19961054 Ver 2_Emails_20100616

Karoly, Cyndi
From: Matthews, Matt
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 9:51 AM
To: Karoly, Cyndi
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts CRC Variance and Request Release from 401 Hold
Attachments: Patricia Bennett Variance Request Cover Letter, CRC-VR 10-01.pdf; Patricia Bennett
Variance Request Final Order, CRC-VR 10-01.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Matthews v-[phone]
NC DENR/Division of Water Quality- f-[phone]
Surface Water Protection Section [e-mail]
1617 Mail Service Center http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/swps/
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Please note that my email address has changed.
E-mail correspondence to and frorn flail's address may be subject to the North C-arohna Public Records Law arid- nzay
be disclosed to third parties.
From: Bruce Marek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2010 9:31 AM
To: Mcmillan, Ian
Cc: 'Bennett, Tricia'; Marek Yacht & Design; [e-mail]; Matthews, Matt; 'Bill Raney, Jr.'
Subject: Bennett Brothers Yachts CRC Variance and Request Release from 401 Hold
Good Morning Ian,
Attached are copies of the CRC Cover Letter from Jennie Hauser, Special Deputy Attorney General, and the Variance
CRC-VR 10-01 signed and dated 6-14-2010 by Robert Emory, Jr., Chairman of the NC Coastal Resources Commission.
With the CRC variance approval, as agent for Tricia Bennett, President of Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc., I formally
request removal of the "DWQ Project Hold" for 401 Water Quality Certification of the maintenance dredging project
that I previously had asked for in December of 2009. Please process the application for 401 Certification that was
generated as part of our application for major modification to CAMA Permit 90-97.
As a state designated "Clean Marina", Bennett Brothers Yachts/Cape Fear Marina hopes to continue for years to come to
serve locally the Wilmington Area Boating Community and globally the needs of visiting yachts with transient and long
term dockage, repairs/retrofits and pump out facilities. 401 Water Quality Certification will allow the attainment of the
CAMA Permit Modification that was intended by the CRC in their last meeting.
Thank you for all of your help and kind considerations in your efforts on this project.
Bruce Marek, P.E.
5489 Eastwind Rd.
Wilmington, NC 28403
910-799-9245
Cell 910-228-2484
°,?savfo
Y
Y, VMY'Y
State of North Carolina
Department of Justice
ROY COOPER
Attorney General
PO Box 629
Raleigh, North Carolina
27602
June 14, 2010
Patricia D. Bennett
1701 J.E.L. Wade Dr.
Wilmington, NC 28401
Reply to:
Jennie Wilhelm Hauser
Environmental Division
9001 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-9001
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
CERTIFIED MAIL/
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
electronically tricia a,bbvachts.com
William A. Raney, Jr. CERTIFIED MAIL/
Wessell & Raney, LLP RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
P.O. Box 1049 electronically [e-mail]
Wilmington, NC 28402
Re: Variance Request for Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA) Permit,
CRC-VR-10-01
Dear Ms. Bennett and Mr. Raney:
At its May 19, 2010 meeting, the Coastal Resources Commission granted your variance
request. Attached ' is a copy of the order, signed by the Chairman of the Coastal Resources
Commission. Prior to undertaking the development for which you sought a variance, you must first
obtain a CAMA permit from your local permitting authority or the Division of Coastal Management.
You must also obtain any other permits that are required for your proposed development.
Sincerely,
Jennie Wilhelm Hauser
Special Deputy Attorney General
cc: Christine A. Goebel, Esq., electronically
James H. Gregson, electronically If
Angela Willis, DCM Morehead City, electronically
Robert R. Emory, Jr., Chairman of CRC, electronically
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER
BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA
COASTAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
CRC-VR-10-01
IN THE MATTER OF: )
PETITION FOR VARIANCE ) FINAL ORDER
BY BENNETT BROTHERS YACHTS, INC. )
}
This matter was heard on oral arguments and stipulated facts at the regularly scheduled
meeting of the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission (hereinafter CRC) on May 19,
2010, in Beaufort, North Carolina pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 113A-120.1 and 15A NCAC 7J.0700,
et seq. Assistant Attorney General Christine A. Goebel appeared for the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Coastal Management (DCM); William A.
