52-03 Washington and Baum Marina

Y 05/29/2003 10715 2524418209 DIXON & MEEKINS PAGE 02
Permit Class Permit Number
NEW 52�03
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environment and Natural urces
and �►
Coastal Resources Commissio V z
err „
for �� .� ...
x Major Development in an Area of Environmental Concern
pursuant to NCGS 113A-118
Excavation and/or filling pursuant to NCGS 1.13-229
issued to Washington and Baum Marina, c/o John Dixon,PO Box 1327, Nags lead NC 27959
Authorizing development in Dare County at canal ad'. Roanoke-S and and ashin ton
Baum Bridge, Roanoke Island as requested in the permittee's application dated 10/10102.in_q g
attached work lan drawing dated revised 2/14/03
71us permit, issued on Aril 14 2 03 ;is subjectto 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.
_Marina Facili
1.) The marina facility will display a sign showing the location of the nearest pumpout facility, including
t other appropriate waste disposal information, at the entrance and exit from the maim pier(s).
2) No sewage, whether treated or untreated, shall be discharged at any time from any boats using the
marina facility. Any sewage discharge at the marina facility shall be considered a violation of this
permit for which the per.mittee is responsible, This prohibition shall be applied and enforced throughout
the entire existence of the permitted facility.
(See attached sheets for additional Conditions)
Ix
action may be appealed by the rmittee or Signed. by the authority of the Secretary of DRNR and the
'Phis permit
other qualified persons within twenty, (20) days of Vic issuing Chairman,of the Coastal Resources Commission,
date. An appeal requires resolution poor to work initiation or
continuance as the case fray be.
Tlus permit must be accessible on-site to Department
personnel when the project is inspected for compliance. nna D. Moffett, TJtrector.
Any maintenance work or project modification not covered Division of Coastal Management
hereunder requires further Divisio»approval..
All work must cease when the permit eVires on This penmit and its conditions are hereby a.cc ted,
�r
December 31, 2006
In issuing this permit, the state of North Carolina agrees
that your. project is consistent with the North Carolina Coastal Sign ure of Permittee
Managemetxt T,rograni. .

05/29/2003 10: 15 25244ie209 DIXON & MEEKINS PAGE 03
rashi:ngton & Baum Marina Permit 052-03
Page 3 of 5
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
The permittee is cautioned that this permit does not authorize the placement of tie piles in
association;with the docking facility. The issuance of this permit does not relieve the permittee
from taking all proper steps to ensure the integrity of the structure and the safety of moored
boats. The permittee shall not hold the State of North Carolina or the United States liable for any
damage to the structure or moored boats,
Excavation and Sp9il Disposal
1.2) An sed.im.en.t curtain, shall be left between the area to be excavated and the existing sound, and a 24 hour
period after completion of excavation will elapse prior to plug removal to prevent unnecessary siltation
into the adjacent water body.
13) Excavation will not exceed —5 feet below the normal water level. In no case shall the depth of
excavation exceed the depth of connecting waters.
1.4) A.11 excavated materials will be confined above mean high water and landward of regularly or irregularly
flooded marsh. behind adequate dikes or other retaining structures to prevent spillover of solids into any
marsh or surrounding waters.
15) The disposal area will be constructed a sufficient distance from the mean high water level or any marsh
to eliminate the possibility of dike erosion into surrounding wetlands or waters.
16) The disposal area will be properly graded and, provided a ground cover sufficient to restrain erosion
within 30 working days of project completion.
17) The spoil disposal area must be inspected and approved by a representative of the Division of Coastal
Management prior to the commencement of any dredging activities.
18) No spoil material is to be placed within 30 feet of the normal high water line, except that which will be
used to backfill, the area behind the permitted.bulkhead.
Shoreline S abdization
19) The bulkhead wi 11 not extend waterward more than an average of 2 feet from the normal. water.level .
20) The authorized alignment of the proposed bulkhead must be staked by a representative of the Division of
Coastal Management within a maximum of 30 days prior to the start of construction. Failure to initiate
construction within 30 days, or erosion of the shoreline by adverse weather conditions, will require the
alignment to be restaked by DCM within a maximum of 30 days prior to the new expected start of
construction.
21.) The bulkhead must be constructed prior to any backfil ling activities.

05/29/2003 10: 15 2524418209 DIXON & MEEKINS PAGE 04
Washington & Baum Marina Permit #52-03
Page 5 of 5
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
31) Appropriate sedimentation and erosion control devices, measures or structures must be implemented to
ensure that eroded materials do not enter adjacent wetlands, watercourses and property (e.g. silt fence,
diversion swales or berms, sand fence, etc.).
32) A ground cover sufficient to restrain, erosion shall be provided within the shorter of 15 working or 30
calendar days of completion of any phase of grading on cut or filled slopes.
33) The permitted activity will be conducted in such a manner as to prevent a significant increase in
turbidity outside of the area of construction or construction-related discharge. Increases such that the
turbidity in the waterbody is 25 NTU's or,less in all saltwater classes are not considered significant.
General
34) If a court of competent jurisdiction determines that a party other than the permittee has legal title to any
part of the area approved for development under this permit, this permit shall be null. and void as to the
area the court determines is not owned by the permittee. This condition shall take effect on the date such.
court ,judgm.ent becomes final, Tn such event, the permittee shall consult DCM prior to initiating or
continuing any further development under this permit.
35) The permittee un.derstands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States requires the
removal, relocation, or other alteration of the structure or work authorized by this permit, or if in the
opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall cause
unreasonable obstruction to free navigation of the navigable waters, the permittee will be required, upon
due notice from the Corps of Engineers, to remove, relocate or alter the structural work or obstructions
caused thereby, without expense to the United States or the state of North Carolina. No claim shall be
made against the United States or the state of North Carolina on account of any such removal or
alteration.
36) Any "No Wake" signs or other aids to navigation must be designed and installed in accordance with any
appropriate requirements of the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission and/or the U.S Coast Guard.
37) The temporary placement or double handling of excavated or fill materials within waters or vegetated
wetlands is not authorized.
NO OTB+: This permit does not eliminate the need to obtain any additional state, federal or local permits,
approvals or authorizations that may be required.
NOTE_ Future development of the permittee's property may require a modification of this permit.
Contact a representative of the Division. at [phone] prior to the corn.mencetn.ent of any
such activity for this determination. The permittee is further advised that many non-water
dependent activities are not authorized within 30 feet of the normal high water level,
NOTE-z The US, Army Corps of Engineers has assigned the proposed project COE Action Id. No.
200010068,

05/29/2003 10: 15 2524419209 DIXON & MEEKINS PAGE 05
Washington & Baurn Marina Permit #52-03
Page 2 of 5
ADDITIONAL CON>DITTONS
3) This permit authorizes only the docks, piers, and other structures and uses located in or over the water
that are expressly and specifically set forth in the permit application. No other structure, whether
floating or stationary, may become a permanent part of this marina facility without permit modification.
No non-water dependent uses of structures may be conducted on, in or over public trust waters without
permit modification.
4) The pier and*associated structures shall, have a minimum setback distance of 15 feet between any parts
of the structure and the adjacent property owner's riparian access corridor, which is determined by
drawing a line parallel to the channel, then drawing a line perpendicular to the channel line that
intersects with the shore at the point where the upland property li.ne meets the water's edge.
5) No attempt will be .made by the permittee to prevent the full and free use by the public of all navigable
waters at or adjacent to the authorized work.
6) The authorized structure and associated activity must not cause an unacceptable interference with
navigation.
7) The permittee will, ,maintain the authorized work in good condition and in conformance with the terms
and conditions of this permit. The permittee is not relieved of this requirement if he abandons the
permitted activity without having it transferred to a third party.
8) This permit does not authorize the interference with any existing or proposed Federal project, and the
permittee will not be entitled to compensation for damage to the authorized structure or work, or injury
which may be caused from existing or future operations undertaken by the United States in the public
interest.
9) The permittee must install and maintain at his expense any signal lights or signals prescribed by the U.S.
Coast Guard, through regulation or otherwise, on the authorized facilities. At a minimum, permanent
reflectors should be attached to the structure in order to make it more visible during hours of darkness or
inclement weather.
l.0) This permit authorizes a maximum of 33 boat slips.
11) In accordance with commitments made by the permittee, no boats over 25 feet in length and no boats
with heads will be allowed within the mari.n.a.
NOTE: It is strongly recommended that the permittee exercise all available precautions in the day-to-day
operation of the facility to prevent facility waste from entering the adjacent waters. Such
discharge, either directly or indirectly, to adjacent waters could contravene state water quality
standards, thereby violating state law,

05/29/2003 10: 15 2524418209 bIXON & MEEKINS PAGE 06
•
Permit 052-03
VGasbington & Baum 11Tarina Page 4 of 5
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
22) The bulkhead must be structurally tight so as to prevent seepage of backfill materials through the
structure.
23) The bulkhead must be solid and constructed of treated wood, concrete slabs, metal sheet piles or other
suitable materials approved by department personnel.
24) The fill material will be clean and free of any pollutants except in trace quantities.
25 No backfill material is to be placed within 30 .feet of the normal high water line, except that which will
be used to backfill the area behind the permitted bulkhead.
Easement
26 prior to construction. of any new boat slips or other docking facilities under
ndrthis
Seat 1t, the permittee
P Property Office
must apply for and receive an Easement from the Department of Administration's
as required under. N.C.G.S. 146-12(e).
Upland Deyelo meat
27) This permit does not authorize the construction of any paved or impervious pe io t such paveking paces it parking
30 feet
of the normal water level. If it is determined by Dare County
spaces are required in order to be found consistent with local zoning ordinances, then this permit shall
become null and void.
28) The highground boardwalk shall be shall be elevated, slatted., and constructed of wood.
Stormwatx Management
of Wate> Quality approval of this project under stormwater. management ides e
f th
29) The Division
Environmental Management Commission is covered e�way approved by theeDWQ will be considered a
which was issued on 3/20/03. Any violation of h p
violation of this CAMA permit.
Sedimentation and Erosion Control
30) In order to protect water quality, runoff from, construction must not visibly increase the amount of
suspended sediments in adjacent waters.

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
April 14, 2003
Washington&Baum Marina
c/o John Dixon
P.O. Box 1327
Nags Head,NC 27959
Dear Mr.Dixon:
The enclosed permit constitutes authorization under the Coastal Area Management Act, and where applicable, the
State Dredge and Fill Law, for you to proceed with your project proposal. The original(buff-colored form)is retained by you
and it must be available on site when the project is inspected for compliance. Please sign both the original and the copy and
return the copy to this office in the enclosed envelope. Signing the permit and proceeding means you have waived your right of
appeal described below.
If you object to the permit or any of the conditions,your may request a hearing pursuant to NCGS 113A-121.1 or 113-
229. Your petition for a hearing must be filed in accordance with NCGS Chapter 150B with the Office of Administrative
Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27611-6714, [phone] within twenty (20) days of this decision on
your permit. You should also be aware that if another qualified party submits a valid objection to the issuance of this permit
within twenty (20) days, the matter must be resolved prior to work initiation. The Coastal Resources Commission makes the
final decision on any appeal.
The project plan is subject to those conditions appearing on the permit form. Otherwise, all work must be carried out
in accordance with your application. Modifications, time extensions, and future maintenance require additional approval.
Please read your permit carefully prior to starting work and review all project plans, as approved. If you are having the work
done by a contractor,it would be to your benefit to be sure that he fully understands all permit requirements.
From time to time, Department personnel will visit the project site. To facilitate this review, we request that you
complete and mail the enclosed Notice Card just prior to work initiation. However, if questions arise concerning permit
conditions, environmental safeguards, or problem areas,you may contact Department personnel at any time for assistance.By
working in accordance with the permit,you will be helping to protect our vitally important coastal resources.
Sincerely,
Douglas V.Huggett
Major Permits and Consistency Manager
Enclosure
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

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: John W. Dixon, Washington Baum Marina
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: South side of US 64/264, foot of the Washington Baum Bridge,
Roanoke Island, Dare County and on a manmade canal off Roanoke Sound
Photo Index - 2000: 182-2136 (P,Q,R,S-19)(T-20) 1995: 183-1896 (P-9)(Q-9,10)(R,S,T-10)
1989: 151-7 (M,N-7)(0,P,Q-8) 1984: 140-503 (H-15,16)(1,J-16)
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2995600 Y: 796900 Manteo Quad LR
GPS: El12017A
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/D&F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 11/08/02
Was Applicant Present - No
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received - 11/06/02
Office - Elizabeth City
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Town of Manteo
Land Classification From LUP - Conservation
(B) AEC(s) Involved: CW, PTA, EW, ES, PTS
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Private, Commercial
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - Municipal sewer available
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing - Docks, bulkhead, riprap
Planned - Marina, docks, bulkhead, bottom excavation, parking area
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: l'
Source - Applicant
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
Dredged Filled Other
(A) Vegetated Wetlands Bulkhead
Coastal Wetlands 532 sf
(B) Non Vegetated Wetlands Parking Shaded by land dock
Coastal Shoreline ES/PTS 6 496 sf LShaded
sf
(C) Public Trust Area/Estuarine by dock 2,104 sf
Waters 10.640 sf Bulkhead 2,128 sf red by slips 7,880 sf
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 35,484 sq. ft. (0.815 acre)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SA Open: No
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to construct a 33 slip marina on his property along an
existing canal bank.

John W. Dixon/Washington Baum Marina
Field Investigation Report
Page Two
Project Setting
The property lies on the south side of US 64/264 adjacent to the Washington Baum
Bridge on Roanoke Island, Dare County. The project area consists of a narrow strip of land
adjacent to a dredged canal off Roanoke Sound that has historically been used for boat
moorings. The south side of the canal consists of a broad coastal marsh that borders US
64/264 to the west towards the intersection with NC 345. On the north side of US 64/264 is
Pirates Cove Marina and residential development. The Roanoke Sound is located to the east as
well as the Town of Nags Head on the beach.
The current deeded acreage is approximately 3.14 (136,835 sf), while the total land area
is approximately 1.48 (64,351 sf). Title to the property is in dispute and may be subject to
claims by unknown parties.
The property has an elevation of approximately 3 ft. above normal water level (NWL) on
the north side of the canal. There is a thin grassy upland area on the north side of the canal.
There is a thin intermittent coastal wetland fringe vegetated with Juncus roemerianus and
Spartina patens along the non-bulkheaded and non-riprapped shoreline that totals
approximately 532 sf. The length of the unbulkheaded portion of the shoreline on the north
side is approximately 1,185 ft. Approximately 540 ft. of the north side of the canal shoreline
was bulkheaded and backfilled as part of the existing NC Wildlife Resources Commission
boatramp facility and parking area. Approximately 200 ft. of the north side of the west end of
the canal has shoreline riprap that probably was placed to stabilize the area when the western
portion of the canal was filled to allow for the widening of US 64/264. Small pockets of
erosion exist along the unprotected shoreline.
The canal width ranges from approximately 32 ft. to 55 ft. and has water depths that
range from -2.2 ft. to -6.4 ft. at NWL. The canal has historically, and is currently being
utilized as a boat mooring area for commercial and recreational vessels. This activity is being
done without the applicant's permission. There are currently several small wood docking
structures as well as a sunken fishing vessel located on the north canal side. These existing
moorings are weathered and dilapidated, and will be removed before any new construction is
initiated. The existing docks appear to have been built without CAMA authorization.
The waters of the Roanoke Sound are classified as SA and are closed to shellfish taking
in this area.
Development Proposal
The applicant proposes to convert the north side of the canal, from the existing
disorderly moorings, to a 33 side-to slips marina facility. The proposed slip sizes will be 19 at
10 ft. wide and 32 ft. long, 13 at 9 ft. wide and 32 ft. long and one at 8 ft. wide and 32 ft.
long.

John W. Dixon/Washing Baum Marina
Field Investigation Report
Page Three
The applicant proposes to construct 1,064 ft. of wood, vinyl and concrete bulkhead
along the north side of the canal's unbulkheaded shoreline to prevent erosion. The bulkhead
will average no more than 2 ft. waterward of NWL and will be used as the mooring side for
the docking facility. A slotted concrete walkway along the bulkhead is proposed to create the
land dock. The proposed dock varies in width from 4 ft. to 6 ft.
The applicant proposes a parking area for 17 vehicles. The spaces will be 10 ft. by 20
ft., paved with asphalt and be located adjacent to the land dock. Other than parking, no other
high ground development is proposed for vessel fuel, sewage pumpout or restroom facility.
The applicant proposes to construct a 4 ft. wide and 526 ft. long floating dock to be
adjacent to the existing bulkhead. No slips are designated for this dock.
The applicant proposes to remove sunken and abandoned debris and to excavate the
bottom of the canal to a water depth of -5 ft. the proposed work area for excavation is
approximately 1,064 ft. long, 10 ft. wide and calls for the removal of 1.5 ft. of material. The
applicant anticipates that approximately 757 cu yds of bottom material will be removed. The
applicant proposes to store the spoil material on site for de-watering with a silt fence between
the canal and the spoil material. A sediment curtain will be used across the mouth of the canal
during periods of excavation.
The applicant proposes to use the excavated material for backfill for his proposed
bulkhead. If the bottom material is unsuitable for backfill use, the material will be hauled
offsite to an upland disposal site.
Anticipated Impacts
The mooring facility will result in 7,880 sf of Public Trust Area (PTA) and Estuarine
Waters (EW) Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs) being captured or occupied by the
proposed 33 mooring slips.
The construction of the proposed bulkhead with backfill will result in the filling of
approximately 532 sf of Coastal Wetlands AEC and 2,128 sf of PTA, EW AECs.
Approximately 214 cu yds of backfill material will be placed below NWL.
The construction of the proposed slotted concrete land dock will result in approximately
5,704 sf of Estuarine Shoreline (ES) and Public Trust Shoreline (PTS) AECs being covered.
The construction of the parking area will result in approximately 6,496 sf of ES and PTS
AECs being covered by impervious asphalt.

John W. Dixon/Washington Baum Marina
Field Investigation Report
Page Four
The construction of the floating dock will result in the shading of 2,104 sf of PTA/EW
AECs and could provide approximately 16 additional slips for docking.
The excavation of the canal will result in approximately 10,640 sf of canal bottom
disturbance, PTA/EW AECs. It is anticipated that the bottom material will be muck with some
sand. Due to the size and shape of the property, the applicant will more than likely have a
difficult time storing the spoil material on site without hindering access to the NCWRC
boatramp.
Temporary water turbidity will occur during construction. The use of the canal will
continue but probably not for free moorage by the those boat owners currently utilizing the
canal. The frequency of the canal use will probably increase.
Submitted by: Frank A. Jennings, III
Date: November 15, 2002

OCT 14 2002
PROJECT NARRATIVE Updated October 8, 2002
:;;pH�'�aL MANAGEMENTP
ELIZABET'H CITY
Quible &Associates, P.C. (Quible) has been contracted by Dixon and Meekins General
Contactors to address the environmental characteristics and potential impacts to existing
conditions in relation to construction of a marina located on the western shore of Roanoke
Sound. The property lies on the south side of US 64/264 adjacent to the Washington/Baum
Bridge. The project area consists of a narrow strip of land adjacent to a dredged canal that has
historically been used for boat mooring. The south side of the canal consists of a broad coastal
marsh that borders US 64/264 to the west towards the intersection with NC 345. On the north
side of the US 64/264 right-of-way is Pirates Cove Marina and residential development. East of
the Roanoke Sound is the Town of Nags Head on the Outer Banks barrier island system. For
reference, the property lies at approximately 35°53'34"N latitude and 75038'27" W longitude.
The current deeded acreage is approximately 136,835 SF(3.14 AC), while the total land area is
approximately 64,351 SF(1.48 AC). There is thin a grassy upland area on the north side of the
canal. There is a thin intermittent coastal wetland fringe along the non-bulkheaded shoreline that
totals approximately 532 SF. The south side of the canal is a broad coastal marsh dominated by
Juncus roemerianus and owned by the State of North Carolina. The subject property is bound to
the north by NC Department of Transportation (NCDOT)property. Located on this NCDOT
property is a public boat ramp,parking and a restroom facility.
Canal widths range from approximately 32 to 55 ft. This canal has historically and is currently
been utilized as a boat mooring area for commercial and recreational sea craft. There are
currently several small wood dockage structures. These existing mooring facilities are highly
weathered and dilapidated, and will be removed before any new construction is initiated. The
existing mean elevation on the tract is approximately 3'above Normal Water Level (NWL). The
property is currently zoned Commercial (C3)by Dare County.
The proposed construction involves the creation of a marina facility with 33 side-to boat slips
(32 ft in length). The enclosed site plan for the proposed project depicts the proposed design.
Slips 1-19 are proposed to be 10 ft wide, 20-32 at 9 ft wide and 33 at 8 ft. As required under
CAMA, no slips will be wider than one-quarter the width of the canal. There is a proposed wood
and vinyl bulkhead and slotted concrete dock along the mooring area. The slotted nature of the
concrete dock will allow water to adequately infiltrate into the subsurface. The walkway is
proposed to be 6 ft wide along the majority of the proposed bulkhead, and 4 ft wide along the
east side of the bulkhead in the vicinity of the proposed parking. The proposed bulkhead
construction is configured along the NWL line, but will require some fill and cut in order to
construct the bulkhead along a line that provides adequate mooring area and necessary parking.
The proposed parking area will provide 17 (20 ft x 10 ft) asphalt paved spaces that will conform
with Dare County zoning regulations. Total new impervious area from the proposed parking area
is 6,496 SF. A 526 LF floating wood dock(4' wide)is also included in the scope of this project
to be installed immediately waterward of the existing bulkhead as shown on Figure 3.
Water depths depicted on Figure 3 were recorded on July 29, 2002 by environmental scientists
from Quible using a measuring rod from a canoe. There will be some maintenance dredging
required withing the mooring area. This will be performed with a back hoe from the shore.
Most water depths are currently sufficient for passage of most sea craft less than 30 ft in length,
but some maintenance dredging is required close to shore where recent sediment has
accumulated. The maximum amount of material to be removed from the mooring area as

maintenance dredging is 1.5 ft. Dredge spoil will be placed behind a silt fence on the subject
property to dry out and minimize siltation rates into the canal after excavation. Additionally, a
turbidity curtain will be placed across the canal immediately east of the maintenance dredge and
bulkhead construction area during construction. If the dredge spoil material is adequate for
backfill on the site, it will be used for bulkhead backfill and site grading before construction of
the dock and parking area. Additional sandy material from an approved off site source will be
used for bulkhead backfill. If organic content in the spoil material is too great and/or particle
size is too small, the material will be,hauled to an off-site upland disposal site. Shellfish and
finned fish are found within the canal. There was no evidence of a shellfish resource within the
canal and the canal is closed to shellfish harvest due to the canal's current use as a marina.
During site investigations, no SAV's were identified within the mooring area.
.._ � .
-_._ ,, .a..,.. . .. ...,.y � �.,_,..r,....,_

Form DCM—MP- 1 `° ®
APPLICATION OCT 14 '200?
(To be completed by all applicants) _:OASTAL MANP,GEMENT
cL;,�;aETH CITY
c. Street address or secondary road number
1. APPLICANT Hwy. 64/264
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
a. Landowner: jurisdiction?
X Yes No
Name John W. Dixon
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
Address PO Box 1327 creek, sound, bay) Roanoke Sound
City Nags Head State NC
Zip 27959 Day Phone [phone] 3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
Fax N/A
z sz ytii �zo y OF PROPOSED PROJECT
b. Authorized Agent: a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
Name Quible &Associates. P.C. excavation and/or filling activities.
See vroiect narrative
Address PO Drawer 870
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
City Kitty Hawk State NC project, new work, or both? Both
Zip 27949 Day Phone [phone] c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use? Private
Fax [phone] d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed project.
c. Project name (if any) Washington &Baum Marina If more space is needed, please attach additional
pages. See project narrative
NOTE: Permit will be issued in name of landowner(s),and/or
project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED 4. LAND AND WATER
PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
a. County Dare a. Size of entire tract 136,835 SF total:
64,351 SF(1.48 AC) land area
b. City, town, community or landmark
Manteo, south from Pirates Cove Marina, adjacent b. Size of individual lot(s) N/A
to the Washington/Baum Bridge.
c. Approximate elevation of tract above MHW or NWL
_3' above NWL

Form DCM-MP- 1 ,
OCT 14
QUASTAL MANAGEMENT
ELI`ABETH CITY
d. Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract
(PsB) Psamments, (HoA) Hobonny muck 5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
e. Vegetation on tract Juncas roemerianus, Myrica
cerifera, Baccharis halimifolia, Spartina patens, In addition to the completed application form, the following
Panicum spp., Phragmites communis, etc. items must be submitted:
f. Man-made features now on tract Rip-rap shoreline, • A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other
bulkheaded shoreline, existing boat docks instrument under which the applicant claims title to the
affected properties. If the applicant is not claiming to be the
owner of said property, then forward a copy of the deed or
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land classification other instrument under which the owner claims title, plus
of the site? (Consult the local land use plan.) written permission from the owner to carry out the project.
X Conservation Transitional • An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and
X Developed Community cross-sectional drawings)drawn to scale in black ink on an 8
Rural Other 1/z" by 11" white paper. (Refer to Coastal Resources
h. How is the tract zoned by local government? Commission Rule 7J.0203 for a detailed description.)
C3
Please note that original drawings are preferred and only high
quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line prints or other
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable larger plats are acceptable only if an adequate number of
zoning? X Yes No quality copies are provided by applicant. (Contact the U.S.
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable) Army Corps of Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of plat
j. Has a professional archaeological assessment been requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to guide
done for the tract? Yes X No agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site. Include
If yes, by whom? highway or secondary road(SR)numbers,landmarks,and the
like.
k. Is the project located in a National Registered Historic
District or does it involve a National Register listed or • A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary.
eligible property?
Yes X No • A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent
waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return
1. Are there wetlands on the site? X Yes _No receipts as proof that such owners have received a copy of
Coastal(marsh) X Other the application and plats by certified mail. Such
If yes, has a delineation been conducted? No landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in which
to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division
(Attach documentation, if available) of Coastal Management. Upon signing this form, the
applicant further certifies that such notice has been provided.
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities. Name NC Department of Transportation
None Address 1929 N.Road Street,Elizabeth City,NC 27909
Phone
Name The State of North Carolina c/o Wanda King
n. Describe location and type of discharges to waters of Address P.O. Box 132, Raleigh, NC 27699
the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary Phone
wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.) Surface runoff Name
Address
Phone
o- Describe-existing drinking water supply source.
Public water supply

Form DCM—MP- 1
OCT 14 HW')
OAS U\i..I\AANAGEMENT
'ELIZABE"(H CITY
• A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
permittee, and issuing dates. project.
None X DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
X DCM MP-3 Upland Development
• A check for $250 made payable to the Department of X DCM MP-4 Structures Information
DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
Environment,Health,and Natural Resources(DEHNR) X DCM MP-6 Marina Development
to cover the costs of processing the application.
NOTE: Please sign and date each attachment in the
• A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in space provided at the bottom of each form.
oceanfront and inlet areas.
• A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act(N.C.G.S. 113A- 1 to 10)
If the project involves the expenditure of public funds
or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting
compliance with the North Carolina Environmental
Policy Act.
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application
will allow only the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to conditions and restrictions
contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed activity
complies with the State of North Carolina's approved Coastal
Management Program and will be conducted in a manner
consistent with such program.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact, grant
permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies
to enter on the aforementioned lands in
connection with evaluating information related to this permit
application and follow-up monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application
is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
This is the/Cy day of October , 2002.
Print Name Jo . Dixon
Signature
d ner or Authorized Agent

Form DCM-MP-2
4 EXCAVATION
OCT 1 �002
AND FILL 0 � _ 1,,ACITY
CITY
(Except bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all other 1. EXCAVATION
sections of the Joint Application that relate to this
proposed project.
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or MHW or NWL in cubic yards --757 cu.yds
fill activities. All values to be given in feet.
b. Type of material to be excavated sand, silt
Average Final
Existing Project Length Width Depth Depth c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
Access (SAVs) or other wetlands? X Yes No
channel intermittent wetland fringe(-532 SF to be disturbed)
Approx.
(MLW)or(NWL) d. Highground excavation in cubic yards --36 CU YDS.
Canal
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED
Boat 1,064' 8 to 3.5' 5' MATERIAL
Approx. 10'
basin
(Mooring area) a. Location of disposal area On-site bulkhead backfill
Boat and site grading
ramp
b. Dimensions of disposal area see site plan
Rock
groin
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
X Yes No
Rock If no, attach a letter granting permission from the
breakwater owner.
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
Other 1,064' 0.5' 3.5' +3' maintenance? X Yes _No
(Shoreline fill, to 10' bgs If yes, where? Off-site disposal if future excavation
bulkhead backfill) is necessary
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
X Yes No
intermittent wetland fringe(-532 SF to be disturbed)
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
X Yes No
1,445 SF shown on plat; additional 1 SF per LF bulkhead
Total fill area of_surface water= -2,509 SF
.�...

