11-97 Renewal 2003 (Variance) Marsh Harbor Resorts LLC

Permit Class
2nd RENEWAL
Permit Number
11-97
ty CRC Variance)
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
and
Coastal Resources Commission
vermit
for
X Major Development in an Area of Environmental Concern
pursuant to NCGS 113A-118
X Excavation and/or filling pursuant to NCGS 113-229
Issued to Marsh Harbour Resorts, LLC,10155 Beach Drive, Calabash, NC 28467
Authorizing development in Brunswick County at Calabash River, Beach Drive of Hwy. 179
, as requested in -the permittee's application dated letter dated 12/11/02
This permit, issued on December 15, 2003 , is subject to compliance with the application (where consistent
with the permit), all applicable regulations, special conditions and notes set forth below. Any violation of these terms may
be subject to fines, imprisonment or civil action; or may cause the permit to be null and void.
1) This renewal must be attached to the original of Permit No. 11-97, which was transferred to Marsh
Harbour Resorts LLC on 10/5/99, as well as the Major Modification of 7/31/00 and the renewal of
11/20/00, and all documents must be readily available on site when a Division of Coastal
Management representative inspects the project for compliance.
2) All conditions and stipulations of the active permit remain in force under this renewal except as
altered herein.+
3) In accordance with the variance granted by the Coastal Resources Commission on 10/23/03, all
walkways that are located within 30 feet of the mean high water line shall be constructed of pervious
materials. The permittee should contact a representative of the Division of Coastal Management
prior to initiation of walkway construction for a confirmation of appropriate pervious walkway
materials and/or designs.
This permit action may be appealed by the permittee or
other qualified persons within twenty (20) days of the issuing
date. An appeal requires resolution prior to work initiation or
continuance as the case may be.
This permit must be accessible on -site to Department
personnel when the project is inspected for compliance.
Any maintenance work or project modification not covered
hereunder requires further Division approval.
All work must cease when the permit expires on
December 31, 2006
In issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees
that your project is consistent with the North Carolina Coastal
Management Program.
Signed by the authority of the Secretary of DENR and the
Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission.
Donffa D. Moffitt, Director
er `Division of Coastal Management
This permit and its conditions are hereby accepted.
Signature ofPermittee

4
inconsistent with 15A NCAC 7J .0404, which requires that after being granted an initial 2-
year renewal, the Division can only issue additional renewals upon finding that substantial
development has begun and is continuing on the permitted project.
16. Given the preceding findings the Division of Coastal Management denied Petitioners'
request for the renewal of CAMA Major Permit No. 11-97 on March 10, 2003.
17. A series of four lawsuits has affected the Marsh Harbour Resorts development and has
adversely affected financing and construction of the project:
a. On September 14, 1999, Marsh Harbour Golf and Yacht Club Interval Association,
Inc. and Golf Coast Realty, Inc. filed a Complaint against The LaDane Williamson
Company, LaDane Williamson of North Carolina, Inc., LaDane Williamson
Company, LLC ("Defendants Williamson") and The Town of Calabash, North
Carolina, asserting procedural and substantive defects in the zoning ordinance. This
case was dismissed on March 6, 2000.
b. On July 3, 2000, Marsh Harbour Golf and Yacht Club Interval Association, Inc. and
Golf Coast Realty, Inc. filed another Complaint against Defendants Williamson and
the Town of Calabash, North Carolina asserting claims similar to the 1999 case. This
case was dismissed on September 23, 2002.
C. On December 28, 2000, Marsh Harbour Resorts, LLC filed a Complaint in Summary
Ejectment against Marsh Harbour Marina, Inc. to terminate the lease and gain
possession of the Marina, which is necessary for Petitioners' development of the
property. Following numerous motions and hearings this case has been assigned to
the North Carolina Business Court where it is currently pending. A Mediated

5
Settlement Conference was held in the case in July of this year, and the parties are
currently in the process of preparing settlement documents.
d. On February 2, 2001, Marsh Harbour Marina, Inc. filed a Complaint against
Defendants Marsh Harbour Resorts, LLC and Inlet Harbor Marina, Inc. regarding the
'lease of the Manna and asserting claims for breach of the lease, breach of promises
to make capital improvements, and failure of Lessor to make repairs, etc. This case
has also been assigned to the North Carolina Business Court. where it is currently
pending. A Mediated Settlement conference was held in the case in July of this year,
and the parties are currently in the process of preparing settlement documents.
18. No new construction has taken place on the authorized project since the C.AMA permit was
issued.
19. Petitioners have expended substantial sums of money since the project's inception on land
use planning and rezoning, surveying and engineering costs, architectural fees, development
of resort development documents (such as Owners' Association Covenants, etc.) and legal
expenses.
20. Petitioners' costs include more than $350,000 on stormwater, water, and sewer design and
permitting.
21. Development of the stormwater management plan required extensive engineering work,
including design of building roof prints, parking configurations, streets and all other
impervious surfaces. Preliminary design of sewer collection and water distribution systems
have been prepared. Approximately 70% of the project construction design work is
complete.