Raney, Jr. appeared on behalf of Petitioner Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc.
Upon consideration of the record documents and the arguments of the parties, the CRC
adopts the following:
STIPULATED FACTS
1. Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc. has been in business in New Hanover County since 1989,
after relocating from Connecticut. The company was owned by Paul and Patricia Bennett until
Paul Bennett's death in 2007. Patricia Bennett is now the sole owner.
2. Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc. was issued CAMA Permit #90-97 on July 2, 1997 for the
construction of a marina and upland boat repair facility along the Northeast Cape Fear River at
1701 J.E.L. Wade Drive, Wilmington. The marina site, approximately 1800 feet in length, is
immediately north of the Isabelle Holmes Bridge, along the east side of the river. Site
photographs were presented to the Commission as part of a power-point slide show.
1
3. On June 10, 2009, DCM staff accepted as complete, Petitioner's application for a Major
Modification of CAMA Permit #90-97 (and associated variance, modifications and renewals).
Petitioner proposed to dredge an area of about 87,000 square feet within the footprint of the
existing docks to remove sediment that had accumulated since the Marina was constructed
without dredging in 1997.
4. On December 23, 2009, DCM denied Petitioner's application for a Major Modification of
CAMA Permit #90-97 (and associated variuice, modifications and renewals).
5. Petitioner is seeking a variance from the CRC's rules which are noted in DCM's permit
denial letter.
6. The 72-slip open water marina was originally designed to be further into the river. A
ruling by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the "Corps") imposed a 112-foot offset from the
32-foot depth federally maintained navigation channel, rather than the 80-foot setback Petitioner
originally thought applicable. This is noted in the December 3, 1997 Final Order of the CRC
regarding the variance allowing dredging of the Travel Lift Pit area. As a result of the Corps
decision, the originally designed marina footprint was shifted landward 32-feet to comply.
7. All of the area of the proposed dredging is within a Primary Nursery Area (PNA), as
designated by the Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF). The PNA in this area covers the entire
width of the river, excluding the maintained channel. "Primary Nursery Areas are those areas in
the estuarine and ocean system where initial post larval development of finfish and crustaceans
takes place. They are usually located in the uppermost sections of a system where populations
are uniformly early juvenile stages." 15A NCAC 7H .0208(a)(4)
8. The waters occupied by the marina are classified as "SC" by the Environmental
2
Management Commission and are closed to shellfishing.
9. No dredging was proposed or authorized in the 1997 permit review and issuance, and like
now, most new dredging in PNAs was not allowed under the CRC's rules. A CAMA permit
could not have been issued at the 1997 time of permitting had it been proposed, unless a variance
had been granted. See Rhode/DMF 11/21/96 and 10/27/97 memos.
10. During Major permit review, DMF stated that "the new dredging will have a significant
adverse impact on the estuarine resources in the project area and objects to the project."
11. During Major permit review, the Wildlife Resources Commission (WRC) supported
DMF's comments and conclusions, and also objected to the project.
12. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) indicated that they were heading towards denial
of the required 401 Water Quality Certification for this project due to a finding that the adverse
impacts to the PNA could result in a removal or degradation of significant existing water quality
uses. See DCM denial letter and DWQ 8-13-09 comments. DWQ's 401 Water Quality
Certification application for this project is still pending and is on hold at this time.
13. The site is subject to lunar tides with currents running upstream and downstream
depending on the tidal cycle. Typical tidal currents in the dock location are 1 to 1.5 knots.
14. At the time the docks were constructed in 1997, all of the boat slips had at least -4.0-feet
at mean low water.
15. At the time the docks were constructed, all of the docks floated freely at all times, even
during unusually low tides.
16. Sections of the main docks, running approximately parallel to the shoreline, are now
experiencing being aground at low water. Photographs submitted by Petitioner show the slope of
3
the shoreline in the area of the marina. This is not good for the safety of people using the docks.