3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION
5. GENERAL
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
X Bulkhead Riprap a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and
b. Length 1,064 LF (new) erosion controlled? Silt fencing and seeding// 1p anting
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
--2'from NWL
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL b. What type of construction equipment will be used(for
10'from NWL (east end of bulkhead) example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
backhoe, dump truck, roller
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
<1'
(source of information) Observation, aerial photography c. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material project site? Yes X No
Wood and vinyl If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below environmental impacts.
water level
(1) Riprap N/A
(2) Bulkhead backfill max. 364 CU YDS
h. Type of fill material sand, silt, organic matter John W. Dixon
ppli ant Pro'ect ame
i. Source of fill material maintenance dredge material; nature -
if not suitable, sand fill will be hauled in from an /�/�v
approved source
Date
Form DCM-MP-2
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization) NA
OCT 14 ?no?
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
,
Yes No ;1,:>„a4GE3WENT
EL I:'::'." i H CITY
If yes,
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the water
(2) Dimensions of fill area
(3) Purpose of fill
b. Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Dimensions of fill area
(2) Purpose of fill

Form DCM—MP-3
UPLAND :. ,
DEVELOPMENT OCT 14 2002
(Construction and/or land disturbing activities) 'UA"TM r'-tr'dNAGEMENT
ELIZ�SFFH CITY
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major j. Have the facilities described in Item i.above received
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all other state or local approval? N/A
sections of the Joint Application that relate to this (Attach appropriate documentation)
proposed project.
k. Describe location and type of proposed discharges to
a. Type and number of buildings, facilities, units or waters of the state (for example, surface runoff,
structures proposed NA sanitary wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent,
"wash down" and residential discharges).
Surface runoff.
b. Number of lots or parcels One
1. Describe proposed drinking water supply source(e.g.
c. Density (give the number of residential units and the well, community,public system,etc.)
units per acre) NA Dare County public water supply
m. Will water be impounded? Yes X No
d. Size of area to be graded,filled or disturbed including If yes, how many acres?
roads, ditches, etc. —29,549 SF (dredge area and
land disturbance) n. If the project is a oceanfront development, when was
the lot(s) platted and recorded? NA
e. If the proposed project will disturb more than one acre
of land,the Division of Land Resources must receive
an erosion and sedimentation control plan at least 30 . Dixon
days before land disturbing activity begins. If pplic t roj N me
applicable, has a sedimentation and erosion control t1V `
plan been submitted to the Division of Land i ature
Resources? Yes No
If yes, date submitted N/A "'Bate
f. List the materials (such as marl,paver stone, asphalt,
or concrete) to be used for paved surfaces.
Asphalt and slotted concrete
g. Give the percentage of the tract within 75 feet of
MHW or NWL, or within 575 feet in the case of an
Outstanding Resource Water, to be covered by
impervious and/or built-upon surfaces, such as
pavement, buildings, rooftops, or to be used for
vehicular driveways or parking. 10.1% (6,496 SF)
h. Projects that require a CAMA Major Development
Permit may also require a Stormwater Certification.
Has a site development plan been submitted to the
Division of Environmental Management for review?
Yes No
If yes, date submitted N/A
i. Describe proposed method of sewage disposal.
No proposed oti-site sewage disposal
......
Revised 03 95"�.___.._ _.,___._......, _.._.._._.__ . ....�......w......� ...,�...,..�__

Form DCM-MP-4
STRUCTURES
OCT14(Construction within Public Trust Areas) COASTAL,4,)A?4AGS,%AENT
E'LIZ y ZTHi CITY
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major f. Mooring structure(boatlift, mooring pilings, etc.)
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all other (1) X Commercial_Community_Private
sections of the Joint Application which relate to this (2) Number 34 pilings (Extension of bulkhead piles)
proposed project. (3) Length
(4) Width
a. Dock(s) and/or Pier(s)
(1) X Commercial_Community_Private g. Other(Give complete description)
(2) Number 2
(3) Length 1 slotted concrete, 1 wood floating
(4) Width concrete-71 l' @ 6'. 354 @ 4';
wood- 526' @ 4'
(5) Finger Piers —Yes X No
(i) Number
(ii) Length
(iii) Width
(6) Platform(s) Yes X No JolpW. Dixon
(i) Number plicant r Pr ect N
(ii) Length '
(iii) Width n re
(7) Number of slips proposed 33
(8) Proximity of structure to adjacent riparian Date
property lines
(9) Width of water body 38' average
(10) Water depth at waterward end of pier at MLW
or NWL exist=-2.5%proposed=--4'
b. Boathouse (including covered lifts) N/A
(1) Commercial Private
(2) Length
(3) Width
c. Groin (e.g. wood, sheetpile, etc.) N/A
(1) Number
(2) Length(s)
d. Breakwater(e.g. wood, sheetpile, etc.) N/A
(1) Length
(2) Average distance from MHW, NWL or
wetlands
(3) Maximum distance beyond MHW, NWL or
wetlands
e. Mooring buoys N/A
(1) _Commercial_Community_Private
(2). Number
(3) Description of buoy
(Color, inscription, size, anchor, etc.)
(4) Width of water body
(5) Distance buoy(s)to be placed beyondshoreline

Form DCM-MP-6 Y
MARINA
OCT 1 4 209''
{10AS'TAL_MANAGEMENT
ELi�.��OETH CITY
DEVELOPMENT
(Required for the mooring of more than 10 vessels)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major f. Describe the typical boats to be served (for example,
Permit, Form DCM-MP-1. Be sure to complete all other open runabout,charter boats,sail boats,mixed types).
sections of the Joint Application that relate to this open runabouts, cabin boats, charter boats
proposed project.
g. Typical boat length 17-25'
1. MARINA CHARACTERISTICS
h. Maximum boat length N/A
a. Check below the type of marina proposed. i. Are any floating structures planned? Yes
X Commercial Public Residential If so, describe 4'x 526 floating dock.
b. Will the marina be open to the general public?
X Yes No
c. If there is residential development associated with the
marina, how many units or lots are planned and how 2, MARINA OPERATIONS
many are currently developed?
N/A
a. Check each of the following sanitary facilities that
will be included in the proposed project.
d. Check all of the types of services to be provided. N/A Office toilets
N/A Full service, including travel lift and/or rail N/A Toilets for patrons
N/A Dockage, fuel, and marine supplies Number
X Dockage ("wet slips") only Location
Number of slips 33 (New) N/A Showers
N/A Dry storage N/A Boat holding tank pumpout
Number of boats 33 Type and location
N/A Boat ramp(s)
N/A Other(describe)
b. Describe treatment type and disposal location for all
e. Check below the proposed type of siting. sanitary wastewater. N/A
N/A Land cut and access channel
N/A Open water with dredging for basin and/or
channel
N/A Open water, no dredging required c. Describe the disposal of solid waste, fish offal and
X Other(describe) existing man made canal trash disposal. Town of Manteo - trash can and
dumpster.
+�►- -�—Revised-

• m. If this project is an expansion of an existing marina,
d. How will overboard discharge of sewage from boats what types of services are currently provided?
be controlled? N/A Wet slips
n. How many slips are now available? 10
e. Give the location and number of "No Sewage o. Is the marina proposed within a primary or secondary
Discharge" signs proposed. N/A nursery area? Yes X No
f. Describe the special design, if applicable, for p. Is the marina proposed within an area open to
containing industrial type pollutants, such as paint, shellfish harvesting? Yes X No
sandblasting waste and petroleum products.
N/A q. Give the location and number of"Pumpout Available"
signs proposed. N/A
g. Where will residue from vessel maintenance be John W. ixon
disposed of? N/A ;itu=re
ect Name
i00%�
h. Give the number of channel markers and "No Wake" Date
signs proposed. -0-
i. Give the location of fuel-handling facilities, and
describe the safety measures planned to protect area
water quality. N/A OCT 1 4 10K
EL ZAB�ETH CF ENT
J. Describe design measures that promote boat basin
flushing or circulation and that reduce water quality
impacts. The proposed marina design will not impede
any circulation in the existing man made canal
system.Circulation of water will be through tide and
wind movements.
k. What will be the marina policy on overnight and live-
board dockage? No live-aboard or overnight
docking allowed.
1. Is the proposed marina located near any shellfish
leases? Yes X No
If yes, give the name and address of the leaseholder.
_.. .� ... . ._ _._� _._...y. ."w.

Mwo'A"

JAN-10-2003 FRI 11:39 AM DCM-DMF E. CITY FAX NO. 252 264 3723 P, 08/08
1,POWND
I.X. PIPE
NOTES:l. ,< '•, 1. THIS SURVEY IS SUBJECT TO A41 FACTS THAT,MAY 0E
s SI I k. F X. REBAR
(} - ft1!lAR SET DISCLOSED BY A FlAL AND ACCURATE TITLE REARCtt,
1.AREA BY COORDINATE COMPUTATION+- 801 S.FA
i X ('CNC. NON. 3. F.I.R.M. 2DNFa Y5(EL 11')
L'ONC, NON.'SET 4. PIN NO.: N/A
'r'%, PA; NAIL 5.,RI-C(ADED REFERENCE: DR 716, PC 415(TOWN OF MANTEO),
Y•`"" F'/:C NAIL SI:T n^•v e; �✓ NORtH RPTFRENCE TAKEN FNOM RIGHT D OK WAY BO 1,
? f p tll
} nIa v 'y, PC JD•JD. DARE GIXINTY RFCISTRv(MOODY PRO,kcT
,•': � - %ATjjt BEjjR a 1050701) J
C'J - aAn,n uETFR
Pll(lNr f70CSTAL
1(fl C:A T.V.
P9y, ' rt.la- UIILIIY VOLE
'' Y\1 ` ♦( C.UY VAR[ 1X,
tit•�4 l;f F!RC liNI)RANi
i, 1ll�r k� IJ n II U:'pF(
1 �
SEAL
M 1
1 -2592
l Ji
aF4:+. 'N7 u;.'4t GC'
c �� i r I ,"AT LI Lh ,i i'AY
A 11 jos Li f f C c cTA IrI!" I rrr4rlrrrrt+rt �! II
I. `F 4 �. � Jd T�(�I�'If'_d•^.N9�1.✓{I1�}}-t4 1 I ,!
RIE Ihe Dedll�f
ftP of tI1}1a 1r a
tz
Ae
t1 e
"? i'41iJA-0i Y AA'ail44a N/J
1 E7EF3ARIMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
((li3 620, PC 150)
1MLN1" OF TRANSPORTATION _
(ABANDONED R "2g A—
OADWAY)
N89'44r40"W
�tt. __
":fil'dd'9iJ"P i
N
-, ;�, .., ...................f�_�t�t�-�-h,----.....,...,..,.., n,.,..? 8a'44'4U" E QU,UO' ,�
V G14 4
rI
';�:c;;SY "• °<'+,itio' otil ,�• /p(�� r — TOWN OF WANTED
::r* nor4i„ I�.c u+ u
CN
1191E r 1psi!NC 0 (DS 716, PG 415)
4 ••T, [:N
i SB'57'416"-W 40,01 %iOREUNE
i/4/01
II NOTE -- THIS PARCEL ADVERSELY
1(•'VJrt I 011 M Ate I!. 0 CLAIMED AGAINST THE TOWN OF
(DO 716. Pi" 4t5) MANTEO. IT IS INCLUDED,IN T?'IEIR
Df_ED (DE 716, PG 415) /0
C?,NAI_. (PUOLI(G TRUST WATERS) \ C�
+ M•.M.•....^..... —f'LAr OF 'I`-;LAND CAMP DOC%' PARCEL AS CLAIMED 8Y
7-1,St9N, Wll.,AS"ON, AND WILSON
PAIi'ts"e'll 0Y IAND N.F."Al? WASHINGTON BAUN BRIDGE -- ROANOKE ISLAND
N.96",S' lfb,A)l ' 'f1f{'N �,F11P _ DA.RR COUNTY -- NORTH CAROLINA
SEABOARD SURVEYING & PLANNINC, INC.
3200 NORTH CROATAN HWY, KILL DEVIL HILLS, NC 27948
�. OFFICE. (252) 413D-9998 FAX: [phone]
bF':[tir'J1'�",r.!.A..',a1it'.f,Ti:I.O'+r09/Ot AIHs, t't A11i:O:0.,�0�U1 W1M •_�—„^,_
`: I Illiil Illll i!NhII I?u ILIIII l 111 I!s�l l!I11!II IIII IlII 93a pi 1c rDRM

10-2003 FRI 11 :34 AM DCM-DMF Er CITY FAX N01 252 264 3723 P. 13
�M,p4i;•iiws.•�.�.a '.wlar�i4�aw,w+�•tad+�.Np�+aeaw�acaw�•,+�m�a'wlw�u�wt"�w'ory..lr�—r/�'�vn�,rr�ss^'ry y'��/�i7�/-� I.
�' R��� r �-+'�+I TnT f��\/�dMN7 iriu�17L1'V �V _�!•�'1�p.�,f! ' ��,��}11.'�-V,L' `} _
�• ... „ ,� _... - . ,• --...—._� ....-.- . M. r�-,n �-.-./-.-rr.�-}^�"�'t—•r..'�•�.�/J} ��-,'j,.�'*�"�,y�!- `-+-' t ..I Y +I rr l•�� 'y,,~.
,It{u'�! .r I �,w n--" .yr ,•,r•.. .r ,_.r'-.•%,.,-�r.rrr��.►�•-.�+� •9 1' ��
'1` �prri J. I , rH,.-f...,ru s .rn - I . 1,It r • JIB - '.,rrT .\.
�� r . . •- .. , .. ,I , • r , ' •r • • r•7: IJ f. •. • - .. AIW Y Ir.^• .. �-J- 1 -
.^`•A f.Ir, 1": r '1 r , r. C' `�• 1 .. - 1 .� w 1 A ry �...1
.SAT
��. -� �` r • �� f / �y y. Y/, �/ . '• !roll ••••, , ' r ' � //� r •,.I., . �� • •
�j ,�,r,. ��.'•�`f!1.7 fO�Jls� �"✓�.✓l'i�1'a•�r'L.R-�J «��'�'� r�... V.IG/�i �/ 1, 7r r.
4.. .>��r.r„��• , ��'"ML�f�r � r •+"' fe.,..�,�� ' ., •�y°','S i-Y'+r„ �r ,, � r. rl 1 1•�A _+ � .,..
i .i1S. r ,�..�« � �-1 lyt..�-✓fir r' ,.
14
K. •���, �f r • r r - . ..Mrrr-w.r n1- ..,r,r'.w.wrw.r�rrn`w^•�Mww.w.•�. y
f �
��';.1�. , r°',.u�N..t�.;r:• .*.X�.,:'�iA tr...=::•`.' n .••,�v�ti`1y::A`F,Nno1�.•W.Giar`�,.. - r
4
.... .� r ��,. �:A..h,w.:•..m,.w. Iwo:.n. r m ,,...w.....,vrn.. r .rv-_. .-K.n

N=10-2003 F,KI 1133 Hri uui•i-uiir L, V i
';el`:" " CONS t r�Cl7ti I)�u�YriG n,.ti:�`�'- :+ .�,�„I
' •. - �I -. .�.rN 4C•....! .. err' ' ''�` 1
nryS +irrr ♦ .......-..-,r• w.. -.ra.—... -�rl 'I-n.�.,...._._.....•--...ur��— �..`r, , 1 I. n '•} 'r
rl1' Ip
. a� P(. .. _.� 1 o,v.• ••.+11 N,�.' 1 , I 1 M{/,��'��/]r Y�Yy• •�� •ry�µ, • ' • I'....�� I�/ �
( ro O f
vae
(1? C7.
- _,,,_ ,rK �n M r . . .I .,, rrv.r.••r ,--wl..,..� .....,r...•Nnr..r �...w.1;_—' 1 I•� r - i " r I .� u
L
. w I
.. y

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
APPLICATION TRANSMITTAL AND PROCESSING RECORD
1) APPLICANT: John W. Dixon County: Dare
LOCATION OF PROJECT: South side of US 64/264, foot of Washington Baum Bridge on
Island in a manmade canal p0
0"17
DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED COMPLETE BY FIELD: 11/06/02 NUV 5 lQll2
FIELD RECOMMENDATION: Attached: NO To Be Forwarded: YES DIV.Of OOASTALMANAGEMEw'
RALEIGH
CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION: Attached: NO To Be Forwarded: YES
FIELD REPRESENTATIVE: Frank A. Jennings, III DISTRICT OFFI E: Elizabeth City
DISTRICT MANAGER REVIEW: /0'),
B) DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED IGH: FEE REC'D:$
PUBLIC NOTICE REC'D: / END OF NOTICE DATE: / z-l6- 2-
ADJ. RIP. PROP NOTICES REC'D: DEED REC'D:
APPLICATION ASSIGNED TO: 14vgq-e rr ON:
C) 75 DAY DEADLINE: 1 -a 0 "0 3 150 DAY DEADLINE:
MAIL OUT DATE: ' R7,-00. STATE DUE DATE:
US4CF 3u-e
FEDERAL DUE DATE: FED COMMENTS REC'D: srr �,,,�.tidsy-2w3
PERMIT FINAL ACTION: ISSUE DENY DRAFT ON /(71/- 0.3
AGENCY DATE COMMENTS OBJECTIONS: NOTES
RETURNED YES NO
Coastal Management-Regional Representative
Coastal Management- LUP Consistency
Division of Community Assistance
Land Quality Section v.— NP-6 7-
Division of Water Quality
Storm Water Management(DWQ)
State Property Office I R.3 D K41s)
Division of Archives&History
Division of Environmental Health ; 1— 13
Division of Highways Z
4 /
Wildlife Resources Commission ' 2 -t 1' � (/
Division. of Water Resources i Z 'L 3-o r �/
Division of Marine Fisheries —7- °3 V
Submerged Lands (DMF)

9-15-03; 2:54PM;QuIGle and Assoc. ; 1 252 261 1260 # 2/ 4
Quible
Quible&Associates, P.C. P.O.Drower870
IOtty Hawk,NC 27949
ENGINEERING•ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES•PLANNING Phone:[phone]
SINCE 1959 Fax:[phone]
PRINCIPALS
Soon C.Boyle,P.E.
Joseph S.LasWer,C.E.P.
Eduardo J.Voldlvleso,P.E.
AM
September 8", 2003 Joseph J,Annllouf,
David S,Neff
To: Charles Jones, NC Divisioa
agement
From: Joe Lassiter,Quible&Re: Slotted Concrete Design- m Marina Project
Per our recent conversation,the purpose of this memorandum is for Quible&Associates,PC to provide the NC Division
of Coastal Management with a proposed design for the slotted concrete deck for the Washington-Baum Marina project
permitted by Major CAMA Permit#52-03. Enclosed is a design that has been permitted and utilized at Caspers Marina
in Swansboro, NC, We became aware of the design during our work with the Town as we were developing a
revitalization plan for the downtown waterfront. The concrete is formed at 16'long x 6'wide with an approximately 2'
x 2'grate in the middle. Each section of concrete is then sloped to the center of the slab to allow water to flow to the
grate. The collected water then percolates into the underlying soils.
This design,or something similar,is what Skip Dixon wants to utilize to meet the requirement that the deck function as
a pervious structure. The basic alignment and configuration of the dock remains unchanged.
Thank you for your attention to this information. Please review and advise if the design proposed will meet the permit
condition. If you have questions please contact me at 252-261-3300.
Cc: Doug Huggett
Skip Dixon

REC QED
AUG 0 1 �Uii3
State of North Carolina Reply to: 11P1��"c
Meredith Jo Alcoke
ROY COOPER Department of Justice Environmental Division
Tel:[phone]
ATTORNEY GENERAL P. O. BOX 629
Fax:[phone]
RALEIGH [e-mail]
2 7602-0629
MEMORANDUM
TO: Eugene Tomlinson, CRC Chairman,by facsimile
Jill B. Hickey, Special Deputy Attorney General, by hand-delivery
Donna D. Moffitt, DCM Director, by U.S. Mail*
Charles S. Jones, DCM Assistant Director,by U.S. Mail
Ted Sampson, DCM District Manager, by U.S. Mail
Doug Huggett, DCM Major Permits Coordinator, by U.S. Mail
Sheila Green, DCM AP Coordinator
FROM: Meredith Jo Alcoke /NJ
Assistant Attorney General
DATE: July 24, 2003
RE: Staff Recommendation: Third P. Hearing Request by Skip Dixon (Dare County)
CMT 2003-08
Please find enclosed the Staff Recommendation for the above-referenced third party
hearing request. The Chairman's decision is due by July 29, 2003.
* DCM's copies of the Staff Recommendation do not include the lengthy exhibits since the
necessary staff members already have a copy of the prior proceedings in the Wilson third
party hearing request (Exhibit A) and a copy of petitioner's petition (Exhibit B).

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN
COASTAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
COUNTY OF DARE CMT 2003-08
IN THE MATTER OF THE )
THIRD PARTY HEARING REQUEST ) RECOMMENDATION OF THE
BY JOHN W. "SKIP"DIXON ) DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
I. BACKGROUND
Petitioner Dixon requests 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 Major Permit
Nos. 76-03 and 77-03 issued to Building Resources, Inc. (John F. Wilson IV). Both permits
authorized Wilson to construct bulkheading adjacent to a canal off Roanoke Sound at the foot of
the Washington Baum bridge in Dare 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 another party 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;
2. Is directly affected by the decision; and
3. Has alleged facts or made legal arguments that demonstrate that the
hearing request is not frivolous.
The CRC has delegated the authority to its Chairman to determine whether a third party

request for a hearing should be granted or denied. 15A NCA.C. 7J .0301(b). A third party
whose hearing request is granted may file a contested case hearing petition with the Office of
Administrative Hearings. N.C.G.S. § 113A-121.1(b). A third party whose hearing request is
denied may seek judicial review. Id.
II. FACTS
A. Petitioner John"Skip"Dixon is a resident of Dare County(hereinafter
"Petitioner"or"Dixon").
B. The permittee in this case is Building Resources, Inc., a corporation associated
with John F. Wilson IV (hereinafter"Wilson").
C. The property in question is located on a dredged canal that is on the south side of
US 64/264, at the foot of the Washington Baum Bridge on Roanoke Island, Dare
County. The canal has historically been used for boat moorings and several
disorderly moorings have been built along the north side of the canal. Ownership
of the canal bank is disputed.
D. On October 10, 2002, Petitioner Dixon submitted an application to the Division of
Coastal Management (DCM) to construct a marina and associated parking along
the existing canal bank in question.
E. When applying for a permit, the CRC's rules require an applicant to "identify the
deed or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected
property." 15A NCAC 7J .0204(b)(4). There are no other rules promulgated by
the Commission which address ownership.
F. In support of his ownership, Dixon submitted a North Carolina General Warranty
2

Deed recorded April 23, 2002 and two title opinions. The deed shows the
Grantor to be the "Town of Manteo, a Municipal Corporation," and the Grantee to
be "John W. Dixon." Dixon's deed contains the following "exception": "Claims
and/or rights of others, if any, to that portion of the property adjoining the canal
traversing same by reason of said third parties' prior use and occupation thereof,
including claim in Book 1365, Page 328 and 329, Dare County Registry."
(Exception 5)
G. The reference in Exception 5 to a claim in Book 1365, Page 328 and 329 is a
direct reference to a deed recorded by Wilson on April 2, 2001.
H. On April 14, 2003, DCM issued CAMA Major Permit No. 52-03 to Washington
and Baum Marina c/o John "Skip"Dixon for construction of a marina and upland
development on the property in question.
I. Dixon's permit contained the following condition: "If a court of competent
jurisdiction determines that a party other than the permittee has legal title to any
part of the area approved for development under this permit, this permit shall be
null and void as to the area the court determines is not owned by the permittee.
This condition shall take effect on the date such court judgment becomes final. In
such event, the permittee shall consult DCM prior to initiating or continuing any
further development under this permit."
J. Wilson challenged that permit by filing a third party hearing request. The Staff
Recommendation and Final Decision in that case are attached hereto as Exhibit A
and incorporated by reference. The Chairman's Final Decision denying the
3

request was not appealed to the superior court.
K. On February 18, 2003, Wilson applied to construct a bulkhead and docks along
the canal bank in question. He submitted two CAMA major permit applications,
one for property referred to as "Jack's Dock" and one for property referred to as
"Island Camp Dock." On the Jack's Dock property, Wilson sought to replace a 6'
by 28' dock with a 6' by 36' dock and to install 36 linear feet of bulkhead to
prevent erosion. He stated on his application that the dock was destroyed by
others without permission on December 24, 2002. On the Island Camp Dock
property, Wilson sought to replace a 4'by 16' dock (he also stated it was
destroyed) and to install 16 linear feet of bulkhead.
L. In support of Wilson's ownership, Wilson submitted a North Carolina General
Warranty Deed recorded April 2, 2001. The deed shows the Grantor to be "John
F. Wilson, Jr. and wife, Estelle J. Wilson, and John F. Wilson IV" and the Grantee
to be "Building Resources, Inc." Building Resources Inc. is a North Carolina
corporation for which Estelle J. Wilson is the registered agent.
M. On June 23, 2003, DCM issued CAMA Major Permit Nos. 76-03 and 77-03 to
Wilson for construction of the bulkhead along two different sections of the canal.
N. During the permit review process, the North Carolina Division of Marine
Fisheries determined that Skip Dixon, the Petitioner in this case, was the legal
owner of the canal bottom within which Wilson's proposed docking facility
would be located. Therefore, it was determined that no piers or other structures
could be constructed on or over these privately owned submerged lands without
4

the express permission of the owner of the bottoms. DCM accordingly deleted
Wilson's proposed docking facility from the permit.
O. Wilson's permits contain the same permit condition regarding ownership that
Dixon's permit contains. (see paragraph I above)
P. DCM was aware that Wilson filed a Complaint in Dare County Superior Court
[03 CVS 1801 requesting that Wilson, certain other individuals, and/or the public
"be adjudicated the owners of prescriptive title to the property, docks, moorings
and pilings on the canal, or the owners of a prescriptive easement therein . . . ."
The Complaint further seeks to enjoin Dixon from constructing any improvements
on the property pending the outcome of the case, whether Dixon has permits to do
so or not.
Q. Petitioner Dixon filed a third party hearing request with the Director on July 14,
2003, challenging the two CAMA Major Permits issued to Building Resources,
Inc. (Wilson). Petitioner's hearing request materials have already been provided
to the chairman and are incorporated as Exhibit B.
5

III. DCM'S RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Has the Petitioner Alleged that the Decision is Contrary to a Statute or Rule?
Yes. By his sole contention of error,Petitioner alleges that DCM's decision to issue the
permits to Building Resources, Inc. is contrary to the CRC's permit processing rule which
requires an applicant to "submit a deed or other instrument under which the applicant claims
title." 15A NCAC U .0204(b)(4). Although Wilson did submit a deed under which he claims
title(attached to Petitioner's petition as Exhibit I), Petitioner argues that the deed is suspect on its
face. Petitioner also alleges that the decision to issue the permit is contrary to N.C.G.S. § 113A-
120, the section in CAMA related to "Grant or denial of permits." Consequently, Staff agrees
that Petitioner has alleged a decision contrary to both statute and rule. N.C.G.S. §
113A-121.1(b)(3)
B. Is the Petitioner Directly Affected by the Decision?
Yes. For purposes of this third party hearing request, DCM does not contest
Petitioner's assertion that he is directly affected by the permit decision. N.C.G.S. § 113A-
121.1(b)(2).
C. Has the Petitioner Demonstrated that the Hearing Request is not Frivolous?
No. Petitioner has not alleged facts tending to establish that DCM exceeded its
authority, acted erroneously, failed to use proper procedure, or acted arbitrarily and capriciously.
Petitioner has offered no grounds upon which to prevail and thus has not met his burden of
demonstrating that the request is not frivolous. N.C.G.S. § 113A-121.1(b)(3). Petitioner has
raised only a question of ownership. Upon information and belief, the rights to the property in
question are currently being adjudicated in Dare County Superior Court. The fact that this
6

dispute is currently pending in a court of competent jurisdiction demonstrates the
inappropriateness of this matter for a contested case hearing. The Office of Administrative
Hearings is not empowered to adjudicate property disputes or evaluate title. Its review is limited
to hearing"contested cases"which are defined as disputes "between an agency and another
person,"not among private litigants. N.C.G.S. § 150B-2(2). Thus, Petitioner has raised no
issues that are appropriate for review by the Office of Administrative Hearings under N.C.G.S. §
150B-23.
First, Petitioner points to the CRC's rule that requires an applicant to "identify the deed or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected property." 15A NCAC 7J
.0204(b)(4). This rule is a threshold requirement for permit processing. There is absolutely no
question that the applicant in this case, Building Resources, Inc. c/o John Wilson, did identify a
deed under which he claims title. Petitioner asserts that the deed is suspect on its face. However,
even if Petitioner is correct and the deed is inferior or invalid, Petitioner has still not alleged a
legitimate error made by the agency. The Division of Coastal Management is not a court of
competent jurisdiction that may properly resolve such property disputes, and the agency is neither
qualified nor authorized under its enabling legislation to do so. The agency could not have
denied Petitioner's permit application on the basis of rule 15A NCAC 7J .0204(b)(4)because the
deed required by the plain language of the rule was properly submitted with the permit
application.
Petitioner also asserts that the decision is contrary to N.C.G.S. § 113A-120 ["Grant or
denial of permits"] This allegation is not explained in the petition and there are no facts to
support that this provision of the statute has been violated. Section 113A-120 lists certain
7

findings that DCM must make in order to justify a permit denial. One of those findings is that
the "development is inconsistent with the State guidelines [administrative rules] or the local land-
use plans." N.C.G.S. § 113A-120(a)(8). None of the findings address whether the applicant has
shown a valid title to the property. The statute requires that"[i]n the absence of such findings, a
permit shall be granted." N.C.G.S. § 113A-120(b). Thus, there is a presumption toward the
issuance of a permit, and the denial of a permit must be based on specific findings enumerated in
the statute.
The statute's reference to the state guidelines may allow the agency to deny a permit
based on ownership when the applicant has not submitted a"deed or other instrument under
which the applicant claims title" as required by 15A NCAC U .0204(b)(4). Since Wilson did
submit a deed in this case, and there were no other potential statutory findings to justify a denial,
there is clearly no violation of N.C.G.S. § 113A-120.
Finally, DCM is staff to the Coastal Resources Commission, the policymaking body that
manages development in the coastal area. It is important to note that the Commission has given
the agency clear direction about how to handle conflicting claims of ownership. The CRC
determined in a final agency decision (that was not appealed) that a property dispute should not
prohibit or delay permit issuance when basic title has been demonstrated by the applicant. In
Flowers v. NCDEHNR (00 EHR 0864), an applicant(Flowers) sought a permit to construct a
marina, and provided a N.C. General Warranty Deed, a title opinion and title insurance along
with his CAMA permit application. Thereafter, a conflicting claim of vested ownership in the
property was asserted by the N.C. Department of Administration. The Division of Coastal
Management put Flowers' application on hold by finding it"incomplete and inaccurate"under
8

15A NCAC 7J .0204(d), the rule which defines the specific and limited bases upon which permit
processing may be suspended.
In Flowers, the Administrative Law Judge recommended and the Coastal Resources
Commission agreed that DCM erred in concluding Flowers' application was incomplete and
inaccurate because the agency could not determine whether Flowers or the State of North
Carolina owned the property at issue. The Final Order stated that Flowers' application contained
a copy of a deed under which he claimed title as required by 15A NCAC 7J .0204(b)(4), and was
therefore complete in all material respects. The Commission found that under 15A NCAC 7J
.0204(d), it was inappropriate to make a determination of incompleteness or inaccuracy due to
the conflicting claim of title by the State Property Office and to thereby terminate processing of
the application. Summary judgment in favor of Flowers was granted and DCM was ordered to
process the permit application.
Similarly, Wilson's application contained a copy of a deed under which he claimed title
as required by 15A NCAC 7J .0204(b)(4), and was therefore complete in all material respects.
There is nothing in the statute or the rules that would justify denying the permit on the basis of
this property dispute. As discussed above, if a project meets the applicable rules and guidelines,
CAMA requires that the permit shall be granted. N.C.G.S. § 113A-120(b).
The Division's decision to issue a permit in this case is not an adjudication of title or
property boundaries,but is simply a determination that the requested development is not
inconsistent with CAMA or the CRC's rules. Petitioner raises no issues properly before an
Administrative Law Judge, and therefore a contested case hearing is not appropriate.
9

IV. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, Petitioner has not met the criteria justifying a contested case hearing. For
the reasons stated herein, the Division of Coastal Management, through its undersigned attorney,
recommends that Petitioner's Third Party Hearing Request be DENIED by the Chairman.
This the day of July, 2003.
FOR THE DIVISION OF COASTAL
JAGEMEN
Meredith Jo A co e
Assistant Attorney General
N.C. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh,NC 27602-0629
[phone]
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I have served a copy of the attached Recommendation of the
Division of Coastal Management on Petitioner 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 to his attorney of record as follows:
Douglas W. Hanna
Womble Carlyle Sandridge &Rice, PLLC
P.O. Box 831
Raleigh,NC Z7602
1:51-
This the : day of July, 2003.
eredith Jo Alco e
Assistant Attorne eneral
10

t
R State of North Carolina Reply to:
Meredith Jo Alcoke
ROY COOPER Department of .justice Environmental Division
ATTORNEY GENERAL P. O. BOX 629 Tel:[phone]
600 Fax:[phone]
RALEIGH [e-mail]
2 7602-0629
MEMORANDUM RECEIVED
MAY 13 2003
TO: Eugene Tomlinson, CRC Chairman, by Federal Express
L�l(�
Donna D. Moffitt, DCM Director, by inter-office mail �FCO MLEIGSTAL ANAGEI��ENT
l�� H
Charles S. Jones, DCM Assistant Director,by U.S. Mail
Ted Sampson, DCM District Manager,by U.S. Mail
V-6oug Huggett, DCM Major Permits Coordinator,by inter--office mail
Jill B. Hickey, Special Deputy Attorney General, by hand-delivery
Petitioner, John Wilson, by U.S. Mail
FROM: Meredith Jo Alcoke
Assistant Attorney General
DATE: May 9, 2003
RE: Staff Recommendation: Third Party Hearing Request by John Wilson
(Dare County)
Please find enclosed the Staff Recommendation for the above-referenced Third Party
Hearing Request. The Chairman's decision will be due by Monday, May 12, 2003.

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA BEFORE THE CHAIRMAN
COASTAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
COUNTY OF DARE 03-03
IN THE MATTER OF THE )
THIRD PARTY HEARING REQUEST ) RECOMMENDATION OF THE
BY JOHN WILSON ) DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
I. BACKGROUND
Petitioner John Wilson requests 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 Major
Permit No. 52-03 issued to Washington and Baum Marina, c/o John"Skip"Dixon, authorizing a
33-slip marina in Dare 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;
2. Is directly affected by the decision; and
3. Has alleged facts or made legal arguments that demonstrate that the
hearing request is not frivolous.
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 N.C.A.C. 7J .0301(b). A third party

whose hearing request is granted may file a contested case hearing petition with the Office of
Administrative Hearings. N.C.G.S. § 113A-121.1(b). A third party whose hearing request is
denied may seek judicial review. Id.
II. FACTS
A. Petitioner John Wilson IV is a resident of Dare County.
B. The permittee is Washington Baum Marina, c/o Skip Dixon ("the applicant").
C. The project is located on the south side of US 64/264, at the foot of the
Washington Baum Bridge on Roanoke Island, Dare County.
D. The project area consists of a narrow strip of land adjacent to a dredged canal off
Roanoke Sound.
E. On the south side of the canal is a vast expanse of coastal marsh and on the north
side of the canal on the other side of US 64/264 is Pirate's Cove Marina and
residential development.
F. The canal has historically been used for boat moorings and several disorderly
moorings have been built along the north side of the canal.
G. The waters of Roanoke Sound at this location are classified as SA Waters by the
Environmental Management Commission and are closed to the harvest of
shellfish.
H. The adjacent waters are not classified as a nursery area by the Division of Marine
Fisheries.
I. The applicant proposed to construct a 33-slip marina along the existing canal
bank. The development also includes a 1,064-foot bulkhead, a floating dock
adjacent to the bulkhead, a slatted concrete walkway along the shoreline, and a

parking area for 17 vehicles.
J. The project will impact the following designated Areas of Environmental Concern
(AECs): Coastal Wetlands, Public Trust Areas, Public Trust Waters, Estuarine
Waters, and the Coastal Shoreline.
K. The footprint of the marina will usurp approximately 7,880 square feet of Public
Trust Areas and Estuarine Waters.
L. During the permit review process, the North Carolina Division of Marine
Fisheries was the only agency that expressed substantial concerns over the project,
but those concerns were later resolved by the applicant.
M. During the permit review process, several local residents including this Petitioner
submitted letters in opposition to the project, alleging that the applicant did not
have clear title to the land to be developed.
N. On April 14, 2003, DCM issued CAMA Major Permit No. 52-03 to Washington
and Baum Marina c/o John"Skip"Dixon for construction of the marina and
upland development. The permit is attached hereto as Exhibit A and is
incorporated herein by reference.
O. Petitioner filed a third party hearing request with the Director on April 25, 2003,
challenging the Major Permit issued to Skip Dixon. Petitioner's hearing request
materials are attached hereto as Exhibit B.
III. DCM'S RECOMMENDATIONS
A. Has the Petitioner Alleged that the Decision is Contrary to a Statute or Rule?
No. 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).

