7092_SITE PLAN- F.L. ROBERTS AND CO.- 634 MAIN ST. � L Rolaerfis � CO
Sh-ee�-
i
Ne,-e-
DOHERTY,WALLACE, PtLLSBURY AND MURPHY, P.C.
ATTORNErs AT LAW
ONE MONARCH PLACE • t9Tr FLOOR
1414 MAM STREET
$PRINOV1ELa.MASSACHUSETTS OIf44.1002
- 14131 733-3111 EXT.324
FAX 44131 734-3910
MFCHAEL 0.SWEET EMAIL-sweet@dwpm.com
S
41 0
Town of Agawam
' 36 Main Street Agawam, Massachusetts 01001-1837
Mp Tel. 413-786-0400 Fax 413-786-9927
MEMO
TO: Building Inspector, Engineering Dept., Police Dept., Fire Dept.
FROM: Planning Board
DATE: July 30, 1999
SUBJECT: F.L. Roberts - Main Street
Attached for your review- and comment is a detailed Site Plan of the F.L. Roberts proposal for
Main Street. The Planning Board will be reviewing this Site Plan at their August 5' meeting.
CRCIDSD:prk
J
A
TOWN OF AGAWAM
36 MAIN STREET AGAWAM, MASSACHL'SETTS 01001
y Tel. 413-7 86-0400
July 23, 1999
Steven Roberts
F.L. Roberts& Co., Inc.
93 West Broad Street
Springfield, MA 01101
Dear Mr. Roberts:
The Agawam Planning Board, at its July 22, 1999 meeting, discussed your conceptual plan to
maintain the existing islands at 634 Main Street while proceeding with the development of the site
in conformance with the Site Plan approved on October 15, 1999. The Board supports this
proposal, but will need a revised Site Plan before formal action can be taken. The Site Plan
should contain all elements which are required under Section 180-13 of the Agawam Zoning
Ordinance.
If you have any questions, please contact the Planning Office at 786-040.0, extension 283.
Sincerely, .
Charles R. Calabrese, Chairman
Agawam Planning Board
cc: Building
VHB
File
MEMO
To: Planning Board
From: Sgt. Draghetti
Subject: FL Roberts - 634 Main Street
Date: July 12, 1999
On October 1, 1998 a site inspection of 634 Main Street was conducted, my findings are as
follows:
Roadway - Main street is a paved asphalt surface running in a north/south direction. The road is
approx. 40 feet wide, with 12 foot travel lanes and 8 foot breakdown lanes. The road is a heavily
traveled primary road and has commuter traffic flow in the morning and afternoon. Lealand Ave
is a residential side street. It is a paved asphalt road approx 24 foot in width and runs in an east/
west direction.
Visibility - There is good visibility on Main Street northerly to route 57 a distance of approx
4/l Oths mile and southerly past Agawam Center.
Lighting - There are street lights in close proximity to the site_
Traffic Controls -There are no parking signs posted on both sides of Main Street and parking is
prohibited on Main Street. The posted speed limit on Main Street is 35 mph. There is an
automated traffic control approx 1/10th mile south of the site at Main Street and School Street.
Lealand Ave has no posted speed limit and parking is allowed on Lealand Ave.
Sidewalks - There are sidewalks on both sides of Main Street. There are no sidewalks in the area
of the site on Lealand Ave.
School Zones - The area of the site is located in a school zone and is across the street from
Phelps Elementary School.
Playgrounds - There is a playground to the rear of Phelps Elementary School and the Agawam
Little League Fields are approx 3/10 the mile from the site on School Street.
Parking - The site plan calls for 9 parking spaces with one reserved for handicap parking. This is
in compliance with the Town of Agawam Parking Ordinance.
Traffic Unit Impact Estimates - none provided
Other-The proposed sidewalk on Main Street is a definite improvement over the current
sidewalk and should increase pedestrian safety.
pyJ'G,T
JV
L
OFFICE OF PLANNING&COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SITE PLAN REVIEW
Reviewer D. Dachos Date 9/2 8/9 8
Date rec'd 9/17/98 Dist. Date 9/1__98
Planning Board Meeting Date 10/1/98
Applicant Information:
1. Name of Business Agawam BP
Address 634 Main Street , Agawam, MA
2. Owner F.L. Roberts & Co. , Inc .
Address 93 West Broad Street , Springfield, MA 01101
Telephone ( 413 ) 7 81-7 4 4 4
3. Engineer Vanasse Hangen Brustlin , Inc.
Address 1
Telephone ( 617 ) 9 2 4-17 7 0
Plan Review:
Scale: 1 n - 201 Dater 9/16/9 8
Title Block ( Street Address, Applicant's Name, Address, Scale, Name of Preparer of Plan):
Main Street address should be identified.
Description of Project:
Proposed expansion and modernization of existing gas station. Merging
of existing property with 8 , 400 sq. ft . adjacent lot . Construction of 1972
sq.'ft.. convenience store and canopy.
Site Plan Review (Cont.)
Description of Site:
Site is presi:ntly fully developed with existing gas station and
single family residence.
Provision for Traffic Flow:
Present traffic flow configuration provides an unsafe condition. Both
gas station and the convenience store across the street have un-
restricted access from Leland Avenue. The Planning Office has
requested that the Engineering Department examine site layout and
suggest possible changes .
Parking:
Parking guidelines recommend 15 parking spaces . Nine have been
provided.
Drainage:
Must be approved by DPW.
Public Utilities:
All utilities must be shown.
Landscaping/Screening and Buffers:
Size and species of all landscaping must be provided. The following
landscape note must be placed on the plan: "All plantings must be
maintained and that portion of the public way abutting the parcel
and including the treebelt shall be maintained in a safe and attractive
condition by the owner of the parcel. "
Sign Location:
O,:K.
I
Exterior Lighting: %
Detail of lighting must be provided. All lighting shall be directed
and/or shielded so as not to shine on adjacent property.
9
Site Plan Review (Cont.)
Rendering or Elevations:
Elegyrations of all sides of the building must be provided. Colors and
textures must also be provided.
Dumpster Location:
Type and height of dumpster enclosure must be provided.
Other Comments or Concerns:
Three ( 3 ) issues require further consideration:
1 ) virtually unlimited access onto Leland Avenue;
2 ) a way to transport pedestrians safely across the site; and
the proposed structure is too close to the property line.
TOWN OF AGAWAM
INTEROFFICE
MEMORANDUM ��AA�E0 May`
To: Planning Board
CC: File
From: Engineering
Date: July 15, 1999
Subject: Conceptual Plan - F.L. Roberts Gas Station - Main Street - SP 320
Per your request dated July 8, 1999, we have reviewed the plan entitled "FL. Roberts Main
Street, Agawam, Massachusetts - Conceptual Layout" prepared by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin,
Inc. of Springfield, MA, scale 1"=10', dated 7/1/99, and we have the following comments:
1. We have recently encountered problems in the vicinity of the proposed project with
storm drainage entering the sanitary sewer system. As we are currently working to
eliminate all combined sewers in the Town, we would not accept any additional
drainage into a combined sewer system until the drainage can-be separated from the
sanitary sewer. We will investigate the catch basins adjacent to the subject site to
determine whether they are connected to the sanitary sewer system.
2. There is a handicap ramp on the proposed conceptual plan labeled, "by others". The
applicant should clarify this.
3. All of our comments in our memo to the Planning Board dated October 15, 1998 still
apply.
Please let us know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
ennifer T. Grabowski John R Stone
Civil Engineer 11 Superintendent of Public Works
hAengineerWtep1anlsp320 3.wpd
:#6
i
A �1
TOWN OF AGAWAM
oil y 36 MAID STREET ACAWA. . �[ASSACHC'SETTS 01001
y Tel. 413-,g6-0400
4 �
JUL 8 1999
MEMO
TO: Building Insp tor, Engineering Dept., Fire Dept., Police Dept.
FROM: Planning Board
DATE: July 8, 1999
SUBJECT: Amended Site Plan - F.L. Roberts - 634 Main Street
The attached Amended Site Plan will be discussed at the Planning Board's July 15`, meeting. The
plan is not complete, but if you would review it conceptually the.Board would appreciate it.
Thank you.
DSD:prk
4:
46
F. L. ROBERTS Avn COMPANY
JUL 8 1999
Deliver To: Debbie Dachos Date: July 2, 1999
Transmittal Agawam Planning Board
From: Jeff Pechulis Re: 634 Main Street BP Station
F.L. Roberts and Company is pleased to submit to you for distribution 10 copies of a revised conceptual
site plan for the above referenced project. As you may recall, F.L. Roberts presented a plan to the Planning
Board that included redevelopment of the entire site including relocating the pump islands and installing a
customized colonial canopy. The original plan was approved by the Planning Board for recommendation
to the Board of Appeals. Similarly,the original site plan was approved by the Board of Appeals.
Subsequent to the Board of Appeals approval, the decision was appealed.
F.L. Roberts has redesigned the site so that it eliminates construction of the controversial items(island
relocation and canopy construction)of which the appeal was based on. We believe that this revised plan,
similar to the original plan,enhances the operations and aesthetics of the project site. Although,the present
site plan is not dependent upon the island and canopy components,we anticipate proceeding with these
items following dismissal of the appeal.
We request that you and the Planning Board continue to support the enhancement of this project site. We
look forward to discussing this proposal at your next scheduled Planning Board meeting.
POST OFFICE BOX 1964•SPRINGFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS 01101 •4131781.7444
Y
._ A
TOWN OF AGAWAM
1� 36 ti1AIN STREET AGAWAM. VIASSACHI:SETTS 01001
y • Tel. 4I3-7 56-0400
� M
MEMO
TO: Building Inspector, Engineering Dept., Fire 5/e t., Police Dept.
FROM: Planning Board .
DATE: July 8, 1999
SUBJECT: Amended Site Plan - F.L. Roberts - 634 Main Street
The attached Amended Site Plan will be discussed at the Planning Board's July 15 ' meeting. The
plan is not complete, but if you would review it conceptually the.Board would appreciate it.
Thank you.
lUu, I° o b f e +A^ w L'fk t +� L&Lx&at-
�5
DSD:prk 5
Se�v�S AGAWAM FIRE DEPARTMENT_
APPROVAL
DATE........... f 9
SIGN,,, ..�...,,.,IL�/.FF//.��//�...�•�"D[!.�'!ArD:St!-`l.'�:Il• .,
5:
F. L. ROBERTS AND COMPANY
Deliver To; Debbie Dachos Date: July 2, 1999
Transmittal Agawam Planning Board
From. Jeff Pechulis Ile: 634Main Street BP Station
F.L. Roberts and Company is pleased to submit to you for distribution 10 copies of a revised conceptual
site plan for the above referenced project. As you may recall, F.L. Roberts presented a plan to the Planning
Avard that included redevelopment of the entire site including relocating the pump islands and installing a
customized colonial canopy. The original plan was approved by the Planning Board for recommendation
to the Board of Appeals. Similarly,the original site plan was approved by the Board of Appeals.
Subsequent to the Board of Appeals approval, the decision was appealed,
F.L. Roberts has redesigned the site so that it eliminates construction of the controversial items(island
relocation and canopy construction)of which the appeal was based on. We believe that this revised plan,
similar to the original plan,enhances the operations and aesthetics of the project site. Although,the present
site plan is not dependent upon the island and canopy components, we anticipate proceeding with these
items following dismissal of the appeal.
We request that you and the Planning Board continue to support the enhancement of this project site. We
look forward to discussing this proposal at your next scheduled Planning Board meeting.
r
POST OFFICE BOX 1964•SPRiNGF1ELO,MASSACHUSErTS 01101 •413/781.7444
! i
A
TOWN OF AGAWAM
36 MAIN STREET AGAWAN[, MASSACHUSETTS 01001
y • Tel. 410-7 96-0400
MEMO
TO: AGAWAM PLANNING BOARD
FROM:. DEBORAH S. DACHOS, DIRECTOR
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND COMMUNLTY'DEVELOPMENT
SUBJECT: CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT/F.L.ROBERTS - MAIN STREET
DATE: DULY 8, 1999
The Planning Office has received a "Conceptual Layout" for F-L. Roberts, 634 Main Street. To
refresh you memories, the Planning Board approved the Site Plan for this site on October 15, 1998.
A copy of the approval letter is attached for-your information. One of the conditions of the Board's
approval was the issuance of a Special Permit by the Board of Appeals. The Board of Appeal's
decision is also attached. The Board of Appeals' decision has been appealed and the Inspector of
Buildings will not issue a Building Permit for the work shown on the approved plan.
The applicant is now requesting that the Planning Board approve a new plan. The plan conforms with
all the approved portions of the old plan except for the configuration of the gas islands. Since this
is the area in dispute, the applicant is asking that the Board conditionally approve the construction
of the new convenience building, lighting, landscaping and sidewalk while awaiting the court decision
with regard to the new location of the gas pumps and canopy. If the court case is decided in the favor
ofthe'applicant, the plan approved by the Board on October 15'would then be implemented. The
traffic flow through the site and its relation to traffic on Leland Avenue is obviously better on the
approved plan.
The Plan received from the applicant is for discussion purposes only and does not contain all the
details of the earlier plan. If the Board supports this request a complete plan must be submitted.
A;,q
o TOWN OF AGAWAM
rI _ 0 36 NIAIN STREET ACAWA.%-1, L-kSSACHUSETTS 01001
Tel. 413-7 86-0400
o�A�El3 MPy`
October 16, 1998
Mr. Steven Roberts
F.L. Roberts & Co., Inc.
93 West Broad Street
Springfield, MA 01 101
Dear Mr. Roberts-
At its duly called meeting held on October 15, 1998, the Agawam Planning Board voted to
approve the Site Plan entitled "F.L.Roberts, Main St. Gas Station/Convenience Store, Agawam,.
Massachusetts prepared by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. and dated September 16, 1998, revised
October 13, 1998 with the following conditions:
1. All comments contained within the Memo from the Agawam Engineering
Department and dated October 15, 1998 shall be addressed.
2. Board of Appeals approval of a Special Permit.
3_ If the hours of operation are to be extended beyond the present operating hours,
the applicant must return to the Planning Board so that the lighting plan can be
further studied.
Three(3) copies of the revised Site Plan shall be submitted to the-Planning Board. Ifyou have
any questions, please contact the Planning Board at 786-0400, extension 283.
m
3>
Sincerely, o _
Charles R. Calabrese, Chairman
Agawam Planning Board
N
_ r
cc: Cleric Z'
DPW
Building
Board of Appeals
VHB
File
'r
TO U".V OF AGAWAillf
0- 36 ,�I.4 IN STREET
AG.4;V.IW, A 14 01001 1'���
•Y•
DECISION OF BOARD OF APPEALS
Petition of: F. L. Roberts &- Company
Premises affected - 632-634 Main Street
Date - January 12, 1999
Case r 1587
The Board of Appeals conducted public hearings on November 5, 1998; Dezember 3, 1998 and
December 17, 1998 and a public meeting on December 17. 1998 at the Agawam .Middle School
Cafeteria, 68 Main Street. Agawam. Vim for all parties interested in the appeal of F. L. Roberts
and Company, who is seeking a Special Permit in accordance with Section 180-7, Paragraph B
(2) of the Zoning Ordinances. which would allow :or the alteration or enlargement of the existing
facility at the premises identified as 632-634 Main Street, Agawam, LNIA.