The flotation for the docks consists of PVC tubs and if they are resting.on the bottom, there is the
potential risk of tub puncture if they rest on a hard or sharp object on the bottom.
17. According to the Coastal Habitat Protection Plan's (CHPP) section on soft bottom
habitat, "...when docks are permitted in vcry shallow areas, moored boats or floating docks may
actually sit on the bottom for a large portion of a tidal cycle (up to 12 hr) or cause considerable
turbidity or prop dredging when attemptir.6 to motor to deeper navigable waters (SAMFC 2009).
Either situation can significantly reduce primary or secondary productivity. (F. Rhode, DMF,
2009)."
18. The 50-foot slips in the south section which run parallel to the main dock, have
insufficient water depth for vessels typical of such slips, causing vessels to be potentially
aground twice a day at low tide. The American Society of Civil Engineers recommends a depth
of 8-feet for a 40-foot slip and a depth of 12-feet for a 50-foot slip. Vessels with a six foot draft
are common for this size slip and vessels of six foot draft occupied these slips in the early years
of the marina, based on the affidavit submitted by Mrs. Bennett.
19. The tidal range at the marina is about 4.7-feet.
20. The mean lower-low water is -0.6-feet mean low water.
21. The outer docks still have a water depth at mean low water of 20-feet to 24-feet.
22. On December 3, 1997, the CRC granted a variance to Petitioner to allow the dredging of
.02 acres of PNA to deepen the area designated as the Travel Lift Pit.
23. The Travel Lift Pit variance Final Order, dated 1997, Conclusion of Law item #5 states
that, "this hardship results from conditions peculiar to the subject property in that Petitioner
4
planned the project to avoid any primary nursery area, but was forced to pull the proposed
project closer to shore and into shallower water to comply with the Corps of Engineers' channel
line, causing part of the project to be relocated into an area that is designated as a PNA, but does
not have high functional value." Conclusion of Law #6 characterized the PNA in the Travel Lift
Area as a "PNA that does not have a high resource value."
24. The applicant agrees that any permit resulting from a variance from the CRC can be
conditioned upon reducing the depth at the landward edge of the main docks from -6-feet MLW
to -4.5-feet MLW. This is a 30% reduction in requested dredge volume to 4400 cubic yards.
(See calculation sheet by Bruce Marek, P.E. January 4, 2010). DCM staff noted that this
proposed condition was not reviewed as part of the CAMA Major Permit process.
25. The marina footprint bounded by the docks is 135,000 square feet. The proposed dredge
area from the landward side of the main docks to the -12-foot MLW contour is 87,000 square
feet. The proposed dredging in areas less than -4-feet is 27,000 square feet.
26. The City of Wilmington has an old storm drain approximately 200-feet north of the north
dock access ramp. According to the affidavit by Mrs. Bennett, this storm drain collapsed in
2000, and photographs provided by Petitioner purport to show the collapse resulting in sediment
being transported into the river at this location.
27. The "Cape Fear Marina" (the name for the marina portion of the site) used to be a
commercial wharf for past usage of the site as a lumber mill. As such, logs and timber were lost
off barges and schooners. Old sunken logs were removed from the site just prior and during the
1997 marina construction, in accordance with regulatory standards, in order to drive piles for the
marina.
5
28. In 1998, Yerkes Construction removed an old dilapidated barge from the northern dock
area, under approvals from the Underwater Archaeology Unit of the State.
29. Historical use of the marina site as wharf/docking areas for commercial vessels dates
back to the 1860's.
30. Petitioner earned the NC "Clean Marina Designation" in 2009.
31. Petitioner has in-slip holding tank pump-out facilities.
32. Petitioner has the prototype Clean Marine Solutions Marina Wastewater Compliance
Systems, a system that uses advanced polymer chemistry and evaporative technology to treat
power wash water and turn it into powder. Bottom paint residue is then removed by the
company's solid waste disposal contractor.
