38466D - Frankel

AMA 1�!L DREDGE & FILL
fr
ENERAL PERMIT ' Previous permit#
ew _iModification _Complete Reissue ❑Partial Reissue Date previous permit issued '
:d by the State of North Carolina,Department of Environment and Natural Resources 7'/
istal Resources Commission in an area of environmental concern pursuant to 15A NCAC T f( , 2 49 ocr
❑Rules attached.
Jame Y iic craw,&' / Project Location: County bery leevUelj
/43' 'r'i'„ 01',161 7g - Street Address/State Road/Lot#(s) /p//Q
///ii/it 71/././2 State'` ZIP 2b'/Q1 / 3 ..udY-/ l�t/-e€711Z .
9/(I) 3,,5�}'Q,3 26 Fax#( ) Subdivision ..7,01 j�r^!,e7 js / L•ll� -I
I Agent 5 /� City ,./Y//faiii le'', ZIP 'ge/,
QQQQrrrr���� M
❑CW PTA �'ES ❑PTS Phone# (_) 4 /45-8 River Basin r'/r-,`
❑OEA s HHF S�`IH ❑UBA ❑N/A Adj.Wtr. Body it ig./lj/ (nat /rr
❑ PWS: ❑FC:
s / no PNA eyes / no Crit.Hab. yes / no Closest Maj.Wtr. Body 4(y/'*' 624" ,
e__cfi b4r ✓
'roject/Activity fie AN-471! G�lle-•r5/2/i.- —X. /4,74,,,,, .1-7lj/ ' ' -"
f N'elceAJ/l., 7 7il V<,71ii.7 544 Geel ybfris.e�rT (Scale: / i/_
Ilength 9{/ x is,' • r
• .1 .,Erb _ ,<f
- f
(s) :r1i 'G" IibIC,��'i /
' "
tM
Riprap length —
F. -•- -— j +
istance offshore y4 i.. ...- . y .-- {
distance offshore r _4t-
L
mel F /I 1,
,i- i .
yards if l, i ' I.
✓Boatlift i I j '� . .-
'InirMi
1 punk ',
r ,tj '
i
dozing +— - W. �� �i
IJ......
' eA I
7 �' Lam. nihn, ij - - a -
Length / I
not sure yes it2 '
i� 1
not sure yes 01?-Li { .l- i { ._ _
m: n/a yes 00 1 I I l 4, . t I l « 1 —r f-
yes r +_.. —1 + i
tached: yes ,ay, -
permit may be required by: - � ��i' . I I See note on back regarding River Basin ri

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
ADJACENT RIPARIAN PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION/WAIVER FORM
rame of Individual Applying For Permit: itierifrifil , Pa/thk-t -
1 'j7 SoJNb ,..,)f-x, ( 02.
.ddress of Property: etb,e,-,, „r _S�, :,:s- ,, -,-),-- —0 r
(Lot or Street#, Street or Road)
Idd iL►yl1NL>1-1),N !`1Z,,., 1 \A1- -
(City and County)
hereby certify that I own property adjacent to the above-referenced property. The individul
Dplying for this permit has described to me as shown on the attached drawing the development the
re proposing. A description or drawing, with dimensions, should be provided with this letter.
etI have no objections to this proposal.
F you have objections to what is being proposed, please write the Division of Coast:
lanagement, 127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, NC 28405 or call 910-395-390
'ithin 10 days of receipt of this notice. No response is considered the same as no objection
ou have been notified by Certified Mail.
WAIVER SECTION
understand that a pier, dock, mooring pilings, breakwater, boat house or boat lift must I
A bck a minimum distance of 15' from my area of riparian access-unless waived by me. (
ou wish to waive the setback, you must initial the appropriate blank below.)
I do wish to waive the 15' setback requirement.
..✓ r I do not wish to waive the 15' setback requirement.
_..;/I' /. 9:4 X. 71 q 7, vO,
ign Name Date

Hf ( '
r.c, BROWN
a� BK, 824 PC 427 \�`„(,.
�,rAK
lit
Site
da•
J� S 5B'23'30' C 437.82' �l ` \
LOCATION MAP L07 10 ,;
. (i'ef u'''...,‘:::: ' lh 1 v. ''''''ts,
ni CA' �e �� 1oi
, K ,\
. !
N 2313'10• w
313.94' ,-
R 5 43'4O'14' W /
SOUS° WATCH DRtV� ,�0 •rp +' 27.83' _ ll
(;6' PR iYArt gm) - y40l. 10' EASFNEN/ 1 LOT'9
RA
Lf7T 8 f
PLOT FC
P►'-I"��� Grde-�(Wk.':t� I' ROBINSON ROBINSON & A
I� 1 T`I 1 r1,�,-r
T/f /S NOT AN ACTUAL SURY£Y, LEGEND: BUILDERS,
1 Ip,C OA I.R.S. 0 IRON MK CA ROO SIT
�--J� pSC(-rP tr,,OR c.w. o ♦;11fiN6 ma 6.0 OR Roo LOT 10 INTRACOAS'
n'1 `�{• .4 1 Cm. o CCnUtR rofan8n�
T _ ,J �� S r ¢ trir uI MASONSOR0 TO
H a �� �- (^tea.r1 pp•K• A Ric, NW NEW HANOVER COUNTY, t
C.,A:(1`J l' �.1 1 1= I �-Fi^°r�" • NDk-rOnuNtNttD et:man JANUARY 27,
TTo S Pa 0I Lc, �5 ©�S1 GRAPH
�+77 TT _ N c N 1H15 LOi !S IM A fL00D HAZARD AREA ACCORDING I
S 1 IJAR G ^':' dv SON & ASSOCIATES �D C01{MUNIIY-PANEL N0. J70168 0102E I wu
ONE NORTH) 'O n ST., WILMINGTON, NC ZONE. `MO (EL11) DATE^ SEPTEMBER 3, 1992 _

DIVISION OF COASTAL IVIANAGEMENT SEP 3 0 2004
ADJACENT RIPARIAN PROPERTY_QWNEI.NOTIFICATION/WAIVER FORM
Name of Individual Applying For Permit !v4 : tejt,, `LCLt1
Address of Property: C c e r r, 5 c,r‘ L \ o. L D r:4---
(Lot or Street#, Street or Road)
(Ai Iri.:cvai•v.., tie..: F�ar�cr
(City and Canty)
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.
If you have objections to what is being proposed, please write the Division of Coastal
Management, 127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, NC 28405 or call 910-395-3900
within 10 days of receipt of this notice. No response is considered the same as no objection if
you have been notified by Certified Mail.
- ' ! ar. :ti.fc!'.!iVw
I understand that a pier,dock, mooring pilings,breakwater, boat house or boat lift must be
set lick a minimum distance of 15'from my oral 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' setback requirement
I do not wish to waive the 15' setback requirement.
C U. 'D, y /3� ..
Sign Nafne Cl ;r CAA- �`"^ Ord to
1 C I'I� LAIWA
,��' - ,1 A 1r' - 1,En/1- 1 iL C h��i i

Elci$ti.n s 1 4 kWay -6
VIP
1J
v lalk 'Y tmAccckx-Dr i4e- 4,Ke46a
(p‘,a.s a� \ 76" COO striv
?it,
0111111114111 LOT 10
30t-4_4 • ,*
.00111111i ,u ;
‘i . \\*%. iff :- ' '' *,,....„, trfs3616P13* irt
silt** LOT 8 let>age jamitaiiimixti
se
�ritiMr siwr►
EASEMENT DETAIL

t
I I
,e►Yin Al.YA()I~J 4 IVie+ , .r.__.—.----
y cY -�4 �' Jd
iN I
gc,od. Q�'i.)ci
I - - I
I f
_ 1 .i -- I , _ J v .a J .9
\I- '. .---:
fd I I
41
., \ ..,,..---•-• ‘‘'' '‘I I ,_"N\b\°. 1
4 �`� - c
z •d ?Lir =80 *0 62

r,CI9now7v I•y
BK. 924 PO.427 ``��. q
CAW ,g'9
S S9 23'30' C 437.52' .
�'1
MAP [07 !0 11,.-47,
rt ::Ir.
mow, t s
�` ,-‘ ...
m
313.94' ' 2...,',.41,,,,..", .A2'£4514164.1"uf' ,'‘ ..‘,. .. .4.11:-?
-..mk� N 58'S8.11' W 43``
R S 42'40'14' W
H_ p-- o,o 27,a3_ _ {{a 1 y
gm r fit` ?0'E,tSrllENl �OT 9 i .
R- 1.
N '
L0r 8
t\t‘,
PLOT FOR
\ 11wIn,,.i,-r Pcwe.irE-'::D,,i I. ROBINSON & ASSOCIATES
TIC rsNOIANAcruk sine LEGEND: BUILDERS, INC. •
IP.R OR I.R.R 0 IRON APO A RCO lir
�� Cr?.Oft CO. • (f111M°PM PPc DR Rao LOT 10 INTRACOASTAL WATCH
- r( o?4'C•c ,-vk 4-r C.01 ) Gm, CNlm %r01dAtR7
'Cron*
C uNt MASONSORO TOWNSHIP
° A- f e_o••r1 R cA P.K, A i�,"TafxY NYC NEW HANOVER COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
l�. ,��y ;•1 C•� r D • NDM•MCNWILN!CD CDKNC
Pe JANUARY 27, 2004
`'O-1 '1 ES� GRAPHIC SCALE
�. �� � s 1 O l oc-5� a
• • r
1H15 L01 (S IM A FLOOD HAZAR0 AREA ACCORDING (01 MT I
BENSON & ASSOCIATES 10 CO�iMUNI1Y-PANEL NO. J70158 0102E 'Pa• ti ROBINSOID.D5hCA242
>th ST., WILMINGTON, NC ZONE: A10 (ELII) DATt: SEPTEMBER 3, 1992

OSAL: • •
-
In C ! l- To a ty PROPOSAL NO.
I —
• SHEET NO.
k x JLt1I7
.1-175 k 8Em H`,/1 1 (! DATE q/
.SUBMITTED TO: �3 v/,r'a WORK TO BE PERFORMED AT: O�/ /�Oa
ADDRESS
/9QT Fg n,V (-
5o ciAvb u47e /* 49c°6 457/it G{JAie#
DATE OF PLANS
W2P 4' /V •C
, .
ARCHITECT
)y propose to furnish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the completion of
A°,440C ,77-- Jn6,` Or Gr/AL,ewjc y rain /1/DIz'b z1
SrD of !-'.9tr,z e y - TZ) 7` 7 SGti. /FieN �ZZ E
tk_______EAs. rine.AJ7-. Aacs. AI er_____ Z-Z,i he el CL- eleA-
P AU/1147NC. eie liTyvh-- /qihM
al is guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance with the drawings and specificat
for above work, and completed in a substantial workmanlike manner for the sum of ®IvE 7?j`0US/1X/j)
42 zz Dollars ($ /6 0 9 ac
nents to be made as follows:
Respectfully submitted i �Ge-e-jl0
m or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs
uted only upon written order, and will become an extra charge Per
rove the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, ac-
slays beyond our control.
Note - This proposal may be withdr
by us if not accepted within d

•
SAL/#7,9 Y g liOA 4-0 itir I4._I/
PROPOSAL NO.
'goy/0/9 SHEET NO.
6,/ t.V2g&--� ✓v ° 2, DATE
.SUBMITTED TO: Vg(f WORK TO BE PERFORMED AT:
/9-2T`�, e ADDRESS
. of//Ui). CJ # 9e 7 1.t/ 7 /
4 is,n^�6 7- 4 ,C` DATE OF PLANS
1. , /I�o ARCHITECT
)y propose to furnish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the completion of .a 2/7" 5
L J,4, x d,9 A / de-2 7D 7-J71/
o cluWEe., �/9,' A uenz�� 402
6/1)-5en- la,
al is guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance with
��the
,,drawings nd specificati
for above work, and completed in a substanti I workmanlike manner for the sum of it/-74e.
/14.30eZ)
7—ttK- 61066,41.725 V a Ilars ($ Va• V•0
nents to be made as follows:
Respectfully submitted ( �<"" lZ'f-44do
in or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs
uted only upon written order, and will become an extra charge Per
)ove the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, ac-
?lays beyond our control.
Note - This proposal may be withdr
by us if not accented within d

