The URL can be used to link to this page

CC'S FROM MHC i. i 77 1 The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Massachusetts Historical Commission .lanuary 18,2007 John I?lundo,Chief F,ngincer Massachusetts Highway Department 10 park.Plavv Boston,MA 02116 Attention: Geoffrey.FulOone -RIS: Reconstruction of Bridge Street,Salem,MA;MI110 601097;MHC4 RC.41292 Dear Mr. Blundo: Thank you for providing inhumation concerning,the 25%design of the above referenced project proposal,which our office received front Rizzo Associates,on December 21,2006. Staff of the Massachusetts I-listened]Commission have reviewed the information providedand have the following comments. The project involves reconstruction of Bridge Street between Howard Street and the Roverly-Salem Bridge. Work will , include full-depth roadway and sidewalk reconstruction,pedestrian and traffic safety improvements.parking- _ improvements for the abutting businesses. landscape and strectscapc improvements,street lighting and drainage - improvements. - A review of MI Us files indicates that the project area includes.the Bridge Street Neck Historic District,which is listed in the National Register off listoric places(36 CFR 60),and the Thomas March Woodbridge Nouse at 48 Bridge Street (MI-ICH SAI .2968).which is listed individually in the National Register of Historic Places and on which MI 1C.holds a preservation restriction. The project area also includes the Bridge Streetscape(MHCH SAL.DI)as well as numerous other properties alone Bridge Street that are included in Mi IC's Inventory of Ilistoric and Archaeological Assets a]'the Commonwealth and may be eligible for listing in the National Register off listoric Places(36 CPR 60). The MHC encourages your consideration of these historic properties us the design progresses. These conunents are offered to assist in meeting the MassHighway Department's 25%lingineering Directive pursuant to Section 106 of the National historic Preservation Act of 966 as amended(36 CFR 800)and Massachusetts General - Laws,Chapter 9. Sections 26-27C(950 CMR 71). If you have any questions,please feel free to contact Walter Maros at this of7icc. ffSi//nffcuel) Ann M. Lattinvillc Director of Architectural Review Massachusetts historical Commission sc: Steve Roper,MI If)-CRS Salem Historical Commission _ - Historic Salem, Inc. 220 Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, Massachusetts 02125 (617) 727-8470•Fax: (617) 727-5128 www.sec.state.ma.us/mhc M .� ��'' Governor Lt. Governor Secretary Commissioner April 15, 2004 RE: SALEM-BEVERLY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS (005402) SECTION 106 EFFECT FINDING Mr. Stanley Gee Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 55 Broadway, Ioth Floor Cambridge, MA 02142 Attn: John McVann Dear Mr. Gee: The Massachusetts Highway Department (MassHighway) has agreed to realign an 1800'- long stretch of proposed roadway comprising the southerly end of the proposed Bridge Street Bypass in Salem. The bypass in its entirety will be a one-mile-long roadway running southerly from the newly completed (1996)Veterans Memorial Bridge to connect with the existing Bridge Street in the vicinity of Washington Street in downtown Salem. The bypass was an original element of the Federally funded Salem-Beverly Transportation Project, which was reviewed by the Federal Highway Administration(FHWA) under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 in 1988-92. That original Section 106 review resulted in a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) signed in 1992. The purpose of the present letter is to address new effects to historic and archaeological resources resulting from the proposed realignment, as well as potential effects to historic resources identified since 1992. This is being done in accordance with: Stipulation I of the 1992 MOA; the regulations implementing Section 106 (36 CFR 800); and the request of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) as expressed in their August 5, 2002 letter to your office (see enclosed copies of the MOA and the ACHP letter—Encs. C and D). The Bridge Street Bypass, as it was proposed and initially reviewed in the late 1980s/early 1990s, ran closely parallel to (easterly of) the existing Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority(MBTA) commuter rail line all the way from the Veterans Memorial Bridge to the head of Washington Street in downtown Salem (see the enclosed, annotated sketch of"Bridge Street By-Pass Terminus Alignments" —Enc. E). As it approached its southerly terminus, the bypass would have risen on an elevated viaduct to meet the intersection of Washington Street and existing Bridge Street at grade. This is the form in which the bypass was initially reviewed under Section 106, and Stipulation I of the 1992 MOA: "Design of the Bridge Street Relocation, Salem,"* stated that the detailed design of the bypass would be reviewed in consultation with the Salem Historical Commission(SHC), the Salem Planning Department ` *[Stipulation I. included both the"Bridge Street By-pass" (from the new bridge westerly to Washington Street) and the"Bridge Street Reconstruction"(from Washington Street westerly to Boston Street).] Massachusetts Highway Department• Ten Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116-3973 (617) 973-7800 (SPD), and the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer(SHPO) as it was developed. At the 25%Design Public Hearing for the Bridge Street Bypass in 1997, several Salem residents suggested that the southerly end of the bypass be realigned in order to eliminate the viaduct and open up the views of the North River. Such an alignment had not been considered previously, as the Parker Brothers factory complex was still in operation on the site in question when the bypass was originally laid out. When Parker Brothers closed and the new owners of the property cleared the site for redevelopment, the City recognized an opportunity to improve the design of the bypass by bringing it through the old factory site at grade, instead of going around it on a viaduct. Both outgoing Salem Mayor Neil Harrington and Mayor-elect Stanley Usovicz met with MassHighway officials and voiced their support for the at-grade (no viaduct) terminus alignment. After studying the proposed realignment (known as the City's Preferred Alternative) MassHighway agreed to change the original design to the City's Preferred Alternative. The proposed new alignment will swing away from the MBTA right-of-way and cross the former Parker Brothers (now Jefferson at Salem) property to connect with Bridge Street near St. Peter Street. A new signalized intersection will be required where the bypass connects with Bridge Street; signals will be added at the existing St. Peter Street--Bridge Street intersection; and a new 3-way signalized intersection at Washington and Bridge streets will replace the existing rotary. At its northerly end, the realigned bypass roadway will consist of two 12' wide travel lanes flanked by 8' shoulders;through its southerly section, the shoulders will be eliminated and the roadway will be widened to include two 12' travel lanes in each direction, plus an additional taming/storage lane at each signalized intersection. New cement concrete sidewalks will be constructed along both sides of Bridge Street and along the easterly side of the realigned bypass; this sidewalk and the one on the northerly side of Bridge Street,will be 10' wide and will function as part of the City of Salem's expanding bikeway/sidewalk network. The existing sidewalk and substandard railing on the northerly face of the 1952 bridge/tunnel at the head of Washington Street (S-01-017 — see below)will be replaced by a new sidewalk and a new concrete parapet carrying an ornamental metal fence backed (over the railroad tracks) by mesh fabric, all painted black. The existing bronze plaque on the bridge's easterly end post will be, removed and reset on the new end post in the same location. The replacement highway guardrails on the approaches to this bridge will be weathering steel on timber posts. City of Salem Standard ornamental street lights will be used throughout the downtown and Bridge Street Neck Historic District portions of the project area; hundreds of trees, ornamental shrubs, vines, and flowering perennials will be set out along the new roadway. (See the enclosed copies of selected project plans—Enc. A.) The realignment of the bypass will require the demolition of one building—the former Harley-Davidson Outlet at 234-240 Bridge Street (SAL.3563;see photo I of Enc. B). An enlarged and heavily altered concrete block commercial structure, this building seems to have started life as a single-story, mid-20`h century gas station. The later additions and remodelings, however, have virtually obliterated whatever original architectural character the building might have had. In the opinion of MassHighway's Cultural Resources Unit (CRU) staff, the former 2 Harley-Davidson Outlet isnot eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NR) The realigned bypass will require some alterations of Bridge S-01-017, the concrete rigid frame structure that presently carries Bridge Street and the upper end of Washington Street over the MBTA commuter rail line (see photo 2 and the enclosed NR eligibility review package for the bridge—Enc. F). Completed in 1952, this primarily underground structure was less than 50 years old when the original Section 106 review was conducted. The bridge is now over the 50- year threshold and has been reviewed by MassHighway's Historic Bridge Specialist for National Register eligibility. As a relatively late, atypical, and generally undistinguished example of a somewhat uncommon 20`h century structural type, it is the opinion of MassHighway's Historic Bridge Specialist that Bridge 5-01-017 is not eligible for listing in the National Register. The complete National Register eligibility review package for the bridge is enclosed. HISTORIC PROPERTIES /DISTRICTS The realignment of the Bridge Street Bypass will bring the proposed bypass roadway closer than originally designed to the following, previously known National Register-listed properties/district (see annotated plan sheets 30-34 for the locations of each): • First Universalist Church (211 Bridge Street); • Bessie Munroe House (7 Ash Street); • Howard Street Cemetery (SW corner of Howard and Bridge streets), and the • Salem Jail and Jailer's House (50 and 48 St. Peter Street) contributing elements of the • Salem Common Historic District. The southerly end of the realigned bypass will still be adjacent to the NR-listed: • Essex County Court Building Complex (32 Federal Street). The proposed realignment will pass near, but will no longer require the relocation of the NR-eligible: • Salem Railroad Signal Tower (242 Bridge Street). In addition, an extensive neighborhood east of, and adjacent to the bypass was entered into the National Register in 2002 as the: • ' Bridge Street Neck Historic District. Potential impacts on this now NR-listed district were not addressed in the original Section 106 review process,but will be considered here. The First Universalist Church (SAL.2432; see photos 3, 4) is a two-story brick . meetinghouse of traditional form, constructed from the designs of William Putnam in 1808-09 and remodeled numerous times since. The gable-roofed block of the meetinghouse faces south, its fagade marked by a projecting gabled pavilion and central bell tower that front on a small 3 plaza off Rust Street. The rear of the church— a largely blank three-story brick wall— faces north onto Bridge Street. Only two original windows are still open in this northern wall (the pair at the gallery level near the corners of the building); others, including a small fan window in the gable, have been bricked in. Three new windows and a service doorway have been cut into the first floor and basement levels of this wall. The First Universalist Church is significant as one of two Federal period churches still standing in Salem, and as one of only two buildings to survive (the Munroe House is the other) in an early 19'h century vernacular neighborhood that was cleared for urban renewal. The Bessie Munroe House (SAL.2431; see photo 5) is a restored, two-story, one-room- deep, hip-roofed Federal dwelling erected in 1811. Reportedly unique in Salem as a house of this type constructed of brick, the building was saved from demolition for urban renewal in 1968 when its then owner, Bessie Munroe, refused to vacate the premises. The Munroe House and its neighbor, the First Universalist Church, were the only buildings in this early 19'h century vernacular neighborhood to survive urban renewal. The Howard Street Cemetery (SAL.807; see photos 6, 20-24), laid out by the City of Salem in 1801, is a nearly flat 2/2-acre parcel containing some 1200 gravestones. It is Salem's fourth-oldest burying ground, and contains burials dating from 1801 through 1954. A long, L- shaped "Chain Tomb" (a continuous series of mound tombs, many of them marked on top by a series of distinctive, granite box tomb markers) running down the spine of the cemetery before turning east to end near Howard Street, is one of its major features; the double row of hillside tombs built into the sloping land facing Bridge Street is another. The northerly half of the cemetery is enclosed by a series of stone retaining walls, of markedly differing characters and presumed ages of construction. Along the cemetery's Bridge Street frontage, a low,heavily mortared rubble masonry retaining wall with roughly squared granite coping course starts at a chain-link-fenced opening near Howard Street and extends westerly. This wall rises and changes character several times (and shows evidence of various repairs) as it bends southerly and then westerly around the site of the former City Scales, and then meets the end of a finely cut, large- dimension granite ashlar retaining wall that lines the westerly side of the cemetery along the former Salem Jail access drive. An entirely separate retaining wall, running along the Howard Street edge of the cemetery, is a stepped wall some 2 feet to 4 feet high, of high-quality drafted granite ashlar capped by long, cut granite copings. This wall ends with a cut vertical post near Bridge Street; it appears that this wall and the end of the rough wall along Bridge Street never met, but simply framed an opening into the northeasterly comer of the cemetery. The Salem Jail (SAL.251; see photo 7) is an imposing but now vacant granite-walled building composed of an original rectangular block constructed in 1811-13, with an 1884/85 granite addition to the west. The older structure was remodeled, and the two Victorian cupolas added, at that time. There are also smaller brick additions on the north and east of the original block. A low, dressed granite ashlar retaining wall, currently topped by a razor-wire-capped security fence, lines the property's Bridge Street frontage (see photo 25). Behind (south of) the jail on St. Peter Street, the three-story brick Jailer's House (SAL.250; see photo 7) was, originally, a handsomely detailed 1813 Federal dwelling with a low hipped roof and a southern wing. The Jailer's House has been vacant for many years, and has suffered a fire. Most of its 4 finely crafted wooden exterior details (including a handsome Doric front entry porch) have been removed. The Salem Common Historic District(SAL.HW) is composed of 266 properties surrounding, and spreading outward along the streets radiating from, the Salem Common. The district's buildings are primarily residential and range in date from the seventeenth through the mid-twentieth centuries. The district is characterized by the generally high architectural quality of its buildings, and by the paucity of intrusive elements or gap sites. The area is also significant as one of the centers of Salem's early development, and as one associated with some of the city's most prominent citizens. The historic district's boundaries extend westward just far enough to contain the Salem Jail, the Jailer's House, and the Howard Street Cemetery. The Bridge Street Neck Historic District is a densely developed 80-acre urban neighborhood comprising some 416 buildings and sites located on the peninsula of land between the North River and Collins Cove,north of downtown Salem. The district stretches northerly from Howard Street Extension to March Street, and is bounded along its entire westerly edge by the MBTA commuter rail right-of-way. The area within the district is primarily residential, except for scattered commercial uses (many of them modem) along Bridge Street, which is the neighborhood's spine. Buildings within the district range in date from the late 18t1 century up to the present; their original architectural characters tend to be modest, and a high proportion of the standing structures have been covered with artificial siding and/or otherwise altered. More than a dozen non-contributing vacant lots are included within the district's bounds— most of these (ten) are located along the district's westerly edge, adjacent to the MBTA right of way. One of the largest of these lots (Lot F, on Howard Street Extension) has been redeveloped as part of the Jefferson at Salem project and is presently occupied by several blocks of new townhouses. The Essex County Court Building Complex (SAL.IB; see photos 8, 9) consists of an impressive row of three stone courthouses including, from east to west: an 1839-41 Greek Revival granite temple designed by Boston architect, Richard Bond; an 1861-62 brownstone Italianate courthouse designed by Enoch Fuller(with an 1880s Richardsonian Romanesque addition/remodeling); and a 1908-09 granite Neoclassical temple by Clarence H. Blackall (with a . 1979-81 reinforced-concrete and glass addition by Phineas Alpers). Each building is individually noteworthy for its architectural character, and the three together form an intriguing history of the evolution of courthouse architecture from the mid-19`1 century through the end of the 20th century. The Salem Railroad Signal Tower (SAL.3579; see photo 10), constructed in 1927 and moved to its present site in 1950, is one of four surviving(of six original) two-story brick signal towers constructed for the Boston & Maine Railroad as part of a system-wide signal improvement program undertaken between 1926 and 1930. The tower originally housed both electrical signaling and mechanical switching equipment as part of an interlocking control system. All of the original switching and signaling equipment has been removed, and the original interior staircase was replaced by the present outside metal staircase in 1956. y 5 ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Virtually the entire area that will be traversed by the realigned portion.of the proposed bypass was once part of the North River. It was cut off from the river by the construction of the dike carrying the Eastern Railroad (now the MBTA line) in the 1840s,but remained an expanse of open water and mud flats into at least the 1880s. An 1884 city atlas shows the open water extending almost as far as Northey Street, but the future location of Howard Street Extension had already been plotted out on dashed lines. Presumably, this marks the start of the Parker Brothers Company's campaign to fill the entire area and cover it with their manufacturing plant and parking lots. The entire 14-building Parker Brothers manufacturing complex,built, extended and remodeled numerous times between 1875 and 1974, was demolished by a later, private owner in 1996, and the site (including four parking lots adjoining the buildings)was graded flat. The property was then sold for development, and the current owners have constructed the Jefferson at Salem condominium project on most of the site (leaving the route of the proposed realigned bypass as open land between the new condominium buildings— see photos 11, 12). The Massachusetts Historical Commission, in their September 1, 2000 review of the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Jefferson at Salem project(see Enc. G), concluded that the project would have no adverse effect on historic properties, and mentioned no archaeological concerns of any kind. Given this area's history as made land created by late 19`h/early 20`h century reclamation activities, initially developed for industrial use, and then leveled and redeveloped in recent years for a condominium complex, virtually no potential can be ascribed to this site for the recovery of any undisturbed prehistoric or historic archaeological resources. The open parcel to be impacted by the realigned portion of the Bridge Street Bypass project has no archaeological value, and no impacts to archaeological resources are anticipated in this area. IMPACTS/EFFECTS First Universalist Church. The realignment of the bypass will mean that Bridge Street, as it presently exists behind the church property, will be widened by approximately 20', all of the widening on the northerly side of the existing roadway, AWAY from the church property (see photos 13-19 and plan sheets 13-19). The widening will allow the expanded roadway to carry two lanes of through traffic in each direction, plus a left turn lane for southbound Bridge Street traffic turning onto-Washington Street. A new cement concrete sidewalk, of the same width and in the same location, will replace the existing concrete sidewalk between the roadway and the church building. The only proposed changes in the sidewalk layout will be the inclusion of new wheelchair ramps at both the Rust St. and the Ash St. corners, and a rounding back of the Ash St. comer (located across a paved parking lot from the church building). No taking of church property will be required, and pedestrian and vehicular traffic will come no closer to the church building than at present. The net effect of the roadway widening, in fact,will be to shift some of the current, very heavy, vehicular traffic on Bridge Street (and some of its attendant noise, pollution and vibration) up to 20' further away from the church building. 6 On the opposite side of Bridge Street from the church, an undistinguished 2& century concrete-block commercial building(the former Harley-Davidson Outlet, 234-240 Bridge St.) will be removed, as will the existing steel pipe highway guardrail and the damaged chain link fencing at the back of the existing sidewalk. A row of London plane trees will be planted behind a new 10' wide cement concrete sidewalk/bikeway, backed by new, weathering steel beam guardrail mounted on wooden posts, beyond the widened Bridge Street (see plan sheets 30 and 111). The originally proposed bypass viaduct, which would have blocked some views from the church toward the North River, will not be constructed. It is the opinion of MassHighway's Cultural Resources Unit staff that the proposed realignment will have no effect on those architectural and historical characteristics that qualify the First Universalist Church for listing in the National Register. Bessie Munroe House. The Munroe House is located on Ash Street, some 150' south of Bridge Street, and is almost totally shielded from the proposed project area by the three-story First Church Parish House, which is located directly behind it(see photo 5). It is the opinion of MassHighway's Cultural Resources Unit staff that the proposed realignment of the Bridge Street Bypass will have no effect on those historical and architectural characteristics of the Bessie Munroe House that qualify the property for listing in the National Register. Howard Street Cemetery. The realignment of the bypass will pull Bridge Street away from the northern side of the Howard Street Cemetery, and will create a new, signalized intersection within the Jefferson at Salem condominium project some 150' northwest of the cemetery (see photos 11 and 25 and plan sheet 31). An irregular triangle of land (some 20— 25,000 square feet) in front of the cemetery and the old Salem Jail,freed up by this relocation, will be landscaped as a small park. The existing driveway between the cemetery and the jail will be extended through the back of this triangle to the relocated streets, but the remainder of the parcel will be loamed, seeded, and planted with rows of maples and beds of roses and daylilies. The site of the old City Scales will remain as a discrete space tucked in against the cemetery wall. (See plan sheets 31 and 112). MassHighway has agreed to rehabilitate the existing masonry retaining walls of the cemetery as part of this project. MassHighway and its design consultants have consulted extensively with the Salem Historical and Cemetery Commissions regarding the condition and proposed treatment of these walls. MassHighway has agreed to repair and/or rebuild, as necessary, the deteriorated portions of the walls, carefully matching the original character of the masonry in each of its several sections. The intrusive and damaging vegetation that has grown up along the front of the walls will be removed; the modern chain link fence that currently closes the opening between the masonry walls at the cemetery's northeasterly corner will be replaced by a row of granite bollards, designed and placed in consultation with the Salem Historical and Cemetery Commissions. (See photos 6, 20-24, plan sheets 23, 119, and Special Provisions 996.06 and 707.11 —Encs. H and 1.) 7 It is the opinion of MassHighway's Cultural Resources Unit staff that the proposed work, which will be performed in a manner consistent with the Secretary's standards for the treatment of historic properties, will have no adverse effect on those characteristics which qualify the Howard Street Cemetery for listing in the National Register as a contributing element in the Salem Common Historic District. Salem Jail and Jailers House. The proposed realignment of the Bridge Street Bypass will pull Bridge Street some 50 feet to 100 feet away from the northerly edge of the Salem Jail/Jailer's House property(see photo 25 and plan sheets 23 and 31). An irregular triangle of land (some 20—25,000 square feet) in front of the cemetery and the old Salem Jail, freed up by this relocation, will be landscaped as a small park. The existing bituminous concrete sidewalk, roadway, and granite curbing along Bridge Street in front of the jail will be removed; a new cement concrete sidewalk will extend the existing easterly sidewalk on St. Peter Street northerly to the location of the realigned bypass. The existing driveway between the cemetery and the jail will be extended (both easterly and westerly) through the back of this triangle to the relocated streets, the remainder of the parcel will be learned, seeded, and planted with rows of maples and beds of roses and daylilies. No land will be taken from the Jail property; the masonry retaining wall along its northerly edge will not be impacted and, in fact, there will there be no physical impacts to the property at all. It is the opinion of MassHighway's Cultural Resources Unit staff that the proposed realignment of the Bridge Street Bypass will have no effect upon those characteristics of the Salem Jail and Jailer's House that qualify them for listing in the National Register as contributing elements in the Salem Common Historic District. Given the above determinations for the Howard Street Cemetery and the Salem Jail and Jailer's House, it is likewise the opinion of MassHighway's Cultural Resources Unit staff that the realignment of the Bridge Street Bypass will have no adverse effect on the Salem Common Historic District as a whole. Bride Street Neck Historic District (BSNHD). The realigned Bridge Street Bypass will pass through the southwesterly corner of the BSNHD, and then run northerly along its westerly bounds. The City of Salem's proposed bikeway/sidewalk, to be built as part of this project, will be located between the new roadway and the buildings of the historic district. The bikeway/sidewalk, its associated connections and landscaping, and one runoff/retention area, will be constructed on property taken by the City of Salem from properties within the HD's bounds. (See photos 26-29 and plan sheets 31-34, and 112-15.) All but two of the properties where takings will be required are identified in the Bridge Street Neck Historic District National Register nomination as noncontributing elements. A long, narrow strip of land will be taken from the contributing Carlton School property (SAL.3835) at 12-20 Skerry Street; the City of Salem, however, has already demolished the 1949 school building and is the process of erecting its replacement (see photo 29). A second, shorter strip of land will be taken from the rear of the contributing J&W Marine property(SAL.3897) at 56 Bridge St. The only building on this property(a former gas station) fronts on Bridge St.; the strip being taken lies across the end of a long, narrow, chain-link fenced parking/storage area(see photo 30) some 300' behind the 8 structure. The only building within the Bridge Street Neck Historic District that is scheduled for demolition— a modern, concrete-block shop at 15 Pearl Street (see photo 31)—is identified in the NR nomination as a noncontributing structure. Minor project work along the westerly edge of the BSNHD will include the construction or planting of: • Ornamental trees, shrubs, and vines along the bikeway/sidewalk(see plan sheets 112-115); • Landscaped entry points onto the bikeway/sidewalk, featuring naturalistic groupings of granite boulders at each entrance from the district's streets; one boulder at each entrance will have the street name sandblasted into it (see plan sheets 118, 119); • A swale between the roadway and the bikeway/sidewalk from the vicinity of Smith Street to Conant Street, draining into the vegetated detention basin at the head of Sanders Street (see plan sheet 33); • A concrete retaining wall topped by an ornamental metal safety railing, painted black, from the end of Conant Street to March Street (see plan sheets 87-91). • Ornamental City of Salem Standard fluted light poles along the roadway, and ornamental City of Salem Standard fluted light poles with neo-classical luminaires along the bikeway/sidewalk along the entire length of the BSNHD; the metal elements painted black (see plan sheet 110); • 8' high wooden stockade fences between the bikeway/sidewalk and the rear of the closest residential properties along the western edge of the district(see plan sheet 19); • On the opposite side of the bypass as it passes the district, the chain link fence atop the low concrete retaining wall between the bypass and the MBTA tracks will be given a black vinyl coating(see plan sheets 92-97). The physical impacts to properties within the Bridge Street Neck Historic District, proposed as part of the relocated Bridge Street Bypass, will be almost exclusively confined to properties identified as non-contributing (vacant lots and one intrusive modern shop building). The proposed bikeway, plantings, street furniture, fences, and walls that will edge the district have all been designed in consultation with the consulting parties named in Stipulation I of the 1992 MOA, with major input from the Bridge Street Neck Neighborhood Association and the Downtown Salem Neighborhood Association (see "Section 106 Consultation" discussion, below). Each reasonable request from the neighborhood associations that was compatible with acceptable safety standards has been incorporated into the final plans. It is the opinion of MassHighway's Cultural Resources Unit staff that the proposed work will have no adverse effect upon those characteristics of the Bridge Street Neck Historic District that qualify the district for inclusion in the National Register. Essex County Court Building Complex (see photos 8, 9). As in the previously reviewed version of this project, the proposed realignment of the Bridge Street Bypass will involve only minor work (sidewalk.and guardrail replacement, traffic island reconfiguration, traffic signal installation, roadway resurfacing/reconstruction, with no widening of the roadway) adjacent to the northeastern comer of the Essex County Court Building Complex. No land will be taken from the courthouse complex; there will be no physical impacts upon the property; and the new, 9 black-painted bridge rail and weathering steel guardrail on the northerly side of Bridge Street might be seen as improvements to the courthouses' setting. (See plan sheets 30, 121, and 124.) It is the opinion of MassHighway's Cultural Resources Unit staff that the proposed realignment of the Bridge Street Bypass will have no effect upon those characteristics of the Essex County Courthouse Building Complex that qualify the complex for listing in the National Register. Salem Railroad Signal Tower(see photo 10). The proposed realignment of the Bridge Street Bypass will eliminate all project impacts to the Salem Railroad Signal Tower, a property that had been scheduled for relocation under Stipulation III of the 1992 MOA. Under the revised plans, no project work will occur within 20' of the signal tower building, and its setting will benefit from the removal of the intrusive, concrete block commercial building (234 Bridge Street) on the opposite side of the commuter rail tracks, and the installation of the new, black- painted bridge rail and weathering steel guardrail on the northerly side of Bridge Street. (See plan sheets 30, 121 and 124.) It is the opinion of MassHighway's Cultural Resources Unit staff that the proposed realignment of the Bridge Street Bypass will have no effect upon those characteristics of the Salem Railroad Signal Tower that qualify the tower for listing in the National Register. SECTION 106 CONSULTATION. In accordance with Stipulation I of the 1992 MOA, MassHighway and its design consultants have consulted with the Salem Historical Commission, the Salem Planning "Department, and the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer(and have considered the views of other, interested local parties) to ensure that the improvements associated with the realignment of the Bridge Street Bypass are compatible with neighboring historic properties. The Salem Planning Department has supported the realigned layout since it was proposed and developed in 1997/98. The Salem Historical Commission reviewed conceptual plans of the realignment in 1998 and stated, in their letter of August 6, 1998 (Enc. J) that although the realignment would result in a widened roadway in front of the First Universalist Church and the Bessie Munroe House (with possible negative impacts on those properties), "the elimination of the previously proposed viaduct which would have larger visual impact is an improvement for the community as a whole. In addition, the alternative alignment will provide an opportunity for a coordinated development of the Parker Brothers site and proposed new MBTA garage." The SHC did express its concern, however, about possible project impacts on the deteriorated stone retaining wall of the Howard Street Cemetery, and proposed that repair and/or replacement of the stone wall be made a part of the project. MassHighway has, in fact, incorporated the repair/rebuilding of the cemetery's historic stone walls into the project. On March 27, 2002, when the plans for the realigned bypass had reached the 75% design stage, MassHighway and its design consultants met with representatives of the SHC, the SPD, and the MA SHPO to review the 75% plans and discuss any remaining issues those three consulting parties might have regarding potential impacts on historic properties. .