PN-21-19 NAB-2019-00477-P12 (School Heights Village)

Published May 25, 2021
Expiration date: 6/24/2021

                    Public Notice
U.S. Army Corps             In Reply to Application Number
of Engineers                    NAB-2019-00477-P12 (School Heights Village)

Baltimore District
PN-21-19                         Comment Period: May 25, 2021 to June 24, 2021


This District has received an application for a Department of the Army permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 USC 1344),as described below:


Core5 Industrial Partners, LLC
1250 North Mountain Road
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17112


The proposed project is located in the Swatara Creek Watershed, at two discrete sites (Core5 Lytle and Core5 School Heights). The two sites consist of four (4) existing tax parcels. Parcel 34-009-004 (Lytle Farm) is a ±105 acre portion of a ±547 acre parent property that is situated north of S.R. 230 directly east of the Swatara Creek bounded by Iron Mine Road to the north and Colebrook Road to the east. Parcels 34-011-085, 34-011-327, and 34-013-037 are adjoining contiguous tracts situated north of S.R. 230 bounded by School House Road to the west, Beagle Road to the north, Cedar St./ Pine Manor mobile home park to the east, and the former Saturday's Market facility to the southeast. The total acreage associated with the School Heights facility is ±196 acres, located in Londonderry Township, Dauphin County, Pennsylvania (Latitude 40.199E Longitude -75.293N).


See HQ SOP, July 2009, Section 12 and 33 CFR 325 App B 9(b)(4)  The Corps makes the determination of overall project purpose using the information provided by the applicant.  The overall project purpose is more specific than the basic project purpose and will help establish the geographic scope of the alternatives review.  The overall project purpose should be specific enough to define the applicant’s needs, but not so restrictive as to preclude all discussion of alternatives. .The project purpose is to provide warehouse and distribution space for e-commerce sales within close proximity to major transportation arteries (I-81, I-83, I-283, Pennsylvania Turnpike) in central Pennsylvania that will provide same and next day service to markets throughout the east coast and mid-Atlantic regions.


Core5 Industrial Partners is proposing the construction of a ±1,217,520 square foot distribution warehouse shipping facility. The plans for this facility include the construction of an access road from East Harrisburg Pike (S.R. 0230) and paved parking and access areas associated with the facility. The proposed construction is located in the northern portion of the Core5 School Heights property along Beagle Road, south of Interstate 283. A total of 108,629 square feet (2.49 acre) of permanent wetland impacts are proposed in 6 discrete wetland areas (Enclosures 1 and 2). There are no regulated waterway impacts associated with this proposal.


The impacts to wetlands associated with this project and discussed in this Public Notice, relate only to areas under the Corps of Engineers jurisdiction. There are other wetland and waterway impacts associated with this project, that are not regulated by this office.

Activity (i.e. culvert)

Stream Impact (lf)

Wetland Impact (Sq. Ft.)

Authority (Section 10/404/408)

Fill for site


3214 (PFO)


Fill for site


105,415 (PEM)




The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, as the lead federal agency, is responsible for all coordination pursuant to applicable federal authorities. 


The applicants marketing analysis revealed a deficiency in warehouse and distribution facilities in the 600,000 to 1 million square foot size within the market area. Specifically, Pennsylvania has seen larger needs and requests for 1 million square foot and above.  The need is driven by the location.  As E-commerce companies desire to deliver products within a single day, the siting next to various highway corridors and being able to reach the large populations centers of New York City, Washington DC/Baltimore and Philadelphia make this location very attractive for warehousing and distribution facilities.

The properties needed to be a minimum 50 acres and listed for sale in the Cumberland, Dauphin, York, and Lancaster County market.

In addition to the minimum size and location requirements, the applicant also considered the following when comparing alternative sites: Appropriate zoning;  Minimum horizontal acreage for building footprint and necessary parking/loading facilities; Access to state highways; Access to Public Utilities; and Access to Labor – Current tenants are requiring many more employees than in the past due to the quicker movement of product with E-commerce. For example, past warehouse specs would allow for one employee for every 3,000 square foot of warehouse space in general. The current spec is to allow for at least one employee for every 2,000 square foot of warehouse space. The applicant stated, “We are seeing many tenants completely eliminate search areas such as Franklin County because of the scarcity of rooftops and labor”. The applicant listed 32 sites that were investigated.

Various alternative configuration and minimization measures were investigated and documented at the sites. The applicant feels that they have minimized impacts to wetlands to the maximum extent possible. The design includes the use of retaining walls and the steepening of side slopes, to reduce wetland impacts.

The applicant has proposed to mitigate for the loss of 2.30 acres of Palustrine Emergent  (PEM) wetlands by creating 2.7 acres of PEM and Palustrine Scrub Shrub wetlands, and the loss of 0.19 acre of Palustrine Forested wetlands will be replaced by the creation of 1.0 acre of PFO wetlands.

