Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3965 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NLqM YORK APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR APPEAL of ( ) PERMIT TO USE ( ) PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY (X ) PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 1, (We) San Simeon Property Assoc. ^ ................................................................. f. Main Road Nome of Appellant ................................................. Street and Number ..... Greenoort ............................................. ' ................................. ~.~. ............ HEREBY APPEAL TO Municipality St,~te THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS'FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON APPLICATION FOR PERMIT NO ..................................... DATED January 30, 1990 WHEREBY TI~E BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED TO San Simeon Retirement Community [Name of ADplicont for permit c/o W~lliam H. Price .... ..M..a...i..n. Road .......................... .~.~..;e. 9..n. ~..o..r...t. ......... .N.~ Street ond Number Mun,c,polily ....... ~;~ .................... I. LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY 920 ChalQ. 61 Lane, Green orr ~treet /Mai,et / Use Distri~; District 1000 Section 045Block02 Lot010.O03 .............................................................................. ~,urrent Owner Iviop No. Lot No. Prior Owner 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED (Indicate the Article Section, Sub- section and Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article XXV Section 100-250 3.. TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is mode herewith for (please check appropriate box) ( ) A VARIANCE to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Mop ( ) A VARIANCE due to lock of access (State of New York Town Law Chap. 62 Cons. Lows Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsection 3 (~ APPEAL OF DECISION 4. PREVIOUS APPEAL A previous appeal kh~a~ (has not) been mode with respect to this decision of the Building Inspector or with respect to this property. Such appeal was ( ) request for o special permit ( ) request for o variance and was made in Appeal No ........................... ,,....Doted ........... . REASON FOR APPEAL ( ) A Variance to Section 280A Subsection 3 ( ) A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance (X) APPEAL OF DECISION is requested for the reoson thor the Building Department wrongfully and intentionally denied building permits to the undersigned, the contract vendee, for the San Simeon development property as noted above in the description portion of the petition even though there is a duly approved site plan and resolu- tion duly adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board approving the site plan for the construction of 144 dwelling units. P0rm (Continue on other side) REASON FOR APPEAL Continued 1. STRICT APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE would produce practical difficulties or unneces- sary HARDSHIP because 2. The hardship created is UNIQUE and is not shared by oil properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in this use district because 3. The Variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and WOULD NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT because STATE OF NEW YORK ) ~,~. ) ss COUNTY OF SlJ~'~'OT,I< ) ..... Sworn to this J ~ do f ~"'--J'"'"'--q~ ..... 828 FRONT STREET, I~ O. BOX 803 GREENPORT, NY 11944 (516) 477-1016 August 28, 1990 Southold Town Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 RE: SAN SIMEON PROPERTY ASSOCIATION Gentlemen: Please be advised that the appeal from the decision of the building inspector denying building permit application for the San Simeon project is hereby withdrawn. JKM/bl ~ cc: Southold Town Attorney APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Charles Grigonis, Jr. Serge Doyen, Jr. Joseph H. Sawicki James Dinizio, Jr. Telephone (516) 765~1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCO'Vr L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: PLANNING BOARD ~ ZONING BOARD OF APPEAL AUGUST 1, 1990 SAN SIMEON RETIREMENT COMMUNITY - Appl. No. 3965 Property 91000-045-02-10.03 The above captioned Appeal was filed with this department on July 30, 1990 requesting a reversal of the building inspector§ decision on denying a permit to develop the property. Please provide this Board with any recommendations or conunents concerning this particular file so that we may proceed with scheduling a hearing for this application. Thank you for your cooperation. ZBA/df JUDITH T. TERRY TO'~N CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATIST[CS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD July 30, 1990 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 1197t FAX (516) 765-1823 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 To: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals From: Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 3965 of San Simeon Property Assoc. Also included is Notice of Disapproval dated January 30, 1990 to William Price a/c San Simeon Comm.; copy of a letter from the Southold Town Planning Board to Donald Denis, AIA, dated June 11, 1986; ZBA questionaire; Notice to Adjacent Property Owners; and Short Environmental Assessment Form. Southold Town Clerk · FORM NO, 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated .....~.~...a~...~. ........ 19.~./?. Location o f Proper ty ,...cl. ~q .... ~r~ a.~ .~..a,A~.. ...... ~_¢,M9.. ~N~7,~ ............. I'touse mo. ~t Street V [-t~mle~ County Tax Map No. 1000 Section .... .O.~.~. ..... Block .... ]. O. ....... Lot .. l .~ .,./. ...... Subdivision ................. Filed Map No ................. Lot No .................. is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds..Q~...'.c,~.....~.X.~....~4~,~... ~..,~.: ~ .~....~.....e ~.~.....~.~.,4..,. ~..,>~..~..~....~ i. ~ ~. ~uilding Inspector RV 1/80 ~ TOWN OF $OUTHOLD PROPERTY ,. RECORD CARD ~N~ J STRE~ I VIL~GE J DIST. J COUNWT~PNO. ~ND .... iMP. ~ . ~ TOTAL DATE R~RKS: · ~ ~ ~ ' ~ COLOR TRIM Foundation ¢ Walls Fire Place Roof Recreation Room Both Floors !/~/ Interior F~inish Heat Rooms 1st Floor Rooms 2nd Floor Dinette Garage Patio I Total J Driveway FORM NO, 3 TOWN OF SOUTItOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTItOLD, N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL Date, , .~..t~/~;~. ~ .~.. ...... , 19 . PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated .. ;.~...o..,~....~.. ~. . 19 ~ O forpe itto ........... ~ ~ .... · ..... ~ ............ at LocationofProperty . .~ . ~ ~__ ~. -- ~ ~ouso~o~' ' ' ~ - ' · ' ~' · · '_' .~~~I ............ County Tax Map No. 1000 Section .... ~ ..... Block .... /. a ....... Lot . .l .0 ...~ ...... Subdivision ................. Filed Map No. : ............... Lot No .................. l~ ~ , ~ ~ ~~ ~ -E ............... RV 1/80 Souchold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 June 11, 1986 Mr. Donald Denis, AIA Main Road Aquebogue, NY 11931 Re: San Simeon Retirement Community Dear Mr. Denis: The following action was taken by the Southold TOwn Planning Board, Monday, June 9, 1986. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the site plan of the San Simeon Retirement Community located at Chapel Lane, Greenport for construction of 144 dwelling units, survey dated as revised January ~: 19~6 with the following ~upplemental plans: Surveys from H2M dated March, May, and September of 1984. Tax Map No. 1000-45-2-10.1. It was noted for the record that this proposal has received certification from the Building Department. When the surveys have been endorsed, we will forward one to you. Please contact this office if. you have any questions. cc: Building Department Pastor Ettlemeyer Very truly yours, BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR., CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M. Schultze, Secretary PROJECT I.D. NUMBER 617.21%. 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 I 2o PROJECT NAME SAN SIMEON PROPERTY ASSOCIATES SEQR 3. PROJECT LOCATION: Municipality Greenport c~un~y Suffolk 920 Chapel Lane, Greenport, New York Tax Map. No. 1000-45-2-10.3 ' S. IS PROPOSED ACTION: ~New [] Expansion [] Modificationlalleratlon 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: 144 Unit retirement community with related facilities. 7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: Initially 3 7 · 7 acres Ultimately 3 7 · 7 acres 8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? ~Yes 0 No If NO, descriDe briefly 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? ~ ~esidential [] Inau$lrial ~Commerc,al [] Agricu,ture [] Pa.~ForesuO.en :space [] Other Describe: Mixed 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING. NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)? [] Yes [] NO If yes, Iisi agency(s) and permit/approvals 1 I. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? ~] Yes [] No If ye~. list agency name and permitlapproval Valid site plan appoval from Southold Town Planning Board, building ~ermits and certificates of occupancy for 4 units from Southold Town uildinq D~p~r~-m~, 12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? [] Ye, XEX~o CE IFY THAT 'H RMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Ihe action is n le Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form betoro proceeding with this assessment OVER I (Continbed on reverse side) The N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act requires submission of thls form, and an environmental review will ba made by this board before any action is taken. SHORT ENVIHONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM INSTRUCTIONS: project and the likely impacts of the action. It is not expected that additional studies, research or other investigations will be undertaken. (b) If any question has been answered Yes the project may be sig- (c) If all questions have been answered No it is likely that the project is not significant. (d) ~nvironmental Assessment 1. Will project result in a large physical change to the project site or physically alter more than 10 acres of land? . Yes .~ NO 2. Will there be a major change to any unique or 3. Will project alter or have a large effect on an existing body Of water? ___Yes X NO 4. Will project have a potentially large, impact on groundwater quality? .~Yes X NO 5. Will project significantly effect drainage flow 6. Will project affect any threatened or endangered plant or animal species? ~Yes X____No 7. Will project result in a major adverse effect on air quality? Yes X NO 8. Will project have a major effect on visual char- acter of the community or scenic views or vistas known to be important to the community? envircamental area by a local agency? ___Yes X.~No 10. Will project have a m~jor effect on existing or 11. Will project result in major traffic problems or cause a major effect to existing transportation ' systems? ~Yes _~_No 12. Will project regularly cause objectionable odors, ance as a result of the project's operation? ~Yes _~_No 13. Will project have any impact on public health or safety? 14. Will project affect the existing community by directly causing a growth in permanent popula- period or have a major negativa effect on the X NO charact~of th~ 99mpueit~ o~/~ighborhood? 15. Is there pub, k~n~e~nin the.. aepresen tinq'~a~~e r t~s's oc ia t e~a QUESTIO:)NAIRE TO 3E CO:-IPLETED AND SUB, fITTED f~ITll YOUR APPLICATION FO:~.IS TO TIlE BOARD OF ,\PPEAL.q Please complete, sign and return to the Office of the Board of Appeals with your completed application forms. If "Yes" is answered to any questions below, please be sure to depict these areas on your survey (or certified sketch), to scale, and submit other supporting documenta- tion. 1. Are there any proposals to change or alter land contours? 2.a)Are there any areas which contain wetland grasses? (Attached is a list of the wetland grasses defined by Town Code, Ch. 97 for your reference.) b)Are there any areas open to a waterway without bulkhead? 3. Are there existing structures at or"below ground level, such as patios, foundations, etc? 4. Are there any existing or proposed fences, cRncrete barriers, decks, etc? Se If project is proposed for an accessory building or structure, is total height at more than 18 feet above average ground level? State total: ~ · ft. e If project is proposed for principal building or structure, is total height at more than 35 feet above average groundl--~l? State total: ....... ft. Are there other premises under your ownership abutting this parcel? If ~es, please submit copy of deed. Are there any building permits pending on this parcel (or abutting land under you~ ownership, if any)? State Permit ~ and Nature: Yes ~' Yes Yes ~ Yes ~ Yes ~ Yes N~o Yes Do state whether or not applications are pending concerning these premises before any other department or agency (State, Town, County, Village, etc.): 10. 11. 12. Planning Board Town Board Town Trustees County Health Department Village of Greenport N.Y.S.D.E.C. Other Is premises pending a sale or conveyance? If yes, please submit copy of names or purchasers and conditions of sale. (from contract) Is new construction proposed in the area of contours at 5 feet or less as exists? If new construction is proposed in an area within 75 feet of wetland grasses, or land area at an eleva- tion of five feet or less above mean sea level, have you made application to the Town Trustees for an inspection for possible waiver or permit under the Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes N~ requirements of Ch. 97 of the Town Code? Yes N~ 13. Please list present use or Operations conducted upon the subject property at this time ~ ~x_~--_ ~ C~h~j_~ and proposed ~-~-~ ~.~ , ~%~--~,.ft~ {,..,,.__~ Please submitphotographs for ~) ) record. ~\ I c.ertify tha~ tt~ ~ove stat~ k.ts are t~e and are being submitted for rel~an~y~.he ~o~d)~~ la considering my applicatioh. , WETLANDS [Amended 8-26.76 hy L.L. No. 2-1976-' 3-26- 85 by L.L. No. 6.19,q5]: A. TIDAL WETLANDS: (1) All lands generally covered or intermittently rav- ered with. or which bord,r on. tidal w=ters, or lands lying beneath tidal watur~, which at mean Iow tide · are covered by tidal waters to a maximnm depth of five (5) feet, including but not limited to banks, hogs. salt marsh, swamps, meadows, flaL~ or other Iow lying lands subject to tidal action: (2) All banks, bogs. meaduws, flat~ and tidal marsh subject to such tides and upon which grows or may grow some or any of the following: salt hay. b~ack grass, saltwortz, sea lavender, tall cordgr:ms, high bush. cattails, groundsel, marshmallow and Iow march cordgrass; anti/hr (3) All land immediately :utjacent to a tidal wetland az defined in Subsection A~2) and lying within seven- ty-five (75) feet lamhvard of the most landward edge of such a tidal wetland. FRESIIWATER WETLANDS: (1) "Freshwater wetlands" as defined in Article 2.1, Ti- tle 1. § 2,1-0107, Subdivisions l(a) ta l(d) inclusive. of the Environmental Cooservation Law of the Slate of New York; and (2) All land immediately adjacent to a "freshwater wet- ]anti," as defined in Subsection 13(1) aud lying with* in seventy-five (75) feet landward of tile most land- ward edge of a "fi'eshwater wetland." 9705 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD lll " VII ..... ~-a ~:~ ~ ~ld, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 TO: FROM: RE: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman San Simeon Retirement Co~unity Chapel Lane, Greenport, N.Y. SCTM ~ 1000-045-02-10.3 DATE: August 7, 1990 Pursuant to your request of August 1st, please find attached a copy of all pertinent correspondence and supporting documentation from the site plan file for this project. The conceptual site plan approval for the entire project that was issued by this Board in 1976 remains valid. The drainage plans for the original Section I (eight dwelling units in four residential buildings) were approved in 1984. Section I was constructed and Certificates of Occupancy were issued. The project sponsors are proposing to expand the original Section I to include more buildings. However, the drainage planz for the proposed expansion of Section I have not been approved because they would result in stormwater draining onto private property that is not owned by the project sponsors. This Board cannot approve the site plan for the proposed expansion of Section 1 without revised drainage plans because then the Town could be sued by the adjoining property owner for allowing stormwater runoff to drain onto his property. Further, you should be aware that the SEQRA process that was conducted in 1984, was on the original Section I only. See this Board's letter of January 16, 1990, and the Negative Declaration dated June 25, 1984, copies of which are included in the attached package of correspondence. Each of the site plans mentioned in the attached material can be reviewed in the Planning Board office. Unfortunately, we have no duplicates to share with you other than the latest submission to expand the existing Section I. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski~ .Ir.. Chaiiman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD July 2, 1990 SCO'I'F L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 J. Kevin McLaughlin :. 828 Front Street P.O.Box 803 Greenport, New York 11944 Re: Site Plan for San Simeon Retirement Community Greenport, N.Y. SCTM # 1000-45-2-10.3 Dear Mr. McLaughlin: The Planning Board discussed your letter of June 21, 1990, in which you request endorsement of the condominium unit designation map for an expanded Section I. This map was submitted on February 20th, 1990 (and accompanied by Jay E. Helme's letter dated February 16, 1990). The Board has been unable to proceed with the endorsement ~iof the ~ondominium unit designation map because the design of ~:the drainage system has not ~een revised in accordance with the recommendations of the Planning Board and the Town's Engineerino ]consultants. Please refer to A. Barton Cass' May 3rd letter to ~the Planning Board. - i~ Upon receipt of revised plans that meet with the Town's requirement that all stormwater runoff generated by the new Section I be contained onsite, this Board will be able to move forward. Very Truly Yours, Chairman VS/vs Enc. cc: ~. Barton Cass, Sidney B. bowne & Son Ray Jacobs, Highway Superintendent Harvey A. Arnoff, Town Attorney May 3, 1990 Bennett Orlowski, .Ir., Chairman Planning Board\" Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: San Simeon Retirement Corrtmunity Section I (SBB No. 87606) Dear Mr. Orlowski: This is in reply to your letter of April 10, 1990 whereby you requested that we determine whether there is sufficient on-site capacity to handle the runoff from Section I of the above referenced plan. The drainage from this section is proposed to be discharged by a system of swales or channels and pipe into an existing pond area on the easterly side of Chapel Lane approximately 500 feet north of Route 25. One of the swales runs along the easterly side of Chapel Lane and appears to have been partially constructed on what seems to be the Chapel Lane Road right-of-way. The plan shows the subject swale to be on the developer's property. This situation should be corrected since the Town road cannot be used to drain private land. The existing pond area has an existing outlet pipe under Chapel Lane which discharges water onto private property on the west side of the road. Since the property on the west side of the road is not controlled in any manner which we know of by the San Simeon developer, the outlet could become blocked at some time in the future. Therefore, the proposed drainage system should not be designed so as to depend on the outflow through the existing pipe under Chapel Lane. The developer should explore other means of providing a positive outlet for the detention pond since the soil conditions will not permit adequate percolation. Although we understand that the swales and channels will remain under private maintenance once constructed, we question whether the system is practical. During winter snow and ice storms it would seem virtually impossible to keep the swales clear of snow and ice. Plowing operations would almost certainly block the system. For this reason we believe that a conventional system should be considered. 45 Manor Road · Smithtown. New York 11787 · (516) 724.0611 2~SEastderichoTurnpike · P,O. Boxl09 · Mineola. NewYork 11501 ,, (516) 746-2350 ';SIDNEY B. BOWNE & SON Bennett Ortowski, Chairman Town of Southold Planning Board May 3, 1990 Page 2 , If we may be of further assistance in this matter, please let us know. Very truly yours, A. Barton Cass ABC:clg Ray Jacobs, Supt. of Highways Ray Dean (SBB) OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF $OUTHOLD SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 June 25, 1990 J. Kevin McLaughlin, Esq. 828 Front Street P.O. Box 803 Greenport, New York 11944 Re: San Simeon Retirement Community 920 Chapel Lane - Greenport, New York /~ T~x Map 1000-45-2-10.3 Dear Mk. McLaughlin. I have a copy of your letter directed to the Southold Town Planning Board dated June 21, 1990. In response to same, please be advised that at a meeting at which I attended, Mr. Price attended, Mr. Orlowski attended, Mr. Kiernan attended, and others representing San Simeon, it was determined that the Board would be inclined to grant approval to Section 1 of San Simeon's Retirement Community provided the drainage would be taken care of completely on site. It is my further understanding that there appears to be a discrepancy in the recollection of th~se attending in that Mr. Price's recollection is that the drainage was as set forth above except for a "ten year storm". It would appear that we could debate this forever. However, if you feel that another meeting is appropriate I would be please to attend, if not, I regret to inform you that the position of the Board is that all drainage must be taken care of on site prior to the endorsement of your client's map. HAA: cc cc: Planning Board of the Town of Southold SAN SIMEON PROPERTIES ASSOCIATES P.O. Box Z Greenport, New York 11944 June 12, 1990 Mr. A. Barton Cass Sidney B. Bowne & Son 45 Manor Road Smithtown, NY 11787 RE: San Simeon Retirement Community Section [, Sidney B. Bowne Job No. 87606 Dear Mr. Cass: Thank you for your letter of June 4th and the additional references concerning our telephone discussions. I think we must really clarify the fact that I have never indicated to anyone that your discussions with me were interpreted by me as advising the town to proceed with the San Simeon plans as reviewed by your company. Your letter, in fact, does not advise the town one way or the other, as n~.ar as I can interpret it. In both your review of the information for the planning board and the planning board's handling of ou~ building permit application (12/4/89), and the endorsement o~ our condominium unit designation map, everyone seems to have forgotten that we posses an approyed site plan for 144 units, an administrative building, and an ".Inn". This site plan and proposed drainage system was approved ~n 1984, the first 8 units, the road, the detention pond, and sewer and water lines, were constructed in 1985 and 1986, based upon approved building permits and an approved site plan. The detention basin was qonstructed in its location and t~ed into a pre-existing pipe constructed prior to 19~U by the Town of Southold to provide drainage from the run off of Chapel Lane and the drive-in theater. The sizing of the detention pond and the initial swales for the project was approved by the Town of Southold in 1984 and subsequently, re-approved in the amendment of the site plan, which was approved in August of 1986. None-of these written approvals are conditioned upon further drainage review. The "Developer" has expended, following site plan approval by the Town of Southold, more than 3.5 million dollars in acquiring this property, in developing the approved drainage system, in building the initial roads, in bringing sewer and water to the site, in constructing 8 units, and in developing plans and programs for the remaining development of the balance of the residen-tial units (136), the "Inn", and the administrative building. ", "' AN SIMEONPROPERTIES ASSOCIATES ~ A. Barton Cass ~ June 12, 1990 Page 2 ~To apply 1989 rules and regulations to a previously J approved site plan in order for the developer to receive fn~ehfurther building permits, is an unwarranted application of the 1989 standards. Whether or not the engineering company's recommendation is for the developer to develop an alternate plan may be correct from an engineering standpoint based on 1989 regulations,'.but does n0t answer the question as to whether the detention pond was properly sized to handle normal run-off with the excess flowing as it had for years, through the Town of Southold's pipe under Chapel Lane. ~, With respect to the swale on the Easterly side of Chapel Lane, let it be stated that the developer has not constructed any swale on the Easterly side of Chapel Lane, except at the entrance. The swale which was constructed, was dug by the Town of Southold in the first quarter of 1990 and ties into a pre-existing outlet pipe constructed by the Town of Southold in the Northern section of the San Simeon property many years ago. Very truly yours, JEH/jah cc: Bennett Orlowski, Jr. J. Kevin McLaughlin SPECIAL CONSULTANTS Thomas R. Pym;hon, Prof. H. F. Soehngen, P.E., SENIOR STAFF Francis J. Lynch Philip Schlotzheuer Dane C. Kenny, P.E. June 4, 1990 SIDNEY B. BOWNE & SON Mr. Jay Helme 28 Pelham Street Newport, Rhode Island 02840 Re: San Simeon Retirement Community Section I Sidney B. Bowne Job No. 87606 Dear Mr. Helme: We are attaching a copy of our letter of May 3, 1990 to the Chairman of the Southold Town Planning Board on the above referenced project. ~As we discussed today over the telephone the main thrust of our letter was to advise the Town that the proposed drainage system should not be designed so as to depend on the outflow through the existing pipe under Chapel Lane. We further elaborated by stating 'Whe developer should explore other means of · providing a positive outlet for the detention pond since the soil conditions will not permit adequate percolation." This is to confirm that the above quote certainly could not have been interpreted as advising the Town to proceed with the San Simeon plans as reviewed by this office. It remains our recommendation thai the developer proceed to conceive an alternate plan for disposing of the runoff from Section I of the project. If there are any questions concerning this matter please give us a call. Very truly yours, A. Barton Cass ABC:sim Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Ray Jacobs - Supt. of Highways Ray Dean - SBB 45 Manor Road · Smithtown, NewYork 11787 · (516) 724.0611 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD II SCO'Fr L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 May 10, 1990 William H. Price, Jr. 826 Front Street, P.O. Box E Greenport, New York 11944 Re: Drainage Review of San Simeon Site Plan SCTM # 1000-045-02-10.3 Dear Mr. Price, The Planning Board received a report on the drainage for Section I of San Simeon Retirement Community, a copy of which is 'enclosed. As per our agreement, please revise the drainage plans for Section I to address the problems noted in the report. After five copies of the revised plans are sent to this office, they will be sent to Sidney B. Bowne's office for review. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very Truly Yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman Enc: VS/vs May 3, 1990 Bennett Orlowski, .Ir., Chairman Planning Board\ Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: San Simeon Retirement Community Section I (SBB No. 87606) ".' .,:i( ' ' Dear Mr. Orlowski: This is in reply to your letter of April 10, 1990 whereby you requested that we determine whether there is sufficient on-site capacity to handle the runoff from Section I of the above referenced plan. The drainage from this section is proposed to be discharged by a system of swales or channels and pipe into an existing pond area on the easterly side of Chapel Lane approximately 500 feet north of Route 25. One of the swales runs along the easterly side of Chapel Lane and appears to have been partially constructed on what seems to be the Chapel Lane Road right-of-way. The plan shows the subject swale to be on the d~veloper's property. This situation should be corrected since the Town road cannot be used to drain private land. The existing pond area has an existing outlet pipe under Chapel Lane which discharges water onto private property on the west side of the road. Since the property on the west side of the road is not controlled in any manner which we know of by the San Simeon developer, the outlet could become blocked at some time in the future. Therefore, the proposed drainage system should not be designed so as to depend on the outflow through the existing pipe under Chapel Lane. The developer should explore other means of providing a positive outlet for the detention pond since the soil conditions will not permit adequate percolation. Although we understand that the swales and channels will remain under private maintenance once constructed, we question whether the system is practical. During winter snow and ice storms it would seem virtually impossible to keep the swales clear of snow and ice. Plowing operations would almost certainly block the system. For this reason we believe that a conventional system should be considered. 45 Manor Road · Srnithtown. NewYork 11787 · (516) 724-0611 235 East Jericho Tumpike · P.O. Boxl0g · Mineola, NewYork 11501 · (516) 746-2350 ~SIDNEY B. BOWNE & SON Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Town of Southold Planning Board May 3, 1990 Page 2 ' If we may be of further assistance in this matter, please let us know. Very truly yours, A. Barton Cass ABC:clg Ray Jacobs, Supt. of Highways Ray Dean (SBB) Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 ~ Southold, New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCO'I~L. HARRIS Supervisor Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 Robert W. Brown A. Barton Cass 45 Manor Road Smithtown, New York 11787 Re: April 10, 1990 San Simeon Site Plan Greenport, New York SCTM ~ 1000-45-2-10.3 Dear Messeurs Brown and Cass, Enclosed please find the drainage plans and supporting documentation submitted by Donald A. Sioss of the H2M Group. The Board would like you to review the drainage plans which were sent to you on March 12, 1990 with the specific reques% that you make a determination as tQ~hgther those plans pr~vid~ for sufficient onsite capacity to handle the drainage for the ekpanded!~er~i0n~bf section'I onl~,;.a Copy of which is enclosed. The enclosed map W~s l~st amended on April 3, 1990, and was stamped by this office on April 9, 1990. Also enclosed is a copy of Mr. SiOss' comments of March 23rd, in response to your request of March 14, 1990. If there are any problems or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact this office immediately. cc: William H. Price, Jr. Very Truly Yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. (/'/~ Chairman Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1~ Donald A. Sioss, P.E. H2M Group 575 Broad Hollow Road Melville, New York 11747-5076 March 26, 1990 Re: Overall Drainage Plan San Simeon Site Plan SCTM ~ 1000-45-2-10.3 Dear Mr. Sioss, On Friday afternoon, the 23rd of March, this office received the hand-delivered set of overall drainage plans for San Simeon Retirement Community. Your cover letter indicated that you felt that the San Simeon project was exempt from the requirement that all runoff be retained onsite. This project is not exempt from that requirement. The specific approvals that were given for Section 1 in 1986, did not include specific drainage details for the remainder of the site. Consequently, it is requested that you provide this office with information indicating that there will be sufficient capability onsite for handling all stormwater runoff. Upon receipt of this information, the entire package of plans and supporting documentation will be forwarded to the Town's engineering consultant for review. If there are technical questions, please direct them to Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner. cc: William Price, Jr. Very Truly Yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman GROUP March 23, 1990 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Town of Southold Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 RE: San Simeon Retirement Community ,..: Overall Drainage Plan ,~---~- .............. SSPA 89-01 Dear Mr. Orlowski: In response to the letter from Sidney B. Bowne & Son to you regarding the above-referenced project, we are enclosing the following items: 1. Design calculations for the culverts and detention pond on the site; 2. Typical sections of swales and channels; 3. Parking lot and pavement sections 4. Test boring data. Drywells will not be installed to dispose of roof drainage. As one can readily see from the test boring data,~.the.