HomeMy WebLinkAboutKelly Road PW STREET FILE SOWN SQ4
�w 715�� o-P siaat V&U&ot
5 �
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE• SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
�f�OS0 co TELEPHONE (860) 644 2511
August 17. 2011
Mr. George L. Jacobs, Associate Vice President/Branch Manager
Dewberry-Goodkind, Inc.
59 Elm Street
Suite 101
New Haven, CT 06510
Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road, State Project 132-127 - Consultant Selection
Dear Mr. Jacobs,
Thank you for interviewing with the Town for the above referenced project. Your firm
was amongst those that presented good qualifications but we selected Weston &
Sampson, who in our opinion was best suited for this particular project. It is possible
that we may contact you in the future should the fee negotiations with Weston &
Sampson not be successfully completed.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer
cc: Michael Gantick, P.E., Director of Public Works
WAPROJECTS-CONSTRUCT\Kelly Rd\Const insp Admin\Consultants Not Selected.doc
SOWN Se
C O-P Sou� ?d&U&Olt
G �
s �
C, 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
f�OsoR•co TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511
August 17. 2011
Mr. Jeffrey A. Scala, VP/Regional Director
Tectonic
1344 Silas Deane Highway, Suite 500
Rocky Hill, CT 06067
Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road, State Project 132-127 - Consultant Selection
Dear Mr. Scala,
Thank you for interviewing with the Town for the above referenced project. Your firm
was amongst those that presented good qualifications but we selected Weston &
Sampson, who in our opinion was best suited for this particular project. It is possible
that we may contact you in the future should the fee negotiations with Weston &
Sampson not be successfully completed.
Sincerely,
a
Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer
cc: Michael Gantick, P.E., Director of Public Works
WAPROJECTS-CONSTRUCTUCelly Rd\Const Insp Admin\Consultants Not Selected.doc
'041N Sf4
07 G U
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
r�OSOR-C-0 TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511
August 17, 2011
Christopher B. Wester, Vice President/Regional Manager
Weston &Sampson
273 Dividend Road
Rocky Hill, CT 06067
Re: Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road, State Project 132-127 - Consultant Selection
Dear Mr. Wester,
We are pleased to inform you that your firm has been selected to provide construction
inspection and administrative services for the above referenced project. This project is
being funded under the STP-Urban program, and will need to meet with all the
procedures and requirements of ConnDOT and FHWA and is being administered by the
Town of South Windsor.
We may need to meet with ConnDOT representatives to discuss the project assignment
and we will be negotiating the fee for the construction services. I will notify you shortly
as to the next step in this process.
If you have any questions, please call me at 644-2511 x 245. We look forward to
working with you and your staff.
Sincerely,
AOZI t_
J ffrey Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer
cc: Michael Gantick, P.E., Director of Public Works
WAPROJECTS-CONSTRUCPKelly Rd\Coast Insp Admin\Consultant Selection Notification doc
1041N Sf4
a .
7-0vf o-P Sou�i `W
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
f�OsoR co TELEPHONE (860) 644 2511
August 17. 2011
Mr. Thomas Balskus, Manager of Construction
Milone & MacBroom, Inc.
99 Realty Drive
Cheshire, CT 06410
Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road, State Project 132-127 - Consultant Selection
Dear Mr. Balskus,
Thank you for interviewing with the Town for the above referenced project. Your firm
was amongst those that presented good qualifications but we selected Weston &
Sampson, who in our opinion was best suited for this particular project. It is possible
that we may contact you in the future should the fee negotiations with Weston &
Sampson not be successfully completed.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer
cc: Michael Gantick, P.E., Director of Public Works
WAPROJECTS-CONSTRUCT\Kelly Rd\Const Insp Admin\Consultants Not Selected.doe
SSW N Sf4
C�
x 0s� �
O J
5 �
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE• SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
f�OSOR c°�� TELEPHONE (860) 644 2511
August 17. 2011
Mr. Abul Islam, President
Al Engineers, Inc.
919 Middle Street
Middletown, CT 06457
Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road, State Project 132-127 - Consultant Selection
Dear Mr. Islam,
Thank you for interviewing with the Town for the above referenced project. Your firm
was amongst those that presented good qualifications but we selected Weston &
Sampson, who in our opinion was best suited for this particular project. It is possible
that we may contact you in the future should the fee negotiations with Weston &
Sampson not be successfully completed.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer
cc: Michael Gantick, P.E., Director of Public Works
WAPROJECTS-CONSTRUCT\Kelly Rd\Const Insp Admin\Consultants Not Selected.doc
��.NN Sf4
a
9 4
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE• SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
�f�OSOR-CO TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511
August 4, 2011
Mr. Hugh Hayward, P.E.
Principal Engineer of Consultant Design
Bureau of Engineering and Highway Operations
Connecticut Department of Transportation
2800 Berlin Turnpike
Newington, CT 06131-7546
Re: RFQ—Construction Inspection and Administration Services for
Reconstruction of Kelly Road, Project 132-127
Dear Mr. Hayward,
The Town of South Windsor has received and reviewed letters of interest with
qualifications from 21 consulting firms for the above referenced project and has
short listed 5 firms for interviews. The Consultant Letter of Interest Rating
Forms from three members of the Consultant Selection Panel and the Consultant
Letter of Interest Rating Summary Form have been previously send to William
Grant, the Project Manager.
The 5 short listed firms were interviewed by the Consultant Selection Panel on
July 19, 2011. Enclosed are the Consultant Interview Rating Forms from the
three panel members and the Rating Summary Form. The panel has selected
Weston &Sampson for this project and requests approval to proceed with fee
negotiations with this firm. Please let us know when this selection has been
approved and when the assignment meeting has been scheduled.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E.
Town Engineer
Enc.
cc Michael J. Gantick, P.E., Director of Public Works
Joe Perna, Project Engineer
COW N Sf4
C
To-wn o-P sioat V&U&Ot
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
f�OSOR CC TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511
June 29. 2011
Christopher B. Wester, Vice President/Regional Manager
Weston &Sampson
273 Dividend Road
Rocky Hill, CT 06067
Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road, State Project 132-127
Dear Mr. Wester,
I am pleased to inform you that your firm has been selected to interview for the above
referenced project. This project is being funded under the STP-Urban program, will need to
meet with all the procedures and requirements of ConnDOT and FHWA and is being
administered by the Town of South Windsor. The firm selected for this project will be required
to provide on-site materials testing services and surveying, including an as-built plan stamped
by a Licensed Surveyor when the work is complete. There is No DBE requirement for
construction inspection and administration of this project. In general you should be prepared to
discuss your previous experience with similar state and municipal projects, including
construction inspection, coordination, communication and record keeping. Please have a list of
at least three current references from similar state and municipal projects you have worked on
recently.
Interviews will be held at the South Windsor Town Hall, 1540 Sullivan Avenue, South Windsor,
Connecticut, in the Madden Room. The interviews are scheduled for July 19, 2011 and each
firm will have 45 minutes. The first 15 minutes may be used for a presentation on your firm
and the last 30 minutes will be used to answer questions from the committee. Please bring the
key people who will be working on this project. The interview times are as follows:
8:30 AM Weston &Sampson
9:30 AM Tectonic
10:30 AM Milone &MacBroom
11:30 AM Dewberry
1:30 PM AI Engineers Inc.
If you have any questions, please call me at 644-2511 x 245. I look forward to your interview
on July 19.
Si cerely,
Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer `
Cc: Michael Gantick, P.E., Director of Public Works ✓
4oy1N Se4
Tloluw o-P Soum ?()&U&0_t
w� 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
OR-CO TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511
June 29. 2011
Jeffrey A. Scala, VP/Regional Director
Tectonic
1344 Silas Deane Highway, Suite 500
Rocky Hill, CT 06067
Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road, State Project 132-127
Dear Mr. Scala,
I am pleased to inform you that your firm has been selected to interview for the above
referenced project. This project is being funded under the STP-Urban program, will need to
meet with all the procedures and requirements of ConnDOT and FHWA and is being
administered by the Town of South Windsor. The firm selected for this project will be required
to provide on-site materials testing services and surveying, including an as-built plan stamped
by a Licensed Surveyor when the work is complete. There is No DBE requirement for
construction inspection and administration of this project. In general you should be prepared to
discuss your previous experience with similar state and municipal projects, including
construction inspection, coordination, communication and record keeping. Please have a list of
at least three current references from similar state and municipal projects you have worked on
recently.
Interviews will be held at the South Windsor Town Hall, 1540 Sullivan Avenue, South Windsor,
Connecticut, in the Madden Room. The interviews are scheduled for July 19, 2011 and each
firm will have 45 minutes. The first 15 minutes may be used for a presentation on your firm
and the last 30 minutes will be used to answer questions from the committee. Please bring the
key people who will be working on this project. The interview times are as follows:
8:30 AM Weston &Sampson
9:30 AM Tectonic
10:30 AM Milone & MacBroom
11:30 AM Dewberry
1:30 PM Al Engineers Inc.
If you have any questions, please call me at 644-2511 x 245. I look forward to your interview
on July 19.
Si cerely,
Y,44 111-4,
Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer
Cc: Michael Gantick, P.E., Director of Public Works
SQ11N Sfq
o
S 719v� V/ slow ?d&U&Ot
a U
�C 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
f�OsoR•co TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511
June 29. 2011
Thomas Balskus, Manager of Construction
Milone & MacBroom, Inca
99 Realty Drive
Cheshire, CT 06410
Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road, State Project 132-127
Dear Mr. Balskus,
I am pleased to inform you that your firm has been selected to interview for the above
referenced project. This project is being funded under the STP-Urban program, will need to
meet with all the procedures and requirements of ConnDOT and FHWA and is being
administered by the Town of South Windsor. The firm selected for this project will be required
to provide on-site materials testing services and surveying, including an as-built plan stamped
by a Licensed Surveyor when the work is complete. There is No DBE requirement for
construction inspection and administration of this project. In general you should be prepared to
discuss your previous experience with similar state and municipal projects, including
construction inspection, coordination, communication and record keeping. Please have a list of
at least three current references from similar state and municipal projects you have worked on
recently.
Interviews will be held at the South Windsor Town Hall, 1540 Sullivan Avenue, South Windsor,
Connecticut, in the Madden Room. The interviews are scheduled for July 19, 2011 and each
firm will have 45 minutes. The first 15 minutes may be used for a presentation on your firm
and the last 30 minutes will be used to answer questions from the committee. Please bring the
key people who will be working on this project. The interview times are as follows:
8:30 AM Weston &Sampson
9:30 AM Tectonic
10:30 AM Milone & MacBroom
11:30 AM Dewberry
1:30 PM AI Engineers Inc.
If you have any questions, please call me at 644-2511 x 245. I look forward to your interview
on July 19.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E., Town Engineer _
Cc: Michael Gantick, P.E., Director of Public Works
10%4N Sf4
y x r 710v� �Soad t
O
m �
:. �, 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE• SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
J�OSOR-CO TELEPHONE (860) 644-2511
June 29. 2011
George L. Jacobs, Associate Vice President/Branch Manager
Dewberry-Goodkind, Inc.
59 Elm Street, Suite 101
New Haven, CT 06510
Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road, State Project 132-127
Dear Mr. Jacobs;
I am pleased to inform you that your firm has been selected to interview for the above
referenced project. This project is being funded under the STP-Urban program, will need to
meet with all the procedures and requirements of ConnDOT and FHWA and is being
administered by the Town of South Windsor. The firm selected for this project will be required
to provide on-site materials testing services and surveying, including an as-built plan stamped
by a Licensed Surveyor when the work is complete. There is No DBE requirement for
construction inspection and administration of this project. In general you should be prepared to
discuss your previous experience with similar state and municipal projects, including
construction inspection, coordination, communication and record keeping. Please have a list of
at least three current references from similar state and municipal projects you have worked on
recently.
