20141165 Ver 3_Denial Discussion Emails_20160907

Strickland, Bev
From: Brian Rubino <[e-mail]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 3:41 PM
To: Bland, Raleigh W SAW; Scarbraugh, Anthony; Biddlecome, William J SAW
Cc: Huggett, Doug; Howell, Jonathan; Hart, Kevin
Subject: RE: Carawan Marina Denial Discussion
Attachments: Carawan 38-96MM Denial Letter.pdf, CAMA Major 20-15.pdf
Raleigh,
I'll call to discuss. Since DCM's position is that matting is an acceptable construction technique and that the existing
permit does not need to be modified by them to be able to use temporary matting, we would not have to modify the
existing permit unless USACE or DWR requires this.
Thanks,
Brian
-----Original Message -----
From: Bland, Raleigh W SAW[mai lto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 3:34 PM
To: Brian Rubino <[e-mail]>; Scarbraugh, Anthony<[e-mail]>; Biddlecome,
William J SAW <[e-mail]>
Cc: Huggett, Doug <[e-mail]>; Howell, Jonathan <[e-mail]>; Hart, Kevin
<[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Carawan Marina Denial Discussion
USACE was in position to issue the permit provided it made it through the State's process. In this regard we had
provided recommended permit conditions to NCDCM for inclusion in the issued permit in addition to the mitigation
transfer responsibility form. If the State's position is resolved we will then proceed with the Federal authorization, but
until then, without the required CZM, we are in a Denial without Prejudice status. Hope this helps and please call if there
are any additional questions or items that we can address......
-----Original Message -----
From: Brian Rubino [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 3:14 PM
To: Bland, Raleigh W SAW <[e-mail]>; Scarbraugh, Anthony
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Huggett, Doug <[e-mail]>; Howell, Jonathan <[e-mail]>; Hart, Kevin
<[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] FW: Carawan Marina Denial Discussion
Raleigh and Anthony,
You are probably aware that the recent Carawan Marina CAMA Major Modification request was denied by DCM. Initially
after receiving this, the owner was in favor of appealing the permit decision and/or applying for a CAMA variance. I
have been working with his attorney to attempt to identify a solution that is acceptable to Phillip and will allow his
permitted jetties to be built w/o appeal or variance. The modification request was for wetland impacts/fill to be able to

access, build and maintain the western jetty. We received the 401 cert for this and I believe we were on track to receive
USACE approval (if DCM was able to permit). I believe that temporary timber matting during construction will be
adequate. DCM is in agreeance that this is acceptable (and allowed under the existing permit) and the purpose of this
email is to confirm that DWR and USACE will also allow this under the existing permit as well. Please advise and let me
know if we should discuss further. See below email to Doug Huggett. I have also discussed with Jonathan Howell. Both
are cc'd here.
Thanks,
Brian
Brian D. Rubino, P.G.
Vice President
Quible & Associates, P.C.
8466 Caratoke Highway, Bldg 400
Powells Point, NC 27966
P.O. Drawer 870
Kitty Hawk, NC 27949
t 252.491.8147
f 252.491.8146
Blockedwww.quible.com <Blockedhttp://www.quible.com/>
LEGAL DISCLAIMER
The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking action in
reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have
received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.

From: Huggett, Doug [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 9:35 AM
To: Brian Rubino <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: Carawan Marina Denial Discussion
Brian
I just got back in from vacation. I am looking into this and will call you as soon as I can get up with Jonathan and discuss
with him.
Thanks
Doug
Doug Huggett
Manager, Major Permits and Federal Consistency Section
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management
[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
[phone] ext. 212
From: Brian Rubino [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, September 02, 2016 4:14 PM
To: Hart, Kevin <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> >; Howell, Jonathan
<[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> >; Spears, Courtney
<[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]> >; Huggett, Doug <[e-mail]
<mailto:[e-mail]> >
Subject: Carawan Marina Denial Discussion
W

