Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-53.-2-21, 25, 25.1, 27.2 * /o&' J FEB 0 r PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L, EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIA-NO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 July 17, 2001 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD George L. Penny, IV CIo Penny Lumber, Inc. P.O. Box 2067 Greenport, NY 11944 Re: Proposed Site Plan for Penny Lumber SCTM#1000-53-2-21,25, 25.1 & 27.1 The following took place at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, July 16, 2001: The final public hearing, which was held at 6:10 p.m., was closed. The following resolution was adopted: WHEREAS, this proposed site plan, to be known as site plan for Penny Lumber, is for a 5,400 square foot private warehouse and a future 5,400 square foot private warehouse; and WHEREAS, George L. Penny, Inc. is the owner of the property known and designated as Penny Lumber, Main Road, Greenport, SCTM#1000-53-2-21, 25, 25.1 & 27.1; and WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was submitted on January 25, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (6NYCRR), Part 617, makes a determination that this project is a Type II Action and not subject to the provisions of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA); and WHEREAS, a front and side yard setback variance was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals on June 7, 2001; and Penny Lumber - Pa,qe Two - July 17, 2001 WHEREAS, this site plan, last revised March 27, 2001, was certified by the Building Inspector on July 16, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Committee has approved the elevation drawings on June 26, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse the final survey, dated July 14, 2001, subject to a one year review from date of building permit. Enclosed please find 2 copies of the approved site plan; one for your records and one to be submitted to the Building Department when you apply for your building permit. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. --Very truly yours, Chairman Eno. Cc: Building Dept. Tax Assessors LASER FICHE FORM I Proiect Type: Site Plans ~ SCTM # 1000 - 53-2-27.2,21,25.2,27 ! Project Name: Penny Lumber Acc Building i Location: Main Road Hamlet: Greenport ]Applicant Name: George Penny Owner Name: Penny, George Zone 1: LI Zone 2: Zone 3: ~licaition Received Date: 6/28/2001 Approval Date: 7/16/2001 !County Filing Date: i ADDITIONAL SUBDIVISION INFORMATION A date indicates that we have received the related information lC and R's · i Homeowners Association · 'R and M Aqreement: [~ SITE PLAN ?resubmlssion conference (',ViLhin 50 ,.lays of written request) Cornplele application received (~vithin 4 months c)f presul), conference) Application reviewed al work session (~vithin 10 (Inys of receipt) Applicant advised of necessary rev sions (within .~0 days o£ review) Revised submission rece vel ~/bead Agency Coordinalion SEORA determination REFERRED TO: , ,,~ ....... ~oning Board Of Appeals (writ[en comments within 60 days of requesO d of Trustees ' Suffolk County Department of Planning Department of Transportation -State ~epartment of Transportation - County /~Sufrolk County DepOt I ea ti ~J~ X/'~ :,,e Commissio~ O~U 9rail Covenams and Piled Covenams and ReslricUon~ Land~cape plan Liahdn~ plan Curb Co~ approval 2!anntng Board SLte Plan Application APPLICANTS AFFIDAVIT STATE OF N~/YORK COUNW OF SUFFOLK ~ ~ ~ .~_V b~ng duly sworn, deposes and says that he resides at C_ in the S~ of New York, and that he is the owner ¢ ~e above prop~rW, or that he is the ~Tttle) (Specify whether Pa~ne~hlp or Corp ) which is hereby making application; that there are no existing structures or improvements on the land which are not shown on the Site Plan; that the title to the entire parcel, including all rights-of-way, has been clearly established and is shown on said Plan; that no part of the Plan infringes upon any duly filed plan which has not been abandoned both as to lots and as to roads; that he has examined all rules and regulations adopted by the Planning Board for the filing of Site Plans and will comply with same; that the plans submitted, as approved, will not be altered or changed in any manner without the approval of the Planning Board; and that the actual physical improvements will be installed in strict accordance with the plans submitted. Signe(~~~~ · Sworn to me ROBERT I. SCOTT, JR. Notary Public, State of New York Qualified in Suffolk County No 01SC472508~ 'term Expirea May Page 3 ]~l[mnmg Board Site Plan Application Total Land Area of Site (acres or square feet) .... Existing Use of Site ~_~0 (, in ~ · Proposed Uses on ~te. Show all u will have which use. If more than one use is proposed per building, indicate square footage of floor area that will be reserved per use. ~,7 '~-~-~ Gross Floor Area of Existing Structure(s) ~Oross F oor Area of Proposed Structure(s) -'~'%, I ~Percent of Lot Coverage by Building(s) .~o SC'~(--6~ercent of Lot for Pad(lng (where applicable) -- 'Percent of Lot for Landscaping (where applicable) Has applicant been granted a variance and/or special exception by ~.) CA Board of Appeals - Case cf & date __ h-¢ ~ Board of Trustees - Case cf & date ~,¢ y~ NY State Department of Environmental Conservation - Case cf & date. _ ~ ~1 Suffolk County Department Health Services - Case cf & date ~/k¢ v~ Case Number ~(~ ~ Name of Applicant _ j~/,aI 'Date of Decision _./~z ~ Expiration Date i~A ~l Other )~¢ ~q Will any toxic or hazardous materials, as defined by the Suffolk County Board of Health, be - stored or handled at the site? ~ F~, If so, have proper permits been obtained? /!4 ~ Name of issuing agency /~ ~ ~Number and date of permit Issued. NO ACTION IEXCAVATION 0£ CONST£UCTION) MAY BE UNDE£TAI(EN UNTIL APPROVAL OF SITE pLAN BY pLANNING BOA£D. VIOLATO£S ANE SUBJECT TO P£OSECUTION. Site Plan Applications Public Hearings Under the current site plan application procedure, the process for reviewing a site plan application is: a public hearing is not scheduled and held by the Planning Board until after, among other things, the site plan has received a stamped Health Department approval, The applicant shall now have the following options: I. To follow the established procedure, or 2. To have the Planning Board schedule and hold a public hearing on the site plan application and have the Planning Board vote on the proposed conditional site plan prior to the applicant receiving Health Departm, ent approval subject to the following conditions: A. The applicant hereby agrees and understands that if the site plan which receives stamped-Health Department approval differs in any way from the proposed conditional site plan on which the Planning Board held a public hearing and voted on, then the Planning Board has the right and option, if the change is material to any of the issues properly before the Planning Board, to hold a public hearing on this "revised" site plan application and review its conditional approval. B. The applicant agrees not to object to a new public hearing and Planning Board review of the revised application. Applicant Agreement on Site Plans. The applicant is aware of the terms of this approval and certifies to these terms by his/her signature below. SCTM~: ~000- ~ .~ ~ ,~Z ~ /I Appl~ ' Date The Town of Soutbold's Code of Ethics prohibits conflicts alert tile town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever acblon is necessary_ to avoid same. de'or'L6¢ L.,./':%-,-'u,-,---x.. __--_ (Last name,~ first llalne, middle initial, NATURE OF APPLICATION: (Check nil that apply. ) 'Fax grievance Variance Change of zone Approval of plat __ Otl,e,- (If "Other," name the activity.) owner~hip of (or employment Name of person employed by the Town of Southold Title or position Of that permon Describe the relationship between yourself (the applicant) and the town officer or employee. Either check tile appropriate line A) through D) alld/or describe in tile space p~ovtded. parent, or child is (check all that apply)~ A) sibling, the owner of greater than 5% of tile shares of the corporate stock of the applicant (when the applicant is a B) tile legal ou beneficial owner of a~y interest noncorporate entlty (when tile appllcant tm not corporation): C) an officer, director, partuer, or employee of tile DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSIIIP f4-16 2 (9/95)--7c 617.20 SEQR Appendix A State Environmental Quality Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Purpose: The full E^F is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a project or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequent- ly, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those who determine significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may not be technically expert in environmental analysis, In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be'aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance, The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby appticants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible enough to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts: Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic proiect data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3, Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially- large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE--Type I and Unlisted Actions Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this proiect: [] Part 1 [] Part 2 []Part 3 Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (PartS I and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and considering both the magnitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. a si nificant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant [:] B. Although the project could have g -- ............ utes described in PART 3 have been required, effect for this Unlisted Action oecause me mmgauu- ~,~a~ therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared.* , t [] C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impac on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. * A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions Name of Action Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead AgenCy Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Preparer (If'different from responsible office,) Date 1 PART 1--PROJECT INFORM ~ON Prepared by Project Sponsor NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant ~'ffect on the enviro'~ment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through IL Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. ADDRESS NAME OF OWNER (If different) NAME OF ACTION LOCATION OF ACTION (include Street Address, Municipality and County) NAME App I ANT PONSOR *t c, BUSIN E/S S TELEPHONE · I BUSINESS TE~LEPHONS DRESS CITY/PO OESCRI~ION OF ACTION STATE Please Complete Each Question-Indicate N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed lind undeveloped areas. 1, Present land use: I-IOrban I-Ilndustrial I-ICommercial I-1Forest I-IAgriculture [3Other 2. Total acreage of project area: c~ r (~ ? acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) Forested Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) Water Surface Area Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) Roads, buildings and other p,('ved surfaces Other (indicate type) 3. What is predominant soil type(s} on project site? a. Soil drainage: I-IWell drained % of site [=]Residential (suburban) I-1Rural (non-farm) C~ PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION acres ~ acres 0 acres acres O acres acres ('-) acres acres 0 .. acres acres [:3Moderately well drained _ % of site [3Poorly drained % of site b. If any agricultural land is Involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NY' Land Classification Systemi' acres. (See I NYCRR 370). 4. Are there bedrock outcroppl~gs on project slte~ EYes /~No a. What is depth to bedrock! (in feet) 2 5' Approximate percentage of proF ~roject site with slopes 7010% __ % [~10-15% % [~]15% or greater % ~ Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the NationM Registers of Historic Places? E)Yes ,,~No 7 Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? E3Yes ~,[,~No 8 What is the depth of the water table?~'~'~10 (in feet) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? E3Yes 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? E]Yes 11 Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? E]Yes ~qo According to Identify each species 12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e.. cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) C]Yes ~No Describe 13. Is the project si~e presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? OYes ~%1o If yes, explain 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? F1Yes /~o 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: ~ ~ ' a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name ~ /Z)i b. Size (In acres) 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? f~Yes OHo a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow Connection? OYes ONo b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? I-lYes i-INo 18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 2S-AA, Section 303 and 304? I-]Yes ~[~1o 19. Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 617? OYes {~klo ' 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? I-lyes B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (flu in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor ~ , (~ ~7 acres, b, Project acreage to be developed: ~-~ · k~ '~ acre*s initially; c:~ , ~, ~ acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped ~ acres. d. Length of project, in miles: ~ k~' (if appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed. %; f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing ~ O ; proposed ,~ O g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour. · (upon' completion of project)? h. If residential: Number and type of housing units: One Family Two Family Multiple Family Initially Ultimately i, Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure ~ O height; _.