At its March 2006 meeting, the CRC:

• Approved the Town of Duck’s implementation and enforcement plan in order to participate in the CAMA minor permit program.

• Adopted for public hearing proposed changes to draft rule NCAC 7H .0312, Technical Standards for Beach Fill Projects, which outlines sediment criteria rules for beach nourishment projects.

• Approved the removal of existing rule NCAC 7H .0308 (a)(3) Beach Nourishment, when NCAC 7H .0312, Technical Standards for Beach Fill Projects, takes effect.

• Approved a change to variance proceedings for the June 2006 meeting. The four determining factors for each variance request heard at that meeting will be considered and voted upon individually and presentations will be limited to 5 minutes.

• Postponed to the next regular meeting a decision on a variance request by Paul King of Dare County, in order to allow a response from DCM staff based on new information provided by petitioner just prior to the variance hearing. The petitioner sought relief from the commission’s rule regarding development within Fresh Pond Areas of Environmental Concern in order to construct two single-family residences, whose septic systems would be located within 1,200 feet of the Fresh Pond AEC.

• Granted a variance to Jane Edwards of Carteret County, who sought relief from the commission’s riparian setback rule to construct a pier from a 10-ft. wide easement across an adjacent property. The petitioner is unable to meet the required 15-foot setback from the adjacent property owners’ areas of riparian access.

• Denied a variance to the Town of Ocean Isle Beach, et al., who sought relief from the commission’s six-foot height limit for sandbags. The Town, along with 11 property owners, wished to increase the height of a 1,500 linear foot existing sandbag structure to 10 feet in height with a base width of 40 feet.

• Denied a motion for a new trial the case of Brunswick Environmental Action Team (BEAT) v. Division of Coastal Management/Tidal Ventures/Gore. An administrative law judge ruled in this case, and the petitioner then made a motion for a new trial in the Office of Administrative Hearings. The commission then upheld the ALJ’s decision in this case. The ALJ found that DCM did not err in permitting the respondent’s development project in Sunset Beach.

• In the case of Moser v. Division of Coastal Management/Pate, remanded the matter to DCM to comply with the Order of Superior Court reversing the CRC’s decision in a contested case, where the court ordered DCM to re-establish a pre-project vegetation line east of Raleigh St. in Ocean Isle Beach.

CRC actions from 2006: January

CRC actions from 2005: January | April | June | November

CRC actions from 2004: January | April | June | August | October

CRC actions from 2003: January | April | July | October

CRC Actions from 2002: January and February | April | July | October