:he Aizawam Zoning, Board of appeals, after said public hearings and meetings duly noticed, and .
after a thorough review of the tac,s presented at the public hearings and after an"on-site"
^.srectior, find the ta[Icwing:
1. The subject ,property is located in a Business A. District zone.
?. The subject property at 634 Main Street is utilized as a gasoline filling station,
which use includes a small convenience store.
3. The petitioner recently purchased the abutting property located at 632 Main Street
for the purpose of merging both lots for the expansion of the gasoline station and
Convenience store.
4, The petitioner proposes to demolish the residence at 632 Main Street to
accommodate a new 1,972 square foot convenience store, which will meet all
zoning requirements.
5. The petitioner has requested to be allowed to replace the existing structure with
two gasoline dispensers, with a proposed structure which will include four multi-
product gasoline dispensers with a 37 foot by 61 foot canopy.
6. The petitioner has requested that the proposed business be allowed to operate on a
24-hour basis.
Case 1587 Decision continued IlQQye
I�IJJ rf'..• t •J � 1'i `J•
7. - A plan prepared by VHB, Inc., 101 Walnut Street. P. 0. Box 9151, Watertown,
NIA, dated 9/16/98 for the proposed project.
9. 1vIr. Richard Bellico, representing the Agawam Historical Commission, spoke in
favor of this petition.
10. The immediate area surrounding 632-634 '-Main Street is comprised of a mixture of
retail businesses, service Facilities and residential structures.
1 1. Opposition was expressed both at the public hearings and in written form by
several area residents. Their concerns included increased vehicular traffic,
vehicular and pedestrian safety, the operation of this business on a 24-hour basis,
and the alteration and expansion of the non-conforming structure.
12. A gasoline filling station is an allowed use under Agawam Zoning Ordinances,
Business A Districts, Section 180-44 {E). A convenience store is also an allowed
use under Section 180--P (B) of the Agawam Zoning Ordinances.
I3. Section 130-7 B (2) of the Agawam Zonina Ordinances states that a building,
structure or land being put to a non-conforming use may be altered or enlarged in
that use, but only after the granting of a permit thereof by the Board of Appeals'.
14. The proposed project is an improvement over that which already exists; especially
in regard to vehicular and pedestrian safety. The creation of visible and separate
sidewalks and the repositioning of the gasoline dispensers will help slow down and
direct the appropriate traffic flows.
15. The proposed canopy is an integral part of the gasoline dispensing structure.
16. The proposed project, subject to the conditions herein, will not increase beyond
the existing setback.
17. This Board has not found justification to allow the business to remain open on an
24-hour basis.
18. The proposed structure and use is not substantially more detrimental to the
neighborhood than is the existing non-conforming structure and use.
19. The proposed structure and use, subject to the conditions set forth herein, will not
adversely affect the health, safety or property values of the neighborhood.
20. The proposed project, subject to the conditions'set forth herein, will not be against
the public interest or detrimental or injurious to the character of the neighborhood.
'Case 9 1587 Decision continued
2 L. The proposed project, subject to the conditions set forth herein, are in harmony
with the general purposes and intent of the Town of Agawam Zoning Ordinance.
Now, therefore, the Zoning Board of Appeals, by the unanimous vote of its three members,
hereby grants t' a petitioner a Special Permit under Sew ien 130-7, Paragraph B (2) of the
Agawam Zerlina Ordinanc_s or the alteration and enlarae:nent of the structure and use of the
subject property as a gasoline filling station and a convenience store with the following
conditions:
1. The proposed project's setback shall not be altered or enlarged beyond the current
setback, the farthest section of the canopy located in the southeast corner of the
property shall be at the existing setback of eight (8') feet with the northeast corner
at a setback of nineteen (19') feet, and all other Town of Agawam Business A
Districts zoning requirements must be met.
2. The petitioner shall construct the new "F. L. Roberts,.Main Street Gas
Station/Conve:nence Store" according to the plans submitted at the public hearing
on December 17, 1998 and signed by the members of this Board.
a. A:1 state and 1-cc--I bu idins rzquir,!rnems ir'iusi be met.
4. The petitioner s .-allowed to sail pre-packaged rinvenience foods only.
There is to be no food preparation. in-store seating, in-store concessions or
vendors such as, but not exclusive of or limited to, McDonald's Express, Dunkin'
Donuts, Blimpie.'s, etc.
5. The fueling, re-fueling and/or servicing of tractor-trailers is prohibited.
fi. The petitioner shall construct this project in accordance with drawings submitted
regarding building materials and fixtures and lighting illumination.
7. There is to be no parting of service vehicles across sidewalks or into the streets.
8. Business hours shall be 5:00 A.-NI. to 1:00 A.M. daily.
9. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the petitioner shall obtain any and all
applicable approvals from Town Boards, including but not limited to Planning
Board, Conservation Commission and any other applicable board or commission.
10. The petitioner shall record with the Hampden County Registry of Deeds a"Notice
of Special Permit" form.
5
Case rc 1537 Decision continued
11. This Permit shall be null and void if construction does not commence within two
(2) years from the date of this decision.
12. This Special Permit, as to the hours of operation (5:00 A.M. to 1:00 A.M.) shall
remain in effect for one (1) year from the date of this decision. The petitioner is
required to file a renewal application with this Board at least sixty(60) days prior
to expiration for the purpose of reviewing the hours of operation.
Doreen Prouty. C. �• H a, e D ra Curtis! f�
I Cl:1tTiFr THAT THIS I5 A nut :.w,av �; THE
CERTIPICAT,c.
TOWN OF ru;,i,:,il. 'IS, 1i.5_A.
0 0
F. L. RQB ERTS AND C OMPANY
Deliver To: Debbie Dachos Date: July 2, 1999
Transmittal Agawam Planning Board
From: Jeff Pechulis Re: 634 Main Street BP Station
F.L. Roberts and Company is pleased to submit to you for distribution 10 copies of a revised conceptual
site plan for the above referenced project. As you may recall, F.L. Roberts presented a plan to the Planning
Board that included redevelopment of the entire site including relocating the pump islands and installing a
customized colonial canopy. The original plan was approved by the Planning Board for recommendation
to the Board of Appeals. Similarly, the original site plan was approved by the Board of Appeals.
Subsequent to the Board of Appeals approval,the decision was appealed.
F.L. Roberts has redesigned the site so that it eliminates construction of the controversial items(island
relocation and canopy construction)of which the appeal was based on. We believe that this revised plan,
similar to the original plan, enhances the operations and aesthetics of the project site. Although,the present
site plan is not dependent upon the island and canopy components,we anticipate proceeding with these
items following dismissal of the appeal.
We request that you and the Planning Board continue to support the enhancement of this project site. We
look forward to discussing this proposal at your next scheduled Planning Board meeting,
1Z ,/mil•' .�..
1�
POST OFFICE BOX 1964•SPRINGFIELO,MASSACHUSETTS 01101 •4131781.7444
A :
TOWN OF AGAWAM
36 MAIN STREET AGAWANI, MASSACHUSETTS 01001
- Tel. 413-7,96-0400
MEMO
TO: Building Inspector, Engineering Dept., Fire Dept., Police Dept.
FROM: Planning Board
DATE: July 8, 1999
SUBJECT: Amended Site Plan - F.L. Roberts - 634 Main Street
The attached Amended Site Plan-will be discussed at the Planning Board's July 15' meeting. The
plan is not complete, but if you would review it conceptually the.Board would appreciate it.
Thank you.
DSD:prk
10/27/98 TUE 09:37 FAX � 0001
*.L. ROBERTS & CO! NC. 'A"
A -
IFIL!J20BERTS
Fax to number. ,
Montion: r,� J 41?S� _
Date:
From,
Number of pages:
r
Additional commenb:
� F
F. L. Roberts & Co. Inc.
93 West Broad Street !
P.O. Box 1964
Sprfngtleld, MA 01102-1964
Phone 413-781-7444
Fax 413-781-4328
o N
.
► - - 3 [i=
TOO
oe
h
- 1 n
� o
jewWje
Zvi
OK -lei ftf
ofjeA( '01
W � �
je
o �o�
zoo %VJ L£=60 301 961L910i
i
o U N 1-
v
� Z
£DOo Xdd 6£.'60 $flL 86/LZ/OT
r
1
a
rood XVi 6E:80 BILL 86ILZIOT
a
t
e00� YV4 6E:60 W11 96/LZ/Oi
o TOWN OF AGAWAM
rI _ •36 MAIN STREET AGAWAM, NI-ASSACHUSETTS 01001
y�C � Tel. 413-786-0400
�pRT'E� Mph
October 16, 1998
Mr. Steven Roberts
F.L. Roberts & Co., Inc.
93 West Broad Street
Springfield, MA 01101
Dear Mr. Roberts:
At its duly called meeting held on October 15, 1998, the Agawam Planning Board voted to
approve the Site Plan entitled "F.L.Roberts, Main St. Gas Station/Convenience Store, Agawam,
Massachusetts prepared by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. and dated September 16, 1998, revised
October 13, 1998 with the following conditions:
1. All comments contained within the Memo from the Agawam Engineering
Department and dated October 15, 1998 shall be addressed.
2. Board of Appeals approval of a Special Permit.
3. If the hours of operation are to be extended beyond the present operating hours,
the applicant must return to the Planning Board so that the lighting plan can be
further studied.
Three (3) copies of the revised Site Plan shall be submitted to the-Planning Board. If you have
any questions, please contact the Planning Board at 786-0400, extension 283.
o c.
Sincerely, �C-) D
3
Charles R. Calabrese, Chairman
Agawam Planning Board
N
Z" �^
cc: Clerk
DPW
Building
Board of Appeals
VHB
File
r
TOWN OF AGAWAM
O� 9
INTEROFFICE
MEMORANDUM a MP
To: Planning Board
CC: File, JTG
From: Engineering
Date: October 15, 1998
Subject: Site Plan - F.L. Roberts Gas Station - Main Street - SP 320
Per your request dated October 14, 1998, we have reviewed the plan entitled "F.L.
Roberts Main St. Gas Station/Convenience Store, Agawam, Massachusetts" prepared
by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. of Watertown, MA, scale 1"=20', dated 9/16/98,
last rev. 10/13/98, and we have the following comments:
1. The title block should show the street address 634 Main Street.
2. No trees or shrubs should be planted within the Town, State, or County
right-of-ways. The Town plans to construct a new water main in the vicinity of
these proposed shrubs.
3. Proposed sewer size, inverts, and a building sewer detail should be shown on
the utility plan. Also, the existing water service is 3/4" copper. The applicant should
verify whether a larger size line is needed by Fixture demand calculations.
4. The Town will accept drainage from the site into the existing drainage system
in Leland Avenue, provided that the catch basin and manhole on subject site must be
maintained to prevent fuel or oil from entering the Town drainage system.
5. A State curb cut permit is required for the curb cut on Main Street. According
to Tim Meyer of Mass Highway District 2, as of 10/15/98, they have not received an
application for this permit. Also, State and Town permits will be required for
sawcutting the existing roads. The plans should show a trench repair detail (for
possible cases where utilities are placed in the Town layout).
P.L. Roberts - 634 Main Street
September 30, 1998
Page 2
6. All concrete sidewalks within the public right-of-way should have a cross pitch
of 1/4" per foot as per the Town of Agawam DPW Standards.
7. The applicant should submit a traffic flow diagram. In particular, we are
concerned with possible conflicts from vehicles backing out of the business to the
south across Leland Ave. We still recommend that the Main Street driveway be right
in and right out only. According to Tim Meyer of Mass Highway, typically the State
does not require this condition because they consider it to be difficult to enforce.
8. All curbing within the public right-of-way should be vertical granite.
Please let us know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
ames T. Daley, P.E.
Town Engineer
h:lengineerksiteplan\sp320_2.wpd
MEMO
TO: Engineering Department
FROM: Planning Board
DATE: October 14, 1998
SUBJECT: Site Plan - Main Street - F.L. Roberts
Please review and comment on the attached revised Site Plan for F.L. Roberts prior to the
Board's October 15th meeting.
Thank you.
DSD:prk
F AGE
a TOWN OF AGA�WAM
36 MAIN STREET kGAtiVA\,I. NI,,kSSACHL,SETTS 01001
Tel. 413 86-0400
October 5, 1998
Mr. Steven Roberts
F. L. Roberts & Co., Inc.
93 West Broad Street
Springfield, MA 01101
Dear Mr. Roberts:
As you are aware, the Planning Board discussed your proposed Site Plan for 634 Main Street at
its October I, 1998 meeting. During the discussion, the Board requested that the following
changes be made to the plan:
1. Address Engineering comments.
2. Area behind the building must be sealed.
3. Grade to Main Street must be flattened.
4. Possible colonial design for sign.
5. Safe pedestrian access through site.
6. Plantings along northern property line should be larger.
Please address these items for the Board's October 15, I998 meeting, If you have any questions,
please contact the Planning Office at 786-0400, extension 283.
Sincerely,
Charles R. Calabrese, Chairman
Agawam Planning Board
cc: DPW
File
0 • [Feago
DONAHUE & CROSS, F.C.
Attorneys at Law
Market Place
1365 Main Street
Springfield, Massachusetts 01103
Telephone(413) 733-4147
Fax (413)737-2512
John F. Donahue Cheryl I. Smith
Judith A. Cross September 28, 1998
Via Facsimile Transmission & First Class Mail
Charles Calabrese, Chairman
Agawam Planning Board
36 Main Street
Agawam, MA 01001
Re: Agenda Item #2
Site Plan Review for F.L. Roberts BP Station on Main Street
Dear Mr. Calabrese:
I am sending this letter regarding the above referenced site plan which is scheduled to
be reviewed by you at the Planning Board meeting on Thursday, October 1, 1998.
Unfortunately, because of another meeting that I have that evening, I am unable to
attend. However, my absence is not a reflection of my concern over the proposed site
plan which has been filed with the Board. In fact, my brother Rob Cross, an engineer
and contractor will be there in my place.
I had an opportunity to review the site plan. By this letter I am expressing my concerns
regarding the project. This letter is not being written in a representative capacity. It is,
however, written to express my concern as an abutter living directly across the street
from the existing station and from the proposed new project which is being planned. I
live at 629 Main Street and am one of the four abutters who are directly impacted by this
project and by your decision regarding the site plan. These concerns are not solely
mine. They are representative of many of the people in the neighborhood many of
whom will be attending Thursday's meeting.
I understand from the building inspector, much to my surprise as well as his, that the
property across the street was zoned Business A through a zone change in the late
1960's. My review of the Zoning By-Laws (Section 180-44B) indicates that services
provided in Business A must be "intended for residents of the immediate vicinity." With
that in mind, I would ask you to carefully scrutinize the proposed project and site plan
submitted for your review in relation to its impact on the safety and welfare of the
immediate vicinity. I am fully aware that while the project may ae_perm(`ssi6li.within its
zone, the Planning Board, nevertheless, has the Vjuri eview the site, lan with
an eye toward its impact, negative or otherwise, on iateneigliborhbod.