22. A stormwater permit for the development was issued by the Division of Water Quality (S W S
920522) on September 13, 2001 and is effective until September 13, 2011. The stormwater
management system is designed to contain the runoff from the first inch and a half of rainfall.
The stormwater permit was issued after the CRC's buffer rule came into effect.
23. The T6wn of Calabash adoPted a new Land Use Plan in 1999 after the Marsh Harbourpermit
was issued. The project is consistent with the new plan. The Town supported the proposed
project and continues to support it, viewing it as positive economic development for their
community and economy.
24. As permitted, the project is consistent with all of the Commission's current rules except for
the buffer rule in some places.
25. The structures that are presently proposed to be located within the 30-foot buffer from the
estuarine shoreline required by 15A NCAC 7H .0209(d) are as follows:
a. Parking: There are 2 parking areas that have intrusions into the buffer.
1. The first parking area is located by the restaurant and intrudes 5 to 10 feet
into the buffer for a distance of approximately 120 feet. Therefore, the total
square footage for this buffer infringement is approximately 600 to 1,200
square feet.
2. The second parking area is located by the marina and has about 5 parking
spaces in the buffer which total approximately 175 square feet.
b. Pool: The pool and concrete decking around the pool represent a 550 square foot
intrusion into the buffer.
C. Recreation Center: There is a recreation center proposed that presently intrudes into

7
the buffer approximately 250 square feet.
d. Condominiums: There, are 3 condominium buildings that intrude into the buffer.
1. The first one is located at the head of the marina basin and intrudes into the
buffer approximately 3 feet for a distance of 33 feet, totaling approximately
100 square feet in the buffer. -
2. The second one is located four buildings south of the recreation center and
intrudes into the buffer approximately 5 feet for a distance of 10 feet, totaling
approximately 50 square feet in the buffer.
3. The third one is located north of the pool and intrudes into the buffer
approximately 4 feet for a distance of 60 feet, totaling approximately 240
square feet in the buffer.
e. Walkways: There are 7 walkways from various structures that go down to the water
and are therefore located in the buffer. All of the proposed walkways are concrete.
Three of the seven walkways range from 20 to 25 feet wide, and the remaining four
range from 6 to 10 feet wide. Only 6-foot wide slatted wooden walkways are
allowed in the buffer.
26. Petitioners filed this variance request on September 11, 2003, seeking relief from strict
application of the "substantial development' rule in 15A NCAC U .0404 in order to obtain
another permit renewal.
27. If Petitioners could obtain a permit renewal under the rule, it would be valid for two years.
Because of the size and complexity of the project, Petitioners are instead seeking a renewal
for four years.

State of North Carolina Reply
Lill B. Hickey
ROY COOPER Department of Justice Environmental Division
Tel: [phone]
.hTTORNEI' GENERALP. O. BOX 629 Fax: [phone]
RALEIGH
27602-0629
Mr. Amos C. Dawson, III
Maupin, Taylor, PA
P.O. Drawer 19764
Raleigh, North Carolina 28719-9764
October 30, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Re: Variance Request for Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Permit
Dear Mr. Dawson:
The Coastal Resources Commission has granted the variance request which you
submitted. Attached is a copy of the order, signed by the Chairman of the Coastal Resources
Commission.
If there are any conditions that you find unacceptable, you have the right to appeal the
Coastal Resources Commission's decision by filing a petition for judicial review in superior
court of the county where the property is located within thirty days after receiving the order. A
copy of the judicial review petition must also be served on the Coastal Resources Commission's
agent for service of process at the following address:
Dan Oakley, General Counsel
Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
Sincerely,
Dci
.Hickeyal Deputy Attorn yf eneral
cc: Meredith Jo Alcoke
Charles Jones
Donna Moffitt
Eugene Tomlinson, Chairman, CRC
Sheila Green
RECEIVED
NOV n 4 2003
);q.pFCOA�t�� AGEMEnr

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF BRUNS WICK
IN THE MATTER OF: )
PETITION FOR VARIANCE BY )
MARSH HARBOUR RESORTS, LLC and )
LaDANE WILLIAMSON COMPANTY, LLC )
BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA
COASTAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
CRC-VR-03-22
FINAL ORDER
This matter was heard on oral arguments and stipulated facts at the regularly scheduled
meeting of the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission (hereinafter CRC) on October 23,
2003, in Wilmington, North Carolina pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 113A-120.1 and Tl 5A NCAC 7J.0700,
et sea. Assistant Attorney General Meredith Jo Alcoke appeared on behalf of the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Coastal Management; Amos C. Dawson, III, Esq.
appeared on behalf of Petitioners.
Upon consideration of the record documents and the arguments of the parties, the CRC
adopts the following:
STIPULATED FACTS
1. Petitioner, Marsh Harbour Resorts, LLC ("Petitioner" or "Marsh Harbour") owns a tract of
land in Calabash, with portions in both North Carolina and South Carolina. The LaDane
Williamson Company, LLC ("Petitioner" or "Company" --collectively "Petitioners") is the
management oversight company for the development of the property.
2. The waters of Calabash Creek at this location are classified as SA by the Environmental
Management Commission. The waters of Calabash Creek adjacent to the project area are
closed to harvest of shellfish and are not designated as a Primary Nursery Area (PNA).

