20080499 Ver 1_WQC Agenda Item 2a_20080507

*41 1 bJ
Schneider
INDIANA
Corporate Headquarters
Historic Fort Harrison
8901 Otis Avenue
Indianapolis, IN 46216
Toll -Free: 866.973.7100
Avon Office
Building 1000
5250 E US Highway 36
Suite 250
Avon, IN 46123
Merrillville Office
9800 Connecticut Drive
Suite B1 -508
Merrillville, IN 46307
West Lafayette Office
1330 Win Hentschel Boulevard
Suite 100
West Lafayette, IN 47906
IOWA
Ames Office
1606 Golden Aspen Drive
Suite 110
Ames, IA 50010
NORTH CAROLINA
Charlotte Office
8001 Arrowridge Boulevard
Charlotte, NC 28273
TENNESSEE
Nashville Office
624 Grassmere Park Drive
Suite 30
Nashville, TN 37211
WQC Agenda Item # 2a
The Schneider Corporation
8001 Arrowridge Boulevard Charlotte, NC 28273 -5604 Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
March 17, 2008
Ms. Amy Chapman
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality 401 Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Suite 250
Raleigh, NC 27604
Ms. Chapman,
On behalf of our client, please accept this submittal packet as our application for a
stream buffer variance for the proposed Project Hermes. Per your instruction this
application has been filled out using the Variance Request Form (Version 1: September
1998) required for the Neuse River Basin as developed by the State of North Carolina,
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Water Quality, modified
for the Randleman Lake Watershed.
Application has been made to the Town of Kemersville and that request is currently
under review by their Watershed Review Committee. As this project is on a very tight
time schedule we are asking that you begin a preliminary concurrent review of our
application prior to receiving the formal okay from the Town of Kernersville.
We thank you for considering this application and look forward to working towards
obtaining your approval for this buffer variance. If you should have any questions or
comments regarding the above or attached information please contact me by phone at
(704) 697 -5916 or e-mail ascales @schneidercorp.com.
Copy TSC File #6991.001
l..J
MAR z % 2008
1AE7 DeNk - WATER OI 'AU Ty
tANDSAND STORmvdATFR BRANCH
b:\6k\6991\101\docs\eorrespondence\scales- chapmen 3-17 -08.doc

OFFICE USE ONLY: Date Received-,­­­,, Request #
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Variance Request Form
t-strategy
ProterWon,,ond-, arian Area R4Ae-(4-fiA-NCAG­ )
Randleman Lake Water §yppjy Watershed Buffer Area
n. rz?
NOTE: This form may be photocopied for use as an original.
Part I* General Information
n \J,7 r'E-- P,
MAR 1 7 2008
OENR - WXIEk QUAL11 Y
WETLANDS AND STOROATER BRANCH
1. Applicant's name (the corporation, individual, etc. who owns the project): At this time the
4 pQJJ',q@0J vojud prq
_ rafm Ln, a 1, n a n 0 ny 010 L lg4
alwa, _LDQ — D"pp ;9Dt is _aPortune 500, Coml?any with
the need for a large distribution center,
__ ... . ........ .. . . ....
2. Print Owner/Signing Official (person legally responsible for the facility and its compliance)
Name: Mr. M. JAY DeVaney. Nexsen Pruet—PLLC,,
Title: Owner's Representative
Street address: 70 ley Road, Suite 100
City, State, Zip: Greensboro. NC 27408 ..........
Telephone: 87-5108 . . . . .........
Fax:
3. Project Name (Subdivision, facility, or establishment name - consistent with project name on
plans, specifications, letters, operation and maintenance agreements, etc.);:
Proiect Hermes
4. Location of Facility
Street address: 1540 Old Greensboro Road _LT_riad.,,@.U(ness Park)
City, State, Zip: Greensboro, NQ 27408
County, Guilford
Latitude/longitude: 3�-_Q6-28.3. W 80-02- �� 3
5. Directions to facility from nearest major intersection (Also attach a map):
Beginning at the intersection of Oterstate 40 and Sandy Ridge Rog1d tCgyQ, 'tbj � o
_Na Sr
L&& fA, &Yat I UL a''Igm
With Old Greensboro Road and the site is on the
6. Contact person who can answer questions about the facility:
Name: Mr. M. Jay DeVaney
Telephone: (336) 3a7-5108
Fax:
Email: JDevanv(-a–)n�a-xsenr)rLigtcotn . .........
7. Requested Environmental Management Commission Hearing Date: May 7,2008
Version 1: September 1998

Part 2: Demonstration of Need for a Variance
NOTE: The variance provision of the Randleman Lake Water Supply Watershed R ° _. _..._
ule
u allows the Environmental Management Commission to grant a variance to an affected party when the following
conditions apply on a given project:
(a) practical difficulties or hardships would result from strict application of the rule:
(b) such difficulties or hardships result from conditions which are peculiar to the property involved, and
(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.
This part of the application is to explain how the project meets criteria (a) and (b)
1. Attach a detailed description (2 -3 pages) explaining the following:
The practical difficulties or hardships that would result from strict application of the Rule.
* How these difficulties or hardships result from conditions that are unique to the property
involved.
0 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.
Part 3 Water Quality Protection
'NOTE:V This part of the application is to explain how the project meets criterion (c), the generM purpose �
intent
variance were granted. reserved, water quality would be protected and substantial Justice would be tfone ff
p q Y A
1 v 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 sediment inputs to surface water.
Water auality will be Drotected on the site throuah strict adherence to the adopted North
QA[gllina Division of Water Quality. Storm Water Be anaaement Practices Manual
007. In q
pneral all stor water u ff from i e will be cold c
1,I,;catch basins and piped to a w t and BMP. u ff 'I b ,' „� _
p nd BMP thro h lev s r r and then sheet flow a 1, e .uf eer. In rj r to
provide redundant storm ter ualh mitigation prior to disc hgfgp [alp the wet
pgnd runoff will be routed through a Slorn�ceotor br n a f It rnber
2. What is the total project area in acres? 127.31 acres _,
3. Which of the following permits /approvals will be required for this project?
CAMA Major
X Sediment/Erosion Control
X 401 Certification /404 Permit
Variance Request Form, page 2
Version 1: September 1998

