travel along the north side of the building. Island could also be slightly raised (truck apron concept) to prohibit the through movement. The 12-foot lane around the corner should be widened to 15 feet. 9. One-way signage should be added at both entrance drives to inform patrons of counter clockwise site circulation. Conclusion Based on the review of the traffic study and the site plan, FHI concludes that the analy- sis of transportation operations and off-site impacts associated with the proposed McDonald's restaurant are minimal, however the proposed site design requires further evaluation and modification to ensure safe and efficient site access and circulation. FHI recommends that the applicant address the comments in this memorandum by providing additional data and analysis and modifying their design proposal accordingly. A coordination meeting between the Town and the applicant should then be held to re- view these recommendations and the applicant's response. ............... ......................................................................................................................................................................--------- .................. ...................... Fitzgerald&Halliday, Inc. e Planning Consultants Page 4 a Bubarisi :Traffic _ _-_.-- --- -___- James G.Qubaris.f E. A S S O C 'wl A T E S Principal Planning*Engineering*Design J _ April19, Q10- RECEIVED Mr. Kevin Campbell District Traffic Engineer APR 2 2 2010 ConnDOT District 1 Maintenance 1107 Cromwell Avenue SUN WINDSOR PLANNING DEPT. Rocky Hill, CT 06067 Re: Proposed McDonald's Restaurant Route 5(John Fitch Boulevard) at Governors Highway Town of South Windsor Dear Mr. Campbell: Reference is made to the meeting held at ConnDOT's Central Office in Newington on March 11, 2010 with you, Division of Traffic Engineering personnel, the developer, the developer's attorney, McDonald's representatives, the site engineer and myself to discuss the subject project. We received favorable reaction to the proposed development from ConnDOT staff with some comments for improvement of our proposed site plan. On March 26, 2010, we also met with the Town's Director of Planning and Town Engineer to also review the subject project and received favorable reaction from Town staff as well with some comments for improvement. Following these two meetings, we have responded to these comments by revising the proposed site plan, and have updated our traffic assessment. Enclosed for your review and approval are two.(2) copies each of the revised site plan and our updated traffic assessment incorporating the following comments: 1. The proposed limited right in and right out site drive on Route 5, which will also serve as an inbound only to subsequent development north of the subject parcel, now has a deceleration lane which has been configured to restrict its adverse impact on the existing culvert in this area. 2. The proposed site drive on Governors Highway closest to Route 5 will now be a right in and right out only drive as well, and the outbound right has been configured to essentially prevent anyone from making an illegal left out of this drive. 75 Brookside Place*Cheshire, CT 06410 *Telephone: 203-272-0400*Fax: 203-272-5655 sjim@BubarisTrafhc.com. 2 The remainder of the proposed site plan remains as previously presented to you and the Town as described in the "Introduction" portion of the enclosed Site Traffic Assessment. We have forwarded one copy of the revised site plan and traffic assessment to the Division of Traffic Engineering and to the Town's Director of Planning for their review and approval as well. Please let me know at your earliest convenience if you have any questions or if you require additional information regarding this matter. Very truly.yours, Bubaris Traffic Associates James G. Bubaris, P.E. Principal Cc: Ms. Tracy Fogarty Division of Traffic Engineering Connecticut Department of Transportation 2800.Berlin Turnpike Newington, CT 06131-7464 Ms. Marcia Bannach Director of Planning Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Bu bads: :l�raff i C_-_s _w_ .._ .._ _..___._ _.� _-_Je mesG BubarlS,RE. A S S 0 C l A T E. S Principal Planning*Enginee.r.ingsDes►,gn April 1.9,20:10 Mr. Kevin Campbell District Traffic Engineer ConnDOT District 1 Maintenance 1107 Cromwell Avenue Rocky Hill, CT 06067 Re: Proposed McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 (John Fitch Boulevard) at Governors Highway Town of South Windsor Dear Mr. Campbell: Reference is made to the meeting held at ConnDOT's Central Office in . Newington on March 11,.2010.with you,:Division of Traffic Engineering personnel,the developer,the:developer's attorney, McDonald's representatives, the.site engineer and myself to discuss the subject project.We received. favorable reaction to the proposed development from.ConnDOT staff with some -comments for improvement of our proposed site plan: On March W, 2010, we also metwith the Town's Director of Planning and Town Engineer to also review the subject project and received.favorable reaction from Town-staff as well with some.comments for improvement. Following these two,meetings,.we have responded to these comments by revising the proposed site plan, and have updated our traffic assessment. Enclosed for your review.and approval are two (2) copies each of the revised site plan and our updated traffic assessment incorporating the following comments: 1. .The proposed limited right in and right out site drive on Route 5,which,will also serve as an inbound only to subsequent development north of the subject parcel, now has a deceleration lane which has been configured to restrict its adverse impact on the existing culvert in this area. 2. The proposed site drive on Governors Highway closest to Route 5 will now be a right in and'right out only drive as well,.and the outbound right has been configured to essentially prevent.anyone from making an.illegal Left out of this drive. 75 Brookside Place.Cheshire, CT 06410 *Telephone: 203-272-0400 Fax: 203-272-5655 *jim@BubarisTraffic.com9 2 The remainder of the proposed site:plan remains as previously presented to you and the Town as described inthe"Introduction".portion of the enclosed Site Traffic Assessment. We have forwarded one copy of the revised site plan and traffic assessment to the Division of Traffic Engineering and to the Town's Director of Planning for their review and approval as well. Please let me know at your earliest convenience if you have any questions or if you require additional information regarding this matter, Very truly.yours, Bubaris Traffic Associates r James G. Bubaris, P.E. Principal' Cc: Ms. Tracy Fogarty Division of Traffic.Engineering Connecticut Department of Transportation 2600.Berlin Turnpike Newington, CT 06131-7464 Ms. Marcia Bannach Director of Planning Town of South Windsor 15.40 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Bri Raff __ _ _ .. _ m __, _ --- _ - -----.lamesGwB u bariS,R E. A S S O C '41 A T E S Principal Planning*Engineerin.g*Design . April 26,2010 Mr. Andy Morrill - Permits Section` ConnDOT District 1 Maintenance 1107 Cromwell Avenue Rocky Hill, CT 06067 Re:. Proposed McDonald's Restaurant Route S (John Fitch Boulevard) at Governors Highway Town of South Windsor Dear Mr. Morrill: Enclosed are four(4) copies of the drainage plan for the subject project as requested. Please let me know at your earliest convenience if you have any questions or if you require additional information regarding this matter. _ Very truly yours, Bubaris Traffic Associates James G. Bubaris, P.E. Principal Cc: Mr. John A. Kucich, P.E. Bohlen Engineering 352 Turnpike Road Southborough, MA 01772 75 Brookside Place 9 Cheshire, CT 06410*Telephone: 203-272-0400•Fax: 203-272-5655 sjim@BubarisTraffc.coma FITZGERALD & HALLIDAY, INC. I72 Cedar Street, Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Tel. (860)247-7200 Fax(860)247-7206 June 7, 2010 ► Ms. Marcia Banach ?�1� Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Peer Review of Traffic Study for Proposed McDonalds Development FHI Project No. 1000.01 Dear Ms. Banach: am enclosing herewith two (2) originals of the agreement between the Town of South Windsor and Fitzgerald & Halliday, Inc. with respect to the referenced project, which originals have been executed on behalf of FHI. Please arrange for the enclosed to be executed on behalf of the Town of South Windsor, returning one (1)fully executed original to my attention for our files. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions concerning the enclosed. I know that Ms.VanBenschoten and the FHI team are looking forward to the project. Very truly yours, { Kelley Kell Contracts inist /KK enc. cc: S. VanBenschoten (w/enc.) Planning Consultants MEMORANDUM To: Marcia Banach Director of Planning From: Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E.,Town Engineer Bobb Grillo, P.E., Project Engineer Date: 5/28/10 RE: App 10-29P MacDonald's Site Plan Comments We have reviewed the site plan for the proposed:MacDonald's restaurant at1049 John Fitch Boulevard and I have the following comments: 1. All the drainage water from the site is proposed to flow to underground retention systems or sheet flow off site. The Stormwater Drainage Report states that all the proposed off-site flows will be Tess than the pre-development flows. 2. The two proposed underground retention systems consist of Stormtech Chambers Systems with Stormtech Isolator Rows. The Stormwater Drainage Report states that these systems are capable of handling the 2 year through 100 year storms with significant off-.site flow reductions from the pre-development flows. The flow reductions are possible because the 2 percolation tests show that the site soils are fast draining with a rates of less than 2 min/in. which equals 30 in/hr. The calculations for the capacities of the retention systems used a conservative 12 in./hr. 3. The retention system components are described in the detail drawings but the quantities of the components, the dimensions of the systems and the system installations are not sufficiently described for a contractor's use. Detail drawings need to be provided.for each retention system. These details should describe the manifold pipe, the fitting from the manifold to each system row, the number of isolator rows, the number of chamber rows, the number of chamber units in each row, the flow path from the manhole to the isolator to the chambers so that the chambers are not contaminated with sediments, the inspection port locations and the overall system dimensions. 4. The plans need to state that site grading over the retention systems allow for'HS20 vehicle loadings in accordance with Stormtech requirements. Spot surface elevations need to be shown at the corners and center of the retention systems. The contractor installing the retention systems and the Town must have Stormtech's installation instructions before any site work starts. 5. _Only3 catch basins are utilized for the site. to addition to the pipe sizing calculations, calculations need to be provided for the capacity of the catch basin grates. 6. There is a low area at the comer of the western driveway. How will water that ponds here be collected or drain? 1 a 7. The high point in Governor's Highway near the eastern site driveway is about 320' from the end of the western driveway. About 90' of the western driveway drains to Governor's Highway. There is no drainage system in Governor's Highway and the wester retention system does not appear low enough to connect to a catch basin at the western driveway. Determine if the wester retention system could be lowered or if a separate retention system could be installed for a catch basin in Governor's Highway. The Stormwater Drainage Report does state that the flow to Governor's Highway will be substantially reduced after development. 8. The site driveway locations, configuration and building/parking layout make for poor circulation with numerous conflict points between vehicles coming and going different directions. Vehicles traveling north and east will,have to go around the building twice to use the drive-through window and exit the site. Vehicles traveling south and west will have to go entirely around the building once to use the drive-through and exit at the same driveway they entered. The circulation needs to be improved by reconfiguring the driveways and/or moving the building to the west. This site should be designed to be fully accessible with two driveways and good circulation., 9. 1 think the right turn`only in and out from the eastern driveway to Governors Highway will be difficult to maintain and enforce. This will lead to other conflicts on site and in Governors Highway. This driveway should be eliminated or moved west so it can be used in and out for vehicles traveling either way on Governors Highway. 10.The site is not pedestrian friendly. Pedestrians will have to cross the parking lot from almost all the parking spaces to the building. What is the purpose of the crosswalk from the eastern parking spaces to the building? There need to be sidewalks across the east side of the landscape island in front of the building and from the north side of the building to the parking spaces to the east or front of the building. 11.There should be sidewalks to the bus shelter, governors highway and intersection of John Fitch Blvd and Governors Hwy for pedestrians who may want to enter the site. 12.The sidewalk on the south side of the site needs to be 5-6 feet wide to provide enough room for pedestrians and allow for the overhang of the front of parked cars. 13.1 did not see a detail for the proposed scoured concrete island at the entrance from John Fitch Boulevard. 14.WPCA review and approval is needed for this plan. Please let me know if there are any questions. 2 t Banach, Marcia From: Banach, Marcia Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2010 11:39 AM To: 'Famiglietti, Dory' Subject: RE: McDonalds Dory, We can absolutely meet before your client does plan revisions. Let's both check availability of our people&set up a time, ok? I'll be out this afternoon but in the rest of the week. Marcia A banach,AICP,Director of Planning Town of South Windsor 1 5+0 jullivan Avenue, South Windsor,CT o6074 s 60-644-25 i i ext 25 5 marcia.banachO_southwindsor.org From: Famiglietti, Dory [mailto:DFamiglietti@kkc-law.com] Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 4:39 PM To: Banach, Marcia Subject: RE: McDonalds Marcia, I've reviewed the draft report. I think we'd like to meet with you and your traffic engineer before we make any plan revisions. Also, it may be easier to answer and discuss some of the questions your engineer asked at that meeting, in person. Would you agree to meet with us before we submit revised plans? Very truly yours, Dorian R. Famiglietti Kahan Kerensky&Capossela, LLP 45 Hartford Turnpike PO Box 45 Vernon, CT 06066 860-646-1974 phone 860-647-8302 fax STATEMENT OF_CONFID.E..NTIALITY If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail at the address shown. This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s)or entity to which it is intended even if addressed incorrectly. Please delete it from your files if you are not the intended recipient. Thank you for your compliance. From: Banach, Marcia [mailto:Marcia.Banach@southwindsor.org] � Sent: Monday,June 14, 2010 1:44 PM To: Famiglietti, Dory Cc: Doolittle, Jeffrey Subject: McDonalds Hi Dorrie, I have received a draft of the peer-review traffic memo fro Susan VanBenschoten. It is not finalized yet, and there may be more forthcoming depending on further information submitted by McDonalds in response to Susan's questions; but we did 6/16/2010 want to get it into your hands ASAP. The draft is attached. We can indeed meet as a group, including your traffic engineer and ours, if you would like to. Let me know once you and your team have reviewed the draft.As always, feel free to call. Marcia A 5anach,AICP,Director of Planning Town of joutk Windsor 1 540 `jullivan Avenue,jouth Windsor,CT o6074 860-644-25 1 1 ext 255 marcia.banach a southwindsor.org 6/16/2010 0,kl&� STATE OF CONNECTICUT �04 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT I ; t 1107 Cromwell Avenue may.CW -fit Rocky Hill, Connecticut 06067 Phone: RECEIVED 0111 ''Z 3 2010 SOUTH WINDSOR PLMNINO DEPT. July 20, 2010 Bubaris Traffic Associates 75 Brookside Place Cheshire, .CT 06410 Attn: Mr. James G. Bubaris, P. E. Dear Mr. Bubaris: Subject: Proposed McDonald Restaurant Route 5 (John Fitch Boulevard) South Windsor, CT The Department has completed its review of the plans entitled, "McDonalds" sheet C-3 dated 2-12-10 (received on 4-21-10) and sheet C- 4 dated 5-5-10 (received on 5-10-10). Please address the following comments: 1. A review of the plan showed that WB-50 type vehicles cannot access the site from any of the driveways under the proposed configurations. SU-30 type vehicles can access the site from the Governor's Highway driveways without encroachment of the drive or Governor's Highway centerlines. The Route 5 driveway similarly accommodates SU-30 type vehicles; however, the raised island at the internal intersection restricts these movements and adjustments should be made. The largest type of delivery vehicle expected at the site should be indicated along with the internal on-site route these vehicles will travel. Any changes to the access drives on Route 5 and Governor's Highway to accommodate these vehicles should also be reflected on re-submitted plans. 2. The appropriate regulatory signs with the Department's Sign Catalog Number should be shown for each driveway (i.e. Stop, Do Not Enter, Keep Right, No Left-Turn, etc.) in accordance with the 2009 Edition of the MUTCD. An Equal Opportunity Employer .@ Printed on recycled or recovered paper - - Mr. James G. Bubaris, P. E. Page 2 July 20, 2010 3. Intersectional sight distances from the proposed site drive on Governor's Highway should be shown on the plans to scale. The owner of the property should enter into an agreement with any adjacent property owner where the sightline from the site drive encroaches to ensure maintenance of the sightlines. The right- of-way along the west side of Route 5 is so wide that the sightline to the left from the Route 5 drive does not need to be shown on the plans. 4. Due to the internal circulation created by the drive-thru and the right-turn out only drive on Governor's Highway, it is recommended that guide signs for Route 5 northbound and southbound be installed within the site. See the attached sketch for recommended sign legends and approximate Locations. 5. The report indicated that the accident data from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2007 was reviewed. The latest available accident data is now January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2008. 6. The existing R-B End Anchorage Type 1 affected by the widening along Route 5 in the vicinity of the new proposed site drive needs to'be re-established. This must be addressed and shown on the revised plan. Please revise and submit four sets of plans, 40-scale or larger, addressing the above-noted comments. Should you have any questions, Mr. Andrew S. Morrill, District Services Agent is available to discuss them with you. He may be reached at (860) 258-4540. Very truly yours, r�- Ronald P. Cormier Transportation Maintenance Director Bureau of Highway Operations cc: Town Planning and Zoning �/ 4 -�...�� . ..... Igo 1Y"C1t61 rp $` LI l L.+-1..i t-_�Cu I t '�:f k�� � l _ 7.3 'F •� T -E.�: _ _f_-grp rm o u � h u , M. Y atr �. �. fit:. '„`*w 'py, rK44 .h '+ h a v t p„, a°a 45�,C;,� }�' v r .� i u �. •"?a', � N ''wrf t ..& 2"r xi rtI �a+�.`1 tr "� S'^•g ' 4 w. ..� All Ni ,Al�gdanr. �'..t^ TOT rtrI RWE PLANNING DEPARMENT IN-HOUSE REFERRAL FORM DATE: 5/12/10 TO: Matt Galligan, Fred Shaw, Michael Gantick, Rich Bond, Walter Summers,Jeff Doolittle Ray Favreau, Karl Reichle, Mark Owens, Steve Lavigueur, Chris Dougan, Bob DeVito John Caldwell, Dennis Sheridan, Ron Asselin FROM: Marcia A. Banach, AICP, Director of Planning The Planning&Engineering Departments have received plans for the following projects: Appl 10-29P, McDonalds Restaurant Site Plan Location: 1049 John Fitch Boulevard(northwesterly corner Rte 5/Governor's Highway) Z Site Plan ❑'Subdivision No. Acres 4.3 Zone RC El Industrial ❑ Commercial ❑ Residential No. Lots/Units Water. ® Public ❑ Private Well Sewerage: ® Public ❑ Septic System Project Description: 3,886 sf restaurant Future Town-owned property involved? ❑ Yes Z No new street(s) ❑ new detention area ❑ new open space/recreation area ❑ active ❑passive Planning Department notes: Please comment by 5/25/10 and return to the Planning Department. t� a v O\qN Se 0 S-0� V&U&iot 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE• SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074 SOR-CO TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511 CERTIFIED MAIL 7008 1300 0001 4578 3122 May 20, 2010 Kahan, Kerensky 8s`Capossela LLP Dorian R. Famiglietti 45 Hartford Tnpk Vernon CT 06066 Dear Ms. Famiglietti: Re: Appl # 10-29P, McDonald's Site Plan Please be advised that the Regular Meeting of the Planning 8v Zoning Commission in the above referenced matter has been scheduled for Tuesday, June 8, 2010 at 7:30 in the Madden Room of the South Windsor Town Hall, 1540 Sullivan Avenue. Someone must be present at the hearing to represent the application. One sign advertising the hearing must be posted on the property for ten (10) consecutive days prior to the hearing and must be clearly visible from a town street. A sign must be posted on 1049 John Fitch Blvd by Friday May 28, 2010. Signs can be obtained in the Planning Department. Sincerely, Maria D. Acevedo Administrative Secretary t South Planning Department Memo To: Dorian Famigletti, Esq From: Michele Lipe, Assistant Director of Planning Date: 5/19/10 Re: #10-29P, McDonalds Site Plan fire Marshal comments just received the following comment from Walter Summers, the town's Fire'Marshal: A new fire hydrant will be required. The hydrant shall be located on the north side of the Route 5 driveway entrance to the site. 1540 Sullivan Avenue,South Windsor,CT 06074 PH 860-644-2511,ext.252 fax 860-644-7280 e-mail Michele.lipe@southWndsor.org 0 Page 1 Southa o Planning Department e o To: Dorian Famigletti, Esq From: Michele Lipe, Assistant Director of Planning Dater 5/14/10 Re: #10-29P, McDonalds Site Plan Following are review comments from the Planning Department. Please make appropriate revisions and submit seven complete sets (including landscaping and architectural elevations)to the Planning Department at least 10 days prior to the scheduled meeting. If you have any questions, please call. 1. It appears that the lighting levels proposed at the southern property line exceed what the regulations allow-Section 6.3.3.A.3 states"Lighting shall not shed more than 25 foot-candle over a property line." Also, the lighting proposal should be revised to eliminate the "hot" spots and provide for more even distribution of light across the parking areas. 2. How does the proposal meet Section 4.1.7 Design Requirements—RC zone A. Design Requirements 2. All buildings must conform to the provisions of Section 8.7 Architectural and Design Review. Applicants must avoid submitting stereotypical franchise type buildings unless the building truly demonstrates architectural excellence. 3. How is the interior landscaping requirement being met? The regulations require 10% interior landscaping or 1 tree for each 10 spaces. The plans indicate 13.5% interior landscaping however only 4 shade trees are proposed in this number. (See Table 6.4.6.A) 4. Is there a free standing sign proposed? 1540 Sullivan Avenue,South Windsor,CT 06074 PH 860-644-2511,ext.252 Fax 860-644-7280 e-mail Michele.lipe@southWndsor.org 0 Page 1 Page 1 of 1 Lipe, Michele From: Summers, Walter Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 8:26 AM To: Acevedo, Maria Cc: Lipe, Michele Subject: RE: RE: App. 10-29P McDonalds Site Plan Maria, We will require the installation of a new fire'hydrant. The hydrant shall be located on the north side of the route 5 entrance driveway to the site. Thanks Walter Summers Fire Marshal Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Ave, South Windsor, CT. 06074 Phone: 860-644-2511 Ext 217 Fax. 860-644-7280 waiter.summers@southwindsor.org Please note that messages to or from the Town of South Windsor may be subject to Freedom of Information statutes and regulations. From: Acevedo, Maria Sent:Thursday, May 13, 2010 4:09 PM To: Agt Chris Duchesne; Asselin, Ronald; Caldwell, John; Devito, Robert; Doolittle, Jeffrey; Dougan, Christopher; Favreau, Raymond; Galligan, Matthew; Gantick, Michael; Lavigueur, Stephan; Owens, Mark; Reichle, Karl; Shaw, Fred; Summers, Walter Subject: RE: App. 10-29P McDonalds Site Plan Good Afternoon, Please review the attached application and forward any comments to add to the file. Thank you. Maria Acevedo Town of South Windsor Planning e&Zoning Administrative Secretary 5/19/2010 June 15, 2010 Kahan Kerensh & Caposse a LLP s Marcia Banach, Stephen M.Bacon Director of Planning Michael A.Bars South Windsor Planning &Zoning Commission Christopher T.Bowen 1540 Sullivan Ave. William E.Breslau South Windsor, CT 06074 Joseph E Capossela WilliamJ.Dakin Re; Site Plan Approval—1049 John Fitch Boulevard— Proposed Dorian Reiser Famiglietti McDonald's Restaurant Solomon Kerensky Michael J.Kopsick Dear Marcia: Douglas K.Manion Justin L.Murphy Please take this letter as the applicant's withdrawal of the above referenced Stephen F.Sutton Antoinette M.Webster application that is currently pending before the South Windsor Planning and Matthew E.Willis Zoning Commission. Unfortunately, McDonald's has decided against relocation Jeffrey M.Wtnnick* to the subject property. Of Counsel Thank you for all of your assistance on this project. Oliver S.Chappell Robert E Kahan Very truly your (1922-1996) *also admitted in MA 45 Hartford Turnpike Dorian R. Famiglietti P.O.Box 3811 Vernon,CT 06066-2181 cc: Bob Urso Telephone John Kucich (860) 646-1974 Facsimile (860) 647-8302 22 Professional Park Road Mansfield Professional Park P.O.Box 465 Storrs,CT 06268 Telephone (860) 487-1842 Facsimile: (860) 487-1786 attorneys@kkc-lawcom www.kkc-lawcom r S TOR MWATER DRAI NAGE REPORT r , 1 FOR 1 PROPOSED "McDonalds 99 RESTA IIRANT 1 ' RECEIVED ' MAY -I n `010 SOUTH WINDSWLANN18GDEPT. ' ASSESSOR°S" 71,LOT 21 1049 John Fitch Boulevard ' Town of south Windsor, Connecticut Har lord County ' Prepared by: BOHLER ENGINEERING ' 352 Turnpike Road Southborough,MA 01772 Tel:(508)480-9900 Fax:(508)480-9080 John A. Kucich, P.E. ' Connecticut P.E. License#26177 May 05,2010 BEPC#W082007 IBOHLER ENGINE E RING I t TABLE OF CONTENTS ' I. INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................I II. DRAINAGE-EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS......................................................................1-2 III. DRAINAGE-PROPOSED SITE CONDITIONS....................................................................2-3 ' IV. DRAINAGE ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY............................................................................3 ' V. DRAINAGE ANALYSIS RESULTS.......................................................................................3-4 VI. CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................................4 APPENDIXA USES Map........................................................................................................................ ' APPENDIX B NRCS Soils Map and Soil Data........................................................................................ ' APPENDIX C Pre- and Post-Development Watershed Maps................................................................... APPENDIX D Stormwater Attenuation Calculations and Rainfall Data.................................................. ' APPENDIX E Water Quality and Recharge Calculations......................................................................... ' APPENDIX F Long Term Operation and Maintenance Plan.................................................................... APPENDIXG Pipe Sizing Calculations.................................................................................................... APPENDIXH Stormtech Isolator Row Data............................................................................................ IAPPENDIX I Geotechnical Report&Permeability Test Results............................................................ I I I.INTRODUCTION ' The following report provides an analysis of the stormwater drainage conditions that will result from the construction of a McDonald's restaurant. The subject site is located at the northeast ' corner of the signalized intersection of John Fitch Boulevard (US Route 5) and Governor's Highway and is comprised of land totaling 183,426 square feet(or 4.21 acres)which is identified by the South Windsor Assessor's Office as Map 71,Lot 21. ' The property is bound to the southwest by Governor's Highway (a two-way, two-lane right of way), to the southeast by John Fitch Boulevard (a two-way divided highway, four-lane right of way under State jurisdiction) and to the north and east by industrial zoned land. The site is located in the flood hazard Zone X(area of minimal flooding)per FEMA mapping. ' This report includes an analysis of the existing and proposed drainage characteristics of the site including building, parking and landscaped areas and provides a detailed analysis of the proposed stormwater infiltration facilities and best management practices (BMPs) that will control stormwater outflow associated with the post-developed site that will serve to reduce the rate of runoff&volume leaving the subject site. This report addresses a comparative analysis of the pre and post development site stormwater ' runoff conditions with the following primary design constraints being: 1. Meeting the standards of the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection ' Agency's 2004 Stormwater Quality Manual, 2. Meeting the Standards of the Environmental Protection Agencies Phase II National ' Pollution Discharge Elimination Sytems(NPDES)regulations, 3. Meeting the regulations set forth by the Town of South Windsor Engineering ' Department. ' H.DRAINAGE—EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS The existing site does not contain any stormwater management structures and can be broken up into three drainage areas (E-1, E-2 & E-3) which flow uncontrolled to their respective ' design points(DPE1,DPE2 AND DPE3). Drainage area E-1 contains 20,193 square feet of land (15,903 sf of impervious areas and ' 4,290 of landscaped area)that sheet flows to the Governor's Highway Right of Way. Drainage area E-2 contains 177, 256 square feet of land (10,681 sf of impervious areas, ' 106,357 sf of pasture in type A soils, 27,945 sf of pasture in type B soils and 32,273 of wooded area)that sheet flows across the site and ultimately into Stoughton's Brook. ' Drainage area E-3 contains 19,456 square feet of land (3,156 sf of impervious areas and 16,300 sf of landscaped area)that sheet flows to the John Fitch Boulevard Right of Way. These drainage areas are shown on "Existing Drain Map" included within the Appendices of ' this report. Based on previous soil investigations conducted by Terracon Consultants, Inc. on December I31, 2009 and test pits completed by Bohler Engineering on 3/25/2010, the on-site soils consist of naturally occurring sands and loamy sands. The soil investigations also indicated 1 that observed groundwater was encountered at depths ranging between 6.67 ft and 7ft below ' finished grade. According to Natural Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) Mapping, the soils within the site can be classified as.hydrologic group "A"soils for a majority of the site and hydrologic group `B" for a small pocket in the middle of the site. These results are ' consistent with the soil investigations conducted by Terracon and Bohler Engineering, Based NRCS permeability rates for Windsor soils, an infiltration rate ranging between 6.0 in/hr to >20 in/hr can be expected. Based on the percolation tests conducted by Bohler Engineering the soils had infiltration rates of 36 in/hr. To be conservative and add a factor of safety, the design used a rate of 12 in/hr(See Soil information within the appendences of this report). ' III.DRAINAGE-PROPOSED SITE CONDITIONS The post-development conditions include a 3,886 square foot McDonalds' Restaurant along ' with associated site improvements which include stormwater management facilities, utility improvements, parking areas, landscaping, lighting, and associated improvements as illustrated on the Proposed Site Plans prepared by Bohler Engineering dated 05105110. ' The goals of the stormwater management system design were to maintain existing site drainage patterns, mitigate peak post development flows &volumes, and protect the water ' quality of the receiving water bodies while recharging as much area as possible. The drainage improvements include routing stormwater from the subject site into two proposed drainage infiltration systems. Prior to infiltration, parking lot stormwater is routed through ' hooded, deep sump catch basins to mitigate oil and floatables and Isolator row(s) with the underground infiltration system that remove suspended solids. The remainder of the developed sight areas will be discharged into grassed areas before ultimately flowing to their ' respective design points. The proposed site drainage system has also been designed to maintain the existing drainage patterns and reduce runoff and volume to off-site properties. ' Additionally, water quality treatment for the developed site will meet or exceed the State's standards by the use of Best Management Practices (BMP's)including street sweeping, deep sump catch basins, a Isolator row combined with an underground infiltration system. These treatments will remove at least 80%of all total suspended solids(TSS)from the parking lot. ' The proposed site can be broken up into 5 drainage areas (P-1, P-2, P-2A,P-2B, P-2C &P-3) which flow to their respective design points (DPP1, DPP2 AND DPP3)or are infiltrated into ' the ground. Drainage area "P-1" consists of runoff area from the area between the developed site and ' Governor's Highway. It is comprised of 10,323 square feet of land (3,452 sf of impervious area and 6,871 sf of landscaped area). ' Drainage area "P-2" which is the majority of the site. The drainage area is comprised of 133,878 square feet of land (5,120 sf of impervious area, 56,318 sf of pasture in "A" soils, 27,945 sf of pasture in`B" soils, 32,273 sf of wooded area and 5,120 sf of landscaped area). ' This drainage area flows across the pasture into Stoughton's Brook. Drainage area "P-2A", which is the developed area north of the building, is comprised of 26,882 square feet of land (21,772 sf of impervious area and 5,110 sf of landscaped area). IAll runoff for the 2, 10, 25 and 100 year storms are infiltrated and mitigated through an underground infiltration system. I Drainage area "P-213", which is the developed area south of the building, is comprised of 28,811 square feet of land (19,084 sf of impervious area and 9,727 sf of landscaped area). 2 I All runoff for the 2, 10, 25 and 100 year storms are infiltrated and mitigated through an underground infiltration system. Drainage area "P-2C", which is the roof area, is comprised of 3,886 square feet of land. All ' runoff for the 2, 10, 25 and 100 year storms are infiltrated and mitigated through an underground infiltration system. ' Drainage area P-3 contains 11,904 square feet of land(2,548 sf of impervious areas and 9,356 sf of landscaped area)that sheet flows to the John Fitch Boulevard Right of Way. ' These drainage areas are shown on"Proposed Drainmap" included within the Appendices of this report. ' IV.DRAINAGE ANALYSIS METHODOLGY The methodology utilized to design the subject stormwater management system to ' demonstrate compliance with the Town of South Windsor, State and Federal requirements/guidelines is based on the SCS TR 55 Urban Hydrology for small watersheds method. In addition, times of concentration were generated from the SCS TR 55 Urban ' Hydrology for small watersheds method. Runoff coefficients for the existing and post- development conditions were developed using widely accepted runoff coefficients. Infiltration rates were based on the field measurements during soil investigations. Compliance with the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection's Stormwater Quality Manual and the Town of South Windsor Requirements for Stormwater Drainage is ' the primary goal of the drainage system design. The rainfall rates used were based the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection's Stormwater Quality Manual Table 7-2 Design rainfall amounts by County. V.DRAINAGE ANALYSIS RESULTS ' The result of the proposed stormwater management system indicates that the peak rates of runoff to the existing and proposed design points as shown in the tables below will be decreased. The tables demonstrate that there will be a decrease in post-development runoff ' rates and volumes associated with all storm events including the 2-year, 10-year,25-year and 100-year storms. This is the result of the proposed drainage system routing runoff through a series of BMP's including an Isolator,and an underground infiltration system. Table 1-Stormwater Runoff Rate—Design Point#1 Governors Highway Storin Existhia Flow Proposed Flow ,. Chanoe 2 year 1.06 0.05 -1.01 -95 ' 10 year 1.76 0.25 -1.51 -86 25 year 2.14 0.38 -1.76 -82 100 year 2.79 0.64 -2.15 -77 I 3 I Table 1A-Stormwater Volume-Design Point#1 Governors Hi hwa Storm Exist. Volume Prop. Volume Chan-e Chanoe 2 year 0.077 0.007 -0.07 -91 ' 10 year 0.131 0.021 -0.11 -84 25 year 0.160 0.030 -0.130 -81 100 year 0.212 0.048 -0.164 -77 ' Table 2-Stormwater Runoff Rate-Desi n Point#2 Offsite Stream Storm Existing Flow Proposed Flow Chanoe Change ' 2 year 0.17 0.06 -0.11 -65 10 year 1.46 0.77 -0.69 -47 25 year 2.62 1.45 -1.17 -45 ' 100 year 5.15 2.99 -2.16 -42 Table 2A-Stormwater Volume-Deslp7n Point#2 Offsite Stream Storm Exist.Volume Prop. Volume Change Change Frequency (At) (At) (At) (%) 2 year 0.059 0.033 -0.026 -44 ' 10 year 0.229 0.147 -0.082 -36 25 year 0.351 0.232 -0.119 -34 100 year 0.606 0.413 -0.193 -32 ' Table 3-Stormwater Runoff Rate-Desi n Point#3 John Fitch Blvd Storm Existing Flow Proposed Flow Change Change 2 year 0.07 0.01 -0.06 -86 10 year 0.40 0.14 -0.26 .65 ' 25 year 0.63 0.26 -0.37 -59 100 year 1.10 0.51 -0.59 -54 ' Table 3A-Stormwater Volume-Design Point#3 John Fitch Blvd ChangeStorm Exist. Volume Prop. Volume Change 2 year 0.012 0.004 -0.08 -67 ' 10 year 0.035 0.015 -0.020 -57 25 year 0.051 0.024 -0.027 -53 ' 100 year 0.084 0.041 -0.043 -52 ' VI. CONCLUSIONS In conclusion, the proposed stormwater management system illustrated on the enclosed drawings prepared by Bohler Engineering results in a decrease in post-development peak ' stormwater runoff rates and volumes from the site. In addition, the proposed best management practices will exceed 80%TSS removal, groundwater recharge will be provided. As a result, the project meets the requirements of the Connecticut Department of ' Environmental Protection's Stormwater Quality Manual and the Town of South Windsor Requirements for Stormwater Drainage. ' 4 I �� Windsor Soils: Very deep,excessively drained soils formed in sandy glacial outwash. Windsor soils are on glacial outwash plains,deltas,and on the tops of glacial stream terraces. Taxonomic Classification: Mixed, mesic, Typic Udipsamments. Drainage Class: Excessively drained. ' Parent Material: Sandy glacial fluvial deposits. er=rnea �l : R,ap'd or,ve rapid t; =ou hoot Available Water Holding Capacity: Low. Soil Reaction: Very strongly to moderately acid in the solum and very strongly to slightly acid in the substratum. Depth to Bedrock: Greater than 65 inches. ' Seasonal High Watertable: Depth: greater than 5 feet. Type: apparent. Months: ' Hydrologic Group: A. j Hydric Soil: No. Floodin /Ponding Potential: Frequency and Type: None. ' Potential Inclusions: Plymouth, Merrimac, Hinckley and Carver soils are similar inclusions. . Moderately well drained Deerfield and Sudbury soils are on lower elevations. 