20210818_N-Lew_Neighbor_Impacts

From: Natalie Lew
To: Miller. David; Wrenn, Brian L; Kastrinskv. Josh; Akroyd, Cathy R; Delli-Gatti, Dionne
Cc: Wiley. Nickel(n ncleg.net; contactoov; Eudy, Ken
Subject: [External] Deny Permit Modification 92-10 due to direct and substantial harm to a neighboring dwelling house
Date: Wednesday, August 18, 2021 10:33:29 AM
Attachments: Public Comment to Dan Sams re Sam Bratton"s comment at 23 Jul 2020 public hearing 2020 07 04.odf
To Dan Sams News and Observer article from Nov 2014 re Kniandale Ouarrypdf
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to Report Spam.
Good morning,
Please include this email and the attachments in the public comments for Wake Stone's Triangle
Quarry permit modification request (92-10). Yes, some of this might be in with the public hearing
comments, but this message and the attachments must also be included with the general public
comments.
Wake Stone's Permit Modification 92-10 must be denied as it causes direct and substantial harm to
a neighboring dwelling house.
In Wake Stone's 12/Aug/2021 response letter, they now propose a 16' to 24' high wall along Old
Reedy Creek Road, behind the Dunn's house, and down to Fox Croft Lake. Wake Stone arrogantly
argues that this wall and the noise do not "constitute direct and substantial physical harm." Yes,
they do — it causes harm to the Dunn's and to the wolfhound dogs that they raise. If you put
something next to a home that makes it such that you and your dogs cannot live there, then, there is
a "direct and substantial physical hazard." Would Wake Stone owners and employees live in such a
house? No. And that is why they bought out the house next to the Knightdale Quarry and
demolished it ... because living next to a quarry pit is just plain bad.
The 12/Aug/2021 letter also states "Wake Stone maintains that a significantly adverse effect in
terms of quarry related noise would be defined as a 10-decibel increase in noise attributable to
quarry activities." Wake Stone cannot just set their own limits! Letting them set the noise limits is
like letting a criminal set their own jail term limit. Ask the Dunn's what the limit should be. They are
the only ones who can truly define the noise damage to both themselves and their dogs. Wake
Stone must be required to PROOVE that their noise and the wall will not harm the Dunn's. They
cannot just be allowed to set their own limits.
Wake Stone goes on to state in this letter that "...a significantly adverse effect to a private residence
is not a denial criterion." First, in just saying that, they have admitted that the quarry pit on Odd
Fellows will have a significant adverse effect. Second, yes it is .... that is what is meant in this section
of the rule: Per 74-51. Permits — Application, granting, conditions, (d) The Department may deny the
permit upon finding: (4) That the operation will constitute a direct and substantial physical hazard ...
to a neighboring dwelling house.
On so many fronts, Wake Stone is twisting the law and trying to sneak through cracks in order to
pursue this destructive quarry pit on Odd Fellows. This is callous. There are thousands opposed to

this new pit and that should speak volumes. This land is not private land ... it is public land managed
by the airport. Even if the airport has the right to lease the land, the bottom line is that the land is
public. We end up with the liability that Wake Stone creates. We must have a say. Otherwise, this
is just an example of big money and government taking advantage of the public.
-Natalie
It is the time you have wasted for your rose that makes your rose so important... from "The Little
Prince"