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
West Fork Deep River /
Cape Fear Basin
stream
WS-1V
Drainage basin area total')
84.83 acres
Existing impervious area3 (total')
0.33 acres
-- .............
Proposed impervious area total')
3 (
1111 �
313 acres
% Impervious area3 (on -site)
98.0 %
Impervious area' (total')
86.38%
*Note that this Impervious area calculation is for the areas drainage to the proposed storm
water quality BMP only and are not reflective of the entire development. Impervious
surface makes up 57.3% of the entire proposed development.
On -site buildings
On -site streets
On -site parking
On -site sidewalks
Other on -site
Off -site
Inage basin 1
592,483 ft'
119,904 ft'
,461,159 ft'
3,753 ft'
basin 2
' The internet site for this information is http: / /h2o.enr. state .nc.us /stomc /ass/alpha/neu.html
' 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?
imoerviras °tr8 Mere derived from information taken from the Guilford
bounty GIS website. This information was t grk entered it a CAD software and
it.. enena �ed.;b
� r BSI �o ter ;_
e t • #eN tt tt�tt�rf4Pe -W hat will be the
sediment removal rates (% TSS) for the proposed structural BMPs.
Odiment removal rates will be a minimum 90% TSS removal from the p, ��
pond. Additional TSS removal will be provided via a Stormceptor brand mechanical
- a�ator installed between the storm water collection sv�tem disoh ro na d the,,,,,.,
w ; nd BMP forebay.
Variance Request Form, page 3
Version 1: September 1998

Part 3: Water Quality Protection, continued
7. 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
„—. lease find attao ble supplemental forms a Ltg, std above.
Part 4: Submittal Checklist
A complete application 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 I
Item
Initials
MJD 0
0 Original and two copies of the Variance Request Form and the attachments
listed below.
MJD *
* A vicinity map of the project (see Part 1, Item 5)
MJD .
. Narrative demonstration of the need for a variance (see Part 2)
■ A detailed narrative description of stormwater treatment/management (see Part
3, Item 1)
M. C
Calculations supporting eitfegen sediment loading estimates (see Part 3, Item 6)
Calculations and references supporting nitrogen sediment removal from
MJD p
proposed BMPs (see Part 3, Item 6)
Location and details for all proposed structural stormwater BMPs (see Part 3,
MJD I
Item 6)
Three copies of the applicable Supplement Form(s) for each BMP and /or
narrative or each innovative BMP (see Par-E.3, Item 7)
Three copies of plans and specifications, including;.
MJD 0 Development/Project name
MJD 0 Engineer and firm
M& 0 Legend and north arrow
M 0 Scale (1" = 100' or 1" = 50' is preferred)
Mj_D 0 Revision number & date
NIA 0 Mean high water line (if applicable)
MJD 0 Dimensioned property /project boundary
MJD
Variance Request Form, page 4
Version 1: September 1998
MJD
Variance Request Form, page 4
Version 1: September 1998

MJQ
0
Location map with named streets or NC State Road numbers
tv1JD
0
Original contours, proposed contours, spot elevations, finished floor
MJQ
Fax:
elevations
MUD
0
Details of roads, parking, cul -de -sacs, sidewalks, and curb and gutter
MJIQ
0-
Footprint of any proposed buildings or other structures
0
Wetlands delineated, or a note on plans that none exist
MJD
D
0
Existing drainage (including off - site), drainage easements, pipe sizes, runoff
MJJD
calculations
Drainage basins delineated
0
Perennial and intermittent streams, ponds, lakes, rivers and estuaries
4
Location of forest vegetation along the streams, ponds, lakes, rivers and
estuaries
Part 5: Deed Restrictions
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): Andrew M. S§&es- The Schneider CorD ralic n
Mailing address:
City, State, Zip:
f)ratle, _�7_NC 28��� _.— _�_- Y__...-- .-- .--- _._._._
Telephone:
L04
Fax:
Email:
�� o
Part 7; Applicant's Certification
I, __ „. JaX.DdVancy _ „___`_� (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:
Variance Request Form, page 5
Version 1: September 1998