-J Wew35od
IL aed pe!!!lia0
! _n
x a a • a -,:,,a , , 3 ,�• ° . 03 $ a6elsod
W <woo•sdsnamivo•le alisgann mo l!s!n uo!letwolu!Nan!lap Jo3
Ln
O I Hoi (pepinoid a6eJanoa eaueJnsul oN:Alup leery aljsawoa) Lnisn {).Si '''
c ' 1d I3 33 E1 L.111 I V IN a 31 d I1d 3 3 o 'woa"sdsn"nnrnrn le al!sgarn ino l!s!n uo!lewwolu!Nan!
Co ¢ 1103iAJOS Ietsod '5•fl ovoid e5eianoa aousunsul oN aloe HEW ells
o d 1d13338 11,1VW a31d11.
o �/_ Wlaoinaas Ieisod
nN 1.8017-d-CO-I8d3Va ld!a3eH wnlau ogsawoa LOOZ 19n6ny'I.1
Q EE55 9622. E000 09T2 hOOL (lage!aowesw
Jags
aI Nan!a a ou
O sax 0 (aa3 awg)L I o P 3 lseu 'b
'a Q 0 0 ❑ PIN painsul❑ L p
Lu ti ( Cr es!pusyoaa!n!.01ld!aoau wnle j ❑ peiels!6au ❑ J 0 7Jq 7
Qp 1 I!ev sseidx3 0 Hein!pa!l!ua0- 7 N `N el 9 (VJ e
edA1 eovueS £
I
q 1 '-,..5 5527W i/8
0
.,! 8 . ,� r11 oN 0 :Mo!aq ssaJppe Nanllap Ialue's3.1 l! :ol passe
�i- m ac (NI s9J, ❑ ,l wal!wal lualall!p sseippe Nan!!ap sl '0
sliwiad coeds}i luoa
c N L!1 aoaldllew ayl}o�{oeq ayl 01 PJeo
o Nanpaa to alea '0 (aweN paluud)�(q pan!aoau •g •nol(01 pJeo ay'uanlaa ueo
'pa
Caassa�pp � as�anai ayl uo ssaippe pue aweu
c c _� .■ loa�v V I Pa�isap s!Nan!Iaa pa101a1sa
e 4 y alaldwoo osly"£pue'Z'I. swell
0 o u"I
ti , Afi3/11730 NO N01103S SIHl 3137d1100 N01103S S1H1 3137d1N•
•
Iwo O
2 o 4;:,
ru lsor d eo IFJd0V5 1d!aoau wnlau o!lsawoa 100Z lsn6ny'
o
ILI 01155 962d. E000 09TT +100Z (Iagelaoindaswc
o o I rt1 m iaqu
Kx cco 0 a. 0I ul o O 5 saA 0 (eej eilx3),Nangaa peloulsau 'q
a.
.C10.0 ❑ PIN painsul❑
es!pueywalry iol ld!aoeb wnleu ❑ peJels!6au ❑
l!ew sseidx3 0 I!e!ry Pe!lwJa0 jej
edAl ao!AJ$5 '£ I, h h g2 ' 7 N ' y' e
'N-I ..r+lo4 .100/ S
• I J..-Nr,cri 9 t17/<
ON ❑ :moleq sseippe ken!lep Jelue'S3),l! :ol passer
seA❑ d l wap wort lueial;!p sseippe Nan!lap sl 'a
}0 j (J G ,/ �� ' Jo)io d a0ads}i mil
a/ nf11{ aoaldllew ay'}o�loeq ail 01 pieo s
ang Q to ale •0 (a a aluu q pa ao �g "nog(of pJeo ayl wnla!ueo e
easseippy❑ 1727 iT7J/�ni/ X esleAaa eq/uo ssaippe pue aweu.
lue6y❑ ` G, 7 //✓� / 'paalsap Si NeAi eG paloulsaf
T b einIts 'y alaldwoo osld"£Pue`Z'I.swell
A1J3n1730 NO NO11O3S SIHl 3137d11100 N01103S SIHI 3137dW 0

29 04 08: 47a p, 2
r
N.Ti_____ _co _
`'s‘'
Iits,- \
-:
_--_•• '
I I p -- '
k,.i A LL-:NAN/
dr" • r c` c? ! — . h ., I ' C' ! .% -�-P+ -c'- .` C• ' .) •., - ,1 .. - ., - 'ti l.t
/n rl�yi1 � rNty I PA AR5ii l rti
1
L '.
pfl. Ci 5rir 0 ,t k
i.iftC.14 N/A ( qc
I r
1 ..--••
-
4 - I r..ot'drty L/t
W, -- I r
„
w_ 1 i.

. . .
11V130 IN31A3SV3
Orkimilsvamm NO egralleMS016110 OM ilift. 01111.0.101111.4111 ORO es inamissiwe
4001CIN
ROW .
auz,ociturt .
<I 2 101
4TV*
$ - i
,„,„
4 analva ,922.0 v An
ow mow_ 2 **INN\ I
um',•-______ , Alla ilkplitalleki mir
Ne,
..."
eilL. i-* a r - '..-1-11--4-:"- ...*:•:..:i.:1•-t."%l'A .• 4°-'4a. ' z- ',..-- •" a. cs_ 7 a • a
____--- - /
'Mc
\1411111 ._____ . -
Ap,r4 j--C,
tOmgmailowie a9runiliVissoria.
\ii
ow 0 t Jai
wiirat a.+atscum
IMO 101111.11101011.10.1111 me „
%US 400 44 \ ---...infr-j- --- i(-1 -59vAid)
(1_2+"7"CI? A4M-ArNNt
F1104,A
C IA 14S 99 / 1)1f2T-Ny_MS.

5OSAL ' .
//71 ,iC PROPOSAL NO.
340x I ,, i^ SHEET NO.
34+75A,race 81-4 1V C= DA257/'7a0a,
AL SUBMITTED TO: c.:3-V WORK TO BE PERFORMED AT:
ADDRESS
e Altr `,f,iw c_
s 50c.eNh ,de _'7/49e0 4S tiff )61
,! 7Jy�/ /�f / DATE OF PLANS
JO. ! ARCHITECT
•eby propose to furnish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the completion of
,P1 GA-Tr 916# 2f 6 t( 9 y' i oin /Jo4J, xis
s �E o C�9��r�'I - 777 Sow y�aeiy �5Z7
Ot ��nsc1T
PA 14r1/4.771/t, ae 3 A.g
trial is guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance with the drawings and specific
sd for above work, and completed in a subs antial workmanlike manner for the sum of ®/rE 'Thtk/—Cildd
ale Zeadfies 735111) 'r2 ----------Dollars ($ /d O 7. QC)
lyments to be made as follows:
Respectfully submitted ieedGe.,-4"60
ation or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs
recuted only upon written order, and will become an extra charge Per
above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, ac-
r delays beyond our control.
Note - This proposal may be with
by us if not accepted within

F'OSAL _
/ W-7V PROPOSAL NO.
06OIV /4/9 SHEET NO.
//�C.i' ta7 e "1679 / f 4/ . e DATE
AL SUBMITTED TO: WORK TO BE PERFORMED AT:
ADDRESS
s (.04-77'y j)/e /r�Y/�('6MT//C.- L-�.7/1
t Th /E'70/Y! /} DATE OF PLANS
VO. / / ARCHITECT
reby propose to furnish the materials and perform the labor necessary for the completion of Y 5Ce3
v LS 4o r - C'L e,r,Dr crypt(yf (.077B�'71/� toe
AidscWaiti4,
Trial is guaranteed to be as specified, and the above work to be performed in accordance with the drawings and specific
ed for above work, and completed in a substtaan .al workmanlike manner for the sum of yam ? fft/ti/eCZ
Lei t/C ..)f)c C e5 7`" ""/// 00 Ilars ($ 9/a. �D
iyments to be made as follows:
Respectfully submitted r "
•ation or deviation from above specifications involving extra costs
xecuted only upon written order, and will become an extra charge Per
above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon stokes, ac-
rdelays beyond our control. Note - This proposal may be with
by us if not accepted within 90

GENERAL PERNIIT COMPUTER FORM 35-'i/,6
PLICANT NAME: 4/ c"' r N"�t
IDITIONAL NAMES:
',C DESIG: DEVELOP AREA: o i 3 PROJ DESC: A- /Z
1 only take 6) (Will only take 1)
)RK: P G e
1 only take 4)
dNT:
I only take 4)
P: NM s "36
I only take 6)
ACTION EXPIRATION
LEDGE&FILL REQUIRED:
,MA MAJOR DEVEL REQUIRED:

NCDENR
Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.
910-395-3900
910-395-3964 FAX
Fax /
i
To: C� �'-- From:
Fax Date: `// Qi Q tJJ/
v Pho el 7 3 Pages: /�p
Re: CC:
❑ Urgent 0 For Review 0 Please Comment 0 Please Reply 0 Please Recycle
•Comments:
.17:01/j
SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECT ION ON DELIVERY
i Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Si e
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ❑Agent
• Print your name and address on the reverse X El Addressee
so that we can return the card to you. B Received by(Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery
• Attachthiscard to the back of the mailpiece,
orthefront r Loth // CY, /(�/
or on if space permits. I� �r
D. Is delivery address different fn item 1? 0 Yes
1. Article Addressed to: if YES,enter delivery address below: 0 No
rnReK LvoNfY
l(n ,L SoviJ wATct1 lam.

r �
Message Confirmation Report NOV 01-2004 05:16 PM ION
Fax Number .
Name
Name/Number 97721723
Page 16
Start Time NOV-01-2004 05:13PM MON
Elapsed Time 02'54"
Mode STD ECM
Results [O.K]
NCDENR
OivieIon of Coastal Management
127 Cardin Drive Ert
910-395-3900
910-305-3064 FAX
Fax
I
To: LJ �/ l
(e)J From:
Date:
44
Plat/)" 7a—!/17 R 1 Pages: --
Ra: CC:
0 Urgent 0 For Review 0 Please Comment 0 Please Reply 0 Ploaeo Recycle
•Comments:

ArA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
:hael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones. Director William G. Ross Jr., Sec
Notice of Intent to Suspend CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D
-tified Mail- 7002 2410 0003 1721 1179
urn Receipt Requested
November 3, 2004
Arthur Frankel
3 Hearthside Drive •
nington, NC 28412
r Mr. Frankel:
This letter is in reference to CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D, issued to you on October 26, 2004, for
:ation of an existing access walkway to a private community pier, at your property, located at 1637 Sound Wa
e. (as per New Hanover County Tax Office), in Wilmington, New Hanover County.
Based upon information brought to the attention of the Division of Coastal Management by your adjacent
ian property owners, it appears that an adjacent riparian property owner notification was not properly submitti
,wner of Lot#9 of Intracoastal Watch, adjacent to the property aforementioned.
Under these circumstances, the Division of Coastal Management is suspending CAMA General Permit No.
6-D. The permit will remain suspended until the Division receives copies of the appropriate notification to the
arty owner of lot#9. At that time, the Division will re-evaluate the permit decision according to the newly sup
mation.
I request that you contact Mr. Robb Mairs, Field Representative for the Division of Coastal Management it
Iington Regional Office at [phone])indicating your intentions to comply with the request specified herei
y, you will need to schedule a pre-application meeting with the Local Field Representative prior to obtaining a
xd and/or new CAMA General Permit.
'‘ncerel ,
R r`
1E;
Gregson
strict Manager

