Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-31P Downeast Associates WITHDRAWN µ RECEIVED MAY 2 2 2007 South Windsor INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR Fee $gfoda ON COMMISSION 1VIIIMAL IMPACT INLAND WETLANDS, WATERCOURSES AND.CONSERVATION APPLICATION Application# p Date Received Action and Date INSTRUCTIONS 1. One application (1) with map and plans (1 copy) shall be submitted together with the fee set forth in the Inland Wetlands, -Watercourses and Conservation Regulations,Town.of South Windsor. (See Regulations, Section VII-X) 2. The South Windsor Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations - should be reviewed with respect to the standards and criteria for application Evaluation. (See Regulations, Sections VII-X) 3. The applicant understands that this application is.to be considered complete only when all information and documents required by the Agency have been submitted. The applicant shall also complete the state filing form. 'A. Applicant's Name: Downeast Associates Limited Partnership c/o Kevin Sims Address: Simon Property Group 225 W. Washington St indianapolis- IN 46204 Phone: (home) N/A (work) (317) 263-7108 (fax) (317)263-2363 B. Legal owner's name: Downeast Associates Limited'Partnership c/o Kevin Sims Address * P. O Box 6120 Indianapolis IN 46206-6120 Phone (home) N/A (work.) (317)263-7108 (fax) (317)263-2363 (list additional owners, addresses, and phone numbers on back of application) -C: If the applicant is not the owner of the.subject property; a letter by the owners) authorizing- the proposed regulated activity set forth.in the application must accompany this form and will be part of the application. D..The:geographical location of the property which is to be affected by the proposed regulated activities including a description of the land in sufficient detail to allow identification of the property on the Inland Wetland and Watercourse Map. Street Address # 22 Wheeler Road; 2,7 and 367 Smith Street DCZ-6 Wheeler&2 and 7 Smith St. RR-367 Smith Street. Assessor's Map # 17 Parcel# 16& 17 Zone .DCZ Assessors Map# 18, Parcel#16, Zone DCZ; Assessor's Map#18, Parcel#14/2, Zone RR E. Purpose and description of all proposed regulated activity(s) including amount of disturbance in square feet and types of fill and the time element involved: As indicated in the attached "Wetlands Assessment,"there are no regulated areas on the subject `Attorney/Agent for Applicant/Owner is: Christopher J.Smith,Shipman&Goodwin,LLP One Constitution Plaza,Hartford,CT 06103 Work Phone:(860)251-5606;Fax:(860)251-5318 Home/cell:(203)263-0545 Email: cismith@goodwin.com C,5/18/2007 FRI 14:17 FAX 860 644 7280 South Windsor Town Hall Q 003/003 r , ' properties, or regulated activities associated with the:-subject General Plan of Development. However, this Application is.-,submitted for the Inland Wet an s, ' Watercourses and Conservation Commission's records. . F. Identify all other permits or approvals that have been issued, applied for, or required with respect to the proposed activity set forth in this application. (These may include but not be limited to, local Planning & Zoning, Zoning Board of Appeals, D.E.P., F.E.M.A., D.O.T., The Armyy Corrpps of Engineers, and any other State, Local or Federal Permits.) P & ZC; DEP; DO'I`and STC. The undersigned hereby applies for the regulated activities listed in paragraph F above, for a Minor Impact Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation permit for the property described herein and confirms that: J. She/he is familiar.with the currently effective. Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Regulations of the Town of South Windsor. 2. .She/he understands that at any time during the review. period, the'Agency may require the applicant;to provide more information about ;the wetlands% and/or watercourses in question and/or any proposed activity. 3. All information.submitted'in the application for rdview shall be-.considered factual, or in the case of anticipated activity, binding. A'knowing failure of the applicant or any of her/his agents to provide correct information, or performance exceeding the _ levels'of activity anticipated, shall be sufficient grounds for revocation'of any permit under these regulations. .4- By making this application, the applicant gives permission to the Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation"Commission members and/or its representative to enter the portions of the premises which are subject of•the application for the Purpose of inspection and investigation and otherwise evaluating the merits of the application both before and-after a final decision has been issued. 5. Upon approval by the authorized Agent the applicant shall cause notice of the decision to .be published in a.daily newspaper having a general circulation in the Town where the activity occurs. The notice must be published within ten (10) days of the decision. .6. -Appeals of this.decision may be brought to the Agency within fifteen (15) days after the ublication date of the notice. Michael E, McCarty;-President Community/Lifestyle Centers Division Sigma re of Owner of Pro e C Da �4; �d7 Signature of Applicant D /JC/1 °7 Michael E, McCarty, President a Community/Lifestyle Centers Division AN SHIPMAN &GOODWINLLP COUNSELORS AT LAW RECEIVED Christopher J. Smith MAY 22 LUU 1 Phone: (860)251-5606 So,an Winas, Fax: (860)251-5318 INLAND WETLANDSAQV.NCY cismithCo-)goodwin.com CONSERVATION COMMISSION May 21, 2007 Hand Delivered Jeffrey H. Folger, Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Submission of Minimal Impact Application ("Application") as provided by Section 8.5 of the Inland Wetland/Watercourse and Conservation Regulations of the Town of South Windsor, South Windsor, Connecticut ("Regulations"), associated with a proposed retail site development of real properties known as 22 Wheeler Road, 2 Smith Street, 7 Smith Street, and 367 Smith Street, located in the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut. Owner/applicant: Downeast Associates Limited Partnership. Dear Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Folger: Please be advised that the undersigned firm represents the owner/applicant, Downeast Associates Limited Partnership ("Downeast"), concerning the above- referenced administrative wetlands application ("Application"). I attach an authorization letter confirming that the undersigned is authorized to file this Application, and provide any support documentation that may be required. Therefore, the following is included in this submittal: 1. Duly executed Minimal Impact Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Application, dated May 18, 2007; 2. "Wetland Assessment Report," prepared by ENSR Corporation, Willington, Connecticut, and dated May 19, 2007; ONE CONSTITUTION PLAZA HARTFORD,CONNECTICUT 06103-1919 1 860-215-5000 WWW.SHIPMANGOODWIN.COM 3. Copy of Application for approval of General Plan of Development as provided by Section 5.4.5 of the Zoning Regulations of the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut ("Zoning Regulations"), with support documentation, depicting the conceptual or general plan of the proposed retail development of the subject properties referenced above; and 4. Filing fee in the amount of$80. As you are aware, Downeast has submitted conceptual development plans for a retail site development of the subject properties to the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor ("P&ZC") as provided by Section 5.4.5 of the Zoning Regulations. If the Basic Development Plans are approved by the P&ZC, Downeast would then be required to submit a Detailed Site Plan of Development as provided by Section 5.4.7 of the Zoning Regulations. As the aforementioned Wetlands Assessment indicates, there are no "regulated areas" on the subject properties, or "regulated activities" associated with the retail site development, as defined by Section 22a-38 of the Connecticut General Statutes, or the Inland Wetland/Watercourse and Conservation Regulations of the Town of South Windsor ("Wetland Regulations"). Therefore, Downeast respectfully submits that this Application is not required, or, in the alternative, may be approved at this time since even if there is a minimal impact, such is not adverse to a wetland, watercourse, or upland review area. In addition, you indicated that it is the policy of the Inland Wetland/Watercourse and Conservation Commission of the Town of South Windsor ("IWWCC") not to accept and process an application for approval of regulated activities associated with the first step of a two step zoning review process such as provided by Sections 5.4.5 and 5.4.7 of the Zoning Regulations where the first step provides for the filing of conceptual or basic plans, and the second step provides for the filing of detailed engineering plans. Indeed, it is the policy of the IWWCC to review only regulated activities as depicted on a Detailed Site Plan of Development since only such provides the necessary detail to enable the IWWCC to properly assess such conduct relative to the Connecticut Inland Wetlands and Watercourse Act ("Wetlands Act"), and the IWWCC's Regulations. Therefore, Downeast understands that it may have to submit a Minimal Impact or full Application with the IWWCC when Downeast submits its Detailed Site Plan of Development with the P&ZC at a future date. However, as you suggested, Downeast hereby provides you and the IWWCC with a full copy of its Application to the P&ZC for approval of Downeast's proposed Basic Development Plans for the subject retail site development. Downeast looks forward to the opportunity to present its Basic Development Plan to the IWWCC -2 - i for informational purposes while Downeast simultaneously processes it Basic Development Plan with the P&ZC. Thus, as we discussed and even though not required at this juncture, Downeast nonetheless submits the enclosed Minimal Impact Application for your review even though there are no regulated areas, or, more importantly, regulated activities, associated with Downeast's Basic Plan of Development. I understand that based upon the aforementioned policy of the IWWCC you may return this Minimal Impact Application to me. Once again, Downeast acknowledges that if the P&ZC approves Downeast's Basic Plan of Development, Downeast may have to submit a Minimal Impact Application, or full Wetlands Application, to the IWWCC when Downeast submits its Detailed Site Plan of Development to the P&ZC as provided by Section 5.4.7 of the Zoning Regulations. Thank you for your, and the IWWCC's, cooperation and assistance concerning this matter. In addition, Downeast looks forward to working with you, and the IWWCC, relative to this exciting retail site development. VeryZ yours, Christopher J S ith cc: Downeast Associates Limited Partnership CPH Engineers, Inc., A. Carpenter, P.E. ENSR Corporation 472181 v.01 S1 - 3 - r ✓ May 18, 2007 pCENCY INLAND VA ON COMf+1 SSION Hand Delivered EONS Jeffrey H. Folger, Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Consent by applicant and owner for submission of Minimal Impact Application as provided by Section 8.5 of the Inland Wetland/Watercourse and Conservation Regulations of the Town of South Windsor, South Windsor Connecticut("Regulations"), associated with a proposed retail site development of real properties known as 22 Wheeler Road, 2 Smith Street 7 Smith Street, and 367 Smith Street, located in the Town of South Windsor Connecticut, with partial access across an existing driveway located on real property known as 1524 Pleasant Valley Road, Manchester, Connecticut. Dear Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Folger: Please be advised that the undersigned Downeast Associates Limited Partnership ("Downeast") is the owner and applicant concerning the above-referenced Minimal Impact Application ("Application"). It is the undersigned's understanding that there are no regulated activities, as defined by Section 22a-38 of the Connecticut General Statutes, associated with the proposed site development of the above-referenced real properties. However, Downeast files the subject Application as provided by Section 8.5 of the Regulations to assist you, and the Inland Wetland/Watercourse and Conservation Commission, in your review of the proposal. Downeast hereby authorizes Christopher J. Smith, of the law firm of Shipman & Goodwin LLP, to submit the Application and any required documentation on behalf of Downeast. In addition, Downeast's respectfully submits that any activity that may possibly have an impact upon a regulated area is minimal, and entitled to administrative approval as provided by Section 8.5. � 'L • a Thank you for your, and the Commission's, cooperation and assistance concerning this matter. Very truly yours, Downe t Associates ted Partnership B ated: May / , 2007 cc: Christopher J. Smith,Esq. Michael E, McCarty, President CPH Engineers, Inc., A. Carpenter, P.E. Community/Lifestyle Centers Division 472064 v.01 S 1 l ; ' SHIPMAN&GOODWIN LLP- COUNSELORS AT LAW R it Christopher J. Smith Phone: (860)251-5606 K,Y Fax: (860)251-5318 cjsmith(@-goodwin.com INLAND Wt'LANDS AGENCY CONSERVATION COMMISSION May 21, 2007 Hand Delivered Jeffrey H. Folger, Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Submission of Minimal Impact Application ("Application") as provided by Section 8.5 of the Inland Wetland/Watercourse and Conservation Regulations of the Town of South Windsor, South Windsor, Connecticut ("Regulations"), associated with a proposed retail site development o_f real properties known ,* as 22 Wheeler Road, 2 Smith Street, 7 Smith Street, and 367 Smith Street, located in the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut. Owner/applicant: Downeast Associates Limited Partnership. Dear Environmental Planner/Conservation Officer Folger: Please be advised that the undersigned firm represents the owner/applicant, Downeast Associates Limited Partnership ("Downeast"), concerning the above- referenced administrative wetlands application ("Application"). I attach an authorization letter confirming that the undersigned is authorized to file this Application, and provide any support documentation that may be required. Therefore, the following is included in this submittal: 1. Duly executed Minimal Impact Inland Wetlands, Watercourses and Conservation Application, dated May 18, 2007; 2. "Wetland Assessment Report," prepared by ENSR Corporation, Willington, Connecticut, and dated May 19, 2007; One Constitution Plaza Hartford,Connecticut 06103-1919 www.shipmangoodwin.com 3. Copy of Application for approval of General Plan of Development as provided by Section 5.4.5 of the Zoning Regulations of the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut ("Zoning Regulations"), with support documentation, depicting the conceptual or general plan of the proposed retail development of the subject properties referenced above; and 4. Filing fee in the amount of$80. As you are aware, Downeast has submitted conceptual development plans for a retail site development of the subject properties to the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor ("P&ZC") as provided by Section 5.4.5 of the Zoning Regulations. If the Basic Development Plans are approved by the P&ZC, Downeast would then be required to submit a Detailed Site Plan of Development as provided by Section 5.4.7 of the Zoning Regulations. As the aforementioned Wetlands Assessment indicates, there are no "regulated areas" on the subject properties, or "regulated activities" associated with the retail site development, as defined by Section 22a-38 of the Connecticut General Statutes, or the Inland Wetland/Watercourse and Conservation Regulations of the Town of South Windsor ("Wetland Regulations"). Therefore, Downeast respectfully submits that this Application is not required, or, in the alternative, may be approved at this time since even if there is a minimal impact, such is not adverse to a wetland, watercourse, or upland review area. In addition, you indicated that it is the policy of the Inland Wetland/Watercourse and Conservation Commission of the Town of South Windsor ("IWWCC") not to accept and process an application for approval of regulated activities associated with the first step of a two step zoning review process such as provided by Sections 5.4.5 and 5.4.7 of the Zoning Regulations where the first step provides for the filing of conceptual or basic plans, and the second step provides for the filing of detailed engineering plans. Indeed, it is the policy of the IWWCC to review only regulated activities as depicted on a Detailed Site Plan of Development since only such provides the necessary detail to enable the IWWCC to properly assess such conduct relative to the Connecticut Inland Wetlands and Watercourse Act ("Wetlands Act"), and the IWWCC's Regulations. Therefore, Downeast understands that it may have to submit a Minimal Impact or full Application with the IWWCC when Downeast submits its Detailed Site Plan of Development with the P&ZC at a future date. However, as you suggested, Downeast hereby provides you and the IWWCC with a full copy of its Application to the P&ZC for approval of Downeast's proposed Basic Development Plans for the subject retail site development. Downeast looks forward to the opportunity to present its Basic Development Plan to the IWWCC -2 - for informational purposes while Downeast simultaneously processes it Basic Development Plan with the P&ZC. Thus, as we discussed and even though not required at this juncture, Downeast nonetheless submits the enclosed Minimal Impact Application for your review even though there are no regulated areas, or, more importantly, regulated activities, associated with Downeast's Basic Plan of Development. I understand that based upon the aforementioned policy of the IWWCC you may return this Minimal Impact Application to me. Once again, Downeast acknowledges that if the P&ZC approves Downeast's Basic Plan of Development, Downeast may have to submit a Minimal Impact Application, or full Wetlands Application, to the IWWCC when Downeast submits its Detailed Site Plan of Development to the P&ZC as provided by Section 5.4.7 of the Zoning Regulations. Thank you for your, and the IWWCC's, cooperation and assistance concerning this matter. In addition, Downeast looks forward to working with you, and the IWWCC, relative to this exciting retail site development. Ver yours estop r J. Smith cc: Downeast Associates Limited Partnership CPH Engineers, Inc., A. Carpenter, P.E. ENSR Corporation 472181 v.01 S1 - 3 - T AN SHIPMAN &GOODWINLLP. COUNSELORS AT LAW Christopher j. Smith Phone: (860)251-5606 Fax:(860)251-5318 clsmithCakoodwin.com RECEIVED May 21, 2007 Hand Delivered MAY 7 2 NO South Windsor INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY Planning and Zoning Commission CONSERVATION COMMISSION Of the Town of South Windsor Attn: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Application for Approval of General Plan of Development ("Application"), pursuant to Section 5.4.5 of the Zoning Regulations of the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut ("Regulations"), to permit a retail site development of real properties known as 22 Wheeler Road, 2 Smith Street, 7 Smith Street, and 367 Smith Street, located in the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut (collectively, "subject property"). Application submitted by the owner of subject property, Downeast Associates Limited Partnership ("Downeast"). Dear Chairperson Patrick Kennedy: Please be advised that the undersigned represents the owner/applicant Downeast with regard to the above-referenced Application for approval of a proposed General Plan of Development, as provided by Section 5.4.5 of the Zoning Regulations of the Town of South Windsor ("Regulations"). Downeast is the owner of the subject property that is included in the Application. Three of the subject properties, 22 Wheeler Street, 2 Smith Street and 7 Smith Street, are currently located in the Development Commercial Zone District ("DC") as provided by the Regulations ("DC properties"). Downeast's Application proposes a retail site development over these three properties. Although not included in the specific site development proposal, the Application also depicts an adjacent lot owned by Downeast that is currently located in the Rural Residential Zone District ("RR"), and is known as 367 Smith Street ("RR property"). This adjacent lot may be the subject of a future application by Downeast to rezone 367 Smith Street from RR to DC to accommodate a possible expansion of the proposed Basic Development Plan. However, 367 Smith is not proposed to be included in the Basic Development Plan site development, and is only shown for informational/disclosure purposes. ONE CONSTITUTION PLAZA HARTFORD,CONNECTIC'UT 06103-1919 1 860-215-5000 1 WWW.SHIPMANGOODWIN.COM As you are aware, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor ("Commission") recently sent notice to Downeast of the Commission's proposal to rezone Downeast's DC properties to the Buckland Road Gateway Development Zone ("GD"). Downeast will be respectfully objecting to this proposed change of zone because the proposed change of zone will adversely impact the subject site development proposal that has been under consideration by Downeast over the past number of months. Indeed, it is only because of the Commission's immediate effort to change the zoning designation of Downeast's DC properties, that Downeast has been forced to file this Application without the benefit of review by the Commission's professional staff. Downeast looks forward to working with the Commission, and the Commission's professional staff, in processing this exciting site development proposal under the DC Regulations, whereby the final development is beneficial to Downeast, the Commission, and the Town of South Windsor. As provided by Section 5.4.5 of the Regulations, Downeast hereby submits the following Application and support documents: I. Duplicate original Application for General PIan of Development as provided by Section 5.4.5 of the Regulations, duly executed by the owner/applicant Downeast; 2. Three sets of maps depicting existing structures, roads and paths, and existing conditions of the subject property as provided by Section 5.4.5(a) ; 3. Three sets of documents depicting the location of adjoining properties and names of property owners, and existing structures and land uses within 500 of the subject property, as provided by Section 5.4.5(b); 4. Three sets of documents depicting present and proposed land uses within the General Plan of Development, including, but not limited to, proposed square footage for the retail structures, as provided by Section 5.4.5(c); 5. Three sets of documents depicting the location of proposed major thoroughfares, pedestrian and vehicular circulation patterns, public and private streets, and road linkages. A "Traffic Impact and Access Study," prepared by Vanasse & -2 - X Associates, Inc., dated May 2007, is also included which provides a comprehensive analysis of pre and post- development traffic generation, and recommended traffic mitigation measures to ensure that the General Plan of Development will not adversely impact levels of service ("LOS") for the immediate intersections, as provided by Section 5.4.5(d); 6. Three sets of plans depicting the three phases of the General Plan of Development with associated acreage, as provided by Section 5.4.5(e); 7. Three sets of documents depicting the general system of utilities and improvements required to service the development, and three copies of a "Statement of Projected Impact on Town," as provided by Section 5.4.5(f); 8. Three sets of a soil survey map, with a summary of soils data, as provided by Section 5.4.5(g); 9. Three copies of a "Wetlands Assessment Report," prepared by ENSR Corporation and dated May 19, 2007, confirming that there are no regulated areas on the subject DC properties, and no regulated activities associated with the General Plan of Development. Although not required, Downeast filed a Minimal Impact Application with the Inland Wetland/Watercourse and Conservation Commission of the Town of South Windsor. Three copies of the application form and cover letter are included in this submittal for the Commission's convenience. These documents are submitted pursuant to Section 5.4.5(h); 10. Three copies of a map depicting open space within the DC zoned properties, with provision for the proposed first two phases of development under the subject General Plan of Development, as provided by Section 5.4.5(i); 11. Three copies of a plan depicting information relative to the fact that Downeast will consider any recommended improvements to accommodate public transportation - 3 - relative to the site development, and will work with the Commission and any public transportation authority to ensure integration of such with the overall public transportation system servicing the area, as provided by Section 5.4.50); 12. Three copies of a "Fiscal Impact Analysis," prepared by Realty Concepts, Inc., dated May 19, 2007, as provided by Section 5.4.5(k); and 13. Filing fee in amount of$600. In addition, I enclose an authorization letter from Buckland Hills, LLC, the owner of adjacent property known as 1524 Pleasant Valley Road, Manchester, Connecticut, dated May 18, 2007, confirming that Downeast is authorized to submit the Application and will be provided access rights to utilize the existing access driveway located on the westerly side of the Buckland Hills property to accommodate the proposed retail site development of Downeast's subject property with approximately 357,035 square feet of retail development, as depicted on the Application's Plan entitled, "South Windsor Towne Plaza, Phase I & Phase II," prepared by CPH Engineers, Inc., dated May 18, 2007. As discussed with Marcia A. Banach, AICP, Director of Planning for the Town of South Windsor, this Application is submitted pursuant to Section 5.4.5 of the Regulations. However, this Application also satisfies the provisions of Section 8.1.2 of the Regulations. Downeast looks forward to working with the Commission and community in providing a retail site development of the subject property that everyone will be proud of. -4 - If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Thank you for your, and the Commission's, anticipated cooperation and assistance concerning this matter. Very yours, Christophe J. Smith Agent and Attorney for Downeast Associates Limited Partnership cc: Downeast Associates Limited Partnership, (w/enclosures) CPH Engineers, Inc., A. Carpenter, P.E., (w/enclosures) Vanasse & Associates, Inc., (w/enclosures) Realty Concepts, Inc., (w/enclosures) ENSR Corporation, (w/enclosures) 472063 v.01 S1 - 5 - RECEIVED MAY 2 LUU I youm umnuso CON ERVA ONNCO��� May 18, 2007 Hand Delivered Planning and Zoning Commission Of the Town of South Windsor Attn: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Confirmation of authorization to submit Application for Approval of General Plan of Development ("Application"), pursuant to Sections 5.4.5 and 8.1.2 of the Zoning Regulations of the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut ("Regulations"), to permit a retail site development of real properties known as 22 Wheeler Road, 2 Sinith Street, 7 Smith Street, and 367 Smith Street, located in the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut (collectively, "subject property"), submitted by Downeast Associates Limited Partnership ("Downeast"), with partial access to Downeast's subject property utilizing an existing access driveway located on the westerly side of real property owned by the Plaza at Buckland Hills, LLC("Buckland Hills"), known as 1524 Pleasant Valley Road, Manchester, Connecticut("Buckland Hills property"). Dear Chairperson Patrick Kennedy: Please be advised that the undersigned Buckland Hills authorizes the filing of the above-referenced Application by Downeast. Specifically, Buckland Hills confirms that Downeast will be provided access rights to utilize the existing access driveway located on the westerly side of the Buckland Hills property to accommodate a site development of Downeast's subject property with approximately 357,035 square feet of retail development, as depicted on the Application's Plan entitled, "South Windsor Towne Plaza, Phase I &Phase II,"prepared by CPH Engineers, Inc., dated May 18, 2007. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Thank you for your, and the Commission's, anticipated cooperation and assistance concerning this matter. Very truly yours, Plaza at Buckland Hills, LLC 01 By: Hlcl-cA_c- -E "7 Duly Authorized Dated: May I, 2007 Michael E, McCarty,President cc: Downeast Associates Limited Partnership Community/Lifestyle Centers Division Christopher J. Smith, Esq. CPH Engineers, Inc., A. Carpenter, P.E. 472063 v.01 S 1 MAY 22 GVU 1 soum Z94 , { VATIONCOMMISSION PURSUANT TO THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR ZONING REGULATIONS SECTION 5.4.5 (F): STATEMENT OF PROJECTED IMPACT ON TOWN: Water Supply Based on discussion with Connecticut Water Company, Public Potable Water Supply is currently available to the subject property to support the proposed development. The development is proposed to generate the need for a maximum average flow requirement of daily 35,703.5 gallons per day. Based on discussion with the Connecticut Water Company the existing supply system for the area has ample resource availability to accommodate the flows necessary to serve it. Final coordination and documentation of the construction measures and specifications for the construction elements will be addressed during the final plan process. Fire Protection Fire hydrants and internal fire protection system are incorporated within the development of the project for fire protection. Sufficient area is available around all buildings for emergency vehicle access. Based on the discussion with the Connecticut Water Company there is sufficient water supply to accommodate the fire protection needs for the subject property. Final fire protection design and delivery volumes and pressures will be evaluated, coordinated and documented prior to construction. Construction measures and specifications for the system elements will be addressed during the final plan process. It is anticipated that the property tax benefits of the property and project may provide the additional revenue to supplement fire protection staff that may be needed to serve the project. Drainage The proposed post-developed drainage system(s) flows will match pre-existing flows resulting in a "zero" net increase in discharge rates of discharge from the property. This will be achieved primarily with the utilization of underground galley "type" detention systems for each basin and an above ground detention pond for a portion of Phase II treatment system. Water quality measures are planned to be used in accordance with the 2004 CTDEP Stormwater Quality Guidelines. The use of a "series" of water quality features is intended to be implemented on the property to achieve water quality goals. The discharges will be made to match the pre-developed conditions in the post-development and also match the same locations as the pre-developed conditions. Discharges are anticipated to be maintained on the southwest, northwest and southeast areas of the property. Final details of the construction of those facilities will be addressed during the final plan process. e r � , PURSUANT TO THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR ZONING REGULATIONS SECTION 5.4.5 (F): STATEMENT OF PROJECTED IMPACT ON TOWN: (Continued) Sewage Treatment Facilities According to a discussion with Mr. Fred Shaw the Superintendent of the Town of South Windsor Water Pollution Control Authority on May 17, 2007, there is ample capacity in the Town's sanitary sewer treatment system to support our development. The development is proposed to generate the need for a maximum average wastewater flow of daily 35,703.5 gallons per day. Mr. Shaw referenced concern about a section of 10" PVC sewer pipe which crosses Smith Street to Clark Street which, in his opinion, is near or at capacity. As part of the final engineering of this project this area of concern will be evaluated and necessary improvements will be designed to address any downstream capacity issues. The Clark Street Pump Station which is located southwest of the site serves the area of the development and has been reported to have sufficient capacity to serve the subject property. Final coordination and documentation of the construction measures and specifications for the construction elements will be addressed during the final plan process. Projected System of Solid Waste Disposal The proposed development will provide ample areas, including appropriate screening as required by the Town of South Windsor Zoning Regulations for the collection of solid waste and recycling, as typically required of commercial/retail developments. It is anticipated that it will be the responsibility of each tenant to contractually employ solid waste removal services to have their solid wastes taken regularly and disposed off-site at government regulated disposal facilities. CONNE ENVIRONMENTAL TICUT DEPARTMENT NWECEIVE® GIS CODE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION For onry 79 Elm Street Hartford,CT 06106-5127 MAY 22 'Luul Gina McCarthy,Commissioner sooup Windsor INLAND WETLANDSOMMISSION Statewide Inland Wetlands &INN brcourses Activity Reporting Form Please complete this form in accordance with the instructions. Please print or type. PART I:To Be Completed By The Inland Wetlands Agency Only 1. DATE ACTION WAS TAKEN: Year Month 2. ACTION TAKEN: 3. WAS A PUBLIC HEARING HELD? Yes No 4. NAME OF AGENCY OFFICIAL VERIFYING AND COMPLETING THIS FORM: (print) (signature) PART II:To Be Completed By The Inland Wetlands Agency Or The Applicant 6. TOWN IN WHICH THE ACTION IS OCCURRING: South Windsor Does this project cross municipal boundaries? Yes - No X If Yes,list the other town(s)In which the action is occurring: 6. LOCATION: USGS Quad Map Name: Manchester,Connecticut AND Quad Number: 41072-G5-TF-024 Subregional Drainage Basin Number: 4000 or 4500 7. NAME OF APPLICANT,VIOLATOR OR PETITIONER: Kevin Sims 8. NAME&ADDRESSILOCATION OF PROJECT SITE:- 22 Wheeler Road 2 Smith Street 7 Smith Street 367 Smith Street Briefly describe the action/project/activity: Construction of a 357,035 square feet of Retail/Commercial Development 8. ACTIVITY PURPOSE CODE: D 10. ACTIVITY TYPE CODE(S): NO 14 10 9 2 11. WETLAND/WATERCOURSE AREA ALTERED[must be provided in acres or linear feet as indicated): Wetlands: 0 acres Open Water Body: 0 acres Stream: 0 linear feet 12. UPLAND AREA ALTERED[must be provided in acres as indicated]: 0 acres 13. AREA OF WETLANDS AND/OR WATERCOURSES RESTORED,ENHANCED OR CREATED: 0 acres [must be provided in acres as indicated] DATE RECEIVED: PART III:To Be Completed By The DEP DATE RETURNED TO DER FORM COMPLETED: YES NO FORM CORRECTED/COMPLETED: YES NO REV.212006 SOIL SURVEY OF STATE OF CONNECTICUT RECEIVED S.Windsor Retail MAY 2 2 607 702000 702100 70 00 702300 702400 70 500 702600 702700 702800 702900 So Q�gdsor 703100 703 00 Y - CONSERVATION o (n r 49 O C % m C 0 O T1' if .0 y .�i r •.:yd o _ Y — 10 nn cfiic t �� "i z to $ N o rn m Sy <�lgka iti r a C f . �#ry� C g ,.tip �„✓ k m .#�'cr t {;t .K $. C m . Z U) m o n m � .*y,., ,.,.•. 1. „ r f -t x �, 'i�}, ivt `t++F S+ Z R _ - �. P.m `. 6 z Co 0 Y Y :y hI -. n TO?000 702100 702200 702300 702400 Z02500 70260D 702T00 702800 702900 703000 703100 70320p T Meters Feet 0 50 100 200 0 150 300 600 900 1,200 USDA NwamlRewarces Web Soil Survey 1.1 5/12/2006 QiM GoaenatiooService National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 1 of SOIL SURVEY OF STATE OF CONNECTICUT MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION 0 Soil Map Units s Cities Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service 0 Detailed counties Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov Q Detailed States Interstate Highways Coordinate System: UTM Zone 18 Roads Soil Survey Area: State of Connecticut �--F- Rails Spatial Version of Data: 3 Water Soil Map Compilation Scale: 1:12000 Hydrography oceans AYAYAYAY Escarpment,bedrock vnvnvnv Escarpment,non-bedrock """"`• Gulley H11111Ullllll Levee .......... Slope v Blowout ® Borrow Pit A Clay Spot ♦ Depression,closed Eroded Spot x Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Gulley Lava Flow ® Landfill Map comprised of aerial images photographed on these dates: _6L Marsh or Swamp 4/23/1990 O Miscellaneous Water Rock Outcrop + Saline Spot Sandy Spot 31 Slide or Slip O Sinkhole 32r Sodic Spot Spoil area The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and o Stony spot digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. O Perennial Water USDA Natural Reserrces t Wet Spot Web Soil Survey 1.1 5/12/2006 Cervervatiea Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3 Soil Survey of State of Connecticut S.Windsor Retail f Map Unit Legend Summary State of Connecticut Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 29A Apwain sandy loffin,0 to 3 percent slopes 32A Haven and Enfield soils,0 to 3 percent GSA slopes 32B Haven ii Bn icld soils,3 to 8 percent slopes 37C Manchester gravelly sandy loam,3 to a%@* . 15 percent slopes • Aj POWAY iGGlt. t a"l nt 4-r ny 8 d" o.�• 307 Urban land "07- 30$ Udorthents,smoothed �i1f USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1.1 5/12/2006 Coaservatlou Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 i SOIL SUMMARY The Soils identified in the Soil Survey Map for subject site on the preceding pages are not classified as hydric soil types, are generally well drained, and flooding frequency is none as described by the NRCS. The minimum depth to the seasonal high water table according to NRCS is greater than 5 ft. e ENSR AECOM 2 Technology Park Drive 11 Phelps Way/PO Box 506 Westford,MA 01886 Willington,CT 06279 (978)589-3000 (860)429-5323 FAX(978)589-3035 FAX(860)429-5378 www,ensr.aecom.com MAY 2� ZUUI South Windsor 1NLANO WETLANDS AGENCY CONSERVATION COMM'SS10N WETLAND ASSESSMENT REPORT PROPOSED RETAIL/COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT SOUTH WINDSOR TOWNE PLAZA PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD, SOUTH WINDSOR,CT Prepared by: ENSR Corporation Willington,CT Prepared for: CPH Engineers,Inc. Vernon, CT May 18,2007 Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road,South Windsor, CT Page I of 19 WETLAND ASSESSMENT REPORT PROPOSED RETAIL/COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT SOUTH WINDSOR TOWNE PLAZA PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD, SOUTH WINDSOR,CT 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW This report has been prepared by ENSR Environmental Consultants to summarize wetland and watercourse investigations conducted north of the existing Plaza at Buckland Hills retail development in South Windsor, Connecticut. ENSR has been retained by CPH Engineers, Inc.to conduct investigations to identify and delineate the jurisdictional wetlands and watercourses west of Buckland Road, south of Smith Street, east of Wheeler Road, and north of Pleasant Valley Road. The roughly 57 acre subject site generally consists of well-drained soil types formed in glacial outwash surficial deposits. Much of the site has been fallow for many years subsequent to various farming and earth moving operations. The western portion of the site is generally in open grassland and old field habitat,while the northern and eastern portions have developed into scrub and woodland secondary growth habitats. Upon review of the soil,hydrologic, and vegetative conditions on the site, it is ENSR's opinion that there are no jurisdictional wetland or watercourse areas on the subject site. A small man-made basin exists in the southeast part of the site that functions for stormwater infiltration of runoff from the existing retail development. It is ENSR's opinion that this basin does not contain the requisite conditions to be classified as either a jurisdictional wetland or watercourse. As described below,there are no other areas on the site which ENSR believes meet statutory criteria for local, state, or federally-defined wetland/watercourse resources. Figure 1 provides an Existing Conditions Plan of the site. Proposed development of the site accordingly does not propose any direct impact to any jurisdictional wetlands or watercourses or within the Upland Review Area as defined in the South Windsor Wetland/Watercourse Regulations. Potential indirect impacts are proposed to be avoided by the use of infiltration measures for treating stormmwater runoff as well as sediment and erosion control best management practices during construction. Accordingly, it is ENSR's opinion that the proposed development does not meet the criteria as a"regulated activity"or a"significant impact activity"as defined in Connecticut General Statutes 22a-36 to 22a-45 and the South Windsor Wetland/Watercourse and Conservation Regulations. To the extent that there may be indirect minimal impacts, it is ENSR's opinion that these are not likely to cause or have the potential to cause adverse impacts on any regulated area. \/ /—ter`. --��'_�•- s- t "� rt��' �� ' ��IP ! � �,� r ��/J� s/ aJ `''� �' / 1�/j•r/ f s ' 44\ � All wa !It it kr 4� j� i�li�!� �1�11�'j�,%' j �` _ ���.._'+;_ x �x*�. •�'.^_L.af�`�-�--l; I\I 1 ,•I �J I � 1 ,,,•� o `� � i x o \ 5 l\ IF c I \ ��` 1 r ENSR � AECOM Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road,South Windsor,CT Page 3 of 19 2.0 SITE INVESTIGATIONS and SUMMARY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ENSR conducted site investigations on several days in May of 2007 to inventory natural resource features and assess the identified natural resources relative to local, state, and federal jurisdictional criteria specified above. Soil and Wetland Scientists inventoried the soil and vegetative conditions and applied statutory criteria to determine the presence/absence of potential regulated areas. ENSR used the criteria of the Connecticut Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act and the South Windsor Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Regulations to determine the presence/absence of jurisdictional wetlands and watercourses on the subject site. The criteria employed are also consistent with those specified to determine jurisdictional limits under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. The roughly 57-acre subject site generally consists of well-drained soil types formed in glacial outwash surficial deposits. Much of the site has been fallow for many years subsequent to various farming and earth moving operations. The western portion of the site is generally in open grassland and old field habitat(see Photo 1,Appendix A),while the northern and eastern portions have developed into scrub and woodland secondary growth habitats (Photo 2). Table 1 presents a listing of plant species observed on the site. Soil conditions on and in the vicinity of the site are indicated in Appendix A as mapped by the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service(NRCS). On-site investigations are consistent with these designations. The subject site consists of well-drained to excessively well-drained soil types such as Merrimac,Enfield and Manchester series. NRCS soils snapping from circa 1960 indicates that much of the site at that time was mapped as Merrimac series. The updated NRCS mapping indicates much of the western portion of the site as"Udorthents, smoothed",reflecting the past grading/leveling of the site and creation of an elevated berm that extends along Wheeler Road and Smith Street. Despite this past grading,the characteristics of the site's soils are largely maintained relative to drainage characteristics. The mapped Merrimac,Enfield and Manchester soil series are all reported by NRCS to have negligible surface runoff with rapid permeabilities in the substratum. In short,the mapped and observed soil conditions are not reflective of hydric or wetland conditions,but rather are consistent with well-drained upland conditions. ENSR , AECOM Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road,South Windsor,CT Page 4of19 Table 1: Plant Species Observed Common Name Scientific Name Relative Abundance Poison Ivy Toxicodendron radicans Common Evening Primrose Oenethra biennis Occasional Japanese Knotweed Polygonum cus idatum' Sparse Autumn Olive Elea gnus spp. Common Common Reed Phragniftes australis Sparse Smooth Sumac Rhus glabra Occasional Red Cedar Juni erus vir iniana Occasional Staghorn Sumac Rhus hina Occasional Wild Grape Vitis SPP. Occasional Multi-flora Rose Rosa multiflora Common Jewelweed Impatiens ca ensis Occasional Norway Maple 4cer platanoides Occasional Red Maple Acer rubrum Occasional Honey Locust Gleditsia triancanthos Occasional Tartarian Honeysuckle Lonicera tatarica Common Goldenrod Solida o SPP. Common Black Oak Quercus velutina Occasional Asiatic Bittersweet Celastrus orbiculatus Occasional Catalpa Catalpa hignoniodes Occasional Pin Cheri Prunus pensylvanica Occasional Cottonwood Po ulus deltoids Occasional Sensitive Fern Onoclea sensibilis Common American Elm Ulmus Americana Occasional Black Birch Betula lenta Occasional Glossy Buckthorn Rhaninus,Nngula Common Willow Salix spp. Occasional Joe Pye Weed Eu adorium maculatum Occasional American Beech Fagus grandifolia Occasional As shown on Figure 1, several locations on or near to the site are noteworthy relative to jurisdictional status under the Inland Wetland and Watercourses criteria. The first is in the southeast portion of the site adjacent to the developed portion of the Plaza site. A small man-made basin exists in this area that functions for stormwater infiltration of runoff from the existing retail development. The area, roughly 50 feet by 100 feet, has been excavated several feet in depth and lined with rip-rap. Two stormwater discharges from the developed site direct runoff into the basin. There is no surface water discharge observable from the basin. During ENSR's reviews the basin was dry, although evidence of some ponding was noted in form of stained leaves. ENSR placed flags Al-A7 to define this infiltration basin. Due to the heavy rip-rapping, examination of soils in the basin was difficult, although from the observations made the soils did not present ENSR ( AECOM Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road, South Windsor,CT Page S of 19 characteristics supportive of hydric or poorly drained conditions. Vegetative cover in the basin is sporadic, although occasional wetland plants(willow and rush)were noted. Appendix B provides photographs of this basin(see Photo#3). It is ENSR's opinion that this man-made stormwater treatment/infiltration feature does not meet the statutory criteria as either a wetland(no hydric soils)or a watercourse(no defined wetland plant community and contains water only in response to direct precipitation events). The infiltration rate of stormwater within this basin appears to be relatively rapid. Just to the east of this infiltration basin a second small area was investigated as a potential wetland resource(Figure 1). This is a small(25x15 ft) area of common reed(Phragmites australis)that has formed again below a stormwater discharge source from the existing development(Appendix B,Photo#4). Phragmites is known as an aggressive, invasive, non-native species common to disturbed sites. No surface water, saturated, or strong indicators of surface water were present within this area, and the soil characteristics'were not consistent with hydric criteria. Accordingly, it is ENSR's opinion that this small patch of Phragmites is not a wetland or watercourse area. North of these two locations, at 367 Smith Street, a culvert was noted under Smith Street (see Photos#5 and 6). The south side of this culvert extends into the mowed lawn of this lot. While it is likely that overland flow passes through this mowed lawn during periods of higher runoff to be conveyed under Smith Street through the culvert,ENSR encountered no evidence that this lawn area supports either wetland soils,vegetation, or hydrology conditions. North of Smith Street, a more defined channel forms with bordering vegetated wetland conditions along side of it. The final area of note is in the southwest portion of the site. An excavated depression is located on the site just north of Pleasant Valley Road,with an outlet culvert leading toward the roadway(Photo#7). It appears that the basin may have been planned as a detention/infiltration basin,however no drainage is directed into it. Neither wetland soils nor wetland vegetation occur within the depression, and accordingly the area is not classified as a jurisdictional wetland. To the south of Pleasant Valley Road a small watercourse is present that conveys flow to the west. The NRCS soils mapping indicates this feature as Quarry Brook,which flows west to Whaples Brook. This watercourse is more than 100 feet off of the property line. 3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND NIITIGATING MEASURES The proposed project will develop the site with retail/commercial space and associated parking and infrastructure. Based upon discussions with CPH Engineers,Inc., the proposed stormwater measures will incorporate best management practices in full compliance with the CTDEP's Stormwater Quality Manual. Consistent with the soil and surficial geologic conditions of the site,the stormwater management plan is intended to focus on infiltration of pre-treated stormwater runoff to ensure no increase in the peak ENSR AF(O=� Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road,South Windsor, CT Page 6 of 19 rate of runoff as well as effective treatment of stormwater quality. Infiltration is considered among the most preferred stormwater management measures due to the high quality of treatment afforded as well as its effect on maintaining groundwater levels, stream baseflows, and wetland moisture levels. Stormwater is anticipated to be directed in three directions from the site via infiltration measures: to the southeast toward the existing infiltration basin via an existing swale; to the southwest toward the excavated depression adjacent to Pleasant Valley Road; and to the northwest to the drainage system in Wheeler Road. An operations and maintenance plan will be developed to address the long-term effectiveness of the stormwater management measures by regular inspections and cleaning of the various treatment devices. Proposed development of the site accordingly does not propose any direct impact to any jurisdictional wetlands or watercourses or within the Upland Review Area as defined in the South Windsor Wetland/Watercourse Regulations. Potential indirect impacts are proposed to be avoided by the use of infiltration measures for treating stormwater runoff as well as sediment and erosion control best management practices during construction. Accordingly, it is ENSR's opinion that the proposed development does not meet the criteria as a"regulated area" or a"significant impact activity" as defined in Connecticut General Statutes 22a-36 to 22a-45 and the South Windsor Wetland/Watercourse and Conservation Regulations. To the extent that there may be indirect minimal impacts, it is ENSR's opinion that these are not likely to cause or have the potential to cause adverse impacts on any regulated area. Dennis J. Lowry Principal Wetland Scientist ENSR Willington, CT ENSR ECOM Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road,South Windsor, CT Page 7 of 19 APPENDIX A USDA SOIL SURVEY MAPPING SOIL SURVEY OF STATE OF CONNECTICUT Pleasant Valley Road, South Windsor, CT 702000 702100 702200 702300 702400 702500 702600 702700 702800 702900 703000 703100 ^4.'4 t r'� ;Y � v .., � 4: � r ,tiwRwrr� `�,. ems,�'�•. ». 