HomeMy WebLinkAbout1725 Ellington Road TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
The Commission will officially receive applications
Application No . Q at either Special or Regular meetings provided they
Received Date : were submitted to the Commission Chairperson, Secretar
Action or Publi Hearing by : or agent, at least fourteen (14) days prior to the
v 1 meeting at which they will be officially received.
No application officially received at a Special Meetin
ece ip t No . I will be acted upon at that meeting.
I
APPLICANT : MAn/CHES%EA FOoD SEA?✓/GES L-T'D-
/D [Jni/✓AC L.N• S41.1rc 303
AD DRESS : C�� MOg7*/N Si•�DELC 14//"ysc-q GT C&o9S TELEPHONE 693-241,W
OWNER OF RECORD ON LAND RECORDS : L)-
ADDRESS :
L_ {f L/< �.Zn eat G/ f 0 i 11i l �—
COMPLETE LOCATION OF PROPERTY: BY,!GfLi3A/D A/9 IVI—
ZONE R• C-
NAME , ADDRESS & TELEPHONE NUMBER OF PERSON TO WHOM INQUIRIES SHOULD BE
DIRECTED : 1",jAr1n1 UN/vwc L'-j- Su11-6 202
WI,VIdsO,49 CT • UlvOq-1 TELEPHONE (og9
THIS APPLICATION IS FOR: (CHECK ONE OF THE FOLLOWING)
1 . Zone Change to (publiTrei-a'r'-in g' .re�iiired)
2 . Filing for Subdivision
3 . Filing for Open Space Subdivision (public hearing required)
�
4 . Filing for Resubdivision (public hearifi- r`,equfLk4!4. a104k
�
5 . Special Exception to Article (public hearing required)
6 . Site Plan of Development
7 . Removal of Sand , Gravel , Clay or Quarry Stone & Ore (public
hearing required)
8 . Other (explain in detail)
THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND OWNER OF THE PROPERTY
AND SUBMITTED WITH 6 SETS OF PLANS ( 7 sets if public hearing is required)
BE IT S R�L=VED BY THE PLANNING & ZO COMMISSION.
Applicant Owner
9 /R4
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR
Fee Schedule and Policv
1. An application processing fee of $25 per lot ($50 minimum) is required
for: Subdivisions,. resubdivisions, and open space subdivisions.
2. An application processing fee of $50 is required for: Change of Zone,
Zoning Amendment, Special Exception, and Earth Removal or Land Filling
Operations.
3. An application processing fee of $25 is required for Site Development
Plans. except: where new buildings/additions/renovations of 2,000 s. f.
or more are proposed, said fee shall be $50; said fee shall be $500
for Site Development Plans in the Designed Commercial Zone; $50 plus
S5 per dwelling unit for Adult Housing ($500 minimum) .
4. An application processing fee of $10 per acre ($300 minimum) is required
for a Change of Zone/General Plan of Development in the Designed
Commercial Zone.
5 . An application processing fee of $100 is required for a Change of Zone/
General Plan of Development in the Multi-Family or DA-15 Residential zones; or
for a Special Exception/General Plan of Development for Adult Housing .
6 . An application processing fee of $50 pLus $5 per dwelling unit is
required for a Special Exception/Site Plan of Development in the Multi-
Family or DA-15 Residential zones ($500.00 minimum).
7. Application processing fees are non-refundable after the application
has been officially received by the Commission. Application processing
fees may be returned prior to the application' s official reception
provided a letter of withdrawal, signed by the applicant , has been
submitted to the Commission prior to the meeting at which said applica-
tion is scheduled to be officially received.
8. Applications unaccompanied by the required application processing fee
are incomplete, and as such may be returned to the applicant and
removed from the Commission' s agenda.
9. Complete applications and required fees shall be submitted at least
fourteen (14) calendar days prior to the Regular or Special Meeting
at which it will be received.
10. Fees for a previously denied application shall not apply to any
subsequent application. However, when a subdivision, resubdivision,
or open space subdivision application has been denied within the
preceding 12 months or approved for fewer lots than requested, and a
new application for the subject tract 19 submitted by `•the same appli-
cant, then the fee for the new application shall be a minimum of $50
plus $25 for each lot above and beyond the number of lots contained in
the earlier application.
11. A fee of $5 per sign is required for signs to be posted by the
applicant on the subject property.
12. Other Fees: Subdivision Regulations - $3.00; Zoning Regulations - $4.00;
Zoning Map $1.00; fees for other documents is as determined by the
Commission.
13. All checks shall be made payable to "Town of South Windsor. "
Adopted: 4/10/84
Revised: 12/4/84
'<0,0 aft(
s 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074
SOR•co AREA CODE 203/644-2511
March 20, 1986
Mr. Martin T . Siddell
Site Development Engineer
Burger King Corporation
10 Univac Lane
Windsor, Connecticut 06095
Dear Mr. Siddell:
RE: Proposed Restaurant Signage
Buckland Road
Your proposed restaurant location lies within the Wapping Center
Commercial district, which has been the recent focus of attention
concerning signage and architectural design .
Specifically, Planning & Zoning Commission members have expressed
their intention to exercise control over signage and building facades.
While your proposed building appears to be attractive , signage could
be a major stumbling block toward approval .
I recommend that your firm not even consider installation of a pole-
mounted free standing Burger King sign along Buckland Road. This is
prohibited in the zoning regulations, would require a zoning variance,
and has little or no chance of approval , given the Town ' s intentions
in this area.
The course of action I do recommend , however , is to plan for a single
building-mounted sign , permitted by right under certain restrictions,
and then pursue a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for an
additional low profile sign, replete with landscaping treatments , to be
situated along the Buckland Road frontage . This sign would not be un-
like those attractive signs in Greater Hartford ' s better office and
industrial parks . I suggest a sign (mounted to a brick and/or wood
structure ) with the Burger King lettering/logo and background no larger
than 2 feet by 8 feet, or 16 square feet per sign face.
With this approach, I believe you can turn a potential liability into a
selling point before the Town' s regulatory bodies .
Sincerely,
Peter R. DeMallie
Director of Planning
CC: Marcia Banach, Asst. Planner//
John Shemo , Economic Development Coordinator
ZUa�6►�iut� C�r�uc�u;try L?`uc�c�i �?a� I sad
1790 ELLINGTON ROAD, SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT 06074 UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST
Rev. Harold W. Richardson,Minister CHURCH PHONE
Rev.James R.Hansen,Minister of Christian Education 644-0933
April 3, 1986
Mr. Robert F. Gilligan, Chairman
South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission
1540 Sullivan Avenue
South Windsor, Ct. 06074
SUBJECT: Burger King Permit
Dear Mr. Gilligan:
The Wapping Community Church has a great deal of interest in the activity
and appearance of Wapping Five Corners. We would appreciate a chance to communi-
cate this interest relative to the proposed Burger King development planned for
Route 30/Buckland Road. We understand that this is a Business/Commercial area,
but the colonial flavor of the Town Hall , Library, Church and some of the Buck-
land Road development is important. While Burger King has a national image,
we are sure that landscaping, light standards, disposal area shelters and parts
of the building itself can reflect the character of the area. Brick facing, for
example would blend well with some of the other existing structures.
If it is necessary to request a formal public hearing, we will do whatever
is required to bring that about. If you believe that it can be handled at a
regular Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, we would be glad to attend and
participate. We would benefit greatly from information from a Burger King rep-
resentative. We understand that plans and renderings are not yet available but
soon will be.
The increase in activity around the church property is causing us to assess
our future plans carefully. Keeping informed affords us a reliable base from
which to work. We look forward to hearing from you in the near future concern-
ing the course of action you would recommend. You can write to me care of the
church or call me during the day at 741-3441 or in the evening at 644-2750.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely yours,
w
E
,IF^ A �
David G. Corwin
President
R, �� t7x
DC:mb Q`601111
� �
taw" sE+�
e mac` 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074
SOR.-CO AREA CODE 203/644-2511
April 22 , 1986
Martin Siddell CERTIFIED MAIL
Manchester Food Services
10 Univac Lane , Suite 303
Windsor, Ct 06095
RE: Application #384 - Burger King - Construction of 3500 s .f.
Restaurant with 61 car parking lot.
Dear Mr. Siddell :
At the April 14 , 1986 meeting, the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency/
Conservation Commission denied without prejudice, application #384
because of concerns that the drainage system was inadequate.