AvicA
r
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
:hael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones. Director William G. Ross Jr., Sec
Notice of Intent to Suspend CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D
rtified Mail- 7002 2410 0003 1721 1179
turn Receipt Requested
November 3. 2004
. Arthur Frankel
8 Hearthside Drive
mington, NC 28412
.r Mr. Frankel:
This letter is in reference to CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D, issued to you on October 26, 2004, for
cation of an existing access walkway to a private community pier, at your property, located at 1637 Sound Wa
ce. (as per New Hanover County Tax Office), in Wilmington, New Hanover County.
Based upon information brought to the attention of the Division of Coastal Management by your adjacent
rian property owners, it appears that an adjacent riparian property owner notification was not properly submitt
Awner of Lot#9 of Intracoastal Watch, adjacent to the property aforementioned.
Under these circumstances, the Division of Coastal Management is suspending CAMA General Permit No
i6-D. The permit will remain suspended until the Division receives copies of the appropriate notification to the
erty owner of lot#9. At that time, the Division will re-evaluate the permit decision according to the newly sur
-mation.
I request that you contact Mr. Robb Mairs, Field Representative for the Division of Coastal Management i
nington Regional Office at [phone] jindicating your intentions to comply with the request specified here
ly, you will need to schedule a pre-application meeting with the Local Field Representative prior to obtaining a
,ed and/or new CAMA General Permit.
ncerel ,
111 Gregson
Istrict Manager

A/7A
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
lel F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secret
Notice of Intent to UnSuspend CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D
tied Mail - 7002 2410 0003 1721 1193
•n Receipt Requested
January 13, 2005
,rthur Frankel
Hearthside Drive
ngton, NC 28412
Mr. Frankel:
This letter is in reference to CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D, issued to you on October 26, 2004, for ti
tion of an existing access walkway to a private community pier, at your property, located at 1637 Sound Watc
. (as per New Hanover County Tax Office), in Wilmington, New Hanover County.
Based upon information brought to the attention of the Division of Coastal Management, it appears that an
;nt riparian property owner notification was properly submitted to the owner of Lot#9 of Intracoastal Watch,
;nt to the property aforementioned. The Division of Coastal Management has also received information from i
Hanover County Planning Department, that relocation of the pier access walkway within the easement on the
nentioned property, would be consistent with the special use permit issued by New Hanover County for the
oastal Watch community pier. However, any modification to the easement location will require the approval c
;d subdivision map.
Under these circumstances, the Division of Coastal Management is unsuspending CAMA General Permit NI
i-D. The permit will remain active until the expiration date of April 6, 2005. I request that you contact Mr.
Mairs, Field Representative for the Division of Coastal Management in the Wilmington Regional Office at (91
900 to schedule a meeting to obtain revised and/or new CAMA General Permit.
Sincerely,
Greg son
1st 'ct Manager
T_ _11 Tl'11.f

-I'2-'2004U-1-W I ti: 14 C. WES 11UUG±S, 11 A I 1 Y. (FAX)910 7721723 P. 001/0F
FACSIMILE
C. WES HODGES, II, P.L.L.C.
Attorney at Law
3138 Wrigh willc Avenue
Wilmington,North Carolina 28403
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
TO:
Name: Robb Mairs
Re: Mark and Elisab Cooney
Fax Number: 395-3964
Transmission Date: November 12, 2004
Number of Pages: 5 (including cover sheet)
FROM:
Name: Wes Hodges
Comments:
The information contained in this facsimile message is attorney-privileged and confidential information intended
only for the use of the individual or entity named as recipient. If the reader is not the intended recipient,be hereby
notified that any discussion, distribution or copy of this communication is strictly nrohi]ited If von liav,mrr.ivn.l

-12-2004(FRI) 16: 14 C. WES HODGES, II ATTY. (FAX)910 7721723 P. 002/a
C. Wes Hodges, II, P.L.L.C.
Attorney at Law
3138 Wrightsville Avenue Telephone: [phone]
Wilmington, N.C.28403 Fax: [phone]
Email:[e-mail]
November 12, 2004
VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S.MAIL
Robb Mairs
Division of Coastal Management
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington,N.C. 28405-3845
Re: Objection to CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D
Dear Mr. Mairs:
As you know, I represent Mark and Elisabeth Looney. Mr. and Mrs. Looney arc the fee simple
owners of Lot 9 in the Intracoastal Watch subdivision, and are adjacent riparian property owners
to Lot 10 owned by Arthur J. Frankel. The purpose of this correspondence is to formally object
in writing to the issuance of the above-referenced CAMA permit to Dr.Frankel.
While Lot 10 in Intracoastal Watch is owned by Dr, Frankel,the community pier is owned by the
Intracoastal Watch HOA. The landward portion of the pier is constructed on a private access
casement located on Dr. Frankel's property. At present,the pier is located on the northern edge
of the casement. Dr. Frankel has applied for a CAMA permit to relocate a portion of the pier to
the southern edge of the easement. The permit initially was issued by you on October 26, 2004,
and requires that all activities under the permit comply with the provisions of 15A N.C.A.C. 7H
.2000. Thereafter, I informed you that my clients, adjacent riparian property owners, had not
received the notice and opportunity to comment as required by 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2002. After
confirming this, you suspended the permit until such time as the proper notice was provided. My
clients received the appropriate notification by certified mail on November 3,2004. An executed
copy of my clients'Notification/Waiver Form is attached hereto for your file.
My clients' objections to the nr000sed nertnit n..nrinatty ara r.1f..fr.1,1 ..t_:..,..:__ 1_

-12-2004(FRI) 16:15 C. WES HODGES, II ATTY. (FAX)910 7721723 P. 003/0
Robb Mairs
November 12,2004
Page 2
First, you have indicated to me that there has been no formal determination of the normal high
water line in this area. Without a determination of the normal high water line, it is impossible to
determine whether the relocated portion of the pier will meet the required setback of fifteen (15)
feet from my clients' "property lines extended into the water at the points that they intersect the
shoreline." As noted on the enclosed form,my clients do not waive this setback requirement.
As you arc aware, the riparian corridors in this area have been the subject of much dispute, as
evidenced by the Gray appeal. During the investigation of the Gray permit application, DCM
was notified that the Intracoastal Watch community pier was not constructed as depicted on the
initial application by Daclar, Inc., the developer of the subdivision, Moreover, in a memo dated
March 20, 2000, Jim Gregson indicated that if the owner of Lot 9 desired to build an individual
private pier, the existing community pier would encroach into the area of riparian access for that
properly. [As the community pier was permitted prior to the subdivision of the waterfront lots in
Intracoastal Watch, there is no issue as to any waiver of riparian rights for individual properties
in the development.]
My review of the file found no riparian corridor surveys of the individual lots in the subdivision.
I believe it is incumbent upon your office to ensure that the proposed relocation will not interfere
with my clients' riparian corridor prior to issuance of the proposed permit. To this end, I request
that you make a formal determination of the normal high water line, so that it can be determined
if any part of the proposed relocation is below the normal high water line and, if so, meets the
applicable riparian setback requirement. Given the unusual circumstances of this shoreline, I
believe it would be erroneous for your office to issue the permit to Dr. Frankel without making
this threshold determination.
Second, 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2005(a)requires that all proposed modifications be carried out within
the "existing footprint of the development." Without question, the relocated portion of the pier
will not have the same footprint as the original development. Moreover,there is no indication on
either the permit or the diagram submitted by the applicant demonstrating that the modified area
will be located in the"existing footprint"as defined by the regulation. In fact, neither the permit
nor the drawing indicate precisely how far to the south the pier is to be moved(there is a notation
on the applicant's drawing asking"What is this distance?).
Furthermore, the provisions of 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2004(1) require that "[d]evelopment carried
out under this permit must be consistent with all local requirements, AEC rules, and local land
use plans current at the time of authorization. The Special Use Permit granted by New Hanover
County for the community pier approved the project based on a conclusion that'the location and

-I'2-'2UU40-K1) lb: 1b U. WES HUUUhS, 11 AIIY. (FAX)910 7721723 P. 004/0F
Robb Mairs
November 12,2004
Page 3
These are the major objections that my clients have to the proposed project at this time. As we
have only recently learned of the issuance of the permit,we are still in the process of evaluating
the specifics of the project. Any additional comments will be relayed to you in a timely fashion,
so•that the project can be thoroughly evaluated prior to a final decision by your office.
Thank you for your cooperation in this regard, and I look forward to discussing these issues with
you in the near future.
'ncerely yours,
j.
r1 UPJfil6-:(,II'
Enclosure
cc: Mark and Elisabeth Looney

-12-20C4(FR1) 16:15 C. WES HODGES, II ATTY. (FAX)910 7721723 P. 005/0F
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
ADJACENT RIPARIAN FRQJ RTY OWNER NOTIFICATTON/WAIVE t_FoRM
Marne of Individual Applying For Permit: A It J 1 : 10 Ke 1
a N F2�•u�cvv paoP���`/ 0NLy�'
Address of Property_ 'f r•c,,r A , .. W � r=r�- r ci7 SOcw-9 Nnrar
(Lot or Street#, keet or Road) v G
Id i Lrn t o Ta a-r C\T
(City and 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.
O83� (SEE NT-CRCRE-P cog-L€SPo.iu eta C
I have no objections to this proposal.
If you have objections to what is being proposed, please write the Divisions of Coastal
Management, 127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, NC 28405 or call 910-395-3900
within 10 days of receipt of this notice. No response is considered the same as no objection if
you have been notified by Certified Mail.
WAIVER SECTION
I understand that a pier, dock, mooring pilings, breakwater, boat house or boat lift must be
set bck a minimum distance of 15' from my area of riparian access-unless waived by me. (It
you wish to waive the setback, you must initial the appropriate blank below.)
I do wish to waive the 15' setback requirement.
I do not wish to waive the 15' setback requirement.
Si 1 e Date
,NtgAL- LoNg.Nir (A. p Tod C= 6E111 Looney) Apri A

NCDENR ; ,i ,
North a p N h Carolina Department of Environment and Natural/ sources
Division of Coastal Management JAN 2 1 200S
Michael F. Easley,Governor Charles S.Jones, Director /Ilia G. Ross Jr., Secretary l
LAVISION OF
January 20, 2005 COASTAL MANAGEMEt
Mr. Arthur Frankel
1637 Sound Watch
Wilmington,NC 28409
CERTIFIED MAIL (7004 1350 0001 1207 1824)
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Re: Suspension of Work/Appeal of CAMA Permit Decision
Dear Mr. Frankel:
The Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission,Eugene Tomlinson, has received a request
for an administrative hearing to challenge CAMA General Permit#GPD38466. The Third Party
Hearing Request was filed on behalf of petitioners Mark and Elisabeth Looney on January 19,
2005. Under N.C.G.S. §113A-121.1 (the Coastal Area Management Act), your CAMA permit is
automatically suspended upon receipt of a hearing request and will remain suspended until
either: (1) Chairman Tomlinson denies the hearing request(under standards set out in the
statute); or(2)there is a final Coastal Resources Commission decision on the permit appeal. You
may not undertake any development under the permit until further notice after Chairman
Tomlinson issues his decision.
The Division of Coastal Management will prepare a recommendation for the Chairman on
whether to grant or deny the hearing request. The Chairman must make a decision within 15
days after receipt of the hearing request. If you wish to submit any materials for the Chairman's
consideration in ruling on the request for contested case hearing, please send them to me as soon
as possible.
• cerely,
S• :j3`.^/11
CharlPc C Tnnec

ikel permit at intracoastal watch
Subject: Re: art frankel permit at intracoastal watch
From: [e-mail]
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 08:53:41 -0500
To: Robb Mairs<[e-mail]>
CC: [e-mail],[e-mail]
Robb The proposed relocation within the existing easement is consistent
with the County requriements and previous approval. . . .
Any changes to the easement location will require the approval of a revised
subdivision map.
Thanks for the notification
Dexter
Robb Mairs
<Robb.Mairs@ncmai To: [e-mail]
l.net> cc:
Subject: art frankel permit at
intracoastal watch
01/12/2005 05:13
PM
mr. hayes,
as per our conversation this afternoon, we need to establish that
relocating the access walkway on arthur frankel is consistant with the
special use permit through new hanover county. the property is located
at 1637 sound watch road and the access walkway is located on the
southern end of mr. frankel's property within an easement. the walkway
gives access to the existing home owners association's community pier.
the applicant proposes to move the access away from his house that is
currently under construction, but still within the easement. proper
notification was established to the adjacent riparian property owners,
but we need to establish that moving the walkway within the easement is
consistent with the county's special use permit issued for the community
dock.
if you have any questions about the permit, please feel free to call me
Inc -)(Inn

