The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About017560D - Brooksr CAMA AND DREDGE AND FILL ai"i ,GENERAL 'C V,'"r PERM111-1�� 1�A7G�� - /IIFV " 7-- as authorized by the State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources and the Coastal Resources Commission in an area of environmental concern pursuant to 15A NCAC '%,--/ '4200 nt Name A. 1 JL' x 6 S Phone Number 09_ ) qy D kiyd t, PL4U i�✓i//YIl� 7�n/ State NC zip D'y y/ _ocation (County, State Road, W�ter Body, etc.)-S6W,.tiun. [ kiX �7'- / �7 ��;k Project Activity �aacq��/1 rilmfr` / o PrC J'?"-'!ff , L-fl*k GRC'rn 1454CoE Ae—.' SekAL5 Jl 191f -f off' // ,i -)ov i IECT DESCRIPTION SKETCH ` � ��Li (SCALE: ) I 3a 1 I J ck) length ngth er d length distance offshore cannel dimensions yards ip dimensions t L; F7" .?ol )( /01 / 4 mit is subject to compliance with this application, site and attached general and specific conditions. Any i of these terms may subject the permittee to a fine, Ca i , I % +2342000 130000 X 2342114 0 Y 137954.9 X 2342028.8 Y 137704.3 tea'141 Cb 4i (O mm C5 (o X 2341939.7 _ Q Y 137444.9COU 2341798.3 137033.2 V Zn 1 0':>7 1 X 2342328.2 Y 138004.8 N I DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT ADJACENT RIPARIAN PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION AAIVER_FORM , Name Of Individual Applying For Permit: S Address Of Property >S� C�Nf-06) (Lot or Street , Street or Road, Clty & County) I hereby certify that I own property adjacent to the above referenced property, The individual applying for this permit has described to me as shown on the attached drawing the development they are proposing. A description or drawing, with dimensions, should be provided with this letter. I have no objections to this proposal. you nave objections to what is being Prono= vision of Coastal Management _ed Dle_=se write lmingtnn u�,-4- , _ _ 127 Cardinal Drive FY+ors or receipt of this notice. No resaonseJis considered theSameas no objection if you have been notified by Certifies Mail WAIVER SECTION I understand that a pier, dock, mooring house lift pilings, breakwater, boat Erom m area must be set back a minimum distance of 15, Y of riparian access unless waived by me. (If you Wish to waive the setback, you must initial the appropriate Below. ) blank I do wish to waive the 15'setback requirement. I.do not wish to waive the 15'setback requirement• DIVISION OF COASTAL M7iT7, LEM_EN T CENT RIPARIAN PROPERTY OWNER NOTTFT(+amTr, Name Of Individual Applying For Permit: ` f'1 Address Of Property: p Y=Lo+ # 17 w1 i m i rl G to ►J MtA�O�V1 O V e Y (Lot or t- f�t Str e� �lC_t or Road, City & County) I hereby certify that I own property adjacent to the above_ referenced property. The individual a Plying for described to me as shown on the attached dr wing the-develocment the areproposing. permit c= should bE A description or drawing, with dimEnsicn_ Provided with this letter. u e I have no objections to this proposal. at is being tror)ose [ii WAIVER SECTION Tease write t live Extensic -3900 within ;id Ered the sa I understand that a *-, moorinc Pier, dock cat house, lift L pilings, breakwater, mus1- be set back a minimum distance of b15' from my area of riparian access unless to waive the setback waived by me, (If you wish below.) you must initial the appropriate bunk I do wish to w- eases �ive the 15'setback requirement, I do not wish to waive the 15'setback requirement. _"el 11--) - n Date: 2/3/98 To: Tim Gregson- Cama From: James D. Jacaruso USACE Wilmington District RE: Pier Construction Permit After speaking with Mr. Philip Brooks, it has been determined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wilmington District Navigation Section, that construction of a pier in the intracoastal waterway in the area suggested on his aerial photography, to the length of the adjacent existing piers will not impede navigation. If you have any questions please feel free to contact our office at 251- 4411. Sincerely, Jim Jacaruso YOUR OFFICE YOUR PROJECT 2/3/98 ------------------------------------------------------------- iginal Coords. on NAD 83 State Plane - NC 3200, U.S. FT 'anslated Coords. on NAD 83 Geographic Coordinates ------------------------------------------------------------- ME INPUT OUTPUT 137954.90000 N 2342114.00000 E mvergence 00 39 08.57741 :ale Factor 1.000064650 137704.30000 N 2342028.80000 E invergence 00 39 07.97299 !ale Factor 1.000064883 137444.90000 N 2341939.70000 E nvergence 00 39 07.34112 ale Factor 1.000065125 34 07 25.26169 N 077 52 10.87588 W 34 07 22.79264 N 077 52 11.92309 W 34 07 20.23698 N 077 52 13.01786 W 27/1999 11:53 9102566180 HOBBS SURVEYING CO I PAGE E TO: FAX #: FROM: DATE: HOBBS SURVEYING COMPANY, INC. 7225 Wrirht9vi4e Avenue, SWIe 103, Wil►nington, NC 28403 Office.