Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDeming Street Reconstruction �l � SST �,w�uvs lric � ..... .. .. ... . Soo s�¢�a zoo pN 5�zvono >- -� V �t 8000 7"PSD 77bP Svc Dow OHI-s 3 0 - -- 3; o0 0 /0 3,¢z 5-' -- - - Cow n Fxrc�/ --------------- ------------ r - - --------- --- - ----- S ----3 4�/; ood --------- ----- ---- .,I i� Ali _ FEB-25-1994 10:28 C.R.C.O.G. 203 724 1474 P.01 r, O/ Capitol Region. Council of Governments 221 Main.St. ,Hartford,CT 06106 Phone:5224217 FAX:724-1.274 TO: Jeff Sord,Enfield Dick Miller,Windsor Dave Krause, West Haxtfb:rd Mike Gantiek, South.Windsor From: Tom h6darz Date: February 24, 1994 Subject: STP-CR Program: Cost increases I am faxing a Oppy of my recommendations for your review prior to the meeting. If.you have questions cau me Friday morning or Monday morning, ECG: Postrlt""brand fax transmittal memo 7671 aTpages► From 9M.- PRO Dept,r f. Phor1B R -y2: Z/ 7 FEB-25-1994 10:29 C.R.C.O.G. 203 724 1474 P.02 Capitol Region Council. of Governments 221 Main St.,Ffw*rd,CT 06106 Phone: 522.2217 FAX:724-1.274 To: Transportation Committee From: Tom MaAar7 Date: February 24, 1994 Subject: STP4M Program:Cost Increases Enfield: Phn St Project Original cast estimate: $870,75d January cost:estimate: $ 1.,013,000 (1.611/o increase approved by the Committee on 1/24/94) New cost estimate: $ 1,013,000 The Committee approved this cost increase at the January meeting but:asked staff to identify any additional cost reductions that might be possible. Recommendation: After discussions with the Town of Enfield I am recommending that the following two items be designated as alternate bid items: L Traffic signal, (at Washington PASIm at) approximate value: $50,000 2.Sidewalk,(on.Elm St) approximate value:$52,000 The Town has agreed to eliminate one or both of these items if bid prices for the project exceed the original cost of the project by more than 10 perc�► ($958,000). Windsor: Marshall Phelps RD. Project Original cost estimate: $ 1,399,170 January cost estimate: $ 1.,517,000 New Cost:estimate: $ 1,41.0,000 {$21,000 or 2%increase) The cost review for this project resulted in a much lower cost increase than 1.. previously reported to the Committee. There are two changes from my previous report. First, the "original cost; eWmaw" has been. corrected to $1,3$9,170 from $1,250,000, 1 had erroneously used the lower number in my previous report, Second,the ROW estimate has been revised from.$260,000 to$105,000. The new estimate is based on.land acquisition cost in the Kennedy Rd. project in Windsor. Kennedy Rd.was an urban systems project in which the Town administered the ROW acquisition. phase. I feel the Town's estimate of$1.05,000 for ROW is reasonable given their experience on Kennedy Rd. I. ecommerrdelion. Approve the cost increase with no conditions. The sine of the increase ($21.,000) is small and will not significantly af`ect the regional program. FEB-25-1994 10:29 C.R.C.O.G. 203 724 1474 P.03 STRCRProgram: Costlncreases 2124194 Page 2 West Hartfordt TAleott Rd.Project oligilmlI.cost eat;i1'17m: $ ).'2$0'000 January estimate: $ 1,546,000 Now oost;ostimaw: $ 1.,250,000 (0%increoso) The cost review consisted of two steps: (1) preparation of a now fully itemired cost estimate barcld on preliminary design plans,and(2) a review of potential cost saving actions. The new estimate of$1,250,000 is much.lower than the catimatx 1 presented last month ($1,546,000 e based on the project oonocpt rnowng), The savings are due to more accurate estimating procedures using quantities determined from, preliminary design plans(versus simple conceptual.plans),and to design modif owions intended to reduce cost, Examples of the latter include substituting road resurfacing for road reconnrucdon in.two locations,and rousing rather ULM 1eplaCM8 softie sigtyal equiph=L Rdcomm ndw-fon I feel.ulte new cost esdmate is more accurate than the January estimate. I recommend that the Committee accept the new estimate(with the design modif:ica ns)prepared by the town. The new cost estimate eliminates the cost increase and obviates the need for Committee action. South Windsor: Deming SL Project Original cost estimate: $593,000 Jamtary cost estimate: $865,000 ($272,000 or 46%increase) New cost estimate. $665,000 ($76,000 or 1.3%increase) The cost review resulted its a reduction in the cost estimate from January but it still leaves a.cost increase of about$76,000 or 13 percent higher. The source of of the increase is a higher.ROW cost. ROW Cost Increase. The original ROW estimate was$102,000. The stew RC?W estimate is$265,000. The number of properties affected(16 sliver takes)and the total area of land to be acquired has not changed from the original estimate. What has changed is the assumed cost per square foot($21.7,000/acre commercial:& $87,0001acre residential) and associated costs such as title searches, appraisals, negotiations, closings, Contingency for court awards (254f0), anrd project ndminfittratinn eat. Originally the gown proposed to administer the ROW phase, However, due to the number of properties affecteed.(16),the State has elected to the administer the ROW acquisition phase. The ROW estimate is probably high sin;ee. the State ROW depan;mettt tends to use a conservative estimating approach. However,since the Stage will be administering the ROW phase I am.unoomfortable rocommawling any reduction.in their estimate, Culvert rshminaledfrom Project. The reduotiotl from Jainuary's awmatc($200,000)is due to the elimination of a culvert replacement. used on a hydraulic analysis performed in the past month, the town has decided not to Mlaco the culvert in.question, Tho culvert was the source of most of the January cost:increase. Tllc culvert was not in the arxgi w proposal but was added to the project: during the concept meeting. The concept team was concerned that that the hydraulic rapacity was iusui7leient. ftccommendwion. I recommend the Committee approve the cost increase of$76,000 or 1.3 percent. The town has agreed to designate the roadway base as an alternate bid item. The towes proposal.includes full depth MconstVwWon but the town will consider recycling the existing base and pavement materials as a substitute if the prices are lower for this alternate method. TOTAL P.03 F�CEioIEO r•- J AN 2 6 1994 D �Ai".,r lEir'1 Cc TRAIN 'i� �1'T:Atm I'.^..N SOUTHMMOR EL,`r'A'J OF i(=F Th YS 1'!3L10W!-RY. STATE, OF CO:"IN;E_Ci T ICU T d TIVTr-1 :.yTI\� ..�:•s� t �.j�l � � T• X coS 7 :E E� 1 IMATH: L;i3LiAF?Y F'FOJE:,i CO T +YCT. I T E MIS Fi C0 T IN3E, vT r—Z h: ^"•fir \' SjDQQ .L"I...L.�\TTALS .TO ��O S t T ION 1+V 1 iitV 1 v a+ err.l.� _ fl IRE;LDIINTARY EN:ula+.rE J.a3 `_[� —T'r ITIES -- I B.D . 0. W. :'1 T Y'1.•1�ID r Fri i. -% r1, - TL,r+ D, Q A, TOTAL r._TT''t_mr0 COST ,,7 ESTIMATE 19�3 E-ZTTMA77 Mr: _ DA TE LESIG '!-: �R;LIAI:SO^:: --�L a — 'I^ � A. 1 DEFARTMENT OF TRAN:.PORTATION L:J=,EAL OF .,IG.HWAYS STATE OF CON E CTICJT .DHEET NO. =�F4 •.;O1 E� lMi i _r1G 'vi,�1 �.,C� �F• J. aJEJECT ST_•_�EIA�Lv—��3•� .l - 00 TACT y T Ly. z 37,000 _ -- v, a0C Z3�,000 - �.•.J-r..'j vi.�1 J 1 c.LE.^nlr�:: G.:��:� I G ( ��. �IW_A 2 %) _ s_ 4-�zoo 4��U 4�40 •; - I C ( 2 %) s a 00 U y a 4-t 40 MOLiL17AT10N ( 2 %) _ n0 _s LA[ Z q 7 l/ 0 +7 40 •1' F IC I T EMS ( 2 ��1 `�la�c�� 7 �I O 4—"1 Qtj :fT :?.: 1T :i{ , (Zrj%) 5200 - g�,JSO -------------- zSZ._7QQ 3� aI5 zZora,r -------------- C,i;e i RA'.,1 1 i tir U: Gv <1 11r`: G:.".:1 `iE.?: OF E ,•,ILATE 1993 C EE C K ED E Y ------ DATA DES.i REV.5-90 PREPARED PREPARED BY ORGANIZATION UNIT NO. WORK ORDER NO. ` rD DEPARTMENTBUREAUOf GHWAAY$ATION C0S.-T i3 -XxX DATE CHECKED CHECKED BY STATE OF CONNECTICUT SHEET NO. COMPUTATION SHEET Esc i�"�'�`�t N�' 3 O SUBJECT: E.CptJSTRUCTtprJ �Ct�t ^1C� S t E.XGAVATioQ a _ 9( ,000.c F. x t/zl x s (,,So /C.,l. i,�y 1�C1 O D L-P, (ASso st E. le)" �\\ X s E51 L.F s 40,00 b CZNCt_.UpES `.xGA�ATtpsJl (2 Ca.-rGt1 L"�AStr1S x s 1, 30o Ea. = 5 1�, (oob OS lS x . S , 35o sir. X s 4S/To1, = s 51500 _. _.-... c.e" x X.0643 X 5,350 x s I S f To = s 31,Ooo T6Soo F-7o 7,i,^A,Tt o�-1 OF' Sv3�7,ADE 5, DOo :. ... _._.. . 4 �00O X 5 3 �L. F • s 12,OOC7 ' DES.0 REV.$40 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DATE.PREPARED PREPARED BY ORGANIZATION UNIT NO. WORK ORDER NO. q s t-. BUREAU OF HIGHWAYS COST `32'XXX • DATE CHECKED CHECKED BY STATE OF CONNECTICUT ES'T1 MAT1>JV SHEET NO. j� COMPUTATION SHEETng SUBJECT: K=CO tJ STRuCTt O >J L7Et�(i N(� S'C RE�.1 -- SO U I H ��1�1D SpR E-U ur.;t si-1 =.CE Pso t L 1,Soo � zoo 2! o , o.o FORM NO.DES.3 REV.&B! DATE PREPARED PREPARED BY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ORGANIZATION UNIT NO. WORK ORDER NO. • /��`�Y BUREAU OF HIGHWAYS / c DATE CHECKED CHECKED BY STATE OF CONNECTICUT [pN� -rA�✓T •3 2— 1; COMPUTATION SHEET l�Ss,GN SHEET NO. SUBJECT: E571,11 /G �:T/ tr'.-r Es r��r.•�r,.si C'o�r of un•1 Cu,-c-y' 80-00K C,20.zl^16 G WCI F+N•'^'lrf�� E CGvr:.' / NCr'-� 1�r�' I�.�!!J `�% .r_L J: $ �`/.'• � •tirj'4 0-4,d Pv ry CC/Gv�/cr iDr_ x / x jri C - 40c.l. /�cx=v�rc+y .SrKl.�er[/>2£ �.atrcF'ic• 1 c�....•�RT 7'x 7' ,r lip x 4 x 2 "F.. ._47f C. Taro: 'C, FORM NO.DES.3 REV.Y8� GATE P!3EPARD PREPARED BY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ORGANIZATION UNIT NO. WORK ORDER NO. }}•-� BUREAU OF HIGHWAYS f.'%�:� Cr.a�,,,,,•;,,,,�,-.. STATE OF CONNECTICUT DATE CHECKED CHECKED BY �_ SHEET NO. COMPUTATION SHEET ��'�^' SUBJECT: %�tt/+N� vT � T- �:T+:'Nf•�r y COiT C-- �L LM c�ai�,t j�Rdp� L�'='::S �✓;e /f /�rt�bKf cY EXfwii�fO�i ✓cf.fT F.�.c�;� A C�fr..GGF_ S F. /� r f w _ 4 0 s •;f 7 /Z 7. SAe DATE.'PREPARED PREPARED BY FORM NO.DES.3 REV.5;84 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ORGANIZATION UNIT NO. WORK ORDER NO. ` BUREAU OF HIGHWAYS DATE CHECKED CHECKED �J�O CON:U4Trai.r� _ / STATE OF CONNECTICUT BY ^'� � COMPUTATION SHEET -4z../ `N SHEET NO. SUBJECT: {BEM/NG :2��T Es:/�/pro Corr of /��uNt Gc.u� B Q.x,K CRoa,r•a;; 74 z . Z - I /7'c $4a5 CLASS F Co../c.z ere C. Y. Z 7 .70 .�crn/r fr4t.+� fex. 2.e.veE _ t //�1/'G'r%.rv,:C-r:•.+•-f 121.s y;H•e C. Y / l� / `�.'• �'J _ - y�i O -Q ifif I DATE PREPARED PREPARED BY FORM NO.DES.3 REV.5/84 ORGANIZATION UNIT NO. WORK ORDER NO. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BUREAU OF HIGHWAYS l /C% • STATE OF CONNECTICUT 1-52-//17 DATE CHECKED CHECKED BY t e.�S•�L:�tM" SHEET NO. COMPUTATION SHEET Der s, P,.✓ SUBJECT : ' FRDM:RIGHTS OF WAY TO: 203 644 3781 DEC 29, 1993 10:19AM P-01 S=TE OF CONNECT1CUT DEPILRT14ENT OF TRANSPORTATION 2000 BERLIN TM PIKE P60. sox 317546 NEWINGTON, CONNECTICUT 0613,E-7546 Fax No. (203) 594-2494 FAX TRANSMISSION COVER Date: _ ZCQ ca?�� � Tame v FAX4 IKL Attn: _ _ _ From: oc, �� 11�L _ PHONES �y _ Subject:_ Number of Pages (including this farm) Messages_ _ 4,3 Loctz - - - — — — -- - - _ — ..._ _ FROM:RIGHTS OF WAY TO: 203 644 3781 DEC 29t 1993 10:20AM P.02 r. Subject: NEW COST ESTIMATE Proj, No. 132.-XXX STATH OF CONNECTICUT FAp No. 1>EPAR11vIUNT Ol'TRANSPOKI'A1'ION Doming Road MEMORANDUM South Windsor _(Vsn. 7,0.6l93) Date: Au s 7, 1993 J<< To: Mr. Richard C.Allen From: rig G r c f' Division Chief Administration Division i i 'fhb Cost Estimate which you requested for the subject project on August 6, 1993, has been completed. The following summarizes the Cost Estimate: A-industrial-- 0 8—Commercial — 0 C -Residential- o D -Vacant Land- 16 E-Easements - 0 Tempo and Rights - 0 Total properties- 16 The total Cost Estimate is as follows: $266,000 This Cost Estimate is being forwarders ro you for further pr00000ing. Approved ri : / : s A pA Y James E, Le is �..Date ... Director of Hights of Way Roger Judson Attachments co: Riohard J. Haley James E, Lewis Thomas J. O'Hala Gene E. Gisselbrecht Cost Estimating SRC Perm c 1 OFFICE OF RIGHTS OF WAY COST ESTIMATE-BY PARCEL sheet 1 of 1 Costs based on cunwx prices as of August 17, 1993 T} Federal Project No. Loca*w: Deming Road a State Project No. 132-)= Town[sj: South Windsor (Vsn.7.0 6193) ; 4 Estimate opmptetedbyCost Es#maWgand Market Data Sei;Wn,Divisiart ofApprais&A Ofte of RigoW of Way_ Eswmt+sd cost at current status of each pxc et(daJlars) ! .0 Type D A,B, Pcl C,D, Value Value Value Final No. T,E Owner Estimated Appraised Registered Friendly Corrderrined Payment 7 D Mechanic Savings $22,500 2 D Motley 7,500 3 D Abby Rd Assocs 7,500 4 D Bertrand 7,500 5 D Jones 22,500 0 & D Brookview Prof Center 24,000 7 D 3rilii 16.000 8 D Samsei Props 12,800 9 D Cotton 3,000 m 10 D A Soucy 3,000 w 1 i D L Soucy t,5oc Z 12 D FDIC 7,800 w 13 D Jack 3,000 m 14 D Wasy'enko 3,000 15 D Dolan 3.000 13 D Cath Cernetaries Assn 24,600 U m N. lD LD W m ro r. 3 W —FROMPRIGHTS OF WAY TO: 203 644 3781 DEC 29, 1993 10:21AM P.04 a OFFICE OF RIGHTS OF WAY COST ESTIMATS-SUMMARY As of August 17, 1993 Fed. Pro).No.: ---- Proj. Location: Deming Road State Pro).No.; 132-XXX Town(s): South Windsor Costs based tipnn estimates for the Current year. Type of Properties: A-InbuStrial developed 0 $0 B-Commercial developed 0 0 C-Residential developed 0 0 D,T.E-Undev.,Temp and Easmt. is 171,200 Subtotal 16 $171,200 Contingenoy for court awards, project mods, etc. 42,800 Total for land,buildings and easements Title searoh, Appraisal costs, purchase fees,etc. RClooation costs; A. Replacement Housing Payments-Owners $0 S. Replacement Mousing Payments--Tenants 0 C. Residential Moving Payments 0 D, Business and Farm Payments 0 E. Relooatinn Services Costs 0 F. Other Relocation Costs _ 0 Total nelooation Costs Demolition Monumenting&Mapping(State pro). only) Asbestos Inspection Total Rights of Way Cost Rounded to Estimate completed by Cost Estimating and Market Data Section, Office of Rights of Way Last Estimate: NIA Dated: No. of Parcels: Prepared By: NOTE: : FROM:RIGHTS OF WAY TO: 203 644 3781 - DEC 29, 1993 10:21AM P.05 OFFICE OF RIGHTS OF WAY COST ESTIMATE-WORKSHEET As of August 17,1933 Fed. Prof. No.: ---- Proj. Location: Deming Road State Pro). No.: 132-XXX Town: South Windsor. RELOCATION COSTS: A. Replacement Housing 0 @ $20,000 = $0 Payments-Owner B. Replacement Housing 0 @ $5,000 - 0 Payments-Tenant G. Residential Owner - o ( $3,600 $0 Moving Pmts. Tenants = 0 Cud 1,000 W 0 D. Business& Moving = 4 @ $20,000 = $0 Farm Pmts. Search = 0 @ 500 = 0 0 D. Relocation Services Costs 0 @► $600 = 0 6. Other 0 TOTAL.RELOCATION RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION -SUMMARY A. Parcel by Parcel $171,200 Court Awards, 75% of $0 0 0 Admin. Settlements, 25% of 171,200 a 42,800 Etc.. Other 0 Total Land and Bldgs. B. Overhead -Complex 4 @ $5,000 - $20,000 -Simple 12 @ 2,500 = 30,000 -Temp 0 @ 2,000 M 0 -Other 0 Total Overhead C. Demolition - Bob'[ o @ $5,00o $0 -Comm'I 0 @ 9,000 = 0 - Ind'i 0 @ 9,000 = 0 -Other 0 Total Demolition D. Mon. & Interstate 0.00 f + $40,000 = $0 Mapping Secondary 0.00 @ 30,000 - 0 (miles) Other 0 (State Only) Total Monumenting and Mapping E.Asbestos Res'I 0 . @ $2,400 = $0 Inspection Comm'Vind, 0 @ 6,000 - 0 Other 0 Tuta l Asbestos Inspection _ TOTAL RIGHTS OF WAY ACQUISITION "' Note:These figures are guides only. Adjustments can be made to reflect project conditions. 4;f R€CEiVED 4 - J A N 2 6 1994 • DE A11•T1'v'"it l OF TRAN:::rOIRTATIviI SOUTHWINOSOR EURW.�U OF H.LGH AYS PUBLIC WOW, �,i STATE. OF CJ II:ECTICUT \ , �.. �r :� E T NO.— d .. COSTr•r-ya�{n rl T_VT + ^rl =�a..)v r• -xxx COST : T = NS 'T Uil�-lA.FY �.'\1 E,v 1 'CONTRACT ITEMS IfiI�IEE ITALS TO COS ST:: 3CTIO�d _ S 5 DQ I RELII° Ii PIRY ENI;INEEEIx,,G _S— SZQ C—) L'T ILITTLES -- T.B.D-- -,rTrr1yD FORCEAMr-GrT%TT SI TOTAL T{^�' I.,,lA ED C^r 1 S d� Q�Q b�� J �e• �_ y.-; �F ESTIMATE 1993 + .. -- E V. S.I_A i_. E i —�•A•L--_— _ A TT�Ey" ' \? EESIG:\�7 .R;7 I DISC":: ---7 — UN T a\ ' Y PZ ar RT1 7NT OF TRANSPORTATION A- EAU OF aIG J->:e STATE OF CONNECTIC JT SHEET NO. n- nn !"rrr1, A TT NG ..".IT 1 ']0.� o u--1 J C..-_Yxx Lh-c 'JECT: Rio n1 ST_._� Sow-Ca m_--- .y n!'. Are r.I^. S `` • .. 1.1`a�.�l�t".1 V V w7� � 21C?sS�4�—�•, ,•t"i C V SUT—P A L ' ' S_Z10 OOo „� v CLEARING 4 G M-- I G :Y Z %) — r or) S. Q�QD 47�(d y; & r OF T RI-nIF P I C ( 'Z -- MOILIZATION ,. { Z %) s _Q Z00 7Y0 TRArr I C IT E iS ( 2 ';;} 4� Q� , MTN.G4� ITL fs (ZS°1% 52 00 _ 6 r3, S s-------------- Z7C) 3JJ `t(.0) td C��NTINGEtiCIES { r7 01) T_2SZ._7QQ 3 I5 CON F VI._ "E4CIE'S _ _S Zoo 000 .J v 1�..aZV 1 1 S ititit $: CV`ir 1 11`cl,: til �__—_—_—_L �Y• _D C HC :F.O PY ------ FIEV 6-90 DATA PREPARED PREPARED BY DES.a TRANSPORTATION ORGANIZATION UNIT NO. WORK ORDER NO. . .• J 't r) .1 . DEPARTMENTBUREAU U EAUOF HWS C O ST 13 X X X DATE CHECKED CHECKED BY STATE OF CONNECTICUT SHEET NO. COMPUTATION SHEET ES�I titan Icy C� ''7 b SUBJECT: ' K E.C.p rJ ST RU C-C►o� �C t�! tl C� S"r R E.E.� SO U1-N W�1�1 DS O tZ ExGAVAT1Ut.1 i,:ca00 l^,F• x 30 WlpTtA x '/Zj x s (0,50 /cam(. _ 23, ioo I,(,OD L..P, �1�ss� E 18 1�.C•�� x s 251L.F. - S 40,Doo . CZNGI.up�S LxGAVAT10sJ1 t2 C-A% rGH vASlt-ls x s 1,30o ..5, SIB Ste(. xs 45/Tots = s 55, 500 x x•oc,43 x5,3so s Wit. x s ISITo►� = s 31,Ooo - - �7RA�1 SvBBASE t+o 1 Z17 u F'o RMQT� o�1 OF- St,3CD7,AVF- g, poo Cll 4 ,oa0 ,000 1 .40 S90 J REV.. DATE.PREPARED PREPARED BY DES ,ORGANIZATION UNIT NO. WORK ORDER NO. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION '�J1 2-XXX q L-' BUREAU OF HIGHWAYS COST DATE CHECKED CHECKED BY STATE OF CONNECTICUT SHEET NO. COMPUTATION SHEET ES-r,`MA,:T 1 Q u, SUBJECT: R�.CO ra STRilCT1 O >J �Eli(1 N(� S-C R�.ET - SOU?H W 1�,1D SOR 1�(000 L- 6 s IDTt 1,Soo s.y . x s 4 /s. = s '7,z00 _ I 9 .I FORM NO.DES.3 REV..5/84 DATE PREPARED PREPARED BY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ORGANIZATION UNIT NO. WORK ORDER NO. BUREAU OF HIGHWAYS BY STATE OF CONNECTICUT DATE CHECKED CHECKED [gip vCuarRr�T SHEET NO. COMPUTATION SHEET SUBJECT: Lam:n/!!!� rIP66 r fs rl".:I-u C'oc r c F /;'L ufo C141"y F w.vo 14 G20:K lniG l l.✓U F,N;'�.ffr_'.;: � CGur':: !'N_C r-f. �„r ♦'1.:}� f..,'� C.ts..a.tr'irY !"i;Cr•' =�,;_ E:r�r•-/F�tE/ 7 z /GfR� I4- G. �C�=Vi[•t+,$ ST2 ue TltttE urJG KF"l:.t. Ca4{r,r 7'X 7' x lip z 45 ' k Z•z - Yo.E3 c.y F �a %arFe FORM NO.DES.3 REV.5/84 DATE PREPARED PREPARED BY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ORGANIZATION UNIT NO. WORK ORDER NO. BUREAU OF HIGHWAYS STATE OF CONNECTICUT DATE CHECKED CHECKED BY SHEET NO. COMPUTATION SHEET �`=�'�^' SUBJECT : %� rie.