66344D - Suprise

ICAMA / ❑ DREDGE & FILL +-P� w i (0 ', - �'
its?,44 A
iEN ERAL PERMIT Previous permit # - SC_t
(New ❑Modification ❑Complete Reissue El Partial Reissue Date previous permit issued ,
Ized by the State of North Carolina, Department of Environment and Natural Resources //��—}
:oastal Resources Commission in an area of environmental concern pursuant to I SA NCAC 6 T ra , l uo
les attached
t Name
1.
44-
/I �C.� h rIGS State ZIP_
(DA -G 1�- V E-Mail
��//�� -
ed Agent �i4e? 1 C R�,4114th
❑ CW f� AA �S ❑ PTS
❑ OEA ❑ HHF ❑ IH ❑ UIBA ❑ N/A
❑ PWS:
yes / no PNA yes
Project/ Activity
igth
nber
I/ Riprap length_
distance offshore
x distance offshod
iic yards
Length
not sure
attached:
Project Location: County Ng W � td�►��V,/.,-
Street/ Address/ State Road/ Lot #(s) �+
l� W'� `�L� f/ t �G•/y J�
Subdivision /
City W,rl`Gj ti+3,�J'll!� 84""dZIP t 9
Phone # ( ) Z -3` Vlt Liver Basin C C1
n� A rl-h
Adj. Wtr. Body � ks � s nat Lp
Closest Maj. Wtr. Body
(Scale: / -'= i
ig permit may be required by:
_ocal Planning jurisdiction)
J❑ See note on back regarding River Basin r�

A
1rA
WDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Goasiai Management
Pat McCrory Braxton C. Davis
Governor Director John E. Sk
Secre
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Date: + 3 a
Name or vroperty owner Applying for Permit: Name of Authorized Agent for this project:
Owner's Mailing Address:
Vtenv\z
Phone Number (-7u5 ) 3 C 4- q cp W
A)Av t) Cr1k
Agent's Mailing Address:
� I .I ? c 2i, 1 Q-10—
'a
Phone Number
i Certity that t have authorized the agent listed above to act on my behalf, for the purpose of applying
for and obtaining all CAMA Permits necessary to install or construct the following (activity):
For my property located at
This certification is valid thru (date) T rI L
ko1 i
Property wrier Signature Date

ey Ld f3'tA-z. _
CEiI UE D MAIL — RFTUIti+i RECEIPT RE i x.$)
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
ADJACE N-T RIPARIAN PROPERTY OWNER STATEMENT
dame of Property Owner. D N\J 1!�) S V M, s L
►ddmss of Property: Lf W,6 S T S fIL O b u fZ t /� l 7S , I � ^avI\1 b u N r w
(Lot or Street ,Street or Road, City & County)
applicant's phone #: I D - (, �= 3 (�� iMailing Adder: ► grL w
hereby certify that I own property adjacent to the above referenced property. The individual applying for this pert
as described to me as shown on the =ched drawing the development they are Proposing: A. description of drawn
rich dimensions must be provided with this Letter
I have no objections to this proposal. Vl' I have objections to this proposal.
i you have objections to what is being proposed, you mast notify the Division of Coastal (Management (DCM
t writing within 10 days of receipt of this notice. Correspondence should be mailed to 127 Cardinal Drive E:
41mington, NC 28405-3845. DCM representatives can also be contacted at [phone]. No response is
msidered the same as no obiecdon if von have been notified by Certified Mail.
WAIVER SECTION
anderstand that a pier, dock, mooring piilings, breakwater, boathouse, or lift must be set back a minimum distance i
i' from my area. of riparian access unless waived by me. (If you wish to waive the setback,
)propriate blank below.) You most initial the
I do wish to waive the 15' set back requirement.
I do not wish to waive the 15' set back requirement
�yc.(
L'o—rType e
ailing Addy /
(Riparian Property Owner Information)
Si
Print or Type Name
N1W1mg Address