R X113; NEED FOR VARIANCE
Strict application of 1 S NCAC 2S .0216 State of North Carolina Randleman (Lake Water Supply Watershed
Program v oid require ",..a minimum one hundred (1010 foot vegetatlive baler along all Wennial waters o.."
This requirement creates a large, swalh that cuts through the ;proposed site where constructlon would not be
permitted® The proposed, use for this slate requires a large„ relatively flat unbroken plece of ground that will
allow traffic flow through the proposed distribution facility. A minimum of 110 contiguous acres of ground is
typically needed for a development of this size. Additional acreage Is being acquired to minimize the Impact
to the stream/wetland areas present on site. Even with this additional acreage, it the existing buffer
requirement were to be enforced the development footprint would have to be dramatically reduced and render
this site unsuitable for the proposed use.
Multiple layouts have been considered for the development of this site. Please see the attached drawings
showing the multiple site plans considered. Each design was prepared to meet the minimum basic
operational needs of the facility, however, the Initial designs provide for a significant stream and wetlands
impact to the eastern and southern wetland areas on the proposed site. The following is a breakdown of the
considered site layouts and the issues with each design as well as the efforts that have been undertaken to
try and mitigate the stream and wetland impacts.
Remark: The proposed facility is specifically engineered to create maximum efficiencies In the conveying
equipment to maximize through -put and minimize the cost and time required to process materials through the
facility. This highly automated equipment is designed first, and then the building to house the equipment is
developed around the equipment to provide the maximum efficiency for the specific business need. As such,
changing the building configuration of the proposed distribution facility Is not an option for the Owner.
C -1 — The required distribution center building and site layout was overlaid on the originally available 110
acre ( approx.) parcel. The layout satisfied the operational needs of the facility, within the 110 acres, but
to accomplish this there was a significant impact on the stream and wetland areas in both the sizeable
eastern area and the south - central areas of the site
C -2 — In an attempt to mitigate the stream and wetland impact, additional acreage (approx. 20 acres) on
the west side of the originally considered 110 acre parcel was Identified as a potential solution to reduce
the impact. The additional 20 acres was subsequently placed under contract, at substantial cost. With
the additional acreage the site plan was revised with the building moved to the west thus allowing
substantially less impact on the stream and wetland areas in the eastern portion of the property and to a
lesser extent the Impact on the south - central areas of the site was reduced.
C -3 — To further reduce the stream and wetlands Impact on the southern area, the site plan was
redesigned again on the combined 1 130 acre parcel and shifted north. Some reduced impact on the
eastern stream/wetland area is realized but not a significant amount.
0 C-4.0 — Next, the distribution center site plan was further revised to reduce the wetlands and stream
Impact by modifying the standard locations of the prototypical site components like the parking areas.
Specifically, the parking areas were reconfigured to enable shifting the main distribution center building
as far north as possible on the site. The overall efficiency of the site Is somewhat compromised by these
design changes, but this layout still satisfies the basic operational needs of the facility (required building
size /configuration, traffic flow pattern, required parking spaces, security) and successfully completely
eliminates the Impact on the eastern stream /wetland area. The south - central stream/wetland area,
however, is still impacted.
C -5.0 — Finally, the distribution center site plan was rotated 1801 and the main distribution center building
moved as far north as possible to determine if the impacts to the stream/wetland areas could be further
reduced or eliminated. This site layout was not further developed to reconfigure the parking areas as it
was determined that the required basic operational needs of the facility could not be satisfied without
impacting both strearnAvefland areas. Furlinarmoro, this design 'places the paved surfaces Immediately
adjacent to Old Greensboro Road and would require major variances for site setback requirements.
b: \6k\ 6991\ 101 \dots\ correspondence \dwg submittal supportdoc

The following table summarizes the environmental impact of each site layout alternative detailed above:
The site layout required to meet the basic operational requirements for the facility cannot be located on the
combined parcels without impacting the stream /wetland areas. The site layout presented in C-4.0 was
determined to be the best alternative as It meets the basic operational requirements for the facility (required
building size /configuration, traffic flow pattern, required parking spaces, and security) and limits the Impact to
the south - central stream /wetland area only. This design comes at substantial additional cost including the
acquisition of an additional 20 acres of land to provide the maximum possible mitigation of the eastern stream
and wetlands area. This concept was further developed and is presented with the preliminary site and
grading plans presented herein.
In addition to looking at multiple site plans for this parcel an exhaustive search of other parcels in the area
was completed. Attached please find a breakdown of those alternate sites and why each was deemed
unacceptable.
Project Hermes will involve a capital investment in excess of $100 million and the creation of approximately
100 full -time and 150 part-time employee jobs by the Owner within five years of the commencement of
operations. The Owner is currently evaluating sites in the States of North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Tennessee for Project Hermes, which is necessary in order for the Owner to meet projected business growth
in the southeast United States. Due to the limited number of 110+ acre sites in the, Piedmont Triad Area that
meet the Owner's business needs, the timely approval of this variance is critical to the Owner's ability to move
forward with Project Hermes in North Carolina..
,
b: \6k\ 6991\ 101 \docs\ correspondence \dwg submittal- support.doc

Water Duality Protection_ Summary — Water quality will be protected on this site by strict adherence to the
adopted North Carolina Division of Water Quality Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual (2007).
Please see the attached Storm Water Maintenance and SWPPP plans for Information regarding water quality
protection. The attached plans show that we are proposing to collect all storm 'water runoff from Impervious
surfaces and p!lpo them to a common wet detention (basin designed in accordance with the IMP manu 1,
Storm water will discharge from the underground collection system into a forebay and then emptying Into the
main basin where the discharge wHi be regulated by a concrete outlet control structure. Discharge from the
outlet coritrol structure will be rooted through a level spreader, to diffuse concentrated flow conditiorus, and
across a vegetative buffer prldir to tying discharged off site. As a redundant measure of water quality
mitigation, the Owner Is proposing the use of Stormceptor brand mechanical storm water filter chambers )Mist
upstream of the storm water collection system discharges Into the proposed forabay. Code requires that the
proposed 8MP be designed to treat one -inch ("l,') of runoff from oil impervious :surfaces. In order to help
mitigate for the loss of existing streams and wetlands due to this variance request, we are ;proposing to treal
one and one -half Inches (1,5 ") of runoff from all Impervious surface.
In addition to removing sediment (minimum 85% TSS removal), nitrogen and phosphorus from the storm
water, the proposed basin will also provide storm water quantity mitigation. The proposed wet pond will be
designed to hold the one year twenty four hour storm event as required by code. In addition, the pond will be
designed to attenuate the peak runoff rates of the post - development ten year and twenty-five year storm
event to that of pre - development rates.
As a redundant storm water quality measure and to help mitigate the impacts of the stream buffer variance,
we are proposing additional stream and wetland buffering outside of the required one hundred foot (100')
buffer required by the ordinance. These additional buffers will be protected by dedicated conservation
easements that will run with the land in perpetuity. A map showing these additional buffer areas has been
included with this submittal for your review and comment. (See drawing C -105)
As a response to possible questions regarding the Owner's standard practices dealing with facility upkeep
and good housekeeping as It relates to storm water, please accept the following. The Owner has standard
procedures for managing operational impacts to storm water run -off from company facilities. The proposed
Kernersville facility will be required to implement the following company procedures:
The facility must develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWP3) that
addresses vehicle maintenance, vehicle washing, vehicle fueling, and all activities that have the potential
to impact storm water run-off from the facility. Best Management Practices (BMPs) are to be
implemented for all such activities to prevent pollution impact to storm water run -off. The SWP3 will be
deveioped to meet the Department of Environment and Natural Resources - Division of Water Quality's
storm water permit requirements to perform visual inspections of the facility and storm water
management system twice a year during rain events and to obtain sampling and analysis of storm water
run-off from the facility twice per year.
■ In the event of spills that cannot be contained and cleaned up during routine maintenance at the facility, a
2417 spill response consultant is to be contacted to dispatch a spill response contractor to clean up the
spill.
The facility is to implement a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan (SPCC) that includes
procedures for monitoring for releases from the on -site fuel storage and dispensing system, Identifies
controls in place to prevent releases from the system, and specifies specific procedures to implement
when releases do accidentally occur.
Questions have arisen regarding hazardous materials handling onsite. Hazardous materials are generally not
stored at these facilities. However, the Owner will have a Hazardous Material Processing Area inside the
main distribution center building to handle any damaged or leaking hazardous materials that are encountered.
This area is located in an area of the floor that is undralned. Any spillage /leakage Is contained and absorbed
using appropriate methods. The facility will have an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Generator ID
Number. We anticipate that it will be a Small Quantity Generator (SQG). Please find attached a copy of the
Hazardous Material Operating Guideline for the proposed user.
b: \6k\ 6991 \101 \dots \correspondence \dwq submittal- supporLdoc

