20010230 Ver 1_Complete File_20010215

Aowr
F O 'C
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
01)4p &+ ) -? 21,0
DWQ Project # 01-0230
Durham County
Page 1 of 2
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. James E. Andrews
The Greenhouse
4406 Roxboro Road
Durham, NC 27713
Cc: Credle Engineering Company, Inc.
Attn: Mr. Edward C. Credle
204 E. Markham Ave
Durham, NC 27701
Re: Neuse River Riparian Buffer - Major Variance Request
James E. Andrews Property, Roxboro Road, Durham, Durham County, NC
Unnamed Tributary Stream to Eno River [03-04-01; 27-2-(19); WS-1V NSW (Water Supply Watershed)]
APPROVAL of MAJOR VARIANCE per the NEUSE RIVER RIPARIAN AREA PROTECTION RULE [15A NCAC 2B
.0233(9)] w/ ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS and Notice for Requirement for a 401 WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION.
Dear Mr. Andrews,
On September 12, 2001, the Water Quality Committee (WQC) of the Environmental Management Commission
(EMC) approved with the conditions listed below your Major Variance Request to impact approximately 80 feet of
intermittent stream channel and its associated riparian buffers to construct the proposed commercial development as
described within your Major Variance Request dated August 15, 2001. As stated within our letter to you dated August 30,
2001, written concurrence from this office for the use of DWQ General Certification Number 3287 (GC3287) (assuming that
you choose to use the US Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 39 to impact the stream) is
required prior conducting the activities approved under the Major Variance. To obtain this written concurrence you will
need to submit seven copies of the Pre-Construction Notification Application Form (PCN) to this office. A permit
application fee of $200 will be required for the PCN submittal. You can download a digital copy of the PCN and obtain
additional information concerning GC3287 and other certifications from our web site address listed below. In addition, you
most likely will be required to submit a copy of this form to the USACE for approval of NWP39. You should contact the
USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office at 919-876-844 1 regarding this.
Conditions required by the WQC for the approval of the Major Variance include the following.
A final, written stormwater management plan shall be approved in writing by this Office before the impacts specified in
the Major Variance Approval occur. The stormwater management plan must include plans and specifications for
stormwater management facilities designed to remove 85% TSS according to the most recent version of the NC DENR
Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual. The stormwater management plan must include at least a sand filter
stormwater management facility that meets DWQ specifications as required by the WQC. These facilities must be
designed to treat the runoff from the entire project, unless otherwise explicitly approved by the Division of Water
Quality (DWQ). Also, before any permanent building is occupied at the subject site, the facilities (as approved by this
Office) shall be constructed and operational, and the stormwater management plan (as approved by this Office) shall be
implemented. The structural stormwater practices as approved by this Office as well as drainage patterns must be
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/
Page 2 of 2
maintained in perpetuity. No changes to the structural stormwater practices shall be made without written authorization
from the Division of Water Quality. Please include the revised plans that meet DWQ specifications within your PCN
submittal. To discuss these specifications please contact Mr. Todd St. John of this office at 919-733-9584.
2. You are required to mitigate for impacts to the protected riparian buffers. We understand that you wish to make a
payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund administered by the NC Wetlands Restoration Program (WRP) to
meet this mitigation requirement. This has been determined by the WQC to be a suitable method to meet the mitigation
requirement. Please provide the area (in square feet) of Zone 1 and Zone 2 of the buffer proposed to be disturbed by this
project. Please include this information within your PCN submittal.
3. You are required to provide nutrient off-set payments into the NC Wetlands Restoration Program (WRP) as required
under the Neuse River Basinwide Stormwater Requirements (15A NCAC 2B .0235 and .0240). You must contact the
subject local government (City of Durham) and NC Wetlands Restoration Program to work out the details of providing
this payment. Until the WRP receives and clears your check (made payable to: DENR - Wetlands Restoration Program
Office), no impacts specified in the Major Variance Approval can occur.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this Major Variance Approval, you may ask for and adjudicatory hearing. You
must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition which conforms to Chapter
O?O? W AT ?9?G
r
O ?
August 30, 2001
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. James E. Andrews
The Greenhouse
4406 Roxboro Road
Durham, NC 27713
Cc: Credle Engineering Company, Inc.
Attn: Mr. Edward C. Credle
204 E. Markham Ave
Durham, NC 27701
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
DWQ Project # 01-0230
Durham County

