Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout22 Wheeler RoadClose, Jensen and Miller, P. C. CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTALISTS, LAND PLANNERS AND SURVEYORS 1137 SILAS DEANE HIGHWAY WETHERSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 06109-4201 203) 563-9375 November 9, 1988 RECEIVED NOV 15 1988 Ms. Marcia Bannach So- WINDSOR PLANNING DEPT, Planning Director Town, of South Windsor Town Hall 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, Connecticut Re: Water Supply The Plaza at Buckland Hills Dear Ms. Bannach: Enclosed is a copy of correspondence to Close, Jensen and Miller from the Connecticut Water Company. Also enclosed is related Town of Manchester correspondence on the same subject which was included in the Plan of Development as submitted. Very truly yours, CLOSE, JENSEN and MILLER, P.C. Kenneth G. Keif , P.E. KGK:ecu cc: Barbara Wagner Enclosure bcOtiti Q p® • ® c Town ff .` anckester STEP HEN TECASSA TER P DO. DEPUTY'MAYOR Q {p n JAMES F FOGARTY.SECRETARY i ©e@ Qo©F,® 41 Center Street O @p oa ,, DIRECTORS 0 V . ® t`lee a ManchesterP. Connecticut 06040 MARYANNHANDLEY GEOFFRF.YNABB, ESQ RONALD OSELLA KENNETH N. TEDFORD, ESQ. BARBARA B. WEINBERG ROBERT B. WEISS, GENERAL MANAGER THEUNIS WERKHOVEN September 28, 1988 Mr. Ken Keifer Post, Jenson and Miller 1337 Silas Deane Highway Wethersfield, CT 06109 RE: Proposed Commercial Development Buckland and Pleasant Valley Road Dear Mr. Keifer: Recently I have had contact with representatives from your firm regarding the provision of public water supply to the subject development. As you are aware, the proposed development is situated in both Manchester and South Windsor. The Town of Manchester Water Department has sufficient water available to meet your domestic and fire protection supply needs, however, part of the development lies outside the franchise area for the Town of Manchester. The Town of Manchester Water Department would be willing to supply water for all of the proposed development provided an arrangement and subsequent agreement can be reached with the Connecticut Water Company. The terms of that agreement should be such that the Connecticut Water Company will ultimately provide service once they have extended their water mains into the area. The exact technical information for water main layout can be arrived at at a later date in the palnning process. I suggest that you make contact with representatives from the Connecticut Water Company to determine their position on this matter. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. The Town of Manchester stands ready to be of assistance in providing water service for that area. Very TrulVounS s, 7RobertJ R E C E I V E D Administrator Town of Manchester Water and Sewer Division S E P ) O 1988 RJY/msj CLOSE,JENSEN & MILLER, P.C, CC: Robert B. Weiss, General Manager Peter Lozis, Director of Public Works RJYMEMOH(59) An Equal Opportunity Employer I THE CONNECTICUT WATER COMPANY NORTHERN DIVISION: 25 NORTH ROAD C WS EAST WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT 06088-0100 TEL. 203-623-3354 A SUBSIDIARY OF CONNECTICUT WATER SERVICE, INC. 1 October 20, 1988 Ms. Terry Barch Close, Jensen & Miller 1137 Silas Deane Highway Wethersfield, CT 06109 RE: Water main extension for Buckland Mall, South Windsor/ Manchester, CT Dear Ms. Barch: Water for domestic use and for fire protection is available with a properly engineered water main extension off of our system, in conformance with our main extension regulations. When plans are available, I would like to review them with you so that we can get a better understanding of the scope of this project. Sincerely, q— Stephen R. Melanson Technical Services Supervisor SRM/sd cc: R. P. Kulas D. F. Lesnieski C. J. Wojciak R: rCEIVED TC 2' _ iyua CLOSE,JENSEN & MILLER, P. C, PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN-HOUSE REFERRAL FORK TO: Karl Reichle, Mike Gantick, Mel Stead, Fred Shaw; Richard J. Sartor, Gary Tyler, Fire Mars Lanning, Jim Snow FROM: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning The Planning & Engineering Departments have received plans for the following project:# V- 101 (1 / Zon L`r Acreage Subdivision Site Plan Residential No. of Lots/units Commercial_ Industrial Location: t u 1 - q a7 sg 41 Project Description:(C44.4A r2 Jrx,,YP1 Z 41k1,41JA Future Town-owned property involved? Yes No kC a)new streets existing frontage also) b)new open space/recreation area active passive c)new detention area Planning Department comments O"t,^ m a,(,( I%L/ Please let me know by s'=17J7 if you will have comments on this application so that I can follow up with your depart ment when I do a Planning Department report. r6 C"bar /J-c; -,2- 'l% =-(' -f- C' 7 s, z.•-- i'"_ 6 C./ 7 1— DER Cp PETER P.DiROSA.JR..MAYOR A Town of Manckester STEPHENT CASS4N0.DEPUTY MAYOR JAMES F FOGARTY,SECRETARY 41 Center Street DIRECTORS Manchester, Connecticut 06040 MARYANN HANDLEY GEOFFREYNAAB.ESQ. RONALD OSELLA KENNETH N TEDFORD,ESQ. BARBARA B. WEINBERG ROBERTB. WEISS, GENERAL MANAGER THEUNIS WERKHOVEN AN 2 6 1989 January 25, 1989 Town Clerk Town Clerk South Windsor Town Hall 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 RE: Notification of Application Within 500 Feet of the Town of South Windsor Dear Town Clerk: Public Act 87-307 requires that the Town of Manchester Planning and Zoning Commission notify the Town Clerk for the Town of South Windsor by registered mail within seven (7) days of receiving the following pending application: Downeast Associates Limited Partnership - Zone Change from Rural Residence to Business III - of 1.70 Acres fronting on Buckland Street approximately 300 feet north of the intersection of Buckland Street and Pleasant Valley Road D-54) " The application was received by the Planning and Zoning Commission on January 23 , 1989. Said notification is being given because a portion of the affected property abuts the Town of South Windsor. The application is on file with this office and may be viewed by the public Monday through Friday - 8: 30 A.M. to 4 : 30 P.M. If you should have any questions or wish to obtain a copy of the plans, please contact the Town of Manchester Planning Department, telephone no. 647-3044 . Sincerely, Stuart Popper Senior Planner SP:pgw An Equal Opportunity Employer A r ivw,\Jt vir 1tiJ`UK CONNECTICUT PLAN'41I11-'c ;tiJ ZONING COMMISSION 4 APPLICATION FORM r ,` SOf C01^ r Application No . Date Received : Action/Public Hearing by: OELICANT: Downeast Associates Limited PArtnership ADDRESS :Merchants Plaza, P.O. Box 7033 TELEPHONE: 317-263-7168 Indianapolis, Indiana 46207 OWNER OF RECORD ON LAND RECORDS: Downeast Associates Limited Partnership Merchants Plaza, P.O.. Box 7033 ADDRESS:Indianapolis. Indiana 46207 COMPLETE LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Corner of. Smith St„Wheeler Road, Buckland Road and P1 Pasant Val ley Road ZONE: DC NAME, ADDRESS , & TELEPHONE NUMBER OF PERSON TO WHOM INQUIRIES SHOULD BE DIRECTED: Thomas Maskey, Melvin Simon Associates (address above) or Barbara C. Wagner, Esq. TELEPHONE: 548-2635 THIS APPLICATION IS FOR: (Check one of the foll6'wing) 1 . Zone Change to Public Hearing re_quired) . 2. Subdivision. 3. Open Space Subdivision (Public Hearing required) . 4. Resubdivision (Public Hearing required) . 5. Special Exception to Article Public Hearing Required) . 6. ' Site Plan of Development. 7. Earth Filling (Section 101 and/or Earth Removal [Section 9] Public gearing Required) . X 8. General Plan of Development. 9. Regulation Amendment: Zoning Subdivision 10. Other (explain in detail.) : CONSULT PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR FEE SCHEDULE. THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SIGNED BY THE APPLICANT AND OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AND SUBMITTED IN TRIPLICA IT$ ALL MAPS AND DOCUMENTS REQUIRE ATTACHED CHECKLIST. A p cant Br: Bar 0vn e r BY: Barbara C.41a Attorney Attorney* Portions of the prop rty owned by George A_ Gilbert and Bernard are under contract and to ne conveyea in r-ne near jLuturv_ GENERAL PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT The Plaza at Buckland Hills South Windsor and Manchester,Connecticut Downeast Associates Limited Partnership February 14, 1989 GENERAL PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT The Plaza at Buckland Hills CONTENTS Page Number Introduction 1 A. Existing Features 2 B. Adjoining Properties 3 C. Present and Proposed Land Uses 6 D. Circulation and Traffic 8E. Phasing of Development 9F. Utilities G. Soil Types 14 1H. Wetlands and Watercourses 17I. Proposed Open Spaces 20J. Public Transportation 21K. Cost[Revenue Statement L. Renderings Related Maps Submitted General Plan of Development Sheet 1 of 4 Gradm &Utilities Plan Sheet 2 of 4 Soilsp n Sheet 3 of 4 Location Plan Sheet 4 of 4 INTRODUCTION The Plaza at Buckland Hills is a site of 92.5 acres straddling the Town Line of South Windsor and Manchester, Connecticut. Approximately 56 acres lie within South Windsor and 36.5 acres in Manchester. The site lies north of Interstate 84. The surrounding streets are Buckland Street/Buckland Road, Pleasant Valley Road, Wheeler Road, and Smith Street. The site forms the highland watershed that drains both to Plum Gulley Brook and Quarry Brook to the Podunk River in South Windsor. The site is former agricultural land with gently rolling terrain. The proposed development of the site is for a retail shopping plaza and for a general office complex. 1- A. EXISTING FEATURES The site for the Plaza at Buckland Hills has been assembled from three properties. The largest property was a part of the former Hartman Tobacco Company and was used for tobacco growing. Abandoned structures relating to the agricultural past remain on the site including tobacco warehouses and barns. A house on Buckland Street is also a part of the site. The topography of the site is gently rolling terrain. Topographic contours are shown on the General Plan of Development", Sheet 1 of 4. The elevations range from just under 120-feet at the northwesternmost corner of the site to 150-foot elevations at the center of the site. The site is mostly open,formerly cultivated field. Some acreage in the northeastern part of the property is in shrubs, having been abandoned from agriculture some years earlier. A stretch of mature trees are found near Smith Street in the north central portion of the site. No rock outcroppings or scenic points of interest are located within the property. 2- B. ADJOINING PROPERTIES The"Location Plan"for the Plaza at Buckland Hills(Sheet 4 of 4)shows all adjoining properties within a 500'distance from the property of the project. This Location Plan also lists all the abutting owners for the Towns of South Windsor and Manchester. The following listing repeats the map code and adjoining property owners from the Location Plan. This listing adds the existing structures on the property and the current land use. IN TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR Map ExistingMa Owner Structure Land Use Smith Street 1. Paul,Helen,Walter& Andrian S.Kebalo One Family Residence Residential 2. Walter P. &Lucyna Kebalo One Family Residence Residential 3. Margaret R.French One Family Residence Residential 4. Walter A. Kamm,Jr. One Family Residence Residential 5. Aaron L. &Karen Johnson One Family Residence Residential 6. Camille J.& Marjorie Marquis One Family Residence Residential 7. Annie Y.Goodrich One Family Residence Residential 8. George C.&Doris Royce One Family Residence Residential 9. Lorraine M.White One Family Residence Residential 10. Robert&Beverly Hayes One Family Residence Residential 11. Robert J.&Beverly Hayes One Family Residence Residential 12. Ray T. &Janet Boulet One Family Residence Residential 13. Catholic Cemeteries Associates of the Archdiocese of Hartford Barn Agricultural 20. Leo&Mary Ann Gauthier One Family Residence Residential 21. Joseph J. & Frances T.Gancarr One Family Residence Residential 22. Willard&Clair Dufour One Family Residence Residential 23. Richard V.& Margaret Molloy One Family Residence Residential 24. Emil J. &Lucille Boutin One Family Residence Residential 25. Gene N.Beau re One Family Residence Residential 26. Michael F. &Claudette Sansom One Family residence Residential 27. George A. Gilbert One Family Residence Residential 28. Theodore& Betty C.Gill One Family Residence Residential 29. Richard&Jeannette D. Haggett One Family Residence Residential 33. Marc Jean Jacques Barns and Residence Agricultural 3- Buckland Road 14. Leon R. &Edward H.Schweir None Not In Use) 15. Manchester I-84 Assoc.Ltd. Partnership None Business Under Const. 16. Mary A.Varrick et al. One Family Residence Residential 17. Mitchel M.Slowick One Family Residence Residential 18. Gurrie& Barbara R.Fandozzi One Family Residence Residential Pleasant Vallgy Road 31. Town of Manchester None Drainageway 32. Stanley P. &Marion E.Baldyga One Family Residence Residential 33. Marc Jean Jacques None Residencial Wheeler Road 30. Nazish Ahmad Condominium Complex Residential 4- IN TOWN OF MANCHESTER Map Existing Code Owner Structure Land Use Windsor Street 34. Edward J. Bride One Family Residence Residential 39. Marilyn& Leonard Chmieleuski One Family Residence Residential 40. Mona M. & Raymond Sullivan One Family Residence Residential 41. Elaine P. &Phillip T.Meek One Family Residence Residential 42. Karen L. & Roy One Family Residence Residential 43. Karen F. &John Botticello One Family Residence Residential 44. Muriel D. &Albenie Roy W. Culver One Family Residence Residential 45. Jonathan L. Comp One Family Residence Residential 46. Elaine M. & Raymond G.Smith One Family Residence Residential 47a State of Connecticut None Open Space 47b State of Connecticut None Open Space Croft Drive 35. Robert&Kim M.Francis One Family Residence Residential 36. M.Jane Zerio One Fam Residence Residential 37. Peter&Helen O.Tkaczuk One F 'y Residence Residential 38. Ryan s. &Kimberly H.James One Family Residence Residential Pleasant Valley Road 48. Town of Manchester Barns Drainage Basin 49. J.C.Penney Warehouse Industrial 50. Richard P.Hayes Office Office 51a.Exxon Corporation Houses Not In Use) 51b Exxon Corporation Gas Station Business 47c State of Connecticut None Commuter Parking Buckland Street 18. Barbara R.&Gurrie Fandorsi One Family Residence Residential 52. Finguerra None Not In Use) 53. Manchester I-84 Associates None Business(Under Const.) 5- C. PRESENT AND PROPOSED LAND USES Present Uses. One occupied residence in Manchester is the only current use of the site. As noted, the predominate former use was agricultural field production, notably for tobacco and with ancillary facilities for greenhouse, storage, drying, shipping, equipment and temporary dormitory for workers. Proposed Uses. The proposed development consists of two main parts: 1) a Community Shopping Plaza occupying approximately two-thirds of the site and 2) an Office Park in the western thud of the property. The proposed development is described on the "General Plan of Development", Sheet 1 of 4. The Community Shopping Plaza is proposed as a T-shaped" development with major entrances from Pleasant Valley Road. The initial building floor area is approximately 490,000 square feet of retail space,comprised of about 285,000 square feet in South Windsor and 205,000 square feet in Manchester. Related parking will accommodate approximately 2,900 vehicle spaces in the front of the center. A service drive and loading docks will be located to the rear of the development. The Office Park is serviced by a proposed new street running between Pleasant Valley Road and Smith Street. It is assumed that 390,000 square feet of office space will be developed in three related 4-story structures. The office development lies entirely within the Town of South Windsor. 6- D. CIRCULATION AND TRAFFIC Internal Circulation. Access to the Community Shopping Plaza will be via two major access drives from Pleasant Valley Road. An internal loop system surrounds the major parking area providing access to the parking aisles. For trucks and servicing, a separate service roadway will loop to the rear of the retail structures. This roadway will connect both to Buckland Street and Pleasant Valley Road with right-turn-in and right-turn-out only drives. The Office Park will be serviced by a proposed boulevard connector between Pleasant Valley Road and Smith Street. External Traffic and Linkage to Highway System. Please see the separate "Traffic Impact Study"by John Collins Engineers,P.C. 7- E. PHASING OF DEVELOPMENT It is the current intention of the developer to phase the development as follows: Phase I will be the main portion of the Community Shopping Plaza, consisting of approximately 490,000 square feet of retail floor area, 2,400 to 2,500 parking spaces, and related landscaping. Phase 2 will be development of the Office Park in South Windsor. Phase will be the retail development of those portions of the site marked for "future development"in Manchester. 8- F. UTILITIES Drainage. The development will generally maintain the existing drainage flow patterns. The storm runoff will be collected by drainage systems and carried to the Town of Manchester detention pond opposite the site on Pleasant Valley Road or to one of two proposed detention ponds located on the site in the Town of South Windsor. This system has been designed to attain zero increase in runoff from the existing to the developed condition, in accordance with the requirements of the Town of South Windsor. Flow to the existing Manchester detention pond southerly of Pleasant Valley Parkway has been maximized because of the excess capacity available there. One detention pond will be located on the northwest corner of the site and will outlet to the existing South Windsor drainage system in Smith Street. The pond at the northeasterly corner, located on the north border of the site,will outlet to grade flowing overland to the existing 24"culvert on Smith Street located approximately 600'west of Buckland Street. Three systems of catch basins and connecting pipe systems, as shown on the Grading and Utilities Plan,Sheet 2 of 4,comprise the storm drainage system. This system,as briefly described above,will drain the entire site. Existing Conditions. Currently, there are four existing drainage areas on the site. The first area, the northwest quarter, approximately 30 acres, drains to the area of proposed detention pond #1. Two existing 15" reinforced concrete pipes carry this drainage to the South Windsor system in that area. The pre-development runoff for a 10-year storm is 20 CFS. 9- The second ar a, approximately 14.5 acres, located in the center of the southern half of the site, drains to catch basins abutting the area located along the north curb of Pleasant Valley Road. This pre-development runoff, 12.9 CFS, is carried to the detention pond located south of Pleasant Valley Road opposite the site. The third area, the eastern half of the site and residences abutting the site on the north border, approximately 53 acres, flows overland to an existing 24" culvert located on Smith Street about 600' west of Buckland Street. There is a low point on the site to which approximately 38 acres drains. The low area fills,overflows and drains with the additional area to the 24"culvert at a rate of 18 CFS. The fourth area, approximately 7.4 acres, located on the southwest corner of the site, drains to two existing catch basins on the north curb of Pleasant Valley Road abutting the drainage area. One catch basin receives the runoff from 5.6 acres of this area at a rate of 5 CFS. The other catch basin drains approximately 1.8 acres at a rate of 1.6 CFS. The pipes from both catch basins carry the pre-development runoff to the detention pond opposite the site. Proposed System. Three drainage areas are proposed. The first proposed area, the northwest quarter of the site, approximately 25.4 acres, drains through a system of catch basins and pipes to a proposed detention pond. The maximum design outflow rate from the detention pond through a 15" reinforced concrete pipe to the existing South Windsor system is 7.8 CFS during a 10-year storm. The second proposed drainage area consists of three sub-areas, all designed to drain to the existing Town of Manchester detention pond located south of the site. The first sub-area,located in the central section of the site,contains 40.6 acres and has a peak runoff of 131.5 CFS for a 10- year storm. The second sub-area,located on the southwest corner of the site has a peak runoff of 10- 11.6 CFS. This sub-area contains 5.6 acres contributing to this peak 10-year storm flow. The third sub-area,located just east of the previously mentioned sub-area,contains 3.85 acres and has a peak runoff of 8.0 CFS. The third area, located on the eastern end of the site, is approximately 18.7 acres. The excess runoff, approximately 40 CFS will be retained by the proposed detention pond and outletted at a rate consistent with maintaining existing drainage conditions. Water Service. The Project lies within two separate water franchises: one in the Town of South Windsor allocated to the Connecticut Water Company; the second in the Town of Manchester, under the City Water and Sewer Division. Close, Jensen & Miller has conferred with both authorities. The Connecticut Water Company presently does not have mains available at the site but anticipates extension of this system to provide service. At this time we have received no commitment as to their schedule. Attached is their letter proposing service to the site. Attached also is correspondence from Mr. Robert J.Young,Administrator of the Town of Manchester Water and Sewer Division which is self explanatory and provides adequate coverage for water supply until such time as franchise areas are resolved. Sanitary Sewerage. The entire area of the site is to be served by the South Windsor sewer district, operated and maintained by the South Windsor Department of Public Works. An existing sanitary sewer in Smith Street, 700 to 800 feet westerly of the intersection of Wheeler Road,can receive the sanitary waste from the site. 11- HE CONNECTICUT WATER COMPANY NORTHERN DIVISION 15 NORTH ROAD C WS EAST WINDSOR CONNECTICUT 06088.0100 TEL 203.623.3354 A SUBSIDIARY OF CONNECTICUT *ATER SERVICE. INC If October 20, 1988 Ms. Terry Barch Close, Jensen & Miller 1137 Silas Deane Highway Wethersfield, CT 06109 RE: Water main extension for Buckland Mall, South Windsor/ Manchester, CT Dear Ms. Barch: Water for domestic use and for fire protection is available with a properly engineered water main extension off of our system, in conformance with our main extension regulations. When plans are available, I would like to review them with you so that we can get a better understanding of the scope of this project. A Sincerely, Stephen R. Melanson Technical Services Supervisor SRM/sd cc: R. P. Kulas D. F. Lesnieski C. J. Wojciak R t C E I V E D 0'T 2 - iyoa CLOSE,JENSEN & MILLER, P.G. 12- I,. PETER P DiROSA.JR..MAYOR o °oA L V Wn 0 Manckester STEPHENT CASSANO.DEPUTYMAYOR 64 n JAMES F FOGARTY, SECRETARY Z AA0 OoQ® 41 Center Street DIRECTORS O • Q Olee a' MARY ANN HANDLEY e Manchester, Connecticut 06040 GEOFFREY NABB.ESQ. RONALD OSELLA KENNETH N. TEDFORD. ESQ BARBARA B. WEINBERG ROBERT B WEISS GENERAL MANAGER THEUNIS WERKHOVEN September 28, 1988 Mr. Ken Keifer Post, Jenson and Miller 1337 Silas Deane Highway Wethersfield, CT 06109 RE: Proposed Commercial Development Buckland and Pleasant Valley Road Dear Mr. Keifer: i Recently I have had contact with representatives from your firm regarding the provision of public water supply to the subject development. As you are aware, the proposed development is situated in both Manchester and South Windsor. The Town of Manchester Water Department has sufficient water available to meet your domestic and fire protection supply needs, however, part of the development lies outside the franchise area for the Town of Manchester. The Town of Manchester Water Department would be willing to 1 . supply water for all of the proposed development provided an arrangement and subsequent agreement can be reached with the i Connecticut Water Company. The terms of that agreement should be such that the Connecticut Water Company will ultimately provide service once they have extended their water mains into the area. The exact technical information for water main layout can be arrived at at a later date in the palnning process. I suggest that you make contact with representatives from the Connecticut Water Company to determine their position on this matter. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. The Town of Manchester stands ready to be of assistance in providing water service for that area. Very Truly Yo s, Robert J. oung R E C EI V E D Administrator Town of Manchester Water and Sewer Division SEP 30 1988 RJY/msj CLOSE,JENSEN & MILLER,P.C. CC: Robert B. Weiss, General Manager Peter Lozis, Director of Public Works RJYMEMOH(59) An Equal Opportunity Employer 13- G. SOIL TYPES The SOIL SURVEY for Hartford County, published jointly in 1962 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Stateion, and Storrs Agricultural Experiment Station, indicates that the Soil Series classifications comprising the site are as follows: Classification of Soils AfA Agawam Fine Sandy Loam-well drained EsA Enfield silt loam-well drained EsB Enfield silt loam-well drained EsC2 Enfield silt loam-well drained MrA Merrimac fine sandy loam-somewhat excessively to well drained MrB Merrimac fine sandy loam-somewhat excessively to well drained MgC Manchester-gravelly/sandy loam-excessively drained The approximate limit of each soil type is as shown on the plan entitled "Soils Plan", Sheet 3 of 4. The indicated soils present no problems for the proposed development. 14- H. WETLANDS AND WATERCOURSES No wetlands soils are shown on the Hartford County Soil Survey mapping of the site, i.e., no soil types indicating soils designated as poorly drained, very poorly drained, alluvial or flood plain. Further,no wetland areas are designated for the site on the official inland wetland maps of the municipalities of South Windsor and Manchester nor on the National Wetlands Inventory map (Manchester, Conn.quadrangle) by the Fish and Wildlife Service of the U.S. Department of the Interior. A drainage swale exists in the northwestern sector of the site which was visited by Dr. Clarence Welti to answer if the low-lying land constitutes a watercourse. His determination that there is no watercourse on the site is attached. 15- I. PROPOSED OPEN SPACES Perimeter Buffer and Street Frontage Setback. The boundaries of the project provide a large amount of landscaped open space, comprised of the"buffer"zone in South Windsor and the street frontage"yard"in Manchester. In South Windsor, a landscaped open space buffer of 100'width is maintained adjoining all project bounds in South Windsor, including the buffer against neighboring residential properties and bordering the public streets of Smith Street, Wheeler Road and Pleasant Valley Road. The perimeter buffer area in South Windsor amounts to a total of 11.37 acres, or slightly over 20%of the total project area within the Town. Where the project abuts residential properties in South Windsor, most of the buffer zone will be thickly planted in evergreens to provide deep visual and sound screening between the project and the residences. Portions of the buffer area along Smith Street have existing wooded areas that may be retained in the landscape scheme. The drainage detention basins located within the buffer will be graded and planted in turf grasses for mowing to maintain open lawn appearances. Other portions of the buffer zone will be designed for attractive landscape plantings.In particular,the expansive buffers adjoining Smith Street, Wheeler Road and Pleasant Valley Road in South Windsor provide the opportunity for a varied landscape treatment: street trees of a stately type,lawns, groves,flowering specimen plantings, shrubs and ground covers. In the town of Manchester the street frontages of Pleasant Valley Road and Buckland Street in the Town of Manchester will be treated as landscaped "front yard" to the project. A minimum area of 2.8 acres will be devoted to the street frontage setback and driveway entry landscaping. Street tree planting, as well as landscaped lawn, will be provided along the street 17- Flowering Trees Pyrus Calleryana Bradford Pear Cornus Kousa Kousa Dogwood Malus Cultivars Crabapples Prunus Serrulata Oriental Cherry Evergreen Trees (Especially for Screening) Pinus Nigra Austrian Pine Pinus Stradbus White Pine TsugaCanadensis Hemlock Picea Pungens Colorado Spruce Shrubs Juniperus Cultivars Junipers Rhododendron Cultivars Rhododendrons Ilex Cultivars Hollies Parking Areas Pyrus Calleryana Bradford Pear Gleditsia Triacanthos Honeylocust Tilia Cordata Linden Acer Rubrum Red Maple Maintenance of Landscaped Buffers and Open Spaces. As the landscaping of buffers, yards, parking areas and ground will be professionally designed and installed, so the highest caliber of contract landscape management services will provide for the year-round maintenance of all planted areas. Routine maintenance will provide for such horticultural care as mulching, weeding, fertilizing, pruning, spraying and mowing. Replacement plantings of injured or diseased trees and shrubs will be conducted. Regular housekeeping will preserve all open space areas in a clean and orderly appearance. 