In regards to environmental initiatives the Owner has begun looking into ways to become more "green" in
their business practices. Initiatives include implementation of a recycling program and participation in
programs to test hybrid hydraulic package vans. Additionally, the Owner is addressing sustainable
management practices Including measuring various metrics that reflect the "carbon footprint" of company
operations with the Intent of publishing the information in an annual "Corporate Social Responsibility" report
and providing a measure of the effectiveness of initiatives being implemented to reduce the intensity of the
company's carbon footprint,
Vehicle Washing:
0 There is provision for washing of vehicles Inside the main distribution center building. The Owner
estimates that 160 vehicles per week will be washed when the facility opens. The wash water will be
collected via floor trench drains and routed through an oil /water separator prior to being discharged into
the sanitary sewer system. The discharged water will not go to the storm water system.
rr There is also an automated truck wash facility that will wash an estimated 1000 to 1500 tractor /trailer
combinations per month. The water will be recycled and waste water will be run through an oil /water
separator prior to discharging into the sanitary sewer system. The discharged water will not go to the
storm water system.
Vehicle Maintenance:
+ There will be a trailer maintenance garage to perform routine maintenance on trailers. Floor trench drains
collect water that comes off the trailers and route it through an oil /water separator prior to discharging Into
the sanitary sewer system. The discharged water will not go to the storm water system.
Fuel Facility:
0 Currently planned for this facility, Is a fuel system comprised of two (2) — 30,000 double wall fiberglass
underground storage tanks with six (6) fueling lanes utilizing a total of 7 dispensers. All piping is double
wall non - metallic pipe. The tanks and the piping have continuous leak detection. The fuel facility has six
(6) fueling lanes with a 30' x 94' canopy overhead. The concrete underneath the canopy sheds to catch
basins that collectively run through a Stormceptor device before discharging to the sanitary sewer
system. The discharge water does not go to the storm water system.
Other material storage or environmental concerns:
■ The facility may have an outdoor diesel driven emergency generator. Appropriate containment will be
provided for the diesel fuel day tank system.
The facility operation involves the use of numerous motor vehicles on site. These vehicles will operate
and be parked on impervious surfaces. The Owner has policies and procedures in place for responding
to any spills /leaks of fuels, oils, antifreeze, etc. All drainage from areas where vehicles are
operated /parked Is collected and treated as described above In Part 3, Section I, including as a redundant
measure of water quality mitigation, the Owner is proposing the use of Stormceptor brand mechanical
storm water filter chambers just upstream of the storm water collection discharges Into the proposed
forebays of the wet pond.
www.schneiderCorP.COM
-
# L12111 K b

WATERS OF THE STATE IMPACT
The following is a breakdown of the impacts to waters of the state that will take place upon approval of this stream
buffer variance, as well as soon to be filed 401 and 404 permits.
Multiple site plans have been developed to minimize these impacts. Please see the discussion in the Part 2:
Variance Need Demonstration portion of this application for more information regarding how the submitted site plan
was arrived at and the lengths gone to in order to minimize impacts to ponds, streams and wetlands. These
impacts are slightly different from the impacts shown in altemative C -4,0 as further modification of the site plan was
done once a preliminary grading plan was completed. A retaining wall structure is now proposed to further reduce
pond impacts.
Mitigation for stream and wetland impact will be through payment to the North Carolina EEP.
b: \6k \6991 \101 \docs \correspondence \ dwq submittal- supportdcc