3. The project area was formerly a coquina rock quarry that was converted to a marina basin in
the late 70's and early 80's.
4. The existing tract has a highground marina with structural supports to accommodate 257
slips, with 120 slips completed. The basin is stabilized with rip rap and bulkhead structures.
Also on the tract are several large time share units, a club douse and swimming pool, tennis
courts, a former 2-story restaurant building now used for office space, a ship's store,
bathroom facilities and service roads. There is also an existing golf course (Marsh Harbour
Golf Links).
5. The tract is characterized by significant topographic relief, sloping down sharply toward the
marina basin. Elevations on the tract range from 10 feet to 50 feet. This significant change
in elevation made design of the stormwater management system complex. Because portions
of the tract are located in two different states, Petitioners have had to obtain permits and land
use approvals from various agencies and local governments in both North and South
Carolina.
6. On June 13, 1997, CAMA Major Permit No. 11-97 was issued to Marsh Harbour Marina
authorizing construction of additional marina docks, nineteen multi unit residential buildings,
and a seven -story hotel, as well as associated infrastructure development. None of these
structures was built.
7. On October 5, 1999, the permit was transferred to Marsh Harbour Resorts, LLC.
8. A major modification was issued on July 31, 2000, changing the scheme of high ground
development to include an expanded hotel complex and conference/meeting center (900
rooms), a parking structure, 266 condominium units, 80 town homes, restaurants, shops, a

recreation center, office center, and associated infrastructure.
9. The CRC's 30-foot buffer rule came into effect August 1, 2000.
10. The modified permit had an original expiration date of December 31, 2000, only 5 months
following the modification.
11. The permit was renewed once on November 20, 2000, with a new expiration date of
December 31, 2002.
12. Rule 15A NCAC U .0404 governs CAMA permit renewals and has been effective since
1955. It provides, "Where substantial development ... has begun and is continuing on a
permitted project, the permitting authority shall grant as many two year extensions as
necessary to complete the initial development."
13. Effective August 1, 2002, this rule governing the renewal of CAMA permits was modified
by the Coastal Resources Commission to further define the term "substantial development."
14. The new language contained in the rule "deems" substantial development to have occurred
on a project "if the permittee can show that development has progressed beyond basic site
preparation, such as land clearing and grading, and construction has begun and is continuing
under normal construction practices on the primary structure or structures authorized under
the permit. For purposes of residential subdivision, installation of subdivision roads
consistent with an approved subdivision plat shall constitute substantial development.
Renewals for maintenance and repairs. of previously approved projects may be granted for
periods not to exceed 10 years." 15A NCAC U .0404.
15. On December 11, 2002, Petitioners submitted another renewal request for Permit 11-97.
The Division of Coastal Management determined the proposed renewal request to be

9
28. Petitioners have also filed a contested case with the Office of Administrative Hearings to
challenge the denial of the permit renewal request. Petitioners have alleged that they have
obtained common law vested rights in the original permit. The parties have entered into a
stay in that case pending the outcome of this variance request.
29. The parties have stipulated to the authenticity of certain oversized drawings which will be
presented to the Commission at their hearing on this matter.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The CRC has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter.
2. The parties have been correctly designated.
3. All notices for the proceeding were adequate and proper.
4. The Commission concludes that the Petitioners have demonstrated that strict
application of Rule 15A NCAC 7J.0404(b) to their existing permit will result in unnecessary
hardships. The Petitioners' variance request materials and the staff recommendation are
incorporated by reference as support for this conclusion.
5. The Commission concludes that the Petitioners have demonstrated that their hardship
results from conditions peculiar to the project property. The Petitioners' variance request materials
and the staff recommendation are incorporated by reference as support for this conclusion.
6. The Commission concludes that the Petitioners have demonstrated that their hardship
does not result from actions taken by Petitioners. The Petitioners' variance request materials and
the staff recommendation are incorporated by reference as support for this conclusion.
7. The Commission concludes that the Petitioners have demonstrated that their proposed

9
development is within the spirit, purpose and intent of the Commission's rules; that it will secure
public safety and welfare; and that it will preserve substantial justice. The Petitioners' variance
request materials and the staff recommendation are incorporated by reference as support for this
conclusion.
THEREFORE, thepetition forvariance from T15A NCAC 7 7 .0404(b) is GRANTED with
the followin.- conditions:
(1) the permit and variance shall expire in December 31, 2006; and
(2) all walkways that intrude into the buffer shall be "pervious."
This the 30th day of October, 2003.
EUG
, eneW. Tomlinson, Jr., Chairman
Coastal Resources Commission

