Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPleasant Valley Road (10)TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ACTION THIS APPLICATION SHALL BE ACCEPTED BY APPLICATION # THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AT RECEIVED DATE:y THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING ON THE APPROVAL DATE: FOURTH TUESDAY OF THE MONTH. IT SHALL REJECTED DATE: BE SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING AND RECEIPT # ZONING COMMISSION OFFICE ONE (1) WEEK PRIOR TO THE FOURTH TUESDAY. APPLICANT: BROOKSIDE REALTY, INC. ADDRESS : 658 Ellington Road, South Windsor, CT TELEPHONE #282-0628 OWNER OF RECORD ON S.W. LAND RECORDS JEAN MARC JACQUES ADDRESS : 626 Ellingotn Road, South Windsor, CT COMPLETE DESCRIPTION OF LOCATION OF PROPERTY 20.26 Acres located on the south side of Pleasant Valley Road and 200' west of the intersection with Wheeler Road ZONE NAME, ADDRESS & TELEPHONE # OF PERSON TO WHOM CORRESPONDENCE AND INQUIRIES SHOULD BE DIRECTED: RAYMOND G. LeFOLL 2307 Silas Deane Highway, Rocky Hill, CT TELEPHONE 5 7THISAPPLICATIONISFOR: (CHECK ONE OF THE FOLLOWING)a 1. Zone Change to Zone (public hearing) q 6 2. Filing for Subdivision t South rac°ss,on 3. Filing for Open Space Subdivision (public hearing) Zpri g P1a p1AQ, ` 4. Filing for Resubdivision (public hearing) 5. Special Exception to Article of the Zoning Regulations (public hearing) 6. Site Development Plan 7. Removal of Sand, Gravel, Clay or Quarry Stone & Ore (public hearing) X 8. Other (explain in detail) Approval of General Plan of Development THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND SUBMITTED ALONG WITH THREE SETS OF PLANS BEFORE IT WILL BE ACCEPTED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMIS N BROOKSIDE REALTY, INC.BROO REALTY, C. By BY Ra mo d G. e o1 p mon G. LeFoll I At rney Its Attorney over) PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED WHEN SUBMITTING THE APPLICATION : 1. Applications must be filed in triplicate. The applications shall be typed or neatly printed. 2. Maps and plans, as defined in the applicable regulations, shall be submitted in triplicate with the application forms . 3. An application fee of $25. is required for filing items #1, #5 and V. 4. A subdivision processing fee of $25. per lot ($50. minimum) is required for filing items #2, #3 and #4. 5. A $20. deposit must be submitted with any item requiring a public hearing. This deposit is for a sign to be placed on the property by the applicant advertising the public hearing. The check will be returned to you when the sign is returned to the Town. 6. Application for Zone Change (item #1) shall comply with Section 11.2.3 of the Zoning Regulations. 7. Application for subdivision and resubdivision (items #2 and #4.) shall comply with the requirements set forth in the Town of South Windsor Subdivision Regulations. 8. Application for an open space subdivision (item #3) shall comply with Section 5.3 of the Zoning Regulations. 9. Application for a site plan of development (item #5) shall comply with Section 4.11 of the Zoning Regulations. 10. Application for sand and gravel removal shall comply with Section 9.3 of the Zoning Regulations. IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE STATUTES, THIS APPLICATION WILL BE ACTED UPON BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, OR A PU:3LIC HEARING DATE WILL BE SET WITHIN 65-DAYS OF THE DATE OF ACCEPTANCE OF THE APPLICATION. Vi r,Town 0-le slo. 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074 AREA CODE 203/644-2511GSORC1 December 19, 1984 Mr. David G. Holmes, Architectural Designer Russell and Dawson 60 Washington Street Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Dear Mr. Holmes: Re: Westage II/Connector Road Planning Department and other staff have held several discussions with you and representatives of Westage Development Corporation pertaining to a prospective multi-family development on vacant land east of the Westage Condominium. Dying these meetings, it was observed that the Town of South Windsor has been pursuing a new two-lane highway through this site, known as the Connector Road". This future highway: is recommended in the 1980 Town Plan amendment; is on the Federal Urban Systems Network; is on the Concept Plan for Interstate Trade-In projects; is eligible for future funding under the Interstate Trade-In program; and holds the Town Councils second-highest priority for Interstate Trade-In projects, following Buckland Road. There is a reasonable probability that it will eventually be constructed. In view of the above, your clients have elected to acco=mdate the Carmector Road through the donation of a 3 + acre tract to the Town, and will design their multi-family project (see 11/84 draft plan) with this in mind, i.e. , will place dwellings and ancillary facilities away from the road, observing a 75 ft. front yard setback frond the proposed right-of-way. The Connector Road is now envisioned as a 34 - ft. wide road within a 60 ft. wide right-of- way. The pavement would be offset to minimize inpact on the intermittent watercourse Imo-,an as Whaples Brook. Your firm attmpted to preserve the integrity of