- 910-256-0002 Fax: 910-256-6180 FAX COVER SHEET TIME: a.m./p,m. ffo Number of pages (not including this cover sheet): Z COMMENTS: / 4. L 27/1999 11:53 9102566180 HOBBS SURVEYING CO I PAGE �� ofe0 eoor< r r9� PAGE e10 AW-061' JD' DO" PER OECD MV$r 1197 PAGE 9 Aw 61. 3.01 19".£O FO APIWOMA fE COCA Wq VARSO LAC \ 1k OfEV &XW eJ 1g PACE OJT W N sir".r ftfwo r• area BMW 1107 PAGE 06?0 OFED ACM JJP PACE M OIMD BOW ►J/9 PAff 0J76 4*1 ►0.416 sP ��- 4gftS l • \ V1Cwry MAP It •• f MAW"' ?For OEED BOOK = PAGE W / M / I I . I owe lick r-.4o 0 40 90 120 4 of army Fer. PO4EIo BROOKS STEP�HAAAt AWO KS 10,1n Sr f/- WO BOW 1197 PACE 0820 M[ASOWORO 'O*NVW AE'w MAIMOW9 C"FY AVRFM .CAAVLM4 ArvOEO 1/16/17e-FO[AO EJC5W PAOPMYr Pon av M►RFLE OAOK $owe, Able. 7M LOT 6 t OCA FEO n AN AA[A Cr 100 YEAR I10W NORTH CAROLNA MZiW N/NOY 1 YL'tlKl N. PLAT Wf AARN t»CEN 1r Imm " YAOf AM nT S FACE C TNR PLAT EAACKt 01u►CdIUT(P 6 1/10000 fYN ARE . V1Yr WMEN L O E Irrrwbmv.i Name CAMA AND DREDGE AND FILL GENERAL PERMIT as authorized by the State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources and the Coastal Resources Commission in an area of environmental concern pursuant to 15A NCAC %t ,/.2C'0 l_T3 R a> KS Phone Number�gT - to 51r ► ",-'d t? P/4-co /i #11 i� N State AIC zip nation (County, State Road, Water Body, etc.) 2 Q— �A44!�«ti bR'�yP LUf z64-�- ti roject Activity W '% n r i///ifF Pi 1Plt G-�fAL,LEb tit 5,400E kP= 0 l Cf ('GAO'. 'r-1 of ,11 ,idOU 5#74/r A :CT DESCRIPTION SKETCH 1\f (SCALE: lr^ wW . 3 Q length gth length stance offshore nnel dimensions ards dimensions c/f{c' /2! Y3V . ciPr2o/X'/n' i t W I i iit is subject to compliance with this application, site and attached general and specific conditions. Any of these terms may subject the permittee to a fine, CIUN=>_(]j, NEXT PERMIT=> GENERAL PERMIT ENTRY/UPDATE C NO: GPD17560 DISTRICT: I COUNTY: NEW HANOVE: ESIG: PT ES EW APP FEE: 50.00 REGIONAL REP: GREGSON .ICANT NAME: BROOKS, PHILIP CNG ADDRESS: 4407 RONDO PLACE CITY: WILMINGTON STATE: NC ZIP: 28412 LOCATION: 280 SHANNON DR, LOT #17 WATER BODY: MASONBORO SN] [ON ADDRESS: (WHEN DIFFERENT FROM MAIL. CITY: WILMINGTON STATE: ZIP: ZEA: 0.01 PROJECT DESC: P-12 STATE PLANE COORD X: Y: PR 284 5 00 0 TE 16 24 00 0 FS 6 16 00 0 BL 10 1: HM 700 OW 1320 ACTION EXPIRATION DREDGE AND FILL: CAMA MAJOR DEVELOPMENT: 02 03 98 05 03 98 3E: ENTER DATA YOU WISH TO CHANGE 1=HELP PF2=MAIN MENU PF3=PERMIT MENU PF4= PREVIOUS SCREEN PF5=ADD N� STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA Department of Environment and Natural Resources 127 Cardinal Drive Extension Wilmington, North Carolina 28405 (910) 395-3900 File Access Record SECTION TIME/DATE NAME REPRESENTING: Guidelines for Access: The staff of the Wilmington Regional Office is dedicated to making public records in our custody readily available to the public for review and copying. We also have the responsibility to the public to safeguard these records and to carry out our day-to-day program obligations. Please read carefully the following guidelines before signing the form: Please call at least a day in advance to schedule an appointment to review the files. Appointments will be scheduled between 9:00 a.m. and 3.00 p.m. Viewing time ends at 5:00 p.m. Anyone arriving without an appointment may view the files to the extent that time and staff supervision is available 2. You must specify files you want to review by facility name. The number of files that you may review at one time will be limited to five. 3. You may make copies of a file when the copier is not in use by the staff and if tim permits. Copies of 25 or less are free 26 or more require payment in full for aH copies made at 10 cents a copy• payment maybe made by check money order, or cash at the reception desk Copies can also be invoiced for your convenience 4. FILES MUST BE KEPT IN THE ORDER YOU FOUND THEM. Files may not be taken from the office. To remove, alter, deface, mutilate, or destroy material in one of these files is a misdemeanor for which you can be fined up to $500.00. 5. In accordance with General Statute 25-3-512, a $20.00 processing fee will be charged and collected for checks on which payment has been refused. �/ CILITY NAME OUNTY 2. 3. 4. ` Ne,,, Hanover County Inspection Department B U--L D I N G ? n n I T ---------------------------- ------------------ ti_ ---�--------- Application Number . . . . . 98-00001397` Date 2/1 Property Address . . . . . . 299 SHANNON DR Tax Parcel Number R07908-003-014-000 Application description . . . BLDG-NEW STRUCTURES OTHER THAN BUI Subdivision Name . . . . . . BRITTANY WOODS Property Use . . . . . . . . RESIDENTIAL Property owner . . . . . . . BROOKS, PHILIP & STEPHANIE Owner address . . . . . . . . 