33. Petitioner, in addition to offering to minimize dredging depths/volumes (See Fact 424),
will agree to add 24 tons of rip-rap as habitat for juvenile fish, landward of U-dock, south of the
Water Treatment Plant discharge pipe as a condition for any permit granted resulting from this
variance request. DCM staff noted that this proposed condition was not reviewed as part of the
CAMA Major Permit process.
34. DCM determined that the proposed modification was consistent with the applicable
CAMA local land use plan.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The CRC has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter.
2. All notices for the proceeding were adequate and proper.
3. The Petitioner has demonstrated that strict application of Rule 15A NCAC 7H
.0208(b)(5)(B) to the permit application will result in unnecessary hardship.
6
At this time, sections of the main (8' wide) docks are aground twice a day at low tide.
These sections run parallel to the shoreline. Also, certain slips or slip ends closest to the main
docks have insufficient water depth for dockage of vessels. The main docks sit in the mud on
one edge and are barely floating on the other, causing them to be at an angle. Docks sitting
askew are not good for the docks and piping systems. Since tide peaks shift approximately an
hour each day, it is not a simple issue to "work around" the period of low tide. Because of the
nearby shipping channel, the docks cannot be shifted into deeper water to avoid the need for
dredging. The Isabelle Holmes Bridge is immediately downstream of the property.
Maintenance dredging in itself is a hardship, as the cost of mobilization, disposal of spoil,
loss of land use for the spoil basin, and disruption of marina operations during dredge cycles
were not planned on nor are they conducive to running a business. Dredge fees, engineering fees
and contingency funds for future dredging are expenses that any business would be very hesitant
to take on, especially in this economy. But if slips can't be rented because there isn't enough
water in the slips to float the boat and if the marina does not function well that also will be a
financial hardship and Petitioner's 13-year reputation could be hurt.
4. The Petitioner has demonstrated that this hardship results from conditions peculiar
to Petitioner's property such as the location, size, or topography of the property. The as-
permitted marina was designed as an open-water marina; with slips located in sufficiently deep
water that no dredging was required. Petitioner's site has approximately 1700 ft of river frontage
along the east bank of the Northeast Cape Fear River. Petitioner's site has long been designated
PNA, which is a common designation for property along the Cape Fear River. The western
edge of the marina is restricted by the existence of the Corps's shipping channel. By agreements
7
Petitioner made with the Corps during the 1997 permit process, many of the western most
slips/tee heads are constrained such that they are less than 20% of the local river width.
Immediately south/down river of the site is the Isabelle Holmes Bridge, US74/NC133. The
Isabelle Holmes Bridge is a hardened structure. Immediately north of the site is the City of
Wilmington Sweeney Water Treatment Plant. There is an outfall pipe from the plant
immediately north of Petitioner's "U" dock. There has been erosion at the base of the outfall
pipe, which appears to constantly discharge water. The erosion in this location is a potential
source of the siltation found at the marina. Therefore, the hardship for which Petitioner seeks a
variance is a result of conditions peculiar to Petitioner's property, especially its location.
5. The Petitioner has demonstrated that this hardship does not result from actions the
Petitioner has taken. This marina was designed as an open water marina without any intent of
need for dredging or for a dredged channel to create a marina. The docks were located in water
of sufficient depth at time of installation, in an area where typical tidal currents are in the 1 to 1
1/2 knot range and wind driven tidal currents can easily reach 3.5 knots. In fact, the maintenance
dredging that is being asked for is not over the entire marina footprint. It is only the near shore
main docks and slips that have experienced shoaling to the point that at low tide, the main
floating docks are aground to the landward side. The tee-heads and the river end of the slips are
still typically in 20' to 24' of depth of water at Mean Low Water. Although docked vessels can
cause silting, permitting of any marina is an acknowledgement that vessels will be berthed in the
marina. Moreover, the major effects of the shoaling that has occurred in this situation are found
on the side of the main dock where typically no vessels are docked.