~aterial on-site' is not suitable for"leac~i~. Several shallow test borings were completed i~ July, 1975 and most of the results show clay and silt to a depth of 8 feet. We recently com- pleted two additional deep borings which show clay to a depth of 60 feet. In inspecting the sewer and water installation for,.the now.existing buildings, ~e confirme~'that~theT~aterial'~ was unsuitable for drainage purposes. We therefore based our drainage.plans on swales, channels and cu!~.erts as_ a means to transport a major 'portion ~f stormwate~ runoff to a new detention pond.' We felt that this natural f~u., of water was more in keeping with the rural nature of the area than catch basins and pipe. Please note that swales and c::anne~s are in direct accordance with Paragraph D of the ~ou~ko!d Code, Section 100-252. That paragraph places high prlorit7 on the conservation of natural features, including natural drainage courses. Also, the absence of curbs makes it .,~.cu,~ to collect the Stormwater in catch basins. The use of swales and small diameter culverts, tends to slow the~, GROUP Bennet Orlowski, March 23, 1990 Page Two Jr. stormwater down and assist in the detention time. The swales and channels will be maintained by on-site maintenance person- nel, since this is a condominium, much like they would maintain a catch basin and pipe installation. ~We noted that ,.our ~design does wallow fo~ stormwater to dis- ~c~a~e di~ectly i~to Moore!i~ Drain, .,Which '~'not ~in accordanc~ ~iw~th the ,current $outhold .Code ~$ection 100-252, Paragraph H. i~Howe~eri"0ur original design was compieted' ~in~'i984 and"~as' ~accep~able at that time. 'This Paragraph H was added to the 'code in July, 1989, after the original design and site~lan ,had been approved (1986). We trust that we have addressed all items or year engineer require any additional contact the undersigned. in question. If you information, please Very truly yours, HOLZ~LACHE~, McLENDO~N &_3~LT~RELL, Donald Aj Sioss, P.E. P.Co DAS/CAD/jlh E~cs. cc: Jay E. Helme William Price, Esq. Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF $OUTHOLD SCO'I'r L. HARRIS Supervisor Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 March 1, 1990 Jay E. Helme Managing Partner San Simeon Properties Associates P. O. Box Z Greenport, New York 11944 Re: Letter of February 16, 1990: Request for site plan approval of new Section I of San Simeon Village SCTM # 1000-045-2-10.3 Dear Mr. Helme, The Planning Board has received ~nd reviewed your letter requesting site plan approval of a new Section I for San Simeon Village. The Board finds that it is unable to proceed with this approval until the detailed information that was requested in its January 16, 1990 letter to William H. Price, Jr. is submitted. A highlighted copy of that letter is enclosed for your convenience. As noted in the letter, before we can proceed legally, we must receive grading and drainage plans for the entire site and we must conduct an environmental review of the entire site. Also needed is a letter from the Village of Greenport attesting to the validity of the sewer and water contract. Confirmation of water and sewer is necessary because the County Health Department's approval must be obtained before the Planning Board can endorse final plans. If water and sewer cannot be obtained for the entire site at this time, the letter from the Greenport Water Company should state how many units will be covered by the contract. Furthermore, the Section boundaries should take into account the availability of water and sewer service because this Board will not be able to issue approval to a Section that will be only partially serviced. ~ Grading and drainage plans have not been submitted for the project except that which was submitted and approved in 1986. The map submitted with your letter of February 14, 1990, incorporates the four buildings that constituted the previously !~pproved Section I from 1986. The 1986 approval made specific ~reference to supplemental maps from H2M that were dated March, May and September 1984. Those supplemental maps show the · 'drainage and grading for four buildings (eight dwellings) only. The map that was 'submitted with the February 14, 1990 ~letter should be revised as follows: the map should be labeled ~Section II. Section I, which was approved in 1986, should no~ included on this map. In the interest of expediting this project, the Board has decided to waive the application fee that is currently required under Article XXV of the Zoning Code. However, you will be asked to reimburse the Town for the cost of the engineering review. When the drainage and grading plans are submitted to this office, they will be forwarded to the Town's engineering consultants for an estimate. You will be notified of the estimated cost of review prior to the actual review. Upon receipt of the money, the Board will authorize the engineering review. If revisions to the first set of plans are deemed necessary, the review of the revised plans will be processed similiarly. - With regard to the environmental review, the Planning Board is bound by the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act. To date, only the original Section I was reviewed pursuant to the New York State law. See enclosed copy of the Negative Declaration and the Planning Board minutes of June 25, 1984. The Board also has received and reviewed a copy of your January 22, 1990 letter to Scott Harris, Supervisor. In response to that letter, the Board wishes to make clear that it has no objection to the condominium form of ownership that is being proposed. Further, this Board is aware that this project is not ~a subdivision. In addition, no statements have been made by this Board implying that it is against this project. And, finally, this Board has not rescinded its approval of the overall site ~plan. Upon receipt of the information highlighted in the January letter to William H. Price, Jr., the Planning Board will proceed diligently with the environmental and drainage review. If there are other technical questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very Truly Yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr Chairman VS:vs Enc: cc: Scott Louis Harris, Supervisor Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF $OUTHOLD January 16, 1990 William H. ~rice, Jr. A~torney At Law 828 Front Street, P.O. Box E Greenport, New York 11944 Re: San Simeon Develcpment N/E/corner State Route 25 and Chapel Lane, Greenport, New York $CTM # 1000-045-2-10.3 Dear Mr. Price, The Planning Board has reviewed your letter of December 15, 1989 in whic~ you request clarification of the procedure for obtaining site plan approval for the above-referenced project on a section by section basis. Upon review of the files, it appears that the Board granted overall site plan approval in 1976. At a later date, the applicant decided to proceed with the application on a section by section basis. Consequently, on February 17, 1984, the Planning Board approved a detailed~site Plan for Section ~, only, of the project. A SEQRA review was.conducted on this Section only, as well, All eight of the units in that section received Certificates of Occupancy in April of 1986. Thare have been no subsequent section approvals requested or given since that time. An amended site plan survey for the entire project was approved in June of 1986 and endorsed on August of 1986. The approval also referred to supplemental plans, which showed details for the Section 1 development. Neither the conceptual site plan that was approved in 1976 nor the amended site plan that was approved in 1986 show proposed drainage and grading. Also, the variances that were granted in 1976 may not be valid due to the adoption of a new Zoning Code in January of 1989. And, further, the overall environmental review of the remaining sections should be conducted for the project as a whole, not section by section. Accordingly, the recommended procedure would be to submit an overall drainage and grading plan, including road profiles, drainage calculations and test hole boring data for the entire site. These plans would be used for environmental review as well as engineering review. A letter from the Greenport Village Utility Company should also be submitted attesting to the validity of the water and sewer contracts. Each application should be complete for that section, in that the proposed drainage, grading, road profiles, elevation and floor .plans shall be submitted for review. The Board will follow the procedure outlined in Article ~ of the curren% Zoning Code. Any section receiving approval under the current Article XXV will be valid for three years from the date of approval. The 1986 amended approval will remain valid for three years until May of 1991. At that time, the Board can consider an extension of its approval. However, be aware that the 1986 amendment does not address the County's denial of proposed access to County Road 48. This omission will have to be addressed in future submissions pursuant to this letter. If there are any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact this office. VS/vs CC: Very Truly Yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. v~ Chairman Matthew Kiernan, Assistant Town Attorney Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector .indicated that nB significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. The Department of Environmental Conservation has no objectio to our agency being lead agency for this action. It has an unlisted classification, and a Tidal Wetlands Permit may be necessary. They comment that the density should not exceed i unit per 10,000 square feet. Because there has been no response in the alloted time from the Suffolk County Department of Heal, Services, it is assumed that there is no objection nor comments by that agency. The project will' meet all the requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold Subdivision of Land Regulations. Further information can be obtained by contactingDiane M.-Schnltz~,., Secretary, Southold Town Planning Board, Main Road, Southold, New Y6rk 11971 Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made by Mr. Mullen, seconded by Mr. following action was taken: : · NEGATIVE DECLARATION~ Latham the Pursuant to Article 8 of th~ Environmental Conservation Law State Environmental Quality Review Act and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section- 617.10 and Chapter 44 of the Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that Southold Town Planning Board as lead agency for the action described below has determined' that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. ~IPTION OF ACTION Ch The ...... ~ubd~v~i~on-o~ site plan of ~t. Peter's Lutheran ~Urc~_h Retirement Community~ Section I for 2 ~ur-~it b~ki~_dings.. The project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment for the following reasons: pg. (s) An environmental assessment has been submitted which indicated that no significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to Occur should the project be implemented as planned. Because there has been no response from the Department of Environmental Conservation in the allotted time, it is assumed that there is no. objection nor comments by that agency. Because there has been no response in the allottedtime from the Department of Health Services, it is assumed that there is no objection nor comments by that agency. The project will meet all the requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold Subdivision of Land Regulations. Further information can be obtained by contacting Diane M. Schultze Secretary, Southold Town Planning Board, Main Road, Southold, New 11971 Vote of the Board: Ayes: O~lowski, Mullen, Latham ,Ward On a motion made by Mr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Ward it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board declarethem selves lead agency with regard to the State Environmental Quality Review Act for the min~uhchivision_of_John . ,Simon located at Peocnic. An intial determination of non-significance has ~n made. Vote of the Board: Ayes:..Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward It was also noted that Re right-of-way must be imporved for this minor subdivision. It was also noted that this received approval frOm the Town Board fro, relie~ from the two-acre zoning. Entenmann'loc~t~d at ~aurel. The Pla~nin~ Board reviewed t~is minor subdivision which is also before the Board of Appeals for an insufficient area variance for lot No. 1.. The Planning Board noted that around the area of Lot 1 there are many oeher small, narrow lots; however, prior to making a formal recommendation to the Board of Appeals, they will make a J~MES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI, Jr. ~ Chairman GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, Jr. ~LLIM~I F MULLEN Ir. lcna~ Wa~ ¢ SUEEO Y 8outhold, N.Y. 11971 · NEGATI~q~ DECLARATION TELEPHONE 765- 1938 Pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservatioff Law State Environmental Quality Review Act and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10 and Chapter 44 of the Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that Southold Town Planning Board as lead agency for the action described below has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION The s~b~v~s~nr~f~,..site~lan of,.St..~eter's Lutheran Church Retirement Community;~!,Section I~for 2 foUr_uni~!b.uildings.. The project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment for the following reasons: An environmental assessment has been submitted which indicated that no significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. Because there has been no response from the Department of Environmental Conservation in the allotted time, it is assumed that there is no objection nor comments by that agency. Because there has been no response in the allottedtime from the Department of Health Services, it is assumed that there is no objection nor comments by that agency. The project will meet all the requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold Subdivision of Land Regulations. Further information can be obtained by contacting Diane M. Schultze Secretary, Southold Town Planning Board, Main Road Southold, New ~orK 11971 , HOI-ZMACHER. McLENDON and MURRELL. P.C. * CONSULTING ENGINEERS. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS and PLANNERS 125 BAYLI$ ROAD. SUITE 140. MELVILLE. N.Y. 11747 · $1~752-9060 ~,_.May 2' 1986 Mr. Mark McKee Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.O. Box 565 Aquebogue, NY 11931 PoCo Re: San Simeon SPLC 83-01 Retirement Community ..Dear Mr. McKee: In accordance with your request, the following is a sum- mation of the drainage calculations and design criteria for the ~ San Simeon Retirement Community. The basis of the drainage design for the site is the lrational formula: i Q = CIA --- iWhere "C" corresponds to a runoff coefficient which reflects the ~ ~ imperviousness of a particular surface (i.e., 90% for pavement, "40% for grass, etc.); "I" corresponds to the rainfall intensity ~! ........ (in inches per hour) at a given point during the design storm; .~ and "A" represents the total area in question in acres. The re- sultant "Q" value is the flow of stormwater runoff (in cubic feet '~- -- per second) for which the facilities are designed.  ' The design of the San Simeon with system began the grading -. of the site. From the proposed grading, roadway and building · ..° layout for the development, areas were identified which, by vir- tue of their lower elevations, would serve as natural stormwater -~"--.