�u T�2F r- G`.Tli`1/47�17 CiJS; C." �L LM atr�t'C jr200� (.i'✓:' i /" /arEFa..e�,cy Ex�w..s.o.. ✓ai...r Fttc'.� A"c.z �'liOG�'- .5 F /2 .� I'. Ue .�^�'�'` r<-.. ��^� �_"ram• /.�_. LQ.�ssu++s.eS l :,f �Z7. 6 Ae. FORM NO.DES.3 REV.5/84 DATE PREPAFEO PREPARED BY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ORGANIZATION UNIT NO. WORK ORDER NO. BUREAU OF HIGHWAYS 1310 CON:UGT(�I•fi _ (/(•�/�� �'�" STATE OF CONNECTICUT DA'FE CHECKED CHECKED BY COMPUTATION SHEET �M; "i SHEET NO. S U B J f C T i �,�E�>/r✓G v7"(?.�ET �.5:�i-rf2 r r> Cp�T OF /SLUM 6""le K r t,,.Ro�lM,r•r, 4,44 17- Box �J'Src �r2iDa� 1.F- CG19.S.S F '.�ONGKta'�' C. Y. - Z 7 370. iI / P.rr:��„�.u�.� EX PH N7lO w• .S,F /G�'a 7. C. 9SC) .�o..vr fra,b�+(' fE.r. G?Ric7GE A%X4-__A toe lbe,Oe rf f i 1 LH y� �?�:�_� ENS.-: f `'••�::�._ /ntrw,=..sit�-.. ,.,- t: �,.s�,.H'` C. Y �S•->^'G _.. y ,?�-, Cv ! ;"•i-Q DATE PREPARED PREPARED BY FORM NO.DES.3 REV.5t84 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ORGANIZATION UNIT NO. WORK ORDER NO. �„ BUREAU OF HIGHWAYS STATE OF CONNECTICUT DATE CHECKED CHECKED BY �.^ < e r<. e r /�dI SHEET NO. COMPUTATION SHEET Dc pa,l SUBJECT : �1�/y(__i'!-+r.l.i. VI�I.a?..i'.,JPi't:,• t, 'r w� '.;,: /=? �^�.. r r MaoAtchitaturG `� �nginrexing �, [DWIiorttnentai /. Ut1,Gricr I>tcsi6n VWj;8E1t�PIEY.0 PA% NO. (203) 257-4882 FACSIIill.�, TP-14 SMITTAL SHEET DATE. tA) Jn8 N0. : G' 3/Cc TO: (FIRM) r ATTENTIONS RE FAX NO.; TOTAL N0. OF PAGES (INCLUDING TUTS COVER LETTER): rROM AIjY PROBLEMS VTTH TMYSMIS5I01 of TRIS FAX, PLEASE CALL AT (203) 363-•2341. COMMENT. An Equai r)rpmttwty Employtt 55 Town Crop.Rnad 120 Mast Streit 235 promenade St.,P.O.Bo:t 63M Ona TRA 3t:= NASHUA.NH 03U60 PROVIDENCE,RI 03 O-6369 WALTH891- MA 02154 WRTH>r563-13.LD,C'1"06109 TeL•603-890-12b9 Tat 401441.2900 ToL 6t7.893-21 lQ Tel:7n3 1i Fax!dOl.861.2m Ras;61:•A9R44S0 Fax:.. VG�GV�V a .v V• Iry vrv. .++r _____._ __._-__ _____ �r 11'_ 5 r vVig Pi ROM Uoul Uul :SSG rii.:1 M11GCT TE3 444 CU TEGlICI.I �00: DzMa S'PIL> UTDRADLTC ANALTSTS This report evaluates the hydrw.ulica bf the Deming Street culvert. The aaelyzxs uses the Corps of Engineers, =C-2 backwater model to determine water surface protilos on Flom Gaul. Brunk through the Deming Street culvert struetsxre. Bydrola$y used in t13.s anaalyafa vas takWl from tue 1988 ?IA& flood Insurance Study for the appropriate raachas of r1um sully Erook. The final comouter model ryas include the 10. 'so, 1W, prd SOLI year flood profile rerulty. The origi=1 MA modal was used ss the base model WILL uew uuz-4ey obtained in the vicinitp of the Denting Street culvert. The Deming Rtrmnr ru'l4orr vas e-ra].uatod L,ith the following atternetivas a.^ shoves is Table I. S. The existing Fr,U model profiles that determined the 100 year elevation at the Deming Street cuJ.vert from the 1988 s-hidy. This model, reflects the current rzH& no yecu r vua e1eva.t.1ons. 2. The existii�g Fb'U u;udrl with addlLlonzl field svrv'eY in the areas of the Demiscg 5treat culvert that reflects the latest "vx-built" conditional! the roadway elevations. This model determines the flood pxo$ile elevations at Deming Street ba4od on an updated "as-built" road=p survey. Since that "as-built" roadway condition at Deming Street is appro3�ma.telq 1.5 feet higher than the 1988 rEMA model, the flood profiles modeled reflect this higher elevarlm vhaaarar ovrrtopping conditionz occur, (i.e. , greater than as 10 yrai• eve.UL). 3. The exl6tiij* "as-built" survey Sor the roadway and =be Deming Sts'ee; cntiv-rt. These flood profiles rafleett the actual. condition. U. Same as Modal Rut No_ 3 a-Ith the roadway raised 0.5 feet. 3b. Same as Kocicl Rua No. 3 with the roadvny reistd 1-0 f+tet. 3c. Seme ss Model Run No. 3 vith the roadway raised 1.5 feet. 4. Same as Model Ruiz No. 3 with an additional. 12 x 5 box culvert. 4a. Same as Model. Sun No. 4 with the roadv$y raised 1.0 feet. S. Same as Model Rtm No. 3 with an additional 15 x 5 box culvert. 6. woo as Model Kim No. 5 viU2 the roadway raised 1.5 tee:. 7. Sam as Model Rua No. 3 but 7ith a 12 x 6 box culvert instead of the csi.sting 12 x 5 box culvert. VY• rU �%�. LY• U �ti:S CC! w:lV i1:.. t3 1.J.JLJ I.I 7►�,.� •1R7 - B. Same as Ktael Run No. 3 with to additional 12 x 6 box culvert added Ito the original 12 a 5 box culvert. 8a. Same as Model Rom, No. 8 aith the roadway rained 1.0 foot. °. 'Same as Model Run No. 3 with an additional 16 x 6 box culvert. 10. `Same as Model Run No. 3 vith an additional 16 a 6 box culvert and the (roddvay raised 1.3 feet. I Then 41ternativets to the existing mods! No.. 3 1zd3cate rhere is a Dossible ;soiutian to not increasing the 100 year flood elevation at the upstream face of the Deming Street culvert by either increasing the hydraulic capa.c4 y oz; a c+ombiutivn of fmcte-c—sing the hydraulic capacity and raising the roadway to prevent overtopping. Ir :thnnld by nntan rhat none of the modeled altarnaticas meet the criteria of not increasing the 100 year floodplain vhen i compared to the existing 1988 M-MA 100 year elevation at Deming street. Table 2 shovs the 10 and 50 yea.* flood evr�te uming Model Run No. 3, the actual. "4z-built" condition of roadv* and Deming Stract culv=t. The 10 year flOvd ;10" nvC vvvi tup Dr.,u.1u4 SLiett vhile Lhe 30 year flood will overtop rapprdiEss of the change in Deming Street profile. Coa4drsationn with the Connecticut Dapartzent of Environmental Protection (ALP) indicate the P22fA values determined in Model ?Wn No. 1 are on file With the, 3tatdi add Federal Agencies and that any update to the 106 yom.r flood profile, determined by a aux-vay or hydraulic change in the field, will have to be vc ified by the Towa of south Windsor, if they pursue to make a change 1n the IUU'yeaz protiie. This action is initiated by the Town to PEKb in tho iozm of d Latter of Map Revision (LOMR) based on nev hydrologic/hydraulic ceamputUtI615 In the detailed studied area. This process 1z quite lengthy and could tape six to nine months to resolve. &s'eg on the resvlt3 from the DEC-2 1OodeUJ3g effort and cOftMUn =tIons w-itlz Or r-Rg chug nWa position to new data supplied by the: Towu and verified ;by a LOMR, Keyes feels that at this time, the existing site eooditior�a at Deming Street do not v--rrast changing the culvert in order to pass the 100 year event undez Deming St:Qet. The present hydraulics indicate the roadway yiii not be overtopped at t e 1G and possibly the Zj year Hood eirsats. �iuce secess era be obtained to surrounding locations by other adjacent �oadvays during a more etveac flood evws:t) tlht Denl� Street culveXL crossing May not need to be designed for the 1UU year hood. i 2 2-6744 • i � ^�w�!«!1 r!. 1 �77f !!• f1l.r .�7+1/� /If 1��.wt'r iI raw ♦*wl�w�I-w� TAIIIA l 100 7EM FLOonFLAW dKALYSIS Top of Roadway kipdel R= 100 Year Flood Bievatioa 1. Existing 1979/1988 FSU 84.54 83.2 •2. FM tfodel Stith 1994 survey fox! roadvay only 85.56 84.6 3. 199! Eaiestiug Cul.vcrL (121 x 51) 85.73 84.6 arirh 1994 survey 3A. 199y Existing Culvert Rare road 0.5 te.et 85.90 85.1 3S. 199t Existing culvert Rai a road 1.0 feet 86.25 05.E 3c. 1994 Existing Culvert Raike road 1.5 feat 66.63 96.1 4. S=� Az hodel Run No. 3 AM4 12' x Y box 8S.Z8 84.6 i 4A. Sami as Model Run No. 4 Rai m ruadvay 1 icwt 65.75 85.6 S. Samo as Model It= No- 3 Addis 16, x P box 85.13 $4.6 6. Sams no Model. gun Ho. 5 Add!a 16e a 5' box Raise xoadvay 1.5 feet 85.35 85.6 7. Samo as model Ruu No- 3 but vith n, x 6' box instead of a 12, x 51 box 65.60 51►.6 8. ,Saint as Model R= No. 3 but I vI ch a 120" x 61 add,6d to UP x 51 box 85.06 84.6 8A. Ear as 8 Rare roadxay 1 foot 65.07 85.6 9. sa� as Model Run No. 3 Add:a IV x 61 box 84.63 81,,6 10. Saft� as Nodal Rm No. 3 Add'a 16, x 61 box Rm%c rooAvsy 1.5 feet 85.72 86A 2-6742 I qpt' rf■w "*WON 544MMINOWN RAWJ �*S mwIPf" Ilrino* r.Vi~��� .[S 1u11V J. •I�..J VVJ JVV -.J.r.1..J .r YVtf..1Y.Y VV.•...r4Ff•'�i •�.J./V TABLE • 2 '..�y�y ilLLJa.i.iRl SMM BR 3."fr1 •+.•�.7TJR• 10 AND 50 VRn M OO MAXW AULMS 10 Fear F3210d it so Ten Floyd Sop of Roadway axial RIM 11Wnsrinn RIOVation Zlwmtion 3. 19M Existing Culvert Pais ing roadway $2.27 85.40 84.6 3A. 1994; u1st.ing Culvert (1211X 5') Wse roadway 0.5 feet 82.27 $5.39 85.1 38. 1994 Exictirg Culvert Rnie� roadvay 1.0 foot 82.27 85.95 85.6 3C. 19941 Existing Oulverc (12'Ix 5') 8afs4 rosdvay 1.5 feet 82_27 86.36 $6.1 i Notez 50 y+ear flnnd nvPrraps rwdvay for all cases modeled. 2-671�2 i i f SOUTH WINDSOR FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT STUDY PODUNK WATERSHED • ROAD FLOODING SUMMARY LOCATION uiuT 2 Year 10 Year 25 Year 100 Ye Depth Time Depth Time Depth Time Depth Tune Over Over Over Over Over Over Over Over Podunk River Road(ft) Road(hrs) Road(ft) Road(hrs) Road(ft) Road(hrs) Road(ft) Road hrs) ZG O o Chapel Street - (-) - (-) - (-) 0.7 (7.3) fop© Pleasant Valley Road - (-) - (-) - (-) 1.1 (6.1) 5 G Pierce Road - (-) - (-) 0.3 (7.3) 0.8 (9.1) 6 G)O Strong Road - (-) - (-) - (-) 0.6 (4.9) C 2-5Sullivan Road - (-) - (-) - (-) 0.7 (2.0) Graham Road - (-) 0.9 (2.2) 1.1 (3.6) 1.4 (4.9) rj Abbe Road - (-) 1.3 (1.8) 1.6 (3.2) 1.9 (5.2) v Foster Street - (-) - (-) - (-) 0.9 (4.1) Plum Gulley Brook Clark Street - (-) 1.0 (2.4) 1.4 (3.5) 1.8 (4.3) G� Buckland Road - (-) 0.5 (0.5) 0.8 (1.2) 1.3 (1.9) Oakland Road - (-) 0.5 (1.1) 0.8 (1.6) 1.2 (2.3) Ellington Road - (-) 0.6 (1.4) 0.9 (1.9) 1.1 (2.6) Route 74 - (-) - (-) - {-) 1.5 (1.3) Sand Hill Road - (-) 1.0 (1.6) 1.4 (2.0) 1.8 (2.8) 66 High Street - (-) 0.3 (0.7) 0.5 (1.0) 0.7 (1.5) �� Nevers Road 0.9 (6.0) 1.6 (12.0) 1.9 (13.4) 2.4 (14.6) Table 7 Headwater Elevations at Structures Present Condition Watershed Plum Gulley Brook Structure Location Low Road Headwater Elevations (ft above MSL)"" Elevation for Recurrence Interval: (feet) 100 Yr 25 Yr 10 Yr 2 Yr Plum Gulley Brook Main Stem: Clark Street 66.0 67.8 67.2 66.7 64.1 I Flown Buckland Road" 89.2 90.5 90.1 89.6 87.0 Driveway culvert at station 123+40 92.0 94.3 93.6 93.3 92.8 Oakland Road` 105.0 106.2 105.8 105.5 101.2 Ellington Road" 110.0 111.1 110.9 110.6 108.5 Relocated Route 74• 119.7 121.3 119.7 117.3 114.2 Sand Hill Road 144.3 146.1 145.6 145.3 141.0 High Street 169.7 170.4 170.2 170.0 165.8 Farm Access Road at station 197+30 180.0 181.8 181.5 181.3 180.8 Nevers Road 180.5 182.9 182.4 182.1 181.5 Designed structures, not yet built (6-1-1992). •• From WSP-2 31 Table 8 Headwater Elevations at Structures J Future Condition Watershed Plum Gulley Brook Structure Location Low Road Headwater Elevations (ft above MSU Elevation for Recurrence Interval: (feet) 100 Yr 25 Yr 10 Yr 2 Yr Plum Gulley Brook Main Stem: Clark Street 66.0 67.9 67.2 66.7 64.4 Buckland Road* 89.2 90.5 . 90.1 89.7 87.1 Driveway culvert at station 123+40 92.0 94.4 93.7 93.3 92.8 Oakland Road* 105.0 106.2 105.9 105.5 101.4 Ellington Road* 110.0 111.2 110.9 110.6 108.6 Relocated Route 74* 119.7 121.4 120.0 117.5 114.3 Sand Hill Road 144.3 146.1 145.7 145.3 141.5 High Street 169.7 170.4 170.2 170.0 166:1 Farm Access Road at station 197+30 180.0 181.8 181.5 181.3 180.8 Nevers Road 180.5 182.9 182.5 182.2 181.5 I * Designed structures, not yet built (6-1-1992). ** From WSP-2 32 Appendix D.3 WSP-2 Peak Discharge Table Plum Gulley Brook Present Condition Discharges WSP-2 Station TR-20 Peak Peak Discharge (in CFS) Discharge Location 100 Yr. 25 Yr. 10 Yr. 2 Yr. REACH 327 REACH 1520 REACH 2O72 REACH 2500 REACH 2946 ROAD CLARK REACH 3085 RESVOR 07 2331 1446 943 342 REACH 3750 ADDHYD 122 2346 1463 995 363 REACH 4653 ADDHYD 116 2127 1328 904 331 REACH 6890 REACH 7820 REACH 8501 ADDHYD 107 2083 1330 916 349 REACH 9700 REACH 9982 ROAD - REACH 111W REACH 11065 ROAD BUCK REACH 11928 ADDHYD 097 2057 1379 991 363 ROAD TWNCMP REACH 12540 ROAD OAKLND REACH 13190 ROAD ELNGTN REACH. 13545 REACH 13985 ROAD RTE74 REACH 14445 REACH 14950 REACH 15390 ADDHYD 095 926 623 453 180 REACH 16685 ROAD SAND REACH 16855 REACH 17400 1/2(RUNOFF 085 + ADDHYD 095) 895 608 450 188 REACH 18700 ROAD HIGH REACH 18840 REACH 19690 ROAD FARMRD REACH 19755 REACH 2O000 ROAD NEVERS REACH 2O375 RUNOFF 085 863 592 446 195 Capitol Region STP-Urban Program 0„ 6-ee-m-l Program Summary: STP-Urban ii$Y�ryyiiiriiiiii::`.`:::i•'.:::::?::ijii�i :: seo 'eun``e"'nee ;<:: :>:Ba ......:....:. . ..::....::.::..........:.:....:.: .:.;.:.... .............................. .:3 COY ::::::.. :•s:.:::•>:;:>.;:.::. .>:»:: :. Pt :::.:.:. ..........:..................... :...:.......:.:..:.:....:................................... .......:..:........... ............P.... ::::.::::.:.......:..............::::..:.::.:::::::::::.:::::.: rea .>.....:>:: >:: :;It�cce�isc;ii . t xtn�:.::::::::..:.................. .......... ...........................:.:: ......::: ...............................Pro .............. ... :.::..... ........................................... ...... ...........:.:..:::::::::.:::::::.:::::..:::::..:................................. Total 14,625,815 11,700,652 16,080,400 12,864,320 1,454,585 1,163,668 Traditional Roadway Projects :...:..:..:::.>:;..;.::>.:::.:.»:.".....:.::R.>:>.::<n:.:<::::.:::.:.:>.:.::.:::.>.:.::...€;.>;.::.:•>>..•»..».•.:.>:.;:.<-.:>....'...?.•:'.::..?.:..:>:..:.:.;:.:«:.:.::.:::>.:.:::.::>.::.:::...<.:::.:>:.:.::.::.:>:.:.<:.::::.<:.:::.::>.:k.:.;:.:.:::.'.:.:.:....:.':.`...-..;x.:.i:.:.}:.[»:.:.:..::::.:>:.::.:::.::.:•::<.:.::::.»:...; X:::.:t:<se<d'az emt<«a':t<;:.;:;'•>:;.:•_:.<:::i.}:::>:<:>:..<'{ .<'><'>:`: z>.>.;;:A. :» `e Xn:»:<::e::a se:: : :;.:'.>. ;t>::::::: ii:: :� : ; : : :: aul'Ln::::;;::<: . ...........<.................... <;>: B : P. . _ :: : :: > :.:»:.»...:.:.::::<. :l:. : ................................: : : ..: o :.. > » ..... :»>:<:>: o :c»:: :»»i:.;: ...... :::>::: ;;:..... : . o ........... ...:;.:: :: :::. ::; hare :>....... : ::. . : .:>;:;; ;;:>:;:>;:> c : : :;: ::: : : . : : »: : : .:::. Bloomfield Maple Ave 1,223,000 978,400 1,269,000 1,015,200 46,000 36,800 East Hartford Burnham St 1,250,000 1,000,000 1,508,000 1,206,400 259,000 206,400 Enfield Elm St 870,755 696,604 1,013,000 810,400 142,245 113,796 Farmington Rt6/Rt177 1,250,000 1,000,000 0 0 -1,250,000 -1,000,000 Hartford Arterial street resurfacing 2,401,222 1,920,978 3,374,000 2,699,200 972,778 778,222 &reconst. Manchester Tolland Tmpke/Paricer 420,270 336,216 287,000 229,600 -133,270 -106,616 Manchester Oakland/North Main 426,638 341,310 233,000 186,400 -193,638 -154,910 Newington 5 intersection 476,300 381,040 497,900 398,320 21,600 17,280 improvements Rocky Hill Silas Deanne Hwy 60,000 48,000 60,000 48,000 0 0 Simsbury Rt10/Wolcott Rd 562,600 450,080 470,000 000 -92,600 -74,080 376, Vernon Rt 83 service road 559,330 447,464 640,000 512,000 80,670 64,536 West Hartford Tolcott Rd-SEICA 1,250,000 1,000,000 1,546,500 1,237,200 296,500 237,200 Windsor Marshall Phelps Rd 1,250,000 1,000,000 1,517,000 1,213,600 267,600 213,600 Windsor Locks Rt 159 1,100,000 880,000 1,077,000 961,600 -23,000 -18,400 TOTAL 13,650,115 10,920,092 14,357,400 11,485,920 707,285 565,828 page 1 Recommendations on Cost Increases Total increase recommended=$290,515 (232,412 federal). '`` a `" e >:>>`'>Conditions Commen s tg:::; :.>:«:> eas0'is>? :.;::.;:•>Ii:,•>:::>. .;:.:ReComm nd t10 s........... t:;:::;::>;::r;:::::.;:::: sfimated:s>:>:::eatima .... .....Incr.Town::>::.>:::<: ::: <:::::::::Pro ec............... ..e . .....:.:.:.. ............................ .-..........................................::..:.................:.:::: ........................................1.............................:..:::::.::._.:.:.::::::.:.:.............. >'' ;: I n on :;...:>;;;::.................. ............................ ................... ........................................................... ............................ ......... ................................. ................................................. ..........................................................:. :..::::;:.;:.;:.; Newington 5 intersections 476,300 491,900 21,600 5% Approve Approval based on 3 projects rather than ' cost increase original 5. 0 Approve Approval based on 30-foot road and Bloomfield Maple Ave 1,223,000 $1,269,000 46,000 4� cost increase elimination of sidewalks. Vernon Rt 83 service road 559,330 640,000 80,670 14% Approve Concept team already reduced the scope cost increase of the project. Enfield Elm St 870,755 1,013,000 142,245 16916 Approve cost increase Rocky Hill Bikeway 327,500 505,000 177,500 54% Postpone action Resolve"rail"ROW issue first. East Hartford Burnham St 1,250,000 1,508,000 258,000 21% Postpone action Resolve street closing issue first. Windsor Marshall Phelps Rd 1,250,000 1,517,000 267,000 21% Continue cost review. check:ROW West Hartford Tolcott Rd-SEICA 1,250,000 1,546,558 296,558 24% Continue cost review. check:signals,ROW,utilities Wethersfield Bikeway 233,200 803,000 5692800 244% Postpone action Resolve"rail"ROW issue first. Hartford 7 reconstruction& 2,401,222 3,374,000 resurfacing projects 972,778 41% Continue cost review. Cost increase excessive. wt P,k.. St 4 grwl as� k, I - t�""r 6� page 3 1121-Kr 5e,-.17-t-7 IA-_ s; STATE OF CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION b 0 z, f�MSi 2800 BERLIN TURNPIKE, P.O. BOX 317546 C/J V�O�-�' yT o TaPe►y��r f NEWINGTON, CONNECTICUT 06131-7546 Phone: 594-3219 December 15, 1993 Ms. Jean E. Zurbrigen . Town Manager Town Hall ' FC, 1540 Sullivan Avenue ,1993 South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 } s Dear Ms. Zurbrigen: ch Subject: Project No. 132-HOO5 v � Reconstruction of Deming Street from Clark Street to Buckland Road Town of South Windsor The Department's Environmental Planning Division has completed its review of this project and has indicated that the following items need to be addressed by the City or consulting engineer: 1 . Investigate whether publicly-owned parks, recreation areas and/or wildlife and waterfowl refuges are to be affected. 2. An inland wetland permit will be required. 3. A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permit will be required. ' This issue will be discussed at the Department' s monthly Project Managers Meeting. The Town will be notified of this meeting. All necessary material must be provided to the Department. 4. This project is located on or adjacent to a flood hazard area: A permit may be required. Contact the Department of Environmental Protection at 566-7245. 