~ wid.~th; j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? Condominium / ~ -~tength. ft. 2 How much natural materia~ : , rock. earth, etc) wdl be removed fron- , site? 3 Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? [Yes E]No [N/A a If yes, for what intended purpose is the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? [Yes [~No c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? []Yes [~No 4 How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed-from site? G acres 5 Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? OYes /~o 6~ If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction ~ months, (including demolition) 7. If multi-phased: a Total number of phases anticipated (number) b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 c. Approximate completion date of final phase ~(-~-'~'~" month ~__o o ,/ d. Is phase I functionally dependent on subsequent phases? OYes ,2~No 8. Will blasting occur during construction? [~Yes ~No 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction ; after project is complete 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this proiect 11. tons/cubic yards year. (including demolition) year. Will project require relocation of an'/projects or facilities? OYes ,~No If yes, explain 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? OYes a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? OYes ~,~No Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? Explain OYes ONo 15. 16. 17. I, project or any portion of project.~ated__in a 100 year flood plain? OYes Will the project generate solid waste? ~(~]Yes a. Ifyes, what is the amount per month . tons I ~--O Q._~.~fL~i C.. b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used?-~'l~Yes I-INo c. If yes, give name ; location d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? OYes e. If Yes, explain Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? I-lyes a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? b, If yes, what is the anticipated site life? years. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? OYes .~No ONo tons/month. 18. 19. Will project routinely produce ~dors (more than one hour per day)? C]Yes 20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? 21. Will project result in an increase in energy use? OYes If yes , indicate type(s) ' No OYes 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity gallons/minute. 23. Total anticipated water usage per day gallons/day. 24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? nYes /~No If Yes, explain 4 Approvals Required: Type Submittal Date City, Town, Village Board L~Yes L}No City. Town, Village Planning Board "~[J}Yes [3No City. Town Zoning Board I~Yes E3No City, County Health Department OYes [3No Other Local Agencies '"'~""~Yes (ZINg Other Regional Agencies CJYes E3No State Agencies E]Yes ~No Federal Agencies E]Yes E}No C. Zoning and Planning Information 1 Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision?~'~Yes [~No If Yes, indicate decision required: E}zoning amendment I-Izoning variance E]special use permit E]subdivisi site plan E]new/revision of master plan UIresource management plan E]other 2. What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? ~- ~ ~-A IA } --~.~. 1'~ 1./t-~ 9//[- I iA L 3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? 4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? ¢ }~ ~ {;~-- q ~ ~- } 5. What is the maximum potential dev~.°~.~enS~°f ihe site if devel°ped as permitted bY the pr°p°sed z°ning? ' - ' 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? ./~Yes E]No 7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a % mile r, adius of pro. posed action? 8. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoiningJsurroundin8 land uses within a 'A mile? .~es [-INo 9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land~ how many lots are proposed? a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? [3Yes 11. Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? I-lYes /~No a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? BYes [~No 12. Will the proposed action result in the generation .of traffic significantly above present levels? OYes ~No a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? ~)Yes E]No D. Intormatlonal Details Attach any additional information as ma,/be needed to clarify your proiect. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification i certlf that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge. / -- / It the a~ion Is~Co~l Area, and yo~ are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Fo~m be P with this ~ment. 5 Part 2--PROJECT IMPACTS AND THEh, MAGNITUDE Responsibility of Lead Agency General Information (Read Carefully) · In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question Have my responses and determinations been reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst · The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold o[ magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are §enerally applicable throughout the State and for most situations. But, for any specific proiect or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate for e Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3 · The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and have been offered as guidance. They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question · The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question · In identifying impacts, cgnsider long term, short term and cumlative effects Instructions (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 20 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. c, If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the Impact. If Impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If Impact will occur but threshold Is lower than example, check column 1. d. Identifying that an Impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily significant. Any large Impact must be evaluated In PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact In column 2 simply asks that It be looked at further, e. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the Impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3. f. If a potentially large Impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change(s) In the project to a small to moderate Impact, also check the Yes box In column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction Is not possible. This must be explained in Part 3. IMPACT ON LAND 1 · Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? ENO []YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 foot of lensth), or where the general slopes in the proiect area exceed 10%. · Construction on [and where the depth to the water table is less than 3 feet. · Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles~ · Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within 3 feet of existing ground surface. · Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more than one phase or stage. · Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year. · Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill. · Construction in a designated floodway. · Other impacts 2. Will there be an effect to any unique or unusual land forms found on the site1 (i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.)l-INO [YES · Specific land forms: 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change [] [] I-lYes [-iNo [] [] I-lYes [-]No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes I--INo [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []yes []No [] [] E3¥es []No [] [] I-lYes []No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] r-lyes []No IMPACT ON WATER Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? (Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the EnvironmentaJ Conservation Law, ECL) E]NO C]YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Developable area of site contains a protected water body · Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a protected stream. · Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. · Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. · Other impacts: 4~ will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water~' E]NO OYI-- S Examples that would apply to column 2 · A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. · Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. · Other impacts: 1 Small to Moderate Impact 2 3 Potential Can impact Be Large Mitigated By Impact Project Change [] []Yes []No [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] [~Yes ~lNo [] []Yes []No [] []Yes I-INo [] I~Yes I-]No 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity~' ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. · Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not have approval to serve proposed (project) action. · Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 gallons per minute pumping capacity. · Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water supply system. . · Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. · Liquid effluent will be conveyed off the site to facilities which presently do not exist or have inadequate capacity. · Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per day. · Proposed Action will likely cause siltation or other discharge into an existing body of water to the extent that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditions. · Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical products greater than 1.100 gallons. · Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water and/or sewer services. · Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage facilities. · Other impacts: 6. will proposed action alter drainage flow or patterns, or surface water runoffi' nNO CtYES Example~ that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action would change flood water flows. 7 [] [] []Yes •No [] [] []Yes []No [] [] DYes •No [] [] []-]Yes •No [] [] [-]Yes I-]No [] [] [~Yes ~]No [] [] DYes []No [] [] []Yes I"lNo [] [] []Yes []No I-~ [] []Yes ~]No [] [] []Yes []No I-I [] nYes []]No [] []Yes ["]NO · Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion. · Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns · Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway · Other impacts: IMPACT ON AIR 7. Will proposed action affect air quality~ ~]NO ~JYE$ Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given hour. · Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of refuse per hour. · Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. · Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed to industrial use. · Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial development within existing industrial areas. · Other impacts: IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? I-]NO [:]YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. · Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. · ^pplica{ion of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other than for agricultural purposes. · O(her impacts: 9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? C]NO I-lYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. · Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres of mature forest (over 100 years of .age) or other locally important vegetation. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10. Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? {:]NO r3YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · The proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture; vineyard, orchard, etc.) 8 1 2 b, ,alt to Potential Moderate Large impact Impact Can Impact Be Mitigated By Project Char,ge ~]Yes ~]No ~]Yes [~No [~]Yes {~]No [~Yes [~No ~]Yes [:]No J--]Yes [:]No I-lYes I--]No I-lYes I-]No [-]Yes ~lNo [:]Yes I-INo I-lyes [-INo I-lyes I--INo [-]Yes [~No [-]Yes I-]No ['-lyes I-INo I-lYes I'-I No · Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of agricultural land. · The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultural District, more than 2.5 acres of agricultural land. · The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural land management systems (e.g., subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches, strip cropping); or create a need for such measures(e.g cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) · Other impacts: IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11. Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? ONO OYES (If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.20, Appendix B.) Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether man-made or natural. · Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource. · Project components that will result in the elimination or significant screening of scenic views known to be important to the area. · Other impacts: IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, pre- historic or paleontological importance? ONO I-lYES Examples that would apply to column 2 * ProPOSed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register of historic places. · Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the project site. · Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. · Other impacts: ~' IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13. Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunitlesi' Examples that would apply to column 2 I-INO OYES · The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity. · A major reduction of an open space Important to the community. · Other impacts: 9 I 2 3 Small to Potential Can impact Moderate Large Mitigated B Impact Impact Project Chart, [] [] [:]Yes [~N [] [] [~Yes [] [] ~Yes ~]N [] [] [~Yes ~ ~ ~Ye$ ~ ~ ~Yes ~ ~ ~Yes D D DYes D D DYes D ~ DYes 14 IMPACT ON CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREAS Will Proposed Action impact the exceptional or unique character istics of a critical enwronmental area {CRA) established pursuant to subdivision 6 NYCRR 617 14(g) ~ [~NO E]YES List the enwronmental characteristics that caused the designation ot the CEA Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action to locate within the CEA? · Proposed Action will result in a reduction in the quantity of the resource? · Proposed Action will result in a reduction in the quality of the resource? · Proposed Action will impact the use, function or enjoyment of the resource? · Other impacts: IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 15 will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? · E]NO E]YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. · Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems · Other impacts: IMPACT ON ENERGY 16 Will proposed action ai~fect the~.community's sources ot fuel or energy supply? [:]NO [~]Y E S Examples that woold apply to column 2 · Proposed Action wil[ cause a greater than 5% increase in th~ use of any form of energy in the municipality. · Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy transmission or supp[y system to serve more than $0 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. · Other impacts: 10 1 2 3 ~ Small to Potential Can Impact ~e Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact impact Project Change [] [] []Yes []No [] ~ []Yes []No [] [] [~]Yes [~]No [] [] []Yes [:]No [] ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No ~ ~ ~Yes ~No NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS 17 Will there be objectionable odors, no~se, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? ONO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive [] facility. [] · Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day) · Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local [] ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. · Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a [] noise screen [] · Other impacts' IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 18. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? []NO []YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous [] substances (i.e. oil, pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic Iow level discharge or emission. · Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any [] form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc.) · Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of [iquified natural [] gas or other flammable liquids. · Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance [] within 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid o[ hazardous waste. [] · Other impact~: Small to vloderate Impact IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARAqTER OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD 19. Will proposed action affect the character of the existing c°mmunity? []NO []YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%. · The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project. · Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals. · Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. · Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures or areas of historic importance to the community. · Development will create a demand for additional community services (e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.) · Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future'projects. · Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment. · Other Impacts: 2 Potential Large Impact [] []Yes [] []Yes [] []Yes [] []Yes [] ~]Yes [] E]Yes [] []Yes [] []Yes [] [:]Yes [] []Yes [] []Yes [] []Yes [] []Yes [] []Yes [] []Yes [] [Yes [] ~ves ~ ~Yes ~ ~ves 3 Gan Impact Be Mitigated By Project Change []No ~No []No []No []No I-INo []No []No []NO []No []No CINo []No [:]No []No ~]No []No r]No I-]No 20. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? rlNO I-Iy: Il n-lf action In Part 2 la Identified aa a polectlal large Impact or If you cannot determine the magnitude ol Impact, proceed to Part 11 Part 3mEV .UATION OF THE IMPORT "CE OF IMPACTS Responsibility of Lead Agency Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impact(s) ma!, be mitigated. Instructions Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2: I Briefly describe the impact 2 Describe (if applicable) how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project change{s) 3 ' Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important. To answer the question of importance, consider: · The probability of the impact occurring · The duration of the impact · Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resources of value · Whether the impact can or will be controlled · The regional consequence of the impact · Its potential divergence from local needs and goals · Whether known objections to the project relate to this impact. (Continue on attachments) 12 617.20 SEQR Appendix B State Environmental Quality Review Visual EAF Addendum This form may be used to provide additional information relating to Question 1 i of Part 2 of the Full EAF. (To be completed by Lead Agency) Distance Between Visibility 1. Would the project be visible from: · ^ parcel of land which is dedicated to and available to the public for the use, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made scenic qualities? · An overlook or parcel of land dedicated to public observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man.made scenic qualities? · A site or structure listed on the National or State Registers of Historic Places? · State Parks? · The State Forest Preserve? · National Wildlife Refuges and state game refuges? · National Natural Landmarks and other outstanding natural features? · National Park Service lands? · Rivers designated as Hatlonal or State Wild, Scenic or Recreational? · Any transportation corridor of high exposure, such as part of the Interstate System, or .Amtrak? · A governmentally established or designated interstate or Inter-county foot trail, or one formally proposed for establishment or designation? · A site, area, lake, reservoir or highway designated as scenlc7 · /4unlclpal park, or designated open space? · County road? · State? · Local road? ~' Project and Resource (in Miles) 0-V4 '~-V2 1/2-3 3-5 5+ [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] 0 [] [] 0 n [] 0 [] n [] n [] o o [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] 2. Is the visibility of the project seasonal? (i.e., screened by summer foliage, but visible during other seasons) BYes Brio 3. Are any of the resources checked in question I used by the public during the time of year during which the project will be visible? OYes f-il'lo DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING VISUAL ENVIRONMENT 4. From each item checked in question 1, check those which generally describe the environment. surroundin, Within mile *1 mile Essentially undeveloped Forested Agricultural Suburban residential Industrial Commercial Urban River, Lake, Pond Cliffs, Overlooks I~esignated Open Space Hilly Mountainous Other NOTE: add attachments as needed 5. Are there visually similar projects within: °1/2 mile []Yes [--1No °1 miles [--]Yes E~No *2 miles []Yes []No *3 miles I-lYes []No ' Distance from project site are provided for assistance. Substitute other distances as appropriate. EXPOSORE 6. The annual number of viewers likely to observe the proposed project is NOTE: When user data Is unavailable or unknown, use best estimate. CONTEXT 7, The situation or activity In which the viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed action is FREQrJ ENCY Holidays/ Activity Dally Weekly Weekends Seasonally Travel to and from work [] [] [] [] Involved in recreational activities [] [] [] [] Routine travel by residents [] [] [] [] At a residence '" [] [] [] [] At workslte [] ~] [] [] Other [] [] [] [] 2 74 ,64 (9~15)--Tex{ 12 PROJECT I.D. NUMBER 617.20 Appendix C State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I--PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) 1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR 2, PROJECT NAME 3. PROJECT LOCATION: Municipality County SEQR 4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address ;.nd road Intersecllons, prominent landmarks, etc., of provide map) 5. IS PROPOSEO ACTION: [] New [] Expansion [] Modlflcatlon/alte,'stlon 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: 7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: Initially acres Ultlmalely acres 8, WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WiTH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LANO USE RESTRICTIONS? [] Yes [] No If No, describe briefly S. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VlCINITY OF PROJECT? [] Re$1de~tt[sl [:::] Industrial [] Commercial [] AgrlcuBure ~] park/FocesUOpen space [] Other 10. IX)ES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)'/ [] Yes [] No If yes, list agsnc),(s) lUld permit/approvals 11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VAED PERMIT OR APPROVAL? [] Yes [] No If ye~, list &gen=y name and permlt/appro'*'&l 12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? I <:~RTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE 8EST OF MY KNOWLeDgE Appllcant/sponso~ name: I I If the action Is In the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, oomplete the [ Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER 1 PART II--ENVIRONMENTAL A$cESSMENT (To be completeo by Agency) C' COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY AOVERS~ EFFECTS,6, SSOCIATED WiTH 'EH[! FOLLOW~NG (Ansv, e~s may b, nand~,rdlen i legible) Existing air qualily surface or gloundw31ef qualiW or qu;~r~tify, noise lea, els, axis"lng [relflc paltern~, 5ohd was,e~ production ol d,sposal, potential lot erosion, drainage ol flooding p¢oblems? Explain hiiefly C6. Long term, shod term, cumulative, or olher effects nol identified in C1-C57 Explain briefly. C7. Olher Impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly. D. WILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CEA? [] Yes [] NO E, IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? [] Yes [] No It Yes, explain briel[y PART Ill--DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency) INSTRUCTIONS: For each adve~'se effect Identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed In connection with Its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; rd) Irreversiblllty; re) geographic scope; and ri) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse Impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. If question D of Part II was checked yes, the determination and significance must evaluate the potential impact of the proposed action on the environmental characteristics of the CEA. [] Check lhls box if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the FULL EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration. [] Check this box If you have determined, based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide on attachmerfts as necessary, the reasons supporting this determination: Oate 2 Date: 06/28/01 Transaction(s): Town Of Southold P.O Box 1179 Southoid, NY 11971 * * * RECEIPT * * * Receipt#: 50694 Subtotal $277.50 1 Application Fees Tnt:al Paid: Total Paid: $277.50 Cash#: 50694 Name: ClerklD: Penny, Lumber Main Road Greenport, NY 11944 LINDAC Internal ID: 35304 LASER FICHE FORM Planning Board Site Plans and Amended Site Plans Print Date: 3/23/2004 Site Plan File Type: Approved SCAN Date: Proiect Type: Site Plans Status: Final Approval SCTM #: 1000- 53-2-27.2,21,25.2,27 Project Name: Penny Lumber Acc Buildin.q-Greenport Address: Main Road Location: Main Road Hamlet: Greenport Applicant Name: George Penny Owner Name: Penny, Georqe Zone 1: LI File Date: 7/16/2001 OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION A date indicates that we have received the related information Endorse Site Plan Date: 7/16/2001 Zone 2: Zone 3: County Filing Date: C and R's: Homeowners Association: R and M Aqreement: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman RICHARD CAGGIANO WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR P.O. Box 1179 Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM Date: September 3, 2003 To: Michael Verity, Principal Building Inspector From: Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman of Planning Boar~ Re: Site Plan of Penny Lumber Main Road Greenport, NY 11944 SCTM# 1000-53-2-27.2 (former SCTM 53.-2-21 &25.1 & 27.1 In reference to the above, this is to inform you that the requirements have been satisfied for the Penny Lumber site plan approved and dated 07116101. Thank you in advance. Cc: file GREENPORT LOCATION and MAIN BUSINESS OFFICE Box 2067 Main Road Greenport, NY 11944 (631) 477-0400 Penny,Lumber HOME & FLOORING CENTERS MATTITUCK LOCATION Box 1440 Sound Avenue Matiituck, NY ~1952 (631) 298-8559 FLOORING CENTER (631) 298-4506 August 28, 2003 Planning Board Members Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 C,E I V,E , ~ 8EP - 2 ~03 ~ PlanflinI 9oaM Re: Penny, George Site Plan 67480 Main Road Greenport, NY 11944 SCTM# 1000-53.-2-27.2 (Former SCTM 53.