- - collection areas. A network of "swales", or small channels (type ,; ....... "C" on the plan) were laid out to collect the water from between buildings, from natural low areas, etc. These swales were con- ''' nected to larger channels along the perimeter of the site (type i'-1"A" on the plan), which would serve to collect the Water from the swales and transport it to the detention pond. Also connected to the perimeter channels were intermediate channels along the road- side (type "B" on the plans) which serve to collect the direct ~!!~ runoff from the roads, as well as adjacent areas. Mr. Mark McKee Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., Page Two P.C. May 2, 1986 The lated by flow contributing to the drainage facilities was calcu- the rational formula using the following parameters: based on the nature of the proposed construc- tion, types of materials and topography, runoff coefficients of 90% were assigned to roof and paved areas, 40% to turf areas, and 70% to walk- ways. Based on rainfall data for the east end of Long Island, a rainfall intensity curve ranging from a maximum value of 7.50 inches per hour for a 5 minute time of concentration, to a value of 2.10 inches per hour for a 60 minute time of concentration was utilized. The time of concen- tration used for the design was 10 minutes (a standard value for the nature of this system), resulting in a value of 5.80 inches per hour. Approximately forty-five sub-areas were identi- fied which contribute to the flow in the channels, each of which was broken down into pavement, roof, walkway and turf areas with the appropriate runoff coefficient, and assigned to the appropriate channel section. The design of the channels was accomplished by examining the contributing drainage areas and identifying the maximum flows that could be expected for that type-of channel. For ease of design, maintenance and construction, a trapezoidal channel section was used, having a 4'-0# bottom width and 2:1 side slopes. The required design depth of the channel section was determined from Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) charts based on the flow and the slope of the channel, and 1'-0" of freeboard was added to arrive at the total depth. Specifically, the depth of the channels were calculated as follows: · Type A - Max. Flow = 30 CFS (from rational formula) Slope = .005 ft/ft Manning's "n" = .03 (characteristic of channel lining material) Depth = 1.5' based on FHWA charts + 1' free- board = 2.5' Mr. Mark McKee Donald A..Denis, A.I.A., P.C. Page Three May 2, 1986 Type B - Max. Flow - 5 CFS Slope = .002 it/it Manning's "n" = .03 Depth = .7' based on FHWA charts + 1' board = 1.7' free- While a typical section was provided on the plan for Type C, the function of this channel type will, in reality, be performed by the natural depressions and channels that are created between the clusters of buildings as final grading is accomplished. As the individual flows created in these channels are negligible relative to the type A and B channels, the section is provided more as a guide than a configuration required to transpo~ the flow. The cumulative effect of these flows in the type A and B channels is the basis for the design. In addition to the channels, a number of corrugated metal culverts were used to transport the channel flows under roadway intersections and walkways. The channel flows at the culvert locations were calculated as previously discussed, and culverts were sized for the required flows and given slope in accordance with capacity charts published in the Corrugated Steel Pipe Tech- nical Manual, as follows: Culvert No. Actual Flow Design (see plan) Design Flow Capacity Slope Size 1 .9 CFS 3 CFS 2.2% 12"* 2 .9 CFS 3 CFS 2.2% 12"* 3 26.9 CFS '30 CFS 1.5% 24" (two pipes) * The excess capacity of these culverts is due to the fact that a 12" minimum pipe size was maintained. AS noted in our previous letter, on-site recharge of th9 runoff was prohibited by the soil coditions, so the only alterna- tive was to make use of existing drainage facilities. A deL tention analysis was performed based on the 10-year design storm and a release rate determined by the capacity of an existing cul- vert under Chapel Lane. The result indicated that a 45,000 cubic foot detention pond would be sufficient to temporarily store the' runoff fro~ the entire developed site until such time as the existing drainage system could remove the runoff. Mr. Mark McKee Page Four Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.C. May 2, 1986 The choice of a system of swales and channels rather than catch basins and piping was made in keeping with the rural nature of the site. In addition, no curbs were to be installed along the roadways, which would have made it difficult to collect the runoff in catch basins. Maintenance was also a consideration, in that a system of catch basins and piping would be more likely to clog with grass cuttings and branches in such a setting. We trust that the information provided in this report will be helpful, and we would be pleased to answer any questions you might have about its content. If you require any further infor- mation, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C. KPW/bh cc: Reverend Gary Ettlemyer Kevin P. Walsh, P.E. HOLZMACHER, McLENDON and MURRELL. P.C. · CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS and pLANNERS 125 BAYLIS ROAD. SUITE 140. MELVILLE, N.Y. 11747 · 516-752.9060 February 3, 1986 Mr. Mark McKee Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.C. Aquebogue Square - Route 25 P.O. Box 565 Aquebogue, NY 11931 Re: San Simeon Retirement Community SPLC 83-01 ~ Dear Mr. McKee: In accordance with your request, we are pleased to provide the following information regarding the San Simeon Retirement ---!Community site design. ~c,~ 1) Drainage Calculations - the drainage system for the site 'consists mainly of swales and open channels, which serve to col- .~" 'lect stormwater runoff and transport it to a central location for · t~ storage and disposal. Due to the topography of the area, the ..... ~site is broken up into two low points to which the stormwater is ~ ...... .ultimately directed, one in the southwest corner of the site and ~one in the southeast corner of the site. Calculations were made -' to determine the amount of runoff which would be generated in each ~- ........ :area from roof, pavement and landscaped~areas, and the swales and .channels were sized accordingly. From the calculations, it was £,., '-~determined that approximately 44 cubic feet per second would be ~. __ .... ,generated on the west side of the site and approximately 37 feet ~,--'.3~,[ ~per second would be generated on the east side. These calculations -..~vu_..are based on the rainfall from a storm of such magnitude that it '~,.' ..... :occurs only once every ten years. It should also be noted that the runoff calculations were based on the full extent of development, "- - ---" even though the site was planned to be developed in stages. ~ Since the impervious nature of the soils on the site pre- ~ vented direct on-site recharge, the remaining alternative was tQ '~'~-,L-~ store the runoff on-site until the excess runoff could' dissipate, through the natural drainage channels that surround the site.. Such a system requires the use of a detention pond, as was in= -. .... ~ stalled in the southwest corner of the site to drain the newly !,'~!-1.3~ developed area. In this CrauS~,f~heenPteOrnidnWaS designed s~ch that it is capable of storing the o ' g the area at a rate of ~44 cubic feetper second (based on full development). Should the Mr. Mark McKee Page Two Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.C. Aquebogue, NY 11931 Februa.ry 3, 1986 rainfall be excessive, the system would simultaneously release runoff through an existing pipe under Chapel Lane. The rate at which the excess runoff is released through the existing pipe cannot exceed the rate at which the pipe previously flowed, thereby preventing the natural drainage areas surrounding the site from being overloaded. A similar system will be designed for the east side of the site as development requires. 2) Sewage Pumping Station and Back-up System - the sewage pump station for the complex consists of a duplex submersible pumping system designed to handle an average daily flow of 33,500 gallons per day. Each pump is capable of pumping a flow of 100 gallons per minutes with the other pump as a back-up. In addition to an on-line back-up pump, the pump station has an emergency generator which will automatically be energized if the LILCO electrical service is interrupted. The pump station is also equipped with an alarm system that will signal a high water level in the wet well. The sewage force main discharges to the Incorporated Village of Greenport collection system. The sewage receives secondary treatment at the Village's sewage treatment plant prior to being discharged into the Long Island Sound. We trust that the information supplied above is sufficient for your needs. However, if you require any further information or have any questions, please feel free to contact our office. Very truiy yours, HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C. Kevi~n P. Walsh KPW/bh cc: Reverend Gary Ettlemyer now or formally John Q. Slolas & Others ,now or formerly Vitlage of Greenport Home Owners Association Parcel "C" - 5754 s.f. now or formerly Abraham Shames & Others Area 6.5941 Acres Future Section Four Futura Section Two Area = 7. LANE 33 ~ CONDOMINIUM MAP O ~ SAN SIMEON VILLAGE SECTION ONE ~' AT GREENPORT '...( TOWN OF SOUTHOLD '~ SUFFOLK COUNTY, N.Y. '~ LICATION FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO RECORDS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD '-~_~ ~ :TION I. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Please complete Section I of this form. Give the form to the Agency Freedom of Information Officer. The Freedom of Information Officer will return one copy to you as a response to your request, or as an interim response. TO: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER AGENCY NAME: AGENCY ADDRESS: Seuthold Tewn Cl~rk I HEREBY APPLY TO INSPECT THE FOLLOWING RECORD (Please describe the record sought. If possible, supply a date, a file title and number, and any other informa- tion that will help locate the record desired): /~,~,~,~,~ ! Signature of Applicant and Printed Name Applicant Represents: Applicant's Ma ina Address, ~ SECTION II. FOR USE BY AGENCY FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER ONLY Approved [ ] Denied: (for the reason(s) checked below) [ ] Confidential Disclosure [ ] Part of Investigatory Files [ ] Unwarranted Invasion of Privacy [ ] Record of Which This Agency is Legal Custodian Cannot be Found [ ] Record is Not Maintained by This Agency [ ] Exempted by Statute Other Than the Freedom of Information Act [ ] Other (specify): [~Receipt of this request is acknowledged. There will be a delay in supplying the requested record until for the following reason: ~ignature: Title: 70~.~ ~ Date: ~:~'/'Z-?F~'~ SECTION III. NOTICE TO APPLICANT YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO APPEAL A DENIAL OF THIS APPLICATION IN WRITING WITH- IN 30 DAYS OF THE DENIAL. INFORMATION AS TO THE PERSON TO CONTACT IS SHOWN BELOW. THE CONTACTED PERSON MUST RESPOND TO YOU IN WRITING WITHIN SEVEN BUSINESS DAYS OF RECEIPT OF YOUR APPEAL. Name: Southold Town Board Business Address: 53095 Main Road Telephone: Southold, New York 516 765-1800 -.2 R-80 ~ RR LIO ~ R-80 RR- / / / / I \ \ \ \ \ \ / % / % PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G, Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 MEMORANDUM  -~ ~-! '~TT L. HARRIS ~ I ' ~ , ~ i/ Supervisor Ill ~ ToWn Hall 53095 Main Road ~] ~J//~ ~'~-- P.O. Box 1179 ....... ::--' Southold, New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 TO: FROM: RE: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman San Simeon Retirement Community Chapel Lane, Greenport, N.Y. SCTM $ 1000-045-02-10.3 DATE: August 7, 1990 Pursuant to your request of August 1st, please find attached a copy of all pertinent correspondence and supporting documentation from the site plan file for this project. The conceptual site plan approval for the entire project that was issued by this Board in 1976 remains valid. The drainage plans for the original Section I (eight dwelling units in four residential buildings) were approved in 1984. Section I was constructed and Certificates of Occupancy were issued. The project sponsors are proposing to expand the original Section I to include more buildings. However, the drainage plans for the proposed expansion of Section I have not been approved because they would result in stormwater draining onto private property that is not owned by the project sponsors. This Board cannot approve the site plan for the proposed expansion of Section 1 without revised drainage plans because then the Town could be sued by the adjoining property owner for allowing stormwater runoff to drain onto his property. Further, you should be aware that the SEQRA process that was conducted in 1984, was on the original Section I only. See this Board's letter of January 16, 1990, and the Negative Declaration dated June 25, 1984, copies of which are included in the attached package of correspondence. Each of the site plans mentioned in the attached material can be reviewed in the Planning Board office. Unfortunately, we have no duplicates to share with you other than the latest submission to expand the existing Section I. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski~ Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (5[6) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD July 2, 1990 SCOT[' L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 J. Kevin McLaughlin 828 Front Street ~ P.O.Box 803 Greenport, New York 11944 Re: Site Plan for San Simeon Retirement Community Greenport, N.Y. SCTM # 1000-45-2-10.3 Dear Mr. McLaughlin: The Planning Board discussed your letter of June 21, 1990, in which you request endorsement of the condominium unit designation map for an expanded Section I. This map was submitted on February 20th, 1990 (and accompanied by Jay E. Helme's letter dated February 16, 1990). The Board has been unable to proceed with the endorsement of the condominium unit designation map because the design of the drainage system has not been revised in accordance with the recommendations of the Planning Board and the Town's Engineering consultants. Please refer to A. Barton Cass' May 3rd letter to the Planning Board. Upon receipt of revised plans that meet with the Town's requirement that all stormwater runoff generated by the new Section I be contained onsite, this Board will be able to move forward. Very Truly Yours, Chairman VS/vs Enc. cc: A. Barton Cass, Sidney B. bowne & Son Ray Jacobs, Highway Superintendent Harvey A. Arnoff, Town Attorney May 3, 1990 Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Planning Board\' Town of Southold 53095 Main Road $outhold, New York 11971 Re: San Simeon Retirement Community Section I (SBB No. 87606) .,:{t.. Dear Mr. Orlowski: This is in reply to your letter of April 10, 1990 whereby you requested that we determine whether there is sufficient on-site capacity to handle the runoff from Section I of the above referenced plan. The drainage from this section is proposed to be discharged by a system of swales or channels and pipe into an existing pond area on the easterly side of Chapel Lane approximately 500 feet north of Route 25. One of the swales runs along the easterly side of Chapel Lane and appears to have been partially constructed on what seems to be the Chapel Lane Road right-of-way. The plan shows the subject swale to be on the developer's property. This situation should be corrected since the Town road cannot be used to drain private land. The existing pond area has an existing outlet pipe under Chapel Lane which discharges water onto private property on the west side of the road. Since the property on the west side of the road is not controlled in any manner which we know of by the San Simeon developer, the outlet could become blocked at some time in the future. Therefore, the proposed drainage system should not be designed so as to depend on the outflow through the existing pipe under Chapel Lane. The developer should explore other means of providing a positive outlet for the detention pond since the soil conditions will not permit adequate percolation. Although we understand that the swales and channels will remain under private maintenance once constructed, we question whether the system is practical. During winter snow and ice storms it would seem virtually impossible to keep the swales clear of snow and ice. Plowing operations would almost certainly block the system. For this reason we believe that a conventional system should be considered. 