,;,�d
gEP 3 Q 19
. � AfAtt !� ' St_,r� ••����,
kJ
• •
Mr. Charles Calabrese
September 29, 1998
Page 2
My concerns as well as those of my neighbors falls into two very broad categories which
I will address in detail.
1. Safe .
A. Dangerous Existing Intersection.
The intersection of Main and Leland Street is already a dangerous
intersection as can be verified by the Police Department records of accidents
involving both pedestrians and motor vehicles which have occurred in that location
in the last two years. Many of these have occurred when I have been home and,
in one instance, almost in my driveway. Both the existing intersection as well the
entrances to the current BP Station and the Corner Deli are the source of the
problem. Main Street, as you should know, is a highly traveled road and
resembles more a highway than it does a residential street through a soon to be
designated historic district. The traffic during the Riverside season only increases
the burdens placed on Main Street as well as those who either live on it or must
access it on a regular basis.
B. New Intersection.
In looking at the plan which is to be reviewed by you, it appears that there
will be a new entrance off Main Street into the proposed convenience store. This
proposed new entrance will now add to the already dangerous situation and
create another potentially dangerous intersection, that of Albert and Main Streets
since the exit is now located closed to Albert Street.
I would strongly suggest, prior to your approving this plan, that you and the
Board spend a little time in the area, particularly during the busy times (i.e.
morning commutes, evening commutes and Saturday mornings in particular). It
will be very clear to you what the safety concerns are if you observe this area
during this time. You will see on a regular basis heavy traffic exiting from
Westfield Bank onto Main Street north and south in close proximity to the Main
and Leland Streets intersection. You will also see that Albert Street, which is
heavily used, will become a factor of traffic feeding in and out should the new
access be allowed as proposed.
In reality for those of us who live in the area and, particularly for me since
my driveway exits directly onto Main Street, it is more a "bumper car" and "dodge-
em" atmosphere more appropriate for an amusement park than it is for a main
Mr. Charles Calabrese
September 29, 1998
Page 3
intersection in town. Backing out of my driveway as it is now is very often an
adventure of questionable safety. I cannot tell you how many near misses in
trying to back from my driveway onto Main Street from both people who are
coming from the gas station on Leland Street or the already existing convenience
store and trying to beat the traffic across Main Street. It was only about two
weeks ago when I had my nearest miss as I was backing out of my driveway and
someone exiting the BP Station onto Main Street, again trying to beat the traffic
and come across Main, came within inches of rear-ending my vehicle as I was
almost across Main Street. I do not foresee this situation improving with the
project that is being proposed.
C. Traffic Flow.
It is clear to me in reviewing the plan that a significant increase in traffic
flowing onto and out of the Roberts' property can be expected_ This must be
considered in light of the already dangerous nature of this intersection and the
traffic generated by the existing businesses accessing Main Street in this
immediate area. It is my understanding that no traffic studies (current and
proposed) have been submitted by F.L_ Roberts to either you or the Engineering
Department, I would suggest, at a minimum, that approval on this plan be
delayed until such studies have been submitted to you in order to allow you to
make an appropriate decision as to the proposed driveways as they are shown
on the plan.
D. Mass. Highway Department.
also spoke with a Permit Engineer at the Mass. Highway Department who
informs me that Mass. Highway Department must approve any projects
which either call for curb cut changes or which would result in a substantial
increase in traffic in and out of the existing or proposed facility. In
speaking with Mass. Highway last week, I was informed that no application
for their review has been received from F.L. Roberts even though it
appears from my discussion with them that their review and approval is
necessary.
E. Plan Exits.
The plan poorly defines the exit from the gas pumps onto Leland Street.
It appears that the existing access will not be changed. Again, I would suggest
that prior to your review that you view this corner at various times during the
I
• - i
Mr. Charles Calabrese
September 29, 1998
Page 4
course of the day. In essence, the current exits from both the BP Station as well
as the Deli and Corner Store access directly onto the crosswalk across Leland
Street so that pedestrians are in no way protected. In fact, there have been
several pedestrian accidents from cars that have either been pulling out of the gas
station or backing out of the convenience store.
2. Screening/Buffer for Noise and Visibility.
Many of my concerns here are as a direct "across the street" abutter which
are concerns shared also by the immediate abutters located on both Leland and
Parker Streets. I would ask this Board to also consider in reviewing the proposed
plan for the landscape screening and buffer that the area's future designation as
an historic district may be detrimentally impacted by the Roberts' project.
A. Landscape/Buffer.
The plan does not appear to adequately protect the abutting properties,
including mine, from the lighting which would be generated by both the headlight
glare, the lighting on the exterior of buildings and fixed poles, and most
particularly, the canopy which is being proposed to be built over the gas pumps.
While the immediate neighbors may appear to be protected from headlight glare
from the six-foot fence proposed for the project, it does not address the impact
on my property. According to the plan, the entire side facing my home will be
completely visible with no landscape screening of any sort other than a few
junipers. In essence, because of the location of the convenience store on the
property, I will have a full unobstructed view of the side of a commercial building
and parking spaces into which there will be a constant flow of cars. There is no
provision in this plan to provide an area densely planted with shrubs or trees of
sufficient height to provide a year-round dense screen to shield me from both the
lights and the noise of cars constantly starting who have been parked at the side
of the store. The immediate neighbors also appear to be looking at a six-foot
fence which is not softened by any type of extensive landscaping barrier to make
it more attractive from their perspective or to shield them from lighting glare, gas
fumes and increased truck and car noises.
B. Hour of Operation/Noise.
We are most concerned regarding the hours of operation of this store.
Most F.L. Roberts convenience stores are 24-hour operations_ If this is their plan,
then the Planning Board should scrutinize extremely carefully the provisions for
9 9
Mr. Charles Calabrese
September 29, 1998
Page 5
screening and buffer for neighbors including myself who will have to deal with the
noise generated by delivery trucks for gas and otherwise coming in at all hours
of the night. If this is the case, you should also be concerned with the headlight
glare, the noise of cars and trucks starting and stopping and the general kind of
offensive noise and light associated with both a gas station and convenience
store. This would also mandate relative to the project since a 24-hour operation
would generate and enormous amount of traffic in addition to that which is already
existing.
C. Canopy.
The proposed canopy is also an area of concern. The two other gas
stations which are within a half-mile of the station have canopies_ A drive by at
night will show that these canopies are extremely visible and brightly lighted. You
can only assume that the canopy proposed with this project would be similar. The
architecture may be different to try to conform with the historic district, but the
basic fact remains that it will be brightly lit and extremely visible to all of us who
are immediate abutters. A six-foot fence will not shield any of us from the impact
of the canopy.
In summary then, I would ask this Board to carefully consider what appears to be a
project with a very negative impact on our neighborhood by this proposed project. While
I understand that as long as it meets the requirements of the Zoning By-Laws, the
project cannot be stopped as long as it serves the needs of"the immediate vicinity", the
Planning Board does have the authority to insure that there is minimal impact on the
neighborhood in terms of safety, which is a primary concern, and also in the quality of
life that we as abutters should be able to enjoy in that neighborhood. While concededly
the existing house which is scheduled to be razed is an "eye-sore", at least from the
point of view of the neighbors, the house is surrounded by trees and heavy shrubbery
so that the impact is minimized. No such buffer or screening is proposed as part of the
new project by F.L. Roberts. It is left to you as the Planning Board to insure that
provisions are made for that purpose. I would also point out that Roberts only recently
acquired the property they plan to build the store on, full well knowing the problems with
the area. It is they, then, who should bear the risk that their plans may have to change
to accommodate the already existing character of this neighborhood.
I would appreciate being informed of your decision as I understand that there is a right
of appeal to the Board of Appeals regarding this matter. I am, however, confident that
you will take into consideration the concerns that I have voiced as well as are voiced by
the concerns of those other abutters in the immediate area. We are not looking to
9 0
Mr. Charles Calabrese
September 29, 1998
Page 6
obstruct progress, however, we do not expect progress to impact the quality of life that
we enjoy in the neighborhood.
Thank you for your consideration.
5:T
ruly y urs,
A. �ROSS
JACIsg
MEMO
To: Planning Board
From: Sgt. Draghetti
Subject: FL Roberts - 634 Main Street
Date: October 1, 1998
On October 1, 1998 a site inspection of 634 Main Street was conducted, my findings are as
follows:
Roadway - Main street is a paved asphalt surface running in a north 1 south direction. The road is
approx. 40 feet wide, with 12 foot travel lanes and 8 foot breakdown lanes. The road is a heavily
traveled primary road and has commuter traffic flow in the morning and afternoon. Lealand Ave
is a residential side street. It is a paved asphalt road approx 24 foot in width and runs in an east /
west direction.
Visibility - There is good visibility on Main Street northerly to route 57 a distance of approx
4/10ths mile and southerly past Agawam Center.
Lighting - There are street lights in close proximity to the site.
Traffic Controls - There are no parking signs posted on both sides of Main Street and parking is
prohibited on Main Street. The posted speed limit on Main Street is 35 mph. There is an
automated traffic control approx 1/10th mile south of the site at Main Street and School Street.
Lealand Ave has no posted speed limit and parking is allowed on Lealand Ave.
Sidewalks - There are sidewalks on both sides of Main Street. There are no sidewalks in the area
of the site on Lealand Ave.
School Zones - The area of the site is located in'a school zone and is across the street from
Phelps Elementary School.
Playgrounds - There is a playground to the rear of Phelps Elementary School and the Agawam
Little League Fields are approx 3/10 ths mile from the site on School Street.
Parking - The site plan calls for 9 parking spaces with one reserved for handicap parking. This is
in compliance with the Town of Agawam Parking Ordinance.
Traffic Unit Impact Estimates - none provided
Other - The proposed sidewalk on Main Street is a definite improvement over the current
sidewalk and should increase pedestrian safety.
A
TOWN OF AGAWAM
INTEROFFICE
y
MEMORANDUM p MPy
To: Planning Board
CC: pile, JTG, Tim Meyer - Mass Highway District 2
From: Engineering
Date: October 1, 1998
Subject: Site Plan - F.L. Roberts Gas Station - Main Street - SP 320
Per your request, we have reviewed the plan entitled "F.L. Roberts Main St. Gas
Station/Convenience Store, Agawam, Massachusetts" prepared by 'Vanasse Hangen
Brustlin, Inc. of Watertown, MA, scale V=20', dated 9/16/98, and we have the
following comments:
1. The title block should show the street address 634 Main Street.
2. No trees or shrubs should be planted within the Town, State, or County right-
of-ways. The Town plans to construct a new water main in the vicinity of some of
these proposed shrubs. The plan should include the note "All plantings must be
maintained and that portion of the public way abutting the parcel and including the
treebelt shall be maintained in a safe and attractive condition by the owner."
3. The sewer and water services should be separated by a minimum of 10 feet (8
feet shown on plan). Proposed sewer size and inverts should be shown on the utility
plan. Also, the existing water service is 3/4" copper. The applicant should verify
whether a larger size line is needed by fixture demand calculations.
4. We recommend that catch basins be added in line with the proposed drain line
near the western radii of the proposed driveway off of Main Street to intercept the
runoff from the driveway prior to its entering the site. The proposed site drainage is
unacceptable. The applicant should either design a trench drain to intercept the site
runoff before it enters Leland Avenue, or should regrade the site to drain to
additional proposed catch basins.
- , •40
F.L. Roberts - 634 Main treet
September 30, 1998
Page 2
5. We recommend that the site plan show a proposed cement concrete sidewalk
along Main Street instead of the proposed bituminous sidewalk.
6. A State curb cut permit may be required for the curb cut on Main Street.
Also, State and Town permits will be required for sawcutting the existing roads. The
plans should show a building sewer detail and a trench repair detail (for possible cases
where utilities are placed in the Town layout).
7. The applicant should show detailed existing conditions for the neighboring
business to the south at 644 Main Street, including the parking Iot and the area in
front of the building up to the curb along Main Street and to the edge of pavement of
Leland Ave. This information is necessary for us to analyze the safety of the
proposed 78.5 foot curb cut along Leland Ave, and to consider possible alternatives to
this design. Typically, we do not allow curb cuts greater than 30 feet.
8. We recommend that if possible, the applicant consider allowing only right
turns in and out of the Main Street driveway. It may be possible to achieve this with
a different traffic path site layout. By copy of this letter to District 2 of Mass
Highway, we are requesting that they require this condition.
9. The site plan should show curbing around the two southernmost parking
spaces in the western parking area, unless there is a reason to omit curbing in this
area.
10. The Owner should file a Form A. application to combine the two existing lots
into one new lot.
11 . Parking guidelines for general retail stores is 1 and 1/2 spaces per 200 square
feet of retail area. This would amount to 15 spaces required for the proposed store.
However, due to the high rate of turnover at a convenience store, this number of
spaces may be excessive.
Please let us know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
James T. Daley, P.E.
Town Engineer
t� F AGq
Jt TOWN OF AGAWAM
36 MAIN STREET AGAWAM. MASSACHUSETTS 01001
y •� Tel. 413-86-0400
�1
ro�q MPS`
MEMO RECEIVED
SEP I d 1998
TO: Building Inspector, Engineering, Police Dept., Fire Dept.
AGAwA&48U1LDrNG DEFT
FROM: Planning Board
DATE: September 18, 1998
SUBJECT: Site Plan - 634 Main Street - F.L. Roberts & Co., Inc. - Agawam BP
Please review and comment on the attached Site Plan for F.L. Roberts& Co., Inc. on 634 Main
Street prior to the Board's October 1st, meeting.
Thank you.
DSD/jq
4
i
� F AGq
TOWN OF AGAWAM
elk 36 \MAIN STREET AGAWANI, \4:-kSSACHUSETTS 01001
Tel. 413-7 86-0400
�RATEQ Mai
MEMO
TO: Building Inspector, Engineering, Police Dept., Fire Dept.
FROM: Planning Board
DATE: September 18, 1998
SUBJECT: Site Plan - 634 Main Street - F.L. Roberts& Co., Inc. - Agawam BP
Please review and comment on the attached Site Plan for F.L. Roberts &'Co., Inc. on 634 Main
Street prior to the Board's October 1 st, meeting.
Thank you.
DSDIjq
AGAWAiNt PLANNING BOARD
Form D
Application for Site Pion Approved
Please complete the following form and rcturrn it and 10 copies of the Site Plan to:
Agawam Plarming Board
Office of Planning and Community Development
36 Main Street
Agawam, MA 01001
1. Name of Business Agawam BP
Address 634 Main Street
Name of.�pplicant/Owncr F. L. Roberts and Company.., Incorporate
Address 93 West Broad Street, Springfield, MA 01101
Telephone (413) 7 81-7 4 4 4
3. Vamc ofBn#ccr/Arcldtcct .Vanasse Han&zn RrtiGt7 in Tor.
Address 101 Walnut Street , P. O. Box 9151
Watertown, MA 02471
Tele-phone 617-924-1770
4. Please give a brief description of the proposed project:
Demolition of present gasoline dispensers and store and
house located at 632 Main Street and construction of an improved
1972 square foot store , 4 multi-product gasoline dispensers and
a canopy.
t
i
SEP 1 7 1998
Rev. 2114/94 PLANNINQ
r
. :.