the brook by relocating it, where practicable, rather than placing it in a culvert. The potential exists for moving the roadway farther away from the brook with reduced impacts if no sidwalk is constructed with- in the right-of-way, or if your clients furnish sidewalk and slope easements to the Town in the area abutting this right-Of-jaaz7. Mr. David G. Holmes December 19, 1984 Page Two We still are awaiting; however, an overall concept to show how this section of the Connector Road fits into the balance of the road sections, and a cross section conceptually portraying no sidewalk and an offset road-oay. I trust this comnmication satisfies your request of December 12, 1984, relative to a preliminary concept plan for the Connector Road. Your efforts to acconmdate the Town's current plan for the Connector Road, and to minimize impacts on Whaples Brook when and if this highway were built, are appreciated. I understand Mr. Richard Martel, Town Engineer, will be corresponding with you concerning engineering aspects of your proposal. Sincerely, Peter R. DeMallie Director of Planning PRD/j sv CC: Rick Martel TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY BROOKSIDE CONDOMINIUMS TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT JUNE, 1986 13321 e• 6259 bo1'O? 0'•,jCENSF4:`(Q`1 4- i^ FUSS & O'NEILL, INC. 210 MAIN STREET MANCHESTER, CONNECTICUT 06040 fo FUSS8c MBLL consulting engineers June 13, 1986 86-155 Mr. William Klock Reino E. Hyyppa & Assoc. 124 Hebron Avenue Glastonbury, CT 06033 Dear Mr. Klock : For your use, we are enclosing six (6 ) copies of the traffic impact statement for Brookside Condominiums in South Windsor, Connecticut . We understand you will use them as part of your application for site plan approval. If you have any questions, please call at any time. Very tru yours, Ste hen F. Mitchell , P. E. William D. O'Neill , P. E. Director of Traffic Section President SFM/sw 122/16 210 MAIN STREET / MANCHESTER, CONN. 06040 / TELEPHONE (203)646-2469 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT•WASTE WATER SYSTEMS•EROSION CONTROL•WATER SYSTEMS•HYDROLOGY and DRAINAGE SYSTEMS•SITE PLANNING HIGHWAYS and BRIDGES•SURVEYING 9 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE•TRANSPORTATION and TRAFFIC•PUBLIC WORKS MANAGEMENT•HYDROGEOLOGY TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE A. INTRODUCTION 1 B. EXISTING CONDITIONS 1 C. BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 1 D. SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC 2 E. DISTRIBUTION OF SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC 3 F. ANALYSES 3 G. CONCLUSIONS 6 APPENDIX A - FIGURES 1 SITE LOCATION PLAN 2A-2B 1987 EXTERNAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES 3 ARRIVAL/DEPARTURE DISTRIBUTION 4 A.M . (P.M . ) PEAK HOUR SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC 5A-5B 1987 COMBINED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES APPENDIX B - CAPACITY ANALYSES WORKSHEETS A. INTRODUCTION JMJ Enterprises, Inc. has proposed construction of Brookside Condominiums , a residential development which is to consist of 71 units on a previously undeveloped parcel of land . The site is located on Pleasant Valley Road in South Windsor, Connecticut near the Manchester Town line. The developer is seeking site plan approval from the town. Fuss & O'Neill , Inc. has been retained to study the impact of the proposed development on adjacent street traffic. This report has been prepared to document the findings of the study. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS Pleasant Valley Road is a local collector road which is two lanes in the vicinity of the site . It widens to four lanes wide at its intersection with the Interstate 84 westbound ramps in the Town of Manchester. The posted speed limit near the location of the site is 30 mph . C . BACKGROUND TRAFFIC In order to determine the impact of the proposed development on adjacent street traffic, traffic volumes from Fuss & O'Neill ' s files were used. The counts were balanced and projected to the 1987 design year using a 1- one percent per year growth factor to account for normal growth in the area. Figure Nos . 2A and 2B show 1987 External Traffic Volumes, which represent 1987 traffic which does not have the site as its origin or destination. The volumes shown in these plates include future" traffic volumes from a mall constructed in the vicinity of the Buckland Street/Pleasant Valley Road intersection. The greatest traffic impact on the roadway network will occur during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours , the periods when "home to work" and "work to home" trips are at their highest levels . The traffic counts indicate that the A.M. peak hour is 7 : 00 - 8 : 00 A.M . and the P.M. peak hour is 4 :30 - 5 :30 P.M. Therefore , these hours were subsequently analyzed. D. SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC An estimate of the amount of traffic generated by the proposed development was made using the Institute of Transportation Engineers "Trip Generation" Manual , published in 1982 . This manual , which is a compilation of trip generation rates for entering and exiting traffic during both the A.M. peak hour and the P.M. peak hour. These hourly trip generation rates (HTGR) are given in terms of vehicles generated per unit for residential developments . When multiplied by the number 2- of units proposed, the HTGR's yield the number of vehicles which can be expected to enter and exit the site during the peak hours . These factors and the generation rates are summarized below. TRIP GENERATION RATES AND VOLUMES 71 UNITS A.M. PEAK HOUR P.M. PEAK HOUR HTGR VOLUME HTGR VOLUME ENTER 0 .07 5 0 . 