10
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I have caused the foregoing Final Order to be served upon the parties
by depositing a copy thereof in the U.S. Postal Service certified mail, return receipt requested
addressed to their attorneys:
Amos C. Dawson, III
Maupin, Taylor, PA
P.O. Drawer 19764
Raleigh, NC 28719-9764
Meredith Jo Alcoke (Hand Delivery)
Assistant Attorney General
Environmental Division
PO Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602
This the 30th day of October, 2003.
JilW. Hickey '
S ial Deputy Attorney G
N.C. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602-0629
[phone]

PWA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor
MEMO TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Donna D. Moffitt, Director
January 9v, 2003
Jill Hickey
Attorney Generals Office
Doug Huggett
Major Permits Coordinator
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Renewal Request for Permit No. 11-97 (Marsh Harbor Resorts),
Brunswick County
Attached please find a copy of a permit renewal request package for the subject permit,
which was submitted on behalf of the permittee by Amos Dawson. The issues
surrounding this case can be summarized as follows:
The CAMA permit for the project was originally issued to Odell Williamson on 6/13/97.
The permit was set to expire on 12/31/00. The permit was transferred to Marsh Harbor
Resorts in October of 1999. On 7/31/00 a Major Modification was issued for the project.
The 12/31/00 expiration date of the permit remained unchanged under the major
modification. On 11/20/00, the permit was granted a 2-year extension, with the new
expiration date becoming 12/31/02.
On 12/11/02, Mr. Dawson submitted a request to renew the permit for a second time. By
Mr. Dawson's own admission, actual construction has not begun on the permitted project
due to numerous outside factors.
When considering the request for renewal, the following CRC rules apply:
15A NCAC V .0404DEVELOPMENT PERIOD EXTENSION
(a) Where no development has been initiated during the development period, the permitting authority shall extend
the authorized development period for no more than two years upon receipt of a signed and dated request from the
applicant containing the following:
(1) a statement of the intention of the applicant to complete the work within a reasonable time;
(2) a statement of the reasons why the project will not be completed before the expiration of the
current permit;
(3) a statement that there has been no change of plans since the issuance of the original permit other
than changes that would have the effect of reducing the scope of the project, or, previously
approved permit modifications;
(4) notice of any change in ownership of the property to be developed and a request for transfer of the
permit if appropriate; and
(5) a statement that the project is in compliance with all conditions of the current permit.
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.ne.us
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

Where substantial development, either within or outside the AEC, has begun and is continuing on a permitted
project, the permitting authority shall grant as many two year extensions as necessary to, complete the initial
development. Renewals for maintenance and repairs of previously approved projects may be granted for periods not
to exceed 10 years.
(b) When an extension request has not met the criteria of Paragraph (a) of this Rule, the Department may circulate
the request to the commenting state agencies along with a copy of the original permit application. Commenting
agencies will be given three weeks in which to comment on the extension request. Upon the expiration of the
commenting period the Department will notify the applicant promptly of its actions on the extension request.
(c) Notwithstanding Paragraphs (a) and (b) of this Rule, an extension request may be denied on making findings as
required in either G.S. 113A-120 or G.S. 113-229(e). Changes in circumstances or in development standards shall
be considered and applied to the maximum extent practical by the permitting authority in making a decision on an
extension request.
(d) The applicant for a major development extension request must submit, with the request, a check or money order
payable to the Department in the sum of one hundred dollars ($100.00).
(e) Modifications to extended permits may be considered pursuant to 15A NCAC 7J .0405.
History Note: Authority G.S. 113A-119; 113A-119.1; 173A-124(c)(8);
Eff. March 15, 1978;
Amended Eff. August], 2000; April 1, 1995; March], 1991; March], 1985; November 1, 1984.
Upon a first reading of the information provided by Mr. Dawson, it does not appear that a second
renewal is allowable under the above rule. (I Should also point out that it has been DCM;s
position that the re -circulation provisions of item (b) above are no different than those required
for a new permit. Thus we have chosen not to use the re -circulation process, and have opted to
require that any such request undergo a new major permit review.) However, Mr. Dawson has
provided an extensive argument that vested rights principles should be applied to this renewal
request. This is an argument that the Division is unfamiliar with. Therefore, I would like to ask
if you could examine the enclosed information, and whether you have an opinion on whether the
requested permit renewal could in fact be issued.
I am available to answer any questions that you might have concerning this matter. If you would
like to discuss this with me further, please feel free to call me at 733-2293 ext. 244. Thanks in,
advance for your help.