5. An erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan must be submitted at the time the permit applications are made. 6. A Special Provision concerning construction noise must be included in the contract. A copy of this special provision follows: 1 2 L AEG An Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled or Recovered Paper �_ C r • Ms. Jean Zurbrigen -2- December 16, 1993 "The contractor shall employ all possible methods to minimize noise pollution caused by construction equipment including but not limited to equipment used for drilling, pile driving, blasting, excavation, and hauling. All drilling units and internal combustion engines shall be muffled so as to reduce noise to an acceptable level as defined herein. All methods and devices employed to minimize noise shall be subject to the continuing approval of the Engineer. The maximum allowable level of noise at the nearest residence occupied building has/will be 90 decibels on the "A"-weighted scale. All noise complaints received by the Engineer shall be investigated for verification, and the results will be analyzed by the Connecticut Department of Transportation, Environmental Planning Division". Enclosed herewith are the Natural Diversity Data Base and State Historic Preservation Office' s (SHPO) determination on the presence of rare and endangered species and historic/archaeological resources in the project area. Please note that SHPO has recommended that a professional reconnaissance survey be undertaken for this project. If you have any questions concerning this project please contact the . Project Engineer, Mr. Drew Colburn, at telephone number 594-3233. Very/truly yours, 'el. Sebastian J. Sbalcio Engineer of Consultant Design Bureau of Engineering and Highway Operations Enclosures 1? INTERDEPARTMENTAL STATE OF CONNECTICUT MESSAGE STO-201 REV. 4/90 (Stock No. 6938-051-01) Obtain"STATE EMPLOYEE SUGGESTION"forms from, and send your ideas to: Employee's-Suggestion Awards Program, 165 Capitol Avenue Hartford, Ct 06106. rinsed on recycled(or recovered)paper NAME, TITLE DATE Sebastian Sbalcio Engineer of Consultant Design 1J4/93 TO AGENCY, ADDRESS ngpt. of Transportation, 2800 Berlin T ke Newington NAME, TITLE TE EPHONE From Stacey Kingsbury, Environmental Analyst A��,4 AGENCY,ADDRESS DEP-NRC Natural DiversityData Base, 79 Elm St, Hartford Su:bject:. . . . . . . . .Project. No. . 13.2-XXX,. .Reconstruction .Of. .Deming . Street;. . . . . . . . . . . . . South Windsor, Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I have reviewed. . Natural. . .Diversity Data Base maps and files . . . . . . . regarding • the .area .delineated. on .the. .map. you. provided , for .the . . . . . , . . . , . . proposed project identified above. According to our information, there- a-re- no known .extant. populations .of. .F.edexal . or. .State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Endangered, Threatened or Special Concern Species that occur . . . . . . .wi-thin- .the• pro j ect -boundar.ies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . . • . Naturah Diversity Data Base -informat-ion. i.nclud.es . al.l . . . . . . . . . • • • . . information regarding critical biologic resources available to us at -the- time, -of• the -request... - -This - information. Is . a. .compilation .of. . . . . . . . data collected over the years by the Natural Resources Center' s Geological. and- Natural Histor.y. Survey and .cooperating. units. .o.f . . . . . . . . . . . DEP, private conservation groups and the scientific community. This information. -is not .necessarily. the. result. .of. comprehensive. . . . . . . . . . or site-specific field investigations. Consultations with the Data- Base- should. -not. be . substituted. .for. on-.site .surveys. required, , . . . . . . . for environmental assessments. Current research projects and new contributors -continue. .to. identify. additional. populations .of. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . species and locations of habitats of concern, as well as, enhance existing - data: . • Such new. information .is. incorporated . in.to .the . . . . . . . . . . . . Date Base as it becomes available. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Please contact me if you have further questions ( 566-3540) . Thank. you. for• - consulting- the• Na-tural. .Diversity. .Data .Bas.e. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 1� Sn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . .R N.OVlJ 1993 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GN Utv �GOADS . . OC . . . . 1 STATE OF CONNECTICUT STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION CONNECTICUT HISTORICAL COMMISSION November 4, 1993 Mr. Sebastian J. Sbalcio Consultant Design CONNDOT 2800 Berlin Turnpike Newington, CT Subject: Deming Street Reconstruction South Windsor, CT CONNDOT #132-XXX Dear Mr. Sbalcio: The State Historic Preservation Office has reviewed the above-named project. This office notes that prehistoric archaeological site #132-034 is located in immediate proximity to the proposed project area. Therefore, we recommend that a professional reconnaissance survey be undertaken to identify all archaeological resources which may exist within the project limits, including equipment storage and contractor work areas. All archaeological studies must be undertaken in accordance with our Environmental Review Primer for Connecticut' s Archaeological Resources. No ground disturbance or construction-related activities should be initiated until this office has had an opportunity to review and comment upon the recommended archaeological survey report. We anticipate working with CONNDOT regarding the expeditious furtherance of the proposed undertaking as well as in the professional management of Connecticut's archaeological heritage. For further information please contact Dr. David A. Poirier, Staff Archaeologist. Sincerely, Dawn Maddox Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer (@ cc: Dr. Nicholas Bellantoni/OSA Mr. Ralph Steadham/CONNDOT NoV 1)i == 199 TEL:(203)566-3005 CONSUL TAtilff 59 SOUTH PROSPECT ST. — HARTFORD, CONN. 06106 LOCALROAE''s 4 N FQUA L OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER f � 40 Capitol Region STP-Urban Program Traditional Roadway Projects NOTE.•All concept team approvals are contingent on favorable outcome from the required public meeting. ::::::»::::g>:>:: .;�<i%::::;:::<;:::.:<::::;>;>:;:<::::.:i>:�i:::::>::::;:<:5:i r.i^:i i :i;i: i ii:»S'ii•'``i:+:;i�;«:::t::>%:;::.:•23>':>::??:iii n ::<:> :::»:<•:�•ti::;•:::::::::i:::rc:>:::•:i::;::::':>:.::::<::i:;;;>: .::::.:::::;:. ;>:.:.:.::.::a:;;:•r;::>::.>:.::•.;:;>:�:.;;:rs;S::::::f;;;:: - ?> iS`.' ?a #3ii ?iii :;asii: ##s`i`;::: 5 i:`'i'r'i•: i%`i:iiSi??'i"' :ii>::: :::?. :.::. :.,.:::...;.. . Town. ... ........ ..............Pro eat ................ :;::;••:::: ........... ...... . t.Tcam;:;•:::;:::�:.;.::.:;::�;:.;;::::::::::::::......:..::::. .:................:;. :. ........................................... ...........................::..::::::::::::::.....Pro ..: .; ,•..:...:,::::::................. ............... . :..>....................... .....................1.:................ ..........................:... escrl tlon,............................. . .. ................................ ...............:::.P::::::.....,......... .... . .,::.:.::.::::.,:::::::.. ::.,............... ........................................ .............................................:...:......................................:... .................................. ... a.............. . ::::::::.:::............... ..........::::.:.:.:::::::::..:........................::.:.:::::::.::::::::.....................:.::::::.::::::::...................:::.:.:::.::..:.::.:.:.:::..... ........:.:.::.::::..:::....... ....::.::::::.::.: :•.: .... . ,........................:...... :::::::: .:;: .:::.:..................._..................Stu ux.....:... ca ............................ ..........:................................:.::::.:.�:..:..............................::::.::::..............................:::::::::.:....... .. ....... ................. ........ ...Recommenda ... ...... ........................ ....:..c....................:.,.. ........... .. . ........... .............:.::::.:::::............................::..:::::. , . ,::::.;:. ton... ;..ol t t na :. ..... .:... g. 1• ne Bloomfield Reconstruct from Rt 218 to Rt 178. Reduce curve Add l a e M 1 Ave 1223 000 $1 269 000 :'• Concerns raise operational lanes to Rt 178/Maple intersection. � ;::;:;:::;:, APPr Conc �' public meeting. Tow n must reso lve East Hartford Burnham St Reconstruct Burnham St .on from 0 m Route S to Dolores Dri ve a .40 mile). 1,250,000 S1,508,000 Approved street closing issue ' •..........::....:•:::::::::»: befo rcproceeding. ,.. creasy. :• Reconstruct Elm St from Rt 220 to Washington Rd(.40 mile). .. Enfield Elm St 870,755 51,013 000 142 Zd$ Approved.Add operational lane to Elm/Rt 220 intersection. r trQS(mefeas Farrington Rt6/Rt177 Add operational lanes to Rt 177 approaches 1,250,000 $0 -1,250,000 Project funded under dropped from Dropped. alternate program. STP-CR program Arterial street resurfacing& 8 S proleds approved 2 projects not Need scope dr Cos! Hanford recomt See separate description of llatdford arterial street projects. 2,401,222 53,334,000 932 778 :.: 2>tol approved.. approved. >:> ee»eenC Manchester Tolland Tm ke/Parker Add operational lanes to intersection of Tolland Turnpike ::....+� P Parker Rd(entrance to industrial ark) 420,270 $287,000 -133,270 Approved. Can be initiated. Add operational lanes to the intersection of North Mai Approved substitute Manchester Oakland/North Main n St.& 400,427 $233,000 -167,427 ed. Netd TIl" Oakland St. Approv project but not in .` TIP. dvHendmgiit ».:: Intersection improvements at 5 locations: :::::ks: ;.x:.,::::.x•5c•;:-:-; 1 Rt 175/Rt 176-add turn lan es ed PP;:;<>;;:;;:.>::>;;;;::•ss:>::: Checking signal •'•.> z'>''> 3<:>`::<':#:>z:»':: 2 W.Hartford/Ch Hill:upgrade signal Newington 5 intersection improvements �*Y PSn 476,300 Not Not ;Need nrort tno #2 di warrants on#2. Yeedscopcdl cost 3.Willard/Hallenn:new signal available available ?;: Seekin T 4.Church/Richard:new signal 8 t installat ion for 3 5.Church/Pane:upgrade signal :�::��..::>::>;::.�::•:•;;•:•; Roc ky ky Hill Silas Deanne Highway Conduct traffic study from Townline Rd to Dividend Rd. 60,000 $60,000 0 Approved. Consultant selection. ••Has•been initiated. Simsbury Rt10/Wolcott Rd Realign&reconstruct intesection of Route 10&Wolcott Rd.(.20 562,600 $470,000 2,600mile) Approved-ed. Can be initiated. Reconstruct.30 mile of Denning Rd as part of b around the South Windsor Denting Rd bypass 8 SSO 0 00 $62 Bue roved t194interaection. Approved. Co nstruct.25 mile frontage road ca st at side eo V 8 f Rt 83 fimn Vernon Rt 83 service a rod roved ' 559 3 30 $640 000 APP with revised Tow n concu rred Wilshire Rd to drivewayto Frank's Nurse ::»::� 70> •`iPE`•`: Nursery. scope. with revised scope. Implement t part of new circulation on pla n for Elmwoo d ar ea 0 Su thEsst Indus 'a to 1-C ommcrcia 1 Area). ( Reconst ruct Ta co l tt d ' West Hartfor d o T (colt d- R SEIC A Tow n proceeding 1,250,000 P 1 8 -.S 305 000 , ed mile Reconstruct ��%'SS O�( ). R Distract 4 intescetions on South Quaker Lane and _,;.r.:.:::::.:::::::: APP�' z:�<�otfllriC:Gdse` New ParkAve, with design A Ad d lions(lanes at int ersection ton of Da Hill nd&Marsha oPC1+ Il Win Y dsor Mar-lull Phel Rd Ps 1,250,000 00 $1 17 000 PhelpsRd. ReconstrucC.7 miles of Marshall Phelps. 5 r.... •••• Approved. Windsor Locks Rt 159 Widen quarter mile section from Elm St to Rt 140 bridge. Coned 1,100,000 $1,077,000 23,000 Approved. roadwa flooding roblcm PPS Can be initiated. page 1 b w STATE OF CONNECTICUT pay NNECTtcG yo DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PA MST 24 WOLCOTT HILL ROAD, P.O. BOX A `r OF T,,,e`'` 4rrf WETHERSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 06129-0801 Phone: 666-7230 August 16, 1993 Ms. Jean E. Zurbrigen Town Manager Town Hall 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Dear Ms. Zurbrigen: Subject: Project No. 132-XXX Reconstruction of Deming Street from Clark Street to Buckland, Town of South Windsor Enclosed for your information is a report of the meeting held on July 20, 1993 at the South Windsor Town Hall and at the project site regarding this project. Should you have any questions concerning this project, please contact Mr. Drew Colburn, Project Engineer, at telephone number 666-7310. Very truly yours, Sebastian J. Sbalcio Engineer of Consultant Design Bureau of Engineering and Highway Operations Enclosure cc: Mr. Francis McMahon, Capitol Region Council of Governments Ms. Marcia Banach, Director of Planning 1 Mr. Michael Gantick. njrQCfnr nf.plihl_,_wn_�5 �R► ~ RECfnrEO AUG 1 9 1993 SOUTHWNOM PUBLIC WOWS DEPT. 0 An Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled orRecovered Paper Page 1 of 5 CONNECTICUT DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BUREAU OF ENGINEERING AND HIGHWAY OPERATIONS REPORT OF MEETING STATE PROJECT NO. : 132-XXX DATE OF MEETING: July 20, 1993 ROUTE: Reconstruction of Deming Street TOWN: South Windsor LOCATION OF MEETING: South Windsor Town Hall and at site SUBJECT OF MEETING: Project Concept Team Meeting IN ATTENDANCE: Department of Transportation (DOT) Alen Atighechi, Project Manager Drew Colburn, Project Engineer Douglas Hummel, Rights of Way Robert Tworkowski, Traffic Engineering David Kilpatrick, Pavement Management David Levesque, Cost Estimating Stephen Delpapa, Environmental Planning Capitol Region Council of Governments Tony Kauzem Baihaghy Town of South Windsor Marcia Banach - Director of Planning Michael Gantick - Director of Public Works Transactions and Determinations: This meeting was arranged by DOT's Consultant Design Section to define the purpose, scope and cost estimate of the proposed Deming Street Reconstruction in the Town of South Windsor. Information gathered from field inspections and various DOT sections are also included in the report. Report of Meeting July 20, 1993 Page 2 of 5 The Guidelines and Procedures for Project Development under the 1991 ISTEA STP Urban Funds was used as the basis of discussion to determine Town and State responsibilities with respect to funding, preliminary engineering and construction. A copy of the guidelines is attached. _ Existing Conditions: . Deming Street with Clark Street and Buckland Road form a bypass corridor around the Route 30/Route 194/Buckland Road (Wapping Center) intersection. Clark Street has already been reconstructed, Buckland Road is under construction. The reconstruction of Deming Street will complete the improvement of the corridor. The existing pavement on Deming Street varies between 19 to 22 feet except in the vicinity of the Plum Gully Brook crossing where the width is 30 feet. The pavement appears to be in reasonably good condition, with bituminous curbing near the intersection of Buckland Road and in the area of the Plum Gully Brook crossing. The narrower portion of the roadway does not have proper cross slope . There exists a high point on Deming Street west of the Plum Gully Brook crossing which presents a sight line problem. Storm drainage exists along the portion of roadway in the area of the Plum Gully Brook crossing but otherwise is scattered, consisting of paved leakoffs and catch basins off the roadway proper. The existing land use is residential along both sides of Deming Street with an office complex near the Buckland Road intersection on the northwest side of Deming Street. In addition an historic property is located in this area. Traffic With the proposed improvements to Deming Street the Average Daily Traffic projected to the year 2000 would be 3800. The proposed improvements would aid in improving the Wapping Center intersection Level of Service from E to D for the base year 2000. Accident Data: No accident data was available for Deming Street. However, the project will alleviate traffic problems and the number of accidents at the Wapping Center intersection which experienced 65 accidents over a three year period prior to its reconstruction. Report of Meeting July 20, 1993 Page 3 of 5 Project Scope: The proposed improvements include: * Full depth reconstruction of the roadway to a uniform 30 foot width fora length- of 1600 feet. * Installation- of 4,000 feet of bituminous concrete lip curb-ing and upgrading of existing storm water drainage consisting of approximately 1600 feet of new pipe and 12 catch basins. * Improve the horizontal and vertical alignment to meet AASHTO standards. Rights of Way: The existing R.O.W. is approximately twenty feet wide through the project. The proposal is to increase the Right of Way width to 50 feet. 15 foot strip takes will be required on both sides of Deming Street. The takes will be required from approximately sixteen property owners. The possibility exists that as many as five properties may require variances along the project. Utilities• The following utilities are located within the project area: Town owned Sanitary Sewer Connecticut Water Company Southern New England Telephone Connecticut Light and Power Cox Cable The pole line will require relocation as it is currently in close proximity to the existing edge of pavement. Fire hydrants will also require relocation. Environmental Impact: This project is expected to be classified as a Categorical Exclusion. Environmental permits that may be required are as follows: . Inland-Wetland Army Corps Flood Plain Management The wetland that may be impacted as a result of this project is in the area of the Plum Gully Brook crossing. The Town is currently in the process of determining the need for upgrading or replacing the crossing of Plum Gully Brook. The Soil Conservation Report of Meeting July 20, 1993 Page 4 of 5 Service has been retained by the Town to conduct the study. Preliminary Engineering and Construction: Geometric design standards will be in accordance with AASHTO minimum guidelines. for Urban Collectors. The Town of South Windsor indicated that they intend to do