4407 RONDO PL WILMINGTON, NC WILMINGTON NC 28412 (910) 799-1258 Contractor . . . . . . . . . OWNER AS CONTRACTOR ----- Structure Information ERECT RESIDENTIAL PIER AND DOCK Construction Type . . . . . TYPE VI CONST - UNPROT Occupancy Type . . . . . . R-3 1&2 FAMILY DWELLINGS Flood Zone . . . . --------------------------------------------------------------------- . . . . NOT APPLICABLE Permit . . . . . . DECKS & PIERS Additional desc PIER & DOCK Issue Date . . . . 2/10/98 Valuation . . . . Expiration Date . . 8/09/98 NEW HANOVER COUNTY INSPECTION DEPT. 414 CHESTNUT STREET WILMINGTON NC 28401 DATE: 2/10/98 TIME: 13:01:55 APPLICATION NBR: 98- 1397 REFERENCE: PIER & DOCK ITEM DESCRIPTION PAID ---------------------------------------- PERMIT FEE 150.00 TOTAL AMOUNT PAID: 150.00 PAYMENT TYPE: CREDIT CARD RECEIPT #: 00000035 CASHIER: JDAILEY VT'S NAIL 'ER L2 ,1 - �, ADDRESS Cntas ION NrEW AkNOVER C01— - Br7I.DiNG PER'YIIT APPLICATION TYPE: ACCESSORY STRUCTURE (PLc ASE PRINT CLEARLY) -kPPLICATIOY T Project Responsibility (For off ► t, � ,^ h _ I-) cc- i'Dr C, tl) K_ S DATE ) i PHONE (c -)9c - t Dr, CITY zip-,-, o-Cotnrrr 1-WMM 2-CAW 34WU �wnrcazsvuaa BLOCK # LOT :TOR C. tk! (\e r LICENSE # :ACCOUNT 7 CITY ST ZIP NAJ9 .A-D D PHONE ST "'i Z1P ") SS , CONTACT PERSON: (r)i�,2rle y-s— c1 CrPHONE �7 �C)ITY ST ZIP 'ION OF WORK: .i =i& a- Co," �C I: I hereby certify that all information in this application is �rrect and and ordinance and regulations. The Ina 'once Dep ,x. 'be notified +xEx i AGE`rr slcrrATuxE - nECT OR ADDITION I work will comply with the State Building Code and all other appticab any changes in the approved plans and specification for the project pt TOTAL PROJECT COST: Z� • �� DETACHED GARAGE / ACCESSORY BUDDING / SWLM POOL <600 SQ. FT. / SWIM POOL >600 SQ. FT �j :CX,4`)PORCH / GREENHOUSE / OTHER: �. FT. = f� O %� SQ. FT: HEATED fHEATED CONST: V(UP) / VI(UP) OTHER: CITY / COUNTY / COMIAUNITY SYSTEM / PRIVATE WELL ITY / COUNTY / CENTRAL SEPTIC / PRIVATE SEPTIC / COM yfU ITY SYSTEM ... crnkn arc;v-Dvrrrc RrntrMVn MR Ff Frr UrrL7 Pt Rr_ rAC rnF-M DO rrf RC R. TNg71R1-S"' TA, 40 C, Al Ci Tit ri 'OD 43 tJ -i to ip, 41 >7 EA v►„01E4a� NEW HANOVER COUNTY INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT 414 CHESTNUT STREET WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28401 (910) 341-7151 THE UNLICENSED PRACTICE OF GENERAL CONTRACTING CONSTITUTES A CRIMINAL OFFENSE UNDER N.C.G.S. 87-13. OWNER - BUILDER N.C.G.S. 87-1 REQUIRES A LICENSED GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO MAKE APPLICATION FOR ANY BUILDING PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION EXCEEDING $30,000.00. HOWEVER, THE LAW ALLOWS OWNERS TO BUILD THEIR OWN HOMES PROVIDED THEY AGREE TO LIVE IN THEM FOR A PERIOD OF AT LEAST ONE (1) YEAR. i,Z St P AS OWNER -BUILDER I AGREE TO- PA THE HU69E I PROPOSE TO BUILD WHICH WILL BE LOCATED AT a , FOR A PERIOD F AT LEAST ONE (1) YEAR. i SIG ATURE DATE New Hanover County North Carolina I, Lb t- t�s6,v,,d 'a-S '1 , a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certifythat �h ° I ° � &001-6`personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the due execution of the foregoing instrument. 4 —� , 4 ant Name is q'4 C CAMA AND DREDGE AND FILL P. GENERAL N? 011 PERMIT._. : 7- XJy as authorized by the State of North Carolina Department of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources and the Coastal Resources Commission in an area of environmental concern pursuant to 15A NCAC Phone Number (1-1/c, -vs State ,Lq' zip IV 1: Location (County, State Road, Water Body, etc.) 7 Yt- / % if Project Activity qC-V,'h 1,154e_�QC- �O_C-! 5e76&e,5 '74A /J00 5#* /1 A-AOi Y )JECT DESCRIPTION length SKETCH _LLlock) -41 t (SCALE: tv 7 1 26) + length iber ead length distance offshore F_ _T channel dimensions _T c yards imp dimensions Y "All n ma*o i,2_ Y�)V 4-t-� -4164, I N -rmit is subject to compliance with this application, site and attached general and specific conditions. Any ,n of thpcp tor— rmitt.. to , F Pri r S—*,IAV NORM North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Coastal Management chael F. Easley, Govemor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretar September 26, 2003 r. Phillip Brooks 07 Rondo Place ilmington, North Carolina 28412 Existing Pier at 311 Shannon Drive New Hanover County ;ar Mr. Brooks: This letter is in reference to your riparian corridor survey dated September 24, 2003 by Hobbs Surveying )mpany, Inc. Based on the survey, you pier appears to have been constructed in accordance with the plicable riparian area setback requirements of 15A NCAC 07H.1200. Your area of riparian access was based t a normal high water determination conducted on September 7, 1999 by New Hanover County 'Zoning and by r on February 3, 1998. Your survey also indicates the pier, as constructed, encroaches into the Federal Channel Setback Line iproximately 18 feet. It is my understanding that you are currently