Re: marsh harbour permit renewal
Subject: Re: marsh harbour permit renewal
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 14:14:37 -0500
From: "Allen Jernigan" <[e-mail]>
To: "Meredith Jo Alcoke" <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Couple questions/suggestions here.
1) Wasn't 11-97 originally for a more traditional project, which was turned into
Resort LaDane in the modification? If so, I think the letter should so reflect.
5) I would delete "due to pending lawsuits and associated legal actions"
>>> Doug Huggett <Doug.Huggett:ncmail.net> 03/07/03 11:54AM >>>
Attached please find the draft denial letter for the Marsh Harbour
permit. As was the case with the Broad Reach denial that I sent to each
of you earlier, I would like to get comments back on this as soon as
possible so that I can get Donna to sign the denial before she becomes
unavailable. Please call me with any questions.
Doug
1 of 1 3MO3 3:01 PM

Re: marsh harbour permit renewal
Subject: Re: marsh harbour permit renewal
Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2003 14:55:14 -0500
From: "Meredith Jo Alcoke" <[e-mail]>
To: "Allen Jernigan" <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Concur with Allen. Also:
Paragraph 4 has error --should be 2002.
2nd paragraph pg. 2; do you want to add at end that "You may also file a variance request with the
Coastal Resources Commission. Please contact this office for appropriate forms." or whatever standard
language you use.
1 of 1 3/7/03 3:09 PM

A��
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
March 10, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Marsh Harbour Resorts, LLC
10155 Beach Drive
Calabash, NC 28467
Dear Sirs:
This letter is in regard to your request i
CAMA Major Permit No. 11-97 for an additior
13, 1997 and modified on July 31, 2000, auth(
adjacent to the waters of Calabash Creek, in the
renewal request, which was received a3
2002, is now complete. Based on the
following findings:
1) On June 13, 1997, CAMA Major
construction of additional marina
hotel, as well as associated infiraso
2) On October 5, 1999, the permi) was transferred
tCoastal Area Manage
m
ent Act (CAMA) to renew
years. Permit No. 11-97, which was issued on June
the construction of the Marsh Harbour Development
of Calabash in B nswick County. Processing of the
,NDivision of astal Management on December 11,
e Division of Coastal Management has made the
d to March Harbour Marina authorizing
residential buildings, and a seven -story
Resorts, LLC.
3) A major modification was issued on July 31 000, changing the scheme of high ground development
to include a larger hotel and conference ce ter, a parking deck 66 condominium units and 80 town
homes.
4) The permit was renewed on November` 20, 2000, with a new expiration date of December 31, 2002.
5) Rules governing the renewal of AMA permits were recently modified by the Coastal Resources
Commission to further define bstantial development. These modified rules became effective on
August 1, 2003.
6) In the applicant's December 11, 2002 renewal request, it was acknowledged that no substantial
development has taken place on the authorized project since Permit 11-97 was originally issued.
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: hfp://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer-50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

CHAIN -OF -CUSTODY RECORD AND TESTING REQUEST
PROJECT: PiVM TIP: COUNTY: ( FcJn tc_k
DESCRIPTION: �1r4� jj;� PHONE NO
'� "� ^ �_ SEND REPORT TO:5v--� FAX NO.:&M Y 7(o7_fp2rj(
CATLIN PROJECT NO.:�Q(-GS4� !� ADDRESS: DATE:�515-n
COLLECTED BY: e� 1� TURNAROUND: 5-ZZ-6
SAMPLE NO. -O - 2
11 _ / Q
BORING NO. _
I
-G FIELD NOTES
STATION
/►}_ T -
LINE
oQ COLA
DEPTH - L
VISUAL CLASSIFICATION TESTS
CHECK THOSE WANTED -
MOISTURE CONTENT
ATTERBERG LIMITS
SHRINKAGE LIMIT
GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION
PASSING #200 SIEVE
SIEVE ANALYSIS DR
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS • ✓
SPECIFIC GRAVITY
BULK DENSITY
PROCTOR STANDARD
PROCTOR MODIFIED
PERMEABILITY CLA
PERMEABILITY REMOLDED
PERMEABILITY SAND
OTHER(SPECIFY)
(ALL THREE PREVIOUS LISTED TESTS)
SAMPLE NUMBER PREFIX:: SS=SPLIT SPOON
S=AUGER BORING ST=SHELBY TUBE
TOTAL NO. OF SAMPLES: b
RELINQUISHED BY: (SIGNATURE) DATElfIME SHIPMENT METHOD RE IV
o
B SI ATURE) DA IME
SAMPLE DI L (CIRCLE ONE)
MM N S.
°LI 5 !s _IZ: o
CATLIN RETURN TO CLIENT
HOLD n
GE _L OF 7 CATLIN Engineers and Selenflsfs
Goofocbnlcal Laboraforlos

