HomeMy WebLinkAboutApp 18-37P Eli Terry Elementary School TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR
PLANNING&ZONING COMMISSION
p APPLICATION FO M
Application Number: �3� r [RECE'VE]D
Official Receipt Date: —7_ 1 f� i' L1 0L1Munis Application #: 'zb 1 Qi 0 J 4 7CSOR PLANNIN
APPLICANT: South Windsor Board of Education
PROJECT NAME: Eli Terry Elementary School
COMPLETE LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 569 Griffin Road
OWNER OF RECORD ON LAND RECORDS: Town of South Windsor
OWNER ADDRESS: 1540 Sullivan Avenue, South Windsor, CT 06074
GIS PIN # 39000569 ZONE A-20
NAME, ADDRESS, TELEPHONE & EMAIL ADDRESS OF PERSON TO WHOM INQUIRIES SHOULD BE DIRECTED:
Henry Thomas, RLA; The LRC Group, 160 West Street, Suite E, Cromwell, CT 06416
860-635-2877; hthomas@lrcconsult.com 60 min.
Estimated presentation time:
THIS APPLICATION IS FOR: (Check all that apply):
❑ Zone Change to (Public Hearing and Certificate of Mailing Required)
❑ Open Space Subdivision/Resubdivision (Public Hearing and Certificate of Mailing Required)
❑ Subdivision ❑ Minor
❑ Major
❑ Resubdivision (Public Hearing Required) ❑ Minor ❑ Major
❑ Conditional Subdivision
® Special Exception to Table 3.1.1 A (Public Hearing and Certificate of Mailing Required)
® Site Plan of Development ® New ❑ Modification Building(s) Sq Ft 66,924 S.f
❑ General Plan of Development
❑ Earth Filling(Sec. 7.6) and/or Earth Removal (Sec. 7.16) (Public Hearing and Certificate of Mailing Required)
❑ Regulation Amendment ❑Zoning ❑ Subdivision -Attach proposed amendment (Public Hearing Required)
❑ Temporary and Conditional Permit (Public Hearing Required) for
❑ Temporary and Conditional Permit Renewal for
❑ Detached In Law Apartment or❑Accessory Apartment (Public Hearing and Certificate of Mailing Required)
❑ Major Home Occupation (Certificate of Mailing Required) for
❑ Other (explain in detail)
PLEASE NOTE: An Application Pending Sign is required to be posted on the property for an applications
ten (10) days prior to being heard by the Commission.
Signatu of Ap li t Signature of Property Owner
Craig Zimmerman, hair, Board of Education Matthew B. Galligan, Town Manager, Town of South Windsor
Print Name of Applicant Print Name of Property Owner Revised 1/9/2017
a
TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR CHECKLIST
REQUIRED INFORMATION SITE PLANS
APPLICANT South Windsor Board of Eduation
PROJECT NAME Eli Terry Elementary School
This checklist must be signed by plan preparer (P.E./L.S.) declaring that all required information
is provided. Items 1-7 are required for all applications; items 8-11 required where appropriate.
Check mark for each item supplied.
X 1. On each sheet for plans or maps, title block with the following information:
X a. Name, address and telephone of applicant.
X b. Name, address and telephone number of Land Surveyor or Professional
Engineer.
X c. Name of Development.
X d. Date when drawings were made.
X 2. Key Map: An overall map drawn to a scale of 1 inch equals either 100 feet or
200 feet. This map will show the overall design of the Development and
surrounding properly within 500 feet.
X a. Data block which gives needed zoning information such as percentage of
lot coverage, acreage of tract, number of apartment units, parking
requirements, etc.
X b. Outline of buildings.
X c. Layout of streets.
X d. Surrounding property boundaries-within 500 feet.
X e. Names of abutting property owners.
X f. Proposed open spaces and recreation areas.
n.a. g. Driveway cuts on abutting properties and any properties across from
proposed site.
X h. Distance to and name of nearest intersection street.
X 3. Architectural Elevations: See attached checklist for Architecture and Design
Review.
i
X 4. Plot Plan: A layout map of the proposed site drawn to a scale of 1 inch equals
40 feet on either of the following size sheets: (1) 24" x 36" with a 3/4" ruled
margin; (2) 18" x 24" with a 1/2" ruled margin, containing the following data:
X a. Distance and bearings of all boundary lines and acreage of site. Iron pins
required at all property angle points and shown on map.
X b. Proposed streets and street lines with center line station, curve data, and
parking spaces.
X c. Building lines in accordance with zoning regulations.
X d. Proposed buildings and other structures, including signs, outside lighting,
and dumpsters (on concrete pad and screened).
e. Easements, noting grantors, grantees, and purpose must be shown in
table format, e.g. below
Grantor Grantee Type of Date Filed Vol/Pg
Easement
X f. Names of abutting property owners.
X g. Monuments will be indicated at corners and angles of all streets and at all
points of curvature and tangency. The monumented points within
proposed site shall be coordinated. These coordinates shall appear in
tabular form on the plot plan. The accessibility of these CGS points shall
be determined by the Town Engineer.
X h. All open space or other common or public land uses shall be indicated.
X i. A-2 certification; P.E./L.S. Seal.
X 5. Topographic Map: A map drawn to a scale of 1 inch to 40 feet on sheets not
exceeding 24 inches by 36 inches, including ruled margins shall in addition to
the requirements of the plot plans show the following:
X a. All existing and proposed buildings.
X b. Curb Lines and pavement width, sidewalks.
X c. Existing and proposed sanitary sewers.
X d. Existing and proposed water and-all existing utilities.
2
X e. Present wooded area indicated by foliage lines. Any trees to be saved
should be shown.
X f. Existing and proposed contours shall be shown in not less than two-foot
intervals, but in cases of relatively level land, the contours shall be one-
foot intervals and spot elevations.
X g . Regulated wetlands and 100-year floodplain or note that none are
present.
X h. Proposed storm drainage system, showing all catch basins, endwalls,
manholes, lengths and sizes of pipes and elevations of structures.
(Maximum distance between catch basins shall be 300 feet and minimum
size of storm drain lines shall be 15 inches, within Town ROW.) If
plan/profile sheet is provided all of this does not need to be shown. Only
top of frame elevations and inverts of open discharge pipe shall be shown
on this plan.
X i. Connections of all springs into proposed storm drainage system as
needed.
X j. Location and indications of existing brook channels, and 100-year flood
limits.
X k. A-2 &T-2 Certification; P.E & L.S. Seals.
X 6. Landscaping plan
X 7. Drainage calculations: - Zero Runoff Increase per attached guidelines.
X 8. Traffic Report
X 9. Site Lighting Plan
n.a. 10. Plans and Profiles: A plan and profile of the proposed streets drawn on
plan/profile paper of scales 1 inch to 40 feet horizontally, and 1 inch to 4 feet
vertically on sheets not exceeding 24 inches by 36 inches, including ruled
margins and containing the following:
a. Layout of streets in sections coordinated by stations with the profile.
b. Street plan showing roadways, drainage, sanitary sewer (including house
sewer), foundation drains, lot lines, buildings including all utilities with
elevations (top frame and inverts), size, type, length, slopes of pipes.
c. Sight line at driveway &street intersections.
3
d. Profile of roadway showing existing and finished grades. Roadway profile
will show all tangent grade and all vertical curve information.
e. Profile will show all catch basins and all drainage lines between catch
basins with all invert and top of frame elevations, sizes, lengths and
slopes of pipes.
f. Where any storm drainage line discharges into an existing brook sufficient
profile of this brook will be shown to determine conditions.
g. CGS datum shall be used on all sites accessible to these controls. The
Town Engineer shall, based on standard engineering practices, determine
the accessibility of these controls.
h. Profiles shall show all sanitary sewer lines and manholes, including
elevations, (inverts, top of frame) sizes, lengths, and slopes of pipes.
Top of foundation elevations for building shall be shown.
n.a. 11. Open Space Site Improvement Plans: For sites which require or include a
provision for open spaces, a plan which contains data for site improvement
may be required. This map shall be drawn to a scale of 1 inch equals 40
feet.
n.a. 12. Sanitary Report: Where individual sanitary sewage disposal systems are
proposed, the final plans shall include a Sanitary Report certified by a
Professional Engineer. The report shall demonstrate the feasibility of the
proposed individual systems.
Auotv--�� July 3, 2018
PLA PRE RER (P.E./L.S.) DATE
February 2002; Rev. 4-04
4
lop
ELI TERRY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Project Narrative July 3, 2018
The site for the proposed new Eli Terry Elementary School is the existing site of the current Eli Terry
Elementary School. The replacement of the school is an element of Phase 2 of the "South Windsor
Public Schools Elementary Schools Master Plan" adopted by the South Windsor Board of Education on
October 29, 2013
The current school building of 52,296 s.f. (exterior dimensions) will be replaced by a new building of
66,294 s.f. (exterior dimensions). The new school building will provide for contemporary standards for
space provisions and teaching environments/technologies, as well as modern lighting, mechanical and
plumbing systems.
The proposed site plan configuration is anchored in the requirement that the existing school building
remain in operation while the new building is constructed. The siting of the new building accommodates
this constraint and allows for the site to remain occupied during construction. When complete, the
school will have increased parking capacity (from 96 to 117 spaces) and new game fields and
playgrounds.
Access into the site for automobiles, buses and service traffic will continue by way of the property's
driveway corridor from Griffin Road. Existing parking spaces along this drive will be removed and
accounted for in new parking areas in the site. Parent and medically fragile student drop-off activities
will occur along the west side of the new building and all such traffic will exit to Griffin Road as they do
today. Bus loading and unloading will occur on the north side of the new building and exit (only) to
Graham Road. This allows for separation of traffic and boarding activities. This bus and exit only route
to Graham Road will be gated off to restrict the use of the exit to buses and delivery or service vehicles
only.
A paved firelane (doubling as a pedestrian and bicycle trail) circulates through the back of the school.
During school hours, this drive will be gated off to prevent vehicular access.
In addition to improvements for vehicular circulation, the property will also be served by walks and
multi-modal trails from both Griffin and Graham Roads and connect to proposed town improvements
to trails and an existing crossing of the Podunk River at the southwest corner of the school site. This
connectivity is consistent with the accessible route requirements throughout the school property.
z:\Iandresourceconsultants\2017 jobs\17-2144 mpn sw eli terry\docs\pe rm itting\town\d raft applications\pzc\et special exception
narrative 07-10-18.docx
LRC Engineering&Surveying,D.P.C.
Land Resource Consultants,Inc. 160 West Street,Suite E
LRC Engineering&Surveying,P.C. Cromwell,CT 06416
LRC Environmental Services,Inc. Tel: (860)635-2877
LRC Engineering and Surveying,LLC Connecticut SBE Certified Fax: (860)635-4226
Offices in Connecticut,New York&New Jersey
www.ircconsult.com
Land Planning 0 Civil Engineering 4 Environmental Services • Land Surveying • Landscape Architecture
July 3, 2018
Name
Address
Address
Re: Eli Terry Elementary School
569 Griffin Road, South Windsor, CT
CERTIFIED MAIL
Dear [name],
The LRC Group is acting as applicant on behalf of the South Windsor Public School District in regards
to site development plans for a new Eli Terry Elementary School which will occupy the current school
site. In accordance with Section 8.2.0 of the "Town of South Windsor Zoning Regulations", you are
hereby notified that an application has been filed on the property abutting yours and is subject to a
hearing by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The application and plans are on file with the South
Windsor Planning Department.
As an abutting property owner you are invited to the hearing to ask questions and/or give comments.
You may also submit written comments regarding the application prior to the hearing if you so desire.
For further information regarding the specific date this application will be heard please contact Michele
Lipe, Director of Planning, Planning Department, 860-644-251 I, ext. 252.
Sincerely,
The LRC Group
Henry Thomas, RLA
Principal
Cc: Kate Carter, South Windsor Public Schools
Charles Warrington, Colliers International
z:\landresourceconsultants\2017 jobs\17-2144 mpn sw eli terry\docs\permitting\town\draft applications\pzc\et abutters notice
07-03-18.docx
LRC Engineering&Surveying,DPC 160 West Street,Suite E
LRC Engineering and Surveying,LLC Connecticut SBE Certified Cromwell,CT 06416
LRC Environmental Services,Inc. Tel: (860)635-2877
Land Resource Consultants,Inc. Fax: (860)635-4226
Offices in Connecticut,New York&New Jersey
www.Ircconsult.com
Land Planning • Civil Engineering 4 Environmental Services • Land Surveying • Landscape Architecture
Abutters to Eli Terry Elementary School,569 Griffin Road
Planning&Zoning Commission Application-Site Plan Approval&Special Permit
South Windsor,CT
As of July 2,2018
Parcel ID Site Address Owner Name Mailing Address Mailing City Mailing Mailing Zip
State
66300005 5 OLD FARM ROAD AHGHARI SAEED 5 OLD FARM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500632 632 GRAHAM ROAD OCONNOR ROBERT J&LAURIE J 632 GRAHAM RD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
14400160 160 BROOK STREET ZAVARELLA JASON 160 BROOK STREET SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500691 691 GRAHAM ROAD BARONE CARL F&GINETTE C 691 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000585 585 GRIFFIN ROAD BILLIG LAURETTE 585 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000516 516 GRIFFIN ROAD FIVE S GROUP INC P 0 BOX 415 E WINDSOR HILL CT 06028-0000
41400060 60 HENRY ROAD ROSE CHARLES N&M LINDA 60 HENRY ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
41400030 30 HENRY ROAD SOUCY ARTHUR LIONEL TR& 30 HENRY ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500715 715 GRAHAM ROAD MADER APRIL N 715 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500721 721 GRAHAM ROAD FAUTEUX MARCEL E&SUSAN F 721 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000563 563 GRIFFIN ROAD FITZGERALD JAMES 563 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000521 521 GRIFFIN ROAD FREIDMAN GERALD R 521 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500662 662 GRAHAM ROAD GIROUARD MARK L&JANICE B 662 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
41400036 36 HENRY ROAD HEDGES PAUL ALLAN&BARBARAJ 36 HENRY ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000603 603 GRIFFIN ROAD TRACY MICHAEL J&VALERIE K 603 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500661 661 GRAHAM ROAD GORDON STEVEN R&LAURA B 661 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500681 681 GRAHAM ROAD ENSLING JENNIFER 681 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
66300006 6 OLD FARM ROAD NIKLARZ RICHARD J 6 OLD FARM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000555 555 GRIFFIN ROAD LOVETT JAMES H&LOUISE B 555 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000531 531 GRIFFIN ROAD MACDONALD TIMOTHY P&GAIL P 531 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500701 701 GRAHAM ROAD MATHEWSON DANIELJ 701 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500675 675 GRAHAM ROAD LEONARD AARON L&SARAH L 675 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
41400050 50 HENRY ROAD MAHAN ERIC&NIKKI 50 HENRY ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000615 615 GRIFFIN ROAD MORRELL CRAIG R 615 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
41400020 20 HENRY ROAD SCHAFFER TIERRA L& 20 HENRY ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500731 731 GRAHAM ROAD NOSKE RONALD W& 731 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500627 627 GRAHAM ROAD DIAS JEFFREY&ERICA 627 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500635 635 GRAHAM ROAD HARTLEY HELEN HELM 635 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000501 501 GRIFFIN ROAD CARKEY BRYAN 501 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000593 593 GRIFFIN ROAD PINTO JOHN A JR&DIANE L 593 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000577 577 GRIFFIN ROAD JACKSON MILTON G JR& 577 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000515 515 GRIFFIN ROAD SACZYK MARY 515 GRIFFIN RD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
14400186 186 BROOK STREET DACOSTA MEGAN 186 BROOK STREET SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
14400174 174 BROOK STREET SNYDER HAROLD E&CAROLE 174 BROOK STREET SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
41400046 46 HENRY ROAD HBW REAL ESTATE IRREVOCABLE TR 46 HENRY ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000539 539 GRIFFIN ROAD SWIATKIEWICZ FRANCIS J& 539 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500712 712 GRAHAM ROAD KEHOE MICHAEL& 712 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000547 547 GRIFFIN ROAD TRINKS NANCY T&IRVING R L/U 547 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500720 720 GRAHAM ROAD PUNIELLO JESSE J&MEGAN 720 GRAHAM ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
3840R013 R013 GREENFIELD DRIVE ISOUTH WINDSOR TOWN OF 1540 SULLIVAN AVE SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
39000569 569 GRIFFIN ROAD ISOUTH WINDSOR TOWN OF 31 569 GRIFFIN ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
37500650 650 GRAHAM ROAD ISOUTH WINDSOR TOWN OF 1540 SULLIVAN AVE SOUTH WINDSOR CT 06074-0000
i
Town of South Windsor ,� lye
Geographic Geographic Information System (GIS) ^
O
Sbxop•�a'
Date Printed:6/12/2018
r ,
F
a
7%
:f
t<let
N
MAP DISCLAIMER-NOTICE OF LIABILITY Approximate Scale: 1 inch=200 ft
This map is for assessment purposes only. It is not for legal description W E
or conveyances.All information is subject to verification by any user.
The Town of South Windsor and its mapping contractors assume no
legal responsibility for the information contained herein. S
i
IUIU1ANX•,. ..«,a v.«.,.,.r,c.
IvRM 1:' A CONNII IPIA WANYANif 1k1111 17s •,q,g1dlY Awl.Iid•L•.M.v.M.140dw
001 G13P
mill!
Kno 'flirt It, SOUTH WINDSOR HEIGHTS, INC., a Connecticut
icorporation with its principal office in the Town of North Stoningtor1, 1
County of New London and State of Connecticut, acting herein by
ISAMUEL M. SISISKY, its President, hereunto duly authorized,
I {
ljfor Ihr c•uuxidl•raliou of Ten (10) Dollars and other valuable considerations ;
On c c ivrd to its full vlll i,fuoliun of the Town of South Windsor, a municip .
Corporation with territorial jurisdiction within the Town of South
Windsor,
. I ,
i
do es gier, y raut, Ilargain, 4111 and rnnfirol unto the said Town of South Windsor,
its successors and assigns forever, 25 certain pieces or parcels of
land, situated in the Town of South Windsor, County of Hartford and
i� State of Connecticut, being Lots Nos. 401-425 inclusive on a certain ;
(� map entitled, "South Windsor Heights Lot Layout Section III South
(�I Windsor, Conn. Scale 1" = 60' Oct. 30, 1956 Primus & Welti, Engr's.