2/23/2016
2/24/2016
2/25/2016 1
2/25/2016
Brent & Sherrie Turner mas, e 'Wells
Daniel Shirley/Overbeck Marine Construction Inc Laboccetta and Stokely _ _
_ — --
Michael AfifylANA Builders Inc. Cad & Jenn'der Sandlin _
Vamams Docks & Bulkheads Inc. Emma Mims & Jeri Adams
Faro
3869'
45 0
_ $100.00
$450.00
minor fee, Lot 4 Chestnut ;
GP 66332D for Labocetta i
SunTrust
major fee, Stokely, 512 N.
2/24/2016
2/26/2016
2/25/2016
TD Bank
BB &T
7774
$100.00
minor fee, 656 Spot Lane
3/4/2016
7082
$200.00
GP 66304D
3/4/2016
J. Michael Randall
Joel Winegarden
NC SECU _
2867_
$100.00
minor fee, 38 Porpoise Pla
_3/2/2016
3/2/2016
3/4/2016
_
MO/Brandon Grimes
Lawrence Parks/Parks Family Leasing Co.
Wells Fargo
56_541
17-3355
$200.00
GP 66341 D
3/2/2016
3/2/2016
Stephen Conway/Southeastern Coastal Const. Co (Timothy
Moore —
Firs_t Federal
9778
$400.00
GP 66339D @$200
Howard Ramsey
GP 66338D @$200
3/2/2016
3/2/2016
Darrell Emy/Lighthouse Marine Constr. Inc
Bob Barnett — —_
Lee McConnell
B of A
5769
$400.00GP
66340D
GP 66303D
3/2/2016
3/2/2016
Will Richardson/Richardson Construction
Randy Mosley/Allied Marine Contractors LLC
Charles Riggs & Associates
Hobie Buffington/Boatzright Inc.
BB &T _
6275
$200.00
3/3/2016
3/4/2016
Kevin & Wendy Longenecker
B of A
8168
$200.00
GP 66271D
minor fee, 140 Walter R. A
GP 66344D
3/4/2016
3/4/2016
John and Janel Brogan
First Citizens Bank
14449
$100.00
3/4/20161
David & Ellen Surprise
First Citizens Bank
2262
$200.00
r
—

NC Division of Coast-i Mgt, Habitat Impact Compute r Sheet
Applicant: ��V(l P!� �G�,brs Permit #.
Date: 3 j
663
Describe.below the HABITAT disturbances forthe application. All values should match the name, and units of measurement
found in your Habitat code sheet.
Habitat blame
DISTURB TYPE
Choose One
TOTAL Sq. Ft.
(Applied for.
Disturbance total
includes any
anticipated
restoration or
temp impacts)
FIND
(Antic
dis
E
re �
an
imps
Dredge ❑
Fill ❑
Both ❑
Other
Dredge ❑
Fill ❑
Both ❑
Other
Dredge ❑
Fill ❑
Both ❑
Other ❑
Dredge ❑
Fill ❑
Both ❑
Other ❑
Dredge ❑
Fill ❑
Both ❑
Other ❑
Dredge ❑
Fill ❑
Both ❑
Other ❑
Dredge ❑
Fill ❑
Both ❑
Other ❑
Dredge ❑
Fill ❑
Both ❑
Other ❑
Dredge ❑
Fill ❑
Both ❑
Other []
Dredge ❑
Dredge ❑
Dredge ❑
Dredge ❑
Dredge ❑
nrarina M
Fill ❑
Fill ❑
Fill ❑
Fill ❑
Fill ❑
Fill 11
Both ❑
Both ❑
Both ❑
Both ❑
Both ❑
Both ❑
Other ❑
Other ❑
Other ❑
Other ❑
Other ❑
Other ❑
1 Sq. Ft.
TOTAL Feet
for.
MNAL rr*1
(Anticipated final
ipated final
(Applied
urbance.
udes any
Disturbance
total includes
disturbance. .
Excludes any
toration
any anticipated
restoration and/or
/ortemp
restoration or
temp impacf
:t amount) __
_ temp impacts
amount