(Comments •10 previously submitted to the SPD by the Bridge Street Neck Neighborhood Association and The Downtown Salem Neighborhood Association were considered and discussed as well.) Consensus among the consulting parties was reached on most of the issues raised; the SHPO's follow-up letter of March 28, 2002 (Enc. K) noted "the project design satisfies Stipulation I of the MOA with the following issues to be resolved:" 1) Final details of the repair/rebuilding of the cemetery wall; 2) Types, styles of lighting fixtures, traffic signals, and traffic signal poles; 3) Possibility of covering the chain link fence between the bypass and the MBTA tracks with black vinyl; 4) Final design of the metal fence between the bypass and the bike/pedestrian trail. MassHighway and its design consultants continued to consult with the SPD and the SHC and have successfully resolved each of the above issues. Specifically: 1) MassHighway has agreed to carefully repair/rebuild the deteriorated sections of the historic masonry walls (see plan sheet 23 and in Special Provision 996.06) and to replace the existing chain link fence across.the opening at the northeast corner with granite bollards (see plan sheet 119 and Special Provision 707.11). 2 MassHighway has agreed to use City of Salem Standard ornamental light poles (both highway size, and bikeway/sidewalk size), colored black, in those portions of the project area in or adjacent to the downtown area, or the Bridge Street Neck Historic District (see plan sheet 110). 3) MassHighway has agreed to use black-vinyl-clad chain link fence between the bypass and the MBTA right-of-way(see plan sheet 92). 4) MassHighway has developed and agreed to use an ornamental metal safety railing, colored black, and similar in design to that used on the 1996 Veterans Memorial Bridge, between the bypass and the bike/pedestrian trail (see plan sheet 91). At the conclusion of this extended consultation process,both the Salem Historical Commission and the Salem Planning Department, as consulting parties named under Stipulation I of the 1992 MOA, expressed their satisfaction that "all reasonable measures have been taken to account for new effects on historic resources attributable to the realignment, and that the terms of Stipulation I of the MOA have been satisfied." (See enclosed copies of SPD and SHC letters of February 19, 2004—Encs. L, M.) If the Federal Highway Administration agrees with MassHighway's No Adverse Effect finding for the Salem-Beverly Transportation Improvement Project,Realignment of Bridge Street Bypass, and agree that the revised project fulfills the terms of Stipulation I of the 1992 MOA, please forward the enclosed copy of this letter and the full set of original supporting materials to the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer for her review and concurrence. Please forward, as well, the enclosed full copies of this package to: the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (signatory to the 1992 MOA); the Salem Historical Commission and the Salem Planning Department (signatories to the 1992 MOA and consulting parties under its 11 ,1, Stipulation I); and the following five parties who have expressed an interest in this project: the First Universalist Church, Salem; the Downtown Salem Neighborhood Association; Mr. James Treadwell, Mr. Staley McDermet; and Historic Salem, Incorporated. If you should have any questions, please contact Stephen J. Roper of MassHighway's Cultural Resources Unit at 617 973-7492. Sincerely., ,ZZ111Gregory H. Prendergast Deputy Chief Engineer Environmental sjr/do encs: A. Selected,annotated project plans(52 sheets) B. Project Review Photo Forms(31 photos on 16 sheets) C. 1992 MOA D. ACHP to FHWA, 8/5/02 E. Annotated"Bridge Street By-Pass Terminus Alignments" F. Bridge S-01-017 NR eligibility package G. MHC to EDEA, 9/1/00 H. Special Provision 996.06 I. Special Provision 707.11 J. SHC to MassHighway, 8/6/98 K. MHC to MassHighway,3/28/02 L. SHC to MassHighway, 2/19/04 M. SPD to MassHighway,2/19/04 also enclosed—packages to be forwarded to: ACHP SHC SPD First Universalist Church Downtown Salem Neighborhood Assoc. J.Treadwell S.MCDerntet Historic Salem,Inc. xc.: J. Blundo,Projects,w/o encs. S.McLaughlin,Project Management,w/encs. - 12 r MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) ' .• ei .t .. kt„I :' -AAAv I ILII i� �.'. . 4 1. Former Harley-Davidson Outlet, 234-40 Bridge St.; from SE. [To be demolished.] IT LSiA, _-4 i 2. View easterly on Bridge St. at Washington St., over S-01-017; from SW. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) F 77 j w { Naq - y NA MV d 3. First Universalist Church, 211 Bridge St., southern facade and western side; from S. Name h n aYz n R s� a 4. First Universalist Church, 211 Bridge St., northern (Bridge St.) elevation; from N. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) t � t T -7- a 5. Bessie Munroe House, 7 Ash St., with First Universalist Church and Parish House in rear; from SE. _� rt 6. Howard Street Cemetery, entry at corner of Bridge and Howard Sts.; from NE. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) I A v c it�- 40 v d ! i 7. Salem Jail (on left) and Jailer's House (on right), 50 and 48 St. Peter St.; from SW. } M i .f 8. Rear (northern) elevations of Essex County Court Building Complex, 32 Federal St.; from E. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) i i 1 t. Y� t� 1 x4 9. Rear (northern) elevations of Essex County Court Building Complex, 32 Federal St.; from NW. �s A kW j u ' �T 7� �F�.. 10. Salem Railroad Signal Tower, 242 Bridge St.; from SW. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) It 1 J F n .a I, I 11. Location of realigned bypass through Jefferson at Salem property - bypass will split off from Bridge St. near center of photo, and curve in front of building on right; from E. 1 � (e . 14still .- Air R R 3�f5�S YiFY,,��...} ✓` �gy 1'• "4^4 � e..L . 1J � Jim 12. Location of realigned bypass through Jefferson at Salem property - bypass will curve between yellow buildings on left, and white buildings on right; from S. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) a , u 13. Bridge St., between First Universalist Church (on right) and Jefferson at Salem.buildings (on left); from W. fr ht91 'Qi' dv z s� Y �y ♦ b�I.�fS 14. Closer view of Bridge St., between First Universalist Church (on right) and Jefferson at Salem buildings (on left); from W. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT — SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) P r r `i—c-C RAM . µ un �:.� �, h fir: h l 33ff � f a 15. Bridge St. at First Universalist Church; from NW. x. .�a 77*- 777 k y�"ww"nu "kS 4 u r Y A 3"i rY.4eR r� �� 5J °i�ri�a�f pv r p'k`'. V1 Ju�j° +} F 1 Jy °y IN _ L a W Y 4 16. Closer view, Bridge St. at First Universalist Church, with Jefferson at Salem buildings'on left; from SW. I� ' MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT — SALEM; REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) i- _,Mm _ A 17. Bridge St. at First Universalist Church, with Harley-Davidson Outlet at far right; from NE. .r �..g� 18. Bridge St. at First Universalist Church, across Ash St., with Harley-Davidson Outlet at center/right; from SE. f MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) y -s 19. Bridge St. between First Universalist Church (on left) and Jefferson at Salem buildings (on right) with Harley-Davidson Outlet at center, right; from NE. . r MI - 20. Howard Street Cemetery, view across Bridge St./Howard St. intersection; from N. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) RIK- r f '. i �a'- *'� '�� _� � �5"_ # "h „ . yea•�..—.,-�.�i - • .�.-� its.�'J'"A+r'��^'�'.r+-"'�'E'.e. '� �'' ,' `.k. .'tai i t F a 21. Howard Street Cemetery, retaining wall along Bridge St., westerly from cemetery entrance; from NE. i .. gam € , 22. Howard Street Cemetery, retaining wall along Bridge St., easterly from former location of City Scales; from W. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) Y � 23. Howard Street Cemetery, retaining wall along Bridge St., easterly from Salem Jail driveway and behind former location of City Scales; from W. as 410 t 24. Howard Street Cemetery, retaining wall along Howard St.; from SE. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT — SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) .tk PLS _R"x I }fit ' � p£- µ`• I 25. Bridge St. between Salem Jail (on right) and Jefferson at Salem (on left); from W. o- 3 _• _ arc�� -*�i^ •1'.�'�i }r...6 a NN �YyX� •Me } v i j aaFFyys� p� Lc�T �q 26. Location of bypass (on left, between chain link fence and MBTA tracks) at SW corner of Bridge Street Neck Historic District; from S. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) y 27; View toward location of bypass (center/left in middle distance) from north end of Saunders St., in the Bridge Street Neck Historic District; from SE. 1 4 i 1 y 1 3 ��w �+�� v.'mak._ �' '�T'j��ryz...`T•- 28. Location of bypass (on right and into center, along MBTA tracks) between Skerry and Conant Sts. in the Bridge Street Neck Historic District; from NE. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) , 29. Location of bypass (on left) between the replacement Carlton School (under construction on right) between Skerry and Burnside Sts. in the Bridge Street Neck Historic District; from SW. 111 i Jti� d 30. Location of bypass (on right) between March and Burnside Sts., across approx. 15' of fenced parking/storage yard of J&W Marine property (middle distance, center) in the Bridge Street Neck Historic District; from N. MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Project Review Photo Form Cultural Resources Unit 10 Park Plaza, Boston, MA 02116 PROJECT - SALEM: REALIGNMENT OF BRIDGE STREET BYPASS. (005402) i 79 - W '�,,,, ,,ice.. "` ' d �" #c " • _ „ �;: 31. Shop building at 15 Pearl St., a non-contributing structure in the Bridge Street Neck Historic District; from S. [To be demolished.] Advisory Council On C Historic Preservation The Old Post Office Building 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue,NW, #809 Washington,DC 20004 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGH74AY ADMINISTRATION, THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE H=STORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING THE SALEM—BEVERLY TRANSPORTATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has consulted with the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Council) pursuant to the regulations (36 CFR Part 800) implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f) , and it has been determined that the Salem- Beverly Transportation Project will have an effect upon historic properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places; and WHEREAS, the Massachusetts Highway Department (MHD) , the Beverly Historic District Commission, the Salem Historical Commission, and the Salem Planning Department have participated in the consultation and have been invited to concur in this Memorandum of Agrement; NOW, THEREFORE, FHWA, the Massachusetts SHPO, and the Council agree that the undertaking shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into account the effect of the undertaking on historic properties. Stipulations FHWA, in coordination with the MHD, will ensure that the following measures are carried out. I. DESIGN OF THE BRIDGE STREET RELOCATION, SALEM A. In consultation with the Salem Historical Commission, the Salem Planning Department, and the Massachusetts SHPO, a project design plan will be developed to ensure, within acceptable safety standards, that improvements associated with the Bridge Street Relocation are compatible with neighboring historic properties. Consultation should include, but not be 2 limited to lighting, pedestrian walkways, curbcuts and curbing, planting materials, waterfront design, traffic signals, and other roadway design details, and should be guided by the following considerations. 1. Lighting. Lighting, both for the roadway and pedestrian areas, should be compatible in style, scale, and location with the adjacent historic Properties. 2 . Curb cuts Curbing and Barriers. Curb cuts should be granite and of suitable dimensions and, if possible, should not be planned in the median strip. To the maximum extent possible, use of jersey barriers should be limited. 3 . Landscaping. To the extent possible, landscaping, both associated with the roadway and the waterfront park, should be employed to provide a year-round visual buffer between the project and adjacent historic properties and provide a noise barrier, as -appropriate. 4. Traffic Signals. Traffic signals and signing, while complying with ASHTO standards and the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUATCD) , should exclude the use of mastarms if at all possible. B. Following completion the project design plan will be reviewed by the Salem Historical Commission, the Salem Planning Department, and .the Massachusetts SHPO. Should any of these parties disagree on any provision of the design plan, the objection will be settled in accordance with Stipulation IV below, DISPUTE RESOLUTION. II. DESIGN OF THE BRIDGE AND BEVERLY APPROACH A. In consultation with the Beverly Planning Department, the Beverly Historic District Commission, and the Massachusetts SHPO, a project treatment plan for the bridge and Beverly approach portion of the project will be developed to ensure, within acceptable safety standards, that improvements associated with the bridge approach to Beverly are compatible to the neighboring historic district. This project treatment plan should include, but not be limited to, the following considerations. 3 1. Traffic Controls . The use of signing, signalization, and/or barriers, to be developed in coordination with the appropriate City officials, to ensure adequate traffic control to avoid an increase of traffic through the Fish Flake Historic District, to the extent possible and to be compatible with the character of the historic district. 2 . Lighting: The use of bridge lighting standards and directional signing should help reduce the perceived elevation of the bridge profile be compatible with the surrounding area and neighboring historic district to the extent possible. 3 . Barriers. Reevaluation of the use, type, and location of road barriers in the median strip and at side edges, to determine whether they would be desirable, safe, and effective, and, if so, what design would be most compatible with the neighboring historic district. The use of jersey barriers should be limited or avoided if at all possible. 4. Pedestrian Access. Enhancement of pedestrian access to the bridge and to the Ferry Way Landing to afford a safe and inviting access to both. 5. Landscaping. Development of a comprehensive landscaping scheme that would use indigenous species and decorative plantings, as well as appropriate paving materials land hardapprdesign elements, to mute the expanse ach road surface, wing walls , and abutments and enhance the gateway character of the approach location. 6. Signing. MHD should consider placement of - interpretive signing, developed by the city, at appropriate locations in the approach area, consistent with the 14UTCDguidelines. Traffic be signing, while complying with the in scale with the adjacent historic district to the extent possible . B. The project treatment plan will be reviewed by the Beverly Historic District Commission, the Beverly Planning Department, and the Massachusetts SHPO. Should any party disagree with any of the aforementioned provison of the project treatment plan, the objection will be settled in accordance with Stipulation IV below, DISPUTE RESOLUTION. 4 III . MOVE OF THE SALEM SIGNAL TOWER In consultation with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) , the Salem Signal Tower (Tower) will be relocated within the confines of the present railroad station site. The relocation will be carried bout thinSalem accordance with a plan reviewed and app that Historical Commission and the Massachusetts SHPO, provides, at a minimum, for the following: A. When the Tower is under the jurisdiction of the MHD, the Department will ensure that the rsucturctedagainst is properly ventilated, secured, Pt vandalism' and the elements. B. The Salem Historical Commidaysnn torreview d the Mand acomment son SHPO shall be afforded 30 day the new site plan for the Tower. C. Specifications for the move will be reviewed by the Massachusetts SHPO and will be in accordance with the approaches recommended in Moving Historic Buildings (John Obed Curtis, IV. DISPUTE RESOLUTION Should the Massachusetts SHPO, the the Salem Planning Department, the Salem Historical Commission,toric Distgictrly Planning Department, or the Beverly tify commission object to plans submitted for review in accordance with StopthetMassachusettst5 POswith specifichall no he MHD, with a copy within fifteen (15) days of recommendations for changes, receipt of the plans. FHWA and the MaZf FHWA determines ssachusetts will consult to resolve the disagreement. that the objection cannot be resolved, lternativesaor notify the Council with a description of any enhancement measures that were conshdered butcil willcbesen and the reasons for their rejection.respond. Any Council comment afforded thirty (30) days to provided in response to such a request will be taken into account by FHWA in accordance with 36 CFR § 800. 6 (c) (2) with reference only to the subject of the dispute; FHWA' s reement responsibility to carry out all actions under this ag that are not the subjects of the dispute will remain unchanged. i 5 Execution of this Memorandum of Agreement and carrying out its terms evidences that FHWA. has afforded the Council an opportunity to comment on the Bever and Transportation Project and its effects on historic properties, and that FHWA has taken into account the effects of the project on historic properties. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION , �,( J Date: Z 2 9 , Ir r By. (Name & Title) MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER Date: By: Ae onough ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION I ny '3 By. Executive Dire" Date: or Robert D. Bush, Concur: MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT ' Date: Z- By. 4� itbe) SALEM;P ,',NG DEPARTMENT f Date: By: Title) 4 6 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION Date: By: (Name & Title) BEVERLY PLANNING EBARTMENT I Date: By: CT COMMISSION BEVEi6e TORIC DI _L1r n I� _ GNP,f , ��,✓ Date: �u By. Title) - AUG 19 2002 1 August 5,2002 Stanley Gee Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 55 Broadway, I Oa'Floor Cambridge,MA.02142-1093 Re: Salem-Beverly Transportation Project Bridge Street Bypass Salem,Massachusetts Dear Mr. Gee: On July 18,2002,the Council received your response to our letter of June 10, 2002,requesting information on how historic properties,and public notification and involvement,were considered as part of the planning process for the realignment of a section of this project.Thank you for the summary and for copies of recent correspondence to parties who have expressed an interest in historic properties within the realigned project area. From the information provided,it is now our understanding that the project has been modified and that approximately 1800 feet of the one-mile segment of the Bridge Street Bypass is proposed for realignment since the 1992 Memorandum of Agreement was executed. In order to address new effects to historic resources as a result of the realignment,namely the First Univeralist Church,the Howard Street Burying Ground, and the Bridge Street Neck Historic District, we understand that MassHighway met with the Salem Historic Commission,the State Historic Preservation Officer, and the Salem Planning Department for purposes of Section 106.Unfortunately,the summary does not clarify the effect determination made by FHWA with regards to these properties. While the summary does acknowledge that the SI PO agreed to a no adverse effect finding for the Jefferson Partnership,Inc.project,that is a separate project and thus,that finding does not apply to the realignment. As you know, under the Section 106 process,the federal agency is required to apply the criteria of adverse effect in consultation with the SHPO and propose a finding. If the agency proposes a finding of no adverse effect,the agency shall notify all consulting parties of the finding and pem pro th the documentation specified in 36 CFR § 800A I(e). If an adverse effect is found,the agency shall consult further to resolve adverse effects. Per Section 800.5 of our regulations, we are requesting that you provide us, along with the other parties who have expressed a interest in this project(First Univeralist Church,Downtown Salem Neighborhood Association,Jim Treadwell, Staley McDermet,and Historic Salem, lneorporated)a copy of your effect finding,and associated documentation, for a 30-day review. ADVISORY COUNCIL ONISTORI H C PRESERVATION 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,Suite 809•Washington, DC 20004 Phone: 202-606-BS03• Fax:202-606.8647 • achp®achp,gov•www.achc.onv HMHd 9btZt,6b/ T.9 RR:RT E90L/9T/99 Should you have any questions regarding the Council's review of this project,please contact Karen Theimer Brown at 202-606-8534,or via eMail at ktheimer@achp.gov.Thank you for your ongoing cooperation. i erely,L.Klima tor Office of Federal Agency Programs - GMHA - 5bG7..b Fbl T.q AS!PT Cgg7 gar ian i o 0 0 �tC � � � 9ALTeM RAIL OAD ` Salem to a j W,,.ARD aTREET CEMETERY OALP-M JAIL AND -SAILER* HOUSE FIROT UNIVERSALIJT b6tlOIE MUNROCL HOV01; CHURCH - REALI4N M ENT E,_%�EX COUNTY COURT BUILDING COMQL,EX ANNOTATED Appmx.Smie:I"=675• BRIDGE STREET BY-PASS IWLrL.�S TERMINUS ALIGNMENTS 4/t2/2oo4 * MASSHIGHWAY HISTORIC BRIDGE INVENTORY MassHighway Recommendation -- National Register Eligibility Municipality On/Over BRDEPTNO Bridge: Salem ST 107, Bridge St./MBTA S-01-017 Significant because: 1) Unusual or unique type: reinforce concrete rigid frame bridge/tunnel 2) Early example of type: ❑ 3) Design advances bridge technology: ❑ 4) Retains integrity: ❑ 5) Builder known and important: ❑ 6) Bridge historically important to area: minor Not significant because: 1) Common type: ❑ 2) Not an early example of type: 1949-52 3) No advance of bridge technology: 4) Integrity lessene(f because of: alterations: deterioration: ❑ 5) Builder unimportant or not known: MPDW 6) No known significance in area: ❑ ❑ Potentially Eligible ® Not Eligible ❑ Not Eligible Individually BUT: ❑ Conditionally Not Eligible, Review at 50 Comments: An atypical, relatively late, and technologically undistinguished example of a somewhat uncommon 20 ' century structural type, of minor local historical interest for its connection with the mid-20�' century urban renewal efforts that denatured parts of downtown Salem. Located in a vastly altered and visually unappealing landscape setting behind an MBTA commuter rail parking lot. Prepared by: S.J. Roper, MassHighway Historic Bridge Specialist Date: 4/09/04 11111 rec 5 04/09/04 11:31 AM * MASSHIGHWAY HISTORIC BRIDGE INVENTORY Town/City: Salem MHD Dist.: 4 Facility Carried: ST 107, Bridge Street (also, the northern end of Washington Street) over Feature Intersected: MBTA(Rockport/Ipswich Main Line, and storage tunnel) Structure No: 501017 32V MHD 634 (mainline) Photo Nos.: 333: 0-9 501017 32R MHD 634 (storage) BDEPT No.: S-01-017 , B.I.N.: 32V AASHTO Rating (date): 93.4 (4/8/04) 32R Common/Historic Name (source): Salem Tunnel Extension(B&M RR bridge list, 1954); B&M RR Portland Main Line - East,bridge#16.62. National Register Eligibility Finding (by/date): Year Built (source): 1949-1952 (plans, plaque) Years Rebuilt (source): Builder (source): Designer (source): MDPW - W.A.H. and L.H.R., designers (plans) Structural Type/Material: 107 (plans) A Y-shaped structure to accommodate the fact that the former Danvers Branch split off from the Portland (East) Main Line within its approximately 300' length. Structure is composed of 15 butted sections of reinforced concrete rigid frames, of varying widths and span lengths (from 31' to 65'). The rigid frames are of the fully developed type with rounded knees and tapered legs; a bit atypical in that their undersurfaces are multi-sloped, rather than laid out as smooth curves. Also a bit atypical in that the feet of the rigid frames are laterally braced by a series of concrete struts constructed between their footings (seen in plans—not visible under the ballast of the railway roadbed). The structure includes a small pump house built in the fork between the two lines, behind the concrete fascia wall which closes the northerly(the only visible) end of the structure. Structure Length: ca. 300' (N-S) Length of Maximum Span: ca. 65' Skew: 10 deg. /flares outward to N Deck Width (out-to-out): ca. 40'-165' (E-W) Main Unit, No. Spans: 1 and 2 Lengths: 3l' - 65' Approaches, No. Spans: - Lengths: - Plaque: Fed Aid project info Location: NE end post Alterations, unusual features, comments: The bridge carries (and was originally designed to carry) a 20" water main along its northern face. The 1949 plans show the variant "Boston-type"bridge rails which still survive, in part, outside the sidewalk on the bridge's north face, but do not show any railing mounted on the curb. The lightweight (and much damaged) steel pipe rail presently mounted on the curb appears to be a fairly recent addition. A galvanized steel staircase, leading up from the MBTA station/parking lot to the north, has been constructed against the extension's northern face - several sections of original bridge railings were removed to make room. The Danvers Line has been abandoned, and its fork of the tunnel extension is now closed off and used as storage. There is some spalling and cracking of the concrete in the rigid frames, and a lot of water infiltration. There are cracks through both abutment wingwalls. HBI form 5 04/09/04 11:19 AM Last update: 4/09/04 sjr Visual Quality (bridge/setting): High ❑ Average ❑ Low ® HDEPTNo:s-oi-017 Site Integrity: Retained ❑ Lessened ❑ Violated Site Description: The tunnel extension structure is virtually invisible— only the northern end of the"Y" is exposed to view, and that is largely obscured behind the 1920s red brick Salem Railroad Signal Tower(SAL.3579) and the much more recent, concrete and steel pedestrian staircase. The MBTA's Salem commuter rail station and its parking lots now occupy the wedge of land between the face of the tunnel extension and the North River. History of Bridge and Site: The present structure was built in 1949-52 to replace a stone-walled railroad cut that.formerly extended northerly from the portal of the Boston &Maine Railroad's old Salem Tunnel at Federal Street, as well as an at-grade highway crossing at Bridge Street. Shortly after this "Salem Tunnel Extension"was completed, the old Salem Tunnel itself was replaced as part of the grade crossing elimination project that created the Riley Plaza traffic circle in downtown Salem. The new highway layout was created on top of a new, concrete-covered steel bent railroad tunnel constructed through downtown Salem. Sources: BH: Y RR: Purcell, 1987 Plans: 1949 OBH: N Other: 1955 plans for S-01-019 Summary Statement of Significance: One of some 120 bridges/culverts identified in the MassHighway bridge database as examples of the concrete rigid frame structural type. An atypical, relatively late example of this somewhat uncommon 20th century structural type, somewhat altered and deteriorated. Essentially a tunnel and, as such, a small, relatively modem, and unimpressive example. Visually, only the northern face of the structure is exposed, and that face is marred by a 20"water main and an obtrusive modern staircase. Of minor local historical interest as an extension of the old stone Boston &Maine RR tunnel;but that early structure was removed as part of the larger Riley Plaza/ downtown Salem grade crossing elimination project of the 1950s. Located in a thoroughly altered and visually unappealing setting behind the MBTA commuter rail parking lot. Statement Prepared By: S.J. Roper, MassHighway Historic Bridge Specialist Date: 4/08/04 Field Survey By: S.J. Roper Date: 4/07/04 HBI form 5 04/09/04 11:19 AM Last update: 4/09/04 sjr TopdZone - The Web's Topographic Map Page 1 of 1 top zoner + Odd;1",3 IkpatiaA Fe KC f y r ,� F ' t/ - �• � to � r _ ki -i Moil � r ��} t } S a s�` L'r4 � • Y'c'�r a .. y .. I8 � : t«• ti � t e w i ,F+tir ..y�"+'h - t �. ♦ 'f `r 'k��r`s�x t� SCh � • „„....' . :. y i"y Co4�a o >♦ C7 • 8-01-017 s A a . 0 0.3 0.6 0.9 1.2 1.5 km I°I G 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 mi Map center is UTM 19 344246E 4709683N (WG584/NAD83) Salem quadrangle M=-15.804 Projection is UTM Zone 19 NAD83 Datum G=-1.282 http://www.topozone.com/print.asp?z=19&n=4709683.00010666&e=344245.999985397&size=s&symsho.-. 4/9/2004 � a F / i eft %a [ 1 £ 1 'tq i •. 4 } }y ,i e g F� k k R qiPro ` r ri _ •w� Ji � i � j4� / civ s. t .