the design in house. - . The survey -i:s currently .in progress, no design work has been conducted. The Town concurred with the ISTEA guidelines, that the State be responsible for advertising, construction administration and inspection of this project. Funding: Preliminary Engineering 100% Town R.O.W. 80% Federal, 10% State, 10% Town Construction 80% Federal, 20% State Public Involvement: The Town was informed of the State Guidelines regarding public involvement. A copy of the public involvement guidelines with a sample press release and formal mailing was given to the Town. Another copy is attached. The Town will analyze the comments expressed as a result of the public involvement program and will notify the Department and CRCOG in writing of the Town's position on the project. Cost Estimate: Contract Items and Contingencies $ 300,000, Incidentals to Construction $ - - 63,000 Utilities T­-.TB.D. R.O.W. $ 265,000 Total $ 8,000 This estimate does not include costs associated with any upgrading of the Deming Street structure over Plum Gully Brook. Areas of Concern: * Strip takes may result in making 3 to 5 lots nonconforming, requiring zoning variances. The right of way cost would increase significantly if variances are not granted. * Structure replacement cost associated with the Plum Gully crossing. The replacement or upgrading of this structure would significantly increase the cost of the project. • r Report of Meeting July 20, 1993 Page 5 of 5 Recommendation: Pending the results_ of the public involvement program, the results of the study- of- the- hydraulic capacity of the Plum Gully Brook crossing,- _arid its affect on project cost, this project is being recommended for -inclusion in the STP Urban Program. SUBMITTED BY: DATE: 8//3 /93 Drew Colburn, Project Engineer APPROVED BY: DATE: Afeii_Ati7gWeA.k, Project Manager GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES TO MUNICIPALITIES FOR PROJECT DEVELOPMENT UNDER 1991 ISTEA STP URBAN FUNDS The procedures set forth are for projects involving improvements to local roads which utilize federal Surface Transportation Program - (STP) Urban Funds. When a project funded under_ this program is located exclusively on a State highway, the Department of Transportation (DOT) will undertake the engineering work with eitKer in-house staff or engage a consultant. If the project should involve both a local and intersecting State highway, the DOT will evaluate the situation and determine if it or the municipality will have the lead role in the Preliminary Engineering' (P.E. ) phase. This will be determined first, by which of the roads has the greatest involvement and second, by the capabilities of the particular municipality to perform the work. I. PLANNING/PROJECT DEVELOPMENT A. IDENTIFICATION: The Municipality will identify the proposed local improvement together with an initial project justification, scope of work and cost estimate. This information is to be submitted to the Regional Planning Agency (RPA) . The proposed local improvement must as a minimum, have a total project cost of $100,000 for attributable areas and $50,000 for non-attributable areas. The RPA will screen all projects sponsored by the Municipalities and forward the initial project information for selected priority projects to the Field Coordinator at the DOT. B. SCOPING & COST ESTIMATING: The Field Coordinator will notify the Local Roads Section of proposed new projects. Local Roads will inform the Project Concept Team (PCT) and arrange a meeting with the Municipality, RPA & PCT to conduct a field review of the proposed project. The purpose of the field review is to obtain a clear understanding of the problem and need, identify all potential impacts, assess alternative solutions and arrive at a realistic project scope, cost estimate and develop a project schedule for the engineering, right of way and construction phases. The scoping will consider such aspects as the character of the neighborhood, the potential presence of contaminated materials, rights of way requirements, social , economic and historic impacts and environmental permit requirements. C. PUBLIC INFORMATION: Following the field review, the sponsor will conduct an informational meeting to ensure the public is aware of the proposal and has an opportunity. to express its view. D. TIP ENDORSEMENT: The next step in the project development phase will be the RPA action in establishing regional project priorities and the RPA and State TIP endorsement process. The Municipality is to commence design activities within six months of the TIP endorsements. NOTE: Sponsors that -fail to meet their responsibilities or to complete activities in a timely fashion may lose the priority assigned to their project. The RPA will be responsible for establishing and imposing penalties on sponsors for failing to commence design activities on time. June 1 , 1993 E, RECOMMENDED PROJECT MEMORANDUM . (RPM) : The Field Coordinator will provide the Local Roads Section with the TIP endorsed projects. Local Roads will prepare the RPM document for circulation and Department approval . The Project Initiation will occur within one month of State and Federal TIP approvals. F. REGIONAL MONITORING: Each RPA is to establish a technical. monitoring/status review committee. It is suggested that the committee convene every other month to discuss each TIP endorsed project within the annual element and- upcoming fiscal year. Each municipality with a funded project is to attend -the status° review meeting. Sponsors will report on their progress relative to design development, permit requirements, right of way and the overall project schedule. The municipalities will be held accountable for maintaining schedule commitments. Sponsors who fail to meet their responsibilities and do not complete activities in a reasonable time may jeopardize the priority of the project. The RPA will be responsible for establishing and imposing penalties for non-performance or lack of adherence to schedules by sponsors. Upon receipt of Federal authorization of the construction phase, RPA monitoring of the project will no longer be required. II. PROJECT DESIGN A. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS: The Municipality will be responsible for the preparation of an environmental document when a project does not qualify for categorical exclusion. The sponsor can assign this item -of work to a project consultant. The environmental document must receive FHWA approval . B. PERMITS: The Municipality is to submit all required permit applications six months prior to completion of the design plans. This is to allow sufficient time to receive the permits prior to advertising. Permit requirements will be initially identified during the project development phase. C. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS: Municipalities may perform the design with in-house staff or contract with a consultant to prepare the required plans, specifications and estimates for local road projects. Sponsors will be responsible for 100% of the design costs (see Section V-Program Financing) . Geometric design standards for roadways will be in accordance with AASHTO minimum guidelines. With proper justification, the Municipality may request an exception when elements of the design do not meet minimum AASHTO standards. Local geometric design standards greater than AASHTO minimums will be allowed. When the Department is responsible for advertising, award and inspection of a local road contract, State Standard Specifications Form 814 shall be used. If the sponsor has standardized roadway specifications which are formatted after the 814, they may be used by the Municipality with the Department' s prior approval . The Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) is to be followed in the design of signs;. 'signals, markings and devices placed on, over or adjacent to a street. The scope of the project may impose the use of additional industry standards, i .e. bridge standards, etc. -Z- June 1 , 1993 D. DESIGN SUBMISSION: The sponsor will be required to make several technical submissions to the State for review and comment; the preliminary design submission (30% stage), the semi-final submission (70% stage) and the final submission (90% stage) . Each submission will have different requirements. The Local Roads Section will inform the Municipality of what is required for each project. A general review, as to form and content, will be performed by the Department. Their comments will be offered to the town for consideration. E. PUBLIC INFORMATIONA-L/PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS: State and Federal policy requires the spon-sor--to provide- the public with the opportunity to comment on the proposed design. The Local Roads Section will advise the Municipality of the type of public involvement the project will require and what steps must be taken by the sponsor to fulfill the legal intent. III. RIGHT OF WAY A. RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION: The Municipality may be responsible for acquiring the right of way. The State will make this determination based on the Municipalities' ability and current Department 'obligations. If the local road project involves relocation of owners or tenants, the Department will administer all right of way activities for that project. An Informational Package prepared by the Department's Office of Rights of Way will be presented to the Municipality. This package fully explains procedures which must be followed to satisfy all legal requirements. The Right of Way process must begin early in the project schedule, i .e. , preliminary design, to allow sufficient time to acquire the necessary property by the advertising date. Close coordination with the Office of Rights of way is expected. IV. PROJECT ADVERTISEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION A. ADVERTISING: In general , the State will be responsible for processing and advertising all STP Urban projects. A Municipality may perform construction advertising and inspection on a local road project subject to review and approval by the Department. The Municipality must provide a written request to the Department no later than the semi-final design submission. The Department, through the Office of Construction, will meet with the sponsor to determine its capabilities, experience and staff qualifications for advertising and inspecting the proposed project. If the request is approved, a final submission of plans, estimates and specifications will be submitted to the Department' s Contract Development Section, which. will ensure that the proper "boiler plate" information is contained in the PS&E package. The Municipality - will be required to advertise and conduct the bidding process' in such a way as' to assure an opportunity for .free, open and competitive bid proposals. The attached procedure entit led "Advertising Procedures for Construction Contracts Administered by Municipalities" is to be followed. -3- June 1 , 1993 B. AWARD: All projects advertised for construction by the Department will normally be awarded within 60 days of the bid opening. The Department or its consultant will inspect these projects. The Municipality will have no official responsibility on their projects, but will be kept informed and invited to attend the preconstruction meeting. C. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT: Municipalities approved for inspection work will be required to follow established construction management and record keeping practices. On a monthly basis, State personnel from District Construction will visit the project to review the operation, construction practices and job records..- Municipalities that wish to hire a consultant to perform the inspection services will be_required to follow the attached procedures for Consultant Selection, Negotiation and Contract Monitoring for Town administered projects. The procedures developed by the State and Federal Highway Administration are to ensure that the selection is made based on qualifications through an equitable selection process. Municipalities that have a written process (which follows the general intent of Federal Guidelines 23 CFR Part 172) may request a substitution. The official local process must have local Council approval . The Department will review such written requests. Municipalities found to have an acceptable program will be placed on a pre-approved list and will be required to resubmit an annual verification. The State must be informed immediately of any changes made to a previously approved local process. NOTE: If a Municipality' hires a consultant during. the P.E. phase for design services and as a part of their scope of services or Agreement with the consultant indicates inspection work as part of their future assignment, the municipality will be required to follow the aforementioned selection procedures for P.E. This is required to satisfy Federal authorization. of funds for construction. D. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE AND CLOSEOUT: All projects will require a semi-final and final inspection prior to acceptance of the project by the State. Post-construction audits will also be required in accordance with the State/Municipal Construction Agreement to ensure that final expenditures both participating and non-participating are properly documented. V. PROGRAM FINANCING: A. The Municipality will be responsible for funding 100% of the P.E. phase without Federal or State reimbursement. The P.E. phase is construed to include all engineering and environmental activities prior to the construction phase and exclusive of Right of Way activities. The Right of Way phase will be shared at an 80% Federal , 100/10 State and 10% local funding ratio. -4- June 1 , 1993 The Construction phase will be shared at an 80% Federal and 20% State funding ratio. Construction of the project would not utilize local funds, unless the contract included certain non-participating items of work requested by the Municipality. 1� It should be noted that for any of the three phases identified above, Federal-aid reimbursement can only be approved for those activities which occur after FHWA authorization is given. B. Projects located-on -a -State facility. The P.E. phase will be performed by the Department or a consultant selected by the Department. Federal and State funds will be utilized at an 80%/20% ratio. The Right of Way phase will be ' shared at an 80% Federal and 20% State funding ratio. The construction phase will be shared at an 80% Federal and 20% State funding ratio. Again, project construction would not utilize local funds unless there were non-participating items of work included in the contract by the municipality. Disk J4: GP June 1 , 1993 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM GUIDELINES It is the Department's policy to keep persons informed and involved when projects are undertaken. It is important that the community share their concerns with the municipality to assist in the project's development. If there is adequate interest, an informational meeting should be conducted. The public involvement program should begin at the outset of the project and be well documented. Such a program is to consist of ( 1) issuing news releases, and (2) conducting a formal mailing to parties affected by the project. News Release: The municipality is requested to issue a news release based on the attached sample and have it published in area newspapers having a` substantial circulation in the project area. Also attached is a list of area legislators and agencies who should be sent -a copy of the news release to inform them of the project. Please forward to ConnDOT written notification that the news release was published in area newspapers and sent to all others on the list. Formal Mailing: The municipality is also requested to do the formal mailing. Attached is a sample letter which can be used to assist the municipality in conducting the mailing. To fulfill the intent of the Department's public involvement program, the letter is to be sent, at minimum, to each affected abutting property owner in the project area and each of the local agencies, commissions, etc. on the attached ' list. Also, the municipality should send a copy of the letter to any area agency, commission, public advisory group, etc. that-may be interested in the project. The municipality should verify in writing to ConnDOT that the formal mailing is done, as required by State policy, and provide a list of names and addresses of each abutting property owner and others who are mailed the letter. SAMPLE NEWS RELEASE {CITY or TOWN name}, CONNECTICUT - The {City or Town} of {City or Town name} has begun the preliminary design of a proposed. project for the {brief-project description} . The project is being designed by the {City or Town} , and recommended for construction under a Federal program-.administered by the Connecticut Department of Transportation _c,,� F/�= It is the {City or Townl 's and the State's policy to keep persons informed and involved when such projects are undertaken. It is important that the community share its concerns to assist in the project's development. The {City or Town} will conduct an informational meeting if there is adequate interest from the public. At this time it is not anticipated that a formal public hearing will be necessary. It is planned_ to {brief description of projectl . The project schedule indicates that the preliminary design plans will be available {Month, Yearl*. Based upon a preliminary assessment, the construction cost will be approximately ${Dollar amount} . It is anticipated that the Federal Highway Administration will provide 80% of the cost, with the {City or Townl providing 20%. Anyone interested in obtaining further information or providing input may do so by contacting {Name of designated City or Town official} . • a NEWS RELEASE DISTRIBUTION Hon. Christopher J. Dodd Mr. William H. Hernandez, Jr. U.S.Senator U.S. Department of Housing & Urban 100 Great Meadow Road Development Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109 One Hartford Square West Suite 204 Hon. Joseph I. Liebe"_rman Hartford, Connecticut 06106 U.S. Senator one Commercial Plaza. Mr. William Ireland III 21st Floor State Conservation Engineer Hartford, Connecticut 06103 U.S. Department of Agriculture 16 Professional Park Road Hon. Barbara B. Kennelly Storrs, Connecticut 06268-1299 U.S. Representative 1st District Department of Interior 1 Corporate Center, llth. Floor Environmental Project Review Hartford, Connecticut 06360 William Green Federal Building 600 Arch Street Hon. John B. Larson Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106 State Senator 3rd District Mr. John W. Shannahan Legislative Office Building - State Historic Preservation officer Hartford, Connecticut 06106-1591 Historical Commission 59 South Prospect Street Hon. John W. Thompson Hartford, .Co_ nnecticut 06106 State Representative 13th District Connecticut Department of Legislative office Building Economic Development Hartford, Connecticut 06106-1591 210 Washington Street Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Mr. Denis Cunningham Connecticut Council on Asst. Director-Water Resources Unit Environmental Quality Connecticut Department of state Office Building Environmental Protection 165 Capitol Avenue State Office Building Hartford, Connecticut 06106. 