Petitioner has not satisfied that requirement because he has not specifically identified any rule
implemented by the Division of Coastal Management,nor has he alleged any facts about the
permitted development that suggest a violation of any rule.
Water Quality Issues
Petitioner first alleges that the decision is"contrary to rule 15A NCAC 2H .0502(f)which
requires that the owner must sign the application." He states that neither Mr. Dixon nor his
designee has the right to apply for a permit on property owned by Building Resources,Inc.
(presumably Petitioner's company).
Petitioner's reference to the Environmental Management Commission's rules regarding
application for a Water Quality Certification are misplaced. The rule cited is not applicable to
CAMA permit applications. Still, the permittee in this case personally signed his application for
a CAMA permit in numerous places. If Petitioner is suggesting that the CAMA permit
application was faulty because he himself did not sign the application,this is a circuitous route to
arguing the ownership issues addressed elsewhere in his petition.
Petitioner next argues that the decision is contrary to rules and policies which prohibit
CAMA permits from being issued in violation of water quality standards. This argument is
without merit. The CRC's rules do require that before a permit may be granted,the agency must
find that the development will not violate water quality standards. 15A NCAC 7H
.0208(a)(2)(C). The Division of Coastal Management relies on other resource agencies to
review, comment, and make recommendations regarding the resource that agency is entrusted to
protect. The Division of Water Quality(DWQ) is the agency responsible for determining
whether proposed projects would violate water quality standards. Ultimate approval by that
Division is demonstrated by their issuance of a 401 Water Quality Certification.

The CAMA permit review process involves a coordinated state and federal review of
each permit application, with all review agency comments considered by the Division before
final action is taken on a permit application. In this case, DCM requested that the Division of
Water Quality review the permit application and respond with any comments or objections to the
project. DWQ did not object to the proposed project when the permit application was circulated,
and in fact did not comment at all within the prescribed comment period. The CAMA permit
was issued without a Water Quality Certification. However, the permit properly notes on its face
that "This permit does not eliminate the need to obtain any additional state, federal or local
permits, approvals or authorizations that may be required." Neither the CAMA statute nor the
CRC's rules require that DWQ issue a Water Quality Certification prior to issuance of a CAMA
permit. The CRC has promulgated rules that keep DCM under a strict time line for issuing
permits, with only certain exceptions for delay. DWQ's delay in issuing a water quality
certification is not a valid basis upon which DCM could suspend permit processing.
If DWQ had commented negatively on the project or recommended that the permit not be
issued, DCM would have been required to take those comments into consideration. But that was
not the case. In fact, shortly after the CAMA permit was issued on April 14, 2003, DWQ did
issue a 401 Water Quality Certification which is attached hereto as Exhibit C. Petitioner's
allegation regarding water quality standards is not supported by any facts and does not meet the
standard for granting a third party hearing request.
Dispute Regarding Ownership
Petitioner argues that DCM issued the permit while having on file duly recorded deeds
and plats certified by a licensed surveyor stating that portions of the property to be developed are
owned by someone other than the applicant. This argument does not allege violation of any

statute or rule and does not meet the standard for allowing the third party petitioner to proceed to
a contested case.
DCM is fully aware of the property dispute at this site and addressed this issue prior to
permit issuance and through the permit itself. The CRC's rules require an applicant to "identify
the deed or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected property." 15A
NCAC 7J .0204(b)(4). Clearly, this standard was met. Prior to permit issuance, the applicant
submitted to DCM a copy of a North Carolina General Warranty Deed, plats drawn by a licensed
land surveyor and a title opinion performed by a North Carolina licensed attorney. The applicant
indicated on the application form that he owns the land for which a permit was sought.
DCM reviewed the information provided by the applicant and determined that evidence of
ownership under 15A NCAC 7J .0204(b)(4)was sufficient to process a permit.
DCM is also aware that this Petitioner and other parties have asserted an adverse claim of
ownership based on longstanding public use of this canal. Rule 15A NCAC 7H .0209(d)(9)
provides that"[e]stablished common-law and statutory public rights of access to the public trust
lands and waters in estuarine areas shall not be eliminated or restricted." DCM reviewed letters
submitted by various individuals asserting such rights of access and determined that the
individuals did not establish that their rights of access would be eliminated or restricted by the
proposed project. The people commenting only alleged that Mr. Dixon did not have clear title.
Petitioner has sought judicial interpretation his rights by filing a Complaint in Dare
County Superior Court. The Complaint seeks a determination that the Plaintiffs (including
Petitioner) or the public be adjudicated the owners of prescriptive title to the property, docks,
moorings and pilings on the canal, or the owners of a prescriptive easement therein. The
Complaint further seeks to enjoin the permittee (Dixon) from constructing any improvements on

the property pending the outcome of the case, whether Dixon has permits to do so or not.
Obviously, this Petitioner is not without remedy and is in fact seeking relief in the appropriate
forum.
DCM has attempted to protect the rights and interests of this Petitioner in the only lawful
way that it can--by conditioning the CAMA Major permit. The permit states: "If a court of
competent jurisdiction determines that a party other than the permittee has legal title to any part
of the area approved for development under this permit, this permit shall be null and void as to
the area the court determines is not owned by the permittee. This condition shall take effect on
the date such court judgment becomes final. In such event, the permittee shall consult DCM
prior to initiating or continuing any further development under this permit."
The fact that this dispute is currently pending in a court of competent jurisdiction further
demonstrates the inappropriateness of this matter for a contested case hearing. The Division of
Coastal Management is not a court of competent jurisdiction that may properly resolve such
property disputes, and the agency is neither qualified nor authorized under its enabling legislation
to do so. While DCM is sympathetic to the public use rights raised by this Petitioner, the adverse
claims cannot preclude permit processing where the applicant has adequately demonstrated his
own title. The CRC's rules provide that "[a]ny individual or governmental entity initiating action
to judicially recognize a public right of access must obtain a court order to suspend processing of
the application" (emphasis added).' 15A NCAC 7J .0204(f). The requirement that a court order
be obtained clearly establishes that DCM does not have the authority to suspend permit
processing in a case like this.
The Division has been challenged on this very issue before, and the CRC determined in a
' Upon information and belief, Petitioner did not attempt to avail himself of this remedy.

final agency decision (that was not appealed) that a property dispute should not prohibit or delay
permit issuance when basic title has been demonstrated by the applicant. In Flowers v.
NCDEHNR (00 EHR 0864), an applicant (Flowers) sought a permit to construct a marina, and
provided a N.C. General Warranty Deed, a title opinion and title insurance along with his CAMA
permit application. Thereafter, a conflicting claim of vested ownership in the property was
asserted by the N.C. Department of Administration. The Division of Coastal Management put
Flowers' application on hold by finding it"incomplete and inaccurate"under 15A NCAC 7J
.0204(d), the rule which defines the specific and limited bases upon which permit processing
may be suspended.
In Flowers, the Administrative Law Judge recommended and the Coastal Resources
Commission agreed that DCM erred in concluding Flowers' application was incomplete and
inaccurate because the agency could not determine whether Flowers or the State of North
Carolina owned the property at issue. The Final Order stated that Flowers' application contained
a copy of a deed under which he claimed title as required by 15A NCAC 7J .0204(b)(4), and was
therefore complete in all material respects. The Commission found that it was inappropriate
under 15A NCAC 7J .0204(d) to make a determination of incompleteness or inaccuracy due to
the conflicting claim of title by the State Property Office and to thereby terminate processing of
the application. Summary judgment in favor of Flowers was granted and DCM was ordered to
process the permit application.
Based on the contested case decision discussed above and the plain language of the rules,
the Division had no choice but to issue a permit in this case. There is nothing in the statute or the
rules that justify denying it or even delaying it on the basis of this property dispute. To the
contrary, if a project meets the applicable rules and guidelines, CAMA requires that the permit

shall be granted. N.C.G.S. § 113A-120(b). The Division's decision to issue a permit in this case
is not an adjudication of title or property boundaries,but is simply a determination that the
requested development is not inconsistent with CAMA or the CRC's rules.
Petitioner's allegations regarding ownership do not establish any basis upon which the
Office of Administrative Hearings might find that the Division of Coastal Management
committed any of the errors in N.C.G.S. § 150B-23. Accordingly,the matter is inappropriate for
a contested case hearing.
B. Is the Petitioner Directly Affected by the Decision?
Yes. For purposes of this third party hearing request,DCM does not contest
Petitioner's assertion that he is directly affected by the permit decision. N.C.G.S. §
113A-121.1(b)(2).
C. Has the Petitioner Demonstrated that the Hearing Request is not Frivolous?
No. Petitioner has not alleged facts which would show that DCM exceeded its
authority, acted erroneously, failed to use proper procedure, or acted arbitrarily and capriciously.
Petitioner has offered no grounds upon which to prevail and thus has not met his burden of
demonstrating that the request is not frivolous. N.C.G.S. § 113A-121.1(b)(3). The water quality
issues have been fully addressed by DWQ. DCM cannot suspend permit processing where there
is an ownership dispute. Thus, Petitioner's factual allegations do not establish any potential error
by DCM,nor any matter properly adjudicated in the Office of Administrative Hearings.
IV. CONCLUSION
In conclusion, Petitioner has not met 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 Wilson's Third Party Hearing Request be DENIED by

the Chairman.
This the day of May, 2003.
FOR THE DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT
�-kwj��7 —
Meredith Jo lco e
Assistant Atto ey General
N.C. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602-0629
[phone]
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I have served a copy of the attached Recommendation of the
Division of Coastal Management on Petitioner 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:
John Wilson, IV
P.O. Box 970
Manteo, NC 7954
This the� day of May, 2003.
Meredith Jo Alco
Assistant Attorney General

Permit Class Permit Number
NEW 52-03
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environment and Natural Resources E X H I B I T
and fr
Coastal Resources Commission
e r M t
for
• Major Development in an Area of Environmental Concern
pursuant to NCGS 113A-118
• Excavation and/or filling pursuant to NCGS 113-229
Issued to Washington and Baum Marina, c/o John Dixon, PO Box 1327, Nags Head, NC 27959
Authorizing development in Dare- County at canal adi. Roanoke Sound and Washington
Baum Bridge, Roanoke Island as requested in the permittee's application dated 10/10/02, including
attached workplan drawing (1) dated revised 2/14/03
This permit, issued on April 14. 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.
Marina Facility
1) The marina facility will display a sign showing the location of the nearest pumpout facility, including
other appropriate waste disposal information, at the entrance and exit from the main pier(s).
2) No sewage, whether treated or untreated, shall be discharged at any time from any boats using the
marina facility. Any sewage discharge at the marina facility shall be considered a violation of this
permit for which the permittee is responsible. This prohibition shall be applied and enforced throughout
the entire existence of the permitted facility.
(See attached sheets for Additional Conditions)
This permit action may be appealed by the permittee or Signed by the authority of the Secretary of DENR and the
other qualified persons within twenty (20) days of the issuing Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission.
date. An appeal requires resolution prior to work initiation or
continuance as the case may be. Y
This permit must be accessible on-site to Department
personnel when the project is inspected for compliance.
nna D. Moffitt,Director
Any maintenance work or project modification not covered / Division of Coastal Management
hereunder requires further Division approval. b
All work must cease when the permit expires on This permit and its conditions are hereby accepted
December 31, 2006
e
In issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees
that your project is consistent with the North Carolina Coastal $
Management Program. SIQ=T Qf FermittQQ a

Washington & Baum Marina Permit #52-03
Page 2 of 5
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
3) This permit authorizes only the docks, piers, and other structures and uses located in or over the water
that are expressly and specifically set forth in the permit application. No other structure, whether
floating or stationary, may become a permanent part of this marina facility without permit modification.
No non-water dependent uses of structures may be conducted on, in or over public trust waters without
permit modification.
4) The pier and associated structures shall have a minimum setback distance of 15 feet between any parts
of the structure and the adjacent property owner's riparian access corridor, which is determined by
drawing a line parallel to the channel, then drawing a line perpendicular to the channel line that
intersects with the shore at the point where the upland property line meets the water's edge.
5) No attempt will be made by the permittee to prevent the full and free use by the public of all navigable
waters at or adjacent to the authorized work
6) The authorized structure and associated activity must not cause an unacceptable interference with
navigation.
7) The permittee will maintain the authorized work in good condition and in conformance with the terms
and conditions of this permit. The permittee is not relieved of this requirement if he abandons the
permitted activity without having it transferred to a third party.
8) This permit does not authorize the interference with any existing or proposed Federal project, and the
permittee will not be entitled to compensation for damage to the authorized structure or work, or injury
which may be caused from existing or future operations undertaken by the United States in the public
interest.
9) The permittee must install and maintain at his expense any signal lights or signals prescribed by the U.S.
Coast Guard, through regulation or otherwise, on the authorized facilities. At a minimum, permanent
reflectors should be attached to the structure in order to make it more visible during hours of darkness or
inclement weather.
10) This permit authorizes a maximum of 33 boat slips.
11) In accordance with commitments made by the permittee, no boats over 25 feet in length and no boats
with heads will be allowed within the marina.
NOTE: It is strongly recommended that the permittee exercise all available precautions in the day-to-day
operation of the facility to prevent facility waste from entering the adjacent waters. Such
discharge, either directly or indirectly, to adjacent waters could contravene state water quality
standards, thereby violating state law.

Washington &Baum Marina Permit#52-03
Page 3 of 5
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
NOTE: The permittee is cautioned that this permit does not authorize the placement of tie piles in
association with the docking facility. The issuance of this permit does not relieve the permittee
from taking all proper steps to ensure the integrity of the structure and the safety of moored
boats. The permittee shall not hold the State of North Carolina or the United States liable for any
damage to the structure or moored boats.
Excavation and Spoil Disposal
12) An sediment curtain shall be left between the area to be excavated and the existing sound, and a 24 hour
period after completion of excavation will elapse prior to plug removal to prevent unnecessary siltation
into the adjacent water body.
13) Excavation will not exceed —5 feet below the normal water level. In no case shall the depth of
excavation exceed the depth of connecting waters.
14) All excavated materials will be confined above mean high water and landward of regularly or irregularly
flooded marsh behind adequate dikes or other retaining structures to prevent spillover of solids into any
marsh or surrounding waters.
15) The disposal area will be constructed a sufficient distance from the mean high water level or any marsh
to eliminate the possibility of dike erosion into.surrounding wetlands or waters.
S
16) The disposal area will be properly graded and provided a ground cover sufficient to restrain erosion
within 30 working days of project completion.
17) The spoil disposal area must be inspected and approved by a representative of the Division of Coastal
Management prior to the commencement of any dredging activities.
18) No spoil material is to be placed within 30 feet of the normal high water line, except that which will be
used to backfill the area behind the permitted bulkhead.
Shoreline Stabilization
19) The bulkhead will not extend waterward more than an average of 2 feet from the normal water level .
20) The authorized alignment of the proposed bulkhead must be staked by a representative of the Division of
Coastal Management within a maximum of 30 days prior to the start of construction. Failure to initiate
construction within 30 days, or erosion of the shoreline by adverse weather conditions, will require the
alignment to be restaked by DCM within a maximum of 30 days prior to the new expected start of
construction.
21) The bulkhead must be constructed prior to any backfilling activities.

Washington &Baum Marina Permit#52-03
Page 4 of 5
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
22) The bulkhead must be structurally tight so as to prevent seepage of backfill materials through the
structure.
23) The bulkhead must be solid and constructed of treated wood, concrete slabs, metal sheet piles or other
suitable materials approved by department personnel.
24) The fill material will be clean and free of any pollutants except in trace quantities.
25) No backfill material is to be placed within 30 feet of the normal high water line, except that which will
be used to backfill the area behind the permitted bulkhead.
Easement
26) Prior to construction of any new boat slips or other docking facilities under this permit, the permittee
must apply for and receive an Easement from the Department of Administration's State Property Office
as required under N.C.G.S. 146-12(e).
Upland Development
27) This permit does not authorize the construction of any paved or impervious parking spaces with 30 feet
of the normal water level. If it is determined by Dare County that such paved or impervious parking
spaces are required in order to be found consistent with local zoning ordinances, then this permit shall
become null and void.
28) The highground boardwalk shall be shall be elevated, slatted, and constructed of wood.
Stormwater Management
29) The Division of Water Quality approval of this project under stormwater management rules of the
Environmental Management Commission is covered by way of Stormwater Permit No. SW7021210,
which was issued on 3/20/03. Any violation of the permit approved by the DWQ will be considered a
violation of this CAMA permit.
Sedimentation and Erosion Control
30) In order to protect water quality, runoff from construction must not visibly increase the amount of
suspended sediments in adjacent waters.

Washington &Baum Marina Permit #52-03
Page 5 of 5
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
31) Appropriate sedimentation and erosion control devices, measures or structures must be implemented to
ensure that eroded materials do not enter adjacent wetlands, watercourses and property (e.g. silt fence,
diversion swales or berms, sand fence, etc.).
32) A ground cover sufficient to restrain erosion shall be provided within the shorter of 15 working or 30
calendar days of completion of any phase of grading on cut or filled slopes.
33) The permitted activity will be conducted in such a manner as to prevent a significant increase in
turbidity outside of the area of construction or construction-related discharge. Increases such that the
turbidity in the waterbody is 25 NTU's or less in all saltwater classes are not considered significant.
General
34) If a court of competent jurisdiction determines that a party other than the permittee has legal title to any
part of the area approved for development under this permit, this permit shall be null and void as to the
area the court determines is not owned by the permittee. This condition shall take effect on the date such
court judgment becomes final. In such event, the permittee shall consult DCM prior to initiating or
continuing any further development under this permit.
35) The permittee understands and agrees that, if future operations by the United States requires the
removal, relocation, or other alteration of the structure or work authorized by this permit, or if in the
opinion of the Secretary of the Army or his authorized representative, said structure or work shall cause
unreasonable obstruction to free navigation of the navigable waters, the permittee will be required, upon
due notice from the Corps of Engineers, to remove, relocate or alter the structural work or obstructions
caused thereby, without expense to the United States or the state of North Carolina. No claim shall be
made against the United States or the state of North Carolina on account of any such removal or
alteration.
36) Any "No Wake" signs or other aids to navigation must be designed and installed in accordance with any
appropriate requirements of the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission and/or the U.S Coast Guard.
37) The temporary placement or double handling of excavated or fill materials within waters or vegetated
wetlands is not authorized.
NOTE: This permit does not eliminate the need to obtain any additional state, federal or local permits,
approvals or authorizations that may be required.
NOTE: Future development of the permittee's property may require a modification of this permit.
Contact a representative of the Division at [phone] prior to the commencement of any
such activity for this determination. The permittee is further advised that many non-water
dependent activities are not authorized within 30 feet of the normal high water level.
NOTE: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has assigned the proposed project COE Action Id. No.
200010068.

EXHIBIT
`J I. • -�4� fS
DCM FORA S ht�� L 3 2003RA
PETITIONERS NAME tnviro9m°FFI10tJ ARTY HEARING
REQUEST ON
COUNTY AMC�C CAMA PERMIT DECISION
FILE NUMBER
(Petitioner leave this line blank)
PLEASE TAKE NOTE that the undersigned, a-person affected by the decision of(check one):
a Local hermit Officer acting on a CAMA Minor Development Permit
application; or
the Division of Coastal Management, Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, acting on a CALLA Major Development Permit
application or CAMA General Permit application
hereby requests permission from the Coastal Resources Commission to file an appeal pursuant to
N.C. Gdn. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b) and N.C. Admin. Code tit. 1 5A, r. 7J.0300 (Please attach a
copy of the permit application decision. If you cannot obtain a copy of the permit application
decision,please provide the name of the permittee, the project location and the permit number.)
Requests are reviewed by the Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission to determine
whether a hearing should be granted. The determination of whether to grant a hearing is in the
sole discretion of the Chairman. N.C. Admin.-Code tit. 1 5A, r. 7J.0301(b).
For this application to be complete, the Petitioner must address each factor listed below on a
separate sheet of paper. You must address these factors before your request will be reviewed.
T he Chairman's decision to grant a hearing will be based on whether the Petitioner:
(1) Has alleged that the decision is contrary to a statute or mile [N.C. Gen. Stat. §
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. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b)(2)]; and
(Please describe how you are directly affected by the permit decision.
Persons directly affected by a decision include, but are not limited to:
(a) any owner of real property in the vicinity of the property to
be developed who can show that the proposed development
is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the value
and enjoyment of his property; and
(b) any person who can demonstrate a history of substantial
use ofpublic resources in the area directly affected by the

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 demonstrate that the request for
the hearing is not frivolous [N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b)(3)].
(Please summarize the evidence or arguments you will present at a
hearing in support of your appeal.)
Based on the attached responses to the above factors, the dersigned hereby requests a third
parry hearing
Date Signature of Petitioner or Attorney
V
Name of Petitioner or Attorney
Po AX-90
Address
AUTZ0 NYC f7?,,
City State Zip
) 415 " /
Telephone Number
NOTES: This request must be served on the Director, Division of Coastal Management, at
the address shown on the attached Certificate of Service Form, within twenty (20)
days of the disputed permit decision. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b)...Failure to
do so constitutes waiver of the right to request a hearing. A copy should also be
sent to the Attorney General's Office, Environmental Division, at the addresses
shown on the attached Certificate of Service Form.
Approval of a Third Parry. Hearing Request allows a petitioner to file a contested
case petition with the Office of Administrative Hearings within twenty (20) days
tn
of receipt of the Chairman's Order. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b).
Denial of a Third Party Hearing Request is a final agency decision which may be
appealed to the Superior Court in the county where the property is located under
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b) and Chapter 150B, Article 4.

CERTIFICATE 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 personally delivering copies to the named
agencies.
Original served on: Director
Division of Coastal Management
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,NC 27699-1638
and a copy served on: Attorney General's Office
Environmental Division
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602-0629
This the X—Yday of �Q
X
Signature of iftitioner or Attorney
EP/30540/w,p
.Updated:July 14, 1999

FPermitlassPermit Number
52-03
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA -
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
and
Coastal Resources Commission
er M t
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 Washington and Baum Marina, c/o John Dixon, PO Box 1327, Nags Head, NC 27959
Authorizing development in Dare County at canal adi. Roanoke Sound and Washington
Baum Bridge Roanoke Island as requested in the permittee's application dated l0/10/02- including
attached workplan drawing (1) dated revised 2/14/03
This permit, issued on April 14, 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.
Marina Facilitv
1) The marina facility will display a sign showing the location of the nearest pumpout facility, including
other appropriate waste disposal information, at the entrance and exit from the main pier(s).
2) No sewage, whether treated or untreated, shall be discharged at any time from any boats using the
marina facility. Any sewage discharge at the marina facility shall be-considered a violation of this
permit for which the permittee is responsible. This prohibition shall be applied.and enforced throughout
the entire existence of the permitted facility.
(See attached sheets for Additional Conditions)
This permit action may be appealed by the permittee or Signed by the authority of the Secretary of DENR and the
other qualified persons within twenty (20) days of the issuing Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission.
date. An appeal requires resolution prior to work initiation or
continuance as the case may be.
This permit must be accessible on-site to DeparUuent
personnel when the project is inspected for compliance.
Any maintenance work or project modification not covered nna D. Moffitt, Director
hereunder requires further Division approval. Division of Coastal Management
All work must cease when the permit expires on This permit and its conditions arc hereby accepted.
December 31, 2006
It, issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees
that your project is consistent with the North Carolina Coastal
Management Program. Signature of Permittee

(1) The decision is contrary to rule 15A NCAC 2H .0502(f) wltich requires
that the owner must sign the application. Neither Mr. Dixon nor his
designee has the right to apply for a permit on property owned by
Building Resources, Inc. and or others. (See Dixon deed book 1425,
page 425; exception (5), page 2.
The decision is contrary to a policy, and perhaps a rule, requiring that
CAMA not issue a permit in violation of water quality standards. In
a letter dated April 14, 2003 from John Domey representing the
Division of Water Quality, he states "that application is on hold
pending completion of a Marine Use Attainability Analysis for marinas
in SA waters required by DWQ".
CAMA issued a permit on April 14, 2003 without a 401 Water Quality
Certification. CAMA issued this same pen-nit while having on file
duly recorded deeds and plats certified by a licensed surveyor stating
that the owner of portions of the property are owned by someone other
than the applicant.

(2) (a) The petitioner is directly affected by the decision since the permit
was granted to Mr. Dixon to develop land owned by others. Indeed
this will have a significant adverse impact on the value and enjoyment
of the petitioner's property.
(b) There is a more than 75-year history of substantial use of public
resources (le., the ditch bank canal) in the area affected by the
proposed development. These public trust waters have been used
continuously since the canal was dug more than 75 years ago by
waterinen to moor their boats. Docks and mooring pilings were
present when CAMA was enacted. Because they pre-exist CAMA
they were grand fathered and have been maintained, repaired and
replaced as necessary without interference from CAMA.

(3) Petitioner and the general public have substantial rights to the public
resources in the area of the permit. The petitioner and other plaintiffs
have on their behalf and on behalf of the general public filed a
complaint in the General Court of Justice, Superior Court
Division, County of Dare asking for prescriptive title to the property
and a prescriptive easement.
Until ownership is resolved, a 401 Water Quality Certification is
granted and a Marine Use Attainability Analysis is submitted, the
petitioner respectfiilly requests that the CAMA permit issued on
April 14, 2003 be rescinded or that the chairman of the Coastal
Resources Commission grant the petitioner a hearing.

NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
COUNTY OF DARE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
File 903-CVS-
BUILDING RESOURCES, INC.; JOHN F.
WILSON, JR., JOHN F. WILSON, IV, F.
THOMSON PETERS; ANDREW
DABNEY McCANN; THOMAS I-1.
NIXON; MARSHALL SANDERLIN;
TIM REBER; GARY TRE►W, MILES
CREEF; MURMY CREEF; DOSSEY
PRUDEN and BINKY JONES,
Plaintiffs :
V. COMPLAINT
JOHN W. "SKIP" DIXON,
Defendant
Plaintiffs, complaining of defendant, John W. "Skip" Dixon, aver and say:
1. Plaintiff, Building Resources, Inc. is a North Carolina corporation with principal
and registered office located in Dare County, N.C. and Plaintiffs, John F. Wilson, Jr., John F.
Wilson, IV, Andrew Dabney McCann, Thomas H. Nixon, Marshall Sanderlin, Tim Reber, Gary
Tracy, Miles Crecf, Murphy Creef, Dossey Pruden, and Binky Jones are citizens and residents of
Dare County, N.C.
2: Plaintiff, F. Thomson Peters is a citizen and resident of Pasquotank County, N.C.
3. Defendant, John W. "Skip" Dixon (hereinafter"Dixon") is a citizen and resident
of Dare County, N.C.
4. On or about November 1, 2002 Dixon, by and through his attorney, demanded
. 1

U4/ZZ/ZUU3 15:16 PAX ZoZ 33b 4ZZ3 11010111AL Hli.hs 1:LLIS 19JUUZ/UUZ
HORNTIfAI.,RILEY, FLLIS& M ALAND,L.I..P.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
OFF.,JR. ICES.
L P.HORNTHA1
POST OFFICE BOX 220 301 EAST MAIN STRITT
J.Fm Rar.Y• F.I jmvmH CrTY,NC 27909
TU0MA9L WR1MJ0.' ELIZABETH CITY,NORTH CAROLINA 27907-0220 TELEMIONE(232)33"971
M.H.HOOD ELLN nurAR(752)333-4223
MARK M.MALAND
DDNALD C.PRIDTTISC NTT.Rw: :w .hr m cm
RonmT IL HoMMS,3%
DMALD 1.MCRM JR- Omus AL%o IN
JOHN D.1MDV NAGS IIEAO.NC
MICRAELP.SANDERS April 22 2003
I-PMLLTR HGRNTITAI..]H
W.RPOOC MtTcHlgLL
'O►CoDrtm
Mr. Doug Huggett;..
Major Permits& Consistency Coordinator
NCDENR,Division of Coast Management
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,N.C. 27699-1638
RE: CAMA Permit No. 52-03 John Dixon
Washington and Baum Marina
Dear Mr. Huggett:
I received your letter of April 14 and the enclosed permit. Regarding Additional Condition 34),
please see a copy of the Complaint filed April 21, 2003 in Dare County Superior Court challenging Mr.
Dixon's claim of ownership to the property involved in the permit and application. We also understand
that the permit may have been issued prematurely.given one Agency's (Water Quality)response.
My clients think it was a mistake to issue the permit when the issue of ownership was not
determined. I agree.
I am
Sincerely yours,
M. H. Hood Ellis
C.C. Mr. John F. Wilson,lV

5— 9-03: 7:50AM:Oulb1e and Assoc.
; 1 252 25'. 1250 # 2/ 2
O�WAT�R Michael F.Easley,Governor
William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary
Q� North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
P Alan W.Kimek,P.E.Director
r Division of Water Quality
> —�
p �
April 23,2003
DWQ#02-1851
Dare County
Mr.John W.Dixon E X H I B I T
I P.O. Box 1327
Nags Head, NC, 27959
%
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Condition
Dear Mr. Dixon:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions,to dredge,fill and/or shade 0.815 acre of vegetated and non-
vegetated wetlands and estuarine waters In order to construct a 33-slip marina along an existing canal bank off Roanoke Sound in Dare
County,as described in your application received by the Division of Water Quality on November 26,2002, and In additional
correspondence received April 23,2003. After reviewing your application,we have determined that this fill is covered by General Water
Quality Certification Number 3400,which can be downloaded from our web site at htto•//h2o enr_state.nc.us/ncwetlands . This
Certification allows you to use your CAMA Permit when issued by the NC Division of Coastal Management. In addition,you should get
any other federal,state or local permits before you go ahead with your project including(but not limited to)Sediment and Erosion Control,
Non-Discharge,Water Supply Watershed and U.S.Coast Guard regulations. Also this approval will expire when the accompanying
CAMA Permit expires unless otherwise specified in the General Certification.
I
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you change your project,you
must notify us in writing and you may be required to send us a new application for a new certification. If the property is sold,the new
owner must be given a copy of the Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for complying with all conditions. If total
wetland fills for this project(now or in the future)exceed one acre,compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC
t 2H .0506 (h). For this approval to be valid,you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification and the additional conditions
listed below:
1. You are required to return the attached Certification of Completion form to notify DWQ when all work included in the 401
Certification has been completed;
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification,you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60
days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing,send a written petition conforming to Chapter 150E of the North
Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings,6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, N.C.27699-6714. This
1 certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
J This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. If you have any
questions,please telephone Tom Steffens in our Washington Regional Office at(252)946-6481 or Cyndi Karoly in our Central Office in
Raleigh at(919)733-9721.
Sincerely,
Alan W.Klimek, P.E.
AW K/cbk
Attachments
cc: Corps of Engineers Washington Field Office
Washington DWQ Regional Office
Central Files
File Copy
Quible&Associates, P.O_ Drawer 870, Kitty Hawk, NC,27949
John Wilson,P.O. Box 970, Manteo, NC,27954
021851
9%
N.C.Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh,NC 27699-1617 [phone] Customer Service
1 Boo 623-7748

i DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
/ WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Washington Regulatory Field Office
P.O.Box 1000
Washington,North Carolina 27889-1000
IN REPLY REFER TO
April 29, 2003
Regulatory Division RECEIVED
Action ID No. 200310138 and State Permit No. 52-03 MAY 0 5 2003
DIV.OF COASTAL MMMGEMENT
RALLW
John W. Dixon
Post Office Box 1327
Nags Head,North Carolina 27959
Dear Mr. Dixon:
Reference your application for a Department of the Army (DA) permit to develop a
33-slip marina, on property located off US Highway 64/264, adjacent to the Roanoke Sound,
on Roanoke Island, Dare County, North Carolina.
Your proposal has been reviewed and found to be consistent with the provisions and
objectives of General Permit No. 198000291. Therefore, you may commence construction
activity in strict accordance with applicable State authorization and the approved plan. Failure
to comply with the State authorization or conditions of the general permit could result in civil
and/or administrative penalties.
If any change in your work is required because of unforeseen or altered conditions or for any
other reason,plans revised to show the change must be sent promptly to this office and the North
Carolina Division of Coastal Management prior to performing any such change or alteration.
Such action is necessary as revised plans must be reviewed and the authorization modified.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Raleigh Bland, Washington Field Office,
Regulatory Division, telephone [phone], extension 23.
Sincerely,
r"�' "
Raleigh Bland, P.W.S.
Regulatory Project Manager

tr �
-2-
Copies furnished:
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Mr. Ronald J. Mikulak, Chief
Wetlands Regulatory Section
Water Management Division
United States Environmental Protection Agency
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Mr. Doug Huggett
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Mr. Garland B. Pardue
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries Service
Pivers Island
Beaufort,North Carolina 28516