-2-21&25.1&27.1) Dear Planning Board, Weather permitting for planting; I agree to cominue the row of cedar shrubs on Kerwin Blvd south to the end of our property. We agree that the shrubs will be a minimum of four (4) feet tall and spaced to screen the yard from Kerwin Blvd. We understand this time of year is not applicable to planting shrubs and agree the fall would be best. Sincerely,. ~-~ ~I George L. Penny IV Presidem PLANNING BOARD MEblBE~I~ BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman RICHARD CAGGIANO WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN SIDOR, JR. P.O. Box 1179 Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 July 29, 2003 Mr. George Penny 67480 Main Road Greenport, NY 11944 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Re: Penny, George Site Plan 67480 Main Road Greenport, NY 11944 SCTM# 1000-53.-2-27.2 (Former SCTM 53.-2-21 &25.1 &27.1 ) Dear Mr. Penny, The Planning Board (PB) reviewed the sitc plan approved on July 16, 2001 at the work session on July 21, 2003. Per the site visit on July 2, 2003 we have inspected and compared the site plan mentioned above, the site is satisfactory to the P.B. except for the item listed below. As discussed please send us a written letter of intent. It must state that weather permitting for planting; you agree to continue the row of cedar shrubs on Kerwin Blvd south to the end of your property. The P.B. agrees that the shrubs need to be a minimum of four (4) feet tall and spaced to screen the yard from Kerwin Blvd. We understand this time of year is not applicable to planting shrubs and agree the fall would be best. If there are any questions you can contact us at (631 ) 765-1938 x229 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Senior Site Plan Reviewer CC:file 473889 SOUTHOLD NYSRPS ASSESSMENT INQUIRY Op SCHOOL GREENPORT SCHOOO RCLS 444 LUMBER YD/ML 53.-2-27.2 67480 MAIN RD = OWNER & MAILING INFO === PENNY GEORGE LINC C/O GEORGE L PENNY IV MAIN ROAD GREENPORT NY 11944 DATE : 07/29/2003 ROLL SEC TAXABLE TOTAL RES SITE TOTAL COM SITE ACCT NO 17 =MISC I .............. - ASSESSMENT DATA ........... RS-SS I **CURRENT** RES PERCENT i ILAND 5,100 **TAXABLE** BANK ITOTAL 28,500 COUNTY 28,500 **PRIOR** TOWN 28,500 ILAND 5,100 SCHOOL 28,500 ITOTAL 28,500 ==DIMENSIONS ===1 ...... - SALES INFORMATION .................................. ACRES 2.68 IBOOK 9492 SALE DATE 00/00/00 IPAGE 00541 PR OWNER ....... TOTAL EXEMPTIONS 0 .............. I== TOTAL SPECIAL DISTRICTS 3 ..... CODE AMOUNT PCT INIT TERM VLG HC OWN CODE UNITS PCT TYPE VALUE I FD031 IW-~020 ISW011 I FI=NEXT PARCEL F3=NEXT EXEMPT/SPEC F4=PREV EXEMPT/SPEC 75.10- 03-050 F6=GO TO INVENTORY F9=GO TO XREF F10=GO TO MENU ADDITIONAk iENDA~ WORK SESSION A( SOUTHOLD TOWN PLAN~ NG BOARD / SlTF~LANS Mattituck Park District / 9233 Peconic Bay Blvd. / Mattituck, NY SCTM# 10~0-1000-12~-17 Zoned R-40 RE: 1) Final approval of site plan ~ch 13, 2003 and SCHD approved plan dated 1/15/98 with original seal. Penny Lumber ~_/ 5~ Greenport, NY RE: l) Site plan sign oft2 ( see staffletter) bs 7/22/03 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 August14,2001 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD George L. Penny, IV Cio Penny Lumber, Inc. P.O. Box 2067 Greenport, NY 11944 Re: Proposed Site Plan for Penny Lumber SCTM#1000-53-2-21, 25, 25.1 & 27.1 Dear Mr. Penny: The following resolution was adopted at a meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, August 13, 2001: WHEREAS, the resolution of July 16, 2001 misclassified this project as a Type II Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617. This project is an unlisted action; BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, do an uncoordinated review of this unlisted action. The Planning Board establishes itself as lead agency, and as lead agency, makes a determination of non-significance and grants a Negative Declaration. Enclosed is a copy of the Negative Declaration for your records. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, Bennett Orldwski, Jr. //~ · ~ Chairman '~ enc. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICt-IARD CAGG1ANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD State Environmental Quality Review NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice of Determination Non-Significant August 13, 2001 This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Law. The Southold Town Planning Board, as lead agency, has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared. Name of Action: SCTM#: Location: SEQR Status: Proposed Site Plan for Penny Lumber 1000-53-2-21, 25, 25.1 & 27.1 Main Road, Greenport Type I ( ) Unlisted (X) Conditioned Negative Declaration: Yes ( ) No (X) Description of Action: This proposed site plan is for a 5,400 sq. ft. private warehouse and a future 5,400 sq. ft. private warehouse. Reasons Supporting This Determination: There is no potential development impact and no change in the current land use. SEQR Negative Declaration - Pa,qe Two An Environmental Assessment Form has been submitted and reviewed, and it was determined that no significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. For Further Information: Contact Person: Robert G. Kassner Address: Planning Board Telephone Number: (631)765-1938 Roger Evans, DEC Stony Brook Suffolk County Department of Health Elizabeth Neville, Town Clerk Applicant PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATI-IANI, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: FROM: RE: Edward Forrester, Director of Code Enforcement Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer Penny Lumber Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-53-2-21, 25.1 & 27.1 DATE: August 8, 2001 The Planning Board has received a revised site plan from the above applicant dated August 7, 2001, showing the State Code requirements and the landscaping placed adjacent to the proposed storage building. The Planning Board has approved this revision. Subntission H/ilhout a Cover Letter Se~tder: Subject: SCTI~I#: 1000- ' Date: APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman James Dinizio, Jr. Lydia A. Tortora Lora S. Collins George Horning TOWN MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Telephone (631) 765-~809 Building Department Gerard P. Goehringer, ZBA Chairma~"JjF_.----~._._.~ July 31,2001 ~ Appl. No. 4948 - George L. Penny, Inc. (6/7/01 Conditions) Please be advised that, with regard to Condition #1 of the June 7, 2001 Decision, the Zoning Board of Appeals was not made aware of the N.Y.S. Construction Code concerning screening. Therefore, based on the regulations of the N.Y.S. Building Construction Code which may relate to this Condition, Condition #1 of the above- referenced Decision by the ZBA, as it may apply, shall remain moot - notwithstanding the fact that the owner may choose or may be required to screen the building and its addition with. - contiguous screening (next to building). Sub~dssion FVilhout a Cover Letter Southold Town AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known~ as by placing the Town's official poster notices(s) within 10 feet of the front property line facing the street(s) where it can be easily seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place lo, seven days prior to the dateQf the public hearingon ~/_1 ~ I 0 I I have sent notices, by certified mail, the receipts of which are attached, to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every prope~y which is across from any ~ublic or private street from the above mentioned prope~y YourSignat(ur~~name (print) Addres? ~' L~ ~ Date Notary Public PLEASE RETURN THIS AFFIDA VIT AND CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS ON THE DA Y OF. OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING Re: Penny Lumber SCTM#: 1000-53-2-21, 25, 25.1 & 27.1 Date of Hearing:Mon., July .16, 2001, 6:10 p.m. ·Comp[ete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. · Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. · Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: X · Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. · Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. · Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: [] Address, Is de~ery address different from item 17 [] Yes If YESienter delivery address below: [] No · Complete items 1,2, end 3. Also item 4 if Restricted Deliver · Print your name and address he reverse so that we can return the card to you. · Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. X Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also coml~lete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired~ Print your name and address on the ~veree so that we can return the card to you~ · Attach this card to the back of the mAilpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: · Complete items 1,2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. · Pdnt your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. · Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: · Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. · Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. · Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: · Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. · Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. · Attach this card to the back of the mail or on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: iComplete items 1,2 and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is des red/ A. Print your name and address on the r.~veree so that we can return the card to yo~. Attach this card to the back of the r~ailpiece, or on the front if space permits. X 1. Article Addressed to: Ill YES, enter delivery address below: 3. Service Type [] Agent [] Add re.~- [] Yes [] No /~(~eived by (Please Print C/early) [B,.~e~f-~elj~ ~ Addres ~ Yes enter deliveW ~ No 2. Article Number (Copy from service label) /670 ooo PS Form 3811, JuN 1999 ~- 2. Article Number (Copy from service label) PS Fo~ 3811, July 1999 Domestic Return R~eipt A. Rec~e~d~.__()l~22jlt~/bl~ease Print Clearly) ,,~,~/,~ ~B. t f eib, [] Yes rt YES, enter delivery address below: [] No 3. ervice Type ~ertified Mail [] Express Mail / [] Registered ~{eturn Receipt for Merchandi I [] Insured Mail [] C.O.D 4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) [] Yes 102595-00-M-095: · Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. · Pdnt your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you. · Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. ~ 1. Article Addressed to: C. Signature [] Agent [] Addressee t from item l? [] Yes enter delivery address below: [] No [] Express Mail J~-Return Receipt for Merchandise [] C.O.D. (Extra Fee) [] Yes 102595-00-M-0952 (Endorsement Requiredl (Endorsement Required} (Endorsement Requ[red)! Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Fax (631) 765-1823 Telephone (631) 765-1802 BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN O1~ SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Building Department July 16, 2001 Southold Town Planning Board BUILDING DEPARTMENT SITE PLAN CERTIFICATION Project Penny Lumber Location Main Road & Kerwin Blvd. Greenport SCTM# 1000-Section 53 -Block 2 - Lot 21,25.1,&27.1 Date of Last Revision Mar. 27, 2001 1. THE PROPOSED USE Lumber/Buildinq Supply AND ACCESSORY USE AS INDICATED ON THE PLAN IS/ARE PERMITTED IN THIS LI DISTRICT. PROPOSED AND EXISTING BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES COMPLY WITH PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 100 OF SOUTHOLD TOWN CODE. ALL STRUCTURES COMPLY WITH SETBACKS AS CONTAINED IN BULK SCHEDULES OR ELSEWHERE IN CHAPTER 100. TO CONDITION'S OF ZBA APPEAL # 4948 Authorized Signature PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHA~I, JR RICHARD CAGGIA-NO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: FROM: RE: Edward Forrester, Director of Code Enforcement Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer ~ Robert G. Penny Lumber Main Road, Greenport Fishers Island Museum SCTM# 1000-53-2-21, 25.1, & 27.1 DATE: June 27, 2001 Please review the attached for certification. APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard E Goehringer, Chairman James Dinizio, Jr. Lydia A. Tortora Lora S. Collins George Horning Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 ZBA Fax (516) 765-9064 Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF JUNE 7, 2001 Appl. No. 4948- GEORGE L. PENNY, INC. PARCEL 1000-53-2-27.1, 25.1, 21, 22 STREET & LOCALITY: Corner of Main Road and Kerwin Boulevard, Greenport. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: June 7, 2001. FINDINGS OF FACT PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: Applicants' property consists of 80,000+- sq. ft. in area, located on the south side of the Main Road (a/k/a S.R. 25) and the west side of Kerwin Boulevard in Greenport, Town of Southold The map prepared February 5, 2001 shows that the property has 300 ft. frontage along the Main Road and 307+- feet along Kerwin Boulevard. The overall acreage is a minimum of 2.67 acres with an existing building material/retail lumber yard with existing buildings. The property is located in the Light Industrial Zone District. BASIS OF APPEAl: Building Inspector's March 20, 2001 Disapproval which reads that Section 100-243 provides that an action not create any new nonconformance or increase in the degree of nonconformance with regard to the regulations pertaining to such buildings. The proposed new commercial building will be less than 20 feet from the side property line, and a new storage building will be less than 100 feet from the front property line. AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTFD: The applicant requests a variance to build a 50 x 102 ft. storage building with a 15 ft. side yard setback instead of 20 feet, and to replace an existing foundation with a 54 x 100 ft. metal storage building maintaining the existing front and side yard setbacks. The locations are more particularly shown on the map prepared by Anthony W. Lewandowski, L.S. dated February 5, 2001. INFORMATION AND EVIDENCE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: The applicant proposes to demolish a preexisting storage building that has a nonconforming front yard setback of 36 feet from Kerwin Boulevard and a nonconforming side yard setback of 6'3'! which southerly property line adjoins property owned by the Long Island Railroad. The existing structure would be replaced by a 54 ft. by 100 ft. metal storage building that would maintain the existing front and side yard setbacks. 