165 Capitol Avenue Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Mr. William Heubner Connecticut Construction Industries U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 912 Silas Deane Highway 424 Trapelo Road Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109 Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Mr. Gary N. Hamby Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration Abraham A. Ribiccff Federal Building 450 Main Street, Room 635 Hartford, Connecticut 06106 SAMPLE LETTER PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION {Date} To: {Abutting Prctgerty- Owners and Those on Enclosed List} Dear: Subject: {Project title} The {City or Town} of {Name of City or Town} is initiating plans to {brief project description} . The _present schedule indicates the preliminary design plans will be available {date} . Based upon preliminary assessment, the construction cost •will be approximately ${dollar amount} . It is anticipated that the Federal Highway Administration will provide 80% of the construction cost with the {City or Town} providing 20%. It is the {City or Town} 's and the State's policy to keep persons informed . and involved when such projects are undertaken. It is important that the community share its concerns with us to assist in the project's development. The {City or Town} will conduct an informational meeting if there is adequate interest from the area residents. At this time, it is not anticipated that a formal public hearing will be necessary. Anyone interested in obtaining further information or providing input may do so by contacting {name and title of designated municipal official} . Very truly yours, {name of municipal official} {title} cc: Sebastian J. Sbalcio, Engineer of Consultant Design, ConnDOT . FROM:CT.DOT ENG.CONS.DESIGN TO: 203 644 3791 SEP 24, 1993 ?:34AM P.01 STATE -OF CONNECTICUT �i 1:y• ,ti CeM■eelk4r DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 24 WOLCOTT HILL ROAD, P.O. DRAWER A. WETHERSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 06109-0801 •*�* t OIL ��✓�/� Phone: � V To.- • N • t Department,, ! /Ie- r- i Date: /9 Number of pages to fallow: i )laoe,,e [r-, Iver,.sti7rb•P •L3 ._ he.-e 1,5 7F 7 �'Y _ '° j'e- ..7�t_� 0 C. �� '7 r•7•'�',�/"' >�"„�+"" e:J;;,i f� YJf.J°+ .C• `f�'1�- i"r'fr^ i't' +`L"i"4"•C•t � ✓ I J3 7`!7t 11cx1� 7't�a;rCLlfr' �+ fr1 f!•"C7c'rCtf'ti l`^�rs7c-fr7(7�a'1�t1"]r �— _ c#'' /rcxf^r9 'at'r fc;'t d nr^► � �r•c'��*`v�,c.�.•t Arl l' Me-. �!f ':�'l�+l 7 f�?+'i c'�yrJ fr,C. e•' �• /i�fF7C �tlG. 7 C C?f?`tr71t tC/ l 2�'t'Cf•{/C[ Y"�Cf f:I 7if E" �""!(.1 JfI C 7T p r� r7 CA r f.7 Y�eg a i ct� 7-3! I 1 Location: 160 Pascone P14m Netiftg on, Connecticut 116111 kAX Telephone: (203) 666-7363 FROM:CT.DOT ENG.CONS.DESIGN TO: 203 644 3781 SEP 24, 1993 7:35AM P.02 PU13L%C XNVOLVEWENT PRQGVJW GUX[1.EL%N9S AT THE PROJECT CONCEPT STAGN it is the Department's policy to keep persons informed and involved when projects are undortakon,, It ice important that the community share their concerns with the municipality to assist in the Project's development. Public Informational Meetiggi. The Municipality is requested to conduct, at a minimum, a public informational meeting. Thies mooting will afford the public an opportunity to support the project or express any concerns that they may have regarding the project. The meeting should be adequately publicized so that any interested parties may attend. Legal Notice: The Municipality is requested to publish a legal notice for Llie public informational meeting based on the attached sample and have it published in area newspapers having a substantial circulation in the project area. Alwo aLLexc:had 1b & list of area legislators and agencies who should be sent a copy of the legal notice to inform them of the project, Please forward to the Department written ltvLifluation that the legal notice was published in area newspapers and sent to all others on the list, Formal NailinQg The Municipality is also requested tea do the formal mailing. Attached is a sample letter which can be used to assist the Municipality in conducting the' mailing. To tulfill the intent Of the Departments publi.o involvement program, the letter is to be sent, at a minimum, to each affected abutting property owner in the project area and each of the local agenciese commissions, etc. on the attached list. Also, the Municipality should send a copy of the letter to any area agency® commission, public advisory group, etc. that may be interested ,in the project. The Municipality should verity in writing to the Department that the formal mailing is done, as required by State policy, and provide a list, of names and addresses of each abutting property owner and others who are mailed the letter. News Release: A news release in the area newspapers having a substantial circulation in the project area is highly recommended. Attached is a sample news release for the Municipality's use. Please forward to the Department written notification if a news release is published. NOTE: After suitable plans are developed which are capable of pictorially explaining to the general public the design under consideration, the ConnDOT's local Road Section will advise the municipality of the type of additional public involvement the project will require. i i I i I FROM:CT.DOT ENG.CONS.DESIGN TO: 203 644 3781 SEP 24, 1993 7:35AM P.03 SAMPLE LEGAL NOTICE FOR PUBLIC INFORMATIONAT, X.EET1 i LEGAL NOTICE lbrief ggroject description) i The {City or Tawas) of JCity or Town name) is in the process of initiating a proposed project for the {brief project desariptai.oAy. The project is being designed by the {City or Town), and recommended for construction under a Federal program administered by the Connecticut Department of Transportation. It is the (City or Town) 's and the State's policy to keep persons informed and involved when such projects are undertaken. It is important that the community share its concerns to assist in the project's development. It is planned to (brief description of project}. Based upon a preliminary assessment, the construction cast will be approximately $(Dollar amount). it is anticipated that the Federal Highway Administration will provide 80% of the project construction cost, with the State providing 20%. The (City or Tows►} will be responsible for all costs associated with the design of the project. i The (City or Town) has scheduled an informational public meeting for {time, date and location of meeting) to receive public input. A conceptual plan of the proposal will be available for review. Anyone interested in obtaining further information or providing input mAy can mo by rnntanting (Name of designated City or Town official). i t E E J� 1 E I FROM:CT.DOT ENG.CONS.DESIGN TO: 203 644 3781 SEP 24, 1993 7:3SAM P.04 SAMPLE LETTER i PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATYON f Tv: (AbuttiUq Property Owners and Those on Enclosed List} � i Dear: Subject: (Project title} The (City or Town} of (Name of city or Town) is initiating plans to (brief project description} . ]3ased upon preliminary assessment, the construction cost will be approximately $(dollar amount). It is anticipated that the Federal Highway Administration will provide 80% of the project construction cast with the State providing 20%. The (City or Town) will be responsible for all costs associated with the design of the project. It is the (City or Town)Ia. and the StateIa policy to keep persons informed and involved when such projects are undertaken. It is important that the community share its concerns with us to assist in the project's development. The (City or Town} has scheduled an informational public meeting for (time, date and location of meeting) to receive public input. Anyone interested in obtaining further information or providing input may do so by contacting (name and title of designated municipal official). Very truly yours, (name of munloi.pal official) �titia} i f cc: Sebastian J. Sbalcio, Engineer of consultant Design, ConnDOT i i FROM:CT.DOT ENG.CONS.DESIGN TO: 283 644 3781 SEP 249 1993 7:36AM P105 SAMPLE NEWS RELEASE i {CITY or TOWN name), CQNNECTXCUT .. The {City or Tern} of {City or Town name) is in the process of initiating a proposed project for the (brief project description) . The project is being designed by the (City or Town) , and ,recommended for construction under a Federal. -program administered by the Connecticut Department of Transportation. It is the {City or Towal 's and the State's policy to keep persons informed and involved when such projects are undertaken. It is important that the community share its concerns to 'assist in the project's development. The (City or Town) has scheduled an informational public meeting for Mime, date and location of Meeting} to receive public input. It is planned to (brief description of project) . Based upon a preliminary assessment, the construction cost will be approximately $(Deol lar amount) . It is anticipated that the Federal Highway Administration will provide 80% of the project construction cost, with the State providing 20%. The (City or Town) will be responsible for all costs associated with the design of the project. Anyone, interested in obtaining further information or providing input may do so by contacting (Name of designated City or Town official), i =ROM:CT.DOT ENG.CONS.DESIGN TO: 203 644 3781 SEP 24, 1993 7:37AM P.06 •e,. I NEWS RELEASE DISTRIEU2ION Ron. Christopher J. -Dodd Mr. William H. Hernandez,• fix. U.S.Senator U.S. Department of dousing urban 100 'areat Meadow Road Development Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109 One Hartford square West Suite 204 Hon. Joseph 1. Lieberman Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Lt.B. sona�ts�r , one Commercial Plaza Mr. William Ireland Ili 21st Floor State Conservation Enginaw.r Hartford, Connecticut 06103 U.S. department of Agriculture 16 Professional Park Road Bull. Barbara B. rennelly Storrs, Connecticut 06268-1299 U.S. Representative 1 sit District Dopart mart of interior 1 Corporate Center, 11th. Floor Environmental Project Review Hartford, Connecticut 06360 William Green 1!aderal Building 600 Arch Street Hon, John B. Larson Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106 state senator: 3rd District Mr. John w. shannahan Legislative Off~i.ra A01!ding State Historic Premervation Officer Hartford, Connecticut 06106«-1591 Historical Commission 59 south Prospect !Street Hon. Kevin F. Ronnie Hartford, Connecticut 06106 State Representative 14th Di.brief Cunitiou luut. Department of Legislative Office Building Economic Development Hartford, Connecticut 06106-1591 210 Washington street Hartford, Connecticut 06106 mr. uenie cunni.ngham Connecticut Council on Aest. Director-Water Resources unit Environmental Quality Connecticut Department of state Office Building Environmental Protection 165 Capital Avenue State Office Building Hartford, Connecticut 06306 165 Capitol Avenue Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Mr. William-Heubnor Connecticut Construction Xadustries v.s. Army corps of Engineers 912 Silas Deane Highway 424 Trarelo Road Wot«horofiold, Connecticut 06109 Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Mr. Gary N. Hamby Division Administrator f rederel. Highway Acinaini&Ux.•rxLiVu Abraham A. Ri.bicoff Federal Building 450 Hain sit rAat:, Room 635 Hartford, Connecticut 06106 i i FROM=CT.DOT ENG.CONS.DESIGN TO: 203 644 3781 SEP 24, 1993 7:37AM P.07 f DISTRIBUTION - PRELINIINARX NOTIFICATION LETTER I Official, Planning and Zoning Commission Official, Zoning Board of Appeals Official, Conservation Commission Offiaialtinland Wetlands Commission Official, Chief of Police Offic,ialr Chief of Fire Department Official, Superintendent of Schools i i 1 E i C 3 i 1 DRAFT NEWS RELEASE SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT The Town of South Windsor is in the process of initiating a proposed project for the Reconstruction of Deming Street from Clark Street to Buckland Road. The project is being designed by the Town, and recommended for construction under a _ Federal program administered by the Connecticut Department of Transportation. It is the Town' s and the State' s policy to keep persons informed and involved when such projects are undertaken. It is important that the community share its concerns to assist in the project's development. The Town has scheduled an informational public meeting for at the South Windsor Town Hall to receive public input. It is planned to reconstruct Deming Street from Clark Street to Buckland Road, a samm:,c. Based upon a preliminary assessment, the construction cost will be approximately $830,000 It is anticipated that the Federal Highway Administration will provide 80% of the project construction cost, with the State providing 20% . The Town will be responsible for all costs associated with the design of the project. Anyone interested in obtaining further. information or providing input may do so by contacting Michael J. Gan tick, Director of Public Works, or Jerry C. Iazzetta, Town Engineer, at 644-2511. EARLY LFIt�ISH �LY 19ti8 1994 _._ 1995 START _ 50 OCT NDV DEC JAfa FEB MAR AF'F: tVf .JUN-JUL_ fI�G 5t P_OCT NOV DEC' lf3N FEB tk�k FaPR F1AY JUIi ULJNXJ N O1SEPg3A !RnOCTq!3 SURVEY: : O1OCTg3A 18FEBg4 PRELIM. ENC-aNEERING: : WA : 160CT9!3 2'9OCT9'J PRE DESIGN COORDINATION 28OGTg3 2'?OCTg3 A PUBLIC INFORMATION MTG 15PbjVG3 14DEC�l;I CULVERT S1-uG'f - 15DEGg3 13JAW44 = CULVERT ESTIMATE—TO1•aN ATTY. : 19FEB94 2OMARg4 DOT REVIEN 1 gFEBg4 13FEBg5 R. G. W. ACQUISITION 1 gFEB94 L)-R-1AR94 :i INITIAL REVT E:W= 1 gFEBg4 1 Lr4ppg4 I EdACC A P P L I CATI D N m, 1gFEB94 25MAR94 P&Z APPLICATI[iN 1 gFEB94 1 gt'lAYg4 .I ARMY CORP APPLICATION : 19FEB94 19JUNg4 D EP APPLICATION K2K 1 gFEBg4 25F EBq 4 COST ESTI t111"E PF:ELI t4_ „.,. 19FEB94 2014AR94 TOWN C-Di}blC I I_ PUB. NEARING t 21MAR94 1clMAY94 SEMI FINAL DESIGN 21MARg4 1 q4A'Y•94 SPECIFIGATIONS L,oMy94 18 ILIN94 DOT REV E W ' 19.NJtd94 02MUG114 FINAL D ES l GN e f]3AI.1G94 01SEP94 DOT RE%,`IE:k 'g O3AUGg4 O'-AUG94 Ct7 ST ESTIMATE r I N ALA 03ALIG94 1 FAUG94 : FINAL REVIEW= : O2SE'P94 15SEP94 IUD D RE5S i,'0 MEN T c 1 65EP94 1#f+ICJ1r94 8 I D 15NQVg4 9'•3JAN95 AWARD 01 N TRACTG"' ' to 14•JAN9S 2SJANg5 : PRE-CDNSTR_ MTG. : p9APR95 06AU,GgS CONSTRUCTION RUN DATE 1 gDCTg3 . DE5C START DATE 01SEP143 AM I LESTDNE DATA DATE 000GTffJ CRITICAL FINISH DATE 06AU695 L-- PROGRESS ' PLANNED SURETRAK DEff..No ST. REGDNSTRUCTIDtI - 1 �� - t 'F:;w� ;}. �ti �y.•j h �wt� }'S_ � � '1. x SAwn w. r ys` r: Update Activities "DEMING„ Activity Rem Start Finish Number Description Pt.t E3ur Date Actual Elate Actual 14:400. . . . . . PRE DESIGN COORDINATION. . . . 0 14 160CT93 . 290CT93 1026. . :. . . . SURVEY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 23 OISEP93 A 30OC E"T9'3 1030. . . ,. . ,. PEREL_IK ENGINEEERING. . . . . .. . . .. 6 134.4 OIOCT93 A 1.8 EB94 1032. „ . ,. ,. . PUBLIC INFORMATION MTtS. . . . . 0 0 2SOC T9;3 . 270C,,`I.•93 103;3. . . . . . CULVERT STUDY .. . ,. . . . „ ,. . ,. . 0 30 ISNOV98 „ 14+DEC:93 :1034,. „ „ . . . DOT REVIEW. . . . . . . „ . . . . . . ,. . „ 0 30 1.9F��B94 . 20IVIA R94 10 35. . . . . ., R. O. W. ACQUISITION. . . . . . . . . 0 360 19 E S94• . :. SF'E B95 1036. . . . . . CULVERT EST:{Iv AT •�_l..riWN ATTY. 0 30 ISDE.C93 . 133AN94 104.0. . . . . .. INITIAL. REVIEW „ . . . 0 14 19E=EE•S94 . 04t"iAR94 104+1. . . . . . IWAi C: APPLICATION. . . . . . . „ . 0 60 19F'E:.894 19AF-'R 94 „ 1042. . . . . ., E'##Z APPLICATION 0 3S 19F•E894 . 2SMAER94 1043. . . . . . ARMY CORP APPLICATION. . . . . . 0 90 19F E894 . 1.9E''II'••4Y94 1045. .. . . . DE_P APPLICATION. . . ,. ., . . . . . . . 0 120 19FE:.S94 . 'i S,3UN94 1050.. . . . . ,. COST ESTIMATE PRELIM. .. . „ ,. . . 0 I 1.9;~E894 . 2SFE=:E 94 1055. .. . . . ,. TOWN "COUNCIL PUE30 HE.ARING. .. ., 0 30 :1.9E EES94 . 20MAER94 1060 ,. SEMI FINAL DESIGN. 1 . 60 21MAR94 1. 1i162,. . . „ . ., DOT REVIEW., . . . ., . „ .i . . . ,. . ., . .-„ 0 30 r 0MAY94 . IC':..:JUN94 Accent Delete Edit More Status W,-.'.tt e schedule Update: Activities "DE..:MING" Activity Rem Start Finish , Number Description Pc:t D u r Date Actual Date Actual 1070. ,. . . . . SPECIFICATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . „ 0 60 21 MAER94 19MAY94 107S. . . . . . FINAL DESIGN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 4S 1.9JUN94 02AUG94 1077. . . . . . DOT REVIEW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 30 03AUS94 . OISEP94 1080. . . . t::Ca;:;..j.. ESTIMATE FINAL. . . . . . . . 0 7 OSAl.Ji"a94 09AUS94+ 1090. . . . . . FINAL fREVIEEW. . . . . .. .. . . .. . . . .. .. 0 14 03AUS94 16AUS94 1.1.00. . .. ,. . . ADDRESS S C:Oh'lENTS. . . . . . . . . . . . 0 14 02SE:{_ 94 IS SiEP94 11.10. . . . . ,. BID . . . . . . .. . . ., ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 60 16 SEP94 . 14NOV94 1.1.2 0. . . . ,. „ AWARD .C.t:INTRAC:T. . . . . :. . . . . . ,. . 0 60 1.SNOV94 . 13JAl' 9S 11,30. . . . . . PRE—.C{3NSTF:. MTG. . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 15 14,7AItil9S . 28JAN95 1.140. . . . . . CONSTRUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . ,. . . ., 0 120 09FlE'6i95 . 06AUG95t . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . ,. . . .. . . . ,. . .. . :. . :. . . . . . . . .. . ,. . . . ,. . . . . ., c 4 i•4 . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i'4.. 0 . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . ,. . . . ,. . „ . . . .. .. .. . . ,. . .. . ,. . . . . .. . .. . . ,. . . .. 0 0 . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . ,. . . . . . ,. . . . :. ,. .: ,. ,. .. . .. . . . „ . . 0 0 . . . . . . . . ,. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A 4 4 0 . . . ,. .. . . . . . . . . . . . e . . ,, . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 0 0 . . . . . ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,. . . .. . . ., .. . . ,. . . . ,. . . ,. . . . .. . . M, 4 a 0 . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . Accept Delete Edit More Status Update schedule • !7s Go /so Boa a//0 .So 7s" a�Q I NORTH Project- l3a- lDO Study.- Route(s). �Fir1/NCB .Sf jU^.�GA�JU /'u. Town(s)- S v y r.� ADT- saw. O00 = :?O0r �i►I i �c System- File- Date- FHJv GJ - . --- - i f ' AtORTH ' i . Praje�t- l.3� -•!�D � ��� � 3 I i SStudy. p nr Tow _-CC'7trJ� I N f�.4��t ,ter Rc�tets�• l� L.r. rr x. iti r`•�t� i^ :_._! a.�l�' System• File /C� �+� -rJ�t �'• Y ra/�• Date• �� Run'�wwwwww.ww�. � SECTION Z AREA, YARD AND HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS 10.1 Except as provided for existing lots in Section 3.5, no building shall hereafter be erected, enlarged, altered or rebuilt, or premises used except in conformity with these regulations, and as prescribed in the schedule which is part of this section and is labeled "Schedule of Areas, Yards and Height Requirements." 10.1.a Each approved residential lot shall contain a contiguous buildable area ("buildable' defined as exclusive of regulated wetlands and watercourses, waterbodies, detention areas, utility easements, rights-of-way, or areas with slopes at or in excess of 151) of at least 10,000 square feet, into which a square of ninety feet by ninety feet (90, x 90') can be located, and on which the dwelling must be located. 10.2 Schedule of Areas, Yards and Height Requirements Minimum Minimum Minimum Zone Lot Area Lot width Lot Depth RR 40,000 s.f-. 175 ft. 200 ft. A-40 40,000 s.f. 150 ft. 200 £t. AA-30 30,000 s.f. 150 ft. 150 ft. A-30 30,000 s.f. 120 ft. 150 ft. A-20 20,000 s.f. 100 ft. 150 ft. RC 30,000 s.f. 150 ft. 150 ft. GC 15,000 s.f. 100 ft. 150 ft. I 20,000 s.f. 100 ft. 150 ft. MF 15 acres 200 ft. 200 ft. RO 2 acres 200 ft. 200 ft. FP 40,000 s.f. 150 ft. 200 ft. w OF 5 acres 200 ft. 200 ft. Maximum Height/ Maximum i MaximumZ Zone Stories Feet Lot Coverage Impervious Cov.1 RR 2-1/2 30 10 15 A-40 2-1/2 30 10 15 AA-30 2-1/2 30 15 15 A-30 2-1/2 30 15 15 A-20 2-1/2 30 15 15 DRZ 2-1/2 30 20 30 RC 3 45 25 60 GC 2 40 30 65 I 2 40 50 65 MF 2 35 30 40 RO 2 30 30 50 FP 2-1/2 30 10 OF 4 57 302 50k0 Footnote 1- Except where specifically noted otherwise elsewhere in these regulations. Footnote 2- of net buildable land. 1. Any section of a building more than one hundred fifty (130) feet from a residential zone may be up to forty (40) feet in height. A building seventy-five (75) feet from a residential zone shall have a maximum height of twenty (20) feet. Maximum height of a building between seventy-five (75) feet and one hundred fifty (150) feet from a residential zone shall be determined using the same ratio of distance to height. Minimum Minimum Minimum Minimum Each Setback Zone Front Yard Rear Yard Side Yard to Zone Line RR 50 ft. 50 ft. 20 ft. A-40 50 ft. 50 ft. 20 ft. AA-30 50 ft. 50 ft. 20 ft. A-30 50 ft. 50 ft. 15 ft. A-20 40 ft. 40 ft. 10 ft. DRZ 40 ft. 40 ft. 40 ft. RC 65 ft. 25 ft. 10 ft. GC 50 ft. 15.ft. 10 ft. I 35 ft. 25 ft. l0 ft. MF 75 ft. 35 ft.* 25 ft.* RO 50 ft. 50 ft. 25 ft. FP 50 ft. 50 ft. 20 ft. OF 50 ft. 50 ft. 50 ft 100 ft.** Footnote *- Where a buffer is required, the rear and side yards shall be a minimum of 25 ft. Footnote **- Can include buffer requirement. bat- a atze maw '� _ GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES TO MUNICIPALITIES FOR PROJECT DEVELOPMENT UNDER 1991 ISTEA STP URBAN FUNDS The procedures set forth are for projects involving improvements to local roads which utilize Federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) Urban Funds. When a project funded under this program is located exclusively on a State highway, the Department of Transportation (DOT) will undertake the engineering work with either in-house staff or engage a consultant. If the project should involve both a local and intersecting State highway, the DOT will evaluate the situation and determine if it or the municipality will have the lead role in the Preliminary Engineering (P.E. ) phase. This will be determined first, by which of the roads has the greatest involvement and second, by the capabilities of the particular municipality to perform the work. I. PLANNING/PROJECT DEVELOPMENT A. IDENTIFICATION: The Municipality will identify the proposed local improvement together with an initial project justification, scope of work and cost estimate. This information is to be submitted to the Regional Planning Agency (RPA) . The proposed local improvement must as a minimum, have a total project cost of $100,000 for attributable areas and $50,OOO for non-attributable areas. The RPA will screen all projects sponsored by the Municipalities and forward the initial project information for selected priority projects to the Field Coordinator at the DOT. B. SCOPING & COST ESTIMATING: The Field Coordinator will notify the Local Roads Section of proposed new projects. Local Roads will inform the Project Concept Team (PCT) and arrange a meeting with the Municipality, RPA & PCT to conduct a field review of the proposed project. The purpose of the field review is to obtain a clear understanding of the problem and need, identify all potential impacts, assess alternative solutions and arrive at a realistic project scope, cost estimate and develop a project schedule for the engineering, right of way and construction phases. The scoping will consider such aspects as the character of the neighborhood, the potential presence of contaminated materials, rights of way requirements, social , economic and historic impacts and environmental permit requirements. C. PUBLIC INFORMATION: Following the field review, the sponsor will conduct an informational meeting to ensure the public is aware of the proposal and has an opportunity- to express its view. D. TIP ENDORSEMENT: The next step in the project development phase will be the RPA action in establishing regional project priorities and the RPA and State TIP endorsement process. The Municipality is to commence design activities within six months of the TIP endorsements. NOTE: Sponsors that fail to meet their responsibilities or to complete activities in a timely fashion may lose the priority assigned to their project. The RPA will be responsible for establishing and imposing penalties on sponsors for failing to commence design activities on time. IJune 1 , 1993 E. RECOMMENDED PROJECT MEMORANDUM (RPM) : The Field Coordinator will provide the Local Roads Section with the TIP endorsed projects. Local Roads will prepare the RPM document for circulation and Department approval . The Project Initiation will occur within one month of State and Federal TIP approvals. F. REGIONAL MONITORING: Each RPA is to establish a technical monitoring/status review committee. It is suggested that the committee convene every other month to discuss each TIP endorsed project within the annual element and upcoming fiscal year. Each municipality with a funded project is to attend the status review meeting. Sponsors will report on their progress relative to design development, permit requirements, right of way and the overall project schedule. The municipalities will be held accountable for maintaining schedule commitments. Sponsors who fail to meet their responsibilities and do not complete activities in a reasonable time may jeopardize the priority of the project. The RPA will be responsible for establishing and imposing penalties for non-performance or lack of adherence to schedules by sponsors. Upon receipt of Federal authorization of the construction phase, RPA monitoring of the project will no longer be required. II. PROJECT DESIGN A. ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS: The Municipality will be responsible for the preparation of an environmental document when a project does not qualify for categorical exclusion. The sponsor can assign this item of work to a project consultant. The environmental document must receive FHWA approval . B. PERMITS: The Municipality is to submit all required permit applications six months prior to completion of the design plans. This is to allow sufficient time to receive the permits prior to advertising. Permit requirements will be initially identified during the project development phase. C. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS: Municipalities may perform the design with in-house staff or contract with a consultant to prepare the required plans, specifications and estimates for local road projects. Sponsors will be responsible for 100% of the design costs (see Section V-Program Financing) . Geometric design standards for roadways will be in accordance with AASHTO minimum guidelines. With proper justification, the Municipality may request an exception when elements of the design do not meet minimum AASHTO standards. Local geometric design standards greater than AASHTO minimums will be allowed. When the Department is responsible for advertising, award and inspection of a local road contract, State Standard Specifications Form 814 shall be used. If the sponsor has standardized roadway specifications which are formatted after the 814, they may be used by the Municipality with the Department' s prior approval . The Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) is to be followed in the design of signs, signals, markings and devices placed on, over or adjacent to a street. The scope of the project may impose the use of additional industry standards, i .e. bridge standards, etc. -2- June 1 , 1993 D. DESIGN SUBMISSION: The sponsor will be required to make several technical submissions to the State for review and comment; the preliminary design submission (30% stage) , the semi-final submission (70% stage) and the final submission (90% stage) . Each submission will have different requirements. The Local Roads Section will inform the Municipality of what is required for each project. A general review, as to form and content, will be performed by the Department. Their comments will be offered to the town for consideration. E. PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL/PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS: State and Federal policy requires the sponsor to provide the public with the opportunity to comment on the proposed design. The Local Roads Section will advise the Municipality of the type of public involvement the project will require and what steps must be taken by the sponsor to fulfill the legal intent. III. RIGHT OF WAY A. RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION: The Municipality may be responsible for acquiring the right of way. The State will make this determination based on the Municipalities' ability and current Department obligations. If the local road project involves relocation of owners or tenants, the Department will administer all right of way activities for that project. An Informational Package prepared by the Department' s Office of Rights of Way will be presented to the Municipality. This package fully explains procedures which must be followed to satisfy all legal requirements. The Right of Way process must begin early in the project schedule, i .e. , preliminary design, to allow sufficient time to acquire the necessary property by the advertising date. Close coordination with the Office of Rights of way is expected. IV. PROJECT ADVERTISEMENT AND CONSTRUCTION A. ADVERTISING: In general , the State will be responsible for processing and advertising all STP Urban projects. A Municipality may perform construction, advertising and inspection on a local road project subject to review and approval by the Department. The Municipality must provide a written request to the Department no later than the semi-final design submission. The Department, through the Office of Construction, will meet with the sponsor to determine its capabilities, experience and staff qualifications for advertising and inspecting the proposed project. If the request is approved, a final submission of plans, estimates and specifications will be submitted to the Department's Contract Development Section, which will ensure that the proper "boiler plate" information is contained in the PS&E package. The Municipality will be required to advertise and conduct the bidding process in such a way as to assure an opportunity for free, open and competitive bid proposals. The attached procedure entitled "Advertising Procedures for Construction Contracts Administered by Municipalities" is to be followed. -3- June 1 , 1993 B. AWARD: All projects advertised for construction by the Department will { normally be awarded within 60 days of the bid opening. The Department or its consultant will inspect these projects. The Municipality will have no official responsibility on their projects, but will be kept informed and invited to attend the preconstruction meeting. C. CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT: Municipalities approved for inspection work will be required to follow established construction management and record keeping practices. On a monthly . basis, State personnel from District Construction will visit the project to review the operation, construction practices and job records. Municipalities that wish to hire a consultant to perform the inspection services will be required to follow the attached procedures for Consultant Selection, Negotiation and Contract Monitoring for Town administered projects. The procedures developed by the State and Federal Highway Administration are to ensure that the selection is made based on qualifications through an equitable selection process. Municipalities that have a written process (which follows the general intent of Federal Guidelines 23 CFR Part 172) may request a substitution. The official local process must have local Council approval . The Department will review such written requests. Municipalities found to have an acceptable program will be placed on a pre-approved list and will be required to resubmit an annual verification. The State must be informed immediately of any changes made to a previously approved local process. NOTE: If a Municipality hires a consultant during_ the P.E. phase for design services and as a part of their scope of services or Agreement with the consultant indicates inspection work as part of their future assignment, the municipality will be required to follow the aforementioned selection procedures for P.E. This is required to satisfy Federal authorization. of funds for construction. D. PROJECT ACCEPTANCE AND CLOSEOUT: All projects will require a semi-final and final inspection prior to acceptance of the project by the State. Post-construction audits will also be required in accordance with the State/Municipal Construction Agreement to ensure that final expenditures both participating and non-participating are properly documented. V. PROGRAM FINANCING: A. The Municipality will be responsible for funding 100% of the P.E. phase without Federal or State reimbursement. The P.E. phase is construed to include all engineering and environmental activities prior to the construction phase and exclusive of Right of Way activities. The Right of Way phase will be shared at an 80% Federal , 10% State and 10% local funding ratio. -4- June 1 , 1993 r d The Construction phase will be shared at an 80% Federal and 20% State funding ratio. Construction of the project would not utilize local funds, unless the contract included certain non-participating items of work requested by the Municipality. It should be noted that for any of the three phases identified above, Federal-aid reimbursement can only be approved for those activities which occur after FHWA authorization is given. B. Projects located on a State facility. The P.E. phase will be performed by the Department or a consultant selected by the Department. Federal and State funds will be utilized at an 80%/20% ratio. The Right of Way phase will be shared at an 80% Federal and 20% State funding ratio. The construction phase will be shared at an 80% Federal and 20% State funding ratio. Again, project construction would not utilize local funds unless there were non-participating items of work included in the contract by the municipality. -5- Disk J4: GP June 1 , 1993 t i r �SO.pN Uj Tawn O-P S-OUL4 ?&"61at U 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 SOR•CO AREA CODE 203/644-2511 July 29, 1993 GZA Gecenvironmental Inc. 27 Naek Road Vernon, CT 06066 Att: Mr. U. LaFosse Re: Quotation for Borings - Deming Street, South Windsor As discussed, we are enclosing a quotation form, drawing and specifications for borings to. be taken in the pavement, along a portion of Deming Street, South Windsor. Please return the quotation sheet to me by August 23, 1993 in a sealed envelope. We anticipate that these borings would be taken early in September. If you have any questions, please call me at 644-2511, Ext. 245 . j truly yours, ry C. Iazz , P.E. Eng' eenji JUL 3 0 1993 � JCl/jsv / cc: Michael J. Gantick, Director of Public Works v Project File - 93-804 r �towN SC Town o-P SotdA ?