N which map is on file in the Town Clerk's Office in said Town of South '
II Windsor to which reference may be had. I
I Together with the right to use Overlook Road as shown on said map for i
all purposes for which a public highway is ord+.narily used.
` Said premises are conveyed together with all the Grantor's right, tit e
and interest in and to Dennis Road and Stephen Drive as shown on said]
map. Said Dennis Road is bounded Easterly by Graham Road and Westerl
by Overlook Roads and said Stephen Drive is bounded Northerly by 4
Griffin Road and Southeasterly by Graham Road.
Said premises are subject to building, building line and zoning t
restrictions, pole line easements and drainage easements appearing
of record.
Said premises are subject to taxes on the South Windsor To.n List 1
of October 1, 1963, which taxes the Grantee lierein assumes and i
agrees to pay as part consideration for this deed.
bL5"�. h.�'J.. I v
1
i
E
1
i �
Traffic Statement for
Eli Terry Elementary School
South Windsor, Connecticut
July 3, 2017
This traffic statement examines the traffic impact for the proposed expansion of the Eli
Terry Elementary School in South Windsor, Connecticut.
Summary
■ The school construction is expected to generate 99 and 46 new site trips during
the respective weekday morning and afternoon peak hours of the school.
■ These new trips from the school expansion will be adequately accommodated by
Griffin Road and Graham Road.
■ During a three-year period of 2015-2017, only one traffic accident (weather-
related) was recorded for the segment of Griffin Road between Brookfield Street
and Graham Road.
■ Adequate sight distances will be provided at the future site driveways on Griffin
Road and Graham Road.
Trip Generation
The existing and future site trips for the school were estimated using data for Land Use
(LU) 520, Elementary School, from Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition published by
the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). The manual provides trip rates based on
number of students and gross building square footage.
For the Eli Terry Elementary School, the estimates based on square footage generate
the most new trips—the differences between the existing and future trips—and therefore
were used in this exercise as conservative projections of new school trips.
Table 1, 2, and 3 show the vehicular trips for the existing and the future conditions and
the net increases resulting from the school construction. During the respective weekday
morning and afternoon peak hours of the school, there will be 99 and 46 new vehicular
trips using the school driveways when the project is completed.
Table 1 Trip Generation for Existing Conditions Based on S uare Footage
Weekday 5 11 510 1,021
Weekday Morning Peak Hour of School 196 160 356
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour of School 73 92 165
Table 2 Trip Generation for Future Conditions Based on Square Footage
11�Weekday 653 653 1,306
Weekday Morning Peak Hour of School 250 205 455
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour of School 93 118 211
1
Table 3 New Trips Based on S uare Footage
Weekday 142 143 285
Weekday Morning Peak Hour of School 54 45 99
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour of School 20 26 46
Existing Traffic Volumes and Traffic Impact
Traffic volumes for Griffin Road and Graham Road at two ConnDOT count stations near
the intersection of Griffin Road and Graham Road are shown in Figures 1 and 2. The
hourly counts were collected in March 2010. At both locations, the peak-hour volumes
were fewer than 200 vehicles per hour. nth the addition of the new school trips (99 for
the morning peak hour and 46 for the afternoon peak hour of the school), the peak-hour
volumes for both roads will increase to fewer than 300 vehicles per hour. In traffic
engineering, a rule-of-thumb roadway capacity for a two-lane road is a range of 1,000-
1,400 vehicles per hour, much larger than the project peak-hour volume of fewer 300
vehicles per hour. So the increased traffic from the school expansion will be adequately
accommodated by Griffin Road and Graham Road.
Figure 1 March 2010 Weekday Traffic Volumes on Griffin Road, Northeast of
Graham Road
140
j 120 I
100
I
80
I 60 I
40 i
I
20 i
0
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q a a a o_ a a a a a a a a Q
{ cc-I CN cM CC� Lfcc1 lcc0 Iccy 0cc0 m O c-I N -1 cN CM C� Ln W ICC, 0CC0 M O ci N
Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q
N c-1 N M V Ln l0 n W < QO a--1 N M �' Ln W r\ 00 0_ d d
a--I Q) O r-I
Source:ConnDOT
2
Figure 2 March 2010 Weekday Traffic Volumes on Graham Road, Northeast of
Griffin Road
200 -------7-
180
160
140
120
1100
16-1 '04
80
60
40 -
NN
20
0
M 0 -1 :T Ln W r.1 M 0
< Q < < < < 3- a- 0- a a 0- M
oo < m ZT Ln W
Ln w r,
0) 0
Source:ConnDOT
Traffic Accident Records
Traffic accident records for the segment of Griffin Road near the school, between
Brookfield Street and Graham Road, during a three-year period of 2015-2017 were
searched using Connecticut Crash Data Repository website hosted by UConn. Only one
accident was recorded for this part of Griffin Road during the period. The accident
occurred on December 23, 2017 and was a one-car collision caused by freezing rain.
Additionally, no school bus accident was recorded for Griffin Road during the period.
3
..
Driveway Sight Distances
The posted speed limit on Graham Road is 25 mph, and the posted speed limit on
Griffin Road is 30 mph. If the roadway design speeds, or 85t"-percentile speeds, are
assumed to be 10 mph more than the posted speed limits-35 mph for Graham Road
and 40 mph for Griffin Road—the associated ConnDOT sight distance requirements are
390 feet for Graham Road and 445 feet for Griffin Road. A plan prepared by the LRC
Group has demonstrated that sight distances at both school driveways will exceed
these ConnDOT requirements.
Kermit Hua, PE, PTOE
Principal
KWH Enterprise, LLC
(203) 606-3525
kermit.hua@kwhenterprise.com
0%
C O N/y' `1",,.
µ%T V/ e'i
<f� R`
i C ci
t
l itlttti
4
' • • - •
5
Land Use: 520
Elementary School
Description
An elementary school typically serves students attending kindergarten through the fifth or sixth
grade. Elementary schools are usually centrally located in residential communities in order to
facilitate student access and have no student drivers. This land use consists of schools where bus
service is usually provided to students living beyond a specified distance from the school. Both public
and private elementary schools are included in this land use. Middle school/junior high school (Land
Use 522), high school (Land Use 530), private school (K-8)(Land Use 534). private school (K-12)
(Land Use 536), and charter elementary school (Land Use 537) are related uses.
Additional Data
Elementary school students generally used school buses more than regular transit and were
dropped off and picked up more than high school students. who were apt to walk longer distances,
ride bicycles, or, in some cases, drive to school. The percentage of students at the sites who were
transported to school via bus varied considerably. Some sites experienced higher than average
trip rates because many students did not utilize the available school bus service. Due to the varied
transit and school bus usage at these sites, it is desirable that future studies report additional detail
on the percentage of students who were bused to school and the percentage that were dropped off
and picked up.
The elementary schools surveyed exhibited significant variations in terms of facilities provided.
Because the ratio of floor space to student population varied widely among the schools surveyed,
the number of students may be a more reliable independent variable on which to establish trip
generation rates.
Time-of-day distribution data for this land use are presented in Appendix A. For the 11 general urban/
suburban sites with data,the overall highest vehicle volumes during the AM and PM on a weekday
were counted between 7:15 and 8:15 a.m. and 2:15 and 3:15 p.m., respectively.
The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s in Alabama,Arizona,
British Columbia (CAN), California, Connecticut, Florida. Hawaii, Minnesota, Montana, New York,
Oregon.Texas, and Utah.
Source Numbers
186, 383, 390, 395, 531536, 572, 579, 583, 609, 611, 612, 613. 632, 707, 852, 856, 858, 866, 877,
878, 896. 940
10 Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition-Volume 2:Data-Institutional(Land Uses 500-599)
6
Elementary School
(520)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Students
On a: Weekday
Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban
NIZ .,,_-u. St,dies 9
A:., tN-i r of St�derts: ,vv
Vehicle Trip Generation per Student
Data Plot and Equation
2sx
x
2.00C
W x
I
{
i
C00
5,T
E
I
�0 200 400 o0C 800 1,000
X=Number of Students
Study Site Fitted Curve - - - - Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation:T=2.13(X)-184.07 RI-0.70
i ?rip Generation Manual 10th Edition-Volume 2 Data•institutional(and Uses 500-599) 11
7
Elementary School
(520)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Students
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m.
Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban
Vehicle Trip Generation per Student
Data Plot and Equation
i
sue:'
I
i
r
f
a
r
400
x
.,Y
2X
200 400 50C 803 i 000 1.200
X=Number of S=.uden!s
Study Site - - - - Average Rate
Fitted curve Equation:Not Given R=a-•--
12 Trip Generation Manua Ott- d�tioa•Voiume 2: Data•institutonal,.and Uses 500-599
8
Elementary School
(520)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Students
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Settingilocation: General Urban]Suburban
Vehicle Trip Generation per Student
Data Plot and Equation
ii
2C- 1.000
X=N-r-,--e.-o�Suaer.ts
Study Site Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given
3e-e-aicn Vanuai 13t.l ;oiu^e 2 Da*,-=- nst;:ut�c-.-al rand uses 500-599) 13
9
Elementary School
(520)
Vehic:e yr=p Ends vs: Students
Can a: Weekday,
AIDE Peak Hour of Generator
SettingtLocation: Genera? UrbaR;Suburban
Vehicle Trip Generatio^ per Student
Data Plot and Equation,
i
i
f
1
e Y.
I
1
1
1
+xi 1
I
i
l
t
i
2 aG 60 3v 1.2GC
Study Site - - - - Average Rate
Fitters Curve Equation:Not Given R—""
14 T" c .8'.! 4Ia`,.a C�.`. c 2:—a a s'uu.cna _d -se3 53. 9i:1
10
Elementary School
(520)
Venice Trip Ends vs: Students
On a. Weekday,
PM Peak Hoar of Generator
Setting;'Location: General UrbaniSuburtban
Vehicle Trip Generation per Student
Data Plot and Equation
i
j,
1
kik
1
I
i
i
I
2
j�
!
l
i
2; 40C i3Occ 1,200
X_N�rroe- 'Sccers
Study Site - - - - Average Rate
Fitteo Curve Equation:Not Given R,.•••«
Ge e aucr,Vanja, m:e_ =-a: G,.. .. a ,_are rises 500-599.) 15
11
Elementary School
(520),
Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
On a: Weekday
Sett ng!Locatian: General tlrbaniSuburban
Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Data Plot and Equatior
9
1
}
7
i
i
I
i
,
I
_v _ GC
X= 03 Sc . . S
Study Site - - - Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: Not Given W-
16 c. tai;C^Van a v cd' _ L --a,. s.,.,..,"a _a"c ..;ses •\r
12
Elementary School
(520)
Vehic e Trip Ends vs; 1000 Sq, Ft. GFA
On a: Weekday,
Pear Hour of Atijacer:*,Street Traffic.
One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m.
Setting.`Location: General UrbariSuburbar,
Vehicle Trip Generation: per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Data Plot and Equatior,
s
i
E
i
i
i
i
i
Study Site - - Average Rate
Fined Curve Equation;No;G,ver; R,g=•*•
3z a a v e_ Da: s.. .. ^a:,_anc uses 500-5W 17
13
Elementary School
(520)
Venice 'rip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
On a: Weekday,
Pear Hour or Adjacenz Street Traffic.
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m
Sett ng:i ocation: Genera! i.lrban!Suburban
Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Data Plot and Equatior
i
i
E
i
i
i
s
_ L..
i
i
i
i
X
f�f
j
Study Site - - - Average Rate
Linea curve equation,Nut Givan W-
■it.
18 3e-era:on Va--a E--:z- - 2. Da.a> -s'.',....-a _a^o 'uses
14
Elementary School
:52 '
u : e �->p EnaS VS: 10,00 sq. it GYA
On a; Weekaay,
AV Peak Hour c--f Generator
9ett2ng Location: General U.rbar?isuburban
Vehicle Trap Gerierataor per 1000 Sq. Ft. GFA
Data Plot and Equation
r.
f
F
i
i
_. ,x
x= u W
Study Site - - - - Average Rate
Fittetl Curve Equatont Not Given RI « •-
a:— �-arc uses 18
15
Elementary School
52 .
Ven;cse r.:":p Ends vs: iir00 Sq: `t. GFA
On a: Weekday.
Se-Vt :g'!- catio.n.. General Urbani.S,-.b�r-,'a'n
Vehicle Trip Generation pe- '0a0 Sq. Ft. GFA
Data Plot and Equatior
' 3
I
1
L�t
I
Study Site - - Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation.Not Giver Rem,....
16
Elementary School
(52G
Ve :c;e -- p Enos vs; Employers
n a Weekday
Sett ngirocation: General u-i aniSuburC-an
Vehicle Trip Generation~ per Empioyee
Data Plot and Equatio-
i
i
-- _ 20C
Study Site Fitted Curare - - - Average Rate
Fitted Curve Equation: n477=0.68-n(X)*4.44 R`=0.90
v _�.�'�,� a:-: �^^a yard uses SJ��-599j 21
17
ementary School
f 520)
vc- c e P, Etas •$s: E^crlcyees
On a. Weekaay-
Peak Hour c`Acja;cer Street Traffic,
One Dour Serween 7 ana 9 a.MT
Se?'t—g.;-oca'rio : Genera' Urtan;Sib;,;, `rna7
Vehicle Trip Generation per Employee
Data Plot and E uatior
i
i
i
J
7
t
_ 20C
Stuay Site - - - Average Rate
Fitted Carve 3, i �__ .•.
LLIE
22 v a- a-.-a e_
18
Elementary School
52
rep, v e '".G Ends vs: E=~°;;ioyees
On a: Weekday
Reak tiOUr of Ac jal-ent Street"traffic.
One Hour Between, 3 and E p.rn.
Sett 7C1?G : Ger.era Urrar'Swb;orna-
Vehicle Trip Generation per Employee
Data Plat and Equatio:.
i
i
i
i
i
20C
Study Site Average Rate
Pitted Curve Eq�anon: Nat Gwen R=_ ...
F{Z ve _�' �ac,7a; _ara jses 50G-5991 23
19
Elementary School
52U
- 1; E:nlas vs: EMployees
On a: 'Vieekday-
Ana Peak Ho,;, Ue:neraty.
Genera! U-banlSabcirvan
Vehicle Trip Generation: per
Data Plot and Eg ratio
t
— 20C
Stuciv Site Average Rate
Fated Curve Gtver,
i
24 3 _'a_v r _u uv.� S'.. d _ �5
20
Elementary School
52;"
e 'r p Ends vs E,nn;pioyees
On a: Weekday.
-P,Y Peak ;,;r:.D'Ge: ura cr
S,r_ ,g _o za-non. Ger'era v.uan•Sjb.,�roan
Vehicle Trip Generat;o,7; per Ernployee
Data Plot and E �atior
f
20C
stuay Site Average Rate
Fitted Curve squavon: Nu-Giaer3 R==
_ �.. . - a :-,-na. _any uses 5a0--5991 25
21
Existing 452 Students
Weekdav 427 427 854
Weekday Morning Peak Hour of School 159 135 294
Weekday Afternoon Peak Hour of School 69 85 154
Increase 15 Students
Weekdav 15 g
29
Weekday Morning Peak Hour of School 5 5 10
lWeekdayAfternoon Peak Hour of School 3 2 5
Proposed 467 Students
7Weekday
442 441 883
Weekday Morning Peak Hour of School 164 140 304
Afternoon Peak Hour of School 72 87 159
22
Existing 52.296 KSF
Entry Exit
W
eekday 511 510 1,021
rnin Peak Hour of School 196 160 356ernoon Peak Hour of School 73 92 165
7
Increase 14.628 KSF
Entry Exit
7Weekday
142 143 746
rnin Peak Hour of School 54 45 ernoon Peak Hour of School 20 26
Proposed 66.924 KSF
WROEPM
W
eekday 653 653 1,306
rnin Peak Hour of School 250 205 455
ernoon Peak Hour of School 93 118 211
23
YEAR 2010 STA NO 132 0153
' STATE OF CONNECTICUT
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BUREAU OF POLICY AND PLANNING
PLANNING INVENTORY AND DATA
TRAFFIC RECORDER DATA
TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR ROUTE DIRECTION B
GRAHAM ROAD-NE OF GRIFFIN ROAD
DAY SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT
DATE 0 0 0 03/31/2010 04/01/2010 0 0
TYPE
HOUR
2010 ADT=1700 ACF=NA
12A 0 0 0 0 5 0 0
01A 0 0 0 0 5 0 0
02A 0 0 0 0 4 0 0
03A 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
04A 0 0 0 0 7 0 0
05A 0 0 0 0 38 0 0
06A 0 0 0 0 93 0 0
07A 0 0 0 0 139 0 0
08A 0 0 0 0 99 0 0
09A 0 0 0 0 81 0 0
10A 0 0 0 62 0 0 0
11A 0 0 0 80 0 0 0
12P 0 0 0 96 0 0 0
O1P 0 0 0 77 0 0 0
02P 0 0 0 109 0 0 0
03P 0 0 0 141 0 0 0
04P 0 0 0 177 0 0 0
05P 0 0 0 168 0 0 0
O6P 0 0 0 122 0 0 0
07P 0 0 0 100 0 0 0
08P 0 0 0 65 0 0 0
09P 0 0 0 58 0 0 0
10P 0 0 0 35 0 0 0
11P 0 0 0 16 0 0 0
TOT 0 0 0 1306 473 0 0
RECORDER 031 24 HR=177944
YEAR 2010 STA NO 132 0141
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BUREAU OF POLICY AND PLANNING
PLANNING INVENTORY AND DATA
TRAFFIC RECORDER DATA
TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR ROUTE DIRECTION B
GRIFFIN ROAD-NE OF GRAHAM ROAD
DAY SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT
DATE 0 0 0 03/31/2010 04/01/2010 0 0
TYPE
HOUR
2010 ADT=1200 ACF=NA
12A 0 0 0 0 3 0 0
O1A 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
02A 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
03A 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
04A 0 0 0 0 9 0 0
05A 0 0 0 0 12 0 0
O6A 0 0 0 0 64 0 0
07A 0 0 0 0 109 0 0
08A 0 0 0 0 98 0 0
09A 0 0 0 0 70 0 0
10A 0 0 0 46 0 0 0
11A 0 0 0 78 0 0 0
12P 0 0 0 55 0 0 0
O1P 0 0 0 79 0 0 0
02P 0 0 0 88 0 0 0
03P 0 0 0 91 0 0 0
04P 0 0 0 118 0 0 0
05P 0 0 0 113 0 0 0
06P 0 0 0 94 0 0 0
07P 0 0 0 60 0 0 0
08P 0 0 0 56 0 0 0
09P 0 0 0 21 0 0 0
10P 0 0 0 17 0 0 0
11P 0 0 0 12 0 0 0
TOT 0 0 0 928 370 0 0
RECORDER 035 24 HR=1298
�54
Design Speed ISD (ft)
(Vmajor)
(mph) Passenger Cars Single-Unit Trucks Tractor/Semitrailers
20 225 280 340
25 280 350 425
30 335 420 510
35 390 490 595
40 445 560 680
45 500 630 765
50 555 700 850
55 610 770 930
60 665 840 1015
65 720 910 1100
70 775 980 1185
Notes:
1. These ISD values assume a left or right turn onto a 2-lane facility without a median.
2. These ISD values assume a minor road approach grade less than or equal to +3%.
INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCES
(Two-Lane Highway or Street)
Figure 11-2C
26
: . 1 • •
(860)648-5048
SOUTH WINDSOR
Parks&Recreation
Memo
To: Michele Lipe, Director of Planning
From: Ray Favreau, CPRP, Director of Parks & Recreation
CC: Planning &Zoning Commission, John Caldwell, Parks Superintendent
Date: 7/9/2018
Re: Phillip R. Smith & Eli Terry Elementary Schools
After review of the plans for Appl.18-36P, Town of South Windsor Phillip R. Smith School and
Appl.18-37P, Town of South Windsor Eli Terry School I offer the following observations on
behalf of the Parks & Recreation Department.