1 Permeability: ' Soil permeability is the quality of the soil that enables water or air to move through it. Accepted, as a measure of this quality is the rate at which a saturated soil transmits water. ' That rate is the "saturated hydraulic conductivity" of soil physics. In line with conventional usage in the engineering profession and traditional usage in published soil surveys, this rate of flow, principally downward, continues to be expressed as "permeability". It is expressed in inches per hour. Permeability class I in/hr ' very slow------- --- --- <0.06-- -- - - F ' Slow 0.06 - 0.20 moderately slow 0.2 - 0.60 moderate 0.6 - 2.0 moderately rapid 2.0 - 6.0 --------------- ! tI V R V w P �p ;o�.q���•q.Sr{�d�' J � +y'§i r` �7(d r�J �` �' '��� � '4,,,�•'T� �� ��A4VIF', ff� li a � 4 14 iip -14 bill il�� Me SITE. 40 *4All all mom t i 1 AREA MAP SCALE: 1 " = 1000' ' (REFERENCE: USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP) I I APPENDIXB ' NRCS Soils Map and Soil Data ', ti f: ti fi fi fi 1• fi � � ti fi fi ti ti fi � ! ti Soil Map—State of Connecticut (SOUTH WINDSOR SOILS) rN N r r N n M720 698760 698800 698840 698880 698920 698960 699000 699040 699080 41"59S' p 41"595" 0 N O Q o N Q M m Q tp0 � O Q m Pl Q m Q N Q N Pl Q N °U9ht°n f1to v � c m Q v p o p o Q O P ? 5 N O Q 41"49 56" 41"49'W' 698720 698 60 698800 698840 698880 698920 698960 699000 699040 699080 N Map Scale:1:2,010 if printed on A size(8.6"x 11")sheet. � m N Meters 0 25 50 100 150 Feet 14 0 100 200 400 600 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 3/15/2010 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of 3 i• i ti ti i i ti i i i i i 1� ! i � � i � Soil Map-State of Connecticut (SOUTH WINDSOR SOILS) MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest(AOQ Very Stony Spot Map Scale:1:2,010 if printed on A size(8.5"x 11")sheet. Area of Interest(AOI) wet Spot The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:12,000. Soils j Other Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for accurate map Soil Map Units measurements. Special Line Features Special Point Features nl. Gully Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service U Blowout Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov Borrow Pit •.• Short Steep Slope Coordinate System: UTM Zone 18N NAD83 ® Clay Spot other This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of Political Features the version date(s)listed below. } Closed Depression # Cities Soil Survey Area: State of Connecticut Gravel Pit Water Features Survey Area Data: Version 7,Dec 3,2009 Gravelly Spot Oceans Date(s)aerial images were photographed: Data not available. Landfill Streams and Canals The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were A. Lava Flow Transportation compiled and digitized probably differs from the background 4— Rails imagery displayed on these maps.As a result,some minor shifting ,1 Marsh or swamp of map unit boundaries may be evident. R Mine or Quarry Interstate Highways p Miscellaneous Water *r US Routes @. Perennial Water = Major Roads yr Rock Outcrop ::Y Local Roads + Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Jar Sodic Spot a Spoil Area g) Stony Spot USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 3/15/2010 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3 ' Soil Map—State of Connecticut SOUTH WINDSOR SOILS ' Map 9 Unit Legend ' State of Connecticut(CT600) Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in A01 Percent of A01 ' 23A Sudbury sandy loam,0 to 5 percent slopes 0.4 3.3% 29A Agawam fine sandy loam,0 to 3 percent slopes 1.5 11.6% 36A Windsor loamy sand,0 to 3 percent slopes 2.4 18.4% 304 Udorthents,loamy,very steep 0.7 5.3% 306 Udorthents-Urban land complex 8.1 61.1% ' 307 Urban land 0.0 0.3% Totals for Area of Interest 13.3 100.0% USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 3/15/2010 ' Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 ' APPENDIX C PRE-AND POST-DEVELOPMENT WATERSHED MAPS ► 1 � / 1 // 1 \ R.n 57.E n 61-0 C \ .e7.95 \ 67-81 .610 'AfA� *6e15 Ata AGAWAM FINE SANDY LOAM / 0-3%SLOPES 1 *6&28 , HYDROLOGIC SOIL GROUP "B" - �F AREA=4.25 ACS.2 / is CN=52 1 ss 11,PPPP I ` TC=24.7 MIN. 60 69.18 ►-4 1 a� -- � n� ` 70.71 i7 ai 6919 ,73 / - ------- rall /• . O p W ra \ *ny / y i 4 100, rn /y *67 ` 1 /• W C W r A o � i F.....E_1 ,, WINDSORLLOOAMY SAND �� C, D ' D P E 2 I. F SLOPES AREA CN=86 `. HYDROLO%oSO GROUP "A" ''' ao =0.46 AC C O I TC=6 MIN. SHALLOW C - & F I n 6 , I n as 76, � CONC TRATED FLOW G 3 DPE 1 , �� 1 1-Z ,� WOODSno n 7 Ul ' , I" 190' SHALLOW S=33% (3:t) fg 70 y5 i� CONCENTRATED 04 nn UDORTHEggMTS *nn ` i� POOR GRASS • �51 ".n URBAN LAND OMPLEX 1 ` B �� 5=0.5%/• _ T T ' f �\.•// M HYDROLOGI SOIL 1 i� *a14 �,J ' 1 ja GROUP -UNC SIF)ED 1 , !: raj '�°•u _j /\\ UDORTHENTS sy N I4 mN -" -- ------ I UNLAYING SOILS I ROUP "A"` 1/ \ LOAMY VERY ST j J ! € o — / 100' SHEET FLOW/• HYDROLO$P SOIL j/ E 3. I tan ir. �. ` 5=1.0% GROUP, NCLASSIFIED w UNLiveb SOILS�QUYA" a 1 AREA=0.27 AC , CN=26 rani ra �/ `O�� / "Ton. .ran / RO TC=6 MIN. liv I I �• w IN 0 1/ n •Z I I j _ 7 \ 7p61kI / \ j6 • /• Q Q e s9n ra_„ j�,,.",fj a� u. i i *76u A /.n roxs• \ -'9m ' •'� / --�7 _ raI • a ar N T o t/ *n.es rays 71�p' /ex--a+ 11 a+---ax--�---SH ot----ox---d1—T- o o n a. co OI 4 pbl i / 72p N U 708 / (/t n 1011 .— 707 D P E 3 71.01 SW ` 11.99 7L97 0 n» 0 12.01 z _ G' BOUND GRAPHIC SCALE 6 n.97* 69ffi m85 6 rap1 g ip7s g raw G*0 G 19.09 • • 8 JOHN FITCH BOULEVARD STATUS DATE BY A PLWES PRELIMINARY p1 per) MCDONALDS, 690 CANTON ST,WESTWOOD, MA 781 329-1450 (A.K.A. CONNECTICUT STATE HIGHWAY ROUTE US 5) 1 inch=30 !t E�__ STREET ADDRESS PLAN CHECKED(F.K.A. HARTFORD-SPRINGFIELD ROAD) 104.9 JOHN FITCH BLVD. AS-BUILT x wnn awxc.wnaiw x mrz a NARl46LE NADTN R.O:W:) B OH LE R SOUTH CITY STATE DRAWN BY: KBS ®BOHLER WINDSOR CT CHECKED BY: JAK ua�wua�wc ENGINZERING WWRIXIION CHECKD�>E J.A. KUCICH µme•= � •"L aE� ��"m" .:.�,,.,"°w` - COUNTY DATE: OS-SHOWN m ro L"ten _ HARTFORD SCALE; AS SHOWN crrsmuclaN aEac arz �wv4■am PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER NATIONAL STORE NUMBER PLAN DESCRIPTION SHEET NO. MASSkaPRELIMINARY �"� —RtQEer tb: De Ul.k cawxeaf.W UO N^•2e177 EXISTING DRAINMAP NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION w062007 wo62007sao.awq OF 14 L � m I � I ' , N23.41'28"E 488.77 0 I (494.54 GEED) i r . P- 1 AREA=0.24 AC n C 6 MI n I vNG o TC= MN. M I P-2 / AREA=3.07 AC CN=50 1.J TC=26.5 MIN. / �n $ P-2AIS AREA=0.62 AC / Y ��•, U ~j TC=6 MIN. 1 8 o 30' SHEET FLOW / H / $a z m ' ) SHORT GRASS 140' SHALLOW 11 D P P S=3.OX CONCENTRATED FLOW j &o Z . P—2 B 70' SHEET FLOW LONG GRASS ' o LONG GRASS 5=0.5% AREA=0.66 AC S=0.5% / 54 SHA�LOW g o CN=78 D I CONCENi�ATED FL PP 1 TC=6 MIN. WOODS ` no 3 S=33OX( :1) F, j I � w AREA= P0.27- § 3 AC CN=52 TC=6 MIN, I UNG .W I I 490.1 qempp, - TT m I I �• /, w g ' / /• W II o o i e II i /• � O N I a o o U GRAPHIC SCALE DPP 3 SOUTH o � r BOUND �\ o p /• r= �o '��...►.•I �" STATUS DATE BY .� JOHN FITCH BOULEVARD t A PUCANT M aruwoaMow.wnuam Rana.."0"".em (A.K.A. CONNECTICUT STATE HIGHWAY ROUTE US 5) �m MCDONALDS, 690 CANTON Sf.WESTWOOD, MA 781 329-1450 PRELIMINARY - w,Mw.a+wo�a wwn mwws STREET ADDRESS PLAN CHECKED rM4wnM1 wwuw M,wwwewMMn.e (F.K.A. HARTFORD-SPRINGFIELD ROAD) n. I 1049 JOHN FITCH BLVD. wwuavcaw (VARIABLE WIDTH R.O.W.) AS—BUILT BOHFj D CITY STATE DRAWN BY: KBS ®BOHLER s x a><x 8 e a><x c SOUTH WINDSOR CT swowastuo m01 01TE J.A. KUCICH CHECKED BY: JAK COUNTY DATE: 05-05-10 HARTFORD SCALE: AS SHOWN PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. NATIONAL STORE NUMBER PLAN DESCRIPTION SHEET NO. 14W^WIIIRTIS uCFNSE Nw♦tAW PRELIMINARY �" �°�H C0M `""T ` "°'°"' - PROPOSED DRAINMAP NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION w08zao7 Wo92oO7seo.dwg OF 14 ' APPENDIX D ' STORMWATER ATTENUATION CALCULATIONS AND RAINFALL DATA ' TO GOVERNORS Design Point Eyisfing I HIGHWAY is F�d OFFSITE TO NORTH Design Point I=chafing 2 ' d PIE 3 ' OFFSITE TO JOHN Design Point ExisUng 3 FITCH i3LVD EF11 TO G0VERMORS Design Point Proposed HIGHWAY ' CPP ' OFFSITE TO NORTH Design Point Proposed 2 DEVELOPED ' AREA WEST UNDEGROUND INFILTRA-flON SYSTEM t a x ' DEVELOPED AREk-EAST UNDEGROUhND INFILTRATION ' SYSTEM a @PP3' ' ROOF Desegn Point Proposed OFFSITE TO J OHN ' FITCH SLVD iw Some of the sizing criteria presented in this chap- 7.4.1 Water Quality Volume(WQV) ter may not be practical to meet due to space Description limitations, soil conditions, and other site constraints The water quality volume (WQV) is the amount of which are common in redevelopment or retrofit appli- stormwater runoff from any given storm that should be cations. Treatment practices sized for smaller captured and treated in order to remove a majority of treatment volumes/flows or exemptions from certain stormwater pollutants on an average annual basis. The criteria may be appropriate in these situations, at the recommended WQV, which results in the capture and discretion of the review authority. Conditions where treatment of the entire runoff volume for 90 percent of ' the recommended sizing criteria may not be applica- the average annual storm events, is equivalent to the ble are identified in the following sections. runoff associated with the first one-inch of rainfall. The WQV is calculated using the following equation: 7.3 Criteria Summary _ (11')(R)(A) Table 7-1 summarizes the hydrologic sizing criteria WQV 12 for stormwater treatment practices in Connecticut. As indicated in Table 7-1, the sizing criteria are based on where: WQV = water quality volume (ac-ft) stormwater runoff generated by 24-hour duration R = volumetric runoff coefficient storms of various return frequencies (i.e., design = 0.05+0.009(1) ' storms). Table 7-2 lists 24-hour design rainfall depths I = percent impervious cover for each county in Connecticut. The rationale for and A = site area in acres application of these criteria are described in the fol- lowing sections. O 2"be volumetric runoff coefficient R can also be ' determined from commonly available tabulated Table 7-2 values for various land use, vegetative cover, Design soil, and ground slope conditions.However, the use of the above equation is recommended since ' 24-Hour Rainfall Amount(inches) it is directly related to the amount of impervious cover at a site,,thereby providing incentive to County I-yr 2-yr 10-yr 25=yr 100-yr reduce site imperviousness and the required Fairfield 2.7 3.3 5.0 5.7 7.2 runoff treatment volume. Reducing impervious cover using the site planning and design Hartford 2.6 3.2 4.7 5;5 6;9 techniques described in Chapter Four can ' Litchfield 2.6 3.2 4.7 1 5.5 7.0 significantly reduce the WQV. Middlesex 2.7 3.3 5.0 5.6 7.1 O impervious cover should be measured from the site plan and includes all impermeable surfaces New Haven 2.7 3,3 5.0 5,6 7.I that are directly connected to the stormwater New London 2.7 3.4 5.0 5.7 T I treatment practice such as paved and gravel Tolland 2.6 3.2 4.8 5.5 6.9 roads, rooftops, driveways,parking lots, side- walks,pools,patios and decks.in the absence of Windham 2.6 1 3.2 4.8 5.5 6,9 site-speck information or for large residential developments, impervious cover may be esti mated based on average impervious coverage ' Source:TP-40, Department of Commerce,Weather Bureau, values for various parcel sizes listed in Table May 1961; NWS Hydro-35, Department of Commerce,National Weather Service,June 1977. 7-3• The values shown in Table 7-3 were derived from research by the University of Connecticut, 7.4 Pollutant Reduction Cooperative Extension System NEMO Project ' The pollutant reduction criterion is designed to (Prisloe et al.,). improve the water quality of stormwater discharges O The WQV should be treated by an acceptable by treating a prescribed water quality volume or asso- stormwater treatment practice or group of prat- ' ciated peak flow,referred to as the water quality flow. 'tices described in this Manual. The WQVshould Most treatment practices described in this Manual use be used for the design of the stormwater treatment a volume-based sizing criterion. The exceptions are practices described in this Manual, except grass ' grass drainage channels, proprietary stormwater treat- drainage channels and proprietary stormwater ment devices, and flow diversion structures, where a treatment devices(e.g., hydrodynamic separa- peak flow rate is utilized. tors, catch basin inserts, and media filters), which should be designed based on the water ' quality flow(WQF). GD2004 Connecticut Stormwater Quality Manual SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type ///24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 1 ' HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Time span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 601 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment E-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY Runoff Area=20,193 sf Runoff Depth=2.00" Tc=6.0 min CN=88 Runoff=1.06 cfs 0.077 of ' Subcatchment E-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff Area=177,256 sf Runoff Depth=0.17" Flow Length=335' Tc=19.4 min CN=52 Runoff=0.17 cfs 0.059 of Subcatchment E-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff Area=19,456 sf Runoff Depth=0.31" Tc=6.0 min CN=57 Runoff=0.07 cfs 0.012 of Subcatchment P-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY Runoff Area=10,323 sf Runoff Depth=0.37" ' Tc=6.0 min CN=59 Runoff=0.05 cfs 0.007 of Subcatchment P-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff Area=133,878 sf Runoff Depth=0.13" Flow Length=294' Tc=26.5 min CN=50 Runoff=0.06 cfs 0.033 of Subcatchment P-2A: DEVELOPED AREA-WEST Runoff Area=26,882 sf Runoff Depth=1.91" Tc=6.0 min CN=87 Runoff=1.36 cfs 0.098 of Subcatchment P-2B: DEVELOPED AREA-EAST Runoff Area=28,811 sf Runoff Depth=1.27" Tc=6.0 min CN=78 Runoff=0.95 cfs 0.070 of Subcatchment P-2C: ROOF Runoff Area=3,886 sf Runoff Depth=2.97" ' Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=0.27 cfs 0.022 of Subcatchment P-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff Area=11,904 sf Runoff Depth=0.17" ' Tc=6.0 min CN=52 Runoff=0.01 cfs 0.004 of Reach DPE1: Design Point Existing 1 Inflow=1.06 cfs 0.077 of Outflow=1.06 cfs 0.077 of ' Reach DPE2: Design Point Existing 2 Inflow=0.17 cfs 0.059 of Outflow=0.17 cfs 0.059 of ' Reach DPE3: Design Point Existing 3 Inflow=0.07 cfs 0.012 of Outflow=0.07 cfs 0.012 of ' Reach DPP1: Design Point Proposed 1 Inflow=0.05 cfs 0.007 of Outflow=0.05 cfs 0.007 of Reach DPP2: Design Point Proposed 2 Inflow=0.06 cfs 0.033 of Outflow=0.06 cfs 0.033 of ' Reach DPP3: Design Point Proposed 3 Inflow=0.01 cfs 0.004 of Outflow=0.01 cfs 0.004 of ' SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type ///24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 2 ' HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Pond UG1: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SYS Peak EIev=65.04' Storage=343 cf Inflow=1.36 cfs 0.098 of Outflow=0.70 cfs 0.098 of Pond UG2: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SYS Peak EIev=65.51' Storage=223 cf Inflow=1.22 cfs 0.092 of ' Outflow=0.74 cfs 0.092 of SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 111 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 3 ' HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC _5/5/2010 Subcatchment E-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY Runoff = 1.06 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.077 af, Depth= 2.00" ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" ' Area (sf) CN Description 15,903 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 4,290 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A 20,193 88 Weighted Average 4,290 Pervious Area 15,903 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment E-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff = 0.17 cfs @ 12.61 hrs, Volume= 0.059 af, Depth= 0.17" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" Area (sf) CN Description ' 10,681 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 106,357 49 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG A 27,945 69 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG B 32,273 30 Woods, Good, HSG A ' 177,256 52 Weighted Average 166,575 Pervious Area 10,681 Impervious Area ' Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) ' 12.7 100 0.0100 0.13 Sheet Flow, A-B Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.30" 6.4 190 0.0050 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, B-C Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps ' 0.3 45 0.3300 2.87 Shallow Concentrated Flow, C-D Woodland Kv= 5.0 fps 19.4 335 Total SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 111 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 4 HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Subcatchment E-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff = 0.07 cfs @ 12.28 hrs, Volume= 0.012 af, Depth= 0.31" t Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" ' Area (sf) CN Description 16,300 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A 3,158 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 19,456 57 Weighted Average 18,300 Pervious Area 3,156 Impervious Area ' Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment P-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY ' Runoff = 0.05 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 0.007 af, Depth= 0.37" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs ' Type III 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" Area (sf) CN Description ' 3,452 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 8,871 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 10,323 59 Weighted Average 6,871 Pervious Area ' 3,452 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description ' (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 8.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment P-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff = 0.08 cfs @ 13.10 hrs, Volume= 0.033 af, Depth= 0.13" ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" ' Area (sf) CN Description 56,318 49 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG A 27,945 69 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG B 32,273 30 Woods, Good, HSG A 12,222 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 5,120 98 Paved parking & roofs 133,878 50 Weighted Average ' T e 111 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 yp Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 5 ' HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/201.0 128,758 Pervious Area ' 5,120 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description ' (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.1 30 0.0300 0.16 Sheet Flow, E-F Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.30" 18.4 70 0.0050 0.06 Sheet Flow, F-G ' Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 3.30" 4.7 140 0.0050 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, F-G Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 0.3 54 0.3300 2.87 Shallow Concentrated Flow, H-1 Woodland Kv= 5.0 fps 26.5 294 Total ' Subcatchment P-2A: DEVELOPED AREA-WEST ' Runoff = 1.36 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.098 af, Depth= 1.91" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" Area (sf) CN Description 21,772 98 Paved parking & roofs ' 5,110 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 26,882 87 Weighted Average 5,110 Pervious Area ' 21,772 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) ' 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment P-213: DEVELOPED AREA-EAST Runoff = 0.95 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.070 af, Depth= 1.27" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" ' Area (sf) CN Description 19,084 98 Paved parking & roofs 9,727 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A ' 28,811 78 Weighted Average 9,727 Pervious Area 19,084 Impervious Area r SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type ///24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 6 HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 0 2006 HvdroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ftNec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment P-2C: ROOF Runoff = 0.27 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.022 af, Depth= 2.97" ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" Area (sf) CN Description 3,886 98 Paved parking & roofs r 3,886 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) r6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment P-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD rRunoff = 0.01 cfs @ 12.41 hrs, Volume= 0.004 af, Depth= 0.17" ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" Area (sf) CN Description 2,548 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 9,356 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 11,904 52 Weighted Average r9,356 Pervious Area 2,548 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY r Reach DPE1: Design Point Existing 1 r Inflow Area = 0.464 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.00" for 2YR event Inflow 1.06 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.077 of Outflow = 1.06 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.077 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min rRouting by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs r 1 r SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type NI 24-hr 2YR Rainfall=3.20" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 7 ' HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Reach DPE2: Design Point Existing 2 ' Inflow Area = 4.069 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.17" for 2YR event Inflow = 0.17 cfs @ 12.61 hrs, Volume= 0.059 of ' Outflow = 0.17 cfs @ 12.61 hrs, Volume= 0.059 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Reach DPE3: Design Point Existing 3 ' Inflow Area = 0.447 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.31" for 2YR event Inflow 0.07 cfs @ 12.28 hrs, Volume= 0.012 of Outflow = 0.07 cfs @ 12.28 hrs, Volume= 0.012 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min ' Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs Reach DPP1: Design Point Proposed 1 ' Inflow Area = 0.237 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.37" for 2YR event Inflow = 0.05 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 0.007 of Outflow = 0.05 cfs @ 12.15 hrs, Volume= 0.007 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs ' Reach DPP2: Design Point Proposed 2 Inflow Area = 3.073 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.13" for 2YR event Inflow 0.06 cfs @ 13.10 hrs, Volume= 0.033 of Outflow = 0.06 cfs @ 13.10 hrs, Volume= 0.033 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min ' Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Reach DPP3: Design Point Proposed 3 ' Inflow Area = 0.273 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.17" for 2YR event Inflow = 0.01 cfs @ 12.41 hrs, Volume= 0.004 of Outflow = 0.01 cfs @ 12.41 hrs, Volume= 0.004 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Pond UG1: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM ' Inflow Area = 0.617 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.91" for 2YR event Inflow 1.36 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.098 af' Outflow = 0.70 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 0.098 af, Atten=48%, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded = 0.70 cfs @ 12.00 hrs, Volume= 0.098 of ' Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type///24-hr2YR Rainfall=3.20" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 8 1 HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 0 2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Peak Elev=65.04' @ 12.25 hrs Surf.Area= 2,520 sf Storage= 343 cf ' Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 2.2 min (821.1 - 818.9) ' Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 64.70' 1,812 cf 45.00'W x 56.001 x 2.33'H Prismatoid 5,872 cf Overall - 1,342 cf Embedded =4,530 cf x 40.0%Voids #2 65.20' 1,342 cf 28.9"W x 16.0"H x 7.121 StormTech SC-310 x 91 Inside#1 3,154 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 0.00' 12.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area ' Qiscarded OutFlow Max=0.70 cfs @ 12.00 hrs HW=64.73' (Free Discharge) 1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.70 cfs) Pond UG2: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM Inflow Area = 0.751 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.47" for 2YR event Inflow 1.22 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.092 of Outflow 0.74 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 0.092 af, Atten= 39%, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded = 0.74 cfs @ 12.05 hrs, Volume= 0.092 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 65.51' @ 12.21 hrs Surf.Area= 2,672 sf Storage=223 cf ' Plug-Flow detention time= 1.4 min calculated for 0.092 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 1.4 min ( 828.4 - 827.0) ' Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 65.30' 1,907 cf 31.00'W x 86.201 x 2.33'H Prismatoid 6,226 cf Overall - 1,459 cf Embedded =4,767 cf x 40.0%Voids ' #2 65.80' 1,459 cf 28.9"W x 16.0"H x 7.12'L StormTech SC-310 x 99 Inside#1 3,366 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 0.00' 12.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.74 cfs @ 12.05 hrs HW=65.35' (Free Discharge) t1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.74 cfs) ' SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 111 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 9 ' HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 C 2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Time span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 601 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method ' Subcatchment E-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY Runoff Area=20,193 sf Runoff Depth=3.38" Tc=6.0 min CN=88 Runoff=1.76 cfs 0.131 of ' Subcatchment E-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff Area=177,256 sf Runoff Depth=0.67" Flow Length=335' Tc=19.4 min CN=52 Runoff=1.46 cfs 0.229 of Subcatchment E-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff Area=19,456 sf Runoff Depth=0.95" Tc=6.0 min CN=57 Runoff=0.40 cfs 0.035 of Subcatchment P-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY Runoff Area=10,323 sf Runoff Depth=1.07" ' Tc=6.0 min CN=59 Runoff=0.25 cfs 0.021 of Subcatchment P-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff Area=133,878 sf Runoff Depth=0.57" Flow Length=294' Tc=26.5 min CN=50 Runoff=0.77 cfs 0.147 of Subcatchment P-2A: DEVELOPED AREA-WEST Runoff Area=26,882 sf Runoff Depth=3.29" Tc=6.0 min CN=87 Runoff=2.29 cfs 0.169 of Subcatchment P-213: DEVELOPED AREA-EAST Runoff Area=28,811 sf Runoff Depth=2.46" ' Tc=6.0 min CN=78 Runoff=1.87 cfs 0.136 of Subcatchment P-2C: ROOF Runoff Area=3,886 sf Runoff Depth=4.46" ' Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=0.40 cfs 0.033 of Subcatchment P-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff Area=11,904 sf Runoff Depth=0.67" Tc=6.0 min CN=52 Runoff=0.14 cfs 0.015 of Reach DPE1: Design Point Existing 1 Inflow=1.76 cfs 0.131 of Outflow=1.76 cfs 0.131 of ' Reach DPE2: Design Point Existing 2 Inflow=1.46 cfs 0.229 of Outflow=1.46 cfs 0.229 of Reach DPE3: Design Point Existing 3 Inflow=0.40 cfs 0.035 of Outflow=0.40 cfs 0.035 of Reach DPP1: Design Point Proposed 1 Inflow=0.25 cfs 0.021 of Outflow=0.25 cfs 0.021 of ' Reach DPP2: Design Point Proposed 2 Inflow=0.77 cfs 0.147 of Outflow=0.77 cfs 0.147 of Reach DPP3: Design Point Proposed 3 Inflow=0.14 cfs 0.015 of Outflow=0.14 cfs 0.015 of SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 11124-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 10 ' HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Pond UG1: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SY Peak Elev=65.59' Storage=1,254 cf Inflow=2.29 cfs 0.169 of ' Outflow=0.70 cfs 0.169 of Pond UG2: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SY Peak Elev=66.10' Storage=1,149 cf Inflow=2.27 cfs 0.169 of ' Outflow=0.74 cfs 0.169 of SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type/1/24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 11 HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Subcatchment E-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY Runoff = 1.76 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.131 af, Depth= 3.38" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" Area (sf) CN Description ' 15,903 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 4,290 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A ' 20,193 88 Weighted Average 4,290 Pervious Area 15,903 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft} (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment E-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff = 1.46 cfs @ 12.38 hrs, Volume= 0.229 af, Depth= 0.67" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs ' Type III 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" Area (sf) CN Description ' 10,681 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 106,357 49 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG A 27,945 69 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG B 32,273 30 Woods, Good HSG A ' 177,256 52 Weighted Average 166,575 Pervious Area 10,681 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) ' 12.7 100 0.0100 0.13 Sheet Flow,A-B Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.30" 6.4 190 0.0050 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, B-C Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps ' 0.3 45 0.3300 2.87 Shallow Concentrated Flow, C-D Woodland Kv= 5.0 fps 19.4 335 Total SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 111 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 12 ' HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Subcatchment E-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff = 0.40 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.035 af, Depth= 0.95" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" Area (sf) CN Description 16,300 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A 3,156 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A ' 19,456 57 Weighted Average 16,300 Pervious Area 3,156 Impervious Area ' Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY ' Subcatchment P-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY ' Runoff = 0.25 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.021 af, Depth= 1.07" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs ' Type III 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" Area (sf) CN Description 3,452 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A ' 6,871 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 10,323 59 Weighted Average 6,871 Pervious Area ' 3,452 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description ' (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY ' Subcatchment P-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff = 0.77 cfs @ 12.54 hrs, Volume= 0.147 af, Depth= 0.57" ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" ' Area (sf) CN Description 56,318 49 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG A 27,945 69 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG B ' 32,273 30 Woods, Good, HSG A 12,222 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 5,120 98 Paved parking & roofs ' 133,878 50 Weighted Average SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type M 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 13 ' HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 128,758 Pervious Area 5,120 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.1 30 0.0300 0.16 Sheet Flow, E-F Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.30" 18.4 70 0.0050 0.06 Sheet Flow, F-G Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 3.30" 4.7 140 0.0050 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, F-G Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps ' 0.3 54 0.3300 2.87 Shallow Concentrated Flow, H-1 Woodland Kv= 5.0 fps 26.5 294 Total Subcatchment P-2A: DEVELOPED AREA-WEST ' Runoff = 2.29 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.169 af, Depth= 3.29" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs ' Type III 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" Area (s CN Description ' 21,772 98 Paved parking & roofs 5,110 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 26,882 87 Weighted Average 5,110 Pervious Area ' 21,772 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description ' (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY ' Subcatchment P-213: DEVELOPED AREA-EAST Runoff = 1.87 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.136 af, Depth= 2.46" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" ' Area (sf) CN Description 19,084 98 Paved parking & roofs 9,727 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A ' 28,811 78 Weighted Average 9,727 Pervious Area 19,084 Impervious Area SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 111 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70II Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 14 ' HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description ' (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY ' Subcatchment P-2C: ROOF Runoff = 0.40 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.033 af, Depth= 4.46" ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" ' Area (sf) CN Description 3,886 98 Paved parking & roofs ' 3,886 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) ' 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment P-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD ' Runoff = 0.14 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.015 af, Depth= 0.67" ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" ' Area (sf) CN Description 2,548 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 9,356 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A ' 11,904 52 Weighted Average 9,356 Pervious Area 2,548 Impervious Area ' Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY ' Reach DPE1: Design Point Existing 1 I Inflow Area = 0.464 ac, Inflow Depth = 3.38" for 10YR event Inflow 1.76 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.131 of Outflow = 1.76 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.131 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min ' Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs I SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type /1124-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 15 ' HydroCAD@)8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Reach DPE2: Design Point Existing 2 ' Inflow Area = 4.069 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.67" for 10YR event Inflow = 1.46 cfs @ 12.38 hrs, Volume= 0.229 of ' Outflow = 1.46 cfs @ 12.38 hrs, Volume= 0.229 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs ' Reach DPE3: Design Point Existing 3 Inflow Area = 0.447 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.95" for 10YR event Inflow 0.40 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.035 of Outflow = 0.40 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.035 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Reach DPP1: Design Point Proposed 1 Inflow Area = 0.237 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.07" for 10YR event Inflow = 0.25 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.021 of ' Outflow = 0.25 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.021 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Reach DPP2: Design Point Proposed 2 ' Inflow Area = 3.073 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.57" for 10YR event Inflow 0.77 cfs @ 12.54 hrs, Volume= 0.147 of Outflow = 0.77 cfs @ 12.54 hrs, Volume= 0.147 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min ' Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Reach DPP3: Design Point Proposed 3 ' Inflow Area = 0.273 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.67" for 10YR event Inflow = 0.14 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.015 of Outflow = 0.14 cfs @ 12.12 hrs, Volume= 0.015 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs ' Pond UG1: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM ' Inflow Area = 0.617 ac, Inflow Depth = 3.29" for 10YR event Inflow 2.29 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.169 of Outflow = 0.70 cfs @ 11.85 hrs, Volume= 0.169 af, Atten= 69%, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded = 0.70 cfs @ 11.85 hrs, Volume= 0.169 of ' Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type/1/24-hr 10YR Rainfall=4.70" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 16 HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 0 2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Peak Elev=65.59' @ 12.42 hrs Surf.Area= 2,520 sf Storage= 1,254 cf ' Plug-Flow detention time= 8.6 min calculated for 0.169 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time=8.6 min (812.1 - 803.5) ' Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 64.70' 1,812 cf 45.00'W x 56.001 x 2.33H Prismatoid ' 5,872 cf Overall - 1,342 cf Embedded =4,530 cf x 40.0%Voids #2 65.20' 1,342 cf 28.9"W x 16.0"H x 7.121 StormTech SC-310 x 91 Inside#1 3,154 cf Total Available Storage ' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 0.00' 12.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.70 cfs @ 11.85 hrs HW=64.73' (Free Discharge) t1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.70 cfs) ' Pond UG2: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM Inflow Area = 0.751 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.70" for 10YR event Inflow 2.27 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.169 of Outflow 0.74 cfs @ 11.90 hrs, Volume= 0.169 af, Atten= 67%, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded = 0.74 cfs @ 11.90 hrs, Volume= 0.169 of ' Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 66.10' @ 12.41 hrs Surf.Area= 2,672 sf Storage= 1,149 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 7.3 min calculated for 0.168 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 7.3 min ( 821.3- 814.0 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 65.30' 1,907 cf 31.00'W x 86.20'L x 2.33'H Prismatoid 6,226 cf Overall - 1,459 cf Embedded =4,767 cf x 40.0%Voids ' #2 65.80' 1,459 cf 28.9"W x 16.0"H x 7.121 StormTech SC-310 x 99 Inside#1 3,366 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices ' #1 Discarded 0.00' 12.