Re: Neuse River Riparian Buffer - Major Variance Request
James E. Andrews Property, Roxboro Road, Durham, Durham County, NC
Unnamed Tributary Stream to Eno River [03-04-01; 27-2-(19); WS-IV NSW (Water Supply Watershed)]
Dear Mr. Fortunes,
On August 28, 2001, the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your Major Variance Request dated August
15, 2001. This variance request is on the September 12, 2001 agenda of the Water Quality Committee (WQC) of the
Environmental Management Commission (EMC) starting at 11:30 a.m. This meeting will be held in the Ground Floor
Hearing Room of the Archdale Building, Raleigh, NC. I strongly suggest that you and your consultants be available at this
meeting to answer any technical or background questions that the Commission members may have.
Please be aware that if the WQC approves the variance, you will be required to submit seven copies of the attached
Pre-Construction Notification Application Form (PCN) for the use of the DWQ General Certification Number 3287
(GC3287)[assuming that you choose to use the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Nationwide Permit (NWP) No. 39]
to impact the stream and construct the proposed commercial development. The 401 Water Quality Certification can not be
issued until the WQC approves the Major Variance. However, you may submit the PCN for the use of GC3287 prior to the
variance approval if you so choose. A permit application fee of $200 will be required for the PCN submittal. You can
download a digital copy of the PCN and obtain additional information concerning GC3287 and other certifications from our
web site address listed below. In addition, you may be required to submit a copy of this form to the USACE for approval of
NWP39. You should contact the USACE Raleigh Regulatory Field Office at 919-876-844 1 regarding this.
Please call John Domey at 919-733-9646 or myself at 919-733-9726 if you have any questions or if you would like to
discuss this matter further.
Sincerely,
rzecki, SIII,
DWQ, 401 Wetlands Unit
Cc: Steve Mitchell, DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
•Z'i0
010'i91?
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), httpJ/h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/
Consideration of a Request for a Variance from the Neuse River /ell
;
Riparian Area Protection Rule
Water Quality Committee Meeting
North Carolina Environmental Management Commission
September 12, 2001
A request has been received for the Water Quality Committee to grant a variance from the Neuse
River Riparian Area Protection Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233) for a proposed commercial / retail
development located on the east side of Roxboro Road at the intersection of North Roxboro Road
and Duke Street, Durham, Durham County, NC. The applicant, Mr. James E. Andrews, is
proposing to pipe and fill ± 80 linear feet of an unnamed intermittent tributary stream and
associated buffers within the Eno River (Water Supply IV, NSW) watershed. The applicant has
proposed adequate stormwater control given the existing site conditions. Some details regarding
the stormwater control will be finalized once a decision on the variance is made. The applicant
does not wish to provide mitigation for the buffer impacts given the existing site conditions, his
proposed stormwater control and off-set payments. If the Committee finds that buffer mitigation
is required for the approval of the variance, then the applicant proposes to make a payment to the
Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund to mitigate for the loss of riparian buffer. The applicant will be
required to comply with the Neuse River Basinwide Stormwater Requirements and any required
Nutrient Offset Payments to the NC Wetlands Restoration Program for increases in annual
nitrogen loading from the site beyond the minimum 3.6 lb/ac/yr.
Preliminary Findings & Recommendations:
The Division staff believe that Mr. Andrews' request has met all of the requirements
[identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233(9)(a)] for granting a variance.
As discussed in Mr. Andrews' request, he has conducted a garden center business on the
property for the past 21 years and wishes to upgrade and build a new building. Current City
of Durham development restrictions and economic restraints require that Mr. Andrews'
purchase additional property. The existing buffer is partially covered with impervious
surface and fill with some successional plant species. As a result of the development there
will be a reduction of approximately 13% in impervious surface.
2. The Division staff believe that Mr. Andrews' has proposed acceptable stormwater control
with conditions.
The Division does not prefer the use of sand filters for stormwater control within river basins
classified as Nutrient Sensitive Waters. However, the Neuse Stormwater Model attributes a
35% reduction of nitrogen to sand filters and states that they should not be used for new
development. Since Mr. Andrews' is proposing redevelopment of an existing partially
developed site, the Division is willing to accept the sand filter as appropriate stormwater
control for this project. The sand filter design proposed within Mr. Andrews' variance
request does not meet the design requirements identified within the DWQ Stormwater BMP
Manual. However, the proposed area allotted for the sand filter is more than adequate to
accommodate for a properly designed sand filter. Therefore, the Division feels that the
conceptual proposed sand filter is acceptable with the condition that a final stormwater
management plan be approved by the Division with a discharge that provides for diffuse flow
through at least 30 feet of vegetated buffer.
3. The Division staff recommends that the WQC require the following conditions to this
variance if approved to support the purpose, spirit and intent of the riparian buffer protection
program :
(a) a sand filter stormwater facility as approved by the Division,
(b) payment into the Riparian Buffer Restoration Fund to mitigate for impacts to the buffers
per 15A NCAC 2B .0242
(c) compliance with the Neuse River Basinwide Stormwater Requirements and nutrient off-
set payments,
Conclusion:
The Division staff recommends that the WQC approve Mr. Andrews' variance request with
the conditions identified in No. "Y' of the "Preliminary Findings and Recommendation"
listed above.
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Variance Request Form
Neuse River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas
NOTE: This form maybe photocopied for use as an original.
Part 1: General Information
r1l E ep Y
Management Strategy
Rule (15A fVC.E..ti0233?
2 8 200!
Applicant's name (the corporation, individual, etc. who owns the project):
James E.Andrews
Print Owner/Signing Official (person legally responsible for the facility and its compliance)
Name: James E.Andrews
Title: Owner
Street_a_ddress: _4406 Roxboro Rd
City, State, Zip: _Durham, NC 27704---- _._.
Telephone: (919)_477-8425_ 541-2487
Fax:
?_?j _ _ _ __..... _....? _ ..
Project Name (Subdivision, facility, or establishment name - consistent with project name on
plans, specifications, letters, operation and maintenance agreements, etc.):
Retail/James E. Andrews
Location of Facility
Street address: 4406, 44112, 4414 Roxboro Rd
City, State, Zip: Durham, N.C. 27704
County: Durham
Latitude/longitude:
Directions to facility from nearest major intersection (Also attach a map):
Property is located on the east side of Roxboro Rd at the intersection of N.
Roxboro Rd and Duke Street.
Contact person who can answer questions about the facility:
Name: James Andrews, Cliff Credle,
Telephone: [phone] or 919-682-2006..___-..__ _
Fax: (919)
Email: [e-mail]
Requested Environmental Management Commission Hearing Date: 9-13-01
Part 2: Demonstration of Need for a Variance
NOTE: The variance provision of the Neuse Riparian Area Rule allows the Environmental Management
Commission to grant a variance to an affected party when the following conditions apply on a given project:
practical difficulties or hardships would result from strict application of the rule:
such difficulties or hardships result from conditios which are peculiar to the property involved; and
the general purpose and intent of the Rule would be preserved, water quality would be protected and
substantial justice would be done if the variance were granted.
This part of the application is to explain how the project meets criteria (a) and (b).
Attach a detailed description (2-3 pages) explaining the following:
The practical difficulties or hardships that would result from strict application of the
Rule.
• 1 own property at the intersection of Roxboro and Duke Street (4406, 4412, 4416
Roxboro Rd.) in Durham and have had a garden center business there for the past
21 years. All totaled, I have approximately 8600 sq.ft. of deteriorated commercial
buildings. For several years I have planned to upgrade and build a new building.
As I recently pursued this end, I found that the tree ordnance of Durham was
placing an inordinate restriction on my development plans. The Durham City Tree
Ordnance requires all new construction contain 14% of the construction site in
undisturbed tree area that cannot be established in any easement or right of way.
My original property (4406-4412 Roxboro Rd) has extensive easement and right of
way pressures, (has extensive sewer, utility and storm water easements on which
you cannot build and cannot plant the trees for the ordnance) and no structure,
which was economically feasible, could be built due to these pressures and
additionally conform to the tree ordnance. I had no existing trees. Therefore I
had to consider buying the adjacent lots north of my property that that had
mature trees and could supply adequate tree coverage to meet the tree ordnance
requirements. This added extensively to the cost of the project. The variance that
I am requesting involves extending the existing storm water drain pipe
approximately 80 feet on one of these lots. In order to secure financing from the
financial institution, one has to show that the project can be profitable. In order
to make this new project economically feasible, an additional building had to be
proposed and the required parking spaces could not be built without extending
the existing drainage pipe so adequate parking could be constructed. Without
extending the pipe the requested distance, the project is not economically
possible
• How these difficulties or hardships result from conditions that are unique to the
property involved.
• The property is narrow and has a sewer easement running the length of it. A
storm drain runs diagonally across the middle of it and utility and water
easements run across the front of it. These are extensive pressures that
restrict the nature of any development. Because of the value of the property,
the only way to make development economically feasible is to extend the
drainpipe so additional parking can be constructed. Lending institutions will
not provide a construction loan until one can show that the project is
economically sound and can support the construction costs.
• Why reconfiguring and/or reducing the built-upon area to preserve a greater portion
of the riparian area is not feasible on this project. If economic hardship is the major
consideration, then include a specific explanation of the economic hardship and the
proportion of the hardship to the entire value of the project.
The project area is small and very confined so reconfiguring is not possible.
Cost and revenue tables based on the original proposed structure, before the
two lots to the north were added, indicated that the building was not
economically possible. Cost and revenue tables based on the proposed
structure with the extended storm drainpipe only gives values that are
marginal based on bank requirements. The extension of the drainpipe is
needed in order to construct the necessary parking area: the parking area is
needed to provide parking for the structure size needed to make the project
economically feasible. Without the extension of the drainpipe, the project
cannot be built.
Part 3: Water Quality Protection
NOTE: This part of the application is to explain how the project meets criterion (c): the general purpose
Complete the following information for each drainage basin. If there are more than two
drainage basins in the project, attach an additional sheet with the information for each
basin provided in the same format as below.
Project Information Drainage Basin lDrainage Basin 2Receiving stream name Receiving stream
classl Drainage basin area (total2)
Existing impervious area3 (total2). 1.54 Acre
Proposed impervious area3 (total2). 1.31 Acre
% Impervious area3 (on-site). 68%
% Impervious area3 (total2)
Impervious area3Drainage basin 1Drainage basin 2
On-site buildings 20,701 SgFt.
On-site streets
On-site parking 28,842
On-site sidewalks 2,855
other on-site
Total on-site 52,398
Off-siteTotall The internet site for this information is
http.Ah2o. enr state. nc. us/strmclasslalphalneu.html
2 Total means on-site plus off-site area that drains through the project.
3 Impervious area is defined as the built-upon area including, but not limited to, buildings, parking
areas, sidewalks, gravel areas, etc.
How was the off-site impervious area listed above derived?
Off site impervious flows through pipe through property.
What will be the
annual nitrogen load contributed by this site after development in pounds per acre per year without
structural BMPs (storm water pond, wetland, infiltration basin, etc)? Attach a detailed plan for all
proposed structural storm water BMWs.
Drainage basin
Size of drainage basin (ac) 1.19
Post-development nitrogen loading rate without BMPs4 (lbslaclyr) 15.49
BMP nitrogen removal etficiency5 (%) 64%
Final nitrogen loading rate (lbs/aclyr) 9.3
Final nitrogen loading from drainage basin (Ibs) 12345Totals- The stated goal of the ordnance is
to achieve a nitrogen run off rate of 3.6 lbs/ac/yr. When this is not achieved, the difference
between the actual and the desired (5.7 lbs/acre/yr) in this case) can be "bought down" at the
rate of $330/lb/acre/yr with a maximum cost of $2100.00/acre. In this case, the cost will be
5.7x$330x 1.19=$2238.39 .
Attach calculations and references.
5 Attach calculations and references.
Part 3: Water Quality Protection, continued
The applicable supplemental form(s) listed below must be attached for each BMP specified:
Form SWU-102 Wet Detention Basin Supplement
Form SWU-103 Infiltration Basin Supplement
Form SWU-105 Curb Outlet System Supplement
Form SWU-106 Off-Site System Supplement
Form SWU-107 Underground Infiltration Trench Supplement
Form SWU-109 Innovative BMPs Supplement
Part 4: Submittal Checklist
A complete appplication submittal consists of the following components. Incomplete
submittals will be returned to the applicant. The complete variance request submittal must
be received 90 days prior to the EMC meeting at which you wish the request to be heard.
Initial below to indicate that the necessary information has been provided.
Applicant's Initialsitem___
__ ?__ • Original and two copies of the
Variance Request Form and the attachments listed below. • A vicinity map of the project (see
Part 1, Item 5) . Narrative demonstration of the need for a variance (see Part 2) • A detailed
narrative description of stormwatertreatment/management (see Part 3, Item 1) • Calculations
supporting nitrogen loading estimates (see Part 3, Item 6) • Calculations and references
supporting nitrogen removal from proposed BMPs (see Part 3, Item 6) • Location and details for
all proposed structural stormwater BMPs (see Part 3, Item 6) • Three copies of the applicable
Supplement Form(s) for each BMP and/or narrative for each innovative BMP (see Part 3, Item
7) • Three copies of plans and specifications, including: 0 Development/Project name
0 Engineer and firm 0 Legend and north arrow 0 Scale (1" = 100' or 1" = 50' is preferred)
0 Revision number & date 0 Mean high water line (if applicable) 0 Dimensioned property/project
boundary 0 Location map with named streets or NC State Road numbers 0 Original contours,
proposed contours, spot elevations, finished floor elevations 0 Details of roads, parking, cul-de-
sacs, sidewalks, and curb and gutter 0 Footprint of any proposed buildings or other structures
0 Wetlands delineated, or a note on plans that none exist 0 Existing drainage (including off-site),
drainage easements, pipe sizes, runoff calculations 0 Drainage basins delineated 0 Perennial
and intermittent streams, ponds, lakes, rivers and estuaries 0 Location of forest vegetation along
the streams, ponds, lakes, rivers and estuaries
By your signature in Part 7 of this application, you certify that all structural stormwater best
management practices required by this variance shall be located in recorded stormwater
easements, that the easements will run with the land, that the easements cannot be changed
or deleted without concurrence from the State, and that the easements will be recorded prior
to the sale of any lot.
Part 6: Agent Authorization
If you wish to designate submittal authority to another individual or firm so that they may
provide information on your behalf, please complete this section:
Designated agent (individual or firm): _Credle Engineering Co.
Mailing address: .......... - _204 E. Markham Ave. ...._
City, State, Zip: _Durham, N.C. 27701
Telephone: _(919)-682-2006........... .... _•_.........
Fax: _(919)-682-2956
Email:
I, .lames E. Andrews _ (print or type name of person listed in Part I,
Item 2), certify that the information included on this permit application form is correct, that the
project will be constructed in conformance with the approved plans and that the deed
restrictions in accordance with Part 5 of this form will be recorded with all required permit
conditions.
Signature:
Date: ate" f;-15-U 1
Title:
Owner