• Phillip R. Smith (PRS)
o Although we are very supportive of grounds beautification, the landscape plans
as proposed will be difficult to impossible for our parks crew to maintain with our
current staffing level. For safety reasons and to minimize damage to vehicles
much of the necessary maintenance like trim mowing and weed-wacking can't be
accomplished during the regular work day requiring unfunded over-time.
Additionally, current State laws prohibit the use of any growth control products at
public schools grades K-8 constraining us to laborious weeding and edging by
hand. We respectfully request paring down the 105 deciduous trees, 42
Evergreens, 16 shrubs and 68 perennials/grasses to a more reasonable level.
Parking lot islands are especially crowded and labor intensive. Perhaps the BOE
should consider out-sourcing with a private landscape contractor.
o What is the expectation of the commemorative paver/garden area? Again, a
maintenance concern.
o I did not see any detail regarding cabinetry/millwork in the cafeteria for our 4th R
Before &After School program storage that was requested from the initial
planning conversations. What we retro-fit at our expense at the new Orchard Hill
School would be beneficial if done up front at PRS.
1
• Eli Terry (ET)
o Once again, although we are very supportive of grounds beautification, the
landscape plans as proposed will be difficult to impossible for our parks crew to
maintain with our current staffing level. For safety reasons and to minimize
damage to vehicles much of the necessary maintenance like trim mowing and
weed-wacking can't be accomplished during the regular work day requiring
unfunded over-time. Additionally, current State laws prohibit the use of any
growth control products at public schools grades K-8 constraining us to laborious
weeding and edging by hand. We respectfully request paring down the 108
deciduous trees, 88 Evergreens, 222 shrubs and 44 perennials/grasses to a
more reasonable level. Parking lot islands are especially crowded and labor
intensive. Perhaps the BOE should consider out-sourcing with a private
landscape contractor.
o We are concerned about the seeded lawn and plantings in the courtyard with no
easy or safe access to mow and maintain.
o Once again, I did not see any detail regarding cabinetry/millwork in the cafeteria
for our 4th R Before &After School program storage that was requested from the
initial planning conversations. What we retro-fit at our expense at the new
Orchard Hill School would be beneficial if done up front at ET.
We welcome an opportunity to discuss this further at the appropriate time with the appropriate
individuals.
2
PLANNING DEPARMENT
IN-HOUSE REFERRAL FORM
DATE: 7-10-18
TO: Matt Galligan, Michael Gantick, Walter Summers, Jeff Doolittle
Ray Favreau, Chris Dougan, Heather Oatis, Kevin Cooney, Tony Manfre,
John Caldwell, Andrea Confrancesco, Chris Duchesne, Vincent Stetson
FROM: Michele Lipe, AICP, Director of Planning
The Planning&Engineering Departments have received plans for the following projects:
Appl 18-37P, Eli Terry Elementary School
Location: 569 Griffin Road
® Site Plan ❑ Subdivision No. Acres 17 ac Zone A-20
❑ Industrial ❑ Commercial ❑ Residential No. Lots/Units
Water: ® Public ❑ Private Well Sewerage: ® Public ❑ Septic System
Project Description: Construction of new 66,924 sf school
Future Town-owned property involved? ❑ Yes ® No
❑ new street(s) ® new detention area
® new open space/recreation area ❑ active ❑passive
Planning Department notes:
Please comment by 7/24/18 and return to the Planning Department.
:W�h.'
• 1 . •
: . 1 •4 14 :
SOUTH WINDSOR
Parks&Recreation
Me a
To: Michele Lipe, Director of Planning
From: Ray Favreau, CPRP, Director of Parks &Recreation
CC: Planning &Zoning Commission, John Caldwell, Parks Superintendent
Date: 7/23/2018
Re: Phillip R. Smith & Eli Terry Elementary Schools
After review of the plans for Appl.18-36P, Town of South Windsor Phillip R. Smith School and
Appl.18-37P, Town of South Windsor Eli Terry School I offer the following observations on
behalf of the Parks & Recreation Department.
• Phillip R. Smith (PRS)
o Although we are very supportive of grounds beautification, the landscape plans
as proposed will be difficult to impossible for our parks crew to maintain with our
current staffing level. For safety reasons and to minimize damage to vehicles
much of the necessary maintenance like trim mowing and weed-wacking can't be
accomplished during the regular work day requiring unfunded over-time.
Additionally, current State laws prohibit the use of any growth control products at
public schools grades K-8 constraining us to laborious weeding and edging by
hand. We respectfully request paring down the 105 deciduous trees, 42
Evergreens, 16 shrubs and 68 perennials/grasses to a more reasonable level.
Parking lot islands are especially crowded and labor intensive. Perhaps the BOE
should consider out-sourcing with a private landscape contractor.
o What is the expectation of the commemorative paver/garden area? Again, a
maintenance concern.
o I did not see any detail regarding cabinetry/millwork in the cafeteria for our 4tn R
Before &After School program storage that was requested from the initial
planning conversations. What we retro-fit at our expense at the new Orchard Hill
School would be beneficial if done up front at PRS.
1
• Eli Terry (ET)
o Once again, although we are very supportive of grounds beautification, the
landscape plans as proposed will be difficult to impossible for our parks crew to
maintain with our current staffing level. For safety reasons and to minimize
damage to vehicles much of the necessary maintenance like trim mowing and
weed-wacking can't be accomplished during the regular work day requiring
unfunded over-time. Additionally, current State laws prohibit the use of any
growth control products at public schools grades K-8 constraining us to laborious
weeding and edging by hand. We respectfully request paring down the 108
deciduous trees, 88 Evergreens, 222 shrubs and 44 perennials/grasses to a
more reasonable level. Parking lot islands are especially crowded and labor
intensive. Perhaps the BOE should consider out-sourcing with a private
landscape contractor.
o We are concerned about the seeded lawn and plantings in the courtyard with no
easy or safe access to mow and maintain.
o Once again, I did not see any detail regarding cabinetry/millwork in the cafeteria
for our 4th R Before &After School program storage that was requested from the
initial planning conversations. What we retro-fit at our expense at the new
Orchard Hill School would be beneficial if done up front at ET.
We welcome an opportunity to discuss this further at the appropriate time with the appropriate
individuals.
2
MEMORANDUM
To: Michele Lipe, Director of Planning
From: Jeff Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer ISD
Bobb Grillo, Project Engineer
Date: July 31, 2018
Re: App 18-37P Eli Terry Site Plan, 569 Griffin Road
I have reviewed the 07-03-18 site plan and the June 5, 2018 Engineering
Summary Report for the above application and I have the following comments:
1. How will pedestrians access the existing school from Graham Road during
construction?
2. Show grading for the temporary parking in Phase 1 by the existing school.
3. Show the asphalt walk on site plans C2.1 and C2.3, that connects to the
concrete walk south of the parking lot, to be 10' wide.
4. Clearly show where the walk changes from concrete to asphalt.
5. The traffic circle by the new school entrance needs to have one common
traffic control at all approaches so as not to confuse drivers. I suggest all
approaches have yield signs and the stop signs and bars be removed.
6. On site plan C2.2 show stop signs and stop bars at the driveway exits
onto Griffin Road and Graham Road.
7. The extruded concrete curb in the parking areas can be switched to
bituminous curb
8. All drainage pipes, except underdrains should be 12" diameter or larger.
9. There are a few flat spots in the driveways and parking areas that need to
be checked to be sure there is enough grade to drain and water does not
pond anywhere. For example, the half circle turn around at the south side
of the driveway/drop off area.
10.The plans show a new connection to an existing 24" RCP by the new
school that goes to an existing 18" RCP FE. This FE needs to be
changed to a 24" RCP and a rip rap plunge pool installed there.
11.Any existing pipes or drainage structures to remain must be inspected with
a written report to document they are in good condition. Any existing
pipes or drainage structures in fair or poor condition need to be removed
and replaced with new pipes and structures.
12.There is an existing CB in the driveway under the middle of the traffic
circle that will be difficult to keep because it is half under a curb. This
should be removed and/or relocated.
13.Why are there underdrains proposed in the lawn north of the new school?
14.Clean-outs should be included at the end and each bend in the 8" collector
pipe by these underdrains. Consider making this pipe 10" or 12"
1
15.The FE outlet from CB 21 east of the new school should be moved south
to line up with the other FE nearby or at least the SE corner of the school
by extending the pipe. This will reduce the length of the swale needed
there. Lower the inverts of CB 20 and 21 if necessary.
16.In their present form the drainage plans and reports cannot be fully
reviewed. The drainage areas on the Pre-development Drainage Plan
and on the Developed Conditions Drainage Plan do not match the
drainage areas in the Engineering Summary Report. The report has many
more sub-drainage areas than those shown on the plans. For instance
the plan shows the building to be one drainage area even though the
pipes lead to more than one discharge area. Some structure labels differ
from plan to report. Some structures have no labels, such as the existing
and proposed flared ends south of the building. Not all structures or pipe
runs are included in the drainage table (no title) on plan C3.0. Each
drainage structure, existing or proposed, abandoned or used, should have
a unique label used consistently on the drainage plans, the drainage
report and the construction plans. The limits of the drainage areas shown
are the property lines but the flow through portions of the on-site drainage
facilities include runoff from areas beyond the property lines, which should
be considered to determine the actual flows and capacities of the drainage
facilities. We can meet meet with the Engineer to go over the drainage.
17.Reference notes should be added to the drainage outlets on plan C3.1
referring to detail 10, Flared End w/Riprap on sheet C5.3.
18.On plans C3.1 and C3.2 structure inverts, pipe lengths and pipe slopes
are missing for the sanitary sewers.
19.A detail should be provided for the grease trap shown on plan C3.2,
sufficient to accommodate the design flow, which should be provided, for
both the kitchen flow and the overall building flow.
20.No phone or cable lines, existing or proposed, are shown on the utility
plans
21.Check the plans for conflicts between storm drainage, sanitary sewer,
water, gas, and other utilities where they cross.
22.Why is a temporary 4" domestic water line proposed during phase 1
instead of installing the permanent water line?
23.No outlet or overflow protection are shown for the temporary sediment
traps on plan C4.1. The two sediment traps along the Podunk River are
close to steep slopes where an overflow could cause erosion. The silt
fence with hay bales should be shown below, not through the sediment
trap south of the building. The note for the sediment trap east of the
building should be moved from under the plan title block.
24.Detaild 1 and 2 for Bit. Conc.Pavement on sheet C5.1, should show 6" of
subbase gravel under the processed aggregate, since these details are for
the driveways and parking area with lots of traffic.
25.All Sidewalk details need to show 4,000 psi Class F concrete with air
entrainment, expansion joints and dowels per Town Standards.
2
26.The detail for Bit Conc Bike path needs to have 6" of processed aggregate
base.
27.The Town has not used Cast Iron Warning tiles on accessible sidewalk
ramps. These should be the Town standard which are 2' x 3' panels in
brick red color by ADA Solutions or Alert Cast by Alerttile.
28.Check the landscape plan for conflicts between trees and drainage pipes,
sewer pipes and other utilities.
29.WPCA review and approval of this plan should be obtained.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
3
SOW N Sf4
O ale slou� ?&Ul&�-t
•S. f.
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE• SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
r�OSOR•CO TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511
August 1, 2018
South Windsor Board of Education
C/O The LRC Group
Henry Thomas
160 West Street, Suite E
Cromwell, CT 06416
Dear Mr. Thomas:
RE: Appl. 18-37P, Town of South Windsor Eli Terry Elementary School - request for
a special exception to Table 3.1.1.A and site plan of development for a new 66,924 sf
elementary school, on property located on at 569 Griffin Road (southerly side of
Griffin Road, westerly side of Graham Road), A-20and FP zone
Please be advised that the Public Hearing of the Planning 8v Zoning Commission in
the above referenced matter has been scheduled for Tuesday, August 21, 2018 at
7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the South Windsor Town Hall, 1540 Sullivan
Avenue. Someone must be present at the meeting to represent the application.
Three signs advertising the hearing must be posted on the property for ten (10)
consecutive days prior to the hearing and must be clearly visible from a town street.
The signs must be posted on Griffin Road, Graham Road and Overlook Road by
Friday, August 10, 2018.
Signs can be obtained in the Planning Department. If you have any questions, feel
free to call 860- 644-2511 Ext 253, Monday - Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.
Sincerely, -- �}
Lauren Zarambo
Planning Department Secretary
South • •
Planning Department
Memo
To: Henry Thomas
From: Michele Lipe,Director of Planning
Date: 8/2/2018
Re: Application#18-37P,TOSW Eli Terry Elementary School
Following are review comments from the Planning Department. Please make appropriate
revisions and submit seven complete sets to the Planning Department a week prior to the
scheduled public hearing (scheduled for Aug 21). Engineering comments are attached. Jeff
Doolittle has suggested that you may want to arrange a meeting to review his engineering
concerns.
General Comments
The plans are difficult to read with all of the layers turned on. I would suggest turning
off the layer for the site plan and/or grading and utilities layer
2� Construction sequence plan should have a grading plan associated with it. I am
concerned with how close to the northern and eastern property lines (and within the
buffer areas) activities are proposed. Additionally, we had discussed leaving a
pathway for students coming from the Graham Road neighborhoods to be able to
access the site.
Key Map
Driveway cuts for the houses on Graham Road should be shown
Zoning Data Table
1. Include FP zoning information as this is an overlay zone on this property
Parking requirement in Table 6.4.3 B for educational uses is 1 space for 250 sf gfa.
Please calculate required parking based on that formula. A request can be made to
r_! reduce the required number of spaces in accordance with Section 6.4.9.
Documentation should accompany that request.
•Page 1
Lipe, Michele
From: Stephen Wagner-SW <wagnersg-sw@outlook.com>
Sent: Wednesday,August 15, 2018 6:46 PM
To: Manfre,Anthony
Cc: Lipe, Michele; Richard Aries
Subject: RE: Eli Terry/Griffin Road Sewer Ext
Now that the PZC application is in hand, I can't discuss the Eli Terry application before (or after)the public hearing.
However, if there is an opportunity to provide for sewer service to abutting homes (now or in the future) in a way that
affects the site plan, I suggest you work with Michele and Jeff to include that in their comments to the PZC during the
public hearing.
Steve
Stephen Wagner
wagnersg-sw@outlook.com
860-648-4434
860-490-8764(m)
From: Manfre,Anthony<Anthony.Manfre@southwindsor.org>
Sent: Wednesday,August 15, 2018 3:19 PM
To:Stephen Wagner contact<wagnersg-sw@outlook.com>
Cc: Lipe, Michele<Michele.Lipe@southwindsor.org>; Richard Aries<rich@siftex.com>
Subject: Eli Terry/Griffin Road Sewer Ext
Hi Steve,
I wanted to touch base with you prior to the P/Z meeting regarding Eli Terry. At the last WPCA meeting I was asked to
explore the interest of abutting Eli Terry properties to connect to sewer. Out of the 11 properties I received 3
responses, 2 of them were not interested including the gentlemen that proposed the sewer extension. He changed his
mind when I gave him the fees to connect.
At this point I don't think that I would recommend extending the sewer in this area. Michele is aware that we were
entertaining the idea but I wasn't sure if the P/Z board was aware.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Regards,
Tony Manfre
Superintendent of Pollution Control
Town of South Windsor
1540 Sullivan Avenue
South Windsor, CT 06074
(860) 644-2511 x247
1
Lipe, Michele
From: Henry Thomas <HThomas@lrcconsult.com>
Sent: Monday,August_20, 2018 8:57 AM
To: Lipe, Michele
Cc: Doolittle,Jeffrey, Folger,Jeffrey
Subject: Phase 2 Schools Applications
Good morning, Michele. I hope your vacation was full of wonderful adventures!
We submitted revised drawings last week for the two schools and attended to most,but not all comments in the
review memos (a matter of available time, not resistance to the comments). I am working on response letters
data to capture note our responses and will have those out to you by email tomorrow morning. I will also
revised our Special Permit narrative to incorporate the requested relief from the parking requirement and have
that out to you in the same email.
From an engineering perspective,we are completing revised reports today with the additional information that
Jeff D requested. We anticipate they will be printed and delivered to your office today, but there's a sliver of a
chance we might not make it as we are using a different software for the requested gutter analysis and it is a
little less predictable to us.