The applicant proposes to construct the 3.7 acres of compensatory wetland mitigation at the site designated as M-1 on Enclosures 1, 3 and 4). The site is located at the northwest corner of Lytle Farm and is situated approximately 100 linear feet east of Swatara Creek.


This project will be evaluated pursuant to Corps Regulatory Program Regulations (33 CFR Parts 320-332). The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable impacts, including cumulative impacts of the proposed activity on the public interest. That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of important resources. The benefit, which reasonable may be expected to accrue from the proposal, must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors, which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered, including the cumulative effects thereof; among those are conservation, economic, aesthetics, general environmental concerns, wetlands, cultural values, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain values, land use, navigation, shoreline erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, and consideration of property ownership and in general, the needs and welfare of the people. The evaluation of the impact of this project will also include application of the Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines promulgated by the Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.


A preliminary review of this application indicates that the proposed work will have no effect federally listed threatened or endangered species or their critical habitat, pursuant to Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, as amended. As the evaluation of this application continues, additional information may become available which could modify this preliminary determination.


The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSFCMA), as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 04-267), requires all federal agencies to consult with the National Marine Fisheries Service on all actions, or proposed actions, permitted, funded, or undertaken by the agency that may adversely affect Essential Fish Habitat (EFH), including species of concern, life cycle habitat, or Habitat Areas of Particular Concern. The project site lies in or adjacent to EFH as described under MSFCMA for managed species under the MSFCMA. The Baltimore District has made a preliminary determination that the project will have no effect  on EFH. The Baltimore District has made a preliminary determination that mitigative measures are not required to minimize adverse effects on EFH at this time. This determination may be modified if additional information indicates otherwise.


Pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and applicable guidance, the Corps has reviewed the latest published version of the National Register of Historic Places and initially determined that no registered properties listed as eligible for inclusion, therein, are located at the site of the proposed work. The Corps has made the preliminary determination that the proposed project would have no effecton historic properties. The Corps final eligibility and effect determination will be based on coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office as appropriate and required, and with full consideration given to the proposed undertaking’s potential direct and indirect effects on historic properties within the Corps’ identified permit area.


Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act also requires federal agencies to consult with federally recognized American Indian tribes that attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties that may be affected by the agency’s undertaking. Corps Tribal Consultation Policy mandates an open, timely, meaningful, collaborative, and effective deliberative communication process that emphasizes trust, respect, and shared responsibility. The policy further emphasizes that, to the extent practicable and permitted by law, consultation works toward mutual consensus and begins at the earliest planning stages, before decisions are made and actions taken.  The Corps final eligibility and effect determination will be based on coordination with interested tribes, in accordance with the Corps current tribal standard operating procedures as appropriate and required, and with full consideration given to the proposed undertaking’s potential direct and indirect effects on tribal resources.


All Section 408 proposals will be coordinated internally at USACE. The Section 408 decision will be issued along with the Section 404 and/or Section 10 decision. Please see the following link for more information regarding Section 408:


The applicant is required to obtain a water quality certification in accordance with Section 401 of the Clean Water Act.   


Where applicable, the applicant has certified in this application that the proposed activity complies with and will be conducted in a manner consistent with the approved Coastal Zone Management Program. By this public notice, we are requesting the state concurrence or objection to the applicant’s consistency statement.

The applicant must obtain any state or local government permits which may be required.

SUBMISSION OF COMMENTS: The Corps of Engineers is soliciting comments from the public; federal, state, and local agencies and officials; Indian Tribes; and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the impacts of this proposed activity.  Any comments received will be considered by the Corps of Engineers to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this proposal. To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species, historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects, and the other public interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act. Comments provided will become part of the public record for this action and are subject to release to the public through the Freedom of Information Act. Comments are also used to determine the need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed activity. 

Written comments concerning the work described above related to the factors listed above or other pertinent factors must be received by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District within the comment period specified above through postal mail at the address below or electronic submission to the project manager email address below. Written comments should reference the Application Number (NAB-2019-00477-P12).


Any person who has an interest which may be adversely affected by the issuance of this permit may request a public hearing. The request, which must be in writing, must be received within the comment period as specified above to receive consideration. Also, it must clearly set forth the interest which may be adversely affected by this activity and the manner in which the interest may be adversely affected. The public hearing request may be submitted by electronic mail or mailed to the following address:

Michael Dombroskie
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District
Regulatory Branch
Pennsylvania Section
State College Field Office
1631 South Atherton Street
Suite 101
State College, Pennsylvania 16801

It is requested that you communicate this information concerning the proposed work to any persons known by you to be interested, who did not receive a copy of this notice.

General information regarding the Corps’ permitting process can be found on our website at This public notice has been prepared in accordance with Corps implementing regulations at 33 CFR 325.3. If you have any questions concerning this specific project or would like to request a paper copy of this public notice, please contact Michael Dombroskie, 814-235-0571, or email at This public notice is issued by the Chief, Regulatory Branch.