At the 23/Jun/2020 public hearing Mr. Bratton said "Written testimony has been submitted from a lady who
lived for over 20 years adjacent to the Knightdale Quarry, only 400' from the active pit. Her residence was
buffered by a berm similar to the one we propose to construct to buffer the 2 residences. She states 'Wake
Stone was an excellent neighbor and friend to her and her grandparents when they lived in the home."'
In addition to "what is the address?", many others questions come to mind: Does this person still live in that
house? What years did this person live in this house? Was it recently or long ago? If it was long ago, is there
anyone of recent who would make such a claim? What is the status of this house now? How do the buffers on
the Knightdale Quarry in general compare to the buffers on the Triangle Quarry?
Thinking that "submitted" meant that the document had been submitted to DEQ as part of the hearing process
(because a claim as significant as that needs to be substantiated, not just hearsay), on 26/Jun/2020 (Friday,
just after Noon), I emailed Daniel Sams (DEQ) asking for a copy of the letter and for the address of the property
that Mr. Bratton was speaking about.
On Monday morning, 29/Jun/2020, 1 promptly received a response from Mr. Johnson, the Public Information
Officer. I very much appreciated the quick response! Mr. Johnson indicated that "Mr. Bratton said that this
letter was submitted to him (Wake Stone). The Division of Energy, Mineral, & Land Resources [does] not have
this letter or the information you requested at this time."
Hmmmm, interesting use of the word "submitted" by Mr. Bratton.
On Wed, 1/Jul/2020, I did receive a response from other DEQ staff. I am very thankful for those responses,
too. The message was similar — that DEQ did not have the "submitted" letter or address. In any event, my
thought process below was the result of the first response that I received from Mr. Johnson.
Since I was not able to find out the address of the home that Mr. Bratton spoke about in the "submitted"
documents, I figured that I would do a little bit of research on my own. I went looking at Google Earth for
homes within 400' of the "active pit." Given how Mr. Bratton used "submitted," I am not sure exactly how to
interpret "active pit." My first thought was the active hole, but it could include the dug -up area around the
hole. Also, knowing Google Earth pictures are a few years old, the pit could actually be bigger than what is
shown.
In looking at Google Earth, there is seems to be one stick -built house that could be within 400' of the "active
pit" and one or two mobile homes.
The address of the closest mobile home is 1900 Village Squire Circle (Knightdale, NC), which is in Village Squire
Estates. Per the Wake County Tax Records, all of Village Squire Estates is owned by one entity. I assumed that
Mr. Bratton was referring to a privately owned home and not a rental, so I decided to look into the stick -built
house bit more.
The address of the stick -built house is 6608 Forestville Road (Knightdale, NC).
http://services.wakegov.com/reaIestate/Account.asp?id=0036868&stype=addr&stnum=6608&stname=Forest
ville&IocidList=&spg=1&cd=01&loc=6608++FORESTVILLE+RD&des=SMITH+LAND&pin=1745910392
This address is a 0.38 acre lot that had (past tense) a small ranch home built in the 1960's. Per pictures in the
tax record, it looks like the house was remodeled in about 2013. The tax value of the home through 2019 was
about $102,000. This property was purchased by Wake Stone on 31/Jul/2019 (in the midst of the fight against
quarrying Odd Fellows) for $450,000 (four and a half times more than the tax value). I know tax value is not a
direct reflection of market value price, but it does give a ball park estimate. On 19/Mar/2020, Wake Stone
appealed the value and as of now, the value of this property is $662 (six hundred and sixty-two dollars, less
than one thousand dollars). I drove by this lot a day or so after looking at online information. The home has
been demolished. Whether or not this is the house that Mr. Bratton was referring to in his public comment, if

Wake Stone is such a good neighbor to a home within 400' of the pit, then why would they destroy this house?
Based on the pictures and the remodeling, the home looked in good condition. More importantly, why would
they pay almost a half million dollars for something that ends up being valued at less than $1,000? Is this what
they plan to do with the Dunn's home and Mrs. Beal's home? If this was the house that Mr. Bratton referred
to, did the sale of the house have any influence on the content of the "submitted" letter?
OK, now let's look at the buffers at the Knightdale Quarry. Per the Wake County Tax records, the Knightdale
Quarry is about 496 acres. I am not sure how many acres the pit is. Visually, it looks to me to be about 1/3 of
the area. Wake Stone also owns an adjacent 132-acre lot that is wooded per Google Earth. In addition, Wake
Stone owns several smaller adjacent or nearby lots totaling about 44 acres, including the 0.38-acre lot they
bought for $450k and then tore down the house. Across the two-lane road (Forestville Rd.) from the pit area
of the Knightdale Quarry, Wake Stone owns about 10 more lots totaling about 155 acres. They used to own 12
lots, but in 2018 two were deeded to the Town of Knightdale. So, essentially, the Knightdale Quarry proper
(i.e. the 496-acre lot) has a huge buffer that is created by the many other adjacent and nearby properties that
Wake Stone owns — private properties that are not used by the public.
This in no way can be compared to the Triangle Quarry or the Odd Fellows land which are both intimately close
to highly used public land. There are no pseudo -buffers (e.g. the vast amounts of adjacent private land) like at
the Knightdale Quarry. The Triangle Quarry is located directly adjacent to Umstead State Park (i.e. there is no
creek or road separating these lands). Umstead is very highly used by the public, especially in the area by the
Triangle Quarry —the historic African -American Reedy Creek entrance. The Triangle Quarry is only 219 acres
and most all of that is pit and working area, e.g. there are minimal buffers on the land (and, in fact, the buffers
have DECREASED over the lifetime of this quarry). Since this highly used public space is extremely close to
quarry operations, the public is stuck dealing with the effects of the quarry — noise, dust in the air, dirty run off
into the park, loss of habitat, loss of needed recreation space, etc. The public is tolerating the quarry. We
know it is there. Whether or not there are formal "findings" on inspection, the Triangle Quarry is hurting the
park and its visitors. A quarry pit on Odd Fellows will only have an additive negative effect on the park. More
of the park border is affected. More greenway is affected. Crabtree Creek is more affected.
Please see the attached graphics.
Odd Fellows, which is separated from Triangle Quarry by Crabtree Creek is just over 100 acres and deeded to
the public, not the RDUAA. It is one thing to quarry private land, especially private land buffered by a whole
bunch of other private land owned by the same company. It is a totally different thing to quarry public land,
especially public land next to a highly used public park, a sensitive creek, and a highly used greenway. There is
absolutely nothing like Odd Fellows. It is unique in topography. It is unique in history. It is contiguous with
Umstead State Park and is actually physically linked/connected to Umstead since Foxcroft Lake, which is on a
list of cultural resources, spans both properties. Odd Fellows is priceless to the community that owns it. It is a
natural extension of Umstead State Park, whether it becomes part of the state park or not.
Wake Stone owns plenty of other land in which to do business. They do not need to lease public land .... and
they certainly do not need to quarry public land.
Wake Stone's mining permit modification should be denied due to having significant adverse effect on the
purposes of a publicly owned park, forest, or recreation area of which Umstead meets all 3 criteria.

R� 1�►� z vAkf Sit dwrod k44
� t32-
a(+'!"S
acres
-7,
..Oac
Ari
f
i 3�3
I f
s�

r q�
,
dr
;;! '
or
lu
T}
„fir■
N oj 1;,+ �N� P~t�6u�S Elam

44,40�
T

Creelr4P, ii fir g
a
' -'Um le S�tate'Paric
. ' The Lmstead
Hole and Spa
w 0
A
Y.
Embassy Suitps
ilton Raleigh Durham,..
t 6as ro s.hops.
y.
THE
U [

July 16, 2020
Dan Sams
Engineering Supervisor
Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Dear Mr. Sams,
I am writing today in follow-up to my letter dated 14/Jul/2020 as I have become aware of some
new information regarding Mr. Bratton's claims that a resident of a home located within 400' of
the Knightdale Quarry pit said they were an "excellent neighbor" and regarding the status of the
Knightdale Quarry.
In his public statement at the 23/Jun/2020 hearing, Mr. Bratton said: "Written testimony has
been submitted from a lady who lived for over 20 years adjacent to the Knightdale Quarry, only
400' from the active pit. Her residence was buffered by a berm similar to the one we propose to
construct to buffer the 2 residences. She states "Wake Stone was an excellent neighbor and
friend to her and her grandparents when they lived in the home." Our blasting and equipment
were well shielded from the residence and we had no adverse impact on her property, house or
well. And that is 400' from the active pit." [I think the last statement seems to originate from Mr.
Bratton, not from Ms. Debman.]
Per his 7/Jul/2020 written statement to Ms. Wehner, Mr. Bratton indicated that the letter from the
home within 400' of the pit came from Ms. Debnam.
Per an article published in the News and Observer on 11/Nov/2014 entitled "Knightdale
considers mining district for Wake Stone's neighbors", "Some residents spoke at the Nov. 3
council meeting to let councilors know of the problems they already have living near the quarry.
Marda Debnam lives on Forestville Road and said she hears machines workinq through the
night at the quarry and once a day in the mid -morning, she feels a blast coming from the
property. She said it shakes her home and is worried what it might be doing to her property. "I
don't know what that's doing to my house," she said."
The full article can be found here:
https://www. newsobserver.com/news/local/community/eastern-wake-
news/articlel 0125839.html?fbclid=lwAROCXgwEe7gaehgAugYin9crSt5CnFoBWwl75LMTCWa
wXAD26Lmecp8WhkQ
This article seems to be in contrast to what Mr. Bratton has claimed. Can you please ask Mr.
Bratton to submit Ms. Debam's letter as evidence? I would think that letter needs to be made
available for review. Also, please send me a copy of this letter once you receive it. Also, can
you let me know if Ms. Debnam signed a confidentiality agreement with Wake Stone?
What transpired with this home does not jive with Wake Stone being a good neighbor and is
thus reason for denying the Triangle Quarry permit modification request. Why would a good
neighbor pay well above retail value for a home and then tear it down? Why would a company
pay $450,000 for something that ends up being valued at $662? Was Ms. Debnam's land
rezoned to industrial because of issues with the Knightdale Quarry? The Dunn's and the Beals
do not want to be forced into the same situation as Ms. Debnam.

In addition, this N&O article indicates that, as of 2014, Wake Stone "estimates their 592 acres of
land [at the Knightdale Quarry] will be usable for 200 to 300 more years." Wake Stone has
sufficient land to either expand the Knightdale Quarry or to create a second pit in that area as
they own several hundred acres adjacent to the Knightdale Quarry. The do not need to quarry
land deeded to the public, especially if the land is next to a highly used state park.
The status of the Knightdale Quarry, the validity and accuracy of Mr. Bratton's claims regarding
Ms. Debnam, and the demolition of the home at 6608 Forestville Road, Knightdale, speak to the
validity of Wake Stone's Triangle Quarry permit modification request. I ask that you deny this
permit modification request as it presents hazard to a neighboring dwelling house ...
public road or other public property. This permit modification request presents a hazard to
the Dunn's home, the Beal's home and homesite, the Old Reedy Creek Road greenway (a
public greenway which is used by thousands of people), and Umstead State Park (a public
property used by thousands that use the Reedy Creek entrance of the Park).
Sincerely,
Natalie Lew
PO Box 80035
Raleigh, NC 27623