Today I spoke with the owner, Phillip Carawan about what his goals are and possible options. I tried to call you all this
afternoon and left messages, but I think this storm may have caused some early closures. I've also had a brief discussion
with an attorney who may try to help us, but our goal is to come up with a solution and avoid appeals, and even
variances, if at all possible. I very much would like to talk with you ASAP about whether Mr. Carawan and/or his
contractor could use timber mats to access the western jetty location for construction. I know such mats are used all
the time for logging operations in wetlands, so I think the Corps will be OK with it. My thought is that DCM might be
able to also allow this as an exemption from the definition of development, or from the coastal buffer rule if we
document that this will only be a temporary access to complete already CAMA permitted development work. I was
thinking we could send DCM a letter describing the matting we would use, how long it would be there, and how we
would assure that the area was fully restored to its natural condition after the rock is moved in. We realize we might
not be able to get the entire jetty length done this way, but if we can get the nearshore part done this way, it greatly
would help as the water depths are generally shallowest near the shore. There is no specific related language in the
existing permit. In this scenario, the 404 area to be crossed would be temporary and the 30' buffer area would be fully
restored upon completion. I understand that you cannot speak for USACE and DWR, but they have already indicated
approval for permanent impacts here, so I suspect temporary crossing would be acceptable to them. If this is allowed by
DCM, we can follow with confirmation from those agencies. It is important to know DCM's position ASAP since the
appeal deadline is near.
Thanks,
Brian D. Rubino, P.G.
Vice President
Quible & Associates, P.C.
8466 Caratoke Highway, Bldg 400
Powells Point, NC 27966
P.O. Drawer 870
Kitty Hawk, NC 27949
t 252.491.8147
f 252.491.8146
Blockedwww.quible.com <Blockedhttp://www.quible.com/>
LEGAL DISCLAIMER

The information transmitted is intended solely for the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of or taking action in
reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have
received this email in error please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
5

Yliillip Uarawan Permit # 20 15
Page 2 of 3
`
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Shoreline Stabilization
3)
Unless specifically altered herein, this:permit authorizesonly the construction of the riprap and bulkhead
`
that are expressly and s c"
p y pe zfically set forth in the permit application and workplan drawing.
4)
The bulkhead shall be structurally tight so as to prevent seepage of backfill materials through the
structure.
5)
The bulkhead shall be solid and constructed of treated wood, concrete slabs, in sheet piles or other
suitable materials approved by department personnel. No excavation landward of the authorized
alignment is permitted except for that which may be required for the construction of the bulkhead wall,
ripr"ap eadmen cables, etc
6)
The riprap material shall be free from loose dirt or any. pollutant. It shall be of a size suff tient to
prevent its movement from the approved alignment by wave or current action.
}�
7)
The riprap material shall consist of clean rock or masonry materials such as but not limited to granite,
marl, or broken concrete.
8)
All backfill material shall be clean and ,free of any pollutants except in trace quantities.
9)All
backfill
material shalt. be obtained from a high ground source --and confined behuid the permitted
bulkhead:.
Channel Excavation
10)
Unlessz specifically altered herein, 4he dimensions of the areato be excavated shall :not exceed -the area
that is expressl and s ecif call' set forth in. the atach ed e
Y p yp rmrt application and workplan drawings.
Any proposal to change the area to be excavated shall requirepermit modification.
1 l)
Excavation shall not exceed —6:5 feet below the normal water level. In no case shall the depth of
excavation exceed.the depth of connecting waters.
12)
In order to protect anadromous fish spawning, no excavation shall be permitted between February 1-5
and September 30 of any year without the prior approval of the Division of Coastal Management.
13)
The temporary placement or double handling of excavated materials within, waters or vegetated wetlands
is not authorized.
Spoil Disposal
14)
All excavated materials shall be confined above normal 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,
GC}h}YK.YYM+.dK�C'rM{-,�wr�}7�i✓r}C+'n �d✓1{%.n{K '+*. ; .a}i Y�+f r�: �S{ r:. +r'r:. 5•r:{ rdw.�.;..,+.N.: 'r7rl:^:d.}{,� ;dtid�tH;N::PrS dP}+ � }+r;.}i?+r.W' r.r'r{ Yr4.�ar}}}; ✓ i5!✓.✓AA.ti^i+'w}::ar7�}v}ii+}},..}f.�.}}<p}t.;

Phillip Carawan Permit # 20-15
Page 3 of 3
k ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
15) Any .change in the spoil disposal area shall require additional authorization from the Division of Coastal
Management.
'Sedimentation and Erosion Control
16) In order to protect water quality, runoff from construction shall not visibly increase the amount of
suspended sediments in adjacent waters.
17) Appropriate sedimentation and erosion control devices, measures or structures shall be implemented to
ensure that eroded materials do not enter adjacent wetlands, watercourses and property (e.g. silt fence,
diversion swales or berms, etc.).
18) All disturbed areas shall be properly graded and provided a ground cover sufficient to restrain erosion
within thirty days of project completion.
General
19) 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.
20) No open water areas or vegetated wetlands shall be excavated or filled outside the area indicated in the
attached workplan drawing.
21) This permit shall not be assigned, transferred, sold, or otherwise disposed of to a third party without the
written approval of the Division of Coastal Management.
22) The permitteeand/or contractor shall meet with a representative of the Division of Coastal .Management
prior to project initiations in order to discuss the conditions set forth in this permit.
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 water level.
NOTE: The N.C. Division of Water .Quality has assigned the`proposed project DWQ'Prcject No. 14-
1165.
NOTE: The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has assigned the proposed project COE Action Id. No. SAW -
2014 -02109.

Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
August 17, 2016
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Phillip Carawan
PO Box 164
Columbia, NC 27925
Dear Mr. Carawan:
PAT MCCRORY
(iVl'e1%i01'
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Sv,nw)v
BRAXTON DAVIS
Oneo"
This letter is in response to your application for a Major Modification to Permit No. 38-96 under the
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), in which authorization was requested to fill Section 404
wetlands for an access road to facilitate the construction of previously authorized jetties and
maintenance excavation of the channel adjacent to the Albemarle Sound, at 1218 Woodard Road in
Tyrrell County. Processing of the application, which was received as complete by the Division of
Coastal Management's Washington Regional Office on May 2, 2016 is now complete. Based on the
state's review, the Division of Coastal Management has made the following findings:
1) The proposed project is a Major Modification to CAMA Major Permit No. 38-96. Major
Permit No. 38-96, which was originally issued on March 15, 1996 to Mr. Warren Woodard,
authorized excavation of a boat basin with a channel and boat ramp. Since the issuance of the
original permit, there have been modifications and/or permit transfers, including the
following:
a) A Minor Modification issued on September 10, 1997 for construction of two
wooden groins into the Albemarle Sound;
b) A Minor Modification issued on October 7, 1998 authorizing the use of
riprap to stabilize the east side of the canal;
c) Permit No. 38-96 was transferred to Lilias J. Morison and Jennifer Frost on
April 12, 2004;
d) Permit No. 38-96 was transferred again on January 12, 2014 to Mr. Phillip
Carawan.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue I Morehead City, NC 28557
252-808-28081252-247-3330(fax)

Phillip Carawan
August 17, 2017
Page 2
e) A Major Modification was issued on February 27, 2015 which authorized
construction of two rock groins, rip rap shoreline stabilization, and wetland
excavation.
2) Major Permit 38-96 has been renewed numerous times and currently expires December 31,
2018.
3) The subject property -is -located -adjacent to Albemarle -Sound.— -
4) The proposed access road project would involve development within the Coastal Shorelines
Area of Environmental Concern (AEC).
5) The proposed access road project would fill 5,321 square feet of vegetated Section 404
wetlands.
6) According to the workplan drawing submitted by the applicant (Sheet 1 of 1 dated revised
4/15/16), all of the proposed access road would be constructed within the 30 -foot coastal
shoreline buffer.
7) In accordance with 15A NCAC 07H.0208(a)(1), private roads are not considered to be water
dependent development.
8) The area to be filled within the Coastal Shorelines AEC is not currently considered an existing
impervious surface.
9) Based upon the preceding findings, the proposed project has been found to be inconsistent
with 15A NCAC 07H.0209(b)(10(A), which states
(10) Within the Coastal Shorelines category (estuarine and public trust shoreline AECs), new
development shall be located a distance of 30 feet landward of the normal water level or
normal high water level, with the exception of the following:
(A) Water -dependent uses as described in Rule 07H. 0208(a)(1) of this Section;
(B) Pile -supported signs (in accordance with local regulations);
(C) Post- or pile -supported fences;
(D) Elevated, slatted, wooden boardwalks exclusively for pedestrian use and six feet in
width or less. The boardwalk may be greater than six feet in width if it is to serve a
public use or need;
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
1367 US Hwy 17 South J Elizabeth City, NC 27909
252-264-3901

Phillip Carawan
August 17, 2017
Page 3
(E) Crab Shedders, if uncovered with elevated trays and no associated impervious
surfaces except those necessary to protect the pump;
(F) Decks/Observation Decks limited to slatted, wooden, elevated and unroofed decks
that shall not singularly or collectively exceed 200 square feet;
(G) Grading, excavation and landscaping with no wetland fill except when required by
a permitted shoreline stabilization project. Projects shall not increase_s__tormwater_____
runoff to adjacent estuarine and public trust waters;
(H) Development over existing impervious surfaces, provided that the existing
impervious surface is not increased and the applicant designs the project to comply
with the intent of the rules to the maximum extent feasible;
(1) Where application of the buffer requirement would preclude placement of a
residential structure with a footprint of 1,200 square feet or lesson lots, parcels and
tracts platted prior to June 1, 1999, development may be permitted within the buffer as
required in Subparagraph (d)(10) of this Rule, providing the following criteria are
met:
(i) Development shall minimize the impacts to the buffer and reduce runoff by
limiting land disturbance to only so much as is necessary to construct and
provide access to the residence and to allow installation or connection of
utilities such as water and sewer: and
(ii) The residential structure development shall be located a distance landward
of the normal high water or normal water level equal to 20 percent of the
greatest depth of the lot. Existing structures that encroach into the applicable
buffer area may be replaced or repaired consistent with the criteria set out in
Rules. 0201 and. 0211 in Subchapter 07J of this Chapter; and
(J) Where application of the buffer requirement set out in 15A NCAC 07H
.0209(d)(10) would preclude placement of a residential structure on an undeveloped
lot platted prior to June 1, 1999 that are 5, 000 square feet or less that does not require
an on-site septic system, or on an undeveloped lot that is 7,500 square feet or less that
requires an on-site septic system, development may be permitted within the buffer if all
the following criteria are met:
(i) The lot on which the proposed residential structure is to be located, is
located between:
(I) Two existing waterfront residential structures, both of which are
within 100 feet of the center of the lot and at least one of which
encroaches into the buffer; or
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
1367 US Hwy 17 South I Elizabeth City, NC 27909
252-264-3901

Phillip Carawan
August 17, 2017
Page 4
(II) An existing waterfront residential structure that encroaches into the
buffer and a road, canal, or other open body of water, both of which
are within 100 feet of the center of the lot;
(ii) Development of the lot shall minimize the impacts to the buffer and reduce
runoff by limiting land disturbance to only so much as is necessary to construct
and provide access to the residence and to allow installation or connection of
(iii) Placement of the residential structure and pervious decking may be
aligned no further into the buffer than the existing residential structures and
existing pervious decking on adjoining lots;
(iv) The first one and one-half inches of rainfall from all impervious surfaces
on the lot shall be collected and contained on-site in accordance with the
design standards for stormwater management for coastal counties as specified
in 15A NCAC 02H.1005. The stormwater management system shall be
designed by an individual who meets applicable State occupational licensing
requirements for the type of system proposed and approved during the permit
application process. If the residential structure encroaches into the buffer, then
no other impervious surfaces will be allowed within the buffer; and
(v) The lots must not be adjacent to waters designated as approved or
conditionally approved shellfish waters by the Shellfish Sanitation Section of
the Division of Environmental Health of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources.
Given the preceding findings, it is necessary that your request for issuance of a CAMA Major Permit
under the Coastal Area Management Act be denied. This denial is made pursuant to N.C.G.S. 113A -
120(a)(8) which requires denial for projects inconsistent with the state guidelines for Areas of
Environmental Concern or local land use plans.
If you wish to appeal this denial, you are entitled to a contested case hearing. The hearing will
involve appearing before an Administrative Law Judge who listens to evidence and arguments of
both parties before making a final decision on the appeal. Your request for a hearing must be in the
form of a written petition, complying with the requirements of § 150B of the General Statutes of
North Carolina, and must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-6714, within twenty (20) days from the date of this denial letter. A copy
of this petition should be filed with this office.
Another response to a permit denial available to you is to petition the Coastal Resources Commission
for a variance to undertake a project that is prohibited by the Rules of the Coastal Resources
Commission. Applying for a variance requires that you first acknowledge and recognize that the
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
1367 US Hwy 17 South Elizabeth City, NC 27909
252-264-3901

Phillip Carawan
August 17, 2017
Page 5
Division of Coastal Management applied the Rules of the Coastal Resources Commission properly in
processing and issuing this denial. You may then request an exception to the Commission's Rules
based on hardships to you resulting from unusual conditions of the property. To apply for a variance,
you must file a petition for a variance with the Director of the Division of Coastal Management and
the State Attorney General's Office on a standard form, which must be accompanied by additional
information on the nature of the project and the reasons for requesting a variance. The variance
request may be filed at any but must be filed a miniirium of six -weeks before a scheduled
Commission meeting for the variance request to be eligible to be heard at that meeting. The standard
variance forms may be obtained by contacting a member of my staff, or by visiting the Division's
web page at http://deq.ne.gov/about/divisions/coastal-management/coastal-manae_ement-
permits/variances-appeals .
Members of my staff are available to assist you should you desire to modify your proposal in the
future. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mrs. Courtney Spears at
[phone] extension 215.
Sincerely,
Braxton C. Davis
Director, NC Division of Coastal Management
cc: Col. Kevin P. Landers — U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington, NC
OCRM/NOAA, Silver Spring, MD
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
1367 US Hwy 17 South I Elizabeth City, NC 27909
252-264-3901