Presenters for Evergreen Walk were Alan Lamson, Principal with FLB Architects, Jay Giles, Senior Vice President with Fuss & O
Lamson had a comprehensive list of questions that were asked at the previous meeting:
the mixing of pedestrians and vehicle traffic on the main street; appearance of the
proposed six-story hotel; use of existing barns; multi-level parking; adequacy and
appearance of open space; truck deliveries/loading for the buildings; turning movements
on access roads; screening of roof top structures; proposed plantings along Buckland
Road; retention of an existing large sugar maple; future development and possible
additional impact that may not be accounted for in the current plan; the triple left turn
coming off the I-84 ramp in Manchester; southbound right-turn cueing on Buckland
Street as it approaches Pleasant Valley Road; potential impact of the development on
Deming Street; the traffic report appearance that more cars are entering the site than
exiting; Plum Gulley Brook concerns and overall concept of the storm drainage system,
including quality of storm water.
Replies to the questions are as follows:
The mixing of pedestrians, traffic and parked cars on main streets is quite successful
elsewhere and is necessary for the vitality of a lifestyle center (both customers and
merchants feel very strongly about it). Traffic calming measures have been designed
into the street. Designated raised crosswalks have been shown, crosswalks have been
shortened by extending the sidewalk area out to the travel way, raised walks with
different materials and pavers are proposed, main street will be kept at a 24' width
curbed travel way. Trucks will use alternate routes for deliveries, eliminating truck
traffic on the main street.
A letter has been submitted to the Planning Department, dated September 10, 2001,
withdrawing the waiver request for the six story hotel (Exhibit A).
Plans for the future development areas have not been solidified at this time, and the
land has been relabeled as "other land of Evergreen Walk" to preclude presumption of
tacit approval of any future development. The applicant noted that there are other
traffic flow improvements that might be able to be accomplished later that would
possibly allow some future development on the property; however, at this time no plans
have been finalized. There has been discussion with the owners of the Simon property
across Smith Street for connection through to this parcel, however, nothing has come
of these discussions as yet. The applicant recognized that the Commission would not
approve future plans unless the traffic flow works.
The developers will attempt to relocate and reuse the existing barns. The concept of
multi-level parking will be explored with the office park phase. More green space has
been provided along Buckland Road; all three entrances have semi-circular green areas
that would be lined with trees. The green space along the wetland corridors will be open
for pedestrian access, i.e., hiking trails and passive recreation. Some of the 10' wide
landscaping islands within the parking areas can be combined; this allows for more/larger
trees plus pedestrian pathways to break up the parking fields. A revised General Plan of
Development has been submitted to show these changes. The Town Green area will be
extended through the parking lot out to Buckland Road. The use of Plum Gulley Brook
corridor for walking trails will be evaluated based on detailed wetland surveys.
Service yards for deliveries will not be located on Main Street. Parking areas and the
access roads will be designed to accommodate truck traffic; this is being done to
accommodate emergency vehicles also, to remove truck traffic from Main St.
It is the intention of the developer to screen the rooftops with parapets, rooftop
screens or second floors. As has been previously noted, some rooftop screening will be
accomplished with landscaping; however, some views through to the buildings will be
provided. The space along Buckland Road should be a positive space, not just a left over
space between the street and the parking lots. The existing sugar maple in the vicinity
of the middle entrance will remain. Driveways have been designed with excess space on
the sides to accommodate future widening.
The Department of Transportation is investigating ways to handle the traffic after it
makes the left onto Buckland Street; additional widening along Buckland Street has been
considered to provide three thru lanes from that point on the ramps thru the existing
intersections.
Extension of the southbound right turn lane at the intersection of Pleasant Valley Road
at Buckland Hills. Traffic projections (supported by the DOT) indicated little additional
traffic on Deming Street. However, the developer proposes to widen Deming Street at
Buckland Road to create an exclusive left-turn lane and also to widen the street to a
uniform 22' width to the top of the hill where the width is currently 22'.
The overall drainage system includes plans to detain as much water as possible via
basins, islands, etc., to keep the same rate of runoff that currently exists (or less). It is
proposed to design a collection system from the parking and roofs through a system of
pipes discharging to Plum Gulley Brook through the use of detention basins. The quality
of storm water will be controlled by Best Management Practices implemented
throughout the site which will reduce the sediment and pollutants leaving the site.
Stubs or extensions of the sewer system will be provided to the east side of Buckland
Road, proper easements will also be provided.
The area just south of the site (Smith Street) is currently a farmer's field and it drains
towards Smith Street slightly and then through a swale area along the north side and
down into the beginnings of a small stream and a wetlands area. the proposal will reduce
the storm water in that area because of the permeability of the ground, so there will be
no storm drainage impact to the Smith Street residents.
Mealy requested input from the public against this application.
Leo Gauthier, of 395 Smith Street, read into the record his letter, dated September 25, 2001. (Exhibit B)
Barbara Matthews, of 480 Clark Street, had concerns centering on water supply and contamination.
Mealy requested input from the public for this application.
Kathryn Hale, of 54 Orchard Hill Drive, spoke in favor of this application but noted that improvements were needed to the traffic on Buckland Road (fewer traffic lights), and the hotel needs to be less than 6 stories.
Matt Galligan, Town Manager spoke in favor of the application. He gave the history of the site and the decisions that have been made in the past. He noted that regional traffic solutions need to be sought by the region
Bill Krawski of Buckland Road had concerns centering on his driveway and access to his property.
Alice Kaminski, of 121 Birch Hill Drive had concerns centering on traffic and lights on Buckland Road. She wondered about the possibility of apartments over the stores on the site; she thought that would be a good idea.