Site Area = 82971 sq. R.
Land Cover
Type of Land Cover area area Concentration (0.43+7.71)
(sq ft) (acres) Coefficient
Impervious surfaoe = 63.2 52398 1.20 2.60 5.29
Managed Open Space 22525 0.52 1.39 5.29
Undisturbed Open Space 7994 0.18 0.95 5.29
Total Area = 82917 1.90 Total N Loading (lb/yr) _
Total Nitrogen Loading (lb/ac/yr) _
Reduction InTofal Nitrogen Loading (Ib/aclyr) _
Post Development Total Nitrogen Loading (Ib/aclyr)
4.11
7.07
'Yo
Wet Detention 25
Constructed Wetland 40
Open Channel Practices 30
Riparian buffers 30
Vegetated Filter w/ Level Spreader 20
Bioretentlon 25
Bioretention wl underdrain 30
Sand filter 40
Primary 6 Secondary Send filters 64
Product of Columns
16.55
3.80
0.92
21.28
11.18
ti
a
Q
z
U
5
¦
1Q1Z-lf4 (616) CILLZ 'O'N 'YIVNNnO 'AMTS ONOBXOM 'N ZNl,
SM38aNV 'B S3WVr
JO UOdOlld
NVId aLIS ¦ 1NV8nV1S38/1IV13H
Xd 9W-Z99(616) 11d 900Z•Zi9(616) 1OLLZDWAVIIQIIO'BAV WVNNWIN'Q IOZ SN0AHAdns/SNHNNvia/S21flHN10NH
DNI `XN`ddWOD ONINIIIINIJNII 21COND
F_ ?Jjguq pip p
F= < all
QI?
LL.
z %I lei _ e bill,
¢
w
fit
w ?fwill ll?f ? b
w 115 fill" 411
-? ^? ^^?..... s G s
0
fill
1?9i?° • ? R,3???? ? ?4I1 ? 5 d ? a
6 o B? to I I

Mill
N

9..
JXI-
J

d
I't

r
/?
,81
7 i /S fit I
??S

00
I
a WAM Ocrf 1Q,ge1 un.oed

e7 n
106""o
o i
o I
.
a9wa /
Lvid
fig/ W6 OOYd MOW aM I
MQ Nai NMO nn own
- w,o-wo- we wi-v6w? I

o 8

'? n ?
? ? ? N
g pppd(((
N
1
th

?+ V}p?.? Mn1

i
d
11
1-1
d
b I?
j zI
d 3
?b r
ti
z
0
P
U
W
N
?°
U

Z
V)
? Q
f
III???
i m
IiI???•p eO90
Igg q
1
>r
i
The Greenhouse
4406 Roxboro Rd.
Durham, NC 27704
Environmental Management Commission
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Raleigh, NC
Dear Environmental Management Commission,
I have attached the architects original drawing (Figure 2) which shows the maximum size
building which can be built on my property with consideration of all easements, buffers etc, and
providing 5 parking spaces per thousand square feet of high traffic structure. It shows the impact
of the tree ordnance and the area that would have to be devoted to the plantings in order to
conform with the requirement of 14% if the total project be devoted to trees which are to be in an
undisturbed area. When I went to the bank to inquire about a loan, the bank would not allow me
to build this building for it is not economically feasible. Not enough income could be projected
from a building of this size to 'cover the mortgage for the project. I had to purchase the
additional lots north of my property that have existing trees on them (>18 inch diameter gives
150% credit). But in order to get the structure large enough to give a projected income which the
bank will accept, I need additional parking spaces which can only be provided by extending the
storm water drain pipe approximately 82 feet. As a result of the variance request that I am
applying for, I will be asked to pay a mitigation fee for the loss of buffer on the storm water
easement. I would respectfully request that this mitigation fee be waived due to the below stated
reasons.
a. As a result of my proposed development, there will be an approximate 13%
reduction in impervious surface thus a net improvement on water quality issues
related to run off. This in itself results in an overall improvement of water quality
and argues against the need for the buffer mitigation.
b. I am proposing the construction of 2 BMPs (described on the site plan drawing)
that additionally reduce the nitrogen in the runoff from the sidewalk and parking
lot areas by 64%. The engineer (Credle Engineering) estimates the overall cost
(engineering, materials and construction and first years maintenance) of these
BMPs to be approximately $20,000 each thus $40,000 in cost for BMPs alone for
nitrogen reduction.
c. The stated goal of the water quality ordnance is to achieve a nitrogen run off rate
of 3.6 lbs/ac/yr. When this cannot be achieved but after a specified level of
reduction has been achieved, the difference between the actual nitrogen run off
and the desired (5.7 lbs/acre/yr) in this case) can be "bought down" at the rate of
$330/lb/acre/yr with a maximum cost of $2100.00/acre. In my case, the cost will
be 5.7x$330x1.19=$2238.39. This in itself is an additional mitigation fee for
nitrogen reduction.
When taken together, I ask that the weight of the above costs can be considered to replace
the stream buffer mitigation fee. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration.
James E. Andrews

N
I
LM

PP n ? 4l?
lip
tie
b
M /
3

Hill
r
V
V)
O ? a
14M
soil
Icd
gill,

r
By your signature in Part 7 of this application, you certify that all structural stormwater best
management practices required by this variance shall be located in recorded stormwater
easements, that the easements will run with the land, that the easements cannot be changed
or deleted without concurrence from the State, and that the easements will be recorded prior
to the sale of any lot.
Part 6: Agent Authorization
If you wish to designate submittal authority to another individual or firm so that they may
provide information on your behalf, please complete this section:
Designated agent (individual or firm): _Credle Engineering Co.
Mailing address: 204 E. Markham Ave.
City, State, Zip: _Durham, N.C. 27701
Telephone: _(919)-682-2006
Fax: _(919)-682-2956
Email:
I, James E. Andrews (print or type name of person listed in Part I,
Item 2), certify that the information included on this permit application form is correct, that the
project will be constructed in conformance with the approved plans and that the deed
restrictions in accordance with Part 5 of this form will be recorded with all required permit
conditions.
Signature:
Date: 8-15-01
Title:
Owner

r
Site Area = 82971 sq. fL

Type of Land Cover

area Lend Cover

area Concentration (0.43+7,71)

Product of Columns
Impervious surface = 63.2 (sq ft)
52398 (acres) Coefficient
1
20 2
60
.
.
5.29 16.55
Managed Open Space 22525 0.52 1.39 5.29 3.80
Undisturbed Open Space 7994 0.18 0.95 5.29 0.92
Total Area = 82917 1.90 Total N Loading (lb/yr) = 21.28
Total Nitrogen Loading (lb/ec/yr) = 11.18
Reduction InTotai Nitrogen Loading Qb/eclyr) = 4.11
Post Development Total Nitrogen Loading pb/ec/yr) a 7.07