You may re-apply at any time. Check with the Engineering Department
about particulars if you have any questions .
Very truly yours ,
John M. Moran, -Jr. irman
/ Inland Wetlands A ncy/
Conservation Commission
Town of South Windsor
JMM;dlb
CC: A. B. Davies , Deputy Town Engineer
Robert Gilligan, Chairman, Planning & Zoning Commission
Thomas D'Auria, Building Official
Peter DeMallie, Director of Planning
John Shemo, Economic Development Coordinator
April 28, 1986
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission
Town of South Windsor
RE: Burger King drive-in restaurant
I am strongly opposed to a Burger King restaurant being located near
the Wapping Five Corners intersection. I have already stated my opposition
to their request for a larger sign, in writing, to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
All of the newer commercial buildings in the area of that intersection
have maintained the neat, subdued "small town" atmosphere that does not contrast
with the older colonial buildings. They all seem to "fit". Actually, I am
opposed to any fast food drive-in restaurant in that area because I feel they
simply do not "fit" the area.
In addition, the traffic problems at that intersection are already beyond
control. I know of people who have spent 15 minutes getting through the inter-
section during later afternoon peak traffic times. It is extremely difficult to
make left turns at that intersection during peak times and I personally have been
caught in a "gridlock" situation - caught in the middle of the intersection
when the light changed and traffic began coming from other directions. A drive-in
restaurant near there would only make a horrendous situation even worse.
In fact, I am opposed to Mr. Kelly's proposed shopping center near the
Society for Savings bank at that intersection, largely for the traffic problems.
If the State doesn't change that to a 4-way intersection soon, no one will want
to go anywhere near that intersection as traffic seems to increase daily and
weekly. It seems that South Windsor simply does not have enough through streets
to handle increased traffic from all the new homes and businesses.
Resp tfully, .
Barbara L. Hill
26 Timber Trail
South Windsor, CT 06074
c `
APR 29 196
South Windsor
plauning & Zoning COMM'"'" -
Y�
WaA#af eomm"a# ek"ewlt eMqU94"fod
179 ELLINGTON ROAD, SOUTH WINDS GOt%IM$CTICUT 06074 UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST
Rev. Harold W. Richardson,Minister ,`_ ,,��' 1,1
CHURCHPHONE
Rev.James R.Hansen,Minister of Christian Educatfen 644-0933
MAY ? 1°8-
April 30 ., 1986
PlanningbA ►t,l d
& Zoa;,a
Robert F. Gilligan, Chairman
South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission
1540 Sullivan Avenue
South Windsor , Connecticut 06074
Subjs,-" Burger King Permit
i
Dear Mr . Gilligan:
On April 3 , 1986 the Wapping Community Church requested
a meeting or public hearing on the application for approval
to construct a Burger King fast food facility. Since that
time the Church Council has passed the attached resolution
opposing the Burger King action.
The two major objections to the facility are the character
of the business and the traffic problems that will be created .
The other commercial and government buildings in the area have
been designed in keeping with the village center , rural setting.
Even with greatly increased traffic activity , the area still
retains the New England charm. We consider that feeling to
be a good one and try to have the church property live up to
that image .
The location of the proposed Burger Ding driveway shown
on plans is in a very critical location. Traffic is backed up
daily on all legs of the intersection. Turning movements into
and out of this facility will block one of the legs . Those
northbound making left turns into the driveway will hold up the
line waiting to cross the intersection. Any back up in the
driveway caused by drive-in traffic will literally stop traffic .
The intersection barely works now. With another driveway inter-
rupting flow on one leg it will be intolerable .
We understand that there will be a meeting for sign size by
the Zoning Board of Appeals on May 1 , 1986 and a public hearing
for the Planning Zoning application on May 13 , 1986. Represen-
tatives of the Wapping Community Church will attend both meetings
to speak in opposition to the construction of the Burger King
facility.
Sincerely yours ,
David G. Corwin
President
RESOLUTION CONCERNING FAST FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS
In that a fast food chain has applied to construct a facility
in the immediate vicinity of the Wapping Community Church , the
Church Council discussed the issue at the April 24, 1986 meeting
and has
Resolved that : the construction of a Burger King fast food
facility as proposed for the Wapping Five Corners is not in
the best interests of the Wapping Community Church.
The church is and has been a landmark in South Windsor . The
character of the area will be changed from that of a colonial
village center to the image of a rapid paced downtown urban area.
Specifically :
1. The pronounced colors, logo and signing for the facility
make it stand out , detracting from the village green
appearance of the area.
2. The increased , peaked traffic demands will be greater
than those experienced from the other establishments in
the area.
3. The probability of increased litter in the area from
take out wrappers and boxes will increase.
4. The general nature of a fast food facility is not in
keeping with the village center atmosphere developed to
date by the commercial establishments in the vicinity
of the church.
The Wapping Community Church Council , therefore, opposes
the construction of a Burger King fast food facility in this
location.
Unanimously approved
April 24, 1986
1
_W� 0-14?S_o_� ?d&uaot
c� 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074
gpR,Cp AREA CODE 203/644-2511
'yOC�
Rtl�,
rMay 2, 1986
MAY 1Q86
CERTIFIED 14AIL
South Windsor
�sry rassi�r
Manchester Food Services Ltd. Planning & Zoning
c/o Martin Siddell
10 Univac Lane, Suite 303
Windsor, CT 06095
Dear Mr. Siddell:
This is to notify you that the South Windsor Zoning Board of Appeals voted
to grant a variance to Section 4.4 3 of the Zoning Regulations to allow a
16 square foot free-standing ground sign and a second 16 square foot building
sign at property located on Buckland Road at the Five Corners, South Windsor,
subject to the following:
1. The free standing sign shall not exceed three feet in height, and the top
of the sign shall not be more than 52 feet off the ground. The masonry
base shall not exceed 30 square feet, and the sign shall be located at
least 15 feet from the property line. The final design and placement
of this sign shall be subject to approval by the South Windsor Planning
and Zoning Commission.
2. The second building sign of 16 square feet shall be on the southern side
of the building facing the parking lot. This sign shall also be subject
to approval by the South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission
3 All. three signs shall be illuminated only during business hours
In granting approval of these signs, the Board noted traffic and safety
concerns in the area. It was felt that the free-standing sign would designate
the entrance to the driveway more clearly, and the additional building sign
on the south would improve visibility in that direction.
This action is effective May 16, 1986, and upon your filing the enclosed form
in the Town Clerk's Office at your own expense.
Very truly yours,
Thomas Murrin, Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
TM/src
encl.
C-C_
f
r
TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
in connection with the proposed
Burger King Restaurant
to be located on
Buckland Road
in
South Windsor, Connecticut
Prepared for:
Burger King Corporation
Prepared by:
STORCH ENGINEERS
161 Main Street
Wethersfield, Connecticut
May 9, 1986
STORCH ENGINEERS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
II . EXISTING CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
A. Site and Adjacent Roadway Descriptions . . . . 2
Area Location Map Figure 1
Site Location Map Figure 2
Roadway Layout Figure 3
B. Traffic Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
C. Trip Distribution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
IV. TRAFFIC IMPACT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
APPENDIX
Traffic Count Summaries
Signal Plan, Routes 30, 74, 194, Buckland Road
Collision Diagram Routes 30, 74, 194, Buckland Road
ITE' s Trip Generation:
"High Turn Over, Sit Down Restaurant"
"Drive-In Restaurant"
Roadway Plan - Buckland Road
STORCH ENGINEERS
I . INTRODUCTION
The Burger King Corporation has proposed the construction of a
Burger King Restaurant on Buckland Road in South Windsor, Connecticut,
several hundred feet south of the intersection of Route 30, 194 and 74
(Wapping Five Corners) . Storch Engineers was retained by Burger King
Corporation to conduct a traffic impact study for submission and
presentation to the South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission. The
present report is based on the December 16, 1985 site plan. The study
has included an on-site investigation of existing traffic conditions on
Buckland Road, an estimate of traffic volumes which will be generated by
the proposed Burger King Restaurant and an estimate of the impact of the
Burger King Restaurant traffic on the capacity and safety of Buckland
Road and possible impact on Wapping Five Corners.