Management
RENTAL QUALITY ✓ 1/
SENT VIA CERTIFIED MAIL — 7011 0110 0000 3789 2426
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
March 7, 2016
Ms. Martha Chaffins
10 West Salisbury Street
Wrightsville Beach, N.C. 28480
Dear Ms. Chaffins:
PAT MCCRORY
Govemor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
BRAXTON DAVIS
Director
This letter is in response to your correspondence received by the N.C. Division of
Coastal Management on February 22, 2016, regarding your concerns about the proposed
development by Mr. David and Ellen Suprise c/o Mr. Hobie Buffington at 14 West Salisbury
Street, adjacent to Sunset Lagoon, in Wrightsville Beach, New Hanover County, North Carolina.
The project consists removal of an existing docking facility and the construction of a new private
docking facility of the Sunset Lagoon.
Based on site visits by staff with our office and review of the provided drawings provided
by the applicant's authorized agent and a previous riparian survey done in 2002 by the previous
property owner (Hooks), the construction of the proposed private docking facility has been
determined to comply with the current Rules of the Coastal Resources Commission (07H.1200)-
General Permit for construction of piers, docks, and boat houses in the Estuarine Shoreline
AEC, and as such, a permit has been issued to authorize the development. I have enclosed a
copy of the permit, as well as, the relevant statutes.
If you wish to contest our decision to issue this permit, you may file a request for a Third
Party Appeal. The Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission will consider each case and
determine whether to grant your request to file for a Contested Case Hearing. The hearing
request must be filed with the Director of the Division of Coastal Management, in writing and
must be received within twenty (20) days of the disputed permit decision. I have enclosed the
applicable forms and instructions that must be filed prior to that deadline. Please contact me at
910-796-7215, if you have any questions, or if I can provide any additional information.
Respectfully yours,

21 February 2016
TO: Robb Mairs
You asked that I write down my questions and associated comments
for you. I have asked four questions and made comments pertaining
to these questions.
I would also like to have a copy of the CAMA regulatory pages that
pertain to riparian corridors so that I can better understand the
criteria for establishing riparian corridors. I will be happy to pay for
the copy service.
TO: Tony Wilson
Enclosed per your request are the questions and comments I have
provided to Robb. I have one question for the Town of Wrightsville
Beach.
Robb has mentioned on several occasions that the Town stipulates
that property lines be extended beyond the forward edges of
properties to a high tide mark and that riparian corridors be drawn
from there. This may be a good policy for straight shore lines, but it
does not work in "U" shaped lagoons, particularly in Sunset Lagoon
given its problem with erosion. The 2002 survey was drawn
in the aforesaid manner. The result was that some property owners
were given a disproportionate amount of beach access while
denying or limiting water access of other property owners.
Question: If this is the case, when was this decision made and by
whom? How can such a decision be appealed? If the decision was

21 February 2016
I appreciate anything that both of you can do to assist in protecting what
limited beach access we have. I hope that future reconstruction of piers
could be guided by policies that would protect the water rights of all
property owners.
Question 1
Why does CAMA extend property lines and use a fluctuating high tide line
from which to draw riparian corridors in an eroding Sunset Lagoon and
other "U" shaped lagoons instead of drawing the riparian corridors from the
permanent forward corner edges of properties?
Impact of current policy on property owners:
Using a high tide line from which to draw riparian corridors has
resulted in some property owners in Sunset Lagoon to position their
piers either in front of or very close to the homes of adjoining
properties thereby cutting off or curtailing their neighbors' access to
the water. At the same time these pier owners have been able to
maintain expansive unencumbered open areas of beach in front of
their own homes.
Using the forward edges of property lines from which to draw riparian
corridors is a fair means of mapping a lagoon. Although not every
property would be able to position a pier or pole in front of their
home, each property would retain some riparian corridor that
would prevent adjoining property owners from taking advantage of
them. It would also encourage adjoining property owners to share
construction and ownership of piers.