Wat Detention 25
Constructed Wetland 40
Open Channel Practices 30
Riparian buffers 30
Vegetated Filter w/ Level Spreader 20
Bloretention 25
Bloratention W underdrain 30
Sand filter 40
Primary 6 Secondary Sand fitters 64

0/-/?Z? aa-./ /tlzll?
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Variance Request Form
Neuse River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rule (15A NCAC .0233)
NOTE: This form may be photocopied for use as an original.
Part 1: General Information
Applicant's name (the corporation, individual, etc. who owns the project):
James E.Andrews
Print Owner/Signing Official (person legally responsible for the facility and its compliance)
Name: James E.Andrews
Title: Owner
Street address: 4406 Roxboro Rd
-_, __ __--_.
City, State, Zip: --.Durham, INC 27704_
Telephone: (919L477-8425_ 541-2487 -------- ----------------------------- --r. ----------- .- ------- _-----.-..--
Fax:
Project Name (Subdivision, facility, or establishment name - consistent with project name on
plans, specifications, letters, operation and maintenance agreements, etc.):
Retail/James E. Andrews
------------------------- - ----------------------- - - -------- ---------
Location of Facility
Street address:......4406, 44112, 4414 Roxboro Rd
City, State, Zip: Durham, N.C. 27704. .
County: Durham
Latitude/longitude:
Part 2: Demonstration of Need for a Variance
NOTE: The variance provision of the Neuse Riparian Area Rule allows the Environmental Management
Commission to grant a variance to an affected party when the following conditions apply on a given project:
practical difficulties or hardships would result from strict application of the rule:
such difficulties or hardships result from conditios which are peculiar to the property involved; and
the general purpose and intent of the Rule would be preserved, water quality would be protected and
substantial justice would be done if the variance were granted.
This part of the application is to explain how the project meets criteria (a) and (b).
Attach a detailed description (2-3 pages) explaining the following:
The practical difficulties or hardships that would result from strict application of the
Rule.
1 own property at the intersection of Roxboro and Duke Street (4406, 4412, 4416
Roxboro Rd.) in Durham and have had a garden center business there for the past
21 years. All totaled, I have approximately 8600 sq.ft. of deteriorated commercial
buildings. For several years I have planned to upgrade and build a new building.
As I recently pursued this end, I found that the tree ordnance of Durham was
placing an inordinate restriction on my development plans. The Durham City Tree
Ordnance requires all new construction contain 14% of the construction site in
undisturbed tree area that cannot be established in any easement or right of way.
My original property (4406-4412 Roxboro Rd) has extensive easement and right of
way pressures, (has extensive sewer, utility and storm water easements on which
you cannot build and cannot plant the trees for the ordnance) and no structure,
which was economically feasible, could be built due to these pressures and
additionally conform to the tree ordnance. I had no existing trees. Therefore I
had to consider buying the adjacent lots north of my property that that had
mature trees and could supply adequate tree coverage to meet the tree ordnance
requirements. This added extensively to the cost of the project. The variance that
I am requesting involves extending the existing storm water drain pipe
approximately 80 feet on one of these lots. In order to secure financing from the
financial institution, one has to show that the project can be profitable. In order
to make this new project economically feasible, an additional building had to be
proposed and the required parking spaces could not be built without extending
the existing drainage pipe so adequate parking could be constructed. Without
extending the pipe the requested distance, the project is not economically
possible
• How these difficulties or hardships result from conditions that are unique to the
property involved.
• The property is narrow and has a sewer easement running the length of it. A
storm drain runs diagonally across the middle of it and utility and water
easements run across the front of it. These are extensive pressures that
restrict the nature of any development. Because of the value of the property,
the only way to make development economically feasible is to extend the
drainpipe so additional parking can be constructed. Lending institutions will
not provide a construction loan until one can show that the project is
economically sound and can support the construction costs.
• Why reconfiguring and/or reducing the built-upon area to preserve a greater portion
of the riparian area is not feasible on this project. If economic hardship is the major
consideration, then include a specific explanation of the economic hardship and the
proportion of the hardship to the entire value of the project.
The project area is small and very confined so reconfiguring is not possible.
Cost and revenue tables based on the original proposed structure, before the
two lots to the north were added, indicated that the building was not
economically possible. Cost and revenue tables based on the proposed
structure with the extended storm drainpipe only gives values that are
marginal based on bank requirements. The extension of the drainpipe is
needed in order to construct the necessary parking area: the parking area is
needed to provide parking for the structure size needed to make the project
economically feasible. Without the extension of the drainpipe, the project
cannot be built.
Part 3: Water Quality Protection
NOTE: This part of the application is to explain how the project meets criterion (c): the general purpose
and intent of the Rule would be preserved, water quality would be protected and substantial justice would
be done if the variance were granted.
Briefly summarize how water quality will be protected on this project. Also attach a detailed
narrative (1-2 pages) describing the nonstructural and structural measures that will be
used for protecting water quality and reducing nitrogen inputs to surface water.
The existing impervious surface is 81% of the total property. The proposed
development results in an impervious surface of 68% impervious. This proposal
starts with a net 13% reduction in impervious surface thus a net improvement on
water quality issues. In addition, the proposed construction contains adequate
nitrogen reduction controls to conform to the City of Durham Neuse Performance
Standards, which are based on the North Carolina State proposed Neuse Performance
Standards. This is brought about by the collection of all surface water that falls on the
sidewalk and parking areas and the transporting of the water to Sand Filters described
on the site plan. The design of the filters gives a 64% reduction in nitrogen of the
surface water that falls on the parking and sidewalk areas. All water that falls on the
larger structure will be allowed to flow onto the 25-foot grass buffer area at the
eastern boundary of the property. The water that falls on the smaller structure will run
onto the grass buffer at the northern side of the property. Storm water that occurs
offsite and is currently being piped across the property will continue to be transported
through the property.
What is the total project area in acres? 1.9 acres
Which of the following permits/approvals will be required for this project?
CAMA Major
Sediment/Erosion Control
401 Certification/404 Permit
Part 3: Water Quality Protection, continued
Complete the following information for each drainage basin. If there are more than two
drainage basins in the project, attach an additional sheet with the information for each
basin provided in the same format as below.
Project Information Drainage Basin 1Drainage Basin 2Receiving stream name Receiving stream
class1 Drainage basin area (total2)
Existing impervious area3 (total2). 1.54 Acre
Proposed impervious area3 (total2). 1.31 Acre
% Impervious area3 (on-site). 68%
% Impervious area3 (total2)
Impervious area3Drainage basin 1Drainage basin 2
On-site buildings 20,701 SgFt.
On-site streets
On-site parking 28,842
On-site sidewalks 2,855
other on-site
Total on-site 52,398
Off-siteTotal I The internet site for this information is
http.Ah2o. enr. state.nc. us/strmclass/alpha/neu.html
2 Total means on-site plus off-site area that drains through the project.
3 Impervious area is defined as the built-upon area including, but not limited to, buildings, parking
areas, sidewalks, gravel areas, etc.
How was the off-site impervious area listed above derived?
Off site impervious flows through pipe through property. „
be the
annual nitrogen load contributed by this site after development in pounds per acre per year without
structural BMWs (storm water pond, wetland, infiltration basin, etc)? Attach a detailed plan for all
proposed structural storm water BMWs.
Drainage basin
Size of drainage basin (ac) 1.19
Post-development nitrogen loading rate without BMPs4 (!bs/ac/yr) 15.49
BMP nitrogen removal etrflciency5 (%) 64%
Final nitrogen loading rate (lbs/ac/yr) 9.3
Final nitrogen loading from drainage basin (Ibs) 12345Totals ------------------ 4 Attach
calculations and references.
5 Attach calculations and references.
Part 3: Water Quality Protection, continued
The applicable supplemental form(s) listed below must be attached for each BMP specified:
Form SWU-102 Wet Detention Basin Supplement
Form SWU-103 Infiltration Basin Supplement
Form SWU-105 Curb Outlet System Supplement
Form SWU-106 Off-Site System Supplement
Form SWU-107 Underground Infiltration Trench Supplement
Form SWU-109 Innovative BMPs Supplement
Part 4: Submittal Checklist
A complete appplication submittal consists of the following components. Incomplete
submittals will be returned to the applicant. The complete variance request submittal must
be received 90 days prior to the EMC meeting at which you wish the request to be heard.
Initial below to indicate that the necessary information has been provided.
Applicant's Initialsitem „
.......... Original and two copies of the
Variance Request Form and the attachments listed below. . A vicinity map of the project (see
Part 1, Item 5) • Narrative demonstration of the need for a variance (see Part 2) • A detailed
narrative description of stormwater treatment/management (see Part 3, Item 1) • Calculations
supporting nitrogen loading estimates (see Part 3, Item 6) . Calculations and references
supporting nitrogen removal from proposed BMPs (see Part 3, Item 6) . Location and details for
all proposed structural stormwater BMPs (see Part 3, Item 6) • Three copies of the applicable
Supplement Form(s) for each BMP and/or narrative for each innovative BMP (see Part 3, Item
7) . Three copies of plans and specifications, including: 0 Development/Project name
0 Engineer and firm 0 Legend and north arrow 0 Scale (1" = 100' or 1" = 50' is preferred)
0 Revision number & date 0 Mean high water line (if applicable) 0 Dimensioned property/project
boundary 0 Location map with named streets or NC State Road numbers 0 Original contours,
proposed contours, spot elevations, finished floor elevations 0 Details of roads, parking, cul-de-
sacs, sidewalks, and curb and gutter 0 Footprint of any proposed buildings or other structures
0 Wetlands delineated, or a note on plans that none exist 0 Existing drainage (including off-site),
drainage easements, pipe sizes, runoff calculations 0 Drainage basins delineated 0 Perennial
and intermittent streams, ponds, lakes, rivers and estuaries 0 Location of forest vegetation along
the streams, ponds, lakes, rivers and estuaries
Site Area = 82971 sq. ft.
Land Cover
Type of Land Cover area area Concentration (0.43+7.7 1)
(sq ft) (acres) Coefficient
Impervious surface = 63.2 52398 1.20 2.60 5.29
Managed Open Space 22525 0.52 1.39 5.29
Undisturbed Open Space 7994 0.18 0.95 5.29
Total Area = 82917 1.90 Total N Loading (lb/yr) _
Total Nitrogen Loading (lb/ac/yr) _
Reduction inTotal Nitrogen Loading (lb/ac/yr) = 4.11
Post Development Total Nitrogen Loading (lb/ac/yr) = 7.07