37 26 EXIT 0 . 37 26 0 . 18 13 Total 31 39 E. DISTRIBUTION OF SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC Regional arrival/departure distributions to and from the proposed development , as shown in Figure No. 3 , were derived from existing traffic patterns . These patterns indicate a directional split of 70 percent to the east and 30 percent to the west . The site generated traffic was then added to the roadway system in accordance with the arrival/departure pattern with the results shown in Figure No. 4 . These volumes were added to the projected traffic volumes to yield the design year combined traffic volumes shown in Figure Nos . 5A and 5B. F. ANALYSES 1 . Intersection Capacity Analyses In discussing intersection capacity analyses , two terms are used to discuss the operating condition of 3- the road or intersection. The volume to capacity ratio (v/c) is a ratio of the volume of traffic using an intersection to the total capacity of the intersection, the maximum number of vehicles that can utilize the intersection during an hour. The v/c ratio can be used to describe the percentage of capacity utilized by a single intersection movement , a combination of movements , an entire intersection approach , or the intersection as a whole. As the v/c ratio approaches 1 , the intersection nears capacity and it may become impossible to accommodate all the vehicles attempting to travel through the intersection . Level of Service is a measure of the delay experienced by stopped vehicle at the intersection . Level of Service is rated on a scale from A to F, with A describing a condition of very low delay and F describing a condition where delays will exceed 60 seconds per vehicle . Delay is defined as a measure of driver discomfort , frustration , fuel consumption, and lost travel time . Therefore , intersections with longer delay times are less acceptable to most drivers . Level of Service is generally used to describe the operation (based on delay time) of both signalized 4- and unsignalized intersections, while v/c ratio is applied to signalized capacity analyses only. These definitions of v/c ratio and level of service , and the methodology for conducting signalized and unsignalized intersection capacity analyses are taken from the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (Special Report No. 209 ) , published by the Transportation Research Board in 1985. Capacity analyses were conducted using the above referenced methodology. Intersection Capacity Worksheets are included in Appendix B of this report . The results of the analyses are as follows : a. Pleasant Valley Road and I-84 Westbound Ramps . This intersection is currently operating at a Level of Service B during both the A.M. and P.M. peak hours . It will continue to do so with the introduction of site generated traffic. b. Pleasant Valley Road and Clark Street . This intersection is currently operating at a Level of Service C or better and will continue to do so with the introduction of site generated traffic. 5- C. Pleasant Valley Road and Site Driveway. The driveway will operate at a Level of Service A. No problems are anticipated with traffic entering and exiting the site. 2 . Site Distance Considerations As shown on the site plan , the driveway location presents limited sight distance to the east on Pleasant Valley Road . It is recommended that the driveway be relocated easterly so that the crest in the road does not obstruct the sight distance in either direction. G. CONCLUSIONS Based on the foregoing analyses , it is the professional opinion of Fuss & O 'Neill , Inc . that the introduction of traffic generated by the development will not disrupt the continuity of traffic flow on the adjacent roadway system, and that roadway conditions will be sufficient to provide safe and efficient travel for the traffic in the area. 6- I J t Pcoo U b U 1 4 i IN Sn0pP-^9 fir,•• Cenrer r U 14 ar •,•+•ayv• y4 tr°ill. • 8• AV S pdUnll a Vinton's Mill r iPond i 4 . r g '•. d •ti J SITE 5 Vatera s Mom u DSO i or°•.• s r td 2 i ` '}• o. P . y HGS t V Jy c4 Pioneer n 1 usfrial Park +'J c, L o•O Red Rock It•s' Country Club e 15 r., r.cy.sw. r ; O Bur. j cor rs 3 efs ` u landf 060 aara.c. r :.YiRfON ri r!iqi 6 1i i Con*Ar aoo.. . r .:i 16 River 1Yy.I•` oK.N u i V d 1 d d o • ' f .• r. d NAdo PWrf. rY,w. i!. ••ffI Vim:C C • i ' a.r 91 f Hop asp t aum, Boa Lake n . °• 3 •• MAVCHESTER, CONNECTICUT L I i K Man shopping 11 0 Plata ES. ' sr SITE LOCATION PLANf J • r• N .,BROOKSIDE CONDOMINIUMS to »• » Scomm. j°a• ' ut ' 7 9. aw,i ` a/ SOUTH Mi1NOSOR CONNECTIGIJT r,.nn.nq l...r10. 