One modification to each of the school's zoning tables was to add square footage of the buildings for area for
alternate classroom space that the PBC and administration are presently and actively considering for the schools
-2 classrooms at Eli Terry (on grade at southeast corner) and 3 at Philip R. Smith (2nd floor build out at the
north end). My recommendation to our team was to put this square footage into the applications so that
approvals don't have to be modified in near the future should they be able to accept the alternates during
bidding. Given your absence, I went ahead with that approach so it could be in the discussion,but if you see
that as being problematic procedurally,please say so. I'll include the revision to the building areas in the
Special Permit narrative, and will attach a zoning table to the narrative for convenience.
Jeff Folger—for IWA, we anticipate giving you revised site plans (as submitted for the Special Permit/Site Plan
last week). However, we are planning to hold off delivery until the 28t`in case there are new comments that
come out of this Tuesday's hearing that should be attended prior to the next IWA review/action.
Thank you.
Henry Thomas, RLA
Principal
The LRC Group
160 West Street, Suite E
Cromwell, CT 06416
P 860.635.2877 x215
F 860.635.4226
1
August 21, 2018
Ms. Michele Lipe, Director of Planning
Town of South Windsor
1540 Sullivan Avenue
South Windsor, CT 06074
Re: Response to Comments PZC Appl. # 18-37P
New Eli Terry Elementary School
LRC Proj. No. 17-2144
Dear Ms. Lipe,
Please find below narrative responses to your comment letter of August 2, 2018 and Jeff Doolittle's
comment letter of August I regarding the plans for the new Eli Terry Elementary School. Where
requested and so noted in our response, modifications have been made to the drawings.
In response to your comments, we offer the followin&
General Comments:
1. The plans are difficult to read with all of the layers turned on. I would suggest turning off the layer
for the site plan and/or grading and utilities layer.
Response: We have turned off irrelevant loyers wherever possible, and have cleaned up graphic conflicts
throughout the plan set We are happy to adjust any specific issues that remain and will continued to
make improvements in the presentation of plan information.
2. Construction sequence plan should have a grading plan associated with it. I am concerned with how
close to the northern and eastern property lines (and within the buffer areas) activities are
proposed. Additionally, we had discussed leaving a pathway for students coming from the Graham
Road neighborhoods to be able to access the site.
Response: The revised plan set now includes a drawing C2.4 which shows the temporary parking plan
layout (for construction phase 1) including grading and drainage improvements. Regarding pedestrian
routes, during the construction period, the school is intending to bus students who would otherwise walk
this route to the existing school. The design, construction and administrative team does not feel there is
a suitable and risk free option to routing pedestrians through or around the construction zone.
LRC Engineering&Surveying,DPC 160 West Street,Suite E
LRC Engineering and Surveying,LLC Connecticut SBE Certified Cromwell,CT 06416
LRC Environmental Services,Inc. Tel: (860)635-2877
Land Resource Consultants,Inc. Fax: (860)635-4226
Offices in Connecticut,New York&New Jersey
www.treconsult.com
Land Planning 4 Civil Engineering 4 Environmental Services • Land Surveying * Landscape Architecture
August 21,2018
Ms.Michele Lipe
Response to Review Comments-Eli Terry Elementary School f
Page 2 of 8
Key Map:
I. Driveway cuts for the houses on Graham Road should be shown.
Response: Driveway cuts are not part of available mapping, have not yet been added to the key sheet
due to limitations in available time. These can be added using aerial photos as a reference should the
information still be required.
Zoning Data Table:
1. Include FP zoning information as this is an overlay zone on this property
Response: Zoning data table has been revised to include FP overlay zone information.
2. Parking requirement in Table 6.4.3 B for educational uses is I space for 250 sf gfa. Please calculate
required parking based on that formula. A request can be made to reduce the required number of
spaces in accordance with Section 6.4.9. Documentation should accompany that request.
Response: Zoning Data Table has been revised to include parking requirements per the calculation.
The narrative for Special Permit has been revised to include a request to reduce the requirements.
Site Plan
1. Distance and bearings of all boundary lines and acreage of the site. Iron pins reacquired at all
property comers.
Response: The boundary data was prepared by other consultants and although it shows up in their
paper copy of the survey, it was not included in the electronic cad file made available to the design
team. We will investigate options for providing this information.
2. A LS seal should stamp the plan to certify location of elements on the plans.
Response: This request relates to our response to the above comment and will require further research
to determine the best manner in which to provide the required professional seal. LRC is not the surveyor
of record.
3. Any easements on the site should be reflected in an easement table.
Response: Easements are being developed but are not complete at this time to illustrate or to reflect in
a table. This will be addressed in a subsequent drawing submittal.
4. A new tree line should be indicated in those areas that are presently wooded and disturbance is
taking place. Any trees to be saved should be clearly identified on the plans and protection added if
necessary.
Response: A limit of disturbance has been added to the plan, and generally speaking, there are few
wooded areas affected within this line with the limited exception of disturbances associated with the
stormwater outlets to the regulated areas along the Podunk River. In this area, a new treeline has
been added. Additional clarification of trees to remain or be removed was not completed by the time of
our drawing submittal, but will be addressed in subsequent plan resubmittals.
5. 100-year floodplain zone should be indicated on the plans
Response. Flood lines do display on plans, but have been clarified by the addition of labels.
Page 2 of 8
August 21,2018
Ms.Michele Lipe
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary School
Page 3 of 8
6. It appears that the fence is going to be six feet in some areas and four feet in other areas. Is it all the
same fence type?
Response: All proposed perimeter chain link fencing is to be 4' height except where shown as board
fence at a 6'height Labels have been revised accordingly.
Landscaping Plan
1. It appears there are several areas where the plantings are on top of utility lines.
Response: Landscape plans have been revised to address many of those conditions, and we will
continue to review for conflicts as utilities may be subject to adjustment during the permitting processes.
2. A cross-section of the buffer is required to illustrate the growth at 5 years and then at maturity.
(See Section 6.2.4.132 and b)
Response: Plan sheet L1.4 "Landscape Buffer Sections"has been added to show representative sections
through several locations of the landscape buffers.
3. Recommend distributing the landscaping within the buffer area rather than up along the fence line
on the eastern property boundary.
Response: Plantings have generally been pulled away from fencing to enhance security monitoring but
are still in a roughly linear fashion to facilitate ease of maintenance. Should more irregularity be
requested, we can further modify the arrangement of plantings.
4. Recommend distributing some of the plants along the rear of the Griffin Road properties
Response: Current plans show new plantings are focused on those areas with adjacency to the new
school building and parking areas. We did not add planting to the westernmost Griffin Road properties
adjacent to the game field, but can do so if requested.
Lighting Plan:
I. Lighting levels should be reviewed so that there are even, adequate lighting levels throughout the
parking areas. The light poles should be tall enough on the access drive so that trucks or other
vehicles will not hit them.
Response: Light levels have been reviewed and several pole locations adjusted to ensure that required
light levels are satisfied and that light trespass limitations are also satisfied. Poles will be sited so that
neither fixtures nor poles are within the traveled way or an offset of 30"from face of curbs. Notes will
be added to the plans accordingly.
Sewer comments from Tony Manfre:
I. Tree plants should be at least 10'from sewer line to prevent roots from entering.
a. Evergreens are shown to be planted on top of the lateral coming from the building. This is a
private lateral, they may want to relocate the planting.
Response: Planting locations will be reviewed and adjusted when utilities are finalized through the
review process.
2. No elevations are shown.
Page 3 of 8
August 21,2018
Ms.Michele Upe
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary School
Page 4 of 8
Response: Elevations of structures and outlets are now shown excepting one manhole. This will be
added to subsequent revised drawings.
3. The plans show an existing lateral coming from the connecting manhole. Can it be used? Will there
be room in the manhole to add another connection?
Response: The new sanitary sewer lateral is proposed to conned to the existing sanitary manhole at the
existing invert elevation in the same general location. Prior to construction, the condition of and the
configuration of the inlet and outlet pipes will be evaluated.
4. The ladder rungs in the manhole can be removed from plans.
Response: Our office will contact Tony Man fre on clarification of the review comment The plans will be
addressed accordingly as required.
In response to Mr. Doolittle's comments, we offer the following:
I. How will pedestrians access the existing school from Graham Road during construction?
Response: During the construction period, the school is intending to bus students who would otherwise
walk this route to the existing school. The design, construction and administrative team does not feel
there is a suitable and risk free option to routing pedestrians through or around the construction zone.
2. Show grading for the temporary parking in Phase I by the existing school.
Response: The revised plan set now includes a drawing C2.4 which shows the temporary parking plan
layout (for construction phase 1) including grading and drainage improvements.
3. Show the asphalt walk on site plans C2.1 and C2.3 that connects to the concrete walk south of the
parking lot,to be 10'wide.
Response: Walk width will be modified to 10'as requested on subsequent plan submittals.
4. Clearly show where the walk changes from concrete to asphalt.
Response: Additional call outs have been added to the plan for clarification of materials limits.
5. The traffic circle by the new school entrance needs to have one common traffic control at all
approaches so as not to confuse drivers. I suggest all approaches have yield signs and the stop signs
and bars be removed.
Response: Traffic control signage and striping have been modified on sheet C2.2 to yield condition
intersections.
6. On site plan C2.2 show stop signs and stop bars at the driveway exits onto Griffin Road and
Graham Road.
Response: Stop bars and stop signs have been added to sheet C2.2.
7. The extruded concrete curb in the parking areas can be switched to bituminous curb
Response: The administrative and design team have a preference for the extruded concrete, but this
can be further discussed to arrive at a mutually agreeable material selection.
Page 4 of 8
August 21,2018
Ms.Michele Lipe
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary School
Page 5 of 8
8. All drainage pipes, except underdrains should be 12" diameter or larger.
Response: Pipe sizing has been modified accordingly and any that remain undersized will be revised to
12"diameter.
9. There are a few flat spots in the driveways and parking areas that need to be checked to be sure
there is enough grade to drain and water does not pond anywhere. For example, the half circle turn
around at the south side of the driveway/drop off area.
Response: Such areas will be reviewed and some have already been address in re-submitted plans.
10. The plans show a new connection to an existing 24" RCP by the new school that goes to an existing
18" RCP FE. This FE needs to be changed to a 24" RCP and a rip rap plunge pool installed there.
Response: A 24"tree would need to be removed for the installation of a new flared end section and
riprop plunge pool. Also, the limit of the inland wetlands exists adjacent to the existing flared end
section. We would recommend a meeting with Jeff'Folger and Jeff Doolittle on site to discuss.
11. Any existing pipes or drainage structures to remain must be inspected with a written report to
document they are in good condition. Any existing pipes or drainage structures in fair or poor
condition need to be removed and replaced with new pipes and structures.
Response: Request noted. A review of the condition of the existing drainage structures and piping to
remain shall be conducted and a written report provided to the town. Any existing pipes and structures
that are in an unsatisfactory condition shall be replaced. Plans will be revised accordingly.
12. There is an existing CB in the driveway under the middle of the traffic circle that will be difficult to
keep because it is half under a curb. This should be removed and/or relocated.
Response: The existing CB will remain during construction period phase 1 to facilitate temporary
drainage conditions. In subsequent construction phases, the frame and grate will be removed, a solid
concrete cover installed and structure backfilled.
13. Why are there underdrains proposed in the lawn north of the new school?
Response: Underdrains are shown under proposed playground surfacing which is currently specified as
poured in place rubber surfacing. This surface is permeable and the underdrains will ensure that water
does not remain under the pavement surface and so reduce the potential for frost heaving.
14. Clean-outs should be included at the end and each bend in the 8" collector pipe by these
underdrains. Consider making this pipe 10" or 12
Response: Cleanouts will be added and pipe sizes upgraded as requested.
I5. The FE outlet from CB 21 east of the new school should be moved south to line up with the other
FE nearby or at least the SE corner of the school by extending the pipe. This will reduce the length
of the Swale needed there. Lower the inverts of CB 20 and 21 if necessary.
Response: The referenced flared end (FES #22) has been relocated south to the extent practical and
remaining Swale shortened up considerably. The other nearby FES has been removed and the line re-
routed to discharge with FES#22.
16. In their present form the drainage plans and reports cannot be fully reviewed. The drainage areas on
the Pre-development Drainage Plan and on the Developed Conditions Drainage Plan do not match
Page 5 of 8
August 21,2018
i
Ms.Michele Lipe
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary School
Page 6 of 8 op
the drainage areas in the Engineering Summary Report. The report has many more sub-drainage
areas than those shown on the plans. For instance the plan shows the building to be one drainage
area even though the pipes lead to more than one discharge area. Some structure labels differ from
plan to report. Some structures have no labels, such as the existing and proposed flared ends south
of the building. Not all structures or pipe runs are included in the drainage table (no title) on plan
C3.0. Each drainage structure, existing or proposed, abandoned or used, should have a unique label
used consistently on the drainage plans, the drainage report and the construction plans. The limits of
the drainage areas shown are the property lines but the flow through portions of the on-site
drainage facilities include runoff from areas beyond the property lines, which should be considered
to determine the actual flows and capacities of the drainage facilities. We can meet with the
Engineer to go over the drainage.
Response: Engineering Summary Report, drainage area maps and site plans have been revised to
provide clarifications suggested.
17. Reference notes should be added to the drainage outlets on plan C3.1 referring to detail 10, Flared
End w/Riprap on sheet C5.3.
Response: Coordinating reference notes have been provided on re-submitted plans.
18. On plans C3.1 and C3.2 structure inverts, pipe lengths and pipe slopes are missing for the sanitary
sewers.
Response: Elevations of structures and outlets are shown on the re-submitted plans.
19. A detail should be provided for the grease trap shown on plan C3.2, sufficient to accommodate the
design flow,which should be provided, for both the kitchen flow and the overall building flow.
Response: Grease trap details are being coordinated with the design team's MEP engineer. Details will
be provided in subsequent revised drawings.
20. No phone or cable lines, existing or proposed, are shown on the utility plans
Response: Phone and CATV services will follow proposed electrical services and linetype on the drawings
has been revised accordingly.
21. Check the plans for conflicts between storm drainage, sanitary sewer, water, gas, and other utilities
where they cross.
Response: Will review and identify crossings requiring revision or protection.
22. Why is a temporary 4" domestic water line proposed during phase I instead of installing the
permanent water line?
Response: New water service may be installed in full from street to new building area during
construction phase I. Call out will be revised to indicate that a temporary service is required for existing
school building during construction of new school and may be discontinued/removed during construction
phase 2.
23. No outlet or overflow protection are shown for the temporary sediment traps on plan C4.1. The
two sediment traps along the Podunk River are close to steep slopes where an overflow could cause
erosion. The silt fence with hay bales should be shown below, not through the sediment trap south
Page 6 of 8
August 2(.2018 J
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary Sclicid
Page 7ofs
of the building.The note for the sediment trap east of the building should be moved from under the
plan title block.
Response: The location of the temporary sediment traps has been shifted north further away from the
steeper existing slopes on the property. A riprap spillway has been added to each temporary sediment
trap. Silt fence backed with hay bales has been added on the down slope of the traps..
24. Details I and 2 for Bit. Conc. Pavement on sheet CS.I, should show 6" of subbase gravel under the
processed aggregate, since these details are for the driveways and parking area with lots of traffic.
Response: Details have been modified accordingly.
25.. All Sidewalk details need to show 4,000 psi Class f concrete with air entrainment, expansion joints
and dowels per Town Standards.
Response: Alf sidewalk details have been modified accordingly.
26. The detail for Bit Conc Bike path:needs to have 6"of processed aggregate base.
Response: Detail has been modified accordingly.
27. The Town has not used Cast Iron Warning tiles on accessible sidewalk ramps. These should be the
Town standard which are 2' x 3' panels in brick red color by ADA Solutions or Alert Cast by
Alerttile.
Response: The requirement for Cast Iron warning tiles has been removed and above noted products wife
be specified, however, dimensions for tiles will be as required to provide warnings for the areas so
indicated,
28. Check the landscape plan for conflicts between trees and drainage pipes, sewer pipes and other
utilities.
Response: Numerous conflicts have been resolved, but drawings will be reviewed further for con f ku
that may be due to the late timing of certain Why adjustments.
29. WPCA review and approval of this plan should be obtained.
Response: It is our intent to pursue format approval after a PZC approval action, however, informal
discussions with the WPCA suggests their system is design to support the addition of the school to their
system.
Revised drawings which incorporate the responses noted above were submitted to the Department of
Planning offices on August, 14,2418.
Please don't hesitate to contact us with any further questions that you may have..
Sincerely,
The LRC Group
H6rykas, RLA
Page 7 of 8
August 21,2018 II
Ms.Michele Lipe
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary School
Page 8 of 8
Principal
Cc: Proj. File
Jeff Doolittle, Town of South Windsor
Jeff Folger, Town of South Windsor
Public Building Committee
zAlandresourceconsultants\2017 jobs\17-2144 mpn sw eli terry\docs\permitting\town\review comment letters&
responses12018-08-21 et response to comments pzc lipe.docx
Page 8 of 8
ELI TERRY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Project Narrative July 3, 2018; Revised Aug. 21, 2018
The site for the proposed new Eli Terry Elementary School is the existing site of the current Eli Terry
Elementary School. The replacement of the school is an element of Phase 2 of the "South Windsor
Public Schools Elementary Schools Master Plan" adopted by the South Windsor Board of Education on
October 29, 2013.
The current school building of 52,296 s.f. (exterior dimensions) will be replaced by a new building of
66,294 s.f. (exterior dimensions) as originally submitted. In order to accommodate changes in enrollment
expectation, the proposed building includes 2 classroom spaces as an alternate to the project, which brings the
revised footprint and total area of the building to 69,319 square feet The new school building will provide
for contemporary standards for space provisions and teaching environments/technologies, as well as
modern lighting, mechanical and plumbing systems.
The proposed site plan configuration is anchored in the requirement that the existing school building
remain in operation while the new building is constructed. The siting of the new building accommodates
this constraint and allows for the site to remain occupied during construction. When complete, the
school will have increased parking capacity (from 96 to 117 spaces) and new game fields and
playgrounds.
In regards to parking, the applicant is requesting modification or relief from the parking requirement of Table
6.4.3.B. Using the table's rate of I space per 250 s.f of gross floor area for educational use, the proposed
building would require 278 parking spaces. Such a requirement for exceeds the school day need for parking at
the site, and beyond the impact to the site and additional impervious coverage, it would be impractical to
maintain and costly to construct over twice the amount of parking proposed by the current plan. Faculty and
staff'projection are projected to number 80 people, leaving 37 parking spaces available for use by visitors and
parents during a typical school day — an increase of I I spaces over existing conditions. These 37 spaces
represent 30% of available parking spaces. The total parking being provided is also a practical limit when
balancing the siting of the building and program requirements such as play, recreational fields and services to the
building.