C. Wes Hodges, II, P.L.L.C.
Attorney at Law
3138 Wrightsville Avenue Telephone: [phone]
Wilmington, N.C. 28403 Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
c 2 v E
November 12, 2004 NOV 1 6 2004
.1)
VIA FACSIMILE AND U.S. MAIL DIVISION OF
COASTAL MANAGEMENT
Robb Mairs
Division of Coastal Management
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, N.C. 28405-3845
Re: Objection to CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D
Dear Mr. Mairs:
As you know, I represent Mark and Elisabeth Looney. Mr. and Mrs. Looney are the fee simple
owners of Lot 9 in the Intracoastal Watch subdivision, and are adjacent riparian property owners
to Lot 10 owned by Arthur J. Frankel. The purpose of this correspondence is to formally object
in writing to the issuance of the above-referenced CAMA permit to Dr. Frankel.
While Lot 10 in Intracoastal Watch is owned by Dr. Frankel, the community pier is owned by the
Intracoastal Watch HOA. The landward portion of the pier is constructed on a private access
easement located on Dr. Frankel's property. At present, the pier is located on the northern edge
of the easement. Dr. Frankel has applied for a CAMA permit to relocate a portion of the pier to
the southern edge of the easement. The permit initially was issued by you on October 26, 2004,
and requires that all activities under the permit comply with the provisions of 15A N.C.A.C. 7H
.2000. Thereafter, I informed you that my clients, adjacent riparian property owners, had not
received the notice and opportunity to comment as required by 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2002. After
confirming this, you suspended the permit until such time as the proper notice was provided. My
clients received the appropriate notification by certified mail on November 3, 2004. An executed
copy of my clients' Notification/Waiver Form is attached hereto for your file.

iii3c742,--;NED
2004
Robb Mairs NOV 6
November 12,2004 DIVISION OF
Page 2 COASTAL MANAGEMENT
First, you have indicated to me that there has been no formal determination of the normal high
water line in this area. Without a determination of the normal high water line, it is impossible to
determine whether the relocated portion of the pier will meet the required setback of fifteen (15)
feet from my clients' "property lines extended into the water at the points that they intersect the
shoreline." As noted on the enclosed form, my clients do not waive this setback requirement.
As you are aware, the riparian corridors in this area have been the subject of much dispute, as
evidenced by the Gray appeal. During the investigation of the Gray permit application, DCM
was notified that the Intracoastal Watch community pier was not constructed as depicted on the
initial application by Daclar, Inc., the developer of the subdivision. Moreover, in a memo dated
March 20, 2000, Jim Gregson indicated that if the owner of Lot 9 desired to build an individual
private pier, the existing community pier would encroach into the area of riparian access for that
property. [As the community pier was permitted prior to the subdivision of the waterfront lots in
Intracoastal Watch, there is no issue as to any waiver of riparian rights for individual properties
in the development.]
My review of the file found no riparian corridor surveys of the individual lots in the subdivision.
I believe it is incumbent upon your office to ensure that the proposed relocation will not interfere
with my clients' riparian corridor prior to issuance of the proposed permit. To this end, I request
that you make a formal determination of the normal high water line, so that it can be determined
if any part of the proposed relocation is below the normal high water line and, if so, meets the
applicable riparian setback requirement. Given the unusual circumstances of this shoreline, I
believe it would be erroneous for your office to issue the permit to Dr. Frankel without making
this threshold determination.
Second, 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2005(a) requires that all proposed modifications be carried out within
the "existing footprint of the development." Without question, the relocated portion of the pier
will not have the same footprint as the original development. Moreover, there is no indication on
either the permit or the diagram submitted by the applicant demonstrating that the modified area
will be located in the "existing footprint" as defined by the regulation. In fact, neither the permit
nor the drawing indicate precisely how far to the south the pier is to be moved(there is a notation
on the applicant's drawing asking"What is this distance?).
Furthermore, the provisions of 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2004(f) require that "[d]evelopment carried
out under this permit must be consistent with all local requirements, AEC rules, and local land
use plans current at the time of authorization. The Special Use Permit granted by New Hanover

Robb Mairs
November 12,2004
Page 3
These are the major objections that my clients have to the proposed project at this time. As we
have only recently learned of the issuance of the permit, we are still in the process of evaluating
the specifics of the project. Any additional comments will be relayed to you in a timely fashion,
so.that the project can be thoroughly evaluated prior to a final decision by your office.
Thank you for your cooperation in this regard, and I look forward to discussing these issues with
you in the near future.
'ncerely your ,
-V\
. I#.7sclivs1)
es II
Nod 1 t .
Enclosure
OF
piVtM2 AGEMENT
cc: Mark and Elisabeth Looney COPS TAI-

•
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
ADJACENT RIPARIAN PROPERTY OWNER NOTIFICATION/WAIVER FORM
Line of Individual Applying For Permit: 12 v 1 � • A.
Ke z'
D N Fa,40 in.: pRoPBrilY ooLy/. . - -
!dress of Property: e,qs�r.c r� _S c�:� a - r:!Z /4.,'-/7 S Ju" D �sr.
(Lot or Street#, street or Road) ►)G u�T.
uCrITbN Rdr.ol2.,r LV iGel
(City and County)
iereby certify that I own property adjacent to the above-referenced property. The individw
plying for this permit has described to me as shown on the attached drawing the development the
proposing. A description or drawing,with dimensions, should be provided with this letter.
--a.: 0STJ C—r (s€E t-tptcNFQ cov.R5P4rD e 1,1 cF
I have no objections to this proposal.
you have objections to what is being proposed, please write the Division of Coast
anagement, 127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, NC 28405 or call 910-395-390
thin 10 days of receipt of this notice. No response is considered the same as no objection
u have been notified by Certified Mail.
WAIVER SECTION
inderstand that a pier, dock, mooring pilings, breakwater, boat house or boat lift must t
t bck a minimum distance of 15' from my area of riparian access-unless waived by me. (
,u wish to waive the setback,you must initial the appropriate blank below.)
I do wish to waive the 15' setback requirement.
I do not wish to waive the 15' setback requirement.
E C E nr.1RIA
1- I ;t-o 9 NOV 1 6 2004
vl• •e Pi* Date
� DIVISION
COASTAL MAC A

AT7A
ivr�
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secre
Notice of Intent to Suspend CAMA General Permit No. 38466-0
Certified Mail - 7002 2410 0003 1721 1179
Return Receipt Requested
November 3, 2004
Mr. Arthur Frankel
4148 Hearthside Drive
Wilmington, NC 28412 •
Dear Mr. Frankel:
This letter is in reference to CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D, issued to you on October 26, 2004, for t
relocation of an existing access walkway to a private community pier, at your property, located at 1637 Sound Watt
Drive. (as per New Hanover County Tax Office), in Wilmington, New Hanover County.
Based upon information brought to the attention of the Division of Coastal Management by your adjacent
riparian property owners, it appears that an adjacent riparian property owner notification was not properly submittei
the owner of Lot#9 of Intracoastal Watch, adjacent to the property aforementioned.
Under these circumstances, the Division of Coastal Management is suspending CAMA General Permit No.
38466-D. The permit will remain suspended until the Division receives copies of the appropriate notification to the
property owner of lot#9. At that time, the Division will re-evaluate the permit decision according to the newly sups
information.
I request that you contact Mr. Robb Mairs, Field Representative for the Division of Coastal Management in
Wilmington Regional Office at [phone],indicating your intentions to comply with the request specified hereii
Lastly, you will need to schedule a pre-application meeting with the Local Field Representative prior to obtaining a
revised and/or new CAMA General Permit.
ncerel ,
Gregson
strict Manager
cc: Ted Tyndall, DCM
Jim Gregson, DCM

ATM
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
ael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secre
Notice of Intent to UnSuspend CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D
ified Mail - 7002 2410 0003 1721 1193
[rn Receipt Requested
January 13, 2005
Arthur Frankel
Hearthside Drive
Lington, NC 28412
Mr. Frankel:
This letter is in reference to CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D, issued to you on October 26, 2004, for i
ation of an existing access walkway to a private community pier, at your property, located at 1637 Sound Wat
(as per New Hanover County Tax Office), in Wilmington, New Hanover County.
Based upon information brought to the attention of the Division of Coastal Management, it appears that an
ent riparian property owner notification was properly submitted to the owner of Lot #9 of Intracoastal Watch,
ent to the property aforementioned. The Division of Coastal Management has also received information from
Hanover County Planning Department, that relocation of the pier access walkway within the easement on the
mentioned property, would be consistent with the special use permit issued by New Hanover County for the
:oastal Watch community pier. However, any modification to the easement location will require the approval
subdivision map.
Under these circumstances, the Division of Coastal Management is unsuspending CAMA General Permit N
6-D. The permit will remain active until the expiration date of April 6, 2005. I request that you contact Mr.
Mairs, Field Representative for the Division of Coastal Management in the Wilmington Regional Office at (9.
;900 to schedule a meeting to obtain revised and/or new CAMA General Permit.
Sincerely,
'm Gregson
ist 'ct Manager
T- T_._.7-11 T/,l X

SENDER: CGMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
• Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Signature
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. 0 Agent
• Print your name and address on the reverse X tom' L. ❑Addressee
so that we can return the card to you. •
B. Receiv-• by(Printed Name) C. Date of D-livery
• Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, (_
or on the front if space permits. .
D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑Ye
1. Article Addressed to:
If YES,enter delivery address below: 0 No
it. iu✓ /aJ keL
�v
I�� ,� 3. Service Type
(,'V l�' r - Certified Mail 0 Express Mail
❑ Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes
2. Article Number
(Transfer from service 7002 2 410 0003 1721 1193
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540
U.S. Postal Service,.
m CERTIFIED MAILTM RECEIPT
r R (Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided)
rR
For delivery information visit our website at www.usps.com
rq
ru
N
rR Postage IMM .;;,,, r /y
a 7j Certified Fee
Postmark
O ReturnReciept Fee WillMi
n Here ,
(Endorsement Required) J J : el
<u'r
O Restricted Delivery FeeMIK
ri (Endorsement Required) `,
ru VIM' . ' , ,
\V
Total Postage&Fees
ru
O Sent
rn
N ' treat.Apt.No.; '/ �/ bG On
PO Box No. u Pe-4.4"r n's'
City
`e, �7 7 n" IV G 'Yy 3 ,
-ri:t1dRetintnkikaj

Tow
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
ael F. Easley,Governor Charles S.Jones, Director William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
February 8, 2005
Arthur Frankel 3 E C E I `U/ J7
7 Sound Watch
'yRar
mington, NC 28409 FEB w Guu3
DIVISION OF
Reinstatement of CAMA General Permit#GPD38466 COASTAL MANAGEMENT
ar Mr. Frankel,
u were informed,by certified mail, that the Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission,Eugene
mlinson, received a request for an administrative hearing to challenge CAMA General Permit#GPD38,
e request was filed on behalf of petitioners Mark and Elisabeth Looney on January 19, 2005. Your CAI
-mit was automatically suspended upon receipt of this hearing request and you were instructed not to
3ertake any development under this permit until further notice.
;ase be advised that Chairman Eugene Tomlinson has DENIED this third party hearing request. At this
MA Minor Permit#04-0013, issued to you is reinstated, and you may now undertake development on
)perty pursuant to the permit.
..ase contact me at 252-808-2808 if you have any further questions.
1}cerely,
.124V-aoS
larles S. Jones
irector
m__1 T__-.1-11