The scope of work included several on-site inspections of the area,
observation of traffic flows on Buckland Road and at the Wapping Five
Corners during a.m. , mid-day and p.m. peak hours, the taking of 24-hour
directional traffic counts on Buckland Road, obtaining the three year
accident history at Wapping Five Corners, studying the traffic signal
operation at that location, and the development of the anticipated trip
generation characteristics of the proposed Burger King Restaurant.
In order to clarify the meaning of the certain specialized traffic
engineering terms used in this Report, the following definitions are
offered:
Trip is a one-way movement to or from a site. One car entering and
leaving a site constitutes two trips.
1
STORCH ENGINEERS
Traffic Generation is the actual number of vehicle movements which
may reasonably be expected to be attracted by a specific development.
Usually, traffic generation is expressed as a number of trips.
Average Weekday Traffic is the total traffic generation of a
development on a typical working weekday.
Peak Hour Generation is the maximum traffic generation which may be
anticipated during the highest volume hour for the particular
development. This analysis parameter may vary as to the time of day,
depending on the type of facility proposed. Office building normally
generate peak volume rates which coincide with the peak volume rates of
the surrounding roadway network, fast food restaurants have peak traffic
during the Noon hour.
Trip Distribution is the process of determining the proportion of
the generated trips that can be expected to originate at any location.
Traffic Assignment is the process of assigning the trips which have
been distributed from the various points of origin to the roadway system
which would provide the most direct route between the points of origin
and destination.
Capacity and Level of Service (LOS) are terms utilized to describe
the ability of a roadway to handle its traffic assignment.
H. EXISTING CONDITIONS
A. Site and Adjacent Roadway Descriptions
The site of the proposed Burger King Restaurant is an approximate
1.3 acre lot to be served by a driveway from Buckland Road. An Area
Location Map is shown in Figure 1, a Site Location map in Figure 2 and
the Proposed Entrance-Exit Driveway Arrangement in Figure 3.
2
.. ► � • � Ire, -. -
A
j �,1� � � �i �' ���,��J�,1�■�fir'
I
swff
�. BURGER KING
CORPORATION
: .
1
AREA LOCATION MAP M
19 Community Road
South Windsor, Ct. 06074
May 12, 1986
To:
Robert Gilligan
Chairman: Planning & Zoning Commission
We would like to voice our support for the Shopping
Center being considered for the Wapping Center Area.
Since the land is already zoned commercial we feel that
something other than a shopping center could be
more undesirable and detrimental to the area.
As far as Burger King goes, there could perhaps be a better
choice but we can thin of a lot businesses that could
be and look a lot worse.
1 19Tr R pectfu y,
:.'•' {'� Henr}� & Shirl y Wa er
Planning & Zoning Commission
EXHIBIT C
1 �
i
11
I '1 c9
., asp vti
I 14e,
C p
It �'`•ti 4�tf \`
I �•«o
�o
N� ,M�� •,Cyf
A
Rp.Ip
�l wQD\
rsco,T/^Q7`yf
J
e MALL wp,p/
lwEE2+ C
/ OS
+/
pCCRI1FLD 4
I ( FLLNGT M Roar) ' R
p�R
ho
I 1
MDNfD4N
fn
SITE LOCATION
BR��T
I
f{
GJLL
I
BURGER KING
CORPORATION
I SOUT+I WINDSOR CONNECT ICUT
5"L E:
N/A
SITE LOCATION MAP DRAVOW sr:
I ♦.J.K.
CN£C e7:
\ STM-RC+i 161 WIN STREET L
\ MAR 1986
I -N6IWERS 1I£T1IMnELG,CT 06109 Dw6. MO.z
197.8' _—
I I I
1 I
I
0
I 0
O
In
o N
a
SITE
N
I I
I �
W
O -------
I �
p � I
I I 0
O
I
I I o
I EASEM NT 1850' —_
I
BUCKLAND ROAD
BURGER KING
CORPORATION
I SOUTH WINDSOR CONNECTICUT
SCALE.
M/A
ROADWAY LAYOUT- DRA1NM BY:
A.J.K.
ICMEC 67:
'M'RCH -16I MAIM STREET MAR.18S6
ENGINEERS I WET►ERSnELD,CT 06109 ms. No.3
STORCH ENGINEERS
Buckland Road is a two-way two-lane north-south feeder road with a
considerable amount of commercial and business use. The northwest
corner of Buckland Road and Route 30 is occupied by a bank, as is the
northeast corner. A Southern New England Telephone Company building is
located immediately to the south of the Buckland Road driveway which
will serve the proposed Burger King. A small shopping center, set well
back from the road is located still further south on the west side of
Buckland Road several hundred feet beyond the Southern New England
Telephone building. Buckland Road is tangent with no severe grades in
the vicinity of the proposed restaurant.
Buckland Road has a bi-directional peak hour volume of
approximately 1000 in the vicinity of the proposed Burger King
Restaurant during the p.m. period as indicated by a ConnDOT count in
1985. Storch Engineers' directional counts made in March 1986 indicated
a somewhat higher peak hour with 710 vehicles northbound and 538
vehicles southbound during the same 4:00-5:00 p.m. peak hour. Noon hour
traffic, most significant with fast food restaurants, was somewhat over
700 according to the ConnDOT 1985 count, and somewhat over 800 according
to Storch Engineers' March, 1986 automatic traffic recorder counts. The
Storch Engineers' counts were probably higher than average because they
were taken on the Thursday before Good Friday which was a noticeable
heavy traffic day.
Buckland Road in the vicinity of the proposed driveway is 36 feet
in width, with a 16 foot southbound lane and 20 feet between center line
and curbing northbound. Northbound morning traffic is delayed by the
traffic signal at the intersection of Route 30, and was observed to
3
STORCH ENGINEERS
queue back to the vicinity of the proposed driveway. It is understood
that preliminary designs are presently being prepared to improve traffic
flow at the intersection of Routes 30, 74, 194 and Buckland Road
(Wapping Five Corners) .
B. Traffic Generation
The proposed Burger King will have an area of approximately 3,472
square feet and will provide both sit down and drive through facilities.
Two sources of information have been used to estimate the number of
vehicles which would be entering and leaving the proposed restaurant
during peak traffic hours. These are the ITE' s Trip Generation and
counts taken by Storch Engineers at a Burger King Restaurant having
a size similar to that proposed here.
The proposed restaurant will have approximately 3,472 S.F. of floor
space. For high turnover, sit-down restaurants, Institute of
Transportation Engineers ' Trip Generation indicates a Mid-day peak hour
average of 15.7 trips per 1,000 S.F. , with a recorded high of 72 and low
of 5 trips per hour. For drive-in restaurants , the ITE survey showed a
Mid-day peak hour average of 78.8 trips per 1 ,000 S.F. , with a high of
194.7 and low of 37.0.
Assuming that 660 square feet (approximately 20 percent) of the
3,472 S.F. proposed restaurant space would be devoted to the drive-in
business and the remaining to the sit-down business, 660 S.F. can be
assigned to the drive-in and 2,812 S.F. to the sit-down portion.
Applying these areas to the ITE's Noon hour data indicates the
anticipated drive-in traffic to be:
660 x 78.8 = 55 (average) or 700 x 194.7 = 128 (maximum)
1,000 1,000
and the sit-down traffic to be:
2,812 x 15.7 = 44 (average) or 2,812 x 75 = 210 (maximum)
1,000 1,000
4
STORGH ENGINEERS
for an average total of 99 trips or maximum of 338 trips during the
12:00 to 1:00 PM Noon hour.
The maximum number of vehicles which the single drive-through lane
of the presently proposed restaurant could possibly handle is about 100
resulting in 200 trips; 100 in and 100 out per hour. For purpose of
this report, we have used the number 128, instead of the ITE average
volume of 55 as the number of vehicle trips per hour generated by the
drive through lane.
Using the highest reported trips from the ITE' s Manual for both the
sit-down portion and the drive-in portion, the sum of drive-in and
sit-down trips will be 338. Thus, 169 vehicles will be entering and the
same number exiting during the Mid-day peak hour.
For the PM peak period, the high turnover, sit-down restaurants
resulted in an average of 10.5 trips per 1,000 S. F. , with a recorded
high of 387 and a low of 3. For drive-in restaurants, the ITE survey
showed a PM peak hour average of 31.6 trip per 1,000 S. F. , with a high
of 73 and a low of 21 .