0.86-15:3 GATE=JUNE 1956 scAL['N.T.S i E(gyp• O e g O / y 492 O PLEASANT VALLEY F28 0 ROAD SITE 288 —164 4 I N F f m b) a 2 a FIGURE NO.2A 0 0 FUSS&0'NE LL MANCHESTER. CONNECTICUT 1987 A.M. EXTERNAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES B ROOKSI DE CONDOMINIUMS rp UTH WINDSOR CONNECTICUT oi No 86-155 DATE JUNE 1986 SCALE N.T.S. 29 bOb 5 ll s h vee 00 PLEASANT VALLEY ROA i7°6 884 S ITE 62a--*51101 -'40 tt qD O) N JOD CD 100, FIGURE NO. 2 FUSS& )WEILL NANCNEfTER. CONNECTICUT 1987 P. M. EXTERNAL PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES BROOKSIDE CONDOMINIUMS rplOUTH WINDSOR CONNECTICUT itoi No 86-155 DATE JUNE 1986 SCALE N T.S. Jo, 0 Joe0 SOJmP O 0 00v P E1 _70%65 / 0' AS VALL Y ROAD SITE 70% 15 55% 5 H N CIO 2 VIA ay FIGURE NO. 3 FUSS&OWER-IL MANCHESTER, CONNECTICUT ARRIVAL / DEPARTURE DISTRIBUTION BROOKSIDE CONDOMINIUMS SOUTH WINDSOR CONNECTICUT rRoi No 86-155 DATE JUNE 1986 SCALE:N.T.S. t 2 9 a 114) f--3(IT) P`eASANT VALLEY 3(17) a ROA f- S I T E 18(9) 4(7)--+ mot I I HICID b) a nib 9. 0 FIGURE N0.4 FUSS&O'NEILL MANCHESTER. CONNECTICUT A.M. (P.M.) SITE GENERATED TRAFFIC BROOKSIDE CONDOMINIUMS FFOUTH WINDSOR CONNECTICURaNo86-155 DATE JUNE 1986 SCALE N.TS. iA T l 49S PLEtirASANT VALLEY ROA e +-T23 4 S ITE I88 - *1 Flo.138 i wro CPO A N f f i bD a 2 a FIGURE NO. 5A Ira FUSS&O'WJLL MANCHESTER . CONNECTICUT 1987 A.M. COMBINED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES BROOKSIDE CONDOMINIUMS SOUTH WINDSOR CONNECTICUT rploi No 86-155 DATE JUNE 1986 SCALE N T.S. m 1' %0 s30 s V PLEA F225 4-1001SANTVALLEYROAf-776 S ITE 633 --•517 p.y H I A . W GD bD a y J FIGURE NO. 5B J n1 FUSS&O'NEILL MANCHESTER. CONNECTICUT 1987 P.M. COMBINED PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES BROOKSIDE CONDOMINIUMS SOUTH WINDSOR CONNECTICUT rotor No 86-155 DATE JUNE 1986 SCALE N T.S. APPENDIX B goRJssMV 8LL PREPARED DATE CHECKED DAM PROJECT NO. Oavuf ng ef191nms BY BY STD GIIZIL56 06-155 SUBJECT:. PLe7F?Spr4- " VALLCY 0,D 4 Z-$Q.- Wil RA-*4 198-4 A.M. SHEET NO. EYTZ P-t lA(— TRAFFIC 1 Of 1, LANE A:T X ADJuiTlD Vow.acCviouv LmAl VaLumm p M F FLOC 395- 90 1,00 43 r go 1.o0 2s?o PLcasw r r-440 2 208 90 bDo 11' Zf «4rf 2 4Ao 90 1.00 489 m N I 280 1. 00 311 p_..A-ems 2. Y. N X Y-T w 7- f3 )L xSul. 0. tsr KTir 5 Kr-v on*V4 SATURATION FLOW ADJUSTMENT WORKSH'ET FL 1ANEGROUPS AD FACTORS O O O O O O O O ® & 9-119-12 Ad t. Appr- larw Ideal Na of Lane li( i) Grade Pkg. Bus Area Left Fba Grow Sat. lines Width \th Rate Morenvono Flow t s N a Phtl9-5 9-6 9-7 94 9-9 9-10 tsao o l.o bo 1.0 1.0 1 /,o ,9S 1(,o N Soo Se) L o I.0 1.0 1.0 ,g 10 1 Coo f1 l 80O Z I.o 9b 1.0 1.O l.0 l.0 .9 1.0 i boo Z 1-001 A6 1,6 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 .9 324 WPC _''_ 1 805) 1 1.07 , ib 1,U 1.0 0 . D 1.0 18a- i 98 'Lss -ZlZe °'Zto s'rz06Z' z4s QAIZ2. Q (Z2O'IOLSlr '92Ob -LIV102S ' aI6Idp• Iyl046lct' rZ' 9N ttLz'L0 t-s0x Mn (gyp^/-Nag) ti-bOAT.L30f") aRKLIW"/ ) smAmm3d11P"/ ) APVJVDCtPA/-w) , a/9x AdrWWWVawlawlwp"gwdAwMmnAwmapbMaND3/AAMI OOOOO " (DmmOpMssa SaPIIrmLipamRLPumS 0a7 . its' vt Qs 7„ voi v grz :7)t-1 toil -dll s2 anoakq tndN14-he -WDWwQIdy3Nbrt 1i ha1SVHd joSdV` 4o1Vgsa-v? . h "tn11-'ti C+ :.OarenS ON133HS ONIZ3fOHd3.LY4GMMID31Y4Clnvdm oFUSSUMBL.L PREPARED DATE CHECKED DATE PROJECT NO. OOrLSI. ng Bf191Y1@8f5 BY BY 57-D IIZ166, 810-/ A-'M' SHEET NO.SUBJECT:, P RSpr-4T VALL—c" AD 4 Z-54 Wig, RA SIPS Ukj?i t+E.LD T12AFF:-;G of LANE ITT X ADS TE vm.".A 61koup VoLumr- F nw q 90 00 439 r I 30 90 1.00 257o PLEWSWur VWAco4 40 r f- 2 30(0 90 bco 340 12' --- 01 .11 3 1(08 -t l (-` 2 4-46 90 boo A-09 ZS3 CIO 1, 00 314- N 2.s• K N )L -p-,xT»,• x jrr Y .= 5 SATURATION FLOW ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET LAM GROUPS AD FACTORS O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 Ad®i at Appr Law Ideal Na ofl,ne Heaver Grade Pkg. 1kn Area It [aft Flow S+L tirKs Width Type Tirrrt Mun Rate Mamrtsw Flow t t t t f fT ftT e pc~ N Uble Uble UW a rpW 9-5 9-6 9a 9-8 9-9 1 9-10 9-11 9-12 41 1000 1.o D 1.0 1.0 11-o /.o .95- IG-(o N 011, 1000 1 1.67 1 .9b Lo /.O l.o 1.0 ,g to 1(0o 180o Z I.o -9b 1.0 I.G I.o /.0 .93 bo I Soo Z 1.00 ,96 1.0 1.O 1 6 l.G I.0 ,9 324 W 1 Sc0 1 1.07 16 1,0 1.0 1 188 1 f FUS5&OT4011 PREPARED DATE CHECKED DATE PROJECT NO.ff@ corsUfiv ec rem BY BY 5 0 12 8(.94—/Ss— SUBJECT: SAS A_j_4-f V 4LI-" QoA D s 84 %ob epmAPS SHEET NO. 2 of i` Bir 3.CAP c mavl LANE V r LANE ^ APT SAT. F vN v U o u P /C r - ROuP FLOW FLOW RATIO FL'DWS C 3 43 q it,-* .2f, 4&o I . Sb 9 r 31-1 257, I(o04 .Koc I I(o 2 340 - too . 1 873 .I 1 Uq 3ZO .I si s-zo9 I G Y T O 0-- +Z 314- 18 440 3 . 3 1 OP r.ldm« cagnm fTe>rt grtmVday Second hrmWayDday do Los t 0 ® m O . O O O 0 O L ww ./c Gnm Delay Lane Delay Propessim L„+e LArw AFFL C.eas{P Ratio R&W LmV& dt P ds recto" Croup Group LOS More- x 6/C C (w/ C+P h' (a«/veh) PF Ddry L OS (*cc/veN MMe arP set) c Table9-13 (sec/veh) Lbie 94 X 9.1 I .ssb9 •4&o o 13.51 -iq .16 D l 4, 26 Nd 72 4 3, D 02 .D 3. 