-iSYr �r ty '. � � � # alllllllllllRf ` � f 41 FEE � e $ ��V�� _ } � _-_ �� ■ �� .tea.. L fid.. e a9 I t� 3:. f r 4 x , r c e S cy y, _ 4 Ym w� f i x. 0 "e The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin,Secretary of the Commonwealth Massachusetts Historical Commission September 1, 2000 Secretary Bob Durand Executive Office of Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge Street Boston, MA 02202 Attn: Bill Gage, MEPA Unit RE: Jefferson at Salem, Salem, MA, MHC#25410; EDEA# 12145 Dear Secretary Durand: Staff of the Massachusetts Historical Commission have reviewed the Final Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)concerning the proposed project referenced above. Additionally,the MHC received information on July 18 from the project proponent addressing Bridge Street's proximity to the First Universalist Meeting House. The proposed project site is within proximity to the Howard Street Burial Ground,the Salem (County of Essex)Jail,and the First Universalist Meeting House,each of which is individually listed in the State and National Registers of Historic Places. The site is also within proximity to the Salem Common Historic District,a district which is listed in the State and National Registers of Historic Places. Additionally,the site is proximate to the Bridge Street Neighborhood, an area which is included in MHC's Inventory of Historic and Archaeological Assets of the Commonwealth(MHC# SAL.DI). MHC staff have reviewed a request for a determination of National Register eligibility for the Bridge Street Neighborhood. After a review of the DEIR,the MHC has the following comments. The MHC understands that the proposed project will involve the construction of a mixed-use residential cluster of on the former Parker Brothers Manufacturing site. The project has been modified since the submission of the Environmental Notification Form to include a redesign of residential units nearest the Bridge Street residential neighborhood. The units will now be constructed as two and one half story townhouses. The units on the western end of the development will be larger in massing and scale, but will not exceed four stories in height. The MHC understands that this project is being designed with the proposed Bridge Street Realignment project in mind. MHC's review of additional information provided by the project proponent indicates that the project will not include the elimination of the sidewalk proximate to the First Universalist Meeting House. The drawings for the roadway provided by the project proponent are based on the most current information available to the proponent from the Massachusetts Highway Department concerning the Bridge Street By-Pass. 220 Morrissey Boulevard,Boston,Massachusetts 02125 • (617) 727-8470 www.state.ma.us/sec/mhc The MHC will review the roadway project in accordance with the stipulations of the Memorandum of Agreement for the Bridge Street By-Pass project, MHC# 2818 (EDEA# 756), once notified by the Massachusetts Highway Department pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. After a review of materials submitted, I have determined that the proposed Jefferson at Salem project, as currently proposed, will have"no adverse effect"(950 CMR 71.07(2)(b)(2))on historic properties. These comments are offered to assist in compliance with M.G.L. Chapter 9, Section 26-27c,as amended by Chapter 254 of the Acts of 1988 (950 CMR 71)and MEPA. Please feel free to contact me if you have questions. Sincerely, Iudi It B. McDonough xe utive Director ate Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission xc: Salem Historical Commission Karen Parker, Epsilon Associates James Elliot, Massachusetts Highway Department Cultural Resources Section i ITEM 996.06 CEMETERY WALL RESTORATION LUMP SUM DESCRIPTION The work to be done under this Item consists of the restoration of an existing stone masonry wall located along Cemetery at the intersection of Bridge Street and Howard Street, to the lines and grades shown on the Plans. The work consists of removing and resetting damaged stones, resetting capstones that are out of alignment, removing vegetation within the wall structure, and re-pointing the wall with chinking stones and mortar. Submittals Submit material specification and color chart for mortar to be used for all joint repairs. MATERIALS The mortar for pointing will be made of l part Portland cement and 2 parts sand. The mortar shall be a mixture of white/gray cement and sand to match the original wall mortar. The stones for chinking shall match the existing stones in color and character. Stone for granite bollards shall conform to the relevant sections of Section 707.11 of these Special Provisions. CONSTRUCTION METHODS Dismantle damaged areas causing no damage to the adjacent wall surfaces. Relay stones in their original locations and orientations, in alignment with the adjacent wall surfaces, and using original stone setting techniques. Replace missing chinking stones with new stones matching the existing. All loose and crumbling mortar joints shall be cut out and filled with new mortar. Existing vegetation shall be removed along the base and surfaces of the wall. Any stumps shall be ground flush. Existing stones and capstones that are out of alignment shall be re-laid in original locations and alignment of the original wall. Remove existing fence at cemetery entrance and replace with new granite bollards as shown on the plans and indicated in accordance with Section 707.11 of these Special Provisions. Remove and reset the existing mailbox as directed by the Engineer and in conformance with the Salem postmaster. Contractor shall consult with the Salem Historic Commission and the Engineer regarding specific elements associated with the Cemetery Wall restoration work. f I ` ; COMPENSATION Method of Measurement and Basis of Payment The Cemetery Wall Restoration shall be measured and paid for at the contract lump sum price which shall be full compensation for furnishing and placing all materials, and for all labor, tools, equipment and incidentals necessary to complete the work to the satisfaction of the Engineer and Salem Historic Commission. Granite bollards will be measured and paid for at the contract unit price EACH, installed complete in place including all labor, equipment, tools, all incidentals necessary to complete the work to the satisfaction of the Engineer. f day ITEM 707.11 GRANITE BOLLARDS EACH Work under this section shall include the placement of granite bollards within the project limits, as shown on the Contract Plans, indicated in the Special Provisions, or as directed by the Engineer. Submittals: At least 30 days prior to ordering, the Contractor shall submit to the Engineer, representative samples, certifications, manufacturer's literature and certified test results for materials as specified below. No materials shall be ordered or delivered until the required submittals have been reviewed and approved by the Engineer. Delivered materials shall closely match the approved samples. Submit detailed Shop Drawings for granite bollard to be fabricated or installed under this Section. Include plans, sections and details as required to show all materials, layout, dimensions, jointing and connections for all items required. Shop drawings required are as follows: Material Samples: Submit three representative samples of granite for bollards showing all proposed finishes and variations. Delivery, Handling, Storage: Materials shall be stored under an approved roof or covered with waterproof tarpaulins at all times, except when men are working and using the materials. MATERIALS Stone for granite bollards shall be of structural granite, hard and durable, gray in color. Granite shall be free from seams which impair its structural integrity of smooth splitting character. Natural variations characteristic of the deposit will be permitted. Granite shall come from an approved quarry. Test samples shall conform to the requirements of ASTM C615. Color of granite shall be light gray. Granite material shall meet to the following mim mum requirements: 1. Abrasion: 70.0 Ha. 2. Absorption: 0.4% (average). 3. ' Compressive strength: 19,000 psi (average). 4. Modulus of rupture: 1,500 psi (average). Exposed surfaces shall be finished as follows: Top shall be sawn with thermal finish. Sides shall be split and dressed so that the surface does not vary more than 10 inch in any direction, inward or outward. Within three inches of each corner, dressing shall be increased so that variation does not exceed 0 0 inch. The arris line of the corner (vertical edge) should not vary more than 10 inch from being straight. Gravel and crushed stone base materials shall conform to the relevant provisions of Section 150. Concrete footing shall conform to the relevant provisions of Section 901. t� CONSTRUCTION METHODS Fabricate granite bollards as shown on approved Shop Drawings. Place compacted base and backfill materials in accordance with the relevant provision of Section 405. Install concrete foundations for piers in accordance with the relevant provision of Section 901. Set piers absolutely plumb and at the height shown on the Drawings. Engineer shall approve exact facing of the pier front in the field. Lifting and handling of piers shall be done with fabric or leather straps. No chains will be permitted. COMPENSATION Item No. 707.10 GRANITE BOLLARD, will be measured and paid for at the contract unit price EACH, installed complete in place including all labor, equipment, tools, all incidentals necessary to complete the work to the satisfaction of the Engineer. r V6/14/98 FR1 12:54 FAX 617 973 8879 MED-ENVIRONMENTAL ,. 'I. no, Q Salem HistoYical Commission ONE SALEM GREEN,SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 (979)745-9595 EXT.311 FAX(978) 740-0404 August 6, 1998 Gregory H.Prendergast Deputy Chief Engineer Environmental Division Massachusetts Highway Department 10 Park Placa Boston,MA 021 i6 RE: Bridge Street By-Pass Dear Mr.Prendergast: At its regular meeting of August 5, 1998,the Salem Historical Commission reviewed conceptual Plans provided by the Salem Planning Department for an alternative alignment of the Bridge Street By- Pass in order to determine its impact on nearby historic resources. The Commission determined that while the roadway in front of the two nearby National Register properties will be widened,thus potentially increasing the generation of noise,pollution and vibration and decreasing access,the elimination of the previously proposed viaduct which would have larger visual impact is an improvement for the community as a whole- In addition,the alternative alignment wil l provide an opportunity for a coordinated development of the Parker Brothers site and proposed new MBTA garage. This coordination of development in itself would have a mitigating effect for the historic properties. The one issue raised by the Commission was the concern for the stone wall of the 1801 Howard Street Burial Ground. The stone wall is already in a state of deterioration and additional pollution and vibration could increase the rate of deterioration. The Commission proposes that the repair and/or replacement of the stone wall be made part of this project as mitigation effort to protect this historic resource. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Helen Sides Chair Cc: Craig L. Wheeler l i � K lug The Commonwealth of Massachusetts William Francis Galvin, Secretary of the Commonwealth Massachusetts Historical Commission March 28,2002 Gregory H.Prendergast Deputy Chief Engineer MassHighway, Ten Park Plaza Boston,MA 02116-3973 Re: Salem—Beverly Transportation Improvement Project,Bridge Street By-Pass, Salem,MA,MHC 92818 Dear Mr.Prendergast: Staff of the Massachusetts Historical Commission has reviewed the information you submitted,received March 6,2002,concerning the proposed project referenced above. In accordance with Stipulation 1 of the Memorandum of Agreement(MOA)for this project,MHC staff met with staff of MassHighway,the Salem Planning Board and the Salem Historical Commission on March 27,2002 to review the project. As a result of the meeting with the parties listed above,the project design satisfies Stipulation 1 of the MOA with the following issues to be resolved: 1. Plans for the reconstruction and/or repointing of the Howard Street Cemetery wall should be revised by MassHighway in consultation with the Salem Historical Commission and forwarded to the parties for review and comment. 2. Specifications for the types and styles of lighting fixtures,traffic signals,and traffic signal poles should be developed by MassHighway and options should be forwarded to the parties for review and comment. 3. MassHighway shall research the possibility of the covering of the chain link fence on the MBTA track side of the By- Pass with black vinyl. 4. Specifications for the design of the metal fence on the bike/pedestrian trail side of the By-Pass shall be forwarded to the parties for review and comment. These comments are provided to assist in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966,as amended (36 CFR 800)and M.G.L., Chapter 9, Sec.26-27C,as amended by Chapter 254 of the Acts of 1988(950 CMR 71.00). Please feel free to contact Taya Dixon if you have any questions. Sincerely, Brona Simon Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission xc: John Rempelakis,MHD-CRS Alex Almeida,FHWA Lance Kasperian, Salem Historical Commission Joseph Walsh,City of Salem,DPCD 220 Morrissey Boulevard, Boston, Massachusetts 02125 (617) 727-8470•Fax: (617) 727-5128 v;ww.state.ma.us/sec/mhc 0 Salem Historical Commission 120 WASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 (978) 745-9595 EXT.311 FAX (978)740-0404 February 19, 2004 Thomas Broderick MassHighway Department 10 Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116-3973 RE: Salem-Beverly Transportation Project Realignment of Bridge Street By-pass - Section 106 Review Dear Mr. Broderick: As you know, the City of Salem has long-awaited the construction of the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project and we are pleased that the permitting process is nearing completion. Under Stipulation 1, Design of the Bridge Street Relocation- Salem, of the 1992 Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)between the Federal Highway Administration, the Massachusetts Historic Preservation Officer and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, MassHighway has consulted extensively with the City of Salem Historical Commission to ensure that proposed improvements are compatible with the neighboring historic properties. During this time,the Salem Historical Commission has been party to several public and neighborhood meetings and we have shared the information provided with other interested parties, as well. As a consulting party under Stipulation I of the MOA, the Salem Historical Commission has consulted with MassHighway,the MASHPO, and the Salem Department of Planning and Community Development regarding the realignment of the Bridge Street By-pass. The Salem Historical Commission is satisfied that all reasonable measures have been taken to account for new effects on historic resources attributable to the realignment, and that the terms of Stipulation I of the MOA have been satisfied. Thank you again for the opportunity to consult on this important project. Sincerely, Lance Kaspari Chair :CONOIT.(,tO � i ` v CITY OF SALEM M DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STANLEY J.USOVICZ,JR. MAYOR 120 WASHINGTON STREET•SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 JOSEPH P.WALSH,JR. TEL:978-745-9595 FAX:978-740-0404 DIRECTOR .. February 19, 2004 Thomas F. Broderick, P.E. MassHighway Department 10 Park Plaza Boston, MA 021.16-3973 RE: Salem-Beverly Transportation Project Realignment of Bridge Street By-pass - Section 106 Review Dear Mr. Broderick: As you know, the City of Salem has long-awaited the construction of the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project and we are pleased that the permitting process is nearing completion. Under Stipulation 1,Design of the Bridge Street Relocation - Salem, of the 1992 Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)between the Federal Highway Administration, the Massachusetts Historic Preservation Officer and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, MassHighway has consulted extensively with the City of Salem Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD) to ensure that proposed improvements are compatible with the neighboring historic properties. During this time, representatives of the DPCD have been party to several public and neighborhood meetings and we have shared the information provided with other interested parties, as well. As a consulting party under Stipulation I of the MOA, the DPCD has consulted with MassHighway, the MASHPO, and the Salem Historical Commission regarding the realignment of the Bridge Street By-pass. The DPCD is satisfied that all reasonable measures have been taken to account for new effects on historic resources attributable to the realignment, and that the terms of Stipulation I of the MOA have been satisfied. Thank you again for the opportunity to consult on this important project. Si erely, P . Jos ph P. Walsh, Jr. Dir ctor L i �S,�TTS h 011�� MISS 1 November 19, 1992 on eat i0� Frank A. Bracaglia, P.E. Deputy Chief Engineer Massachusetts Highway Department Ten Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116-3973 RE: Salem/Beverly Transportation Project, Beverly and Salem, MA Dear Mr. Bracaglia: This letter is to follow-up on the meeting held on November 5 , 1992 between staff of the Massachusetts Historical Commission and representatives of the Federal Highway Administration, the Massachusetts Highway Department, the City of Beverly, and the Beverly Historical Commission to discuss the project referenced above. At the meeting, MHC staff had the opportunity to review the Project Treatment Plan forthe enhancement of the Beverly approach area and the project area adjacent to the Fish Flake Hill Historic District. After review of the project plans you submitted, MHC has the following comments . Several aspects of the proposed work, i.e. the masonry facing and decorative metal railing on the wing wall and the use of brick pavers in medians and sidewalks, are important improvements which address previous concerns of the MHC and the Beverly Historic District Commission. However, MHC is concerned that other aspects of the design, some of which were itemized in the Memorandum of Agreement, have not been addressed or fully developed. These issues include the design/location of a traffic island at the Front/Water/Cabot streets intersection, the color and design of light standards, the extensive use of Jersey Barriers (rather than the less obtrusive at-curb BR-2 railing) , and the need for more extensive landscaping beyond the base of the wing wall. MHC staff request the opportunity to further consult with MHD staff and representatives of the City of Beverly, including the Beverly Historic District Commission, to explore feasible alternatives which would avoid, minimize or mitigate the visual effects of the project on the Fish Flake Hill Historic District, which is listed in the State and National Registers of Historic Places.' Massachusetts Historical Commission,Judith B.McDonough,Executive Director; State Historic Preservation Officer 80 Boylston Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02116 (617) 7278470 Office of the Secretary of State, Michael. Connolly,Secretary r V These comments are provided to assist in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (36 CFR 800) and Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 9, Sec. 26-27c, as amended by Chapter 254 of the Acts of 1988 (950 CMR 71.00) . 4 If you have additional questions , please contact me or Allen Johnson. Sincerely, (&O t- 0, )-;, u ith B. McDonough Executive Director State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission cc: Donald Hammer, FHwA Don Klima, ACHP Beverly Historic District Commission Salem Historical Commission Salem Planning Department $ TTTS O( 9 SAI I S S'0� "tOnWealth to PP June 24, 1992 Michael Swanson Chief Engineer Mass. Highway Department 10 Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116 ATTN: Jim Elliott RE: Beverly-Salem Bridge and Transportation Project Dear Mr. Swanson: Thank you for submitting the final Memorandum of Agreement for the Beverly-Salem transportation project. Enclosed please find the original MOA, with my signature, for further circulation to the remaining consulting parties for their signature. Thank you once again for your and FHWA's consultation with the MHC on this project. I look forward to future consultation on this and other transportation projects in Massachusetts. If you have any questions or need further assistance, please feel free to ' contact Brona Simon, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer at this office. Sincerely, J 'th B. McDonough (J e Historic Preservation Officer Executive Director Massachusetts Historical Commission Enclosure ac: Arthur Churchill, FHWA Don Klima, ACHP Beverly Historic District Commission Salem Historical Commission Salem Planning Dept. Massachusetts Historical Commission,Judith B.McDonough,Executive Director, State Historic Preservation Officer 80 Boylston Street,Boston, Massachusetts 02116 (617) 7278470 Office of the Secretary of State, Michael J. Connolly,Secretary 1 1 Beverly-Salem Transportation Project Summary of MHC's Comments Project section Historic Properties NR Status Effect Bridge St. McIntire Hist Dist/ NRELG/ CNAE widening, Chestnut St Hist Dist NR " Salem Peirce-Nichols Hse NHL NOEF Federal St Hist Dist NR NAE Salem Tower NRELG AE Blubber Hollow ---- NSR North Canal INE ---- New Bridge Existing Bridge INE ---- Beverly-Salem Fish Flake HillHist Dist NR AE 8 - 26 Rantoul St NRELG NAE See-Side Eye Clinic INE ---- Archaeological Resources More Info needed Key to Abbreviations: NRELG National Register Eligible (MHC opinion) NHL National Historic Landmark (NR) NR Listed in National Register of Historic Places INE Not eligible for listing in National Register (MHC opinion) CNAE Conditional No Adverse Effect NOEF No Effect AE Adverse Effect NSR No significant historic or archaeological resources in the project impact area 6/28/91 y October zs, 1991 eto t• .; .. O� Mr, Doasld E. Hammer C., 'y rrss� ot'Q F�alDiviaiou Admini4trator "'onWea!!h to H(ghway Admiautrgrioo SS Broadway, loth Floor Camhrldgo, MA 02142 Re: Salem/Bomriy Itancportatloa Project 130P.,C1Mam Athu Arthur CiuL.&:l, District Engineer . Dear Mr. Hammer: Thank you far Your letter requesting elarl6caticn about the Salem/Beverly Bridge project iiwm MHC. 'I persoa�the project do the delaand thepMDPW'at ��e you that I have looked earoMly at MXC fladin olo cuhe del Council's Criteria of Adverse Efl gtUddA ios about the app(lngdon of the Advisory forward with rhe est' f bops that this alucidatar MHCs f3adinga and that we can go consultation with the project, Salam Iasuaa: Bridgo.Street to Faderai St. In summary. MDPIl n concern has is the application of eritorIA and appli"tion is different distrleta, MHC agrees with the-MDPW a apparent inconafateatie2 of surrouading to the north of the district boundary has than naiyeis that the eatarged getting or believe MHC& letter of June 28; 1941 ins Changed and been �ptomlmd over tithe I € summarizing St. inadvertently omid'ed the whole of the criteria statement ai•2 g that the Bridge ac widening the would "uad to isolate the (Mcludrej historic district Which Includes altariag the eiiaraeter of the distrites getting when the character contributes to F the Propertles' qualllyiag for the ) atlooal R the nort'arly railroad right-of-W., am �*' MHC u's se teach the een c CU ct a=e:eriredon ihat "me' MHC also agrees that threlocatioPartn Of h the diutlua setting fiat been rompromiEed over improve the setting az tht Idcln of cite roadway ad related acdvltles have this potential to I re Me district boundary whish conNrts Pan of the ends of the sidential yards with ue audacap� and f i al servlea or out buildings f th backs of urban hn charaetgrixe the fin4 immure o Pact of the district MHC mads the "conditional no ad a* etfeet t PDortunity co review the project plans this arc developed farther for this area, i MRC-11 finding for the Federal Street Mtrlct differed from McIntire District because of their dltferent characters. rnsraad of A largely resldeatiel district, it tr inatkud strict because o district in the center city, with the associated harder surfaces, few it arty osis buildtags, and.taor® formal And spare landscaping elemeara boundary. The proposed road to eharaetedm iri netting especially along the aorthera the new work wq' esPa°uon It naamwer hero than it McEntire, and it is Unlikeiy'ttiat velli iadude elements that mn Aubstandally affect rhe Federal Street dfetriet more than i current condition do now. Thin is the basis foe our diffaroat findings of e9acL ( a F 1KauaebUsettsHistorital Cot+imiuion,Jtrdithb ]del tough i g0$oylaton onto t,Boete R Slaw Xtr fePtixtewatto.r Offuer vl — °7.h(a+e+ehusetu 0$119 (617)727.8470 OtPfcs of the Secreta orStste,Mich9e11.Connolly,,S&,sfswy, I Salem Siznal Towez In an earnest attempt to facilitate the project through the Section 106 process, MHC applied the criteria of effect to this resource so the agencies would know its position on a possible move in advance. There remains a disagreement,about its eligibility. I understand.that you will be seeking an opinion of eligibility from the keeper of of the National Register. Now Bridgc and Beverly Districts MHCs concluded that the proposed new bridge itself, in its 'latest revised version, constitutes an adverse effect on the Fish Flake Hill National Register district; We agree that, a bridge crossing,has long been a part of this setting MHC often has found large scale new bridges to have adverse effects on surrounding districts. We do find that the changes between the current proposal and the one reviewed in 1981 are sufficient to warrent a new finding,of effect; its size, scale and engineered approaches diminish the overall integrity of Fish Flake Hills location, design, setting, and association and do introduce elements that are out of character with the district which is significant for its contribution w Beverly's long maritime heritage. In reviewing the NR nomination for the expanded disrrict, I find that the Fish Flake Hill district's maritime associations are extensively discussed and are inextricably related to the waterfront. Although the waterfront setting of the Fish Flake Hill district has undergone change over time, MHC still finds that it contributes overall to the understanding of the district. The proposed bridge t expansion would be visible from numerous public ways within the Fish Flake Hill district and become, visually, a dominant, our of scale external feature. MHC considers that further discussion of alternatives would be relevant to our consultation, and we ! would look to the agencies' lead about appropriate ones to re-examine. MHC understands that this f proposal resulted from examination of various alternatives and complex conditions. Further discussion of this alternative would be most productive if it focused on mitigating the impact of this bridge proposal especially at the Beverly approach. The touch down area is a gateway not only to the district but also to Beverly and deserves the most advantagous planning and sensitive mitigation. These comments are offered to assist in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (36CFR8W). Please feel free to call me with any questions. j incerel , { u 'th B. McDonough State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission xc: Michael Swanson, Massachusetts Department of Public Works Don Klima, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation William Finch, Beverly Historic District Commission. Anne Harris, Salem Historical Commission Jane. Guy, Salem Planning Department l Secretary Susan ,Tierney, EDEA/MEPA Unit i i 4 ' i Q' ,J TS t17 lr ase "t r S3 a 9� MI SSNO �c� " �-� rr June 28, 1991 '071WeaI t)t Anthony Fusco Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 55 Broadway, 10th floor ,t Cambridge, MA 02142 ATTN: Arthur Churchill RE: Beverly-Salem Bridge and Bypass Project Dear Mr. Fusco: Thank you for submitting additional information on the Beverly-Salem Bridge and Bypass project, which was received at this office on June 17, 1991 . Staff of the MHC have reviewed the materials you submitted and have the following comments. The MHC disagrees with a number of your findings concerning the effects of the proposed Beverly-Salem transportation project will have on significant historic resources. The MHC has reviewed the project information you submitted, as well as observations made on site visits and the scaled model of the proposed bridge over the Danvers River, and has; concluded the following: ) Bridge Street Widening, Salem The proposed widening of Bridge Street is located adjacent to the McIntire/ Chestnut Street and federal Street Historic Districts and the Peirce-Nichols House, properties which are listed or eligible for listing i;n the National Register (see enclosed Summary Sheet) . The proposed modification of the project design to locate the widened Bridge Street 30 feet to the North of the McIntire District has helped to reduce the visual effects that the new roadway will have on the character and setting of this historic district. However, 1 the increase in width of Bridge Street from two lanes to four lanes, might tend to islolate the historic district unless the "buffer area" proposed between the roadway and the district is suitably landscaped. Thus, I have determined that the proposed widening of Bridge Street will have "no adverse effect" on the McIntire/Chestnut Street District provided that the following condition is met: Landscape plans and proposed configurations of streetlights and traffic signals are submitted to the MHC and the Salem Historical Commission for review and approval , ,as they become more fully developed. The MHC recommends that mature trees and other vegetation be planted which will serve as "living" screen to visually obscure the views of the new roadway from Massachusetts Historical Commission,Judith B.McDonough,Executive Director,State Historic-Preservation Ofjicer 80 Boylston Street,Boston,Massachusetts 02116 (617)727-8470 Office of the Secretary of State,;Michael j.Connolly,Secretary i a the historic district and that streetlights and traffic signals are designed to be compatible with the adjacent historic district. The proposed roadwork along Bridge Street adjacent to the Federal Street Historic District will have "no effect" on this National Register district. The proposed roadwork along Bridge Street in the vicinity of Blubber Hollow is unlikely to affect significant, intact archaeological deposits associated with the "Blubber Hollow" area of Salem. Reviewofthe project design plans indicates that only a small area of ground will be impactefby roadwork and that this impact area has been previously disturbed by prior roadwork and buried utilities. Thus, the degree of subsurface disturbance and the highly localized nature of the project impact area (the principal core of "Blubber Hollow" is located at a considerable distance to the north of the project area) precludes the likelihood that any significant, intact archaeological deposits are present. The MHC has determined that the Salem Signal Tower possesses sufficient integrity of workmanship, materials, setting, and association to be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under criteria A, C and D at the local level of significance (see MHC's comments of May 30, 1991 and July 25, 1990) . Since you disagree with MHC's opinion on the applicable criteria of significance of the Signal Tower, you should now seek a determination of eligibility from the Keeper of the National Register at the National Park Service in Washington, D.C. (36 CFR 800.4(c)(4)) . The MHC has determined that the proposed moving of the Signal Tower would constitute an "adverse effect" since the moving of the structure will result in damage and i alteration of the property and its setting (36 CFR 800.9(b)(1 ) & (3) ). I agree that the proposed new location for the structure, alongside the railroad tracks is appropriate to the Historical significance and association of the Tower, and, thus, the adverse effect is acceptable. The fact the the Tower 3 has already been moved in the past further strengthens this determination.. A Memorandum of Agreement should be drafted, which should include stipulations which would mitigate the adverse effect of moving the 'structure. The stipulations should include the following : that a detailed reuse plan be developed for the structure which will insure its continued viability and active use; that the moving be conducted by a team qualified to move historic buildings; that the moving meet the Secretary of Interior's Guidelines for E moving historic buildings; that rehabilitation of the Tower for its reuse meet a the Secretary's Standards for Rehabilitation rof Historic Buildings. ( I agree that the project will have no effect on the Peirce-Nichols House, since there are no changes proposed in the project area. which abuts this National Historic Landmark. a a Finally, the MHC has determined that the North Canal is not eligible for listing in the National Register, due to its lack of historical significance (see MHC's 5/30/91 comments). New Beverly-Salem Bridge Review of the materi-al's submitted to the MHC as well as observations made of the project model and during site visits indicates that the proposed new bridge and approach roadway on the Beverly side of the project will have an. adverse Effect on Fish Flake Hill Historic District by isolating the historic l a x 7 district from its setting and by introducing visual elements which are out of character with the district and its setting (36 CFR 800.9(b)(2 & 3). Since the time the project EIS was filed, the boundaries of the Fish Flake Hill Historic District have been enlarged. Currently, Fish Flake Hill Historic District, a property which is listed in the National Register of Historic Places, directly abuts the project .area at the location of the approach roadway to the bridge. The proposed approach roadway configuration where the bridge touches down in Beverly will result in a much larger increase in the amount and elevation of actual roadways than existing conditions. Thus, the approach will create a wide expanse of blacktop on the immediate edge of the historic district as well as introducing an 'elevated roadway leading up to the bridge', which will be very visible from the district (especially along Cabot and Water Streets) and inconsistent with the scale and configuration of the existing roadways and bridges adjacent to the district. The proposed new bridge, 63 feet high and 90 feet wide, with several massive concrete supports, will be 'very visible from major overlooks within the Fish Flake Hill district as well from views outside the district, e.g.,, from Salem, the harbor and the Danvers River, looking toward;. the district. The large size, scale and massing of the bridge will appear out of scale with the historic characteristics of the setting of 'Fish Flake Hill which are characterized by small , low-scale buildings, structures, roadways, and bridges. { The MHC requests that FHWA and MDPW explore prudent and feasible project alternatives which would avoid, reduce, minimize or mitigate the adverse visual effects of the size and scale of the bridge and the approach roadway on the Fish Flake Hill Historic District. A number .of alternatives were briefly described in the project's Final Supplemental EIR. However, lacking in these descriptions was an analysis of the feasibility of project alternatives. Specifically, the feasibility of reconfiguring the approach roadway to reduce the expanse of pavement to minimize or avoid its intrusion on the edge of Fish, n Flake Hill Historic District should be carefully considered. In addition, alternatives which would reduce the height of the new bridge but still service both land and marine traffic should be evaluated for their feasibility. I understand that the proposal for a fixed bridge span was selected in order to t allow both cars .and boats to travel without stopping. The use of a moveable bridge, which would not require such a high clearance above water, should be more carefully studied. It may be prudent and feasible to design a combination bridge which would be of sufficient clearance to allow the majority of watercraft to pass under unheeded, but be low enough to: not have such an adverse visual effect on the Fish. Flake Hill historic district. The lower bridge could then include a moveable bridge which would service the t minority of sailboats with tall masts and thus have minimal- effects on automobile traffic. A