Also, during the years that the marina has operated, a couple of non-recurring events
8
beyond the Petitioner's control occurred that may have contributed to the shoaling. First, a City
of Wilmington storm drain collapsed, adding silt and debris to the river. Second, in conjunction
with the Smith Creek Parkway construction, pipeline and/or other utility crossings were added
waterward of the north side of the Isabelle Holmes Bridge. The significance of these events to
the shoaling is not completely understood, but the events did occur and may have contributed to
Petitioner's hardship.
For each of the foregoing reasons, Petitioner has demonstrated the hardship in this case
does not result from the Petitioner's actions.
6. The 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.
Petitioner offers a full service boatyard/ marina with the capacity to allow access for large
vessels. This service is consistent with the intent of LAMA and the CRC's rules. The
permitting of the marina in 1997 is an indication that the design was considered adequate in
having minimum adverse impact. Additionally, Petitioner's marina and facility are a designated
North Carolina "Clean Marina". The site includes a DWQ approved stormwater pond, an NFPA
compliant 45'x 1 10' Spray Paint Building, a Marine (Bottom) Washwater Compliance System,
and in-slip holding tank pumpout facilities.
CRC rule 15A NCAC 07H.0203 states that "it is the objective of the Coastal Resources
Commission to protect present common-law and statutory public rights of access to the lands and
waters of the coastal area." Additionally, CRC rule 15A NCAC 07H.0206 seeks to "conserve
and manage important features of estuarine waters so as to safeguard and perpetuate their
9
biological, social, aesthetic, and economic values; to coordinate and establish a management
system capable of conserving and utilizing estuarine waters so as to maximize their benefits to
man and the estuarine and ocean system. 15A NCAC 07H.0206(C). CRC rule 15A NCAC
07H.0208 contemplates that before a permit is issued, the applicant will minimize adverse
impacts "upon the productivity and biologic integrity of coastal marshland, shellfish beds, beds
of submerged aquatic vegetation, spawning and nursery areas," including the need for continual
dredging to allow access for boats, and will not violate water and air standards. 15A NCAC
07H.0208(a)(2)(B) and (C).
The J.E.L. Wade sight has long been a wharf area dating back to the Civil War. Large
schooners and timber barges regularly docked at the site. The Point Peter Ferry was located at
the north end at Hilton Street. By the 1920's when the first Isabelle Holmes Bridge was built,
schooners had already transitioned to power driven vessels. The Corbett (Timber) Company
owned the site prior to Petitioner's purchase in 1996. Petitioner chose the 1701 J.E.L. Wade site
for its past history as a commercial wharf and for the ability to locate the docks in water deep
enough to not require dredging, so as to minimize impacts to primary nursery areas. During the
initial permitting process in 1997, a number of agencies reviewed the marina design plans and
allowed the permit to be approved.
Since receiving its CAMA permit, Petitioner has followed best management practices in
regards to water quality standards by installation and maintenance of its stonmwater pond and a
"no discharge, bottom wash down" compliance system and air with quality standards by its
NFPA compliant Paint Spray building. The local Wilmington-New Hanover County
2006CAMA Land Use Plan Strategy 3.20.4 recognizes the need and allows for an exception for
10
maintenance dredging in the Wilmington Urban Waterfront and Wilmington Industrial
Waterfront.
Petitioner proposes to ensure the public's safety in the proper maintenance of the water
depth at the floating docks, and substantial justice allows granting this variance. The Petitioner's
submittal was based on using the existing footprint of the docks. If shoaling continues, the docks
could be damaged or someone could be hurt because of the docks being askew. Safety of the
marina and the people using the marina are of great importance to Petitioner.
The marina is protected by a fire standpipe system located in the main docks. Damage to
the standpipes could leave all vessels unprotected in case of fire. Plumbing lines for holding
tank pumpout are also located in the dock system. Keeping the docks floating reduces
unnecessary stresses on pipe fittings. Petitioner has worked hard to achieve the Clean Marina
designation and has worked hard to make the marina a desirable destination for boaters by
providing functioning pumpout equipment.