0 A 0• IS S-40 4d 90 2-5,8 5% • 9 g 1.0 26,84 26.8. A q 90 2-1.76 68 ,4Z 42 8 IWO 90 12- 6 1I .4Z_ 5, 4,6 7.8 7 _g go PREPARED DATE CHECKED DATE PROJECT NO. OOP1S j*g er-4 *ws BY BY STD 11z1f6 96_1-s"S- SUBJECT:, Pc t=NS(-r.4-r VALL- Rt 4 Z-S¢ W8 RA-SIPS 198-4 P.M.SHEET NO. EXTUE4,4 , TRAFF-;G I Of LANE # x Ao3mt:T D L=te a Z /.ao 9 Z 1.o0 9 JAI i 2' 2 (off}- .8Z l•oD 40 1 r' 4 l 20q , SZ 1, oo 2 2. X N X -pvl y-?Nlf ) Y' x t* X- socros r o« SATURATION FLOW ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEET F oN ANE GROUTS AD FACTORS O O O © O 4 O O ® ® ® Lei®.t Appr.Lane Ideal Na of Lane Heavy Grade pk6 Bus Area i t Left Flow Sat Lines Width Aeh 11f Turn 'Limn RatsMorroewFlowf (f t f f( ( pcpl pry N a a vp 9-5 9-6 9a 9-8 9-9 9-M 941 9-n igoa 1 1 I.00 , O l•0 1.0 I-Q /-0 .95' 16-440 N 9Do I.0' ,° !• o /.o 1.0 )•o ,6 0 1 6o f I80o Z I.o Vo 1.0 /.0 /.0 3 5v-7- 1 sco Z .00 ,96 I.v I•c l.v 1.0 l.c .9 324 w -— aco I 1.07 ,•ib i . /-o 0 0 o t 88- I PREPARED DATE CHECKED DATE PROJECT NO.O OOr19l,ljlf'19 BflgjllB9tg BY BY s1-t> I ft-ISr SUBJECT: SSA -1T vAu E{ 1W s s4 W QA IPS SHEET NO. 2 of z. 4 3 Uf' LANE APT SAT. FLO v/ CRmcAL q op v/ A+wKsis Roue p,AS Ft.Ow FL.oW RATIO FowS U C , C l 3 Ilan ,aSZo .0 0 Is l .623 3+1 I(PO4 ,o5"?- 693 .10 1^1a ee ioe 'e= ,Cool 2 3SS .Zf 4 •343 220 . 6,Z 867,1 Ii r I 9 4-& 3Z44 .Z 9 4 G Si(o Z a'g0 (p 186 5iol 1 E-iota Gnwl IAW Sewad Ux s.ewc m m ® o . o 0 0 0 4) 0 0 Low Gmm C)de Delay Lane Way Pmpeuioe Lane Lane Appi Grout Ratio Rath Leith dl GmW d3 FKtm GcoW +' W US More- X R/C C (aec/vdi) Cape ty (sec/veh) PF Delay LOS (;c o Lbk arp sed t Table 9-13 (sec/veh) Table 94 X 94 I . G Z3 16 30. 0 t s) 5.3 1.6 3S.3 2 1 D N(3 IoZ 90 7. 12 j3,j3 jo . 00 1.o 7. /2 g c2 4- .?11 3 90 16,7 a -ZO .7 1.0 i 9.51 C 19.51 G f-- .4,24 .4,a:7 90 13.7/ LS 8 43 6 . 15 1 .e o qo 1.43 57 4Z o . 60 A, •97 A fjo FUSS&O,NEILL PREPARED DATE CHECKED DATE PROJECT NO. OO iaft 18 ef'Kgl11@ws BY BY STD SUBJECT:, PLeF-ASA-4-r- VAi_C_LI f tD 4 Z s¢ we, RR Ps 178-4 P .m.SHEET NO. CDM i TRAFP;C 1 oI 1, LANE 41r"x ADSoCTEU Vow.1ECmouv l,% Ft.ow 91 csaur oo aD . f 2' 2 4p33 SZ boo I-+2 q-4 t A 4-2ZS , 8Z 1, 60 2-+4—* in 2.s. Y.X ., x, xJt t, y_+Q_ >Ltsr Ktar = S SATURATION FLOW ADJUSTMENT WORKSHEEI' Flo~LAM GROUPS AD FACTORS O O O O O O O O O 0 ® 1 0 Ad +t Appr. Lane Ideal Na of Lane Heavy Grade Pkg. eus Area Ri6ht Left F Sat Lanes Width %% TVe Turn Tian Rate MamR flow t 1. ! !t ! PCPIWQ NTable Table Table Table Table Table I TAkIwbi1 9-5 1 9-6 9a 9-8 9-9 9-10 9-11 9-12 41 1000 o D I.O 1.0 1.0 1,o -95' 1(o'-b mb q'b 1. 0 to 1.0 1.0 ,8 10 IGO 13 1800 Z i.o ,9b 1.0 I.o 1.o l.0 .97 1,6 loco 2 1.0o ,q6I 1,0 1,C) l 1.6 1.0 1 l.o .9 324 law 1 1.07 ,'fib ).0 1.0 O 1.O 188 I PREPARED DATE CHECKED DATE PROJECT NO.ffo corsifiry ergjf eery BY BY 5 d 2 ev. ISM SUBJECT: 7pk_"SA-tt-IT VRL_l" PDAfl S- 84 Wb (ZA IPS SHEET NO. z, of 3.CAP t rsK LANEPKA AT. F v/ C"m C LANE- APT V/C1oUPFL.cw/ FLOW RATIO.L 3 +I 9 I 1&04- .0 00+ .(0 1 4 cc oe v/e= .&ob i j• isaa .4,31 4.' say _ . 006r1 "94{0 3746 29 4(0 gQ .. - , 4— 1 +Z 2 l8 14S 80 S2 • PlotIbm Delay Seaondarm VjW Delay doLOS O . ®0 0 O O 0 0 0 Lane w/e Green apde Deter Lent Deter PmVesston lane Lazne Group Rdio Rath La%& dl GeoW da Fectm GroW (soup Delay Monte- X a/C C (sec/veh) Cape tr (w/vch) PF Delay LOS ('cc/`eN TAk aa+b zed a Table 9-13 (acc/veh) M"e 94 x 94 091 qb 29.95 153 1•0 35-14 D NQ 103 . 52 -10 -1. 25 W87 1.0 7. 25 g 21.49 C 34 90 18,64 i 23 1.0 P 9.3 7 C 19.37 C 6 46L 90 113.96 1500 44 6. 41 WE, IF . I-4q .So`1 90 46 /52 4Z o. 62 A- _ FUSS&O'NEILL PREPARED DATE CHECKED DATE PROJECT NOOconsultingengineersBYBY i2 SUBJECT: -PL E,95)9 N T lii9L-Ley j O A 1"7 , C L A f K ST SHEET NO. of A. N1_ -PeR'K hOW2 1 Sri IA 1 99 EX d-1_. T 2 c 446—_ _ T Lo,4 I C Fo 9or--vpi4 VA rNr s,7f- fi 9 AM. ; i 9 co,al I I 1 2, LA-4E X Z LA-?1 Sol" 'DPIAAD s T I b D fibS FO PLJT 0' 4 P4' I I I II i 1 I '' I I ;I I I• I I 1 I I I I i I I I I I I I I i i I I FUSS&O'NE1LL PREPARED DATE CHECKED DATE PROJECT NO consulting engineers BY BY 8(0-15 5 SUBJECT: PLEA-.k t J T V A LLJGI RT,, c C_t_A I•- SHEET NO. of PFAIL- uiL _ _ ----- - ---- -- 1 3 1_ 9 Ex-Ele-1,I ki- r12RA iC------• — TIZAVFAc— Fo aL x. lo5+3S SRtJT'_ Z—L 97 x Z t t-I I i rt i i FUSS&O'NEILL PREPARED DATE CHECKED DATE PROJECT NO. consulting engineers BY BY SrD o-t3-8G 86—/S757 SUBJECT: pL9:RSR-t-4T VAtL/ Pb j 5 T—. -jkiV /' SHEET NO. Go4 ,,-4 T72AFF+ of WORKSHEET FOR ANALYSIS OF T INTERSECTIONS HOURLY VOLUMES VOLUMES IN PCPH Major Street:19S R-r/r yEt, N N— Vs Z V' 9_Z Grade V2 V. 3 1 V2_y V. 3- 2 V3 N—m V3 V,V, V, V, 11DateofCounts: Ti 1-1 E 119N, >3 i I V SMp IL Time Period: ' M-S•oo A.td. O YIELD Average Running Speed: N—Q Minor Street: PHF:_Q_,fL!CGrade 4 % S ;If-bP_I r VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Movement No. 2 3 4 5 7 9 Voluaw(vph) i 46 Vol.(pcph),see Table 10-1 3 9 ZD j STEP 1:RT from Minor Street r V, Conflicting Flaw,V,1/2 V3+V2—14Q — i41 vph(V,,) Critical Gap,T,,and Potential Capacity,cp T,,—_-L,_C sec(Table 10-2)cp,— 9-0.pcph(Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity,ce, c,,,,—c,,, pcph STEP 2:LT Frain Major Street j V. Conflicting Flow,V,V3+V2— -z- +_140 —t4L vph(V,,.) Critical Gap,T,,and Pbtential Capacity,cp T.— S D sec(Table 10-2)cp.—IOw1pcph(Fig. 10-3)I Percent of cp Utilized and Impedance Factor(Fig. 10-5) (v./Cp.)X 100— -3d P.— /-D Actual Capacity,c. cn,.—cp.— I 1_0 pcph STEP 3:LT From Minor Street V, I Conflicting Flow,V, 1/2 V3+V2+Vs+V. —!