1. The applicant testified that it would be expense to construct the new metal storage building in a conforming location because he would like to retain part of the existing foundation, the raised concrete portion, and use it as a platform to unload and load tractor trailers as part of his business operations. 2. At the board's request at the May 3, 2001 headng, the applicant submitted a cost estimate to remove the building and to construct a new elevated platform. The estimated costs, prepared by K.L Dickerson Excavating Inc., and submitted by letter May 8, 2001, was $42,500. · Page 2-June 7, 2001 Appl; No. 4948 - George )Inc. 1000-53-3-27.1 at Greenport 3. The applicant also proposes to construct a new 50 ft. by 102 ft. storage building and requests a 15 ft. side yard setback instead of the code-required 20 ft. setback. The applicant testified that the 5 ft. variance is required to ensure that the new building will not interfere with an existing drainage field. 4. Several neighbors in the area expressed concerns about the need for a buffering area along Kerwin Boulevard to mitigate the impact of a conforming light-industrial operation near a residential community. 5. The applicant agreed to provide maximum screening as a condition of this approval. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION, DESCRIBED BELOW: Based on the testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspection, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the area vadance will not produce an undesirable change in character of neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The proposed use is consistent with the Light Industrial Zone District. The applicant proposes to replace, improve and expand an existing structure. The new storage structure will not change the preexisting front and side yard setbacks to Kerwin Boulevard. The applicant has agreed to provide extensive buffering that will be an improvement for the neighborhood. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The applicant has submitted dollars and cents proof that to use all new construction for the 54 x 100 ft. metal storage building at another site on the property, without use of the existing concrete foundation, would cost an additional $42,500. The 5 ft. side yard vadance requested for the 50x102 ft. storage building is reasonable because to move the structure to the code required 20 fL setback would damage existing drainage fields. 3, The front yard setback variance is substantial in relation to the code requirement. However, the property contains two front yards and the relief granted herein will not further increase the nonconforming front and side yard setbacks. 4. The hardship has been self-created because the applicant knew when he purchased the property that the side yard setback of the existing structure was nonconforming. The hardship of the front yard setback has not been self-created because the Southold Town Code was modified subsequent to the date applicant purchased the property (1989). 5. The proposed variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. No evidence has been submitted to suggest that the proposed variances will impact environmental conditions, and the applicant has agreed to provide screening to mitigate visual and physical conditions. · * Page. 3,- June 7, 2001 ' ' Al~pl. No. 4948 - George 1000~53-3-27.1 at Greenport In considering this application, the Board deems this action to be the minimum necessary and adequate for the applicants to enjoy the benefit of additional indoor storage, and that the grant of this variance will preserve the character of the neighborhood, and the health, safety, welfare of the community. RESOLUTION/ACTION: On motion by Member Tortora, seconded by Member Horning, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT the variance, as applied for, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Applicant shall provide and maintain adequate screening along the front yard facing Kerwin Boulevard. 2. Planning Board approval of adequate screening in issuance of the site plan review. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: Memb~~Din_~ ~rtgra, Collins, Horning. This Resolution was duly adgpted (5-0). J / .. / . · and SOUTHOLD TOWN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE June 26,2001 The ARC met at Town Hall at 4:3,0 p.m.. Members present were: Garrett A. Strang, Co-Chairman Robert I. Brown, Co-Chairman Howard G. Meinke, New Suffolk/Cutchogue Robert Keith, Mattituck, Secretary Also attending were Robert G. Kassner of the Planning Board Staff and George Penny. Moved by Howard Meinke and seconded by Garrett Strang, it was RESOLVED to APPROVE the MINUTES of the meeting of May 1, 2001. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. PENNY LUMBER (Main Road - Greenpod) Moved by Howard Meinke and seconded by Garrett Strang, it was RESOLVED to APPROVE the application with the understanding that the colors wilt be silver for the sides and white for the roof and tdm. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. Robed W. Keith Secretary JUN 8 2001 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fex (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 27, 2001 Mr. George L. Penny, IV Cio Penny Lumber, Inc. P.O. Box 2067 Greenport, NY 11944 Re: Proposed Site Plan for Penny Lumber SCTM#1000-53-2-21,25, 25.1 & 27.1 Dear Mr. Penny: The final public hearing on the maps, dated March 27, 2001, will be held Monday, July 16, 2001 at 6:10 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall. Please refer to the enclosed copy of Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, in regard to the Town's notification procedure. The notification form is enclosed for your use. The sign and the post will need to be picked up at the Planning Office, Southold Town Hall. Please return the endorsed Affidavit of Posting, proof of certified mailing, and the signed green return receipts from the certified mailings on the day of the public hearing before 4:00 p.m. Please also return the sign and the post to the Planning Office after the public hearing. Please contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Chairman C encl. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known as by placing the Town's official poster notices(s) within 10 feet of the front property line facing the street(s) where it can be easily seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for seven days prior to the date of the public hearing on I have sent notices, by certified mail, the receipts of which are attached, to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across from any public or private street from the above mentioned property on Your name (print) Signature Address Date Notary Public PLEASE RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT AND CERTIFIED MAlL RECEIPTS ON THE DAY OF. OR AT THE PUBLIC HEARING Re: Penny Lumber SCTM#: I000-53-2-21, 25, 25.1 & 27.1 Date of Hearing:Mon.~ July 16, 2001, 6:10 p.m. Southold Town Planning Board Notice to Adjacent Property Owners You are hereby given notice: 1. That the undersigned has applied to the Planning Board of the Town of Southold for a site plan; 2. That the property which is the subject of the application is located adjacent to your property and is described as follows: SCTM#1000-53-2-21, 25, 25.1 & 27.1; 3. That the property which is the subject of this application is located in the Light Industrial Zoning District(s). That the application is for a 5,400 sq. ft. private warehouse and a future 5,400 sq. ft. private warehouse. The property is located on the corner of Main Road and Kerwin Boulevard in Greenport. That the files pertaining to this application are open for your information during normal business days between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. Or, if you have any questions, you can call the Planning Board Office at (631)765-1938. That a public hearing will be held on the matter by the Planning Board on July 16, 2001 at 6:'10 p.m. in the Meeting Hall at $outhold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold; that a notice of such hearing will be published at least five days prior to the date of such hearing in the Suffolk Times, published in the Town of $outhold; that you or your representative have the right to appear and be heard at such hearing. Petitioner/Owner's Name(s): George L. Penny, IV, Inc. Date: June 27, 2001 § 58-1 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING § 58-1 Chapter 58 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING §58-1. Provldln g notice of public hearings. [HISTORY: Adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Southold 12-27-1995 as L.L. No. 25-1995. Amendments noted where applicable.] § 58-1. Prov~dlng notice of public hearings. Whenever the Code calls for a public hearing, this section shall apply. Upon determining that an application is complete, the board or commission reviewing the same shall fix a time and place for a public hearing thereon. The board or commission reviewing an application shall provide for the giving of notice: A. By causing a notice giving the time, date, place and nature of the hearing to bo published in the official newspaper within the period prescribed by law. B. By requiring the applicant to erect the sign provided by the town, which shall be prominently displayed on the premises facing each public or private street which the property involved in the application abuts, giving notice of the application, the nature of the approval sought thereby and the time and place of the public hearing thereon. The sign shall be set back not more than ten (10) feet from the preperty line. The sign shall bo displayed for a period of not less than seven (7) days immediately preceding the date of the public hearing. The applicant or his/her agent shall file an affidavit that ~/he has complied with this prevision. C. By requiring the applicant to send notice to the owners of record of every property which 'abuts and every property which is across from any public or private street 5801 ~-~-~ § 58-1 SOUTHOLD CODE § 58-1 from the property included in the application. Such notice shall be made by certified mail, return receipt requested, posted at least seven (7) days prior to the date of the initial public hearing on the application and addressed to the owners at the addresses listed for them on the local assessment roll. The applicant or agent shall file an affidavit that s/he has complied with this provision. GEORGE L. PENNY, IV., INC. PENNY LUMBER 1000-53-2-21, 25, 25.1 & 27.1 Site Plan for a 5,400 sq. ft. Private Warehouse & a Future 5,400 sq. ft. Private Warehouse MON. - JULY 16, 2001 - 6:10 P.M. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: FROM: RE: Edward Forrester, Director of Code Enforcement Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer ~ Robert G. Penny Lumber Main Road, Greenport Fishers Island Museum SCTM# 1000-53-2-21, 25.1, & 27.1 DATE: June 27, 2001 Please review the attached for certification. ~,~' ~PPEAL~ BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Ooehringer, Chairman James Dinizio, Jr. Lydia A. Tortora Lora S. Collins George Homing Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 ZBA Fax (516) 765-9064 Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF JUNE 7, 2001 Appl. No. 4948-..GEORGE L PENNY, INC PARCEL 1000-53-2-27.1, 25.1, 21, 22 STREET & LOCALITY: Corner of Main Road and Kerwin Boulevard, Greenport. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: June 7, 2001. FINDINGS OF FACT PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: Applicants' property consists of 80,000+- sq. ft. in area, located on the south side of the Main Road (a/k/a S.R. 25) and the west side of Kerwin Boulevard in Greenport, Town of Soutbold. The map prepared February 5, 2001 shows that the property has 300 ft. frontage along the Main Road and 307+- feet along Kerwin Boulevard. The overall acreage is a minimum of 2.67 acres with an existing building material/retail lumber yard with existing buildings. The property is located in the Light Industrial Zone District. BASIS OF APPEAl: Building Inspector's March 20, 2001 Disapproval which reads that Section 100-243 provides that an action not create any new nonconformance or increase in the degree of nonconformance with regard to the regulations pertaining to such buildings. The proposed new commercial building will be less than 20 feet from the side property line, and a new storage building will be less than 100 feet from the front property line. AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant requests a variance to build a 50 x 102 ft. storage building with a 15 ft. side yard setback instead of 20 feet, and to replace an existing foundation with a 54 x 100 ft. metal storage building maintaining the existing front and side yard setbacks. The locations are more particularly shown on the map prepared by Anthony W. Lewandowski, US. dated February 5, 2001. INFORMATION AND EVIDENCE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: The applicant proposes to demolish a preexisting storage building that has a nonconforming front yard setback of 36 feet from Kerwin Boulevard and a nonconforming side yard setback of 6'3" which southerly property line adjoins property owned by the Long Island Railroad. The existing structure would be replaced by a 54 ft. by 100 ft. metal storage building that would maintain the existing front and side yard setbacks. 