“He doesn’t get it, this is what it is all about. It is about that he did not ask for and get the permit that he knew he needed to have. And then when he got permits, he violated them. This whole issue is about permits and it is unfortunate that he does not understand that. And he stands up in front of us and tells us it is not about permits. It is shocking that his attorney has not told him it is about permits. Everyone acknowledges that there are clear violations going on. The owner was intelligent enough to know that he was doing something improper and yet everything went ahead anyway. I am concerned about this attitude of total disregard of what the rules are when everybody else has to abide by them. If this gentleman is given a free pass it sets a very bad tone for the entire community. This is a dilemma for the Board, we have something that has helped the area and is being used, possibly improperly as residence, which it is not zoned for, and a clear violation of permits and the rules that are set up in the County. We need to address that.” – RH Meyers, Northampton County Wetlands Board in response to Eyre Baldwin’s unpermitted construction in the wetlands at Salt Grove.
The unpermitted work included a new bulkhead out 10 feet channelward, extending further out into the wetlands, thus increasing the property’s footprint. A new 10 x 16 dock was built to the new bulkhead. The excuse for moving the bulkhead out was to create a more robust tieback system. In the process, approximately 200 square feet of State owned subaqueous bottom, 500 square feet of vegetated intertidal mudflat, and 500 square feet of vegetated tidal wetlands were impacted.
Mr. Baldwin also built a floating dock, new pilings and a gangway (ramp), and a concrete pad to the east has been constructed. The owner attempted to eradicate phragmites near the slab, and has added a geotextile base and covered it with shells. Disturbances to the wetlands did occur.
While there was a $7500 penalty for the action, the maximum the Wetlands Board could levy, to this point, the County has not received payment of the fine.
At Salt Grove, absurdity seems to hold no bounds. The structure had been used as an event/vacation rental, however the 2016 zoning ordinance removed that use, which prompted the owners to apply for a new use as a shellfish watch house, which was eventually approved.
An oyster watch house? Most watch houses were constructed in the late 1800’s when the state started leasing ground for oyster beds to the dominant shucking houses. They were manned 24/7, and the sentries were armed, tasked with protecting the beds from poachers. In some cases, entire families moved in to watch over the beds. That hardly seems like the case at Salt Grove. Whether or not there is even a bed worth watching in that location is debatable. The following email trail exposes continued non-compliance:
From: thornton@shorecontainer.com [mailto:thornton@shorecontainer.com]
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2017 02:47 PM
To: smcghee@co.northampton.va.us, ‘Janice Williams’
Cc: bjones@co.northampton.va.us, ckolakowski@co.northampton.va.us,
‘Granville Hogg – Board of Supervisors’, bpleatherbury@co.northampton.va.us,
Shawn.Smith@deq.virginia.gov
Subject: 19489 Robin Road Cape Charles Porch and Pad FOIA
|
Hello All,
I am requesting a FOIA on documentation that “compliance has been achieved” for the porch and pad added to the “Oyster Watch House” at 19489 Robin Road, Cape Charles, VA. Please remember there was no water quality impact assessment, building permit or land disturbance permit during this time.
Bruce Jones outlined this in his email below:
Dear Mr. Tayloe: Your e-mail of May 31, 2017, was, as you know, forwarded to me for response. I apologize for the delay in doing so. I am also in receipt of your July 24, 2017, email. You ask whether non-paying guests are allowed to use a watch house for the night and whether a “watchman” is allowed to have “overnight guests/girlfriends spend the night with him.” Normally, it is not among the functions of the zoning administrator, absent a specific proposal for a use or a request for zoning clearance, to give advisory opinions about the permitted uses of real estate in the County. The zoning ordinance speaks for itself. However, you have lodged complaints with respect to the use of the watch house and, accordingly, I think you are entitled to know the County’s thinking on the issue. Unfortunately, as you are undoubtedly aware, “watch house”, though a use permitted by right in the district in which the watch house in question is located, is not defined in the ordinance and the applicable performance standards do not address the issues you raise. As a result, the County has not, thus far at least, considered it to be appropriate to prosecute such activities as violations of the ordinance. You also ask what penalties will be assessed against the owner of the watch house for possible violations resulting from the occupancy of the watch house before a certificate of occupancy had been issued. You ask the same question about the “porch and pad [added] to the grader shed/watch house with no building permit.” County staff attempts to work with citizens to secure compliance where there are violations and, on the matters you raise, did so. Compliance has been achieved and, while such a result will not invariably deter prosecution, it often does and in this case the Board of Supervisors sees no reason to pursue the matter further. Bruce D. Jones, Jr. Northampton County Attorney Please let me know when the appropriate documentation has been produced. I would like to receive these after-the-fact permits.
Also, why have I never seen a silt fence at the wharf facility before, during or after construction? Does Northampton County require silt fences for an area entirely inside the 100 foot setback for the Chesapeake Bay Act? I have plenty of pictures documenting this activity over the past decade that has happened inches from our creek. I even have pictures with concrete and other debris going into the water! It is odd because the County recently granted a land disturbance permit on this property bordering this 100 setback that has a silt fence up.
I appreciate it!
Thanks and have a great day, |
—-Original Message—–
From: thornton@shorecontainer.com [mailto:thornton@shorecontainer.com]
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2017 02:28 PM
To: smcghee@co.northampton.va.us, ‘Janice Williams’, Hank.Badger@mrc.virginia.gov
Cc: bjones@co.northampton.va.us, ckolakowski@co.northampton.va.us,
‘Granville Hogg – Board of Supervisors’, bpleatherbury@co.northampton.va.us
Subject: Weekend Guests at the Watchouse
|
Hello All,
I hope all is well!
We had more weekend guests living at the “Oyster Watch House” this past weekend. At approximately 9:30pm on Friday night we saw two guests enter the bulding with multiple bags and hanging clothes. They left the next morning and came back late Saturday for another night. They packed their numerous bags and hanging clothes on Sunday to make their way back to Maryland. I have pictures with dates and times if these are needed. I am not sure if these guests were renting the facility, as it had been rented nightly in the past.
I spoke with Susan McGhee about this. She stated Bruce Jones should of answered my questions about overnight guests that were not the “Oyster Watch Man” in his email below. She went on to state there were no rules on how this “Oyster Watch House” could be used.
Here it the email from Bruce Jones:
Dear Mr. Tayloe: Your e-mail of May 31, 2017, was, as you know, forwarded to me for response. I apologize for the delay in doing so. I am also in receipt of your July 24, 2017, email. You ask whether non-paying guests are allowed to use a watch house for the night and whether a “watchman” is allowed to have “overnight guests/girlfriends spend the night with him.” Normally, it is not among the functions of the zoning administrator, absent a specific proposal for a use or a request for zoning clearance, to give advisory opinions about the permitted uses of real estate in the County. The zoning ordinance speaks for itself. However, you have lodged complaints with respect to the use of the watch house and, accordingly, I think you are entitled to know the County’s thinking on the issue. Unfortunately, as you are undoubtedly aware, “watch house”, though a use permitted by right in the district in which the watch house in question is located, is not defined in the ordinance and the applicable performance standards do not address the issues you raise. As a result, the County has not, thus far at least, considered it to be appropriate to prosecute such activities as violations of the ordinance. You also ask what penalties will be assessed against the owner of the watch house for possible violations resulting from the occupancy of the watch house before a certificate of occupancy had been issued. You ask the same question about the “porch and pad [added] to the grader shed/watch house with no building permit.” County staff attempts to work with citizens to secure compliance where there are violations and, on the matters you raise, did so. Compliance has been achieved and, while such a result will not invariably deter prosecution, it often does and in this case the Board of Supervisors sees no reason to pursue the matter further. Bruce D. Jones, Jr. Northampton County Attorney I have the following questions:
– Why was a permit given when there is no ordinance defining a “Oyster Watch House”?
– Is an “Oyster Watch House” allowed to be used as a dwelling for overnight guests? I would like a yes or no answer on this.
The letter (please see attached) that was sent to Eyre Baldwin, Bert Turner (Baldwin Lawyer) and John Outten (Building Official) dated November 14th, 2016 from Melissa Kellam and Bruce Jones outlines the intended use of an “Oyster Watch House” and specifically states the following:
– “Is not designed to be used as a dwelling.”
Furthermore, this same letter states “documents and other evidence demonstrating you have leased shellfish grounds within viewing distance of the watch house and that these shellfish grounds are currently in use.”
– Why was a permit given when you cannot see Eyre Baldwin’s oyster ground from the “Oyster Watch House”? Please see attached map. These grounds are in another area on the opposite side of a piece of land. There is land, a house and a 2 areas of forest blocking the view.
– I still cannot find any information that these grounds are currently in use? Could you please supply me with this information?
I appreciate it!
Thanks and have a great day, |
The fact that the county would not pursue further civil violations for the unpermitted work, and would then approve a use like an oyster watch house raises concerns. These concerns have been raised by District 1 Supervisor Granville Hogg on multiple occasions, but they have thus far fallen on deaf ears.
In the Mathai case, the county seemed willing to drop the hammer. Why is the Salt Grove developer allowed to walk away with a hardly a slap on the wrist? Why is there no consistency in penalties? If it had not been for a citizen following up, would there have been any attempt to retrieve the $7500 fine?
About the Author
Would the author of this article like to elaborate on the motives behind this “citizen” who is so diligently following up with the county? It would be interesting to know whether or not Mr. Tayloe has made an offer to purchase Salt Grove.
Is he trying to devalue the property and make circumstances so uncomfortable for the owner & so unattractive to other potential purchasers so he can purchase the land at a steal?
It seems to me that the owner of Salt Grove is being bullied in this situation so that he is forced to sell to Mr Tayloe and that Mr. Creed is practicing biased journalism to satisfy his own agenda.