having discussions with the US Army 3tps of Engineers in reference to this matter. Please be advised that if the US Army Corps of Engineers urnunes that the pier is inconsistent with federal setback requirements, the structure would have to be located landward of the setback line. If I can be of additional assistance in this matter, please advise. Sincerely, � J^im�gson District Mana Wilmington Files January 10, 2004 Division of Coastal Management 1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638 Donna Moffitt, On February 3, 1998 a CAMA permit was issued for the construction of a dock, at 299 Shannon Drive, to Philip and Stephanie Brooks. There are multiple serious violations pertaining to this permit which have come to light. 1. The CAMA permit includes a sight drawing that shows the pier is to be built in the center of the 52 foot wide property. The pier has been constructed on the far right hand side of the property and in fact encroaches on the neighboring property. (see attached survey) 2. The CAMA permit includes attached specific conditions requiring that the pier is to comply with USACOE setbacks. The pier encroaches into the USACOE channel. 3. The CAMA permit requires that a written statement has been obtained from adjacent riparian landowners certifying that they have no objections to the proposed work. The adjacent property owners did object to the proposed work based on drawings similar to the drawing in the CAMA permit. The pier was constructed in a different location, not "as proposed". Therefore, the adjacent property owners were denied their right to object to the construction. 4. Setback waivers were obtained from adjacent property owners The following paragraph is included on the CAMA permit. This permit is subject to compliance with this application, site drawing and attached specific conditions. Any violation of these terms may subject permittee to a fine, imprisonment or civil action; and may cause the permit to become null and void. The pier was not built in "compliance with -- application" The pier was not built in "compliance with -- site drawing" The pier was not built in "compliance with -- attached specific conditions" The pier constructed under permit #017560 does not just have "Any violations of these terms" it in fact violates all the terms of the permit. The documented violations are not merely simple oversights or mistakes. They have been made in a calculated manner to deprive neighboring property owners of their rights. Based on the facts I have submitted I am requesting: 1. CAMA inform the New Hanover County Building department that permit #017560 not adhered to and is therefore null and void. 2. CAMA condemn the pier. 3. CAMA "subject the permittee to a fine, imprisonment or civil action" Jonathan Costa cc: Grady Hobbs, Chief Code Enforcement Officer Eugene Tomlinson Jim Gregson Office of the Attorney General January 10, 2004 Grady Hobbs Chief Code Enforcement Officer New Hanover County Inspection Department Wilmington, North Carolina 28403 Mr. Hobbs, On February 10, 1998 a building permit was issued for the construction of a pier, at 299 Shannon Drive, to Philip and Stephanie Brooks. There are multiple serious violations pertaining to this permit which have come to light. 1. The permit issued by the building department was based on CAMA permit # 017560. The pier was constructed significantly differently than the CAMA permits allows. A. The CAMA permit includes a sight drawing that shows the pier is to be built in the center of the 52 foot wide property. The pier has been constructed on the far right hand side of the property and in fact encroaches on the neighboring property. (see attached survey) B. The CAMA permit includes attached specific conditions requiring that the pier is to comply with USACOE setbacks. The pier encroaches into the USACOE channel. C. The CAMA permit requires that a written statement has been obtained from adjacent riparian landowners certifying that they have no objections to the proposed work. The adjacent property owners did object to the proposed work based on D. Setback waivers were obtained from adjacent property owners based on drawings similar to the CAMA permit. The pier was constructed in a different location. Therefore, the waivers given were fraudulently obtained. These waivers are null and void. The following paragraph is included on the CAMA permit. This permit is subject to compliance with this application, site drawing and attached specific conditions. Any violation of these terms may subject permittee to a fine, imprisonment or civil action; and may cause the permit to become null and void. Based on the fact that all the terms of the premit have been violated I believe that CAMA permit #017560 is null and void. In addition: The drawing submitted