+L+4 9Z+ —G vph(V,,) j Critical Gap,T,,and Potential Capacity,cp T,— G.57sec(Table 10-2)cp,—405- pcph(Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity,ca C.,—CP,X P.—kS X t•0 —pcph SHARED-LANE CAPACITY SH— v,+v, if lane is shared M/c...7)+(v./c.,,) Movement Na v( h) c (pcph) h)c LOS 7 4oS- A 9 zO 0 sPr31000 OFUSS&O'NEILL PREPARED DATE CHECKED DATE PROJECT NO consulting englrneerS BY BY UBJECT: PLERsgr-r VA--". 4 SIT£ pQ le/A I M COf j i10 lL, SHEET NO. r-eA V--= G of WORKSHEET FOR ANALYSIS OF TINTERSECTIONS HOURLY VOLUMES VOLUMES IN PCPH Major Street:P 1Z7AsA+Jr yAU Elf N D . VS 1bSo Vs 1LNQSV Grade Az V2 V,!8 2-- V. 3P a % JL V, N-0 V3 V7 V, V7 VI9 Date of Counts:xy, 1,2 4 S70P Time Period: 4 20- S, w vm O YIELD Average Running Speed:M4 N-0 Minor Street: PHF: Grade d_% 5 iTE TeryEEt! VOLUME ADJUSTMENTS Movement No. 2 3 4 5 7 9 Volume(vph) Q- Vol.(pcph),see Table 104 Z p 10 STEP 1:RT from Minor Street r V, Ong Flow,V, 1/2 Vr+V2-SZZ- V,) Critical Gap,T,,and Potential Capacity,cp T,-S:sec(Table 10-2)cr,-Gto pcph(Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity,cD, CM9=cpq- ro!D pcph STEP 2:LT From Major Street r V. Conflicting Flow,V, Vr+V2-S2_-vph(V..) Critical Gap,T,and Potential Capacity,cp T,— 5_4 sec(Table 10-2)cp,—(05!5 pcph(Fig. 10-3) Percent of cp Utilized and Impedance Factor(Fig. 10-5) (v,/C;.)X 100-_51-P.- • ro Actual Capacity,c,, cn,,-cp,-I¢ pcph STEP 3:LT From Minor Street D V7 Conflicting Flow,V. 1/2V,+V2+Vs+V.-A-_+5, L42 +Za - BIZ-vph(V,,) Critical Gap,T,and Potential Capacity,cp T,-sec(cable 10-2)cps- 3C00 pcph(Fig. 10-3) Actual Capacity,c,, CM —cp,X P. X _—3-12-1 pcph SHARED-LANE CAPACITY SH v7+v, if lane is shared v7/C,1)+(v./C...) Movement Na v(pcph) h) c5l,(pcph) cit LOS 7 4 3S3 B 9 10 6 10 505 A- 4 ZD 00S lc(c S G U 9 TO WI-2- aye siolum 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 SOR C 4NAREACODE203/644-2511 TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE JOURNAL INQUIRER THURSDAY, JUNE 5, 1986 THURSDAY, JUNE 12, 1986 LEGAL NOTICE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a public hearing of the Planning & Zoning Commission on Tuesday , June 17 , 1986 , at 8 : 00 P . M. in the Council Chambers of the South Windsor Town Hall , 1540 Sullivan Avenue , South Windsor , to consider the following : 1 . Application of Robert D. Milkie , for a Special Exception to Section 4 . 5 . 2 . 16 . 1 of the Zoning Regulations , to permit compartmentalized warehousing on a site located on the north side of Sullivan Avenue , near the intersection of West Road , GC zone . 2 . Application of Brookside Realty , Inc . , for approval of a General Plan of Development for Brookside Condominiums , consisting of 71 units located on the south side of Pleasant Valley Road , east of Westage Condominiums , MF-A zone . Copies of these applications and maps more clearly defining the properties are on file in the Office of the Town Clerk of the Town of South Windsor . At this hearing , interested persons may appear and be heard and written recommendatons will be received . PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Robert F . Gilligan , Chairman David H . Sorenson , Secretary BROOKSIDE CONDOMINIUM IMPACT REPORT JUty ? lgE10 Soutl N i Gsurmission Planning & Zoning Com Reino E. Hyyppa & Associates 124 Hebron Avenue Glastonbury, CT 06033 Brookside Condominium is a proposed 71 unit condominium project which will be located on the south side of Pleasant Valley Road approxi- mately 600 feet west of Wheeler Road . All proposed units are to be two bedrooms. A traffic report has been submitted by the consulting firm of Fuss & O'Neill . The site has been laid out so that it will be completely serviced by a circular roadway which will provide ample service in the event of an emergency. Construction of this roadway, its associated utilities including storm sewer) and sanitary sewer will be done in accordance with Town Standards . A detention basin is proposed on-site so that there will be negligible impact downstream. With 71-2 bedroom units being proposed, it is anticipated that the development will use 17,750 gals . per day (71 units x 2-1 /2 people per unit x 100 GPD = 17,750 GPD). This would create a peak flow of 0.1 US 17,750 GPD x 3.5 peaking factor x 1/1 ,000,000 x 1 .55 = 0.1 CFS) in the sewer system. Neither of these should have any major impact upon the respective systems . Being 2-bedroom units, there should be very few children living in the development; therefore, there would be very little impact upon the school system. Plans have been forwarded to the police and fire department and their comments should have been forwarded directly to the Town Planner 's office. ePOLICE DEPARTMENT POLICELICE 7-awn- Scwm 151 SAND HILL ROAD • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074-2784 AREA CODE 203/644-2551 William R. Ryan- Chief June 13, 1986 Ms. Marsha Banach Acting Director of Planning South Windsor Town Hall South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Dear Ms. Banach: I just received the development plan of Brookside Condo- miniums, have reviewed the item, and wish to offer some comment. In as much as this development will abut the complex known as Westage Apartments, I see what appears to be a "road stub" on the southwestern portion of the Brookside properties. If there is a plan to connect these two condo complexes, I would support that thinking on the basis of providing emergency vehicle and personnel access without the restriction of having to return to Pleasant Valley Road proper. If I can be of further assistance in this matter, please advise. Respectfully, William R. Ryan WRR:eoc Chief of Police sowM of+` LD 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 SOR•CO AREA CODE 203/644-2511 July 28, 1986 Raymond G. LeFoll, Esq. 2307 Silas Deane Highway Rocky Hill, Ct. 06067 Dear Ray: Re: App. #1156 - Brookside Condominiums General Plan of Development Please be advised that the Planning & Zoning Commission voted on July 15 , 1986 to approve the above application for a General Plan of Development for Brookside Condominiums, consisting of 71 units located on the south side of Pleasant Valley Road, as shown on plans prepared by Reino E. Hyyppa & Associates, dated 2/18/86 , Map No. 177-84-1, subject to the following modifications : 1. The area of the future connector road, which is approximately 3,- acres, shall not be considered part of this plan of development and the plans shall be modified to clearly indicate this. The data block calculations shall be adjusted accordingly. 2 . The plans must be modified to demonstrate that the requirement for 600 s. f. per unit of developed recreational space has been met. 3. The principal road shall be more clearly defined. 4 . The road stub to Westage Condominiums should extend to the property line. 5. The types of building materials to be used must be specified. 6. Driveway access to Pleasant Valley Road should be moved to the east to achieve better sightline. 7 . The key map should detail features within 500 ' of the site. A black and white transparent mylar of sheets 1, 2 and 3, together with three blueprint copies, with this letter of approval reproduced thereon, must be submitted to this Commission to be stamped and signed. It will then be returned to you and you must file the mylars in the Town Clerk ' s Office within 90 days . Yours very truly, PLANNING & ZONING CeMMISSION 1:1_t I • % ' a-mil r 1 i tvgBy: 4 Marshall Montana, Vice-Chairman CC: R. Martel, Town Engineer M. Banach, Planning Director E. Belleville Assessor T. D'Auria, Building Official Planning Department Report Brookside Condominiums General Plan of Development a 1. This site is an already existing MF-A zone, and has been zoned for apartments since 1970, general multi-family since 1981 . 2 . The parcel contains 20 1/4 acres but has the disadvantage of possessing land on which the Town of South Windsor proposes to construct the future Connector Road between Clark Street and Pleasant Valley Road. The applicant has agreed to deed the re- quired property to the Town, as well as land South West of the proposed road which will no longer be of any practical value to him - a total of about 3 1/2 acres. 3 . The proposed density of this project is 3 .5 units per acre, by far the lowest density of any multi-family development in South Windsor . (Pleasant Hills has 4.8 units/acre ; Plum Ridge has 5 .2 units/acre, Strawbridge has 6 units/acre) . Allowable density is 8 units/acre, or 162 units for this parcel. 4. Buffering of this complex must take into account some unusual circumstances . First , the entire property boundary that abuts an Rural Residential zone to the South is included in the land to be deeded to the Town of South Windsor. In the area between the land to be deeded to the Town and Brookside ' s primary road, Whaples Brook will be relocated , thus making it tough to address landscaping at this time. In the event the connnector road were not to go through, this site has a natural follage buffer along the subject boundaries . There is landscaping proposed for the West boundary, between this project and Westage - it is not buffer style. Since there appears to be a possibility that the two condo projects may ultimately link up and share recreational facilities , buffer-type plantings would inhibit free access between the projects . 5 . The interior access pattern appears to be reasonable, with a primary road circling the entire project. It is obvious that this site was intended to be interconnected with the adjoining Westage - which has a cul-de-sac at its East boundary in the same location as Brookside ' s street stub on its West boundary. For emergency and safety access reasons , this project would be much improved by the connection of the two private drives - as would Westage. I hope this will be actively pursued by this applicant. All parking requirements are met by this application, and all parking is removed from principal streets . I can see potential problems with the width of entrances to some of the secondary accessways - for example, at Building 12 . At those points , the integrity of the primary road is lost and it is difficult to see exactly where the roadway is . Planning Department Report Page 2 . Brookside Condominiums General Plan of Development 6 . Applicant' s traffic report indicates a sight line problem to the East with the access drive in its proposed location. The entrance drive should be relocated easterly to correct this situation, jr a ve 1, 7 . Improvements are needed to Pleasant Valley Road along the front- age of this project. The exact nature of the needed improvements can be detailed at the site plan stage. I will need more time to fully assess the anticipated traffic as presented in the appli- cant ' s traffic report, which I saw for the first time yesterday. 8 . Our multi-family regulations do require 600 sq. ft . of developed recreation area for each unit . Inasmuch as the possibility o combining with Westage recreational facilities does exist , it would be unfortunate to require duplication of facilities ; however, this application does have to stand on its own. The applicant needs 42 , 600 sq. ft. of developed recreation area (exclusive of yards) for 71 units , and is providing 15 , 000 of developed area, which consists of a platform tennis court and the detention area. Also provided is71,500 sq. ft . of conservation/open space area within the land to be deeded to the Town of South Windsor. This land will be useful to the condominiums until such time as the connector road is constructed. I would hope that the applicant would not be penalized for donating land to the Town, which land would otherwise more than adequately meet the area requirements for recreation. 9. The landscaping plan appears to be creative , and original in some of the concepts. Rather than a standard, screen type evergreen planting along the Pleasant Valley Road frontage , the landscape architect has angled red maples such that there will appear to be a continuous row as a driver approaches the complex from either direction. Also , red maples have been used around the shallow detention basin to set off a park-like area with a distinct bound- ary, as well as to provide a feeling of privacy to all units back- ing onto the detention area. The foundation plantings look terrific ; however, at the site plan stage they will have to be coordinated with the sidewalks which currently appear to pass through plantings on many buildings . Also, I would like to be assured that the back of Building 9 does not face Pleasant Valley Road with no screening. 10. The use of a variety of building types should help to ensure that this project does not appear to be a mass of identical buildings , and thus will render this project more aesthetically pleasing. This is the first use of the eight-plex building in South Windsor, and there is no "back" to these buildings. I have seen this type of architecture used very successfully in other condominium pro- jects . A 75 ' setback has been maintained along the Connector Road Planning Department Report Page 3 . Brookside Condominiums General Plan of Development 10. frontage , and the project has been designed so that no build- ings will have backs facing the Connector Road. 11 . Section 4. 6 .4.4 B of our regulations states that "applicants shall provide a variety of dwelling unit types . " In this project all units are two-bedroom units . Unit type A has the potential to be converted to three-bedroom, and this is so noted on the plans . 12 . Phasing is proposed such that 32 units are in Phase I, 39 in Phase II. Provisions must be made for a temporary cul-de-sac to service Phase I units . This can be addressed in the site plan. 13 . There is a very small amount of regulated wetlands on site , shown on Sheet 3 . The brook on site will eventually be re- located to accommodate the Connector Road. There is a permit from Inland Wetlands Agency to the applicant in effect to re- locate the brook; however I suspect the permit will be allowed to lapse since it is the Town' s responsibility to relocate the brook when the Connector Road is constructed. Applicant will need to submit a Conservation Plan to IWA/CC for this project . 14. There is a 4 ' cinder path planned for pedestrian use within the complex. The cinder path will blend more readily with the open space areas through which the path travels than would a pavement walk. Creative use of post-and-rail fencing could enhance the trail ; this can be addressed at the site plan stage. 15 . The applicant ' s engineer is aware that in buildings 5 & 6 , neither end unit (5-4 or 6-1) can have windows under Section 4.6 .4. 2F of our regulations if the buildings are two stories high. This section regulates separating distances between buildings , and the proximity of the two buildings precludes windows . The same applies to Unit 7-4 and 8-1 in Buildings 7 & 8 . 16 . Sewage disposal will be gravity flow to the Clark Street pump station where there is plenty of capacity according to the Super- intendent of Pollution Control . A formal application will have to be made to WPCA by the applicant. 17 . Applicant has made all Planning Department requested modifications to these plans with the exception of a key map which details features within 500 ' of the site . Such a map is required for the General Plan and would be very useful to us . Maps are on file at the Town Hall for the condominium projects surrounding this site , and it seems that a Class D key map could be compiled from the existing maps . June 17 , 1986