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley,Governor Charles S.Jones, Director William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
February 18, 2005 R ECEIVEfl
Mr. Arthur Frankel FEB 2 4 2005
1637 Sound Watch DIVISION Wilmington,NC 28409 COASTAL MANAGE
MENT
Re: Reinstatement of CAMA General Permit#GPD38466
Dear Mr. Frankel,
You were informed, by certified mail, that the Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission,
Eugene Tomlinson, received a request for an administrative hearing to challenge CAMA General
Permit#GPD38466. The request was filed on behalf of petitioner Mr. and Mrs. Looney on
January 19, 2005. Your CAMA Permit was automatically suspended upon receipt of this hearing
request and you were instructed not to undertake any development under this permit until further
notice.
Please be advised that Chairman Eugene Tomlinson has DENIED this third party hearing
request. At this time, CAMA General Permit#GPD38466, issued to you is reinstated, and you
may now undertake development on this property pursuant to the permit.
Please contact me at 252-808-2808 if you have any further questions.
Sincerely,
C-1241*-2-
d• )3'"131
Charles S. Jones
Director
.,,,. T T_.--1_11

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley,Governor Charles S.Jones, Director William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
February 18, 20052 c
22-v.
Mr. Arthur Frankel FE8 2 2005
1637 Sound Watch 4
Wilmington, NC 28409 CoASTDiA�MIoN Op
Re: Reinstatement of CAMA General Permit#GPD38466
Dear Mr. Frankel,
You were informed, by certified mail, that the Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission,
Eugene Tomlinson, received a request for an administrative hearing to challenge CAMA General
Permit#GPD38466. The request was filed on behalf of petitioner Mr. and Mrs. Looney on
January 19, 2005. Your CAMA Permit was automatically suspended upon receipt of this hearing
request and you were instructed not to undertake any development under this permit until further
notice.
Please be advised that Chairman Eugene Tomlinson has DENIED this third party hearing
request. At this time, CAMA General Permit#GPD38466, issued to you is reinstated, and you
may now undertake development on this property pursuant to the permit.
Please contact me at 252-808-2808 if you have any further questions.
Sincerely,
C-1)-C1'12to
Charles S. Jones
Director
_-. T__1 T____1_11

witr
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
hael F.Easley,Governor Charles S.Jones, Director William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
February 8, 2005
D EC717-1-7-7,17n
jfj-. Arthur Frankel `l'
37 Sound Watch FEB
ilmington, NC 28409 4L",5
COASTAL j�A i\ OF
. Reinstatement of CAMA General Permit#GPD38466 DEMENT
ar Mr. Frankel,
were informed, by certified mail, that the Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission, Eugene
mlinson, received a request for an administrative hearing to challenge CAMA General Permit#GPD38
e request was filed on behalf of petitioners Mark and Elisabeth Looney on January 19, 2005. Your CA
rmit was automatically suspended upon receipt of this hearing request and you were instructed not to
dertake any development under this permit until further notice.
;ase be advised that Chairman Eugene Tomlinson has DENIED this third party hearing request. At this
MA Minor Permit#04-0013, issued to you is reinstated, and you may now undertake development on
)perty pursuant to the permit.
;ase contact me at 252-808-2808 if you have any further questions.
kcerely,
ji2C1d-24,0 S
arles S. Jones
-ector
Ted Tyndall

i
Q�n
State of North Carolina
tOY COOPER Department of Justice
ORNEY GENERAL 900I Mail Service Center REPLY TO:Meredith Jo Alcoke
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA Environmental Division
2769}9OOI malcokePmail.ius.state.nc.us
919/716-6600-Telephone
919/716-6767-Fax
MEMORANDUM E C E I V E
TO: Eugene Tomlinson, Chairman, CRC FEB 0 4 2005
Ted Tyndall, Assistant Director, DCM Morehead City 'J
Jim Gregson/Robb Mairs, DCM Wilmingtot°t DIVISION G F
COASTAL MANAGEME
Stephanie Bodine, DCM Morehead City
Jill Hickey, Special Deputy Attorney General (by hand-delivery)
FROM: Meredith Jo Alcoke
Assistant Attorney Genera
RE: Staff Recommendation: Third Party Hearing Request by
Mark and Elisabeth Looney
DATE: February 3, 2005
Please find enclosed the staff recommendation for the above-referenced Third Party
Hearing Request. The Chairman's decision is due February 4, 2005.
Enclosure

E , EivEr,, ,
STATE OF NORTHP CARO
FEB 0 it 2005
'BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN
DIVISION EW.TAk-RESOURCES COMMISSION
COUNTY OF NEW HANO\ASTAL MANA ._- 05-02
IN THE MATTER OF THE )
THIRD PARTY HEARING REQUEST ) RECOMMENDATION OF THE
BY MARK LOONEY AND ) DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
ELISABETH LOONEY )
I. BACKGROUND
Petitioners Mark and Elisabeth Looney request permission to file a petition for contested
case hearing as a third party pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 113A-121.1(b). Petitioner seeks to challenge
CAMA General Permit No. 38466 issued to Arthur Frankel authorizing minor modification of an
existing community access pier adjacent to the Intracoastal Waterway in Wilmington, New
Hanover County.
Under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), a third party may file a contested case
hearing petition to challenge the issuance or denial of a CAMA permit to someone else only if
the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) first determines that a contested case hearing is
appropriate. Section 113A-121.1(b) of the North Carolina General Statutes provides that the
determination as to whether a hearing is appropriate should be based upon a consideration of
whether the petitioner:
1. Has alleged that the decision is contrary to a statute or rule;

The CRC has delegated the authority to its Chairman to determine whether a third party
request for a hearing should be granted or denied. Rule 15A NCAC 7J .0301(b). A third party
whose hearing request is granted may file a contested case hearing petition with the Office of
Administrative Hearings (OAH) within 20 days after the Commission makes its determination.
N.C.G.S. § 113A-121.1(b). A third party whose hearing request is denied may seek judicial
review. Id.
II. FACTS
1. Petitioners Mark and Elisabeth Looney are the owners of Lot 9 in the Intracoastal Watch
subdivision in Wilmington, New Hanover County, North Carolina.
2. Intracoastal Watch is located adjacent to the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway(AIWW)
near Myrtle Grove Sound.
3. The permittee in this case is Arthur Frankel. Dr. Frankel is the owner of Lot 10 adjacent
to Petitioners.
4. There is an existing residence on the Petitioners' lot. Dr. Frankel is in the process of
constructing a residence on his lot.
5. There is a 10-slip community pier for the residents of Intracoastal Watch located within a
private access easement across Dr. Frankel's property.
6. Dr. Frankel applied for and received a CAMA General Permit (No. 38466) to modify the
upland portion of the community pier ("access pier"). No part of the actual community
docking facility will be altered because there will be no modifications of the flier ctn,rt,,,

authorized to move the pier 15 feet to the south toward the Petitioners' property. It would
still be located within the existing private access easement.
8. Petitioners filed this third party hearing request on January 20, 2005. Their hearing
request materials were previously sent to the Chairman and are incorporated by reference.
III. DCM'S RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Has the Petitioner Alleged that the Decision is Contrary to a Statute or Rule?
Yes. In order to prevail in a third party hearing request, a petitioner must first allege
that the agency made a decision that is contrary to statute or rule. N.C.G.S. § 113A-121.1(b)(1).
In this case, Petitioner alleges that the decision is contrary to certain conditions required in 15A
NCAC 7H .2000, the general permit for minor modifications of docks and piers. Although
Petitioners cite to certain rules, they have not made specific factual allegations or legal arguments
that demonstrate such provisions have been violated.
B. Is the Petitioner Directly Affected by the Decision?
Yes. Petitioners own property adjacent to the property to be developed. For purposes
of this third party hearing request only, Staff does not contest that Petitioners are directly affected
by the decision as required by N.C.G.S. § 113A-121.1(b)(2).
C. Has the Petitioner Demonstrated that the Hearing Request is not Frivolous?
No. Petitioners have not demonstrated that the hearing request is not frivolous.
N.C.G.S. § 113A-121.1(b)(3). Petitioners raise the following issues: (1) that the modified pier is
not within the "existing footprint"; (2) that the modified pier will be lengthened. (11 that the

, depth review, as discussed below.
Petitioners have challenged a General Permit authorized under Section 15A NCAC 7H
.2000 which is titled "General Permit for Authorizing Minor Modifications and Repair to
Existing Pier/Mooring Facilities in Estuarine and Public Trust Waters and Ocean Hazard Areas."
The purpose of this general permit is to allow for"reconfiguration, minor modifications, repair
and improvements to existing pier and mooring facilities[.]" 15A NCAC 7H .2001. See general
permit rules, Exhibit 1. By definition, development under this part is deemed to be of minimal
impact and can be approved under expedited procedures.
Footprint
Petitioners first allege that the pier modification violates the "Specific Condition" in 7H
.2005 requiring that "All proposed development must be carried out within the existing footprint
of the development with no increase in the number of slips nor any change in the existing use."
This contention misconstrues the requirement. "Existing footprint" is defined as "the area
delineated by the outer most line of tie pilings, ends of piers, and upland basin or area within an
enclosing breakwater, whichever is greater."
The primary purpose of this rule, like most of the pier rules, is to limit impacts to
navigation in public trust waters. If an applicant carries out work within the existing footprint,
presumably there will be no new impacts on the established riparian corridors or navigation in
general. In this case, the minor modification of the pier is above the normal high water line.
Logically, there are no legitimate concerns regarding navigation for this development

upland development are the same under the minor permit and the general permit. Consequently, a
minor permit could have been issued for this development instead.
Length
Petitioners next argue that the modification will add length to the structure. This
argument raises no justiciable issue. First, the general permit requirements do not address this
issue. The only applicable limitations are that there can be no new slips, nor a change in existing
use. Second, the CRC's rules in general do not limit the length of access piers. Similar to
setbacks, pier length is only a concern within public trust waters because length may impact
navigation. In the upland area, pier length is not limited. Even if there is some additional
decking associated with the pier's modification, it is primarily cosmetic and minimal in size and
impact.
Trees
Petitioners' argument that the modified pier will require destruction of hardwood trees
raises no issue of relevance under the CRC's rules. There are young trees in the area in question.
While DCM Staff would prefer such trees be replanted or avoided, there is no rule prohibiting
the cutting or removal of upland vegetation.
Local Requirements
Lastly, Petitioners argue that the proposed modification violates the "General Condition"
in 7H .2004(f) requiring that "development under this permit must be consistent with all local
requirements, AEC rules, and local land use plans current at the time of authorization_"

The only basis on which DCM can determine if a proposed development is consistent
with local requirements is by asking the local government authority. In this case, that is precisely
what DCM did. In response to DCM's inquiry, the Director of Planning for New Hanover
County specifically indicated that "the proposed relocation within the existing easement is
consistent with the County requirements and previous approval." Any changes to the easement
location, the County indicated, would require approval of a revised subdivision map. If
Petitioners disagree with County's determination, the appropriate relief will have to be sought in
another forum. Such issues cannot be adjudicated in the Office of Administrative Hearings.
In conclusion, it appears that Petitioners' primary concern is that the community access
pier is being moved closer to Petitioners' residence. It is clear that the HOA authorized Dr.
Frankel to seek this modification. Petitioners' cause of action, if any, is against the HOA. The
rules and standards of the CRC have not been violated. Petitioners have not made sufficient
allegations to show that the project violates any development standards and therefore has failed
to demonstrate that the request is not frivolous as required by N.C.G.S. § 113A-121.1(b)(3).
IV. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, Petitioners did not meet the criteria justifying a contested case hearing.
For the reasons stated herein, the Division of Coastal Management, through its undersigned
attorney, recommends that the Petitioner's Third Party Hearing Request be DENIED by the
Chairman.