7r V' M �+ -� .. • Yp�"fi-�+Ly'.a' Adn]Y. Y .ash, ti','5,�*' �_ ._ � V r - _ diAq y a ,P e 1• x� =^Ha m 41 Alkb- rx "rt ^wr. 4 .:fie o i- r fi Lam: • 1 - .'i ., �;.. 4 1 r ' `�'"y'�n, y�+� �'k 9 c 702000 702100 702200 702300 702400 702500 702600 702700 702800 702900 703000 703100 Meters Feet ` 0 50 100 200 0 150 300 600 900 1,200 USDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1.1 5/15/2007 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Pagel of 3 SOIL SURVEY OF STATE OF CONNECTICUT Pleasant Valley Road South Windsor CT MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Soil Map Units ® cities Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Detailed Counties Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov s J Detailed States Interstate Highways Coordinate System: UTM Zone 18 Roads Soil Survey Area: State of Connecticut —+—'— Rails Spatial Version of Data: 4 water Soil Map Compilation Scale: 1:12000 Hydrography oceans AYAYAYAY Escarpment,bedrock vnvnvnv� Escarpment,non-bedrock Gulley nunuuum Levee .......... Slope v- Blowout- ® Borrow Pit Al Clay Spot ♦ Depression,dosed - Eroded Spot Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot 1. Gulley Lava Flow Landfill Map comprised of aerial images photographed on these dates: 4• Marsh or Swamp 4/23/1990 O Miscellaneous Water v Rock Outcrop + Saline Spot Sandy Spot 3) Slide or Slip O Sinkhole y1 Sodic Spot Spoil area The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and a Stony Spot digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. M Very Stony apot As a result,some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. p. Perennial Water USDA Natural Resources W Wet Spot Web Soil Survey 1.1 5/15/2007 Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 2 of 3 Pleasant Valley Road,South Soil Survey of State of Connecticut Windsor,CT Map Unit Legend Summary State of Colinecticut Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 29A Agawam fine sandy loam,0 to 3 1.5 10 percent slopes 29B Agawam fine sandy loam,3 to 8 0.1 0.1 percent slopes 32A Haven and Enfield soils,0 to 3 percent 18.8 12.3 slopes 32B Haven and Enfield soils,3 to 8 percent 8.1 5.3 slopes 37C Manchester gravelly sandy loam,3 to 5.8 3.8 15 percent slopes 37E Manchester gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 1.7 1.1 45 percent slopes 65D Cheshire fine sandy loam, 15 to 35 3.1 20 percent slopes,extremely stony 66C Narragansett silt loam,8 to 15 percent 2.1 1.4 slopes 68D Narragansett silt loam, 15 to 25 0.6 0.4 percent slopes,extremely stony 232B Haven-Urban land complex,0 to 8 3.7 2.4 percent slopes 306 Udorthents-Urban land complex 10.9 7.1 307 Urban land 53.9 35.4 308 Udorthents,smoothed 42.0 27.5 [1$ Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 1.1 5/15/2007 T Conservation service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3 ENSR � AECOM Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road, South Windsor, CT Page 9 of 19 Merrimac Soil Series The Merrimac series consists of very deep,somewhat excessively drained soils formed in glacial outwash. They are nearly level to very steep soils on outwash terraces and plains and other glaciofluvial landforms. Slope ranges form 0 to 35 percent. Saturated hydraulic conductivity is high or very high.Mean annual temperature is about 48 degrees F.and mean annual precipitation is about 42 inches. Ap--O to 10 inches;very dark grayish brown(I OYR 3/2)fine sandy loam,light brownish gray (10YR 6/2)dry;weak fine and medium granular structure;very friable;many fine roots; 10 percent fine gravel;strongly acid;abrupt smooth boundary. (6 to 14 inches thick) Bwl--10 to 15 inches;brown(7.5YR 4/4)fine sandy loam;weak fine and medium granular structure;very friable;common fine roots; 10 percent fine gravel;strongly acid;clear wavy boundary. Bw2--15 to 22 inches;dark yellowish brown(1 OYR 4/4)gravelly sandy loam;weak fine and medium granular structure;very friable;few fine roots; 15 percent gravel;strongly acid;clear wavy boundary. Bw3--22 to 26 inches;dark yellowish brown(1 OYR 4/4)gravelly loamy sand;very weak fine granular structure;very friable; few fine roots;25 percent gravel;moderately acid; clear wavy boundary.(Combined thickness of the Bw horizons is 6 to 34 inches thick.) 2C--26 to 65 inches; 80 percent yellowish brown(1OYR 514)and 20 percent dark grayish brown (10YR 4/2)very gravelly sand;single grain;loose;stratified;few fine roots in upper 4 inches;40 percent gravel, 10 percent cobbles;moderately acid. RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: Solum thickness ranges from 18 to 30 inches.Rock fragments are mainly granite or gneiss,but up to 25 percent are flat,fine-grained slate,shale,or phyllite fragments.The upper part of the solum commonly has 5 to 20 percent gravel but includes cobbles in some pedons and the lower part 5 to 30 percent.The substratum contains 25 to 55 percent gravel and 5 to 15 percent cobbles. Total volume of rock fragments in the particle-size control section is less than 35 percent. Clay content is less than 18 percent.Reaction ranges from extremely acid to moderately acid unless limed. The Ap horizon has hue of 7.5YR or 1 OYR,value of 3 or 4,and chroma of 2 to 4.Undisturbed areas have an A horizon with value of 2 to 3,and chroma of 1 or 2 that is 1 to 4 inch thick.Some pedons have a thin,light colored E horizon below the A.The Ap,A and E horizons are fine sandy loam,sandy loam, or very fine sandy loam in the fine-earth fraction. The Bw horizon has hue of 7.5YR or 1OYR in the upper part and 7.5YR to 2.5Y in the lower part. Value ranges from 3 to 6 and chroma from 3 to 8.Texture of the upper part of the Bw horizon is fine sandy loam,sandy loam,or very fine sandy loam in the fine-earth fraction.It has granular or subangular blocky structure or the horizon is massive.The lower part of the B horizon is sandy loam,coarse sandy loam,loamy coarse sand,or loamy sand in the fine-earth fraction. Sandy loam textures do not extend below a depth of 27 inches,but a minimum thickness of 5 inches of sandy ENSR ( AECOM Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road,South Windsor,CT Page 10 of 19 loam overlies any lower B or 2C horizon that is loamy fine sand or coarser.The B subhorizon that lies above the 2C horizon in many pedons is single grain. Some pedons have a BC horizon that is similar to the lower part of the Bw. The 2C horizon has hue of 1 OYR to 5Y and ranges widely in value and chroma. It consists of stratified coarse sand,sand,gravel, and cobbles and has a weighted texture of gravelly or very gravelly sand or coarse sand. Some pedons have thin lenses of loamy fine sand or fine sand. GEOGRAPHIC SETTING:Merrimac soils are level to very steep soils on glacial outwash plains and valley trains,and associated karnes,eskers,stream terraces and water deposited parts of moraines.The steeper slopes are on the margin escarpments of terraces and plains,and on eskers and kames. Slope ranges from 0 to 35 percent. The soils formed in water sorted gravelly and sandy material derived mainly from granitic,gneissic and some schistose rocks.Mean annual precipitation ranges from 28 to 55 inches;mean annual air temperature ranges from 45 to 50 degrees F.,mean growing season ranges from 120 to 200 days. GEOGRAPHICALLY ASSOCIATED SOILS: These are the Ailawam,Hinckley, Sudbury, Scarboro, Walpole and Windsor soils on nearby landscapes.The well drained Agawam soils are coarse-loamy over sandy or sandy-skeletal. The excessively drained Hinckley soils are sandy- skeletal.The very poorly drained Scarboro soils are in depressions.The moderately drained Sudbury soils are on adjacent,slightly lower landforms.The somewhat poorly drained poorly and drained Walpole soils are in drainageways and on low landforms.The excessively drained Windsor soils are have loamy fine sand to sand textures in the Bw horizon and lack rock fragments. DRAINAGE AND PERMEABILITY: Somewhat excessively drained.Runoff is negligible to medium. Saturated hydraulic conductivity is high or very high. USE AND VEGETATION: Most areas are cultivated and used for growing hay,pasture,silage, corn,or truck crops. Some areas are used to grow tobacco in the Connecticut River Valley in Massachusetts and Connecticut. Some areas are forested with mostly white pine,gray birch, hemlock,red maple,and red,black,white,and scarlet oaks. ENSR I AECOM Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road,South Windsor,CT Page 11 of 19 Enfield Soil Series The Enfield series consists of very deep,well drained loamy soils formed in a silty mantle overlying glacial outwash.They are nearly level to sloping soils on outwash plains and terraces. Slope ranges from 0 to 15 percent.Permeability is moderate or moderately rapid in the surface layer and subsoil and rapid or very rapid in the substratum.The mean annual temperature is about 49 degrees F. and the mean annual precipitation is about 50 inches. Ap--O to 7 inches;dark grayish brown(IOYR 4/2)silt loam;moderate fine granular structure; friable;many very fine and fine roots;5 percent fine gravel;strongly acid;abrupt smooth boundary.(6 to 12 inches thick) Bwl--7 to 16 inches;strong brown(7.5YR 516)silt loam;weak medium subangular blocky structure; friable; common very fine and many fine roots; 5 percent fine gravel;strongly acid; clear wavy boundary. Bw2--16 to 25 inches;light olive brown(2.5Y 514)silt loam;weak medium subangular blocky structure; friable,few very fine and common fine roots; 5 percent fine gravel;strongly acid; abrupt wavy boundary. (Combined thickness of the Bw horizons is 12 to 36 inches) 2C--25 to 60 inches;brown(IOYR 5/3)very gravelly sand;single grain;loose;stratified;45 percent gravel and 5 percent cobbles;strongly acid. RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: Thickness of the solum ranges from 16 to 40 inches and typically corresponds to the depth of sand and gravel.Rock fragments range from 0 to 5 percent in the solum and from 0 to 70 percent in the substratum.The fragments are mainly rounded pebbles and typically make up 75 percent or more of the total rock fragments.Unless limed,the soil is very strongly acid to moderately acid. The Ap horizon has hue of 7.5YR or 1 OYR,value of 3 or 4 and chroma of 2 to 4.Dry value is 6 or more.Undisturbed pedons have a thin A horizon with value of 2 or 3 and chroma of 1 through 3.The Ap or A horizon is silt loam or very fine sandy loam.It has weak or moderate granular structure and is friable or very friable. The upper part of the B horizon has hue of 7.5YR or 1 OYR,value of 4 or 5 and chroma of 3 to 8. The lower part of the B horizon has hue of 7.5YR to 2.5Y,value of 4 to 6 and chroma of 3 to 6. The B horizon is silt loam or very fine sandy loam.It has weak granular or weak subangular blocky structure or the horizon is massive.Consistence is friable or very friable. The 2C horizon is neutral or has hue of 2.5YR to 5Y,value of 4 to 6 and chroma of 0 to 6.It is commonly stratified sand and gravel.Texture of individual strata ranges from coarse to fine sand to loamy sandy in the fine earth. GEOGRAPHIC SETTING:Enfield soils are nearly level to sloping soils on terraces and outwash plains. Slopes range from 0 to 15 percent,but are generally less than 8 percent. The soils formed in a silty mantle over stratified sandy and gravelly fluvial materials derived from a variety ENSR I AECOM Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road,South Windsor,CT Page 12 of 19 of acidic rocks.Mean annual temperature is 45 to 52 degrees F.,mean annual precipitation is 40 to 50 inches;and the growing season is 120 to 195 days. GEOGRAPHICALLY ASSOCIATED SOILS: These are the Agawam,Branford, Bridgehampton,Broadbrook,Hartford,Haven,Hinckley,Merrimac,Narragansett,Ninigret, Rainbow,Raynham,Raypol, Scio,Tisbury, Walpole, Wapping, Windsor and Unadilla soils. The moderately well drained Tisbury and poorly drained Raypol soils are associated in a drainage sequence.Agawam,Branford,Copake,Haven and Narragansett soils are coarse-loainy over sandy or sandy-skeletal.Belgrade,Hero,Ninigret,Scio and Tisbury soils have redoximorphic features within a 24 inch depth.Bernardston,Broadbrook and Newport soils are coarse-loamy and have a dense till substratum.Bridgehampton,Hartland and Unadilla soils have a coarse-silty particle-size control section.Hartford and Merrimac soils are sandy.Hinckley and Windsor soils are coarse-textured and excessively drained. Pollux and Riverhead soils are coarse-loamy and have a stratified substratum.Rainbow and Wapping soils are moderately well drained soils formed in glacial till.Raynham and Walpole soils are poorly drained soils in low terrace areas. DRAINAGE AND PERMEABILITY: Well drained. Surface runoff is negligible or low. Permeability is moderate or moderately rapid in the solum and rapid or very rapid in the substratum. Saturated hydraulic conductivity is moderately high or high in the solum and high or very high in the substratum. USE AND VEGETATION:Most areas are used for cultivated crops,hay or pasture.Common crops are silage corn,vegetables,tobacco and nursery stock. Some areas are wooded or used for community development. Common trees are red,white and black oak,hickory,white ash,red maple,sugar maple,black birch,beech,hemlock and white pine. Manchester Soil Series The Manchester series consists of very deep,excessively drained soils formed in sandy and gravelly glacial outwash and stratified drift.They are nearly level to steep soils on outwash plains,terraces,kames, deltas and eskers. Slope ranges from O to 45 percent. Saturated hydraulic conductivity is high or very high in the surface layer and subsoil,and very high in the substratum. Mean annual temperature is about 50 degrees F.and mean annual precipitation is about 48 inches. Ap--O to 9 inches;dark brown(7.5YR 3/2)gravelly sandy loam;weak medium granular structure;very friable;many fine and common medium roots;20 percent gravel;strongly acid; clear smooth boundary. (6 to 10 inches thick) Bw--9 to 18 inches;reddish brown(5YR 4/3)gravelly loamy sand;very weak fine and medium granular structure;very friable; few fine roots;25 percent gravel;strongly acid;clear wavy boundary. (4 to 20 inches thick) C--18 to 65 inches;reddish brown(5YR 4/4)very gravelly sand;single grain;loose; 50 percent gravel;very strongly acid. ENSR � AECOM Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road,South Windsor, CT Page 13 of 19 RANGE IN CHARACTERISTICS: Thickness of the solum ranges from 12 to 24 inches.Rock fragments,mainly rounded pebbles,range from 15 to 50 percent in the solum and from 35 to 70 percent in the substratum. The weighted average volume of rock fragments from 10 to 40 inches is more than 35 percent.Unless limed,the soil very strongly acid to moderately acid. The Ap horizon has hue of 5YR to 1 OYR,value of 3 or 4 and chroma of 2 to 4.Undisturbed pedons have a thin A horizon with value of 2 or 3 and chroma of 1 to 3.The Ap or A horizon is sandy loam, fine sandy loam,loamy fine sand or loamy sand in the fine earth fraction.It has weak granular structure and is friable or very friable. The Bw horizon has hue of 5YR or 2.5YR,value of 4 or 5 and chroma of 3 to 8. Texture in the fine-earth fraction is loamy sand,loamy fine sand or sandy loam in the upper part of the horizon and loamy fine sand,loamy sand or sand in the lower part of the horizon. Sandy loam texture does not extend below a depth of 10 inches.The Bw horizon has weak granular structure or it is single grain. Consistence is very friable or loose. The C horizon has hue of 5YR or 2.5YR,value and chroma of 3 to 6.The horizon is commonly stratified sand and gravel.Fine earth texture in individual layers is coarse sand,sand or loamy sand. GEOGRAPHIC SETTING:Manchester soils are nearly level to steep soils on terraces,outwash plains,kames,deltas and eskers. Slope ranges from 0 to 45 percent.The soils formed in sandy and gravelly glaciofluvial materials and stratified drift derived mainly from a red sedimentary rocks and basalt.Mean annual temperature is 45 to 52 degrees F.,mean annual precipitation is 38 to 50 inches and the growing season is 140 to 185 days. DRAINAGE AND PERMEABILITY: Excessively drained. Surface runoff is negligible to high. Saturated hydraulic conductivity is high in the surface layer,and high or very high in the subsoil and substratum. The soils are droughty. USE AND VEGETATION: Most areas are forested or in brushy vegetation. Cleared areas are used for hay,pasture and silage corn. Small areas,mostly irrigated,are used for tobacco, vegetables and nursery stock.Many areas are in community development.Common trees are white,red and black oak,gray birch,aspen,white pine and pitch pine. Gravel is commonly excavated from areas of these soils. DISTRIBUTION AND EXTENT:Glaciofluvial landforms in the Connecticut River Valley of Connecticut;MLRA 145.The series is of moderate extent. ENSR ( AECUM Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road,South Windsor,CT Page 14 of 19 APPENDIX B PHOTOGRAPHS i ENSR ( AECOM Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road,South Windsor, CT Page 15 of 19 Photo#1: General view of west side of site looking east. May 2007. 3. Photo#2: General view of east side of site. May 2007. 4 y" Y f WellandENSRIAECOM Assessment Report Pleasant Road,South • e •�., 17o 19 _ �' - KF w•i a t �j.�4 •2' 4 '�. .Krj ` 4 ! r' •••jxY yr. _ - r.�.� • 1 1 J #5: Culvert under SI1 I Street at 367Smith 1 Photo 1 1 at 367Smith Street lookingsouth from culvert. May 2007. ENSR ( A.ECOM Wetland Assessment Report Pleasant Valley Road,South Windsor, CT Page 18 of 19 Photo#7: Excavated depression and outlet culvert toward Pleasant Valley Road in southwest corner of site. TRAFFIC IMPACT AND ACCESS STUDY SOUTH WINDSOR TOWNE CENTER SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT Prepared,for: CPH ENGINEERS,INC. VERNON, CONNECTICUT r. O� G*= No.21868 ;�� May 2007 5�1/0- Prepared by: VANASSE&ASSOCIATES, INC. 10 New England Business Center Drive Suite 314 Andover, MA 01810 (978)474-8800 1 Copyright 0 2007 by VAI All Rights Reserved CONTENTS EXECUTIVESUMMARY............................................................................................................. 1 StudyArea.......................................................................................................................... 1 ExistingConditions............................................................................................................2 FutureConditions............................................................................................................... AnalysisResults.................................................................................................................3 Recommendations...............................................................................................................4 Conclusions........................................................................................................................4 INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................5 ProjectDescription.............................................................................................................5 StudyMethodology............................................................................................................5 EXISTINGCONDITIONS..............................................................................................................7 Geometry............................................................................................................................7 ExistingTraffic Volumes...................................................................................................9 MotorVehicle Crash Data................................................................................................ 10 FUTURECONDITIONS............................................................................................................... 12 BackgroundTraffic Growth............................................................................................. 12 Site-Generated Traffic...................................................................................................... 14 Trip Distribution and Assignment.................................................................................... 15 Future Traffic Volumes—Build Condition...................................................................... 15 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS......................................................................................... 17 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 17 AnalysisResults............................................................................................................... 