Again assuming 660 S.F. will be used for the drive-in business and
2,812 S. F. for the sit-down business, the anticipated drive through
hourly traffic volume will be:
660 x 31.6 = 21 (average) or 660 x 73 = 48 (maximum)
1,000 11000
and the sit-down traffic:
2,812 x 10.5 = 30 (average) or 2,812 x 38.7 = 109 (maximum)
1,000 1,000
for an average total of 51 or a maximum of 157 trips during the PM
peak period. Using the higher number of 157 trips , 79 vehicles can be
expected to enter and 78 vehicles to exit during the PM peak hour.
5
STORCH ENGINEERS
It has not been deemed necessary to consider breakfast traffic,
since the worst cases in terms of site generated traffic will be at Noon
time and in terms of the peak hour of adjacent street traffic during the
PM peak period.
C. Trip Distribution
In determining the number of additional vehicles that the proposed
site will attract, it can be safely assumed that the customers of the
proposed restaurant will be either (1) local people or (2) people who
are on Buckland Road or (3) people passing through Wapping Five Corners
who turn off onto Buckland Road. While the proposed Burger King
may have between 51 and 157 cars arriving during the Noon hour and a
similar number leaving, it can be expected that the majority of
restaurant traffic will be drawn from passing traffic which will leave
the traffic stream, purchase food and then reenter the traffic stream in
the same direction and will thus not affect total traffic volume on
Buckland Road. The same holds true for the 79 vehicles arriving and 78
vehicles departing during the PM peak period.
When considering the distribution of vehicles arriving and leaving
the site, the number of cars on Buckland Road arriving from north and
south, respectively, can be assumed to be proportional to the volume of
passing traffic in each direction with some additional traffic arriving
from the north and departing to the north having been diverted from the
Wapping Five Corners traffic flow. We have assumed that 65% of cars
will be from Buckley Road passing traffic and 45% diverted from other
traffic passing the Wapping Five Corners.
6
STORGH ENGINEERS
We have shown the total of the distribution of trips in the
following table to exceed 100 percent of those vehicles anticipated
entering into and exiting from the site during both the Noon and PM peak
hour. This conservative method of assigning origins and destinations
offers an added margin of safety to the analysis.
The results of this analysis indicate the following volumes may be
expected during the peak hours:
Trip Distribution
Time of Day 0
Location Noon Peak PAS Peak
Enter Exit Enter Exit
-J
Site 157 157 ., 79 78
Buckland Road
from ambient traffic
Northbound (51.4%) 52 52 (63%) 32 32
65%
Southbound (48.6%) 50 50 (37%) 19 19
Buckland Road
generated traffic
Northbound 0 70 0 36
45%
Southbound 70 0 36 0
Total 110% = 172 172 87 87
IV. TRAFFIC IMPACT
The estimated maximum flow of vehicles is as previously calculated,
157 vehicles during the Noon peak hour and 78 vehicles during the PM
peak hour into and 78 out from the site. These numbers which are
already at the extreme high end of the fifteen restaurants surveyed and
included in the ITE Trip Generation manual have been further increased
7
STORCH ENGINEERS
by 10% to provide a "worst case scenario" .
The 120 Southbound entering and 50 southbound exiting vehicles
making right turns should cause little interference with Buckland Road
traffic, since with an adequate radius on the driveway curb cut, they
will be able to enter without materially affecting following cars and
should have easy exit in joining the southbound traffic flow. It is to
be remembered that 415 vehicles per hour is only a vehicle every 81
seconds, the equivalent of cars moving at 25 miles per hour being an
average of 1,100 feet apart. The 50 PM peak hour vehicles making right
turns into the site from the southbound lane and the 19 entering that
lane present no problem.
The 52 noontime and 32 PM peak hour northbound entering vehicles
must, of course, make left turns across the southbound flow. This
should not, however, present a problem since with a southbound noon hour
flow of 415, the average gap between southbound vehicles will be 8
seconds and because of the bunching effect of the traffic signals at
Wapping Five Corners there will be much longer gaps occurring
regularly. Since eight second gaps are considered acceptable to any
driver, and since most drivers will accept a five second or shorter gap,
it is clear that with nine second average gaps northbound drivers will
have no trouble whatsoever safely making the left turn. This situation
is further helped by the width of the northbound lane (20 feet) which
permits following vehicles to bypass a northbound left turning vehicle
without delay.
8
STORCH ENGINEERS
The 122 noontime and 68 PM peak hour vehicles exiting northbound
vehicles must cross the southbound lane and merge with the northbound
lane. With the noontime northbound flow of 439 vehicles, the average
gap is 8.2 seconds, adequate on an average basis to allow easy entry
into the northbound flow. Since vehicles always tend to group, much
longer than average gaps will appear several times each minute which can
be expected to frequently correspond to southbound traffic gaps and
permit entry. There would be no capacity or safety problem from the 122
vehicles (one vehicle every 30 seconds) exiting during the moderate noon
hour traffic period. There would normally be no problem with the 68
vehicles (one vehicle every minute) exiting during the PM peak traffic
period. However, the overloaded condition of Wapping Five Corners W-,h #
causes a backup of traffic on Buckland Road that backs to and beyond the
proposed driveway during a portion of the PM peak hour (4:30 - 5:30) .
This problem will exist for Burger King patrons wishing to turn north on
Buckland Road. What will happen in practice is that with a one car per
minute flow exiting from Burger King, some drivers will find a way to
enter the slowly moving queue while others will turn south, go to a
suitable turn around point and then make the left turn into the
northbound lane. The noted problem is , of course, resolved by the
widening of Buckland Road as is currently proposed by the Town and soon
to be designed. ' Actually, of course, it is highly unlikely that traffic
volumes to and from the Burger King Restaurant will be as high as the
highest volumes reported in the ITE Trip Generation manual used in these
calculations , particularly since these highest figures were increased by
10% as part of our calculations. Restaurant dinner traffic actually
9
STORCH ENGINEERS
does not peak during the PM peak traffic period but during the following
hour when traffic is at a considerably lower level , northbound volume
dropping from 637 during the 5:00-6:00 PM period to 412 during the
6:00-7:00 PM period. This further reduces the already small impact of
the PM dinner period restaurant generation.
The final location to be considered is Wapping Five Corners, and
possible effect of the proposed restaurant on traffic at that location.
It is believe self-evident that vehicles entering and leaving the
restaurant which are drawn from and return to Buckland Road traffic will
have no effect on the Wapping Five Corners . However, traffic drawn to
the restaurant from Route 30 and the other entering roads will cause
some additional traffic movements at the Wapping Five Corners . However,
the effect of these movements will be positive as well as negative. For
vehicles coming east on Route 194 and intending to turn north on Route
30, the effect is positive-the left turn is avoided and a straight
through movement going to the restaurant and a right turn movement
returning to Route 30 substitute. For vehicles coming east on Route 194
who would otherwise turn right on Route 30 (a very small movement) the
effect is negative - a straight through and left turn is substituted for
a right turn.
For vehicles coming north on Route 30 and otherwise going straight
the effect is small - two right turns instead of a straight through
move. For vehicles coming north on Route 30 and turning left onto Route
74 the effect is positive - a right turn and 450 right turn instead of a
difficult left turn.
For vehicles coming south on Route 30 and intending to go straight,
10
STORCH ENGINEERS
the effect is negative, two left turns instead of a straight through
movement.
For the light move of vehicles coming north on Route 30 and
wishing to turn left into Route 194, the effect is positive, a right and
straight through instead of a difficult left.
Because of the combination of negative and positive effect, any
diversion of traffic to the restaurant from existing traffic movements
at the Wapping Five Corners can, therefore , be expected to be slight.
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The operation of the proposed Burger King Restaurant on Buckland
Road, South Windsor, can be expected to draw mainly from passing
traffic, but with a substantial amount of traffic from that presently
using Wapping Five Corners on the other roadways.
No problem in capacity or safety is foreseen with traffic at the
intersection of the proposed driveway and Buckland Road. Adequate gaps
occur in Buckland Road traffic in both directions to permit northbound
traffic to enter the restaurant drive and to enter the northbound stream
of Buckland Road traffic from the restaurant drive. Southbound entering
and exiting traffic should suffer no delays, whatsoever, since average
gaps exceed those necessary for virtually undelayed exiting and normal
traffic platooning as well as the Wapping Five Corner signals will
result in much longer gaps occurring regularly.
