Janet McDonald

James Stegeman

April 21, 2020

CEO Michael L. Thurmond
1300 Commerce Drive,
Decatur, GA 30030
CEOMichaelThurmond@dekalbcountyga.gov
DeKalb County Board of Commissioners
1300 Commerce Drive
Decatur, GA 30030
BOCinfo@dekalbcountyga.gov
Andrew Baker, Director
DeKalb County Dept. Planning and Sustainability
330 W. Ponce de Leon Ave.
Decatur, GA 30030
plansustain@dekalbcountyga.gov
Roads & Drainage Division
727 Camp Rd.
Decatur, GA 30032
rad_customerservice@dekalbcountyga.gov

RE: Sheppard Rd Stone Mountain, GA 30083-3642

Permit Numbers: 3053976, 3053985

The admitted contingency for the variance to be granted, was that the site plan/survey had
to show the Sheppard Rd. non-exclusive ingress egress easement of 10 feet between
the properties.
They have violated the easement, destroyed tree roots within the easement, and torn up
blacktop on the easement.
There is a definite problem with the size of the lot.
We have all the tax and appraisal records since 2002 and earlier, plus the tax sale records,
Certified tax statement from 2019 all show that the size of the lot is 0.10 acres. Not 0.14,
not 0.15, not 0.16, only 00.10. The tax map shows that there is 150 feet along between the
properties, which is in agreement with our warranty deed, their site plan shows 170 feet.
Theses discrepancies, are not just a little here and a little there, which when it comes to
property, is too much by itself. These are quite a bit different. Taking half again as much
property as they have .10 of an acre is the true amount of property, and they show it up to
.15 and .16. And where do you think they steal it from? Then the 170 feet false
measurement, versus the true 150 feet, that is a lot of difference.
Walter Prince has had his license revoked for one year previously for falsifying surveys
and site plats. Swearingen pled guilty to kidnapping in Cobb County and was on 15 years
of probation, during which time, he had no license, and when the probation ended, his
contractor license was given back on probationary period at first. The previous owner,
Nehemiah Wells had been guilty of abusing and raping a minor, and did seven years in
prison. These people have not quit violating Georgia’s penal codes, building codes, or
zoning codes.
The non-conforming status went out the window when the property was not lived in for 30
years and changed hand 6-12 times, just in the last 7-8 years. Plus, you cannot suffer a
hardship, when you have the duty of due diligence prior to buying a cheap piece of property
that is in violation of all zoning laws in the county. Investors don’t suffer hardships by
buying property in violation of all zoning laws, and want to put a new house on it, that is
much too large for the yard.
The current site plat shows the following falsified items on the site plan:
*They are stealing 1272 square feet from us, which is where they got the .15, rather than
the .10 from;
* The site plan shows water meter next to the road, when it is not, before they destroyed
the meter, it was in the yard’s (previous) fenced area. We have photos of the water meter,
inside the fenced area of the property; they destroyed the meter when they attempted to
remove the meter because they planned to move it to where the site plan shows, but
apparently could not find the water line, thus the reason they destroyed the shoulder of the
road;
*Shows our mailbox ½ way up our driveway, when it is down on the road;
*All of the dimensions on the site plan are wrong, no one has had a real survey done since
1970, and the point of origin was Ridge Ave, not San Pablo, San Pablo was not even there
in 1970. Allowing the dimensions of the property alleged, will throw off the dimensions
of every property on this side of Sheppard Rd. We all know that Ridge Ave was finally
paved in 1977-78. According to Pindar’s “A widening of the intersecting street would
necessitate a revision of the description of the property for future use, otherwise a loss of

2
title would occur”. Pindar’s Georgia Real Estate Law and Procedure §13-17 Intersections
of streets. Even if they wanted to, they could not get a proper survey at this late date in the
game. Going back as far as the first showing transfer in 1983, the size of the property was
.10. Not .14, not .15, not .16, but .10. I don’t think it is fair to us at 821 Sheppard Road,
to allow these people to steal not only our easement, but another 1272 square feet from our
property. James is a disabled, and elderly adult, at 70 years old. I believe it could be
considered exploitation of a disabled and elderly adult.
*They show a concrete pad where there is not, and never has been one;
*Shows tree protection and silt fence, where none have been installed;
*Fails to observe the easement, and the site plan shows no easement; the man came flying
up the driveway with his truck and got out screaming and James and me about the stakes
in the ground marking the easement, so that they would know where it is, and not destroy
it, or the tree roots for our 50 year old tree. He got out of his truck and went to his workers
and said “ignore that old f___cker” and informed them that they can tear up the ground
over the easement. We are not allowed on our easement for any reason;
*The plan calls for removing 20 cubic yards (12 x 15 area x 3 feet deep, or 180 square feet
1 foot deep), they are going to remove it, and bring in the same amount of soil, they plan
to fill in a culvert that cannot be filled in, and in the same instance, lower the property
where the house shall go.
*By lowering the land where the house will, go, the easement will be up in the air, so they
are not taking into account of the easement, they are going to continue destruction of the
easement;
*The drawing they have shows topographical – shows 968 for front porch, they show
Sheppard Road is at 964, that would mean there is 4 foot difference in height right now,
but show that where Sheppard Rd, and Sheppard Cove meet is 995, showing that the road
is 27 feet higher than the property. That is totally backwards, the properties are way, way
above the road;
*Site plan claims that they are going to use the existing septic system, the problem is that
the site where they show the septic system, has never been a septic system, it is the old
well; the septic system was right up against the house almost, and they have run over it
with all this heavy equipment they are using, and the ground has actually sunken down
where the tank is. We have seen the tank opened, we know where the tank is. Plus, if they
can’t tell a well from a septic system, they are not builders.

3
No matter what, they don’t have enough land for a septic system and drain fill. These
people are going to create nightmares beyond measure they will be putting sewage in the
well, and polluting the well and ground water;
*The drawing has our driveway completely wrong location;
*The plan shows that they are going to use the foundation from the old building, when
there is no foundation for the old building. When I asked that man if knew that there was
not a foundation, he said “well it don’t have a crawl space”, and I asked if he had ever been
inside the house, because it had not floor, and you could see to the dirt, and see no
foundation, and he admitted he had never even been inside the house;
*They ae supposed to build on top of the old foundation that don’t exist, and they even lied
about the square footage of the old house, it was 864 square feet, including the front porch.
So how are they claiming that they can put a 2,000 square foot house on the foundation of
800 square foot or less?
*Another issue, is that they managed to get a variance for the front yard, but not the sides
and the back. There are not 10 feet on each side of this 2000 square foot, 2-story house,
and there sure ain’t 40 feet in the back yard.
*Apparently, they need a bunch more variances, or the county plans to do what the zoning
laws forbid, which will it be?;
*Everything in the plan has been falsified and falsely sworn to.
I seriously cannot believe that the County is going to let these people, who
apparently know nothing about building a house, do all of these things?
I also seriously cannot believe that the County granted a variance and building
permits in order to take a hardship away from people that didn’t own the property until
September, and is using it for investment property, they don’t plan on living there, while
violating our property rights, when we have lived here almost 26 years and paid property
tax all that time. How can causing us a hardship, make giving an investor more property
rights than we have, make sense to you?
Is no one going to look into these facts? Is no one going to actually come out and
do inspections on this property?
Everything within their applications has shown to be false, and they have sworn the
document to be true, when anyone with eyes knows it is all lies. They knowingly, willingly,
wantonly, and with malicious intent falsified and falsely swore to public records, and are
stealing property from us. It makes no sense to me.

4
 We purchased this property with an easement, and our property being the dominant
estate. We have not abandoned our easement and use parts of it every single day, just to
leave our property. How does anyone justify what is being done to us and our property?
Some people come in, and say it isn’t so, so it’s not? I don’t think so. Plus the fence marks
the property line, always has, always will, we bought with that being the understanding,
and that was 26 years ago.

See Wilson v. State Wilson v. State, 730 S.E.2d 500 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012):
“The State presented evidence indicating that by understating the cost and scope of the
building project on the permit, Wilson avoided having to comply with a number of county
requirements..” @ 172.
“In addition to the false statement charge, Wilson was charged with seven counts of theft
by deception and one count of violating the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act, but the jury acquitted him of each of those charges.” Wilson v. State,
730 S.E.2d 500, 504 n. 2 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012).
“The trial court stated that considering ‘everything that flowed’ from Wilson's false
statements on the permit application, ‘it is hard to imagine a case where a false statement
is more significant, and he could not imagine more damage to someone's home than existed
at the Aarons' house” Wilson v. State, 730 S.E.2d 500, 507 (Ga. Ct. App. 2012).
James Stegeman had been a general contractor for many years, more than 25 years, in fact,
prior to being hit by a car in a crosswalk in 1990, which put Mr. Stegeman into the disabled
category, and he could no longer do what was necessary to continue his business “J.
Stegeman, General Contracting”.

Pindar’s §13-17 Intersections of streets

Fixing the location of corners by reference to the intersection of two streets or roads is a
common practice among surveyors and conveyancers. Such an intersection has been
defined as the area or space common to both of two intersecting streets. Smeltzer v.
Atlantic Coach Co. 44 Ga App.53, 56, 160 S.E. 665 (1931). A beginning point on the
margin of a street located a specified distance from an intersection refers to the intersection
as then located. Johnson v. Town of Palmetto, 139 Ga. 556, 77 S.E. 807 (1913).

5
A widening of the intersecting street would necessitate a revision of the description
of the property for future use, otherwise a loss of title would occur. A beginning point
on a street described as a certain distance from an intersection ordinarily construed as
measured along the margin of the street, but in the absence of such language may be read
as measured in a straight line to the intersection. Smith v. Welch, 212 Ga. 345, 92 S.E. 2d
297 (1956).
From an engineering standpoint, measuring the distance along a curving or winding street
presents difficulties; most of such surveys are based on 50-foot or 25-foot chords, and
variations of several feet between two surveys may be produced. A rounded intersection
is another profile source of discrepancy. (In the modern residential subdivision,
intersections are almost invariably rounded rather than angular.) Unless the deed calls for
measurement from the corner as projected to a point instead of a curve, there may be an
ambiguity as to the true intent of the parties. (For example, the intention might have been
to measure from the beginning of the curve of the intersection.).
Then, too, engineers may disagree in attempting to project a rounded intersection to a point,
whether either or both of the intersecting streets do not run in a straight line, since there is
no useful mathematical formula for projecting a curve unless it is a perfect arc of circle.
(In such a case, any attempted projection to a point would be arbitrary). A beginning
point described as 75 feet “more or less” east if an intersection, without more, has been
held insufficient. Malone v. Klear, 203 Ga. 291, 46 S.E.2d 495 (1948).

The code sections show that the easement cannot be ignored and cannot be damaged. Just
because someone purchases a property, without checking all the facts, we are not to be
disparately treated, and we don’t deserve what is being done to us.
Huckaby v Chatham A04A1886, page 54 3rd

The site plan has not been followed, it has been falsified and falsely sworn to, and must
be revoked, under the County’s own zoning laws.

/s/
/s/