Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93008_1336 (2)8199 HE DR ICK: Let me make a point. Should we also specify in this particular hearing that it is also running concurrently as we did in the previous meeting, that the rezoning request and the Wt public hearing for the PRD will both be one and the same? POPE: Yes, considered at the same time. BRYAN: The only reason, really, that there is some objection at this point to the rezoning from the people that I have been talking to and myself, is what is going to happen to? MASSEY: Objection, your honor, the people he's been talking to. POPE: Sustained. BRYAN: The objection is what is going to happen to the effluent. If the Crosland people would find a land disposal use for the effluent, then all opposition on my part would be dropped. In relation to that, I have a letter here from the Department of Natural Resources, which was addressed to Mr. Thomas Weber of the Mid -South Water Systems pertaining to the Heronwood Development, and I would like to read one sentence, it says MASSEY: Objection, your honor. POPE: Could you identify the letter? BRYAN: The letter is from Paul Welms, who is the supervisor of the Director of the Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, Division of the Environmental Management. POPE: To whom is it addressed? BRYAN: It is addressed to Mr. Weber. POPE: Who is that, Weber? BYRAN: Mid -South Water Systems. POPE: What is the date of the letter? BRYAN: The date of the letter is December 6, 1985. MASSEY: We would object to that, having no relevance to this project, being too far away to have any relevance to this project. POPE: I can't determine whether it is relevant or not until I hear it. Read it and I'll decide. BRYAN: I won't read the whole letter. I'll be glad to let you read the whole letter. It says, "In view of the fact that this development already has a more environmentally acceptable method for waste disposal, your request for a MPDES permit to discharge to Class A (2) and B waters of the state is denied." The approval of the environmentally accepted method was septic tanks, so the state of North Carolina, in my opinion, in this letter MASSEY: We would object to that, not having any relevance to this plan here. POPE: I am going to reserve a ruling on that. Proceed, Mr. Bryan. LLt BRYAN: The other item that I would like to read to the board is taken from Laws and Rules for Ground Absorption, Sewage Treatment, and Disposal Systems, Section 1900 of the N. C. Administrative Code, Title X, Department of Human Resources. May I read you something from that? POPE: We will take judicial notice of the law. BRYAN: Page 29, paragraph 1958, "Non -Ground Absorption Sewage Treatment Systems, Item D. Sewage recycling systems which discharge treated wastewater meeting the state drinking, water stan- dards may be used only for toilet flushing and recycled sewage, shall not be used for body contact, or human consumption. Such systems must be specifically approved by the state or local health department." I thought that it was interesting that the State does not allow by their own rules treated wastewater to come into body contact with people. And yet it seems that some of the State rules allow it to be discharged into our drinking and in the places where we swim and boat and it also says it cannot come into body contact. At this point I would like to, if you would, to ask Mr. Parker if he would come so that he may be qualified as an expert witness. POPE: I'll hear from Mr. Parker. Are there any questions of Mr. Bryan at this time by the commissioners? Are there any questions of Mr. Bryan by the proponents? MASSEY: No questions. POPE: Any question of Mr. Bryan by any of the other opponents? Mr. Bryan, I will take under advisement the letter of December 12, 1985. I'll admit into evidence the Administrative Code, and I'll hear from Mr. Parker.