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.74 cfs @ 11.90 hrs HW=65.33' (Free Discharge) ' t1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.74 cfs) SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type/1/24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 17 ( I HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/201.0 Time span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 601 points Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method I Subcatchment E-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY Runoff Area=20,193 sf Runoff Depth=4.15" Tc=6.0 min CN=88 Runoff=2.14 cfs 0.160 of Subcatchment E-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff Area=177,256 sf Runoff Depth=1.04" Flow Length=335' Tc=19.4 min CN=52 Runoff=2.62 cfs 0.351 of I I Subcatchment E-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff Area=19,456 sf Runoff Depth=1.38" Tc=6.0 min CN=57 Runoff=0.63 cfs 0.051 of Subcatchment P-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY Runoff Area=10,323 sf Runoff Depth=1.53" ITc=6.0 min CN=59 Runoff=0.38 cfs 0.030 of Subcatchment P-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff Area=133,878 sf Runoff Depth=0.91" ( � Flow Length=294' Tc=26.5 min CN=50 Runoff=1.45 cfs 0.232 of Subcatchment P-2A: DEVELOPED AREA-WEST Runoff Area=26,882 sf Runoff Depth=4.04" II Tc=6.0 min CN=87 Runoff=2.79 cfs 0.208 of Subcatchment P-213: DEVELOPED AREA-EAST Runoff Area=28,811 sf Runoff Depth=3.14" ITc=6.0 min CN=78 Runoff=2.39 cfs 0.173 of Subcatchment P-2C: ROOF Runoff Area=3,886 sf Runoff Depth=5.26" ITc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=0.47 cfs 0.039 of Subcatchment P-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff Area=11,904 sf Runoff Depth=1.04" Tc=6.0 min CN=52 Runoff=0.26 cfs 0.024 of Reach DPE1. Design Point Existing 1 Inflow=2.14 cfs 0.160 of Outflow=2.14 cfs 0.160 of 1 Reach DPE2: Design Point Existing 2 Inflow=2.62 cfs 0.351 of Outflow=2.62 cfs 0.351 of Reach DPE3: Design Point Existing 3 Inflow=0.63 cfs 0.051 of Outflow=0.63 cfs 0.051 of Reach DPP1: Design Point Proposed 1 Inflow=0.38 cfs 0.030 of Outflow=0.38 cfs 0.030 of Reach DPP2: Design Point Proposed 2 Inflow=1.45 cfs 0.232 of Outflow=1.45 cfs 0.232 of Reach DPP3: Design Point Proposed 3 Inflow=0.26 cfs 0.024 of Outflow=0.26 cfs 0.024 of ' SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 111 24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 19 ' HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Subcatchment E-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY Runoff = 2.14 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.160 af, Depth= 4.15" ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" Area (sf) CN Description 15,903 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 4,290 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A ' 20,193 88 Weighted Average 4,290 Pervious Area 15,903 Impervious Area ' Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment E-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff = 2.62 cfs @ 12.34 hrs, Volume= 0.351 af, Depth= 1.04" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs ' Type III 24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" Area (sf) CN Description 10,681 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 106,357 49 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG A 27,945 69 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG B 32,273 30 Woods, Good, HSG A ' 177,256 52 Weighted Average 166,575 Pervious Area 10,681 Impervious Area ' Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 12.7 100 0.0100 0.13 Sheet Flow,A-B ' Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.30" 6.4 190 0.0050 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, B-C Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 0.3 45 0.3300 2.87 Shallow Concentrated Flow, C-D Woodland Kv= 5.0 fps 19.4 335 Total ' SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 111 24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 20 ' HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Subcatchment E-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff = 0.63 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.051 af, Depth= 1.38" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" Area (sf) CN Description 16,300 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A 3,156 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A ' 19,456 57 Weighted Average 16,300 Pervious Area 3,156 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY ' Subcatchment P-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY ' Runoff = 0.38 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.030 af, Depth= 1.53" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs ' Type III 24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" Area (sf) CN Description 3,452 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A ' 6,871 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 10,323 59 Weighted Average ' 6,871 Pervious Area 3,452 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description ' (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment P-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff = 1.45 cfs @ 12.48 hrs, Volume= 0.232 af, Depth= 0.91" ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" ' Area (so CN Description 56,318 49 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG A 27,945 69 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG B ' 32,273 30 Woods, Good, HSG A 12,222 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 5,120 98 Paved parking & roofs 133,878 50 Weighted Average SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 11124-hr25YR Rainfall=5.50" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 21 ' HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 128,758 Pervious Area ' 5,120 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description ' (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.1 30 0.0300 0.16 Sheet Flow, E-F Grass: Short n=0.150 P2= 3.30" 18.4 70 0.0050 0.06 Sheet Flow, F-G Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 3.30" 4.7 140 0.0050 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, F-G Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 0.3 54 0.3300 2.87 Shallow Concentrated Flow, H-1 Woodland Kv= 5.0 fps 26.5 294 Total Subcatchment P-2A: DEVELOPED AREA-WEST Runoff = 2.79 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.208 af, Depth= 4.04" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs ' Type III 24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" Area (sf) CN Description ' 21,772 98 Paved parking &roofs 5,110 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 26,882 87 Weighted Average 5,110 Pervious Area ' 21,772 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description ' (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY ' Subcatchment P-213: DEVELOPED AREA-EAST Runoff = 2.39 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.173 af, Depth= 3.14" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" ' Area (sf) CN Description 19,084 98 Paved parking & roofs 9,727 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A ' 28,811 78 Weighted Average 9,727 Pervious Area 19,084 Impervious Area SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type ///24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 22 ' HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description ' (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY ' Subcatchment P-2C: ROOF Runoff = 0.47 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.039 af, Depth= 5.26" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" Area (sf) CN Description 3,886 98 Paved parking & roofs 3,886 Impervious Area ' Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment P-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff = 0.26 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.024 af, Depth= 1.04" ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" Area (sf) CN Description 2,548 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 9,356 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A ' 11,904 52 Weighted Average 9,356 Pervious Area 2,548 Impervious Area ' Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Reach DPE1: Design Point Existing 1 Inflow Area = 0.464 ac, Inflow Depth = 4.15" for 25YR event Inflow 2.14 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.160 of Outflow = 2.14 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.160 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min tRouting by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs t SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 11124-hr25YR Rainfall=5.50" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 23 ' HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Reach DPE2: Design Point Existing 2 Inflow Area = 4.069 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.04" for 25YR event Inflow = 2.62 cfs @ 12.34 hrs, Volume= 0.351 of Outflow = 2.62 cfs @ 12.34 hrs, Volume= 0.351 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs Reach DPE3: Design Point Existing 3 Inflow Area = 0.447 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.38" for 25YR event Inflow 0.63 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.051 of Outflow = 0.63 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.051 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Reach DPP1: Design Point Proposed 1 Inflow Area = 0.237 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.53" for 25YR event Inflow = 0.38 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.030 of Outflow = 0.38 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.030 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Reach DPP2: Design Point Proposed 2 ' Inflow Area = 3.073 ac, Inflow Depth = 0.91" for 25YR event Inflow 1.45 cfs @ 12.48 hrs, Volume= 0.232 of Outflow = 1.45 cfs @ 12.48 hrs, Volume= 0.232 af, Atten= 0%, Lag=0.0 min ' Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Reach DPP3: Design Point Proposed 3 Inflow Area = 0.273 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.04" for 25YR event Inflow = 0.26 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.024 of ' Outflow = 0.26 cfs @ 12.11 hrs, Volume= 0.024 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs ' Pond UG1: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM ' Inflow Area = 0.617 ac, Inflow Depth = 4.04" for 25YR event Inflow 2.79 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.208 of Outflow = 0.70 cfs @ 11.80 hrs, Volume= 0.208 af, Atten= 75%, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded = 0.70 cfs @ 11.80 hrs, Volume= 0.208 of tRouting by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type/1/24-hr 25YR Rainfall=5.50" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 24 HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 C 2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Peak Elev=65.96' @ 12.47 hrs Surf.Area=2,520 sf Storage= 1,884 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 13.6 min (811.3- 797.7) rVolume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 64.70' 1,812 cf 45.00'W x 56.001 x 2.33'H Prismatoid 5,872 cf Overall - 1,342 cf Embedded =4,530 cf x 40.0%Voids ' #2 65.20' 1,342 cf 28.9"W x 16.0"H x 7.12%StormTech SC-310 x 91 Inside#1 3,154 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 0.00' 12.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area ' Discarded OutFlow Max=0.70 cfs @ 11.80 hrs HW=64.73' (Free Discharge) L1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.70 cfs) r Pond UG2: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM Inflow Area = 0.751 ac, Inflow Depth = 3.39" for 25YR event r Inflow 2.86 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.212 of Outflow 0.74 cfs @ 11.85 hrs, Volume= 0.212 af, Atten= 74%, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded - 0.74 cfs @ 11.85 hrs, Volume= 0.212 of r Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 66.47' @ 12.48 hrs Surf.Area= 2,672 sf Storage= 1,855 cf r Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 12.6 min (821.4 - 808.8 ) r Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 65.30' 1,907 cf 31.00'W x 86.201 x 2.33'H Prismatoid 6,226 cf Overall - 1,459 cf Embedded =4,767 cf x 40.0%Voids #2 65.80' 1,459 cf 28.9"W x 16.0"H x 7.12'L StormTech SC-310 x 99 Inside#1 r3,366 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 0.00' 12.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.74 cfs @ 11.85 hrs HW=65.34' (Free Discharge) ' t1=Exf11tration (Exfiltration Controls 0.74 cfs) r r r r SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type ///24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 25 HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Time span=0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 601 points ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment E-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY Runoff Area=20,193 sf Runoff Depth=5.50" Tc=6.0 min CN=88 Runoff=2.79 cfs 0.212 of Subcatchment E-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff Area=177,256 sf Runoff Depth=1.79" Flow Length=335' Tc=19.4 min CN=52 Runoff=5.15 cfs 0.606 of ' Subcatchment E-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff Area=19,456 sf Runoff Depth=2.25" Tc=6.0 min CN=57 Runoff=1.10 cfs 0.084 of Subcatchment P-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY Runoff Area=10,323 sf Runoff Depth=2.44" ' Tc=6.0 min CN=59 Runoff=0.64 cfs 0.048 of Subcatchment P-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff Area=133,878 sf Runoff Depth=1.61" Flow Length=294' Tc=26.5 min CN=50 Runoff=2.99 cfs 0.413 of Subcatchment P-2A: DEVELOPED AREA-WEST Runoff Area=26,882 sf Runoff Depth=5.38" Tc=6.0 min CN=87 Runoff=3.67 cfs 0.277 of Subcatchment P-2B: DEVELOPED AREA-EAST Runoff Area=28,811 sf Runoff Depth=4.38" Tc=6.0 min CN=78 Runoff=3.31 cfs 0.242 of Subcatchment P-2C: ROOF Runoff Area=3,886 sf Runoff Depth=6.66" Tc=6.0 min CN=98 Runoff=0.59 cfs 0.050 of Subcatchment P-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff Area=11,904 sf Runoff Depth=1.79" Tc=6.0 min CN=52 Runoff=0.51 cfs 0.041 of ' Reach DPE1: Design Point Existing 1 Inflow=2.79 cfs 0.212 of Outflow=2.79 cfs 0.212 of Reach DPE2: Design Point Existing 2 Inflow=5.15 cfs 0.606 of Outflow=5.15 cfs 0.606 of Reach DPE3: Design Point Existing 3 Inflow=1.10 cfs 0.084 of Outflow=1.10 cfs 0.084 of ' Reach DPP1: Design Point Proposed 1 Inflow=0.64 cfs 0.048 of Outflow=0.64 cfs 0.048 of rReach DPP2: Design Point Proposed 2 Inflow=2.99 cfs 0.413 of Outflow=2.99 cfs 0.413 of ' Reach DPP3: Design Point Proposed 3 Inflow=0.51 cfs 0.041 of Outflow=0.51 cfs 0.041 of SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type/1/24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 26 HydroCAM 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Pond UG1: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SY Peak Elev=66.96' Storage=3,084 cf Inflow=3.67 cfs 0.277 of Outflow=0.70 cfs 0.277 of Pond UG2: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SY Peak Elev=67.54' Storage=3,271 cf Inflow=3.90 cfs 0.291 of Outflow=0.74 cfs 0.291 of SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type///24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 27 HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Subcatchment E-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY ' Runoff = 2.79 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.212 af, Depth= 5.50" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Area (sf) CN Description 15,903 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 4,290 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A 20,193 88 Weighted Average 4,290 Pervious Area 15,903 Impervious Area t Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY ' Subcatchment E-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH ' Runoff = 5.15 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 0.606 af, Depth= 1.79" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs ' Type III 24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Area (sf) CN Description 10,681 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A ' 106,357 49 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG A 27,945 69 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG B 32,273 30 Woods, Good, HSG A ' 177,256 52 Weighted Average 166,575 Pervious Area 10,681 Impervious Area ' Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) ' 12.7 100 0.0100 0.13 Sheet Flow,A-B Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.30" 6.4 190 0.0050 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, B-C Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps ' 0.3 45 0.3300 2.87 Shallow Concentrated Flow, C-D Woodland Kv= 5.0 fps 19.4 335 Total SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 111 24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 28 HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 0 2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Subcatchment E-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff = 1.10 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.084 af, Depth= 2.25" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" ' Area (sf) CN Description 16,300 49 50-75% Grass cover, Fair, HSG A 3,156 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 19,456 57 Weighted Average 16,300 Pervious Area 3,156 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY ' Subcatchment P-1: TO GOVERNORS HIGHWAY Runoff = 0.64 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.048 af, Depth= 2.44" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs tType III 24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Area (sf) CN Description 3,452 98 Paved parking & roofs HSG A 6,871 39 >75% Grass cover, Good HSG A 10,323 59 Weighted Average 6,871 Pervious Area ' 3,452 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment P-2: OFFSITE TO NORTH Runoff = 2.99 cfs @ 12.43 hrs, Volume= 0.413 af, Depth= 1.61" ' Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90 Area (sf) CN Description 56,318 49 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG A 27,945 69 Pasture/grassland/range, Fair, HSG B 32,273 30 Woods, Good, HSG A 12,222 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 5,120 98 Paved parking & roofs 133,878 50 Weighted Average SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 11124-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 29 HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 128,758 Pervious Area 5,120 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 3.1 30 0.0300 0.16 Sheet Flow, E-F Grass: Short n= 0.150 P2= 3.30" 18.4 70 0.0050 0.06 Sheet Flow, F-G ' Grass: Dense n= 0.240 P2= 3.30" 4.7 140 0.0050 0.49 Shallow Concentrated Flow, F-G Short Grass Pasture Kv= 7.0 fps 0.3 54 0.3300 2.87 Shallow Concentrated Flow, H-1 Woodland Kv= 5.0 fps 26.5 294 Total Subcatchment P-2A: DEVELOPED AREA-WEST Runoff = 3.67 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.277 af, Depth= 5.38" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs tType III 24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Area (sf) CN Description 21,772 98 Paved parking & roofs 5,110 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A 26,882 87 Weighted Average 5,110 Pervious Area 21,772 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY ' Subcatchment P-213: DEVELOPED AREA-EAST Runoff = 3.31 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.242 af, Depth= 4.38" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Area (sf) CN Description 19,084 98 Paved parking & roofs 9,727 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A ' 28,811 78 Weighted Average 9,727 Pervious Area 19,084 Impervious Area SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type/1/24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 30 HydroCADD 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HvdroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment P-2C: ROOF Runoff = 0.59 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.050 af, Depth= 6.66" tRunoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90 Area (sf) CN Description 3,886 98 Paved parking & roofs 3,886 Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Subcatchment P-3: OFFSITE TO JOHN FITCH BLVD Runoff = 0.51 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.041 af, Depth= 1.79" Runoff by SCS TR-20 method, UH=SCS, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Type III 24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" ' Area (sf) CN Description 2,548 98 Paved parking &roofs HSG A 9,356 39 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG A ' 11,904 52 Weighted Average 9,356 Pervious Area 2,548 Impervious Area ' Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 6.0 Direct Entry, DIRECT ENTRY Reach DPE1: Design Point Existing 1 Inflow Area = 0.464 ac, Inflow Depth = 5.50" for 100YR event Inflow 2.79 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.212 of Outflow = 2.79 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.212 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs YP SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type Ill 24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 31 ' HydroCADC 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Reach DPE2: Design Point Existing 2 ' Inflow Area = 4.069 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.79" for 100YR event Inflow = 5.15 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 0.606 of Outflow = 5.15 cfs @ 12.31 hrs, Volume= 0.606 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs t Reach DPE3: Design Point Existing 3 Inflow Area = 0.447 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.25" for 100YR event - Inflow 1.10 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.084 of Outflow - 1.10 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.084 af, Atten= 0%, Lag 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Reach DPP1: Design Point Proposed 1 Inflow Area = 0.237 ac, Inflow Depth = 2.44" for 100YR event Inflow = 0.64 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.048 of Outflow = 0.64 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.048 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Reach DPP2: Design Point Proposed 2 Inflow Area = 3.073 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.61" for 100YR event Inflow 2.99 cfs @ 12.43 hrs, Volume= 0.413 of Outflow = 2.99 cfs @ 12.43 hrs, Volume= 0.413 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Reach DPP3: Design Point Proposed 3 Inflow Area = 0.273 ac, Inflow Depth = 1.79" for 100YR event Inflow = 0.51 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.041 of Outflow = 0.51 cfs @ 12.10 hrs, Volume= 0.041 af, Atten= 0%, Lag= 0.0 min Routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Pond UG1: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM Inflow Area = 0.617 ac, Inflow Depth = 5.38" for 100YR event Inflow 3.67 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.277 of Outflow = 0.70 cfs @ 11.70 hrs, Volume= 0.277 af, Atten= 81%, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded = 0.70 cfs @ 11.70 hrs, Volume= 0.277 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type/1/24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING Page 32 1 HydroCADO 8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Peak Elev=66.96' @ 12.53 hrs Surf.Area= 2,520 sf Storage= 3,084 cf rPlug-Flow detention time= 24.5 min calculated for 0.276 of(100% of inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 24.4 min ( 814.3- 789.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 64.70' 1,812 cf 45.00'W x 56.00'L x 2.33'H Prismatoid 5,872 cf Overall - 1,342 cf Embedded =4,530 cf x 40.0%Voids I #2 65.20' 1,342 cf 28.9"W x 16.0"H x 7.12%StormTech SC-310 x 91 Inside#1 3,154 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 0.00' 12.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.70 cfs @ 11.70 hrs HW=64.72' (Free Discharge) L1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.70 cfs) Pond UG2: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM Inflow Area = 0.751 ac, Inflow Depth = 4.65" for 100YR event Inflow 3.90 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.291 of Outflow 0.74 cfs @ 11.75 hrs, Volume= 0.291 af, Atten= 81%, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded = 0.74 cfs @ 11.75 hrs, Volume= 0.291 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 67.54' @ 12.54 hrs Surf.Area= 2,672 sf Storage= 3,271 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 25.2 min ( 826.6-801.4) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 65.30' 1,907 cf 31.00'W x 86.20%x 2.33'H Prismatoid 6,226 cf Overall - 1,459 cf Embedded =4,767 cf x 40.0%Voids ' #2 65.80' 1,459 cf 28.9"W x 16.0"H x 7.121 StormTech SC-310 x 99 Inside#1 3,366 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 0.00' 12.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.74 cfs @ 11.75 hrs HW=65.34' (Free Discharge) ' t1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.74 cfs) ' APPENDIX E ' WATER QUALITYAND RECHARGE CALCULATIONS H drolic Soil type A IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE(AC) 0.5 ACRES RECHARGE FACTOR 0.4 INCHES 0.016666667 AF REQUIRED TOTAL AF 0.016666667 ITOTAL AF REQUIRED AF TO CF 726 CF REQUIRED Hydrologic Group Volume to Recharge(x Total Impervious Area) Hydrologic Group Volume to Recharge x Total Impervious Area A 0.40 inches of runoff Total Volume Provided 3154 cf B 0.25 inches of runoff Recharge Total Volume Required 726 cf C 0.10 inches of runoff D 1waived H drolic Soil type A IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE(AC) 0.53 ACRES RECHARGE FACTOR 0.4 INCHES 0.017666667 AF REQUIRED TOTAL AF 0.017666667 ITOTAL AF REQUIRED AF TO CF 769.56 JCF REQUIRED Hydrologic Group Volume to Recharge(x Total Impervious Area) Hydrologic Group Volume to Recharge x Total Impervious Area A 0.40 inches of runoff Total Volume Provided 3336 cf B 0.25 inches of runoff Recharge Total Volume Required 770 cf C 0.10 inches of runoff D 1waived � � � � � � � � (• � � s• IIIIIII� IIIIII� � � �� �� is WQV FACTOR 1 INCHES 1 INCHES R=VOLUMETRIC RUNOFF COEFFICIENT 0.77 0.05+(0.009*I 0.05+ 0.009*81)=0.77 WQV 0.047 AF REQUIRED Pretreatment WQV 0.012 AF REQUIRED WQV=WATER QUALITY VOLUME AF R=VOLUMETRIC RUNOFF COEFFICIENT I=PERCENT IMPERVIOUS WQV=(1")(R)(A)112 A=SITE AREA(AC) I M I I Total Volume Provided 0.277 laf WQV Total Volume Required 0.047 laf Pretreatement Total Volume Provided 4269 of* Pretreatment WQV Total Volume Required 0.012 laf *Stormtech Units=14.7 cf storage/unit Isolator row=7 units long x 4 rows 411.6 7 units x 4 rows=28 units @ 14.7 cf per unit Isolator row manhole 64 4'x 4'x4'manhole=64 sf Catch basin 64 4'x 4'x4'catch basin=64 sf 539.6 0.012 Af Provided WQV FACTOR 1 INCHES 1 INCHES R=VOLUMETRIC RUNOFF COEFFICIENT 0.68 0.05+(0.009*1) 0.05+(0.009*70)=0.68 WQV 0.043 AF REQUIRED Pretreatment WQV 0.011 AF REQUIRED WQV=WATER QUALITY VOLUME(AF) R=VOLUMETRIC RUNOFF COEFFICIENT 1=PERCENT IMPERVIOUS WQV=(1")(R)(A)M 2 A=SITE AREA(AC) Total Volume Provided 0.291 of WQV Total Volume Required 0.043 laf Pretreatement Total Volume Provided 0.012 of Pretreatment WQV Total Volume Required 1 0.011 laf *Stormtech Units=14.7 cf storage/unit Isolator row=11 units long x 2 rows 323.4 11 units x 2 rows=22 units @ 14.7 cf per unit Isolator row manhole 64 4'x 4'x4'manhole=64 sf (2)Catch basins 128 4`x 4'x4'catch basin=64 sf 516.4 0.012 Af Provided imiiii I• i i i ' SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type/1/24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING ' HydroCADS 8.00 s/n 002612 0 2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Pond UG1: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM Inflow Area = 0.617 ac, Inflow Depth = 5.38" for 100YR event Inflow = 3.67 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.277 of ' Outflow = 0.70 cfs @ 11.70 hrs, Volume= 0.277 af, Atten= 81%, Lag= 0.0 min Discarded = 0.70 cfs @ 11.70 hrs, Volume= 0.277 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 66.96' @ 12.53 hrs SurF.Area=2,520 sf Storage= 3,084 cf Plug-Flow detention time= 24.5 min calculated for 0.276 of(100% of inflow) ' Center-of-Mass det. time= 24.4 min (814.3- 789.8 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description ' #1 64.70' 1,812 cf 45.00'W x 56.00'L x 2.33H Prismatoid 5,872 cf Overall - 1,342 cf Embedded =4,530 cf x 40.0%Voids #2 65.20' 1,342 cf 28.9"W x 16.0"H x 7.121 StormTech SC-310 x 91 Inside#1 ' 3,154 cf Total Available Storage Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices ' #1 Discarded 0.00' 12.000 inlhr Exfiltration over Surface area Discarded OutFlow Max=0.70 cfs @ 11.70 hrs HW=64.72' (Free Discharge) L1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.70 cfs) SOUTH WINDSOR 05-03-10 Type 111 24-hr 100YR Rainfall=6.90" Prepared by BOHLER ENGINEERING HydroCAD®8.00 s/n 002612 ©2006 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC 5/5/2010 Pond UG2: UNDEGROUND INFILTRATION SYSTEM ' [85] Warning: Oscillations may require Finer Routing>1 ' Inflow Area = 0.751 ac, Inflow Depth = 4.65" for 100YR event Inflow 3.90 cfs @ 12.09 hrs, Volume= 0.291 of Outflow = 0.74 cfs @ 11.75 hrs, Volume= 0.291 af, Atten= 81%, Lag= 0.0 min ' Discarded = 0.74 cfs @ 11.75 hrs, Volume= 0.291 of Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-30.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 67.54' @ 12.54 hrs Surf.Area= 2,672 sf Storage= 3,271 cf Plug-Flow detention time= (not calculated: outflow precedes inflow) Center-of-Mass det. time= 25.2 min ( 826.6- 801.4) ' Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1 65.30' 1,907 cf 31.00'W x 86.20'L x 2.33'H Prismatoid ' 6,226 cf Overall - 1,459 cf Embedded =4,767 cf x 40.0%Voids #2 65.80' 1,459 cf 28.9"W x 16.0"H x 7.121 StormTech SC-310 x 99 Inside#1 3,366 cf Total Available Storage ' Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 0.00' 12.000 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area ' Qiscarded OutFlow Max=0.74 cfs @ 11.75 hrs HW=65.34' (Free Discharge) 1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.74 cfs) I I I APPENDIX F ' LONG TERM OPERA TION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN LONG TERM STORMWA TER SYSTEM OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PLAN ' The Operation and Maintenance Plan shall identify best management practices for implementing maintenance activities in a manner that minimizes impacts to wetland resource areas. ' SURFACE MAINTENANCE COMPONENT: Parking Lot Sweeping RESPONSIBILITY: During Construction: General Contractor Post Construction: McDonalds' ' ACTION: Street Sweeping with a Vacuum Sweeper FREQUENCY: ' During Construction:As needed Post Construction:Quarterly,with sweeping scheduled primarily in Spring&Fall ' DESCRIPTION: Driveway and parking areas shall be swept quarterly(with sweeping scheduled primarily in the Spring and Fall)to remove sediments prior to introduction into the stormwater management system. McDonalds'will monitor all areas and remove sediments as necessary, considering both annual necessity and the need for more frequent cleaning during construction. ' Sweeping shall be performed with a high efficiency vacuum sweeper to remove sediments prior to introduction into the stormwater collection system. Washing and water jetting shall be discouraged. DRAINAGE SYSTEM The following components shall be inspected: ' • Inspection during or immediately following initial installation of sediment controls. • Inspection following severe rainstorms to check for damage to controls. • Inspection prior to seeding deadlines,particularly in the fall. ' • Final inspection of projects nearing completion to ensure that temporary controls have been removed,stabilization is complete,drainage ways are in proper condition,and the final contours agree with the proposed contours on the approved plan. ' COMPONENT: Deep sump catch basins/manholes w/sumps RESPONSIBILITY: During Construction:General Contractor Post Construction:McDonalds' ' ACTION: Cleaning(Sediment removal/sump cleaning)and Inspection FREQUENCY: During Construction ' 1. Cleaning—As needed during construction or whenever the depth of deposits is greater than or equal to one half the depth from the bottom invert of the lowest pipe. 2. Inspection—Weekly during construction ' Post Construction 1. Cleaning—Twice a year or whenever the depth of deposits is greater than or equal to one half the depth from the bottom invert of the lowest pipe in the basin. 2. Inspection—Twice a year rDESCRIPTION: Basins are to be cleaned twice per year. The General Contractor will monitor sumps and remove sediments as necessary.Mcdonalds'will monitor sumps post construction on an as needed basis.Precautions shall take place to maintain the integrity of the oil trapping hoods during cleaning. The hoods shall be inspected and repaired as necessary. Accumulated Hydrocarbon shall be collected separately from accumulated sediment. All material shall be disposed of in accordance with DEP regulations. Inspections: o Frame and Grate o Inlet and Outlet condition ' o Cracks and settlement&joint failure&leaking o Sediment Accumulation o Oil/Gas Sheen in water o Condition of hood ' o General Inspection of structure t COMPONENT: Underground Infiltration Basins RESPONSIBILITY: During Construction:General Contractor/Manufacturer Post Construction:McDonalds'/Manufacturer ACTION: Inspection/cleaning FREQUENCY: During Construction 1. Cleaning—As needed during construction or whenever the sediment depth is 6"deep. ' 2. Inspection—As needed during construction but once at month at a minimum. Post Construction l. Inspection to ensure proper functioning—After every major storm during the first 3 months of ' operation and twice a year thereafter. 2. Cleaning—As needed during construction or whenever the sediment depth is 6"deep. 3. Inspect and clean outlet control devices-After every major storm during the first 3 months of ' operation and twice a year thereafter. DESCRIPTION: The underground infiltration basin shall be inspected a minimum of twice a year to ' ensure that they are operating as intended and that all components are stable and in working order. Inspections shall be by qualified personnel assigned by the property owner. Sediment collecting in the basin bottom shall be inspected twice annually,and removal shall commence any time the sediment reaches a depth of six inches anywhere in the basin. Sediments removed shall be disposed of in accordance with the latest DEP guidelines for stormwater sediment disposal. Inspections: o Inlet and Outlet condition ' o Sediment Accumulation o Oil/Gas Sheen in water o Condition of outlet pipe ' o General Inspection of basin o See Maintenance for Stormtech APPENDIX G ' PIPE SIZING CALCULATIONS 1 1 1 1 DRAINAGE COMPUTATIONS COMP.BY: KBS CHKD. JAK PROJECT: Mcdonalds JOB NO. W082007 DATE: 5/5/2010 DATE: South Windsor,RI DESIGN PERIOD 100-YEAR LOCATION IMPERVIOUS AREA OTHER SUM SUM Q Q V FROM TO A C CA A C CA CA Tc Tc I IxCA D S Ln full full Ac Ac Min Min in/hr cfs in ft/ft cfs f sCB-1 UG-2 0.22 0.9 0.20 0.09 0.3 0.03 0.23 5 5 12 0.005 3.21 CB-2 UG-2 0.22 0.9 0.20 0.12 0.3 0.04 0.23 5 5 12 0.005 . 3.21 CB-3 UG-1 0.5 0.9 0.45 0.12 0.3 0.04 0.49 5 5 12 0.005 0.013 5. 3.21 ROOF UG-2 0.089 0.9 0.08 0.00 0.3 0.00 0.08 5 5 12 0.010 0.013 4.54 f 1 N2S41'_28"E ' 1 (494.54' DEED)NONN rj 1 1 1 0) • I N W � I o --I __ _, 1 r: W 1 a o C133 -• 1 R o r n y 1� z o � CB 1 :�;. j � .' C132 E y& s no _ maW J sa W I U na W • � � 0 o g S2N�'— "W I I 490.% CHI II j II w i i �• �• j / � w F- n _ A I+ a I N o q 011 011 ql Ox— ql I z z Ja (n U GRAPHIC SCALE o SOUTH \ ao o +a so eo BOUND �y W (Q7 FEET) Fnn ysF� g ' �, •100'' �& 1 inch a 30 it ad 8 E 8 STATUS DATE BY JOHN FITCH BOULEVARD e aaiOaE; to APPLICANT �AS—BUILT RELIMINARY 1� MCDONALDS, 690 CANTON ST,WESTWOOD, MA 781 329-1450 — — a<m�.oMi.K,x or iusawuam i■aao"oinraa, (A.K.A. CONNECTICUT STATE HIGHWAY ROUTE US 5). j _ — STREET ADDRESS AN CHECKED a �Mm 1049 JOHN FITCH BLVD. (F.K.A. HARTFORD—SPRINGFIEID ROAD) ). (VARIABLE WIDTH R.O.W.) BOH L E R CITY STATE DRAWN BY: J K05 mn .A. KUCICH ®sxo�■■■■�■aBOHLER 8 N 6 I N 8 8 8 I N C WN511M1IC90N 01EGf p17E SOUTH WINDSOR CT CHECKED BY: JAK ' m • COUNTY DATE: 05-05-10 rnaTamiwN Utv a>F HARTFORD SCALE: AS SHOWN „c PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER NATIONAL STORE NUMBER PLAN DESCRIPTION SHEET NO. PRELIMINARY WAMOQS�LKM�-.'s" — CATCH BASIN �M ' NOT TO BE USED FOR CONSTRUCTION 11 W082007 IL W082007.0.&g ISUBCATCHMENT MAP OF 14 11111� 111111■ 1� � �■ � � � � � � � � � � � � � � `Y �r 1 r �J tit •� Y k Precipitation Regions E xp lan atio n 0 Region 1 Region? _ Region 3 r 0 Region 4 /VMajnrHmIn 0IvIlp-4c Figure 3. Four Precipitation Regions in Connecticut. 21 10.00 I---'i--r-r-rt y-I-------r---r--I--I-y-rtt ------1----I--t-t-r-I-1-I- J__L_L_I_J J_I_______L___L__I__I_J_L J1 _____I____I__J_J_L J_1_L I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I 11 T T 1 I I I I I 1 1 -------'---- -,-r,-I-I- I I I 1 I I I I I I- I I I 11 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I 11 1 1 1 I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 11 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I I_ I 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 1 - I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I J_ 1_ L_ _ I_I__ L___l__11_J_l11 ______I___J__1_J_L J_I_I- I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 I I 1 1 I I I 1 1 11 1 I I I I I I _,__1 I t I _____-,____I--Y-t-r-l-hr I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1.00 ------I---t--t-t-1-t'1-I------ - - I- y tt -----1--=-I--t-'1-r-I-I-r J__L_1__J J_I__ 1_ _I_ L _I__ _I__J_J_L J_I_L 1 L - ----,---T--r-r-r„-I-------r --r --- ,-r T -- ---I----I--T-,-r,-r r I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I 1 1 --- I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I J__L_L_I_J J_I-______L___L__II_J_L1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 11 1 I I I I I I I I = I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I 11 1 I I I I N I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I 11 1 I I 1 I I 11 1 W I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I 11 I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I 11 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I 1 11 1 I I I 1 I I I I 0.10 ------I---t--r-r-rt7-r------r---r--r-r-I-rtt ------r---I--t- -r-I-rr J__L_L_I_J J_I_______L___L__I__I-.-1_L 11 -----_I__ I I I I I I I 1 I 1 1 I I I I----------,-1I---- - -- -I1-------r---rI- 1 1-rT7 ______- _---__,iI-_--_,TI--l-I- 2Y -I------- ------ -r- IIIIr- I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I 1 I 11 I 1 1 I I I � -f- 5Y � I -,---,--��-� ------ I 1 I I 11 1 I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 11 1 I I I I I I I I I OY I I I I 1 I 11 1 I I I 1 I I I _I_______L___L__I__I_J_L 11 _i_ 25YI I I I I I 11 1 I I I I I I I ' I I 1 I I 1 1 1 I 1 I I 11 1,- �- 50Y -1-------r---r--I--I-,-rTT ------1____I--,-,-r,-I-r I 1 I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 1 -- 1 MY I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 0.01 0.10 1.00 10.00 100.00 Duration (hours) ' Figure 5b. Intensity-Duration-Frequency(IDF)Curves. Region 2. ' 47 ' APPENDIXH ' STORMTECH ISOLATOR ROW DATA f 1 1 ' 6 StormTech® STORMTECH ISOLATOR""ROW-STEP-BY-STEP MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES Step 1) Inspect Isolator Row for sediment ' A) Inspection ports (if present) I. Remove lid from floor box frame ' ii. Remove cap from inspection riser iii. Using a flashlight and stadia rod, measure depth of sediment iv. If sediment is at, or above, 3 inch depth proceed to Step 2. If not proceed to step 3. ' B)All Isolator Rows i. Remove cover from manhole at upstream end of Isolator Row ii. Using a flashlight, inspect down Isolator Row through outlet pipe ' 1. Mirrors on poles or cameras may be used to avoid a confined space entry 2. Follow OSHA regulations for confined space entry if entering manhole ' iii. If sediment is at or above the lower row of sidewall holes (approximately 3 inches) proceed to Step 2. If not proceed to Step 3. Step 2)Clean out Isolator Row using the JetVac process A) A fixed culvert cleaning nozzle with rear facing nozzle spread of 45 inches or more is preferable B)Apply multiple passes of JetVac until backflush water is clean C)Vacuum manhole sump as required ' Step 3)Replace all caps, lids and covers Step 4) Inspect&clean catch basins and manholes upstream of the StormTech system following the procedures for Classic Manifold Inlet System Figure 18 StormTech Isolator Row(not to scale) 1)8) 1)A) 2 77, --- iA 4 ' $ i --- �"��B! +o BO 08 00 0 OB +Q OB Ba B BO BO a0 0G BB 0 0 0 0 .G .B BB .0 .B .0 .. . III f - Call StormTech at 888.892.2694 or visit our website at www.stormtech.com for technical and product information. 23 G 13.0 Inspection fi Maintenance ' 13.6 ECCENTRIC PIPE HEADER INSPECTION Eccentric Header step-by-Step Maintenance Theses guidelines do not supercede a pipe manufac- Procedures turer's recommended I&M procedures. Consult with the 1. Locate manholes, access ports or risers connected ' manufacturer of the pipe header system for specific I&M to the header system procedures. Inspection of the header system should 2. Remove grates or covers be carried out quarterly. On sites which generate higher 3. Using a stadia rod, measure the depth of sediment ' levels of sediment more frequent inspections may be 4. If sediment is at a depth of about 25% pipe volume necessary. Headers may be accessed through risers, or 25% pipe diameter proceed to step 5. If not access ports or manholes. Measurement of sediment proceed to step 6. may be taken with a stadia rod or similar device. Clean- 5. Vacuum pump the sediment. Do not flush sediment out of sediment should occur when the sediment volume out inlet pipes. has reduced the storage area by 25% or the depth 6. Replace grates and covers of sediment has reached approximately 25% of the 7. Record depth&date and schedule next inspection diameter of the structure. Figure 19—Manifold Maintenance 13.7 ECCENTRIC PIPE HEADER MAINTENANCE Cleanout of accumulated material should be accom- plished by vacuum pumping the material from the head- er. Cleanout should be accomplished during dry weath- er. Care should be taken to avoid flushing sediments out through the outlet pipes and into the chamber rows. 3,4,5 24 Call StormTech at 888.892.2694 or visit our website at.www.stormtech.com for technical and product information. e ' 13.0 InspectionMaintenance 13.4 ISOLATORTm ROW INSPECTION Regular inspection and maintenance are essential to assure _ . a properly functioning stormwater system. Inspection is easily accomplished through the manhole or optional inspection ports of an Isolator Row. Please follow local i '�_ . • - and OSHA rules for a confined space entry. u P - _ Inspection ports can allow inspection to be accomplished completely from the surface without the need for a con- fined space entry. Inspection ports provide visual access to the system with the use of a flashlight. A stadia rod ' may be inserted to determine the depth of sediment. If upon visual inspection it is found that sediment has accumulated to an average depth exceeding 3 inches, ' cleanout is required. A StormTech Isolator Row should initially be inspected Looking down the Isolator Row. immediately after completion of the site's construction. ' While every effort should be made to prevent sediment from entering the system during construction, it is during this time that excess amounts of sediments are most likely to enter any stormwater system. Inspection and ' maintenance, if necessary, should be performed prior to passing responsibility over to the site's owner. Once , in normal service, a StormTech Isolator Row should be ' inspected bi-annually until an understanding of the sites .