21 February 2016
After a large sandbar was removed in Sunset Lagoon, the lagoon
began to erode west to east. In the photographs below you can see
the significant erosion that has taken place. The erosion continues at
an unfortunate pace. 15 vertical inches of sand have eroded in front
of our home in the bottom center of Sunset Lagoon since 2008. In
the 14 years since 2002, a lot of sand in front of the Hooks' house
has simply disappeared. As the shore line erodes east and toward
the forward edge of the Hooks' property line, the size of their riparian
corridor diminishes in size.

21 February 2016
This is a picture of the same beach taken in 2011.
Question 3
4�
The 2002 survey completed for the Hooks family by Stocks Land Surveying
Company used a high tide marker in front of our home to assist in
--4-"1:-L.:.. - aL - L.:-L. &:A - I ..L......... aL - nnnn ....... LI..... .....,. r" A R A A

21 February 2016
The company I employed in 2008 to survey the bottom of the lagoon
used this same high tide marker to assist in establishing a high tide
line. When I questioned the existence of such a marker, I was told
that Stocks Land Surveying had told my company where to find the
marker and I was advised of its location. There is no designated
marker. What was identified as a marker was merely the remnants
of an old pipe that delivered water to a pier that once existed in front
of our home.
Also note that although our survey used the criteria provided by
Stocks Land Surveying to be consistent in the completion of our
survey, the elevation levels and high tide lines vary. Given the loss of
fifteen vertical inches of sand in the last eight years and the fact that
there were six years between the Hooks survey and my 2008 survey,
I assume that the erosion that took place in the lagoon between 2002
and 2008 to be the reason. A current survey would reflect the
additional loss of 15 vertical inches of sand at the bottom of the
lagoon with additional loss of sand westward from the center of the
lagoon toward the property that once belonged to the Hooks family.
Shown in the photograph below is a 2008 picture of the removal of
the vertical portion (the "high tide marker") and a part of the horizontal
piping that delivered water to the pier. You can see in the photograph
that white sand is covering the horizontal bar that connects two
pilings. The second photograph shows the same piling and cross
bar. It was taken in February 2016. The yardstick shows clear
evidence of the 15 inch vertical erosion of sand that took place
between 2008 and 2016. This photograph demonstrates that the
complexion of the lagoon has changed due to signifiant erosion
since 2002. The third photograph shows that the shore line is now
situated well behind the pilings. Periodically high tides extend
beyond the shore line depicted in the photograph. These high tides
have over time advanced toward the forward edge of our property

21 February 2016
'*_- _..r
Photograph 1
The horizontal wooden boards are covered in sand. They extends to
the left toward the other piling. The vertical portion of the marker is
the short end of the pipe. The block in the photograph was originally
placed over the pipe so that no one would inadvertently step on the
jagged edge of the pipe.The white stick to the right is the handle of
the shovel being used to prop up the piping. Below is a picture taken
in February 2016 of the same piling and crossbar.

Photograph 3
Question 4
21 February 2016
The Hooks family constructed their pier on a survey that I know
inadvertently slipped by CAMA in 2002. It is unfortunate that the forward
edge of the property lines were not used to draw the riparian corridors.
What can CAMA now do to provide relief to the owners of the four
properties between the two piers at the bottom of the lagoon?
The four properties properties positioned between the two piers
shown in the photographs below have very limited water access.
Note that the owners of the two piers that border these four properties
enjoy not only the use of their piers but also enjoy the use of a wide
expanse of beach. (Note the two photographs below.) As the first
application for the total reconstruction of piers built using the 2002
survey begin, this would be an appropriate time to implement a policy
that would require new construction to use riparian corridors drawn

21 February 2016
The Hooks' house is on the right. They enjoy beach access
on both sides of their pier which is in the left portion of the
photograph. Two of the four houses at the bottom of the lagoon
with limitPri watar arrpcc arp to thA loft of the Hnnkc' hni min

21 February 2016
Note the pier on the right. The shorter house in the middle owns
the pier which is positioned in front of the two houses to the right.
These houses are the other two of the four properties at the bottom
"U" of the lagoon. While these properties have extremely limited
beach access, note the unencumbered beach in front of the house
that owns the pier.

