92-14 MM 2016 Town of North Topsail Beach

_----------------- -
Permit Class Permit Number
MODIFICATION/MAJOR 92-14
(by CRC Variance) STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environment and Natural Resources y
and Q
Coastal Resources Commission G�
Vermit
for RECEIVED
X Major Development in an Area of Environmental Concern
pursuant to NCGS 113A-118 DEC 0 5 2016
X Excavation and/or filling pursuant to NCGS 11306(; ; . ,rj p•IDITY
Issued to Town of North Topsail Beach, 2008 Loggerhead Court, North Topsail Beach, NC 28460
Authorizing development in Onslow County at Atlantic Ocean from 2276 to 2382 New River
Inlet Road , as requested in the permittee's application dated 6/14116. and as modified at
the 9/13/16 Variance hearing before the CRC, which is reflected in the CRC's variance Order dated 10/5/16.
This permit, issued on October 27, 2016 , is subject to compliance with the application (where consistent
with the permit), all applicable regulations, special conditions and notes set forth below. Any violation of these terms may
be subject to fines, imprisonment or civil action; or may cause the permit to be null and void.
1) In keeping with the Variance granted by the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) on September 13,
2016, and the CRC Variance Order signed by the CRC Chairman on October 5, 2016, the temporary
construction containment (geotextile) tubes may remain in place until May 1, 2017. By May 1, 2017,
the Town of North Topsail Beach shall compromise and remove the geotextile tubes. hi this case, as
discussed at the variance hearing, removal includes cutting all exposed geotextile tubes and removing
A visible material using a forklift to pull out loose material. Removal does not include excavating
entire geotextile tubes if the tube is covered with sand. The Division of Coastal Management may
provide additional directions to the Town and/or its consultants based upon site conditions at the time
of the removal process. The intention of this requirement is that by May 1, 2017 the geotextile tubes
will no longer be operable.
2) All exposed geotextile material shall be removed by May 1, 2017.
(See attached sheet for Additional Conditions)
This permit action may be appealed by the permittee or other
qualified persons within twenty (20) days of the issuing date.
This permit must be accessible on -site to Department
personnel when the project is inspected for compliance.
Any maintenance work or project modification not covered
hereunder requires further Division approval.
All work must cease when the permit expires on
December 31, 2019
In issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees that
your project is consistent with the North Carolina Coastal
Management Program.
Signed by the authority of the Secretary of DENR and the
Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission.
Y L,'
BraxtdA C. Davis, Director
Division of Coastal Management
This permit and its conditions are hereby accepted.
Signature of Permittee

Town of North Topsail Beach Permit 992-14
Page 2 of 2
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
3) Na sand or sandbags shall be placed upon any uncompromised portion of the geotextile tubes.
4) As long as the sandbags and geotextile tubes remain, the geotextile tubes and sandbag revetment shall
remain within and shall not exceed the footprint of the oversized sandbags allowed by the CRC in its
final agency decision dated November 24, 2014.
5) This Major Modification shall be attached to the original of CAMA Permit No. 92-14, which was
amended by CRC variance on November 26, 2014, as well as all subsequent modifications; and copies
of all documents shall be readily available on site when a Division representative inspects the project for
compliance
6) All conditions and stipulations of the active permit remain in force under this Major Modification unless
specifically altered herein.
NOTE: Notice is hereby given that absent a significant or material change in circumstances, the CRC has
indicated that further variance requests to extend the time for removing the geotextile tubes will
not be considered or heard.
NOTE: An application processing fee of $250 was received by DCM for this project.

1
Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
July 26, 2016
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Town of North Topsail Beach
c/o Stuart Turille
2008 Loggerhead Court
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460
Dear Mr. Turille:
PAT MCCRORY
cn,•„nor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Se, warp
BRAXTON DAVIS
n;rrc,nr
This letter is in response to your application for a major modification to permit no. 92-14 under the
Coastal Area Management Act (LAMA), in which authorization was requested to allow the existing
temporary construction containment tubes, as well as associated scour aprons and "chock tubes",
located between 2284-23 82 New River Inlet Road, to remain in place for an extended period of time.
Processing of the application, which was received as complete by the Division of Coastal
Management's (DCM) Wilmington Regional Office on June 14, 2016, is now complete. Based on
the state's review, the Division of Coastal Management has made the following findings:
1) The Town of North Topsail Beach was issued emergency CAMA Major Permit No. 92-
14 on October 24, 2014 to allow for the construction of a 20' x 6' sandbag revetment at
the subject property. CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14 was amended byway of a
variance granted by the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) on November 26, 2014
to allow for the construction of a 45' x 12' sandbag revetment.
2) Immediately prior to the issuance of the November 26 h, 2014 Major Modification to
CAMA Major Permit 92-14, the Town requested permission to install temporary
construction containment tubes, and associated scour aprons and chock tubes seaward of
the alignment of the sand bag revetment. The purpose of the temporary construction
containment tubes was to "allow for a safer work environment landward of the tube,
which will expedite the installation of the sand bag revetment." The Town further stated
in a letter dated November 25,.2015, "Upon completion of the project, the temporary
containment tube will be removed".
3) The temporary construction containment tube, as well as associated scour aprons and
chock tubes, were not determined by the Division to constitute an additional
erosion control response, and therefore could be permitted, provided that a) structures
were designed in a manner that served only as a temporary construction methodology,
and b) that a commitment was received from the Town stating that the temporary
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue I Morehead City, NC 28557
252-808-2808 1252-247-3330 (fu)

North Topsail Beach
July 26, 2016
Page 2
construction containment tubes, scour aprons and chock tubes would be removed in their
entirety either immediately upon project completion, or by May 21, 2015, whichever is
sooner.
4) On November 26, 2014, a Major Modification to CAMA Permit No. 92-14 was issued.
The Major Modification included the following conditions:
11) In accordance with commitments made by the permittee, the authorized
temporary construction containment tube used to assist in the safe
construction of the authorized temporary sand bag revetment shall be
removed in its entirety either immediately upon project completion, or by
May 21, 2015, whichever is sooner. Additionally, should the Division of
Coastal Management determine that the temporary construction containment
tubes are no longer needed or are no longer serving their intended purpose of
providing a safe work environment landward of the tubes, the tubes shall be
removed immediately upon written notification by the Division.
ITM
13) The scour apron and "chock" tubes shall extend no further oceanward
than the oceanward toe of the temporary construction containment tube. All
portions of the scour apron and chock tubes located oceanward of the
temporary sandbag revetment shall be removed in their entirety at the same
time as the associated temporary construction containment tubes.
5) OnTebruary 24, 2015, the Division received notice from the Town's consultant that
construction of the sand bag revetment was complete.
6) On February 27, 2015, the Division formally requested from the Town a plan for the
removal of the temporary construction containment tubes, scour aprons and chock tubes.
7) Based upon the failure of the Town to proceed with the development and
implementation of a removal plan for these structures, the Division issued a Notice of
'Violation (NOV) to the Town on March 26, 2015. During settlement negotiations
relating to the NOV, the Town was given the option to apply for a Major Modification
to Permit No. 92-14, requesting permission to leave the temporary construction
containment tubes, scour aprons and chock tubes in place for an extended period of time.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality 1 Coastal Management
1367 US Hwy 17 South J Elizabeth City, NC 27909
252-264-3901

North Topsail Beach
July 26, 2016
Page 3
8) On August 29, 2016, a Major Modification to CMA Permit No. 92-14 was issued
pursuant to a Variance granted by the Coastal Resources Commission under the
provisions provided for in NCAC 07J.0700. This Major Modification contained the
following condition:
1) In keeping with the Variance granted by the Coastal Resources
Commission (CRC) on July 16, 2015, and the CRC Variance Order signed
by the CRC Chairman on August 14, 2015, the temporary construction
containment (geotextile) tubes shall be removed when the Onslow County
channel maintenance/beach disposal project is complete, or by June 30,
2016, whichever comes first.
9) The Onslow County channel maintenance/beach disposal project was completed on or
about April 26, 2016. The Division verified the continued presence of the temporary
construction containment tubes on May 19, 2016.
10) Based upon the failure of the Town to proceed with the development and
implementation of a removal plan for these structures, the Division issued a Notice of
Violation to the Town on June 3, 2016. During settlement negotiations relating to the
NOV, the Town was given the option to apply for a Major Modification to Permit No.
92-14, requesting permission to leave the temporary construction containment tubes,
scour aprons and chock tubes in place for an additional period of time.
11) NCAC 7H.0308(a)(2)(K) states in part, "Sandbags used to construct temporary erosion
control structures shall be tan in color and three to five feet wide and seven to fifteen
feet long when measured flat."
12) NCAC 7H.0308(a)(2)(L) states, "Soldier pilings and other types of devices to anchor
sandbags shall not be allowed."
13) Based upon the findings outlined above, the proposed project modification has been
determined to be inconsistent with NCAC 7H.0308(a)(2)(K) and NCAC
7H.0308(a)(2)(L), as well as the requirements of the Variance granted by Coastal
Resources Commission pursuant to NCAC 07J.0700.
Given the preceding findings, it.is necessary that your request for issuance of a CAMA Major
Modification to Permit No. 92-14 under the Coastal Area Management Act be denied. This denial is
made pursuant to N.C.G.S. 113A-120(a)(8) which requires denial for projects inconsistent with the
state guidelines for Areas of Environmental Concern or local land use plans.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
1367 US Hwy 17 South I Elizabeth City, NC 27909
252-264-3901

North Topsail Beach
July 26, 2016
Page 4
If you wish to appeal this denial, you are entitled to a contested case hearing. The hearing will
involve appearing before an Administrative Law Judge who listens to evidence and arguments of
both parties before making a final decision on the appeal. Your request for a hearing must be in the
form of a written petition, complying with the requirements of § 150B of the General Statutes of
North Carolina, and must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-6714, within twenty (20) days from the date of this denial letter. A copy
of this petition should be filed with this office.
Another response to a permit denial available to you is to petition the Coastal Resources Commission
for a variance to undertake a project that is prohibited by the Rules of the Coastal Resources
Commission. Applying for a variance requires that you first acknowledge and recognize that the
Division of Coastal Management applied the Rules of the Coastal Resources Commission properly in
processing and issuing this denial. You may then request an exception to the Commission's Rules
based on hardships to you resulting from unusual conditions of the property. To apply for a variance,
you must file a petition for a variance with the Division of Coastal Management Director and the
State Attorney General's Office on a standard form, which must be accompanied by additional
information on the nature of the project and the reasons for requesting a variance. In accordance with
the Notice of Violation issued to the Town on June 3, 2016, the variance request must be filed no
later than August 3, 2016, after which the Town and the Division of Coastal Management will work
diligently to agree on a set of stipulated facts in anticipation of the variance being heard by the
Coastal Resources Commission at its September 13-14, 2016 meeting. The standard variance forms
may be obtained by contacting a member of my staff, or by visiting the Division's web page at
http://deq.nc. gov/about/divisions/coastal-management/coastal-management-permits/variances-
appeals.
Sincerely,
1
Braxton C. Davis
Director, Division of Coastal Management
cc: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington, NC
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
1367 US Hwy 17 South I Elizabeth City, NC 27909
252-264-3901

I. Project Narrative.
The Town of North Topsail Beach completed Phase I of its multifaceted inlet and shoreline
management plan in February 2013 with the repositioning of the New River Inlet ocean bar
channel to a more central location between the south end of Onslow Beach and the north end of
North Topsail Beach. The material removed during repositioning of the channel was used to
construct a beach fill along 7,730 feet of shoreline south of New River Inlet.
As stated in prior permit applications, the beach fill along the north end of North Topsail Beach
experienced rapid rates of volume loss resulting in the eventual loss of all of the fill material
north of the Topsail Reef by August 2014. In response to the emergency situation created by the
rapid deterioration of the fill, the Town of North Topsail Beach applied for a permit to construct
a sandbag revetment along approximately 1500 feet of shoreline north of Topsail Reef. While
this initial request was denied due to the size of the proposed sandbag revetment, the Town of
North Topsail Beach was ultimately issued a CAMA Major Permit (Permit #92-14) dated
November 26, 2014 through the variance process.
In addition to the enlarged size of the sandbag revetment, the permit allow the Town to use a
temporary sand filled containment tube to provide protection to the area during installation of the
sandbag revetment. The conditions of the permit required the temporary containment tube to be
removed immediately upon completion of the sandbag revetment or by May 21, 2015 whichever
occurred sooner. A typical cross-section of the sandbag revetment and temporary containment
tube is provided in Figure 1.
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
7
revetment
DCM WILMINGTON, NO
JUN 14 2016

The sandbag revetment was essentially completed on February 25, 2015. An aerial photograph
taken of the project site on February 20, 2015 via a drone is shown in Figure 2.
Figs --- -- --- -
tube. (Photo Courtesy of Mike Capuano)
As can be seen in the aerial photo, the northern end of the sand tube was exposed while most of
the tube along the south end of the sandbag revetment was buried. The exposed portion of the
sand tube on the north end of the revetment was continuing to provide substantial scour
protection for the sandbag revetment. However, due to the volatility of the shoreline in the area,
portions of the sand tube are alternately buried and covered. A series of ground photos of the
completed sandbag revetment taken March 6, 2015, show some exposed and buried sand tubes
are provided on Figure 3 to 7. The figures are arranged in a north to south order.
In the spring of 2015, the Town requested a permit modification to leave the tube in place for the
duration of the sandbag permit. Through discussions with the North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management, a plan was developed to allow the Town to leave the tubes in place until
either the completion of a proposed navigation maintenance project, which would place sand
along the revetment, or June 30, 2016, whichever comes first. A variance was sought by the
Town and granted by the CRC on July 16, 2015, and a permit modification was issued on August
29, 2015.
RECEIVED
RECEIVED DCMWIIIAINGTON,NC
JUN 14 2016
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

r i;
cure 3. March 6, 2015 photo of s uwdhoe rcvcuncnt and sand tube at north end of revennei
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
it.
RECEIVED
DCM WIL MINGTCN, NC
AN 14 2016

Figure 6.
revetment.
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2%
RECEIVED
DCM WILTAINGTCN• NC
JUN 14 NIS
DCM- MHD CITY

Figure 7. March 6, 2015 photo showing buried sand tube along south end of sandbag revetment.
Dredging activities associated with the navigation maintenance project ended on April 22,
2016. Originally, disposal of the material from the navigation project was to begin at a point
opposite the intersection of New River Inlet Road and River Road, which located opposite
baseline station 1157+00 (Figure 8). The project was proposed to extend south as far as the
volume of material would permit, which was expected to extend along the entire length of the
portion of the revetment fronted by the geotextile containment tube. However, conditions
along the north end changed from the time the contract was bid to the time the contractor
began to mobilize for the job and there was not enough dry sand beach in front of the sandbag
revetment to allow the contractor to install the discharge pipeline in the location originally
proposed. Therefore, an amendment to the contract was issued that allowed the contractor to
begin disposal just north of the sandbag revetment (near baseline station 1163+50) (Figure 8).
With disposal starting north of the sandbag revetment, the length of shoreline covered by the
navigation maintenance material did not extend along the entirety of the sandbag revetment
fronted by the geotextile containment tube. The photos shown in Figures 9, 10, and 11 show
the area during construction of the navigation project currently underway.
In the attached letter (Appendix D), Dr. William Cleary P.G., Emeritus Professor of Geology,
states: "...it is my opinion based on personal observation and shoreline change data that the
removal of the geo-tube will have serious consequences on the stability of the sand bae
"revetment". Its removal will ultimately lead to accelerated erosion of the sea bed adjacent to
the sand bags due to a variety of wave -related processes. In turn, the consequent degradation of
the sand bag armoring will have dire consequences for the homes currently protected by the
sand bags."
RECEIVED RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTGN, NC
JUN 21 2016 JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Given the dynamic nature of the area just south of New River Inlet, the uncertainty of future
shoreline responses in this area, and the limited extent of the beach that will be covered by the
navigation maintenance project, the Town of North Topsail Beach again request consideration
of modifying the sand bag permit to allow the sand tubes to remain in place until the expiration
of the existing permit for the sandbag revetment (November 2022) or until such time the north
end of the island stabilizes as a result of the channel relocation portion of the management plan
or, if the relocated channel fails to produce the desired shoreline response, until such time the
TOWN can install a terminal groin on the south shoulder of New River Inlet, whichever comes
first.
LOCATION OFF
IPELINE ROUTE
m+smucnow -. �
10
00
•ccfss
\ � m
AGS RCKM%t5' � sma I
NSPJ lful
Ps: to
SrI/t IOGq I(Yt i r yr
pppmnnfee Savuinn hint /
W Eavd to [?'apssa tar / 500 — _.
TDA-MMY CblruAL IOBF MpI1H FILL lE0.WMUS —
AS WV iCuna TA" SrCIM
(70 ec peron:-D)
� cx*rtc-, o[xuumx
Figure 8. Map showing the originally proposed beach disposal start location and the actual beach disposal start
location.
With regard to the channel relocation, the TOWN is moving forward with plans to reposition
the ocean bar channel of New River Inlet to a preferred position and alignment as allowed
under DOA SAW 2005-00344 dated May 16, 2001 and CAMA Major Permit#78-10.
Repositioning of the inlet bar channel is expected to occur during the 2016-2017
environmental dredging window.
Most of the material removed to reposition the channel will be deposited within the beach area
designated as Phase 2 of the Town's shoreline and inlet management plan, however, in keeping
with this plan, the Town intends to provide periodic maintenance fill within the beach segment
covered by Phase 1 in order to maintain the status of Phase 1 as an "Engineered Beach" under
the rules established by FEMA. RECEIVED
RECEIVED DOMWILF.4INGTON,NC
JUN 21 2016 JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Y
�Y
r
Figure 9. April 1, 2016 photo showing northern location of the tube during navigation maintenance project
construction.
Figure 10. April 3, 2016 photo showing poles placed by the dredge contractor marking the landward location of sand
to be placed during the navigation maintenance project construction.
RECEIVED
JUN 21 20%
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NO
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Figure H. April 22, 2016 photo showing construction of the navigation maintenance project.
As previously stated, the commitments by the Town of North Topsail Beach to remove the sand
tubes in accordance with the permit conditions were made in good faith and based on the belief
the sand bag revetment alone would be able to provide the degree of protection needed to
preserve the area until the inlet channel relocation project begins to produce measurable positive
impacts on the area. While there are signs the inlet ebb tide delta has responded in a manner as
expected, i.e., material on the north side of the ebb tide delta has migrated on shore as predicted
and there have been indications material has begun to accumulate on the seaward portion of the
ebb tide delta located south of the bar channel, the channel shoaled at a faster rate than
anticipated and in so doing, the channel migrated north close to the position it occupied prior to
the initial realignment. Once the channel migrated out of the preferred positon, sediment build-
up on the south side of the ebb tide delta slowed. Given this slower rate of sediment
accumulation south of the bar channel, the time needed for the north end of the island to respond
positively to the preferred bar channel position may be closer to the upper limit of 15 years
projected during the formulation of the plan.
With the prospect of an extended period of recovery along the north end of the island associated
with the channel relocation project, the Town is considering applying for a permit to construct a
terminal groin on the south shoulder of New River Inlet in the event the next channel relocation
project does not produce the needed positive shoreline impacts in a timely manner. Authority to
consider a terminal groin at New River Inlet was recently provided by Session Law 2015-241
Section 14.6.(r).
Documentation of the success or failure of the channel relocation project to reconfigure the ebb
tide delta of New River Inlet to a condition that would produce positive shoreline changes along
the north end of the island could take 2 to 3 eaarrs t �PI V V next channel reloc,o&latgte
Gl.�ttab DCM WILMINGTON, NC
JUN 21 Z016 JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Town elects to seek a permit to construct a terminal groin, designing and permitting of the
structure could take at least 3 years. If the beach fill placed within Phase 1 during the next
channel relocation project erodes at rates comparable to past fills, including that placed during
the 2012/2013 project, the sandbag revetment would again be exposed to conditions that could
produce serious scour at the seaward toe of the revetment and thus threaten its structural
integrity.
In order for the sand bag revetment to continue to provide protection for the threatened homes
along the north end of North Topsail Beach until a more long-term solution can be implemented,
the sand tubes must be allowed to remain.
Given the continued dynamic changes in the shoreline fronting the sandbag revetment, the
limited extent of the beach covered by the navigation maintenance project, the risk of failure of
the revetment due to scour along the seaward toe of the structure, and the protracted time period
to determine a more permanent solution for the erosion problem, the Town of North Topsail
Beach again request a modification of the existing CAMA permit #92-14 to extend the time the
sand tubes can remain in place until a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be
implemented.
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTCN, NC
JUN 14 2016

= mr-1
APPLICATION for
M81or Development Permit
(last revised 12/27/06)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1, Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Project Name (if applicable)
Town Of North Topsail Beach
Phase 1 Emergency Sandbag Revetment
Applicant 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Stuart
Turille
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
N/A
N/A
N/A
IF additional applicants, please attach an additional pages) with names listed.
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
2008 Loggerhead Court
N/A
North Topsail Beach
NC
ZIP
Country
Phone No.
FAX No.
28460
USA
910 - 328 - 1349 ext. n/a
N/A - -
Street Address (d diflemnt from above)
City
State
ZIP
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A -
Email
[e-mail]
2. Agent/Contractor Information
Business Name
N/A
RECEIVED
Agentl Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
JU N 21 2016
N/A
N/A
N/A
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
N/A
MI
N/A
Last Name
N/A
DCM- MHD CITY
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
Slate
N/a
N/A
N/A
N/A
ZIP
Phone No. 1
Phone No. 2
N/A
N/A -
ext. N/A
N/A - ext. We
FAX No.
Contractor #
N/A
N/A
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A -
Email
N/A
RECEIVED
<Form continues on back> DCM WILMINGTCN, NIC
JUN 14 2016
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement.net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 2 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple)
Street Address
State Rd. #
Onslow
New River Inlet Road
N/A
Subdivision Name
city
Stale
Zip
N/A
North Topsail Beach
NC
28460 -
Phone No.
Lot No.(s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
910 - 328 -1349 ext. n/a
N/A, ,
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
White Oak River Basin
New River Inlet and Atlantic Ocean
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
®Natural []Manmade ❑Unknown
New River Inlet and Atlantic Ocean
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
®Yes ❑No
work falls within.
North Topsail Beach
4. Site Description
a.
Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
Approximately 1350 ft.
16,200 sq. ft.
c.
Size of individual lot(s)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high wateo or
n/a, I
NWL (normal water level)
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
5 ft. MHW ❑NHW or ❑NWL
e.
Vegetation on tract
No vegetation is present due to past erosion and presence of sandbag revetment. J U N 2 1 201
I.
Man-made features and uses now on tract
There are currently 20 residential structures located along the ocean shoreline north of the Topsail Reef Condominiums.
New River Inlet Road is located immediately landward of the homes. The residential structures serve as both permanent
residences and rental properties. A sand bag revetment was constructed along approximately 1,500 ft. of shoreline, north of
Topsail Reefs Condominiums in February 2015. The revetment includes a 50 ft. return wall that extends from the northern
terminus of the revetment perpendicular to shore and ties into the existing upland dune system. An additional 330 ft.
segment of the revetment extends north of the initially constructed revetment. There are temporary containment sand tubes
oceanward of the sand bag revetment.
g.
Identify and describe the existing land uses adiacent to the proposed project site.
The property immediately south of the installed sand tube is occupied by oceanfront residential condominiums. To the
north, the area is undeveloped and bounded by New River Inlet. The Topsail Reef Condominiums are protected by a
sandbag revetment installed in 2012.
h.
How does local government zone the tract?
I. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
R-1 Residential
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
®Yes []No ❑NA
J.
Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes RNo
k.
Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. ❑Yes RNo ❑NA
If yes, by whom? N/A
I.
Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does ft involve a ❑Yes RNo ❑NA
National Register listed or eligible property?
MI
ATY
DU
4 WILDAINGTCN, NC
.ne!
252.808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagemenl

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 3 of 5)
APPLICATION for
<Form continues on next page>
Major Development Permit
m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site? ❑Yes ®No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? ❑Yes ®No
(III) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ❑Yes []No
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
n/a
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
his
p. Describe existing stone water management or treatment systems.
his
5. Activities and Impacts
a.
Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? []Commercial ZPublic/Government
❑Private/Community
b.
Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
The Town of North Topsail Beach believes leaving the temporary containment sand tubes in place continues to provide vital
scour protection to the sand bag revetment constructed in February 2015, and its removal prior to a more long-term solution
to the erosion problem being implemented, could pose a risk of failure of a portion of the sand bag revetment. Currently the
Towns is working toward the next channel realignment event scheduled to occur during the 2016/2017 dredge window.
Furthermore, the Town is conducting a numerical modeling study to evaluate design alternatives for a terminal groin.
c.
Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where It is to be stored.
n/a
d.
List all development activities you propose.
The Town proposes to leave the temporary containment sand tube in place until a more long-term solution to the erosion
problem can be implemented, or the sand bag revetment permit expires (2022), whichever comes first.
e.
Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? maintenance
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 16,200 ®Sq.Ft or ❑Acres
g.
Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area ®Yes ❑No ❑NA
that the public has established use of?
h.
Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state. RECEIVE
N/A
JUN 21 2016
1.
Will wastewater or stornwater be discharged into a wetland? ❑Yes ®No � M _ M H D
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ❑Yes []No ®NA
j.
Is there any mitigation proposed? ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
01
ITY
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
252-808-2808 :: i-888-4RG0A3T :: www.nccoastalmanagemee>rj 14 2016

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 4 of 5)
APPLICATION for
<Form continues on back>
Major Development Permit
6. Additional Information
In addition to this completed application form, (MP-1) the following items below, if applicable, must be submitted In order for the application
package to be complete. Items (a) — (t) are always applicable to any major development application. Please consult the application
instruction booklet on how to property prepare the required items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross -sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, clearly indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR.
f. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in
which to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Name George and Diann Vann Phone No.
Address 2386 New River Inlet Rd., 12926 Couples PI., Waldorf, MD 20601
Name Wayne and Margaret Nielson Phone No.
Address 19471 Youngs Cliff Rd., Sterling, VA 20165
Name George Neal III Phone No.
Address 3203 Henderson Rd., Greensboro, NC 27410-6032
g. A list of previous stale or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include peril numbers, permlttee, and issuing dates.
Permittee: Town of North Topsail Beach (management plan) DOA Permit SAW-2005-00344
Permiltee: Town of North Topsail Beach (management plan) CAMA Permit 79-10
Perittee: Town of North Topsail Beach (Off -Island Truck Haul) CAMA Permit 191-05(As modified)
Permittee: Town of North Topsail Beach (Sand Bag revetment CAMA Permit 92-14 (As Amended)
Permittee: Town of North Topsail Beach (Sand Bag revetment) DOA Pemit SAW-2014-01700
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization for, if applicable.
1. Wetland delineation, if necessary.
J. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), if necessary. If the project involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
1 7. Certification and Permission to Enter on Land I
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described In the application.
The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal vj'�✓�p QQ--
enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit applic�(C
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge. J U N 2 12016
Date N.J,tOr)4t` Print Name sh'wt' ILVrltt
Signature 7 ,,,,,,:�e DCM- M H D CITY
l
DCM RErFIvET®N
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project. , NC
❑DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information ❑DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts JUN 1
4 2016
252-808-2808 :: 4.888.4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement.net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 5 of 5)
APPLICATION for
❑DCM MP-3 Upland Development
®DCM MP-4 Structures Information
Major Development Permit
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
JUN 14 2016
252.808-2808 :: 1.888.4RCOAST :: www.nceonstalmanagement.net

Form DCM MP-2
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and/or fill activities. All values should be given in feet.
Access
Other
Channel
Canal
Boat Basin
Boat Ramp
Rock Groin
Rock
(excluding
(NLW or
Breakwater
shoreline
NWL)
stabilization
Length
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Width
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Avg. Existing
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NA
NA
N/A
Depth
Final Project
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NA
NA
N/A
Depth
1. EXCAVATION ®This section not applicable
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in b. Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards.
c. (i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
❑WL ❑None
(if) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL
a. Location of disposal area.
c. (i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑Yes []No ❑NA
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
❑WL []None
(it) Describe the purpose of disposal In these areas:
d. High -ground excavation in cubic yards.
®This section not applicable
b. Dimensions of disposal area.
d. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
❑Yes []No [:]NA
(it) If yes, where?
f. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
❑Yes []No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
RECEIVED
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016 DCM WILIAINGTON, NC
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastaimanagement.net revised: 12/26/06

Form DCM MP-2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 2 of 3)
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION El This section not applicable
(If development is a wood groin, use MP-4 — Structures)
a. Type of shoreline stabilization: b. Length: 1 350 ft.
[]Bulkhead ❑Riprap ❑Breakwater/Sill ®Other: Width: 15 ft.
Geotextile Containment Tube
c. Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL: 15 d. Maximum distance walerward of NHW or NWL: 15
e. Type of stabilization material:
Sand Filled geotextile containment tube
g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level.
Bulkhead backfill N/A Riprap N/A
Breakwater/Sill N/A Other N/A
I. Source of fill material.
N/A - The tubes are already full, no additional fill is required for this
modification.
f. (i) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months?
®Yes ❑No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
information.
Erosion of sand in front of the containment tube continues as
discussed in the project narrative attached. The erosion is due
to a combination of waves, tidal currents, and the configuration
of the New River Inlet.
h. Type of fill material.
NIA - The Tubes are already full, no additional fill is required for
this modification.
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES t�Ws�ron�npt� Qtticable
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization) 00 IVi— IVI Nu Cl
Y
a. (i) Will fill material be brouaht to the site? ❑Yes ❑No ❑NA b. fi) Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands/marsh (CW).
If yes,
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
(ii) Amount of material to be placed in the water _
number of square feet affected.
(Ili) Dimensions of fill area
❑CW ❑SAV _ ❑SB
(iv) Purpose of fill
❑WL []None
(it) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas:
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion
b. What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g., dragline,
controlled9
backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
N/A
N/A - The permit modification is to allow existing tubes to stay in
place.
c. (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project?
d. (i) Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
[]Yes ®No ❑NA
site? []Yes ®No []NA
(it) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented.
(ii) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
u I) L) ► F n.e ,n Sawldbaz
Date Project Name RE -N
DCM 1MLI:4WG '-
1 a ontC
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nj� �r: eeoastalmanagement.net - revised: 12/26/06

Form DCM MP-2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 3 of 3)
TLI� l l le,
Applic nt Name
Applicant Signature
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTCN, NC
JUN 14 2016
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: ww .nccoastalmanagement.net revised: 12/26106

t:.,,
dO
..��...i ,$• Pro-ect Aree
�) ' epo l&%rdpkll Beac11
�.
Holly Rid

Sheet 2 of 4. Plan view of sandbag revetment and geotube
+Y "
f'..
f ✓t° «
y @�1 U.OD
♦ i,�j. 3tNM PttO Aga.wR Rpetlen olatten
i]Hd Now River MMI Read
♦.tv��� \ � � �' Gwrg. Nullg
ilti5 OD 32031NrMereon Rd
IN
ti\ r
t
Greane�om, NC gyN0a033
C°
2Me.A New River Intel Real
Wayne and Margaret NNhen
19471 Young. Calf Rd.
StMing,VAMIGM
Notes:
Lenend:
1. 2012 background imagery is from the
Geotube
NC OneMap imagery service.'
Sandbag Revetment
♦ Baseline Station
North End Adjacent
RlparYn Owner
2306 Now River Inlet Rd.
George and Dianne Vann
129M Ceupie. PI.
WaMOA, MD MSD1
D 150 3D0
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
JUN 14 2016

Sheet 3 of 4. Typical Cross -Section — Permitted Sand bag revetment
I
I5
................................................
... ........... n ....................30' Wes....................
..........................
I........
+
O
m
.. .... ................... �....^ ...... ......
f
...... ......... ...................... .......................
�
............ ....
1FIFORAR0 COI IL
•IUBE
n
!SCOUR SYSTF
Q
0
+
R. +B.B'
m
NAW
z
z
G
3
rc
c
io' SS'
CHOCK BAG
0
-_ ROLL PlB:VEN7
30 SCOUR APRON
is FT SCOUR
_s
..............................................................................................................................................
.FT
......
0 10 w
00 40 50
W ]0
BO W
MANGE IRON BA NC (FEET)
DO
v
m
E
Z
n
z
o
0o
n
m
Z
z
.�

Sheet 4 of 4. Typical Profiles
PROFILE UNE: 1155f00 LOCATION: NORTH TOPSAIL
m Sand , n Ube
Q
_...___...__ APR 2014
m
APRIL M15' -
I DKTANCE5-REFERENCED-TO:- _...........: ...__.............. �.,
N w 288233 FEET
E - 2498175 FEET
AZ. 135 DEG..
i
0 75 150 225 300 375 450 525 600
DIST. (FEET)
PROFILE LINE: 116010C ..,ctd lON: LOPTh iCPSAL
sow Sandba s Sand Tube Sand Range. 62IT
RECEIVED
J JN 21 2016
DCIV- MHD CITY
----- APR 2014
m /PRIL 2015
DISTANCES -REFERENCED -TO:.r._....__....:............. _.. __. _.__...-;........._.....
N + 286564 FEET
E - 2498586 FM
AZ. !a 130 DEG.;
i
0 75 150 225 306 375 456 525 600 67PECEIVED
DIST. (FEET) DCM WMAINGTON, NC
JUN 14 2016

IVED
2016
D CITY
JUN 14 2016

RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
REGDiV cii
[)CM WILt•.4INGTON, NC
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
j

DCM- MHD CITY JUN 14 2016

r
N
L
LL
RECEIVED REMVED
DCM WILMINGTCN, NC
JUN 21 2016 JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

4
f r
Ah
_LO
Cl
CEIVED
N ! 1 2016
MHD Cl
LL
DCM WILL AING 1 Cif, NC
JUN 14 2016

0
LO
0
N �
M
cfl ,
. i
i
jP
n99�i
li
Vim

Figure 8

u> -� .........1155+0.0.. j .......
... .... .... .... . .
0
Ft
v
�o
n
Z m
m
x
v
o <
n
m
'
v
<
I
----------------- APRIL 2015
MARCH 201F.
v
z
0
zmmm
Z®
Figure 9
0 Ft 1 Uo
l
DISTANCES REFERENCED TO:
.. :..................
N 2862 33 FEET
E _ 2498175 FEET
135 DEG.:
300
40

v
0
70
Z n
m
0
0 <
m
u� 1.1 6.0 + 1.3 0..............
:................:............ ......................
>.
Ft
................:................. ::
------------------ APRIL 2015 DISTANCES REFEF'EIVCED T0;
I
MARCH 2016 N..^.286564 FEET
E 240$586 FEET
AZ.: = 130 DEG.-
I
-100 0 Ft 100
Figure 10
200
300
400

Z
N
O
O7
C
Z
h'+
IP
N
O
T

Fred J. Burns, Mayor 1 ,' Stuart Turille
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tern Town Manager
Aldermen:
Don Harte Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
Joann M. McDermon Asst. Town Manager/Town Clerk
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Natures Tranquil Beauty
June 3, 2016
Ms. Debra Wilson
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
RE: Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach Regarding CAMA
Permit 92-14
Dear Ms. Wilson,
The condition of the permit for which the TOWN is seeking a modification is the extension of
time in which the temporary construction containment tube can remain prior to its removal. As
stipulated in Permit #92-14, the containment tube was to be removed upon completion of the
sandbag revetment or by May 21, 2015; whichever is sooner. Furthermore, a variance was
granted and a modified permit was issued on August 29, 2015 to allow the containment tubes
to stay in place until the Onslow County channel maintenance/beach disposal project is
complete, or by June 30, 2016, whichever comes first.
The Onslow County navigation maintenance project that was completed on April 22, 2016 did
not end up placing sand along the entirety of the revetment. The project was originally
proposed to extend south as far as the volume of material would permit, which was expected to
extend along the entire length of the portion of the revetment fronted by the geotextile
containment tube. However, conditions along the north end changed from the time the contract
was bid to the time the contractor began to mobilize for the job and there was not enough dry
sand beach in front of the sandbag revetment to allow the contractor to install the discharge
pipeline in the location originally proposed. Due to the changed conditions, the contract was
amended to allow the contractor to begin disposal operations north of the sandbag revetment,
thereby reducing the length of shoreline fronted by the geotextile containment tube that was
covered by the navigation maintenance material.
Furthermore, as included in this submittal, an attached letter from Dr. William Cleary, P.G.,
and Emeritus Professor of Geology notes that extreme (elevated) water levels resulting from
several periods of Perigean (King or Supermoon) tides during the latter part of September and
early October 2015 and coinciding with the passage of Hurricane Joaquin and associated storm
RECEIVED
North Topsail Bea h, NC 28460 nthnc.org JUN 0 8 2016 Toll Free: (800) 6877 92
Fax [phone]
DCM- MHD CITY

Page 2 of 2 Town of North Topsail Beach
Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach Regarding CAMA Permit 92-14
waves caused significant oceanfront shoreline erosion to occur within the sandbag revetment
area. The erosion of the shoreline resulted in the steepening of the lower foreshore profile in
front of the sandbag revetment. Dr. Cleary goes on to state, in regards to February 2016 drone
aerial images of the area, that "incident waves breaking along the base of the sand bags further
led to scouring of the sea bed promoting further slumping of the bags. This process frequently
occurred during the subsequent months and may be considered the norm." In summation, Dr.
Cleary stated that "the removal of the geo-tube will have serious consequences on the stability
of the sand bag "revetment". Its removal will ultimately lead to accelerated erosion of the sea
bed adjacent to the sand bags due to a variety of wave -related processes."
Additionally, with the prospect of an extended period of recovery along the north end of the
island associated with the channel relocation project, the TOWN has already executed a
contract to move forward with the modeling and design of a terminal groin that would be
required to be completed as part of the permitting process, which could take at least 3 years.
With this in mind and given the fact that volatility of the inlet shoreline conditions continues to
threaten the possible undermining of portions of the sandbag revetment, the Town is again
concerned about the risk of undermining of the structure. Currently, this undermining is being
held in check by the presence of the sand tubes.
A complete application package is attached and includes a detailed project narrative along with
an aerial photo of the project site taken near the time of completion of the sandbag revetment.
Other information being submitted with this request includes forms MP-1, MP-4, an AEC
Hazard Notice, list of adjacent riparian owners notified, easements showing ownership, and the
required fee. Please note that we will supplement or amend any of these items as needed.
Please contact me at 910.328.1349 (office) should you have any questions or need additional
information.
Sincerely,
J1 "
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Cc:
Braxton Davis (Div. of Coastal Management)
Doug Huggett (Div. of Coastal Management)
Jason Dail (Div. of Coastal Management)
Brian Edes (Town Attorney)
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach
Regarding CAMA Permit 92-14
Prepared by:
The Town of North Topsail Beach
Submitted to:
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Wilmington Regional Office
June 2016
RECEIVED
JUN 0 B 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach
Regarding CAMA Permit 92-14
Contents
FORMS
DCM MP-1
DCM MP-4
ATTACHMENT
Project Narrative
Appendix A: Work Plat and Location Maps
Appendix B: Signed Ocean Hazard AEC Notice and Easements
Appendix C: Adjacent Riparian Landowner Notifications
Appendix D: Letter from Dr. William J. Cleary, P.G.
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

mom
APPLICATION for
Maier Development Permit
(last revised 12/27106)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Project Name (if applicable)
Town Of North Topsail Beach
Phase 1 Emergency Sandbag Revetment
Applicant 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Stuart
Tudlle
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
N/A
N/A
N/A
If additional applicants, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
te
2008 Loggerhead Court
N/A
North Topsail Beach�NC
ZIP
Country
Phone No.
FAX No.
28460
USA
910 - 328 -1349. ext. n/a
N/A - -
Streel Address (d different bom above)
City
State
ZIP
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A -
Email
[e-mail]
2. Agent/ContractorInformation
Business Name
N/A
Agent/ Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
N/A
N/A
N/A
Agentt Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
N/A
N/A
N/A
Mailing Address
PO Box
City
State
N/a
N/A
N/A
N/A
ZIP
Phone No.I
Phone No. 2
N/A
N/A-
ext. N/A
N/A-
ext. n/a
FAX No.
Contractor#
N/A
N/A
Street Address (if different from above)
City
State
ZIP
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A -
Email
N/A
RECEIVE
<Form continues on back>
JUN 0 8 Z016
nCM- MHD CITY
252-808.2808 :: 1.888.4RCOAST :: www.neeoastalmanagement.net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 2 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple)
Street Address
State Rd. #
Onslow
New River Inlet Road
N/A
Subdivision Name
City
State
Zip
N/A
North Topsail Beach
NC
28460 -
Phone No.
Lot No.(s) (8many, attach additional page with list)
910 - 328 -1349 ext. n/a
N/A, I I ,
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
White Oak River Basin
New River Inlet and Atlantic Ocean
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
®Natural ❑Manmade ❑Unknown
New River Inlet and Atlantic Ocean
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
®Yes ❑No
work falls within.
North Topsail Beach
4. Site Description
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
Approximately 1350 ft.
16,200 sq. ft.
c. Size of individual lot(s)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
n/a, I I
NWL (normal waterleveo
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with alist)
5ft. MHW ❑NHWor ❑NWL
e. Vegetation on tract
No vegetation is present due to past erosion and presence of sandbag revetment.
f. Man-made features and uses now on tract
There are currently 20 residential structures located along the ocean shoreline north of the Topsail Reef Condominiums.
New River Inlet Road is located immediately landward of the homes. The residential structures serve as both permanent
residences and rental properties. A sand bag revetment was constructed along approximately 1,500 ft. of shoreline, north of
Topsail Reefs Condominiums in February 2015, The revetment includes a 50 ft. return wall that extends from the northern
terminus of the revetment perpendicular to shore and ties into the existing upland dune system. An additional 330 ft.
segment of the revetment extends north of the initially constructed revetment.
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses adlacent to the proposed project site.
The property immediately south of the installed sand tube is occupied by oceanfront residential condominiums. To the
north, the area is undeveloped and bounded by New River Inlet. The Topsail Reef Condominiums are protected by a
sandbag revetment installed in 2012.
h. How does local government zone the tract?
I. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
R-1 Residential
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, ff applicable)
®Yes []NO ❑NA
J. Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? []Yes ®No
k. Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, by whom? N/A
1. Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a []Yes ®No ❑NA
National Register listed or eligible property?
<Form continues on next page> JUN 0 8 2016
252-808-2808 :0 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanag'6LVW"MHD CITY

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 3 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site? ❑Yes ®No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? [_]Yes ®No
(ifl) If yes to either () or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ❑Yes ❑No
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
n/a
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
n/a
p. Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems.
We
5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? ❑Commercial ❑PublldGovemment
®Private/Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
The Town of North Topsail Beach believes leaving the temporary containment sand tubes in place continues to provide vital
scour protection to the sand bag revetment constructed in February 2015, and its removal prior to a more long-term solution
to the erosion problem being implemented, could pose a risk of failure of a portion of the sand bag revetment. Currently the
Towns is working toward the next channel realignment event scheduled to occur during the 2016/2017 dredge window.
Furthermore, the Town is conducting a numerical modeling study to evaluate design alternatives for a terminal groin.
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
n/a
d. List all development activities you propose.
The Town proposes to leave the temporary containment sand tube in place until a more long-term solution to the erosion
problem can be implemented, or the sand bag revetment permit expires (2022), whichever comes first.
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? maintenance
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 16,200 ®Sq.Ft or []Acres
g. Will the proposed project
encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area ®Yes []No ❑NA
that the public has established
use of?
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
N/A
I. Will wastewater or stomiwater be discharged Into a wetland? ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ]--]Yes []No ®NA
j. Is there any mitigation proposed? ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
•rvr
ED
<Form continues on back> JUN 0 8 2016
252-808-2808 :: 1.888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmnnngemenD(!M- MHD CITY

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 4 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
6. Additional Information ='
In addition to this completed appllcatlonlog,'- V, 1�-1) the following hems below, l/applicable, must be submitted in bider for the application
package to be complete It glr'fie) ( tKeyslgiphcable to any malordevelopment application. Please consult the application
instruction booklet on now tit.-A)rdt35 `pn ` _ ereijaIred items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross -sectional drawings) drawn to scale, Please give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, clearly Indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that Is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other Instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR.
I. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in
which to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Wine Gl _� �ti(arin'V:inn — .. 1 hone No.
;gdklress �x (flyer Inlet Rd., 12926 Couples PI., Waldorf, MD 20601
Name Wayne and Margaret Nielson Phone No.
Address 19471 Youngs Cliff Rd., Sterling, VA 20165
Name George Neal III = Phone No. -
`Address 3203 Henderson Rd., Greensboro, NC 27410-6032 - -
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
Perniaee: Town of North Topsail Beach (management plan) DOA Permit SAW-2005-00344
Ramillies: Town of North Topsail Beach (management plan) CAMA Permit 79-10
Pernatee: Town of North Topsail Beach (Off -Island Truck Haul) CAMA Permit I91-05(As modified)
PenniBee: Town of North Topsail Beach (Sand Beg revetment CAMA Persil 92-14 (As Amended)
Pernittee: Tom of North Topsail Beach (Sand Bag revetment) DOA Pemlt SAW-2014-01700
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form, If applicable.
I. Wetland delineation, If necessary.
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects In oceanfront and Inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), If necessary. If the project Involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter on the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project
I further certify that the Information provided in this epplicatlon Is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date 11 -, 3 _ d o(b Print Nameu—
Signature
Please Indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project RECEIVED
❑DCM MP-2 Excavation and FIII Information ❑DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts JUN U 8 2016
❑DCM MP-3 Upland Development
❑CM- MHn CITY
252.808-2808 :s 1.888-4RCOAST .. www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 5 of 5)
APPLICATION for
®DCM MP-4 Structures Information
Major Development Permit
RECEIVED
JUN 08 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
252-808-2808 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP-4
STRUCTURES
(Construction within Public Trust Areas)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please induce all supplemental information.
1. DOCKING FACILITY/MARINA CHARACTERISTICS
a. (i) Is the docking facility/marina:
❑Commercial ❑PubliGGovernmenl ❑Private/Community
®This section not applicable
b. (i) Nil the facility be open to the general public?
❑Yes ❑No
c. (I) Dock(s) and/or pier(s)
d. (i) Are Finger Piers included? ❑Yes []No
(i) Number
If yes:
(lit) Length
(ii) Number
(iv) Width
(ii) Length
(v) Floating []Yes []No
(iv) Width _
(v) Floating []Yes ❑No
e. (1) Are Platforms included? []Yes []No
f. (i) Are Boatlifts included? []Yes ❑No
If yes:
If yes:
(ii) Number
(i) Number
(Ili) Length
(iii) Length
(iv) width
(iv) width
(v) Floating ❑Yes ❑No
Note: Rooted areas are calculated from dripline dimensions.
g. (1) Number of slips proposed
h. Check all the types of services to be provided.
❑ Full service, including travel lift and/or rail, repair or
(i) Number of slips existing
maintenance service
❑.Dockage, fuel, and marine supplies
❑ Dockage (°wet slips") only, number of slips:
❑ Dry storage; number of boats:
❑ Boat ramp(s); number of boat ramps:
❑ Other, please describe:
I. Check the proposed type of siting: j. Describe the typical boats to be served (e.g., open runabout,
❑ Land cut and access channel charter boats, sail boats, mixed types).
[]Open water; dredging for basin and/or channel —
[]Open water; no dredging required
❑Other; please describe:
k. Typical boat length: I. (1) Will the facilittyy be open tothe general public?
❑Yes No
m. (1) Will the facility have tie pilings? RECEIVED
[]Yes [--]No
(ii) If yes number of be pilings? JUN 08 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
252-808-2808 :: 14884RCOAST :: www.necoastalmananement.net revised: 12/27/06

Form DCM MP-4 (Structures, Page 2 of 4)
2. DOCKING FACILITY/MARINA OPERATIONS ®This section not applicable
a. Check each of the following sanitary facilities that will be included in the proposed project.
❑ Office Talets
❑ Toilets for patrons; Number: _; Location:
❑ Showers
❑ Boatholding lank pumpout; Give type and location:
b. Describe treatment type and disposal location for all sanitary wastewater.
c. Describe the disposal of solid waste, fish offal and trash.
d. How will overboard discharge of sewage from boats be controlled?
e. (i) Give the location and number of "No Sewage Discharge" signs proposed.
(ii) Give the location and number of "Pumpout Available" signs proposed.
f. Describe the special design, if applicable, for containing industrial type pollutants, such as paint, sandblasting waste and petroleum products.
g. Where will residue from vessel maintenance be disposed of?
h. Give the number of channel markers and "No Wake" signs proposed.
i. Give the location of fuel -handling facilities, and describe the safety measures planned to protect area water quality.
j. What will be the marina policy on overnight and live -aboard dockage?
k. Describe design measures that promote boat basin flushing?
I. If this project is an expansion of an existing marina, what types of services are currently provided?
RECEIVED
in. Is the madnaldocking facility proposed within a primary or secondary nursery area?
❑Yes ❑No JUN 0 S 2016
252-808-2808 :: 1-8884RCOAST :: w .nceoastalmanaaomant.net is / I c Y

Form OCM MP-4 (Structures, Page 3 of 4)
n. Is the marinaldocking facility proposed within or adjacent to any shellfish harvesting area?
[]Yes [--]No
o. Is the mannaldocking facility proposed within or adjacent to coastal wellandsimarsh (CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom
(SB), or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL []None
p. Is the proposed marinaldocking facility located within or within close proximity to any shellfish leases? []Yes []No
If yes, give the name and address of the leaseholder(s), and give the proximity to the lease.
3. BOATHOUSE (including covered lifts) ®This section not applicable
a. (1) Is the boathouse sfruclure(s):
[]Commercial ❑Public(Government ❑Private/Communily
(ii) Number
(iii) Length
(iv) Width
Note: Roofed areas are calculated from ddpline dimensions.
4. GROIN (e.g., wood, sheetpile, etc. If a rock groin, use MP-2, Excavation and Fill.) ®This section not applicable
a. (i) Number
(i) Length
(iil) Wdth
5. BREAKWATER (e.g., wood, sheetpile, etc.) ®This section not applicable
a. Length b. Average distance from NHW, NVVL, or wetlands
c. Maximum distance beyond NHW, NWL or wetlands
6. MOORING PILINGS and BUOYS ®This section not applicable
a. Is the structure(s):
❑Commercial ❑Public/Govemment ❑PdvalelCommunity
a Distance to be placed beyond shoreline _
Note: This should be measured born marsh edge, if present.
e. Arc of the swing
7. GENERAL
b. Number
d. Description of buoy (color, inscription, size, anchor, etc.)
RECEIVED
JUN 0 S 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
252-808-2808 :: 1.888-4RCOAST :: vvv v.nccoastalmanaoement.net revised: 12127106