19- K. COSTS AND REVENUES Please see the separate cost/revenue analysis of the project. 21- 1 i r. The Plaza at Buckland Hills South Windsor / Manchester, Connecticut Architect: Simmons & Associates, Inc. PLANNING DEPARTMENT IN-HOUSE REFERRAL FORM TO: Karl Reichle, Mike Gantick, Mel Stead, Fred Shaw, Richard J. Sartor, Gary Tyler, Fire Marshall Lanning, Jim Snow FROM: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning The Planning & Engineering Departments have received plans for the following project:# fJ/Gi,z 0- fxtor1,"A M.U') Zone & Acreage Subdivision Site Plan Residential_ No. of Lots/units Commercials Industrial 1Location: a'.'r KlU I..u-awl-= Project Description: Z Future Town-owned property involved? Yes No X a)new streets existing frontage also) b)new open space/recreation area active passive c)new detention area Planning Department comments Please let me know by if you will have comments on this application so that I can follow up with your department when I do a Planning D partment report. C Ua 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074 oSOR ae AREA CODE 203/644-2511 February 21, 1989 Attorney Ralph Alexander Brady, Willard & Alexander 303 Burnside Ave. East Hartford, CT 06108 Dear Ralph: Re: Necessity for Zone Change application, Plaza at Buckland Hills As you are probably aware, in past years an application for a zone change/general plan of development for Winchester Mall was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission. All requirements for filing the zone change boundary map and general plan of development were complied with. Subsequently, suit was filed by a residents' group. The suit was recently decided in favor of the Town, on appeal. (Enclosed is a copy of the final judgement. ) The attorney for the current applicant, Downeast Associates Limited Partnership, has requested verification that the zone change is in place and that they need only file application for a general plan. (See section 4.12, especially 4.12.3 and 4.12.6, of South Windsor's Zoning Regulations. ) Very Truly Yours, Marcia A. Banach Director of Planning ml EXHIBIT A 1 HAMMER • SILER • GEC)RGE • Asso cIAI'ES ECUNOMI( Am) DEVEIA MENT CONSLLTANLS February 23, 1989 Ms. Barb Wagner Updike, Kelly, Spellacy One State Street Box 31277 Hartford, CT 06103-3176 Dear Ms. Wagner: At Tom Maskey's request, I am sending you 12 copies of the cost- benefit analysis for the Buckland Hills project. Please feel free to phone me with any questions concerning this report. in a ly, J h D. up A s ciat cc: David Slater, HSGA Tom Maskey, Melvin, Simon & Associates Atlanta • Denver • Fort Lauderdale • Silver Spring • Washington 1638 Penntiylvania Denver, Colorado • 80203 • 303/860-9996 UPDIKE, KELLY & SPELLACY, P. C. COUNSELORS AT LAW PETER KELLY MARK ZIMMERMANN ELIZABETH K MCLAUGHLIN ONE STATE STREETBOURKEGSPELLACYJOHNJMURPHYCHARLESJNICOL THOMASJ SHORTELL RICHARDS ORDER POST OFFICE BOX 31277 THOMAS W.DEMILLE JAMES W ABRAMS BONNIE C ROBSON PAULL MCCORMICK MICHAELJ ANDREANA CYNTHIAJ RUMMEL HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06103-3176JAMESHLLOYD.M MARJORIE J BERGER JANET HUBON STRATTON JOHN C.KING HAROLD M BLINDERMAN JOSEPH F TILGHMAN.JR JAMEST GRAHAM KATHERINE C.CALLAHAN BARBARAC WAGNER CABLE "LIKSLAW" ELIZABETH COLLINS BARTON CHRISTOPHER M CELIO JOHN F WOLTER TELEX 643067 HO HFD ALAN I SCHEER ANNA V CRAWFORD TE LECOPIER (203) 548-2660CAROLSCLAPPROBERTMDECRESCENZO JAMES M CONNOR LAURA B FRANKEL OF COUNSEL DEBORAH MONTEITH NEUBERT SUSAN A HAYS DOUGLAS M COSTLE•203) 548-2600 KAREN P BLADO PETER R HUNTSMAN CHRISTINE BECK MICHAEL D.NEUBERT MORTON H LIBBEY.JR R DIAL PARROTT ROBERT J MARTINO DAVID E.STURGESS AMY S MCCABE STUART N.UPDIKE DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 1904-1983) ADMITTED TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND CALIFORNIA BARS ONLY February 27, 1989 HAND DELIVERED Ms . Marcia Bannach Town Planner Town of South Windsor South Windsor, CT 06074 RE : Plaza at Buckland Hills Dear Marcia: Enclosed please find 12 copies of the cost-benefit analysis for the above-referenced project. Please call me with any questions you may have. Very truly yours, BARBARA C . WAGNER BCW:DEB cc : Mr. Glenn Johnson r SENDER: Complete items 1 and 2 when additional services are desired, and complete Items 3 and 4. Put your address In the "RETURN TO" Space on the reverse side. Failure to do this will prevent this card from being returned to you. The return receipt fee will Provide you the name of the Person delivered to and thef ve . For additional fees the following services are available.Consult postmaster for fees and check box(so)for additional service(s) requested. 1. Show to whom delivered,date,and addressee's address. 2. Restricted Delivery t(Extra charge)t f(Extra charge)1 3. Article Addressed to: 4. Article Number TY Service: C"! RegiRegi stetered Insured Certified COD t Express Mail C T (( Always obtain signature of addressee or agent and DATE DELIVERED. 5. Signature—Addressee 8. Addressee's Address(ONLY if r x requested and fee paid) 6. Signatures— i Agpnt Ir, 66X 7. Date of Delivery 17 3 7_ C 7 PS Form 3611, Mar.1987 U.S.O.RO.1N7.17t-W bOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT ram C,i' - '-L _.. ) _ . 1 r (',1 (\1•., ,J . i A. rd;'3 Cti Ln ni r f' LAW OFFICES BRADY,WILLARD&ALEXANDER 303 BURNSIDE AVENUE GERAL.D W.BRADY EAST HARTFORD,CONNECTICUT 06108 TELECOPIER RICHARD C.WILLARD 203)289-5477 2031 291-9282 RALPH J.ALEXANDER SHAUN K.M.JONES T k- HVEDLs MA i u 198Q March 9, 1989 DEPT. Marcia Banach, Director South Windsor Planning Department 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 RE: Necessity for Zone Change Application; Plaza at Buckland Hills Dear Marcia: Regarding your correspondence of February 21, 1989, that matter was handled entirely by Attorney Ralph Elliott. Therefore, 1 would direct you to his office for the determination you are seeking. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Ralph J. Alexander P.,. 'aSb UPDIKE, KELLY & SPELLACY, P. C. COUNSELORS AT LAW PETER KELLY MARK ZIMMERMANN ELIZABETH K MCLAUGHLIN ONE STATE STREET BOURKEG SPELLACY JOHNJ MURPHY CHARLESJ NICOL THOMASJ SHORTELL RICHARDS ORDER POST OFFICE BOX 31277 THOMAS W DEMILLE JAMES W ABRAMS BONNIE C ROBSON PAULL MCCORMICK MICHAELJ ANDREANA CYNTHIAJ RUMMEL HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06103-3176 JAMES H LLOYD.M MARJORIE J BERG ER JANET HUBON STRATTON JOHN C KING HAROLD M BLINDERMAN JOSEPH F TILGHMAN.JR JAMEST GRAHAM KATHERINEC CALLAHAN BARBARAC WAGNER CABLE "UKSLAW" ELIZABETH COLLINS BARTON CHRISTOPHER M.CELIO JOHN F WOLTER TELEX 643067 HO HFD ALAN I SCHEER ANNA V CRAWFORD TELECO PIER (203J 5482680CAROLSCLAPPROBERTMDECRESCENZO JAMESM CONNOR LAURAB FRANKEL OF COUNSEL DEBORAH MONTEITH NEUBERT SUSAN A HAYS DOUGLAS M COSTLE• 203) 548-2600 KAREN P BLADO PETER R HUNTSMAN CHRISTINE BECK MICHAEL D NEUBERT MORTON H LIBBEY.JR R DIAL PARROTT ROBERT J MARTINO DAVID E.STURGESS AMY S McCABE STUART N UPDIKE DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 1904-I983) ADMITTED TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND CALIFORNIA BARS ONLY March 13, 1989 Ms . Marcia Banach Town Planner Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Re: The Plaza at Buckland Hills The Towns of South Windsor and Manchester, Connecticut Dear Marcia: Enclosed please find ( 12 ) traffic impact studies and ( 12 ) corresponding maps in connection with the above-captioned project. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, ARBARA C. WAGNER BCW: j d cc: Mr. Glenn Johnson Mr. Thomas Maskey Mr. Dennis Jones James H. Lloyd, III STATE OF CONNECTICUT MEMBERS TRAFFIC COMMISSION Commissioner of Transportation Department of Transportation Commissioner of Public Safety Commissioner of Motor Vehicles 24 Wolcott Hill Road • P.O. Drawer A Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109 Phone : 566-5228 E E I / E MAN 10 1999 March 14, 1989 C(1_ 4',iDSOR PLANNING DEPT. Attorney Thomas W. DeMille Updike, Kelly & Spellacy One State Street P.O. Box 31277 Hartford CT 06103-3176 Re: STC# 171-8903-01 Dear Attorney DeMille: Subject: The Plaza at Buckland Hills Manchester/South Windsor This is to confirm receipt of the data and plans transmitted with the letter of March 13, 1989, from Ms. Barbara C. Wagner. However, eight (8) copies of the site plan and the completed submission guideline checklist (copy enclosed) are needed in order to start the review. In accordance with the checklist, please forward one additional set of data to Chief of Police Robert D. Lannan, the Legal Traffic Authority of the Town of Manchester and to Chief of Police Gary K. Tyler, the Legal Traffic Authority of the Town of South Windsor. Very truly yours, William W. Stoeckert Executive Director cc: Chief Robert D. Lannan Chief Gary K. Tyler Mr. Russell Davidson Mr. Thomas D'Auria Mr. Richard Sartor Mr. Robert B. Weiss Attorney Ralph G. liot Ms. Marchia Banack Downeast Associates L.P. An Equal Opportunity Employer March 17, 1989 Ralph Elliot, Esquire Tyler, Cooper and Alcorn City Place, 35th Floor Hartford, CT 06103-3488 RE:Necessity for Zone Change Application, Plaza at Buckland Hills Dear Ralph: The South Windsor Planning & Zoning Commission has received an application for the Plaza at Buckland Hills. The applicant, at our recommendation, has applied only for a General Plan of Development approval under the Designed Commercial zone. The applicant's attorney has expressed concern that the application should also include a zone change request (see attached correspondence) . Please advise as to the necessity of a zone change request in conjunction with the General Plan of Development request. Very truly yours, Marcia A. Banach Director of Planning MAB/pmm cc:Richard J. Sartor, Town Manager EXHIBIT C UPDIKE, KELLY & SPELLACY, P. C. COUNSELORS AT LAW PETER G.KELLY MARK J.ZIMMERMANN ELIZABETH K.MCLAUGHLIN ONE STATE STREETBOURKEG.SPELLACY JOHN J MURPHY CHARLES J.NICOL THOMAS J.SHORTELL RICHARD S.ORDER POST OFFICE BOX 31277THOMASW.04MILLE JAMES W.ABRAM5 BONNIE C ROBSON PAUL L.MCCORMICK MICHAELJ ANDREANA CYNTHIA J.RUMMEL HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06103-3176 DAMES H.LLOYD.W MARJORIE J.BERGER JANET HUBON STRATTON JOHN C.KING HAROLD M BLINDERMAN JOSEPH F TILGHMAN,JR. JAMES T.GRAHAM KATHERINE C CALLAHAN BARBARA C.WAGNER CABLE "UKSLAW ELIZABETH COLLINS MARTON CHRISTOPHER M.CELIO JOHN F.WOLTER TELEX 643067 HO HFD ALAN I.SCHEER ANNA V.CRAWFORD CAROLS.CLAPP ROBERT M.DCCRESCENZO TEL ECO PIER (203)548-2680 JAMES M.CONNOR LAURA B.FRANKEL OF COUNSEL DEBORAH MONTEITH NEUBERT SUSAN A HAYS DOUGLAS M COSTLE' 203)548.2600 KAREN P.BLADO PETER R HUNTSMAN CHRISTINE BECK MICHAEL D.NEUBERT MORTON H.LISBEY,JR R DIAL PARROTT ROBERT J MARTINO DAVID E STURGESS AMY S.MCCABE STUART N.UPDIKE DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 1904-1903) ADMITTED TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND CALIFORNIA BARS ONLY March 21 , 1989 BY HAND DELIVERY Mr. William W. Stoeckert Executive Director Traffic Commission Department of Transportation 24 Wolcott Hill Road P.O. Drawer A Wethersfield, CT 06109 Re: STC# 171-8903--01 The Plaza at Buckland Hills Dear Mr. Stoeckert: As requested in vour letter dated March 14 , 1989 , enclosed please find (8) copies of the site plan and the. completed submission guideline checklist. We have also enclosed eight (8) copies of a letter addressing Item VI-F of the checklist (storage/queue analysis) which was previously omitted from the traffic study. Very t my yours, ARBARA C. WAG . R BCW:jd cc: Mr. Peter J. Mackiewicz Mr. Glenn Johnson (w/encl) Thomas W. DeMille, Esq. (w/encl) 011AR T -e"ii1C TYLER COOPER & ALCORN COUNSELLORS AT LAW WILLIAMR MURPHY WILLIAMH CHAMPLIN.III CITYPLACE 205CHURCH STREET MIL TON P DEVANE TIMOTHY W BINGHAM P O BOX 1936JOHNHFILERDAVIDWSCHNEIDER35THFLOOR RICHARD G BELL ROBERT W ALLEN NEW HAVEN.CONNECTICUT WILLIAM5 ROGERS CARTERLAPRADE HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06103-3488 06509-1910RALPHGELLIOTROBERTLKEEPNEWS GORDONS FERGUSON RICHARDW BOWERMAN 203) 522-1216 203)769-0700 MICHAEL J DORNEY GEORGE F. O BRIEN,JR SAMUELW BOWLBY ROBERTJ METZLER II TELECOPIER (203) 278-38OZ TELECOPIER(203)777-1161 BRUCE LEWELLYN RONALDJ COHEN ROBERT K CIULLA MARGARET P MASON JOSEPH C LEE WILLIAM W BOUTON 111 t_ 3 LANDMARK SQUARE JAMES G.KENEFICK JR VERONICA M FALLON I--• - BARRY C HAWKINS ALICE A BRUNO STAMFORD.CONNECTICUT IRVING 5 SCHLOSS RICHARD f DRIP p 06901-2501 JON T HIRSCHOFF iV V VJ( 203)346-5SS5 TELECOPIER(203)348-3675 MARK V CONNOLLY NAN BUODC CHEQUER WILLIAMS FISH,JR ROBERT E TRALJTMANN KEVINMcCANN FILLISW 5fOBER J` II OF COUNSEL ROBERTAL McCAW CHARLESR ANDRES DAVID J WIESE THOMAS 5 MARRION HENRY W PASCARELLA.PC EMMETT E BROWN III KRISTINE D RAGAGLIA 2GLENCOURT ALAN J SOBOL CHRISTUPHER F WANAT March 3 0JOHNRHEWITTSHAWNL0SULLIVAN 1989 GREENWICH.CONNECTICUT MICHAELB DASHJIAN JOSEPH A ACETO 06630-4SOS JUDITH A PA VEL ANN HAMILTON MAHER SHEILA M COOLEY CHRIS I CIPHER P MCCORMACK 2 031 869-2000 MARGAREI A LITTLE STEPHEN G MURPHY.JR TELECOPIER(203)669-2001 BEN.A SOINIT PA TRICIA M O'NEIL L1 MARK J PRICE JEAN KELL`/CUMMINGS DAVIOR PURVIS MARK A MILANO MICHAEL J QUINN LORRAINE SLAVIN EDWARDA RENN MARSHALL J TOUPONSE ARTHUR 5 WELLS GREGORY H BONENBERGER JACQUELINE D BUCAR NOT ADMITTED IN CONNECTICUT Marcia A. Banach Director of Planning Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: South Windsor Planning & Zoning Commission - Plaza at Buckland Hills Dear Marcia: Thank you for your letter of March 17, postmarked March 29 and received by me today. While you indicate you are enclosing correspondence, all that was in the envelope was the South Windsor Zoning Regulations. I should like to see that correspondence and, perhaps, the application itself. Sincerely, RGE:j rc cc: Richard Sartor Close, .Jensen and Miller, P. C. CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTALISTS, LAND PLANNERS AND SURVEYORS 1137 SILAS DEANE HIGHVI'AY NVETIiERSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 06109-4201 203) 563-9375 March 23 , 1989 Mr. Peter J. Manchiewicz John Collins Engineers, P.C. 852 Commerce Street Thornwood, N.J. 10594 Re: The Plaza at Buckland Hills South Windsor & Manchester, CT Dear Mr. Manchiewicz: The subject has come up of the existence of a small length of Non Access Line on the property in the vicinity of our entrance opposite the entrance to J.C. Penney, proposed driveway 3. There have also been discussions as to how it should be removed. The Non Access was established in August 1970 with the acquisition by the State for the construction of I-84 as then designed by me when I was with the firm of Fenton G. Keyes Associates. The construction was held during the early 70's pending the results of evaluation of the project for environmental requirements. Subsequently it was redesigned to accommodate the J.C. Penney Complex. Concurrent with the redesign, Pleasant Valley Road in South Windsor was extended easterly to then Burnham Street in Manchester in today's configuration. With that, the Non Access Line was deleted except for a small portion extending into our remaining property. As it exists today it has no purpose or meaning, and the S.T.C. should remove it in a routine manner as part of their review of your application. The enclosed plan, which we believe visually clarifies the above, is from a portion of a plan entitled: "BOUNDARY MAP SHOWING APPROX. FUTURE HWY NON ACCESS LINES, HARTMAN TOBACCO CO. PROPERTY" by Griswold & Fuss, dated 1/10/73 with revisions to 1/2/79. T Close, Jensen and Miller, P. C. CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTALISTS, LAND PLANNERS AND SURVEYORS VI'ETHERSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 06109-4201 Mr. Peter J. Manchiewicz 2- March 23 , 1989 By copy of this letter we are forwarding the enclosed to the State Traffic Commission for inclusion in the permit application and requesting that the remaining Non Access Line be deleted. If there are any questions, please call . Very truly yours, CLOSE, JENSEN and MILLER, P.C. Kenneth G. Keif r, P.E. KGK:ecu cc: w/encl . Glenn M. Johnson Tom Maskey Barbara Wagner William W. Stoeckerkt, S.T.0 A TOWN LINE O 4 \ 4- i2\ q<` 0\\ F} 53.5±REMNANT OF NON-ACCESS9 090 S 61°-19'-30"W 153.5 3' PXC\\ \N ACOU RED 55 S75*-50'-08,,W FORMER BURNHAI`I STREET) iFORMERBURNHAMSTREET1 PROPERTY ACQUIRED ORIGI ALY OAS\ FOR ORIGINAL I-84 DESIG as\\ 0A\ 4c r A d SOUTH WINDSOR MANCHESTER fi 1RNHAM STREET) PLEASANT VALLEY ROAD f I1 ) IcoI ICI I ORIGI ALY 13>1 6ESIG14 ion co ImlImI I II A I I RECEIVED MAR 2?1989 steTr&c Co. 9[/!d(17 f rl[rl[ ! Designed D.J. OO Drawn J.M.M.Corsult,ng Engineers, wand Planners 8 Surveyorsl Checked K.G.K._No ? ,_ oscr,F , n 1137 Seas Deone H,ghway Wetners` eld , Conect,cut 06109 • : Scalel'Re'sicri 200' Date 3/2 /89 1 THE PLAZA AT BUCKLAND HILLS Sheet No I CLARIFICATION OF NON-ACCESS LINE Of ^ S.WINDSOR / MANCHESTOR CONNECTICUT Job No File No STATE OF CONNECTICUT MEMBERS TRAFFIC COMMISSION Commissioner of Transportation Department of Transportation Commissioner of Public Safety Commissioner of Motor Vehicles 24 Wolcott Hill Road • P.O. Drawer A Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109 Phone : 566-5228 RECEIVED MW 28 is" SQ WINDSOR PLANNING DEPL March 27, 1989 Attorney Thomas W. DeMille Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C. One State Street P.O. Box 31277 Hartford, CT 06103-3176 Re: STC# 171-8903-01 Dear Attorney DeMille: Subject: The Plaza at Buckland Hills Manchester/South Windsor This is to confirm receipt of Attorney Barbara C. Wagner' s March 21 , 1989, letter and material related to the subject development. The review of the previously submitted data revealed that flow dia- grams were not provided separately for the 400,000 square foot office com- plex and the 500,000 square foot retail facility. The diagrams for each location studied should indicate the site generated traffic and the back- ground traffic for both aspects of the development. Therefore, eight copies of the data should be submitted in order to initiate a formal re- view. Receipt of this data will not preclude the Bureau of Planning or the Bureau of Highways from requesting additional data during the course of the review process. Additionally, please advise this office if the opening date of 1990 remains as the target date for occupancy of the development. Although an application was submitted in July 1988 reflecting that date, a formal re- An Equal Opportunity Employer Attorney Thomas W. DeMille 2 -March 27, 1989 view has not been initiated due to lack of completed data. If the 1990 opening date is no longer planned, the projected volumes may have to be adjusted accordingly. Very truly yours, wflliam W. Stoeckert Executive Director cc: Chief Robert D. Lannan Chief Gary K. Tyler Mr. Leo Belval Mr. Thomas D'Auria Mr. Richard Sartor Mr. Robert B. Weiss Attorney Ralph G. EYiott Ms. Marchia Banack Downeast Associated Limited Partnership Mr. John Collins STATE OF CON-NECTICUT MEMBERS TRAFFIC COMMISSION Commissioner of Transportation Department of Transportation Commissioner of Public Safety Commissioner of Motor Vehicles w s 24 Wolcott Hill Road • P.O. Drawer A Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109 Phone : 566-5228 March 30, 1989 RECEIVED MAR 31 1989 Atorney Thomas W. DeMi l le SG. WINDSOR PLANNING DEPT. Updike, Kelly and Spellacy One State Street Hartford CT 06103 Re: STC# 171-8903-01 Dear Attorney DeMille: Subject: The Plaza at Buckland Hills Towns of Manchester/South Windsor The Bureau of Planning has completed the review of the March 13 submission and has forwarded the enclosed comments. Should you have any questions regarding the comments, you may contact Mr. John Curtis (Telephone: 566-5719). These comments and the data previously requested in my March 27 letter must be fully addressed prior to any further review of the development. Partial responses to these requests will not be suitable. Very truly yours, William W. Stoeckert Executive Director cc: Chief Robert D. Lannan Chief Gary K. Tyler Mr. Leo Belval Mr. Thomas D'Auria Mr. Richard Sartor Mr. Robert B. Weiss Attorney Ralph G. Elliott Ms. Marcia Banach Downeast Associated Limited Partnership Mr. John Collins An Equal Opportunity Employer The Plaza at Buck-land Hills 3-28-89 1 ) The trip/rate used for generation is incorrect for the retail as stated in the I.T.E. (4th edition) please use: L.V. Code #820 p.m. peak - T = 2.58(x)+381 Sat. peak - Ln(%) = .62 in(x)+3.97 2) A.M. peak hour volumes must be submitted for review due to office facilities. 3) Distribution is not acceptable. Consultant has placed trips on J C. Penney Rd. which is a private road. The percent of trips assigned to I-84 is low. This area cannot absorb 60% of generation for this project. A higher percent of the generation must be from I-84. 4) The completion year 1990 appears unrealistic. A 3% growth rate per year plus any anticipated developments should be added to the 1990 background traffic if the 1990 opening is changed. 5) Flow diagrams for site generation of "The Plaza at Buckland Hills" should be prepared and completed separately for retail and office. 6) The method used to calculate shopping credit is incorrect. Shopper credit must contain diverted trips from I-84. 7) The background traffic is incorrect. It does not coincide with the latest approved traffic from Fuss & O'Neill dated March 188. 10 r_a s 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06024 AREA CODE 203/644-2511 31 March 1989 Atty. Ralph Alexander Brady, Willard and Alexander 303 Burnside Avenue East Hartford, CT 06108 re: Appl . #89-17P, The Plaza at Buckland Hills Corner Smith-Wheeler-Buckland- Pleasant Valley Roads Dear Ralph: We would appreciate a review for conformance to Designed Commercial (DC) regulations the subject application scheduled for public hearing on or before May 4 , 1989 . The concern is that this application should include a request for a zone change to DC and a General Plan of Development as required in regulations section 4 . 12 . 3 attached. Please advise by our regular meeting scheduled for April 25, 1989 . Very truly yours , PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Raymond F . Hallowell, Jr. Chairman 4o,NN Sf,` H r Oc V 9 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074 tiosoR co AREA CODE 203/644-2511 April 3, 1989 Ralph Elliot, Esquire Tyler, Cooper and Alcorn City Place, 35th Floor Hartford, CT 06103-3488 RE: South Windsor Planning & Zoning Commission - Plaza at Buckland Hills Dear Ralph: My apologies for omitting the correspondence to which I alluded in my letter of March 17 , 1989 . Enclosed please find the missing correspondence plus a copy of the application submitted by Downeast Associates Limited Partnership. Thank you for your assistance. Very truly yours, Marcia A. Banach Director of Planning MAB/pmm Enclosure STATE OF CONNECTICUT MEMBERS TRAFFIC COMMISSION Commissioner of Transportation Department of Transportation Commissioner of Public Safety Commissioner of Motor Vehicles 24 Wolcott Hill Road • P.O. Drawer A Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109 Phone : 566-5228 April 5, 1989 Mr. Kenneth G. Keifer Close, Jensen and Miller 1137 Silas Deane Highway Wethersfield CT 06109 Re: STC# 171-8903-01 Dear Mr. Keifer: Subject: The Plaza at Buckland Hills Towns of Manchester/South Windsor This is to confirm receipt of your March 23 letter and plan relative to the existing non-access line on Pleasant Valley Road. Your request to delete the non-access line as shown on the submitted plan will be forwarded to the Division of Rights of Way for consideration. All future correspondence concerning this matter should be addressed to Mr. James E. Lewis, Department of Transportation - Division of Rights of Way, Drawer A, Wethersfield CT 06109. Very truly yours, J'Lb'4 'b William W. Stoeckert Executive Director cc: Chief Robert D. Lannan Mr. Leo Belval Chief Gary K. Tyler Mr. Thomas D'Auria An Equal Opportunity Employer Ul Y Gary K. Tyler Chief of Police SOR•CO Police Services SOUTH WINDSOR POLICE DEPARTMENT CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENTS Project Title: Plaza at Buckland Hills Date: 7, April 1989 zi,. Developer is responsible for the purchase and installation of all street and traffic signs. Any signs on or intersecting with a State Highway must be cleared through the Department of Trans- portation. All signs must be in place before a c.o. is issued. L1 2. Developer is responsible for the purchase of all street lighting through Connecticut Light and Power. CL&P will install all lighting once they have received payment from the developer and the locations of the lights has been reviewed by the Police Department. All lighting must be in place before a c.o. is issued. Developer will submit three (3) 83 x 11 or 8z by 14 maps of the proposed project to the Police Department for the purpose of j identifying and locating all signs. Completed maps will be f distributed to the developer, Town Planner and the Police 1 Department. Any changes in road design will require new maps. L`7 4• Temporary street signs must be in place as soon as possible and maintained throughout the project. Emergency phone numbers for the duration of the construction must be provided to the Police Department on a company letter- head. If the developer occupies or owns the building/s after construction emergency numbers must be provided to the Police Department. 76. All buildings located on property which abutts a public highway must be numbered. Such number/s (address) shall be visible from the street. All numbering shall comply with Town Ordinance 6-800 thru 6-802. Barns, garages and outbuilding which are located on the same premises as a numbered structure are excluded. 7. See attached recommendations. I 151 Sand HIII Road • South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 • (203) 644-2551 i 2- CONSTRUCTION SUGGESTIONS 1 . Keep all shrubbery low around doors and windows so as to allow an unrestricted view. Locate business name , if applicable, on the building . 3 . Backlight business name and address . 4 . Provide lights over all doors . 5 . Provide ample lighting of parking areas . 6 . Advise the new owner / purchaser to provide the Police Department with emergency numbers - (Business , Commercial and Industrial property only) . SIGNATURE Sergeant Thomas C. Hart #103 Traffic Services Unit Approved by; Chief Gary . Tyle PLAZA AT BUCKLAND HILLS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMENTS Key Map 1 . Structures identified in the General Plan document must be shown on the map. General Plan Map 1 . Note that map is oversized for filing; if approved, reduction to 200 scale needed 2 . Phases should be distinguished on General Plan map, with acreage of each phase indicated 3 . Show square footage (or range of possible footages ) for office buildings on General Plan General Plan document 1 . Proposed number of parking spaces for retail part of site is roughly in compliance with Section 8 of zoning regulations . How does proposed office space and number of proposed parking spaces compare with Section 8? 2 . Why is there a difference in number of parking spaces related to Community Shopping Plaza on pages 6 & 8? 3 . Solid waste disposal (Section 4 . 12 . 5 . f of zoning regulations) not addressed 4 . Page 18 , Landscaped Roadways and Parking areas, paragraph 3 . Is a waiver under Section 4 . 12.4 .b.1 of zoning regulations requested to allow only 5% landscaping in parking areas? 