Feb 10, 2016
To: Martha Hines Chaffins
10 W Salisbury Rd.
Wrightsville Beach NC 28480
From: Boatzright Inc.
817 Berwyn Rd.
Wilmington NC 28409
Boatzright is the agent of record for David Suprise, of 14 W Salisbury ur.
Wrightsville Beach NC 28480
Dear adjacent riparian property owner,
You have received this letter as part of the required CAMA notification process for
adjacent property owners.
The adjacent property owner at 14 W Salisbury Dr. has applied for a CAMA
General permit to install a boat lift and replace the fixed pier and floating dock. All
worK wigs remain msiae the riparian set DacK as per the arawing aitacnea. 1 ne
work will consist of installing new boat lift, removing the old pier and constructing
a new pier.
A CAMA, Adjacent Riparian Property Owner Statement and drawing are attached.
As an adjacent landowner please sign and return the form attached.
Best regards
Hobie Buffineton

PG.tSS pig2
��

WORTMAN
►,►1 1.141) PG. 851
tsar i II 1 00�:°._
mAn
C ,
t )! VI t (A IMI•N I c ill3D I •� ,�\�=}-,``� + o
3
LO1 b :
9Z -in
rnQ 1
C
... _.___ • •:: � t`_ �-`-mow+ ` � \ �• � � 1`0
JEFFERY L. +
JEANNE R. MOORE DB, 1935 PG. 1407
LAT 6 '
N
I \�
Nsa°2a�oo"E �
90.21
Fn-
-
3402, OOO 1251,84
EVELYN W. 071
BLIZZARD TRU5T
DB. 2851 PG. 863 rn
PT. LOTS 7 4 8 ZI ` h� -- " •. `
,,o—

CERTIFIED NiiAM - RETURN RF CEIPT RE OUR. �S i r
DMSIOi`+ OF COASTAL L `�AGEMErT
AWACENT RIPARIAN PROPERTY owN-ER STATEMENT
dame of Property Owner. D Q\) " D S V ?a l s L
Address of Property t{ CST S A L I S b v tz 2) 7S ,d,i,
(Lot or Street , Street or Road, City & County) .
applicant's phone #: - a 6 JL- 3 �y Mailing Address:
tJ)Ln.,� Q�yo
hereby certify that I own property adjacent to the above referenced property. The individual applying for this pe;
1a5 described to me as shown on the attached drawing the development they are proposing= description of draw
vith dimensions must be provided with this letter.
I have no objections to this proposal. ✓ I have objections to this proposal
f you have objections to what is being proposed, you must notify the Division of Coastal Management (DCl
a writing within 10 days of receipt of this notice. Correspondence should be mailed to 127 Cardinal Drive
X-1Imington, NC 28405-3845. DCM representatives can also be contacted at [phone]. No response is
considered the same as no ob eection if von have been notified by Certified Mail.
WAIVER SECTION
understand that a pier, dock, mooring pilings, breakwater, boathouse, or lift must be set back a minimum distancf
.5' from my area of riparian access unless waived by me. (If you wish to waive the setback, you must initial the
appropriate blank below.)
I do wish to waive the 15, set back requirement.
_. ✓ -I do not wish to waive the 15' setback requirement_
U� ' et'z J
6� � Ll- ea)
'nnt or Type Name
tailing Addres� rr //
(Riparian Property Owner Information)
Signature
;RT]IA H. rNtltCTal_r
Print or Type Name
Mailing Address