Access into the site for automobiles, buses and service traffic will continue by way of the property's
driveway corridor from Griffin Road. Existing parking spaces along this drive will be removed and
accounted for in new parking areas in the site. Parent and medically fragile student drop-off activities
will occur along the west side of the new building and all such traffic will exit to Griffin Road as they do
today. Bus loading and unloading will occur on the north side of the new building and exit (only) to
Graham Road. This allows for separation of traffic and boarding activities. This bus and exit only route
LRC Engineering&Surveying,D.P.C.
Land Resource Consultants,Inc. 160 West Street,Suite E
LRC Engineering&Surveying,P.C. Cromwell,CT 06416
LRC Environmental Services,Inc. Tel: (860)635-2877
LRC Engineering and Surveying,LLC Connecticut SBE Certified Fax: (860)635-4226
Offices in Connecticut,New York&New Jersey
www.Ircconsult.com
Land Planning • Civil Engineering 4 Environmental Services * Land Surveying • Landscape Architecture
I
to Graham Road will be gated off to restrict the use of the exit to buses and delivery or service vehicles
only.
A paved firelane (doubling as a pedestrian and bicycle trail) circulates through the back of the school.
During school hours,this drive will be gated off to prevent vehicular access.
In addition to improvements for vehicular circulation, the property will also be served by walks and
multi-modal trails from both Griffin and Graham Roads and connect to proposed town improvements
to trails and an existing crossing of the Podunk River at the southwest corner of the school site. This
connectivity is consistent with the accessible route requirements throughout the school property.
z:\landresourceconsultants\2017 jobs\17-2144 mpn sw eli terry\docs\permitting\town\draft applications\pzc\et special exception
narrative rev 08-21-18.docx
Page 2 of 2
REVISED ZONING DATA TABLE August 21, 2018
E?i Terry Elementary School
Required (Existing) Proposed
Zone A-20 A-20
Parcel Size 16.7 Ac. (727, 300 s.f.) 16.7 Ac. (727, 300 s.f.)
Use(by Special Exception per Article 3.1.1A) Elementary School Elementary School*
Zone FP-Overlay FP-Overlay
Flood Hazard Area 3.26 Ac. (141,793 s.f.) 3.35 Ac. (145,875 s.f.)
Front Yard 40' 40'
Side Yard 10 10
Rear Yard 40' 40'
Buffer(in addition to side and rear yards) 50' 50'
Building Height 30'-2.5 stories 33 '- 1 story
(Per 3.1.21), height may be increased by 1'for (See Allowable Building
every 2' inside req.yard) Height Computation below)
Building Footprint(exterior face) 52,296 s.f. 66,924 s.f.
Building Area (single story) 52,296 s.f. 66,924 s.f.
Building Area w/Add Alternate Classrooms 69,319 s.f.
Parking** 96
Required: 1 per 250 gsf 278 117
Interior Landscaping(parking lots) 10% 14.3%
Lot Coverage (Impervious)* 35%Allowed 30.2%
(For Educational Use per Table 3.1.1.A) (21.1% Existing)
Wetlands (%of total site) 1.42 Ac. (9.4%)
Disturbance in Wetlands None
Additional Regulated Area (%of total site) 2.92 Ac. (17.5%)
Disturbance in Regulated Area .5 Ac.
Per Town of South Windsor Regulations& requirements, proposed design results in a zero net
increase of stormwater discharge for the 2, 10, 25 and 100-year storms.
* For Educational Use per Table 3.1.1.A
** Parking requirement is per table 6.4.313. Reduction requested.
Allowable Building Height Computation:
33'to Top of Gym Roof parapet
190'to closest Yard Line(@1ft height per 2ft from line=95'+30')= 125' allowable height
22'to mean level Classroom Gable Roofs
(28'to Top of Classroom Gable Roofs)
24'to mean level Main Entry Roof
(25'to Top of Main Entry Roof)
STAFF REPORT CONTACT INFORMATION
Michele R. Lipe, AICP Director of Planning Michele.lipe@southwindsor.org
APPLICATION NUMBER APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER
Appl 18-37P,TOSW Eli Terry TOSW Bd of Education - applicant
Elementary School TOSW - owner
Special Exception/Site Plan
PUBLIC HEARING DATE PROPERTY ADDRESS/LOCATION
Tuesday, August 21, 2018 569 Griffin Road
BRIEF SUMMARY OF REQUEST Special Exception Review criteria
1. Request special exception for 66,924 sf 1. The goals and objectives of the Plan of Development are
new school and site plan met;
2. Supporting documentation submitted 2. Adverse traffic impacts are not created;
includes a narrative of the project and 3. Negative impacts on property values are not created;
traffic statement
3. Staging plan showing how the site will 4. The land is physically suited for the proposed use;
operate during construction (school will 5. Adverse environmental impacts are not created;
remain in session while construction takes 6. There is a balance between neighborhood acceptance and
place) community needs;
7. Present and proposed utilities, streets, drainage system,
and other improvements have adequate capacity to
accommodate the proposed use
8. Historic factors are adequately protected;
9. The overall physical appearance of the proposed
development is compatible with surrounding
development and the Commission's goals for the
neighborhood/corridor.
10. The architectural design is aesthetically pleasing and
blends well into the surrounding area.
The Commission may impose additional conditions in
accordance with these regulations in order to ensure that all
applicable criteria enumerated above and/or within a
particular use category are satisfied.
MAP SOURCE
EXISTING EXISTING LAND USE SURROUNDING ZONING& SITE IMPROVEMENTS SIZE OF
ZONING LAND USE Single entrance from Griffin PROPERTY
A-20 School property Residential zoning on Road with five foot wide
sidewalk. Bus/service vehicles
Residential; all sides 17 acres
FP Zone will exit onto Graham Road
through a one-way exit only
driveway. Complete circulation
around the site via an 8 foot
pathway. 117 parking spaces have
been provided. Pole lighting has
been provided around the site.
Buffer screening has been
provided in areas where the
residences are most impacted.
Landscaping has been provided
throughout the parking areas and
around the perimeter of the
parkin g area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
APPROVE APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS/MODIFICATIONS DENY
COMPATIBILITY with the COMPREHENSIVE PROPERTY HISTORY
PLAN/ZONING ORDINANCE
Existing school site
The proposed development meets
all the bulk requirements of the A- PENDING ACTIONS/APPROVALS
20 zone. Modification requested The IWA/CC public hearing was held open to September 5, 2018.
for parking reduction in required. WPCA approval is needed.
RECOMMENDED APPROVAL CONDITIONS:
Standard Site Plan Approval Conditions; Special Exception filing
ATTACHMENTS SUBMITTED PLANS/ PUBLIC HEARING PETITION/ LEGAL NOTICE STANDARD
(CIRCLE) NARRATIVE APPLICATION FORM APPROVAL
ONDITIONS
Appl #18-37P, TOSW Eli Terry School
Special Exception -
PH 8-21-2018
Planning Department Report
1. Request for a special exception to Table 3.1.LA and site plan of development for
a new 66,924 sf elementary school, on property located on at 569 Griffin Road
(southerly side of Griffin Road, westerly side of Graham Road), A-20 and FP
zone
2. When evaluating this project, the Special Exception criteria for consideration
include:
a. The proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Plan of
Conservation and Development.
b. The application has met the requirements of the zoning regulations.
c. The land is physically suited to the proposed use.
d. Minimal, if any, adverse environmental impacts are created.
e. No traffic or other hazards will be created.
f. The impacts on the capacity of the present and proposed utilities, street,
drainage systems, sidewalks, and other elements of the infrastructure will be
minimal.
g. There will be minimal or no adverse effects on existing uses in the area.
h. Surrounding property values will be conserved.
i. The character of the neighborhood will be maintained or minimally disrupted.
j. The general welfare of the community will be served.
k. There is a balance between neighborhood acceptance and community needs.
1. Historic factors are adequately protected; or due consideration to preservation
of historic factors has been demonstrated.
m. The overall physical appearance of the proposed development is compatible
with surrounding development and the Commission's goals for the
neighborhoodr.
n. The architectural design is aesthetically pleasing and blends well into the
surrounding area.
i
The Commission may impose additional conditions in accordance with these
regulations in order to ensure that all applicable criteria enumerated above are
satisfied.
3. The primary access for the new school will be through the existing school drive
on Griffin Road. The primary access drive be designed with a round-about type
entrance. Vehicular traffic will be separated from the buses. The medically fragile
students will have a separate drop-off loop within the parent drop off area. Buses
and service vehicle will then exit out to Graham Road through a new curb cut
(where the existing walkway is today).
4. There are pedestrian walks proposed along the sides of the new driveways. The 8
foot wide bituminous path from Graham Road and sidewalk from Griffin Road
will tie into the sidewalk network throughout the site and ultimately connect to
the pathway that exits onto Brook Street. This pathway is being upgraded
through a separate Safe Routes to School project.
5. Other safety improvements include raised crosswalks, which will also serve to
slow traffic through the drive. The crosswalk and handicap ramps will be rebuilt
at the Graham Road crossing to tie into the existing sidewalk network.
6. There are no established parking requirements specifically for this use. For uses
not listed in the zoning regulations, the Commission determines the appropriate
number of spaces based on similarity to the listed uses (1 sp per 250 sf; 278)
and/or standards available from recognized authorities. The plan calls for 117
parking spaces shown on the school site in the parking lots which is an increase
from the 96 spaces they have at Eli Terry now. The administration feels is
adequate for the daily number of teachers/visitors anticipated.
7. In accordance with Section 6.4.9, they are requesting a reduction in spaces. The
PZC can consider this reduction when it is demonstrated that:
• The increase in stormwater run-off rate shall be held to a minimum by
reducing the parking spaces, and/or
• The applicant demonstrates through actual experience that a lesser number
of parking spaces will suffice, and further that due to the nature of the
building or business, future owners/occupants of the building are also
unlikely to need to number of parking spaces required by the zoning
regulations.
8. There is a 50' buffer requirement along the residential property boundaries
around the perimeter of the site. To the maximum extent possible, the buffers
areas are being focused in the areas where existing residences will be most
impacted by the new school location. Planting and trees that will be planted with
low maintenance landscaping along the perimeter. Will the existing four foot
2
fencing be replaced? Can you clarify the areas that will be treated with fencing
other than the four foot chain link?
9. There is also an extensive landscape plan including street trees throughout the
parking areas. There are no foundation, foundation plantings, and evergreens.
The parking lot landscaping is requirement is being met with shade trees
throughout the parking area. The Parks and Grounds division have reviewed this
plan and modifications have been made in attempts to ease some of the
maintenance requirements; however there is still a significant amount of new
landscaping.
IO.Parking lot lighting consists of standard shoebox lights, full cutoff, with 12 and
16' poles. The outdoor lighting is proposed to be dark-sky compliant and the
lighting levels are relatively uniform across the site.
11. The Architectural and Design Review Committee reviewed this application on
July 19 and August 9. The Committee discussed with the architect and
representatives the various aspects of the project and were pleased with the
project as presented.
12.There is proposed sign at the entrance at Griffin Road and a sign is also permitted
on the building. The proposed sign is in conformance with signage regulations.
13.South Windsor Police Department and the Fire Marshal have reviewed the plan.
and have worked with the Design Team. A fire lane will be built around the
perimeter of the building tying into the walk ways that are being added.
14.The site will be served by public water and sewer. Water Pollution Control
Authority approval is required.
15.There are regulated wetlands on site. The application was heard by IWA/CC on
July 18; the hearing was kept open and continued until September 1, so the PZC
will need to keep this hearing open until IWA/CC has acted so that the wetlands
findings can be entered into the public hearing record for consideration by this
Commission.
There are still a few outstanding Planning Department comments that we would
anticipate being addressed with revised plans. In particular, getting existing trees to
be saved versus removed identified; more information related to any proposed
easements and maps LS stamps and property corners pinned as required.
3
ELI TERRY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Project Narrative July 3, 2018; Revised Sept. 6, 2018
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SCHOOL AND SITE:
The site for the proposed new Eli Terry Elementary School is the existing site of the current Eli Terry
Elementary School. The replacement of the school is an element of Phase 2 of the"South Windsor Public
Schools Elementary Schools Master Plan" adopted by the South Windsor Board of Education on October
29, 2013.
The current school building of 52,296 s.f. (exterior dimensions) will be replaced by a new building of
66,886 s.f. (exterior dimensions)as originally submitted. In order to accommodate changes in enrollment
expectation, the proposed building includes 2 classroom spaces as an alternate to the project, which brings
the revised footprint and total area of the building to 69,391 square feet. The new school building will
provide for contemporary standards for space provisions and teaching environments/technologies, as
well as modern lighting, mechanical and plumbing systems. Of special note,specific programs include the
District's medically fragile program and our district elementary intensive program.
The proposed site plan configuration is anchored in the requirement that the existing school building
remain in operation while the new building is constructed. The siting of the new building accommodates
this constraint and allows for the site to remain occupied during construction. When complete,the school
will have increased parking capacity (from 96 to 117 spaces) and new game fields and playgrounds. It
should be noted that available parking at the school has not always been 96 spaces, and that in recent
years spaces have been striped on existing pavements to bring the existing total up to 96.
Access into the site for automobiles, buses and service traffic will continue by way of the property's
driveway corridor from Griffin Road. Existing parking spaces along this drive will be removed and
accounted for in new parking areas in the site. Parent and medically fragile student drop-off activities
will occur along the west side of the new building and all such traffic will exit to Griffin Road as they do
today. Bus loading and unloading will occur on the north side of the new building and exit (only) to
Graham Road. Buses exiting onto Graham Rd. occurs only twice a day. This allows for separation of traffic
and boarding activities. This bus and exit only route to Graham Road will be gated off to restrict the use
of the exit to buses and delivery or service vehicles only.
A paved firelane (doubling as a pedestrian and bicycle trail) circulates through the back of the school.
During school hours,this drive will be gated off to prevent vehicular access.
In addition to improvements for vehicular circulation,the property will also be served by walks and multi-
modal trails from both Griffin and Graham Roads and connect to proposed town improvements to trails
LRC Engineering&Surveying,D.P.C.
Land Resource Consultants,Inc. 160 West Street,Suite E
LRC Engineering&Surveying,P.C. Cromwell,CT 06416
LRC Environmental Services,Inc. Tel: (860)635-2877
LRC Engineering and Surveying,LLC Connecticut SBE Certified Fax: (860)635-4226
Offices in Connecticut,New York&New Jersey
www.Ircconsult.com
Land Planning • Civil Engineering • Environmental Services • Land Surveying • Landscape Architecture
loop
and an existing crossing of the Podunk River at the southwest corner of the school site. This connectivity
is consistent with the accessible route requirements throughout the school property.
PARKING:
In regards to parking, the applicant is requesting modification or relief from the parking requirement of
Table 6.4.3.B. Using the table's rate of 1 space per 250 s.f. of gross floor area for educational use, the
proposed building would require 278 parking spaces. Such a requirement far exceeds the school day
need for parking at the site, and beyond the impact to the site and additional impervious coverage, it
would be impractical to maintain and costly to construct over twice the amount of parking proposed by
the current plan. Faculty and staff currently number 88-90 people, leaving 37 parking spaces available
for use by visitors and parents during a typical school day — an increase of 11 spaces over existing
conditions. These 37 spaces represent 30%of available parking spaces. Administrative staff believes this
is sufficient parking for typical school day needs. The total permanent parking being provided is also a
practical limit when balancing the siting of the building and program requirements such as play,
recreational fields and services to the building, as well as considerations for the amount of impervious
surface and the related stormwater quality management improvements that accompany parking.
Overflow parking is provided on the new game field at the west side of the site which is made accessible
by means of a sloped curb profile at the northwest most corner of the new parking area. This provides for
at least a net of 80 additional parking spaces that can be available to accommodate event parking. The
configuration of this area is conducive to delineation by traffic cones or post and ribbons put in place at
the time of an event.
SITE LIGHTING:
Site lighting is provided by the use of high performance, full cut-off and low profile (small size) post
mounted fixtures with LED lamp sources. The fixtures are mounted primarily at 12' height with some
fixtures in the interior of the parking lot being set at 16'height. The nature of the fixture housing, optics
and LED lamp source provides for very crisp control of the light patterns and sharp cutoff of back lighting
where lights are located on the perimeter of parking areas and drives. Being full cutoff,fixtures are "dark
sky" friendly and compliant with the zoning requirements. The LED lamps are specified at a color
temperature of 3,000K(Kelvin) which is warm and closer to incandescent light temperature.
On typical school days, pole mounted lighting will be turned on throughout the site at nightfall by means
of light sensors, and with the exception of selected fixtures related to site security that will remain lit but
at 60%of light output, pole lighting will be turned off. The security fixtures may be ramped up to 100%
light output when so triggered by motion sensors, and those fixtures which had been turned off, ramped
up to 50%light output by the same sensor systems.
Excepting lighting at the school's main entrance that may be ornamental in nature, all building mounted
lighting associated with exit and entrance doors will be full cut-off in nature,design to cast light down onto
walking surfaces, and fixtures will not have exposed lamp sources.
Page 2 of 3
TRAFFIC CONTROL GATES:
A sliding traffic control gates is installed between the traffic circle or "round about"and the bus loading
and unloading zone along the north side of the school. A second swinging pipe gate is installed on the
exit drive to Graham Road at the approximately 155'back from the property line at Graham Road. These
gates will be closed by school personnel after all busses have discharged students for morning arrival, and
will remain closed until school dismissal and bus loading activities begin. Gates will generally remain
open evenings, nights and weekends to facilitate police patrols and service functions at the site before or
after school hours. Y J,, 1 ,),k 6L
STUDENT LOADING AND UNLOADING:
Buses will discharge students on the curbline at the north end of the school as they arrive at the site.
Students will be monitored and guided by school staff to ensure that students are kept out of the bus travel
lanes, and that students walking to the site use the raised and delineated crosswalks at either end of the
bus staging zone.