45 Manor Road · Smithtown, NewYork 11787 · (516) 724-0611 235 East Jericho Turnpike · P.O. Boxl09 · Mineola, NewYork 11501 . (516) 746-2350 · ~;IDNEY B. BOWNE & SON Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Town of Southold Planning Board May 3, 1990 Page 2 ' If we may be of further assistance in this matter, please let us know. Very truly yours, A. Barton Cass ABC:ctg Ray Jacobs, Supt. of Highways Ray Dean (SBB) HARVEY A. ARNOFF Town Attorney MAITHEW G. KIERNAN Assistant Town Attorney OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 June 25, 1990 J. Kevin McLaughlin, Esq. 828 Front Street P.O. Box 803 Greenport, New York 11944 Re: San Simeon Retirement Community 920 Chapel Lane Greenport, New York /Mc'~Laugh ~?x Map 1000-45-2-10.3 Dear M li . I have a copy of your letter directed to the Southold Town Planning Board dated June 21, 1990. In response to same, please be advised that at a meeting at which I attended, Mr. Price attended, Mr. Orlowski attended, Mr. Kiernan attended, and others representing San Simeon, it was determined that the Board would be inclined to grant approval to Section 1 of San Simeon's Retirement Community provided the drainage would be taken care of completely on site. It is my further understanding that there appears to be a discrepancy in the recollection of those attending in that Mr. Price's recollection is that the drainage was as set forth above except for a "ten year storm". It would appear that we could debate this forever. However, if you feel that another meeting is appropriate I would be please to attend, if not, I regret to inform you that the position of the Board is that all drainage must be taken care of on site prior to the endorsement of your client's map. HAA:cc Very tru.~y y~o~s, f/~arvey A. Al-~b-ff ,- --- ~--- Town Attorney f// cc: Planning Board of the Town of Southold SAN SIMEON PROPERTIES ASSOCIATES P.O. Box Z Greenport, New York 11944 June 12, [99(~ Mr. A. Barton Cass Sidney B. Bowne & Son 45 Manor Road Smithtown, NY 11787 RE: San Simeon Retirement Community Section [, Sidney B. Bowne .Job No. 87606 Dear ~{r. Cass: Thank you for your letter of June 4th and the additional re]erences concerning our telephone discussions. I think we must really clarify the fact that ] have never indicated to anyone that your discussions with me were interpreted by me as advising the town to proceed with the San Simeon plans as reviewed by your company. You~ letter, in fact, does not interpret it. In both your review of the iniorm~tion for the ;)]arming b~ard and the planning board':: ,h~nd]Jng o~ ,)u~ build fha permit application (12/4/89), ano the endorsement o] ~n~r condominium unit designation map, everyone seems to heve forgotten that we posses an approved site plan lot i.J4 uhits, an administrative building, and an "Inn". '?hJu site plan and proposed drainage system was approved ]n 19~{4, {he first 8 units, the road, the detention pond, and sewer aud water lines, were constructed in 1985 and 1986, based upon approved building permits and an approved site plan. The detent]on basin was constructed in its location and tied into a pre-ex~sting p~pe constructed prior to 19~U by the Town of Southold to provide drainage from the run oJi Chapel Lane and the drive-in theater. The sizing of the detention pond and the initial swales for the project was approved by the Town of Southold in 1984 and subsequently, re-approved in the amendment of the site plan, which was approved in August of 1986. None of these written approvals are conditioned upon further drainage review. The "Developer" has expended, following site plan approval by the Town of Southold, more than 3.5 million dollars in acquiring this property, in developing the approved drainage system, in building the initial roads, in bringing sewer and water to the site, in constructing 8 units, and in developing plans ~nd programs for the remaining development of the balance of the residential units (136), the "Inn", and the administrative building. SAN SIMEONPROPERTIES ASSOCIATES ~ A. Barton Cass ~ June 12, 1990  Page 2 ~To apply 1989 rules and regulations to a previously approved site plan in order for the developer to receiw? further building permits, is an unwarranted application of the ]989 standards. Whether or not the engineering compc~ny's recommendation is for the developer to develop an alternate plan may be correct from an engineering standpoint based on 1989 regulations, but does not answer the question as to whether the detention pond was properly sized to handle normal run-o£f with the excess flowing as it had to~ years/ through the Town of Southold's pipe under Chapel Lane. With respect to the swale on the Easterly s~de o£ Chapel Lane, let it be stated that the developer has not constructed any swale on the Easterly side of Chapel Lane, except at the entrance. The swale which was constructed, was dug b~ the Town of Southold in the first quarter of 1990 and ties into a pre-~xisting outlet pipe constructed by the Town o~ Southold in the Northern section of the San Simeon property ~..~ny years ago. JEH/jah cc: Bennett Orlowski, Jr. J. Kevin McLaughlin Very truly ?ur: , ~anaginq Partner FOUNDER (lg22-1959) OWNE SIDNEY B. BOWNE & SON PARTNERS Chester C. Kelsey. P,E., L.S. Robert A. Stanton, p.E. R0bert W. Brown, L.S. Frank J. Antetomaso, P.E. June 4, 1990 Mr. Jay Helme 28 Pelham Street Newport, Rhode Island 02840 ASSOCIATES George A. Style, P,E. Jerry O. Alrnont, P.E. SPECIALCONSULTANTS Thomas R. Pynchon, L.S. Prof. H.F. Soehngen, P.E.,L.S. SENIOR STAFF Francis J, Lyllch Philip $chlotzhauer Joseph F, Stesman Wdlia m T. Styne Rich&rd B. Weber A. Barton Cass, P,E. Re: San Simeon Retirement Community Section I Sidney B. Bowne Job No. 87606 Dear Mr. Helme: We are attaching a copy of our letter of May 3, 1990 to the Chairman of the Southold Town Planning Board on the above referenced project. As we discussed today over the telephone the main thrust of our letter was to advise the Town that the proposed drainage system should not be designed so as to depend on the outflow through the existing pipe under Chapel Lane. We further elaborated by stating "The developer should explore other means of providing a positive outlet for the detention pond since the soil conditions will not permit adequate percolation." This is to confirm that the above quote certainly could not have been interpreted as advising the Town to proceed with the San Simeon plans as reviewed by this office. It remains our recommendation thai the developer proceed to conceive an alternate plan for disposing of the runoff from Section I of the project. If there are any questions concerning this matter please give us a call. Vex~ truly yours, A. Barton Cass ABC:sjm Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Ray Jacobs - Supt. of Highways Ray Dean - SBB 45 Manor Road · Smithtown, NewYotk 11787 · (516) 724-0611 235 East Jericho Tucnoike · P.O. Box 10~ · Mineola, New York 11~1 · t~l~ PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latharn, Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD scott L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 May 10, 1990 William H. Price, Jr. 826 Front Street, P.O. Box E Greenport, New York 11944 Re: Drainage Review of San Simeon Site Plan SCTM % 1000-045-02-10.3 Dear Mr. Price, The Planning Board received a report on the drainage for Section I of San Simeon Retirement Community, a copy of which is enclosed. As per our agreement, please revise the drainage plans for Section I to address the problems noted in the report. After five copies of the revised plans are sent to this office, they will be sent to Sidney B. Bowne's office for review. If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very Truly Yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman Enc: VS/vs SIDNEY B. BOWNE-&--S'ON ..... Chester C. Kelsey, P.E., L.S. Robert W. Brown, L.$. Frank J. Antetomaso. ASSOCIATES George A. Style, P.E. Jerry O. Almont, P.E. May 3, 1990 Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Planning Board\ Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: San Simeon Retirement Community Section I (SBB No. 87606) Thomas R. Pync~on, k.S. Prof. H.F,$oehngen. P.E..L.B. Dear Mr. Orlowski: This is in reply to your letter of April 10, 1990 whereby you requested that we determine whether there is sufficient on-site capacity to handle the runoff from Section I of the above referenced plan. The drainage from this section is proposed to be discharged by a system of swales or channels and pipe into an existing pond area on the easterly side of Chapel Lane approximately 500 feet north of Route 25. One of the swales runs along the easterly side of Chapel Lane and appears to have been partially constructed on what seems to be the Chapel Lane Road right-of-way. The plan shows the subject swale to be on the developer's property. This situation should be corrected since the Town road cannot be used to drain private land. The existing pond area has an existing outlet pipe under Chapel Lane which discharges water onto private property on the west side of the road. Since the property on the west side of the road is not controlled in any manner which we know of by the San Simeon developer, the outlet could become blocked at some time in the future. Therefore, the proposed drainage system should not be designed so as to depend on the outflow through the existing pipe under Chapel Lane. Tbe developer should explore other means of providing a positive outlet for the detention pond since the soil conditions will not permit adequate percolation. Although we understand that the swales and channels will remain under private maintenance once constructed, we question whether the system is practical. During winter snow and ice storms it would seem virtually impossible to keep the swales clear of snow and ice. Plowing operations would almost certainly block the system. For this reason we believe that a conventional system should be considered. 45 Manor Road · Smithtown. New York 11787 · (516) 724-0611 235 East Jericho Turnpike · P.O. Boxl09 · Mineola, NewYork 11501 · (516) 746-2350 'SIDNEY B. BOWNE & SON Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Town of Southold Planning Board May 3, 1990 Page 2 If we may be of further assistance in this matter, please let us know. Very truly yours, A. Barton Cass ABC:clg Ray Jacobs, Supt. of Highways Ray Dean (SBB) Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTFL. HARRIS Supervisor Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 Robert W. Brown A. Barton Cass 45 Manor Road Smithtown, New York 11787 April 10, 1990 San Simeon Site Plan Greenport, New York SCTM ~ 1000-45-2-10.3 Dear Messeurs Brown and Cass, Enclosed please find the drainage plans and supporting documentaticn submitted by Donald A. Sioss of the H2M Group. The Board would like you to review the drainage plans which were sent to you on March 12, 1990 with the specific request that you make a determination as to whether those plans provide for sufficient onsite capacity to handle the drainage for the expanded version of Section I only, a copy of which is enclosed. The enclosed map was last amended on April 3, 1990, and was stamped by this office on April 9, 1990. Also enclosed is a copy of Mr. Sioss' comments of March 23rd, in response to your request of March 14, 1990. If there are any problems or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact this office immediately. cc: William H. Price, Jr. Very Truly Yours, Bennett O rlowski, Jr. Chairman Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O, Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOWFL. HARRIS Supervisor Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-I~ Donald A. Sioss, P.E. H2M Group 575 Broad Hollow Road Melville, New York 11747-5076 March 26, 1990 Re: Overall Drainage Plan San Simeon Site Plan SCTM ~ 1000-45-2-10.3 Dear Mr. Sioss, On Friday afternoon, the 23rd of March, this office received the hand-delivered set of overall drainage plans for San Simeon Retirement Community. Your cover letter indicated that you felt that the San Simeon project was exempt from the requirement that all runoff be retained onsite. This project is not exempt from that requirement. The specific approvals that were given for Section 1 in 1986, did not include specific drainage details for the remainder of the site. Consequently, it is requested that you provide this office with information indicating that there will be sufficient capability onsite for handling all stormwater runoff. Upon receipt of this information, the entire package of plans and supporting documentation will be forwarded to the Town's engineering consultant for review. If there are technical questions, please direct them to Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner. cc: William Price, Jr. Very Truly Yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman March 23, 1990 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Town of Southold Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 RE: San Simeon Retirement Community Overall Drainage Plan SSPA 89-01 Dear Mr. Orlowski: In response to the letter from Sidney B. Bowne & Son to you regarding the above-referenced project, we are enclosing the following items: 1. Design calculations for the culverts and detention pond on the site; 2. Typical sections of swales and channels; 3. Parking lot and pavement sections 4. Test boring data. Drywells will not be installed to dispose of roof drainage. As one can readily see from the test boring data, the material on-site is not suitable for leaching. Several shallow test borings were completed in July, 1975 and most of the results show clay and silt to a depth of 8 feet. We recently com- pleted two additional deep borings which show clay to a depth of 60 feet. In inspecting the sewer and water installation for the now existing buildings, we confirmed that the material was unsuitable for drainage purposes. We therefore based our drainage plans on swales, channels and culverts as a means to transport a major portion of stormwater runoff to a new detention pond. We felt that this natural fl~:... ~f Water was more in keeping with the rural nature of the a:,,~ '~kan catch basins and pipe. Please note that swales and ~'-:~ are in direct accordance with Paragraph D of the '-k~ut!.~ci Cocie, Section 100-252. That paragraph places high ~e conservation of natural features, including n,~ .... ur~! drainage courses. Also, the absence of curbs makes it ~['-~cult to collect the Stormwater in catch basins. The use of iud, ales and small diameter culverts, tends to slow the~ Jr. Page Two stormwater down and assist in the detention time. The swales and channels will be maintained by on-site maintenance person- nel, since this is a condominium, much like they would maintain a catch basin and pipe installation. We noted that our design does allow for stormwater to dis- charge directly into Moore's Drain, which is not in accordance with the current Southold Code Section 100-252, Paragraph H. However, our original design was completed in 1984 and was acceptable at that time. This Paragraph H was added to the code in July, 1989, after the original design and site plan had been approved (1986). We trust that we have addressed all items in question. If you or year engineer require any additional information, please contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, HOLZ~ACi~ER, McLENDO~ & ~iLt~RELL, ona m . Sioss, P.E. PICe DAS/CAD/jlh Encs. cc: Jay E. Helme William Price, Esq. Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTr L. HARRIS Supervisor Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 March 1, 1990 Jay E. Helme Managing Partner San Simeon Properties Associates P. O. Box Z Greenport, New York 11944 Re: Letter of February 16, 1990: Request for site plan approval of new Section I of San Simeon Village SCTM # 1000-045-2-10.3 Dear Mr. Helme, The Planning Board has received and reviewed your letter requesting site plan approval of a new Section I for San Simeon Village. The Board finds that it is unable to proceed with this approval until the detailed information that was requested in its January 16, 1990 letter to William H. Price, Jr. is submitted. A highlighted copy of that letter is enclosed for your convenience. As noted in the letter, before we can proceed legally, we must receive grading and drainage plans for the entire site and we must conduct an environmental review of the entire site. Also needed is a letter from the Village of Greenport attesting to the validity of the sewer and water contract. Confirmation of water and sewer is necessary because the County Health Department's approval must be obtained before the Planning Board can endorse final plans. If water and sewer cannot be obtained for the entire site at this time, the letter from the Greenport Water Company should state how many units will be covered by the contract. Furthermore, the Section boundaries should take into account the availability of water and sewer service because this Board will not be able to issue approval to a Section that will be only partially serviced. Grading and drainage plans have not been submitted for the project except that which was submitted and approved in 1986. The map submitted with your letter of February 14, 1990, incorporates the four buildings that constituted the previously approved Section I from 1986. The 1986 approval made specific reference to supplemental maps from H2M that were dated March, May and September 1984. Those supplemental maps show the drainage and grading for four buildings (eight dwellings) only. The map that was'submitted with the February 14, 1990 letter should be revised as follows: the map should be labeled Section II. Section I, which was approved in 1986, should not be included on this map. In the interest of expediting this project, the Board has decided to waive the application fee that is currently required under Article XXV of the Zoning Code. However, you will be asked to reimburse the Town for the cost of the engineering review. When the drainage and grading plans are submitted to this office, they will be forwarded to the Town's engineering consultants for an estimate. You will be notified of the estimated cost of review prior to the actual review. Upon receipt of the money, the Board will authorize the engineering review. If revisions to the first set of plans are deemed necessary, the review of the revised plans will be processed similiarly. With regard to the environmental review, the Planning Board is bound by the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act. To date, only the original Section I was reviewed pursuant to the New York State law. See enclosed copy of the Negative Declaration and the Planning Board minutes of June 25, 1984. The Board also has received and reviewed a copy of your January 22, 1990 letter to Scott Harris, Supervisor. In response to that letter, the Board wishes to make clear that it has no objection to the condominium form of ownership that is being proposed. Further, this Board is aware that this project is not a subdivision. In addition, no statements have been made by this Board implying that it is against this project. And, finally, this Board has not rescinded its approval of the overall site plan. Upon receipt of the information highlighted in the January letter to William H. Price, Jr., the Planning Board will proceed diligently with the environmental and drainage review. If there are other technical questions, please do not hesitate to contact this office. Very Truly Yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr'. Chairman VS:vs Enc: cc: Scott Louis Harris, Supervisor Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O.' Box I 179 Southold. New York I i971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD January 16, 1990 William H. price, Jr. A~torney At Law 828 Front Street, P.O. Box E Greenport, New York 11944 Re: San Simeon Develcpment N/E/corner State Route 25 and Chapel Lane, Greenport, New York SCTM ~ 1000-045-2-10.3 Dear Mr. Price, The Planning Board has reviewed your letter of December 15, 1989 in which you request clarification of the procedure for obtaining site plan approval for the above-referenced project on a section by section basis. Upon review of the files, it appears that the Board granted overall site plan approval in 1976. At a later date, the applicant decided to proceed with the application on a section by section basis. Consequently, on February 17, 1984, the Planning Board approved a detailed site plan for Section I, only, of the project. A SEQRA review was conducted on 'this Section only, as well. All eight of the units in that section received Certificates of Occupancy in April of 1986. Thare have bee'n no subsequent section approvals requested or given since that time. ' An amended site plan survey for the entire project was approved in June of 1986 and endorsed on August of 1986. The approval also referred to supplemental plans, which showed details for the Section 1 develop~eI~t. Neither the conceptual site plan that was approved in 1976 nor the amended site plan that was approved in 1986 show proposed drainage and grading. Also, the variances that were granted in 1976 may not be valid due to the adoption of a new Zoning Code in January of 1989. And, further, the overall environmental review of the remaining sections should be conducted for the project as a whole, not section by section. Accordingly, the recommended procedure would be to submit an overall drainage and grading plan, including road profiles, drainage calculations and test hole boring data for the entire site. These plans would be used for environmental review as well as engineering review. A letter from the Greenport Village' Utility Company should also be submitted attesting to the validity of the water and sewer contracts. Each application should be complete for that section, in that the proposed drainage, grading, road profiles, elevation and floor plans shall be submitted for review. The Board will follow the procedure outlined in Article XXV of the current Zoning Code. Any section receiving approval under the current Article XXV will be valid for three years from the date of approval. The 1986 amended approval will remain valid for three years until May of 1991. At that time, the Board can consider an extension of its approval. However, be aware that the 1986 amendment does not address the County's denial of proposed access to County Road 48. This omission will have to be addressed in future submissions pursuant to this letter. If there are any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact this office. VS/vs CC: Very Truly Yours, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. v~ Chairman Matthew Kiernan, Assistant Town Attorney Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector .indicated t~%at n~ significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. The Department of Environmental Conservation has no objection to our agency being lead agency for this action. It has an unlisted classification, and a Tidal Wetlands Permit may be necessary. They comment that the density should not exceed 1 unit per 10,000 square feet. Because there has been no response in the alloted time from the Suffolk County Department of Heal~ Services, it is assumed that there is no objection nor comments by that agency. The project will~ meet all the requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold Subdivision of Land Regulations. Further information can be obtained by contacting Diane M.'Scknltze,., Secretary, Southold Town Planning Board, Main Road, Southold, New York 11971 Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made by Mr. Mullen, seconded by Mr. Latham the following action was taken: ~ NEGATIVE DECLARATION ~/~ ~/~ Pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law State Environmental Quality Review Act and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10 and Chapter 44 of the Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that Southold Town Planning Board as lead agency for the action described below has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. ~IPTION OF ACTION The ~b~iv±m~mn-mf site plan of ~t. Peter's Lutheran C_~hur_~ch Retirement Community~ Section I for 2 four-unit buildings.. The project has been determined not to have a significant e'~ect on the environment for the following reasons: Pg. (8) 6/25/84 An environmental assessment has been submitted which indicated that no significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. Because there has been no response from the Department of Environmental Conservation in the allotted time, it is assumed that there is no objection nor comments by that agency. Because there has been no response in the allottedtime from the Department of Health Services, it is assumed that there is no objection nor comments by that agency. The project will meet all the requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold Subdivision of Land Regulations. Further information can be obtained by contacting Diane M. Schultze Secretary, Southold Town Planning Board, Main Road, Southold, New zor~ 11971 Vote of the Board: Ayes: Or~lowski, Mullen, Latham ,Ward On a motion made by Mr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Ward it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board declarethem selves lead agency with regard to the State Environmental Quality Review Act for the minor ~chiv±sion_of_John ,Simon located at Peocnic. An intial determination of non-significance has been made. Vote of the Board: Ayes:.Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward It was also noted that me right-of-way must be imporved for this minor subdivision. It was also noted that this received approval from the Town Board fro~relieq from the two-acre zoning. Entenmann'loc~tJd at Laurel. The Pla~nin~ Board reviewed t~is minor subdivision which is also before the Board of Appeals for an insufficient area variance for lot No. 1.. The Planning Board noted that around the area of Lot 1 there are many oeher small, narrow lots; however, prior to making a formal recommendation to the Board of Appeals, they will make a J'~M ES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI, Jr., Chairman GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, Jr. ~LLIAM F,MULLEN lcnara wa~d NEGATIVE DECLARATION TELEPHONE 765-1938 Pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law State Environmental Quality Review Act and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10 and Chapter 44 of the Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that Southold Town Planning Board as lead agency for the action described below has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION The ~b~ivi~i~n-~f site plan of St. Peter's Lutheran Church Retirement Community, Section I for 2 four-unit buildings. The project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment for the following reasons: An environmental assessment has been submitted which indicated that no significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. Because there has been no response from the Department of Environmental Conservation in the allotted time, it is assumed that there is no objection nor comments by that agency. Because there has been no response in the allottedtime from the Department of Health Services, it is assumed that there is no objection nor comments by that agency The project will meet all the requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold Subdivision of Land Regulations. Further information can be obtained by contacting Diane M. Schultze Secretary, Southold Town Planning Board Main Road, Southold, New xor~ 11971 ' HOLZMACHER. McLENDON and MURRELL, P.C. ,, CONSULTING ENGINEERS. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS and PLANNERS 12~ BAYLIS ROAD. SUITE 140. MELVILLE. N.Y. 11747 ,, 516-752-9060 May 2 , 1986 Mr. Mark McKee Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.O. Box 565 Aquebogue, NY 11931 PoCo Re: San Simeon SPLC 83-01 Retirement Community Dear Mr. McKee: In accordance with your request, the following is a sum- mation of the drainage calculations and design criteria for the San Simeon Retirement Community. The basis of the drainage design for the site is the rational formula: Q = CIA Where "C" corresponds to a runoff coefficient which reflects the imperviousness of a particular surface (i.e., 90% for pavement, 40% for grass, etc.); "I" corresponds to the rainfall intensity (in inches per hour) at a given point during the design storm; and "A" represents the total area in question in acres. The re- sultant "Q" value is the flow of stormwater runoff (in cubic feet per second) for which the facilities are designed. The design of the San Simeon system began with the grading of the site. From the proposed grading, roadway and building layout for the development, areas were identified which, by vir- tue of their lower elevations, would serve as natural stormwater collection areas. A network of "swales", or small channels (type "C" on the plan) were laid out to collect the water from between buildings, from natural low areas, etc. These swales were con- nected to larger channels along the perimeter of the site (type "A" on the plan), which would serve to collect the water from the swales and transport it to the detention pond. Also connected to the perimeter channels were intermediate channels along the road- side (type "B" on the plans) which serve to collect the direct runoff from the roads, as well as adjacent areas. Mr. Mark McKee Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.C. Page Two May 2, 1986 The flow contributing to the drainage facilities was calcu- lated by the rational formula using the following parameters: C t based on the nature of the proposed construc- tion, types of materials and topography, runoff coefficients of 90% were assigned to roof and paved areas, 40% to turf areas, and 70% to walk- ways. Based on rainfall data for the east end of Long Island, a rainfall intensity curve ranging from a maximum value of 7.50 inches per hour for a 5 minute time of concentration, to a value of 2.10 inches per hour for a 60 minute time of concentration was utilized. The time of concen- tration used for the design was 10 minutes (a standard value for the nature of this system), resulting in a value of 5.80 inches per hour. Approximately forty-five sub-areas were identi- fied which contribute to the flow in the channels, each of which was broken down into pavement, roof, walkway and turf areas with the appropriate runoff coefficient, and assigned to the appropriate channel section. The design of the channels was accomplished by examining the contributing drainage areas and identifying the maximum flows that could be expected for that type of channel. For ease of design, maintenance and construction, a trapezoidal channel section was used, having a 4'-0" bottom width and 2:1 side slopes. The required design depth of the channel section was determined from Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) charts based on the flow and the slope of the channel, and 1'-0" of freeboard was added to arrive at the total depth. Specifically, the depth of the channels were calculated as follows: · Type A - Max. Flow = 30 CFS (from rational formula) Slope = .005 ft/ft Manning's "n" = .03 (characteristic of channel lining material) Depth = 1.5' based on FHWA charts + 1' free- board = 2.5' Mr. Mark McKee Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.C. Page Three May 2, 1986 Type B - Max. Flow - 5 CFS Slope = .002 ft/ft Manning's "n" = .03 Depth = .7' based on FHWA charts + 1' board = 1.7' free- While a typical section was provided on the plan for Type C, the function of this channel type will, in reality, be performed by the natural depressions and channels that are created between the clusters of buildings as final grading is accomplished. As the individual flows created in these channels are negligible relative to the type A and B channels, the section is provided more as a guide than a configuration required to transport the flow. The cumulative effect of these flows in the type A and B channels is the basis for the design. In addition to the channels, a number of corrugated metal culverts were used to transport the channel flows under roadway intersections and walkways. The channel flows at the culvert locations were calculated as previously discussed, and culverts were sized for the required flows and given slope in accordance with capacity charts published in the Corrugated Steel Pipe Tech- nical Manual, as follows: Culvert No. Actual Flow Design (see plan) Design Flow Capacity Slope Size 1 .9 CFS 3 CFS 2.2% 12"* 2 .9 CFS 3 CFS 2.2% 12"* 3 26.9 CFS '30 CFS 1.5% 24" (two pipes) * The excess capacity of these culverts is due to the fact that a 12" minimum pipe size was maintained. As noted in our previous letter, on-site recharge of the runoff was prohibited by the soil coditions, so the only alterna- tive was to make use of existing drainage facilities. A de- tention analysis was performed based on the 10-year design storm and a release rate determined by the capacity of an existing cul- vert under Chapel Lane. The result indicated that a 45,000 cubic foot detention pond would be sufficient to temporarily store the runoff from the entire developed site until such time as the existing drainage system could remove the runoff. Mr. Mark McKee Page Four Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.C. May 2, 1986 The choice of a system of swales and channels rather than catch basins and piping was made in keeping with the rural nature of the site. In addition, no curbs were to be installed along the roadways, which would have made it difficult to collect the runoff in catch basins. Maintenance was also a consideration, in that a system of catch basins and piping would be more likely to clog with grass cuttings and branches in such a setting. We trust that the information provided in this report will be helpful, and we would be pleased to answer any questions you might have about its content. If you require any further infor- mation, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C. KPW/bh cc: Reverend Gary Ettlemyer Kevin P. Walsh, P.E. HOLZMACHER, McLENDON and MURRELL, P.C. · CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS an~ PLANNERS 125 BAYLI$ ROAD, SUITE 140, MELVILLE. N.Y. 11747 ,, 516-752-90f)0 February 3, 1986 Mr. Mark McKee Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.C. Aquebogue Square - Route 25 P.O. Box 565 Aquebogue, NY 11931 Re: San Simeon Retirement Community SPLC 83-01 Dear Mr. McKee: In accordance with your request, we are pleased to provide the following information regarding the San Simeon Retirement --~Community site design. 