This the day of February, 2005.
FOR THE DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
A„),(k
o,
Meredith Jo Alco
Assistant Attorney eneral
N.C. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602-0629
[phone]
[phone] (fax)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I have served a copy of the attached Recommendation of the
Division of Coastal Management on Petitioners in care of their counsel by causing a copy thereof
to be placed in the United States Postal Service bearing sufficient postage for delivery by first
class mail and addressed as follows:
C. Wes Hodges, II
3138 Wrightsville Avenue
Wilmington, C 28403
(X
This the day of February, 2005.
Alk
- a
Meredith Jo Alcok
Assistant Attorney General

./X
SECTION.2000-GENERAL PERMIT FOR AUTHORIZING MINOR MODIFICATIONS AND REPAIR TO
EXISTING PIER/MOORING FACILITIES IN ESTUARINE AND PUBLIC TRUST WATERS AND OCEAN
HAZARD AREAS
15A NCAC 07H.2001 PURPOSE
A permit under this Section shall allow for reconfiguration,minor modifications,repair and improvements to existing pier and
mooring facilities in estuarine waters and public trust areas according to the authority provided in Subchapter 07J.1100 of
this Chapter and according to the rules in this Section. This permit shall not apply to oceanfront shorelines or to waters and
shorelines adjacent to the Ocean Hazard AEC with the exception of those shorelines that feature characteristics of the
Estuarine Shoreline AEC. Such features include the presence of wetland vegetation,lower wave energy,and lower erosion
rates than the adjacent Ocean Erodible Area.
History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-107; 113A-118.1;
Eff. October I, 1993;
Amended Eff.April 1, 2003.
15A NCAC 07H.2002 APPROVAL PROCEDURES
(a) The applicant must contact the Division of Coastal Management and complete an application form requepng approval for
development. The applicant shall provide information on site location,dimensions of the project area,and his/her name and
address.
(b) The applicant must provide:
(I) a dated plat(s)showing existing development and the proposed development;and
(2) confirmation that:
(A) a written statement has been obtained and signed by the adjacent riparian property owners
indicating that they have no objections to the proposed work;or
(B) the adjacent property owners have been notified by certified mail of the proposed work. Such
notice shall instruct adjacent property owners to provide any comments on the proposed
development in writing for consideration by permitting officials to the Division of Coastal
Management within ten days of receipt of the notice, and, indicate that no response will be
interpreted as no objection.
(C) DCM staff will review all comments. If DCM determines that:
(i) the comments are relevant to the potential impacts of the proposed project; and
(ii) the permitting issues raised by the comments are worthy of more detailed review,the
applicant will be notified that he/she must submit an application for a major
development permit.
(c) Approval of individual projects will be acknowledged in writing by the Division of Coastal Management and the
applicant shall be provided a copy of this Section. Construction authorized by this permit must be completed within 90 days
of permit issuance or the general authorization expires and a new permit shall be required to begin or continue construction.
History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-107; 113A-118.1;
Eff.January 1, 1994.
15A NCAC 07H.2003 PERMIT FEE
The applicant must pay a permit fee of one hundred dollars(S 100.00)by check or money order payable to the Department.
History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-107; 113A-118.1; 113A-119.1;

(b) Individuals shall allow authorized representatives of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to make
periodic inspections at any time deemed necessary in order to be sure that the activity being performed under the authority of
this general permit is in accordance with the terms and conditions prescribed herein.
(c) There shall be no unreasonable interference with navigation or use of the waters by the public by the existence of piers or
mooring pilings.
(d) This permit will not be applicable to proposed construction where the Department has determined,based on an initial
review of the application, that notice and review pursuant to G.S. 113A-119 is necessary because there arc unresolved
questions concerning the proposed activity's impact on adjoining properties or on water quality;air quality;coastal wetlands;
cultural or historic sites;wildlife; fisheries resources; or public trust rights.
(e) This permit does not eliminate the need to obtain any other required state, local,or federal authorization.
(f) Development carried out under this permit must be consistent with all local requirements,AEC rules,and local land use
plans current at the time of authorization.
(g) This general permit will not be applicable where the Department determines that the proposed modification will result in
closure of waters to shellfishing under rules adopted by the Commission for Health Services.
History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-107; 113A-118.1;
Ell January I, 1994;
Amended Eff.August 1,1998.
I5A NCAC 07H.2005 SPECIFIC CONDITIONS
(a) All proposed work must be carried out within the existing footprint of the development with no increase in the number of
slips nor any change in the existing use. "Existing footprint" is defined as the area delineated by the outer most line of tie
pilings,ends of piers,and upland basin or area within an enclosing breakwater,whichever is greater.
(b) Modifications to piers and mooring facilities shall not interfere with the access to any riparian property,and shall have a
minimum setback of 15 feet between any part of the pier(s)or piling(s)and the adjacent property lines extended into the water
at the points that they intersect the shoreline. The minimum setbacks provided in the rule may be waived by the written
agreement of the adjacent riparian owner(s),or when two adjoining riparian owners are co-applicants. Should the adjacent
property be sold before construction of the pier(s)or piling(s)commences,the applicant shall obtain a written agreement with
the new owner waiving the minimum setback and submit it to the Division of Coastal Management prior to initiating any
development. The line of division of areas of riparian access shall be established by drawing a line along the channel or deep
water in front of the property,then drawing a line perpendicular to a line of the channel so that it intersects with the shore at
the point the upland property line meets the water's edge. When shoreline configuration is such that a perpendicular
alignment cannot be achieved,the pier shall be aligned to meet the intent of this rule to the maximum extent practicable.
History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-107; 113A-118.1;
Eff. October 1. 1993.

dR-74240 -31:vED
1 SLUE y�
� 09
4.
JAN 2 5 2005
State of North Carolina DIVISION OF
COASTAL MANAGEMENT
DY COOPER Department of Justice
)RNEY GENERAL9001 Mail Service Center REPLY TO:Meredith Jo Alcoke
RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA Environmental Division
27699 9001 malcokermail.iusstate.nc.us
919/716-6600-Telephone
919/716-6767-Fax
MEMORANDUM
TO: Eugene Tomlinson, Chairman, CRC
Ted Tyndall, Assistant Director, DCM Morehead City*
Jim Gregson/Robb Mairs, DCM Wilmington
Stephanie Bodine, DCM Morehead City*
Jill Hickey, Special Deputy Attorney General (by hand-delivery)
FROM: Meredith Jo Alcoke
Assistant Attorney Gener
RE: Assignment Memo: Third Party Hearing Request by Mark and Elisabeth Looney
DATE: January 24, 2005
Please take notice that I have been assigned to handle the third party hearing request
filed by attorney C. Wes Hodges II on behalf of Mark and Elisabeth Looney. The Looneys
challenge a CAMA General Permit (No. 38466-D) issued to Dr. Arthur Frankel. The permit
authorizes relocation of an existing access walkway to a private community pier in the
Intracoastal Watch subdivision in Wilmington, NC. Primarily, petitioners claim that the new
configuration is not within the "existing footprint" as required by the general permit under which
it was authorized. Petitioners also argue that the relocated pier is inconsistent with the special
use permit issued by New Hanover County for the initial pier construction, and that the
Intracoastal Watch HOA is not authorized to allow Dr. Frankel to change the pier which is used
by the whole subdivision.
The petition is enclosed for the Chairman, the Wilmington Staff, and the CRC counsel.
Because the petition was filed on January 20. the Chairman's decision will he clue by Friday_

I L•LL
AN-19-2005 12:41 From: To:910 7721723 P.3'5
E PIO
DC1M FORM s '! JAN 2 2L o5
M Atc& a l) N.C.ATTORNEY
PIr1t1TONER'SNAtv1E E��Sq���N L� .�� E y ►. ;ri-^ r : ; ,,re„
TFIlRD PARTY FEARING
COUNTY E W N a o,f E QUEST ON
LAMA PER/CT DECISION
FILE NUMBER
(Petitioner Ieave this line blank)
• PLEASE TAKE NOTE that the undersigned,a person affected by the decision of(check one):
,�. ' ; 'a Local Permit Offecer acting on a CAMA Minor Development Permit
application;or
the Division of Coastal Management,Department of Environment and
Natural Resources,acting on a CAMA Major Development Permit
application or CAMA General Permit application
hereby requests Psion from the Coastal Resources Commission to file an appeal
N.C.Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b)and N.C.Admin. Code tit. 15A,r. 73.0300 (Please attach a to
copy of the permit application decision. Ifyou cannot
decision,please provide the name of the permitteee prof cr location and the ermit
application
the permit member,)
Requests are reviewed by the Chairman of the Coastal Resource
whether a hearing should be s Commission to det:zmiae
granted. The determinarion of whether to grant a he
Chairman. N.C.Admin. Code tit ISA,,r.71.0301(b). the
le discretion of the
For this application to be complete,the Petitioner must address each factor liste
separate sheet of paper. You must address these factors before yourrequest re uest d below on a
The Chairman's decision to grant a hearingwill ee reviewed.
will be based on whetiler the Petitioner.
(I) Has alleged that the decision is contrary to a statute or rule [N.C. Gen. Star
113A-121.1(b)(1)); §
(Please cite the statute or regulation allegedly violated by the permit decision.)
(2) Is directly affected by the decision [N.C. Gen. sit § 113A-121.1(b)(2)];
and
(Please describe how you are directly affected by the permit decision.
_ Persons directly affected by a decision include, big are nor limited t.,

_ .1`tiv-i�-ebt��lWCUl 1 .cc P.
AN-19-2005 12:41 From: To:910 7721723 P.4/5
development when the development is within or touches
upon an area subject to the public trust,)
(3) Has alleged facts or made legal arguments that demo
the hearing is not frivolous �0�the request for
Ll`rC. Ge. Stat § 113A-121.I 3
(Please swnmarize the evidence or ar s n at'
hearingIn. -. �entsyou will present a
support of your appeal.)
Based on the attached responses to the above facto the undersigned herebyrequests
ply hearing. q gists a third
• __ 1I ( 9I20c5 _ C yU - _ ..
Date
Signature of PeitionQ`r or,/Attomey
C. vJEs t-IcDGc:51 -tT AT?cROE
Name of Petitioner'or Attorney
3 ( 3 S N 7sys LtF INJ E
Address
tntil 0 rl N C 2 03
City
State Zip
QIo '?? 2— Ib7 $
Telephone Number
NOTES: This request must be served on the Director,Division of Coastal
the address shown on the attached Cein �
cate of Service Form, Management,
t ( at
20)
Gen
days of the disputed permit decision. N.C. ,within twenty e t
do so constitutes waiver of the right to req _ Stat § 113A-121.1(b). Failure to
uest a hearing. A copy should also be
sent to the Attorney General's Office,Enviromnental Division, at the addresses
shown on the attached Ccrthicate of Service Form.
Approval of a Third Party Hearing Request allows a petitioner to file a contested
case petition with the Office of Administrative Hearings within twenty
r, days
of receipt ofthe Chairman's Order. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1 (20)
Denial of a Third Party Hearing Request is a final
agency decision which may be
appealed to the Superior Court in the county whose the„rfm..,,,.:..,-___-,

ATTACHMENT TO DCM FORM 5
THIRD PARTY HEARING REQUEST ON CAMA PERMIT DECISION
(1) The Petitioners are alle2inQ that the decision is contrary to a statute or rule.
The Petitioners are the fee simple owners of Lot 9 in the Intracoastal Watch subdivision,
and are adjacent riparian property owners to Lot 10 owned by Arthur J. Frankel. Dr. Frankel has
applied for and received a CAMA General Permit to modify the existing community pier for
Intracoastal Watch. While Lot 10 is owned by Dr. Frankel, the community pier is owned by the
Intracoastal Watch HOA. The landward portion of the pier is constructed on a private access
easement located on Dr. Frankel's property. At present, the pier is located on the northern edge
of the easement. The community pier was situated in its present location at the time both the
Petitioners and the Applicant purchased their respective lots in Intracoastal Watch. Dr. Frankel
has applied for a CAMA permit to relocate a portion of the pier to the southern edge of the
easement and otherwise reconfigure the pier. The DCM originally issued Permit No. 38466-D to
Dr. Frankel on October 26, 2004, which Permit required that all activities under the Permit
comply with the provisions of 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2000. Thereafter, the undersigned notified
DCM that the Petitioners, adjacent riparian property owners, had not received the notice and
opportunity to comment as required by 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2002. After confirmation of this lack
of notice, DCM suspended the Permit until such time as proper notice was provided. The
Petitioners received appropriate notification by certified mail on November 3, 2004. The
Petitioners timely submitted written objections to the proposed Permit on November 12, 2004.
On January 13, 2005, DCM unsuspended CAMA Permit No. 38466-D.
Attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is a copy of the diagram submitted by the Applicant in
support of the CAMA permit application.
Attached hereto as Exhibit"B"is a copy of CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D.
Attached hereto as Exhibit "C" is a copy of a letter dated January 13, 2005, from Jim
Gregson, District Manager, to the Applicant, Arthur Frankel, giving notice of the intent to
unsuspend Permit No. 38466-D.
Attached hereto as Exhibit "D" are photographs of the Intracoastal Watch community
pier and dock and the surrounding area.
Attached hereto as Exhibit"E" is a copy of the Order Granting Special Use Permit for the
construction of a community boating facility at the Intracoastal Watch subdivision.
a. 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2005(a) — Specific Conditions. Subsection (a) requires that
"Tn 111 nrnnncoi7 I,, ,.,.. ] ..s..._.0 47_- -• 4-• - r .