-3-
Mr. David Rackley
NMFS, Habitat Conservation Division
219 Fort Johnson Road
Charleston, South Carolina 29412-9110
Mr. Ted Sampson, District Manager
Elizabeth City Regional Office
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
1367 US 17 South
Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909

ED
sT� ° 2003
91 z MAY
�* � pUllh�1
State of North Carolina Reply to:
Meredith Jo Alcoke
ROY COOPER Department Of Justice Environmental Division
ATTORNEY GENERAL P. O. Box 629 Tel:[phone]
RALEIGH Fax:[phone]
[e-mail]
27602-0629
MEMORANDUM
TO: Eugene Tomlinson, CRC Chairman, by U.S. Mail
Donna D. Moffitt, DCM Director, by email
Charles S. Jones, DCM Assistant Director,by email and U.S. Mail
- Ted Sampson, DCM District Manager, by email
Doug Huggett, DCM Major Permits Coordinator, by email and inter-office mail
Jill B. Hickey, Special Deputy Attorney General, by hand-delivery
FROM: Meredith Jo Alcoke P�_
Assistant Attorney General
DATE: April 30, 2003
RE: Assignment Memo: Third P. Hearing Request by John Wilson (Dare County)
Please take notice that I have been assigned to handle the Third Party Hearing Request
filed by John Wilson. Mr. Wilson challenges CAMA Major Permit No. 52-03 issued to
Washington and Baum Marina,le/o John,Dixo on April 14, 2003. The petitioner claims that the
permit was issued in error because (1)portions of the property are owned by him; (2) the
applicant did not sign his application; and (3) the project violates the rule stating that DCM shall
not issue a permit in violation of water quality standards.
Petitioner filed a Complaint in Dare County Superior Court on April 21, 2003,
challenging Mr. Dixon's claim of ownership.
I will provide a copy of the petition to the Chairman, the CRC counsel, and relevant
DCM Staff. Because the petition was filed on April 25, 2003, the Chairman's decision will be
due by Monday, May 12, 2003.
cc: J. Allen Jernigan, by email

DCitiI FOR 15 APR 3 2003-
r CNN Xodw ,�.�.r.,Al IurK IVti uG.i/cHAL
P1 TiTIO v�R'S N.M IE _nvironm-,THIRD aARTY HE.A UNG
AMCREQUEST ON
COUNTY C AMA PERMIT DECISION
FILE NUMBER
(Petitioner leave this line blank)
PLEASE TAKE NOTE that the undersigned, a-person affected by the decision of(check one):
a Local Permit Officer acting on a CAN/!A Minor Development Permit
application; or
the Division of Coastal Management, Department of Environment and
Natural Resources. acting on a CALLA Major Development Permit
application or CAMA General Permit application
hereby requests permission from the Coastal Resources Commission to file an appeal pursuant to
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b) and N.C. Admin. Code tit. 1 5A, r. 7J.0300 (Please attach a
copy of the permit application decision. Ifyou cannot obtain a copy of the permit application
decision,please provide the name of the permittee, the project location and the permit number.)
Requests are reviewed by the Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission to determine
whether a hearing should be granted. The determination of whether to grant a hearing is in the
sole discretion of the Chairman. N.C. Admin.-Code tit. 15A, r. 710301(b).
For this application to be complete, the Petitioner must address each factor listed below on a
separate sheet of paper. You must address these factors before your request will be reviewed.
The Chairman's decision to grant a hearing will be based on whether the Petitioner:
(1) Has alleged that the decision is contrary to a statute or rule [N.C. Gen. Stat. §
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. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b)(2)]; and
(Please describe how you are directly affected by the permit decision.
Persons directly affected by a decision include, but are not limited to:
(a) any owner of real property in the vicinity of the property to
be developed who can show that the proposed development
is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the value
and enjoyment of his property; and
(b) any person who can demonstrate a histon, of substantial
use ofpublic resources in the area directly affected b , the

development when the development is within or touches
upon an area subject to the public h-1lSt.)
(3) Has alleged facts or made legal arguments that demonstrate that the request for
the hearing is not frivolous [N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b)(3)].
(Please summarise the evidence or arguments you will present at a
hearing in support ofyour appeal.)
Based on the attached responses to the above factors, the undersigned hereby requests a third
party hearing.
Date Signature of Petitioner or Attorney
Name of Petitioner or Attorney
/VD
Address
jolm/zo SIC f7?�7/
City Sttate Zip
( Af ) 47Y- .:�5- 19
Telephone Number
NOTES: This request must be served on the Director, Division of Coastal Management, at
the address shown on the attached Certificate of Service Form, within twenty (20)
days of the disputed permit decision. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A=121.1(b). Failure to
do so constitutes waiver of the right to request a hearing. A copy should also be
sent to the Attorney General's Office, Environmental Division, at the addresses
shown on the attached Certificate of Service Form.
Approval of a Third Parry Hearing Request allows a petitioner to file a contested
case petition with the Office of Administrative Hearings within twenty (20) days
of receipt of the Chairman's Order. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b).
Denial of a Third Party Hearing Request is a final agency decision which may be
appealed to the Superior Court in the county where the property is located under
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b) and Chapter 150B, Article 4.

CERTIFICATE 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 personally delivering copies to the named
agencies.
Original served on: Director
Division of Coastal Management
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638
and a copy served on: Attorney General's Office
Environmental Division
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh, NC 27602-0629
This the A"`day of �QQ
Signature ofpktitioner or Attorney
EP/30540/wp
Updated:July 14, 1999

Permit Class
NEW Permit Number
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA 52-03
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
and
Coastal Resources Commission
Co r
x Major Development in an Area of Environmental Concern
pursuant to NCGS 1 13A-118
- x Excavation and/or filling pursuant to NCGS 1 13-229 -
Issued to Washington and Baum Marina, c/o John Dixon, PO Box 1327, Nags Head, NC 27959
Authorizing development r-• in Dare
County at canal adi. Roanoke Sound and Washington
Baum Bridge Roanoke Island as requested in the permittee's application dated 10/10/02 including
attached work plan drawing dated revised 2/14/03
This permit, issued on April 14 2003 is subject to compliance with die application (where consistent
with the permit), all applicable regulations, special conditions and notes set forth below. Any violation of these terms rnay
be subject to fines, imprisonment or civil action; or may cause the permit to be null and void.
Marina Facility
1) The marina facility will display a sign showing the location of the nearest pumpout facility, including
other appropriate waste disposal information, at the entrance and exit from the main pier(s).
2) No sewage, whether treated or untreated, shall be discharged at any time from any boats using the
marina facility. Any sewage discharge at the marina facility shall be-Qonsidered a violation of this
permit for which the permittee is responsible. This prohibition shall be applied and enforced throughout
the entire existence of the permitted facility.
(See attached sheets for Additional Conditions)
T7us permit action may be appealed by the pennittee or Signed b the authority of the Secretary
other qualified persons within twenty (20) days of the issuingy l tar} of n. and the
date. An appeal requires resolution prior to work initiation or Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission.
continuance as the case may be.
T7tis permit must be accessible on-site to Department ���
personnel when the project is inspected for compliance.
Any maintenance work or project modification not covered ana D. Moffitt, Director
hereunder requires further Division approval. Division of Coastal Management
All work must cease when the permit expires on This permit and its conditions arc hereby accepted.
December 31, 2006
In issuing this permit, the Statc of North Carolina agrees
that your project is consistent with (he North Carolina Coastal k
Management Program. Signature of Perwittee

(l) The decision is contrary to rile 15A NCAC 2H .0502(f) which requires
that the owner must sign the application. Neither Mr. Dixon nor his
designee has the right to apply for a pen-nit on property owned by
Building Resources, Inc. and or others. (See Dixon deed book 1425,
page 425; exception (5), page 2.
The decision is contrary to a policy, and perhaps a rule, requiring that
CAMA not issue a permit in violation of water quality standards. In
a letter dated April 14, 2003 from John Domey representing the
Division of Water Quality,-he states "that application is on hold
pending completion of a Marine Use Attainability Analysis for marinas
in SA waters required by DWQ".
CAMA issued a permit on April 14, 2003 without a 401 Water Quality
Certification. CAMA issued this same pen-nit while having on file
duly recorded deeds and plats certified by a licensed surveyor stating
that the owner of portions of the property are owned by someone other
than the applicant.

(2) (a) The petitioner is directly affected by the decision since the permit
was granted to Mr. Dixon to develop land owned by others. Indeed
this will have a significant adverse impact on the value and enjoyment
of the petitioner's property.
(b) There is a more than 75-year history of substantial use of public
resources (le., the ditch bank canal) in the area affected by the
proposed development. These public trust waters have been used
- continuously since the canal was dug more than 75 years ago by
watermen to moor their boats. Docks and mooring pilings were
present when CAMA was enacted. Because they pre-exist CAMA
they were grand fathered and have been maintained, repaired and
replaced as necessary without interference from CAMA.

(3) Petitioner and the general public have substantial rights to the public
resources in the area of the pen-nit. The petitioner and other plaintiffs
have on their behalf and on behalf of the general public filed a
complaint in the General Court of Justice, Superior Court
Division, County of Dare asking for prescriptive title to the property
and a prescriptive easement.
Until ownership is resolved, a 401 Water Quality Certification is
granted and a Marine Use Attainability Analysis is submitted, the
petitioner respectfully requests that the CAIVIA permit issued on
April 14, 2003 be rescinded or that the chairnan of the Coastal
Resources Commission grant the petitioner a hearing.

NORTH CAROLINA IN TI-IF, GENERAL, COURT OF JLJSTICF-
COUNTY OF DARE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
File #03-CVS-
BUILDING RESOURCES, INC.; JOI-IN 1-.
WILSON, JR.; JOI-IN F. WILSON, IV; F.
THOMSON PETERS; ANDREW
DABNEY MCCANN; THOMAS 1-1.
NIXON; MARSHALL SANDERLIN;
TIM REBER; GARY TREW, MILES
- CREEF; MUk. I Y CREEF; DOSSEY
PRUDEN and BINKY JONES,
Plaintiffs
V.
COMPLAINT•
JOHN'W. "SKIP" DIXON,
Defendant
Plaintiffs, complaining of defendant, John W. "Skip" Dixon, aver and say:
I. Plaintiff, Building Resources, Inc. is a North Carolina corporation with principal
and registered office located in Darc County, N.C. and Plaintiffs, John F. Wilson, Jr., John F.
Wilson, IV, Andrew Dabney McCann, Thomas H. Nixon, Marshall Sanderlin, Tim Reber, Gary
Traw, Miles Creef, Murphy Creef, Dossey Pruden, and Binky Jones are citizens and residents of
Dare County, N.C.
2: Plaintiff, F. Thomson Peters is a citizen and resident of Pasquotank County, N.C.
3. Defendant, John W. "Skip" Dixon (hereinafter "Dixon") is a citizen and resident
of Dare County, N.C.
4. On or about November 1, 2002 Dixon, by and through his attorney, demanded
1

5- 7-03; 3:00PM;Quible and Assoc. ; 1 252 261 1250 # 2/ 3
5^ u-VJ; :�; :�lrrvi G5 L441OL V`J' ;iF
c
Ake
M.Q
�j AF
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Marine Fisheries
Michael F, Easley, Governor Preston P, Pate, Jr,, Director
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
April 2$, 2003
CERTIFIED WV'
7001 1140 0002 4965 4592 i
Mr. John W, Dixon
PO Sox 1327
Nags Head NC 27959
RE; DIXON, JOHN W.
DAR-0331-000-0001
Dear Mr. Dixon:
The Department's records indicate that a claim of ownership was registered under General Statute
113-205 to certain submerged lands located in Dare County, of which you are the record owner. The said
property is described in Deed Book 1425 Page 425 recorded in Dare County.
The General Assembly enacted G.S. 113-205 in 1965, requiring all persons claiming an interest
greater than that of the general public in submerged lands to file their claim before January 1, 1970. The
statute further provided, that any such interest which was not registered became null and void. The
purpose of that statute is to determine which private claims may be recognized under the law. The
program will not take away any lands which were validly granted by the State to private citizens.
Consistent with the authority delegated to me by the Secretary of the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources under G,S. 113-205, 1 have reviewed the submerged lands claim registered by
Elma E. Midgette to a tract of submerged lands described in that claim, Due to the large number of claims
filed and the complexity of issues involved, it has taken several years to reach the review of your claim.
I apologize for any inconvenience which that delay may have caused you.
In my review I have consulted with the staff of the Secretary of the Department of Administration
and representatives of the Attorneyand Go issue easements forDepartment of the use of public and Administration has general
authority to manage public land
Consequently, in accordance with 15A NCAC 01 G.0303(b), your claim of fee simple title to the bed
of waterbody created by the excavation of your land above the high water mark is recognized. The waters
covering this bed shall be presumed subject to public trust uses, which include, but are not limited to, the
L
L
, v
3441 Aroru*l St., P.C. Box 769, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone:[phone] FAX! 252-727-51271Internet
�'; An Equal Oppor�u^;1y' t�i�--alive Action Employer—50% '1tFcycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

5- 7-03; 3:00PM;Qu ible and Assoc_. ; 1 252 261 1260 # 3/
Mr, John W Dixon
Page 2
April 28, 2003
right to navigate, swim,hunt, fish and enjoy recreational activities in the watercourses_ However, this
decision does not affect your riparian rights, including the right to construct a pier for access to deep water.
The State makes no claim to title to lands located above the high water line.
This letter serves as final notice to you of the disposition of your submerged lands claim. Should
you wish to contest the determination of your claim, G.S. 113-206(e) requires that you file a civil action in
the Superior Court of the county in which the property is located. Please note that you must file any such
lawsuit within three years of the date on which you received this letter.
A declaration of the disposition of your Sldecla5 claim atio will will
mailed to yourecorded
after its in the re orday
where the submerged lands are located. A copy of the
tion.
ons
concerning
Thank you for your patience while your claim was resolve . if you have any ubmerged Lands Office letheett rhead
this matter, please contact Mrs. Jeanne J. Hardy, Public Trust/S
address or by telephone at 1-800-682-2632 (in North Carolina) or 252-726-7021 ext. 192.
Sincerely yours,
/rt5
n . Pate, Jr.
Director
PPP/jjh
cc: Attorney General's Office
poD,ff+�

HORNTHAL,RILEY,ELLIS& MALAND,L.L.P.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
L.P.HoRNTHAL,JR POST OFFICE BOX 220 OFFICES:
J.FRED RILEY" 301 EAST MAW STREET
THOMAS L.WHITE,JR." ELIZABETH CITY,NORTH CAROLINA 27907-0220 ELIZABETH CITY,NC 27909
M.H.HOOD ELLIS TELEPHONE[phone]
MARK M.MALAND TELEFAx(252)3354223
DONALD C.PRENTISS E-MAIL:[e-mail]
ROBERT B.HOBBS,JR. INTERNET:www.hrem.com
DONALD I.MCREE,JR.
JOHN D.LEIDY OFFICES ALSO IN
MICHAEL P.SANDERS NAGS HEAD,NC
L.PHILLIP HORNTHAL,III April 22, 2003
W.BROCK MITCHELL
"OF COUNSEL
APR P, 3 2003
,AV. LW9 lA a`"'Er
V.
Mr. Doug Huggett WLum
Major Permits & Consistency Coordinator
NCDENR, Division of Coast Management
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh,N.C. 27699-1638
RE: CAMA Permit No. 52-03 John Dixon
Waskington and Baum Marina
Dear Mr. Huggett:
I received your letter of April 14 and the enclosed permit. Regarding Additional Condition 34),
please see a copy of the Complaint filed April 21, 2003 in Dare County Superior Court challenging Mr.
Dixon's claim of ownership to the property involved in the permit and application. We also understand
that the permit may have been issued prematurely given one Agency's (Water Quality)response.
My clients think it was a mistake to issue the permit when the issue of ownership was not
determined. I agree.
Iam
Sincerely yours,
M. H. Hood Ellis
C.C. Mr. John F. Wilson, IV

r- r)
NORTH CAROLINA n: IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
C.S.C.
COUNTY OF DARE SUPERIOR COURT DIVpIISION
-�T- File #03-CVS- 1 1
BUILDING RESOURCES, INC.; JOHN F. ' '` �:*&
WW
WILSON, JR.; JOHN F. WILSON, IV; F. '
THOMSON PETERS; ANDREW
DABNEY McCANN; THOMAS H. APR �, 1 2003
NIXON; MARSHALL SANDERLIN;
EDWARD H. REBER, JR.; GARY TREW; : ;MV.0FC0jNSTA0j11t-���!'�
MILES G. CREEF; MURPHY CREEF; l'``'�"H
and WILLIAM E. `BINKY"JONES,
Plaintiffs
V. COMPLAINT
JOHN W. "SKIP" DIXON,
Defendant
Plaintiffs, complaining of defendant, John W. "Skip" Dixon, aver and say:
1. Plaintiff, Building Resources, Inc. is a North Carolina corporation with principal
and registered office located in Dare County, N.C. and Plaintiffs, John F. Wilson, Jr., John F.
Wilson, IV, Andrew Dabney McCann, Thomas H. Nixon, Marshall Sanderlin, Edward H. Reber,
Jr., Gary Trew, Miles G. Creef, Murphy Creef, and William E. "Binky" Jones are citizens and
residents of Dare County, N.C.
2. Plaintiff, F. Thomson Peters is a citizen and resident of Pasquotank County, N.C.
3. Defendant, John W. "Skip" Dixon (hereinafter"Dixon") is a citizen and resident
of Dare County, N.C.
4. On or about November 1, 2002 Dixon, by and through his attorney, demanded
1

r y
that Plaintiffs and others similarly situated to move their boats and vacate the property and docks
located on the canal south of the Washington Baum Bridge on Roanoke Island leading to public
waters known as the Roanoke Sound and commonly known as the"Ditch Bank" or"Dykster's."
5. On information and belief, Dixon based such demand upon a claim of ownership
by virtue of a deed dated April 19, 2002 from the Town of Manteo to Dixon filed for record on
April 23, 2002 in Book 1425 at Page 425 of the Dare County Registry. A true copy of such deed
is attached hereto as Plaintiffs' Exhibit#1.
6. Months prior to the Town of Manteo purporting to convey such property to
Dixon, both the Town and Dixon were on notice of the rights, ownership and property of
Plaintiffs and the public in the docks, pilings and moorings and boats on the canal.
7. In recognition of Plaintiffs' and the public's rights,property and ownership in the
docks, pilings, moorings and boats on the canal and by its own terms, Dixon's purported deed
from the Town of Manteo (Plaintiffs' Exhibit#1) expressly and specifically excepted"Claims
and/or rights of others, if any, to that portion of the property adjoining the canal traversing same
by reason of said third parties'prior use and occupation thereof, including claim in Book 1365,
Page 328 and 329, Dare County Registry." See attached hereto true copies of the deeds to
Plaintiff, Building Resources, Inc.(Plaintiffs' Exhibit#2 and Plaintiffs' Exhibit#3) referenced in
Book 1365 at Page 328 and 329, Dare County Registry.
8. Since Plaintiffs' (and their predecessors) and the public's use of the canal
commonly known as the"Ditch bank" or"Dykster's" and Plaintiffs' (and their predecessors) and
the public's use and occupation of the property and docks located on the said canal had existed
continuously since the canal was originally excavated in connection with the construction of the
2

road, bridge and highway (circa 1929) approximately seventy-five (75) years ago, Plaintiffs'
refused to vacate the said property and docks and in some instances refused to move their
property and boats in response to Dixon's demand as stated in Section 4 of this Complaint.
9. On Christmas Eve, December 24, 2002 Defendant, Dixon, or others at his
direction, wrongfully trespassed and entered, without authorization, upon the property, pilings,
docks and moorings on the canal in the possession of Plaintiffs and the public and wrongfully
removed and destroyed said property, docks, pilings, and moorings. Plaintiffs and the public are
entitled to recover substantial damages from Dixon proximately caused by said trespass and
destruction of property.
10. On Christmas Eve, December 24, 2002 Defendant, Dixon, or others at his
direction, wrongfully trespassed upon and without justification, authority or lawful excuse,
interfered with and took boats belonging to, and in the possession of, one or more of the
Plaintiffs which were moored and/or docked in the canal; and moved, without the permission or
consent of the owners, such boats to the dock area maintained by the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission in connection with the boat ramp adjacent to the canal property and the
Roanoke Sound. Those Plaintiffs upon whose boats Dixon, or others at his direction, wrongfully
trespassed are entitled to recover nominal and substantial damages proximately resulting
therefrom.
11. Plaintiffs and the public are the owners in fee simple of the property, docks,
pilings and moorings on the canal and were in possession of same until Defendant, Dixon's
unlawful acts on December 24, 2002 as described above.
12. Defendant, Dixon's claim of title and ownership to such property, docks, pilings

and moorings on the canal to the exclusion of plaintiffs and the public is valid neither in law nor
in fact in that Plaintiffs', their predecessors' and the public's use of such property and docks
adverse, notorious, hostile and continuous use for more than twenty (20) results in a vesting of
title or an easement by prescription and Defendant, Dixon's alleged source of title (Plaintiffs'
Exhibit#1 attached) expressly and specifically excepts any right, title or interest of the Plaintiffs'
and public.
13. Defendant, Dixon's claim of title and ownership to such property, docks, pilings
and moorings on the canal to the exclusion of plaintiffs and the public is a cloud upon the
adverse title or prescriptive easement vested in the Plaintiffs and public.
14. On information and belief, Defendant, Dixon, or someone for or on his behalf, has
applied for permits to construct docks and other improvements upon the property of the Plaintiffs
and public on the canal where Plaintiffs' and the public's docks, pilings, moorings and property
were previously located prior to Defendant, Dixon's wrongful trespass, destruction and removal
of same as noted above, and Plaintiffs are entitled to a preliminary and permanent injunction
restraining and enjoining Dixon, and any one acting for or on his behalf, from trespassing or
otherwise entering upon the property and the prior locations of the docks, pilings, moorings and
property of the Plaintiffs on the canal, and from constructing any improvements thereon whether
having permits for such construction or not, pending the final determination of this action and as
part of the final judgment in this action.
15. Prior to Defendant, Dixon's wrongful actions, Plaintiffs and the public were
permitted to, and had in fact on many occasions over the years, maintained, repaired and replaced
their property, docks, pilings and moorings without application for any permit from any local,
4

1 1
state or federal agency because such facilities predated laws such as the Coastal Area
Management Act of 1974, but now that Defendant, Dixon has unlawfully trespassed upon,
destroyed or otherwise removed Plaintiffs' and the public's property, docks, pilings and
moorings in the canal, Plaintiffs and the public have been informed that they must apply for
permits from applicable local, state and federal agencies/entities to replace the facilities
wrongfully destroyed and removed by Defendant, Dixon thus subjecting Plaintiffs and the public
to a regulatory process they were previously "grandfathered" from. Defendant, Dixon's said
wrongful acts have proximately resulted in substantial damages equivalent to the additional cost
Plaintiffs and the public must now incur to obtain any and all permits required to replace their
property, docks, moorings and pilings wrongfully destroyed and otherwise removed by
Defendant, Dixon and equivalent to the permanent loss of such property, docks, moorings and
pilings to the extent Plaintiffs and the public are unable to secure permits as a result of
Defendant, Dixon's wrongful actions.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray the Court as follows:
A. That Plaintiffs and the public have and recover of Defendant, Dixon a substantial
monetary amount representing the damages proximately resulting from Dixon's wrongful
trespass and destruction of real property, including but not limited to the additional cost of
having to secure permits to replace such property, docks, moorings and pilings and the damages
associated with the permanent loss of same in the event permits may not obtained;
B. That those Plaintiffs upon whose boats Defendant, Dixon did wrongfully trespass
upon have and recover of Defendant, Dixon nominal damages and a substantial monetary amount
representing the damages proximately resulting from Dixon's wrongful trespass upon such boats;
5

r
C. That Plaintiffs and/or the public be adjudicated the owners of prescriptive title to
the property, docks, moorings and pilings on the canal, or the owners of a prescriptive easement
therein, and the claim of Defendant, Dixon removed as a cloud on said title or easement;
D. That a preliminary and permanent injunction issue, to wit: that Defendant, Dixon,
and any one acting on his behalf, be restrained and enjoined from going upon the property, and
prior location of the property, docks, moorings and pilings of Plaintiffs and the public pending a
final judgment in this action and as part of said final judgment, including but not limited to
prohibiting Defendant, Dixon from constructing any improvements thereon pending the outcome
of this case whether Defendant, Dixon has permits to do so or not;
E. That Plaintiffs have such other and further relief to which they may be so entitled.
F. That Plaintiffs have and recover their costs, including reasonable attorney's fees,
to the extent authorized by law.
G. That Plaintiffs have a JURY TRIAL on all issues of fact to which they are so
entitled.
This 2I!day of A 12003.
Homthal, Riley, Ellis & Maland, LLP
By:Z� rt
M. H. Hood Ellis
N. C. State Bar. No.. 6606
By: Ri�
Michael P. Sanders
N. C. State Bar. No. 17587
P.O. Box 220
Elizabeth City, N.C. 27907-0220
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
6

VERIFICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF DARE
JOHN F. WILSON, JR., being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he has read the
foregoing COMPLAINT and the same is true of his own knowledge except as to the matters
stated upon information and belief and, as to those he believes them to be true.
John F. Wilson, Jr. ,
Sworn to and subscribed before me this , 2003.
v
r
otary Pu c
e ***
My commission expires: ti PUBLIC
44 scroll'y
(Affix Notary Stamp or Seal)
7

VERIFICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF DARE
JOHN F. WILSON, IV, individually and as a duly authorized officer of BUILDING
RESOURCES, INC., being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he has read the foregoing
COMPLAINT, that he is authorized to verify same on behalf of himself and BUILDING
RESOURCES, INC., and the same is true of his own knowledge except as to the matters stated
upon information and belief and, as to those he believes them to be true.
John F*son,
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 17 day of , 2003.
-•'�� ,,,,tary
*** a
My commission expires:
YA a-xe—c to, ZOOS y�+o9�P �°lJBIIC G
0 Co
(Affix Notary Stamp or Seal)
8

VERIFICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF PASQUOTANK
F. THOMSON PETERS, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he has read the
foregoing COMPLAINT and the same is true of his own knowledge except as to the matters
stated upon information and belief and, as to those he believes them to be true.
F. Thomson Peters
Sworn to and subscribed before me this I J day of H , 2003.
>d
My commission expires:
' Pt/BIIC
'"ftmIli It,
(Affix Notary Stamp or Seal)
9

1
VERIFICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF DARE
THOMAS H. NIXON, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he has read the
foregoing COMPLAINT and the same is true of his own knowledge except as to the matters
stated upon information and belief and, as to those he believes them to be true.
Thomas H. Nixon
l
1z-r'-
It
Sworn to and subscribed before me this_day of Apt , 2003.
' a
6RJ
lic
~ NOTARY
My commission expires: Y r
P118L1 C
CO 1
(Affix Notary Stamp or Seal) 4tttttttttttlt�
10

VERIFICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF DARE
ANDREW DABNEY McCANN, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he has
read the foregoing COMPLAINT and the same is true of his own knowledge except as to the
matters stated upon information and belief and, as to those he believes them to be true.
�—2V"'
Andrew Dabney McCann
lri'g
Sworn to and subscribed before me this_da of 4UJL , 2003.
is
kOTA Ry
My commission expires: e
BO
�•"eobena��t�Ss
(Affix Notary Stamp or Seal)
11

VERIFICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF DARE
MARSHALL SANDERLIN, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he has read the
foregoing COMPLAINT and the same is true of his own knowledge except as to the matters
stated upon information and belief and, as to those he believes them to be true.
Marshall Sanderlin
Sworn to and subscribed before me this'day of AJ , 2003.
z
My commission expires:
Pt/BLIC
-akc-�- t 2004
(Affix Notary Stamp or Seal)
12

V LRI F ICATION
S VA-1 1 OF NOR I I I C AROHNA
COUNTY 01: I)ARI:
EOWARD 14. REBER. heing first duly sworn, deposes and says that he has read the fcircgoing
COMPLAINT and the same is true of his own knowledge except as to the matters slated upon
information and belief and, as to those he believes Ihcm to he true.
tA.rb>�Q K.94,7�
EDWAQO R.Rchcr,✓9.
f 5 r� AE'i�2�L
Sworn to and subscribed hcf�irc n�c fills �1,ly ��I� , 2003.
visits
SA
NOT A Ry
Nly commission expires:
i PUBLIC
—c- (�. 2 Ao� ��a9�
co V :01 ,
(Affix Notary Stamp or Scal)
. I �

VERIFICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF DARE
GARY TREW, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he has read the foregoing
COMPLAINT and the same is true of his own knowledge except as to the matters stated upon
information and belief and, as to those he believes them to be true.
Gary Trew
fh
Sworn to and subscribed before me this A/day of� 2003.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
(Affix Notary Stamp or Seal)
14

VERIFICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF DARE
MILES CREEF, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he has read the foregoing
COMPLAINT and the same is true of his own knowledge except as to the matters stated upon
information and belief and, as to those he believes them to be true.
r
Miles Creef
Sworn to and subscribed before me this f . 12003.
Notary P lic
My commission expires:
-�o 6
(Affix Notary Stamp or Seal)
15

VERIFICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF DARE
MURPHY CREEF, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he has read the
foregoing COMPLAINT and the same is true of his own knowledge except as to the matters
stated upon information and belief and, as to those he believes them to be true.
1/tV4— 440�—
urphy Cre f
Sworn to and subscribed before me this of , 2003.
Notary Pu is
My commission expires:
21- ,2D- 641
(Affix Notary Stamp or Seal)
16

VERIFICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF DARE
W(LLIAM E�` BINKY JONES, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he has read the foregoing
COMPLAINT and the same is true of his own knowledge except as to the matters stated upon
information and belief and, as to those he believes them to be true.
W(Wiat 6:� Binky`Jone
1t4
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 5 day of , 2003.
auto
My commission expires: E
PUBLIC
`GCiOAC& t 8 ZaoeA
••.A con�v,�;,�
••••.,loss,,,••.
(Affix Notary Stamp or Seal)
mhhe2890
17