� f
aft—
f
a
eF-
Town of Ag-awamBeautification
commends
-� � .�► a �: o�., za
i
for outstandingr to nt of Agawam
6 f,
.. .l �+.,� .�,i• Mµ BOARDOF
T s ft �.w3a.•�,d�-e --e wr'iYY]P4f�st�:r:�x•� _''",';sr - �• - � ^•s.:. - - 7 .=y.,,•�:. .. ,a_ —a,, •:at-!:i•tsr•,._F�q...,.r�.
- '`'� ;-- .. .ram, _ .� . ... _ — - .- _ ... _'�� .S' C,• ., - .:.J`•, - - _
;�� .1;r,. •.r"• „R.. �.r.. ,r._. :..= 3lR'i� 'ia :•en.,�. ��.rti,.a wr.•;.'.te<�.y,y*'7.t•:a:w���r�i� ..'tiv��.F,h,;ra.._t=:...y,..::�.=.a�,.1r..{.:�55,+d'ti..�,.;.,�:.:_.: .:r�eP+:`�y�+w a'ei.� r•:..1:: ..i:'�:
SEP 29 '98 69:49 P,2i7
DONAH.UE & CROSS, ,P.C.
Attorneys at Law
Market Place
1365.Main Street
Springfield, Massadumts 01103
Telephone(413)733-4147
Fax(413)737-2512 .
John ' . Donahue C'hetyl L Smith
1u�ith °ss September 28, 1998
,a Facsimile Transmission &First Class bail
.yarfes Calabrese, Chairman
jawam Planning Board
_3 plain Street
..-a warn, MA 01001
} Agenda Item #2
Site Plan Review for F.L. Roberts BP Station on Main Street
L;gar Mr. Calabrese:
.arn sending this letter regarding the above referenced site plan which is scheduled to
;eviawed by you at the Planning Board meeting on Thursday, October' 1, 1998.
�. c�,;nately, because of another meeting that I have that evening, I am unable to
„C. However, my absence is not a reflection of my concern over the proposed site
which has been fled with the Board. In fact, my brother Rob Cross, an engineer
„.;•1, contractor will be there in my place.
nad a.- opportunity to review the site plan- By this letter I am expressing my concerns
regarding the project. This letter is not being written in a representative capacity. . It-is,
W s:•��;� r, written to express my concern as an abutter living directly across the street
fi om the existing station and from the proposed new project which is being planned. I
+. .,: at 529 Main Street and am one of the four abutters who are directly impacted by this
-�je and by your decision regarding the site plan. These concerns are not solely
They are representative of many of the people in the neighborhood many of
:.nr will be attending Thursday's meeting.
;:)derstand from the building inspector, much to my surprise as well as his, that the
s.operty across the street was zoned Business A through a zone change in the late
My review of the Zoning By-Laws (Section 180-448) indicates that services
.::w,Jded in Business A must be "intended for residents of the immediate vicinity." With
it :Hind, I would ask you to carefully scrutinize the proposed.project and site plan
rl�rnir`�d for your review in relation to its impact on the safety and welfare of the
1.-2Liate vicinity, I am fully aware that while the project may be permissible within its
lh.e Planning Board, nevertheless, has the jurisdiction to review the site plan with
eye toward its impact, negative or otherwise, on the immediate neighborhood.
r 'CEP 29 198 09:50 P.3/7-
1 1
-hides Calabrese
: y:ernber 29, 1998
;a 7
My concerns as well as those of my neighbors falls into two very broad categories which
I will address in detail.
1. Sa
A. Dangerous Existing Intersection.
9 9
The intersection of Main and Leland Street is already a dangerous
intersection as can be verified by the Police Department records of accidents
involving both pedestrianeand motor vehicles which have occurred in that location
in the last two years. Many of these have occurred when I have been home and,
'n one instance, almost in my driveway. Both the existing intersection as well the ,
entrances to the current SP Station and the Corner Deli are the source of the
problem. Main Street, as you should know, is a highly traveled road- and.
resembles more a highway than it does a residential street through a soon to be
designated historic district. The traffic during the Riverside season only increases �
the burdens placed on Main Street as well as those who either live on it or must
access it on a regular basis.
B. New Intersection.
In looking at the plan which is to be reviewed by you, it appears that there
Will be a new entrance off Main Street into the proposed convenience store. This
Proposed new entrance will now add to the already dangerous situation and
.reate another potentially dangerous intersection, that of Albert and Main Streets
since the exit is now located closed to Albert Street.
I would strongly suggest, prior to your approving this plan, that you and-the
Soard spend a little time in the area, :particularly during the busy times -(i.e.
rnoming commutes, evening commutes sand Saturday mornings in particular). It
will be very clear to you what the safety concerns are if you observe this area
during this time. You will see on a regular basis heavy traffic exiting from
Westfield Bank onto Main Street north and south in close proximity to the Main
and Leland Streets intersection. You will also see that Albert Street, which is
It-,4avily used, will become a factor of traffic feeding in and out should the, new
::ccess be allowed as proposed.
In reality for those of us who live in the area and, particularly for me since
my driveway exits directly onto Main Street, it is more a "bumper car" and "dodger
ti:m" atmosphere more appropriate for an amusement park than it is for a main
---.Ep 29 198 09:51 P.4i7
Cr.arles Calabrese
. :ptember 29, 1998
intersection in town. Backing out of my driveway as it is now is very often an
adventure of questionable safety. I cannot tell you how many near misses. in
trying to back from my driveway onto, Main Street from both people who are
coming from the gas station on Leland Street or the already existing convenience
store and trying to beat the traffic across Main Street. It was only about two
°.veeks ago when I had my nearest miss as I was backing out of my driveway and
.someone exiting the BP Station onto Main Street, again trying to beat the traffic
and come across Main, came within inches of rear-ending my vehicle as I was
n1mast across Main Street_ I do not foresee this situation improving with the
project that is being proposed.
C. Traffic Flow.
It is clear to me in reviewing the plan that a significant increase in traffic
.60wing onto and out of the Roberts' property can be expected_ This must be
considered in light of the already dangerous nature of this intersection and the
:.-affcc generated by the. existing businesses accessing Main Street in 'this
.Mmediate area. - It is my understanding that no traffic studies (current and
�:,oposed) have been submitted by F.L.' Roberts to either you or the Engineering
Department. I would suggest, at a minimum, that approval on this plan. be
relayed until such studies have been submitted to you in order to allow you to
make an appropriate decision as-to the proposed driveways as they are shown
on the plan.
D. Mass. Highway Department
I also spoke with a Permit Engineer at the Mass. Highway Department who
informs me that Mass. Highway Department must approve any projects
which either call far curb cut changes or which would result in a substantial
increase in traffic in and out of the existing or proposed facility. In
speaking with Mass. Highway last week, I was informed that no application
for their review has been received from F.L. Roberts even though it
appears from my discussion with them that their review and approval is
necessary.
E. Plan Exits.
The plan poorly defines the exit from the gas pumps onto Leland Street.
i appears that the existing access will not be changed. Again, I would suggest
-hat prior to your review that you view this comer at various times during the
_,F 2�9 '96 09:52 P.5/7
Ch-F rles Calabrese
rr�n�;�er 29, 1998
course of the day. In essence, the current exits from both the BP Station as well
as the Deli and Corner Store access directly onto the crosswalk across Leland
Street so that pedestrians are in no w4y protected. In fact, there have been
several pedestrian accidents from cars that have either been pulling out of the gas
station or backing out of the convenience store.
Screer3inalBuffer for Noise and_Msibili
Many of my concerns here are as a direct "across the street" abutter which
�-:i a concerns shared also by the immediate abutters located on both Leland and
Parker Streets. I would ask this Board to also consider in reviewing the proposed
p:an for the landscape screening and buffer that the area's future designation as
an historic district may be detrimentally impacted by the Roberts' project
A. Landscape/Buffer.
The plan does not appear to adequately protect the abutting properties;
eluding mine, from the lighting which would be generated by both the headlight
Glare, the lighting on the exterior of buildings and fixed poles, and most
particularly, the canopy which is being proposed to be built over the gas pumps.
" r-)ile the immediate neighbors may appear to be protected from headlight glare
t.:rcm the six-foot fence proposed for the project, it does not address the Impact
-:, my property. According to the plan, the entire side facing my home will be
,:umpleteiy visible with no landscape screening of any sort other than a few
junipers. In essence, because of the.locabon of the convenience store on the
property, I will have a full unobstructed view of the side of a commercial building
a,-id parking spaces into which there will be a constant flow of cars_ There is no
provision in this plan to provide an area densely planted with shrubs or trees of
l.Jficient height to provide a year-round dense screen to shield me from both the
.' l:ts and the noise of cars constantly starting who have been parked at the side
the store. The immediate neighbors also appear to be looking at a six-foot
ce which is not softened by any type of extensive landscaping barrier to make
,t more attractive from their perspective or to shield them from lighting glare, gas ,
-:�.,nes and increased truck and car noises.
B. Hour of OperationlNoise.
We are most concerned regarding the hours of operation of this store.
�Vrk;St F.L. Roberts convenience stores are 24-hour operations. If this is their plan, '
:~�,n the Planning Board should scrutinize extremely carefully the provisions for
' 1
i
SEP 29 'yg 09:52 P.6/7
'es Calabrese
-am •-er 29, 1998
screening and buffer for neighbors including myself who will have to deal with.the
noise generated by delivery trucks for gas and otherwise coming in at all hours .
of the night. If this is the case, you should also be concerned with the headlight
glare, the noise of cars and trucks starting and stopping and the general kind of
offensive noise and light associated with both a gas station and convenience
-re. This would also mandate relative to the project since a 24-hour operation
.,uld generate and enormous amount of traffic in addition to that which is already
dsting.
C. Canopy.
The proposed canopy is also an area of concern. The two other gas
S-;utions which are within a half-mile of the station have canopies. A drive by at
r,. ht will show that these canopies are extremely visible and brightly lighted. You
ca.i only assume that the canopy proposed with this project would be similar. The
::;.hitecture may be different to try to contbrm with the historic district, but the
.,:.sic fact remains that it will be brightly lit and extremely visible to all of us who
immediate abutters. A six-foot fence will not shield any of us from the impact
the canopy.
Yurr;r„ary then, I would ask this Board to carefully consider what appears to be .a
, roiect with a very negative impact on our neighborhood by this proposed project. While
} order gland that as long as it meets the requirements of the Zoning By-Laws, the
rro;ect .Dnnot be stopped as long as it serves the needs of"the immediate vicinity" the
Fanning 3oard does have the authority to insure that there is minimal impact on the
,. :n,Lighb:,i hood in terms of safety, which is a primary concern, and also in the quality of
than jje as abutters should be able to enjoy in that neighborhood. While,concededly
house which is scheduled to be razed is an "eye-sore", at least from the
,t c. .:ew of the neighbors, the house is surrounded by trees and heavy shrubbery
tat ;ia impact is minimized. No such buffer or screening is proposed as part of the
.14 project by F.L. Roberts. It is left to you as the Planning Board to insure that
are made for that.purpose. I would also point out that Roberts only recently
the property they plan to build the store on, full well knowing the problems with
aj-di;. It is they, then, who should bear the risk that their plans may have to change
��c:o. ,rr�odate the already existing character of this neighborhood.
:!-.L. appreciate being informed of your decision as I understand that there is a right
to the Board of Appeals regarding this matter. i am, however, confident that
{:0" ::ike into consideration the concerns that I have voiced as well as are voiced by
cc::.;-_rns of those other abutters in the Immediate area. We are not looking to
r =F 29 '98 09:54 P.1/1
Calabrese
c bstruct progress, however, we do not expect progress to impact the quality of life=that
.=re enjoy in the neighborhood.
,tank you for your consideration.
Very truly y urs,
• T CROSS
LI
i
y � ®
* + §
¥ ¥
» � -
�
A * /�7
< fKK
* * � �
Ile
\ } \ «
.•�
\f� �� , �%
�. _ � '%y%
L !✓�� ',_,� des YYY
c
s.
:3
_ 1[:•"�:
.\
ti. `.
/qy �
Vr
r
`$°c f� ca—
n
O
r
Z
o
o �
N
U
-111, UY: ►`vorkCenter 250 2158581354
09/28/98 2:25P?4 Job 200
Page 2/3
1
a
I
m
m
4 .1 .1 J 2 2 2 J 4 J 0 0
.1 .2 .3 a .3 Al .2 .1 2 a .4 .s .9 a 2 .1 0 0
•L .a .� .9 .� .7 .] 2 a .7 11 1.7 1.4 .8 .3 .l J a
SUMMARY CANOPY
------------------
s 116 6.4 7.3 4.9 2J 1i .0 .0 a i9 l7 is .0 J o AVERAGE fc = 53,72
MAXIMUM fc 66.5
MINIMUM fc = 36
.6 is 3.1 • 64 17 t.6 2.1 la I.7 29 a.7 a .7 .1 a AVERAGE/MINIMUM • 1.49
MAXIMUM/MINIMUM = 1.85
6 16 19 7.7 114 a 119 9.5 as t7 1 x. . .1 .1 0
SUMMARY INSIDE CURS
.6 1.4 is 13.4 >i 41.7 47 40.1 17.7 as Is o 0 0
■
AVERAGE fc ■ 7.49
■ ■
MAXIMUM fc a 26.3
.6 1.4 41 16.1 =A (!!::)76. M LS t 0 0 o MINIMUM fc ■ .4
AVERAGE/MINIMUM = 18.72
MAXIMUM/MINIMUM = 65.75
.6 es 4.7 17J �1 78a■ 6S p. s7a 6.7 to o a 0
MAINTAINED FOOTCANDLE VALUES AT GRADE,
.6 13 4.6 184 Its 60.9 "3 60. 143 63 1 0 0 .1 US1NG A .72 MAINTENANCE FACTOR.
a 1.4 4.5 1Re 79.9 r6.8,, 57 zz.9 s] .2 .2 4
a 1J ss M-3 des 42A a76 09 1" 3.7 t as 4 a -9 a 1
.4 .e 2 tw 22.9 1" 4A 42 7 7.1 7.9 LJ , .1
2 .3 1 2 16 64 96 51 417 74b 71 6 s 1 .3 .l
2 .3 .0 1.3 2.3 14 to 4.3 9 1.7 4A t6 13 A .1 J
13 12 13 ad 19 19 12 .7 .3 2 1
.7 .6 1 1.3 1.4 A 3
O
•Ind us tries
13In?93--s 0•r"(Sill M-OW3
LIGHTING PROPOSAL FOR
Mt $ 4 R1,M-ALCM-12-5 1 VP5-2 2 0-100-MH-120-L0596- 2 2m C-STORE
■ A 12 RIC-S-400--SIr1H-73 1 458 AGAWAM. MA
ME TY POLE 10TY! RA K T TY OTHER QTY FIXTURE OTY ■•*Is/•s�� ��' LO-30695
ASSEMOL ASSEMBLIES EACH CONSISTING OF: 6528 9-24-94
BILL OF MATERIALS TOY.L WAM h. 8D8 SHEET 1 OF 1
� TM
17
LIGHTING POLES BOLLARD`
FLAGPOLES PIER
Construction Forms for Cast-in-Place FLOODLIGHTS SIGNS
3
Architectural Concrete Bases
No need to settle for ordinary or
unslightly bases... w .,
�w t
,y;rw
9F.
e
AbOlite Lighting offers
an affordable alternative...