WQC Agenda Item # 2b

.n I T. COUNT,

®\-
f
/
)
�
N
2iu
\ \ ƒI
\%
I N

A
ol
0
I L I'
17 1 g I I i I, T
ON 'NORTH CAMINA
IL OHMm.fAft PLO
99@29zl�
11=11

L7,
T a)
29
ID
SE
a
. ........ ... ..
z q
FL
CD
:r
A ID
ql
Er
fe,
vi,
8 9- 9. OR cn m
O
��o .0m
me.
XO
m
go (A r

a_ ... ... ..... ......__.
VI
�i rµ
Z
n
°
.. � S2
� o
`
y�
..........
ro
°o
m
\ °i 4pp4
y ° ° dO,
°
0
o r ��.,, - °o �� m � � ter✓` iF � ,� ^�y� � t \ ro
ic
v�
1
3'2i
1�1 pi_ ...r �,i.... J—iJJIIk :... r.:..
... ........
Preliminary Not for Construction, 3/14[2008
OZ #M01IUNON DO

ja .1
iR
N.-
€E �� �'n¢ Ile
,�v t(
eo
pi
I t
2Y
�A I
i�,y t
4
d
J%f
�y
M' 13
I, S
114 �Av
"00,
iV 4"
Y it
x
A
q
tlE
Otwi
Preliminary Not for Construction, 3/14/2008
o
.. .......... . . . . .... .... . ... .... .
j q
. . . . . ...........

q
w ,
r
(7'
o
°
gv
r
� a
,
r Y
� N
°
w F�
i n
WH
W 6 1, P
°
II j I �
4.
iw
yr
n
Y , 1
u
V
s s�. u7
Mr
w*W ie i . 1) OiJiui&
"",
"
rc
Preliminary Not for Construction, 3/14/2008
j�� • iay� &�
'a
r....i.. r ... .rt✓ rwuu wlmi

WQC Agenda Item # 2d
TOWN OF KERNERSVILLE
P.O. Box 728
Kemersvilie, NC 27285 -0728
March 20, 2008
Ms. Amy Chapman, Environmental Senior Specialist
Division of Water Quality 401 Unit
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699 -1650
Subject: Approved Findings, Conclusions, Decision and Conditions
Request for Major Exception — the "Hermes Project
Randleman Reservoir Watershed — Upper Portion
Town of Kernersville — Watershed Review Committee
Guilford County, North Carolina
Dear Ms. Chapman:
dB- oua�
Dawn % Morgan, Mayor
Curtly L. Swisher. Town Manager
134 East Mountain Street
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
Pursuant to our telephone conversation, please find enclosed Findings, Conclusions, Decision and Conditions
approved by the Watershed Review Committee (Committee) of the Town of Kernersville, which have been
certified by the Town Clerk, for the proposed "Hermes Project ". After publishing notices in local papers and
sending written notices to affected local governments, the Committee conducted a public hearing, today,
which was held in accordance with the notices and the Town's Environmental Ordinance.
Representatives for the "Hermes Project" requested a major exception (variance) as provided in the Town
of Kernersville's Code of Ordinances (Chapter C — Environmental Ordinance, Article III — Watershed
Protection, Section 3 -7.4 Exceptions, Major). The "Hermes Project" is proposed for a tract containing
approximately 130 acres, which is located within the Town of Kernersville, Guilford County, North
Carolina, having a street address of 1540 Old Greensboro Road.
A complete record of the hearing has been developed. Should you desire, we can provide copies of the
recorded documents and minutes of the hearing. Please let me know if you need, or want, this information.
Should you have questions or need additional information, please contact me at (336) 996 -5530.
You may send email to rradford(a,tokna.com„
Si rely,
R sell D. Radford, P.4Waershed , Adm inistrator
Town of Kernersville
Enclosures
CC: Ms. Sue Homewood
Mr. Jay DeVaney, Attorney
Mr. Curtis Swisher, Town Manager
Mr, John G. Wolfe, III, Attorney
ALDERMEN
Kevin Bugg - Brooke W. Cashion - Dana Caudill Jones - Keith Mason - Bob Prescott
NORTH CAROLINA'S
1V, PIEDMONT
TRIAD

TOWN OF KERNERSVILLE
Dawn H. Morgan, Mayor
Curtis L. Swisher, Town Manaeer
P.O. Drawer 728 134 East Mountain Street
Kernersville, NC 27285 -0728 Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
I, Dale F. Martin, Town Clerk of the Town of Kernersville, North Carolina, do hereby certify that the
attached document is a true and accurate excerpt of the Minutes of the Kernersville Watershed Review
Committee Hearing held on March 19, 2008.
Witness my hand and the seal of the Town of Kernersville, this 20`h day of March, 2008.
Q�'j - .. --
Dale F. Martin, CMC
Town Clerk
ALDERMEN
Kevin Bugg — Brooke W, Cashion — Dana Caudill Jones — Keith Mason — Bob Prescott
NORTH CAROLINA'S
PIEDMONT
TRIAD

WATERSHED COMMITTEE HEARING
TOWN OF KERNERSVILLE, N. C.
MARCH 19, 2008 AT 10:30 AM
Present: John G. Wolfe, IIII, Hearing Officer; Curtis L. Swisher, Town Manager; Russell
D. Radford, "Town Engineer/Watershed Administrator; Timothy G. Shields, Public Works
Director; Doran Maltba, Asst. Public Works Director; Ana Jaramillo, Engineer; Elizabeth
Binkley, Stormwater Technician, Jeff Hatling, Community Development Director, and Dale F.
Martin, Town Clerk.
Full public hearing with all persons wishing to be heard having been heard from including:
Jay Devaney, Attorney; Denise Poulos, LLS, ECS Carolinas, LLP; Keith Price, Jr., PE, Samet
Corporation; Brian Hall, Samet Corporation; Andy Scales, PE, The Schneider Corporation.
At conclusion of the public hearing:
Action taken b C mmittee:
Russell Radford, Watershed Administrator presented the following Motion, which was
subsequently amended by Committee, based on the findings of fact as stated below: Based upon
the application for major exception, including supporting documents, and upon sworn statements
presented today, I offer the following in the form of a motion for consideration and approval by
the Committee:
Findings of Fact:
C. The site for the "Hermes Project" is proposed to be located within the Town of
Kernersville and in the Upper Portion of the Randleman Lake (Deep River) Water Supply
Watershed. If approved, discharge of storm water runoff from the site will be into an
unnamed tributary to Deep River, which has a current stream classification of WS -IV,
The Town's Environmental Ordinance requires that a 50 -foot wide, two -zone stream
buffer be maintained adjacent to streams and ponds. Among other conditions, the
Environmental Ordinance imposes strict limits on development within the stream buffer,
and also limits new impervious surfaces on a site within the watershed to no more than
70 %.
2. The Town of Kemersville's Code of Ordinances (Chapter C — Environmental Ordinance,
Article III — Watershed Protection, Section 3 -7.4 Exceptions, Major) provides for an
applicant to request a major exception (variance), which would be considered by the
Town's Watershed Review Committee. Pursuant to the request for a major exception to
the stream buffer rule, the Watershed Review Committee has scheduled this public
hearing to receive sworn testimony and to permit citizen input for and against this matter.
3. A preliminary plan for the "Hermes Project ", which was submitted with the application
for major exception, shows a proposed disturbance and encroachment of development
within a regulated 50 -foot wide stream buffer on the site.