At the Wapping Five Corners, the effect of vehicles leaving the
traffic streams, going to the restaurant, and returning to the traffic
stream, will have both negative and positive effects which should fairly
well balance. Since most drivers will try to avoid difficult manuevers
11
STORCH ENGINEERS
but do not want to be diverted when the driving is easy, there will be a
tendency for drivers whose moves can be foreseen as plusses to make more
use of the restaurants than drivers whose moves can be foreseen as
minusses, thus tipping the scale toward the overall effect being
positive. However, in no case can any large negative (deleterious)
effect on traffic volume or safety be foreseen at this location.
Overall , even using the highest generation figures shown in the
Institute of Transportation Engineer's Trip Generation manual , and
further increasing them by 10% to allow for any traffic flow differences
from that otherwise projected, the proposed Burger King Restaurant
should cause no flow or safety problem.
12
APPENDIX
MACHINE COUNT SUMMARY
STORCH ENGINEERS
Location: BUCKLAND ROAD Town• SOUTH WINDSOR Tape #
300 FT. SOUTH OF RTE.194,74&30 INTERS Date • 3-(27/28)-86 W
Direction: NORTH BOUND Project Counter #
.7
MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THLRSDAY FRIDAY SATURDAY SUNDAY
DATE
12- 1 . AM 83
1-2 AM �3
2- 3 AM 2 y
3-4 AM 9
4-S AM 5 .
3-6 AM 3Z/
6-7 AM �7
7-8 AM /83
B-9 AM Icy
9-10 AM
10-11 AM 2,$6 2,97
W-12AM
12- 1* PM y3�,
1 - 2 PM 7
2- 3 PM �/76
3-4 PM
4 -5 PM 7/0
S-6 PM 637
6 -7 PM 4112
7-8 PM 387
8 -9 PM 8S
9 -10 PM q0
10-11 PM 1 yy
II-12 PM
HIG R
24 W..TDTA4
COMMENT:
MACHINE COUNT' SUMMARY
STORCH ENGINEERS
Location: BUCKLAND ROAD Town. SOUTH WINDSOR Tape #
300 FT. SOUTH OF RTE.194,74&30 INTERS Date • _:z so) _ g s W
Direction: SOUTH BOUND Project # : zq g-7-,jot Counter # S
MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY T"SDAY FRIDAY SATLIR UNDAY
DATE -a7-86 12
12-
12- 1 . AM ylq Z/8 93
t-2 AM 3y 37 36
2- 3 AM ;z0
3-4 AMT if 7
4-S AM
5-6 AM 63 �3 9
6-7 AM 59 3�
7-8 AM 30 f ► 33 56
8-9 AM 332 7,33 7/
9 -10 AM •y37 3 y3 3_u /63
10-11 AM 37-5 3925 3�Y 21
W-12 AM 37,Z /12 y35 25y
12- 1• PM 1106 Z 330
1 - 2 PM 371/ //oS y2� 266
2- 3 PM 365 39y 197
3-4 PM yy2 33-5 3?-3 200
4 -5 PM 5-?9 3 90 32U 277 .
5-6 PM 1 y70 371 312- 26/
6 -7 PM 423 337 32-7
7-8 PM ;7-9g 32 5 2-q 8 2-7-3
8 -9 PM 202- / 90 �7-05
9 -10 PM AO /G 7
10-11 Pit 92 g2 q I 83
11-12 PM 7! 8 2. 103 :5y
HIGH R
24 HR.TDT
COMMENT:
MA.C-HZNE COUNT SUlL`'lARY
STORCH ENG:NEERS
Location:
Town: ^ape #
� -, r,. Date: -
- � W
Direction: Project # : 4�2 7_.�-, , Counter ;
MONDA7 TUESDA7 WEDNES04f TH•URSDAY FRIDAY S.ATURDAy SUNDAY
DATE
12- 1 . AN i Ll
1-2 AM
2- 3 AM
3-4 AM
4-S AM I /�
• S-6 AM ��
6-7 AM
7-8 Am 7 ?
8-9 AM Z 3
9 -10 AM
D-11 AM
If*—i2 AM
12— 1- PM
1 - 2PM
2-3 PM
3-4 PM
4 -5 PM
S-6 PM
6 -7 PM
7- 8 PM
8 -9 PM
9 -10 PM
10-11. PM
11-12 PM
AVGHIGH R
24 HR7
COMMENT:
FI � IGNiA .
youl,
FOR SIGNAL LAYOU 1
i WINDSOR ,
. 194 B BUCKLAND RD 1
TIMING
PHASE C _ FLASHING
VEH MAX ; CL I CL . 2 OPERATION_-
-R--- k R { _R. - ff F A -
-R R R - R I FL A -
R- - R R R -- FL A
R _ - -
k R R FL R
R --- r- --
R i__ .R R FL— R
R R --1 R _ _ R-- FL--R 17G
. - G .-- A R FL._. R t
60 5
-ro ;[ a ESE,
PFA
E�JIi MEN l RFwUiREO
PHASE A TO BE ON RECALL N'- ALL ARROWS TO HAVE 12*' LENSES.
PHASE A ADV. r# I TO OPERA 1 3 0 FULL ACTUATED CONTROLLER -
'� 1 PHASE A ADV. #2 TO OPERA BASE MOUNTED
! 2 DUAL ADVANCE GREEN TIMER WITH
PHASE 8 ADV. # I TO OPERA CLEARANCE
PHASE B ADV # 2 TO OPERAI I TIME CLOCK
I I MAGNETIC DETECTORS SENSOR
t _
2 LOOP DETECTOR
2 CONCRETE HANDHOLE
1 2 WAY-4 SECTION T S. SPAN WIRE MTD.
EXISTING EQUIPMENT
_ 2 MAGNETIC DETECTOR 8[ SENSOR__
3 2 WAY-3 SEC_TIO_N TS SPAN WIRE MTD
_ _
-- -
I 2 1 WAY- 3 SECTION TS_SPAN_ WIRE_ MTD
CONCRETE HANDHOLE
STEEL PO E
DIVISION OF i RAFT ir.-
' I Fitt-;.t ' JR�'F.'r, M H. IMAR. 72 1S J.N 12-12-72
DFr. GNE[ ET C j5.22- 72 S J N 12 12 72
G' AW G S-5 26-72 1 G S 12'27-12
K
....._`A I•%Ri)'• c G �F�..._I1�li—_A E,`� ._L.-o..._......s..._....1
SHEET I OF 2
132 - 203
FORM NO THA-18 l U 3-7O
`MAGNETIC DETECTOR
IGNETIC DETECTOR
OP DETECTOR 18' X 6' (3 TURNS).
\ 0 SIGNAL
'A( CONTROLLER
FLAN FOR PAVEMENT MARKINGS.
REFLECTS PROPOSED GEOMETRIC
SIGNAL NOT TO BE REVISED UNTIL
?IONS ARE COMPLETED.
I R S C., 2,#8
2fR.S.C.,2-O/C,#14
5/C#14
2-3/C#14
2/C,#12
ROUTE 30
I
SNET
214
40- ROUTE 30 1,
J— a
STATE OF C,ONNECTICUT
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BUREAU OF HIGHW%YS - OFFICE OF I RAFFIC
TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR
RTE. 30 AT RTE. 74, RTE. 19 4 8
BUCKLAND RD.