18 G:\4917\mports\TTAS 051807.doc CONTENTS (Continued) CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................................................23 Recommendations.............................................................................................................23 Conclusions......................................................................................................................23 �j G:W9171reports\TIAS 051807.doc FIGURES No. Title 1 Site Location Map 2 2007 Existing Peak Month Traffic Volumes 3 2009 No-Build Peak Month Traffic Volumes 4 Estimated Trip Distribution 5 Estimated Trip Assignment Traffic Volumes 6 2009 Build Peak Month Traffic Volumes GA4917Veports\TIAS 051807.doc TABLES No. Title 1 Existing Roadway Traffic-Volume Summary 2 Accident Data Summary 3 Trip Generation Summary 4 Trip Distribution Summary 5 Summary of Peak-Hour Traffic-Volume Increases 6 Level-of-Service Criteria for Signalized Intersections 7 Level-of-Service Criteria for Unsignalized Intersections 8 Intersection Level-of-Service Summary 9 Summary of Vehicle Queue Analysis 10 Mitigated Intersection Level-of-Service Summary G:W917\reports\T1AS 05I807.doc EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Vanasse & Associates, Inc. (VAI) has conducted a Traffic Impact and Access Study (TIAS) in order to assess the traffic impacts associated with a proposed retail development to be located on the north side of Pleasant Valley Road in the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut. This study reviews access requirements, safety considerations, and identifies and analyzes existing traffic conditions and future traffic conditions with the proposed project. This study was prepared in general accordance with the Connecticut State Traffic Commission (STC)guidelines for the preparation of Traffic Impact Studies(TISs). STUDY AREA The study area contains three locations in the vicinity of the project site in the towns of South Windsor and Manchester,Connecticut, which includes the following intersections: • Pleasant Valley Road at I-84 Westbound Ramps • Pleasant Valley Road at the Plaza at Buckland Hills Drive • Pleasant Valley Road at Croft Drive/Manchester Trail EXISTING CONDITIONS A comprehensive field inventory of traffic conditions on the study area roadways was conducted for this project in November 2006. The field investigation consisted of an inventory of existing roadway geometries, and operating characteristics, as well as land use information within the study area. Traffic Volumes Traffic volumes were counted both mechanically and manually in November 2006. All traffic volumes were collected on Friday, November 17 and Saturday November 18, 2006, so as to capture time periods when public schools were in session. Automatic Traffic Recorder (ATR) counts were conducted on Pleasant Valley Road east of Croft Drive for a forty-eight hour period. Manual turning movement counts (TMCs) and vehicle classification counts were conducted GA4917\reportATIAS 051807.doc 1 during Friday evening (4:00 to 6:00 PM) and Saturday midday (11:00 AM to 2:00 PM) peak periods at the above study locations. The ATR data gathered as part of this study was collected during the month of November. Traffic-volume data compiled by the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) indicated that November Friday and Saturday traffic volumes are approximately 12 percent and 11 percent lower than the peak month (June and July for Friday and May, June, and July for Saturday) volumes, respectively. To reflect the peak month conditions,the collected Friday and Saturday ATR data were increased by 12 percent and 11 percent,respectively. Analysis of the peak-period traffic counts indicates that the evening peak-hour occurs between 5 and 6 PM and the Saturday midday peak-hour occurs between 11 AM and 12 PM. It should be noted that the individual peak-hour volumes for each intersection were used to present a"worst- case"scenario. Pleasant Valley Road in the vicinity of the project site was estimated to carry approximately 9,280 vehicles per day (vpd) on a typical weekday and 8,930 vpd on Saturday during the peak month. Weekday evening peak hour traffic flow is approximately 9.0 percent of daily traffic flow. Similarly, Saturday midday peak hour traffic flow is approximately 7.5 percent of Saturday daily traffic volume. Accident Analysis The accident data for the study intersections were obtained from ConnDOT for the calendar years 2003 to 2005, to identify crash trends and/or safety deficiencies in the study area. Review of the accident data indicated that the Pleasant Valley Road intersection with I-84 westbound ramps experienced the most accidents during this time period, and most of the recorded accidents were angle or rear-end type accidents. No fatalities were observed during this time period. FUTURE CONDITIONS Background Traffic Growth To determine traffic growth in the study area, historic traffic count data collected by ConnDOT were reviewed. This data indicates that there has been a slight decrease in traffic volumes over the past several years. For the purpose of this study, a conservative (high) 2.0 percent per year compounded annual growth rate was used to account for general background traffic growth. Specific Development by Others Research was conducted to identify any specific background developments that would have an impact on the traffic operating conditions within the study area by the 2009 Build year. Discussions with the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester indicated there are several projects either approved or being constructed within 1 mile of the project site. Traffic associated with these developments is obtained from their respective traffic report and incorporated into the 2009 No-Build traffic volumes. GA4917reportATIAS 051807.doe 2 Site-Generated Traffic Volumes Traffic volumes expected to be generated by the proposed facility were forecast using trip-generation data from the Seventh Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual,' based on ITE Land Use Code(LUC) 813 and LUC 820. The proposed development consists of approximately 357,035 square foot (sf) of retail space. Based on ITE data, during the weekday evening peak hour, the site will generate 1,619 vph (785 vehicles entering and 834 vehicles exiting) with 1,533 vph new to the roadway system (742 vehicles entering and 791 vehicles exiting. During the Saturday midday peak hour, the site will generate approximately 2,164 vph (1,115 vehicles entering and 1,049 vehicles exiting) with 2,094 trips new to the roadway system (1,080 vehicles entering and 1,014 vehicles exiting). Other generated trips are pass-by trips on the existing roadway. ANALYSIS RESULTS Pleasant Valley Road at I-84 Westbound Ramps Under the 2007 Existing condition, this signalized intersection operates at an overall LOS C during the weekday evening peak hour and LOS D during the Saturday midday peak hour. Under the 2009 No-Build condition, this intersection would operate at an overall LOS D during the weekday evening peak hour and LOS E during the Saturday midday peak hour. Under the 2009 Build condition, the intersection would operate at an overall LOS F during both study peak periods. Recommendations are proposed to mitigate this intersection. Pleasant Valley Road at the Plaza at Buckland Hill Drive Under the 2007 Existing condition, this signalized intersection operates at an overall LOS C during both study peak periods. Under the 2009 No-Build condition, this intersection would operate at an overall LOS C during both study peak periods. Under the 2009 Build condition,the intersection would operate at an overall LOS F during both study peak periods. Recommendations are proposed to mitigate this intersection. Pleasant Valley Road at Croft Drive/Manchester Trail Under the 2007 Existing condition, both northbound and southbound movements operate at LOS B during both study peak periods at this unsignalized intersection. Under the 2009 No- Build condition, the northbound movements would operate at LOS C during both study peak periods, and the southbound movements at LOS B during both study peak periods. Under the 2009 Build condition, the northbound movements are expected to operate at LOS E during the weekday evening peak hour and LOS F during the Saturday midday peak hour. The southbound movements are expected to operate at LOS F during both study peak periods. Recommendations are proposed to mitigate this intersection. 'Trip Generation, Seventh Edition;Institute of Transportation Engineers;Washington,D.C.;2003. G:M917reports\TIAS 051807.doe 3 RECOMMENDATIONS Pleasant Valley Road at I-84 Westbound Ramps The eastbound approach is proposed to be reconstructed to provide one extra shared through and right turn lane. The northbound I-84 westbound off-ramp is proposed to add an exclusive left-turn lane. Signal timing and coordination offset should also be adjusted. Pleasant Valley Road at the Plaza at Buckland Hills Drive An exclusive right turn lane is proposed to be added to the westbound direction to accommodate the expected right turn volumes. The existing westbound outside shared/through and right-turn lane will be designated as a through lane. Signal timing and coordination offset should also be adjusted. Pleasant Valley Road at Croft Drive The unsignalized intersection is proposed to be signalized as part of the project. The existing pavement width of Manchester Trail can accommodate three lanes with two southbound exiting lanes and one northbound entering lane. Pavement markings on Manchester Trail are recommended to show one exclusive left turn lane and one shared through and right turn lane. It is recommended that the eastbound Pleasant Valley Road approach be widened to provide an exclusive left turn lane into the site. Signal timings at the intersection are proposed to be coordinated with the adjacent Buckland Hill Plaza Drive and I-84 westbound ramps intersections. In addition to the roadway/intersection mitigation measures, the following measures proposed should be incorporated on site: • Any vegetation or signs should be placed in such a way as to not exceed 24 inches in height so sight distance is not obstructed. • STOP signs should be installed and STOP bars be marked at the internal site drive intersections as appropriate,placing them behind any pedestrian crosswalks. CONCLUSIONS The roadways and intersections within the study area are expected to experience general traffic volume increases in the area due to the proposed development. With the recommended on-site and off-site improvements in place, the study intersections are not expected to experience significant delays as a result of the proposed development. �I GA4917\mpons\TIAS 051807.doc 4 INTRODUCTION VAI has conducted a TIAS to assess the traffic impacts associated with the proposed retail development to be located on the east side of Wheeler Road and south side of Smith Street in South Windsor, Connecticut. This study reviews access requirements, safety considerations, and identifies and analyzes existing traffic conditions and future traffic conditions with the proposed project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project site is located south of Smith Street and east of Wheeler Road. The site is bounded by several residential properties in the east, Smith Street in the north, the Manchester town line in the south, and Wheeler Road in the west. The proponent proposes to construct a 357,035 square foot (sf) retail development, including a 207,035 sf stand-alone building and 150,000 sf of separate retail space. Access to the site will be provided by two existing roadways. One is Manchester Trail which connects to Pleasant Valley Road in the north and across Croft Drive; the other is the Plaza at Buckland Hills West Drive which also connects to Pleasant Valley Road from the north. Figure 1 shows the site location in relation to the local roadway network. STUDY METHODOLOGY This study was prepared in general accordance with the State of Connecticut STC guidelines for the preparation of Traffic Impact Studies(TISs); and was conducted in three distinct stages. The first stage involved an assessment of existing traffic conditions in the study area and included an inventory of roadway geometrics, observations of traffic flow, and collection of daily and peak-period traffic counts. In the second stage of the study, future traffic conditions were projected and analyzed. Specific travel demands forecasts for the project were assessed along with future traffic demands due to expected traffic growth independent of the project. In accordance with state guidelines for the preparation of TISs, the Build Year of 2009 was analyzed. Consequently, two future conditions were analyzed: 2009 No-Build peak-month peak-hour condition without the proposed development and 2009 Build Year peak-month peak-hour condition. The traffic analysis conducted in stage two identifies existing or projected future roadway capacity, traffic safety, and site access issues. GA4917VeportATIAS 051807.doe 5 c� 1.; ,� �:�� �- •"�"�1 ram? l ,� �-- I %� ' �-' ,;'" J f ( ' o e ___- s _ 'f r r f; � rr• � I .,>� , 1 133 so � � c\ J r r' {siI -.�O\` ��`F� , \/`�,G"1� �- e 9 r • ;...t I fl 1 t � I f ! ./�;,,�`; ,r SITE e / r l ►' I ( �`, r C si 4 • i� i r: ) l 1t i dolt „r i WI is ' 1 •..�.y . ,. ,�� - f [ 1 r P 1 J 77 f _` A i 00. Site Location Map Planner- R:\4917\4917sim.dwg 5/16/2007 2:46:20 PM EDT Copyright.©2006 by VAI. All Rights Reserved. The third stage of the study presents and evaluates measures to address traffic and safety issues, if any,identified in stage two of the study. I 6 r,A4917Veports\T'M 051807.d- EXISTING CONDITIONS A comprehensive field inventory of trafficconditions consist dthe of anstudy inventory of existing�nducte oadway in November 2006. The field investigation s and land geometrics,traffic volumes,and operating The characteristics, area for the 1project waspsselected as posted eed tto contain use information within the study area. Y three major intersections in the vicinity of the project site through which project-related traffic would travel and are listed below. • Pleasant Valley Road at Croft Road/Manchester Trail • Pleasant Valley Road at the Plaza at Buckland Hill driveway • Pleasant Valley Road at I-84 westbound ramps GEOMETRY Roadways Pleasant Valley Road ction and Pleasant Valley Road is a two to four-lane arterial it connects Ma that is in Streeter in the west n the has a general east-west alignment m the y Town of South Windsor and Buckland hour in the study area. n the east in the Town East _Ea is of the of n Plaza at Posted speed limits are 30 miles p ( Buckland Hills Drive, Pleasant Valley Road carries a four-lane cross-section, with two travel lanes per direction. Extra turning lanes are provided at major intersections. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of the street. Land use along Pleasant Valley Road,within the study area, consists primarily of shopping plazas and vacant land. 7 GA4917keports\TIAS 051807.doc E Intersections Pleasant Valley Road at Croft Road/Manchester Trail Valley Road intersection with Croft Road/Manchester Trail is a four-leg The Pleasant Val y unsignalized intersection with stop controls on the Croft Road and Manchester Trail approaches. The westbound Pleasant Valley Road approach provides an exclusive left-turn lane, a shared through and right-turn lane, and approximate 2-foot wide shoulders on both sides.The eastbound Pleasant Valley Road approach provides an approximate 12-foot wide general purpose lane, a 6-foot wide marked median, and 2-foot wide shoulders on both sides. The northbound Croft Road approach provides a general purpose lane in each direction, separated by a double yellow center line and with no shoulders. The southbound Manchester Trail approach provides an approximate 39-foot wide unmarked lane with no shoulders. Crosswalks do not exist at the intersection. Land uses at the intersection consist of vacant land. Pleasant Valley Road at Buckland Hills Mall Drive/The Plaza at Buckland Hills Drive The Pleasant Valley Road intersection with Buckland Hills Mall Road/The Plaza at Buckland Hills Drive is a four-leg signalized intersection. The eastbound Pleasant Valley Road approach provides an approximate 12-foot wide exclusive left-turn lane, a 12-foot wide shared through and right-turn lane, and 2-foot wide shoulders. The westbound Pleasant Valley Road approach provides two 12-foot wide general purpose lanes and 2-foot wide shoulders. The northbound Buckland Hills Mall Drive provides one approximate 12-foot wide exclusive left-turn lane and ' one 14-foot wide shared through and right-turn lane. The southbound Buckland Hills Plaza Drive provides one two 12-foot wide exclusive left turn lane, one 12-foot wide through lane, and an approximate 16-foot wide channelized right-turn lane. Crosswalks are marked on the easterly and northerly legs. Signal timing consists of three phases, including one lead phase for the westbound Pleasant Valley movements, sPleasant Valley Road Land ues atthe directions, and one phase for the northbound and outhbound movements. intersection consist of a shopping plaza and several residential lots. Pleasant Valley Road at I-84 Westbound Ramps The Pleasant Valley Road intersection with I-84 westbound ramps is a four-leg signalized intersection. The eastbound Pleasant Valley Road approach provides one approximately 12- oot wide exclusive left turn lane, two 12-foot wide through lane, one 13-foot wide exclusive right turn lane, and 2-foot wide shoulders. The westbound Pleasant Valley Road approach provides two 12 to 13-foot wide exclusive left turn lanes,one 12-foot wide through lane,one 12-foot wide exclusive right turn lane, and 2-foot wide shoulder. The northbound I-84 westbound ramps approach provides one approximately 12-foot wide exclusive left-turn lane,one through lane,one exclusive right turn lane, and one 3-foot wide shoulder. The northerly approach is a one-way northbound roadway entering the Plaza at Buckland Hill. Crosswalks exist across the all intersecting approaches except the easterly Pleasant Hill Road approach. Signal timing consists of four phases, including one lead phase for the westbound and westbound Pleasant Valley Road movements, one phase for Pleasant Valley Road both directions, one fully-actuated pedestrian phase, and one phase for the northbound movements. Land uses at the intersection consist of several restaurants. 8 G:W917\reportATIAS 051807.doo EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES ' In order to determine existing traffic-volume demands and flow patterns within the study area, automatic traffic recorder(ATR) counts, manual turning movement counts (TMCs), and vehicle classification counts were conducted. All traffic counts were conducted on Friday and Saturday in November 2006, to capture time periods when public schools were still in session. The ATR count was conducted for a 48-hour period on Pleasant Valley Road,east of Croft Drive. Critical time periods were examined during Friday evening and Saturday midday periods. The peak commuter period TMCs were conducted in fifteen-minute intervals during Friday evening (4:00 to 6:00 PM)and Saturday midday(11:00 AM to 2:00 PM)peak periods. Seasonal Adjustments In order to evaluate the potential for seasonal fluctuation of traffic volumes within the study area, the Connecticut STC was contacted. Discussions indicated that according to most recent continuous count station data, the weekday average daily traffic (ADT) data for the month of November was approximately 12 percent lower than the peak month (June or July) data. The Saturday ADT data for the month of November was approximately 11 percent lower than the peak month(May, June,or July)data. For the purpose of this study,the collected Friday evening and Saturday midday TMC data as well as the weekday and Saturday ATR data were increased to these peak-month conditions,accordingly. In addition,to reflect the 2007 existing condition, a 2 percent growth rate was applied to the 2006 collected volumes. A summary of 2007 existing daily traffic volumes is provided in Table 1. The 2007 existing Friday evening and Saturday midday peak-month peak-hour traffic volumes are depicted on Figure 2. Table 1 EXISTING ROADWAY TRAFFIC-VOLUME SUMMARY Weekday Friday Evening Peak Hour Saturday Saturday Midday Peak Hour Daily Percent Daily Percent Volume Volume of Daily Predominant Volume Volume of Daily Predominant Location (vpd)a (vph)b Traffic' Flowd (vpd)' (vph) Traffic Flow Pleasant Valley Road,east of Croft 9,280 830 9.0 53.4%,EB 8,930 670 7.5 54.2%,EB Drive Source: ATR counts conducted by VAI,November 2006. 'Two-way daily traffic expressed in vehicles per day,adjusted to 2007 peak month condition. bTwo-way peak-hour volume expressed in vehicles per hour. `The percent of daily traffic that occurs during the peak hour. dEB=Eastbound. As presented in Table 1, daily traffic flow on Pleasant Valley Road is approximately 9,280 vehicles per day (vpd) on a typical peak-month Friday and 8,930 vpd on a peak-month Saturday. The Friday evening peak hour traffic flow is approximately 9.0 percent of the weekday daily total, while the Saturday midday peak hour traffic flow is approximately 7.5 percent of the Saturday daily total. Friday evening peak-hour has an approximately 53.4 percent eastbound directional flow and Saturday midday peak-hour directional flow is also to the east with approximately 54.2 percent. GA49171reports\nAS 051807.dm 9 ' BUCKLAND HILLS PLAZA MANCHESTER MAIL Q 3 w z 0 650 L2 0)(M to t66 308 o 4 367 j 4 362 ROAD �72 PLEASANT 1 r34 VALLEY i 301 *,► 47-5 21-� 426--► �I r 455—► to,q r 497--- a 14� C4 M 264Z d o z d a- 00 o> o af? f2< U� W BUCKLAND HILLS MALL BUCKLAND HILLS PLAZA MANCHESTER TRAIL r a 3 w z 0 4-0N TO A-87 L 753 Co 0 0 M a 4 306 4 358 PLEASANT 1�► �-227 VALLEY 14 re ROAD j-1139 367—► 4 Io C 331--► to r 584-0 W a 15 385� N z a 00 OM LL F�U� BUCKLAND HILLS Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. 2007 IAN Existing rarlsportato Engineers Flannels Peak Hour Traffic Volumes R:\4917\4917nt1.dwg 5/18/2.007 12.52:44 PM EDT _ Copyright©2007 by VAL NI Rights Reseriad. A review of the peak-period traffic counts indicates that the Friday evening peak-hour generally occurs between 5:00 and 6:00 PM and the Saturday midday peak hour occurs between 11:00 AM and 12:00 PM. The counts are provided in the Appendix of this report. MOTOR VEHICLE CRASH DATA Motor vehicle crash data at the study intersections were obtained from Connecticut Department of Transportation for the calendar years 2003 to 2005, to identify crash trends and/or safety deficiencies in the study area. Motor vehicle crash data for study locations was researched to determine the type of incident, severity, and roadway conditions for each incident. A summary of the data is provided in Table 2. As can be seen from Table 2, the study locations were recorded to experience a total of 16 accidents during the three-year period. Of them, 14 accidents were reported at the Pleasant Valley Road intersection with I-84 westbound Ramps, 1 accident at the Plaza at Buckland Hills Drive, and 1 accident at Croft Drive. It can also be seen from the table that 75 percent(12 accidents)of the recorded accidents were involved with property damage only. It should be noted that there were no fatal accidents reported during the review year period from 2003 to 2005. GA4917keports\TIAS 051807.doe 10 Table 2 ACCIDENT DATA SUMMARYa Pleasant Valley Road at The Plaza.at I-84 westbound Scenario Croft Drive Buckland Hills Ramps Year: 2003 0 0 2 2004 0 0 7 2005 1 1 5 Total 1 1 14 Averageb 0.33 0.33 4.67 Type: Angle/Sideswipe 0 0 6 Rear-End 0 0 6 Head-On 0 1 0 Hit Fixed Object 1 0 2 Other or Unknown 0 0 0 Total 1 1 14 Time of Day: Weekday(7:00-9:00 AM) 0 0 2 Weekday(4:00-6:00 PM) 0 0 2 Remainder of Day I 1 10 Total 1 1 14 Pavement Conditions Dry 1 0 6 Wet 0 0 5 Snow 0 0 3 Icy 0 1 0 Unknown 0 0 0 Total I 1 14 Day of Week: Monday through Friday 1 1 11 Saturday and Sundav 0 0 3 Total 1 1 14 Severity: Fatal Accident 0 0 0 Injury Type A' 0 1 0 Injury Type Bd 0 0 0 Injury Type C' 1 0 2 Propea Damage Only 0 0 12 Total 1 1 14 $Source: ConnDOT(Manchester)crash data,2003 through 2005. bAverage accidents over three-year period. 'Injury Type A: Incapacitating Injury as defined by ConnDOT. dInjury Type B: Noncapacitating Evident Injury as defined by ConnDOT. 'Injury Type C: Possible Non Evident Injury as defined by ConnDOT. GA4917\reports\TIAS 051807.doc 1 I FUTURE CONDITIONS To determine the impact of site-generated traffic volumes on the roadway network under future conditions, baseline traffic volumes in the study area were projected to the year 2009. Traffic volumes on the roadway network at that time, in the absence of the project(that is,the No-Build condition), would include existing traffic, new traffic due to general background traffic growth, and traffic related to specific development by others expected to be completed by 2009. Inclusion of these factors resulted in the development of 2009 No-Build traffic volumes. Anticipated site-generated traffic volumes were then superimposed upon these No-Build traffic-flow networks to develop the 2009 Build volume conditions. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC GROWTH Traffic growth is a function of the expected land development in the immediate area and the surrounding region. Several methods can be used to estimate this growth. A procedure frequently employed estimates an annual percentage increase in traffic growth and applies that percentage to all traffic volumes under study. The drawback to such a procedure is that some turning volumes may actually grow at either a higher or a lower rate at particular intersections. An alternative procedure identifies the location and type of planned development, estimates the traffic to be generated, and assigns it to the area roadway network. This procedure produces a more realistic estimate of growth for local traffic. However, the drawback of this procedure is that the potential growth in population and development external to the study area would not be accounted for in the traffic projections. To provide a conservative analysis framework,both procedures were used. Specific Development By Others Research was conducted in order to determine if there were any projects that would have an impact on future traffic volumes at the study area intersections. Based on the discussions with the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester,there are several development projects close to the study area and they are listed in the following. • The Evergreen Walk mixed-use development is to be located on Buckland Road north of Pleasant Valley Road in South Windsor. The project consists of a 250 room hotel, a 75,000 sf indoor recreation area, 650,000 sf of office space, and 375,000 sf of retail use G:W91Treports\MS 051807.doe 12 for a total of 1,230,000 sf. The project related trips were obtained from the traffic study2 for the project and incorporated into the 2009 No-Build traffic networks. • A proposed hotel development with 107 rooms is to be located off Pleasant Valley Road to the south of the study project site in Manchester,Connecticut.The project related trips were obtained from the traffic statement3 for the project and were incorporated into the ' 2009 No-Build traffic networks. • A proposed cinema expansion is located off Redstone Road east of Buckland Hill Street in Manchester, Connecticut. The project involves expanding the existing 89,900 sf, 16 screen Showcase Cinema by 16,059 sf, to provide 776 additional seats and 2 screens. The project related trips were obtained from the traffic study4 for the project and were incorporated into the 2009 No-Build traffic networks. • A BYs Discount Club is to be located off Tolland Turnpike in east side of proposed Buckland Street in Manchester, Connecticut. The project consists of 140,496 sf of development, including 119,598 sf discount club, 14,580 retail, 3,000 sf restaurant, 3,120 sf fast food restaurant with drive-through, and a 12 fuel position gas station. The project related trips were obtained from the traffic study'for the project and incorporated into the 2009 No-Build traffic networks. General Background Traffic Growth To determine traffic growth in the study area, historic traffic count data provided by STC were reviewed. This data indicates that there has been a slight decrease in traffic volumes over the past several years. For the purposes of this analysis, a 2.0 percent annual growth rate was selected. Therefore, a 2.0 percent per year compounded annual growth rate was used to account for general background traffic growth. The historical STC data is provided in the Appendix. Roadway Improvement Projects Manchester Public Works Department (DPW) was contacted to identify any roadway improvement projects along the Pleasant Valley Road in the general study area by the Build year of 2009. Discussions with the Manchester DPW indicated that a Buckland area transportation study is conducted which covers the Pleasant Valley Road corridor. The report is not completed at this time. Although mitigation measures are expected to be proposed in the report, it is believed that no mitigation actions are going to be implemented by the year 2009. For the purpose of this study,no planned roadway improvements are assumed at the study intersections. No-Build Traffic Volumes The 2009 No-Build peak-month peak-hour traffic-volume networks were developed by applying the 2.0 percent per year compounded annual background traffic growth rate to the existing peak- month peak-hour traffic volumes, and adding the site specific developments identified above. Figure 3 shows the 2009 No-Build weekday evening and Saturday midday peak-month peak-hour traffic-volume networks. 2 Traffic Impact Study,Proposed Evergreen Walk Mixed-use Development,South Windsor,Connecticut;F.A.Hesketh &Associates,Inc.;July 2001 3 Traffic Statement,Proposed Hotel Hampton Inn and Suites,Manchester,Connecticut;Close,Jensen and Miller,P.C,; April 2006 4 Traffic Impact and Access Study,Manchester,Connecticut;Greenman-Pedersen,Inc;August 2006 5 Traffic Impact Study,Proposed BJ's,Manchester,Connecticut;F.A.Hesketh&Associates,Inc.;February 2006 G:\4917\reports\TW 051807.doc 13 BUCKLAND HILLS PLAZA MANCHESTER I TRAIL 3 1 w z O N o t-2 to M rp7i f451 4-440 PLEASANT 1 J-46236 VALLEY 1 -,`2 ROAD r1643 31- t 21' 501-► 525--► a 593-w 14 N N 6Z -rl 298--j, rn 00 W O 0 o m< OfW w U� 3 BUCKLAND HILLS MALL BUCKLAND HILLS PLAZA MANCHESTER TRAIL r I w z z 0 `t 4-125 A-783 4-0 N M� 80 _ Q� •-408 1(� 4-8 ROAD 4-15 521 PLEASANT j r24 VALLEY *1505 29-- ,► * 34� � I 463--► T N 4 6-► I(W 736--► to Go 7--+ N 434- - o z �a 0 o> f2< U 0 BUCKLAND HILLS Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. 2009 No-Build Transportation Engineers & Planners Peak Hour Traffic Volumes R:\49M4917nt2.dwg 5/18/2007 12.•55:38 PIA FDT copyright 0 2007 by VAL NI Rights R"wvad. SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC The proposed facility consists of 357,035 sf of retail development. Of the total building size, approximately 207,035 sf will be used for a stand-alone retail store and 150,000 sf for a strip- type retail center. In order to estimate the number of trips that will be generated by the project, statistics published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual' for similar land uses were examined. For the purposes of this study, the ITE Land Use Codes (LUC) 813 and LUC 820 were used to forecast the generated vehicle trips. Using the independent variable, trips were projected for the proposed development and the results are ' presented in Table 3. As can be seen from Table 3, generated trips by the proposed development consist of new and pass-by trips. Pass-by trips are those trips made into the site by those motorists who are already on the roadway system adjacent to the site. They enter the site as an intermediate stop on their way to their respective primary destination. ConnDOT suggests a maximum pass-by rate of the lower of 20 percent of the site-generated traffic or 10 percent of the adjacent street traffic. In this case, 20 percent of the site traffic is higher than 10 percent of the adjacent street traffic. The overall effect of the pass-by trip phenomena is that the increases on traffic due to a project on the adjacent roadway system are reduced. Table 3 PROPOSED SITE TRIP-GENERATION SUMMARY Time Period/ Total Retail Total Retail Pass-By ' Direction Store Tripsa Center Trips b Trips' New Trips Weekday Daily 10,188 8,840 1,024 18,004 Weekday Evening: Entering 392 393 43 742 Exitiniz 409 425 43 791 ' Total 801 818 86 1,533 Saturday Daily 11,904 11,930 986 22,848 Saturday Midday: Entering 529 586 35 1,080 Exitin 508 541 35 1,014 Total 1,037 1,127 70 2,094 'Based on ITE LUC 813,trip rates,and 207,035 sf. bBased on ITE LUC 820,regression mode,and 150,000 sf. °10%adjacent roadway traffic assumed. ' As shown in Table 3, during the weekday evening peak hour, the site will generate approximately 1,533 new vehicles per hour (vph) (742 vehicles entering and 791 vehicles exiting). During the Saturday midday peak hour, the site will generate approximately ' 2,094 new vph(1,080 entering and 1,014 vehicles exiting). 'Trip Generation, Seventh Edition;Institute of Transportation Engineers;Washington,D.C.;2003. ' GA4917Veports\TIAS 051807.doc 14 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT ' The directional distribution of the site-generated trips to and from the proposed development is typically a function of population densities, areas of employment, existing traffic patterns at area intersections, and prevailing traffic conditions on area roadways. Considering the nature of the project, it was determined that the trip distribution will follow the existing roadway traffic patterns. Figure 4 illustrates the estimated trip distribution patterns for the proposed development. These patterns are shown in Table 4 as well. ' Table 4 TRIP-DISTRIBUTION SUMMARY Direction ' Roadway (To/From) Percent Pleasant Valley Road West 13 East(Entering) 65 East(Exiting) 35 I-84 Westbound Ramp South(Entering) 22 South(Exiting) 52 Total 100 ' FUTURE TRAFFIC VOLUMES—BUILD CONDITION In accordance with ConnDOT guidelines for the preparation of TISs, the 2009 Opening Year Build year condition was analyzed. The 2009 Opening Year Build year networks were developed by superimposing the traffic expected to be generated by the proposed development ' during the respective peak-hours onto the 2009 No-Build peak-month peak-hour traffic-volume networks. The weekday evening and Saturday midday trip assignment networks are graphically depicted on Figure 5. The 2009 Opening Year Build weekday evening and Saturday midday peak-month peak-hour traffic-volume networks are graphically depicted on Figure 6. A summary of peak-hour projected traffic-volume increases in the site proximity are shown in Table 5. As shown in Table 5,2009 Opening Year project-related traffic-volume increases in the vicinity of the site are anticipated to range from 18.7 to 27.6 percent, with vehicle increases ranging from 199 to 1,057 vph during the study peak periods. The highest increase in volume is expected on Pleasant Valley Road to the east of I-84 westbound ramps. G:4917\reports\TIAs 051807.doc 15 Trqffic Impact and Access Study-Proposed Development-South BUCKLAND HILLS ' MANCHESTER PLAZA TRAIL SITE 1 } 3 I w z 6 13% 5% PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD ' z z o°- N 35% LL 00' j 22%BUCKLAND HILLS 52% MALL Trip Distribution Summary Transportation Engineers Planners R:\4917\4917trip.dwg 5/18/2007 1:09:40 PM EDT Copyright 0 2007 by VAL NI Rights Reserved. SITE New Pass—By Total Trips Trips Trips Out 791 43 834 MANCHESTER Total t 533 86 1 619 BUCKLAND HILLS TRAIL PLAZA } a 3 I w z o N 121 a k_408 PLEASANT 4 4-37 VALLEY ♦—237 ROAD ♦-482 102., 271--► 277—+ _6—► 411� 0 Z ' 00 oa 0 Of U� 3 ' BUCKLAND HILLS MALL SITE New Pass—By Total ' Trips Trips Trips In 1,080 35 1,115 Out 1,014 35 1,049 MANCHESTER Total 2,094 70 2164 BUCKLAND HILLS ' TRAIL PLAZA I a 3 w z 0 C-4 In N fO M 4_390 r) 4--580 ' PLEASANT VALLEY �► f-36o ROAD 1 4r-_:� 350—► 355--* —5---► 527'7 fco l) N Z � o� w IFa of - U� 00 BUCKLAND HILLS Trip Assignment "Transportation Engineers& Planners R:\4917\4917b,1p1.dwg 5/18/2007 1:03.51 PM EDT Copyright©2007 by VAL MI Rtghts Reserved. BUCKLAND HILLS MANCHESTER SITE PLAZA ' TRAIL 1 } Q 3 i w Z O N 00 4-277 m o!2 k-501 4-676 N f-425 M •-288 �922 ' PLEASANT (► r36 VALLEY 1 ROAD 1643 133-4 495 * 1 - 7ss—f• 1 to 870 'Nl 1 -' 1 _ 0 Z Oa �-w 0000� 0 � m< Uo 3 BUCKLAND HILLS MALL I ' BUCKLAND HILLS I MANGHESTER SITE PLAZA TRAIL 1 r a ' z w z O .o N to4-390 N M O fi-�40 '�783 I 4-378 f--1223 PLEASANT �j� r24 VALLEY 1 re ROAD r1505 174--t ** 48,' * 34-4 458� Io c 766—i G i r 1091—► M 7-+ N 15Z 961--* M z Z Oa CoO� 0� inof BUCKLAND HILLS I Note: Imbalances exist due to numerous curb cuts and side streets that are not shown. 2009 Build IAN Transportation Engineers& Planners Peak Hour Traffic Volumes R:\4917\4917nt3.dw9 5/18/2007 1:0408 PM EDT Copyrlght©2007 by VAL NI Rights Reamed. ' Table 5 SUMMARY OF PEAK-HOUR TRAFFIC-VOLUME INCREASES8 2009 Traffic-Volume Percent Increase ' 2009 Opening Increase No-Build vs. Location/Peak Hour No-Build Year Build No-Build vs.Build Build 2009 Pleasant Valley Road, west of ' Croft Drive: Weekday Evening 1,062 1,261 199 18.7 Saturday Midday 984 1,256 272 27.6 Pleasant Valley Road, east of I- 84 Westbound Ramp: Weekday Evening 4,019 4,778 759 18.9 Saturday Midday 4,354 5,411 1,057 24.3 1-84 Westbound Ramp, south of Pleasant Valley Road: Weekday Evening 2,851 3,425 574 20.1 Saturday Midday 3,113 3,878 765 24.6 'In vehicles per hour. t t t ' GA4917Veports\T1AS 051807.doe 16 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS ANALYSIS Measuring existing and future traffic volumes quantifies traffic flow within the study area. To assess quality of flow, roadway capacity and vehicle queue analyses were conducted under Existing, No-Build, and Build traffic-volume conditions. Capacity analyses provide an indica- tion of how well the roadway facilities serve the traffic demands placed upon them, with vehicle queue analyses providing a secondary measure of the operational characteristics of an intersec- tion or section of roadway under study. ' METHODOLOGY Levels of Service ' A primary result of capacity analyses is the assignment of level of service to traffic facilities under various traffic-flow conditions. The concept of level of service is defined as a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream and their perception by motor- ists and/or passengers. A level-of-service definition provides an index to quality of traffic flow in terms of such factors as speed, travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort,convenience,and safety. Level of service (LOS) is defined in the Highway Capacity Manual7 by six levels. They are given letter designations from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F representing the worst. ' Since the level of service of a traffic facility is a function of the traffic flows placed upon it, such a facility may operate at a wide range of levels of service, depending on the time of day, day of week, or period of year. Tables 6 and 7 summarize the levels of service and delay criteria for signalized and unsignalized intersections,respectively. ' 7Transportation Research Board;Highway Capacity Manual;&h Edition,Washington,D.C.;2000. ' G:W917VWrts\TIAS 051807.dce 17 1 Table 6 LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONSa Average Control Delay Level of Service (Seconds Per Vehicle) A < 10.0 B 10.1 to 20.0 C 20.1 to 35.0 D 35.1 to 50.0 E 50.1 to 80.0 F >80.0 aSource: Highway Capacity Manual; Transportation Research Board;Washington,DC;2000;page 16-2. Table 7 LEVEL-OF-SERVICE CRITERIA FOR UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONSa 1 Average Control Delay Level of Service (Seconds Per Vehicle) A <10.0 B 10.1 to 15.0 C 15.1 to 25.0 D 25.1 to 35.0 E 35.1 to 50.0 F +50.0 aSource: Highway Capacity Manual; Transportation Research Board;Washington,DC;2000;page 17-2. ANALYSIS RESULTS 1 Level-of-service analyses were conducted during the weekday evening and Saturday midday peak-hours for 2007 Existing, 2009 No-Build, and 2009 Build conditions for the intersections within the study area. The intersection capacity was analyzed using Synchro software (version 6). Synchro software is based on Highway Capacity Manual calculation methodology. The intersection analysis results are summarized in Table 8, with detailed calculation sheets presented in the Appendix. The following is a summary of level-of-service analyses for the intersections within the study area. 1 G\491'NeportAT[AS 051807.doe 18 ' Table 8 INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE SUMMARY Signalized 2007 Existing 2009 No-Build 2009 Build ' Intersection/Peak Hour V/C' Delayb LOS' V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay LOS Pleasant Valley Road at I-84 Westbound Ramp Weekday Evening 0.65 29.3 C 0.87 48.2 D 1.08 >100 F Saturday Midday 0.71 37.8 D 0.94 64.6 E 1.30 >100 F Pleasant Valley Road at the Plaza at Buckland Hill Drive Weekday Evening 0.45 26.7 C 0.54 28.6 C 0.85 90.6 F Saturday Midday 0.41 27.2 C 0.49 28.5 C 1.11 >100 F Unsignalized Intersection/ 2007 Existing 2009 No-Build 2009 Build Critical Movement/Peak Hour Demandd Delay LOS Demand Delay LOS Demand Delay LOS Pleasant Valley Road at Croft Drive NB Croft Drive Weekday Evening: 29 13.6 B 30 16.4 C 30 45.3 E Saturday Midday: 27 15.0 B 28 17.9 C 28 >100 F ' SB Manchester Trail Weekday Evening: 50 11.7 B 53 13.6 B 478 NCe F Saturday Midday: 67 11.0 B 71 12.2 B 588 NC F ' BVolume to capacity. bDelay in seconds per vehicle. `Level of service. ' dDemand in vehicles per hour. eNC=Not Calculated.Delay was not calculated by Synchro program for this condition. ' Pleasant Valley Road at I-84 Westbound Rams Under the 2007 Existing condition, this signalized intersection operates at an overall LOS C during the weekday evening peak hour and LOS D during the Saturday midday peak hour. Uri er the 2009 No-Build condition, this intersection would operate at an overall LOS D during the weekday evening peak hour and LOS E during the Saturday midday peak hour. Under the 2009 Build condition,the intersection would operate at an overall LOS F during both study peak ' periods. Pleasant Valley Road at the Plaza at Buckland Hill Drive Under the 2007 Existing condition, this signalized intersection operates at an overall LOS C during both study peak periods. Under the 2009 No-Build condition, this intersection would ' operate at an overall LOS C during both time periods studied. Under the 2009 Build condition, the intersection would operate at an overall LOS F during both study peak periods. ' Pleasant Valley Road at Croft Drive/Manchester Trail Under the 2007 Existing condition, both northbound and southbound movements operate at LOS B during both study peak periods at this unsignalized intersection. Under the ' GA4917keports\TIAS 051807.doc 19 ' 2009 No-Build condition,the northbound movements would operate at LOS C during both study peak periods, and the southbound movements at LOS B during both study peak periods. Under ' the 2009 Build condition, the northbound movements are expected to operate at LOS E during the weekday evening peak hour and LOS F during the Saturday midday peak hour. The southbound movements are expected to operate at LOS F during both study peak periods. QUEUE ANALYSIS ' Queues were examined at the critical Pleasant Valley Road intersections with the Plaza at Buckland Hills Drive and Manchester Trails (site driveway). The analysis results are ' summarized in Table 9. Table 9 SUMMARY OF VEHICLE QUEUE ANALYSIS a,b ' 2009 Build Queue Turning Lane 95"'Queue Time Period/Approach Avg./95t` Storage Length Over Capacity Pleasant Valley Road at Plaza Drive Weekday Evening: Pleasant Valley Road EB LT 1/2 4 No ' Pleasant Valley Road EB TH/RT 33/45 44 Yes Pleasant Valley Road WB LT/TH/RT 18/24 38 No Distribution Center Drive NB LT 0/1 13 No Distribution Center Drive NB TH/RT 1/3 13 No ' Plaza Drive SB LT 12/15 15 No Plaza Drive SB TH/RT 1/2 15 No Saturday Midday: ' Pleasant Valley Road EB LT 1/2 4 No Pleasant Valley Road EB TH/RT 36/47 44 Yes Pleasant Valley Road WB LT/TH/RT 40/60 38 Yes Distribution Center Drive NB LT 0/1 13 No Distribution Center Drive NB TH/RT 0/1 13 No Plaza Drive SB LT 16/19 15 Yes Plaza Drive SB TH/RT 1/2 15 No Pleasant Valley Road at Croft Drive` Manchester Trail SB LT/TH/RT Weekday Evening: Err 10 Yes Saturday Midday: Err 10 Yes aIn vehicles. bFrom Synchro queue output. ' `Only 95`h queues are available. EB = eastbound; WB = westbound; NB = northbound; SB = southbound; LT = left-turn; TH=through movement;RT=right-turn. ' G:W917VeportsNUAS 051807.doc 20 MMITIGATION As can be seen from Tables 8 and 9, all three study intersections are expected to experience increasing delays with decreased levels of service as a result of future development. To accommodate the project related traffic and vehicle queues, mitigation measures are proposed at the three intersections and the improved level of service analysis are summarized in Table 10 and presented below. The detailed analysis sheets are attached in the Appendix. Pleasant Valley Road at I-84 Westbound Ramps The eastbound approach is proposed to be reconstructed to provide one extra shared through and right turn lane. The northbound I-84 westbound off-ramp is proposed to add an exclusive left-turn lane. Signal timing and coordination off-set should also be adjusted. With the proposed mitigation measures, the intersection is expected to have an overall LOS D during both the weekday evening peak hour and Saturday midday peak hour. In addition, all movements are expected to operate at LOS E or better during the study peak periods. Pleasant Valley Road at the Plaza at Buckland Hills Drive An exclusive right turn lane is proposed to be added to the westbound direction to accommodate the expected large right turn volumes. The westbound outside shared through and right turn lane will be designated as a through lane. Signal timing and coordination off-set should also be adjusted. With the proposed mitigation measures, the intersection is expected to have an overall LOS C during the weekday evening peak hour and LOS D during the Saturday midday peak hour. In addition,all movements are expected to operate at LOS E or better during the study peak periods. Pleasant Valley Road at Croft Drive The unsignalized intersection is proposed to be signalized as part of the project. The existing pavement width of Manchester Trail could accommodate three lanes with two sorthbound exiting lanes and one northbound entering lane. Pavement marking on Manchester Trail is recommended to show one exclusive left turn lane and one shared through and right turn lane. The eastbound Pleasant Valley Road is recommended to add an exclusive left turn lane into the site. Signal timings at the intersection is proposed to coordinate with the adjacent Buckland Hill Plaza Drive and 1-84 westbound ramps intersections. With the proposed mitigation measures, the intersection is expected to have an overall LOS C during the weekday evening peak hour and the Saturday midday peak hour. In addition, all movements are expected to operate at LOS E or better during the study peak periods. GA4917\rgorts\T1AS 051807.doc 21 Table 10 MITIGATED INTERSECTION LEVEL-OF-SERVICE SUMMARY 2009 Build with 2009 No-Build 2009 Build Proposed Improvements Intersection/Peak Hour V/C' Delayb LOS' V/C Delay LOS V/C Delay_ LOS Pleasant Valley Road at I-84 Westbound Ramps Weekday Evening 0.87 48.2 D 1.08 >100 F 0.96 37.9 D Saturday Midday 0.94 64.4 E 1.30 >100 F 0.99 47.1 D Pleasant Valley Road at the Plaza at Buckland Hills Drive Weekday Evening 0.54 28.6 C 0.85 90.6 F 0.83 30.2 C Saturday Midday 0.49 28.5 C 1.11 >100 F 0.90 39.4 C Pleasant Valley Road at Croft Drive/Manchester Traild Weekday Evening -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.78 22.2 C Saturday Midday -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.85 28.0 C aVolume to capacity. 