&7� f,`� U 9 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 R•CO AREA CODE 203/644-2511 l��SO � July 29 , 1993 Clarence Welti Associates, Inc. P.O. Box 397 227 Williams Street Glastonbury, CT 06033 Re: Quotation for Borings - Deming Street, South Windsor As discussed, we are enclosing a quotation form, drawing and specifications for borings to be taken in the pavement, along a portion of Deming Street, South Windsor. Please return the quotation sheet to me by August 23, 1993 in a . sealed envelope. We anticipate that these borings would be taken early in September. If you have any questions, please call me at 644-2511, Ext. 245 . *Very truly yours, jrry C I ta, P.E. T wn En ine J J U L 3 0 19�3 JCl/jsv cc: Michael J. Gantick, Director of Public Works Project File - 93-804 owap sio� ?1)&U/A&t N V 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074 so -co AREA CODE 203/644-2511 July 29, 1993 New England Boring Contractors Inc . 129 Kreiger Lane Glastonbury, CT 06033 Re: Quotation for Borings - Deming Street, South Windsor As discussed, we are enclosing a quotation form, drawing and specifications for borings to be taken in the pavement, along a portion of Deming Street, South Windsor. - Please return the quotation sheet to me by August 23, 1993 in a sealed envelope. We anticipate that these borings would be taken early in September. If you have any questions, please call me at 644-2511, Ext. 245 . Jtruly ours, JEE;r=ineet,--/ Iaz a, P.E. JCl/jsv Jul- cc: Michael J. Gantick, Director of Public Works Project File - 93-804 r , PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM GUIDELINES It is the Department's policy to keep persons informed and involved when projects are undertaken. It is important that the community share their concerns with the municipality to assist in the project's development. If there is adequate interest, an informational meeting should be conducted. The public involvement program should begin at the outset of the project and be well documented. Such a program is to consist of (1) issuing news releases, and (2) conducting a formal mailing to parties affected by the project. News Release: The municipality is requested to issue a news release based on the attached sample and have it published in area newspapers having a` substantial circulation in the project area. Also attached is a list of area legislators and agencies who should be sent a copy of the news release to inform them of the project. Please forward to ConnDOT written notification that the news release was published in area newspapers and sent to all others on the list. Formal Mailing: The municipality is also requested to do the formal mailing. Attached is a sample letter which can be used to assist the municipality in conducting the mailing. To fulfill the intent of the Department's public involvement program, the letter is to be sent, at minimum, to each affected abutting property owner in the project area and each of the local agencies, commissions, etc. on the attached list. Also, the municipality should send a copy of the letter to any area agency, commission, public advisory group, etc. that may be interested in the project. The municipality should verify in writing to ConnDOT that the formal mailing is done, as required by State policy, and provide a list of names and addresses of each abutting property owner and others who are mailed the letter. i r SAMPLE NEWS RELEASE (CITY or TOWN name) , CONNECTICUT - The {City or Town} of {City or Town name} has begun the preliminary design of a proposed project for the {brief project description} . The project is being designed by the {City or Town} , and recommended for construction under a Federal program administered by the Connecticut Department of Transportation. It is the {City or Town} 's and the State's policy to keep persons informed and involved when such projects are undertaken. It is important that the community` share its concerns to assist in the project's development. The {City or Town} will conduct an informational meeting if there is adequate interest from the public. At this time it is not anticipated that a formal public hearing will be necessary. It is planned to {brief description of project} . The project schedule indicates that the preliminary design plans will be available {Month, Year} . Based upon a preliminary assessment, the construction cost will be approximately ${Dollar amount} . It is anticipated that the Federal Highway Administration will provide 80% of the cost, with the {City or Town} providing 20%. Anyone interested in obtaining further information or providing input may do so by contacting {Name of designated City or Town official} . I . L NEWS RELEASE DISTRIBUTION The Honorable Christopher J. Dodd Mr. William H. Hernandez, Jr. U.s.Senator U.S. Department of Housing & Urban 100 Great Meadow Road Development Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109 one Hartford Square West Suite 204 The Honorable Joseph I. Lieberman Hartford, Connecticut 06106 U.S. Senator One Commercial Plaza Mr. William Ireland III 21st Floor State Conservation Engineer Hartford, Connecticut 06103 U.B. Department of Agriculture 16 Professional Park Road The Honorable Sam Gejdenson i Storrs, Connecticut 06268-1299 U.S. Representative 2nd District Department of Interior P.O. Box 2000 Environmental Project Review 74 West Main street William Green Federal Building Norwich, Connecticut 06360 600 Arch Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania The Honorable Tony Guglielmo e Senator Mr. John W. Shannahan State District State Historic Preservation officer Legislative office Building Historical Commission Hartford, Connecticut 06105-1591 59 south Prospect Street Hartford, Connecticut 06106 The Honorable Patrick J. Flaherty State Representative Connecticut Department of 8th District Economic Development Legislative office Building 210 Washington Street Hartford, Connecticut 06106-1591 Hartford, Connecticut. The Honorable Pamela Z. Sawyer Connecticut Council on State Representative Environmental Quality 55th District State office Building Legislative office Building 165 Capitol Avenue Hartford, Connecticut 06106-1591 Hartford, Connecticut 06106 The Honorable Joseph D. Courtney Mr. William Heubner State Representative Connecticut construction Industries 56th District 912 Silas Deane Highway Legislative Office Building Wethersfield, Connecticut. 06109 Hartford, Connecticut 06106-1591 Mr. Denis Cunningham Asst. Director-Water Resources Unit ,Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection State office Building 165 Capitol Avenue Hartford, Connecticut 06106 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 424 Trapelo Road Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 Mr. Gary N. Hamby Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration Abraham A. Ribicoff Federal Building 450 Main Street, Room 635 Hartford, Connecticut 06106 SAMPLE LETTER PRELIMINARY NOTIFICATION {Date} To: {Abutting Property Owners and Those on Enclosed List} Dear: Subject: {Project title} The (City or Town} of {Name of City or Town} is initiating plans to {brief project description} . The present schedule indicates the preliminary design plans will be available {date) . Based upon preliminary assessment, the construction cost will be approximately ${dollar amount} . It is anticipated that the Federal Highway Administration will provide 80% of the construction cost with the {City or Town} providing 20%. It is the {City or Town) Is and the State Ispolicy to keep persons informed and involved when such projects are undertaken. It is important that the community share its concerns with us to assist in the project's development. The {City or Town} will conduct an informational meeting if there is adequate interest from the area residents . At this time, it is not anticipated that a formal public hearing will be necessary. Anyone interested in obtaining further information or providing input may do so by contacting {name and title of designated municipal official} . Very truly yours, {name of municipal official} {title} cc: Sebastian J. Sbalcio, Engineer of Consultant Design, ConnDOT . Nit 11• Y PLANNED PLANNED 1993 1994 START FINISH SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEP OCT NOV 01SEP93 07SEP93 ® PRE DESIGN COORDINATION 08SEP93 215EP93 ® DEVELOP CHECKLIST 22SEP93 20NOV93 SURVEY 220CT93 19JAN94 PRELIM. DESIGN 21NOV93 19MAY94 R. O W. ACQUISITION . 20JAN94 02FEB94 INITIAL REVIEWS 20JAN94 26JAN94 COST ESTIMATE PRELIM. ® 20JAN94 18FE894 TOWN COUNCIL PUB. HEARING® 19FEB94 19MAY94 FINAL DESIGN 19FEB94 19APR94 SPECIFICATIONS 20MAY94 26MAY94 : COST ESTIMATE FINAL® : 20MAY94 02JUN94 FINAL REVIEW® 03JUN94 16JUN94 ADDRESS COMENTS® 17JUN94 14JUL94 BID® 15JUL94 28JUL94 AWARD CONTRACT® 29JUL94 28JUL94 PRE-CONSTR:MTG. A: CONSTRUCTION 29JUL94 2SNOV94 RUN DATE 13JUL93 0 DESC START DATE 01SEP93 Q MILESTONE DATA DATE 01SEP93 ® CRITICAL FINISH DATE 2SNOV94 PROGRESS PLANNED SURETRAK DEMING ST. RECONSTRUCTION I v STATE OF CONNECTICUT `ONNEQryp`r DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ZF 3 a� 24 WOLCOTT HILL ROAD,P.O. Box A ''OF Tft WETHERSFIELD,CONNECTICUT 06129-0801 Phone: 666-7230 r%rI T- une 22, 1993 Ms. Jean E. Zurbrigen 9 Town Manager r JUN 2 51993 Town Hall, 1540 Sullivan Ave. �� ,�;•�n. �v;�sr's South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 , o Dear Ms. Zurbrigen: Subject: Reconstruction of Deming Road, as part of bypass around the Buckland Road/ Route 30/ Route 194 intersection This letter is to confirm a concept meeting scheduled for 1:30 p.m. , Tuesday, July 20, 1993, at the South Windsor Town Hall to discuss such items as the scope, schedule, and funding for the proposed Reconstruction of Deming Road. Please invite to the meeting anyone from your staff who might be interested. If you have any questions concerning this matter please contact the Project Engineer, Mr. Drew Colburn at 666-7310. Very truly yours, Sebastian J. Sbalcio Engineer of Consultant Design Bureau of Engineering and Highway Operations cc: Mr. Francis McMahon - Capitol Region Council of Governments Ms. Marsha Banach - Director of Planning, Town of South Windsor J U M Z.8, 1993 v-' f sh. An Equal Opportuniry Employer Printed on Recycled or Recovered Paper Memo to JCI d5rAffV 5- From DTE 6-25-93 Re: Deming Street Reconstruction TSW Project #93-804 Status Report The TSW has done a closed traverse survey from the Clark Stree Reconstruction control points, along Deming Street, through t g t Buckland Road Reconstruction controls, both claimed to beonthe same datum. The traverse was approximate) 7 200 long, closure of a y g, with a % approximately 1 :16,000. The traverse along Deming Street was set up to locate the existing property corners, the structures and a base line from which the preliminary cross sections from the end of the Clark Street Project to the end of the Deming Street part of the Buckland Project ends . From 10+00 Clark to 16+00 Buckland it approximately 1, 610 if. , A base line plan has been started, the property corners coordin- ated and plotted. The preliminary cross sections have been taken, along the base line, but not plotted. Areas of concern; How much ROW will be required? Easterly of the Plum Gully Brook it doesn't apprear to be much of a problem. Westerly of the Brook, there will be land taking required, even for a 50' ROW. ' There is an alignment problem with the Buckland Road end. The tangent for that portion of Deming Street, per plans, is given as S 56-45-03 . 8 E. Depending upon where the TSW chooses the base line to be, from 9+00 Clark to 16+00 Buckland, the bearing is S 58-15-30 . 59 E, from the center of the Plum Gully Bridge to 16+00 Buckland, the bearing could be S 58-11-58. 88 E. Essential) there should be a modification in the curve angle and the y tangent direction, of approximately 1-30-00 to improve the alignment. To add an unnecessary number of curves in a straight road, is poor design. There will have to be a determination of where the TSW wants the center line and then make the pro Keyes and CONNDOT. Proposal to I believe that there is probably sufficient information, in house, at this time to generate preliminary plans for the project. STP-CR Application DEMING STREET RECONSTRUCTION Part 1: Project Description Part 2: Project Cost Estimate Part 3: Project Rating Information Return by: December 11, 1992 Return to: Finn McMahon ` CRCOG 221 Main St. Hartford, CT 06106 Direct questions to: Tom Madarz, 522 2217 i 1 I f R Deming Street Reconstruction Part 1 : Project Description (a) Proposed Improvement The Deming Street .Reconstruction Project consists of the reconstruction of 1600t feet of roadway (see attached map) . Deming Street would be reconstructed to a width of 30 feet. Surface and subsurface drainage systems would be installed. Horizontal and vertical alignment improvements would be made consistent with current AASHTO and Town standards . ROW acquisition and utility relocations would also be required. Further detail on the current problems with Deming Street are described under Part 3 and Section 4 of the application package. The proposed project would serve to complete the reconstruction of the Clark Street-Deming Street corridor linking Route 30 and Buckland. Road. The Town has recently completed the Clark Street Reconstruction Project and the Buckland Road project construction is to begin in the spring of 1993 . Therefore, the Clark Street- Deming Street corridor has been or will be completed to the east and to the west of the proposed Deming Street project. The Transportation in- South Windsor Report III entitled Alternatives Analysis: Wapping Center and Buckland Road, . prepared by CRCOG, evaluated thirteen alternatives to remove or divert traffic from the Route 30/Route 194/Buckland Road intersection) . CRCOG developed and used the South Windsor traffic forecasting model to test the effectiveness of the thirteen alternatives . In the Transportation in South Windsor Reports entitled Strategy for Improving and Preserving Traffic Flow and Safety (executive summary) CRCOG recommendations for specific improvements for the Buckland Road corridor (recommendation #3) included one of the above noted alternatives--the reconstruction of Clark Street from Route 30 to Deming Street and the reconstruction of Deming Street from Clark Street to Buckland Road. CRCOG's recommendation stated that this alternative "should be implemented in any case. It achieves a reasonable improvement in the level-of-service, . . . , and much of the reconstruction is already scheduled as part of the Buckland Road Project (State Project 132-100) and the Clark Street Project. Alternative D can be constructed independent of any other alternative and still be effective. " The South Windsor Town Council, by resolution, (see ° attached copy) has supported the proposed Deming Street project. G � 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 I,yO�R•CO��i AREA CODE 203/644-25n December 8, 1992 Ms. Jean E. Zurbrigen, Town Manager Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, Connecticut Dear Ms. Zurbrigen: At its Regular Meeting of Monday, December 7, 1992, the South Windsor Town Council approved the following Resolution: WHEREAS, through its surface transportation program, the Federal Highway Administration has made funds available to the States for highway improvements; and _ WHEREAS, there is a $1 million funding cap per town; and WHEREAS, the Town of South Windsor commissioned a Town-wide Transportation Study- for the purpose of effecting improvements, preserving traffic flow, and vehicular and pedestrian safety; and . WHEREAS, the Deming Street reconstruction ranked among the highest of the Study's priorities as a strategy for improving said traffic flow and safety in the Buckland corridor " NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the South Windsor Town Council authorizes Town Manager Jean E. Zurbrigen to submit a funding request to the Capitol Region Council of Governments for the reconstruction of 1,600 feet (more or less) of Deming Street--including widening it to 30 feet, installing surface and subsurface drainage, and improvements to horizontal and vertical alignment as its Priority I submission for an estimated cost of $5.50,000; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, should the project receive funding approval from the Capitol Region Council of Governments, the South Windsor Town Council will provide a 20% funding match, or $110,000. Respectfully submitted, Patricia R. Brown Secretary to the Clerk of the Council .cc: Marcia Banach, Director of Planning Michael Gantick, Director of Public Works George P. Spring, Director of Finance 1 e Part 1: Project Description (a) Proposed Improvement Provide a brief written description of the proposed improvement and why it is needed. (b) Preliminary Project Plan A preliminary project plan,drawn at a scale of 1"= 100 feet or larger,should be submitted. The following items should be depicted on the plan. 1. Existing edge of pavement 2. Proposed new edge of pavement 3. Project limits 4. Property lines 5. Potential right-of-way impacts 6. Utilities This plan should be considered as a"conceptual"or"sketch"plan in which a high degree of accuracy is not required. An adequate base map for the plan would your town assessor's maps (usually available on an air photo base at 1"=100 fee)or an MDC quadrangle map (1" =200 feet) enlarged to 1" = 100 feet. (c) Preliminary Cross-Section Provide one or more typical cross-sections(not to scale)depicting the following: 1. Pavement width(federal guidelines require at least 30 feet) 2. Sidewalk location and width 3. Utility pole placement 4. Snow shelf location and width 5. Right-of-way lines (d) Pavement 1. Existing pavement type and width: Oil/Gravel & nituminus varies from 19 ' to 22 ' in spots. 2. Will existing pavement be left as is,overlaid,reconstructed or recycled?Re cons truc ted 3. Proposed new pavement structure(describe type and depth of each course including the base: 2" Class II & 2" Class I Bituminous Concrete (e) Right-of-Way 1. Existing ROW: 2 0±feet Proposed ROW: 5_jeet (50 feet is the minimum allowed in most federal projects) 2. Generally describe the nature and extent of the ROW impacts(e.g. 10-15 strip takes, 1 total take) 15 + ' strips each side 2 0 ALL MATERIALS ARE TO MEET CONN. D.O.T. SPECIFICATIONS FORM 814 AS AMENDED En G _ o 0 � rn � aZ r p OW-0" WITT OF WAY MAJOR COLLECTOR O 50'-O• RIGHT OF WAY-A41NOR COLLECTOR W-0'.RIGHT OF WAY- LOCAL W W 30'MAJOR COLLECTOR 30' MAJOR COLLECTOR 7 3 25' MINOR COLLECTOR 25' LOCAL COLLECTOR N 2S LOCK W 8 W , MAJOR COIL ,r MAJOR COLL. IY MAJOR COLL ,s• MAJOR COLL.. 3• IW MINOR COIL 15' MINOR COLL 15' MINOR COLL. 10' MINOR COLL ,2' LOCAL IS LOCK IS LOCK 12' LOCK n 5• r_SIDEWALK SEE DETAL Pm T aF ,z• S CONC.D $1oEWALx cm AFPU"_ SEE E DETAIL O �T 1�4• - 1' 1 ,' 3/B• : 1' (IF mum 3 181T CURS 1 --1. 