4, The "Hermes Project" is intended for a large distribution center, which has been pre -
engineered to achieve maximum logistic efficiencies for the needs of the business. The
minimum site requirement is for 110 acres, on relatively flat land. In this instance,
approximately 130 acres has been proposed for the site.
The application for variance identified, ten (Itl) sites in theTriad area that were evaluated
for their potential to serve the intended, business. Except for the site wider consideration,
all other sites were reported ley the applicant to be unacceptable for various reasons,
Discounting limitations imposed by the stream buffer rules„ the site proposed for the
"Hennes Project " is acceptable to die applicant.
6. five (5) site developmem alternatives were evaluated for the "Hermes Project" in an
effort to avoid disturbLq , a str~eara W114, Given the size and. orgrani7 tiona,l requirements
for the project, the engineering consultant could not "fit" the project onto the site„ while
not also impacting a stream buMr,
'7, The applicant has proposed an impervious cover on the site of 57.3 percent.
S. Vehicle wash water, any discharges from vehicle maintenance, and runoff from the fuel
island will bepretreated, and discharged into a anunicipal sanitary sewer system,
. The application for major exception (ariance) to the stream buffer rules includes a
proposal to collect and to treat stormwater runoff from both onsite and offsite surfaces.
Treatment of the stormwater is to include, in series, a "Stormeeptor(s) ", a wet detention
pond, and a level spreader /filter strip. The "Stormceptor" is a proprietary device intended
to collect and treat runoff from vehicle operations and storage area(s) prior to discharge
into the wet detention pond.. A Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures Plan will
be developed for the fuel island and other areas of the site subject to spills; this plan will
function to further prevent and/or control spills. The wet detention pond has been
proposed to reduce suspended solids, nitrogen and phosphorous from stormwater runoff
leaving impervious surfaces on the site. A level spreader /filter strip is proposed to be
used in series with the water quality draw -down flow from the pond to provide additional
treatment for suspended solids, phosphorous and nitrogen.
10. The applicant has proposed to control post - development, peak runoff rates for the 2 -year,
10 -year, 25 -year and 50 -year storm events to that of pre - development peak runoff rates
for the same storm events.
11. The applicant has proposed to obtain other environmental permits, as may be required,
specifically those addressing handling of any hazardous material that may be onsite,
temporarily. Hazardous wastes passing through the site, but not stored, will be handled
in a Hazardous Material Processing Area designed for that purpose.
1.1 The applicant is involved in a cornp roy wide prograra to quantify and to reduce its
carbon footprint. This program will include the proposed site.
Based upon the above proposed findings, I further propose the` Watershed Review Committee
conclude the following:
Conclusions:
1. Assuming the request for variance is granted by the Environmental Management
Commission, a final site plan will be submitted by the applicant, which will contain a

detailed Stormwater Management Plan to meet requirements of the Environmental
Ordinance and any conditions attached to an approved variance.
2. The applicant for the "Hermes Project" has presented information that describes the
proposed site to be unique in that it is the only one out of ten (10) potential sites that met
the selection criteria. It was reported that practical difficulties associated with (a)
minimum site development requirements and (b) site configuration needs of the applicant
preclude being able to avoid disturbance of the stream buffer.
'. As currently proposed, site development is proposed for 57.3 percent of impervious
cover, which is compared to a maximum allowed by the Town's Environmental
Ordinance of 70 percent.
4. In order to minimize impacts on the stream, buffer disturbance has been limited to no
more than that required to make the site feasible.
, , As established by the State's BMP Manual, a treatment scheme has been proposed for the
site, which is estimated to reduce pollutants from the discharge of stormwater by: (a)
90% of suspended solids, (b) 40% of nitrogen, and (c) 61% of phosphorous. The
proposal meets the required level of treatment for stormwater, established in the Town's
Ordinance. While providing additional pollutant removal, treatment through the
"Stormceptor" was not included in the projected removal calculations.
6. Control of post - development, peak runoff rates to pre - development rates for the 2 -year,
10 -year, 25 -year and 50 -year storm events is anticipated to minimize stream bank erosion
downstream from the site.
7,. Payment into a mitigation bank, or other forms of buffer mitigation, has not been
proposed as part of the Town's consideration of this major exception. The Town of
Kernersville's Environmental Ordinance does not provide for mitigation. However, the
applicant has stated his intent to apply for a 404 Permit and 401 Certification, which will
very likely include buffer mitigation.
. Other environmental permits, coupled with site development plans, that are required for
handling of any on site hazardous wastes will be followed by the applicant to further
ensure public safety and to limit exposure to the environment.
If members of the Committee agree with my proposals for findings and conclusions, I propose
the following decision and conditions:
Decisions and Conditions:
In accordance with The Town of Kernersville's Code of Ordinances (Chapter C — Environmental
Ordinance, Article III — Watershed Protection, Section 3 -7.4 Exceptions, Major), the application
submitted on behalf of the "Hermes Project" for a major exception to stream buffer rules in the
aforementioned Environmental Ordinance is granted pursuant to the following conditions:
1, This major exception shall only apply to the applicant for the "Hermes Project, to the
specific property and for specific uses identified in the applicant's supporting
information.
2. Detailed site development plans, specifically including a Stormwater Management Plan,
shall be developed in accordance will all applicable local and State laws, rules and
regulations. Prior to commencing site work, all site development plans shall be reviewed