6Delay in seconds per vehicle. `Level of service. Trisignalized under future conditions without mitigation. GA49171reports\TIAS 051807.doe 22 FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS ' 55.95 ACRES SMITH STREET ' SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT Realty Concepts, Inc. REALTY CONCEPTS INC Counselors-Investment Managers-Appraisers ' 2514 Boston Post Road,Unit 9C•Guilford,CT 06437• t(203)453-1117• f(203)458-2689 • stang@realtyconcepts.net May 21, 2007 Atty. Christopher J. Smith Shipman & Goodwin, LLC One Constitution Plaza Hartford, CT 06103-1919 ' RE: Smith Street 55.95 Acres Proposed 330,000 Sq/Ft ' Retail Development South Windsor, CT Dear Atty. Smith, ' At your request, I have reviewed the proposed development submitted by the applicant, Simon Property Group, Inc., for the above referenced property to the South Windsor, CT Planning & ' Zoning Commission. The purpose of this analysis is to determine the impact of the proposed 330,000 square foot Retail Complex Development on municipal services. This is a general consulting report and is not a consulting appraisal report or an appraisal report as defined under the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). Pertinent current town records were examined including zoning regulations, Plan of ' Development, site development plans prepared by applicant, Simon Property Group, traffic reports by Vanasse & Associates, Inc. of Andover, MA dated May 2007 and other pertinent data. The "Proposed development of the site does not propose any direct impact to any ' jurisdictional wetlands or watercourses" based on a wetlands assessment report by ENSR Corporation of Willington, CT dated May 19, 2007, and therefore does not meet the criteria as a "significant impact activity". The proposed development meets the 2002 South Windsor Plan of ' Development and is within the requirements of the South Windsor Planning and Zoning Regulations and is subject to approval by the South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission. The purpose of this analysis is to determine the fiscal impact of the proposed 350,000+/- ' square foot retail development, if approved, on the municipal service and school system of the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut as of May 21, 2007. Realty Concepts, Inc. Atty. Christopher J. Smith May 21, 2007 ' 1 have reviewed the proposed development of the 55.95 site as asquare foot retail center as proposed by the applicant. I have reviewed the current South Windsor real estate ' zoning regulations, 2002 Town Plan of Development and real estate market conditions in South Windsor, Connecticut, The Traffic Report by Vanasse & Associates, Inc. and the Wetlands Assessment Report by ENSR Corporation. All these factors, including a review of the Town of ' South Windsor 2006-2007 municipal and school budgets, were considered within this analysis in determining the impact of the proposed development. The above referenced reports are under separate cover and are an integral part of this analysis and must be used in ' conjunction with this analysis. Following is a summary of my findings as of May 21, 2007: 1) The proposed development should have a positive fiscal impact on the Town of ' South Windsor, Connecticut with minimal impact on the demand for town services, in particular, no impact on the school system. ' 2) An increase in property tax revenue can be anticipated due to the proposed development and can be favorably anticipated by the Town of South Windsor. This will lessen the tax impact on the residential property tax base. ' 3) The proposed retail development is in concert with the Town of South Windsor Plan of Development and also with other current developments in the immediate area of the subject property. ' 4) The Town of South Windsor has anticipated the growth of commercial development in the Town. This foresight has placed no additional demand on the ' current municipal public safety staff, equipment or budget. Attached please find the method of analysis and a summary of my findings. Respectfully, L� Stanley A. Gniazdow i, CR IM, FRICS ' Consultant CT Certified General Appraiser No. 237 Expires April 30, 2008 ' Enclosures 27111 Realty Concepts, Inc. ' PURPOSE OF THE ANALYSIS ' The purpose of this analysis is to determine the fiscal impact of the proposed 330,000 square foot retail development, if approved, on the municipal service and school system of the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut as of May 21, 2007. ' The objective of this assignment is to undertake the investigation and analyses required to reach supportable conclusions regarding physical and financial impact due to the proposed ' development of the subject property. ' MARKET VALUE DEFINED ' The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently and knowledgeably, and assuming the price is not affected by undue stimulus. Implicit in this definition is the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of title from ' seller to buyer under conditions whereby; • Buyer and seller are typically motivated; ' • Both parties are well informed or well advised, and acting in what they consider their own best interests; ' • A reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market; ' . Payment is made in terms of cash in U. S. dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto; and ' • The price represents the normal consideration for the property sold/rented unaffected by special or creative financing or sales/rental concessions granted by anyone associated with the sale/rent. Realty Concepts, Inc. ' DEFINITIONS ' Source: The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Second Edition; published by The American Institute of Real Estate Appraisers, 1989 ' Fee Simple Interest ' Absolute ownership unencumbered by any other interest or estate, subject only to the four (4) powers of government. Mortgaged Fee Interest ' A fee simple estate or leased fee estate subject to a mortgage. ' Infrastructure 1) In planning, used to describe services and facilities that are integral parts of urban community life. 2) In a group of buildings or a complex, the core of development that is the source of all utilities and support services, e.g., gas and electric lines, streets, curbs. ' North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Employment by sector ' SCOPE OF THE ANALYSIS The scope of this assignment is to develop within a reasonable degree of probability, based on ' current and historical data and economic conditions, the impact the proposed project will have on the Town of South Windsor, CT municipal and school budgets. The investigations, activities and tasks completed during this analysis included, but were not limited to, the following: ' • The property and surrounding area was lasted inspected on May 18, 2007. • Pertinent public records were examined and analyzed as well as The Site to do Business demographic services. • A survey and analysis of the South Windsor, Connecticut real estate market was conducted. This investigation included discussions with real estate professionals in the area and review of on line proprietary data bases. ' • Public records of the Town of South Windsor were examined. • Preliminary development plans, wetlands assessment and traffic study were examined. ' • Financing considerations were discussed with other real estate appraisers, several commercial real estate lending officers, and other professionals in the real estate financial tcommunity. Realty Concepts, Inc. 2 ' COMMUNITY DATA South Windsor is an incorporated town in north central Connecticut, situated west of Hartford and the Connecticut River. Located on the ' eastern border of Hartford County, it is flanked to the west by the Tolland County towns of Ellington and Vernon, to the north by East Windsor, to the east by Windsor and to the south by East Hartford and Manchester. ' South Windsor, Connecticut CERC Town Profile 2007 Town Hall Belongs to 1540 Sullivan Avenue Hartford County South Windsor,CT 06074 Hartford Labor Market Area (860)644-2511 Capitol Area Economic Dev.Region ted in 1945 Capitol Region Planning Area 19rO1pen Demographics ' Population(2006) Race&thnictty (2006) Town County State Town County State White 21,821 652,661 2,817,144 1990 22,090 851783 3,287116 Black 1,091 107,127 336,250 2000 24,412 857:183 3,405:565 Asian Pacific 1,224 29,164 117,614 2006 24,945 881,556 3,551,413 Native Ainerican 29 1,149 5,713 ' 2011 25,355 900,748 3,667,369 Other/Multi-Race 780 91,455 274,692 106=11 Growth/Yr 0.3% 0.4% 0.6% Hispanic(any race) 725 117,359 403,194 Land Area(sq.miles) 28 735 5,009 Poverty Rate(1999) 1.8% 9.3% 7.9% Pop./Sq.Mile(2006) 892 1,199 709 Educational Attainment(2000) ' Median Age(2006) 41 40 39 Persons Age 25 or Older Tarrn % State . % Households(2006) 9,093 344,097 1,343,259 High School Graduate 3,776 23% 653,300 28% Med HH Inc.(2006) $84,993 $57,927 $61,879 Some College 4,460 27% 553,667 24% Bachelors or More 6,876 42% 720,994 31% Age Distribution(2006) ' 0-4 S-17 I8-24 25-49 50-64 6S+ Total Male 736 3% 2,509 10% 791 3% 4,258 17% 2,486 10% 1,251 5% 12,031 Female 727 3% 2,368 9% 796 3% 4,687 19% 2,577 10% 1,759 7% 12,914 County Total 52,347 6% 151,465 17% 80,615 9% 303.026 34% 166.333 19% 127.770 14% 881,556 State Total 212,473 6% 615,114 17% 327,812 9% 1,240,233 35% 666,797 19% 488,984 14% 3,551,413 Economics %of Business Profile(2005) %of Total Top Five Grand List(2004) Amount Net Sector Firms Employment Evergreen Walk Lifestyle Ctr(Shoppes $22,617,400 1.1% Connecticut Light&Power Co. $15.506,160 0.8% ' Agriculture 3.7% 1.2% May Company $15.159,495 0.8% Const.and Mining 15.1% 8.0% Town Center of South Windsor $13,312,810 0.7% Manufacturing 9.0% 31.4% Gerber Companies $12,043,425 0.6% Trans.and Utilities 3.7% 6.2% Net Grand List(2004) $2,008,658,573 Trade 20.8% 21.49/o Top Five Major Employers(2006) ' Finance,Ins.and 6.8% 3.9% Towu of South Windsor Filenes Real Estate DST Outpost Gerber Scientific Services 37.2% 26.6% International Fuel Cells Government 3.9% 1.3% Town State Retail Sales(2002) $555,054,127 $105,014,859,890 All Outlets Education 2004-2005 School Year Town State Connecticut Mastery Test Percent Above Goal Grade 4 Grade 6 Grade 8 Total Town School Enrollment 5,151 563,216 Town State Town State Town State Most public school students in South Windsor attend South Windsor Reading 68 53 84 60 75 65 ' School District,which has 5.073 students. Math 74 57 87 61 72 56 Writing 74 63 83 61 75 61 For more education data Students per Computer Town State Average Class Size Average SAT Score ' please see; Elementary: 8.0 4.0 Grade K 20.0 Grade 2 21.0 Town State httptl/www.state.et.us/sde/ Middle: 4.0 3.0 Grade 5 23.0 Grade 7 19.0 Verbal 522 508 Secondary: 4.5 3.2 High School 19.7 Math 549 508 Town Profiles April,2007. Page 1 turvw.CLrACOtt7 No mpresentation or warranties,erpmsred or implied,are given regarding the ocmrracy of this b omanon. Realty Concepts, Inc. 3 South Windsor CC(!= start hereConnecticut RZCC*o 0 0 Government Government Form:Council-Manager Annual Debt Service(2005) $3,903,703 ' 201 As%of Expenditures 5.4% Total Revenue 2005 $76,922,700 Total Expenditures(2005) $49,919,40 ( ) Eq.Net Grand List(2003) $3,274,707,719 Tax Revenue $61,419,824 Education $22,927,796 Per Capita $132,194 Non-tax Revenue $15,502,876 �� $22,927,796 As%of State Average 92% ' Intergovernmental $13,423,560 Total Indebtness(2005) $30,151,293 Date of Last Revaluation(2005) 2002 Per Capita Tax(2005) $2,464 As%of Expenditures 41.4% Moody's Bond Rating(2005) Aa3 As%of State Average 124.0% Per Capita $1,210 Actual Mill Rate(2005) 31.23 ' As%of State Average 62.7% Equalized Mill Rate(2005) 18.71 %of Grand List Cotrr/ind(2003) 15.4% Flousing/Real Estate ' Housing Stock(2005) Town County State Owner Occupied Dwellings(2000) 7,936 215,253 869,742 Existing Units(total) 9,672 363,495 1,431,569 As%Total Dwellings 87% 61% 63% %Single Unit 83.69/o 61.1% 64.7% Subsidize Housing(2001) 268 45,714 148,930 ' New Permits Auth.(2005) 68 2,487 11,885 Distribution of House Sales(2006) Town County State As%Existing Units 0.70% 0.68% 0.83% Number of Sales Demolitions(2005) 142 1,386 Less than$100,000 2 360 1,332 House Sales(2006) 197 9,506 37,483 $100,000-S199,999 11 2,842 7,461 ' Median Price $285,000 $234,900 $275,000 $200,000-$299,999 97 3,582 11,804 Built Pre 1950 share(2000) 8.5% 30.2% 31.5% $300,000-$399,999 60 1,505 6,393 $400,000 or More 27 1,217 10,493 Labor Force ' Place of Residence Commuters(2000) (2005) Town County State Commuters into Town from: Town Residents Commuting to: Labor Force 14,272 443,552 1,817,032 South Windsor 2,327 Hartford 2,619 ' Employed 13,752 419,656 1,727,934 Manchester 931 South Windsor 2,327 Unemployed 520 23,896 89,098 East Hartford 793 Manchester 1,255 Unemployment Rate 3.6% 5.4% 4.9% Enfield 606 East Hartford 974 Place of Work Hartford 605 Windsor 634 ' (2005) Vernon 591 Bloomfield 599 Total Employment 11,582 485,691 1,643,963 Ellington 410 Vernon 490 '92-V5 Growth 0.8% 0.0°h 0.60/0 East Windsor 354 West Hartford 335 AAGR West Hartford 312 Glastonbury 291 ' Manufacturing 3,210 n.a. 195,400 Glastonbury 295 Enfield 265 Quality of Life Residential Utilities ' Town State Library(2001) Town Electric Provider Banks(2003) 11 1,226 Total Volumes 119,917 Connecticut Light&Power Lodging(1998) 0 756 Circulation Per Capita 6.7 (800)286-2000 Day Care Facilities(1999) 18 1,721 Gas Provider ' Infant Mortality Rate Distance to Major Cities Miles Yankee Gas Company Per 1,000 births(2001) no caic 4.5 Hartford 8 (800)989-0900 Crime Rate(1999) Boston 87 Water Provider Per 1,000 Residents 12 33 New York City 108 Connecticut Water Company ' %Open Land(1990) 50.0% 68.7% providence 59 (800)286-5700 Town County Cable Provider Hospitals(1999) 0 9 Cox Communications CT,Inc. ' Total Beds 0 2,642 800-955-9515 Town Profiles April,2007.page 2 www.ceraeom No rwpresentation or warranties apnesaed or implied,are given regarding the accuracy of this information ' Realty Concepts, Inc. 4 Location Man Ltp P oo� SUBJECT aRakt�. P O SM�� Baja Fresh M. �7 p 4 dl 10 i f UII Olive Garden Italian � estauraM f r,� AaWfAolobins dW bBar de f� dendlys O Oardan ANetAM ST PAS G1L Sp,yµkNA `-'T oY' �O Data use subject to license. ®DeLmm.XMw95.0Professional. o doo loon wvvw.deli me.com MN(14.3 Wj Dale Zoom 14.0 Realty Concepts, Inc. 5 } Yf k ¢��..f } �,, �•. �}. �` yy � fit"` `:. sR-I '. _ �r�'+�'-.. � i�F f`t t •. ,. P ik k � xtt y ts�>�s - ilk y �k • •j '7 7ra fX ii� 'a 1. 7r.,,e/ i 1� � .^ 4 .�` * r �� Win• �,f � 'res: p. r^` z-;� ��,� :.y; Cif s ^�~'r ��'a,�'+_; -�'►�l ' �'�• ,,,;. ion. ,� ;� �• �,�,� �~—. x�. `-� A ry1,, Arr y tMJ�u � . s Y. wr f :r r es i :• �' �'' "3,^r+L..'V zz r n^ phi` y Me�'�*�y.,, "t. �. .. ►. �R. '� '•... ' . - � - r�r ' ,y _ ' ;'� "�r^ �`s'r_ 'rta'�t {,��'k o< �: °:' T � � � a.�'.' yt� � ,� n i 4 j a. �yp,l .r M m f 4 .MN�'^'*� �:;.t !`�.y• ,h;. y� ,'�l' -ter f F ,j2,r .}• .� +"Ry' , x ^mew �} t� � � +`A s� v+'.z, .,y:.. e go Image O 2007 19'cn of le 0 o yw �2007 Euiopa Teohnolo gs •. Pointer 41'48 26,56'N 72-33'40.22"4N elev 741 ft ;;;;1.�.,",. j § Stfeamin9u����.�I�I��a,.100%' 'nB� E alt 708 1l Q ' b ' 'Y , • , 1 d 1 1 W-ToIrld . i • . �► . wsa 5 -.- +1y •,.,,• R�l ���"` ./'�`-.'"yyr a�11� ,, r ,. .� I1. P•: -Il• 1 r.ur ��l' r �• !.,�t.1.�� ♦♦ ",►1.`_.';. ��"""```���`�rI1 f-.� -yam;' 'a ,�� PI 1 .,��' o r•�..'���nf� �/r; .r . �♦ ~, � f AS o NOR / ~' ♦i '� MCI �l Tn`,� �. ': .� !► •� `ram • c t.�•:I'; r`a!ram �' �. `,.: ♦ �' ,� +-'~ =! ��• c r ; q, ;i • •mac '� t j�`�ti * :�. - - tIli x4l ' Town Plan of development (Continued) The subject property is within the Economic Development Area earmarked for commercial ' development. The proposed development conforms to the 2002 South Windsor Plan of Development and is within its goal of 40% commercial development for the town. The current commercial development is about 21% according to town officials. The plan states the following: ' Economic Development Areas Existing commercial and industrial areas along Route 5, Sullivan Avenue, the I- ' 291 corridor, and Buckland Road form the nucleus of the Economic Development areas. These areas are characterized by a mix of older and newer tcommercial/industrial buildings and are generally serviced by utilities and arterial streets. Some of the older areas along Route 5 and Sullivan Avenue are in need tSouth Windsor Plan of Conservation and Development 13 ' of rehabilitation and redevelopment. The most appropriate uses are and will continue to be commercial and industrial uses that are in conformance with the Guiding Principles and Objectives of this Plan. Mixed uses, designed to replicate ' a more traditional way of life, may be appropriate in some areas such as the Buckland Road Gateway Development Zone. Within existing industrial zones, ' limited commercial uses to serve the industrial uses (such as restaurants, banks) may be appropriate. = r- Low ' I Land,Uaea +�. � /` -�-�(n�,•-� / r , LandRa TM �onal �r-• .�- �� • �! \ y E r D�"' i Subject PLAN OF CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED LAND USE SOUTH WMXM,CONNECTOR ' 0 t 4 wre.wwrr�w,o�wr Meg Realty Concepts, Inc. 9 �c r T $.fir MAP & PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBJECT South Windsor Town Line �-u f Manchester Town Line Realty Concepts, Inc. 12 ' PROPOSED PROJECT ' The 55.95 acres is proposed to be developed with about 330,000 square feet of single story retail in 3 buildings. The units will average about 2,500+/-square feet for the satellite stores and 50,000 to about 125,000 square feet for the anchor tenants. Tenancy has not been determined at the writing of this report. The site will be improved with off street parking (2,800+/- spaces). The site is privately owned. Therefore, all the roads, street lighting, trash removal and ground care will be paid by, and be the responsibility of, the owner after completion of the development. The development will be of superior quality and in concert with the architecture and character of South Windsor and the area. Access to the site will be through an existing entry from the existing retail center to the south. ' TRAFFIC The traffic report by Vanasse & Associates, Inc. of Andover, MA dated May 2007 indicated the ' roadways and intersections within the study area are expected to experience general traffic volume increases in the area due to the proposed development. With the recommended on- site and off-site improvements recommended within their report in place, the study intersections are not expected to experience significant delays as a result of the proposed development. MANAGEMENT ' The success and value added components for the proposed development is the management which is controlled by the developer who is recognized as leader in retail development and ' management. The owner poses superior experience and management skills. The owner will have central management that affords rules and regulation and enforcement since it is a private development. Most private developments have rules and regulations that municipalities do not have, or can not enforce, that add value to the complex. DEVELOPMENTIMPACT ' The consultant has analyzed the impact of the proposed 330,000+/- square foot retail development on municipal services and tax revenue. The consultant has based the following ' analysis on the following data: DEVELOPMENT VALUE-COST Development costs are based on information provided by the applicant and verified by the consultant. Construction cost per square foot for the shell including tenant improvements is estimated to be about $120.00 per square foot. Land value including site improvements is estimated to be about $200,000 per acre. Supporting land sales data can be found in the addenda of this report. COST TO DEVELOP Site: $200,000 x 55.95 Acres = $11,190,000 Building Cost&TI: 330,000 s/f x $120.00 s/f = $39,600,000 Estimated Project Value = $50,790,000 ' Via Cost Approach SAY: $51,000,000 Realty Concepts, Inc. 13 ' INCOME APPROACH TO VALUE ' The Income Approach to Value has been included in this analysis and is considered to be an approach that would be given consideration by the typical Municipal Assessor in Connecticut to estimate the value for ad valorem taxes for the subject property under today's market conditions. The capitalization method used in this analysis report is described as follows: Direct Capitalization Direct Capitalization is a method used to convert an estimate of a single year's income expectancy, or an annual average of several years' income expectancies, into an indication of value in one direct step -- either by dividing ' the income estimate by an appropriate income rate or by multiplying the income estimate by an appropriate factor. Direct capitalization does not explicitly differentiate between the return on and return of capital because investor ' assumptions are not specified. Direct capitalization has the advantage of simplicity, but its primary limitation is that it does not directly address profitability as a determinant of value, and only focuses on momentary income, which is gml ' one of the future benefits of ownership. ' Subject Property The site will be improved with 330,000+/- square feet of retail buildings in three free standing buildings and 2,800 +/- paved parking spaces and landscaping as of the date of this analysis. ' Estimated Market Rent After reviewing the current market, information provided by the applicant, and the Net Operating ' Income data on the following page; and considering the location of the subject property; condition and layout of the buildings, competitive space available, and the general real estate market conditions at this time, it is my opinion that the conservative estimated market rental ' rate for the subject property is $14.00 s/f on a pure net plus CAM basis, and is the estimated rent the South Windsor Town Assessor may reflect as current market rent for the subject property. Therefore; $14.00 per square foot pure net represents market rent for the subject ' property. Estimation of Vacancy and Collection Loss ' As of the effective date of this analysis, vacancy for buildings of this type averaged around 3% to 15%. In estimating a stabilized vacancy rate, the location is considered to contribute to good market appeal. Having considered all these factors, a conservative stabilized vacancy rate of ' 3%is estimated for the subject property. Expenses ' Since the subject property is leased on a pure net basis, which means all operating expenses are passed through to the tenants, no expenses will be listed since they offset by the CAM ' charges. Realty Concepts, Inc. 14 INCOME APPROACH TO VALUE(continued) ' ALL FIGURES ARE ANNUAL 2007 $/So Ft Total POTENTIAL RENTAL INCOME ' Base rent 330,000 s/f 14.00 4,620,000 Base rent from vacant space 0.00 0.00 Percentage rent(plus base) 0.00 0.00 ' Percentage rent 0.00 0.00 Common area maintenance 0.00 0.00 Common area maintenance from vacant space 0.00 0.00 Real estate taxes 0.00 0.00 Real estate taxes from vacant space 0.00 0.00 ' Marketing 0.00 0.00 Total Rental 14.00 4,620,000 Plus: Other Income(affected by vacancy) ' Less: Vacancy&Cr.Losses 3% (0.42) (138,600) EFFECTIVE RENTAL INCOME 13.58 4,481,400 Plus: Other Income(not affected by vacancy) 0.00 0.00 GROSS OPERATING INCOME 13.58 4,481,400 OPERATING EXPENSES Real Estate Taxes 0.00 0 ' Personal Property Taxes(included above) Property Insurance 0.00 0 Off Site Management 0.00 0 Payroll 0.00 0 Expenses/Benefits 0.00 0 Taxes/Workers Compensation 0.00 0 ' Repairs and Maintenance 0.00 0 Utilities: Electric 0.00 0 ' Gas/Feul 0.00 0 Water/Sewer 0.00 0 Management Base rent 3% 0.00 0 Accounting and Legal 0.00 0 Licenses/Permits 0.00 0 Advertising/Lease-up costs 0.00 0 Supplies 0.00 0 Miscellaneous Contract Services: Water/Sewer 0.00 0 ' Painting 0.00 0 Signage 0.00 0 Building Repairs 0.00 0 Miscellaneous 0.20 66,000 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 0.00 66,000 NET OPERATING INCOME 13.38 4,415,400 Realty Concepts, Inc. 15 Selection of Appropriate Capitalization Rate ' The appropriate capitalization rate can be estimated through a variety of methods, including comparative analysis, mortgage/equity analysis, and yield rates. ' The appraiser has estimated a capitalization rate using mortgage/equity criteria. A loan can be made available to a well-capitalized purchaser with financing terms of 80% loan-to-value at a 6.5% effective yield with 25-year amortization. The mortgage constant would be 0.081025. A 10% annual cash-on-cash return is assumed to be adequate to attract equity financing. The mortgage/equity capitalization rate is expressed below. ' Loan to Value % x Mortgage Constant = Factor .80 x .081025 = .064820 % of Equity % x Cash on Cash Return= ' .20 x .1000 = .020000 Capital Return Rate = .084820 Rounded To 8.5% ' Another methodology considered reasonable to estimate an appropriate capitalization rate is a comparative analysis. As reported by various sources located throughout the United States, it was estimated that going in capitalization rates for the majority of commercial property type ' range between 8.0% and 12%. The predominant range of responses was between 7.75% and 10%. ' Given the location and quality of the subject, it is the appraiser's opinion that a capitalization rate of 8.5% would be more appropriate for a property of this type. The likely capitalization rate range applicable to the subject would be 7.5% to 10%. Capitalization Rate via Comparative Analysis 8.5% ' Therefore, the appraiser has determined that a 9.00% cap rate is appropriate for this property type. r Realty Concepts, Inc. 16 I ' ME APPROACH TO VALUE continued INCOME (continued) rQuart er 2007" Neighborhood. , ROtail CentersB0St001V0FcesteF Stamford r Income ' Asking Rent $23.99 $23.41 $29.10 $28.19 $52.98 $51.35 $31.82 $30.88 Effectiye Rent $22.39 $21.84 $27.99 $27.12 $50.50 $48.93 $29.98 $29.0 Otherincome $1.12 $1.09 $1.40 $1.36 _$2.52 $2.45 $1.50 $1.45 Totallncome $23.50 $22.93 $29.39 $28.48 $53.02 $51.38 $31.48 $30.55 t Vacancy Rate 5.4% 5.2% 6.2% 5.8% 8.9% 8.6% 8.0% 6.3'f. EGI $22.25 $21.75 $27.57 $26.83 $48.33 $46.99 $28.96 $28.62 Expenses ' TotalEspenses $5.79 $5.65 $6.96 $6.79 $9.01 $8.79 $6.53 $6.37 EspenseRatio 26.041 25.98% 25.26'%. 25.32% 18.84% 18.71% 22.55% 22.26% NOI $16.451 $16.10 $20.61 $20.04 $39.32 $36.20 $22.43 $22.25 ' Avg Sale Price $198 $195 $197 $184 $364 $336 $228 $215 OAR 8.3% 8.3% 10.5% 10.9% 10.8% 11.4V 9.6% 10.4% ' GRM 8.85 8.93 7.04 6.78 7.21 6.87 7.60 7.37 EGIM 8.90 8.97 7.15 6.86 7.53 7.15 7.86 7.49 '4th Quarter 2006 Data Copyright 2007 NaltyRato..coM M ' Value Estimate - Direct Capitalization The current market value of the subject fee estimate is estimated by capitalizing the projected ' net operating income before adjustments at a 10.0% rate as follows: ' E.O.Y. Net Operating Income - Capitalization Rate = Value Estimate $4,415,400 - 085 = $51,945,882 SAY: $52,000,000 ' ESTIMATED MARKET VALUE VIA INCOME APPROACH TO VALUE (DIRECT CAPITALIZATION) ' FIFTY TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($52,000,000) Realty Concepts, Inc. 17 ' ASSESSMENT AND TAX DATA ' The Town of South Windsor assesses real estate at 70% of market value. Real estate in the Town of South Windsor was revalued as of October 1, 2002, and is reflected in the 2005 and 2006 Grand List Assessment. The mill rate as of July 2005 is 32.54mills ($32.54 per thousand ' dollars of assessment). Therefore; the consultant will utilize for this analysis a 70% assessment rate and a mill rate of 32.54 for real and personal property tax estimates. ' SCHOOL AGE CHILDREN &TARGET MARKET The consultant has reviewed the South Windsor 2006-2007 Town budget to provide a breakdown of public school aged children, number of pupils and the current cost to educate a ' child in South Windsor. Based on public information from the Town of South Windsor and State of Connecticut Department of Education, the cost to educate a child for 2006 school enrollment of approximately 5,084 students is about $54,820,012. The per student local cost burden is ' about $10,782.85 per student. Since this is a retail development there will be no impact on the South Windsor School District and therefore no financial impact to the Town of South Windsor. 