Interviews will be held at the South Windsor Town Hall, 1540 Sullivan Avenue, South Windsor,
Connecticut, in the Madden Room. The interviews are scheduled for July 19, 2011 and each
firm will have 45 minutes. The first 15 minutes may be used for a presentation on your firm
and the last 30 minutes will be used to answer questions from the committee. Please bring the
key people who will be working on this project. The interview times are as follows:
8:30 AM Weston &Sampson
9:30 AM Tectonic
10:30 AM Milone & MacBroom
11:30 AM Dewberry
1:30 PM AI Engineers Inc.
If you have any questions, please call me at 644-2511 x 245. I look forward to your interview
on July 19.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E.,Town_Engineer
Cc: Michael Gantick, P.E., Director of Public Works
S0VIN Sf4
o
G
Tiov� oP Sout,�i ?d
U
7 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
r�OSOR-CO TELEPHONE(860) 644-2511
June 29. 2011
Abul Islam, President
AI Engineers, Inc.
919 Middle Street
Middletown, CT 06457
Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road, State Project 132-127
Dear Mr. Islam,
I am pleased to inform you that your firm has been selected to interview for the above
referenced project. This project is being funded under the STP-Urban program, will need to
meet with all the procedures and requirements of ConnDOT and FHWA and is being
administered by the Town of South Windsor. The firm selected for this project will be required
to provide on-site materials testing services and surveying, including an as-built plan stamped
by a Licensed Surveyor when the work is complete. There is No DBE requirement for
construction inspection and administration of this project. In general you should be prepared to
discuss your previous experience with similar state and municipal projects, including
construction inspection, coordination, communication and record keeping. Please have a list of
at least three current references from similar state and municipal projects you have worked on
recently.
Interviews will be held at the South Windsor Town Hall, 1540 Sullivan Avenue, South Windsor,
Connecticut, in the Madden Room. The interviews are scheduled for July 19, 2011 and each
firm will have 45 minutes. The first 15 minutes may be used for a presentation on your firm
and the last 30 minutes will be used to answer questions from the committee. Please bring the
key people who will be working on this project. The interview times are as follows:
8:30 AM Weston &Sampson
9:30 AM Tectonic
10:30 AM Milone & MacBroom
11:30 AM Dewberry
1:30 PM AI Engineers Inc.
If you have any questions, please call me at 644-2511 x 245. I look forward to your interview
on July 19.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E.,_Town Engineer__
Cc: Michael Gantick, P.E., Director of Public Works
SaW N Sf4
co
C�
+ [�
s
7_0 O-Pslaa� 2v&
w� 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
R•c° TELEPHONE(860) 644 2511
May 20, 2011
Mr. Hugh Hayward, P.E.
Principal Engineer of Consultant Design
Bureau of Engineering and Highway Operations
Connecticut Department of Transportation
2800 Berlin Turnpike
Newington, CT 06131-7546
Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road, Project 132-127
Dear Mr. Hayward,
Enclosed is the Final Design for Review submission for the Kelly Road Reconstruction Project. This submission
includes 12 copies of the Final Review Plans (66 sheets), 12 Copies of the Special Provisions and 12 copies of
the Final Design Report. The updated design parameters, schedule of property owners, detailed cost estimate
and calendar day chart are appended to the Final Design Report. All the comments on the Semi-Final Design
for this project, which we received from the CDOT have been addressed in the Final Review Plans, Special
Provisions, Final Design Report, and additional reports. Also enclosed are 12 copies of the Semi Final Design
comments and the Town's response to these comments. In addition, the following reports are being
transmitted with this submission:
Addendum to the Drainage Design Report 2 copies
Quantity Calculations for Construction Items 2 copies
DEP NDDB Review Request with Attachments A and B 2 copies
We look forward to addressing any comments on the Final Design for Review and finalizing the plans and
specifications for the reconstruction of Kelly Road.
Please call me at 644-2511 x245 or Joe Perna at the same number, ext 240 with any questions or comments
about this Final Design for Review submission.
Very truly yours,
J ffrey B. Doolittle, P.E.
Town Engineer
Enc.
cc: - William-Grant,£onnDOT - - - - - - - - - -
Allison Wilcox, ConnDOT
Michael J. Gantick, Director of Public Works
Joseph Perna, Project Engineer
SpW N Sf4
7J loam ?d&U&olt
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
sox•C0 TELEPHONE(860) 644-2511
March 29, 2012
Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road
Dear Property Owner/Resident:
As you may be aware, the Town will be reconstructing Kelly Road from the intersection
of Avery Street to the Vernon Town Line to improve the roadway and the drainage in
this area. The contract for this project has recently been awarded to Spazzarini
Construction and it is anticipated that work will begin around the second week in April,
2012.
As part of this construction project, the Contractor will be utilizing the existing Town
owned parcel located in the southwest corner of Diane Drive between house nos. 150 &
160 as a staging area for storage of construction materials, and as a possible location
for their job trailers. This area will be utilized for the duration of the project which is
expected to be completed by the end of the summer, 2013. The area will be fenced off
during this period and will be restored to its current state upon completion of the
project.
Project updates can be found on the Citizen Service Request Dashboard by accessing
the Town web site at www.southwindsor.org. If you have any questions regarding this
project, please feel free to call me at 644-2511 ext. 244 or the Project Engineer, Joseph
Perna at ext. 240.
Very Truly Yours,
Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E.
Town Engineer
Cc: Michael Gantick, Director of Public Works
Karl Reichle, Town Garage Operations Manager
Joseph Perna, Project Engineer
Raymond Favreau, Director of Parks and Grounds
Gantick, Michael
From: Gantick, Michael
Sent: Monday, September21, 2009 12:33 PM
To: 'PERELLI, JOHN C PW'
Subject: RE:
John:
We certainly encourage residents to express their views to both the staff and the elected
officials. We really_ do .try to listen I will bring the copy of the preliminary plans for
the road fronting your property that shows the new sidewalk one .foot further from your
house than the existing sidewalk. The proposed new edge of pavement for the road is
approximately 2 1/2 feet further from your house than the existing edge of pavement. The 7
foot snow shelf ( measured from the face( gutter line of pavement) ) of the curb to the
edge of the sidewalk closest to the road is our standard for all new roads ( including
subdivisions) and has been the standard for many, many years.
-----Original Message----
From: PERELLI, JOHN C PW [mailto:john.perelli@pw.utc.com]
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:07 PM
To: Gantick, Michael
Subject:
Mike I want to apologize for directing some of my frustration on you
this morning given the wrong info from clerks office as to whom the
town manager is With that said I did receive your voice mail about my not to worry
about my end of street that the shift in property line would happen at the other end of
street (mostly) if that is
gospel I probably wont have any thing to add tonight; I want you all
to know the 32 years ive lived on kelly rd have been any thing but pleasant with the
inability of our police force to control the speeding and stop sign violations and cars
passing stopped school buses . My wife mary and I have or grand children living with us
and it is really to dangerous to let them out on the front lawn many complaints have .been
turned in to the police with no action taken thanks for the call back ill be a church
house mouse tonight if what you explained on the
11;09 voice mail to me JohnPerelli
1
,T J°
MEMORANDUM
To: Matthew Galligan, Town Manager
CC: Michael Gantick, P.E, Director of Public Works V
From: Jeff Doolittle, P.f., Town Engineer'
Date: December 3, 2009
Re: Kelly Road Reconstruction, ConnDOT Project No. 132-127
Engineering has marked the locations of the property lines along Kelly Road, the
proposed sidewalk, and the edges of the proposed roadway based on the preliminary
design. Attached is a copy of the letter that was sent to the residents about this effort.
The following information is presented to document the existing conditions and explain
the proposed preliminary design. Please pass this along to the Town Council.
The existing road base and pavement has deteriorated to the point where it needs to
be replaced to provide a road with at least a 20 year life: The pavement has been built
up in various layers over the years but is not in good condition and the base under the
pavement is sand which does not have the strength or stability for a good long lasting
road base. Kelly Road had a PCI of 72 in July of 2008 and it is decreasing every year.
The existing pavement width varies from 22-28 feet with a 37 foot paved section by
Avery Street.
There is a sharp curve and steep hill east of Gerber Road West that has limited sight
distance and has been difficult to negotiate in poor weather. The existing road is closer
to the abutting properties on the north side of the Right-of-Way.
The existing sidewalk on the north side of the road is bituminous pavement and is 4
feet wide, except near Avery Street where it narrows. This sidewalk is uneven and has
many cracks, bumps and depressions. The buffer between the sidewalk and road
varies in width from 0 feet to about 5 feet and is too steep to easily maintain grass in
some places. This sidewalk is in poor condition and needs to be replaced.
The proposed design would correct these problems. The road would be completely
reconstructed with new base, pavement, curbing and drainage improvements. The
geometry of the road will be improved by lowering the road at the top of the hill by
Gerber Road West and constructing a more gradual curve around this corner. Also, the
small hills and rolls in the road will be smoothed out by lowering the road slightly in
several places and the road will have a uniform 26 foot width, except for 38 feet width
by Avery Street. The proposed road would be shifted south about 4 feet so it is more
centered in the ROW, between abutting properties. This will allow for a larger grass
snow shelf between the curb and sidewalk, and allow room for the utilities in this area
(utility poles, trash containers, storm drainage, water main, etc.).
As part of this project the Town proposes to replace the existing sidewalk with a 4 foot
wide Portland cement concrete sidewalk. There would be a 7 foot wide grass snow
shelf between the curb and sidewalk with a gentle slope so it could be easily mowed
and maintained. Enclosed are the design parameters that are being used to develop
the plans for the reconstruction of Kelly Road. Also attached is a memo from Joe Perna
regarding sidewalk standards and conditions in Town (including Kelly Road) and
sidewalk standards from other area Towns, the State, National Transportation
agencies, and Federal agencies.
The Town has had numerous public meetings to discuss the reconstruction of Kelly
Road over at least the past 14 years. Attached is the information that was handed out
at the latest public information meeting held on August 5, 2009, and the public
comments received at that meeting and initial responses from Town Staff.
The proposed design also has some Traffic Calming elements to try to reduce traffic
speeds and maintain the residential nature of this road. Unfortunately,the ConnDOT
has determined that raised speed bumps are not to be included in this project. A letter
from ConnDOT to this effect is also attached. The Town can install such features after
this project is complete.
The proposed Kelly Road Reconstruction project has been approved for Federal and
State funding (up to $3,613,000 total) under the STP-Urban program. The Town is
responsible for the design costs and 10% of the ROW costs. This would provide a new
roadway, sidewalk and drainage that would have at least a 20 year life.
It has been suggested that the existing road be milled and overlayed where it is. This
would provide a new pavement surface but it would not address any of the base issues,
geometric issues drainage issues or the existing sidewalk. Repaving Kelly Road would
only provide about 5-10 years life because the base would still be deficient.
Engineering has estimated that this option would cost $700,000 and it would have to be
funded by the Town. This approach would not be eligible for Federal and/or State
funding under the STP-Urban Program. The existing sidewalk would have to be
replaced by the abutting property owners (per the Town Ordinance Section 86-82)
unless the Town decided to fund this.
Town staff strongly recommend that we proceed with the design and reconstruction of
Kelly Road under the STP-Urban Program. We are available to discuss this further at
your convenience.
November 3, 2009
Re: Reconstruction of Kelly Road, State Project No. 132-127
Dear Property Owner/Resident:
The Town of South Windsor is planning to reconstruct Kelly Road from Avery Street to
the Vernon Town line using State and Federal funds. Preliminary design plans for the
reconstruction of Kelly Road have been developed by the Engineering Division. The
Engineering Division was asked by the Town Council to stake out the property lines,
proposed edge of pavement and proposed sidewalk as shown on the preliminary design
plans. Town staff will be out to mark these three features in front of each property on
Kelly Road between November 9 and November 20, 2009. We will locate existing
monuments and enough iron pins to mark private property along this road. A color
coded stake will be placed in the lawn or a painted mark made on the pavement to
mark these three features in front of every property on Kelly Road. The back of the
proposed sidewalk (edge closest to the houses) will only be marked on the north side of
the road where the sidewalk is proposed. Please note that these marks will be
approximate because they are based on preliminary plans but they should be within 6
inches of the final locations. The property lines will be marked with a Blue stake, the
proposed edge of pavement will be marked with a White stake or paint mark and the
back of the ,proposed sidewalk will be marked with an Orange stake or paint mark. A
typical sketch showing a property with these features marked and color coded is
enclosed for your information. If you have questions about the proposed locations of
these features or other aspects of this project such as grading onto your property or
reconstruction of your driveway, you can contact the Engineering Division after this
mark out is complete and we will be glad to discuss this project more with you.