Flied aeok. 142E Paso: 425 Doc Id. seel4sa
e4123120E2 1et2EAtt Receipt •. E0E17
Do0 Ow Receipt
Exel" Tax pd: f 140.N
ttMOARp M GRAY, REOI[TER OF1 O„EM3 CAREnCO, NC
DARN. ����;i,t REAL ESTATE Illflf(Il�f 111111f IIII�IIIIf1lllilffipllf Ifllllllf� 006 i
COUNTY C\�/1. TRANSfER TAX td0ol: I o
,4 Pala: 1 of 2
a 20a2 te.2egn
LT a PLAINTIFF'S
W EXHIBIT
APPROVED
DARE COUNTY TAX a "-
COLLECTOR
J
No. _a t ,
Excise Taz S 140.00
Recording Time,book and Paso
Tax Lot No..................................................... .............. Parcel Identifter No. 025857 007
. . .. .................................... .....
Verided by...................................................................... Count on the..... day of.'.......,...
y . ............................................. ......................................
..................................................................................................................................
Mail after recording to McCown do McCown,300 Sir Walter Raleigh Street,Manteo,NC 27954
.............................................................................
This instrument was prepared by Aldridge,Seawell, Felthousen&Malamey,LLP,805 North Main Hwy,Maateo,NC 27954
Brief description for the Index
.......................................................................
....
...............
Roanoke Island "Boat Ditch"Pro pert
NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED made this ...1.9.th.... day of. ....AP.ril....................... .20.P�..,by and between
GRANTOR GRANTEE
The Town of Manteo,a Municapal Corporation John W.Dixon
P. 0. Box 1327
Nags Head, NC 27959
Enter in apprwprlate blade tar each party; name,address,and,if appraprtate,ebaractor of entity,e.4•corporation or partnerswp.
The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties,their heirs, successors, and assigns, and
shall Include singular, plural, maacullne, feminine or neuter as required by context,
WITNESSETH, that the Grantor, for a valuable consideration ,paid by the Grantee, the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, has and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the Grantee In fee simple, all that
certain lot or parcel of land situated in the Nags fie.ad Township,
tB.H�Xdf ...Town of.Manteo.. ...._.. ...,
. Darr County,North Carolina and more particularly described as follows:
All that certain tract or parcel of land located and being on Roanoke Island,Nags Head Township,Dare County,North Carolina,adjoining
U.S.Highway 64-264 leading to Washington Baum Bridge,Roanoke Sound and other lands of Louis Midgett,Sr.and bounded as follows:
BEGINNING at the interaection of the centerline of the pavement of the old abandoned U.S.Highway 64-264 with the Western mean high
water mark of Roanoke Sound,the said abandoned U.S.Highway 64.2641ying ton Baum Bridge approximately 125 feet to the South of the present
right-of--way of U.S.Highway 64-264 leading to Washington on the Fast side of Roanoke Island;thence from the beginning
point and along the centerline of the pavement of the abandoned Highway 64-264 South 85 deg.10 min,West 570.05 feet to a point;
thence continuning along said centerline South 85 deg. 15 min.23 sec.West 1106.24 feet to a point located and being at the intersection of
the Southern margin of the right-of-way of the new U.S.Highway 64-264 with the Centerline of the pavement of abandoned U.S.Highway
64-264;thence along the Southern margin of the right-of-way of U.S.Highway 64.264 South 77 deg.51 min.30 sec.West 321.41 feet to
a point in the centerline of s canal;thence cornering South 4 deg.40 min.58 sec.East 43.22 feet to the Southern edge of the right-of-way
of the Virginia Electric and Power Company;thence cornering and along the Southern edge of the aforesaid utility tight-of-way in the
Virginia Electric and Power Company North 85 deg.19 min.02 sec.East 1,100 feet to a point;thence North 87 deg.35 min.56 sec.East
907.68 feet to the intersection thereof with the Eastern mean high water mark of Roanoke Sound;thence cornering North 8 dcg.21 min.
17 sec.West 123.46 feet to the point of beginning.
Same being a portion of those lands known as the L.N.Midgett tract,also known as the A.D.Midgctt tract as shown on a map or plat
thereof recorded in Book 13,Page 57,Dare County Registry,
There is excepted from the property conveyed herein that portion of property hcreinabove described which was included in that Consent
Judgment entered into the proceeding captioned"Department of Transportation,Plaintiff v.Ralph G.Reed,Jr.and wife,Freida Reed;
Louts Midgett,Sr.;Dora L.Midgett;Louis Midge",Jr,;Robert Midgctt;Nancy M.Murray;Thomas L.White,Jr.,Trustee and Intercom,
Inc."and recorded in Deed Book 634 at Page 199 the excepted portion of property being accepted more particuW"y described as a portion
of that property set forth in that Memorandum of Action recorded in Dced Book 509 at Pagc 776 in the office of the Regiser of Deeds of
Dare County,North Carolina.
w.c.>tor as«.r.r.e Ma, t b a 1914,aartee4 ntr. NCBA 001 Solffil)

1430
1111 Hill�oll�II1111111111�I1111 111'I11I11i eieazi12M ie:zsan
The property herninabove described was acquired by Grantor by Instrument recorded ln-.......................
......... ...............................
.................................Book...7.1.6.,..Page...4,15—D.ar.e.County...Public..Beglatry...............................
d�agpp .......................................
A map showing the above described property Is recorded In Flit Book......1.3.......pate.......57.......,
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid lot or parcel of land and all privileges and appurtenances thereto belonging to
the Grantee in fee simple.
And the Grantor covenants with the Grantee,that Grantor is seised of the premises in fee simple, has the right to convey
the same in fee simple, that title is marketable and free and clear of all encumbrances, and that Grantor will warrant
and defend the title against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever except for the exceptions hereinafter stated.
Title to the property hereinabove described is subject to the following exceptions:
(1) Reservation for the benefit of Louis Midgett,Sr.and wife,Dore L.Midgett,and their children,as
set out in deed recorded in Book 392,Page 663,Dare County Registry.
(2) Any an all North Carolina Dept.of Transportation casements and rights of way affecting the
subject property and general service easements affecting the subject premises.
(3) Rights of others in and to the use of any portion of the subject property located below the mean
high water mark and deemed public trust waters by the State of North Carolina or any court of
competent jurisdiction.
(4) Any matters that might be determined by an accurate survey of the subject premises,Including,
but not limited to,any deficiencies ih quality of land due to erosion or otherwise.
ins}' Claims and/or rights of others,if any,to that portion of the property adjoining the canal traversing
IMK,� o�d third parties'prior use and occupation thereof,including claim in Book
55 11tt 329,Dare d6tinty Registry.
IN
.*.Pqr %aa`-by
sell
aatkartaed f re-ri caned WtaW to►e L r.rate ��• K U a•f vats, aa[ rar[ed this twtreaa<a[ to Y• 1-.}■.d in as
as•Y.Mrutla. nald Yr lYt�etitr of It, aloard •( r,ire{t_1, the day ar'• ee aX.
Town of Hanteo
tscwr.i
...... —tscer.i
BY: Lee T-g,�i
i„
r l NORTH CAROLINA,Dare County
J •'; ";; 1, the undersigned,a Notary Public of the County,and State
Y aforesaid, certify that on the J`L, day
2002,Lee Tugwell,personally before
ApK 1 '
Y appeared before me and being
first duly sworn deposes and nays: that he is Mayor of the
4 .,,O ,, �cJw Town of Manteo and that the seal at7ixod to the foregoing
instrument is writing is the Official seal of the Town of
a Manteo and that the said writing was signed and sealed by him
' on behalf of the Town of Manteo by authority duly and legally
given by the Boattof Commissioners of the Town of Manteo
as will appear in the Minutes of the Commissioners of the
Town of Manteo for the L_day of&6 002, And
the said Lee Tugwell acknowledged the said to be the
act and deed of the Town of Manteo by and through its Board
•of Commissioners.
Witness my hand and officials or sea,
'2002. �oN 0. T a3 day or
My commission expiresi,
o c
00
'ae t.rer.t• rtittea �.>.r --- i co(m�,
` u>? t lw_.�dd ca _Nix
Q - � ---------------------------------------------------
-•----------------------------------- ------------------------- ------ - -
-•-------------------------------- y s u
"t p ge k"d to to e•rr.et.I'a1s Wteemeat W nay grttlteatl ate den re ytered at tae date and time cad to tae IIael:►ad r e.hoerr on the
tct gar.4er.e/.
-___._ _• --SadraTaa or DZtns ron-----•-!a e_ _
---...-•...Darcy/Auytaat-Itsybr.f D«p

Filed Soots, 1366 Paaa� 321 Coo Id: 6029309
e 94/22/21mi 49:64AM Rooelpl S: 24919
too Coda, DEED NO E%olaa Tax Pd: $0.00
6M6RRnM CRIAA'YII, REGISTER OF DEEDS DARE CO, NC
s0
e a30 0; 00 66AM < PLAINTIFF'S
T'S
Q #2
. a
Land Transfer
Land Transfer Tax: $
Excise Tax
Recording Time,Book and Page
Tax Lot No, Parcel Identifier No.
Verified by County on the day of
by
Mail after recording to: John F.Wilson,IV,P.0.Box 1892,Manteo,NC 27954
This instrument was prepared by: John F.Wilson,IV
Brief Description for the index Berry/Wilson Dock Parcel
NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED made this 15'day of March,2001,by and between
GRANTOR GRANTEE
John F.Wilson,Jr.and wife,Estelle J.Wilson Building Resources,Inc.
P.O.Box 1891
Manteo,NC 27954
Fa1a b appropia0e block Ca aad,party:wne,addr<q aoQ if aPProP��.chanUa d mti0'.a.r.,corponriaa or paaKrahip.
The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties,their heirs,successors,and assigns,and shall include
singular,plural,masculine,feminine or neuter as required by context.
WITNESSETH,that the Grantor,fora valuable consideration paid by the Grantee,the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,has and
by these presents does grant,bargain,sell and convey unto the Grantee in fee simple all that certain lot or parcel of land situated on
Roanoke Island,Nags Head Township,Dare County,North Carolina and more particularly described as follows:
Beginning in the Southern margin of an abaadonJ roadway of the North Carolina Department of Transportation,said
beginning point being located South 84 degrees,14 minutes,04 seconds West,1,535.61 feet from N.C.D.O,T.DISK 40 foot
OIS Station No.11+74.85 P.T.with survey baselineYB;thence pr ceding from the point and place of beginning South 89
degrees,44 minutes,40 seconds East,51.15 feet to a point;theaceTuth 89 degrees,50 minutes,03 seconds East,16.85 feet
to a point;thence cornering South 00 degrees,15 minutes,20 seconds West,a distance of approximately 12,31 feet to a
point;thence cornering South 77 degrees,l9 minutes,13 seconds West,15.05 feet to a point;thence North 78 degrees,58
minutes,03 seconds West, 16.94 feet to a point;thence cornering North 00 degrees,15 minutes,20 seconds East,a distance
of approximately 15.59 feet to the point of place of beginning.For a more accurate description of the property conveyed
herein,reference is made to that map or parcel captioned "Plat of Berry/Wilson Dock Parcel as claimed by Jack Wilson
.Parcel of Land Near Washington Baum Bridge-Roanoke Island—Nags Ilead Township-Dare County,North Carolina"
dated February 28,2001,prepared by Manson Ray Meekins RLS,a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference as fully set oat.
NOTE;THIS FORM CONTAINS REVISIONS WHICH ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF TH E OFFICIAL FORM PROMULGATED BY TILE.
NORTH CAROLINA BAR ASSOCIATION AND SHOULD BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED PRIOR TO-EXECURON.

I�I�III III�I A�II�1 II I IIIIII�I��)�I�'I fl��I�II U'I�111 629
e0 eM oe f ee:aaan
The property hereinabove described was acquired by Grantor by instrument from Wheeler Berry on May 6,1996,whose family who had
been in possession of said property from 30 years previously.
A map showing the above described property is recorded in Plat Book: See attached.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid lot or parcel of land and all privileges and appurtenances thereto belonging to the Grantee in fee
simple,the
And the Grantor covenants with the Grantee,that Grantor is seized of the premises in fee simple,has the right to convey the same in fee
simple,that title is marketable and free and clear of all encumbrances,and that Grantor will warrant and defend the title against the lawful
claims of all persons whomsoever except for the exceptions hereinafter stated.
Title to the property hereinabove described is subject to the following exceptions:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal,or if corporate,has caused this instrument to be signed in its corporate
name by its duly authorized olrcers and its seal to be hereunto affixed by authority of its Board of Directors,the day and year first above written.
(SEAL)
ha lisoo,Jr.
Fate J.Wilson SEAL)
t{, ssssnsssngs
qjy i
t !t' North Carolina,Due County
CE +r## ex
K 0 1,the undersigned,a Notary Public of the County and State af0resA4 certify that John F.Wilson,Jr.and wife Estelle Wilson,
'Polo Grantor,personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument.
Witness my hand and offictat stamp or seal,this the
x 5,[1 day of March,2001
O Myc«nmLss bnap'c: aAc /G404
�1 Q
NORTH CAROLINA
DARE COUNTY
The foregoing certi ate of P. L / C, L cJe
a Notary Public of 1 tare.
is certified to be correct. This instrume and this certificate are duly registered at the date and time in the Book and
Page shown on the first page hereof.
Barbara M.Gray,Register of/Deeds,
By ,���X�� J�C//vl 1�1h Assistant Register of Deeds
NOTE:THIS FORM CONTAINS REVISIONS WIIICII ARE DtFFERENTFROM THE PROVISIONS OFTItE OFFICIAL,FORM PRONIULGA"1"ED BY THE
NORTH CAROLINA BAR ASSOCIATION AND SHOULD BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED PRIOR TO RXECUTION.

r
`fo`wo LEGEND
yR„� �•� -C]L PpE 1ttlS SWWY IS SU0.2CT TO ANY FACTS THAT NAY 6E
-0L MAR DISCLOSED BY A FULL AM ACCkWATE TITLE SEARCH.
SITE O-ROAR SET 2 AREA By COORDINATE COWMATgR-L123 i.F!
-EA CONC NON. 3.FIRM,IONE.•YS(CL 11•)
CONC WON SET ♦PIN NO.:N/A
S.RCCd¢OED 1tLTERF.NCE:OR 7fC PC 415((TOWN pF wWRO):
-EX 7A NAIL NORTH R n-KE TARCN FROM RR>f1T d'MAY!Op!1. .
PAC NAL SET ►0 30-31 DARE COUNTY RCCISTRY QICDOT PRO,ECT
SEWER SERVICE 6.10007015
RAA10 NATER METER '
P110NE PEDESTAL
CAT.Y.
2 --{{_cu WERE
�I'MdNaNGlai1R C1auR0'WOW 1.
�f-ELEFIRCT
H1011AHT `()ppSl�yi A/11M OIE0M0(QIf1
®-CIECi. ]BANS
VICINITY MAP NTS
aIII NVl IIIIII NJ llila lllll(III II NCI VII�� ,�,u"0, ,i,i,A„
►�w S e! i
tNN1111fIf//
L2 Al v%p'I'�.f 'AYu
a N/F
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(DB 620, PG 150) -
PMYNp l
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(ABANDONED ROADWAY) _
h S89'44'4Q-E ,N8 0.93-w
769.58 589 SO'03"E 8
_ S 89'44'40' E 51.15'---
e— :
N.C.D.O.T.Cm - C
1535.61 vi
p'o/s I r �e4 !;
VOL 11+N.00 P.T. 1 '
AMYLY iasnrlE __ 8
-r-BR ___ __• - —/ A_Ic N7g 1 g1S W OS
N/F r +7w �
TOWN-OF MANTEO t/sM,1ME _
(08 716, PG 415) S85'28'17'W
NOTE —THIS PARCEL ADVERSELY 36.83• N/F
-�lo' .CA/��'•.., CLAIMED
NTEO.AITAISST THE INCLUDED INN T TH HOR
TOWN OF MANTEO
OEEp (DB 7i6, PO 415) (OB 710, PG 415)
SEAL ; CANAL (PUBLIC TRUST WATERS)
} L-2592 T L YANXW RAY NEt)MS P15 fXRTfY THAT Ms PLAT WAS DRAWN
�NpER NY SUPERNSICM IRON kt ACIUAI lJRYEY IAfDER NY iL,PERYeION;
1NAT THE RATIO OF PRECISION AS CALCULATED IS I:t0.000r iNAT iMs
S 1 PUT Q PREPMm M ALY'OR0A1(CE MIH D CTION.1900 OF IHE ETATE
\ \C i0AR0 q' gSTRATION AL(jS STANDAIy OF P ACTI(F'.
'AAL��//-
LATE
PLAT OF,"BERRY/1MLSON DOCK' PARCEL AS CLAIMED BY
JACK WILSON 1 - -
PARCEL OF LAND NEAR 1PASHINGTON BAUM BRIDGE — ROANOKE ISLAND
NAGS HEAD TOWNSHIP — DARE COUNTY — NOAP11 CAROLINA
20 10 0 70
SNABOARD SURVNYING & PLANNING, INC.
1 Inch - YO fL 3200 NORTH CROATAN HWY, KILL DEVIL HILLS, NC 27948 i.
000C1{16 SURKYED 1 NIW PLATTED 02 M 1 ILK
OFFICE: [phone] FAX; (252) 4430-0S71
Tt Y4

Filed look: 136% Pa.: 129 Dm ld: 6020310
14r02120a1 e2:156RM Raoelpt a: 24919
Doc Code: DEED we Exciea Tax pd: SO A0
SWUM M WSN. REGISSTO OF
II DEEDS DME CO, NC
IIIIII�IIII I�IIII IIII IIUII IIW II�II NI III'I II'I I'�I 140212001 09 6aRM
Q PLAINTIFF'S
W EXHIBIT
J
a #3
rn
J
J
Q
Land Transfer#:
Land Transfer Tax: S �(
Excise Tax �v
Recording Time,Book end Page
Tax Lot No. Parcel Identifier No.
Verified by County on the_day of
by
Mail after recording to: John F.Wilson,IV,P.O.Box 1892,Manteo,NC 27954
This instrument was prepared by: John F.Wilson,IV
Brief Description for the index island Camp Dock Parcel
NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED made this 15"day of March,2001,by and between
GRANTOR GRANTEE
John F.Wilson,Jr.and wife, Building Resources,Inc.
Estelle J.Wilson and P.O.Box 1891
John F.Wilson,IV Manteo,NC 27954
Paen i sppropriNe 61odc for ach poly:ssm0.eddreu,sod,If apprapriun,chusUa of entity,a.e.,ootporatiaa ar psrtmnhip.
The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties,their heirs,successors,and assigns,and shall include
singular,plural,masculine,feminine or neuter as required by context.
WITNESSETH,that the Grantor,for a valuable consideration paid by the Grantee,the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,has and
by these presents does grant,bargain,sell and convey unto the Grantee in fee simple all that certain lot or parcel of land situated on
Roanoke Island,Nags Head Township,Dart County,North Carolina and more particularly described as follows:
1
Beginning In the Southern margin of an abandoned roadway of the North Carolina Department of Transportation,said
beginning point being located South 80 Degrees,35 minutes,50 conds West,960.10 feet from N.C.D.O.T.DISK 40 foot
O/S Station No.11+74.85 P.T.with survey baseline YB;thence proceeding from the point and place of beginning South 89
degrees,"minutes,40 seconds East,40 feet to a point;thence cornering South 00 degrees,15 minutes,20 seconds West,
approximately 21.83 feet to a point;thence cornering South 88 degrees,57 minutes,46 seconds West,40.01 feet to a point;
thence cornering North 00 degrees,15 minutes,20 seconds East,approximately 22.74 feet to the point and place of
beginning.For a more particular description of the property herein conveyed,reference is made to that plat captioned
"Island Camp Dock Parcel as claimed by Wilson,Wilson,and Wilson,Parcel of Land Near Washington Baum Bridge—
Roanoke Island—Nags Head Township—Dare County—North Carolina" prepared by Mason Ray Meekins dated
February 28,2001 which is attached hereto and Incorporated herein by reference.
NOTE:THIS FORM CONTAINS RE VISIONS WHICH ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE rROVISIONS OFTHE OFFTCTAL FORM PROMULGATED BY ME
E
NORTH CAROLINA BAR ASSOCIATION AND SHOULD BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED PRIOR TO EXECUTION.

IIII IIIIIl 1111111111111111111111111 o0083 oor 0fl.66Hn
The property hereinabove described was acquired by Grantor by adverse possession.
A map showing the above described property is recorded in Plat Book: Soo attached.
TD HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid lot or parcel of land and all privileges and appurtenances thereto belonging to the Grantee in fee
simple,the
And the Grantor covenants with the Grantee,that Grantor is seized of the premises in fee simple,has the right to convey the same in fee
simple,that title is marketable and free and clear of all encumbrances,and that Grantor will warrant and defend the title against the lawful
claims of all persons whomsoever except for the exceptions hereinafter stated.
Title to the property hereinabove described is subject to the following exceptions:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal,or if corporate,has caused this instrument to be signed in its corporate
name by Its duly authorized officers and Its seal to be hereunto affixed by authority of its Board of Directors,the day and year first above written.
` (SEAL)
h■ ilson,Jr,
(SEAL)
Este) Ilsot
(SEAL)
John F.
,aamµasmanym
. RCS k t. 44
A1t�Tp RY l
e u f North Carolina,Date County
C Nkt W
INK 1,the undersigned,a Notary Public of the County mad State aforesaid,certify that John F.Wilson,Jr.,wife Emile Wilson,and
PUBLIC o John F.Wilson,IV,Grantor,personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the execution oftheforegoinginsuumem.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal,ibis the31 day of .2001
CO
My commission expire kJ tic
NORTH CAROLINA
DARECOUNTY
The foregoing cortificat of -)n L . I t
o Notary Public of
is certified to be correct. This insiremeat anJ this certificate are duly registered at the date and time in the Book and
Page shown on the first page hereof.
Barbara Gray,Register of Deeds E
Assist ni Register of Deeds
•
NOTE:THIS FORM CONTAINS REVISIONS WHICH ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE OFFICIAL FORM PROMULGATED BY THE
NORTH CAROLINA BAR ASSOCIATION AND SHOULD BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED PRIOR TO EXECUTION.

Auw P
faro
POAa cacrnn
0-EK PLPE NOTM
SITE 0 -EX ROAR I.THM SURYEY S SIJMJECT TO ANY FACTS THAT WAY 6C
-RFRM SI:1 OISCIOSED 6Y A FULL AND ACCLMATE TITLE SEARcK
L AREA BY COORNNATE COMPWATION-at LFk
■-EX CONC WON. 3.F1Rx ZONE: V5(EL 11)
CONC.MOW.SET 4.FR/NO:N/A
py -EX
P/k NNL 1 RECD=RDMNCE:08 716.PO 115(TOFR/OF 4ANTE0}.
SET
NORTH RCITRETICE TA FROM RIGHT WAY WAY BOOK I.
SAPFA tfRyla 6 LT30�70'E) AR DE MMTY RECSTRY(NCOOT FROJECT
® -WATER METER
®- PEOCSTAI
_ C.AT.`X��r C.AT.V.
OT4TY POLE
WY INC
FIRE HYDPIANI �FFH�n11flf��f
®-ELECT.TRANS. �� Y\ C.ARO(
c��OQ.ofESS/0Y\Z-
MINITY MAP NTS z 2/Q2 SEAL -�>� s
i t(
I L-2592 =
l 4MSON RAY 4EFxNS Pli,C'UtYY THAT M3 PLAT WAS DRAWN �•• .•�'"�`�-,,�
111/DER MY 9UPERNSION FROM M ACTUAL Q/RVEY UNVER MY y1WF1MA0N;
THAT TN(RATIO OF PRECISION As CxCUUTED IS 1:l000 r• TIUT TNS �. n Y
PLAT K MET)N Att'OgpANCE WIM SCCIgN,1600 OF 111E STATE Ra.11anT�YaA,,
BOMO OF REARED
RUIFS'STANOAR04 OF PRACI)W, fff 4
A- Z t /# arawa CaRgaa.
1-250 GATt �pE4MBlwWo6.awWarw a o`+E. .�
At# �E1rpl+n
N L
oFEssio�tit
�N ��
4FfHAY%t'� N /F
DEPARTMENT OF/TRANSPORTATION
(D9 620, PC 150)
N/F
EPAR ENT OF TRANSPORTA ON
(ABANDONED ROADWAY)'
1489'44'40"W
9'44'40"E 614.49' .
_ 198.94' S 9'44'40' E 40.00' _ ._v
Ir
N.CD.D.T.CNSK 9600.10' (rE�` h IR N F
a•0/5 5 F, TOWN OF MANTEO
STA 11+7A.65 P.T.
V[Y Q (DO 716. PC 415)
SUR USFINF Z aa1R1c
�Y-OR pp�
N/F 1/4/01
NOTE — THIS PARCEL ADVERSELY
TOWN OF MANTEO CLAIMED AGAINST THE TOWN OF
(DO 716. PC 415) MANTEO. IT IS INCLUDED IN THEIR
DEED (08 716. PC 415)
CANAL (PUBLIC TRUST WATERS)
PLAT OF -ISLAND CAMP DOCK' PARCEL AS CLAIMED 9Y
WILSON, WILSON, AND 1WILSON
PARCEL OF LAND NEAR WASHINGTON BAUA! BRIDGE 7 ROANOKE ISLAND
NAGS HEAD TOWNSHIP — DARE COUNTY — NORTH CAROLINA
i;
20 19 0 ZD SEABOARD SURVEYING & PLANNING, INC. .
1 inch - 20 ft 3200 NORTH CROATAN HWY. KILL DEVIL HILLS, NC 27M
OMCE: [phone] FA)L [phone]
9 i11A SORYETEI):171 2 Ol 4RM A1TEP.02 1 14N
IIIIII IIIII ulllli Ilu Ilia dill IIII III lllll 1111 ;1 3'210V w
Inches
7
�i✓A Y ��; 3 F C �

YFA
WCDENR
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
TO: Skip Dixon
252 441-8209
FROM: Doug Huggett
Permits and Consistency Unit Head
Division of Coastal Management
DATE: April 29, 2003
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

1.0 Project Purpose
1.1 Introduction
The purpose of this Environmental Assessment (EA) is to provide the North Carolina
Department of Environment & Natural Resources, Division of Coastal Management
(DCM), and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE) with a decision making tool to
assess the environmental affects of conducting a beach nourishment project to protect
upland structures and enhance the recreational beach, as well as extend the life of the
USACE Section 933 Project.
The North Carolina DCM will be coordinating the state review of a CAMA Major Permit
Application pursuant to the recognition of this EA. The USACE will also be reviewing the
permit application. Other agencies involved include Divisions of Water Quality, Land
Quality, Water Resources Commission, Marine Fisheries, Environmental Health,
Archives and History, Wildlife Resources Commission, Department of Administration,
and the Department of Transportation. The USACE will be conducting the federal
review of the permit application. Additional commenting agencies involved are the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS),
and the Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS).
The USACE Section 933 Agreement associated with the Wilmington Harbor Deepening
Project, is to place 660,000 cubic yards of sand along 10,600 ft of shoreline along
Holden Beach. The sand is to be placed seaward of the mean high water line (MHWL)
with a berm elevation of +7 ft MSL with a width of 50 ft. The Section 933 Project will
primarily benefit 200 properties situated along the central portion of the island. The
purpose of the Town's proposed project is to provide protection for additional upland
structures situated along the shorefront of Holden Beach from future loss due to long-
term shoreline retreat as well as storm related erosion. Specifically, protection will be
provided from the western margin of Lockwood Folly Inlet and extending approximately
30,300 ft to the west.
GNV/2001/DocProd/01-490/EA/September 7,200111:17 AM
1-1

' C6P -1 Fix eC[ -1 RECEIVED
CA ✓o S
APR 2 5 ZOUJ
DCNI FORBI 5
PFTITIO'N`ER'S NA-TvIE JN�( „L/ THIRD PARTY HEAPJI','G
REQUEST ON
COUCNTY CA�2A PERMIT DECISION
FILE NUivIBER
(Petitioner leave this line blank)
PLEASE TAKE NOTE that the undersigned, a-person affected by the decision of(check one):
a Local Permit Officer acting on a CAMA Minor Development Permit
application; or
V the Division of Coastal Management, Department of Environment and
Natural Resources, acting on a CAJvLA Major Development Permit
application or CAMA General Permit application
hereby requests permission from the Coastal Resources Commission to file an appeal pursuant to
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b) and N.C. Admin. Code tit. 15A, r. 7J.0300 (Please attach a
copy of the permit application decision. Ifyou cannot obtain a copy of the permit application
decision,please provide the name of the permittee, the project location and the permit number.)
Requests are reviewed by the Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission to determine
whether a hearing should be granted. The determination of whether to grant a hearing is in the
sole discretion of the Chairman. N.C. Admin.-Code tit. 15A, r. 7J.0301(b).
For this application to be complete, the Petitioner must address each factor listed below on a
separate she-It of paper. You must address these factors before your request will be reviewed.
T'ne Chairman's decision to grant a hearing will be based on whether the Petitioner:
(1) Has alleged that the decision is contrary to a statute or rule [N.C. Gen. Stat. §
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. Stat. § 1 I'A-121.1(b)(2)]; and
(Please describe how you are directly affected by the permit decision.
Persons directly affected by a decision include, but are not limited to:
(a) any owner of real property in the vicinity of the property to
be developed who can show that the proposed development
is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the value
and enjoyment of his property,- and
(b) any person who can demonstrate a history of substantial
use ofpublic resources in the area directly affected by the

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 demonstrate that the request for
the hearing is not frivolous [N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b)(3)].
(Please summarise the evidence or arguments you will Present at a
hearing in support of your appeal.)
Based on the attached responses to the above factors, the ndersigned hereby requests a third
party hearing.
Date Signature of Petitioner or Attorney
./O#iN RllzyOAI �y
Name of Petitioner or Attorney
Rd AX-90
Address
1WWA1l,C-D Ve PY�7/
City State Zip
Telephone Number
NOTES: This request must be served on the Director, Division of Coastal Management, at
the address shown on the attached Certificate of Service Form, within twenty (20)
days of the disputed permit decision. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-,121.1(b)...Failure to
do so constitutes waiver of the right to request a hearing. A copy should also be
sent to the Attorney General's Office, Environmental Division, at the addresses
shown on the attached Certificate 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 (20) days
of receipt of the Chairman's Order. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b).
Denial of a Third Party Hearing Request is a final agency decision which may be
appealed to the Superior Court in the county where the property is located under
N.C. Gen. Stat. § 113A-121.1(b) and Chapter 150B, Article 4.

CERTIFICATE 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 personally delivering copies to the named
agencies.
Original served on: Director
Division of Coastal Management
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1638
and a copy served on: Attorney General's Office
Environmental Division
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh,NC 27602-0629
This the Yday of
Signature of lititioner or Attorney
EP/30540/wp
.Updated:July 14, 1999

FPermi�t Class Permit Numbei
52-03
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
a Excavation and/or filling pursuant to NCGS 113-229
Issued to Washington and Baum Marina, c/o John Dixon, PO Box 1327, Nags Head, NC 27959
Authorizing development in Dare County at canal adi. Roanoke Sound and Washington
Baum Bridge, Roanoke Island as requested in the permittee's application dated 10/10/02, including
attached workplan drawing (1) dated revised 2/14/03
This permit, issued on April 14, 2003 , is subject to compliance with the application (where consisten
with the permit),all applicable regulations, special conditions and notes set forth below. Any violation of these terms ma,
be subject to fines, imprisonment or civil action; or may cause the permit to be null and void.
Marina Facilitv
1) The marina facility will display a sign showing the location of the nearest pumpout facility, including
other appropriate waste disposal information, at the entrance and exit from the main pier(s).
,
2) No sewage, whether treated or untreated, shall be discharged at any time from any boats using the
marina facility. Any sewage discharge at the marina facility shall be-Qonsidered a violation of this
permit for which the permittee is responsible. This prohibition shall be applied.and enforced throughout
the entire existence of the permitted facility.
(See attached sheets for Additional Conditions)
This permit action may be appealed by the permittee or Signed by the authority of the Secretary of DENR and the
other qualified persons within twenty (20) days of the issuing Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission.
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 L�Vhna
41D)
personnel when the project is inspected for compliance.
Any maintenance work or project modification notcovered Moffitt, Director
hereunder requires further Division approval. Division of Coastal Management
All work must cease when the permit expires on This permit and its conditions are hereby accepted.
December 31, 2006
in issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees
that your project is consistent with the North Carolina Coastal

(1) The decision is contrary to rule 15A NCAC 211 .0502(f) which requires
that the owner must sign the application. Neither Mr. Dixon nor his
designee has the right to apply for a permit on property owned by
Building Resources, Inc. and or others. (See Dixon deed book 1425,
page 425; exception (5), page 2.
The decision is contrary to a policy, and perhaps a rule, requiring that
CAMA not issue a permit in violation of water quality standards. In
a letter dated April 14, 2003 from John Dorney representing the
Division of Water Quality, he states "that application is on hold
pending completion of a Marine Use Attainability Analysis for marinas
in SA waters required by DWQ".
CAMA issued a permit on April 14, 2003 without a 401 Water Quality
Certification. CAMA issued this same permit while having on file
duly recorded deeds and plats certified by a licensed surveyor stating
that the owner of portions of the property are owned by someone other
than the applicant.

(2) (a) The petitioner is directly affected by the decision since the pen-nit
was granted to Mr. Dixon to develop land owned by others. Indeed
this will have a significant adverse impact on the value and enjoyment
of the petitioner's property.
(b) There is a more than 75-year history of substantial use of public
resources (le., the ditch bank canal) in the area affected by the
proposed development. These public trust waters have been used
continuously since the canal was dug more than 75 years ago by
watennen to moor their boats. Docks and mooring pilings were
present when CAMA was enacted. Because they pre-exist CAMA
they were grand fathered and have been maintained, repaired and
replaced as necessary without interference from CAMA.

(3) Petitioner and the general public have substantial rights to the public
resources in the area of the permit. The petitioner and other plaintiffs
have on their behalf and on behalf of the general public filed a
complaint in the General Court of Justice, Superior Court
Division, County of Dare asking for prescriptive title to the property
and a prescriptive easement.
Until ownership is resolved, a 401 Water Quality Certification is
granted and a Marine Use Attainability Analysis is submitted, the
petitioner respectfully requests that the CAMA permit issued on
April 14, 2003 be rescinded or that the chairman of the Coastal
Resources Commission grant the petitioner a hearing.

NORTH CAROLINA IN THE GENERAL, COURT OF JUSTICE
COUNTY OF DARE SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
File #03-CVS-
BUILDING RESOURCES, INC.; JOHN F.
WILSON, JR.; JOI-IN F. WILSON, IV; F.
THOMSON PETERS; ANDREW
DABNEY McCANN; THOMAS H.
NIXON; MARSHALL SANDERLIN;
TIM REBER; GARY TREW, MILES
CREEF; MURPHY CREEF; DOSSEY
PRUDEN and BINKY JONES,
Plaintiffs
V. COMPLAINT
JOHN W. "SKIP" DIXON,
Defendant
Plaintiffs, complaining of defendant, John W. "Skip"Dixon, aver and say:
I. Plaintiff, Building Resources, Inc. is a North Carolina corporation with principal
and registered office located in Dare County, N.C. and Plaintiffs, John F. Wilson, Jr., John F.
Wilson, IV, Andrew Dabney McCann, Thomas H. Nixon, Marshall Sanderlin, Tim Reber, Gary
Trew,-Miles Creef, Murphy Creef, Dossey Pruden, and Binky Jones are citizens and residents of
Dare County, N.C.
2: Plaintiff, F. Thomson Peters is a citizen and resident of Pasquotank County, N.C.
3. Defendant, John W. "Skip" Dixon (hereinafter "Dixon") is a citizen and resident
of Dare County, N.C.
4. On or about November 1, 2002 Dixon, by and through his attorney, demanded
1

€ Of\NATF9 Dy(aI (S-�(']
�l Michael F.Easley,Governor
William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary .
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
O Alan W. Klimek,P.E.,Director
Division of Water Quality
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
March 20, 2003
MAR 2 4 2003
Mr. John W. Dixon DiV.OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
PO Box 1327 RALEI7114
Nags Head, NC 27959
Subject: Stormwater Permit No. SW7021210
CAMA Major for Washington
and Baum Marina
General Stormwater Permit
Dare County
Dear Mr. Dixon:
The Washington Regional Office received your Stormwater
Application and supporting information for the subject project on
March 7, 2003 . Staff review of the plans and specifications has
determined that the project, as proposed, will comply with the
Stormwater Regulations set forth in Title 15A NCAC 2H. 1000. We are
forwarding Permit No. SW7021210 dated March 20, 2003 to Mr. John W.
Dixon.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until
rescinded and shall be subject to the conditions and limitations as
specified therein. Any future development at this site will
require an additional Stormwater review and a permit for any
Stormwater control measures deemed appropriate.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this
permit are unacceptable, you have the right to request an
adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days
following receipt of this permit. This request must be in the form
of a written petition, conforming to Chapter 150B of the North
Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Drawer 27447, Raleigh, NC 27611-7447 .
Unless such demands are made this permit shall be final and
binding.
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington,N.C.27889
Telephone[phone] FAX[phone]

1
Mr. John W. Dixon
March 20, 2003
Page Two
If you have any questions, or need additional information
concerning this matter, please contact Bill Moore at (252) 946-
6481, extension, 264 .
Sincerely,
Jim Mu11ig
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
Washington Regional Office
cc: ✓Doug Huggett, DCM, Raleigh
Quible & Associates
Dare County Planning Dept
Washington Regional Office
Central Files

e
State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW7021210
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
STATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT
GENERAL PERMIT
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143,
General Statutes of North Carolina as amended, and other applicable
Laws, Rules and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
Mr. John W. Dixon
Dare County
FOR THE
construction, operation and maintenance of stormwater management
systems in compliance with the provisions of 15A NCAC 2H. 1000
(hereafter referred to as the "stormwater rules") and the approved
stormwater management plans and specifications, and other
supporting data as attached and on file with and approved by the
Division of Water Quality and considered a part of this permit for
a vegetated buffer to serve the Washington and Baum Marina located
near Manteo, NC.
The Permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until
rescinded and shall be subject to the following specific conditions
and limitations .
I . DESIGN STANDARDS
1 . This project involves the construction of a wooden
bulkhead, slotted concrete docks and 33 boat slips . A
narrow vegetated buffer exist between an existing asphalt
road and the proposed bulkhead/dock alignment . The site
plan shows no built-upon area for the remaining high
ground portion of the site.
2 . Approved plans and specifications for projects covered by
this permit are incorporated by reference and are
enforceable parts of the permit.
3 . No stormwater piping in addition to the existing piping
shall be allowed except:
3

a. That minimum amount necessary to direct runoff
beneath an impervious surface such as a road.
b. That minimum amount needed under driveways to
provide access to lots .
II . SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE
1 . Grasslined swales, vegetated buffers and other Best
Management Practices used for stormwater runoff control
shall be adequately maintained throughout the life of the
project.
2 . The permittee shall at all times provide adequate erosion
control measures in conformance with the approved Erosion
Control Plan.
3 . The permittee shall submit all information requested by
the Director or his representative within the time frame
specified in the written information request.
III. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1 . Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations
contained in this permit may subject the Permittee to an
enforcement action by the Division of water Quality, in
accordance with North Carolina General Statutes 143-
215 . 6A to 143 .215. 6C.
2 . The permit may be modified, revoked or terminated for
cause . The filing of a request for a permit
modification, or termination does not void any permit
condition.
3 . The issuance of this permit does not prohibit the
Director from reopening and modifying laws, rules, and
regulations contained in Title 15A of the North Carolina
Administrative Code, Subchapter 2H. 1000; and North
Carolina General Statute 143-215. 1 et. al .
4 . The following items will require a modification to the
permit:
a. Any revision to the approved plans, regardless of
size
b. Project name change
C. Change of ownership
d. Redesign or addition to the approved amount of
built-upon area.
e. Further subdivision of the project area
4

f. In addition, the Director may determine that other
revisions to the project should require a
modification to the permit .
5. For any additions or modifications of the previously
permitted built-upon area, the permittee shall submit to
the Director revised plans and specifications and shall
receive approval prior to construction.
6 . The Director may notify the permittee when the permitted
site does not meet one or more of the minimum
requirements of the permit. Within the time frame
specified in the notice, the permittee shall submit a
written time schedule to the Director for modifying the
site to meet minimum requirements . The permittee shall
provide copies of revised plans and certification in
writing to the Director that the changes have been made.
7 . The permit is not transferable to any person except after
notice to and approval by the Director. The Director may
require modification or revocation and reissuance of the
permit to change the name and incorporate such other
requirements as may be necessary. A formal permit
request must be submitted to the Division of Water
Quality accompanied by the appropriate fee, documentation
from both parties involved, and other supporting
materials as may be appropriate . The approval of this
request will be considered on its merits, and may or may
not be approved.
8 . The issuance of this permit does not preclude the
Permittee from complying with any and all statutes,
rules, regulations, or ordinances which may be imposed by
other government agencies (local, state and federal)
which have jurisdiction.
Permit issued this the 20 th day of March, 2003 .
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. , Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Permit Number SW7021210
5

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Marine Fisheries Preston P. Pate Jr,, Director
William G, Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Doug Huggett, DCM Major Permits Processing Coordinator
THROUGH: Mike Street, Chief Habitat Section
FROM: Sara E. Winslow, Northern District Manager
SUBJECT: Washington-Baum Marina Project
DATE: February 26, 2003
On February 7, 2003, I met with Mr. John Dixon and Mr. Joe Lassiter, Quible
& Associates, to discuss the Division of Marine Fisheries comments and concerns with
the proposed Washington-Baum Marina project.
The dredging proposed for this project is limited to the footprint of the proposed
slips. The dredging width will be — 10 ft. wide, with an excavation depth of 1.5 ft.
This will provide --3.5 ft. of water under the centerline of the boats at NWL for a
depth not to exceed 5 ft. If a turbidity curtain is utilized during excavation this agency
will not request a dredging moratorium. The turbidity curtain must remain in place
until sediments have settled out of the water column.
The coastal wetlands on the southside of the canal are not owned by the State.
Approximately 20-40 ft. of the wetlands are owned by Mr. Dixon. This agency had
expressed concern with the marsh sloughing off due to increased boat traffic. Mr.
Dixon will post the canal with NO WAKE signs. He stated, he would monitor the
coastal wetlands and if erosion was observed he would look at measures to control,
including a vertical breakwater. In the future if this becomes necessary this agency
would recommend a low water breakwater to ensure adequate water exchange between
the wetlands and receiving waters.
3441 Arendell Street, P.O. Box 769, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www,ncdmf.net

This agency expressed concern with the size vessels (25-30 ft.) that may utilize
this marina and routinely have head facilities on board. Mr. Dixon stated he would
accept conditions in the Major CAMA Permit that limits boats to a maximumv?,Wft.
in;length, with no heads onboard and no live aboards within the marina. This agency
supports this condition.
To reduce the impervious surface the applicant has eliminated the paved parking
along the canal. Unimproved parking has been provided to boats utilizing the canal for
over 50 years. The applicant will continue this policy with the new marina. This
agency still feels that traffic congestion in the area will be a problem considering this
marina and the existing WRC Boat Ramp facility.
Mr. Dixon provided aerial photography from the 1960s to the early 1990s which
showed 15 to 25 boats moored in this canal. A commercial marina with fuel docks,
boat sales and service and leased slips operated out of this canal for years prior to the
Washington-Baum Bridge being constructed. Prior to the commercial marina facility
the canal was used to moor boats operating out of the Oregon Inlet Fleet. The
proposed marina does seem to be a continuation of the historic use of this canal. This
agency still feels that the proposed marina and the existing WRC facility will cause
navigation problems.
The title dispute issues raised will be resolved by Mr. Dixon's attorneys and the
NC Attorney General's Office.
In summary, the Division removes its objection to the proposed project provided
that the commitments Mr. Dixon has made are incorporated in the DCM Major Permit.

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
MEMORANDUM RECOVEL
JAN 1 9 2003
TO: Doug Huggett, Major Permits Coordinator, DCM L-AV.OF COASTALMANAGEMENT
FROM: Ted Sampson, District Manager, DCM
DATE: January 8, 2003
SUBJECT: John W. Dixon, Washington Baum Marina Major Permit Application
Recommendations
REFERENCE: (a) Frank Jennings Memo to Doug Huggett; same subject and date
1. I basically concur with the recommendations of Reference (a). This development proposal
would formalize the utilization of this property as a marina, a use that has informally
occurred for many years through both occasional and long-term use by various private
individuals or entities.
2. However, the major concern over the issuance of this permit relates to this prior use of this
area by others for the mooring/docking of their vessels, and any rights to title to the property
that they may have acquired. Questions also exist with respect to public trust rights within
this area. The title of the applicant to this property has an exception within it that specifically
reserves the rights of others in and to the use of any portion of the property located below the
mean high water mark and deemed public trust waters.
3. In that the question of determining title to contested property ownership is outside of the
purview of the Division of Coastal Management, and reserved to the Courts of North
Carolina, it seems that the issuance of the permit may be appropriate, with condition #20
recommended by Reference (a); i.e., the voiding of the permit if claims or disputes of title are
found to be valid. However, for one portion of the property that Mr. Dixon is seeking to
develop, we have pending another application by Mr. John F. Wilson IV to develop the
property in a different way with a pier and a bulkhead. Would we then be obligated to grant
that permit with a similar exception and, in effect, issue two permits for the same property to
be developed in different ways?
4. While we have received a copy of the Title to the property, by which Mr. Dixon claims
ownership, and additional supporting material from his attorney Mr. Charlie Aycock, and an
opinion of title by a North Carolina licensed attorney, Linda H. McCown, none of this
appears to validate any grant of title to Mr. Dixon for the property claimed by Mr. Wilson.
1367 U.S. 17 South, Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled 110%Post Consumer Paper

5. While the supporting data do shed doubt onto the legitimacy of Mr. Wilson's claim, Mr.
Dixon's title specifically excepts the claim in the deed book #1365, Page 328 and 329, Dare
County Registry, which is the portion of the property claimed by Mr. Wilson.
6. In the case of Mr. Dixon's application, it does not appear that the Division of Coastal
Management is determining rightful title to contested ownership, but rather judging whether
to issue a permit for development on property for which Mr. Dixon's own evidence of title
indicates that he does not own. In this case, issuance of the permit as recommended in
Reference (a) does not seem appropriate, unless the permit was conditioned to exclude
development on that portion of the property registered in the deed book as an exception to his
title.
7. An alternative approach of placing this application on hold, until such time as the issue of
title has been resolved by the NC courts, may be preferable. In that Mr. Dixon's application
with respect to the title of this portion of the property has been found to be both incomplete
and inaccurate, placing it on hold is a legitimate option. This option becomes more attractive
based on additional information that was received this week on January 7, 2003. We have
received letters from three separate individuals who claim rights to portions of the property
adjoining the canal by reason of prior use or occupation, as provided for in Exception #5 to
Mr. Dixon's title. These letters, from Faison Thomson Peters, Thomas Herman Nixon, and
Andrew Dabney McCann, do not reference any particular portion of the property that Mr.
Dixon seeks to develop, and granting the permit request with the exception of these areas is
therefore not an option. Until such time as additional information is provided that clarifies
the location and legitimacy of these claims, it appears that there now exists three additional
areas of this property to which Mr. Dixon's deed does not apply.
8. Exception #3 to Mr. Dixon's title states, "Rights of others in and to the use of any portion of
the subject property located below the mean high water mark and deemed public trust waters
by the State of North Carolina or any court of competent jurisdiction." While this exception
to title is somewhat troubling, given the traditional past use of this area as a harbor of refuge
during storm conditions in this area, this "public trust use" is really no different than any
other area where marinas are developed over public trust waters. It does focus attention on
the issue of whether the proposed marina "...significantly interferes with the public right of
navigation or other public trust rights which the public may be found to have in these
areas..." (15A NCAC 07H.0207(d)) If such interference is deemed to occur, then the
development of the marina would be acceptable only if it provided overriding public benefit.
This paragraph goes on to indicate that marinas may be acceptable if they would not be
detrimental to the public trust rights. Since this area has functioned informally as a marina,
with a large number of vessels tying up along this shoreline, I do not believe that its formal
development as a marina would pose any significantly greater restrictions upon public trust
rights, even during storm conditions.
9. I recommend that this permit application be placed on hold until such time as it is modified
by the applicant to seek development only upon the property to which the applicant has been
granted title by the deed, or until such time as ownership along this shoreline has been
resolved by a NC court of competent jurisdiction, and that court decision is provided as
supplemental application information.

5. While the supporting data do shed doubt onto the legitimacy of Mr. Wilson's claim, Mr.
Dixon's title specifically excepts the claim in the deed book #1365, Page 328 and 329, Dare
County Registry, which is the portion of the property claimed by Mr. Wilson.
6. In the case of Mr. Dixon's application, it does not appear that the Division of Coastal
Management is determining rightful title to contested ownership, but rather judging whether
to issue a permit for development on property for which Mr. Dixon's own evidence of title
indicates that he does not own. In this case, issuance of the permit as recommended in
Reference (a) does not seem appropriate, unless the permit was conditioned to exclude
development on that portion of the property registered in the deed book as an exception to his
title.
7. An alternative approach of placing this application on hold, until such time as the issue of
title has been resolved by the NC courts, may be preferable. In that Mr. Dixon's application
with respect to the title of this portion of the property has been found to be both incomplete
and inaccurate, placing it on hold is a legitimate option. This option becomes more attractive
based on additional information that was received this week on January 7, 2003. We have
received letters from three separate individuals who claim rights to portions of the property
adjoining the canal by reason of prior use or occupation, as provided for in Exception #5 to
Mr. Dixon's title. These letters, from Faison Thomson Peters, Thomas Herman Nixon, and
Andrew Dabney McCann, do not reference any particular portion of the property that Mr.
Dixon seeks to develop, and granting the permit request with the exception of these areas is
therefore not an option. Until such time as additional information is provided that clarifies
the location and legitimacy of these claims, it appears that there now exists three additional
areas of this property to which Mr. Dixon's deed does not apply.
8. Exception #3 to Mr. Dixon's title states, "Rights of others in and to the use of any portion of
the subject property located below the mean high water mark and deemed public trust waters
by the State of North Carolina or any court of competent jurisdiction." While this exception
to title is somewhat troubling, given the traditional past use of this area as a harbor of refuge
during storm conditions in this area, this "public trust use" is really no different than any
other area where marinas are developed over public trust waters. It does focus attention on
the issue of whether the proposed marina "—significantly interferes with the public right of
navigation or other public trust rights which the public may be found to have in these
areas..." (15A NCAC 07H.0207(d)) If such interference is deemed to occur, then the
development of the marina would be acceptable only if it provided overriding public benefit.
This paragraph goes on to indicate that marinas may be acceptable if they would not be
detrimental to the public trust rights. Since this area has functioned informally as a marina,
with a large number of vessels tying up along this shoreline, I do not believe that its formal
development as a marina would pose any significantly greater restrictions upon public trust
rights, even during storm conditions.
9. I recommend that this permit application be placed on hold until such time as it is modified
by the applicant to seek development only upon the property to which the applicant has been
granted title by the deed, or until such time as ownership along this shoreline has been
resolved by a NC court of competent jurisdiction, and that court decision is provided as
supplemental application information.

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
MEMORANDUM:
kL
I A N i `r 2003
TO: Doug Huggett, Major Permits Coordinator, DCM « (1F00ASYALm!1NAGO" " `
THROUGH: Ted Sampson, District Manager, DCM
FROM: Frank A. Jennings, III, Coastal Management Representative
SUBJECT: John W. Dixon, Washington Baum Marina Major Permit Application
Recommendations
DATE: January 2, 2003
The applicant proposes to construct a 33 slip marina on his property along an
existing canal bank at the foot of Washington Baum Bridge US 64/264, Town of Manteo,
Dare County. The applicant bought the property from the Town of Manteo after it was
declared surplus by the Town Board of Commissioners. Much discussion and
correspondence has occurred regarding ownership issues involved with this property.
The applicant has provided a deed with his permit application which is required by
07J.0204(b). Therefore, this document will not further address ownership issues.
The development proposal for the marina (bulkhead, backfill and docks) appears
consistent with 07H.0208 Use Standards for Coastal Wetlands, Public Trust Waters, and
Estuarine Waters; however, the paved parking in the "buffer" area, within 30 ft. of
normal water level, is inconsistent with 07H.0209.
It is recommended that the permit be authorized with the following conditions:
1. The paved parking spaces are not authorized.
il� 2. Excavation will be conducted below the normal water level.
v 3. Excavation will not exceed -5 feet below the normal water level.
4. The bulkhead will not extend more than a 10 ft. waterward of normal water level
at any point along its alignment at the time of construction.
1367 U.S. 17 South, Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: http://dcrn2.enr,state.nc.us
An Equal opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled 110%Post consumer Paper

Doug Huggett
January 2, 2003
Page Two
5. The alignment of the proposed bulkhead must be staked by a representative of the
Division of Coastal Management (DCM) within a maximum of thirty (30) days
prior to the start of construction. Failure to initiate construction within thirty (30)
days, or erosion of the shoreline by adverse weather conditions, will require the
alignment to be re-staked by DCM within a maximum of thirty (30) days prior to
the new expected start of construction.
6. The bulkhead must be constructed prior to any backfilling activities.
7. The bulkhead must be structurally tight so as to prevent seepage of backfill
materials through the structure.
8. The bulkhead must be solid and constructed of treated wood, concrete slabs, metal
sheet piles, or other suitable materials approved by Department personnel. No
excavation is permitted, except for that which may be required for the
construction of the bulkhead wall, riprap, deadmen cables, etc.
9. The fill material will be clean and free of any pollutants, except in trace
quantities. Metal products, organic materials, or unsightly debris will not be used.
10. All fill material to be placed below normal water level will be confined behind the
permitted bulkhead.
11. The temporary placement or double-handling of excavated or fill materials within
waters or vegetated wetlands is not authorized.
12. No excavated or fill material will be placed at any time, in any marsh or
surrounding waters, outside of the alignment of the fill area indicated on the
workplat(s).
13. All excavated materials will be confined above mean high water and landward of
regularly or irregularly flooded marsh behind adequate dikes or other retaining
structures to prevent spill-over of solids into any marsh or surrounding waters.
14. The marina will display a sign showing the location of the nearest pumpout
facility, including other appropriate waste disposal information, at the entrance
and exit from the main pier(s).

Doug Huggett
January 2, 2003
Page Two
5. The alignment of the proposed bulkhead must be staked by a representative of the
Division of Coastal Management (DCM) within a maximum of thirty (30) days
prior to the start of construction. Failure to initiate construction within thirty (30)
days, or erosion of the shoreline by adverse weather conditions, will require the
alignment to be re-staked by DCM within a maximum of thirty (30) days prior to
the new expected start of construction.
6. The bulkhead must be constructed prior to any backfilling activities.
7. The bulkhead must be structurally tight so as to prevent seepage of backfill
materials through the structure.
8. The bulkhead must be solid and constructed of treated wood, concrete slabs,metal
sheet piles, or other suitable materials approved by Department personnel. No
excavation is permitted, except for that which may be required for the
construction of the bulkhead wall, riprap, deadmen cables, etc.
9. The fill material will be clean and free of any pollutants, except in trace
quantities. Metal products, organic materials, or unsightly debris will not be used.
10. All fill material to be placed below normal water level will be confined behind the
permitted bulkhead.
11. The temporary placement or double-handling of excavated or fill materials within
waters or vegetated wetlands is not authorized.
12. No excavated or fill material will be placed at any time, in any marsh or
surrounding waters, outside of the alignment of the fill area indicated on the
workplat(s).
13. All excavated materials will be confined above mean high water and landward of
regularly or irregularly flooded marsh behind adequate dikes or other retaining
structures to prevent spill-over of solids into any marsh or surrounding waters.
14. The marina will display a sign showing the location of the nearest pumpout
facility, including other appropriate waste disposal information, at the entrance
and exit from the main pier(s).

Doug Huggett
January 2, 2003
Page Three
15. No sewage, whether treated or untreated, shall be discharged at any time from
boats using the marina. Any sewage discharge at the marina shall be considered a
violation of this pen-nit for which the permittee is responsible. This prohibition
shall be applied and enforced throughout the entire existence of the pennitted
structure.
16. This permit authorizes only the docks, piers, and other structures and uses located
in or over the water that are expressly and specifically set forth in the permit
application. No other strictures, whether floating or stationary, may become a
permanent part of this marina without permit modification. No non-water
dependent uses of structures may be conducted on, in, or over public trust waters
without permit modification.
17. No attempt will be made by the pennittee to prevent the full and free use by the
public of all navigable waters at or adjacent to the authorized work.
18. The authorized structure and associated activity must not cause an unacceptable
interference with navigation.
19. This permit does not authorize the interference with any existing or proposed
Federal project, and, the permittee will not be entitled to compensation for
damage to the authorized structure or work, or injury which may be caused from
existing or future operations undertaken by the United States in the public
interest.
20. This permit authorizes work only on the applicant's property. Should any claims
or disputes of title be found to be valid, this permit will be voided.

r + /
s
® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Charles R.Fullwood,Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Doug Huggett, Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
FROM: Richard B. Hamilton � d IJ. N ►�fiyt
Chief Deputy Director
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
DATE: December 19, 2002
SUBJECT: CAMA Permit Application for John W. Dixon, Washington Baum Marina, Dare
County,North Carolina.
Staff with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission(NCWRC)reviewed the
permit application with regard to associated impacts on fish and wildlife resources. A visit of the
project site was conducted on December 12, 2002. Our comments are provided in accordance
with provisions of the Coastal Area Management Act(G.S. 113A-100 through 113A-128), as
amended, and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act(48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661
et seq.).
The applicant proposes construction of the Washington Baum Marina along a manmade
canal near Manteo,North Carolina. This canal parallels the south side of US Highway 64/264
and an access road to the adjoining Wildlife Boat Access on Roanoke Sound. To the south of the
canal is a large salt marsh that adjoins Broad Creek and is owned by the State of North Carolina.
The proposed marina includes: (1) 33 boat slips measuring 32' long by 8-10' wide, (2) a 1064'
bulkhead with a landward-oriented dock, (3) 17 paved parking spaces, and(4) a 4' by 526'
floating dock along existing bulkhead and public access area. Also proposed is excavation of a
1064' by 10' area of canal to a depth of—5'. The proposed project would impact a total of
12,644 ft2 of Public Trust Area and Coastal Wetlands and approximately 12,200 ft2 of Public
Trust Shoreline.
The project as proposed will impact wildlife resources by degrading the marsh and
shallow water habitats along the canal. These habitats support a variety of wildlife species such
as blue heron(Ardea herodias) and sora rail (Porzana carolina). Moreover,the northern
diamondback terrapin(Malaclemys terrapin terrapin) and black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis),
which are listed as Special Concern and Significantly Rare species, respectively,have been
observed in this marsh. Water exchange between the canal and Roanoke Sound is limited
because the canal is relatively narrow and long. Consequently,petroleum, cleaning products,
and other pollutants that are spilled by marina patrons and accumulate in the waters and
sediments of the canal will have a negative impact on these resources. The proposed excavation
may exacerbate this pollution and degrade water quality if the final project depths exceed the
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center• Raleigh,NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] ext.281 • Fax: [phone]

y
CAMA—Dixon Page 2 December 19, 2002
existing water depths in Roanoke Sound near the opening of the canal. The rate of these impacts
could not be assessed from the information provided in the application. If permitted, marina
operations will contribute to pollution that has documented impacts on aquatic organisms and the
wildlife that prey on these organisms.
Increased and concentrated boat traffic in the canal would further affect wildlife
resources. Based on the number of vessels and docks observed in the canal during the site visit,
current boat activity is far less than that anticipated for a commercial 33-slip marina. Although
the proposed slips may conform to setback requirements, since the canal is only 32' to 55' wide,
congested boat traffic will likely cause collisions with the bottom and prop washing along the
southern region of the canal. The cumulative effect of these events will be erosion of the marsh
shoreline, a degraded bottom community, and elevated turbidity.
In addition to impacts on wildlife resources, the NCWRC is concerned about conflicts
between marina operations and public use of the Washington Baum Bridge Wildlife Boat Access
area. During certain periods, boaters and shore-bound fisherman heavily use the public boat
ramp, and fishing piers. The NCWRC points out to the applicant the proposed floating dock,
which would effectively block access to the canal from the shore and vice versa, will be a public
dock because it is attached to state property and afloat on public trust waters. The proposed
onsite spoil disposal area, proposed marina parking, and traffic congestion on the access road
will also inhibit unobstructed access to the Wildlife Boat Access.
While the NCWRC does not officially object to issuance of a permit for the project, we
do ask that our concerns be addressed in the final plans. We appreciate the opportunity to review
and comment on this project. If you need further assistance or additional information,please
contact Shannon Deaton at(919) 733-3633.
cc: The Honorable Ray White—NCWRC District 1 Commissioner
ec: NCWRC—Myers, G.
NCWRC - Thomas, C.

r
EST
OF rtiF United States Department of the Interior
Q P /yT
y o FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
"'CH 3 �e'9 Raleigh,North Carolina 27636-3726 FMCEIVEC
December 18, 2002 DEC 3 0 2002
oW.OFOO�AL�AGOW
Mr. Raleigh W. Bland
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Washington Regulatory Field Office
P. O. Box 1000
Washington,North Carolina 27889-1000
Subject: Action ID# 200310138, Washington Baum Marina, Dare County,North Carolina
Dear Mr. Bland:
This letter provides comments of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service on the Public Notice(PN)
for the subject project. The applicant, John W. Dixon for the Washington Baum Marina,has
submitted an application for processing under the Coastal Area Management Act(CAMA)-Corps
permit processing agreement. These comments are submitted in accordance with the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act(48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d) and Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act(ESA) of 1973, as amended(16 U.S.C. 1531-1543). They are to be
used in your determination of compliance with 404(b)(1) guidelines (40 CFR 230) and in your
public interest review(33 CFR 320.4) as they relate to protection of fish and wildlife resources.
The applicant proposes to convert the north side of a dredged canal from the disorderly moorings
presently along the canal to a 33-slip marina facility. The canal is on the south side of the US
64/264 highway and adjacent to the Washington Baum Bridge over Roanoke Sound. The canal
connects to Roanoke Sound. The work would involve dredging a 0.24-acre area of public
trust/estuarine water(in the canal), and the fill of a 0.21-acre area of vegetated wetlands (a
coastal fringe marsh),non-vegetated wetlands, and open water. A 0.18-acre area of public trust
shoreline and estuarine waters would be affected by shading of the proposed dock. The proposed
bulkhead would average no more than two feet waterward of the normal water level in the canal.
Since the project would continue the existing use of the canal as a docking/mooring location,
there is no need for additional detailed discussion of project purpose and need or an analysis of
alternatives. However, in regard to maintaining the fish and wildlife habitat provided by coastal
marsh in the project area, the Service recommends that marsh within the property that would not
be impacted by the marina be protected by a conservation easement. It is unclear how much
marsh could be protected. The PN states that the deeded acreage of the property is 3.14 acres,
but the total"land"area is 1.48 acres. Land area may refer to uplands or include the area that is
not open water which would include both uplands and wetlands. We believe that the those areas
of the property that are not open water were historical coastal marsh and that an excellent
opportunity exists to preserve marsh habitat not affected by the proposed work.

The Service has reviewed available information on federally threatened or endangered species
known to occur in Dare County. We have also reviewed information from the North Carolina
Natural Heritage Program(NCNHP) database on the reported occurrence of these species in the
project area. The NCNHP database shows that the federally endangered West Indian manatee
(Trichechus manatus)has been reported in the waters near the mouth of Broad Creek, southeast
of Roanoke Island. Schwartz(1995)reports several documented occurrences of the manatee in
the coastal waters of Dare County.
Manatees are seasonal transients in North Carolina,primarily from June through October. They
are aquatic mammals which may use freshwater,brackish, or marine habitats. The species can
move freely between salinity extremes. The species may be found in shallow coastal waters,
bays, lagoons, estuaries,rivers, and inland lakes. Manatees are commonly found in water three
to seven feet deep. Manatees spend much of their time underwater or partly submerged, and this
behavior often makes the species difficult to detect. These mobile animals may not inhabit a
given area for extended periods, and manatees may move into a given project site where the
species has never been reported previously. Therefore,the areas that may contain manatees
cannot be determined by visual surveys that are satisfactory for less mobile, year-round species.
To adequately protect this endangered species,reasonable precautions must be implemented in
areas that could be used by manatees during the warmer months of June through October.
The canal along which the project would be constructed could be used by the manatee. Current
water depths range from-2.2 feet to -6.4 feet of the normal water level (NWL). The applicant
proposes to remove sunken and abandoned debris and excavate the bottom of the canal to a depth
of-5.5 feet. The excavation would impact an area 1,064 feet long by 10 feet wide. Such work
could injure or kill any manatee in the canal.
To address the issue of construction activities in water that could be used by the manatee,the
Service recommends that work be conducted during the seven-month period from November 1 to
May 31. Manatees are unlikely to be in the project area during this period.
As an alternative to a seasonal work moratorium, the Service developed guidelines, entitled
"Precautions for General Construction in Areas Which May Be Used by the West Indian
Manatee in North Carolina,"for activities that do not include the use of explosives. A copy of
these guidelines (updated in June 2002) is attached. These guidelines are applicable for work
only during the months of June through October. These guidelines address all types of in-water
construction, except blasting, and should produce little, if any, additional expense. The
guidelines are intended mainly to ensure that construction personnel are informed that manatees
may occur in the work area, that work should cease if a manatee approaches the work area,work
should not resume until the manatee leaves the work area, and procedures for reporting the death
or injury of a manatee. The PN notes that a sediment curtain would be placed across the mouth
of the canal during the periods of excavation. If dredging occurs during the June through
October period, the applicant must ensure that the curtain does not pose a hazard to manatees
(see precaution 8). In regard to precaution 8, the Service would not consider the canal to be
essential habitat for manatees in North Carolina, so manatee access to the canal during
construction is not required.

r
1
With the inclusion of the seasonal work moratorium or the construction precautions as a permit
condition,we believe the project described in the PN is not likely to adversely affect the
manatee. With such a condition,we believe that the Corps' requirements under Section 7(a)(2)
of the ESA would be satisfied. We remind you that obligations under Section 7 consultation
must be reconsidered if. (1)new information reveals impacts of this identified action that may
affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered; (2)this action is
subsequently modified in a manner that was not considered in this review; or, (3) a new species
is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this permit application. Please advise us
of any action taken by the Wilmington Corps District. If you have questions regarding these
comments,please contact Howard Hall at 919-856-4520(Ext. 27) or by e-mail at
howard hallQqfws.gov.
Sincerely,
Garland B. Pardue, Ph.D.
Ecological Services Supervisor
Literature cited:
Schwartz, F. J. 1995. Florida manatees, Trichechus manatus (Sirenia: Trichechidae), in North
Carolina 1919-1994. Brimleyana 22: 53-60.
Attachment
cc: (without attachment)
Kathy Matthews,US EPA,Athens, GA
4 Doug Huggett,NC Division of Coastal Management,Raleigh,NC
David McHenry,NC Wildlife Resources Commission,Washington,NC
Mr. John Dorney,NC Division of Water Quality,Raleigh,NC

r
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
/ WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
Washington Regulatory Field Office
P.O.Box 1000
Washington,North Carolina 27889-1000
IN REPLY REFER TO December 3, 2002
Regulatory Division
Action ID No. 200310138
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Dear Mr. Dorney:
Please reference the application olfthn W. Dixon for Department of the Army(DA)
authorization and a State Water Quality Certification to develop a 33-slip marina,on property
located off US Highway 64/264, adjacent to the Roanoke Sound, on Roanoke Island, Dare
County, North Carolina. Your receipt of this letter verifies your acceptance of a valid request
for certification in accordance with Section 325.2(b)(ii) of our administrative regulations.
We are considering authorizing the proposed activity pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act, and we have determined that a water quality certification is required under the
provisions of Section 401 of the same law. A Department of the Army permit will not be
granted until the certification has been obtained or waived.
In accordance with our administrative regulations,in most cases,60 days after receipt
of a request for certification is a reasonable time for State action. Therefore,if you have
not acted on the request,or asked for an extension of time,by February 4,2003,the
District Engineer will deem that waiver has occurred.
rCO�`STA� NGE
r

1
-2-
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Raleigh Bland,Washington Regulatory
Field Office; Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone], extension 23.
Sincerely,
4&4,
Raleigh Bland, P.W.S.
Regulatory Project Manager
Copies Furnished:
Mr. oug Huggett
Di ision of Coastal Management
/o,'rth Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
CA ei 114
DEC 0 9 2441
OFC pAqgC
fin,►C_'Yn

l U
`� DEC 19 `z002
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor Division of Marine Fisheries Preston P. Pate Jr., Director
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Doug Huggett, DCM Major Permits Processing Coordinator
THROUGH: Mike Street, Chief Habitat Section
FROM: Sara E. Winslow, Northern District Manager,/
SUBJECT: John W. Dixon Proposal
DATE: December 16, 2002
The North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries submits the following
comments pursuant to General Statute 113-131. The Division objects to this project
based on the following points.
Roanoke Sound and its tributaries function as a nursery area for spot, croaker,
weakfish, spotted seatrout, red drum, flounder, shrimp, blue crabs and other
commercially and recreationally important species. Oyster resources are also found
throughout the area. Roanoke Sound waters adjacent to the proposed project are
classified SA but closed to shellfish harvest.
The project site is adjacent to the Washington Baum Bridge and the North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) boat ramp facility. It consists of a
narrow strip of land between US Highway 64-264 and a dredged canal on the south side
of the roadway. A thin intermittent coastal wetland fringe exists along the non-
bulkheaded/riprapped area (1,185 ft.). The southside of the canal consists of a broad
coastal marsh owned by the State of North Carolina. The canal width ranges from
approximately 32 to 55 ft. and water depths range from 2.2-6.4 ft (NWL).
The current deeded acreage is approximately 3.14 ac, while the total land area is
only approximately 1.48 ac. There is currently a title dispute, so the site may be
subject to claims by unknown parties.
3441 Arendell Street, P.O. Box 769, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.ncdmf.net
N n-_..�,t t 4 not

Doug Huggett
December 16, 2002
Page Two
The canal has historically been utilized by local fishermen as a mooring area.
Currently, 3-5 vessels, with a length up to —22 ft. utilize the area for mooring.
A marina facility of 33 side to slips proposed for the site. Proposed are 19 slips
10 ft. wide by 32 ft. long, 13 slips 9 ft. wide by 32 ft. long and one slip 8 ft. wide by
32 ft. long. A 1,064 ft. long wood, vinyl and concrete bulkhead is proposed along the
north shore of the canal, averaging 2 ft. waterward of the normal water level which will
be used as the mooring side for the dock. A slotted concrete walkway along the
bulkhead is proposed to create the land dock. The dock with will vary from 4 to 6 ft.
A paved parking area for 17 vehicles is proposed for the facility on the eastern end of
the property, within 6 ft. of the canal. The applicant proposes a 526 ft. long by 4 ft.
wide floating dock to be adjacent to the existing bulkhead, with no slips proposed at this
dock. Removal of sunken and abandoned debris and excavation of the canal to a depth
of-5 ft. is proposed for approximately 1,064 ft. of the canal, with a width of 10 ft. and
removal of 1.5 ft. of material. The proposal is to store the spoil material onsite for
dewatering with a silt fence to control drainage of effluent to the canal. A sediment
curtain is proposed to cross at the canal mouth.
The proposed project would result in 7,880 sq. ft. of Public Trust Area (PTA)
and Estuarine Waters (EW) of AEC being captured by 33 proposed slips. The
bulkhead and backfilling would result in the loss of 532 sq. ft. of Coastal Wetlands and
2,128 sq. ft. of PTA and EW. The concrete land dock would result in 5,704 sq. ft. of
Estuarine Shoreline and Public Trust Shoreline being covered. The proposed parking
area would result in approximately 6,496 sq. ft. of impervious surface (10.1%) in the
AEC. The proposed floating dock would shade 2,104 sq. ft. of PTA/EW, in the AEC.
This dock would have the potential to provide an additional 16 slips for dockage.
Excavation of the canal would disturb approximately 10,640 sq. ft. of bottom. Based
on the location the bottom material will probably be muck. The importance of Roanoke
Sound and adjacent tributaries as a nursery area was previously noted. The
environmental integrity of the area must be protected during critical times of usage.
The southern shoreline of the canal borders an extensive and productive state
owned coastal marsh system. The proposed project will impact these wetlands due to
increased boat traffic and use of the area. Sloughing off of this marsh because of wakes
from increased boat traffic will result in loss of biologically productive coastal marsh,
as well as of the canal. The fringe wetlands along the north shore would be lost as a
result of the bulkheading and dock construction. Wetlands are of great importance to
fisheries resources, serving as sources of biological productivity, providing food
directly and indirectly, and serving as nursery areas for many important species.

Doug Huggett
December 16, 2002
Page Three
Finally, wetlands perform important roles in modifying acute impacts of hydrologic
events, moderating stormwater flows, trapping sediments and providing nutrients for
incorporation into resident plants. The proposed 33 slip marina would increase the
amount of boat traffic by approximately 7 to 10 times that which currently occurs in the
area.
It is likely that toxic substances will be introduced into the waters due to the
increased boat traffic. Boat bilges may be pumped out, resulting in solvents and
petroleum products entering the water. In addition, no vessel waste system pumpout
facilities are proposed and vessels in the 25-30 ft. range routinely have head facilities
on board so human waste may well enter the canal.
Eutrophication will likely occur due to this project, from increased use,
degradation of the marsh, reduction in marsh filtration capability, and pollution from
boats using the facility. The cumulative impacts of this project will result in a negative
impact to the surrounding waters.
Increased boat traffic in the canal would result in sloughing of the marsh which
will likely result in a need for frequent maintenance dredging. The proposed marina
will create a hazard to navigation in the canal and probably in the area of the NCWRC
boat ramp facility because the proposal is for 33 slips, but only 17 parking spaces are
proposed.
The Division is also very concerned with the proposed excavation of the canal
and handling of the spoil retention/dewatering area. It is adjacent to the canal and, if
the material is muck, a silt curtain will not be sufficient to prevent material from
flowing back into the canal.
In summary, the Division objects to the proposed project due to cumulative and
substantial adverse impacts on the natural resources, the habitat•, and to the receiving
waters.

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
/ WILMINGTON DISTRICT,CORPS OF ENGINEERS `vN
Washington Regulatory Field Office RECE,I`° VY
P.O.Box 1000 DEC )
Washington,North Carolina 27889-1000 C O 3 ZO L
IN REPLY REFER TO f- A� r e
Z(� 1�* �00� OW.(*0() SAliJMAGE `
Wr-1G!'
Regulatory Division �p t ,
Action ID: W031 V � � l� Applicant: mwlp
Waterway: a!^t�& County: Work Type: M rw n(I
Mr. Ron Sechler Mr. Doug Huggett
National Marine Fisheries Svc, NOAA Division of Coastal Management
Pivers Island NC Department of Environment, Health
Beaufort, NC 28516 and Natural Resources
Post Office Box 27687
Mr. Garland B. Pardue Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Post Office Box 33726 �•
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726 C 1ClAq I Regional Office
Division 4'Coasial Management
Mr. Ronald J. Mikaluk, Chief NC Department of Environment, Health
Wetlands Section—Region IV and N_ turallesFo�ur
Water Management Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Gentlemen:
Pursuant to Action ID No. 198000291, the CANIA-Corps General Permit processing
agreement, a State Field Investigation Report is enclosed.tYour com ents nd/o
recommendations would be appreciated on or before ��/ (��C a✓w� , �
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Raleigh Bland, Washington
Regulatory Field Office, telephone [phone], extension 23.
Sincerely,
r4lu
Raleigh W. Bland, P.W.S.
Regulatory Project Manager
Enclosure

Ai. ,
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley,Govemor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
November 22, 2002
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Mr. William A. McNeil Director
Division of Community Assistance W40
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
SUBJECT: CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review
Applicant: John W. Dixon
Project Location: South side of US 64/264 at the foot of the Washington Baum Bridge on
Roanoke Island in Dare County
Proposed Project: Construct a 33 slip marina.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
form by December 13, 2002. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please
contact Frank A. Jennings, III at [phone]. When appropriate, in-depth comments with
supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
SIGNED DATE /l �S-`o Z
1367 U.S. 17 South, Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc,us
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled 110%Post Consumer Paper

DEC
NCDENR OFCOASTALMANAGIWEN-'
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources I'a":'�'^H
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F.Easley,Governor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary
November 27,2002
MEMORANDUM DEC 0 5 2002
TO: Mr. Roberto Canales
State Construction/Materials Branch
Division of Highways
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
SUBJECT: CAMA PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW
APPLICANT: JOIN W. DIXON - WASHINGTON BAUM MARINA
PROJECT LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF US 64/264, FT. OF THE WASHINGTON BAUM
BRIDGE, ROANOKE ISLAND, DARE CO. & ON A MANMADE
CANAL OFF ROANOKE SOUND.
PROPOSED PROJECT: CONSTRUCT A 33 SLIP MARINA ON HIS PROPERTY ALONG
AN EXISTING CANAL BANK.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
form by December 17, 2002. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please
contact Doug Huggett at [phone], ext. 244. When appropriate, in-depth comments with
supporting data is requested.
REPL
This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
1-YJ9 P963-EC i VAS PR E7 V1ou.SLK f►PpRo v1FD /3 7' &_1GT -50M E M01- rxs
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project, only if the recommended changes are incorporated.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNEDlryllkkx2� DATE 0 —
a-a�_ 49,,6114-
" -
1638 Mail S rvice 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

NCDENR pE� 3 'ZU02
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources SSA��ANA�'ET
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F.Easley,Governor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary
November 27,2002
MEMORANDUM D (� Q
TO: Linda Sewall, Director
Division of Environmental Health '
FROM: Doug Huggett SIHqUMNA
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
SUBJECT: CAMA PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW
APPLICANT: JOHN W. DIXON - WASHINGTON BAUM MARINA
PROJECT LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF US 64/264, FT. OF THE WASHINGTON BAUM
BRIDGE, ROANOKE ISLAND, DARE CO. & ON A MANMADE
CANAL OFF ROANOKE SOUND.
PROPOSED PROJECT: CONSTRUCT A 33 SLIP MARINA ON HIS PROPERTY ALONG
AN EXISTING CANAL BANK.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
form by December 17, 2002. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please
contact Doug Huggett at [phone], ext. 244. When appropriate, in-depth comments with
supporting data is requested.
REPLY
` This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
y This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project, only if the recommended changes are incorporated.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED LA J1ZV�""ATE
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\10%Post Consumer Paper

NCDENR DEC
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural ResouA&0N
Division of Coastal Management �wARESp�� S
Michael F.Easley,Governor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William�.Ross Jr.,Secretary
November 27,2002
Wlm&%#C W wit
MEMORANDUM DEC ?. . 'U
TO: Mr. John Sutherland, Chief
TFC000,TALM
Water Planning Section
Division of Water Resources
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
SUBJECT: CAMA PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW
APPLICANT: JOHN W. DIXON - WASHINGTON BAUM MARINA
PROJECT LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF US 64/264, FT. OF THE WASHINGTON BAUM
BRIDGE, ROANOKE ISLAND, DARE CO. & ON A MANMADE
CANAL OFF ROANOKE SOUND.
PROPOSED PROJECT: CONSTRUCT A 33 SLIP MARINA ON HIS PROPERTY ALONG
AN EXISTING CANAL BANK.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
form by December 17, 2002. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please
contact Doug Huggett at [phone], ext. 244. When appropriate, in-depth comments with
supporting data is requested.
REPLY
This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project, only if the recommended changes are incorporated.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED DATE
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone]\FAX: [phone]\ Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity\Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled\10%Post Consumer Paper

—��—NCDENR DEC P 2002
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources `'CpRES RIPATONOFF7CE
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F.Easley,Governor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G.Ross Jr.,Secretary L013
�November 27,2002 'fog_
' Q —
MEMORANDUM Yl2/ ll(p
TO: Ms. Renee Gledhill-Early, Director
Division of Cultural Resources rC - 1 v4-
Archives & History Building
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
SUBJECT: CAMA PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW
APPLICANT: J04dN W. DIXON - WASHINGTON BAUM MARINA
PROJECT LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF US 64/264, FT. OF THE WASHINGTON BAUM
BRIDGE, ROANOKE ISLAND, DARE CO. & ON A MANMADE
CANAL OFF ROANOKE SOUND.
PROPOSED PROJECT: CONSTRUCT A 33 SLIP MARINA ON HIS PROPERTY ALONG
AN EXISTING CANAL BANK.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
form by December 17, 2002. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please
contact Doug Huggett at [phone], ext. 244. When appropriate, in-depth comments with
supporting data is requested.
REPLY
This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
N/ This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project, only if the recommended changes are incorporated.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED DATE (2- DZ_
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone]\FAX: [phone]\Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity\Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled\10%Post Consumer Paper DEC 0 2 2002

PW
ITINA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal ManagementC
Michael F.Easley,Governor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William
"'y
Z�f17
November 27, 2002 SEC
P'
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. Joseph H. Henderson, Director Ll
State Property Office NOV 2 7 2002
Department of Administration
FROM: Doug Huggett
State Property Otlice
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
SUBJECT: CAMA PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW
APPLICANT: JOHN W. DIXON - WASHINGTON BAUM MARINA
PROJECT LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF US 64/264, FT. OF THE WASHINGTON BAUM
BRIDGE, ROANOKE ISLAND, DARE CO. & ON A MANMADE
CANAL OFF ROANOKE SOUND.
PROPOSED PROJECT: CONSTRUCT A 33 SLIP MARINA ON HIS PROPERTY ALONG
AN EXISTING CANAL BANK.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
form by December 17, 2002. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please
contact Doug Huggett at [phone], ext. 244. When appropriate, in-depth comments with
supporting data is requested.
REPLY
This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project, only if the recommended changes are incorporated.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED DATE (Z
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone]\FAX: [phone]\ Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity\Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled\10%Post Consumer Paper

RECEIVE
�.NZ DEC 2 7 2001
NCDENRr.oFoo� ° �
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
November 27,2002
MEMORANDUM �o��� •
P F C
TO: David McHenry a?
Wildlife Resources Commission N V
cD Ci;','&f`:it y
ATTN: Habitat Conservation Program
FROM: Doug Huggett )t. 2L14
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
SUBJECT: CAMA PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW
APPLICANT: JOHN W. DIXON - WASHINGTON BAUM MARINA
PROJECT LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF US 64/264, FT. OF THE WASHINGTON BAUM
BRIDGE, ROANOKE ISLAND, DARE CO. & ON A MANMADE
CANAL OFF ROANOKE SOUND.
PROPOSED PROJECT: CONSTRUCT A 33 SLIP MARINA ON HIS PROPERTY ALONG
AN EXISTING CANAL BANK.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
form by December 17, 2002. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please
contact Doug Huggett at [phone], ext. 244. When appropriate, in-depth comments with
supporting data is requested.
REPLY
This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
/
This agency approves of the project, only if the recommended changes are incorporated.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED< t7�n DATE 12./ (`l 1U 2
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone]\FAX: [phone]\ Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity\Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled 110%Post Consumer Paper

9
Am,
1A
NCDENK
Y
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
November 27,2002
MEMORANDUM
G TO: David McHenry ti
rF ' Wildlife Resources Commission v *Y
i.
t •A,TTN: Habitat Conservation Program �, �,,•t;t
FROM: Doug Huggett y. -244 � V
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
'k
SUBJECT: CAMA PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW
APPLICANT: J W. DIN - WASHINGTON BA,UM MARINA
PROTECT LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF US 64/264, FT. OF THE WASHINGTON BAUM
)BRIDGE, ROANOKE ISLAND, DARE CO. & ON A, MANMADE
CANAL OFF ROANOKE SOUND,
t`
PROPOSED PROJECT: CONSTRUCT A, 33 SLIP MARINA ON HIS PROPERTY ALONG
AN EXISTING CANAL BANK.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
Form by December 17, 2002. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please
contact Doug Huggett at [phone], ext. 244. When appropriate, in-depth comments with
supporting data is requested.
REPLY
_ This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
_ V -I his agency approves of the project, only if the recommended changes are incorporated.
Th s agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached eo,nmeints.
SIGNED rnr1 DATV 1 U Z
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]nternet: http://dcm2•enr,state,nc.us
An Equal Opportunily 1 Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled 110%Post Consumer Paper

gi
�LnQ s
� DEG l 9 2�'n s
NCDENR L
North Carolina Depa­,ment of E wironment and Natural Res urc
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Donna D, Moffitt, Director VYilliam G. Ross Jr., Sec
November 22, 2002
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Mr. Preston P. Pate, Jr., Director
Division of Marine Fisheries
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
SUBJECT: CAMA/DREDGE & FILL permit Application Review
Applicant: John W. Dixon
Project Location: South side of US 64/264 at the foot of the Washington Baum Bridge on
Roanoke Island in Date County ,'
Proposed Project: Construct a 33 slip marina.
a
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
form by December 13, 2002. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please
contact Frank A. Jennings, III at [phone]. When appropriate, in-depth comments with
supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
W~�
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
_ This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached. %
' / St
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
.,r
SYGNED DATE
1367 U.S, 17 South, Ellzabeth City, North Carolina 27909
Phone: [phone] \FAX: [phone] Internet: http;lldcm2.enr.state.no,us
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled 110%Post Consumer Paper
90 'd K: TT 201 z uer �ZTS�ZSZ:x?d S­ld3ddd/SGNu7Hns dWG

. . �� �E I 2
002A � ✓/
NCDENR �..------ -J
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Res urcik,10 F-Hoz BITAT
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Govemor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
November 22, 2002
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Mr. Preston P. Pate, Jr., Director
Division of Marine Fisheries
FROM: Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
SUBJECT: CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review
Applicant: John W. Dixon
Project Location: South side of US 64/264 at the foot of the Washington Baum Bridge on
Roanoke Island in Dare County
Proposed Project: Construct a 33 slip marina.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
form by December 13, 2002. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please
contact Frank A. Jennings, III at [phone]. When appropriate, in-depth comments with
supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached
P J
comments.
SIGNED DATE
1367 U.S. 17 South, Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc,us
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled 110%Post Consumer Paper

k;� Mti ri"m,I e'ya
A YCOCK &
NOV I - 20n?
JDUTLER, PLLC =' 14wT
CITY
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
2405 S. Croatan Highway,PO Box 117, Nags Head, NC 27959
www.outerbanksattorneys.com
CHARLIE AYCOCK TELEPHONE [phone]
BETSY BUTLER TELEFAX 252.441.5622
TOLL FREE 800.918.9605
November 13, 2002
Frank Jennings
CAMA
Elizabeth City Division
1367 U.S. 17 South
Elizabeth City, NC 27909 (via fax and mail)
Re: Applications by Building Resources,Inc. for CAMA Permits
Dear Mr. Jennings:
I represent John W. "Skip" Dixon,the OWNER of the real property which is the subject of the
CAMA applications referenced above.Obviously, Mr. Dixon objects to the issuance of any
CAMA permit to another regarding property that he owns.
I have enclosed a copy of Mr. Dixon's deed duly recorded in Deed Book 1425,page 425, Dare
County Registry.The property owned by Mr. Dixon is the subject of two title searches
performed by North Carolina licensed attorneys of which I am aware. The title searches are
consistent,showing a chain of title back to and including a division deed recorded in 1947 in
Deed Book 33,page 376, Dare Co. Registry, NC. In 1985, Louis Midgett, et ux, conveyed the
property to Ralph Reed (reserving a boat slip for his heirs which is recognized by Mr. Dixon);
and, the Town of Manteo acquired the property from Mr. Reed in 1990. As you can see by the
enclosed,the Town conveyed the property to my client. The record clearly substantiates
ownership in Mr. Dixon.
There is no record establishing the validity of the claim of ownership of Building Resources,Inc.
other than deeds filed in 2001 executed by the Wilsons, the principals of the corporation. Copies
of those deeds are enclosed. There exists no "source deed" for the claims. There is nothing of
record conveying any of the property to the Wilson, grantors in the deeds to their corporation.
If Building Resources, Inc. and/or the Wilson are claiming by adverse possession, I find no
court decree awarding ownership nor do I find any action pending to establish same.
Because of the unusual recording of the Building Resources, Inc. "deeds", I made it a point to
try and determine how the property lines described in the deeds came about. Certainly they did
not"just appear" out of nowhere. So, I want to relate to you a conversation that I had with the
surveyor that was hired by the Town of Manteo for the purpose of transferring a deed to Mr.
Dixon under a contract that had been entered into. At the point in time when the Town of
Manteo hired Ray Meekins to perform the survey, there was nothing of record in the County of
Dare indicating any adverse claim by Mr. Wilson and/or any of his entities, including Building
Resources, Inc. Accordingly, I conferred with Ray Meekins at Seaboard Surveying and asked

him about the plat that he supplied to the Town. This is the plat wherein the lines originated,
indicating an adverse claim by Mr. Wilson and his father. I asked Mr. Meekins how the lines
were determined. He told me that the plat would speak for itself. There is nothing on the plat
which indicates how the lines were derived. The only logical conclusion is that Mr. Meekins
obtained the "lines" information from Mr. Wilson or someone on his behalf. It is with hopes
that Mr. Wilson will answer that question for you, among others,before his application for
Building Resources is processed.
Secondly,I asked Mr. Meekins whether or not the plat had been recorded. He said he
did not know but that he felt as if Mr. Wilson was planning to do that. I asked Mr. Meekins
whether or not he ever found anything of record indicating an adverse claim on the part of the
Wilson at the time he made his basic analysis for the purpose of drawing the plat and his reply
was "No". So, again, there is nothing of record placing ownership in the hands of the Wilsons,
the people who signed the deeds purporting to convey to Building Resources, Inc.
As you know,Mr. Dixon has applied for a CAMA permit which encompasses the properties
claimed by Building Resources, Inc. Mr. Dixon s ownership is verified by two record title
searches. Please proceed with his application.
If you have received or if you do receive information that any NC licensed attorney can verify
the Building Resources claims,please let me know. These are unusual circumstances and I
clearly understand that your department is not,and should not be,in a position to determine
title. However,if Building Resources,Inc. cannot establish ownership through a title
certification, I submit that they must obtain a court decree in order to move forward. It is with
hopes, and I anticipate,that your department will agree.
My best regards, ^�
Charlie
C: "Skip" Dixon

JOHN F. WILSON
ARCHITECT
October 11, 2002
DECEIVED
OC f 6 'ZUUZ
Mr. Frank Jennings Mp�IpGE�T
NC Division of Coastal Management 17WOFCOASTAL 1GH
1367 U.S. 17 South
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
Re: Washington and Baum Marina
Major CAMA Permit Application
Dear Mr. Jennings:
Does CAMA have the legal right to review and permit a project on property
owned by someone other than the applicant?
The purpose of this correspondence is to inform you that the owners of at least
two (2)-adjoining parcels were not notified of the application filed on September 17, 2002
by Quible& Associates, PC on behalf of John Dixon and Senator Hoyle.
Both properties are located within the project area. Both properties are owned by
Building Resources, Inc., Post Office Box 1891, Manteo, N.C. 27954. Deeds for these
parcels are filed in Book 1365, Pages 328 and 329 in the Dare County Registry. Both
parcels were most recently surveyed by Manson Ray Meekins, Professional Land
Surveyor....Seal L-2592 and dated February 28, 2001. Survey plats were recorded on
April 2, 2001.
In the deed from The Town of Manteo to John W. Dixon dated April 19, 2002,
exceptions are made to both of these parcels on page 2 of the deed, #(5), recorded in
Book 1425, Page 425, Dare County Registry.
Since the Washington and Baum Marina application includes property owned by
Building Resources, Inc., I respectfully request that the application not be reviewed nor
the project permitted unless and until the application is amended to remove properties not
owned by the applicant.
re
Jo F. Wilson IV
President
Building Resources, Inc.
cc: Mr. Ted Sampson
Ms. Donna Moffitt, Director DCM
P.O.Box 1891,305 Queen Elizabeth Street,Manteo,NC 27954
[phone]

1 - 17-03; 1G: 4!.DAM;QUIBLE AND ASSOC. ; 1 252 261 1260 # 2/ 3
•
uible
le &Associates, P.C. P.O.Drawer870
f9tiy Hawk.INC 27949
ERING•ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES•PLANNING Phone;252-261�300
SINCE 1959 Fax [phone]
PRINCIPALS
Soon C.Boyle,P.E,
t Joseph S.LoWer.C.E.P.
Eduardo J,Valgivioso,RE.
ASSOCIATES
Joseph J.Anlauf,P.E.
1 January 16, 2002 David S.Neff
Mr. Doug Huggett
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
NC Division of Coastal Management
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699
Re: Washington-Baum Marina-NC Division of Marine Fisheries Comments
Dear Mr. Huggett:
The purpose of this correspondence is for Quible & Associates, P.C. (Quible) to respond on behalf of
John W. Dixon to comments from the NC Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) for the Washington Baum
Marina project. The comments dated December 16, 2002 were prepared by Sara E. Winslow, Northern
District Manager for DMF. Following review of the memorandum, it is my opinion that there are a
number of inaccuracies and unfounded speculations in the response that need to be highlighted and,
f
hopefully, corrected as review of the project continues, Towards that end I offer the following comments:
1. The response questions the acreage of the property and a potential title dispute. As you are aware, the
deeded property includes the submerged land that lie beneath the canal bottom. That bottom is a part of
the deeded tract that was excavated to build the canal. The applicant continues to hold title to that
bottom. Therefore, the total parcel area is 3.14 acres as indicated in the application.
The title dispute is being reviewed by the Attorney General's office based on information provided to the
NC Division of Coastal Management(DCM) by the applicant's attorney. I'm not sure why DMF is
commenting on title issues or who is providing them with that information but two title opinions by
attorneys have been provided to the DCM indicating clear title of the property by Mr. Dixon.
2. The DMF comments state that the "33 slip marina would increase the amount of boat traffic by
approximately 7 to 10 times that which currently occurs in the area." If fact, there is photographic
evidence that this area has been used for 50 years to moor and operate vessels. The number of boats
moored in the canal has consistently been greater than ten boats. At the time Mr. Dixon purchased the
property there were two sunken boats in the canal with several other boats in various stages of disrepair
that were tied to make shift docks along the canal. Those boats have been relocated and debris and trash
in the canal has been removed. It should also be noted that the public boat launching facility that adjoins
the subject property is one of the most heavily utilized boat ramps in the State. There are hundreds of
boats launched, retrieved and operated in the rea. In addition, Pirates Cove Marina is located within 500
feet of the subject property with a large num r of boats that access Oregon Inlet via the main channel
that runs directly east of the tract. The fact i4 that the proposed development will be a continuation of an
existing marina use on the tract and will be al imall subset of the boats that currently operate in the area,
I I
I,

1 - 17-03; 10: 40AM;OUIBLE AND ASSOC. ; 1 252 261 1260 # 3/ 3
I:
1,, speed
Page 2- Washington-Baum Marina
3. The DMF response also contains a numbf statements regarding the impacts of the project on
wetlands and receiving waters. It states that coastal wetlands will be adversely impacted from
increased boat wakes. In fact, the marina lieithin a designated "No Wake " zone and as a practical
matter no one is going to operate a vessel at that will create a wake within the subject canal. The
impact from boat wakes on coastal wetlands 4✓ithin the project area should be minimal and the wetlands
fringe to the south is a part of the Dixon parcel and not owned by the State of North Carolina.
In conclusion, the applicant is willing to meet with the DMF to address legitimate concerns about
protection of waters and wetlands in proximity to the project. Things that can be done include the
` posting of no wake signs in the canal, prohibiting live aboard and heads on vessels and providing
additional detail on control of the spoil material that will need to be excavated to construct the boat slips,
What the applicant cannot do is respond to an overstatement of potential impacts of the project as if they
are fact. I think a review of the write up of the projL.;t by Frank Jennings for DCM illustrates a more
3
balanced view of the impacts of the proposal. The project does have impacts but, in truth, the slips are a
more formalized version of a marina operatioo that has been in place in various forms along the subject
„- canal for approximately 50 years. With that as our stated position, we will be pleased to meet with DMF
and/or DCM to discuss how to make the proppsed project better.
Thank you for your attention to this informati;bn. If you have questions please contact me at 252-261-
3300.
Sincerely,
Quible & Associates, PC
l
�i.
oseph S, Lassiter, CEP
Sara Winslow
Frank Jennings
Preston Pate
Skip Dixon
Charles Jones
m
;t
I
I
i
E

DCM% DWQ%
Development Type FEE (14300 1601-435100093 1625 6253) (24300 1602 435100095 2345
1. Private,non-commercial
development that does not involve S250 100%(S250) 0°ib(SO)
the fitting or excavation of any
wetlands or open water areas:
If, Public or commercial development
that does not involve the rifling or $400 100%(5400) 0%(SO)
excavation of any wetlands or open
water areas:
III. Fordevelopment that involves the
filling and/or excavation of up to 1
acre of wetlands and/or open water
areas,determine if A,B,C,or D
below applies:
III(A). For Private,non-commercial
development,If General water Quality S25C 100%(S250) 0%(SO)
Certification No.3301 (see attached)
can be applied:
III(5): For public or commercial
development,if General water Quality 5400
100%(3400) 0%{SO)
Certification No-3301 (see attached)
can be applied:
III(C). If General Water Quality
Certification No.3301 (see attached}
could be applied,but"'
stall 60%(S240) 40%(S160)
determined that add]ticnal review and goowritten DWQ concurrence Is needed
because of concems related to water
quality or aquatic life:
III(D), If General Water Quality 5400 60%(5240} 40%(5160)
Certification No.3301 (see attached)
can not be applied:
IV. For development that involves
the rifling and/or excavation of mare 5475 60%.(S285) 40%(S1 SO)
than one acre of wetlands and/or
open water areas:
1p

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Govemor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
November 22, 2002
The Coastland Times
Legal Advertisement Section
P. O. Box 588
Manteo, North Carolina 27954
Re: Public Notice - JOHN W. DIXON PROJECT
Dear Sir:
Please publish the attached Notice in the Tuesday, November 26, 2002, issue of the Coastland
Times.
The State Office of Budget and Management requires an original Affidavit of Publication prior to
payment for newspaper advertising. Please send the affidavit, an original copy of the published
notice, and an original invoice to Jaye Poole, NC Division of Coastal Management, 1638 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638, Telephone [phone].
Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you should have any questions, please contact me
at our Elizabeth City office.
Sincerely,
ed Sampson
if District Manager
TS/dc
Enclosure
cc: Doug Huggett
File
1367 U.S. 17 South, Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: http:Hdcm2,enr.state.nc,us
An Equal opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled 110%Post Consumer Paper

NOTICE OF FILING OF
APPLICATION FOR CAMA MAJOR
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources hereby gives public notice as
required by NCGS 113A-119(b) that application for a development permit in an Area of
Environmental Concern as designated under the CAMA was received on November 6, 2002.
According to said application, JOHN W. DIXON proposes to construct a 33 slip marina in
a manmade canal on the south side of US 64/264 at the foot of the Washington Baum Bridge on
Roanoke Island in Dare.
A copy of the entire application may be examined or copied at the office of Frank A.
Jennings, III, NC Division of Coastal Management, located at 1367 US 17 South, Elizabeth City,
NC, 27909, [phone] during normal business hours.
Comments mailed to Donna D. Moffitt, Director, Division of Coastal Management, 1638
Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1638, prior to December 16, 2002, will be considered
in making the permit decision. Later comments will be accepted and considered up to the time of
permit decision. Project modification may occur based on review and comment by the public and
state and federal agencies. Notice of the permit decision in this matter will be provided upon
written request.
PUBLISHED ON: Tuesday, November 26, 2002