1. The applicant testified that it would be expense to construct the new metal storage building in a conforming location because he would like to retain part of the existing foundation, the raised concrete portion, and use it as a platform to unload and Icad tractor trailers as part of his business operations. 2. At the board'S request at the May 3, 2001 hearing, the applicant submitted a cost estimate to remove the building and to construct a new elevated platform. The estimated costs, prepared by K.L. Dickerson Excavating Inc., and submitted by letter May 8, 2001, was $42,500. · Page 2,- June 7, 2001 AppI: No. 4948 - George L. Ig~llnc. 1000-53-3-27.1 at Greenport 3. The applicant also proposes to construct a new 50 ft. by 102 ft. storage building and requests a 15 ft. side yard setback instead of the code-required 20 ft. setback. The applicant testified that the 5 ft. vadance is required to ensure that the new building will not interfere with an existing drainage field: 4. Several neighbors in the area expressed concerns about the need for a buffering area along Kerwin Boulevard to mitigate the impact of a conforming light-industrial operation near a residential comm ~unity. 5. The applicant agreed to provide maximum screening as a condition of this approval. REASONS FOR BOARD ACT ON, DESCRIBED BELOW: Based on the testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspection, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the area vadance will not produce an undesirable change in character of neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The proposed use is consistent with the Light Industrial Zone District. The applicant proposes to replace, improve and expand an existing structure. The new storage structure will not change the preexisting front and side yard setbacks to Kerwin Boulevard. The applicant has agreed to provide extensive buffering that will be an improvement for the neighborhood. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method, feasible for applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The applicant has submitted dollars and cents proof that to use all new construction for the 54 x 100 ft. metal storage building at another site on the property, without use of the existing concrete foundation, would cost an additional $42,500. The 5 ft. side yard vadance requested for the 50x102 ft. storage building is reasonable because to move the structure to the code required 20 ft. setback would damage existing drainage fields. 3. The front yard setback vadance is substantial in relation to the code requirement. However, the property contains two front yards and the relief granted herein will not further increase the nonconforming front and side yard setbacks. 4. The hardship has been self-created because the applicant knew when he purchased the property that the side yard setback of the existing structure was nonconforming. The hardship of the front yard setback has not been self-created because the Southold Town Code was modified subsequent to the date applicant purchased the property (1989). 5. The proposed variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. No evidence has been submitted to suggest that the proposed variances will impact environmental conditions, and the applicant has agreed to provide screening to mitigate visual and physical conditions. · A~pl. No. 4948 - George L nc. 1000-53-3-27.'1 at Greenport In considering this application, the Board deems this action to be the minimum necessary and adequate for the applicants to enjoy the benefit of additional indoor storage, and that the grant of this vadance will preserve the character of the neighborhood, and the health, safety, welfare of the community. RESOLUTION/ACTION: On motion by Member Tortora, seconded by Member Homing, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT the variance, as applied for, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Applicant shall provide and maintain adequate screening along the front yard facing Kerwin Boulevard. 2. Planning Board approval of adequate screening in issuance of the ~ite plan review. Homing. This Resolution was duly ad~ed (5-0). ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman V~ILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHA/VI, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD LEGAL NOTICE Notice of Public Hearing NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, pursuant to Article XXV of the Code of the Town of Southold, a public hearing will be held by the Southold Town Planning Board, at the Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York in said Town on the 16th day of July, 2001 on the question of the following: 6:10 P.M. Public Hearing for the proposed site plan for Penny Lumber. The property is located on the corner of the Main Road & Kerwin Boulevard, in Greenport, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, State of New York. Suffolk County Tax Map Number 1000- 53-2-21, 25, 25.1 & 27.1. Dated: 6/27/01 BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman PLEASE PRINT ONCE ON THURSDAY, JULY 5, 200'1 AND FORWARD ONE (1) AFFIDAVIT TO THIS OFFICE, THANK YOU. COPIES SENT TO: The Suffolk Times The Traveler Watchman P.O. Box 1179 53095 Route 25 Southold, NY 11971 Phone: (631) 765-1938 Fax: (631) 765-3136 E-Mail: planning@southold.org To; Christina Weber, The Suffolk Times From: Valerie Scopaz/carol Fax: Page: 2 ph~n~: D~e: 6/27/01 R.: Legal Ad for 7/5/01 Edition cc: Unjent For Review Please Commnt Please Reply As Requested Please pdnt the following legal ad in the July 5th Edition. Thanks. 6:10 p.m.: Penny Lumber PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD LEGAL NOTICE Notice of Public Hearing NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, pursuant to Article XXV of the Code of the Town of Southold, a public hearing will be held by the Southold Town Planning Board, at the Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York in said Town on the 16th day of July, 2001 on the question of the following: 6:10 P.M. Public Hearing for the proposed site plan for Penny Lumber. The property is located on the corner of the Main Road & Kerwin Boulevard, in Greenport, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, State of New York. Suffolk County Tax Map Number 1000- 53-2-21, 25, 25.1 & 27.1. Dated: 6/27/01 BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) CAROL KALIN, Secretary to the Planning Board of the Town of Southold, New York being duly sworn, says that on the 27th day of June, 2001 she affixed a notice of which the annexed printed notice is a true copy, in a proper and substantial manner, in a most public place in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, to wit: Town Clerk's Bulletin Board, Southold Town Hall, 63095 Main Road, Southold, New York. 7/16/01 Re.qular Meetin.q: 6:10 p.m. Public Hearing for the Penny Lumber Proposed Site Plan, SCTM#1000-53-2-21,25, 25.1 & 27.1 Carol Kalin Secretary, Southold Town Planning Board Sworn to before me this day of ~/tC_~ ,2001. Notary Public LYNDA M. BOHN Qualified In Suf~;~" -- Term F--xp,res Marc'"h~8~, ~)n~ pur~uam to ~ X3CV o~ I~ Code o~ the Town of $outhold, a peblic hearing will ~ held by t~ Sou~old To~ ques~on of ~e following: 6:10 p.~. ~blie He,rig for ~e prO~sed site pl~ f~ Penny Lum~r. the Main Road ~ ~in Boulev~d. th BY O~ER O~E SO,OLD ~ Ch~an STATE OF NEW YORK) )SS: ~_OUNTY OF S.UFFOLK) ~ ~'LD~/t~.0..~ of Mattituck, in said county, being duly sworn, says that he/she is Principal clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a weekly newspaper, pub- lished at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, and that the Notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly pub- lished in said Newspaper once each week for I weeks successively, commencing on the ~ day of ~-]-~ 20 0 I ~,, , ~ ~ ~ ....... Principal Clerk Sworn to be , ,s day of 20 O/ PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 18, 2001 George L. Penny, IV Penny Lumber, Inc. Main Road, P.O. Box 2067 Greenport, NY 11944 Proposed site plan for storage buildings Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-53-2-21, 25.1 & 27.1 Zone Light Industrial (LI) Dear Mr. Penny, The Planning Board has received your revised elevation plans dated June 8, 2001. The Board will notify you when the Architectural Review Committee sets a date to review your plan. The Board will require a revised site plan showing the Zoning Boards of Appeals requested landscaping buffer on Kerwin Boulevard. Details of the swale, entrance gates, fence, street trees and landscaping buffer on Kerwin Boulevard should be shown. The future 54" by 100' storage building is partly in the drainage swale area and must be moved. If you have any questions, or require assistance, please contact this office. k~.ob-~'t (t Kassner Site Plan Reviewer ~ubmissio~ Wilhoul a Cow'~r Letter Subject: SCTM#: 1000-Y Date: JUN ~ :~ 2tJlJl ,.~,,.~o1~ Towr'~ Pla,q~i~.(~ ~oard APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard E Goehringer, Chairman James Dinizio, Jr. Lydia A. Tortora Lora S. Collins George Homing Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 ZBA Fax (516) 765-9064 Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF JUNE 7, 2001 Appl. No. 4948 - GEORGE L. PENNY, INC. PARCEL 1000-53-2-27.1, 25.1, 21, 22 STREET & LOCALITY: Corner of Main Road and Kerwin Boulevard, Greenport. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: June 7, 2001. FINDINGS OF FACT PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: Applicants' property consists of 80,000+- sq. ft. in area, located on the south side of the Main Road (a/k/a S.R. 25) and the west side of Kerwin Boulevard in Greenport, Town of Southold. The map prepared February 5, 2001 shows that the property has 300 ft. frontage along the Main Road and 307+- feet along Kerwin Boulevard. The overall acreage is a minimum of 2.67 acres with an existing building material/retail lumber yard with existing buildings. The property is located in the Light Industrial Zone District. BASIS OF APPEAL: Building Inspector's March 20, 2001 Disapproval which reads that Section 100-243 provides that an action not create any new nonconformance or increase in the degree of nonconformance with regard to the regulations pertaining to such buildings. The proposed new commercial building will be less than 20 feet from the side property line, and a new storage building will be less than 100 feet from the front property line. AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant requests a variance to build a 50 x 102 ft. storage building with a 15 ft. side yard setback instead of 20 feet, and to replace an existing foundation with a 54 x 100 ft. metal storage building maintaining the existing front and side yard setbacks. The locations are more particularly shown on the map prepared by Anthony W. Lewandowski, L.S. dated February 5, 2001. INFORMATION AND EVIDENCE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: The applicant proposes to demolish a preexisting storage building that has a nonconforming front yard setback of 36 feet from Kerwin Boulevard and a nonconforming side yard setback of 6'3" which southerly property line adjoins property owned by the Long Island Railroad. The existing structure would be replaced by a 54 ft. by 100 ft. metal storage building that would maintain the existing front and side yard setbacks. 1. The applicant testified that it would be expense to construct the new metal storage building in a conforming location because he would like to retain part of the existing foundation, the raised concrete portion, and use it as a platform to unload and load tractor trailers as part of his business operations. 2. At the board's request at the May 3, 2001 hearing, the applicant submitted a cost estimate to remove the building and to construct a new elevated platform. The estimated costs, prepared by K.L. Dickerson Excavating Inc., and submitted by letter May 8, 2001, was $42,500. Page 2-June 7, 2001 Appl; No. 4948 - George L. Pe~lfnc. 1000-53-3-27.1 at Greenport 3. The applicant also proposes to construct a new 50 ft. by 102 ft. storage building and requests a 15 ft side yard setback instead of the code-required 20 ft. setback. The applicant testified that the 5 ft. vadance is required to ensure that the new building will not interfere with an existing drainage field. 4. Several neighbors in the area expressed concerns about the need for a buffering area along Kerwin Boulevard to mitigate the impact of a conforming light-industrial operation near a residential community. 5. The applicant agreed to provide maximum screening as a condition of this approval. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION, DESCRIBED BELOW: Based on the testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspection, the Board makes the following findings: 1. Grant of the area variance will not produce an undesirable change in character of neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The proposed use is consistent with the Light Industrial Zone District. The applicant proposes to replace, improve and expand an existing structure. The new storage structure will not change the preexisting front and side yard setbacks to Kerwin Boulevard. The applicant has agreed to provide extensive buffering that will be an improvement for the neighborhood. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method1 feasible for applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. The applicant has submitted dollars and cents proof that to use all new construction for the 54 x 100 ft. metal storage building at another site on the property, without use of the existing concrete foundation, would cost an additional $42,500. The 5 ft. side yard variance requested for the 50x102 ft. storage building is reasonable because to move the structure to the code required 20 ft. setback would damage existing drainage fields. 3. The front yard setback variance is substantial in relation to the code requirement. However, the property contains two front yards and the relief granted herein will not further increase the nonconforming front and side yard setbacks. 4. The hardship has been self-created because the applicant knew when he purchased the property that the side yard setback of the existing structure was nonconforming. The hardship of the front yard setback has not been self-created because the Southold Town Code was modified subsequent to the date applicant purchased the property (1989). 5. The proposed variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. No evidence has been submitted to suggest that the proposed variances will impact environmental conditions, and the applicant has agreed to provide screening to mitigate visual and physical conditions. Page, $ - June 7, 2001 ,~ · Al~pl. No. 4948 - George L. PenWnc. 1000-53-3-27.1 at Greenport In considering this application, the Board deems this action to be the minimum necessary and adequate for the applicants to enjoy the benefit of additional indoor storage, and that the grant of this variance will preserve the character of the neighborhood, and the health, safety, welfare of the community. RESOLUTION/ACTION: On motion by Member Tortora, seconded by Member Homing, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT the variance, as applied for, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Applicant shall provide and maintain adequate screening along the front yard facing Kerwin Boulevard. 2. Planning Board approval of adequate screening in issuance of the site plan review. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: Memb~~Din~gra Collins, and Horning This Resolution was duly ~ted !5-0~¥. ~_J/.,...~.~JJ PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LakTHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 May 7, 2001 George L. Penny, IV Penny Lumber, Inc. Main Road, P.O. Box 2067 G-reenport, NY 11944 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Proposed site plan for storage buildings Main Road, G-reenport SCTM# 1000-53-2-21, 25.1 & 27.1 Zone Light Industrial (LI) Dear Mr. Penney, The Planning Board has received the enclosed letter from the Architectural Review Committee. It is being sent to you for your attention. If you have any questions, or require assistance, please comact this office. Site Plan Reviewer Encl. Cc: James Richter, Town Engineer SOUTHOLD TOWN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE May 1,2001 The ARC met at Town Hall at 4:30 p.m.. Members present were: Garrett A. Strang, Co-Chairman Robert I. Brown, Co-Chairman Theodore Carpluk, Southold Yan Rieger, Orient Sanford Hanauer, Mattituck Robert Keith, Mattituck, Secretary Also attending was Robert G. Kassner of the Planning Board Staff. Moved by Theodore Carpldk and seconded by Garrett Strang, it was RESOLVED to APPROVE the MINUTES of the meeting of April 5, 2001. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. PENNY LUMBER (Main Road - Greenport) Moved by Yan Rieger and seconded by Sanford Hanauer, it was RESOLVED to TABLE the application as incomplete awaiting the several items on the ARC checklist and the identification of a design professional. The committee made the preliminary comment that the roof pitch should be a minimum of 4 in 12 to make the structure appear more like a barn in character. The Committee offered to the Planning Board the thoughts that a dense, high evergreen buffer would provide screening from Kerwin Boulevard and that, since the porosity of the soil is unknown, the adequacy of the swale for drainage appears to be in question. It may also have an effect on the appearance of the structure / Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. Robed W, Keith Secretary SOUTHOLD TOWN ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE May 1 , 2001 The ARC met at Town Hall at 4:30 p.m.. Members present were: Garrett A. Strang, Co-Chairman Robert I. Brown, Co-Chairman Theodore Carpluk, Southold Yan Rieger, Orient Sanford Hanauer, Mattituck Robed Keith, Mattituck, Secretary Also attending was Robert G. Kassner of the Planning Board Staff. Moved by Theodore Carpluk and seconded by Garrett Strang, it was RESOLVED to APPROVE the MINUTES of the meeting of April 5, 2001. Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. MAY: PENNY LUMBER [ffvlain Road - Greenport) Moved by Yan Rieger and seconded by Sanford Hanauer, it was RESOLVED to TABLE the application as incomplete awaiting the several items on the ARC checklist and the identification of a design professional. The committee made the preliminary comment that the roof pitch should be a minimum of 4 in 12 to make the structure appear more like a barn in character. The Committee offered to the Planning Board the thoughts that a dense, high evergreen buffer would provide screening from Kerwin Boulevard and that, since the porosity of the soil is unknown, the adequacy of the swale for drainage appears to be in question. It may also have an effect on the appearance of the structure Vote of the Committee: Ayes All. 1670 HOUSE (North Road - Southold) Pre-submission discussion) Garrett Strang described a 2400 square foot addition to the east of the present building which follows its cedar shingle roof and siding and is of the same design. The Committee commented that the addition was nicely proportioned and asked that a cupola be considered in lieu of the vent gable on the south roof and that an alternative be proposed for the top of the arch window on the south elevation. PINDAR VINEYARDS STORAGE BUILDING (Main Road - Peconic) Robert Kassner described a 36,000 square foot climate controlled building of metal material set back from the Main Road. The Committee would like to see a site plan showing the parcel with the proposed building together with the parcel to its east in order to see the relationship of the buildings; also a floor plan showing the usage of the building and photographs of both properties. The Committee invites the owner and/or the architect to a meeting to be held next week The concerns for discussion are the appearance of tloe elevation facing the road, the visibility of the west elevation from the road, and the mansard on the east elevation; all to lead to lead to an appearance more in character with a farm building. Robert W. Keith Secretary JEAN W. COCHRAN SUPERVISOR TOWN HAL[. - 53095 MAIN ROAD Fax. (516)-765-1366 TO N OF SOU FHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 I'el (516)- 765 - 1560 OFFICE OF THE ENGINEER TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 24, 2001 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman - Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Penny Lumber, Main Road, Southold SCTM #: 1000-53-02-21,25.1 & 27.1 APR 211111 Sou old Town Dear Mr. Orlowski: Plalllllllg Board As per your request, I have reviewed the latest site plan submission for the above referenced project. The drainage calculations shown on the plan indicates the increased amount of run-off that would be generated by the proposed site developments. The proposed drainage swale along the south-east property line has an area large enough to handle the additional run-off that will be generated by the improvements. Any future storage buildings should not be located within this proposed swale area. At this time I would like to point out that the existing buildings, site facilities and drainage structures have not been included in this drainage review. This review was directed solely at the additional run-off generated by the proposed improvements to the site. If you have any questions concerning this report, please contact my office. Subiuission Without a Covey Lelte~v ~e~der. SCTM#: 1000- Date: 2001 Soul,oki Town PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: FROM: RE: Jamie Richter, Town Engineer Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer Penney Lumber Main Road, Southold SCTM# 1000-53-2-25A, 21, 27.1 DATE: April 11, 2001 In response to your March 14, 2001 drainage review of the above project, the applicant has resubmitted drainage calculations. It appears that the new drainage swale goes thru the proposed future storage building? The proposed swale also removes the previously proposed landscaping on the east side! Your review of the drainage for the proposed buildings is requested. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 March 22, 2001 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD George L. Penney, IV Penney Lumber, Inc. Main Road, P.O. Box 2067 Greenport, NY 11944 Proposed site plan for storage buildings Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-53-2-21, 25.1 & 27.1 Zone Light Industrial (LI) Dear Mr. Penney, The Planning Board has received the enclosed letter from the Town Engineer. It is being sent to you for your attention. If you have any questions, or require assistance, please contact this office. Sin~cerely, Site Plan Reviewer Encl. JEAN W. COCHRAN SUPERVISOR TO~q HALL - 53095 MAIN ROAD Fax (516)~765-1366 JAMES A. RICHTER, R.A. ENGINEER TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 Tel.(516)-765- 1560 OFFICE OF THE ENGINEER TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman - Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Penny Lumber Storage Building Route 25, Greenport SCTM Ct: 1000-53-02-21,22, 25.1, & 27.1 Dear Mr. Orlowski: March 14, 2001 Southold Town Planning Board As per your request, I have reviewed the site plan for the above referenced project. The drainage calculations provided on the plan require on-site containment of 7,662 cubic feet of run-off. The proposed drainage design is an eight (8') foot wide strip of land along the South Easterly property line. This proposed shallow swale does not have the capacity to contain 7,662 cubic feet of water. The drainage design should be revised to contain all run-off generated by the new construction. All run-off should be contained on-site and not allowed to enter the town roadway or adjacent Rail Road property. Test holes should be provided to verify soil conditions and depth to ground water. The bottom of all proposed swales, recharge basins or leaching pools should maintain a minimum separation of two (2') feet above the water table. It should also be noted that the proposed new building setbacks appear to be less than required by Town code. This item should be reviewed by the Building Department to verify compliance. A variance may be required to locate buildings as proposed. If you have any questions concerning this report, please contact my office. CC: Raymond L. Jacobs (Superintendent of Highways) S i~4'e~e ly, JEAN W. COCHRAN SUPERVISOR ]'OWN HAI.L - 53095 MAIN ROAD Fax (516)-765-1366 JAMES A. RICHTER, R.A.~. ENGINEER TOWqq OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 Tel.(516)-765 -1560 OFFICE OF THE ENGINEER TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman - Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Penny Lumber Storage Building Route 25, Greenport SCTM #: 1000-53-02-21, 22, 25.1, & 27.1 Dear Mr. Orlowski: March 14, 2001 MAR 1 · outho}0 ' ' As per your request, I have reviewed the site plan for the above referenced project. The drainage calculations provided on the plan require on-site containment of 7,662 cubic feet of run-off. The proposed drainage design is an eight (8') foot wide strip of land along the South Easterly property line. This proposed shallow swale does not have the capacity to contain 7,662 cubic feet of water. The drainage design should be revised to contain all run-off generated by the new construction. All run-off should be contained on-site and not allowed to enter the town roadway or adjacent Rail Road property. Test holes should be provided to verify soil conditions and depth to ground water. The bottom of all proposed swales, recharge basins or leaching pools should maintain a minimum separation of two (2') feet above the water table. It should also be noted that the proposed new building setbacks appear to be less than required by Town code. This item should be reviewed by the Building Department to verify compliance. A variance may be required to locate buildings as proposed. If you have any questions concerning this report, please contact my office. CC: Raymond L. Jacobs (Superintendent of Highways) Si~ely, PLANNING BOARD MEMBE~ BENNETT ORLOWSICI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hail, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 12, 2001 Cynthia Caprise, Secretary Greenport Fire District P.O. Box 58 Greenport, New York 11944 Dear Ms. Caprise: Enclosed please find one (1) survey, dated February 5, 2001, for the Site Plan for George L. Penny, Inc., Route 25, Greenport. ,M#53-2-21, 25.1 & 27.1 The enclosed site plan is being referred to you for fire access review and for your recommendations as to whether any fire- wells are needed. Please specify whether firewells are shallow or electric. O The enclosed subdivision is being referred to you for your recommendation at to whether any firewells are needed. Please specify whether firewells are shallow or electric. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, Robert G. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer enc. PLANNING BOARD MEMBE~ BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCI-IIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIA-NO Town Hail, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: FROM: RE: Jamie Richter, Town Engineer Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer Penney Lumber Storage Buildings Route 25, Greenport SCTM# I000-53-2-21, 25.1 & 27.1 DATE: March 9, 2001 Please review the above project for drainage. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman V~ILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICt-L~RD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971~0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 1, 2001 George L. Penney, IV Penney Lumber, Inc. Main Road, P.O. Box 2067 Greenport, NY 11944 Proposed site plan for storage buildings Main Road, Greenport SCTM# 1000-53-2-21, 25.1 & 27. l Zone Light Industrial (LI) Dear Mr. Penney, The Planning Board has received your site plan for two proposed storage buildings. The Board will proceed with its review; however, the proposed storage building will be non-conforming as to the side yard setback. A notice of disapproval from the Building Depa. rtm. ent and a variance from the Zoning Board will be necessary it the building remmns m the proposed location. The proposed future storage building does not meet the side yard setback for this zone and will also need a notice of disapproval from the Building Department and a variance from the Board of Appeals if the building remains in the proposed location. If you have any questions, or require assistance, please contact this office. assner Site Plan Reviewer Cc; Edward Forrester, Director of code Enforcement Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Board of Appeals · ~4NNING BOARD MEMBE}'I BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. z Chairman WILLI£,M J CREMERS t,X]NNEI'H L. F, DWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHA~Vl, JR. RICHARD G. WARD PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town i{all, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-3136 Telephone (516) 765-1938 Date Received Date Completed Filing Fee New Change of Use Re-use Extension Revision of Approved Site Plan Name of Business or Site: SCTM #: Location: Address: Name of Applicant: Address of Applicant: Telephone: Owner of Land: APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF A SITE PLAN' ~ooo- ~'3 - Z_- 'z_g-, I 3outhold Town Ptannin~ ~ Agent or Person responsible application: for Address: Telephone: Site plans prepared by: License No. Address: Telephone: lo,3o looo MORTON BUILDINGS GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS _LAMINATED COLUMNS - NO. 1 OR BETTER SOUTHERN :YELLOW PINE NAIL LAMINATED .3 MEMBER S4S COLUMNS USED IN MORTON BUILDINGS ARE PRESSURE TREATED BELOW GRADE TO A RETENTION OF ,8 POUNDS PER CUBIC FOOT WITH CHROMATED COPPER ARSENATE TYPE III, OXIDE TYPE, AS LISTED IN FEDERAL SPECIFICATION TT-W-571J. THE TREATED PORTION OF THE COLUMN EMBEDDED IN GROUND SHALL BE LAMINATED WITH STAINLESS STEEL NAILS. OOT N D HOP G - COLUMN HOLES ARE DUG 4 FEET DEEP MIN. DEPTH BELOW GRADE AND READY-MIX CONCRETE PADS OR DRY CONCRETE MIX I~ADS ARE POURED IN PLACE (NOTE PLANS FOR SIZE & TYPE), TWO OALVANIZED STEEL BASE ANCHORS ARE PLACED 1" FROM BOTTOM OF COLUMN OR 1/2" GALVANIZED STEEL ROD PLACED 2 1/2" PROWl BOTTOM Of COLUMN, ADDITIONAL CONCRETE MLX IS PLACED AROUND BASE OF COLUMN THEN BACKFILLED WITH SOIL AND COMPACTED AT 8" INTERVALS, ~p_LASHBOARDS - SPLASHBOARDS ARE NO. 2 OR BETTER SOUTHERN YELLOW PINE 2"xB" S28 AND CENTER MATCHED, PRESSURE TREATED TO NET RETENTION OF !,6 POUNDS PER CUBIC FOOT WITH CHROMATED COPPER ARSENATE TYPE Ill, OXIDE TYPE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH AMERICAN WOOD PRESERVERS' ASSOCIATION SPECIFICATION 62, ONE ROW IS FURNISHED FOR BUILDING ON A LEVEL SITE. FRAMING LUMBER - SIDE NAILERS ARE 2"x4" S48 OR ?"xG" SPF NO.2 OR GETTER SPACED APPROXIMATELY 30" O.C, WITH ALL JOINTS STAGGERED AT ATTACHMENT TO COI~UMNS, ROOF PURLINS ARE 2'x4" S48 NO, 2 OR BETTER ON EDGE SPACED APPROXIMATELY 24" O.C. ALL OTHER FRAMING LUMBER IS NO. 2 OR BETTER. ROOF TRUSSES - FACTORY ASSEMBLED WITH 18 OR 20 GAUGE GALVANIZED STEEL TRUSS PLATES AS REQUIRED AND KILN DRIED LUMBER AS SPECIFIED. IN-'PLANT QUALITY CONTROL INSPECTION IS CONDUCTED UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE TPt tNSPECTION BUREAU, TRUSSES ARE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH CURRENT STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE STATED LOADING. SIDING PANELS (KYNAR 500/HYLAR 5000'~ -0,019" M,IN,, Ggo GALVANIZED OR AZ55 GALVALUME, WITH AN ADDITIONAL BAKED-ON KYNAR ~O0/HYLAR 5000 FINISH, PAINT IS NOM. 1 MIL THICK ON EXTERIOR gOOFiNG PANELS (KYNAR 500/NYLAR 5000) -0,019" iMIN,, Ggo GALVANIZED OR AZ55 GALVALUME, WITH AN ADDITIONAL BAKED-ON KYNAR ~O0/HYLAR 5000 FINISH. PAINT IS NOM, 1 MIL THICK ON EXTERIOR, ; TRIM -DIE-FORMED TRrM OF 0,019" MiN., G90 GALVANIZED OR AZ55 GALVALUME STEEL ON GABLES, RIDGES, CORNERS, BASE, WINDOWS, AND pOOPS WITH SAME FINISH AS ROOFING OR SIDING PANELS, ~UTT~RS - 5" K-STYLE, ,030 HIGH TENSILE ALUM NUM GUTTER, KYNAR 500/HYLAR 5000 FINISH TO MATCH TRIM, ON BOTH SIDES OF THE BUILDING, ADDITIONAL NOTES 1,) ALL PLOT PLANS AND RELATED DETAILS SHALL By PROVIDED BY OWNER UNLESS INCORPORATED AS PART OF THESE DRAWINGS, 2.) ALL INTERIOR PARTITIONS AND ROOM FINISHES IF NOT INCLUDED WITH THESE DRAWINGS SHALL BE PROVIDED BY OWNER, STANDARD FINISHES SHALL HAVE LEST THAN 200 FLAME SPREAD RATING AS REQUIRED BY ASTM E84 FOR ORDINARY CONDITIONS AND 25 ORI LESS FOR EXITS, PASSAGEWAYS, AND CORRIDORS. 3.) FLOOR COVERINGS JUDGED TO REPRESENT AN UNUSUAL HAZARD SHALL MEET THE SAME TESTING PROCEDURES AS REQUIRED FOR WALL AND CEILING FINISHES. 4,) MORTON BUILDINGS GENERAL SPEOIFIOATIONS APPgY UNLESS INDICATED DIFFERENTLY ON SPECtFIC JOB DRAWINGS OR SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION, 5,) KYNAR 500 IS A REGISTERED TRADEMARK OF ELF! ATOCHEM NORTH AMERICA, HYLAR 5000 IS A TRADEMARK OF AUSIMONT, USA. CS2x4KK 10-00 SHEET 1 OF5 20F5 30F5 40F5 50F5 PROPOSED MORTON BUILDING ILDING LOCATION PLAN I 10' 40' SCALE: 5' 20' 80' BUILDING DESIGN CRITERIA USE GROUP C4.2 ONSTRUpTION TYPE 5-B LIVE ROOF LOAD DESIGN 50 PSF WIND LOAD 80 MPH (EXP, FLOOR LOAD 1125 PSF i FLOOR A~EA I 5400 SQ FT SHEET INDEX DESCRIPTION SPE CIFICATIONS, SHEET INDEX, BUILDING LOCATION PLAN COL UMN PLAN ELE /ATIONS SEqTIONS TRLSS DRAWING & DETAIL TYPICAL LUMBER SPECIFICATIONS- 1997 NDS SIZE DESCRIPTrON BENDING VALUE Fb 2"x4." NO.1&2 SPF 1513 PSI 2"x4" 2100f MSR SPF 2100 PSI 2"x6" NO.1&2 SPF 1138 PSI 2"x6" NO. 1 SYP 1650 PSI 2"x8" NO. 1 SYP 1500 PSi 2"x10" NO. 1 SYP 1.300 PSI 2"x12" NO. 1 SYP 1250 PSI ALL 1950f MSR SYP 1950 PSI 1/2"x16" LAMINATED VENEER LUMBER 2800 PSI 1/2"x15" CLU-LAM 1650 PSI 1/¢"x16 I/2" OLU-LAM 2400 PSI NOTE: HIGHER GRADE MATERIAL REQUIRED AS NOTED ON PLANS. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN FOR THIS BUILDING WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MM DIRECT SUPERVISION AND TH~F~AM A DULY RONALD L, SUTTON~ P.E, OB NOi 28_0651 ) d n Itl Itl 'DRAWN BY: RP 882 · DATE: 5-7-01 CHECKED BY: JJB DATE: 6-8-01 REVISED DATE: REVISED DATE REVISED DATE: ~EVISED DATE: · rSCALE: AS NOTED SHEET NO. k, 1 oF5 53'-9" ¢¢-4 I/2" -- 30'-10 I/2' -- 22'-10 1/2" - W-lO 1/2" - 7'-4 1/2' v2t, 115"¢ 15"¢ 115"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ ~J~-OONTJNUOUS 2"x4" LOWER CHORD TRUSS TIES AND 2"xS" DIAGONAL END BRACES APPROXIMATELY 7-6" & 8'-0" O.C. TYPICAL 22"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ I I I 4'-10 1/2], NOTE: ¢' IDENTIFIES ITEMS THAT ARE NOT PROVIDED BY MORTON BUILDINGS, INC. OR MORTON BUILDINGS' SUBCONTRACTORS AND ARE THE OWNERS RESPONSIBILITY. 22"¢ 22"¢] 22"¢J 54' S.C. TRUSSES ~~'~ 7'-6" O,C, TYPICAL 22"¢ i 24"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ COLUMN PLAN COLUMN PLAN LEGEND m- 3-2"x6" LAMINATED COLUMN LOCATION ·- HEADERED TRUSS' LOCATION []- (2) WALK DOORS¢' ~__- 12'x12' OVERHEAD DOOR¢' 24'x4' OVERHEAD COOR~. 7/16" OSB SHEAR WALL W/ NAILS ~* 6" O.C. (SEE DETAIL PG. 5 OF 5) 24" DIA. FOOTING W/ 24"¢ 10" THICK READI-MIX PAD OR (7)50# BADS OF SACKRETE PRE-MIXED W/WATER. PLACE (4)50# BAGS OF SACKRETE PRE-MIXED W/ WATER AROUND COLUMNS WHEN SETTING. 22"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ 22"¢ I I I 22"¢- 15"¢- 2~" DIA. FOO11NG W/ 9" THICK READI-MIX PAD OR (5)50# BAGS OF SACKRETE PRE-MIXED W/WATER, PLACE (3)50# BAGS OF SACKRETE PRE-MIXED W/ WATER AROUND COLUMNS WHEN SETTING, 15" CIA, FOOTING W/ 8" THICK READI-MIX PAD OR (2)50# BAGS OF SACKRETE PRE-MIXED W/WATER. PLACE (1)50# BAG OF SACKRETE AROUND COLUMNS WHEN SETTING. NOTE: FOR FOOTINGS THAT REQUIRE PRE-MIXING WITH WATER, USE 1/2 GALLON OF WATER PER 50# BAG, ROUGHUNIT SYMBOL OPENINGSCHEDULE VERIFY FROM LEGEND WIDTr HEIGHT [] VERIFI 46'-4 1/2' 38'-t0 1/2" 14'-10 1/2" - -- 7'-+ 1/2" SCALE: 16' rOFFICE: LJOB NDi28_0631 I,I I,I BY: RP 882 DATE: 5-7-01 CHECKED BY: DATE: REVISED DATE: REVJSED DATE: LREVISED DATE: EVISED DATE: L 2OF5 --. T#78 TRIM STEEL CORNER TRiM T#167 TRANSITION TRIM HI-RIB STEEL WAINSCOT t#21 CORNER TRIM T#167 BASE TRIM SOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION STEEL CORNER TRIM T#167 TRANSITION TRIM HE-RIB STEEL WAINSCOT T#21 CORNER TRIM BASE TRIM T#5 RIDGE caP WEST ELEVATION T#78 TRIM HI-RIB STEEL T#21 CORNER TRIM T#167 TRANSITION TRIM HI-RIB STEEL WAINSCOT T#21 CORNER TRIM T#167 BASE TRIM NORTH ELEVATION -- T#16 GABLE TRIM HI-RIB STEEL Ti#21 CORNER TRIM HI-RIB STEEL WAINSCOT T#21 CORNER TRIM T#167 BASE TRIM · rOFFICE: CUTCHOGUE, NY LJoB Noi28_o6~1 lift I.--; I i I I ~'DRAWN BY: RP 882 · DATE: 5-7-01 CHECKED BY: DATE: REVISED DATE: REVISED DATE: REVISED DATE: ~REVISED DATE: · SCALE: 16' 3or 5 2"x6" BEV, PURLIN.-- T#7B EAVE 16'-0" GRADE TO HEEL KYNAR HI-RIB 2"x4" PURLINS I© 25" (NO. 2 SRF) ~ISH GRADE 54' S,C, TRUSS 1/2"X5 1/2" M, BOLTS 20d R.S. NAILS HI-RIB STEEL (KYNAR) 3-2"x8" LAMINATED COLUMN (4) ROWS 2"x4" NAILERS 2100f MSR SPF 1 1/2"xl 1/2" VERTICAL BLOCKING AT COLUMN LOCATION -- '#187 TRANSITION TRIM --2"x6" NOTCHED NAILER STEEL WAINSCOT (KYNAR) OSB PROTECTIVE LINER BASE TRIM ROW 2"x8" TREATED SPLASHBOARD CONCRETE FLOORe --4" MINIMUM COMPACTED GRANULAR BASEe I~.) SLOPE GRADE AWAY FROM TNB BUILDING BASE ANCHORS THICK READI-MIX PAD OR (5)50# BAGS OF SACKRETE PRE-MIXED W/WATER. PLACE (3)50# BAGS OF SACKRETE PRE-MIXED W/ WATER AROUND COLUMNS WHEN SETTING, SIDEWALL SECTION 80 M.P,H, WIND LOAD A-A o, L ~' IDENTIFIES ITEMS THA~1 ARE NOT PROVIDED BY MORTON BUILDINGS, INC. OR MORTON BUILDINGS' SUBCONTRACTORS AND ARE THE OWNERS RESPONSIBILITY. (5) 1/2"x5 1/2" k4. E 2'x10~ HEADER (3) 2"x8" STUB COLt 124 / T# 12~, 2"x2~' BLOCK -- ~ T# 151 1 T# 154' 2"x3" JAMB (~BYOND) (5) 2"x8" JAMB COLUMN (~EYOND) [ 2"x6" BLOCK i(~EYOND) -- GRADE TO BOT' OF 2"x6" BL (..3) 2" HEADER (NO. 1 SYP.) 2"x12" HEADERS 1SYP,) 155 12'-5" GRADE TO BOTTOM OF 2"x6' BLOCK OHD HEADER SECTION B-B SCALE: I "= 1'-0" 2"x6" BLOCK ~ T# 124 ~. T# 12 2"x2" BLOCK -- T# 151 OM T# 154 2"x3" JAMB (BEYOND) :6" JAMB COLUMN (BEYOND) 2"x6" BLOCK (BEYOND) -- OHD HEADER 5~' S.C. TRUSS 2"x10 HEADERS HEADER HEADER MEMBER EA, 2"x12" EA, 2"x 10" NAILING SCHEDULE STUB JAMB COLUMN 8 6 6 NOTES; i 1, NUMBERB ABOVE, ARE 2Od R,$, NAILS REQUIRED PER CONNECTION, 2. PRE-DRILL HEADERS AS REDUIRED TO PREVENT SPURTING, 3. [F NUMBER OF NAILS REDUIRED FOR HEADER TO JAMB, COLUMN CONNECTION IS EXCESSIVE TO CAUSE SPLITTINS, THE EXCESS NAILS MAY SE iNSTALLED IN HEADER SUPPORT BLOCKING, MASEAL 152 SECTION C-C IFFICE: "~ ~28-0651 J r ~DRAWN BY: RP 882 DATE: 5-7-01 CHECKED BY: DATE: REVISED DATE: REVISED DATE: REVISED DATE: ~EVISED DATE: I SCALE: AS NOTED SHEET NO. '4or 5 16x8 PL 18 Go, 10'3" 16xll PI. 18 Oa. CAMBER AT CENTERLINE 1-3/'¢' WEB #1 2-5x10 PI, 9xll PI, 2"x4" WEB- STIFFENER 11x13 PI. #2 TRUSS SPACING 7'-6" O.C. LIVE LOAD 50 PSF DEAD LOAD 4 PSF CEILING LOAD - PSF TOTAL LOAD 34 PSF 1/2" CROWN 11x13 PI, WEB #3 11x15 4x5 PI, WEB #4 WEB #5 9x9 PL TR~SS DESIGN SPECIFICATION: /Truss hos been designed by computer using the Purdue /Plone Structure Anolyzer lAW current stondords end jspecificotions of recognized engineering principles. lTrusses ore monufoctured by Morton Buildings, LUMBER SPECIFICATION (1997 NOS for Wood Construction): ILower Chord -- 1950f - 1.5E MSR Southern Pine Top Chord --- No. 1 K.D. - 19 Southern Pine Web Members -- No. 1 K.D. - 19 Southern Pine SS PLATE SPECIFICATION (ICBO Evoluation Report No. 2929): ASTM A-446, Grade A 20 Go. end 18 Go. where noted, olvonized steel Morton truss plotes identified by o stomped every 1-1/4" elong the center of the plete. RA LENGTH 28'3-15/16" ore 2x4's except where noted WEB 8x10 2'~1; 12 J4 20x9 PI. 18 Go. 16x9 PI. 38' 2-13x8 PI. 18 Ga. L.C, 15 1/2" 10'5-1/4" -- 16'11-7/8 -- 26'10-1/2" CCP 54' S.C. TRUSS -2"x4"PURLIN ~CALE: 1/2"= 1'-0" STD, 2"x4" NAILERS EXTRA NAILERS ADDEB~ BETWEEN STD, NAILERS MAX, SPACE TO BE 24") .~-7/16" OSB CHORD OF END TRUSS VERTICAL BLOCKS AT COLUMN BETWEEN NAILERS OF OSB SHEETS NAILED W/ 1-3/4" SHINGLE GUN NAILS SPACED 6" O.C. SUPPORTS W/ 1-3/4" SHINGLE GUN NAILS SPACED 6" O.C. LAMINATED COLUMN 5/4"x4" NAILER (IF PROTECTIVE LINER IS INCLUDED) TRTD, BASEBOARD 60d R,S, TRUSS ~R' i SCREW ON -GRIP PEAK SIDE AND (2) ON EAVE SlOE OF PURLIN IN HOLES SHOWN (JOINT MUST BE TIGHT BEFORE FASTENING CUPS) 2"x4" BUTTED PURLIN SCALE: l l/~'= 1'-0" --2"x6" BLOCK BETWEEN NAILERS NAILED TO COLUMN W/ 20d GUN NAILS. NAILED 6" O,C, I LAMINATED COLUMN 7/16" OSB 2"x4" NAILERS LAMINATED COLUMN DETAIL OSB SHEARWALL ELEVATION OSB SHEARWALL SECTION 20 go, GALV. PURLIN CONNECTOR g Iii-~ ~RAWN BY: RP 882 · DATE: 5-7-01 CHECKED BY: DATE: REVISED DATE: ~EVISED DATE: REVISED DATE: ~REVISED DATE: · [sCALE:S"?E;%? ] 5o 5