(AME5 it MARTMA
WORTMAN
DB. 3349 P(;. 851
LOT 4
BERAMAR
DEVELOPMENT
CORP. .
DB. 1805 PG. 1030
LOT 5
JEfFERY L. 4
jEANNE R. MOORE
DD. 1935 PG. 1407
LOT G
N34024'OC7F
0
0yy
<
>
to
.2 P
[lU
i n toK 0,N A.-4
r;
ti
.
534924100W 125.54t 52 5 (Y--
(A.
71 S,-
EVEL"4 W.
DL12ZARD TRU5T
015. 2851 FG, 8C3
FT. LOTS 7 4 8 v.
41,
.4
Q
0
cy� QP
C9 > f")
Co
7-
0. --f CD 0 co >
n < rD

LI► WnRTMAN
I •I 1 t. 140 PG. 851 0 !1 ; ♦ 1 q .,�
p
1 #1 Vl I (il'MI N f Z Z
tSfjro I't3, 1 o"jo �'
rn n rn Z
JEFFERY L.
JEANNE R. MOORE \ 1 I •�+ 1 Z� \ .-�
6"DB. 1935 PG. 1407 P
LOT 6
N34°24'00"
23.00'
1,55
90.2 i ' `
7o r =Ip !n /
6474100"W 128':�8�g'
r�(TIE) \ \
EVELYN W. 7k ' ' 6�
BLIZZARD TRU5T
DB. 2851 PG. 863
►'T. LOT5 7 ; 8 zl `.h,llh��

VA,
Qdar,Aing �o I-V�N
aaid o►► Xa
j, oac

�bLK P,c2

Basic Map
WB

v) o \,\V-1
/ —ec, / / ,iy` at `6
BE5T FIT CIRCLE \ \ �0
RADIU5 - 148' ---\
/
MARGARET M. 5PALLEK
/ • DB. 1940 FG 122
j % / • / — — LOT Is �7)
I j / CHARlE5 F. HALL
/ ELEANOR G. HALL
SUNSET / DB. 3018 PG. 61 2
LOT 14 I
LAGOON ;
MID -POINT OF RIPARIAN BASELINE / /�/ •
A5 PER LOCAL CAMA OFFICIAL \ I / / I ALAN B. BLAKE
LOT13
DEGREES �` �� ry ( Z
RYP / 3�� — — — — C
y
WILUAM A- RANEY JR. 4 Q
JEAN RAN N I —
DB. 3186 PG. PG. 55551
/ LOT 12
I • I • I 351�N
08
j /• L/ t \,p LOT- 624
5B \ W\ \
BULKHFADJ 41 (sue ( \
/ LOG j \ (; c 9}
j Q H1 WAU In
Eli-
< U v I z o I J O_ 7.9 02KSTOKr
It IT)in
c°vi K f \
' Ins I LJ9 Og I uZ�g :ram � DWELLING # 14 oujNO •(�Sa�S \ 25.0
to >OO Z-
-Qi p p Y— PORCHIP
lain
Sy \
0
N55"36'0O W
e
rnt er
2
BP
5ALI5BURY STREET _ R

1 May 2016
Dear Robb,
Thank you for your email in reference to my visit to CAMA on Thursday,
28 April 2016.
When I noted that the construction of the pier in front of what was the Hooks'
property had begun, I checked to see if the 15 foot setback marker on the
eastern side of the corridor had been repositioned. I was disappointed to find
that it had not. There was a second metal pole in the same position placed to
indicate that a second survey had been conducted.
I am concerned that the marked riparian corridor for the Hooks' property is not
the same riparian corridor that is shown on the 2002 survey of the lagoon. It is
also not the same as indicated by the 2008 survey I contracted to establish the
riparian corridors of the six properties at the bottom of the lagoon. It appears that
instead of using the property line between the Blizzard's property and the Hooks'
former property to establish the eastern side of the riparian corridor, the surveyor
used the property line between the Blizzard's property and our property. This
action widens the corridor significantly allowing additional space for the
construction of the pier and further limiting our access to the water.
What can be done to correct this situation? I do not believe that you have made
a site inspection since the survey of the corridor. When you do visit the site, you
will see the survey marker near the cedar tree that marks the eastern edge of the
Hooks' property which was placed there at the time of the property sale. There is
not 15 feet from the extended property line to the setback marker.
Do I need to commission a separate survey to reestablish a riparian corridor for
this pier or will CAMA require Boatzright Incorporated to adhere to the riparian
corridor as established in the 2002 survey of Sunset Lagoon and the permit for
construction issued in March?
In reference to my correspondence of 21 February 2016. 1 wanted to again