Discussion ensued among the Commissioners with the following comments and concerns:
Traffic lights: What is the maximum speed at which all lights could be green so a driver
could get through them all? (answer: the posted speed limit, 40 mph). Perhaps a sign
could be posted on Buckland Road noting that signals are timed for 40 mph.
How would a future interconnection with Plaza at Buckland Hills affect Smith Street
residents? (Answer: the interconnection would most likely pass under Smith Street so
there would be no interconnection.)
Concerns re Deming Street, particularly the problem with the narrow curve going uphill.
Trying to understand what transpired with the flooding on the Krawski property; what
are the implications for storm drainage and flooding for this side of Buckland Road?
(Answer: the applicant will make sure this projecton Mr. Krawski's property is not adequately sized; this project's culverts will be.)
Concerns re Mill Pond. (Answer: Erosion & sediment control plans will be submitted to
IWA/CC at the site plan stage; this project will not increase the rate of runoff, so will
not make any downstream problems worse.)
Concern re two additonal traffic lights rather than just one on Buckland Road.
Phasing of berm along main street; needs to be done early in the project. (Applicant
agreed this can be done.)
There is a Main Street in South Windsor, the same name should not be used on this site.
(Applicant noted that "main street" is just a style, not a name.)
A connection between I-291 and this site could ultimately mitigate traffic problems.
It was noted that both the Town's traffic engineer and the developer's traffic engineer
agree that three signalized entrances are needed to serve this development.
The proposal to widen Deming Street to a uniform 22 feet makes sense.
If the height of the proposed 250 room hotel is decreased by two stories, would the
hotel still have 250 rooms? (Yes; the proposal was based on the number of rooms
anticipated to be needed.)
How much would the development need to be scaled back to maintain only two left-turn
lanes off the I-84 ramp? (Applicant said that is impossible to say. There are times now
when the traffic on that ramp backs up to the highway, and there is as much as 30%
variation day-to-day. The triple left turn lane would mean that the number of times that
intersection is in failure would be reduced.
Is it possible that there would ever be four left-turn lanes? (No; the applicant notes
there are physical constraints that would prevent that; and the ramp system itself
cannot feed that many vehicles into the lanes.)
Possibility of developer coming up with a smaller plan? (No; the project as proposed
provides a critical mass needed to make the lifestyle center successful; plus it is less than
allowed by the regulations.)
Mealy noted that the General Plan of Development is a concept of the entire area that the developer wants to develop. Commissioners can be very specific in questions and want the answers to also be specific; however, specific applies to the Site Plan of Development which will be submitted later.
Mealy closed the public hearing at 10:00 p.m.
ITEM: Regular Meeting
Mealy opened the Regular Meeting at approximately 10:10 p.m. in the Madden Room.
Motion to extend the meeting was made by McCann and seconded by Larson. The motion passed and the vote was unanimous.
Motion to discuss Item 3 under New Business first was made by Montana and seconded by Porter. The motion passed and the vote was unanimous.
NEW BUSINESS:
3. Appl #01-31P, Fiori, Martin, request for a 5 year in-law apartment, 12 LeFoll Blvd., A-20 zone
After discussion Evans made a motion to approve appl #01-31P. Porter seconded the motion. The motion passed and the vote was unanimous.
Preliminary discussion with Dan Lanza
Dan Lanza, representing his mother who is the owner of the property at 2163 Ellington Road, described a preliminary plan for Senior Housing on the three acres located there. The property has 280' frontage on Ellington Road. The proposal consists of 20 units containing approximately 1100 square feet, full basements, single story, including a garage. The existing house and barn would be removed. Rear property is heavily wooded which would provide significant buffering of neighboring residences. All requirements for Senior Housing could be met.
After discussion the Commissioners had the following suggestions for Lanza:
check location of driveway in respect to the light at Sand Hill and also the distance to
Palmer Drive, i.e., sight lines; site needs to provide a smooth flow of traffic; units could
be staggered on the site to have a more appealing look; conversation with abutting
residents should be considered; driveway layout is awkward and could result in problems,
less units might solve that problem.
Preliminary discussion with Peter DeMallie re SRD
DeMallie, representing Jeff Bianco, Bob Urso, and Arnold Greenberg presented a preliminary proposal for Senior Housing on property located near Sharon Drive, north of Pleasant Valley Road and south of South Satellite Road on a site containing 6.2 acres. The proposed plan exhibited long driveways to the homes with access to the site through a residential area. The units will feature one floor living in the end units. The town house units (garden type units) will feature a second floor and include approximately 1600 - 1800 sq. ft. of living space. The units will have walk-out basements and two bedrooms. A community center is also proposed for this development. It's a wooded site with wetlands to the west of the site. Public water and sewer serve the site. DeMallie noted that
this proposal is of lower density than other approved SRD's in South Windsor.
Discussion ensued among the Commissioners with the following comments and concerns:
trash pickup and snowplowing;
access from a residential area;
may be a good transitional piece between residential and industrial areas;
potential for reconsideration of the unit cap imposed on SRD150 only room for one more project).
ITEM: Minutes
The minutes of 6/5/01, 6/19/01, 7/10/01, 7/17/01, 7/31/01, 8/7/01, 8/14/01, 8/21/01 were approved by consensus of the Commission.
ITEM: Adjournment
A motion to adjourn the meeting at 11:00 p.m. was made by Evans. Montana seconded the motion. The motion passed and the vote was unanimous.
Respectfully submitted,
Phyllis M. Mann
Recording Secretary