and approved by relevant agencies. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining all
permits needed for the proposed development. Detailed development plans for this
project shall not deviate more than allowed by existing ordinance from plans and
documents, which were submitted in support of this request.
3, Treatment of stormwater runoff from this proposed site shall meet, or exceed, treatment
efficiencies for suspended solids, nitrogen, and phosphorous from best management
practices proposed for this project. Treatment removal efficiencies for best management
practices shall be determined by application of relevant design criteria identified in the
Stormwater Bet M4ngggement Manual — July 2007 published by North Carolina Division
of Water Quality.
4. The applicant's final development plans for this project must include means to control the
post - development, peak runoff rates from the 2 -year, 10 -year, 25 -year and 50 -year storm
events to pre- development, peak runoff rates for the same storm events.
5, The applicant submitting an application for an erosion and sediment control permit to the
Land Quality Section of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources for this
project must set forth proposals which exceed the Section's minimum performance
standards for erosion and sediment control.
& The applicant provides mitigation for stream buffer disturbances as may be specified by
the Environmental Management Commission and in the Section 404 Permit and Section
401 Certification.
7.. At such time as a variance may be approved by the North Carolina Environmental
Management Commission, the applicant shall submit to the Town of Kernersville for
approval detailed, final development plan(s), which meet, or exceed, the most restrictive
condition(s) approved by either the Town of Kernersville - Watershed Review
Committee or the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission.
Motion and amendments were seconded by Doran Maltba and the vote was all for and motion
carried.
Y1(',t a fe, III, Hearin fficer and Town Attorney
ATTEST:
Dale E. Martin, Town Clerk

Xa

oil
5 ^, ]�
� �" i
�'
d � '4 y#r
P";, ' F. 4 •`""„ ;,, e "% *a'fl'Ps �v ' rvi, ", N v �° a ! µ,. �yI
^
�" '
.. � � �- " "r ,:�i �� w� yp� Y"µ�r'g� � " "�,� '•'• tl "^A YID °M r"vY^ �N"",ine�w- ^atn�N' ">�" 4A;��.
M
u
Ia.�P�
�' ".,
W , I �' ,'.➢ � '' ,� ! '� "�vr�µp�M A 'e1b Y 9. J qn �r wN � ± ' ' i" It
v � w
v
" "",, -" °'41
� ^"r'
Y wl+ k
�.�
Ael

site to control stormwater. Diffuse flow measures wilt be installed at the outfall of all stormwater facilities. The City
of High Point supports this variance.
A motion was made by Mr. Green that the WQC approve of staff's recommendation regarding the major variance
request. Mr. Westall seconded the motion. The chairman asked the committee if it had knowledge of the particulars
and is comfortable with the motion without going through the presentation. He commented that he personally was.
Seeing no concern on that issue, he then asked for a discussion on the item. There being no discussion, he called a
vote on the motion. The motion carried.
At the end of the WQC meeting, staff asked the WQC reopen the Larco variance to confirm that it was approved
with the conditions recommended by the Division.
2 Request by FedEX Ground Package System, Inc. for a Major Variance from the Randleman
Lake Water Supply Watershed Riparian Buffer Protection Rules for the Protect Hermes site to
l�ca "ttt rsvil:lc f cfion ltern Sic 11orn wot tl
At the time of the preparation of the summary of May 7, 2008 WQC meeting, DWQ staff acknowledged that
the number of impacts in the description of this agenda item were erroneously reported in original variance
Application submitted by the applicant. The number of impacts presented at the meeting come from the
revised variance application submitted and are accurate.
FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. requests approval of a major variance from the Randleman Lake Water Supply
Watershed Riparian Area Protection Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0250) for filling in 375 linear feet of stream, 0.19 acres
of wetlands, 11,250 square feet of Zone 1 buffers and 7,500 square feet of Zone 2 buffers for the purpose of
constructing a distribution plant in Reniersville, NC located at 1,540 Dld. Greensboro Road in Triad Business Park.
At the present tithe, mitigation is not a requirement in the Randleman Take Water Supply Watershed buffer rules.
However, the applicant is proposing to do mitigation for the loss of the buffers. The applicant is also proposing to
treat stormwater for sediment removal and diffuse flow at the site. This project will require a 404 permit /401
certification from the Corps and DWQ, respectively. The Town of Kernersville supports this variance.
Ms, Homewood presented this agenda item and gave a detailed explanation of the information as presented below
t`lre pro )ciscd prciject w^vottlr„l� grade and fall X125 linear feet 0f per-crrjtral sti-cant, which is protected by the Randleman
lauffe,r raffles. l'l e, buf l'er irnpactau %'Vo I'd tie aapprosimately 4.6.,6, 34 square (cei of Zone 1, aand abtata.t: 24,000 Square feat
tr1' 2raarut `2" "f "lre laroject is apprraxunia�tety 110 acres of building and taarld.ng area.
lac ueraluatrenaa arts fray a vtat °iataoo in.
the 11..aaiidterata n rules refer back to the water supply watershed regulation taaad tiaea'e tare three criteria in order taw apply
for a indoor or aaraall Co vrtrraanca 'I'hosc criteria are thatY (t) there are, lia auctical differcilces or unnec- essaary hardships
that prcwt�aat c.ara1rislfailce with tht. strict letter of the Ordinance ol- rtile, (2) the variance is in harinony with the geaaudral
as °aacraa of tho 1,r)-cal watershed pru'atectaon t.trchnaance : acrd pmrscrves its spirit, and (3) iaa grauntiar,g the vaaritirtce the public
safety and welfare has been assured water duality, has been piotcctcd, aataal staistaaraiaul jubs.taco has beeur done. The
practical difficulty of this project is that it is difficult to find large tracts of land that meet the business needs of this
FedEx hub that would not impact some streams or wetlands, FedEx, on tho approximately 110 acres of land., has
done additional measures to avoid and minimize stream and buffer impacts. They have purchased an adjacent parcel
of land so that they could relocate the site away from another stream on the property and reconfigured their building
and parking area from what was originally planned. The Randleman rules do not require mitigation as part of the
variance. But FedEx has proposed voluntary mitigation by paying into the Ecosystem Enhancement Program at
bualft"r raaut:;s that are needed used in oJbcr They, will also be treating„ stannivater as is required by
die locaat ordiaaaaaa o and the 40t permitting pra�a�uass 'hey sure proposing a storanwatcr wet detentiotr pond and will, be
aalsa�t uising .at level spreader at the outlalt efthe pond to ensure. diffuse -flow, which is a requit -anent tauader buffer
rules. Before coming to the WQC, the Randleman rules require that approval of a variance under a local ordinaaact
be received. The Town of Kernesville Watershed committee did approve this major variance to their ordinance in
March 2008. The Division requests that the variance be approved and the following items be included in the
variance: deed restrictions on the remaining buffers and streams on the property, Division review and approval of
(lie final aaaatigation plan, Division review and approval of the fantail stwarsri.wvfmr ph in, and that operation and
maintenance on the stormwater system — wet detention pond and level spreader - be required. The Division
recommends that with these items included that the WQC approve this variance.

