|
Monday, 04 April 2011 13:03 |
|
In the summer of 2010, BASE began tracking an emerging issue regarding the Army Corps of Engineers and its policy regarding setbacks along federal channels, including the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (ICWW). In short, the Corps issued policy changes in 2009 which, after further review from BASE, appeared to impact every property and dock along the AICWW throughout the Corps Wilmington District--which encompasses the entirety of North Carolina's coast. This policy delineates the mandatory channel setbacks from the waterway and impacts whether new structures, like piers and docks, can be built. Furthermore, the policy impacts whether these types of structures can be reconstructed after a storm event or repaired and maintained. Due to the policy's significant implications throughout North Carolina, BASE asked to meet with representatives from Congressman Mike McIntyre's office and with Corps officials to discuss the issue and provide comments.
For a visual example of the setbacks, see the photos below. Areas in red delineate the expanded and refined setbacks currently in place. Structures within these red areas will face difficulties rebuilding should they be impacted by a storm, fire, etc. FOR MORE INFORMATION see BASE's Presentation on Corps Setbacks (March 2011).
On March 15th of this year, the Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers released a revised "Commander's Policy” regarding “Setbacks Along Federally Authorized Waterways." These revisions clarified the impacts of the setback policy in a number of different areas including bends in the AIWW, inlets, and channel crossings. While the new 2011 document will have a significant impact, it is estimated that the revisions cut the estimated total of 750 structures initially impacted to approximately 400. Not included in the 400 structures “still encroaching” are the waterfront lots which may have lost water access due to the changes in setbacks. As the impacts will be on a property-by-property basis, landowners and real estate professionals are urged to use the Corps mapping tool (LINK) to best gauge the impact on their properties.
“We appreciate the Corps willingness to sit down and discuss the challenges and make some modifications which were included in the 2011 policy. However, the impact this change has on current landowners on the coast remains significant. According to the estimates, there are now 400 structures which can remain in place, but don’t comply with the new setbacks and will face significant difficulties if impacted by a storm or a fire. Properties will be impacted on a case-by-case basis, so it would be advisable for property owners to consult the Corps mapping tool to see how their properties and investments may or may not be impacted. Another outstanding question is how the rule change will impact disclosure on lots that have been listed with waterway access that now, under the new rule, no longer can build a structure,” said Newman.
He adds, “These changes will have a significant fiscal impact on individual property owners as well as county tax bases. In spite of the changes, some place, like Holden Beach will continue to have numerous structures and lots impacted. The actual financial impact per lot will vary, but one person estimated that losing water access would cut the value of a lot in half. This would eventually carry over to the value of future homes built on the property and the subsequent taxable value used to assess taxes. The impact to the tax base will be significant. Effectively, we have cut in half the value of some of the most valuable remaining lots in our coastal counties. The affects on property values in a fragile real estate market has repercussions for every sector in the coastal economy.”
The 2011 policy has been signed by the acting Colonel of the Corps district and is now the policy in place. However, the Corps will be distributing information on revised policy and maps which demonstrate the impacts. Additionally, the Corps will be accepting comments and will make information available for individual landowners with questions.
|
|
|
Friday, 18 March 2011 10:42 |
|
Unfortunately, one of members in New Hanover County has been embroiled in an issue over the past year with local Health Department staff—and subsequently DENR-- which has cost this 16 lot project over a year in delays and a cost increase of $100,000. This issue has elevated to a discussion with DENR in Raleigh where they backed up their position with a “verbal opinion” from an unnamed employee in the AG’s office. This is not a sufficient factual explanation for something which will impact a large number of existing lots in North Carolina.
The issue revolves around the setbacks required for septic systems and a “verbal opinion” that treats easements the same as property lines—requiring a 10 foot setback. The crux of the issue is outlined in an email from DENR staff from the summer of 2010 which ostebsibly provides a new interpretation of 18A .1950(a)(12), identifying “our attorney” as the source,:
|
|
Friday, 18 March 2011 09:15 |
|
We along with our Coalition members at the Topsail Island Association of REALTORS® have been receiving many inquiries with regard to the current tax revaluation and the associated appeals process. We have posed this question to the Pender County Tax Assessor, Anthony Masiero for a more complete response. Following is that response:
The informal appeal process as the name implies is not a statutory step. It’s done mostly to catch any no brainer errors we may have made, which are commonly keying errors – with close to 50,000 parcels it’s bound to happen. The deadline is set so we can finish accumulating all of the informal appeals, make decisions on them, and correct them in our software and mail out decision letters in time to start the formal appeal process, the Board of Equalization and Review (BOER).
The BOER process is statutory, and has to begin no later than the first Monday in May which is why we set up a deadline for the informal appeals. The BOER can start as early as the first Monday in April, and so we will start it as soon as we can but the volume of the informals will dictate that to some degree. If someone misses the informal process they can still by law appeal up until the BOER adjourns for the year. While it’s not required we’d certainly prefer anyone that is going to appeal do so through the informal process first because it might be just a clerical error on their record, and we’d like to fix those. Plus it gives us a better forecast of how many BOER appeals we’ll have.
The taxpayer can continue on and appeal BOER decisions to the Property Tax Commission at the state level, and those decisions can be appealed to the State Court of Appeals and on up to the State Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 6 of 57 |