--- characteristics is developed. The site's maintenance , manager can then revise the inspection schedule based on experience or local requirements. '' ' 13.5 ISOLATOR ROW MAINTENANCE JetVac maintenance is required if sediment has been col- lected to an average depth of 3 inches or more inside the ' Isolator Row. The JetVac process utilizes a high pressure water nozzle to propel itself down the Isolator Row while A typical JetVac truck.(This is not StormTech product.) scouring and suspending sediments. As the nozzle is ' retrieved, a wave of suspended sediments is flushed back into the manhole for vacuuming. Most sewer and pipe _ .. maintenance companies have vacuum/JetVac combina- tion vehicles. Fixed nozzles designed for culverts or large ' ' diameter pipe cleaning are preferable. Rear facing jets =. x �N with an effective spread of at least 45" are best. Most r JetVac reels have a minimum of 400 feet of hose allowing maintenance of an Isolator Row up to 50 chambers long. sue_ The JetVac process shall only be performed on StormTech >_ Rows that have AASHTO class 1 woven geotextile over ✓ their angular base stone. ' Examples of culvert cleaning nozzles appropriate for Isolator Row maintenance.(These are not StormTech products.) 22 Call StormTech at 888.892.2694 or visit our website at www.stormtech.com for technical and product information. 1 ' APPENDIX I ' GEO TECHNICAL REPORT& PERMEABILITY TEST RESULTS Geotechnical Engineering Report ' Proposed McDonald's Restaurant South Windsor, Connecticut ' December 31, 2009 Project No. J2095226 Prepared for: ' McDonald's USA, LLC Westwood, Massachusetts Prepared by: ' Terracon Consultants, Inc. Rocky Hill, Connecticut Offices Nationwide Established in 1965 Employee-Owned EnvironmentalIrerracon 41 i Irerracon ' December 31, 2009 ' McDonald's USA, LLC 690 Canton Street, Suite 310 Westwood, MA 02090 Attn: Ms. Donna Cole ' P: [781] 329 1450 F: [781] 329 8782 E: donna.cole@us.mcd.com ' Re: Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed McDonald's Restaurant 1049 John Fitch Boulevard South Windsor, Connecticut Terracon Project No. J2095226 Dear Ms. Cole: ' Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) is submitting, herewith, the results of our geotechnical evaluation for the above-referenced project. The purpose of this evaluation was to obtain information on subsurface conditions at the project site and, based on this information, to provide recommendations regarding the design and construction of foundations and site development for the proposed restaurant. Terracon issued a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment(ESA) report for this site under separate cover. In this letter report, we include our understanding of the project, a summary of the ' exploration program, and our design and construction recommendations. This report is subject to the General Comments in Section 5. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you have questions concerning this report, or if we may be of further service, please contact us. SincerelyAStaff� ltants, Inc. e, P.E. Richard . McLaren, P.E. technical Engineer Senior Associate Department Manager—Geotechnical Services /ekc/J2095226 ' Attachment Terracon Consultants, Inc. 201 Hammer Mill Road Rocky Hill, CT 06067 ' P [8601721 1900 F [8601721 1939 terracon.com IS e i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION...............................................................................................1 2.1 Project Description .................................................................................... 1 2.2 Site Location and Description.................................................................... 2 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS AND CONDITIONS....................................................3 3.1 Typical Profile ......•••• 3 .................................................................................. 3.2 Groundwater.............................................................................................. 3 ' 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION.......................................3 4.1 Geotechnical Considerations..................................................................... 3 4.2 Earthwork .................................................................................................. 4 4.2.1 Site Preparation.........................................................................................4 4.2.2 Material Types...........................................................................................5 ' 4.2.3 Compaction Requirements........................................................................5 4.2.4 Utility Trench Backfill .................................................................................6 4.2.5 Grading and Drainage...............................................................................6 4.2.6 Construction Considerations......................................................................6 4.3 Foundation Recommendations.................................................................. 7 ' 4.3.1 Design Recommendations ............................. .7 4.3.2 Construction Considerations......................................................................8 4.4 Seismic Considerations........................................................................... 10 4.5 Floor Slab.. ............................................................................................ 10 4.5.1 Design Recommendations ...................................................................... 10 4.5.2 Construction Considerations ....................................................................10 4.6 Pavement................................................................................................ 11 4.6.1 Design Recommendations ......................................................................11 ' 4.6.2 Construction Considerations............................................ .12 6.0 GENERAL COMMENTS.................................................................................................13 ' APPENDIX A—FIELD EXPLORATION Exhibit A-1 Topographic Vicinity Map—Figure 1 Exhibit A-2 Exploration Location Diagram—Figure 2 Exhibit A-3 Boring Logs—JB-1 through JB-6 Exhibit A-4 Field Exploration Description APPENDIX B—LABORATORY TESTING Exhibit B-1 Laboratory Testing APPENDIX C—SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Exhibit C-1 General Notes Exhibit C-2 Unified Soil Classification System Reliable■ Responsive ■ Convenient■ Innovative ' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT PROPOSED MCDONALD'S RESTAURANT 1049 JOHN FITCH BOULEVARD SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT ' Project No. J2096226 December 31, 2009 ' 1.0 INTRODUCTION The geotechnical engineering report for the proposed McDonald's restaurant located at 1049 rJohn Fitch Boulevard in South Windsor, Hartford County, Connecticut, as shown on the Topographic Vicinity Map (Figure 1) in Appendix A, has been completed. Six soil borings (JB-1 ' through JB-6) were drilled throughout the site to depths up to 22 feet below existing ground surface. An Exploration Location Diagram (Figure 2) and individual exploration logs are included in Appendix A. The purpose of these services is to provide information and geotechnical engineering recommendations relative to: ■ subsurface soil conditions ■ foundation design and construction ■ groundwater conditions ■ seismic considerations ' ■ earthwork ■ slab design and construction 2.0 PROJECT INFORMATION The site is located at 1049 John Fitch Boulevard in South Windsor, Hartford County, Connecticut. The site is an approximate 4.3-acre tract of land that has been improved with an approximately 16,300-square foot (sf), single-story brick warehouse with associated paved and landscaped areas to the south. An approximately 4,700-sf, single-story, wood-sided outbuilding is located within the southwestern portion of the site. The remainder of the site consists of agricultural fields. 2.1 Project Description Our knowledge of the project is based on review of the "Survey Based Concept Plan", Drawing No. C-2, dated September 30, 2009, by Bohler Engineering of Southborough, Massachusetts. The project consists of the demolition of the existing warehouse and outbuilding and the construction of ' a new prototypical restaurant within the footprint of the existing warehouse. Paved drive lanes and parking areas are planned around the building. Concrete pads and sidewalks will be constructed at various locations across the site. Access to the site will be provided by three entrance/exit lanes, ' two from Governor's Highway and one from John Fitch Boulevard. A summary description of the project is presented below: ' Reliable ■ Responsive ■ Convenient ■ Innovative 1 ' Geotechnical Engineering Report Irerracon Proposed McDonald's Restaurant■South Windsor, Connecticut December 31,2009■Terracon Project No.J2095226 ITEM DESCRIPTION ' Site layout Appendix A, Exhibit A-2 (Figure 1), Exploration Location Diagram Building One story with a footprint of about 3,900 sf Building Construction Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU) exterior walls with interior steel framing (assumed) Finished Floor Elevation i Unknown ' Interior Columns: 120 kips (assumed) Maximum Loads Exterior Columns: 100 kip (assumed) Load Bearing Walls: 3.5 kips per foot(assumed) ' Floor Slabs: 150 pounds per square foot(assumed) Total Settlement: 1 inch Maximum allowable settlement ' : Differential Settlement: '/inch A proposed grading plan was not available at the time of writing Grading this report. However, based on existing site grading and the Surrey Based Concept Plan, only minor grading, less than about 1 foot or so, appears to be required. Basement Level A basement is not proposed for this building. ' 2.2 Site Location and Description ITEM DESCRIPTION Location 1049 John Fitch Boulevard, South Windsor, Connecticut An approximately 16,300-sf, single-story brick warehouse with Existing improvements associated paved and landscaped areas. An approximately 4,700-sf single-story,wood-sided outbuilding. ' Generally bituminous concrete pavement south of the existing Current ground cover warehouse. Agricultural fields north and west of the existing structures. Existing topography The site slopes slightly down to the northwest. The 1992 USGS topographic quadrangle map for Manchester, Connecticut shows the 70-foot surface elevation contour(NGVD 1929) traversing the site. The quadrangle map depicts the site as being located in a primarily commercial area. r t ' Reliable ■ Responsive■ Convenient■ Innovative 2 Geotechnical Engineering Report Irerracon Proposed McDonald's Restaurant■South Windsor, Connecticut December 31,2009■Terracon Project No. J2095226 3.0 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS AND CONDITIONS 3.1 Typical Profile Based on the results of the borings and observations at the time of drilling, subsurface conditions on the project site can be generalized as follows: ' 1 Approximate Depth to i Material Encountered Consistency/Relative Description Bottom of Stratum(feet) j Density Poorly graded sand with ' Stratum 1 10 to 11.5 silt,orange brown Loose to Medium dense (Glaciofluvial Deposit) Lean clay, gray Stratum 2 >11.5 Very soft to soft (Glaciolacustrine Deposit) 1. Bituminous concrete was encountered at the surface in JB-1. The remaining explorations ' encountered topsoil at the surface. Conditions encountered at each boring location are indicated on the individual boring logs in Appendix A of this report. Stratification boundaries on the boring logs represent the approximate location of changes in soil types; in situ, the transition between materials may be gradual. Further details of the borings can be found on the boring logs. 3.2 Groundwater Groundwater was encountered in each exploration at depths ranging from 7 to 8 feet below existing ground surface. Fluctuations in groundwater level may occur because of seasonal variations in the amount of rainfall, runoff and other factors. Additionally, grade adjustments on and around the site, as well as surrounding drainage improvements, may affect the water table. The possibility of groundwater level fluctuations should be considered when developing the design and ' construction plans for the project. 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION 4.1 Geotechnical Considerations ' The site is underlain by a potentially compressible glaciolacustrine deposit below a depth of approximately 10 to 11.5 feet. The warehouse, which has been in place for over 40 years, does ' not exhibit exterior signs of distress due to settlement. This implies that the existing development did not cause significant consolidation of the glaciolacustrine deposit. Provided the grade is not raised as part of this project, consolidation of the glaciolacustrine soils should ' Reliable ■ Responsive■ Convenient■ Innovative 3 ' Geotechnical Engineering Report Irerracon Proposed McDonald's Restaurant■South Windsor, Connecticut ' December 31,2009■Terracon Project No.J2095226 not occur. However, if grade is raised by more than about a foot, then consolidation of the ' glaciolacustrine deposit may start. Further recommendations would be required. ' As part of the site development, the existing warehouse and outbuilding will be demolished. Demolition should include removal of foundation elements within the proposed construction area. Loose backfill adjacent to existing foundations should be removed. The proposed building ' will be constructed entirely within the footprint of the warehouse. We recommend that existing foundation elements and utilities within the proposed building area and within the foundation bearing zone be removed. The foundation bearing zone is defined as the volume below 1 H:1 V ' lines extending outward and downward from the lower edges of the footings. We consider the soils currently beneath the existing pavement to be inadequate to provide proper drainage and support of the pavement section. As such, we recommend removal of the existing bituminous concrete pavement and enough underlying soil to accommodate a new pavement section, including a 12-inch layer of granular base/subbase. 4.2 Earthwork 4.2.1 Site Preparation As part of the site preparation, the existing buildings will be demolished and pavements removed. ' We recommend that existing foundation elements and utilities within the proposed building area and within the foundation bearing zone be removed. Elsewhere, existing foundation elements and utilities should be removed only where they conflict with proposed utilities and pavements, and in ' such cases to a depth of 3 feet below the affected utility or underside of pavement section. Areas disturbed during demolition of the existing structures and the removal of foundation elements should be evaluated by the geotechnical engineer or his representative prior to placement of fill. tDisturbed soils should be undercut prior to placement of fill. Excavations for the removal of foundation elements and utilities should be backfilled in compacted lifts. Prior to placing fill, vegetation, bituminous concrete, topsoil, and any otherwise unsuitable materials should be removed. The exposed subgrade should be compacted with a least six passes of a minimum 10-ton (static weight) vibratory roller compactor. Unstable subgrades and any deleterious material should be removed and replaced with compacted structural fill or minus %-inch crushed stone, as necessary. Fill may then be placed to attain the required grade. ' Reliable ■ Responsive ■Convenient■ Innovative 4 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed McDonald's Restaurant■South Windsor, Connecticut Irerracon ' December 31, 2009■Terracon Project No.J2095226 4.2.2 Material Types Fill should meet the following material property requirements: Fill Type USCS Classification Acceptable Location for Placement ' All locations and elevations. The native glaciofluvial Structural Fill GWz deposit may be selectively re-used as structural fill, provided it meets the gradation requirements in Note 2, below. Common fill may be used for site grading to within 12 inches of finished grade. Common fill should not be ' Common fill Varies 3 used under settlement sensitive structures. The native glaciofluvial deposit may be re-used as common fill, provided it is free of organics and can be adequately compacted. 1. Compacted structural fill should consist of approved materials that are free of organic matter and debris. Frozen material should not be used. Fill should not be placed on a frozen subgrade. 2. Imported structural fill should meet the following gradation: ' Percent Passing by Weight Sieve Size Structural Fill ' 6" 100 3" 70—100 2" (100)* %11 45—95 No.4 30—90 ' No. 10 25—80 No. 40 10—50 No.200 0- 12 ' * Maximum 2-inch particle size within 12 inches of the underside of footings or slabs 3. Common fill should have a maximum particle size of 6 inches and no more than 25 percent by ' weight passing the US No. 200 sieve. 4.2.3 Compaction Requirements ' ITEM ; DESCRIPTION Fill Lift Thickness 8 inches or less in loose thickness Compaction Requirements 95% maximum modified Proctor dry density (ASTM D1557, Method C) Moisture Content—Granular Material Workable moisture levels ' 1. We recommend that structural fill be tested for moisture content and compaction during placement. Should the results of the in-place density tests indicate the specified moisture or compaction limits have not been met, the area represented by the test should be reworked and ' retested, as required, until the specified moisture and compaction requirements are achieved. Reliable ■ Responsive ■Convenient■ Innovative 5 ' Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed McDonald's Restaurant■South Windsor, Connecticut Irerracon ' December 31,2009■Terracon Project No.J2095226 4.2.4 Utility Trench Backfill ' All trench excavations should be made with sufficient working space to permit construction including backfill placement and compaction. If utility trenches are backfilled with relatively clean granular material, they should be capped with at least 18 inches of cohesive fill in non-pavement ' areas to reduce the infiltration and conveyance of surface water through the trench backfill. Alternatively, trenches should be backfilled with material that approximately matches the permeability characteristics of the surrounding soil. Fill placed as backfill for utilities located ' below the slab should consist of compacted structural fill or suitable bedding material. 4.2.5 Grading and Drainage Adequate drainage should be provided at the site to reduce the likelihood of an increase in moisture content of the foundation soils. Pavement or parking areas should be sloped away from the building to reduce the likelihood of water ponding near the structure. 4.2.6 Construction Considerations ' Although the exposed subgrade is anticipated to be relatively stable upon initial exposure, unstable subgrade conditions could develop during general construction operations, particularly if the soils are wetted and/or subjected to repetitive construction traffic. Should unstable subgrade conditions develop, stabilization measures will need to be employed. Construction traffic over the completed subgrade should be avoided to the extent practical. The ' site should also be graded to prevent ponding of surface water on the prepared subgrades or in excavations. If the subgrade should become frozen, wet, or disturbed, the affected material should be removed, or should be scarified, moisture conditioned, and recompacted. ' As a minimum, temporary excavations should be sloped or braced, as required by Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) regulations, to provide stability and safe working ' conditions. Temporary excavations will probably be required during grading operations. The contractor, by his contract, is usually responsible for designing and constructing stable, temporary excavations and should shore, slope or bench the sides of the excavations, as required, to maintain stability of both the excavation sides and bottom. All excavations should comply with applicable local, State and federal safety regulations, including the current OSHA ' Excavation and Trench Safety Standards. The geotechnical engineer should be retained during the construction phase of the project to observe earthwork and to perform necessary tests and observations during subgrade preparation; proofrolling; placement and compaction of controlled compacted fills; backfilling of excavations in the completed subgrade; construction of retaining walls; and just prior to ' construction of foundations. tReliable ■ Responsive ■ Convenient■ Innovative 6 ' Geotechnical Engineering Report Irerracon Proposed McDonald's Restaurant■South Windsor, Connecticut ' December 31,2009■Terracon Project No. J2095226 Installation of deeper site utilities may require excavation near or below the groundwater table. Temporary dewatering may be required to allow installation of the utilities and compaction of the engineered fill. For utilities, proofrolling of the exposed subgrade need not be performed and static compaction of the initial lift of fill may be appropriate. Crushed stone (%-inch minus) may be used in place of structural fill at or close to the water level to facilitate fill placement. 4.3 Foundation Recommendations The proposed building may be supported on shallow spread footings bearing on the native glaciofluvial deposit or on compacted structural fill or minus s/-inch crushed stone placed on the glaciofluvial deposit. Design recommendations for shallow foundations are presented in the following paragraphs. ' 4.3.1 Design Recommendations DESCRIPTION VALUE ' Net allowable bearing pressure 3,000 psf Minimum strip footing width 18 inches Minimum isolated spread footing width 24 inches Minimum footing embedment below finished 3.5 feet grade for frost protection Approximate total settlement 2 <1 inch Estimated differential settlement 2 <%inch Total Unit Weight(y) 120 pcf ' Passive earth pressure coefficient, Kp3 3.0 (ultimate) Coefficient of sliding friction ° 0.5 (ultimate) 1. The recommended net allowable bearing pressure is the pressure in excess of the minimum surrounding overburden pressure at the footing base elevation. 2. Foundation settlement will depend upon the variations within the subsurface soil profile, the ' structural loading conditions, the embedment depth of the footing, the thickness of compacted fill, and the quality of the earthwork operations. 3. Passive pressure calculated with this parameter should be reduced by at least a factor of safety of 3, ' to reflect the amount of movement required to mobilize the passive resistance. 4. A factor of safety of at least 1.5 should be applied to the sliding resistance. ' Site underground utilities, light standard foundations, drainage structures, and the like may be soil supported in a similar manner to building footings. Foundations for site appurtenances may 1 be designed on the basis of a net allowable bearing pressure of 2 ksf. However, the net allowable bearing pressure should be reduced to 1.5 ksf, if the foundation dimensions are less than the recommended minimum. ' Reliable ■ Responsive ■Convenient■ Innovative 7 ' Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed McDonald's Restaurant■South Windsor, Connecticut Irerracon ' December 31,2009■Terracon Project No. J2095226 The underside of interior footings not exposed to outside temperatures should be at least 1.5 ' feet below finished floor level. If interior footings are to be exposed to freezing temperatures during construction, the underside of interior footings should be at least 3.5 feet below adjacent grade unless underlain by lean concrete to the frost depth of 3.5 feet. If construction occurs ' during cold weather, the soil bearing surfaces in exposed footing excavations should be protected from frost. Groundwater was encountered near the expected foundation level in the explorations. The groundwater table will likely fluctuate and may be seasonally higher. Therefore, foundation drains are recommended for the proposed building. The foundation drain should consist of a ' minimum 4-inch diameter perforated or slotted HDPE pipe in a trench lined with geotextile separation fabric (Mirafi 140N, or equivalent), and filled with minus 3/-inch crushed stone. The perforations/slots in the HDPE pipe should be approximately level with the underside of footing ' elevation. Water stops should be installed where appropriate in foundation walls. Provided the perimeter foundation drain is installed, underslab drains will not be required. A below-grade basement is not anticipated for the proposed building. Therefore, dampproofing of foundation walls is not required. ' 4.3.2 Construction Considerations The base of foundation excavations should be free of water and loose soil prior to placing concrete. Concrete should be placed soon after excavating to reduce bearing soil disturbance. 1 Should the soils at bearing level become wet, disturbed or frozen, the affected soil should be removed prior to placing concrete. The geotechnical engineer should be retained to observe and test the soil foundation bearing materials. ' If unsuitable bearing soils are encountered in footing excavations, the excavations should be extended deeper to [>; Itit i lei it 4.ctit ts' 91i suitable soils and the footings , could bear directly on these soils at the lower level. The footings w �` ' x could also bear on properly Desiaa FwUngLosui - F compacted structural fill �dmrill Q� DTI extending down to the suitable ° _ soils. Overexcavation for compacted structural fill �.144 placement below footings should ' extend laterally beyond all edges note:Excavation in sketch is shown vertical for convenience. of the footings at least 8 inches Excavations should be sloped as necessary for safety. per foot of overexcavation depth ' below footing base elevation. The overexcavation should then be backfilled up to the footing base elevation with well-graded granular material placed in lifts of 8 inches or less in loose ' Reliable ■ Responsive■ Convenient■ Innovative 8 ' Geotechnical Engineering Report Irerracon Proposed McDonald's Restaurant■South Windsor, Connecticut ' December 31,2009■Terracon Project No. J2095226 thickness and compacted to at least 95 percent of the modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D1557, Method C). The overexcavation and backfill procedure is described in the tadjacent figure. Based on groundwater levels encountered during our explorations, excavation for footings may require excavation close to or below the groundwater table. Temporary dewatering may be required to allow placement of the footings. Proofrolling of the exposed subgrade may require ' that the water table be lowered a couple of feet below the bottom of the excavation. If fill is required, minus 3/-inch crushed stone may be used in place of structural fill at or close to the water level to facilitate fill placement. Structural fill, compacted in accordance with the 1 recommendations of this report, should then be placed to bottom of footing grade. The contractor should be required to maintain a stable subgrade during construction. The contractor should prevent groundwater, if encountered, and surface water runoff from collecting in the excavation. Subgrade soils that become unstable because of water and/or reworking by construction activity should be replaced with compacted structural fill or minus %-inch crushed ' stone, as necessary. The predominant soil types at the recommended subgrade level will be the native glaciofluvial ' deposit, which may have an elevated silt content. Soils with a higher silt content will be sensitive to excess moisture and lose strength quickly during wet periods. Contractors ' experienced in earthwork construction in New England should be aware of the silty soil behavior and the effect that moisture and inclement weather can have on its workability. If a contractor bids construction knowing that earthwork must begin during the winter or wet months, the ' contractor should include a contingency in his bid to use off-site suitable fill, and to remove and dispose of on-site soils that become unsuitable. Reliable ■ Responsive ■Convenient■ Innovative 9 Geotechnical Engineering Report Irerracon Proposed McDonald's Restaurant■South Windsor, Connecticut ' December 31,2009■Terracon Project No. J2095226 4.4 Seismic Considerations DESCRIPTION VALUE Code Used Connecticut State Building Code(CBC)' Site Class E z ' Maximum considered earthquake ground 0.064g(1.0 second spectral response acceleration) motions(6 percent damping) 0.237g (0.2 second spectral response acceleration) Liquefaction potential in event of an earthquake Not susceptible ' 1. The CBC incorporates the Seismic Design Category approach from the 2003 International Building Code. 2. The CBC requires a site soil profile determination extending a depth of 100 feet for seismic site classification. The current scope requested does not include the required 100 foot soil profile determination; the borings performed for this report extended to a maximum depth of 22 feet. ' However, we expect soil consistent with that encountered above a depth of 22 feet will extend to a depth of at least 100 feet. 4.5 Floor Slab 4.5.1 Design Recommendations ' DESCRIPTION VALUE Floor Slab support 12-inch thick layer compacted structural fill Modulus of subgrade reaction 200 pounds per square inch per in(psi/in) 1. Floor slabs should be structurally independent of building footings or walls to reduce the possibility of floor slab cracking caused by differential movements between the slab and foundation. Where appropriate, control joints should be saw-cut in the slab to help control the location and ' extent of cracking. For additional recommendations, refer to the ACI Design Manual. A vapor retarder should be placed beneath concrete slabs-on-grade. The slab designer should ' refer to ACI 302 and/or ACI 360 for procedures and cautions regarding the use and placement of a vapor retarder. ' 4.5.2 Construction Considerations On most project sites, the site grading is generally accomplished early in the construction phase. However as construction proceeds, the subgrade may be disturbed because of utility excavations, construction traffic, precipitation, etc. As a result, the floor slab subgrade may not be suitable for placement of granular base and concrete, and corrective action will be required. ' Reliable■ Responsive ■Convenient■ Innovative 10 Geotechnical Engineering Report Irerracon Proposed McDonald's Restaurant■South Windsor, Connecticut December 31,2009■Terracon Project No. J2095226 We recommend the area underlying the floor slab be rough graded and then thoroughly ' compacted with at least six passes of a minimum 10-ton (static weight) vibratory roller compactor, before being proofrolled with a loaded tandem axle dump truck prior to final grading and placement of granular base. Particular attention should be paid to high traffic areas that ' were rutted and disturbed earlier and to areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas with unsuitable conditions should be repaired by removing and replacing the affected material with properly compacted fill. Floor slab subgrade areas should be moisture conditioned and properly compacted to the recommendations in this report, immediately prior to placement of the granular base and concrete. 4.6 Pavement ' 4.6.1 Design Recommendations Traffic Area Bituminous Bituminous Portland Granular Granular Total Concrete Concrete Cement Base Subbase Thickness Surface Binder Course Concrete Course Course ' Course (inches) (inches) (inches) (inches) (inches) inches 1 Standard Duty 1.5 1.5 N/A 6 l 6 1 15 rHeavy Duty 1.5 2.0 N/A 6 i 6 j 15.5 i Rigid N/A N/A 6 6 j 6 18 Pavement designs were based on AASHTO Guide for Design of Pavement Structures (1993) and our experience with similar projects. The thickness of each course is a function of subgrade strength, traffic, design life, serviceability factors, and frost susceptibility. The design of pavement thickness was based on the following: ' • 00 18-kip Equivalent Axle Loads EALs for standard-duty parking lot 60,0 p q ( ) Y p 9 • 100,000 18-kip EALs for heavy-duty driveways and truck access lanes • Soil characterization of"fair', based on the encountered subsurface conditions • Design life of 20 years Pavements subjected to high traffic volumes and heavy trucks require thicker pavement sections. Rigid concrete pavement is recommended at the location of dumpsters where trash ' trucks will park, areas of channelized traffic, drive-through aprons, and loading areas. For dumpster pads, as a minimum, the concrete pavement area should be large enough to support the container and tipping axle of the refuse truck. The outer edges of concrete pavement are ' susceptible to damage as trucks move from the concrete to the adjacent bituminous concrete. Therefore, the concrete thickness of the outer 2 feet of the concrete pavement should be increased to 12 inches. Dowels should be placed across slab expansion joints to limit differential settlements. Welded wire mesh (% inch) should be incorporated into the rigid concrete pavement design to provide tensile strength and increase serviceability. The above Reliable ■ Responsive ■ Convenient ■ Innovative 11 iGeotechnical Engineering Report Proposed McDonald's Restaurant■South Windsor, Connecticut Irerracon December 31,2009■Terracon Project No.J2095226 sections represent minimum thicknesses and, as such, periodic maintenance should be anticipated. The bituminous concrete should be placed in accordance with the State of Connecticut Department of Transportation (CTDOT) Standard Specifications for Roads, Bridges and Incidental Construction (Form 816) 2004. Bituminous concrete should be placed within the temperature range specified therein and compacted to 92 percent of the Marshall Density for the job mix formula. Pavement_components should meet the following material specifications from Form 816. Pavement Component Specification ' Bituminous concrete wearing course M.04.02—Class 2 Bituminous concrete binder course M.04.02—Class 1 Base course M.02.06, Grading C Subbase course i M.02.06, Grading B Portland cement concrete M.03.01, Pavement 4.6.2 Construction Considerations Pavement subgrades prepared early in the project should be carefully evaluated as the time for ' pavement construction approaches. We recommend the pavement areas be stripped of existing organic material, bituminous concrete, and enough underlying soil to accommodate the new pavement section. Following removal of these items, the area should be rough graded and thoroughly compacted with at least six passes of a minimum 10-ton (static weight) vibratory roller compactor before being proofrolled with a loaded tandem-axle dump truck. Particular ' attention should be paid to high traffic areas that were rutted and disturbed and areas where backfilled trenches are located. Areas where unsuitable conditions are located should be repaired by replacing the materials with properly compacted fill. When proofrolling/subgrade stabilization has been completed to the satisfaction of the geotechnical engineer, subbase may be placed. ' Future performance of pavements constructed on the site will be dependent upon maintaining stable moisture content of the subgrade soil. The performance of pavements may be enhanced by reducing excess moisture that can reach the subgrade soils. The following recommendations should be considered at a minimum: • Grading the site to a minimum 2 percent slope away from the pavements; • Installing an edge drain at the edge of the pavement on the high side of the site; • Sealing landscaped areas in or adjacent to pavements to reduce moisture migration to subgrade soils; Placing compacted backfill against the exterior side of curb and gutter; and, tReliable ■ Responsive ■Convenient ■ Innovative 12 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed McDonald's Restaurant■South Windsor, Connecticut Irerracon ' December 31,2009■Terracon Project No. J2095226 • Placing curb and gutter directly on subgrade soils without the use of base ' course materials. Preventative maintenance should be planned and provided through an on-going pavement ' management program in order to enhance future pavement performance. Preventative maintenance activities are intended to slow the rate of pavement deterioration, and to preserve the pavement investment. Preventative maintenance consists of both localized maintenance, e.g., crack and joint sealing and patching, and global maintenance, e.g., surface sealing. Preventative maintenance is ' usually the first priority when implementing a planned pavement maintenance program and provides the highest return on investment for pavements. Prior to implementing any maintenance, additional engineering observation is recommended to assess the type and extent ' of preventative maintenance. ' 5.0 GENERAL COMMENTS Terracon should be retained to review the final design plans and specifications, so comments ' can be made regarding interpretation and implementation of our geotechnical recommendations in the design and specifications. Terracon also should be retained to provide observation and testing services during grading, excavation, foundation construction, and other earth-related ' construction phases of the project. The analysis and recommendations presented in this report are based upon the data obtained ' from the explorations performed at the indicated locations and from other information discussed in this report. This report does not reflect variations that may occur between explorations, across the site, or due to the modifying effects of weather. The nature and extent of such variations may not become evident until during or after construction. If variations appear, we should be immediately notified so that further evaluation and supplemental recommendations can be provided. The scope of services for this project does not include either specifically or by implication any ' environmental or biological (e.g., mold, fungi, bacteria) assessment of the site or identification or prevention of pollutants, hazardous materials or conditions. Terracon has issued a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment under separate cover. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of our client for specific application to the project discussed and prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering ' practices. No warranties, either express or implied, are intended or made. Site safety, excavation support, and dewatering requirements are the responsibility of others. In the event that changes in the nature, design, or location of the project as outlined in this report are planned, the ' conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless Terracon reviews the changes and either verifies or modifies the conclusions of this report in writing. ' Reliable ■ Responsive ■ Convenient■ Innovative 13 1 APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Y East Wind / f t `e. ! .lam �` �'/x _ ?•+ R8 '.�ICY r � �\" �"'' t'" .r. �; n ,�'.�I +}' •k, � � �. � �t}y^`tp } / Or- 1 •`-` t. t�! s .i 1 it .,n.,.f.\� "' 4 .o+' •�� \� ��- /��/! oU Ed • + t + + F l G� tf �.v kryj� a. y riY � :.� .. 880• *.•°'-S_ ��(( (,ri "T�o� � .{ �., f „•.i j �t�i(�I i3- �� ° Q 'Q V� � r • t �'•Q it ®�� 1 ',v _nY \• �Q� t .� �:..� t0 �, �B'7 •� s' ,t��7'I�r � �'� u 14�y"�Tr � � `", �.� P �p ;. .:.- ��9 t� tlft • � r ��-y)p/��—/�/y��7�,7"' � �i�.l{ �T j_.� .n` '?` . `� va �� A JLJ .n11Tf� 1� ✓ �4*� � i a a j• ~fit � �� 1t��G �" �• t ;.16- :t - • ``� t^ p f ♦ t xn {1��ar_:1.. -, I 1•;j t �: •TF f e { k t9a; •` 4 __ YF'• •,�+f-'� t t �� r s� r �r-_�•� �,'r-7�Jgv • R !•, 1rr1,�.. -.,` I 4t { h zN.�n K 4 Y+v kr. rt 5 6Y• ..fix fi lti+.s. 441 dsor /up j h t�� e.�`i �:'F: ii'i• I "\�j I • 1 t e�!r� .�•��`� "~p. 1 yry� Q * �• C �• � 4 ctiy.4{�a�_ 0 4q 4 >�..> >r"` •U 'l•- t�1Y •r ••�.•f Y' - � ''r ��� b ��• ft. + � _r••, �. t•, •rJ .� 1 t o v • O ••^ -G ti• 1 1 p •4\. 