SIGNAL LAYOUT
PHASE A ADV. PHASE A PHASE B AOV. DESIGNED BY —E_T_ C-.__. DATE 5 llZ 7,
\\\ DRAWN BY _— G. S. _ DATE
yY �� ��► 1 a CHECKED BY-_, + DATE
APPROVED BY ;����—_ DATE -7— �'-
F� F— S.T.CT f EPOf.T # —.---- APPR -. ----
T T
SCALE 1" = 40'
SHEET 2 OF 2
COLLISION DIAGRAM: ROUTES 30,194 AND 74 AT BUCKLAND ROAD
a
JUL.1,1982-JUN,30,1985
SOUTH WINDSOR
A,
74
Q a• r( ti F
Q
a� �
3 7 o b 40
Off'
°' `\b ry a3 �' Q
ry Q
OAKLANp ROAD
_ 7;I ypT a
PT 9� 92 5'�ypn, smogs f�Pm
'�Ph, 'S%3qP� Z-9-r y.ropn -rye P
6;ZZ q� �•'z3 ��
S%
RT1=_ 3 0
1-/L <i
aC=DEl.-S 4Y TYac
;7pE I GST IMtGIT��'] G
FX,At- l D I 1 0 k O
pwn�u;�16 I u I � � • o ry
. z
CA-AC.
m
LEGEND -
MOVING VEHICLE --00' LEFT TURN COLLISION
---� PEDESTRIAN SIDE SWIPE
® PARKED VEHICLE �'�� OUT OF CONTROL
PARKING OR UNPARKED VEHICLE �.� REAR END COLLISION WITH
❑ FIXED OBJECT BACKING VEHICLE
—04 REAR END COLLISION • FATAL ACCIDENT
HEAD ON COLLISION O PERSONAL INJURY
__-_� orr_uT nwr.i c rni � c�nw
832 —High Turnover, Sit-Down Restaurant
Description:This category of restaurants comprises On the basis of the available information,high
sit-down eating places with turnover rates of turnover, sit-down restaurants generate an
generally less than one hour. Restaurants in average of 164.4 vehicle trip ends per 1,000
this group are usually moderately priced and square feet gross floor area on an average
frequently belong to chains such as Howard weekday. Saturday and Sunday trip volumes
Johnson's, Sambo's and others. Typical drive- were significantly lower at 67.8 and 39.0 vehi-
in restaurants which are primarily take-out or- cle trip ends per 1,000 square feet,respectively,
iented are not included in this analysis but are as shown in the following summary.
treated separately under Land Use Code 833. The w eekda'v generator peak hour was be-
Data were collected from four different sources tween 6 and 7 P.M., followed closely by the
comprising a total of 22 studies located in vari- noon period. No information was available
ous parts of the United States.The restaurants with respect to the timing of the peak hours on
investigated ranged in size from 1 ,200 to Saturdays and Sundays.
17,500 square feet of gross floor area; seating
capacities for restaurants for which this in- Data Limitations: Although a sizable number of
formation was available were between 100 and studies was available for analysis, consider-
1,000 seats per restaurant. able differences existed in the type of data and
the time periods for which data were collected.
Trip Characteristics: Since no information was There is a great need for more precise defini-
available on person trip ends,only vehicle trip tions and a more common terminology in trip
' end data could be inventoried.Trip generation generation data gathering.
rates were computed on the basis of 1,000
square feet gross floor area since this was the
only common information available for all
studies. Data were not sufficient to develop
meaningful trip generation rates based on the
number of seats per restaurant.
Rev. 1982
SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION RATES
Land Use/Building Type High Turnover, Sit-Down Restaurant ITE Land Use Code 832
Independent Variable—Trips per 1 ,000 Square Feet
Average Number Average Size of
Trip Maximum Minimum Correlation of Independent
Rate Rate Rate Coefficient Studies Variable/Study
Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends 164.4 551.2 47.9
Peak A.M. Enter
Hour Between Exit
of 7 and 9 Total* 47.5 63.5
Adjacent P.M. Enter 9.9 17 -
Street Between Exit 4.0 2 -
Traffic 4 and 6 Total 10.5
Peak A.M. Enter 10. 1
Hour Between Exit
of 12-1 P.M. Total
Generator P.M. Enter
Between Exit
6 and 7 Total 22.2 39.0 I 18.0 3 8.2
Saturday Vehicle Trip Ends 67.8 105.2 62.4 2 9.7
Peak Enter
Hour of Exit
Generator Total 10.0 13.2 7.0 6 10.9
Sunday Vehicle Trip Ends 39.0 40.0 32.4 2 9.7
Peak Enter
Hour of Exit
Generator Total 6.9 8.8 4.6 6 10.9
Source Numbers 2, 4, 5 , 72
ITE Technical Committee 6A-6—Trip Generation Rates
Date: July 1475
*Represents two restaurants which apparently cater to breakfast patrons.
833—Drive-In Restaurant
Description: This category includes drive-in and
fast-food restaurants that have no or only a
limited number of sit-down facilities. Gener-
ally, food is ordered and taken out to be con-
sumed outside the restaurant building. Sur-
veyed restaurants included fast-food eating
places such as McDonald's, Dunkin Donuts,
Burger Chef and others.
Data were collected from trip generation
studies conducted by the New England and
Ohio Sections ITE,comprising a total of 12 ob-
servations. The restaurants investigated
ranged in size from 1,590 to 5,400 square feet of
gross floor area with an average of 2,900 square
feet per restaurant.Seating capacity data were
available for only three observations with an
average of about 30 seats per restaurant.
Trip Characteristics: Trip generation rates were
computed on the basis of 1,000 square feet of
--. gross floor area. As the summary indicates,
drive-in restaurants generated an average of
553 vehicle trip ends per 1,000 square feet
gross floor area on an average weekday. No in-
formation was available for Saturday and
Sunday trip generation. The generator peak
hour occurred generally between noon and 1
P.M. During this hour,an average of 78.8 vehi-
cle trip ends were generated per 1,000 square
feet floor space in both directions.
Data Limitations: Lack of data existed for weekend
trip generation rates which conceivably could
surpass the weekday rates.Also,the data were
limited to fast-food restaurants along major
arterial streets,easily accessible by auto.None
of the observations included a fast-food restau-
rant in a downtown or central business district
which would rely heavily on walk-in patrons.
' SUMMARY OF TRIP GENERATION RATES
Land Use/Building Type Drive-In Restaurant ITE Land Use Code 833
Independent Variable—Trips per 1 ,000 Square Feet
Average Number Average Size of
Trip Maximum Minimum Correlation of Independent
Rate Rate Rate Coefficient Studies VariablelStudy
Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends 553 828 376 6 2.68
Peak A.M. Enter 49. 7* 1 1 .59
Hour Between Exit 40.2* 1 1.59
of 7 and 9 Total 89.9* 1 1.59
Adjacent P.M. Enter 17.0 4 3.57
Street Between Exit 14.6 4
Traffic 4 and 6 Total 31 .6 73.0 21 .1 4 S.
Peak A.M. Enter
Hour Exit
of Total
-� Generator P.M. Enter
44.4
Between Exit 41.9
12 and 1
Total q
Saturday Vehicle Trip Ends
Peak Enter
Hour of Exit
Generator Total
Sunday Vehicle Trip Ends
Peak Enter
Hour of Exit
Generator Total
Source Numbers 4, 5
ITE Technical Committee 6A-6—Trip Generation Rates
Date: July 1975
*Represents Dunkin Donuts Restaurant
Y! 1 � ti 32 9
STATE OF CONNECTICUT {� CON.—TI1—
JEPART"1-NT OF TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONa
3UZE' 9IJ OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH BUREAU OF PLAN,NI'1G A14D RESEARCH
PL14NINU INVENTORY* AND DATA PLANNIN' INVENTORY• AND DATA
TRAFFIC R=CORDDER DATA TRAFFIC R=CORDER DATA
TOWN OF SO. WINOSOR ROUTE 74 DIRECTION 3 TOWN OF SO. WINDSOR ROUTE 3D DIRECTION 8
LOC N.E. OF ROUTE 3J LOC EAST OF ROUTE 74
0,4Y SUV HON TUES WED TNUR FRI SAT 7"Y SUN 4ON TUES WED THUR FRI SAT
DATE :] 812 813 0 0 0 0 r
GATE 1) 812 313 7 J 0 0 TYPE
TYP= HOUR 19 {5 ADT = 11700
HO(U`R 19995 A _�Tyy=JL yyyy55 B{]`G
5yO3 a yy a Ly
b E TY?TT Yi`T y` MYY YY l7 #M + YT TT #$##Y#$
MT_t) 1 1 47 0 0 0 0 N If; 7 0 79 J 0 0 0
1A 0 0 39 0 J D 0
lA ❑ 0 1b 00 0 0 24 0 7 32 J 0 0 0
2A 0 1 9 7 0 0 0 34 7 0 42 0 0 D
3 A 3 J 4 0 0 0 0 4 ; :J 0 49 9J 0 0
4 A 7 J 2 6 0 0 0 0 54 } J 1 3 2 0 0 0 0
5a 7 ,J 73 0 0 0 0
b : ; ; 365 0 0 D 0 :l 0 702 0 0 7 0
7A 1481 5�J5 0 0 0 0 74 J 921 959 7 0 0 0
8A 7 347 334 0 0 0 0 F,A J 693 663 1 0 0 0
c .t 7 575 596 19 0 7
n i 3 25,1 274 0 0 0 0 I 1GA 0 553 J 9 Tl 0 0
1L 4 J 243 J 7 0 0 0
11A 1 244 0 0 0 0 0 114 0 665 7 0 0 rl
12' 7 775 0 0 0 0 0
9 2 6 D 7 0 0 0 0 I 0 519 ; 0 0 0 0
1f 232 0 0 0 0 0 2p 7 567 0 0 0 0 0
2;' 7 264 7 0 0 0 0 3" :7 913 0 O 0 0 0
3? 0 4G'4 0 J 7 D 0 4P 0 1172 3 0 0 0 0
4P J 540 0 0 0 1 ,O 5D 0 1124 0 0 0 0 0
SP 0 623 2 a 0 D 0 6? 13 697 0 D 0 0 0
6P 7 363 0 0 0 0 0 7? 0 5G2 0 0 0 0 7
7? U '_96 D D 0 0 0 R� 0 474 0 0 0 7 0 rf.!