2
structure, as it will require the construction of a new segment of walkway running parallel to the
common driveway and perpendicular to the boundaries of the access easement. Furthermore, the
diagonal run of the modified pier and dock from the marsh line to the waterline will add length to
the total structure. Finally, the proposed new location of the modified pier will necessitate the
destruction of numerous hardwood trees that are located adjacent to the existing community pier.
Without question, the relocated and reconfigured portion of the community pier will not have the
same footprint as the original development. There is no indication on either the Permit (Exhibit
"B") or the diagram submitted by the Applicant (Exhibit "A") demonstrating that the modified
area will be located in the "existing footprint" as defined by the regulation. This is because the
relocated and reconfigured portion of the community pier most certainly will not be located in
the "existing footprint" of the original development, as required by 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2005(a).
The purpose of Section .2000 is to allow for minor changes and repairs to existing structures that
does not expand or alter the existing footprint of the development. The proposed relocation and
reconfiguration of the community pier will relocate the pier outside of the existing footprint of
the development, will increase the overall length of the structure, will necessitate the destruction
of protected hardwood species and marsh grass, and will have the ultimate effect of transforming
an aesthetically pleasing structure into a zigzagging monstrosity that benefits nobody but Dr.
Frankel —who has no greater rights with respect to the community pier than the Petitioners and
any other property owner in Intracoastal Watch.
The Petitioners are in the process of preparing a civil action to challenge the authority of
the Intracoastal Watch HOA to allow the Applicant to change the configuration and location of
the community pier, as that decision is not in the best interests of the members of the Association
as a whole. The Petitioners will amend this Request to include copies of pertinent court filings
regarding the proposed relocation of the Intracoastal Watch community pier.
(b) 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2004(f) — General Condition. Subsection (f) requires that all
"[d]evelopment carried out under this permit must be consistent with all local requirements,
AEC rules, and local land use plans current at the time of authorization." (emphasis added) The
Order Granting A Special Use Permit for construction of the Intracoastal Watch community pier
approved the project based on a conclusion by the New Hanover County Commissioners that
"the location and character"of the pier"as submitted and approved" conformed with the plan of
development for New Hanover County. (Exhibit "E") (emphasis added) No amendments or
modifications were made to the Special Use Permit that would allow the location and character
of the pier to be changed from what was submitted and approved by the County. The letter from
Jim Gregson to Dr. Frankel purporting to unsuspend CAMA Permit No. 38466-D states that
DCM "has also received information from the New Hanover County Planning Department, that
relocation of the pier access walkway within the easement on the aforementioned property,
would be consistent with the special use permit issued by New Hanover County for the
Intracoastal Watch community pier. However, any modifications to the easement location will
require the anrnrnva1 of o ravianll „1. 1:.,, W _ " m__i_•, «..,,, ..

3
whether the location of the easement played any part in the County's decision to grant a Special
Use Permit to the developer of Intracoastal Watch. This hearsay statement from some member
of the New Hanover County Planning Department is not sufficient to satisfy this issue, especially
where the New Hanover County Commissioners — not the Planning Department — granted the
Special Use Permit in question. On its face, the proposed modification and reconfiguration of
the community pier violates the express language of the Order Granting Special Use Permit. A
Third Party Hearing is necessary to more fully explore the issue of whether the modifications
and relocations approved under Permit No. 38466-D are consistent with all local requirements
and land use plans — specifically, the Special Use Permit authorizing the construction of the
Intracoastal Watch community pier in a specific configuration and location.
In conclusion, the Petitioners contend that the proposed relocation and reconfiguration of
the Intracoastal Watch community pier exceeds the permissible scope of 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2000
et seq. Furthermore, the Petitioners' allegations, as stated herein, are relevant to the potential
impacts of the proposed project, and the permitting issues raised by these allegations are worthy
of more detailed review, such that the Applicant should be required to submit an application for a
major development permit, as set forth in 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2002(2)(C).
(2) The Petitioners are directly affected by the decision.
The Petitioners are adjacent property owners to the Applicant and, along with all property
owners in Intracoastal Watch, have a beneficial interest in the private access easement over Lot
10 and the community pier and dock. When the Petitioners purchased Lot 9, the developer of the
Intracoastal Watch subdivision had already obtained a Special Use Permit and CAMA permit,
and had built the community pier and dock in a specific location and configuration approved by
DCM and New Hanover County. The community pier was also constructed when the Applicant
purchased Lot 10. Consequently, both the Petitioners and the Applicant purchased their Lots
with full knowledge of the location of the private access easement and community dock. The
Petitioners also purchased their property with the knowledge that the common elements of the
subdivision, including the community pier, could only be modified for the benefit of the property
owners as a whole. The proposed relocation and reconfiguration of the community pier benefits
only the Applicant by providing him with more room for his yard (Exhibit "D"). While all of the
property owners of Intracoastal Watch are negatively affected by the unsightly and unnecessary
relocation/reconfiguration of the community pier, the Petitioners will suffer the most. Under the
CAMA Permit, the community pier will be moved approximately 15 feet closer to the property
of the Petitioners, leaving the pier only a few feet from the Petitioners' house. The Petitioners
made a significant financial investment when they purchased their property, and this investment
was based in part upon the pre-existing location of the community pier. This investment will be
diminished if the pier is reconfigured and relocated to twist and turn and run only a few feet from
their home — which will require the unnecessary destruction of more marsh grass and protected
harriurnnri cTar;ao 'Tin. A .. 4-L_ ..at.__L_ I-----I . I • .. . . - -

4
protection of the vegetation growing within the easement. Because of these environmental and
economic factors, the Petitioners are directly affected by the DCM's decision to unsuspend the
Applicant's CAMA Permit and allow this unnecessary relocation and configuration that benefits
only one member of the Intracoastal Watch HOA.
(3) The Petitioners have alleged facts and/or made legal arguments that demonstrate that this
request for a hearing is not frivolous.
Based upon the foregoing, including the Exhibits attached hereto, there is substantial and
material evidence demonstrating that the Applicant's proposed project does not meet the spirit or
letter of 15A N.C.A.C. 7H .2000 et seq. Consequently,DCM violated these standards by issuing
the Applicant's CAMA Permit. The Petitioners strongly believe that the Applicant's Permit was
issued in error, and that a Third Party Hearing is necessary to more fully develop and explore
these issues, to ensure that the management objectives and specific requirements of CAMA are
being served by the issuance of CAMA Permit No. 38466-D.
The Petitioners reserve the right to amend this Third Party Hearing Request on CAMA
Permit Decision.
This the 19th day of January, 2005.
C. WES HODGES, II,P.L.L.C.
7)
C. WES HODGES, II
3138 Wrightsville Ave u
Wilmington,N.C. 2840
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorney for Petitioners

r x bale/ iinle ohh-i -690000C1J)
To:910 7721723 P.5'5
4-19-2005 12:42 From:
CERT7ICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that this-Third Party Hearing Request has been served on the State
agencies named below by depositing copies of it with the United States Postal Service with.
sufficient postage for delivery by first class mail or by-p=sonally delivering copies to the named
" kge2Pies• - - 7.:
Original served on: Director
Division of Coastal Management
1638 Mail Servic;Center
Rafeigh,NC, 27699-1638 _ _ _
_. .
and a copy served en: Attorney Gen=ars OEce
. - - ----Eirvironrnmnthl Division
P.O.Box 629
Raleigh,NC 27602-0629
-11-1
This the r 9 day of 1", "4- r-•1/4/
- Signature of Pentioner or Attorney .
EP/30540/1;1p
Updated:July 14,1999
•
_
•
••

29 04 08i47a p. 2
J II,J p t S ,��``l
/ 1 ......---r
.....„--- owl 1
oiz.,°
I \: \_L.--
i 1-----. its tv
I I .
------
i f NICgL
%..-%h Lt_i,,AyI
I —
/Y, ACC K „.'e — rhARSi l.rtic
— _.
I I _
,,,,t A
Pt yeAfi I I
ri.ANwel.
l-l•-)k."44-s: I
1

ct. 2E 04 12: 0ip
,
\ )CC AMA / i 'DREDGE & FILL -
GENERAL PERMIT
Previous permit# -
INew :XModificadon 'Complete Reissue : 'Partial Reissue Date previous permit issued
.uthorizcd by the State of North Carolina.Department of Environment and Natural Resources //1 .2 t 4U
the Coastal Resources Commission in an area of environmental concern pursuant to I5A NCAC C7 ' !Rolm atracned.
Project Location: County _�E's.r j��'tGV/l/
dicant Name , f /'1..-1/0" cr2f-r'Al
L•, Lot# s' f/49
cress J �a%j '� ^JCy G'1 r Street Address/State Road, ( ) L1'
://hl: f(/ State,/r Z2lIP 'i /C.,3 } ... .. /tr. .. Ysi-7" - ..
me# (4/47) 352,54-S'7 Far.#(.. ) . . . _ .
Subdivision .0/774/ e:e. "•'/s7G. / 1-Z s7i•1;
:horized Agent S!/7t
City i> '2/�•i i Jv C,/ ZIP 7 S'//t
i CW' I),"EW ixrTA IAES : I PTS Phone# (910 ) G' ./`15Y River Basin C f""%
acted I I OFA I I HHF i I IH I i USA i I N/A �1/ lr% ..
C(s): Adj.Wtr.Body..-...... _ P'-• ....../ .( ./
I PWS: I IFC: _ il,'/� /r' [%//l• ��'li
--- Closest M .Wtr. Body .f
•
LW: es / no PNA /irei
/ no Grit.Hab. yes / no
r fi1G 1 „ 7iZ r'i.�y
ape of Project/Activity ��/"r it t lrl'CCJ /-?,/i / /F i '-I�',
fi eW 5l.ne,,, 7 4/' 71 l .J ,./t2"/ii, il, !' tl.sr"-,i"(Scale: / ; r,
Pier(dock)length it, d L..' -
Platform(s) r fj2i % n'7/7/.4 . . . /2t.r/yC•�.
Finger pier(s) r+4 -(ram Sin/A t.f/,..f
,r 4
Groin length kit yr y�
nurnbor �', I
Bulkhead/Riprap length 1%1!
avg distance offshore n I iJ j
max disnnce offshore �:•+� /`'
\ .
•
Basin.
.!.in,channel
cubic yards fr-, 4- •% _
Boathouse/6oa
Bat nmp //
dik 1 I Pf`7�'.et,
—
11I1
Beach Bulldcang Ix�-f/n�j--� I
Omer ! l CL:'Pn/l'!/....'7i, IJ l 9 2 2.
/ '�r .r`P7n'Nin.'l/j I I ( • ^ �l
Shoreline Length.•Ja°. . • , i ��0
%
SAV: not sure yes C'-d pi,'
I ` (� t r v,� '�
Sandbags: not sure yes 4td ,°fit;- "7: 1 5 A . `O
Moratorium; n/a yes eo . I -'E "I—
Photos: yes 517 . J--
Waiver Attached: yes ea /f l i. _
A building permit may be required by: /1//�/� Ct'/ ' I I Sec note on back regarding River Basins rul
. _ . . — .... //i•_/i.i —ter . 2!t!. ��,/7// '`rdram ("17-•r7/7f:-'

