19890220 Ver al_Complete File_20100726

ST Tt
?(,Y? W?fw 1v
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
JAMES G. MARTIN June 21, 1989
GOVERNOR
JAMES E. HARRINGTON
SECRETARY
Mr. R. Paul Wilms, Director All G 1939
Environmental Management Division
NRCD, Archdale Building Y^J,, ; ?r
512 N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687,,._
Dear Mr. Wilms:
? r ? >>
_. J?4
Jul,, so ' M9
W,1111ISTRATIVE SERVICES
RUO. ZCE MAIJAGEMEI11
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
GEORGE E. WELLS, P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
SUBJECT: State Environmental Assessment.for NC 12 - Proposed Dune Reinforcement
South of Oregon Inlet
Attached is a copy of the State Environmental Assessment for the subject proposed
highway improvement. Should comments received on the Environmental Assessment
demonstrate a need.for preparing a Draft Environmental Impact Statement you will
be contacted as part of our scoping process.
Copies of this Assessment are being submitted to the State Clearinghouse, area-
wide planrdng agencies and Dare County officials.
Please note that U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service and North Carolina Coastal
Management Act Permits will be required as noted in the report.
Any comment you have concerning the Environmental Assessment should be forwarded
to:
Mr. J. M. Greenhill, P. E.
Manager of Planning and Research Branch
N. C. Division of Highways
P. 0. Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Your comments should be received by August 1, 1989. If no comments are re-
ceived by that date we will assume you have none.
Sincerely,
9.-X. AWM441
M. Greenhill, P. E.
Manager of Planning and Research Branch
MTS/plr
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
f
}
NC 12
Proposed Dune Reinforcement South of Oregon Inlet
Federal-Aid Secondary Route Number RS-2358
M-192
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Division of Highways
In Compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
For further information contact:
Mr. J. M. Greenhill, P. E., Manager
Planning and Research Branch
NCDOT Division of*Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Telephone [phone]
APPROVED:
Da, a J. enh 11 , P. E.
M Hager Planning and Research Branch, NCDOT
Y ,
NC 12
Proposed Dune Reinforcement South of
Federal-Aid Secondary Route Number
Oregon Inlet
RS-2358
11-192
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
May, 1989
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Research Branch By:
Michael T. S n ley
Special Proj cts Engineer-Research ??.???`?""'' ?•,,
? SEAL ?
M. P. Strong, P. E 5848 =
Highway Research Engineer
.,4 : PAtQtcv? ,?.
SUMMARY
Environmental Assessment
Prepared by the Planning and Research Branch,
Division of Highways
North Carolina Department of Transportation
1. Description of Proposed Action - The North Carolina Department of
Transportation proposes to place hydraulically filled sandbags
along seven hundred (700) linear feet of shoreline, adjacent to
NC 12, approximately one mile south of the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge
over Oregon Inlet. This construction is intended to stabilize the
primary dune at that location and thus prevent further washing over
of NC 12 by the Atlantic Ocean. The project location is shown in
Figure 1.
The 2' x 5' x 10' sandbags will be stacked in a three-two-one
configuration at the base of the dune, as shown in the cross section
in Figure 2. The sandbags will receive a minimum eighteen-inch sand
cover, restoring the dune to a height approximately ten to twelve
feet above the roadway surface.
The project is entirely contained within the Pea Island Nation-
al Wildlife Refuge, which encompasses the entire width of Pea Island
frorp Oregon Inlet to a point approximately seventeen miles south of
the Bonner Bridge. Since the project is to be constructed entirely
with State funds, the evaluation requirements mandated by Section
4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act do not apply to this
project. An easement special use permit is, however, being sought
from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
2. Environmental Impacts - Beneficial primary impacts include the
stabilization of the weakened dune structure at the project location
and the protection of the vital transportation link between the
barrier island communities located to the south of the project and
the primary mainland access points to the north.
Adverse primary impacts are expected to be negligible.
3. Coordination With Other Agencies - The project has been coordinated
with the North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Commun-
ity Development, Division of Coastal Management, and the U. S.
Fish and Wildlife Service.
4. Actions Required b Other Agencies - A Coastal Area Management Act
CAMA permit is required for this project, and application for
such has been made to the Division of Coastal Management. Applica-
tion for an easement has been made to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
6. Additional Information - For further information concerning the
propose project, t e following individual may be contacted:
Mr. J. M..Greenhill, P. E., Manager
Planning and Research Branch
NCDOT Division of Highways
Post Office Box 25201
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
Telephone [phone]
Environmental Assessment
NC 12
Proposed Dune Reinforcement South of Oregon Inlet
Federal-Aid Secondary Route Number RS-2358
I. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT
A.