3P J' 203 J D 0 D 0 9P 0 313 ? J 0 0 9
9? 0 1B0 0 0 J 0 0 1 P 0 216 0 7 0 0 0
1u'' D 123 (1) 0 0 9 0 llr 0 157 0 1 0 0 J
110 0 70 J ❑ 0 a
TOT 0 5239 1553 0 0 0 0 T 0 T 7 11224 3293 0 0 0 0
RECORDER 224 24 H4 = 5784 ; — 4 RECORDER ?28 24 H;R = 12299 G. 4
TA 13 11
STATE OF CONNECTICUT j STATt OF CONNErTLcuT
DE°ARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
3UREAU OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 3U?EAU OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH
PLANNING INVENTORY• AND DATA PLANNIh4S INVENTOPY ' AND DATA
T4AFFIC RECORDER DATA I TPA;FIC R CORDER 7ATA
TOWN OF S0. WINDSOR ROUTE DIRECTION 8 i TOWN OF SO. WIN or ROUTE 194 DIRECTION 3
LOC GUCKLAND ROAD - SOUTH OF ROUTE 30 LOC N .W. OF ROUTE 30
JAY SUN 110A TUES 14E9 THUR FRI SAT 3NY SUN 4ON TUES WED THUR FRI SAT
n4 T E 7 812 313 0 0 0 0 DATE fJ 812 813 J 0 0 �?
TYPE TYP-
HJUR 1985 AOT = 11400 HCUD 1935 AOT = 121f13 4
8 G
MID 0 0 85 7 0 0 0 M,ID 0 0 102 a 0 0 0
1 A J 'J 23 D 0 0 0 1 D 3 40 ❑ 0 0 0
24 0 J 13 0 0 0 0 1A J 7 23 7 J 0 0
3.1 7 7 32 0 0 0 0 3a ❑ J 59 3 0 7 0
43 0 32 0 0 0 0 4A 7 , 52 J 0 0 a
54 ] 0 163 0 0 0 0 1 5A J ^ 175 9 0 0 0
6.A ] 9 581 0 0 0 0 611, 'J 0 809 0 0 0 0
7A 0 93,1 399 0 0 ❑ 0 74 J 983 932 0 0 0 0
8,A J 709 739 0 0 0 0 FA ' 732 734 J 0 0 0
9A 0 513 0 0 0 0 0 9A J 67t1 656 0 0 9 0
InA 9 625 0 0 7 0 0 1C,A 1 6 3 J 0 0 0 9 0
11A 0 667 J 'J 0 0 0 11A 7 583 J 0 0 0 0
12P 0 705 0 0 0 0 0 12? 0 765 0 0 0 0 0
1 ? 583 J 0 0 0 0 1P lJ 793 0 0 0 0 J
2° 0 7U2 J 0 tl ?] 0 2p 744 1 0 0 0 0
3P 0 852 ) 0 0 0 0 3P _; Q35 0 0 0 0 (]
4P D 1027 0 0 0 0 0 °" 0 1957 0 0 0 0 0
5n 0 942 J D 0 ❑ ❑ 5r 0 1D41 0 0 0 ❑ 0
6P D 7 U 9 0 0 ❑ 0 0 5? 7 729 0 0 0 J 0
7P ] 603 ] 0 0 J 0 7P 1 604 0 0 1 0 7 F#
8? j 463 U 0 0 0 J 8° '7 445 7 0 0 0 0
9? 0 339 0 0 0 0 ❑ >' J 323 D 13 0 0 0
1L1�` :1 196 0 0 0 0 0 lOP U 22' 11 0 0 0 0
lla 7 141 0 0 0 0 0 119 0 165 0 9 0 0 0
TOT J I'D?22 2664 0 0 0 0 TUT J 11427 3587 0 0 0 0
P-CORJE? 225 24 HR = 11943 G - 4 R C0R'7ER 229 24 HR = 12592 G. - 4
-f AT- -F L -,,.4EC . _ -UT
DEPARTMENT Or TRINSPORTATION
3U?EAU OF PLAN4ING AND RESEAP.CH
PLANNINS INVENTORY' AND DATA
TRAFFIC RECORDER DATA
TOWN OF S). WINDSOR ROUTE 33 DIRECTION 3
LOC WEST OF POUTE 194
3JAY 3U`1 f"ON TUE5 ,4E0 THUR FDI SAT
O A T E J 312 '313 0 0 3 0
TYPE
H0LV: 1935JJ.._Ayy)T = 7807yy
`] 0 60 3 0 0 0
1A 1 7 22 0 0 9 0
2A 0 3 15 3 0 7 0
_ 3A 7 0 13 7 J 0 0
4A 3 0 29 0 0 0 0
5A 0 0 93 0 3 9 7
6A J U 465 3 7 0 0
7,A ) 703 714 0 7 0 ❑
bt, 3 465 482 0 D 3 0
9A 0 350 0 0 0 0 0
1CA J 344 3 0 D 3 0
I I A Ij 373 0 0 9 3 0
12P ^ 4B1 7 0 0 3 0
1P .1 397 3 0 3 D 0
2P J 405 0 0 9 0 0
3P 0 577 0 0 0 0 0
4P 0 873 0 0 0 0 0
5P 3 Ab3 J 3 a 7 0
6P 0 474 0 0 0 0 D
7P J 417 9 0 0 0 9
3P 3 2 8 S 0 0 3 0 7
9P 0 231 3 0 0 0 0
lop J 169 1 0 0 3 0
11P J 100 0 0 0 0 0
TOT 7 7513 1394 0 0 0 0
RECORDER 227 24 HR = 8216 G — 4
STORCH ENGINEERS/STORCH ASSOCIATES JOe y �7—oa
161 Main Street SHEET NO OF
WETHERSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 06109 I'
(203) 529-7727 CALCULATED BY DATE�• ��
CHECKED G� DATE_
SCALE
B U I L D I G
Q`
RrE- 30
ISUGc�TY �3AN4
kR Sf3v�N�S
BANK
I
w
I N
0
n
SITE w
n
� N �
i co N
I
,TELEPHONECO. r
n
z '
o �
Y 3 1986
tJ1A
South W►ndsor
& Zoning Commission A
planning T R A N S
DESIGNS
jrv,, �
-�aLA�fY\
CiJ I�t5 �'�
'A53
L G
pn 7
X
au_ o
Y
jc
,
J
JJ
. � a
EXHIBIT F
u
to
MAY 12 1986
South Windsor
,..� Planning & Zoning Commission
b-e cL r i4l v, Al "t'-di e
�-cr C`D vw vu2v-c'f'a( cL�� (r—PJ,'�evt�iQ f
P
// ' -- ll//
/h fl h�\^0 a nG� Zo h.'n C��vs►�o,,SS�,� e r U�
� � y
ct crcl f-"":I qi C Acts Lzt�
Or r� - �•� �� u_ S '- ��r Gt — /�� ��'�',:JjorR rcf CAS
. . yr, � ;A
cW
�CJ /(3/
�4? --
J P
`j 44ell Pam/ - --
J -y
to r �
-- ---- — —1,J A o
--- --- .Cc�. a M o�-���_.c.� Sv►�'J�L.0 cal_'�'�i�_.._ aN-��q
0 0
bC LJ-tl Wc:i-4 Cc,�—
wad v� 4 p,4 ea.