1• y�,y A 41 K.1 ' SCALE:1:24 000 1 12 0 1 MILE 10W 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 60M 7000 FEET 1 .5 0 110LOMETER CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 PmjWMgr. SCL PmhotNo. J2095226 TOPOGRAPHIC VICINITY MAP FIG.No. Dmvm By: MMCHET It�rr�con PROPOSED MCDONALD'S RESTAURANT ' APH MulcxEST6lLcaxxEcncur•1sn checked By: Consulting Engineers and Scientists SCL Fie No. J2095226 1049 JOHN FITCH BOULEVARD w Appmved6y: 201 HemmarM""d R HIIl cannecOwt06087 SOUTH WINDSOR,CONNECTICUT RWMpeb: •I DECEMBER20 99 1 1 _ T' —i L _ _ ,-,� - i ' 5\ -6 ij SIM. 1 1 I I 1 ,,;� _- APM)OHATE ARFA V=SF 1 14 MAP 71 LOT 21 B 2 I NF OF JB- 1049 JOHN FITCHLANDS BOUCEVAR VOL: 1945, PG. 65 1 p 01 (SEE NOTE 9) � t 00 65'FRONT BUILDI NOTES: 1. THIS DIAGRAM WAS PREPARED BASED ON A PLAN BY BOHLER ENGINEERING OF 40 0 20 40 SOUTHBOROUGH,MASSACHUSETTS,TITLED,"SURVEY BASED CONCEPT PLAW,SHEET NO.: C-2, !Siiie!!n PROJECT NO.:W082007,DATE:SEPTEMBER 30,2009. SCALE IN FEET 2. THE TEST BORINGS JB-1 THROUGH JM WERE ADVANCED ON DECEMBER 10,2009. TEST BORINGS WERE ADVANCED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF TERRACON WITH EQUIPMENT OWNED AND OPERATED BY NEW ENGLAND BORING CONTRACTORS, INC. OF GLASTONBURY, CONNECTICUT. LEGEND 3. THE APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF THE TEST BORINGS WERE TAPED FROM SITE FEATURES. THE LOCATIONS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ACCURATE ONLY TO THE DEGREE IMPLIED BY THE JB-1 TEST BORING LOCATION(TYP) METHOD USED. 4. USE OF THIS DIAGRAM IS LIMITED TO THE ILLUSTRATION OF THE APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF THE TEST BORINGS,AND OTHER PERTINENT SITE FEATURES. ANY OTHER USE OF THIS DIAGRAM WITHOUT PERMISSION FROM TERRACON IS PROHIBITED, FIG.No. Pfaj�.Ct Mngr. SCL Pmlect NO. J2095226 l��rr3CIM EXPLORATION LOCATION DIAGRAMDrawn ey. APH - PROPOSED MCDONALDS RESTAURANT Ch"ked By: 1"=40' SCL Fie No. Consulting Engineers and Scientists 1049 JOHN FITCH BOULEVARD Apploled BT. J2095226 RWM Date: DECEMBER 20M a 2 1 HamerILRaM Roc kvH4�necticut!606i SOUTH WINDSOR,CONNECTICUT 2 in pF(a"op 00 LOG OF BORING No. JB-'I Page 1 of 1 CLIENT McDonald's USA,LLC SITE 1049 John Fitch Boulevard PROJECT South Windsor,CT Proposed McDonald's Restaurant SAMPLES TESTS T C9 0 Q o W a ' DESCRIPTION g 3 z H z cn w > in o:w Z z X(n o r cn Co w O �w z ov W =u~i ' w vi D w a ¢0 = zF- i—w 0 Approx. Surface Elev.: (Unknown) 0 z � N 0 a m 0 BITUMINOUS CONCRETE SP 1 SS 18 4-4 3-3 ' SP 2 SS 21 4-6 8-11 POORLY GRADED SAND,with silt,orange-brown, 5 SP 3 SS 16 6-9 loose to medium dense. 12-13 r (GLACIOFLUVIAL DEPOSIT) •�10 10 CL 4 SS 8 2-3 3-3 15 CL 5 SS 24 1/12" 1-1 LEAN CLAY,gray,very soft to medium stiff. 20 CL 6 SS 24 1-2 o (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT) 3-3 N 22 o BORING TERMINATED AT 22.0 ft w W 'a c? U t O O 2 H N N 0 J Q Z 0 U N The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines between soil and rock types; in situ,the transition may be gradual. 31/41'ID HSA,2"OD SS,140h a ' WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS,ft BORING STARTED 12-10-09 WL � 7 1 BORING COMPLETED 12-10-09 o WIL11rerracon1RIG Mobile B-48 FOREMAN TC AAWL After 5 minutes LOGGED DY JOB# J2095226 LOG OF BORING No. JB-2 Pagel of 1 CLIENT McDonald's USA,LLC SITE 1049 John Fitch Boulevard PROJECT South Windsor,CT Proposed McDonald's Restaurant SAMPLES TESTS O O a o DESCRIPTION M 3 F z a oo w� OwwH U) m w Q0 VQ W Approx. Surface Elev.: (Unknown) o D z uai a D u~i o� TOPSOIL SP 1 SS 12 2 5 5-5 SP 2 - SS 23 3-2 3-5 ' POORLY GRADED SAND,with silt,orange-brown, 5 SP 3 SS 20 5-7 very loose to medium dense. 7"9 10 SP 4 SS 18 5-9 " 11.5 (GLACIOFLUVIAL DEPOSIT) 11-5 15 CL 5 SS 24 1/12" 1-1 LEAN CLAY,gray,very soft. 20 CL 6 SS 24 1/12" o (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT) 1-1 22 N o BORING TERMINATED AT 22.0 ft w w r 'a c? 0 Z � ~ 0 J Q N The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines between soil and rock types; in situ,the transition may be gradual. 31/4"ID HSA,2"OD SS,140h ' WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS,ft BORING STARTED 12-10-09 os o WL SL 8 1 BORING COMPLETED 12-10-09 w WL 3z 1 erracon RIG Mobile B-48 FOREMAN TC WL After 5 minutes LOGGED DY JOB# J2095226 LOG OF BORING No. JB-3 Page 1 of 1 ' CLIENT McDonald's USA,LLC SITE 1049 John Fitch Boulevard PROJECT South Windsor,CT Proposed McDonald's Restaurant SAMPLES TESTS m O DESCRIPTION 2 3 1-: z U a = U) m > 0° w� Ow w� I- to Lu O !_Z U� = ' Approx. Surface Elev.: (Unknown) o D z W vai �o Q D r~n o f- TOPSOIL SP 1 SS 14 1-2 3-2 ' SP 2 SS 19 2-3 3-5 POORLY GRADED SAND,with silt,orange-brown to 5 SP 3 SS 12 4-5 brown,loose to medium dense. 8-10 Q 10 (GLACIOFLUVIAL DEPOSIT) 10 CL 4 SS 11 3-1 2-3 15 CL 5 SS 24 1/12" LEAN CLAY,gray,very soft to soft. 1 2 20 CL 6 SS 24 1/12" 0 (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT) 1 2 '0 22 o BORING TERMINATED AT 22.0 ft w F 'a c? U O O 2 F ' O co 2 U � The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines 0 between soil and rock types; in situ,the transition may be gradual. 3 1/4"ID HSA,2"OD SS,140h U WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS,ft BORING STARTED 12-10-09 ' 0 WL 8 1 BORING COMPLETED 12-10-09 o WL 3z rracon RIG Mobile B-48 FOREMAN TC a WL After 2 minutes LOGGED DY JOB# J2095226 LOG OF BORING No. JB-4 Page 1 of 1 [CLIENT McDonald's USA,LLC SITE 1049 John Fitch Boulevard PROJECT South Windsor,CT Proposed McDonald's Restaurant SAMPLES TESTS ifl ca c a \ LU DESCRIPTION g 3 z a Cn m w O LU 0° wH Ow w� w U) D } w o- QO = z� �w Approx. Surface Elev.: (Unknown) o � z af co �5 O TOPSOIL SP 1 SS 20 1-2 2-2 SP 2 SS 19 2-4 sa POORLY GRADED SAND,with silt,orange-brown to 5 SP 3 SS 22 5-14 brown,loose to medium dense. 10-11 " (GLACIOFLUVIAL DEPOSIT) 10 LEAN CLAY,gray,very soft. 10 CL 4 SS 24 1-1 1-2 ' 112 (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT) BORING TERMINATED AT 12.0 ft 0 c? 0 0 N 0 ' W r 'a t? U O z Z 3 D o 0 J Q Z 2 U 100 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines between soil and rock types; in situ,the transition may be gradual. 3 1/4"ID HSA,2"OD SS,140h 0 ' WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS,ft BORING STARTED 12-10-09 WL - 7 t BORING COMPLETED 12-10-09 o WL T � Irerracon RIG Mobile B-48 FOREMAN TC Z5 WL After 5 minutes LOGGED DY JOB# J2095226 LOG OF BORING No. JB-5 Page 1 of 1 ' [CLIENT McDonald's USA,LLC SITE 1049 John Fitch Boulevard PROJECT South Windsor,CT Proposed McDonald's Restaurant SAMPLES TESTS ifl O a o °L 1 DESCRIPTION c 3 z 3f d m W p m WIW- oW wF Qz0 U Approx. Surface Elev.: (Unknown) o � z � � c4 �U a �u~i o� TOPSOIL SP 1 SS 18 3-3 2-2 SP 2 SS 15 2 5 5-6 POORLY GRADED SAND,with silt,orange-brown to 5 SP 3 SS 14 1 34 brown,loose to medium dense. 64 r 10.5 (GLACIOFLUMAL DEPOSIT) 10 CL 4 SS 18 5-3 LEAN CLAY,gray,soft. 1-2 ' 12 (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT) BORING TERMINATED AT 12.0 ft 00 0 0 N Z O¢¢ K W f a ' o 0 z 3 F 0 0 J Q ' Z O N The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines between soil and rock types; in situ,the transition may be gradual. 31/4"ID HSA,2"OD SS,140h 0 WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS,ft BORING STARTED 12-10-09 WL - 1 BORING COMPLETED 12-10-09 o WL � rracon RIG Mobile B-48 FOREMAN TC Z5 WL Not Encountered LOGGED DY JOB# J2095226 LOG OF BORING No. JB-6 Page 1 of 1 CLIENT McDonald's USA,LLC SITE 1049 John Fitch Boulevard PROJECT South Windsor,CT Proposed McDonald's Restaurant SAMPLES TESTS i0 ' p a p a DESCRIPTION 3 z z vi w > m Ww Zz Ir<n a a M a ¢o = zX =w (D Approx. Surface Elev.: (Unknown) o D z F- a a D to o TOPSOIL SP 1 SS 15 1-1 1-1 SP 2 SS 24 2 3 3-5 ' POORLY GRADED SAND,with silt,orange-brown to 5 SP 3 SS 16 4-4 brown,very loose to medium dense.TY 6-5 Q ( GLACIOFLUVIAL DEPOSIT) LEAN CLAY,gray,very soft. 10 CL 4 SS 18 2-1 1912 (GLACIOLACUSTRINE DEPOSIT) 1 2 BORING TERMINATED AT 12.0 ft n 0 0 N Z 0 W F a' U 0 N z Z_ W 0 N Vl O J Q Z 0 The stratification lines represent the approximate boundary lines between soil and rock types; in situ,the transition may be gradual. 31/4"ID HSA,2"OD SS,140h N WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS,ft BORING STARTED 12-10-09 WL �1 7 1 BORING COMPLETED 12-10-09 o WL erracan RIG Mobile B-48 FOREMAN TC 11ri 03 A WL After 2 minutes LOGGED DY JOB# J2095226 Irerracon Field Exploration Description P P Terracon monitored the advancement of six test borings(JB-1 through JB-6)throughout the site on December 10, 2009. The explorations were advanced using an all-terrain-vehicle (ATV) mounted ' Mobile B-48 rotary drill rig, owned and operated by New England Boring Contractors Inc. of Glastonbury, Connecticut. The borings were advanced using 3'/4-inch I.D. continuous flight hollow- stem augers(HSA)and terminated in the glaciolacustrine deposit. ' In the split-barrel sampling procedure, which was used to take soil samples, the number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D. split-barrel sampler typically the middle 12 inches of the total 24-inch penetration by means of a 140-pound safety hammer with a free fall of 30 inches is the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) resistance value "N". This "N" value is used to estimate the in-situ relative density of cohesionless soils and consistency of cohesive soils. The soil samples were placed in labeled glass jars and taken to our Rocky Hill (Hartford) laboratory for further review and classification. Information provided on the boring logs attached to this report includes soil descriptions, relative density and/or consistency evaluations, boring depths, sampling intervals, and groundwater conditions. The borings were backfilled with auger cuttings prior to the ' drill crew leaving the site. Field logs of the explorations were prepared by a Terracon field engineer. These logs included visual classifications of the materials encountered during drilling as well as interpretation by our field engineer of the subsurface conditions between samples. Final exploration logs included with this report represent further interpretation by the geotechnical engineer of the field logs and incorporate, where appropriate, modifications based on laboratory classification of the samples. The approximate exploration locations were measured by taping from existing features in the field and by estimating right angles. The locations of the explorations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used to define them. Exhibit A-4 APPENDIX B ' LABORATORY TESTING i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i Laboratory Testing Descriptive classifications of the soils indicated on the exploration logs are in accordance with the enclosed General Notes and the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). USCS symbols are also shown. A brief description of the USCS is attached to this report. Classification was by visual/manual procedures. r i 1 1 t Exhibit B-1 r 1 APPENDIX C SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS r GENERAL NOTES DRILLING&SAMPLING SYMBOLS: SS: Split Spoon—1'/8 I.D.,2"O.D., unless otherwise noted HS: Hollow Stem Auger ST: Thin-Walled Tube-2"O.D., unless otherwise noted PA: Power Auger RS: Ring Sampler-2.42"I.D.,3"O.D.,unless otherwise noted HA: Hand Auger DB: Diamond Bit Coring-4", N, B RB: Rock Bit BS: Bulk Sample or Auger Sample WB: Wash Boring or Mud Rotary 1 The number of blows required to advance a standard 2-inch O.D.split-spoon sampler(SS)the last 12 inches of the total 18-inch penetration with a 140-pound hammer falling 30 inches is considered the"Standard Penetration"or"N-value". WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT SYMBOLS: WL: Water Level WS: While Sampling N/E: Not Encountered WCI: Wet Cave in WD: While Drilling DCI: Dry Cave in BCR: Before Casing Removal AB: After Boring ACR: After Casing Removal Water levels indicated on the boring logs are the levels measured in the borings at the times indicated. Groundwater levels at other times and other locations across the site could vary. In pervious soils, the indicated levels may reflect the location of groundwater. In low permeability soils,the accurate determination of groundwater levels may not be possible with only short-term observations. DESCRIPTIVE SOIL CLASSIFICATION: Soil classification is based on the Unified Classification System. Coarse Grained Soils have more than 50% of their dry weight retained on a#200 sieve; their principal descriptors are: boulders, cobbles, gravel or sand. Fine Grained Soils have less than 50%of their dry weight retained on a#200 sieve;they are principally described as clays if they are plastic, and silts if they are slightly plastic or non-plastic. Major constituents may be added as modifiers and minor constituents may be added according to the relative proportions based on grain size. In addition to gradation, coarse-grained soils are defined on the basis of their in-place relative density and fine-grained soils on the basis of their consistency. CONSISTENCY OF FINE-GRAINED SOILS RELATIVE DENSITY OF COARSE-GRAINED SOILS Unconfined Standard Penetration Standard Penetration Compressive or Wvalue(SS) Consistency or N-value(SSl Ring Sampler(RSl Relative Density Strenath,Qu,psf Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft. Blows/Ft. <500 <2 Very Soft 0-3 0-6 Very Loose 500—1,000 2-3 Soft 4-9 7-18 Loose 1,001 —2,000 4-6 Medium Stiff 10—29 19-58 Medium Dense 2,001 —4,000 7-12 Stiff 30—49 59-98 Dense 4,001 —8,000 13-26 Very Stiff 50+ 99+ Very Dense 8,000+ 26+ Hard RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF SAND AND GRAVEL GRAIN SIZE TERMINOLOGY Descriptive Term(s)of other Percent of Maior Component Particle Size Constituents Dry Weight of Sample Trace <15 Boulders Over 12 in. (300mm) With 15—29 Cobbles 12 in.to 3 in. (300mm to 75 mm) Modifier >30 Gravel 3 in.to#4 sieve(75mm to 4.75 mm) ' Sand #4 to#200 sieve(4.75mm to 0.075mm) Silt or Clay Passing#200 Sieve(0.075mm) RELATIVE PROPORTIONS OF FINES PLASTICITY DESCRIPTION Descriptive Term(s)of other Percent of Term Plasticity Constituents Dry Weight Index Trace <5 Non-plastic 0 ' With 5-12 Low 1-10 Modifiers >12 Medium 11-30 High 30+ Exhibit C-1 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM N Gravels: Clean Gravels. Cu>_4 and 1 _<Cc:5 3 E GW Well-graded gravel' More than 50%of Less than 5%fines° Cu<4 and/or 1>Cc>3 E GP Poorly graded gravel F coarse Gravels with Fines: Fines classify as ML or MH GM Silty gravel F,a,H fraction retained on F G H Coarse Grained Soils: More than 12%fines Fines classify as CL or CH GC Clayey gravel More than 50%retained No.4 sieve Clean Sands: Cu>_6 and 1_<Cc<_3 E SW Well-graded sand' on No.200 sieve Sands: 50%or more of coarse Less than 5%fines° Cu<6 and/or 1>Cc>3 E SP Poorly graded sand' fraction passes Sands with Fines: Fines classify as ML or MH SM Silty sand°' '' No.4 sieve More than 12%fines° Fines Classify as CL or CH SC Clayey sand'-"` PI>7 and plots on or above"A"line' CL Lean clay K,L,M Inorganic: PI<4 or lots below"A"line' ML SiItK,L,M Silts and Clays: p Liquid limit less than 50 Liquid limit-oven dried organic clay K,L.M,H Fine-Grained Soils: Organic: Liquid limit-not dried <0.75 OL Organic silt K,L,M,o 50%or more passes the PI plots on or above"A"line CH Fat clay K,L.M No.200 sieve Inorganic: K,L,M Silts and Clays: PI plots below"A"line MH Elastic Silt Liquid limit 50 or more Organic: KL Liquid limit-oven dried Organic clay K, .<0.75 OH Liquid limit-not dried Organic silt ''M° Highly organic soils: Primarily organic matter,dark in color,and organic odor PT Peat " Based on the material passing the 3-in.(75-mm)sieve " If fines are organic,add"with organic fines"to group name. B If field sample contained cobbles or boulders,or both,add"with cobbles ' If soil contains>-15%gravel,add"with gravel"to group name. or boulders,or both"to group name. j If Atterberg limits plot in shaded area,soil is a CL-ML,silty clay. ° Gravels with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: GW-GM well-graded K If soil contains 15 to 29%plus No.200,add"with sand"or"with gravel with silt,GW-GC well-graded gravel with clay,GP-GM poorly gravel,"whichever is predominant. graded gravel with silt,GP-GC poorly graded gravel with clay. ` if soil contains>-30%plus No.200 predominantly sand,add"sandy" D Sands with 5 to 12%fines require dual symbols: SW-SM well-graded to group name. sand with silt,SW-SC well-graded sand with clay,SP-SM poorly graded M If soil contains>-30%plus No.200,predominantly gravel,add sand with silt,SP-SC poorly graded sand with clay "gravelly"to group name. z " PI>_4 and plots on or above"Kline. E Cu=D60010 Cc= (Dso) ° PI<4 or plots below"A"line. D10 X DB0 P PI plots on or above"A"line. F If soil contains>_15%sand,add"with sand"to group name. ° PI plots below"A"line. ° If fines classify as CL-ML,use dual symbol GC-GM,or SC-SM. T 60 F. For classification of fine-grained � — soils and fine-grained fraction 50 of coarse-grained soils JO0_' '' _ Equation of"A"-line a Horizontal of PI=4 to LL=25.5. X 40 then PI=0.73(ILL-20) - - - - - Q`r.. - W p Equation of"U"-line •' I Z Vertical at LL=16 to PI=7, G 30' then PI=0.9(LL-8) '-- — —--- - - -� - v~i 201 CL I' MH or OH 10 ,l r 7 L= 4 -ML ML or OL r , 1 0 0 10 16 20 30 40 5o 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT(LL) Exhibit C-2 S•'NUrhisor,GT ' City/Town of &X,+N W i Clw, Or 312512oip SPIN Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal -rp � 5. Groundwater Observed: Yes [ No ❑ if Yes: Depth Weeping from Pit 71 kq") Depth Standing Water in Hole Estimated Depth to High Groundwater: iW CI inches elevation Deep Observation Hole Number: I Soil Soil Matrix: Redoximorphic Features Soil Coarse Fragments Soil Structure Soil Horizon/ Color-Moist (mottles) Texture %by Volume Consistence Other Den pth Layer (Munsell} (USDA) (Moist) Depth Color Percent Gravel Cobbles $Stones LS SQj V krj� tt, rZ 10 '11L 9/6 2A 5/-�, P C2 / 7 G ,yts Additional Notes Len; __AIcr.. S9) tw �i^�s lSn r 4Q,?43 in nySf<ti(�y t�Trn�,crEv,t �P4 pA; Mt a✓J 1 i Assn aF 5NGui- I DEP Form 11 Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal•Page I of 1 W cr /aorr7 lug, Cityfrown of ,5a*, WIvisor, Gt Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal 5. Groundwater Observed: Yes � No:❑ Tpl(2 If Yes: Depth Weeping from Pit Depth Standing Water in Hole Sir Estimated Depth to High Groundwater: CILAS inches elevation Deep Observation Hole Number: Z Soil Soil Matrix: Redoximorphic Features Soil Coarse Fragments Soil Structure Soil Horizon! Color-Moist (mottles) Texture %by Volume Consistence Other Depth (ent) Layer (Munsell) (USDA) (Moist) Depth Color Percent Gravel Cobbles &Stones tovn 5/6 LS _ Sg -�ri> t�vd�s t" Ava caf � Additional Notes DEP Form 11 Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal•Page 1 of 9 IIIIIIII■ ' � � � � i� � ice■ � � � � � 11- .»�uf:YaN� '�1104.1• W02<2.ft* City/Town of Gocxb{ , U)okisor, GT ;/ -gvlo Form 11 - Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal `* 5. Groundwater Observed: Yes d No ❑ -rp #3 If Yes: Depth Weeping from Pit Depth Standing Water in Hole-491) Estimated Depth to High Groundwater: S41, C',ta4Q Inches elevation Deep Observation Hole Number: all Soil Soil Matrix: Redoximorphic Features Soil Coarse Fragments Soil Structure Soil Depth Horizon/ Color-Moist (mottles) Texture %by Volume Consistence Other Layer (Mansell) {USDA) (Moist) (in.) Depth Color Percent Gravel Cobbles &Stones 414� L�>7 C, lovX"f-5 5c3 Vff- lWr Additional Notes DEP Form 11 Soil Suitability Assessment for On-Site Sewage Disposal•Page 4 of 1 Nc polhlA S. �),imsdr GT 1N0821 City/Town of GO�I,,, �),nd d(- �I /Zto ' a Percolation Test � 2 ' Form 12 Percolation test results must be submitted with the Soil SuitabilityAssessment for On-site Sewage 9 Disposal. DEP has provided this form for use by local Boards of Health. Other forms may be used, but the information must be substantially the same as that provided here. Before using this form, check with the local Board of Health to determine the form they use. _ Important: A. Site Information When filling out forms on the computer,use only the tab key Owner Name to move your 04 16�1 Qi n cursor-do not —Strreet Address or Lot# ' use the return key. (�. W'j Ad5or Citylrown State Zip Code Q Contact Person(if different from Owner) Telephone Number B. Test Results 3 2�r� cJ�( 3�z /fu q % Date Time Date Time Observation Hole# Depth of Perc r Start Pre-Soak End Pre-Soak Time at 12" 2� 0:// Time at 9" Time at 6" Time(9%6") S nA A Rate (Min./inch) h 61 W_l l-b � 2 m Test Passed: Test Passed: ❑ Test Failed: ❑ Test Failed: ❑ n, l�r-t�C�LJ-r�-•-�� Test Performs By. Witnessed By: Comments: t5form12.doc-06/03 Pere Test-Page 1 of 1 b [I \ [arsine•¢ .m n 5.virrmY1 .. �} }� f \ .ua � TM"tvni wro.`at'».�w w a,'.n�.»'"°`woonm•M`rw`o°rw«rTfw".w�t[f wmr } 'r �� ,uv \ __ �„® '°W,"»Yn�«mr<Xt"«:"dor""r,ua:`r�:,c'«.»wi�fOOrx.,M'"60P•el`,`>o-X"`n �.-_°•:,,� `"`ram �y( �,r �' ; \.� .un -_ •ml nr.[.•nm«M[r«a X,mX<m.raX,•mA»rtx rtc ' � U} �/ F / .1_MSIIM -` ,]aw'y\\••••• .n .• r •rt uwAm ra rma ww[nt rw.axxvvwyr,fuw / e rwEm uAuusaW er.7r— " � a „ "m"w""«mtr`a'w:mia Mew.b,«w•cv wu,fw»uvwum n,M«v«nw tw.,t omaa'""w"A..P.m. 1�'� �'�'Au 15 � • �'" ' QI�[]u.°.�..'"o s.�a'a`awn»Di:o• vmmncMY[«<u.x.w.,r,_.n<mw»«rccr. ©Tes4 n(1}4 lbcaA�c� Gl- <ZnyY� aa.»vY[[a<ataa<oar«<W.v.x. Xx»[W.a«ro,[, -- _n \\ •`" a «im[a VafmcrmawMoeuil.0 mr.N«w m»wr,w««qr. PCe.YS ,Fly 1 r J 'a:I g .a .un 1 ,. [M,.�rifsefwaf.marne»nra+«,m w.<w.Xuv°w moor.ww[exv,.a•.n.. . � '} afA1M}m lAWWl4Y ftA3CAYC1 aal � � Yr,r<w<nam nt,avU fyvwor.rw.Hat rb»Axt w[ur,,wYtY muxb.tw+UMW. M. o I1. un rl ��/ $ .w, ... •a� Uu["�cmxH.r.mr»aUf•,eu wxsn vmfmbt,[n<cvu y.»:fumreu fa,m c fF'ia+i:vrv°"bw,.t{A0O<rw[cnwt w�i.auw'mot"'ivwa.<i m'im v¢a>. (> I Y '!qp 'R 1 me ou it ••' 7 Unon w.xl X wrAy mw«r.. PAA If nu iL , ,m,M worn mn..wflwY y6 d� ' ��0� _ p}}14 I'�i �•� y tax[r.»®.uo e.n.w[Xmawra°e.meow m.ba[Ie,, �} t1�;1t, \ ---_ ///f' as w,. m Ma ea.Mn,0.ra»mnUN w'm.•»ax n»lum,«« /t} �� •" �'�'.aw .m x rs,a•c saruo ro rwy r..»MY nxm+wn«aMY m�rw,x�r«.no,xs rmw• I` s»rr ______ _ _ —-_�.'. �: r,/ 5ra m, ��% \ <�1riY4•vt u�unv uX nt wt,wmrm W �xt .vair°'lvfrnl 1� ' summ t,uv n.Ml,« "«' .t�f.rm . � 'X w. \ rwUa[AQ \ � .1.yX4 p•t mrb/m tVT �,\ m[n M row.t»X.S yTt[n wv ewm nntu u m w]u r • �U •.w'mw"Yaa ' ua R� iLf<rtr �' Tnr,[..,.; ,r •` .a a.---,o.<• r a'�u au .o-� -- -----� ---•-----•V � ...— --_—__ �wum]taxb.m,«Mr, Am "`• att.wrl yw }a�, fa.x a fNM awMm ��—� _r.- V/"u ,wAwa T«,]•ae[<:wa Anf wwa«»[nti ell rf«trrwXa•o]n .'y \ r t<aa .na<«]a«nv`u:ra,»'.`x'v"w.vt.a'�"."LacfaM,.r:rcMM"'r] 6� ,-6r n �•r�`m�`•Ar}= GWS.Ti>� atUm •nrnrlm ._ x° . '.itiN uwsr rm.wn,u4 m,..,M rtw<wUl m.a[u a aW _ r. ul, <xIr f.4uu u[CMxC,M tram,wt F .... �g� <y,•wnr.¢x. -- ` A rwX'G°[`sMs-w va.n»-n sMmai rur..mtw[n»,]f«»,n•ra[ut[.ay.Xxr mwn. E4UD ®©JOHN FITCH BOULEVARD I�aR M}� _ wa[mr (r.U.F CUNNCMICUT S]AIC HIGHWAY RUlll[US 6} ! i� a ua»rtU t w[w. twuwa,u.w mwn[Im an.su.utt t4 __ 0. • (F.IGA.HAPIM80-SPSW4il[ID WOAOt f `,C ar� , uf, rrrlr lawurts wau C.nm seaaY�w�>,W[ �r� YrL]IWUS VY1.l[Mr 6NMO LI,C Y.SUWICC MWNM ra.waXm urmu»'f u.¢m xn4ur. uwie'W[« mvcAs a]-woo o:;°M1a]cryx.]w'o'ro' ° nWa Hart luvutw maa r°A»u""vs�p3JJ .wvr . n smi ai1V A"Oro rastir;wN+1®�cvo,ns,[rwrwi avu[usr i"nu' a% tit m<[w`u,vss,t,a a f■.1C■�O,1U■ta a AL S LAND iU SURVEY -/<....., cDONALD'S USA, LLC }� mg iom FlttBWEA]— T. 0 W f a- n.`> rmv a uW� .cc wIu eaa»e-,ew aaW.u««[cros wuur,ranwa i<°unua.[b raunu M,wrt[m+t N<x• mroe m rxxl°r»r`C'w a"t"w.ot,�°ittP[°Ixt w ncm'su�fiYIX ,um ■ ■E4 lA[Sr•MM N rr�� 6]ve•, v[»r uwbS tuft [s ]]][lbns ua. a[�q y[yHa nays, a w m CF S—EMDSCX af. ___� .f«.nuratwo X.rol m[ rwii.[rwa: xaca um[ wx Mu.°ovaxeo«Me rmb uxoa Ns m '/e me-aus RAairam wuntt eow+EenWT a rH n GRAPHIC SCALE a� 1�CONTROL POINT ; ��/ �Ufmram � �O�uSSa �A18E GM,INCe�� "`"SS "" �S - ]G biU te, m«ttMul„bXu twe lU«o fine. , i,rrn PIM. [SS. APB. ]-Shoe �]P 1 K } ZONING ANALYSIS TABLE tm MAO= affirm NIOaOlND A"rsrner + SIGNAGEaaaYlali [Mxa14 IAOrONO I - RWrAala It.!P K x WA R x ao.ow N 10 IT No CWJIK + aaw■R l�illr lowrown 1W 4Mr4'A NO OIMNOE MW 71 PUMNO 910NAGE "IM wn Ite' nag't No bum 1 r0o taR aM I x/V IM Eru Qh 1 wWw o"x rt wD YAM(n! 1C A MIX a N/F`UNDO a e t r'tl�RK4 u. ra nu VAN Ml u We A /�1Er. THE J. 2L.>��O orou AR MW VAN" W WA MX W,•p01•!a6 RO No W4 SIR OLL 7N "I AM WA t M m o mm u. WA Gaa Noah" 41F OVA ar r z - _ • WE IN ru aal 1 x J M EUI Nu PA y�p�a aN x arEanaR oe caaE M ON W, M1N & t Y IOp i,aq si. ter 0""-an UO Ills WA. sM Ntsil•26E — — — — — — IR4 A fUa tANoaOA►E sanAec I A , — — — / —— — — — --- zw sRL sM - - I ALLa9 me ,A+AaaDAID M tai.Wiwi" 78 �. 7� OR Was _ W&/rr= - -.] T W.L wElN.tMINR 1$x - AA IILIF ] , rAlRt tMMf to tr EerALp� saa/�. AC[s -ra1nw►1`aw.ta'Im,.IR n'r,ru -1R1lE RaO1FD M Oarallf of FaQ. GENERAL SITE NOTES 1 1, MMbaBRtA7lNd 11U11®IF. .1� �� � � � � O 1_,r : . ) s taMct><a�oa�aoaAaao�oNAras�n.KieavpNanam.e�aOawNarwn�Nnaraw+a JINCAOrl lar �1Mr1Mt j.-� 1 -VAL I`.x.v u v/%ft K"O TWW v'/pl"t aema NN+sieuwt 4c raca N o w a t s �1 /•'� ronraal N oroiRir ru aww aar ecaoK.e nrwiat rmr MN vx ra Nruua NR Na N M owa miaFAnol - t - - _ _ - ,•. _ a IQ.MOM"Mja R wpa M K Omm fWwft me-'aAO.0 K%Mo IN K.WpL 0wom AR ID MINK :DR wraMsrA I {1n W r �• r6NMO J ,j GnaRt w %. )j 0A"M a MN ��•}}�� j1 K IR-xY- RIM OrA la 0 ME AS OF n.11M 11.at K NO or SO al[IOR.�IINtw. - - _. + IMIR{IpJ - r1. - %. - s AL wMWR RNq VAW 9&N WAR M WE!4A UJWGn - ------ v1 I _ f - f x Na AsaARR meFcok lFrolOjiatavu ALraN�wA+xaw 10AI R6owoI M w WWW wE=NNm 10 a""a FAMO 1 f.t y SWAP?I.. 41d R4A 4K M mO10R w4 ENaa a4 naa101T,10 m R1M M IRia.00LPOK t AL 41 K NMN4A 001 db OOIt aAIC prR x q. N/i Ow+ raR sRR a ai do~muau� raw wor N1Ag'p4Nouao ,oE°Ae r�E a' 0Sw1°"` ,21 a l a RR T/1 ,DO JOHN IrrCN 80{RE�'AND.uC _ / + _ R7R10[R!7 t K AwRMII MRp - V.! VOL.1045.P0 65 o: � - - � J 4 A[.01[I.URfaaERm rAE0i0�.a'rNar%RM6MRpWbEMH1AQ./OE.NMmO'.NKKIEdl iO4RRCNAiIOMP.. to� 59 mom wo As � p O •R. r ;. _ 1 r: as tll n p"DUCK 1p/Aa01 OE1�f Did P X�'Mo OWUNKYK"an M b�ORlwl14 �9R iMlialNlE / t J WP r{ H. MEW Mo DIU R fA M4 Ftl r MX RA3 � � 111III---yyy Xl a W til►a — 4 „nLo 1L 1Q NA6MN ItlN Ot AW11Ma1 RApW loom DamrE Ar K>r t RM RprA 10.47RAM10A xAL Ma`PI1 DRM lapO4 M Iarr M11R - D11601 Er AIM R OMM ISO TOM MIE 2 M M K RK Olt r K AVAD RM 0"R DYE=IN AN Ka 9%Form er1P/Jarr ]t f / 41r 00 JWA WILTY,uc Ap iWkIr �`�c'epW= _ -_ _ f �l• VOL.,860.n0.201 Is ,moo cullimps wNMa n Mtl�Ra D�K MobobMwe a i OmDID 10 KFM 100 ONFWRM[R"ON L I c�1M4"N W a Go MOWS SCE aNu Qa' Rf 1 • Wu�V�•` y# two M � ED •1 KR RAar MN MlRp1d IM IR®1a41 _ � IL roIw sru Rm W�[�YUMmaltx�aleRa4 rm aN11A0un6 A4 Aome a DIU/OR RaAS.eroAle.R[RR eua4 aa4o¢ooa wo ww /�\ y r'�. •• 1 - I _ / �1'1 _ 1A 0"% ObRA WIM009K& a4M AU 4O1RNECOaWlaas M 01010 Oa4reK)SM K MKO t M gCoto aOK NL MA GaM.aOR a\\�—✓J/] O a1N'pM`KIs 1 ry ! t=: ti aw W �' �e f L x aFRE�Ia s MOM la XL s eRs KyRA aw4 DOMAIN I*erlOraln F iavolla W awR OR sRreRolt N.Aa+mNxa vMaoa n 00I 10-1 0 0I Mw aDR41N4 O RREAIR M m0 MOM aaNt _ sr]r,1wt IJIA n 0ii ,R1.6 l«Iss i j \* t slay TAa a1aRRat is wsNarA yx, / b ! 17. mM.aa 4 N DOON OwE aM„a1 RraA4M NA10Fi AIMK AEMDf 16 AlrlOf 6 M N am. aNL N KV"K N,OMIT ra 1 'P EMIT 4wN OnJ - - � /• �Ra � x"Al K10smIs=16M 00"K 1 KPM 11p11ry 11WEIS A47MtORTa roML Ae N 1FIM A as DOW Au va 41 now � ]R-1 T11r � Ia1NrK � T � NaID O Elat 4° Kea ri apsaoe lwi _ /' ( 'a s°wL roe Mo"�OLioL a00K Aia a'MwE R°x"RiDeam pN�caaas moo°1iMru�walxoh to°FaRr "Ma" Stu R tan 100 WO kw D!M t4Owe awNtOt a Ivv4K 4I6fLO0*A DO"O Wa M_Kw NNWW WNW NRR N COMM AMc \r/ W.'a T W I : ty,► -16.1 — .. wix j 11 1 4t AL own 9lu W na MW mRR�I Mo r a Res awoad■fP CI"was ORua MIDI a M RME OEM AURA aONomm woa. r�ar010 �M-1] �� 1M►.>!it4wY At - O p / 1 - x m11 OM 00 it MR�Aw IlRDR OWKM 1 �11R~0 a K DO W 10 a NX FL"CF O1m61ll1aOIM M IN Wr M s 0041 NO DOW01 UK. - � w 161t° ias O Iuriwsl o M( y rOm»MIa1ADnw4amaa o MIT wall" P '� - � - 4/ _ M�'/ /•/ t ]I: aam�a NmDF MAiw�wEla M/1E EEm Aa F6x sn ReDA®ra llDl_RwDa : _ _ _ o 4 r �, ( ]r..-. ••� •,1 / /•/ +'••+.•�j - A (1i1rK1pNmMM11A1 4au auA MK WMA~' Domaiol1RAo WAX mAM0 As ms m AD IN a m�wawmor"^awM AL I Art v AR4Ba N1OM K KOW NMif W IeoErrauawAASM a K oa1A oat u oa1w6K NIa RRe wuA DaYa4,eN aMVMa a.aR+a j + �— — — — /— — 1v eAaa uMsa�E 154: ,ly�e4�]eEy} — JJDD 1�4 / — _ M*1F&a MRaYEOMJNKt RNA01 NO WD 0AO Vw DO a UM wOMaKRMNOA EIOFd%. r aaL�NI tORRaa1S w1 /- laOG'1014r DNEY llaa b•1 \ - 1OKM MDRW fo NODUD Or U1L 0M A"$0 N4AW.00 W CWAM•0 K As1oOLLMt4 XL CA. Pf FLW OF LWU60l OOrA 1G1d4 ] 52r4 V2a-W - 4a0.ji ol Ilq. ■.sOKOE.NRNa11'IN1./14 00DR ROA MO4 aM a Cl r NwM pO11GiW tR M RDT.Nala4 Nl aMa Ir ORWMat a D[aKAMraK. E) fOIOIK Iwmrlw MMIB t Ia101 DYHm t0A K oole a MW OaDIM W R MP1151r1.1Nf0&MwDAtAmaDIDOVRSVNr fM.S1Nt - KO[w K traa mwaR p(8! Ipwa�am M 1DtlORRK IOaMti M M MOD M masAia 1Eac,r. refloat n rNlmUls O ` ' KfIIaM Ol Orp�A91bIM1D14DIA0 WONNFM KAOM N1awOMK(IO MmRM 07WUAtM MNJIlI OAtaNl'{Kt 106 R01E01f Aa W A(GI � I MO g/BRIEFR DY®RwN KIaaA6 NIE 14MW!R 0Z Atl wm oaAir caa w mwm at K Eams w mocco wR Of aw sDK lei O `ooar ar °A10 +�Rw�tR wg Tw a Na ILKv M AMar wog$at NOa M IN 0D6A aaRl=ow R 9aFl Mfww(M J®a[SMI16 Ola DKAOM awl K ROMO � fJ O ar mu.PAD - if 1D MM MKIR N4 M K DOE ADIVOR&%U aOaK OM ar%Mft NM Or Oft WAP MWLce Lash pl-1J M'xOI ad p01aMkMl_ 11_` 4 AREA LOT • NrtFr - -fi/fMtl - ) IKra7� - 1�1 K oaelaaw 4 Rsq 1R a/tl.arou low lays WON M OMtOORR aMawEf NI Now m(DR Na TIC Mdr�.Aat 90w F K -Ni AIU R rOK 01'aPo06 - ' 11 Ea14(wRDIaF FYLL RRa AS Ar1144 M INC oeOl AMKIMII,Mar a BE Ob1R101011 rrr60A 7rA AS Fal 00w1i4 MDa[I Dit S4atq A6 aQ Dµ t4 cur EIC 4 / 9W N/Y WX + a4E,rAd IrNa a RErq mralR/a M K ErF 1r1 a D alaa a 0p471RRM 1rD1 rNaWe4 AE a wNK A[M Sat RD7ptRUD a M mRNr rA @ DW NMU DIFFIAIO AMOa K DMI[INRR M Aal/aEM.I1Na OMMOIaD SIwllKlom DI70ra1R t61aw[Fal Ar awla4 M1M1 _ W a a01l4KBo�16 M M RD NO lRM104 cf I4 M W ON N[M WK AEOG40.�t taiOwlOR.la1P ON.�RC aRl Ip R 4Na NI APa�MNR 7s a_ m i SRO WE IRE - - - lO�M t4E ta[ - !i/rrlp.. 1.- n RMONaAAgaK AamFS4 AMMN aAK4 K aa1K N4 m4OlM Or x MO a NODw11 K MKMaKIAI[Il Iola epIDM Ae K y U AftiNp GrN FW.TR MIRAGaI -- sKf.1NSMlaa ONr - 6a11Raot aW JPQ 1w u onto MAW K4 o"as a R E0410lK mum u K MKa Oft N me IMiia9 YMTa 111LLW M NM/S QA 1Arrk' A(•Q M@ p mDI _ _ - OC/lO MRF 1I2 KrY1R WO atDKeN. - - SKAU fD5•) S - - fillm NOT ur IAafxl - - - (yNsr ApIaRYJ NIOiAIp Y11Rr r01a - - N. K O,arRl0.tR9 Fa1R AIpMW1 MOAOI R AE DIM P rr R It AIM A4r M NlS M mOAWR6Rlwa ra K WL AO N RWs u 1[8oa0r _ SC(D MrE IK - y - PRNK lM mOLINREAW NIOIIII a MW 1EMM 1RRmOK R W/IAD)M 1 MN NO MFGHM E A40aOlROS 1YR4K A4 n91a%14.KIDIr AAMIIT laaw R,a444 MMAaa 4 M IIa1Rf Y[1a M OOLR Al911I4O1 K1rA K AVra R ILL AIK W Wgai .� t. r K mnON K.11 nM KAAI M7R41ORORft KMGaaW g�OmAfWW 1R4E4 ARA aMrtO AA1"",,W KRM41DII Kowa A4OomaaRlEOpwLis KA11OIlaAA afA1 NoOAwmvm aaL AIrma1ME16AHKa.OMwWRRNABAI a : .IGNNE 1(aW - maDaMOM OR RNK ONISI6 RRtr4 a44rA0K K COMM awlD Wrt°O kWK M DWa WAM tM al so M 10 OW-DOI - - NMM111114 iRM npM IBR04 tarObMlAO qa4 OKap1 me on aMW1111 A1AAR4 KVAat - JOHN FITCH BOULEVARD pA RIP1.-spumom� U PRELIMINARY DATE BY - d049 JOHN FITCH BOULEVARD I.I.C.C/O 909 URSO 18-3 : (A.K,A. CONNECiICUT STATE HIGHWAYROUTE US S) - - - : - - I« aRa:3wNLa1N15K411E ARTHUR DRIVE, SOUTH WINDSOR,CT-(860) 646-1974 PLAN CHECKED - - - ci- - (F.K.A. HARTFORD-SPRINOFIELD ROAD) - ����� � ��� IAJUulJlJulnl Nia11BLE1wotx R:O.w.] STREET ADDRESS AS-BUILT W V Nug° @ Gfl@v� � � BOHLER 1049 JOHN FITCH BLVD. DRAWN BY: KBS ' U UA& D al 1 F r• 0[0( pME CITY - STATE CHECKED BY: JAK sxarxssT>:>cxo J.A. KUC�CH GRAPHIC SCALE O.IAENR]RrrNNa —X- SOUTH WINDSOR CT RwN,on DATE: 05-05-10 4y.. o o A o x M N N IN wnwawiLlMx°xm n1NNlru.00s ] •"j1'•" COUNTY HARTFORD SCALE: As SHOWN �Q i`LS 11 IR1 U Wl`1�1 ° ° 1l - _ Aawlun x�°maa N` PRDELSSIOH&ENGINEER aiww,a Nw�at 1� W - (IN n") m R ,1 NATIONAL STORE NUMBER PLAN DESCR�TION SHEET N0[ i n..s K ta.r*1N-nE4 o 1 Inch• 00 1t PigiEp Nx Ola LD]; aaManclrt uc4lEt w AE1» SITE PLAN V 1r M naiQ 110d �1 �QQ PRELIMINARY woB20o7 wOBzao7AaD.a.e r NIOT TO!Lr USED ROA CONIBTRLICTM OF 14 SIGN SUMMARY TABLE ZONING ANALYSIS TABLE Trrs AUA1ra mrim 2ROr0rq Imum Dow 1 dPK110 I - aIWNNIt LI ra N/A R IF m amm v I&SA M IT 0*00^ ■I mmiul w w FooK n ow 4Mrr t tO OIWIMI GUI SIGNAC•E M IN n V Ilr s7tY t IID LIIAIRr 1 nw ru pN t p/a RIP Na lyt , I°"t0r r dfi R ut irr rAtP lrrl to IAA A�Odso zo t/r tAKOa a W.i t ;l u' Ma K#A fM@(14 ri' WA A yr+o �rl� . THE vol:Door PAC.-AOWiPAIn JOLWJ OM oe P�) rr' - WA rARL 710i'pM.IM RM IRR atP-M►elt -AP[NLRB �, I Y INRRI-ws i). ,Np..I�N�. ,� ,VA t 11M'tM`fi - — — — - - �,yp, YKNDw OPKMIE StI Ipl WA NAY ff+ t oRa naP wu 7iN r y!�RPP Iru � ',M iap i us u� 1,a goKtAPs-wa 09 xR N/A rKIm N2i41'28% — _ _ �'K/i IA-PP9wi rntlnc I A 1a - - — — — — —i, — — — — -- - - - wm wa m - - 9K Aift OK A t►MMIv10mtA1101ENt 11 m IILIR aiP JAtIT y - 1 1 IIaI RMR MNtR- 1p R NAI 1ti,W R PgOpRA falRIRIPPIa M 7t Aa[i -W YA r mR.M& w,wN IIIN,mu t PAN111;rtlr4 u Mr:M�P1.u�'.Ki A4! NMi.RORpm K 01INe1i Of IOL - - AI!.+ nra� p � � GENERAL SITE NOTES I � 8 � a It Kill MOM LlKrrIONmN - W pmK971KKUNKfirmcomWDAtES,III MmbMftwAmatdMwrNIt MOM KmjwQ ro j lKtnl M 1M - 1\\\\tPtPRRRIMMMppR f.-� ( spc[,•e.m.we wryrR mmi4.n m anlK rwr rO7Wn.re..Ao1 ro o7eN a ,• • alNam-tstMirr9laawll wR N:Lm■eft"wMamorar Wa Ia MNdaamm"am"uneff"mI >/y, 1 ;a man film s■mma is m mmm amlifil eaCwAl AO r1a R%OM Irx=in OwIllI=b pam" a Niffil lal lot na MUM uC 0 0 ad - mall- '�..'� 7 Now � r IhS - 1 Or 1 GLNM w rll w r0im� ii i l eoux.ome a mw riNP 1 • Ar MAAaR,q ` l / !. . s trm at ld stlo.la to n.tvhaxN.lazwlwaoe,emlar w. _ t avant ufm mr la -• - — - 9ed(arJ - /. a Oath All"lMOa Im R ouR%m*fw 0Amwlpa. - ywabweeaetoaxa«rttaswirlaraercratwwvirtouorwtlAt taw wsmawm mm�psealarwua pppp V !!!II f tYa R«aR x mwctAws Ram Mt nM aMn abr9-,MM Alt as Nao to KL a w NanIM AtaNn ! a ONO ills t@M NM J LOT 21 / O l i ANDS OF A IE 1■aVmAaal!RL R oit!MI-t WNW 0 M i wQIfIDtt4 r 7m R.or MAt iAaMK MEPCmIt la1lO Nr4ld Nq _ laA OF*-, - - - % lll' aMKaar rw IRIS--t aRllWw a aoxler-tNWc u Rr utm 1D Nar+n-e a RMa 1D(auaa rw.mlRAma AtaaaRai as rota J VOL FITCH H ePG.9ARO.LLC i - rm-avRsa xra-11W[wRwn. - /� IN fill wma tlp mm""I a[X aMa IM>P m"M"�B?aIM31�t■tY96 a"IEtk YaaAt O1 J PFldl' - _ / I j -b ,t"NO aW A aRET"i tiuISM l lir-a°t�w :C-�ir� aovMM -v mom amp"lo Or Ow ut"K41k mwm © 4f�7 Y v' t OR�OaR �• - t - n If. mver tMf I'm ITcmm A ma in hmMAP : x M OIIr1tMl 1 ` ta LOT la It wR PMM AN Iam a frel-raI tgva b IONR PaROII M K tr a 111A W■NIL-0OMMCNI"A rsDlpn'ONIK Ooaa-M RM1Y Il g Wn/rLAWA a m - at h a r nl tmaao aaa wo R wrlm wAn wa aIwlRt avinu k f `1 % M I aFAw:1V,uo S a wRK IM '{{ RpBw- J' VOL+eeo.Pa 204 fi_u uNatt txoR a x IustlM R re9arm N w mtNtwe rtr b sauna mNr1N allt corn trim t IMat r w a-no--u oNr aIa .. $ Iiu. • ..V - - / 'j Ata®tar1KY11ael Ntra ale-IaRMIMLM tt10M�■-at to Xla lMaCAR:tDe-a[taRWd a I-0.ffaa aaKGU I mm R"r sm l-Rif"va la El anal. ry e•? I M y•i x :�'#;+ Off AM#0 ••j}'�J�� , tl. O�.t��t lru WO TO III laMC%WLAUM K"rm Ohl warat,-P h MIM OF OaaRAI PM OkIeW6.rVON UMMMOn .LIM aaea MRF O�( 1. Ob. . l `•. �/ Ay _-� i< . .33Z am'.p3 r •1 - O <`;' 1 _ I .! / r +s OW traM IT We fill Ili no IR wl�L uWMMUM taa Aaoma a0900.sN K OPM M■laaora a-Mt aL aM PIT l�C> � ry t r J' -temtutMlettrtaas - FYa a10A'Ali'pa Al an lM• �' __ \� - / qMu la"MP+�pM) I Lu ♦ I ' 3 ~iP t , + " m rri'ma romew m mRa n lr inPRaOR 0A 10i0 DDWM o 8o a rOraa t iomoaa trt aloa wa mAtx-A At ar laaoll masts u+Nuw {IIr. - - low wNRWs b IIMIRP llrialw A°icf �' b ) It DiarAtl-ro Dora ot-M OK N FMWFM M-■4 Accra RAra b tAtltr,tiaalAa,m If awl.oo mm twt R tP"u Im Oat K l - + _ '``' ?j $` Arrr ImJ - - /* - , yr,l -IlartR ItIM6 b NNtlrrl ro 6-0[-[91-aUla weuNr llta-IO-t�+MIOr w R-qw-RtRNwFOR A M IMAIA - tiai a 7M*A RawP Ina x IoeNu ,' 1 Ills ,► IdOxgt[aw:['w�i lltiOx oll(L,LA liiii,�.aaAm 10 faa.s.-�lr"a-O oq r""m�ms Or1gaata eu.i�9: ((,) 1 b IOAwPa[81A1 _Op NMiI MM Rllrf —— — — _ — J 7 _ iMt R wtR ba Raa awr OMt9 Mutt maw7a a rvaallr 4 06O1a17 AI Off"fill so ow amill woo m w W6 km 9w. �✓ �gg - I + r Al Ct10rR 9ru t■r M rrM mM1mI1 traM■M N OR d Ntrm■mat+to-Ia:aaR Itm a x nwc aws-oar aocoaol ram. � Lia � li-t r►Y► .. .IRO 1M)� —�� — � peN Nlr la9.11 j aM,r PrwW Y2 tRtA'alweOaYL�pPI / - a WIL arwnaDOW N t ivl Is00 atth a MITI ei IM=a 1010 xaim m a M m-n a ofil t NMI l M 9 iJ I.i Ej rIN9Nr {a PeN Aapw-TykJ� • om MG A OMW 6 em p� trNr ilrCltlPl - 'I� wti AMD i lNl - - + - - _ _ �•/ - 21. Bawl GIMM ttr NOINISt MO A a WON MA W&R 10 WPM la SO MOM O 4 ALMMMLVRZ lillif 711117 P{0l0a"em MM W W1pMa apeog W Sa m■m ow Mp ooma at}Al anioll~1 ! ( ,� Y \',1 - /•n - v awal�A it MIS M Iallarbaiaw6K,ao auc'10Ma yKMiw wa n1161 Ww IM CM tral b CIt M rtwAtt - -.,/— lr war U 11 -mltlp_ , — JJ11 - M.LrOoa a Mn(KO ta1Ma Fa w awtat faR.-D b01 l0[al a 0 FM WK M IrK FOOD a MR= ooAFOYAS.1.:. I t- "• O wxM16/fL10r IOACIm/IA{rWMtAt IaD IPtAaI.eONQ BaIAN ro K mo"Atwt Fa NO Awm A-bwl WRIr6 07aA 110.Wn 99 aR naar w IN ll s2r/i'a"W / 4Po-) nq _ — _ tamal AttrlF 7m r t IgoR a9s Anr oM r a■M 7rQ woNaa wA x erorA aaNK rt are a onAaA a M esMa�aM /• y 'r Ilu t x atol oawtaA-(F R1Murs oua-o Rae t-uw ItwM t°mlru.mR7�aFf■x a RrO `iAsasrxar»xFamRr W d C \ ROOYR Ia waN ebfiM ml iwaOR a A=waIa x 4EMFam WJOIMMNAN a7-R FO/N06RWanAr p[1 `tea -RafmR,voml0llfomw-t-t Aaeu.n rM lM.aanw mmr ar raaa nmAamawa:ra mawiaantnmasamAawr wA aI O) 1pr(n► \ _ _ 1 j OY lKmma~MIwP • �. r !a lwI a Ax RRM a IMLII'-baa-a MAatNi x alar O MM 2M R mttM MM fa$M MM..WW O 01"ttl R MEMO O !J AWA •� -, ' N K on mleMrKANO 9M K ILU koala 11i IIM x COOK wOMNIN9 Finaa woad aRrw-LMMO :. � w o: MV/bra !� - awA RNP"pa � o� \ �fMORIR N��t /•.N 1 .I�a� aye pQ a A A SfAtrt Ara prJr - of-1].M rWJ: - i - M LRA R wrIRNrw L80F Or r0w0A _ a .ow Piminfin ol x t a l w*arl i mm~M a�i+Ip 7[WON lu w s ra a�Nwt n OWI90=w M 1Pol■tW to■Mi M M a Or vww A I9Or - - - r _ AoewrrttrAaa R--I�a0awa(-a w aNM l■I vIn 7fAaI,m arla■mrltem fawae9M,At a aIOI-[K NN Rltw-na w aM4CI0A �]j. AY dORLMt�Kieft m mix INo cr mm AA ciw It lDaow t prict am"Tom IN 10�wt"a IT MUM in 1110110"Ill 11411011 Illut �w a M owm mumm IN ff mi na HKA 2 I f cosev tl N0.1a1S mINAM w K aml IF eMa Boom■-AM or*9 Mill li coem 1110 R RMa w am NM - z f3 y++9� _ _ - - - - - - xeMewb d wa ra■+a aeMr--a a-oAmllm wt I«w Mam 5 $ ti _ }. a =VM M!%a alJUW tI WHOM- 04 go OF ptM 4mr4 amJ, MRwtW4mW a0[wp♦Bn,pllA ivJMatMM C� Sao-1/2 iK IAM.1PrRIrr.W IRf.itMrlllle N* kla I/OC Lrl ZP/7NAi 071eaC1a MA1 Ira ola u Oa16 qRa Atr AM9a IM a m RIrIi ro IIM.Io®ar a w tAUAa 9fr R 9Aararo I-raoa YIMIa Orll w rAMal AS9111t Gill INK Alta RwOD-a PRIR Ia0 �y wtWa-4 aIOa9. - AA At7Y Ado MCI Lar 9[ttlR Ar _ OalrD- '-. '- 9-7t[O - SdD_ - - W9aD■Yd 7rf (Amlr!ATMMIj KPOINIF at r $Q■wOQoa PRaI MR - -M gtArWMMMMAIWM 4 lwit OOQttlarA Ao A N Mr IaA Maat1.r N ROO ~NAO y, Qa', Orl A mRiKAM01 6now �r 90UfW AINaT AVW MMK aetIM M M M Ilallf MMa la OMA.R K90.aOI Rare w AYIe1T R NL 1At[AFIOAIAra p IQ F. rw wonmi ilAOIw RN M>rWTMtR InIbMxlamCOM-W 1LRo4 wFa Ito mlaq Fa Ytm Mta6Ya 10117.a NATOI-as a �� ra .r 8 Ara w/ta me Dural r 91LL N,Ir 9m FI x uAOr a AL Cap N Oe-ta Ar an■Oo[.Al i!a a PaailS MAam wN A{4[p lIt[b rt At - AAM1/t/trdw - _ - � - j - afe04-Oa m NIK a-a!S IaYIMD aWAt4 w OORMIa 9ML NO W A aA w 4afA Ae OdaA rM1[SS utl iLl.SUa aNN ro OaRU lIn ypl . R7r M/wr Al AAII ItgM IIIRIEt wa/D-I rt hMtt wi At mas o Nrwm Kura nomm - JOHN FITCH BOULEVARD FAIIt' EW 9TRIIP1ri+LlEGENO rA Off BY ptltx STIL' l - 1049 JOHN FITCH BOULEVARDLICANT LLC,C/O 800 URSO 18-3 :PREUAPPFANARI' - - - - (A.K.A. CONNECTICUT STATE HIGHWAYROUTE US 5) - - - - - - {« 9q1-.gRw[YawSa819[ - ARTHUR DRIVE, SOUTH WINDSOR,CT(860) 646-1974 PLAN CHECKED - _ - ci (F.K.A. HARTFDRD-SPRINOFIEU) ROAD) STREET ADDRESS AS-BUILT - - �QQ NANVIILE taon+IIIo •tl�Ov L'�+n 1049 JOHN FITCH BLVD, DRAWN BY: Kes L1 7 CLiIQ D D D D� a I eL R it w a I m z_fej">trx1�0 GTr STATE CHECKED BY: JAK GRAPHIC SCA6E �,- wro, , a„ calamcnawwxa aR J.A. KUC�CH SOUTH WINDSOR CT/�yy�� //�� //��'•�� ,or •'�"' - DATE: 05-05-10 4� A4�'ad3. �IYIIN- 0 tn1 �V - - >• N a. M Ix wacll n+r■a.,.A.arwllm t.....w.Iw•rar rAra.. a � 7= ;« i �E COUNTY HARTFORD sc+uE: AS SHOWN u . O u r. - - '� PNOFISSeOHAL ENGINEER NATIONAL STORE NUMBER PLAN DESCRIPTION SHEET NO. a�wmw�,_rc�...w _ INN�I O•JL'SU L.1 _ (IN 71111 - wf&1*0)x auc m.w.AIM yI Iw K K I~-lreIr-nos 0 0 M p - 1 enah'• a0 a- _ - PIrJECi Na pl l0.R cnMcnc-r LCOIsc Ir aIn SITE PLAN ...■/ w0a2ao> woa2GGasD.s.Q 0i 14 NOT TO sitUSED POR CONSTRUCTWN t 1 Bub a ris, ,c Tr a ff ic A S S O C A T E S ' Planning*Engineering+Design May 5, 2010 ' Ms. Dorian R. Famiglietti, Esq. Kahan Kerensky & Capossela, LLP 45 Hartford Turnpike ' PO Box 45 Vernon, CT 06066 ' Re: Site Traffic Evaluation Study Proposed McDonald's Restaurant and Bank Development John Fitch Boulevard (Route 5) at Governors Highway ' South Windsor, Connecticut Dear Ms. Famiglietti: ' Reference is made to the proposal to develop a McDonald's Restaurant with a drive-through window operation on the southern portion of the vacant parcel located ' at the northwest quadrant of the intersection of John Fitch Boulevard (Route 5) at Governors Highway, in the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut. ' The subject restaurant is proposed to be situated with frontage on both Route 5 and Governors Highway, to consist of about 3,900 square feet of building area, and to be served by 79 parking spaces. ' Introduction ' In developing the site plan for the subject restaurant, it was essential to locate the restaurant on the parcel so as not to render the future development of the remaining northern end of the parcel impossible or difficult, while setting up the access and ' egress for the restaurant to also serve any future development of the remainder of the parcel. After reviewing several possibilities for development of the remainder of the parcel, it was decided to select something like a bank with a drive-up operation since such would generate the most site-generated traffic of any allowed uses for the site, other than another restaurant. Another restaurant was excluded for the ' remainder of the parcel since the arrangement made by the owner of the parcel with the developer of the subject restaurant prohibits the development of any other restaurants. ' It was therefore assumed in the analyses that follow that the remaining, northern part of the parcel can be potentially developed in the future to accommodate a bank with t drive-up windows and with frontage only on Route 5. For the "bank" portion, provisions have been made to interconnect the bank development to the restaurant development via a shared drive so that access/egress for the bank would also be possible via Governors Highway at the rear (west side) of the parcel. 