WSMU_MRSV_Ltr_19980122

r
r
TOVVI`I OF Erskine Smith,Jr.,AICP
Planning Director
Town of Mooresville
MOORESVILLE 413 N.Main Street
P.O.Box 878
PLANNING Mooresville,NC 28115
DEPARTMENT
January 22, 1998
Mr. A. Preston Howard, Jr. P. E.
State of North Carolina
Division of environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
P. O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
Dear Mr. Howard:
I am wring on behalf of the Town of Mooresville in response to the"draft" letter dated November 5, 1997.
Although brief in nature the Town would appreciate an opportunity to respond in person if a time could be
arranged with you.
1) Mr. Shoe has some information provided by Ford Motor Company stating that for a dealer of his size
and volume, the minimum area suggested for a dealership would cover approximately 5 ''A acres.
The Town cannot respond to how Ford arrived at this acreage requirement. However the Town
assumes that a Company that has been in business for over 90 years has some data on their various
dealerships around the world that provides them information on space and volume requirements and
site planning for the particular market area they plan to serve. Mr. Shoe is asking Ford Motor
Company for data in response to your inquiry.
2) Reduction of the Buffer width has always been a concern to both the Town and Shoe Enterprises.
However, due to the uniqueness of the lot, the design of the site and wet detention pond, the Town
realized that the only water runoff flowing through the 50 foot buffer would be the rain that fell in the
buffer. The non-point source runoff will be controlled by curbing, then channeled to and contained in
the oversized wet detention pond. One of the reasons the Town recommended approval the
variance was that the site has no "above stream" runoff flowing through the site, so all non-point
source runoff from the new site was easier to calculate and control, so that we can be confident it will
be contained in the oversized wet detention pond.
3) Although irrelevant to the variance request, Mr. Shoe optioned the property in early 1992. He was
and is a Town Board member. He was excused from all deliberations regarding this matter. By his
own admission he was aware of the Watershed. However the proposed rules and regulations
regarding Watershed Ordinances were not proposed or adopted by the state until July 1992. No
rules or ordinances were in place by the Town of Mooresville until July 1993.
4) Attached is a copy of the Findings of Fact addressed by the Town Board when they recommended
approval of the variance request on April 8, 1997. The Board did not specifically address the finding
of no reasonable use of the property. However the standards for issuance of a variance set out in
15A) NCAC.0104 ( r) do not require such a finding. The Town's ordinance does state that "There
are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships in the way of carrying out he strict letter of the
ordinance". The Board does not believe that the hardship was the result of Shoe Enterprises own
actions for the reasons stated in response #3 above. The main reason the Board recommended
approval of the variance was the uniqueness of the property, e.g. (that there are no other properties
01/22/98 THU 15: 34 [TX/RX NO 83051 Z 002

bordered by two perennial streams in the WS-IV Lake Norman Watershed that contain have no off
site run off sheet flowing through the site and that the only water run-off on this site would fall on this
site or be created by this site.) The Board concluded that the circumstances meet the applicable
variance criteria.
5) It is the Town's understanding that Mr. Dick Brolin of B. K. Barringer and Associates, P. E. is
addressing this question. He will supply the DWQ-WSWP with the drawings, configuration and run-
off calculations. Once we understand better what design features are necessary to obtain a variance,
Shoe Enterprises is willing to provide the necessary drawings and information.
6) Shoe Enterprises in construction of the dealership site will have a storm water drainage collection
system. It is the intent that all impervious surface run-off will be collected into this system and piped
directly to the oversized wet detention basin. It was the Town opinion that additional trenches,
swales, plantings, landscaping, etc., was not necessary in the remaining 50 foot buffer to just filter
rainfall. However, Mr. Shoe has stated that he is willing to provide grass, trees, etc. in the 50 foot
buffer if the EMC adds that as a requirement or condition to approval of the major variance.
7) The Town has provided Mr. Brent McDonald of the DWQ-WSWP staff a copy of the Town's
ordinance.
8) The Town submitted as part of the record to the EMC on May 16, 1997, a copy of the notification and
list of all jurisdictions within the WS-IV Lake Norman Catawba River Watershed (not Falls Lake WS-
IV?). I have enclosed the list again for your review. No jurisdiction commented for or against the
proposed major variance either by written or verbal correspondence to the Town of Mooresville.
The Town believes it has complied to the requirements for a recommendation for approval of a major
variance to the EMC. The Town is also aware that the EMC has not dealt with a large number of variance
applications from local jurisdictions. This was evidenced by the Water Quality Committee reaction and
response to the Town and applicant. The Town expressed concern over this process early in the
comment period for the adoption of the Statewide Watershed rules. First, from a timing aspect, how long
it would take for a local applicant to receive state approval. Second, the local government is always
concerned about possible inconsistencies in the process where State authority overlaps local land use
authority. Rest assured that the Town considered this variance, as it would all others, to determine
whether granting of a variance would have a significant impact on the overall water quality of the
watershed, since the Town's only water supply is located in this watershed.
Sincerely,
Erskine Smith, Jr. AICP
Planning Director
Enclosure
• Page 2
01/22/98 THU 15: 34 [TX/RX NO 8305] Z 003

urgent
facsimile
To: Glenn Dunne
Company:
Fax Number: [phone]
Business Phone:
From: Erskine Smith
Fax Number: [phone]
Business Phone:
Home Phone:
Pages: 3
Date/Time: 1/22/98 3:32:46 PM
Subject: Shoe Enterprises meeting w/Preston Howard
I have incorporated the changes into the new draft.
Should I bring this to give to Preston Howard ? Brent McDonald ? or just
sit on it until the Town recieves an official letter from them ?
Let me know want you think either by phone or at your ofice tommorrow
Thanks Erskine
704-662-7039 fax
704-662-3188
01/22/98 THU 15: 34 [TX/RX NO 8305] [ ]001