In order to protect public health and safety plumbing, standpipes, water and sewage lines,
electrical cables, pedestals and dock boxes must be placed at a certain depth and the State
Building Code requires additional depth for immersion of floating docks, for a total of
approximately 20". With the correction for MLLW, therefore, clearance of 28" under the
landward edge of the main docks is deemed by Petitioner to be the most likely original design
placement of the docks.
In addition to minimizing the project volume by reducing the depth of dredging,
Petitioner offers the placement of 25 tons of class B riprap at the northern end of the site along
the bank at U-Dock, near to the erosion area at the Water Treatment Plant Discharge. Petitioner
II
has offered to reduce the depth of dredging and to place riprap as a good stewardship offer of
project minimization and mitigation.
The marina and boat repair facility has for a great number of years been a tax-paying
employer of approximately 25 employees, and the business brings in work for outside
subcontractors such as prop repairers, marine surveyors, yacht designers and cushion makerst.
It is substantially just under all the circumstances presented in this case to allow
Petitioner to engage in limited maintenance dredging so that this unique business can continue to
operate as a "commercial wharf ' integral to Wilmington's Industrial Waterfront.
ORDER
THEREFORE, the variance from 15A NCAC 7H.0208(b)(5)(B) is GRANTED.
The granting of this variance does not relieve Petitioner of the responsibility for obtaining
a CAMA permit, or any other necessary 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 this variance and to take any appropriate action
should it be shown that any of the above Stipulated Facts is not true. The offers for "mitigation"
made outside of the Major Permit review process can be evaluated by DCM if it chooses to do so
and can be accepted or rejected by DCM if the agency determines the offered "mitigation" is
beneficial.
This the 14`x' day of June 2010.

Robert R. Emory, Jr., Chairman
Coastal Resources Commission
12
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that I have this day served the foregoing FINAL ORDER upon the
parties by the methods indicated below:
William A. Raney, Jr.
Wessell & Raney, LLP
P.O. Box 1049
Wilmington, NC 28402-1049
Patricia D. Bennett
1701 J.E.L. Wade Dr.
Wilmington, NC 28401
Christine A. Goebel
Assistant Attorney General
N.C. Department of Justice
James H. Gregson
Angela Willis
Division of Coastal Management
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, NC 28557
This the 14th day of June 2010.
CERTIFIED MAIL/
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
electronically waraneyawbellsouth.net
CERTIFIED MAIL/
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Electronically triciaOwbbyachts.com
electronically c oebel ,ncdoj,gov
electronically Jim. Gregson(cDncdoj.? ov
Angela. Willi s(a),ncdoi,. gov
Jennie Wilhelm Hauser
Special Deputy Attorney General
N.C. Department of Justice
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh, N. C. 27602
Commission Counsel
13
A-07h qU- ?ost? v z
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
June 29, 2009
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
James H. Gregson Dee Freeman
Director Secretary
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Cyndi Karoly, Supervisor
401 Oversight & Express Permits Unit
Division of Water Quality-Surface Water Protection
° Ctr-z, gO?I? Q
D
JUL 12009
DENR - WATER aAUTy
WETLANDS AND STOR WATER BRiWCH
FROM: Doug Huggett, NC DENR-DCM Major Permits Coordinator
400 Commerce Ave., Morehead City, NC 28557 (Courier 11-12-09)
SUBJECT: CAMA / Dredge & Fill Major Permit Application Review
Applicant: Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc.