to the New Hanover County Building Department, to obtain a permit, shows the pier is to be built in the center of the 52 foot wide property. It was not. The CAMA permit is for a dock at 280 Shannon Drive. The Building permit is for a dock at 299 Shannon Drive. There has been significant electrical and plumbing work done on the dock without permits or inspections. The documented violations are not merely simple oversights or mistakes. They have been made in a calculated manner to deceive the Building Department and to deprive neighboring property owners of their rights. Based on the facts I have submitted I am appealing to The New Hanover County Building Department to condemn the pier built at 299 Shannon Drive. Jonathan Costa January 10, 2004 Eugene Tomlinson Coastal Resources Commission 1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638 Mr. Tomlinson, On February 3, 1998 a CAMA permit was issued for the construction of a dock, at 299 Shannon Drive, to Philip and Stephanie Brooks. There are multiple serious violations pertaining to this permit which have come to light. 1. The CAMA permit includes a sight drawing that shows the pier is to be built in the center of the 52 foot wide property. The pier has been constructed on the far right hand side of the property and in fact encroaches on the neighboring property. (see attached survey) 2. The CAMA permit includes attached specific conditions requiring that the pier is to comply with USACOE setbacks. The pier encroaches into the USACOE channel. 3. The CAMA permit requires that a written statement has been obtained from adjacent riparian landowners certifying, that they have no objections to the proposed work. The adjacent property owners did object to the proposed work based on drawings similar to the drawing in the CAMA permit. The pier was constructed in a different location, not "as proposed". Therefore, the adjacent property owners were denied their right to object to the construction. 4. Setback waivers were obtained from adjacent property owners The following paragraph is included on the CAMA permit. This permit is subject to compliance with this application, site drawing and attached specific conditions. Any violation of these terms may subject permittee to a fine, imprisonment or civil action; and may cause the permit to become null and void. The pier was not built in "compliance with -- application" The pier was not built in "compliance with -- site drawing" The pier was not built in "compliance with -- attached specific conditions" The pier constructed under permit #017560 does not just have "Any violations of these terms" it in fact violates all the terms of the permit. The documented violations are not merely simple oversights or mistakes. They have been made in a calculated manner to deprive neighboring property owners of their rights. Based on the facts I have submitted I am requesting: 1. CAMA inform the New Hanover County Building department that permit #017560 not adhered to and is therefore null and void. 2. CAMA condemn the pier. 3. CAMA "subject the permittee to a fine, imprisonment or civil action" Jonathan Costa cc: Grady Hobbs, Chief Code Enforcement Officer Donna Moffitt Jim Gregson Office of the Attorney General W (MON) 08:28 DEHNR COSTAL MSMT 26i7J4 Ea;; I- N _ ON AND JESS I E COSTA TEL:919 733 1495 P.00 910 784 9306 F.i January 10, 2004 Division of Coastal Management 1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1638 Donna Moffitt, Co p.1axc�1 To Chr,r(,?-5> var Post -Ito Fax Note 7071 uete _ pe ep 7 T-3 , na From Co./Dept. n Co. n _ �n Fax # On February, 3 1990 a ChA1�W or th� rnn;tn irri f a tin ,� 4» J1 iai i,,w �h ive, co r �� p a�� { ��. There are mu pie serious violations pertaining to this permit which have come to light. 1. The CAMA permit includes a 1JgU drawing that shows the pier is to be built In the center of the 52 foot wide property. The pier has been constructed on the for right hand side of the property and in fact encroaches on the neighboring property. (see attached survey) 2. The LAMA permit includes =Ached sneCific conditions requiring that the pier is to comply with USACOE setbacks. The pier encroaches Into the USACOE channel. 3. The LAMA permit requires that AZritten state e� nt has been obtained frorUdiacent rigarionn c rtJfyIn&4bAt havg n�bja ions to the 2to2osedmgk, The adjacent property owners did object to the proposed work based on drawings similar to the drawing in the CAMA permit. The pier was constructed In a different location, not "as proposed", Therefore, the adjacent property owners were denied their right to object to the construction. 4. Setback waivers were obtainArl frnm aeIisran► .,.,,.,�.