5 . Acreages of parcel differ between the General Plan and the Cost-Benefit Analysis; also proposed square footages of uses, and phasing. 6 . Need estimate of projected wastewater flows (daily average and peak rates ) Traffic Report 1 . Town' will ,be requiring. -developers of:-Buckland Hills Mal-I'' to c -de-s ' Slater Street; report ne-ds to reflect this 2 . Report indicates that improvements within existing right-of- way at 5-corners are not feasible; yet we have a preliminary plan which demonstrates that improvements are feasible. General Comments 1 . Note that driveway onto Smith Street is located directly across from a house - does not facilitate future driveway alighment across Smith Street. 2 . Be prepared to discuss how buffer will conform to criteria specifically outlined in Section 5 .4 . 2 (in particular, detention basin areas ) 3 . Be prepared to discuss aesthetic concerns which are not apparent from General Plan - e.g. , pictures/drawings of typical parking lot landscaping treatments, buffer treatments, landscaping rear stores, lighting fixtures, etc. At Site Plan state 1 . Fire Marshall will require pavement surrounding any building in excess of three stories . 2 . Sidwalks along South Windsor frontage will be needed. 3 . Plans for road improvements in South Windsor will be required. C r O-P S"0M44 W e u 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 osoR,co' AREA CODE 203/644-2511 April 10, 1989 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning FROM: Jerry C. Iazzetta, Town Engineer RE: Plaza at Buckland Hills We have reviewed: drawings dated 2-14-89, Sheets 1 to 4; drawings dated 7-22-88 Sheets STC-1 to STC-8; General Plan of Development dated Feb. 14, 1989; Traffic Impact Study dated Jan. 31, 1989 , for the proposed Plaza at Buckland Hills . Our comments shown below are based on the preliminary information contained in the documents provided. Since there were no specific details or calculations, the Engineering Department is unable to make a determination as to whether the proposed drainage, detention areas , etc . will or will not work. 1 . General Plan of Development, Pg. 11 states that the detention pond in the northeast corner of the property is to be " . . .outletted at a rate consistent with maintaining existing drainage conditions . " Sheet 2 of the drawings does not show any outlet. Also what is the discharge rate? 2 . General Plan of Development indicates flows for a 10 year storm. Why was a 10 year storm chosen for this? Were the 2, 5, 25, 100 year storms also evaluated? 3 . A large area of storm drainage is proposed to be outletted into a detention area in Manchester. Has approval been given by Manchester? 4 . Sheet 2 shows storm drainage in the southwest corner of the site being tied directly into the Town of South Windsor storm drainage system. This is not acceptable based upon our "no increase" parameters . 5 . Sheet 2 - The detention basin in northwest corner of site shows a discharge pipe outlet approximately 200, from the basin. The contours show that this water will not reach the basin. Also, this pipe must be brought to the basin with proper outlet measures (i .e. flared end, riprap, etc . ) Marcia A. Banach April 10, 1989 RE: Plaza at Buckland Hills 6 . Sheet 2 - The contours for the detention basin in the northeast corner of the site are not correct. There is an 8 foot difference between two contour lines (132 to 140 ) . 7 . There are various discrepancies in drainage details shown on Sheet 2 and Sheet STC-1 to 4 . Which are correct? The Traffic Impact Study shows a level of service of "E" for Buckland and Deming, Pleasant Valley and J.C. Penney east and Buckland and Smith. What is the current level of service for these and why is an "E" level of service acceptable? 9 . Proposed off site drainage should be shown on the overall comprehensive plan. 10 . Sanitary sewers are not addressed on the drawings . The Plan of Development does not address the flows, capacity of existing system, etc. 11 . Plans do not address roof drainage and how it is to be handled. 12 . Spot elevation in critical areas needs to be shown. 13 . Drainage should insure that no ponding in parking lot and at curbs will occur. Gutter flow analysis should be made. As indicated above, these comments are preliminary and are not meant to imply that compliance to these would insure Engineering Department approval of this project. JCl/jsv cc: Michael J. Gantick, Director of Public Works Project File 7 . Construction recommendations A. Reconstruct/improve Smith Street west from entrance to Clark Street. B. Reconstruct/improve intersection of Smith Street/Wheeler Road. C . Reconstruct/improve Clark Street south from Smith Street to Chapel Road, including the intersection of Clark/Pleasant Valley Road. D. Reconstruct/improve Pleasant Valley Road west from Wheeler Road to Clark Street, including it' s intersection with Wheeler Road. E. Improve radius of driveways both front and back of structures , including parking lot, entrance/ exits . Access for fire/police vehicles . F . Construct paved road to rear of structures/ office space for access of police/fire apparatus . G. Improve radius of curve located on Pleasant Valley Road just east of Wheeler Road. H. Require that office space be provided for police personnel assigned to shopping plaza at no cost to the Town. Would be used for interviewing victims of shoplifting, robbery, vehicle theft, etc . Respectfully submitted, Sergeant Thomas C. Hart #103 Traffic Services cc : file TH/ma TYLER COOPER & ALCORN COUNSEI.LOPIS AT LAW WILLIAMR MURPHY WILIIAMH CHAMPLIN III CITYPLACE JVir CHUM':"STRCCT MII TON I.OTVANE TIMOTHY W SINCIMAM JOHNM FILER DAVIO W SCHNEIOCR 35T H FLOOR P O OO Y,rS1R RICHARDIS 8E11. ROBEAT W.ALLEN NEW HAVEN,CONNECTlcu1 WILLIAMS ROGFRS cARTERLAPRADF HARTFORD. CONNECTICUT 06 1 03-3488 RALPIIO ELLIOT ROBERTI. KEEPWWS paspe-1410 CROON S FERGVSON RICHARD W.ISOWERMAN 203) 522—i Z 1 6 12031 Tff-"Top MICHAEL J DONNEY GcoROE E O BRIEN JA SAMUELW ROWLBY ROpCRT J.MrTZLER.lI TE(.ECOPIEk (203) 278-3802 rcLccaPlEa l7au T1 f-neI ORVCC LEW—LYN RONALDJ COMCN ROBCRt K CIIILLA McRD wNET P MwSON JOSEPHC LtE WILLIAM W MOUTON III e L ANDMARK SOUARF JANIES O KENEFICK,Jn VERONICA M.•ALLON BARRYC HAWKINS AUCEA BRUN" 6TAMrORCI.CONNEC TICUT IRVINGS SCHLOSS RICHARDF ORR 00001.?i01 JON T HIRSCIIDrh I703I546-16655 TtLECOPICIn1203)48-1975 MARK V CONNOLLY NAN RUDDE CNEOUER WILLIAM S HSH.JR. ROBERT Z TRAUTMANN KEVIN MCCANN FILOSW STOKER OF COUNSEL RORCRTAL MCCAW CHARLESR ANDRES OAVI"J WIESf' THOMASR MARRION NrNRY W.PASCARELL A PC EMMrTT E BROWN,ill KRISTINE D RAOAGLIA ALAN J S"HOL e'MRISTOPFICR F.WANAT April 25, 1989 ZOLEN COURT JOHNR IICWITT SIIAWN L.O'SULLIVAN GAFCNWICM CONNECTICUT MICHAEL Y DA!i"JIAN JOSr.PN A ACrT" 00530-4SOS JUDII H A RAVEL TIN IIAMILTON MAHGR SI(CILAM COOLEY CHRIS TOPHERP IACCOHMACK 12071007-2000 MARGARET A LIT ILE STEPHENO MURPHY JR fE1.rCOP1eR d07r sfo-200+ BEN A 60LNIT PATRICIA M OWER f I bHtCN J.ADNOPOZ' MARK J¢RICE JEAN KELI Y CUMMIHG' DAVID R.L•UR VIS MARK A.MII ANO MICIIACL J OUINN RECEIVEDM RR INEHAL J AVINTOU LDWAmT UR . RENNMARSNALLJTODPONSEANTHURS.WEJ_LS HEGfIRY H 80NrNDCRGER JALUUFL.INC O bUCAR NOT ADMITTCO IN CONNCC 7ICUT APR 27 149a Marcia A. Banaoh Director of Planning so. c,N^T Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 05074 Re: South Windsor Planning & Zoning Commission - plaza at Buckland Hills Dear Marcia: With respect to a prospective application by the Plaza at Buckland Hills for approval of a general plan of development on the same site that was to have been occupied by the Winchester Mall, you have been asked by the developers, and have therefore asked me, for an opinion as to whether the zone change voted by the Planning and Zoning Commission on February 5, 1985, is still valid and effective, so that the new developers need not file an application for that same zone change with their application for approval of a general plan of development. The resolution adopted by the Planning and zoning commission is enclosed with this letter. In the last unnumbered paragraph on page 4, the Commission approved the application for a change of zone from Rural Residential to Designed Commercial, and also approved a general plan of development for the property subject to various numbered conditions. The relevant portion of the resolution, dealing with the effective date of the zone change, is set forth on the last page of the resolution (the next to the last page of this enclosure) as follows: 7 Marcia A. Banach April 25, 1989 Page 2 Within ninety (90) days ofthe date of this approval, the following plans shall be filed in the office of the Town Clerk aft r having first been stamped and signed by the Commission: a. A zone change map, prepared in accordance with sections 11. 2 . 3g and h of the Zoning Regulations, and drawn to a scale of 1" - 401 , conforming to A-2 standards, showing the distance and b arings of all boundary lines and acreage of the land where th zone change was granted. b. The "Land Use Plan Map" and "Grading, Drainage and Utility Site Plan" dated September 11, 1984 , prepared by F.A. Hesketh & Associates. The effective date of the approved zone change and General Plan of Development shall be the date the plans are filed in the office of the Town Clerk. By its decision in Pleasant Valley Neighborhood Association Planning and Zoning commission of the Town of South Windsor, 15 Conn. App. 110 (1988) , from which no appeal was taken to th Supreme Court, the Appellate Court upheld the resolution of the Commission, and therefore the zone change. Accordingly, if th two filings referred to in the quoted paragraph above were made with the Town Clerk after having first been stamped and signed by the Commission, the zone change became effective upon the date of that filing, and the Zone change remains in full force and effect regardless of the abandonment of the general plan of development which accompanies it. The effective date set forth in the resolution is consistent with Zoning Regulation 11. 2 . 3h with respect to the effective date of zone changes. Very truly yours, RGE:J rc cc: Richard Sartor Encl. TI I RESOLI TIyLr PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION i The Planning & Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor hereby approves subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth the application of Melvin Simon and Co . , Bronson & Hutensky and Bernard G. Martin for change of zone from Rural Residential to Designed Commercial and a General Plan of Development for th property more particularly described on Exhibit A, which is i attached hereto and made a part hereof. The aforesaid application was filed with the Commission on September 11 , 1984 , and was the subject of public hearings held by the Commission on November 13 , 14 and 15 , 1984 , and December j 11 , 1984 . Extensive testimony was received both on behalf of the l applicants and from persons both favoring and opposing the appli- cation. The applicants and their witnesse$ were subjected to extensive questioning. Many exhibits were also filed with the i. Commission, including a number of them proffered by counsel for II the Pleasant valley Neighborhood Association and its individual I members , which oppose the application. Also received an November 15 , and carefully considered by the Commission , was a brief of some 26 pages plus attachments from the aforesaid counsel for the Association , supplementing questioning of Witnesses that occurred during the hearings . Among the exhibits filed with the Commission were two that merit special identification: ( 1 ) an Agreement dated December 11 , 1984 between the Town of South Windsor can the one hand and Bronson & Hutensky - Melvin Simon and Associates , Inc . Exhibit A h reinafter th Joint Venture) on the other hand (this agreement will her inafter b referred to as the "Agr ement") ; and (2) a letter dated November 26 , 1984 , from Town Manager Richard J. Sartor to the members of the Town Council entitled "Traffic and Transportation Improvement Plan Relevant to the South and Central Areas of the Town of South Windsor" , with attachments , a plan approved by the Town Council on December 3 , 1984 , and referenced in the Agreement. These exhibits were filed with the Commission at its hearing on December 11 , and were explained by the Deputy l Mayor and the Town Manager. The Agreement appears to the Commission to be one designed to anticipate the possible need for new, widened or reconstructed public roads if the subject application were to be approved, and to provide reasonable assurances that certain of these public improvements , otherwise beyond the control of this Commission or th applicant, would in fact be built if they were made con- ditions of the approval of the instant application. Specifical- ly, the Town binds itself with respect to Road Improvements Nazi . 7 , 8 and 9 listed in the Agreement ---- (7) "Pleasant valley Road Clark Street Alternative" , (8) "Smith Street and wheeler Road Cul-De-Sacs and Reconstruction" ; and (9) "Neighborhood Cul-De-Sacs" --- to design , construct , reconstruct , relocate or repair roads and cul-de-sacs (whichever may be necessary to effect the improvement) "in a manner consistent with" whatever time schedule may be imposed by this Commission . Agreement , paragraph 1 (c) . The Joint venture , in turn , has committed itsel- to make available up- to $1 , 800 , 000 for all road improvements identified in the Agr ement; and the parties have specifically Exhibit A 2- agreed that if any or all of the Improvements Nos. 7-9 inclusive are made 1 conditions to the approval of the application by this Commission, the sums (up to $1. 8 million dollars) will be first applied tc these projects , with any funds that remain to be applied to any other of the projects that may be required to be built. iI The completion of the other projects (Nos . 1-6 inclusive in I the Agreement) is expressly made "subject to the schedule of availability and disbursement" of federal and state funds for l which, the Agreement states , these improvements will be eligible. The Agreement further states , however, that the mown "cannot and does not guarantee the availability of federal or state funds for such Road Improvement projects" . Agreement, paragraph 1 (b) . No. 6 among these items ws the "Connector Road" so-called. In con- i nection with this "Connector Road" , the Commission has also received evidence that significant opposition , and therefore consequent delay, is likely to attend any efforts necessary to acquire the property needed to lay out and construct the read and I the construction of the road itself. In light of these factors , the Commission is unable to find that it has reasonable assurances that the construction of im- provement Nos . 1-6 inclusive , significantly includl.ng the "Con- nector Roar;" , is probable before the mall is open . While the Commission believes that improvement Nos . 1 - 5 are needed to meet the future traffic growth requirements of the is Town whether or not the instant application is approved , it finds thdt these improvements do not need to be in place prior to the opening of the ccntemplated mall; and therefore their 1 construction is not made a condition of the op ping of the mall . 3- Exhibit A I tt can and does find, however, that the evidence b fore it reasonably assures it that the construction of Improvements Nos. 71 8 and 9 is probable. The Commission has carefully considered all the evidence before it and all of the arguments , both oral and written, on the matter. It has carefully considered the factors which by law it II must and should consider in arriving at its decision. In light of all of the above, the Commission believes that its decision hereinafter set forth is in accordance with the comprehensive plan and is designed to foster, protect and advance the ends it is by law required to consider in arriving at its decision. The conditions it has placed upon its approval are those which, in i I its judgment , based upon the evidence before it, are reasonably necessary to foster, protect and advance those various ends; and it specifically finds that upon the evidence before it those improvements set forth in the agreement which it does not make conditions of its approval are not reasonably necessary to fos- ter, protect and advance these various ends . Accordingly, the Commission hereby approves the application of Melvin Simon & Campanv, Bronson & Hutenskv and Bernard G. Martin for a change of zone from Rural Residential to Designed Commercial and a General Plan of Developinent- for the property more particularly described on Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, subject to the following conditions : 1 . The applicant shall comply with all requirements of law, including but not limited to the requirements of the South 4- Exh-lbit A Windsor Zoning Regulations that it apply to the Commission for approval of a detailed site development plan-I 2. The Commission finds trlat Improvement No. 7 in the I aforesaid "Agreement" - "The Pleasant Valley Road-Clark Street Alternative"—- is an alternative to Improvement No. 6 in that Agreement, the "Connector Road" . While the Commission believes that the "Connector Road" would be preferable to Improvement No. 7 , it recognizes based upon the evidence before it that the construction and opening of the "Connector Road" prior to occupancy of the mall is unlikely. It finds that Improvement No. 7 will satisfactorily meet the traffic needs occasioned by the opening of the mall, and that Improvement No. 6 is riot necessary to meet those needs if Improvement No. 7 is constructed. Accordingly, the applicant shall not seek from the Town, accept or begin operations under a Certificate of Occupancy until either Improvement No. 7 ( "The pleasant Valley Road-Clark Street Alternative" ) or Improvement No. 6 (the "Connector Road" ) has i been constructed and opened to trattic . The Commission urges that the design of Improvement No. 7 be consistent with the other l improvements provided Lor herein. 3 . Applicant shall cooperate with the Town Ln desi; ning improvements to Smith Street ( Improvement No. 8 in tilE3 "areement" ) with a view toward retaining the residential character of Smith Street and with a further view not to increase the traffic carrying capacity of smith Street; and in curisidesation the design of these improvements shall consider such things as , but not by way of requirement or limitation, a cul-de-sac or signalization. Ttte Commission urges that the design of Improvement No. 8 be consistent with the other improvements provided for herein. Exhibit A 5- 4 . If within two years after -issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the mall the Town Engineer shall determine that Improvement Mo. 9 in the aforesaid "Agreement" --- "Neighborhood Cul-de-sacs" ---- is necessary, they shall be constructed as ii provided for in the aforesaid "Agreement" . 5 . On the detailed site plan of development to be submitted I ` pursuant to the zoning regulations of the Town of South Windsor, ntrances to the mall at the westerly end shall be designed to consid r any changes that have been made in Smith Street, Wheeler I Road, or any other road, in order to provide improved local traffic flow. I 6 . The Commission shad not accept an application for a detailed site plan of development until the applicant has filed with it all necessary approvals obtained from the Department of Environmental Protection and Department of Transportation. 7 . Applicant shall contact the United States Geodetic Survey to attempt to ensure that storm water drainage has been i designed to provide reasonable protection for , and appropriate 11 I recharge to , the aquifer; and shall file Frith the Cur.'.mission all I communications from the Survey in this regard. I 8 . The detailed site plan of development shall provide i that buffering shall be established where the site abuts or is across the street `rom residential zones or uses . All buffer I plans shall be designed by a landscape architect , and shall f consist of appropriate landscaping treatments to mitigate visual, noise and other potential impacts , and shall include coniferous E.chibit A 1 1 and deciduous trees and shrubs , fencing and earthen berms con- 11 strutted to a reasonable height (higher than six feet , where 1 practicable) . Where possible an escarpment shall be constructed between the mall area and residential areas. 9 . The detailed site plan of development shall provide that the height, of the building structure shall be as limited by the zoning regulations . However, mechani.cals and utility strut- tures on the roof may extend an additional fifteen feet because , in the judgment of the Commission, such a height is in keeping with the purpose and intent of these regulations and may be necessary for the applicant properly and economically to con- struct and house utilities and structures on the roof of the proposed building. Within ninety (90) days of the date of this approval , the V following plans shall be filed in the office of the Town Clerk after having first been stamped and signed by the Commission: a. A zone change map , prepared in accordance with Sections 11 . 2 . 3 .g and h of the Zoning Regulations , and drawn to a scale of 6 = 40 ' , conforming to A-2 standards , showing the distance and bearings of all boundary lines and acreage of the land where the zone change was granted. b. The "Land use Plan Map" and "Grading , Drainage and Utility Site Plan" dated S(Dtember 11 , 1984 , prepared by F . A . Hesketh & Associates. The effective date of the approved zone change and General Plan of Development shall be the date the plans are filed in the office of the Town Clerk. Exhibit A ZONE CHANGE All that certdin tract of land owned by Hartman Tobacco Company, George Andrew Gilbert and Bernard G. Martin, within the Town of South Windsor, Connecticut, being described as follows : Beginning at the intersection of the northerly street i f line of Pleasant Valley Road with the Town Line separating the Town of Manchester and South Windsor, Connecticut; f . Thence running westerly along the northerly street line I r of Pleasant Valley Road to Wheeler Road; Thence running northerly along the easterly street line of Wheeler Road to Smith Street; Thence running easterly along the southerly street line of Smith Street to land now or formerly of Richard W. and Jeannette D. Haggett; i I Thence running southerly, bounded easterly by said Haggett land; I Thence running easterly, bounded northerly by said Haggett land and land now or formerly of Theodore and Betty G. Gill , land now or formerly of George A. Gilbert, and land now or formerly of F. Michael and Claudette Sansom; Thence running northerly, bounded westerly by said Sansom land to land now or formerly of Monica V. Daley; Thence running easterly, bounded northerly by said Daley land to land now or formerly of Emil J. and Lucielle Boutin; I Thence running southerly bounded easterly by said Boutin land; Thence running easterly bounded northerly by said Boutin land and land now or formerly of Richard V. and Margaret Molloy, land now or formerly of Willard and Claire Dufour , and land now or formerly of Joseph J. and Frances T. Gancarz to Land now or formerly of Gurrie A. and Barbara R . Fando,-zi ; Thence running southerly and easterly bounded northeasterly by said Fandozzi land to the Manchester and South Windsor Town Line; Thence running westerly along said Town Line to the point and place of beginning. Said tract contains 57 acres more or less . Said tract being shown on a plan titled "Wincho,ter , Proposed Zone Change, General Plan of Development , South Windsor , Connecticut , Date ; 8/ 17/84 , Scale: 1 "=2001 , " by F. A. Hesketh & Associates , 101 Millbrook Common , Bloomfield, CT 06002 EXHIBIT A UPDIKE, KELLY & SPELLACY, P. C. COUNSELORS AT LAW PETER G.KELLY MARK J.ZIMMERMANN ELIZABETH K MCLAUGHLIN ONE STATE STREET BOURKEG SPELLACY JOHNJ MURPHY CHARLESJ NICOL THOMAS J 5HORTELL RICHARD S.ORDER POST OFFICE BOX 31277 THOMAS W DEMILLE JAMES W ABRAMS BONNIE C ROBSON PAULL MCCORMICK MICHAELJ ANDREANA CYNTHIAJ RUMMEL HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06103-3176 JAMES H LLOYD.III MARJ0 RIE J.BERGER JAN ET HUBON STRATTON JOHN C KING HAROLD M BLINDERMAN JOSEPH F TILGHMAN,JR JAMEST GRAHAM KATHERINEC CALLAHAN BARBARAC WAGNER CABLE UKSLAW ELIZABETH COLLINS BARTON CHRISTOPHER M CELIO JOHN F WOLTER TELEX 643067 HO HFD ALANI SCHEER ANNA V CRAWFORD CAROLS.CLAPP ROBERT M DECRESCENZO TELECOPIER (203)548-2680 JAMES M.CONNOR LAURA B FRANKEL OF COUNSEL DEBORAH MONTEITH NEUBERT SUSAN A HAYS DOUGLAS M COSTLE' 203) 548-2600 KAREN P BLADO PETER R HUNTSMAN CHRISTINE BECK MICHAEL D.NEUBERT MORTON H LIBBEY,JR R DIAL PARROTT ROBERTJ MARTINO DIRECT DIAL NUMBER DAVID E STURGESS AMY S MCCABE STUART N UPDIKE 1904-1983) ADMITTED TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA RECEIVEDANDCALIFORNIABARSONLY MAY 1 1989 April 28 , 1989 SO. WINDSOR PLANNING DEPL Ads. Marcia Banach Town Planner Town of South Windsor 1.540 Sullivan Avenue South P.74ndsor, Connecticut 06074 Re: Plaza at Ruck?and Hills Application for General Plan of Development Dear Marcia: As counsel to Downeast Associates Limited Partnership, the applicant in the above-referenced application, we hereby request an extension to the statutory period in which a public hearing is to be held . 'Fe ask that an extension be granted through (Tune 6-71 1989 , the elates on which the public hearing is scheduled to be held. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Very t y ours, ARBARA C. WAGNER cc - Mr. Thomas Maskey Mr. Clenn Johnson James H. Llovd , Tll , Esq. COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS THE PLAZA AT BUCKLAND HILLS Prepared for Melvin Simon Associates May 1989 HAMMER SILER , GE0RGEASS0CIATES Atlanta/Denver/Fort Lauderdale/Silver Spring/Washington 1111 Bonifant Street Silver Spring, Maryland 20910 301/565-5200 FOREWORD Hammer, Siler, George Associates was retained by Melvin Simon Associates to provide a cost-benefit analysis for a community shopping center and office development proposed for construction in the towns of South Windsor and Manchester, Connecticut. The development is to be known as "The Plaza at Buckland Hills" (Buckland Hills) . This analysis considers only that portion of Buckland Hills which is located within the Town of South Windsor. The study was conducted in accordance with the Town of South Windsor' s zoning ordinance, Section 4.12.5.K, which requires developers to provide a cost-benefit analysis to evaluate the financial impact of proposed developments. The analysis follows as closely as possible the Municipal Cost-Benefit Analysis Model prepared by the Capital Region Council of Governments (CRCOG) in 1982. The use of this model ' s methodology allows the Town and the developer to discuss the proposal ' s financial impact using the same definitions and elements of costs and revenues. In order to forecast future expenses and revenues attributable to the Buckland Hills development, it was necessary to make a number of estimates and assumptions regarding the project ' s physical and operational characteristics, as well as its requirements for public services. In making these assumptions, we relied on information provided by several local officials, department representatives and the developer. On the basis of the information we received, we believe the forecast assumptions used herein are sound and reasonable. This report contains four brief sections. Section I describes the characteristics of the planned Buckland Hills project; Section II presents estimates of expenses which will be incurred by the Town as a result of the development of Buckland Hills; the third section estimates revenues to the Town of South Windsor; and the net financial benefits of the Buckland Hills development are summarized in Section IV. HAMMER, SILER, GEORGE ASSOCIATES Silver Spring, Maryland May 1989 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page FOREWORD i SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS i Section I. THE PLAZA AT BUCKLAND HILLS 1 Development Program and Construction Schedule 1 I Section II . EXPENSES TO THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR 4 Expense Estimates 5 Building Department 6 Public Works Department 6 Fire Department 7 Police Department 7 Conclusions Regarding Expenses 8 j Section III . REVENUES TO THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR 10 Revenue Estimates 10 Property Tax Revenues 11 Nonproperty Tax Revenues 12 Conclusions Regarding Revenues 15 I Section IV. NET BENEFITS TO THE TOWN OF WINDSOR 16 Conclusions Regarding Net Benefits 17 I 1 I I I j i SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This analysis forecasts estimates of the net financial benefit expected to accrue to the Town of South Windsor from the development of the proposed Buckland Hills shopping center. In conducting the analysis, we estimated expenses and revenues attributable to Buckland Hills over a ten-year period between fiscal year (FY) 1990 (July 1, 1989 to June 30, 1990) and FY 1999. After reviewing the Buckland Hills development plan with representatives from seven Town departments, it was determined that expenses would be incurred by the Building Department, the Public Works Department, the Fire Department and the Police Department. Revenues to be generated by Buckland Hills will come from real and personal property taxes, building permit fees and a sewer connection fee. This analysis estimates that expenses to the Town will increase from 163,700 in FY 1990 to $280,800 in 1999. In each year, the greatest j expense to the Town will be for police department services. Over the same period, revenues to the Town are forecast to increase from $352, 100 to over $3.6 million. The largest source of revenue to the Town will be from local taxes on real property at Buckland Hills. I The analysis finds that the proposed Buckland Hills development would result in a substantial positive net financial benefit to the Town of South Windsor. Based on forecasts of future revenues and expenditures, the net financial benefit to the Town would be $188,400 in FY 1990; by FY 1999, the net benefit is expected to reach $3.4 million. I I i i i I i i I i Section I . THE PLAZA AT BUCKLAND HILLS i I i i i I i I Section I. THE PLAZA AT BUCKLAND HILLS i i Buckland Hills is located on a 94.12-acre parcel bounded generally by Smith Street on the north; Buckland Road on the east; Pleasant Valley Road to the south; and on the west by Wheeler Road. Approximately 59.46 acres of the site is located in the Town of South Windsor and 34.66 acres are located within the Town of Manchester. The location of this property isI shown on Figure 1 . I Buckland Hills is the second development project to be proposed on the subject property since 1984, when a regional shopping center and office park was proposed at the same location. This project, called Winchester Mall , was planned to include a 972,000-square-foot shopping center, of which 763,840 square feet were located on 57 acres in South Windsor. The balance of the shopping center and all of the 240,000 square feet of office space were planned to be located in Manchester. Winchester Mall was never constructed; however, a regional shopping center of comparable scale is currently under construction on a site across Buckland Road from the Buckland Hills property. I Development Program and Construction Schedule The Buckland Hills project is planned to contain a total of 490,855 square feet of retail space and 390,000 square feet of office space which will complement the adjacent regional mall . Of the total retail space, 289,445 square feet is planned on 23.5 acres in South Windsor and 201 ,410 i Qasvi;an E v Pd. t 4 d m hoc o a Co0 1'ii S-R O\` gtd` 9a Smith St. i 1P Cl i• N 000. yy EAST HARTFORD The Plaza at North Buckland Hills Site Location Scale 0 1 Mlles FIGURE 1 i square feet is to be in Manchester, encompassing 34.7 acres. The 390,000 i square feet of office space is planned for 35.9 acres in South Windsor. No office development is planned for the Manchester portion of the property. The retail component of Buckland Hills will contain a mix of small shops and major tenants in an unenclosed L-shaped configuration. Major tenants will occupy a total of 295,250 square feet of space in nine stores, ranging from 15,000 to 60,000 square feet in size. Smaller shops will occupy the remaining 195,600 square feet of space. This development program is shown below in Table 1 . j i Table 1 . PLAZA AT BUCKLAND HILLS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Square Feet Acres Retail Jurisdiction Retail Office Total Major Shops Office Total South Windsor 23.54 35.92 59.46 202,060 87,385 390,000 679,445 Manchester 34.66 0.00 34.66 93, 189 108,221 0 201 ,410 Total 58.20 35.92 94. 12 295,249 195,606 390,000 880,855 I Source: Melvin Simon Associates I The developer anticipates that Buckland Hills will be developed in three phases. The first phase of construction is planned to include the entire retail portion of the project. A nine-month construction period is expected for the retail portion, with construction starting in July 1989 and ending in March 1990. The second phase of development is expected to include 130,000 square feet of office space to be constructed between March 1992 and March 1993. The final phase is planned to include the remaining 260,000 square feet of office space which is planned for I i 2- f • i , `i i is (.i r ,l \„ i , I construction between March 1994 and March 1995. This construction schedule is summarized below in Table 2. Table 2. BUCKLAND HILLS CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE I Phase Land Use Square Feet Construction Period I Retail 490,855 July 1989 - March 1990 j II Office 130,000 March 1992 - March 1993 III Office 260,000 March 1994 - March 1995 i Source: Melvin Simon Associates i The analysis which follows is based on this development program and construction schedule. The next section presents estimates of expenses which the Town of South Windsor will incur from the construction and operation of Buckland Hills. f i I it I 3- i f i i Ii i i I i i Section II. EXPENSES TO THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR i Section II . EXPENSES TO THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR This section estimates the level of anticipated municipal expenditures by the Town directly attributable to the Buckland Hills proposal . As prescribed in the CRCOG Cost-Benefit Analysis (C-BA) Model , ancillary costs such as additional demand upon schools and sewers, should 1 be considered separately as "nonmonetary costs" . Accordingly, this analysis considers only direct expenses described in the C-BA Model , attributable to the Buckland Hills proposal . Direct expenses include both nonrecurring, or initial expenses, such as building, site and fire inspection costs, and recurring expenses, such as police patrol and periodic fire inspections. Those expenses which are passed through to the developer are not considered because development fees and ongoing service charges are assumed to be adequate to cover improvements or services which will be necessitated by the development. For instance, the cost of local road improvements necessitated by the project is not reflected because the developer will 2.3 million forPerpayPY such improvements. Accordingly, this $2.3 million is not shown as a 4 revenue to the Town because it is earmarked for this specific purpose. i Similarly, the costs of operating city services such as the wastewater treatment plant or sanitary landfill are not reflected because their operation is paid for through regular service fees. For example, although the developer will pay a tipping fee of $45 per ton of refuse, i 4- i iIl---- these monies will be used for landfill operations. Therefore, tipping fees are not shown as a revenue to the Town. In this analysis, each department's expenses are estimated for fiscal year 1990, which runs from July 1, 1989 to June 30, 1990. This annual j expenditure amount is then inflated at eight percent per year to estimate I future costs to the Town. This eight percent annual increase is based on the average escalation in municipal expenditures in the Capitol Region during the last decade, according to the Town Assessor j I Expense Estimates i In order to estimate the level of expenditures which each department i in the Town will need to make to service Buckland Hills, we met with a representative of each department and reviewed the Buckland Hills development plan. This review included a discussion of the development program and schedule. Based on this review, each representative was asked to estimate the level of effort needed to support the Buckland Hills project, in terms of personnel time and expense and operating costs. The following list includes the local officials who were interviewed: i Building Official Town Engineer Fire Marshall Police Chief Public Works Director i Planning Director Town Sanitarian i In most cases, department representatives provided estimates of their departmental costs. Following is a discussion of each department' s estimates of costs to the Town which are summarized in Table 3. i 5- f I I i 1 I Building Department I The Building Department' s current annual operating budget is 155,000, of which $140,000 is for personnel and $15,000 is for operating expenses. The Town's Building Official estimates the department would need to devote ten percent of its budget to inspecting building construction at Buckland Hills during the nine-month construction period. Based on these estimates, the cost of building inspection for fiscal year i 1990 is calculated to be $11,600. A comparable level of effort would be required to inspect each of the two later phases of office construction The cost of building inspection for these later phases is inflated at j eight percent per year. i I i Public Works Department I The Town Engineer has estimated that one engineer will spend an average of one and one-half hours per day at Buckland Hills during the nine-month construction period. Inspections will include utility installation, site grading and drainage and erosion control measures. The I j engineer estimates that a $30 per hour rate will cover salary and operating overhead for one engineer. Based on these estimates, the cost of site engineering inspections will be about $8,500 for the first phase of development in fiscal year 1990. In addition, plan review time will account for another $1,500 in expenses, bringing the total cost to $10,000 j for site engineering inspections. Of this total , an estimated $8,900 will j be personnel expenses and $1,100 will be operating costs. i I I 6_ i Fire Department The Fire Marshall estimates that fire inspections will take ten percent of an inspector' s time, both during construction and after Buckland Hills is operating. During the second and third phases of construction, when the office buildings are under construction, the inspector's time is increased to 20 percent -- 10 percent for routine inspections of existing space and 10 percent for inspection of the new construction. The cost estimate for 1990 is based on these percentages of a $36,000 personnel expense including salary, benefits, uniforms and supplies. I i i Police Department f The cost of police protection will represent the largest expense to the Town resulting from the development of Buckland Hills. The Chief of i Police estimates that the project will create a demand for three additional officers -- one officer for each shift. These officers will I respond primarily to traffic-related incidents, burglaries and shop- lifting crimes. Annual personnel costs for the three officers will amount to $123,000 for fiscal year 1990. This total includes $90,000 for salaries, $31,500 for fringe benefits and $1 ,500 for uniforms. In addition, up to one new patrol car will be required in 1990; this car will then need to be replaced in 1995. The cost of the car, with equipment, will be about $17,000. Annual operating costs for the car are estimated at $5,000, including insurance, fuel and maintenance. In this analysis, the cost of purchasing new vehicles in 1990 and 1995 is amortized over i I five-year periods and the annual cost of operations and personnel are inflated at eight percent per year. I I i i I As noted, we interviewed representatives of other departments which will incur little or no expense from the development of Buckland Hills. Specifically, the Town Sanitarian indicated that costs to his department I would be negligible; while the Planning Department will collect j application fees roughly equal to their expense for plan review. For ` these reasons, expenses for these departments are not reflected in this j analysis. Total expenses to the Town of South Windsor presented above are i summarized in Table 3. i j Table 3. BUCKLAND HILLS ATTRIBUTABLE EXPENSES, SOUTH WINDSOR, FY 1990-FY 1999 Fx epnsesFY1990FY1991FY1992FY1993FY1994FY1995FY1996FY1997FY1998FY1999 j PersonneljBuilding Inspection $10.50 SO.00 $5.38 $11.79 S6.27 $13.80 $0.00 $0.00 SO.00 S0.00 Site Inspection 8.90 0.00 3.43 7.51 4.00 8.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fire Department 3.60 3.89 5.71 7.75 6.66 9.03 5.84 6.31 6.81 7.35 Police Department 132.30 142.54 153.60 165.54 178.44 193.27 208.32 224.57 242.12 261.07 Subtotal 155.30 S146.43 $168.11 $192.59 S195.37 $224.87 S214.16 $230.88 $248.93 5268.42 i Operatic Building Inspection $1.13 $0.00 $0.58 $1.27 $0.66 S1.47 $0.00 SO.00 SO.00 SO.00 Site Inspection 1.10 0.00 0.42 0.93 0.50 1.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Fire Department 1.70 1.84 1.98 2.14 2.31 2.50 2.70 2.91 3.15 3.40 Police Department 4.50 4.86 5.25 5.67 6.12 6.61 7.14 7.71 8.33 9.00 I Subtotal 8.43 $6.70 $8.23 $10.01 S9.59 $11.67 $9.84 $10.63 S11.48 $12.39 Total 163.73 S153.12 $176.34 S202.61 $204.96 $236.54 $224.00 $241.51 S260.40 S280.82 Net Present Value 1989 Annual 151.30 S130.80 $139.20 $147.90 S138.30 $147.50 $129.10 $128.70 S128.20 S127.80 i 10-Year Total S1,368.80 Note: In thousands of current dollars. Source: Hammer, Siler, George Associates Conclusions Regarding Expenses Total expenses accruing, to the Town of South Windsor are estimated toi be $163,708 in fiscal year 1990. By 1999, annual expenses attributable to i j 8- i Buckland Hills are forecasted to be about $291,000 after accounting for an eight percent annual increase in the cost of providing these municipal services. The net present value of expenses over the period amounts to over $1 .3 million, using a discount rate of 8.16 percent -- the 26-month T-bill rate as of mid-May 1989. As indicated in Table 3, the one-time costs of building and site inspections are shown to occur only while construction is underway. These costs are adjusted to reflect the portion of the fiscal year in which construction is expected to occur. The recurring expenses -- fire inspection and police department -- account for the majority of total costs over the period. In fact, police department expenses are forecasted to account for almost 84 percent of all costs to the Town in FY 1990; by 1999, this percentage is expected to increase to 96 percent of total expenses. I i r i I 4 I I j i i 9- i I i I Section III . REVENUES TO THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR This section estimates the amount of revenue which the Buckland Hills development will yield to the Town of South Windsor. By far, the largest source of revenue will be generated from real property and personal property taxes. The project will also yield one-time fees which will be paid to the Town upon initiation of a new phase of construction. A discussion of methodology and key assumptions follows, and Table 4 then 1 summarizes total revenue to the Town of South Windsor from Buckland Hills. I Revenue Estimates In order to determine the amount of potential tax revenues to be generated b Buckland Hills, it is first necessary to estimate the value9YY of the project. This analysis uses the same approach to determine property values as the Town Assessor will use when he assesses the property for tax purposes. In the initial years after construction, the Assessor will use the cost approach to estimate the market value of the project. This approach considers the market value of the property to be equivalent to the construction cost of the project. After Buckland Hills is established in the market place, that is, after the project has reached a stabilized level of occupancy, the Assessor will convert to using the income approach to estimate the project ' s market value. The income approach estimates a property' s market value based on the capitalized value of the project's annual net income. i I 10— s i i Property Tax Revenues IInmakingpropertyvalueforecastsandresultantrealandpersonal property tax revenue yields, it is necessary to make certain assumptions about future conditions and events. Specifically, assumptions need to be made regarding current and future construction costs, the construction timetable, future project income, the amount of personal property relative to real property and future mill rates. The key assumptions used in this analysis, along with certain relevant facts, are outlined below. I The construction costs for the retail portion of Buckland Hills are assumed to be $55 per square foot of building including site costs, in fiscal year 1990. Construction costs are assumed to increase at five percent per year throughout the six-year construction period.I Construction costs for the office portions of Buckland Hills are assumed to be $65 per square foot in 1990 dollars. This amount is inflated at five percent per year and then used to estimate the construction value of the office buildings to be built in the second and third phases. The phasing of construction is assumed to occur according to the development schedule described in Table 2. We have assumed it will take three full years of business before the retail portion of Buckland Hills reaches stabilized sales and occupancy levels. For both phases of office construction, we have assumed it will take two full years for the office buildings to reach a stabilized occupancy level . A stabilized occupancy level of 90 percent is assumed for both retail and office space. Net rental income to be generated by the retail portion of the project is assumed to be $16 per square foot in 1990 dollars. Office space is assumed to 11- I I generate net rental income of $12 per square foot in 1990 dollars. These income levels are inflated at five percent per year throughout the forecast period. A capitalization rate of 9.5 percent has been assumed in calculating the market value of the property based on net operating income. This cap rate was suggested by the Town Assessor and several area real estate appraisers. The last reassessment in South Windsor was in 1984. To adjust taxable values to the 1984 base year, an assessment rate of 40 percent of market value is used for real property; a 70 percent assessment rate is used for personal property. These rates were provided by the Town Assessor. The value of personal property within the retail portion of the project is estimated to equal 20 percent of real property value. Within the office portion, personal property is assumed to equal 30 percent of real property value. We have assumed that in any year one-half of all personal property values are fully taxable, the rest having been depreciated.i The current mill levy for FY 1990 is 36.8 mills. The mill rate is increased 5.5 percent each year to account for future increases in the municipal inflation index. This assumption was confirmed by South Windsor's Director of Economic Development. Nonproperty Tax Revenues In addition to real and personal property tax revenues, the Buckland Hills project will generate nonrecurring, one-time fees. The building permit fee is $10 per $1,000 of construction cost. The Town will receive building permit fees at the beginning of each phase of construction. The amount of these fees far exceeds the Building Department' s costs for building inspections so most of this fee goes into the general fund and i provides a subsidy to other municipal operations. I i 12- I Another revenue fee is the one-time sewer connection fee which will be paid by the developer. The amount of this fee is based on $1,000 per acre of developed land. The revenues from this fee go into the general fund and then a portion is earmarked toward the sewer assessment fund which was established to retire bonds issued to make improvements in local wastewater treatment facilities. i These revenues, combined with property tax revenues, are presented in Table 4. I I I i I i i II I I Ii i l i I I 13- i i I Table 4. BUCKLAND HILLS ATTRIBUTABLE REVENUE, SOUTH WINDSOR, FY 1990-FY 1999 Real Property FY 1990 FY 1991 FY 1992 FY 1993 FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999 Square Feet Retail 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 Office 0 0 130,000 130,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 Total 288,295 288,295 418,295 418,295 678,295 678,295 678,295 678,295 678,295 678,295 Construction Value Retail 7,532 $15,856 515,856 $15,856 O O SO SO SO SO Office 0 0 3,074 9,782 20,645 32,354 0 0 0 0 Total 7,532 $15,856 S18,931 $25,638 S20,645 $32,354 SO SO SO SO Capitalized Income Value Retail SO SO SO O 553,117 555,773 $58,561 561,490 564,564 561,792 Office 0 0 0 0 0 0 59,416 62,386 65,506 68,781 Total O SO SO O $53,117 S55,773 S117,977 S123,876 S130,070 S136,573 Market Value Retail S7,532 $15,856 S15,856 S15,856 $53,117 $55,773 $58,561 $61,490 S64,564 S67,792 Office 0 0 3,074 9,782 20,645 32,354 59,416 62,386 65,506 68,781 i Total 7,532 $15,856 S18,931 $25,638 $73,762 $88,127 $117,977 $123,876 $130,070 $136,573 Taxable Value Retail S3,013 $6,342 $6,342 S6,342 S21,247 $22,309 $23,425 S24,596 $25,826 $27,117 Office 0 0 1,230 3,913 8,258 12,941 23,766 24,955 26,202 27,512 Total 3,013 S6,342 S7,572 $10,255 $29,505 S35,251 S47,191 $49,550 $52,028 $54,629 I Mill Rate 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 j Real Tax Revenues S105.4 S222.0 $265.0 $358.9 $1,032.7 $1,233.8 S1,651.7 S1,734.3 S1,821.0 S1,912.0 I Personal Property Market Value Retail 1,506 $3,171 $3,171 $3,171 $3,171 S3,171 $3,171 $3,171 $3,171 13,111 Office 0 0 922 2,935 6,193 9,706 17,825 17,825 17,825 17,825 i I Total 1,506 $3,171 S4,094 S6,106 S9,365 S12,877 S20,996 $20,996 S20,996 S20,996 Taxable Value j Retail S1,054 $2,220 $2,220 $2,220 $2,220 $2,220 $2,220 S2,220 $2,220 52,220 Office 0 0 646 2,054 4,335 6,794 12,477 12,477 12,477 12,477 i Total 1,054 $2,220 $2,865 S4,274 $6,555 $9,014 $14,697 $14,697 $14,697 $14,697 i Depreciated Value S527 S1,110 S1,433 $2,137 $3,278 $4,507 S7,349 S7,349 S7,349 S7,349 Mill Rate 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 35.0 Personal Tax Revenues $18.5 $38.8 $50.1 $74.8 $114.7 $157.7 $257.2 S257.2 S257.2 S257.2 I Total Tax Revenues $123.9 S260.8 S315.2 $433.7 $1,147.4 $1,391.5 $1,908.9 S1,991.5 $2,078.2 S2,169.2 Other Revenues B1dg.Permit Fees S158.6 SO SO $97.8 SO.0 $215.7 SO.0 SO.0 S0.0 $0.0 Sewer Connection 63.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total S221.9 SO.0 $0.0 S97.8 $0.0 $215.7 $0.0 S0.0 SO.0 SO.0 Total Town Revenues S345.8 $260.8 $315.2 $531.5 $1,147.4 $1,607.2 S1,908.9 S1,991.5 S2,078.2 S2,169.2 Net Present Value 1989 Annual S325.5 S247.2 S291.3 $462.2 S1,008.2 S1,326.9 $1,595.0 S1,622.6 S1.651 2 S1,680.7 10-Year Total S10,210.8 Note: In thousands of current dollars. i Source: Hammer, Siler, George Associates i 14- i I Conclusions Regarding Revenues i Property tax revenues from Buckland Hills are forecasted to increase from $130,300 in FY 1990 to nearly $3.7 million in FY 1999 in current dollars, that is, accounting for a five percent annual increase in rental income and construction costs, and a five and one-half percent annual I increase in the annual mill rate. Other revenues include building permit and sewer connection fees, which account for $535,400 of additional I revenue to the Town. In Table 4, these "other revenues" are shown as j i accruing to the Town in the initial year of each new construction phase. In reality, these revenues may be received in installments; however, a j payment schedule has not yet been agreed upon. j The ten-year projected stream of total revenues from Buckland Hills equates to a net present value of $10.2 million, using a discount rate of 8. 19 percent. This discount rate is based on the 26-month T-bill rate as of mid-May 1989. I i i i I i 15- I I i I I I I I I i I i Section IV. NET BENEFITS TO THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR j I i I i I i I i I i Section IV. NET BENEFITS TO THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR i I The net financial benefits attributable to Buckland Hills are calculated by subtracting annual expenses from annual revenues. Table 5 compares expenses and revenues and summarizes the net benefits to the Town of South Windsor for the period between FY 1990 and FY 1999. Table 5. SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES ASSOCIATED WITH BUCKLAND HILLS, FY 1990-FY 1999 Fiscal Total Total Net NPV Year Revenues Expenditures Benefit 1989 1990 352,136 $163,725 188,411 174, 148 1991 289,333 $153,124 136,209 116,367 1992 368,837 $176,341 192,496 152,006 1993 633,316 $202,609 430,707 314,365 1994 $1,494,505 $204,962 $1,289,543 869,962 1995 $2,127,883 $236,544 $1,891,339 $1, 179,361 1996 $2,767,406 $223,999 $2,543,408 $1,465,906 1997 $3,045,925 $241,505 $2,804,420 $1,493,984 1998 $3,353,372 $260,405 $3,092,967 $1,522,970 1999 $3,692,806 $280,816 $3,411,989 $1,552,875 i NPV $10,210,782 $1,368,838 $8,841,944 10-Year Total ) Note: NPV = net present value, discounted to 1989 at a rate of 8. 19 percent. Source: Hammer, Siler, George Associates 16- I i I i Conclusions Regarding Net Benefits I i Based on this analysis, it is clear that the development of Buckland Hills will result in a substantial positive net financial benefit to the i I Town of South Windsor. During the ten-year analysis period, the net financial benefit from Buckland Hills increases from $188,000 in FY 1990 to over $3.4 million in 1999. This cash flow amounts to a net present value of $8.8 million in FY 1990. The considerable growth in net benefitsi results from the fact that annual revenues attributable to the proposed Buckland Hills development increase at a much greater rate than attributable expenses. In fact, the ratio of revenues to expenses increases from 2. 1 :1 to 13. 1 : 1 over the ten-year analysisyy period. Not included here is the value of benefits received beyond the analysis period, which will continue indefinitely into the future. I I 17- REVIEW OF "COST - BENEFIT ANALYSIS, THE PLAZA AT BUCKLAND HILLS" John Shemo, Economic Development Coordinator Property Tax Revenues The estimate of mill rate for fiscal year 1990 ( 35 mills ) should have been made closer to 37 mills . The use of a constant mill rate throughout the forecast period 10 years ) is questionable. A more appropriate projection of property tax revenues could have been based on the product of market value multiplied by a current effective tax rate. The effective tax rate could then have been adjusted each year based on a municipal inflation index (possibly 5 - 6%) . A general reassessment will be made in 1994, not 1992 as stated. Use of a municipal inflation index applied to an effective tax rate would have lessened the concern over the impact of revaluation. Revenue/Expense Projections My preference would have been to show the revenue and expense projections in terms of net present value ( 1989 dollars ) though the format used is acceptable. Non Quantifiable Benefits and Costs No mention is made of non quantifiable benefits and costs, such as air quality, soils, water, traffic, land values in the surrounding area, future development potential in the surrounding area, and employment. 10jiN Sf,( G U ti 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074 SOR•co l AREA CODE 203/644-2511 May 22, 1989 Ms . Barbara Wagner Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C. P. 0. Box 31277 One State Street Hartford, CT 06103-3176 re: Appl . #89-17P, Plaza at Buckland Hills Smith St. /Wheeler/Buckland/Pleasant Valley Road Dear Ms . Wagner: Please be advised that the public hearing in the above matter has been scheduled for Tuesday, June 6, 1989 at 7 : 30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the South Windsor Town Hall, 1540 Sullivan Avenue. Signs advertising the hearing must be posted for 10 consecutive days prior to the hearing, and must be clearly visible from the road. Please have them posted by Friday, May 26 , 1989 . One sign should be placed on the southerly side of Smith Street, another on the easterly side of Wheeler Road, a third sign on the westerly side of Buckland Road, and a fourth on the northerly side of Pleasant Valley Road. Signs can be purchased in the Town Hall for $5 . 