Wet Detention 25
Constructed Welland 40
Open Channel Practices 30
Riparian buffers 30
Vegetated Filter w/ Level Spreader 20
Bioretention 25
Bloretenbon w/ underdrain 30
Sand filter 40
Primary & Secondary Sand filters 64
Product of Columns
16.55
3.80
0.92
21.28
11.18

Part 3: Water Quality Protection, continued
4. Complete the following information for each drainage basin. If there are more than two
drainage basins in the project, attach an additional sheet with the information for each basin
provided in the same format as below.
Project Information Drainage Basin 1 Drainage Basin 2
Receiving stream name .s-
Receiving stream class' ??-
Drainage basin area (total)
Existing impervious area3 (total2)
Proposed impervious area3 (total2)
% Impervious area3 (on-site)
% Impervious area3 (total)
Impervious area3 Drainage basin 1 Drainage basin 2
On-site buildings Q
On-site streets
On-site parking
On-site sidewalks - r-
2-
Other on-site ,_
Total on site'.;:':: -
Off-site
Total
The internet site for this information is http://h2o.enr.state.nc.uslstrmclasslalphalneu.html
2 Total means on-site plus off-site area that drains through the project.
3 Impervious area is defined as the built-upon area including, but not limited to, buildings, parking areas,
sidewalks, gravel areas, etc.
5. How was the off-site iious area listed above d,erived?
6. What will be the annual nitrogen load contributed by this site after development in pounds per
acre per year without structural BMPs (stormwater pond, wetland, infiltration basin, etc)?
Attach a detailed plan for all proposed structural stormwater BMPs.
Drainage Size of Post-development BMP nitrogen Final nitrogen Final nitrogen
basin drainage nitrogen loading rate removal loading rate loading from
basin without BMPs4 efficiencl (Ibs/ac/yr) drainage basin
ac Ibs/ac/ r % Ibs
1
2
3
4
5
aTol`a/s
Attach calculations and references.
5 Attach calculations and references.
Variance Request Form, page 3
Version 1: September 1998
OF W ATFR Michael F. Easley
?0 pG Governor
co r William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
] Department of Environment and Natural Resources
O `C Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
June 26, 2001
CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. James E. Andrews
The Greenhouse
4406 Roxboro Road
Durham, NC 27713
Cc: Credle Engineering Company, Inc.
Attn: Mr. Edward C. Credle
204 E. Markham Ave
Durham, NC 27701
DWQ Project # 01-0230
Durham County
Re: Neuse River Riparian Buffer - Major Variance Request
James E. Andrews Property, Roxboro Road, Durham, Durham County, NC
Unnamed Tributary Stream to Eno River [03-04-01; 27-2-(19); WS-IV NSW (Water Supply Watershed)]
Dear Sirs,
The NC Division of Wer Quality (DWQ) met with you on 2/15/01 notifying you that your proposed project would
require a Major Variance from the Neuse River Buffer rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233). To date the DWQ has not received
your request for a Major Variance. Please respond within one month of the date of this letter by sending your request for a
Major Variance to this office. We will begin the review procedure [including placement of your project on the agenda of
the next available Water Quality Committee (WQC) meeting of the NC Environmental Management Commission] as soon
as we receive your Major Variance Request. If we do not receive this information within one month of the date of this
letter, we will assume that you no longer want to pursue this project and we will consider the project as withdrawn. Please
note that the review of this Major Variance request is not subject to the same 60-day review period as identified within 15A
NCAC 213 .0233(8) or 15A NCAC 211.0507. The next available WQC meeting for this project is September 12, 2001.
Please call me at 919-733-9646 or Mr. Bob Zarzecki at 919-733-9726 if you have any questions or if you would like
to discuss this matter further.
Sincerely,
Wire Stevens,
r
\J I/
Cc: Steve Mitchell, DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
010230
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), hftp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetlands/
/ u, ? - z e7

F o ?P`
?
-, ?
G?c.e ?G?,?o ? asz.??- ?w ?- c?c?
to ?? ? ? .sue ;
o?

y'ir of ??cac ,y/izol 4 Mc

The average prime rent in this area for this type of building is $16-18/sq.ft.
N C
?1 zg;-io?
r
512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh NC 27604 Phone [phone]
James E. Andrews
The Greenhouse
4406 Roxboro Rd
Durham, NC
Bob Zarzecki
Division of Water Quality
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC
We recently met and evaluated my property at the intersection of Roxboro and Duke
street. I was asked to write a summary justifying my request to improve the property.
My summary follows:
I own property at the intersection of Roxboro and Duke Street (4406, 4412, 4416
Roxboro Rd.) and have had a garden center business there for the past 21 years. My wife
has had a florist for 10 r 4412 Roxboro Rd until recently. All totaled, I have
approximately 86001 . . of deteriorated commercial buildings. For several years I have
planned to upgrade our businesses and build a new building. As I recently tried to start
the improvement process, I found that the tree ordnance of Durham was placing an
inordinate restriction on my plans. The tree ordnance restrictions were so severe that the
size of building which could be built while complying with the ordnance, could not
support the overall cost of the project. The tree ordnance reads, that all new projects shall
have 14% of the project covered with trees of a minimum dimension. There are
restrictions on size and location of the plantings. There were no existing trees on my
property and in addition, I had extensive sewer, utility and storm water easements on
which you can neither build nor can you plant the trees required by the ordnance. The
rules state that 14% of the project must be occupied by trees but these trees can not be
placed on storm, sewer, utility or other easement. Therefore I had to consider buying two
adjacent lots that have trees on them and combine them with my property to meet the tree
ordnance requirements. This added extensively to the cost of the project. Not only do I
have building and development costs to contend with, I now have additional land costs. I
then found that there were restrictions on extending the storm water drain pipe an
additional 60 ft. Without the extended piping, I will have neither egress from the parking
lot to the back of the building nor required parking for the project. Both of which would
impact negatively the size of building which could be built as well as any use of the
buildings. Without being able to pipe the storm drain an additional 60 ft, I will be
unreasonably restricted as to the use of the land. Also, allowing piping of the storm drain
as requested, does not impact the % of pervious surface negatively beyond what is
already existing.
In order to secure financing from the financial institution, one has to show that the
project can be profitable. The costs related to the construction are listed below:
Sewer capital fee and tap
Grading fee
City impact fees
Expensed interest
Survey
Development fees
Misc. & Contingency
Sub-Total
TOTAL
Return on Investment
Rent
Rent/Sq.Ft.
1,320
246
22,373
6,000
4,000
125,498
48.000
421.175
2,139,570
0.14 (8-9% mtg + 5-6%)
299,541
24.96
Project using only historical plot: This estimate takes into consideration neither the cost
of purchasing and planting the plant material necessary to cover the approximate 8,960 sq
ft of area of tree coverage required by the tree ordnance nor any mitigation costs from
NCDENR.
Proposal with 12,000 Sq Ft structure
Hard Costs Amount:
Land 1.6 AC $ 600,000
Building, 12,000 SF @85 1,020,000
Site work
Off site 36,000
On site 62.400
Sub-Total 19718,400
Soft Costs
Mortgage Points
Construction loan 12,550
Permanent loan 25,100
Legal 6,800
Title Insurance 600
Environmental 1,480
Soil Report 1,200
Architect 26,000
Landscape Architect 28,500
Civil Engineer 8,800
Traffic Engineer 5,200
Blueprints 480
Inspections 720
Zoning/Site Plan(reimburse developer) 1,320
Brokers Fees 36,600
Real Estate Appraisal 2,200
Construction Interest 48,630
Interim Real Estate Taxes 2,400
Site Aerial Photos 400
Builders Risk Insurance 760
Building Permits
Plumbing 2,128
Electrical 135
Mechanical 205
Water capital fee and tap 1,260
Project as proposed: This project meets all the requirements set out by the Durham
planning board as far as offsets and tree ordnance requirements and requires no variances.
It does not take into account additional costs from NCDENR.
Hard Costs Amount:
Land 2.0 AC $ 800,000
Building, 21200 SF @85 1,8021000
Site work
Off site 45,000
On site 78,000
Sub-Total 2,625,000
Soft Costs
Mortgage Points
Construction loan 15,687
Permanent loan 31,375
Legal 8,500
Title Insurance 750
Environmental 1,850
Soil Report 1,500
Architect 35,000
Landscape Architect 3,500
Civil Engineer 11,000
Traffic Engineer 6,500
Blueprints 600
Inspections 900
Zoning/Site Plan(reimburse developer) 1,650
Brokers Fees 63,600
Real Estate Appraisal 2,750
Construction Interest 60,788
Interim Real Estate Taxes 3,000
Site Aerial Photos 500
Builders Risk Insurance 950
Building Permits
Plumbing 2,661
Electrical 169
Mechanical 256
Water capital fee and tap 1,575
Sewer capital fee and tap 1,650
Grading fee 308
City impact fees 27,967
Expensed interest 7,500
Survey 5,000
Development fees 156,873
Misc. & Contingency 60,000
Sub-Total 512,450
TOTAL 3,137,450
Return on Investment 0.14
Rent 439,243
Rent/Sq.Ft. 20.72
N
O i
? LLJ
m??o L(n
ij0
r
, LL-(4
O
?N
?
?C6 ?LW
gym,
U V
C),
LL,
o Q
?z
V_
N
-0
)o I
no
In
m ?-

Lr)
Q?
? N
w
?m
00
ww
2 C) ?z
?w
w
w
i
I
00
rn
y,
i
O'o
M
co
U

QZ
=w
Cif :2
?wU
O of
w
?w°D
CL
UV)
w }. w
?Q
?
N
N
0
0
GD
3
OD
In '
M i
o ,
0
j
x c6
00

?.
RIZ/
\ o
?o
? ?O
\ 0°o
Q
z?
?O
o?
i
ca)
P W I"I
o=ej
RY
fit
RI/
O
0
0
3«F Ft 7,0-.9

Z
(D wZ
?nF- D

A-A
\N\ <
? -IN \
0
lco
14
i
ti
O
z
r -3,
V/ Z?
Z'O
?3 4JL?Gr GVr ?
00771-9e luL?5ic-AMY - -
?p
?. U1?rshcr36?? B,cL_ ?t inn /'cz?c
?JJ`?`c?'r1 •`yI/K .Sz???ltr.?-71U,tJ .
I C Ci C rL IV
- _ r1f ?j ?J?1
An?
?CG? 12e?1J
?s

f?
r.
a//7L
b?fy '
}

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Variance Request Form
Neuse River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas
NOTE: This form may be photocopied for use as an original.
Part 1: General Information
r1l E cp y
Management Strategy
,AQ.023. 33)
Rule (15A NQ
i
IL7
W282001
Applicant's name (the corporation, individual, etc. who owns the project): y- WATEit LI;'r
James E.Andrews?
Print Owner/Signing Official (person legally responsible for the facility and its compliance)
Name: James E.Andrews
Title: _Owner
Street address: 4406 Roxboro Rd
City, State, Zip: _Durham, NC 27704
Telephone: j919)_477-8425_ 541-2487
Fax:(
Project Name (Subdivision, facility, or establishment name - consistent with project name on
plans, specifications, letters, operation and maintenance agreements, etc.):
Retail/James E. Andrews
Location of Facility
Street address: _4406, 44112, 4414 Roxboro Rd
City, State, Zip: Durham, N.C. 27704
County: Durham
Latitude/longitude:
Directions to facility from nearest major intersection (Also attach a map):
Property is located on the east side of Roxboro Rd at the intersection of N.
Roxboro Rd and Duke Street F.
Contact person who can answer questions about the facility:
Name: James Andrews, Cliiff Credle,
Telephone: 9? 19) 477-8425 or 919-682-2006
Fax: (919)_682-20W
Email: Andrews.Janws&pamacl.epa.gov
Requested Environmental Management Commission Hearing Date: 943-01 }}??
r,..
k -Z Y3?.'•?: ,i .. d.ii r..V . `'+'Cn r r v yh?t 4. /E•.14- ?. ..
r
Part 2: Demonstration of Need for a Variance
NOTE: The variance provision of the Neuse Riparian Area Rule allows the Environmental Management
Commission to grant a variance to an affected party when the following conditions apply on a given project:
practical difficulties or hardships would result from strict application of the rule:
such difficulties or hardships result from conditios which are peculiar to the property involved; and
the general purpose and intent of the Rule would be preserved, water quality would be protected and
substantial justice would be done if the variance were granted.
This part of the application is to explain how the project meets criteria (a) and (b).
Attach a detailed description (2-3 pages) explaining the following:
• The practical difficulties or hardships that would result from strict application of the
Rule.
• I own property at the intersection of Roxboro and Duke Street (4406, 4412, 4416
Roxboro Rd.) in Durham and have had a garden center business there for the past
21 years. All totaled, I have approximately 8600 sq.ft. of deteriorated commercial
buildings. For several years I have planned to upgrade and build a new building.
As I recently pursued this end, I found that the tree ordnance of Durham was
placing an inordinate restriction on my development plans. The Durham City Tree
Ordnance requires all new construction contain 14% of the construction site in
undisturbed tree area that cannot be established in any easement or right of way.
My original property (4406-4412 Roxboro Rd) has extensive easement and right of
way pressures, (has extensive sewer, utility and storm water easements on which
you cannot build and cannot plant the trees for the ordnance) and no structure,
which was economically feasible, could be built due to these pressures and
additionally conform to the tree ordnance. I had no existing trees. Therefore I
had to consider buying the adjacent lots north of my property that that had
mature trees and could supply adequate tree coverage to meet the tree ordnance
requirements. This added extensively to the cost of the project. The variance that
I am requesting involves extending the existing storm water drain pipe
approximately 80 feet on one of these lots. In order to secure financing from the
financial institution, one has to show that the project can be profitable. In order
to make this new project economically feasible, an additional building had to be
proposed and the required parking spaces could not be built without extending
the existing drainage pipe so adequate parking could be constructed. Without
extending the pipe the requested distance, the project is not economically
possible
• How these difficulties or hardships result from conditions that are unique to the
property involved.
• ' The property is narrow and has a sewer easement running the length of it. A
storm drain runs diagonally across the middle of it and utility and water
easements run across the front of it. These are extensive pressures that
restrict the nature of any development. Because of the value of the property,
the only way to make development economically feasible is to extend the
drainpipe so additional parking can be constructed. Lending institutions will
not provide a construction loan until one can show that the project is
economically sound and can support the construction costs.
• Why reconfiguring and/or reducing the built-upon area to preserve a greater portion
of the riparian`area is not feasible on this project. ` If'economic hardship is the major
consideration, then include a specific explanation of the economic hardship and the -
proportion of the hardship to the entire value of the project.
The project area is small and very confined so reconfiguring is not possible.
Cost and revenue tables based on the original proposed structure, before the
two lots to the north were added, indicated that the building was not
economically possible. Cost and revenue tables based on the proposed
structure with the extended storm drainpipe only gives values that are
marginal based on bank requirements. The extension of the drainpipe is
needed in order to construct the necessary parking area: the parking area is
needed to provide parking for the structure size needed to make the project
economically feasible. Without the extension of the drainpipe, the project
cannot be built.
Part 3: Water Quality Protection
NOTE. This part of the application is to expian how the project meets criterion (c): the general purpose
and intent of the Rule would be preserved, water quality would be protected and substantial justice would
be done if the variance were grarded-
Briefly summarize how water qualiityvA be protected on this project. Also attach a detailed
narrative (1-2 pages) describing the nonstructural and structural measures that will be
used for protecting water quality and reducing nitrogen inputs to surface water.
The existing impervious surface is 81% of the total property. The proposed
development results in an impervious surface of 68% impervious. This proposal
starts with a net 13% reduction in impervious surface thus a net improvement on
water quality issues. In addition, the proposed construction contains adequate
nitrogen reduction controls to conform to the City of Durham Neuse Performance
Standards, which are based on the North Carolina State proposed Neuse Performance
Standards. This is brought about by the collection of all surface water that falls on the
sidewalk and parking areas and the transporting of the water to Sand Filters described
on the site plan. The design of the filters gives a 64% reduction in nitrogen of the
surface water that falls on the parking and sidewalk areas. All water that falls on the
larger structure will be allowed to flaw onto the 25-foot grass buffer area at the
eastern boundary of the property. The water that falls on the smaller structure will run
onto the grass buffer at the rwrthern side of the property. Storm water that occurs
offsite and is currently being piped across the property will continue to be transported
through the property.,
What is the total project are;i in acres ?_1.9 acres'
Which of the following perin"ls/approrar}swill be required for this project?
CAMA Major
x Sediment/Erosion Contrai 't
401 Certification/404 Pemut
x
_
?