If you have any questions, please call me at 644-2511, extension 245 or the Project
Engineer, Joseph Perna at extension 240.
Very truly yours,
Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E.
Town Engineer
Enc.
cc: Matthew B. Galligan, Town Manager
Michael J. Gantick, Director of Public Works
Joseph Perna, Project Engineer
Project No. 132-127
Reconstruction of Kelly Road
Town of South Windsor
DESIGN PARAMETERS
Typical Section and other Design Features:
Project Scope of Work: Major Reconstruction (Non-Freeway)
Roadway Classification: Urban Collector
Volume: ADT = 4,100 — Westerly Section (2003)
6,000 — Near Vernon Town Line (2003)
Posted Speed Limit: 30 mph / 25 mph (in vicinity of Gerber Road West)
85t" Percentile Speed: 40 to 44 mph
Travelway: Two 11 ft. lanes and 2 ft. shoulders — Kelly Road
One 18 ft. lane (north side) and one 16 ft. lane (south side)-
west side of Kelly Road near intersection with Avery Street
Pavement Section: 2 inches Superpave 0.5 inch
4 inches Superpave 1.5 inch
6 inches Processed Aggregate Base
6 inches Gravel Subbase
Design Standards: ConnDOT Highway Design Manual (2003)
Town of South Windsor Public Improvement Specifications
Additional Information:
PROPOSED
STANDARD FOR PROJECT
Design Speed 35-45 mph 40 mph
Travel Lane Width 11-12 ft lift
Shoulder Width 4-8 ft 2 ft*
Horizontal Curvature 490 ft (min.) 750 ft (min.)
Vertical Curvature (k-value)(Crest) 44 44 (min.)
Vertical Curvature (k-value)(Sag) 64 64 (min.)
Maximum Grade 10% 7.5% (max.)
Minimum Grade 0.5% 0.75% (min.)
Stopping Sight Distance 305 ft 308 ft(min.)
Cross Slope 1.5 — 3.0 % 3.125 %*
Superelevation 4.0% n/a
* Requires exception from design standards
Y'
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jeffrey Doolittle, Town Engineer
FROM: Joseph J. Perna, Project Engineer
DATE: December 2, 2009
RE: Kelly Road Reconstruction Project
State Project No. 132-127
I have compiled the following information regarding questions about the layout and
design of the proposed roadway and sidewalk on Kelly Road:
With regards to the rationale used in the design of the proposed road realignment with
new concrete sidewalks for this project, we have followed the guidelines set forth in the
Town of South Windsor's Public Improvement Specifications for a typical roadway
section. A local roadway with an average right-of-way width of 50 feet and pavement
width of 26 feet allows for a 4 foot wide sidewalk set 1 foot from street line to back of
walk, and a 7 foot wide buffer zone or snow shelf. This buffer zone provides safety as it
separates pedestrians from vehicular traffic, as well as providing an area for
accumulated snow which is deposited from the snow plows. It should be noted that the
buffer zone can vary in width, depending on the width of the existing right-of-way and
location of the sidewalk. The minimum width allowed per Town Specifications is 4 feet.
When we looked at the new road alignment for Kelly Road, we recognized that the
existing roadway was not centered in the right-of-way. Utilizing the typical roadway
section as described above, the proposed roadway section for Kelly Road was
established by holding the north street line and laying out the proposed sidewalk, snow
shelf (or buffer), and roadway. With this layout, the roadway is generally centered
within the existing right-of-way (see attached roadway section detail). With this layout,
the proposed roadway is being shifted to the south on average approximately 4 feet
(varies from 2 to 6 feet). When one looks at the location of the existing storm drain
structures located on the south side of the road, it becomes evident that the existing
roadway was not located in the center of the right-of-way as the structures are off-set
from the gutter Line (see attached digital photo). The white stakes that appear in this
photo clearly shows that the proposed roadway on the south side is in alignment with
what was the original intent for the roadway layout.
With regards to the design and layout of the proposed sidewalk on the north side of
Kelly Road, we again followed the guidelines set forth in the Town of South Windsor's
Public Improvement Specifications which calls for a 4 foot wide portland cement
concrete walk and a 7 foot buffer or snow shelf (see attached digital photo which shows
a typical roadway section at one of the newer subdivisions in town).
It should be noted that ConnDOT guidelines call for a 5 foot wide walk as a standard for
all state projects but we decided to provide a 4 foot wide walk per the Town of South
Windsor standards. Both the Federal Highway Administration (FHA) and the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) recommend a minimum width of 5 feet for a sidewalk or
walkway, which allows two people to pass comfortably or to walk side-by-side. The
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)
guidelines state that the minimum clear width for a sidewalk is 4 feet. Where sidewalk
widths are less than 5 feet, it is recommended that passing spaces be provided at
reasonable intervals. This standard was applied recently on the Buckland Road project
which was federally funded (see attached digital photo). We should keep in mind that
this might be a standard that could be applied for the Kelly Road project.
It should also be noted that because this is a state and federal funded project, the
layout and design of the sidewalk must comply with the requirements of the most
recent ADA standards, which include requirements for sidewalk widths, grades,
locations, surface treatments, and curb ramps. We have researched the current ADA
requirements and have found that the minimum width allowed for a pedestrian access
route is 4 feet (see attached ADA guidelines for Accessible Public Rights-of Way — page
24). The ADA Accessibility Guidelines also refer to the AASHTO guidelines for standards
on sidewalk and buffer widths. I have attached portions of these guidelines for your
edification (pgs 58 & 59).
To further address the question on proposed sidewalk width, I have also contacted
several towns in the area surrounding South Windsor including Manchester, East
Hartford, Vernon, West Hartford, Windsor, Enfield, and Glastonbury, and found that all
of these towns have a minimum standard width for sidewalks of at least 4 feet with
several towns using 5 feet as a minimum standard. I also checked the existing
bituminous sidewalk on Kelly Road for the entire length and found that the width is a
uniform 4 feet except for one small section which crosses the existing culverts near the
intersection with Avery Street which is 3.5 feet in width (see attached digital photos). In
this case, it makes sense to replace the existing sidewalk with a new sidewalk of at
least equal width.
Please let me know if you have any further questions or require further clarification
regarding any of these issues.
s
STREET LINE STREET LINE
NORTH 50 FT R.O.W. SOUTH
UTILITY POLE VARIES
LOCATION
12 FT 13 FT 13 FT 12 FT
VARIES PAVEMENT PAVEMENT VARIES
1, 4, 70 29 11, 11, 2, 7,
CONCRETE SNOW H LF TRAVEL LANE TRAVEL LANE SNOW SHELF
WALK
SLOPE VARIES
L_ t z FT TYP
t 1-- � 3�•.Fl. t 4.F r
3:1 MAX SLOPE VARIES
3:1 MAX
BITUMINOUS CONCRETE
LIP CURBING CENTER LINE
2" SUPERPAVE 0.5 INCH
4" SUPERPAVE 1.5 INCH
6" PROCESSED
AGGREGATE BASE
6" GRAVEL SUBBASE
PROPOSED ROADWAY SECTION
KELLY ROAD
NOT TO SCALE
t
., ��
Ellfa�� = ' ; P
Jv
9 �� •
k t �
�s A,i
�~ a t � :���, + � '� d� ,yam r j�n �' •
r r r_ i
s-
Ilk
I�
' F
k � i did' i 4
� � C ++�,+.� �:j i t Yj�• J
+y k* ! ! TM f
i `,
�Sbi � � eF•a Y ^_
ti..
e
' -_ ,•, .r Hie -., '�"'�. .. ..T_ d � �� P
` 1
W
:
r
P .J 1 �J_,�_ �."'ram"._.. .�' 1...P`^w. •. -' ��M -_-�,,.� � � "t ���^T,
� " r
-
-
` t !
_ I
f 1 0
�. raa �. ♦ ... 3 ,'`ate.
Y.N ,pgn.
AS
�,a. s `` "- ��P •_� r�„T� �' �� ". �,, "+"'S- 's, > r any
_Y4 i ti'4 �• Xc
a
d.. t •y, �.. � 1 {LLL,� - `rat[
Apt,
I .
I
"0 Revised Draft Guidelines for Accessible Public Rights-of-Way Page 24 of 48
R301.3 Width qk► irts_ -v.iaK llf�lisT A►�vrS v( Con►M� 1c.
Advisory R301.3.1 Continuous Width. The pedestrian access route provides a minimum accessible
route of passage within a sidewalk or other walkway that may not comprise the full width of the
pedestrian circulation route, particularly in urban areas. Industry-recommended sidewalk widths can be
ound in 'Guide for the Planning, Design, and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities, American Association
f State Highway and Transportation Officials, July 2004 (www,aasfrMarg). The minimum width
must be maintained without obstruction.
Where a pedestrian access route turns or changes direction, it should accommodate the continuous
assage of a wheelchair or scooter. As with street or highway design for vehicles, additional
maneuvering width or length may be needed at recesses and alcoves, doorways and entrances, and
long curved or angled routings, particularly where the grade exceeds 5%. Individual segments of
pedestrian access routes should have a minimum straight length of 1.2 m (4.0 ft).
Street furniture, including fixed or movable elements such as newspaper and sales racks, cafe seating
and tables, bus shelters, vender carts, sidewalk sculptures, and bicycle racks, shall not reduce the
required width of the pedestrian access route.
Provisions for protruding objects apply across the entire width of the pedestrian circulation path, not
-ust the pedestrian access route.
R301.3.2 Width at Passing Spaces.Walkways in pedestrian access routes that are less
than 1.5 m (5.0 ft) in clear width shall provide passing spaces at intervals of 61 m (200 ft)
maximum. Pedestrian access routes at passing spaces shall be 1.5 m (5.0 ft) wide for a
distance of 1.5m (5.0 ft).
R301.3.3 Width at Elevators and Lifts. The pedestrian access route at elevators and
platform lifts shall be permitted to comply with the applicable requirements of section 407,
408, and 410 of Appendix D to 36 CFR part 1191 (the ADA and ABA Accessibility
Guidelines).
R301.3.4 Width at Doors, Doorways, and Gates. The pedestrian access route through
doors, doorways, and gates shall be permitted to comply with R411.2.3.
R301.4 Walkway Grade and Cross Slope
R301.4.1 Cross Slope. The cross slope of the walkway of a pedestrian access route shall
be 2 percent maximum.
111301.4.2 Street or Highway Grade. Where the walkway of a pedestrian access route is
contained within a street or highway border, its grade shall not exceed the general grade
established for the adjacent street or highway.
R301.4.3 Supported Slope. Where the walkway of-a pedestrian access route is
supported by a structure, it shall comply with R305.5.
dvisory R301.4.3 Supported Slope. This provision covers pedestrian access routes on bridges,
ver asses underpasses and similar facilities.
R301.5 Surface. The surface of the pedestrian access route shall be firm, stable and slip resistant.
http://www.access-board.gov/prowac/draft.htm 12/1/2009
r AQS 4iTC> Gait& ja(z i u� FLA" )"a' iN r>e5) ,
AND d/�¢ATIo/1 aT� �t7�e,TTR1AN V:AC-IL4111F 3
58 3 Pedestrian Facility Design
adequate for some local streets on an interim
, Q basis, especially when this improves a condi-
d fj } tion where there were no sidewalks previously
(28).