1 4r 1' bt►� m 0 3� 1-,/2• BITUMINOUS CONCRETE CLASS 4 TpP90L t SEED W PROCESSED STONE 1RMROCK BASE* SURFACE COURSE (COMPACTED) AND (COYPACTED) MEET GRADAnoN Mo5.0,-1 ,-1/r BITUMINOUS CONCRETE CLASS I 1 4• TOPSOL t SEED. O• TAN. BANK RUN GRAVEL SUBBASE * FW#D8t COMM 0 (COMPACTED) -GRASS STRIP RESERVED FOR DS OVER PREPARED SUBGRADE (COMPACTED) HYDRANTS. POLES. ECT. MEET GRADATION OF MLOG GRADING B 2- BITUMINOUS CONCRETE CLASS I * 0 SURFACE COUILSE (COMPACTED) AND Y 611UMNOUS CONCRETE CLASS 1 O BINDER COURSE (COMPACTED) Z FOR COLLECTOR ROADS C * 'ACTUAL DEPTHS &MATERIALS SHOULD BE BASED ON A PAVEMENT DESIGN FOR EACH ROM. m C ' A 'O v v . m NOT TO SCALE 3. How many takings will result in nonconforming lots that will require a zoning variance? Five 4. Do you anticipate any problems obtaining the zoning variance? No 5. How may families and/or businesses will be displaced? None (f) Utilities 1. List all utilities and their owners within the project area(gas,water, sewer,electric, telephone.cable TV etc.) Water - Connecticut Water; Sanitary Sewer - Town; bNET. CL&P: COX 2. If any of these utilities are likely to be affected by the ro ect please explain the nature and extend of the impact. Relocate poles (CK. & SNET) ; Hydrants 3. Are there any plans to expand or improve existing utilities within next five years? No (g) Storm Water Drainage System and Under Drains 1. If you propose to modify,replace,or install a system,please indicate the nature and extent of.improvements. Provide a mu ILestimate of the improvements needed(e.g. length of new storm sewer pipe,numb rFr of new catch basis,etc.) 1600 LF ± New Pipe, Catch Basins (121) (h) Culverts,Bridges & Other Crossings 1. Identify any existing crossings that are likely to be modified(e.g.extended),rehabilitated, or replaced as part of the project. Indicate the type of improvement needed and the reason for iL If any existing crossings have inadequate hydraulic capacity please indicate. To be determined during study phase (i) Railroad Grade Crossings 1. Identify any existing crossings and indicate if any modifications are needed. None (j) Sidewalks 1. Provide a rough estimate of the number of linear feet of sidewalk to be replaced or constructed. Specify the type of material. 2. What percentage of the above is for"replacement" of existing sidewalk? (k) -Parks,Cemeteries, &Historic Structures 1. Identify any parks,cemeteries,or historic structures that are likely to be affected by the project. None (1) Wetlands 1. Identify any wetlands that are likely to be affected b the project(Locate them on a map if that is more appropriate). Wetlands possib�y in vicinity of Plum Gulley Brook (m) Traffic Signals 1. Identify any intersections where traffic signals will need to be modified,replaced,or installed If it is an old signal you should consider replacement rather than modification in your cost estimate. None (n) Curbing 1. Providing a rough estimate of the number of linear feet of new curbing to be installed. Specify the type of curbing. If you are goingto reuse existing granite curb please so indicate. 4,"000 LF Biturminous Curb (o) Retaining Walls 1. If you anticipate using retaining walls please provide a mugh estimate of the height, length,and type of materials. None (p) Design 1. Has any survey or design work already been done?Explain No. Preliminary site assessment has been initiated. Full survey to be part of design phase. 2. Will the design be done by town forces or by a consulting firm? Design to be done by Town forces. 4 Part 2: Project Cost Estimate 1. Cost summary The applicant must prepare an estimate of the total cost of the proposed project. Data on the cost estimate should be summarized and provided in the table below. Funding Participating Non Participating Federal Shan Phase Coed Cost2 (80%of part. cost) Study. _ 3,0 0 0-.UUU _ -of-Way: ��' � 81,600 Const � T , 8,400 Construction3: - Totak 550,000 115,000 440,000 2. Detailed Construction Cost Estimate Provide a breakdown of your construction cost estimate below. Also attach a copy of your detailed cost estimating sheet. participating non participating Construction-contract items: 3 61,0 0 0 — Utility c08ts4: 8,000 72,000 Incidentals: 4 3, — Contingency6: 16,000 — Total construction cost: 4 4 8,0 0 0 72,000 t Participating costs include only those items that are eligible for federal funding and that the town plans to seekfunding for. 2 Non participating costs include those items which are either. (a)not eligible for federal funding,or(b) funded through alternate sources. One example of a type"a"non participating cost is the replacement of sewer lines not directly affected by the roadway construction work. A type"b"non participating cost can be any eligible project cost for which the town chooses not to seek reimbursement. For example, many towns choose not to seek federal funding for the design phase of a project in order to avoid the lengthy process of executing a town/mate agreement. 3 This must agree with the appropriate construction total entered in the section 2 below. 4 Costs for new or relocated.utilities(gas,electric,telephone,cable,water, sewer). If you have assumed that the utility companies will bear some or all of the costs of relocation please show these costs in the non participating column. 5 Incidentals include construction survey,construction inspection, traffic control during construction, materials testing,and other miscellaneous items. Use 12% of the construction contract items as your estimate of incidentals. 6 For initial planning purposes use 10%of the construction contract items for your contingency amount. 5 Part 3: Project Rating Information 1 . Traffic Volume or Transit Ridership Pursuant to the project description, the proposed Deming Street Reconstruction project would serve the Sullivan Avenue/Buckland Road corridor including the- Wapping Center intersection (see attached map) . The latest traffic counts for the project area are attached. 2 . Traffic Flow Improvement The reconstruction of this portion of Deming Street would complete the Clark-Deming corridor. linking Route 30 to Buckland Road. As stated in the project description,. the Clark-Deming corridor was identified in the CRCOG Transportation in South Windsor Report III . Alternative Analysis : Wapping Center & Buckland Road (as the recommended alternative for reducing expected congestion at the Wapping Center intersection) . The Clark-Deming alternative, based upon the CRCOG analysis, would divert 1900 vehicles from the Buckland Road and 1900 vehicles from the Ellington Road leg of Wapping Center respectively (base year 2000) . (See comparison. Figure 4 (Base) and Figure 9 (Alternative D) Source: CRCOG Transportation in South Windsor Report III . ) The level of service at the Route 30/Route 194/Buckland Road (Wapping Center) intersection would be improved from a LOS E to a LOS D. 3 . Safety Improvements a. The Deming Street project will improve the level of service at the Wapping Center intersection. From the Transportation in South Windsor Report 1, entitled Existing Conditions Table 3, the Wapping Center intersection experienced 65 accidents over a 3-year period with a critical rate factor of 1 . 37 . As this intersection is currently under construction, accident data for the improved Wapping Center is not available. b. The Deming Street project will improve the level of service at the Wapping Center intersection from a LOS of E to LOS of D for the base year 2000 . Based upon the CRCOG analysis, 1900 vehicles vehicles would be diverted from each of the Buckland Road and Ellington Road legs of the Wapping Center intersection (see previously noted Figures 4 and 9 ) . Therefore, there exists the potential for a reduction in accidents at the Wapping Center intersection based upon the traffic diverted from the intersection by the Deming Street project. 1Jtl.-YJJ-177G lw•1i rr�un �,a(�aouu�cy.� �.•u.u. - _ _ - �_ __ 01 STATE CF C04MICTICUT OEPARTM_NT 3F TR•%NSPORtATION SURIAU OF PO.L!-Y AND PLANNING PLANNING INVENTORY :A'•D . OATA STAR RTEO DIR' TOWN NAIME LOCATION YR A D T 3 2 USSR N 30. kINDSOR NORTH 0; k.3• :ti RAMP TC ROLTE 241 90 1 64OC 5 30V a so. WINDSOR NORTH OF rORTHVIEW DRIVE 90 114CC ---vw 7 3C g S0. WI• CSOR WEST QF COWIMUNITY R I0_ 11�0C ---" 8 1941,1 SC WINDSOR N-W. OF COMffUNITY RO- D 90 175 c. 9 7 41/ .R S.0--O N-OA— N._. 0,ROUTS, 3:; --- - - 90 7 3 0 C .'wlG. _ 304 J. . So. WtNOSOR.._ SAST OF ROUTE 7`,' 9^ i2J1rV $0. WINDSOR 2UCKLAND 0.30 SC1:TM Of ROUTE 30 :0 1 baG 12 304 1 SQL. WINDSORR AT MtNCH ESTER TOW% LINE 'YO 1G211.: 14 19»J 3 SO. WIN:SCR NO'RTM OF PIER 90 142Cp 17 1944 0 SO. WINDSOR S.E. OF U-S. S 90 1490E 18 ussf ' so.' W' - SOR SOUTH! OF ROUTE 1 94 1 ! „U.S54 S $0. W!NDSOR SOUTH Of ROUTE 1 4 �0 116010 25- US5 .. S _.SO._ WINDSOR NOPT�f 0�, R^UTE 3i, CQNt�_ TGR CO 135,10 ... .._....... . .. y04Ti' OF ROUT_ 194 �ry 12ioc 26 _0.54 S. . . S.2.. ..:�►I(SOR _ NO_2T4 Of ROUT: 194 _......._.__._..... `� �_1dCC e° 74� 3 S0. WINDSOa siT "eLLiNGfiON Tb'N�t i:I rig °A LTc0 30 194 8 SO. WINDSCR S.c. OF RYE STREET 90 12YL`IL 37 291 E SO. wi.vD1OR' G.E. OFF RAmp TO U.3. 5 40 1250G 45 301 a $0. W I N D SO WEST OF PI5?CE R0'� 0 90 127 CC 46 741 9 so. WINDSOR r N._. Of SAND SILL FO_ ':1AD 90 9d0^: 47 74J N $0• WIND SOS N. OF F()STER ST4; 'T * 1 �� C 44 194v R S0. w'INDSOR N.W. 0"r TROY ROAD 134Cu 70: US5j N 50. WINDSOR -NORTH OF CNAOIL QI-AO 90 1be"C 70. US5J S SO. WINDSOR NORTH Of CHAPEL RO;.O 90 1490C ' "-71- -US3v .N S0. WINDSOR NORTH Of 1TROMil AO.'• D 90 1130E 79 US5J S SO. ';IyDSOR SOUTH OF W.o. ON R+rP TO POLITE 291 90 c1C0 8C 744 R SC. L,INOSOR S.W. OF POSTIQ STAB=T ::` 40 '10c0 83 1 .4 SO. WINOSOR 3UCKLAN0 ROAD - S^LlT4 OF OFMIN•S RTRS T 90 1 ?10r 69 -j 3 SC. WINOSOR DSMINv STREET - EAST OF SUPKLAN-0 ROAD 9 75C 39 S�^.. WINDSOR DRMTN4 STREET - VAST OF ?UCKLAND RCAD y0 250 . w 4G "4 So. WINDSOR 'U �AD ^ NCRTA Of DSMING STREET 90 1510C 95 US54 N SO. W:NDSOR SOUTH OF 40VERNORT. KICHWAY qL WOO . OO • 95 USSR S 5!!. .i1140SO4 SOUTH OF - 0V9R% RS WIG""" 90 13?00 94 a SO. WINDSOR CELT ROAD - SOUTH OF 5 vTT ORIV. - 90 Tom^ 97 .1 v. SC. WINOSOR MARILYN R AO - SOUTS+ Cc SLIZASETM STRCtT 70 c�70 9! � : $0. WINDSOR CLEARVIEW vAIVC - NORTH OF MO TON LANE. 90 :GG 17"_ 1041 A. SO. WINDSOR T.E. OF TROY R:>' D 90 1570C 111 194V :i SO. WINDSOR SOUTH OF SA4D -HILL QC-%0 112CG 112 USA 5 SO. WINDSOR ' SOUTH Qf STRO•NC ROa3 l *� 9". 110000 113 USA 1 SO. WI110$Vti AT G4�T WI!�ilSOR T41ak L. Ne. 90 21i0L —*► 114 SO w:NDSCR *ti^ STASIT W'sST 0= SUCKLAND ROAD 70 19cc 114- q 30. WINDSOR DEMINS STREET WEST OF gUCKLA-ND RCAD 9 SSG PC03 30J rR SO. WINDS,^.R N.J. or v.S. 5 - AT R.+R. CRO30thAj 9 710G 2C19 48 $0, 'WINDSOR MAIN STREET - SOUTH OF SULLIVAN AVENUE 9.� 1CCC 2C41 JR So. WINDSOR MAIN STREET - SOUTH CF 2LSASANT VALLEY 40- 90 21C,^. 2C42 � .4 Sr. WINDSOA N IN STRE'. T - AT ,?AST 14ARTF04C TOW11 LING 9v 14Cv 4 . Geometric and Drainage Improvements Existing Conditions The existing pavement width along the Deming Street project varies between 19 to 22 feet (except at Plum Gully Brook where the width is 30 feet) . Pursuant to AASHTO design considerations, pavements with less than 22 feet of width provide inadequate vehicle and edge-of- pavement clearances . The existing pavement surface does not have a consistent nor proper cross slope which negatively impacts driver ability to steer easily and keep their vehicles in the proper travel paths. The existing pavement condition is considered fair, based upon the Town's Pavement Management Survey which shows a PSI (Pavement. Serviceability Index) of 3 . 8 (5 . 0 is best score) . The pavement exhibits rutting, polished aggregate, longitudinal and tranverse .cracking, alligator cracking and some pavement bleeding. The existing . pavement structure is exhibiting these signs of stress suggesting inadequate base, drainage and pavement conditions . The polished pavement combined with the noted rutting, bleeding pavement and poor surface drainage has promoted poor skid resistance along this section of Deming Street. The existing vertical alignment does not provide a uniform grade and, in fact, there are numerous dips and rises which again have a negative impact on driver comfort. These vertical deficiencies, when combined with the above noted- problems, creates a cumulative negative impact on driver safety. Another major problem with the existing road is the lack of a formal subsurface and surface storm drainage system. On the eastern section of the project, storm water is conveyed via a drainage ditch along the south side of the road. There are no catch basins along this section of the road from Buckland Road to the Plum Gully Brook Culvert. Storm water on the north side of Deming Street sheet flows along the gutter from Buckland Road to the Plum Gully Brook Culvert. i f To the west of the Plum Gully Brook Culvert again there is no formal surface drainage system in the road except along the western most 200 plus/minus feet of the project. Per the Soil Conservation Service Soil Survey, the project area is dominated by soils with high seasonal groundwater tables (Elmwood (10-20 inches) , Limerick (0-8 inches) and Tisbury (8-20 inches) . ) Further, several spring conditions are present along the existing south road shoulder area to the west' of the Plum Gully Brook Culvert. Outbreaks of groundwater in this area often requires additional sanding for ice conditions during the winter season. As there is no formal underdrain system along Deming Street, this condition negatively affects the integrity of the pavement structure. The combined lack of a surface and subsurface drainage system when .combined with the other noted- physical deficiencies negatively impacts driver safety as well. Because of the limited ROW and the existing roadside drainage ditch, the road lacks a usable shoulder in many_ places . As Deming Street will serve- as part of a vital link between Ellington Road and Buckland Road, the need for a proper shoulder is paramount to provide a space for stopping free of the -traffic lanes, improved lateral clearance for signs, space for pedestrian use, and improved aesthetics . Proposed Condition The proposed Deming Street project would serve as a major improvement/elimination of\ the multitude of existing deficiencies noted above. A uniform pavement width of 30 feet would be installed to match that of the improved portions of Deming Street completed under the Buckland Road Reconstruction Project (132-100) and the Clark Street Reconstruction Project. The horizontal and vertical alignment would be improved to meet current AASHTO and Town standards for Deming Street (which is considered a major collector) , thus improving driver comfort and safety. Surface and subsurface drainage improvements would eliminate the problematic conditions identified previously, again improving driver comfort and safety. Improved shoulder construction and a new pavement structure would again improve driver comfort and safety and would meet the needs placed upon Deming Street from a traffic perspective. 5 . VMT Reduction - Not Applicable 6 . Vehicle Emissions Reduction The proposed project will improve the LOS at the Wapping Center intersection from a LOS of E to a LOS of D (base year 2000 ) . Therefore, vehicle exhaust- emissions will probably be reduced due to reduced delays at the Wapping Center intersection. 7 . Regional Significance The Deming Street project will improve the LOS of the Wapping Center intersection as .previously mentioned. This is an important point since the Wapping Center intersection is a critical point along the Sullivan Avenue/Buckland Road corridor. The Sullivan Avenue/Buckland Road corridor runs from 'Route 5 to _the I- 84 interchange, providing a key transportation link between the northern towns of East Windsor, Ellington (and surrounding towns ) to the Manchester, East Hartford area plus access to I-84, I-291 and I-384 . Therefore, improved levels of service at the Wapping Center is an essential positive consideration for the transportation _ system in the subregional area served by the Sullivan Avenue/Buckland Road corridor. 8 . Other Benefits Other benefits derived from the proposed Deming Street project would include: a. The project is an integral element of the comprehensive transportation program (as recommended by CRCOG) which has been initiated by the Town of South Windsor over the past several .years along the Sullivan Avenue/Buckland Road corridor. It would complete Recommendation #3 from Report 5 of the CRCOG Transportation Study for South Windsor for the Buckland Road corridor. b. The project_ completes the middle unfinished section of Deming Street linking Ellington, Clark and Buckland Road. The Town has recently reconstructed the Clark Street leg and will be reconstructing the Buckland Road/Deming Street intersection in 1993; this project . compliments previous improvements to the east and the west of the proposed project. e D Figure 9 ALTERNATIVE RECONSTRUCTION/REALIGNMENT OF CLARK STREET AND DEMING STREET L.O.S. = D (Buckiand Rd./Rt. 30/Rt. 194 Intersection, 2000 PM Pk. Hr.) 15,700 •j 6,600 24,200 9,400 71900 139300 ES Ellington Road (Rt. 30) 5,400 18,200 0�,�� a Oe��� •Qoa 9 Street e ar'Qr ee� 3,800 \a`�5G�� A Juno 1990 Proposed New or c Realigned Road 209300 0,000 Year 2000 ADT. a ,o -15- . BASE Figure 4 YEAR 2000 WITH PROGRAMED IMPROVEMENTS L.O.S. = E (Bucldand Rd./Rt. 30/Rt. 194 intersection, 2000 PM Pk. Hr.) 15,700 IS 6,700 Q' N E11in9ton Road Gam. -: �� 24,300. L 8 800 9,800 13,400 Ellington Rd T 30) ' 3,000 oak�a�a 20,100 Aoaa 0 1,100 rRt.001 x �i 'a C a 21,600 a S°utit ..; 1-84 WB ': Jura Im Ramps .yu. Proposed New or ;v 27,10 Realigned Road ,�, Pleasant 20,700 0,000 Year 2000 ADT � { y Valley Rd. - 5 - 6EL13 cr Chi bvcff '� GuS� 4�cjrA-`a Le 417 i