Board of Commissioners rarely overturns the recommendation of the
Planning Board. If the Planning Board is in place to make
recommendations, there must be a compelling reason for the BOC to
overturn its position. The Planning Board voted
4-2 against recommending the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to
the commissioners. Even though John Finelli on the Planning Board voted
to support the CUP for Commercial Ready Mix Products, he stated that
could not support night-time pours, which are clearly a significant
part of the project's success based on the discussions in the hearing
The commissioners took up the CUP at its May
19 meeting, and there was a public comment period. The meeting
lasted very late and the board put off discussion and a vote until June
At the end of the May 19 board meeting, Commissioner Allen
Burrus made a statement indicating that he had grave concerns for the
future of his own business if the permit is not approved. I ask that
Commissioner Burrus recuse himself from the deliberations and the vote
on this permit. It is now a matter of public record that he has a
business interest that he feels compelled to protect at all cost. He
should not participate in any discussions about this issue with the
other commissioners, since he cannot possibly make a fair, objective
decision that takes into consideration the interests of the whole
community he is meant to represent.
There is no disagreement about needing a bridge. We must work together to do it the right way.
applicant has the burden of proof to demonstrate that the company can
meet the requirements of the zoning, specifically that the activities
at the site will not be noxious, harmful or deleterious.
of the witnesses the company brought to the hearing have a business
interest in supporting the applicant, who is also their customer.
Cox is the "manufacturers' rep" for the admixture company which means
he sells the chemicals to Coastal Ready Mix. How could the public
or the BOC expect objective expert witnesses to answer completely and
truthfully regarding questions about carcinogens or the degree to which
any substance may be harmful to the residents immediately surrounding
the proposed site?
The burden of proof has not been met, and
in many cases the sworn testimony even called into question the
avoidance of a noxious, harmful or deleterious effect.
Cox, the manufacturer’s representative, spoke about admixture and its
handling. When asked about whether or not the admixture was classified
as a carcinogen, he stated that it was not. When asked repeatedly as to
whether or not these substances were harmful to workers or adjacent
residents, he did not answer “yes” or “no.” He gave further context
about the hazardous materials ratings on health, flammability, and
The ones that would be used at the CPMR proposed
site are "moderate" under the health category which means "temporary or
minor injury-reversible,” according to Mr. Cox. This language is not
consistent with the National Fire Protection Association’s description
in NFPA 704 (the “fire diamond” found on trucks transporting chemicals)
Standard System for the identification of the hazards of Materials for
Emergency Response. The 0-4 scale Mr. Cox referenced has the following
descriptions under “health:”
0 - Poses no health hazard,
no precautions necessary and would offer no hazard beyond that of
ordinary combustible materials (e.g. wood)
1 - Exposure would cause irritation with only minor residual injury (e.g. acetone)
- Intense or continued but not chronic exposure could cause temporary
incapacitation or possible residual injury (e.g.diethyl ether)
3- Short exposure could cause serious temporary or moderate residual injury (e.g. chlorine)
- Very short exposure could cause death or major residual injury
cyanide, phosphine, carbon monoxide,sarin, hydrofluoric
None of these match “moderate” nor did Cox
provide relevant real-life examples other than to insist that no hazard
whatsoever would be posed to the residents by the use of the admixture
chemicals. No one addressed the effects of Portland cement dust other
than to insist that controlling it with sprinkling, tarps, or other
dubious measures will eliminate its existence in the surrounding
comments powered by
Hal Goodman, the structural engineer
licensed in multiple states, spoke about the proposed noise reduction
walls. He referenced a major project he had worked on several years ago
-- Interstate 64 and the walls erected to reduce noise in the
Norfolk-Hampton Roads corridor. When asked what the decibel reduction
was as a result of the walls in the Interstate 64 project, he could not
recall, but he did say that you would “hear the noise on the road just
like any other truck” and mentioned the “whine of tires and the noise
of diesel engines.”
Goodman stated that once the trucks leave
the site the walls will do nothing to reduce the truck noise. This will
impact ALL the neighborhoods north of Dare Building. The noise from the
trucks will reverberate throughout all the neighborhoods as 1,344
trucks per month (2,688 round trips) travel north to the project
These are not exactly resounding endorsements
and do little to alleviate the concerns about avoiding harmful, noxious
or deleterious effects. They do not meet the burden of proof that these
problems would be sufficiently mitigated by implementing the range of
actions that are feasible on this site (conditions placed on the CUP).