� 'zl
There are many locations where clear
sidewalk widths greater than the minimum
rraveiewey -� are desirable.Along arterials not in the central
business district(CBD),sidewalk widths of
Exhibit 3-5. 1.8 to 2.4 in [6 to 8 ft] are desirable where a planting strip is provided between the side-
Pedestrian Travel Way Clear walk and the curb, and sidewalk widths of 2.4 to 3.0 m [8 to 10 ft] are desirable where the
of Obstructions(29). sidewalk is flush against the curb. In CBD areas, the desirable sidewalk width is 3.0 in [10
ft] or sufficiently wide to provide the desired level of service (see discussion below).These
widths represent a clear or unobstructed pedestrian travel way. Point narrowings in the
desired widths may be acceptable in isolated instances as long as there is at least 1.2 in [4
ft] for accessible passage. However,where practical, street lights, utility poles, sign posts,
fire hydrants,mailboxes,parking meters,bus benches, and other street furniture should
be located so they do not obstruct the desirable sidewalk width(4).
Chapter.18 of the Institute of Transportation Engineers' Highway Capacity Manual
(HCM) (27) provides procedures to assess the sidewalk width needed to accommodate
particular volumes at a desired level of service. Exhibit 3-4 illustrates the method used by
the HCM to define effective walkway width, deducting shy distances from building faces,
fences,walls, and other lateral obstructions.
The principal performance measure for sidewalks and walkways is space.Two criteria
that are used to determine sidewalk level of service (LOS) are available area per person and
flow rate.These performance measures are designated by six levels of service from A to E
LOS A represents an almost empty sidewalk, LOS C to D usually provide maximum
pedestrian flow conditions,while LOS F is total breakdown.
In areas where high pedestrian volumes are expected, it may be appropriate to provide
sidewalks with widths of 3.0 to 4.5 in [10 to 15 ft] or more to accommodate pedestrian
flows. Conversely,when excessively wide sidewalks are located in areas where there are low
pedestrian volumes, the expansive pavement and empty-looking sidewalks may seem
uninviting to pedestrians (28).
j
AAsu , c,
Guide for the Planning,Design,and Operation of Pedestrian Facilities 59
Exhibit 3-5 illustrates a variety of potential obstructions and how the sidewalk
can be designed with adequate clearance. For example,when the sidewalk abuts
storefronts,it is desirable to provide about 0.6 in [2 ft] of additional width to
accommodate shy distance from walls,shoppers stopping to look into windows,
and to avoid conflicts with doors opening and pedestrians entering and leaving
the adjacent buildings(14).The provision of shy distance along building fronts is _
illustrated in Exhibit 3-6. Similar width accommodations may be needed adja-
cent to sidewalk vendors and newsstands.The use of any sidewalk width for it
cafes, newsstands, or other vendors should be regulated under an encroachment
permit process that considers accessibility and pedestrian level of service. -
_ I
0.6 m
[2 ft.]
Providing a buffer can improve pedestrian safety and enhance the overall
walking experience. Buffer width is the distance between the sidewalk and the adjacent Exhibit 3-6.
Shy Distance Between
roadway.The buffer width in a commercial area will be different from the buffer needs of Building and Walkway(29).
a residential area. Landscaped buffers can serve to provide a snow storage area and splash
protection for pedestrians, and space for curb ramps,street light poles, trash pick up, and
traffic signs.Additionally, buffer area plantings and benches can aid in creating an inviting
social setting for the pedestrian.
On-street parking or bike lanes can also act as a sidewalk buffer.
Desirable landscape buffer widths as measured from the edge of the traveled way are:
• Local or collector streets-0.6 to 1.2 to [2 to 4 ft]
• Arterial or major streets-1.5 to 1.8 m [5 to 6 ft]
If a planting strip is not provided, then the desirable total width for a curb-attached
sidewalk in residential areas should be at least 1.8 in [6 ft]. In commercial areas or along
busy arterial streets, the desirable total curb-attached sidewalk width should be 2.4 in [8 ft]
to provide space for light poles and other street furniture, as well as protection from
splashing, car door openings, and snow storage in northern climates (4).
Where there is a landscaped buffer area at a bus stop between the sidewalk and street,
accessible paved loading/waiting pads and connections to the sidewalk for both front and
rear doors of a bus should be provided.Accessibility requirements for bus stops are
presented in ADAAG Section 10 (12).
_ r M
L K 1 �'{•E
s,
r> F'' p l��:t �t' •
r
.i — � Pt Ise '.'�; �o t '� ':�a `�- •
s't; •
I
E, .f
t
I_ } ,ft
C
.\ y Sr�t •
I:
e •
Qy �.�F'�kQt f � f�,,{� tl � ri ��I�II� IVY .• •
i I 1
yi
.-
i 4, t
+
4
'� t'� a? fir. '}. r•: # ,�•.eRt!r��� a�r':� .�;.i 'd "'w ti ►�{�,�
.y�J L ,,lam, i -,1�• n"
.^`� ,��. 3i" �''t '` fit � �•(1y'; � J
Kr
4
4
•f •"t k
+ram
_
t . y
R
r
�r,S : ... ... _ i y i,l .:.y J�'F r ' :Y.r .,.n^ .ye*•µ°.. ��'...ta'�+s4•�i'„pl'� �,
h
rr _
1•�'^ yi. « T { ;�� 9 .". �{ ^i.� T '..'Y. 8..ti wCy' .i'�M1 ad, •.� ^S:\ ''���Il ..,�¢ .��'"r°'R.'}' ...
6 y.�°' � ',%: ,+�L,� .v:. w wSr r> x x,�.'+-"ck�t ,x M•n 4,� r"'P�, � r f 1k, j
t. "•^!,� � l"�D�� ,'...r'L k..v Y.3rc?"r�",�Y`�.°�'.'�.xl?�a��� ..SfF'a?tlFN�i��!Fw r�R��r�! "-�'4. _` .`•.4'�•4ar��"1�"� .."'..
11,4 fah
,
y
NZ A
'i1,°��'�' ,M .1j' __ ,• 'c
s
-sties^* ,x�� ,�,. ,.,,r�a`R"� „� ''� � `r•c--
I i �� � 'r, a'C'F',1� ',�'\,ti"•sla'.. �^a� a � a.e^. �.'S*'',�fF.d"�„i'4#m�
• -mot .. ° .7 �`I':
- y� ...� �"+ F �.�, ,AT•4' � X�a '� "a3�r' rin'X w r'.. A �`.� 'v���;�� � � t',n:!Ad
a
1 + v •:: .' ��, ! ARC
4
i
w�� ,�, ram' �,:'" r*t,-Y_ ". �";"' x`i"S'"^a,•r "ei": A F'\'. -.. ^, .� _
A •'�„ ate, ' _: w' a� % a .fti "� d �: �e,yry.
� �.. .. ,� ti� .fit 's+.``Tls+•.,s r,'.,. �°j^°�
--
.ya y— s
I
a 1, r y'7 r tR'
tCm d
r
� x�.�'Z i�v I I �i E� F t •
�`�t_.�d��� 4, 1 ��I � S r,1. � �• 5 � � i� l ill
y 'sr •
r,
fjl
al
a
r.'
` r
C � V
i LSa ;
°
.=. - - ^y' .,. ..-.,,_,•, .. mow' ,
,
,
r-
w
` 1
». ��� ...-,:,' x'. ...1^�'''' r Lek �: V h`i �'.� .r• •- t`'"�- .,iz�z-'^ S�ad",�`,,
d• � K- fi i h. ,c
s
S
•/ c F_
lip
v ll�✓ ems
r,l�F i�j
v
�I
4 � i
f
Tr
i�.�a F�y ma's+ .� e� �� � �, ; "'r�� � > ■
r q,.
a
t��xa ����h a r f i'j1 of 1 � •
� r ! _ .'A � ,/ rl.,. ,1 � r �„ r � ,� I ! 1:+� v. .�� gy����• a �>4a
1 � , � - - y'1' �/�'�� y„ � 'r� -.r'!':/ !r�T�I r f .'��y, �"�"'�' r. fi✓� -. � —'cm.+�.
�, � - :..� �_.r v � - r Y� ,('� .r_•.,rF �� -S 4-•! �� ! fir,,.•
y � e '`.-O` r--."�! •�(��� ,.n.�.+_„— —�, �iv'''� r ''`'� ' *4rp��' 'f •'�$1�`1b'9 i-5 _. .,`1'`!'. �•�i:"
Y
I
"
_
wn.
Y t+�
d fir .:. .. 4+C+t' 4 1 .�..• � �:
is•r I Y .. TM'.
PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING
RECONSTRUCTION OF KELLY ROAD
SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT
STATE PROJECT#132-127
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, 2009
SOUTH WINDSOR TOWN HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE
SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT 06074
7:00 P.M.
PROGRAM
I. INTRODUCTORY STATEMENTS
Moderator
Mr. Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E.
South Windsor Town Engineer
IL DESIGN PRESENTATION
Mr. Joseph Perna
South Windsor Project Engineer
III. RIGHTS OF WAY PRESENTATION
Mr. Douglas Hummel, SR/WA
Office of Rights of Way
Connecticut Department of Transportation
IV.AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION
Federal, State, Regional, and Local Representatives
Public Participation
SIGN IN SHEETS WILL BE PROVIDED ONE-HALF HOUR BEFORE THE
SCHEDULED START OF THE INFORMATIONAL MEETING FOR THOSE
WISHING TO SPEAK.
After the Design and Rights of Way presentations,the Moderator will recognize persons wishing
to speak. There will be a five-minute time limit on all first-time speakers. Persons wishing to
speak a second time will not be recognized until all have had an opportunity to speak. Documents
and other information are available for public inspection or copy,at the following locations.
Town of South Windsor Connecticut Dept.of Transportation
Engineering Division Office of Consultant Design-Local Roads
1540 Sullivan Avenue 2800 Berlin Turnpike
South Windsor,Connecticut 06074 Newington,Connecticut 06131
Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00 Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00
GENERAL INFORMATION
This project is being recommended for rights of way acquisition and construction under the
STP-Urban Program,a Federal,State,and local cooperative effort to improve traffic flow and
safety in urban areas.
The preliminary design for this project will be discussed this evening along with private
property rights of way and easement acquisition procedures and tentative schedule for the
rights of way acquisition, easement&construction activities.
All comments and recommendations made at this evening's public informational meeting will
receive careful consideration by the Town of South Windsor and the State of Connecticut
Department of Transportation.
As a result of the information gained at this informational meeting,some of you may wish to
make additional written statements or exhibits in place of,or in addition to,oral statements
made at the informational meeting. Such additional written statements or exhibits must be
reproducible in black and white and on paper not to exceed 8-1/2"x 11" in size. Additional
statements should be addressed to:
Mr.Jeffrey Doolittle, P.E. Mr. Richard B.Armstrong
Town Engineer Principal Engineer—Consultant Design
Town of South Windsor Connecticut Dept. of Transportation
Engineering Division Office of Consultant Design-Local Roads
1540 Sullivan Avenue 2800 Berlin Turnpike
South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Newington, Connecticut 06131
Written statements or exhibits may be introduced for the record at this informational meeting
or filed by August 20, 2009 at the above mentioned address.
t
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This project consists of the reconstruction and realignment of approximately 3,770 feet of
Kelly Road from the intersection with Avery Street to the South Windsor/Vernon Town
Line. Kelly Road is classified as an Urban Collector roadway. There are two lanes of traffic
and a total of about 4600 vehicles per day use Kelly Road. The posted speed limit is 25-30
mph,the average speed is between 30 and 35 mph and the 85%speed is 40-44 mph. The
pavement width generally varies from 22 to 28 feet with a 37 foot wide section by the
intersection of Avery Street. The existing pavement structure is in poor condition due to a
substandard base and poor drainage.The road has been resurfaced as much as possible
without having major impacts on driveways or drainage.