75 Brookside Place• Cheshire,CT 06410•Telephone:203-272-0400• Fax:203-272-5655 •jim@BubarisTraffic.com. 2 Since the development of the bank parcel would be compromised p p sed significantly without access/egress via Route 5, it is proposed that a right in / right out only common drive be provided for this parcel to eventually accommodate two developments along Route 5 about midway along the parcel's frontage. This Route 5 drive would enhance the restaurant's operation as well. Additionally, it is proposed ' that a right in / right out only drive be provided for the restaurant on Governors Highway near its intersection with Route 5. Please refer to Exhibit 1-A of the Appendix which shows both an aerial view of the site and a map indicating the relationship of the site with respect to the surrounding roadway network. ' Please refer to Exhibit 1-13 of the Appendix which pp shows the proposed overall site plan for the subject restaurant development and the manner in which the parcel can ' be further developed in the future to accommodate something like a drive-through bank development. The restaurant portion of the development is the one now being considered; that for the bank is a possible development that may occur in the near future thereafter. Please refer to exhibit 1-C of the Appendix which shows the proposed restaurant site ' plan. ' Note that the proposed restaurant will be oriented so that the front (east end) of the building faces Route 5. The drive-through operation would circulate counter- clockwise around the building with two ordering stations at the rear (west end) of the building, and the drive-up window operation would be located at the south end of the ' building facing.Governors Highway. Access to the restaurant would be either via the shared right in / right out only drive on Route 5 between the two developments, the ' restricted right in / right out only drive on Governors Highway near Route 5 at the front of the restaurant, or the shared full access/egress drive on Governors Highway at the rear of the restaurant. ' Additionally, if a bank is developed on the remainder of the subject parcel, access to the bank would be either via the shared drive on Route 5 which would only allow entry to the bank from Route 5, or via the shared full access/egress drive on Governors Highway at the rear (west end) of the parcel. Circulation around the bank would be clockwise to access either the bank itself or the drive-up windows at the rear of the bank, and no egress (exit) to Route 5 would be permitted (i.e., only entry from Route 5). ' Background Peak Hour Traffic Volumes For purposes of the analyses that follow, the selected study periods include the ' weekday am, noon and pm peaks, and the Saturday noon peak when typically the lunch time operation peaks at the restaurant and Saturday operations would wind down at the bank. The selected study area includes the signalized intersection of Route 5 at Governors Highway and the two site drives serving the existing bank on the south side of Governors Highway across the street from the subject site. Table 1 ' Trip Generation Estimates Proposed McDonald's Restaurant and Bank Development ' Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut ' McDonald's Drive-Thru Drive-Thru Restaurant Bank Total ' Weekday AM Peak Hour ' Inbound 98 27 125 Outbound 94 21 115 Total 192 48 240 ' Weekday Noon Peak Hour Inbound 109 37 146 Outbound 105 30 135 Tota l 214 67 281 Weekday PM Peak Hour ' Inbound 69 50 119 Outbound 63 50 113 Total 132 100 232 Saturday Noon Peak Hour ' Inbound 118 54 172 Outbound 113 50 163 Total 231 104 335 ' Bubaris Traffic Associates May 2010 3 .. ' Please refer to Exhibits 2 through h 5 of the Appendix which summarize the existing 2010 weekday am, weekday noon, weekday pm and tum ng movement counts traffic ' volumes for the subject study area derived from or recent at the three existing study intersections.' T 6ese counts were 30 to 8 30 am froml 1 00 am conucted in lat toe1:00 February 2010 on a typical weekday from pm, and from 4:00 to 6:00 pm, and on a typical Saturday from 11:00 am to 1:00 pm to derive the four peaks summarized in Exhibits 2 through 5. Please refer to Exhibits 6 through 9 of the Appendix which summarize the background (no-build) 2012 weekday am, weekday noon, weekday area two years prom now when itm and Saturday noon peak hour traffic volumes for the subject study is anticipated that both the proposed restaurant and bank would be t '2 through 5 full 'by Exhibits 6 through 9 were derived by expanding he data in Exhibits the typical growth rate of 2 percent per year for each of two years. Site-Generated Traffic ' For of this study, it has been assumed that both the proposed restaurant purposes and bank would each house about 4,000 square feet of building area. Utilizing trip generation data assembled' for this uses, trip y the Instituteation of es were Transportation ortation Engineers (ITE) for various l es as summarized in 1 on the developed for each of the proposed uses purpose as summarizeda nl Exhibits 10A and previous ' page utilizing the calculations for this p p 10B of the Appendix. A review of Table 1 shows that the subject developments bow�281 collectively hour generate 240 trips per hour during the weekday am peak, atrips about p trips per hour during the during the weekday noon peak, aboutr2 2the Saturday noon peak.weekday pm ' peak, and about 335 trips per hour dun g Conservatively, it has been assumed in the anal ses that ity, many f these tripsfollow would be derived from ' traffic new to the traveling tem although he roadway syst m for other purposes. traffic already ' A trip is defined as a one-way vehicular movement traveling either to or from the site. Please refer to Table 2 on the next page which been assume summarizes he estimated trip d for each of the four distributions for the subject development. be study peak periods that traffic traveling to or from the site for each oach nu e w culd each distributed on the roadway network in proportion to the approaching street for each of those peaks. Please refer to Exhibits 11 through 14 of the Appendix which graphically depict the site-generated traffic volumes associated with each study peak hour based on the data and estimates contained in Table 2. Table 2 Site-Generated Traffic Volumes and Distributions McDonald's Restaurant and Bank Development Route 5 at Governor's Highway South Windsor,Connecticut R=restaurant Peak Hour Traffic Distributions B=bank To and from the T=total To and from the 7o and from the West To and from the East South via North via via via Route 5 Governor� Route 5 Govern�hWa Peak Hour Traffic volumes 30% 2% 56% 12% Wee Jay v_ AMPeak R B T R g T R @ T — _ B T R s T 3 Inbound 98 27 125 R 12 3 15 29 8 38 2 1 55 15 70 2 p 2 53 12 64 11 3 14 28 6 35 Outbound 94 21 115 40% 5% 39% 16°rG Week&I�Peak R B T R B T R g T s R s T 7 R T 5 2 309 37 146 43 14 57 17 6 23 44 15 58 Inbound 41 12 53 17 5 22 42 12 54 5 2 7 Outbound 105 30 135 7% 44% 39% 10% Weekday Peak R B_ T_ B T R g T T R B T R 8 27 R B 7 5 12 30 22 52 5 4 20 46 Inbound 69 50 119 4 q 8 25 20 44 6 5 11 28 22 50 Outbound 63 50 113 3 40°�6 % 45% 12% Saturda____�NOOn Peak R T B T R s_ T R s T R @ T R s 5 14 6 21 47 22 69 4 118 54 172 53 24 77 Inbound 3 2 5 Outbound 113 50 163 51 23 73 14 6 20 45 20 65 Bubaris Traffic Associates May 2010 4 Combined Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' Please refer to Exhibits 15 through 18 of the Appendix which summarize the combined (build) 2012 weekday am, weekday noon, weekday pm and Saturday noon ' peak hour traffic volumes for the subject study area. Exhibits 15 through 18 were derived by combining the background (no-build) peak hour traffic volumes from Exhibits 6 through 9 with the associated site-generated peak hour traffic volumes ' from Exhibits 11 through 14. Traffic Operations Analysis Please refer to Exhibits 19 and 20 of the Appendix which summarize the definitions for levels of service for signalized and unsignalized intersections, respectively, as provided in the Highway Capacity Manual methodology for traffic operations purposes. The analyses which follow utilize the sanctioned Highway Capacity methodology facilitated by use of the widely accepted Synchro Traffic Operations Analysis Software. Please refer to Table 3 on the next page which summarizes the results of the 2012 ' background (no-build) and 2012 combined (build) traffic operations analyses for the four study intersections, including (1) Route 5 at Governors Highway, (2) Route 5 at the proposed right in /right out site drive, (3) Governors Highway at the proposed ' southwest site drive and existing bank's west drive, and (4) Governors Highway at the proposed southeast right in / right out site drive and the existing bank's east drive. ' The 2012 background (no-build) peak hour traffic operations analyses are based on the peak hour traffic volume diagrams summarized in Exhibits 6 through 9 of the Appendix. The background peak hour traffic operations analysis worksheets are contained in Exhibits 21 through 24 of the Appendix. The 2012 combined (build) peak hour traffic operations analyses are based on the ' peak hour traffic volume diagrams summarized in Exhibits 15 through 18 of the Appendix. The combined peak hour traffic operations analysis worksheets are contained in Exhibits 25 through 28 of the Appendix. A review of Table 3 shows that the four intersections within the immediate defined study are will continue to operate at excellent (i.e., LOS A) to very good (i.e., LOS B) levels of service even with the introduction of the proposed and future developments. Route 5 at Governors Highway will continue to provide overall levels of service B, with only some minor changes to LOS B or LOS C for some of the approaches during some of the four study peaks. ' Governors Highway at the two proposed site drives for the subject development in proximity to the two existing site drives for the existing bank across the street would ' continue to operate at LOS A to LOS B with only a minor change from LOS A to LOS B for the existing bank's east drive during one of the peaks, and LOS B for the new exiting maneuvers from the proposed southwest drive during all of the peaks. Table 3 Summary of Traffic Operations Analyses Levels of Service Proposed McDonald's Restaurant and Bank Development Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut 2012 Background Peaks 2012 Combined Peaks AM Noon PM Sat AM Noon PM Sat Governors Hiehwav at Southwest Drive/Bank West Drive Governors Highway eastbound left --"- -- Governors Highway westbound left A A A A A A A A A A Bank West Drive northbound approach -.-- B B B B Southwest Drive southbound approach ---- ---- ---- Governors Hi hway at Southeast Drive Bank East Drive ---- ---- A A A A A Governors Highway eastbound approach " A A A A A A A Governors Highway westbound left A A A A A A A A B Bank East Drive northbound left/right ---- A A A A Southeast Drive southbound right -� Route 5 at Governors Hiehwav } C B C C C C C C Governors Highway eastbound approach C C C C C C Governors Highway westbound approach C C B B A A B A B B Route 5 northbound approach B B A A B B B B Route 5 southbound approach - B _ _ B _ _ B _ _ B _ _ B _ _ B - -OVERALL- B _ B Route 5 at East Drive ---- B B B B East Drive outbound right Bubaris Traffic Associates May 2010 5 The proposed right in / right out only drive on Route 5 will experience LOS B for the proposed outbound right-turn movement. ' Therefore, the proposed and future developments should not have an adverse impact on existing levels of service within the defined study area, maintaining essentially the same levels of service that would otherwise exist without these developments. Queuing Analysis Please refer to Table 4 on the next page which summarizes the 95t" percentile queuing analysis for 2012 background (no-build) and combined (build) conditions. A review of Table 4 shows that the available storage capacities of all existing and proposed approach lanes are adequate to accommodate the respective peak hour ' traffic volumes to be processed by each approach or turn lane. Furthermore, the site drive locations are or will be located far enough in advance of ' the respective approach lanes so that stored traffic in the abutting lane will not restrict movement in and out of the adjacent site drive, with two exceptions: 1. On the Governors Highway eastbound approach to Route 5, the eastbound queue awaiting the change of the traffic signal from red to green will continue to block exit from the existing bank's east drive on the south side of Governors ' Highway, although such would not curtail right turns in and out of the proposed restaurant site drive opposite the bank's drive due to its proposed geometrics which would not out allow left turns out of the restaurant and into the ' eastbound approach. The bank, however, would continue to have two options available to it one is for exiting traffic from the bank to do so from its west drive instead to which Governors Highway eastbound traffic will not extend, or t if heading south on Route 5, to exit from the existing bank drive on Route 5. ' 2. On the Route 5 southbound approach to Governors Highway, the southbound queue awaiting the change of the traffic signal from red to green will block the right out only exit from the proposed site drive on Route 5 during the weekday am peak only, but only about half of the time (i.e., the 50t" percentile queue). Exiting motorists from the restaurant would either have to occasionally wait for this condition to clear, or to become accustomed to utilizing the proposed rear exit from the restaurant at the far end of Governors Highway to which the Governors Highway eastbound queue will not extend. ' Therefore, the lengths of the turn lanes and approaches, and the locations of the proposed site drives are essentially satisfactory to accommodate proposed 2012 build conditions assuming the proposed (i.e., restaurant) and future (i.e., bank) ' development of the site. Table 4 Summary of 95th Percentile Queuing Analyses Proposed McDonald's Restaurant and Bank Development Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut 2012 Background Peaks 2012 Combined Peaks Available AM Noon PM Sat AM Noon PM Sat Storage Status Governors Highway at Southwest Drive/Bank West Drive Bank West Drive northbound approach 1' 3' 2' 3' 1' 3' 2' 3' 25' OK Southwest Drive southbound approach ---- ---- ---- ---- 12' 14' 12' 16' 135' OK Governors Highway at Southeast Drive/Bank East Drive Bank East Drive northbound approach 0' 2' 0' 2' 0' 2' 1' 2' 25' OK Southeast Drive southbound approach ---- ---- ---- ---- 0' 0' 0' 0' 35' OK Route 5 at Governors Hiehwav Governors Highway eastbound approach 39' 71' 119' 58' 110' 133' 181' 145' 40'(1)/225'(2) (4) Governors Highway westbound approach 168' 157' 151' 93' 178' 175' 160' 99' 200' OK Route 5 northbound left-turn lane 41' 37' 31' 28' 76' 84' 81' 84' 205' OK Route 5 northbound right-turn lane 24' 29' 19' 12' 25' 30' 20' 15' 205' OK Route 5 southbound left-turn lane 57' 45' 72' 45' 57' 45' 72' 45' 215' OK Route 5 southbound through/right lanes 262' 123' 162' 77' 306'(3) 155' 200' 122' 225' OK Route 5 at East Drive East Drive outbound right-turn lane ---- --- ---- ---- 5' 5' 4' 5' 140' OK Notes: (1)To existing bank's east drive on Governor's Highway (2)To existing bank's west drive on Governor's Highway (3)50thpercentile queue=177' Bubaris Traffic Associates (4)OK for existing bank's west drive as is the case today May 2010 6 Traffic Crash Assessment A review was made of the most recent 3-year accident experience for the intersection of Route 5 at Governors Highway as made available by the Connecticut Department of Transportation for years 2005, 2006 and 2007. The actual traffic crash summaries are included in Exhibit 29 of the Appendix. The summary of these traffic crashes is included in Table 5 on the next page. A review of Table 5 shows a very favorable accident experience with only 15 accidents over this 3-year period, no recurring pattern that needs possible correction, and no indication that this favorable accident experience would be exacerbated by the proposed and future developments. Conclusion ' We find that the proposal to develop the subject parcel at the northwest quadrant of Route 5 at Governors Highway with two facilities, such as a fast food drive-through ' restaurant and a drive-up bank, should not adversely impact traffic operations that would otherwise exist without this development. ' With one facility to be located with frontage to both streets, and with the other having frontage only on Route 5, it is essential so as not to compromise the development potential of the second, remote facility to also have a right in / right out only site drive ' on Route 5 to be shared by both facilities, although only the restaurant would utilize this particular site drive as an outbound drive, while both will utilize it as an inbound drive. Additionally, the restaurant would be provided a right in / right out only drive on Governors Highway near Route 5, and a full access/egress shared site drive would ' be provided at the far end of Governors Highway to serve both facilities. Specifically, the proposed restaurant will be oriented so that the front of the building faces Route 5. The drive-through operation would circulate counter-clockwise around the building with two ordering stations at the ' rear of the building, and the drive-up window operation would be located at the south end of the building facing Governors Highway. Access to the restaurant would be either via the shared right in/right out only drive on Route 5 between the two developments, the restricted right in/right out only drive on Governors Highway near Route 5 at the front of the restaurant, or the shared full access/egress drive on Governors Highway at the rear of the restaurant. Table 5 Summary of Traffic Crash Experience 3 Years - 2005, 2006 and 2007 Route 5 at Governor's Highway South Windsor, Connecticut Rear End Crashes Right Angle Crashes Fixed Objects Head-On Crashes GRAND EB/EB WB I WB NB/NB SB/SB Total EB/NB EB/SB WB/NB WB/SB Total EB WB NB SB Total EB/WB NB/SB Total TOTAL 1 2 3 6 2 1 1 4 3. 1 4 1 1 15 Bubaris Traffic Associates May 2010 7 ' Additionally, if a bank is developed on the remainder of the subject parcel, access to the bank would be either via the shared drive on Route 5 which would only allow entry to the bank from Route 5, or via the shared full ' access/egress drive on Governors Highway at the rear(west end) of the parcel. Circulation around the bank would be clockwise to access either ' the bank itself or the drive-up windows at the rear of the bank, and no egress to Route 5 would be permitted (i.e., only entry from Route 5). ' Our initial consultation with traffic personnel from both ConnDOT's Traffic Division and ConnDOT's District Traffic Engineer indicated that they appear amenable to what has been proposed herein. ' Our initial consultation with the Town's Director of Planning and the Town Engineer also achieved a favorable response to the subject development proposal. ' We have since our meeting with the Town transmitted our latest site plan and updated traffic study to ConnDOT's District Office in Rocky Hill to solicit their review and approval. At the time this report was written, no response has yet been received from the District Office, except to request some drainage information which has been transmitted to the District Office. ' Very truly yours, Bubaris Traffic Associates ' James G. Bubaris P.E. Conn. Reg. No. 9203 ' Principal •� Q� G-8Cl8. \G3�•�QC'� .a"' n 9�i•G� iic tP: - No.9203 = %�9p�•.<�CENSE������ ' Cc: "'I'ln'11OX` Mr. Bob Urso, 1049 John Fitch Boulevard, South Windsor Mr. Francis Essien, McDonald's USA, LLC Ms. Lisa Chaplin, McDonald's USA, LLC ' Mr. John Kucich, P.E., Bohler Engineering rn z v ' Site Traffic Evaluation Study Proposed McDonald's Restaurant and Bank John Fitch Boulevard (Route 5) at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut ' APPENDIX ' Table of Contents ' Exhibit 1 A— Location Map B— Overall Site Plan with Two Possible Developments ' C — Proposed Restaurant Site Plan Exhibit 2 Existing 2010 Weekday AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 3 Existing 2010 Weekday Noon Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' Exhibit 4 Existing 2010 Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 5 Existing 2010 Saturday Noon Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 6 Background 2012 Weekday AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 7 Background 2012 Weekday Noon Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 8 Background 2012 Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' Exhibit 9 Background 2012 Saturday Noon Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 10 Trip Generation Estimates: ' A— Fast Food Restaurant with Drive-Thru (ITE Code#934) B — Drive-In Bank (ITE Code #912) 1 ' (continued) ' (continued) Exhibit 25 Traffic Operations Analyses Combined 2012 Weekday AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 26 Traffic Operations Analyses Combined 2012 Weekday Noon Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Exhibit 27 Traffic Operations Analyses Combined 2012 Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' Exhibit 28 Traffic Operations Analyses Combined 2012 Saturday Noon Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' Exhibit 29 Traffic Crash Summaries Route 5 at Governor's Highway 3 Years Experience—2005, 2006 and 2007 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 t Exhibit 1- A Location Map ! Proposed McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M M M M M M M M M r M M M M M M M M M Googlemaps Address To see all the details that are visible on the screen,use the"Print" link next to the map. Get Directions My Maps Print Send Link LqI . P.� .� � ,��-0 _ :. rk.'�r�� "�;.���k �'✓�A1it����", 'wt,. %�1� :',"�, j ,:: r� ��� 1 �.�Fr�l��6 "' ".« � i"fi` � I r Pw Y��* / ��'," �1; I •: � �! � ��! J�AJrn, AN .w�ri r�V� ik ,J�M'r r, • r r y v. • � r 4��, r1 .1% b kz4 ��' k 9 `�'F f w a.�" " '�d"M '�'>°�WI �'� ,�. � ;+4,; i •' y P � ! V r� '1 1 l `wr 'I�,I�� •fr. ��p�y �a(u„r,! r3�. , ;r,; � p ::;;. X1 :"}h h �� ,.,.,,>a� �� Po + ��NP*'...� �° v'�. "',." M7' ;:,:� � �, •' � , �,� ,�'."'� iw"'i .� wa 40 } I ,I ^ �' �'�r• ._,�, 'r raaJgr � �w• l p "��' �► r�� � ,�,�, u�� � � .,� Y'g"{�i +',:i n w I 'Y ' ✓� ' ���+•..•' A `` ... ,� �i -�+"e, ^�� !"... may, �.,f • yrye Jr} _ ' �C�p� y 016 DlgitalGlobe,JGeo b,-U'. Geologic urv� .__. F S httr�•//mark annalP r.nm/ Gooste maps Address To see all the details that are visible on the screen,use the"Print" link next to the map. Get Directions My Maps Print Send Link lore}'a'Vimw + 7 r , ' �, + ■ UTC P,7VaP.f te � i ell hr _ T�clYrb:alcr�i� �� + Ei�ctr�a C�ralYt�ri� 5r r Victor#2Ortie . l llsfic3u►afi Contra,C Fu(noure ..:�.■.,, �""` 3r.,f.4r! + � �peci�tty v, ' FaMit ners ` Nn� Ae. Aci`i nad.e ,° v+ 02010 Google-Map data i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Exhibit 1- B 1 Overall Site Plan with Two Possible Developments Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 rr r r rr r r r rr� r r r� rr r� r� r r r■� �r rr �W I Ip. ..I_.. ,..�.. _ 'i F r1 T9&I I I + a w1 I i MAP]i I ¢ �uxx(oF CONCEPTMAN STANDARD mENRAT.NOTES: e R II cl �` ;a WMoxea e.W9ae 4l b � T •re , � •�W���a� � jI n I ZONING ANALYSIS TABLE McDONALD'S '1 I ~+le Yd awm e 3 I tS e i ro d u © 1 a wm(M 1VANM i °CI@ A, Mxoa rWn rcnv.aM M•w..mE q " ® IL— — —L �a_ 490.]4' ae ® B 1 I - ( -JOHN FITCH BOULEVARD ��p (A.KA.CONNECTICUT STATE HIGHWAY ROUTE US B) (F.—HARTFMD-SPRINGFIEW RMD) �9 STATUS MTE BY (V.—WWM FA.W.) PRELIMINPRY STREET ADDRESS PUW CHECKED R pryer T F R 1049 JOHN FITCH BLVD. AS-BUILT BOHLER CE DRAWN SY; MOB GRAPHIC SCALE ® B®++LER NY STAT ..a I N G I N I I I Y N 6 mwianNF aEa — J,A. KUCICH SOUTH WINDSOR CONN. OHECKED Br: eAx co— MTE: 09-30-09 meemT) a� HARTFORD SCALE: AS SXDWN , �so tt Pg0FE49AUAl Eu NATIONN.STORE NUMBER PLAN DESCRIPTION SXEET N0. PRELIMINARY NN�w UWOeI: _ SURVEY BASED �� oe:om xooan.eve.9 NOT To ee USED Poa coNsrnucnoN CONCEPT PLAN Exhibit 1- C Proposed Site Plan for McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut r� rr r rr rr rr rr r� rr rr r rr rw wr rr ZONING ANALYSIS TABLE GENERAL SITE NOTES �?C arcNrR�Ac aa,�im[m.RPR.r tw,i°om°AX[r[a,.a., axP. a..�AR.x[oroxA: xa Ra[[Rn ,.S,uR.:< a w m avN;m,m,s[°rxAl mn•m[ �' _ w 01 B3• txMw �oR3 aaw.,s woRm N[rem rn«m a W. m[, o`,m R"mt�'rataA,x wxrr xLwan m rcmAa rc.,u3awra,K.xA.,[,r.x,oroW /_/ 'wRTM•.m:mRxi�[:�R�>�x wRr�t wA�R - 10"o°oo.344 3 A,o cm wA -m�wEmu xR9xT an wA _ Ma oawaRS Aa,r,wWlxc Mxsm Wx i q up. xalAo[nn wA " "`A°R,4k"W4 vW a wxrsrwn mm g w*c°xaruFc(AJ 9pm mxa ro M rcinxrt[o smnws cXtwxx xa nnr a uano m roa & --—— --28—L—-----—————————————--—(d9a, I M p�BemLp_q `f9S umo aYlvu ummq rx nAe[s wP lvl: °CSAp6%50=L]�.R-SORT IACR -v�-fl IAA 1'pEL i®�PIM fl'Ixl.AmE A m���0� ' >Rssars w°. 4 �° � � I -m rxm[.Ir au,mxu Aw ARa warn wv.lmasrx.xnlm[r,wvntaMru,aawm�R. — � — r�m srwnw�anen ramtanRR�°m vuu x n>wMRu�'rm[w,va rwl ur.;c°��ws°aEauo im IB PAVf'MRNT STRIPING 1 PGEh'D R. fK vm4A/tOxwnm fxu a[NUA m [S.VmR[tm uxlut t nmrrgrt,;vminua,[rc.A[auirto Y I I xoi°om�[iM�«s[N,trs sXmnw«rcio`amn0v"mr"a�x inoamrRx a I I t C® R+a.sMM m°uXt r " a.PHrwc R.X:w.R smrvmXs wm rA[ntmawx,wa o a I1 I I .�mxa m Wam[N NmxR <C I I I11 X a 411=1 R .1=%raR R .1 o arm i l� Mma INRr APR°WNWH11—°mm,m91iNWR, 1 ® 1 MAP]t a SanvRw.tta['Mx.0 ro ASSWAr�ir,w.rc°NA.apr RoivlMiAX�s AXO u°Aw[ula�sR410194LL LOTG.L 81 x[aam °i v/V7 p I 9x x/F uxe of .Eu �' wnRAr[mmx.aa wx[mx wro,.r � I r� I SSA.19A5.P�.R5 .� ` � on�AWM"roA�9� ,�RW:,RKwARwtKlxtaaN,: D � "��A4Ww ;[ ro DE� o MAP/ ( I 'a� ' r,. riAa��°,�a��°wP>MM,xrRrcx.wAro�a.awAaA�. [ O ,m°,a°o"TMPauea m SNMMRUNR aWRi._GNI.._sirtv__W`nus ... G� mR�XN,Aa� a mxa�laRm�� Q w��w� s�,mr.�Na�RRx,MKRx�� oI I a � IwmM �a � amNR _ I / I yN arcs xR[�NAxR WR a W.aNw�imx�mrc O ��anw I IIR VfiroMer[iWrsacuACA t1AW'49.M�94 vtAW1uMAKK�It¢4N^tOWb14RRmm[ta mK°S,uu. a$d p »oamwx[Row[x[xa¢ .wmRxaNA a,w /'� g ,{� d �tRt6 , i' 1 I ry ;"'trci`m"Xr °nx ,aNra WaM /r,T st k "� /• g ) I u M'asW OA e'a xm wmN ,�P�AR`nws 1nI 6 I � ��mO`aw4 M rm tm[o fo,miOAuaqu MA6.uFm°a„SNExR RdMOts°¢PAua 6 Q a W KWVOL� — — -- —ice — ----- --- mz `O Hw °�[S N a�Od 1 NKNL.Oittm'[aiaAN.R�uA°is"Sxei�@'nIXJ'ttM4A�•'bs,N 0 �, r �• ,I� ,� ,R im�rRA[W�Wiw�wltwr�N�WNwMm��R�x,ARRNaM�Ammr xRo,W� �� � M[m�,�xm[NwmarRR.rc��.WMaA1�mA�RNatF.r�xa�[F�Wt _ .. �, �� ,rp,R �.a� ,� �•; � ,• RL ���������,� MK�A�R�N�m�� ma�M s :n lPux a,� I A,— A. X WxmMµR�awWmr PIR '— _ ' /•/ � Ig'�' GRAPHIC SCALE ` —JOHN FITCH BOULEVARD Ia�� w STATUS$ S I)ArE 1 wmnre.n•a (A.K.A.CON IMICUT STATE HIGHWAY ROUTE US 5) •� i i cl„P¢tf 7 PRELIMINARY -�.. a A lL -ROAD) STREET ADDRESS I—CHECKED ;,ry;�„"K•mR' (F.K.A.HARTFORO-SPRINCFIELD...mwrtm (veRmetL wOm R.o.w.) �n AS-BUILT - FILER LE \ 1049 JOHN FITCH BLVD.CITY STATE DRAWN BY:. M E N t......o t9X wn J.A. KUCICH SOUTH WINDSOR CT CHECKED BY: -- • ^� COUNTY DATE: 02-12- HARTFORD SCALE: AS SHO PROFESS�CN4 ENGNEER NATIONAL STORE NUMBER �P—DE1C111i101 SHEET 10, PRELIN�I�d i�Y ga NOTTO ERE SITE PLAN USD @=O W i3 March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut N NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale Bank 938 1 1 1 McDonald's O 0 73 826 39 Z--42 ' +-- 154 +-- 168 +—74 �— 14 �7-- 4 lq� 77 Govemors Highway f 11 26 —► 1 14 40 —+ 0 0 16 25 396 85 2 —4, 0 —4. 13 --� C N r I.,,, o 0 N LU m m Exhibit 2 1 Existing 2010 Weekday AM Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut i N ' NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale Bank 490 1 1 1 1 McDonald's to ' 0 ' 31 426 33 '--,43 /— 55 �--- 93 +--49 �-- 43 �-- 12 116 ' Gov®mors Highway 32 59 5 31 89 --► 5 11 43 25 377 106 6 —�, 1 —� 25 --41 C C W ' m m Exhibit c Existing 2010 Weekday Noor Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volume; March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut N ' NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale i 1 Bank 664 1 1 1 ' McDonald's LO 1 0 1 26 581 57 '--51 ♦-- 31 4— 61 I +—22 r— 31 �-- 3 4J 102 Govemors Highway 38 ' 116 —► 0 22 136 —► 1 4 73 16 680 42 3 2 29 --� ID cc ' W m m Exhibit 4 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates Existing 2010 Weekday PMPeak Hour Traffic Volumes 1 March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway 1 South Windsor, Connecticut 1 N 1 1 NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale 1 Bank 418 1 1 1 1 McDonaid's to 1 0 1 1 1 17 368 33 Z--28 �--- 22 �--- 53 +—25 �-- 33 r-- 3 58 1 Govemors Highway � I 16 T 1 26 —► 2 28 49 --► 2 17 31 16 318 30 19 c � cW 1 m m Exhibit 1 Existing 2010 Saturday Noor Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volume: 1 March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut 1 N 1 1 NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale 1 Bank 1 976 1 1 1to McDonald s m 0 1 1 76 859 41 '-- 44 /— 160 4-- 176 77 �-- 15 �-- 4 80 1 Govemors Highway 1 11 1 27 1 15 42 0 0 17 26 412 88 2 0 —i 14 0 m N 1 W m 00 Exhibit E 1 Background 2012 Weekday AN Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volume: March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut N ' NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale Bank 510 1 1 1 ' McDonald's m 4W ' 0 32 443 34 '�-- 45 — 57 97 51 f— 45 �-- 12 4 �i► 121 Govemors Hi hway t t 33 I ' 61 —► 5 32 93 —► 5 11 45 26 392 110 6 --�, 1 -- 26 --� m � J4W m m Exhibit ' Background 2012 Weekday Noor Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volume; 1 March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut N 1 1 NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale 1 Bank 691 1 1 1 1 McDonald s O 1 C i 1 ' 27 604 59 'L-- 53 /— 32 63 23 �-- 32 r-- 3 4J 106 1 Governors Highway I 4 40 I 1 121 ---► 0 23 141 —► 1 4 76 17 707 44 3 —�, 2 -Z 3019 --� C C plid m p � 1 W m m Exhibit E 1 Background 2012 Weekday PN Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volume; ' March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut N ' NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale Bank 435 1 1 1 McDonald's to 1 0 18 383 34 Z— 29 ' �-- 23 55 26 j-- 34 �-- gh 3 � � � 60 Govemors Hiway I 17 T 27 ---► 2 29 51 ---► 2 18 32 — 17 331 31 4 5 �, 20 --� � e � e m W c � c m m Exhibit 4 Background 2012 Saturday Nooi Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volume! 3/2/2010 FASTFOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU* (2008) ---------------------------- Exhibit 10A ---------------------------- ' SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS ' SOURCE:TRIP GENERATION REPORT,INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS,2008 LAND USE: CODE#934-FAST FOOD RESTAURANT WITH DRIVE-THRU WINDOW PROJECT: Fast Food Portion-McDonald's and Bank Project ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Route 5 at Governor's Highway,South Windsor,CT ' NUMBER OF 1,000'S SQUARE FEET AREA: - - -- - - - 3.900 -- - TOTAL TIME PERIOD ITE TRIP GENERATION EQUATION TRIPS INBOUND OUTBOUND AVERAGE T=496.12(X) 1935 967 967 WEEKDAY 50% INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND PEAK HOUR T=49.35(X) 192 98 94 ' 7 TO 9 AM 51 % INBOUND*49%OUTBOUND PEAK HOUR T=33.84(X) 132 69 63 4 TO 6 PM 52% INBOUND*48%OUTBOUND AM PEAK HOUR T=54.81 (X) 214 109 105 OF GENERATOR 51 %INBOUND*49%OUTBOUND PM PEAK HOUR T=46.14(X) 180 94 86 OF GENERATOR 52% INBOUND*48%OUTBOUND AVERAGE T=722.03 (X) 2816 1408 1408 SATURDAY 50% INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND SAT PEAK HR. T=59.39(X) 232 118 113 OF GENERATOR 51 % INBOUND*49%OUTBOUND AVERAGE T=542.72 (X) 2117 1058 1058 SUNDAY 50% INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND SUN PEAK HR. o T=46.67(X)+61.0 243 117 126 /o IN OF GENERATOR 48 BOUND 52%OUTBOUND ' 3/2/2010 ' DRIVE-IN BANK* (2008) --------------------------------- Exhibit 10B --------------------------------- SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS SOURCE:TRIP GENERATION REPORT,INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS,2008 LAND USE: DRIVE-IN BANK--CODE#912 PROJECT: Bank Portion McDonald's and Bank Project- --------------- Route 5 at Governors Highway,South Windsor,CT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ NUMBER OF 1,000'S SQUARE FEET AREA: 3.900 TOTAL TIME PERIOD ITE TRIP GENERATION EQUATION TRIPS INBOUND OUTBOUND AVERAGE T= 148.15(X) 578 289 289 WEEKDAY 50% INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND PEAK HOUR T= 12.35(X) 48 27 21 7 TO 9 AM 56% INBOUND*44%OUTBOUND PEAK HOUR T=25.82(X) 101 50 50 4 TO 6 PM 50% INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND AM PEAK HOUR T= 17.31 (X) 68 37 30 OF GENERATOR 55% INBOUND*45%OUTBOUND PM PEAK HOUR T=26.69(X) 104 53 51 ' OF GENERATOR 51 % INBOUND*49%OUTBOUND AVERAGE T=86.32(X) 337 168 168 SATURDAY 50 % INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND SATURDAY T=26.53 (X) 103 54 50 PEAK HOUR 52 % INBOUND*48%OUTBOUND ' AVERAGE T=31.90(X) 124 62 62 SUNDAY 50 % INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND ' SUNDAY T=4.78(X) 19 9 9 PEAK HOUR 50% INBOUND*50%OUTBOUND ' March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut XX = Inbound N 0'Outbound 1 1 NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale Bank 70 East Drive ' 2a F 1 1 McDonald's 7 0 0 cc 4) O O yr ' Z-- 12 F2 L 42 28 Z-- 0 85 /— 0 f-- 12 ♦-- 16 Govemors Highway 2 ---? I I 65 I ' --► 85 --► 14 37 Exhibit 1' Site-Generated Weekday AN Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volume,, March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut ' XX = Inbound N YYQ--Outbound 1 NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale Bank 57 r 4j 1 East Drive 42 0� ' McDonald's r 0 0 rIts 3 4) 1 0 0 CO) to ' t-- 21 5 t— 61 42 '�- 87 /— F � 4— 21 4— 23 t Govemors Highway 7 53 I I —► 87 —► 22 59 12 Exhibit 12 Site-Generated Weekday Noor Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volume; /I March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut t XX = Inbound N 0=Outbound NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale Bank 47 0 1 I East Drive McDonald's LO m r cc o CO) 4--- 27 F4 L 37 28 '�- 0 78 FFJ ♦-- 27 12 �- 4j IF- AJ Govemors Highway 9 —? I 1 45 ' —► 78 —► 11 52 41 _741 22 --�, Exhibit 12 Site-Generated Weekday PN Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volume; March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut t XX = Inbound N 0=Outbound NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale Bank 77 1 1 East Drive 45 McDonald's u7 m 0 � 1 cc 3 4) o Co �-- 28 FTJ L 61 46 Z-- 114 /— 0 � 28 � 4— 20 ' Govemors Hi hwa 6 —? I 1 I 84 —? I —► 114 —+ 20 69 —� 20 Exhibit 1 ' Site-Generated Saturday Noor Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volume: March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut N ' NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale t Bank 70 976 1 1 East Drive 28 to McDonald's 3 p` 0 3 � c°n v0 ��— 12 2 Z-- 42 76 887 41 t-- 44 1 0 85 162 187 93 �--1 15 �— 4 �i► �-- 80 Govemors Highway 2 —� T I 76 I I 27 —► 1 0 15 127 —► 0 0 31 63 412 88 2 0 20 ---, Exhibit 15 Combined 2012 Weekday AM Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volumes March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut N ' NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale Bank 57 510 1 ,J 1 East Drive 42 McDonald's LO m In � cc 3 4) 1 � CO) � t--- 21 5 t— 61 32 485 34 t-- 45 2 0 87 /— 62 4— 118 74 i-- 45 41 f-- 12 � �l► 121 Govemors Highway 7 —? T 86 I ' 61 —► 5 0 32 180 --► 5 11 67 85 392 110 6 1 38 ---� Exhibit 16 ' Combined 2012 Weekday Noon Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volumes March 2010 McDonald's Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway South Windsor, Connecticut i N ' NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale ' Bank 47 691 1 4J 1 East Drive 28 Z McDonald's m 0 0 c 3 � 0 0 CO) Cf) Z-- 27 4 Z-- 37 27 632 59 53 4 0 78 +— 36 90 35 r— 32 � 3 f— � 106 .l Govemors Highway 9 —? T t 85 I ' 121 0 0 23 219 —► 1 4 87 69 707 44 3 --�, 2 52 Exhibit 17 ' Combined 2012 Weekday PM Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volumes March 2010 McDonald's.Restaurant Route 5 at Governors Highway ' South Windsor, Connecticut N ' NOTE: Drawing Not to Scale Bank 77 435 1 1 East Drive 45 —� iLO McDonald's O ' 0 > 0 3 � 0 0 CO) CO) ' t— 28 3 t— 61 18 428 34 29 2 0 114 26 83 46 �-- 34 *j 3 60 Govemors Highway 6 - 1* T 1 101 1 I 27 --► 2 0 29 165 —► 2 18 52 86 331 31 4 5 —�, 40 Exhibit 1 f ' Combined 2012 Saturday Noor Bubaris Traffic Associates Peak Hour Traffic Volume; 1 EXHIBIT 19 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS 1 SOURCE: HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL MCM), 2000 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD (1) i Level of Service for signalized intersections is defined in terms of control delay, which is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, increased fuel consumption, and lost travel time. The delay experienced by a motorist is comprised of a number of factors that relate to control, geometric, traffic, and incidents. Total i delay is the difference between the travel time actually experienced and the reference travel time that would result during base conditions in the absence of traffic control, geometric delay, any incidents, and any other vehicles. i Specifically, LOS criteria for traffic signals are stated in terms of the average control delay per vehicle, typically for a 15-minute analysis period. Delay is a complex measure and depends on a number of variables, including the quality of i progression, the cycle length, the green ratio, and the volume-to-capacity (v/c) ratio for the lane group. In the case of signalized intersections, the Level of Service for each approach is computed, and an overall Level of Service for the entire intersection is determined. Levels of Service (LOS) for signalized intersections are defined as follows: LEVEL OF SERVICE CONTROL DELAY PER CONDITION VEHICLE (SECONDS) LOS A < 10 LOW DELAY LOS B > 10 TO 20 SHORT DELAY LOS C > 20 TO 35 AVERAGE DELAY LOS D > 35 TO 55 CONGESTION ' NOTICEABLE LOS E > 55 TO 80 LIMIT OF i ACCEPTABLE DELAY LOS F > 80 UNACCEPTABLE i In today's environment, Levels of Service C to D are considered acceptable, and Levels of Service A to B are seldomly achieved at signalized intersections. i (1) HCM, Exhibit 16-2. i EXHIBIT 20 LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS SOURCE: HIGHWAY CAPACITY MANUAL (HCM), 2000 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD (1) Level of Service for unsignalized intersections similar to the study intersections is defined in terms of the average control delay for the approach or movement evaluated. Control delay involves movements at slower speeds and stops on intersection approaches as vehicles move up in the queue or slow down upstream of an intersection. The delay experienced by a motorist is comprised of factors that relate to control, geometrics, traffic, and incidents. Total delay is the difference between the travel time ' actually experienced and the reference time that would result during base conditions in the absence of incident, control, traffic, or geometric delay. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. At two-way stop-controlled and all-way stop-controlled intersections, control delay is the total elapsed time from a vehicle joining the queue until its departure from the stopped ' position at the head of the queue. The control delay also includes the time required to decelerate to a stop and to accelerate to the free-flow speed. Level of Service (LOS) for a two-way stop-controlled intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay and is defined for each minor movement. LOS is not defined for the intersection as a whole. Level of Service(LOS)for an all-way stop-controlled intersection is determined by the computed or measured control delay and is defined for all movements. A LOS is then defined for the intersection as a whole. Levels of Service (LOS) for unsignalized intersections are defined as follows: LEVEL OF SERVICE AVERAGE CONTROL DELAY CONDITION PER VEHICLE (SECONDS) LOS A 0 TO 10 LITTLE OR NO DELAY LOS B > 10 TO 15 SHORT DELAY LOS C > 15 TO 25 AVERAGE DELAY LOS D > 25 TO 35 LONG DELAY LOS E > 35 TO 50 VERY LONG DELAY LOS F > 50 EXTREME DELAY In today's environment, Levels of Service D to F are common and are often experienced on minor street approaches to major streets carrying relatively high traffic volumes. (1) HCM, Exhibits 17-2 and 17-22. ' Exhibit 21 Traffic Operations Analyses Background 2012 Weekday AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Background AM Peak 7: Governors Highway & Bank West Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor --* — ' Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations '* 4 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop ' Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) 27 2 15 160 1 15 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 29 2 16 174 1 16 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) ' Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None ' Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 454 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 32 237 30 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 32 237 30 ' tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 99 100 98 ' cM capacity(veh/h) 1581 744 1044 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 ' Volume Total 32 190 17 Volume Left 0 16 1 Volume Right 2 0 16 cSH 1700 1581 1018 Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.01 0.02 Queue Length (ft) 0 1 1 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.7 8.6 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.7 8.6 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary - Average Delay 1.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 25.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 1 Background AM Peak 9: Governors Highway & Bank East Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor ' Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations '+ *T Y Sign Control Free Free Stop ' Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) , 42 0 4 175 1 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 46 0 4 190 1 1 ' Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) ' Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 164 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 46 245 46 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 46 245 46 ' tC, single (s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 1562 742 1024 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 46 195 2 Volume Left 0 4 1 Volume Right 0 0 1 cSH 1700 1562 860 ' Volume to Capacity 0.03 0.00 0.00 Queue Length (ft) 0 0 0 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.2 9.2 ' Lane LOS A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.2 9.2 Approach LOS A ' Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 22.4% ICU Level of Service A ' Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 Background AM Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor - -. - .. Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations *1� I tt r 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 ' Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 205 205 215 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 ' Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 ' Frt 0.955 0.970 0.850 0.988 Fit Protected 0.987 0.981 0.950 0,950 Satd. Flow(prot) 0 1756 0 0 1773 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3497 0 Fit Permitted 0.918 0.866 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 1633 0 0 1565 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3497 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 15 17 96 11 ' Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 55 55 Link Distance (ft) 164 4904 3781 273 ' Travel Time(s) 3.2 95.5 46.9 3.4 Volume(vph) 11 17 14 80 77 44 26 412 88 41 859 76 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow(vph) 12 18 15 87 84 48 28 448 96 45 934 83 ' Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 45 0 0 219 0 28 448 96 45 1017 0 Turn Type Perm Perm custom custom custom Protected Phases 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 ' Permitted Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Detector Phases - 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 ' Minimum Split(s) 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 11.0 22.0 22.0 11.0 22.0 Total Split(s) 34.9 34.9 0.0 34.9 34.9 0.0 22.0 33.1 33.1 22.0 33.1 0.0 Total Split(%) 38.8% 38.8% 0.0% 38.8% 38.8% 0.0% 24.4% 36.8% 36.8% 24.4% 36.8% 0.0% Maximum Green (s) 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 17.0 27.1 27.1 17.0 27.1 Yellow Time(s) 3.0 3.0• 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 All-Red Time(s) 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1,0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag ' Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max Act Effct Green (s) 17.2 17.2 7.5 57.1 57.1 8.1 59.9 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.08 0.63 0.63 0.09 0.67 v/c Ratio 0.14 0.70 0.19 0.20 0.09 0.28 0.44 Uniform Delay, d1 20.0 31.2 41.8 7.7 0.0 40.5 8.5 ' Control Delay 20.6 32.6 38.9 9.1 2.9 38.8 9.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 20.6 32.6 38.9 9.1 2.9 38.8 9.7 LOS C C D A A D A Approach Delay 20.6 32.6 9.5 11.0 Approach LOS C C A B ' Bubaris Traffic Associates Page 1 3/3/2010 ' Background AM Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor ' Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 90th %ile Green (s) 22.2 22.2 22.2 22.2 7.8 41.7 41.7 9.2 43.1 90th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 70th %ile Green (s) 17.9 17.9 17.9 17.9 6.6 47.6 47.6 7.6 48.6 ' 70th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 50th %ile Green (s) 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.1 0.0 51.4 51.4 6.6 63.0 50th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Skip Coord Coord Gap Coord 30th %ile Green (s) 12.4 12.4 12.4 12.4 0.0 65.7 65.7 0.0 65.7 30th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord 10th %ile Green (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 0.0 69.1 69.1 0.0 69.1 ' 10th %ile Term Code Min Min Min Min Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord Stops(vph) 24 166 26 175 10 38 437 Fuel Used(gal) 0 10 1 14 2 3 47 CO Emissions(g/hr) 28 678 92 971 164 184 3255 ' NOx Emissions(glhr) 5 132 18 189 32 36 633 VOC Emissions (g/hr) 7 157 21 225 38 43 754 Dilemma Vehicles(#) 2 11 0 23 0 0 52 Queue Length 50th (ft) 14 108 15 57 0 25 98 Queue Length 95th (ft) 39 168 41 106 24 57 262 Internal Link Dist(ft) 84 4824 3701 193 Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 205 215 Base Capacity(vph) 571 548 354 2245 1040 354 2331 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.08 0.40 0.08 0.20 0.09 0.13 0.44 Intersection Summary ' Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 90 ' Offset: 0(0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated ' Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.70 Intersection Signal Delay: 13.3 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 58.6% ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Splits and Phases: 3: Governors Highway& Route 5 01 P m2 'M` m4 ' +2�2,s 33.1 s 34.9 s 't m5 4 06 ' 22 s I 11111111133.1s ' Page 2 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 ' Exhibit 22 Traffic Operations Analyses Background 2012 Weekday Noon Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Background Noon Peak 7: Governors Highway & Bank West Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor —+ — ' Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations T, 4 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop ' Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) 61 6 45 57 5 32 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 66 7 49 62 5 35 ' Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) ' Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None ' Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 454 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 73 229 70 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 73 229 70 tC, single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 ' p0 queue free % 97 99 96 cM capacity(veh/h) 1527 735 993 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 ' Volume Total 73 111 40 Volume Left 0 49 5 Volume Right 7 0 35 cSH 1700 1527 948 ' Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.03 0.04 Queue Length (ft) 0 2 3 Control Delay(s) 0.0 3.4 9.0 ' Lane LOS A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 3.4 9.0 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 22.2% ICU Level of Service A ' Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Pagel Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 ' Bac kground Noon Peek 9: Governors Highway & Bank East Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor ' Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations '� *T Y Sign Control Free Free Stop ' Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) 93 1 12 97 5 11 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 101 1 13 105 5 12 ' Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) ' Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None ' Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 164 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 102 233 102 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 102 233 102 ' tC, single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 ' p0 queue free% 99 99 99 cM capacity(veh/h) 1490 748 954 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 ' Volume Total 102 118 17 Volume Left 0 13 5 Volume Right 1 0 12 cSH 1700 1490 878 ' Volume to Capacity 0.06 0.01 0.02 Queue Length (ft) 0 1 2 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.9 9.2 ' Lane LOS A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.9 9.2 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.1 Intersection Capacity Utilization 22.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 Background Noon Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor -0. - ' Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt r +T Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 205 205 215 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 ' Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 ' Frt 0.967 0.972 0.850 0.990 Fit Protected 0.984 0.973 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 0 1772 0 0 1762 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3504 0 ' Fit Permitted 0.862 0.788 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 1553 0 0 1427 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3504 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 22 18 120 10 ' Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 55 55 Link Distance (ft) 164 4904 3781 273 Travel Time(s) 3.2 95.5 46.9 3.4 Volume(vph) 33 45 26 121 51 45 26 392 110 34 443 32 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow(vph) 36 49 28 132 55 49 28 426 120 37 482 35 ' Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 113 0 0 236 0 28 426 120 37 517 0 Turn Type Perm Perm custom customcustom Protected Phases 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 ' Permitted Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Detector Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 Minimum Split(s) 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 11.0 22.0 22.0 11.0 22.0 Total Split(s) 30.9 30.9 0.0 30.9 30.9 0.0 20.0 29.1 29.1 20.0 29.1 0.0 Total Split(%) 38.6% 38.6% 0.0% 38.6% 38.6% 0.0% 25.0% 36.4% 36.4% 25.0% 36.4% 0.0% Maximum Green (s) 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 15.0 23.1 23.1 15.0 23.1 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max ' Act Effct Green (s) 18.0 18.0 7.4 49.0 49.0 7.6 49.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.23 0.23 0.09 0.61 0.61 0.10 0.62 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.71 0.17 0.20 0.12 0.22 0.24 Uniform Delay, d1 20.6 26.2 36.9 8.2 0.0 36.9 8.2 ' Control Delay 19.8 28.7 34.0 9.5 3.2 34.0 9.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 19.8 28.7 34.0 9.5 3.2 34.0 9.4 ' LOS B C C A A C A Approach Delay 19.8 28.7 9.4 11.0 Approach LOS B C A B ' Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 1 Ba ckground Noon Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor 1 --6. - 1 Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 90th %ile Green (s) 23.5 23.5 23.5 23.5 7.6 31.4 31.4 8.2 32.0 90th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord ' 70th %ile Green (s) 19.0 19.0 19.0 19.0 6.4 37.2 37.2 6.9 37.7 70th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 50th %ile Green (s) 15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9 0.0 52.2 52.2 0.0 52.2 50th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord 1 30th %ile Green (s) 12.9 12.9 12.9 12.9 0.0 55.2 55.2 0.0 55.2 30th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord 10th %ile Green (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 0.0 59.1 59.1 0.0 59.1 ' 10th %ile Term Code Min Min Min Min Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord Stops (vph) 64 177 26 177 14 33 215 Fuel Used(gal) 1 10 1 13 3 2 24 1 CO Emissions(g/hr) 72 719 90 939 207 152 1644 NOx Emissions (g/hr) 14 140 17 183 40 30 320 VOC Emissions(g/hr) 17 167 21 218 48 35 381 Dilemma Vehicles(#) 6 13 0 25 0 0 30 1 Queue Length 50th (ft) 38 101 13 35 0 18 43 Queue Length 95th (ft) 71 157 37 104 29 45 123 Internal Link Dist(ft) 84 4824 3701 193 Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 205 215 Base Capacity(vph) 537 492 354 2169 1016 354 2161 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.21 0.48 0.08 0.20 0.12 0.10 0.24 Intersection Summary ' Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 ' Offset: 0(0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated 1 Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.71 Intersection Signal Delay: 13.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.1% ICU Level of Service A 1 Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Governors Highway& Route 5 01 02 "'� o4 1 20 s 29.1 s 30.9 s o5 1 rob 20 s 29.1 s ' Page 2 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 1 r r r r r r r r r r Exhibit 23 Traffic Operations Analyses Background 2012 Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes r 1 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 Background PM Peak 7: Governors Highway & Bank West Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1, 4 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop ' Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) 121 3 32 32 1 23 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 132 3 35 35 1 25 ' Pedestrians Lane Width(ft) Walking Speed(ft/s) ' Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 454 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 135 238 133 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 135 238 133 tC, single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 98 100 97 cM capacity(veh/h) 1450 733 916 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 135 70 26 Volume Left 0 35 1 Volume Right 3 0 25 cSH 1700 1450 907 ' Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.02 0.03 Queue Length(ft) 0 2 2 Control Delay(s) 0.0 3.9 9.1 ' Lane LOS A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 3.9 9.1 Approach LOS A ' Intersection Summary Average Delay 2.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 23.3% ICU Level of Service A ' Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 ' Background PM Peak 9: Governors Highway & Bank East Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations TO 4 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) 141 2 3 63 1 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 153 2 3 68 1 4 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal(ft) 164 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 155 229 154 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 155 229 154 ' tC, single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 1425 757 892 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 155 72 5 Volume Left 0 3 1 Volume Right 2 0 4 cSH 1700 1425 861 ' Volume to Capacity 0.09 0.00 0.01 Queue Length (ft) 0 0 0 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.4 9.2 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.4 9.2 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 17.5% ICU Level of Service A ' Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Bubaris Traffic Associates Pagel 3/3/2010 Background PM Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor ---t '-. I Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations + tt r 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 205 205 215 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0' 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 ! Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.972 0.960 0.850 0.994 Flt Protected 0.987 0.972 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 0 1787 0 0 1738 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3518 0 Flt Permitted 0.882 0.746 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 1597 0 0 1334 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3518 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 16 25 48 5 ! Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 55 55 Link Distance(ft) 164 4904 3781 273 ! Travel Time(s) 3.2 95.5 46.9 3.4 Volume(vph) 40 76 30 106 23 53 17 707 44 59 604 27 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 ! Adj. Flow(vph) 43 83 33 115 25 58 18 768 48 64 657 29 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 159 0 0 198 0 18 768 48 64 686 0 Turn Type Perm Perm custom custom custom Protected Phases 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 ' Permitted Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Detector Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 Minimum Split(s) 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 11.0 22.0 22.0 11.0 22.0 Total Split(s) 34.9 34.9 0.0 34.9 34.9 0.0 22.0 33.1 33.1 22.0 33.1 0.0 Total Split(%) 38.8% 38.8% 0.0% 38.8% 38.8% 0.0% 24.4% 36.8% 36.8% 24.4% 36.8% 0.0% ! Maximum Green (s) 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 17.0 27.1 27.1 17.0 27.1 Yellow Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag ' Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max Act Effct Green (s) 17.6 17.6 7.2 53.8 53.8 8.8 62.1 ! Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.08 0.60 0.60 0.10 0.69 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.71 0.13 0.36 0.05 0.37 0.28 Uniform Delay, dl 28.9 29.4 43.1 9.7 0.0 39.1 6.9 ' Control Delay 28.9 31.2 38.9 11.8 4.1 38.7 7.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 28.9 31.2 38.9 11.8 4.1 38.7 7.2 ! LOS C C D B A D A Approach Delay 28.9 31.2 12.0 9.9 Approach LOS C C B A ! Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 ! Background PM Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor -11 -. -' . Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 90th %ile Green (s) 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 6.9 39.3 39.3 10.6 43.0 90th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 70th %ile Green (s) 18.5 18.5 18.5 18.5 0.0 45.8 45.8 8.8 59.6 70th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Skip Coord Coord Gap Coord 50th We Green (s) 15.3 15.3 15.3 15.3 0.0 50.3 50.3 7.5 62.8 50th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Skip Coord Coord Gap Coord 30th %ile Green (s) 12.2 12.2 12.2 12.2 0.0 54.7 54.7 6.2 65.9 30th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Skip Coord Coord Gap Coord 10th %ile Green (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 0.0 69.1 69.1 0.0 69.1 ' 10th %ile Term Code Min Min Min Min Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord Stops(vph) 111 143 18 363 7 53 238 Fuel Used(gal) 2 9 1 25 1 4 30 CO Emissions (g/hr) 130 606 61 1774 85 263 2099 ' NOx Emissions (g/hr) 25 118 12 345 17 51 408 VOC Emissions(g/hr) 30 141 14 411 20 61 486 Dilemma Vehicles (#) 8 10 0 39 0 0 35 ' Queue Length 50th (ft) 73 93 10 113 0 35 59 Queue Length 95th (ft) 119 151 31 202 19 72 162 Internal Link Dist(ft) 84 4824 3701 193 Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 205 215 Base Capacity(vph) 559 474 354 2117 966 354 2428 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.28 0.42 0.05 0.36 0.05 0.18 0.28 Intersection Summary ' Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 90 ' Offset: 0(0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated ' Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.71 Intersection Signal Delay: 14.5 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Governors Highway& Route 5 01 1 PoZ ju 04 +22 s I M33.1 s 34.9 s 1 05 t 06 22 s1 111111133.1 s Page 2 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 ' Exhibit 24 Traffic Operations Analyses Background 2012 Saturday Noon Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' at ea Background S Peak g 7: Governors Highway & Bank West Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor --* — ' Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations 1� 4 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) 27 4 34 23 2 29 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 29 4 37 25 2 32 ' Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) 454 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 34 130 32 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 34 130 32 tC, single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF(s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 98 100 97 ' cM capacity(veh/h) 1578 843 1042 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 Volume Total 34 62 34 ' Volume Left 0 37 2 Volume Right 4 0 32 cSH 1700 1578 1027 ' Volume to Capacity 0.02 0.02 0.03 Queue Length (ft) 0 2 3 Control Delay(s) 0.0 4.4 8.6 ' Lane LOS A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 4.4 8.6 Approach LOS A Intersection Summary Average Delay 4.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 19.8% ICU Level of Service A ' Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 Background Sat Peak 9: Governors Highway & Bank East Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor 1 -Ih. 11r, *— 1 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Tf 4 Y Sign Control Free Free Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 1 Volume(veh/h) 51 5 3 55 2 18 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 55 5 3 60 2 20 1 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None .Median storage veh) 1 Upstream signal (ft) 164 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 61 124 58 1 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 61 124 58 1 tC, single(s) 4.1 6.4 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF (s) 2.2 3.5 3.3 p0 queue free% 100 100 98 1 cM capacity(veh/h) 1542 869 1008 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 1 Volume Total 61 63 22 Volume Left 0 3 2 Volume Right 5 0 20 cSH 1700 1542 992 1 Volume to Capacity 0.04 0.00 0.02 Queue Length (ft) 0 0 2 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.4 8.7 1 Lane LOS A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.4 8.7 Approach LOS A 1 Intersection Summary Average Delay 1.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 15.3% ICU Level of Service A 1 Analysis Period (min) 15 1 1 1 Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 1 Background Sat Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor ' Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations *4 tt r 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 205 205 215 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 ' Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.960 0.965 0.850 0.993 Flt Protected 0.988 0.975 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 0 1767 0 0 1753 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3514 0 ' Flt Permitted 0.931 0.831 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 1665 0 0 1494 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3514 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 22 23 34 6 Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 55 55 Link Distance(ft) 164 4904 3781 273 ' Travel Time(s) 3.2 95.5 46.9 3.4 Volume(vph) 17 32 20 60 26 29 17 331 31 34 383 18 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow(vph) 18 35 22 65 28 32 18 360 34 37 416 20 ' Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 75 0 0 125 0 18 360 34 37 436 0 Turn Type Perm Perm custom custom custom Protected Phases 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Detector Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 ' Minimum Split(s) 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 11.0 22.0 22.0 11.0 22.0 Total Split(s) 30.9 30.9 0.0 30.9 30.9 0.0 20.0 29.1 29.1 20.0 29.1 0.0 Total Split(%) 38.6% 38.6% 0.0% 38.6% 38.6% 0.0% 25.0% 36.4% 36.4% 25.0% 36.4% 0.0% Maximum Green (s) 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 15.0 23.1 23.1 15.0 23.1 ' Yellow Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 All-Red Time(s) 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag ' Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max ' Act Effct Green (s) 12.5 12.5 7.2 58.3 58.3 7.6 61.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.09 0.73 0.73 0.10 0.76 v/c Ratio 0.27 0.50 0.11 0.14 0.03 0.22 0.16 Uniform Delay, d1 21.9 26.3 38.1 5.0 0.0 36.9 4.4 Control Delay 22.5 26.0 34.0 5.8 3.3 34.0 4.5 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 22.5 26.0 34.0 5.8 3.3 34.0 4.5 LOS C C C A A C A Approach Delay 22.5 26.0 6.9 6.8 Approach LOS C C A A Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/3/2010 r Background Sat Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor r -� t � Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 90th %ile Green (s) 14.3 14.3 14.3 14.3 6.7 40.6 40.6 8.2 42.1 90th%ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 70th %ile Green (s) 11.3 11.3 11.3 11.3 0.0 44.9 44.9 6.9 56.8 70th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Skip Coord Coord Gap Coord 50th %ile Green (s) 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 0.0 58.8 58.8 0.0 58.8 50th %ile Term Code Min Min Min Min Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord r 30th %ile Green(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 0.0 59.1 59.1 0.0 59.1 30th %ile Term Code Min Min Min Min Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord 10th %ile Green (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 74.0 74.0 0.0 74.0 ' 10th %ile Term Code Skip Skip Skip Skip Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord Stops(vph) 44 83 19 109 5 33 114 Fuel Used(gal) 1 5 1 10 1 2 .18 CO Emissions(g/hr) 51 371 61 723 60 152 1270 NOx Emissions(g/hr) 10 72 12 141 12 30 247 VOC Emissions(g/hr) 12 86 14 168 14 35 294 Dilemma Vehicles(#) 4 7 0 18 0 0 22 r Queue Length 50th (ft) 24 48 9 19 0 18 23 Queue Length 95th (ft) 58 93 28 68 12 45 77 Internal Link Dist(ft) 84 4824 3701 193 r Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 205 215 Base Capacity(vph) 574 518 354 2578 1162 354 2679 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.13 0.24 0.05 0.14 0.03 0.10 0.16 Intersection Summary ' Area Type: . Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 ' Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated ' Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.50 Intersection Signal Delay: 10.1 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period(min) 15 rSplits and Phases: 3: Governors Highway& Route 5 01 m2 ---1► oil r 20 s M29.1 s I 030.9s m5 4 06 r20 s 29.1 s 1 r Bubaris Traffic Associates Page 2 3/3/2010 1 ' Exhibit 25 Traffic Operations Analyses Combined 2012 Weekday AM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Combined AM Peak 7: Governors Highway & Southwest Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations + + Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) 2 27 2 15 162 12 1 0 15 85 0 1 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 2 29 2 16 176 13 1 0 16 92 0 1 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) 454 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 189 32 251 257 30 266 251 183 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 189 32 251 257 30 266 251 183 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF(s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free% 100 99 100 100 98 86 100 100 ' cM capacity(veh/h) 1385 1581 695 640 1044 670 644 860 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 34 205 17 93 ' Volume Left 2 16 1 92 Volume Right 2 13 16 1 cSH 1385 1581 1012 671 ' Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.14 Queue Length (ft) 0 1 1 12 Control Delay(s) 0.5 0.7 8.6 11.2 ' Lane LOS A A A B Approach Delay(s) 0.5 0.7 8.6 11.2 Approach LOS A B ' Intersection Summary Average Delay 3.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 31.9% ICU Level of Service A ' Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/21/2010 Combined AM Peak 9: Governors Highway & Southeast Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor 1 --* --jp. *- t Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations T + r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ' Volume (veh/h) 0 127 0 4 187 42 0 0 0 0 0 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 138 0 4 203 46 0 0 0 0 0 2 ' Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) 164 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 249 138 375 396 138 373 373 226 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 249 138 375 396 138 373 373 226 tC, single(s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage (s) tF(s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 1317 1446 579 540 910 583 556 813 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 138 253 0 2 Volume Left 0 4 0 0 Volume Right 0 46 0 2 cSH 1700 1446 1700 813 ' Volume to Capacity 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 Queue Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.2 0.0 9.4 ' Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.2 0.0 9.4 Approach LOS A A ' Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 22.6% ICU Level of Service A ' Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Pagel Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/21/2010 Combined AM Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor ' Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations + ft r fl� Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 205 205 215 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 ' Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.979 0.973 0.850 0.988 Flt Protected 0.971 0.982 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 0 1771 0 0 1780 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3497 0 Flt Permitted 0.720 0.850 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 1313 0 0 1541 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3497 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 11 16 96 10 Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 55 55 Link Distance(ft) 164 4904 3781 273 ' Traver Time(s) 3.2 95.5 46.9 3.4 Volume(vph) 76 31 20 80 93 44 63 412 88 41 887 76 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow(vph) 83 34 22 87 101 48 68 448 96 45 964 83 ' Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 139 0 0 236 0 68 448 96 45 1047 0 Turn Type Perm Perm custom customcustom Protected Phases 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Detector Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 ' Minimum Split(s) 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 11.0 22.0 22.0 11.0 22.0 Total Split(s) 34.9 34.9 0.0 34.9 34.9 0.0 22.0 33.1 33.1 22.0 33.1 0.0 Total Split(%) 38.8% 38.8% 0.0% 38.8% 38.8% 0.0% 24.4% 36.8% 36.8% 24.4% 36.8% 0.0% Maximum Green (s) 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 17.0 27.1 27.1 17.0 27.1 ' Yellow Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max Act Effct Green (s) 18.3 18.3 9.0 56.0 56.0 8.1 52.9 ' Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.62 0.62 0.09 0.59 v/c Ratio 0.50 0.72 0.38 0.20 0.09 0.28 0.51 Uniform Delay, d1 29.2 31.1 39.0 8.2 0.0 40.5 11.4 ' Control Delay 29.6 32.7 38.7 9.8 3.1 38.8 14.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 29.6 32.7 38.7 9.8 3.1 38.8 14.1 ' LOS C C D A A D B Approach Delay 29.6 32.7 11.9 15.1 Approach LOS C C B B Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/21/2010 ' Combined AM Peak 3_Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 90th %ile Green (s) 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 10.9 40.0 40.0 9.2 38.3 90th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 70th %ile Green (s) 19.3 19.3 19.3 19.3 9.0 46.2 46.2 7.6 44.8 70th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 50th %ile Green (s) 16.3 16.3 16.3 16.3 7.7 50.2 50.2 6.6 49.1 50th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord ' 30th %ile Green (s) 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.4 6.4 64.7 64.7 0.0 53.3 30th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Skip Coord 10th %ile Green (s) 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 0.0 68.8 68.8 0.0 68.8 ' 10th %ile Term Code Min Min Min Min Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord Stops(vph) 99 182 56 181 10 38 564 Fuel Used(gal) 2 10 3 14 2 1 15 CO Emissions(g/hr) 117 734 213 982 164 77 1042 NOx Emissions(g/hr) 23 143 41 191 32 15 203 VOC Emissions(g/hr) 27 170 49 228 38 1 18 241 Dilemma Vehicles(#) 7 12 0 23 0 0 54 Queue Length 50th (ft) 65 118 37 59 0 25 177 Queue Length 95th (ft) 110 178 76 111 25 57 306 Internal Link Dist(ft) 84 4824 3701 193 Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 205 215 ' Base Capacity(vph) 458 540 354 2201 1021 354 2058 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.30 0.44 0.19 0.20 0.09 0.13 0.51 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 90 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 60 Control Type: Actuated-Coordinated ' Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.72 Intersection Signal Delay: 17.1 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.7% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Splits and Phases: 3: Governors Highway& Route 5 01 P o2 "'w m4 ' 22 s 33.1 s 134.9 s o5 o6 33.1 s ' Bubaris Traffic Associates Page 23/21/2010 Combined AM Peak 6: East Drive & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor, --* t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations r tt 0 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% Volume(veh/h) 0 28 0 532 976 70 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 30 0 578 1061 76 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) 273 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1388 568 1137 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1388 568 1137 ' tC, single(s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 93 100 ' cM capacity(veh/h) 134 466 610 Direction, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 30 289 289 707 430 Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 30 0 0 0 76 cSH 466 1700 1700 1700 1700 Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.17 0.17 0.42 0.25 Queue Length(ft) 5 0 0 0 0 Control Delay(s) 13.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ' Lane LOS B Approach Delay(s) 13.3 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B ' Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.2% ICU Level of Service A ' Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Pagel Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/21/2010 Exhibit 26 Traffic Operations Analyses Combined 2012 Weekday Noon Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Combined Noon Peak 7: Governors Highway & Southwest Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor ' Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations *4 + 44 4 Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 7 61 6 45 62 21 5 0 32 87 0 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 8 66 7 49 67 23 5 0 35 95 0 2 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 454 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 90 73 264 273 70 296 265 79 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 90 73 264 273 70 296 265 79 ' tC, single(s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 97 99 100 96 85 100 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 1505 1527 668 611 993 615 617 982 Direction, Lane_ # EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 80 139 40 97 ' Volume Left 8 49 5 95 Volume Right 7 23 35 2 cSH 1505 1527 932 620 Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.03 0.,04 0.16 Queue Length (ft) 0 2 3 14 Control Delay(s) 0.7 2.8 9.0 11.9 ' Lane LOS A A A B Approach Delay(s) 0.7 2.8 9.0 11.9 Approach LOS A B Intersection Summary Average Delay 5.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 32.0% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/21/2010 ' Combined Noon Peak 9: Governors Highway & Southeast Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations '# *TO Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ' Volume(veh/h) 0 180 1 12 118 61 5 0 11 0 0 5 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 196 1 13 128 66 5 0 12 0 0 5 ' Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent.Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) 164 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 195 197 389 417 196 396 384 161 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 195 197 389 417 196 396 384 161 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 ' tC, 2 stage (s) tF(s) 2.2 .2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 99 99 100 99 100 100 99 cM capacity(veh/h) 1379 1376 562 522 845 552 544 884 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 197 208 17 5 Volume Left 0 13 5 0 Volume Right 1 66 12 5 cSH 1700 1376 730 884 ' Volume to Capacity 0.12 0.01 0.02 0.01 Queue Length (ft) 0 1 2 0 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.6 10.1 9.1 Lane LOS A B A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.6 10.1 9.1 Approach LOS B A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 30.2% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Bubaris Traffic Associates Pagel 3/2 1/2010 Combined Noon Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor 1 ---* 0� f- - t Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations 4# 49 tt r 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 205 205 215 0 ' Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turning Speed(mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 ' Frt 0.973 0.975 0.850 0.991 Flt Protected 0.978 0.975 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 0 1773 0 0 1771 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3507 0 Flt Permitted 0.762 0.736 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 1381 0 0 1337 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3507 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 17 16 120 9 Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 55 55 Link Distance(ft) 164 4904 3781 273 Travel Time(s) 3.2 95.5 46.9 3.4 ' Volume(vph) 86 67 38 121 74 45 85 392 110 34 485 32 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow(vph) 93 73 41 132 80 49 92 426 120 37 527 35 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 207 0 0 261 0 92 426 120 37 562 0 Turn Type Perm Perm custom custom custom Protected Phases 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 ' Permitted Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Detector Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Minimum Initial(s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 Minimum Split(s) 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 11.0 22.0 22.0 11.0 22.0 ' Total Split(s) 30.9 30.9 0.0 30.9 30.9 0.0 20.0 29.1 29.1 20.0 29.1 0.0 Total Split(%) 38.6% 38.6% 0.0% 38.6% 38.6% 0.0% 25.0% 36.4% 36.4% 25.0% 36.4% 0.0% Maximum Green (s) 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 15.0 23.1 23.1 15.0 23.1 Yellow Time (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 All-Red Time(s) 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag ' Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max Act Effct Green (s) 19.9 19.9 9.6 47.1 47.1 7.6 40.