lowered bridge elevation would also help alleviate the adverse visual effect of the elevated portion of the approach roadway on Fish Flake Hill . Review of the project plans and model indicates that minor modifications to the Cabot and Rantoul Street intersection are proposed. It appears that these roadway changes and the new bridge will have no adverse effect on the character and setting of the Rantoul Street district, a property which is eligible for listing 'in the National Register. #CF 3 5 i I 6 The MHC is currently awaiting the results of the archaeological survey of the approach roadway area in order to determine whether any significant archaeological resources will be impacted by the project. These comments are offered to assist in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. You should now seeek the comments of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 1100 Pennsylvania Ave. ; NW, #809, Washington, D.C. 20004. A copy of these comments should accompany the documaentation you submit to the Council . If you have any questions concerning these comments, please feel free to contact Brona Simon, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer. Sincerely Judith B. McDonough State Historic Preservation Officer Executive Director Massachusetts Historical Commission Enclosure 9 xc: Michael Swanson, MDPW Don Klima, ACHP Beverly Historic District Commission Salem Historical Commission Salem Planning Dept. f€ x 1 a 1 l R 2 9 t ,TTS * �I June 5, 1991 *C, O 9c �MISS10 �eC Secretary Susan Tierney On Wealth to Executive Office of Environmental Affai 100 Cambridge Street, 20th Floor Boston, MA 02202 ATTN: MEPA Unit RE: Beverly-Salem Bridge/Transportation Project EOEA # 0756 Dear Secretary Tierney: Staff of the Massachusetts Historical Commission have reviewed the Final Supplemental EIR for the project referenced above and have the following comments. The MHC has consulted with the Federal Highway Administration, Massachusetts Department of Public Works, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Salem Historical Commission, and Beverly Historical Commission concerning the effects of the proposal on significant historic and archaeological properties, in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR 800) . Presently, the MHC is awaiting additional information from FHWA concerning the project (see enclosed correspondence), which is not included in the Final Supplemental EIR. If you have any questions, please contact Brona Simon at this office. Sincerely, Ju ith B. McDonough -- -- - -- xecutive Director State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commissionk � Enclosures ` JUlnj 11 1999 xc: Anthony Fusco, FHWA Michael Swanson, MDPW SALEM RAINING DEPT. Don Klima, ACHP Anne Harris, Salem Historical Commission Jane Guy, Salem Planning Dept. William Finch, Beverly Historic District Commission JM/BS/hl Massachusetts Historical Commission,Judith B.McDonough,Erecutive Director, State Historic Preservation Officer 80 Boylston Street,Boston,Massachusetts 02116 (617) 727-8470 Office of the Secretary of State, Michael J. Connolly,Secretary � \ s Q o ITS d a om"lOnWealth t° Jul 111991 May 30, 1991 SALE! PLA?IKIKG DEPT. Anthony Fusco Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 55 Broadway, 10th Floor Cambridge, MA 02142 ATTN: Arthur Churchill RE: Beverly - Salem Transportation Project Dear Mr. Fusco: Thank you for submitting additional information on the history and architecture of the See-Side Eye Clinic in. Beverly. The additional materials you submitted were sufficient for MHC to evaluate the significance and integrity of the building and to apply the National Register criteria. The purpose of this letter is to provide you with MHC's opinion concerning the National Register eligibility of the See-Side Eye Clinic and Rantoul Street district in Beverly and the Signal Tower and North River Canal in Salem. See-Side Eye Clinic, 15 Cabot Street, Beverly, MA The See-Side Eye Clinic, formerly the office of John Girdler's coal and wood business, is a remnant of a once-significant industry along Beverly's waterfront. At one time, the complex also included several sheds, large and small., for the storage of wood and coal . This was one of two complexes owned by Girdler in Beverly in the late 19th and early 20th century, and one of a number of similar enterprises within the city limits. The building appears composed of fragments that predate its ca. 1898 construction date. While the Girdler family business apparently existed here between the late 1880s and 1968, the levEl of information provided does not suggest it was exceptionally significant in the context of Girdler's other operations or of the coal/fuel industry generally in Beverly. This is not the only industrial structure remaining in the waterfront area (see Rantoul St.). The See-Side Eye Clinic does not retain integrity of setting workmanship, setting, or association; integrity of design and materials are also questionable. As a fragment of what was formerly a larger complex of related coalandwood sheds and structures, the See-Side Eye Clinic does not meet the criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. _ Massachusetts Historical Com missiony�p0 104 al�aagecuttveDirectoi State HistoricPresery¢tionOffuer _ 80 Boylston Street,Boston,Massachusetts 02116 (617) 727-8470 Office of the Secretary of State,Michael J.Connolly,Secretary Rantoul Street District, Beverly, MA i - I The lower portion of Rantoul Street, between Cabot and School Streets, appears to retain integrity as a mid-19th century workers' housing area. the area includes at least 8 single and multifamily residences, built between ca. 1855 and 1892. At least five of them were built on speculation in the 1850s by developer John Greene. At the foot of the street stood a Rubber Factory by 1852, replaced in the 1870s' by E.N. Tuttle woodenware manufactory (which survives and could contribute to a National Register Historic District) . Survey for this area is incomplete and it is unclear what other resources exist in the area. Hose House #2 (corner of School and Rantoul ) was previous listed in National Register. Rantoul Street was platted by the 1850's and its growth and development appears directly related to the 1839 arrival of the B & M RR (to the west) and mid-19th century industry to the south and east. A potential historic district could extend north from School Street but further inventory information would be necessary to determine the full extent of the district in the Goat Hill area. Signal Tower, Salem, MA The Signal Tower was built in 1927 to house the signal systems for the Boston and Maine railroad. The Salem Signal Tower is similar in design to all B & M signal towers - two stories, brick, overhung tiled hipped roof, copper cornice, metal sash windows and brick corbelling. In 1950, the tower was moved to a new foundation adjacent to the track, 48 feet away from its original site. The fact that the tower has been moved and its machinery replaced has not seriously affected its integrity. In industrial and engineering facilities, replacement of machinery is a normal course of the development of technological advances in industry and engineering. The current location of the signal tower retains its historic association with the railroad track. The Salem Signal Tower is one of the only four surviving towers in the B & M system and retains sufficient integrity of workmanship, materials, setting and association, to be eligible for listing in the National Register under criteria A, C and D at the local level . North River Canal , Salem, MA The North River "Canal " is a misnomer. The North River Canal was built in the 1880s as a river channelization project to help the flow of waste and sewerage from the tanneries in the Blubber Hollow area. The channel was not built for, nor was it used as, a canal . The Blubber Hollow area no longer retains its historic tangeries to which the channel was related. Due to lack of historical significance of the channel and lack of integrity of association with the former tanneries, the North River Canal does not meet the criteria of eligibility for listing in the National Register. The MHC hopes this information will be helpful in your development of the necessary documentation for the Beverly - Salem Transportation project in compliance with Section 106 of National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR 800). The MHC looks forward to receiving the results of the archaeological survey of the Beverly portion of the project in the vicinity of the Ferry Landing area, in order to determine whether the project will have an effect on significant archaeological resources. , ou If have an R y y questions concerning these comments, please contact Brona Simon, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, at this office. Sincerely, ith B. McDonough Executive Director State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission JBM/cd xc: Michael Swanson, MDPW Don Klima, ACHP William Finch, Beverly HDC Anne Harris, Salem HC Jane Guy, Salem Planning Dept. � .. TS * y! 0 yy R E E VEF I 0AfAl SN 0, , * APR 16 1991 c041"1onWealth t0� SAICA FIJV°x,F T y April 11 , 1991 Anthony Fusco Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 55 Broadway, 10th floor Cambridge, MA 02142 RE: Beverly-Salem Bridge and Bypass Project - Archaeological Review Dear Mr. Fusco: Thank you for submitting additional information on the Beverly-Salem Bridge and Bypass project in response to item 3 of MHC's letter of January 18, 1991 . Staff of the MHC have reviewed the materials you submitted and have the following comments. The materials you submitted include boring logs for the Ferry Landing area of Beverly. Review of the boring logs indicates the presence of historic period archaeological materials (wood, brick, cinders, coke, ash and metal fragments) observed within the top 4 to 16 feet of fill above the natural clay or bedrock. The Ferry Landing area is known, through review of the historical documentary evidence, to have supported a wharf, ferry landing and other waterfront structures and buildings in the late 17th and 18th centuries. The presence of wood and other cultural materials in the soil borings suggests that significant archaeological deposits and features associated with the early historic waterfront activities may be present in the project impact area. The presence of thick deposits of fill , rather than evidence of prior cutting, suggests that intact historic archaeological deposits are likely to have been preserved under the fill in the project area not previously disturbed by the placement of utilities. Furthermore, review of MHC's files indicates that the portion of the Beverly-Salem bridge project where it touches down in Beverly had not been included in any of the previous .archaeological surveys which have been conducted for the Beverly-Salem bridge project. Given the strong potential of the Beverly portion of the bridge project to contain significant historic period archaeological resources, the MHC requests that an intensive (locational ) survey of this portion of the project be conducted in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic_Preservation_ --- -- - Act of 1966 (36 CFR 800). The intensive survey should include the excavation Massachusetts Historical Commission,Judith B.McDonough,Executive Director,State Historic Preservation Officer 80 Boylston Street,Boston,Massachusetts 02116 (617) 727-8470 Office of the Secretary of State,Michael J.Connolly,Secretary of a sufficient number and size of archaeological test units in order to locate, identify and assess the integrity of any significant archaeological features or deposits located within the project area for the bri.dge approach and roadways. Staff of the MHC would be willing to assist in developing an appropriate scope of work for the archaeological survey. Review of the materials you submitted concerning the current conditions of the proposed Bridge Street roadwork in the Blubber Hollow area of Salem indicates that this narrow project impact area has been previously disturbed and is unlikely to contain intact, significant archaeological deposits. The MHC looks forward to your response to the remaining comments in our letter of January 18, 1991 , as well as to those comments which have been made by the interested parties in the interim period. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely Jc,v� Brona Simon Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer State Archaeologist Massachusetts Historical Commission xc: George Turner, MON Don Klima, ACHP Beverly Historic District Commission Salem Historical Commission Salem Planning Dept. H f, '9r-, Iss\ C� o�Jmo� Wealth toy January 18, 1991 Anthony Fusco Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 55 Broadway, 10th floor Cambridge, 14A 02142 RE: Beverly-Salem Bridge and Bypass Project Dear Mr. Fusco: Thank you for submitting additional information on the Beverly-Salem 'Bridge and Bypass project, which were received on January 8, 1991 . Staff of the MHC have reviewed the materials you submitted and have the following comments. As you are aware, the cities of Salem and Beverly, the Beverly Historic District Commission, the Salem Historical Commission, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, among others, have expressed an interest in participating in the "Section 106" consultation for this project. The MHC' recommends that a copy of the documentation you submitted be sent to the consulting and interested parties for review and comment. In reviewing the information you submitted, the MHC is unable to concur with 1 the "no effect" finding you have made without the following additional information: 1 ) The MHC is not able to evaluate the National Re,^ister el49, ,ility of the See-Side Eye Clinic in Beverly without information on the post-1890 changes to the building and its usage. Despite having been moved historically, the building may have significance in the 1890-1941 period. Were there other buildings associated with it during this period that no longer stand? How was the building modified during this period and what were its uses? The MHC 3 requests that a MHC Inventory Building Form be completed that addresses these questions and that photograph(s)iits main elevation(s) be included. 2) The description of effects to the Fish Flake Hill Historic District does not clearly evaluate the effects of the proposed bridge to the enlarged National Register district. The effects of the proposal on the enla historic district should be more fully described, e.g. eged the the distance;, of the proposed bridge approach to the district; how the bridge and its approach will visually affect the character and setting of the district. While the illustrations you submitted present an overview perpective, additional ,Massachu seas Historical Commission,Judith B.McDonough,Executive Director, State Historic Preservatiorn;Of icei 80 Boylston Street, Boston, Massachusetts02116 (fill) 727$470 Office of the Secretary of State. Michael J. Connolh,Secretary 7 I g photographs showing existing and proposed project conditions from key vantage points within and adjacent to the Fish Flake Hill Historic District would be very helpful. , 3) The discussions of the potential of the Ferry Landing :area in Beverly and Blubber Hollow area in Salem to contain intact, significant archaeological. resources are generally lacking a description and assessment of the existing subsurface conditions. Examination of any available soil boring logs or other geotechnical data might be helpful in assessing subsurface integrity as well as illustrations showing the locations of modern utilities and other documented disturbances. 4) The modifications to the widening of Bridge Street in Salem indicate that Bridge Street will be relocated at some distance to the north of the edge of the cntrehe naturelofithiss�"buffer"strict, wshouldibe moreafullyodescribed. thWhatstypes ofTland use, landscaping or tree-plantings are contemplated? 5) The comments of the consulting and interested parties should be provided to the MHC. These comments are offered to assist in compliance with Section 106 of the i National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR 800). Staff of the MHC would be happy to meet with you and the interested parties in reviewing the documentation you submitted. If you have any questions or require further assistance, please feel free to contact Brona Simon, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, at this office. Sincerely, LZ (J Jith B. McDonough Executive Director State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission xc: George Turner, MDPW Ellen DiGeronimo, MDPW Don Klima, ACHP Beverly Historic District Commission Salem Historical Commission Salem Planning Dept. ) 3 E 8 yy� 5 p!� 1 SFJ TS y . C*0 z /' d July 25, 1990 �"� 9� 'fMISSN ° � �� Secretary John DeVillars m"`OnWealth to Executive Office of Environmental Affairs 100 Cambridge St. Boston, MA 02202 ATTN: MEPA Unit RE: Salem-Beverly Bridge/Bridge St. Bypass Project EOEA #0756 Dear Secretary DeVillars: Staff of the Massachusetts Historical Commission have reviewed the Draft SEIR for the proposed project referenced above and offer the following comments. The MHC previously reviewed and commented on this project in the past in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR 800) . However, recent modifications to the project design have been proposed, which might have an effect upon significant historic and archaeological properties. The MHC is presently unable to concur with the "no effect" determinations made in Section 5.20 of the DSEIR without further information than that which was included in the DSEIR. The DSEIR describes the proposed project changes on pages 2-6 and 2-8 of the DSEIR. It would be helpful if an overall project map were included which highlights these changes, for comparison with Figure 4, and as a reference marker for the detailed Phase maps. For the purpose of reviewing the effects that these project changes will have on historic and archaeological properties, a project map showing the locations of historically significant buildings, districts and sites would be helpful , with reference to the existing and proposed conditions. Examination of the information describing the proposed Salem-Beverly Bridge (page 4-30 and Figure 12) indicates that the new configuration is likely to have an effect on the adjacent Fish Flake Hill Historic District. Likewise, it appears that the widening of Bridge Street along the Chestnut Street Historic District (McIntire District) and the Federal Street Historic District will have an effect on the character and settings of these districts. The visual analysis section of the DSEIR does not contains sufficient information to evaluate these effects. Visual depictions, through a project model and photographs of existing conditions from a number of prominent views from within and looking towards the historic districts should be matched with illustrations of the same view of the proposed conditions. In addition, visual analysis of the proposed noisebarrier should be made in relation to nearby historic properties. Massachusetts Historical Commission,Valerie A.Talmage,Executive Director, State Historic Preservation Officer 80 Boylston Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02116 (617) 7278470 Office of the Secretary of State, Michael J. Connolly,Secretary The section concerning the potential project impacts to archaeological resources should include a listing of the archaeological. surveys conducted on this project in the past, with maps of the previously surveyed areas compared to the changes made in the project design. An assessment of the archaeological sensitivity of any segments of the new project area which have not previously been surveyed should be made (e.g. , the redesign of the Salem-Beverly bridge in Beverly) . The MHC has determined the the Signal Tower in Salem is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (page 5-72, 73) . The fact that the Tower has been moved and its machinery replaced has not seriously affected the its integrity. The Tower retains sufficient integrity of workmanship, materials and association to be eligible for listing in the National Register under criteria A, C and D of the Register. The MHC requests additional information on the "See-Side Eye Clinic" building on Water Street in Beverly be submitted in order to determine whether it is eligible for listing in the National Register. In summary, the MHC has welcomed receipt of the DSEIR for this project. However, in order to comment fruitfully on the effects that the project might have on significant historic and archaeological properties, additional information is needed. If you have any questions concerning these comments, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Brona Simon Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer State Archaeologist Massachusetts Historical Commission xc: Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Frank Bracaglia, MDPW Anthony Fusco, FHWA Anne Harris, Salem Historical Commission Jane Guy, Salem Planning Dept. William Finch, Beverly Historic District Commission cvjTS Q, p June 25, 1990 d RECEIVED * J U N 2 9, 1990 Anthony Fusco -y � Division Administrator Co AfMISSX BUT. Federal Highway Administration 'hon[vealthto 55 Broadway Cambridge, MA 02142 RE: Beverly - Salem Bridge and Bridge Street Bypass Project Dear Mr. Fusco: It has recently come to the attention of the Massachusetts Historical Commission that eminent domain taking has recently been initiated for the construction of the Bridge Street bypass, a segment of the project referenced above. I understand that this project is likely to have an effect on several historic properties which are listed or are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The MHC is frustrated by a lack of information about the project as it is currently designed, and has concerns about its potential effects on significant historic properties. As you know, the MHC has commented on this project in the past. However, it has come to our attention that a number of changes have been made to the original project plans. MHC requests the opportunity to review current project design plans and information on the project's effects upon the historic properties which are near or adjacent to the project area in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR 800). If you have any questions concerning these comments, please feel free to contact Brona Simon, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, at this office. Sincerely, Vo-CAn,.a Valerie A. Talmage Executive Director State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission VAT/cd xc: Ellen DiGeronimo, MDPW George Turner, Jr. , MDPW Don Klima, ACHP Annie Harris, Salem Historical Commission Jane Guy, SalemPlanning Department tJ0mmission 80 Boylston Street,Boston, Massachusettsc02116 Director,utzve (617) 727 8470 Historic Preservation Officer Office of the Secretary of State, Michael j. Connolly, Secrelary TS jY Q � o June 25, 1990 d Anthony Fusco y Division Administrator C' O MISSIO �QeQ Federal Highway Administration omonWealthto 55 Broadway Cambridge, MA 02142 RE: Beverly - Salem Bridge and Bridge Street Bypass Project Dear Mr. Fusco: r' It has recently come to the attention of the Massachusetts Historical Commission that eminent domain taking has recently been initiated for the construction of the Bridge Street bypass, a segment of the project referenced above. I understand that this project is likely to have an effect on several historic properties which are listed or are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The MHC is frustrated by a lack of information about the project as it is currently designed, and has concerns about its potential effects on significant historic properties. As you know, the MHC has commented on this project in the past. However, it has come to our attention that a number of changes have been made to the original project plans. MHC requests the opportunity to review current project design plans and information on the project's effects upon the historic properties which are near or adjacent to the project area in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (36 CFR 800). If you have any questions concerning these comments, please feel free to contact Brona Simon, Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer, at this office. Sincerely, V CL L ,,j Valerie A. Talmage L Executive Director State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission VAT/cd xc: Ellen DiGeronimo, MDPW George Turner, Jr, , MDPW Don Klima, ACHP Annie Harris, Salem Historical Commission Jane Guy, Salem Planning DepartmentWismscGuVpeA� at eeute eMassacseriitorii2lmin, aerimag ,RciaDictor, State Historic Preservation Officer 80 Boylston Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02116 (617) 7278470 Office of the Secretary of State, Michael j. Connolly,Secretan, I �StiTTS *�'I V� sp n 9�o IVMISSI ov RECEWED onWealth t SEP 1 5 1989 September 7, 1989 SALEM PLk"INING DEPT. Robert Johnson Chief Engineer Massachusetts Department of Public Works 10 Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116 RE: Beverly-Salem Bridge and Bypass Project -- Archaeological Review Dear Mr. Johnson: Thank you for submitting a copy of the preliminary management summary report for the Beverly-Salem Bridge replacement project, which was prepared by UMass Archaeological Services (UMAS). Review of the preliminary archaeological management summary indicates that UMAS completed an intensive archaeological testing program in the project impact areas around Burnside and Thorndike Streets and the Skerry House, which the background research determined were most likely to contain significant archaeological resources. The results of the investigation revealed that the Burnside and Thorndike Street areas do not contain any significant archaeological resources. No further archaeological research is required for these two areas. At the Skerry House, UMAS discovered cultural materials dating to the 17th-19th centuries, which may potentially contain significant information concerning the early historical settlement of the March Street peninsula, and may, upon site examination, be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The MHC agrees with the MDPW archaeologist's substantive comments on the memorandum and how it could be improved; and recommends that UMAS address these comments. The MHC, however, disagrees with the MDPW's opinion that the early-mid 19th century trash pit is not eligible for listing in the National Register. Even though the trash pit postdates the period of the Planters Settlement, it appears to be associated with a time period in Salem's history when major changes were being made in the focus of local economic systems and lifestyles. The apparent discreteness, density and contents of cultural materials in the feature is somewhat unusual and warrants further investigation. Massachusetts Historical Commission,Valerie A.Talmage,Executive Director,State Historic Preservation Officer 80 Boylston Street,Boston,Massachusetts 02116 (617) 727-8470 Office of the Secretary of State,Michael J.Connolly,Secretary The MHC concurs that the Skerry House area should be subjected to an archaeological site examination to further identify significant archaeological features and deposits. The possibility that the site may contain a "post-in-ground" or other impermanent structure dating to the 17th century should be carefully explored. If feasible, intact areas beneath the later additions of the Skerry House should also be investigated. If you have any questions concerning the scope of work for the archaeological site examination, please feel free to contact Brous, Simon, State Archaeologist and Deputy SHPO, at this office. Sincerely, v Valerie A.. Talmage Executive Director State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission xc: Don Klima, ACHP James Walsh, FHWA Anne Harris, Salem Historical Commission William Finch, Beverly Historic District Commission James Treadwell Jane Gay, Salem Planning Dept. ` r �S�TTS * fps f0 wo ¢ n 'c Al ISs�°� June 29, 1989 � "lonWealth tole Robert Johnson JUL �� 1ST Chief Engineer Massachusetts Department of Public Works 10 Park Plaza Boston, MA 02116 RE: March Street Bridge Replacement/Beverly-Salem Bridge Dear Mr. Johnson: Thank you for submitting a copy of the preliminary management summary report for the March Street Bridge replacement project, which was prepared by UMass Archaeological Services (UMAS). I understand from your letter accompanying this report, received on May 30, 1989, that the March Street Bridge replacement project is a project to replace a deteriorated bridge over the B&M railroad right-of-way, and is not considered part of the Beverly-Salem Bypass/Route IA project. I understand that the Department found it efficient to combine the two projects into one archaeological scope of work which stemmed from a concern that the Beverly-Salem Bypass project might have an effect on significant archaeological sites associated with the early Planters Settl however, the March Street Bridge replacement project is pa rt If, rt emem the Beverly-Salem Bypass project, the MHC would not be able to segment of the project at this time. of on only one Given your description of the separateness of the March Street Bridge replacement project, the MHC offers the following comments: Review of the preliminary archaeological management summary indicates that UMAS completed a thorough archaeological testing program in the project impact areas which the background research determined were most likely to contain significant archaeological resources, as described in the archaeological research design previously submitted to, and approved by, the State Archaeologist. The testing was completed in accordance with the archaeological research design. The results of the investigation revealed that the March Street Bridge replacement project area does not contain any significant archaeological resources. No further archaeological research is required for the March Street Bridge project. Massachusetts Historical Commission,Valerie A.Talmage,Executive Director, State Historic Preservation Officer 80 Boylston Street,Boston,Massachusetts 02116 (617) tote 70 Office of the Secretary of State, Michael J. Connolly,Secretary I The MHC is looking forward to receiving a copy of the full archaeological report when it becomes available (950 CMR 70). If you have any questions concerning these comments, please feel free to contact Brona Simon, State Archaeologist and Deputy SHPO, at this office. �Sincerely, 1 "0 �11.eru.e� Jv�v�� S Valerie A. Talmage Executive Director State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission xc: Don Klima, ACHP James Walsh, FHWA Anne Harris, Salem Historical Commission William Finch, Beverly Historic District Commission James Treadwell Jane Gay, Salem Planning Dept. S ,TTS � r * C'p "Z� June 2, 1989 0�"lonWeaWt tom R E C E I V E L) Ellen DiGeronimo Associate Commissioner JUN 0 ? 1989 Massachusetts Department of Public Works pp g 10 Park Plaza SALES PLFe1iliJueilih DEPT. Boston, MA 02116 RE: Beverly-Salem Bypass Dear Ms. DiGeronimo: Thank you for submitting a copy of the preliminary report prepared by UMass Archaeological Services concerning the proposed Beverly-Salem Bypass and March Street Bridge replacement project. Staff of the MHC are currently reviewing the report, and copies of it have been distributed to interested parties for comment. 4 The MHC would like to remind MDPW that additional information concerning the effects of the project to Fish Flake Hill Historic District in Beverly is necessary to determine whether the proposed new Beverly-Salem Route IA bridge will have any visual , atmospheric or audible impacts to the district. The MHC has requested that photographs or models be developed which depict the existing and proposed conditions of the project area, including the Fish Flake Hill Historic District. In addition, a copy of the traffic study for the Beverly side of the project would be helpful . The MHC is looking forward to the results of the historic structure report for the Skerry House. In addition, the MHC would appreciate the opportunity to review project design plans for the area near the North River Canal and Revolutionary War plaque in Salem (see copy of letter dated May 9, 1989 from James Treadwell , enclosed). Massachusetts Historical Commission,Valerie A. Talmage,Executive Director,State Historic Preservation Offuer 80 Boylston Street,Boston,Massachusetts 02116 (617) 727-8470 Office of the Secretary of State. Michael J. Connolly, Secretary I a These comments are offered to assist in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, ��T�Or�a �(�✓+'—ars. Brona Simon State Archaeologist Deputy Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission Enclosure cc: Salem Historical Commission Salem Planning Department Beverly Historic District Commission Advisory Council of Historic Preservation Federal Highway Administration James Treadwell BS/kb vS1 � s * h'r C a h * CIO 0� 4fMIS5 `20nWealtlt to August 3, 1988 Robert Neiley Chairman Beverly Historic District Commission City Hall 191 Cabot Street Beverly, h1A 01915 RE: Route rlrL-A, Bridge ov-2c- Danvers River, Beveriyim Sale +,G v Dear 1•1r,-N-6iley: r 11 Thank you for your letter requesting further review of the Route 1 -A bridge project over the Danvers River in Beverly and Salem. Staff of the HHC are looking into the status of the "Section 106" review and will keep you informed of our research. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Brona Simon at this office. Sincerely, Valerie A. Talmage Executive Director State Historic Preservation Officer Massachusetts Historical Commission VT/emb Massachusetts Historical Commission,Valerie A."falmage,Fxecutive Director,State Historic Preservalion Officer 80 Boylston Street,Boston,Massachusetts 02116 (617)727-8470 Office of the Secretary of State, Michael J.Connolly,Secretary f SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS $iRTE EED.AID PflUI.NO E_R' SnEEi iOiAL THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS MASS 2004 «, 177 Pw P7 FLE x0. 005402 SII MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT TITLE SHEET ° CONSTRUCTION OF q BRIDGE STREET REET BY SS IN THE CITY OF THE 1988 SPECIFICATIONS, THE 1994 SUPPLEMENTAL SALEM SPECIFICATIONS DATED NOVEMBER 8, 2000 jJ((''��COUNTY AS AMENDED AUGUST 23, 2002, THE 1996 ESSEX 'lam® V 1 TY CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS; THE 1988 "MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR STREETS AND HIGHWAYS", PART VI OF THE MANUAL ON UNIFORM INDEX TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, REVISION 3 DATED SEPTEMBER 3,1993, THE 1990 "STANDARD DRAWING FOR SIGNS AND SUPPORTS", THE AMERICAN STANDARD FOR SHEET NO. DESCRIPTION FEDERAL AID PROJECT NO. (NFA) NURSERY STOCK (ANSI 2-60.1-1986), AND ALL AMMENDMENTS WILL GOVERN. 1 TITLE SHEET 2 LEGEND & ABBREVIATIONS 3 KEY PLAN 4-11 BORING LOGS 12-13 SURVEY CONTROL PLANS - 14-18 TYPICAL SECTIONS END PROJECT 19-23 CIVIL DETAILS J��: ° STA. 286+03t 24-29 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANSa✓ N 560037.59 E 764556.26 DESIGN DESIGNATION 30-35 CONSTRUCTION PLANS 36-44 CONSTRUCTION PROFILESg _D 45-46 GRADING PLANS 47-52 CURB TIE PLANS 4 r �tRg�•�y ._ho / \ J: DESIGN SPEED 40 MPH 59-58 DRAINAGE & UTILITY PLANS M�q oenR6oRN ,� � ! \ ADT (1997) — 59 80 EXISTING SIGNING -��s.-� " 61-87 PAVEMENT MARKING & SIGNING PLANS 68-70 ADT (2017) 25,700 68-70 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLANS �� K 6.8% " 71-74 TRAFFIC SIGNAL DATA \ F \ .�� J� D 54.0% 75 TIME—SPACE DIAGRAM 1 "' .0 "_ �' \, / T (PEAK HOUR) 76-77 TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS �� / \� T (AVERAGE DAY) 5% 78-83 TRAFFIC DETAILS 84-86 TRAFFIC SIGN SUMMARYo !Q1 `\ 1760 87-102 WALL & NOISE BARRIER DETAILS �.� /7 \V� �� pN - DORN 950 c 103-110 LIGHTING PLANS & DETAILS 111-119 LANDSCAPING PLANS & DETAILS 120-125 BRIDGE PLANS �N •+ BEGt ROJE�T ' 128-165 CROSS—SECTIONS A. ,234+00 166-177 SEWER PUMP STATION DETAILS i N 555818.69 9 E 716236&:36 � ./SALEM .� . MASS 100 DESIGN _fHIGHWAY E CONVENTIONAL SIGNS "� / HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT SUBMISSIO COUNTY, CITY, OR TOWN BOUNDARY RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL COUNTY, CITY, OR TOWN SIDE 'LINE_ ^� ea�Y 2 1 2®® FENCE LINE —X X— 014� � BASE LINE OR SURVEY LINE 240 'Py Chief Engineer Date _0 _ RIGHT OF WAY LINE - APPROVED 3 CULVERT = SCALES - AS NOTED g aacvneco BY. MHD COMMISSIONER Date PROPOSED SURFACE Ehr"U bF The SEhraf6CvW z< s S29 MainStreet Suhe 203 PRESENT LENGTH OF PROJECT = 5,203 FT = 0.985 MILES =Ke%9 Bos[oD MA 02 29 w _ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ELEVATIONS APPROVED POLE 74 2V p DIVISION ADMINISTRATOR Date ASSOCIATE COMMISSIONERS Date ikxa SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS LEGEND STATE FED.AID PFOJ.N FINAL SXEET i T L GENERAL NOTES: SL ON HD 177 ryfl p STOP LINE - 12" MASS 2004 2 177 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SET BARRICADES, WARNING LIGHTS, AND OTHER PROTECTIVE PROPOSED EXISTING CROSSWALK SWILLSOLID TILE NO.005402 DEVICES THAT ARE NECESSARY, IN THE JUDGEMENT OF THE ENGINEER, FOR THE '.s MAIL BOX - SOLID WHITE LANE LINE-4" WLL BROKEN WHITE LANE LINE (10' LINE, 30' SPACE TYP.)-4" LEGEND AND ABBREVIATIONS PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC. DM" '-,r''`I' DRAINAGE MANHOLE SWEL SOLID WHITE EDGE LINE-4" 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL EXISTING DIMENSIONS AND GRADES IN THE 7YGL " STEAM MANHOLE -------_.... YELLOW GORE LINE-12" FIELD BEFORE COMMENCING WORK AND PROMPTLY NOTIFY THE ENGINEER TC ANY B L'-T CONTROL CABINET, GROUND MOUNTED DYCL ---- DOUBLE DOUBLE YELLOW CENTER LINE-4" DISCREPANCIES. WHERE THE CLEAR INTENT Of THE NEW WORK IS TO MATCH G'-U CONTROL CABINET, POLE MOUNTED WCHL EXISTING CONDITIONS, THE FIELD DATA SHALL GOVERN. � rI"! FLASHING BEACON CONTROL & METER PEDESTAL WGL -------- -- SOLID WHITE CHANNELIZATION LINE-8" ' 3. EXISTING GRADES SHOWN ON THESE PLANS ARE DERIVED FROM AERIAL PHOTOGRAMMETRY, ® LOAD CENTER ASSEMBLY - WHITE GORE UNE-12" AND ACCURACY IS NOT GUARANTEED. ELEVATIONS REFER TO N.G.V.D. OF 1929. ■ PULL BOX 12"X12"(AND AS NOTED) SYEL ... SOLID YELLOW EDGE UNE-4" m - ELECTRIC HANDHOLE 12" X 24" BYCL BROKEN YELLOW CENTER LINE (10' LINE, 30' SPACE TYP.)-4" 4. EXISTING UTILITY LINES INDICATED OR NOTED ON THESE DRAWINGS ARE SHOWN AS ELECTRICAL HANDHOLE (NUMBER AS NOTED) SYCL ._ MH n�II ELECTRICAL MANHOLE (DO) SOLID YELLOW CENTER LINE - 4" OBTAINED FROM EXISTING R INFORMATION AND ARE ONLY APPROXIMATE IN LOCATION. OF- ) DWLL _- DOTTED WHITE LANE LINE - 4" (2' LINE, 4' SPACE) EXISTING UTILITIES OTHER THAN THOSE INDICATED ON THIS DRAWING MAY BE ON THE SITE. pnL -U=�I- TELEPHONE MANHOLE (DO) � — THE CONTRACTOR IS WARNED TO PROCEED WITH CAUTION WITH ALL WORK, ESPECIALLY CSM" ,j"'-`I SEWER MANHOLE (DO) = = = -- - -' TRAFFIC SIGNAL INTERCONNECT CONDUIT EXCAVATION WORK. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO MAKE ALL POSSIBLE INVESTIGATIONS AS TO Y 'T:Illl HYDRANT p o .-_... _......_ 7RAFFFIC SIGNAL CONDUIT (TYPE AS NOTED) POSSIBLE UNMARKED UTILITY LINES. BEFORE DESIGNING. EXCAVATING, BLASTING, INSTALLING, In CATCH BASIN & CURB INLET BACKFILLING, GRADING, PAVEMENT RESTORATION, OR REPAIRING, ALL UTILITY COMPANIES, �..-- -•-•- --------- OVERHEAD CABLE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE, MUST BE NOTIFIED, INCLUDING THOSE IN CONTROL OF UTILITIES NOT ■ !-"+ CATCH BASIN -•-•- - ----- DIRECT BURIAL CABLE SHOWN ON THIS PLAN. THE ENGINEER ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR DAMAGES .'- FIRE ALARM BOX --"--" CURBING INCURRED AS A RESULT OF UTILITIES OMITTED OR INACCURATELY SHOWN. •PM PARKING METER -Iu- •-+ --- CONTOURS CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY DIG-SAFE AT LEAST 72 BUSINESS HOURS BEFORE ANY ..L. .._-.....,-_.. WATER PIPE (SIZE & TYPE OF MATERIAL) CONSTRUCTION BEGINS AT 1-800-344-7233. ELECTRICAL GROUND -- - -- GUARD RAIL DID. GAS GATE 5. ALL ITEMS DESIGNATED "REMOVE" AND NOT RELOCATED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT, ANOw.c. WATER GATE - PROPERTY LINE DETERMINED TO BE IN SALVAGEABLE CONDITION BY THE ENGINEER, SHALL BE STACKED ON • -'-- EASEMENT LINE SITE FOR REVIEW AND PICKUP BY THE MUNICIPAUTY. ALL MATERIALS NOT PICKED UP BY 0/ ", CONTROLLER PHASE ACTUATED THE MUNICIPALITY, SHALL BECOME PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR, AND BE REMOVED p _ MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY FROM THE SITE. O '(T RAILROAD LINE O I TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEAD (SIZE AS NOTED) DRAIN LINE 6. ALL EXISTING PAVEMENT SHALL BE SAW CUT TO A NEAT LINE WHERE IT MEETS —w— - WATER LINE PROPOSED CONDITIONS. C7 .::'1 WIRE LOOP DETECTOR (6'X 6' TYPICAL UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED) VIDEO SURVEILLANCE CAMERA —S— SEWER LINE 7. ALL AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION AND NOT COVERED BY PAVEMENT, MICROWAVE DETECTOR —E— ----------- LIGHTING CONDUIT STRUCTURES, BALLAST, ETC., SHALL RECEIVE 4" OF LOAM BORROW AND SEED. ~ �-•- MAGNETOMETER (2 SHOWN) S. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE'.FOR LEASING OR OTHERWISE OBTAINING LANDS B * PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON, SIGN (DIRECTIONAL ARROW AS SHOWN) AND SADDLE NECESSARY FOR AREAS OF CONSTRUCTION STAGING AND/OR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT, OPTICOM CONFIRMATION STROBE LIGHT X` - ABBREVIATIONS VEHICULAR SIGNAL HEAD 9. THE EXISTING RAILROAD TRACKS ARE OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE MASSACHUSETTS ...- - VEHICULAR SIGNAL HEAD, OPTICALLY PROGRAMMED PRC POINT OF REVERSE CURVATURE R STEADY CIRCULAR RED PCC POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SCHEDULING �- AND COORDINATING HIS WORK WITH EXISTING META PASSENGER TRAINS AND PERFORMING HIS a- - FLASHING BEACON WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE OPERATING RAILROAD. u_ nF PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL HEAD (TYPE AS NOTED OR AS SPECIFIED) Y STEADY CIRCULAR AMBER CC CURB CORNER 1-- *'�-- PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL HEAD, OPTICALLY PROGRAMMED G STEADY CIRCULAR GREEN EL ELEVATION FR FLASHING CIRCULAR RED CEM. CEMENT 10.ADDITIONAL NOTES ARE INDICATED ON THE VARIOUS CIVIL AND TRAFFIC PLANS INCLUDED • u SIGNAL POST AND BASE (ALPHA-NUMERIC DESIGNATION NOTED) FY FLASHING CIRCULAR AMBER WCR WHEEL CHAIR RAMP IN THESE CONTRACT DRAWINGS. lIt STREET LIGHT POLE RV STEADY RED VERTICAL ARROW CONIC. CONCRETE 11.FOR WHEELCHAIR RAMP DESIGN PARAMETERS, SEE SHEET 20. } { UTILITY POLE (NO. OF POLE & TYPE OF UTILITY) YV STEADY AMBER VERTICAL ARROW GRAN. GRANITE GV STEADY GREEN VERTICAL ARROW PROP. PROPOSED "it GUY POLE RL STEADY RED LEFT ARROW DEXIST. EXISTING '�• -' STEEL OR ALUMINUM MAST ARM, SHAFT AND BASE(ARM LENGTH AS NOTED) YL STEADY AMBER LEFT ARROW GL STEADY GREEN LEFT ARROW STA. STATION ;•.''. HIGH MAST POLE OR TOWER RR STEADY RED RIGHT ARROW UP UTILITY POLE LLIGHT WALL & NOISE BARRIER GENERAL NOTES: SIGN AND POST YR STEADY AMBER RIGHT ARROW ST. STREET OLE • 1. FOUNDATIONS MAY ALTERED, IF NECESSARY, TO SUIT CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED ..- GSL STEADY GREEN SLASH LEFT ARROW FT FEET ® DURING CONSTRUCTIOIO SIGNAL AND LIGHTING MAST ARM OR STEADY GREEN RIGHT ARROW RD. ROAD N, WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER. - WHEELCHAIR RAMP UTILITY POLE AND LIGHTING MAST ARM GSR STEADY GREEN SLASH RIGHT ARROW @ BASELINE FYV FLASHING AMBER VERTICAL ARROW TYP TYPICAL 2, SCALES NOTED ON THE PLANS ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO REDUCED SIZE PRINTS. TML --*!"- FENCE FRV FLASHING RED VERTICAL ARROW DIA. DIAMETER " DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC FLOW FRL FLASHING RED LEFT ARROW MIN MINIMUM 3. ELECTRONIC FILES WERE USED FOR SURVEY. - EMERGENCY PRE-EMPTION DETECTOR (OPTICOM) ERR FLASHING RED RIGHT ARROW MAX MAXIMUM 4. ALL UNSUITABLE MATERIAL SHALL BE REMOVED WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE F_ c'^1 RIP RAP W WALK WHITE SUB. SUBMITTAL STRUCTURE FOUNDATIONS AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. ••cv FW FLASHILUNAR NG WALK-LUNAR WHITE CONSTR.CONSTRUCTION GATE VALVE FOW FLASHING DON'T WALK-PORTLAND ORANGE FDN. FOUNDATION 5. DESIGN IN ACCORDANCE WTH THE 2002 AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE 0 •-• SOIL BORING DW DON'T WALK-PORTLAND ORANGE CAB. CABINET HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS. SPECIFICATIONS. it TI TEST PIT OL OVERLAP PED PEDESTRIAN wVAR. VARIES FROM PROVIDED SHRUB BO BY OTHERS E 6, REINFORCING STEEL SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ASTM TREE ADJ ADJUST NO. NUMBER N DESIGNATION A615, GRADE 60. UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE PLANS. ABAN. ABANDON OP OPTICOM ALL #'4 BARS SHALL BE LAPPED 20" AND ALL #5 BARS.SHALL BE LAPPED 26". TREELINE DICL DUCTILE IRON CEMENT LINED FOR HORIZ. BARS WITH 12" OR MORE OF CONCRETE BELOW THE BAR, THE LAP LIMIT OF BORDERING RET. RETAIN LENGTHS SHALL BE 29" FOR #4 BARS AND 36" FOR 05 BARS. IF THE ABOVE VEGETATED WETLANDS REM. REMOVE BARS ARE SPACED 6" OR MORE ON CENTER, THE TOP LENGTH SHALL BE 80% FLARED END SECTION R&S REMOVE & STACK o OF THE TOP LENGTH GIVEN ABOVE. ALL OTHER BARS SHALL BE LAPPED AS W/STONE EROISION PAD R&R REMOVE & RESET e SHOWN ON PLANS. R&T REMOVE & TRANSPORT N.I.C. NOT IN CONTRACT PBS PRINT BOTH SIDES 7. BENCH MARK IS BASED ON MEAN SEA LEVEL DATUM OF 1929 U.S.C.G.S. DISC " ^ F & 0 FRAME AND COVER #3AA-2 ON S.E. CORNER OF R.R. BRIDGE AT MARCH STREET, EL. = 28.83. F & G FRAME AND GRATE 0 8. ALL REINFORCING BARS AND SUPPORTING'DEMCES SHALL BE EPDXY COATED. R.C. REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE oI D.I.P. DUCTILE IRON PIPE 9. ALL ANCHOR BOLTS SHALL BE SET BY TEMPLATE BEFORE THE CONCRETE IS PSB PLANTABLE SOIL BORROW TS zz SIAL PLACED. CCVE TCLOSEID CIRCUIT VIDEO EQUIPMENT Z4w� 3 TC TOP OF CURB i 10.ALL WELDING AND THE PREPARATION AND ASSEMBLY OF MATERIAL FOR WELDING BC BOTTOM OF CURB a i w SHALL CONFORM TO THE STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR HIGHWAYS AND BRIDGES, RD REMOVE AND DISPOSE g THE AASHTO STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIGHWAYS AND BRIDGES, AND THE PC POINT OF CURVATURE AASHTO/AWS BRIDGE WELDING CODE. (ANSI/AASHTO/AWS D1.5) PT POINT OF TANGENCY 0 azym o 5In f- ------------- SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS s*N*E reo.us vsw. hntsa� sNEFr roup : YENF N0. SHEER MASS i 3 177 NOTE vvWER nlE No.005402 FOR DETAILS OF PROP. RETAINING KEY PLAN WALLS, PROP. BALLAST WALL & PROP. NOISE BARRIERS, SEE SHEET No's 87 THRU 102 et .� RETAINING WALL N2 (2.094 LF.) STA. 264+84 70 STA. 285+78 ' BALLAST WALL (120 L.F.) NORTH RI VER O7 \ 'OR PROPOSED BRIDGE MODIFICATIONS STA. 272+30 TO STA. 273+50 ARRIER 2 ,.•^` " ? EE BRIDGE PLANS NOISE B BRIDGE NO. S-01-017) (550 E•F'� (77DAL) NORTH RIVER END PROJECT T 1 \ ! FT STA. 286+W3 1 a�Nm (TlDALJ 6 j N 56001259 I 764556 26 �S MMUTER FA 4 � 1 \\ —IIF- IT - - - - - _- NTA. 828BEGIN 00 PROJECT � ��, Nnya I MBSA �Mo^".,,� I ._...., .. / YSMITH BTA GO v _ 9 o - 2 /8SA1EM Ir ri E 762363.36 I 7 v� ➢ �'"� - ! � ._..265.. 70....,.:a- - -. �' 1 BEVtR�SALEM i _- 255., _ .. °m-.� -E} EIRf GE so LIMIT Of7 WORK r' STA. - ��.wd' f1.� tl Irb r �''�;LiO .✓� � � ��r.. y m =M ' _.� vi.. `r S ; aF I =J I i,�-� �P .\_�t• \� ` i )�4.,y 245. .. A ;�--•� i `r `In 2 chi '1µm �✓r,.��i 7 5 < � PS �� thAv/ '• cam", - /:/'` STA 1�4+WO -FOR DETAILS OF PR RK ~^ GR055 ST 'r :i II r 11 I i '. I . PUMP STATION. SEEOP. r SHEET No's 165-176 N526.61 55 II' 1 1 761729.72 NOISE BARRTER RETAINING WALL Al 876 L.F. 730 LF.) SP\� -vim -f y�`M G� EEr STA. 268+44 TO STA. 277+20 ILS �oy�P �y PAY 1 PLAN — SHEET NUMBER REFERENCE PLAN — SHEET NUMBER REFERENCE i PLATE 1 I PLATE 2 PLATE 3 PLATE 4 PLATE 5 PLATE 6 PLATE 1 PLATE 2 PLATE 3 PLATE 4 PLATE 5 PLATE 6 PLATE 7 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN 24 25 26 27 28 29 DRAINAGE & UTILITY PLAN 53 54 55 56 57 - 58 - N E MONSTRUCTION PLAN 30 31 32 33 34 35 PAVEMENT MARKING & SIGNING PLAN 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 o CONSTRUCTION PROFILE 36 37 38 39 40 41 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLAN 68 69 - - - - 70 GRADING PLAN 45 46 - - - - LIGHTING PLAN 103 104 105 106 107 108 - ' CURB TIE PLAN 47 48 49 50 1 51 52 LANDSCAPING PLAN 111 112 1 113 114 115 116 - i I n 0 u I a_i 3 j N YS� Q 0 200 500 1000 - mm FEET pwym $ 1'= 200' 6m i SOVV LL I SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS SfaiE FED.NO PPW.NO E5CnL SXEEi iOiaL YFaN N0. $H�E15 MASS 2004 15 177 1.5' OFFSET @ VARIES (4'-1.5' P.p Mi FUW. 005402 CONSTRUCTION OFFSET) TYPICAL SECTIONS VARIES VAR. 15'-24' VAR. 19'-21' 11.5' 11,5' VARIES 2 OF 5 CEM. CONIC. SB TRAVELWAY SB TRAVELWAY NB TRAVELWAY NB TRAVELWAY CEM. CONC. SIDEWALK - SIDEWALK I MEET EXIST. MEET EXIST. GRADE (TYP.) PGL GRADE (TYP,) .015/' AS EXIST. AS EXIST. *FULL DEPTH PVMT. CONSTRUCTION PROP, GRAN. 01 BEE PAVEMENOP. COLD T NG TRAFFIC ANOTES)NE RESURfACiNG BRIDGE STREET BYPASS 31�" CURB TYPEN ISLANDS ARETO APPLY REMOVED.ERE 'SEE PLANS. CURBB TYPE 3: ( STA. 234+00 TO STA. 238+00* Ni J u VA-4 I 1.5' OFFSET CONSTRUCTION 1.5' OFFSET I S 10' 11.5' 11.5' 1 VARIES LEVELCEM. CONC. SB TRAVELWAY SB TRAVELWAY SB LEFT TURN NB TRAVELWAY NB TRAVELWAY CEM. CONC. SIDEWALK/BIKEWAY I SIDEWALK MEET EXIST. S PGL GRADE (TYP.) PtDUNDj' 3 z ,015'/' 20' ' PROP. 4" LOAM .075'/'_ `a�'I-' .020'Z' .0 ____----- BORROW & SEED I 1:21�� 1' LZ PROP. COLD PLANE & RESURFACING SI MEET EXIST. - i BRIDGE 238 00 Ro s a BYPASS (SEE PAVEMENT NOTES) �I PROP. GRAN. GRADE (TYP.) I WIDTH VAR. �I J CURB TYPE PROP.'WEATHERING PROP. GRAN. al STEEL BEAM GUARDRAIL CURB TYPE (INCREASES DOWN-STATION) VA-4 WITH ODD POST -------- � W � � PROP. 1 3/4` HOT MIX ASPHALT MODIFIED TOP COURSE PROP. 2" HOT MIX ASPHALT BINDER COURSE ' PROP. 4" HOT MIX ASPHALT BASE COURSE PROP. 4" DENSE GRADED CRUSHED STONE j PROP. 8" GRAVEL BORROW LLLLPROP. 24" SPECIAL BORROW I i II I` 1.5' OFFSET CONSTRUCTION 1.5' OFFSET 3' I 10' 8' 12' 12' 12' 12' 12' VARIES LEVEL OEM. CONC. PLANTING AREA SB TRAVELWAY SB TRAVELWAY SB/NB LEFT TURN NB TRAVELWAY NB TRAVELWAY CEM. CONC. SIDEWALK/BIKEWAY SIDEWALK MEET EXIST. w j I GRADE (TYP.) PGL MEET EXIST. ROUND I GRADE (TYP.) t ,015' .020' .020' .075'/' —————————————————---—i- ---- --- PROP. 4' LOAM BORROW & SEED PROP. 4" LOAM PROP, 4" LOAM PROP. GRAN. BRIDGE STREET BYPASS PROP. GRAN. BORROW & SEEDBORROW & SEED CURB TYPE STA. 244+00 TO STA, 247+00 CURB TYPE VA-4 VA-4 of � PROP. 1 3/4" HOT MIX ASPHALT MODIFIED TOP COURSE u PROP. 2' HOT MIX ASPHALT BINDER COURSE 3 ! PROP. 4" HOT MIX ASPHALT BASE COURSE �aN,a N I PROP. 4' DENSE GRADED CRUSHED STONE o PROP. 8' GRAVEL BORROW LL t, o PROP. 24" SPECIAL BORROW i aom� po SVY� p C'�vYip � �oUV G i T SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS sArc ITO,AID PROJ.Wj `46�E7 STOTAL LUM CONSTRUCTION MASS 120041 16 177 5! VAR. VAR. (22'-12') VAR, (10'-0') VAR. (24'-12') VAR. 10, 10' PIROJECT Lc xo.005402 LEVEL 1.5' OFF.- SB TRAVELWAY PAINTED CORE AREA N8 TRAVELWAY 1.5 OFF.- PLANTING AREA HOT MIX ASPHALT LEVEL 8' SHILD. I 8' SHLD. SIDEWALK/BIKEWAY TYPICAL SECTIONS 3 OF 5 1 PROP. 4* LOAM BORROW & SEED) MEET EXIST. PGL GRADE (TYP.) ROUND DO GRADE (TYR.) .020' .020".020',f .030 1 .015, 1 ROUND MEET EXIST �p------ ------ :4 --- --------- POP. 4! LOAM BORROW & SEED -PROR 4* LOAM PROP. HOT MIX ASPHALT BRIDGE STREET BYPASS L PROP. GRAN. BORROW & SEED BERM TYPE 'A" STA. 247+00 TO STA. 251+00 CURB TYPE VA-4 1 ROP. 1 3/4- HOT MIX ASPHALT MODIFIED TOP COURSE PROP. 2" HOT MIX ASPHALT BINDER COURSE —PROP. 4" HOT MIX ASPHALT BASE COURSE —PROP. 4' DENSE GRADED CRUSHED STONE PROP. 8" GRAVEL BORROW —PROP. 24!' SPECIAL BORROW CONSTRUCTION S' 8' 12' 12' 8' VARIES I0'-15 10, 3, 1 LEVEL SHOULDER SB TRAVELWAY NEI TRAVELWAY SHOULDER PLANTING AREA HOT MIX ASPHALT LEVEL 4' SIDEWALK/BIKEWAY 2' PROP, GRAN. I PROP. 4!' LOAM ROUND PGL CURB TYPE BORROW & SEED—i VA-4 ROUND MEET EXIST. 030'/` 1. GRADE (TYP.) -060'/ MAX, f 1:4 I MEET EXIST. 1:2 // PROP IR------ -GRADE (TYP.) I --- ---GRADE-(TYP.)------ ROP. 4" LOAM --------- - HOT MIX ASPHALT BORROW & SEED PROP. 4" LOAM BERM TYPE "A" BRIDGE STREET BYPASSBORROW & SEED WEATHERING SUPERELEVATED SECTION _ PROP. 1 3/4' MOT MIX ASPHALT MODIFIED TOP COURSE STEEL BEAM GUARDRAIL STA. 251+00 TO STA. 257+00 PROP. 2- MOT MIX ASPHALT BINDER COURSE WITH WOOD POST (STA. 257+00 TO STA. 260+00 - NORMAL CROWN) —PROP. 4" HOT MIX ASPHALT BASE COURSE PROP. 8' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE —PROP. 4" DENSE GRADED CRUSHED STONE PER META STANDARD DRAWING (3206) —PROP. 8" GRAVEL BORROW BEGIN AT STATION 254+90± —PROP. 24" SPECIAL BORROW CONSTRUCTION 8. 12, 1 5' VARIES VARIES, To, SHOULDER SS TRAVELWAY 12 SHOULDER HOT MIX ASPHALT N8 TRAVELWAY LEVEL DRAINAGE/BMP STRIP SIDEWALK/BIKEWAY o4' CHAIN LINK FENCE E PROP. 6' CHAIN LINK FENCE 1' 2' (STA. 260+00 263+00) w z MEET EXIST. GRADE (TYP.) PROP. 4" LOAM PGL i� T, E ROUND PROP. 4' LOAM ROUND BORROW & SEED— of BORROW & SEED DO .020',!! 020'/� 030' .1 .030' .030' 1 MEET EXIST -L 2' rl GRACE —I IE 1 z 3 N 02C'L 1:2 PROP. HOT MIX ASPHALT 1:2 ----------- BERM TYPE `A7 BIR I D9 E S_ IlRDR.L STA 2 6.+O� .ST 1/4. HOT MIX DT M X I RIDGE STREET BYPASS PROP, WEATHERED STA. 260+00 TO STA. 268+00 STEEL BEAM 2 PROP. RET. WALL #2 1 WITH WOOD POST BEGIN AT STA. 264+84 1 12" CRUSHED STONE PROP. 1 3/4" HOT MIX ASPHALT MODIFIED TOP COURSE (SEE WALL DETAILS) HOT MIX ASPHALT BINDER COURSE iPROP. 2 PROP. 4' HOT MIX ASPHALT BASE COURSE A. PROP. 4* DENSE GRADED CRUSHED STONE PROP. 8' GRAVEL BORROW —PROP. 24" SPECIAL BORROW 0 gas SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS FATEf 0.u0 IRU NO FlSG1. SHEET 10T. YEAR N0. S�M MASS 20041 17 1177 M EV REE xo.005402 j TYPICAL SECTIONS @ 4OF5 CONSTRUCTION VAR. (44' MIN.) 2'-4" 10' S. HOT MIX ASPHALT PLANTING AREA VAR. 32' MIN. - - SIDEWALK/BIKEWAY i j 8112' 12' 8' PROP. 3'-6" HIGH SHOULDER SB TRAVELWAY NB TRAVELWAY SHOULDER SAFETY RAILING MEET EXIST. I GRADE (TYP.) PROP. 6' CHAIN 1 1 LINK FENCE z z .015 _------_-- - 7 - i PROP. 4" LOAM PGL x y PROP. 4" LOAM a BORROW & SEED ¢ rr I �,__L °' .020' A20'P m .030' 1 BORROW & SEED MEET EXIST. 030' v v GRADE (TYP.) Fl 1 � I 1 Ory--PROP. 6"0 U.D. i ----- --------------- I I (SEE WALL DETAILS) ' BRIDGE STREET BYPASS ` j I STA. 268+00 TO STA. 277+00 PROP. RET. WALL SI PROP. RET. WALL y�2 ITL (SEE WALL DETAILS) (SEE WALL DETAILS) PROP. 1 3/4" HOT MIX ASPHALT MODIFIED TOP COURSE PROP. PRECAST CONC. I PROP. 2" HOT MIX ASPHALT BINDER COURSE SINGLE FACE F SHAPE PROP. 4" HOT MIX ASPHALT BASE COURSE BARRIER PROP. 4" DENSE GRADED CRUSHED STONE PROP. 8" GRAVEL BORROW .PROP. 24" SPECIAL BORROW I _ I CONSTRUCTION 8' VAR. 12'-24't VAR. 8' 8' SHOULDER SB TRAVELWAY NB TRAVELWAY SHOULDER PLANTING -I - AREA 1' wl 1• PROP. NOISE BARRIER #1 PROP. 6' CHAIN (SEE WALL DETAILS) LINK FENCE z w - - 3 MEET EXIST. PGGRADE (TYP,) J .020' u .020• °' --- -- u cj ROUND DRAINAGE/BMP STRIP Fl -- - i SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS SIAIE fFO.A10 VNW.!q RSL'4 $NM Tmi KwR H0. SEM MASS 120041 18 177 ' vnOJEti ME uo. DD5402 TYPICAL SECSTIONS 5 OFI CONSTRUCTION 7' 2''' 12' 12' 12' 2' VAR. 10'-6' 2' 13' 13' VAR. 2' VAR. CEM. CONC. OFF, NB RIGHT TURN NB LEFT TURN NB LEFT TURN OFF. CEM. CONC. OFF. SB TRAVELWAY SB TRAVELWAY LANE MERGE OFF. CEM. CONC. SIDEWALK I MEDIAN SIDEWALK PROP.PAVEMENT NOTES)ST. LL DEPTH CON (SEE MEET EXIST � EXI GRADEPGL GRADE �) .015' .015' .015' AS AS EX. As EX. - AS EX F PROP. GRAN 51 PROP. COLD PLANE & RESURFACING 31w 1 PROP, COLD PLANE & RESURFACING =I PROP. GRAN. VI„j (SEE PAVEMENT NOTES) aim (SEE PAVEMENT NOTES) oIw CURB TYPE 3 vi17 rWl7DTHVA!R 3,z CURB TYPE VA-4 N j VA-4 WASHINGTON STREET STA. 0+50 TO STA. 2+60 i i ! CONSTRUCTION 7 2' 12' 12' 12' 12' 2' 7' PROP. $LOAM CEM. CONC. OFF. TRAVELWAY TRAVELWAY TRAVELWAY TRAVELWAY FF. CEM. CONC. PROP. 4' LOAM BORROW SEE SIDEWALK SIDEWALK BORROW & SEED MEETI GRADEMEET EXIST. I E(TYP.) !I PGL GRADE (TYP,) -______ x:1:6 .015'/ .020' lv� .020' .015' PROP. GRAN. PROP. GRAN. CURB TYPE - CURB TYPE VA-4 VA-4 N BRIDGE STREET STA. 10+50 TO STA. 12+50 e PROP, 1 3/4' HOT MIX ASPHALT MODIFIED TOP COURSE I PROP. 2' HOT MIX ASPHALT BINDER COURSE PROP. 4' HOT MIX ASPHALT BASE COURSE PROP. 4" DENSE GRADED CRUSHED STONE e PROP. 8" GRAVEL BORROW i n v i z � � I 0 4 O aU mP O V N=mO b I sono d i I I 1 1/2' BEVEL, 4 SIDES SALEM 12'-0" BRIDGE STREET BYPASS 8'-0" O.C. .n 6' i V-0" 6' 6inTE RD.AID R .No HS" vxn AL VE/M 0. 9NEEiTOT5 •1 6 MASS 2004 19 177 i 1 1/2" BEVEL, 4 SIDES I 'R ECT RE ND. 005, 5 8 PICKETS 2" X 3" P.T. RAIL 24' DIA. OPENINGS I CIVIL DETAILS 3/4' % 1 •I / ' in FASTENED WITH DOWELS I I 1 OF 5 2" % 3" PRESSURE TREATED RAIL 1 -1-. FASTENED WITH DOWELS io r 1 1 6'-0" —6" ROUND % 11'-3' ro 7'-0' r .I LONG POST, 8'-0" O.C. 1 trRr�l 3/4' X I 5/8" PICKETS I I iq FASTENED TO RAIL WITH 1/2 LAP - JOINT AND 'j WOOD DOWELS • SECURE WITH DECK INI I t DOWELS, TYPICAL E--6" ROUND X 11'-3" L----------------------------------------- NN LONG POST. 8'-0" O.C. 6 TYPICAL PLAN VIEW FINISH GRADE FINISH GRADE ----- --- - ----- PROVIDE MANHOLE FRAME & COVER UP TO FIN. GRADE n� io5 MORTAR JOINT (TYPJ :.///G ?l.//i!N — /.✓ti ELEVATION SECTION NON SHRINK `SET FRAME IN FULL 24' RC GROUT (TYP.) 6' MORTAR BED (TYP.) NOTES: 15" INLET 4" PRECAST CONC. 6" 6" 1.ALL FENCE POSTS SHALL BE TREATED WITH "CUNAPSOL" ALL SIDES FOR A DIMENSION OF 2'-6" FROM BUTT OF POST. BAFFLE WALL WATERTIGHT _ 2.POSTS SHALL BE EXTENDED TO MAINTAIN I:A MINIMUM DEPTH IN GROUND OF 3'-0" TO ACCOMMODATE ANY CHANGES IN GRADE. GASKET JOINT 3" (MIN.) 1'-01 TEE (A 3.LINE OF FENCE TOP AT BOTTOM SHALL BE INSTALLED STRAIGHT AND TRUE. ALL POSTS AND FACING BOARDS T MIN. OR SLATS SHALL BE INSTALLED PARALLEL AND PLUMB. ALL RAILS SHALL BE INSTALLED PARALLEL AND TRUE. T 2'-3" 4'CON' RECAST 15' 4.ALL FASTENERS SHALL BE WOOD DOWELS` TYPE. T 4'-6" 4'-6" WALL BAFFLE!n OUTLET 5'-0" WALL I 7._0, PROVIDE STAINLESS STEEL LIQUID3(12") DIA. v 8'-0" HIGH STOCKADE FENCE — SECTION STRAP ANCHOR W/EXP. LEVEL �� HOLES 6„ 6^ NOT TO SCALE 6• BOLTS 0 INLET & OUTLET .11 If TYP. I Q, BRIDGE STREET BYPASS 6" CRUSHED STONE BASE 6" SEE SETTLEMENT PLATFORM DETAILS BELOW %�p//j./F i %, /11i CROSS SECTION VIEW L Q TRACK PROPOSED I - COMPACTED RETAINING WALL APPROX. RIGHT CURB LINE SUBGRADE ! I SURCHARGE NOTES: 1. CONCRETE TO BE 5000 P51 ® 28 DAYS AND REINFORCED FOR HS-20 LOADING. 2 h APPROX. FINISHED GRADE - 2. ALL PIPE CONNECTIONS TO BE WATERTIGHT. TOP OF PRELOAD 3. INLET & OUTLET TEES TO BE SCH 40 PVC AND CENTERED UNDER MANHOLE COVER 5=( 2 APPROX. EXIST. 4. RECOMMENDED MANUFACTURER ROTONDO OR APPROVED EQUAL � •`--I0. 1 GROUND 5. COVERS IN THE STRUCTURE TO BE REMOVED PRIOR TO MANHOLE RISER INSTALLATION. IPRELOAD 6. STEEL REINFORCEMENT TO BE ASTM A-615-75. GRADE 60. - i '"� 7. MINIMUM CAPACITY 2500 GALLONS AT LIQUID LEVEL. j 8. SEAL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS WITH 1" DIA, BUM RUBBER OR EQUIVALENT. TYPICAU PRELOAD/SURCHARGE DETAIL — STA. 252+50 THRU STA. 286+00 9. MANHOLE FRAME AND COVER TO BE LEBARON FOUNDRY TYPE LK110 OR APPROVED EQUAL. ' SCALE 1'-0" 11 y(s I PRECAST 2500 GALLON OIL AND GRIT SEPARATOR (STATION 271+55 LT. AND 282+90 LT.) NOT TO SCALE O CAP 6" x 6" v 1'-2" LONG 1i STEEL " MIN. THICK PRESSURE TREATED WOOD BLOCKS t ROUND WASHER MIN. 2" STD. BLACK IRON PIPE. )"6" RAIL BOLT, 16"LONG PROPOSED GRADE PIPE SECTIONS TO BE 5'-0WEATHERING LONG, THREADED AT BOTH STEEL BEAM RAIL E j ENDS, AND PROVIDED WITH6• -1 ONE STD. PIPE COUPLING O I I FOR EACH LENGTH RAIL WASHER ROUND WASHED WITH HEX NUT4f 3" - - H 8' • 8'-0" LONG 1 LAYER OF 3/4" VARIES POPRESSURE T W- O DEC. W000 MARINE PLYWOOD t r I I I� % 5-1/2" BUCK IR o' i EXISTING GROUND IRON FLOOR FLANGE 0 SURFACE I I 1N8 BOLT HOLE NOTE: SETTLEMENT PLATE TO BE PLACED ON 4'-0' X 0'-6' T X 7" % 1/4" STEEL 4 (MIN.) BOLTS REQUIRED L J cul '^ THICK BED OF COMPACTED SAND. OVERLYINGFILL WASHER PLATE OR 2' DIA. $ SUBGRADES OR EXISTING PIPES,,CROSSING THE BERM. WASHERS EACH BOLT ELEVATION POST DETAIL 'gmm g PLAN SECTION .-s WEATHERING STEEL BEAM GUARDRAIL WITH WOOD POST TYPICAL SETTLEMENT PLATFORM DETAILS NOT TO SCALE ouo u I NOT TO SCALE SALEM OpOS RELOCATED - - I -�.• -� BRIDGE STREET BYPASS FO I I - Vitt Mm uo Pxw.m F r�L sr,ou? srortTi'is sa BRIDGE STREET .__ ._ ___ .____ ..__._.._____.—.____ _-__.._.._._.- ..cq......♦ _,;rs.,..�_ .,,- �..a,., ." ,.-.,: r :._ .q..__.r - l I �- MASS 2004 23 177 \``/ • �Y.{- - -. __ ''// Il \ 4°£.. PR ECT FILE N0. 005402 vT� LGI i} CIVIL DETAILS 'I RELOCATED "�S=/,t7(ISTttJC STONE WALL REMOVE NK /�'9: I ,) 5 OF 5 CEMETERY DRIVEWAY /1 `-TO BE REPAIRED FROM WALL TY�":\ CTREET _ (SEE NOTE 1) i :<., E?I�(D�E BRIDGh_7 STREET ^D T' RELOCATE EXIST, I STO BUIL ( MAILBOX AS DIRECTED \I ALL (SEE NOTE 3 �: EXISTING EXISTING STONE riz iz M• \ RETAINING WALL CEMETERY EAI �� v FENCE AND INSTALL NEW GRANITE BOLLARDS (SEE NOTE 4) V REMOVE EXISTING v Q / ISTl C y TREES IN FRONT OF AEX / \\ WALL AND GRIND Qy, C '�CEM. _Y STUMPS FLUSH DISMANTLE AND RECONSTRUCT (SEE NOTE 2 A STONE WALL NOTES EXISTING CHAIN LINK FfNLf 1,REMOVE ALL VEGETATION ALONG FACE OF WALL CUT OUT ALL LOOSE AND CRUMBLING MORTAR JOINTS, FILL DEEP CAVITIES IN FACE/ WALL AND POINT JOINTS TO MATCH ORIGINAL, INCLUDING TTOOLED flLREPLACE MISSING CHINKING STONES CEMETERY STORY WITH NEW STONES TO MATCH THE ORIGINAL / CHARACTER. 2.REMOVE STONE CAP AND RE-SET WALL STONES TO ORIGINAL LOCATIONS AND ORIENTATION. ( S ., RE-POINT TO MATCH ADJACENT WALL SECTIONS. `� . '�-'l /� � � 3. DISMANTLE AND RECONSTRUCT DAMAGED STONEWORK, CAUSING NO DAMAGE TO ADJACENT STONE WALL SURFACES. PLAN RE-LAY STONES IN ORIGINAL LOCATIONS AND ORIENTATIONS. SCALE: 1"=20' REPLACE MISSING CHINKING STONES WITH NEW STONES MATCHING THE ORIGINAL CHARACTER. POINT FACE JOINTS TO MATCH ADJACENT WALL. 4. REMOVE EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCE AT CORNER OF HOWARD AND BRIDGE STREETS. INSTALL NEW GRANITE BOLLARDS (SEE LANDSCAPE DETAILS, SHEET 119). CONSULT WITH CEMETERY AND HISTORICAL COMMISSION ABOUT SPECIFIC ENTRANCE DESIGN AND SECURITY. 5,MORTAR FOR ALL POINTING WORK TO CONSIST OF 1 PART PORTLAND CEMENT AND 2 PARTS SAND. COLOR TO BE WHITE/GRAY MIX TO MATCH ORIGINAL MORTAR. REPAIR EXISTING 9' REMOVE CHAIN LINK REPAIR EXISTING Y RE-BUILD EXISTING HIGH STONE WALL W FENCE AND INSTALL NEW REMOVE IVY ALONG FACE OF WALL HIGH STONE WALL STONE WALL (SEE NOTE 1) 'o HOWARD GRANITE BOLLARDS AND REPAIR EXISTING 4' HIGH (SEE NOTE 1) (SEE NOTE 3) STREET [(SEE LANDSCAPE DETAILS, STONE WALL (SEE NOTE 1) — SHEET 119) - _ r, CEMETERY I � DRIVEWAY CEMETERY WALL .ELEVATION z I� SCALE: 1"=10' oto a IZQ`�' m aft SALEM GUARDRAIL WATER SUPPLY ALTERATIONS DRAINAGE DETAILS LIGHTING DETAILS LANDSCAPING DETAILS TRAFFIC SIGNAL DETAILS BRIDGE STREET BYPASS PROP. TERMINAL END STA, 234+34 LT. BEGIN STRAIGHT SECTION w/BRIDGE END POSTnn.c vco.AID OJ, no n sAL hoe, WEM STRAIGHT SECTION STA. 234+34 TO STA. 236+08 LT, ATTACHMENT STA. 237+60 TO STA. 240+12.5 LT. SEE SHEEP No. 53 SEE SHEET No. 53 SEE SHEET No. 103 SEE SHEET No. 111 SEE SHEET No. 68 1771 (ATTACH TO BRIDGE END POST) BURIED END STA. 240+125 TO STA. 240+50 LT S N R> no. 0054004 30 ` p3 \ > a ''`•. eRwcm ms 02 CONSTRUCTION PLAN * 5_. ( 1 a 1T1 BEGIN PROP SIDEIM LI ., < 1 OF 6 { •l ,�- mm STA. 234+26t LT ^1 - .� f�� MEET EXIST.bRK ' \ N } �' B ocE IV BYPASS C --a STA. 234+00 a \ 1 �N 555818.69 ,, \ 1 I R tsoo Do' "9B� \\\ E 762363.36 \ \ F Y r L-280.91' MBIA \\ 1----PROP TOP10P1 SLOPE, T=14o.e6' SALEM STAT/ON "a PROP. 1-3/4" HOT MIX \ 1 PROP GRAN CURB ,'' 0=10'4347 CURVE DATA _ ASPHALT COLD PLANE & 8 \ \ BRIDGE ST. BYPASS _ � R&S EXIST (TYP.), 1 c r 46 TYPE VA a GRAN. R=500,00' " >r F ) L=234 41' w'� m T-119.40' BEGIM�ROP SIDEWALK CURB TYPr + A-26'51'43' " Y. RESURFACE \` M ,«STA. 234+71t RT. N PR S`WCUT -< < < TYPE VXA CURB \ F LINE' (TYP.) > o c) ^" \ T'/ STA 237+27.34 BRIDGE ST BYPASS @ t, V� G9 TYPE VA�-4 (TYP) \;: \\s iT, hA` STA. 0+00.00 WASHINGTON 5T @ PROP CEM GONG \ \I#S.. DRIVEWAY APRON '• 1T D FULL P :PVMT \� - 4• x PROP 8.75 WIDE CEM. \ ''-- rn \-\ CDNST UCTION 'A (1 CONIC SIDEWALK �- \ O "R&S EXIST. GRAN: •... F::'. y V, CURB (TYP.) \. 1� \y 1\\ :. '(OYP) WCR •�� ROP. VAR WIDTH CE`Mt. REM. EXIST. ISLAND, \ CONC. SIDEWALK (5' MIN) • — --- R&S GRAN. CURB - \ �`\ �, FOR,PROPOSED BRIDGE MODIFICATIONS (BRIDGE NO 5 01-017) SEE BRIDGE PLANS BRI - ON 1 0� cGOING B05T \ 1 x PROP CEM. CONQr/ISCYAD w/GRAN. CURB TYPE.VA-4w.' I \"-,; PROP. CEM IPSW (6' WIDE CUT,THkU CONIC WCR (TYP.) \C PROP. bEML'CONC. " \ \ PkOP SILT FENCE & HAYSAL(S F6P WCR (TYP.) ,rEROSI0f1/3EfSIMENi CONTROL 1YP.) PROP. SAWCUT .. �v� PROS 10' WIDE CEM/: - -eREM CO 0, SIDEWALK/BI((BWAY LINE (TYP.) / � � /-�- - ISLAND R& 6RAN. PLANTED ISLAND w "a GRAN CU A. 'o- 1 � `� EXIST BLDG. 70 BE � 'GRAN. CURB TYPE VA-4 � � % \ t - S ;� PRZ7P.GRAN. CURB /`Q •SV BYMOTHERSD MEET OF XISTORK (TYP.) 4 - PROP CEM. L " 2♦ \\1 \ J ... _. i '\ \\ YPE".VA 4 TYP. (0•N�C) WCR 9 d♦( /iI 1 4 Nz ♦ j STA•'2+60 "O s ♦ 0� PR F E Hl N 555568.90 '� , i \\ �. / / &€Y ExISTwt''ffk1WEWAv 0p E 78271;6\14 ': ; � .�M i%� - K& ,Exls1.. GRAN \\ `'� \,� y/ �,.` . / ' / /�'/' JEFFERSON.AT_SALEM" _ \ \ .., *+ i -. ` CUR ,(TYP.) >� \ .q:. �'\ �♦ 'R&R P-B.O. / t� - yg\ REM: EXIST. I� AND. R&S "' �`�9 �•• �\ l ` t OEI2ELOPMENT:PROJECT - • -\ a\ ry� \ 'v (PROP. BY OTHERS) \ -GRAN CURB \ > i �" \' 1. >i /ry yN -PROP. CEM. CONIC ISLAND ,. t. N - ` \ 6'` '-ryb ♦O / w/GRAN. CURB TYPE S8� ` —PROP. M. PROP. GEM: PLOP GRAN CURS) i ` - i a S 1 -CONIC. SI EWAGK CON" SIDEWALK ,p 3" 5• TYPE VA-4 (TYP,) / STA. 241+03.56 BRIDGE ST. BYPASS @ _ l i v C W VARIES (TYP.) q r /- Vi1' ,) PROP.GRAN URB A, `tB ,F` ♦♦ ♦'�7pA ' � STA. 10+00.00 ASH 5T@ (AHEAD) " 10+00.00 DRIVEWAY BACK > INC �,, TYPE:Vg 4 (TYP) .4,' RETAIN E%IST"'WOODS ',' ,o�� A♦ ♦ >i i Gyp+/ A� o=; "PRdP. t-3/4"" t MTXvv FENCE & GATES WQR PROP,ItEM �� s V \ JY P CEM CONIC. ASPHALT C PLAN r& < TYP. /`/ y' �` i V '' > - k, GONC`. WCR ' A pp0� fi s e X )� RE$URF ,•-,r (,{yP) c� WCR. C/7yT i ! ASPHALT COLD PO LR �yo9 ♦ `7vXm R&S EXIST RESURFACE x x r _ -`` GRAN CURB (TYP) I\ '- / - \ Nr -•"�• / 3 C ♦ OG PROP FULL DEPTH PVMT. j/f/ '`O`,"' /' `\Y ,+A,\\ _ �� ✓ C,\'PROP GRAN CURB I - `o ` f r CONSTRUCTION I TYPE vA 4 (TYP �� 1 r:'�\ ,._. �.5 �4� VV A• C`� PROP. CEM - J h �� C r PROP! S 1 TY PLANTING 7 i QC', AREA (SEE TVPICALS) C CONS. SIDEWALK , ♦ �A `REM. !'�� \ i '�� •PROP. CEM. CONC. �� \"��\ �•� C CONC.:WCR PROP. 10' WIDE CEM DRIVEWAY APRON r �� v ' (TYP,)" GONG. SIDEWALK/BIKEWAY `^ ')ti �'• A\ t _ �/' C rvs LIMIT OF WORK '< PROP, TOP OF SLOPE P A 0+70 PROP CEM. i`. EET-EXIST. / (TYP) WCR & .�/ - - a 1•.•A't•� ( _ _z Q� �� 6 -,� PROP CEM NOUnES . /a0`o9 CONIC. SIDEWALK WIDTH01, VARIES (TYP.) �3 m SSSn'. LINE (TYP.) '. \REM. REM. �» 0 3 0 40 100 200 am CONTNO . -N SHT_ _ 7 i 80 o FEET FOR PROFILE SEE SHEET NO. 36 Z6 1 ao' HORIZONTAL SIDE STREET PROFILES SEE SHEET NO. 42 za�v a I SALEM GUARDRAIL WATER SUPPLY ALTERATIONS DRAINAGE DETAILS LIGHTING DETAILS LANDSCAPING DETAILS TRAFFIC SIGNAL DETAILS BRIDGE STREET BYPASS STA FED.A10 PflW.N0 FISGL SXEEi TOTPL NONE SEE SHEET No. 54 SEE SHEET No. 54 SEE SHEET No. 104 SEE SHEET No. 112 SEE SHEET No. 69 vEna ND. sXEETs MASS 20041 31 1177 VROJECt mE N0. 00.5402 F_cONT. ON SHT_NO_30-1 EccONT. ON SHT_NO_3Q CONSTRUCTION PLAN 2 OF �.• �. ♦ ROP. 80T. OSE .♦ rn 73 S\'. �\\ \P ♦ P'-B-.O.EXISTINCi�RIV1EWAY ' A'/im n./ / 1 ._.