Hernandez, the NC Department of Transportation project engineer, made
available to the Planning Board a chart that demonstrated the transit
time range that allowed for concrete to travel and meet the temperature
requirements for a range of air and concrete temperatures.
spite of relentless avoidance and obfuscation on the part of the
various representatives of the applicant, the fact is that proper
temperature cement CAN be delivered within the time window from the
Nags Head cement plant, also owned by the applicant, with time to
spare. (Section 1000 (E) Elapsed Time for Placing Concrete from 2012
Standard Specifications - NCDOT).
For Class AA concrete at 79
degrees or less for whichever is lower, the air or concrete, the time
range is up to 60 minutes without using admixture and up to 1 hour and
45 minutes using admixture. This allows adequate time for the concrete
to travel from the Nags Head plant.
In a rough math
exercise on the time it takes to travel to the temporary bridge site
from the plant in Nags Head (MP 9.5) and from the proposed site (MP41),
taking into consideration conservatively slow speed limits, it's about
an additional 5 minute difference from MP 9.5 and the project location.
Obviously, there will be variables that come into play, but they are
much more likely to cause slower travel on a two-lane road at 35 mph
with eight crosswalks vs. the bypass road (U.S.158) with a 45-50 mph
speed limit and four lanes and then the 55 mph section through south
Nags Head and beyond with very few intersections.
The crosswalks impacted by this proposed CUP are:
Community Center and the Chicamacomico Lifesaving Station. The
recycling center, public boat launch and the ferry dock are also
located at this crosswalk.
2. Pamlico Station
Shopping Center at Holiday Drive; also close to Lisa’s Pizzeria,
Radikal Kiteboarding and Austin’s Fish Market.
3. Atlantic Drive, which is the road to the Rodanthe Pier and the EMS and the fire station.
4. Tradewinds Drive near Waterfall Park.
5. Camp Hatteras which has facilities on both the east and west sides of the road
Campground; near the Dairy Queen, Atlantic Coast Café, St. Clair
Landing campground at Mac Oca Drive.
7. Ocean Waves Campground.
Landing – the location for 21 affordable housing units and near Asa
Gray’s campground which has sites for over 20 campers.
described how the elements of the bridge would be constructed from two
headings. The larger components with the most particular demands on
temperature come first, and then the superstructure will be built from
the ends toward the middle. The applicant will be working from both
directions per Hernandez' description, meaning that it is completely
possible for the cement to come from the north at the proper
temperature. The plan to build from two headings was not made explicit
at the Planning Board meeting.
Lines 0115 (IA1) and 0120
(IA2) on Page 11 of the "Roadway Item" list of the Parsons contract for
this project refer to Class AA concrete. Line 0115 had 14,939.5 cubic
yards at $452/yard for a total of $6,752,654. Line 0120 states a need
for 16,884.1 cubic yards but does not state the unit price or list the
bid amount. This means that the contractor for this concrete
(CRMP/Parsons) will be paid as much as $14,384,267 for this component
of the project.
I have heard that the other potential site
(Island Convenience) asked $1,000 more per month and that the
contractor would have to provide fill to the site. If the fill cost is
between $50,000 and $100,000 and the rent is $60,000 more over the
five- year span of the contract, the extra cost would at most be about
.01 of a percent. Even if it's just line 0115 at $6,752,654, the
maximum of $160,000 additional cost is still just .02 of a percent.
cannot be argued to a reasonable person that the Island Convenience
option is too expensive within the large scope of this contract. Even
the company’s attorney Sharkey Stark stated that that the “best
place would be right next to the job site.” One would think that Island
Convenience would be a more attractive option based on his reasoning.
If you factor in the time and fuel that would be saved on each 4.2 mile
round trip that will happen 1,344 times per month, the Island
Convenience option would be the more effective choice.
is the motivation for CRMP to build another site on a controversial
location when they actually can get their cement from Nags Head and
also have an option that is only marginally more expensive but closer
to the project site? They are in a fixed bid and perhaps this is a way
to control fuel costs. Perhaps there is a capacity issue at the Nags
Head plant with other business to which they have committed. These
problems are not the concern of the Board of Commissioners.
will these decisions impact our children and families?” This is the
mission statement that appears on every Board of Commissioners agenda.
Please consider the points I have made and the statements from
the other residents of the tri-villages and Hatteras as you make your
McIntosh is a full-time resident of Salvo and is the director of
operations at REAL Watersports. She is the president of Hatteras Island