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.25 0.25 0.12 0.59 0.59 0.10 0.51 v/c Ratio 0.58 0.76 0.43 0.20 0.12 ' 0.22 0.31 Uniform Delay, d1 24.1 26.0 33.8 9.2 0.0 36.9 11.8 ' Control Delay 25.9 30.2 34.0 10.5 3.5 34.0 14.4 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 25.9 30.2 34.0 10.5 3.5 34.0 14.4 LOS C C C B A C B Approach Delay 25.9 30.2 12.6 15.6 Approach LOS C C B B Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/21/2010 Combined Noon Peak ■ 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 90th %ile Green(s) 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 11.8 29.9 29.9 8.2 26.3 90th %ile Term Code Max Max Max Max Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 70th %ile Green (s) 21.5 21.5 21.5 21.5 9.8 34.7 34.7 6.9 31.8 ' 70th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 50th %ile Green(s) 18.4 18.4 18.4 18.4 8.3 49.7 49.7 0.0 36.4 50th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Skip Coord ' 30th %ile Green(s) 14.9 14.9 14.9 14.9 6.9 53.2 53.2 0.0 41.3 30th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Skip Coord 10th %ile Green (s) 10.1 10.1 10.1 10.1 0.0 58.0 58.0 0.0 58.0 ' 10th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord Stops(vph) 145 200 75 188 15 33 303 Fuel Used(gal) 2 11 4 14 3 1 8 CO Emissions (g/hr) 162 802 281 959 209 63 562 ' NOx Emissions(g/hr) 32 156 55 187 41 12 109 VOC Emissions(g/hr) 38 186 65 222 48 15 130 Dilemma Vehicles(#) 12 15 0 25 0 0 32 ' Queue Length 50th (ft) 83 113 44 39 0 18 85 Queue Length 95th (ft) 133 175 84 108 30 45 155 Internal Link Dist(ft) 84 4824 3701 193 ' Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 205 215 Base Capacity (vph) 476 460 354 2084 981 354 1791 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.43 0.57 0.26 0.20 0.12 0.10 0.31 Intersection Summary ' Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 ' Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2:1NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.76 ' Intersection Signal Delay: 17.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Splits and Phases: 3: Governors Highway& Route 5 01 � o2 ±t o4 za 29.1 x 30.9 o5 4 06 2a s z9.1 $ ' Bubaris Traffic Associates Page 2 3/2 1/2010 tCombined Noon Peak 6: East Drive & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor -.-* t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations tt 0 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% ' Volume(veh/h) 0 42 0 523 510 57 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 46 0 568 554 62 ' Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) 273 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 870 308 616 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 870 308 616 tC, single(s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 ' tC, 2 stage(s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 93 100 ' cM capacity(veh/h) 291 688 960 Direction, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 46 284 284 370 247 ' Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 46 0 0 0 62 cSH 688 1700 1700 1700 1700 ' Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.17 0.17 0.22 0.15 Queue Length (ft) 5 0 0 0 0 Control Delay(s) 10.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B ' Approach Delay(s) 10.6 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B ' Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.4 Intersection Capacity Utilization 25.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Bubaris Traffic Associates Page 13/21/2010 ' Exhibit 27 Traffic Operations Analyses Combined 2012 Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Combined PM Peak 7: Governors Highway & Southwest Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor + Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations *, + Sign Control Free Free , Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ' Volume(veh/h) 9 121 3 32 36 27 0 0 23 78 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92, 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 10 132 3 35 39 29 0 0 25 85 0 4 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage ' Right turn flare (veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) 454 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 68 135 280 291 133 301 278 54 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 68 135 280 291 133 301 278 54 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5, 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 99 98 100 100 97 86 100 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 1533 1450 654 601 916 619 611 1013 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 145 103 25 89 ' Volume Left 10 35 0 85 Volume Right 3 29 25 4 cSH 1533 1450 916 631 ' Volume to Capacity 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.14 Queue Length (ft) 0 2 2 12 Control Delay(s) 0.5 2.7 9.0 11.6 Lane LOS A A A B ' Approach Delay(s) 0.5 2.7 9.0 11.6 Approach LOS A B Intersection Summary ' Average Delay 4.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 33.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/21/2010 Combined PM Peak 9: Governors Highway & Southeast Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations '* r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ' Volume(veh/h) 0 219 2 3 90 37 1 0 4 0 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 238 2 3 98 40 1 0 4 0 0 4 ' Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) ' Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal(ft) 164 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 138 240 368 384 239 368 365 118 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 138 240 368 384 239 368 365 118 tC, single (s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF(s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 100 100 100 99 100 100 100 ' cM capacity(veh/h) 1446 1326 585 548 800 584 562 934 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 240 141 5 4 Volume Left 0 3 1 0 Volume Right 2 40 4 4 cSH 1700 1326 745 934 ' Volume to Capacity 0.14 0.00 0.01 0.00 Queue Length (ft) 0 0 1 0 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.2 9.9 8.9 ' Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.2 9.9 8.9 Approach LOS A A ' Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.3 Intersection Capacity Utilization 23.8% ICU Level of Service A ' Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Pagel Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/21/2010 ' Combined PM Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' Lane Configurations Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 205 205 215 0 ' Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 Total Lost Time(s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 ' Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 ' Frt 0.968 0.963 0.850 0.994 Fit Protected 0.981 0.973 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 0 1769 0 0 1745 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3518 0 Fit Permitted 0.813 0.696 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 1466 0 0 1249 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3518 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 19 23 48 5 ' Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 55 55 Link Distance(ft) 164 4904 3781 273 Travel Time(s) 3.2 95.5 46.9 3.4 ' Volume(vph) 85 87 52 106 35 53 69 707 44 59 632 27 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow(vph) 92 95 57 115 38 58 75 768 48 64 687 29 ' Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 244 0 0 211 0 75 768 48 64 716 0 Turn Type Perm Perm custom custom custom Protected Phases 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Permitted Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 ' Detector Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 Minimum Split(s) 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 11.0 22.0 22.0 11.0 22.0 ' Total Split(s) 34.9 34.9 0.0 34.9 34.9 0.0 22.0 33.1 33.1 22.0 33.1 0.0 Total Split(%) 38.8% 38.8% 0.0% 38.8% 38.8% 0.0% 24.4% 36.8% 36.8% 24.4% 36.8% 0.0% Maximum Green (s) 29.0 29.0 29.0 29.0 17:0 27.1 27.1 17.0 27.1 ' Yellow Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 All-Red Time(s) 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 1.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag ' Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max Act Effct Green (s) 19.4 19.4 9.3 52.0 52.0 8.8 51.5 ' Actuated g/C Ratio 0.22 0.22 0.10 0.58 0.58 0.10 0.57 v/c Ratio 0.74 0.73 0.41 0.38 0.05 0.37 0.36 Uniform Delay, d1 30.2 29.1 38.9 10.8 0.0 39.1 10.8 Control Delay 32.3 31.8 38.7 13.1 4.5 38.7 13.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 32.3 31.8 38.7 13.1 4.5 38.7 13.1 LOS C C D B A D B Approach Delay 32.3 31.8 14.8 15.2 Approach LOS C C B B ' Bubaris Traffic Associates Page 1 3/2 1/2010 Combined PM Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR ' 90th %ile Green (s) 25.6 25.6 25.6 25.6 11.4 36.9 36.9 10.6 36.1 90th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 70th %ile Green (s) 20.7 20.7 20.7 20.7 9.4 43.6 43.6 8.8 43.0 ' 70th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 50th %ile Green (s) 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.3 8.0 48.3 48.3 7.5 47.8 50th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord ' 30th %ile Green (s) 14.2 14.2 14.2 14.2 6.6 52.7 52.7 6.2 52.3 30th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 10th %ile Green (s) 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 0.0 68.3 68.3 0.0 68.3 10th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord ' Stops(vph) 185 155 63 384 7 53 353 Fuel Used(gal) 3 9 3 26 1 2 9 CO Emissions(g/hr) 219 649 235 1814 86 108 661 NOx Emissions (g/hr) 43 126 46 353 17 21 129 VOC Emissions (g/hr) 51 150 55 420 20 25 153 Dilemma Vehicles (#) 12 11 0 39 0 0 37 ' Queue Length 50th (ft) 121 101 41 121 0 35 111 Queue Length 95th (ft) 181 160 81 214 20 72 200 Internal Link Dist(ft) 84 4824 3701 193 Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 205 215 Base Capacity(vph) 516 444 354 2043 934 354 2015 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.47 0.48 0.21 0.38 0.05 0.18 0.36 Intersection Summary ' Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 90 Actuated Cycle Length: 90 ' Offset: 0(0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.74 Intersection Signal Delay: 18.6 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.3% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Splits and Phases: 3: Governors Highway& Route 5 1* 01 � o2 04 ' 22 s 33.1 134.9s o5 � o6 ' 22 s 33.1 s ' Page 2 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/21/2010 Combined PM Peak 6: East Drive & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor --* t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations ' tt 0 Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% ' Volume(veh/h) 0 28 0 845 691 47 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate(vph) 0 30 0 918 751 51 ' Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage ' Right turn flare (veh) Median type None Median storage veh) Upstream signal (ft) 273 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 1236 401 802 vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 1236 401 802 tC, single(s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 ' tC, 2 stage(s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 95 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 168 599 817 Direction, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 30 459 459 501 301 ' Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 30 0 0 0 51 cSH 599 1700 1700 1700 1700 ' Volume to Capacity 0.05 0.27 0.27 0.29 0.18 Queue Length (ft) 4 0 0 0 0 Control Delay(s) 11.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ' Lane LOS B Approach Delay(s) 11.3 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary ' Average Delay 0.2 Intersection Capacity Utilization 30.6% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Pagel Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/21/2010 Exhibit 28 Traffic Operations Analyses Combined 2012 Saturday Noon Peak Hour Traffic Volumes ' Combined Sat Peak 7: Governors Highway & Southwest Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations + + Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% Volume (veh/h) 6 27 4 34 26 28 2 0 29 114 0 2 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 7 29 4 37 28 30 2 0 32 124 0 2 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal (ft) 454 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 59 34 164 177 32 193 164 43 ' vC1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 59 34 164 177 32 193 164 43 ' tC, single(s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF (s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free % 100 98 100 100 97 83 100 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 1545 1578 782 697 1042 727 708 1027 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 40 96 34 126 Volume Left 7 37 2 124 Volume Right 4 30 32 2 cSH 1545 1578 1021 731 Volume to Capacity 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.17 Queue Length (ft) 0 2 3 16 Control Delay(s) 1.2 2.9 8.6 10.9 ' Lane LOS A A A B Approach Delay(s) 1.2 2.9 8.6 10.9 Approach LOS A B ' Intersection Summary Average Delay 6.8 Intersection Capacity Utilization 29.8% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Page 1 Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/21/2010 ' Combined Sat Peak 9: Governors Highway & Southeast Drive McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations '� r Sign Control Free Free Stop Stop Grade 0% 0% 0% 0% ' Volume(veh/h) 0 165 5 3 83 61 2 0 18 0 0 3 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 179 5 3 90 66 2 0 20 0 0 3 Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None None Median storage veh) Upstream signal(ft) 164 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 157 185 315 345 182 332 315 123 vC 1, stage 1 conf vol vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 157 185 315 345 182 332 315 123 ' tC, single(s) 4.1 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 7.1 6.5 6.2 tC, 2 stage(s) tF(s) 2.2 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 p0 queue free% 100 100 100 100 98 100 100 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 1423 1390 634 576 860 607 600 927 Direction, Lane# EB 1 WB 1 NB 1 SB 1 Volume Total 185 160 22 3 ' Volume Left 0 3 2 0 Volume Right 5 66 20 3 cSH 1700 1390 831 927 ' Volume to Capacity 0.11 0.00 0.03 0.00 Queue Length,(ft) 0 0 2 0 Control Delay(s) 0.0 0.2 9.4 8.9 ' Lane LOS A A A Approach Delay(s) 0.0 0.2 9.4 8.9 Approach LOS A A Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.7 Intersection Capacity Utilization 24.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Bubaris Traffic Associates Page 1 3/21/2010 ' Combined Sat Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor ' Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations *T* ff r 1 0 Ideal Flow(vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 205 205 215 0 Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 Total Lost Time (s) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Leading Detector(ft) 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 Trailing Detector(ft) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Turning Speed (mph) 15 9 15 9 15 9 15 9 Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 0.95 0.95 Frt 0.972 0.971 0.850 0.994 Fit Protected 0.974 0.978 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(prot) 0 1764 0 0 1769 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3518 0 Fit Permitted 0.788 0.817 0.950 0.950 Satd. Flow(perm) 0 1427 0 0 1478 0 1770 3539 1583 1770 3518 0 Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes Yes Satd. Flow(RTOR) 17 19 34 6 Headway Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Link Speed (mph) 35 35 55 55 Link Distance (ft) 164 4904 3781 273 Travel Time(s) 3.2 95.5 46.9 3.4 Volume(vph) 101 52 40 60 46 29 86 331 31 34 428 18 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Adj. Flow(vph) 110 57 43 65 50 32 93 360 34 37 465 20 Lane Group Flow(vph) 0 210 0 0 147 0 93 360 34 37 485 0 Turn Type Perm Perm custom custom custom Protected Phases 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 ' Permitted Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Detector Phases 4 4 4 4 5 2 2 1 6 Minimum Initial (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 6.0 4.0 4.0 6.0 4.0 Minimum Split(s) 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 11.0 22.0 22.0 11.0 22.0 Total Split(s) 30.9 30.9 0.0 30.9 30.9 0.0 20.0 29.1 29.1 20.0 29.1 0.0 Total Split(%) 38.6% 38.6% 0.0% 38.6% 38.6% 0.0% 25.0% 36.4% 36.4% 25.0% 36.4% 0.0% Maximum Green (s) 25.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 15.0 23.1 23.1 15.0 23.1 ' Yellow Time(s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 All-Red Time (s) 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.0 1.0 1.0 2:0 1.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Vehicle Extension (s) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Recall Mode None None None None None C-Max C-Max None C-Max Act Effct Green (s) 16.7 16.7 9.6 50.3 50.3 7.6 43.9 ' Actuated g/C Ratio 0.21 0.21 0.12 0.63 0.63 0.10 0.55 v/c Ratio 0.68 0.46 0.44 0.16 0.03 0.22 0.25 Uniform Delay, d1 26.7 23.9 33.8 7.4 0.0 36.9 9.8 ' Control Delay 28.6 24.3 34.0 8.5 4.5 34.0 11.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay 28.6 24.3 34.0 8.5 4.5 34.0 11.9 LOS C C C A A C B Approach Delay 28.6 24.3 13.1 13.4 Approach LOS C C B B ' Bubaris Traffic Associates Page 1 3/2 1/2010 Combined Sat Peak 3: Governors Highway & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor ' Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 90th %ile Green (s) 21.2 21.2 21.2 21.2 11.9 33.7 33.7 8.2 30.0 90th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 70th %ile Green (s) 17.4 17.4 17.4 17.4 9.9 38.8 38.8 6.9 35.8 ' 70th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Gap Coord 50th %ile Green (s) 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.5 8.4 53.6 53.6 0.0 40.2 50th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Skip Coord ' 30th %ile Green (s) 11.7 11.7 11.7 11.7 6.9 56.4 56.4 0.0 44.5 30th %ile Term Code Gap Gap Gap Gap Gap Coord Coord Skip Coord 10th.%ile Green (s) 9.0 9.0 9.0 9.0 0.0 59.1 59.1 0.0 59.1 ' 10th %ile Term Code Min Min Min Min Skip Coord Coord Skip Coord Stops (vph) 156 96 78 140 6 33 234 Fuel Used(gal) 3 6 4 11 1 1 6 CO Emissions (g/hr) 177 431 287 776 62 63 433 ' NOx Emissions (g/hr) 34 84 56 151 12 12 84 VOC Emissions(g/hr) 41 100 66 180 14 15 100 Dilemma Vehicles(#) 12 8 0 21 0 0 28 Queue Length 50th (ft) 90 56 44 26 0 18 64 Queue Length 95th (ft) 145 99 84 83 15 45 122 Internal Link Dist(ft) 84 4824 3701 193 Turn Bay Length (ft) 205 205 215 ' Base Capacity(vph) 491 510 354 2226 1008 354 1934 Starvation Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Spillback Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Storage Cap Reductn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Reduced v/c Ratio 0.43 0.29 0.26 0.16 0.03 0.10 0.25 Intersection Summary Area Type: Other Cycle Length: 80 Actuated Cycle Length: 80 ' Offset: 0(0%), Referenced to phase 2:NBT and 6:SBT, Start of Yellow Natural Cycle: 55 Control Type:Actuated-Coordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.68 ' Intersection Signal Delay: 16.8 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 42.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 3: Governors Highway& Route 5 01 P o2 -*" o4 20 s 29.1 s 1 30.9 s o5 * o6 ' 20 s =9q.1 s ' Bubaris Traffic Associates Page 2 3/2 1/2010 ' Combined Sat Peak 6: East Drive & Route 5 McDonald's and Bank, Route 5, South Windsor --* t Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations tt + Sign Control Stop Free Free Grade 0% 0% 0% ' Volume(veh/h) 0 45 0 461 435 77 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Hourly flow rate (vph) 0 49 0 501 473 84 ' Pedestrians Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/s) Percent Blockage Right turn flare(veh) Median type None Median storage veh) ' Upstream signal(ft) 273 pX, platoon unblocked vC, conflicting volume 765 278 557 vC1, stage 1 conf vol ' vC2, stage 2 conf vol vCu, unblocked vol 765 278 557 tC, single(s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 ' tC, 2 stage (s) tF (s) 3.5 3.3 2.2 p0 queue free% 100 93 100 cM capacity(veh/h) 339 719 1010 Direction, Lane# EB 1 NB 1 NB 2 SB 1 SB 2 Volume Total 49 251 251 315 241 ' Volume Left 0 0 0 0 0 Volume Right 49 0 0 0 84 cSH 719 1700 1700 1700 1700 ' Volume to Capacity 0.07 0.15 0.15 0.19 0.14 Queue Length (ft) 5 0 0 0 0 Control Delay(s) 10.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lane LOS B Approach Delay(s) 10.4 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS B Intersection Summary Average Delay 0.5 Intersection Capacity Utilization 24.5% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 ' Pagel Bubaris Traffic Associates 3/21/2010 Exhibit 29 ' Traffic Crash Summaries Route 5 at Governor's Highway 3 Years Experience — 2005, 2006 and 2007 Illlw w w w liiw w Iw w r iwi Iw iwi I� r w ii■i■ � Illllw w GpNNECTICG� roo yQ a F, OF Version 2.1 Traffic Accident Experience Report for ROUTE: 5 FROM: 40.60 TO 40.80 TIME PERIOD: BETWEEN 01-01-2005 AND 12-31-2005 TOTAL ACCIDENTS: 4 Time: 10:29:29 PM Date: 3/11/2010 TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TABLES FOR ROUTE 5 4 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between 1/1/2005 and 12/31/2005 ' OFFENDING TRAFFIC UNIT BY OFFENDING TRAFFIC UNIT DIRECTION AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE NB 2 2 50.00% SB 1 1 25.00% WB 1 1 25.00% ' TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC UNIT TOTALS BY DIRECTION OF ALL TRAFFIC UNITS AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE NB 2 2 25.00% SB 4 4 50.00% EB 1 1 12.50% WB 1 1 12.50% 5 TOTAL 8 8 100.00% ' page 3 ' TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TABLES FOR ROUTE 5 4 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between 1/l/2005 and 12/31/2005 ' TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY CONTRIBUTING FACTOR AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Violated Traffic Control 3 3 75.00% Animal/Foreign Object in Rd 1 1 25.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY HOUR AND DAY OF WEEK SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT TOTAL PERCENTAGE ' 12:OONOON- 12:59 PM 1 1 25.00% 01:00 PM - 01:59 PM 1 1 25.00% 03:00 PM - 03:59 PM 1 1 25.00% 09:00 PM - 09:59 PM 1 1 25.00% TOTAL 2 1 1 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY HOUR AND YEAR ' 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE 12:OONOON- 12:59 PM 1 1 25.00% 01:00 PM - 01:59 PM 1 1 25.00% ' 03:00 PM - 03:59 PM 1 1 25.00% 09:00 PM - 09:59 PM 1 1 25.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% ' TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY OTHER ROADWAY FEATURE AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE ' Intersec. Public Road 4 4 100.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY CONSTRUCTION OR MAINTENANCE AND YEAR ' 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE No 4 4 100.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% ' TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY MEDIAN BARRIER PENETRATION AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE ' None 3 3 75.00% Not Applicable 1 1 25.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% ' VEHICLE TOTALS BY VEHICLE TYPE AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE ' Automobile 7 7 87.50% Single Unit Trk/2axle/4tire 1 1 12.50% TOTAL 8 8 100.00% OBJECT TOTALS BY OBJECT STRUCK AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL Foreign Object on Pavement 1 1 100.00% TOTAL 1 1 100.00% page 2 rTRAFFIC ACCIDENT TABLES FOR ROUTE 5 4 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between 1/1/2005 and 12/31/2005 TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY MONTH AND YEAR. 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE JANUARY 2 2 50.00% MAY 1 1 25.00% NOVEMBER 1 1 25.00% ' TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY LIGHT CONDITIONS AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Daylight 3 3 75.00% Dark-Lit 1 1 25.00% TOTAL - 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY WEATHER CONDITIONS AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE ' No Adverse Condition 3 3 75.00% Snow 1 1 25.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY ROAD SURFACE CONDITION AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE ' Dry 2 2 50.00% Wet 2 2 50.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY COLLISION TYPE AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Turning-Opp. Direction 1 1 25.00% ' Turning-Intersecting Paths 1 1 25.00% Angle 1 1 25.00% Fixed Object 1 1 25.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY ACCIDENT SEVERITY AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Injury 2 2 50.00% Property Damage Only 2 2 50.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% ' OCCUPANT INJURIES BY YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE A-Injury 2 2 66.67% B-Injury 1 1 33.33% TOTAL 3 3 100.00% page 1 Gp�NECT�c�J' A a OF TRp'���o Version 2.1 Traffic Accident Tables for ROUTE: 5 FROM: 40.60 TO 40.80 ' TIME PERIOD: BETWEEN 01-01-2005 AND 12-31-2005 TOTAL ACCIDENTS: 4 Time: 10:29:19 PM Date: 3/11/2010 t r r r rr rr rr rr rr rr r r r r rr rr rr rr r rir CONNECTIC T DEPA RTMENT ARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE 4 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between l/1/2005 and 12/31/2005 PREPARED: 3/11/2010 LIGHT SURFACE MILEAGE ALPHA DESCRIPTION OF ACC LOCATION DATE OF ACCIDENT CASE # TIME CONDITION CONDITION WEATHER CONDITION INJURY CODES: K A B C TOT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOWN: SOUTH WINDSOR 040.70 INT GOVERNORS HWY Monday, January 10, 2005 102803 1358 Daylight Wet No Adverse Condition yOO' Collision Type: Turning-Intersecting Paths Contributing Factor: Violated Traffic Control At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 1 SB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Going Straight SB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Avoiding Vehicle Going Straight EB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Turning Right on Red Light 040.70 AT GOVERNOR'S HWY Thursday, January 06, 2005 104068 2147 Dark-Lit Wet Snow Collision Type: Angle Contributing Factor: Violated Traffic Control At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 2 SB Single Unit Trk/2axle/4tire 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Skidded Slowing or Stopping For Vehicle Going Straight WB Automobile 0 0 1 0 1 Maneuver: Vehicle Going Straight 040.70 AT GOVERNORS HWY Saturday, May 21, 2005 127874 1516 Daylight Dry No Adverse Condition Collision Type: Fixed Object Contributing Factor: Animal/Foreign Object in Rd At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 1 NB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Going Straight Object Struck: Foreign Object on Pavement In Roadway 040.70 AT GOVERNORS HWY Monday, November 14, 2005 165525 1219 Daylight Dry No Adverse Condition Collision Type: Turning-Opp. Direction Contributing Factor: Violated Traffic Control At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 1 NB Automobile 0 1 0 0 1 Maneuver: Vehicle Turning Left from Proper Lane SB Automobile 0 1 0 0 1 Maneuver: Vehicle Going Straight page 1 of 1 G�NNECr���T v� yA a � a 3�yT OF 7RPA�a� Version 2.1 Traffic Accident Experience Report for ROUTE: 5 FROM: 40.60 TO 40.80 TIME PERIOD: BETWEEN 01-01-2006 AND 12-31-2006 TOTAL ACCIDENTS: 7 Time: 10:30:43 PM Date: 3/11/2010 TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TABLES FOR ROUTE 5 7 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between 1/1/2006 and 12/31/2006 OBJECT TOTALS BY OBJECT STRUCK AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL Tree 1 1 100.00% TOTAL 1 1 100.00% OFFENDING TRAFFIC UNIT BY OFFENDING TRAFFIC UNIT DIRECTION AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE NB 3 3 42.86% SB 3 3 42.86% EB 1 1 14.29% TOTAL 7 7 100.00% TRAFFIC UNIT TOTALS BY DIRECTION OF ALL TRAFFIC UNITS AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE NB 5 5 35.71% SB 8 8 57.14% EB 1 1 7.14% TOTAL 14 14 100.00% page 3 r r TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TABLES FOR ROUTE 5 7 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between l/l/2006 and 12/31/2006 TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY CONTRIBUTING FACTOR AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Speed Too Fast for Conditions 1 1 14.29% Failed to Grant ROW 1 1 14.29% Following Too Closely 4 4 57.14% Unsafe Backing 1 1 14.29% TOTAL 7 7 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY HOUR AND DAY OF WEEK SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT TOTAL PERCENTAGE 07:00 AM - 07:59 AM 1 1 14.29% 08:00 AM - 08:59 AM 1 1 2 28.57% 03:00 PM - 03:59 PM 2 2 28.57% 04:00 PM - 04:59 PM 1 1 14.29% 10:00 PM - 10:59 PM 1 1 14.29% TOTAL 1 1 5 7 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY HOUR AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE 07:00 AM - 07:59 AM 1 1 14.29% 08:00 AM - 08:59 AM 2 2 28.57% 03:00 PM - 03:59 PM 2 2 28.57% 04:OO PM - 04:59 PM 1 1 14.29% ' 10:00 PM - 10:59 PM 1 1 14.29% TOTAL 7 7 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY OTHER ROADWAY FEATURE AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Intersec. Public Road 4 4 57.14% Intersec. Commercial Dr 2 2 28.57% None 1 1 14.29% TOTAL 7 7 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY CONSTRUCTION OR MAINTENANCE AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE ' No 7 7 100.00% TOTAL 7 7 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY MEDIAN BARRIER PENETRATION AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE None 3 3 42.86% Not Applicable 4 4 57.14% TOTAL 7 7 100.00% VEHICLE TOTALS BY VEHICLE TYPE AND YEAR ' 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Automobile 12 12 85.71% Motorcycle 1 1 7.14% Single Unit Trk/2axle/4tire 1 1 7.14% TOTAL 14 14 100.00% page 2 TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TABLES FOR ROUTE 5 7 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between 1/l/2006 and 12/31/2006 TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY MONTH AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE JANUARY 1 1 14.29% MARCH 1 1 14.29% 1 JUNE 2 2 28.57% 1 ' SEPTEMBER 1 1 14.29% NOVEMBER 1 1 14.29% i DECEMBER 1 1 14.29% 1 TOTAL 7 7 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY LIGHT CONDITIONS AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Daylight 5 5 71.43% Dark-Lit 2 2 28.57% TOTAL 7 7 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY WEATHER CONDITIONS AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE No Adverse Condition 4 4 57.14% Rain 2 2 28.57% Snow 1 1 14.29% TOTAL 7 7 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY ROAD SURFACE CONDITION AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE ' Dry 3 3 42.86% Wet 2 2 28.57% Snow/Slush 2 2 28.57% TOTAL 7 7 100.00% ' TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY COLLISION TYPE AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Turning-Intersecting Paths 1 1 14.29% Rear-end 4 4 57.14% Backing 1 1 14.29% Fixed Object 1 1 14.29% TOTAL 7 7 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY ACCIDENT SEVERITY AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Injury 4 4 57.14% Property Damage Only 3 3 42.86% TOTAL 7 7 100.00% ' OCCUPANT INJURIES BY YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE B-Injury 2 2 40.00% C-Injury 3 3 60.00% TOTAL 5 5 100.00% page 1 tiO �o a 3�yr OF TRQ�y�0 ' Version 2.1 Traffic Accident Tables for ROUTE: 5 FROM: 40.60 TO 40.80 TIME PERIOD: BETWEEN 01-01-2006 AND 12-31-2006 TOTAL ACCIDENTS: 7 Time: 10:30:34 PM Date: 3/11/2010 ww ww ww ww ww w ww w w ww ww ww ww ww ww ww ww ww ww CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE 7 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between l/l/2006 and 12/31/2006 PREPARED: 3/11/2010 LIGHT SURFACE MILEAGE ALPHA DESCRIPTION OF ACC LOCATION DATE OF ACCIDENT CASE # TIME CONDITION CONDITION WEATHER CONDITION INJURY CODES: K A B C TOT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOWN: SOUTH WINDSOR 040.68 100 FT S OF GOVERNORS HWY Friday, January 13, 2006 106350 1650 Dark-Lit Wet Rain Collision Type: Rear-end Contributing Factor: Following Too Closely At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 2 ✓ SB Automobile 0 0 0 1 1 Maneuver: Vehicle Slowing For Vehicle Turning Right from Proper Lane SB Single Unit Trk/2axle/4tire 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Skidded Slowing or Stopping For Vehicle Going Straight 040.68 AT BANK OF AM Friday, June 16, 2006 132425 1559 Daylight Dry No Adverse Condition Collision Type: Rear-end Contributing Factor: Following Too Closely / At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 2 V1 SB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Slowing For Turn Right SB Automobile 0 0 1 0 1 Maneuver: Vehicle Slowing For Vehicle Going Straight 040.70 AT GOVERNORS HWY Friday, March 03, 2006 114304 0609 Daylight Snow/SlushNo Adverse Condition Collision Type: Turning-Intersecting Paths Contributing Factor: Failed to Grant ROW At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 1 ✓ EB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Turning Left from Proper Lane SB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Going Straight 040.70 INT GOVERNORS HWY Thursday, June 15, 2006 132424 2218 Dark-Lit Dry No Adverse Condition Collision Type: Rear-end Contributing Factor: Following Too Closely At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 1 ✓ SB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Going Straight SB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Skidded Slowing or Stopping For Vehicle Going Straight SB Automobile 0 0 0 2 2 Maneuver: Vehicle Stopped For Traffic Signal 040.70 INT GOVERNOR'S HWY Friday, September 29, 2006 150636 0705 Daylight Wet Rain Collision Type: Rear-end Contributing Factor: Following Too Closely At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 1 t� NB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Skidded Slowing or Stopping For Stopped Vehicle NB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Stopped For Turn Right 040.70 INT GOVERNORS HWY Friday, November 10, 2006 161911 1549 Daylight Dry No Adverse Condition Collision Type: Backing Contributing Factor: Unsafe Backing At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 1 NB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Backing Along Roadway NB Motorcycle 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Stopped For Vehicle Backing Along Roadway page 1 of 2 CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE 7 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between 1/l/2006 and 12/31/2006 PREPARED: 3/11/2010 LIGHT SURFACE MILEAGE ALPHA DESCRIPTION OF ACC LOCATION DATE OF ACCIDENT CASE # TIME CONDITION CONDITION WEATHER CONDITION INJURY CODES: K A B C TOT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOWN: SOUTH WINDSOR 040.80 .1 MI N OF GOVERNORS HWY Tuesday, December 05, 2006 166582 0816 Daylight Snow/S1ushSnow Collision Type: Fixed Object Contributing Factor: Speed Too Fast for Conditions 10 At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 1 NB Automobile 0 0 1 0 1 Maneuver: Vehicle Going Straight Object Struck: Tree Off Road & Shoulder, Right page 2 of 2 G�NNEC7'lq r r a }' Version 2.1 Traffic Accident Experience Report for ROUTE: 5 FROM: 40.60 TO 40.80 TIME PERIOD: BETWEEN 01-01-2007 AND 12-31-2007 TOTAL ACCIDENTS: 4 Time: 10:24:40 PM Date: 3/11/2010 TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TABLES FOR ROUTE 5 4 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between l/1/2007 and 12/31/2007 OBJECT TOTALS BY OBJECT STRUCK AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL Tree 1 1 50.00% V Utility Pole 1 1 50.00% V TOTAL 2 2 100.00% OFFENDING TRAFFIC UNIT BY OFFENDING TRAFFIC UNIT DIRECTION AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE NB 2 2 50.00% SB 1 1 25.00% WB 1 1 25.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC UNIT TOTALS BY DIRECTION OF ALL TRAFFIC UNITS AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE ' NB 2 2 33.33% SB 1 1 16.67% WB 3 3 50.00% TOTAL 6 6 100.00% ' page 3 ' TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TABLES FOR ROUTE 5 4 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between 1/1/2007 and 12/31/2007 TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY CONTRIBUTING FACTOR AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Violated Traffic Control 1 1 25.00% Under the Influence 1 1 25.00% Animal/Foreign Object in Rd 1 1 25.00% Improper Turning Maneuver 1 1 25.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY HOUR AND DAY OF WEEK SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT TOTAL PERCENTAGE 01:00 AM - 01:59 AM 1 1 25.00% 08:00 AM - 08:59 AM 1 1 2 50.00% 10:00 AM - 10:59 AM 1 1 25.00% TOTAL 2 1 1 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY HOUR AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE 01:00 AM - 01:59 AM 1 1 25.00% 08:00 AM - 08:59 AM 2 2 50.00% 10:00 AM - 10:59 AM 1 1 25.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY OTHER ROADWAY FEATURE AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Intersec. Public Road 3 3 75.00% Intersec. Commercial Dr 1 1 25.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY CONSTRUCTION OR MAINTENANCE AND YEAR ' 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE No 4 4 100.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY MEDIAN BARRIER PENETRATION AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Not Applicable 4 4 100.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% ' VEHICLE TOTALS BY VEHICLE TYPE AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Automobile 5 5 83.33% Tractor Semi-Trailer 1 1 16.67% TOTAL 6 6 100.00% page 2 ' TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TABLES FOR ROUTE 5 4 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between 1/1/2007 and 12/31/2007 ' TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY MONTH AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE MARCH 1 1 25.00% 1 MAY 1 1 25.00% 7 AUGUST 1 1 25.00% 7 SEPTEMBER 1 1 25.00% 2 ' TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY LIGHT CONDITIONS AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Daylight 3 3 75.00% 2 Dark-Lit 1 1 25.00% 2 TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY WEATHER CONDITIONS AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE No Adverse Condition 4 4 100.00% 2 TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY ROAD SURFACE CONDITION AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE ' Dry 4 4 100.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY COLLISION TYPE AND YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Turning-Intersecting Paths 1 1 25.00% Sideswipe-Same Direction 1 1 25.00% Fixed Object 1 1 25.00% Moving Object 1 1 25.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% TRAFFIC ACCIDENT TOTALS BY ACCIDENT SEVERITY AND YEAR ' 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE Injury 2 2 50.00% Property Damage Only 2 2 50.00% TOTAL 4 4 100.00% OCCUPANT INJURIES BY YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 TOTAL PERCENTAGE B-Injury 2 2 66.67% C-Injury 1 1 33.33% TOTAL 3 3 100.00% page 1 �o Zo '3�yr OF xa HMO ���a° Version 2.1 Traffic Accident Tables for ROUTE: 5 FROM: 40.60 TO 40.80 TIME PERIOD: BETWEEN 01-01-2007 AND 12-31-2007 TOTAL ACCIDENTS: 4 ' Time: 10:24:22 PM Date: 3/11/2010 CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC ACCIDENT EXPERIENCE 4 accidents occurred on ROUTE 5 from mileage 40.60 to 40.80 between 1/1/2007 and 12/31/2007 PREPARED: 3/11/2010 LIGHT SURFACE MILEAGE ALPHA DESCRIPTION OF ACC LOCATION DATE OF ACCIDENT CASE # TIME CONDITION CONDITION WEATHER CONDITION INJURY CODES: K A B C TOT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TOWN: SOUTH WINDSOR 040.70 INT GOVERNORS HWY Monday, March 19, 2007 120425 0852 Daylight Dry No Adverse Condition Collision Type: Turning-Intersecting Paths Contributing Factor: Violated Traffic Control J� At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 1 Y NB Automobile 0 0 1 0 1 Maneuver: Vehicle Going Straight WB Tractor Semi-Trailer 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Turning Left from Proper Lane 040.70 ON GOVERNOR'S HWY Thursday, May 31, 2007 136371 0804 Daylight Dry No Adverse Condition Collision Type: Sideswipe-Same Direction Contributing Factor: Improper Turning Maneuver At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 1 y� WB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Turning Right from Proper Lane WB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Turning Right from Proper Lane 040.70 INT GOVERNOR'S HWY Sunday, August 26, 2007 164875 0128 Dark-Lit Dry No Adverse Condition Collision Type: Fixed Object Contributing Factor: Under the Influence At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 1 NB Automobile 0 Injuries Maneuver: Vehicle Going Straight Object Struck: Utility Pole Off Road & Shoulder, Right 040.77 350 FT N OF GOVERNORS HWY Sunday, September 30, 2007 178283 1022 Daylight Dry No Adverse Condition Collision Type: Moving Object Contributing Factor: Animal/Foreign Object in Rd At-Fault Traffic Unit: # 1 SB Automobile 0 0 1 1 2 Maneuver: Vehicle Avoiding Animal in Road Object Struck: Tree Off Road & Shoulder, Right page 1 of 1