After school student loading will occur when all buses are staged in the two parallel bus lanes. The buses
staged in the lane closest to the curbline will be loaded first,and when ready,be released as a group. Only
then will students be loaded into the second line of busses in the outside lane. Similar to the first line,
when ready, the second line of busses will be released as a group. School staff will be in the bus loading
zone to facilitate safe student boarding and dismissal.
Parents may discharge students directly to the sidewalk by means of the curbline on the west side of the
school. Students will be monitored and guided by school staff to ensure that students are kept out of the
travel lanes. Parents may also park and walk students to the front door area. Walking and bike riding
students must have written permission to do so from parents. Typically, young students who walk
out to Graham are accompanied by their parents.
SERVICE AND DELIVERY TRAFFIC:
Trash Collection will be scheduled to occur before the bus loading period. Collection of general trash is
anticipated to occur 3 times per week during the school year. Collection of recyclables trash is anticipated
to occur no more than 2 times per week during the school year. Note that dumpsters are located on a
heavy duty concrete pad and enclosed by a solid wood panel fence and gate.
Food services and supply deliveries will be made to the school's loading dock before.the bus loading period,
and at specific times:no earlier than 7:30 am—8:00 am 9-10:30 am and 2-3 pm (this is designated
by food services staff hours of operation and planned around arrival/dismissal and recess waves).
Mail, UPS and Fed Ex deliveries which are typically made during the school day will arrive at the parent
drop off curbline and make deliveries to the Main Office via the school's main entrance.
z:\landresourceconsultants\2017 jobs\17-2144 mpn sw eli terry\docs\perm itti ng\town\d raft applications\pzc\et special
exception narrative rev 09-06-18.docx
Page 3 of 3
D
August 21, 2018; Revised 9-04-18
Ms. Michele Lipe, Director of Planning
Town of South Windsor
1540 Sullivan Avenue
South Windsor, CT 06074
Re: Response to Comments PZC Appl. # 18-37P
New Eli Terry Elementary School
LRC Proj. No. 17-2144
Dear Ms. Lipe,
Please find below narrative responses to your comment letter of August 2, 2018 and Jeff Doolittle's
comment letter of August I regarding the plans for the new Eli Terry Elementary School. Where
requested and so noted in our response, modifications have been made to the drawings.
In response to your comments, we offer the following
General Comments:
1. The plans are difficult to read with all of the layers turned on. I would suggest turning off the layer
for the site plan and/or grading and utilities layer.
Response: We have turned off irrelevant layers wherever possible, and have cleaned up graphic conflicts
throughout the plan set. We are happy to adjust any specific issues that remain and will continue to
make improvements in the presentation of plan information.
2. Construction sequence plan should have a grading plan associated with it. I am concerned with how
close to the northern and eastern property lines (and within the buffer areas) activities are
proposed. Additionally, we had discussed leaving a pathway for students coming from the Graham
Road neighborhoods to be able to access the site.
Response: The revised plan set now includes a drawing C2.4 which shows the temporary parking plan
layout (for construction phase I) including grading and drainage improvements. Regarding pedestrian
routes, during the construction period, the school is intending to bus students who would otherwise walk
this route to the existing school. The design, construction and administrative team does not feel there is
a suitable and risk free option to routing pedestrians through or around the construction zone.
LRC Engineering&Surveying,DPC 160 West Street,Suite E
LRC Engineering and Surveying,LLC Connecticut SBE Certified Cromwell,CT 06416
LRC Environmental Services,Inc. Tel: (860)635-2877
Land Resource Consultants,Inc. Fax: (860)635-4226
Offices in Connecticut,New York&New Jersey
www.Ircconsult.com
Land Planning 4 Civil Engineering 4 Environmental Services • Land Surveying • Landscape Architecture
J
August 21,2018
Ms.Michele Lipe lop
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary School
Page 2 of 8
Key Map:
1. Driveway cuts for the houses on Graham Road should be shown.
Response: Neighboring driveway cuts have been added to sheet R-I.
Zoning Data Table:
I. Include FP zoning information as this is an overlay zone on this property
Response: Zoning data table has been revised to include FP overlay zone information.
2. Parking requirement in Table 6.4.3 B for educational uses is I space for 250 sf gfa. Please calculate
required parking based on that formula. A request can be made to reduce the required number of
spaces in accordance with Section 6.4.9. Documentation should accompany that request.
Response: Zoning Data Table has been revised to include parking requirements per the calculation.
The narrative for Special Permit has been revised to include a request to reduce the requirements.
Site Plan
I. Distance and bearings of all boundary lines and acreage of the site. Iron pins reacquired at all
property comers.
Response: The boundary data was prepared by other consultants and although it shows up in their
paper copy of the survey, it was not included in the electronic cad file made available to the design
team. The project team will arrange to have this documentation prepared for inclusion in the final
document set
2. A LS seal should stamp the plan to certify location of elements on the plans.
Response: This request relates to our response to the above comment and will require further research
to determine the best manner in which to provide the required professional seal. LRC is not the surveyor
of record. The project team will arrange to have required certification in the final document set
3. Any easements on the site should be reflected in an easement table.
Response: Easements are being developed but are not complete at this time to illustrate or to reflect in
a table. This will be addressed in the final drawing submittal.
4. A new tree line should be indicated in those areas that are presently wooded and disturbance is
taking place. Any trees to be saved should be clearly identified on the plans and protection added if
necessary.
Response: A limit of disturbance has been added to the plan, and generally speaking, there are few
wooded areas affected within this line with the limited exception of disturbances associated with the
stormwater outlets to the regulated areas along the Podunk River. In this area, a new treeline has
been added. To clarify improvements to remain or be removed, including trees, we are including Site
Demolition Plans in the resubmitted plan set
5. 100-year floodplain zone should be indicated on the plans
Response: Flood lines do display on plans, but have been clarified by the addition of labels.
Page 2 of 8
August 21,2018
Ms.Michele Lipe
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary School
Page 3 of 8 lop
6. It appears that the fence is going to be six feet in some areas and four feet in other areas. Is it all the
same fence type?
Response: All proposed perimeter chain link fencing is to be 4' height except where shown as board
fence at a 6'height Labels have been revised accordingly.
Landscaping Plan
I. It appears there are several areas where the plantings are on top of utility lines.
Response: Landscape plans have been revised to address many of those conditions, and we will
continue to review for conflicts as utilities may be subject to adjustment during the permitting processes.
2. A cross-section of the buffer is required to illustrate the growth at 5 years and then at maturity.
(See Section 6.2.4.132 and b)
Response: Plan sheet L 1.4 "Landscape Buffer Sections"has been added to show representative sections
through several locations of the landscape buffers.
3. Recommend distributing the landscaping within the buffer area rather than up along the fence line
on the eastern property boundary.
Response: Plantings have generally been pulled away from fencing to enhance security monitoring but
are still in a roughly linear fashion to facilitate ease of maintenance. Should more irregularity be
requested, we can further modify the arrangement of plantings.
4. Recommend distributing some of the plants along the rear of the Griffin Road properties
Response: Current plans show new plantings are focused on those areas with adjacency to the new
school building and parking areas. We did not add planting to the westernmost Griffin fin Road properties
adjacent to the game field, but can do so if requested.
Lighting Plan:
I. Lighting levels should be reviewed so that there are even, adequate lighting levels throughout the
parking areas. The light poles should be tall enough on the access drive so that trucks or other
vehicles will not hit them.
Response: Light levels have been reviewed and several pole locations adjusted to ensure that required
light levels are satisfied and that light trespass limitations are also satisfied. Poles will be sited so that
neither fixtures nor poles are within the traveled way or an offset of 30"from face of curbs. Notes will
be added to the plans accordingly.
Sewer comments from Tony Manfre:
1. Tree plants should be at least 10'from sewer line to prevent roots from entering.
a. Evergreens are shown to be planted on top of the lateral coming from the building. This is a
private lateral, they may want to relocate the planting.
Response: Planting locations will be reviewed and adjusted when utilities are finalized through the
review process.
Page 3 of 8
D
August 21,2018
Ms.Michele Lipe
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary School
Page 4 of 8
2. No elevations are shown.
Response: Elevations of structures and outlets are now shown.
3. The plans show an existing lateral coming from the connecting manhole. Can it be used? Will there
be room in the manhole to add another connection?
Response: The new sanitary sewer lateral is proposed to conned to the existing sanitary manhole at the
existing invert elevation in the some general location. Prior to construction, the condition of and the
configuration of the inlet and outlet pipes will be evaluated.
4. The ladder rungs in the manhole can be removed from plans.
Response: Ladder rungs have been removed from manhole details.
In response to Mr. Doolittle's comments, we offer the following:
1. How will pedestrians access the existing school from Graham Road during construction?
Response: During the construction period, the school is intending to bus students who would otherwise
walk this route to the existing school. The design, construction and administrative team does not feel
there is a suitable and risk free option to routing pedestrians through or around the construction zone.
2. Show grading for the temporary parking in Phase I by the existing school.
Response: The revised plan set now includes a drawing C2.4 which shows the temporary parking plan
layout (for construction phase I) including grading and drainage improvements.
3. Show the asphalt walk on site plans C2.1 and C2.3 that connects to the concrete walk south of the
parking lot, to be 10' wide.
Response: Walk width has been modified to 10'as requested.
4. Clearly show where the walk changes from concrete to asphalt.
Response: Additional call outs have been added to the plan for clarification of materials limits.
5. The traffic circle by the new school entrance needs to have one common traffic control at all
approaches so as not to confuse drivers. I suggest all approaches have yield signs and the stop signs
and bars be removed.
Response: Traffic control signage and striping have been modified on sheet C2.2 to yield condition
intersections.
6. On site plan C2.2 show stop signs and stop bars at the driveway exits onto Griffin Road and
Graham Road.
Response: Stop bars and stop signs have been added to sheet C2.2.
7. The extruded concrete curb in the parking areas can be switched to bituminous curb
Response: The administrative and design team have a preference for the extruded concrete, but this
can be further discussed to arrive at a mutually agreeable material selection.
8. All drainage pipes, except underdrains should be 12" diameter or larger.
Page 4 of 8
C
August 21,2018
Ms.Michele Lipe
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary School IWOP
Page 5 of 8
Response: Pipe sizing has been modified accordingly and any that remain undersized will be revised to
12"diameter.
9. There are a few flat spots in the driveways and parking areas that need to be checked to be sure
there is enough grade to drain and water does not pond anywhere. For example, the half circle turn
around at the south side of the driveway/drop off area.
Response: Flat areas have been reviewed and minor revisions made in re-submitted plans.
10. The plans show a new connection to an existing 24" RCP by the new school that goes to an existing
18" RCP FE. This FE needs to be changed to a 24" RCP and a rip rap plunge pool installed there.
Response: This outlet has been moved up gradient to eliminate conflict with the existing tree and
reduce undermining it. The outlet area will be armored to reduce discharge velocities.
11. Any existing pipes or drainage structures to remain must be inspected with a written report to
document they are in good condition. Any existing pipes or drainage structures in fair or poor
condition need to be removed and replaced with new pipes and structures.
Response: Request noted. A review of the condition of the existing drainage structures and piping to
remain shall be conducted and a written report provided to the town. Any existing pipes and structures
that are in an unsatisfactory condition shall be replaced. Final plans will be revised accordingly.
12. There is an existing CB in the driveway under the middle of the traffic circle that will be difficult to
keep because it is half under a curb. This should be removed and/or relocated.
Response: The existing CB will remain during construction period phase I to facilitate temporary
drainage conditions. In subsequent construction phases, the frame and grate will be removed, a solid
concrete cover installed and structure backfilled.
13. Why are there underdrains proposed in the lawn north of the new school?
Response: Underdrains are shown under proposed playground surfacing which is currently specified as
poured in place rubber surfacing. This surface is permeable and the underdrains will ensure that water
does not remain under the pavement surface and so reduce the potential for frost heaving.
14. Clean-outs should be included at the end and each bend in the 8" collector pipe by these
underdrains. Consider making this pipe 10" or 12
Response: Cleanouts have been added and pipe sizes upgraded as requested.
15. The FE outlet from CB 21 east of the new school should be moved south to line up with the other
FE nearby or at least the SE corner of the school by extending the pipe. This will reduce the length
of the swale needed there. Lower the inverts of CB 20 and 21 if necessary.
Response:
Modified storm drain infrastructure from Grade 1-5 playground area
and directed it easterly, including discharge from catch basins in service drive. Pipe and swale that ran
north to south toward the Podunk River(discharging at FES#22) has been eliminated and roof drainage
gathered up and discharged independently at a smaller outlet structure.
Page 5 of 8
August 21,2018
Ms.Michele Lipe
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary School
Page 6 of 8
16. In their present form the drainage plans and reports cannot be fully reviewed. The drainage areas on
the Pre-development Drainage Plan and on the Developed Conditions Drainage Plan do not match
the drainage areas in the Engineering Summary Report. The report has many more sub-drainage
areas than those shown on the plans. For instance the plan shows the building to be one drainage
area even though the pipes lead to more than one discharge area. Some structure labels differ from
plan to report. Some structures have no labels, such as the existing and proposed flared ends south
of the building. Not all structures or pipe runs are included in the drainage table (no title) on plan
C3.0. Each drainage structure, existing or proposed, abandoned or used, should have a unique label
used consistently on the drainage plans, the drainage report and the construction plans.The limits of
the drainage areas shown are the property lines but the flow through portions of the on-site
drainage facilities include runoff from areas beyond the property lines, which should be considered
to determine the actual flows and capacities of the drainage facilities. We can meet with the
Engineer to go over the drainage.
Response: Engineering Summary Report, drainage area maps and site plans have been revised to
provide clarifications suggested.
17. Reference notes should be added to the drainage outlets on plan C3.1 referring to detail 10, Flared
End w/Riprap on sheet C5.3.
Response: Coordinating reference notes have been provided on re-submitted plans.
18. On plans C3.1 and C3.2 structure inverts, pipe lengths and pipe slopes are missing for the sanitary
sewers.
Response: Elevations of structures and outlets are shown on the re-submitted plans.
19. A detail should be provided for the grease trap shown on plan C3.2, sufficient to accommodate the
design flow,which should be provided, for both the kitchen flow and the overall building flow.
Response: Grease trap details and sizing calculation is now included in the resubmitted drawing set.
20. No phone or cable lines, existing or proposed, are shown on the utility plans
Response: Phone and CAN services will follow proposed electrical services and linetype on the drawings
has been revised accordingly.
21. Check the plans for conflicts between storm drainage, sanitary sewer, water, gas, and other utilities
where they cross.
Response: Will review and identify crossings requiring revision or protection.
22. Why is a temporary 4" domestic water line proposed during phase I instead of installing the
permanent water line?
Response: New water service may be installed in full from street to new building area during
construction phase 1. Call out has been revised to indicate that a temporary service is required for
existing school building during construction of new school and may be discontinued/removed during
construction phase 2.
23. No outlet or overflow protection are shown for the temporary sediment traps on plan C4.1. The
two sediment traps along the Podunk River are close to steep slopes where an overflow could cause
erosion. The silt fence with hay bales should be shown below, not through the sediment trap south
Page 6 of 8
August 21,2018
Ms.Michele Lipe
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary School 140P
Page 7 of 8
of the building. The note for the sediment trap east of the building should be moved from under the
plan title block.
Response: The location of the temporary sediment traps has been shifted north further away from the
steeper existing slopes on the property. A riprap spillway has been added to each temporary sediment
trap. Silt fence backed with hay bales has been added on the down slope of the traps.
24. Details I and 2 for Bit. Conc. Pavement on sheet C5.1, should show 6" of subbase gravel under the
processed aggregate, since these details are for the driveways and parking area with lots of traffic.
Response: Details have been modified accordingly.
25. All Sidewalk details need to show 4,000 psi Class F concrete with air entrainment, expansion joints
and dowels per Town Standards.
Response: All sidewalk details have been modified accordingly.
26. The detail for Bit Conc Bike path needs to have 6" of processed aggregate base.
Response: Detail has been modified accordingly.
27. The Town has not used Cast Iron Warning tiles on accessible sidewalk ramps. These should be the
Town standard which are 2' x 3' panels in brick red color by ADA Solutions or Alert Cast by
Alerttile.
Response: The requirement for Cast Iron warning tiles has been removed and above noted products will
be specified, however, dimensions for tiles will be as required to provide warnings for the areas so
indicated.
28. Check the landscape plan for conflicts between trees and drainage pipes, sewer pipes and other
utilities.
Response: Numerous conflicts have been resolved, but drawings will be reviewed further for conflicts
that may be due to the late timing of certain utility adjustments.
29. WPCA review and approval of this plan should be obtained.
Response: It is our intent to pursue formal approval after a PZC approval action, however, informal
discussions with the WPCA suggests their system is design to support the addition of the school to their
system.
Other modifications to the drawings based on our own review, comments received at the public hearing, and
technical conversations with Town planning and engineering staff include the following.
• Modified location of FES #29 so that grading associated with it is reduced and that proposed fenceline
section can be a continuous line. Also modified grading associated with FES #28 to reduce width of
grading impact See sheet C3.1.
• Modified storm drain infrastructure from Grade 1-5 playground area and directed it easterly, including
discharge from catch basins in service drive. Pipe and swale that ran north to south toward the Podunk
River (discharging at FES #22) has been eliminated and roof drainage gathered up and discharged
independently at a smaller outlet structure. Graded in a low point along this property line to ensure that
runoff remains on the school property.
Page 7 of 8
;1
D
August 21,2018
Ms.Michele Lipe
Response to Review Comments—Eli Terry Elementary School
Page 8 of 8
• Located a section of cast-in-place mountable curb to allow for access onto natural turf game field for use
as overflow parking during school events. Net parking gained in event conditions is 81 spaces. See
sheet C2.0 and C2.1.
• Zoning data table on sheet R-I revised to reflect overflow parking provisions and revised building height.
• Stormwater infiltration chamber details have been added to the plan set See sheet C5.6.
• The pedestrian walk from Graham Road the school has been shifted to sit 8' off of the face of curb
instead of snug to the back of curb. Walk intersections and ramps have been adjusted accordingly.