The road will be reconstructed to improve existing conditions by installing new gravel and
stone base material, paving the road to a uniform 26 foot width, installing curbing,
improving the existing drainage system by installing new catch basins and replacing drainage
pipes where necessary. The road will be realigned slightly to improve sight lines by Gerber
Road West,smooth out the dips and rolls on the hill and widen the radius by Avery Street.
The pavement will be 38 feet wide by Avery Street to provide one lane in each direction
with room to bypass vehicles turning left onto Avery Street. All stop signs currently on Kelly
Road will remain. The existing flashing warning beacon at the intersection of Kelly Road and
Gerber Road West will be removed as it will no longer be necessary.
The existing 4 foot wide bituminous sidewalk on the north side of the road is in poor
condition and will be replaced with a 4 foot wide Portland cement concrete sidewalk that is
separated from the curb by a 7 foot wide grass snow shelf.
Traffic calming measures include constructing the roadway at a uniform width of 26 feet
which will provide 11 foot wide travel lanes and 2 foot wide shoulders,construction of
textured pavement strips and installation of landscape gateway features at both ends of the
roadway. Speed humps and raised intersections will not be constructed as part of this
project but may be provided by the Town after this project is complete. The Town will work
with residents to evaluate the effectiveness of speed humps as traffic calming measure prior
to construction of this project.
The proposed improvements will require various right-of-way acquisitions including
temporary rights to grade or reconstruct driveways and slope easements.
The estimated construction cost based on the preliminary design presented tonight is
approximately$ 3,613,000.
The current schedule is for the Town to continue the design work this year and get the
plans about 70%complete by this winter. These plans will include any changes made
as a result of comments made at this meeting and other public comments and will be
reviewed by the ConnDOT. Another public information meeting may be held this
winter or next spring to go over these revised more complete plans. The plans will be
finalized next year and construction is scheduled for FY 2011-2012.
The Federal Highway Administration will provide 80%of the construction cost,with the
State providing 20%.
The cost of the project design is funded 100%by the Town.
The Federal Highway Administration will provide 80%of the cost of right of way
acquisitions, with the State providing 10%and the Town providing 10%.
The United States Department of Transportation's Federal Highway Administration
administers the Federal-Aid Highway Program. When using Federal-Aid funds for
construction of local roads,the State, municipalities and regional planning agencies
cooperate to determine the systems to be improved, the projects to be built, and the
design and construction standards to be used. At appropriate stages,the State
consults with the regional and local agencies and officials. Similarly, at specific stages,
the State must consult with and obtain the approval of the Federal Government.
COLOR CODE FOR PUBLIC INFORMATIONAL MEETING PLANS
YELLOW Proposed road reconstruction including intersecting roads
ORANGE Proposed Concrete Sidewalk
DARK GREY Proposed reconstruction of existing driveways
RED Existing Edge of Pavement
GREEN Limits of Grading(cuts and fills)
BLUE Property Lines
MAGENTA Taking Line
UTILITY LINES (under the roadways)
GREEN Sanitary Sewer
BLUE Water
ORANGE Gas
Kelly Road Informational Meeting—August 5,2009
Questions and Comments from the Public are summarized below. Town responses are
Italicized.
1. What will be the timeline-length of construction?
R— The Town expects the reconstruction of Kelly Road to take one construction season
(usually May-December).
2. Will the road be closed?
R The Town does not plan to close this road for construction.
3. Will the stamped concrete sections be placed at stop signs?if not, would suggest moving
the stamped concrete sections to stop sign areas.
R— The stamped concrete sections are currently shown between stop signs as part of the
traffic calming measures. The Town will look at moving these to the stop signs or adding
more stamped concrete measures.
4. Would like Town to consider using sloped curb (Cape Cod Curb)vs. standard curb because
it is more bicycle friendly(easier to ride up curb if forced off the road).
R— Town prefers to use standard 6"bituminous curb because it is easier for snow plows to
follow, provides a better separation between vehicles and pedestrians on the sidewalk,
discourages motorists from using the grass shoulder,and allows room for future pavement
overlays. The Cape Cod Curb does not improve the safety of a proper bike lane and is not
a substitute for a paved shoulder that is narrower than recommended for a bike lane.
5. Happy to see new sidewalk.
6. Would like to see better lighting on the street(something more significant and full cut-off).
R- The Town will contact CL&P(who owns the street lights) about installing better lights
that meet current standards(full cutoff)and increase the number of lights if needed.
7. Sightline issue at intersection with Avery Street due to existing AT&T cabinet and associated
vegetation. Many asked for problem to be resolved ASAP.
R— Town has moved stop bar and stop sign closer to Avery Street per ConnDOT
guidelines. Low overhanging tree branches to the south of Kelly Road along Avery Street
have been trimmed. Town has trimming and removed the bushes around the AT&T cabinet
to make it easier to see traffic approaching Kelly Road from the south on Avery Street.
Engineering measured the sight line at the end of Kelly Road to be-625 feet to the south
along.Avery Street which meets the ConnDOT guidelines for cars.
8. Would like the Town to consider installing traffic signal or 3-way stop signs or traffic calming
measures at the intersection of Kelly Road with Avery Street. They pointed out that stop
signs are installed at the intersections with Pine Knob Circle, Woodland Drive, and Orchard
Hill Drive.
R— Town has analyzed traffic at this intersection several times and will continue to do so.
The latest study by the Town's Traffic Engineer concludes that the current traffic conditions
do not meet the MUTCD warrants for a traffic signal. This study also evaluated a 3-way stop
at this intersection and the analysis shows that this will significantly affect traffic on Avery
Street and severely degrade the overall operation of this intersection. The current traffic
conditions also do not meet the MUTCD warrants for a 3-way stop. The traffic engineer did
Kelly Road Informational Meeting-August 5, 2009
Questions and Comments from the Public are summarized below. Town responses are
Italicized.
1. What will be the timeline- length of construction?
R- The Town expects the reconstruction of Kelly Road to take one construction season
(usually May-December).
2. Will the road be closed?
R The Town does not plan to close this road for construction.
3. Will the stamped concrete sections be placed at stop signs? If not, would suggest moving
the stamped concrete sections to stop sign areas.
R- The stamped concrete sections are currently shown between stop signs as part of the
traffic calming measures. The Town will look at moving these to the stop signs or adding
more stamped concrete measures.
4. Would like Town to consider using sloped curb (Cape Cod Curb)vs. standard curb because
it is more bicycle friendly(easier to ride up curb if forced off the road).
R- Town prefers to use standard 6"bituminous curb because it is easier for snow plows to
follow, provides a better separation between vehicles and pedestrians on the sidewalk,
discourages motorists from using the grass shoulder, and allows room for future pavement
overlays. The Cape Cod Curb does not improve the safety of a proper bike lane and is not
a substitute for a paved shoulder that is narrower than recommended for a bike lane.
5. Happy to see new sidewalk.
6. Would like to see better lighting on the street(something more significant and full cut-off).
R" The Town will contact CL&P(who owns the street lights) about installing better lights
that meet current standards(full cutoff) and increase the number of lights if needed.
7. Sightline issue at intersection with Avery Street due to existing AT&T cabinet and associated
vegetation. Many asked for problem to be resolved ASAP.
R- Town has moved stop bar and stop sign closer to Avery Street per ConnDOT
guidelines. Low overhanging tree branches to the south of Kelly Road along Avery Street
have been trimmed. Town has trimming and removed the bushes around the AT&T cabinet
to make it easier to see traffic approaching Kelly Road from the south on Avery Street.
Engineering measured the sight line at the end of Kelly Road to be 625 feet to the south
along Avery Street which meets the ConnDOT guidelines for cars.
8. Would like the Town to consider installing traffic signal or 3-way stop signs or traffic calming
measures at the intersection of Kelly Road with Avery Street. They pointed out that stop
signs are installed at the intersections with Pine Knob Circle,Woodland Drive, and Orchard
Hill Drive.
R- Town has analyzed traffic at this intersection several times and will continue to do so.
The latest study by the Town's Traffic Engineer concludes that the current traffic conditions
do not meet the MUTCD warrants for a traffic signal. This study also evaluated a 3-way stop
at this intersection and the analysis shows that this will significantly affect traffic on Avery
- -- - Street and severely degrade the overall operation of this intersection. The current traffic
conditions also do not meet the MUTCD warrants for a 3-way stop. The traffic engineer did
say a traffic signal may be warranted at this intersection in about 10-20 years. A round-
about was discussed as part of the Kelly Road traffic calming study however, this option was
eliminated because there is not enough ROW and many residents were opposed to it. The
improvements to Kelly Road will not preclude future improvements to this intersection. The
Town will be looking at improvements to this intersection and the nearby section of Avery
Street in the future also. Stop Signs have been installed on Avery Street at this intersection
as of the first week in December 2009.
9. Eliminate proposed turning lane at intersection with Avery Street to discourage drivers
traveling westbound on Kelly Road from using that route.
R—Kelly Road will not have dedicated left or right turn lanes at the intersection with Avery
Street. However, the pavement will be wide enough so cars wanting to turn right can
bypass cars turning left if there is enough room. This will allow cars turning right to keep
moving and reduce the number of cars waiting at this intersection. It will also allow vehicles
to turn right from the road instead of cutting the right corner on the dirt as they do now. This
corner will be curbed and landscaped.
10. Slow down traffic. Would like to see more of a police presence on the road.
R- This comment was passed along to SW Police.
11. Can Town prohibit trucks from using Kelly Road
R— The Traffic Calming study found that all trucks and busses using Kelly Road make up
only 1% of the total traffic on this road. Kelly Road is a collector road that connects Avery
Street to a major intersection in Vernon. Prohibiting trucks from using Kelly Road may force
trucks to use other residential local roads in South Windsor which is not desirable. This
comment was also passed along to SW Police.
12. Concern with trucks entering on Gerber Road West vs. East. There are times when the truck
driver is confused about which entrance to use and they have actually backed up the hill on
Kelly Road as they cannot negotiate the turn.
R- Trucks for Gerber are supposed to use Kelly Road East and signs are posted to that
effect. The Town proposes renaming Gerber Road West to clear up any confusion.
13. With regards to the two westbound lanes coming from Vernon, would like to see the right
lane be changed to exclusive right hand turn into existing trailer park and left lane be
exclusive for Kelly Road.
R- This is up to the Town of Vernon and does not affect the Kelly Road Reconstruction.
t4. Kevin McCann was disappointed that two of the traffic calming elements (raised
intersections and speed humps)were eliminated from the project. He also noted that there
are Town regulations regarding sightline requirements which can be enforced if the existing
utility box at the intersection is causing sightline problems.
R—Engineering was also disappointed that ConnDOT will not allow us to proceed with all
traffic calming elements as par:`of this project. However, The department plans to pursue
installing speed humps on Kelly Road separate from this project.
15. Will parking be allowed on Kelly Road?
R- The road will be paved 26 feet wide with curbs on both sides so there will not be any
room for designated parking on this road. However, the Town does not plan to prohibit
parking unless it causes problems.
16. Suggestion to add painted cross-walk on Kelly Road at intersection with Diane Drive (at 4-
way stop).
R— This will be considered in the Design.
17. Discussion regarding possible cross-walk from Gerber Rd West and Gerber Rd East(by the
Hillcrest elderly housing complex)to proposed sidewalk on north side of Kelly Road.
R— This will be considered in the Design.
18. Mrs. Hammick @ 292 Kelly Road expressed concerns regarding the proposed location of
the new sidewalk which will require cutting down of all the trees in front of her property
which at the moment provide screening and privacy from Kelly Road.
R-Alternatives will be looked as in the Design. These trees are within the Town's ROW.
19. Pick color of stamped concrete carefully so it does not look worn after short period of time
R— This will be considered in the design.
20. Concern expressed that manhole covers not be in wheel paths when road is realigned.
R-Sewer manholes will not be relocated as part of this project. Town will work to minimize
rattling covers by using gasketed/locking covers if necessary.
21. What will impact be on hedges at Spruce/Luarel/Kelly?
R-Roadway improvements have been designed to minimized impacts to all properties.