- i ),_./I to/ EFFERSON AT SALEM" DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ASPHq ai'�/ir..n�/''/ 'by QG A♦1// // BERM TYPE \ / 1• y PROP CEM. CONIC.ISLAND �.. - BRIDC DATA ,� (PROP. BP�07HERS) Q G > \ / PROP. FULL DEPTH PVM7. /•/ / /�� - BYPASS': ,� t , :, \& �,� \ \♦ A-4 T / x46 ♦ / �;, a.. 1.. CONSTRUCTION ti "- w GRAN. CURB TWE SBAN. CUB - i STA. 241+03.56 BRIDGE ST. BYRA55,g7� „ LRDH STA. 246+69.38 BRIDGE 57. BYPASS @ -STA 10+00.00 ASH�ST Q (AH AD p, TSTA. 70+00.00 BRIDGE ST @ (QHFAD) = y Y i/' >P y/. i / 'PROP GRAN„CURB TA 10+0000 DRIVEWAY 6ACK \ STA. 10400.00 DRNEWAY BACK TYPE VA 4 (TYP) 1 L D A0�/, �j? \\ . ♦ `\ 2 yr PROP CEM CONC. 1 Y W.GRAN: CURB ,[�O �nnn /{a� r // n�rn/3 WCR I !I,. / i -' TYPE%4A-4 (TW.) -�4: END PROP. SIDEWALK & GRAN 1 PROP. 1-3/4" CURB, STA. 247+50t LT ,5/inn gp ` n/ n/ r406 IA �/ V C .- fS%. Ca .� I i_ ASPHALT COLD PL'AN9 &/ ) / r, '_ R&S EXI >' > t T PROP. HOT MIX ASPHALT -`lz/, TYP7pp < RESURFACE > V„f/ n CURB TRANS. %'GRAN', RB (TW.) v Wh _ / N A nn l l n / ^ •� �♦ PROP. FULL DEP PVMT. ,r �� i '.TYPE HOT.MIX y.>� inn / n/ nig ROP )40 WIDE F'L ANTING '0 GRAN. CURB 0� �. .. 1'°• t ) CONSTRUCTION 0`�� ASPHALT BERM pn ''AREA SEE TYPIOALS h �..�. �/ /i '' h \ �♦ - _ PROP. 8' WIDE PLANTIN / 'n p nn ' PROP t t3E"HOT MIX ASPHAL1 qq . CEM. >' + \ r i / 4' - brTA�247+6Oi' / P CONi`S�SIDEwALK � � � "�, a. I AREA (SEE TWICALS) �, '� `m LT, * /nn 0 / BIKEWA�/SIDEWALK �,,/ V - A0 ♦\ EM. . )„ A J' _PROP. CEM.-. EXISTING PROP. CEM. !A...�,/� ✓ r4N♦ n .T., �_/f PROP CEM ONC ) ,-� >- L. i K _„_. C 60' i �,. "Jff�E SON AT SA i. \\\ �, PROP. 10'AWA CEM - ' LEM'• bRIVEWAY APRON n K / %f �♦ MEET (O PC}WCR% ,,, CONIC. SIDEWALK/BIKEW/YS'�- =-DRfV@WAY ro`” CONC. WCR nG' �p ,Qx�+ry / n/ ;5� DEVELOPMENT PROJECT LIMIT„OF WORKS ” n ��/.��\� xa� =r;�ti-. \ \(TYPPROP. TOP of slop (iW).. . . ��i' - n ` ` PROP. 9Y'O7HER5 '. \ " // PROP. BT:.OF.560PE ( ) \STA'.yJ0+70 /� - PROP. CEM. 9) / l ) _J- _ - <'' EES' FkIS - ROP -EM. 4 J 1 P. CEM -�� _ n/ pj \ /- '\\+l 'eC7 ) v . 9 3 \ - �.� 'r 1 CONC R ,/P .\ �- � � __ n WC N,!' ' \ / / P OP. SILT FENCE & HAYBALES FOR YP' �� (TYP r' - I� 'r\- EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL (T W.) n o v l 10 v SIDEWA K \�\a�3 / i I R ST v R' Off/K f i)/ b'TH VARIES, WCUj LINE (TYP) 'r- �, � v`\ REM. ��EM @CURVE DATA\ UP B.O. ASH ST. \ ,{_, PROP. CEM'✓CONC n/ 245 +/ i \ . \ \\' DRIVEWAY APRON \� �`w'1-_ N �l'� �_ _--e- '5,_-_500-0-0- !. a / .'� _ ry ROR•CEM, CON L;a — PROP. CEM. CONC. g / �' L!,1..36.46' \/��\ "`b WTR YP. PROP.GRAN. CURB WCR TYP. EGIN„PRO BIKEWA-Y/91OEWALK bj, r-, "\,y` - r,- , \ 'ARP XY CONT - OEM + ) ( ) STA. '247+353 RT \ T- .66' `\ S T -4 (TW.) \ . �DR11(E�17AWCON6T. ONC IVO TWE VA ( ) r \ da�,t 5138'15" J> \ ( (T, t+% t., - PROP, CEM CON WCR TYP \ LIMIT OF WOR PROP. 8' WIDE CEM. �n PROP. 7' WDf CEM \\ \/ STA. 1+10 n �6�9 CONIC. SIDEWALK `o CONIC. SIDEWALK «T�,ICT _ = - ^tc (\ // .�`' MEET EXIST' �! l;" .r> M' ROP.GRAN /CURB' r ,. 4�1F�^ ,Y f �? - REM. IST. PVMT., i TWE VA-4 (TYP.) ' / \ @ CtJRV DATA - OP.4 LB & SEE ST PETERS ST /F �♦6 `t A, x... D REM. TREES (3 N61 Q x P \\ �IF'f0+j /�.: PRDR. E CEM lL T 532971:6 >f . . '.r� Na' f "UR AST. PROP.REM 41" LOAM T`9..- CONIC: SIDEW K. .\� POSTS & GAELS Ei p=3613012" / �"4'i2 gyp' ) SEED A^ TE r \ /' / " aft `�� \♦ PROP CEM. CO C \ \ '\/ d orf .. ,:. ?'xc'. "" ♦,- W R (TYP.).!. �� n !,r VV iq' cp yq � �;: �r� ', , '" LIMIT OF, WORK STA. 14400 LK (10 WIDE) ( PROP:SAWCUT MEET EXIST. y / LINE (TYP) N 556528.81 ` Y0� REPAIR EXISTING D xs \/r /3 i. t E 763729,72 1 ,-,��L��1�T PROP. CEM CONE NOUST �( CEMETERY RETAINING DRIVEWAY APRON .r 1 14 STA. 244+00.00 BRIDGE ST. R✓n !�� WALL SEE'SHEET N0. T3 P i PROP.GRAN. CURB y STA 0+ 0.00 ST. PETERS '. REM. EXf§T..PVMT., TYPE VA-4 (TYP) k +24.92 N3 ' AD PROP. 4" LOAM & SEED �.P PROP CEM CON G '!�, 17g�0 ��OS EL CURVE DATA WCR (TW.) 8' _ A \\ �ni > ,.Y \� ✓w\ ,,.M .} ��. BRIDGE ST PROP, FULL.DEPTH PVMT. \ BR/Q ^ G i R=250.00 CONSTRUCTION „r Y7� T CE SWEET o . ell mv. L-265.17' _ A HOT MIX A=604620" �� ASPPHHALT COLD PLANE & �� ` RESURFACE � C_ , '�iaT Ic roe �P �� S.4�E MMON N1 �To t 13 T � v ">' g 0 40 100 200 ��uc g FEET FOR SEE NO. 37 FOR SOEFILE STREET PROFFIIL DES SEE SHEET NO. 43 1 40' HORIZONTAL �ouo u I. SALEM GUARDRAIL WATER SUPPLY ALTERATIONS DRAINAGE DETAILS LIGHTING DETAILS LANDSCAPING DETAILS BRIDGE STREET BYPASS STATE FEN.A.PRW. NO F5CP1 SHEET TOTAL PROP. BURIED END STA. 251+62.5 TO STA. 252+00 LT. SEE SHEET No. 55 SEE SHEET No. 55 SEE SHEET No. 105 SEE SHEET No. 1113 .FAR N. SHEES CURVED SECTION (R-525') STA. 252+00 TO STA. 255+60 LT. MASS 2004 32 177 STRAIGHT SECTION STA. 255+60 TO STA. 264+84 LT, w l FILE No. 005402 (ATTACH TO END POST 0 BEGIN OF RETAINING WALL 1 PROP. BURIED END STA. 257+62.5 TO STA. 258+00 RT. CONSTRUCTION PLAN STRAIGHT SECTION STA. 258+00 TO STA. 268+44 RT. 3 OF 6 (ATTACH TO BARRIER 0 BEGIN OF RETAINING WALL #1) NOR TH Rl VER (TIDAL) APPROXIMATE CURVE DATA MEANH MEAN HIGH WATER LINE BRIDGE ST. BYPASS R=500.00' - SRIF ( ) L:362.13' T 189.42' 4129'50" }_ T BO RiIN 6LiFR5 Cpvf fuRN lF NEIN E4� IP 1111, - Jt FAu 0 wain Arm,i� ♦ e�_s� �. i e _ e s. A. a a e..u? ti_s T \s = PSWICH• � I 4. EXISTING 2- SEWAGE EASEMENT - — _ _ BOSTON _ _ �- 3 5 H L 0 NO ACCESS _ ^^.IUD 256 _ 257 '0 258 255 - �-- _ ... __- All ' II i PROP 2003 S,H.LO NO ACCESS c IZI PRO 2003 CITY LAYOUT BEGIN HOTMIXASPHALT i - — BERM TYPE A RE�`. ST. WALL t Izl PROP. BOT. OF SLOPE PROP SILT FENCE & HAYBALES FOR ��'/ / ril STA. 254 60± I STA. 250+703 RT PROP. 225x8' HIGH IONJSEDIMENT CONTROL (TYP) /�/ / / /..., END N PROP.'HOT MIX ASPHALT - STOCKADE FENCE TO - U CURB TRANS. _ ABUT. PROPERTI EROS ' /.g XISTING R - / � ' A .LINK FENCE ' JEFFERSQ/�.AT_SALEM I � PROP, HOT MIX A6,PkTALT /� //� ,F�' � i�I fit id I - ..GEL0 ifENT ROJEo- _ �✓` y � <. �RIDGE7 5T BYPAS '�.,CON57RUC710N TYPE �:.,� / //� •Sr. / ��-lC V� CC� C. 1 ,!�.� PROP. e'F OTHERS - Q C DATA AI X l A F / / PROP FULL DEPTH RvMT. Z .` PROP.GRAN. v. i { _:� i R=SOO,OOI r $TA. 2 §,+ 4.38 BRIDGE ST BYPASS / ry9 ur FT L�fi95 STA. 70+00.00 BRIDGE ST fl ` AHEAD �'' v „y:!t �Y /i/ / // / TYPE VA 7 T 7 STA. 10+00 00 DRIVEWAY A'CK Vq, 2N N' 'X J �} PROROR�• CURB \ �\ �3�/i eI TYPE VA-4 (TYP.) r /✓ / ri% ter? � q ♦ y./ ,. � /, ! u,c.,y y - END PROP. SIDEWALK & GRAN. CI STA 247+50t LT ci'r /ice .,�0 / /�/i 'I ✓// t O e _ \ ::PROP. HOT MIX ASPHALT- ,y 166'7/ u � - / CURB TRANS �Q:. i�/� / //�/ Q� .,,�� 'A / ' i/ 'PROP 1d, WIDE PLANTING �µ / - BEGIN HOT MIX�!�i / .. �� 1 / >', % ' ' ' . AREA (SEE TYPIC°ALS) i X <j ,p Ui a t . ASPHALT y , „vTcn / °✓; . STAi247+66i( �p / / \._ 'eTYPE'A'� /� � �,/ Y" PROP. $'�iIIDE PLANLINGORr // // ( PROP 1cv't�De'HOT MIX ASPHALT (GONG. SIDEWALK�G MEET BIKEWA`7�3IDEWALK AREA SEE TYPICI �qqq""" ��'J'J n PROP. 10' WIDE CEM. %IS1MGr > PROP. CEM. i /� :__ ry 1 Ery /ted \ \ "JEFFERSON AT SRLEM ` R1V�WAY �+�P CONC. WCR \` ' ` K, IKE °-" � , '�-� �/�' oo _ ,..Rx°'ry // � �.. ';< DEV�'LOPMENT PROJECT PROP. TOP OF 9LOP CONC. CR 1,y7YP i/ / �// PROP, TFEN EENAYBALES FOR RYO7HERS) r � ( ' <- o )' Zl PROP, CEM / o _J y:tyyy�j_ r { _ i oI ` Ili-{-7YP.-)' x' 4- ,yq0 y SEDIMENT CONTROL (TPP) h .. _. IT w Q'm o 0 160 too 200 FEET CONT. ON SHT_N5. 1 1 , I S FOR PROFILE SEE SHEET NO. 38 's-'Rwo 1"= 40' HORIZONTAL ?oc§u d - _3 OF, SALEM GUARDRAIL WATER SUPPLY ALTERATIONS DRAINAGE DETAILS LIGHTING DETAILS LANDSCAPING DETAILS BRIDGE STREET BYPASS SI.n IM..0 POW.NO FlSCI{00 NoSnE T IOTA SEE PREVIOUS SHEET SEE SHEET No. 56 SEE SHEET No. 56 SEE SHEET No. 106 SEE SHEET No. 714 . s MASS 2004 33 17777 PFOdFC!Fut im 005402 CONSTRUCTION PLAN 4 OF 8_ CURVE DATA NOR TH RI VER BRIDGE ST. BYPASS 0' (rroa[) R=,0000.0 l=256.31' PROP. SILT FENCE & HAYBALES FOR T=128.16' EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL (TYP.) 4A=01'28'07" PROP, SILT FENCE & HAYBALES FOR APPROXIMATE BEGIN PROP. RET. WALL pt HAPE BEGIN RR TRACK EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL (TYP.) PROP, TO STA. 2648 BSD WIRE HIGH TIDE LINE 13ARRlERPC INSTA.GLE FACE 68+445 FIT. SHIFT (BO) (CONSTRUCT TO MBTA STANDARDS) PROP. FULL DEPTH PVMT. PROP. BOTTOM OF SLOPE APPROXIMATE CONSTRUCTION EXIST. RR PROP. RC END POST, MEAN HIGH WATER LINE EXIST, RR R&S EXIST. 8' HIGH SIGNAL POLE (TYP.) BEGIN. PROP. RET. WALL p2 SIGNAL 6, a PROP. HOT MIX ASPHALT CLF, STA 255+003 TO ( POLE (TYP) -n BERM JYPE A' „ STA 277+003 LT PROP (BO))TRACK DETAILS)+84 L E WALL SALT MARSH LINE (2 200 UF APPROX.) " SHIFT BO PROP F DE VMT. In "-+-rz,� CONSTRUCTION— PON t$VJPO ' — _ - ------- F,_1 200 S - N, '� ..--f-..�_� -- -__—?d i`_-- ,.-r��c =:=�� -�.3=,_a_'F._ __-.�. ___ _ Wim+ _:— -`-� ...• - POP .H. — � _ ....,.,._ IZI Ipl `V\ \. o- � _0..�—. N_25'4r806.�E .�____.H._ -_�_ -_ p,_� r_ _�— _..-_. �}_ _�. .... hI 257 � < .__ 256 _- 0 .-260 _ _7051.Si _.261 262 . ..`. _.. . ...263 64 R&S EXIST. 6'-8., HIGH C F +10.82 PROP.,g TOM-OF SLOPE 265 266 PC 2 67 - 3 P51 +67.122PT '`T�- I~� -�- -,�- --_ =�..... ,•— 59 � '— _ — PROP 2003—S.H.L.O_- NO_ACCESitCG3=�F— --P _2 369 3� 202.7 to 'V " ---- - �_= .a`�S_ ` \` \ PROP. DETENTION BASIN �� / — $ '�~ $ i}r -ue �l I '`-� +97.2 �� --REM —� N 2To'38 06 E Pt 33' OT58'48" E I I 1 L �•� J\ (SEE DRAINAGE & UTILITY - _ -- 5 4 43 - • I N96.1 U 548 V'1' �� + +24.49 PLANS /+ r ,-,t . ( PROP BOTTOM OF SLOPE _ _ 5000 PROP TOP { -kpv •s r, �5 � 1Qz0 r r �` PROP. HOT MIX ASPHALT PROP 2003 PROP.-fi WIDE BIT- I t. OF SLOPE. / r ;yj 5� / I ` yr �\,, 't\\ �' /,y �� N14'O6'40"E BERM TYPE A' r.CITY LAYOUT a CONC. SIDEWALK I+ f 1 -REM. EXIST. ,T.m \ X — / -b7,�4-- - - -- - - PROP. 2003 PVMT.EXPROP. I', I - E%6T BLDG 70 BE it WALL PROP. 228 H16 -A' si W''FN �J' P �'c8r � 4 1 ' 'z�\ \ ` �N — PROP 10' WIDE Cltt LAYOUT STOCKADE FENCA Q _ r w" �-� MT7Y �" �t� '. �`\ # x�x / HOT MIX ASPHALT 4" LOAM & F I PROq. 10' WIDE DEMOLISHED - S^ ^ / PRO . BOT. OF SLOPE HOT MIX.ASPHAL T3Y-OTRERq F PRO . 2' WIDE SWALE SIDEWAU ABUT. RROPERYI =5 BIKEWAY/SIDEWALK SEED i ,A Y REM: EXIST. ______- 1; WIDE PI PROP. BOULDERS AND %ISTING f + �r��t'>Nr' r� r PRO OF-LINE TYP. 'PROP A" 4B SEED pROP. 4' HIGH , I HOTPROPMIX ASPHALT (SEE DRAINAGE & PNEP TYPUT yy Yap, y z J » _ ( ) ' -\ , , PROP.GRAN CURB PAVERS AT END OFf , -C/A LINK�roCE r�J % / l' I"- I �:`� t UTILI7IY PLANS) ( ) t SET FLUSH. TYP. "STREET; SEE LANDSCAPE I'� / 50,,�,,.,v�P� ``ppgg�lYC UDER r CHAIN LINK FENCi t SIDEWALK PROP. BOULDERS AND r >I ( ) ' -- - PROP 'f'7 RS'A;T%END OFA — I < PLANS FOR DETAILS STYP j ! t PROP. ib WIDE REM REM: EXIST, PVMT., PAVERS AT END OF, PROP. 10' COLD 'p( _ r�SIfiEE,T,�SEE LAN4SCA , _ HOT MI%,A�pHALT,•' 3. PROP. < ^ `^ PROP. 4" LB & I STREET, SEE ANDSCAPE °� PLAN�@ESUBEACINGr PLA�1S FOR DETAILS'. ) ;- SIDEWALK i '� TOP OF SLOPE EED PLA (, /\ _.r NS FOR DE TAILS SAWC (T u /r >, z...,,.. i4' ,. :.r 'i, t ' CO PLANN� .r•Y7 IAR TCr?Y F9 ?ROP. 2' WIDE SWAL7 :j/ / __.'PROP.GRAN..CURB \ � '/" _ ., r-•-; I RESURFACINGLDLI / ) reSEE;DRAINAGE & /Q ), s ,� "'�f�OP/ BOULDER �UThTTY PLANS r / s '> t `. P P.GRAN. CURB ,, " „, I'.. , - PROP GRAN. CURB l xR l ) / "^� a.r tz u; > >, \ P VERS'AT END OF / SET PLUSH q ro s ✓Fk./ a,�, t^ �, SE FLUSH TYP. �` , ° ' SET FLUSH TYP - ( ) PPL NET, SEE LANDSCAPE ( ) E .¢ L:(Y'*C( PROP. Ab '�0 PLAN - T A. `� � RE lG", q ,Y y o''�/ i \t,'� u'� \ PROP. SAWCUY7 ) ANS FOR DETAILS (TYP.} PROP. 320 x8' HIGH �J ROl/t YO COLD PLANE/ m i i� \LINE (TYP.) - STOCKADE FENCE TO IC) D I RESURFACING AYEd9ON L 1 ":s I ' ABUT PROPERTIES O , �' sri;,tIr c " D i- ' [� 1`�� 1�C �ORG ^ DI'O 'IR"1�T i Pa uEn PARKING T '' C 9✓ � 5 I t v.. �f Ij� (7 / oA 21 mt A. V) rm*1 ff` A TA Lo �mr 8 0 40 100 200 rcwwm o FEE SVD FOR PROFILE SEE SHEET N0. 39 oNsa j i"= 40' HORIZONTAL �ouu SALEM GUARDRAIL WATER SUPPLY ALTERA110NS DRAINAGE DETAILS LIGHTING DETAILS LANDSCAPING DETAILS BRIDGE STREET BYPASS STATE PED,AID PROW.NO PISGL SIEET TOTAL NONE SEE SHEET No. 57 SEE SHEET No. 57 SEE SHEET No. 107 SEE SHEET No. 115 rFort N0. sNEETE MASS 2004 34 177 PNOJECT ME No.005402 CONSTRUCTION PLAN jco •„ 5OF6 A m REMOVE EXISTING SEWER PUMP STATION. '7 v AND CONSTRUCT NEW PUMP STATION - NOR �H �� (SEE PROP. PUMP STAT ON y, MODIFICATIONS PLANS, SHEETS 166-177)-I (TOAL) �II 9. CURVE DATA '' I ( A,VEN UG BEGIN NOISE BARRIER g2 BRIDGE ST. BYPASS 4ITN STA. 277+593,;LT. (SEE ', II SM b WALL DETAILS) APPROXIMATE R=5250.00' HIGH TIDE LINE L=640.00 I 1 T=320.40' / BEGIN PROP, RET. WALL $1 APPROXIMATE �-06'59'05" �� BARRIERSINGLE 268+445 RLE - MEAN HIGH WATER LINE .. �.qR I C0URT ABUT•P10'.8' IGH 0'ABUT. PROPERTIES ; �' "'" �� PROP 4' LOAM ,gTREET PROP. T1`ENCE & HAYBALES FOR ROP 60e8' HIGH CLF Y _ PROP. 110'x8' HIGH '�+.L & SEED _ --- PROP. RET. WALL p2 EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL (TYP) EXIST. RR (SEE WALL DETAILS) I ' '" 5 x�-, ,I -REM EXIST. ACCESS- - SIGNAL PROP. BALLAST RETAINING WALL / RET, EXIS r L -WA6h8-' -_ 7 SHLOso - POLE (TYP.) STA. 272+30 LT. TO STA. 273+50 f PROP. FULL DEPTH PVMT. <, I FENCE r �' r -- - 2003 CONSTRUCTION PROP PROP. RR TRACK SALT MARSH LINE (SEE WALL DETAILS) -- - + i SHIFT (BO) �i , PROP, 55'x8' HIGH 1 I r✓Anr.etv-= PROP. 2003 S.H,L.O NO ACCESS / kBUT.PROPERTIES' 278 .Acc Ss i - RI UP B.C. 270 - SPC 0171 272 273 +67 12 _ _�__--- N _ Prr 202 TY vru n1N . 2<.,V `3§9,gp--.=-- — - _ ._. - PROP. '2003 S.H 0 1 369 RGS _ t. _ _ - . ROP: OT SPHALT N 2T 1613 E ROP 2003 r 9P 2 CITY LAYOUT STAG. 2R07+205 (SE 1 �ORIVEWAY CO T.1 ( - - 16' WIDE a 075848' E REM. �XIST PVM T., I ( ) 7 196.62' CITY LAYOUT- ! 1 WALL;D�YAILS) ._ 1 3 4d43'��', (_ IER PROP. 4" LB & ROP. 4" LOAM @ PROP -6 WID e!r nro✓PwA. iY r4["Ly'" 'PROP. T,OP� T -"SEED HOT MI% ASP ALT I CONTINUE PC SINGLE FACE I BEGIN NOISE BARRIER ry1 SLOPE-a r a 11°x *II '+'�A' I -R�fWSWJi7YP8 7PROP. RE7 oWALLPROP./ROW (Tn')PROP sAWCUT SIDEWALK I, �PROPM 4" LOAM SEED--- II I WALL DETAILS) RT (SEE is WEMLL€XIST ±'l *) P I A� ( )Y S-j I � OP. 10r°CbLO PLANE/ BARRPC IIERL(SEECWALLE F SDETAILS) PROPHAPE UNE (GRAN. CURL r RESURFACING � PLANE/ ROP. 10' WIDE'HOT MIX r, SURFACINGi s IA4a0x i } SET FLUSH (TYP) SPHALT BIKEWAY/SIDEWALK— i. 666 € ,- _ f IRE _:. ., IYII r TREET SEE'LANDSCAPE + RbP,S AT EElts AND I I. A a� b_- ar RnY LD1 _ PROP. 10 WIDE ! 1AVERS AT END OF N( ) " - AVERS AT EN OF I w �. ,ria (TYP.) TRE ANS FOR REEL D�AIDCSC(TYP.) _ I �l t" i llI HOT MI% SPHALT' /� p�pRr 3Y pRlYEwA!' I \I NTHJO `V ,r it <"BKC IDEWALK LANS.FOR DETAILS TYP E l sr l>, r'1sNw / STI20 1 "`_-xl" __ srdla •1F I ' li m ...�—,- � t ___„ ...._.. seanceL—�; A I +s- �f m. FN i, I ` ND 277714 177' SIDEWALK-a RT` 1�G�- �T �2 � �T 6C, TC 2 ' I sr4'l6i- SEs `� ('t `�„""..'.;.� tic V) ' .-__ � I' ”, -cam- .. " �I k <. Ir = I uco _ �Iarr� �5r/ to worooa I rRly w>>L a _ i j � / soav 11 \� rs iS ix .. rn _ ;T IJ,! {� 1 alr ORIIkHY k A9lm_�* j 'x a._-.;;yF--x'11 "•----I-- �, * � S 1'n 1/ sTOrt * ttt^ , GARA6 Is '� , `I % ` X7 L 1 LJ .. arr p - T �—r-�- .calve Ar .. ,. _ -_. COURT sHFr" I cvFpRY STREET ao 100 200 u WQ m FEET FOR PROFILE SEE SHEET NO. 40 ?Wo�u d i"= 40' HORIZONTAL -------- SALEM GUARDRAIL WATER SUPPLY ALTERATIONS DRAINAGE DETAILS LIGHTING DETAILS LANDSCAPING DETAILS TRAFFIC SIGNAL DETAILS BRIDGE STREET BYPASS FRif fED.ND GROJ. NO FlSGL SXEEL ioTPL NONE SEE SHEET No. 58 SEE SHEET No. 58 SEE SHEET No. 106 SEE SHEET No, 116 SEE SHEET No. 70 ,¢, x0. sHEfis MASS 2004 35 177 cx.ECT FILE No,005402 CONSTRUCTION PLAN 60F6 60 /fNOR TH RI VER (TIDAL) h r.5, a LIMIT OF ROADWAY CONSTRUCTION WORK APPROXIMATE MATE x 4 STA. 286+03 �. HIGH TIDE LINE J fV ] 1 ' .� I ° , MEET EXIST. NDTE: T N 560037.59 PROPOSED TRAFFIC SIGNAL, PAVEMENT MARKINGS PRO{'.(J1 D LL #'2 AND SIGNING WORK CONTINUES BEYOND THIS POINT APPROXIMATE (SEE WA DETAILS) E 764556.26 SEE SHEETS 67 70 FOR DETAILS MEAN HIGH WATER LINE END NOISE BARRIER p2 STA 263+O7t LT RET. EXIST. CLF STA. 283+00 END RR TRACK ROP. DITCH SEE DRAINAGE - '" ,!" TO STA. 284+60 LT. SHIFT 80 & UTILITY PLANS) 1 -- sas'ETIf-(sEE WALL oETaLs) ( ) — — — _ RAIL .yy Doi rrazr ` N ! - J 1SroP w s tt . PROP. SILT FENCE & HAYBALES FOR END PROP. RET. WALL y2 --BOST0N _ - COMMUTER _ r _� W000 2 r/1 ! T z �IY_i W _ _ - _ rl�sr'ov i..' I ;e slyr i.. .T �`�/�2b ,b'G,r T. / ( ) —:.. BAY — AUTHORITY ;. i. - -- r I TRANSPORTATION — HIGH TIDE -sW-- ROP 4 L-0KMMATE ' ( TA 56_ - i � YEROS=ON/SEDIMENT CONTROL MASSA CHVSETTS �_ APPROXIMATE HIGH TIDE LINE N P JL'3T -MFT _ MEAN HIGH WATER LINE RbC ,fT �.& IPSWICH m— EXISTING, E S I I PROP, 2003 S H.L o'!- NO ACCESS -- - - 5T _ LEM�VERLY—BR10� T _ c O RL � � x �77 I �lII�nc � ' &S-FxIST 1 IMPACT J-._- ?OR- z88B0 TaIe z8s28 287 o ^u I— I_ 0 - ( - 1106 O6 ' — NO _ ACCESS _ 4��' 1 r'P^ PROP. 4 LOAM & SEED i' "END PROP PRECAST SINGLE FACED -EXIST. BRIDGE CIONSTRUCTION F SHAPE'BARRIER Q t 73TOP31.._ I PROP NOISEBARRIER' 1 - - ! $ (BY OTHERS) GOA _. h ---'-""- pp N _ _ ' I —PROP. BOT OF SLOPE wo CPRROOP. ULL4SN1� PVMT. / EN NOISE�ARRIER Nt / 1 yyd I (SEf WALL DETAILS) HHH999 E 5 284+ 53 RT. ~ - 1 !.(SEE WALL6DETAILS) W rte`` s tel/ O STIId I o-3' Q II'Pia V:Uair AR"f 3 h r TA .288+41.39 EXISTING BRIDGE.STREET BYPA 55 30 00 L - i fB UpY FI d 2 .,9 W'4SS eB J t x STA 288+44 24 BRIDGE STREET BYPASS OPP GV , y �tiJ L f1 o ! N A, �mm g o ao too zoo FEET �°.wm FOR PROFILE SEE SHEET NO. 41 o a 1"- 40' HORIZONTAL i �ovu a SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS ST0SE ��D.�O�OJ. Nol"vFM N0..AL SHEET TA1'. MAS 2004F61 F1777 i v I P�ECT FILE NO. 005 VIm 402 70 PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND SIGNING mm M3-3 Ml-5(107) 1P IMITOF META NOTES: 'PAVEMENT MARKINGS W3-3 SALEM STATION 1. ALL EXISTING SIGNS SHALL REMAIN EXCEPT WHERE NOTED OTHERWISE STA 234+00 R7-,2D AND AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. M4�5 MEET EXISTING - --12" SWGL? SLO�E 2. ALL SIGNS REMOVED AND RESET SHALL BE RELOCATED AS SHOWN. (45• 0 10, O.C.) M6-3 3. ALL SIGNS SHALL BE PLACED AT THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE ENGINEER. M3:2( M1-5114 1-5 114) 's 4. THE DISPOSITION OF ANY EXISTING SIGNS NOT SHOWN ON THIS PLAN 08, ......... SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE ENGINEER. 5. ALL SIGNS REMOVED AND RESET SHALL BE RESET WITH A NEW POST. N' 6. ALL SIGNS DESIGNATED R&S SHALL BE REMOVED AND STACKED AT A -SF� • o. SR7�' D♦ d SP-2 LOCATION SPECIFIED IN THE SPECIAL PROVISIONS OR AS DIRECTED BY 21 THE ENGINEER. .SSE ROTE 9 7. THE FINAL LOCATION OF ADVANCE DIS AND D8 SIGNS SHALL BE SEE NOTE,9 DETERMINED IN THE FIELD BY THE ENGINEER. 8. SPEED LIMIT TO BE SEF BY MHD. SP 4 SEE NOTE,9' R7-20 Hi R3 8LLR TON 9. RELOCATED SIGNS SHALL BE MOUNTED ON NEW POST AND FOUNDATION. BOS 3'-3° CLEARANCE MUST BE MAINTAINED ON ALL SIDEWALKS. IPSWICH 10.MINIMUM 3' WIIA-2 -B-2 \R1-2 "p, B-3 �R3-71- D6-3 DS-3 R7-2D"MSITOR CENTER-' MIT OF ,?AVCvMENT MARKT SETA 4+lou MEET EXISTING R7-00 15 7�-/21) 44 MO-AL -4 B-3 MOUNT C114) ryo STRAIN,PC �k M6 Y R7-- p V/ IN ' 0 1 7 2D SI-. POLE A, Aq S w, 06 ii IVt. 0 1 2f 7- rr R7-20 vo 11 "7 R3-2 Yi S "so, N L A, '11-ll— -,-, .......... 191 0 E R7-21) R7-�b LIMITOF PAVEMENT MARKINGS 7, P' STA 10+70 7"20 MEET EXISTING 12" YGI t. (ooe Or 1 ( 51 45 Lops, a 16 O.0 /-RJ -3 c D3- " of 03-4R3-71- RI-1 R7_2D DiOL 30 '\ , - \�\X, w R7-2D 41 -0 A x" X, WIL -60 0 40 too 200 rcuwm 153. J"- 40' HORIZONTAL LC:6NT :ON: SH:1�:NI SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS SLPiE EED.PID RflOJ.NO ESCN' SNEEi iOiAL TEAR ND. SNEER MASS 2004 62 11771 PROJEGi DILE NO.ODGJ4D2 CONT. ON 7W_N6_6-1-1 EC:ONT. ON SHT_NO_63D PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND SIGNING 2 O 7 Ty4 G71 1-6(14) Y / _ ,�«x i, -- -7 W3-3, P a \ J 2 \ AO �9 SYOL (45 SLOPE r ® 10 O.C.) �f R7 2D ` '�.� � ((��/ YOB % I � R3-7L IT OF R7y�6 �r o T 'V' / A V« / V :� L _ '.. Mt 5(114) i PAVEMENT MARKINGS \ r' M6-3 \ 10+70< �/, A yw� R7 2D 'Salem State College' EAT EXISTING ' -- R3-71- STA \'.. ,_ 12 Y " 46t nt wo Salem' r t SC' / A - �gdPo arrow) B-2 i • 6 6 { R3-5L' <-..✓ D3-4 Rt-1 -. r .. e � _.\e f R7-2D R7-20 � �� 7.41 244 f i C✓° •� ;�� w 5 n �' �RS-SL r i "`VVV ,x , t t "'LIMIT-6 ' I , B-2 -20 ' D3-1 .r r ? ',PAWEMENT MARKINGS '* 6-3 ( D3 2 ` 1+10 MEET EXISTING R7-2D 8-3 R7-21D , M4-5 C j m \ R7-20 x. .JF✓F M6 1R �J', `03-1 B-3..-� R7-2D 03_'"9,,, ry / / - '!i / .�"p' s✓ MOUNT ON MAST�'RM., - \. DTCL-70' ; �4l 'R7 21),'L O i • ,,// /7 o. LIMIT OF 443'3 .PAVEMENT MARKINGS v, p gip. STA 14�K00 3-3 _ MEET EXISTING x R7-2D /3 t \, N s � pl� 5 5 O 40 100 200 S \$ FEET n 1"= 40' HORIZONTAL � d SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS STAiE FEO.IJ0 PRN.NO F— SNEE! TOTµ - tq. SXEE14 MASS10044163 1177 R CT RE w.005402 PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND SIGNING 3 OF NOR TH Rl vER (TIDAL) ._ '. .:�..... _. - - R2-1(30) � r PSW CH S. —vim _ iJ. i xs i i ,. P%7 —BOSTON :m -.._� -__. _ ......Z PRQP•_2003- S.H.L.O.-.- NO.ACCESS. – ___ 1 I 56 257 258 i yl^ r r S.H.L.O. NO ACCE --- 1' I � 2 PROP 2003 SH PROP, 2003 CITY 1'bUT - _ R2-1(35) - lzol SY 1, ..-�� r��;^, tl _ :. r � M /% ...4' I �^I 1 rr r ) A { as ° '(fir rr i ;_Jf xx /S 12• SYOL �O ' ,'Sy t /i ; ' \1 (45SLOPE �• Q O 10' 0 ) - w — �f�, � v � r kyr Q� < • J� r \ N � dLOG • n.w�n t$eolpn •=to ') R3-7L - i •� ^; r l( i� B-3 �R3�6L �8-2 _1� � D6-5 R3 SL'" .....1- ,> s 46 8} 86 0 40 100 200 m}m CONT.- - -TON SH-N0._ 2 Vpp} p C fEET �Wwm �i I•- 40 HORIZONTAL SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS $TAiF fFD.Ap AMW.!p i5 511EET IOTA" YEM I SNT41 MASS 2004 64 177 �Nix w.005402 PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND SIGNING 4 OF B" CURVE DATA NORl T H RI V/ER BRIDGE ST. BYPASS Rat 0000.00' L=256.37' TIDAL) T=126.,6 0-01 z807- R2-1(30) �F a : �a R2 5A W14-3 TONt n� _;B U T �y , ,crcS."� '.�>nr� �ZS� - ,.?. :.;3 an � m,Y-- '�$i '-k._....-... ___... . . -__ -. _ � -- � -� __ ..�-•....__ —_...__. __ �� 63 284 265 X66 ..267 26 u _ 2003 S.H.L _ 49�- Igl to - ----- _ SWEL--1200' - .I lZl 257 258 SYCL-540' 259 „ �, 260 261 DYCL-210' 262 2 BYCL-1590' 8 269 - SYCL-7590 ll Ill BYCL-540' v SWEL-7200' m lal lAl i m PROP. 2003 S.H.L.0. - NO ACCESS -_-.,�----7^<__PROP 9C'111 IAYOU�T JI. W14 3 a °F-/ / �♦ _ - ' PROP 2003 v: CITY LAYOUT PROP. ?603 S`d4/ '�� CITY LAYOUT T , , 1 r7 I I 1 J�r „ l �L.d�-( J(Il ! / e �' ':� I 1 �I' I ` i.'Y 1!11 t .` � 1 /� d I IL'�.' \' I' __I� rr u f 144 1 i as 1 qy �_� YT )• a-- a I � __-...,1 kR_ -.T- I -...0 ".?..0 a I. __. n" ._< I . .k- I -�'-• -�"... �-_� (q ,,._ , ._ I I f -"___ S Z } �.. '}:._ • nl 1 ° ,�� - II i t L.-, �i $ 713 I I M.._ 1 I m J , $ 1 R'1 I ... `-r' -, _ a .�� A I i 11 I . .,... I _ -31 0 40 100 200 mm FEET rcwaym 4y �Amm d 1"= 40' HORIZONTAL �otU� d SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS salt TD,uD vow. rro �I sxLcrWx 'm .0. "TMASS 2004 65 177 rx v rue w.005402 PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND SIGNING ' ' t 5 OF 7 � - 1 � I 1 T I t II NOR l H l \p VER Zp SMITH AVENUE I it (TIDAL) �, L II ., -� 111 •.`,. ``' ._ , �.. _ Mq ( Roti .w. STREET -13 COURT `} y� d R4-2 — Np ACCESS r pp S.H.40� PROP: 2 - PROP. 2003 S.H.L.O. - NO ACCESS - - ACCESS- 281 — 260 - Ili Si 278 ACC N - ' C - � 279 N 28 ._ ,. ^'- 277 � II _— - SWEL-1200 275 " - _ _ I�I 270 ti 271 272 273 274 _ _ - _ I0 NO AGUIESS SWEL-1 0' P _ ,' R2-5A PROP. 2001 �, � _� � � ��: � � � ' . PROP. 2003 CITY LAYOUT 9 I�I CITY LAYOUT I « � z LJ L-AlIl 4 I L I II I Lo m ; L I ki Lryl it I ..... f: a rt I \ __ . I I' rr, L.i l t im w — I , cwr-ppy CTRFFT G"OURT a'� so' _._ ,00 - 200 N m �wm So FEET TU¢ m • �� a ,^= ao' HORIZONTAL SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS \ \ srnrF rFo.uo xxa, xo rrsc.0 sRFf. YUR N0. SXFfIS MASS 2004 69 177 PRWECr mF xo.005402 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLAN LOCATIONS NO. 2 & \ \ - �\�\ -.., J `�\\ \� _,._. _ 9q /,\ \ 1/ ( \ ., j// \� ,,,....✓� Got^ PROP PRE-EMPTION RECEIVER (T11P) tiv 0�x `� \� •� .�� ) PROP SERVIGE CONNECTION I 1 \`�� - _ I PROP. SOW TS-2 TME 1 SIGNAL CONTROLLER PROP 31N. INTERCONNECT C NDUtT— III /✓ -'_ P3 /� O ryg0 '�\ \ 5 ? P1 CC A _ _ \ G r X11 p/ / 1 ` SIGN A 2Io D IG /O P5 P2 244 o' // O - II - . E ' ROP. PRE-EMPTION CONFIRA{ATION5{R0�3E (WHITE) (TYP:) \, \ P7 ® -. ' - �-. / STREET BYPASS NOTES- BRIDGE S„ 1. SEE SHEET 68 FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL GENERAL!NOTES. rJ) It PROP SERVICE CONNECTION - Q E 0 Ic y - >m> L - \T ( `dir20 100 � 50` mmn n /r,-' �'"�._ �' `/ .FEET v _ <zxm g I 1- 20' HORIZONTAL �uuo a Z POLE AQSALEM SPAN LENGTH (AS REQUIRED) POLE B BRIDGE STREET BYPASS VARIES AS REQUIRED (TVP) VARIES VARIES VARIES sure rc0.nm ARM NO `y R` SNO. 5[EIS MASS 2004 81 177 PROJECT TLE NO. 005402 SEE DRAWING BELOW FOR CONNECTION DETAIL 1'-6" TYPICAL STANDARD SPAN WIRE ASSEMBLY u a a LOAD CARRYING CABLE O 7N DISCONNECT HANGER /J tl w ® POLE MOUNTED (TYR) TRAFFIC SIGNALS TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEADS AS REO'0 (TVP.) FOR DEiz TAIL J a�,-, (N0. OF SECTIONS & FACES AS REO'D) SEE DRAWING BELOW ® w�a a AS REO'D W QZ Zj 6 � >UQ w TETHER WIRE z a F 0 0 0 Z v 2'-0" o MIN. p MAX. a o I To -m j TOP OF ROADWAY 'o AD 4 EXIST.GROUN o CURB LINE LJ ? REINFORCED CONCRETE FOUNDATION (TYR) wo 4 D—TAI - (REFER TO DETAILS ON SHEET 3) 1 5/8" HEX NUT & FIAT WASHER (2) 7, 5/8" BOLT W/NUT & LOCKWASHER @ 1 1/2" ELEVATION GENERAL NOTES: C>(( l�f SPAN WIRE CLAMP `J � ��--DRIP LOOP SPAN WIRE ASSEMBLY WITH TETHER WIRE 5/8" 'U' BOLT 1 3/8" STEEL PIN 1. POLES SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED AND SIGNAL HEADS SHALL NOT BE 1/4"X 3" STEEL CLAMP 18 CIRCUIT 1 1/2" GALV. DOUBLE LOCKNUT OR A (NOT TO SCALE) HUNG UNTIL 28 DAYS AFTER CONCRETE FOUNDATION HAS BEEN STEEL PIPE VARIABLE IN POSITIVE LOCKING DEVICE PLACED UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED BY THE ENGINEER IN CHARGE. BY POLE MFR. LENGTH DISCONNECT HANGER ATTACHMENT METHOD OF MULTI- CONDUCTOR CABLE TO SPAN WIRE: 2. THE ROADSIDE FACE OF ALL NEW SIGNAL POLES SHALL BE INSTALLED 5/16"% 2" COTTER PIN (2) '045 STAINLESS STEEL ALLOY 430 LASHING(SPINNING WIRE OR APPROVED EQUAL) POLE CAP (TYR) A MINIMUM OF 2• FROM THE FACE OF CURB. "J" HOOK 'J" HOOK 3. ALL EXPOSED CORNERS & EDGES OF FOUNDATIONS WHICH PROTRUDE 2• p WIRE ENTRANCE MIN. SAG 5% UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ABOVE THE ADJACENT GROUND SHALL BE CHAMFERED OR ROUNDED SEE DETAILS 1 & 3 STRAND VISE f TO PREVENT SHARP CORNERS OR EDGES. HEAD Z g SPAN WIRE HANGER AND BALANCE ADJUSTER SEE DETAIL 3 POLE CLAMP LASHING WIRE CLAMP (AS PER FIELD REQUIREMENTS SEE DETAIL I 4, POLES SHALL BE HOT DIP GALVANIZED TO A.S.T.M. DESIGNATION A123. LE MFR m SEE DETAIL 4 ACCESSORIES SHALL BE HOT DIP GALVANIZED TO A.S.T.M. DESIGNATION 2" NIPPLE A153. US WELD o w 5. SIGNAL HEAD WEIGHT SHALL INCLUDE CABLE, CLAMPS, UNIVERSAL JOINT, 2 1/2-INSULATED ONzBALANCE ADJUSTER, DISCONNECT HANGER & SIGNAL BRACKETS. CONDUIT NIPPLE a NYLTIES a SPAN WIRE - 6. ALL APPURTENANCES TO BE MOUNTED NO POLES SHALL BE 5/8"X 2" HEX HD. MACH. BOLT w LOAD CARRYING CABLE J FASTENED IN THE MANNER RECOMMEND BY THE MANUFACTURER. •8 DISCONNECT HANGER & LOCKWASH�(i MULTI-CONDUCTOR CABLE 5/8 W/HEXNIff & FLAT ® SEE DETAIL 7 DRIP LOOP 7. MA (FOR MASSACHUSETTS), THE HEIGHT OF POLE, THE RAKE OF POLE, WASHER (2 REO-D) z 6"- 8" DI0. THE MANUFACTURER & THE POLE I.D. NUMBER SHALL BE ETCHED ON u 3, 1 ENTRANCE FITTING ® OUTSIDE WALL APPROXIMATELY 2' ABOVE THE FOUNDATION. THE SEE DETAIL 2 TETHER WIRE LETTERS SHALL BE 1/4", 1 -CLP•MPTETHER WIRE (REQUIRED e. THE BOTTOM OF ALL SIGNAL HEADS SHALL BE MOUNTED AT THE z ONLY FOR SPA 14 ELEVATION WITH HANGERS VARYING IN LENGTH AS REQUIRED. t1 1/4" CLAMP W/TE HER S OPTICALLY PROGRAMMED 1/eATTACHMENT SIGNALS) 9. ATTACHMENT POLE CLAMPS TO BE DESIGNED BY THE MANUFACTURER. ' LI--I- BOTTOM BRACKET ASSEMBLIES FOR MULTI-WAY HEADS; JJJ////// 0 4 18" SLACK 10. STRAIN POLE SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH PAN WIRE RARE LA AS « WIRE ROPE CLIP 5/16 'U' CLAMP (MIN.2 CLOSURE ASSEMBLY FOR ONE WAY HEADS TO BE APPROXIMATELY VERTICAL WHEN SPAN WIRE IS IN PLACE & REQUIRED) OR 3M 18" SLACK TENSIONED WITH LOAD. w O TETHER CLAMP WIRE ROPE CLIP O _o AT _T_URNBUCKLE > STRAIN POLE SHALL BE INSTALLED HAND HOLE WITH PROVISIONS FOR GROUNDING POLE 8 WITH SUFFICIENT RAKE SO AS (LOCATION 90'FROM ENTRANCE COUPLING) THE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS SIZE TAKEUP MIN. LENGTHOPENING WID. TO BE APPROXIMATELY VERTICALQ HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT A B C D WHEN SPAN WIRE IS IN PLACE ELEVATION SPAN WIRE LOAD CARRYING CABLE 1/2° 6" 12" 23/32" AND TENSIONED WRH LOAD STANDARD DRAWINGS 9TETHER WIRE SPAN WIRE DETAIL SPAN WIRE ASSEMBLY NN S.J�� B. THE SPAN WIRE LOAD CARRYING CABLE SHALL BE NOT LESS S� ` THE TETHER WIRE CABLE SHALL BE WITH TETHER WIRE 3/8" DIA, SEVEN WIRE, STEEL STRAND CABLE WITH TETHER WIRE OV J NOT LESS THAN 1/4" DIA. SEVEN CONFORMING TO A.S.T.M. A475, CLASS A. EXTRA HIGH j ./ REVISED DATE : JANUARY 2. 1985 AUTOMATIC COMPRESSION WIRE STEEL STRAND CABLE (NOT TO SCALE) STRENGTH (MIN. BREAKING STRENGTH 15,400 IBS.) EVI CONFORMING TO A.S.T.M. AA475, ZINC COATED STEEL WIRE STRAND. THE SPAN WIRE S FITTING HOO CLASS A, ZINC COATED STEEL MUST BE DESIGNED AND CHECKED FOR LOAD CAPACITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER BRIDGE ENGINEER e MIN. SIZE SPAN WIRE - 3/8" 5/16" A-36 WIRE STRAND. FOR EACH APPLICATION. i MIN SIZE TETHER WIRE - 1/4" STEEL ROD TETHERWR 1/5/94 6 DIRECTOR BrPkD CHIEF ENGINEER SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS 51<iF fEO.NO PNOJ.NO fISGL $xIET IOiPI 1EPP NO, SXEM MASS 2004 68 177 Ix CT ME xo.005402 TRAFFIC SIGNAL PLAN BRIDGE ST. ® WASHINGTON ST. (LOCATION NO. 1) GENERAL TRAFFIC aj-N16L NOTES l/ 1 REMOVE AND STACK ALL EXISTING SIGNAL EQUIPMENT SIGNAL POSTS. SIGNAL HEADS PULLBOX COVERS, ETC...)ABANDON ALL EXISTING CONDUIT, PULL BOXES, AND "\ R s1 REMOVE AND DISCARD ALL SIGNAL FOUNDATIONS. SEE CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR EXISTING SIGNALS 2. WORK ON THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM SHALL BE IN ACCORDAN TH THE STANDARD SPECT SPECIFICATIONS.THE TRTHEAFFIC SPECIAL PROVISIONS, (� ) AND AS DIRECTED 8Y THE ENGINEER. 3. PROP. CONTROLLER SHALL BE AN 8DW, KEYBOARD ENTRY, % ,,.._� \/ \\ E '; r Ta _- , ,� -•`� MENU—DRIVEN TYPE WITH INTERNAL COORDINATION CAPABILITIES. R..� 4. POST—MOUNTED SIGNALS SHALL HAVE A TWO FOOT MINIMUM CLEARANCE BETWEEN VERTICAL PROJECTION OF THE CURBLINE AND THE SIGNAL VISOR. 5. ALL SIGNAL EQUIPMENT INCLUDED IN THIS PROJECT SHALL BE LISTED ON THE CURRENT MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT'S APPROVED LIST AND IS SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER. 6. THE FINAL LOCATION OF PROPOSED OPTICOM RECEIVERS AND CONFIRMATION STROBE LIGHT SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE SALEM FIRE DEPARTMENT AND APPROVED BY MHO. 7. FIRE PREEIA TIMING SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE FIRER ✓ � \\ i \ � \ ' `\ SALEM E DEPARTMENT TMENT AND APPROVED B7' MHD. SPECIAL FOUNDA ION \ Rx - )`.� P - 8. ALL OVERHEAD CONDUCTORS FOR SIGNAL HOUSINGS SHALL LA BE STRANDED WIRE. / FOR DETAILS?SEE'BRIDGE�P NS -s; x / l� p!� `\(BRIDGE NO S-01 017) N 9. ALL PROPOSED WIRE LOOP DETECTORS SHALL BE CENTERED 43, d /I ' • \ � T \ 1 ^ I` 1 WITHIN RESPECTIVE LANES EXCEPT FOR BICYCLE DETECTION. a 2 10. SEE LOOP DETECTOR DETAIL SHEETS FOR SPLICE PATTERN p ( ,v AND OTHER INFORMATION. 111`\\ �/ "'^ \ \�t \ T 11, THE FINAL LOCATION OF SIGNAL EQUIPMENT MAY BE ADJUSTED IN THE FIELD AS NECESSARY WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE " ENGINEER. SIGNAL EQUIPMENTT SHALL ALLOW A MINIMUM 3-3" K CLEARANCE FOR PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL. 3 12. ALL TRAFFIC SIGNAL SDALL BE 3 TYPE NM PLASTIC PROP. PRE-EMPTION RECEIVER TYP. (UL) UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. OP. PRE-EMTIONCOION STROBE wHITE C —->,' ' PROP.>SERVICE CONNECTION / / - - !.AL PS I / PROP. BDw TS-2 TYPE 1 $(GNAL CONTROLLER p F D )- PROP. 3 IN. INTERCONNECT CONDUIT a / P �� A P5 � / \CO SIGN o 0 i MOMENT 250 FT-KIPS - 'I-\ `�\ e` TiQ < \ \\\\�\\`` ® \ \ ry\ 0 20 /SO 100 ��l ET \�\ SAG \ �.. \•�\\\\\`�y !\ 20' HORIZONTAL �cou ti SALEM _ BRIDGE STREET BYPASS SIRE IED.AID PROJ.NO FlSGL SXEEI TOTAL YEM N0. SUEEiS CONANT MAss 2004 87 177 x LIMIT OF FOOTING STREET PROJE=*"TENo.005402 — —— —— — WALL & NOISE BARRIER DETAILS m x _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ a • - - - - - - - - - - - - - — 1 OF 16 3 12" 1p 10 RETAINING WALL #1 PLAN & ELEVATION ... .. , _. STA. 268+44 TO STA. 272+00 1 HIGHWAY BARRIER FACE 0 ALL �I'_6^ (TYP,) GUTTER UNE o L a i v e + r N a (L BRIDGE STREET BYPASS NOTES _ o N 1. FOR GRANTY WALL SECTION, 1'1270 N 2T16'13F_ p _ _� _ Ze9 _ _ PT _ _ — _ �6E SEE SHEET 89. F I +64.0 202.77 +92.0 +67.12 2. FOR H-PILE WALL SECTION, rn PLAN BEGIN CAST-IN-PLACE WALL SEE SHEET 90, SCALE 1'-0" AND HIGHWAY BARRIER Z 1 STA. 268+44 j JI F � 3'-6" HIGH SAFETY RAILING i HIGHWAY BARRIER (N.S.) APPROX. EXIST, GROUND TOP OF ROADWAY AT GUTTER (N.S.) IEL. 18.92 EL. 18.70 EL. 18.26 1.14' EL. 17,66 TOP OF WALL FINISHED GRADE (F.S.) _-EL._16_83 -_ EL. 16.00 EL. 16.00 — _ — /_ CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION i" EXPANSION — — — — — — ' I JOINT (TYP.) JOINT (TYP.) BOTTOM OF FOOTING — — — — — — 1— — — — — — — EL. 8.0 I ELEVATION SCALE 1¢" a 1'-0" EXISTING SIDEWALK CARLTON SCHOOL \\I O ° ° ° 1 SKERRY 0 Imo_ II STREET END WALK/BIKE PATH LIMIT OF FOOTING Y — _ STA_270+683—--- �. te f _ O - iE r II � i — _ _ -- - -- - a—� 12" I III b i a I I I I 1 3 ,,.. .. i •I ALONG FACE ' WALL 3 I 'I. 1 -6" (TVP) I' I HIGHWAY BARRIER I a R 5271.33' y FACE OF WALL + I ,FEND CAST-6- (TYP.) WALL GUTTER LINE I 4 t5 S BRIDGE STREET BYPASS STA.BEG2 1+07TEEL H-PILE WALL I w l N Q. r STA. 271+07.9 N 1 W X= 272 — _ 271 PC _ —f — N 2T16_13" E _ 27010 — - +69.90 +36.0 202.77 + rn I R >= 5250' PLAN N 8 01 SCALE 1'-0" I d N I TOP OF STEEL H-PILES AND TOP OF CAST-IN-PLACE N TOP OF PRECAST PANELS CONCRETE CAP u N EL. 19.00 (TYP. EXCEPT PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE Q w d 1 AS NOTED) 1" EXP. JT. 3'-6" HIGH SAFETY RAILING (TYP. EXCEPT AS NOTED) APPRO%. EXIST. GROUND Z FINISHED GRADE (F.S.) I� �P•) CONSTRUCTION JOINT (TYP.) TOP OF WALL 70P OF ROADWAY AT GUTTER (N.S.) EL. 16.92 1= o EL. 20.14 1.14' HIGHWAY BARRIER (N.S.) EL. 20.14 EL. 19.86 19.57 V LJ 19.28 19.04 $ 7 RR�_ BOTTOM OF FOOTING CONSTRUCTION 6 < 1" EXPANSION ~ I EL. 11.0 EL. 8.0 JOINT (TYP.) JOINT (TYP.) 1 I I I I I II I 12" TYP. i o I i I STEEL H-PILE (HP 12z84) (TYP.) iii 6" UNREINE CONC. LEVELING PAD I 1 LIMITS OF STEEL H-PILE AND PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL - 336' 11/2' GROOVE (TYP.) iAc o 0 8 20 40 2'-0" 0 PRE-AUGERED HOLE, , I ELEVATION VN=o FEET FILL W/ LEAN CONCRETE (TYP.)