1) Drainage Calculations - the drainage system for the site >~,h -- consists mainly of swales and open channels, which serve to col- ~:" 'lect stormwater runoff and transport it to a central location for ~.~ .... storage and disposal. Due to the topography of the area, the ---~site is broken up into two low points to which the stormwater is · ~ ...... .ultimately directed, one in the southwest corner of the site and 'one in the southeast corner of the site. Calculations were made -' to determine the amount of runoff which would be generated in each ;~ ...... :area from roof, pavement and landscaped areas, and the swales and channels were sized accordingly. From the calculations, it was ---;determined that approximately 44 cubic feet per second would be · ~' . generated on the west side of the site and approximately 37 feet ;,,~---,~'~,,~_~.?~ per second would be generated on the east side. These calculations -'are based on the rainfall from a storm of such magnitude that it ~..- .... occurs only once every ten years. It should also be noted that the runoff calculations were based on the full extent of development, :" - --" even though the site was planned to be developed in stages. Since the impervious nature of the soils on the site pre- vented direct on-site recharge, the remaining alternative was to store the runoff on-site until the excess runoff could'dissipate through the natural drainage channels that surround the site. Such a system requires the use of a detention pond, as was in- stalled in the southwest corner of the site to drain the newly developed area. In this case, the pond was designed such that it is capable of storing the runoff entering the area at a rate of 44 cubic feet per second (based on full development). Should the Mr. Mark McKee Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., Aquebogue, NY 11931 PoCo Page Two February 3, 1986 rainfall be excessive, the system would simultaneously release runoff through an existing pipe under Chapel Lane. The rate at which the excess runoff is released through the existing pipe cannot exceed the rate at which the pipe previously flowed, thereby preventing the natural drainage areas surrounding the site from being overloaded. A similar system will be designed for the east side of the site as development requires. 2) Sewage Pumping Station and Back-up System - the sewage pump station for the complex consists of a duplex submersible pumping system designed to handle an average daily flow of 33,500 gallons per day. Each pump is capable of pumping a flow of 100 gallons per minutes with the other pump as a back-up. In addition to an on-line back-up pump, the pump station has an emergency generator which will automatically be energized if the LILCO electrical service is interrupted. The pump station is also equipped with an alarm system that will signal a high water level in the wet well. The sewage force main discharges to the Incorporated Village of Greenport collection system. The sewage receives secondary treatment at the Village's sewage treatment plant prior to being discharged into the Long Island Sound. We trust that the information supplied above is sufficient for your needs. However, if you require any further information or have any questions, please feel free to contact our office. Very truly yours, HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C. Kevi~n P. Walsh KPW/bh cc: Reverend Gary Ettlemyer TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTIIOLD 3 Counly, New York$16- 76S-~aO~ Z~V 6 4 2 Southold. N. Y. 11971 ~¢,,~q ~ 19 Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTI' L. HARRIS Supervisor Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 Donald A. Sioss, P.E. H2M Group 575 Broad Hollow Road Melville, New York 11747-5076 March 26, 1990 Re: Overall Drainage Plan San Simeon Site Plan SCTM 9 1000-45-2-10.3 Dear Mr. Sioss, On Friday afternoon, the 23rd of March, this office received the hand-delivered set of overall drainage plans San Simeon Retirement Community. for Your cover letter indicated that you felt that the San Simeon project was exempt from the requirement that all runoff be retained onsite. This project is not exempt from that requirement. The specific approvals that were given for Section 1 in 1986, did not include specific drainage details for the remainder of the site. Consequently, it is requested that you provide this office with information indicating that there will be sufficient capability onsite for handling all stormwater runoff. Upon receipt of this information, the entire package of plans and supporting documentation will be forwarded to the Town's engineering consultant for review. If there are technical questions, please direct them to Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner. cc: William Price, Jr. Very Truly Yours, Bennett Orlowski,~J~. Chairman ' G OUP Holzmacher, McLendon and Murrell, P.C. · Holzmacher, McLendon and Murrell, Inc. · H2M Labs, Inc. Engineers, Architects, Scientists, Planners. 575 Broad Hollow Road, Melville, NY. 11747-5076 (516) 756 8000 · 1201) 575-5400 FAX: 516-694-4122 HAND DELIVERED March 23, 1990 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Town of Southold Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 RE: San Simeon Retirement Community Overall Drainage Plan SSPA 89-01 Dear Mr. Orlowski: In response to the letter from Sidney B. Bowne & Son to you regarding the above-referenced project, we are enclosing the following items: 1. Design calculations for the culverts and detention pond on the site; 2. Typical sections of swales and channels; 3. Parking lot and pavement sections 4. Test boring data. Drywells will not be installed to dispose of roof drainage. As one can readily see from the test boring data, the material on-site is not suitable for leaching. Several shallow test borings were completed in July, 1975 and most of the results show clay and silt to a depth of 8 feet. We recently com- pleted two additional deep borings which show clay to a depth of 60 feet. In inspecting the sewer and water installation for the now existing buildings, we confirmed that the material was unsuitable for drainage purposes. We therefore based our drainage plans on swales, channels and culverts as a means to transport a major portion of stormwater runoff to a new detention pond. We felt that this natural flow of water was more in keeping with the rural nature of the area than catch basins and pipe. Please note that swales and channels are in direct accordance with Paragraph D of the Southold Code, Section 100-252. That paragraph places high priority on the conservation of natural features, including natural drainage courses. Also, the absence of curbs makes it difficult to collect the stormwater in catch basins. The of swales and small diameter culverts, tends to slow Mdvillc, N.Y · Pdverhead, N.Y. · Fairfield, N.J. use th~ GROUP Bennet Orlowski, Jr. March 23, 1990 Page Two stormwater down and assist in the detention time. The swales and channels will be maintained by on-site maintenance person- nel, since this is a condominium, much like they would maintain a catch basin and pipe installation. We noted that our design does allow for stormwater to dis- charge directly into Moore's Drain, which is not in accordance with the current Southold Code Section 100-252, Paragraph H. However, our original design was completed in 1984 and was acceptable at that time. This Paragraph H was added to the code in July, 1989, after the original design and site plan had been approved (1986). We trust that we have addressed all items or year engineer require any additional contact the undersigned. in question. If you information, please Very truly yours, HOLZNA~.I~E-R, ~McLENDO~N &~r~RELL, Donald A. Sioss, P.E. PoCo DAS/CAD/jlh Encs. cc: Jay E. Helme William Price, Esq. a-I : EL,$2.$1 GROUND SUR~CE BRN. ORGANIC LOAM IOL) (11-65) BRN. SAND LOAM LOL) {11-65) dULT~-COLOR£D SILTY .~RAVELLY SAND WiTH SILT LAYERS . . {SM) (6-65) END OF BORING 8' B-9 (EL.29,6) GROUND SURFACE (EL. 35,6) GROUND SURFACE I, I 15~'1 oo.~o~.^~,~,~.. IIIllll B-2 EL. 38.61 GROUND SURFACE END OF BORING B' B-lO [EL.ZO.8) GROUND SURFACE I I 12/~L laRN. ORGANICLOAM / ~,~ IO~RN. SILTY SAND ,TR.GRAVEL END OF BORIN~ CLASSIFICATION {EL. 26.6) I, I B-18 GROUND S'URFACE BRN. ORGANIC LOAM B-$ EL. 3,0.8) GROUND SURFACE  SRN. ORGANIC LOAM "~ [OL) (11-65) /- ~ LT. BRN. GRAVELLY SAND [SWI [6-651 2 I10~ REO - BRN.SAND 5 ~l~ {SWI [7-65] 4 ~ DK.BRN. GRAVELLY SAND [COBBLE) 8 ,~,~'~, (SW) [6-65) ENO OF BORING 8' I- la.J ~~o[ SB I CLASS,F,CAT'ON EL. 34.31 GROUND SURFACE · ........ , BRN.ORGANIC LOAM I ~ \ RRN. SILT LOAM \ ~OLI (11-65) 30,,~ ~RN. SILTY GRAVELLY SANO $  RED-SRN. SAND 4 8 (SWI [7-651 END OF BORING t- ~ qOlSB I CLASSIFICATION B-II {EL. 24.0) GROUND SURFACE 5 ~ SEN. SILTY CLAY END OF BORING 8' ~.oIs~ I c~s~,~,c~,o. B-12 EL. $0.0) GROUND SURFACE BRN.ORGANIC LOAM '1 1.0L) 111-65) I ° o SRN. SILTY SAND ISM) (7-65) 0 o BRN, SAND,TR. SILT o TR. GRAVE~ P o END OF BORING 8' B-19 t':IRt3UN D SURFACE [EL.17.51 B-20 GROUND SURFACE B-5 : B-6 EL. 32.6) GROUND SURFACE IlL. 27.5) GROUND SURFACE WATER ;, / 8RN. SAND LOAM I I I I lOLl [11-65) IIIII I ,,~'"~0 RN.GRAV~LLY SAND,TR. SILT o ~ {SW} {6-65) 2 17~__ BRN. SAND o c ,,,"IT (SW) 17'65) o 5 ~ o c $ 4 ~ ~RN.GRAVELLY SAND,TR.SILT' o {SW) 16-65) ~" END OF BORING 8' I- °lSBI CLASS,F,CAT,O"  BRN. ORGANIC LOAM ~ ~ {OL) [11-65) /" ] GRY.-BRN. SILTY SAND TR. GRAVEL - °_ 2~' '' 15 ,~,~ RED-BRN. SILTY SAND TR. GRAVEL 0 o 5 ~ {SM) [7-65) o S7/9/~7 3RN. SANDY[cL) CLAY'TR'GRAVEL{9_65) ~'~ 4.. j'~'~O BRN.SAND, TR. GRAVEL o o END OF BORING B' I- ~ NO[ SB [ CLASSIFICATION WATER B-IS [EL. 29.5) GROUND SURFACE ~BRN' ORGANIC LOAM ~..~~'"~10! ~RId' SILTY SAND BRN. ~.DY CLAY B-14 {EL.20.5) GROUND SURFACE  BRN.ORGANIC LOAM ~.L ,~ I OL) 11'651 ~, o I 19~ BRN. SILTY SAND o ~ SM) (7-65) ~ S ~'~ BRN. SANDY CLAY // $ 57~ ICL1 [9-65) END OF BORING 8' I- ..=,oi SB I C.ASS,F,CA ,O" [EL. 23.31 GROUND SURFACE B-2;) {EL. 25.01 '~ROUND SURFACE B-7 L. 21.8l GROUND SURFACE ENO OF BORING 8' B-8 EL.29.9) GR'OUND SURFACE  BRN. ORGANIC LOAM I BRN. SILTY SAND 5 ~ BRN. SANDY CLAY ~ (CL) 19-65) END OF BORING 8' I- NolsB I CLASS,F,C , ',ON L. 15.1) GROUND SURFACE I1,1 Iz ~ BRN.ORGANIC. LOAM ,~I..LL~LLI B-16 EL. 21.43 GROUND SURFACE BRN, ORGANIC LOAM lOLl H~-651 GRY. CLAY, TR. ROOTS (CLI (9-65) MULTI-COLOREO CLA~Y END OF BORING 8' EL. ~.5.6) GROUND SURFACE BRN. ORGANIC LOAM ~ {OL) {11-651 l I11 ~ BRN. SANDY CLAY I' '~ tc,~ END OF BORING B' I- C,ASS,F,CA*'O" B-18 EL, Z6.6) GROUND SURFACE '-'-~ 2 ~LTI-COLORED SILTY SAND ~ 4~ BRN. SILTY ~ND END OF BORINO .B-I B-19 b-20 : {El.. ?.3.3) OROUND SURFA tEL. 17. 5) GROUND SURFACE [I I 14/~"1 8RN. ORGAN[C~ LO&U' GROUND SURFACE ~ I I ~ I I ~16~ 8RN. ORG~NiCLOAU~/IIII[---~ '~-~ END OF BORING 8 ~ ,. J {EL. 23.3) GROUND SURFACE I ~ GRN. ORGANIC LOAM S ~ SRN. SANDY CLAY TR.GRAVEL 3 ~ (CL3 (9-65) END OF BORING 8' 1- ~Nol ssi C~-ASS,F,CA~'~O. B-22 (EL. 25.03 ~ROUND SURFACE I ~ BRN. ORGANIC LOAM Illlll ~ ~ (OL) (11-65) ~ 5 ~ BRN. SANDY CLAY TR. GRAVEL 3 s~,,~,' (CL) {9-653 ~ END OF BORING 8' ~.olsB I cL~ss,F,c~',o. Name: Surveyor: McDON f. GEOSC. .NCE Box 1000 · SOuthold. New york 11971 · (516) 765-3677 TEST HOLE DATA SHEET ~A-890! ~ Location: San Simeon Oreenoort Tax Map Number: Project Description: E'ngineer(n~ Date: ~ 2/8/89 Comments: 7.8' 10' Brown aha qr~yts~ bro-m clay Wator in brown san"y cI~¥ w~t% 30-~c~¢ ~r~v~ Water in ~row~ cla¥ Water encountere~ ?.~' ~low surface- © © McDON,4rD GEOSCIE~N~F. Box 1000 · Southold. New Yo~k 11971 · {516) 766-3677 ~; TEST HOLE DATA SHEET -Name: Surveyor: Location: San Simeon Oreenport Tax Map Number: Project Description: 'Eng[neer ing Date: ] 2/] 2/8g~ Grey loamy- clay Grey clay Water in frown clay 0I Comments: Water encountered 18' below surface H2M/HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C. Consulting Engineers Environmental Scientists Planners SHEET NO I CALCULATED BY ~' ~ ~) o* ,9.. D*TE 03-22--q0 CHECKED BY. DATE SCALE I 7 $ ? ct.:), O. OI 0.02,5 0,04 O o.02 g,I 0,5 12" ~,~" 15" ..~ H2M/HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C. Consulting Engineers Environmental Scientists Planners Rssum~ 21 o SHEET NO CALCULATED BY CHECKED 6Y D,rE SCALE Z 0,4 ':::'.57 H2M/HOLZMACHER~ McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C. Consulting Engineers Environmental Scientists Planners SHEET NO. OF CALCULATED BY DATE CHECKED BY DATE. ECALE HOLZMACHER, McLENDON lind MURRELL, P.C. · CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTAL SCiENTiSTS and pLANNERS 125 BAYLIS ROAD, SUITE 140, MELVILLE, N.Y. 11747 · 516-752-9060 February 3, 1986 Mr. Mark McKee Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.C. Aquebogue Square - Route 25 P.O. Box 565 Aquebogue, NY 11931 Re: San Simeon Retirement Community SPLC 83-01 Dear Mr. McKee: In accordance with your request, we are pleased to provide the following information regarding the San Simeon Retirement -?Community site design. 1) Drainage Calculations - the drainage system for the site ~c,: ---consists mainly of swales and open channels, which serve to col- i~. 'lect stormwater runoff and transport it to a central location for ~^~ storage and disposal. Due to the topography of the area, the ..... ;site is broken up into two low points to which the stormwater is m? ..... ,ultimately directed, one in the southwest corner of the site and 'one in the southeast corner of the site. Calculations were made -' to determine the amount of runoff which would be generated in each ~A$ ...... :area from roof, pavement and landscaped areas, and the swales and 'channels were sized accordingly. From the calculations, it was ~:~.~ --idetermined that approximately 44 cubic feet per second would be ,[ .generated on the west side of the site and approximately 37 feet ,,:3 ,~.~_~ per second would be generated on the east side. These calculations ~'"? 'are based on the rainfall from a storm of such magnitude that it N..