PFis Re: Marsh Harbor
Subject: Fwd: Re: Marsh Harbor
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 12:48:31 -0500
From: "Meredith Jo Alcoke" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
MJ's response
Perm, --
I I'g7
Subject: Re: Marsh Harbor
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 12:44:26 -0500
From: "Meredith Jo Alcoke" <MALCOKE@mail,jus.state.nc.us>
To: "Allen Jernigan" <ajem@mail Jus.state.nc.us>, <[e-mail]>,
<[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Since a "permit decision" has been made, they could file a contested case, a declaratory ruling, a
variance, or any combination of these except a declaratory ruling and a contested case-- the declaratory
ruling procedures require that a matter not be the subject of a contested case, which makes sense since a
ruling must be made on undisputed facts.
Charles and I have discussed that this may be an appropriate matter for a variance. FYI: the filing
deadline for variances for the April CRC meeting in Morehead is March 26. However, given the
complexity of the project and the somewhat full agenda, it may have to be scheduled for the July
meeting in Raleigh.
1 of 1 3/21/03 11:24 AM

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Donria D. Moffitt, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
March 10, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Marsh Harbour Resorts, LLC
10155 Beach Drive
Calabash, NC 28467
Dear Sirs:
This letter is in regard to your request under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) to renew
CAMA Major Permit No. 11-97 for an additional two years. Permit No. 11-97, which was issued on June
13, 1997 and modified on July 31, 2000, authorized the construction of the Marsh Harbour Development
adjacent to the waters of Calabash Creek, in the Town of Calabash in Brunswick County. Processing of the
renewal request, which was received as complete by the Division of Coastal Management on December 11,
2002, is now complete. Based on the state's review, the Division of Coastal Management has made the
following findings:
1) On June 13, 1997, CAMA Major Permit No. 11-97 was issued to March Harbour Marina authorizing
construction of additional marina docks, nineteen multi -unit residential buildings, and a seven -story
hotel, as well as associated infrastructure development.
2) On October 5, 1999, the permit was transferred to Marsh Harbor Resorts, LLC.
3) A major modification was issued on July 31, 2000, changing the scheme of high ground development
to include a larger hotel and conference center, a parking deck, 266 condominium units and 80 town
homes.
4) The permit was renewed on November 20, 2000, with a new expiration.date of December 31, 2002.
5) Rules governing the renewal of CAMA permits were recently modified by the Coastal Resources
Commission to further define substantial development. These modified rules became effective on
August 1, 2002.
6) In the applicant's December 11, 2002 renewal request, it was acknowledged that no substantial
development has taken place on the authorized project since Permit 11-97 was originally issued.
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

\'
7) Based upon the findings outlined above, the proposed project has been determined to be inconsistent
with 15A NCAC 07J .0404, which requires that in circumstances such as this, the Division of Coastal
Management may only renew a permit upon finding.that substantial development has begun and is
continuing on the permitted project.
Given the preceding findings, it is necessary that your request for the renewal of CAMA Major
Permit No. 11-97 be denied. This denial is made pursuant to N.C.G.S. 113A-120 (a)(8), which requires
denial for projects inconsistent with state guidelines or local land use plans.
If you wish to appeal this denial, you are entitled to a hearing. The hearing will involve appearing
before an Administrative Law Judge who listens to evidence and arguments of both parties and then makes a
recommendation to the Coastal Resources Commission. Your request for a hearing must be in the form of a
written petition, complying with the requirements of §15013 of the General Statutes of North Carolina, and
must be filed with the office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-
6714, [phone], within twenty (20) days from the date of this letter. A copy of this petition should be
filed with this office.
Also, you should be advised that as long as this state permit renewal denial stands, your project must
be deemed inconsistent with the N.C. Coastal Management Program, thereby precluding the issuance of
federal permits for this project. The Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) gives you the right to
appeal this finding to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter. Your
appeal must be on the grounds that the proposed activity is (1) consistent with the objectives or purposes of
the CZMA, or (2) is necessary in the interest of national security, and thus, may be federally approved.
Members of my staff are available to assist you should you desire to apply for a new. If you have
any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. Doug Huggett at [phone], extension 245.
Sincerely,
Donna D. Moffitt
DM/dvh
cc: Mr. Eldon Hout, Director - OCRM/NOAA, Silver Spring, MD
Colonel Charles R. Alexander - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington, NC
DCM - Morehead City
DCM — Wilmington
Amos Dawson, Maupin, Taylor and Ellis
Kenneth Shanklin