• Fencing type and extent at the boundary of the two lots adjacent to the bus exit drive to Graham Road
has been changed to 4' ht black vinyl fused to match other new fencing, and has been limited to the
residential lot rear boundaries and a shortened length of fencing on the side lot lines. Landscape
treatments in this area have been adjusted to resemble the treatment of the school's main entrance
drive. These adjustments are consistent with the interests of the individual home owners in discussion
with school representatives.
• A maintenance strip has not been added to the perimeter of the building, however, such a provision is
being reviewed by school facilities staff:
Revised drawings which incorporate the responses noted above are being submitted to the Department
of Planning offices on September 4, 2018.
Please don't hesitate to contact us with any further questions that you may have.
Sincerely,
The LRC Group
Henry Thomas, RLA
Principal
Cc: Proj. File
Jeff Doolittle, Town of South Windsor
Jeff Folger, Town of South Windsor
Public Building Committee
z:\land resourceconsultants\201 7 jobs\1 7-2144 mpn sw eli terry\dots\permitting\town\review comment
letters & responses\2018-09-04 et response to comments pzc lipe.docx
Page 8 of 8
1r PANTED METE STOP BAR (NOEL 4MARCEL E• & SUS .
DOUBLE REUOW OE41ERL E(s-) ` tip-, FA,UTEUX
(VOL. 130 PG. )
\` NSF � /
RA YMOND W.
& LAURETT "'�O RDAMI
BlLL1G m
V� . , >< � / x 173.6
LAIN4N\F
941 c� MIL TON G. JACK.SON' JR.
°\� (VOL, 2213 PG. 307) '' ` '' \ y�
J / F °�
N�
/ C> ApRIL N. MAOER
a Aw i T''BIT.COW / J, PG. 349)
R10N G. / (VOL,OE/ e x 179.40
ALD .4 / _ (PANT OUT OPR COI
WHO.SIDEWALK
BEGIN NEW C.L.FENCEUNE / OF 11 W/ p. O
/O lY S 8 ASPHALT wAUL a B4 CURB IKEPATH;
NS
Hgrp. L�ACLc _ +74-- G p�
uNE) / 1. F ` L' —PA
n T.
EXTRUDED CONE CURB
S'ASPHALT WAU(!BND:PATH SIT ppryC,p�DEgNDAN. { i
D NAI.K G BNE TRAIL./ a
t71D OF NEW C.L.FFKCFIJNE x 177.5
--
• r • ]BAN 1111
BLACK NNYI.� r COIIC.CURB RAMP W
\\ 4 iHYCEWARM
y
LAIN t j
SNET 3942 L y cac wAlx _ SNET iEXTRUDED
(g 4'MATE PAIN7FD WE LINE NI
T.F.=170.93' TIM x 17 N*AuL ODNO O: , caNa
sBnm u
CURB
15 RCMAI®AhTLTF—" x 171.25 — -$ - CIP CDNC:aqe '
7RA9N'P ! EID\ y74Bla VINYL saRD sTD R P/i0 BaLF 6l FENCE
FUSE OE LA7&)R� UELAM �E
MT.BLACK BUQfAL PENCE
1
/ \ 7) i, t (3CT r INSIDE ATOP.LINE)
N\F CY_
u n
'"""g°�"PAD ' -- O° CURB( HEhGON
HATCHING ®GAN1EL J MAT
r wAv DUTY (VOL. 2436 PG. 90j
COW-PAVEMENT
^^
za C
4'(TRU 1NIITE PAYIEyYyE LNE /� f
S'CONC.WALK
DED c/alk y V Z ppppNNLR�E W//✓ ti
r� r. "GONG.CURB ,/.'., INRWN�CU U P.CONC.
RET. S
/ 171:1 s' n FUSED
NL�CR(7LE _ G1,E x i
2.97 R/C>S �7' 74 AWN.FU�aE X/L PUa�LNTS 4�+W/ e
LAWN W/4 17
NiEBRAL I : .. BRICK BEAT WALL W/CAST STORE CAP RDN S
N
I
jTABLE BM, MON
Icow, e J} 3
1,3
x 169 71
S 1 / —�BUFFER ��:PPPN �I�IETTE C.
c T urn sLmm BARONS
/~ (NOEL 136 PG 288)
Co"- .�. GONG WALK RAISED N40D mAw
B01ES
DONM{ .. I ,. NTEONAL CONa CURB 7
*t� v
PROJECT TITLE SKETCH TITLE DATE 9/10/18
moser COPYRIGHT
pilon Eli Terry Elementary School ELIMINATION OF PROPOSED FENCE Moser Pilon Nelson Architects
nelson ALONG NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE SCALE: 1t1=501
architects 569 Griffin Road JORDAN LANE AND BUS/SERVICE EXIT TO GRAHAM ROAD SKETCH NO.
30
"ERSF'E�,°' South Windsor, Connecticut
SK-L 1.2-1
" tows st,� pp
t`�S
Tiow o-P sioa, V&Uaot
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE•SOUTH WINDSOR,CT 06074
r�OsoB•co�`� TELEPHONE(860)644-2511
HAND DELIVERED
September 11,2018
Matthew Galiigan
Town of South Windsor
1540 Sullivan Avenue
South Windsor,Ct 06074
RE: Appl. #18-37P—Eli Terry School
Dear Mr. Galligan:
On September 5,2018,the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission approved Appi.#18-37P
—Town of South Windsor, Eli Terry School—569 Griffin Rd—-iWA/Conservation Commission
application for construction of an educational institution building, parking, stormwater management
system, and associated utilities. The site is located easterly of Graham Rd and southerly of Griffin Rd. A-
20 Residential zone,with following conditions:
1. The final approved copy of the entire set of plans and this fetter reproduced. thereon must be
submitted to the Planning Department. This must be completed within 65 days of approval prior to
any construction activity on the site. Plans submitted to Planning & Zoning Commission shall,be
considered having met this requirement.
2. The applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the Town of South Windsor against any liability,
which might result from the proposed operation or use.
3. The permit is valid for five years and shall expire on September 5, 2023. It is the
landowners)/applicant(s)-responsibility to track expiration dates and notify the Commission of a
renewal request at least 65 days prior to expiration.
4. Bonds shall be collected from the contractor in the amount of $15,000 for erosion and sediment
controls and$25,000 for the stormwater system.
5. Replace swale on the east side and show on plans.
6. All approvals required must be obtained and submitted prior to any activity on the site.
7. A contact person shall be identified on the plans.
Very truly yours,
INLAND WETLANDS AGENCY/
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Barbara Kelly,Chairperson
cc: Director of Planning
Chief Building Official
Town Engineer
Henry Thomas, LRC Group-Certified
160 West Street
Cromwell,CT 06014
1 I
q Nol AUIL"
\ OvERLOOK RO O
J
ac1
___ �\4 • ' N'I.Y.
S
R q �
J a
i 8
a r- o
7'INTQHWNE
T N4INE s werr
r jA
_ r ,
I �
$ I � ae.Eavco lucwc y
\ ] ACE
te
aclv(o v,J,v d
— _ �� —_ �► �wrevA:.uNt ',r� o m-o�ss � � ',r .
I //� / I i��� — id'Avro oaornn � wneuro FlA-
.1r /
/ / m
ts
ri
tt
CM
G d 'tlO O
G
I � F
to C O�
° N
t
F
II -GRAHAM
PROJECT TITLE DATE 09/19/2018
MOSER Eli TerryElement School Moser
a
PILONMoser Pilon Nelson Architects
NELSON 569 Griffin Road SCALE:Not to Scale
ARCHITECTS - - --- —
30 JORDAN LANE SKETCH TITLE SKETCH NO.
werNeasnieLo.cr na,nn EVENT/OVERFLOW PARKING EXHIBIT
snow 5nB-nte+ ST T C,q r®a
1 I
I I
INOT BUILT)
OVERLOOK ROAD
\\ -----�\ \� —
U I I I 111 1
1 � - _ o
f \\1 i� �' y !bS(AVFD GMWNC y R .r
.� H -TODR� YBTPASS IANF y I
W MRODIIp-Oli Itl AUTO DROP.OR _ F
gymrr
/ r
I
6
P /
\ ` /
Nzm
' oV
I1 y
\ -- GRAHAM o
PROJECT TITLE DATE 09/19/2018
MOSER COPYRIGEli Terry Elementary School Moser P on Neilson Architects
NELSON 569 Griffin Road SCALE:Not to Scale
ARCHITECTS
'N SKETCH TITLE SKETCH NO.
PERIMETER FENCING EXHIBIT
SK-C2.Ob
REVISED ZONING DATA TABLE September 19, 2018
Eli Terry Elementary School
Required(Existing) Proposed Net Increase
Zone A-20 A-20
Parcel Size 16.7 Ac.(727,300 s.f.) 16.7 Ac.(727,300 s.f.)
Use(by Special Exception per Article 3.1.1A) Elementary School Elementary School*
Zone FP-Overlay FP-Overlay
Flood Hazard Area 3.26 Ac.(141,793 s.f.) 3.35 Ac.(145,875 s.f.)
Front Yard 40' 40'
Side Yard 10 10
Rear Yard 40' 40'
Buffer(in addition to side and rear yards) 50' 50'
Building Height 30'-2.5 stories 33'- 1 story
(Per 3.1.21),height may be increased by 1'for (See Allowable Building
every 2' inside req.yard) Height Computation below)
Building Footprint(exterior face) 52,296 s.f. 66,886 s.f.
Building Area(single story) 52,296 s.f. 66,886 s.f.
Building Area w/Add Alternate Classrooms 69,391 s.f.
Parking-Required: 1 per 250 gsf** 278
Parking-Provided** 96 117 21
Overflow Parking(game court and turf) 0 66 66
Total Event Parking Available 96 183 87
Interior Landscaping(parking lots) 10% 14.3%
Lot Coverage(Impervious)* 35%Allowed 30.2%
(For Educational Use per Table 3.1.1.A) (21.1%Existing)
Wetlands(%of total site) 1.42 Ac.(9.4%)
Disturbance in Wetlands None
Additional Regulated Area(%of total site) 2.92 Ac.(17.5%)
Disturbance in Regulated Area .5 Ac.
Per Town of South Windsor Regulations&requirements,proposed design results in a zero net
increase of stormwater discharge for the 2, 10,25 and 100-year storms.
* For Educational Use per Table 3.1.1.A
** Parking requirement is per table 6.4.3B. Reduction requested.
Allowable Building Height Computation:
33'to Top of Gym Roof parapet
190'to closest Yard Line(@1ft height per 2ft from line=95'+30')=125'allowable height
22'to mean level Classroom Gable Roofs
(28'to Top of Classroom Gable Roofs)
24'to mean level Main Entry Roof
(25'to Top of Main Entry Roof)
Dr.Kate M.Carter
SOUTH Superintendent of Schools
(860)291-1205
Sheryl 1-Mortensen
W IND S OR Assistant Superintendent
1 Curriculumand Instruction
(86o)291-1210
P UJ'LD3 L I C Colin J.McNamara
Assistant Superintendent
Personnel and Administration
SCHOOLS (86o)291-1215
Chris M.Chemerka
Director of Finance&Operations
(860)291-126o
DREAM . ACHIEVE . INSPIRE .
Date: September 21, 2018
To: Michele Lipe, Director of Planning
From: Kate Carter, Ed.D., Superintendent of Schools
The following information is being provided as a follow-up to the Planning and Zoning Commission's hearings
regarding Phase Two of the Ten-Year Elementary Facilities Plan. I recognize that the hearing for Eli Terry is
closed so I am sending this as a staff level communication for clarification purposes only.
Parking
The proposed parking provides a notable increase in capacity from current conditions:
• ET will increase from 96 paved spaces to 111 paved spaces. Overflow parking consists of the paved
play area off the bus drop,and in two grassed areas to the south and northwest off the paved parking,
which will accommodate approximately 70 additional spaces.Additional parking if needed can occur
on the play fields.
The architects will forward to you directly the following exhibits that further illustrate the proposed parking:
• ET Data Table
• ET SK-C2.Oa Event/Overflow Parking
Maintenance of Grounds
As a question regarding the maintenance of courtyards was raised, it should be noted that the Board of
Education already assumes the responsibility for regular maintenance of its various courtyards across the
district. In some cases it involves BOE staff, volunteers, or contracted services. This task will not fall to the
Parks and Recreation Department.
Interior Cabinetry
In his letter copied to the Planning and Zoning Commission, Mr. Favreau expressed a concern that he had not
seen drawings related to his request for cabinetry. I am confused by Mr. Favreau's decision to bring his
request for interior storage cabinetry as a matter for the Planning and Zoning Commission. The
administration and project professionals developed a clear process for requests related to programming
needs. End-users of the building (teachers, nurses, principals, custodians, etc.) are all invited to individual
programming meetings where they describe the needs of their program to the architects. Although the Parks
and Recreation Department is not viewed by the State as a primary end-user, we have included them in the
programming meeting process. Through these meetings they were able to communicate their requests to
the architects directly. In addition, all town departments have an open invitation to attend any and all
working group meetings. These are staff level meetings with the project professionals that are convened bi-
173'7 MAIN STREET,SOUTH WINDSOR,CT o6074-1028 • (860) 291-1200 0 FAX: (860) 291-1291
weekly. Other departments, such as the Fire Marshal, Town Planner, Police and Fire, have attended these
meetings and their input is always valued. The needs of the 4th R have been considered and promoted by
school staff at countless planning meetings.
We are not at a point in the process where any stakeholder, including teachers, has seen any specific
drawings regarding storage. No one has told Mr. Favreau that his request was denied, which is why I am
unclear as to why this has become a concern at all, let alone one raised officially as a Planning and Zoning
matter. Regardless, his request for cabinetry to support the operations of the 4th R program has been heard
and there is no foreseeable reason it cannot be accommodated, with the exception of significant budget
constraints that cause us to prioritize higher needs. We do not anticipate that to be the case. It is my hope
that if the Commission intends to respond to Mr. Favreau's letter, he will be encouraged to use the same
communication channels that all other town departments have followed.
1737 MAIN STREET,SOUTH WINDSOR,CT o6074-1028 9 (860) 291-1200 0 FAX: (860) 291-1291
tO.N N Sf4
C �
y �
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
f�OSOR c° TELEPHONE (860) 644 2511
CERTIFIED MAIL 7016 0910 0000 98610370
October 2, 2018
South Windsor Board of Education
C/O The LRC Group
Henry Thomas
160 West Street, Suite E
Cromwell, CT 06416
Dear Mr. Thomas:
Re: Appl. 18-37P, TOSW Board of Education Eli Terry School Special Exception Site Plan of Development
We are pleased to advise you that the Planning& Zoning Commission voted on September 25,2018,to approve
with modifications the above referenced application for a special exception to Table 3.1.LA and site plan of
development approval. This approval is for a 66,924 sq ft elementary school, on property located at 569 Griffin
Road, A-20 and FP zone, as shown on plans prepared by Moser Pilon Nelson Architects, dated July 3, 2018 as
revised. This approval is subject to the following modifications:
1. Prior to commencement of any site work, a meeting must be held with Town Staff.
2. No building permit will be issued until the final mylars have been filed in the Town Clerk's office.
3. This application is subject to the conditions of approval of the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation
Commission including a bond in the amount of$15,000 for erosion and sediment controls and$25,000
for stormwater system.
4. An as-built plan is required prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy per Section 9.1.3 of the
Zoning Regulations.
5. All plans used in the field by the developer must bear the stamp and authorized signature of the Town of
South Windsor.
6. This approval does not constitute approval of the sanitary sewer, which can only be granted by the
Water Pollution Control Authority.
7. The building street number must be included on the final plan.
8. Pavement markings must be maintained in good condition throughout the site drives and parking areas.
9. All free standing signs and/or building signs require the issuance of a sign permit before they are
erected.
10. If an Office of State Traffic Administration certificate is required, no building permits will be issued
until the certificate has been issued(per CGS §14-311).
11. In accordance with Section 6.4.9,the Commission has granted a modification to the required 278
parking spaces based on the uses presented. The approved reduction allows 117 spaces to be built with
66 temporary spaces available around the perimeter of the site and additional in the ball field if
necessary. The modification to the required number of parking spaces is based on the operation of the
facility presented, and the availability of temporary parking.
12. Trees to be preserved around the site shall be protected in the field prior to construction activities.
13. Perimeter site lighting shall be controlled by light sensors and will be turned off by time clock at 11:30
PM. The same lights will turn on at 4 AM and remain on until turned off by photocell. The lighting shall
be programed to minimize the impact on surrounding residential properties.
14. Land Surveyor seal is required to certify the site plan. All proposed and existing iron pons shall be
identified on the site plan and easement chart provided.
15. Engineering comments dated 9/25/18 must be addressed to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer.
16. Provide additional bicycle racks to accommodate a total of 32 bikes.
17. The Commission recommends that a hardscape material be placed around the building to minimize
landscaping.
18. Details of the ball fields should be shown on the plans.
19. The Commission request that the Board of Education investigate using an alternative to grass in the
courtyard area.
Black and white transparent mylars of Sheets # Vl, C2.0, C2.1, C2.2 and C2.3 with the above modifications,
together with three print copies of the entire set of plans must be submitted to this Commission to be stamped
and signed. The letters of approval of this Commission as well as the Inland Wetlands Conservation
Commission and the Water Pollution Control Authority must be reproduced on the mylars.
After the mylars have been signed by the Commission,they will be returned to you for filing in the Office of the
Town Clerk. After filing these plans, a copy of the receipt must be submitted to the Planning Department.
The attached Special Exception-form must be completed and filed in the Town Clerk's office. The special
exception will take effect upon filing.
Sincerely,
Bart Pacekonis, Chairman
Planning and Zoning Commission
BP/llz
cc: Town Engineer
Chief Building Official
Assessor
Superintendent of Pollution Control
Fire Marshal
Board of Education
The Special Exception will take effect upon filing of this form.
I, Bart Pacekonis, Chairman of the South Windsor Planning&Zoning Commission,hereby certify that on
September 25, 2018 the Planning and Zoning Commission granted to the South Windsor Board of Education a
Special Exception to Table 3.1.LA of the Zoning Regulations and site plan of development approval. This
approval is for a 66,924 sf elementary school, on property located at 569 Griffin Road, A-20 and FP zone, as
shown on plans prepared by Moser Pilon Nelson Architects, dated July 3, 2018 as revised.
