20011601 Ver 1_COMPLETE FILE_20010305

o?OF W AT QG Michael F. Easley
Governor
C f - William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
November 6, 2001 (Revised)
(Replaces 11-02-01 Approval)
DWQ # 01-1601
Pamlico County
Page 1 of 2
George R. Couranz
111 Brigham Street 28C
Hudson, MA 01749
[phone] (FAX)
Subject Property: Couranz Residence, Lot 16, Bell Point Subdivision, Merritt, Pamlico County, NC
Bay River [03-04-13, 27-150-(9.5), SA HQW NSW]
Rice Creek [03-04-13, 27-150-18, SA HQW NSW]
APPROVAL for the use of the "General" MAJOR VARIANCE; From the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico Riparian Buffer
Rules for the Construction of Residential Structures on Existing Lots within the Coastal Counties as defined by the
Coastal Area Management Act with ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Dear Mr. Couranz,
You have our approval, in accordance with the conditions listed below, to impact approximately 502 ft2 of Zone 2
of the protected riparian buffers for the purpose of constructing the proposed single family residential dwelling on the
subject property. This letter shall act as your approval for the use of the "General" Major Variance; From the Neuse and
Tar-Pamlico Riparian Buffer Rules for the Construction of Residential Structures on Existing Lots within the Coastal
Counties as defined by the Coastal Area Management Act with ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS as approved by the Water
Quality Committee (WQC) of the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) on May 10, 2001. This approval shall
replace the approval issued on November 2, 2001. In addition, you should get any other required federal, state or local
permits before you proceed with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control and CAMA
permits.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your variance request form dated
September 28, 2001 and the attached site plan initialed by Division of Water Quality (DWQ) staff on 11/06/01 except as
modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new request for
approval. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this approval and is thereby responsible for
complying with all conditions. For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed below.
An additional condition is that native, woody vegetation shall be planted in the retained portions of Zone
1 of the protected riparian buffer on the property as indicated within your application. These plantings
shall occur no longer than one year after construction of the home has been completed.
2. No impacts shall occur to Zone 1 of the protected buffers (except for the additional plantings as described
within condition number one above and "exempt" activities as described within 15A NCAC 2B .0233(6))
without prior approval from the DWQ.
3. The septic system and associated drain field is to be located outside of the protected riparian buffers as
indicated within the attached site plan.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), hftp://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands/
Page 2 of 2
4. Stormwater shall be directed as diffuse flow at non-erosive velocities through the protected stream buffers
as identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233(5). Roof drainage from the house shall be directed to vegetated
areas at non-erosive velocities prior to entering the protected riparian buffers. Any additional stormwater
located on the remainder of the property shall be directed as diffuse flow at non-erosive velocities prior to
entering the protected riparian buffers. No new ditching or piping of sormwater through the protected
buffers is allowed.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this approval, you may request your application be presented to the
WQC of the EMC for review. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. If the WQC decision is
not acceptable to you, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition that
conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-6714. This approval and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a
WQC review or hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under the Neuse River Riparian Buffer
Protection Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233 (9)(b)). Please call Mr. Bob Zarzecki 919-733-9726 or Ms. Deborah Sawyer at
252-946-6481 if you have any questions or require copies of our rules or procedural materials.
Sincerely,
oAcg J. Thorpe, P . .
ire ctor, D
Attachment: "Figure 2 House and Septic System Siting (Enlarged)" initialed by DWQ staff on 11/6/01
Cc: Deborah Sawyer, DWQ Washington Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
DWQ 011601
m m
N. N
O 7
7 N
r N
-n N
W
CD
CD
C N
OO
B
0-0
SD
m
O
N r
()0,-
I. -
C) 1c
'=7
OC
G
A
N
x
0
W
A
`r7
b
n
y
C/2
QQ
A
a
ti
SS,
F
gC o?
4
Q ?z
? c=
0
- u
0

N C

0
4

o '

r C
7

4
s
e
c
e
r
o
C
3
d
a ?
c
??I N
N
A N
m
s N
\ > N
a ?
? ? C 1
E Ga
? # C O
i a
w c ra r-
PIZ n
I C
f u 7
Q
\ N
N
r r i.+
a a a
II
CF i
O a
N ? i1J
w ?_
? s
111.2
±= _ - O
E` + c L _0 w
VS-
X11 ? ? ? _ _ ?6 ?E.
1!
7-5
Q G r -
?t
file:A.
Bob Zarzecki wrote:
Dr. Couranz,
I've revised your variance approval to reflect your Sept. 28, 2001 application and wetland delineation.
The revised approval should go out this week. Please call if you have any additional questions.
Sincerely,
- Bob Zarzecki (919-733-9726)
[e-mail] wrote:
> 6 November 2001
> Dear Mr Zarzecki,
> A zip file is attached containing:
> 1. Email from Deborah Sawyer (11 May 2001) requesting that I have the Corps of Engineers delineate
the wetlands on my property.
> 2. A revision to the initial variance application (Revision 1 , 22 June 2001) showing the revised
position of the septic drain bed.
> 3. A copy of the revised septic permit (jpg file)
> 4. A letter from the undersigned to Deborah Sawyer indicating that the Corps of Engineers would visit
my property-
> 5. Revision to the variance application on 28 September 2001 based on a new site survey including the
new wetlands delineation.
> 6. Copy of the Corps of Engineers certification
> If you are unable to print the revised septic permit, I will send you a copy by mail. I can also send you
copy of the new plot plan with the updated wetlands data if it is needed. I will need your correct mailing
address if this data is needed.
> The initial survey of my property included areas identified as wetlands. It was these areas that I used in
my initial (12 March 2001) and the 26 June revision for a variance. As it turns out, the areas identified in
the survey I used were the wetlands delineation that was included in the subdivision filing at the Register
of Deeds, Pamlico County. This is also the delineation used by the Pamlico County Health Dept for the
septic permit.
> Ms Sawyer, in her 11 May email requested that a delineation be made by the Corps of Engineers. At
that time, I did not know that the wetlands on my site plan and the septic permit were previously
accomplished delineations. I contacted the Corps of Engineers in Washington, NC and was referred to
Mr Bill Biddlecome. I forwarded Ms Sawyer's email to Mr Biddlecome. He told me that he didn't think
he needed to do a site visit and said that he would try to contact Ms. Sawyer. After a few days, he told
me that he was not able to make contact with Ms. Sawyer but he would visit my property and stake the
wetlands. After the wetlands were defined, I had them added to the survey of my property. The new
survey, with a certification from the Corps of Engineers, was sent to Ms. Sawyer on 28 Sept along with a
second revision to the variance application that reflected the new wetlands data.
> Based on the Major Variance approval you faxed to my home, it would appear that the variance
1 of 2 11/6/0111
fileW/Untitlei
request you are using is the 26 June first revision. When I received the latest wetlands data, I recalculated
the impact in Zone 2 of the house. This data increased the impact from 183 sq ft to 502 sq ft. The
location of the house has not changed. There will be some variation in the location between the two
variance request revisions just due to my ability to place the house outline on the plot plan. Further, I
used the facilities of AutoCAD 14 to calculate the area information. That data probably reflects a level of
precision beyond which I can place the house on the plot plan but it should be close.
> Since the variance has just been issued, I wanted to draw this difference of old versus new delineation
data to your attention so that the variance would be correct.
> Best Regards,
> Dr.Bob Couranz
> [e-mail]
> 508-490-1526(Office)
> --------------------------
> Name: Bell Point Lot 16 Variance Data.zip
> Bell Point Lot 16 Variance Data.zip Type: Zip Compressed Data
(application/x-zip-compressed)
> Encoding: base64
> Download Status: Not downloaded with message
2 of 2 11/6/01 11:18 AN
REVISION B
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Variance Request Form - for Minor Variances
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rules
NOTE. This form may be photocopied for use as an original.
Please identify which Riparian Area Protection Rule applies.
u Neuse River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rule (15A NCAC .0233)
u Tar-Pamlico River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management
Strategy Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rule (15A
NCAC.0259)
Part 1: General Information
(Please include attachments if the room provided is insufficient.)
1. Applicant's name (the corporation, individual, etc. who owns the property):
George R and Michele M. Couranz
2. Print Owner/Signing Official (person legally responsible for the property and its compliance)
Name: George R Couranz
Title: Owner
Street address: 111 Brigham St 28C
City, State, Zip: Hudson, MA 01749
Telephone: 508) - 490-1526 (Office)
Fax: 978) - 568-0803 (Home)
3. Contact person who can answer questions about the proposed project:
Name: George R. Couranz
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
4. Project Name (Subdivision, facility, or establishment name - consistent with project name on
plans, specifications, letters, operation and maintenance agreements, etc.):
Couranz Residence, Bell Point Subdivision, Lot 16
Merritt, NC
Version 1: February 2000
5. Project Location:
Street address: Lot 16, Point of View Drive
City, State, Zip: Merritt, 28515
County: Pamlico
Latitude/longitude: 35N 09'44", 76W 39'01"
6. Directions to site from nearest major intersection (Also, attach an 8'/2 x 11 copy of the USGS
topographic map indicating the location of the site):
Take Route 55 out of Bayboro toward Oriental until you reach State Road (SR) 1324 in
Merritt (a left turn). Take SR1324 East to Bell Point Road (SR 1330, a left turn).. Take Bell
Point Road to the Bell Point Subdivision where the main road is Point of View Drive. Go to
the end of Point of View Drive to Lot 16 as shown in the attached drawing (Figure 1).
7. Stream to be impacted by the proposed activity:
Stream name (for unnamed streams label as "UT' to the nearest named stream):
Bay River and Rice's Creek
Stream classification [as identified within the Schedule of Classifications 15A NCAC 2B
.0315 (Neuse) or.0316 (Tar-Pamlico)]:
8. Which of the following permits/approvals will be required or have been received already for
this project?
Required: Received: Date received: Permit Type:
CAMA Major
CAMA Minor
401 Certification/404 Permit
On-site Wastewater Permit
NPDES Permit (including stormwater)
Non-discharge Permit
Water Supply Watershed Variance
_X_ 8/11/99 Septic Permit
X 8/10/01 404 Wetlands Definition
Part 2: Proposed Activity
(Please include attachments if the room provided is insufficient.)
1. Description of proposed activity [Also, please attach a map of sufficient detail (such as a plat
map or site plan) to accurately delineate the boundaries of the land to be utilized in carrying
out the activity, the location and dimension of any disturbance in the riparian buffers
associated with the activity, and the extent of riparian buffers on the land. Include the area
of buffer impact in ft2.
Construction of a primary residence and associated septic system. The buffer impact totals
502 sq ft for the residence in Zone 2. The septic system drain bed, originally in Zone 1, has
been moved outside the buffer area.
Variance Request Form, page 2
Version 1: February 2000
2. State reasons why this plan for the proposed activity cannot be practically accomplished,
reduced or reconfigured to better minimize or eliminate disturbance to the riparian buffers:
The attached plan shows the proposed location of the house. The house location as shown
has been moved back from a more desirable location closer to the water producing a
reduced footprint. The Pamlico County Health Dept has moved the septic drain bed from a
location originally in Zone 1 to a location outside the buffer area.
3. Description of any best management practices to be used to control impacts associated with
the proposed activity (i.e., control of runoff from impervious surfaces to provide diffuse flow,
re-planting vegetation or enhancement of existing vegetation, etc.):
It is proposed that after construction, approximately 30 low growing shrubs would be planted
along the northern and riverfront marshes to provide additional soil control and protection
from human traffic. Additionally, approximately 12 low growing shrubs will be planted alont
the tip of the south marsh providing similar protection.
4. Please provide an explanation of the following:
(1) The practical difficulties or hardships that would result from the strict application of this
Rule.
Moving the planned site away from the water has reduced the footprint of the house in Zone
2. The siting difficulty for the house is mainly caused by the finger of marsh area penetrating
into the property from the south. The house has been positioned just behind the top of the
marsh to minimize ingress into the buffer zones.
(2) How these difficulties or hardships result from conditions that are unique to the property
involved.
The finger of marsh as described in 4(1) above basically cuts the building lot into two parts.
This feature makes siting the house on the lot difficult but the Zone 1 and 2 restrictions make
locating the house on the more desirable water side location impossible. This problem is
further compounded by the fact that the septic drain bed location is in the area between the
top of the south marsh and the marsh on the north boundary of the lot.
(3) If economic hardship is the major consideration, then include a specific explanation of the
economic hardships and the proportion of the hardship to the entire value of the project.
N/A
Part 3: Deed Restrictions
By your signature in Part 5 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.
Variance Request Form, page 3
Version 1: February 2000
Part 4: 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)
Mailing address:
City, State, Zip:
Telephone:
Fax:
Email:
None at this time
Part 5: Applicant's Certification
I, George R Couranz (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: /s/ George R Couranz
Date of Amendment: Sept 28, 2001
Title: Owner
Variance Request Form, page 4
Version 1: February 2000

P.°. A 91. 90_3 .? g
3
3

°RO NAD-93 L
'i? 3
a? 8S 8?

0
q$ 0 4S

e

t

?
33
_g \? Cg S
V
y?1y? g .

°
JN s m =
9
?
J 3 ?r'"b F4
3 3b
a ".y
i a a Lsr

x

t N
4? >

w

\O' ?
?il ` O
\ y?\
1? N
?0 ?_1
d ca
P
d
LL
c
0
L

.9g -gZ
41 00 59
e'e' S 212p
N pUO??a O`'
O ? 11-0k
rn
pr) C)
\ N 0
N N
? N
Q_ N
N N
C S
J -
O C
M U
M
N
U)
- N
C M
0 N
04
N C.

O

d"
M '-
N p Q)
M
N C
p

p
N
N
[O
N
N
mac'.

O
J
N?\
v
a \1?
y
v
c S2
0
c
0
v
0
3
2
FY
9'
w
U)
N
U)
U)
M
N
N
O
n
ll
J
KD
V
V

b
i.
a
W
b+
H
v
O
x
N
i.
G4
N
l0
0 O
E00
O N
L
+. Rf
N 7
Cl)
L
O .O
a
O
L
N L
N ?
O C
O O
L L
99 9Z!
41 •.Op y9, E
!? N (- so00o/?a? zgZF SAO`' 2120 o
O • N kOk
O, N
` M
\ U?/? N N
• • N • N
d ?
2 ® LO
® M
N
In ?
M
?® • N/
•M
N•
N •
? N
C N1?
O N?
C)
d •
N
N
•
N
N
•
00 •
N
N?\
v
p
u`oi ?N
a
O ?
J
c
0
v
c
0
3
• U
N
•
• n
? M
N
N
'0 04
•N N N
• • • •
•
N •
2
? U
Q
CN
J N
N
Ld
?i
a
PCs
W
a
L
QI
M
fir
r?
?Tk
m
ao
O
ON
LL
.. co
w 7
N ?
7 ?
8' m
OLL
N ?
U C
C.0
cO
U1
'i e
(t m
M
4-4
O
bA

0
W
.. o
X
?1Z
42i?0
J
(WH %
tf I E
vv-. g a a m
o
0
0. 2- M W
Z' FZ
s ?w
i.
m
p0.
w
40
o ?9
0.
°a
to
lit E
_?in cz
c c ...
u0)
.
MCL
0--o ti
mu 0,
e
4-4
d
0 ca
z •' o
M
0
400
N
ul
o
Aak
U
` z
4-o _
o
M
N
a

tu
Vbl
44

p

N
w
O
N
O
bA
a

..A
M
or-

W
u
zQ3
J
4?- GEC

Sam

Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
George R; Couranz
111 Brigham Street 28C .1
Hudson; MA 017,49
[phone] (FAX) 77
November 2, 2001
DWQ # 01-1601
Pamlico County
Page 1 of 2
Subject Property: - - Couranz Residence,-Lot 16, Bell Point Subdivision,-Merritt, Pamlico County, NC - -- -
Bay River [03-04-13,27-150-(9.5), SA HQW NSW]
Rice Creek [03-04=13, 27-150-18, SA HQW NSW] -
APPROVAL for the use of the "General" MAJOR VARIANCE; From the Neuse and Tar-Pamlico Riparian Buffer
Rules for the Construction of Residential Structures on Existing Lots within the Coastal Counties as defined by the
Coastal Area Management Act with ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Dear Mr. Couranz,
You have our approval, in accordance with the conditions listed below, to impact approximately 183 ft2 of Zone 2
of the protected riparian buffers for the purpose of constructing the proposed single family residential dwelling on the
subject property. This letter shall act as your approval for the use of the "General" Major Variance; From the Neuse and
Tar-Pamlico Riparian Buffer Rules for the Construction of Residential Structures on Existing Lots within the Coastal
Counties as defined by the Coastal Area Management Act with ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS as approved by the Water
Quality Committee (WQC) of the Environmental Management Commission (EMC) on May 10, 2001. In addition, you
should get any other required federal, state or local permits before you proceed with your project including (but not
limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control and CAMA permits.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your variance request form dated
June 26, 2001 and the attached site plan initialed by Division of Water Quality (DWQ) staff on 11/02/01 except as
modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new request for
approval. If the property is sold, the new owner must be given a copy of this approval and is thereby responsible for
complying with all conditions. For this approval to be valid, you must follow the conditions listed below.
1. An additional condition is that native, woody vegetation shall be planted in the retained portions of Zone
1 of the protected riparian buffer on the property as indicated within your application. These plantings
shall occur no longer than one year after construction of the home has been completed.
2. No impacts shall occur to Zone 1 of the protected buffers (except for the additional plantings as described
within condition number one above and "exempt" activities as described within 15A NCAC 2B .0233(6))
without prior approval from the DWQ.
3. The septic system and associated drain field is to be located outside of the protected riparian buffers as
indicated within the attached site plan.
North Carolina Division of Water Quality, 401 Wetlands Certification Unit,
1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1650 (Mailing Address)
2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, NC 27604-2260 (Location)
919-733-1786 (phone), 919-733-6893 (fax), http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/ncwetiands/
Page--2 of 2 :
4. Stormwater shall be directed as diffuse flow at non-erosive velocities through the protected stream buffers
as identified within 15A NCAC 2B .0233(5). Roof drainage from the house shall be directed to vegetated
areas at non-erosive velocities prior to entering the protected riparian buffers. Any additional stormwater
located on the remainder of the property shall be directed as diffuse flow at non-erosive velocities prior to
entering the protected riparian buffers. No new ditching or piping of stormwater through the protected
buffers is allowed.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this approval, you may request your application be presented to the.
WQC of the EMC for review. You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. If the WQC decision is
not acceptable to you, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition that
conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-6714. This approval and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a
WQC review or hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under the Neuse River Riparian Buffer
Protection Rules (15A NCAC 2B .0233 (9)(b)). Please call Mr. Bob Zarzecki 919-733-9726 or Ms. Deborah Sawyer at
252-946-6481 if you have any questions or require copies of our rules or procedural materials.
Sincerely,
P.Thorpe, D.
cWQ
Attachment: "Figure 1 House and Septic System Siting" initialed by DWQ staff on 11/2/01
Cc: Deborah Sawyer, DWQ Washington Regional Office
File Copyl
Central Files
DWQ 011601
o'
CD
V
2
w
N
O
O
O
,o0f?
\ \d?rL
F
It
(IQ
Ej
.y
N
x
0
W
W
Cl)
m
Q+
C
b
e?
n•
y
K
CD

dQ
^1 1

1
.
'
O
uzl99

_ f E-Y4 'iS Y 7J -?
PP/r
°F WA t, Michael F. Easley
'Governor
o 7Y
William G. Ross,Jr.Secretary
? Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
Division of Water Quality
Department of Environmental and Natural Resources.
Wetlands/401 Unit
Location: 2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250 Raleigh, NC 27604-2260
Mailing Address: 1650 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1650
Contact Information: General 919-733-1786 Fax: [phone]
Fax To: R. Cov???.Z Fax Number: q'48-5(-8-08o3
Company: Date: '? z o
From: Rob Zarzeck, Phone: - 433-g-?z.c&
No. Of Pages including cover sheet: LI
Notes or special instructions:
Currans(Couranz)Property
Subject: Currans(Couranz)Property
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 10:21:56 -0500
From: Bob Zarzecki <[e-mail]>
Organization: Division of Water Quality; 401 Certification Unit
To: Coleen Sullins <[e-mail]>
CC: deborah sawyer <[e-mail]>

Coleen,
I could not locate anything in our database or my files for a Bob
Currans. I'm assuming that this is regarding Bob Couranz's property in
Pamlico County. His property is located in Bell Point Subdivision
adjacent to the Bay River and Rice's Creek (both SA HQW NSW waters). No
file was started on this project in our office because we never received
a completed signed application. However, I kept a digital file of
emails and draft applications that were passed on to me from the WaRO.
The first information I received on this project was a digital copy of a
Minor Variance application sent to the WaRO dated 3/5/01. The
application had the house in the buffers and a septic system drain field
from a Peat system within 22 feet of a coastal wetland/marsh. Deborah
and Tom went to the site on 5/10/01 and verified that the septic system
was too close. Keep in mind that this was before the General and no
systems (including innovative systems) were allowed within the buffers.
Numerous correspondences took place between the WaRO and Dr. Couranz to
revise the site plan. A draft digital copy of his revised application
dated 6/26/01 was sent to me via email. The revised plan only proposes
183 square feet of Zone 2 buffer impact for the house and moves the
septic system outside of the buffers. A signed final application was to
follow. I have not been able to find any such application. A file and
number should have been opened if it would have come in. No file was
created. Deborah recalls the application and believes that she sent it
up, although she can not locate a copy of it in her files. For some
reason it looks like the 401 Unit never got it or it was misplaced.
I received a follow up email dated 9/10/01 from the WaRO indicating
problems between the Pamlico County Health Dept. and Mr. Couranz
concerning revising his septic permit from its original location 22 feet
from the marsh. Bob Uebler and Steven Lane apparently went to the site
and moved the system after finding suitable soils greater than 50 feet
away from the marsh. This email was the last information that I have on
the property.
I spoke to Deborah today. She feels reasonably assured that Mr. Couranz
sent in a signed final application and that the septic permit was worked
out with Pamlico County. The WaRO seems to be fine with the revised
6/26/01 application that I have a digital copy of. The application was
for a Minor Variance, however I believe that we can issue this under the
General Variance and not require any mitigation. I plan to write up an
approval for this application today and to call Mr. Couranz and request
that he fax a copy of the Pamlico County approved septic permit for our
files. I wasn't going to ask for a signed copy of the application or a
completed General Variance application since the project has taken so
long to work out. Please let me know if you agree. I'll have the
approval in John's box today with a note to fax a copy to Mr. Couranz.
Sorry for the long email.
- Bob
1 of 2 11/2/01 1 '
dt
f
COPY
PLAA80-0 ?_ ?' m O
.? f!1
O•
LiJ rs 4
t eddy c3 S? VI
c cu o c im D
0 cu ? -?
ca ?.
-
o?p L o -co
- _,, ?a
f-t- G
cn
c
cn
E
a?
U
N
'LS
G
ai
U
y
x
w
7 \
?yf0
d
0
0
0
N
RS
3
Q
CD
U-
0
a>
Alto
Subject: [Fwd: "General" Variance] w:
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 14:55:22 -0400'`.
From: Deborah Sawyer <[e-mail]> ;;.
Organization: DENR
To: Bob Zarzecki <[e-mail]>
CC: Coleen Sullins <[e-mail]>
Bob,
I contacted Mr. Couranz (who lives in Mass.) to tell him that he did not
qualify for the "General" Variance because the septic system is only 22
ft. from the marsh line and it is not a peat system (which must be at
least 35 ft.). Mr Couranz is very frustrated because he said that he
talked to Jenny Lassiter and that she said that the first septic tank
permit is the only one permitted. Bob Uebler and Steven Lane revisited
the site and moved the system out of the buffer entirely but apparantly
there is some confusion about the move. Mr. Couranz wants the septic
system in the newly determined area but Jenny is telling him that his
permit is the 1st one which is 22 ft. from the marsh. Bob Uebler has
agreed to talk to Jenny and try to work this out. If it is only a matter
of giving the county another fee payment ($125.00), I don't think that
is a problem with the property owner. He just doesn't understand what he
is supposed to do.
I think that the DWQ needs to draft a letter to all the county health
departments who are in the coastal counties (not to single out Pamlico).
Recently, I gave a presentation and answered questions at a meeting of
county sanitarian supervisors. Pamlico was not present. Beaufort, Hyde,
Craven and Carteret were there, though, and they understand what can and
can't be permitted. They also seem to understand the "General" Variance.
It won't hurt, though, to put something in writing. I'll draft the
letter and get Bob to review it. After it is finalized, I will send it
up to Coleen for signature.
Thanks,
Deborah
Subject: Re: "General" Variance
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2001 12:17:12 -0400
From: Bob Zarzecki <[e-mail]>
Organization: Division of Water Quality; 401 Certification Unit
To: Deborah Sawyer <[e-mail]>
Deborah,
You are correct. Only approved "innovative systems" can be placed within
the buffer. Let me know if you want me to draft or review a letter to
Jenny. Thanks,
Bob
Deborah Sawyer wrote:
> Bob,
> I just got a call from Mr. Couranz in Pamlico Co. If you will remember,
> he is the man who had the septic system in the buffer zone (Zone 1) and
> also did not have a 404/CAMA line designated on his plat. Dr. Bob Uebler
> and Steven Lane (Pam. Co. Hlth. Dept.) went to the site recently and
> moved the system out of the Buffer Zone. According to Bob Uebler, the
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Revision 1, 22 June,2001
Variance Request Form - for Minor Variances
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rules
NOTE. This form may be photocopied for use as an original.
Please identify which Riparian Area Protection Rule applies.
K Neuse River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rule (15A NCAC .0233)
u Tar-Pamlico River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management
Strategy Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rule (15A
NCAC.0259)
Part 1: General Information
(Please include attachments if the room provided is insufficient.)
1. Applicant's name (the corporation, individual, etc. who owns the property):
George R and Michele M. Couranz
2. Print Owner/Signing Official (person legally responsible for the property and its compliance)
Name: George R Couranz
Title: Owner
Street address: 111 Brigham St 28C
City, State, Zip: Hudson, MA 01749
Telephone: 508) - 490-1526 (Office)
Fax: 978) - 568-0803 (Home)
3. Contact person who can answer questions about the proposed project:
Name: George R. Couranz
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
4. Project Name (Subdivision, facility, or establishment name - consistent with project name on
plans, specifications, letters, operation and maintenance agreements, etc.):
Couranz Residence, Bell Point Subdivision, Lot 16
Merritt, NC
Version 1: February 2000
5. Project Location:
Street address: Lot 16, Point of View Drive
City, State, Zip: Merritt, 28515
County: Pamlico
Latitude/longitude: 35N 09'44", 76W 39'01"
6. Directions to site from nearest major intersection (Also, attach an 8'/2 x 11 copy of the USGS
topographic map indicating the location of the site):
Take Route 55 out of Bayboro toward Oriental until you reach State Road (SR) 1324 in
Merritt (a left turn). Take SR1324 East to Bell Point Road (SR 1330, a left turn).. Take Bell
Point Road to the Bell Point Subdivision where the main road is Point of View Drive. Go to
the end of Point of View Drive to Lot 16 as shown in the attached drawing (Figure 1).
7. Stream to be impacted by the proposed activity:
Stream name (for unnamed streams label as "UT' to the nearest named stream):
Bay River and Rice's Creek
Stream classification [as identified within the Schedule of Classifications 15A NCAC 2B
.0315 (Neuse) or.0316 (Tar-Pamlico)]:
8. Which of the following permits/approvals will be required or have been received already for
this project?
Required: Received: Date received: Permit Type:
CAMA Major
1 April 2001 CAMA Minor
401 Certification/404 Permit
On-site Wastewater Permit
NPDES Permit (including stormwater)
Non-discharge Permit
Water Supply Watershed Variance
Others (specify)
Part 2: Proposed Activity
(Please include attachments if the room provided is insufficient.)
1. Description of proposed activity [Also, please attach a map of sufficient detail (such as a plat
map or site plan) to accurately delineate the boundaries of the land to be utilized in carrying
out the activity, the location and dimension of any disturbance in the riparian buffers
associated with the activity, and the extent of riparian buffers on the land. Include the area
of buffer impact in ft2.]:
Construction of a primary residence that impacts buffer Zone 2. The buffer impact totals 183
sq ft for the residence. The associated septic system is outside the buffer zone.
Variance Request Form, page 2
Version 1: February 2000
2. State reasons why this plan for the proposed activity cannot be practically accomplished,
reduced or reconfigured to better minimize or eliminate disturbance to the riparian buffers:
The attached plan shows the existing reduced footprint location from a more desirable
location closer to the water. The reduced footprint location is a major change from the more
desired location. Originally the house would have been 51' from the water whereas in the
proposed siting it is 175' from the water. The original Zone 1 impact would have been 491 sq
ft and Zone 2 impact of 1246 sq ft for a total of 1737 sq ft. The proposed location footprint is
only 183 sq ft or 10.5% of the original site. The proposed location removes the septic
drainbed entirely from Zone 1.
3. Description of any best management practices to be used to control impacts associated with
the proposed activity (i.e., control of runoff from impervious surfaces to provide diffuse flow,
re-planting vegetation or enhancement of existing vegetation, etc.):
It is proposed that after construction, approximately 12 low growing shrubs would be planted
along the tip of the south marsh providing protection of the marsh line.
4. Please provide an explanation of the following:
(1) The practical difficulties or hardships that would result from the strict application of this
Rule.
Moving the planned site away from the water has reduced the footprint of the house in Zone
2. The siting difficulty for the house is mainly caused by the finger of marsh area penetrating
into the property from the south. The house has been positioned just behind the top of the
marsh to minimize ingress into the buffer zones. A drain bed site originally specified by the
county government for the septic system to be largely in Zone 1 has been repositioned totally
outside the buffer zone.
(2) How these difficulties or hardships result from conditions that are unique to the property
involved.
The finger of marsh as described in 4(1) above basically cuts the building lot into two parts.
This feature makes siting the house on the lot difficult but the Zone 1 and 2 restrictions make
locating the house on the more desirable water side location impossible.
(3) If economic hardship is the major consideration, then include a specific explanation of the
economic hardships and the proportion of the hardship to the entire value of the project.
N/A
Part 3: Deed Restrictions
By your signature in Part 5 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.
Variance Request Form, page 3
Version 1: February 2000
Part 4: 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): None at this time
Mailing address:
City, State, Zip:
Telephone:
Fax:
Email:
Part 5: Applicant's Certification
I, George R Couranz (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: /s/ George R Couranz
Date of Amendment: June 26, 2001
Title: Owner
Variance Request Form, page 4
Version 1: February 2000

et eddy
\\Ri`J > '? `2S
Q
y
U
a
b
a
a?
0
x
w
7 \
'O
0
0
0
N
3
a?
LL
S
S Ln
Ln
d
d
d

O
O L
L 4-
4-
X S
0
M Lf7 S
L
LA d
L c

oA
c?
7E
8
OA
Q
CIO)
O
ti
O
x
N
y
CA
w

co
a)
CD
as
CL O
0
ON
LL 2'
z lC
(D 7
(D
7 N
Q
a) LL
T
U C
f? y
L L
`ca m
d
b
0
N
.
X
S
N E
x mm
L
L p?
O ? GL
E E 6 N (ij ._
O L •
N --S-e{
I
1 • M ~
X q w

M
M
a
C LO
O
O N
U-
co
y 7
N L
7
0-0)
N LL
cc ..
N '-
O C
O O
.y
.02
co `m
S S
N L
i L
O C
E ?
E E
0 0
OJ L L
4 ?
X
O O
(h tr)

Subject: Re: [Fwd: Minor Variance Application]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 14:54:44 -0400
From: Bob Zarzecki <[e-mail]>
Organization: Division of Water Quality; 401 Certification Unit
To: Deborah Sawyer <[e-mail]>
It sounds like he needs to have Pamlico County revise his permit and find him
another usable location outside of the buffers ... then he needs to relocate his
house, trying to keep it first out of the buffers and second only within Zone 2
if need be...if he only impacts Zone 2 then we can issue him a
"General" ... make sure he is aware of the "General" and send him a copy of the
application form.... let me know what I can do...thanks ...Bob
Deborah Sawyer wrote:
> FYI,
> Deborah
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Subject: Re: Minor Variance Application
> Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 09:18:40 EDT
> From: [e-mail]
> To: <[e-mail]>
> CC: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
> Dear Ms. Sawyer,
> Thank you for your note on my variiance request. I need some assistance in
clearing/resolving some of the issues
> you noted.
> 1) The application is for a minor Variance which is for impacts to
Zone 2. You propose impacts to
> Zones 1 and 2. If you propose impacts to both Zones 1 and 2,
a Major Variance Application will
> need to be submitted by you.

> The issue of impact on zone 1 is really a function of the site for the drain
bed. I would prefer not to impact Zone 1 with the septic sy stem.

> 2) The impact to Zone 1 is for the drainfield of the
conventional septic system. The Buffer Rules
> require septic systems to be 50 feet from the
coastal marsh line. Please supply this office with
the justification for this impact to Zone 1. Is this a
necessity (hardship) which can't be avoided.

> I have asked the Pamlico County Health Dept to consider a different site for
the septic system on the property. The existing site is not a good one for me
trying to site the house on the property but it is the one defined by the PCHD.

> 3) The plats show the CAMA marsh line which designates the
CAMA wetlands but the Section 404
> wetlands are not designated. Please supply a plat with the
Section 404 wetlands delineation
> signed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
> I need some help here in identifying where I can go in the Corps of Engineers
to get the required plat. Could you please identify the office for me?
> 4) There is a portion of the dwelling in Zone 2. Please
supply justification of why the dwelling can't be constructed
out of the buffer zones (hardship).
> In this area, I would refer you to the variance application. The house has
already been moved from the preferred location much closer to the water to this
> less preferred site. Given the small amount of the house that is still in Zone
2, I believe the proposed mitigation plan offsets the small Zone 2 impact.
> Thank your for your assistance.
> Dr Bob Couranz
Bob Zarzecki
Environmental Specialist III - DENR/ DWQ
401 Wetlands Certification Unit
Bob Zarzecki
Environmental Specialist III - DENR/ DWQ
401 Wetlands Certification Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd (office address) 1650 Mail Fax: [phone]
Service Center (mail address) Work: 919-733-9726
Raleigh
NC
27669-1650
Additional Information:
Version 2.1
Subject: Re: Minor Variance Application
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 09:18:40 EDT
From: RCouranz@aol. com
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Dear Ms. Sawyer,
Thank you for your note on my variiance request, 'I need some assistance in
clearing/resolving some of the issues
you noted.
1) The application is for a Minor Variance which is for impacts to
Zone 2. You propose impacts to
Zones 1 and 2. If you propose impacts to both Zones 1 and 2, a
major Variance Application will
need to be submitted by you.
The issue of impact on Zone 1 is really a function of the site for the drain
bed. I would prefer not to impact Zone 1 with the septic -system.
2) The impact to Zone 1 is for the drainfield of the
conventional septic system. The Buffer Rules
require septic systems to be 50 feet from the
coastal marsh line. Please supply this office with
the justification for this impact to Zone 1. Is this a
necessity (hardship) which can't be avoided.
I have asked the Pamlico County Health Dept to consider a different site for the
septic system on the property. The existing site is not a good one for me trying
to site the house on the property but it is the one defi ned by the PCHD.
3) The plats show the CAMA marsh line which designates the
CAMA wetlands but the Section 404
wetlands are not designated. Please supply a plat with the
Section 404 wetlands delineation
signed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
I need some help here in identifying where I can go in the Corps of Engineers to
get the required plat. Could you please identify the office for me?
4) There is a portion of the dwelling in Zone 2. Please supply
justification of why the dwelling can't be constructed out of
the buffer zones (hardship).
In this area, I would refer you to the variance application. The house has
already been moved from the preferred location much closer to the water to this
less preferred site. Given the small amount of the house that is still in Zone
2, I believe the proposed mitigation plan offsets the small Zone 2 impact.
Thank your for your assistance.
Dr Bob Couranz
Subject: Couranz Project in Pamlico Co.
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 13:37:16 -0400
From: Deborah Sawyer <[e-mail]>
Organization: DENR
To: Bob Zarzecki <[e-mail]>,
John Dorney <[e-mail]>,
Coleen Sullins <[e-mail]>,
Jim Mulligan <[e-mail]>
I tried to send the plat for the Couranz Minor Variance Request several
different ways but it doesn't appear that it went through. This one has
the actual attachment from Mr. Couranz's E-mailed appliction.
Tom Steffens and I went to Pamlico Co. on Thursday 5/10/01 to review a
Minor Variance Request for Mr. Couranz near Merritt in Pamlico Co. Mr.
Couranz sent this application to me in Marsh but it was incomplete (no
site maps). Site maps were sent in late April. The 1st problem, with the
application is that he filled out the Minor Variance appl. form for
impacts to both Zones 1 and 2. the 2nd and most serious concern is that
the impact to Zone 1 is for the drain field of a conventional septic
system. The im-acts to Zone 2 is for the septic system and the dwelling.
The lot is a very large lot and from our observations, the dwelling
could be moved out of the buffer areas. If the soils are acceptable, the
septic system definitely could be moved out of the zones. I have
attached the appl. which Mr. Couranz E-mailed to me so that you can see
the plat for the proposed project. I sent 2 pics under a separate
E-mail. The 1st pic is of Tom standing in the inundated wetland only a
few feet from the proposed drainfield. The 2nd pic shows approx. where
the field is to be constructed (Tom is standing in the approx.
location).
Tom and I went to the Health Dept. to get a copy of the permit. The
permit shows the system approx. 20 feet form a 404 wetland. the pictures
I have sent you show that this wetland is CAMA marsh and inundated at
the time of the investigation. The permit was issued on 8/11/99. We
definitely need to investigate some of these sites because there appears
to be no hardship or reason to put the septic system as close to the
marsh as they have.
Deborah
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: couranzvarianceappl.ZIP
Type: Zip Compressed Data
couranzvarianceappl.ZIP (application/x-zip-compressed)
Encoding: base64
Download Status: Not downloaded with message

Subject: Minor Variance Application
Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 13:21:05 -0400
From: Deborah Sawyer <[e-mail]>
Organization: DENR
To: [e-mail]
CC: Bob Zarzecki <[e-mail]>
Mr. Couranz,
On May 10, 2001 this office investigated your proposed building site near
Merritt in Pamlico County. Your maps and drawings were very helpful. After
reviewing the application and site plan, we evaluated the site. There are
several concerns which we need you to address:
* The application is for a minor Variance which is for impacts to Zone 2.
You propose.impacts to Zones.l and 2. If you propose impacts to both
zones 1 and 2, a Major Variance Application will need to be submitted
by you.
* The impact to Zone 1 is for the drainfield of the conventional septic
system. The Buffer Rules require septic systems to be 50 feet from the
coastal marsh line. Please supply this office with the justification
for this impact to Zone 1. Is this a necessity (hardship) which can't
be avoided.
* The plats show the CAMA marsh line which designates the CAMA wetlands
but the Section 404 wetlands are not designated. Please supply a plat
with the Section 404 wetlands delineation signed by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers.
* There is a portion of the dwelling in Zone 2. Please supply
justification of why the dwelling can't be constructed out of the
buffer zones (hardship).
This office needs the aformentioned application, information, and
justifications prior to continuing with the variance process. If you have
any questions or comments, please call this office at [phone]. Thank
you.
Deborah Sawyer

Subject: Meeting in N. Carolina
Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 13:10:06 EDT
From: [e-mail]
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
3 May 2001
Ms Deborah Sawyer
North Carolina Dept of Water Quality
943 Washington Square
Washington, North Carolina 27889
Dear Ms Sawyer,
It has been 6 weeks since I submitted a request for variance on our property at
Lot 16, Bell Point Subdivision, Merritt, NC. As I indicated in our telephone
conversation several weeks ago, our contractor was approaching the point when
all necessary planning was in place prior to start of construction on our house.
I plan to be in Oriental, NC on Friday, 11 May to review the final plans with
our builder. After completion of that review, the only issues delaying the start
of construction are the building permits.
You indicated in our telephone conversation that you expected to visit our.
property during the week of April 23rd. I would appreciate the opportunity to
review the status of my variance request with you. I have recently spoken to Mr.
Thorpe and he has advised me that you are normally in your office on Fridays. I
would be pleased to visit your office on either the morning or afternoon of
Friday, 11 May at your convenience. Please advise me of the time that would be
best for you.
If you have any data that you can
variance will be granted shortly
either by email or by telephone.
Sincerely,
Dr Robert Couranz
111 Brigham St, 28C
Hudson, MA 01749
[e-mail]
share with me before the meeting, or if the
and a meeting is not required, please advise me
CC: Mr. Robert Thorpe
Mr. Robert Zarzecki
Subject: [Fwd: Retransmission of Application Cover Letter]
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 10:16:10 -0500
From: Bob Zarzecki <[e-mail]>
Organization: Division of Water Quality; 401 Certification Unit 41,
To: deborah sawyer <[e-mail]>
Deborah,
It looks to me that they can avoid the house impacts by just shifting it
out of the buffers and reconfiguring their driveway. I have a real
probelm with their drain field within the buffers. Is this a peat
system? Why can't the drain field be positioned directly behind the
house. PS...I have not formally check this project in. They will need
to send me a hard copy to start a formal file. Let me know your
thoughts. See you tomorrow.
- Bob
Subject: Retransmission of Application Cover Letter
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 15:46:44 EST
From: [e-mail]
To: <[e-mail]>
This goes with the Application previously transmitted
Robert Couranz
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Name: Letter
Deborah Sawyer
Scott Jones Bob
Zarzecki.doc
Type:
cc
Microsoft Word
Letter Deborah Sawyer cc Scott Jones Bob Zarzecki.doc
Document
(application/msword)
downloaded with
Bob Zarzecki
Environmental Specialist III - DENR/ DWQ
401 Wetlands Certification Unit
Bob Zarzecki
Environmental Specialist III - DENR/ DWQ
401 Wetlands Certification Unit
2321 Crabtree Blvd (office address) 1650 Fax: [phone] (may
Mail Service Center (mail address) change)
Encoding: base64
Download Status: Not
message
5 March 2001
Ms. Deborah Sawyer
North Carolina Dept of Environment and Natural Resources
943 Washington Square` F
Washington, NC 27889
Dear Ms Sawyer,
In 1999, my wife'and I purchased property in Merritt, NC to be used as a retirement home. At that
time, a survey of the lot was accomplished. Further, to assure that we were able to build on the
lot, we obtained a septic permit from the Pamlico County Dept. of Health. Our architect has
completed his design and we are working with our builder to start construction. Working with the
1999 survey and septic permit, we have investigated a number of sites for the house. We have
tried to become familiar with the building requirements on the property including those
administered by the Department of Environment and Water Quality. As a result, several changes
in siting were made basically moving the house back from a preferred waterfront location to the
proposed site. We have reached a siting for the house that, to us, is a reasonable compromise of
building requirements. We believe our plan requires a minor variance with existing regulations.
Attached to this letter is a copy of the Division of Water Quality form "Variance Request Form -
for Minor Variances" addressing our property at Lot 16 in the Bell Point Subdivision, Merritt NC.
We have tried since 19 February but been unable to contact you by telephone to discuss the
variance application. As a result, there are several entries that without further guidance, we could
not accurately respond. Specifically, we don't know which rule set applies to our location. Further,
we have not responded to Item 7, stream classification for the same reason. Absent the two
preceding points, we have responded to the basic items in the variance request to the best of our
knowledge of the general regulations.
We have attached to the request three drawings based on the lot survey to show the proposed
house location and the septic system per the existing permit. The drawings are based on the
AutoCAD drawing provided by the 1999 survey and are believed to be to accurate. The location
of the septic drain bed has been drawn per its description in the septic permit. In Figure 1, the
overall view of the lot, I have also shown the location of 30 ft and 50 ft setback lines from the
marsh areas as I understand that these lines are important in your planning.
Figure 2 focuses on the area surrounding the house and septic system. From these computer-
based drawings, I have calculated the surface areas that are affected by the existing siting: Zone
1, 281 sq ft; Zone 2, 1720 sq ft. The septic system is the vast majority of the ingress into the
buffer area. The problem of siting the house on the property is complex due to the finger of marsh
that extends into the lot from the south and the location of the septic site just below the marsh on
the north boundary. Absent the required buffer area between the marsh and the CAMA line, it
would have been desirable to site the house in the forward (toward the water) section of the lot.
Given all of the tradeoffs, we believe that the site shown in the variance request form is a
reasonable location.
The variance request form (Figure 3) also indicates a plan for replanting once construction is
completed. We understand that guideline have been established for such replanting when the
buffer area is disturbed and we believe that the indicated replanting along the marsh on the
northern side significantly exceeds those guidelines. Additionally, low shrubs along the tip of the
southern marsh finger have been added in the area where trees and other vegetation will be
removed to build the house and provide some safety from forest fires as recommended by the
North Carolina Forestry Service. This replanting, when combined with the addition of mid-height
deciduous trees in the area cleared during construction, will add diversity in the environment that
we hope will provide shelter and food for birds and small animals.
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Variance Request Form m for Minor Variances
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rules
NOTE. This form may be photocopied for use as an original.
Please identify which Riparian Area Protection Rule applies.
? Neuse River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rule (15A NCAC.0233)
? Tar-Pamlico River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management
Strategy Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rule (15A
NCAC.0259)
Part 1: General Information
(Please include attachments if the room provided is insufficient.)
1. Applicant's name (the corporation, individual, etc. who owns the property):
George R and Michele M. Couranz
2. Print Owner/Signing Official (person legally responsible for the property and its compliance)
Name: George R Couranz
Title: Owner
Street address: 111 Brigham St 28C
City, State, Zip: Hudson, MA 01749
Telephone: 508) - 490-1526 (Office)
Fax: 978) - 568-0803 (Home)
3. Contact person who can answer questions about the proposed project:
Name: George R. Couranz
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
4. Project Name (Subdivision, facility, or establishment name - consistent with project name on
plans, specifications, letters, operation and maintenance agreements, etc.):
Couranz Residence, Bell Point Subdivision, Lot 16
Merritt, NC
Version 1: February 2000
2. State reasons why this plan for the proposed activity cannot be practically accomplished,
reduced or reconfigured to better minimize or eliminate disturbance to the riparian buffers:
The attached plan shows the existing reduced footprint location from a more desirable
location closer to the water. The major factor is the septic system footprint that corresponds
to a septic system permit issued in 1999 by the Pamlico County Health Dept.
3. Description of any best management practices to be used to control impacts associated with
the proposed activity (i.e., control of runoff from impervious surfaces to provide diffuse flow,
re-planting vegetation or enhancement of existing vegetation, etc.):
It is proposed that after construction, approximately 30 low growing shrubs be planted along
the northern marsh to provide additional soil control and protection from human traffic.
Additionally, approximately 12 low growing shrubs would be planted along the tip of the south
marsh providing similar protection. Finally, 4 to 5 deciduous trees will be planted in the
approximate locations shown in Figure 2. These trees were planned to allow the tall loblolly
pines to be removed for protection from wind damage and forest fires as recommended by
the North Carolina Forestry Service.
4.. Please provide an explanation of the following:
(1) The practical difficulties. or hardships that would result from the strict application of this
Rule.
Moving the planned site away from the water has reduced the footprint of the house in Zone
2. The siting difficulty for the house is mainly caused by the finger of marsh area penetrating
into the property from the south. The house has been positioned just behind the top of the
marsh to minimize ingress into the buffer zones. However, the drain bed for the septic system
has been defined by the Pamlico County Health Dept and it is largely within Zones 1 and 2
(Zone 1: 281 sq ft; Zone 2: 1377 sq ft ). A variance is needed to provide for both the house
and the drain site. The drain site specified by the county government is required for the
construction of the house.
(2) How these difficulties or hardships result from conditions that are unique to the property
involved.
The finger of marsh as described in 4(1) above basically cuts the building lot into two parts.
This feature makes siting the house on the lot difficult but the Zone 1 and 2 restrictions make
locating the house on the more desirable water side location impossible. This problem is
further compounded by the fact that the septic drain bed location is in the area between the
top of the south marsh and the marsh on the north boundary of the lot.
(3) If economic hardship is the major consideration, then include a specific explanation of the
economic hardships and the proportion of the hardship to the entire value of the project.
N/A
Part 3: Deed Restrictions
By your signature in Part 5 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.
Variance Request Form, page 3
Version 1: February 2000
c
O
O O '>

° >
a m Cl) U)

?ll
"- SZ
t.
VY

?" rr

: ,
1
?
1 ? ? IMI
y
Y I
?
N .# ?
-

Q
a?
cn
N
h
U
a
a?
a
a?
0
x
w

0
0
0
N
21'
0
2
LL
T
0
?J'dd
Q
ti
X

N
M
X
W
en
a
w
a
a
b
ou
rA
0
a
0
s.
a
M
iw
w
c
Q Q
O
O N
LL
.. ca
N 7
N L
7 ?
c d
O LL
cr ..
N T
U C
O O
? .y
L L
Pvteft
Cedar Pt �.,poinf,
X4
o
-Zit James
p", Point ?
Va demere
C
RR C12 27
SPiles D
Box Point,& -
Mere (C)
Windmill
Point
Petty Pt
Gull (C)
-----?Smith Cr Wise Pt
Point
Light (C)
Poorhouse Pt
1?7s _-.Near (C)
4,
4
N,F ,.,a C.
Bay Bell Point
Ligfif
orton (C)
(c)
COURANZ. Skip(C)
Cedar Pt
op (c)
Potter (0)-4,
71
7
J
�c
'k
sv_
$gY �..���� .,,,=` 1330) f. l � �. � �� � ,�
4k
X6
RoW (C)A
t
N
1324
en*c
1324
neord
Mark,
Name: VANDEMERE
Date: 11/2/101
Scale: 1 inch equals 2000 feet
Location: 035109'40.1" N 076138'59.0" W
Copyright (C) 1997, Maptech, Inc. 12Z // /Z

r*
[e-mail] wrote:
26 June, 2001
Ms. Deborah Sawyer
North Carolina Dept of Environment and Natural Resources
943 Washington Square
Washington, NC 27889
Re: Amendment to Application for Variance on Lot 16, Bell Point Subdivision, Merritt, N.C.
Dear Ms Sawyer.
This letter and its attachments are in further response to your email of May 11, 2001. The following
actions have been taken since our last correspondence:
file://.
1. The Pamlico County Health Department has moved the location of the septic site on Lot 16 outside of
the buffer zone boundaries.
2. Mr Bill Biddlecome of the Army Corps of Engineers will visit my property on 3 July to define any 404
wetlands. A copy of the site survey will be provided to you as soon as it is available. -
With these actions, I can further respond to your email by paragraph:
a) The removal of the septic system from both Zones 1 and 2 makes the variance request a minor
variance.
b) The change in position of the drain bed places it outside the buffer area and beyond 50' from the
marsh area.
c) As noted by 2 above, the Corps of Engineers will visit the property and define the 404 wetlands. In
addition, I call your attention to a copy of the initial septic permit. The septic permit contains a plot plan
identifying 404 wetlands. Please see Attachment 1.
d) The reduced footprint location for the house as shown in this variance application is one that was
moved from 'a more desirable location closer to the water. The reduced footprint location is a major
change from the more desired location. Originally the house would have been 51' from the water whereas
in the proposed siting it is 175' from the water. The original Zone 1 impact would have been 491 sq ft
and Zone 2 impact of 1246 sq ft for a total of 1737 sq ft (house only). The proposed location footprint
house location is only 183 sq ft or 10.5% of the original site. I believe that the footprint has been
significantly reduced.
Given these changes, I have amended my initial variance request and transmit the amendment to as
Attachment 2.
It is believed that with these changes and the additional data to be provided that the proposed variance
request should be acceptable. If you have any reason to believe that there are other issues to be resolved
before a variance is granted, please identify those issues for me so they can be rapidly resolved.
1 of 2 6/26/01-
f'j ://Nntitle
Sincerely,
George R. Couranz
111 Brigham St 28C
Hudson, MA 01749
RCouranz @ aol.com
508-490-1526 (office)
Attachment 1: Septic Permit dated 8/11/99 identifying Section 404 Wetlands.
Attachment 2: Revision 1, Variance Request Form - for Minor Variances
Name: Variance Application Amendment.doc
Variance Application Amendment.doc Type: Microsoft Word Document (application/msword)
Encoding: base64
Download Status: Not downloaded with message
2 of 2 6/26/012:05 Plv
Revision 1, 22 June,2001
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Variance Request Form - for Minor Variances
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rules
NOTE. This form may be photocopied for use as an original.
Please identify which Riparian Area Protection Rule applies.
? Neuse River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rule (15A NCAC.0233)
? Tar-Pamlico River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management
Strategy Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rule (15A
NCAC.0259)
Part 1: General Information
(Please include attachments if the room provided is insufficient.)
1. Applicant's name (the corporation, individual, etc. who owns the property):
George R and Michele M. Couranz
2. Print Owner/Signing Official (person legally responsible for the property and its compliance)
Name: George R Couranz
Title: Owner
Street address: 111 Brigham St 28C
City, State, Zip: Hudson, MA 01749
Telephone: 508) - 490-1526 (Office)
Fax: 978) - 568-0803 (Home)
3. Contact person who can answer questions about the proposed project:
Name: George R. Couranz
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
4. Project Name (Subdivision, facility, or establishment name - consistent with project name on
plans, specifications, letters, operation and maintenance agreements, etc.):
Couranz Residence, Bell Point Subdivision, Lot 16
Merritt, NC
Version 1: February 2000
5. Project Location:
Street address: Lot 16, Point of View Drive
City, State, Zip: Merritt, 28515
County: Pamlico
Latitude/longitude: 35N 09' 44", 76W 39' 01
6. Directions to site from nearest major intersection (Also, attach an 8'/2 x 11 copy of the USGS
topographic map indicating the location of the site):
Take Route 55 out of Bayboro toward Oriental until you reach State Road (SR) 1324 in
Merritt (a left turn). Take SR1324 East to Bell Point Road (SR 1330, a left turn).. Take Bell
Point Road to the Bell Point Subdivision where the main road is Point of View Drive. Go to
the end of Point of View Drive to Lot 16 as shown in the attached drawing (Figure 1).
7. Stream to be impacted by the proposed activity:
Stream name (for unnamed streams label as "UT' to the nearest named stream):
Bay River and Rice's Creek
Stream classification [as identified within the Schedule of Classifications 15A NCAC 2B
.0315 (Neuse) or.0316 (Tar-Pamlico)]:
8. Which of the following permits/approvals will be required or have been received already for
this project?
Required: Received: Date received: Permit Type:
CAMA Major
1 April 2001 CAMA Minor
401 Certification/404 Permit
On-site Wastewater Permit
_ NPDES Permit (including stormwater)
Non-discharge Permit
Water Supply Watershed Variance
Others (specify)
Part 2: Proposed Activity
(Please include attachments if the room provided is insufficient.)
1. Description of proposed activity [Also, please attach a map of sufficient detail (such as a plat
map or site plan) to accurately delineate the boundaries of the land to be utilized in carrying
out the activity, the location and dimension of any disturbance in the riparian buffers
associated with the activity, and the extent of riparian buffers on the land. Include the area
of buffer impact in ft2.]:
Construction of a primary residence that impacts buffer Zone 2. The buffer impact totals 183
sq ft for the residence. The associated septic system is outside the buffer zone.
Variance Request Form, page 2
Version 1: February 2000
2. State reasons why this plan for the proposed activity cannot be practically accomplished,
reduced or reconfigured to better minimize or eliminate disturbance to the riparian buffers:
The attached plan shows the existing reduced footprint location from a more desirable
location closer to the water. The reduced footprint location is a major change from the more
desired location. Originally the house would have been 51' from the water whereas in the
proposed siting it is 175' from the water. The original Zone 1 impact would have been 491 sq
ft and Zone 2 impact of 1246 sq ft for a total of 1737 sq ft. The proposed location footprint is
only 183 sq ft or 10.5% of the original site. The proposed location removes the septic
drainbed entirely from Zone 1.
3. Description of any best management practices to be used to control impacts associated with
the proposed activity (i.e., control of runoff from impervious surfaces to provide diffuse flow,
re-planting vegetation or enhancement of existing vegetation, etc.):
It is proposed that after construction, approximately 12 low growing shrubs would be planted
along the tip of the south marsh providing protection of the marsh line.
4. Please provide an explanation of the following:
(1) The practical difficulties or hardships that would result from the strict application of this
Rule.
Moving the planned site away from the water has reduced the footprint of the house in Zone
2. The siting difficulty for the house is mainly caused by the finger of marsh area penetrating
into the property from the south. The house has been positioned just behind the top of the
marsh to minimize ingress into the buffer zones.A drain bed site originally specified by the
county government for the septic system to be largely in Zone 1 has been repositioned totally
outside the buffer zone.
(2) How these difficulties or hardships result from conditions that are unique to the property
involved.
The finger of marsh as described in 4(1) above basically cuts the building lot into two parts.
This feature makes siting the house on the lot difficult but the Zone 1 and 2 restrictions make
locating the house on the more desirable water side location impossible.
(3) If economic hardship is the major consideration, then include a specific explanation of the
economic hardships and the proportion of the hardship to the entire value of the project.
N/A
Part 3: Deed Restrictions
By your signature in Part 5 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.
Variance Request Form, page 3
Version 1: February 2000
Part 4: 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): None at this time
Mailing address:
City, State, Zip:
Telephone:
Fax:
Email:
Part 5: Applicant's Certification
I, George R Couranz (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: /s/ George R Couranz
Date of Amendment: June 26, 2001
Title: Owner
Variance Request Form, page 4
Version 1: February 2000
PL. Sl BO3 'L
bq
Q
U)
El
N
U
N
b
Q
c?
N
ti
O
x
w
'O
0
0
0
N
21,
co
7
.Q
d
LL.
c
0
E2
2? ' ?/ddyJ
S S
LA Ln
L L
d d
5-
2-
E £
O O
L L
4- 4-
o
M U')

S
N
L
S
Ln
L
d
b
N
b4
\ cE
W
1 °°
q
N
y
O
x
N
N
bA
w

c
no
E? o
0
O CV
LL ?
.. O
y 3
d i
3 ?
O
N LL
..
CC
N r
U c
c O
cri .N
C ..
M am
s s
N
i i
O ?
£ E
X 4 ?
o °
v
3
0
N
r X
s
S m
0 i xH
i n?
6
E E ¢H _
E o ;aC
_ co M ? --wry
N . I w
R!
J? M
i.
x W
N
c
co
Q. O
E O
O N
LL ?,
.. cc
N O
L
cD LL
cc ..
a>
U C
C O
co
co m
Attachment 1, Septic Permit
Subject: Attachment 1, Septic Permit
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 11:55:50 EDT
From: [e-mail]
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Please see attached file
Name: Septic Permit.jpg
Type: JPEG Image (image/jpeg)
?. Septic Permit.tn Encoding: base64
Download Status: Not downloaded with message!
1 of 1 6/26/01 1:27 PTY
% bI X?9\ -?,, I Y A 0- erao " :t,?

State of North Carolina
J Vv
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Variance Request For - for Minor Variances
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rules
NOTE: This form may be photocopied for use as an original.
Please identify which Riparian Area Protection Rule applies.
5?j5?DI
u Neuse River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management Strategy
Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rule (15A NCAC .0233)
u Tar-Pamlico River Basin: Nutrient Sensitive Waters Management
Strategy Protection and Maintenance of Riparian Areas Rule (15A
NCAC.0259)
Part 1: General Information
(Please include attachments if the room provided is insufficient.)
1. Applicant's name (the corporation, individual, etc. who owns the property):
George R and Michele M. Couranz
2. Print Owner/Signing Official (person legally responsible for the property and its compliance)
Name: George R Couranz
Title: Owner
Street address: 111 Brigham St 28C
City, State, Zip: Hudson, MA 01749
Telephone: 508) - 490-1526 (Office)
Fax: (978) - 568-0803 (Home)
3. Contact person who can answer questions about the proposed project:
Name: George R. Couranz
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
4. Project Name (Subdivision, facility, or establishment name - consistent with project name on
plans, specifications, letters, operation and maintenance agreements, etc.):
Couranz Residence, Bell Point Subdivision, Lot 16
Merritt, NC
Version 1: February 2000

5. Project Location:
Street address: Lot 16, Point of View Drive
City, State, Zip: Merritt, 28515
County: Pamlico
Latitude/longitude: 35N 09'44", 76W 39'01"
6. Directions to site from nearest major intersection (Also, attach an 8'l2 x 11 copy of the USGS
topographic map indicating the location of the site):
Take Route 55 out of Bayboro toward Oriental until you reach State Road (SR) 1324 in
Merritt (a left turn). Take SR1324 East to Bell Point Road (SR 1330, a left turn).. Take Bell
Point Road to the Bell Point Subdivision where the main road is Point of View Drive. Go to
the end of Point of View Drive to Lot 16 as shown in the attached drawing (Figure 1).
7. Stream to be impacted by the proposed activity:
Stream name (for unnamed streams label as "UT" to the nearest named stream):
Bay River and Rice's Creek
Stream classification [as identified within the Schedule of Classifications 15A NCAC 2B
.0315 (Neuse) or.0316 (Tar-Pamlico)]:
8. Which of the following permits/approvals will be required or have been received already for
this project?
Required: Received: Date received: Permit Type:
CAMA Major
1 April 2001 CAMA Minor
401 Certification/404 Permit
On-site Wastewater Permit
NPDES Permit (including stormwater)
Non-discharge Permit
Water Supply Watershed Variance
Others (specify)
Part 2: Proposed Activity
(Please include attachments if the room provided is insufficient.)
Description of proposed activity [Also, please attach a map of sufficient detail (such as a plat
map or site plan) to accurately delineate the boundaries of the land to be utilized in carrying
out the activity, the location and dimension of any disturbance in the riparian buffers
associated with the activity, and the extent of riparian buffers on the land. Include the area
of buffer impact in ft2 J:
Construction of a primary residence and associated septic system. The buffer impact totals
343 sq ft for the residence and 1658 sq ft for the septic system. The Zone 1 impact of the
residence is 0 sq ft and is 281 sq ft for the septic system. The Zone 2 footprint is 343 sq ft for
the residence and 1377 sq ft for the septic system.
Variance Request Form, page 2
Version 1: February 2000
2. State reasons why this plan for the proposed activity cannot be practically accomplished,
reduced or reconfigured to better minimize or eliminate disturbance to the riparian buffers:
The attached plan shows the existing reduced footprint location from a more desirable
location closer to the water. The major factor is the septic system footprint that corresponds
to a septic system permit issued in 1999 by the Pamlico County Health Dept.
3. Description of any best management practices to be used to control impacts associated with
the proposed activity (i.e., control of runoff from impervious surfaces to provide diffuse flow,
re-planting vegetation or enhancement of existing vegetation, etc.):
It is proposed that after construction, approximately 30 low growing shrubs be planted along
the northern marsh to provide additional soil control and protection from human traffic.
Additionally, approximately 12 low growing shrubs would be planted along the tip of the south
marsh providing similar protection. Finally, 4 to 5 deciduous trees will be planted in the
approximate locations shown in Figure 2. These trees were planned to allow the tall loblolly
pines to be removed for protection from wind damage and forest fires as recommended by
the North Carolina Forestry Service.
4. Please provide an explanation of the following:
(1) The practical difficulties or hardships that would result from the strict application of this
Rule.
Moving the planned site away from the water has reduced the footprint of the house in Zone
2. The siting difficulty for the house is mainly caused by the finger of marsh area penetrating
into the property from the south. The house has been positioned just behind the top of the
marsh to minimize ingress into the buffer zones. However, the drain bed for the septic system
has been defined by the Pamlico County Health Dept and it is largely within Zones 1 and 2
(Zone 1: 281 sq ft; Zone 2: 1377 sq ft). A variance is needed to provide for both the house
and the drain site. The drain site specified by the county government is required for the
construction of the house.
(2) How these difficulties or hardships result from conditions that are unique to the property
involved.
The finger of marsh as described in 4(1) above basically cuts the building lot into two parts.
This feature makes siting the house on the lot difficult but the Zone 1 and 2 restrictions make
locating the house on the more desirable water side location impossible. This problem is
further compounded by the fact that the septic drain bed location is in the area between the
top of the south marsh and the marsh on the north boundary of the lot.
(3) If economic hardship is the major consideration, then include a specific explanation of the
economic hardships and the proportion of the hardship to the entire value of the project.
N/A
Part 3: Deed Restrictions
By your signature in Part 5 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.
Variance Request Form, page 3
Version 1: February 2000
Part 4: 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): None at this time
Mailing address:
City, State, Zip:
Telephone:
Fax:
Email
Part 5: Applicant's Certification
I, George R Couranz (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: /s/ George R Couranz
Date: 5 March 2001
Title: Owner
Variance Request Form, page 4
Version 1: February 2000
PL. P, SL. 80-7
.S
o:
„ tee/ _ ?rx "s, a
?A
n
?a

s
a
a?

0
0
0
x

w
J,
vr\
.r
0
Q
O
N
fr6
L
N
LL
c
0
L

1
it
N
11-1
LD
CQ
C
Gz7
bA
C
V
d
\1\ Vf
Ri
1
a
x
N
6>
L
O
CA
W

(D
N
CY)
f6
CL O
O
O N
LL
Co
M 7
N ?-
7 ?
Q L
N LL
N `-
U C
C O
.U)
m O
S
S L
U) i
i C5
C5

E £

O
O ,
i i

X
• tl
f
Z\ N ?
0
J
X
os
t 3
ni
C
C
R3
a
y
0
a
11 a
M
L
1 ?

I-
c
Q 0
O
ON
LL Z
Q) f0
N ?
3D
60
N LL
ct ..
N ?
U C
C O
? .N
f6 d
Couranz: Near Merritt, Pamlico Co.
`b 3
11�
Al
• :�
rIi �
sn

GEORGE& MICHEL_ COURANZ
Owner. v PROVEMENT PERMIT
Owner Address 111BRIGHAM STREET; 28. VALID INDEFINITELY
Owner Addrress(2):HUDSON ' MA 01749
Owner Phone #:[phone]
Property Addrew:486 POINT VIEW DRIVE - MERRITT
Property Address(2):BELL POINT SID, LOT# 16
PIN:K05-8-1AA6
Record #42052
Establishrttent Type:HOME
Type of WeU:PUBLIC
Design Flow (GPD):360
- AN AUTHORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT MUST BE OBTAINED AND
Initial Site ALL FEES PAID PRIOR To WASTEWATER SYSTEM INSTALLATION
Type of Wastewater System:Converrtional Perforated Pipe
Long Term Acceptance Rate(GPDfSQFT):0.4 THE PAMLICO CO. HEALTH DEPARTMENT RESERVES THE RIGHT
Trenc
Trench Spacing h 3F(OC):9 FT T TO REVOKE THIS PERMIT IF THE SITE IS ALTERED, INTENDED Septic Tank Volume:1 e:1000 GAL USE CHANGED, .ORANY INFORMATION IS FALSIFIED.
..
ANY CHANGES TO THIS PERMIT WILL REQUIRE A REDESIGN PERMIT
Raped' Site AND SUBSEQUENT. FEE.
Type of Wastewater System:Chambered System
Long Terre Acceptance Rate(GPD%SQFT):0.4
Trench Width:3 FT
Trench Spacing (CC)-9 FT
Septic Tank Volume:1000 GAL
125.00 feet
i
I
1:1500
w?
HOUSE L OCAT ION oanol. !500'
N 65. 4S 2r.
/ HOU
255' " E 4?
0 ` x'S' !
1 0-

. S?•,
5.live" E
44u"`r??O
0
'a Cp4
ti Authorized Agent:
cif
JJ
cow PW
S2e•3S•MS"w
69.46'
zo, e,
WILLARD WALTER COLE III, RS
OPTION
S2.9041026
' t53,4g•
S Il• a5' Q2~
X00,19'
Date 8/19/99
PlN:K05-8-1A 46 GRAVITY FED SYSTEM
Record #:42052 (Not to Scale)
Line Length:75'
Number of Lines:4
Side View
Supply Line Lateral (Maximum fall of 1- on 40 ft)
(Minimum fall of 1° in 8 feet)
Ef9uwd Fier
Distribution Box Nitrification Field
Septic Tank
CONVENTIONAL PERFORATED PIPE
PW:KO5-844-16 WITH SHALLOW PLACEMENT
Record #:42052 (Not to Scale)
Line Length:75'
Number oftines:4
Sectional View
4 (or 5) inch perforated pipe with
three 1 /2 (or 3/4) inch diameter holes
on 4 inch centers along length of pipe
6 inches of soil cover -
2 inches of crushed Ground Surface
rock over pipe
NATIVE SOIL
6 inches of crushed
rock under pipe
36-
9 feet
12 " except in sand where 1 Ware required from seasonal high wetness condition
Soil with unsuitable properties
-Rock Size #'s 3,4,5,5.7 or 6 of ASTM D-448
PINX05-8-1A 16 . GRAVITY FED SYSTEM
Record #:42052 (Not to Scale)
Line Length:75'
Number of Lines:3
Side View
Supply Line Lateral (Maximum fall of 1' on 40 -ft)
(Minimum fall of 1" in 8 feet)
OR...t Flter ?l
Distribution Box Nit ication Fieid
Septic Tank
SHEET ?OF
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT. PROPERTY :
HEALTH & NATURAL RESOURCES DATE:
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH COUNTY:
SOIL SITE EVALUATION FOR
ON-SITE VASTEWATER I'STEM
APPLICANT: OWNER AGENT: PHONS:
ADDRESS: APPLICATION( DATE: DATE EVALUATED g-fa_gg
A Le ?,- 'W101 O/ 7Y9 PROPOSED FACILITY: ??e
PROPERTY.SIZE: 315
LOCATION OF SITE:
WATER SUPPLY: On-site Well Comm. Well Public er EVAL. METHOD: Auger Bonn g &,--Fj-t Cut_
.194a .1941

PROFILE
s LANOSCP
fOSJ
SLOPE(%) HORIZON
DEPTH
IIN.I (3)(1) (a)(2) (a)(3)?
TEXTURE STRUCTURE HIREROLOGT/.
COHSISTEHCE
MATRIX MOTTLE
COLOR COLOR

OTHER PROFILE FACTORS

X

C?

I -/ I

+ 'SL

f'' O a/

G/y ?

f .1942 Wetness
Cord. . ???
I .1943 Oepth/.1956 Sapr.. .
1944 R
t
i
iv

???"?'p??
a 0
I
+?
t S(- '
i, S
I ?G'G
F y•
/ h' I
51
I
(
?iZ1 .
es
r
ct
e Hari. -
.1948 Profile Cass. PS
Profile LIAR . D•(?

I !I I +I !! I .1942 Wetness Cord. -

l I ( I I .1943 Deoth/.1956 Sao . . /.1
i I I I I .1944 Restrictive Hari. - S
I I I I .1948 Profile Class.
I I
1 Profile LTAR O C?
1 I I .1942 ;:etness Cond. -

S 1 .1943 Death/.1956 Saor. -
3 1 ! I .1944 Restrictive Hori. -

.1948 Profile class. -
Profile LTAR -
{ I t - .1942 Wetness Cond. -
I
I .1943 Depth/.1956 Sapr. -
.1944 testrietive Hari. -
I ( .1948 Profile Class. -

Profile LUIR -
AVAILABLE SPACE (.1945) ,> OTH=-?Li-ACTORS (1940 X* SiTLCLASSMICATiON (.19<E)
SYS', ref TYPE Q 271e) ? LONG-iSRhACCEPTANCE RATE(S)
E'1ALUATHD BY: OTHER (S) PRES'ehT:__
C0MMB.N'TS: Svs 1 ? z? ?,a?a !?yl G? rtG?

NOTE:
TMw aawMg r o..ma lorR•rnlnuypr.ip o,a r ose. aaepl.Y.
deemptlon df ft k* r±own H r nee ar sub*mm a..olpUOn It Is W
tom aoeidatlon, wpww1unm or tbrt 4 1, S•w wubdmWm pa and
rwwblaM eor.n.ne. for tuth•r F u,
'3t
N6
255 958 E
N 57•'6 33 G
h P.
S 29. 41' 28' W
153.46'
05, .79?" W
S 02 • O3• S !!•!00
04"
E ..
25-14-
4
7
es. g4. '
43,00 E -, 4174.8 44„ W
68. g5
S3l•14'4'E S 5
53 e .0 28. 38'55** W
69.46'
0 150 300 450 600
GRAPHIC SCALE
Bell Point
Lot #16
No. 2 Township
Pamlico County
Legend.
- - - Marsh Line
WL 404 Wetlands