New and unique OeAFCOR M. " bases.
Three sizes of distinctive cast-in-place archi-
tectural concrete pole bases featuring sculp-
tured reveals for an attractive dimension, with
or without color accent band.
!, J
's i41•t
fs634/formsfly"eps/080 1-5mc
� -.fr,:,'rr 'yY ��}� ,54 r-fir �• rn�'T��
f ,•W.. -"J - .f'�, [ e` fA ..f �Y�r fS'�i-_.ram Il.
'.� .4 Pu � # �I 15=.l", 1. ,+ply. 3 • r AW �y f
w .r• t j
,fir"r •�' •�' ` ` :'4 k�k'+erw ``'t°► �,�!y�y� �'
4 L .y'•.
of:R¢ n.y-y��l�y, i,tt„t` y `; JS�iI�� ._.— - y;.fs �h \ ,4 f •�
,�j.'ti j�;�y�a�KtSrk �-�fi'•�- i�;�f.,�f�'..�i�Ywj... J 1 \! S�f/ �•,
ajlt � aa� r• Oy�'` 4�,a� Via.'" � } •['"- j ``�
6dow I11
I � L ''1'r With red[In"
lamp visit. N %t
ti:' ' =•+ . � i. '` [• III)' �'.J��'Ir _ �,?
r y r.
Wit,
- ;d'; - •„ �'a��;5. � ''i,i: i 'F: .•��t tilr. 't!"h!d+ �
iiv-
f r �y / •�.I � '5' lY�� '•ti1��l�jY•.
r Y``
Zke TZoc�cte$ bel wc��h°dth'Itk3�cWi�%►u1vr.As G1oUds
cxbove�� Gess►a�cawNIed '�s''1+owa�d o'�AN
aw
�g1 ff R
iON
/ poini-' " �e acly.S: e—e-pening gloom did
toS�Galn" �e jc%v.iqHnEj nerves of irst-time
��� e�w, e�^s�F 1?{; eeriME)
dn .�n aowwe at tie ,
JE-'t •MJ �jl'..1� I _.[-, 5� !{ �IJ k.a�� r�. .F 6 SI. �.'�
. i ISIVlg peaks, we nofjced 0 single
A 45�
F�,►no�nntcaQn op. singled oUt
�, sS i>»•• "'" ,ac.•r f;, r y;..-, ;r '_iri,--�,
`gas �lre`sun broke`fRP,0`i� Iir'the ICI
��•�� � ':h-: �• ,a9�_d{,
_ c�ot.�ds to send a wic e cs t,N ft o f,li It
earthwaNd. 7t was an ihs iecift`K;�j
:.�[;.ifl`r!P�S '4••° ` �iy�.p �'� �iY��tir1• •Sf �;%�I�'tir4'.'��'
DEEP BOWL
RLlN 5ER1L8 - - - -
�, r 4+,"F d 'r�3S�Sr �I -,.°n�"Stki1�FsS,, fj•' r I T, `•• - • • `• - •
1� `i;vrk`�f��,r�r.i4..�s`L..J_�1s�r.r��ti �J �;,, �Y�• ,• • • • • • -_
4.1
, It 1�k�•T�„• ,,- T �.��'tK. r�yfr�a,'{ ;,' ' \ :1 • •• r•
a"?-4 rr ryf'. : �iMS x+..�•_i ;,�'V[lY i. I" .. • 1' •• •• • • • '•
r:} Ft���„p'J•L.'LJ3 :� 3� :}:Iklra 1..+r .•7
n Mlr''rili�4',•-{ r� `,1� r l f I.f.• .j I
j�S. i�i•�A �.�?:€i frT�+ �i,_ i ;f 41.. Zi � _
,..E 'r'1•�IIC•^•k%�� '�}��.�,i",'_S.^ I I ,• 4 �'
•':.'I��dhoal� dG
-)!n�/f yJS4 ^r �1, f.�Y��k�14�r1.•�7�t1 / _ l
''•1 ,Y$'i" { tY�'f.4:.,•L. ? �,l\1.1fL.d fr rq V 5 _
•
rr�r
7.
77,
�}I ',?1.J �I��{,'p ".Y)j h• ,sl'I `7�4� �S;e ` 1 I r
tp fr.
AL
1. I ,��-' ���YT`I)' "-t 1�{fir�7'• IF 3'}M {5 t . • f . : r� ,
� :•(t.1;a diyy,}C�},+:s.;;�-•i,�3rE'r1T=J�1:.._�...-.-�•:�,•.•s��.�wF i I
I •• •I i - I I I 1
ABOLITE I
d F u v E n U X
I D
POLE DATA: NOSTALGIC DESIGN
Aluminum Pole Specifications:
} • Pole shaft is aluminum tubing welded to a cast
aluminum base.
• End of pole is designed for use with Shepherd's Crook
or other optional pole brackets.All brackets are slip fit over
end of pole.
• Standard finish is bronze baked-on powder coating.
Black, white, or verdigris finishes are optional.
t • Poles are furnished with anchor bolts with zinc plated double
nut washers. Galvanized anchor bolts are standard.Anchor
i bolts conform to ASTM-A36 with a minimum yield strength of
I 36,000 PSI.
I.
• Hand-hole is 9"above pole base.
Will accept commercial postline ballast for use with
a HID lamps.
1
CAST ALUMINUM POLE RATING BOLT CIRCLE
Height Series Uescriptlen 713 MPH 80 MPEPA
P 90 MPH 190 MPH Boll Circle 9�1r
8' RLM ALUM 9.0 6.8 5.2 4.2 Anchor Bolt Size 1/2'x 18'
M 6.5 4.9 3.7 2.9 Anchor Bolt Projection 3'
12' RLM ALUM ; '4.9 3.6 2.7 2.1 Base Plate Thickness 112'
a �po a r1; 1/2 lbs. 10':32.1/4 lbs. IT:35 lbs. Note:Base plate illustrations may change without notice.Do not use for
setting anchor bolts.Consult factory lot the base plate templates.
POLE DATA: STRAIGHT ROUND DESIGN
Steel Pole Specifications:
• Pole shaft is electro-welded ASTM-A500 Grade B
3"steel tubing with a minimum yield strength of 42,000 PSI.
• Base is ASTM-A36 hot-rolled steel plate with a minimum yield
strength of 36,000 PSI.
• Standard finish is powder painted bronze. Black or white
1 , finishes are optional.•
Poles are furnished with anchor bolts with zinc plated double
nuts and washers. Galvanized anchor bolts are optional.
Anchor bolts conform with ASTM-A36 with a minimum yield
strength of 36,000 PSI.
r • Hand-hole is 12"above pole base.
I
• Will accept commercial postline ballast (of use with
HID lamps.
• Ground lug is standard.
I
• Base cover is one-piece spun aluminum.
STEEL POLE RATING BOLT CIRCLE
Height Ple Series Descripilnn 70 MPH 80 MPH EPA 90 MPH 100 MPH Bolt Circle Slotted
8' RLM S11G 10.6 7.9 6.1 4.7 Anchor Bolt Size 314'x 30'
10, RLM S11G 7.6 5.5 4-1 3.8 Anchor Bolt Projection 3-114'
12` RLM S11G 5.3 3.7 2.6 1.8 Base Plate Thickness 3W
Steel pole weights:3'Dia.11 Ga.is approximately 3.7 lbs.per it. Note: Base plate illustrations may change without notice.Do not use for
setting anchor bolts.Consult lactofy for the base plate templates,
All Abakle poles are guaranteed to meet the EPA requirements lists.AboOre is nor responsible it a pole order has a lower EPA rating Than the indicated winddoading tone where the pole
will he located,Caution:The Abolila guarantee does not apply it the pole/bracketllixture combination is used to support any other Items.such as flags.pennants,or signs,which would add
stress to the pole.Abolile cannot accept responsibility for harm or damage caused In these situations.Note:Abolite pole calculations include a 1.3 gust factor over steady wind velocity.
Example:poles designed to withstand e0 MPH steady wind will withstand gusts to 104 MPH.EPA's are from locations 100 miles away from hurricane ocean Ones.Note:Hurricane ocean
lines are the Atlantic and Gull of Mexico coastal areas.
Abotite Neuveaux• 10000 Alliance Road, Cincinnati,Ohio 45242•(513) 793.8875•FAX: (513) 793-0295
"I { A THE RICHMOND D SERIES
Rl C H il'V{O N D The Richmond Series achieves a clean, uncluttered canopy appearance. Its rectangular shape
recesses easily into a single canopy panel, allowing the fixture frame to be flush-mounted with
the canopy ceiling.The Richmond Series is easily installed and provides a water-tight fixture-
to-canopy fit.
SPECIFICATIONS
HOUSING L iG'-i l&DuR`EI-) BALLAST
Each Richmond housing is The Richmond is designed High-power factor type
formed,Heavy-gauge aluminum to operate with a single lamp ballast is designed for-20'F
and internally welded at the of either of the following operation.The ballast is mounted
corners.Corners are finished to lamp types:Super Metal to the housing reinforcing plate.
produce a clean,sharpappearance halide or Metal Halide with
pp mogul-base sockets.Clear lamp MOUNTING
while increasing housing strength supplied as standard. The Richmond is shipped
and ensuring weather-tight complete with all mounting
construction. REFLECTORS/DISTRIBUTION hardware.The Richmond is
LENS/GASKET PATTERNS equipped with 72-inch electrical
The-Richmond is available in Each Richmond fixture is leads and 1!2-inch liquid-fight
any of the following lens types: supplied with a symmetrical flexible conduit connector.Fixture
a dropped borosilicate prismatic reflector system.Photometric data is mounted flush with canopy deck
glass lens or C73 diffused flat is certified by an independent panels where it is accessible from
tempered glass lens.A continuous, testing facility. the top.A tube of silicone sealant
one-piece EPDM gasket ensures FINISHES is supplied to prevent leakage on
underside of canopy.Mounting
maximum sealing to the housing.
Each Richmond fixture is finished brackets are easily installed. Not
LENS FRAME/DOOR with DuraGrip,LSI Lighting used for enclosed canopy
FASTENER Systems'revolutionary superior applications.
The Richmond features a hinged baked-on polyester-powder
lens frame,hinging the frame to finishing process,to give the I�
the luminaire with concealed hinges fixture an exceptionally attractive t C :L
and locked with one captive door appearance.Standard finish listed for wet locations.
fastener.Lenses are sealed to the colors available for the Richmond
lens frame with silicone sealant. are bronze,black,or white,The
DuraGrip polyester finish
SOCKETS withstands extreme weather
Porcelain mogul-base sockets changes without cracking or
feature spring-reinforced peeling.Finish is guaranteed
contacts for long life. for five full years.
PHOTOMETRICS
400w super Mehl Halide(Single)-Dropped Lens 400W Super Metal Halide-flat tens
Symmetrical Distribution G. Symmetrical Distribution
3MH 2MH 1MH 0 HT. A e C D E F G 2MH 1MH 0
■ ® -,�
12' 55.56 27.78 13.89 5.56 2.78 1.39 .56
14' 40.e2 20.41 10,20 4,08 2.04 1.02 .41
2MH 16' 31.25 15,63 7.81 3.13 1.56 78 31
■
2MH
ME
18' 2 . . . 2. 1. . .25
1 M H �0 20.00 10A00 5A00 2.00 1.00 .50 .20 ■N®ON �A A rL,�'■■ 1MH is ' .
EME52MH tMHH
N3MH 2MH
Lumen Hating molim
Levels shown are in foatcandles.
Front Front
*GHTWG SYSTEMS
10000 Alliance Road•P.O.Box 42728•Cincinnati,Ohio 45242-0728•(513)793-3200•FAX(513)984.1335
f
0 _ L ;Hrwa Sys TEHS RICHM0ND
DIMENSIONS
r9.1l2"1
L11-15116"� fir,
Dropped Lens Flat Lens � � "��
{¢r
'A 4.p?
14" rye
Side Bottom
ORDERING INFORMATION Select appropriate choice from each column to formulate order code.Peter to example below.
Luminalre tdhull Lamp Li ht Lens Line Luminaire Options
P Wattage Voltage' Finish
E RIC S-S_ymmetrical 175 SMH-Super Metal Halide 5 OL-Dropped Botwicate 4110V Bf1Z-Bronze LL-Less Lamp
Prismatic ass Lens MT-Multi Tap" BLK-Black C-Coated Lamp
;400 MH-Metal Halide 73-' C73 Oitfased Flat > TT-Tri-Tap"' WHT-White ZM9-"Z"Mounting
175,250.400 Watt e s Bracket
NO-No Options
EXAMPLE OF A TYPICAL ORDER RIC S 400 SMH DL MT WHT NO
'For international voltages,consult factory. i
"MT-Multi Tap is shipped standard unless otherwise specified.Multi Tap consists of 120V,208V,240V,and 277V. Multi Tap is pre-wired for 277V.
Alternate voltages will require field re-wiring.
"'Tri-Tap is shipped standard for C-UL applications. Tri-Tap consists of 120V,277V,and 347V. Tri-Tap is pre-wired for 347V. Alternate voltages will require field re-wiring.
STANDARD MOUNTING KIT` OPTIONAL ZMB MOUNTING KIT`
Liquid-fight
Liquid-light Conduit&Fittings
Conduit 3 Fittings
�- Future
�—Fixture
Canopy Canapy�
Deck Rip Deck Rib
Deck Opening:
9 518- x 19 318-
*For applications other than single deck metal canopies, consult factory.
Sent by: WorkCenter 250 2158581384 07/13/98 4:21PM Job 875 Page 2/4
--------------
-
r�.
t
i
I
N
I
U
y
vv \
1.J
O
N
N
-[ ---_....-..--
F _
� l
I �
� r
i
rm
i
� l
I �
5 �
28"x15" DEEP COMPOSITE
ALUMINUM SHROUDS &
REVEAL (MONOCOLUMN)
FIBERGLASS PLANTER
(SEE SITE PLAN) PROTECTION BUMPER
(SEE SITE PLAN)
�1 I� DISPENSER II II II
GRAD
ISLAND ELEVATION
ISLAND SCALE: 3/4"= V-0" 3' DISPENSER W/ 2 PLANTERS
4.
.1 1 .3 .3 .3 1 .z s 1 .3 .4 .3 .3 .3 1 .1 p o
1 .4 A .9 .9 .3 1 .3 .3 11 1.7 1.4 .9 3 .1 .1 0
.a 1 ZI .9 tl 12 LT 19 la .6 1 1 0
SUMMARY CANOPY
------------------
s li 414 7s 49 al u 1 / 13 19 63 11.6 0 s o
AVERAGE Ft c 53,7Z
MAXIMUM fc 66.5
MINIMUM fc - 36
A Is 3.1 a 6A 17 2.6 x1 Ia 1.7 is 4,5 2 .7 .1 0 AVERAGE/MINIMUM a 1.49
MAXIMUM/MINIMUM - 1.135
.6 16 39 7.7 11.4 13 IIA 9.3 16 2.T 2 2. .4 1 1 p
SUMMARY iNSIDE CURB
A 1.4 3.3 11.4 36 411 43 404 17.3 44 la 0 a o
------------------
AVERAGE fc = 7.49
i a m MAXIMUM fc c 26.3
.6 1.4 4.1 I63 7/.4 yr. 0 6.8 t 0 a o MINIMUM fC ■ .4
AVERAGE/MINIMUM - 18.72
MAXIMUM/MINIMUM ■ 65.75
s Is 4a vs Allus■ 6s �. zu a t1 o p o
MAINTAJNED FOOTCANDLE VALUES AT GRADE.
.a IS 4.6 11.1 wa 60.7 663 Z45 6.3 0 6 .1 USING A .72 MAINTENANCE FACTOR.
.6 1.4 4.5 1" 39J W 37 US 6.3 1 2 S
.3 1j 15 14.3 %l 49A 331 A& I" 3.3 2. 4; 4. 1 .9 .7 .1
4 .1 .Z Ma 92.1 10./ 4a 41 3 7.2 7.9 14 A 1
1 .3 1 a 16 6.4 9.6 11 4.7 7.6 7.1 6 .i 1 .3 1
_ .3 .1 13 zs 14 se 4.3 .9 7.7 46 to L3 s A 1
.1 .1 1 3 .1 1.1 11 13 z.4 19 19 12 .7 j 1 .1
.1 .1 .1 1 .2 - .3 A 1 13 L4 .9 .3 .3 1 .1 1
0 .1 .l .l 1 1 2 .1 .3 .4 .3 .4 1 .1 s 1 0
*.Industries
(513)ftj-->zos.rra($131 793--4a23
LIGHTING PROPOSAL FOR
4 RLM-ALUU-12-S 1 DPB-2 2_j JOD-100-MM-120-LDS95- 2 258 -STORE
■ A 12 1 1 RIC-5-400-SMH-73 1 455 AGAWAM, MA
LEE OTY POI F QTY1- RA K T JQTY1 OTHER QTY1 FIXTURE TY w4rrs/4sscmx7 wuL. !'-"' LO-30695
ASSEMB ASSEMBLIES EACH CONSISTING OF: 6,528 am, 9-24-98
BILL OF MATERIALS I vi& wArm I BOB SHEET of 1
TM
17
LIGHTING POLES BOLLARDIc
FLAGPOLES PIER:
Construction Forms for Cast-in-Place FLOODLIGHTS SIGN:
Architectural Concrete Bases
No need to settle for ordinary or
unslightly bases...
kC•w•SDI
tb..
1^Y
1KY'
r
uy
Abolite Lighting offers
-T,
an affordable alternative...
• pr � �n
1. a
t'
y �-
'�Y.
New and unique o M bases. .
Three sizes of distinctive cast-in-place archi-
tectural concrete pole bases featuring sculp-
tured reveals for an attractive dimension, with
or without color accent band. { }
ti
is 6341 fo rm s fl y.a ps 10&01.5m c
� .� ,��34 �•�'"� � r� Via .•, `' ���€• ;3 �
Aj
e' 'i:,�:��#�h"fib J IA i' lL,�.�r•,�'�Y -S 1 d
."irk. V ♦ '� l! -"r�.
l t•Vy •4. �Y .
r f 'tee• s ia� 114,
11
Of f1w
MR;ow Bmd
Ix
' '�rr , a� '1.i-! ten° y °•". �-." '- ]1 � \ �
fedvow lighthmpebm
do
fit: r ��. '. ;� _ ri yt•, .,
Sr `j• x�r H � ti Y' t. � _`�•.s •`k ,1y .yyy.�.;
tt 1 4� �!ur• _ ,,,�a
rs 4w
���,r�'c
ti.�s
`lrl�e 72ockies� below cxnc�`�tLtiic4lot►s cloIAds
,�,::
abovete'YY ssna..Gawv�iec�=lustowawd ouw
jtch%i�pihIY ` lr r w, sHti t I'9y -si dt ..e•-e pKt: a
ig gloom did
ca.lrn flee �,ahgling heNves o'� f i -sf-time
` ' + t� '� +ne'v�s: ey�wih down Ah =awe at tIt1e
!�=i �s 1��µ,yi�t•��a+a;µ� r�x�.<,� ���'�,����L.'s ,!�"p rui�fl e ',:i�,���sr
a r.+Yisih ecsl� we`n.not�ced a sih le �f; ,•:
Y 001
. 'hip rhoLtI{'}�Qik1` singled oLAt '�'' •
•`� •� SIAM
V��, �! �"cr.►�hated� its ma es elevated
t t G15 e s[.th bY`oKe f �i'01�1(�V►` fka k,ak
�u clorAds fo sehd a wide'ds;I 'ci {.o ili � t
eaNtl�ward. ,�+ was ah inspiration' ''
1.}�a s;b�w,.T;�� i'iFy�'�.1, ,:1,'weF,3•�
DEEP
t~
BOWL
.`RLIIl1 SE!l1I8
IsI
ig,y 1'rr v-'1 t�&1'/�}y •aja'S�ii+^ .'^it d
itis1 !'ifE ah{ i,„ 7 •• - - • '• • • ! .
i' x{j+ 1 re,rr,s t''.,. . Lf�.r•F1 �,�J�,, S;�r F�',� •• • • • • •
'i• Fes:` 'a,`. .f� .•_., �3y-� tt 1
_ i''T f1 °yy�%!•'%i�-:-•• •f` r 1�i• r,• `� ! •- t► '• • r! ! • s t• "s- •
i i �'+>.NIsr:N i.},i ` ! a- ! ••. .
':F:, yi•: ai.Y f�,c•tis• •.r._ryty"::'S;i �•�i.- t
-t •,:.- n, X tip.' ''S. ':p, •r.' S.'.
.i -'.•:+lt � I�G�}�Syri`�';''�ti;'�_.' .i�' ■�.�.�IRRyylt� '''��1�:.. F.
a��.?.•....:,,�., �;�',,i'�';���,, +sue'•�..�F;�'':'•�� ;
• t GifT 1.^.•t6+i...:��wL.d:::Lt._•=�'.::'.�n�4+ L.ti�'f'��....��.� -
r� �5 r� x �
= Yii• �tlx x.�1 ,, '• , , •,,'
� Ly�S:JJ• fi1Hti�, d 1 � a� � �;'Jl�lr' ,� '+1 y
+� ^d Q'4'�'i��R Frd'��' F!r k ,`I 4S tf w,,.J.t r� .,! �.t>• •„
r• — F ._�p•r,L'4 A.�".. ,1:iy •- ti�,q ,* It
- •�_ ;r t
- ,•
11 1 Fh s� t �
AjIt � tY it •._ yr J ii. . .. '-6.
., ,. e.}��_ •ri-'r�{{�'r^.' � .-k-�ti''�fi.1S,��'i-�a ��t ,:_ tF �r " n
`'Zaf�.,�.'tit:.��,;•_ - �•••y„� -4J►'t'�L�ti.- (t� � _ _ I
k�i��}L'•�Ii�ZY pt�.,Cr xr'r t�tx�rfr},,u.." r i:_, i '! •
n .1�•:rj ,.•��'�S'�-�•;, `i';'?�.�4. �� 1yy([�`L •i'F�;S�;{.@' ifi': '• .' ' ',.'4. '
if 1
.fit t�7:*;:�'t4w.,:{��,; a ria..�. _ ?ra tl:,�.•, 4(?•- ,t ..� ...
PM
• • r: s • ! rr
ABOLITE I
N E U V C A U x
r -
1 POLE DATA: NOSTALGIC DESIGN
Aluminum Pole Specifications:
• Pole shaft is aluminum tubing welded to a cast
aluminum base. 140.
• End of pole is designed for use with Shepherd's Crook
or other optional pole brackets.All brackets are slip lit over
end of pale.
• Standard finish is bronze baked-on powder coaling.
Black,white,or verdigris finishes are optional.
• Poles are furnished with anchor bolts with zinc plated double
nut washers. Galvanized anchor bolts are standard.Anchor
I bolts conform to ASTM-A36 with a minimum yield strength of
36,000 PSI.
• Hand-hole is 9"above pole base.
Will accept commercial postline ballast for use with
HID lamps-
t
CAST ALUMINUM POLE RATING BOLT CIRCLE
Height Series' Description 70 MPH 80 MPH 90 MPH 100 MPH Boll Circle 91'�d
8' HLM ALUM 9.0 6.8 5.2 4.2 Anchor Bolt Size 112'x 18'
M 6.5 4.9 3.7 2.9 Anchor Boll Projection 3'
r 12' RLM ALUM 4,9 3.6 2.7 2.1 Base Plate Thickness 112'
a po a Ig s: -1/P€ts. 10':32-114 lbs. 12':35 lbs. Note:Base plate illustrations may change without notice.Do not use for
setting anchor bolts.Consult factory for the base plate templates.
POLE DATA: STRAIGNT ROUND DESIGN
f Steel Pole Specifications:
• Pole shaft is elect►o•welded ASTM-A500 Grade B
3"steel tubing with a minimum yield strength of 42,000 PSI.
` Base is ASTM-A36 hot-rolled steel plate with a minimum yield
d % strength of 36,000 PSI,
® Standard finish is powder painted bronze. Black or white
finishes are optional.
• Pales are furnished with anchor bolts with zinc plated double
nuts and washers.Galvanized anchor bolts are optional.
Anchor bolts conform with ASTM-A36 with a minimum yield
strength of 36,000 PSI.
• Hand-hole is 12"above pole base.
I
■ Will accept commercial postline ballast for use with
HID lamps.
Ground lug is standard.
• Base cover is one-piece spun aluminum.
STEEL POLE RATING BOLT CIRCLE
Height Series Description 70 MPH 80 MPH 90 MPH 109 MPH Bolt Circle Stalled
8' RLM S11 G 10.6 T9 6.1 4.7 Anchor Boll Size 314"x 30'
10' - RLM St 1G 7.6 5.5 4.1 3.8 Anchor Bolt Projection _3.1/4'
12' RLM SI1G 5.3 3.7 2.6 1.8 Base Plate Thickness 314'
sleet pole weights:3'Dia.11 Ga.is approximately 3.7 tbs.per It. �. Nate: Base plate illustrations may change without notice.Do not use for
setting anchor bolts.Consult factory for the base plate templates.
All Abolile poles are guaranteed to meet the EPA requiiemenT%Ilsts,Abolile is not responsible it a pole order has a lower EPA raling then lha indicalnd wind-loadeng zone where the pole
will be located.Caution:Tile Abolite guarantee does not apply it the polerbracketiklure combination is used to support any other items,such as Ilag$,pannants.or eigna,which would add
stress to the pole.Abolile Cannot accept responsibility for harm or damage caused in these ehuatlons,Note:Abolile pole calculation$include a 1.3 gust factor over steady wind velocity.
Example:pofes designed to withstand e0 MPH steady wind will withstand gusls to 104 MPH.EPA'S are from locations 100 miles away from hurricane ocean lines,Note:Hurricane ocean
lines are the Atlantic and Gull of Mexico coastal areas.
Abolile Neuveaux• 10000 Alliance Road,Cincinnati,Ohio 45242•(513)793.8875•FAX:(513)793.0295
.tt- THE RICHMOND®SERIES
R ! C H f Vl O N D The Richmond Series achieves a clean, uncluttered canopy appearance. Its rectangular shape
recesses easily into a single canopy panel, allowing the fixture frame to be flush-mounted with
the canopy ceiling.The Richmond Series is easily installed and provides a water-tight fixture-
to-canopy fit.
SPECIFICATIONS
HOUSING UGi-i T SCj6R ES BALLAST
The Richmond is designed High-power factor type
farmed,heavy-gauge aluminum
Each Richmond housing is to operate with a single lamp ballast is designed or-20'F
and internally welded at the of either of the following operation.The ballast is mounted
corners.Corners are finished to lamp types:Super Metal to the housing reinforcing plate.
produce a clean,sharp appearance Halide or Metal Halide with
mogul-base sockets.Clear lamp MOUNTING
while increasing housing strength supplied as standard. The Richmond is shipped
and ensuring weather-tight complete with all mounting
construction. REFLECTORS/DISTRIBUTION hardware.The Richmond is
LENS/GASKET PATTERNS equipped with 72-inch electrical
The Richmond is available in Each Richmond fixture is leads and 1/2-inch liquid-tight
any of the fallowing lens types: supplied with a symmetrical flexible conduit connector.Fixture
a dropped barosilicate prismatic reflector system.Photometric data is mounted flush with canopy deck
glass lens or C73 diffused flat is certified by an independent panels where it is accessible from
tempered glass lens.A continuous, testing facility. the top.A tube of silicone sealant
one-piece EPDM gasket ensures FINISHES is supplied to prevent leakage on
maximum sealing to the housing. Each Richmond fixture is finished underside of canopy.Mounting
brackets are easily Installed. Not
LENS FRAME/DOOR with DuraGrip, LSI Lighting used for enclosed canopy
FASTENER Systems'revolutionary superior applications.
The Richmond features a hinged baked-on polyester-powder
lens frame,hinging the frame to finishing process,to give the
the luminaire with concealed hinges fixture an exceptionally attractive {, CT
and locked with one captive door appearance.Standard finish listed for wet locations.
fastener.Lenses are sealed to the colors available for the Richmond
lens frame with silicone sealant. are bronze,black,or white.The
DuraGrip polyester finish
SOCKETS withstands extreme weather
Porcelain mogul-base sockets changes without cracking or �W
feature spring-reinforced peeling.Finish is guaranteed
contacts for long life. for five full years.
PHOTOMETRICS
400w Super Metal Halide(single)—Dropped Lens 40OW Super Metal Halide—Fiat Lens
Symmetrical Distribution MTG. Symmetrical Distribution
3MH 2MH tMH 0 HT. A 8 C D E F G 2MH 1MH 0
■■® 1 S5.5i 27.78 13.89 5.5fi 2.781.39 fi
14, 40.82 20.41 10.20 4,08 2.04 1.02 .41■■■■2MH 36' 31.25 15.63 7,81 3.13 1.56 78 33
0�®
2MH
24.69 12.35 6.17 2.47 12 .v 18'
r 1MH 20' 20.00 10.00 5.00 2.00 1.00 .■� iMH
■■ D C BA 10 ■® 0
3 1MH �yC9
NOMMUNH ■®L".�"" SMH
■■.■3MH •■ 2MH
0=0 Lumen Rating 40,000l
Levels shown are in oattandles.
Front Front
LIGHTING SYSTEMS
10000 Alliance Road•P.O.Box 42728•Cincinnati,Ohio 45242-0728•(513)793-3200•FAx(513)984.1335
L" RICHMOND
IGHTING SYS TENS
DIMENSIONS
f 9'1�1
Dropped Lens Flat Lens
3 '
r �"G ti'' x s` �r�•V
14" _
......
~
Side Bottom
ORDERING INFORMATION Select appropriate choice from each column to formulate order code. Refer to example below.
Lumloafre W Lamp Ui tit Lens Line Luminatre Options
tfilsoi Wattage __ voltage` Finish
RIC S-Symmetrical 175 SMN. Super Metal Halide OL-Dropped Sorosilicate 480V BRZ-Bronze LL-Less Lamp
I M
' a Pdsma' :S4
Lens MT-Multi Tap-' BLK-Black C-Coated Lamp {Y-
'.400 MH-Metal halide 73' C73 DifFiat TT- Tap-Tap " wHT-White ZMS-"Z'Mounting Ifl
175.250,400 watt e Bracket
NO-No Options
EXAMPLE OF A TYPICAL ORDER JLRIC S 400 S M H LLM WHT LNO
'For international voltages.consult factory.
"MT-Multi Tap is shipped standard unless otherwise specified.Multi Tap consists of 120V,208V,240V,and 277V. Multi Tap is pre-wired for 277V.
Alternate voltages will require field re-wiring.
•Tri-Tap is shipped standard for C-UL applications. Tri-Tap consists of 12OV,277V,and 347V. Tri-Tap is pre-wired for 347V. Alternate voltages will require field rewiring.
STANDARD MOUNTING KIT' OPTIONAL ZMB MOUNTING KIT`
Liquid-tight
Liquid-ilght Conduit&Fittings
Conduit&Fittings
+--Fixture
+-� Fixture
Canopy
Canopy/
Deck Rib Deck Rib
Deck Opening:
9 51a" x 19 318"
*For applications other than single deck metal canopies, consult factory.
co � �(�L1�19 �s
toB # g
LAG � � �.Q S-14
EOXk /
DOCUMENT#
PAGE
Based on the information provided, all dimensions and luminaire locations Revisions
shown represent recommended positions. The engineer and/or architect must Rev. Date B
determine applicability of the layout to existing or future field conditions.
1
.1 .2 .2 .2 .1 .1 .1 O D
1 .2 .3 .3 .3 .2 .2 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .5 .3 .2 .1 O 0
.2 .4 .8 19 .8 .5 .3 .2 .3 .5 1.1 1.7 1.4 .8 .3 .1 .1 0
.4 I 2.1 .9 2.3 1.2 4.7 3.9 1.8 .6 .2 .1 0
SUMMARY CANOPY
------------------
.5 IS 4.4 7.3 4.9 2.1 1.1 .8 .9 1.5 3.9 7 6.5 2.6 .8 .1 0 AVERAGE fc = 53 . 72
MAXIMUM fc = 66. 5
MINIMUM fc = 36
6 1.8 53 8 6.4 3.7 2.6 2.1 14 1.7 2.9 5. 4.3 a .7 .1 D AVERAGE/MINIMUM = 1 . 49
MAXIMUM/MINIMUM = 1 .85
.6 1.6 3.9 7.7 11.4 13 11.9 9.5 5.8 2.7 2 2. .4 .1 .1 0
SUMMARY INSIDE CURB
--- ----- --------.6 1A 3.5 11.4 36 41.7 45 40.1 17.5 4.6 1.8 1 0 0 D
AVERAGE fc = 7. 49
■ ■ ■ MAXIMUM fc = 26 . 3
.6 1.4 4.1 16.1 58.4 56.9 25 6.2 2 0 0 D MINIMUM fc = 4
AVERAGE/MINIMUM = 18 . 72
MAXIMUM/MINIMUM = 65 . 75
.6 1.5 4.5 17.11 58.8 ■ 65 07. 25.6 6.7 2.2 0 0 0
MAINTAINED FOOTCANDLE VALUES AT GRADE,
.6 1.5 4.6 18.1 52.8 60.9 66.5 60. 24.5 6.3 P. 0 0 4 USING A .72 MAINTENANCE FACTOR.
.6 1.4 4.5 18.8 59.9 57. 2e.9 6.3 2 .2 .2 l
S 1.1 3.5 14.5 fe.8 411A 53.6 08 18.8 t-5 2. 4.6 4. 2. .9 .3 .1
NOTE: ALL 12' POLES TO BE MOUNTED ON DECORATIVE CONCRETE PEDESTALS
2' ABOVE GRADE, FOR A TOTAL MOUNTING HEIGHT OF 14'.
.4 .8 15. 22.2 261 22.9 10.8 4.9 4.2 5 7.9 7.9 1.1 .4 .1
2 .5 1 2 3,6 6.4 9.6 5.1 4.7 7 7.1 6 .8 1 .3 .1
2 .3 .8 1.3 2.3 3.4 3 2-8 4.3 .41111110M.7 4.6 2.8 1.5 A .2 .1
l .1 .2 3 .5 .8 141 1.2 1.5 i?.4 3.9 3.9 1.2 .7 .3 .2 .1
.1 .1 .1 .2 .2 .5 .6 1 1.3 1.4 .9 .5 .3 .2 .1 .1
0 l 1 1 1 .2 .2 .2 .3 4 .5 .4 .2 .2 .1 .1 0
CANOPY FIXTURE LOCATIONS INDICATED ARE SUEJECT TO LIMITATIONS IMPOSED BY THE
CANOPY CONSTRUCTION. BE CERTAIN TO CHECK FOR POSSIBLE INTERFERENCES BEFORE
CUTTING FIXTURE OPENINGS.
-Industries
MIX 01111011 RD. PA 80K 42726 6INCNU11I,00 4942
W3) 713-32M ■ FAX (513) 703-e023
LIGHTING PROPOSAL FOR
11111111110111111 B 5 RLM-ALUM-12-S 1 DPB-2 2 8D-100-MH-120-LDS96- 2 258 C--STORE
■ A 1 12 1 1 RIC-S-400-SMH-73 I 1 458 AGAWAM, MA
This lighting pattern represents illumination levels calculated from laboratory data TYPE10TY POLE QTY QRACKET 1QTY I OTHER TY FIXTURE _IQTY WATTS/ASSEMBLY scA14: 1"=20' LO_ 30695
taken under controlled conditions In occordance with Illuminating Engineering Society ASSEMBLY ASSEMBLIES EACH CONSISTING OF: 678s DATE. 9-z4-98
approved methods. Actual performance of any manufacturer's Iuminaire may vary due to ariation in ele conditions. BILL OF MATERIALS TOTAL WATT'$ en 9D6 SHEET 1 OF 1
vetricol voltage, tolerance in lamps, and other variable field condition .
Based on the information provided, all dimensions and luminoire locations w -+� r Revisions
shown represent recommended positions. The engineer and/or architect must Reyl Date I By-
determine applicability of the layout to existing or future field conditions.
0 0
.1 .2 .3 .3 .3 .2 .2 .1 12 .3 .4 .5 .5 .3 .2 .1 O 0
2 .4 .8 .9 .8 .S .3 .2 13 .3 1.1 I.7 1.4 .8 .3 .1 .1 0
.4 1 23 .9 2.3 1.2 47 3.9 IS .6 ,2 .1 Q
SUMMARY CANOPY
------------------
.a I.6 4.4 7.3 4.9 24 1.1 .9 .8 1.3 19 6.5 2.6 Z I 0 AVERAGE fc _ 53 . 72
MAXIMUM fc 66 .5
MINIMUM fc = 36
.6 I.e 51 .8 6A 3.7 2.6 2.1 1.6 L7 2.9 5, 4.5 2 .7 .1 0 AVERAGE/MINIMUM = 1 . 49
MAXIMUM/MINIMUM = 1 .85
.6 1,6 3.9 7.7 11.4 13 11.8 9.5 5.8 2.7 2 2, .4 .1 .1 0
SUMMARY INSIDE CURB
------------------
.6 1.4 3.5 11.4 36 41.7 45 40.1 17.5 4.6 12 0 O Q
AVERAGE fc = 7 . 49
MAXIMUM fC = 26 . 3
.6 1.4 4.1 16.1 58.4 56.9 25 62 2 0 0 Q MINIMUM fc = . 4
no AVERAGE/MINIMUM = 18.7e
MAXIMUM/MINIMUM = 65 . 75
.6 1.5 4.5 17.1 1 58.8 65 fl. 25.6 6,7 2.2 0 0 0
MAINTAINED FOOTCANDLE VALUES AT GRADE,
.6 1.5 4.6 18.1 52.8 60.9 66.5 60. 243 6.5 2 0 0 1 USING A .72 MAINTENANCE FACTOR.
.6 1.4 4.5 18.8 59.9 57, 22.9 6.3 2 .2 .2 .1
.5 1.1 3.5 14.5 We 48,EM Sib Ile 18.8 5.5 2. 4.6 4. 2. .9 .3 .1
NOTE: ALL 12' POLES TO BE MOUNTED ON DECOR ATIVECONCRETE PEDESTALS
2' ABOVE GRADE, FOR A TOTAL MOUNTING HEIGHT OF 14'.
4 .8 15. 21.2 26,3 2219 I0.8 4.8 4.2 5 7.8 7..9 1.1 .4 .1
2 .5 1 2 3.6 6.4 9.6 5.1 4.7 7.6 7.1 6 .8 1 .3 .1
.2 .3 .8 1.3 2.3 3.4 3 2,8 4.3 1111111111W.7 4.6 2.8 1.5 .6 .2 .1
.1 1 2 .5 .8 1.1 1.2 1.5 2.4 3.9 3.9 12 .7 .3 .2 .1
.1 a .1 .2 .2 ,3 .5 .6 1 1.3 1.4 .9 .5 .3 .2 .1 ,k
0 .1 .1 .1 .1 .2 .2 .2 .3 .4 y .4 .2 .2 l l O
CANOPY FIXTURE LOCATIONS INDICATED ARE SUBJECT TO LIMITATIONS IMPOSED BY THE
CANOPY CONSTRUCTION. BE CERTAIN TO CHECK FOR POSSIBLE INTERFERENCES BEFORE
CUTTING FIXTURE OPENINGS.
D
4n d us tries
IOU ALIWKE OR P.O.DIX 42729 WWI,ON 45242
(513) 703-32M . FAX (513) 703-0023
LIGHTING PROPOSAL FOR
men B 5 RLM-ALUM-12-S 1 DPB-2 2 BD-100-MH-120-LDS98- 2 258 C--STORE
■ A 12 RIG-S-400-SMH-73 1 458 AGAWAM, MA
This lighting pattern represents #Iluminotion levels calculated from laboratory data
TYPE TY POLE QTY BRACKET 1QTY1 OTHER TY FIXTURE TY WATTS/AssmiY scAtz, 1"=20' L0-30695
taken under controlled conditions In accordance with Illuminating Engineering Society ASSEMBLY ASSEMBLIES EACH CONSISTING OF: 67$6 PATE: 9--24-98
approved methods. Actual performance of any manufacturers luminaire may vary due to
variation in electrical voltage, tolerance In lamps, and other variable field conditions. BILL OF MATERIALS TOTAL WATTS 9Y: 0013 SHEET 1 OF 1
'e..-e
Vanasse Hangen BrustUn, Inc.
z Tmsportafion
Land Development
';l n.e.00 & j 000 GAL
Environmental Servioes
12,
OLAD
,�WNDER,G�
N 101 Walnut Street,P.O.Box 9151
413ER�
TA N kils
�EhOIIN
Watertown,Massachusetts 02471
e�'
617 9241770•FAX 617 924 2M
-2
--d SITE PLAN APPPOVAL
A
AGAWAM PLANNINU SCARD
,1 A 199
0 o
'w
0
4
0
0 v
C-STORE
3
A
__-1,972 8F
QL
1> f
CANOPY
DRAIN (TX
Pi
Pt
CB 1 `♦ �, c � `; ,;i ":6' 2";i
4 R0W R96.8 � 9f.0 I
R=97
1 94.00
2 9P�C_11
ou T)
A ��94.31) 'CANOPY
1=9436. CANOPI
1-94.30 CANOPY
1 94.30 -CANOPY
OP., x" -uu� alMb 4
1 93.90 ',fou
V. 1N 94.12M
V3 FrM
kP '2- ..Nv. :!!r A.25
6CUCI
Ch SAWCUT LIN TYP.)
007
`2 ISTING WA
is .� .� - E 1 !! \4� .l:r'I�I�Y' �.f I }
TER--' 7
T;
97.4
k
a
98
9 7C
4
'!4
A
_2
20 0 20 40
....... ........ .............. 41
SCALE IN FEET
DROP, 0,0NNE
-CTION
TO EXISTING SEWER
PER' '
STANDARDS
T,
v
1 TOWN COMMENTS 10/13/98
24' DIA NOTES: NOTES: No. Revision Date AppTd.
1. ALL SECTIONS SHALL BE DESIGNED FOR 1, ALL SECTIONS SHALL BE DESIGNED FORACCESS I
HS-20 LOADING. HS-20 LOADING. Designed b=7rawn by Checked by
iv m 2. COPOLYMER MANHOLE STEPS SHALL BE 2. PROVIDE "V" KNOCKOUTS FOR PIPES WITH CAD checked by Approved by
INSTALLED AT 12' O.C. FOR THE FULL I' MAX. CLEARANCE TO OUTSIDE OF PIPE.
DEPTH OF THE STRUCTURE. MORTAR ALL PIPE CONNECTIONS,
48' DIA. MANHOLE Scale Date
9/16/98
3. PROVIDE "\r KNOCKOUTS FOR PIPES WITH 3. JOINT SEALANT BETWEEN PRECAST SECTIONS Project Title
AL HATE TOP 5 1' MAX. CLEARANCE TO OUTSIDE OF PIPE- SHALL BE PREFORMED BUTYL RUBBER.
(STEEL REINFORCED FOR HS-20 LOADING) MORTAR ALL PIPE CONNECTIONS. 24' SQUARE 4. CATCH BASIN FRAME SHALL BE SET F.L. Roberts
4. JOINT SEALANT BETWEEN PRECAST SECTIONS IN FULL MORTAR BED.
FINISH SHALL BE PREFORMED BUTYL RUBBER. PENING (TYP ADJUST TO GRADE WITH CLAY BRICK AND SURFACE
GRADE 8' 24' DIA. 8' 5. DRAIN MANHOLE FRAME SHALL BE SET MORTAR (2 BRICK COURSES TYPICALLY, TREATMENT Main St. Gas Station
ACCE;� IN FULL MORTAR BED. 5 BRICK COURSES MAXIMUM) (VARIES)
SEE ADJUST TO GRADE WITH CLAY BRICK AND &MFNATE TOP SL68
MORTAR (2 BRICK COURSES TYPICALLY, RCED FOR HS-20 LOADING)(STEEL REINIFO
NOTE 5. 5 BRICK COURSES MAXIMUM) FINISH Convenience Store
GRADE DEPTH
00 1;� Agawam, Massachusetts
VARIES
SQUARE Issued for
z E 0
L)0 <im 00 cpb
�f= z n SEE NOTE 4 COMMON FILL/
0 Of 0 Imal
zw W(n ORDINARY BORROW
w 0 _J a- �.,STEPS. SEE 0
0 W < X 0
U z NOTE 2. Z J;�
w WR Permitting
ow 201 <Z0 _J
0 V) z F-
z UJ.w<W
U.J M P 00
in cc
w WWI 0 0S CU
< C3— 0
z waz 48' DIA. MIN, 0
cc Or 48' DIA. MANHOLE MIN. 0 0 Jw Drawing Title
LLJ LLJ 0 K
(n Zn SEE NOTE 3
< HAND
,,,---SEE NOTE 4. CL D TAMPED
OUTLET
HOOD HAUNCHING
lie --OUTLET 0 0 co
Grading,
DIA. COMPACTED
VARIES q. DIA. — 11
w z a 2� BEDDING
0 La
NF= INVERT VARIES 21 Drainage and
10; L 12"_
DIA. 11. COMPACTED
V)
(TYP)
V) VARIES
NON-SHRINK SUBGRADE
Z UJ ------- Ut•ilities Plan
0(n 12' GROUT
co
_- NON-SHRINK
GROUT z:
12' COMPACTED
0 0 GRAVEL
.1., cp
o C-1 0, �0 Q) �U�H
0 La:0
(� 00 :D
0 C� 0 Drawing Number
z
7,,7/7\7/\7'
Lwa 12- COMPACTED
0
SUBGRADE
L
SHELF TO BE FORMED TYP.L-CEMENT CONCRETE INVERT i
AT A SLOPE OF 1' PER k--12* COMPACTED C-3
FOOT (FOR PIPE SIZES Q
18 INCHES AND LARGER) --j GRAVEL
60 0 0 Cm
COMPACTED
SUBGRADE Sheet of
Ar�
Drain Manhole le (DM Catch Basin(CB)With Hood Utility Trench
3
Project Number
LD-101 A N.T.S. LD-105 A N.T.S. LD-118 A N.T.S. 06051
60510D
.z
7 5
FREE STA DINQ 519N6' f_b�kM
� , = EVERGREEN TREES & SEED
6" DECORATIVE
1 > ` Y R�! OCATE GAS FENCE ,; Vanwse Han en Bmst to nc.
I 2HANDICAP PARKING SIGN"` TANK VENTS
7" ON CE T H Y �„- � ., T�P�on
1 x N ER & MULCH ,� Laud Development
9`x18 Yu` , �� ,
PARKING G �r. �. a � :�: Environmental Services
HARDWOOD STAKES $,aa0 & 1400o GAL- '-;? SPACE (TYP,) rtE�,�,.,
6 DECORATIVE
OR DEADMAN (TYP.} UNDERGROUND ',E „I���, :: ;S' ,'' FENCE 101 Walnut Stt+eet,P.O.Boa 9151
02471
— TREE PIT :TQ REMAIN �' u':-R } y�' 4: .✓.r':�• ,t w Rco°'efs atertown,Massach�tsetta
4.4M `~ _yy 617 9241770 FAX 617 924 22,86
. 1' '+y 'N i'Y 4'1 f1
Self ��;' 4 v ' ' ��a 1'x15" 6' HIGH _' CKADE
26 5 Unleaded , 8 ROOT BALL SPLIT RAIL FENCE FENCE DUMPSTEf `ENCLOSURE
Self \ Iry - -
r
BLACK REINFORCED RUBBER •� -
' �� GUY WIRE ` : . 6 L SEED . SI _ N.IAI_
° �"l
=,Y s BUSINESS
``' HOSE (ABOVE FIRST BRANCH) r - "
o FGATfEP ` - -
` -ZONE.�'s�,/ LINE
PLAN ' TI-REE STRANDS OF10 GAUGE !,' ACCESSILE p :'�. �1 `,z. � rf% �.�ACCESSPBLE h
RAMP BY
' TWISTED GALVANIZED STEEL WIRE r'
/ OTHERS
- c-STORE y
2'x2"x8' HARDWOOD STAKE mom,\ 2 JH Sc MULCH
~' "'` ' .7 x61'
LGH j % ' : " r` CANO Y • 972 SF
rI (3 STAKES PER TREE) 4R a� b�"''�. ..CANOPY
_ , `::•, ��
14.5" TIGHTEN AS SHOWN. �`'
4 �' , v W/ M E1e1 S "I D
T - v WOMEN`S HAW) ICAP '�
u y ".' Pf7PQS D ACCESSIBLI
5
y' ON C�
Y ;,_ y.., RESTR00f't
TREE SHALL BE SET PLUMS, tjw
IfJtlVALt, i FENCE L,
AFTER SETTLEMENT
Y i 7
IS & NJLCHlit
�• .
Not To Scale -- \ \. J
RGOTBALL SHALL BE SET 2" � .,�� � � � .may. �� `f �• i1 .t�
ABOVE THE ESTABLISHED '' `} '•' # ':
FINISHED GRADE.
/ t r .. z
6 AR AT 7' ON
/— 3'" PINE BARK MULCH, 4` �ONC. SIDEWALK; 4 > " CENTER & M
/ DO NOT PLACE MULCH j f• 1 z3r �`J n� MULCH
POST SIG =o v' 20"f SPILT RAIL FENCE
WITHIN 3" OF TRUNK. Q `
p - ;f 47x "x22.5` H1G 3 FP
/
z o c e r
3"" SLOPE TO FORM 3- HIGH SAUCER. w. CIF b r _ .. 1. fn ,
K
--
PROPOSED 5
._f CONC. SIDEWALK ' _ __ D J,7
PLANT BACKFILL MIXTURE.
_..�� „_... •__,.r,, .. ....-..r. .-- _ _.................._- .._....^ __ -- - - ..,—_.__.ram...._.____. ..- ° 9_.__ ........ T..r.....
1
SURFACE " I j l uu �; t49.2L" _. --- ._.
r"1F s s4i 1 _r.,.....__—_._ E/ — UNTIE AND ROLL BACK BURLAP 2 FP 41, PROPOSED 5`
TREATMENT 10" 2 RADIUS (TYP.) J ACCESSIBLE ACCESSIBLE ;
FROM 1/3 OF ROOT BALL (MIN); \;; CONC. SIDEWALK
VARIES B" \ \ \ �\ ' ? TRAMP RAMP (TYP.)
2" 6" 2" I/��/�I/;. IF SYNTHETIC WRAP IS USED, '--- -' ;' (TYP.} -f�
_- BITUMINous / fi UH AND MULCH
REMOVE COMPLETELY. p
CONC. PAVEMENT " _/
SLOPE ¢ (TOP COURSE} 18 _,..,._ _...__- _._._
VARIES . _._.__...... ,.. .
-- EXISTING SUBGRADE, OR -------
BITUMINOUS —_ TOPSOIL MOUND COMPACTED
CONC. PAVEMENT PROPOSED 6"
k (BINDER COURSE) 12" VARIES 12" PROPOSED 6
2" BIT. CUdR.9':ro ,Rr
:; -' Iz r .r BIT. CURB
00 6" LOAM & SEED
oo O°° °o° O ° °°°o ° °° °° °° • •
3 o a ° 0 o o° 8 o`� °° °o ° 8°p Tree Planting (For Trees Under 4" Caliper) Z o a z a 40
08 NOTE: PUMP ISLANDS 1 AND 3 WITH PLANTERS ON SOUTH END OF ISLAND. 3' DISPENSERS AND 10'-8° ISLAND SCALE IN FEET
�co 00°o ° Oa °° °° ° °� °�� o o ao LD-SOl N.T.S. PUMP ISLANDS 2 AND 4 WITH PLANTERS ON SOUTH END OF ISLAND. 3' DISPENSERS AND 9' ISLAND
o ° Q °0 0 sop.
o ° oa°
0 MCA ° O'a� Va °�° C) °°�'C?
% p � P° Oo �°°
Q 0 °C�? a °°o o O od0 n 8 o ° °o O oaa� °O O ° aQ
\ ° c °
HARDWOOD STAKES
OR DEADMAN (TYP.)
TREE PIT
BITUMINOUS COMPACTED
TACK COAT GRAVEL BASE ROOT BALL
PI` LIST
COMPACTED GUY WIRE KEY Gnl. COTANIICAL N" COMMON NAM DIRE
— 1 TOWN COMMENTS 10/13/9$
SUBGRADE BLACK REINFORCED AR 11 THUJA OCCIDENTAL IS 'TECHY' TECHY ARBORVITAES 4'-5' HT. No. ReAston Dote ppvd.
RUBBER HOSE JH 14 JUNIPERU5 HORIZONTALIS 'BLUECHIP' CREEPING JUNIPER 19"-181, SPD.
PR 6 FRAXINUS PENNSYLANICA 'PATMORI=' PATMORE GREEN ASH 2-1I2"-3" CAL. Designed by Drown by Checked by
P�At�
THRI-E STRANDS OF #10 GAUGE LANDSCAPE NaM CAD checked by Approved by
TWISTED GALVANIZED STEEL WIRE -
1• ALL PLANTINGS WILL BE MAINTAINED AND THAT PORTION OF THE PU.iLIC 6.ALL TREES SHALL BE BALLED AND BURLAPPED,UNLESS OTHERWISE Scale ��. Date 9/16198
WAY ABUTTING THE PARCEL AND INCLUDING THE TREE BELT WILL BE NOTED, OR APPROVED BY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. Project 31tie
GALVANIZED EYE AND TURNBUCKLE
MAINTAINED IN A SAFE AND ATTRACTIVE CONDITION BY THE OWNER OF 1.FINAL QUANTITY FOR EACH PLANT TYPE SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE F.L.
THE PARGI=L PLAN. THIS NUMBER SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE IN CASE OF ANY r
(TREES OVER 10' HIGH ONLY) Roberts
DISCREPANCY BETWEEN QUANTITIES SHOWN ON THE PLANT LIST AND
2. ALL PROPOSED PLANTiNCs LOCATIONS SHALL BE STAKED CAREFULLY DISCREPANCY
THE PLAN.
- / A5 SHOWN ON THE PLANS FOR FIELD REVIEW BY THE OWNER'S
RE Main St. Gas Station
PRESENTATIVE PRIOR TO INSTALLATION. S.ANY PROPOSED PLANT SUBSTITUTIONS MUST 15E APPROVED IN
Bitnminoue Curb (BC) ! SQUARE 5x5 CEDAR POSTS s CONTRACTOR SMALL VERIFY LOCATIONS OF ALL UTILITIES WRITING BY THE OUNER'S REPRESENTATIVE,
ROOTBALL SHALL BE SET 2" WITH CEDAR PYRAMID CAP AND NOTIFY OlUll ERS REPRESENTATIVE OF CONFLICTS. 9. ALL PLANT MATERIALS INSTALLED SHALL MEET OR EXCEED THE Convenience Store
LD-410 N.T.S. ABOVE THE ESTABLISHED SPECIFICATIONS OF THE "AMERICAN STANDARDS FOR NURSERY
FINISHED GRADE. 4•NO PLANT MATERIALS SHALL 15E INSTALLED UNTIL ALL GRADING: AND STOCK" BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF NURSERYMEN, Agawam MasSaGhuSettS
E [-DADO CEDAR CONSTRUCTION PAS BEEN COMPLETED IN THE IMMEDIATE AREA. I0 ALL PLANT MATERIALS SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR ONE YEAR issued for
k i CAP STRIP 5.A 3-INCH DEEP SHREDDED PINE BARK SHALL BE INSTALLED UNDER FOLLOWING DATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE. I"
ALL. TREES AND SHRUBS, AND IN ALL PLANTING BEDS, AS SHOWN "al
ON THE PLANS, OR AS DIRECTED BY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. II. LOAM AND SEED ALL AREAS NOT OTHERWISE TREATED WITH 6" OF LOAM. I
4" CEMENT - J 3" PINE BARK MULCH, DO NOT Permitting
CONCRETE �— = PLACE MULCH WITHIN 3" OF TRUNK.
CURB VARIES W.W. MESH
FINISH Title
FINISH GRADE 1 x4 Drawing� . _F
PAVEMENT 3/16"/FT• f— SLOPE TO FORM 3" HIGH SAUCER. CEDAR BOARDS
x x `r �
x /------ 2"X2" HARDWOOD STAKE BUTTED ZONING TABLE Layout and -'44 .t
+ OR DEADMAN -
EXPANSION � �
�2,.�a`�•a����!"� JOINT 3� 7 � (3 STAKES PER TREE) ZONE: BUSINESS A
" SEALANT TIGHTEN AS SHOWN-
Materials Plax
GRAVEL BORROW (WHEN �' USE: GAS FILLING STATION
17
(COMPACTED) REQ'D) ,� ���\ PLANT BACKFILL MIXTURE.
NOTES: SECTION REQUIRED i PROVIDED
�^ UNTIE AND ROLL BACK BURLAP 8
,. P T YDE EXPANSION,5rT, WITH MINIMUM LOT FRONTAGE N A 114 300t S.F.
t
c. wiTy PRE- ��y/ S,. \\/\�/��/��/. FROM 1/3 OF ROOT BALL (MIN); _ 3 . / ...._ i it w
—.. II -
M YIN s FE o. ,LJ �`` ( ) I I f 1 , N A.___.. ' 120 ON MAIPJ STREETti9 I`
Mo�Lc�D �o;nT BILLER. IF SYNTHETIC WRAP IS USED, _._._._ ..>�.L E
Drawing
2. PROVDE Do�ED Duu�+Y 1/2" REMOVE COMPLETELY. CV
_ — Drawin Number
�o;'`Ts �.+ 4' O.C. � � FRONT YARD SETBACK _ _ ..... 3� 1 .35' (BUILDING)_-_ ----0"—(CANOPY) .
CONCRETE .
SIDEWALK i 12" VARIES 12" - ---EXISTING REAR YARD SETBACK -_ 25' t 33 5f F ' _-'-
3. PROVIDE BROOM F'IN€SH IN SUBGRADE, OR TOPSOIL - ------�-
I DIRECTION PERPENDICULAR 1/2" PREFORMED — - MOUND, COMPACTED SIDE YARD SETBACK - � NLA_.— 13_FT. —_ _ C' 2
I TO CURB. EXPANSION JOINT MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE~_.._. _ 1 50%..... 1 14%
- -
HAND NAILED WITH ALUMINUM ...MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT 45 K45'
BLDG. FACE OR M A _.,_,.� ..._....
FIXED OBJECT RING SHANK NAILS ... ._... _.._.._._. _.._..._..�,._..._,�.� ._ -_-, ,.._.__.�.I.rv._
JOINT DETAIL sheet of
TOTAL STALLS N/A 19 2 3
�____._.._..._.
Monolithic Concrete Curb & Sidewalk (MCC) Evergreen Tree Planting Decorative Fence STREE . IGHT OF WAY LINE jo, i .;..... ... ...
Project Number
06051
L'D-4.15
N.T.S. LD-503 N.T.S. REV N.T.S.
L11C17 i