This approval is subject to the following modifications:
1. Prior to commencement of any site work, a meeting must be held with Town Staff.
2. No building permit will be issued until the final mylars have been filed in the Town Clerk's office.
3. This application is subject to the conditions of approval of the Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation
Commission including a bond in the amount of$15,000 for erosion and sediment controls and$25,000
for stormwater system.
4. An as-built plan is required prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy per Section 9.1.3 of the
Zoning Regulations.
5. All plans used in the field by the developer must bear the stamp and authorized signature of the Town of
South Windsor.
6. This approval does not constitute approval of the sanitary sewer, which can only be granted by the
Water Pollution Control Authority.
7. The building street number must be included on the final plan.
8. Pavement markings must be maintained in good condition throughout the site drives and parking areas.
9. All free standing signs and/or building signs require the issuance of a sign permit before they are
erected.
10. If an Office of State Traffic Administration certificate is required, no building permits will be issued
until the certificate has been issued(per CGS §14-311).
11. In accordance with Section 6.4.9,the Commission has granted a modification to the required 278
parking spaces based on the uses presented. The approved reduction allows 117 spaces to be built with
66 temporary spaces available around the perimeter of the site and additional in the ball field if
necessary. The modification to the required number of parking spaces is based on the operation of the
facility presented, and the availability of temporary parking.
12. Trees to be preserved around the site shall be protected in the field prior to construction activities.
13. Perimeter site lighting shall be controlled by light sensors and will be turned off by time clock at 11:30
PM. The same lights will turn on at 4 AM and remain on until turned off by photocell. The lighting shall
be programed to minimize the impact on surrounding residential properties.
14. Land Surveyor seal is required to certify the site plan. All proposed and existing iron pons shall be
identified on the site plan and easement chart provided.
15. Engineering comments dated 9/25/18 must be addressed to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer.
16. Provide additional bicycle racks to accommodate a total of 32 bikes.
17. The Commission recommends that a hardscape material be placed around the building to minimize
landscaping.
18. Details of the ball fields should be shown on the plans.
19. The Commission request that the Board of Education investigate using an alternative to grass in the
courtyard area.
GIS PIN 3900569
(In es give, jp111114 hurgaiit, sell..,11111 E'e,ttfinn utful the mlift Town of South �4iric4sor,
its succossora . and assigns forever, 25 certain pieces or -parcels of
land, Situated in the mown of -Sout it Windsor, County of tiartf'ord and
State of -oonnact�icut:, being Lots Nos. 401-425 inclusive ors a certain
map ahtit,led, „South: Windsor Heights Lot Layout Section 11I South.
Windsor, 'Conn. Scale I" = 60' Oct.. 3A. 1956 Primus & welti, .gngr's.1r,
Which map is on file. in the Town Clerk'is .Office in said Town of -Sout
Windsor to which reference may be had.
To
get:har with tha .right to use overlook. Raad as shown on said map for
all .purposes. for which a public highway is ordj.narily used.
Said Promises-are conveyed together with all the Grantor's right, tit[Le
and interest in. and tp` DWInis- Road and Stephen Drive as shown on said
rnap.: Said Dennis Road is'bounded Easterly by draham Road and Westerl
by over.100% Road; and said Stephen Drive -is bounded Northerly by
Griffin Road and Southeasterly. by. Graham Road.
OWNER OF RECORD: Town of South Windsor
Dated at South Windsor, Connecticut this 28th day of September,2018.
In accordance with CGS Section 8-3d
Chairman Bart Pacekonis
Planning&Zoning Commission
Received for record this day of , 20_, at
South Windsor, Connecticut ATTEST:
q O'N H SE4
C
y �
• :. w� Tisiw� olle S_a� V&U&Ot
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
f�OSos•co TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511
November 28, 2018
South Windsor Board of Education
C/O The LRC Group
Henry Thomas
160 West Street, Suite E
Cromwell, CT 06416
RE: 569 Griffin Road — Eli Terry Elementary School
WPCA Approval — P&Z Application No. 18-37P
Dear Mr. Thomas:
The South Windsor Water Pollution Control Authority, at its regular meeting of November 7, 2018,
approved the application as presented for connection to the Town's sewerage system for the
proposed 66,924 sq. ft. elementary school, on property located at 569 Griffin Road, South Windsor,
CT and as more specifically shown on plans entitled "Town of South Windsor, Eli Terry Elementary
School, 569 Griffin Road, South Windsor, CT 06074", Prepared by LRC Group, Cromwell, CT.
Drawing No. C3.0 "Overall Grading & Utilities Plan", Drawing No. C3.1, C3.2, C3.3 "Grading & Utilities
Plan Enlargement", and Drawing No. C5.3 "Site Utility Details", dated 7/3/2018, Revisions: 8/14/18,
8/31/18, 9/25/18 and 10/31/18. This approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. Move rip rap away from the sewer line;
2. Technical approval of the Town of South Windsor Engineering Department; and
3. Final Authority approval and acceptance of the sanitary sewerage connection is conditioned
upon the installed sewer line having been inspected by the Town staff, and upon the written
verification of the Town staff that said sanitary sewer line was installed in substantial
conformance with the design plans approved by the Authority, and meeting all regulations and
appropriate technical specifications relating to sanitary sewer construction.
This approval letter must be superimposed on the final approval plans.
Sincerely yours,
1
Rich d Aries, Chairman
Wat r Pollution Control Authority
RA:ead
cc: Michael J. Gantick, Director of Public Works
Jeff Doolittle, Town Engineer
Michelle Lipe, Town Planner
Chris Dougan, Chief Building Inspector
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
Date: April 2, 2019
Re: Eli Terry& Philip R. Smith Schools
LRC job# 17-2144& 17-2145
via Hand Delivery
Attn: Michele Lipe, Dir. of Planning
Town of South Windsor Planning Dept.
1540 Sullivan Avenue
South Windsor, CT 06014
}
We are sending:
® Attached ❑ Separate Cover via:
❑ Prints ❑ Correspondence ❑ Permit Apps ❑ Change rder
❑ Shop Drawings ❑ Specifications ❑ Samples ❑ Other
#Copies li Date Sheet No. Description !!
5 4-2-18 46 pages Record Plan Sets for Eli Terry Elementary School# 18-37P
5 4-2-18 1 39 pages Record Plan Sets for Philip R. Smith Elementary School# 18-36P
I ea. Mylars: Cover Sheet,V-1, C2.0, C2.1, C2.2 and C2.3 (Eli Terry)
I ea. Mylars: Cover Sheet,V-1, C2.0, C2.1 and C2.2(Philip R.Smith)
I
i
These are transmitted (as checked below):
® For Approval ❑ Approval as Submitted ® Resubmit ❑ Copies for Approval
❑ For Your Use ❑ Approval as Noted ❑ Submit ❑ Copies for Distribution
❑ As Requested ❑ Returned for Corrections ❑ Return ❑ Corrected Prints
❑ For Review/Comment ❑ For Bids Due: ❑ Returned after Loan
Remarks: As discussed, EM-I (Easement Maps) are included in the table of contents for each
school, but maps (though in progress) are not yet final and copies not included. These
will be provided separately when available. Also as discussed, V-I survey drawings will
be replaced with new copies when additional monuments and pins are set and
documented (not by LRC).
Copy To: Project File From: Henry Thomas, RLA
Hugh Pearson, MPN (trans.only)
Chuck Warrington, Colliers (trans.only)
Mark Schweitzer, Colliers (trans.only) Signed:
teoo
\11ryLRC Engineering&Surveying,DPC 160 West Street,Suite E
LRC Engineering and Surveying,LLC Connecticut Certified SBE Cromwell,CT 06416
LRC Environmental Services,Inc. Tel: (860)635-2877
Land Resource Consultants,Inc Fax: (860)635-4226
Offices in Connecticut,New York&New Jersey
www.Ircconsult.com
Land Planning • Civil Engineering • Environmental Services 4 Land Surveying • Landscape Architecture
tAWN St4
�
OTov� olle sisilu� V&U&ot
c �
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
S c° TELEPHONE (860) 644 2511
April 4, 2019
The LCR Goup
Henry Thomas
160 West Street, Suite E
Cromwell, CT 06416
Dear Mr. Thomas:
Re: Preconstruction Meeting for Appl. 18-37P, Eli Terry School
IN ATTENDANCE
Name Company E-MAIL Phone
number
Michele R. Lipe SW Planning michele.lil2e(cvsouthwindsonor 644-2511 x252
Jeffrey Folger SW Planning 'effrev.folaer�c�southwindsor.or 644-2511 x229
Jeffrey Doolittle SW Engineering 'effrey.doolittle(d.,southwindsor.or r 644-2511 x245
Bernie Drabek SW Engineering bemard.drabek(a),southwindsor.or 644-2511 x241
David Mauldin SW Fire Marshal david.mauldin(d,,southwindsor.or 282-0669 x2
Tony Manfre SW Pollution Contr anthonv.manfre&.southwindsor.or 644-2511 x247
Jeff LeMay SW Pollution Contr 'effrev.lema g,,southwindsor.or(�, 860-289-0185
Christopher Duchesne SW Police Dept. christo her.duchesneg)southwindsor.or 860-648-6273
Mary Huda SW Assessor mary.huda:v.southwindsor.ora 644-2511 x213
Hugh Pearson Moser Pilon hpearson;Lempn-arch.com 860-563-6164
Nelson Architects
Marcus Brennan Gilbane mbrennanLd;gilbaneco.com 860-625-4312
Andy Maido Gilbane amaido,Li. ilbaneco.com 860-308-6783
Michael Colossale Colossale michae1.cotossale(a,cotossaleconstruct ion.com 860-223-3179
Construction
Jack Cannon Eversource (gas) 'ohn.cannone(cueversource.com 860-292-2270
Mark Schweitzer Colliers mark.schweitzeroct colliers.com 929-255-0305
Henry Thomas LRC Group hthomasglrcconsult.com 860-635-2877
Rich Reynolds LRC Group rre rnoldsglrcconsult.com 860-635-2877
The following is a brief summary of points discussed during the meeting:
Erosion and Sedimentation Control
1. All erosion and sedimentation control measures are to be in place prior to earth moving operations in
each area and maintained/cleaned out area and maintained/cleaned out duringconstruction. Call Jeffrey Folger, Senior Environmental
Planner for inspection when measures are in place, prior to commencement of site work or if any
problems/concerns arise during construction at 860-644-2511 Ext. 229.
2. All topsoil stockpile areas to be protected (ringed with haybales or equal).
3. During construction a crushed stone tracking pad may need to be installed and maintained to minimize
tracking of dirt/gravel on to Graham Road. Calcium chloride or water is to be used for dust control as
required.
4. Install and stabilize the detention basin and Swale on site first.
Public Works
1. Three complete sets of approved/revised plans to be provided to Town prior to start of construction.
They will be stamped by the Planning Department along with plans developer needs. Only approved
plans are to be used on the job site.
2. The Engineering Department is to be notified forty-eight (48) hours prior to the start of major
construction work on site with inspections and testing per Developers Checklist for the following:
a. After site is staked out
b. All drainage work
c. Preparation of subgrade, compaction tests `
d. Placement of bituminous concrete, two (2) inch layers maximum
3. The project schedule is to start building construction in April 2019 and get a Certificate of Occupancy
on the new school in May 2020.
4. A street cut permit must be taken out for the new driveway and any utility work in Graham Road
and/or Griffin Road.
5. Certification of gravel used as subbase and processed stone for base will be required from an approved
testing company
6. The contractor should be aware that the inspection of the infrastructure improvements may result in
the replacement of structure tops and/or structures prior to final paving if found to be deficient.
7. No subgrade formation/base in frozen ground/snow. Same for pipe/structure installation.
8. Progress As Built Plans are to be submitted to the Town Engineer for approval prior to paving and
after subgrade formation. Show elevations and location of all storm drainage and sanitary sewer.
9. An as built plan will be required for the improvements to the site and a copy submitted to the Town,
prior to the request for a C.O.
10. As built plans are to include horizontal and vertical location of all underdrains, footing drains, sanitary
sewers, storm drains and utilities located as per revised as-built checklist.
11. All pipe and structures to be backfilled with free draining material compacted in maximum one foot
lifts with approved compaction equipment or approved equal if deep trench is encountered. Any pipe
or structure work requires inspection prior to backfilling.
12. Any problems and/or questions regarding construction of this project will be directed to Andy Maido
from Gilbane in the field at cell phone 860-308-6783 or/and Marcus Brennan from Gilbane in the field
at cell phone 860-625-4312.
13. Job meetings will be held as needed, and can be called by the developer or Town.
14. Seventy-two (72) hours' notice needed for a certificate of occupancy inspection.
15. Any proposed changes are to be presented to the Engineering or Planning Department prior to
implementation on change order form in quadruplicate with 4 copies of the drawing. Town will
attempt to turn around within 24 hours.
16. Normal hours of operation 7:00 a.m. — 5:00 p.m., no work on Sunday.
17. Town of South Windsor construction noise ordinance will apply.
18. A drain layers permit must be pulled from the Town of South Windsor for the new sewer lateral lines
and to disconnect the existing school sewer lateral prior to demolition.
19. The main sewer lateral will need to be tested and pass a low pressure air test and mandrel test before
acceptance by the Town.
20. No paving after October 15 or before April 15 without written approval from Director of Public
Works.
21. Extra care must be taken when compacting around structures such as catch basins and manholes.
These spots often become problem areas in the future due to settling, therefore, the Town
staff/inspectors may be requesting additional compaction tests in these areas.
22. Sanitary lateral locations should be tied down to existing structures and shown on the progress as
built.
23. During construction of individual sanitary sewer house laterals, the contractor shall prepare an as-built
sketch on standard form provided by the Engineering Department. This form should be submitted to
the design engineer/surveyor for their use in preparing the as-built plan. The Engineering Department
suggests that the contractor also show locations of foundation drains and water laterals on this form.
Planning Department
1. Landscaping is to be installed in accordance with the approved landscaping plan. If there are changes
required, contact the Planning Department. Additional landscaping installed on one part of a site will
not preclude planting all of the remaining items shown on the landscaping plan.
2. All bonds required; mylar to go on file prior to issuance of building permit.
3. All easements must be submitted for review prior to filing of mylars.
4. Sign permits are required for all temporary and permanent signs.
5. Town of South Windsor construction noise ordinance will apply.
Utilities
1. Contact utilities for coordination of utilities connection.
Fire Marshal (Commercial Facilities)
1) Documents—Complete set of stamped plans with the following:
a. Plan review paid
b. Code information sheet
c. Exiting plans with travel distances
d. Wall types
e. Door schedule
f. Mechanical, Electrical, reflected ceiling
g. Fire alarm
h. Basic sprinkler layout
** PLAN REVIEW COULD TAKE 30 DAYS FOR APPROVALS **
2) Inspections:
a. Above ceiling
b. Penetrations and separations
c. Sprinkler system
A. Hydraulic calculations and cut sheets
B. Underground flush and hydrostatic test
C. System hydrostatic test
D. Main drain test/inspectors test
E. Outside bell
F. NFPA 13 paperwork
d. Fire Alarm
e. Emergency lighting test
f. Final Inspection
** PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING**
1. Consulting inspection will be welcomed
2. Multiple inspections can be done on the same day
3. Stocking/addition of fixtures to occupancy will only be allowed if the life safety systems are on
line.
Police Services
1. Emergency phone numbers for the duration of the construction must be provided to Police Services on
a company letterhead. If the developer occupies or owns the building after construction emergency
numbers must be provided to Police Services.
2. All buildings located on property that abuts a public highway must be numbered and visible from the
street. All numbering shall comply with Town Ordinance 6-800 through 6-802.
3. Barns, garages, and outbuildings, which are located on the same premises as a numbered structure, are
excluded.
4. Erect temporary sign on the site during construction identifying the project.
5. If an alarm is to be installed contact Police Services.
Building Department
1. Plan review with Building Official/Fire Marshal required prior to application for building permit.
Coordinate with Chief Building Official.
Very truly yours,
A n
Jeffrey Doolittle
Town Engineer
JD/llz
cc: Michele Lipe, Director of Planning
Bernie Drabek, Engineering Inspector
Michael Gantick, Public Works
Christopher Dougan, Chief Building Official
Tony Manfre, Superintendent of Pollution Control
Walter Summers, Fire Marshal
Utilities
PRECONSTRUCTION MEETING SIGN —IN SHEET
(please print clearly)
Rr r, x lit w"z�as, a n,u ., . ;x ,r F ,::: a,i,^ ,,t •,�8n r r'r' '~;in,.. �,.,.- ,._, �3 ,r ..,i 'i,.'g, ps r
; ,r Y
,„ i;,. k
r f ..u..,,m f y
a .._ £t.r a'r.., r;.....
,,. .,:� s!is
., ...:,'�'�... P .... ,.. ..... t
..:.a.m „ 41
..,. s;i...-
- �.r. ..,.
a;u
gat
4?i
v E r r 7 o Gt—Y , 'j GS LJ 9.o
OL co3 ei►� t � �c.n� bre�� o.� ,Ibaneco. CoAoL g(o0 ' (naS-Y3 �a
i Cyr' G�✓vtov l 5 cow 7
iG oSS r� t SS4`e_ �✓s-�r �' eoloss4%e223 �3179
Q l 0 ` �Q VC_ �O/u 1G�nK� •Cv�USso lG! CONS �rvc�iol✓ e-&—
C�v'� OL«+� 1� .�l.ai "7 n,.�y ♦��_ '.:� ,..,nrl' r ,�.-- �L.G - G' ;{ .
�� ` .�y1�.�i�.�c��..Y�.- , , �--'� �"L.J 5�'i`✓l v-'l� . (�!G.���Lt.�-��i��••L��,;�''` �,�-"C')... � �y.�-.i'J/ ,�[,�.7�//
V-•��� e4ALUOAJJ -i+.UiG �•lU��� L C�lQ1 1 �-` • `Q��O�.Q 4V't.�S�V C L-Z-Z[ V
..� 9AS ScA e—,i �/Z9 Z5 - o
rl �bV9g L op P%-4JAoAV6 CA jYwoA4u.Lf- c m 6W • (off.SSI J
Ve`frj d 1, z C ko e fE ?M r>C@ U?CCo,16uCr. NO WS' 2677
a�r
C,1*15 OUCKSA SWPOLICc 0"71V?t+fA a AO-G 8-GAV