",• .�. _ c vru�—I�C�Jr1�lWCU/ I C CG P. E
N-1S-2005 12:41 From: To:910 7721723 P.2/5
AVICIFA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secrets
Notice of Intent to UnSuspend CAMA General Permit No, 38466-D
Certified Mnil- 7002 2410 0003 1721 1193
Return Receipt Requested
January 1.3, 2005
Mr. Arthur Frankel
4148 Hearthaide Drive
Wilmington, NC 28412
Dear Mr. Frankel:
This letter is in reference to CAMA General Permit No. 38466-D, issued to you on October 26, 2004, for the
relocation of an existing access walkway to a private community pier, at your property, located at 1637 Sound Watch
Drive. (as per New Hanover County Tax Office), in Wilmington, New Hanover County.
Based upon information brought to the attention of the Division of Coastal Management, it appears that an
adjacent riparian property owner notification was properly submitted to the owner of Lot#9 of Intracoastal Watch,
adjacent to the property aforementioned. The Division of Coastal Management has also received information from th
New Hanover County Planning Department, that relocation of the pier access walkway within the easement on the
aforementioned property, would be consistent with the special use permit issued by New Hanover County for the
Intracoastal Watch community pier. However, any modification to the easement location will require the approval of
revised subdivision map.
Under these circumstances, the Division of Coastal Management is unsuspending CAMA General Permit No,
38466-D. The permit will remain active until the expiration date of April 6, 2005. 1 request that you contact Mr.
Robb Mairs, Field Representative for the Division of Coastal Management in the Wilmington Regional Office at(910
395-3900 to schedule a meeting to obtain revised and/or new CAMA General Permit,
•
incerely,
regson
'ct Manager
rr• Toil T...,A,tl nr' .x

,•., • :N. • ,Wit, L
. :
•
J M la t
a •Ni. x ,
} Yi �i• f4,'4 ttu 1
Pi. �" E t ;I
PLAINTIFF'S
e. F i : • ., ' '\ / EXHIHI}BIT
axs4,- \ ".!' d lam/
ffi
.b ti`i' '',d P • • • `� LS,�'it,. i,4 � film V r
• 0
1 V 4 I,,,Ilr t ❑ n r szx. .�,.
+, b •Q • ' :•�{` .`k h Y t t d•�{,7--i t lot r l o.L .. ',. , J'rt II , >
1IIBc .
.;.�y 0. h� r'','Ie"f, ,k,_. —.4:1-4.. j �. •tt a t ` ,; .t( 4 ' 'lt ''''? it J •�. a J1.bi ,�, .'..::.A!..... ti r,k; +4-1,y �r.N. �,+1.PINS` - ,�'•
1/1,.: .. I(r�,M+,,, k a 1 �.. '( a ?+ r41 +Y' 'i. 4 et
'/g � , I. .n+• I 1.
- I ,"" .Y 5� s{ •t I, 1
' •.15}`PP,,kn+i�,y- .:.•1 jy `'� 4, � ):4411" 'R"`•'
•
4i"r tt�! .4 f

ra 1y I , r_fir 7. a .- N,�.�,.! a, S. I ixlk ^r • 4�z_ , •.,,, ,4. ,
:::Ari,:,....4-7--..••,0.11;r,c..::,--,- ..!4:0',7-1•447.,.;•;\--,-=..•••-:•-•-,,,.. , •,, •. t ......_
•
! :7 $ t'M ,Yt ,:t
slj � `
rF A ''�" r .. '-r: r• ""y .L.-t '4, , -;,-r.3 avc t'.a:.11--k_r?.g _
*_ .a-. •-t ��.rjY+yz y �P+ ti . e 3 1 r r/ 033x:1.
.:.-
:.
•
V •. �:-
a- . r -�` x r a'_ A�t` .r` r •i�R+ �.ti+ti 7 ""ii .a _-• r`.4
•
_ �.i • tr't a 1,- y
• - 1- •
•
•
_ T :•• ',3 to -
j t' �� ,.. —
~t I. Y r. '•''._: 1 d a• �d S r, ..-.
ae - •`.. ,,- A•s"1 f !L' rypA!1
41
-.
L �{
M • �w Si. • I
•_' _
k: • •fir:'
L a trf - - •-tL t.reT.. i
— - .t—
SEAT
--t ,;
� �' . =+dC.-per 6 sc 3•T �.
' '-,� a e,,;Sty+-ram �:' =
H
' .lt a •`'k ,4mme
ii � ,(� ,is
. - : '
N .
F a ji �
■■

,. . _ . .,11,74.61, r.. _ .liammi.,,,,,,.....„..at.„..,..g .. _,.,,,
•
•_
. 1,.. .,,.......!47.__. 3 ,.1-,
WEi.." -'.::`---...4.-E...44',A"...A..';;* -'':'r.• '. ••••3.-_.-,--.-::‘i :11 •• -•'. .•-• , . .:„.'•0'...,.-'::
s y_ R t 4 A. t. _
• -',':,---;:i 4,-----,w,.. ..-:-.4-,A - --,;..--,-, . _ -. -,!...F.f.-r,,,,,,,. --.14.o•L-i: ..,iv,,,, .4 i i. - iN,,. i#•,,,I.r.--- ----2 _ ----
3 ._ . ir.:: %,-,;,,Ix ;4..z---.i,--:-..-•-.--:- --.-.,-.-1,..-r.7*---7 "rF-1's-t''' " - ,. . - !'ff.__11
0. /
•.■ t � �i:Li
( !::t!
•
ri
will"
'S J tE y
't ' • 4.411-.. f:t11.--:---.....--••••••" '`..,$' ._Is._ --7-...,_. --ri --.,.,-.e.-....:A:;.. .2. -. .1E11 •
L L `
14
j, • _
n —yr +, 4 Bryrynn t Apr
•
t F c---:• tx K r at ,
{ :t• ----`-s "�. K--,+E••d '�" • .'fit l
�t� ; �1 ,.y
wit+ •#!. •" � _ - 4 r '•d3 5y.?sr.43. -.. •' ''—.-!'�: �.
` !J JW1L
: ., cwex,{,,w.F.— ,,fie .,{[�xt `':
1. x 1 S ',? f
ail
'x • �e� r, { t _. cam...• ; . t
R tF _ _<_; aI !t - 4c .fir fii
•
t i "r F%: {+r L Syr ::i; -r.
•
•
s . • 41 1,0q tom.:. , '�I F / I,.......:.- v �— •a.

MAY-07-1999 FRI 03:45 PM NHC INSPECTIONS FAX NO. 9103414332 P.
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ORDER GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
Community Boating Facility
The County Commissioners for New Hanover County having held a public hearing on=
to consider application number S-429, submitted by DACLAR, Inc., a request for a special use
permit to use the property located at Intracoastal Watch Subdivision and having heard all the
evidence and arguments presented at the hearing, make the following FINDINGS OF FACT an(
draw the following CONCLUSIONS:
1. The County Commissioners FIND AS A FACT that all of the specific
requirements set forth in Section 72-37 of the County Zoning Ordinance WILL be satisfied if th
property is developed in accordance with the plans submitted to the County Commissioners.
2. It is the County Commissioners' CONCLUSION that the proposed use DOES
satisfy the first general requirement listed in the Ordinance; namely that the use will not
materially endanger the public health or safety if located where proposed and developed
according to the plan as submitted and approved. In support of this conclusion, the
Commissioners make the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Sewer service is not required_ A water connection will be provided for boat
•
cleanups.
B. The facility will be located adjacent to the existing subdivision. Access is privat
C. The site is located in the Myrtle Grove VFD.
3. It is the County Commissioners' CONCLUSION that the proposed use DOES
satisfy the second general requirement listed in the Ordinance; namely that the use meets all
required conditions and specifications. In support of this conclusion, the Commissioners make
the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. Community boating facilities are permitted by special use permit in the R-15
Residential District, The property is zoned R-15.
B. Off-street parking will be provided at individual lots. Additional parking is
available at the development's pool and club house area.
C. The number of slips proposed (10) does not exceed the number of lots in the
subdivision(19).

(-07-1999 FRI 03:45 PM NHC INSPECTIONS FAX NO. 9103414332 [J. LA
A. As a general rule, boating facilities like this tend to compliment property values,
B. Similar facilities are located on nearby properties.
5, It is the County Commissioners' CONCLUSION that the proposed use DOES
satisfy the fourth general requirement listed in the Ordinance; namely that the location and
character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in
harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the plan of
development for New Hanover County. In support of this conclusion,the Commissioners make
the following FINDINGS OF FACT:
A. These kinds of facilities arc commonplace for similarly situated properties.
B. New Hanover County policies encourage access to its public waters.
6. Therefore, because the County Commissioners conclude that all of the general and
specific conditions precedent to the issuance of a SPECIAL USE PERMIT HAVE been satisfied,
IT IS ORDERED that the application for the issuance of a SPECIAL USE PERMIT BE
GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:
A. That the applicant shall fully comply with all of the specific requirements stated in
the Ordinance for the proposed use, as well as any additional conditions
hereinafter stated.
B. If any of the conditions imposed by this special use permit shall be held invalid
beyond the authority of this Board of Commissioners by a court of competent
jurisdiction,then this permit shall become void and of no effect.
C. Other:
1. All other applicable federal, state and local laws.
2. That the pier not extend any further into the adjacent bay than the longest
adjacent pier.
Ordered this 13th day of July, 1998.
. wig W ,�,�,t.t.— tit . CJ
I NI*, William A. Caster, Chairman

41A I'T A
NCDENR JAN 2 1 2005
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natura es urces
pp
Division of Coastal Management COASTAL 1SiON OF
Michael F. Easley,Governor Charles S.Jones, Director William G. Fto"sll igitiiirF�
January 20, 2005
Mr. Arthur Frankel
1637 Sound Watch
Wilmington,NC 28409
CERTIFIED MAIL (7004 1350 0001 1207 1824)
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Re: Suspension of Work/Appeal of CAMA Permit Decision
Dear Mr. Frankel:
The Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission,Eugene Tomlinson, has received a request
for an administrative hearing to challenge CAMA General Permit#GPD38466. The Third Party
Hearing Request was filed on behalf of petitioners Mark and Elisabeth Looney on January 19,
2005. Under N.C.G.S. §113A-121.1 (the Coastal Area Management Act), your CAMA permit is
automatically suspended upon receipt of a hearing request and will remain suspended until
either: (1)Chairman Tomlinson denies the hearing request(under standards set out in the
statute); or(2)there is a final Coastal Resources Commission decision on the permit appeal. You
may not undertake any development under the permit until further notice after Chairman
Tomlinson issues his decision.
The Division of Coastal Management will prepare a recommendation for the Chairman on
whether to grant or deny the hearing request. The Chairman must make a decision within 15
days after receipt of the hearing request. If you wish to submit any materials for the Chairman's
consideration in ruling on the request for contested case hearing, please send them to me as soon
as possible.
• cerely,
Q