�.. ORN) 08:28 DEHNR COSTAL MGMT TEL:919 733 1495 P. 002 _°Af:3•i 0==3io FI1 iUN L+ND SESSIE COSTA 914a 7e4 "I.A6ea P.0 The following paragraph is included on the CAMA permit, This n . Any violation of these terms may subJett permittee to a fine, Imprisonment or civil action; and may cause the permit to become null and void. The pier was = built In "compliance with -- application" The pier was = built In "compliance with -- site drawing" The pier was nZ built in "compliance with -- attached specific conditions" The pier constructed under permit #017560 does not just have "Any vlolations of these terms" it in fact violates all the terms of the permit. The documented violations are not merely simple oversights or mistakes. They have been made in a calculated manner to deprive neighboring property owners of their rights. Based on the facts I have submitted I am requesting: 1. CAMA inform the New Hanover County Building department that permit #017560 not adhered to and is therefore null and void. Z. CAMA condemn the pier. 3. CAMA "subject the permittee to a fine, Imprisonment or civil action" Jonathan Costa :c: Grady Hobbs, Chief Code Enforcement Officer Eugene Tomlinson Jim Gregson Office of the Attorney General W044�le�� PAS Philip Brooks Stephanie Brooks Petitioner Case Number 04 EHR 0605 Order for Prehearing Statements: Issues to be resolved and party's position on each: May 10, 2004 1. Whether CAMA's reversal of its initial decision regarding permit issuance was injurious to petitioner: V It is our position that we were injured. The permit holder began legal proceedin�� against us because we simply restated CAMA's decision that a pier could not be built on 5 his property without a waiver from us. The permit holder alleged we were attempting frustrate sale of his property by "making false representations regarding the property, such that obtaining a permit for the construction of a dock would be impossible." This was not our decision but CAMA's. As a result, he threatened to commence litigation for monetary recovery in excess of $324,000. Also, the permit holder's attorney recommended, in addition to monetary recovery, that part of the resolution to this pending litigation would be to cease communicating with CAMA, not to object to a CAMA permit, and to waive the 15 foot CAMA setback requirement. We were amazed that a professional in the area of law, an attorney, would make such recommendations for his client since all of these are our rights as North Carolina citizens. In addition, CAMA is the primary public agency that determines where and what can be built on coastal property and to recommend that we cease communicating with them was incredulous. In addition, we have found the permit holder's comments about one of his potential buyers, an attorney, quite threatening. Specifically, we were told he would go to any length necessary to secure a pier permit with the purchase of this property. We have found this to be quite true. The permit holder has made slanderous accusations to potential buyers, numerous county officials and agencies, the Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission, the NC Director of CAMA, and the Attorney General's office regarding us and our property, either in writing or verbally. To counter such accusations we have had to obtain an additional and expensive survey for CAMA, be subjected to inspections of our property by the building department, answer numerous questions, either in phone conversations or in writing regarding the permit holder's allegations against us, and to educate ourselves in matters of law for self protection. We are simply adjacent property owners who have chosen not to waive our setback and, as a result, have received unbelievable attack. Most recently, the permit holder has requested that New Hanover County Building Department and CAMA officials condemn our nier (which wn¢ onnctnir+nA .,--,l;--+- !`AXXA .....7-J_L'-__ _'__ The property upon which the proposed pier is to be built is not in any way adjacent to other property owned by the permit holder. A narrow 10 ft. access alley courses the posterior perimeter of the Petitioner's property but does not provide vehicular access to the permit holder's marsh property. There is no parking provision for this property. Currently, the presence of even one vehicle along this access ally restricts entry and exit from the Petitioner's property. In summary, the injury has been at all levels- monetary, emotional, physical, and social. 