Town will work with residents to save trees/shrubs where possible.
22.At#264 sidewalks now slope towards road;will it be improved?
R—Sidewalks will be constructed to Town Standards. Grass slopes will not be too steep to
mow/maintain.
23. Happy with proposed 7 foot grass strip between road and sidewalk:
24.What does the Origin-Destination analysis find is the percent of through traffic using Kelly
Road?
R- The Origin-Destination analysis done as pan`of the traffic calming study found 65% of
Eastbound traffic is through traffic and up to 54% of Westbound traffic(in the evening) is
through traffic.
25. General support for the proposed Kelly Road improvements was expressed by-many
citizens:
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
NECT,CGr
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION so
9
" P A"S 2800 BERLIN TURNPIKE, P.O. BOX 317546 ��T OF TNp�yC
NEWINGTON, CONNECTICUT 06131-7546
Phone:
594-3219
June 15, 2009 rw
Mr. Jeffrey B. Doolittle, P.E. CF/�/�O
Town Engineer J�N Town of South Windsor
Town Hall �5 UTy �(luy
1540
Sullivan
ndsor! Connecticut 06074 �NFFR�iyG pFp�
South Windsor!
Dear Mr. Doolittle:
Subject: Project No. 132-127
FAP No. Pending
Reconstruction of Kelly Road
Town of South Windsor
As you are aware, the preliminary design submission for the subject project was
recently reviewed by the Department and comments made as a result of the review have been
returned to the Town. The majority of the comments were also discussed at the Preliminary
design review meeting held at the Department on May 7, 2009..
Among the items commented on during the review was the speed bump
component of the traffic calming elements proposed by the Town. The formal comments
offered by the Department state that the speed bumps were not to be included in the project,
even as a non-participating item as requested by the Town. Various aspects of this feature
were also discussed at the design review meeting, including placement, constructability,
drainage considerations, and noise generation.
Subsequent to the meeting, this office initiated further discussions within the
Department to evaluate the feasibility of including speed bumps in this project. During the
course of those discussions, a number of-concerns were expressed including the likely
diversion of traffic from Kelly Road to adjacent local roads and neighborhoods, violation of
driver expectancy, motorist and pedestrian safety, and the overall effectiveness of the speed
bumps in accomplishing the goal of slowing traffic.
In recognition of the above, you are hereby informed the Department cannot
support the inclusion of speed bumps as a traffic calming measure as part of this project.
Should the Town still wish to pursue construction of these features, it must be done as a Town
initiative subsequent to the completion and acceptance of this project.
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Printed on Recycled or Recovered Paper
Mr. Jeffrey B. Doolittle -2- June 15, 2009
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the Project
Engineer, Ms. Veronica M. Calin, at telephone number (860) 594-3226.
Very truly yours,
Sebastian I balcio
Principal Engineer
Bureau of Engineering and
Construction
cc: Mr. Matthew B. Galligan, Town Manager
Mr. Thomas Maziarz, Capitol Region Council of Governments.
12�
To_� 074C Saa� ?1)&U/&)1t
s �
y �
1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CT 06074
soR`co TELEPHONE(860) 644 2511
December 15, 2009
Re: Kelly Road Reconstruction Project
Dear Property Owner/Resident:
At the December 7th, 2009 Town Council meeting, a resolution was adopted supporting the
continuation of the design of the roadway improvements along Kelly Road. The next step in the
process involves development of"semi-final'plans which will be submitted to the State
Department of Transportation for review. As part of this process, the Town will be updating the
original topographic base mapping, which identifies any physical features such as the road,
sidewalk, driveways, trees, mailboxes, fences, walls, landscape areas, hedges, property corner
pins, monuments, storm drainage structures, utilities, etc. The Town has hired a consultant to
update the survey and base map which will require some field work and mapping. As part of
this survey, they may be on the front of your property to measure and update the location of
these features. I anticipate that this work will take place within the next couple of weeks.
One of the features that need to be shown on the plans is the location of any wells in the front
of each property. If your property has been identified as one that may have a private well on it,
the Town will provide a wooden stake with a white top and the word "well'on it (this wooden
stake will be placed by your front door). Please drive this stake into the ground where, to the
best of your knowledge, your well is located in the front of your property, by Tuesday December
22, 2009. The surveyor will then measure the well location based on this stake and show it on
the plans. If a wooden stake is not provided for your use, this is because our records indicate
that your house is connected to a public water supply. If you have a well and we did not leave
you a wooden stake, please call us and we will bring you one.
Your cooperation in this matter is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, feel free to
call me at 860- 644-2511 ext. 245, or you may contact the Project Engineer, Joseph Perna at
ext. 240.
Sincerely,
J 4ffrey Doolittle, P.E.
Town Engineer
cc: Michael J. Gantick, Director of Public Works
Joseph Perna, Project Engineer
PlanningSouth Windsor
Memo
To: Matthew J. Galligan,Town Manager
From: Gary K.Tyler, Chief of Police; Michael J.Gantick,P.E., Director of Public Works;
Marcia A. Banach,AICP, Director of Planning;Jeffrey P. Doolittle, P.E. Town
Engineer
Date: 11/13/01
Re: Kelly Road
In response to your memorandum dated October 18,2001, regarding Kelly Road truck traffic,
we offer the following information and recommendations.
The Issues:
It appears from the discussions regarding Kelly Road reconstruction that the residents have
two major concerns:the use of Kelly Road by truck traffic,and excessive vehicle speeds.
Reducing the speed limit to 25 mph as suggested is not likely to have any noticeable impact,
as drivers will travel a roadway at the speed at which they are comfortable.Thus, if the speed
limit is 25 mph but the roadway is comfortable to drive at 40 mph,people will still drive at 40
mph. Targeted enforcement can have a temporary effect on speeds, but unless the high level
of enforcement is permanent,the effect will diminish over time.
Stop signs as a means of speed control are historically ineffective at serving that purpose.
Replacing stop signs with larger stop signs is unlikely to have a noticeable impact. (There is
no harm to installing larger stop signs; however,they are not very residential in scale and the
residents may not consider them to be an aesthetic addition to their neighborhood.)
Stop signs and speed limits will not likely impact the use of the road by tracks.
As you know, these issues arise over and over again, particularly in residential
neighborhoods on collector streets such as Kelly Road. Rarely has an effective solution been
implemented, short of physically dosing off a street to through traffic. Having many streets
_ become cul-de-sacs is a very poor solution, too, since that impedes emergency response
and forces all traffic to use a few streets(thus exacerbating congestion problems), rather than
dispersing the traffic throughout a large network. Closing Kelly Road to truck traffic, if it is
determined to be a legally viable option, may lead to problems on other Town roads. It also
•Page 1
1. Engage the services of a professional traffic calming consultant to educate Town staff,
boards and commissions,and the Town Council about traffic calming.Videotaping a
session for replay on public access 1V would also help to educate the public.
2. Select a specific neighborhood(like Kelly Road)to begin a pilot project.Analyze the
problem to verify and define it,with the assistance of the traffic calming consultant.
3. Conduct a charrette at which the neighborhood residents are introduced to the concepts
of traffic calming. The charrette would be highly interactive and would include the
residents identifying the various issues and then helping to select the actual traffic
calming measures to be applied.The charrette would be conducted by the consultant,
who ensures that the measures selected are appropriate for the problem to be solved).
Appropriate staff must also be involved (planning,engineering, public works, public
safety).
4. Require that the residents achieve some predetermined level of buy-in from their own
neighborhood(say, 60-70%of residents must sign on to the project),and that the
residents themselves must approach the Town Council to request implementation of the
traffic calming program.
5. Include the pilot project in the Capital Improvements plan (in this instance, if Kelly Road is
the pilot project,the necessary reconstruction of the roadway should be part of the
Project).
6. Evaluate the success of the implemented traffic calming project.
We would be happy to discuss this recommendation with you,and to begin exploring the first
step of the process to educate staff, elected and appointed officials,and the public.We look
forward to working on this program and to the exciting possibilities of traffic calming for
providin real solutions to the very real traffic issues faced by South Windsor residents and
busin s s
i
Gary K.Tyler,:-C ief of Police ; Michael J. Ganti , P.E., Director of
Public Works
Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning effrey B. Doolittle, P.E.,Town
Engineer
•Page 3
S0*N Se
F
�� �s� ?40 A
9 , . 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074
�r�dsoe•C0 AREA CODE 203/644-2511
December 19 , 1995
Mr. John Perelli
186 Kelly Road
South Windsor, CT 06074
Dear Mr. Perelli:
Per our conversation on December 14, 1995, please find
enclosed for your information a copy of the Town's Sidewalk
Ordinance. Your attention is directed to SECTION 6-501 concerning
obligations of property owners to clear sidewalks of snow/ice.
As I indicated, our plow operators are instructed to make
every effort to minimize deposits of snow onto sidewalks . When
there is no snow shelf (grass area between the road and sidewalk) ,
snow will be deposited immediately adjacent to the road despite
efforts of the plow drivers to the contrary. Even when there is a
snow shelf, some snow will end up in the sidewalk area, especially
when there are heavy, large amounts of snow.
It can take 10-12 hours after it has stopped snowing for our
crews to push back and clear all streets of snow. Therefore, if a
resident clears snow from a sidewalk during a snow storm or prior
to the plow drivers completing the clearing of streets, snow will
end up in the sidewalk area.
Again, our drivers try to mitigate snow deposits on sidewalk
areas, but in most cases, some snow, more or less, will end up in
the sidewalk area.
Thank you for your concern and feedback.
Very truly yours,
Michael J. antick, P.E.
Director of Public Works
MJG:bmr
Enclosure
cc: Melvin C. Stead, Jr. , Supt. of Streets
hvss0/PUBLICW0RKS/186keIIy
MEMORANDUM
TO: Liana T. Kuras, Acting Town Manager
FROM: Michael J. Gantick, Director of Pu li Worksi'
Jerry C. Iazzetta, Town Engineer
Marcia A. Banach, Director of Plammng 41�
DATE: August 11, 1995
RE: Kelly Road Reconstruction
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the memorandum from Mayor Ryan to you dated July 19, 1995, regarding Kelly
Road reconstruction, following is a clarification of the issues.
The existing Kelly Road pavement is essentially at the end of its useful life. With no action, the
road will continue to deteriorate.
1. Federal/State funding considerations. Mayor Ryan's memo indicated that Town staff should
meet with Kelly Road residents to try to identify an improvement plan that meets both the
residents' wishes and CRCOG engineering standards, in order to utilize the federal/state
funding. However, the Town Council has indicted that there will be no widening of Kelly
Road. Capitol Region Council of Governments has indicated that a minimum width of 28 feet
is acceptable, but that it is not acceptable to leave Kelly Road at its current non-uniform width.
(Kelly Road currently varies in width from a minimum of 22' to a maximum of 28', with the
average width at about 24-25'.) Therefore, with the Council decision to preclude widening of
Kelly Road, there is no possibility of using the federal/state STP (Surface Transportation
Program) funds that the Town was awarded for this project. The reconstruction of Kelly Road
without widening to a minimum uniform width, and the use of federal funds to do so, are
mutually exclusive propositions.
2. Repair alternatives and cost implications.
a. Full reconstruction, to 28' width. Includes road widening, curbing, drainage, sidewalks,
and correction of sight distance problems. Corrects all existing problems. Estimated life of
new road: 20 years. Total project cost estimate: $1,538,300.
Funding Sources: Federal/State STP Funds (Est) $1,528,800
Total Town Cost (Est) $ 9,500
b. Overlay on existing pavement at existing width. Adds pavement thickness only; does not
include sidewalk construction. Does not correct any structural, drainage, or sight distance
problems; addresses only pavement surface problem. May exacerbate drainage and access
problems at some existing driveways. Estimated life of new pavement: 3-7 years. Total
project cost estimate: $85,000+.