- ..... occurs only once every ten years. It should also be noted that the runoff calculations were based on the full extent of development, '~:'~- ~" even though the site was planned to be developed in stages. Since the impervious nature of the soils on the site pre- vented direct on-site recharge, the remaining alternative was to store the runoff on-site until the excess runoff could'dissipate through the natural drainage channels that surround the site. Such a system requires the use of a detention pond, as was in- stalled in the southwest corner of the site to drain the newly developed area. In this case, the pond was designed such that it is capable of storing the runoff entering the area at a rate of 44 cubic feet per second (based on full development). Should the Mr. Mark McKee Page Two Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.C. Aquebogue, NY 11931 February 3, 1986 rainfall be excessive, the system would simultaneously release runoff through an existing pipe under Chapel Lane. The rate at which the excess runoff is released through the existing pipe cannot exceed the rate at which the pipe previously flowed, thereby preventing the natural drainage areas surrounding the site from being overloaded. A similar system will be designed for the east side of the site as development requires. 2) Sewage Pumping Station and Back-up System - the sewage pump station for the complex consists of a duplex submersible pumping system designed to handle an average daily flow of 33,500 gallons per day. Each pump is capable of pumping a flow of 100 gallons per minutes with the other pump as a back-up. In addition to an on-line back-up pump, the pump station has an emergency generator which will automatically be energized if the LILCO electrical service is interrupted. The pump station is also equipped with an alarm system that will signal a high water level in the wet well. The sewage force main discharges to the Incorporated Village of Greenport collection system. The sewage receives secondary treatment at the Village's sewage treatment plant prior to being discharged into the Long Island Sound. We trust that the information supplied above is sufficient for your needs. However, if you require any further information or have any questions, please feel free to contact our office. Very truly yours, HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C. Kevi~n P. Walsh KPW/bh cc: Reverend Gary Ettlemyer HOI..ZMACHER, McLENDON and MURRELI,. P.C. · CONSULTING ENGINEERS, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS and PLANNERS 125 BAYLIS ROAD, SUITE 140, MELVILLE, N.Y. 11747 ,,, 516-752.9060 May 2, 1986 Mr. Mark McKee Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.C. P.O. Box 565 Aquebogue, NY 11931 Re: San Simeon Retirement Community SPLC 83-01 Dear Mr. McKee: In accordance with your request, the following is a sum- mation of the drainage calculations and design criteria for the San Simeon Retirement Community. The basis of the drainage design for the site is the rational formula: Q = CIA ---- Where "C" corresponds to a runoff coefficient which reflects the ~ imperviousness of a particular surface (i.e., 90% for pavement, ...... 40% for grass, etc.); "I" corresponds to the rainfall intensity ~ ........ (in inches per hour) at a given point during the design storm; ~ and "A" represents the total area in question in acres. The re- sultant "Q" value is the flow of stormwater runoff (in cubic feet ~; .... per second) for which the facilities are designed. The design of the San Simeon system began with the grading of the site. From the proposed grading, roadway and building layout for the development, areas were identified which, by vir- tue of their lower elevations, would serve as natural stormwater collection areas. A network of "swales", or small channels (type "C" on the plan) were laid out to collect the water from between buildings, from natural low areas, etc. These swales were con- nected to larger channels along the perimeter of the site (type "A" on the plan), which would serve to collect the water from the swales and transport it to the detention pond. Also connected to the perimeter channels were iDtermediate channels along the road- side (type "B" on the plans) which serve to collect the direct runoff from the roads, as well as adjacent areas. Mr. Mark McKee Page Two Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.C. May 2, 1986 The lated by flow contributing to the drainage facilities was calcu- the rational formula using the following parameters: based on the nature of the proposed construc- tion, types of materials and topography, runoff coefficients of 90% were assigned to roof and paved areas, 40% to turf areas, and 70% to walk- ways. Based on rainfall data for the east end of Long Island, a rainfall intensity curve ranging from a maximum value of 7.50 inches per hour for a 5 minute time of concentration, to a value of 2.10 inches per hour for a 60 minute time of concentration was utilized. The time of concen- tration used for the design was 10 minutes (a standard value for the nature of this system), resulting in a value of 5.80 inches per hour. Approximately forty-five sub-areas were identi- fied which contribute to the flow in the channels, each of which was broken down into pavement, roof, walkway and turf areas with the appropriate runoff coefficient, and assigned to the appropriate channel section. The design of the channels was accomplished by examining the contributing drainage areas and identifying the maximum flows that could be expected for that type of channel. For ease of design, maintenance and construction, a trapezoidal channel section was used, having a 4'-0" bottom width and 2:1 side slopes. The required design depth of the channel section was determined from Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) charts based on the flow and the slope of the channel, and 1'-0' of freeboard was added to arrive at the total depth. Specifically, the depth of the channels were calculated as follows: Type A - Max. Flow ~ 30 CFS (from rational formula) Slope = .005 ft/ft Manning's "n" = .03 (characteristic of channel lining material) Depth = 1.5' based on FHWA charts + 1' free- board = 2.5' Mr. Mark McKee Donald A.' Denis, A.I.A., Page Three P.C. May 2, 1986 Type B - Max. Flow - 5 CFS Slope = .002 ft/ft Manning's "n" = .03 Depth = .7' based on FHWA charts + 1' free- board = 1.7' While a typical section was provided on the plan for Type C, the function of this channel type will, in reality, be performed by the natural depressions and channels that are created between the clusters of buildings as final grading is accomplished. As the individual flows created in these channels are negligible relative to the type A and B channels, the section is provided more as a guide than a configuration required to transport the flow. The cumulative effect of these flows in the type A and B channels is the basis for the design. In addition to the channels, a number of corrugated metal culverts were used to transport the channel flows under roadway intersections and walkways. The channel flows at the culvert locations were calculated as previously discussed, and culverts were sized for the required flows and given slope in accordance with capacity charts published in the Corrugated Steel Pipe Tech- nical Manual, as follows: Culvert No. Actual Flow Design (see plan) Design Flow Capacity Slope Size 1 .9 CFS 3 CFS 2.2% 12"* 2 .9 CFS 3 CFS 2.2% 12"* 3 26.9 CFS '30 CFS 1.5% 24" (two pipes) * The excess capacity of these culverts is due to the fact that a 12" minimum pipe size was maintained. As noted in our previous letter, on-site recharge of the runoff was prohibited by the soil coditions, so the only alterna- tive was to make use of existing drainage facilities. A de- tention analysis was performed based on the 10-year design storm and a release rate determined by the capacity of an existing cul- vert under Chapel Lane. The result indicated that a 45,000 cubic foot detention pond would be sufficient to temporarily store the runoff from the entire developed site until such time as the existing drainage system could remove the runoff. Mr. Mark McKee Donald A. Denis, A.I.A., P.C. Page Four May 2, 1986 The choice of a system of swales and channels rather than catch basins and piping was made in keeping with the rural nature of the site. In addition, no curbs were to be installed along the roadways, which would have made it difficult to collect the runoff in catch basins. Maintenance was also a consideration, in that a system of catch basins and piping would be more likely to clog with grass cuttings and branches in such a setting. We trust that the information provided in this report will be helpful, and we would be pleased to answer any questions you might have about its content. If you require any further infor- mation, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, HOLZMACHER, McLENDON & MURRELL, P.C. KPW/bh cc: Reverend Gary Ettlemyer Kevin P. Walsh, P.E. NOTES: 1) ALL CORRUGATED METAL PIPE IS TO BE 14 GAUGE GALVANIZED STEEL. 2) THE CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO NOTIFY OWNERS OF ALL UNDER- GROUND UTILITIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND ARRANGE FOR FIELD MARK-OUTS. SHOULD IT BE NECESSARY, THE CONTRACTOR ~LL COORDINATE ANY UTILITY RELOCATIONS WITH THE RESPEC- 3) THE CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL REQUIRED ROAD OPENING PERMITS. 4) CONSTRUCTION STAKE-OUT FOR ROADWAYS SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH, AND PROVIDED BY, THE OWNER. LEGEND t PROPOSED FIRST PHASE CONSTRUCTION PROPOSED FUTURE CONSTRUCTION EXISTING CONTOURS PROPOSED CONTOURS DRAINAGE CHANNELS ~SF--~ ~/a~ ~.Z o-~2~ Project No: SPLC 83-01 Drawing No: ST. PETER'S LUTHERAN CHURCH Data: MAY 1984 Revlalona: your SAN SIMEON RETIREMENT COMMUNITY GREENPORT, NEW YORK J Consulting Engineers 516-752.9060 · Environmental Scientists 516-694.3040 [] 516-727-3480 [] Planners 516-694.3410 [] Holzmacher, McLendon & Murrell, P.C. Melville, N.Y. Riverhead, N.Y. Farmingdal®, N.Y. ~heet Title: Sheet DRAINAGE, GRADING & PAVEMENT PLAN I Of 2 . - / 269 285 ~50 '"'~,4~,.CEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED (See Reverse) s~°.Peters Evan Church. s~§t~ ~° Main St. Pber~de NY 11944 Postage S .2 5 Special Dehvery Fee o 8 5 to whom and Oat~red · 9 0 Dale. .OUTHOLD ;OCIATES : NOTICE : TO of Southold : ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER CAL LUTHERAN CHURCH OF GREENPORT lion) (Special Permit) ~ [circle choice] _____~__ ............ w~=u~ u~ ~htlding Department Decision dated January; 30, 'EN NOTICE: e undersigned to petition the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold 1990). 2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located adiacent to your property and is des- cribed as follows; 920 Chapel Lane, Greenport, New York Suffolk County Tax Map No.: District 1000, Section 045, Block 02, Lot 010.003 3. That the property which is the subject of such Petition is located in the following zoning district: 4. That by such Petition, the undersigned will request the following relief: Building Permits for the conStruction of 144 dwelling units $. That the provisions of the Southold Town Zoning Code applicable to the relief sought by the under- signed are Article XXV Sect/on 100-250 [ ] Section 280-A, New York Town Law for approval of access over right(s)-of-way. · 6. That within five.days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will be filed in the Southold Town Clerk's Office at Main Road, Southold, New York and you ma), then and there examine the same during regular office hours. (516) 765-1809. 7. That before the relief sought may be granted, a public hearing must be held on the matter by the Board of Appeals; that a notice of such hearing must be published at least five days prior to the date of such hearing in the Suffolk Times and in the Long Island Traveler. Mattituck Watchman, newspapers published in the Town of Southold and designated for the publication of such notices; that you or your representative have the right to appearand be heard at such hearing.Dated: ~' ~ ~4~ ~clotC3 ~~~~~ C '~'~';'~ Names: '~-~ ~tc~-~ ~os,,~t~9 f~f !c .e~_A d d r ess ~ ~, -- Tel. No. [Copy of sketch or plan showing proposal to be attached for convenience purposes,] John G, Sides & Others now er formerly Abraham Shames & Others Area : 6.5941 Acres FutUre Section Four LAN E 0 CONDOMINIUM MAP SAN SIMEON VILLAGE SECTION ONE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SUFFOLK COUNTY, N.Y. ~,'~ '~ '--~' now or formerly dohn (3. Slolas & Others ,now or formerly Village of Greenport Area = 5754 s.f. now or formerly Abraham Shames & Others Home Owners Association Parcel "A" Area = 6.5941 Acres Future S;ectlon Four OWNER: SAN SIMEON PROPERTIES ASSOCIATES P.O, SOX "Z" GREENPORT, N,Y. 11944 0 0 Future Sect[on Two Future Section Three now or formerly St. Peters Evangelical Lutheran Church of Greenport . LOCATION MAP THIS MAP AND ACCOMPANYING FLOOR PLANS WHEN FILED tN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUFFOLK COUNTY SHALL COLLECTIVELY BE DEEMED TO BE THE FILING REQUIRED BY ARTICLE 9-B SECTION 339-P, OF THE REAL PROPERTY LAW OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK AND SHALL BE CONSIDERED IN CONJUCTION WITH THE DECLARATION OF CONDOMINIUM FOR SAN SIMEON VILLAGE,SECTION ONE RECORED IN SAID OFFICE SIMULTANEOUSLY HEREIN. APPROVED BY THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PLANNING BOARD DATE OF APPROVAL BY: APPROVED BY THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLDBOARD OF ASSESSORS DATE OF APPROVAL BY: "1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP WAS MADE BY US FROM ACTUAL SURVEYS COMPLETED FEB. 12, 1990 AND THAT ALL CONCRETE MONUMENTS SHOWN THUS: · HEREON ACTUALLY EXIST AND THEIR POSITIONS ARE CORRECTLY SHOWN AND ALL DIMENSIONAL AND GEODETIC DETAILS ARE CORRECT." Home Owners Association Parcel Area = 8.2993 Acres CONDOMINIUM MAP SAN SIMEON \ .: " SECTION ON ~ AT GREENPORT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SUFFOLK COUNTY, N.Y. 6es. Re" LAN E N34°4G'OO"W DATE: FEB. 12, 1990 SCALE: 1" = 100' NO 90-0049 ioo HOWARD W. YOUNG, N.Y.S. LS. tlc NO. 45893 VILLAGI- YOUNG & YOUNG 400 OSTRANDER AVENUE, RIVERHEAD, N.Y. ALDEN W, YOUNG, NY.S. P.E. & ES. LIC. NO. 1 2845 HOWARD W, YOUNG, N,Y.S. LS. L~C NO. 45893 THOMAS C. WOLPERT, N.Y,S. P.E. LIC, NO. 61 483 V///////d I ] 20- DRAINAGE AREA SOIL BORINGS Designed B~c Project No: JRW SSPA-8901 ,,row,n..., 8AN 8~ME@N PR©PERTFF8 ASg©CflATE8 1" = 50' ,.~..dB~ ~°'" SAN 8~ME©N OCTOBER 1989 ...,.i .... RET REMIENT OOMMUNW¥ REV, 3-Z5-90 WATER SHED AREA Holzmachor, McLondon & Murroll, CONSULTING ENGINEERS · ARCHITECTS · PLANNERS · SCIENTISTS · SURVEYORS Sheet Title: PRELIMINARY DRAINAGE Sheet 'ALT~*1~0N O~ ~JS"~'~B~3' EXO3=TaYAAND GRADING PLAN ~ OF 1 \\ ./' ', I '~\~.'~ //~../ ' ~ · , -- ~ ~ ~. / ,,-, / :..'.. - /'~ II / , LEGEND ' - , .... ' ~ - ~ ~ 6 EXISTING CONSTRUCTION ~ ".'.,...:... '... ~ '' t,, I' ) ~~~ PROPOSED FUTURE CONSTRUCTION --.,. PHASE 1 CONSTRUCTION ~ . '.'' '.. / SECTION UNE ..... -...'B2 - I ~-- / EXISTING CONTOURS /' / ~ A,DMINIS~ATI~ ~ . PROPOSED CONTOURS CHANNEL DRAIN ASPHALT SWALE DRAIN // CMP CULVERT / ;~ / j . . ~ DETENTION' I BASIN £~-. /~ 2 LQ _ TYPE ~A" ,CHANNEL TYPE 'B' CHANNEL J I I /-¢-0o ~oo 3+oo PROFILE SCALES: VERT.: 1"=' ,0'; HORIZ,: 1% '~0' I I I I :TYPE 'C' CHANNEL (SWALE) 810" TYPICAL PARKING LOT SECTION NO SCALE SECTION -"FY-PICAL'PAV~ECTI'O'~ NO SCALE PLAN DETAIL OF RIP RAP AT CMP END SECTIONS * (INLET AND oUTLET) GENERAL NOTES - DRAINAGE, GRADING & PAVEMENT 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Ail underground utilities (electric, telephone, sewer, etc.) shall be in place before pavement is constructed. The existing culveYt passing under Chapel Lane shall be cleaned of all debris. The cost of construction of all drainage swales and channels is to be included in Item 120, Excavation and Gradinq. The clearing and grubbing necessary for construction of paved areas and drainage channels shall be included in Item 120, Excavation and Grading. The Contractor shall keep the clear- ing and grubbing to a minimum in order to maintain the rustic nature of the site. . Ail graded and excavated areas (other ways) shall be furnished with topsoil 150 and 160. than pavement and walk- and seeded under Items *rmwln, No, ST. PETEFIS LUTHERAN CHURCH AS SHOWN MAY 1984 "-"'°"': RETIREMENT COMMUNITY Revised Loy0ut GREENPORT, NEW YORK , ,' ~, Environmental Scientists f~..,3o4o [] , ,/,/~, d [ Planners Holzmacher, McLendon & Murrell, P.C. Sheet Title:,: Sheet eXC~T,.y~, DRAINAGE, GRADING & PAVEMENT DETAILe '-, 2 Of 2