1 PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES A result of the proposed development is the addition of new personal property tax to the Town ' Grand List. Discussions with the Assessor have resulted in a conservative estimate for the subject property is $10.00 per square foot of the gross building area. This results in an estimate of $3,300,000 tax base due to the proposed development. The personal property tax base ' includes maintenance equipment and store fixtures only. ADDITIONAL TOWN SERVICES The consultant has reviewed the proposed development and has observed the following: That the Town of South Windsor will not be required to plow, maintain or service the site's roadways and parking areas, lighting, sewer and storm drain system, trash removal, and water (including ' fire hydrants)system. POLICE & FIRE SERVICES tIn an effort to allocate the cost of Public Safety (emergency services) to the subject, the consultant used the 2006-2007 South Windsor Budget totaling $5,936,480. This equates to a ' per capita cost of ($5,936,480 + 25,173 - 2006 population) $253.83 per capita. Typically this would be allocated on a per capita basis or an allocation made to the subject property. ' A discussion with Police Chief Gary K. Tyler revealed that emergency services has anticipated development in this area of South Windsor as retail and staff and equipment is currently in place to service the proposed development. Therefore; if the proposed 330,000+/- square foot ' retail development is permitted and built, it will have no increase in demand for police, fire or emergency services or increases on their budgets. Realty Concepts, Inc. 18 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY ' The analysis methodology is to develop the estimated market value of the proposed 330,000+/- square foot retail development; determine the estimated market values of real property and ' personal property; apply the current assessment valuation method utilized by the Town of South Windsor; apply the current mill rate and estimate the tax revenue generated by the proposed development, then develop the estimated cost to the Town of South Windsor per pupil and any ' other supportable financial cost to the Town of South Windsor. Once the estimated revenue is developed, the estimated expenses to the Town of South Windsor are deducted. The same methodology will be utilized for any alternative site ' development. In the case of the subject property, the assignment is to determine the fiscal impact of the ' proposed development on the Town of South Windsor. The site is currently zoned for commercial development. There is no comparative alternative use analysis required. Since two methods of estimating value for ad valorem taxes have been used, they will be compared to each other to determine the range of assessment , tax revenue and town expense due to the proposed development.. On the following page is a summary of my findings: Realty Concepts, Inc. 19 ' DEVELOPMENT SITE ANALYSIS And ' FISCAL IMPACT CALCULATION Income Cost Approach Approach Retail Retail ' Complex 330,000 s/f 330,000 s/f Value $51,000,000 $52,000,000 Total $51,000,000 $52,000,000 tTotal Value $51,000,000 $52,000,000 70%Assessment $35,700,000 $36,400,000 ' Times Mill Rate 32.54 32.54 Total Real Estate Tax Revenue $1,161,678 $1,184,456 PERSONAL PROPERTY TAX ' Fixtures& Equip Est.Value $3,300,000 $3,300,000 Total Value $3,300,000 $3,300,000 ' 70%Assessment $2,310,000 $2,310,000 Times Mill Rate 32.54 32.54 Total Personal Prop. Tax Revenue $75,167 $75,167 TOTAL TAX REVENUE $1,236,845 $1,259.623 ' Municipal Expenses School Children ' (.25x 0 Units) 0 Cost/Child(2002) $10,782 Total Ed. Cost $0 ' Public Safety $50,000 Public Works $50,000 ' Total City Cost 100 000 100 000 NET (Cost)/Revenue to Town $1,136,845 $1,1,59,623 ' Realty Concepts, Inc. 20 CONCLUSION The preceding analysis clearly demonstrates that the proposed retail development will have ' minimal effect on the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut financially. The proposed retail development would have no allocation of expenses for road maintenance, street lighting, rubbish removal, sewers, and demand for additional public services. ' Therefore: 1) The proposed development should have a positive fiscal impact on the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut with minimal impact on the demand for town services, in particular, no impact on the school system. 2) An increase in property tax revenue can be anticipated due to the proposed development and can be favorably anticipated by the Town of South Windsor. This will lessen the tax impact on the residential property tax base. 3) The proposed retail development is in concert with the Town of South Windsor ' Plan of Development and also with other current developments in the immediate area of the subject property. 4) The Town of South Windsor has anticipated the growth of commercial development in the Town. This foresight has placed no additional demand on the current municipal public safety staff, equipment or budget. Realty Concepts, Inc. 21 Stanley A. Gniazdowski, CRE, CCIM, FRICS ' 2514 Boston Post Road, 9C, Guilford, CT 06437 TEL: 203.453.1117 FAX: 203.458-2689 EXPERIENCE ' Realty Concepts, Inc. Guilford, Connecticut President 1984 to Present ' Provided real estate consulting, appraisal, asset management, litigation support and development consulting to national corporations, developers, investors, retailers, governmental ' agencies, lenders and law firms. *Assignments successfully completed include: consulting or valuation of specialized assets, ' due diligence, workouts and restructuring of assets with values to $100,000,000 • restructure real estate department of two billion dollar corporation; corporate real estate impact and cost of capital analysis; structure sale lease backs, land lease, master leases, leases and determine ' leasehold values • bifurcation & negotiation of$80,000,000 partnership; *development management; tax appeal of major assets • market and site demographic studies; gap analysis; surrogate site assemblage • expert witness for unique and specialized assets , inverse condemnation; public hearing testimony for proposed developments , zone changes& ' development impact studies • commercial appraisals of typical and unique properties and general and transitional management. ' *National real estate lecturer, trainer and associate professor New York University, CCIM senior instructor and trainer for national real estate firms and organizations. Cushman &Wakefield New York, New York Vice President 1982 to 1984 Performed consulting services to investors and corporate clients; structured transactions for in- house brokers and clients. Structured and completed sale of a single asset in excess of $100,000,000; and structured sale lease backs; development structuring and general ' counseling. W.T. Beazlev Company New Haven, Connecticut ' Vice President 1979 to 1982 Financial services division. Responsible for directing property management division, structuring condominium conversions; support brokerage division and general counseling and valuation. Moniello Associates East Haven, Connecticut Manager 1973 to 1979 ' Directed residential and commercial sales departments. Personally specialized in commercial investment sales and consulting. 1 Realty Concepts, Inc. 22 EDUCATION ' • University of New Haven 1972. BS Business Administration. Deans Award Graduate. • Commercial Investment Real Estate Institute five graduate level courses . • Real Estate Securities and Syndication Institute. • Society of Real Estate Appraisers: Market, feasibility and marketability studies. • University of New Haven: Commercial Investment R E Analysis. Appraisal I & II . PROFESSIONALDESIGNATIONS • CRE:Counselor of Real Estate 1987 ' • CCIM: Certified Commercial Institute Member 1982 • CRS:Certified Residential Specialist 1978 ' TEACHING AFFILIATIONS *Associate Professor—New York University 1996 -Award for Teaching Excellence • Senior instructor Commercial Investment Real Estate Institute—CCIM program • Instructor- Industrial Development Research Council : Corporate Real Estate • Compass Management& Leasing ' PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS • Chairman—2000 CCIM Cl 102 Course &Technology Task Force • Chairman - 1995 Connecticut CRE Chapter • Chairman - 1992 CCI M Course 101 & Course rewrite • Chairman - 1988 Connecticut CCIM Chapter • Chairman Connecticut Association of Realtors: Common Interest Communities and Rental ' Housing Law Committee. • Landauer/CCIM National Real Estate Survey- CCIM Editorial member 1995-96 • Chairman (1989 & 1990)Commercial Investment Real Estate Journal. ' • CCIM Comprehensive Exam Team and Designation Committee. • Education Committee member, American Society of Real Estate Counselor. ' PROFESSIONAL LICENSES • Certified General Appraiser• Broker- Connecticut • Licensed Real Estate Securities - Connecticut ' OTHER: • National lecturer on Real Estate Valuation, Development, Counseling, Market ' Analysis, and Syndication. • Consulted & Lectured in Hungary, Poland, Russia, Slovakia & Ukraine on Real Estate Financing and structuring transactions •Testified before the State Joint Judiciary Committee as an expert witness on the ' Connecticut Condominium conversion Law and other real estate issues • President: University of New Haven Alumni Association 1991&1992. • Board of Governors, University of New Haven ' • Shoreline Foundation REFERENCES: Available upon request Realty Concepts, Inc. 23 PARTIAL LIST OF CORPORATE US CLIENTS ' ALLIED SIGNAL ATLANTIC BANK & TRUST COMPANY AVALON COMMUNITIES, INC. ' BANK BOSTON CHEMICAL BANK CITIZENS BANK CONNECTICUT HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY DATTCO EDENS & EVANT ' EASTERN EUROPEAN REALTY FOUNDATION EMERGILITE ' FIRST UNION BANK GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES GREATER NEW HAVEN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE H. J. RUSSELL CO. ' HARLAND, O'CONNOR, TINE, & WHITE HOMART INTEGRATED RESOURCES JPI KNIGHTS of COLUMBUS ' LAFAYETTE AMERICAN BANK MARRIOTT CORPORATION METLIFE CAPITAL CREDIT UTOPIA MENTAL HEALTH NEW HAVEN SAVINGS BANK NEUROGEN CORPORATION ' NORTHERN TRUST BANK RHODE ISLAND HOSPITAL TRUST ROCKEFELLOR GROUP ' ROUSE CORPORATION SCHNEIDER NATIONAL SHAW'S SUPERMARKET ' SIGMA XI SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE COMPANY STOP AND SHOP COMPANIES SWISS BANK TILCON, INC. TOMASSO BROS. ' TOWN OF EAST HAVEN TOWN OF MADISON ULBRICH STEEL ' UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT FOUNDATION UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAVEN UPJOHN COMPANY ' WALMART YALE UNIVERSITY Realty Concepts, Inc. 24 ADDENDA t Realty Concepts, Inc. 25 ' STRATEGIC SCHOOL PROFILE 2005-06 South Windsor School District ' JOSEPH L WOOD,Superintendent Telephone: (860)291-1205 This profile was produced by the Connecticut State Department of Education in accordance with CT General Statutes 10-220(c). COMMUNITY DATA ' County: Hartford Public School Enrollment as a Percent of Town Population: 20.6% 2000 Population: 24,412 Public School Enrollment as%of Total Student Population: 95.2% 1990-2000 Population Growth: 10.5% Percent of Adults without a High School Diploma in 2000. 9.3% 2000 Per Capita Income: $30,966 Adult Education Enrollment in 2004-05 School Year: 45 ' Number of Public Schools: 7 Number of Adults Receiving Diplomas in 2004-05 School Yr.: 14 Number of Nonpublic Schools: 0 District Reference Group(DRG): B DRG is a classification of districts whose students'families are similar in ' education,income,occupation,and need,and that have roughly similar enrollment. DISTRICT NEED ' Current and Past District Need Year District DRG State %of Students Eligible for Free/Reduced-Price Meals 2005-06 5.3 4.9 26.9 2002-03 5.0 N/A 25.4 %of K-12 Students with Non-English Home 2005-06 5.5 6.4 12.6 Language 2000-01 4.0 N/A 12.5 %of Elementary and Middle School Students Above 2005-06 93.9 93.1 88.0 Entry Gr.Who Attended Same School Previous Yr. 2000-01 93.4 N/A 87.0 ' %of Kindergarten Students who Attended Preschool, 2005-06 85.7 90.0 79.2 Nursery School,or Headstart 2000-01 84.2 N/A 74.7 %of Juniors and Seniors Working More Than 16 2005-06 24.8 16.9 21.7 ' Hours Per Week 1 2000-01 1 34.4 1 N/A 31.7 STUDENT ENROLLMENT AND RACE/ETHNICITY ' Enrollment Race/Ethnicity Number Percent Grade Range PK-12 American Indian 21 0.4 ' Total Enrollment 5,084 Asian American 338 6.6 5-Year Enrollment Change 0.5% Black 278 5.5 Projected 2010 Enrollment Hispanic 201 4.0 Elementary 1,940 White 4,246 83.5 Middle School 1,113 Total Minority 2005-06 838 16.5 High School 1,682 1 Total Minori 2000-01 1 630 12.5 Prekindergarten,Other 69 Realty Concepts,Inc. 26 ' South Windsor Zoning Regulations ' DESIGNED COMMERCIAL ZONE 5.4 Designed Commercial Zone ' 5.4.1 General. Designed Commercial(DC Zone) shall be designated by the Planning and Zoning Commis- sion only in accordance with due consideration of the following criteria: Conservation of ' property values; the impact of traffic in the immediate neighborhood;the general character of the neighborhood;the general welfare of the Town;and in consistency with the objectives and principles of the Comprehensive Plan of Development. ' 5.4.2.1 Permitted Uses The principal permitted uses are: Buildings for offices, retail sales and business/personal ser- vices along with parking and accessory uses serving the uses permitted above. Such accessory ' uses of land or structures shall be intended and designed only for the use,maintenance or op- eration of the property. 5.4.2.2 Special Exception Uses ' The following additional uses may be permitted in the Design Commercial Zone as a Special Exception after public hearing, subject to the provisions of Sections 5.5.3, 5.4.4, and all other applicable sections of these regulations. Such uses will be allowed only when the Commission has determined that: (1) traffic or other hazards will not be created; (2) general property values will be conserved; (3) there will be no adverse effects on existing uses in the area; ' (4) the general welfare of the community will be served; (5) there will be no adverse impacts on the capacity of present and proposed utilities, streets, ' drainage systems,sidewalks,and other infrastructure; (6) no adverse environmental impacts will be created The Commission may impose additional conditions in accordance with these regulations in order to ensure that all criteria enumerated above and/or within a particular use category are satisfied 5.4.2.2.a. Day care centers for children,duly licensed by the State of Connecticut and any other applica- ble agencies,provided the following conditions are satisfied: (1) no safety hazards are created, particularly with respect to access into and out of the site ' and building; (2) any outdoor play area must be substantially level and suited to playground use; (3) any outdoor play area must be located on the site in an area which is removed from any possibility of encroachment by vehicular accidents on adjoining streets; (4) there must be adequate parking to accommodate any anticipated heavy patronage func- tions such as open house,recitals,plays,etc.; 94 Realty Concepts, Inc. 27 ' Section V:Use Regulations,Commercial ' (5) a school bus turnaround must be provided if any children will be brought to the center by school bus; (6) the surrounding environment must be reasonably free of industrial/commercial pollutants ' and excessive noise at the time of application,and there must be a reasonable expectation that the surrounding area will remain free of pollutants in the future; (7) the surrounding environment must be reasonably physically and verbally non-threatening ' to children and staff at the time of application,and there must be a reasonable expectation that the surrounding area will remain non-threatening in the future; (8) if the day care center is to be a separate building.the site must be screened from adjoining t sites to the standards established in Sections 10.4.a.1 and 10.4.a.2. Screening may be lo- cated within the required yards. If the day care center is located within a multiple tenant facility,any outdoor play are must be screened from adjoining uses to the standards estab- lished in section 10.4.a.1 and 10.4.a.2. 5.4.3 Procedure The applicant shall file with his application, in seven(7)copies, a General Plan of Develop- ment for all of the property located within the proposed Designed Commercial zone. The Commission shall,after due notice,hold a public hearing on the application and shall take ac- tion thereon, all as provided by the Connecticut General Statutes. If the application is ap- proved,the establishment of the DC zone shall permit the applicant and/or his assigns to pro- ceed with completion of the development set forth in the General Plan of Development, subject to the remaining provisions of these regulations. ' The Commission shall require improvements in the utility, transportation, or public service systems of the Town of South Windsor where in the judgment of the Commission the impact of the proposed development will create a direct adverse condition requiring improvements for safe and proper operation,whether such improvements are on or off the site area.Approval of ' the application shall establish a DC zone for the property described in the application,and the Zoning Map shall be amended accordingly,and one copy of the General Plan of Development and accompanying documents with the approval of the Commission endorsed thereon shall be filed with the Town Clerk,as required by the General Statutes. ' 5.4.4 General Requirements a. Minimum Area.The tract shall consist of a single lot or a number of contiguous lots under ' one ownership or control having a total area of not less than 30 acres. b. Minimum landscaping and open space uses. ' Parking 1. Not less than ten(10%)percent of the interior of a parking lot containing fifty(50)or more parking spaces shall be landscaped with trees and continuously maintained.The ' Commission may waive up to one-half(1/2) of this ten (10%) percent requirement when consistent with the intent of this section. 2. Planting along the perimeter of a parking area, whether screening, landscaping or ' buffering,will not be considered as part of the ten(10%)percent interior landscaping. 3. Where a parking area abuts the buildings on the subject property,the adjacent border plantings are not considered as part of the interior landscaping. 95 Realty Concepts, Inc. 28 ' South Windsor Zoning Regulations 4. Planting beds shall have an area of not less than twenty-five(25)square feet,exclud- ing curbing. 5. Planting beds must be distributed as evenly as possible throughout the parking area. ' 6. The parking and landscaping plan shall show a satisfactory method of storm drainage and snow storage,and planting beds shall be protected by curbing. 7. The parking lot landscape plan shall be drawn to scale and show the plant list giving ' common name, height, caliper, eventual spread, the quantity of each, and, when ap- propriate,the spacing. 8. Ground cover alone is not acceptable. Trees selected will be checked for suitability in regard to eventual spread and adaptability to existing soil and climatic conditions. 9. Preparation of beds for trees shall be described Mulched planting beds shall be pro- vided around all trees and shrubs. 10 Gravel or stone shall not be used for ground cover unless suitably contained within the intended area. ' 11. Trees and bushes planted within five(5)feet of any parking area shall be of a variety capable of withstanding salt damage. 12. When possible,existing trees shall be saved by appropriate welling and mounding. ' 13. In order not to alter excessively the groundwater table,the applicant is encouraged to integrate water detention areas within the overall design of the parking lot. ' Open Space At least ten percent(10%)of the gross site area(in addition to parking area landscaping) shall be devoted to open space uses,suitably landscaped and maintained. Such open space ' may include buffers and planting beds adjacent to buildings. c. Setback,Area and Similar Requirements;Inapplicability of Certain Provisions. Except as otherwise provided herein, the provisions of Section 10 shall not apply to any DC zone, provided, however, that the requirements of the Commission for design stan- dards of site improvements shall apply to any such zone, and in addition,every structure ' shall have legal access to an arterial street, and no structure and no group of structures shall be erected in such proximity to any other structure as to constitute a fire hazard,or to prevent adequate light and air from reaching such structure. ' d. Building Height. The building height of any structure within a DC zone shall not exceed forty (40) feet, except that a greater building height for any structure may be permitted where,in the judgment of the Commission,such greater building height is in keeping with the purpose and intent of these regulations and is approved by an affirmative vote of two- thirds of the Commission members. e. Roads,Parking Areas,Sidewalks and Curbing. ' All roads within a DC zone to be dedicated to the Town shall conform to all applicable Town ordinances and regulations. The design of all other accessways shall be subject to approval by the Commission. ' f. Off-Street Parking Requirements/Loading Spaces. t 96 Realty Concepts, Inc. 29 Section V:Use Regulations,Commercial ' The provisions of Section 13 shall apply to all Designed Commercial zones, provided, however,that the Commission may require an additional number of parking spaces within a DC zone or any phase or unit thereof, as the public interest may require, or may vary such requirements for appropriate reasons provided that such reasons are made part of the record.Loading docks will be screened or enclosed. g. Utilities,Sewers,Water Supply,Fire Protection,Storm Drainage. ' No development plan in a DC zone shall be approved unless adequate public utilities,pub- lic sanitary sewers,and storm drainage are to be provided by the developer or developers, and clear evidence has been furnished of safe and satisfactory means of supplying potable water and fire protection,and unless the proposed utilities,sewers,drainage,potable water ' supply and fire protection have been shown to be adequate to accommodate reasonably anticipated future development within the DC zone. The developer or developers shall also provide fire hydrants at appropriate locations.All Town specifications for furnishing ' and installation of water systems and hydrants must be met. h. Utilities. ' All utilities in the Designed Commercial development shall be placed underground includ- ing electric power transmission lines and telephone lines,unless waived for sufficient rea- sons and so stated. ' i. Buffer Areas. Buffers shall conform to Section 10.4. j. Development of Zone District Over Period of Years. The development of an entire DC zone may be completed in phases or units. A detailed site development plan limited to one or more phases or units may be approved by the Commission. ' Each phase or unit shall be consistent with the General Plans submitted pursuant to these regulations, and to the requirements of these regulations, and shall be capable of inde- pendent existence without the completion of succeeding stages. 