Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Shoreline Stabilization topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Adjustment approves waiver for shoreline stabilization at 4230 Masonboro Loop Road
Summary
The Wilmington Board of Adjustment unanimously approved a waiver allowing a partially built steel‑pile sill and associated riprap at 4230 Masonboro Loop Road after finding three of four required findings satisfied; the applicant said erosion has been documented since 2013 and a CAMA permit had been issued but city approval was not in place.
The Wilmington Board of Adjustment on March 19 unanimously approved a waiver allowing a partially built shoreline stabilization sill and associated riprap at 4230 Masonboro Loop Road.
Brian Chambers, who presented the item to the board, told members the waiver seeks to permit a water‑dependent erosion‑control measure on a 1.68‑acre property adjacent to coastal wetlands and Whiskey Creek. Chambers said a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) permit had been issued for the structure but that the property owner had not secured city approval, prompting a stop‑work order in November.
Applicant Jeff Workman, who identified himself as the owner of 4230 Masonboro Loop Road, said the shoreline has been eroding since 2013 and that CAMA recommended a free‑standing sill wall with riprap at each end. "I've been dealing with this erosion since 2013," Workman said, and showed maps and photos he said document the shoreline loss.
Board members asked whether the structure would impair navigation or adjacent properties. Chambers and Workman said the Division of Coastal Management staked the allowable location and that the permitted wall had been sited to avoid the navigation channel. Staff also told the board that because the constructed segment is in the water, the third finding of fact (which limits how far structures may extend from land into resource buffers) did not apply.
Workman told the board his CAMA permit authorized up to 56 feet of free‑standing sill wall and that the constructed portion measures about 54 feet. Staff said CAMA had paused its permit timing to allow the applicant to seek city approval; staff also said modifications would be required to meet CAMA standards (for example, spacing to allow water passage and final riprap placement behind the sill).
After discussion, a board member moved to approve the waiver "as presented" based on the three applicable findings of fact; another member seconded. Members voted in favor and the motion passed unanimously.
The board entered the application materials into the record, closed the evidentiary hearing when no additional evidence was presented, and adjourned the meeting. The board did not specify follow‑up deadlines in the hearing record; compliance with CAMA and any required modifications remain conditions for final completion of the work.