+� i_- EL�TP2.0 SCALE : 1¢" 1'-0" 9 mo�J d Ij I � SA N BRIDGE STREEfM BYPASS CARLTON SCHOOLwAh N N 88 77 005402 5 7 - ( \ \••\\\\� \ �� \ . >\�.�\�>\ � ��ii> ��'�\�`-y�`i� `.\`•\`\' \\. •.�\\\\\�>. •.\��,\` � '.� >�.\.\ \ \��\;I MASS vco w2004 17 \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ N 1 12" I LL & NOISE BARRIER ER DETAILS 2 OF 16 RETAINING WALL #1 PLAN & ELEVATION - - � � � = "' \ - STA. 272+00 TO STA. 276+00 . GUTTER LINE `FACE OF WALL HIGHWAY BARRIER 'a R 5271.33' a op ALONG FACE OF WALL S a 1 w q BRIDGE STREET BYPASS I NOTES: 273 n 272 ari 1. FOR GRAVITY WALL SECTION, N 1274 _ + — — —0 — — 1 _ — _ W SEE SHEET 89. R 5250' 10 2. FOR H-PILE WALL SECTION, PLAN W SEE SHEET 90. SCALE : lb" 1'-0" I tWn Z TOP OF STEEL H-PILES AND TOP OF CAST-IN-PLACE o �1 TOP OF PRECAST PANELS CONCRETE CAP 1 0 Z I EL. 19.00 (TYP. EXCEPT PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE OA I+ AS NO 3'-6" HIGH SAFETY RAILING (TYP. EXCEPT AS NOTED) APPROX. EXIST. GROUND FINISHED GRADE (F.S.) N 2.14 1" EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) TOP OF ROADWAY AT GUTTER (N.S.) CONSTRUCTION JOINT (TVP.) EL 20.14 1.14' HIGHWAY BARRIER (N.S.) EL. 20.14 r 1N OI I I r I I I I I I ZFI 11 n I I I I I i r ' i I I I I I 2 - i STEEL H-PILE (HP 12x84) (TYP,) i I 6" UNRCED LEVELING I i CONC, LEVELING PAD I � � 8'-0" I I I I P (N .) ' I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i i III I I I I I LIMITS OF STEEL H-PILE AND PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL 336' 2'-0" 0 PRE-AUGERED HOLE, I FILL W/ LEAN CONCRETE (TYP.)— 1 E�, --20 ELEVATION SCALE 1¢" a 1'-0" BURNSIDE STREET O O 0 0 1 f LIMIT OF FOOTING ' 1 _ -- ---- -- - ------- -- - - - -,- - -_ --- _ ___ _ _- - - _ - L __ - - e 1 I r - HIGHWAY BARRIER 1'-6" (TYP.) FACE OF WALL i m I GUTTER LINE II m a R 5271.33' > c < I ALONG FACE OF WALL ; ,I j END STEEL H-PILE WALL c 1 CTI S f[ BRIDGE STREET BYPASS N - BEGIN CAST-IN-PLACE WALL =1 O / I STA. 274+42.5 W vl lP-2-76— I a _!/ ?e E w I +85.95 — — +14.24 a _ — — — _ _-,., 274 0 ... __ ______.. — p a - R - 5250' PLAN I^ I N SCALE : )§" - 1-O" I a 41 TOP OF STEEL -PILES AND TOP OF CAST-IN-PLACE o N I TOP OF TYPED PRECAST PANELS CONCRETE CAP e d 3'-6" HIGH SAFETY RAILING FINISHED GRADE (F.S.) EL. 18.00 PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE Q 1 Z ri APPROX. EXIST. GROUND TOP OF ROADWAY AT GUTTER INS.) 1.14' (TYP. EXCEPT AS NOTED) 1 TOP OF WALL ' I - EL. 17.15 HIGHWAY BARRIER (N.S.) EL 19 14 PANEL TYPE EL 20.06 F EL. 17,59 EL 18.76 o Z EL 17.29 CONSTRUCTION EL 17.88 EL 18.17 EL 18.47 � cl -� JOINT NP. a p _ ___ 8. lll 1 EXP/A�N�S,ION ¢1 - BOTTOM F OnN 4' TYP. JOINT OYP.) s 3 EL. 9.0 --4w-12" TYP. I I I ; �V� rcrc�� i LIMBS 'OF STEEL IH-PILE AND 0 0 1/2" GROOVE (TYP J PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL 336' �oola o 0 8 20 40 ELEVATION 2'-0" 0 PRE-AUGERED HOLE. 1 u FEET FILL W/ LEAN CONCRETE (TYP.) ' PILE TIP SCALE : J§" V-0" I EL. _ -2.0 �OUV 2 MARCH BRIDGE STREET EETBYPASS STREET I - FATE 1rt .uo"W.W to� sxcn roMupL vo. sc I I BRIDGE risa MASS koo4 89 177 I LIMIT OF FOOTING I vvaccr nc xo.005402 I I AF RAILING WALL & NOISE BARRIER DETAILS 3'-6' HIGH SAFETY l G --- - - --- --- - - - - -- - - - - - ----- -.- - - - -- -1 SEE DETAILS SHEET 91 3 OF 16 e 12 RETAINING WALL #1 PLAN & ELEVATION ___ -----{ STA. 276+00 TO STA. 277+20 " Q, BRIDGE STREET BYPASS '- - --'---- -- J 10'-0" WALK BIKE PATH HIGHWAY BARRIER GUTTER LINE FACE OF WALL HIGHWAY BARRIER 1'-6" (TYP.) 1 END CAST20.4IN PLACE WALL a a R 5271 J3' ' STA. 277+20.4 3 FACE OF EXISTING ABUTMENT n a �Q BRIDGE STREET BYPASS ry ALONG FACE OF WALL w m 277 276 1 Ci 1" " CHAMFER (NP.) +09.89 +57.66 PT � .-3. 6" = 20_0^ 1 PLAN R - 5250' 2� SCALE S$" 1'-O" 1 0 4j" DEEP V-GROOVE � � 6 BIT. DAMP PROOFING 1' PREFORMED FILLER APPROX. 4 ® 12" EACH WAY �(EXIST. GROUND B 9 12 TOP OF ROADWAY HIGHWAY BARRIER EXISTING 3'-6' HIGH CONSTRUCTION � CONTINUOUS 12"x2" KEY FINISHED GRAD (F.S.) SEE DETAILS SHEET 90 E MARCH STREET BRIDGE SAFETY RAILING AT CUTER (N.S.) 1" EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) TOP OF WALL I d ABUTMENT JOINT (TYP.) I TOP OF ROADWAY WITH CRUSHED STTONIE AND FILTERIN EL 1567 EL. 16.12 EL. 16.41 EL 16.71 EL 17.0 EL. 17.15 - 2'_CL. FABRIC WRAP,SEE DETAIL THIS SHEET 6. — ____ —_ __ _ ---- - 7s I"--� FO •. N, p •off O 0 12" 2'-0" LONG p1 MAXIMUM TOE PRESSURE /)5 ® 18', 3'-0" LONG TWO LAYERS OF BOTTOM OF FOOTING HIGHWAY BARRIER (N.S.) 1 � TAR PAPER EL, g,p � 2.0 KSF . 1 CATION 0 8 20 40 ELEVATION I 6'-6" FROM STA. 268+44 TO STA. 268+92LO STA. 275+85.95 TO STA. 277+20.4 FEET l.- 8' SCALE )•§" V-O" 7'-6" FROM STA. 268+92 TO STA. 269+64 ; STA. 274+42.5 TO STA, 275+85.95 8'-6" FROM STA, 269+64 TO STA. 271+07.9 TYPICAL GRAVITY WALL SECTION SCALE 3¢" 1'-O" TOP OF PLASTIC WATERSTOP PROPOSED GRADE FACE OF WALL PREFORMED FILLER (IN ACCORDANCE WITH WALK / BIKE PATH PREFORMED FILLER M9.14.0 CORK) (EXP. JOINT ONLY) (IN ACCORDANCE WITH M9.14.0 CORK) PLASTIC WATERSTOP 5 WIDE AT CONST. JT. TOP OF KEY 9' WIDE AT EXP. JT. PLASTIC WATERSTOP SHEET LEAD N THICK ' / VARIES E PREFORMED FILLER (IN / I.---y 6" MIN. PROPOSED GRADE (EXP. JOINT ONLY) 70P OF ROADWAY �� _ - I 1 ACCORDANCE WITH M3.05.3 S BITUMINOUS JOINT FILLER) o iv PREFORMED FILLER (IN ACCORDANCE WITH N M3.05.3 BITUMINOUS JOINT FILLER) (EXP. JOINT ONLY) j j' LIMITS OF EXCAVATION �j ? 6" DIAMETER '''VV'''//��/ o s PERFORATED � TSHEET LEAD " THICK (EXP. JOINT ONLY) - /� / j iv - UNDERDRAIN - 4 PREFORMED FILLER (IN ACCORDANCE WITH I I// ///%' �I M9.14.0 CORK) (EXP. JOINT ONLY) �t/�' / 6" MIN. TRENCWRAP H INERDRAIN GEOEXTILE i:' ! FABRIC 1" (EXP. JOINT) FACE OF WALL 6" MIN. 1116" �^ CRUSHED STONE GRAVITY WALL 12' 12" N. f3 EXPANSION AND CONSTRUCTION JOINT DETAILS LIMITS OF PREFORMED FILLER LIMITS OF EXCAVATION AND GRAVEL BORROW UNDERDRAIN DETAIL J Q NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE S NOTES: 1. REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE CONTINUOUS THRU CONSTRUCTION JOINTS 0 o AND END 2" CLEAR AT EXPANSION JOINTS. T uo 0 2. FILLER MATERIAL SHALL BE FASTENED SECURELY TO ONE SIDE OF JOINT. �ivi.ag g SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS VARIES 8*-8" MIN. sT�T _; j,,E A,o p�W Wl CARLTON �R q BRIDGE STIR PRESSURE TREATED P0041 90 1177 STREET BYPASS 6. SCHOOL WOOD WEDGE. FULL 2W (23f O.D.) DIA. 4' HIGH SAFETY RAILING HEIGHT OF PANELS �a ME W 005402 x ll* I.G. SCH 40 PIPE1. , -0. 6 (TYPICAL) WALL & NOISE BARRIER DETAILS SLEEVE (GALV.) CAST-IN-PLACE 4 OF 16 CONCRETE CAP 1 MIN. RETAINING WALL #1 DETAILS 20'-0" Y,- CHAMFER (TIP.) 6. APPROX, EXIS FIN G OUND 5 1/2Juta5 1/2- #4 12- FINISHED VARIES (1.14! TYP.) GRADE--- PLAN LIMITS OF ANTI-GRAFFITI COMPOUND FRONT FACE OF PRECAST CONCRETE PANELS 12 PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL NOTES: TO BE FLUSH WITH FACE OF H-PILE r NGE p 5 - #4 A�SSTHOW S SHOWN NJ 1. PRECAST PANELS SHALL BE 5000 PSI CONCRETE I SEALANT 51, WIDE PLASTIC 3V," CHAMFER (TVP.) WITH 3�V' MAX. AGGREGATE. WATERSTOP x 24" LONG At 1* PREFORMED FILLER (2 REQUIRED PER PANEL) 2. CONCRETE CAP REINFORCING SHALL BE CONTINUOUS BIT. DAMP PROOFING THROUGH CONSTRUCTION JOINTS, AND STOP 2" CLEAR TOP OF ROADWAY HIGHWAY BARRIER FILTER FABRIC #506- AT EXPANSION JOINTS. (2' WIDE) FRONT FACE OF PRECAST 3. PROVIDE 1" PREFORMED FILLER AT EXPANSION JOINTS CONCRETE PANEL IN CONCRETE CAP. /PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL 6 x 12" WIDE UNREINFORCED CONCRETE LEVELING PAD 2h- CL. STEEL H-PILE (HP12x84) TOP 5' OF PILE TO BE GALVANIZED. EXPOSED FLANGE ABOVE HIGH 2'-0r' 0 PRE-AUGERED HOLE, I I BARRIER TO BE PAINTED FILL W/ LEAN CONCRETE AND APPROXIMATE THE COL ORTO OF CONCRETE PERMANENT STEEL CASING AS A*] 6' (FED. STD. 5958 COLOR ID #37150). REQUIRED. ELEVATION SECTION A-A TYPICAL H-PILE WALL SECTION PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL DETAILS (STA. 271+07.9 TO STA. 274+42.5) SCALE l'-O" SCALE 1*-0" 11A,- X 6' SLOT. 10" DEEP 547'1'/2' " EACH END r_/2- E41 6- (TYP.) 2 1 c4l 4 - #5 HOOPS J 5 LONGITUDINAL BARS 10 DEEP L7 loV SLOT 1/ 10 10 i2" DIA. 10 .1 LONGITUDINAL BARS - — LIFT HOLES10 0 10' RAD3" COVER —1 84* 10 D D 10 #5 HOOP OARS 55* '7 I" RAD. 1 lj"W SLOT IDE C41 L 1-o PLAIN SMOOTH CAST PLAIN SMOOTH E41 BAR HOOP _T FILTER FABRIC BAR DOWEL, 18" LONG IN BARRIER BAR DOWEL, 18" LONG NOT TO EXCEED 20" O.C. L V-3- j 1/0 S 0 SPACING (STA. 277+20 PLAN SECTION B-B TO STA. 286+03) ELEVATION SECTION C-C SECTION D-D ELEVATION SECTION E-E BARRIER NOTES* DOWEL DETAILS REINFORCING DETAILS 1. ALL CONCRETE IS TO BE FIELD COATED AFTER FINAL INSTALLATION WITH A CONCRETE PENETRANT/SEALER. CAST IN PLACE CONCRETE SINGLE FACE PRECAST F SHAPE BARRIER SHALL CURE NOT LESS THAN 28 DAYS PRIOR TO COATING. SCALE 1" V-07 2. DOWELS TO BE GALVANIZED, AASHTO—M31, GRADE 60. 3. PREMOULDED JOINT FILLER REQUIRED FOR PRECAST BARRIERS. 3. USE MINIMUM COVER OF 1%" UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED. 3. MATERIAL IS 4000 PSI - V4' - 610 LB/Cu.Yd. CONCRETE 3. ALL STEEL TO BE GALVANIZED OR EPDXY COATED, A SHTQ1, GRACE 60. SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS mrz rm.•.o nxar.ra rrsu� SHEET ror.L rc..n w. swEErs 8'-0" MAIN POST SPACING MASS 20041-9111771 GUARD RAIL SLEEVE NOTES: vaoeEn vxE xo. 005402 03Yt"O.D. (EXTRA STRONG) A RAILING CIRCLE ATTACHMENT BAR ❑>/Z"x>/2' BAR i. ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE HORIZONTAL. WALL k NOISE BARRIER DETAILS ❑3"xi' (TYP.) GUARD RAIL INTERMEDIATE 7- D D (TYP - 5 OF 16 03" 0.0. RAILING BAR TOP RAILING BAR ) 2. AFTER THE PRECAST CONCRETE WALL PANELS HAVE BEEN ERECTED BUT RETAINING WALL #1 DETAILS (EXTRA STRONG) 02 x1 02"0" BEFORE THE WALL CAPS ARE PLACED, FINAL MEASUREMENTS SHALL BE TAKEN BY THE CONTRACTOR AND ANY FINAL ADJUSTMENTS TO THE RAIL SYSTEM SHALL BE MADE AT THE SHOP PRIOR TO SHIPMENT. moo O O O O O O O O O O SEE PANEDETAL ITTAHIS SHEET RAILING 3 SALL HALLABE PLUMB. PARALLEL TO GRADES AT TOP OF WALL, AND ALL POSTS 4, EXPANSION PROVISIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED NEAR WALL EXPANSION JOINTS AND AT 50 FOOT MAXIMUM SPACING. 5. PLATES, BARS AND BALUSTERS SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM M709 GRADE 36, h 6. PIPE RAILS AND RINGS SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM A53 I TYPE S. iv 7. H.S.S. SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM A501 GRADE B. 8. ANCHOR BOLTS, NUTS AND WASHERS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ASTM DESIGNATION A307. TOP OF CONCRETE CAP 9. ALL METAL POSTS AND RAILING ASSEMBLIES SHALL BE HOT-DIPPED L GALVANIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM A123. 10. ALL HARDWARE SHALL BE GALVANIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM A153. INTERMEDIATE AND BOTTOM RAILING BAR 11. PREPARATION AND ASSEMBLY OF MATERIALS FOR WELDING SHALL CONFORM TO E72"x1" BOTTOM RAILING BAR RAILING BAR THE AWS STRUCTURAL WELDING CODE ANSI/AWS D1.5. ATTACHMENT BAR ❑2"x1" -" DIAMETER ❑3 x1 (TYP.) (SOLID ROUND) 12. THE RAILING SYSTEM SHALL BE GALVANIZED AND PAINTED USING AN EPDXY wxlxo (TYP,) _ RAILING MAIN POST -�, MASTIC COATING SYSTEM WITH A SEMI-GLOSS BLACK ALIPHATIC URETHANE SLOT FOR )4 DIA, BOLT ❑3"x3"x�e" FINISH COAT. �^ (TYR,) THREADED BOLT 3E-6" HIGH SAFETY RAIL ELEVATION NOT TO SCALE 8" GUARDRAIL SLEEVE DRILL do TAP (TYR 3?� O.D. (EXTRA STRONG) FOR 0 A307 q" q^ GUARDRAIL THREADED BOLT (TYP.) 1g ^'' 2 1g G{IARORAIL 3" O.D. (EXTRA STRONG) RAILING MAIN POST T6' 2N U" T6� 3 O.D. DIA. HOLE )S T❑OZ"RAILING BAR H.S.S. (TYP.) FOR Y4" 0 A325 RAILING CIRCLE _ H.S. BOLTS W/ ljox.%l BAR LOCK-WASHER (TYP.) 7" o.o. (TYP.) TYPICAL RAILING HSS 3x344 MAIN RAILING POST ❑3%3"x5' PANEL ATTACHMENT DETAIL a 1`y§' DIA. INT. RAILING BAR NOT TO SCALE HOLE ❑2"x1" ,dol J!1" BASE PLATE (TYP,) =Rr PLAN b P to I I wOF RAIL DETAIL AT TOP OF MAIN POST *V4 XPANDABLE saucE—LocK NOT TO SCALE n EEVE CONNECTION. COORD r SIDE SLEEVE DIM. W/ NON-SHRINK LEVELING 4" TSIDE DIA. OF GUARDRAIL 45 GROUT AS REQUIRED 3e END CAP WELDEDGALV. WA 0 A325 TO ENDS OF RAILS H.S. BOLTS W OOF / 3"®GUARDRAIL DE OF RAIL � LOCK-WASHER (ttPJ � I CREW • g BASE PLATE OYP.) SECTION A DETAIL AT RAIL END CAP GUARDRAIL SLEEVE CONNECTION G NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE ELEVATION ATTACHMENT DETAIL �mm 8 NOT TO SCALE QZy b OVV 11 PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL NOTES: SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS BEGIN WALL STA. 264+84 1. PRECAST PANELS SHALL BE 5000 PSI nsw SHEET TOTAL W.T LED.""w.HO �y N0. SHEETS _ — & BRIDGE STREET 13YPASS CONCRETE WITH �" MAX. AGGREGATE. — PRESSURE TREATED MAS$ 004 92 177 N 2548'06" E 265 ` WOOD WEDGE, FULL 2. CAST-IN-PUCE CONCRETE CAP/BARRIER/ H EII ME Ho.005402 HEIGHT OF PANELS LIGHT POLE COPING SHALL BE CLASS D (TYPICAL) CONCRETE (4000 PSI, 3S• 6IOLB). WALL k NOISE BARRIER DETAILS o PROPOSED ENDPOST 6• '� 3. CONCRETE CAP REINFORCING SHALL BE 6 OF 16 i _ I _ SEE DETAILS SHEET XX i MIN, RETAINING WALL �f2 PLAN & ELEVATION _- ___ ___o-_ _ --_ CONTINUOUS THROUGH CONSTRUCTION JOINTS, STA. 264}B4 TO STA. 265+50 GUTTER LINE AND STOP 2" CLEAR AT EXPANSION JOINTS I THRIE BEAM GUARD RAIL 1 5 1/2- 5 1/2° 7'-9" QB 4 PROVIDE 1" PREFORMED FILLER AT EXPANSION JOINTS IN CONCRETE C . FIELD MEASURE ©0 NOTES: �.i1 HIGHWAY BARRIER /CONCRETE CAP PLAN 5. FOR BRIDGE STREET BYPASS LIGHTING =I = TRACK SIDE FACE FOR END POST DETAILS SEE SHEETS 103-108. 1. ALL CONSTRUCTION JOINTS IN CAST-IN-PLACE rn 1 CAP/BARRIER SHALL BE LOCATED AT INTERVALS W i� OF CONCRETE CAP SEE SHEET XX NOT MORE THAN 24 FEET. ALL EXPANSION JOINTS SHALL BE LOCATED AT INTERVALS NOT m I MORE THAN 72 FEET. SEE DETAILS ON THIS 01 n _ t TRACK AAj �" CHAMFER (TYP,) SHEET. N +IF-- _ _ IL 2. REINFORCEMENT SHALL BE CONTINUOUS THRU 1 U 11 w I — — o A5®6` EXPANSION JOINTS.OINTS AND END 2" CLEAR AT a y, FRONT FACE �i - a m T CONCRETES PANEL — /PRECAST 3. FOR END POST DETAILS. SEE SHEET 99. W PLAN Z I!_ PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL 4. FOR PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL DETAILS, SCALE : }§" a V-0" 1(f/ SEE THIS SHEET. z 2�¢" CL. =I TOP OF STEEL H-PILES < 5. SHEET 95ET LIGHT HAUNCH DETAILS. SEE TOP OF CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE CAP6. FOR LIGHTING DETAILS, SEE SHEETS 109 AND 110. � I SECTION A-A �I CONSTRUCTION JOINT (TYP.) At' 6' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE (BLACK) PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE Q ELEVATION (TYP. EXCEPT AS NOTED) _ I EL 14.58 (MAX.) EL 74.32 EL. 14.24 END POST ORADEED RoaownY PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL DETAILS SCALE : 1¢" 1'-0" It H- U N 0� J U U U APPROX. E%IST. GROUN 4 OF CONCRETE CAP 6" UNREINFORCED ICONC, LEVELING PAD iii AND CHAIN LINK FENCE iI iI 20'-0" BYPASS RD. STEEL H-PILE (HP 12x63) (TYP.) 8-0" (ttP.) L IH �;I ! lil lil 6' RICH CHAIN LINK FENCE " LIMITS OF H-PILE AND PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WAIL - - A -� VINYL COATED (BLACK) 2'-0" 0 PRE-AUGERED HOLE, PILE TIP 6' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE � i � FILL W/ LEAN CONCRETE (ttP.)�i �EL, -3 (MIN.) CL META TRACK 2>1- (2;6` O.D.) DIA 11%, z g"5 ELEVATION x 11" LG. SCH. 40 SCALE )b" a 1'-0" 1 PIPE SLEEVE (GALV.) _---_``-DETAIL A ELY4" CHAMFER ERIC SEALANT ER (TYP.) VARIES 9'-8" MIN. IF•� % Til � / TOP`OF ROADWAY ti LIMITS OF ANTI-GRAFFITI COMPOUND IL V 2" CL,- i m FRONT FACE OF PRECAST CONCRETE PANELS \\ 1 ". -". i (TYP.) N oTO BE FLUSH WITH FACE OF H-PILE FLANGE r 12-M4 is _ « p 5" WIDE PLASTIC > (TYPO �. •� �WATERSTOP x 24" LONG (2 REQUIRED PER PANEL) i N BIT. DAMP PROOFING - CONSTRUCTION JOINT 1" EXPANSION JOINT I FILTER FABRIC r ROADWAY FACE ROADWAY FACE 1 2' WIDE 'a II• • w OF BARRIER IIS-- 5 WIDE PLASTIC WATERSfOP OF BARRIER 9" WIDE PLASTIC WATERSTOP 1 ( ) I� • .I 3" MIN'¢ 6-44 LONG. CL. > m STEEL H-PILE (HP72x63) (GALVANIZED) r6" x 12" WIDE UNREINFORCED u 2-#6 ADDITIONAL (THRU 2-R6 EXPOSED FLANGE ABOVE EXISTING GROUND CONCRETE LEVELING PAD 1�•' PREFORMED FILLER 1 506"• o CONSTRUCTION JOINT) ADDITIONAL TO BE PAINTED TO APPROXIMATE THE I g FI #4 COLOR OF CONCRETE (FED. STD. 5958 I I S Nn 1" DIA. HOLES IN H-PILES •• COLOR IQ X37150). . 1 I I• FOR 2 ADDITIONAL {�6 BARS X4 '1 I': Y-0. 6 PRE-AUGERED HOLE, (SEE NOTE #2 THIS SHEET) I •' 3 FILL W/ LEAN CONCRETE 1 I 5_0• •#406" (PERMANENT STEEL CASING I 67 1 AS REQUIRED) 4" x 2" KEY (IS®6• 4` x 2" KEV 8 44 (THRU CONSTRUCTION JOINT) 2" CLR. ALL REBAR DETAIL A TYPICAL H—PILE WALL SECTION CONSTRUCTION JOINT EXPANSION JOINT SCALE: ," = 1'—° SCALE-- i" _ V_D• SCALE: ," ,'—D" (STA. 271+07.9 TO STA. 274+42.5) SCALE " gg i �oi=iD d i ---------- — — — — — �0 BRIDGE STREET BYPASS - — SALEM 267 PC 266 N 25'48'06" E BRIDGE STREET BYPASS �- SiRE FED.MD GPW.Ep E'SGL SMEEi iOiFL +10.82 1051.51' run xD. sxEErs �R 10000' 0 1 MASS 004 93 1177 1 0 ao 0 1 n ,i mo xo.005402 tt N-------------------------------=o-------'------'------------------ GUTTER NE UWALL & NOISE BARRIER DETAILS 7 OF 16 :S .I I r,.::.. .. �.. .:a...2.: I:-:;;:V ..; I•. . - ::, . .2 . :::- :,;.2 ;-2:.. - ;; S .: I ,.2RETAINING WALL STA. 265+50 TO STA. 270+00 I , ,,:, 2 PLAN & ELEVATION I 1 TRACK SIDE FACE HIGHWAY BARRIER / CONCRETE CAP R e 10021.58' 0 OF CONCRETE CAP ALONG FACE OF CONCRETE CAP LIGHT POLE I I ip COPING (TYP.) 111111 F1 pl a SIFT TRACK NOTE: +1 — — — — _ _ FOR PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL NOTES. SEE SHEET 92. PLAN p Q I d I SCALE : 1'-O" 1 wl z d 6 HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE (BLACK) 1 PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE (2 TOP OF CAST-IN-PLACE �Mqx) CONSTRUCTION JOINT (TYP.) i 7 TOP OF STEEL H-PILES (TYP. EXCEPT AS NOTED) CONCRETE CAP yr f :v.'( r LIGHT POLE COPIN 2 EL. 15.58 EL 15.35 EL. 15.10 1 0 EL. 14.84 EL. 74.58 F EL. 7.00 1" EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) EL 7.50 1 I 1 � i -APPRO%. EXIST. GROUND i 6" UNREINELING _ 1 CON0. LEVELING PAD i 1 i 1 STEEL -PILE (HP 12x63) (TYP.) F -0) III III III 1YR. _I I —V^ LIMITS OF H PILE AND PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL ELEVATION 2'-0" 0 PRE-AUGERED HOLE, FILL W/ LEAN CONCRETE (TYP.) EL.- TIP 30 (MIN.) SCALE : )§" 1'-O" �� BRIDGE STREET BYPASS 268 270 _ — _ N 2716'13" E — _ 269 — — PT 202.77' PROP. CB 3 +67.12 `\ STA. 269+33 `R = 10000' So 1 0 ________ S t o__ __ ___ __ _ ____ ____ __ N ' n __ -_ 11ffE`� LINE __ ___ ____ ____ _ ___ ______ __ __ ______ ___________________ _ ,. ;<, ...t..,r, . .. I,..t:, L..;. ,2 I<' 2, t•,.. 2 �. "..yam. , .I.... or..: 2. V nTRACK SIDE FACE HIGHWAY BARRIER / CONCRETE CAP \-R - 10021.58' m o o m ALONG FACE OF CONCRETE CAP TR CONCRETE CAP - LIGHT POLE { I I COPING (TYP.) Ct TRACK + I — 1 o I1 In PLAN ++ I SCALE 770" 1 w r N 1 Z HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE (BLACK) I = TOP OF STEEL H-PILES n to'_D.• V « z 1 CONSTRUCTION JOINT (TYP.) TOP OF CAST`-IN-PLACE LIGHT POLE COPING (MAX.) PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE (2) 1 CONCRETE CAP (HEIGHT VARIES)._ 1 r , (EYE. EXCEPT AS NOTED) r ' _ EL 15.36 '�'^ EL. 15.58 EL. 15.58 H I EL. 14.67 EL. 14.86 - EL. 15.11 (MIN) 0 1" EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) EL. 7.50 1 APPROX. EXISTT GROUND 6" UNREINFORCED I 1 1 i i i DONG. LEVELING PAD " E i 1 $ I STEEL H-PIIS (HP 12x63) (TYP.) 8'-0" , i I III III Ill (TYP.) Iii i Iii III I "a' o�� g I LIMITS OF H-PILE AND PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL ri (• r 2'-0" 0 PRE-AUGERED HOLE, on o ELEVATION FILL W/ LEAN CONCRETE (TYP.)-�" '�- PILE TIP i z x o EL.= -3.0 (MIN.) oow4oQ 1p - SCALE )¢" 1'-0" ��Va / �fL BRIDGE STREET BYPASS SALEM 272 _ _ — _ — — 271 — PC _ N 2716'13` E — — vD BRIDGE STREET BYPASS +69.90 1 202.77' sure 'M M 1n-.xo C. PROP. OIL k GRIT SEPARATOR a PROP. CB nsaE sxEcr roml R = 5250' @ PROP. CB run xo. sxcErs I STA. 271+55 o STA. 271+13 STA. 270+24 1 MASS 2004 94 177 o 5' "t �j 1 a CT ME xo.005402 1 GUTTER LINE r~14'11{0'3--i m p_ �" a --------- - ------------------------------ -(-------------- WALL & NOISE BARRIER DETAILS r_______________ ____ 11 I N I I I I8 OF 16 1 • , . . y _ 2 ` w_ RETAINING WALL {2 PIAN & ELEVATION 3: I I , ; 5 s Z _ _ STA. 270+00 TO STA. 274+50 O C HIGHWAY BARRIER / CONCRETE CAP R = 5228.42' \—TRACK SIDE FACE I m 01 F S' ALONG FACE OF CONCRETE GAP OF CONCRETE CAP L HT p w N o - o COPING (TYP) mj 1 ... _.. _ E%IST. TRACK_. - m �(L RELOCATED TRACK SC . .. . TS _.._ _... o NOTE:_ - N FOR PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL -� NOTES, SEE SHEET 92. Z PLAN x SCALE : ig' 1'-0" 1 w al � sl x 6' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE (BLOCK) 4 0'-0" I < TOP OF STEEL H-PILES PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE QA TOP OF CAST-IN-PLACE (MAX) CONSTRUCTION JOINT (TYP.) 1 CONSTRUCTION JOINT (TYP.) EL 15.14 EL. 14.68 EL. 14.68 EL. 14.67A(TYP. EXCEPT AS NOTED) CONCRETE CAP 1 LIGHT POLE COPIN 1 G r�«� :✓t l '-0. EL 15.40 � 11" EXPANSION JOINT (TP.) EL ITT I ITT IT' Rl III IT/ ITT I IT' ITT APPROX. EXIST. GROUND 6. 1 UNREINFOR CED i ' CONC. LEVELING PAD iT STEEL H-PILE HP 12x63 TYP. i li �1iNP. lil I III III III ( ) ' PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL LIMITS OF H-PILE AND EC a ELEVATION 2'-0" 0 PRE-AUGERED HOLE, FILL W/ LEAN CONCRETE (TYP.)� i'��PILE TIP SCALE : �' e 1'-0' EL= -3.0 (MIN.) — _ 274 _ — — — — — 273 — qBRIDGE STREET BYPASS — — I 6 3 R = 5250' I I a o 1 0 I __ _____________________ ____'o__________________________________________________________________ ' ___________ �_______ N__________________________ GUT__TER_LINE � . - .. CK CE 1 HIGHWAY BARRIER / CONCRETE CAP - '.`+ OFA CO CIRETEACAP R 5228.42' i _. .__--_. --_-. ... _— ---- - - ---- - - --- ----- LIGHT-POLE - o - _ ALONG FACE OF CONCRETE CAP — — a n n n n n COPING TYP rn ^ -EXIST TRACK - " RELOCATED TRACK-__. .. W1 -___r___.__ — _.__..__ ___— __.__. _.._...._ . . _. ._ _..___._ _.__ ..._. - . — _... _-.—_. ..� ._._..._..---- n ------------- _ ... o PLAN 1 � "! < L___..._. ---SCALE d I CONSTRUCTION JOINT (TYP.) 6HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE (BLACK) I U TOP OF STEEL H-PILES PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE OA TOP R CAST-IN-PLACE(HEIGHT 1 F Z 1 (TYP. EXCEPT AS NOTED) CONCRETE CAP (HEIGHT VARIES) (MAX.)(MA%.) 1 = 71 LIGHT POLE COPING 1•_0 �� a u;.<""�? � ^`� F 16.53 EL. 16.43 EL. 16.18 EL. 15.92 (MIN.) EL. 15.66 EL. 15.4 o Q J 1 1" EXPANSION JOINT (1YP.) EL. 7.50IT' ITT ITT 11 IT' T. Hil1 i ' ' �APPROX. E%ISI. GROUND i 1 1 6' UNREINFORCED 1 1 f f I CONC. LEVELING PAD 1 g i STEEL H-PILE (HP 12x63) (TYP.) III III III (TYP.) yu _ 5r LIMITS OF H-PILE AND PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL 2'-0" 0 PRE-AUGERED HOLE, ' PILE TIP pony ELEVATION FILL W/ LEAN CONCRETE (TYP,)—; SCALE ]•$" = 1 —O" El.= —3.0 (MIN.) , BRIDGE STREET BYPASS - 276 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - SALEM 275 BRIDGE STREET BYPASS a Si�iE fE�./10 PPW.ep fiPl SEE SNlt15 i52 50' o , 1 MASS 2004 95 177 1 c p .1 1 vPartcr RE rro.005402 __--GUTTER LINE --------------------------N__ ------------------------------- WALL & NOISE BARRIER DETAILS ISI 16 `_ 2 ....r2 I .._:,,. RETAINING WALL#2FPLAN & ELEVATION L--- — '- -- - .�, .- 'TiT�HWAY BARRIER 7 CONCRETE CAP' `TRACK SIDE FACE ---- R '5228 42 -"-' --, ' "------ ... -, _ ._. - STA. 274+5 TO STA. 279+00 EXIST. TRACK -----__p OF CONCRETE CAP ALONG FACE OF CONCRETE CAP o 1 HT ..J p -_ .__-___. __..... ... .. _.... .__J1 f7_RJl1l...._ ___... ._ p COPING ......_.... ___ -.... -_ _._ - NOT • "' ._... 1 W PRECASTPANEL WALL --.-_. .. N EXIST. TRACK "--PLAN ES, SEE EE SHEET 92. No _........ . __. _...... __ ..... I + 1 SCALE 1'-0" W N zi I 6' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE (BLACK) PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE (2) 10'-0" I U (TYP. EXCEPT AS NOTED) ~1 TOP OF STEEL H-PILES TOP OF CAST-IN-PLACE (MAX') CONSTRUCTION 1 z 1 LIGHT POLE COPING CONCRETE CAP y .*«��.• ;x.-' JOINT (TYP.) 1 .� - EL 15.66 EL. 15.92 EL. 16.18 (MIN.) i 1 EL. 16.43 EL 16.5 U 1" EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) EL. 7,50 I � 1 11 1 APPROXI. EXIST. GROUND 6` UNREINFORCED T ' FIF CONC. LEVELING PAD 1 T P P 8'-0" i STEEL H PILE H 12263 ( ) (TY ) YP. I ( ) I III III III III III LIMITS OF H-PILE AND PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL A - �V ELEVATION 2'-0" 0 PRE-AUGERED HOLE, PILE TIP SCALE ?�" 1'-0" FILL W/ LEAN CONCRETE (TYP.)-1 r~ EL.= -3.0 (MIN.) _.._... . ._._-_. _ -� _._. T BRIDGE STREET BYPASS 279 278 7.I ... .f. i,. i PT zn /- - _ �/ 5250' ___ 5 t _ GUTTER UNE__a _____-__ _________________________LL_________________ fl I --- PROP. CB 1 0 _________ __ o ____ o _ 1� i' o STA. --- i PROP. CB 3 STA. 278+50 I I _______-____ o______________ 5' "t ____________ _o________________ _ _______ _ o__ -t__�_ ��__ j�__j I .,.,.I'. x ..; -): '.r< . . ..-,2,..',. 2.......:.:.':.I" I. 2 .. a ; Ka,2 I .,, ,y -. 2 ' '. I. S I 7777 ED , HIGHWAY BARRIER / CONCRETE CAP -- - - --- -- _ -� � ___ -COPING TYP. 1 - - R 5228.42' rn _._------- -""-'---- -� - TRACK SIDE FACE o - �! e W I , ----- LIGHT POLE Ci I EXIST. TRACK OF CONCRETE CAP - I ( ) n I ALONG FACE OF CONCRETE CAP ,,-rk RELOCATED TRACK W T EXIST. BRIDGE -._._.------ PLAN (OVER) +1 EXIST. TRACK _ -__...._-__ _.-___....-.. _._-_...._ _. _.._.SCALE -_s_1'-0 _.___ ..__._ -..... ;1 ._ ...,._ .,.._. _.._-.-_-_- ... .. .. . . ....._._ . ... . I I-ii l -46' MARCH ST OVER -. . _._._.... .....-_... �, ...._._......._ - ( I I.. N _ a Va~i I I i� 6' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE (BLACK) TOP OF STEEL H-PILES I = p 10-0" F r Z CONSTRUCTION JOINT (TYP.) PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE 0 TOP OF CAST-IN-PLACE (MAX.) (TVP. EXCEPT AS NOTED) CONCRETE CAP (HEIGHT VARIES) LIGHT POLE COPING '*o 1 � t O 6 = EL. 14.39 EL. 14.62 EL. 14.88 EL 15.14 .I EL. 15.40 '(Miry,) E . 15.66 N 1" EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) EL. 7.50 1 I � FINISHED GRADE j 6" UNREINFORCED 1 — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — �APPROX. E%I GROUND — — — — — — — — — — �a w 1 f it 1 i f CONC. LEVELING PAD g STEEL H-PILE (HP 12263) (TYP.) / III III III (TYP.) 1 lil lil iJ'-.' $gym g ��LIMITS OF H-PILE AND PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL IOF H-PILE AND PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL FILOW/ LEAN CONC ETE (TYP.)+� r� ELEVATION vILE TIPwoo a SCALE : Y¢ 1'-0" i EL.m -3.0 (MIN.) a j �ODU T BRIDGE STREET BYPASS 260 SALEM 281 — — _ C��—N 20'1YO8" E — — _ 279 BRIDGE STREET BYPASS .� �� 1106.06' surz M.m a .Im r�ll. x,, s¢Eµis �� ¢ PROP. 0 < (L PROP. CB I PROP. B' 0 SANITARY SEWER \\ .STA.-280+25-"-'"1 3 STA. 279+35 I EXIST. PUMP STATION o -- 200 4 96 177 EXISTING SMH tt005402 CONTRACTOR TO EXERCISECAUTION WHEN ---- R9 '__ WALL & OISEBDETAILS TO BE REMOVED -----____----------------- U _ CUTTER LINE =480 10 OF 16INSTALLING PILESNEAR_EXISTING_$FWVER #2 PLAN & ELEVA T RETAINING WAL ION ,x' I STA. 279+00 TO STA. 283+50 LIGHT POLE 1 L R 4978.42' HIGHWAY BARRIER / CONCRETE CAP TRACK SIDE OF CC+ ALONG FACE OF CONCRETE CAP m PANEL WALL I w of COPING (TYP.) EXISTING 8' SEWER LINE w -. I NOTE: OI o e ..._`O __..._. _ W FOR PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL - __.. N NOTES. SEE SHEET 92. ¢RELOCATED TRACK- '-' _ _ PLAN _ T �- EXIsr TRACK + _r SCALE 1'-0 1 N = TOP OF STEEL H-PILES 6' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE (BLACK) p CONSTRUCTION JOINT (TYP.) I w 10-0" I Z TOP RE CAST-IN-PLACE PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE Q m I (MAX.) LIGHT POLE COPIN I CONCRETE CAP (TYP. EXCEPT AS NOTED) 2 EL 15.23 EL. 14.85 EL. 14.49 P-0' ! kik:%5 EL 14.52 EL 14.39 I~ (MIN.) ti 1" EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) EL. 7.50 T EL. 7.00 1 ' ' I ' APPRO%i. EXIST. GROUND 'FINISHED GRADE 1 1 1 6' UNREINFORCED _ - I CONC. LEVELING PAD i STEEL H-PILE (HP 12x63) (TYP.) B-0" i III CI III (TYP•) i 1 III III �L EXIST 8" SEWER LINE LIMITS OF H—PILE AND PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL 2'-0' 0 PRE—AUGERED HOLE, ELEVATION FILL W/ LEAN CONCRETE (TYP.)�i PILE TIP SCALE }§" a 11-0' EL.- -3.0 (MIN.) — — — — �¢ BRIDGE STREET BYPASS — — — — — �— — — 283 —N 20'1Y08_* E _ 282 — 281 1106.06' 1 I 1 i n < y __ _____________________ Q PROP. CB ¢ PROP, OIL & GRfT SEPARATOR o -- — R-4980' R=4980 m I STA. 283+10 STA. 282+90 Qo -- -- --_--P7 w ____ __ ---- -- GUTTER LINE 14-0't BARRIER CRETE CAP ALONG F F CONCRETE P 1x 1 5'-0't 1707 56 E _ ____ I . :g.;.. � R 49 842 HIGHWAY A IER CON ACE O CA 1 + - w LIGHT POLE TRACK SIDE OF COPING (TYP.) N N � CONCRETE CAP PLAN •� - I "+I I N SCALE : )•§. = 1'-0' o I = ry N HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE (BLACK) _ NV r Z I TOP OF STEEL H-PILES CONSTRUCTION JOINT (TYP.) TOP O OF CAST—IN—PLACE (HEIGHT VARIES) LIGHT POLE COPING (MAXO.) PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE Q (TYP. EXCEPT AS NOTED) EL. 17.00 EL. 16.65EL. 16.29 EL. 15.94 7 rJY_'p•1 r'' EL. 75.59 EL. 15.23 {moi L EL. 9.00 EL. 8.50 r 1" EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) I EL. 7.50 ; LL-'2o j I• - i6" UNREINFORCED APPROX. EXIST] GROUND CONC. LEVELING PAD l i STEEL H-PILE (HP 1243) (TYP.) 111 CI CI (TYP.) UMTS OF H PILE AND PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL 2'-0" 0 PRE-AUGERED HOLE, ELEVATION FLL w/ LEAN CONCRETE (TYP.) PILE TIP -uL,i9�9 SCALE }¢•• 1'-O" EL, -3.0 (MIN.) �ou0 d SLEM BRIDGE STRAEET BYPASS ---------------- -T- r7:71 M.AID �.W1 F=I SnET I rs IVASSI 0041 97 1177 -402 WALL & NOISE BARRIER DETAILS 11 OF 16 RETAINING WALL #2 PLAN & ELEVATION STA. 283+50 TO STA. 285+78 . BRIDGE STREET BYPASS 1 2861 285 284 ........ BRIDGE STREET BYPASS PGL - — - — - — - — - - - — - -- - — - — - — — - ---- I — - — - __ - — - — - — - -- T- - - - - - - *0 10 1 w N 0 + SEE DETAIL M ------------ ! IISHEET 98. --------------------- Q PROP. Cs ------------------ STA. 285+50 --------------------- w z 5. .:L ----------- ----------------- --- -nTTER LINE — i. ------ I \_TRACK SIDE FACE LHIGHWAY BARRIER CONCRETE CAP OF CONCRETE CAP 54� SIDE TRACK OF CONCRETE CAPI b" O EXISTING BEVERLY-SALEM BRIDGE SOUTH ABUTMENT I PLAN SCALE NOTE: FOR PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL WALL NOTES, SEE SHEET 92. io E PANEL 13E TOP OF CAST-IN-PLACE 6' HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE (BLACK) FIELD M&ASTRTEOD CONCRETE CAP (HEIGHT VARIES) E; !(2AXO) PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL TYPE A EL. 18.60 -TOP OF STEEL H-PILES CONSTRUCTION JOINT (TYP.) LIGHT POLE COPING (TYP. EXCEPT AS NOTED) (MATCH EXISTING EL EL. EL. 17. EL. 18.41 EL. 18.06 17.70 I,-(r 17.36 MIN,) EL... �O W�W EXPANSION JOINT (TYP.) Ps I T'H ... TEL 9,DO f QD B B B j TH 1 -7' i I p I: I F Fl,-. I# `FINISHED SHED G E 6.. NREINFOR' ED GONG. LEVELING PAD APPR X. EXIST.l 8. ;,GROUND STEEL H-PILE'(HP 12263) (TYP-) TYR PRECAST CONCRETE PANEL 2'-0* 0 PRE-AUGEPED HOLE, FILL W1 LEAN PIL TIP SCALE l'-O" 'k;1_EL.IE -3.0 (MIN ELEVATION CONCRETE (Typ.)71 EMS SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS 51.1E fEo�Er mov.ra "'. sNfEr 57 orK MM, M0. SXEER MASS 004 103 177 fRJlfLi ME W.005402 I iM LIGHTING PLAN � t ff ''�� f \ Y \ LIMIT OF WORK \ � ',.... j \ >' STA. 234+00 ,� ' 1 4, ' @CURVE DATA 'h. "� \ I MEET EXIST. BRIDGE ST. BYPASS �A r.N 555818.69 R=1500.00' \� "` . C�'98 •'',... E 762363.36 1 , 7 L 62&).91' - O / ) T-140.86 MB oy 6-10'43.47" @ CURVE DATA SALEM STATION (' , y ! BRIDGE ST. BYPASS ( J SYi t'rz ♦?� i a �. R-500.01' - 1 � L 234.41' £ s M �C T-119.40' f uH vP �'' 26.51'43' v 3. y ' °' ��, \., %, �.: 1 6 >` a 'P !•\ A.A. 0+00?003WASHINGTON T.SBY@PASS •^ / / } I , '' ,r-- 1�'n <• \♦ \� n S w'M t�j r i ,RGa •rr I tt N°t O n 'F}nl la x r k IN .... S PAA� GH (0; €ENTE �r0 T- r r,- - $/i" ♦��? i S5 LT EMH ° �'�� i Imo\ \ �O ♦�� ...♦\ r Y�K.S��T t µ j.�� _ ___. t 'f;. i d LC1-3 r;..4 LC LIM F WORK STA 2460 , 6 MEET EXIST. .) l r. U N 555568.90 65 L,. E 762775..14 ..0 yp. _ , .} \ v� O ,) 4't;'.;`♦ `� +70 RT. ) \ � 1'010 NG D&(TYP) �� / // �� "JEFFERSON AT_SALEM -- - DEVELOPMENT.-PROJECT `\ +' PROP. PB +15 RT \ ! / (' (PROP BY OTHERS) e - l f T .:.1 BRIDGE ST. BYPASS All r .4 y * y ♦ l �\ LC' p0,\��/_ / TA. 10+00.00 ASH ST Et STA. 10+0006DRIVEWAY BAC(f '�_- �0 RT Fa � A•r � . ' � / !< � iii. N \.\ /�• `\ ,'•O�i' Yf Ponce \ '�' ":✓\ 7\\ i i �' i �...., B \ - � X), '.amu i ./\�' A � +6 \ `\G,EQ�`, _ 1 Y ♦,`V \5�4,. . E• 1 010 CND (TYP) A ( C Y i +30 R \ \ 1� r' P1 N x.jr: •dam ' \ \+90 LT. LEGEND: \\rte >� 8 LC LOAD CENTER �) n q �. +y\a'1 \ - ♦flj •5 \ LIMIT-0F WORK` ;f` �y\` ,z �✓ y �. ) i !! T STA. 10+70 �` •. `J 1.. +20 LT. 8 ROADWAY LIGHTING MEET EXIST. BW BIKEWAY LIGHTING \\ ' / \ x � 'wTr�r /'' 1t •;, t !(,` ✓ B g -�\\ ♦ i" \\ � � z.••. y ,1 ,,`+\ RCS` * ?`c'� LC1-2 �yy 8 0 40 i00 200 Nmm ^ FEET Wmy 8 �q�$ a 1"s 40' HORIZONTAL _ _ do�u a CONT. ON SHT. N0. 104 C _ � I SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS sire rto..m HMJ.«o ^ux sNEEr �L rCw No. vrtrs MASS 2004 104 177rm a ECT RLE No.005402 bw ON — NO_70] CONT. ON SHT. NO_105 LIGHTING PLAN LC1 1 _ cLr � 1'-10 GND. TYP. , - �� -r y ' I .._ ,. . . .. 7.___ '�,..e +65 T. 2 & @�c - A i��l.._ t �'" _ JEFFERSONALSALfM"._ .I 2 \ N ( ) � PROP. BY OTHERS) _. I _ b J �. <'✓ / r � DE�ELOPMENT�PROJfCT u o _ 1 rJ ` J ; I EST. DATA �r -_ BRIDGE 5T BYPASS _._.._, �� \ \ ••, i i ,a / 1 A / STA. 247+03.56 BRIDGE ST BYPASS' 1 t \ 6. R=695 13' $TA, 2a6+69.38 BRIDGE 5T'';BYPA$$. .• -- i• ®° ryhY / 2 n/ \ Ct` _.STA. 10+00.00 DR STEL HEAD -rwY -s 1" '". L=695;13' .6A ) `�',,, ,y ,e® B K� ✓ _ _ n / p � / (AHEAD ' I I I ] � i �', T=417.00' STA. 10+00.00 00 BRIDGE 1d ( J. I I I �=79'39'23" STA. 10+0000 DRIVEWAY IRV �60 LT �� i.'o✓°a° h //B 2 1 #10 GND (T'85 •V / ��- '' B 'A,, 0i �r +10 LT- & RT ° ry GND. (TYP.) \�,� +90 LT r ,\ �.- _ f t\ ; ' °` ryR9 /C� +� LC2-2 r` 2-4 \\ �' _ - ✓, -,:'.� i / "JEFTERSON AT SALEM" UM4".rOF WORK' •/. �/ C� ` <'r�\ �,.. <_ g.. ° } •� DEV LOPMENT PRO„tCT r a�_ (r �_ r' I _; 1 ter' / �. .✓ `2Y/� PROP. BY O THERS 7D+70 ' \ �r . / /\ +20 Li ,. _``\ +50 LT B °° ._.