Following staff's recommendation, Mr. Westall asked how would stream impacts be dealt with. Ms. Homewood
said that the stream will be required as part of the 404 permit. He asked what is the ratio. She said the Division
would require a 1:1 ratio.
Chairman Peterson opened the floor for questions and discussions. He asked how does what is offered by FedEx
compare to what they would be required to do under the rules. Ms. Homewood said that the proposed draft of the
Randleman rules would require a different set of criteria for variances. The chairman said that FedEx is offering
quite a lot to the project and they might meet the mitigation proposed in draft Randleman rules. Ms. Homewood
said that the voluntary mitigation would meet what is proposed in the draft riles.
Mr. Westall made the motion that the Committee approves the major variance. Mr. Brewer seconded the motion.
Mr. Westall stated that motion would include the provisions that they would adopt conditions recommended by
DWQ staff
Chairman asked all those in favor of the motion for approval please signify by saying I. The motion was carried.
3, Presentation on Petitions for Rulemaki!ftE from the Waterkee er Alliance et. al. to amend 15A
NCAC 02B.0505
The Waterkeeper Alliance, et. al. (collectively " petitioners ") filed rule snaking petitions September 11 and October
16, 2007 to add rule language to 15A NCAC 02B .0505 for monitoring requirements for animal operations (covered
by the NPDES General Permit and State General permit, respectively). Rule making petitions are allowed under
G.S. 150B -20 and Rule 15A NCAC 02I .0500. The EMC has 120 days from the filing of a petition to grant or deny
petitions, however, the petitioners have agreed to waive the requirement and schedule these petitions for the May
2008 WQC and EMC meetings. The WQC heard from the petitioners, one person representing an opposing
viewpoint, and the Division of Water Quality. The Division of Water Quality recommended an alternative rule
proposal to the WQC for consideration.
Petitioners: (Handouts were passed out to the committee, counsel, opposing folks, and DWQ staff.)
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, it's been about 20 years since this industry has dug in here in North
Carolina with the lagoons and spray fields. For those 20 years with the help of this Committee and the state of North
Carolina, we passed a law and regulations to try to regulate the use of these lagoons and spray fields so that our
rivers and streams and air communities are protected. I thank you for the efforts you have made to this committee
along the way to do just that. The unfortunate truth, however, is that we are probably no better off than the final
analysis than we were when this industry fully developed about 15 years ago, and that's because we still have
somewhere between and 3 and 4000 lagoons on the ground, in use and with the laws that were passed last year those
existing lagoons can be replaced when they fail as you know with other lagoons. So we are likely to be stuck with
this problem with lagoons some three or four thousand in here in North Carolina for quite some period of time and
that brings us here to this regulation or this new rulemaking that we have before the committee. Last year we
appeared before the NPDES committee on an appeal from an administrative action where we were appealling North
Carolina's NPDES pennitting process and we were encouraged almost or I believe unanimously by the committee to
come forward with rule making and you asked that we expedite that. Well it has taken a whole year, but we are
finally here. One of the things that the industry argues and has for some time look we're regulating, we have waste
management plans and if we follow those waste management plans there will be no discharge. That's like telling a
wastewater treatment plant that we are going to give you certain parameters for what you can put in the river, but as
long as you follow and your waste water treatment plan is up to standard you don't have to do any test to make sure
that you are in compliance with those particular limits that are on that system. So ever since this industry has been
here they have been allowed to put the waste on fields without ever determining just exactly what is running out of
those ditches and out of those drain tiles that are underneath the fields. A significant number of these facilities do
discharge even under the best of conditions, even in a drought. You look at the photographs I put before you; most
of those photographs are in the last two years when we've had a drought. The best of conditions for putting waste on
fields and yet even under those conditions this system does discharge to surface waters. The tirne has come now to
place requirements on this industry to begin to prove to the community - which we don't believe they can -, but to
prove to the citizens of North Carolina and to the state that in fact they are a zero discharge system. They will never