B.
Summary of Proposed Improvements
The North Carolina Department of Transportation, Division of
Highways (NCDOT) proposes to place hydraulically filled sandbags
along seven hundred (700) linear feet of shoreline, adjacent to
NC 12, approximately one mile south of the Herbert C. Bonner Bridge
over Oregon Inlet. These sandbags would be placed in a three-two-
one tiered configuration and covered with sand, to provide for
reinforcement of the dune separating NC 12 and the Atlantic Ocean.
The construction sequence would consist of site preparation,
placement of the bags and sand cover, preparation of a natural
grade to the roadway on the landward side of the dune, planting of
vegetation along the dune, and the erection of sand fencing tying
in to the adjacent dune at either end of the project.
Funding and Scheduling
Total construction costs for the proposed project are estimated
to be $75,000. The North Carolina Board of Transportation has
approved funding in this amount to cover the construction costs.
These funds were allocated from the "Emergencies, Unforeseen Events
and Public Service Roads" fund.
Construction is anticipated to begin in August 1989. All
required permit requests have been submitted and are currently
awaiting action.
II. NEED FOR PROPOSED PROJECT
NC 12 traverses the length of the barrier island between Oregon
and Hatteras Inlets, connecting a number of coastal communities and
providing access to Cape Hatteras National Seashore, the Cape
Hatteras Lighthouse and Pea Island National Wildlife Refuge.
Average daily traffic on NC 12 at Oregon Inlet during 1988 was 3200
vehicles, with peak traffic in summer months approaching 10,000
vehicles per day. The Herbert C. Bonner Bridge, conveying NC 12
over Oregon Inlet, provides the only highway link between the
barrier island and the mainland. A ferry service operates at the
southwest end of the barrier island, providing a link to neighboring
Ocracoke Island. Approximately 5000 persons reside on the island,
and a much larger number visit the island during the year. NC 12
constitutes the sole means of access to the island by motor vehicle.
This part of the North Carolina coast is subject during winter
months to severe storms which often result in extensive erosion
damage to the shoreline. At the location of the proposed project,
the dune ridge separating NC 12 from the Atlantic Ocean has experi-
enced substantial deterioration, to the point that there is a
comparatively flat traverse from the ocean to the roadway. The
ocean has washed over the roadway from time to time, during recent
storms. Continued erosion and storm damage threaten to undermine
the roadway, thus severing the critical highway link between the
communities to the south and the mainland.
III. ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
A. Do Nothing
If no remedial measures are taken to stabilize the dune at the
project location, future storms will result in episodes of ocean
water encroachment, during which the highway would be rendered
impassible. In all likelihood, the highway would remain impassible
until such time as maintenance crews were able to clear the roadway
of sand and debris and repair any damage. Continued episodes of
roadway submergence over time will result in the eventual undermin-
ing of the roadway, permanently severing the highway link between
the barrier island and the mainland. The "do-nothing" alternative
is therefore considered unacceptable.
B. Postponement
Even if remedial measures are eventually taken in time to
prevent destruction of the roadway, isolated occurrences of ocean
encroachment would nevertheless close the road for periods of time,
causing severe inconvenience to island residents, and causing
further weakening of the roadway structure. Thus the postponement
alternative is likewise considered unacceptable.
C. Alternative Modes of Transportation
Alternative transportation modes either do not exist or are
impractical for accommodating the travel needs of those who travel
NC 12. Although a ferry is available at the south end of the
island, it is incapable of handling the volume of traffic that
would result from the severing of NC 12 at the north end of the
island. Even if an adequate level of service could be provided,
such service would be very costly and the resulting travel delay of
several hours and more than one hundred miles would be totally
unacceptable to motorists.
D. Construction Alternatives
Due to the critical need for near-term remedial action at the
project location, and the comparatively high cost and construction
time requirements of feasible alternatives to the proposed project,
none are being considered.
V. COORDINATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES
The North Carolina Department of Natural Resources and Commu-
nity Development, Division of Coastal Management has advised that a
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) permit will be required for the
proposed project. Application for such permit has been made by the
NCDOT, but no action has been taken to date. It is anticipated that
a variance may be required, due to the fact that the distance be-
tween the structure to be protected (i.e. the roadway) and the per-
ceived hazard (i.e. the ocean) exceeds the maximum of twenty feet
that is allowed by CAMA regulations.
A request for a right-of-way easement special use permit has
been submitted to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service by
the NCDOT. No action has been taken to date on this request.
FIGURE is LOCATION MAP

HA NAPONAL
2`9
jtt. HowC?ra?i III 7 D I 1
D ?''? SandaAint

Zult

No
thorn
1 ?'troras

Kitsy I
'Hark ,? ery,•,..t a.RU a,.a..

Colintt ill Devil Hills
a. a
15
158 . a.b.
/ oua !. R.r S
/H
!1 aWd> ,,,, a,•„Hats Ham
astaes 'n row
a.gan•r a.•.• a««.
a P9 lt.abM M v«..l

Wnn zsa
a w 6 slabom
?

CAPE HATTERAS NATIONAL
r?;
SEASHORE Rt CREATION AREA
G0?
P
N
! v Mo ...? '1`
? ?aoat
'w,nc.Gear
?-
fHWSf on /n/d
D A R E
I : riot l . tSt.Np

I .r/oNA, Il
Stumpy wnoua 1

P!
1 It

I
-?
IRodantna
?,`waves
f 6a g Sh•d!r Salvo

i

` I Aron
It p
4 Z
s N
Bustq?
I ucrmwuSf
???
\ Hatlara F
{
r
?i. j
CAPE MAmu3
(
`
Hatteras WEE
AREA
ENLARGED
ABOVE
O
;T PEA
ISLAND " ::
rx'?, J i
ISLAND
WILDLIFE
NATIONAL
REFUGE
r
DARE COUNTY
NORTH CAROLINA
r
.
ID
a
a
y
V
O
W
v
N
J
_o
0
N
t
O
J
r
=?I
? I
Q ?p
?a
1Q
X?
w >v
N

D

? Yl

?
W

ro
a.. ? N Z
O
? F
0
Ql
t
Q
.t
N
V
Z
ly,
Q

h)
n
a?
U
?'' '•? DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
WATER QUALITY SECTION
Comments concerning an application.for State Federal CAMA Permit(s) from
U
A. PERMIT:
This office cannot comment on this project until after the close of the Section
401 Certification Public Comments Period.
X This office has no objection to the issuance of the permit(s) for the proposed
project with the following conditions:
_ That the activity be conducted in such a manner as to prevent significant
increases in turbidity outside the area of construction or construction-
related discharge (increases of 25 NTU's or less are not considered
significant).
That the instream turbidity not be increased by more than 50 NTU's as a
result of the proposed activity after a reasonable opportunity for dilu-
tion and mixture. -
That turbidity levels in shall not be increased
by more than 10 NTU's as a result of the proposed activity after a reason-
able opportunity for dilution and mixture.
B. CERTIFICATION STATUS:
i
N\ Certification is not required
for this project.
Certification is required for
this project. Such action to
process the certification has
been initiated. Proposed
Certification will be acted on
or after
The proposed project is certified
under Gen eral Certification
A) No. 1179 issued on January 25, D) No. 1431 issued on October 16,
1977, for sewer line construction 1980, for boat ramp construction.
B) No. 1272 issued on November 10, E) No. 1664 issued on September 8,
1978, for bulkhead construction. 1983, for Rip-Rap Placement.
C) No. 1273 issued on November 10, F) No. 1665 issued on September 19,
1978, for discharges of liquid 1983, for incidental bridge
effluent from diked upland disposal `construction.
areas.

WATER QUALITY SECTION
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

L?J . •1? 3Il ,v?
u
1989
" ?c I'vED
?.t
PO,"'M(.'; I i ! DFC ilia IEQ P CO 0014-
NO COUNTY, DAQ?' RPOTON. W,
ISSUE: Y RECEIVED: 09060!?
DENY? INITIAL REPORT:
PEA ISLAND NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, i MILE SOUTH O OREGON

i':O1:7IFS : W;°iRO....;...1: N TL?r••il_..-M L! ;.'....'i:)E".i'.i
MEMORANDUM
TO: DEBORAH SAWYER
FROM: T. Gray Hauser, Jr.
SUBJECT: APPLICATION FOR CAMA MAJOR PERMIT AND/OR
DREDGE AND FILL PERMIT
DATE: June 2, 1989
??EIV
tiara e
"D- v Fic'?
JU?'J 5 fyQB
Attached is an application by N.C. D.O.T. PEA ISLAND
which was received by me on 5/11/89 I am considering
this application complete, have acknowledged receipt, and have
begun processing.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me.

/yll
Enclosures
OFFICE OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT Lat:35045116"
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT Long:75030144"
1. APPLICANT'S NAME N.C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
2 LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE N.C. 12, Pea Island National Wildlife
Refuge, Dare County, 1 mile south of Oregon Inlet. (no aerial photo
available
3_ INVESTIGATION TYPE: DREDGE & FILL CA4A X
4. INVESTIGATIVE F
(A) DATES OF SITE VISIT
(B) WAS APPLICANT PRESENT
A
5/11/89 5/24/89
no
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: APPLICATION RECEIVED 5/11/89
OFFICE Elizabeth City
6 SITE DESCRIPTION: (A) LOCAL LAND USE PLAN Dare County
LAND CLASSIFICATION FROM LUP conservation
DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS IDENTIFIED IN LUP
"Development can not destroy or irretrievably alter frontal dunes or
beaches; nor significantly affect the quality or reduce the value of
public park, game lands, sanctuaries or other non-intensive recreation
areas".
(B) AEC(S) INVOLVED: OCEAN HAZARD X ESTUARINE SHORELINE
COASTAL WETLANDS PUBLIC TRUST WATERS
ESTUARINE WATERS OTHER
(C) WATER DEPENDENT: YES NO X OTHER
(D) INTENDED USE: PUBLIC X PRIVATE COM-TERCIAL
E) TYPE OF W.
PLANNED
(F) TYPE OF STRUCTURES: EXISTING N/A
PLANNED
(G) ESTIMATED ANNUAL RATE OF EROSION 12-141SOURCE DCM small scale
map, page 11 of 14
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: AREA
(A) VEGETATED WETLANDS DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(B) NON-VEGETATED WETLANDS:
(C) OTHER: sandbagged
frontal dune 10,500 sq. ft.
(D) TOTAL AREA DISTURBED: 10,500 sq. ft.
8 PROJECT SUMMARY- Applicant proposes to construct a wall of
sandbags 6 ft. high, 15 ft. wide at the base and 700 ft. long along
the ocean front The sandbags would be placed against the frontal
dune escarpment and covered with sand.
WATER TREATMENT: EXISTING N/A
N. C. D.O.T.
BIO REPORT
PAGE 2
SITE EVALUATION
The applicant proposes to harden the seaward: face of the
frontal dune with a wall of sandbags stacked in pyramid fashion.
The sandbags (2' X 5' X 101) would be stacked six feet high, with
a 15 foot-wide base, along 700 feet of shoreline. The bags would
then be covered with a minimum of 18 inches of sand.
The site for the proposed project is a frontal dune
relatively close to NC 12 within the Pea Island NWR, about 1.2
miles south of Oregon Inlet. The dune line is very sparsely
vegetated with American beach grass (Ammophila breviligulata).
The low elevation of the frontal dune subjects this area to storm
overwash. Sand is migrating from the dune across N.C. 12.
The seaward toe of the frontal dune is about 180 feet
landward of the mean high tide level. The beach is thus quite
broad in this area, with a long depression and tidal pool running
parallel to the beach, about 60 feet seaward of the frontal dune.
ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
The proposed sandbag wall or bulkhead is to be covered with
at least 18 inches of sand. This sand cover will be difficult,
if not impossible, to maintain. An exposed line of sandbags is
to be expected, damaging the aesthetic value of this natural,
undeveloped beach.
The sandbag bulkhead will reflect the energy of storm waves,
resulting in accelerated beach erosion. Beach erosion will
steepen the offshore profile, increasing the energy and erosive
power of storm waves striking the shoreline. Usually longshore
currents increase along a hardened shoreline, also accelerating
beach erosion. This shoreline is a popular recreational area for
surfing. Alterations to the beach profile and wave action will
impact the recreational value of this area.
A sandbag bulkhead would block the exchange of sand between
the dune and beach. This would prevent the natural rebuilding of
the beach and dunes during fair weather following storm erosion.
Shoreline erosion may worsen at the ends of the sandbag wall,
where wave energy will be increased.
N. C. D.O.T.
BIO REPORT
PAGE 3
In the late 1970's the National Park Service abandoned the
maintenance and stabilization of high artificial dunes because
they adversely impacted the entire island profile from ocean to
sound. The steep sound-side profile created by the artificial
dunes reduced the amount of coastal marsh.
While this section of shoreline is managed by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, it is contiguous with the Cape Hatteras
National Seashore. Shoreline management should be consistent on
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Park Service lands on
the Outer Banks. The N.C. Department of Transportation has
applied to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for a special use
permit for this project.
CAMA REVIEW
The proposed development is inconsistent with specific use
standards for ocean shoreline erosion control specified in T15
NCAC 07H .0308. Section .0308(a)(1)(A) states that beach
nourishment and relocation are the preferred erosion control
measures, and comprehensive plans shall be preferred over small
scale methods. The proposal is a small scale hardening of the
shoreline. Section .0308(a)(2) allows the use of sandbag
bulkheads on a temporary basis if a structure is imminently
threatened, i.e. within 20 feet of the erosion scarp. The
seaward edge of the pavement is 50 to 80 feet from the erosion
escarpment. While all sandbag measures are temporary since they
eventually fail, this application does not propose a time limit
on their placement. Section .0308(b)(2) states that frontal
dunes shall not be broadened or extended in a oceanward direction
except for beach nourishment or in an emergency. While this
section of road requires frequent maintenance and sand removal,
it is not imminently threatened as defined in State regulations.
Submitted by: T. Gray Hauser, Jr ? i"-
Date: June 2, 1989
!'least: type or print. l:arciully d.cribc all an- .
ticipated development activities, including cons
tionn, excavation, filling, paving, land clearing, a
stormwater control. If the requested information
not relevant to your project, write NIA (not ap- ??'1Y i n
plicable). Items 1-4 and 8-9 must be completed fo
all projects.
«"?fl-r- .'f?4?iT•?S'S ?a.YYT + ?uAiA a.
North Carolina Department of Transportation b.
a. Name L. R. Goode, Ph.D., PE,
Address P. 0. Box 25201.
City _ Raleigh . State NC
Zip 27611 Day phone _ 733-2031
Landowner or X_ Authorized agent
b. Project name (if any) N/A
c. If the applicant is not the landowner, also give
the owner's name and address.