-_- � ?t r. c BC7_1 } ... LC2-2 9,ob LC2-4 It CURVE DATA ASH ST. \ c +25 RT.� / �� \F .._......9 244 LCI-1 __ Z46 �. \ 1 / i' / ) .ti.F< _ �.,�•' [y, \ L=136.46• �/ `\\ \�� I ' vB LCI-2 LCI-2 �`� +60 LT�'RT 'r I 414 LIMIT OF WORD/ +05 RT. STA. 1+10 �' �I #TO #4& MEET EXIST. \� 1-,;t0 ONO. (rn.) \ < n \\ S CURVE DATA - +,� 7 \ ST. PETERS ST. 'h. 'tso RT-, \ �'�' t a \\ 1;0-100:00. >l , `",,- j / -At-... 371 N o0'X o . LIMIT OP WORK \ \ ''� /-;. - .a.`� „ Ars / ,.•i :' STA 14+00 p / w \ % / Q. S �, .• r _.� r:. < i MEET EXIST. N 556526.61 E 763729.72 ♦ �< SP�� •. STA.Y44+00.00 BRIDGE STBY@ . PASS _ 7 $TA. O+U0.00 ST. PETERS ST Q CURVE DATA BRIDGE ST. / LEGEND: \ / k\ N' R-250.00' �l� 1 BR/QGE oL=265.17 LC LOAD CENTER T=146.59' G� (0 D=6V46'20" B ROADWAY LIGHTING AA/r0 c) .` BW BIKEWAY UGHTING -;, 0 40 100 200 N'Ww' g FEET < m �� 1"= 40HORIZONTAL IDV— SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS Si4tE TED.NO vRW.ND 2004 SHEE! 1=1 E<R K. $HEM MASS 105 177 vRaccr EaE Ho,DOE LIGHTING PLAN 3 OF owe NOR TH R/ VER LEGEND: LC LOAD CENTER 'y (TIDAL) B ROADWAY LIGHTING @CURVE DATA BW BIKEWAY LIGHTING BRIDGE ST BYPASS ti. T 189.42' �S=41'29'50" ' - ,-: :. 1j •• - 2-C-2 AIN PAIN LP {10 GNO&(TYP) ObH-,T.-. . - PROP. +85 6',, PAEO NAP & RT. IPSWICH— _ BOSTON -- _—___.-- -� - ...... //r -- •._ a; ..._; E1 1 +60 LT & RT ` ..- i 0� - .. 1I 60 LT. & RY __ _ _ __ ____= m® _®® _ _ ,_ -.. �+ 0 LT & RT LC2-2 256 2-1 257 II 256,I$I - - n \ -- —a — — _ — - -- — _ _ -- --_ __ —_ \ / _ -- — — ..,..-. .� \...; -..� ,\- LC2-" - - __ - - 4 L 4 II L 2 3 161 - LCS. 5 . 4 li r. L L BW 0 3 w LC ! 5/` B 5 / BW, � C -2 BBB'B � �C5 LOAD CENTER O ° A B 2- B li t o •5� A.. "JEFFERSON-AT-SALEM" -- _... �, %.' �> B <>✓'� �. I' _DEVELOPMENT,PROJE£F —�- — , I ) i- n +60 LT & RT (PR,QP. B-f 07HERSI B. CDATA 1 ` .. RIDG 1 3 - _ / n �C3' - x r•'' / I -L\ R x,00100": STA. 10+009,08 BRIDGE T It BYPASS - \ \ / .-�®4 � B � C`s \//�� - �ry+"t� .' ! '�"'� co STA. 10+60.00 BRIDGE ST , (AHEAD) �: '® LC2-2 STA. 70+0000 DRIVEWAY C% � ty !'' !.% B� q s m tl � &� 11-x` _ 1 " ...t\.��.. � � ,;;" BB' �® x � � ,,.• �.� / � m-... .e; � 1 �• kk v I / s ® T41r, r 1 ,#10 ( �SSy Z +10 LTG& RT. oB ✓4 � ^ j� . / B ti �V,J%��`s r yl-,.. B a B BB 0,1 sY' / c� S. B o2-2 N 4 $TORY VNII l B pg �C2-4 "JEFffrRSON AT EM - DEVELOPMENT PROJoJECT' �i 3D (PROP. BY-OTHERS`) ` / +50 LT. � ,C ., s' B B® �` .\ yr " �• ; o _ LC2-2 m'm 3 C 0 40 100 200 PEEP CONT. ON TNT. NO_104 pp �WWO p 1"= 40' HORIZONTAL 8 I' IT- SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS $iAIE FED.ND PflQI. NO FISCµ SHEET TaA YEAR N0. SHEETS MASS 2004 106 177 PR ER Ra N0,005402 LIGHTING PLAN 4 OF NOR TH Rl VER CURVE DATA BRIDGE ST. BYPASS (TIDAL) R-10000.00' L=2256.356.31' T 128.16' A=07'28'07' 2"C-2 p4 & 1 #10 GND. (TYP.) 4P o > J aq ue +60 LT & RT, 10 LT 60 LT & RT T� 10 LT. & RT. 60 LT. & RT. Ck + & + _ urfui"For_ ,,.._s ?a 'b l�F..:�5�Ft - a'• k 7h`1 S. / J r' ' a /n „x a M1`V x x.,x•xX_.zl. 41 YRy �. _-. .. -�... 0 "Al fUX —_ 5 xlia rr trfgv (' a - eo^ +60 lT. & RT. I- 10 LT. & R . - hI ISI = _ a__„ r__ r :_ 1 - ", x ��r IPSWICH IgI 257 258 BC2-1 259 LC2-1 260 . 261 BC2 1 262 BC2-1 263 264 BC2-1 265 BC3-2 - 266 267j BC3 2 268 803-2 BC2-3 ~ v. O — TBC2 3 �— �— B �— B- �— ~ ~ —O_ C3 4 B —{ B —� — ~ — kvoik oI LC2-3 LC2-3 lC2 3 LC3 4 LC3-4 E a o Irk BW Bw i e_� L � r' .. _ r = _ I r ro ' _-� �:8C5 = BC5 I� U _ BW4� BWS LOS LCS LCS = LC 5' ® i a .�'�LCS' ^ _ LCS LC5 '^v ye�., „ , o / BCss Bw ��a dos � mr ;gam% p� c lC5 'P STREEfiICW'9N .r. .SM�nP ��_9 ,1��\� BW $a ✓� .. , LOAD CENTER",NQ' is -; LCS, , m c2) R!n/ rRF s Lcs x sr^T fi,- 1, LOSPR BW ..✓��, q Li!�o/�� OPIBiIKEWAY ��l/ -i r �✓r 4rr ,/ a�� + _' /"n' LCS LOAD CENTER N0,' S' - rPU NFNr y t ti o r E ` 'v r Tc') ON ' TT yr �'' I• r CEMv A ST E ` a a /'A✓E'0 PARKING I� E � Z r i s V rZD „ _ l 4 ' � �+.xp�KEWAYr UGHilkfj-i��e{x�..� ljp u o 40 100 200 vm � FEET coo 1"= 40' HORIZONTAL Looe d k SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS siRre fED.ao vNOJ.No lw—m nET m YEM N0. SHEETS MASS 2004 107 177 d = MWEC ME 40. 005402 ' ,� � -"� �• '' LIGHTING PLAN ! •i �s 5 OF 6 a II i M 1 , c i _ NOR TH Rl VER h t N(I h I (TIDAL) EL CURVE DATA AVENUE � •"� n r I#y BRIDGE ST. BYPASS SMI TN - R-5250.00' L=640.00' T 320.40' `< I rill N r f A=0559'05" ; . t r e ate.ARCy ;f sTRtET U 6b 4T =t t4 +10 LT &RT - 4 RT Li +10 LT +60 LT. & RT. +10 LT. & RT. +60 LT. & RT. +10 LT. & RT. '^� +60 LT xw. N Oil WATERELF.U= +65 RT , ,�.: _ x-'� _ • •_- L,. . '.)'.'• �- J _. _ __ - s 781 ras 8 c ..:. �- - s v B 280 7;' A,3`. � . '27§ LC3 1 - lol -T�-t-r — T5 C31 _ _ R— L�c313 — ` - _ 277 _ 6 �0--� B Izl B - a _-. - 76 L e „2_-1Y�_ zi LC32 -.=- " '269'„-^ s.,_;.:, n -B=» w=war.-.� _-_ -- --- ___-- _1 �_ B - "-275 - -Or'C3� BC3_ � _, _ "'IL C3-3 L - s na> en s saa 6k 1— —e — —+ _. _� L'63y 2 277 LC3 2 272 273 =. __ :. >,s _..� ¢• 1 r 8 -+,-^+--�J --i B —O --I— --0_� --� — --0,— 8 LC3-3 �1 _ _--_- _s=_ ISI LC3_4 GRASCC h B LC3-4 LC3-3 C3-3 ` ' 121 w T .✓ LC3=4 _. _ ISI - __ .. esm®m=�m 0 LBW v BW BW sttwil�� bI �2 C 2 &� , �+ U N •LC5 .• LC5 ' xG t JJ) A10 GND TYd: 1 aae�� 1 � POOP - GAFPrC, H 'j�rr,,?••AAY biqN Xv._.J M* W {v!✓fJ1 L` M { 1 TT OA; CENTER NO.LIGHT3 A.� OAQ £�Y IF li GA r r1_. � IT DRI4TWAY x � LL .; -/ '� /. .. :., .!_• J./_ .�_. .i:._.._.� , _ I. L_ J f 1 5 J SigRY m -.' TORY �)S1LD t ( ♦ 31j L : I W000 �- c 1 } �II, � t E %2 STOR - T GARAGE WOO ia b roRY I 5mn� o ,. � T .. r v nn' i .I I , c I �i _ `I IDr.. , tir C1 r�91� u „ '' I s ._I f +1�U -IIY i' c - _.__... A� � � � II' 1 � �{�'..•p e I J �I'_ i n ��;� �y +,*I� t ) r � � S �� •� � �� a y b j ryR, wAG - sr Y '10~ -s-�a rri ImYT SI < "0-19 + f ...o.,.-m. '.'7 Ix- t ' I Fif ) .✓f v;:11 i. +I 1Sn2� ° Elj / �{ � 2 'l ,iRY l k �T /e.l Jx L`! ..;C.:1fi Srp:4f +wrys k.>_., l' <' a La. Via... w ,✓ Ir ` I.,._ '` '�( w R'�AfakY-LIGHTl16C' ux �J lW � P I'c tc / v1 ��RrI..- 'r� z _ eJP.4” nl 1 +riC,. 7� ;vr' a > I�, '.v NJ i, 'S ` I. I'•I { s {: ,..rf,, 3 BWyI (YEN�Y. s t4 z> r r f a z srow n w �11 f/,zm✓W Y}..>.,1 II GAnACE' m'Jg_ Hfi. ORI:W. v ( I? _ �.. �OU RT- N ., 9 c1lFRRY RTRFFT �mm 3 0 40 100 200 FEET �m o sj�cYwS ao m 7"= 40' HORIZONTAL o�u d SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS SiAiE fED.AID.PPDJ. Np FISfI{ SMyl LOTµ YEAR N0. SHEE15 MASS 2004 108 177 'MEU FILE N0. 0055402 LIGHTING PLAN 6 OF X NOR TH Rl VER LIMIT OF ROADWAY I I" gt CONSTRUCTION WORK f, i ,�fge ax>r,� ?' STA. 286+03 ( u t!'; MEET EXIST, N 560037.59 �� E 764556.26 r�_ 4 _ rt r r:r rcr y 3? `I m <`� BOSTON COMMUTER RAIL' I � ..� S17RY 21/ �. IIS L tJ/,YS Y- wocb I � r a r �. /2 _ - _ U5"" - / / o ' r �„ +so LT. & RT +10 TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY I I ®GO STREET COu ®�� — ASSACHUSETTS BAY .. ergrRu tdT +t6 LT: RT �' M PSWICH ,t---� rt� " . cs EXISTING -- sT SALEM/BEVERLY BRIDGE lol y cs o BBC 4-2 LBC4-2 _ 88 �3_1- ��i ��1 } �a < "Q82 LC4 2 -. 283 / 284 288N 28 __ 287 288 IU— 280 287 —4—,�r--I —F— - —9— _� -1 —I— 0 4e 13 3-3 .-' 4C3�r'3-<r`*`" x--" LC4-�... . � _ B LC4 4 ..i J / --__-- -ae»—=s=e: e== r ... 1 10 ONE. i 4E- I I PRO`_��P��tr�TREEL,LIGHT / 2"C 2 $4 ik r l LOA9$CENTER NO 4 EXIST. BRIDGE STREET / r M I 1) 1 - ) ! 4 BYPASS CONSTRUCTION x p cans T� (BY OTHERS) I Pi Inn F nr I - I I r l I I 2S ? 1 ( / o (/l �.._. 111 jt ( I A._ F v`r,rz G_ T� fl w---x�. I IN u Ing.nrr. Il i y s y J 5 1� 21, re . �u I Q') E �iraWD r 4. rl ��f[3Q__�--.� 1 mco RYY F� .x ti 4 CPnSls �a ,.I F .n.•l. STA 288+44.24 BRIDGE STREET BYPASS OPP _ n @ ry // 1 STA 2$8+47.39 fi%ISTING BRIDGE STREET BYPASS @, 30,00' LT O ; R s. � LEGEND _ Itr o JLC IOb.D. R , tF B ROADWAY UGHTI i r• 1 1,r I" J �ctE�4k A UGHTI / �.. I . - LVI P" Q n Ill I i 1 `t'l".�) ✓- p�I '�y 40 / 100 �0 Fl _T 1". 40' HORIZONTAL E��S a SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS $ATE IM M PROJ.NO lvFAR NL $XEEt0. I SXEE3 taiµ MASS1 P0041110 1177 PROJECT FlLE N0.005402 ELECTRICAL DETAILS 2 OF K 4'-0" 0 1 I I I, �i CONTRACTOR TO CAULK OPENING AT FITTING. "CLAM SHELL" HEAVY WALL IRON CASTING 2" LETTERING WITH Y6 REVEAL SA STREET LIGHT POLE TO MATCH EXISTING POLES ON EXISTING SALEM/BEVERLY BRIDGE 3"x5" OVAL HANDHOLE WITH b GROUND LUG AT 5' ?CIL?. \ INSTALL BASE HALF WITH AJ ACCESS COVER OPPOSITE m fV RAISED 1" FOR LEVELING POLE I � HOT OR BO GALVANIZED ro I I CONDUIT ANCHOR BOLTS AND NUTS M tl"— ' II 5" MIN. BOLT �yl ELECTRICAL HANDHOLE EXTENSION — — FINISHED GRADE I I I I I I I BASE HALF SECTION b 4'I-- N i PLAN DETAIL A LIGHT POLE MOUNTED ON CONCRETE FOUNDATION OR RETAINING WALL NF 6 LIGHT POLE MOUNTED ON CONCRETE e FINISHED C7 FINISHED FOUNDATION OR RETAINING WALL GRADE GRADE 0 V-6" MIN, FINISHED GRADE o `w FOR CONCRETE FOUNDATION « DETAILS SEE STANDARD DRAWINGAWING SO SD 3.013 FOR CONCRETE FOUNDATION FOR RETAINING WALL FOUNDATION DETAILS SEE MASSH$ SO 3. DETAILS SEE SHEEP 98 STANDARD DRAWING SD �I 013 FOR RETAINING WALL FOUNDATION W DETAILS SEE SHEEP 98 i a j w TYPICAL LIGHT POLE — CITY STANDARD TYPICAL LIGHT POLE — CITY STANDARD TYPICAL LIGHT POLE — ELEVATED ROADWAY LIGHTING s 8 SINGLE LUMINAIRE ALONG BIKEWAY LSIDEWALK SINGLE LUMINAIRE ��m $ (STA. 237+70 TO STA. 276+10) (STA 253+50 TO STA 270+50) (STA 277+60 TO STA. 285+10) rcwum NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE FJM2g I� Will SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS IMA rm.uo vxa.w encu sxm roiu vux . sr[Ers MASS12004111 177 vaaccr v.c na 005402 LANDSCAPING PLAN 1 1 OF 6 . CTI - LIMIT OF WORK STA. 234+00 MEET EXIST. N 555818.69 jA - E 762363.36 \ (: " M r r SALEM,.' SFATION r i ::. f�C' _ '� r• � \� I � , y,- rr .. .�n ...t`-!, + r: - ./�z%�-_ __....b Zrr .� s ,r�. '1101, .. 'v � _ _ v .� •—: hay&rs'x,.b�® o��t` �3 � x3 _� STs e� o-" nn _�..� a .da r< n - 77 STON 30 'PSWIC LEGEND UJ PROPOSED DECIDUOUS TREE \ J TREE SHRUB MASS "_- ' PERENNDLS/GROUND OVE ARS -- D X PROPOSED VINE m AN ' - �� SEL-0INO LIMT OF WETLAND PLANTING STAWQRK 1 -. p �\ -SEE SHEET NO. 116 FOR PLANT LIST 'r u MEET EXIST.• *x\ ------ --- F7 SEEDING .SEE SHEET NO. 117 FOR PLANTING NOTES N 555568.90 x o E 76271.5.14 \ -r 'r /.�y�%/- --=/r ,1 JEFFER5QN AT SALEM -- \ T (PRPP. BN O )THER .... ey'\%\ / HT."--,NO. 112 m � 1 '9 PA G ., ;, r _. r _ . � *4\AR �1 r / 4bK LIMIT OF WORKv'A00•,HSO 700 H50 STA.' 10+70 8 IG 8 IG m x •i V � ' .r' -MEET EXIST. 5 �k _ Z , x 4 w o 40 100 200 ! � "�� v� 4 AR�— �mm FEET - zw m 2 1"= 40' HORIZONTAL ��w§ i SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS nAiE M.M P .W PBCAL — — rcw No. yr MASS P004 112 1177 aamcct FlIE tq.005402 COM. ON $HT. N0. 111 CONT. ON SHT. N0. 1-1-31 LANDSCAPING PLAN 2 OF 6 i "JEFFERSON AT SALEM _ � �r ) ' L ?�9 / DEVELOPMENT.PROJECT (PROP. BY ETHERS) r i � 9 15 AR 0 ORO!` c. SEEDING / a9 / ,, ' / > ' ^; •-'� 4 CK NP JF_FtERSON AT SALEM', i9 4.%9'H SO ' �, / �� v �'i° DEVELOPMENT PROJECT ai / (P,ROP. BY OTHER-3) � LIMIT.OF WORK ',>? �� 700 HSO 100 HSO \ .30 1 -- . , r'I 9 STA. 10+70 ,, e Ic a Ic —' , `. / MEET EXIST s � 09 HSO ' FJ� 2 W'_ 10D 16 � P' 1' x 4 AIR \y249 el 18 244 245 246 i-I' \ OR ,_-V- - f p� —+ �@ �. . 18 OR 00 HSO 8 AR r rrt °• K _ 4 ' 20 RA 120 HA 1SE1'PmN0 ��.. 40 RA LIMIT OF WORK-- y STA. 1+10 S AR MEET EXIST. u- ) C 1 I 3 AR\ `'EEDING i0 ARA iYP_ _ 100 HSO O' .:.30 RAA\ *c s r ' WORK *6+00 • E �a2G P E 6$x329', 8 I LEGEND 4, 1` 'err--..�. ' ,T Bhp/pG M ! E 4E (� PROPOSED DECIDUOUS TREE �J TREE m l_ o ""EDSUB MASS/ PERENNIALS/GROUNDCOVERS < PROPOSED VINE V WETLAND PLANTING 0 40 100 200_PEET =8Pm n *SEE SHEET N0. 118 FOR PLANT UST a 40' HORIZONTAL 6 El SEED ING *SEE SH€ET N0. 777 FOR PLANTING NOTES ion - a SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS $V.TE "D.M 'MW HFlSCM. SXf£f IOTk YFM N0. SNEEiS MASS 2004 113 177 w w Fla No. 005402 LANDSCAPING PLAN 3 OF 6 LEGEND -.00000 C� TREE OSED DECIDUOUS TREE NOR TH RI VER " ® PROPOSED SHRUB MASS/ PERENNIALS/GROUNDCOVERS e PROPOSED VINE jai WETLAND PLANTING •SEE SHEET NO. 118 FOR PLANT LIST _ ,_-__ - ,,. SEEDING --' -' rSEE SHEET N0. 117 FOR POINTING NOTES JA _ J 1 y, Y 5' T _ - _4 T !' CONT ON SHT NO rq T4 c __ _' d - DINGr � ,,, - - 15OR IYP. 3 5 HH.LA... NO ACCESS OI / o 2 A. ' 255 t_ 2506 x 257 ��.� 258 1-- C3-- —« I— O-- '-'� _ - _•. _6'PA' 15 AR , / 10 PA 9 PROTECT EXISTING PLANTS 61 -JEFFERSON AT SALEM" GEVELOPM€NT PROJECT (PROP BY OTHERS) 16 AR y CONT ON $HT. NO. 112 P� / -I 15 AR ,D .. T K.� w \ SEEDING.. tYP i " "JEFFERSON AT SALEM' m a SK - OEVELOPMENT PROJECT - t= - i 09 H50 100 HSJ4 CK �� 00 �� (PROP. ETHERS) z - T m 09 HSO vp 141 nl --,a 18 OR 40 100 200 mm FEET rcwwm �� pwo 4 1"- 40' HORIZONTAL zo�i� a SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS rto:uo raa.No M15- sN0n. roEuLECEN� R WASSI2004 114 177 PROPOSED DECIDUOUS TREE am+�T me 005402 TREE LANDSCAPING PLAN 4 O 6 PROPOSED SHRUB MASS/ PERENNIALS/GROUNDCOVERS • PROPOSED VINE WETLANO PLANTING -SEE SHEET N0. 118 FOR PLANT LIST EjSEEDING -SEE SHEET NO. 117 FOR PLANTING NOTES NOR TH RI VER (TioaL) CONT. ON SHT. N0. 113 CONT. ON SHT. NO. 115 ___ _ _ �, - 9 P$ '- ac _` --------------- -------- -------------- BOSTON _ ___. ___ T __ T -_ n _ T__ T_____ PROP. 2003 S.H,LO. - u 257 258 '� 259 260 -" 261 1262 -c --- 263 x� 264 265 _ 266 267 —C , X9. I E OR ij OR _ 2003 5 PA PROTECT� 6 RM �, ', a- x'.r t6i PRQP 2003 EXISTING 6 CAI \ Y �� 11 ARA _- �3 4 RM' CI LAYOUT Y rt Y) aY 5 AR` _,.,p - `--- --� ROP. 200 CAI o SM/ PLANTS 7 SJ �- ' �`"ti�c. : P' LAYOUT 3 OP 1 II aJ .J, w ] - SEEDING TYP. ;r - SJ > PROTECT _ - L' xNUN.xx -_ rl +iXJe '•- - rH ' 5 OP 820 HH _ a ��4FT . 7460 HH r - ., v L- s EXISTNI t 5_) V �r`1 v "( �.d 0 HN. PLANTS T WO 9 SJ 1 / y 2 'T I - a �2r� - ro 11 !01�J��xJYA r 1n1 9 CAI _ 1l - _ , £ 1 « .1 'PROTECT`. - - { ` t I ...... 1 t It� sTxl „: )1\` /✓� - EXISTING r r 2 OP' pl - t ; e y,w r nt.e PLANTS x F 1 -I A -Ct �h �y ( f11 ` _ .-N.._ V vj O Lc1 / 4 RC Cz ;n r ET :. = RR s yT. z a Z sl V7 r rf. i p0 I� y IIF' , i x i69 � .ra 1 A 1 'i'60 I r v/ vJ� vIy !Vn'� < w, Yl IwSlli (x1 � .jA=a� 1 � +{` m _ _ r2zO— Otti1 p x S1� �., r xW( �L� � /. 61i m m r ory m 0 40 100 -____ __ 200 A? — FEET aWxm o i"= 40' HORIZONTAL O�V h ---I1 I SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS SG1E iEp.uD PRW.N fISGLL SN TObI YPM W. of MASS 004115 F177 PNau.T ma Na 005402 / Z ",;I. )/ _� :'.. x^,s- -N r x )�l�c ... LANDSCAPPII 6 PIAN QF1'tz F 1 n �I r• (( LND `1 �� LEV, NO X116 2 / �� ' (1 PROPOSED DECIDUOUS TREE NOR OR TH ER �M� AVENUE „1 L TREE r r v I % _1 # 4SL1N 111 IftY 4i WF PROPOSED SHRUB DCOVE PERENNIALSJGROUNOGOVERS "� 1 1J�11 = 52 HH PROPOSED VINE i - 61996 CM P`xge\ ��Cw ""- _IL_.. tr T SET 70 SJ « ou.R I 61 "68 HM S K S.JN r !. a SEEDING C £ WETLAND'PLANTING - 158 R �: 1Yp 6 LT «SEE SHEET NO. 118 FOR PLANT LIST e 65 SJ NO ACCESS - 0 SEEDING «SEE SHEET NO. 117 FOR PLANTING NOTES ,' }:+`~' ' ' ROP: 20O�'� 9 CONT. ON SHT. NO. 114 PROP. 2003 S.H.L.O. - NO ACCESS % NO ACCESS_:. _ _ 281 ___ ___--- 279 �- w : 27B --`�- NO ACCESS 277 _1— - 76 _ --E3-- — _ u 269 __ 2 247 HF 9 270 -- 271 ____ __.-_ 272 _______ _-_'__ 293 ____-_ _.. 27A . 2705--_ —`i � —� 41`1 r PROP. 2003 S.H LO 9 NO ACCESS-, — — _._ — m 254 JH --� ____________ PROP 2003. Cltt LAYOU SEEDING 242 RT rc#at ) PROP 2003 5 PA CITY LAYOUT AT TOP 1YP. U�p OF WALL 1 A181v1 f 1 ) I zl 1AiKNG I -I .L'2loJao .� l5i0�A fI r F O IA 1 - z it u. 10 PA wc�' l wobU 17 f i 7 L 1 1 �v :� o 1/ r I r - 1 3�k1 _I S r I d _ 51, fs a. sr 11A AV fAYPI ,___ 1 xy I1I � « __ _ "OVY .1 L n rsck h4' _ :. �1 AI-A'1151' . 1146X(6 . a _ r V couRr 1,-1r o ao 100 zoo Qvc-ppY -iTPFFr . . s . I . ._.-�.,;<Rsa,ll 1I, � °d'o"ym o FEET 3VUO � cuu a 1`- 40' HORIZONTAL SALEM BRIDGE STREET BYPASS m•rz r>a,wo rncu.xo roru rzin xo. sHccn MASS k004111-6 177 ' vaa[er•cc.w 005402 LANDSCAPING PLAN 6 OF LEGEND " 0PROPOSED DECIDUOUS TREE ',,_J TREE NOR TH RI VER '00PROPOSED SHRUB MASS/ r PERENNIALS/GROUNDCOVERS s'w�a (TIDAL) PROPOSED VINE CONT. ON SHT. N0. 115 r" WETLAND PLANTING { LIMIT OF ROADWAY ti CONSTRUCTION WORK SEEDING -SEE SHEET NO, 118 FOR PLANT LIST ' STA. 286+03 a -SEE SHEET NO. 117 FOR PLANTING NOTES MEET 560037.59 7 E 764556.26 BOSTON CdM �it�AtL4 r BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORb _ Z 183 HH _ ... .. 5 r ET s 0 SV OL'.RT 5 ms 48 HN� MASSACHUSETTS BA --- $ ��--.- T IPSWICH .. u PROP, 2003 S.N.L O.�NO CS — _ _ _ —_ — — — — a - — 2&6 287 —288 9 4 289 290 291 1.39_ —g— 183 PT $ ry u c - 280 281 282 253 284 285 2 -0 -0 as 287 288 / 1 —I— —I —O --, �— —P— 0 —1— m NO ACCESS ________________________ Q —EXIST. BRIDGE STREET BYPASS CONSTRUCTION @ rv� (BY OTHERS) N r Ln m W � STA. 288+44.24 BRIDGE STIR PY � STREET PASS @ OPP ' - STA 288+41.39 EXISTING RIDGE'STREET BYPASS Q, 30.00' LTME -"- -' m -- , 0 40 100 200 yymm N7 77 FEET ¢em n �a W 4y i"= 40' HORIZONTAL SALEM _ - - - BRIDGE STREET BYPASS 7M.uD PRN.x0 IISGL kT TOfsL YFAR NO. $x- MASS 004 117 177 NLE No.005402. . INSTALL TREE PLUMB LANDSCAPINGDETAILS TOP OF ROOTBALL SHALL BEAR SEED AND EROSION CONTROL MATTING ON 1 OF 3 SAME RELATIONSHIP TO FINISHED ALL SLOPES 2:1 OR GREATER, TYPICAL GRADE AS TO PREVIOUS EXISTING SEE PLANS FOR TREATMENT ' GRADE 1:1 TRANSITION SLOPE BETWEEN SEEDED IN ADJACENT AREAS ROOT FLARE SHALL BE EXPOSED; AREA AND EARTH.SAUCER MULCH SHOULD NOT BE WITHIN - - 4" OF TREE TRUNK PLANT TREE PLUMB 3" BARK MULCH PLACE BALL ON SUBSOIL. REMOVE AND PULL BARK MULCH BACK AWAY FROM - DISCARD BURLAP EXCEPT UNDER BALL. - TRUNK OF TREE REMOVE ALL SYNTHETIC SOIL WRAPPING ANCHOR VINES TO MATERIALS (TREATED BURLAP, NYLON 3" BARK MULCH NOISE BARRIER WITH TWINE, WIRE BASKETS, ETC.) AND DISCARD APPROVED TIES EXCAVATE SUBSOIL AS REQUIRED a - 3" HIGH EARTH SAUCER AROUND TREE PIT PROPOSED NOISE BARRIER - - TO PLACE ROOTBALL TO PROPER .ELEVATION. PLACE ROOTBALL I" PLANTING SOIL MIX WEED BARRIER, INSTALLED DIRECTLY ON SUBSOIL I� 11- BEFORE PLANT MATERIAL EXCAVATE HOLE TO DIAMETER UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL 3X WIDER THAN ROOTBALL PLANTING SOIL MIX.. SEE BACKFILL HOLE WITH PLANTING 1:1 TRANSITION SLOPE BETWEEN EARTH I�'�, 2' MIN. SPECIFICATIONS SOIL MIX AS SPECIFIED SAUCER AND SEEDED AREA 7" - .. _ UNDISTURBED R COMPACTED K MULCH AS SPECIFIED SUBG U BED 0 CO C E 3 BAR � � �� PLACE ROOTBALL ON UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL - - SUBGRADE UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE .. LOAM `� 4I ; 12" WIDTH OF 12" NOTE: STAGGER TREE PITS TO AVOID 3-0' NOTE: - A` ROOTBALL THE AGGREGATION OF VERTICAL & 1. SPACING SHALL BE 3'-0" O.C. HORIZONTAL 1:1 SLOPES 2. PLANTS TO BEAR SAME RELATIONSHIP ED. EQ. EQ. p T - TO FINISHED GRADE AS TO NURSERY GRADE - TYPICAL DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING R� TYPICAL DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING ON SLOPE TYPICAL VINE PLANTING . NOT TO SCALE' LJ V lJ L NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE BULBS, SPACE AS SHOWN ON _ PLANT LIST PLACE SHRUBS PERPENDICULAR 3" BARK MULCH TO GRADE - - PLANTING MIX, WITH BONE MEAL PULL.BARK MULCH AWAY FROM BASE OF SHRUB - - - PERENNIAL GROUND COVER, .PLACE CROWN ABOVE MUCH SPACE AS SHOWN ON PLANT LIST 3" BARK MULCH 3" BARK MULCH PLANTING SOIL MIX /—SEE PLANS FOR TREATMENT OF - - 1 ADJACENT AREAS _ T I I LOAM TPLANTING MIX I777, —PLACE ROOTBALL ON UNDISTURBED OR COMPACTED SUBSOIL DEPTH OF 0 TBALL L I I UNDISTURBED SUBSOIL '7/� T rr NOISE BARRIER pIAME2 LIME 6" OR 1/2 DIA. OF ROOTBALL, WHICHEVER IS GREATER. a - BULB PLANTING P R NNIA /GROUND COVER PLANTING T DRAINAGE TROUVINES TYPICAL BULB/PERENNIAL/GROUND COVER TYPICAL SHRUB PLANTING BETWEEN VINES - PLANTING ``� Nor To scALE LOAM PLANTING BERM NOT TO SCALE tn TO CONNECT ROOT PLANTING NOTES ZONE TO ADJACENT LOAM 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUPPLY ALL NEW PLANT MATERIAL IN QUANTITIES ' 8. PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BEAR THE SAME RELATIONSHIP TO GRADE AS SUFFICIENT TO COMPLETE THE PLANTING SHOWN ON THE PLANT LIST. IT BORE TO PREVIOUS GRADE IN THE NURSERY. CRUSHED STONE TROUGH IF DISCREPANCIES EXIST BETWEEN THE NUMBER OF PLANTS DRAWN ON THE 9` PULL STONE FROM STEMS PLANTING PLAN AND THE NUMBER OF PLANTS IN THE PLANT LIST, THE 9. PREPARE ALL SHRUB PLANTING BEDS TO A DEPTH AS SHOWN ON PLANTING m LOAM BERM PLANT LIST SHALL GOVERN. DETAILS ON THIS SHEET WITH PLANTING SOIL MIX (SEE SPECIFICATIONS). 2. ALL NEW PLANT MATERIAL SHALL CONFORM TO THE MINIMUM GUIDELINES 10. ALL PLANT BEDS TO RECEIVE 3" COMPACTED BARK MULCH. 9 ESTABLISHED FOR NURSERY STOCK PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION a OF NURSERYMEN, INC. ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE OF SPECIMEN - 11. ALL EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN SHALL BE PROTECTED DURING CONSTRUCTION.. QUALITY. PROTECTION TECHNIQUES SHALL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE. - B '$• - 'k BY THE ENGINEER. - - y F y f 3. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE BALLED AND BURLAPPED OR CONTAINER-GROWN, m UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THE PLANT LIST, 12, ALL DISTURBED AREAS WHICH ARE NOT PAVED OR MULCHED SHALL BE SEEDED. w 3'<0„ d'+'P �,Py ANY AREAS OF SEEDING NOT'SPECIFIED ON THE DRAWINGS SHALL BE LAWN o 0, �� Y ;: +,.qgs* 4. ANY PROPOSED SUBSTITUTIONS OF PLANT SPECIES SHALL BE MADE ONLY SEED MIX. AFTER WRITTEN APPROVAL IS.OBTAINED FROM THE ENGINEER. C 13. ALL AREAS TO BE SEEDED SHALL RECEIVE SIX INCHES (6"j OF LOAM, AS 5. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE TAGGED AND APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER'S MEASURED AFTER COMPACTION. N SEE FOR VINE PLANTING REPRESENTATIVE AT THE NURSERY PRIOR TO DIGGING OR DELIVERY TO THE SITE. «. CRUSHED 14. PRUNE TREES IN ACCORDANCE "NTH THE SPECIFICATIONS. A VINE PLANTING A day T' CRUSHED STONE LAYER 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE AND VERIFY ALL EXISTING UTILITY LINES PRIOR ' , a TO PLANTING AND SHALL REPORT ANY CONFLICTS TO THE ENGINEER. 15. REMOVE ALL BURLAP & TWINE FROM TOP 1/3 OF SALL FOR B&B STOCK. 6 REMOVE ALL CONTAINERS FROM CONTAINER GROWN PLANTS PRIOR TO PLANTING. �gym w8'm ^o NOT TO SCALE a�uo n 7. LOCATION OF ALL PLANT MATERIAL SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO PLANTING. zo$u a " 'PAVER EDGE SALEM. BRIDGE STREET BYPASS HANOVER "TUMBLED BRICK" nnrt rto.uo ma;wa nscu sJ�T Nora RAKED MORTAR .JOINTS PAVER (OR APPROVED EQUAL) 00 uo. s77 ON PTOHAND T BED, MASS 004 118 177 -4" THICK.GRANITE COBBLE STONE PAVERS SWEPT HAND TIGHT JOINTS - I UNTED AREA 2 COLORS: CHOCOLATE/TAN BLEND nnoascr Flm NO.005402 SOUTH MOUNTAIN SAND LANDSCAPING DETAILS MORTAR BED , . T" T N T ' 5 0 EDUS SETTING a a BED —X—=X 6' 4000 PSI 28 DAY CONCRETE SLAB WITH N ,g� •. / 2?„g„ �" ,., I Z' 8" DENSE GRADED CRUSHED TONE Lb' - 6K6 W2.9 % W2.9 WWM REINFORCEMENT � YI a.o�W�yavr",PS D S ED S fJ p 9" COMPACTED GRAVEL BORROW POLYETHY ENE PAVER EDGE Cl o q �' Illl r- til .IL—"=11f III L_''=11 RESTRAINT N GALV. STEEL I: _ O 9' COMPACTED SUBGRADE r� SPIKE _I II ,II � I h I I� COMPACTED SUBGRADE ITT . COBBLESTONE PAVERS CONCRETE UNIT PAVERS 1 NOT TO SCALE G NOT TO SCALE DECIDUOUS TREES ?¢ ITEM NO. SYM. Ott BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME HEIGHT CAL. NOTES STREET NAME SANDBLASTED ONTO 776,551 AR 147 1 Acer uorum 'October Glory' Maple — Red 'October Glo 3'-3.5" iN FACE OF ONE BOULDER AS �w _ PF-ARL APPROVED BY ENGINEER; FULL 'SIZE 776.527 ARA 34 Acer r.brnm 'Armstron ' Mo le.- Red 'Armstron ' 3'-3.5" '. STREET GRAPHIC TO BE PROVIDED BY - 777.733 JN 5 Ju Ions ni ra Black Walnut Y-3.5" ENGINEER 783.443 LT 6 Linodendron tuli ifera Tulip.Tree. Y-3.5". 783.468 NS 5 N ssa sylvatica Tupelo COBBLESTONE PAVERS 777.549 PA 68 Platonus ocenfolio 'Blood ood' Plane Tree — London 'Blood ood' 3"-3.5" 777.652 PN 6 Po ulas nigra 'Italica' Poplar — Block 3'-3.5" j. :d< X R. 777.141 OR 20 Quercus polustris Oak — Pin Y-3.5" Orb Io&0a0� a0d,O 777.043 OR 91 Quercus rubra Oak — Northern Red Oak 3'-3.5" O 0O 4 0 -. ORNAMENTAL TREES I al III— ,III'- —III III—III— ITEM N0. SYM. OTY BOTANICAL NAM - COMMON NAME HEIGHT . CAL. NOTES ITI—T—i i III—ITI i —ITI ITiI I I ITI 780.742 CK 18 Cornus kouso Dogwood — Japanese Single Stem 2"-2.5" 1I' WIDTH VARIES EVERGREEN SHRUBS ITEM NO. I SYM.I OTY I BOTANICAL NAME I COMMON NAME I HEIGHT I CAL. I NOTES 785.733 IG62 Ilex labra 'Caacto' Inkber — Compact 2'-3' ,3 BOULDER MARKER 787.081 RM m174 Rhododendron maximum 'Alba Rhododendron — Roseboy Alba24"-30" NOT TO SCALE DECIDUOUS SHRUBS ITEM NO. SYM. OTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME I HEIGHT CAL NOTES 790.833 CAI 20 Cornus alba 'Ivor Halo' Dogwood — Variegated 'Ivory Holo' 2'-3 790.263 CM 96 Cornus mos Dogoo — Cornelianche 2'-3' �. 795.300 HM 116 H drop eo macro h Ila 'Nikko Blue Hydrangea —Nikko Blue IT-24" RA 90 Rosa alba Rose — White Medelantl 7-0" 794.143 SJ 20 S iraea japonica 'Little Princess Sl — Little Princess 15"-18" Spread mo 792.433 5V 1135 1 Syringo vul oris Lilac — Common Purple 3-4 GROUND COVER/VINES o - ITEM N0. SYM. QTY BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME HEIGHT- CAL. NOTES 796.035 HH 7005 Hedem helix Baltica. Iv Vine — Baltic - I ilaf, 786.081 JH 1254 Juniperus horizontalis Bar Harbor Ii Juniper.— Bar Harbor 15:—18 1 1 24 O.C. a 796.039 1 PT 1425 Parthenocissus tricus idato I Ivy Vine — Boston I. gallon 4 9 PERENNIALS - ITEM N0. SYM. .Ott BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME HEIGHT CAL. NOTES 796.769 HSO 1038 Hemerocallis Stella.D.OroDaylil — Stella d Oro 1 gallon, 12 O.C. i m - WETLAND PLANTS a 796.441 CST 1180 Carex stricla Tussock Sedge tubers 2' O.C. 'o 790.643 CSS 26 Cornus alba 'Siberica' Dogwood — Siberian 2'-3' - - m 794.737 CA 20 Clethra olmfolio Summersweet Shrub 3'-4' z 795.157 IVs 60 Ilex verlicillata ! Winterber — Female 24-30 Plant 4 female to I male 795.153 IVA 15 ilex verticillate m Winterber — Male 24"—JO" Plant 4 female tot mole t 792.200 LR 16 1 Lonicera fr rantissima Winter Honeysuckle 18'-24" m yam,° PLANT LIST NOT TO SCALE L I EQUAL EQUAL SALEM s-a 5 5 6-a _ 'BRIDGE STREET' BYPASS S AWE 1111 AD PR . 40 °ISCK SHEET TOTIJ. YEN N0. SHEETS - / HOT MIX ASPHALT WALK. - MASS . 2004 119 177 T i PAwca oIEE uo. 005402 IRREGULAR EDGE GRANITE COBBLES LANDSCAPING DETAILS SURFACE FINISH TO COMPLY WITH ADA GUIDELINES 3 OF HT- STONE WITH ENGRAVED STREET.NAME l 118 ENGRAVING TO FACE STREET ' 4 TJ ��. H -3' - —SEE P ANS FOR SHRUB AND GROUNDCOVER 20'-0' SPECIt�S AND QUANTITIES VERIFY FIELD CONDITION PRIOR TO M I"' COMMENCING WORK AND REPORT WT-1 1?8 8"x9" UNIT PAVERS: COLOR 1 ANY DISCREPANCIES TO THE ENGINEER _- } CONFIRM COLOR WITH LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT i..' �T� i� -1 2 8"x9" UNIT PAVERS: COLOR 2 g•_0•• 5•_0" 5•_0•• 5•_p•• CONFIRM COLOR WITH LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT HT= . _.r NOTE: I r _ HT= . '. �' 1 I'"I- - INSTALL MIRROR/REVERSE LAYOUT AT EVERY OTHER INTERSECTION AS DIRECTED IN THE FIELD BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. T MtJ2 1 C b I in 1'-8" 2 NATURAL STONE BOULDERS c 1 _ 119 SIZES TO BE SIMILAR 70 THOSE INDICATED ON THIS DRAWING. q• 3•_ STONES TO BE APPROVED IN THE - q,^ q3•_q^ q: 4 ' 3.- .. 4. 3..-4. 4, FIELD BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. GRANITE CURB FLUSH GRANITE CURB 158 GRANITE BOLLARD, TYP. . 148 GRANITE PIER, TYP. END OF ESREAR IINPHEIGHT STREET ENLAMENAN BFOFBCAG 1 GRANITE BOLLARDS AND PIERS AT CEMETERY WALL- ELEVATION NOT TO SCALE .. NOTE: REFER TO SHEET 118, DETAIL 3 FOR METHOD OF PLACING ROCK IN PAVED AREA PLACED GRANITE BOULDER BURIED TO MINIMUM 1/3 ITS DEPTH i EXISTING GRADE M < rN AREA EXCAVATED TO ACCOMODATE GRANITE PIER WITH �¢ _ BOULDER AND BACKFILLED WITH ENG AVING 8".�- g .wQ x> _ _ EXISTING SOIL io THERMAL FINISH I 3•• SAWN & THERMAL FINISH TOP GRANITE BOLLARD, COMPACTED SUBGRADE SAWN THERMAL FINISH ON SPLIT FACE ALL SIDES NOTE - 1_p'• FINIS GRADE. FRONT AND BACK SPLIT Tn FINISH GRADE. WIDTH VARIES ROCK AND LOCATION TO.BE SEE PLAN FOR FACE ON SIDES. SEE SEE PLAN FOR o SPECIFICATION FOR 12" APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE MATERIALS MATERIALS AN OF SPLITTING. I TOLERANCE 0 L - ARCHITECT IN THE FIELD. _ _ v m - - PITCNTOP OF V. � �... PITC TOP OF • 9 .. ..'q= ° : 5b0' ° CONCRETE NATURAL STONE BOULDER 5 FON RETE ,� gd ?� � FOOT NGFOOTING NOT TO SCALE - - QJ :;'°Q3 i - - CON RETE 1-�--��— b ° CONCRETE FOOT NG .LJ_� I •°'.�' FOOTING COMPACTED GRAVEL �' ro COMPACTED GRAVEL _ A `: ° BORROW ALL o° 'r edd BORROW ALL AROUND m ,. ': o� AROUND ..... ... _LICOMPACT COMPACTED 3/4" _ 1CRUSHEDESTONE m - q` '�a°°� • CRUSHED STONE- n rrCr1�, =1'U COMPACTED n�1 f fl 1 T F,- 1'? COMPACTED SUBGRADE _ SUBGRADE = GRANITE PIER GRANITE BOLLARD 4 NOT TO SCALE 5 NOT TO SCALE 'MW ZODU 1 SLATE fID.n10 PROD.00. flS AI WE' MA4 .. - ASS.j NFA 120041 121 177 - Pflwwr P0.E"o. 008402 BRIDGE STREET .237 - CONSTRUCTION. BASELINE .236+95t ' - (SEE CIVIL PLANS) - REMOVE EXIST. WHEEL GUARD, CURB AND SIDEWALK. NNE" EMOVE EXIST END POST TV & REPLACE W/NEW END EX/ST EXS�' POST r REMOVEEXIST. END POST A B REPLACE w/NEW END I. EXIST. CURB LINE REMOVE AND DISPOSE EXIST. PROP. CURB LINE POST, R&R PLAQUE. - REMOVE AND DISPOSE EXIST BRIDGE RAIL AND POSTS (SEE CIVIL PLANS) - BRIDGE RAIL L AND POSTS , PARAFFIN JOINT - PROPOSED SIDEWALK EXPANSION JOINT - PARAFFIN JOINT � �,. .0. ., .0 ❑,.:.., O ❑,. St .-.❑ .. -n '_ter , . }. o. ,„ O �•j / . u .i R 0 I O I I ,,� PROP. MODIFIED END POST J y PROP. TRAFFIC SIGNAL STRAIN Ybw SPACE HIGHWAY GUARD POLE FDN. ATTACHED TO EXIST. __. j. , , SPACE HIGHWAY GUARD POSTS HI AVOID 2A" �" I TUNNEL STRUCTURE LEXIST, 20" WATERMAIN POSTS TO AVOID 20" E I -r (6'-0" x 3'-6") - B E%IST. META STATION ACCESS TO REMAIN WATERMAIN WATERMAIN a - ; PLATFORM TO REMAIN ` I I tl5 I A r ' PROP, MODIFIED END POST _ - ='T -- _ EXIST. ENTRANCE TO MBTA 'a PROP. CONCRETE CP-PL2 BARRIER I -- STATION TO REMAIN - ' i 'W/SAFETY RAILING AND 1"x 1" MESH .COLOR GALVANIZED BLACK (TYP.) _ 4 .T EXIST. MBTA TRACK GENERAL PLAN SCALE: 1/8:. EXIST. MBTA CANOPY 141'-7 3 4" OVERALL - -'-< i 71._4,: 20'-11 3/4" / 49'-4" 12" 12" I 12" B EQUAL SPACES 12" 9 EQUAL SPACES All 21'-6" 21;-6" 15-3 1/Z" 20'-0" PROP. CONCRETE CP-PL2 8ARRIER w/SAFETY RAILING AND 1"xt" MESH COLOR GALVANIZED BLACK (TYP.) NOTE: ------ ----- - - "- -' - FOR SECTIONS A-A AND B-B, - _ - SEE SHEET 3 OF 6. LJ U U _ /.. 1._B './� g g ` �U LJ NOTE: SPACE HIGHWAY.GUARD NOTE: EXIST. PIPE POSTS TO AVOID EXIST. . - SPACE.HIGHWAY GUARD EXIST. PIPE 20" WATERMAIN SUPPORT POSTS At AVOID 20, SUPPORT BRACKET EXIST. 20"AIN WATERMAIN OVER TUNNEL '-4 TO REMAIN t WATERMAIN (TYP.) ( ) 23'_��» --�� PROP CONCRETEND PL2 BARRIER'. EXIST MBTA TRACK w/SAFETY RAILING AND 1"x 1" MESH APPROXI EXIST. GROUND (T COLOR GALVANIZED BLACK (TYP.) EXIST. ENTRANCE TO MBTA LMAINTAIN EXIST. BRIDGE BACK 3 STATION OF SIDEWALK GRADE (TYP.) ELEVATION ey.x PROP. TRAFFIC SIGNAL STRAIN SCALE: 1/e" s 1'-0" POLE FDN. ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION a' : 8 (SEE SHEET 3 OF 6) DATE DESCRIPTION USE ONLY PRINTS OF LATEST DATE "foo s �Nwa -01-017 SHEET 2 OF 6 SHEETS, BRIDGE N0. S (■) ao�� g INTERMEDIATE - _ SEE TYPICAL RAILING RAILING BAR 1" x 1" x 9 GA'WW MESH PANEL ATTACHMENT- . 02"x 1" COLOR GALVANIZED BLACK DETAIL THIS SHEET nEcu EXCfT io*« ETASn iFO.AIO.PROJ.HO. KAP 1 SXER MASS. NFA 2004 124 177 GUARD RAIL POST SPACING- - RAILING CIRCLE 03" O.D TOP RAILING BAR ❑1 "xt " BAR PRmRCT mrxo. 005402 f1 R NG ❑2"x r� ( EXTRA ST 0 A . � � 7" O.D. (TYP.) 1., - NOTES: -- 1. ALL DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE HORIZONTAL. - 2. AFTER THE PRECAST CONCRETE WALL PANELS HAVE BEEN ERECTED BUT ro TOP OF SIDEWALK PARAFFIN BEFORE THE WALL CAPS ARE PLACED, FINAL MEASUREMENTS SHALL BE TAKEN I OR WEARING SURFACE JOINT A BY THE CONTRACTOR AND ANY FINAL ADJUSTMENTS TO THE RAIL SYSTEM SHALL BE MADE AT THE SHOP PRIOR TO SHIPMENT. BOTTOM RAILING BAR 12" MIN. TO \ 3. ALL RAILS SHALL BE PARALLEL TO GRADES AT TOP OF WALL, AND ALL POSTS .END-POST 02"xi" PARAFFIN JOINT RAILING MAIN POST `RAILING BAR END-POST. SHALL BE PLUMB. 03"x3"x�6" Y," DIAMETER 4, EXPANSION PROVISIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED NEAR WALL EXPANSION JOINTS H.S.S. (TYP.) (SOLID ROUND) . . ' AND AT 50 FOOT MAXIMUM SPACING. ELEVATION 5. PLATES, BARS AND BALUSTERS SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS.OF ASTM M709 GRADE 36. SCALE: 3/8" a 1'-O" GUARDRAIL 3" O.D. 6. PIPE RAILS AND RINGS SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM A53 TYPE S. 7. H.S.S. SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF ASTM A501 GRADE 8, B. ANCHOR BOLTS, NUTS AND WASHERS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ASTM DESIGNATION A307, 9. ALL METAL POSTS AND RAILING ASSEMBLIES SHALL BE HOT-DIPPED GALVANIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM A123. 10. ALL HARDWARE SHALL BE GALVANIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM A153. 11. PREPARATION AND ASSEMBLY OF MATERIALS FOR WELDING SHALL CONFORM TO THE AWS STRUCTURAL WELDING CODE ANSI/AWS 01.5. 12. THE RAILING SYSTEM SHALL BE GALVANIZED AND PAINTED USING AN EPDXY MASTIC COATING SYSTEM. WITH A SEMI-GLOSS BLACK.ALIPHATIC.URETHANE _ FINISH COAT. 1'. x 1" x9CA WW MESH, COLOR GALVANIZED BLACK rL OF+RAILFINISHES: CHAIN LINK FABRIC SHALL RECEIVE A 4±1 MIL TGIC POLYESTER POWDER 'I - COAT FINISH. COLOR SHALL MATCH RAILING SYSTEM. Y FASTENERS SHALL BE PERMANENTLY COLORED TO MATCH THE 45' NON-SHRINK LEVELING RAILING SYSTEM. GROUT AS REQUIRED _ 4er Orr. iv 1`•.' 2 r,r 2 Hr 5r., GALV. %" 0 A325 n 1�6 DIA. HOLE - H,S. BOLTS W/ FOR �" 0 A325 _ m LOCK-WASHER (TYP.) H.S. BOLTS W/ ' r LOCK=WASHER (TYP.) Bx8x�" cm HSS 3x3x 6" BASE PLATE (TYP,). MATERIALS:EXTRUSIONS & PLATES —ASTM B 221, ALLOY 6061-T6 tH%0LE DIA' CHAIN LINK FABRIC —ASTM B 221, ALLOY 6061-T94 8"' SELF-TAPPING SCREWS —TYPE 304 STAINLESS STEEL ANCHOR BASTM A 325 GALVANIZED ASE PLATE (TYP.) 4' TEE BOLTS BOLTS ASTM A 307 GALVANIZED OR LAN ELEVATION TYPE 304 STAINLESS STEEL -i ATTACHMENT DETAIL g - NOT TO SCALE . T ta ' SECTION A- I ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION SCALE: 1)�" = 1'-0" DATE DESCRIPTION. room sI USE ONLY PRINTS OF LATEST DATE v wo SAFETY RAILING WITH PROTECTIVE SCREEN SHEET S OF 6 SHEETS, BRIDGE N0, S-01-017 (_) i