Funding Sources: Federal/State STP Funds (Est) -0-
Total Town Cost (Est) $85,000+
c. Partial reconstruction in place, to existing width. Includes removal of existing pavement,
replacement with 4" of new pavement at same width and road profile; curbing; sidewalk
reconstruction; additional drainage structures plus replacement of 6 existing catch basins.
Does not correct drainage problems (ponding) in some driveways; does not correct sight
distance problem. Curbing would be difficult to place, as road width meanders in & out
along length of road. Note: placement of curbing requires road widening of about two
feet, as curbing must have pavement base to be placed upon, and placing curbing along the
existing pavement area would narrow the road even further. Total project cost estimate:
$400,000+.
Funding Sources: Federal/State STP Funds (Est) -0-
Total Town Cost (Est) $400,000+
3. Right-of-way implications/residential property impacts.
a. Full reconstruction. The full reconstruction and widening would primarily be done within
existing Town right-of-way. The only residential property taking might occur at the
intersection of Avery Street and Kelly Road; however, there would be grading rights
required. Residential property impacts would consist of regrading and possibly some
removal of vegetation within Town R.O.W., and some regrading outside of the Town
R.O.W. (with possible associated vegetation removal). Unless preliminary design is
performed, the nature and extent of regrading and vegetation removal as well as specific
properties impacted cannot be determined.
b. Overlay. No right-of-way impacts, as the overlay occurs over the existing roadway with no
other improvements. However, possible residential property impacts could include
increased driveway ponding and steeper driveway grades.
c. Partial reconstruction. Widening needed for curbing would be done within existing Town
R.O.W.; there may be regrading and removal of vegetation associated with this alternative
due to sidewalk construction. As with the full reconstruction alternative, actual impacts to
residential property cannot be determined until preliminary design is undertaken.
Attached is a matrix comparing the three alternatives.
Town staff are very cognizant of the residents' concerns; however, there still is the option of
proceeding with preliminary design for the full reconstruction project, without committing the
Town to going forward with construction, and without rejecting the federal funding at this time.
All three options could be further explored so that right-of-way and residential property impacts
could be identified for all options. After the preliminary design work is completed, there will
be detailed information available regarding the actual impacts of each option, allowing the
Council to make a decision at that time about which option U any) to pursue. We would need a
` Council resolution to CRCOG indicating that the Council has elected to proceed with
preliminary design for the full reconstruction project.
If the Council does not wish to pursue this approach, CRCOG will need a Town Council
resolution indicating that the Council has elected to reject the federal/state STP funding for this
project, so that the funds can be reallocated to another project within the Capitol Region.
Kelly Road Alternatives
Comparison
Alternative A: Alternative B: Alternative G
Full Reconstruction Pavement Partial
Overlay Reconstruction
• Widen to 28' • Add pavement on top • Remove existing
• Add drainage, curbing, of existing pavement pavement, replace with
Description sidewalks within existing ROW new pavement
• Correct inadequate • Add curbing, sidewalks,
sight line some drainage
Residential • Widening within No residential property • Reconstruct within
existing ROW impacts existing ROW
Property • Grading, vegetation • Widen for curbs
Impacts removal needed • Grading, vegetation
removal needed
• Corrects existing Neighborhood • Solves some drainage
drainage problems acceptance problems
Advantages • Corrects sight line • Neighborhood
problem acceptance
• Upgrades road to Town • Life expectancy 20 years
standards
• Least cost to Town
• 20-year life expectancy
• Lack of neighborhood • Road continues to • Curbing difficult
acceptance deteriorate • Does not correct all
Disadvantages • Overlay lasts about 3-7 drainage problems
years Does not correct sight
• Increases drainage & line problem
driveway access • Curbing requires slight
problems widening
Does not correct sight . Very high cost to Town
line problem
Total Project Cost
(Est) $11538,300 $853000+ $400,000+
Federal/State
Funds $1,528,800 $0 $0
_ Total Town
Cost $9,500 i $851000+ I $400,000+
I �
NOTE TO FILE:
Received a call from Mr.Perelli of 186 Kelly Road concerning a number of road related issues:
1. Patch from water line break has created a large bump.Told Mr.Perelli that CWC would be fixing as it
was not a permanent patch.
2. He felt break was caused by heavy trucks that he observed using Kelly Road the week prior to the
break.
3. Wanted to know what could be done to prohibit truck traffic.I informed of the Rye Street court case
the Town had regarding truck traffic.
4. He wanted to know if the culvert near Avery Street could have a weight limit posted which might
discourage truck traffic.I said I believed that had been investigated previously but I would look into it.
5. He had been left with the impression that some repaving work would be done.I indicated to him that
there had been no decision by the Town Council for any project and there was no funding in for any
work and we too shared the concern that the road is continuing to deteriorate.
Michael Gantick 8/5/97
Cc:Jerry
Mel
Marcia
Sgt.Fields
r
C u cam-Zl�`l2° . " /-o O-ye S-G,� ?d J AN 4 1996
' 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR,CT 06074-2786
soR-CO AREA CODE 203/644-2511, EXTENSION 200
FAX 203/644-3781
Town Manager_
January 3, 1996
Mr. Robert Eisman
68 Kelly Road
South Windsor, CT 06074
Dear Mr. Eisman:
Your letter of December 26, 1995 raising questions about snow removal
from the sidewalk in front of your home, has been received.
By local ordinance, the removal of snow and ice from sidewalks is the
responsibility of the owner, agent or occupant.
Ordinance enforcement is by the Police Department and often is on a
complaint basis . Absent complaints, enforcement may be largely by
news releases in local papers .
The ordinance has no provision for the granting of waivers . If you
are unable to clear the walk, you may be able to get someone from the
"Hire-A-Kid" program at Human Services, or a local snow removal
contractor.
Sidewalks on Kelly Road were designed and constructed of bituminous
material based upon citizen input. Sidewalk is considered sidewalk,
without exception.
We sympathize with corner lot residents , and the problems they
encounter on snow removal. Snow is something few of us appreciate,
after it falls .
The Public Works Department has been contacted regarding your concern.
We trust we have responded to all of the issues raised in your letter.
Cordially,
Dana Whitman, Jr.
Acting Town Manager
DW:dr
cc: Mike Gantick, Director of Public Works
Gary Tyler, Police Chief
Members of the South Windsor Town Council
/reid/W I lYrMAN-95/PUBLICW OKS/1-cisman
December 26 1995
Cc i—
Town Manager; w
kN C,Y, b
I am writing to request a waiver from the requirement to shovel a sidewalk in front of my
residence This sidewalk has not been shoveled since its creation over 25
years ago.
What prompted this request?
On Friday,December 22 nd,a police officer indicated that an anonymous source had complained
that our sidewalk was not shoveled. What neighbor would call the police to complain about our
sidewalk ? We have thought about what has changed in the neighborhood during the past year,
and only the newspaper carriers came to mind. So we stopped the annual Christmas tips. This
morning we saw an article in the Journal Inquirer concerning the sidewalks in South Windsor.
This article may be an indication that the anonymous source may not have been a neighbor, but
someone working for the town.
Waiver justification issues:
The sidewalk in front of our house is not a true sidewalk, but rather a unique, asphalt extension
of Kelly Road, with no edge or material between the sidewalk extension and the road. The
only indication of where the sidewalk starts and the road begins is a crack in the asphalt.
As there is no road separation,the snow from the plows just rolls on to this quasi sidewalk.. I
don't believe that I should be required to shovel a path on our lawn to compensate.
We have not shoveled this side walk during our fifteen years at this location. I asked the previous
owner, fifteen years ago and again this week,and they never shoveled this sidewalk either. So this
quasi sidewalk hasn't been shoveled since it's creation approximately 25 years ago..
In addition, the town snowplows use the corner of Kelly and Willow street to unload the snow
while plowing Kelly Road.(We live at this corner.) . This results in a major pile of snow, ice and
gravel in the corner of our lot. Each spring I repair the grass and remove the sand from this area.
We have never complained,assuming that this is part of winter in Connecticut.
I had reconstructive surgery on my hand this year and can't spend much time exposed to the cold
air. To have this sidewalk cleaned after every snowfall is going to require us to hire someone,
creating the potential for a major winter expense:
Summary:
We don't believe that we should be required to shovel this unique sidewalk/asphalt path in front of
68 Kelly Road because:
This path can only be considered a sidewalk in the loosest of terms.
This asphalt path has not been shoveled for over 25 years.
There hasn't been any complaints since it's creation
There is no method the town can use to plow Kelly road without depositing snow on this path
unless the town constructs some type of barrier or road-sidewalk separator. We can't be
expected to keep a sidewalk shoveled if every pass of the snow plow redeposits the snow.
(It's similar to the end of the typical driveway,only 200 feet long.)
The town presently dumps snow at the corner, with piles reaching 8 feet in height. It we
are required to shovel this sidewalk then the town will have to cease this operation.
We are therefore requesting a waiver to any town ordinance that would require us to shovel this
unique asphalt path located at 68 Kelly Road. Thank you.
Sincerely;
Robert Eisman
A ? 1
3-506 REMOVAL OF SNOW AND ICE FROM SIDEWALKS AND LI ::L::'r THEREFORE
6-501 OBLIGATIONS OF PROPERTYOWNER OR OCCUPANT
The owner . an. o= -e=:ses
b, wit`'_a the "own where
tl cause be removed
ti in t.ect. -four ( 24)
he ;rmed . c_ within
t�q J"OW� IV\ S�a� iR �GC !n the _awe shall have
fa H'4 �Ort?Vt fling _ c h sunrise .
Wh �d1� CC wa�t/� it snow, the sidewalk
sh lavel b, covering with
sa This sec_ioa shall not
ap ar lot line of
pr + pus to a sidewalk on
th, For the purposes of
the W� '" �d' - section shall not
ap 1 C Town of South
Wir �(,� YJrK ''` ` s_ibility of the Town
aft JU H'`�'"` 1/I CCl �s yl (�,,.,f, _ a "reasonable" E 3.m e .w_
_
rem d L'IdGY�
it s and street snow
�S7 rx��u � vN f C,��/ or occupant , and, in
the 7 hereof, who shall
vio _ /k f led Thirty-Five .
Dol amount to be
det Bureau pursuant to
Put - _ shall be levied if
it + n '' /k fro 1
-5v2 ?r'BL
I�t�GI ZS
The !" yrr�� reby adopted by the
Town
6-503 TOWN
Notwi ___, provisions of Section 13a-149 of the
General Statutes as amended or of any other provision of the
General Statutes or any special act , the Town of South Windsor
shall not. be liable to any person injured in person or
property caused by the presence of ice or snow on a public
sidewalk unless the Town of South Windsor is the owner or
person in possession and control of lanL abutting such G
sidewalk , other than land used as a hi;hway or street ,
provided the Town of South Windsor shall be liable for its
affirmative acts with respect to such sidewalk .
MEMORANDUM
TO: Liana T. Kuras, Acting Town Manager
FROM: Michael J. Gantick, Director of Pu 1i Worksj
Jerry C. Iazzetta, Town Engineer
Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning
DATE: August 11, 1995
RE: Kelly Road Reconstruction
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In response to the memorandum from Mayor Ryan to you dated July 19, 1995, regarding Kelly
Road reconstruction, following is a clarification of the issues.
The existing Kelly Road pavement is essentially at the end of its useful life. With no action, the
road will continue to deteriorate.
1. Federal/State funding considerations. Mayor Ryan's memo indicated that Town staff should
meet with Kelly Road residents to try to identify an improvement plan that meets both the
residents' wishes and CRCOG engineering standards, in order to utilize the federal/state
funding. However, the Town Council has indicted that there will be no widening of Kelly
Road. Capitol Region Council of Governments has indicated that a minimum width of 28 feet
is acceptable, but that it is not acceptable to leave Kelly Road at its current non-uniform width.
(Kelly Road currently varies in width from a minimum of 22' to a maximum of 28', with the
average width at about 24-25'.) Therefore, with the Council decision to preclude widening of
Kelly Road, there is no possibility of using the federal/state STP (Surface Transportation
Program) funds that the Town was awarded for this project. The reconstruction of Kelly Road
without widening to a minimum uniform width, and the use of federal funds to do so, are
mutually exclusive propositions.