II
------- (Al xt /k
POLICE DEPARTMENT
may',w
POLICE 7-awn- Ole �• A
151 SAND HILL ROAD • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN 06074-2784
AREA CODE 203/644-2551
William R. Ryan- Chief
May 12, 1986
Mr. Robert Gilligan, Chairman
Planning & Zoning Commission
South Windsor Town Hall
South Windsor, Connecticut 06074
Dear Sir:
As the Traffic Authority for the Town of South Windsor, I
have reviewed the proposed Town Center complex plans, located
between Ellington Road and Buckland Road, and have some concerns
with the proposal I have seen.
My first concern is the exit-entry way on Ellington Road,
opposite the Colonial Cornere development and it appears that the
placement of the driveways to each is offset and not diagonally
across from one another. I view this as a problem, especially
with vehicles intending turns in either direction on Ellington
Road.
The second concern, also commented by Fire Marshal William
Lanning, is the numerous parking spaces fronting the building
housing the shoppes or retail outlets. This arrangement would
hamper the response of the emergency services equipment and personnel
and should be dedicated as a "Fire Zone," being left completely open.
The third concern is the placement of the Burger King Restaurant
and parking lot so near the exit-entry to Buckland Road.
This form of retail outlet, considered to be a traffic generator,
would present a traffic problem to an already overloaded roadway,
namely Buckland Road.
I could not support this planned situation off Buckland Road
unless there were some expansion planned for Buckland Road itself.
At the proposed location of the driveway to and from Buckland
Road, there are only two (2) lanes of travel available or established,
and I feel that this is inadequate to support the kind of traffic I
anticipate will be entering and exiting this portion of the complex.
Mr. Robert Gilligan May 12, 1986
Page 2.
If I can be of further service to the Commission on this matter,
please feel free to contact me at your convenience.
Respectfully,
Will. Ryan
Chief of Police
WRR:eoc
BURGER KING CORPORATION
June 12, 1986
Ms. Marcia Banach
Acting Town Planner
Town Hall
South Windsor, CT 06074
RE: SITE PLAN, SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS
TPZ - BURGER KING MANCHESTER FOOD SERVICES
Dear Ms. Banach:
I am aware that since the TPZ closed the hearing on the above referenced
application, it cannot accept any further testimony. However, the
Commission was critical of the method in which our traffic study was
carried out, and I feel that the enclosed letter from our Traffic
Engineers contains information that the Commission should be aware of.
Secondly, much of the opposition to the proposal centered on the
appearance of our building and whether or not it would "fit" with the
BURGERcolonial atmosphere that exists at Wapping Five Corners. I would like
KIN� to suggest that if the Commission were to make full architectural design
review a condition of approval, we would work in unison with the Town
and abutters to make reasonable design changes to the building.
I thank you for your concern and assistance. If you have any questions
please call. N,
Sincerely, r
�Z10
01
Martin l Site Engineer �,�t`'•1 v1�`���CoR, ay`�tion
?V0.�4
RECEIVED
cc: D. Megliola 6`-"��
T. Mueller AN 16 1� '
J. Reckert
M, WINDSOR PLANNING DEPT, _
Enclosure
10 UNIVAC LANE,SUITE 303,WINDSOR,CT 06095 TELEPHONE (203)688-2299
STORCH
161 MAIN STREET, WETHERSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 06109
ENGINEERS (203) 529-7727
May 27, 1986
Mr. Martin Siddell
Burger King Corporation
Westboro Office Park
1800 West Park Drive
Westboro, Massachusetts 01581
Subject: Proposed Restaurant
Buckland Road
South Windsor, Connecticut
Dear Mr. Siddell :
You have requested that we review the potential impact of the holiday
(Good Friday) on counts performed for the subject study location.
We have reviewed the data accumulated from 3/27/86 to 3/30/86 for this
project as compared to state volume counts taken on August 12 and 13 of
1985 and with manual turning movement counts taken on May 7, 1986.
This comparison is as follows:
Northbound Southbound Both
August, 1985
4:00 - 5:00 p.m. -- -- 1,027
12:00 - 1:00 p.m. -- -- 705
March 27, 1986
4:00 - 6:00 p.m. 710 538 1,248
12:00 - 1:00 p.m. 439 415 854
May 7, 1986
4:00 - 6:00 p.m. 664 433 1,097
12:00 - 1:00 p.m. N/A N/A N/A
It is probable that traffic volumes used in this study were somewhat
higher than those which would normally be expected. This was probably
due to the proximity of the holiday as indicated in our report.
The concern expressed by the commission that the counts used in the
analysis were probably low is not borne out by the comparison of other
available information.
FLORHAM PARK WETHERSFIELD PROVIDENCE BOSTON PHILADELPHIA NEW YORK
NEW JERSEY CONNECTICUT RHODE ISLAND MASSACHUSETTS PENNSYLVANIA CITY
STORCH ENGINEERS
Mr. Martin Siddell
Page Two
May 27, 1986
The analysis used was conservative. Further we would note that in the
development of recommendations for the Town Shopping Center the traffic
potential for the proposed restaurant was considered. It would,
therefore, be our opinion that the construction of both proposals could
be accomplished without a materially adverse impact in traffic subject
to the specific recommendations in our report being implemented.
We trust this letter will clarify the question concerning count data.
O ry truly yours,
S,TORCH ENGINEVRS
James W. For
Associate i
JWF:mt
Wecr 4697
cc: Lionel M. Rodgers
�4O•pM
y r _
9 ` 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074
�f��soR•Co���` AREA CODE 203/644-2511
July 7, 1986
Mr. Martin Siddell, Site Engineer
Burger King
10 Univac Lane, Suite 303
Windsor, Ct. 06095
Dear Mr. Siddell :
Re: App. #1140 - Manchester Food Services, Ltd.
Please be advised that the Planning & Zoning Commission voted
on July lst to deny the above application for a site plan of
development for a Burger King restaurant located on the west
side of Buckland Road, south of the Five Corners intersection,
in an RC zone, due to the fact that it is not an approved
building lot.
Yours very truly,
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
vg By: -
Robert F. Gilligan, Ch irman
CC: M. Banach, Acting Planning Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
*R _
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074
AREA CODE 203/644-2511
July 16 , 1986
Manchester Food Services CERTIFIED MAIL
C/O Martin Siddell
10 Univac Lane, Suite 303
Windsor, Ct 06095
RE: Application #388 - Burger King, located on Buckland Road at the
Five Corners . Subdivision of land by R. Kelley and construction
of 3500 s. f. restaurant with 61 car parking lot.
Dear Mr. Siddell:
At the July 14 , 1986 meeting of the South Windsor Inland Wetlands Agency/
Conservation commission, the agency voted to deny application #388
without prejudice for reasons being that this application is no longer
active.
You may re-apply at any time. Check with the Engineering Department
about particulars if you have any questions .
Very truly yours ,
/ John M. Moran, Jr. , Ch, C man
Inland Wetlands Agency,/
Conservation Commission
Town of South Windsor
JMM:dlb
CC: Richard S. Kelley, RSK-Kellco
A. B. Davies , Deputy Town Engineer
Planning & Zoning Commission ,- '
Thomas D'Auria, Building Official
Marcia Banach, Director of Planning
John Shemo, Economic Development Coordinator
Richard Martel, Town Engineer
70u� 0-les-0� ?d&U&Ot
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074
sos•ca AREA CODE 203/644-2511
September 3, 1987
Richard Goodman, Esq.
Attorney-at-Law
60 Washington Street .�
Hartford, Connecticut 06106
RE: Application #1260 -
Manchester Food Services Resubdivision and Site Plan
Dear Attorney Goodman:
Please be advised that the Planning and Zoning Commission voted on
September 1, 1987, to deny the above-referenced Application for a
Resubdivision and Site Plan of Approval on John Fitch Boulevard for
the following reasons:
1. The proposed location directly west of the intersection of
Ellington Road and John Fitch Boulevard would result in a
very hazardous traffic pattern which would not promote the
safety of the community.
2. The proposed use would have a negative impact on the ad-
joining property to the south which is used in a residential
capacity.
Very truly yours,
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
By: 1t,
ouise C. Evans, Chairman
LCE:cbs
cc: R. Martel, Town Engineer
T. D'Auria, Building Official
E. Belleville, Assessor
W. Lanning, Fire Marshal
Evans, Chairman, Planning & Zoning Commission
Inland Wetlands Agency/Conservation Commission