2. Whether there has been compliance with the following statutes: A) NC General Statute 132, 15A NCAC 0711.1205 (relates to proper setbacks) It is our position that the issued permit does not comply with the 15 foot property and riparian line setback. B) NC General Statute 132, 15A NCAC 07H.0205 (relates to management objective) It is our position that the issued permit violates CAMA's highest priority, which is to(,o'" conserve the existing coastal wetlands, since this pier would begin in an area below the marsh line and also ward of the �ang water mark. i , w en e be ction of our pie , AMA officials this very question -whether a person would be allowed to begin a pier below the marsh line or not. The answer was negative. CAMA is now allowing this permit holder to do so. There seems to be inconsistent application of law. C) NC General Statute 132, 15A NCAC O7H.1204-Part A (relates to exclusive use of land owner) It is our position that although the permit has been issued to the current property owner, it is not intended for his exclusive use; therefore, the application for a General Permit would not be appropriate. Part C (relates to interference to navigation) It is our position that interference to avin to is indicated since the proposed pier blocks a Eommon canal to which an adjacent subdivision has been granted water access. L7 u4- "-ka+' 10,� La„d; „y Part D (relates to unnecessary endangerment of conservation) O It is our position that the origination of this pier, below the marsh line and mean high water in an estuarian environment, would significantly and negatively affect marsh grass and other vegetation, as well as various species of fish, birds, etc., which currently nest and breed in this area. Vehicular traffic has already destroyed marsh grass in the existing, as well as adjacent, areas ecause there is no parking available for this property, since it is entirely "underwater". E) NC General Statute 132, 15A NCAC 07H.1202 was violated. It is our position that violation occurred because CAMA issued permit #36844-D prior to our notification as adjacent property owners. F) NC General Statute 132, 15A, NCAC 07H.1102. It is our position that there has been non-compliance because this permit should not have been written under the General Permit provisions. The granting of an initial third party hearing on the previous permit (#35156-D) substantiated that the issues surrounding this permit were certainly worthy of more in-depth review. These were never resolved prior to the issuance of permit 936844-D. G) NC General Statute 132, 15A, NCAC 07H.1104. It is our position that this statute was violated because the questions and issues proposed by the Petitioner regarding the impact on adjoining properties, wetlands, wildlife, fisheries resources, and public trust rights related to permit 934246-D and permit #35156-D had not been resolved and still apply in their entirety to permit #36844-D. 3. Whether the issued permit violates New Hanover County regulations for R-15 setbacks: It is our position that the permit as issued does not allow for the proper 10 foot setback for structures from adjacent property lines as outlined in the NHC code. 4. Whether permit #36844-D should be allowed; It is our position that this permit should be revoked since it violates the above statutes and since CAMA initially made a decision not to allow pier construction. We do not understand how three different experts from CAMA could make on site visits an -1-7 determine that a pier could not be built on the permit holder's property, as well as a fourth official who also reached the same conclusion from map review, and then reverse its position. If this permit is allowed, the precedent it sets will be monumental because of its impact on construction in environmentally sensitive areas. If allowed, it will permit construction of piers on any free standing marsh/estuary areas regardless of dry land access and will allow origination of piers below the determined mean high water line. This essentially means that CAMA's reason for existence is moot since it is the public agency charged with protecting such fragile environmental areas. We find it disturbing and ironic that CAMA would allow this permit since it directly contradicts its charge and purpose to protect public trusts areas. Proposed Witnesses: Jason Dail Jim Gregson Ed Brooks Philip Brooks Stephanie Brooks 2 David Arnold Debra Wilson — �h ��' LP1`►tts Davey Bruton C. Wes Hodges, II Discovery: We will be requesting all the documentation which CAMA has on file on permit # 36844-D, as well as the paperwork and applicable drawings on permit #35156-D and permit #34246-D. Any other discovery requests should be able to be handled in the time frame Judge Mann presented. Location of Hearing: Wilmington, NC is acceptable. Estimated length of hearing: 2 to 3 days Philip and Stephanie Brooks 4407 Rondo Place Wilmington, NC 28412 (910)799-1258 hm (910)352-3134 cell Special Considerations: 1. Due to the "on -call" nature of Petitioner's employment, the proposed court date of August 09" may have to be adjusted since petitioner's employment scheduling is only assigned two weeks in advance. 3. It should be noted that there were some inaccuracies in the "Final Decision" document (Exhibit A -attached) we received which summarized our initial Third Party Hearing Request that remain pertinent to this hearing, specifically II. A, K, and U. Also, in the Assistant Attorney General's "Recommendation of the Division of Coastal Management" document dated March 12, 2004, (Exhibit B-attached) she states in paragraph H, "There is no basis in CAMA or the CRC's rules for DCM to refuse to issue a new permit to Mr. Costa due to the pending litigation because his proposed development meets all of the applicable guidelines. CAMA specifically requires that when a project meets the development standards, a permit shall be issued." The granting of the initial third party hearing, prior to Mr. Costa's surrendering permit #35156-D, was proof that there were valid questions regarding this permit and whether it, indeed, met applicable guidelines. These unresolved issues provided grounds to deny the issuance of permit #36844-D. On January 7, 2004, the Chairman of the North Carolina Resources Commission himself stated in III. C of a "Final Decision" document (Exhibit A -attached) that "The question of whether or not the permitted location of Mr. Costa's proposed pier violates the Commission's rules raises a valid question for adjudication in a contested case proceeding." Yet, CAMA ignored this "Conclus' aw", as well as our c tinuing concerns, and quickly issued Mr. Costa a "ne third pe it (# 36844-D). ` 4. We have spent countless hours and expense in defending ourselves against the accusations this permit holder has made to individuals, as well as local and state agencies, because we trusted in CAMA's initial decision, believing them to be the "experts." Finally, we have devoted excessive time in preparing and submitting proper documentation for this, as well as the previously granted hearing. It does not seem fair that CAMA would issue a new permit before the issues regarding the previous permit had been resolved, especially since the very same issues apply in entirety to this "new" permit. The granting of the permit (936844-D) has now resulted in additional concerns and has further complicated the issues. DOPER \EL S. BEGAN V FON C. DAVIS August 1, 2019 Philip Brooks 4407 Rondo Place Wilmington, NC 28412 Dear Mr. Brooks: NORTH CAROLINA Environmental Quality This letter is in response to our conversation today in reference to your existing pier, located at 1521 Marsh Cove Lane, adjacent to the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway in Wilmington, New Hanover County. You were inquiring as to whether the structure is still considered compliant with the rules of the Division of Coastal Management. Your pier was authorized by CAMA General Permit No. 011560-D issued on 2/3/98 and CAMA General Permit No. 020438-D issued on 3/30/99. The structure's location was confirmed to be within the authorized riparian corridor according to a survey dated September 24, 2003 by Hobbs Surveying Company, Inc. Waivers were obtained by both of the adjacent riparian property owners for the structure to be allowed within the adjacent 15' riparian corridor setbacks. As such, your structure continues to be consistent with all requirements of 15A NCAC 07H.1200, GENERAL PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PIERS AND DOCKING FACILITIES and may remain in place within the existing footprint. Please contact me at 910-796-7266, if you have any questions, or if I can provide any additional information. Respectfully yours, az--, �'o 2 Debra D. Wilson District Manager N.C. Division of Coastal Management 127 Cardinal Dr. Extension, Wilmington, N.C. 28405 SAY \ 10, ANCpV Lp EIDSTWG PUMP HOUSE EIP\ACCF S �4/V N S F (16t SF) 27 qRj Fj EXfS11NG WOOD PAR \ 1 EIP \ I —! • I � ma's'• \ EXISTING CONC. PAD VICINITY MAP N . T. S. N.T.S. i 1 290t SF (TO BE REMOVED) SETBACKS COASTAL WETLANDS LINE RAGGED BY CAMA <n �o \. 575 AEC SETBACK +/_ 400' FRONT 25' SIDE 10' 10/26/17 `` REAR: 30' FROM NHW LIN \N m EIR — X CAMA SETBACK — — co \'� ° NHW LINE PUGGED BY CAMA BRYAN AREA TABLE 10/26/17 \ Qt� (DB 5093/2924) TOTAL PARCEL: 10,44 RBS AREA ABOVE NHW 5,R EXISTING WOOD PIER Z \ BUILDABLE AREA: 1,456 OD \ \ (WTHIN SETBACKS SHONN) LA\ \• cn �, \N 1 I I I 1 J, / \\�, CARo MAX IMPERVIOUS (25%) 1,46G E s s iO4, ' O� of T . rn _= a SEAL co 4937 _ 1 " EIP /�/ A ��JJ11111�\\ S 2i3g?�� EIR CJyyRT`� c NAD B3 <2011) ROOF ISO 0 40 80 1� = 40, (U.S. SURVEY FEET) SYMBOL LEGEND: E)OSINVG OW (AS NOTED O REBAR SET EJO -MG MONUMENT (AS PROPERTY BOUNDARY LNRS PER RECORD DATA LWS NOT SURVEYED (At toll I CERTIFICATE OF ACCURACY & MAPPING JM COUNTY PARCEL t Ro79G14—003-0I7-000 ML BY GRAPHIC PLOTTING THE SUBJECT PARCEL IS IN SPECIAL 1,THE UNDERSIGNED. CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY WAS DRANK UNDER MY SUPERVISION ((DEED DESCR