2. Repair alternatives and cost implications.
a. Full reconstruction, to 28' width. Includes road widening, curbing, drainage, sidewalks,
and correction of sight distance problems. Corrects all existing problems. Estimated life of
new road: 20 years. Total project cost estimate: $1,538,300.
Funding Sources: Federal/State STP Funds (Est) $1,528,800
Total Town Cost (Est) $9,500
b. Overlay on existing pavement at existing width. Adds pavement thickness only; does not
include sidewalk construction. Does not correct any structural, drainage, or sight distance
problems; addresses only pavement surface problem. May exacerbate drainage and access
problems at some existing driveways. Estimated life of new pavement: 3-7 years. Total
project cost estimate: $85,000+.
Funding Sources: Federal/State STP Funds (Est) -0-
Total Town Cost (Est) $85,000+
s
c. Partial reconstruction in place, to existing width. Includes removal of existing pavement,
replacement with 4" of new pavement at same width and road profile; curbing; sidewalk
reconstruction; additional drainage structures plus replacement of 6 existing catch basins.
Does not correct drainage problems (ponding) in some driveways; does not correct sight
distance problem. Curbing would be difficult to place, as road width meanders in & out
along length of road. Note: placement of curbing requires road widening of about two
feet, as curbing must have pavement base to be placed upon, and placing curbing along the
existing pavement area would narrow the road even further. Total project cost estimate:
$400,000+.
Funding Sources: Federal/State STP Funds (Est) -0-
Total Town Cost (Est) $400,000+
3. Right-of-way implications/residential property impacts.
a. Full reconstruction. The full reconstruction and widening would primarily be done within
existing Town right-of-way. The only residential property taking might occur at the
intersection of Avery Street and Kelly Road; however, there would be grading rights
required. Residential property impacts would consist of regrading and possibly some
removal of vegetation within Town R.O.W., and some regrading outside of the Town
R.O.W. (with possible associated vegetation removal). Unless preliminary design is
performed, the nature and extent of regrading and vegetation removal as well as specific
properties impacted cannot be determined.
b. Overlay. No right-of-way impacts, as the overlay occurs over the existing roadway with no
other improvements. However, possible residential property impacts could include
increased driveway ponding and steeper driveway grades.
c. Partial reconstruction. Widening needed for curbing would be done within existing Town
R.O.W.; there may be regrading and removal of vegetation associated with this alternative
due to sidewalk construction. As with the full reconstruction alternative, actual impacts to
residential property cannot be determined until preliminary design is undertaken.
Attached is a matrix comparing the three alternatives.
Town staff are very cognizant of the residents' concerns; however, there still is the option of
proceeding with preliminary design for the full reconstruction project, without committing the
Town to going forward with construction, and without rejecting the federal funding at this time.
All three options could be further explored so that right-of-way and residential property impacts
could be identified for all options. After the preliminary design work is completed, there will
be detailed information available regarding the actual impacts of each option, allowing the
Council to make a decision at that time about which option (if any) to pursue. We would need a
Council resolution to CRCOG indicating that the Council has elected to proceed with
preliminary design for the full reconstruction project.
If the Council does not wish to pursue this approach, CRCOG will need a Town Council
resolution indicating that the Council has elected to reject the federal/state STP funding for this
project, so that the funds can be reallocated to another project within the Capitol Region.
Kelly Road Alternatives
Comparison
Alternative A: Alternative B: Alternative C-
Full Reconstruction Pavement Partial
Overlay Reconstruction
Widen to 28' Add pavement on top • Remove existing
• Add drainage, curbing, of existing pavement pavement, replace with
Description sidewalks within existing ROW new pavement
• Correct inadequate • Add curbing, sidewalks,
sight line some drainage
Residential • Widening within No residential property • Reconstruct within
existing ROW impacts existing ROW
Property • Grading,vegetation • Widen for curbs
Impacts removal needed • Grading, vegetation
removal needed
• Corrects existing Neighborhood . Solves some drainage
drainage problems acceptance problems
Advantages • Corrects sight line . Neighborhood
problem acceptance
• Upgrades road to Town • Life expectancy 20 years
standards
• Least cost to Town
• 20-year life expectancy
• Lack of neighborhood • Road continues to • Curbing difficult
acceptance deteriorate . Does not correct all
Disadvantages • Overlay lasts about 3-7 drainage problems
years • Does not correct sight
Increases drainage& line problem
driveway access • Curbing requires slight
problems widening
• Does not correct sight . Very high cost to Town
line problem
Total Project Cost
(Est) $1,538,300 $85,000+ $400,000+
Federal/State
Funds $1,5285800 $0 $0
Total Town
Cost $9,500 $85,000+ $400,000+
MEMORANDUM May 21 , 1991
TO: Mike Gantick
FROM: Mel Stead �^�
��-
RE: Kelly Road Trench Yankee Gas
CL&P Gas Company took out a permit to install a replacement gas line on
Kelly Road , March 2, 1988. The work was done over time and the trench
patched and left 1 " to 1 1/2" low. This condition lasted about 3 weeks
then the top layer was replaced.
A year later , mid 1989 the entire trench was reworked for the gas company
by Felix A. Marino Co. , Inc. They used the infrared method. (CL&P became
Yankee Gas July 1989. )
In the fall I was asked first by Mr. Ed Flannagan of the gas company and
then by Mr. Bob Marino to approve the patch in writing. I got the
impression from both of them that lack of payment was the problem.
The gas company had some problems with the patch. I looked at the entire
length of the repair and saw no evidence of cracking , but did notice some
discolorations on the old existing pavement along both sides of the trench
at what appeared to be regular intervals. Neither Ed nor Bob indicated
what caused the discoloration. It did not appear to be a problem then.
I considered that the two parties were trying to put the Town in the
middle and told both that I would not send either party a written approval
of the repair. The joints along both sides of the trench have opened up
over this past winter. I noticed this first in late December 1990.
I called Ed Flannagan on April 29, 1991 . I discussed the problem with Ed
and was told about the above scenario and that the Town approved the
repair. We discussed it at length and it appears that his understanding
and mine are different. Ed said he would call Marino and have him contact
me. He has not contacted me by May 7, 1991 .
I was speaking with Leo Luciani of Yankee Gas on May 7 and told him that
there had been no further contact about Kelly Road. He said he would talk
to their Finance people about it.
Bob Marino called me about an hour later and we set up a meeting for 10: 00
A. M. , Wednesday, May 8. -
Ron and I met with him and walked the entire trench. I have attached the
letter sent to me from Bob Marino. Everything he said in his letter is
what he said when we met. He left out his comments about some surface
scouring that he said was the fault of his crews work.
I am not in one hundred percent agreement with his assessment. I would
like first to excavate a section of the trench to inspect the vertical
face of the patch for the presence of emulsion. I have told Leo Luciani
that I would be doing this soon.
MCS/ds
cc: Jerry Iazzetta
/
�Q{ fA ✓ /. •
l
Marirco Co. J9 izc.
JN
Pavement Maintenance Contractors
J
P.O.BOX 431
32 CORWIN STREET
PEABODY,MA 01960
TELEPHONEFAX(508)532-3726
Y
May 13 , 1991 I2 . .
�l 1
Melvin C. Stead, Jr. do a
Superintendent of Streets RECEIVED
Department of Public Works
Town of South. Windsor
1540 Sullivan Ave.
South Windsor, CT 06074 ,o
RE: Yankee Gas trench Kelley Rd. , South Windsor
Dear Mel:
I 'd like to take this opportunity to thank you and Ron Asselin
for meeting with me at the Kelley Rd. Yankee Gas trench site last
Wednesday May 8, 1991. To verify our observations, the cracks on both
sides of the trench have substantially opened. As mutually observed
this condition is mainly caused by two problems, trench settlement
and total lack of any emulsion on the vertical face of the trench.
Ron's rememberance of the first asphalt course within one inch of
the pavement surface with the later final lift placed level with the
surrounding surface, violates the preparation specification. Without
sweeping and tacking following a delay in placing of a '2" compacted
course may have been the causal effect of the original "rippling" of
the trench.
New patching (possibly services) done on the trench since it
received infrared treatment appears to have emulsion only on the
horizontal perimeter and also none on the vertical face.
As you know infrared patching is a cosmetic process and is
only as good as the preparation for it. In this particular instance
compaction seems to be lacking, the courses weren' t placed in 2"
lifts at the same time -and no penetration emulsion whatsoever was
used on the vertical face. These conditions will always lead to
excessive premature cracking.
As discussed you should contact Yankee Gas and show them the
obvious deficiencies.
7elix A. Marino Jnc.
I - Co.,
Pavement Maintenance Contractors
t P.O.BOX 431
32 CORWIN STREET
PEABODY,MA 01960
11 TELEPHONE(508)532-3838
FAX(508)532-3726
i .
;
Our recommended procedure would be to infrared the settled
section of the trench, and if they further crack at an unacceptable
is later date, to crack seal them with hot elasphalt.
Sincerely,
;i
;f
�Ro ert S. Mariano
Vice President
{` FELIX A. MARINO CO. , INC.
it
CC: Al Memmot
Al Miramant
Mike Kozik
r
t
i
r
;
i'
i
;
i
i
MEMORANDUM October 21 , 1987
TO: Michael Gantick: , Director of Public: Works
RE: llr::.?:..v.mnay.........�
At the request of the Town Manager, l met. with Mr. Crocco Vicino of 1E:9 Kelly
Road , to discuss s the water problem in his driveway.
Mr. Viccino is insisting that a catchy basin be installed east of his drive. :C
requested Engineering to take spot elevations in the area, a copy of the
results t:,s is attached. No puddles would exist if driveway were paved to normal
cross section.
Because there are several catch basins on the north side of Kelly, Mr. Vi cci.no
perceives there should be more on the south side. However , the main storm line
is on the north side of Kelly. The puddle can be corrected without cutting
across Kelly and tapping the storm .line.
................._._................__....._.._.................................................
h`len l�. u'steari , fir.
Superintendent of Street Services
MCS/ds">
Attachments
sl 00*1 �
r
0) Vd
6'/£Z� //'££Z 69 ££Z
so'L£Z� L/IFZ ZSZ,I
• C6'ZfZ
Vr•zFa X xss•zta �4ti ; ��'�
��� o9•c£zx i I
I x L8'F£Z
68i'�'�s•.v
6 •osp
,_...I._. .....
,•_ ; _ ..1_. . }._.. _ I
1. I
.tv,.
�;' � ,�..I:r. i_i, .. .�, r. ,�: ...I... .j_" q. j ._ ' I �i 'i i -► •j: .j.
i 7t4
I• � I II
iI ....I....j. . ...j .. I .. ...I. j, .I; ••'• .I. . J ( ...r. . i ` ...I . .j .. .. j.:.. �..,.i '• . I.. � I
;. ..�. . .. .. �.. ' .. .. I . } j. 1. I I. I. .J. ►....j i....
I I 'I' I •I• •I• .I .I �. .i_ Yj. i i � �
II r 44 1, ,...}.
:.,1�11 �1 ' _.. «i.. '.ty �... .,I � .J ..j i ,., .i .. i. ...I... r.i• I ..y,.: .-....�� ,f_. I I'
i. al+ — ,• -1 i.. .I. .I: i-. I .I: .. t .� , ' ;.1-,� �_�_ ,� i l.. .. �.. ...1
. . . . . .. . . :.:
I I .. .. .. .. . ..I,. :.+jN, .. .. j .._ - i i .L� i •` r ..._ I �� I __._4�_.��. _.. _..;I. ..1. _ �_
I I I i i •i .. . I I.... . ► j I�
' •I ..I.. .i... � .j i .. � .. i. .j... ,. ..j... j i j.. -. � � I 'i � � I.. I• I I. i .I...-I... ; ...