NC®ENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F.Easley, Govemor Donna D. Moffitt, Director William G. Ross Jr.,Secretary
November 22, 2002
Mr. Joseph Lassiter
Quible & Associates, P.C.
P. O. Drawer 870
Kitty Hawk, North Carolina 27949
Dear Mr. Lassiter:
The Division of Coastal Management hereby acknowledges receipt of your application for State
approval for development of property located on the south side of US 64/264 at the foot of the Washington
Baum Bridge on Roanoke Island in Dare County. It was received on November 6, 2002, and appears to be
adequate for processing at this time. The projected deadline for making a decision is-January 20,2003. An
additional 75-day review period is provided by law when such time is necessary to complete the review. If
you have not been notified of a final action by the initial deadline stated above, you should consider the
review period extended. Under those circumstances, this letter will serve as your notice of an extended
review. However, an additional letter will be provided on or about the 75th day.
NCGS 113A-119(b) requires that Notice of an application be posted at the location of the proposed
development. Enclosed you will find a "Notice of Permit Filing" postcard which must be posted at the
property of your proposed development. You should post this notice at a conspicuous point along your
property where it can be observed from a public road. Some examples would be: Nailing the notice card to
a telephone pole or tree along the road right-of-way fronting your property; or at a point along the road
right-of-way where a private road would lead one into your property. Failure to post this notice could result
in an incomplete application.
An onsite inspection will be made, and if additional information is required,you will be contacted by
the appropriate State or Federal agency. Please contact me if you have any questions and notify me in
writing if you wish to receive a copy of my field report and/or comments from reviewing agencies.
Sincerely,
Frank A. Jennings,:III
Coastal Management Representative
FAJ/dc
Enclosure
cc: Doug Huggett - Permit Coordinator, DCM
Ted Sampson - District Manager, DCM
John W. Dixon
1367 U.S. 17 South, Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state,nc,us
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled 110%Post Consumer Paper

�. .
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
April 14, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Hornthal, Riley, Ellis & Maland
c/o Mr. Hood Ellis
P.O. Box 220
Elizabeth City,NC 27907-0220
Dear Mr. Ellis:
Thank you for your letter concerning the Coastal Area Management Act (LAMA) Major
Development Permit application submitted by the Washington and Baum Marina, in which
authorization was requested to construct a 33 slip marina adjacent to the Washington Baum
Bridge on Roanoke Island. The Division appreciates your concerns about the proposed project,
and we have looked very closely at the issues raised in your letter.
The Coastal Area Management Act permit review process involves a coordinated state and
federal review of each permit application, with all review agency comments considered by the
Division before final action is taken on a permit application. In this case, the Division, in close
coordination with the N.C. Attorney General's Office, has determined that the property
ownership dispute referenced in your letters are outside the scope of what can be considered as a
part of the CAMA review process. Additionally, the multi-agency review of the project did not
result in any issues that would support denial of the proposed project. As a result of these
findings, the Division has issued a permit for the proposed activity on April 14, 2003, and a copy
is being provided to you for your information.
If you wish to object to the issuance of the permit, you may request an appeal of this decision
within twenty (20) days of the permit decision §113A-121(b). If you would like copies of the
appropriate appeal forms or should you like to discuss the specifics of the process,please contact
me by telephone at(919) 733-2293 ext 245 or by email at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Wr'�'j'aay,
Doug Huggett
Major Permits and Consistency Coordinator
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone]\FAX: [phone]\ Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity\Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled\10%Post Consumer Paper

(DomesticU.S. Postal S4vice
CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT
Only;
m m
Lr] Ln
Cal ca
■ C- o , .-111
.
Ul L l Postage $
• ■ • '� rL r1.1
_ E— Er Certified Fee
� Postmark
■ • ��� ru ru Return Receipt Fee Here
r r 1 `q (Endorsement Required)
■ �� O 17 Restricted Delivery Fee
O O (Endorsement Required)
■ •
Total Post C" sa_b�jJ
• �� � � Sent To
it7 O Stre �4NAGEMENT�
_ o o
o o -IA� E CEITEI - ---------
� srar
SENDER: I PS Form 3800,May 2000 See Reverse for Instructions
• •N COMPLETE THIS SECTIONON DELIVERY
■ Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Received by(Please Print Clearly) B. Date of Delivery
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you. C. Signature
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, X ❑Agent
or on the front if space permits. ❑Addressee
11 D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑Yes
1. Article Addressed to: `5 a- If YES,enter delivery address below: ❑ No
HCRY) Al �1%ej, s 9- rnVAla,k
mp- "Dt)s tF-i�0s
p.c- eon aao
NC an log- oaao 3. Service Type
I I 0�ertified Mail ❑ Express Mail
❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes
2. Ar
qUale Number(Copy from service label)
I �0-�U C)©► a ase (z'
PS Form 3811,July 1999 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-00-M-0952

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
April 14, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Faison Thompson Peters
1812 Brick House Lane
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
Dear Mr. Peters:
Thank you for your letter concerning the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Development Permit application submitted by the Washington and Baum Marina, in which
authorization was requested to construct a 33 slip marina adjacent to the Washington Baum
Bridge on Roanoke Island. The Division appreciates your concerns about the proposed project,
and we have looked very closely at the issues raised in your letter.
The Coastal Area Management Act permit review process involves a coordinated state and
federal review of each permit application, with all review agency comments considered by the
Division before final action is taken on a permit application. In this case, the Division, in close
coordination with the N.C. Attorney General's Office, has determined that the property
ownership dispute referenced in your letters are outside the scope of what can be considered as a
part of the CAMA review process. Additionally, the multi-agency review of the project did not
result in any issues that would support denial of the proposed project. As a result of these
findings, the Division has issued a permit for the proposed activity on April 14, 2003, and a copy
is being provided to you for your information.
If you wish to object to the issuance of the permit, you may request an appeal of this decision
within twenty (20) days of the permit decision §113A-121(b). If you would like copies of the
appropriate appeal forms or should you like to discuss the specifics of the process, please contact
me by telephone at(919) 733-2293 ext 245 or by email at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Doug Huggett
Major Permits and Consistency Coordinator
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone]\FAX: [phone]\ Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal opportunity\Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled\10%Post Consumer Paper

I a -
0.
do
t.
* f COMPLETE SECTIONON
SENDER: • THIS SECTION
■ Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Received by(Please Print Clearly) B. Date of Delivery
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse C. Signature p Agent
so that we can return the card to you. ❑Addressee
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, X
or on the front if space permits. D. Is delivery address different from item 19 ❑Yes
5 a-O'� ❑ No
1. Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below:
F:Ek- SC)n tiorh�srn P��e��
��1 a �;:c,K {-douse Lance
t✓ l;zap C��y, IyC an'io 1
3. Service Type
'Certified Mail ❑Express Mail
❑Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑Insured Mail ❑C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes
2 Articleom qas ��Vt)
Domestic Return Receipt
102595 00-M-0952
PS Form 3811,July 1999
Only;U.S. Postal Service
CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT
-d (Domestic Mail
ca cc co
C3 0
c/ipe etLS.,."'��.. CU
-a -n I Sort o or
Diu..
zQW1
Lrl Lr] Postage
$
• L — rU-. � Certified Fee Postmark
Here
_��� Return Receipt Fee
• 0 -- � � (Endorsement Required)
• E3 E3
< I Restricted Delivery Fee
Waft E3 Q (Endorsement Required) /
• - ro o Total Po I AT O `5�-03
------- � �
• r rl SebtNR-COASTAI- MANACEMEN-------------
• OO 0 Street, p or P No
I�g_MAIL SERVICE CENTER
----�_ C3 C] �-
-City StatelQA !V^�+ 7T?:,'I "
C� C
n ' _

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
April 14, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Andrew Dabney McCann
P.O. Box 7
Nags Head,NC 27959
Dear Mr. McCann:
Thank you for your letter concerning the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Development Permit application submitted by the Washington and Baum Marina, in which
authorization was requested to construct a 33 slip marina adjacent to the Washington Baum
Bridge on Roanoke Island. The Division appreciates your concerns about the proposed project,
and we have looked very closely at the issues raised in your letter.
The Coastal Area Management Act permit review process involves a coordinated state and
federal review of each permit application, with all review agency comments considered by the
Division before final action is taken on a permit application. In this case, the Division, in close
coordination with the N.C. Attorney General's Office, has determined that the property
ownership dispute referenced in your letters are outside the scope of what can be considered as a
part of the CAMA review process. Additionally, the multi-agency review of the project did not
result in any issues that would support denial of the proposed project. As a result of these
findings, the Division has issued a permit for the proposed activity on April 14, 2003, and a copy
is being provided to you for your information.
If you wish to object to the issuance of the permit, you may request an appeal of this decision
within twenty (20) days of the permit decision §113A-121(b). If you would like copies of the
appropriate appeal forms or should you like to discuss the specifics of the process, please contact
me by telephone at [phone] ext 245 or by email at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
Doug Huggett
Major Permits and Consistency Coordinator
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

N DELIVERY
• SECTION COMPLETEIS • •
A. Received by(Please Print Clearly) B. Date of Delivery
■ Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse C. Signature
so that we can return the card to you. ❑Agent
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, X ❑Addressee
or on the front if space permits. D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑Yes
1. Article Addressed to: l5 a-C�3) If YES,enter delivery address below:
❑No
Vo- Go)( r7
N C a r�qsq 3. Service Type
G1,dertified Mail ❑ Express Mail
❑Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes
2. Article Number(Copy from service label) a5 / \
7ood l%-7b o(Sla �J d
PS Form 3811,July 1999
Domestic Return Receipt 102595.00-M•0952
— Postal
CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT
(Domestic Mail Only;No Insurance Coverage Provided)
ru ru
ru ru
Vi
Postage $
�
M Certified Fee
0 Q- Er Postmark
• .
Here
• Return Receipt Fee
. �� ra ra (Endorsement Required)
• - M C3 Restricted Delivery Fee
C3 C3 (Endorprpt+(>f.�ggy� OR �5 a-0 3)
•
4LLLLL.�.....��,,,'tLLJJ``�M�
p C3
to e s !rAl mall
- - R,J r r NT R
Str �o;°Y P�H
l7 ox
o o
_ :
-MEW 11141

�i
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
April 14, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. John Wilson
P.O. Box 1891
Manteo,NC 27954
Dear Mr. Wilson:
Thank you for your letter concerning the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Development Permit application submitted by the Washington and Baum Marina, in which
authorization was requested to construct a 33 slip marina adjacent to the Washington Baum
Bridge on Roanoke Island. The Division appreciates your concerns about the proposed project,
and we have looked very closely at the issues raised in your letter.
The Coastal Area Management Act permit review process involves a coordinated state and
federal review of each permit application, with all review agency comments considered by the
Division before final action is taken on a permit application. In this case, the Division, in close
coordination with the N.C. Attorney General's Office, has determined that the property
ownership dispute referenced in your letters are outside the scope of what can be considered as a
part of the CAMA review process. Additionally, the multi-agency review of the project did not
result in any issues that would support denial of the proposed project. As a result of these
findings, the Division has issued a permit for the proposed activity on April 14, 2003, and a copy
is being provided to you for your information.
If you wish to object to the issuance of the permit, you may request an appeal of this decision
within twenty (20) days of the permit decision §113A-121(b). If you would like copies of the
appropriate appeal forms or should you like to discuss the specifics of the process, please contact
me by telephone at [phone] ext 245 or by email at [e-mail].
Sincerely,
4S
Doug Huggett
Major Permits and Consistency Coordinator
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone]\ FAX: [phone]\ Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity\Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled\10%Post Consumer Paper

Postal
(DomesticMAIL RECEIPT
CERTIFIED
Only; Provided)
--_
0 Postage $
LI) L.r7
• . • �_ Er 0ru — Certified Fee Postmark
a
• Return Receipt Fee Here
' • �� n_I !U (Endorsement Required)
C r i Iq
• C3 C3 Restricted Delivery Fee
n O C3 (Endorsement Required)
a o �
' '
-_ C3 C3
Total Posti NATC�R
(5
�
. F-S§�W�Wtc_
ff LL.•.. F_ �ANACEMENT
ENR-COAST L -
C3 C3 A i 0C3 C3 Uo-163'g 1�ICECENTE State, 'i�Eu. g ��9�
COMPLETE SECTIONON DELIVERY
COMPLETE •
■ Complete Items 1,2,and 3.Also Complete reerdlease Print Clearly) B. Date of Delivery
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you. ❑Agent
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, ❑Addressee
or on the front if space permits. ess different from item 1? ❑Yes
1. Article Addressed to: `�a a-t7�Ielivery address below:
❑No
P,0
3. Service Type
1 t�tl 1 p-t ertified Mail ❑Express Mail
❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes
2. Article Number(C//oopy from service label)
V f V ` 102595-00-M-0952
PS Form 3811,July 1999 Domestic Return Receipt

.V
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
April 14, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Thomas Hermon Nixon
4328 Barracuda Drive
Nags Head,NC 27959
Dear Mr. Nixon:
Thank you for your letter concerning the Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Development Permit application submitted by the Washington and Baum Marina, in which
authorization was requested to construct a 33 slip marina adjacent to the Washington Baum
Bridge on Roanoke Island. The Division appreciates your concerns about the proposed project,
and we have looked very closely at the issues raised in your letter.
The Coastal Area Management Act permit review process involves a coordinated state and
federal review of each permit application, with all review agency comments considered by the
Division before final action is taken on a permit application. In this case, the Division, in close
coordination with the N.C. Attorney General's Office, has determined that the property
ownership dispute referenced in your letters are outside the scope of what can be considered as a
part of the CAMA review process. Additionally, the multi-agency review of the project did not
result in any issues that would support denial of the proposed project. As a result of these
findings, the Division has issued a permit for the proposed activity on April 14, 2003, and a copy
is being provided to you for your information.
If you wish to object to the issuance of the permit, you may request an appeal of this decision
within twenty (20) days of the permit decision §113A-121(b). If you would like copies of the
appropriate appeal forms or should you like to discuss the specifics of the process, please contact
me by telephone at(919) 733-2293 ext 245 or by email at [e-mail].
Si erely,
Doug Huggett
Major Permits and Consistency Coordinator
1638 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Phone: [phone]\FAX: [phone]\ Internet: http://dcm2.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity\Affirmative Action Employer—50%Recycled\10%Post Consumer Paper

u.S. Postal Service
CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT ,
Provided)
(Domestic Mail Only,No Insurance Coverage
n o
m �
..n oC`GceG ''A vt l �Cort
`�— —a —0 Postage $
U u'1
• �_� ru ru Certified Fee
• . • d— n— Postmark
� �----- Here
• ---- Return Receipt Fee
• • �"�"'��� rlJ (Endorsement Required)
• • Cl C1 Restricted Delivery Fee
—� Cl Cl (Endorsement Required)
- • . AT�R �a-o3j
O� Total Po e ' -
•
Sent
ENB=�Q T__A"._MANACEI-/IEN�C -
Apt No. or PO Box No.
O p Street, 1 f
C3 CI $ E_GENTER--------------
CI City,State-ZIP+4 `"
r 27699 y
- +
11 COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
- +
SENDER: - SECTION
■ Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete
A. Received by(Please Print Clearly) B. Date of Delivery
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse C. Signature ❑Agent
so that we can return the card to you. ❑Addressee
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, X
or on the front if space permits. D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ❑Yes
❑No
1. Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below:
m mQ S �AeRmcrvl Wkon
Lj Ds S�Wcge_
J 1 3. Service Type
p Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail
❑Registered ❑Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ insured Mail ❑C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery?(bra Fee) ❑Yes
2. Article Number(Copy from service label) a �(0
oo�a
102595-00-M•0952
Domestic Return Receipt
�
PS Form 3811,July 1999

JAN-10-2003 FRI 11 ,33 AM DCM-DMF E. CITY FAX N01 252 264 3723 PI 10
'}' , y+, ..� ... , Jr� ., ' •p p'I rad`.•,`114•,�+r.� , , tr•.�J 1-Ji :Y�'�3^.. ' .i1`:•:._�
J3 ., • ^. ••' I I, r ,
r'.9 L"f.J. r 4, J lsim.gy, a.�..MM•s.y J
ill a. i Coil Kldj;;C,,tat r4larLS4 �.11 '4cwngY of Mr rMM 3LLy-DjW AT kakci S
(YOUR NAME
c =Cc:siR Cuas PLAn .
'. bri �A�,ttc,h can t 15 ztvtt'm�idc ac =41y dcalcrs the proposed rvnst=dgn,
to tMs ptoraosl1 �/� c,� che;�1 the sratem�t beIow)/rsign and d= tI7�
j'lp,% k'S �;l0,0 w' h" IS;,At t'AR',.`11. tI �, � 11 n Ohl �uSf� r La; �5 y'J�/� _W6�,��C �7�'IG�4�r
�• r ,( g (`p y4 2r'A. II;AN
All, - -
,95
�y 4 ` t
•.Li•����.���.Y VilriA )i�t0l�.� 4ntM��`�^1,.1.4r.1.�J3 !.� t+,.�1� YJ��.X�����{ alj plt,%t Send yw wti= comments tv N.C.•Dhri im of
°r ,�rt� �21 a 'A ll',; 's' � �' " l tSi1't, k'1r,';�?1�{' h i,t�, "C; Zi9A°. 1rVrima corameats must be re:rived
y0v be Jtlmwc:c&-'� n t7 l= 'das..
Y
Sin iy, (4 Poo -50L4acA&
t�aj;ttt,tqq»'Is, 4r,-,,�ady proposed P-nd hlerea �v�v�thut right of objection'
s' �a'�1",ai�l,l A �r'ige-eyas,l. "Ot $x�f,o; 1 14 17-279.
(a tiu, wo��xt �i Ares.-at y prrposk-I "Ind havc c,-;c'osed comalcxt,,.
:y
t 1'y;Ed 141,i:vt Me en rmcivnel.Cbi ah s pCaae~t within my riparian cotridor
fl=t fmzl my P=pe-7- y,uft t .
, ,• y.�, t., .'�c Ohl'

't AN' 10-2003 FRI 11 :33 AM DCM-DMF E. CITY FAX NO, 252 264 3723
l,, sty -p-Mi2ly you 3:w an 4djaw putt r1pW13A lndowzcr of��u i zR►nlG
(YOUR NAME
��7,,-� i�,,.,'� . c �,3A:.nf'�.:� X'.� �?���i��."LXirG w _ `'�1�Y„ •� 9 U.(;�1"I"�C.'���{.J �� ,
(`�'OM +C0;�.4TRt7CrIQ\ PLAN}` T
Slig, too, oil tt;6 mm't Sidi~at:umiely depicts tie propo=d Was=tion.
,;;,ZJ y,.,o to (W."i ptopow, plea rhF--k the statcm:nt below, $ gn and &1 tT the
i il.o4'mtit u4 (R"''t G1 this W'St IAIC'_" i -- ?G A
�b,� � '
pIfl': d Selid YOU''r Writt-7 cotnmtnts to ALC. Vvl�SiD17
la,;nrx , w;,rw:it,, '1167 li:r Srlwh. '991n;,ba� (;icy, .W must be c:v6d
U W
is �;atiw me h0j. y�!J1 J a 10 dam. will he flata:,pmad as rw abjC:d=S,
,
z"lo to f4,jvgj+,wt 2S pxrS1t1-qqy tarr S�end he 6v waive that right of qba=tioa
.,
tz� liar', PV-katly pcopot.1 � me
havc enc!osed ta
katu c,baY.,vv I b a-ve agmtd 1.0 t &iis prvjea witWn my ripest conidor
hack,or 15 fe.�-,:.Ogm my,pmpe-T lirse.
K -0_
pm9V�.yuy.,[�,...,i..p.,�g..,�w�,.............�.r.'.y_.y��-yv-�ww�r},nu(.�w.-�.'rAow�.�-.m. �w•�'-�7�Aq—+
_ ... .,. ern ,.r,..,. - .4n W�5lM'PM•1.1 ���WW 1'��?l+ii .7i�Y�.�a ��d LI
... - ,+ w' ' r..�•» � —�—•'^� -- � "ram ._.,. .. •M �rA'r't.�yl .

Filed Book: 1388 Papa: 320 Doc Id: 6029309
04/02/2001 09:68AM Receipt M: 249%
Doc Coda: DEED NC Exola• Tax Pd: $0.00
BARBARA M GRAY, REGISTER OF DEEDS DARE CO, NC
IIIII�IIII'(Ilill�II I IIIIII IIIII�I�il III IIIII II'I INN 0410 30 01 09:68AM
I
Land Transfer#.
Land Transfer Tax: S
Excise Tax
Recording Time,Book and Page
Tax Lot No. Parcel Identifier No.
Verified by County on the_day of
by
Mail after recording to: John F.Wilson, IV, P.O.Box 1892,Manteo,NC 27954
This instrument was prepared by: John F. Wilson, IV
FBcrry[Wilson Dock Parcel
Brief Description for the index
NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED made this 15'h day of March,2001,by and between
GRANTOR GRANTEE
John F. Wilson,Jr.and wife, Building Resources,Inc.
Estelle J.Wilson P.O. Box 1891
Manteo,NC 27954
Enter in appropriate block for each parry:name,address,and,if appropriate,character of entity,e.g.,corporation or partnership.
The designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties, their heirs, successors, and assigns, and shall include
singular,plural,masculine,feminine or neuter as required by context.
WITNESSETH,that the Grantor,for a valuable consideration paid by the Grantee,the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,has and
by these presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the Grantee in fee simple all that certain lot or parcel of land situated on
Roanoke Island, Nags Head Township,Dare County,North Carolina and more particularly described as follows:
Beginning in the Southern margin of an abandoned roadway of the North Carolina Department ofTransportation,said
beginning point being located South 84 degrees, 14 minutes,04 seconds West,1,535.61 feet from N.C.D.O.T.DISK 40 foot.
O/S Station No. 1 1+74.85 P.T.with survey baselineYB; thence proceeding from the point and place of beginning South 89
degrees,44 minutes,40 seconds East,51.15 feet to a point; thence South 89 degrees,50 minutes,03 seconds Past,16.85 feet
to a point; thence cornering South 00 degrees, 15 minutes,20 seconds West,a distance of approximately 12.31 feet to a
point; thence cornering South 77 degrees, 19 minutes, 13 seconds West, 15.05 feet to a point;thence North 78 degrees,58
minutes,03 seconds West, 16.94 feet to a point;thence cornering North 00 degrees,15 minutes,20 seconds East,a distance
of approximately 15.59 feet to the point of place of beginning. For a more accurate description of the property conveyed
herein,reference is made to that map or parcel captioned "Plat of Berry/Wilson Dock Parcel as claimed by Jack Wilson
Parcel of Land Near Washington Baum Bridge-Roanoke Island—Nags Head Township-Dare County,North Carolina"
dated February 28,2001,prepared by Manson Ray Meekins RLS,a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference as fully set out.
NOTE:THIS FORM CONTAINS REVISIONS WHICH ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE PROVISIONS OFTHE OFFICIAL FORM PROMULGATED BY TIIE
NORTH CAROLINA BAR ASSOCIATION AND SHOULD BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED PRIOR TO EXECU nON.

IIIIIIIIIIiIIllllll!!liIlllllIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIfillIlll Pag : 2 of
e e9:156gM RJ
The property hereinabove described was acquired by Grantor by instrument from Wheeler Berry on May 6, 1996,whose family who had
been in possession of said property from 30 years previously.
A map showing the above described property is recorded in Plat Book: See attached.
TO HAVE AND To HOLD the aforesaid lot or parcel of land and all privileges and appurtenances thereto belonging to the Grantee in fee
simple,the
And the Grantor covenants with the Grantee,that Grantor is Seized of the premises in fee simple,has the right to convey the same in fee
simple,that title is marketable and free and clear of all encumbrances,and that Grantor will warrant and defend the title against the lawful
claims of all persons whomsoever except for the exceptions hereinafter stated.
Title to the property hereinabove described is subject to the following exceptions:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal,or if corporate,has caused this instrument to be signed in its corporate
name by its duly authorized officers and its seal to be hereunto affixed by authority of its Board of Directors,the day and year first above written.
JW4L-1,
h `� I (SEAL)
hn ikon,Jr.
SEAL)
EsteJ.Wilson
C'• '`pattua�gi�i.
WA Rr
i€ North Carolina,Dare County
1 �k CKC
K C 1,the undersigned,a Notary Public ofthe County and State aforesaid,certify drat John F.Wilson,Jr.and wile Estelle Wilson,
s P' 8 Her Grantor,personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the execution of the foregoing instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal,this the 51 day of March,2001
rrc11%ol. °s My commission expires:`l3LLrL�`"��✓ 4(�C: l'
NORTH CAROLINA
DARE COUNTY
The foregoing certificate ofP
a Notary Public of JcarP
is certified to be correct. This instri m�ands certificate are duly registered at the date and time in the Book and
Page shown on the first page hereof.
Barbara
M. Gray, Register of Deeds
By (,1,{�� Q�, Assistant Register of Deeds
NOTE:THIS FORM CONTAI'.VS REVISIONS WHICII ARE DIFFERENT FRONT THE PROVISIONS OFTIIE OFFICIAL.FORM PRO,,%itJl.c;%1'ED BY TIIF.
NORTI1 CAROLINA BAR ASSOCIATION AND SIIOI!LD BE CAREFULLY REVIEWED PRIOR TO EXECUTION.

Filed Book: 1425 Pape: 426 Doc Id: 6061430
04/23/2002 10:25AM Receipt 11; 50617
Doo Code; DEED NC Excise Tax pd: $140.00
BARBARA M GRAY, REGISTER OF DEEDS DARE CO, NC
DARE a PEAL ESTATE III�IIIIIIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIII
/.,,,! ; 'I'K A N '
5 Y E K f A X I�I IIIIII III I�III IIII I II Page:
3�1 02 2
ag :26AM
C O Ll IJ I'>` �
LT =DC
APPROVED
DARE COUNTY TAX
COLLECTOR �7n�
No. qRt(o - ea
Excise Tax $ 140.00 Recording Time, Book and Page
Tax Lot No. .................... . ........ Parcel Identifier No. 025857 007
.............. ..... . .................................. ...............
Verified by ...... .................................. .................... . ...... County on the .. ... ......... day of ...........
by ......................... ................................................
Mail after recording to .McCown&McCown, 300 Sir Walter Raleigh Street,Manteo,NC 27954
. .........................................................................................................................................
... ................................ ....I............................. .. ........................................................................
This instrument was prepared by Alcir.>.dge, Seawell, Felthousen&MaIarney, LLP, 805 North Main Hwy,Manteo,NC 27954
................................................................ ............. ........ .......... ....
Brief description for the Index
Roanoke Island "Boat Ditch" Property]
NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL WARRANTY DEED
THIS DEED made this ...19th„., day of ... ...,April 20.02 , by and between
GRANTOR GRANTEE
The Town of Manteo,a Municapal Corporation John W. Dixon
P. 0. Box 1327
Nags Head, NC 27959
Inter In appropriate block for each party: name, address, and, if appropriate, character of entity, e.q. corporation or partnership.
'he designation Grantor and Grantee as used herein shall include said parties, their heirs, Successors, and assigns, and
hall include singular, plural, masculine, feminine or neuter as required by context.
VITNESSETH, that the Grantor, for a valuable consideration paid by the Grantee, the receipt of which is hereby
cicnowledged, has and by these presents does grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the Grantee in fee simple, all that
ertain lot or parcel of land situated in the t$iF4M . Town of. Manteo _ Nags Head Township,
Dare County, North Carolina and more particularly described as follo��-s:
-kll that certain tract or parcel of land located and being on Roanoke Island, Nags Head Township, Dare County,North Carolina, adjoining
i_l.S. Highway 64-264 leading to Washington Baum Bridge, Roanoke Sound and other lands of Louis Midgett, Sr. and bounded as follows:
BEGINNFNIG at the intersection of the centerline of the pavement of the old abandoned U.S. Highway 64-264 with the Western mean hit,h
.eater mark of Roanoke Sound, the said abandoned U.S. Highw;ty 64-264 lying approximately 125 feet to the South of the present
ight-of-way of U.S. Highway 04-264 leading to Washington Baum Bridge on the East side of Roanoke Island; thence from the begirumle
Joint and along the centerline of the pavement of the abandoned Highway 64-264 South 85 deg. 10 min. West 570.05 feet to a point;
hence continuning along said centerline South 85 deg. 15 min. 23 sec. West 1106.24 feet to a point located and being at the intersection of
:he Southern margin of the right-of-way of the new U.S. Highway 64-264 with the centerline of the pavement of abandoned U.S. Highway
A-264; thence along the Southern margin of the right-of-way of U.S. Highway 64-264 South 77 deg. 57 min. 30 sec. West 321.41 feet to
i point in the centerline of a canal; thence cornering South 4 deg. 40 min. 58 sec. East 43.22 feet to the Southern edge of the right-of-way
)f the in
Electric and Power Company; thence comerilg and along the Southern edge of the aforesaid utility right-of-way in the
✓irginia Electric and Power Company North 85 deg. 19 min. 02 sec. East 1,100 feet to a point; thence North 87 deg, 35 min. 56 sec. East
107.68 feet to the intersection thereof with the Eastern mean high water mark of Roanoke Sound; thence cornering North 8 deg. 21 min.
.7 sec. West 123.46 feet to the point of beginning.
;ame being a portion of those lands known as the L.N. Midgett tract, also known as the A.D. Midgett tract as shown on a map or plat
hereof recorded in Book 13, Page 57, Dare County Registry.
.-here is excepted from the property conveyed herein that portion of property hereinabove described which was included in that Consent
udgment entered into the proceeding captioned "Department of Transportation, Plaintiff v. Ralph G. Reed, Jr, and wile, Freida Recd;
.ouis Midgett, Sr.; Dora L. Midgett; Louis Midgett, .ir.; Robert \lidget: Nancy -4. Murray; Thomas L. White, Jr.,Trustee and huercom,
nc.' and recorded in Deed Book 634 at Page 199 the excepted portion of property being accepted more particularly described as a portion
if that property set forth in that Memorandum of Action recorded in Deed Book 509 at Page 776 in the office of the Regiser of Deeds of
)are County,North Carolina,
C. Bar Assor Form No. L-? 'D 1976. Revised 1g77 i`'�'°A !ln! Sot,t0'O

5061430
I IIIIII IIII II�IIII IIII III�II IIII IIII�I III IIIII IIII IIII 04d/23/2002 10:25AM
The property hereinabove described was acquired by Grantor by instrument recorded in ...........I.......
......................
.......................
_ .... ...._ _... .. .....B.00.k... .16.,....Page...4.1.5,...par.e...Co.unty...Public...Regis.tr.y..........................
A map showing the above described property is recorded in M��a�pp
g.Xa�t Book ......13......... page .......5.7........,
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the aforesaid lot or parcel of land and all privileges and appurtenances thereto belonging to
the Grantee in fee simple.
And the Grantor covenants with the Grantee, that Grantor is seized of the premises in fee simple, has the right to convey
the same in fee simple, that title is marketable and free and clear of all encumbrances, and that Grantor will warrant
and defend the title against the lawful claims of all persons whomsoever except for the exceptions hereinafter stated.
Title to the property hereinabove described is subject to the following exceptions:
(1) Reservation for the benefit of Louis Midgett, Sr. and wife, Dora L. Midgett, and their children, as
set out in deed recorded in Book 392, Page 663,Dare County Registry.
(2) Any an all North Carolina Dept, of Transportation easements and rights of way affecting the
subject property and general service easements affecting the subject premises.
(3) Rights of others in and to the use of any portion of the subject property located below the mean
high water mark and deemed public trust waters by the State of North Carolina or any court of
competent jurisdiction.
(4) Any matters that might be determined by an accurate survey of the subject premises, including,
but not limited to, any deficiencies in quality of land due to erosion or otherwise.
(5) Claims and/or rights of others, if any, to that portion of the property adjoining the canal traversing
same by reason of said third parties'prior use and occupation thereof, including claim in Book
1365, Page 328 and 329,Dare County Registry.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has hereunto set his hand and seal, or If corporate, has caused this Instrument to be signed In its
corporate me by its duly authorized officers and its seal to be hereunto affixed by authority of its Board of Directors, the day and year first
above writnaten.
Town of Manteo
------------------------^ -------(SEAL)
-------Z--� ------
BY: Lee Tugw
!" NORTH CAROLINA,Dare County
I, the undersigned, a Notary Public of the County, and State
aforesaid, certify that on the I'L- _ day of AP-
2002, Lee Tugwell, personally appeared before me and being
first duly sworn deposes and says: that he is Mayor of the
Town of Manteo and that the seal affixed to the foregoing
instrument in writing is the official seal of the Town of
Manteo and that the said writing was signed and sealed by him
on behalf of the Town of Manteo by authority duly and legally
given by the Boatkof Commissioners of the Town of Manteo
as will appear in the Minutes of the Commissioners of the
Town of Manteo for the /3 day of Ft b' 4002. And
the said Lee Tugwell acknowledged the said ing to be the
act and deed of the Town of Manteo by and through its Board
of Commissioners.
Witness my hand and official S. or sea, day of
cam, 2002, otA 0.
My ccnunission expiresrl-
o ary is
00
o "UB OG �.
�e toreaofng. rtf[icate(s) of _ _ ac G 1 ►,v 1 d d --�- -�
-----
---------- ----------------- -a(0---�.---�----- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
ire certified to be correct. This instrument and this certificate are duly registered at the date and time and In the Book and Pate showrf on the
t page hereof.
-------t .�� �
---------------------REGISTER OF DEEDS FOR---_-_-�
� Q„�--_
--------_-.-COUNTY
------- -Deputy/Assistant-Register of Deeds
---------------------------------------