5.4.5 General Plan of Development. The General Plan of Development shall consist of one or more maps at a scale of not less than ' 1"=100',prepared by an engineer,architect,landscape architect or planner,and accompanying documents,and shall show or indicate: a. Existing structures,existing topography at two(2)foot contours,existing roads and paths, major topographic features, slopes of greater than ten(10%)percent grade and the loca- tion points of scenic interest,and wooded and open areas. b. The location of adjoining properties,the names of the owners of such properties as appear on the latest records in the office of the Assessor;and the existing structures and land uses within 500 feet of the boundaries of the proposed development. c. Present and proposed land uses within the boundaries of the entire proposed development, ' whether commercial, service, recreational or open space, or other, and the acreage as- signed to each. Proposed square footage of building or floor area for all proposed uses shall be shown and described in sufficient detail to clearly indicate the nature and scale of 97 ' Realty Concepts, Inc. 30 ' South Windsor Zoning Regulations ' the proposed uses. The proposed footage as shown shall establish the maximum building sizes and the areas within which it will be permissible to construct such buildings. d. The location of proposed major thoroughfares,and proposed vehicular and pedestrian cir- culation patterns, including location and dimension of private and public streets, and in- cluding proposals for linkage of roads within the zone to the Town and State Highway system, accompanied by a statement regarding estimated peak hours traffic generated for the development phase under construction. te. Whether property within the entire district is to be developed in phases or units,and if it is to be so developed the anticipated location and acreage of such phases or units. ' f. The proposed general system of utilities,water,supply,fire protection,drainage,and sew- age disposal, including a statement regarding the projected impact on Town water supply, fire protection, drainage and sewage treatment facilities. The projected location of major ' culverts and of drainage basins serving the district,whether or not within the district,and the projected system of solid waste disposal and its impact on Town facilities for solid waste disposal shall also be indicated. ' g. A soil survey map of the Soil Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture, with summary analysis, with such other information as may be required to show adequate soils data, indicating the type of soils, and their location,and the location of streams. h. The location of any"inland wetland"or"water courses"as defined in Connecticut Public Act No. 155,as amended. i. A map or statement indicating the projected amount and locations of open space within the entire district,and the proposals for maintenance of buffers and open space. j. Any projected system for public transportation and its relation to existing systems. ' k. A statement regarding anticipated costs and revenues to the Town as a result of the antici- pated land uses. 1. Such other relevant information as the applicant may wish to submit. 5.4.6 Approval ' The General Plan of Development shall,upon approval, be signed by the Chairperson of the Commission,and filed in the Commission's records. a. Approval of the General Plan of Development shall be valid for up to ten(10)years from ' the date of Commission approval. b. If construction has not commenced within the agreed to time,up to thirty(30)months fol- lowing approval, the Commission may, after a public hearing, modify or terminate such ' approval. 5.4.7 Detailed Site Plan of Development for Issuance of Building Permits. ' No building permit shall be issued with respect to property in a DC zone or any phase or unit whereof except in accordance with approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission ob- tained pursuant to the provisions of its regulations, Section 8, as to such property or such phase or unit thereof. ' 98 ' Realty Concepts, Inc. 31 10.2 Schedule of Areas,Yards and Height Requirements Zone Minimum Lot Minimum Lot Minimum Lot ' Area Width* Depth RR 40,000 s.f 175 ft. 200 ft. A40 40,000 s.f. 150 ft. 200 ft. ' AA-30 30,000 s.f. 150 ft. 150 ft. A 30 30,000 s.f. 120 ft. 150 ft. A 20 20,000 s.f 100 ft. 150 ft. RC 30,000 s.f. 150 ft. 150 ft. ' GC 15,000 s.f. 100 ft. 150 ft. GD 3 acres 200 ft. N/A ' CD 5 acres See Sect.5.9.5.a N/A I 20,000 s.f. 100 ft. 150 ft. MY 15 acres 200 ft. 200 ft. RO 2 acres 200 ft. 200 ft. FP 40,000 s.f. 150 ft. 200 ft. ' OP 5 acres 200 ft. 200 ft. ' *Lots with frontage on Buckland Road or Sullivan Avenue have a minimum lot width of 15o feet.Where the requirements of Section 10 are greater,the Section 10 requirements apply. ' Realty Concepts, Inc. 32 South Windsor Zoning Regulations Zone Maximum Maximum Maximum % Maximum% Stories Height/Feet Lot Coverage Impervious Coverage ' RR 21/2 30 10 A40 21/2 30 10 AA- 21/2 30 15 ' 30 A-30 2 % 30 15 A-20 21/z 30 15 DRZ 2 % 30 20 30 RC 3 45 25 60 GC 2 40 30 65 GD 2* 30* N/A 60* CD 5 60 N/A 65 I 2 40 50 65 ' MF 2 35 30 40 RO 2 30 30 50 FP 21/2 30 10 10 OP 1 4 1 57 1 302 1 502 'Except where specifically noted otherwise elsewhere in these regulations. ' 2of net buildable land. *Requirements vary. See Section 5.8.5.a for specific requirements. ' 1. Any section of a building more than one hundred fifty(150) feet from a residential zone may be up to forty(40)feet in height. A building seventy-five(75)feet from a residential zone shall have a maximum height of twenty(20)feet. Maximum height of a building be- tween seventy-five(75)feet and one hundred fifty(150) feet from a residential zone shall be determined using the same ratio of distance to height. ' Realty Concepts, Inc. 33 COMPARABLE LAND SALES ' Town of SOUTH WINDSOR in HARTFORD County Sale Price $14,000,000 Property 151 Buckland Rd Sale Date 10/19/2000 Seller Catholic Cemetaries Assoc. 700 Middletown Ave, North Haven Ct 06473 Vol/Pg 1169/4 Buyer Evergreen Walk LLC 231 Central Ave, White Plains Ny 10606 Zone GD Map 27 Block n/a Acres 230.11 ' Lot 15 $/Acre $60,840 Memo n/a $/SQFT $1.40 ' Town of SOUTH WINDSOR in HARTFORD County Sale $6,000,000 Price Property Buckland Rd Sale Date 4/7/2000 ' Seller Manchester I84 Assoc. L.P 1109 Rose La, Virginia Beach Ca 23451 Vol/Pg 1137/50 Buyer Lowes Home Centers Inc 1203 School St, Wilkesboro NC 28697 Zone GD Map n/a Block n/a Acres 14.12 Lot 1,2&3 $/Acre $424,929 Memo 3 lots 1.68,1.00,11.44 - partly in ' Manch $/SQFT $9.76 Town of SOUTH WINDSOR in HARTFORD County Sale Price $4,500,000 ' Property Buckland Rd Sale Date 4/7/2000 Seller M/S Town Line Assoc. LLC n/a Vol/Pg 1137/111 Buyer Target Corp Minneapolis MN Zone GD ' Map n/a Block n/a Acres 21.66 Lot 2 $/Acre $207,756 ' Memo n/a $/SQFT $4.77 Realty Concepts, Inc. 34 Largest Taxgavers -The following table sets forth the Tmm's ten largest taxpayers, ' per the Grand List dated October 1,2005. ' Name of Taxpaver Nature of Business Grand Total %of Grand List Evergreen Walk Lifestyle Center Retail $ 28,092,290 1.36% CT.Light&Power Utility 15,964,890 .77% ' May Company(Filenes) Retailing/Distributor 15,520,694 .75% Town Center of South Windsor Retail 13,490,890 .65% ' Gerber Companies Manufacturing 11,927,607 .580/0 ' Evergreen Walk LLC Retail 11,694,300 .57% Lowes Home Centers Inc. Retail 9,938,550 .480/a ' DST Realty Manufacturing 9,403,170 .45% ' Target Corp. Retail 9,358,210 .45% CT.Water Company Utility 8.361 191 .40% Total $133,751,792 Sowce.`Down of South Wiadsoz Assessmes Of ioe. Realty Concepts, Inc. 35 TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR ' Comparison of Annual Espenditivas-By Department t 2006/2007 2006/2W7 2004/05 2005/06 2005/06 Department Couneal Description Actual Adapted Estimated Request Approved ' GENERAL GOVERNMENT LEGISLATIVE TOWN COUNCIL 126,702 155,310 155,310 163,763 159,463 ' Total 126,702 155,310 153,310 163,763 L",463 ' BOARDS&COMAUSSIONS HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION 26 2,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION 273 500 500 500 500 PUBLIC BUILDING COMMISSION 0 1,020 1,020 1,020 520 ' HOUSING AUTHORITY 3,991 4,908 4,1M 4,476 4,476 S.W.REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 4,835 5,000 5,000 5,000 2,000 INLAND/WETLANDS COMM. 6,903 7,625 7,025 7,625 7,625 ' LAND PRESERVATION ADVISORY 0 480 480 480 480 OPEN SPACE TASK FORCE 42 Irm 11500 1,500 1,500 EMERGENCY RESPONSE 0 0 0 0 0 PARK&RECREATION COMNIISSION 337 7,500 6,862 7,SW 6,100 PLANNING&ZONING COMMISSION 20,889 23AW 22,850 23,500 10,500 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 3,396 3,800 3,000 4,300 3,800 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMA. 833 14,000 14,000 14,000 3,000 ' Total 41,525 71,833 68,368 74901 44,501 ' JUDICIAL PROBATE COURT 7,033 13,818 10,488 10,488 10,488 Total 7,033 13,818 10,488 10„m 10,488 ' ELECTIONS REGISTRAR OF VOTERS 105,529 115,758 115,243 119,526 U7,976 ' Total 105,529 115,758 115,243 I19,526 117,976 EI�ECUTIVE ' TOWN MANAGER 296,587 292,988 293,563 307,425 318,925 Total 286,587 292,988 293,563 307,425 318,925 ' COMMUNITYDEVEIDPAENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT 254,766 263,819 266,421 273,166 268,316 ECONOMIC DEV COORDINATOR 0 0 0 0 0 ' BUILDING DEPARTMENT 188,726 204,349 203,464 205,751 205,551 Total 443,492 468JN 469,895 478,917 473,867 Realty Concepts, Inc. 36 ' TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR Comparison of Annual Expenditures-By Department ' 2006/2W7 2006/2W7 2D04/05 2005/06 2005/06 Department Councl Description Actual Adapted Estimated Request Approved ' FINANCE ASSESSOR 220,423 243,804 240,380 251,W 246,223 ' BOARD OF TAX REVIEW 126 253 180 255 255 COLLECTOR OF REVENUE 147,731 150,760 131,760 156,782 156,M2 FINANCE OFFICE 255,201 276,450 272,2M 285,448 285,448 ' Total 623,481 671,269 664,529 693,708 688,208 RECORDING&REPORTING TOWN CLERK 189,714 1N,130 188,130 193,300 193,300 Total 189,714 188,L30 188,130 193,M 193,300 ' LAW TOWN ATTORNEY 193,387 171,368 258,552 239,121 214,121 Total 183,387 171,368 258,552 239,121 214,121 CENTRAL SERVICES TOWN HALL 397,688 344,339 343,869 352,947 319,642 ' INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 366,722 336,198 375,693 452,486 429,066 TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT 12,616 28,000 28,000 29,000 18,000 HEALTH&SAFETY COMMITTEE 0 3,288 3,288 3rM7 0 ' MEDIA 1,895 9,500 91500 7,000 1%000 Total 768,921 721,345 760,3W 844,820 776,708 ' Total GENERAL GOVERNMENT 2,776,371 2,869,987 2,984,408 3,122,969 2,997,557 PUBLIC SAFETY ' POLICE PROTECTION ADMINISTRATION 475,488 431,307 426,917 311,922 306,N7 OPERATIONS 2,122,143 2,OU,461 2,176,445 2,984,649 2,690,347 ' INFORMATION SERVICES 185,998 195,829 154,176 0 0 SUPPORT SERVICES 1,649,90 1,656,868 1,566,035 1,656,6M 1,574,727 COMMUNITY SERVICES 94AM IM,179 125,179 142AQ 142,440 ' Total 4,527,984 4,420,644 4,448,772 5,095,649 4,714,101 FIRE PROTECTION ' FIRE MARSHAL 85,946 100,834 118,834 102,475 97,483 SW VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT. 461,895 495,913 495,913 564,295 520,709 HYDRANTS&WATER LINES 566,229 600,000 588,062 604,167 604,187 ' Total 1,114,070 1,196,747 1,204829 1,270,957 1,222,379 Realty Concepts, Inc. 37 TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR Comparison of Annual Expenditures-By Deparunmt ' 2006/2007 2006/2W7 2004/05 2005/06 2005/06 Department Council Description Actual Adopted Estimated Request Approved ' OTHER PROTECTION STREET LIGHTS 318,965 405,972 393,972 482,524 442,500 Total 318,965 405,972 393,972 482,524 442,500 Total PUBLIC SAFETY 5,%1,019 6,023,363 6,045,573 6,849,130 6X%980 ' PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION PUBLIC WORKS MANAGEMENT 165,744 168,M9 168,W9 181,940 181,940 Total 165,744 168,389 168,389 181,940 184940 ENGINEERING ' TECHNICAL SUPPORT 299,355 286,356 287,980 335,975 325,975 Total 299,355 286,356 287,980 335,975 325,975 STREET SERVICES HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE 1,902,730 1,976,402 1,%4,523 2,183,084 2,120,222 MOTOR EQUIPMENT REPAIR 540,216 519,604 611,915 629,050 601,579 Total 2,442,946 2,496„006 2,576,438 2,812,234 2,721,801 PARKS&GROUNDS ' PROPERTY MAINTENANCE 784,80 1,014,553 1,018,943 1,202,748 1,124185 Total 7K$W 1,014,553 1,018,%3 %"2,748 1, PUBLIC BUILDINGS BUILDING MAINTENANCE 873,223 930,828 975,279 993,662 989,662 Total 873,123 930,828 973,279 993,662 989,662 POLL1vnON CONTROL REFUSE DISPOSAL 1,512,703 1,716,952 1,689,447 1,804,319 1,77%757 Total 1,512,703 1,716,952 1,689,447 1,804,319 1,770,757 Total PUBLIC WORKS 6,078,754 6,613,084 6,716,476 7,330,778 7,114320 Realty Concepts, Inc. 38 ' TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR Comparison of Annual Expenditures-By Department ' 2006/2007 2006/2007 2004/05 2005/06 2M/06 Department Council ' Description Actual Adopted Estimated Request Approved RECREATION&LIBRARY RECREATION ' ADMINISTRATION 3AO93 329,684 334,915 344,923 344.923 Total 3AS93 329,684 334,915 344,923 M4,923 ' LIBRARY LIBRARY W4478 857,452 857,452 M777 M777 ' Total 821,478 857,452 857,452 891,777 SM777 Total RECREATION&LIBRARY 1,133,371 L187,136 1,192,367 1,2M,700 4236,700 ' HUMAN SERVICES CONSERVATION OF HEALTH ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 85,324 99,734 97,626 105,061 102,061 ' PUBLIC HEALTH NURSE 14,976 18,175 18,175 19,943 19,085 Total 100AM U7,909 U5,801 125,004 121,146 ' HUMAN SERVICES ADMINISTRATION 118,553 123,488 123AU 137,096 132,940 YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES 180,605 211,632 M632 227,684 218,939 ADULT AND SENIOR SERVICES 245,761 266,403 262,173 28%914 274,698 ' MINI-BUS SERVICE 35,726 56,193 47,693 49,087 49,067 SHELTERED WORKSHOPS 3,894 4,144 4,114 4,394 4,394 ' Total 584,539 661,8W 649,100 707,175 680,058 Total HUMAN SERVICES 684,839 77%769 764,901 832,179 801,204 ' DEBT SERVICE INTEREST,BONDED DEBT 1,246,598 1,154,805 1,154,805 4017,076 1,017,876 PRINCIPAL,BONDED DEBT 2,5W,000 2,605,000 2,605,000 2,675,000 2,675,000 ' Total DEBT SERVICE 3,826,598 3,759,805 3,759,805 3,692,876 3,697,876 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT'S 2,235,000 2,716,775 2,736,775 2,985,542 2,785,542 ' Total CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS 2,2M,000 2,716,775 2,736,775 2,985,542 2,785,542 UNCLASSIFIED ' CONTINGENCY 47JU 215,000 215,000 215,000 215,000 S.W.PATRIOTIC COMMISSION 12,720 13,500 13,500 AM 13AN CEMETERIES 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 ' Realty Concepts, Inc. 39 ' TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR Comparison of Annual E2Tend hues-By Department 2006/2007 2006/2007 2M/05 2005/06 2005/06 Department Council Description Actual Adopted Estimated Request Approved ' UNCLASSIFIED-(continued) WOOD MEMORIAL LIBRARY 7,500 7,5W 7,500 7,SW 7,500 SALARY CONTINGENCY 0 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 ' Total 70,931 279,000 279,000 279,000 279,000 MUNICIPAL INSURANCE CASUALTY&IdABII 1TY INS. 165,485 193,161 189,169 193,413 193,413 Total ]b5„485 193,161 189,169 193.413 193,413 ' PENSION CONTRIBUTIONS PENSION FUND 175,507 582,945 582,557 857,386 857,386 SOCIAL,SECURITY 717,W8 774,054 770,217 849,845 806,085 ' Total 992,615 1,3W999 L354774 1,707,231 1,663,471 EMPLOYEE INSURANCE ' HEALTH&LIFE INSURANCE 1,724,262 1,970,842 1,972,521 2,187,422 1,957,072 Total 1,724,262 1,970,842 L972,521 4187,422 L957,072 WORKERS'COMPENSATION INS. 218,351 258,967 253,461 344,121 339,121 Total 21%351 258,967 255,461 344,121 339,121 ' UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 27,548 10,2W 7,847 10,2W 10,200 Total 27,548 10,2W 7,847 10,2W 10,200 ' Total UNCLASSIFIED 3,099.192 4,069,169 4,056,772 .4,721,387 4-442.277 TOTAL.TOWN EXPENDITURES 26,795,144 28,019,NS 28,257,077 M,774561 29046,4% ' TOTAL BOARD OF EDUCATION 49AI,042 52,303,312 52,M3,312 55,370,798 54,820,012 TOTAL BUDGET 75,026,186 80,322,400 80,5W-M9 W142,359 5266,468 Realty Concepts, Inc. 40 1,04 Retail Express Pack Realty Concepts,Inc. REALTY CONCEPTS INC Counselors-Investment Managers-Appraisers ZIP*:08074(South Windsor,CT) 2000-2006 Population:Annual Rate 0.92% 2006-2011 Population:Annual Rate 0.55% ' Total Population �Areal ' 30000 500o ' 0000 115000 10000 15000 0 ---- ------ -_1990_ 2000 _. ------ 2006.- --- -------2011 Source U.S.Bureau of the Census,2000 Census of Population and Housing.ESRI converted 1990 Census data into 2000 geography.ESRI forecasts for 2006 and 2011. ' 02006 ESRI On-dwand reports and maps from Business Analyst Online.Order at wwW.esri.com/ba0 or call 600-292-2224 5119/2007 Page 1 of 7 Realty Concepts, Inc. 41 Retail Express Pack ' I +, Realty Concepts,Inc. REALTY CONCEPTS INC Counselors•Investment Managers Appraisers ZIPS:06074(South Windsor,CT) 2000 Population by Sex Males 48.2% ' Females 51.8% 2006 Population by Sex Males 48.2% ' Females 51.8% 2011 Population by Sex Mates 48.1% Females 51.9% 2006 Population by Race ' Area 1 ' 90.0 80.0 ` iFF R .. 60.0 50.0 C N N 40.0 30.0 ' 20.0 t 10.0 &6 3.8 0.3 0.9 1,.2 0.0 White Alone Black Alone Amer Indian Atone AsiaNr'acific Alone Other Race Alone Two or More Races .--___— 2006 Hispanic Origin 3.4% Data Note:Persons of Hispanic Origin may be of any race. ' Source:U.S.Bureau of Me Census,2000 Census of Population and Housing.ESRI forecasts for 2006 and 2011. ' 02006 ESRI On-demand sports and maps from Business Analyst Online.Order at www.esri.com/bao or call 800-282.2224 191912007 Page 2 of 7 Realty Concepts, Inc. 42 Retail Express Pack Realty Concepts,Inc. R REALTY CONCEPTS INC Counselors•Investment Managers•Appraisers ZIPS:06074(South Windsor,CT) 2000 Population by Age ' Total 24,254 0-4 6.3% 5-9 8.2% 10-14 8.3% ' 15-19 6.2% 20-24 3.2% 25-34 10.1% 35-44 19.6% 45-54 16A% 55-64 9.7% 65-74 7.0% 75-84 3.7% 85+ 1.3% 2006 Population by Age Total 25,673 ' 0-4 5.9% 5-9 6.9% 10-14 8.3% 15-19 6.8% 20-24 4.4% 25-34 7.8% 35-44 16.3% 45-54 17.8% 55-64 12.5% 65-74 7.2% 75-84 4.5% 85+ 1.7% ' 2011 Population by Age Total 26.386 0-4 6. % 5-9 6.4% 10-14 7.6% 15-19 7.1% ' 20-24 4.7% 25-34 8.9% 35-44 12.9% 45-54 18.8% 55-64 13.6% 65-74 7.3% 75-84 4.8% 85+ 2.0% Median Age 2000 39.0 2006 41.6 ' 2011 42.8 Source:U.S.Bureau of the Census,2000 Census of Population and Housing.ESR1 forecasts for 2006 and 2011. Realty Concepts, Inc. 43 Retail Express Pack 10, Realty Concepts,Inc. REALTY CONCEPTS INC ' Counselors-Investment Managers-Appraisers ZIPS:06074(South Windsor,CT) 2000-2006 Civilian Employed Population 16+Annual Rate 0.56% 2006-2011 Civilian Employed Population 16+Annual Rate 0.95% Total Civilian Employed Population 16+ �Area1 5000 a000 00: 2000 1000 r0000 9000 6000 7000 6000 . 5000 # 5000 } 3000 2000 1000 0 1990 2000 2006 2011 Source:U.S.Bureau of the Census,2000 Census of Population and Housing.ESRI converted 1990 Census data into 20011 geography.ESRI forecasts for 2006 and 2011. ' 02006 ESRI On-demand reports and maps from Business Analyst Online.Order at www.esri.com/bao or call 1100-292.2224 1111912007 Page 4 of 7 Realty Concepts, Inc. 44 Retail Express Pack Realty Concepts,Inc. REALTY CONCEPTS INC ' Counselors•imestment Managers•Appraisers ZIPs:06074(South Windsor,CT) 2000-2006 Households Annual Rate 0.91% ' 2006-2011 Households Annual Rate 0.6% Total Households Areal moo 9000 8000 000 6 000 6000 �. 4000 K `t a x .. •� . 3000 2000 I 1000 L 0 _.... 2006 2011_..__-- ---_.J source:U.S.Bureau of the census,2000 Census of Population and Housing.ESRI converted 1990 Census data into 20110 geography.ESR1 forecasts for 21106 and 2011, 02006 ESRI On-demand reports and maps from Business Analyst Online.Order at www.esri.com/bao or call 600-292-=4 51IW2007 Pape 5 of 7 Realty Concepts, Inc. 45 r't 1 Retail Express Pack ' , Realty Concepts,Inc. REALTY CONCEPTS INC ' Counselors-Investment Managers-Appraisers ZIPS:06074(South Windsor,CT) 1990 Households by Income ' Household Income Base 7,870 <$15.000 4.1% $15.000-$24,999 5.2% $25,000-$34,999 10.3% $35,000-$49,999 20,7% ' $50,000-$74,999 31.7% $75,000-$99,999 17.0% $100,000-$149,999 7.6% $150,000+ 3A% ' Median Household Income $57,602 2000 Households by Income Household Income Base 8,889 ' <$15,000 4.3% $15,000-$24,999 5.2% $25,000-$34.999 6.7% $35,000-$49,999 11.5% ' $50.000-$74.999 23.3% $75,000-$99,999 20.9% $100.000-$149,999 17.6% $150,000-$199,999 6.2% ' $200,000+ 4.3% Median Household Income $73,680 2006 Households by income ' Household Income Base 9,374 <$16,000 2A% $15,000-$24,999 4A% $25,000-$34,999 4.7% $35,000-$49,999 8.1% $50.000-$74,999 17A% $75,000-$99,999 18.2% $100,000-$149,999 26.8% $150,000-$199,999 8.9% ' $200,000+ 9.2% Median Household Income $91,345 2011 Households by Income ' Household Income Base 9,661 <$15,000 1.7% $15.000-$24,999 3.0% $25.000-$34,999 3.5% ' $35,000-$49.999 6.2% $50,000-$74.999 13.9% $75,000-$99,999 15.0% $100,000-$149.999 30.3% ' $150"*0-$199,999 11.7% $200,000+ 14.5% Median Household Income $108,346 ' 2000-2006 Median Household Income Annual Rate 3.5% 2006-2011 Median Household Income Annual Rate 3.47% ' Data Note: Detail may not sum to totals due to rounding.Income represents annual Income for the preceding year.Income for 200E and 2011 is expressed in current dollars,Including an adjustment for inflation. Source:U.S.Bureau of the Census,2000 Census of Population and Housing.ESRI converted 1960 Census data Into 2000 Geography.ESRI forecasts for 2006 and 2011. ' 02006 ESRI On-demand reports and maps from Business Analyst Online.Order at www.asrl.com/bao or call 800-292-=U 6116M007 Page 6 of 7 ' Realty Concepts, Inc. 46 Retail Express Pack Realty concepts Inc. YAWN eiI r I REALTY CONCEPTS I N C Zips:06074(s0061 Windsor'CT) Counselors•IacestmenrManagers Appraisers 9,374 8.0% 2006 Households by Net Worth 6A% 3.3% Total 5.9% <$15,000 3.7% $15,000-$34,999 BA% $35,000-$49,999 $5p,000_$74,999 11.4% $75,000-$99.999 21. $100,000-$149,999 31.3% $267,946 $150,000-$249,999 $250,000-$499,999 $801,984 $500,000+ Median Net Worth Average Net Worth 9,374 4.4% 2006 Households by Disposable Income 5.1% 7.6% Total 14.4% <$15,000 28.2% $15,000-$24,999 19.3% $26,000-$34,999 12.70/0 $35,000-$49,999 4.5% $60,000-$74,999 3.9% $75,000-$99,999 $63,600 $100,000-$149.999 $82,259 $150,000-$199,999 $200,000+ Median Disposable Income 9,023 Average Disposable Income 87.6% 10.6% 1.8% ' 2000 Housing Units Owner Occupied Housing nits Renter Occupied Housing Units 9,544 Vacant Housing Units 89 0% 9.3% ' 2006 Housing Units 1.8% Owner Occupied Housing Units Renter Occupied Housing Units 9,851 ' Vacant Housing Units 88.9% 9.2% 2011 Housing Units ' Owner Occupied Housing Units Renter Occupied Housing Units Vacant Housing Units "Worth ulotion Survey,U•S.Census Bureauand Keogh Current Popequityin vehicles,iRAs examples ' on the stop plans,net�qa s and vehicle loans;Finances, osabie income forecasts are based in Pen ude home on t a of Consume e home MunY'°q debt Inc► h Survey Disposable income is after-tax household inconnt.Dd t4 eh inot��c Exarnp es of u°pet worth are based Data Note:D�siw and mutuakt fund shar K outstandingbills is total household wealth minuse-earn ng secured d unseOUN110 and othh includes accounts,business equity inters debt,certain bank loans, of unsecured debt Inctu a credit��sum to totals due to rounding• ESRI to for 2006 and 2011. ' Federal Reserve Board.Detail MY ulation and Housing. Source. U.S.Bureau Of the census,2000 Census of Pop 47 ' Realty Concepts,Inc. Retail Goods and Services Expendituresconcepts,Inc. REALTY CONCEPTS INC Counselors•investment Managers-Appraisers ZIPS.06074(south Windsor,CT) 2006 2011 Demographic summary 25,673 26,386 TOP Tapestry segments' Population 9,374 9,661 In Style 311 22.9%.9% Households 7,050 7,195 Suburban Splendor 12 0% Families 41.6 42.8 Exurbanites Median Age $91 345 $108,346 8.5% Median Household income Cozy and Comfortable 7 7% Sophisticated Squires Average spending Amount Total Potential spent Index $28,958,476 113 $3,089.23 $5.896,398 122 $629.02 $9.172,381 Apparel and services 105 $978.49 $5 343,542 Men's 128 $570.04 $2.817.652 Women's 80 $300.58 Children's $315.66 $2,769,544 Footwear 201 $295.45 $2,789,544 Watches&Jewelry 201 Apparel Products and Services' $361.59 $3,389,539 I Computer 160 $50.41 $472,552 Computers and Hardware for Home Use 160 $5,252.60 $49,237,915 Software and Accessories es for Home Use $1,068.53 $10,016,440 Entertainment&Recreation 175 $292.92 $2,745,817 ' Fees and Admissions 179 $1,832,820 172 $240.6 $2,255,350 Membership Fees for Ciubs2 163 $240.60 $928,699 Fees for Participant Sports,excl.Trips 163 $99.07 $$928,699 Admission to MovieRheatre/OperaBaliet 189 $240.43 $ 2,253,754 ' Admission to Sporting Events,excl.Trips 476 149 $1,625.82 58,224,562 Fees for Recreational Lessons $877.38 Tvivideolsound Equipment 146 $202.28 $1,89B,171 Community Antenna or Cable Television 160 $62.40 $584,933 Color Televisions 156 $75 96 $712,039 ' VCRs,Video Cameras,and WD Players t47 $54 75 $$32,188 Video Cassettes and DVDs 153 $3.43 $32, 88 Video Game Hardware and Software 156 $96 94 $852,469 Satellite Dishes 147 $249.88 $2,342,364 Rental of Video Cassettes and DVDs 149 $82,541 148 $8.81 $6,78B4O38 Sound Equipment' 175 $724.13 $2,855,789 Rental and Repair of TV/Sound Equipment 155 $304.65 $6 274,038 Pets 16 $669.30 ' Toys and Games $278 71 $2,612,647 Recreational Vehicles and Fees° 124 $228.71 162 $2,143,944 Sporis/Recreation/Exercise Equipments $352 74 $3,306,543 Photo Equipment and SuPpliese 161 $114,476,974 Rea�nd 148 $12,212.18 $67,042,647 145 $7,11 5 .98 $g 905,092 Food 146 51,056.66 $17,363,446 Food at Home 143 $1,852.30 $7,327,858 Bakery and Cereal Products 146 $781.72 $11,815,399 Meat,Poultry,Fish,and Eggs $1,260.44 Dairy Products 147 52,200.86 $20,630,852 Fruit and Vegetables 146 $5,080.20 152 $47,434,327 Snacks and Other Food at Home $866 73 $8,143,493 ' Food Away from Home 151 $605.67 $5,677,559 Alcoholic Beverages 144 Nonalcoholic Beverages at Home ' 5/19/2007 Page t of 3 on-demand reports and maps tram Business Analyst Online.Order at Jonff rommao of tall 800-292-2224 ' G2f106 ESRI 48 Realty Concepts,Inc.