not going to change its position, there was no point to hiring a lawyer and going
through the appeal process.
I will be glad to meet with you and Debbie Wilson at your convenience. My only
expectation is that the pier that is being constructed be within the Hooks' riparian
corridor as established in the 2002 survey of Sunset Lagoon and that it be in
compliance with the CAMA permit issued on 7 March 2016.
Thank you once again for your time,
Martha Chaffins
[phone]
15 Foot Setback Marker Real Estate Marker Setback Marker
i
The lot marker is
in the background.

Sunday, 10 April 2016
Robb,
Yesterday I noticed the survey marker in front of the Blizzard house establishing a 15
foot setback for the riparian corridor for the new pier in front of what was formally the
Hooks' property.
This 15 foot setback marker cannot possibly be positioned correctly. The setback is
supposed to be 15 feet inward from the extended property line between what was the
Hooks' property and the Blizzard's property.
Please note the pictures below. Picture 1 shows the setback marker. Picture 2 shows
the survey marker used to establish the forward edge of the Hooks/Blizzard properties
at the time of the Hooks property sale. (It is positioned immediately to the right of the
cedar tree.) Picture 3 shows the top of the setback marker looking back towards the
cedar tree. (If you look closely, the property marker can be seen to the immediate right
of the tree.) You will note there is no possibility that the 15 foot setback marker is
positioned 15 feet inward from the extended property lines between the two houses.
There needs to be an adjustment of the 15 foot setback survey marker and
consequently the marker that denotes the vertex of the angle that establishes the length
of the pier.
I cannot imagine how this has happened. Construction on the pier has not begun. Any
assistance CAMA may provide in correcting this error is deeply appreciated.
Thanks,
Martha Chaff ins
[phone]
Picture ONE Picture TWO Picture THREE
}

1 May 2016
Dear Robb,
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
MAY 0 2 2016
Thank you for your email in reference to my visit to CAMA on Thursday,
28 April 2016.
When I noted that the construction of the pier in front of what was the Hooks'
property had begun, I checked to see if the 15 foot setback marker on the
eastern side of the corridor had been repositioned. I was disappointed to find
that it had not. There was a second metal pole in the same position placed to
indicate that a second survey had been conducted.
I am concerned that the marked riparian corridor for the Hooks' property is not
the same riparian corridor that is shown on the 2002 survey of the lagoon. It is
also not the same as indicated by the 2008 survey I contracted to establish the
riparian corridors of the six properties at the bottom of the lagoon. It appears that
instead of using the property line between the Blizzard's property and the Hooks'
former property to establish the eastern side of the riparian corridor, the surveyor
used the property line between the Blizzard's property and our property. This
action widens the corridor significantly allowing additional space for the
construction of the pier and further limiting our access to the water.
What can be done to correct this situation? I do not believe that you have made
a site inspection since the survey of the corridor. When you do visit the site, you
will see the survey marker near the cedar tree that marks the eastern edge of the
Hooks' property which was placed there at the time of the property sale. There is
not 15 feet from the extended property line to the setback marker.
Do I need to commission a separate survey to reestablish a riparian corridor for
this pier or will CAMA require Boatzright Incorporated to adhere to the riparian
corridor as established in the 2002 survey of Sunset Lagoon and the permit for
construction issued in March?
In reference to my correspondence of 21 February 2016. 1 wanted to again
m iactinn (�AMA'c rnntini earl i ica of thin 9nng ci irvav nivan thin cinnifirant arncinn

+ I ' t
art+ �..! � jr - . � •*a
• � i
L"