Fora( DCM MP-4 (Structures, Page 4 of 4)
a. Proximity of structures) to adjacent riparian property lines
n/a
Note: For buoy or mooring piling, use arc ofswing Including length
of vessel.
c. Width of water body
n/a
e. (I) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project?
❑Yes ®No ❑NA
gq If yes, explain what type and how they will be Implemented.
his
Proximity of structure(s) to adjacent docking facilities.
n/a
d. Water depth at waterward end of structure at NLW or NWL
n/a
BOTHER
❑This section not applicable"
a. Give complete description:
A temporary sand -filled containment tube was Installed as part of the Phase I Emergency Sand Bag Revetment on the north
end of North Topsail Beach, for the purpose of providing protection to the area during installation of the sandbag reventment
The containment tube is approximately 1,350 ft. long and 12 ft. wide, and affects approximateey 16,200 sq. ft. of shoreline.
The containment tube was constructed at approximately 5 ft NAVD. The original permit, issued in November 2014, required
the temporary containment tube to be removed upon complefion of the sandbag revetment, or May 21, 2015, whichever was
sooner. Subsequently, the Town requested a variance to allow the tube to stay in place longer and in August 2015 a permit
modification was Issued to allow for an extension until the Onslow County Navigation project was completed or June 30,
2016, whichever Is sooner. Portions of the containment tube are altemately buried and covered depending on shoreline
conditions. The shoreline continues to be unstable and the tubes are providing scour protection for the sandbag revetment.
Removal of the tube at this time poses a risk that rapid scour along the toe of the revetment could occur leading to
subsequent failure of the revelment The Town is seeking a permit modification to allow the temporary containment tube to
remain In place unfit a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented or the permit for the sand bag
revetment expires, whichever comes first?
,Jt.lr,re_ Zo I (v
Date- -
North Topsail Beach Shoreline Protection Project Phase t
Emergency Sand Bag Revetment -
Project Name
Town
yyoppf North Topsail Beach
Applic��
J r vv r•• aw G�
Applicant Signature
RECEIVED
JUN 0 S 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
252-808.2808 :: 1-888.4RCOAST :: wwvvmcconstaimanamement.net revised: 12t27106

1.Project Narrative.
The Town of North Topsail Beach completed Phase I of its multifaceted inlet and shoreline
management plan in February 2013 with the repositioning of the New River Inlet ocean bar
channel to a more central location between the south end of Onslow Beach and the north end of
North Topsail Beach. The material removed during repositioning of the channel was used to
construct a beach fill along 7,730 feet of shoreline south of New River Inlet.
As stated in prior permit applications, the beach fill along the north end of North Topsail Beach
experienced rapid rates of volume loss resulting in the eventual loss of all of the fill material
north of the Topsail Reef by August 2014. In response to the emergency situation created by the
rapid deterioration of the fill, the Town of North Topsail Beach applied for a permit to construct
a sandbag revetment along approximately 1500 feet of shoreline north of Topsail Reef. While
this initial request was denied due to the size of the proposed sandbag revetment, the Town of
North Topsail Beach was ultimately issued a CAMA Major Permit (Permit #92-14) dated
November 26, 2014 through the variance process.
In addition to the enlarged size of the sandbag revetment, the permit allow the Town to use a
temporary sand filled containment tube to provide protection to the area during installation of the
sandbag revetment. The conditions of the permit required the temporary containment tube to be
removed immediately upon completion of the sandbag revetment or by May 21, 2015 whichever
occurred sooner. A typical cross-section of the sandbag revetment and temporary containment
tube is provided in Figure 1.
A
f�
................... ............. ..._.................................... _......... ............ ...._... _lt.wu.......... .......... ........ _.... ___...............
qw
9
ownw ww¢
w
4
nrtws niw uww[Omlw�w�wi W%Y MA
� �I
rortaaw wu wcaia
wio�
y
IqN
Figure 1. Typical cross-section of sandbag revetment and temporary containment tube.
R E C
EIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

The sandbag revetment was essentially completed on February 25, 2015. An aerial photograph
taken of the project site on February 20, 2015 via a drone is shown in Figure 2.
Fig
tube. (Photo Courtesy of Mike Capuano)
the
As can be seen in the aerial photo, the northern end of the sand tube was exposed while most of
the tube along the south end of the sandbag revetment was buried. The exposed portion of the
sand tube on the north end of the revetment was continuing to provide substantial scour
protection for the sandbag revetment. However, due to the volatility of the shoreline in the area,
portions of the sand tube are alternately buried and covered. A series of ground photos of the
completed sandbag revetment taken March 6, 2015, show some exposed and buried sand tubes
are provided on Figure 3 to 7. The figures are arranged in a north to south order.
In the spring of 2015, the Town requested a permit modification to leave the tube in place for the
duration of the sandbag permit. Through discussions with the North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management, a plan was developed to allow the Town to leave the tubes in place until
either the completion of a proposed navigation maintenance project, which would place sand
along the revetment, or June 30, 2016, whichever comes first. A variance was sought by the
Town and granted by the CRC on July 16, 2015, and a permit modification was issued on August
29, 2015.
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Fi
Figure 4. March 6, 2015 photo of sandbag revetment and sand tube at north end of revetmen
RECEIVED
JUN 0 S 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Figure 6.
revetment.
sandbag
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Figure 7. March 6, 2015 photo showing buried sand tube along south end of sandbag revetment.
Dredging activities associated with the navigation maintenance project ended on April 22,
2016. Originally, disposal of the material from the navigation project was to begin at a point
opposite the intersection of New River Inlet Road and River Road, which located opposite
baseline station 1157+00 (Figure 8). The project was proposed to extend south as far as the
volume of material would permit, which was expected to extend along the entire length of the
portion of the revetment fronted by the geotextile containment tube. However, conditions
along the north end changed from the time the contract was bid to the time the contractor
began to mobilize for the job and there was not enough dry sand beach in front of the sandbag
revetment to allow the contractor to install the discharge pipeline in the location originally
proposed. Therefore, an amendment to the contract was issued that allowed the contractor to
begin disposal just north of the sandbag revetment (near baseline station 1163+50) (Figure 8).
With disposal starting north of the sandbag revetment, the length of shoreline covered by the
navigation maintenance material did not extend along the entirety of the sandbag revetment
fronted by the geotextile containment tube. The photos shown in Figures 9, 10, and 11 show
the area during construction of the navigation project currently underway.
removal of the Reo-tube will have serious consequences on the stability of the sand bag
"revetment". Its removal will ultimately lead to accelerated erosion of the sea bed adiacent to
the sand bags due to a variety of wave -related processes. In turn, the consequent degradation of
the sand bag armoring will have dire consequences for the homes currently_ protected by the
sand bags
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 Z016
DCM- MHD CITY

Given the dynamic nature of the area just south of New River Inlet, the uncertainty of future
shoreline responses in this area, and the limited extent of the beach that will be covered by the
navigation maintenance project, the Town of North Topsail Beach again request consideration
of modifying the sand bag permit to allow the sand tubes to remain in place until the expiration
of the existing permit for the sandbag revetment (November 2022) or until such time the north
end of the island stabilizes as a result of the channel relocation portion of the management plan
or, if the relocated channel fails to produce the desired shoreline response, until such time the
TOWN can install a terminal groin on the south shoulder of New River Inlet, whichever comes
first.
PROXIMATE — - — — -�
W,.,,LEINE
CATION OF
40d, .......... ROUTE
CONS7WIft J
__0kT or MT, 1i
Y ]d69N ,
e 1
- AM100.bCIGlt '� A '
y uji,
EF40
00
hry —w saa>Kr 5imrc �� I - -
m a m a r,. l� 500' - _ .
CORTNALOYT VIBE Al
TUPOWY
A -eu 10GTip1 WEN FlLL IERWWS —�
(TO BE R(>,gyEp) r�R� SECTKN `
tia�.xw CAVW
Figure 8. Map showing the originally proposed beach disposal start location and the actual beach disposal start
location.
With regard to the channel relocation, the TOWN is moving forward with plans to reposition
the ocean bar channel of New River Inlet to a preferred position and alignment as allowed
under DOA SAW 2005-00344 dated May 16, 2001 and CAMA Major Permit#78-10.
Repositioning of the inlet bar channel is expected to occur during the 2016-2017
environmental dredging window.
Most of the material removed to reposition the channel will be deposited within the beach area
designated as Phase 2 of the Town's shoreline and inlet management plan, however, in keeping
with this plan, the Town intends to provide periodic maintenance fill within the beach segment
covered by Phase 1 in order to maintain the status of Phase 1 as an "Engineered Beach" under
the rules established by FEMA. RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Figure 9. April 1, 2016 photo showing northern location of the tube during navigation maintenance project
construction.
Figure 10. Api
to be placed during the navigation maintenance project construction.
cation of sand
RECEIVED
JUN 0 S Z016
DCM- MHD CITY

Figure 11. April 22, 2016 photo showing construction of the navigation maintenance project.
As previously stated, the commitments by the Town of North Topsail Beach to remove the sand
tubes in accordance with the permit conditions were made in good faith and based on the belief
the sand bag revetment alone would be able to provide the degree of protection needed to
preserve the area until the inlet channel relocation project begins to produce measurable positive
impacts on the area. While there are signs the inlet ebb tide delta has responded in a manner as
expected, i.e., material on the north side of the ebb tide delta has migrated on shore as predicted
and there have been indications material has begun to accumulate on the seaward portion of the
ebb tide delta located south of the bar channel, the channel shoaled at a faster rate than
anticipated and in so doing, the channel migrated north close to the position it occupied prior to
the initial realignment. Once the channel migrated out of the preferred positon, sediment build-
up on the south side of the ebb tide delta slowed. Given this slower rate of sediment
accumulation south of the bar channel, the time needed for the north end of the island to respond
positively to the preferred bar channel position may be closer to the upper limit of 15 years
projected during the formulation of the plan.
With the prospect of an extended period of recovery along the north end of the island associated
with the channel relocation project, the Town is considering applying for a permit to construct a
terminal groin on the south shoulder of New River Inlet in the event the next channel relocation
project does not produce the needed positive shoreline impacts in a timely manner. Authority to
consider a terminal groin at New River Inlet was recently provided by Session Law 2015-241
Section 14.6.(r).
Documentation of the success or failure of the channel relocation project to reconfigure the ebb
tide delta of New River Inlet to a condition that would produce positive shoreline changes along
the north end of the island could take 2 to 3 years following the next channel relocation. If t"RECEIVE
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD C

Town elects to seek a permit to construct a terminal groin, designing and permitting of the
structure could take at least 3 years. If the beach fill placed within Phase 1 during the next
channel relocation project erodes at rates comparable to past fills, including that placed during
the 2012/2013 project, the sandbag revetment would again be exposed to conditions that could
produce serious scour at the seaward toe of the revetment and thus threaten its structural
integrity.
In order for the sand bag revetment to continue to provide protection for the threatened homes
along the north end of North Topsail Beach until a more long-term solution can be implemented,
the sand tubes must be allowed to remain.
Given the continued dynamic changes in the shoreline fronting the sandbag revetment, the
limited extent of the beach covered by the navigation maintenance project, the risk of failure of
the revetment due to scour along the seaward toe of the structure, and the protracted time period
to determine a more permanent solution for the erosion problem, the Town of North Topsail
Beach again request a modification of the existing CAMA permit #92-14 to extend the time the
sand tubes can remain in place until a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be
implemented.
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Appendix A: Work Plat and Location Maps
RECEIVED
JUN 08 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

$neaas Fen' ���arr�'
Pra'ect Area
Y`Nort;ATdps e'Beaca
Holly RIEgVicinityMap
North Topsail Beach
e �* �' • �
North End
Emergency Sandb
ag
Revetment
}:q Gale; ro 20; :.`�„ •.4i U(I QtV .,.

Sheet 2 of 4. Plan view of sandbag revetment and geotube
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 Z016
DCM- MHD CITY

Sheet 3 of 4. Typical Cross -Section — Permitted Sand bag revetment
15
..............
.......... ...........................
K
....................
30. tam ...................
......
.. .........................
10
......... ...................
................................
ti
..........................
TEMPORARY CONTA
.
TUBE & SCOUR Sr.
of
BFt.
+6 ' NAW
S
3
-
5
............................
*,,S
...........
4,* 'ill
4 .... 4 ...........
. ...... 4 .........
z
F 0
5.V
CHOCK BAD
ROLL PREVE
...............
30 FT SCOUR APRONJ
....................................
76 Fr SCOUR APRON-/
.......... ......... .... I ......
......
0 10 M M 0 w w M M
DMAHM IKONBAMMME (FEET) \w
_ Ex!
a
0
M
0
o M
M

Sheet 4 of 4. Typical Profiles
H PROFILE LINE: 1155+00
m
w
i..............
.............. <..........
...___.....___. APR 2014
m
APRIL 2015
i
0
]5 150
PROFILE LINE: 1180+00
m
a
LOCATION: NORTH TOPSAIL
015T. (FEET)
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY j

Appendix B: Signed Ocean Hazard AEC Notice and Easements
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

OCEAN HAZARD AEC NOTICE
Project is in an:
-.X.—
Ocean Erodible Area
— - High Hazard Flood Area
-�Y_ Inlet Hazard Area
Property Owner:
Tbyn)
Gc— IVDY4N
MPS:4z ; I rJrca C'"
Property Address:
Date Lot Was Platted:
This notice is intended to make you, the applicant, aware of the
special risks and conditions associated with development in this
area, which is subject to natural hazards such as storms, erosion
and currents. The rules of the Coastal Resources Commission
require that you receive an AEC Hazard Notice and
acknowledge that notice in writing before a permit for
development can be issued.
The Commission's rules on building standards, oceanfront
setbacks and dune alterations are designed to minimize, but not
eliminate, property loss from hazards. By granting permits, the
Coastal Resources Commission does not guarantee the safety of
the development and assumes no liability for future damage to
the development. Permits issued in the Ocean Hazard Area of
Environmental Concern include the condition that structures be
relocated or dismantled if they become imminently threatened
by changes in shoreline configuration. The structure(s) must be
relocated or dismantled within two (2) years of becoming
imminently threatened, and in any case upon its collapse or
subsidence.
The best available information, as accepted by the Coastal
Resources Commission, indicates that the annual long-term
average ocean erosion rate for the area where your property is
located is V " 11 -1 feet per year.
The rate was established by careful analysis of aerial
photographs of the coastline taken over the past 50 years.
Studies also indicate that the shoreline could move as much as
3 bo feet landward in a major storm.
The flood waters in a major storm are predicted to be about
feet deep in this area.
Preferred oceanfront protection measures are beach nourishment
and relocation of threatened structures. Hard erosion control
structures such as bulkheads, seawalls, revetments, groins, jetties
and breakwaters are prohibited. Temporary sand bags may be
authorized under certain conditions.
The applicant must acknowledge this information and
requirements by signing this notice in the space below. Without
the proper signature, the application will not be complete.
Property Owner Signature 0 Date
SPECIAL NOTE: This hazard notice is required for
development in areas subject to sudden and massive storms and
erosion. Permits issued for development in this area expire on
December 31 of the third year following the year in which the
permit was issued. Shortly before work begins on the project
site, the Local Permit Officer must be contacted to determine the
vegetation line and setback distance at your site. If the property
has seen little change since the time of permit issuance, and the
proposed development can still meet the setback requirement,
the LPO will inform you that you may begin work. Substantial
progress on the project must be made within 60 days of this
setback determination, or the setback must be re -measured. Also,
the occurrence of a major shoreline change as the result of a
storm within the 60-day period will necessitate re -measurement
of the setback. It is important that you check with the LPO
before the permit expires for official approval to continue the
work after the permit has expired. Generally, if foundation
pilings have been placed and substantial progress is continuing,
permit renewal can be authorized. It is unlawful to continue
work after permit expiration.
For more information, contact.
Local Permit Officer
Address
Locality
Phone Number
RECEIVED
JUN 08 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
Revised May 2010

BEFORE YOU BUILD
Setting Back for Safety: A Guide to Wise Development Along the Oceanfront
When you build along the oceanfront, you take a calculated risk.
Natural forces of water and wind collide with tons of force, even
on calm days.
Man-made structures cannot be guaranteed to survive the force
of a hurricane. Long-term erosion (or barrier island migration)
may take from two to ten feet of the beach each year, and,
sooner or later, will threaten oceanfront structures. These are the
facts of life for oceanfront property owners.
The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) has adopted rules for
building along the oceanfront. The rules are intended to avoid an
unreasonable risk to life and property, and to limit public and
private losses from storm and long-term erosion. These rules
lessen but do not eliminate the element of risk in oceanfront
development.
As you consider building along the oceanfront, the CRC wants
you to understand the rules and the risks. With this knowledge,
you can make a more informed decision about where and how to
build in the coastal area.
The Rules
When you build along the oceanfront, coastal management rules
require that the structure be sited to fit safely into the beach
environment.
Structures along the oceanfront, less than 5,000 square feet in
size, must be behind the frontal dune, landward of the crest of
the primary dune, and set back from the first line of stable
natural vegetation a distance equal to 30 times the annual
erosion rate (a minimum of 60 feet). The setback calculation
increases as the size of the structure increases [15A NCAC
7H.0306(a)(2)]. For example: A structure between 5,000 and
10,000 square feet would require a setback from the first line of
stable, natural vegetation to a distance equal to 60 times the
annual erosion rate (a minimum of 120 feet). The graduated
setback continues to increase through structure sizes greater than
100,000 square feet.
The Reasons
The beachfront is an ever -changing landform. The beach and
the dunes are natural "shock absorbers," taking the beating of the
wind and waves and protecting the inland areas. By
incorporating building setbacks into the regulations, you have a
good chance of enjoying the full life of the structure. At first, it
seems very inviting to build your dream house as close to the
beach as possible, but in five years you could find the dream has
become a nightmare as high tides and storm tides threaten your
investment.
The Exception
The Coastal Resources Commission recognized that these rules,
initially passed in June 1979, might prove a hardship for some
property owners. Therefore, they established an exception for
lots that cannot meet the setback requirement. The exception
allows buildings in front of the current setback, if the following
conditions apply:
1) the lot must have been platted as of June 1, 1979, and
is not capable of being enlarged by combining with
adjoining land under the same ownership;
2) development must be constructed as far back on the
property as possible and in no case less than 60 feet
landward of the vegetation line;
3) no development can take place on the frontal dune;
4) special construction standards on piling depth and
square footage must be met; and
5) all other CAMA, state and local regulations must be
met.
The exception is not available in the Inlet Hazard Area.
To determine eligibility for the exception the Local Permit
Officer will make these measurements and observations:
required setback from vegetation line
exception setback (maximum feasible)
rear property line setback p
_ max. allowable square footage onr o esq E I V E D
JUN 08 2016
-PR&PERMITSTRUCTURE; INADEQUATE SETBA'DCM- MH
PERMITTED STRUCTURE; PRE -STORM BEACH PROFILE
ADEQUATE POSTSTORMREACH PROFILE
SETBACK
ONE YEAR AFTER $TORMJB EACH REBUILDING
After the storm, the house on the dune will begone. The other house has a much better chance of survival.
CITY

F1da
DOG 20: OrO,6770003 1VP*: CFP
gcordrd: 05 14 2012 at 03:4 :15 On
P Aar: 42d.00 P221 1 of a
PW1nY1 Tlx: $0. 00
On.1. County NC
P16Pcu L. Po(1Prd P.C. of Oudr
-3831 Fa637-639
For Onslow County Parcel 1O N1574
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ONSLOW
GRANTOR: NEAL GEORGE III
GRANTEE TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
TERM: THIRTY(30) YEARS
Book: 3831 Page, 1977-Current: 637 Seq:1
Book: 3831 Page: 637 Page 1 of 3
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

BEACH NOURISHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT
For Onslow County Parcel ID R779C•24
COUNTY OF ONSLOW
GRANTOR: MEAL GEORGE III
GRANTEE: TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
TERM: THIRTY(30) YEARS
In exchange for the sum on One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt
of which is acknowledged, the Grantor and Grantor's heirs and assigns (collectively "Grantor") convey to
the Town of Topsail Beach, North Carolina, a municipal corporation (Towel) and on behalf of its
representatives, agents, employees, officials, engineers, consultants, surveyors, contractors,
subcontractors, permittees, invitees and assignees (collectively *Granteee) does now grant and convey
unto the Grantee, this Easement until December 33, 2041 to go upon the Prrperty to conduct
AcdviNes in the Easement Area (as those italicized terms are defined below), subject to the following
conditions:
Propertysubiect to Easement: That oceanfront property identified as the address of,
2284-8 NEW RIVER INLET RD, North Topsail Beach, NC 28445 and, Onslow County Tax
Parcel ID N778C-14, and described in [check applicable box):
H Deed Book 3622 and Page 844 of the Onslow County Registry recorded 7/14/2011 as N TPSL
SH 2 BA L48A of and as shown on Map Book and Page 20-015 of the Onslow County Registry.
❑ See Exhibit A attached.
2. Easement Arm on Property Where Activities. May Take Place: That potion of the Property, if
any, which (1) is seaward of the first tine of stable vegetation, or Ili) is seaward of the toe of the frontal
sand dune adjacent to the beach, or (RI) is seaward of the crest of the erosion escarpment, whichever
feature 6 most landward.
3. ActiWtler. 'Activities" are those tasks required of the Town under Its Shoreline Protection
Project, which tasks Include evaluating, surveying, studying, monitoring, inspecting, preserving,
patrolling, constructing, operating, maintaining, repairing, rehabilitating, nourishing, and replacing the
public beach, the dune system and other erosion control and storm damage reduction measures
together with appurtenances thereto, including depositing sand, altering Easement Area contours and
profiles, building berms and dunes, moving, storing, and removing construction equipment and supplies,
erecting and removing temporary structures, and performing any other work necessary and incident ta
the Shoreline Protection Project over, at, on, under and above the Easement Area. Activities do not
Include moving or damaging permitted permanent improvements within the Easement Area.
4, Grantor Reserved Riohrs. Grantor reserves the right to construct dune walkover structures to
the extent allowed by any applicable Federal, State of lam] laws or regulations, provided that such
structures shall not violate the Integrity of the dune in shape, dimension or function.
S. Other Conditlarrs: (a) Grantee will indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Grantor for any
claim arising from Activities on the Property; (b) Grange has no responsibility to restore or repair
natural forces damage; (c) Grantee makes no representations on sand volume, if an to be placed on or
in front of the Property or protective effects the Activities or SHORELINE'P1�57TNo A$AOJELT wig
Book: 3831 Page, 1977-Current: 637 Seq: 2
Book 3831 Page: 637 Page 2 of 3
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Pa, s of s
provide the Property, (d) Grantor acknowledges (i) any raised lands created seaward of a pre -project
mean high water mark is the property of the State of North Carolina subject to the public trust; Ili) the
Fluctuating state of the ocean beach; and (Ili) Grantee makes no representation on the precise location
of either the most seaward boundary of the Property or the most landward extent of the public trust
beach; (a) This Easement binds Grantor, runs with the title to the Property, And terminates on
December 31, 2042; (f) Grantor and signatories acting on its behalf warrant and covenant that (i)
Grantoes title to the Property is free and discharged from all right, title, claim or interest of the Grantor
or anyone claiming by, through or under Grantor, (ii) Grantor will hold harmless, indemnify and defend
Grantee from such claims; and (Ili) all signatories executing this instrument on behalf of Grantor have
authority to do so; and (1) Grantee shall have the right to temporarily or permanently assign this
easement to the federal, state, or county governments, or any agencies or department thereof or any
governmental authority formed to implement beach nourishment, renuurishment and / or stabilization
related to the Shoreline Protection Project.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this instrument is executed by the Grantor under seal, and if an entity, Grantor
has caused this instrument to be signed in the entity name by its duly authorized agent and its seal to be
hereunto affixed, and IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this Easement this the
z4llday f� 2012.
Signature: a . Signature:
Prim Name: GEeI� C. /U6r� L Print Name:
Signature:
Print Name:
STATE OF nC
COUNTY OF [9
a Notary Pubic of the Coymy and State aforesaid,
certifythat
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
Instrument.
Witnes�s y�han�ad and offitlal stamp or seal, this
day jj'; � n 2012.
r a .ijQy
'Notary Public yXQZ7CL 6. W(-
My commission expires:
LEEANN N. WOLFE
�I'Al
Yila"L Na ill I,,
fyOnlsllrtla Fasaaatt.ur0. ana
Book: 3831 Page: 637 Pagc3 of
Signature:
Print
STATE OF _
COUNTYOF
a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid,
certify that
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of 2012,
Notary Public
My commission expires:
Book: 3831 Page, 1977-Current: 637 Seq; 3
RECEIVED
JUN 0 S 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Paga 1012
I�111111111111111
Doc to: 009611aaaWa ryes: tit
Recor4ad: OMoe/aai2 at 11: a): Da M
Fee aat: 4M.o4 Rape 1 a1 a
ORay"" Tax: pop
ReD0000 L. Pollard Mo. of Dead,
w3793 ro268-269
BEACH NOURISHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT
For Onslow County Parcel 10 R34336
COUNTY OF ONSLOW
GRANTOR: NIELSEN WAYNE F & MARGARET S
GRANTEE TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
TERM: THIRTY(30) YEARS
In exchange for the sum on One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable considerations, the mcelpt of which is
acknowledged, the Grantor and Grantor's heirs and assigns (collectively "Grantor') convey to the Town of Topsail Beach, North
Carolina, a municipal corporation ("Town') and on behalf of Its representatives, agents, employees, officials, engineers,
consolunts, surveyors, contractors, subcontractors, permittees, invitees and assignees (collectively'Gramea") does now gram
and convey unto the Grantee, this Easement until December 31, 2041 to go upon the Property to conduct Activides In the
Easement Arco (as those italicized terms arc defined below), subject to the following conditions:
1. Property Sub''ect to Easement: That ocean front property identified as the address of 2284-A NEW RIVER
INLET RD, North Topsail Beach, NC 28445 and, Onslow County Tax Parcel 1D R778C-14.1, and described In
[check applicable box):
® Deed Book 2652 and Page 678 of the Onslow County Registry recorded 9-May-06 as N TPSL SH 2 RA L48B of and as
shown on Map Book and Page 20-015 of the Onslow County Registry.
❑ See Exhibit A attached.
2. 1509MMt Area 20 Properry Where Activities May Take Place: That portion of the Property, if any, which (i) is seaward
of the first line of stable vegetation, or (III is seaward of the toe of the frontal sand dune adjacent to the beach, or (III) Is seaward
of the crest of the erosion escarpment, whichever feature Is most landward.
3. AtlNtles. 'Activities" are those tasks required of the Town under its Shoreline Protection Project, which tasks include
evaluating, surveying, studying, monitoring, Inspecting, preserving, patrolling, constructing, operating, maintaining, repairing,
rehabilitating, nourishing, and replacing the public beach, the dune system and other erosion control and storm damage
reduction measures together with appurtenances thereto, including depositing sand, altering Easement Am contours and
profiles, building berms and dunes, moving, storing, and removing construction equipment and supplies, erecting and removing
temporary structures, and performing any other work necessary and Incident to the Shoreline Protection Project over, at, on,
under and above the Easement Area. Activities do not include moving or damaging permitted permanent improvements within
the Easement Arm.
4. Grantor Reserved Rights. Grantor reserves the right to construct dune walkover structures to the extent allowed by any
applicable Federal, State or local laws or regulations, provided that such structures shall not violate the integrity of the dune in
shape, dimension or function.
5. Other Candltiong (a) Grantee will indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Grantor for any claim arising from Activities
on the Property; (b) Grantee has no resportsib0ry to restore or repair natural forces damage; (c) Grant" makes no
representations on sand volume, If any, to be placed on or
Book: 3793 Page,1977-Current 268 Seq:1 RECEIVED
Book: 3793 Page: 268 Page l of
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

P.e.2 of 2
provide the Property; (d) Grantor acknowledges (1) any raised lands [mated seaward of a pre -project
mean high water mark is the property of the State of North Carolina subject to the public trust; (II) the
fluctuating state of the ocean beach; and (iii) Grantee makes no representation on the precise location
of either the most seaward boundary of the Property or the most landward extent of the public trust
beach; (a) This Easement binds Grantor, runs with the title to the Property, and terminates on
December 31, 2092; (f) Grantor and signatories acting on Its behalf warrant and covenant that (1)
Granites title to the Property is free and discharged from all right, title, claim or interest of the Grantor
or anyone claiming by, through or under Grantor, (ii) Grantor will hold harmless, indemnify and defend
Grantee from such claims; and (ill) all signatories executing this instrument on behalf of Grantor have
authority to do so; and (g) Grantee shall have the right to temporarily or permanently assign this
easement to the federal, state, or county governments, or any agencies or department thereof or any
governmental authority formed to implement beach nourishment, renourishment and / or stabilization
related to the Shoreline Protection Project.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this instrument Is executed by the Grantor under seal, and if an entity, Grantor
has caused this instrument to be signed in the entity name by Its duly authorized agent and its seat to be
he unto affixed, IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Garner has exerted this Easement this the
1 day of 2012, ,n,,� 1
Signature. l � kAA — Signature: jN'75 . e-
PrintName: t`9hhkv wttf 1�+i r�5'2..�—
Signature:
Print Name:
STATE OF JI,Q�tnJIFk
COUNTY OF
1, F
a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid,
certHythat LJAYrt)E NIU. Sfrj
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of 2012.
Notary Public /Fra
My commission exph.ax1a I-vl6.
��WIVm
Book: 3793 Page: 268 Page 2 of 2
Signature:
Print Name: STATE OF Y /
COUNTYOF briz.
a Notary Public bf the County and State aforesaid,
certify that fP)4,tc(Rtie� A)wla
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
Instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of 2��
Notary
My commission expires: �`Z �1�otol6
gllgllaiagalt0la
w noTMifa �2. ara
arereurr.mu
Book: 3793 Page, 1977-Current: 266 Seq:2
RECEIVED
JUN 0 S 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Paaa 1 & 2
10111111111111111
Maaeo !rL• oMaa/420002 Tll,1T•DO /,n
w. is afl Papa t of 1
aevMannua Tax: b.QO
analau County rA
eabacca L. Pajlard 4a,. or ands
m3793 aa316-317
Far Onslow, County Parcel 10 N044405
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ONSLOW
GRANTOR: VANN GEORGE C & DIANN L
GRANTEE: TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
TERM: THIRTY (30) YEARS
EXCISE TAX: $ 0.00
In exchange for the sum on One Dollar ($S.OD) and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt of which is
acknowledged, the Grantor and Grantor's heirs and assigns (collectively 'Grantor) convey to the Town of Topsail Beach,
North Carolina, a municipal corporation ('Town') and on behalf of its representatives, agents, employees, officials,
engineers, consultants, surveyors, contractors, subcontractors, permittees, Invitees and assignees (collectively "Gnmee )
does now grant and convey unto the Grantee, this Easement until December 31, 2041 to go upon the Property to conduct
Activilies in the Easement Area (as those Raliciled terms are defined below), subject to the following conditions:
1. Property SublW to Easement: That ocean front property identified as the address of 2386 NEW RIVER
INLET RD, North Topsail Beach, NC 28445 and, Onslow County Tax Parcel ID g778D-54, and described in
[check applicable box]:
H Deed Book 1981 and Page 838 of the Onslow County Registry recorded 12-AUG-02 as NR BEACH CB S1 L4 of and
as shown on Map Book and Page 22-205 of the Onslow County Registry.
O See Exhibit A attached.
2. Easement Arm on Proaerty Where Activities May Take Place: That portion of the Property, if any, which (i) is
seaward of the first line of stable vegetation, or (ii) is seaward of the toe of the frontal sand dune adjacent to the beach, or
(ill) is seaward of the crest of the erosion escarpment, whichever feature is most landward.
3. !d ks. 'Actvithrs" are those tasks required of the Town under its Shoreline Protection Project, which tasks
include evaluating, surveying, studying, monitoring, inspecting, preserving, Patrolling, constructing, operating, maintaining,
repairing, rehabilitating, nourishing, and replacing the public beach, the dune system and other erosion control and storm
damage reduction measures together with appurtenances thereto, Including depositing sand, altering Easement Area
contours and profiles, building berms and dunes, moving, storing, and removing construction equipment and supplies,
erecting and removing temporary structures, and performing any other work necessary and incident to the Shoreline
Protection Project over, al, on, under and above the Easement Anro. Activitles do not include moving or damaging
permitted permanent improvements within the Easement Area.
4. Grantor RKeryed Rights. Grantor reserves the right to construct dune walkover structures to the extent allowed
by any applicable Federal, State or local laws or regulations, provided that such structures shall not violate the integrity of
the dune in shape, dimension or function.
S. Other Cwsdhions: (a) Grantee will Indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Grantor for any claim arising from
Activities on the Property; (b) Grantee has no responsibility to restore or repair natural forces damage; (c) Grantee makes
no representations on sand volume, if any, to be placed on or
RECEIVED
Book: 3793 Page, 1977-Current: 316 Seq:1
Book'. 3793 Page: 316 Page l of JUN 082016
DCM- MHD CITY

Paae 2 of t
in from of the Property or protective effects the Activltles or SHORELINE PROTECTION PROJECT will
provide the Property; (d) Grantor acknowledges (i) any raised lands created seaward of a pre -project
mean high water mark Is the property of the State of North Carolina subject to the public trust; (is) the
fluctuating state of the ocean beach; and (Ili) Gramea makes no representation on the precise location
of either the most seaward boundary of the Property or the most landward extent of the public trust
beach; (a) This Easement binds Grantor, runs with the title to the Property, and terminates on
December 31, 2042; (f) Gmntar and signatories acting on Its behalf warrant and covenant that (I)
Grantors title to the Property is free and discharged from all right, title, claim or interest of the Grantor
or anyone claiming by, through or under Grantor, (ii) Grantor will hold harmless, indemnify and defend
Grantee from such claims; and (Ili) all signatories executing this instrument on behalf of Grantor have
authority to do so; and (g) Grantee shall have the right to temporarily or permanently assign this
easement to the federal, state, or county governments, or any agencies or department thereof or any
governmental authority formed to implement beach nourishment, renourishment and / or stabilization
related to the Shoreline Protection Project.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Instrument is executed by the Grantor under seal, and If an entity, Grantor
has caused this instrument to be signed in the entity name by its duly authorized agent and Its seal to be
hereunto affixed and IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Granter has executed this Easement this the
�`�day wsvJl2cJF 2012.
Signature:—� „ Signature:
Print Name: �+?69F - VANN Print Name:
Signature:,,✓ l0 C�� ` `�,�.T
Privet Name: Z\QY1R V :-. Qn�
STATE OF M.1 LJ�+m
COUNTY OF rJ�An/es
a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid,
certifythat �ir9NN X&& 1/RNN
and 6eAt,fe C T/9A'A/
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
Instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of 2012.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
Book: 3793 Page: 316 Page 2 of 2
Signature:
Print Name:
STATE OF _
COUNTY OF
I,
a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid,
certify that
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
Instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of 2012.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
Book: 3793 Page, 1977-Current: 316 Seq: 2
RECEIVED
JUN 0 S 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Appendix C: Adjacent Riparian Landowner Notifications
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Fred J. Burns, Mayor a
Stuart Turille
Richard Marartney, Mayor Pro TernTown Manager
Aldermen:
Don Harte Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
Joann M. McDernnon Asst. Town Managerfrown Clerk
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Nature's Tranquil Beauty
June 3, 2016
VANN GEORGE C & DIANN L
12926 COUPLES PL
WALDORF MD 20601
SENT CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT
Re: REVISED RESTORATION PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH. REQUEST
FOR MODIFICATION TO PERMIT #92-14.
Adjacent Riparian Property Owner Notification
Dear Sir or Madam:
The Town of North Topsail Beach (TOWN) is submitting a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Permit Modification application to the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NC DCM) for work
occurring within an Area of Environmental Concern.
As more completely described in the attached application, the TOWN intends to submit a CAMA Major
Modification application to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons
to remain until a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented, or the sand bag
revetment permit expires.
Attached to this notice, please find a copy of the application as submitted to the NC DCM office. Within 30
days from receipt of this notice you may submit comments regarding the referenced project to the following
address:
Attn: Ms. Debra Wilson
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Sincerely,
Stuart J. T'ur_il'le
Town Manager
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
2008 Loggerhead Court
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 nthne.org
Phone [phone]
Toll Free: [phone]
Fax [phone]

Fred J. Bums, Mayor
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tern
Aldermen:
Don Harte
Joann M. McDermon
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Nature's Tranquil 133eauty
June 3, 2016
NEAL GEORGE 111
3203 HENDERSON RD
GREENSBORO NC 27410-6032
SENT CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT
,
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
Asst. Town Manager/Town Clerk
Re: REVISED RESTORATION PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH. REQUEST
FOR MODIFICATION TO PERMIT #92-14.
Adjacent Riparian Property Owner Notification
Dear Sir or Madam:
The Town of North Topsail Beach (TOWN) is submitting a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Permit Modification application to the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NC DCM) for work
occurring within an Area of Environmental Concern.
As more completely described in the attached application, the TOWN intends to submit a CAMA Major
Modification application to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons
to remain until a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented, or the sand bag
revetment permit expires.
Attached to this notice, please find a copy of the application as submitted to the NC DCM office. Within 30
days from receipt of this notice you may submit comments regarding the referenced project to the following
address:
Attn: Ms. Debra Wilson
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Sincerely,
RECEIVED
JUN 0 S Z016
Stuart J. Turille
Town Manager
DCM- MHD CITY
2008 Loggerhead Court Phone [phone]
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 ntbnc.org Toll Free: [phone]
Fax [phone]

'" �0"
Fred J. Burns, Mayor
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tern
Aldermen:
Don Harte
Joann M. McDermon
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Nature's Tranquil Beauty
June 3, 2016
NIELSEN WAYNE F At MARGARET S
19471 YOUNGS CLIFF RD
STERLING VA 20165
SENT CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
Asst. Town Manager/Town Clerk
Re: REVISED RESTORATION PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH. REQUEST
FOR MODIFICATION TO PERMIT #92-14.
Adjacent Riparian Property Owner Notification
Dear Sir or Madam:
The Town of North Topsail Beach (TOWN) is submitting a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Permit Modification application to the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NC DCM) for work
occurring within an Area of Environmental Concern.
As more completely described in the attached application, the TOWN intends to submit a CAMA Major
Modification application to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons
to remain until a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented, or the sand bag
revetment permit expires.
Attached to this notice, please find a copy of the application as submitted to the NC DCM office. Within 30
days from receipt of this notice you may submit comments regarding the referenced project to the following
address:
Attn: Ms. Debra Wilson
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Sincerely,
I/Lj JA'�-&
Stuart J. Turille
Town Manager
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
2008 Loggerhead Court Phone [phone]
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 ntbnc.org Toll Free: [phone]
Fax [phone]

South End Adjacent Riparian Owners
a
IX)
GRyl� UIV '.
• 2284-B New River Inlet Road
George Neal III
so
P°� Q 0460
07
3203 Henderson Rd.
r
Certified Fee $0.00
Greensboro, NC 27410-6032
p
Pmnnrt
(Fndoraem R RZp.'tF) $0.08 Here
• 2284-A New River Inlet Road
o
Restricted N&M Fee '
(End°ree.t Regekeo
$0.
Wayne and Margaret Nielson
o
Taal Posts" a Feas $ 06/03/2016
19471 Youngs Cliff Rd.
Sterling, VA 20165
d
�I PL�� e �' ! L.
ED
__.. 4 ......... �.�, jj
r
alOBox Na 2CO e rJ ers�,
North End Adjacent Riparian Owners
------------------------------- ......
°" - — - - --..
3W.TtEri►W1%3M 1f1 ra:Zi
George and Dianne Vann U.S. Postal Service"
12926 Couples Pl. CERTIFIED e
Waldorf, MD 20601 a Domestic Mail Only
to
ra +
to C� ,
1
Ln
m Postage $ G4tiG
(` sG.ilO .70
07
CeNtled Fee
r-1 Posimarr
C7 Fl W Recelgt Fee $0.00 Here
p (Endarsen ed Required)
L3 ResWW DeWsry Fee so 00
O (Endmaroe.N Required)
ru
Er
Tote) Poatage 3 Fuse 06/03/2016
O
to I
'en{V 2 �- tl-----�-�-
C3 Po
�— --' - —' - ------ _T 7---..
r o POBnrNo ...`i7 l <</1 1FL
f`- Ltjy----- ZIPN -----.-_...--- Q.'------ L 1 -• -- -----�...
Postal
CERTIFIED MAILP RECEIPT
Domestic
to WA1,}1TF;hP;".296C � � 3 E
4 0460
m P 07
M1 CenlfredFee fa.aa
RECEIVED
O ReNrn Re apt Fee s0.G0 Here
O (Eretoreement Hawked)
QQ q Q Restricted DetNery Fee
JUN o 0 2UtUl O (End«sementR S�
0 N TUelPostage&Feas $ 06/03/2016
� fb.
DCM- MHD IT1� ��. Ctx-.� i1 n---------...-
3s6PW'fd r(ot
ar--- Box No. .-. .—

Appendix D: Letter from Dr. William J. Cleary, P.G.
RECEIVED
JUN 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

APPENDIX D: LETTER FROM DR. WILLIAM J. CLEARY, P.G.
From: William J Cleary
To: Mr. Brian Edes
Date: 25 May 2016
Re: North Topsail Beach Shoreline Recent Changes
Dear Mr. Edes:
Mr. Stuart Turille, the Town Manager of North Topsail Beach, requested that I provide
you information pertaining to the changes in the shoreline conditions along the North
Topsail Beach during the past year. According to Stuart, the information below is
needed for support in the filing of an application relating to the variance modification
involving the removal of the geo-tube along the northernmost North Topsail Beach
oceanfront shoreline. The narrative that follows is based on studies that I have
conducted for the Town.
Figure 1 shows the North Topsail Beach shoreline conditions on June 13, 2015. The
image was obtained —four months after the completion of the sand bag "revetment"
project in February 2016. The aerial photograph depicts a relatively wide low -tide
beach that fronts the sandbag armored shoreline reach. The letter designations that
appear on the Figure 1 (A, B & C) delineate locations where oceanfront change
measurements were made of the shoreline erosion (red colored #s) that occurred
between June 13 and October 7, 2015. Figure 2 is a satellite image (9/10/15) of the
same area that depicts the shoreline conditions approximately three months later than
those depicted in Figure 1. Inspection of Figure 2 shows that the width of the low -tide
beach has changed little with the exception of the reach near "A" where the flood
channel has widened and consequently eroded a portion of the low tide beach
(compare to Fig.1). Further inspection of Figure 2, illustrates that the dry beach width
and its lateral extent have increased during the three-month period.
Significant oceanfront shoreline changes occurred during the latter part of September
and early October 2015 when several periods of Perigean tides (King or Supermoon
tides). The drone captured oblique aerial photographs imaged in Figure 3, depict the
RECEIVED
JUN 08 2016
DCM- MHn r%IT,

APPENDIX D: LETTER FROM DR. WILLIAM J. CLEARY, P.G.
results of wave overtopping during a Perigean tidal event. During a period of several
weeks, relatively strong onshore winds exacerbated the effects of the extreme water
levels during which time storm waves broke well landward of the normal surf zone. This
period of time of elevated water levels coincided with the passage of Hurricane Joaquin
some distance offshore the Town. During the passage of the large storm, incident
waves continually broke at the base of the revetment and as water levels increased the
wave broke across the seaward slope of the bags. As the plunging waves broke along
the seaward slope and at base of the structure, scouring of the sea bed occurred
resulting in a general deepening immediately seaward of the sandbags. Consequently,
a number of bags slumped, further degrading the integrity of the 'revetment".
The combination of the above events ultimately led to extensive erosion of the low -tide
beach (Figs. 1 and 4). Erosion of the low -tide platform (low -tide beach) was variable and
ranged from 225ft in vicinity of Location "A" to 86ft in vicinity of Location "C" immediately
updrift of the Topsail Reef Condominiums (Figs. 1 and 4). The erosion of the low -tide
beach promoted the subsequent failure (slumping, etc.,) of sand bags in areas along the
armored shoreline, overtopping (overwash) and steepening of the foreshore profile
along a major portion of the aforementioned shoreline reach (Figs. 4-7). Figure 8
depicts Pre- and Post -Hurricane Joaquin images of the oceanfront shoreline. A
comparison of the images clearly shows the effect of the erosion and the consequent
steepening of the lower foreshore profile. Note the location of the zone of breaking
waves.
The Drone captured images of 19 February 2016 depicted in Figure 8 show the incident
waves breaking along the base of the sand bags further that led to scouring of the sea
bed promoting further slumping of the bags. This process frequently occuRSCEI ED
subsequent months and may considered the norm.
JUN 08 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
The most recent cross -shore survey of the sand bags and the near shore area occurred
in mid -March 2016. Two of the many resulting profiles are imaged on Figures 9 and 10,

APPENDIX D: LETTER FROM DR. WILLIAM J. CLEARY, P.G.
the locations of which are shown on Figure 11 (red -colored lines). Profile 1155+00 (Fig.
9) is located -500ft southwest of Location "A" imaged on Figures 1 and 4. A cursory
inspection of the profile changes shows that the sea bed has been both deepened and
steepened. The dip in the seabed at the 100ft mark likely is related to breaking waves.
The changes along this profile typify the profiles to the southwest along the sand bag
armored shoreline. Profile 1160+130 is located northeast of profile 1150+00, a shoreline
reach transitional to New River Inlet, and as such is heavily influence by tidal currents,
waves and currents augmented by breaking waves. A comparison of the April 2015 and
the March 2016 surveys again shows an overall deepening of the beachface.
Historically, shoreline changes in this area have been heavily influenced by the marginal
flood channel.
In brief, it is my opinion based on personal observation and shoreline change data that
the removal of the geo-tube will have serious consequences on the stability of the sand
bag 'revetment'. Its removal will ultimately lead to accelerated erosion of the sea bed
adjacent to the sand bags due to a variety of wave -related processes. In turn, the
consequent degradation of the sand bag armoring will have dire consequences for the
homes currently protected by the sand bags.
Please advise if clarification is needed
Regards,
William J. Cleary
Emeritus Professor of Geology, UNCW
Professional Geologist NC #475
RECEIVED
JUN 08 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

North Topsail Beach
0" vo
Sewar
vw
Pond
S
41
Ike
Modified image, Courtesy NOAA 6/13/2015

North Topsail* Betch
Pond
FC
� 4 4r1,1I
r
1� J
Via ,
--
_ 9/1015

--'J-QI � � lyt r �.4 • �.
W3QT(llS off 1" 9/30/201ig
_ y w
s � I
A
Modified drog6limages, Courtesy Onslow Co.

North Topsail Bead ��. ,,''AA
�A Pond
s$�jo
.i Aw l 1r
FC
AWIF
O�
Modified image, Courtesy NOAA 10/7/2015

MIS.,
-7kZ i-
L
10/07/2015
Figure 6 JUN 08 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

�,
�-RE
1.
on
4
Modified image after JXf Wensel," North TSMIgIllLach Erosion 2/19/16 Drone Video 2/19/2016
ri wept
SeaON
fin
t w A _.
Stumped Bags `-
B h 2/19/2016

zc,.........1155#O.Q..k ........:................:..... '
Ft
.................. .............. ::.-
®----------------- APRIL 201.5
Z n MARCH 2O16
o m
N
O m
ci rn ® rcl
0 Ft 100
Figure 9
DISTANCES REFERENCED TO:
E 2498175 FEET
AZ.: = 135 DEG.:
200
300

v
�
�
z n
0
v^'
o m
n
� �
<(-, - � ... 1.16.0+1.30:.....
Ft
OD
r
I
..........................•.................•................ 1..1
----------------- APRIL 2015
MARCH 2016
-100 0 Ft
rigure iu
DISTANCES REFERENCEL) TO:
E 2498586 FEET
A7.: = 130 DEG.:
1; :0
3100 40DI

1. Coordinates are in feet based on the
North Carolina State Plane Coordinate System r
North American Datum of 1963 (NAD 83). .�
-Influenc
2. Background imagery provided byUSACE,
flown on September 10, 2015.
® 2015 DigitalGlobe Ne�dview License. � ;
• ,
North
"* rr
7 7 !il
s--
'
Ar
iyJr
3".
r
7.FIQ t,�0
Courtesy CP & E of NC, modified image 9/15/2015

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
August 9, 2016
Regulatory Division
Action ID No. SAW-2014-01700
Mr. Stuart Turille
Town of North Topsail Beach
2008 Loggerhead Court
North Topsail Beach, North Carolina 28460
Dear Mr. Turille:
RECEIVED
AUG 11 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
This refers to the Department of the Army (DA) permit application for a Department of
Army permit to extend the time granted for the existing temporary construction containment
tubes to remain in place through 2022, or until a "long-term solution to the erosion problem can
be implemented". The application has been assigned number SAW-2014-01700.
This office has received information that the State of North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management (DCM) denied authorization for you to complete the above described work.
In accordance with 33 CFR Part 320.40), the District Engineer may deny permits when
required State or local authorization and/or certification has been denied. Accordingly, your
application for a DA permit is hereby denied without prejudice.
This denial without prejudice does not prohibit submittal of future applications. You
must notify us in writing if your proposed work is approved by the DCM in the future. Further
consideration will be given to your application at that time.
In addition, this project remains in non-compliance as described in our July 8, 2015
notice of non-compliance letter. In accordance with your application and project plans dated
October 3, 2014 and the CAMA permit # 92-14 special condition # 11, made part of the
Department of Army Permit, which specifically required the temporary containment tubes to be
removed in their entirety upon completion of the construction of the sandbag revetment, or by
May 21, 2015 whichever was sooner, this project was considered to be in non-compliance. On
May 11, 2015 this office received a copy of your application to the North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management (NC DCM) requesting a time extension for the temporary containment
tubes to remain in place through March 31, 2016, or until the Onslow County channel
maintenance project was completed in North Topsail Beach. The NC DCM denied your request
on June 2, 2015 and subsequently, in accordance with 33 CFR Part 320.4 0), our office also
denied your request without prejudice on June 10, 2015. As a result of the denial, a hearing
before the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) was requested and held on July 15, 2015. The

Spa
CRC formally granted the variance by letter dated August 14, 2015, and subsequently the DCM
issued a permit on August 29, 2015 which allowed the temporary containment tubes to remain in
place until the completion of the Onslow County navigation project, or June 30, 2016, whichever
came first. The Onslow county navigation project was completed in late April, 2016.
As stated in our July 8, 2015, the Corps' position is to bring your project into compliance.
To accomplish this, the Corps requests that you remove the temporary containment tubes
immediately upon the end of the turtle nesting and hatching season, which occurs between May 1
and November 15. In consideration thereof, we ask that you please advise this office of your
intentions and plans to comply with the terms outlined in this letter within 30 days of receipt of
this letter.
If you have any other questions concerning your application for a DA permit, please
contact Ms. Liz Hair, at the above letterhead address, or by phone at 910-251-4049.
Sincerely,
l
Kevin P. Landers Sr.
Colonel, U.S. Army
District Commander
Copy Furnished:
Mr. Kenneth Wilson
Coastal Planning & Engineering of NC, Inc.
4038 Masonboro Loop Road
Wilmington, North Carolina 28409
Mr. Braxton Davis
Director, Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Mr. Doug Huggett
Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557

-3-
Mr. Chad Coburn
North Carolina Division of
Environmental Quality
Division of Water Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Ms. Kathy Matthews
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Raleigh Ecological Services Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina, 27626
Thomas G. Walker
U. S. Attorney, Eastern District
of North Carolina
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 800
Federal Building
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
RECEIVED
AUG 11 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
NOTICE OF VIOLATION
June 3, 2016
CERTIFIED MAIL 7011 2000 0002 2768 8240
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Town of North Topsail Beach
c/o Stuart Turille, Town Manager
2008 Loggerhead Ct.
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460
PAT MCCRORY
Governor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
BRAXTON DAVIS
D,mefor
RE: NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND REQUEST TO CEASE UNAUTHORIZED DEVELOPMENT
CAMA VIOLATION #16-17D
Dear Mr. Turille:
This letter is in reference to your response via e-mail to Jason Dail on March 31, 2016, where you
quoted "My goal is to comply with the permit requirement to remove the tube upon conclusion of
the project' in addition to a site visit conducted by DCM staff on May 19, 2016 for property located
between 2276 & 2392 New River Inlet Road, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean located in the Town of North
Topsail Beach, in Onslow County, North Carolina.
Information gathered by NC Division of Coastal Management (DCM) staff shows that the Town of North
Topsail Beach has violated the terms or conditions of CAMA/Dredge and Fill State Permit No. 92-14, which
was issued to the Town of North Topsail Beach by way of a major modification pursuant to a variance from
the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) and the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality on
August 29, 2015. 1 hereby request that you immediately CEASE AND DESIST such violation(s) and comply
with the terms and conditions of the above permit. If the terms and conditions of a permit are not complied
with, the permit becomes null and void from the date of its issuance.
On October 24, 2014, CAMA/ Dredge and Fill State Permit No. 92-14 was issued to The Town of North
Topsail Beach for the installation of a sandbag revetment within the project area. The sandbag revetment
was authorized for dimensions measuring 6 feet in height by 20 feet in base width. On November 26, 2014
the DCM amended CAMA/ Dredge and Fill State Permit No. 92-14, in accordance with the CRC's variance
order No. 14-16, to allow for the installation of a larger sand bag revetment (12 feet in height NAVD88 by
45 feet in base width). In addition, the permit, as amended on the November 26, 2014, authorized the
installation of a "temporary construction containment tube" otherwise referred to as a "geotuben which was
to be installed immediately at the seaward -most toe of the sandbag revetment structure. A scour apron and
temporary "chock" tube was also authorized under this permit modification, the placement of the scour
apron and chock tube structures were authorized no further oceanward than the seaward -most toe of the
temporary containment tube used to construct the temporary sandbag revetment structure.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
910-796-7215

Town of North Topsail Beach
June 3, 2016
Page 2 of 4
On August 29, 2015 the DCM amended CAMA/Dredge and Fill State Permit No. 92-14 in accordance with
the CRC's variance order No.15-05. Permit Condition No. 1 allowed the temporary construction
containment (geotextile) tubes to remain in place until the Onslow County channel maintenance/beach
disposal project is complete, or by June 30, 2016, whichever comes first.
This permit was issued for major development in the Ocean Hazard and Inlet Hazard Areas of
Environmental Concern (AEC), adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in accordance with North Carolina General
Statutes (N.C.G.S.) 113A-118. This permit included the following terms and conditions(s):
(1) Condition No. 1 states: "In keeping with the Variance granted by the Coastal Resources
Commission (CRC) on July 16, 2015 and the CRC Variance Order signed by the CRC Chairman
on August 15, 2015, the temporary construction containment (geotextile) tubes shall be removed
when the Onslow County channel maintenance/beach disposal project is complete, or by June 30,
2016, whichever comes first."
(2) Condition No. 3 states: All conditions and stipulations of the active permit, including Condition No.
13 of the Amended Permit requiring that the associated scour aprons and "chock" tubes be
removed when the associated geotextile tubes are removed, remain in force under this Major
Modification unless specifically altered herein.
For the following reasons, you are in violation of the above terms and condition(s) of said permit:
(1) The DCM received ICW/New River Navigation Project - Observation Reports #34 & #35 from the
Town of North Topsail Beach's authorized agent, Coastal Planning and Engineering of NC, PC; via
email on April 26, 2016. According to the ICW/New River Navigation and Channel Maintenance
Project Construction Observation report, dated April 26, 2016, "No sand or discharge samples
were collected today since dredge and disposal activities have been completed" indicating that the
Onslow County channel maintenance/beach disposal project is complete.
(2) To date, and as verified during a site visit on May 19, 2016, the temporary construction
containment tubes and the temporary scour apron and "chock" tubes used for constructing the
authorized sandbag revetment have not been removed.
To comply with the terms and condition(s) of the permit issued to the Town of North Topsail Beach, the Town
of North Topsail Beach must:
(1) Remove the temporary construction containment tubes and all portions of the scour apron and
chock tubes within thirty (30) days; or
(2) Within thirty (30) days upon receipt of this notice, the Town of North Topsail Beach shall submit a
CAMA Major Modification application that is complete to the satisfaction of the DCM seeking to
modify Permit 92-14 to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and
scour aprons to remain. Following the anticipated denial of the modification request, and no later
than August 3, 2016 the Town of North Topsail Beach will submit a variance petition package that
satisfies the requirements of the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC). The Town of North
Topsail Beach and DCM will work diligently to agree on a set of stipulated facts in anticipation of

Town of North Topsail Beach
June 3, 2016
Page 3 of 4
the variance being heard by the CRC at its September 13-14, 2016 meeting. If such variance
request is denied by the CRC, or the variance request submitted by the Town of North Topsail
Beach is not heard at the September 13-14, 2016 CRC meeting, the aforementioned structures
shall be removed by September 30, 2016.
If the Town of North Topsail Beach intends to cooperate with this request, the person authorized by the Town
of North Topsail Beach, is requested to sign one of the attached Restoration Agreements and return it in the
enclosed, self-addressed envelope within ten (10) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to comply with this
request or respond back to this office prior to the requested deadline with an acceptable schedule for
compliance will be interpreted as a refusal or failure to cooperate and may result in a Notice of Continuing
Violation, as well as a court injunction being sought ordering compliance, or other enforcement action.
A civil assessment of up to $10,000 plus investigative costs may be assessed against any violator. Each day
that the development described in this Notice is continued or repeated may constitute a separate violation
that is subject to an additional assessment of $10,000.
The relevant statutes and regulations are available from this office, and I am willing to assist the Town of
North Topsail Beach in complying with the requirements of these laws. A site inspection will be made in the
near future to determine whether this REQUEST TO CEASE AND DESIST has been complied with. I request
that you, as Town Manager please contact me immediately at [phone] to discuss resolution of this
important matter.
Thank you for your time and cooperation. Upon completion of the restoration as requested in the Restoration
Plan Agreement to the satisfaction of the Division of Coastal Management, the Town of North Topsail Beach
will be notified as to the amount of the civil assessment for failure to comply with the terms, conditions, or
requirements of such,permit.
Sincerely,
Debra D. Wilson
District Manager
Enclosures
Cc, Braxton Davis, Director, DCM
Roy Brownlow, Compliance Coordinator, DCM
Tyler Crumbley, USACE
Brian Edes, Attorney for the Town of North Topsail Beach

Huggett, Doug
From:
Coats, Heather
Sent:
Monday, July 18, 2016 12:19 PM
fo:
Huggett, Doug
Subject:
NTB recs from Jason
Attachments:
ntb recs.pdf
Jason's recs are attached. Chad said he will be issuing the 401 today. Mike's working on his comments and I've emailed
Maria for hers as well. Will check back in when I have more to report!
Heather Coats
Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
910 796 7302 office
heather. coats(a)ncdenr. gov
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
''Nothing Compares
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the
North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.

1�
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pat McCrory Donald R. van der Vaart
Governor Secretary
June 2, 2015
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Town of North Topsail Beach
c/o Stuart Turille
2008 Loggerhead Court
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460
Dear Mr. Turille:
This letter is in response to your application for a major modification to permit no. 92-14
under the Coastal Area Management Act (LAMA), in which authorization was requested to
allow the existing temporary construction containment tubes, as well as associated scour aprons
and "chock tubes", located between 2284-2382 New River Inlet Road, to remain in place until at
least March 16, 2016, or until the completion of a channel maintenance and beach nourishment
project currently under development by Onslow County. Processing of the application, which
was received as complete by the Division of Coastal Management's (DCM) Wilmington
Regional Office on May 1, 2015, is now complete. Based on the state's review, the Division of
Coastal Management has made the following findings:
1) The Town of North Topsail Beach was issued emergency CAMA Major Permit No.
92-14 on October 24, 2014 to allow for the construction of a 20' x 6' sandbag
revetment at the subject property. CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14 was amended by
way of a variance granted by the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) on
November 26, 2014 to allow for the construction of a 45' x 12' sandbag revetment.
2) Immediately prior to the issuance of the November 26th, 2014 Major Modification
to CAMA Major Permit 92-14, the Town requested permission to install temporary
construction containment tubes, and associated scour aprons and chock tubes
seaward of the alignment of the sand bag revetment. The purpose of the temporary
construction containment tubes was to "allow for a safer work environment
landward of the tube, which will expedite the installation of the sand bag
revetment." The Town further stated in a letter dated November 25, 2015, "Upon
completion of the project, the temporary containment tube will be removed".
3) The temporary construction containment tube, as well as associated scour aprons
and chock tubes, were not determined by the Division to constitute an additional
erosion control response, and therefore could be permitted, provided that a)
structures were designed in a manner that served only as a temporary construction
methodology, and b) that a commitment was received from the Town stating that
400 Commerce Avenue, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper

the temporary construction containment tubes, scour aprons and chock tubes would
be removed in their entirety either immediately upon project completion, or by May
21, 2015, whichever is sooner.
4) On November 26, 2014, a Major Modification to CAMA Permit No. 92-14 was
issued. The Major Modification included the following conditions:
11) In accordance with commitments made by the permittee, the
authorized temporary construction containment tube used to assist in the
safe construction of the authorized temporary sand bag revetment shall
be removed in its entirety either immediately upon project completion,
or by May 21, 2015, whichever is sooner. Additionally, should the
Division of Coastal Management determine that the temporary
construction containment tubes are no longer needed or are no longer
serving their intended purpose of providing a safe work environment
landward of the tubes, the tubes shall be removed immediately upon
written notification by the Division.
and
13) The scour apron and "chock" tubes shall extend no further
oceanward than the oceanward toe of the temporary construction
containment tube. All portions of the scour apron and chock tubes
located oceanward of the temporary sandbag revetment shall be removed
in their entirety at the same time as the associated temporary
construction containment tubes.
5) On February 24, 2015, the Division received notice from the Town's consultant that
construction of the sand bag revetment was complete.
6) On February 27, 2015, the Division formally requested from the Town a plan for
the removal of the temporary construction containment tubes, scour aprons and
chock tubes.
7) Based upon the failure of the Town to proceed with a removal plan for these
structures, the Division issued a Notice of Violation (NOV) to the Town on March
26, 2015. During settlement negotiations relating to the NOV, the Town was given
the option to apply for a Major Modification to Permit No. 92-14, requesting
permission to leave the temporary construction containment tubes, scour aprons and
chock tubes in place until at least March 16, 2016, or until the completion of a
channel maintenance and beach nourishment project currently under development
by Onslow County. The Town chose this option, with the understanding that a
variance from CRC rules would be necessary to allow these structures to remain in
place.
8) The project will be located within the Ocean Hazard AEC and is therefore subject
to the use standards of NCAC 7H.0308(a)(2)(K) and NCAC 7H.0308(a)(2)(L), the
Ocean Hazard AEC Temporary Erosion Control Structures regulations of the N.C.
Division of Coastal Management.

9) NCAC 7H.0308(a)(2)(K) states in part, "Sandbags used to construct temporary
erosion control structures shall be tan in color and three to five feet wide and seven
to fifteen feet long when measured flat."
10) NCAC 7H.0308(a)(2)(L) states, "Soldier pilings and other types of devices to
anchor sandbags shall not be allowed."
11) Based upon the findings outlined above, the proposed project has been determined
to be inconsistent with NCAC 7H.0308(a)(2)(K) and NCAC 7H.0308(a)(2)(L).
Given the preceding findings, it is necessary that your request for issuance of a CAMA
Major Modification to Permit No. 92014 under the Coastal Area Management Act be denied.
This denial is made pursuant to N.C.G.S. 113A-120(a)(8) which requires denial for projects
inconsistent with the state guidelines for Areas of Environmental Concern or local land use
plans.
If you wish to appeal this denial, you are entitled to a contested case hearing. The hearing will
involve appearing before an Administrative Law Judge who listens to evidence and arguments of
both parties before making a final decision on the appeal. Your request for a hearing must be in
the form of a written petition, complying with the requirements of § 150B of the General Statutes
of North Carolina, and must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-6714, within twenty (20) days from the date of this denial
letter. A copy of this petition should be filed with this office.
Another response to a permit denial available to you is to petition the Coastal Resources
Commission for a variance to undertake a project that is prohibited by the Rules of the Coastal
Resources Commission. Applying for a variance requires that you first acknowledge and
recognize that the Division of Coastal Management applied the Rules of the Coastal Resources
Commission properly in processing and issuing this denial. You may then request an exception
to the Commission's Rules based on hardships to you resulting from unusual conditions of the
property. To apply for a variance, you must file a petition for a variance with the Division of
Coastal Management Director and the State Attorney General's Office on a standard form, which
must be accompaniedy additional information on the nature of the project and the reasons for
requesting a variance. The variance request may be filed at any time, but must be filed a
minimum of six week efore a scheduled Commission meeting for the variance request to be
eligible to be heard at that meeting. The standard variance forms may be obtained by contacting
a member of my staff, or by visiting the Division's web page at
http://www.nccoastaimanagement.net/web/cm/90.
Sincerely,
Braxton C. Davis
Director, Division of Coastal Management
cc: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington, NC

1
.Permit Class
' ,NIODIFICATION/MAJOR
(by CRC Variance) STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department'of Environment and Natural Resources
and
Coastal Resources Commission
Verm "t
for
X Major Development in an Area of Environmental Concern
pursuant to NCGS I OA-118
X Excavation and/or filling pursuant to NCGS 113-229
Permit Number
92-14
,,Issued to Town of North Topsail Beach, 2008 Loggerhead Court, North Topsail Beach, NC 28460
-Authorizing development in Onslow County at Atlantic Ocean from 2276 to 2382 New River
luletRoad as requested in the permittee's application dated 6/14/16, and as modified at
the 9/13/16 Variance hearing before the CRC which is reflected in the CRC's variance Order dated 10/5/16.
"This permit, issued on October 27, 2016 is subject to compliance with the application (where consistent
with the permit), all applicable regulations, special conditions and notes set forth below. Any violation of these terms may
be subject to fines, imprisonment or civil action; or may cause the permit to be null and void.
1) In keeping with the Variance granted by the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) on September 13,
2016, and the CRC Variance Order signed by the CRC Chairman on October 5, 2016, the temporary
construction containment (geotextile) tubes may remain in place until May 1, 2017. By May 1, 2017,
the Town of North Topsail Beach shall compromise and remove the geotextile tubes. In this case, as
discussed at the variance hearing, removal includes cutting all exposed geotextile tubes and removing
all visible material using a forklift to pull out loose material. Removal does not include excavating
entire geotextile tubes if the tube is covered with sand. The Division of Coastal Management may
provide additional directions to the Town and/or its consultants based upon site conditions at the time
of the removal process. The intention of this requirement is that by May 1, 2017 the geotextile tubes
will no longer be operable.
2) All exposed geotextile material shall be removed by May 1, 2017.
(See attached sheet for Additional Conditions)
This permit action may be appealed by the permittee or other
qualified persons within twenty (20) days of the issuing date.
This permit must be accessible on -site to Department
personnel when the project is inspected for compliance.
Any maintenance work or project modification not covered
hereunder requires further Division approval.
c
All work must cease when the permit expires on
December 31, 2019
,In issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees that
your project is consistent with the North Carolina Coastal
Management Program.
Signed by the authority of the Secretary of DENR and the
Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission.
BraxtdA C. Davis, Director
Division of Coastal Management
This permit and its conditions are hereby accepted.
Signature of Permittee

. .. .. ...
1? ,,,'J',Town of North Topsail Beach Permit #92-14
Page 2 of 2
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
No sand or sandbags shall be placed upon any uncompromised portion of the geotextile tubes.
Aj,�:As long as the sandbags and geotextile tubes remain, the geotextile tubes and sandbag revetment shall
47 remain within and shall not exceed the footprint of the oversized sandbags allowed by the CRC in its
final agency decision dated November 24, 2014.
This Major' Modification shall be attached to the original of CAMA Permit No. 92-14, which was
101A a well . all
U
111;F__111,,, of all documents shall be readily available on site when a Division representative inspects the project for
compliance
;;-6) All conditions and stipulations of the active permit remain in force under this Major Modification unless
i�z< specifically altered herein.
=�QTE- Notice is hereby given that absent a significant or material change in circumstances, the CRC has
indicated that further variance requests to extend the time for removing the geotextile tubes will
not be considered or heard.
-NOTE: An application processing fee of $250 was received by DCM for this project.

Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
October 26, 2016
Town of North Topsail Beach
2008 Loggerhead Court
North Topsail Beach, N.C. 28460
Dear Sir or Madam:
PAT MCCRORY
Gocenmr
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Sec relary
BRAXTON DAVIS
Director
The enclosed permit constitutes authorization under the Coastal Area Management Act, and where
applicable, the State Dredge and Fill Law, for you to proceed with your project proposal. The original (buff -
colored form) is retained by you and it must be available on site when the project is inspected for compliance.
Please sign both the original and the copy and return the copy to this office in the enclosed envelope. Signing
the permit and proceeding means you have waived your right of appeal described below.
If you object to the permit or any of the conditions, you may request a hearing pursuant to NCGS
113A-121.1 or 113-229. Your petition for a hearing must be filed in accordance with NCGS Chapter 150B
with the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27611-6714, (919) 733-
2698 within twenty (20) days of this decision on your permit. You should also be aware that another qualified
party may submit an objection to the issuance of this permit within twenty (20) days.
The project plan is subject to those conditions appearing on the permit form. Otherwise, all work must
be carried out in accordance with your application. Modifications, time extensions, and future maintenance
requires additional approval. Please read your permit carefully prior to starting work and review all project
plans, as approved. If you are having the work done by a contractor, it would be to your benefit to be sure that
he fully understands all permit requirements.
From time to time, Department personnel will visit the project site. To facilitate this review, we
request that you complete and mail the enclosed Notice Card just prior to work initiation. However, if
questions arise concerning permit conditions, environmental safeguards, or problem areas, you may contact
Department personnel at any time for assistance. By working in accordance with the permit, you will be
helping to protect our vitally important coastal resources.
Enclosure
Sincerely,
v 11A
Douglas V. Huggett
Major Permits Manager
N.C. Division of Coastal Management
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue I Morehead City, NC 28557
252-808-2808 T

J)CM Coordinator:
MAILING DISTRIBUTION SHEET
Permitee:
Agents:
DCM Field Offices
Elizabeth City
Morehead City
Washington
Wilmington
US ACOE Offices:
Washington: Raleigh Bland
Josh Pelletier
Permit #• 2 Vey
f
(with revised work plan drawings)
William Westcott (NC DOT)
Bill Biddlecome (NC DOT)
Wilmington: Tyler Crumbley
Liz Hair
Cultural Resources: Renee Gledhill -Early or ([e-mail]) c.�
Public Water Supply: Heidi Cox (WIRO) r/
Joey White (WARD)
Marine Fisheries:
Shane Staples
Gregg Bodnar
NC DOT:
Ben Hughes i/
Shellfish Sanitation:
Shannon Jenkins
/
State Property:
Tim Walton
Water Quality:
Karen Higgins (Raleigh) V
John Hennessy (NC DOT)
Washington:
Anthony Scarbraugh — 401
Wilmington:
Robb Mairs — 401
Chad Coburn - 401
113DI65 1011;
Washington: Scott Vinson - Stormwater /
Wilmington: Georgette Scott Stormwater✓
Wildlife Resources: Maria Dunn//
LPO:
Fax Distribution: Permitee #:
Agent #:_

STATE OF NORTH CAR.OLINA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTiCL-
ROY COOPER
ATTORNEY GENAAL
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
2008 Loggerhead Court
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460
11.0. Box 629 RITZY ro: NIAxr 1- LuoNss6
IL\taacii,NU27602 rKVIRON\n:\rALDIVISION'
Tia.: [phone]
rAx: [phone]
1➢Iur:ASc @ucdgj.6o%,
October 5, 2016
Cerlified Maii/Relxirn Receipt Requested
Re: Variance Request for Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Permit,
CRC-VR-16-09
Dear Mr. Turille:
At its September 13, 2016 meeting, the Coastal Resources Commission conditionally
granted Petitioner the Town of North Topsail Beach's request for a variance for an extension of
time to keep a temporary geotextile tube on the beach until May 1, 2017. Attached is a copy of
the final agency decision signed by the Chair of the Coastal Resources Commission. Following
receipt of this decision, DCM will issue a major modification to further amend CAMA Major
Permit No. 92-14 to conform to the terms of the variance.
if for some reason you do not agree to the variance as issued, you have the right to appeal
the Coastal Resources Commission's decision by filing a petition for judicial review in the
superior court as provided in N.C.G.S. § 150B-45 within thirty days after receiving the final
agency decision. A copy of the judicial review petition must be served on the Coastal Resources
Commission's agent for service of process at the following address:
Sam M. Hayes, General Counsel
Dept. ofEnvironmental Quality
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
If you choose to file a petition forjudicial review, i request that you also serve a copy of
the petition for judicial review on me at the address listed in the letterhead. if you have any
questions, please feel free to contact me.
tttorney General and
Counsel for tnne Coastal Resources Commission

Town of N. Topsail Beach
October 5, 2016
Page 2
cc: Frank D. Gorham, III., electronically
Brian E. Edes, electronically
Christine A. Goebel, Esq. electronically
Braxton C. Davis, electronically
Mike Lopazanski, electronically
Angela Willis, electronically

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA ) BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA
COASTAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
COUNTY OF ONSLOW ) CRC-VR-16-09
IN THE MATTER OF: ) FINAL AGENCY DECISION
PETITION FOR VARIANCE )
BY TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH )
This matter was heard on oral arguments and stipulated facts and stipulated exhibits at the
regularly scheduled meeting of the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission (hereinafter
"Commission") on September 13, 2016 in Wilmington, North Carolina pursuant to N.C. Gen.
Stat. § 113A-120.1 and 15A NCAC 7J .0700, el seq. Assistant General Counsel Christine A.
Goebel, Esq. appeared for the Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Coastal
Management (hereinafter "DCM").. Attorney Brian E. Edes, Esq. appeared on behalf of
Petitioner Town of North Topsail Beach. Commissioner Neal Andrews recused himself from
consideration of the variance request.
During the hearing on the Town's variance request, Chairman Gorham requested that
Petitioner and DCM Staff pull out of the hearing and engage in settlement negotiations to
determine whether the Town and DCM could agree on a joint recommendation to the
Commission. After approximately 30 minutes, Petitioner and DCM returned to the Commission
and stated they had successfully negotiated an agreement. The Town's attorney informed the
Commission that the Town was amending its variance petition to reduce the time it sought to
allow the geotextile tubes to remain in place to May 1, 2017.
In light of the revised variance request, DCM recommended that if the Commission
decided to grant a variance, the variance should include the following conditions:
• The geotextile tubes may remain in place until May 1, 2017;

By May 1, 2017, the Town is required to compromise and remove the geotextile
tubes. DCM has defined removal to require that the Town cut the exposed
geotextile tube and remove all visible material using a forklift to pull out loose
material. Removal does not include excavating the entire geotextile tube if it is
covered with sand. DCM may provide addition directions to the Town and its
consultants based on Site conditions during the removal process.
• By May 1, 2017 any exposed geotextile tube material shall be removed;
• By May 1, 2017 the geotextile tubes shall not be operable.
• No sand or sandbags may be placed on any uncompromised portion of the
geotextile tubes;
• The geotextile tubes and sandbag revetment will remain within and will not
exceed the footprint of the supersized sandbags allowed by the Commission in its
final agency decision dated November 24, 2014.
The Town, through its attorney, orally represented to the Commission at the hearing that it
agreed with these conditions.
Upon consideration of the record documents and the arguments of the parties, the
Commission adopts the following:
STIPULATED FACTS
1. The Petitioner in this case is the Town of North Topsail Beach (hereinafter
"Petitioner" or "Town"). The Town is represented by Town Attorney Brian Edes. DCM Staff are
represented by Assistant General Counsel Christine A. Goebel.
2. The site at issue in this case is located at the north end of North Topsail Beach,
and includes the beach waterward of the first line of stable natural vegetation (hereinafter
"FLSNV") from just north of the Topsail Reef condominiums toward New River Inlet to the
northernmost house on New River Inlet Road, which includes 39 parcels of land with 20
duplexes structures/40 residences (hereinafter "Site"). At the time these 20 structures were
2

constructed, they were located in the second row from the ocean front. The Site is depicted in the
Project Narrative section of the stipulated exhibits, and in other exhibits. The Town holds
easements, which are stipulated exhibits, on these oceanfront parcels in order to use the property
for the purposes of implementing beach nourishment projects.
3. The Site is located within the Ocean Erodible and Inlet Hazard Areas of
Environmental Concern (hereinafter "AECs").
4. The long-term average annual erosion rate at the Site is 2-feet per year. The Site is
entirely within the Inlet Hazard AEC which uses the rate for the adjacent ocean hazard area per
15A NCAC 7H .0310(a)(1). Staff agrees that this Site experienced accelerated erosion in the 12-
15 months prior to the November 2014 variance hearing.
5. According to the Town's Project Engineer, Tom Jarrett, P.E. of Coastal Planning
& Engineering (hereinafter "CP&E"), one of the unique features of the area is the influence of
the ebb tide delta of the New River Inlet, on sediment transport along the shoreline. This is
demonstrated by the photo shown in Stipulated Exhibit 15 in which incoming waves from the
southeast are refracted around the ebb tide delta resulting in a change in sediment transport
direction (indicated by arrows) just south of New River Inlet. The area in which the direction of
sediment transport changes as a result of wave refraction is commonly referred to as a nodal
zone. In general, the nodal zone is characterized by the net movement of material away from or
out of the zone. While a nodal zone will generally exist adjacent to a tidal inlet, the influence of
the nodal zone on the shoreline of North Topsail Beach is enhanced due to the absence of
significant shoal accumulations on the south side of the inlet. The absence of shoal material
south of the inlet is one of the issues the channel relocation project was designed to address, i.e.,
3

the purpose of moving the channel was to encourage the reconfiguration of the inlet's ebb tide
delta through the redistribution of shoal material from the north side of the inlet to the south side.
Mr. Jarrett provided portions of the Final Environmental Impact Statement of the North Topsail
Beach Shoreline Protection Project prepared December 2009 (hereinafter "FEIS"). See stipulated
exhibit provided to the Commission.
History of the Site
6. The north end of the Town has a history of erosion. Appendix B of the FEIS
contains a history of erosion and past beach nourishment projects. Mr. Jarrett summarized the
nourishment projects between 2002 and 2011 (hereinafter "Jarrett Erosion History Report").
7. According to the FEIS, erosion of the shoreline south of New River Inlet has been
a persistent problem since around 1984 when the bar channel of New River Inlet shifted its
alignment toward Onslow Beach. Prior to 1984, the north end of North Topsail Beach was
accreting at an average rate of 6.1 feet per year. Following the change in channel position and
orientation, the north end began to erode at an average rate of 5.3 feet per year. Most of the
accelerated erosion was attributed to the north end's higher degree of exposure to wave energy.
Prior to the channel shift, the south side of the ebb tide delta provided a breakwater effect with
Waves breaking relatively far offshore. With the loss of the south side delta, more wave energy
was transmitted directly to the shore. This, combined with the development of flood channels
close to and parallel to the north end, increased sediment transport rates to the north.
8. Since 1993, and despite the use of sandbag structures in some places, 11
residential structures, all of which were located seaward of the existing 20 structures at the Site,
were either removed or lost to erosion.
4

The Town's Inlet Management Plan/FEIS
9. Beginning in 2006, the Town hired CP&E to develop an Inlet Management Plan
for the New River Inlet (hereinafter "Inlet Management Plan"). The Inlet Management Plan was
completed in December 2009 and memorialized in the FEIS publication. The entire Inlet
Management Plan is covered by the Department of the Army Permit SAW 2005-00344 dated
May 16, 2001. CAMA Major Permit No. 79-10 was issued on July 21, 2010 authorizing Phase I
of the Inlet Management Plan. A modification on October 12, 2012 authorized a change to the
beach fill density, the amount of material to be removed from the ocean bar channel, and
removed a previously permitted upland disposal site. CAMA Permit No. 79-10 was further
modified on September 26, 2013 authorizing Phase 5 of the Inlet Management Plan during the
2014-15 dredging window, an increase in beach fill densities, and allowing Phase 5 to take place
before Phases 2-4 if necessary, Copies of this permit and its modifications are stipulated exhibits.
10. Phase 1 of the Inlet Management Plan was completed in February 2013 and
included the repositioning of the New River Inlet ocean bar channel to a more central location
between the south end of Onslow Beach and the north end of North Topsail Beach. Material
removed during the repositioning of the channel was used as beach fill along 7,730 feet of
shoreline south of New River Inlet as shown in stipulated exhibits provided to the Commission.
11. The Town's stated purpose for moving the ocean bar channel of New River Inlet,
as stated in the FEIS, was for the purpose of inducing sand accumulation on the south side of the
inlet's ebb tide delta. Based on the documented historic behavior of the inlet, the Town believed
that moving the channel to a more central position with an alignment approximately
perpendicular to the adjacent shorelines would result in accretion of the shoreline south of the
5

inlet. Dr. William Cleary estimated that the time required for the new channel to have a positive
impact on the shoreline to be three to four years as noted in the FEIS.
12. According to Mr. Jarrett, the behavior of the shoreline on the north end of North
Topsail Beach is tied to the position and alignment of the main bar channel of New River Inlet.
Morphological studies of New River Inlet, reported in the FEIS, describe the relationship
between the position and alignment of the channel and the response of the shorelines on both
sides of the inlet. The FEIS also identified a position and alignment of the bar channel that would
provide a beneficial impact on the north end shoreline. Based on the FEIS, the Town of North
Topsail Beach elected to artificially move the channel to the preferred position and alignment
indicated by the morphological studies.
13. Phase 1 construction moved the mean high water (hereinafter "MHW") shoreline
an average of 272 feet seaward of the pre -project MHW shoreline in the area between Building
No. I of Topsail Reef and the south shoulder of New River Inlet (baseline stations 1149+00 to
1160+00). An August 2014 beach profile survey by Gahagan & Bryant, indicates the MHW
shoreline north of Topsail Reef receded between 200 and 250 feet since completion of Phase 1,
which is equivalent to 130 and 167 feet per year. Visual inspections of the beach shows
continued erosion since the August 2014 survey. The MHW shoreline has essentially returned to
its pre -project position. According to Mr. Jarrett, while the rate of loss of the fill placed during
Phase 1 of the management plan has been higher than anticipated, the loss is comparable to
losses experienced from previous fills by the US Army Corps of Engineers (hereinafter
"USACE") through disposal of material removed during maintenance of the Atlantic Intercoastal
Waterway and portions of the channel passing through Cedar Bush Cut.
2

14. According to Mr. Jarrett in his Jarrett Erosion History Report, based on the
documented history of shoreline changes along the north end of North Topsail Beach, he
believes that the recent acceleration in the rate of shoreline change is not related to the channel
relocation project. Instead, Mr. Jarrett believes that much of the accelerated erosion can be
attributed to the unnatural shoreline configuration created by the beach fill, i.e., the conditions
that were causing the north end to erode prior to relocating the channel, such as the absence of a
significant shoal on the south side of the inlet and the presence of flood channels, still persist.
Mr. Jarrett believes these conditions will continue to exist until such time the newly aligned
channel effects the predicted changes in the ebb tide delta of New River Inlet. Until that time,
waves will continue to impact the area in such a way as to cause accelerated sediment transport
from the north end and into New River Inlet.
15. According to the "Year 2 Post -Construction Physical Monitoring Report" dated
October 2014 and prepared by CP&E, a copy of which is a stipulated exhibit (hereinafter
"Monitoring Report"), monitoring of the inlet demonstrated some of the expected results taking
place with sand accumulating on the south side of the inlet. However, the rate of build-up, as
predicted, was relatively slow. As a result, the north end of North Topsail Beach has continued to
experience high rates of erosion. As of August 2014, most of the fill placed north of the Topsail
Reef Condominiums in February of 2013 had been lost, as shown in photographs provided to the
Commission as stipulated exhibits.
16. The FEIS states that periodic maintenance is necessary about every 4 years to
keep the channel in its preferred position and alignment. Material removed to maintain the
channel would be used to provide periodic nourishment of the North Topsail Beach shoreline.
7

17. The USACE permit allows maintenance of the channel to be accomplished once
every four years providing one of two channel maintenance thresholds are met. One channel
threshold is associated with shoaling of the channel and the second is based on the position and
alignment of the channel. Following Phase 1's completion in February 2013, the Town is not
permitted to maintain the channel until at least the 2016/2017 environmental dredge window.
18. Based on site photographs, the final remnants of the dune which was created as
part of the Phase I project and was evident in August 7, 2014 photos had completely eroded by
the time photos were taken in late September 2014. The photographs referred to in these
stipulated facts were provided to the Commission as stipulated exhibits.
19. Flooding of the area has increased. Flood waters have spilled on to New River
Inlet Road and side streets during times of high tide at least four times in late 2014 as seen in
photographs provided to the Commission.
Larger Sandbag Revetment CAMA Permit Process
20. Beginning in the early summer of 2014, Town officials and their agents contacted
DCM Staff to inquire about possible options for protecting homes at the Site from erosion taking
place following Phase 1. DCM issued a modification to permit 191-05 on August 14, 2014
authorizing sand from an upland source to be placed at the Site. This permit was originally
issued on December 5, 2005 following Hurricane Ophelia and authorized for dune reconstruction
at the Site. The work authorized by the modification of CAMA Major Permit No. 191-05 has not
been undertaken.
21. On or about August 15, 2014, the Town, with help from its CP&E consultants
Tom Jarrett and Ken Willson, submitted a CAMA Major Permit Application seeking to install
0

approximately 1,450 linear feet of geotextile tubes (7.5 feet tall and 45 feet in circumference) at
the Site. This permit application was deemed complete (except for the receipt of all of the
easement agreements from the Town, which were received later) by DCM on August 27, 2014,
and was sent to the resource agencies for comment through the CAMA Major Permit process.
Because the proposed geotextile tube was inconsistent with the Commission's rules limiting the
size of sandbags, DCM Staff planned to deny the permit application after the public notice period
ended on September 19, 2014. The Town planned to seek a variance from this permit denial.
22. On September 18, 2014, DCM received a modification request to the initial
geotextile tubes proposal which requested permission to use 35,000 to 50,000 cubic yards of
sand to create in a "sand bench" at the Site raising the beach elevation approximately 6 feet
before placing the geotextile tube on the "sand bench." DCM determined that the significant
changes and increased scope of this modified project would require a new CAMA permit
application from the Town, including notice of the modified project to the public and adjacent
neighbors, and review by the resource agencies.
23. Following discussions between the Town, its agents, DCM and other resource
agencies, the Town submitted its "final design" sandbag proposal on September 26, 2014. This
new CAMA Major Permit application was deemed complete by DCM on October 3, 2014. A
copy of the application was provided to the Commission as a stipulated exhibit. Also, on October
2, 2014, DCM retired the Town's initial August 2014 application following receipt of the new
CAMA Major Permit application for its "final design."
24. The final design proposed installing sandbags at the Site, from the existing larger
sandbag revetment at Building No. 1 of Topsail Reef and extending north approximately 1,450
9

feet parallel to the existing shoreline. A 50-foot return wall would extend landward from the
north end of the sandbag structure just north of the home located at 2378 New River Inlet Road.
A plan view of the sand bag revetment and a typical cross-section view of proposed revetment
are shown in the stipulated exhibits. The proposed borrow site for the sand needed to fill the
sandbags was an approximately 5 acre area on the point, just north of the Site, called "the spit."
25. Topsail Reef received two variances from the Commission in July 2012 and
October 2014 to construct a revetment south of the Site similar in size to Petitioner's proposal.
26. The proposed sandbag revetment would follow an alignment roughly parallel to
the seaward -most support piles of the threatened residential structures with the landward toe of
the revetment positioned as close as practical to the front support piles of the structures. The
authorized temporary erosion control structure would be located no more than 45 feet waterward
of the waterward most pilings of those buildings controlling the alignment of the temporary
erosion control structure from 2304 New River Inlet Rd. to the northern terminus of the
temporary erosion control structure, namely those structures at 2304, 2314, 2354, 2362, 2368 and
2378 New River Inlet Road. No portion of the temporary erosion control structure between 2304
New River Inlet Road and the southern terminus of the temporary erosion control structure will
be located more than 115 feet waterward of the waterward most piling of each building.
27. As part of the CAMA Major Permit Application process, adjacent neighbors and
the public were given notice of the Town's application and the final sandbag design through
publication in the Star News on October 8, 2014. DCM staff received one comment. This
comment, an objection from Topsail Reef - an adjacent riparian property owner, was retracted.
10

28. During the CAMA Major Permit application process, the Town's application,
DCM's Field Report, and other materials were sent to resource agencies for comment. Of the
agencies who responded, the DCM Fisheries Specialist raised concerns about the impact of the
proposal on the surf zone habitat. DCM did not deem these concerns sufficient to support permit
denial. Copies of the field report and noted comments received by DCM were provided to the
Commission as stipulated exhibits.
29. On October 21, 2014, DCM staff conducted a site visit and determined that "site
conditions [had] deteriorated and emergency action is warranted." Consequently, at the Town's
request, the DENR Secretary authorized the issuance of an Emergency CAMA Major Permit,
which allows DCM discretion to suspend public notice, adjacent riparian notice, and the normal
agency coordination process. Once the emergency permit authority was activated for this site,
DCM halted the normal coordination process with federal agencies.
30. On October 24, 2014, DCM issued CAMA Emergency Major Permit No. 92-14 to
the Town conditioning its approval on compliance with the Commission's rules limiting the size
of sandbag structures to a base width of 20 feet and a height of six feet.
31. The Town stipulated that its proposed design was inconsistent with the
Commission's rules limiting the size of sandbag structures.
32. On November 7, 2014, DCM received the Town's 2014 variance petition. The
Town also requested an expedited hearing before the scheduled December Commission meeting.
33. The tax value of the structures at the Site and their lots total about $9 million and
their loss from the tax base would reduce the annual tax revenue of the Town by $35,388 based
on the proposed 2016 tax rate of $0.3932 per $100.

34. The larger sandbag revetment in the 2014 variance request was intended to protect
the 20 threatened residential structures for at least 2.5 years or until such time as the beach fill
project provided under Phase 1 of the North Topsail Beach shoreline inlet management plan can
be renourished. The Town of North Topsail Beach is committed to managing the north end
shoreline by,maintaining the preferred position and alignment of the New River Inlet ocean bar
channel and using material removed to maintain the channel to nourish the northern 7.25 miles of
its ocean shoreline. The channel maintenance program and periodic nourishment are intended to
maintain and preserve the dune and beach system in as near a natural state as possible.
35. On October 15, 2014, the Town's Board of Aldermen passed resolution 2014-13
for a special assessment pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 160A-238 to fund the larger sandbag structure
requested in the variance. Fifty percent of the total project cost (approximately $2.3 million) was
to be paid by the 39 parcel -owners identified in the resolution based on oceanfront frontage. This
assessment resolution was the subject of a public hearing on November 6, 2014. On November 6,
2014, the Town passed resolution 2014-16 confirming the assessment. Meeting minutes (draft)
reflect five public comments received. Copies of the resolutions and meeting minutes (draft)
were provided to the Commission as stipulated exhibits. On November 14, 2014, the Town
issued a Notice of Special Meeting scheduled for November 19, 2014 to receive
recommendations on the selection of a contractor for the sandbag project.
36. The Town of North Topsail Beach, in its November 2014 variance request, sought
a variance of conditions 1 and 2 of CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14. Specifically, the Town
requested a variance to condition 1 to allow a temporary erosion control structure with a base
width of 45 feet and a height sufficient to achieve an elevation of +12.0 ft. NAVD. The Town
12

requested a variance to condition 2 to allow that no portion of the authorized temporary erosion
control structure shall be located more than 45 feet waterward of the waterward most pilings of
those buildings controlling the alignment of the temporary erosion control structure from 2304
New River Inlet Rd. to the northern terminus of the temporary erosion control structure and no
portion of the temporary erosion control structure between 2304 New River Road and the
southern terminus of the temporary erosion control structure will be located more than 1 ] 5 feet
waterward of the waterward most piling of each building.
November 2014 Variance Hearing
37. On November 19, 2014, the Commission held an expedited hearing and granted
the variance allowing the Town to install sandbags larger than those allowed by rule, up to a base
width of 45 feet and an elevation of+12.0 feet NAVD. The Commission also granted the Town's
request to locate the sandbag structure waterward up to 115 feet from the waterward pilings. The
Commission issued its Final Agency Decision granting the variance on November 24, 2014.
38. An additional 275 linear feet of sandbags authorized in the traditional six
foot by 20 foot configuration was added to CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14 through a minor
modification in order to protect additional properties north of the originally permitted structure.
Town's Request for Modified Permit to Allow
Use of Geotextile Tubes during Construction
39. On November 24, 2014, Town consultant Tom Jarrett called DCM requesting a
modification of CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14 to down -scale the size of the sandbag structure
from the 45 feet by +12.0 ft. NAVD allowed under the variance granted by the Commission.
DCM Staff confirmed that if the proposed modification resulted in a smaller sandbag structure
that was within the limits set by the variance, the modification was allowed.
13

40. Later that day, DCM received another call from the Town's agent requesting
permission to use a temporary geotextile containment tube to stabilize the project area while the
larger sandbag structure was installed. This was the first time the Town mentioned this proposal.
41. In a series of emails and a report during November 24-26, 2015, the Town
formalized its request to use the geotextile tubes as a temporary construction method. The Town
agreed to remove the geotextile tubes following installation of the approved sandbag revetment.
This request included a proposed sandbag structure with a reduced elevation of 7.5 to 9 feet
above grade instead of the +12.0 feet NAVD elevation approved in the Commission's variance.
42. The Town's stated purpose for using a geotextile tube during construction was
that the tube would allow for a safer work environment landward of the tube and thereby
expedite installation of the sandbag revetment and the tube would stabilize the area around the
foundations of the houses and the property between the landward side of the houses and the road.
During their discussions, the Town clearly conveyed to DCM Staff that the geotextile tube was a
temporary construction method, not part of the sandbag structure's design, and would be
removed immediately following construction of the sandbag revetment, along with the scour
apron and chock tubes, which are also inconsistent with the Commission's rules
43. On November 26, 2014 DCM issued a permit allowing the Town to use a
temporary geotextile tube during construction of the sandbag revetment.
44. CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14, as amended, provides in Condition 11 that,
In accordance with commitments made by the permittee, the authorized
temporary construction containment tube used to assist in the safe construction
of the authorized temporary sand bag revetment shall be removed in its entirety
either immediately upon project completion, or by May 21, 2015, whichever is
sooner, Additionally, should the Division of Coastal Management determine that
the temporary construction containment tubes are no longer needed or are no
longer serving their intended purpose of providing a safe work environment
14

landward of the tubes, the tubes shall be removed immediately upon written
notification by the Division.
45. The Town and its consultant agreed in writing that the temporary geotextile tube
was permitted for construction purposes only and was not designed to be part of the revetment.
Construction of the Sandbag Revetment
46. Mobilization of equipment to the project area began December 9, 2014.
47. A geotextile tube was filled in place on top of a scour apron seaward of the
proposed sandbag revetment location. The first tube was placed December 13, 2014 (Project
Narrative Figure 1). The tenth tube was placed December 22, 2014 (Project Narrative Figure 2).
48. The original plan was to extend the tube south along the shoreline and terminate it
50 feet north of the Topsail Reef sandbag revetment in an alignment parallel to the shore.
49. During installation of the tube, the contractors and engineer observed water
flowing at high velocity from the protected area during ebbing tides. If such flows were
channeled toward the Topsail Reef revetment, there was a high probability of scour occurring at
the base of the Topsail Reef return wall. In order to avoid this scenario, the contractor and CP&E
turned the southern end landward and tie the tube into high ground before shutting down for
Christmas break. Figure 2, Project Narrative shows the orientation of this tube after installation.
50. The geotextile tube worked as designed providing temporary protection to the
work area and preventing further loss of sand from the project area during construction of the
sandbag revetment. The nominal dimension of the temporary tube is 30 feet in circumference.
The tubes achieved variable heights of approximately 3 to 5 feet and a width of 12 feet.
Individual tubes range in length from 100 to 150 feet.
15

51. The contractor returned to the project site on December 28, 2014 and began
laying the base of the sand bag revetment in the vicinity of 2378 New River Inlet Road on the
northern end of the project area.
52. On January 14, 2015, the contractor cut through the southernmost temporary tube
in order to construct the sand bag revetment. Over the next two weeks, the southernmost tube
deflated. The remains of the southern -most tube, scour apron, and chock tube were removed.
53. On February 24, 2015, the Town's authorized agent informed DCM by e-mail that
construction on the sand bag revetment was complete. The sandbag revetment extends
approximately 1,500 ft. north from Topsail Reef. Approximately, 1,350 feet of the tube remains
in place from 2378 to 2290 New River Inlet Road.
54. Beginning around December 1, 2014, during the same timeframe as the Town's
sandbag revetment project, the Town began work on Phase 5 of the Town's project to place a 14
foot + NAVD by a 25 foot -wide dune with a 45 foot -wide berm waterward of the dune at the
western -most portion of the Town's larger project area. The sand for that project was dredged
from an offshore borrow site located approximately one half mile to I -and -a -half miles offshore
of the northern extent of Phase 5. The dredging operations for Phase 5 ended June 20, 2015. The
Town's consultant CP&E performed a survey of Phase 5 in July of 2015 and April of 2016.
Lawsuit filed against the Town regarding the Sandbag Revetment and Assessment
55. In May of 2015, a group of Homeowners subject to the sandbag revetment
assessment filed a lawsuit against the Town alleging, among other things, that the revetment was
insufficient to protect their property. As a result, the Town has not collected the assessment.
16

56. On June 23, 2016, the Town received a letter from the North Carolina Local
Government Commission expressing concern over the significant decrease in the Town's
General Fund Balance, noting the assessment was intended to increase the Town's General Fund,
and asking for information regarding the status of the assessment collections and the Town's
plans to increase the fund balance.
Request to keep the Geotextile Tube and Notice of Violation
57. On February 27, 2015, DCM sent a letter notifying the Town that it needed to
remove the geotextile tube, chock tubes and scour apron.
58. On March 5, 2015, CP&E sent a letter to DCM requesting further modification of
CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14, modified November 26, 2014, to allow the geotextile tube to
remain for the duration of the sand bag permit.
59. On March 12, 2015, DCM's Major Permit Manager Doug Huggett responded to
the request informing the Town that it was inappropriate to request a modification of the Permit
for permission to allow these structures to remain given this was a permit compliance issue. In
addition, Mr. Huggett noted that the request was incomplete.
60. On March 20, 2015 the Town, through its agent, responded to DCM's request that
it comply with the terms of the permit and remove the geotextile tubes.
61. DCM issued a Notice of Violation (NOV) to the Town on March 26, 2015
because construction of the sandbag revetment was finished but the Town had not removed the
temporary geotextile tubes. DCM included a proposed restoration plan requiring removal of the
tubes. The NOV and restoration plan were provided to the Commission as stipulated exhibits.
17