COMPLETE Tiff SECTION
SECTIONSENDER:
COMPLETE THIS .
■ Complete items 1,2 and 3. Also complete
A. Signature -
- item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
-
j ■ Print your name and address on the reverse
X El Agent
so that we can return the card to you.
- ❑Addressee
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
B. Received by ( printed Name)
C. Date of Delivery j
or on the front if space permits.
"
i
I. Article Addressed to: 11_C� 7
D. Is delivery addressdifferent from Rem 11 L] Yes
YYla�,sh �lcu�btn,a Aes�nks L,LC
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
Ill�lss. Y�eac�, 17R;vt
3. Service Type :.
j
❑ Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail j
-
❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise j
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery?-- (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes "
- 2. Article Number
-
I ()-ranter from service label) 0 -
j PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt / J
102a98-01-M-0381. '.
u96.669LZ �N H�13
-- --- ----- a.d,Zeels:Nlo-
3/scH�^)(�d
o o r
--- ---- -�13A, [r31�.... 1JI s
U��P�Y�kala{fiGoiBgloA 1^Pa�J7uPdesealdl aureN
o 0
.
WiVNUEODOMY44dd1aadlala1
0
E3 C3
O O
(minbotl luawmopu3)
• -
-
bed Nenpeo p01014sey
C3
eie R
(pminba6 luawawopua)
eed idleaed wnley
o C3
rLl. rU • ..
�' �'
- yrzwlsod
sari fx+l!Yap-
g e8;450d
W W
W W..
- - • o
-.
j.
--Ldl3P3U
-
-.} _

MAR-07-2003 FRI 04:15 PM NODENR WIRO 9103502004 P. O1
Stale of North, Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Wilmington Regional. Office
Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
FAX COVER SHEET
Date: .Illar ���C�o3 No. Of Pages:
To: nu5 A From: Lirdo_
CO: �.
—�' CO: W t �o
FAX #: `� l `f 13 3 —1 y� 5 FAX#: [phone]
REMARKS:
127 Cardinal Drive Exteplon, Wilmingt9P, N.C. 29405.3845 Tcicphmie [phone] Fax (910) 350�2g04
An Fquel Opportunity Affirmative Action $,mployer
i,L/ s� u^
I c
—LIS —P
-C olG �� Ilya
Cq4y
'-/;,/ro"o
asyal�
/,yLG�-6IyL� ��� ys• al �
h9Lk) tea^ci od
t •1,q Vy iE

,
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
March 10, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Marsh Harbour Resorts, LLC
10155 Beach Drive
Calabash, NC 28467
Dear Sirs:
This letter is in regard to your request under the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) to renew
CAMA Major Permit No. 11-97 for an additional two years. Permit No. 11-97, which was issued on June
13, 1997 and modified on July 31, 2000, authorized the construction of the Marsh Harbour Development
adjacent to the waters of Calabash Creek, in the Town of Calabash in Brunswick County. Processing of the
renewal request, which was received as complete by the Division of Coastal Management on December 11,
2002, is now complete. Based on the state's review, the Division of Coastal Management has made the
following findings:
1) On June 13, 1997, CAMA Major Permit No. 11-97 was issued to March Harbour Marina authorizing
construction of additional marina docks, nineteen multi -unit residential buildings, and a seven -story
hotel, as well as associated infrastructure development.
2) On October 5, 1999, the permit was transferred to Marsh Harbor Resorts, LLC.
3) A major modification was issued on July 31, 2000, changing the scheme of high ground development
to include a larger hotel and conference center, a parking deck, 266 condominium units and 80 town
homes.
4) The permit was renewed on November 20, 2000, with a new expiration date of December 31, 2002.
5) Rules governing the renewal of CAMA permits were recently modified by the Coastal Resources
Commission to further define substantial development. These modified rules became effective on
August 1, 2002.
6) In the applicant's December 11, 2002 renewal request, it was acknowledged that no substantial
development has taken place on the authorized project since Permit 11-97 was originally issued.
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: hftp://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer-50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

7) Based upon the findings outlined above, the proposed project has been determined to be inconsistent
with 15A NCAC 07J .0404, which requires that in circumstances such as this, the Division of Coastal
Management may only renew a permit upon finding that substantial development has begun and is
continuing on the permitted project.
Given the preceding findings, it is necessary that your request for the renewal of CAMA Major
Permit No. 11-97 be denied. This denial is made pursuant to N.C.G.S. 113A-120 (a)(8), which requires
denial for projects inconsistent with state guidelines or local land use plans.
If you wish to appeal this denial, you are entitled to a hearing. The hearing will involve appearing
before an Administrative Law Judge who listens to evidence and arguments of both parties and then makes a
recommendation to the Coastal Resources Commission. Your request for a hearing must be in the form of a
written petition, complying with the requirements of §150B of the General Statutes of North Carolina, and
must be filed with the office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-
6714, [phone], within twenty (20) days from the date of this letter. A copy of this petition should be
filed with this office.
Also, you should be advised that as long as this state permit renewal denial stands, your project must
'be deemed inconsistent with the N.C. Coastal Management Program, thereby precluding the issuance of
federal permits for this project. The Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) gives you the right to
appeal this finding to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter. Your
appeal must be on the grounds that the proposed activity is (1) consistent with the objectives or purposes of
the CZMA, or (2) is necessary in the interest of national security, and thus, may be federally approved.
Members of my staff are available to assist you should you desire to apply for a new. If you have
any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. Doug Huggett at [phone], extension 245.
Sincerely,
Donna D. Moffitt
DM/dvh
cc: Mr. Eldon Hour, Director - OCRM/NOAA, Silver Spring, MD
Colonel Charles R. Alexander - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington, NC
DCM - Morehead City
DCM — Wilmington
Amos Dawson, Maupin, Taylor and Ellis
Kenneth Shanklin

ftyge status - undeliverable]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Message status - undeliverable] / r
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 13:34:16 -0500
From: Dan Oakley <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR
To: Doug Huggett <[e-mail]>
Thanks.
Doug Huggett wrote:
> Dan
> The denial was signed by Donna on Monday of this week and was mailed on
> Tuesday (I believe). Therefore it is to late to pull it back.
> Doug
> Dan Oakley wrote:
> > 2nd try
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Subject: Message status - undeliverable
> > Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 11:31:04 -0500
> > From: [e-mail]
> > To: [e-mail]
> > The message that you sent was undeliverable to the following:
> > doug.huggettWmail.jus.state.nc.us (user not found)
> > Possibly truncated original message follows:
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Subject: Marsh Harbor
> > Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 11:34:44 -0500
> > From: Dan Oakley <dan.oakley®ncmail.net>
> > Organization: NC DENR
> > To: [e-mail], [e-mail],
> > [e-mail], [e-mail],
> > [e-mail]
> > I've just talked to Amos Dawson. He has not gotten the denial letter
> > yet; and requests that this matter be placed on hold w/o a denial while
> > he takes this to the CRC for a declaratory ruling -- I guess in
> > April. is this possible (has the letter gone out?) and/or desirable?
> > Please advise.
> > If the letter has gone, he will decide whether to appeal to OAH, seek a
> > variance or seek a declaratory ruling or maybe a combination.
aldoad znoA qa> assatd noA pTnoo
DSW OS91 ST 3agwnu Mau zno
nag
sxuegy
•Moux
APM STgq JOISE3 1Tew atlq qab TTTM aM
OZ91 zabuoT ou sT IT OSW Mau a anecl aM
1ou•1it:umou@uo2SnH•2noQ :oy
<Jau•liemou@n put:] 3o US•Aoq> pur(xoulS nag :mo r3
00V0- ZO:ZSSLO ZOOZ 2W LO TOM :a1VG
alufl lot spuepaM :1aa[gnS
1 of 1-WHOO)}lRx"W

P. L DAR
JJDT FN
YARGARE
ROBERT I
JAIES n
UT 16 TO
BIG BUFFALO
� ko
rz7-Tr-r&7
MATCHLINE STA. 84+00
5-I-OO1 it
� I
II I
n
�_�__�
16-
BIG BUFFAL
if ' I
I1 ice:
I
;
�
JR. ; I
,tz
TiKH
If I
CH 1
ii
\
I
(
MARCAR£T Ft1C:H
\ ROBERT FNM
/ I
'i
e
\\ JA1E5 FHCR
!
I
.;
:REEK
\\
+00
I
/ \
4' MATCHLINE STA. 83+00
/
r�
PLAN VIEW
n SITE 14
'1-004;/
f0
) CREEK
N. C. DEPT.OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
LEE COUNTY
PROJECT:8.T540402 (2-2417AB)
/om 0 2 m US 421/NC 87
SCALE ® DENOTES FILL IN SURFACE WATERS SANFORD BYPASS
SHEET /8 OF 6PO 10/9/00

Fwd: Marsh Harbor © 2002 Restore America's Estuaries. All Rights Reserved.
Subject: Fwd: Marsh Harbor
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 12:47:39 -0500
From: "Meredith Jo Alcoke" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
see msg from dan. he sent it to your wrong address. I will now send you my response.
Subject: Marsh Harbor T
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 11:34:44 -0500
From: Dan Oakley <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
[e-mail], [e-mail]
I've just talked to Amos Dawson. He has not gotten the denial letter
yet; and requests that this matter be placed on hold w/o a denial while
he takes this to the CRC for a declaratory ruling -- I guess in
April. Is this possible (has the letter gone out?) and/or desirable?
Please advise.
If the letter has gone, he will decide whether to appeal to OAH, seek a
variance or seek a declaratory ruling or maybe a combination.
1 of 1 3/21/03 11:25 AM

N.C. Division of Coastal Management
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638
Tel.[phone]
S
+.,, i.
D.Ilv... .....
1g38
Pp 'Bi ll„��
7000600002169336393
InIIII)iui))r).r).)el,rl
Z J3

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
mOO�sh HUA6WR mks LUL
lotss Peadi DR,Ye
(.ccicaloaskI NC, M469
A. Signature
X ❑ Agent
❑ Addressee
B. Received by (Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from Rem 1? ❑ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: Cl No
3. Service Type
❑ Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail
❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Fxtre Fee) ❑ Yes
2. Article Number
(transfer from service label) �Q (Q� a 9931 c / 3
PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595.01-14-0381