' 'ref . .. lr .(. ..-.^r•..`. ' ......

Complete the following information for each drainage basin. If there are more than two
drainage basins in the project, attach an additional sheet with the information for each
basin provided in the same format as below.
Project Information Drainage Basin 1Drainage Basin 2Receiving stream name Receiving stream
classl Drainage basin area (total2)
Existing impervious area3 (total2). 1.54 Acre
Proposed impervious area3 (total2). 1.31 Acre
% Impervious area3 (on-site). 68%
% Impervious area3 (total2)
Impervious area3Drainage basin 1Drainage basin 2
On-site buildings 20,701 SgFt.
On-site streets
On-site parking 28,842
On-site sidewalks 2,855
other on-site
Total on-site 52,398
Off-siteTotal I The internet site for this information is
http.//h2o. enr state. nc. us/strmclass/alpha/neu.html
2 Total means on-site plus off-site area that drains through the project.
3 Impervious area is defined as the built-upon area including, but not limited to, buildings, parking
areas, sidewalks, gravel areas, etc.
How was the off-site impervious area listed above derived?
Off site impervious flows through pipe through property.
What will be the
annual nitrogen load contributed by this site after development in pounds per acre per year without
structural BNVs (storm water pond, wetland, infiltration basin, etc)? Attach a detailed plan for all
proposed structural storm water BMPs.
Drainage basin
Size of drainage basin (ac) 1.19
Post-development nitrogen loading rate without BMPs4 (lbs/ac/yr) 15.49
BMP nitrogen removal effciency5 (%) 64%
Final nitrogen loading rate (Ibs/ac/yr) 9.3
Final nitrogen loading from drainage basin (lbs) 12345Totals- The stated goal of the ordnance is
to achieve a nitrogen run off rate of 3.6 lbs/ac/yr. When this is not achieved, the difference
between the actual and the desired (5.7 lbs/acre/yr) in this case) can be "bought down" at the
rate of $330/lb/acre/yr with a maximum cost of $2100.00/acre. In this case, the cost will be
5.7a$330a1.19=$2238.39 .
Attach calculations and references.
5 Attach calculations and references.
Part 3: Water Quality Protection, continued
The applicable supplemental form(s) listed below must be attached for each BMP specified:
Form SWU-102 Wet Detention Basin Supplement
Form SWU-103 Infiltration Basin Supplement
Form SWU-105 Curb Outlet System Supplement
Form SWU-106 Off-Site System Supplement
Form SWU-107 Underground Infiltration Trench Supplement
Form SWU-109 Innovative BMPs Supplement
Part 4: Submittal Checklist
A complete appplication submittal consists of the following components. Incomplete
submittals will be returned to the applicant. The complete variance request submittal must
be received 90 days prior to the EMC meeting at which you wish the request to be heard.
Initial below to indicate that the necessary information has been provided.
Applicant's Initialsitem
. Original and two copies of the
Variance Request Form and the attachments listed below. . A vicinity map of the project (see
Part 1, Item 5) • Narrative demonstration of the need for a variance (see Part 2) . A detailed
narrative description of stormwatertreatment/management (see Part 3, Item 1) • Calculations
supporting nitrogen loading estimates (see Part 3, Item 6) . Calculations and references
supporting nitrogen removal from proposed BMPs (see Part 3, Item 6) • Location and details for
all proposed structural stormwater BMPs (see Part 3, Item 6) . Three copies of the applicable
Supplement Form(s) for each BMP and/or narrative for each innovative BMP (see Part 3, Item
7) . Three copies of plans and specifications, including: 0 Development/Project name
0 Engineer and firm 0 Legend and north arrow 0 Scale (1" = 100' or 1" = 50' is preferred)
0 Revision number & date 0 Mean high water line (if applicable) 0 Dimensioned property/project
boundary 0 Location map with named streets or NC State Road numbers 0 Original contours,
proposed contours, spot elevations, finished floor elevations 0 Details of roads, parking, cul-de- ,
sacs, sidewalks, and curb'and gutter 0 Footprint of any proposed buildings or other structures
0 Wetlands delineated, or a note on plans that none exist 0 Existing drainage (including off-site),
drainage easements, pipe sizes, runoff calculations 0 Drainage basins delineated 0 Perennial
and intermittent streams, ponds, lakes, rivers and estuaries 0 Location of forest vegetation along
the streams, ponds, lakes, rivers and estuaries
a
t
r
By your signature in Part 7 of this application, you certify that all structural stormwater best
management practices required by this variance shall be located in recorded stormwater
easements, that the easements will run with the land, that the easements cannot be changed
or deleted without concurrence from the State, and that the easements will be recorded prior
to the sale of any lot.
Part 6: Agent Authorization
If you wish to designate submittal authority to another individual or firm so that they may
provide information on your behalf, please complete this section:
Designated agent (individual or firm): _Credle Engineering Co.
Mailing address: 204 E. Markham Ave.
City, State, Zip: _Durham, PLC. 27701
Telephone: _(919)-682-2006
Fax: _(919)-682-2956
Email:
I, James E. Andrews (print or type name of person listed in Part I,
Item 2), certify that the infomnabon included on this permit application form is correct, that the
project will be constructed in conforrrgnce with the approved plans and that the deed
restrictions in accordance vv ft Part 5 of this form will be recorded with all required permit
conditions.
M
Signature:
Date: 8-15-M
Title: -
Owner
11111111 1 1 ilk 11 111 11 ' I I IN 11 11
Site Area = 82971 sq. it
Land Cover
Type of Land Cover
area
area
Concentration (0.43+7.71)
Product of Columns
(sq ft) ( acres) Coefficient
Impervious surface = 83.2 52398 1.20
2.80 5.29
18.55
Managed Open Space 22525 0.52 1.39 5.29 3.80
Undisturbed Open Space 7994 0.18 0.95 5.29 0.92
Total Area = 82917 1.90 Total N Loading (Iblyr) = 21.28
Total Nitrogen Loading (lbladyr) = 11.18
Reduction inTotal Nitrogen Loading (Ib/adyr) = 4.11
Post Development Total Nitrogen Loading Qb/adyr) = 7.07

Wat Detention 25
Carmtructed Welland 40
Open Channel Practices 30
Riparian buffers
Vbgsfsted Fitter wf Level Spreader 30
20
Blows tion 25
Biorelention vW underdraii 30
Send >iller 40
Primary & Secondary Sand filers e4
1 - r
,a•' 191,9-1/9 (ate) vwz -z )N 'YIVI19no 'a ms 0900x09 'N 61H
SM3N4NV '8 S3V4V 6 10 MOJO)ld
3 Nb'ld 311S ¦ 1NVNf1V1S3H/-IIV138 tlRR
rdb Rd996L4119(616) IIJ900L419(616) 10LLL'D'N•WVI111M] 1AVWVIIHIIVW'91,0L
.,,N ?,,,••'d, ' S110A9AI1fIS/S21:INNV'i1VSNfl8NIDNr7
O ;II????KA G „ ob?be
Q a??
WOO
M 11 9 t; I g? Q III I ??? I
CL 0 of GA R
Q RI ;i
Z $q t? ??? .E.?yyy"??1 Ee6g4pQ{ w ?? 9 5 yay yb1?td
- I ? ?8 1 y t I I I ?? n? ? ? 6? ?? 8 ? II ' itl Y7 A ?? EI
rill
w?pp t` Q?7 s ; $t. w Fall h y y ???=x
4w MOW) L 0 U4'W4'? 444 '1111 $
3
I it 1, z fill a 7 a a °? C6a
I F- 1 1% ]JIM 1110M tf
11d Q d1'll a a Y 'a '? I a I 11 I" ? bR
¦ 1 96?p 9Q@??? 9 a 9 1 9 I a? ;tibtlQ
• ? . ' I ? ?? ? ? SII e e s o e ? o ? ?
Ill
Ih I ? ?r ? ? I 1 1
1 ? I
N09'10.00
0 1Y 133.21 OTAL
gg? ;' \ of N 1,1? ,1; I 1 „ 7
C1q
1
fill)