62. On April 24, 2015, DCM issued a revised restoration plan to the Town, indicating
it could remove the geotextile tubes or petition the Commission in time to be heard at its July 15,
2015 meeting for a variance allowing the Town to keep the geotextile tubes.
63. On May 4, 2015, the Town indicated it would seek a variance.
Application for major modification to CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14
64. Prior to requesting a variance, the Town sent a revised major modification request
on May 1, 2015, which DCM accepted as complete, seeking to retain the geotextile tubes as a
part of the temporary erosion control structure. Section 8a of the modification request states, the
tubes would "remain in place until the Onslow maintenance navigation and disposal of material
along the north end of North Topsail Beach can occur, or until March 31, 2016." The Town's
request and attachments was provided to the Commission as stipulated exhibits.
65. As part of the CAMA Major Permit Modification Application process, adjacent
neighbors and the public were given notice of the Town's CAMA permit application through
publication in the Star News on May 11, 2014. No comments were received by DCM staff.
66. Also as part of the CAMA Major Permit Modification application process, the
Town's application, Field Report, and other materials were sent to resource agencies for
comment. Of the agencies responding, DCM Fisheries Specialist raised concerns about the
impact of the project on surf zone habitat. The Wildlife Resources Commission also forwarded
concerns. DCM did not deem these concerns sufficient to support permit denial. The Field
Report and noted comments received by DCM are stipulated exhibits.
67. On June 2, 2015, DCM denied the Town's request because the proposed
geotextile tubes were inconsistent with the Commission's rules regarding temporary erosion
18

control devices found at 15A NCAC 7H. 0308(a) (2) (K) and (L) regulating the size of sandbags
and prohibiting the use of anchoring devices for sandbags.
August 2015 Variance
68. Thereafter, the Town submitted a Petition requesting a variance from 15A NCAC
7H .0308(a)(2)(K) and (L) which would allow the Town to keep the geotextile tubes in place as
part of the temporary erosion control sandbag structures until March 31, 2016 or the completion
of Onslow County's channel maintenancelbeach disposal activities, whichever is later. The
variance was heard during the July 16, 2015 Commission meeting. During oral argument, the
Town explained that the Onslow County -sponsored shallow -draft channel navigation project
would remove shoal material from portions of the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, the Channel to
Jacksonville, and Cedar Bush Cut and deposit the material along the north end of North Topsail
Beach. Based on the available information, the volume of material to be removed during the
project appeared sufficient to cover the shoreline from New River Inlet south to the area fronting
Topsail Reef.
69. The Commission voted to conditionally approve the variance allowing the sand
tubes to remain in place until completion .of an Onslow County shallow -draft navigation project
or June 30, 2015, whichever comes first. The Commission's final agency decision was issued
August 14, 2016. DCM issued the permit modification on August 29, 2015.
Onslow County's Shallow Draft Inlet Navigation Project
70. Onslow County, in cooperation with the Town of North Topsail Beach, obtained
permits allowing the County to maintain authorized federal navigation channels in the vicinity of
North Topsail Beach. See, USACE Permit No. SAW-2014-02012 (GP No. 198000291), CAMA
19

Permit No. 138-15 (amended December 10, 2015), and DWR 401 Water Quality Certification
No. 2015-0605 provided to the Commission as stipulated exhibits.
71. Petitioner states that a cost estimate was developed for construction of the Onslow
County project including bidding documents and contractor coordination, dredge mobilization,
cost to pump sand to beach, and construction observations. The cost to implement this project
was estimated at $1,694,500. The State, Onslow County, and North Topsail Beach agreed to
share the cost of permitting and construction with the Town of North Topsail Beach responsible
for 25 percent of the total cost or $423,625.
72. Between March 22, 2016 and April 22, 2016, more than 130,000 cubic,yards of
material was removed from the channels and deposited along portions of the north end of North
Topsail shoreline between 2396 New River Inlet Road (baseline station 1163+00) and 2300 New
River Inlet Road (baseline station 1152+00).
73. The Petitioner states that the original plan for disposal of the navigation
maintenance material began at a point opposite the intersection of New River Inlet Road and
River Road (approximately baseline station 1157+00) with the disposal extending as far south as
the volume of material would allow. The area expected to be covered by the navigation
maintenance material included the entire portion of the sandbag revetment fronted by the
geotextile containment tube. However, Petitioner contends that conditions along the north end
changed from the time the contract was bid to the time the contractor began to mobilize for the
job and there was not enough dry sand beach in front of the sandbag revetment to allow the
contractor to install the discharge pipeline in the location originally proposed. Therefore, an
amendment to the contract was issued that allowed the contractor to begin disposal just north of
20

the sandbag revetment (near baseline station 1163+50). With disposal starting north of the
sandbag revetment, the length of shoreline covered by the navigation maintenance material did
not extend along the entirety of the sandbag revetment fronted by the geotextile containment
tube. As a result, the disposal area only extended to about baseline station 1152+00.
74. On April 26, 2016, DCM was informed that the project was completed. DCM
verified this information during a May 19, 2016 site visit. On or about June 1, 2016, DCM issued
another NOV requiring the Town either remove the geotextile tube as required by the permit or
seek a variance from the Commission at the September 2016 Commission meeting. The Town
responded that it would seek a variance from the Commission at the September meeting.
75. Petitioner contends that at the present time (August 2016) a significant portion of
the navigation maintenance material deposited in front of the sandbag revetment has been lost
with most of the material migrating north along the New River Inlet shoreline. Petitioner
contends that the conditions that existed prior to the navigation maintenance project conducive to
potential scour and undermining of the sandbag revetment remain in effect today.
76. The Parties stipulate that conditions at the site vary. Sometimes the geotextile
tube is covered and sometimes it is not.
77. Pursuant to the NOV restoration plan, on June 14, 2016 (dated June 3, 2016), the
Town again requested a modification to CAMA Permit 92-14 to allow the sand tubes to remain
in place for the duration of the existing sandbag revetment permit, which expires in November
2022, or until a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented. A copy of
the modification request was provided to the Commission as a stipulated exhibit and includes
notice, the DCM major permit forms, the project narrative, and a letter from Dr. Cleary. A copy
21

of DCM's 2016 field report was also provided to the Commission as a stipulated exhibit. During
the permit review process, the WRC provided new comments and attached their 2015 and 2014
comments. The WRC 2016 comments were provided to the Commission as a stipulated exhibit.
In connection with the 2016 modification request, no additional objections were received.
78. DCM denied the Town's request to modify the permit on July 26, 2016.
Opinion of Tom Jarrett, CP&E provided to DCM
79. The March 5, 2015 Letter to DCM from Tom Jarrett, CP&E was provided to the
Commission as a stipulated exhibit and includes the following opinions: The geotextile tube
along the north end of the sandbag revetment continues to provide vital scour protection and its
removal, could result in dramatic failure of a portion of the sand bag revetment. Significant
accretion of sand has occurred along the southern portions of geotextile tube. Approximately
1,000 feet of the southern portion of the tube has been partially or completely covered.
80. In Tom Jarrett's opinion, the tubes have not had any noticeable adverse impact to
adjacent shorelines as compared to revetments composed of only sand bags. Mr. Jarrett further
opines that allowing the geotextile tube to remain until expiration of the sandbag revetment
permit would not have any greater negative impact on adjacent properties than the impacts
associated with the sand bag revetment itself.
81. In Tom Jarrett's opinion, the rapidly changing conditions along the north end of
North Topsail Beach and the accelerated rate of loss of material from the area has made it
abundantly clear that the sand bag revetment alone will most likely not be able to protect the
homes or the roads in this area for a sufficient amount of time to allow for the recovery of the
shoreline associated with the channel realignment project.
22

82. In Tom Jarrett's opinion, reconfiguration of the ebb tide delta of New River Inlet
has essentially ceased given that the ocean bar channel has returned to a position and alignment
comparable to that existing before the 2012-13 channel relocation project. The movement of the
channel to the north and the subsequent impacts on the ebb tide delta are documented in the last
two project monitoring reports dated September 2015 and June 2016 (draft) both of which were
provided to the Commission as stipulated exhibits. Positive impacts from the inlet channel on
shoreline along the north end of North Topsail Beach will likely not occur until the channel can
again be moved back to a preferred position and alignment. The Town anticipates performing
channel maintenance during the 2017-18.
83. In an April 27, 2016 letter to the Town Manager, Mr. Jarrett stated, "[c]onditions
contributing to erosion along the north end of North Topsail Beach have not changed
significantly since March of 2015." Since material deposited along the north end did not extend
along the entire sandbag revetment, it may be subject to possible failure due to undermining and
scour if the sand tubes are removed. See letter provided to Commission as a stipulated exhibit.
84. In Tom Jarrett's opinion, restoring the channel to a preferred alignment will not
cause immediate changes. The time required for the north shoreline on North Topsail Beach to
respond to the preferred channel location was projected to take at least five years before positive
impacts began to be manifest and possibly 15 years before the shoreline retuned to a condition
comparable to that which existed during the mid- 1980's. These projections assumed the channel
would be maintained in perpetually in its preferred position. Even though the initial channel
relocation project was carried out in 2012-13, the changes in the ebb tide delta resulting from this
initial effort have for the most part been negated due to the inability to hold the channel in its
23

preferred position and alignment. Therefore, the expected changes in the ebb tide delta and its
impact on the shoreline along the north end of North Topsail Beach have been delayed.
Opinion of Dr. William J Cleary, University of North Carolina at Wilmington
85. In a letter dated May 25, 2016, Dr. William J. Cleary called attention to scour of
the sea bed immediately seaward of the sandbag revetment that resulted from the combined
impacts of Perigean tide events in September and October of 2015 and Hurricane Joaquin. See
letter provided as a stipulated exhibit. In his opinion, the erosion of the low -tide beach
contributed to the slumping of some sandbags which in turn led to overtopping of the revetment
and steepening of the foreshore profile in the area fronting most of the sandbag revetment. Dr.
Cleary opines that based on his personal observation and shoreline change data, `the removal of
the [geotextile-tube] will have serious consequences on the stability of the sand bag revetment
and that its removal will ultimately lead to accelerated erosion of the sea bed adjacent to the sand
bags due to a variety of wave -related processes. In turn, the consequent degradation of the sand
bag armoring will have dire consequences for the homes currently protected by the sand bags."
Town's Response to Consultants' Opinions
86. With the prospect of an extended period of recovery along the north end of the
island associated with the channel relocation project, the Town is considering applying for a
permit to construct a terminal groin on the south shoulder of New River Inlet in the event the
next channel relocation project does not produce the needed positive shoreline impacts in a
timely manner. Session Law 2015-241 Section 14.6.(r) provides the necessary authority for the
Town to consider a terminal groin at New River Inlet.
24

87. Based on DCM's experience with permitting similar structures, permits for a
terminal groin will likely not be available for at least a year once the resource agency review
process is initiated. At this time (August 2016), the Town together with Onslow County has
issued a request seeking qualified firms to develop long-term management plans for New River
Inlet to include but not be limited to consideration of a terminal groin.
Continuing Efforts to Address the Erosion Problem
88. Since the completion of the sandbag revetment, the Town has spent over
$500,000 to maintain the revetment according to an August 2016 statement of Assistant Town
Manager Carin Faulkner, a copy of which is a Stipulated Exhibit.
89. In July 2015, the Town authorized CP&E to conduct an alternative channel
analysis using the numerical model known as. Delft3D. Delft3D is a state of the art model that
has the capability of simulating changes in inlet morphology in response to man -induced
changes. The model was used to evaluate a full range of possible channel positions and
alignments. The alternative analysis was completed in June 2016 and recommended the channel
realignment permit be modified to allow for an alternative channel alignment that pivots the
2012/2013 channel clockwise 17 degrees. The Town executed a contract with CP&E on April
14, 2016 to assist with securing permits for this project. It'is anticipated that permits will be
issued in the fall of 2016 and that the project will be constructed during the winter of 2017/2018.
90. In July 2015, the Town contracted with CP&E to use the Delft3D model to
conduct a preliminary assessment of the possible use of a terminal groin on the south side of
New River Inlet as a means of controlling the erosion along the shoreline immediately south of
the inlet. The preliminary analysis simulated six (6) terminal groins of different lengths and
25

orientations. The preliminary assessment indicated a terminal groin could be effective in
controlling erosion on the north end of town.
91. On July 26, 2016, the Town and Onslow County entered into an interlocal
agreement to collaborate in the commission and funding of a study to determine the best
available options for the establishment of hardened structures including but not limited to
terminal groins, jetties, or a combination thereof, to maintain the navigation channel through the
New River Inlet to authorized depths over the next 50 years (hereinafter "Interlocal
Agreement"). The long-term sustainability of the Town's storm damage reduction project will
require sand from New River Inlet. Onslow County's primary interest is to maintain dependable
navigation through New River Inlet in the most cost effective manner over 50 years. To that end,
the Town issued a Request for Qualifications (hereinafter "RFQ") seeking qualified engineering
firms to conduct a study to determine the best options, including hard structures, to maintain the
navigation channel through New River Inlet and protect development on the adjacent shorelines.
History of the Commission's Consideration of Geotextile Tubes
92. Spencer Rogers gave a presentation at the July 2010 Commission meeting on the
use of geotextile tubes for temporary erosion control. During the Commission's September 16,
2010 meeting, DCM Staff presented additional information regarding geotextile tubes.
93. During its 2010 presentation, Staff raised public safety concerns about the
stability of geotextile tubes, their ability to roll, and susceptibility to complete failure if damaged.
Due to these concerns, Staff recommended against amending the rules for temporary erosion
control structures to allow the use of geotextile tubes. The Commission did not initiate
rulemaking to allow the temporary use of geotextile tubes.
Orm

94. At the April 29, 2015 Commission meeting, DCM Staff presented a PowerPoint
similar to that used in 2010, raised the same concerns about geotextile tubes, and recommended
against rulemaking. The Commission discussed geotextile tubes again at its July 2016 meeting
and decided not to include geotextile tubes in the temporary erosion control structure rules.
The Town's Variance Request
95. On August 3, 2016, the Town requested a variance from 15A NCAC 7H.
0308(a)(2)(K) and (L) in order to keep the geotextile tubes in place as a part of the temporary
erosion control sandbag structures until the Town can identify a long-term solution for the
erosion problem on the extreme north end of its shoreline. The Town indicated that it intends to
explore the possibility of installing a terminal groin immediately adjacent to New River Inlet and
has entered into an Interlocal Agreement for that purpose. In the event Onslow County and the
Town are not successful in obtaining a permit to construct a hardened structure at New River
Inlet, the Town requested a variance authorizing modification of the sandbag permit to allow the
sand tube to remain for the duration permitted for the sandbag revetment (November 2022).
STIPULATED EXHIBITS
Included with the Petition and the Staff Recommendation for the Commission's review
were the following Stipulated Exhibits:
All the stipulated exhibits presented to the Commission as part of the 2014 Variance
including:
o Beach nourishment easements from 38 oceanfront owners to the Town;
o Exhibit 15 aerial photo 2014 Google;
o Relevant portions of FEIS for Inlet Management Project dated July 2009;
o Tom Jarrett Erosion History Report dated Nov. 13, 2014, Jarrett affidavit Oct. 7,
2014 and Jarrett Erosion Report;
o CAMA Major Permit 79-10 as amended, issued July 21, 2010;
o August 2014 Shoreline Survey Beach Profiles Stations 11+35 to 11+55 (CBI);
o Cleary Letter;
o October 2014 Monitoring Report;
27

o Sandbag "Final Design" CAMA Major Permit application and attachments;
o Comment from DCM Fisheries Specialist;
o DCM Field Report;
o Emergency Permit email from DCM to Town dated October 21, 2014;
o CAMA Major Permit 92-14 with cover letter;
o Tax base information from Town;
o Town resolution 2014-13;
o Town resolution 2014-16;
o Draft Town meeting minutes showing public comment on sandbag project;
o Notice of Town meeting on November 19, 2014 to put sandbag project to bid;
o Various site photographs (22 photos) included in PowerPoint presentation.
• All the stipulated exhibits presented to the Commission as part of the 2015 Variance
including:
o Major Permit Modification Application submitted by the Town to the DCM on
May 1, 2015 including forms, attachments and appendices;
o Correspondence from the DCM to the Town, dated February 27, 2015;
o Correspondence from Coastal Planning and Engineering of North Carolina, Inc. to
DCM dated March 5, 2015;
o Correspondence from Coastal Planning and Eng of NC, Inc. to DCM dated March
18, 2015;
o June 25, 2015 Statement of Tom Jarrett, P.E.;
o The Commission's November 24, 2014 Final Agency Decision granting 2014
Variance petition;
o Modification to CAMA Major Permit No..92-14 authorizing "regular" sized bags
on the north end;
o Email chain from November 24-26, 2014 regarding the geotextile tube request,
including Town's commitment to remove bags;
o Report from Town re use of geotextile tubes and new proposed size of sandbag
structure;
o Permit No. 92-14 as amended on November 26, 2014;
o Project Narrative from Town;
o Correspondence from DCM to Town on March 12, 2015;
o March 20, 2015 response from Town to DCM;
o March 26, 2015 NOV and restoration plan;
o April 24, 2015 revised restoration plan;
o May 4, 2015 signed copy of revised restoration plan;
o Comments received during permit review process from DCM Fisheries Specialist
and WRC;
o DCM Field Report for modification request
o June 2, 2015 letter to Town from DCM denying modification request;
0 2010 PowerPoint re: geotextile tubes by DCM to Commission;
0 2015 PowerPoint re: geotextile tubes by DCM to Commission;
o Updated PowerPoint with aerial and ground level site photographs.
28

• Final Agency Decision issued August 14, 2015 conditionally granting the Town's request
for a variance;
• 2016 Notice of Violation and signed restoration plan;
• The Town's Petition seeking a variance submitted August 3, 2016 and attachments
including the following:
o The subject permit;
o A description of the proposed development including a site pla;
o Proof of notice to the adjacent property owners;
o The Town's written reasons and arguments as to how the Town meets the four
variance criteria; and
o A draft set of proposed stipulated facts and stipulated exhibits.
• May 25, 2016 letter from Dr. William Cleary Opinion to Town Attorney with
attachments (Figures 1 — 11);
• CV for Dr. William J. Cleary;
• Coastal Planning & Engineering of NC, Inc. Contract for Terminal Groin Feasibility
Study including Exhibits A — C;
• July 26, 2016 Interlocal Agreement between Town and County for Groin/Jetty study;
• July 29, 2016 Request for Qualifications issued by Town;
• June 23, 2016 Letter to Town from Local Government Commission;
• 2016 DCM Field Report for modification request;
• April 27, 2016 letter to Stuart Turille from Tom Jarrett regarding Geo-Tube Removal
including attached Fig. 1;
• CV for Stuart Jarrett;
• July 26, 2016 letter to Town from DCM denying request for permit modification;
• August 2016 statement from Assistant Town Manager Carin Faulkner regarding cost
spent to maintain the revetment;
• Town's June 2016 application for a Permit Modification, including attachments;
• 2016 comments from WRC on Town's modification request;
• DCM's and Town's PowerPoint presentations.
29

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The Commission has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter.
2. All notices for the proceeding were adequate and proper.
3. DCM submitted a Staff Recommendation for the Commission's consideration on
September 1, 2016 in which it took the position that Petitioner had failed to carry its burden to
meet all four of the factors without which a variance cannot be granted. In summary, DCM
pointed out that the "supersized" sandbags previously authorized by the Commission in the 2014
variance should have been sufficient to afford the temporary protection required at the Site.
DCM argued that any hardship imposed by the Commission's rules is unnecessary as Petitioner
opted to install a smaller sandbag structure than that authorized by the Commission and
Petitioner can still reconfigure the existing sandbag structure to the full size allowed by the 2014
variance. In its Recommendation, DCM pointed out that it had approved Petitioner's request to
employ the geotextile tubes as a temporary construction method because Petitioner and its
consultant had provided written confirmation that the geotextile tube would be removed
following construction. DCM recommended the Commission deny the request because allowing
the geotextile tube to remain in place after construction is complete is not consistent with the
spirit, purpose, and intent of the Commission's rules, does not protect public safety and welfare,
and does not preserve substantial justice, DCM based its recommendation on the Commission's
policy that only allows temporary erosion control for imminently threatened structures and its
concerns over the stability and safety of geotextile tubes. DCM also noted that contrary to the
prediction of the Town's consultants, portions of the Town's geotextile tube have already been
removed and the remaining sandbags have not failed.
no]

4. Following the Town's revision to its variance request during the September 13,
2016 hearing, DCM amended its recommendation to the Commission and agreed that if the
Commission granted the variance and allowed the geotextile tubes to remain in place until May
1, 2017 it should do so with the following conditions:
• The geotextile tubes may remain in place until May 1, 2017;
• By May 1, 2017, the Town is required to compromise and remove the geotextile
tubes. DCM has defined removal to require that the Town cut the exposed
geotextile tube and remove all visible material using a forklift to pull out loose
material. Removal does not include excavating the entire geotextile tube if it is
covered with sand. DCM may provide addition directions to the Town and its
consultants based on Site conditions during the removal process.
• By May 1, 2017 any exposed geotextile tube material shall be removed;
• By May 1, 2017 the geotextile tubes shall not be operable.
• No sand or sandbags may be placed on any uncompromised portion of the
geotextile tubes;
The geotextile tubes and sandbag revetment will remain within and will not
exceed the footprint of the supersized sandbags allowed by the Commission in its
final agency decision dated November 24, 2014.
6. In light of the Town's revised variance request and DCM's revised
recommendation, the Commission agrees that Petitioner has met the requirements in N.C.G.S. §
113A-120.1(a) and 15 NCAC 07J .0703(f) which must be found before a variance can be granted
as set forth below.
a. Strict application of from 15A NCAC 7H .0308(a)(2)(K) and (L) will cause
unnecessary hardships.
The Commission affirmatively finds that in light of the Town's agreement to amend the
variance request to specify May 1, 2017 as a date certain by which the geotextile tubes will be
removed, strict application of 15A NCAC 7H .0308(a)(2)(K) and (L) (hereinafter "Sandbag
31

Rules") would cause Petitioner unnecessary hardship. The Sandbag Rules are designed to allow
for temporary erosion control measures in the Ocean Hazard AEC. Without this variance,
Petitioner would be in the position of having to remove the geotextile tubes during the upcoming
winter storm season.
The Commission affirmative finds that Petitioner has shown that the strict application of
the Sandbag Rules would cause Petitioner unnecessary hardship in light of Petitioner's assurance
that the geotextile tubes will be compromised and removed by May 2017, and subject to the
condition that neither sand nor sandbags will be placed on the geotextile tubes and that the
geotextile tubes and existing sandbag revetment will be maintained within the footprint
previously allowed by the Commission in its November 24, 2014 final agency decision.
For these reasons, the Commission affirmatively finds that Petitioner has met the first
factor without which a variance cannot be granted.
b. Petitioner has demonstrated that the hardship results from conditions
peculiar to Petitioner's property.
The Commission affirmatively finds that Petitioner has demonstrated that the hardship
results from conditions peculiar to the property. Specifically, the Site is located within the Inlet
Hazard AEC for the New River Inlet and is influenced by the dynamic inlet processes. The
behavior of the shoreline on the north end of North Topsail Beach is impacted by the position
and alignment of the main bar channel of New River Inlet as shown by morphological studies of
New River Inlet reported in the FEIS. The studies also identified a position and alignment of the
bar channel that would provide a beneficial impact on the north end shoreline. Based on these
studies, the Town elected to artificially move the channel to the preferred position and alignment
indicated by the morphological studies. The Town completed the channel realignment project in
32

February 2013. The purpose of moving the channel was to encourage the reconfiguration of the
inlet's ebb tide delta through the redistribution of material from the north side of the inlet to the
south side. However, this purpose was not realized.
The Town's consultant, Tom Jarrett, has now advised that the ocean bar channel has
returned to a position and alignment comparable to that existing before the channel relocation
project. As a result, it is his opinion that reconfiguration of the ebb tide delta of New River Inlet
has essentially ceased. See, Stip. Fact No. 84 and September 2015 and June 2016 (draft)
monitoring reports provided to the Commission as stipulated exhibits. Mr. Jarrett opined that
positive impacts from the inlet channel on shoreline along the north end of North Topsail Beach
will likely not occur until the channel is relocated to the preferred position and alignment. The
Town anticipates performing channel maintenance during the 2017-18.
Given the Town's unsuccessful attempt to realign the channel in the Inlet Hazard AEC,
the Commission affirmatively finds that Petitioner has demonstrated that the hardship results
from conditions peculiar to the property and has met the second factor required for the grant of
its request for a variance.
C. Petitioner has demonstrated that hardships do not result from its actions.
The Commission affirmatively finds that Petitioner has demonstrated that the hardship
does not result from actions taken by the Petitioner. Specifically, the Town has done nothing to
accelerate the erosion affecting the Site and has taken significant, if unsuccessful, steps to
address the problem, including development and implementation of its Inlet Management Plan.
In particular, the Commission notes that in 2014 the Town requested a variance allowing
construction of a supersized sandbag structure. The Commission granted the Town's request.
33

However, as the Town candidly admitted during oral argument, the Town was unable to afford
the cost of the permitted sandbag structure when the bids came in. Consequently, the Town
reduced the size of the sandbag revetment. In its initial Recommendation, DCM pointed out that
hardships, if any exist, are the result of the Town's own failure to build the sand bag revetment to
the permitted dimensions authorized by the Commission. While the Commission is troubled to
learn that the Town requested a variance for a supersized sandbag structure that it did not have
the financial capacity to construct, logically there is no basis for assuming that this failure is the
cause of Petitioner's current hardships. In fact, given Site conditions during construction, it is
possible that construction of the supersized sandbag revetment might also have also resulted in
the Town requesting permission to install a geotextile tube during construction of the supersized
sandbag revetment to stabilize the work environment. It is impossible to know whether
installation of geotextile tubes during construction of a supersized revetment would have resulted
in the same or similar conditions as occurred during construction of the smaller revetment.
During construction of the smaller sandbag revetment the Town requested DCM allow
the use of a geotextile sand tube during construction in order to stabilize the work environment
and allow equipment to be used safely on the shoreline. The Town and its consultants agreed in
writing to remove the geotextile tube when construction was completed. After the smaller
sandbag revetment was completed in the Spring of 2015, the Town became aware that the beach
profile in front of the revetment and geotextile tube became steep and wave action had caused
the geotextile tubes and sandbag structures to mold together. The consultants alerted the Town to
concerns that if the geotextile tubes were excavated, that work could cause the revetment to fail.
Following construction, the Town was concerned that the sandbag revetment alone would not be
34

able to protect the homes or the roads in this area during the winter storm season or give the
shoreline the necessary time for gradual recovery. These Site conditions do not appear to have
been caused by Petitioner nor do they appear to have been anticipated by Petitioner.
After considering the stipulated facts and stipulated exhibits, the Commission
affirmatively finds that the hardships relating to this specific variance request are not the result of
the Town's actions. For these reasons, the Commission affirmatively finds that Petitioner has
demonstrated that it has met the third factor required for a variance.
d. Petitioner has demonstrated that the revised variance request is consistent
with the spirit, purpose and intent of the Commission's rules, will secure
public safety and welfare, and will preserve substantial justice.
Petitioner has demonstrated (a) that the requested variance is consistent with the spirit,
purpose and intent of the Commission's rules, (b) that it will secure public safety and welfare,
and (c) that it will preserve substantial justice. Specifically, the spirit, purpose and intent of the
Commission's rules for the Ocean Hazard Area of Environmental Concern is to allow temporary
erosion control to protect imminently threatened structures, while limiting the size of the
individual sandbags and the dimensions of the overall structure that may be permitted. In 2003,
CAMA was amended to include 113A-115.1, which prohibited the use of erosion control
structures along the ocean shoreline, except in a few specific situations. The Commission's rules
allow for the continued use of "temporary erosion control structures" made of sandbags to
protect imminently threatened structures. The installation and design standards in the
Commission's rules reflect the temporary nature of the structures, and demonstrate that sandbags
were not intended as large, permanent structures. The Sandbag Rules are designed to offer
immediate relief and time to find a permanent solution. The Commission's size limits on
35

individual sandbags and limits on the overall structure size are intended to promote structural
stability and effectiveness, while maintaining the temporary nature and the public's right of safe
access to the beach.
The Town has struggled to find a permanent solution to erosion in this Inlet Hazard AEC.
In 2013, the Town sought to control erosion by realigning the channel. The channel relocation
did not produce the predicted measurable positive impacts on the Site. As part of the 2016
Navigation Maintenance Project founded jointly by the Town, Onslow County, and the State, the
Town received sand along the revetment. However, for unforeseen reasons, the 2016 project was
unable to place sand along the entire length of the revetment fronted by the geotextile
containment tubes. In addition, much of the material placed during the 2016 project has been lost
as a result of rapidly changing conditions along the north end of the island.
In its Recommendation, DCM has accurately stated that the spirt, purpose and intent of
the Commission's rules is to allow temporary erosion control for imminently threatened
structures while limiting the size of the individual sandbags and dimensions of the overall
structures that may be permitted. Moreover, DCM correctly points out that the Commission has
not adopted rules allowing the long term use of geotextile tubes because of safety and other
design concerns. In this case, the tubes were only allowed as a temporary construction tool and
were not designed to provide continued long-term protection as part of the sandbag revetment.
Under the specific facts of the revised request, which reflect current site conditions and
include an agreement between Petitioner and DCM as to conditions to be imposed on this limited
further extension of time to leave the geotextile tubes in place, the Commission affirmatively
finds that request is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the Commission's Rules.
36

The second assessment to be made is whether the variance proposed by Petitioner will
impact public safety and welfare. Petitioner submits, and the Commission agrees, that if the
deadline for removal of the geotextile tubes is extended through the winter storm season to May
1, 2017, public safety and welfare will be protected, However, because of concerns over the
design of geotextile tubes (including stability) as a long term temporary solution, once the winter
storm season is ended — no later than May 1, 2017 — the Commission requires that the geotextile
tubes be compromised and removed. DCM has defined removal to require that the Town cut the
exposed geotextile tube and remove all visible material using a forklift to pull out loose material.
Removal does not include excavating the entire geotextile tube if it is covered with sand. DCM
may provide addition directions to the Town and its consultants based on Site conditions during
the removal process. This removal is necessary to protect the public from safety issues that are
anticipated to increase as the tubes deteriorated and as the warmer summer months increase the
public's recreation use of the public trust area. Allowing the geotextile tubes to remain in place
for the winter storm season and then removing the tubes will lessen any unreasonable dangers to
life and adjacent property.
Observations made during the construction process indicate the tubes have not had a
noticeable adverse impact on adjacent shorelines as compared to the impacts relating to the
revetments composed of only sand bags. Therefore, allowing the sand tube to remain for slightly
extended period of time (to May 1, 2017) should not have any additional negative impact on
adjacent properties.
Finally, the Commission agrees that a variance subject to conditions will preserve
substantial justice by allowing the Town to continue using the geotextile tubes, which were never
37

designed to be part of the permitted sand bag revetment, for a limited time until May 1, 2017 and
then compromise and remove the exposed geotextile tubes under DCM's direction.
For these reasons, the Commission affirmatively finds that Petitioner has met the fourth
factor required by N.C.G.S. § 113A-120.1(a) subject to the conditions set forth below.
THEREFORE, the Town's request for a variance from 15A NCAC 7H. 0308(a)(2)(K)
and (L) in order to extend the time to keep the geotextile tubes in place as a part of the temporary
erosion control sandbag structures is GRANTED subject to the following negotiated conditions
agreed to by the Town and DCM as a compromise during the September 13, 2016 hearing:
I. The geotextile tubes may remain in place until May 1, 2017;
2. By May 1, 2017, the Town is required to compromise and remove the geotextile
tubes. DCM has defined removal to require that the Town cut the exposed
geotextile tube and remove all visible material using a forklift to pull out loose
material. Removal does not include excavating the entire geotextile tube if it is
covered with sand. DCM may provide addition directions to the Town and its
consultants based on Site conditions during the removal process.
3. By May 1, 2017 any exposed geotextile tube material shall be removed;
4. By May 1, 2017 the geotextile tubes shall not be operable.
5. No sand or sandbags may be placed on any uncompromised portion of the
geotextile tubes;
6. The geotextile tubes and sandbag revetment will remain within and will not
exceed the footprint of the supersized sandbags allowed by the Commission in its
final agency decision dated November 24, 2014.
The granting of this variance does not relieve Petitioner of the responsibility for obtaining
any other required permits from the proper permitting authority. This variance is based upon the
Stipulated Facts set forth above. The Commission reserves the right to reconsider the granting of
kri

this variance and to take any appropriate action should it be shown that any of the above
Stipulated Facts is not true or that the Stipulated Facts have materially changed. Notice is hereby
provided that absent a significant or material change in circumstances, the Commission will not
hear or consider any further variance request from the Town to extend the time for removing the
geotextile tubes located on North Topsail Beach.
This is the 5°i day of October 2016. ^ -W
�OA:e �/c(sb' e,lvne
Frank D. Gorham, III, Chairman
Coastal Resources Commission
39

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I have this day sewed the foregoing FINAL AGENCY DECISION
upon the parties by the methods indicated below:
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
2008 Loggerhead Court
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460
Brian E. Edes
Town Attorney
Crossley McIntosh & Collier
5002 Randall Parkway
Wilmington, NC 28403
Christine A. Goebel, Esq.
Assistant General Counsel
N.C. Department of Env. Quality
217 West Jones Street
Raleigh, NC 27699
Cenilied Allail/Return Receipt Requested
and Electronically at
townmanager na north-toosaiI-beach.ora
U.S. Mail and Electronically at
[e-mail]
Electronically al
christine. _oebel@ncdenr. eov
Braxton C. Davis, Director electronically:
Mike Lopazanski, Assistant Director Braxton.Davisancdenr.aov
Angela Willis, Assistant to the Director Mike Lopazanski c ncdenngov
Division of Coastal Management Angela.Willis ccDnedenr.gov
400 Commerce Ave.
Morehead City, NC 28557
This is the 5`1' day of October, 2016.
SI(ecial,ffieputy Attorney General and Commission Counsel
N.C. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh, N. C. 27602
Q17

North Topsail Beach
July 26, 2016
Page 3
8) On August 29, 2016, a Major Modification to CMA Permit No. 92-14 was issued
pursuant to a Variance granted by the Coastal Resources Commission under the
provisions provided for in NCAC 07J.0700. This Major Modification contained the
following condition:
1) In keeping with the Variance granted by the Coastal Resources
Commission (CRC) on July 16, 2015, and the CRC Variance Order signed
by the CRC Chairman on August 14, 2015, the temporary construction
containment (geotextile) tubes shall be removed when the Onslow County
channel maintenance/beach disposal project is complete, or by June 30,
2016, whichever comes first.
9) The Onslow County channel maintenance/beach disposal project was completed on or
about April 26, 2016. The Division verified the continued presence of the temporary
construction containment tubes on May 19, 2016.
10) Based upon the failure of the Town to proceed with the development and
implementation of a removal plan for these structures, the Division issued a Notice of
Violation to the Town on June 3, 2016. During settlement negotiations relating to the
NOV, the Town was given the option to apply for a Major Modification to Permit No.
92-14, requesting permission to leave the temporary construction containment tubes,
scour aprons and chock tubes in place for an additional period of time.
11) NCAC 7H.0308(a)(2)(K) states in part, "Sandbags used to construct temporary erosion
control structures shall be tan in color and three to five feet wide and seven to fifteen
feet long when measured flat."
12) NCAC 7H.0308(a)(2)(L) states, "Soldier pilings and other types of devices to anchor
sandbags shall not be allowed."
13) Based upon the findings outlined above, the proposed project modification has been
determined to be inconsistent with NCAC 7H.0308(a)(2)(K) and NCAC
7H.0308(a)(2)(L), as well as the requirements of the Variance granted by Coastal
Resources Commission pursuant to NCAC 07J.0700.
Given the preceding findings, it is necessary that your request for issuance of a CAMA Major
Modification to Permit No. 92-14 under the Coastal Area Management Act be denied. This denial is
made pursuant to N.C.G.S. 113A-120(a)(8) which requires denial for projects inconsistent with the
state guidelines for Areas of Environmental Concern or local land use plans.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
1367 US Hwy 17 South I Elisabeth City, NC 27909
252-264-3901

North Topsail Beach
July 26, 2016
Page 4
If you wish to appeal this denial, you are entitled to a contested case hearing. The hearing will
involve appearing before an Administrative Law Judge who listens to evidence and arguments of
both parties before making a final decision on the appeal. Your request for a hearing must be in the
form of a written petition, complying with the requirements of § 150B of the General Statutes of
North Carolina, and must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service
Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-6714, within twenty (20) days from the date of this denial letter. A copy
of this petition should be filed with this office.
Another response to a permit denial available to you is to petition the Coastal Resources Commission
for a variance to undertake a project that is prohibited by the Rules of the Coastal Resources
Commission. Applying for a variance requires that you first acknowledge and recognize that the
Division of Coastal Management applied the Rules of the Coastal Resources Commission properly in
processing and issuing this denial. You may then request an exception to the Commission's Rules
based on hardships to you resulting from unusual conditions of the property. To apply for a variance,
you must file a petition for a variance with the Division of Coastal Management Director and the
State Attorney General's Office on a standard form, which must be accompanied by additional
information on the nature of the project and the reasons for requesting a variance. In accordance with
the Notice of Violation issued to the Town on June 3, 2016, the variance request must be filed no
later than August 3, 2016, after which the Town and the Division of Coastal Management will work
diligently to agree on a set of stipulated facts in anticipation of the variance being heard by the
Coastal Resources Commission at its September 13-14, 2016 meeting. The standard variance forms
may be obtained by contacting a member of my staff, or by visiting the Division's web page at
http://deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/coastal-management/coastal-management-permits/variances-
appeals.
Sincerely,
r
Braxton C. Davis
Director, Division of Coastal Management
cc: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington, NC
State of North Carolina I Enviroomeotal Quality I Coastal Management
1367 US Hwy 17 South I Elizabeth City, NC 27909
252-264-3901

Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
NOTICE OF VIOLATION
June 3, 2016
CERTIFIED MAIL 7011 2000 0002 2768 8240
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Town of North Topsail Beach
c/o Stuart Turille, Town Manager
2008 Loggerhead Ct.
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460
PAT MCCRORY
Governor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
BRAXTON DAVIS
Director
RE: NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND REQUEST TO CEASE UNAUTHORIZED DEVELOPMENT
CAMA VIOLATION#16-17D
Dear Mr. Turille:
This letter is in reference to your response via e-mail to Jason Dail on March 31, 2016, where you
quoted "My goal is to comply with the permit requirement to remove the tube upon conclusion of
the project" in addition to a site visit conducted by DCM staff on May 19, 2016 for property located
between 2276 & 2392 New River Inlet Road, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean located in the Town of North
Topsail Beach, in Onslow County, North Carolina.
Information gathered by NC Division of Coastal Management (DCM) staff shows that the Town of North
Topsail Beach has violated the terms or conditions of CAMA/Dredge and Fill State Permit No. 92-14, which
was issued to the Town of North Topsail Beach by way of a major modification pursuant to a variance from
the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) and the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality on
August 29, 2015. 1 hereby request that you immediately CEASE AND DESIST such violation(s) and comply
with the terms and conditions of the above permit. If the terms and conditions of a permit are not complied
with, the permit becomes null and void from the date of its issuance.
On October 24, 2014, CAMA/ Dredge and Fill State Permit No. 92-14 was issued to The Town of North
Topsail Beach for the installation of a sandbag revetment within the project area. The sandbag revetment
was authorized for dimensions measuring 6 feet in height by 20 feet in base width. On November 26, 2014
the DCM amended CAMA/ Dredge and Fill State Permit No. 92-14, in accordance with the CRC's variance
order No.14-16, to allow for the installation of a larger sand bag revetment (12 feet in height NAVD88 by
45 feet in base width). In addition, the permit, as amended on the November 26, 2014, authorized the
installation of a "temporary construction containment tube" otherwise referred to as a "geotube" which was
to be installed immediately at the seaward -most toe of the sandbag revetment structure. A scour apron and
temporary "chock" tube was also authorized under this permit modification, the placement of the scour
apron and chock tube structures were authorized no further oceanward than the seaward -most toe of the
temporary containment tube used to construct the temporary sandbag revetment structure.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
910-796-7215

Town of North Topsail Beach
June 3, 2016
Page 2 of 4
On August 29, 2015 the DCM amended CAMA/Dredge and Fill State Permit No. 92-14 in accordance with
the CRC's variance order No.15-05. Permit Condition No. 1 allowed the temporary construction
containment (geotextile) tubes to remain in place until the Onslow County channel maintenance/beach
disposal project is complete, or by June 30, 2016, whichever comes first.
This permit was issued for major development in the Ocean Hazard and Inlet Hazard Areas of
Environmental Concern (AEC), adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in accordance with North Carolina General
Statutes (N.C.G.S.)113A-118. This permit included the following terms and'conditions(s):
(1) Condition No. 1 states: "In keeping with the Variance granted by the Coastal Resources
Commission (CRC) on July 16, 2015 and the CRC Variance Order signed by the CRC Chairman
on August 15, 2015, the temporary construction containment (geotextile) tubes shall be removed
when the Onslow County channel maintenance/beach disposal project is complete, or by June 30,
2016, whichever comes first."
(2) Condition No. 3 states: All conditions and stipulations of the active permit, including Condition No.
13 of the Amended Permit requiring that the associated scour aprons and "chock" tubes be
removed when the associated geotextile tubes are removed, remain in force under this Major
Modification unless specifically altered herein.
For the following reasons, you are in violation of the above terms and condition(s) of said permit:
(1) The DCM received ICW/New River Navigation Project - Observation Reports #34 & #35 from the
Town of North Topsail Beach's authorized agent, Coastal Planning and Engineering of NC, PC; via
email on April 26, 2016. According to the ICW/New River Navigation and Channel Maintenance
Project Construction Observation report, dated April 26, 2016, "No sand or discharge samples
were collected today since dredge and disposal activities have been completed" indicating that the
Onslow County channel maintenance/beach disposal project is complete.
(2) To date, and as verified during a site visit on May 19, 2016, the temporary construction
containment tubes and the temporary scour apron and "chock" tubes used for constructing the
authorized sandbag revetment have not been removed.
To comply with the terms and condition(s) of the permit issued to the Town of North Topsail Beach, the Town
of North Topsail Beach must:
(1) Remove the temporary construction containment tubes and all portions of the scour apron and
chock tubes within thirty (30) days; or
(2) Within thirty (30) days upon receipt of this notice, the Town of North Topsail Beach shall submit a
CAMA Major Modification application that is complete to the satisfaction of the DCM seeking to
modify Permit 92-14 to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and
scour aprons to remain. Following the anticipated denial of the modification request, and no later
than August 3, 2016 the Town of North Topsail Beach will submit a variance petition package that
satisfies the requirements of the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC). The Town of North
Topsail Beach and DCM will work diligently to agree on a set of stipulated facts in anticipation of

Town of North Topsail Beach
June 3, 2016
Page 3 of 4
the variance being heard by the CRC at its September 13-14, 2016 meeting. If such variance
request is denied by the CRC, or the variance request submitted by the Town of North Topsail
Beach is not heard at the September 13-14, 2016 CRC meeting, the aforementioned structures
shall be removed by September 30, 2016.
If the Town of North Topsail Beach intends to cooperate with this request, the person authorized by the Town
of North Topsail Beach, is requested to sign one of the attached Restoration Agreements and return it in the
enclosed, self-addressed envelope within ten (10) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to comply with this
request or respond back to this office prior to the requested deadline with an acceptable schedule for
compliance will be interpreted as a refusal or failure to cooperate and may result in a Notice of Continuing
Violation, as well as a court injunction being sought ordering compliance, or other enforcement action.
A civil assessment of up to $10,000 plus investigative costs may be assessed against any violator. Each day
that the development described in this Notice is continued or repeated may constitute a separate violation
that is subject to an additional assessment of $10,000.
The relevant statutes and regulations are available from this office, and I am willing to assist the Town of
North Topsail Beach in complying with the requirements of these laws. A site inspection will be made in the
near future to determine whether this REQUEST TO CEASE AND DESIST has been complied with. I request
that you, as Town Manager please contact me immediately at [phone] to discuss resolution of this
important matter.
Thank you for your time and cooperation. Upon completion of the restoration as requested in the Restoration
Plan Agreement to the satisfaction of the Division of Coastal Management, the Town of North Topsail Beach
will be notified as to the amount of the civil assessment for failure to comply with the terms, conditions, or
requirements of such permit.
Sincerely,
Debra D. Wilson
District Manager
Enclosures
Cc: Braxton Davis, Director, DCM
Roy Brownlow, Compliance Coordinator, DCM
Tyler Crumbley, USACE
Brian Edes, Attorney for the Town of North Topsail Beach

Town of North Topsail Beach
June 3, 2016
Page 4 of 4
RESTORATION PLAN
For
Town of North Topsail Beach Property
C/o Mr. Stuart Turille, Town Manager
CAMA Violation No. 16-17D
Property located between 2276 & 2392 New River Inlet Road, Onslow County
Remove the temporary construction containment tubes, all portions of the scour apron located
oceanward of the temporary sandbag revetment, and all chock tubes within thirty (30) days upon
receipt of this notice; or
2. Within thirty (30) days upon receipt of this notice, the Town shall submit a CAMA Major
Modification application that is complete to the satisfaction of the DCM seeking to modify Permit
92-14 to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons to
remain. Following the anticipated denial of the modification request, and no later than August 3,
2016 the Town will submit a variance petition package that satisfies the requirements of the
Coastal Resources Commission (CRC). The Town and DCM will work diligently to agree on a set
of stipulated facts in anticipation of the variance being heard by the CRC at its September 13-14,
2016 meeting. If such variance request is denied by the CRC, or the variance request submitted
by the Town is not heard at the September 13-14, 2016 CRC meeting, the aforementioned
structures shall be removed by September 30, 2016.
I, Mr. Stuart Turille, on behalf of the Town of North Topsail Beach, agree to comply with one of these
options within this restoration plan to the satisfaction of the Division of Coastal Management (DCM) within
10 days upon receipt of this notice, or provide an explanation for non-compliance. When corrective actions
are complete, the Town will notify the DCM so the work can be inspected.
SIGNATURE:
DATE:
It is the policy of the Coastal Resources Commission to assess a civil penalty plus investigative costs against all violations. The
amount assessed will depend upon several factors, including the nature and area of the resources that were affected and the
extent of the damage to them. If restoration is not undertaken or satisfactorily completed, a substantially higher civil assessment
will be levied and an injunction sought to require restoration.
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled \ 10% Post Congumer Paper

Fred J. Burns, Mayor
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tern
Aldermen:
Don Harte
Joann M. McDermon
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Nature's Tranquil Beauty
June 13, 2016
Mr. Jason Dail
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
sst. Town Manager/Town Clerk
RE: Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach Regarding CAMA Permit
92-14 - RESUBMITTAL
Dear Mr. Dail,
Per your e-mail communication sent on June 6, 2016, the Town has provided the following additional
information to your office:
1. The signed certified mail receipts demonstrating that the adjacent riparian property owners
received notification of your planned development.
2. A completed MP-1 Form, Section 4. (0, which includes the existing "temporary containment
sand tube" as referred to in the original application.
3. A completed MP-1 Form, Section 5(a), with the use of the project as Public/Government.
4. A completed, signed, and dated MP-2 Form.
5. A check made payable to NCDEQ in the amount of $400.
Sincerely,
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Cc:
Braxton Davis (Div. of Coastal Management)
Doug Huggett (Div. of Coastal Management)
Brian Edes (Town Attorney)
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
2008 Loggerhead Court Phone [phone]
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 ntbnc.org Toll Free: [phone]
Fax [phone]

'.ram 9"'
Fred J. Burns, Mayor
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tern
Aldermen:
Don Harte
Joann M. McDermon
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Nature's Tranquil Beauty
June 3, 2016
K
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
Asst. Town Manager/Town Clerk
Ms. Debra Wilson RECEIVED
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources JUN 14 2016
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina28405 DCM- MHD CITY
RE: Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach Regarding CAMA
Permit 92-14
Dear Ms. Wilson,
The condition of the permit for which the TOWN is seeking a modification is the extension of
time in which the temporary construction containment tube can remain prior to its removal. As
stipulated in Permit #92-14, the containment tube was to be removed upon completion of the
sandbag revetment or by May 21, 2015; whichever is sooner. Furthermore, a variance was
granted and a modified permit was issued on August 29, 2015 to allow the containment tubes
to stay in place until the Onslow County channel maintenancelbeach disposal project is
complete, or by June 30, 2016, whichever comes first.
The Onslow County navigation maintenance project that was completed on April 22, 2016 did
not end up placing sand along the entirety of the revetment. The project was originally
proposed to extend south as far as the volume of material would permit, which was expected to
extend along the entire length of the portion of the revetment fronted by the geotextile
containment tube. However, conditions along the north end changed from the time the contract
was bid to the time the contractor began to mobilize for the job and there was not enough dry
sand beach in front of the sandbag revetment to allow the contractor to install the discharge
pipeline in the location originally proposed. Due to the changed conditions, the contract was
amended to allow the contractor to begin disposal operations north of the sandbag revetment,
thereby reducing the length of shoreline fronted by the geotextile containment tube that was
covered by the navigation maintenance material.
Furthermore, as included in this submittal, an attached letter from Dr. William Cleary, P.G.,
and Emeritus Professor of Geology notes that extreme (elevated) water levels resulting from
several periods of Perigean (King or Supermoon) tides during the latter part of September and
early October 2015 and coinciding with the passage of Hurricane Joaquin and associated storm
2008 Loggerhead Court Phone [phone]
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 nthnc.org Toll Free: [phone]
Fax [phone]

Page 2 of 2 Town of North Topsail Beach
Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach Regnrdiug CAMA Permit 92-14
waves caused significant oceanfront shoreline erosion to occur within the sandbag revetment
area. The erosion of the shoreline resulted in the steepening of the lower foreshore profile in
front of the sandbag revetment. Dr. Cleary goes on to state, in regards to February 2016 drone
aerial images of the area, that "incident waves breaking along the base of the sand bags further
led to scouring of the sea bed promoting further slumping of the bags. This process frequently
occurred during the subsequent months and may be considered the norm." In summation, Dr.
Cleary stated that "the removal of the geo-tube will have serious consequences on the stability
of the sand bag "revetment". Its removal will ultimately lead to accelerated erosion of the sea
bed adjacent to the sand bags due to a variety of wave -related processes."
Additionally, with the prospect of an extended period of recovery along the north end of the
island associated with the channel relocation project, the TOWN has already executed a
contract to move forward with the modeling and design of a terminal groin that would be
required to be completed as part of the permitting process, which could take at least 3 years.
With this in mind and given the fact that volatility of the inlet shoreline conditions continues to
threaten the possible undermining of portions of the sandbag revetment, the Town is again
concerned about the risk of undermining of the structure. Currently, this undermining is being
held in check by the presence of the sand tubes.
A complete application package is attached and includes a detailed project narrative along with
an aerial photo of the project site taken near the time of completion of the sandbag revetment.
Other information being submitted with this request includes forms MP-1, MP-4, an AEC
Hazard Notice, list of adjacent riparian owners notified, easements showing ownership, and the
required fee. Please note that we will supplement or amend any of these items as needed.
Please contact me at 910.328.1349 (office) should you have any questions or need additional
information.
Sincerely,
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Cc:
Braxton Davis (Div. of Coastal Management)
Doug Huggett (Div. of Coastal Management)
Jason Dail (Div. of Coastal Management)
Brian Edes (Town Attorney)
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach
Regarding CAMA Permit 92-14
Resubmittal
Prepared by:
The Town of North Topsail Beach
Submitted to:
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Wilmington Regional Office
June2016
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach
Regarding CAMA Permit 92-14
RESUBMISSION
Contents
FORMS
DCM MP-1 (Revised)
DCM MP-2
ATTACHMENT
Project Narrative
Appendix A: Work Plat and Location Maps
Appendix B: Signed Ocean Hazard AEC Notice and Easements
Appendix C: Adjacent Riparian Landowner Notifications
Appendix D: Letter from Dr. William J. Cleary, P.G.
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

gem MP-1
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permlt
(last revised 12127/06)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Project Name (if applicable)
Town Of North Topsail Beach
Phase 1 Emergency Sandbag Revetment
Applicant 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
Stuart
Turille
Applicant 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
N/A
N/A
N/A
If additional applicants, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address
PO Box
city
State
2008 Loggerhead Court
N/A
North Topsail Beach
NC
ZIP
Country
Phone No.
FAX No.
28460
USA
910 - 328 -1349 ext. n/a
N/A - -
Street Address (if ddferent from above)
City
State
ZIP
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A -
Email
[e-mail]
2. Agent/Contractor Information
Business Name
N/A
AgenU Contractor 1: First Name
MI
Last Name
N/A
N/A
N/A
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
N/A
N/A
N/A
Mailing Address
PO Box
city
State
N/a
N/A
N/A
N/A
ZIP
Phone No. 1
Phone No. 2
N/A
N/A-
ext.N/A
N/A- ext.n/a
FAX No.
Contractor fit
N/A
N/A
Street Address (ifddferent from above)
Ciry
State
ZIP
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A -
Email
N/A
RECFivFn
<Form continues on back>
JUN 14 2016
nCh4_ 11 HD ntTY
252-808-2808 :: t-888.4RCOAST :: www.nccoastaimanagement.net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 2 of 5)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple)
Street Address
State Rd. #
Onslow
New River Inlet Road
N/A
Subdivision Name
City
State
Zip
N/A
North Topsail Beach
NC
28460 -
Phone No.
Lot No.(s) (d many, attach additional page with list)
910 - 328 -1349 ext. n/a
N/A, I I ,
a. In which NC river basin is the project located?
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
White Oak River Basin
New River Inlet and Atlantic Ocean
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
®Natural []Manmade ❑Unknown
New River Inlet and Atlantic Ocean
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
®Yes ❑No
work falls within.
North Topsail Beach
4. Site Description
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
Approximately 1350 ft.
16,200 sq. ft.
c. Size of individual lot(s)
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
n/a, I I
NWL (normal water level)
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
5 ft. MHW ❑NHW or ❑NWL
e. Vegetation on tract
No vegetation is present due to past erosion and presence of sandbag revetment.
I. Man-made features and uses now on tract
There are currently 20 residential structures located along the ocean shoreline north of the Topsail Reef Condominiums.
New River Inlet Road is located immediately landward of the homes. The residential structures serve as both permanent
residences and rental properties. A sand bag revetment was constructed along approximately 1,500 ft. of shoreline, north of
Topsail Reefs Condominiums in February 2015. The revetment includes a 50 ft. return wall that extends from the northern
terminus of the revetment perpendicular to shore and ties into the existing upland dune system. An additional 330 ft.
segment of the revetment extends north of the initially constructed revetment. There are temporary containment sand tubes
oceanward of the sand bag revetment.
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses adacent to the proposed project site.
The property immediately south of the installed sand tube is occupied by oceanfront residential condominiums. To the
north, the area is undeveloped and bounded by New River Inlet. The Topsail Reef Condominiums are protected by a
sandbag revetment installed in 2012.
h. How does local government zone the tract?
I. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
R-1 Residential
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
®Yes []No ❑NA
j. Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes ®No
k. Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, by whom? N/A
I. Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does h involve a ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
National Register listed or eligible property?
■ V ICU
252-808-2808 :: 1-888.4111COAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
DCM- MHD CITY

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 3 of 5)
APPLICATION for
<Form continues on next page>
Major Development Permit
m. (1) Are there wetlands on the site? ❑Yes ®No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? ❑Yes ®No
(ill) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ❑Yes ❑No
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
n/a
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
n/a
p. Describe existing stone water management or treatment systems.
n/a
5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? ❑Commercial ZPublic/Government
❑Private/Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
The Town of North Topsail Beach believes leaving the temporary containment sand tubes in place continues to provide vital
scour protection to the sand bag revetment constructed in February 2015, and its removal prior to a more long-term solution
to the erosion problem being implemented, could pose a risk of failure of a portion of the sand bag revetment. Currently the
Towns is working toward the next channel realignment event scheduled to occur during the 2016/2017 dredge window.
Furthermore, the Town is conducting a numerical modeling study to evaluate design altematives for a terminal groin.
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
n/a
d. List all development activities you propose.
The Town proposes to leave the temporary containment sand tube in place until a more long-term solution to the erosion
problem can be implemented, or the sand bag revetment permit expires (2022), whichever comes first.
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? maintenance
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 16,200 ®Sq.Ft or ❑Acres
g. Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public accessway or other area ®Yes ❑No ❑NA
that the public has established use of?
h. Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state.
N/A
I. Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland? []Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ❑Yes ❑No ®NA
J. Is there any mitigation proposed? ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
RECEIVED
252-808.2808 :: 1.888.4111 :: www.neeoastalmanagement.-M 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 4 of 5)
<Form continues on back>
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
6. Additional Information
In addition to this completed application form, (MP-1) the following Items below, if applicable, must be submitted In order for the application
package to be complete. Items (a) — to are always applicable to any ma/or development application. Please consult the application
instruction booklet on how to properly prepare the required items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross -sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, clearly Indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that Is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other Instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e. The approprtate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR.
I. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised that they have 30 days in
which to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Name George and Diann Vann Phone No.
Address 2386 New River Inlet Rd., 12926 Couples PI., Waldorf, MD 20601 -
Name Wayne and Margaret Nielson Phone No.
Address 19471 Youngs Cliff Rd., Sterling, VA 20165
Name George Neal III Phone No.
Address 3203 Henderson Rd., Greensboro, NC 27410-6032
g. A list of previous state or federal permits Issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permutes, and Issuing dales.
Pernittee: Town of North Topsail Beach (management plan) DOA Permit SAW-2005-00344
Permlltee: Town of North Topsail Beach (management plan) CAMA Penmlt 79-10
Permiltee: Town of North Topsail Beach (Off -Island Truck Haul) CAMA Permit 191-05(As modified)
Permittee: Town of North Topsail Beach (Sand Bag revetment CAMA Permit 92-14 (As Amended)
Permittee: Town of North Topsail Beach (Sand Bag revetment) DOA Pemit SAW-2014-01700
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization form, if applicable.
I. Welland delineation, if necessary.
J. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and Inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with 0e N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), N necessary. If the project Involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act.
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application.
The project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fad grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to
enter on the aforementioned lands In connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow-up
monitoring of the project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Data%UeAoja 41 Print Name nSehAk-17 tt.tirl� RECEIVED
Signature 7 lUN 14 2016
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
❑DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information []DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts DCM- M H D CITY
252.808-2808 :: 1.888-4RCOAST :: www.neconstalmanagement.net

Form DCM MP-1 (Page 5 of 5)
APPLICATION for
❑DCM MP-3 Upland Development
®DCM MP4 Structures Information
Major Development Permit
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
252-808-2808 :: 1.888.4RCOAST :: www. nccoastalman age m ent.net

Form DCM MP-2
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP-1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and/or fill activities. All values should be given in feet.
Access
Other
Channel
Canal
Boat Basin
Boat Ramp
Rock Groin
Rock
(excluding
(NLW or
Breakwater
shoreline
NWL)
stabilization
Length
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Width
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Avg. Existing
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NA
NA
N/A
Depth
Final Project
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
NA
NA
N/A
Depth
1.
EXCAVATION
®This section not applicable
a.
Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in
b.
Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards.
c.
d.
High -ground excavation in cubic yards.
(i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands/marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL []None
(it) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
2.
DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL
®This section not applicable
a.
Location of disposal area.
b.
Dimensions of disposal area.
c.
d.
(i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
Ill Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA
(it) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
(ii) If yes, where?
e.
(i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands/marsh
I.
Ill Does the disposal include any area in the water?
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
❑yes ❑No ❑NA
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL []None
(ii) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
nr-M- MHD CITY
252-808-2808 :: i-888.4RCOAST :: www.nccoastalmanagement.net revised: 12/26/06

Form ®CM MP-2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 2 of 3)
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION ❑This section not applicable
(If development is a wood groin, use MP-4 — Structures)
a. Type of shoreline stabilization:
❑Bulkhead ❑Riprap ❑Breakwater/Siff ®Other.
Geotextile Containment Tube
c. Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL: 15
e. Type of slablIbmtlon material:
Sand Filled geolexlile containment tube
g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level.
Bulkhead backfill N/A Riprap hM
Breakwater/Sill NIA Other N/A
I. Source of fill material.
NIA - The tubes are already full, no additional fill is required for this
modification.
b. Length: 1,350 ft.
Width: 15 ft.
d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL: 15
f. (1) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months?
WYes ❑No DNA
01) if yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
Information.
Erosion of sand In front of the containment tube continues as
discussed In the project narrative attached. The erosion Is due
to a combination of waves, tidal currents, and the configuration
of the New River Inlet.
h. Type of fill material.
N/A -The Tubes are already full, no additional fill is required for
this modification.
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES ®This section not applicable
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. (1) WIII fill material be brought to the site? ❑Yes ❑No El NA b. (0 WIII fill material be placed in coastal wetlands/marsh (CW).
If yes,
(I) Amount of material to be placed In the water
(I11) Dimensions of fill area
(Iv) Purpose of fill
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV _ ❑SS _
OWL ❑None
(Iq Describe the purpose of the fill In these areas:
15. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion b. What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g., dragline,
controlled? backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
NIA NIA - The permit modification is to allow existing tubes to stay In
place.
c. (I) WIII navigational aids be required as a result of the project?
❑Yes ®No DNA
(ip If yes, explain what type and how they will be Implemented.
d. (1) WIII wetlands be crossed In transporting equipment to project
site? ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
(11) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental Impacts.
u Ep,-P-�ViG4 50,
— — �� — C
Date _ Poojcct Name
RECI IVa
252-808-2808 :: 1-8884RCOAST::w .neeoastelmanagement.net JUN 14 2016 revised: 12126/06
DCM- MHD CITY

Form DCM MP-2 (Excavation and Fill, Page 3 of 3)
App�nt Name n /gyp
Applicant Signature
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
252-808-2808 :: 1.888-4RCOAST :: www.nccoaslalmanagement.net revised: 12126106

1.Project Narrative.
The Town of North Topsail Beach completed Phase 1 of its multifaceted inlet and shoreline
management plan in February 2013 with the repositioning of the New River Inlet ocean bar
channel to a more central location between the south end of Onslow Beach and the north end of
North Topsail Beach. The material removed during repositioning of the channel was used to
construct a beach fill along 7,730 feet of shoreline south of New River Inlet.
As stated in prior permit applications, the beach fill along the north end of North Topsail Beach
experienced rapid rates of volume loss resulting in the eventual loss of all of the fill material
north of the Topsail Reef by August 2014. In response to the emergency situation created by the
rapid deterioration of the fill, the Town of North Topsail Beach applied for a permit to construct
a sandbag revetment along approximately 1500 feet of shoreline north of Topsail Reef. While
this initial request was denied due to the size of the proposed sandbag revetment, the Town of
North Topsail Beach was ultimately issued a CAMA Major Permit (Permit #92-14) dated
November 26, 2014 through the variance process.
In addition to the enlarged size of the sandbag revetment, the permit allow the Town to use a
temporary sand filled containment tube to provide protection to the area during installation of the
sandbag revetment. The conditions of the permit required the temporary containment tube to be
removed immediately upon completion of the sandbag revetment or by May 21, 2015 whichever
occurred sooner. A typical cross-section of the sandbag revetment and temporary containment
tube is provided in Figure 1.
„
........................................................................................
......................
...... ...........
.... _...... .............
aOTYi
„lone
b R YYIY
aRra ns YKR. /.1
OOOIW
1! T YYl1
4L RL11P
If ��
fill
ti
ilSi-Ell
Figure 1. Typical cross-section of sandbag revetment and temporary containment tube. R E C E I V E
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

The sandbag revetment was essentially completed on February 25, 2015. An aerial photograph
taken of the project site on February 20, 2015 via a drone is shown in Figure 2.
Fig
tube. (Photo Courtesy of Mike Capuano)
the
As can be seen in the aerial photo, the northern end of the sand tube was exposed while most of
the tube along the south end of the sandbag revetment was buried. The exposed portion of the
sand tube on the north end of the revetment was continuing to provide substantial scour
protection for the sandbag revetment. However, due to the volatility of the shoreline in the area,
portions of the sand tube are alternately buried and covered. A series of ground photos of the
completed sandbag revetment taken March 6, 2015, show some exposed and buried sand tubes
are provided on Figure 3 to 7. The figures are arranged in a north to south order.
In the spring of 2015, the Town requested a permit modification to leave the tube in place for the
duration of the sandbag permit. Through discussions with the North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management, a plan was developed to allow the Town to leave the tubes in place until
either the completion of a proposed navigation maintenance project, which would place sand
along the revetment, or June 30, 2016, whichever comes first. A variance was sought by the
Town and granted by the CRC on July 16, 2015, and a permit modification was issued on August
29, 2015.
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Figure 3. March 0, 201 i photo oI saudhag revcunent and sand tube at north end of revetment.
Figure 4. March b, 2015 photo of sandbag revetment and sand tube at north end of revetment.
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016

Figure 6.
Figure 5. March 6, 2015 photo of sandbag revetment and partially buried sand tube.
revetment.
sandbag
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Figure 7. March 6, 2015 photo showing buried sand tube along south end of sandbag revetment.
Dredging activities associated with the navigation maintenance project ended on April 22,
2016. Originally, disposal of the material from the navigation project was to begin at a point
opposite the intersection of New River Inlet Road and River Road, which located opposite
baseline station 1157+00 (Figure 8). The project was proposed to extend south as far as the
volume of material would permit, which was expected to extend along the entire length of the
portion of the revetment fronted by the geotextile containment tube. However, conditions
along the north end changed from the time the contract was bid to the time the contractor
began to mobilize for the job and there was not enough dry sand beach in front of the sandbag
revetment to allow the contractor to install the discharge pipeline in the location originally
proposed. Therefore, an amendment to the contract was issued that allowed the contractor to
begin disposal just north of the sandbag revetment (near baseline station 1163+50) (Figure 8).
With disposal starting north of the sandbag revetment, the length of shoreline covered by the
navigation maintenance material did not extend along the entirety of the sandbag revetment
fronted by the geotextile containment tube. The photos shown in Figures 9, 10, and 11 show
the area during construction of the navigation project currently underway.
In the attached letter (Appendix D). Dr. William Cleary P.G.. Emeritus Professor of Geology,
states: "...it is my opinion based on personal observation and shorelinc change data that the
removal of the geo-tube will have serious consequences on the stability of the sand bag
"revetment". Its removal will ultimately lead to accelerated erosion of the sea bed adjacent to
the sand bags due to a variety of wave -related processes. In turn, the consequent degradation of
the sand bag armoring will have dire consequences for the homes currently protected by the
sand bags."
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Given the dynamic nature of the area just south of New River Inlet, the uncertainty of future
shoreline responses in this area, and the limited extent of the beach that will be covered by the
navigation maintenance project, the Town of North Topsail Beach again request consideration
of modifying the sand bag permit to allow the sand tubes to remain in place until the expiration
of the existing permit for the sandbag revetment (November 2022) or until such time the north
end of the island stabilizes as a result of the channel relocation portion of the management plan
or, if the relocated channel fails to produce the desired shoreline response, until such time the
TOWN can install a terminal groin on the south shoulder of New River Inlet, whichever comes
first.
A _ — •i
LOCATION OF
PIPELINE ROUTE
.« aR� ,i
Ofgim•�sun p.B.r /
moan % TaYeSlA
_ � �• � Y TBC129 ,
,f • A
'fr .,J •S''W
BCA[b '.11
' STIfT .A9FA I
3IA�tItOFA'gY.1
to
Appn:rase SaNnrn fm•t �i
rA / 500'
1 l
7 MY C MWEnr MW / ry TH qLL iE�—
As-Bu,Lt LMAIO TAPER SECrM
(10 BE REYOvw)
G%ECS tdAiCA%dl
iM S1 ?PEtl ltfp
Figure 8. Map showing the originally proposed beach disposal start location and the actual beach disposal start
location.
With regard to the channel relocation, the TOWN is moving forward with plans to reposition
the ocean bar channel of New River Inlet to a preferred position and alignment as allowed
under DOA SAW 2005-00344 dated May 16, 2001 and CAMA Major Permit#78-10.
Repositioning of the inlet bar channel is expected to occur during the 2016-2017
environmental dredging window.
Most of the material removed to reposition the channel will be deposited within the beach area
designated as Phase 2 of the Town's shoreline and inlet management plan, however, in keeping
with this plan, the Town intends to provide periodic maintenance fill within the beach segment
covered by Phase 1 in order to maintain the status of Phase 1 as an "Engineered Beach" under
the rules established by FEMA.
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Figure 9. April 1, 2016 photo showing northern location of the tube during navigation maintenance project
construction.
Figure 10. April 3, 2016 photo showing poles placed by the dredge contractor marking the landward location of sand
to be placed during the navigation maintenance project construction.
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

9�E 3
lie
Figure 11. April 22, 2016 photo showing construction of the navigation maintenance project.
As previously stated, the commitments by the Town of North Topsail Beach to remove the sand
tubes in accordance with the permit conditions were made in good faith and based on the belief
the sand bag revetment alone would be able to provide the degree of protection needed to
preserve the area until the inlet channel relocation project begins to produce measurable positive
impacts on the area. While there are signs the inlet ebb tide delta has responded in a manner as
expected, i.e., material on the north side of the ebb tide delta has migrated on shore as predicted
and there have been indications material has begun to accumulate on the seaward portion of the
ebb tide delta located south of the bar channel, the channel shoaled at a faster rate than
anticipated and in so doing, the channel migrated north close to the position it occupied prior to
the initial realignment. Once the channel migrated out of the preferred positon, sediment build-
up on the south side of the ebb tide delta slowed. Given this slower rate of sediment
accumulation south of the bar channel, the time needed for the north end of the island to respond
positively to the preferred bar channel position may be closer to the upper limit of 15 years
projected during the formulation of the plan.
With the prospect of an extended period of recovery along the north end of the island associated
with the channel relocation project, the Town is considering applying for a permit to construct a
terminal groin on the south shoulder of New River Inlet in the event the next channel relocation
project does not produce the needed positive shoreline impacts in a timely manner. Authority to
consider a terminal groin at New River Inlet was recently provided by Session Law 2015-241
Section 14.6.(r).
Documentation of the success or failure of the channel relocation project to reconfigure the ebb
tide delta of New River Inlet to a condition that would produce positive shoreline changes along
the north end of the island could take 2 to 3 years following the next channel relocMIM
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Town elects to seek a permit to construct a terminal groin, designing and permitting of the
structure could take at least 3 years. If the beach fill placed within Phase 1 during the next
channel relocation project erodes at rates comparable to past fills, including that placed during
the 2012/2013 project, the sandbag revetment would again be exposed to conditions that could
produce serious scour at the seaward toe of the revetment and thus threaten its structural
integrity.
In order for the sand bag revetment to continue to provide protection for the threatened homes
along the north end of North Topsail Beach until a more long-term solution can be implemented,
the sand tubes must be allowed to remain.
Given the continued dynamic changes in the shoreline fronting the sandbag revetment, the
limited extent of the beach covered by the navigation maintenance project, the risk of failure of
the revetment due to scour along the seaward toe of the structure, and the protracted time period
to determine a more permanent solution for the erosion problem, the Town of North Topsail
Beach again request a modification of the existing CAMA permit #92-14 to extend the time the
sand tubes can remain in place until a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be
implemented.
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
')CM- MMHD CITY

Appendix A: Work Plat and Location Maps
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM_ MHD CITY

Ain
a
HollyRtclg
1.

Sheet 2 of 4. Plan view of sandbag revetment and geotube
Oka -
lkt
s \
Vol
\� ♦ a y t .cv
tot
it
i I*°
t lY -v
anowner
50 ft.. '—
2316 2J66 New River Inlet Rd
Georg,nVol, c
12926 'duples P1 .
WaleortM030601
•' ` iT'. l -
0
South End Adjacro Riparian Owners
2281-B New River l Jet Road
e Ate"' p
George Neal In
I �`. 115 0G _
Y
Greensboro NC 2id1030J2
Greensboro,
sboro, C 27
r F t
228i New River Inlet Read
Wayne and Marpant Nblson
191 Youngs Cliff Rd
Sterling, VA 20165
Notes:
legend:
1. 2012 background imagery is from the
0 Geotube
NC Orl imagery service.
Sandbag Revetment
L Baseline Station
0 1So
S,
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Sheet 3 of 4. Typical Cross -Section — Permitted Sand bag revetment
,6
................................................................
n
.. ..................
w u=...................
.....................
...... .. ......
0
TO..............................
...............................
.............................................
................
.TEMPORARY CGNTNNMENT
"!
TUBE @ SCOUR SYSTEM
ir
..............t
..................... ti
.tt.... ...................
EO
8�
0
10'
SS' CHOCK BAG
ROLL PREVENTION
UR
JO FT SCO....ROM
18 SCOUR APRON
____ __
..
...
0 10 20 w b 60 MI 70 SO BA \ 00
DISTANCE IRON g NE (FEE» EXISTING
k�

Sheet 4 of 4. Typical Profiles
PROFILE LINE: 1155,00 LOCATION: NORTH TOPSAIL
ry Sand In Sand OEe a e.
.tea I ... _...
z
�m
y
----------------- APR 2014
- -
APRIL 2015 --.
DISTANCES- REFERENCED -TO.
........__..._:...._.._.....:..._._..._...;.... �•...:....
N w 286233 FEET
E 2498175 FEET
AZ. '= 135 DEC.
0 73 156 225 300 375 450 525 600 6
DIST. (FEET)
w
PROFILE LINE: 1160+00
LOCATION: NORTH TOPSAIL
'Sand..._,
l
Ube
Sand: Range: 622
I
I
C
>`m
W
I
.................
....
. - .....
APR 2014
m
APRIL 2015
DISTANCES-REFERENCED-TO- i— :
N ti 286564 FEET
-
E - 2498586 FEET
I
AZ. 130 DEG.:
0
75 150
225 300
375 450 525 600
DST.
(FEET)
87RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Appendix B: Signed Ocean Hazard AEC Notice and Easements
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCI�►- MHD CITY

OCEAN HAZARD AEC NOTICE
Project Is In an: —4—
Ocean Erodible Area
High Hazard Flood Area
Inlet Hazard Area
Property Owner: T
ygyl '� t\JMh
7 2sss ; I fle<�, c,"
Property Address:
Date Lot Was Platted:
This notice is intended to make you, the applicant, aware of the
special risks and conditions associated with development in this
area, which is subject to natural hazards such as storms, erosion
and currents. The rules of the Coastal Resources Commission
require that you receive an AEC Hazard Notice and
acknowledge that notice in writing before a permit for
development can be issued.
The Commission's rules on building standards, oceanfront
setbacks and dune alterations are designed to minimize, but not
eliminate, property loss from hazards. By granting permits, the
Coastal Resources Commission does not guarantee the safety of
the development and assumes no liability for future damage to
the development. Permits issued in the Ocean Hazard Area of
Environmental Concern include the condition that structures be
relocated or dismantled if they become imminently threatened
by changes in shoreline configuration. The structure(s) must be
relocated or dismantled within two (2) years of becoming
imminently threatened, and in any case upon its collapse or
subsidence.
The best available information, as accepted by the Coastal
Resources Commission, indicates that the annual long-term
average ocean erosion rate for the area where your property is
located is V " 11-1 feet per year.
The rate was established by careful analysis of aerial
photographs of the coastline taken over the past 50 years.
Studies also indicate that the shoreline could move as much as
300 feet landward in a major stone.
The flood waters in a major storm are predicted to be about
Ife feet deep in this area.
Preferred oceanfront protection measures are beach nourishment
and relocation of threatened structures. Hard erosion control
structures such as bulkheads, seawalls, revetments, groins, jetties
and breakwaters are prohibited. Temporary sand bags may be
authorized under certain conditions.
The applicant must acknowledge this information and
requirements by signing this notice in the space below. Without
the proper signature, the application will not be complete.
Property Owner Signature Date
SPECIAL NOTE: This hazard notice is required for
development in areas subject to sudden and massive storms and
erosion. Permits issued for development in this area expire on
December 31 of the third year following the year in which the
permit was issued. Shortly before work begins on the project
site, the Local Permit Officer must be contacted to determine the
vegetation line and setback distance at your site. If the property
has seen little change since the time of permit issuance, and the
proposed development can still meet the setback requirement,
the LPO will inform you that you may begin work. Substantial
progress on the project must be made within 60 days of this
setback determination, or the setback must be re -measured. Also,
the occurrence of a major shoreline change as the result of a
storm within the 60-day period will necessitate re -measurement
of the setback. It is important that you check with the LPO
before the permit expires for official approval to continue the
work after the permit has expired. Generally, if foundation
pilings have been placed and substantial progress is continuing,
permit renewal can be authorized. It is unlawful to continue
work after permit expiration.
For more information, contact:
Local Permit Officer
Address
Locality
F91TT7--7dMN7.TTI
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
Revised May 2010

BEFORE YOU BUILD
Setting Back for Safety: A Guide to Wise Development Along the Oceanfront
When you build along the oceanfront, you take a calculated risk.
Natural forces of water and wind collide with tons of force, even
on calm days.
Man-made structures cannot be guaranteed to survive the force
of a hurricane. Long-term erosion (or barrier island migration)
may take from two to ten feet of the beach each year, and,
sooner or later, will threaten oceanfront structures. These are the
facts of life for oceanfront property owners.
The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) has adopted rules for
building along the oceanfront. The rules are intended to avoid an
unreasonable risk to life and property, and to limit public and
private losses from storm and long-term erosion. These rules
lessen but do not eliminate the element of risk in oceanfront
development.
As you consider building along the oceanfront, the CRC wants
you to understand the rules and the risks. With this knowledge,
you can make a more informed decision about where and how to
build in the coastal area.
The Rules
When you build along the oceanfront, coastal management rules
require that the structure be sited to fit safely into the beach
environment.
Structures along the oceanfront, less than 5,000 square feet in
size, must be behind the frontal dune, landward of the crest of
the primary dune, and set back from the first line of stable
natural vegetation a distance equal to 30 times the annual
erosion rate (a minimum of 60 feet). The setback calculation
increases as the size of the structure increases [15A NCAC
7H.0306(a)(2)]. For example: A structure between 5,000 and
10,000 square feet would require a setback from the first line of
stable, natural vegetation to a distance equal to 60 times the
annual erosion rate (a minimum of 120 feet). The graduated
setback continues to increase through structure sizes greater than
100,000 square feet.
The Reasons
The beachfront is an ever -changing landform. The beach and
the dunes are natural "shock absorbers," taking the beating of the
wind and waves and protecting the inland areas. By
incorporating building setbacks into the regulations, you have a
good chance of enjoying the full life of the structure. At first, it
seems very inviting to build your dream house as close to the
beach as possible, but in five years you could find the dream has
become a nightmare as high tides and storm tides threaten your
investment.
The Exception
The Coastal Resources Commission recognized that these rules,
initially passed in June 1979, might prove a hardship for some
property owners. Therefore, they established an exception for
lots that cannot meet the setback requirement. The exception
allows buildings in front of the current setback, if the following
conditions apply:
1) the lot must have been platted as of June 1, 1979, and
is not capable of being enlarged by combining with
adjoining land under the same ownership;
2) development must be constructed as far back on the
property as possible and in no case less than 60 feet
landward of the vegetation line;
3) no development can take place on the frontal dune;
4) special construction standards on piling depth and
square footage must be met; and
5) all other CAMA, state and local regulations must be
met.
The exception is not available in the Inlet Hazard Area.
To determine eligibility for the exception the Local Permit
Officer will make these measurements and observations:
required setback from vegetation line
exception setback (maximum feasible)
rear property line setback
max. allowable square footage on lowest floor
RECEIVED
PRE-PLRNIIT STRUCTURE; INADEQUATE SETBACK
PERMITTED PRE -STORM BEACH PROFILE DCM- M
STRUCTURE:
ADEQUATE POST -STORM BEACH PROFILE
SETBACK r. ` ONE YEAR AFTER STORM/BEACH REBUILDING
After the storm, the house on the dune will be gone. The other house has a much better chance of survival.
2016
D CITY

P., 1 of
O
■1111111111111�1
DOC 10: 0 5677000.1 Trw: CAP
RPcoldod: M/1U2012 at 03:43:13 M
Ho . {2{.00 Pape I of 3
w "s1
0mlCL. PNC
u L. Mb�cPoi, NC.,d
o(Ivd RPq. of pofd,
-3831,o637-639
BEACH NOURISHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT
For Onslow County Parcel 1001574
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ONSLOW
GRANTOR: NEAL GEORGE III
GRANTEE: TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
TERM: THIRTY(30) YEARS
RECEIVED
Book: 3831 Page,1977-CufnM: 637 6aq:1
Bpde 3831 PaB« 617 Pop I of3 JUN 14 2016
DCM— MHD CITY

Page z or 3
BEACH NOURISHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT
For Onslow County Parcel ID g778C-14
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ONSLOW
GRANTOR: NEAL GEORGE III
GRANTEE: TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
TERM: THIRTY (30) YEARS
In exchange for the sum on One Dollar ISS.00) and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt
of which is acknowledged, the Grantor and Grantors heirs and assigns (collectively "Grantor') convey to
the Town of Topsail Beach, North Carolina, a municipal corporation ("Town') and on behalf of its
representatives, agents, employees, officials, engineers, consultants, surveyors, contractors,
subcontractors, permittees, invftees and assignees (collectively "Gnntee'I does now grant and convey
unto the Grantee, this Easement until December 31, 2041 to go upon the Property to conduct
Activities in the Easement Area (as those italicized terms are defined below), subject to the following
conditions:
Property Sublect to Easement: That ocean front property identified as the address of,
2284-8 NEW RIVER INLET RD, North Topsail Beach, NC 28445 and, Onslow County Tax
Parcel ID R778C-14, and described in [check applicable bog]:
Ed Deed Book 3622 and Page 944 of the Onslow County Registry recorded 7/14/2011 as N TPSL
SH 2 BA L48A of and as shown on Map Book and Page 20-015 of the Onslow County Registry.
❑ See Exhibit A attached.
2. Easement Area on Property Where Artivirifirs May Take Place: That portion of the Property, If
any, which (i) is seaward of the first line of stable vegetation, or (if) is seaward of the toe of the frontal
sand dune adjacent to the beach, or (ill) is seaward of the crest of the erosion escarpment, whichever
feature Is most landward.
3. Activities. "Activities" are those tasks required of the Town under its Shoreline Protection
Project, which tasks include evaluating, surveying, studying, monitoring, inspecting, preserving,
patrolling, constructing, operating, maintaining, repairing, rehabilitating, nourishing, and replacing the
public beach, the dune system and other erosion control and storm damage reduction measures
together with appurtenances thereto, including depositing sand, altering Easement Area contours and
profiles, building berms and dunes, moving, storing, and removing construction equipment and supplies,
erecting and removing temporary structures, and performing any other work necessary and incident to
the Shoreline Protection Project over, at, on, under and above the Easement Area. Activities do not
include moving or damaging permitted permanent improvements within the Easement Area.
4. Grantor Reserved Rfohts. Grantor reserves the right to construct dune walkover structures to
the extent allowed by any applicable Federal, State or local laws or regulations, provided that such
structures shall not violate the Integrity of the dune in shape, dimension orfunction.
5. Other cand/tlans: (a) Grantee will Indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Grantor for any
claim arising from Activities on the Pmperfy; (b) Grantee has no responsibility to restore or repair
natural forces damage; (c)Grantee makes no representations on sand volume strrif an io be placed on or
in front of the Property or protective effects the Activities or SHORELINE-PROT_ 60ROIECT will
Book: 3831 Page,1977-Current: 637 Seq:2 RECEIVED
Rack. 3891 Pege 637 Pege 2 of
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Pp. 3 or 3
provide the Property, (it) Grantor acknowledges (i) any raised lands created seaward of a pre -project
mean high water mark is the property of the State of North Carolina subject to the public trust; (ill the
fluctuating state of the ocean beach; and (iii) Grantee makes no representation on the precise location
of either the most seaward boundary of the Property or the most landward extent of the public trust
beach; (a) This Easement binds Grantor, runs with the title to the Property, and terminates on
December 31, 2042; (f) Grantor and signatories acting on Its behalf warrant and covenant that (i)
Grantor's title to the property is free and discharged from all right, title, claim or interest of the Grantor
or anyone claiming by, through or under Grantor; (ii) Grantor will hold harniess, indemnify and defend
Grantee from such claims; and (Ili) all signatories executing this instrument on behalf of Grantor have
authority to do so; and (a) Grantee shall have the right to temporarily or permanently assign this
easement to the federal, state, or county governments, or any agencies or department thereof or any
governmental authority formed to implement beach nourishment, renourishment and / or stabilization
related to the Shoreline Protection Project.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this instrument is executed by the Grantor under teal, and it an entity, Grantor
has caused this Instrument to be signed in the entity name by its duly authorized agent and its seal to be
hereunto affixed, and IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this Easement this the
24O� daypf_4s( 2012.
Signature: /2Lda./I --�- I Signature
Print Name: 6cF't'G C. NG, 1((
Signature:
Print Name:
STATEOF nC
COUNTY OF • • Q1Cf
a Notary Pub of the Coy,Myand ate aforesaid,
certify that -raox C/ is
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
Instrument.
Witnesss.my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of L,Julk I!% . 2012,
�otary Publics 6.d"
My commission expires:
LEEAW K INOLFE
k"aaak
otalertta.y,arD.ear
b CaM11an Eaaaa tEaaa a. 7Ma
B.k. 3831 Page 637 Page 1o13
Print Name:
Signature:_
Print Name:
STATE OF
COUNTY OF
I,
a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid,
certify that
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of .2022.
Notary Public
My commission explres:
Book: 3831 Page, 1977•Current: 637 Seq:3
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Page t of a
a11,l"'l1n„I'
Patofdad: /0aat/i0alt�tTypo
l lo:Oa M
FO Aat: 11211.00 P. 1 of a
Wvanua Tat- $0 po
MI. caunty Rc
Rabacca L. Pollard Ma, of oaada
w3793 Pa268-269
BEACH NOURISHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT
For Onslow County Parcel IO R34336
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ONSLOW
GRANTOR: NIELSEN WAYNE F 8 MARGARET S
GRANTEE: TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
TERM: THIRTY(30) YEARS
In exchange for the sum on One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt of which is
acknowledged, the Grantor and Grantors hein and assigns (collectively "Grantor') convey to the Town of Topsail Beach, North
Carolina, a municipal corporation (Town') and on behalf of In representatives, agents, employees, officials, engineers,
consultants, surveyors, contractors, subcontractors, permittees. Invitees and assignees (collectively 'Grantee") does now grant
and convey unto the Grantee, this Easement until December 32, 2041 to go upon the Property to conduct Activities in the
Easement Area (as those italicized terms are defined below), subject to the following conditions:
1. Property Subject to Easement: That ocean front property identified as the address of 2284-A NEW RIVER
INLET RD, North Topsail Beach, NC 28445 and, Onslow County Tax Parcel ID R778C-14.1, and described In
[check applicable box):
® Deed Book 2652 and Page 678 of the Onslow County Registry recorded 9-May-06 as N TPSL SH 2 BA L480 of and as
shown on Map Book and Page 20 015 of the Onslow County Registry.
❑ See Exhibit A attached.
2. Easement AMP on Property Where ctivl 1 Take I : That portion of the Property, If any, which (i) Is seaward
of the first line of stable vegetation, or (1() is seaward of the toe of the frontal sand dune adjacent to the beach, or (iiij is seaward
of the crest of the erosion escarpment, whichever feature is most landward.
3. Activit/es. "Activities are those tasks required of the Town under its Shoreline Protection Project, which tasks include
evaluating, surveying, studying, monitoring, inspectirg, preserving, patrolling, constructing, operating, maintaining, repairing,
rehabilitating, nourishing, and replacing the public beach, the dune system and other erosion control and storm damage
reduction measures together with appurtenances thereto, including depositing sand, altering Easement Area contours and
profiles, building berms and dunes, moving, storing, and removing construction equipment and supplies, erecting and removing
temporary structures, and performing any other work necessary and incident to the Shoreline Protection Project over, at, on,
under and above the Easement Area. Activities do not include moving or damaging permitted permanent improvements within
the Easement Area.
4. Grantor Reserved Riahn. Grantor reserves the right to construct dune walkover structures to the extent allowed by any
applicable Federal, State or local laws or regulations, provided that such structures shall not violate the integrity of the dune in
shape, dimension or function.
5. Other Conditions: (a) Grantee will indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Grantor for any claim arising from Activities
on the Property; (b) Grantee has no responsibility to restore or repair natural forces damage; (c) Grant" makes no
representations on sand volume, if any, to be placed on or
Book: 3793 Page,1977-Current: 268 Seq:1 RECEIVED
Book: 3793 Page: 268 Page 1 of 2
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Page 2 of 2
provide the Property, (d) Gnmor acknowledges (i) any raised lands created seaward of a pre -project
mean high water mark is the property of the State of North Carolina subject to the public trust; (II) the
fluctuating state of the ocean beach; and (III) Grantee makes no representation on the precise location
of either the most seaward boundary of the Property or the most landward extent of the public trust
beach; (e) This Easement binds Grantor, runs with the title to the Property; and terminates on
December 31, 2042; (f) Grantor and signatories acting on its behalf warrant and covenant that (1)
Grantor's title to the Property is free and discharged from all right, title, claim or interest of the Grantor
or anyone claiming by, through or under Grantor, (ii) Grantor will hold harmless, indemnify and defend
Grantee from such claims; and (III) all signatories executing this instrument on behalf of Grantor have
authority to do so; and (a) Grantee shall have the right to temporarily or permanently assign this
easement to the federal, state, or county governments, or any agencies or department thereof or any
governmental authority formed to implement beach nourishment, renourishment and / or stabilization
related to the Shoreline Protection Project.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this instrument Is executed by the Grantor under seal, and if an entity, Gnmor
has caused this instrument to be signed in the entity name by Its duly authorized agent and its seal to be
he�r unto affixed, d IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this Easement this the
-fJa_day of 2012.
Signature:,X,.y. Signature: 1�
Print Name: \`1wv,Tt
Signature:
Print Name:
STATE OF YI�tIJIk
COUNTY OF
1. Notary Public of the Co my State aforesaid,
certify that I.JAYn1s NtLLS�
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
ch y of ,, 2012.
Notary Pubc n�/Fx ,,
My commission expires�a I 06-
aHeruz PnaNDla
w*xm euac
couupxwr,LL*Hor vamwn
src COurne8KY1 iJhiEB sEe a are
wuavori r raaav
Book'3793 Page: 268 Pagc2 0l2
Print Name: _ rnez2AwC'�'SizN7e-�,
Signature: ����
Print Name:
STATE OF Y
COUNTY OF
I .661Ltlth zsa is L
a Notary Public bf the County and State aforesaid,
certify that 01
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of gf"Al 2012.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
ahuai Pwrew
wrxevwrx
oaegrnrvtrz.te o vex,wu
rrcoercaonewrte ree a.aw
cna.ssuv a naeo
Book: 3793 Page, 1977•Current: 268 Sect:2
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- lilMHD CITY

Page 1 of 3
ooc tD: oosena000z Tvw: cHP
Hecord ed: oe/oe/2otz at 30 An
Fee Art E28.00 Pear 1 of 3
Hevener Tip: i0.00
Onelov cavn[v NC
Hrbesce t. Fofla,d A, of Deeds
-3793,g316-317
BEACH NOURISHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT
For Onslow County Parcel 10 R044405
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ONSLOW
GRANTOR: VANN GEORGE C & DIANN L
GRANTEE: TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
TERM: THIRTY(30) YEARS
EXCISE TAR: S 0.00
In exchange for the sum on One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt of which is
acknowledged, the Grantor and Grantor's heirs and assigns (collectively "Grantor") convey to the Town of Topsail Beach,
North Carolina, a municipal corporation ("Town') and on behalf of its representatives, agents, employees, officials,
engineers, consultants, surveyors, contractors, subcontractors, permittees, invitees and assignees (collectively "Grantee")
does now grant and convey unto the Grantee, this Easement until December 31, 2041 to go upon the Property to conduct
Activities in the EosementAreo (as those italicized terms are defined below), subject to the following conditions:
1. Property Subject to Easement: That ocean front property Identified as the address of 2396 NEW RIVER
INLET RD, North Topsail Beach, NC 28445 and, Onslow County Tax Parcel ID R778D-54, and described in
[check applicable box):
® Deed Book 1881 and Page 838 of the Onslow County Registry recorded 12-AUG-02 as NR BEACH CO Sl L4 of and
as shown on Map Book and Page 22-205 of the Onslow County Registry.
0 See Exhibit A attached.
2. Easement Ana on Property Where Activities May Take Plata: That portion of the Property, if any, which (i) is
seaward of the first line of stable vegetation, or (ii) is seaward of the toe of the frontal sand dune adjacent to the beach, or
(III) is seaward of the crest of the erosion escarpment, whichever feature is most landward.
3. AcNvRJeaK -Activities" are those tasks required of the Town under Its Shoreline Protection Project, which tasks
Include evaluating, surveying, studying, monitoring, inspecting, preserving, patrolling, constructing, operating, maintaining,
repairing, rehabilitating, nourishing and replacing the public beach, the dune system and other erosion control and storm
damage reduction measures together with appurtenances thereto, including depositing sand, altering Easement Area
contours and profiles, building berms and dunes, moving, storing, and removing construction equipment and supplies,
erecting and removing temporary structures, and performing any other work necessary and incident to the Shoreline
Protection Project over, at, on, under and above the Easement Arco. Actv/tas do not Include moving or damaging
permitted permanent improvements within the Easement Area.
4. Grantor Reserved Riahn. Grantor reserves the right to construct dune walkover structures to the extent allowed
by any applicable Federal, State or local laws or regulations, provided that such structures shall not violate the Integrity of
the dune in shape, dimension or function.
S. Other Condit : (a) Grantee will Indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Grantor for any claim arising from
Activities on the Property. (b) Grantee has no responsibility to restore or repair natural forces damage; (c) Grardee makes
no representations on sand volume, if any, to be placed on or
RECEIVED
Book: 3793 Page, 1977-Current: 316 Seq:1
Book: 3793 Page. 316 Page I of 2 JUN 14 2016
DCM.- f,PH C;'Y

.raeetra
in front of the Property or protective effects the ActWa or SHORELINE PROTECTION PROjEct will
provide the Property; (d) Grantor acknowledges (i) any raised lands created seaward of a pre -project
mean high water mark Is the property of the State of North Carolina subject to the public trust; (it) the
fluctuating state of the ocean beach; and (iii) Grantee makes no representation on the precise location
of either the most seaward boundary of the Property or the most landward extent of the public trust
beach; (e) This Easement binds Grantor, runs with the title to the Property, and terminates on
December 31, 2042; (f) Grantor and signatories acting on its behalf warrant and covenant that (1)
Grantors title to the Property is free and discharged from all right, title, claim or interest of the Grantor
or anyone claiming by, through or under Grantor, (ii) Grantor will hold harmless, indemnity and defend
Grantee from such claims; and (iii) all signatories executing this instrument on behalf of Grantor have
authority to do so; and (g) Grantee shall have the right to temporarily or permanently assign this
easement to the federal, state, or county governments, or any agencies or department thereof or any
governmental authority formed to implement beach nourishment, renourishment and / or stabilization
related to the Shoreline Protection project
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this instrument is executed by the Grantor under seal, and if an entity, Grantor
has caused this instrument to be signed in the entity name by its duty authorized agent and its seal to be
hereunto ,,LLa�ffixed, and IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this Easement this the
�_ Zy t 1,,*- 2012.
Signature: GG s�irs-C1-/^- Signature:
Print Name: 17"Y�++- a' Ais N Prim Name:
Signature: s 1n p4 04\ k,n.
Print Name: Lta l, yWy.
STATE OF M9L�LRNA
COUNTYOF /'%,AG/&S
w
a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid,
certify that Am r/N V41VIY
and &"4e C It/ '
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of MA,B;/i B . 2012.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
Book. 3793 Pagel 316 Page 2 of 2
Signature:
Prim Name:
STATE OF _
COUNTY OF
a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid,
certify that
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of . 2012.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
Book: 3793 Page, 1977-Current: 316 Sec: 2
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Appendix C: Adjacent Riparian Landowner Notifications
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

'" 94
Fred J. Burns, Mayor
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tern
Aldermen:
Don Harte
Joann M. McDermon
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Nature's Tranquil Beauty
June 3, 2016
VANN GEORGE C & DIANN L
12926 COUPLES PL
WALDORF MD 20601
SENT CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
Asst. Town Manager/Town Clerk
Re: REVISED RESTORATION PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH. REQUEST
FOR MODIFICATION TO PERMIT #92-14.
Adjacent Riparian Property Owner Notification
Dear Sir or Madam:
The Town of North Topsail Beach (TOWN) is submitting a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Permit Modification application to the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NC DCM) for work
occurring within an Area of Environmental Concern.
As more completely described in the attached application, the TOWN intends to submit a CAMA Major
Modification application to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons
to remain until a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented, or the sand bag
revetment permit expires.
Attached to this notice, please find a copy of the application as submitted to the NC DCM office. Within 30
days from receipt of this notice you may submit comments regarding the referenced project to the following
address:
Attn: Ms. Debra Wilson
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Sincerely,
Stuart J. Turille
Town Manager
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
2008 Loggerhead Court Phone [phone]
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 ntbnc.org Toll Free: [phone]
Fax [phone]

Fred J. Burns, Mayor
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tern
Aldermen:
Don Harte
Joann M. McDermon
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Nature's Tranqui( Beauty
June 3, 2016
NEAL GEORGE III
3203 HENDERSON RD
GREENSBORO NC 27410-6032
SENT CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT
r
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
Asst. Town Manager/town Clerk
Re: REVISED RESTORATION PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH. REQUEST
FOR MODIFICATION TO PERMIT #92-14.
Adjacent Riparian Property Owner Notification
Dear Sir or Madam:
The Town of North Topsail Beach (TOWN) is submitting a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Permit Modification application to the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NC DCM) for work
occurring within an Area of Environmental Concern.
As more completely described in the attached application, the TOWN intends to submit a CAMA Major
Modification application to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons
to remain until a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented, or the sand bag
revetment permit expires.
Attached to this notice, please find a copy of the application as submitted to the NC DCM office. Within 30
days from receipt of this notice you may submit comments regarding the referenced project to the following
address:
Attn: Ms. Debra Wilson
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Sincerely, ^ Q RECEIVED
Stuart J. Turille JUN 14 2016
Town Manager DCM- MHD CITY
2008 Loggerhead Court Phone [phone]
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 ntbnc.org Toll Free: [phone]
Fax [phone]

Fred J. Burns, Mayor
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tem
Aldermen:
Don Harte
Joann M. McDermon
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Nature's Tranquil Beauty
June 3,2016
NIELSEN WAYNE F & MARGARET S
19471 YOUNGS CLIFF RD
STERLING VA 20165
SENT CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT
ram
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
Asst. Town Manager/Town Clerk
Re: REVISED RESTORATION PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH. REQUEST
FOR MODMCATION TO PERMIT #92-14.
Adjacent Riparian Property Owner Notification
Dear Sir or Madam:
The Town of North Topsail Beach (TOWN) is submitting a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Permit Modification application to the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NC DCM) for work
occurring within an Area of Environmental Concern.
As more completely described in the attached application, the TOWN intends to submit a CAMA Major
Modification application to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons
to remain until a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented, or the sand bag
revetment permit expires.
Attached to this notice, please find a copy of the application as submitted to the NC DCM office. Within 30
days from receipt of this notice you may submit comments regarding the referenced project to the following
address:
Attn: Ms. Debra Wilson
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Sincerely, RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
Stuart J. Turille
Town Manager
DCM- MHD CITY
2008 Loggerhead Court Phone [phone]
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 ntbnc.org Toll Free: [phone]
Fax (910) 328A508

South End Adjacent Riparian OwnersLn
a
GRESlli
• 2284-B New River Inlet Road
Ln
to
m
George Neal III
3203 Henderson Rd.
M1
cergfled Fee
Greensboro, NC 27410-6032
0
Return R..W Fes
O
(Endorsement Requ Q
• 2284-A New River Inlet Road
O
O
Restricted Delivery Fee
(Endorsement Required)
!0.
Wayne and Margaret Nielson
ru
Er
Totes Poetag. a Fee.
19471 Youngs Cliff Rd.
o
$6
Sterling, VA 20165
Lin
r
e
PLC ------
M1
greet Apt No.�
IX P� BO%I�iU. t
North End Adjacent Riparian Owners
dV e• nP % \
.-ra�„tc Yl
• 2386 New River Inlet Rd.
George and Dianne Vann
12926 Couples PI.
Waldorf, MD 20601
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
I-
AL l��E
0460
70 07
.00
.09 Pcshrwk
100 Here
.00
(1610312016
ra
Ln
..
a
Ln
f. a C
rk i i
�
Q
0
mpostage
s
0460
07
r-
Certifletl Fee
f0.00
r=1
O
O
Rek.nReeelptFee
(Endorsement Required)
In -An
$0.00
Here
O
Restricted D.Mery� rFeetle
ors (Endement R")lt)
ltF,eps
00
O
ru
it
Tatet Postage 8
►O
06/03/2016
O
CO
M1
re-(sen-%)IB"
$beet3Apt No.+�rj� I
1 ll
- Sox No.--
rte_.! 11 -Q F------------
r �
-- .
Postal
CERTIFIED MAIL"
RECEIPT
cc
..
�
� . . III
to
WAL � 216[ 3
PoS
4
U460
m
07
M1
certified Fee
0.UO
Pgetma k
p
O
Return Receipt Fee
(EMorsement Requited)
f0.00
Here
r7
Restricted Delivery Fee
(Endorsement Required)
o
fry,
Totet Postage 6 Fees
$
06/03/2016
o
s6.
1���
4&-1- —
---r------------- -
.°. _ecr
wPO Box No. loC� i
��`
iQs �"-_....---------
M1
--
CrryetQ GC
VY1
�l b of

- — ■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Riparian VYIAWt$ [A-
0 Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card to you.
South End Ad'acerit Ri arIAttach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
p or on the front if space permits.
1. Adlnle Addm«w s...
2294-B New River Inlet Road
George Neal III
3203 Henderson Rd
Greensboro, NC 274I0-6032
a 2284-A New River Inlet Road
Wayne and Margaret Nielson
19471 Youngs CliffRd.
Sterling, VA 20165
North End Adjacent Riparian
• 2386 New River Inlet Rd.
George and Dianne Vwn
12926 Couples Pl.
Waldorf, MD 20601
3�03 +��►��¢�^ Rl.
U�e�'v�sro, NG
�� yit�-bo3lIlIa
III'I�I'� I'll I'IIIIIIII I l I'III I"Ifll I'� III IN
4590 9401 0036 5071 9929 44
2, Article Number Mansfer fmm service bbell
15 0920 0001 ?85 5144
PS Form 3811, April 2015 PSN 7530-02-ODD-9053
���_ 1'"'
❑ Agent
VVVV���,
❑ Addressee
Pn'nted Name)
C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from item 17 ❑ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
Type
❑ Adult Signature
3. Srpfied
O Rnonty Map Express®
Adult signalure Restricted Delivery
❑ Registered Mail^'
❑ Registered Mail Restricts,
Ce Mail®
Oervice
elivny
❑ certified Mail Restricted Delivery
Cl Return Receipt for
❑ collect on Delivery
Memhandlse
❑ Collect on Delivery Restricted Delivery
D Signature ConfinnationTM
❑ Insured Mail
❑ signalure Confirmation
O Insured Mail Restricted Delivery
RestriC4 Delivery -
Domestic Return Receipt
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2r,'7
DCM- ^ r..

Stuart, Go ahead and send me what you have and I will begin processing. Please note that I will need the
signed certified mail receipts before we make a decision on the project.
Thank you,
Jason
Jason Dail
Field Representative
NC Department of Environmental Quality
NC Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.
Wilmington, NC28405
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone]
Jason. Dail@ncdenr. gov
-' ^Nothing Compares �.
E-mail correspondence to and from this address
may be subject to the North Carolina Public
Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Appendix D: Letter from Dr. William J. Cleary, P.G.
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

APPENDIX D: LETTER FROM DR. WILLIAM J. CLEARY, P.G.
From: William J Cleary
To: Mr. Brian Edes
Date: 25 May 2016
Re: North Topsail Beach Shoreline Recent Changes
Dear Mr. Edes:
Mr. Stuart Turille, the Town Manager of North Topsail Beach, requested that I provide
you information pertaining to the changes in the shoreline conditions along the North
Topsail Beach during the past year. According to Stuart, the information below is
needed for support in the filing of an application relating to the variance modification
involving the removal of the geo-tube along the northernmost North Topsail Beach
oceanfront shoreline. The narrative that follows is based on studies that I have
conducted for the Town.
Figure 1 shows the North Topsail Beach shoreline conditions on June 13, 2015. The
image was obtained —four months after the completion of the sand bag 'revetment'
project in February 2016. The aerial photograph depicts a relatively wide low -tide
beach that fronts the sandbag armored shoreline reach. The letter designations that
appear on the Figure 1 (A, B & C) delineate locations where oceanfront change
measurements were made of the shoreline erosion (red colored #s) that occurred
between June 13 and October 7, 2015. Figure 2 is a satellite image (9/10/15) of the
same area that depicts the shoreline conditions approximately three months later than
those depicted in Figure 1. Inspection of Figure 2 shows that the width of the low -tide
beach has changed little with the exception of the reach near "A" where the flood
channel has widened and consequently eroded a portion of the low tide beach
(compare to Fig.1). Further inspection of Figure 2, illustrates that the dry beach width
and its lateral extent have increased during the three-month period.
Significant oceanfront shoreline changes occurred during the latter part of September
and early October 2015 when several periods of Perigean tides (King or Supermoon
tides). The drone captured oblique aerial photographs imaged in Figure.3..danipt,'ba-
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

APPENDIX D: LETTER FROM DR. WILLIAM J. CLEARY, P.G.
results of wave overtopping during a Perigean tidal event. During a period of several
weeks, relatively strong onshore winds exacerbated the effects of the extreme water
levels during which time storm waves broke well landward of the normal surf zone. This
period of time of elevated water levels coincided with the passage of Hurricane Joaquin
some distance offshore the Town. During the passage of the large storm, incident
waves continually broke at the base of the revetment and as water levels increased the
wave broke across the seaward slope of the bags. As the plunging waves broke along
the seaward slope and at base of the structure, scouring of the sea bed occurred
resulting in a general deepening immediately seaward of the sandbags. Consequently,
a number of bags slumped, further degrading the integrity of the "revetment'.
The combination of the above events ultimately led to extensive erosion of the low -tide
beach (Figs. 1 and 4). Erosion of the low -tide platform (low -tide beach) was variable and
ranged from 225ft in vicinity of Location "A" to 86ft in vicinity of Location "C" immediately
updrift of the Topsail Reef Condominiums (Figs. 1 and 4). The erosion of the low -tide
beach promoted the subsequent failure (slumping, etc.,) of sand bags in areas along the
armored shoreline, overtopping (overwash) and steepening of the foreshore profile
along a major portion of the aforementioned shoreline reach (Figs. 4-7). Figure 8
depicts Pre- and Post -Hurricane Joaquin images of the oceanfront shoreline. A
comparison of the images clearly shows the effect of the erosion and the consequent
steepening of the lower foreshore profile. Note the location of the zone of breaking
waves.
The Drone captured images of 19 February 2016 depicted in Figure 8 show the incident
waves breaking along the base of the sand bags further that led to scouring of the sea
bed promoting further slumping of the bags. This process frequently occurred during the
subsequent months and may considered the norm.
The most recent cross -shore survey of the sand bags and the near shore area occurred
in mid -March 2016. Two of the many resulting profiles are imaged on FigRe-9CxdIiO,ED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

APPENDIX D: LETTER FROM DR. WILLIAM J. CLEARY, P.G.
the locations of which are shown on Figure 11 (red -colored lines). Profile 1155+00 (Fig.
9) is located -500ft southwest of Location "A" imaged on Figures 1 and 4. A cursory
inspection of the profile changes shows that the sea bed has been both deepened and
steepened. The dip in the seabed at the 100ft mark likely is related to breaking waves.
The changes along this profile typify the profiles to the southwest along the sand bag
armored shoreline. Profile 1160+130 is located northeast of profile 1150+00, a shoreline
reach transitional to New River Inlet, and as such is heavily influence by tidal currents,
waves and currents augmented by breaking waves. A comparison of the April 2015 and
the March 2016 surveys again shows an overall deepening of the beachface.
Historically, shoreline changes in this area have been heavily influenced by the marginal
flood channel.
In brief, it is my opinion based on personal observation and shoreline change data that
the removal of the geo-tube will have serious consequences on the stability of the sand
bag 'revetment'. Its removal will ultimately lead to accelerated erosion of the sea bed
adjacent to the sand bags due to a variety of wave -related processes. In turn, the
consequent degradation of the sand bag armoring will have dire consequences for the
homes currently protected by the sand bags.
Please advise if clarification is needed
Regards,
William J. Cleary
Emeritus Professor of Geology, UNCW
Professional Geologist INC #475
RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- VHD CYry

d --
North Topsail Beach.
Pond
. t eel m
Sekward4&ilow-fid0bea
FC
i. �4 t '
O W
1
s
lop
�'' Modified image, Courtesy NOAA 6/13/2015

OWW
4
=a
4R

fit
; L
REGENEL)
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
•
W,
LL

I* i t
v
Z
0
Figure 4

RECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

�� , •�.. fly! ` .� 1,� 1 1 1 ._• ...Z/ %' N
E 3i ; �.,J7
_ <1 r
i
A
In r
..
✓: r��T �:. �\�.�-
:Nti1
v
IAV 1
ECEIVED
JUN 14 2016
IVHD CIT .
LjL

LO LO
� r
O
N
ti
• O
b O
y R
Y;LL
MM r
em y
i'* i
fz
r Q co

v
0
n
5
Figure 8
https://vimeo.com/156088939

0
Ft
N
v
i
m
z n
m
C)
a�
I
-<
.........1.155+00.. �' ....... :................ ................:.................
----------------- APRIL 2015
MARCH 2016
DISTANCES REFERENCED TO:
E _ 2498175 FEET
135 DEC.:
-100 Ft 100 200
Figure 9
300

Ft
n
�
1
m
Z n
m_
^' CO
1
P m
Py
f[77
1.16.0+1.30.:.... 1.1 ......... .:................:.................:...................
----------------- APRIL 2015
MARCH 2016
-100 0 Ft 100
Figure 10
DISTANCES REFERENCED TO:
N • � 28fi5B4 FEET
E - 2498586 FEET
AZ.: = 130 DEG.:
200
300

..�....... S ,_, m
v o <
� � m
v

PATMCCRORY
covemor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secremry
BRAXTON DAVIS
Coastal Management Director
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
June 17, 2016
RECEIVED/NCDENR/DWR
MEMORANDUM:
JUN 1 7 2016
TO:
Chad Coburn
401 Wetlands Water qualit Re
i DWR - WiRO Operations Section
Wilmington Reg*
FROM:
pal
Heather Coats, Assistant Major Permits Coor@naPe
NCDEQ — Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilm., NC 28405 heather. coats@ncdenroov
Fax: [phone] (Courier 04-16-33)
SUBJECT: CAMA / Dredge & Fill Application Review
Applicant: Town of North Topsail Beach 92-14MM
Project Location: along the oceanfront beach between 2284 -2382 New River Inlet Rd.,
adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in North Topsail Beach, Onslow County
Proposed Project: to allow the existing temporary containment tube (Geotube) to remain in place
through 2022, or until a "long-term solution to the erosion problem can be
implemented", according to the applicant.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and
return this form to Heather Coats at the address above by July 10, 2016. If you have any
questions regarding the proposed project, contact Jason Dail at [phone] when
appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
/ i(- I l C I 6ZC LLB [ik_l C17 Avc, // (� cc -(—
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED DATE O r-o ;) - a C)f (
RECEIVED
AUG 0 8 2016
(Nothing Compares
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality [ Cori W Management D C M- M H D CITY
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
910.1964215

`u5
Pat McCrory
Governor
May 8, 2015
MEMORANDUM:
TO
FROM
SUBJECT:
Applicant:
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resource
Donald R. van der Vaart
Secretary
Shannon Jenkins
NC DMF
Shellfish Sanitation Section
Jonathan Howell, NC DENR-DCM Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
400 Commerce Avenue, Morehead City, NC 28557 (Courier 11-12-09)
CAMA / D&F Permit Application Review
Town of North Topsail Beach 92-14MM
Project Location: 2284 — 2382 New River Inlet Rd., adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, In NTB, Onlsow County
Proposed Project: Applicant proposes to extend the time granted for the existing temporary construction
containment tubes (2284 - 2382 New River Inlet Rd., adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean), to
remain in place through March 31, 2016, or until the Onslow County channel maintenance
project is completed., in North Topsail Beach, Onslow Co.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and
return this form to Jonathan Howell at the address above by June 1, 2015. If you
have any questions regarding the proposed project, contact Jason Dail at [phone]
when appropriate, in depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
SIGNI
RECEIVED
This agency has no comment on the proposed project. MAY 27 2015
Vb'wl-r+M1'Iry Irl{q
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
DATE
Aal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
Phone: [phone] FAX: 910,395-3964Internet: www.ncooastalman�ement.net
An Equal OpporNniry 1 Affirmadve Acbon Employer

I North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jonathan Howell, Assistant Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
FROM: Maria T. Dunn, Coastal Region Coordinator �-
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: May 29, 2015
SUBJECT: CAMA Dredge/Fill Permit Application for Town of North Topsail Beach, Major
Modification to 92-14, Onslow County, North Carolina.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NC WRC) reviewed the
permit application with regard to impacts on fish and wildlife resources. The project site is located
between 2276 and 2382 New River Inlet Road adjacent the Atlantic Ocean and New River Inlet. Our
comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Coastal Area Management Act (G.S. 113A-
100 through I I3A-128), as amended, Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act, as amended, and the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).
The applicant proposes to extend the time granted for the existing temporary construction
containment tubes (Geo-tubes) to March 31, 2016, or until the Onslow County channel maintenance
project is completed.
The NCWRC commented on the original permit application (Deaton 18 September 2014). At this
time we stated significant concern for the structures with regard to hardening of the shoreline, the removal
of sea turtle nesting habitat, and the loss of shorebird foraging area. Site visits have been conducted
periodically to observe the structures and their impacts.
Our comments and concerns from the original review remain the same. A copy of the September
18, 2014 memorandum is included for reference.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on this permit modification. If you need RECEIVED
further assistance or additional information, please contact me at [phone] or at
maria.dunn(i�ncwildlife.org JUN 01 2015
ybYtl-WInLI t:NJy
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jonathan Howell, Assistant Major Permits Processing Coordinator
NCDENR Division of Coastal Management
FROM: Shannon L. DProgram Manager
Habitat Conservation
n Program
DATE: September 18, 2014
SUBJECT: CAMA Dredge/Fill Permit Application for Town of North Topsail Beach,
Onslow County, North Carolina.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) reviewed the
permit application with regard to impacts on fish and wildlife resources. The project site is
located between 2276 and 2382 New River Inlet Road adjacent the Atlantic Ocean and New
River Inlet. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Coastal Area
Management Act (G.S. I I3A-100 through I I3A-128), as amended, Sections 401 and 404 of the
Clean Water Act, as amended, and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).
The applicant proposes to install a large sand bag (Geo-tube) revetment for approximately 1,450'
to protect residential structures located along the north end of Topsail Island near the New River
Inlet fronting the Atlantic Ocean. The Geo-tubes have a dimension of 7.5' in height and 45' in
diameter and are proposed to be filled with approximately 10,000 cubic yards of sand from a
nearby spit removing 12 to 15 inches of material from a 5 acre area.. This material will be mixed
with water from the surf zone, slurried, and placed in the Geo-tube. The structure will lie
approximately 20' below the normal high water level and 25' above the elevation of normal high
water. This project area is included within the beach nourishment project covered under PermitRECEIVEDNo. 79-10. The waters at the project location are classified SA by the Environmental
Management Commission. JUN 01 1015
The NCWRC has reviewed the proposed project as a permanent hardening of the shoreline since
the project as proposed does not meet conditions for temporary sand bags of imminently
threatened structures. Sandbagging is intended as a temporary measure to minimize erosion with
an alternate long term plan. Construction of a permanent hardened shoreline interferes with
sediment transport, the natural migration of barrier islands, and increased erosion or scour to
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

CAMA Dredge/Fill Permit N. Topsail Beach, Onslow Co.
adjacent properties. With these review considerations, the placement of the Geo-tube will
significantly inhibit sea turtle access to the beach and remove nest laying area. The filling of the
Geo-tube using 5 acres of material from the nearby spit will have habitat impacts by removing
foraging and nesting habitats for shorebirds including species such as piping plover, red knot,
and several tern species.
Additionally, this project is within a permitted beach nourishment project which does not allow
current shoreline structures/bags to be covered. NCWRC worked with the Town of North
Topsail Beach to minimize impacts for the nourishment project and ensured the permit's
conditions addressed our wildlife resource concerns. The addition of a 1,450' Geo-tube within
this project boundary is contrary to NCWRC's minimization goals. Due to these concerns,
NCWRC questions if the beach nourishment permit (Permit 79-10) will have reduced and altered
effectiveness if this project is permitted as proposed.
As proposed, this project will have significant adverse impacts to wildlife resources and we are
requesting that alternatives be considered before this project is permitted. The NCWRC does not
object to sandbagging of this area in the traditional sense as specified in NC Division of Coastal
Management (NCDCM) rule, but we do not view sand bag revetments as long term solutions to
control erosion issues along ocean front beaches. Please see our attached recommendations for
the use of sand bags when deemed necessary by NCDCM.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this permit application. Please feel free
to contact Maria Dunn at [phone] or at maria.dunn(a,ncwildlife.org if there are any
additional questions or concerns.
RECEIVED
JUN 01 1015
wi-j"H40ffK

CAMA Dredge/Fill Permit
N. Topsail Beach, Onslow Co.
Recommendations for the use of sand bags under emergency conditions
to minimize impacts to wildlife resources for coastal counties
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
If it is determined imminently threatened structures should be protected with sand bags as
specified in NC Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) rule, NCWRC has these concerns
and recommendations:
Proposed work should be conducted outside the shorebird and sea turtle nesting
moratoria, or from April 1— November 15, or until the last know turtle nest has hatched.
If this project is declared an emergency and sandbags must be placed at imminently
threatened structures during the moratoria, we request that the work be expedited to the
greatest extent possible to reduce the potential for any unintended impacts to nesting sea
turtles and their nests. All work should be conducted during the daytime only and only
begin after qualified sea turtle monitors have evaluated the project area for any potential
sea turtle nesting activities. Regular sea turtle monitoring occurs on Topsail Beach and
we strongly recommend that the applicant coordinate appropriately with this group.
• The NCWRC would like the applicant to be aware of rule 15A NCAC 7H .0308 (a) (2)
(g) in regards to sand bag removal in a timely fashion. This rule outlines that sandbags
should not be allowed to remain in place for more than five years since North Topsail
Beach has a beach nourishment plan currently permitted for this project area.
• It is preferred that material used to fill sand bags comes from an offsite source. If it is
determined that material from the spit could be used, we request NCDCM and the
applicant consult with the NCWRC and USFWS to reduce impact to this area.
Minimization of impact may include creating a tidal pool shorebirds could utilize and
overall less area of impact with less removal of material.
RECEIVED
JUN 01 1015
b4>uauwny 6"

DCM Coordinator: HC/O H
Permit #• r
MAILING DISTRIBUTION SHEET
Permitee• w/n )VWI,h
DCM Field Offices
Elizabeth City
Morehead City
Washington
Wilmington
US ACOE Offices:
Washington:
Wilmington:
Cultural Resources:
Public Water Supply:
DCM/
Fisheries Specialist
NC DOT:
DMFI
Shellfish Sanitation:
State Property:
Water Resources:
Washington:
Wilmington:
DEMLR
Washington:
Wilmington:
Wildlife Resources:
LPO:
(with revised work plan drawings)
P/Easy L
1
Raleigh Bland
William Westcott (NC DOT)
Bill Biddlecome (NC DOT)
Tyler Crumbley
Liz Hare
Renee Gledhill -Early
Heide Cox (WIRO)
Joey White (WARO)
Shane Staples
Gregg Bodnar
Ben Hughes
Shannon Jenkins
Tim Walton
Karen Higgins (Raleigh)
John Hennessy (NC DOT)
Anthony Scarbraugh-401
Joanne Steenhuis — 401
Chad Coburn - 401
Scott Vinson-Stormwater
Georgette Scott- Stormwater
Maria Dunn
�PIS)
P-QCe Pfi�
Red✓�n
t� m
a_Rff
3P
40
r Distribution: Permitee #:
Agent #:

Wilmington, INC 28405
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed
to third parties.
-----Original Message -----
From: Hair, Sarah E SAW [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 3:46 PM
To: Spears, Courtney <[e-mail]>; Coats, Heather <[e-mail]>; Coburn, Chad
<cha d.co bu rn @ ncde n r.gov>
Cc: Dail, Jason <[e-mail]>
Subject: recent projects in Fender and Onslow
All:
This email is to notify you that the following projects will be reviewed under the GP 291 process:
Corps Action ID: SAW-2014-01858
Project name: Kim Quinn/South Anderson Boulevard/modification
County: Pender
Corps Action ID: SAW-2014-01700
Project name: Town of NTB/geotube
County: Onslow
Corps Action ID: SAW-2015-01682
Project name: Carl Spears
County: Onslow
The Kim Quinn project has already been coordinated with EPA and DWR with no additional comments. I'll wait for the
DCM permit mod and then issue the 404. The Corps recommendations/conditions will stay the same as in the previous
authorization.
The other two projects will be advertised by the Public Notice to the federal agencies. I hope to have those out early
next week. I anticipate both will be denied by our office, as DCM is recommending denial in the Bio report.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Have a great weekend!
Liz Hair
Project Manager
USACE-Wilmington District
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, INC 28403
910-251-4049
[e-mail]

0
Coats, Heather
From: Hair, Sarah E SAW <[e-mail]. mil>
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:09 AM
To: Coats, Heather
Cc: Dail, Jason; Coburn, Chad
Subject: RE: recent projects in Pender and Onslow
Heather,
I spoke with Chad Coburn late last week, and sent an email to Jason maybe last week or the week before indicating that I
would be sending this out on public notice for comment. After further review of the file, it appears that the USFWS
Biological Opinion covers the Geotube. Originally, I thought that it didn't, which was the reason I was going to circulate
the modification. So now, I'm just going to hold off and have a discussion with the Service pending the anticipated'DCM
denial. We would then issue our permit denial without prejudice, once we receive the DCM denial.
The project is technically in violation since the Geotube was to be removed after the completion of the Onslow County
Navigation project. We will need to send a letter to the town putting them on notice, as we did last year.
Please let me know if you have any other questions.
Thanks,
Liz
-----Original Message -----
From: Coats, Heather [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:00 AM
To: Hair, Sarah E SAW <[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] FW: recent projects in Pander and Onslow
Hi Liz,
Just checking back in with you on the NTB project- can you please give me an update on the status and when you might
have comments?
Thanks in advance and I hope you're doing well!
Heather
Heather Coats
Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental,Quality
910 796 7302 office
[e-mail]
127 Cardinal Drive Extension

r �,
®North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordon
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jonathan Howell, Assistant Major Permits Processing Coordinator
.Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
FROM: Maria T. Dunn, Coastal Region.Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: May 29, 2015
SUBJECT; CAMA Dredge/Fill Permit Application for Town of North Topsail Beach, Major
Modification to 92714; Odslow. County, North Carolina.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission(NCWRC) reviewed the
permit'application w2th'regard to impacts on fish and wildlife resources. The project site is located
between 2276 and 2382New River Inlet Road adjacent the Atlantic.0cean and New River Inlet: Our
comments. are provided in accordance.with provisions of the.Coastal Area Management Act (G.S. 1.13A-
100 through -I 13A-128), as amended,. Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water-Ac4 as amended-,,and•the
Fish and Wildlife:Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 u:S,C. 661 et.seq).
The applicant proposes to extend the time granted for the existing temporaryconstnietion
containment tubes (Geo-tubes) to March 31, 2016, or until the Onslow County channcl.maintename
project; is completed
The NCWRC commented on the original permit application (Denton 18 September 2614). Atthis
time we stated significant concern for the structures with regard to hardening of the.'shoreline, the removal
of sea turtle nesting habitat, and the loss of sborebird foraging area. Site visits,have.been conducted
periodically"to observe the structures and their impacts.
Our comments and concems-from%the original review remain the same. A copy of the September
18,2014 memorandum is included for reference.
Thank you for the opportunity, to provide comment on this permitmodification. If you need
further assistance or additional information, please contact me at [phone]:or at
maria:duiiritirrncwildlife o±
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: (919) 707=0220 • Fax: [phone]

M
LAMA Dredge/Fill Permit.
N. Topsail Beach, Onslow'Co.
Recommendations for the: use of sand bags under emergency conditions
to' minimize -impacts to wildlife,resources for coastal counties
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
If it is determined imminently threatened structures should be:protected with sand bags as
specified in NC Division of Coastal Management.(NCDCM) rule, NCWRC has these concerns
and recommendations:
r, Proposed work should be conducted outside the shorebird and sea -turtle nesting.
moratoria,. or from April.l -November 15,' or until the last know turtle nest has hatched.
If this,project is.declared an emergency and sandbags must be placed at imminently
threatened structures during the moratoria,; we request that the workbe expedited to the
greatest extentpossible to reduce the potential.for any unintended impacts to nesting sea
turtles and their nests. All. work should be conducted during the daytime only and only
begin after qualified sea t4i7le.monitors,have evaluated the;project area for any potential
sea turtle nesting activities. Regular seaturtle monitoring occurs on Topsail Beach and
we: strongly recommend that the applicant coordinate appropriately=with this group.
• The NCWRC would like the applicant to be aware of rule 15A NCAC 7H_0308.(a) (2)
(g) in regards to sand bag removal in -a timely fashion. This rule outlines that sandbags
should not be allowed to remain in place for more than five years sinceNorth Topsail
Beach has a beachnourishment plan currently permitted for this project -area.
• It is preferred that material used,to.fill sand bags comes from an offsite source. If it is
determined that material from:the spit could be used, we request NCDCM and the
applicant consult with the NCWRC and.USFWS to reduce'impactto this area.
Minimization of impact may include creating a tidal pool shorebirds could utilize and
overall less area of impact with less removal of material.

MEMORANDUM
To: Heather Coats
From: Michael Christenbury, Wilmington District Planner
Subject: Consistency Determination, Major Permit Application, Town of North
Topsail Beach, North Topsail Beach, Onslow County
Date: July 18, 2016
Consistency Determination:
project appears to be consistent and not in conflict with the North Topsail
I Use Plan update.
The applicant is requesting authorization to allow the existing temporary containment
tube (Geotube) to remain in place until 2022. The project is located from 2284 to 2382
New River Inlet Drive, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean in North Topsail Beach, Onslow
County.
Areas of Environmental Concern (AEC's) impacted by the proposal are OH, and IH.
Waters at the site are classified as SA and are not open to the harvesting of shellfish. The
area is not a primary nursery area.
I have reviewed this proposal for consistency with the North Topsail Beach Land Use
Plan and offer the following comments.
The general area of the project is classified Residential, while the AECs impacted by the
work are classified as Developed.
In general, the North Topsail Beach Land Use Plan allows development in Developed
classified AECs which is consistent with the State's minimum use standards. The North
Topsail Beach Land Use Plan contains some policies, which exceed the State's minimum
use standards. However, none of these more restrictive policies appear to be applicable
to this project.
Provided all other local, state and federal requirements can be met, this project
appears to be consistent with the North Topsail Beach Land Use Plan Update.
Cc: File
F-IECEiVED
DCM WILMINGTON. NC
JUL 1 8 2016

Water Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
Town of North Topsail Beach
Attn: Stuart Turille, Town Manager
2008 Loggerhead Court
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460
PAT MCCRORY
Iww.
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Atxmrr,
S. JAY ZIMMERMAN
July 28, 2016 D,`"'
Onslow County
D W R# 2014-0940v4
Subject Property: Phase I Emergency Sandbag Revetment
Modified Approval of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Conditions
Dear Mr. Turille:
You have our approval, in accordance with the enclosed conditions and those previously listed in
approvals dated November 18, 2014, and January 7, 2016, to allow the existing temporary containment
tubes (Geotubes) from 2284 to 2382 New River Inlet Road to remain in place through 2022 or until a
"long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented", as described in your CAMA
application dated June 10, 2016 and received by the Division of Water Resources (Division) on June 17,
2016. After reviewing your application, we have decided that the impacts are covered by General Water
Quality Certification Number 3900 (GC 3900). In addition, you should obtain or otherwise comply with
any other required federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project including (but
not limited to) Erosion and Sediment Control, Non -discharge, Water Supply Watershed, and stormwater
regulations. Also, this approval to proceed with your proposed impacts or to conduct impacts to
waters as depicted in your application shall expire upon expiration of the 404 or CAMA Permit. This
approval requires you to follow the conditions listed in the previously issued certification along with
the attached certification. Please re -read the conditions to make sure that you are in compliance.
Violations of any condition herein set forth may result in revocation of this Certification and may
result in criminal and/or civil penalties. The authorization to proceed with your proposed impacts or to
conduct impacts to waters as depicted in your application and as authorized by this Certification shall
expire upon expiration of the 404 or CAMA Permit. This approval, the previously issued approvals
dated January 7, 2016, and November 18, 2014, and their conditions are final and binding unless
contested. This Certification can be contested as provided in Articles 3 and 4 of General Statute 150B
by filing a written petition for an administrative hearing to the Office of Administrative Hearings (hereby
known as OAH). A petition form may be obtained from the OAH at http://www.ncoah.com/ or by calling
the OAH Clerk's Office at [phone] for information.
Within sixty (60) calendar days of receipt of this notice, a petition must be filed with the OAH. A
petition is considered filed when the original and one (1) copy along with any applicable OAH filing fee is
received in the OAH during normal office hours (Monday through Friday between 8:00am and 5:00prD. C;p Ep
excluding official state holidays). Rtv G
Aug o a 2o�s
State of North Carolina I Deparmlent of Environmental Quality I Division of Water Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Ext, Wilmington NC 28405
919 796 7215

Town of North Topsail Beach
jr
DW R p 2014-0940v4
Page 2 of 2
The petition may be faxed to the OAH at [phone], provided the original and one copy of the
petition along with any applicable OAH filing fee is received by the OAH within five (5) business days
following the faxed transmission.
Mailing address for the OAH:
If sending via US Postal Service: If sending via delivery service (UPS, FedEx,
etc):
Office of Administrative Hearings Office of Administrative Hearings
6714 Mail Service Center 1711 New Hope Church Road
Raleigh, NC 27699-6714 Raleigh, NC 27609-6285
One (1) copy of the petition must also be served to DEQ:
Sam M. Hayes, General Counsel
Department of Environmental Quality
1601 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1601
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Resources under Section 401 of the Clean
Water Act. If you have any questions, please telephone Jennifer Burdette in the Central Office in Raleigh
at 919.807.6364 or Jennifer.Burdette@ncdenr.¢ov or Chad Coburn in the DWR Wilmington Regional
Office at 910.796.7379 or [e-mail].
Sincerely,
G egson, Re ional u ervisor
Srec�� g P
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Wilmington Regional Office
Division of Water Resources, NCDEQ
Enclosures: GC 3900
cc: Liz Hair- USACE Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
Jennifer Burdette — Wetlands and Buffer Unit
Courtney Spears - DCM Morehead City
WiRO
RECEIVED
AUG 0 8 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

PAT MCCRORY
(]nrmnr
i
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Water Resources S. JAY ZIMMERMAN
ENVIRONNEN VAL QUALITY
MR=
DWR Project No: County:
Applicant:
Project Name:
401 Water Quality Certification Issued Date:
Certificate of Completion
Upon completion of all work approved within the 401 Water Quality Certification or applicable Buffer
Rules, and any subsequent modifications, the applicant is required to return this certificate to the DWR
401 & Buffer Permitting Unit, 1650 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC, 27699-1650. This form may be
returned to DWR by the applicant, the applicant's authorized agent, or the project engineer. It is not
necessary to send certificates from all of these.
Applicant's Certification
I, hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and
diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be
built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the
approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature: Date:
Agent's Certification
I, , hereby state that, to the best of my abilities, due care and
diligence was used in the observation of the construction such that the construction was observed to be
built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the
approved plans and specifications, and other supporting materials.
Signature: Date:
If this project was designed by a Certified Professional
I, . as a duly registered Professional (i.e.,
Engineer, Landscape Architect, Surveyor, etc.) in the State of North Carolina, having been authorized to
observe (periodically, weekly, full time) the construction of the project, for the Permitee hereby state that,
to the best of my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the construction such
that the construction was observed to be built within substantial compliance and intent of the 401 Water
Quality Certification and Buffer Rules, the approved plans and specifications, and other supporting
materials.
Signature:
C
Date: IRECEM.- r"
AUG 0 S 20'
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Water Resources
1611 Mad service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
a— 919 707 9000
pCM- fti�i...;

i�
?:u
Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
NOTICE OF VIOLATION
June 3,2016
CERTIFIED MAIL 7011 2000 0002 2768 8240
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Town of North Topsail Beach
c/o Stuart Turille, Town Manager
2008 Loggerhead Ct.
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460
PAT MCCRORY
Governor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
BRAXTON DAVIS
Director
RE: NOTICE OF VIOLATION AND REQUEST TO CEASE UNAUTHORIZED DEVELOPMENT
CAMA VIOLATION #16-17D
Dear Mr. Turille:
This letter is in reference to your response via e-mail to Jason Dail on March 31, 2016, where you
quoted "My goal is to comply with the permit requirement to remove the tube upon conclusion of
the project" in addition to a site visit conducted by DCM staff on May 19, 2016 for property located
between 2276 & 2392 New River Inlet Road, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean located in the Town of North
Topsail Beach, in Onslow County, North Carolina.
Information gathered by NC Division of Coastal Management (DCM) staff shows that the Town of North
Topsail Beach has violated the terms or conditions of CAMA/Dredge and Fill State Permit No. 92-14, which
was issued to the Town of North Topsail Beach by way of a major modification pursuant to a variance from
the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) and the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality on
August 29, 2015. 1 hereby request that you immediately CEASE AND DESIST such violation(s) and comply
with the terms and conditions of the above permit. If the terms and conditions of a permit are not complied
with, the permit becomes null and void from the date of its issuance.
On October 24, 2014, CAMA/ Dredge and Fill State Permit No. 92-14 was issued to The Town of North
Topsail Beach for the installation of a sandbag revetment within the project area. The sandbag revetment
was authorized for dimensions measuring 6 feet in height by 20 feet in base width. On November 26, 2014
the DCM amended CAMA/ Dredge and Fill State Permit No. 92-14, in accordance with the CRC's variance
order No. 14-16, to allow for the installation of a larger sand bag revetment (12 feet in height NAVD88 by
45 feet in base width). In addition, the permit, as amended on the November 26, 2014, authorized the
installation of a "temporary construction containment tube" otherwise referred to as a "geotube" which was
to be installed immediately at the seaward -most toe of the sandbag revetment structure. A scour apron and
temporary "chock" tube was also authorized under this permit modification, the placement of the scour
apron and chock tube structures were authorized no further oceanward than the seaward -most toe of the
temporary containment tube used to construct the temporary sandbag revetment structure.
State of North Carolina I Enviromnental Quality I Centel Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
910496-7215

" Town of North Topsail Beach
June 3, 2016
Page 2 of 4
On August 29, 2015 the DCM amended CAMAIDredge and Fill State Permit No. 92-14 in accordance with
the CRC's variance order No.15-05. Permit Condition No. 1 allowed the temporary construction
containment (geotextile) tubes to remain in place until the Onslow County channel maintenance/beach
disposal project is complete, or by June 30, 2016, whichever comes first.
This permit was issued for major development in the Ocean Hazard and Inlet Hazard Areas of
Environmental Concern (AEC), adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in accordance with North Carolina General
Statutes (N.C.G.S.) 113A-118. This permit included the following terms and conditions(s):
(1) Condition No. 1 states: "In keeping with the Variance granted by the Coastal Resources
Commission (CRC) on July 16, 2015 and the CRC Variance Order signed by the CRC Chairman
on August 15, 2015, the temporary construction containment (geotextile) tubes shall be removed
when the Onslow County channel maintenance/beach disposal project is complete, or by June 30,
2016, whichever comes first."
(2) Condition No. 3 states: All conditions and stipulations of the active permit, including Condition No.
13 of the Amended Permit requiring that the associated scour aprons and "chock" tubes be
removed when the associated geotextile tubes are removed, remain in force under this Major
Modification unless specifically altered herein.
For the following reasons, you are in violation of the above terms and condition(s) of said permit:
(1) The DCM received ICWINew River Navigation Project- Observation Reports #34 & #35 from the
Town of North Topsail Beach's authorized agent, Coastal Planning and Engineering of NC, PC; via
email on April 26, 2016. According to the ICWINew River Navigation and Channel Maintenance
Project Construction Observation report, dated April 26, 2016, "No sand or discharge samples
were collected today since dredge and disposal activities have been completed" indicating that the
Onslow County channel maintenance/beach disposal project is complete.
(2) To date, and as verified during a site visit on May 19, 2016, the temporary construction
containment tubes and the temporary scour apron and "chock" tubes used for constructing the
authorized sandbag revetment have not been removed.
To comply with the terms and condition(s) of the permit issued to the Town of North Topsail Beach, the Town
of North Topsail.Beach must:
(1) Remove the temporary construction containment tubes and all portions of the scour apron and
chock tubes within thirty (30) days; or
(2) Within thirty (30) days upon receipt of this notice, the Town of North Topsail Beach shall submit a
CAMA Major Modification application that is complete to the satisfaction of the DCM seeking to
modify Permit 92-14 to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and
scour aprons to remain. Following the anticipated denial of the modification request, and no later
than August 3, 2016 the Town of North Topsail Beach will submit a variance petition package that
satisfies the requirements of the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC). The Town of North
Topsail Beach and DCM will work diligently to agree on a set of stipulated facts in anticipation of

Town of North Topsail Beach
June 3, 2016
Page 3 of 4
the variance being heard by the CRC at its September 13-14, 2016 meeting. If such variance
request is denied by the CRC, or the variance request submitted by the Town of North Topsail
Beach is not heard at the September 13-14, 2016 CRC meeting, the aforementioned structures
shall be removed by September 30, 2016.
If the Town of North Topsail Beach intends to cooperate with this request, the person authorized by the Town
of North Topsail Beach, is requested to sign one of the attached Restoration Agreements and return it in the
enclosed, self-addressed envelope within ten (10) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to comply with this
request or respond back to this office prior to the requested deadline with an acceptable schedule for
compliance will be interpreted as a refusal or failure to cooperate and may result in a Notice of Continuing
Violation, as well as a court injunction being sought ordering compliance, or other enforcement action.
A civil assessment of up to $10,000 plus investigative costs may be assessed against any violator. Each day
that the development described in this Notice is continued or repeated may constitute a separate violation
that is subject to an additional assessment of $10,000.
The relevant statutes and regulations are available from this office, and I am willing to assist the Town of
North Topsail Beach in complying with the requirements of these laws. A site inspection will be made in the
near future to determine whether this REQUEST TO CEASE AND DESIST has been complied with. I request
that you, as Town Manager please contact me immediately at [phone] to discuss resolution of this
important matter.
Thank you for your time and cooperation. Upon completion of the restoration as requested in the Restoration
Plan Agreement to the satisfaction of the Division of Coastal Management, the Town of North Topsail Beach
will be notified as to the amount of the civil assessment for failure to comply with the terms, conditions, or
requirements of such permit.
Sincerely,
Debra D. Wilson
District Manager
Enclosures
Cc: Braxton Davis, Director, DCM
Roy Brownlow, Compliance Coordinator, DCM
Tyler Crumbley, USACE
Brian Edes, Attorney for the Town of North Topsail Beach

Town of North Topsail Beach•
June 3, 2016
Page 4 of 4
RESTORATION PLAN
For
Town of North Topsail Beach Property
C/o Mr. Stuart Turille, Town Manager
CAMA Violation No. 16-17D
Property located between 2276 & 2392 New River Inlet Road, Onslow County
Remove the temporary construction containment tubes, all portions of the scour apron located
oceanward of the temporary sandbag revetment, and all chock tubes within thirty (30) days upon
receipt of this notice; or
2. Within thirty (30) days upon receipt of this notice, the Town shall submit a CAMA Major
Modification application'that is complete to the satisfaction of the DCM seeking to modify Permit
92-14 to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons to
remain. Following the anticipated denial of the modification request, and no later than August 3,
2016 the Town will submit a variance petition package that satisfies the requirements of the
Coastal Resources Commission (CRC). The Town and DCM will work diligently to agree on a set
of stipulated facts in anticipation of the variance being heard by the CRC at its September 13-14,
2016 meeting. If such variance request is denied by the CRC, or the variance request submitted
by the Town is not heard at the September 13-14, 2016 CRC meeting, the aforementioned
structures shall be removed by September 30, 2016.
I, Mr. Stuart Turille, on behalf of the Town of North Topsail Beach, agree to comply with one of these
options within this restoration plan to the satisfaction of the Division of Coastal Management (DCM) within
10 days upon receipt of this notice, or provide an explanation for non-compliance. When corrective actions
are complete, the Town will notify the DCM so the work can be inspected.
SIGNATURE:
DATE:
It is the policy of the Coastal Resources Commission to assess a civil penalty plus investigative costs against all violations. The
amount assessed will depend upon several factors, including the nature and area of the resources that were affected and the
extent of the damage to them. If restoration is not undertaken or satisfactorily completed, a substantially higher civil assessment
will be levied and an injunction sought to require restoration.
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Phone; 910-796-7215 \ FAX: [phone] \ Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled \ 10% Post Consumer Paper

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
APPLICATION TRANSMITTAL AND PROCESSING RECORD
1) . APPLICANT: Town of North Topsail Beach COUNTY: Onslow
PROJECT NAME: 92-14MMPhase I Emergency Sandbag Revetment
LOCATION OF PROJECT: between 2284 - 2382 New River Inlet Dr., adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean,
in North Topsail Beach, Onslow County.
DATE APPLICATION RECEIVED COMPLETE BY FIELD: 6-14-16
FIELD RECOMMENDATION: Attached: NO
CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION: Attached:
FIELD REPRESENTATIVE: Jason Dail
DISTRICT MANAGER REVIEW:
B) DATE RECEIVED BY MAJOR PERMITS UNIT:
PUBLIC NOTICE REC'D: 6-19-16
ADJ. RIP. PROP NOTICES REC'D:
APPLICATION ASSIGNED TO: S
C) 75 DAY DEADLINE:
MAIL OUT DATE: 6-16-16
FEDERAL DUE DATE:
To Be Forwarded: n/a
To Be Forwarded: n/a
DISTRICT OFFICE: WLLMINGTON
FEE REC'D: $4001 #40799
END OF NOTICE DATE: 7-10-16
DEED REC'D:
ON:
150 DAY DEADLINE:
STATE DUE DATE: 7-10-16
FED COMMENTS REC'D: _
PERMIT FINAL ACTION: ISSUE DENY DRAFT ON
AGENCY
DATE
COMMENTS
RETURNED
OBJECTIONS:
YES NO
NOTES
Coastal Management - Regional Representative
% C � U
/
JC
Coastal Management - LUP Consistency
Division of Community Assistance
of
Land Section (DEMLR)
(,�2-101W-M
Division of Water Resources (401)
Storm Water Management (DEMLR)
State Property Office
Division of Archives & History
Division of Environmental Health
Division of Highways
Wildlife Resources Commission
Local Permit OfficeDivision
ffI2016
of Marine Fisheries / DCMCorps
of Engineers
F w5 C/36,14 V

Huggett, Doug
From: Coats, Heather
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:12 AM
To: Huggett, Doug
Subject: FW: recent projects in Fender and Onslow
I just received this update...
Heather Coats
Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
910 796 7302 office
[e-mail]
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed
to third parties.
-----Original Message -----
From: Hair, Sarah E SAW[mailto:[e-mail]
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:09 AM
To: Coats, Heather <[e-mail]>
Cc: Dail, Jason <[e-mail]>; Coburn, Chad <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: recent projects in Pender and Onslow
Heather,
I spoke with Chad Coburn late last week, and sent an email to Jason maybe last week or the week before indicating that I
would be sending this out on public notice for comment. After further review of the file, it appears that the USFWS
Biological Opinion covers the Geotube. Originally, I thought that it didn't, which was the reason I was going to circulate
the modification. So now, I'm just going to hold off and have a discussion with the Service pending the anticipated DCM
denial. We would then issue our permit denial without prejudice, once we receive the DCM denial.
The project is technically in violation since the Geotube was to be removed after the completion of the Onslow County
Navigation project. We will need to send a letter to the town putting them on notice, as we did last year.
Please let me know if you have any other questions.
Thanks,

Liz
-----Original Message -----
From: Coats, Heather [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:00 AM
To: Hair, Sarah E SAW <[e-mail]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] FW: recent projects in Pender and Onslow
Hi Liz,
Just checking back in with you on the NTB project- can you please give me an update on the status and when you might
have comments?
Thanks in advance and I hope you're doing well!
Heather
Heather Coats
Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
910 796 7302 office
[e-mail]
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed
to third parties.
-----Original Message -----
From: Hair, Sarah E SAW [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 3:46 PM
To: Spears, Courtney <[e-mail]>; Coats; Heather <[e-mail]>; Coburn, Chad
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Dail, Jason <[e-mail]>
Subject: recent projects in Pender and Onslow
Imp
This email is to notify you that the following projects will be reviewed under the GP 291 process:
Corps Action ID: SAW-2014-01858

in
Hu jgett, Doug
From: Coats, Heather
Sent: Monday, July 18, 2016 9:01 AM
To: Huggett, Doug
Subject: FW: recent projects in Fender and Onslow
Hi Doug,
Here's what I've received so far from Liz. I just sent an email asking for an update and will forward any additional info I
hear.
Let me know if you need anything else!
In
Heather Coats
Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
910 796 7302 office
[e-mail]
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC28405
Email correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed
to third parties.
-----Original Message -----
From: Hair, Sarah E SAW[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Friday, July 08, 2016 3:46 PM
To: Spears, Courtney <[e-mail]>; Coats, Heather <[e-mail]>; Coburn, Chad
<[e-mail]>
Cc: Dail, Jason <[e-mail]>
Subject: recent projects in Fender and Onslow
This email is to notify you that the following projects will be reviewed under the GP 291 process:
Corps Action ID: SAW-2014-01858

Project nW e: Kim Quinn/South Anderson Boulevard/modification
Cou,nty:Pender
Corps Action ID: SAW-2014-01700
Project name: Town of NTB/geotube
County: Onslow
Corps Action ID: SAW-2015-01682
Project name: Carl Spears
County: Onslow
The Kim Quinn project has already been coordinated with EPA and DWR with no additional comments. I'll wait for the
DCM permit mod and then issue the 404. The Corps recommendations/conditions will stay the same as in the previous
authorization.
The other two projects will be advertised by the Public Notice to the federal agencies. I hope to have those out early
next week. I anticipate both will be denied by our office, as DCM is recommending denial in the Bio report.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Have a great weekend!
Liz Hair
Project Manager
USACE-Wilmington District
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
69 Darlington Avenue
Wilmington, NC 28403
910-251-4049
[e-mail]

Reconnnendations for State Permit Modification --June 2016- North Topsail Beach CAMA
Major No. 92-14
As proposed, this project is INCONSISTENT with 15A NCAC 07H .0308 (a)(2)(B) (E)&(K)
Temporary Erosion Control Structures. Based on this information, the Wilmington Regional -
Office OBJECTS to the project as proposed and any request fora favorable permit decision
should be DENIED. The basis for this determination is referenced below, as specified in
accordance with current Rules adopted and administered by the Coastal Resources Commission.
Additionally, it should be noted that the continued placement of the temporary construction
containment tube may limit if not restrict public access to and/or from the public beach.
The proposal in in conflict with:
15A NCAC 07H .0308 SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS FOROCEAN HAZARD AREAS
(a)(2) Temporary Erosion Control Structures:
(B) Temporary erosion control structures as defined in Part (2)(A) of this Subparagraph shall be
used to protect only imminently threatened roads and associated right of ways, and buildings and
their associated septic systems. A structure is considered inuninently thueatened if its foundation,
septic system, or right-of-way in the case of roads, is less than 20 feet away from the erosion
scarp. Buildings and roads located more than 20 feet from the erosion scarp or in areas where
there is no obvious erosion scarp may also be found to be imminently threatened when site
conditions, such as a flat beach profile or accelerated erosion, increase the risk of
imminent damage to the structure.
(E) Temporary erosion control structures shall not extend more than 20 feet past the sides,of the
structure to be protected. The landward side of such temporary erosion control structures shall
not be located more than 20 feet seaward of the structure to be protected or the right-of-way in
the case of roads. If a building or road is found to be imminently threatened and at an increased
risk of imminent damage due to site conditions such as a flat beach profile or accelerated
erosion, temporary erosion control structures may be located more than 20 feet
seaward of the structure being.protected. In cases of increased.risk of imminent damage, the
location of the temporary erosion control structures shall be determined by the Director of the
Division of Coastal Management or their designee in accordance with Part (2)(A) of this
Subparagraph.
(K) Sandbags used to construct temporary erosion control structures shall be tan in color and
three to five feet wide and seven to 15 feet long when measured flat. Base width of the structure
shall not exceed 20 feet, and the height shall not exceed six feet.
The permittee remains in NON-COMPLIANCE with CAMA Major Development Permit No.
92-14, specifically Conditions No. 11 and No, 13, as well as Condition No. 1 of CAMA/Dredge
and Fill Major Permit Modification issued August 29, 2015.

9 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
TO: Heather Coats
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
FROM: Maria T. Dunn, Coastal Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Division
DATE: July 21, 2016
SUBJECT: CAMA Dredge/Fill Permit Modification for Town of North Topsail Beach State Permit
No. 92-14, Onslow County, North Carolina.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) reviewed the permit
modification request with regard to impacts on fish and wildlife resources. The project site is located
between 2276 and 2382New River Inlet Road adjacent the Atlantic Ocean and New River Inlet. Our
comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Coastal Area Management Act (G.S. 113A-
100 through 113A428), as amended, Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act, as amended, and the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).
The applicant wishes to extend the time allowed for the existing temporary construction containment
tubes (Geo-tubes) to 2022 or until a "long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented".
This modification request comes after an already extended period of time, "March 31, 2016 or until the
Onslow County channel maintenance project is completed", was granted.
The NCWRC commented on the original permit application (Deaton 18 September 2014) as well as
dining the first modification request (Dunn 29 May 2015). Our agency stated significant concerns during
both occasions. Significant impacts, even when viewed as a short -tern, temporary structure include:
• Hardening of the shoreline;
• Degradation of adjacent shorelines due to increased erosion and scour;
• Interference with natural sediment transport and barrier island migration;
• Removal of sea turtle nesting Habitat;
• Loss of shorebird foraging area;
i
Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

CMDP mod NTn 92-14 Page 2. July 21, 2016
Extending the length of time the structure remains continues the impacts listed above as well as increases
the Town's dependency on the structure. The structure would likely become a permanent feature as it
becomes more difficult to remove or if it is covered dining permitted nourishment projects or other
natural processes. Allowing the structure to remain, even if covered with sand and vegetation, would
essentially establish a'hardened shoreline with an impenetrable barrier to nesting sea turtles.
Therefore, the NCWRC continues to have concern with the presence of the Geo-tube and our comments
and positions from earlier correspondence remain. Copies of the two previous memorandums are included
for record.
We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on this permit modification. If you need further
assistance or additional information, please contact me at [phone] or at
maria. dunn,cncwildlife.ore

® North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission 0
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jonathan Howell, Assistant Major Permits Processing Coordinator
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
.�
FROM: Maria T. Dunn, Coastal Region Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
DATE: May 29, 2015
SUBJECT: CAMA Dredge/Pill Permit Application for Town of North Topsail Beach, Major
Modification to 92-14, Onslow County, North Carolina.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Cormnission (NCWRC) reviewed the
permit application with regard to impacts on fish and wildlife resources. The project site is located
between 2276 and 2382 New River Inlet Road adjacent the Atlantic Ocean and New River Inlet. Our
comments ire provided in accordance with provisions of the Coastal Area Management Act (G.S. 113A-
100 through 113A-128), as amended, Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act, as amended, and the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.)-
The applicant proposes to extend the time granted for the existing temporary construction
containment tubes (Geo-tubes) to March 31, 2016, or until the Onslow County channel maintenance
project is completed.
The NCWRC commented on the original pennit application (Deaton 18 September 2014). At this
time we stated significant concern for the structures with regard to hardening of the shoreline, the removal
of sea turtle nesting habitat, and the Ioss•of shorebird Foraging area. Site visits have been conducted
periodically to observe the structures and their impacts.
Our comments and concerns from We original review remain the same. A copy of the September
18, 2014 memorandum is included for reference. (j
Thank you for the opportunity to provide comment on this permit modification. If you need
further assistance or additional information, please contact me at [phone] or at
maria.dnn�,,ncrvildlifc ore
Mailing Address. Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721' Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

� North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jonathan Howell, Assistant Major Permits Processing Coordinator
NCDENR Division of Coastal Management
FROM: Shannon L. Deaton, Program Manager
Habitat Conservation. Programu�
DATE: September 18, 2014
SUBJECT: CAMA Dredge/Fill Permit Application for Town of North Topsail Beach,
Onslow County, North Carolina.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) reviewed the
permit application with regard to impacts on fish and wildlife resources. The project site is
located between 2276 and 2382 New River Inlet Road adjacent the Atlantic Ocean and New
River Inlet. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Coastal Area
Management Act (G.S. 113A-100 through 113A-128), as amended, Sections 401 and 404 of the
Clean Water Act, as amended, and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as
amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).
The applicant proposes to install a large sand bag (Geo-tube) revetment for approximately 1,450'
to protect residential structures located along the north end of Topsail Island near the New River
Inlet fronting the Atlantic Ocean. The Geo-tubes have a dimension of 7.5' in height and 45' in
diameter and are proposed to be filled with approximately 10,000 cubic yards of sand from a
nearby spit removing 12 to 15 inches of material from a 5 acre area.. This material will be mixed
with water from the surf zone, slurried, and placed in the Geo-tube. The structure will lie
approximately 20' below the normal high water level and 25' above the elevation of normal high
water. This project area is included within the beach nourishment project covered under Permit
No. 79-10. The waters at the project location are classified SA by the Environmental
Management Commission.
The NCWRC has reviewed the proposed project as a permanent hardening of the shoreline since
the project as proposed does not meet conditions for temporary sand bags of imminently
threatened structures. Sandbagging is intended as a temporary measure to minimize erosion with j
an alternate long term plan. Construction of a permanent hardened shoreline interferes with
sediment transport, the natural migration of barrier islands, and increased erosion or scour to
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fishcrics • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]

CAMA Dredge/FillPermit N. Topsail Beach, Onslow Co.
adjacent properties. With these review considerations, the placement of the Geo-tube will
significantly inhibit sea turtle access to the beach and remove nest laying area. The filling of the
Geo-tube using 5 acres of material from the nearby spit will have habitat impacts by removing
foraging and nesting habitats for shorebirds including species such as piping plover, red knot,
and several tern species,
Additionally, this project is within a permitted beach nourishment project which does not allow
current shoreline structures/bags to be covered. NCWRC worked with the Town of North
Topsail Beach to minimize impacts for the nourishment project and ensured the permit's
conditions addressed our wildlife resource concerns. The addition of a 1,450' Geo-tube within
this project boundary is contrary toNCWRC's minimization goals. Due to these concerns,
NCWRC questions if the beach nourishment permit (Pert -nit 79-10) will have reduced and altered
effectiveness if this, project is permitted as proposed.
As proposed, this project will have significant adverse impacts to wildlife resources and we are
requesting that alternatives be considered before this project is permitted. The NCWRC does not
obj ect to sandbagging of this area in the traditional sense as specified in NC Division of Coastal
Management (NCDCM) rule, but we do not view sand bag revetments as long term solutions to
control erosion issues along ocean front beaches. Please see our attached recommendations for
the use of sand bags when deemed necessary by NCDCM.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this permit application. Please feel free
to contact Maria Dunn at [phone] or at maria, duanOgncwildlife.org ifthere are any
additional questions or concerns.

CAMA Dredge/Fill Permit
N. Topsail Beach, Onslow Co.
Recommendations for the use of sand bags under emergency conditions
to minimize impacts to wildlife resources for coastal counties
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
If it is determined imminently threatened structures should be protected with sand bags as
specified in NC Division of Coastal Management (NCDCM) rule, NCWRC has these concerns
and recommendations:
Proposed work should be conducted outside the shorebird and sea turtle nesting
moratoria, or from April 1 — November 15, or until the last know turtle nest has hatched.
If this project is declared an emergency and.sandbags must be placed at imminently
threatened structures during the moratoria, we request that the work be expedited to the
greatest extent possible to reduce the potential for any unintended impacts to nesting sea
turtles and their nests. All work should be conducted during the daytime only and only
begin after qualified sea turtle monitors have evaluated the project area for any potential
sea turtle nesting activities. Regular sea turtle monitoring occurs on Topsail Beach and
we strongly recommend that the applicant coordinate appropriately with this group.
• The NCWRC would like the applicant to be aware of rule 15A NCAC 7H .0308 (a) (2)
(g) in regards to sand bag removal in a timely fashion. This rule outlines that sandbags
should not be allowed to remain in place for more than five years. since North Topsail
Beach has a beach nourishment plan currently permitted for this project area.
• It is preferred that material used to fill sand bags comes from an offsite source. If it is
determined that material from the spit could be used, we request NCDCM and the
applicant consult with the NCWRC and USFWS to reduce impact to this area.
Minimization of impact may include creating a tidal pool shorebirds could utilize and
overall less area of impact with less removal of material.

,i
ya
Coast&Management
ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY
June 17, 2016
MEMORANDUM:
TO:
Heidi Cox
Environmental Engineer
Public Water Supply
PAT MCCRORY
Golrnuor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Se rerary
BRAXTON DAVIS
Dimelor
JUN 16 '2d16
olvfsion
vviRO, p bwatea es WAces
FROM: Heather Coats, Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
NCDEQ — Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., .Wilm., NC 28405 heather. coats(cilncdenr.gov
Fax:[phone] f9514r66074-_18.33),
SUBJECT: CAMA/Dredge && Fill Application Review
Applicant: Town of North Topsail Beach 92-14MM
Project Location: along the oceanfront beach between 2264 -2382 New River Inlet Rd.,
adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in North Topsail Beach, Onslow County
Proposed Project: to allow the existing temporary containment tube (Geotube) to remain in place
through 2022, or until a "long-term solution to the erosion problem can be
implemented" according to the applicant.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and
returnitiis:form:to.HeatherlCoa s at the address above by July 10, 2016. If you have any
questions regarding the proposed project, contact Jason Dail at [phone]•when
appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: ✓ This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED DATE (96 z2 ZZ_u6
bCA9 yRCCEN17D
�NothingCompares;..` tLhgf�(,7r,;; I,r
State ofNodh Cuolina I Envirommuntal Quality l Coastal Management JUN 3 O l.Qjs
127 Cmdinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
910-796-7215

}^ N
PAT MCCRORY
jrnre,nor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Serrelnp
Coastal Management 9RAXTON DAVIS
ENVIA01114E11TAL QUALITY Dirvlor
June 17,2016
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Shannon Jenkins
NC' DMF
Shellfish Sanitation Section
FROM:
Heather Coats,. Assistant Major Permits.Coordinator
NCDEQ—,Division of Coastal. Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., 1NIIm., NC 28405,heether..coats(a)tibdenr.nov
Fax: 395' 3964 (Cou ler 0'4s;;.
SUBJECT:
CAMAI Dredge & Fill. Application Revlew
Applicant:
Town of North Topsail Beach;92-14MM
Project Location:
along the oceanfront beach between 2284 -2362 New River Intel Rd.,
adjacent to the Attantic.Ocean, in North Topsail Beach; Onslow County
Proposed Project:
to allow the existing temporary containment tube (Geotube).to remain in.place
through.,202Z or until a "long-lerm.solution; to the erosion problem can be,
Implemented", accordingl4q the appl/cent.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on thelproposed project and
returnith sYfortrritoi /eathefYrCdats attheaid' dress above by July 10, 2016. if you have ariy
questiohs,regardinjl the proposed project; contact Jason Dail.at [phone] when
appropriate, in-depth'comments with supporting,data is requested.
REPLY: _ This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has:no.comment"on the proposed project.
_ This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated, See'atWhed.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described In the attached comments.
r-fir ��G•vNJ,V/%,rL'Nr�Nr,
SIGNED DLO' /tom DATE 4�
-5>�NothingCompares� Received
SlaloorNoMC.volini I EnvirnnmelvalQuality l C"lal Management JUN 27 2016
127 Cardinal Drnx L%L, Wilndiigjon NC 28405'
910:796-7215
DCM

.rc t 1
�x
A1� f
Y {
em nt� "JUP7 O'20J8;
6RAXTON DAVIS
UAlITY ` ` Owner
+I) _
! ;IJMORK' PREScR/ATIOU JFF.ICE
e r1i7,r2p,16'>
ty, ILt ao(l F
MORANDUM
} • Renee Gledhill Early
Dept of;CulturahRe-sources
< Archives;&`History'-
PAT MCCRORY
Goremor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
Fax , 395-3 • (Cpurler 04;_ 16A33)
SUBJECT: CAMA/Dretlge,f&fMbApplicationwRevlew-
Appllcant: Towo.ofNortll.Topsail-Beactii92e;14MM .
Project Location . atong the'oceanfrolit beach "between 2284-238ZNew•RiverInlet Rd.,,
adjacent to4he Atlantic.0aean; in:North -Topsarbl3each, Onslow;County
Proposed Project:., ,to al/ow,the existing;temporaryrcontainrhent tube;(Geotube) to,remain in place
ihrni,rvh
t 'rlmpiemented' according,to.'the applicant: `,
PleaseJndicate below your agency's position or viewpoint omt 6 proposed project and
. ,return thl5sfonn toi�leather,Coats at theta- ress apove,by,,July 10, 2016 , If you;hawany
gtjestionsrregarding ttietproposed protect .contact JasomDail at (910) 79,, 221 when.
appropnaie in depth!epmmenks+with supporting dataiis re4uestedt
REPLY: This-agency.has no objection to the"project as proposed
This agency has no,comment:onithe proposedproject;
This agency approves.ofthe pioJecfonlyff.the-recommended changes
are incorporated.'See_atfached,
This agency objecis�to the'project'for'reEisons described in th&MWchedtcomrnents.
SIGNED DATE ' c
Received
JUN 2 7 Z016 Nothing ComparesS..� JUN 2 j 2016
Stale of North Carolina`] L'maroamental Quality l Conotal Manati mcni
DCt� it 127 Canlawl Dmro I'Ft',14ilniinMon, NC 2&{OS
�/ I y � , �910 77&7217

Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
June 17, 2016
MEMORANDUM:
TO:
RECEIVED
,)UN 2 0 2016
DOA
STATE PROPERTY
OFFICE
Tim Walton
Dept of Administration
State Property Office
PAT MCCRORY
Gmemor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secrclary
BRAXTON DAVIS
Director
FROM: Heather Coats, Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
NCDEQ — Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilm., NC 28405 heather. coats(o)ncdenroov
Fax:[phone] (Courier+04.16-33}'
SUBJECT: CAMA /Dredge & Fill Application Review
Applicant: Town of North Topsail Beach 92-14MM
Project Location: along the oceanfront beach between 2284 -2382 New River Inlet Rd.,
adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, to NorW Topsail Beach, Onslow County
Proposed Project: to allow the existing temporary containment tube (Geotube) to remain in place
through 202Z or until a "long-term solution to the erosion problem can be
implemented', according to the applicant.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and
eturn;thl§ form to.Heathen:Coats}at the address above by July 10, 2046. If you have any
questions regarding the proposed project, contact Jason Dail at [phone] when
appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY:
SIGNED
This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
DATE 7-4 -a-di b
Nothing Compares�m
State ofNottli Carolina I Environmental Quality l Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
910.796-7215
RECEIVED
DCNI V:gLf.41NGTOtJ, NC
JUL 0 6 2016
1

I
a;o
Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
June 17, 2016
MEMORANDUM:
TO:
Dan Sams
District Manager
DEMLR - WiRO
PAT MCCRORY
Go.ra.,
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
BRAXTON DAVIS
Director
AIN ] 6 2016 +�
FROM:
Heather Coats, Assistant. Major Permits Coordinator
NCDEQ - Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilm., NC 28405 heather.coats(a)ncdenr.gov
Fax:[phone] (Eouriers,04:18=33),
SUBJECT:
CAMA/Dredge & Fill Application Review
Applicant:
Town of North Topsail Beach 92-14MM
Project Location:
along the oceanfront beach between 2284 -2362 New River Inlet Rd.,
adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in North Topsail Beach, Onslow County
Proposed Project: to allow the existing temporary containment tube (Geotube) to remain in place
through 2022, or until a "long-term solution to the erosion problem can be
implemented", according to the applicant.
Please Indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and
elurn fhisformrfo fieather'Go'atsat the address above by July 10, 2016. If you have any
questions regarding the proposed project, contact Jason Dail at [phone] when
appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED DATE eal17 Z°I6
RECEIVED
DCM WUJA WTON, No
-5�'-^Nothtng Compares AIN 2 E1 2016
slate of North Carolina I Environmental Quality l coantnl Management
127 Cardinal Driw Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405
910-796.7215

Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
June 17, 2016
MEMORANDUM:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Applicant:
Project Location:
PAT MCCRORY
Govemor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
BRAXTON DAVIS
Director
Gregg Bodner
Fisheries Resource Specialist
DCM; Morehead City
de4a�the s'lItant Major Permits Coordinator
NCDEQ — Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext. Wilm., NC 28405 heather. coats(o)ncdenr.gov
Fax: [phone] Courier 04=16-33
CAMA / Dredge &Fill Application Review
Town of North Topsafl Beach 92-14MM
along the oceanfront beach between 2284 -2382 New River Inlet Rd.,
adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in North Topsail Beach, Onslow County
Proposed Project: to allow the existing temporary containment tube (Geotube) to remain in place
through 2022, or until a "long-term solution to the erosion problem can be
implemented" according to the applicant.
Please indicate below your a9ency's position or viewpoint on -the proposed project and
r to um this form to Heather Coats the address above by July 10, 2016. If you have any
questions regarding the proposed project, contact -Jason Dail at [phone] when
appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes
are. incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
v SIGNED DATE 7"l/zGI�
ypu�pp
'. L RECEIVED
-::�'-^Nothing Compares . JUN it 2016
State ofNoeh Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive E:¢., Wilmington, NC 28405 DCM- MHD CITY
910-796-7215 .

w
Environmental
Quality
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Doug Huggett, DCM Major Permit Coordinator
FROM: Gregg Bodnar, DCM Fisheries Resource Specialist
SUBJECT: Town of North Topsail Beach (91-14MM)-
DATE: 7/11/2016
PAT MCCRORY
Governor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
A North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (DCM) Fisheries, Resource Specialist has reviewed the
subject permit application for proposed actions that impact fish and fish habitats. A North Carolina
Division of Coastal Management (DCM) Fisheries Resource Specialist has reviewed the subject permit
application for proposed actions that impact fish and fish habitats. The applicant proposes to allow the
existing temporary Geotube containment system to remain in place through 2022, or accordIng to the
applicant, a "long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented". The surrounding waters
are classified as able to support shellfish (SA); are closed to shellfish harvest, and are within the Ocean
Hazard (OH) and Inlet Hazard (IH) AECs:
As stated in previous comments made by DCM fisheries resource staff (5/29/2015), the Geotube
structures interfere with normal intertidal habitat functions and processes. The intertidal beach zone
supports numerous benthic organisms (coquina clams, mole crabs, etc.), as well as providing forage,
nursery, and refuge areas for species such as kingfish, pompano, flounder and red drum. Oceanfront
shoreline armoring has been well documented to degrade intertidal beach zones by affecting erosion
patterns and sediment grain size which can result in a much.narrower surf zone, increased turbidity, and a
reduction in abundance and diversity of benthic macroinvertebrates (Deaton et al. 2010, Defeo etal.
2009, Pilkey and Wright 1988). The placement of a shore -parallel, hardened structure like a large sandbag
revetment or Geotube structure on an eroding oceanfront beach has a.likelihood of resulting in significant
loss of intertidal beach habitat. Erosive processes could undermine the structure itself, resulting in failure
of the structure and.damage to associated infrastructure, which could further degrade the surf zone
habitat:
Allowing a structure such as the one in question to remain in place for the extended period of time is likely
to have significant adverse impacts to habitats critical to fish and shellfish, and to other species that
frequent the intertidal beach zone. Long term impacts include the direct loss of habitat currently usurped
by the structure and the degradation of the surrounding habitat caused by the structure's interference,
.with normal coastal processes. Finally, allowing the Geotubes to remain in place for an.excessive period of
time increases the potential for the structure to become.entrenched, with various degrees of vegetation
or sand covering the structure. As time increases and the structure becomes more entrenched, removal
of the structure would become increasingly impectful on the surrounding habitat.
'Stale of North Carolina l.Environmental quality -
400 Commerce Avenue/Morehead City. N.C. 28557
252-808-2808 1 252-247-3330 [faz]
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

PAT MCCRORY
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Environmental secremry
Quality
Contact Gregg Bodnar at [phone] ext. 213 [e-mail] with further questions or
concerns.
Deaton; A.S. W.S. Chappell, K. Hart;,J.O`Neal, B. Boutin. 2010. North Carolina Coastal Habitat
Protection Plan. North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
Division of Marine Fisheries,: NC. 639 pp,
Defeo, 0., McLachlan, A., Schoeman; D. S., SchlacheryT. A., Dugan, J., Jones, A., Lastra, M. and
Scapin], F. (2009). Threats to sandy beach. ecosystems: a review: Estuarine, Coastal and
Shelf Science, 81(1), 1-12.
P[Ikey, O. H., & Wright III, H. L. (1988). Seawalls versus beaches. Journal of Coastal Research, 41-
64.
I
State of North Carolina I. Environmental Quality
400 Commerce Avenue/Morehead City. N.C. 28557 -
252-808-28081 252-247.3330 [fax] - -
An Equal OpporlunitylAffirmative Action Employer

Appendix D: Letter from Dr. William J. Cleary, P.G.
,L�
Ob"y
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
gf�hib� ®�N, t4c
BEM W -
JUN 14 2016

0
APPENDIX D: LETTER FROM DR. WILLIAM J. CLEARY, P.G.
From: William J Cleary
To: Mr. Brian Edes
Date: 25 May 2016
Re: North Topsail Beach Shoreline Recent Changes
Dear Mr. Edes:
Mr. Stuart Turille, the Town Manager of North Topsail Beach, requested that I provide
you information pertaining to the changes in the shoreline conditions along the North
Topsail Beach during the past year. According to Stuart, the information below is
needed for support in the filing of an application relating to the variance modification
involving the removal of the geo-tube along the northernmost North Topsail Beach
oceanfront shoreline. The narrative that follows is based on studies that I have
conducted for the Town.
Figure 1 shows the North Topsail Beach shoreline conditions on June 13, 2015. The
image was obtained four months after the completion of the sand bag "revetment'
project in February 2016. The aerial photograph depicts a relatively wide low -tide
beach that fronts the sandbag armored shoreline reach. The letter designations that
appear on the Figure 1 (A, B & C) delineate locations where oceanfront change
measurements were made of the shoreline erosion (red colored #s) that occurred
between June 13 and October 7, 2015. Figure 2 is a satellite image (9/10/15) of the
same area that depicts the shoreline conditions approximately three months later than
those depicted in Figure 1. Inspection of Figure 2 shows that the width of the low -tide
beach has changed little with the exception of the reach near "A" where the flood
channel has widened and consequently eroded a portion of the low tide beach
(compare to Fig.1). Further inspection of Figure 2, illustrates that the dry beach width
and its lateral extent have increased during the three-month period.
Significant oceanfront shoreline changes occurred during the latter part of September
and early October 2015 when several periods of Perigean tides (King or Supermoon
tides). The drone captured oblique aerial imaged in Figure 3, depict the
RE6VIr
JUN 21 2016 JUN 14 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

APPENDIX D: LETTER FROM DR. WILLIAM J. CLEARY, P.G.
results of wave overtopping during a Perigean tidal event. During a period of several
weeks, relatively strong onshore winds exacerbated the effects of the extreme water
levels during which time storm waves broke well landward of the normal surf zone. This
period of time of elevated water levels coincided with the passage of Hurricane Joaquin
some distance offshore the Town. During the passage of the large storm, incident
waves continually broke at the base of the revetment and as water levels increased the
wave broke across the seaward slope of the bags. As the plunging waves broke along
the seaward slope and at base of the structure, scouring of the sea bed occurred
resulting in a general deepening immediately seaward of the sandbags. Consequently,
a number of bags slumped, further degrading the integrity of the 'revetment'.
The combination of the above events ultimately led to extensive erosion of the low -tide
beach (Figs. 1 and 4). Erosion of the low -tide platform (low -tide beach) was variable and
ranged from 225ft in vicinity of Location "A" to 86ft in vicinity of Location "C" immediately
updrift of the Topsail Reef Condominiums (Figs. 1 and 4). The erosion of the low -tide
beach promoted the subsequent failure (slumping, etc.,) of sand bags in areas along the
armored shoreline, overtopping (overwash) and steepening of the foreshore profile
along a major portion of the aforementioned shoreline reach (Figs. 4-7). Figure 8
depicts Pre- and Post -Hurricane Joaquin images of the oceanfront shoreline. A
comparison of the images clearly shows the effect of the erosion and the consequent
steepening of the lower foreshore profile. Note the location of the zone of breaking
waves.
The Drone captured images of 19 February 2016 depicted in Figure 8 show the incident
waves breaking along the base of the sand bags further that led to scouring of the sea
bed promoting further slumping of the bags. This process frequently occurred during the
subsequent months and may considered the norm. RECEIVE
JUN 21 2016
The most recent cross -shore survey of the sand bags and the ne2fPfltfiee Af2h'MPIdy
in mid -March 2016. Two of the many resulting profiles are imaged on Figures 9 and 10,
p�pQ hGh NG� GN, NC;
JUN 14 20%

APPENDIX D: LETTER FROM DR. WILLIAM J. CLEARY, P.G.
the locations of which are shown on Figure 11 (red -colored lines). Profile 1155+00 (Fig.
9) is located —500ft southwest of Location "A" imaged on Figures 1 and 4. A cursory
inspection of the profile changes shows that the sea bed has been both deepened and
steepened. The dip in the seabed at the 100ft mark likely is related to breaking waves.
The changes along this profile typify the profiles to the southwest along the sand bag
armored shoreline. Profile 1160+130 is located northeast of profile 1150+00, a shoreline
reach transitional to New River Inlet, and as such is heavily influence by tidal currents,
waves and currents augmented by breaking waves. A comparison of the April 2015 and
the March 2016 surveys again shows an overall deepening of the beachface.
Historically, shoreline changes in this area have been heavily influenced by the marginal
flood channel.
In brief, it is my opinion based on personal observation and shoreline change data that
the removal of the geo-tube will have serious consequences on the stability of the sand
bag 'revetment'. Its removal will ultimately lead to accelerated erosion of the sea bed
adjacent to the sand bags due to a variety of wave -related processes. In turn, the
consequent degradation of the sand bag armoring will have dire consequences for the
homes currently protected by the sand bags.
Please advise if clarification is needed.
Regards,
William J. Cleary
Emeritus Professor of Geology, UNCW
Professional Geologist NC #475
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
130M � 146 ON, NG
JUN 14 2016

-e
MAJOR PERMIT FEE SCHEDULE
NTB Geotube / $400 #40799 / Onslow Co.
DCM %
DWQ %
Development Te
Fee
14300160143510009316256253
2430016024351000952341
I. Private, non-commercial development that does
not involve the filling or excavation of any
wetlands or open water areas:
$250
100%
$250
0%
$0
II. Public or commercial development that does
not involve the filling or excavation of any
Wetlands or open water areas:
$400
100%
$400
0%
$0
III. For development that involves the filling
and/or excavation of up to 1 acre of wetlands
and/or open water areas, determine if A,B, C,
or D below applies:
III(A). Private, non-commercial development, if
General Water Quality Certification No. 3490
See attached can be applied:
$250
100%
$250
0%
$0
III(B). Public or commercial development, if
General Water Quality Certification No. 3490
See attached can be applied:
$400
100%
$400
0%
$0
III(C). If General Water Quality Certification No.
3490 (see attached) could be applied, but DCM
staff determined that additional review and written
DWQ concurrence is needed because of
concerns related to water quality or aquatic life:
$400
60%
$240
40%
$160
III(D). If General Water Quality Certification No.
3490 see attached cannot be applied:
$400
60%
$240
40%
$160
IV. Development that involves the filling and/or
excavation of more than one acre of wetlands
and/or open water areas:
$475
60%
$285
40%
$190
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- M.HD CITY

DENR LAMA Daily Check Log for WIRO
Date
Daft
Depostfe
I
Check
Receipt or
Received
d I Check From Name
Name of Permit Holder
Vendor Check Number amount
Permh NumberlCommencs
Refund/Reallocated
6/14120t
Town of North Topsail Beach
!StuartTudlle First CRizens Bank 1 40799 00.00!ma oennnft
mod New River Inlet Rd. Onslow JD rct. 2310D
W
U
>_
o
f:V
U Z
ui
�

Recommendations for State Permit Modification — June 2016 - North Topsail Beach CAMA
Major No. 92-14
As proposed, this project is INCONSISTENT with 15A NCAC 07H .0308 (a)(2)(B) (E)&(K)
Temporary Erosion Control Structures. Based on this information, the Wilmington Regional
Office OBJECTS to the project as proposed and any request for a favorable permit decision
should be DENIED. The basis for this determination is referenced below, as specified in
accordance with current Rules adopted and administered by the Coastal Resources Commission.
Additionally, it should be noted that the continued placement of the temporary construction
containment tube may limit if not restrict public access to and/or from the public beach.
The proposal in in conflict with:
15A NCAC 07H .0308 SPECIFIC USE STANDARDS FOR OCEAN HAZARD AREAS
(a)(2) Temporary Erosion Control Structures:
(B) Temporary erosion control structures as defined in Part (2)(A) of this Subparagraph shall be
used to protect only imminently threatened roads and associated right of ways, and buildings and
their associated septic systems. A structure is considered imminently threatened if its foundation,
septic system, or right-of-way in the case of roads, is less than 20 feet away from the erosion
scarp. Buildings and roads located more than 20 feet from the erosion scarp or in areas where
there is no obvious erosion scarp may also be found to be imminently threatened when site
conditions, such as a flat beach profile or accelerated erosion, increase the risk of
imminent damage to the structure.
(E) Temporary erosion control structures shall not extend more than 20 feet past the sides of the
structure to be protected. The landward side of such temporary erosion control structures shall
not be located more than 20 feet seaward of the structure to be protected or the right-of-way in
the case of roads. If a building or road is found to be imminently threatened and at an increased
risk of imminent damage due to site conditions such as a flat beach profile or accelerated
erosion, temporary erosion control structures may be located more than 20 feet
seaward of the structure being protected. In cases of increased risk of imminent damage, the
location of the temporary erosion control structures shall be determined by the Director of the
Division of Coastal Management or their designee in accordance with Part (2)(A) of this
Subparagraph.
(K) Sandbags used to construct temporary erosion control structures shall be tan in color and
three to five feet wide and seven to 15 feet long when measured flat. Base width of the structure
shall not exceed 20 feet, and the height shall not exceed six feet.
The permittee remains in NON-COMPLIANCE with CAMA Major Development Permit No.
92-14, specifically Conditions No. 11 and No. 13, as well as Condition No. 1 of CAMA/Dredge
and Fill Major Permit Modification issued August 29, 2015.
(RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

PAT MCCRORY
Gommor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
June 16, 2016
[e-mail]
2 Pages
Star News
Legal Advertisement Section
Post Office Box 840
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
Re: Major Public Notice for Town of NTB Emergency SB's / Onlsow County
Kyle & Heather: Please publish the attached Notice in the Sunday, June 19, 2016 issue.
BRAXTON DAVIS
Director
The State Office of Budget & Management requires an original Affidavit of Publication prior to
payment for newspaper advertising.
Please send the original affidavit and invoice for payment to Shaun Simpson at the NC Division of
Coastal Management, 127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, NC 28405, 910-796-7226. Paying by
credit card to the attention of Luke Skiera, (Ref acct # 796-7215).
Please email a copy of the credit card receipt to me.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you should have any questions, please contact me
at our Wilmington office.
cc:
Heather Coats - WiRO
Doug Huggett - MHC
Mickey Sugg & Liz Hair - USACE
Sarah Young- DCM
Sincerely,
Shaun K. Simpson
Permitting Support & Customer Assistance
Nothing Compares
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coa nal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 29405
910-796-7215

NOTICE OF FILING OF
APPLICATION FOR CAMA MAJOR
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
The Department of Environmental Quality hereby gives public notice as required by
NCGS 113A-119(b) that the following application was submitted for a development permit in an
Area of Environmental Concern as designated under the CAMA: On June 14, 2016, the Town
of North Topsail Beach proposed to allow for the existing "Geotube" sandbags to remain in
place for an extended period of time at the current location between 2284 - 2382 New River
Inlet Rd., adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in North Topsail Beach, Onslow County. A copy of
the application can be examined or copied at the office of Jason Dail, N.C. Dept. of
Environmental Quality, Division of Coastal Management, 127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington,
NC 28405, (910-796-7221) during normal business hours.
Comments mailed to Braxton C. Davis, Director, Division of Coastal Management, 400
Commerce Avenue, Morehead City, NC 28557-3421, prior to July 10, 2016 will be considered
in making the pen -nit decision. Later comments will be accepted and considered up to the time
of permit decision. Project modification may occur based on review and comment by the public
and state and federal agencies. Notice of the permit decision in these matters will be provided
upon written request.
Nothing Compares -
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 29405
910-796-7215

DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
APPLICANT'S NAME: Town of North Topsail Beach - June 2016 Maior Permit
Modification, No. 92-14
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: The project site is located along the oceanfront beach from
2284 to 2382 New River Inlet Drive, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in North Topsail Beach,
Onslow County.
Photo Index — 2006: 28-(6497): Oceanfront & Inlet, 12n 28-(391): Oceanfront & Inlet
1995: 28-(379): Oceanfront & Inlet State Plane Coordinates — X: 2449610
Y:256997 Lat.: 3413 1'29.15"N Long:77°20'47.98"W
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA / D&F
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit(s) — Multiple visits between Jan. 2013
and June 2016. Was Applicant Present — Yes
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received — Complete 6/14/16 (with exceptions)
Office — Wilmington
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan — Town of North Topsail Beach
Classification From LUP — No Classification / Developed
(B) AEC(s) Involved: OH, Hi
(C) Water Dependent: Yes
(D) Intended Use: Government
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing — Municipal Sewer
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing — Commercial and Residential structures and access -ways
Planned — Sand bag revetment
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: 2'/year Source — LTAASCR 2011 Update
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands (coastal)
N/A
N/A
N/A
(B) Non -Vegetated Wetlands - open
N/A
—16,200 sq. ft. (existing
N/A
water
temporary containment
tube — i.e. "Geotube"
(C) Other(Highground)
N/A
N/A
N/A
*N/A — Not applicable
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 0.37 acres (16,200 sq. ft.)+
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SA Open: NO
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting authorization to allow the exist* a lV�D
containment tube Geotube to remain in lace until 2022. R G�
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

North Topsail Beach — June 2016, CAMA Major Permit Modification, No. 92-14
Page Two
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The permittee is requesting approval; through this CAMA major permit modification, to
allow for the continued operation, function and/or placement of the existing temporary
containment tube ("Geotube"), located between 2284 and 2382 New River Inlet Road,
North Topsail Beach. The information presented in this application package specifically
addresses the continued use of the temporary containment tube, with no other relevance to
any other sand bag, or temporary erosion control features. The relative information of the
new project is described below. The projected time line for continued placement would run
through 2022, or until a "long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented",
according to the applicant.
The project site is located in North Topsail Beach, specifically between 2284 and 2382 New
River Inlet Road, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in Onslow County. To get to the site from
Wilmington take US HWY 17 N to NC Hwy 210, which is located at the Lowe's Home
Improvement on US HWY 17. Turn right onto NC Hwy 210 and continue across the Surf City
Swing Bridge. Take a left at the first street N. New River Drive (NC Hwy 210). Continue on NC
Hwy 210 until you reach the New River Inlet Road (approximately 8.15 miles). Turn right onto
New River Inlet Road and continue to the far end. Turn left at the stop sign and the project area
will be located on the right hand side of the road, just north of the 2282 New River Inlet Road.
The project area spans from the northern side of 2284 New River Inlet Road, north to the
property identified by the Onslow County Tax office as 2382 New River Inlet Road. The current
elevation of the project area ranges from approximately 6' NAVD to approximately 8' NAVD.
The project site is adjacent to residential properties. The project site is bordered by New River
Inlet to the north, the Atlantic Ocean to the East and residential properties to the south and west.
The high ground portion of the property is primarily un-vegetated with the exception of lawn
grasses and ornamental landscaping around the existing homes.
The Annual erosion rate in the project area is 2'/year per the Division of Coastal Management's
2011 Annual Erosion Rate maps. Previous field investigation reports have demonstrated this
particular area of North Topsail Beach experiences "accelerated erosion" and the shoreline is
progressively receding.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The Town of North Topsail Beach currently has several CAMA Major Development Permits that
are active, including CAMA Major Permit No. 79-10 (Shoreline Stabilization), No. 191-05
(Beach Bulldozing) and the subject CAMA permit, No. 92-14 (Sand bag revetment). CAMA
Major Permit No. 92-14, which was amended by CRC variance on November 26, 2014,
authorized the installation of approximately 1,500 linear feet of sand bags (sand bag revetment)
and approximately 1,200 linear feet of temporary construction containment tube (i.e. Geotube)
along the ocean front area of North Topsail Beach, between 2276 and 2382 New River Inlet
Road. Prior to installation of the sand bag revetment structures, the Town's contractor installed
the temporary construction containment tube, which was to be used as a safety iCgi VIM E D
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

North Topsail Beach — CAMA Major Permit Modification, No. 92-14
Page Three
installing the sand bag revetment. Once the temporary construction containment tube was
installed, the contractor(s) began installing the revetment along the project shoreline (starting
from the northern terminus working south). Following completion of the sand bag revetment, the
Town (through its consultant — Coastal Planning and Engineering) began to seek authorization
which would allow the temporary containment tube to remain in place, as noted in the sequence
of events detailed below.
On February 24, 2015, Division of Coastal Management (DCM) staff received a written notice
from Coastal Planning and Engineering, indicating the sand bag revetment was complete.
On February 27, 2015, the DCM sent a certified letter to the Town of north Topsail Beach
requesting a "Compliance Action Plan" for removal of the temporary erosion control tubes (i.e.
temporary construction containment tube).
The letter detailed the commitments made by the permittee (Town of North Topsail Beach), as
referenced in Condition No. 11) of CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14. Specifically, Condition No.
11) of CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14 stated "In accordance with commitments made by the
permittee, the authorized temporary construction containment tube used to assist in the safe
construction of the authorized temporary sand bag revetment shall be removed in its entirety
either immediately upon project completion, or by May 21, 2015, whichever is sooner. "
On March 20, 2015, Coastal Planning and Engineering staff member Tom Jarrett, P.E.,
submitted a written response to DCM's "Compliance Action Plan" indicating that "conditions
along the shoreline fronting the sand bag revetment appear to be improving as much of the sand
tube (i.e. Geotube or temporary containment tube) is now covered by sand", but "conditions
along the extreme north end of the sand bag revetment have not improved dramatically ". In
addition, the permittee's consultant described the inlet hazard area as being "dynamic" in nature
and the uncertainty of future shoreline responses in the area should be taken into consideration
for allowing the temporary containment tube in place until the completion of Onslow County's
channel maintenance project. At this time, it should be noted that DCM has not received a
CAMA Major development permit request from Onslow County requesting authorization to
dredge New River Inlet, so the uncertainty of when this project will happen is unknown. Data
collected during multiple site visits (by DCM staff) following completion of the sand bag
revetment project show that nearly two-thirds of the temporary construction containment tube
was exposed at some point along its alignment.
On March 26, 2015, DCM staff issued a Notice of Violation (NOV) to the permittee for violation
of CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14 (CAMA Violation #15-05D) for failure to comply or meets
the requirements of Conditions No. 11 and No. 13 of CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14.
Restoration and/or fulfillment of the NOV required that the permittee "remove the temporary
construction containment tubes and all portions of the scour apron and chock tubes". The Town
(permittee) was provided a ten (10) day time period (from the receipt date of the NOV) to
provide a response to the NOV, by way of remediation through one of the restoration
agreements.
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

North Topsail Beach — CAMA Major Permit Modification, No. 92-14
Page Four
On May 4, 2015, DCM staff received a signed copy of the "Revised Restoration Plan for North
Topsail Beach Property" dated April 24, 2015, from Stuart Turille (Town Manager, North
Topsail Beach) indicating the Town would submit a CAMA Major Permit Modification
application to DCM within ten (10) days from receipt of the NOV. The actions sought through
the permit modification request would include the allowance of the temporary construction
containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons until the completion of the planned Onslow
County shallow draft navigation project or March 31, 2016, whichever is sooner. Additionally,
the agreed upon restoration plan stated "Following the anticipated denial of the modification
request, and no later than June 3, 2015, the Town will submit a variance petition package that
satisfies the requirements of the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC). The Town and DCM will
work diligently to agree on a set of stipulated facts no later than June 17, 2015. The Town will
seek a variance from the CRC at its July 15-16, 2015 meeting. If such a variance request is
denied by the CRC, or the variance request submitted by the Town is not heard at the July 15-16,
2015 CRC meetin, the aforementioned structures shall be removed by July 31, 2015."
On August 29, 2015, the DCM amended CAMA/Dredge and Fill Permit No. 92-14 in
accordance with the CRC's variance order No. 15-05. Permit Condition No. 1 allowed for the
temporary construction containment (geo-textile) tubes to remain in place until completion of the
Onslow County channel maintenance/beach disposal project was complete, or until June 30,
2016, whichever came first.
On April 26, 2016, the applicant's agent (Coastal Planning and Engineering of NC, PC)
submitted "Observation Reports No. 34 & No. 35" indicating that "No sand or discharge
samples were collected today since dredge and disposal activities have been completed". The
subject observation reports conclude that dredging and/or beach fill operations in the area of the
temporary construction containment tube were completed on, or prior to April 26, 2016.
On June 3, 2016, DCM staff issued a Notice of Violation (NOV No. 16-17D) to the permittee for
violation of CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14, in accordance with the CRC's variance order No.
15-05, for failure to comply or meets the requirements of Conditions No. 11 and No. 13 of
CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14. Notice of Violation No. 16-17D also cites failure to comply
with Conditions No. 1 of the most recently amended version of CAMA/Dredge and Fill Permit
No. 92-14, which states "In keeping with the Variance granted by the CRC on July 16, 2015, and
the CRC Variance Order signed by the CRC Chairman on August 15, 2015, the temporary
construction containment tubes shall be removed when the Onslow County channel
maintenance/beach disposal project is complete, or by June 30, 2016, whichever comes first.",
and Condition No 3 which states: "All conditions and stipulations of the active permit, including
Condition No. 13 of the Amended Permit requiring that the associated scour aprons and
"chock" tubes be removed when the associated geotextile tubes are removed, remain in force
under this Major Modification unless specifically altered herein".
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

North Topsail Beach — CAMA Major Permit Modification, No. 92-14
Page Five
The June 3, 2016, Notice of Violation (NOV NO. 16-17D) provided two (2) restoration plans to
include either: 1) Remove the temporary construction containment tubes and all portions of the
scour apron and chock tubes within thirty (30) days; or 2) Within thirty (30) days upon receipt of
this notice, the Town of North Topsail Beach shall submit a CAMA Major Modification
application that is complete to the satisfaction of the DCM seeking to modify Permit 92-14 to
allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons to remain.
Following the anticipated denial of the modification request, and no later than August 3, 2016
the Town of North Topsail Beach will submit a variance petition package that satisfies the
requirements of the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC). The Town of North Topsail Beach
and DCM will work diligently to agree on a set of stipulated facts in anticipation of the variance
being heard by the CRC at its September 13-14, 2016 meeting. If such variance request is
denied by the CRC, or the variance request submitted by the Town of North Topsail Beach is not
heard at the September 13-14, 2016 CRC meeting, the aforementioned structures shall be
removed by September 30, 2016.
On June 6, 2016, the Town of North Topsail Beach signed and dated the subject Restoration Plan
and on June 14, 2016, the subject CAMA/Dredge and Fill Permit Modification request was
submitted.
10. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
The applicant's proposal to keep the temporary construction containment tube in place would
result in the continued filling of approximately 16, 200 sq. ft. of public trust area. Additionally,
approximately 16, 200 sq. ft. of publicly accessible beach would be restricted by its continued
placement.
Submitted by: Jason Dail Date: June 15, 2016 Office: Wilmington
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY

Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
June 14,2016
Town of North Topsail Beach
Attn: Stuart Turille, Town Manager
2008 Loggerhead Ct.
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460
Dear Mr. Turille:
PAT MCCRORY
I�UMl119f
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
S Ytln
BRAXTON DAVIS
Dimaor
The Division of Coastal Management hereby acknowledges receipt of your application for a CAMA
Major Development Permit Modification (CAMA Major Permit No 92-14). According to the
information we have received, you are requesting State approval for continued placement of a "geo-textile
containment tube" between 2284 and 2382 New River Inlet Road, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in
North Topsail Beach, Onslow County. With exception of the signed certified return mail receipts, the
application was received as complete on June 14, 2016, and appears to be adequate for processing at this
time. The projected deadline for making a decision is August 28, 2016. An additional 75-day review
period is provided by law when such time is necessary to complete the review. If you have not been
notified of a final action by the initial deadline stated above, you should consider the review period
extended. Under those circumstances, this letter will serve as your notice of an extended review.
However, an additional letter will be provided on or about the 751 day.
If this agency does not render a permit decision within 70 days from June 14, 2016, you may request a
meeting with the Director of the Division of Coastal Management and permit staff to discuss the status of
your project. Such a meeting will be held within five working days from the receipt of your written
request and shall include the property owner, developer, and project designer/consultant.
NCGS 113A-119(b) requires that Notice of an application be posted at the location of the proposed
development. Enclosed you will find a "Notice of Permit Filing" postcard which must be posted at the
property of your proposed development. You should post this notice at a conspicuous point along your
property where it can be observed from a public road. Some examples would be: Nailing the notice card
to a telephone pole or tree along the road right-of-way fronting your property; or at a point along the road
right-of-way where a private road would lead one into your property. Failure to post this notice could
result in an incomplete application.
An onsite inspection will be made, and if additional information is required, you will be contacted by the
appropriate State or Federal agency. Please contact me if you have any questions and notify me in
writing if you wish to receive a copy of my field report and/or comments from reviewing agencies.
g/y,
- rely,
eld Representative
cc: MHC, DCM
Mickey Sugg and Liz Hair, COE
Maria Dunn, NCWRC
Joanne Steenhuis, NCDWR
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
State of N«W Carolina I Env'vonmental Quality I CoaRal Memgemmt
127 Cardinal Drive Eat., WlmingtM NC 28405
919 796 7215

v
n
0
NOTI(00$1:
CAMA PERMIT
P 2thj Fq
R
ollow theex►s ►ng emporary c►nment
tub' "od
mof timeat it's curmnt t^.cat►Qn hgtWean ZZRQ 2382-
m New Wiver n e r., a r c
m North Topsail Beach, Onslow County.
®COMMENTS ACCEPTED THROUGH JuITv_1_Q�16
APPLICANT:
TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
Attn: btuart Turille, I own Manager
2000 Loggerhead ou
N. opsateac , X.
n
FOR MORE DETAILS CONTACT
THE LOCAL PERMIT OFFICER BELOW:
NC Div. of Coastal Management
M Cardinal Dr. Ext.
Wilmington, NC 28405
Jason Dail, Field Representative
910-796-7221

'" 94A�
Fred J. Burns, Mayor
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tern
Aldermen:
Don Harte
Joann M. MCDermon
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Naturt's Tranquil Seauty
June 3, 2016
NEAL GEORGE III
3203 HENDERSON RD
GREENSBORO NC 27410-6032
SENT CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
Asst. Town Manager/Town Clerk
Re: REVISED RESTORATION PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH. REQUEST
FOR MODIFICATION TO PERMIT #92-14.
Adjacent Riparian Property Owner Notification
Dear Sir or Madam:
The Town of North Topsail Beach (TOWN) is submitting a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Permit Modification application to the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NC DCM) for work
occurring within an Area of Environmental Concern.
As more completely described in the attached application, the TOWN intends to submit a CAMA Major
Modification application to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons
to remain until a more long -tern solution to the erosion problem can be implemented, or the sand bag
revetment permit expires.
Attached to this notice, please find a copy of the application as submitted to the NC DCM office. Within 30
days from receipt of this notice you may submit comments regarding the referenced project to the following
address:
Attn: Ms. Debra Wilson RECEIVED
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension J U N 2 12016
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Sincerely, DCM- MHD CITY
.*—� I � RECEIVED
Stuart J. Turille DCM WIL HINGTCN, NC
Town Manager JUN 14 2016
2008 Loggerhead Court Phone [phone]
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 ntbnc.org Toll Free: [phone]
Fax[phone]

South End Adjacent Riparian Owners
• 2284-B New River Inlet Road
George Neal III
3203 Henderson Rd.
Greensboro, NC 27410-6032
• 2284-A New River Inlet Road
Wayne and Margaret Nielson
19471 Youngs Cliff Rd.
Sterling, VA 20165
■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
N E PAL_ &qo
3�03 ��n evson ��
�oetrs inro, N�
,2-?yi6 -to63D
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
9590 9401 0036 5071 9929 44
2. Article Number ?ransfar from service /abet?
15 0920 0001 7385 5144
North End Adjacent Riparian Owners P3 Form 3811, April 2015 PSN 7530-02-000-9053
• 2386 New River Inlet Rd.
George and Dianne Vann
12926 Couples Pl.
Waldorf, MD 20661
A. Signet re
XOXY
❑ Agent
❑ Addressee
6. eived by (Printed Name) C. Date of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from item 17 ❑ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
JUN 14 7'!il'
3. Service Type
❑ Priority Mall Exprees®
❑ Adult Signature
❑ Registered MailT°
Adult Signature Restricted Delivery
❑ Registered Mail Restricted
Certified Mail®
Delivery
❑ Certified Mail Restricted Delivery
❑ Return Receipt fa
❑ Collect on Delivery
Merchandise
❑ Collect on Delivery Restricted Delivery
❑ Signature Confirmationn"
❑ Inured Mail
0 Signature Confirmation
❑ Insured Mail Restricted! Delivery
Restricted Delivery
Domestic Return Receipt
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY"
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NE
'JUN 14 20%

Fred J. Burns, Mayor �° :'i Stuart Turllle
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tem /� Town Manager
Aldermen:
Don Harte Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
Joann M. McDermon R Asst. Town Managerfrown Clerk
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Nature's Tranquil Beauty
June 3, 2016
NIELSEN WAYNE F & MARGARET S
19471 YOUNGS CLIFF RD
STERLING VA 20165
SENT CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT
Re: REVISED RESTORATION PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH. REQUEST
FOR MODIFICATION TO PERMIT #92-14.
Adjacent Riparian Property Owner Notification
Dear Sir or Madam:
The Town of North Topsail Beach (TOWN) is submitting a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Permit Modification application to the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NC DCM) for work
occurring within an Area of Environmental Concern.
As more completely described in the attached application, the TOWN intends to submit a CAMA Major
Modification application to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons
to remain until a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented, or the sand bag
revetment permit expires.
Attached to this notice, please find a copy of the application as submitted to the NC DCM office. Within 30
days from receipt of this notice you may submit comments regarding the referenced project to the following
address:
Attn: Ms. Debra Wilson DECEIVED
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension JUN 21 2016
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Sincerely, 11 � DCM- MHD CITY
JA^^ & RECEIVED
Stuart J. Turille DCM WIU.4INGTCN, NC
Town Manager JUN 14 2016
2008 Loggerhead Court Phone [phone]
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 ntbnc.org Toll Free: [phone]
Fax [phone]

Stuart, Go ahead and send me what you have and I will begin processing. Please note that I will need the
signed certified mail receipts before we make a decision on the project.
Thank you,
Jason
Jason Dail
Field Representative
NC Department of Environmental Quality
NC Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext.
Wilmington, NC28405
Phone: [phone], Fax: [phone]
Jason. Dail @ncd enr. gov
K. TI- <>^Nothing Compares.
E-mail correspondence to and from this address
may be subject to the North Carolina Public
Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
QQM MEWED
WMINGTON, NO
JUN 14 2016

South End Adjacent Riparian Owners
• 2284-B New River Inlet Road
George Neal III
3203 Henderson Rd.
Greensboro, NC 27410-6032
• 2284-A New River Inlet Road
Wayne and Margaret Nielson
19471 Youngs Cliff Rd.
Sterling, VA 20165
North End Adjacent Riparian Owners
• 2386 New River Inlet Rd.
George and Dianne Vann
12926 Couples Pl.
Waldorf, MD 20601
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON. NC
JUN 14 2016
U.S. Postal Service'"
CERTIFIED MAIL° RECEIPT
Domestic Mail Only
For delivery information, visit our website at w...usps.comV.
.'ft".t k.
r-a
eralled Fee
(I
M
O
Return Receipt Fee
(Endorsement Required)
fa. as
i°mmerk
U Heap
Restricted Delivery Fee
•
W F O
N
O
ru
(Endorsement Required)
f1-1•
>
iuz �t
$
Er Total Postage & Fees
/2Z6
o
f6.
o
nt To
7-t, e
srrtda Nip` -e -- u
M1
or PO---- .. �,203 e n e rsa,
--ere; ----------
ciy zir..i ----------------------
A es,)bqa NG
Postal
CERTIFIED MAILO RECEIPT
r-9 Domestic mail only
Ln
rq
Lr
Ln
AL SE
m �oea s Z 0460
171 ad $
a.aa ? 07
O ReerrW%bgt fo•aa n'..�....p(pl flc
p (Entlor:2rb t�equlr Herer ,J
Reetricta9spvtIppery v—y
p (Endorsem -Ma'
E3 Total Pow & F.ay: � ' 4OW3�2016
0
SanLn
re-�_ .k 0 r`�— {N�EI - ra.
Baeei aAyr. No. -�-.+, I ^ t31' pp /
ciyO Box No. / I l / I Q -- -/ 1 j rL• /J _.._..
Ciry, .7l f4r �
-0 �. e
ra
Ln
to WALff1F MF'196C IAL USE
M Foul, F ECEIVED0460
r LMINGTCN, W
f ,
Derailed Fee as
ra
ID Return Receipt Fee ' �_ 4 ? re k
p (Endorsement Required) fa•a 11 j�
O Restricted Delivery Fee '
00
O (Endosement Required)
N $0.
Q- Total Postage & Fees $ 06/03/2016
o $6.
o- erg 7C 4< i cut n
saeetxr„er�:,-----------
orPOsoxNo.
M1 - 1- -s

r

�� 94A
Fred J. Burns, Mayor
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tern
Aldermen:
Don Harte
Joann M. McDermon
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Nature's Tranquil ijeauty
June 3, 2016
VANN GEORGE C & DIANN L
12926 COUPLES PL
WALDORF MD 20601
SENT CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT
r_,
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Cartn Z. Faulkner, MPA
Asst. Town Managerfrown Clerk
Re: REVISED RESTORATION PLAN FOR THE TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH. REQUEST
FOR MODIFICATION TO PERMIT #92-14.
Adjacent Riparian Property Owner Notification
Dear Sir or Madam:
The Town of North Topsail Beach (TOWN) is submitting a Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Major
Permit Modification application to the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (NC DCM) for work
occurring within an Area of Environmental Concern.
As more completely described in the attached application, the TOWN intends to submit a CAMA Major
Modification application to allow the temporary construction containment tubes, chock tubes and scour aprons
to remain until a more long-term solution to the erosion problem can be implemented, or the sand bag
revetment permit expires.
Attached to this notice, please find a copy of the application as submitted to the NC DCM office. Within 30
days from receipt of this notice you may submit comments regarding the referenced project to the following
address:
Attn: Ms. Debra Wilson RECEIVED
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources JUN 21 2016
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
DCM- MHD CITY
Sincerely,
" 'I RECEIVED
Stuart J. Turille DGM WILMINGTON, NC
Town Manager JUN 14 2016
2008 Loggerhead Court Phone [phone]
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 ntbnc.org Toll Free: [phone]
Fax [phone]

hae f of 2
NONUNION
P cord:a: O�aI M%2o tTi t]OupOe vn
Fa. =: 42e.aa Paa. 1 of 2
n.v nu. Tax- W 40
ands county
L. Po[l.rd P.a. or Dotl.
-3793 Pa268-269
REACH NOURISHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT
For Onslow County Parcel 10 034336
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ONSLOW
GRANTOR: NIELSEN WAYNE F & MARGARET S
GRANTEE: TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
TERM: THIRTY(30) YEARS
In exchange for the sum on One Dollar (61.00) and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt of which is
acknowledged, the Grantor and Grantor's heirs and assigns (collectively "Grantor") convey to the Town of Topsail Beach, North
Carolina, a municipal corporation ('Town) and on behalf of Its representatives, agents, employees, officials, engineers,
consultants, surveyors, contractors, subcontractors, permittees, Invitees and assignees (collectively "Grantee") does now grant
and convey unto the Grantee, this Easement until December 31, 2041 to go upon the Property to conduct Activities in the
EasrmmtArra (as those italicized terms are defined below), subject to the following conditions:
1. Property Subject to Easement: That ocean front property identified as the address of 2284-A NEW RIVER
INLET RD, North Topsail Beach, NC 28445 and, Onslow County Tax Parcel ID g778C-14.1, and described In
[check applicable box):
Id Deed Book 2652 and Page 678 of the Onslow County Registry recorded 9-May-06 as N TPSL SH 2 BA L48B of and as
shown on Map Book and Page 20-OIS of the Onslow County Registry.
❑ See Exhibit A attached.
2. Easement Area on Property Where Activities May Take Place: That portion of the Property, if any, which (1) Is seaward
of the first line of stable vegetation, or (it) is seaward of the toe of the frontal sand dune adjacent to the beach, or (IR) Is seaward
of the crest of the erosion escarpment, whichever feature Is most landward.
3. Activities. "Activities" are those tasks required of the Town under its Shoreline Protection Project, which tasks Include
evaluating, surveying, studying, monitoring, inspecting, preserving, patrolling, constructing, operating, maintaining, repairing,
rehabilitating, nourishin& and replacing the public beach, the dune system and other erosion control and storm damage
reduction measures together with appurtenances thereto, including depositing sand, altering Easement Area contours and
profiles, building berms and dunes, moving, storing, and removing construction equipment and supplies, erecting and removing
temporary structures, and performing any other work necessary and Incident to the Shoreline Protection Project over, at, on,
under and above the Easement Area. Activities do not include moving or damaging permitted permanent improvements within
the Easement Area.
4. Grantor Reserved RiahN. Grantor reserves the right to construct dune walkover structures to the extent allowed by any
applicable Federal, State or local laws or regulations, provided that such structures shall not violate the integrity of the dune in
shape, dimension or function.
5. Other Conditions: (a) Grantee will indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Grantor for any claim arising from Activities
on the Property; (b) Grantee has no responsibility to restore or repair natural forces damage; (c) Grantee makes no
representations on sand volume, If any, to be placed on or
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM— MHD CITY
Book: 3793 Page, 1977-Current: 268 Seq:t
Rook: 3793 Page: 268 Page I of 7
RECEIVED
DCM WILhAINGTON, NC
JUN 14 2016

Pre. 2 or 2
provide the Property; (d) Grantor acknowledges (1) any raised lands created seaward of a pre -project
mean high water mark is the property of the State of North Carolina subject to the public trust; (II) the
fluctuating state of the ocean beach; and (Ili) Grantee makes no representation on the precise location
of either the most seaward boundary of the Property or the most landward extent of the public trust
beach; (a) This Easement binds Grantor, runs with the title to the Property, and terminates on
December 32, 2042; (f) Grantor and signatories acting on Its behalf warrant and covenant that (1)
Grantors title to the Property is free and discharged from all right, title, claim or interest of the Grantor
or anyone claiming by, through or under Grantor, (11) Grantor will hold harmless, indemnify and defend
Grantee from such claims; and (NI) all signatories executing this instrument on behalf of Grantor have
authority to do so; and (g) Grantee shall have the right to temporarily or permanently assign this
easement to the federal, state, or county governments, or any agencies or department thereof or any
governmental authority formed to implement beach nourishment renourishment and / or stabilization
related to the Shoreline Protection Project.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this instrument Is executed by the Grantor under seal, and if an entity, Grantor
has caused this instrument to be signed in the entity name by Its duly authorized agent and its seal to be
heMurlto affixed, Ind N TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this Easement this the
-�Aa dayof +�-y`y`.�,',yV�'_ 2012,
Signature: AIL 6-4 Signature:
Prim Name: -ea—
Signature:
Prim Name:
STATE OF � 6,WIA
COUNTYOF L,,Oberz2, )
a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid,
cenffythat t,JA,ya and
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
Instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
dayof 311'tMCW .2012.
Notary Public
My commission expire,
�Cf�
etteaa2 PIYIIOIg
amurruax;
oozuosaa.sn,arvagxs
rn �wwr�r,sne
Book: 3793 Page: 268 Page 2 of 2
Signature:
Print Name:
� %
STATE OF YLR..%lrJfA-
COUNTY OF
a Notary Public bY the County and State aforesaid,
certify that
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
Instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
dayof.gft" .20 .
Notary Public
My commission expires: *L?olv(�
oorrorrenmarvxrraw
WooraaaadlaxMfa M a.iWe
WYasaeer2sam
Book: 3793 Page,1977-Currant: 288 Seq:2
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WILPAINGTCN, NC
JUN 14 2016

Pyatal
1®111111111111111
pep IS: ooaeff42=2 TTP.: call
Rword.d: 0e/Oe/2012 at fl:a):JO M Fu Ret eee.00 Pape t o/ a
Rev nu. Tax: ao.00
WWmcL. Pell N R.q. of 0.0.
w3793 P4316-317
REACH NOURISHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT
For Onslow County Parcel ID R044405
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ONSLOW
GRANTOR: VANN GEORGE C & DIANN L
GRANTEE: TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
TERM: THIRTY (30) YEARS
EXCISE TAX: $ 0.00
In exchange for the sum on One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt of which is
acknowledged, the Grantor and Grantors heirs and assigns (collectively "Grantor') convey to the Town of Topsail Beach,
North Carolina, a municipal corporation ("Town') and on behalf of its representatives, agents, employees, officials,
engineers, consultants, surveyors, contractors, subcontractors, permittees, Invitees and assignees (collectively "Grantee")
does now grant and convey unto the Grantee, this Easement until December 31, 2041 to go upon the Property to conduct
Activities in the Easement Area (as those italicized terms are defined below), subject to the following conditions:
1. Property Subject to Easement: That ocean front property identified as the address of 2386 NEW RIVER
INLET RD, North Topsail Beach, NC 28445 and, Onslow County Tax Parcel ID N778D-54, and described in
]check applicable box]:
® Deed Book 1881 and Page 838 of the Onslow County Registry recorded 12-AUG-02 as NR BEACH CB St L4 of and
as shown on Map Book and Page 22-205 of the Onslow County Registry.
0 See Exhibit A attached.
2, Easement Area an Prm ty Whom Activities May Take Place: That portion of the Property, If any, which (I) is
seaward of the first line of stable vegetation, or (ii) is seaward of the toe of the frontal sand dune adjacent to the beach, or
(III) is seaward of the crest of the erosion escarpment, whichever feature is most landward.
3. AstlWtiex 'Activities' are those tasks required of the Town under Its Shoreline Protection Project, which tasks
include evaluating, surveying, studying, monitoring, inspecting, preserving, patrolling, constructing, operating, maintaining,
repairing, rehabilitating, nourishing, and replacing the public beach, the dune system and other erosion control and storm
damage reduction measures together with appurtenances thereto, including depositing sand, altering Easement Area
contours and profiles, building berms and dunes, moving, storing, and removing construction equipment and supplies,
erecting and removing temporary structures, and performing any other work necessary and incident to the Shoreline
Protection Project over, at, on, under and above the Easement Arta. Activities do not Include moving or damaging
permitted permanent Improvements within the Easement Area.
4. Grantor Reserved Rfohts. Grantor reserves the right to construct dune walkover structures to the extent allowed
by any applicable Federal, State or local laws or regulations, provided that such structures shall not violate the Integrity of
the dune in shape, dimension or function.
5. Other Conditions: (a) Grantee will Indemnity, hold harmless and defend the Grantor for any claim arising from
Activities on the Property, (b) Grantee has no responsibility to restore or repair natural forces damage; (c) Grantee makes
no representations on sand volume, if any, to be placed on or
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
Book: 3793 Page, 1977-Current: 316 Seq:t
RECEIVED
Book: 3793 Page: 316 Pug. 1 of 2
DCM WILhAINGTCN, NC
JUN 14 2016

Pape 2 M 2
in front of the Property or protective effects the Activities or SHORELINE PROTECTION PROJECT will
provide the Property, (d) Grantor acknowledges (i) any raised lands created seaward of a pre -project
mean high water mark is the property of the State of North Carolina subject to the public trust; (IO the
fluctuating state of the ocean beach; and (iii) Grantee makes no representation on the precise location
of either the most seaward boundary of the Property or the most landward extent of the public trust
beach; (a) This Easement binds Grantor, runs with the title to the Property, and terminates on
December 31, 2042; (f) Grantor and signatories acting on Its behalf warrant and covenant that (I)
Grantor's title to the Property is free and discharged from all right, title, claim or Interest of the Grantor
or anyone claiming by, through or under Grantor (II) Grantor will hold harmless, indemnity and defend
Grantee from such claims; and (ill) all signatories executing this instrument on behalf of Grantor have
authority to do so; and (g) Grantee shall have the right to temporarily or permanently assign this
easement to the federal, state, or county governments, or any agencies or department thereof or any
governmental authority formed to implement beach nourishment, renourishment and / or stabilization
related to the Shoreline Protection Project.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this instrument is executed by the Grantor, under seal, and if an entity, Grantor
has caused this instrument to be signed in the entity name by its duly authorized agent and Its seal to be
hereunto affixed, and IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this Easement this the
_!�kLKay aM 1. , 2012.
Signature: - _ Signature:
Print Name: 17 �2 R'7G C. VNN Prim Name:
Signature: t main :'X\
Print Name: 1\�n'�� J� \)Qn� r
STATE OF MAe�LA,rv,
COUNTY OF / plie S
a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid,
certify that AD,46N .vyf?NN
and iseLlC9e C fI'W'V
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of MWA 8 .2012.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
Book: 3793 Page: 316 Page 2 of 2
Signature:
Print Name:
STATE OF _
COUNTY OF
I,
a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid,
certify that
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of . 2012.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
Book: 3793 Page, 1977-Current: 316 Seq:2
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTCN, NC
JUN 14 2016

Page 2 ol3
BEACH NOURISHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT
For Onslow County Parcel ID #778C-14
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF ONSLOW
GRANTOR: NEAL GEORGE III
GRANTEE: TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
TERM: THIRTY(30) YEARS
In exchange for the sum on One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable considerations, the receipt
of which is acknowledged, the Grantor and Grantor's heirs and assigns (collectively "GraMol^) convey to
the Town of Topsail Beach, North Carolina, a municipal corporation ("Town") and on behalf of its
representatives, agents, employees, officials, engineers, consultants, surveyors, contractors,
subcontractors, permittees, invitees and assignees (collectively "Grantee") does now grant and convey
unto the Grantee, this Easement until December 31, 2041 to go upon the property to conduct
Activities in the Easement Area (as those italicized terms are defined below), subject to the following
conditions:
Property Subject to Easement: That oceanfront property identified as the address of,
2284-8 NEW RIVER INLET RD, North Topsail Beach, NC 28445 and, Onslow County Tax
Parcel ID #778C-14, and described In (check applicable box):
fb Deed Book 3622 and Page 844 of the Onslow County Registry recorded 7/14/2011 as N TPSL
SH 2 BA L48A of and as shown on Map Book and Page 20-015 of the Onslow County Registry.
0 See Exhibit A attached.
2. Easement Area on Prooery Where Activities May Take Place: That Portion of the Property, If
any, which (i) is seaward of the first line of stable vegetation, or (d) is seaward of the toe of the frontal
sand dune adjacent to the beach, or (ill) is seaward of the crest of the erosion escarpment, whichever
feature Is most landward.
3. BQ{yjj[f<,1• "Activities" are those tasks required of the Town under Its Shoreline Protection
Project, which tasks Include evaluating, surveying, studying, monitoring, Inspecting, preserving,
patrolling, constructing, operating, maintaining, repairing, rehabilitating, nourishing, and replacing the
public beach, the dune system and other erosion control and storm damage reduction measures
together with appurtenances thereto, including depositing sand, altering Easement Area contours and
profiles, building berms and dunes, moving, storing, and removing construction equipment and supplies,
erecting and removing temporary structures, and performing any other work necessary and Incident to
the Shoreline Protection Project over, at, on, under and above the Easement Area. Activities do not
include moving or damaging permitted permanent Improvements within the Easement Area.
4. Grantor Reserved Rights. Grantor reserves the right to construct dune walkover structures to
the extent allowed by any applicable Federal, State or local laws or regulations, provided that such
structures shall not violate the Integrity of the dune in shape, dimension or function.
5. Other Conditions: (a) Grantee will indemnify, hold harmless and defend the Grantor for any
claim arising from Activities on the Property; (b) Grantee has no responsibility to restore or repair
natural forces damage; (c) Grantee makes no representations on sand volifan to be placed on or
in front of the Property or protective effects the Activities or SHORELINE' PRO7'hl!I RO1ECf will
Book: 3831 Page, 1977-Current: 637 Seq:2
Book: 3831 Page: 637 Page 2 of 3
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WIUAINGTQN, NC
JUN 14 2016

P.,3m3
provide the Property, (d) Grantor acknowledges (i) any raised lands created seaward of a pre -project
mean high water mark is the property of the State of North Carolina subject to the public trust; (ii) the
Fluctuating state of the ocean beach; and (iii) Grantee makes no representation on the precise location
of either the most seaward boundary of the Property or the most landward extent of the public trust
beach; (a) This Easement binds Grantor, runs with the title to the Property, And terminates on
December 31, 2042; (f) Grantor and signatories acting on its behalf warrant and covenant that (i)
Grantor's title to the Pmp"is free and discharged from all right, title, claim or interest of the Grantor
or anyone claiming by, through or under Grantor, Ili) Grantor will hold harmless, indemnify and defend
Grantee from such claims; and (ill) all signatories executing this instrument on behalf of Grantor have
authority to do so; and W Grantee shall have the right to temporarily or permanently assign this
easement to the federal, state, or county governments, or any agencies or department thereof or any
governmental authority formed to implement beach nourishment, renourishment and / or stabilization
related to the Shoreline Protection Project.
iN WITNESS WHEREOF this instrument is executed by the Grantor under seal, and N an entity, Grantor
has caused this instrument to be signed in the entity name by its duty authorized agent and its seal to be
hereunto affixed, and IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Grantor has executed this Easement this the
2y0' day f 2012,
Signature: a . Signature:
Print Name:Print Name:
Signature: signature:
Print Name: Print Name:
STATE OF nC-
COUNTYOF tmr9
c i eAnn'y (.sue
a Notary Public of the Coymy and State aforesaid,
certify that � .os C/ �/
and
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
Instrument.
Witness.{mny hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of / Id .2012.
or
rotary Public Ln,,20C.L 6.,;L)'L
My commission expires:
LEITANN IL WOLFE
NIMYPdk
etaMd 0eIa05 NaOi groan
F 0aaaaltMea Gak+Naar A N11
Book: 3831 Page: 637 Page 3 of 3
STATE OF _
COUNTY OF
1,
a Notary Public of the County and State aforesaid,
certify that
personally appeared before me this day and
acknowledged the execution of the foregoing
Instrument.
Witness my hand and official stamp or seal, this
day of .2012.
Notary Public
My commission expires:
Book: 3831 Page, 1977-Current: 637 Seq:3
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WILPAINGTCN, NC
JUN 14 2016

C I DoD NNNNNNNNNII
Doc D: WPPlG770DDa T P.: DPP
a..ord.d: oe/1v2012 .c �a:.a,15 Pn
PH AM: $25, DO P.p. 1 or 3
aw.nu. rIV 60.00
Reb oc L.
Pv ND
aab.ec. L. Poll.rd P.a. of D.ad.
w3831 Pd637-639
BEACH NOURISHMENT EASEMENT AGREEMENT
For Onslow County Parcel ID R1574
COUNTYOFONSLOW
GRANTOR: NEAL GEORGE III
GRANTEE: TOWN OF NORTH TOPSAIL BEACH
TERM: THIRTY(30) YEARS
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM— MHD CITY"
Book: 3831 Page, 1977-Current: 637 Sag: 1 RECEIVED
Hook: 3631 rage: 637 Page l of DCM WILMINGTON, NC
JUN 14 2016

OCEAN HAZARD AEC NOTICE
Project Is in an: Ocean Erodible Area High Hazard Flood Area Inlet Hazard Area
Property Owner: -1—py-jn G lsjod% mpSp: I Gec� GI„
Property Address:
Date Lot Was Platted:
This notice is intended to make you, the applicant, aware of the
special risks and conditions associated with development in this
area, which is subject to natural hazards such as storms, erosion
and currents. The rules of the Coastal Resources Commission
require that you receive an AEC Hazard Notice and
acknowledge that notice in writing before a permit for
development can be issued.
The Commission's rules on building standards, oceanfront
setbacks and dune alterations are designed to minimize, but not
eliminate, property loss from hazards. By granting permits, the
Coastal Resources Commission does not guarantee the safety of
the development and assumes no liability for future damage to
the development. Permits issued in the Ocean Hazard Area of
Environmental Concern include the condition that structures be
relocated or dismantled if they become imminently threatened
by changes in shoreline configuration. The structure(s) must be
relocated or dismantled within two (2) years of becoming
imminently threatened, and in any case upon its collapse or
subsidence.
The best available information, as accepted by the Coastal
Resources Commission, indicates that the annual long-term
average ocean erosion rate for the area where your property is
located is t` 11. feet per year.
The rate was established by careful analysis of aerial
photographs of the coastline taken over the past 50 years.
Studies also indicate that the shoreline could move as much as
300 feet landward in a major storm.
The flood waters in a major storm are predicted to be about
I(, feet deep in this area.
Preferred oceanfront protection measures are beach nourishment
and relocation of threatened structures. Hard erosion control
structures such as bulkheads, seawalls, revetments, groins, jetties
and breakwaters are prohibited. Temporary sand bags may be
authorized under certain conditions.
The applicant must acknowledge this information and
requirements by signing this notice in the space below. Without
the proper signature, the application will not be complete.
A4�3�
Property Owner Signature Date
SPECIAL NOTE: This hazard notice is required for
development in areas subject to sudden and massive storms and
erosion. Permits issued for development in this area expire on
December 31 of the third year following the year in which the
permit was issued. Shortly before work begins on the project
site, the Local Permit Officer must be contacted to determine the
vegetation line and setback distance at your site. If the property
has seen little change since the time of permit issuance, and the
proposed development can still meet the setback requirement,
the LPO will inform you that you may begin work. Substantial
progress on the project must be made within 60 days of this
setback determination, or the setback must be re -measured. Also,
the occurrence of a major shoreline change as the result of a
storm within the 60-day period will necessitate re -measurement
of the setback. It is important that you check with the LPO
before the permit expires for official approval to continue the
work after the permit has expired. Generally, if foundation
pilings have been placed and substantial progress is continuing,
permit renewal can be authorized. It is unlawful to continue
work after permit expiration.
For more Information, contact.
�, ��/\) 1�)&►
Local Permit Officer
Address
NC Div of Coastal Menagstrrerd
127 Candkiel Dr. Ern
Locality Wilmington, NC 28405
9IJ- -r,t6- I,?- !l
Phone Number
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WIL6,41NGTCN, NC
JUN 14 2016 Revised May2010

'5" 90"�
Fred J. Burns, Mayor
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tem
Aldermen:
Don Harte
Joann M. McDermon
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Nature's Tranquil Beauty
June 3, 2016
Ms. Debra Wilson
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
Asst. Town Manager/Town Clerk
RE: Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach Regarding CAMA
Permit 92-14
Dear Ms. Wilson,
The condition of the permit for which the TOWN is seeking a modification is the extension of
time in which the temporary construction containment tube can remain prior to its removal. As
stipulated in Permit #92-14, the containment tube was to be removed upon completion of the
sandbag revetment or by May 21, 2015; whichever is sooner. Furthermore, a variance was
granted and a modified permit was issued on August 29, 2015 to allow the containment tubes
to stay in place until the Onslow, County channel maintenanceibeach disposal project is
complete, or by June 30, 2016, whichever comes first.
The Onslow County navigation maintenance project that was completed on April 22, 2016 did
not end up placing sand along the entirety of the revetment. The project was originally
proposed to extend south as far as the volume of material would permit, which was expected to
extend along the entire length of the portion of the revetment fronted by the geotextile
containment tube. However, conditions along the north end changed from the time the contract
was bid to the time the contractor began to mobilize for the job and there was not enough dryRECEIVE[
sand beach in front of the sandbag revetment to allow the contractor to install the discharge
pipeline in the location originally proposed. Due to the changed conditions, the contract was JUN 2 12016
amended to allow the contractor to begin disposal operations north of the sandbag revetment,
thereby reducing the length of shoreline fronted by the geotextile containment tube that
covered by the navigation maintenance material. M W M iH D C
Furthermore, as included in this submittal, an attached letter from Dr. William Cleary, P.G.,
and Emeritus Professor of Geology notes that extreme (elevated) water levels resulting from
several periods of Perigean (King or Supermoon) tides during the latter part of September and
early October 2015 and coinciding with the passage of Hurricane
Joaquin
o q to and associated storm
RECEIVDCM WILEAINGTCN, NC
JUN 14 2016
2008 Loggerhead Court Phone [phone]
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 ntbnc.org Toll Free: [phone]
Fax[phone]

Page 2 of 2 Town of North Topsail Beach
Permit Modification Request far Town of North Topsail Beach Regarding CAM Permit 92-14
waves caused significant oceanfront shoreline erosion to occur within the sandbag revetment
area. The erosion of the shoreline resulted in the steepening of the lower foreshore profile in
front of the sandbag revetment. Dr. Cleary goes on to state, in regards to February 2016 drone
aerial images of the area, that "incident waves breaking along the base of the sand bags further
led to scouring of the sea bed promoting further slumping of the bags. This process frequently
occurred during the subsequent months and may be considered the norm." In summation, Dr.
Cleary stated that "the removal of the geo-tube will have serious consequences on the stability
of the sand bag "revetment'. Its removal will ultimately lead to accelerated erosion of the sea
bed adjacent to the sand bags due to a variety of wave -related processes."
Additionally, with the prospect of an extended period of recovery along the north end of the
island associated with the channel relocation project, the TOWN has already executed a
contract to move forward with the modeling and design of a terminal groin that would be
required to be completed as part of the permitting process, which could take at least 3 years.
With this in mind and given the fact that volatility of the inlet shoreline conditions continues to
threaten the possible undermining of portions of the sandbag revetment, the Town is again
concerned about the risk of undermining of the structure. Currently, this undermining is being
held in check by the presence of the sand tubes.
A complete application package is attached and includes a detailed project narrative along with
an aerial photo of the project site taken near the time of completion of the sandbag revetment.
Other information being submitted with this request includes forms MP-1, MP-4, an AEC
Hazard Notice, list of adjacent riparian owners notified, easements showing ownership, and the
required fee. Please note that we will supplement or amend any of these items as needed.
Please contact me at 910.328,1349 (office) should you have any questions or need additional
information.
Sincerely,
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Cc:
Braxton Davis (Div. of Coastal Management)
Doug Huggett (Div. of Coastal Management)
Jason Dail (Div. of Coastal Management)
Brian Edes (Town Attorney)
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WILI,AINGTCN, NC
JUN 14 2016

,5� go".
Fred J. Burns, Mayor
Richard Macartney, Mayor Pro Tern
Aldermen:
Don Harte
Joann M. McDermon
Richard Peters
Walter Yurek
Nature's Tranquil Beauty
June 13, 2016
Mr. Jason Dail
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Carin Z. Faulkner, MPA
Asst. Town Manager/Town Clerk
RE: Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach Regarding CAMA Permit
92-14 - RESUBMITTAL
Dear Mr. Dail,
Per your e-mail communication sent on June 6, 2016, the Town has provided the following additional
information to your office:
1. The signed certified mail receipts demonstrating that the adjacent riparian property owners
received notification of your planned development.
2. A completed MP-1 Form, Section 4. (0, which includes the existing "temporary containment
sand tube" as referred to in the original application.
3. A completed MP-1 Form, Section 5(a), with the use of the project as Public/Government.
4. A completed, signed, and dated MP-2 Form.
5. A check made payable to NCDEQ in the amount of $400.
Sincerely,
Stuart Turille
Town Manager
Cc:
Braxton Davis (Div. of Coastal Management)
Doug Huggett (Div. of Coastal Management)
Brian Edes (Town Attorney)
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTQN, NC
JUN 14 2016
2008 Loggerhead Court Phone [phone]
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460 ntbnc.org Toll Free: [phone]
Fax [phone]

Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach
Regarding CAMA Permit 92-14
Resubmittal
Prepared by:
The Town of North Topsail Beach
Submitted to:
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Wilmington Regional Office
June2016
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WILt,AINGTCN, NC
JUN 14 2016

Permit Modification Request for Town of North Topsail Beach
Regarding CAMA Permit 92-14
RESUBMISSION
Contents
FORMS
DCM MP-1 (Revised)
DCM MP-2
ATTACHMENT
Project Narrative
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Work Plat and Location Maps
Appendix B: Signed Ocean Hazard AEC Notice and Easements
Appendix C: Adjacent Riparian Landowner Notifications
Appendix D: Letter from Dr. William J. Cleary, P.G.
RECEIVED
JUN 21 2016
DCM- MHD CITY
RECEIVED
DCM WMAINGTCN, NC
JUN 14 2016

NC Division of Coastal Management
Major Permit Application Computer Sheet
AEC �� Fee Schedule 44,006
CDAITS SIPS ��%
�
Applicant:
o J tk
Agent/Contractor:
A —
Project Site County:
ea)
Staff:
District: Wilmington
Project Name:
ty
Rover File: �✓
Initial date of application submittal:
Date application "received as complete" in the Field office
Permit Authorization:
SITE DESCRIPTION/PERMIT INFORMATION
ORW: Ye No PNA: ❑Ye o
Photos Taken: Yes N
Setback Required (riparian): ❑Ye
Critical Habitat: LJYesNo LJNot Sure
15 foot waiver obtained: Yes No
azard Notification Returned:
Yes ❑No
SAV: ❑Yes No []Not Sure
Shell Bottom: Yes No Not
Temporary Impacts: es No
Sure
Sandbags: Yes ❑No El Sure
Did the land use classification cane
Mitigation Required (optional):
from county LUPAYes []No
❑Yes)2No
Moratorium Conditions:
Environmental Assessment Done:
Length of Shoreline:
Yes []No❑NA
❑Yess"A ❑NA
j�
Shellfish &ea Designation:
Project Description: (code)
Development Area: (code)
SECONDARY WATER CLASSIFICATION — OPTIONAL (choose MAX of 4)
Future Water Supply (FWS)
0 Nutrient Sensitive Waters (NSW)
Swamp Waters (SW)
High Quality Waters (HOW)
LJ Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW)
WETLANDS IMPACTED
❑ (404) Corp. of Engineers (Jurisdictional
❑ (LS) Sea lavender (Limonium sp.)
❑ (SS) Glasswort ( Salicomia sp.)
wetlands)
(CJ) Saw grass (Cladium jamaicense)
❑ (SA) Salt marsh cordgrass (Spartina
(SY) Safi reed grass (Spartina
altemifiora)
cynosuroides)
(DS) Salt or spike grass (Distichlis
(SC) Bullrush or three square (Scirpus
El (TY) Cattail (Typha sp.)
spicata)
sp.)
❑ (JR) Black needlerush (Juncus
❑ (SP) Salt/meadow grass (Spartina
roemerianus)
patens)
APPLICATION FEE
El No fee required - $0.00
❑ III(A) Private w/ D&F up to 1 acre; 3490
III(D) Priv. public or comm w/ D&F to 1
can be applied - $250
acre; 3490 cant be applied - $400
❑ Minor Modification to a CAMA Major
❑ Major Modification to a CAMA Major
❑ IV Any development involving D&F of
permit - $100
permit - $250
more than 1 acre - $475
❑ Permit Transfer - $100
III(B) Public or commercial w/ D&F to 1
Express Permit - $2000
e; 3490 can be applied - $400
❑ Major development extension request -
II. Public or commercial/no dredge
$100
and/or fill - $400
❑ 1. Private no dredge and/or fill - $250
❑ III(C) Priv. public or comm w /D&F to 1
acre; 3490 can be applied; DCM needs
DWQagreement -$400
DCM- MHD ` `_

Applicant:
Date:
Describe below the ACTIVITIES that have been applied for. All values should match the dimension order, and units of
measurement found in your Activities code sheet.
TYPE
REPLACE
Activity Name
Number
Choose
Choose
Dimension 1
Dimension 2
Dimension 3
Dimension 4
One
One
New Work
Replace
Man ❑
❑N
New Work Ll
Replace
Maini ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work 0
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
New Work
Replace
Maint ❑
❑ Y ❑ N
Describe below the HABITAT disturbances for the application. All values should match the name, and units of measurement
found in your Habitat code sheet.
TOTAL Sq. Ft.
FINAL Sq. Ft.
TOTAL Feet
FINAL Feet
(Applied for.
(Anticipated final
(Applied for.
(Anticipated final
DISTURB TYPE
Disturbance total
disturbance.
Disturbance
disturbance.
Habitat Name
Choose One
includes any
Excludes any
total includes
Excludes any
anticipated
restoration
any anticipated
restoration and/or
restoration or
and/or temp
restoration or
temp impact
temp impacts)
impact amount)
temp impacts)
amount
f I
�✓
Dredge ❑ Fill Both ❑ Other ❑
, Z
(>
Dredge ❑ ill Both ❑ Other ❑
2
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
Dredge ❑ Fill ❑ Both ❑ Other ❑
919-733-2293 :: 1-888-4RCOAST :: w .nccoastalmanaaement.net revised: 10112J06

� Tf (�� T"/" 'F, 0 / ai,) c" / C' )
■ Complete hems 1, 2, and 3.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
Neii,rz %5en (VAyne J f `(�I�fc rc
j �er�iiti4�U16S
1111111INIIIIIIIIIII I I IN 1111111111111111
9590 9401 0036 5071 9929 13
2. Article Number (barterer Mem Semce Al
7015 0920 0001 73A5 5151
PS Form W 1, April 2015 PSN 7530-02-000-9053
A. Signature
❑ Agent
X n aww.e
S. Received by (Punted Name) I C. Datp of Delivery
D. Is delivery address different from item 17 ❑ yea
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ NO
Service Type
❑ Primity Mall Eepress®
Adult Signature
❑ Registered Malty^
Adult Signature Reabicted Delivery
❑ Registered Mail Restricted
Lea fie Mel®
Delivery
Cedilcd Mai Restricted Delivery
D Return Receipt for
Collect on Delivery
Me¢tandise
CWlect on Del'lvery R.fticu d Deivery
D Slgnslure cmfrmstlon"
Insured Mail
D Signature confnnation
Insured Mail Restricled Delivery
neetdcted Delivery
Domestic Return Receipt
RECEIVED
JUN 2 2 2016
DCIW_ MHD CITY

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mallpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1. Article Addressed to:
III'IIII IIII IIIIII'llllllll III IIIII I IIII�I III .r
9590 9402 1529 5362 7369 44
7002 3150 0003 9918 2990
X
❑ Agent
D. Is delivery address different from Item 17 U Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below. ❑ No
3. Service Type
❑ priority Mall Express®
❑ Adult Signature
❑ Registered Malp"
� Signature Restricted Delivery
efied
13 Registered Mall Restricted
Melle
Da ery
❑ Certified Mail Restricted Delivery
a urn Recelpt for
❑ Collect on Delivery
Merchandise
❑ Collect on Delivery Restricted Delivery
❑ Signature Confinnatlone
I Insured Mail
❑ signature Confirmation
nau ecl Mall Restricted Delivery
Restricted Delivery

USP,$, ZRAGKQ�LGjt.,.
1111111
ilia
.,•h�-'`J_'ti111111
I FUiSrsPt-SClaas&s FMeaells Pald
Permd No. G-10
9590 9402 1529 5362 7369 44
United States
Postal Service
RECEIV E
AUG01N
pCM_ MHC
your name,

P
9 North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO: Heather Coats
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
FROM: Maria T. Dunn, Coastal Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Division
DATE: July 21, 2016
SUBJECT: CAMA Dredge/FiU permit Modification for Town of North Topsail Beach State Permit
No. 92-14, Onslow County, North Carolina.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) reviewed the permit
modification request with regard to impacts on fish and wildlife resources. The project site is located
between 2276 and 2382 New River Inlet Road adjacent the Atlantic Ocean and New River Inlet Our
comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Coastal Area Management Act (G.S. 113A-
100 through 113A-128), as amended, Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act, as amended, and the
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.).
The applicant wishes to extend the time allowed for the existing temporary construction containment
tubes (Geo-tubes) to 2022 or until a "long -teats solution to the erosion problem can be implemented".
This modification request comes after an already extended period of time, "March 31, 2016 or until the
Onslow County channel maintenance project is completed", was granted.
The NCWRC commented on the original permit application (Deaton 18 September 2014) as well as
during the first modification request (Dunn 29 May 2015). Our agency stated significant concerns during
both occasions. Significant impacts, even when viewed as a short -tam, temporary structure include:
• Hardening of the shoreline. RECEIVE I
• Degradation of adjacent shorelines due to increased erosion and scour; DCM WILMINGTOP
• Interference with natural sediment transport and barrier island migration
• Removal of sea turtle nesting habitat; JUL 2 12016
• Loss of shorebird foraging area;
Mailing Address: Habitat Conservation • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fan: [phone]
NC

CMDF mod—NT13 9244 page 2 July jI,2OI6.
Extending the length of time the structure remains continues the.impacts listed above as well as increases
the Town's dependency onihe structure. The structure would likely become -a permanent feature as it
becomes more difficult toremoVe or if it is covered dudng.p-e-rn'u"ttdd'nouiishmbiit projecn,or other
,processes. Allowing the structure to remain, even if covered with sand and vegetation, would
essentially establish a hardened shoreline with an;impenetrable barrier o nesting sea turtles:
Therefore, the NCWRC continues to have concem with the presence of the Geo-tubc and our comments
and ' positions from earlier correspondence remain. Copies of the two proviou&memo.randum's are included,
for record
We appreciate the opportunity toreviewnrid'doniffiefit on this parmitmodification. Ifyou.necd further
assistanceor additional information, please contact meat C252).949-3916 or at
marih.dtjnpQZ.ncwildliP6.orP

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission.
Gordon Myers, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
TO:: Jonathan Howell, Assistant Major Permits Processing Coordinator
NCDENR Division of Coastal Management
FROM: Shannon L. Deaton, Program Manager
Habitat Conservation Program y
DATE: September 18, 2014
SUBJECT: CAMA Dredge/Fill Permit Application for Town of North Topsail Beach,
Onslow County; North Carolina.
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission:(NCWRC) reviewed the
permit application with regard to impacts on fish and wildlife resources. The project site is
located between 2276 and 2382 New River Inlet Road adjacent the Atlantic Ocean and New.
River Inlet..0ur commenfs are provided inaccordancewith provisions of the Coastal Area
Management Act (G.& 113A-100 throughI DA428), as amended, Sections 401 and 404 of the
Clean Water Act, as amended, and the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (49 Stat 401, as.
amended; 16 U.S.C.661 et seq.).
The.applicant proposes to install a large sandbag (Geo-tube) revetment for approximately 1,450'
to protect residential structures located along the north end of Topsail Island near the New River
Inlet fronting the Atlantic Ocean', The Geo-tubes-have a dimension of 7.5'in heigliif and,45' in
diameter and are proposed to be filled.with approximately 10,000 cubic.yards of sand from a
nearby spit removing 12•to 15 inches of material1rom a 5 acre area.. This material will,be mixed
with water• rom.the surf zone, slurried, and placed in the Geo-tube. The structure will lie
approximately 20'below the normal high water level and 25' above the elevation of normal.high
water. This project area is included within the beach.nourishment,project covered under Permit
No. 79-10. The waters at the project location are classified:SA by the'Environmental
Management Commission'.
The NCWRC has reviewed the proposed project as a permanent hardening of the shoreline since
the project as proposed does not meet conditions for temporary sand bags of imminently
threatened structures. Sandbagging is intended as'a'temporary measure'to minimize erosion With
an altemate long term plan..Construction of a permaneni hardened shoreline interferes with
sediment transport, the natural migration of barrier islands, and increased.erosion or;scour to
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries i 1721 Mail Servico,Centcr' • Raleigh; NC 27699-1721
Telephone: (919)'707-0220 • Fax: '(919)'707-0028

CAMA Dredge/Fill Permit X Topsail Beach, Onslow.Co
adjacent properties: With these, review considerations, the placement of the Geo-tube will
significantly inhibit sea turtle access io the beach and remove nest laying'area. The filling of -the
Geo-tube using 5 acres of material from the nearby spit will have habitat impacts by removing
foraging and nesting habitats.for shorebirds ipcluding species such'as piping plover, red knot,
and several tem species.
Additionally, this project.is within.a.permitted beach nourishment project which does not allow
currentshoreline structuresibags to be covered. NCWRC worked with the Town of North
Topsail Beach to nunimize impacts for the nourishment project and ensured the permit's
conditions. addressed' our wildlife resource concerns. The addition of a1,450' Geo4ube within
this project boundary is contrary to NCWRC's minimization goals. Due to these concerns;.
NCWRC questions ifthe beach nourishmentpermit!(Permit19-10) will have reduced and altered
effectiveness if this. project is perriiitted as proposed.
As proposed, this project will have significant adverse -impacts to wildlife resources and we are
requesting that altematives be considered before thisprojecf ispermitted. The NCWRC does not
object to sandbagging of this 'area, in the traditional sense. as specified in;NC Division of Coastal
`Management (NCDCM) rule, but we do notview sand bag revetments as long term solutions to
control' erosion issues along ocean front beaches. Please see our attached recommendations for
the use of,,sand bags -when deemed necessaryby, NCDCM.
'Thank you for the opportunity to review antf commentonthis°permit application. Please feel free
to contact: Maria Dunn at [phone] or at maria.dunn(iDiicwildlife.orx if there are any.
additional questions or concerns.
2

PAT MCCRORY
Govemor
!,a
Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
June 17, 2016
MEMORANDUM:
TO:
Shannon Jenkins
NC DMF
Shellfish Sanitation Section
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Secretary
BRAXTON DAVIS
nimaor
FROM: Heather Coats, Assistant Major Permits Coordinator
NCDEQ — Division of Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilm., NC 28405 heather. coats(o)-ncdenrpov
Fax: [phone] (Courier 04-16-33)
SUBJECT: CAMA / Dredge & Fill Application Review
Applicant: Town of North Topsail Beach 92-14MM
Project Location: along the oceanfront beach between 2284 -2382 New River Inlet Rd.,
adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in North Topsail Beach, Onslow County
Proposed Project: to allow the existing temporary containment tube (Geotube) to remain in place
through 2022, or until a "long-term solution to the erosion problem can be
implemented", according to the applicant.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and
return this form to Heather Coats at the address above by July 10, 2016. If you have any
questions regarding the proposed project, contact Jason Dail at [phone] when
appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes
are incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
Pot 5L 61^NOv T<tir%^9
SIGNED DATE
Nothing Compares�.�
State of Noah Caolim, I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Ext, Wilmington, NC 28405
910-796-7215
4 _17-16
RECEIVED
JUN 2 S 2016
DCM- ,.MHD CITY

Coastal Management
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
July 26, 2016
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Town of North Topsail Beach
c/o Stuart Turille
2008 Loggerhead Court
North Topsail Beach, NC 28460
Dear Mr. Turille:
PAT MCCRORY
c,,,,-,ra
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
Srrntmy
BRAXTON DAVIS
Dire,,,,
This letter is in response to your application for a major modification to permit no. 92-14 under the
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA), in which authorization was requested to allow the existing
temporary construction containment tubes, as well as associated scour aprons and "chock tubes",
located between 2284-2382 New River Inlet Road, to remain in place for an extended period of time.
Processing of the application, which was received as complete by the Division of Coastal
Management's (DCM) Wilmington Regional Office on June 14, 2016, is now complete. Based on
the state's review, the Division of Coastal Management has made the following findings:
1) The Town of North Topsail Beach was issued emergency CAMA Major Permit No. 92-
14 on October 24, 2014 to allow for the construction of a 20' x 6' sandbag revetment at
the subject property. CAMA Major Permit No. 92-14 was amended by way of a
variance granted by the Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) on November 26, 2014
to allow for the construction of a 45' x 12' sandbag revetment.
2) Immediately prior to the issuance of the November 26th, 2014 Major Modification to
CAMA Major Permit 92-14, the Town requested permission to install temporary
construction containment tubes, and associated scour aprons and chock tubes seaward of
the alignment of the sand bag revetment. The purpose of the temporary construction
containment tubes was to "allow for a safer work environment landward of the tube,
which will expedite the installation of the sand bag revetment." The Town further stated
in a letter dated November 25, 2015, "Upon completion of the project, the temporary
containment tube will be removed".
3) The temporary construction containment tube, as well as associated scour aprons and
chock tubes, were not determined by the Division to constitute an additional
erosion control response, and therefore could be permitted, provided that a) structures
were designed in a manner that served only as a temporary construction methodology,
and b) that a commitment was received from the Town stating that the temporary
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue I Morehead City, NC 28557
252-808-2808 1252-247-3330 (fax)
AakaMWW—` VT.Z t I,I ^r.. - Jr., .:. x r

North Topsail Beach
July 26, 2016
Page 2
construction containment tubes, scour aprons and chock tubes would be removed in their
entirety either immediately upon project completion, or by May 21, 2015, whichever is
sooner.
4) On November 26, 2014, a Major Modification to CAMA Permit No. 92-14 was issued.
The Major Modification included the following conditions:
11) In accordance with commitments made by the permittee, the authorized
temporary construction containment tube used to assist in the safe
construction of the authorized temporary sand bag revetment shall be
removed in its entirety either immediately upon project completion, or by
May 21, 2015, whichever is sooner. Additionally, should the Division of
Coastal Management determine that the temporary construction containment
tubes are no longer needed or are no longer serving their intended purpose of
providing a safe work environment landward of the tubes, the tubes shall be
removed immediately upon written notification by the Division.
13) The scour apron and "chock" tubes shall extend no further oceanward
than the oceanward toe of the temporary construction containment tube. All
portions of the scour apron and chock tubes located oceanward of the
temporary sandbag revetment shall be removed in their entirety at the same
time as the associated temporary construction containment tubes.
5) OnTebruary 24, 2015, the Division received notice from the Town's consultant that
construction of the sand bag revetment was complete.
6) On February 27, 2015, the Division formally requested from the Town a plan for the
removal of the temporary construction containment tubes, scour aprons and chock tubes.
7) Based upon the failure of the Town to proceed with the development and
implementation of a removal plan for these structures, the Division issued a Notice of
Violation (NOV) to the Town on March 26, 2015. During settlement negotiations
relating to the NOV, the Town was given the option to apply for a Major Modification
to Permit No. 92-14, requesting permission to leave the temporary construction
containment tubes, scour aprons and chock tubes in place for an extended period of time.
State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality I Coastal Management
1367 US Hwy 17 South I Elizabeth City, NC 27909
252-264-3901

U.S. Postal Service..,
CERTIFIED MAIL., RECEIPT
(Domestic Mail OnIV: No Insurance Coverage
PS Form 3800, June 2002 See Reverse for Instructions

Certified Mail Provides:
■ Certified
mailing receipt fe&&,et/l zooz eunr'ooee vans sd
■ A unique Identifier for your mallplece
■ A record of delivery kept by the Postal Service for two years
Important Reminders:
■ Certified Mail may ONLY be combined with First -Class Mail® orPriority Made.
■ Certified Mal is not available for any class of International mait.
■ NO INSURANCE COVERAGE IS PROVIDED with Cerjifiad Mail. For
valuables, please consider Insured or Registered Mail. /y
is For an additional fee, a Return Receippt may be requested to provide proof of
delivery. To obtain Return Receipt service, please complete and attach a Retum
Receipt (PS Form 3811) to the article and add applicable postage to cover the
fee. Endorse mailpieoe."Return Receipt Requested". To receive a fee waiver for
a duplicate return receipt, a USPS® postmark on your Certified Mail receipt is
required.
■ For an additional fee, delivery may be restricted to the addressee or
addressee's authorized agent. Advise the clerk or mark the mallplece with the
endorsement "Restricted Delivery'.
is If a postmark on the Certified Mail receipt is deslred, please present the artl-
cle at the post office for postmarking. If a postmark on the Certified Mall
receipt is not needed, detach and affix label with postage and mail.
IMPORTANT: Save this receipt and present it when making an inquiry.
Internet access to delivery Information Is not available on mall
addressed to APOs and FPOs.