00 each. Very truly yours, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Raymond F. Hallowell, Jr. Chairman cc: vPZC File Applicant Engineer M. Banach, Dir. of Planning UPDIKE, KELLY & SPELLACY, P. C. COUNSELORS AT LAW PETER KELLY MARK ZIMMERMANN ELIZABETH K MCLAUGHLIN ONE STATE STREETBOURKEGSPELLACYJOHNJ.MURPHY CHARLESJ NICOL THOMASJ SHORTELL RICHARD S.ORDER POST OFFICE BOX 31277THOMASWDeMILLEJAMESWABRAMSBONNIEC.ROBSON PAUL L MCCORMICK MICHAEL J.ANDREANA CYNTHIA J RUMMEL HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06103-3176 JAMES H.LLOYD.IE MARJORIE J.BERGER JANET HUBON STRATTON JOHN C KING HAROLD M BLINDERMAN JOSEPH F TILGHMAN.JR JAMEST GRAHAM KATHERINEC CALLAHAN BARBARAC WAGNER CABLE "UKSLAW ELIZABETH COLLINS BARTON CHRISTOPHER M.CELIO JOHN F WOLTER TELEX 643067 HO HFD ALANI SCHEER ANNA V CRAWFORD CAROLS CLAPP ROBERT M.DECRESCENZO TELECOPIER (203)548-2680 JAMES M CONNOR LAURAB FRANKEL OF COUNSEL DEBORAH MONTEITH NEUBERT SUSAN A HAYS DOUGLAS M COSTLE• 203)548-2600 KAREN P BLADO PETER R HUNTSMAN CHRISTINE BECK MICHAEL D NEUBERT MORTON H LIBBEY.JR R.DIAL PARROTT ROBERT J MARTINO DAVID E STURGESS AMY S McCABE STUART N.UPDIKE DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 1904-1983) ADMITTED TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND CALIFORNIA BARS ONLY n 1 May 22 , 1989 Ms. Marcia Banach Town Planner AI Town of South Windsor planning & Lol (r, LGlticlEt+rD 1540 Sullivan. Avenue South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Re: Plaza at Buckland Hills Application for General Plan of Development Dear Marcia: Enclosed please .find a resubmission of the application in connection with the above-referenced matter, with revisions as we discussed . Very truly yours, BARBARA C. WAGNER cc: Mr. Thomas Maskey Mr. Glenn Johnson James H. Lloyd, III, Esq. l L _ , Ad c M _ . nina e inf,u-ninGon Sul;A tUd to UP Town Ulmer a l et tr r Hated 5/ I2/?9 to M . Lahti ck , provivips Wy proposed fiu'.,s to the V n, ROM Your SAC -- it does not Pn<. y7e pie ha. A ' s uhility to rontrol ilc` into it . The inf„'-patiun `il_"l'L 1 I h!_ rugv rcd 1 or revipw wil 1 be t otJ flew i n i 1 ow and outfoll h dro^r aAs, an ona l y s is ni the ex _s_-t ing outflow s._ructure aDd an oje:r., i 1ll'pact zLaL__..v :C posed on the Town 's C:'__sink rc'qL'1cc inn . 0V havee q c s 1. 7n s < N I r _F to VC] y r IL'y yoh s, q ,_ '1 rn rU ir,4kNI Er rU T t SENDER: Complete items 1 and 2 when additional services are desired, and complete Items 3 and 4' Put your address in the "RETURN TO" Space on the reverse side. Failure to do this will prevent thiscardfrombeingreturnedtoyou. The return receipt fee will provide you the name of the Persondthedateofdellyffy. For additional fees the following services are available. Consult postmaster for fees and check box(es)for additional service(s) requested. 1. Show to whom delivered,date,and addressee's address. 2. Restricted Delivery 1(Extra c4te)1 1(Extra charge)1 3. Article Addressed to: t 4. Article Number Ty'of Service: 1,Q i` Z Regist El Insured Gam El Certified COD ON 6-7 S/_tl '72-: Express Mail CT Always obtain signature of addressee or agent and DATE DELIVERED. 5. Signature—Addressee 8. Addressee's Address(ONLY if X requested and fee paid) 6. Signature—Znt X r Date of i 4 PS Form 3d11, Mar.1987 U.sARO.1M7-178-= DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT 1041 11 se s 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074 sOR•cO' AREA CODE 203/644-2511 TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE JOURNAL INQUIRER THURSDAY, MAY 25, 1989 THURSDAY, JUNE 1, 1989 LEGAL NOTICE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Notice is hereby given that there will be a public hearing of the Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday, June 6 , 1989 at 7 : 30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the South Windsor Town Hall to consider the following: 1 . Proposal of the Planning and Zoning Commission for amendments to sections 11 . 4 , 4 . 1 . 8 of the Zoning Regulations to ( 1 ) limit ZBA granting of use variances in residential zones by excluding all uses permitted in industrial and commercial zones from residential zones; and 2 ) to allow 50% impervious coverage for permitted non- residential uses in residential zones . 2 . Appl . #89-17P, Downeast Associates Limited Partnership for a General Plan of Development for 59 .46 acres of property at Smith St. , Wheeler Road, Buckland Road, and Pleasant Valley Road to provide approximately 289 ,445 square feet of retail space and 390, 000 sq. ft. of office space to be known as the Plaza at Buckland Hills , DC Zone. Copies of the application and/or maps more clearly defining the properties are on file in the office of the Town Clerk and/or the Planning Department of the Town of South Windsor. At this hearing, interested persons may appear and be heard, and written recommendations will be received. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Raymond F. Hallowell, Jr. , Chairman Marshall Montana, Secretary r-Y-r" a F. Close, Jensen and Miller, P. C. IV 114. FQh c CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTALISTS, LAND PLANNERS AND SURVEYORS 1137 SILAS DEANE HIGHWAY WETHERSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 06109-4201 I 1 203) 563-9375 June 2, 1989 Mr. William J. Camosci Director of Eng*neering Services Town of Manchester 41 Center Street Manchester, CT 06040 Re: Storm Drainage Plaza at Buckland Hills Pleasant Valley Road) Dear Mr. Camosci: With regard to your letter of May 23, 1989, requesting a detailed analysis of the detention pond near J.C. Penney and Pleasant Valley Road, we shall undertake such analysis if deemed necessary when we proceed into final design for the Plaza at Buckland Hills site. The project is yet in a preliminary stage. For your information, early conversations were held both with Mr. Jim Otis of Fuss and O'Neil and Mr. James Weber,Assistant Town Engineer, in September 1988, and both engineers gave indications that the detention system had ample capacity for drainage from the Plaza at Buckland Hills development. Thank you for your attention to this matter. We shall work closely with the Town in the final design. Very truly yours, CLOSE,JENSEN and MILLER, P.C. Cory Garro, P.E. CG/D11D--J:ecu cc: Mr. Michael J. Gantick, Dir. of Pub. Wks., So.Windsor 11 Mr. Glenn M.Johnson Barbara C. Wagner Vol, RECENEO J i1 N 5 1989 ` Tam of So.Wtndmr Public Wmkt C,, Not 9 9 SOW" seq O-P s,o qd 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074 soR•c0 AREA CODE 203/644-2511 June 5, 1989 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Marcia A. Banach, Director of Planning FROM: Jerry C. Iazzzetta, Town Engineer 4 RE: Plaza at Buckland Hills We have reviewed the General Plan of Development dated 4/25/89, pursuant to Section 4 . 12 of the Zoning Regulations for the proposed Plaza at Buckland Hills . Our comments shown below are based on preliminary information contained in the drawings and are provided as guidance to the applicant in preparing a detailed site plan of Development. 1 . Detention basins need to be analyzed for 2, 5, 10, 25 and 100 year storms . 2 . The Northeast detention basin outlet structure piping has to be defined. a. This basin shows an outlet pipe across private land that will require an easement. b. A capacity will be required for all existing storm drainage systems . 3 . A large area of storm drainage is proposed to be outletted into a detention area in Manchester. Requires coordination with Town of Manchester. 4 . Proposed off site drainage should be shown on the overall comprehensive plan. 5 . Sanitary sewers are not addressed on the drawings . A detail flow generation report along with a sewer capacity analysis and associated sewer construction plans will be required. 6 . Spot elevations in critical areas will need to be shown. 7 . Drainage should insure that no ponding in parking lot and at curbs will occur. Gutter flow analysis should be made. 8 . Detailed construction plans for all road, drainage, and sanitary improvements will be required, pursuant to local and state regulations . PLAZA AT BUCKLAND HILLS PUBLIC HEARING June 6, 1989 DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR RECORD BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT Traffic: 1 . Winchester Development, South Windsor, Ct. SEA Consultants Inc . , November 1984 . 2 . Traffic Impact Analysis of the Proposed Buckland Hills Development on South Windsor Roadways . SEA Consultants Inc. , March 1987 . 3 . General Plan of Development, Winchester Mall, South Windsor- Manchester Ct. F.A. Hesketh & Associates, Bloomfield, Ct. , August 1984 . Cost/Benefit: 4 . Cost-Benefit Analysis, Winchester Mall, South Windsor, CT. Capitol Region Council of Governments, October 1984 . 5 . Cost-Benefit Analysis: The Financial Impact of Winchester Mall on the Town of South Windsor. C.David Frese, November 1984 . Environmental Impacts : 6 . Environmental Review Team Report on Buckland Commons Mall, South Windsor/Manchester, CT. Eastern Connecticut Resource Conservation and Development Area, April 1981 . 7 . Air Quality Study for the Proposed Buckland Commons Mall, South Windsor. TRC Environmental Consultants, Inc . , June, 1981 . 8 . Wildlife Habitat Evaluation, Buckland Commons, South Windsor and Manchester, Ct. Interdisciplinary Environmental Planning, June 1981 . 9 . Buckland Commons Traffic Noise Impact Analysis . Interdisciplinary Environmental Planning, undated. 10 . Buckland Commons Air Quality Impact Analysis, Management of Resources and the Environment, undated. 11 . Capitol Region Council of Governments . Report on Zoning Referral #84/197 ( Zone Change/General Plan of Development, Winchester Mall) . November 1984 . Zone Change: 12 . "Pleasant Valley Neighborhood Association et al vs Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor et al" Connecticut Law Journal, July 5, 1988 . 13 . Correspondence from Attorney Ralph Elliot to Marcia Banach, Director of Planning, re: South Windsor Planning & Zoning Commission - Plaza at Buckland Hills, dated April 25, 1989 . 1. 2. b C-7 3. I a a e _ J% 1 IJ ' ;0 4. razL ex-- I y S V 0 5. 0 L ir1s 8Sa Hh p.2ce 6. 7. 8. 9. 16. [Ala 17. 18. 19. Z_4 21 . 22. 23. 25. rd C:2 aA bi L4 0" 26. 28. ED n>I 29. 30. 31. 14 r V,11.o 32. 33. 34. 35. BRADY, WILLARD & ALEXANDER ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE 400 330 ROBERTS STREET EAST HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06108 GERALD W.BRADY AREA CODE 203 RICHARD C.WILLARD TELEPHONE 289-5477 RALPH J.ALEXANDER TELECOPIER 291-9282 SHAUN K.M.JONES June 27, 1989 Raymond F. Hollowell, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 RE: Issue of Designed Commercial Zone, Zone Change and General Plan of Development Dear Mr. Hollowell: I am writing in response to your recent inquiry regarding the above-captioned issue. More specifically, you have inquired as to whether or not a subsequent general plan of development under a previously approved DC zone and general plan of development may be substituted for the original general plan of development: The pertinent part of the zoning regulations is 4:12 DESIGN COMMERCIAL ZONE (DC ZONE). Under that section of the regulations the DC zone change and the general plan of development are incorporated into one process pursuant to Subsection 4.12.3 of the regulations. Both the zone change and the general plan of development must be approved by the commission in order for an application to be approved. Once approved, as the regulation is written, the general plan of development becomes the guideline for the development of the parcel in question, and the language of 4.12.3 is clear on this point: "If the application is approved, the establishment of the DC zone shall permit the applicant and/or his assigns to proceed with completion of the development set forth in the general plan of development, subject to the remaining provisions of these regulations." There is no provision under the regulation for any modification in the general plan of development either by amendment or by subsequent general plan of development application. It is my opinion that an applicant wishing to modify the general plan of development within a DC zone would be required through the provisions of 4-12 to make application for a new DC zone designation together with a new general plan of development. If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, i Ralpli J. lexander RJA/asb A 77 AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and concluded this day of July, 1988 by and between THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR, a municipal corporation located in the County of Hartford and State of Connecticut ( "South Windsor" ) ; THE ,MALL AT BUCKLAND HILLS PARTNERSHIP, a Connecticut joint venture form of general partnership consisting of Homart Manchester Investment Co. and Manchester Simon Developers Limited Partnership ( "Buckland a Connecticut Partnership" ) ; and DOWNEAST ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, x&xxZndiRzft limited partnership consisting of Downeast Developer Limited Partnership, an Indiana limited partnership as its General Partner and Bronson & Hutensky, a Connecticut General Partnership as its limited partner (Winchester Partnership" ) . W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, The Buckland Partnership is the owner of a certain parcel of land in Manchester, Connecticut upon which it is presently constructing Phase I of a mixed use development consisting of approximately 1 ,442 , 000 square feet, more or less (the "Mall" ) , and WHEREAS, The Buckland Partnership has been issued State Traffic Commission Certificates Numbers 603, 603-A and 603-B permitting the construction and operation of said Mall provided certain conditions in Certificate No. 603 , 603-A and 603-B are satisfied, and WHEREAS, Condition 34 of Certificate No. 603 requires "that in the event that the Town of South Windsor finds it necessary to cul-de-sac Slater Road at the South Windsor/Manchester Town Line to prevent through traffic to and from the Mall, the developer will be responsible for this construction and cost" , and WHEREAS, South Windsor in its own name and through its then Chief of Police, William R. Ryan, initiated an action in the Superior Court for the Judicial District of Hartford/New Britain against the State Traffic Commission, Homart Development Company and others seeking to revoke Certificate No. 603 and subsequently brought similar actions in n- its own name and through its Town Manager, Richard Sartor, seeking to revoke Certificates Nos . 603-A and 603-B, said suits having been consolidated (the "Lawsuits" ) , and WHEREAS, said Lawsuits , claim, inter alia that the State Traffic Commission failed to order The Buckland Partnership to construct certain needed highway improvements within the Town of South Windsor, and WHEREAS, The Winchester Partnership is the owner of a certain parcel of land partially in The Town of South Windsor and partially in The Town of Manchester, Connecticut, and WHEREAS, Fifty-seven (57 ) acres of said parcel is located within the Town of South Windsor more particularly described in Exhibit A hereto ( "Premises" ) WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor ( "Zoning Commission" ) has previously approved the development of a regional shopping center on Premises , said approval being the subject of an appeal presently pending before the Connecticut courts , and WHEREAS, The Winchester Partnership has abandoned its plan to construct a regional shopping center and is in the process of filing an application with the appropriate authorities, federal, state and municipal, to permit the development and construction of a multi-use retail-commercial facility of approximately 750, 000 square feet on Premises and contiguous land in Manchester (the "Manchester Land" ) to be called the Plaza at Buckland Hills (the "Plaza" ) , and WHEREAS, South Windsor and The Winchester Partnership entered into an Agreement dated December 11 , 1984 under which South Windsor agreed to construct certain off-site road improvements in return for a certain contribution from the Winchester Partnership (The "1984 Agreement" ) , and WHEREAS, as security for the performance of its obligations thereunder, The Winchester Partnership provided South Windsor an 3- irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of One Million Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars (the "Letter of Credit" ) , and WHEREAS, South Windsor and The Winchester Partnership believe that the 1984 Agreement should be superceded by a new agreement more relevant to current plans and proposals, and WHEREAS, The Winchester Partnership wishes to undertake development of the Premises in a manner significantly different from that contemplated in the 1984 Agreement, and to that end wishes to resolve any outstanding differences with South Windsor regarding the effect upon South Windsor, including especially its roads, such development would or could have, and to provide a method for effecting such improvements as South Windsor deems necessary. WHEREAS, South Windsor believes that the execution of this Agreement is beneficial to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the Town. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutually beneficial covenants , agreements, and obligations set forth herein, and in consideration of the monetary consideration to be provided hereunder to South windsor, the parties agree as follows : 1. "Five Corners" Contribution The Buckland Partnership agrees to contribute a sum not to exceed Five Hundred Forty-Five Thousand ( $545, 000 . 00) Dollars to South Windsor (the "Contribution" ) for the purpose of constructing interim improvements to The Five Corners Intersection as described in a letter to Town Manager Richard J. Sartor from SEA Consultants dated August 5, 1987 (Exhibit B attached hereto, the "Five Corner Improvements" ) . Said Five Corner Improvements shall be constructed by South Windsor. Partial payments of said Contribution shall be made by The Buckland Partnership within thirty ( 30) days of receipt of appropriate invoices for design and construction activity, certified by the Connecticut licensed professional engineer supervising the project for The Town of South Windsor. The Buckland Partnership obligation to pay any portion 4- of said Contribution, then unpaid, shall terminate five ( 5 ) years from the day the Mall opens for business , provided that said termination date shall be extended one day for each day that the construction of the Five Corner Improvement is delayed by forces outside the control of South Windsor, provided, however, that in all events , the Buckland Partnership' s obligations shall terminate ten 10 ) years from the day the Mall opens for business . 2 . Slater Road Cul-de-Sac The Buckland Partnership shall at its own cost and expense cul-de-sac Slater Road at The South Windsor/Manchester Town Line . Said work shall be accomplished as part of the highway improvements now being installed pursuant to State Traffic Commission Certificates Nos . 603 , 603-A and 603-B provided land outside of present right of way is not required. 3. Road Improvements - Residential Areas The Winchester Partnership shall at its own cost and expense design (in accordance with a design approved by South Windsor) and construct (in accordance with standards set for highway construction by the Connecticut Department of Transportation) the following improvements as pictorially described in Exhibit C entitled" 1 . ) $2M Road Improvements, SEA Consultants Inc. , July 1987" or such other improvements as the Zoning Commission may require in lieu of said pictorially described improvements ( "Residential Improvements" ) : A. Upgrade Pleasant Valley Road - Town Line to Clark Street B. Upgrade Clark Street - Pleasant Valley Road to Chapel Road C. Realignment and reconstruction of the intersection of Pleasant Valley Road at Clark Street D. Upgrade Smith Street (Clark to Buckland) including the intersection of Smith and Buckland ( including Buckland southerly to the Town Line) E. Cul-de-sac Wheeler Road near Smith Street 5- Said Improvements are estimated to cost approximately 2 ,251 , 000 . 00 to install . The Winchester Partnership (and its heirs , executors, administrators , successors and assigns ) agrees that it will not apply for, accept or act pursuant to any certificate of occupancy until the Residential Improvements set forth in this paragraph have beep completed and South Windsor has certified to the Winchester Partnership that they are acceptable to South Windsor. The Winchester Partnership's obligation to construct said improvements is conditioned upon the following: A. The Zoning Commission in the exercise of its independent authority granting final approval of applications to be filed by the Winchester Partnership with respect to Premises seeking final approval of a General Plan of Development, Special Permits and/or site development plan approval to permit development and construction of Plaza, and B. All litigation, if any, involving such approvals having been terminated and such approvals have been upheld, and C. All appeal periods applicable to such approvals, and applicable to judicial decisions, if any, upholding such approvals having expired, and D. A building permit having been issued by South Windsor allowing construction on The Premises to commence, and E. The State Traffic Commission issuing a Certificate of Public Safety pursuant to C.G. S . 14-311 permitting and authorizing the construction of said Residential Improvements, and F. Rights of way necessary to construct The Residential Improvements having been acquired from Third parties . South Windsor agrees to use its best efforts to assist in said acquisitions . 6- 4 . Release of Obligations . The Town agrees that The Winchester Partnership shall be released from its obligations which have not otherwise matured and become effective hereunder if : ( 1 ) ( i) The Winchester Partnership withdraws any application pending in South Windsor for a zone change, General Plan of Development for the Premises and/or any subsequent application for site development plan approval and ( ii) such withdrawal(s ) is accepted by the Zoning Commission so that all rights granted by any such approvals become null and void, and of no further legal effect; and (iii) counsel for South Windsor certifies that conditions (i) and ( ii) above have been satisfied; or, (2) in the alternative, if counsel for South Windsor certifies that: (i) any approval of The Winchester Partnership' s application for a zone change and General Plan of Development for the Premises and/or any subsequent application for site development plan approval in South Windsor has been reversed on appeal by a court of competent jurisdiction from which court no further appeal is available and such approval is thereby null and void, and of no further effect, or if a further appeal is available, that all periods for taking such appeal have expired and the right to such appeal no longer exists; or that ( ii) for some other reason such approval is null and void and of no further effect; or (3 ) within thirty ( 30 ) days of such approval of The Winchester Partnership' s application for a zone change, General Plan of Development, Special Permit and/or site development approval either conditional or unconditional, by the appropriate zoning authorities in South Windsor, the applicants therefor, have done those things which in the opinion of counsel for South Windsor are legally sufficient to relinquish all rights such applicants or any of them (or the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, or assigns of such applicants, or any of them) might have with respect to the thus-approved application(s) . 7- 5 . Duties of South Windsor South Windsor acknowledges that the construction contemplated as a result of the Buckland Partnership' s Contribution and the Winchester Partnership' s Residential Improvements will significantly lessen the adverse impact from traffic that otherwise would have resplted and that accordingly it shall withdraw all pending legal actions with respect to the Mall and Plaza; that it shall refrain from taking any further legal action, whether legislative, judicial, administrative or ministerial with respect to the construction of the Mall and Plaza unless such construction is not in accordance with approved plans and acceptable construction standards; and that it shall notify all administrative and judicial bodies reviewing any application submitted by either the Buckland Partnership or the Winchester Partnership, including, but not limited to the State Traffic Commission and Planning and Zoning commissions of its support of said application( s ) . In furtherance of those duties, South Windsor shall within ten ( 10) days of the execution of this Agreement: A. Deliver to Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C . , counsel to both The Winchester Partnership and The Buckland Partnership ( "Partnership Counsel" ) appropriate withdrawals of actions with respect to the Lawsuits together with releases in favor of both partnerships in form and substance satisfactory to Partnership Counsel, and B. Deliver to Partnership Counsel a letter addressed to the Connecticut State Traffic Commission, in form and substance satisfactory to Partnership Counsel, informing said Commission of the withdrawal of actions with respect to said Lawsuits and stating that South Windsor will offer no objection to the issuance of a Certificate to the Winchester Partnership permitting the construction of The Plaza provided that said Certificate contains as a minimum The Residential Improvements defined in Paragraph 3 of this Agreement as conditions . 8- 6 . Representations and Warranties . A. Winchester Partnership represents and warrants to the Town the following: i) Winchester Partnership is a validly existing limited partnership created under the laws of Indiana ii) The execution and delivery by Winchester Partnership of this Agreement and the performance by it of all of its obligations hereunder have been duly authorized by all necessary action on the part of it and do not and will not A) conflict with, or result in a breach of any of the terms , conditions or provisions of, or constitute a default under, or result in the creation of any lien under, any agreement or other instrument under which it or any of its partners or property is or will become obligated, (B) violate any provisions of any laws or governmental rules , regulations, orders or decrees or any orders or decrees of any court or administrative agency or governmental official applicable to and binding upon it or the partners thereof or (C) require any waivers, consents or amendment by an trustee or holder of any indebtedness or obligations of it or the partners thereof; and iii) This Agreement has been duly executed and delivered by Winchester Partnership and constitutes the legal, valid and binding obligation of it, enforceable against it in accordance with its respective terms . B. Buckland Partnership represents and warrants to the Town the following: i) Buckland Partnership is a validly existing joint venture form of general partnership in good standing under the laws of Connecticut; and ii) Buckland Partnership has adequate power and authority to execute, deliver and perform all of its obligations under this Agreement; and 9- iii) The execution and delivery by Buckland Partnership of this Agreement and the performance by it of all of its obligations hereunder have been duly authorized by all necessary action on the part of it and do not and will not A) contravene any provisions of the partnership agreement, B) conflict with, or result in a breach of any of the terms , conditions or provisions of, or constitute a default under, or result in the creation of any lien under, any agreement or other instrument under which it is or will become obligated, C) violate any provisions of any laws or governmental rules , regulations, orders or decrees or any orders or decrees of any court or administrative agency or governmental official applicable to and binding upon it or (D) require waivers , consents or amendment by any trustee or holder of any indebtedness or obligations of it; and iv) This Agreement has been duly executed and delivered by Buckland Partnership and constitutes the legal, valid and binding obligation of it enforceable against it in accordance with its respective terms . 7 . Specific Performance; Enforcement by Town. A. The Winchester Partnership and the Buckland Partnership acknowledge and agree that South Windsor would be materially damaged by the failure of said partnerships to perform their obligations under this Agreement, for which damage no adequate remedy at law exists . Accordingly, The Winchester Partnership and the Buckland Partnership expressly agree and consent that South Windsor shall be entitled to the remedy of specific performance and such other equitable remedies as may be available in the event The Winchester Partnership and/or The Buckland Partnership fails to perform its obligations hereunder. B. The Winchester Partnership shall be liable to South Windsor for reasonable costs and expenses , including without limitation, reasonable attorneys ' fees , incurred by South Windsor in attempting to 10- enforce Paragraph 3 of this Agreement or to collect amounts due hereunder. The Buckland Partnership shall be liable to South Windsor for reasonable costs and expenses , including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys ' fees, incurred by South Windsor in attempting to enforce Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Agreement or to collect amounts due hereunder. 8 . Indemnification of South Windsor. The Winchester Partnership hereby agrees to indemnify and hold South Windsor harmless from any claims, suits, actions, losses, damages, costs, and expenses, including without limitation reasonabl attorneys fees, arising from or with respect to its failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement. The Buckland Partnership hereby agrees to indemnify and hold South Windsor harmless from any claims, suits, actions, losses , damages, costs, and expenses, including without limitation reasonable attorneys ' fees, arising from or with respect to its failure to perform its obligations under this Agreement. 9 . No Assignment. The Winchester Partnership may not assign its rights or delegate its duties hereunder without the prior express written consent of South Windsor, and any attempt to do so in contravention of this paragraph shall be voidable at the sole discretion of South Windsor; provided that The Winchester Partnership may, without South Windsor's prior written consent assign its rights hereunder to an entity succeeding to its interest in the Premises so long as i) such entity is owned or controlled directly or indirectly by Melvin Simon Associates or by Melvin Simon and/or Herbert Simon; and ii) such successor assumes and agrees , in writing, to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 10 . Termination of 1984 Agreement. The 1984 Agreement is hereby terminated and of no force or effect. The Letter of Credit shall be promptly returned upon execution of this agreement. 11- 11 . Performance Bond. Upon receipt of all necessary permits and approvals required to construct the Plaza, and prior to receipt of a building permit, The Winchester Partnership shall deliver a performance bond to South Windsor as security for the performance of its obligations hereunder. Said Performance Bond shall be in the initial amount of $2 , 251, 000 . 00 . The parties acknowledge and agree that because this figure represents 1987 dollars, it is reasonable and appropriate that such figure be adjusted periodically to reflect increases in road construction costs through the life of this Agreement. Accordingly, the parties agree that the amount of the Performance Bond due hereunder shall be adjusted to reflect changes in the "Yearly Average Composite Index" determined by the State of Connecticut Department of Transportation and published as part of the report prepared by such department and currently known as "Connecticut Price Trends For Highway Construction. " If such index shall be discontinued with no successor or comparable successor index, the parties shall in good faith attempt to agree upon a substitute formula which is most consistent with the parties ' intent to adjust the Performance Bond to reflect changes in road construction costs . If the parties are unable to agree upon a substitute formula, then upon written request by either party to the other, the matter shall be submitted to a three member arbitration panel convened in accordance with the construction arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association then prevailing. The decision of such panel shall be binding upon the parties . 12 . Connecticut Law Governs . Connecticut law shall govern interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement. 13 . Covenants of Joint Venture to Run with Land ALL AGREEMENTS, PROMISES, OR COVENANTS OF THE WINCHESTER PARTNERSHIP HEREUNDER, HOWEVER DENOMINATED, SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE COVENANTS OF THE WINCHESTER PARTNERSHIP. THE WINCHESTER PARTNERSHIP (AND THE PARTNERS THEREOF IN THEIR INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY) EXPRESSLY COVENANT AND AGREE THAT THE 12- COVENANTS OF THE WINCHESTER PARTNERSHIP HEREIN SHALL MATERIALLY BENEFIT THE PREMISES AND SHALL RUN WITH THE PREMISES (OR PORTION THEREOF) , WHICH COVENANTS SHALL BIND THEIR SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS AND ANY OTHER PARTY CLAIMING TITLE TO SUCH PREMISES TO OR THROUGH THE WINCHESTER PARTNERSHIP OR THE PARTNERS THEREOF. 14 . , Binding Effect. The covenants and stipulations of this Agreement shall apply to and bind the heirs , executors, administrators, successors and permitted assigns of the respective parties hereto. 15 . Entire Agreement. It is understood and agreed that this Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties hereto, and that no oral statements or promises or any understanding not embodied in this writing shall be valid or binding. upon the parties hereto. 16 . Notices . All notices required or permitted hereunder shall be sent to the party receiving notice at the address indicated below. and shall be sent by first-class certified mail (postage pre-paid, return receipt requested) : Any notice provided by mail or courier service shall be deemed to have been provided when mailed or entrusted to a responsible courier service, as the case may be, pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph. Any party entitled to receive notice hereunder may change the address to which notice to that party shall be sent by notifying the other parties in writing of such change in address, pursuant to the provisions of this paragraph. 17 . Miscellaneous . Wherever used, the singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singular, and the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders . Headings used herein are for the convenience of the reader only, and shall not be deemed to modify, limit or otherwise affect the substantive text. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each one of which 13- shall be deemed an original . This Agreement may not be modified except in writing, signed by the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. Witness : THE MALL AT BUCKLAND HILLS PARTNERSHIP V By Homar Magic er Investment Co. A Gen al r 1-- By D110thorized DOWNE,AST ASSOCIATES LIMITED HIP, a Cwxiecticut limited partnership By: DOWNEAST DEVELOPERS LIMITED PA ML%aP, an Indiana limited rtnPrchip, General Partner By: DOWN AST, INC., an Indiana corporation, its General Partner By= R.L. Foxmrthy,yVice President THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR By Ri d J. Sartor, Its To/ Mana er, my Authorized STATE OF iS t i L7 p COUNTY OF C ^ On this the 1a'` day of l d before me, the undersigned offi personally ap eared who acknowledged imself herself to be the f THE M1 ChL AT UC LLS, a partnership, and tha he/she, as such vice- / ' being authorized so to do, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein contained as( her free act and deed and& the free act and-weed of the Part ersh'p, b si ning the name of the corporation by-.him fherself as i:'r C 1"/5i` Pi In Witness Whereof I hereunto set hand. Notary Public , Commissioner of the Superior Court OFFICIAL SEAL " DOROTHY JEAN McGEE NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF ILLINOIS aiY COh',MI>if319N €XPIR€S 9/i/90 STATE OF INDIANA ) SS: COUNTY OF MARION ) On this , 291 day of August, 1988, before me appeared R.L. Foxraorthy, to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that he is Vice President of DOWNEAST, INC., the corporation which executed the foregoing instrument as General Partner of DOWNEAST DEVELOPERS LDUTED PARTNERSHIP, a General Partner of DOWNEAST ASSOCIATES LIINUTED PARTNERSHIP, that he }cows the seal of said corporation, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors, and the said R.L. Fanxnthy acknowledges the execution of the said instrument as the free act and deed of said corporation. 2 a A '4—r Notary Public NANCY A. NOTARY PUBLIC SAlf OF INDIANAJOHNSONWVNV#MY COMMISSION EXP,S[/r.S' 1990 14- DF COUNTY OF On this the day of 19_, before me, the undersigned officer, personally appeare who acknowledged himself/herself to be of DOWNEAST ASSOCIATES LIMITED PART SHIP, a Partnership, and that he/she, as such being authorized so to do, executed the foregoing in ument for the purposes therein contained as his/her free act an eed and the free act and deed of the Partnership, by si ng the name of the Partnership by himself/herself as In Wi ess Whereof I hereunto set my hand. Notar P lic Commissioner of the Court STATE OF Connecticut at South Windsor COUNTY OF Hartford On this the 7th day of October 1988 , before me, the undersigned officer, personally appeared Richard 3 . Sartor who acknowledged himself/AxxDoebdx to be the Town Manager of THE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR, and that he/A)b&, as such Town Manager being authorized so to do, executed the foregoing instrument for the purposes therein contained as hislA-m cfree act and deed and the free act and deed of the Town, by signing the name of the Town by himself/he¢aedxfc as Tin Mana In Witness Whereof I hereun my,hand. Patricia R. Brown Notary Public/ Commissioner of the Superior Court My Commission Expires 3/31/89) 15- EXHIBIT A A certain piece or parcel of land located in the Town of South Windsor, County of Hartford and State of Connecticut containing approximately 57 acres and being bounded and described as follows : Northerly by Smith Street and by land now or formerly of Richard Haggett, et al, Theodor Gill, et al, George A. Gilbert, F. Michael Sasom, et al, Monica Daley, Emil Boutin, et al, Richard V. Mo.Lloy, et al, Willard Dufour, et al and Joseph Gancarz , et al . Easterly by land now or formerly of Richard Haggett, et al, Emit Boutin, et al, and Gurrie A. Fandozzi, et . al . Southeasterly by the Manchester Town Line. Southwesterly by Pleasant Valley Road. Westerly by Wheeler Road. EXHIBIT A A certain piece or parcel of land located in the Town of South Windsor, County of Hartford and State of Connecticut containing approximately 57 acres and being bounded and described as follows : Northerly by Smith Street and by land now or formerly of Richard Haggett, et al, Theodor Gill, et al, George A. Gilbert, F. Michael Sasom, et al, Monica Daley, Emil Boutin, et al, Richard V. Molloy, et al, Willard Dufour, et al and Joseph Gancarz, et al. Easterly by land now or formerly of Richard Haggett, et al, Emit Boutin, et al, and Gurrie A. Fandozzi, et. al . Southeasterly by the Manchester Town Line. Southwesterly by Pleasant Valley Road. Westerly by Wheeler Road. m: August 5, 1987 EX ILI & B G E A Con3ultant3 InC. Cngtnee+31 ArCtllteCt3 85 Massacnusatts%•venue fir. Richard J. Sartoramcnage.MA 02139 0t8 197•7800 Town Manager Corr. Parx west Town Hall 00 Focen F+oao 1540 Sullivan AvenueSoutnPomano.ME 0410&2314 r) -2291 South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 0 seas Oeane H,gnwav e:nerstieb.cT 06109-3412 fie: 13uc.kI Road Development Negotiations721-:003 znnCiDWS imota B.Goiastern.P E. Dear Mr. Sartori cencx G.Auttero.P E. ssonen H.Gmbo.P We have reviewed the data generated and containeM our recent m raffIc Sleoen H. enneln M.Stewart.PE. studies and have developed a possible scenario forkerim improvements 7av,c*.Goocemote.P E. ntnonv J.Zuena.P In the Five Corners area. ssocrare in Cnarge of AMnIfecture the flow M.eranoon.A.IA. We propose four steps that collectively will result*improving aut C.Floss.P.E. of traffic through the Five Comers intersection until such time as Long-range permanent improvements are made. 1. We suggest the immediate termination of Elli n Road southbound in a cul-de-sac northeast of the Five !Corners intersection effectively producing a four—way intersection. 2. We propose, through pavement widening and pvement marking, to improve the approaching and departing traffie flows at the altered four-way intersection. Buckdand Road northhomd, Sullivan Avenue southbound and Ellington Road eastbound will beprovided with three approach lanes each. Oakland will remain wift two approach lanes. Departing lanes will also be widened throug* pavement widening within existing rights-of-way. 3. We propose to install a new signal light at are altered four-way intersection including new conduits, poles, wastarms and signal facilities. 4. We propose modest alterations in the Sand Hill (toad area to accommodate the rerouting of traffic from Qlington Road along with minor geometric modifications at Sand Mil Road and Sullivan Avenue. We also propose modest alterations at the Foster and Oakland intersection. The alterations that we propose can be expected to improve the level of. service on an interim basis, with the ?loll construction. The experience in traffic handling at Five Corners is now at level F on a scale of A_ttoo.F, with A representing no delays. 9 O RECL`E Jj s l .N*7 1 1 t Mr. Richard J. Sartor S E A Consultants Inc. August 5, 1987Page2 We expect that the interim improvements delineated above could achieve a level of service of D, which will provide tolerable traffic handling during peak hours, Preliminary. cost estimates for the items delineated above, while remaining within existing rights-of-way, are $375,000 to $400,000 for the work at Five Corners and approximately $50,000 to $75,000 for the work for the improvements at Sand Hill Road and the Foster/Oakland intersection. The termination of Ellington Road at the cul-de-sac would be a permanent improvement requiring no later expenditure and the new signal equipment would represent permanent improvements that may require modest adjustment once permanent improvements are made, but would serve over the long--term. Collectively, it appears that for a cost of between $425,000 and $475,000 significant improvements to traffic management at rive Corners could be achieved on an interim basis. Please let us hear from you if we can be of further help. Very truly yours, S E A CONSULTANTS INC. mold B. Golds ein ABG/bac:0167j cc: -James Bancroft, S E A Wethersfield rr CLARK 11 s p i 0 N I HEELER p. PROPOSED WINCNESTER UALL oG s ti de tY14 0 A A r71 x >/9 IF e,UGK`AN 1 .) $2M Road Improvements S E A Consultants Inc. 61,P #I July 1987 PLAZA AT BUCKLAND HILLS PUBLIC HEARING June 6 , 1989 DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR RECORD BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT Traffic: 1 . Winchester Development, South Windsor, Ct. SEA Consultants Inc. , November 1984 . 2 . Traffic Impact Analysis of the Proposed Buckland Hills Development on South Windsor Roadways . SEA Consultants Inc. , March 1987 . 3 . General Plan of Development, Winchester Mall, South Windsor- Manchester Ct. F.A. Hesketh & Associates, Bloomfield, Ct. , August 1984 . Cost/Benefit: 4 . Cost-Benefit Analysis, Winchester Mall, South Windsor, CT. Capitol Region Council of Governments, October 1984 . 5 . Cost-Benefit Analysis: The Financial Impact of Winchester Mall on the Town of South Windsor. C.David Frese, November 1984 . Environmental Impacts: 6 . Environmental Review Team Report on Buckland Commons Mall, South Windsor/Manchester, CT. Eastern Connecticut Resource Conservation and Development Area, April 1981 . 7 . Air Quality Study for the Proposed Buckland Commons Mall, South Windsor. TRC Environmental Consultants, Inc . , June, 1981 . 8 . Wildlife Habitat Evaluation, Buckland Commons, South Windsor and Manchester, Ct. Interdisciplinary Environmental Planning, June 1981 . 9 . Buckland Commons Traffic Noise Impact Analysis . Interdisciplinary Environmental Planning, undated. 10 . Buckland Commons Air Quality Impact Analysis, Management of Resources and the Environment, undated. AMr 11 . Capitol Region Council of Governments . Report on Zoning Referral #84/197 ( Zone Change/General Plan of Development, Winchester Mall) . November 1984 . Zone Change: 12 . "Pleasant Valley Neighborhood Association et al vs Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor et al" Connecticut Law Journal, July 5, 1988 . 13 . Correspondence from Attorney Ralph Elliot to Marcia Banach, Director of Planning, re: South Windsor Planning & Zoning Commission - Plaza at Buckland Hills, dated April 25, 1989 . On-' r Tom o-Psotd% 70: 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 JbSaR.coNs' AREA CODE 203/644-2511 June 5, 1989 Mr. Raymond Hallowell, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Town of South Windsor South Windsor, Connecticut Dear Ray: At the May 24, 1989 meeting of the Economic Development Commission, the Commission reviewed the concept plan for the Plaza at Buckland Hills, as well as the cost benefit analysis prepared for Melvin Simon Associates by Hammer, Siler, George Associates. After evaluating this analysis, as well as input from the Town' s Economic Development Coordinator, the Commission concluded that the Plaza at Buckland Hills will have a net beneficial economic impact on the Town of South Windsor. The Economic Development Commission unanimously endorses the proposed Plaza at Buckland Hills concept, and requests that the Planning and Zoning Commission consider the beneficial effects this development would bring to the Town of South Windsor. Very tr,1y yours, Kenneth Brill, Chairman Economic Development Commission KB:prb I TO: South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission RE: Application # 89-17P Downeast Associates for approval of a General Plan of Development for the Plaza at Buckland Hills: Public Hearing of June 6, 1989 et seq. MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION A. Another Zone Change is Required To approve this application for a General Plan of Development without approving a new zone change to Designed Commercial would be illegal. 1. When the original zone change to Designed Commercial was approved a General Plan of Development was also approved. A Designed Commercial Zone is a floating zone which does not have the specific rules, standards or conditions of other type zones. It is for a particular piece of property. However, there must be specific standards for a floating zone. 2 Anderson American Law of Zoning 3rd. 11.05-11.08. Section 8-2 of the General Statutes requires uniformity in zoning regulations within a particular zone. Veseskis v. Bristol Zoning Commission LAW OFFICES 168 Conn. 358 (1975) . This cannot be accomplished with the general Designed RICHARD M.RITfENBAND 1734 ELLiN-ON ROAD Commercial standards because each floating zone is different or unique since SOUTH WINDSOR CONN 06074 it applies, in each instance, to a different piece of property. Therefore, the 1203)644 2456 j URiS NO 50412 General Plan of Development becomes the rules, standards or conditions of that specific Designed Commercial Zone for that particular piece of property. The zone or zone change and the General Plan of Development are inseparable, inter- twined, interrelated and dependent upon each other. There can be no Designed k7r. C4 i 2 - Commercial Zone for a particular property without a General Plan being adopted at the same time. There cannot be a Designed Commercial Zone without regu- lations, standards or conditions, and these are in the form of the General Plan of Development applicable only to that specific property. Conversely, for the same reasons, there cannot be an approved General Plan of Development without a specific Zone Change approval at the same time. 2. The General Plan of Development now submitted for approval is sub- stantially different from the original one. It would mean a substantial change in the rules, standards and/or conditions of this Designed Commercial Zone. Accordingly, a new change of zone to Designed Commercial for the subject property must accompany any approval of a new General Plan of Development. 3. Since there is no application, hearing and action for a zone change to accompany this application for a General Plan of Development, approval of the General Plan would be illegal. 4. The conditions that existed at the time of the original zone change no longer exist. The new conditions (i:e the additional malls in the vicinity, LAW OFFICES RICHARD M.RITTENBAND additional traffic, etc.) should be taken into consideration. 1734 ELLINGTON ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CONN 06074 B. Traffic 203)644-2456 1. The Commission, as the members well know, is not required to accept JURIS NO 50412 the arguments, studies, conclusions, etc. , in the traffic reports submitted by the applicant. The members can use their own knowledge and observations of present and future traffic conditions. of 4 N i 3 - 2. It is clear even to the casual observer, that traffic congestion on Buckland Road, the Five Corners and streets connecting to same is already horrendous. It is also clear that construction and then completion of the malls and other complexes in the Buckland Road/Street area of the South Windsor/Man- chester Town Line will substantially increase the traffic flow onto South Windsor streets,in particular the aforementioned streets and intersections, resulting in traffic congestion reaching crisis proportions. The addition of the Plaza at Buckland Hills subject of this application will take the traffic congestion beyond the crisis proportion and create gridlock on Buckland Road, Pleasant Valley Road, the Five Corners and roads connecting to same. It will create an intolerable, negative impact upon the safety, air and noise quality and quality of life of people residing in these areas and those using these roads and areas who do not live there. I am well aware that the developers have promised to make certain traffic or road improvements if their Plan is approved to alleviate this 4W UFFiE ES MHARD M.WrTENBAND condition; but, I submit that such improvements will not be sufficient to 1 734 E-INGT(N ROAD SOUTH WINDSOR CONN 06074 eliminate or sufficiently reduce these hazards. With existing traffic and the 203)6442456 traffic generated by the malls and other area developments in Manchester as a JURIS NO 50412 base, the additional traffic created by the Plaza at Buckland Hills will put the traffic congestion over the edge, will increase it sufficiently to create a crisis and/or gridlock that taken as a whole cannot be offset sufficiently N 4 - by the proposed traffic or road improvements the developers will make. With the addition of the Plaza at Buckland Hills, the crisis or gridlock will pre- vail despite the proposed traffic improvements and will endanger the health and safety of residents of and people utilizing the affected areas of South Windsor. Zoning law is clear that in order to approve the application the Com- mission must make a determination that the development will not be detrimental to the surrounding area. 80 ALR 3rd. 126. Further the (traffic/road) improve- ments must be sufficient to offset the expected detrimental effects, and the improvements must be certain prior to commencement of development. Montgomery County v. Greater Colesville Citizens Assoc. , 70 md. App. 374, 521 A 2d 770 1987). We submit that based upon the above and the evidence before it, the Commission cannot make a determination that the development will not be detrimental to the surrounding area and cannot be certain the improvements will be made prior to commencement of development. LAW DG FIC ES C. The General Plan of Development does not comply with the provisions of RICHARD M.RITTENBAND 1 734 ELLINGTON ROAD Section 4. 12 of the South Windsor zoning regulations, including, but not SOUTH WINDSOR CONN 06074 203)644 2456 limited to, Section 4. 12.5, in particular, but not limited to, the following: JURIS NO 504 12 1. It does not show the specific proposed use for the areas labelled future development nor does it show the acreage assigned to same or the acreage assigned to each specifically labelled use as required by Section 4. 12.5,c. 1 4V i 5 - It is not sufficient to refer to it in the summary. It should be on the maps. 2. There is no Key Map. 3. It does not show on the maps drainage and other items required by Section 4. 12.5f, or the statement required by said section. 4. It does not contain a soil survey map of the Soil Conservation Service of the United States Department of Agriculture as required by Section 4. 12.5,g. It merely Mites said map as a source. Richard and Jeannette D. Haggett 291 Smith Street, South Windsor, CT. Lorraine White 302 Smith Street, South Windsor, CT. James J. and Sandy Rice 95 Buckland Road, South Windsor, CT. Rudolph and Mindy Eliasson 103 Buckland Road, South Windsor, CT. Marion Edlund 90 Buckland Road, South Windsor, CT. 11IC1s Richard M. Rittenband tICMARDM. Their Attorney Juris No. 50412 1 734 ELLINGTONTON ROADO4D SOUTH WINDSOR CONN 06034 203)644 2456 JUR,S NO 50412 C s Exhibit I A GLOSSARY OF PLANNING TERMS People who come into a group dealing with the terminology of planning and land development often discover that the "language barrier" is an obstacle to their understanding. The following terms are commonly used by planners, developers, and realtors. Many express concepts for which no simple alternative words suffice, so it is helpful to learn them. Some of these definitions have been adapted from The Job of the Planning Commissioner by Albert Solnit, published by t e University of La i orn a Extension, Berkeley, in 1974, and from the Land Use Decision Making Kit produced by E-P Educational Services, Hamden, Connecticut, in 1975. ACCESSORY USE: An activity or structure which is incidental or secondary-to the principal use of the same site. AESTHETIC REGULATIONS: Regulations pertaining to building design and site developments in the interest of appearance. Courts have frequently refused to uphold portions of subdivision regulations and zoning regulations designed solely for the sake of beautification, although this generally critical view of aesthetic regulations is mellowing. A UIFER: A large layer of rock, sand, or gravel that is sufficiently porous to conduct groundwater and to yield significant quantities of water to wells or springs. ARCHITECTURAL CONTROLS: Regulations and procedures requiring structures to a suits e, armonious , and in keeping with the general appearance, historical character, or style of their surrounding area. Critics have suggested that architectural controls legislate "taste" and require new antiques" in historical zones, thereby cheapening the real land- marks. Defenders point out that a community that has a historical character or prevailing architectural design should protect and preserve it from the cheap and vulgar, most particularly from the standard building packages produced for fast-food franchises , filling stations , or other businesses whose trademark is the flashy building and sign. BEDROCK: The solid rock, commonly called "ledge", that forms the eartFrs crust. It is sometimes exposed at the surface, but more commonly is buried beneath a few inches to 200 feet of soils. BUFFER ZONE: A strip of land se rating and/or screening one type of f land use Mom another. An example is a dense, wide screen of vegetation around a commercial or industrial area to insulate the commercial or industrial area from an adjacent but incompatible residential area. 4, 55 Welland : 0000 000 NORTH LINE / 1 310we Pon000000f CENTER LINE tI 1 litN'wlxrw a. Wet/ond T Ta^• ' . y Wet/and r t I • 1 Tc Li.TATF 64 OrTT . V g 9 D Pf n : yMUnz I'IcnIIUw ) '. JUN 6 1989 nd1CAc'c.S Z c fi S. -.i, +&Ying& Winlg RomjqsjoV411'1'5j U'1d M>--w1 t MU r c- V C L< ..-. CO r,Lv,('n . 'L w;11 a G vc:, I a)L CA I --y S C S T - ,S a cr Q.,1 Y< z nG L C.c.-,cl0..S-4-9. 1, 1,c ,, Inc` Ca P 1-.. w. •c z (' ..5<s a; c- w,c. 1..,s Q.„ Qc--i e c-r z ,,L C o.r, 5 C„s 1-.rn- Xl- t/l- Q)G csL c-S G, I ccf C)c . Z waaZS C7lL.caSS f U l i Q !n k C v (qR, -, , !'mac, W GG,S (/N11i /iS '7 1 k CAI u no U < L u t es' b -,t. , Z z Qr l k A- 'I c i.(. ^ lN1 Z 'h C/n 1, + ^ /G F-e f, O v. U Qe C,Q.z _,e u j-l-.u.. a-S V O-rS\-S cAcco.,>s, VLrSIS SJ-&Q s',cde-)s, S o ci n -4-v Q G I J(j--j Uc S 1V G4"C/3 (P)&,Zcl s + C>(n S S+c,%*,G-s)6 CAC, %CZ . y c.a. z'„ cV 4A c..Cng C-, Ci. -,v mac- '1-•-' .,.,S c rt e d^1 S-}3 w L,Z, C-s -rcnk, vn, L Q`,L t- ...r..S r, co "r, CM- Z a.ILX, CtS C} C In 1 r•c 5 S t 5 - ], zoo r.)r v CA c' v.z d j..l-J' A'G-- n . 5 s c col QQ7' I' c)r 1 ,cc.5 -)' W 1 C^( *Q-U C- / . tGV c 1 ,UC— w Ci y t rS CAA tr I CUv,IC6 C'-,.mac.., C\--u Q v c,l 1`y 7 e.y S rl )r\—X. S ILCA S 0 l--tn Lc-OS S " C--,•7 S)L. z U , ' r, 7, F',3 w ,'es' S C.co z.-.. Z CU Z w, ,U CO--)C. e. c'.c i 1 a-e \• C c-e 5 5 5 cf'e:, CIS r-ci c.)e_L e 1 u.•S -j / 11 c y 6\2. l 1'l..v-1 a(cn S Q ct ce- - 0' oP Mc,11 c-N Z co ) CU r1 SDI c-C = U r1 un.-Ief- w>c n5 S cL rnc- D e-- O Q IL G . -. C.C&- , c w Cn'es'c,Z CAS QCA 5 k , C-i G 1C13 C O.-n a-r y ('o cn Z S Q S . ... r,5 v< <„r, z v rl-.mot S • z, -.c/ - 'O,-, S ) SO v--j w-. Z C, )( p e.CAL er ,Z -,,;. ',i-y -. 1c...Z gCAVe ., Wa•-o cc,v c.S U...., ---e. 'r -j G 1) U S kv rt-5 1-•. u'. ..,1,, v Ul 1 r C/ SA- C^,-, 1-,ems ... v c, c,'-R- CJ l . =.S '1-r'1' w e S. IcIce-, bC.\ C) . bU C.[nve fi -fi C) •S c)n L L - U n)y . Cri 4'Cllc.-1S CA---c,y A-C- l w, z v . P i e,s S SUV`. DI SS .Z .S ._.:,-'rZ c) C'r UC-<Jly Table 4. BUCKLAND HILLS ATTRIBUTABLE REVENUE, SOUTH WINDSOR, FY 1990-FY 1999 I Real Property FY 1990 FY 1991 FY 1992 FY 1993 FY 1994 FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999 Square Feet Retail 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 288,295 2B8,295 Office 0 0 130,000 130t000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 390,000 Total 288,295 288,295 418,295 418,295 678,295 678,295 678,295 678,295 678,295 678,295 Construction Value Retail 7,532 $15,856 $15,856 $15,856 SO 0 O s0 0 0 Office 0 0 3,074 9,782 20,645 32,354 0 0 0 0 Total 7,532 $15,856 $18,931 $25,638 $20,645 $32,354 0 0 O s0 Capitalized Income Value Retail O O s0 O $53,117 $55,773 $58,561 $61,490 $64,564 $67,792 Office 0 0 0 0 0 0 59,416 62,386 65,506 68,781 Total s0 O s0 O $53,117 $55,773 $117,977 $123,876 $130,070 $136,573 j Market Value Retail 7,532 $15,856 $15,856 $15,856 $53,117 $55,773 $58,561 $61,490 $64,564 $67,792 Office 0 0 3,074 9,782 20,645 32,354 59,416 62,386 65,506 68,781 Total 7,532 $15,856 $18,931 $25,638 $73,762 $88,127 $117,977 $123,876 $130,070 $136,573 Taxable Value Retail 3,013 $6,342 $6,342 $6,342 $21,247 $22,309 $23,425 $24,596 $25,826 $27,117 Office 0 0 1,230 3,913 8,258 12,941 23,766 24,955 26,202 27,512 Total 3,013 $6,342 $7,572 $10,255 $29,505 $35,251 $47,191 549,550 $52,028 $54,629 Mill Rate 36.8 38.8 41.0 43.2 45.6 48.1 50.7 53.5 56.5 59.6 Real Tax Revenues 110.9 $246.2 $310.2 $443.2 $1,345.1 $1,695.4 $2,394.5 $2,652.5 $2,938.4 $3,255.0 i Personal Pro ert Market Va ue Retail 1,506 $3,171 $3,171 $3,171 $3,171 $3,171 $3,171 $3,171 $3,171 $3,171 Office 0 0 922 2,935 6,193 9,706 17,825 17,825 17,825 17,825 Total 1,506 $3,171 $4,094 $6,106 $9,365 $12,877 $20t996 $20,996 $20,996 $20,996 Taxable Value Retail 1,054 $2,220 $2,220 $2,220 $2,220 $2,220 $2,220 $2,220 $2,220 $2,220 Office 0 0 646 2,054 4,335 6,794 12,477 12,477 12,477 12,477 Total 19054 $27220 $2,865 $4,274 $6,555 $9,014 $14,697 $14,697 $14,697 $14,697 Depreciated Value 527 $1,110 $1,433 $2,137 $3,278 $4,507 $7,349 $7,349 $7,349 $7,349 1 Mill Rate 36.8 38.8 41.0 43.2 45.6 48.1 50.7 53.5 56.5 59.6 Personal Tax Revenues $19.4 $43.1 $58.7 $92.3 $149.4 $216.8 $372.9 $393.4 $415.0 $437.8 Total Tax Revenues 130.3 $289.3 $368.8 $535.5 $1,494.5 $1,912.2 $2,767.4 $3,045.9 $3,353.4 $3,692.8 Other Revenues 6g.Permit Fees $158.6 O O $97.8 $0.0 $215.7 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 Sewer Connection 63.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 221.9 50.0 $0.0 $97.8 $0.0 $215.7 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 Total Town Revenues $352.1 $289.3 s368.8 $633.3 $1,494.5 $2,127.9 $2,767.4 $3,045.9 $3,353.4 $3,692.8 Net Present Value 1989 Annua 325.5 $247.2 5291.3 $462.2 $1,008.2 $1,326.9 $1,595.0 $1,622.6 51,651.2 $1,680.7 10-Year Total $10,210.8 Note: In thousands of current dollars. Source: Hammer, Siler, George Associates 14- 1 ' REPORT OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR ON THE PROPOSED PLAZA AT BUCKLAND HILLS TO THE SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSIONS Mr. Chairman, Commissioners: My name is John Shemo. I am the Economic Development Coordinator for the Town of South Windsor. My office has reviewed the potential fiscal impacts of the proposed Plaza at Buckland Hills development on the Town of South Windsor. I am in general concensus with the Cost Benefit Analysis prepared for Melvin Simon Associates by Hammer, Siler, George Associates dated May 1989 . The consultant has estimated a net benefit from the development ranging from $188,411 in 1990 to $3,411,989 in 1999 . The net benefit would increase proportionately to the phasing of the construction of the development which would include 288, 000 square feet of retail space to be completed in South Windsor in 1990; 130, 000 square feet of office space to be completed in 1993 and an additional 260,000 square feet of office space to be completed in 1995. A ten year net benefit is estimated to produce $8, 841,944 using 1989 dollars . If all three phases of the construction are completed, the retail portion of this project would in the year 1999, for example, account for 45% of the total project revenues to the Town. The office portion would account for 55% . In the same year, the portion retail would account for approximately 41% of the project's net benefit to the Town and the office portion approximately 59% . The differences between the percentages of revenues and net benefits for the two uses is attributable to the retail portion accounting for a disproportionate share of the expenses which would be incurred by the Town as a result of the development. You should note that on page 14 of the report, the bottom line revenue projections throughout the forecast period do not match the revenue projections on page 16 . This page was recently revised to reflect a yearly adjustment to the mill rate but was inadvertently not incorporated within the report. I am transmitting to you the revised page 14 to correspond with the revised page 16 . This should more accurately portray revenues accruable to the Town of South Windsor. Employment is a significant factor in considering the impacts that this development will have on the Town of South Windsor. A large number of jobs both full-time and part-time will be created. These would include among others, sales; service; clerical; secretarial; managerial and professional positions . The net impact of this employment would be beneficial to the Town of South Windsor. The cost benefit analysis as prepared by Hammer, Siler, George Associates did not analyze the issue of employment nor did it analyze other non-quantifiable costs and benefits associated with the development. I believe the Director of Planning in her review has covered a portion of these issues as relate to the environment. Report of ECD Page 2 June 6, 1989 For purposes of comparison I have attempted to relate the scale of the retail portion of this development to other local developments . The examples used are meant to compare scale and not architectural design or retail mix. The retail portion of the Plaza at Buckland Hills as proposed equals 490, 855 square feet, 289,445 square feet of which would be located in South Windsor. Corbins Corner located in West Hartford contains a total of 305, 778 square feet. Burr Corners in Manchester with the new addition contains a total of 397, 000 square feet. Again this comparison is being made for purposes of scale only. In closing as Economic Development Coordinator for the Town of South Windsor, I urge the Planning and Zoning Commission to consider all of the very important and positive impacts that this development could have on the Town of South Windsor. OF CpM F o . South Windsor Chamber of Commerce o F y 1750 Ellington Road, South Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Tel. 203-644-94420CjQm oC9`OSOR.CO PLO T0 LIVE,WORL June 6, 1989 To: South Windsor Planning & Zoning Commission From: South Windsor Chamber of Commerce. Contact Dexter S. Burnham Re: Proposal to eliminate use variances As the spokesman for the South Windsor Chamber of Commerce, now representing more than 300 individual businesses, we are concerned with the .proposal to abolish use variances as stated in the May 25 and June 1 published legal notices of this public hearing. Our concerns are as follows: 1. We may be losing an independent Zoning Board of Appeals. The ZBA is one component of a delicate system of checks and balances•. The ZBA must remain an independent board free of the Planning and Zoning Commission to render its decisions . This proposal would appear to undermine that concept. 2 . Good development can and has happened as a result of use variances . Three attractive office developments come to mind, namely Westview Office Park at the intersection of Ayers and Graham Roads, and Sullivan Ave. ; the Old Firehouse on Route 30; the former Stever Williams property opposite Clark St. , now housing the law offices of Cummings and Lanza. All three developments have been cited as an asset to the community, both aesthetically and tax-wise, and are commercial uses in residential zones . 3 . Most use variances apply to small parcels, and zone changes by the Planning and Zoning Commission are generally inappropriate for such small parcels. (spot zoning. ) 4 . Use variances offer the only relief available to property owners along our busier streets , including Routes 5, 30 and 194 , and Buckland Rd. , i Page 2 5 . Many single family homes are no-longer suited for contirlued residential use due to trends in traffic and development, including development across town lines . 6 . Use variances may be applicable for other than office uses . This should be determined on a case by case basis by the Zoning Board of Appeals . 7 . As single-family homes on busy streets outlive their use- fulness, they enter a transitional phase. Use variances may allow many of these properties to be upgraded, which is beneficial appearance wise, and to our Grand List. 8 . Many of the zoning districts are obsolete, especially along busy corridors . 9 . The Zoning Board of Appeals can take up variances on a case by case basis, and impose necessary conditions to make them work. The Chamber of Commerce is therefore opposed to any effort to abolish or limit use variances, and urges the Planning & Zoning Commission not to rush into a hasty decision. i t June 9. 1989 fig TownTown of South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission Town Hall South Windsor, CT 06074 Dear Members of the Commission: As a resident of the area near the proposed Plaza at Buckland Hills, I urgeyounottoapprovetheirapplication. In addition to traffic, pollution, and property value problems that were identified during the hearing on June 6.1989, I see several other aspects that prove the developers' lack of concernforthisarea. First of all, the developers have stated that they have carefully "planned"this project to blend into the area. This is not true! If they had, theywouldnothaveplannedmoreretailstores (like Service Merchandise, Zayre's,Toys R Us) which we don't need. They would not have planned three-story andhigherofficebuildingswhichwouldprotrudelikesorethumbs. And theywouldnothaverequestedwaiversforopenspaceandlandscapingrequirements.The developers show no understanding of the area; they have simply plannedforthemost, out of the least space, for their own economic gain. In addition, the design is a cheap-looking strip mall, with a few embellish-ments on the roofs, cleverly hidden by tall trees in the artist's rendering;again, they have chosen an inexpensive design to maximize their profits. Itdoesnotfitintothearea. Something more tastful, such as colonial repro-ductions, would have been a better choice. If they were concerned about this area, they also would have planned formore, not less, landscaping than was required. But this may simply be a negotiating ploy: overstate your demands to leave room for negotiating so that you get what you really wanted in the first place while making youropponentsthinktheyhavegottenadeal! The other major problem here is that we are being misled to believe thatretailoperationswillmeaneconomicgrowthandprogress. This is a fallacy.We will be getting, in exchange for a "tax base", hundreds of low-paying,dead-end jobs that will go for begging. Retail careers generally pay notoriously low and will certainly not support a family living in SouthWindsor. Our children, however, will be enticed to work these jobs, often working long hours and sacrificing grades and school involvement. But in theend, we won't have the work force to maintain the stores or the property.Heartland Plaza. just down the road, is an example of a strip shopping centerthathasalreadydegeneratedbecauseoflackofhelp. The proposed Plaza atBucklandHillswilllookthesameinayear. JOHN COLLINS ENGINEERS, P.C• TRAFFIC • TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS 852 COMMERCE STREET • THORNWOOD, N. Y. 910594 • (914)769.9020 June 9, 1989 Mr. William W. Stoeckert State of Connecticut Traffic Commission Department of Transportation 24 Wolcott Hill Road PO Draw A Wethersfield, CT 06109 Re: The Plaza at Buckland Hills Towns of Manchester/South Windsor, CT Re: STC # 171-8903-01 Dear Mr. Stoeckert: In accordance with the Bureau of Planning' s comments regarding our March 13th submission, we are enclosing 8 copies of the requested traffic volume information. Please note that subsequent to the receipt of your March 30th letter we 've had several discussions with the Bureau of Planning regarding same. The enclosed information also addresses the comments outlined in your March 27th letter. For your information the target date for occupancy of the development has been revised to reflect and opening date of 1992 . If you have any questions regarding the enclosed information, please contact us. Sincerely, JOHN INS ENGINEERS_i_R.C. Peter Mackiewicz cc: Tom DeMille Barbara Wagner Tom Maskey d60.StoeckerVED 11_ 'SIVED J UN 121989 - Fk SirditTMftCWVkft Stae Traffic CO!IdssiOn State Traffic COm(rission i 1 3 s s . E 11 t.; Y ( fir_ ij 1 Y i -- — — 1 f i 1 i a 4 j, i i l i i , t 1Ow M df,< G V 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 pso`coN AREA CODE 203/644-2511 June 13, 1989 Close, Jensen & Miller, P.C. 1137 Silas Deane Highway Wethersfield, CT 06109-4201 Att: Terri Barch RE: Plaza at Buckland Hills, South Windsor, CT W have reviewed the "Preliminary Sanitary Sewer Design at Buckland Hills, Grading & Utility Plan" dated 6/6/89 and have the following comments : 1 . The slopes of the sanitary sewer main is too flat - less than 0 .4% in several locations . 2 . Pipe should be larger than 8" as shown - possibly 10" or 12" . 3 . Our standards are to maintain a minimum velocity in a partially filled pipe of about 2.5 feet per second. 4 . Our standards are for a maximum distance of 300 , betw n manholes . If you have any questions or comments concerning the above, I can b reached on 644-2511, Ext. 245 . ery truly ours, r Iaz a, P.E. E ginee JCl/jsv cc: C. Fred Shaw, Ass't. Dir. Public Works/Polution Control Michael J. Gantick, Director of Public Works Marcia A. Banach, Director of Plannning - Project File PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 5 6 JUNE 1989 2 . Appl. #89-17P, Downeast Associates Limited Partnership for a General Plan of Development for 59 .46 acres of property at Smith St. , Wheeler Road, Buckland Road, and Pleasant Valley Road to provide approximately 289,445 square feet of retail space and 390,000 sq. ft. of office space to be known as the Plaza at Buckland Hills, DC Zone. The applicant was represented by James H. Lloyd, Esq. ; Thomas Maskey, Melvin Simon Associates' Vice President of Development; Architect Joseph Frazier of Simmons and Associates; Traffic Engineer John Collins; and Cory Garro of Close, Jensen & Miller, Site Engineers . Mr. Lloyd opened with an overview of project size, location, phasing, and history. Mr. Maskey ran a video illustrating projects and tenants with whom the applicants had previously worked. Mr. Garro reviewed storm drainage, sanitary provisions, and water service. Mr. Collins discussed traffic, acknowledging that traffic would be a factor and that some Town roads would need revamping to mitigate traffic. Mr. Lloyd produced an agreement (Attachment D) between The Mall at Buckland Hills Partnership (developer of the nearby regional mall in Manchester) , the Town of South Windsor, and Downeast Associates Limited Partnership (developer of The Plaza at Buckland Hills) dated July 1988 and executed in August, September, and October 1988. He reviewed the road improvement commitments contained in the agreement and entered the agreement into the record. Mr. Frazier called the project an upscale one -- a blend of traditional and contemporary design featuring exteriors of brick, sloped shingled roofs, and bronze aluminum window mullions, with buildings linked by an acrylic plaster sign band with backlit letters in lieu of box signs . Columns would have stone bases . He said the thre 3-story office buildings would be brick and glass . Mr. Maskey returned to summarize timing; he said phasing would begin with retail (which generally required upgrading the infrastructure) and end with the office buildings . Mr. Lloyd wrapped up the presentation, noting that two waivers were being requested; one in the number of parking spaces and another to change open space in the parking areas from 10% to 5%. He said Drawing 5/5 of the general plan of development contained an incorrect building envelope, which would be corrected; and said there was some possibility of the office buildings exceeding 40, in height. Mr. Lloyd maintained that the proposal was consistent with the Town Plan and zoning requirements . Town Planner Marcia Banach submitted a list (Attachment E) of various documents and reports used in the preparation of her report, which she read as follows: 1 . The site which is the subject of tonight's application has been studied extensively in several previous applications for large shopping centers. As a result, there are numerous documents in our files r lating to the impacts of PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 6 6 JUNE 1989 such a facility. I would like to submit the following documents into the record, as they have been drawn from for information contained in this report. All are of interest when examining both the proponents' and opponents' viewpoints regarding the potential impacts of the Plaza at Buckland Hills. PLAZA AT BUCKLAND HILLS PUBLIC HEARING June 6, 1989 DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR RECORD BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT Traffic: 1 . Winchester Development, South Windsor, Ct. SEA Consultants Inc. , November 1984 . 2. Traffic Impact Analysis of the Proposed Buckland Hills Development on South Windsor Roadways. SEA Consultants Inc. , March 1987 . 3 . General Plan of Development, Winchester Mall, South Windsor-Manchester Ct. F.A. Hesketh & Associat s, Bloomfield, Ct. , August 1984 . Cost/Benefit: 4 . Cost-Benefit Analysis, Winchester Mall, South Windsor, CT. Capitol Region Council of Governments, October 1984 . 5 . Cost-Benefit Analysis: The Financial Impact of Winchester Mall on the Town of South Windsor. C.David Frese, November 1984 . Environmental Impacts: 6 . Environmental Review Team Report on Buckland Commons Mall, South Windsor/Manchester, CT. Eastern Connecticut Resource Conservation and Development Area, April 1981 . 7 . Air Quality Study for the Proposed Buckland Commons Mall, South Windsor. TRC Environmental Consultants, Inc. , June, 1981 . 8 . Wildlife Habitat Evaluation, Buckland Commons, South Windsor and Manchester, Ct. Interdisciplinary Environmental Planning, June 1981 . 9 . Buckland Commons Traffic Noise Impact Analysis . Interdisciplinary Environmental Planning, undated. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 7 6 JUNE 1989 10 . Buckland Commons Air Quality Impact Analysis, Management of Resources and the Environment, undated. 11 . Capitol Region Council of Governments . Report on Zoning Referral #84/197 (Zone Change/General Plan of Development, Winchester Mall) . November 1984 . Zone Change: 12 . Pleasant Valley Neighborhood Association et al vs. Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of South Windsor et al. " Connecticut Law Journal, July 5, 1988 . 13 . Correspondence from Attorney Ralph Elliot to Marcia Banach, Director of Planning, re: South Windsor Planning & Zoning Commission - Plaza at Buckland Hills, dated April 25, 1989 . 1 . Tonight's application is the first step in a two-step process which must be completed before any construction can occur on the site. This step is the General Plan of Development stage, where the plans contain enough general information to provide a good overview of the proposed project. If the application' s General Plan is approved, the applicant must proceed to Step 2 - Special Exception and Site Plan. At the Special Exception stage, full technical details about all aspects of the site engineering must be provided. There will be another public hearing at that time. Under the previous Winchester Mall application, the Planning and Zoning Commission granted approval for a zone change and general plan of development. The approval was appealed; however, the case was ultimately decided in favor of the Planning and Zoning Commission. The Town's Special Attorney for the lawsuit has provided correspondence indicating that the zone change granted by this Commission in Feb. 1985 is still in full force and effect today. Thus tonight's application deals only with a new General Plan of Development. 2 . This application represents a gain of 390,000 sq. ft. of office area and a loss of 474,000 sq. ft. of retail area compared to the previously approved Winchester Mall . 3 . There will be about 3800 parking spaces for the office and retail uses . The ratio of parking spaces to floor area falls into the generally accepted practice for shopping center development. The interior circulation pattern has a ring road which is free of parking space encroachments to allow for unobstructed emergency vehicle access and to PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 8 6 JUNE 1989 separate vehicle traffic from pedestrians as much as possible. The plan shows a boulevard driveway from Pleasant Valley through to Smith Street. This approach has not been discouraged because there seems to be potential for a driveway cut through to the Archdiocese property directly across from a driveway cut for the Plaza. It should be noted that the proposed driveway is directly across from an existing house. 4 . Water and sewer service are (or will be) present in the vicinity of the site. Approval for sewers will be required from both the South Windsor WPCA and the Manchester Sewer Authority. It appears at this time that adequate capacity exists in the Clark Street pump station, but a final determination regarding possible need for improvements to the pump station will be made at the site plan stage. CWC water lines will be installed along the Plaza's Smith St. frontage this summer. 5 . The DC zone requires a 100' buffer from adjacent residential areas . The buffer has been shown on the general plan. The applicant has been advised that the buffer must conform to the standards of new buffer requirements, which indicate that the field of view must be substantially obscured within 5 years' time to such an extent activity on the site is not immediately apparent. Provision of an adequate buffer is one of the Planning Department' s main concerns. 6 . The general plan document indicates that 20% of the site within South Windsor will be devoted to open space -- 10% is required. The open space is located within the required buffer area, as is permitted in Town regulations . 7 . The applicant has requested a waiver of one half of the landscaping requirements for the parking lot areas . A provision for such waiver is included in Town regulations when consistent with the intent of that section. B . Traffic is one of the major impacts which this development would have on South Windsor. The traffic engineer has estimated that about 11,900 vehicles will visit the Plaza on an average weekday. The previously approved Winchester Mall was expected to generate about 18,600 vehicles visiting the site on an average weekday. These figures do not reflect diverted trips . The P. M. peak hour is the hour of most concern; this proposal will draw about 1850 trips into and out of the site during the P. M. peak hour. Federal, State, and local road improvement programs are already underway to address the substantial traffic growth which is occurring all around. Interstate 291 is scheduled PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 9 6 JUNE 1989 to be complete in 1995 . The rebuilding of 5-Corners is scheduled for 1995 opening. Interim 5-Corners improvements are currently being designed, to be in place in another year or so. The rebuilding of Buckland Road into a 4-lane road will be completed as funding becomes available from the State/Federal government. The Town Council has authorized preliminary design for reconstruction of Clark Street. Chapel Road will be reconstructed this summer. Unfortunately, the connector road, which was planned to connect Clark St. in the vicinity of the I-291 ramp, to Pleasant Valley Road, has been postponed indefinitely due to lack of Federal/State funding. Town Staff concur that approval of this application would impact additional local roads in a manner quite similar to the effects which Winchester Mall would have had. Accordingly, the Planning Department recommends that similar types of road improvements are needed. These include: Reconstruction of the intersection of Clark St. and Pleasant Valley Road. Reconstruction of Clark St. from Chapel Road to Pleasant Valley Road. Reconstruction of Pleasant Valley Road from the town line to Clark Street. Reconstruction of Buckland Road from the town line to Smith Street. The fate of Smith Street is unresolved at present. With the loss of the connector road, a road improvement program had been envisioned to keep a free flow of traffic around the Plaza -- including keeping the intersection of Clark St. and Pleasant Valley Road open and the intersection of Smith St. and Buckland Road open. The preliminary engineering for the reconstruction of Buckland Road indicates that keeping Smith Street's intersection with Buckland Road open would involve major impacts to residences on Smith St. near the intersection. Therefore, it was decided to proceed with a design which terminates Smith St. at Buckland Road. If this occurs, road improvements to Smith St. from Clark St. to the entrance drive are recommended. The exact nature of the local road improvements will depend in large part upon the site circulation pattern which this Commission establishes if this application is approved, and may include the Town Staff-recommended improvements and/or other road improvements . Sidewalks are recommended along the applicant's South Windsor frontage. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 10 6 JUNE 1989 9 . There are no regulated wetlands on the site. At the site plan stage, Conservation Commission approval will be required. The soils on this side are highly erodible, and wind and water erosion during construction will be a major concern of Town Staff . An aggressive erosion and sediment control program for the site will be expected, with strict enforcement as needed by Town Staff . 10 . The impact of a large shopping facility on groundwater quality at this site had been examined by the Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team for the application for Buckland Commons Mall in 1981 . The Buckland Commons Mall square footage was slightly higher, at 1 . 2 million square feet. The site is underlain by thick fine-grained sediments. The potential for large yields of water from fine-grained material is generally not as likely as from coarse-grained materials . On the other hand, there are apparently some Manchester Water Company well fields in similar material off New State Road. This matter was discussed with Ms. Edith Tannenbaum of the Long Island Regional Planning Board, who authored a report for the National Urban Runoff Project. The study monitored results of stormwater runoff from urban areas including large shopping centers . The runoff was returned to groundwater via recharge basins. Ms. Tannenbaum indicated that the only notable problem occurred during winter with road salt, which temporarily raised the chloride levels in the groundwater in the vicinity of the basins . At the site plan stage, it will be expected that oil and grease separators be designed into the stormwater drainage system. 11 . The previous two applications for this site have had extensive reports from various consultants on air quality impacts of a large shopping facility. The Eastern Connecticut Environmental Review Team report done for Buckland Commons indicated that only a minor degradation in air quality inventory would result. The report indicated that the increase in carbon monoxide might cause some health problems to individuals with acute health problems exposed to the emissions on a daily basis, but should pose very few problems for most individuals . The report also noted that every attempt possible should be made to provide for an efficient transportation system, thereby reducing the negative air quality effects of the development. 12 . The Police Department has indicated that paved access surrounding the buildings would be required for any office building in excess of three stories. They also request that office space be provided for police personnel assigned to the plaza, at no cost to the Town. At the site plan stage, the police and fire departments will be reviewing PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 11 6 JUNE 1989 curve radii to ensure that all essential corners are maneuverable by all emergency vehicl s. 13 . If this application is approved, the Planning Department will expect that the site plan application include detailed road improvement plans . Public Works Director Michael Gantick provided his report: The subject application has been reviewed pursuant to the guidelines set forth in Section 4 . 12 of the Zoning Regulations regarding a General Plan of Development for a DC Zone. The proposed means of providing storm drainage and sanitary sewers are consistent with acceptable practices in the Town of South Windsor; therefore the General Plan of Development generally conforms to the above noted provisions of the Zoning Regulations . It should be noted, however, that pursuant to Section 4 . 12 . 7 and 4 . 13 of the Zoning Regulations, a detailed site plan of development would be required for issuance of Building Permits. As guidance to the applicant the following items would need to be addressed: 1 . Detention basins need to be analyzed for 2, 5, 10, 25 and 100 year storms. 2 . The Northeast detention basin outlet structure piping has to be defined. a. This basin shows an outlet pipe across private land that will require an easement. b. A capacity analysis will be required for all existing storm drainage systems . 3 . A large area of storm drainage is proposed to be outletted into a detention area in Manchester. Requires coordination with Town of Manchester. 4 . Proposed off site drainage should be shown on the overall comprehensive plan. 5 . Sanitary sewers are not addressed on the drawings . A detail flow generation report along with a sewer capacity analysis and associated sewer construction plans will be required. 6 . Spot elevations in critical areas will need to be shown. 7 . Drainage should insure that no ponding in parking lot and at curbs will occur. Gutter flow analysis should be made. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 12 6 JUNE 1989 8 . Detailed construction plans for all road, drainage, and sanitary improvements will b required, pursuant to local and state regulations . Economic Development Coordinator John Shemo read his report Attachment K) in its entirety, noting that a revised Page 14 Attachment J) of the Hammer Siler George Associates report, distributed to Commission members just before the hearing, carried a more accurate revenue accounting than that bound into the report. He read a letter of support (Attachment F) from Kenneth Brill, Chairman of the Economic Development Commission, into the record. Mr. Hallowell said environmental, traffic, and other reports previously compiled were being used during review of this application and, as such, would become part of the application' s public record. He invited the public to comment on the application. The first speaker was Bill Krawski, 130 Buckland Road, who said South Windsor could have had the [regional] mall but had missed its opportunity to enhance its economic base. He said one story shopping centers were a waste of land; it would be better to use the land for high rise construction. Next was Francis A. Maffe, Jr. , 116 Croft Drive, Manchester. He objected to the mall's dumping traffic onto Pleasant Valley Road and questioned the accuracy of the traffic report. He said none of the area roads were equipped to handle mall traffic without improvements . He also said a guarantee was needed from the developer against depletion of wells in the area. Lois Merker, 7-5 Foncine Lane, said she had moved to South Windsor for the town's residential flavor, and that another mall that would turn Pleasant Valley Road into a second Route 5 was not needed. She said ample shopping was already available nearby. Atty. Richard Rittenband, 1734 Ellington Road, submitted a memo Attachment G) outlining the opposition of a group of Smith Street/ Buckland Road residents he represented. The residents' concerns included traffic, lack of needed road improvements, questions about validity of the DC zone where the mall was proposed, and a lack of certain documents and information required by the zoning regulations . John E. Griswold, 14-4 Arthur Drive, echoed earlier comments that plenty of shopping already existed nearby and said another mall was not needed and not beneficial to the Town, especially in light of the traffic it would generate. Dick Haggett, 291 Smith St. , said he and the other residential property owners abutting the mall needed assurance that the aquifer and wells would not be polluted and that air quality would not deteriorate. He cited decreased residential property values, noise, crime, traffic, speeding, and accidents in his objection to i PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 13 6 JUNE 1989 the application. Charles Varrick, 206 Farmstead Drive, listed the already poor water quality in town as a major concern and entered a map of the aquifer Attachment H) into the record. He asked about direction of drainage, and runoff into area ponds. Tina LaMorte, 14B St. Marc Circle, said she was an ex-Fairfield County resident who had been attracted to South Windsor by its open spaces . She said the property where the mall was proposed was an asset to the town as open land, and questioned whether development might destroy possible archaeological findings at the site. Darcy Olsen, 12-2 Arthur Drive, said residents had opposed the Winchester Mall four years earlier and that traffic had not improved any since then. She asked how many people present would like to live across the street from another Westfarms Mall. Anna Raymond, 19-4 Arthur Drive, said she was voicing her own and her neighbors ' concerns: traffic impacts such as existing off-peak backups; blocking of views by 40, - 60' high buildings; loss of neighborhood safety; and shopping already available. She suggested that traffic be re-evaluated, since studies presented appeared unrealistic; and said the developer's stated goal of providing malls the community wants and needs was not being met since the community had long been saying it did not want the mall. Larry O'Neil, 23-5 Arthur Drive, said that future road widening on Pleasant Valley Road to accommodate traffic would take so much of his back yard he'd be able to shake hands with passing motorists while grilling his hamburgers . Dennis Raposa, 145 Murielle Drive, said the application evidenced poor foresight; first too many condos, and now too many malls . He added that Hartford was already having trouble renting its excessive office space, and said South Windsor didn't need a strip mall that would become another Manchester Parkade. Fred Edlund, 386 Hilton Drive, said the environmental air impact survey seemed outdated, and asked if the effects of the Pavilions at Buckland Hills mall in Manchester had been considered. Ms. Banach said no. Mr. Hallowell interjected that up-to-date information had not been requested yet. Leo Gauthier, 395 Smith Street, asked if another public hearing would be held to review the site plan. He asked if a driveway was proposed onto Smith Street, and Mr. Hallowell answered one was . Mr. Gauthier stated his objection to it, saying residents had been assured during hearings of earlier proposals there would be no driveway onto Smith Street. Th re was no additional public comment, and Mr. Hallowell turned to the Commission for input. First was Mr. Castro, who agreed with a comment made by Atty. Rittenband that the Town Attorney should PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 14 6 JUNE 1989 review the legalities of the zone. Mrs . Rossi asked how many parking spaces were asked to be waived; the applicants responded approximately 250, but did not provide the exact number. She noted that Manchester's having approved twice as much nearby development as originally projected might substantially affect traffic and environmental quality reports. Mr. Collins said Page 7 of the traffic study listed developments included in the traffic analysis . He did not allude to environmental impacts . Mrs . Montana expressed concern about the lack of independent studies by town-hired consultants, particularly in light of nearby development in Manchester, and objected to being expected to rely on the developer's presentation for current information. She questioned the applicant's traffic projections, said there are imaginative ways to do parking areas, and discussed with Mr. Maskey the types of retail stores expected to occupy the plaza. Mrs . Evans noted that coverage seemed intense and asked where the future development shown on the drawings was. Mr. Maskey said it was in Manchester. Mrs . Evans asked how many parking space waivers would be sought in Manchester, and Mr. Maskey answered none. Mrs . Evans qu stioned the purpose of parking lot landscaping waivers . Mr. Maskey said the perimeter landscaping could be strengthened accordingly; Mrs . Evans noted that townspeople, generally concerned with visual impacts of shopping malls, found that green space throughout such areas mitigated the impact. Mr. Sorenson questioned traffic circulation relative to the Smith St./Buckland Road intersection; Mr. Maskey said a general plan of development was always subject to modification. Mr. Conde said he would bring in an independent CRCOG aquifer report for the Commission to peruse. Mr. Hart said 1981 reports used for Town Staff reports seemed outdated. Mr. Hallowell noted a letter of opposition (Attachment I ) received from Jennifer Shea, which was not read into the record due to its length and the hour. He questioned traffic levels of service on South Windsor streets, and asked the applicant if buffers would block the view within 5 years as prescribed, considering slopes in the area. Atty. Lloyd said yes . Mr. Hallowell asked what had been or could be provided in the way of community services, since the mall was called a community" center. Mr. Maskey said he would not say the applicants had never done anything like this, although shopping and r creation were not necessarily a good mix. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 15 6 JUNE 1989 There was no additional comment, and the public hearing concluded. ADJOURNMENT Date approved: Respectfully submitted, Rosalyn I . Toper, Recording Secretary Minutes accepted by PZC: Raymond F. Hallowell, Jr. , Chairman Marshall Montana, Secretary RECEIVED UPDIKE, KELLY & SPELLACY, P. C.JUN 15 1989 COUNSELORS AT LAW SO. WINDSOR PLANNING DEPL PETER G.KELLY MARK J ZIMMERMANN ELIZABETH K MCLAUGHLIN ONE STATE STREET BOURKE G.SPELLACY JOHNJ MURPHY CHARLESJ NICOL THOMASJ SHORTELL RICHARD5 ORDER POST OFFICE BOX 31277THOMASW.DEMILLE JAMES W ABRAMS BONNIE C ROBSON PAUL L.MCCORMICK MICHAELJ.ANDREANA CYNTHIAJ.RUMMEL HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06103-3176 JAMES H LLOYD.IE MARJORIE J BERGER JANET HUBON STRATTON JOHN C KING HAROLD M BLINDERMAN JOSEPH F TILGHMAN,JR JAMEST GRAHAM KATHERINE C.CALLAHAN BARBARAC WAGNER CABLE "UKSLAW" ELIZABETH COLLINS BARTON CHRISTOPHER M CELIO JOHN F.WOLTER TELEX 643067 HO HFD ALANI SCHEER ANNA V.CRAWFORD CAROLS CLAPP ROBERT M DECRESCENZO TELECO PIER (203)548-2680 JAMES M CONNOR LAURA ISFRANKEL OF COUNSEL DEBORAH MONTEITH NEUBERT SUSAN A HAYS DOUGLAS M COSTLE• 203)548-2600 KAREN P.BLADO PETER R.HUNTSMAN CHRISTINE BECK M ICHAEL D.NEUBERT MORTON H LIBBEY,JR R.DIAL PARROTT ROBERTJ MARTINO DIRECT DIAL NUMBER DAVID E STURGESS AMY 5 MCCABE STUART N,UPDIKE 1904-1983) ADMITTED TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA AND CALIFORNIA BARS ONLY June 14 , 1989 Ms. Marcia Banach Town Planner Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue south Windsor, Connecticut 06074 Re: Plaza at Buckland Hills Dear Marcia: As per our discussion last week, we would request that the resolution for approval of the General Plan of Development for the Plaza at Buckland Hills include a recitation that (i) the application for the General Plan is complete anti complies with all requirements of the Zoning Regulations of the Town of South Windsor, and (ii) the Designed Commercial zone previously approved for this site and as shown on the Zoning Map of the Town of South Windsor is in effect and does not require re-approval in connection with the approval of this General Plan of Development. Also as a follow-up to our conversation, by copy of this letter, I am asking that Denis Jones of Close, Jensen & Miller forward to your office a revised Sheet 5 showing the revised building envelope boundary, so that the envelope does not extend into the proposed roadway through the office portion of the project. I look forward to hearing from you as to the placement of this application on the Commission' s agenda for discussion. If a hearing date is established prior to June 30th, please call Jim Lloyd (548-2607) as I will be away on vacation. UPDIKE, KELLY & SPELLACY, P. C. Ms. Marcia Banach June 14 , 1989 Page Two Thank you for your continued assistance in these matters. Very t y yours, ARBARA C. WAGNER cc: Mr. Glenn Johnson Mr. Thomas Maskey James H. Lloyd, III, Esq. Mr. Denis Jones Close, Jensen and Miller, P. C. CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTALISTS, LAND PLANNERS AND SURVEYORS 1137 SILAS DEANE HIGHWAY WETHERSFIELD, CONNECTICUT 06109-4201 203) 563-9375 RECEIVED June 15, 1989 JUN 16. 1989 SO. WINDSOR PLANNING DEPT. Ms. Marcia Banach Town Planner Town of South Windsor Town Hall 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 Re: Plaza at Buckland Hills Revised Building Envelope Plan Dear Ms. Banach: Enclosed are six prints of the revised Sheet 5 of 5, "Plaza at Buckland Hills: Permissible Building Envelope Plan", relocating the permissible building envelope line so that it does not cross the proposed roadway serving the western office area. This transmittal was referenced in the letter to you from Barbara C. Wagner of Updike, Kelly, Spellacy, P.C., dated June 14, 1989. Very truly yours, CLOSE,JENSEN and MILLER, P.C. 6;-- - Denis Jones DJ:lru Enclosure cc: Barbara C. Wagner Glenn M.Johnson STATE OF CONNECTICUT MEMBERS TRAFFIC COMMISSION Commissioner of Transportation Department of Transportation Commissioner of Public Safety Commissioner of Motor Vehicles 24 Wolcott Hill Road • P.O. Drawer A Wethersfield, Connecticut 06109 Phone : 566-5228 RECEIVED JUN 20 1989 June 16, 1989 SO. WINDSOR PLANNING DEPTH Mr. Peter Mackiewicz John Collins Engineering 852 Commerce Street Thornwood NY 10594 Re: STC# 171-8903-01 Dear Mr. Mackiewicz: Subject: The Plaza at Buckland Hills Towns of Manchester/South Windsor This is to confirm receipt of your June 9 submission which consisted of the traffic volume data that is needed by the Bureau of Planning for their part in the initial steps of the Certificate review process. Copies of your submission will also be forwarded to the Bureau of Highways ' Office of Traffic Engineering to be included in the material previously submitted. This office will advise you should any additional data be required during the review. Very tru yoft William W. Stoeckert Executive Director cc: Mr. Kenneth G. Keifer Attorney Thomas W. DeMille Chief Robert D. Lannan Chief Gary K. Tyler Mr. Leo Belval Mr. Thomas D'Auria Mr. Richard Sartor Mr. Robert B. Weiss Attorney Ralph G. Iliot Ms. Marcia Banach Downeast Associates LP Mr. John Collins An Equal Opportunity Employer BRADY, WILLARD & ALEXANDER ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE 400 330 ROBERTS STREET EAST HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06108 GERALD W BRADY AREA CODE 203 RICHARD C WILLARD TELEPHONE 289-5477 RALPH J ALEXANDER TELECOPIER 291-9282 SHAUN K M JONES June 27, 1989 Raymond F. Hollowell, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Town of South Windsor 1540 Sullivan Avenue South Windsor, CT 06074 RE: Issue of Designed Commercial Zone, Zone Change and General Plan of Development Dear Mr. Hollowell: I am writing in response to your recent inquiry regarding the above-captioned issue. More specifically, you have inquired as to whether or not a subsequent general plan of development under a previously approved DC zone and general plan of development may be substituted for the original general plan of development: The pertinent part of the zoning regulations is 4:12 DESIGN COMMERCIAL ZONE (DC ZONE). Under that section of the regulations the DC zone change and the general plan of development are incorporated into one process pursuant to Subsection 4.12.3 of the regulations. Both the zone change and the general plan of development must be approved by the commission in order for an application to be approved. Once approved, as the regulation is written, the general plan of development becomes the guideline for the development of the parcel in question, and the language of 4.12.3 is clear on this point: "If the application is approved, the establishment of the DC zone shall permit the applicant and/or his assigns to proceed with completion of the development set forth in the general plan of development, subject to the remaining provisions of these regulations." There is no provision under the regulation for any modification in the general plan of development either by amendment or by subsequent general plan of development application. It is my opinion that an applicant wishing to modify the general plan of development within a DC zone would be required through the provisions of 4-12 to make application for a new DC zone designation together with a new general plan of development. If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, Ra1pM J. lexander RJA/asb TT, UPDIKE, KELLY & SPELLACY, P. C. COUNSELORS AT LAW PETER KELLY MARK ZIMMERMANN ELIZABETH K MCLAUGHLIN ONE STATE STREET BOURKE G SPELLACY JOHN J MURPHY CHARLES J NICOL THOMAS J.SHORTELL RICHARD S ORDER POST OFFICE BOX 31277 THOMAS W DEMILLE JAMES W ABRAMS BONNIE C ROBSON PAULL MCCORMICK MICHAELJ ANDREANA CYNTHIAJ RUMMEL HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 06103-3176 JAMES H.LLOYD,EII MARJORIE J.BERGER JANET HUBON STRATTON JOHN C.KING HAROLD M BLINDERMAN JOSEPH F.TILGHMAN.JR JAMEST GRAHAM KATHERINE C.CALLAHAN BARBARA C.WAGNER CABLE ••UKSLAW ELIZABETH COLLINS BARTON CHRISTOPHER M CELIO JOHN F WOLTER TELEX 643067 HO HFD ALANI SCHEER ANNA V CRAWFORD CAROLS CLAPP ROBERT M DtCRESCENZO TELECO PIER (203)548-2680 JAMESM CONNOR LAURA B FRANKEL OF COUNSEL DEBORAH MONTEITH NEUBERT SUSAN A HAYS DOUGLAS M COSTLE• 203)548-2600 KAREN P.BLADO PETER R.HUNTSMAN CHRISTINE BECK MICHAELD NEUBERT MORTON H LIBBEY,JR R.DIAL PARROTT ROBERT J MARTINO DAVID E STURGESS AMY S.MCCASE STUART N UPDIKE DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 1904-1983) ADMITTED TO DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA j j AND CALIFORNIA BARS ONLY June 28, 1 8 t I•+ J t, ) HAND DELIVERED` Mr. Raymond F. Hallowell, Jr. Chairman Town Planning andI jl Zoning Commission tNindsor Town Hall Flanr,;ng & Zoning Commission1540SullivanAvenue South Windsor, CT Re: Application of Downeast Associates Limited Partnership- Application for Approval of General Plan of Development Dear Mr. Hallowell : As you know, we are counsel to Downeast Associates Limited PartnershipandMelvinSimon & Associates, Inc. , applicant and developer in connection with the above referenced zoning application. In light of the action by the commission last evening of denying the application for approval of the General Plan of Development, request is hereby made that the applicant be given the opportunity to meet informally with the commission or a subcommittee of the commission to discuss future development of the subject site. We are most anxious that this meeting take place as soon as possible.If such a meeting could be arranged Thursday evening, June 29, 1989; Thursday evening, July 6, 1989; or during the day Friday, July 7 ,1989 , we would very much appreciate it. If those dates are not available, the applicant will endeavor to meet with the commission or a subcommittee of the commission at any time. Very truly yours, 7 J FESH. LL , III JHL:DEB cc: Marcia Banach, Director of Planning Thomas Maskey Glenn Johnson To: All PZC Members From: Marcia Banach Director of Planning Date: 28 June 1989 re: Plaza at Buckland Hills -- Necessity for Zone Change Change Application; Legal Opinions I recently distributed to you copies of correspondence between Atty. Ralph Elliot and me regarding the above-referenced subject matter. Not included were copies of my earlier correspondence (attached) with Town Atty. Ralph Alexander wherein I sought clarification of the zone' s legal status and he instead referred me to Atty. Elliot. You should also be aware that the applicants for the Plaza at Buckland Hills, via their attorney, had indicated on several occasions that they were willing to file for a Zone Change/General Plan, but had been reassured by all of the correspondence that this would not be required. 40MN !f,` 1yrTawasoSOUL1i ? -o - v 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074 osOR-Co AREA CODE 203/644-2511 29 June 1989 Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C. One State Street P. 0. Box 31277 Hartford, CT 06103-3176 Attn: James H. Lloyd, III re:Appl. #89-17P, Plaza at Buckland Hills Dear Atty. Lloyd: In response to your letter of June 28, 1989 , please be advised that the Planning and Zoning Commission will be unable to meet with you during the fifteen-day appeal period that begins with publication of the legal notice of action taken on the captioned application. The notice has been mailed out for publication on Saturday, July 1, 1989 , which would make Monday, July 17 the earliest a meeting might be contemplated (assuming the notice is published on July 1 ) . Some Commission members may be available during the weeks of July 17 and July 24; after that, the Commission is on recess for the full month of August. Very truly yours, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Raymond F. allowell, Jr. Chairman cc: M. Banach, Director of Planning PZC File 4 M aft( G Ua 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR. CONN. 06074 pSOR C0 AREA CODE 203/644-2511 TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE JOURNAL INQUIRER SATURDAY, JULY 1, 1989 LEGAL NOTICE TOWN OF SOUTH WINDSOR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION At its June 27, 1989 meeting, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted to take the following action: 1 . Approve, with modifications, Appl. #89-28P, Wapping Fair Association Inc. , for a Temporary and Conditional Permit to hold the annual Wapping Fair on Sept. 8, 9, and 10, 1989 at the Rye Street Park, RR Zone. 2 . Approve, with modifications, Appl. #89-45P, E. Andreoli & Sons, Inc. , for a Site Plan of Development for Meyer Gage, 230 Burnham Street (westerly of Long Hill Road) , I Zone. 3 . Approve, with modifications, Appl. #89-27P, Gerber Scientific Products, Inc. , for a Site Plan of Development rev. ) at 571 jiutmeg Road North, I Zone. 4 . Deny Appl. #89-17P, Downeast Associates Limited Partnership, for a General Plan of Development for the Plaza at Buckland Hills, property at Smith/Wheeler/ Buckland/Pleasant Valley Roads, DC Zone. Dated at South Windsor, Connecticut this 28th day of June, 1989 . PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Raymond F. Hallowell, Jr. , Chairman Marshall Montana, Secretary M b e TO-W n O-P 1540 SULLIVAN AVENUE • SOUTH WINDSOR, CONN. 06074 SOR•co AREA CODE 203/644-2511 5 July 1989 Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C. One State Street P. 0. Box 31277 Hartford, CT 06103-3176 Attn: Atty. Barbara Wagner re:Appl . #89-17P, Plaza at Buckland Hills Dear Atty. Wagner: Please be advised that the Planning and Zoning Commission voted on June 27 , 1989 to deny the above-referenced application for a General Plan of Development. The reasons for denial are: 1 . The application should have included a request for a zone change. The application does not comply with the requirements of Section 4 . 12 of the Zoning Regulations . 2 . Negative impact on residential property values along Smith Street, Wheeler Road, and Pleasant Valley Road due to the aesthetics of this type of large, open commercial shopping plaza. 3 . Negative impact on general character of the neighborhood. 4 . The traffic data presented seems to show an unrealistically low traffic impact. 5 . The application did not fully address the benefits to South Windsor vis-a-vis employment opportunities and tax benefits . Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 4ond F. Hallowell, Jr. Chairman I July 5, 1989 Town of South Windsor Planning and Zoning Commission Town Hall South Windsor, CT 06074 Dear Members of the Commission: Thank you for your intelligence, foresight, and good judgment in voting against the Plaza at Buckland Hills. I was so happy to read the article in the Hartford Courant on 6/28/89 stating your reasons for rejecting the plaza. Those were exactly my thoughts; but, to be quite honest, I was beginning to lose faith that anything could be done to stop senseless development, especially after the land had been sold to Simon & Associates. I wrote a letter to the Commission and then did not mail it because I did not think it would make much difference in comparison to the slick presentations of the developers. I have enclosed it now in case you might be interested in reading it. Thank you again; you not only made a very wise decision but you also restored one person's faith. Keep up the good work. Very truly yours, a Peggy Chirico P-625 092 473 CA) 7"i9ic sT Qn r-z77 Sp SENDER: Complete Items 1 and 2 when additional services are dsalred, and complete Items 3 and 4. Put your address in the "RETURN TO" Space on the reverse side. Failure to do this will prevent this card from being returned to you. The return receipt fee will Provide you the name of the person delivered to and the date f v . For additional fen the following services are available. Consult postmaster for fees and check box es)for ad es ditional services)requested. 1. El Show to whom delivered,date,and addressee's address. 2. Restricted Delivery t(Extra charge)t t(Extra charge)t 3. Article Addressed to: 4. Article Number 5#A-0/9-11 fF G_ (,Uht?N F4L CSrQ , f7 3 ulo JJHE lac— Type of Service: E 57,—E7 157— F, Roistered Insured L4 Certified COD Express Mail Always obtain signature of addressee or agent and DATE DELIVERED. 5. Signature—Addressee 8. Addressee's Address(ONLY if X requested and fee paid) 6. Signature—A 7. Date of D ry i l9e9 PS Form 3811, Mar.1987 r ue.ar. .1sy7-IM2M DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT