20081042 Ver 1_More Info Received_20081110

08-io y2.
LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP INC.
Environmental Consultants
12 Q731 R:3 0W?, 0
November 7, 2008
NOV 1 0 2008
TO: Ms. Joanne Steenhuis
NC Division of Water Quality
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
DENR - WATER QUALITY
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
RE: Additional Information for 401 Water Quality Certification Application
Surf City Commons; Pender County, NC; DWQ# 08 1042
Commercial Property Analysts, Inc.
Dear Joanne:
Thank you for your letter dated September 24, 2008 in which you request additional information
regarding the 401 Water Quality Certification application submitted for the Surf City Commons project in
Pender County, NC. Below is a response to each of your comments.
1. Information needs to be provided that shows all considerations to avoid and minimize wetland impacts
for this project were considered and that there are no practical alternatives. Please note, in our
meeting on July 24, 2008 we discussed that buildings located entirely on wetland fill are not usually
considered an avoidance. No minimization of wetland impacts has been achieved on your proposed
design. Please consider incorporating bridges with the large road crossing, reducing the road
crossing footprint at Crossing #1 by having it go directly towards the larger store (Sheet W5) and
accessing the other stores (Sheet W4) via road crossing #2, hence the parking spaces (Sheet W4)
could then be relocated to areas that are now shown as roads. Include the location of utilities to show
that additional wetland impacts will not be required.
As mentioned in the original application submittal, the applicant reviewed several site designs and had
already reduced impacts from 12.4 acres of wetlands and 432 LF of stream down to 8.65 acres ofwetlands
and no stream impacts. Based on comments received from DWQ and the Corps, the project engineer has
further reduced wetland impacts to 5.53 acres by eliminating two outparcels, changing the road
configuration leading into the property, and repositioning the Retail A buildings. Please note that utilities
will be located within the proposed impact footprint.
The applicant did evaluate the potential to bridge the three road crossings within the site plan. The main
entrance road spans approximately 410 feet through wetlands. The other two crossings are approximately
45 feet and 75 feet in length. Based on estimates obtained by the engineer, bridging these wetlands would
cost approximately $4500 per linear foot or $2,365,000 total. This option would not be economically
feasible for the applicant.
www.lmgroup.net • [e-mail] • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15, Wilmington, NC 28403 9 P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
In addition to the economic considerations, bridging is not a feasible option for other reasons as well.
Bridges create maintenance and ownership issues as well as community safety concerns with regards to
limiting emergency vehicle access, elevation changes and steep slopes. Furthermore, the difference in
elevation between the lowest points in the wetlands to the adjacent upland is minimal. In our opinion,
constructing a bridge or pre-manufactured concrete arch span to traverse the wetland is not a feasible
alternative due to this lack of elevation change. The bottom of the girders, or span would be flush with the
wetland surface unless the entire upland on the approach and decent of the bridge were raised at least two
(2) or more feet, one hundred feet in each direction. Accordingly, the proposed development would also
require significant fill amounts to promote positive drainage. For these reasons, bridging is not considered
feasible.
2. In the July 24, 2008 meeting, we discussed the number of parking spaces that will be required by Surf
City. You had stated that Surf City had not yet approved the proposed commercial facility. Have you
presented your proposal to the Planning Board for Surf City for their approval so that the number of
parking spaces required could be correctly calculated and used in the avoidance and minimization
requirement for this project?
Although the project has not yet been submitted to Surf City's Planning Board, Mr. Todd Rademacher, the
Planning Director for Surf City, has written a letter in support of the project (enclosed). In this letter he
states that "Parking for shopping centers in excess of 100,000 square feet of floor area are required a
minimum of 4 parking spaces per 1000 square feet and a maximum of 5 parking spaces per 1000 square
feet."
In general, the revised site plan conforms to the Town's minimum parking requirements given the types of
stores anticipated to be located within the shopping center. Retail A is 146,000 sf in size. The revised site
plan shows a total of 586 spaces for this area, which is just slightly over the Town's minimum requirement
of 584 (see site plan for additional parking details). Retail B is 68,000 sf in size. The revised site plan
includes 220 spaces for this area, which exceeds the minimum requirements of 170 spaces. However, more
flexibility in Retail B is needed because of the likelihood that this area will contain restaurants, which have
higher parking requirements.
3. Please provide the date of incorporation/organization of "Commercial Property Analysts " and Mr.
Joseph Boan's connection to the business. The business is not recognized by the Secretary of State's
website when I searched the database. Please provide the correct name of the business, in some places
in the application it is referred as incorporated and other places it is referred to as a limited liability
corporation. Also include Mr. Boan 's affiliation with the business.
We apologize that the applicant's contact information in the IP application was incorrect. Commercial
Property Analysts, Inc. is based out of Palm Beach, Florida. Mr. Boan is the president. The revised IP
application that contains the applicant's accurate information is included with this letter.
4. Please provide additional information as to the alternative off sites looked at (including the ones we
discussed in the meeting) and detail the criteria reviewed and why they were deemed unsuitable for
this project include such things as costs and additional environmental factors.
As discussed in the project narrative and the meeting, the applicant evaluated four sites: the Register Tract,
the Sidbury Tract, the Yang Tract, and the preferred alternative.
J.E. Register Tract (4215-99-0423-000L)
This 32.59-acre tract is located directly north of the preferred site, north ofHighway 17 (Figure
5). This site was not considered feasible for a retail development for several reasons. The tract is long
and narrow with limited frontage off of Highway 17. Any retail stores would have limited visibility
from passing traffic. In addition, it contains a very large pond that would need to be filled and obtaining
adequate fill material for the pond would be expensive. In addition, the site contains a cell tower-that
would require relocation, which would cost approximately $1 million. The site is also located adjacent
to the Holly Shelter Game Lands. Development of this site could potentially be detrimental to sensitive
habitat in this area. Finally, the price of the tract and terms of a potential sale were unreasonable to the
applicant. For these reasons, this tract was not considered feasible.
Sidbury Tract (4226-21-9367-0000)
This 29.12-acre tract is located off of Highway 17, southwest of the intersection ofHighway 17
and Manhollow Church Road and northeast of the preferred site (Figure 6). The applicant was
interested in this tract because it is located adjacent to a retail and commercial development that is
currently being constructed and the applicant's project could tie directly into this development.
However, the owner was not interested in selling the property. Therefore, this is not considered a
viable alternative.
Yang Tract (4226-22-6774-0000)
This 152-acre tract is located at the intersection of Highway 17 and Buck Shot Road (see enclosed
figure). Mr. Randy Cox with Prudential Real Estate has contacted Mr. Yang several times regarding
this property and found that he is not willing to sell his property at this time. Furthermore, this tract is
not in the current scope of retail activity for the Town of Surf City. Please note that the "For Sale" sign
at the corner of Highway 17 and Buckshot Lane is actually for a tract located approximately one mile
up Buckshot Lane that is owned by Mr. Joe Beasley. This tract was considered too far removed from
Highway 17 to be a feasible alternative.
It is also important to note that the Town of Surf City has been working diligently to provide
interconnectivity in and around the retail and residential developments located at the Highway 17/210
intersection. Their intent is to keep as much local traffic off of 210, especially during the rental summer
season. As opposed to the sites listed above, the preferred site is located between existing developments. It
will help to provide connection (either direct or indirect) between the existing Lowes Home Improvement,
Harris Teeter Shopping Center, a new apartment complex, and the Dogwood Lakes residential community.
In addition, the Town is planning to install a traffic light on Highway 210 at the Harris Teeter. This
intersection will provide access to the Walmart Shopping Center and a residential complex and will
eventually connect to Manhollow Church Road. This pattern of development will connect over 1000 new
3
residences and five commercial projects.
5. Include a draft copy of your "preservation document "for the remaining on-site wetlands. Please be
aware that the State requirement for mitigation is 1:1 for this project.
The applicant is currently working on a preservation map and document for remaining wetlands on site. In
addition, he proposes to buy into the NC Ecosystem Enhancement Program to meet the 1:1 mitigation
requirement.
6 Please send a new first page for the PCN form with the correct address for this project (i. e. the
address in Florida) since the original hold letter was not received at the present address on the
application and was returned to NCDENR as undeliverable.
Enclosed is the revised IP application form.
I hope this response adequately addresses all of your comments. Please contact me if you have any
additional questions. Thank you for your assistance with this project.
Sincerely,
Kim Williams
End
C: Mr. Ronnie Smith, ACOE
Mr. Ian McMillan, DWQ
Mr. Stephen Rynas, DCM
Mr. Joseph Boan, Commercial Property Analysts, Inc.
Mr. Randy Cox, Prudential
Mr. Jack Reel, Thomas and Hutton
LMG
LAND MANAGEMENT GROUP INC.
00 Environmental Consultants
November 7, 2008
TO: Mr. Ronnie Smith
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
P.O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402
RE: Additional Information for Individual Permit Application
Surf City Commons; Pender County, NC; Action ID# SAW-2008-01902
Commercial Property Analysts, Inc.
Dear Ronnie:
Thank you for your letter dated October 1, 2008 in which you request additional information regarding
the Individual Permit application submitted for the Surf City Commons project in Pender County, NC. Below is
a response to each of your comments.
1. Permits for work within wetlands or other special aquatic sites are available only if the proposed
work is the least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative. Please provide additional
information regarding off-site alternatives and detail the criteria reviewed and why they were
deemed unsuitable for this project. Please compare the costs and other factors, in detail, of the
proposed project to the off site alternatives.
As discussed in the project narrative and in the meeting, the applicant evaluated four sites: the Register
Tract, the Sidbury Tract, the Yang Tract, and the preferred alternative.
J.E. Register Tract (4215-99-0423-000L)
This 32.59-acre tract is located directly north of the preferred site, north ofHighway 17 (Figure
5). This site was not considered feasible for a retail development for several reasons. The tract is long
and narrow with limited frontage off of Highway 17. Any retail stores would have limited visibility
from passing traffic. In addition, it contains a very large pond that would need to be filled and obtaining
adequate fill material for the pond would be expensive. The pond is estimated to be five acres in size
and an average of 10 feet deep. In addition, the site contains a cell tower that would require relocation,
which would cost approximately $1 million. The site is also located adjacent to the Holly Shelter Game
Lands. Development of this site could potentially be detrimental to sensitive habitat in this area. Finally,
the price of the tract and terms of a potential sale were unreasonable to the applicant. For these
reasons, this tract was not considered feasible.
Sidbury Tract (4226-21-9367-0000)
This 29.12-acre tract is located off of Highway 17, southwest of the intersection of Highway 17
and Manhollow Church Road and northeast of the preferred site (Figure 6). The applicant was
www.lmgroup.net • [e-mail] • Phone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
3805 Wrightsville Ave., Suite 15, Wilmington, NC 28403 9 P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
interested in this tract because it is located adjacent to a retail and commercial development that is
currently being constructed and the applicant's project could tie directly into this development.
However, the owner was not interested in selling the property. Therefore, this is not considered a
viable alternative.
Yang Tract (4226-22-6774-0000)
This 152-acre tract is located at the intersection of Highway 17 and Buck Shot Road (see enclosed
figure). Mr. Randy Cox with Prudential Real Estate has contacted Mr. Yang several times regarding
this property and found that he is not willing to sell his property at this time. Furthermore, this tract is
not in the current scope of retail activity for the Town of Surf City. Please note that the "For Sale" sign
at the corner of Highway 17 and Buckshot Lane is actually for a tract located approximately one mile
up Buckshot Lane that is owned by Mr. Joe Beasley. This tract was considered too far removed from
Highway 17 to be a feasible alternative.
It is also important to note that the Town of Surf City has been working diligently to provide
interconnectivity in and around the retail and residential developments located at the Highway 17/210
intersection. Their intent is to keep as much local traffic off of 210, especially during the rental summer
season. As opposed to most of the sites listed above, the preferred site is located between existing
developments. It will help to provide connection (either direct or indirect) between the existing Lowes
Home Improvement, Harris Teeter Shopping Center, a new apartment complex, and the Dogwood
Lakes residential community. In addition, the Town is planning to install a traffic light on Highway 210
at the Harris Teeter. This intersection will provide access to the Walmart Shopping Center and a
residential complex and will eventually connect to Manhollow Church Road. This pattern of
development will connect over 1,000 new residences and five commercial projects.
2. Please furnish information regarding upland alternatives.
Because of the location and extent of wetlands within the preferred property, no reasonable upland
alternatives exist. To avoid wetlands, a 410' long bridge would need to be constructed off of Highway
17 in order to gain access to uplands within the site. This bridge would cost approximately $1,850,000.
Once within uplands, the building and parking footprint would be severely limited to only small retail
buildings in order to avoid any wetland impacts. No large buildings and their required parking would fit
solely within uplands. Without these large retailers, this project is not economically feasible. Therefore,
this alternative is not viable.
3. It appears that the entrance road can be shifted south to cross the wetland at the most narrow
location. Also, it appears that the other access road can connect to the entrance road at a location
at or near Road Crossing #2. Road Crossing #2 appears that it could be shifted north
approximately 50 to 100 feet to reduce wetland impacts. Please justify the location and
configuration of the proposed roads with local ordinances, rules and/or regulations.
The specific location of the entrance road off of Highway 17 needs to line up with the existing cut in the
median (see site plan). Additionally, since NC DOT will not grant a light at this entrance, the angle ofthe
intersection must provide good visibility to drivers both entering and exiting the center. Taking these
2
factors into consideration, the applicant was still able to reconfigure the entrance road to reduce wetland
impacts. Please see the enclosed site plan.
To further reduce wetland impacts, the applicant has eliminated the two outparcels off of Highway 17
and repositioned Retail Area A. Wetland impacts have been reduced from 8.65 acres to 5.53 acres, a
36% reduction. Please note that the loss of the two outparcels has significantly affected the applicant's
economic return. The outparcels carried the highest value per square foot due to the proximity to the
highway. Additionally, the outparcels could have been sold or leased independently from the shopping
center, which would have reduced the up front capital required.
4. Please consider bridging the road crossings and compare the cost of bridging to the proposed road
crossings to describe the feasibility and practicability of the alternative.
The applicant did evaluate the potential to bridge the three road crossings within the site plan. The main
entrance road spans approximately 410 feet through wetlands. The other two crossings are
approximately 45 feet and 75 feet in length. Based on estimates obtained by the engineer, bridging these
wetlands would cost approximately $4500 per linear foot or $2,365,000 total. This option would not be
economically feasible for the applicant.
In addition to the economic considerations, bridging is not a feasible option for other reasons as well.
Bridges create maintenance and ownership issues as well as community safety concerns with regards to
limiting emergency vehicle access, elevation changes and steep slopes. Furthermore, the difference in
elevation between the lowest points in the wetlands to the adjacent upland is minimal. In our opinion,
constructing a bridge or pre-manufactured concrete arch span to traverse the wetland is not a feasible
alternative due to this lack of elevation change. The bottom of the girders, or span would be flush with
the wetland surface unless the entire upland on the approach and decent of the bridge were raised at
least two (2) or more feet, one hundred feet in each direction. Accordingly, the proposed development
would also require significant fill amounts to promote positive drainage. For these reasons, bridging is
not considered feasible.
5. Please consider the use of retaining walls to minimize unavoidable impacts. Please provide
justification if you are unable to utilize retaining walls to reduce impacts.
The typical cost for block-segmented retaining walls is approximately $18/sf. Based on rough finish
grade estimates, approximately 13,000 sf of retaining wall would be required around the retail areas,
costing approximately $234,000. However, adding retaining walls to the site design would only result in
a minimal reduction in wetland impacts. Because of their high cost and the minimal environmental
benefit, utilizing retaining walls is not considered a viable option.
6 Your proposal to have 1.4 parking spaces per 400 square feet of building is greater than the
minimum amount of parking required by the Town of Surf City (I space per 400 square feet).
Please reduce the number of parking spaces to 1 space per 400 square feet or provide information
from the Town of Surf City which requires the amount of parking spaces that you have proposed.
Mr. Todd Rademacher, the Planning Director for Surf City, has written a letter in support of the project
(enclosed). In this letter he states that "Parking for shopping centers in excess of 100,000 square feet of
floor area are required a minimum of 4 parking spaces per 1000 square feet and a maximum of 5 parking
spaces per 1000 square feet."
The revised site plan generally conforms to the Town's minimum parking requirements given the types
of stores anticipated to be located within the shopping center. Retail A is 146,000 sf in size. The revised
site plan shows a total of 586 spaces for this area, which is just slightly over the Town's minimum
requirement of 584 (see site plan for additional parking details). Retail B is 68,000 sf in size. The
revised site plan includes 220 spaces for this area, which exceeds the minimum requirements of 170
spaces. However, more flexibility in Retail B is needed because of the likelihood that this area will
contain restaurants, which have higher parking requirements.
7. It appears that many of the parking spaces can be re-located in the uplands areas behind the
proposed buildings. Please revise your plans to utilize these upland areas or provide justification
for not utilizing these upland areas.
Please see the revised site plan that shows how uplands have been utilized to the maximum extent
practicable.
8. It appears that the storm water ponds located between Wetlands Fill A4 and BI can be moved in
the upland areas behind Wetlands Fill -B-1, hence the parking spaces can be shifted west to reduce
wetland impacts. Please revise your plans to utilize these uplands or provide justification for not
utilizing these upland areas.
Because this site is located within 'h mile of SA waters, the applicant is required to capture stormwater
utilizing infiltration. Therefore, ponds need to be located within the soils that have the highest infiltration
rates. However, the site plan has been revised to better utilize uplands throughout the project area.
9. The buildings labeled as Wetlands Fill Al andA2 on the attached map would be located entirely in
wetlands. These impacts should be removed from your plans unless you can justify the impact. Your
justification for these impacts should include a detailed comparison of the revenue expected from
these two lots to the costs of the entire project to demonstrate that the project is not feasible without
these two commercial lots.
The revised site plan has deleted these outparcels and reduced overall wetland impacts to 5.53 acres. As
mentioned above, the loss of the two outparcels has significantly affected the applicant's economic
return.
4
10. The MOA requires that appropriate and practicable mitigation will be required for all unavoidable
adverse impacts remaining after all appropriate and practicable minimization has been employed.
You have proposed to preserve the remaining 8.65 acres of wetlands and 1012 linear feet of stream
located on-site and the utilization of the North Carolina Ecosystem Enhancement Program
(NCEEP) for the restoration of 8.65 acres of non-riparian wetlands within the Cape Fear River
Watershed. Please be aware that this project is not located in the Cape Fear River Watershed and
mitigation for the proposed impacts should occur in the same hydrologic unit code as the project.
The proposed project is located in the New River Watershed (HUC 03020302). Please provide a
letter from the NCEEP stating that they are willing to accept your payment for the proposed
impacts. Also, please provide a draft copy of the document that you would use to preserve the
remaining wetlands on the property.
According to the NCEEP, the site is located within the White Oak River Basin. However, they do not
currently have credits available in that watershed. Therefore, the NCEEP acceptance letter was for the
Cape Fear River Basin. Please note that this particular portion of White Oak 01 is hydrologically part of
the Cape Fear River Basin. According to Kelly Williams with the NCEEP, this area has been included
with the White Oak for cataloging purposes.
I hope this response adequately addresses all of your comments. Please contact me if you have any
additional questions. Thank you for your assistance with this project.
Sincerely,
Kim Williams
End
C: Mr. Ronnie Smith, ACOE
Mr. Ian McMillan, DWQ
Mr. Stephen Rynas, DCM
Mr. Joseph Boan, Commercial Property Analysts, Inc.
Mr. Randy Cox, Prudential
Mr. Jack Reel, Thomas and Hutton
APPLICATION FOR DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY PERMIT
Privacy Act Statement
Authority: 33 USC 401, Section 10: 1413, Section 404. Principal Purpose: These laws require permits authorizing activities in, or affecting, navigable
waters of the United States, the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, and the transportation of dredged material for
the purpose of dumping it into ocean waters. Routing Uses: Information provided on this form will be used in evaluating this application for a permit.
Disclosure; Disclosure of requested information is voluntary. If information is not provided however, the permit application cannot be processed nor
can a permit be issued.
One set of original drawings or good reproducible copies which show the location and character of the proposed activity must be attached to this
application (see sample drawings and instructions) and be submitted to the District Engineer having jurisdiction over the location of the proposed
activity. An application that is not completed in full will be returned
(ITEMS 1 THRU 4 TO BE FILLED BY THE CORPS)
1. APPLICATION NO. 1 2. FIELD OFFICE CODE 1 3. DATE RECEIVED 14. DATE APPL. COMPLETE
(ITEMS BELOW TO BE FILLED BY APPLICANT)
5. APPLICANT'S NAME 8. AUTHORIZED AGENTS NAME AND TITLE (an agent is not
Mr. Joseph Boan required) Kim Williams
Commercial Property Analysts Environmental Consultant
Land Management Group, Inc.

6. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS
214 Brazilian Avenue, Suite 200 9. AGENT'S ADDRESS
Land Management Group, Inc.
Palm Beach, FL 33480 P.O. Box 2522
Wilmington, N.C. 28402
7. APPLICANT'S PHONE NOS. W/AREA CODE 10. AGENT'S PHONE NO. W/AREA CODE
a. Business [phone] [phone] (phone)
b. Fax [phone] [phone] (fax)
11. STATEMENT OF AUTHORIZATION
I hereby authorize Land Management Group, Inc. to act in my behalf as my agent in the processing of this application and to furnish, upon request,
supplemental information in support of this permit application. SEE ATTACHED FORM
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE
DATE
NAME, LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY
12. PROJECT NAME OR TITLE - Surf City Commons
13. NAME OF WATERBODY, IF KNOWN (if applicable)
N/A
15. LOCATION OF PROJECT
Pender North Carolina
COUNTY STATE
16. OTHER LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS, IF KNOWN
14. PROJECT STREET ADDRESS (if applicable)
Off of Highway 17; near intersection with Hwy 210
Surf City, NC
Tax Parcel ID Numbers: 4215-88-4211-0000, 4215-87-9642-0000
17. DIRECTIONS TO THE SITE
From Wilmington, take Hwy 17N into Pender County. Site will be on the right, just before Lowe's Home
Improvement Store (see vicinity map).
NOV 1 0 2008
DENR - WAfEk QUALI' f
WETLANDS AND STORMWATER BRANCH
18. NATURE OF ACTIVITY (Description of project, include all features) - The preferred project consists of constructing
220,000 square feet of retail/commercial space with associated parking and roads. Wetland fill for building
pads, parking lots, and roads is requested (See Project Narrative).
19. PROJECT PURPOSE (Describe the reason or purpose of the project) - To provide a commercial development within
an expanding section of Surf City (See Project Narrative).
USE BLOCKS 20-22 IF DREDGED AND/OR FILL MATERIAL IS TO BE DISCHARGED
20. REASON(S) FOR DISCHARGE - To provide buildable areas for commercial/retail development that are
accessible from Highways 17 and 210 and that interconnect with other developments in the area (See Project
Narrative).
21. TYPE(S) OF MATERIAL BEING DISCHARGED AND THE AMOUNT OF EACH TYPE IN CUBIC YARDS - Clean,
compacted sub-grade soil materials, clean ABC aggregate, pavement etc all above street reinforced concrete
culverts at map specified locations. See map for area in each location.
22. SURFACE AREA IN ACRES OF WETLANDS OR OTHER WATERS FILLED
5.53 acres of 404 wetlands
23. IS ANY PORTION OF THE WORK ALREADY COMPLETE? no IF YES, DESCRIBE THE COMPLETED WORK
24. ADDRESSES OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS, LESSEES, Etc., WHOSE PROPERTY ADJOINS THE WATERBODY
see attached sheet
25. LIST OTHER CERTIFICATIONS OR APPROVALS/DENIALS RECEIVED FROM OTHER FEDERAL, STATE, OR LOCAL
AGENCIES FOR WORK DESCRIBED IN THIS APPLICATION N/A
AGENCY TYPE APPROVAL* IDENTIFICATION NUMBER DATE APPLIED DATE APPROVED DATE DENIED
26. Application is hereby made for a permit or permits to authorize the work described in this application. I certify that the
information in this application is complete and accurate. I further certify that I possess the authority to undertake the work
described herein or am acting as the duly authorized agent of the applicant.
SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT DATE
18. U.S.C. Section 1001 provides that: Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly
and willfully falsifies, conceals, or covers up any trick, scheme, or disguises a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or
representations o r makes or uses any false writing or document knowing same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or entry, shall
be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years or both.
laluzD Numddo4S 80/61/90
Lt Ae-4$1H'S'Cl Z89oZ-f
O
N(0-p
10
i
9c) 0
i'QS. ?WZo"?N
f, G P _ 4=U
r ?` F FO
?o
Z z FF
I LL
N -1 CL
3
14
J
°o
o
?a
c m a
., a s,, r M Z II
N r-
?.
LLI
I- Z,
U
C C U ? o
•
0
V
n
Corn
H w
W
r? w WM
UJZ
?F-O
O r.? I--
.,? I Z H Z
IM > U
? Q ? N? ? Q ZJd
Q ?' ?O o w Z?z
<UIR
w w < . 3:
ll „? ? app ? 0
F--? o m O
• WUZ
• O I-?I 1=-
W
CZ$ D
O
w ?
o p
ON ,OJ
W
4A
hr.C s

3

Q

? O
@S nQ

W ? 5
o
x
U ? ?
vPi LL
P F-

u ¢ u
y
O
3 o
3
r
z
8
3
3
0

L? -

x

O =
W w o

w o

O
H

x

?
F
-

F w
z
f

31x0 A9 SNOISIA3H ON N018NIWlIM rNnOatl?H1tlON
N?raa autlaw++o+eatareu• rN-3-S clM XMNI'9 ),8vvgiNns loVdWl
ON 'S1S l1VNV J 12l3d0ad MJIMBN tlg'NVNM s •r) .-D
1V10a3WW00 :1N3110
wow„a, ?,a,..rroN, MMM 8 ?y 01 ? O Z 133 H S
tese•zes WIG) : xrj
(OIM d
B) N
OtZ'ZEE :3NON W
,11X(100 830N3d :,kiNnoo sovsON'NOIDNtWTjf, -
tot3ims 1 p'T ?N 'Al Nf107 b30N3d JNI 'S 1SAlV Nb A1?J3dOiid IVI Ri3WWOJ
1N3Wd013n30 1VIM3WW00 aroaNOtiriSStZ SJNIMVH(I 11W83d aNd113M
111AI10V (13SOd021d .oC) E)Nla33Nt9N3 NOIJ ?8 svwoHl
0
c_
0
0
U
0
z
T
U ° (n U) O
LLJ
Ul U ??
?

W °
o
s U O
QQ U
Q
E-
U o
c Q O ro

C
o CU
?
v
a O Ln
P4
-

O
N
O
? V
° o_ 3 N N to
U C
O t
- N Y 11 II II

W -r-
a ° C a)
pT 3 a)
U °
° ° -
00
ri) Q

N 07 = O c ?-

??n
O
O
m

a)
O
N
a
i

CL E

a) v
rn m W' _
G
-
O
O

0
~
~ O

0
O N Ul ( J

c c O
0 °
O
0
NO
a 3 3 -0
U] U I[» I'- > U
x
o J
a
0
U V '
N U
?QQ
a) U ? lT
> Q O
U C6
a.
O
d
E V V U
?QQ
rn 0
O Q I n N
? N fn
F -0
U C
O
p o
o y Q 0
a
°Ol
C Q OD. N
CO =
N
W
0

co
LC)
U
v
u
O O

o

0 °
y
a) N

. _ .
3i: z
.,
J
,

.? c -0
a
rn

Q O _
0
W = C i C a) O
0 o L c
}
ou 0 0 0 0
0000EE0
00 .- o
° o °
0

O O O

In ? O O a a ?> , -.
0 v ° c 3 rn
E as °QQ °aa a 3 E.? a U)

Q?
'T r-00Q
Q
rl) 0
l
rn = iL ° E o0

'
0-
z
M
ao 0 0 r
)
-0-00 M -- - a) O~ p 0 3 - W
N +- O O O 00- O m In - . 3 TL c o
a) Ln a)
F 3 [t .? 0 c o - W J
O O
c Q (Y]
0 0
F
3
a)O -
C -°0 +-L0-(9 _ co ro?- _
o O ° o - 3 W /
0 0
r
Nrn c?? T?? ? o E o
_ O O
- a
1 - "
Qaaam oo
O> m m L N O '- O U ° 0N
d
to N N W W W V' ° N ° Qi? ?t a) O
-° O C a) r- N N ° U
?. C C G C C H O O O Z N p .- C
---? wz- x x ?L c o -
0 0 =o m o a) a) ° E-' Q W ° W 0 Q c .,
Of rY ? 3 >i ?i Z - N rn V In
r
a
, . r

..

I'
- „ v U

vv ..
W
>
l

v 1
v

_

rn

I
C

a
. J J

- ,
v LLIEL
- - _
v W
Z '

-
W
Z a "

>
>
LS a
Z ? q ? o
U
31Y0 Aa SNOISIA38 ON NOlONiwIIM•YN1?OLtl°HiLOp NV-ld NOUV30-1 lOVdWl / 3313 aNV-113M
0NI'S1S111VNt1 Al83d021d H=vae?itlwwYOSatlvH?•vwwtlr?H?og
MOIMBNOtlg'HYlMYAYg • OHS ?yI1?
-1d10213WW00 :1N3110 ?"aaay `_ ?
{gEEZEEWig: 'r,A rj 01 30 2 133H S
-
09EE.2EE(0161:>'NOHd d
AlNfl00 d30N3d :AlNf100 - Sovsz'DN'NOLSMI JAA
{°{H11nS y ~ ON'A1Nf10J 830N3d 'JNI'S1S),IVNV Atli 3dOdd IVID8:]M J
1N3Wd0-l3A30 -lVi3d3WW00 °"°ar+°uviss{z ?'H q 6 SJNIMdaa liWU3d dN'd113M
:AllAli3V a3SOdONd 000NUMNISJN3NO1Lf1H785tlWOHL
3.oa B sNOisinaa o„ No1WalY91/A.YNwtlYVNltloN NV'ld NOIIVOOI i0VdWI /-1313 ONV-113M
'ONI'SIS),lVNV ),id3dONd N?Yae as+tlxw1 o19a avN3 .NrrotlY3Ninos
x?iM9Nfltlg'1IYNNYAY$ • YI°tl03?
lVIO2l3WWOO ?1N311O W NIa3g
ME(o"o)axvj 01 30 b 133HS
ee•ze
o9Evj
.6 -2Ee (ol6)
ta) ' arvolld - W
),iNnoo a30N3d :,11N(l0O so0az DN'NO1F?NIWII/y? x y -
{p{'311nS O 1 pS ON 'A1Nf1OO HJMN3d 'ONI 'S1SA-IVNV A1H3dOHd IVtDH3WWOO
1N3WdOl3A30IVIOa3WW0O ptlpaNOlltll$6lz moo„ 5 SDNIMVNG 11W2l3d aNd113M
111AllOV 03SOd0ad -000NIUMNl°ON3NO1tnH;gSVWOH-?-,

v

,
,

L
J
Q
' J
i

a
lLL- J -

(f) Z
L)
O
?
., - ?
-
Q o o
`
o J
,' CL
U-) DIMU
J
QQ
0 O LL

O - 1
, (n O
(
0 n N
1
d
O U

7
i

r ,
i

1
i
C)
N
-' - N
Z O
C)

_2
G? 0
W
U) Lo
(n
0
I
?

,
T

O
O +
Lij i
Oro 7

z
-

N
O
,
N

J
-
Q J N
LLJ

L

=
07
m
:
J L
fh ?LL J o?
O ..
_
LL. -J J G
J ?Q
~?ULL L, L?
LLI L m m o rn
0< u ° ? Q
C J Q O o
- O
X W cv Ln
z

J

w

O
OD
- N
, _

0 1 "

,
LLJ

U ? J
3 `T
r

N
i

31v0 SN0151A38 'ON No1+ae?IVnIM v.... o..a
N7tl3B-W W--.3 . YNI"IO.Yo-.9 NV-ld NOIIVOO-1 1OVdW1 / -11IJ CINV-113M
'0NI'SlSA1VNV kiH3dO?Jd ??MStlae+?Na.?s•.oao??
- wo»+ou??.s wowim?m %Nlaa??
-IVIO83NNOD :1N3110
Isee.zeeWIG) a-.4 o i 01 30 S 133HS LO
OBEEZEE (016) aHON?I W
),1Nnoz) 830N3d ).t1Nnoo - sovsz'?N'Np1?Nlw,l?n
z
Ip1 azInS O 1 S ]N 'A 1Nf100 830N3d 'ONI 'S1SA-lVNV A163d0ad 7VIJa3WW0J -
1N3WdO13AM 1VMJAVYW03 adoaNpuvisslz S9NIMV8a lIWM3d aNVI13M w
-0 W?
:AilAli3V 43SOdOdd 'OZ) DNIa33NION3 NO.LLnH 7a svWOHl
NOlONiWIIM VNI'lOtltl?H1LON
31V? AB SNOI51?3tl ON
H=?a3..H WNOS?,NtlH,. N„odtl,H,?o9 I - NOU33S I # JNISS083 OV02i
'ONI 'S1SAIVNV Al83d021d M=IMBN Ng HVNNVAtl9 YVIOtl03?j
1VM13WW00 :1N3110
WOO'NOLLNI 6tlWOH1'MMM
wfeaef ca61 a? o° ?i 01 A0 9 13 3 H S
Ofiff-ZEfi 10{6) ' aNOH`I W _
A1Nf10O 830N3d :A1Nf10O SOVBZ'ON NOI9NIW ii/N
l01311Ns 1 p'r ON'A1NnoD d30N3d 'ONI'S1SA-ItlNV Alil3d Odd ItlIJ213WW00 -
1N3Wd013A30 1VI083NN00 pdpaNOlidisslz o 6d? SJNlmvNa llWU3d ONV113M
ws
AltAIlOV 03SOd02ld -03SNIa33N1'JNEjNoixnHvBsv--H.1
NOLDNINf11M•tlNl'IOri?HlaoN Z -
3- AB SN0151?3H ON
Ya6 a'utlAW 7JOAH31tlYN'J YNI'paV7 Ninog
'0NI 'S1SAIVNV A183d02id N01103S I# JNISS083 dV02!
HJ?,xsNnae ti+vNriAtls •noaoa?
1V1083WW00 :iN3110 w %N aaBY
-' --- OJ'NOlll111-BtlWOHl'MMM
Knee-xee tme> : xrj o ?y 01 0 L 1 H S -
AlNf100 830N3d :AlNf100 - - osee•zESwisi:aNONa m
SODSZ-ON'NOl`JNIWII/N y y
LOL aung O 1 oS 0N'AiNnoo HAGN3d 'JNI'S1SA-lVNV 1,183dOdd 1V17a3M%03
iN3WdO13A30 1V10N3WW00 atloa14011V?s61z SJNIMdaa lOVdwi aN`d113M
:A11AIi0V 03SOdOdd
'00 SNIM33NISN3 N011L1H 7g SV WOHI
3100 A8 SNGISIA38 ON N-.-IM tlNnOLtl?H1LON
ONI 'S1SAIVNV .1id3dONd de++ w'.H.arn?noH?"'°'9 £ - N01103S 1# 9NISS080 GV02i
1VI383WW00 :1N3110 w %NlaagN rv1
OJ1I1H-BtlWOlll'MMM `1
??Iase•zee Gael :><tl? o ? y 01 A0 B 1 3? H S I_
oses•zes wlel : aNONd >v -
AiNf100 N3GN3d :AiNf100 sogaz-ON'N0-L9NIWIIM y y
Ip13mns O 1 pS ON'/,i Nf10O 830N3d ONI 'S1SAl/NV A1213dOdd ?VIOa3WWOO
iN3Wd013n30 lVI0dDWW00 avoaNOUVisslz SJNIMeaa labdWl aNV-l13M
AlIAIlOV 43S0d0ad 'OJ `JNIHMN19N3 NO11fIH Ig SVWOHy
O
II N
-

o U u

^ U
O
N
O
J O
F- _ In c? . W
z -a
wu
1-1 W W r-
za a?
O U U W

III
? II
I'
? -
I: I.. I
I SU)0 c) (n >
I

I J
I
0
O

U
I ?

I ? x
O 0
O -
Q O

\
I I
v \
I
O ?
CC) I
\\
LC)
U
a 0 U
a = z
I U) 1

Q?l
\\ Z
ly-
U u
(D Ld
0 0 D U)
(o o ? Q
o Q p
o C5 W
I i U

III ? i ?/
a?
Q ?
?•
O o
L
, ?
O I
lD U) " I
I I
2 I
I
I
I I
`I
I

I
I
I
II
II

I I

I I
I
I
:I
I -
i

I
I I
m

d

O
I

I
I? N

I

x
tD CD CD
t?
L0
r
E
3104 AB SNOI?IA3tl 'pN NotoHlvnlM•vanotavYN?tloN t, - N01103S Z# JNISSOaO aN'd-I13M
H]Y393LLtlAW T101831tlYH? tlYp Hin09
'ONI'SISAIVNV A1N3dOdd MoMBH?tle+YwYeYS•Y9tloe?
IVIO83WW03 :1N311O WO]'NOL H-BVIOHL'MMM %NIa33N' ?'!1
Iseesee (0I6) : xqj 01 JO 6 13 3 H S V
oeee-zeew16l.3N °
A1Nfl0O 830N3d :A1Nf10O sovaz-OWMOIONIW IA&
{o{3iins 1 pr 3N'A1Nnoz) 830N3d ]NI'S1S1,-MV l,i63d023d IVI3b3WW07 -
1N3Wd013A30 _lVMJ31NWOO °"°a"Ollvlseiz SJNImvHa IOVdWl aNV-113M
AlInIlOV (13SOd021d -oz) Emims3w9N3 No11nH v svwoHy
O
K? N
-

- } ` Y

2 C =
U _
O co
O

I O
Q I
H- Lo
-

N- J
I I Z
Ow - a
WU
I I_I J J ~
II (Y 4
O U 4 (Y
U W

! III
III I
', I
', S to O O In >

I
I
i

_

J

O
U I

II ? ? h I
I

\
I
it ? I a VII
I II
II
I
I
I ?
v Q vA?II I?
?
a
(n o \ I \,

?
II
I I
?I
_. If

°
C
? - - - -- - V - III - -

II

N
oI = ? Q
III
l w
U

a
°II

III
G ?

CD
, z
? I C I
I B ? cn I
o a
,,,
L
\ I u U) z
? I 1
? ? II
???` U

J I II
,I
?` A w

o
o
0 O
0l I I I
\\
II

O
-
O \
I
II `II O
I

I

I
? f
!I
?
I I \`?? III
? ? I
6 0

I
_ _ I?
I

I
_ _
?

?
_
\ I I , ,III _
ti\? II
,
i I
r I I I?i
I I
_ II _ _

I I I
_ -_ _ ?
II I o
I I
Z
I
?

11
II
x
L'i
I II
I
? I III I I

11
O c9
n In
1: N
u OD O
V ID
':)NI 'S1SA-IVNV Alb3dOMd
'IVI02l31NW00 :1N31-10
AlNf100 830N3d :AlNf100
1N3Wd0-l3A30 -1VID83WW00
:AlIA110V 03SOdONd
31 Vd AB SNOISIA3H ON
OLONINIIM - YNI'i 0-N
..-s 1 w4101631aYH? YNI'N)aV7 Han0g
H?Ixleanae'NYNNYnvs • vloaon?
%NIa3?N
WO?'
O-AM 7
19CE-zee ee (01e) : YY?
t9Ee (a
09ce-zer (OIB) : aNOHd W
sovez*3N•NoIgNHY1iM
tot 91InS o of
GVOH NOIIV.LS Litz Y'?7H v add
'00 9NIH33NISN3 N011f1H )B StlWOHl
N01103S 3-113 aNd-l13M -IVOld ki
01 30 01 133HS O
CIO 7?
ON 'A1NnOD d30NAd 'ONI'S1SA-)VNV A1fJ3d02id 1V1383M400
SJNimvHa 13ddYYI aNVl13M
,0-1-
t
z o =' -
u
u
0% co
N
O ?
Q -
f _ lf) N - J

O U U W

W p

Q J
I

\ II, U)

p
J
?
A
(D
Z
y \? Q

Q
u

\
J J Z U)
J J O Z

W
W S Q \
Cf)
O,W

CL
W
?
p
?I Q J
> Z
\ \

``
\\ n \
Yang Tract
Register Tract
:
x
*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: North Carolina Atlas & Gazetteer. Pg 84.2003 SCALE 1" - 1 Mile
Surf City Commons
LMG
Commercial Property Analysts «<11MAk.U;i6INi .FUfI .
Pender County, NC ,,.,,,,,,,.
40-07-549 www.LMGroup.net Vicinity Map
Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
June 2008 P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402

x
<

s
l
f
5 ° 'a y
4 ! ? NY `ter- ' I T 1 E}+M+ <{ '°
°
{ 5

a t% x ;
s ! i1 a
s
t
? --
-•} f }
?
.
ter
!

%
'm
t • ( i
# '
I
}
i
i # ? I ssY
3 i t 7 i
q
c}
n
? t
?
!
t
? ,.?
a t
W t? ? 3 t? s s t ! ?? a >? {
.
0
;P ?i? , Fo- t o ? .} rtrt
• i f. .>-ty ? t
P
' tS fi, ??
t
U
+
{e
RV
K.«i
4
, s
3
,s t• :. F r
Y i 4
i t
rof t °
t{
? f
.
t
x
{
?
!! 1 ,:# d 4 P ?
'? '1
Y
?
k
?
?*
\
?
'
4
. 4
I
+
- S>'S
J
s
k
ro
#'
r
?
'.?.
Ff}j
.
?
? - .?dy
sb
t'i.
e`
^r 't .
.
.M
1
L,r
9i P'P
?a=
1 \
4
°
4{
'.
:
° a
,
?
1
,t
A (
aatE
A
41

Y Is d y dd {
{ M`'?y ,do-',
s 1 17 "* ?? t S•?r <Q`ti :d i },7 3i. y ?` s" r jk+:
t
?
?
k is q
'
b:'?'1..::'9I6't'? ' ?` ?4t y
T .y ° ? 4 f + ,:'ro d' taxI\ ?. 1'` "{ K-Re
1 I, 1 ! tF yt.+?Yh Y,?,,. ? S g F +? ?q
ilt '! y. wti t? # P f's v .J S:• +f t Y {711{ ?? ? s d r"i ?i,C
µ
0atr { S .. >° {
1 .. ? +, EI°• 'Yi v .$' ? I ? ;.r ! _ h } A
,? "; ! rM ) 5..? 4 4 T .._t Id a 3 a.J _` } 4 S ' cf . fi t k,h i?r ?'
tY ]

iKr, se , (? 4t a#? r?qS ?3?vrot{- 3 d
t r •. Ry{tro "r ^l t; « Y r e} t?. i ?; t ,? p 1 i 1 IS 7 r 'ir !t r?IA t
° (` l } l J d? r Y` R
d { ( F

`
' ,?' r•??r?3ro ? 1y?f $ ! ,r ?S !?j ??fi? '.{+a.^t 7933 ff ! 1 ! rj! ?• JW
J
O
{{ p
!?' f? D i `A µ1's q,, ? nF K "f t .? 9 ¢ f l?s ['• J ? a ? ?r?° s? t a5 :' ! .
4 ,

I ?V
.+' °-M Jl t =,Y R .Y
_
i? Y F
}a?4 ja
/
N f
!• Ni
`
?
a
f
C
- y
??
l
s
AN'
.
411
?
q µ
t k

*Boundaries are approximate and are
not meant to be absolute.
Map Source: 2006 NAPP Aerial Photography SCALE 1" = 800'
Commercial Analysts LMG
Joe Boan
q":D MAN VN!1
J?h(1',;P ,
°,,,..°; ,° , I " °,'
Yang Tract: -147 acres
-
Pender County, NC www.LMGroup.net Aerial Photograph
40-07-549 Phone: [phone] •1.866.LMG.1078
Fax: [phone]
June 2008 P.O. Box 2522, Wilmington, NC 28402
"" own Of Surf City
<FR17NOV 7 2009 9:76/S7. 9:75/No.7S27205740 P 2
TOWN OF SURF CITY
P. O. BOX 2475 214 N. NEW RIVER DRIVE SURF CITY, NC 28445
Telephone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
http : //surfcity. govoffice. com
A. D. (Zander) Guy, Jr., Mayor
Nelva R. Albury, Council Member
Michael H. Clyp ?8ftt,*ember
Donald R. Helms, Council Member
Douglas C. Medlin, Mayor Pro-tem
William J. (Buddy) Fowler, Council Member
RE: Surf City Commons (Response to DWQ information request)
The Town of Surf City supports the development of Sur
other large scale retail projects at the intersection of Highway 2
the Towns Position that this area is the most approprl la?atio,
development as it is serviced by Surf City water, sewer and is
a-'
.
an area that allows for the service ofall areas beeen.Wilmi
North Carolina. The Town believes that this area is mtn
these two urban areas. The current zou3ng classification C
vr this type''
intense zoning distnct'in Surf City, l anel00,4,
ons and all
Highway 17. It is
as type of
ig+wographically in
on and Jac
regional
e
between
3 commercial, the most
f4eveloument. More
importantly Surf City Water and Sewer Liiies ar??u tly uastalled along the frontage of
r vva?
r lines run.,north on hwiway 17 which would prohibit
this property. No watt A- n-
!qwe
the development of?p ernes nixrth of the Hia$ vay 210/17 intersection:.
v
,a9S
Parkang soppingeaters of m`frzcess;of 100,000 square feet of floor area are
'? ' a ¢d o SSA _-.
requtr a minimum of 4 ` ark* ' aces .per 1000 square feet'and a maximum of 5
parking spaces per 1000 square feel,`.
00 0:-
.,
If you have`Apiy,-:guestions please contact me at 910-328-413 1.
Todd J.
7 77