1 d

p
z
0
1=
U
W
V)

)
1
Ct pM I /
I nO?p I n
A 1
I
q¢??? ?l f
u IMA. Rh •lnwov AYGAN
.7 A,1N'M' , IfM110
110 / N Oev? / . 1`/4
cis / CN 7b", / 7001 MM
An wai W o un mm
_ 110-10- 111 101-11]W4
11W?- 4-N 11

LV11
10m
In 6191
W9
w M1N
+ F
0
lop
z° H 1
N
N ? 1
u•
Vl ? 1 ? 1
ahth
d ?gg
I
w
w,

1 1 1 1 1 1 I
II I?I?I 0 .ole
NPAIM psi
N
U
Z
w3 Q
N
?Q
U
The Greenhouse
4406 Roxboro Rd.
Durham, NC 27704
Environmental Management Commission
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Raleigh, NC
Dear Environmental Management Commission,
I have attached the architects original drawing (Figure 2) which shows the maximum size
building which can be built on my property with consideration of all easements, buffers etc, and
providing 5 parking spaces per thousand square feet of high traffic structure. It shows the impact
of the tree ordnance and the area that would have to be devoted to the plantings in order to
conform with the requirement of 14% if the total project be devoted to trees which are to be in an
undisturbed area. When I went to the bank to inquire about a loan, the bank would not allow me
to build this building for it is not economically feasible. Not enough income could be projected
from a building of this size to 'cover the mortgage for the project. I had to purchase the
additional lots north of my property that have existing trees on them (>18 inch diameter gives
150% credit). But in order to get the structure large enough to give a projected income which the
bank will accept, I need additional parking spaces which can only be provided by extending the
storm water drain pipe approximately 82 feet. As a result of the variance request that I am
applying for, I will be asked to pay a mitigation fee for the loss of buffer on the storm water
easement. I would respectfully request that this mitigation fee be waived due to the below stated
reasons.
a. As a result of my proposed development, there will be an approximate 13%
reduction in impervious surface thus a net improvement on water quality issues
related to run off. This in itself results in an overall improvement of water quality
and argues against the need for the buffer mitigation.
b. I am proposing the construction of 2 BMPs (described on the site plan drawing)
that additionally reduce the nitrogen in the runoff from the sidewalk and parking
lot areas by 64%. The engineer (Credle Engineering) estimates the overall cost
(engineering, materials and construction and first years maintenance) of these
BMPs to be approximately $20,000 each thus $40,000 in cost for BMPs alone for
- - - - - - - - -- - nitrogen reduction.. = - w -__ _ - - - = - - - - -
c. The stated goal bf the water quality ordnance -is--t"6'
s to achieve a nitrogen run off rate
of 3.6 lbs/ac/yr. When this cannot be achieved but after 'a specified level of
reduction has been achieved, the difference between the actual nitrogen run off
and the desired (5.7 lbs/acre/yr) in this case) can be ,`bought down" at the rate of
$330/lb/acre/yr with a maximum cost'of $2100.00/acre.,,-th my case, the cost will
be 5.7x$330x1.19=$2238.39. This in itself is an additional mitigation fee for
rte: ;- > t
nitrogen reduction.
When taken together, I ask that the weight of the above costs can be considered to replace
the stream buffer mitigation fee. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration.
James E. Andrews

T

P-q

1??
,,?
4
L g n

C I
? d

IBI
lies

??II
B?
i
i
i

?. Mill'-
I•
1

11'?
t
f) ?p .1 y u
?
}

ra' '!

??,j It s
N
r
?s
H
1
r
r.t P?
Vol
,
''1 O
1
t'
It' r "
soil

o
l
1

')
?If'. ( I f g ?d uiL p1' 1 K
?`Sr•1111 ?Kr? ;4 1
fl
?
' rM y
I Ir i

I ,il

,
1 I ,
,1
?
?
.ofl :
irrY
a

i f 1 1t
r 1
y I
1, Mjl y , 1'v
1. I,' nl I A.,. •l lit IN
?iog !1 } °''?ly by
by j 1
C) 7G 1 t • I
r
r , {,f 1• J , j n r ? u, ?, '
1, l s ,
? ?''iG Y,II ?I??V? {I?k I??? ? IFld?u llrr't'1?
N , '{ ?' 33'yf 1 r- Wtt? r ?.
1 /
?'4? , Q 11 , ?')Y ? ?^ X11 ??' L?} •,
lS?j ? 'al y 1' {? ('d I r
t I1., yl1 4t? ?r?` ?rr, ??+l
h ' •' Ir14,?}?u,,,??yy'?1 Iy 1 !f;?i 1 e r -'
d? as
1
i
tilt . ' ? ,I • ,
,
I If
11'

I.l I 1 `.
Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
A. Received by (Please Print Clearly) B. e if Deliver
-dl
? Agent
? Addresse,
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE''!,!
?- `• F,i?st-G1?S5-k4ai!
Postage,& Fee!
USPS
Permit No. G-11
• Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box •
NC DENR
DWQ - WETLANDS/401 UNIT
1650 MAIL SERVICES CENTER
RALEIGH NC 27699-1650

r
By your signature in Part 7 of this application, you certify that all structural stormwater best
management practices required by this variance shall be located in recorded stormwater
easements, that the easements will run with the land, that the easements cannot be changed
or deleted without concurrence from the State, and that the easements will be recorded prior
to the sale of any lot.
Part 6: Agent Authorization
If you wish to designate submittal authority to another individual or firm so that they may
provide information on your behalf, please complete this section:
Designated agent (individual or firm): _Credle Engineering Co.
Mailing address: 204 E. Markham Ave.
City, State, Zip: _Durham, N.C. 27701
Telephone: _(919)-682-2006
Fax: _(919)-682-2956
Email:
I, James E. Andrews (print or type name of person listed in Part I,
Item 2), certify that the information included on this permit application form is correct, that the
project will be constructed in conformance with the approved plans and that the deed
restrictions in accordance with Part 5 of this form will be recorded with all required permit
conditions
Signature-
--
Date:'.
' Title:
Owner
4Y' y
E-15-61 1} :
3

r
Site Area = 82971 sq. IL
Land Cover
Type of Land Cover
area
area Concentration (0.43+7.71)
Product of Columns
(sq n) ( ewes) Coefficient
impervious surface = 63.2 52398 1.20 2.80 5.29 16.55
Managed Open Space 22525 0.52 1.39 5.29 3.80
Undisturbed Open Space 7994 0.18 0.95 5.29 0.92
Total Area = 82917 1.90 Total N Loading (Ib/yr) = 21.28
Total Nitrogen Loading (lb/artyr) = 11.18
Reduction InTotel Nitrogen Loading (Ib/ac/yT) = 4.11
Post Development Total Nitrogen Loading (Ib/ac/yr) = 7.07
BMP Type %
Wet Detention 25
Constructed Wetland 40
Open Channel Practices 30
Riparian buffers 30
Vegetated Filter Yd Level Spreader 20
Bloretention 25
Bioretention w/ underdrain 30
Sand fitter 40
Primary & Secondary Send fitters 64

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality COPY
Variance Request Form
Neuse River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rule (15A NC_..ACL.022331
NOTE: This form maybe photocopied for use as an original
' i 2 8 2001
Part 1: General Information
i VJETU„'?G;CUP
Applicants name (the corporation, individual, etc. who owns the project): WATEitr 'Y'S,-CT:-
James E.Andrews -_._.... s ...,_"_."'
Print Owner/Signing Official (person legally responsible for the facility and its compliance)
Name: James E.Andrews
Title: _Owner
Street address: 4406 Roxboro Rd
City, State, Zip: _Durham, NC 27704
Telephone: 919 _477-0425_ 541-2487
Fax:(
Project Name (Subdivision, facli ty, or establishment name - consistent with project name on
plans, specifications, letters, operation and maintenance agreements, etc.):
Retail/James E. Andrews
Location of Facility
Street address: _4406, 44112, 4414 Roxboro Rd
City, State, Zip: Durham, N.C. 27704
County: Durham
Latitude/longitude:
Directions to facility from nearest major intersection (Also attach a map):
Property is located on the east side of Roxboro Rd at the intersection of N.
Roxboro Rd and Duke Street
Contact person who can answer questions about the facility:
- :V P
Name: James Andrews, Cliff credle
Telephone: [phone] or 9t9-682-2006 3 "'.:
Fax: [phone]''' Email: Andrews..lames@epamail epa.gov
Requested Environmental Mamgemerd Commission Hearing Date: 9-13-01
LL
Mbus;?IF•n _= e•'e+..
RIM
ta: