32932_ADAMS, JOHN_20021121

❑ C,AMA / ❑ DREDGE & FILL
GE IN EERAL PERMIT Previous p rmit #
New C-Modification ❑Complete Reissue ❑Partial Reissue Date previous permit issued
As authorized by the State of North Carolina, Department of Environment and Natural Resources
and the Coastal Resources Commission in an area of environmental concern pursuant to 15A NCAC
❑ Rules attached.
Applicant Name
Address
City
Phone # ( )
Authorized Agent
Affected Ll CW
AEC(s): ElOEA
❑ PWS:
ORW: yes / no
State
Fax # ( )
❑ EW C' PTA
C HHF ❑ IH
FC:
PNA yes / no
ZIP
F] ES G PTS
❑ UBA ❑ N/A
Crit. Hab. yes / no
Project Location: County
Street Address/ State Road/ Lot #(s)
Subdivision (hr i ; /l
City__. ZIP
Phone # (). - River Basin
Adj. Wtr. Body_ 0 , 1 / i t , J, r d (nat man unkn
Closest Maj. Wtr. Body_ —__+
0 mom MEMO HIMM
MEMEMEMEMEM
ME
NOMMEEM
NONE
In
MOMMEME
ONOM
ME
=
ME
ONE
�&Ml
a
E
MM=
..ON
MEMBLEM
mmossom■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ems■■
CNN■■■■!,■■■■■■■1■■■■I�■■■
Age or Ap Printed am
Signature Please read compliance statement on back of permit
*
ory) r-L it �� ,7n
Application Fee(s) Check #
[--Permit Officer's Sign re
Issuing DatT Lv J Expiration Date
Local Planning)urisdiction Rover File Name

Statement of Compliance and Consistency
This permit is subject to compliance with this application, site drawing and attached general and specific conditions. Any
violation of these terms may subject the permittee to a fine or criminal or civil action; and may cause the permit to become
null and void.
This permit must be on the project site and accessible to the permit officer when the project is inspected for compliance. The
applicant certifies by signing this permit that 1) prior to undertaking any activities authorized by this permit, the applicant will
confer with appropriate local authorities to confirm that this project is consistent with the local land use plan and all local
ordinances, and 2) a written statement or certified mail return receipt has been obtained from the adjacent riparian
landowner(s) .
The State of North Carolina and the Division of Coastal Management, in issuing this permit under the best available
information and belief, certify that this project is consistent with the North Carolina Coastal Management Program.
River Basin Rules Applicable To Your Project:
❑ Tar - Pamlico River Basin Buffer Rules ❑ Other:
euse River Basin Buffer Rules
If indicated on front of permit, your project is subject to the Environmental Management Commission's Buffer Rules for the
River Basin checked above due to its location within that River Basin. These buffer rules are enforced by the NC Division of
Water Quality. Contact the Division of Water Quality at the Washington Regional Office (252-946-6481) or the Wilmington
Regional Office (910-395-3900) for more information on how to comply with thesebuffer rules.
Division of Coastal Management Offices
Central Office
Mailing Address:
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638
Location:
Parker -Lincoln Building
2728 Capital Blvd.
Raleigh, NC 27604
919-733-2293 / 1-888-4RCOAST
Fax: [phone]
Elizabeth City District
1367 U.S. 17 South
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
252-264-3901
Fax: [phone]
(Serves: Camden, Chowan, Currituck,
Dare, Gates, Pasquotank and Perquimans
Counties)
Morehead City District
151-B Hwy. 24
Hestron Plaza II
Morehead City, NC 28557
202-808-2808
Fax: [phone]
(Serves: Carteret, Craven, Onslow -above
New River Inlet- and Pamlico Counties)
Washington District
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
252-946-6481
Fax: [phone]
(Serves: Beaufort, Bertie, Hertford, Hyde,
Tyrrell and Washington Counties)
Wilmington District
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
910-395-3900
Fax: [phone]
(Serves: Brunswick, New Hanover,
Onslow -below New River Inlet- and
Pender Counties)
www.nccoastaimanagement.net
Revised 10/05/01

JOHN H. ADAMS 6?43Zq3Z
JUDITH G. ADAMS
6116 CASTLETON CT 252-637 6158
NEW BERN, NC 28560
PAY"TOTt ►I, C 4,
ORDER of
GENERALELECTRIC D
EMPLOYEE ES FEDERALL CREDIT
UNION
10485 READING ROAD CINCINNATI. OH 45241
FOR
-:7) ( 1: 2 L. 20 7 GIB 2 Ll: L00000 5 6 5000IV?0
5720
13-7682/2420
Q Z DXFE
Z$ % U0

'07/26/02 13:38 FAX
0
Zoo
TO: Tracey Wheeler (Cams)
Fax#: [phone]
Date: July 26, 2002
Page#: 4
From: Foley & Foley (Sandy)
Phone#: [phone]
Customer Work Sheet
/Ck Yl av � ce
Customer Name: John Adams Date: July 26.2002
Mailing Address: 6116 Castleton Ct. New .Bern. NC 28560
Job Address: Fairfied Harbour Phone:[phone]
Adjacent Property Owners
Left Side: Lemons Right Side: OttinQer
Job Type Deserirytion
Bulkhead
Dock/Walkway
Platform end of dock
Boathouse
Boatlift/jet ski
Piling Set (4) Him (Drawing Attached)
Ramp/Jetty.
Dredge
Rip Rap_

61! L Am cT,
G,1544i N.C.
iiffw
S17Lr� GtA�lc
I
w
co
N 1
O
N
CD c41 cis+ FT.,
I.o r 3ff rFc ,r
ffy o. iv csr
V0. rQ co J VI 2.
,u ram, ZCA40
�u C.
,?Fka
IF
CIO
07rt - 4„Ti- ova,
PL

07/26/02 13:38 FAX
(1 22; u2 117: "_J FAX
9M
r
- La'Slr - \rd1 _ t a-i,
ADJECINT RIPARIAN PROPERTY OWNER s-rATFMI✓N'T
(FOR A III I:R/11 GORING t'II..INC;/rl0ATl IrMBOATTIOUSP.)
I hrrchv certify dim I nivn Property adjacenl tol"J.'_,A.owt1
PI Opel ty la" sled al iWl i, -CAt?Ld1.> -o - ceT AoTie i Ee r FF/a
(1.n PI:A Rn,rl ev..' .
He has decrided tO MP, n.9 clln«•n hclnw, life develnllmenl he is ProposinLc at dim lorallrin and. I
hnvc no nhjer.tions In his prorrs,f 1 unde.rsland thal a pie(hnoolnlg 1111,ngN(ollill/boatlinose
mull be act hack minimum dislan,�v of fifteen feel i 15') from my mca of riparian ac.cetis unless
waived by me
_ I U0 1101 v!Ic11 to ivoivc vllr rrlhack rrc1111rPlnenl.
I do -i3h dial crrl,al•k rnrltlll'Cn5C111
f YPSCIMI I ION AND/OR DRAWING OF PROPOSED UG�11.L.U1'hII .Nl
(Tn he filled ll1 h,. lndrt idnil proliming developmeal)
64"
47T
z6w7_
1-
� • ._l.�i� �� / • _�U�s ������ -1- L cal ro tit s
1�ICt Trl,,. t'!.111)C
N,
- 7�-
�1fltpllullC fllllnh�l
Llal
t rrlr, & f1if1r� f r,l,Ir:,rlrlr�

07/26/02 13:38 F.AT [a04
f J UL - 1. 200;1 15, F'i I'_ DWI 412 762 6946 P.01 •01
AL)JF-CENT RIPARIAN PROPERTY OWNER STATEMENT
(FOR A rIRKNOORINCI PTI_1NGA30ATLIFT/BOATi(OUSr)
1 hereby certify That t nwn property adjRcenf Io,T ..d—Is
Property Iscated
He Nu decrided to n1e, nc Shawn below, the developmem he Is proposhiS at that location, and, 1
have no objections to his proposal, 1 understand that a pier/rmmrina piling/boxfli"oathouse
must be Set back minimum distance of fifteen feet 1
# (51 ROlr lhy area Ornparian ACCC<E Un1C.fs
waived by me.
_ 1 rla not wioh It' wnrvc yhc Whack r¢gnirevnem.
1 Ag wiirh to waive that Setback requirement,
'M DESCRIPTION AND/OR DF AWING Or, NItOP05Fr) UpV1�1.01'MI'.Nl'
( To be filled in by holvidual pnWrulne dcvelaptnent)
Sew a77T
I r fI
FRQ3--prrl
Print or Typc Nnnic
7Z-�-
7atePl�onC Nlnhbcr
Date , /Q2
role} k r-n10r CfmlrlClpr%
TOTnL P.Al

L]
•.v J � u LVCi
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA BEFORE THE NORTH CA ROLINA
COASTAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
COUNTY OF CRAVEN CRC VR 02-16
IN THE MATTER OF: )
PETITION FOR VARIANCE ) FINAL ORDER
BY JOHN ADAMS )
This matter was heard on oral arguments and stipulated facts at the regularly scheduled
meeting of the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission (hereinafter CRC) on October 23,
2002, in Wilmington, North Carolina pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 113A-120.1 and T 15A NCAC 7J.0700,
et sea. Assistant Attorney General Meredith Jo Alcoke appeared for the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Coastal Management; Petitioner John Adams did
not appear.
Upon consideration"of the record documents and the arguments of the parties, the CRC
adopts the following:
FINDING OF FACTS
1. Petitioner owns a developed residential lot at 6116 Castleton Court in Fairfield
Harbour, near New Bern in Craven County.
2. The lot is adjacent to a canal leading to Spring Creek and is bulkheaded along 90 feet
of shoreline.
3. The lot is bounded by four unimproved properties on either side.
4. A 4.5-foot wide by 20-foot long dock exists adjacent to the bulkhead. A single-family
residence is located on the lot.
5. The waters of this basin have been classified SB Sw NSW ("nutrient sensitive
waters") by the Division of Water Quality and are not open to the harvest of shellfish.

6. The proposed development is located in the Estuarine and Public Trust Waters Areas
of Environmental Concern (AECs).
7. Petitioner's lot is located in the Estuarine Shoreline AEC. It is situated on a canal,
is bulk -headed, and is generally not subject to severe erosion and flooding. The bulkhead alignment
defines the normal water level on the shoreline.
8. Approximately 60% of the lots on the canal have docks that extend to one-third the
width of the canal. Many of these are downstream of the applicant's property.
9. The canal is 60 feet wide at the project site.
10. The canal is the narrowest canal in Fairfield Harbour. At the time the canal was
excavated and most of the properties developed, structures were allowed to extend to one-third the
width of the waterbody under the CRC's rules.
11. Petitioner requested a CAMA General Permit to install four mooring pilings offshore
from the existing dock. The proposed pilings would extend 20 feet waterward of the existing
bulkhead alignment, or 15.5 feet waterward of the edge of the dock.
12. The purpose of the mooring pilings is to allow Petitioner to safely moor his 35-foot
boat which has a 12-foot beam.
13. The proposed structures could not be approved under a CAMA General Permit
because the CAMA General Permit for docks, piers, and boathouses does not allow pier length to
exceed one-fourth the width of the water body under current rules. 15A NCAC 7H .1205.
14. At this site, one-fourth the width of the canal is 15 feet.
15. The Commission amended its pier length rules in 1998 to change the one-third
standard to a one -quarter rule except in certain circumstances (when the proposed pier is located
between longer piers within 200 feet of the applicant's property).

16. The CRC's rule regarding pier length provides that "Pier length shall be limited by:
(i) not extending beyond the established pier length along the same shoreline for similar use; (This
restriction shall not apply to piers 100 feet or less in length unless necessary to avoid unreasonable
interference with navigation or other uses of the waters by the public); (ii) not extending into the
channel portion of the water body; and (iii) not extending more than one-fourth the width of a
natural water body, or human -made canal or basin ... The one-fourth length limitation shall not
apply when the proposed pier is located between longer piers within 200 feet of the applicant's
property. However, the proposed pier cannot be longer than the pier head line established by the
adjacent piers, nor longer than 1/3 the width of the water body." 15A NCAC 7H .0208(b)(6)(J).
17. To the northwest, the next dock is more than 200 feet away. It is approximately 240
feet from Petitioner's property. The dock's outermost mooring pilings extend to one-third the width
of the water body.
18. To the southeast, the next dock is located approximately 100 feet away. The dock's
outermost mooring pilings also extend to one-third the width of the water body.
19. In this case, the one -quarter rule must apply because Petitioner's pier is not located
between longer piers within 200 feet of his property. Petitioner would therefore be allowed under
the rules to construct the mooring pilings 15 feet from the bulkhead alignment.
20. In this case, the difference between the one-third rule and the one -quarter rule is 5
feet.
21. As a part of the major permit process, Petitioner provided notification to adjacent
riparian property owners, each of whom stated that they had no objection to the proposal.
22. Petitioner filed this variance request on August 12, 2002, seeking relief from
application of the one -quarter rile in 15A NCAC 7H .0208(b)(6)(J) and 15A NCAC 7H.1205(m).

Petitioner seeks permission to build out to 20 feet, approximately one-third the width of the
waterbody.
Based on the foregoing Stipulated Facts, the Coastal Resources Commission makes the
following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The CRC has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter.
2. The parties have been correctly designated.
3. All notices for the proceeding were adequate and proper.
4. The Commission concludes that the Petitioner has demonstrated that strict application
of 15A NCAC 7H .0208(b)(6)(J) and 15A NCAC 7H.1205(m) to Petitioner's permit application
will result in unnecessary hardships. The Petitioner's variance request materials and the staff
recommendation are incorporated by reference as support for this conclusion.
5. The Commission concludes that the Petitioner has demonstrated that Petitioner's
hardship results from conditions peculiar to the project property. The Petitioner's variance request
materials and the staff recommendation are incorporated by reference as support for this conclusion.
6. The Commission concludes that the Petitioner has demonstrated that Petitioner's
hardship does not result from actions taken by Petitioner. The Petitioner's variance request
materials and the staff recommendation are incorporated by reference as support for this conclusion.
7. The Commission concludes that the Petitioner has demonstrated that Petitioner's
proposed development is within the spirit, purpose and intent of the Commission's rules; that it will
secure public safety and welfare; and that it will preserve substantial justice. The Petitioner's
variance request materials and the staff recommendation are incorporated by reference as support
for this conclusion.

ORDER
THEREFORE, the petition for vari:. _--c from 15A NCAC 7H .0208(b)(6)(J) and 15A NCAC
7H.1205(m) is GRANTED as requested.
This the ` 4-k day of QSoJeet', her , 2002.
EugeVe B. Tomlinson, Jr., Chairman
Coastal Resources Commission

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I have caused the foregoing Final Order to be served upon the
Petitioner by depositing a copy thereof in the U.S. Postal Service with sufficient postage for
delivery by first class mail and addressed to:
John Adams
6116 Castleton Court
New Bern, NC 28560
h
This the - day of ,�•,,►�.r , 2002.
ijv
es P. Longest, Jr.
Special Deputy Attorney General
N.C. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602-0629
[phone]

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA
COASTAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
COUNTY OF CRAVEN CRC VR 02-16
IN THE MATTER OF: )
PETITION FOR VARIANCE ) FINAL ORDER
BY JOHN ADAMS )
This matter was heard on oral arguments and stipulated facts at the regularly scheduled
meeting of the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission (hereinafter CRC) on October 23,
2002, in Wilmington, North Carolina pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 113A-120.1 and T15A NCAC 7J.0700,
et sea. Assistant Attorney General Meredith Jo Alcoke appeared for the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Coastal Management; Petitioner John Adams did
not appear.
eS k d�J
Upon consideration of the record documents and the arguments of the parties, the CRC
adopts the following:
FINDING OF FACTS
1. Petitioner owns a developed residential lot at 6116 Castleton Court in Fairfield
Harbour, near New Bern in Craven County.
2. The lot is adjacent to a canal leading to Spring Creek and is bulkheaded along 90 feet
of shoreline.
3. The lot is bounded by four unimproved properties on either side.
4. A 4.5-foot wide by 20-foot long dock exists adjacent to the bulkhead. A single-family
residence is located on the lot.
5. The waters of this basin have been classified SB Sw NSW ("nutrient sensitive
waters") by the Division of Water Quality and are not open to the harvest of shellfish.

6. The proposed development is located in the Estuarine and Public Trust Waters Areas
of Environmental Concern (AECs).
7. Petitioner's lot is located in the Estuarine Shoreline AEC. It is situated on a canal,
is bulkheaded, and is generally not subject to severe erosion and flooding. The bulkhead alignment
defines the normal water level on the shoreline.
8. Approximately 60% of the lots on the canal have docks that extend to one-third the
width of the canal. Many of these are downstream of the applicant's property.
9. The canal is 60 feet wide at the project site.
10. The canal is the narrowest canal in Fairfield Harbour. At the time the canal was
excavated and most of the properties developed, structures were allowed to extend to one-third the
width of the waterbody under the CRC's rules.
11. Petitioner requested a CAMA General Permit to install four mooring pilings offshore
from the existing dock. The proposed pilings would extend 20 feet waterward of the existing
bulkhead alignment, or 15.5 feet waterward of the edge of the dock.
12. The purpose of the mooring pilings is to allow Petitioner to safely moor his 35-foot
boat which has a 12-foot beam.
13. The proposed structures could not be approved under a CAMA General Permit
because the CAMA General Permit for docks, piers, and boathouses does not allow pier length to
exceed one-fourth the width of the water body undercurrent rules. 15A NCAC 7H .1205.
14. At this site, one-fourth the width of the canal is 15 feet.
15. The Commission amended its pier length rules in 1998 to change the one-third
standard to a one -quarter rule except in certain circumstances (when the proposed pier is located
between longer piers within 200 feet of the applicant's property).

16. The CRC's rule regarding pier length provides that "Pier length shall be limited by:
(i) not extending beyond the established pier length along the same shoreline for similar use; (This
restriction shall not apply to piers 100 feet or less in length unless necessary to avoid unreasonable
interference with navigation or other uses of the waters by the public); (ii) not extending into the
channel portion of the water body; and (iii) not extending more than one-fourth the width of a
natural water body, or human -made canal or basin ... The one-fourth length limitation shall not
apply when the proposed pier is located between longer piers within 200 feet of the applicant's
property. However, the proposed pier cannot be longer than the pier head line established by the
adjacent piers, nor longer than 1/3 the width of the water body." 15A NCAC 7H .0208(b)(6)(J).
17. To the northwest, the next dock is more than 200 feet away. It is approximately 240
feet from Petitioner's property. The dock's outermost mooring pilings extend to one-third the width
of the water body.
18. To the southeast, the next dock is located approximately 100 feet away. The dock's
outermost mooring pilings also extend to one-third the width of the water body.
19. In this case, the one -quarter rule must apply because Petitioner's pier is not located
between longer piers within 200 feet of his property. Petitioner would therefore be allowed under
the rules to construct the mooring pilings 15 feet from the bulkhead alignment.
20. In this case, the difference between the one-third rule and the one -quarter rule is 5
feet.
21. As a part of the major permit process, Petitioner provided notification to adjacent
riparian property owners, each of whom stated that they had no objection to the proposal.
22. Petitioner filed this variance request on August 12, 2002, seeking relief from
application of the one -quarter rule in 15A NCAC 7H .0208(b)(6)(J) and 15A NCAC 7H.1205(m).

Petitioner seeks permission to build out to 20 feet, approximately one-third the width of the
waterbody.
Based on the foregoing Stipulated Facts, the Coastal Resources Commission makes the
following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The CRC has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter.
2. The parties have been correctly designated.
3. All notices for the proceeding were adequate and proper.
4. The Commission concludes that the Petitioner has demonstrated that strict application
of 15A NCAC 7H .0208(b)(6)(J) and 15A NCAC 7H.1205(m) to Petitioner's permit application
will result in unnecessary hardships. The Petitioner's variance request materials and the staff
recommendation are incorporated by reference as support for this conclusion.
5. The Commission concludes that the Petitioner has demonstrated that Petitioner's
hardship results from conditions peculiar to the project property. The Petitioner's variance request
materials and the staff recommendation are incorporated by reference as support for this conclusion.
6. The Commission concludes that the Petitioner has demonstrated that Petitioner's
hardship does not result from actions taken by Petitioner. The Petitioner's variance request
materials and the staff recommendation are incorporated by reference as support for this conclusion.
7. The Commission concludes that the Petitioner has demonstrated that Petitioner's
proposed development is within the spirit, purpose and intent of the Commission's rules; that it will
secure public safety and welfare; and that it will preserve substantial justice. The Petitioner's
variance request materials and the staff recommendation are incorporated by reference as support
for this conclusion.

ORDER
THEREFORE, the petition for variance from 15A NCAC 7H .0208(b)(6)(J) and 15A NCAC
7H.1205(m) is GRANTED as requested.
This the ?'N` day of her , 2002.
EugeVe B. Tomlinson, Jr., Chairman
Coastal Resources Commission

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I have caused the foregoing Final Order to be served upon the
Petitioner by depositing a copy thereof in the U.S. Postal Service with sufficient postage for
delivery by first class mail and addressed to:
John Adams
6116 Castleton Court
New Bern, NC 28560
h
This the Yltday of , 2002.
es P. Longest, Jr.
Special Deputy Attorney General
N.C. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602-0629
[phone]

ENVIRONMENTAL
Fax:[phone]
CAMA PERMIT VARIANCE REQUEST
PETMONER'S NAME
'COUNTY
4
FAWLT-19� I
Sep 30 '02 15:43 P.02
ACM FORM 11
Staff Only
DATE RECEIVED
FILE NUMBER
41
Pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 113A-120.1 and 15A North Carolina Administrative
i
Code, 7j Section.0700, the petitioner in this matter applies to the Coastal Resources Commission for
a Variance.
The undersigned states that he or she has received a final decision on an Application for a
-CAMA (check one);
7/Major Development Permit El Minor Development Permit
For this variance request to be complete and processed, the petitioner must provide all of the
ififorniWdEfisted below. The undersigned petitioner verifies that this variance request is
c6thplete and includes:
1. The case name and location of the development as identified on the permit application;
2v-,!,:Afttgplajjatjor, of reasons why the petitioner believes that the Commission should make
be granted. Seo-, arinnee Criteria. Petitioner must
I AniR inecessary f6r a variance to V
idvi 6 comp the three questions presented on this form, and should be able
d' complete responses to
to answer (a) and (b), in the affirmative and (c) in the negative; XA712k j 77'o 40-(
All
3. A copy of the CAMA permit application and official denial for the development in question;
ant
4, The date of the petitipn, and the name, address, and phone number of the petitioner; and
-POP
5. A complete description of the proposed development including a site drawing with adequate
topographical and survey information. r, Mi -D j2&,);, k4aQ -TA iqfr

ENVIRONMENTAL
Fax:[phone] Sep 30 '02 15:43
P. 03
VARIANCE HEARING PROCEDURES
' • �k variance request will be considered by the Cbmtriissiofi ati regularly scheduled meeting_
• Variance petitions will be scheduled no later than the seoo�d regularly scheduled meeting
following the date of receipt of the petition by the Division of Coastal Management, except
when a later meeting is agreed upon by the petitioner and the Division of Coastal
Management.
A complete variance petition, as described below, must be received by the Director of the
Division ,of Coastal Management a minimum of four weeks in advance of a regularly
scheduled Commission meeting to be eligible for consideration by the Commission at that
meeting.
• The stipulated facts upon which the variance is based must be agreed to by the petitioner and
the attorney for the Division of Coastal Management at least two weeks prior to the meeting
at which the variance is heard.
o If stipulated facts are not agreed upon at least two weeks prior to the meeting, the
variance petition must be rescheduled for the next meeting of the Commission.
Therefore, a petitioner is encouraged to submit a complete variance request more
than four weeks in advance of a meeting in order to have the maximum opportunity
to be heard at the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Commission.
51W)Utr -lit
d E$110601ftgtinStgnees, g petition must be heard by means of an administrative hearing -
When there are controverted facts that are significant in determining the propriety of a'
W ki the Nitmissiori determines that more facts are needed due to the extraordinary nature
of a petition; or when the staff determines that agreement cannot be reached on sufficient
.
ots b# to base meaningful decision.
which a variance
.1 'LLB
' �jC.�'IAIYD�Yi7w �,•..

ENVIRONMENTAL
M
Y.^
M
Fax:[phone]
Sep 30 '02 15:44 P.04
VARIANCE CR1 TERJA (If necessary, please attach additional sheets)
When the Commission finds the followine three factors, the Commission may vary or modify the
application of the restnetions to the property $o that the spirit, purpose, and intent ofthe restrictions
are pr es rved;'ptiblic safety and welfare secured, anH'substantial justice presetved. `In Ofitihg a;
variance, the Commission may impose reasonable and appropriate safeguards upon any permit it;:;
issues,` N.C.G.S. § 113A-124.1
(a)
(b)
(c)
Will enforcement of the applicable development guidelines or standards cause the petitioner;,,,
practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships? Identify the difficulties or hardships.
Do such difficulties or hardships result from conditions peculiar to the petitioner's
property? Explain.
Could the Coastal Resources Conurission have reasonably anticipated these conditions when
the applicable guidelines or standards were adopted? Explain.
bile to the Rbove information and pursuant to statute, the undersigned hereby requests a.
variance.
Date 23- I z- o z
Signat4c
Name of
Address
City
itisistfer or Attorney
Co
Telephone Number
StateNC zip a Sri,
Fax Number (if applicable)
This variance request must be served on the Director, Division of Coastal Management, and the Attorney
General's Office, Environmental Division, at the addresses shown on the attached Certificate of Sevice form 1
rf a contested case hearing wilt be requtred to resolve dtsputed facrs, or you want to appeal the permit,
decision instead of or in addition to your Variance Request, a separate Petition fora Contested Case Hearing
mw be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC
z. 27699-6714, as well at with the parties listed on the attached Certificate of Service form.

ENVIRONMENTAL Fax:[phone] Sep 30 '02 15:45 P.05
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that this Variance Request has been served on the State agencies named below
by depositing copies of it witb the United States Postal Service with sufficient postage for
delivery by first class mail or by personally delivering copies to the named agencies.
-Original served on: Director
Division of Coastal Management
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638
and a COPY served on: Attorney Generalts Office
Environmental Division
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602-0629
This the day of 20 �
�,Rtfvlsed, December, 2001

MF
Fax:[phone] Sep 30 '02 15:46
VARIANCE CRITERIA
(a) Difficulties or hardships.
Yes:
(1) Loss or damage to 35' boat due to high winds and water.
Loss of value t future sale al fr
P. 06
F, -perry o can V property.
EY,
(3) Loss of expected recreational use of canal front property.
(4) Dissimilar to other canal properties.
(b) Peculiar Conditions.
Yes-
(1) 6116 Castleton is bounded by four (4) unimproved properties causing the 200
foot rule to come into play.
(2) All, but one, existing canal homes have the desired tie pilings.
(3) Adjacent property owners have given permission to the proposed tie piling
installation.''
c) Anticipated Conditions:
No:
There is no way the Commission could have anticipated the condition were a
sixteen year old property would be bounded by four (4) unimproved canal front
properties.

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
5 August 2002
Mr. John Adams
6116 Castleton Ct.
New Bern, NC 28560
Dear Mr. Adams,
This letter is in reference to our 1 August 2002 onsite meeting regarding your
proposal to install four pilings adjacent to the existing pier on your property at 6116
Castleton Ct. in Fairfield Harbour. Your property is located on a manmade canal off of
Spring Creek in Craven County, near New Bern, North Carolina. You are proposing to
place the pilings 20 feet waterward of the existing bulkhead on your property. This
bulkhead demarcates the normal water level in the canal. The canal adjacent to your
property is 60 feet wide. At our meeting we discussed the permit regulations that limit the
waterward extent of pier structures. Specifically, both 15A NCAC 07H.0208(b)(6)(J)(iii)
and 15A NCAC 07H.1205(m) state that pier length may not extend more than 1/4 the
width of a natural waterbody, human -made canal, or basin. The 1/4 limitation shall not
apply when the proposed pier is located between longer piers within 200 feet of the
applicant's property. My 1 August 2002 site visit revealed that there are not two longer
piers on either side within 200 feet of your property. Given this fact, the 1/4 rule limitation
applies to your site. Therefore, your proposal to place pilings at 1/3 the width of the
waterbody is inconsistent with these regulations and no permit is available to authorize
this development. Based on the above information your request for a permit is denied.
You may request a variance from the rule through the Coastal Resources
Commission. I am enclosing the form for a variance. If I can be of additional assistance
in this or related matters, please call me at 252-808-2808.
Sincerely,
Tracey L. Wheeler
Coastal Management Representative
Attachments
cc: Donna Moffitt - Director, Division of Coastal Management
Charles Jones - Assistant Director, Division of Coastal Management
M. Ted Tyndall - District Manager, DCM, Morehead City Office
151-B Hwy. 24, Hestron Plaza II, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

07/26/02 13:38 FAX
zo1
TO: Tracey Wheeler (Cams)
Fax#: [phone]
Date: July 26, 2002
Page#: 4
From: Foley & Foley (Sandy)
Phone#: [phone]
Customer Work Sheet
Customer Name_ John Adams Date: July 26.2002
Mailing Address: 6116 Castleton Ct. New Bern, NC 28560
Job Address: Fairfied Harbour Phone:[phone]
Adjacent Property Owners
Left Side: Lemons I Right Side: Ottin¢er
Job ape Description
Bulkhead
Dock/Walkway
Platform end of dock
Boathouse
Boatlift/jet ski
Piling Set (4) Him (DrawinE Attseh_ed)
Ramp/Jetty
Dredge_
Rip Rap_

611 G C6��1 cT.
�u c� FiAFAJ.. N-C.
atrw
ti
w
S��.r� C,v9Rlc
C
;:;,t rty ♦ %t6r
AJ r44) 0441'i
C.
.?Fko
07rl - GJe.- Art."
PL d
r

07/28/02 13;38 FAX la03
of -22: u; 07 : "_3 PAX I�101
ADMIT N'T RIPARIAN PROPERTY OWNER S-rATF.MFNT
(FOR A I'II:K/MOORING T'IL.ING/T)OATI IFT/BOATTTOUSP)
I herchv certify ihm I mvn property adjacelll to. s
Pf oi1cl t y l,(, --iIetI al (pal L- sJTLdJ+Lv+ - 47 �T-Jf ( f e r ACM
(,,n w:.1, Arod ev. `
He hne dec.rided to me. As chnwn hclnw, the deyeinpmen( he is ptoposiq at that locatrnn and. I
hnvr no nhjec.tions to his proprr,al 1 understand that a pierrlmoofmg pfl uK/bnallifl/Lioathnt�se
must he set hack minimum di.rian,.x (if fifteen fee( 0 S') from my Rica of riparian 3,.cc5s urdcss
wVaived by me
._X_ I d0 not v.r(rh Ir, wpivc Oic .srfh,rk rcyuirprne+fl.
du wish f,, wilve Iltaf crfl,;,oA rnrl(firr.me.w
Dr -SCRIP 1 ION ANC)/OR DRAWING OF PROPOSED UL• IFL.OI'MENT
( Tn he filled In h., h4%idnol proposing development)
SO
.ram-LAw--�
1'tinf vi Tv tr N.iwc
(( y
'Itltpllulit t�Jt(mhc�
L,a r"?,L-?,�(D —2�
77,
r., .,7_ r
Parr\ .�r r--,rr,I-nr�lr:�clrn.

07/26/02 13:38 FAX Z 04
J I IL -1.7- 200.p 15 PI I'_ L�f1Nl< 412 762 6946 P.01101
ADJECENT RIPARIAN PROPERTY OWNER STATEMENT
(FOR A rIBAJMOORINO PTLING/130ATLIFT/BOATTIOUSr)
1 hereby certify Ihr,t t own property sdjolcent lo.TJ
Prore+ty lec>,led el�pfl� t, �' •� o.T .teTsfr r
J
rr— ftm. rAW'M N C
He hm deerided 10 me, 11c shown below, the development he Is proposoinX at that location, and, 1
have no objections to ilia proposal, I understand that a pier/rnooring pilln,9/boatlift/boatholise
trust be set hack minimum distance of fifteen feet (151 Rom my area of riparian access: un1w
waived by me.
_ 1 du not wioll 110 wpive yhe Pelback rrgllirenna,ll.
1 .ft wiPh t" waive that setback requirement.
DESCRIPTION n /D oR DR.AW1Na Or, 111koroSRr) uFvrl.OhMI:N�_—
f To be Riled in br irktivldial propndna dewf4oll,enl)
S!'i a7T.
z6W%.' 1
Print or Tyrc Nsmrc
72# q6Z--
7Cteplwn; Nuilrbcr
Dale
rnrcy k. rn1cY CnFilraciora
Tn-nL P_R1

,pr n.
- rc --
T �
4

rj
Awr
lift
IL
��i