4

a. Street address or secondary road number
b. City, town, community, or landmark
-Pen Trland National Wildlife Refuge
c. County Dare
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? No
e. Name of body of water nearest project
Atlantic Ocean
a. Describe all development activities you propose
(for example, building a home, motel, marina,
bulkhead, or pier).
Proposed Placement of Hydraulically
Filled Sandbags for Dune Stabilization
One Mile South of Oregon Inlet Bridge
If you plan to build a marina, also complete
and attach Form DCM-MP-2.
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an ex-
isting project, new work, or both?
une Protection
c. Will the project be for community, private, or
commercial use?
Community
Size of entire tract N/A
Size of individual lot(s) N/A
Elevation of tract above mean sea level or Na-
tional Geodetic Vertical Datum N/A
Soil type(s) and texture(s) of tract Sand
c.
d.
c. Vegetation on tract None; Bare Sand
f. Man-made features now on tract tJ/A
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan Classifica-
tion of the site? (Consult the local land use
plan.)
Conservation Transitional
Developed Communitl,
Rural R ae Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
N/A
i. How are adjacent waters classified? N/A
j. Has a professional archaeological survey been
carried out for the tract? No _
If so, by whom? _ N/A _
wo_
Complete this section if the project includes any
upland development:
a. Type and number of buildings, facilities, or
structures proposed N/A
b. Number of lots or parcels.- N/A -
c. Density (Give the number of residential units
and the units per acre.) N/A
d. Size of area to be graded or disturbed N/A
e. If the proposed project will disturb more than
one acre of land, the Division of Land
Resources must receive an erosion and sedimen-
tation control plan at least 30 days before land
disturbing activity begins. If applicable, has a
sedimentation and erosion control plan been
submitted to the Division of Land Resources?
N/A
f. Give the percentage of the tract within 75-feet
of mean high water to be covered by im
permeable surfaces, such as pavement,
buildings, or rooftops.- N/A
d. LUcscrilu- the manned use of rho nroirrr
asphalt, or concrete, to be used for paved
surfaces. N/A
h_ If applicable, has a stormwater management
plan been submitted to the Division of En-
vironmental Management? N/A
i. Describe proposed sewage disposal and/or waste
water treatment facilities. N/A
j. Have these- facilities received state or local
approval? N/A
k. Describe existing treatment facilities.
N/A
1. Describe location and type of di-,charges to
waters of the state (for examplersurface runoff,
sanitary wastewater, industrial/commercial
effluent, or "wash down"). N/A
m. Water supply source N/A
n. If the project is oceanfront development,
describe the steps that will be taken to main-
Lain established public beach accessways or pro-
vide new access. N/A__
o. If the project is on the oceanfront, what will
be the elevation above mean sea level of the
first habitable floor? N/A
a. Describe below the purpose of proposed excava-
tion or fill activities (excluding bulkheads,
which are covered in Section 7).
Length Width Depth
Access channel
(MLW) or (NWL)
Boat basin
Other (break-
water, pig
b=<==p,
may)
Fill placed in
wetland or below
MHW
Upland fill
areas
N/A
N/A
+700' 15' 6'
N/A
N/A
below water level in\ cubic .yards NIA
c. Type of material Sand _
d. Does the area to be excavated include marsh-
land, swamps, or other-wedands7 No
e. High ground excavation, in cubic yards 400 e.y.
f. Dimensions of spoil disposal area N/A
g. Location of spoil disposal area N/A
h. Do you claim title to the disposal area? N/A
If not, attach a letter. granting permission from
the owner.
i. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance?/. N/A
If so, where? N/A
j. Does the disposal area include any marshland,
swamplland,'or water areas? N/A
k. Will the fill material be placed below mean
high water? -No
1. Amount of fill in cubic yards MIA
m. Type of fill material N/A
n. Source of fill material N/A
o. Will fill material be placed on marsh or other
wetlands? No
p. Dimensions of the wetland to be filled N/A
q. How will excavated or fill material be kept on
site and erosion controlled? N/A
r. What type of construction equipment will be
used (for example, dragline, backhoe, or
hydraulic dredge)? Backhoe and
Hydraulic Pump-
s. Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equip-
ment to the project site?_I12- If yes, explain
the steps that will be taken to lessen en-
vironmental impacts.
Sandbags
a. Length of hmMc44%9,wcv}p +700'
b. Average distance watcrward of mean high water
or normal water level +180
c. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months,
in feet N/A .
d. Type of bulkhead material Sandbags
e. Amount of fill, in cubic yards, to be placed
below mean high water N/A
f. Type of fill material Sand
2
3 Y
4c, ? OEM- WmEl Imam
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims
title to the affected property. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then for-
ward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permis-
sion from the owner to cant' out the project.
An accurate work plat (including plan view and
cross sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on 8 ;1 x I1 white paper. (Refer to Coastal
Resources Commission Rule 71.0203 for a detailed
description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if 16
high quality copies are provided by the applicant.
(Contact the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regard-
ing that agency's use of larger drawings.) A site or
location map is a part of plat regiuirements and it
must be sufficiently detailed to guide agency per-
sonnel unfamiliar with the area to the site. Include
county road (SR) numbers, landmarks, and the like.
A stormwater management plan, if applicable, that
may have been developed in consultation with the
Division of Environmental Management.
A list of the names and complete addresses of the
adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners. These
individuals have 30 days in which to submit com-
ments on the proposed project to the Division of
Coastal' Management. The applicant must advise
the adjacent landowners of this opportunity by sen-
ding a copy of the permit application to them by
registered or certified mail. This notification is re-
quired by G.S. 113-229(d).
Name U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service
Address Dept. of Interior
Name
Address
Name_
Address
A list of previous state or federal permits issued
_ k on the project tract. Include permit
RE _E , permittee, and issuing dates.
MNYIT,
Ot i,AV
for $100 made payable to the Depart-
4atural Resources and Community
icnt to cover the costs of processing the
application.
A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in ocean-
front and inlet areas. .
A statement on the use of public funds. If the
project involves the expenditure of public funds, at-
tach a statement documenting compliance with the
North Carolina Environmental Policy Act
(N.C.G.S. 113A-1 to 10).

Any permit issued in response to this application
will allow only the development described in the
application. The project will be subject to condi-
tions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the pro-
posed activity complies with the State of North
Carolina's approved Coastal Management. Program
and will be conducted in a manner consistent with
such program.
I further 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 ap-
plication and follow-up monitoring of project.
This is the 8 day of.
19_.
X
Landowner or oriz agent }
Send the completed application materials to'th.e
Division of Coastal Management Office nearest you
and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. See the
map on the inside front cover for the appropriate
DCM office and addresses and phone number.*'
3
rgro

? i
v
?\-S,outh Point
/.• ?.
7. 1
n? oar.rnN I? , T
• ;LIVI'MAT S1 TION
. Sri y • ? r-• ? \\ ? \
? Area •? ?•.. ? ?_ '
.'i1 I ti C? \ nL T
Sh I i tl I .J?
"GI
- 4 7'30"
31rA
1
\ a^59
X95.9 ,
0 a I '` % r \
Area
t2 r r t, vh\ 3157nm- N.
11 E- U
32130" Ia rv
51 ME It ISLAND) 35o4
• • Her mon._ncnl nn e! c Hurt, Ar ip N, V.nf..N l?-.IPA] J
5935 111 NW V WWA,&7mr t.,,
ti+'. y ?5,lnnnm E. 75?"3 Q'
USCRGS T-9278
ROAD CLASSIFICATION
Heavy-duty......_._._ .....?.,,,??.... Light-duty
I Medium•duty:...._ Unimproved dirt
I II C t?nnlr ,':Lily f'niil,?

A••
1 HerLa •Ht.?
1 . )/ ?La-......1 r, n.° ?rlll rSrl •t '• ..p....a L..A ..,...
?. 1.;.
I++fdcMon Si ,, + }rKlu utrd uluf
,
t lull l endl nu NO r ...,,Reps Iles r., J
s EA --
ll,./I lluy MIShOtf "1S
Her.IuuIIdllrl,t
?rMeclers I ' r f 7u ???' ?Whslthont
?AAA???I[II 1 [efl M/uns 1 n 1!_
1Pltaiinl Grort ulumDn+ y?nI f
3 G1 1 I / llle Huhol t
eilortr $cupptr G
woodlt ' J "'°"' ?'iy [ loon
none 1`1el1Zf /
I ?] e3. p I 11 et.:?.. ??'ost/?E lsuNo
1,
1 Opel cherry a 91
FI mouth 1 wo.chtse,-
Y Esprit Pan .• I I
• ?a....ra ha. Landing I urdnno?sf CAru.•n bdl•I
WASHINGTON ?P.n•y...3rq .I 1 D A R. E PROJECT'
I'nr4n Ld[,• Vu ISLI 5* ,t r
99
Is T Y R R E L L I' ](' ?bal011Al :[ C
11 Wenona I I Stumpf 1\? nPnll
I'r ny-l l?,I[r ? ? _ Gum Nest Pmnl \grurd
I /.ul,•
tl `?
Kit ltlmr JJJ I s-4,
C?Nw 43 15 11 I I 'IJ'f Rodsntht
r (1D1 1 i
Pmlteo H Y D si wires
,LttrhrOle ,.1.11 91 ? r• lu•ySA.wlh '••
`7! ? $1110
]LI ' ? I IAll hl?ld .l
1'I It haven
J -
? cls) ?`L,rranu,.[rrrl?L`-? Inpldneld `?' ti ? 3)
.. n S III.. ....'u _. .. I'.-... _..... ..
SCA1I I)1 MIIIS nHI IIKII[l)IIAI S AI•PROX 11 MII[S
fl }? III /II 111 111 /N Sr,A1 I OI NII nMt 11113 [SRI IW.1111r I Al S API•Inla 71 kN IIMf II1S I
pall I MIll 1%IIJIIAI III 1141 NIInM1111%
CAPE 11A1T[RAS NATIONAL
MASI" IKaDOUAa7ER1 ? .
.? r Il•••.,.
^?(?'A??? - I.. 1/ PEA .•I nstl aW wu.l?NU
"? I P '.3 \ 171 I°? ?1 VI '•.w.NA
ISLAND CE
C)
y. Hs,. , ufi IJ 1 /ol.yu, 61.r c G. Silo, ?I.I 5 ?.. `. ` ..
CAPE HATTERAS NATIONAL ??i ?1/ 1}1_? f r 2?'
?-J \\t, ,!J)\? 1 SEASHORE RECREATION AREA ?/1 I''f?'/}'y?"? •r ;I
PROJECT 'I
?.? I?& !IIAND s 1. E
PEA ISLAND NATIONAL WILDLIFE I
+cfa3E • 1
r. 1.101 . ?, •?-? ? •
• of c?a`.'• ; `?,?) i • j
?- 3
?J I ` `elo ? ' / 1
SCALE
1 t MILLS I
}.II.Nk11?F[ I I I 1
N.C. DEPT. OF. 'I'RANSPORTATION
DIVISION UF HIGHWAYS
rte. CC
t?vlh DAi1L C'Uum
? PROPOSED 1'I,ACli6II:N"r OF IIYDRAU-

'L Oq -LICALLY FILLE;1) SANDBAGS ' FOR
'
'
'
'
'
DUNI•1 S
I
ADII.I
LA
1
ION ONE MILE
.,.;;,•. S011'1711 01" OREGON INLET BRIDGE

Y SIIEI:T 01 APRIL 1959
t. J...
to
IL9
w
ly
I?
p
z
z
G1
d
J1
N
w
a
i
? I
O?w
N xr
Of
O i
I
i

i
i

i

w
a
l- 1 : w{
J
W ,
z I
D

0
J

I W
co
I
Q

I J .? ?O

z
13
ON cc
a
to
wz
zw

LO
ff)
I
N.C. DEPT. OI, TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION ,01- IIIGIIWAYS
DARE COUNTY
I'R?)Pc?SI:U I'I,ACI?M[iN'I OR IIYDItAIJ-
- I,I(,AI,L,Y FILLED SANDBAGS I'Olt
DUNE ')TAUILIZATION ONE MILE
SOU'I'll OF OI(UGON INLET BRIDGE
?
SIIEE'I'_2,_ OF ? APRIL 1989
'X- sE?TZOrI
_ A A
o goo
Wl- ??.
?-kD
1 10
I _1.L
is
.LAS ? O - q0
DUNE"?KOO
. EXIST LNG
i
MLN??1UM 1? SRND COVEFZ
H' ? RO\-IC-RFILED
SRND pRGS x 5" X 10
I
10 V ERA-.
SCR?.? ?'? = 5 0 NORLZ
;,y1V 1 ll'%?'?
L9l
I-a
OLEAN
n.xi.I.B
?L_