Project Location: adjacent to the NE Cape Fear River, on the NE side of the Isabella Holmes
Bridge, in Wilmington, New Hanover County
Proposed Project: Modification of State Permit No. 90-97 to hydraulically dredge to a depth of
-12 feet at NLW within the footprint of the existing marina
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return
this form by July 25, 2009. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project,
contact Holley Snider 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
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, NC 28405 One
Phone: [phone]\FAX:[phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net Nof hCaTolliina
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer N tllyd llif
CAMA Major Modification #90-97 Bennett Brother's Yachts, Inc. Page 2
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is located adjacent to the Northeast Cape Fear River, approximately .85 miles north of its
division with the Cape Fear River. This property abuts the Isabella Homes Bridge to the south side, and
fronts J.E.L. Wade Drive. The tract is approximately 13 acres in size, and is comprised of several tracts
of land controlled by Bennett Brothers Yachts. The project site has highground elevations ranging from 6
feet to 35 feet above mean sea level and has a grade of approximately 40+ degrees, sloping from
J.E.L.Wade Drive to the river's edge. The soils are sandy, and support Loblolly Pine, Wax Myrtle, Red
Maple, and various vines such as Poison Ivy and Catbrier. The site currently operates as Bennett
Brothers Yachts, Inc., existing man-made highground features include a boat repair and maintenances
building, paint shop, office building, mechanical building and shed, marina clubhouse and
gravel/concrete parking lot. The highground also features several concrete retaining walls, located along
the vegetated hillside, and some remnant building foundations are present. The project site has
approximately 1,910 linear feet of shoreline frontage along the Northeast Cape Fear River. Water
dependant structures on the property include a travel lift pit with piers and floating docks. The Bennett
Brothers Yachts received CAMA Major Permit #90-97 on July 2, 1997, which authorized the
development of the marina with an 80-slip docking facility and associated upland structures. The
permit was modified to include changes to the slip lay-out and has been renewed five (5) times.
Dredging within the travel lift pit was approved by CRC Variance #749 on March 19, 2007. CAMA
Major Permit #90-97 is due to expire on December 31, 2010. The City of Wilmington supplies the
drinking water to the project site and wastewater treatment facilities.
There are Section 404 Wetlands located on the project site although no development or impacts are
proposed within these wetlands at this time. Along the river's edge, there are coastal wetlands,
predominantly vegetated with Spartina altemi ora, Spartina cynosoroides, and Scirpus spp.. The
wetlands along the north shoreline range in width from approximately 30 feet to greater than 100 feet
along the south shore. Typha lati olio and Cladium jamaicense are interspersed along the shoreline. The
Northeast Cape Fear River is approximately 700 feet wide in the immediate vicinity of the project site.
Water depths in the area of the marina docking facility range from 0.0 feet at Normal Low Water (NLW)
to approximately -3 feet along the landward side of the floating docks. The waterward edge of the
floating finger piers have water depths of approximately -25.0 feet at NLW and are located approximately
110 feet from the edge of the Army Corps of Engineers Northeast Cape Fear Navigation Channel.
The Wilmington-New Hanover County LUP classifies the upland areas of the project site as
Conservation/Developed. The waters of the Cape Fear River are classified as SC by the NC Division
of Water Quality (DWQ). The NC Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) has designated this area of
the Cape Fear River as Primary Nursery Area and the waters adjacent to the proposed project are
closed to the harvesting of shellfish. There has been no archeological assessment done on the project
site. No Stormwater or Sedimentation/Erosion Control Plans have been submitted for this project and
previous authorization was obtained in 1997 under the CAMA Major Permit #90-97.
10. PROPOSED PROJECT:
The applicant is proposing to modify the existing permit to hydraulically dredge to a depth of -12 feet at
Normal Low Water within the footprint of the existing marina. The proposed dredge limits
CAMA Major Modification #f90-97 Bennett Brother's Yachts, Inc. Page 2
would be located entirely within the footprint of the existing floating docks. The applicant is proposing to
dredge the entire length of the marina facility (approximately 1790 feet). As proposed, the dredge limits
would extend from the landward edge of the floating docks waterward approximately 60 feet and slope to
meet the connecting water depth contours. The proposed dredging would increase water depths (on
average) from an average depth of approximately -3.0 feet at NLW to approximately -12 feet at NLW
along the landward edge of the southern floating dock. The proposed dredging under the northern
floating dock, located approximately 15-45 feet waterward of coastal wetlands, would increase water
depths from 0.0 feet at NLW to -12 feet at NLW along the landward edge of the floating dock. The
dredge spoil material would be located on the property outside of the 75 feet Estuarine Shoreline Area of
Environmental Concern (AEC). The applicant is proposing to construct a spoil retention basin, for
disposal of dredge material, by grading the existing sloping hillside, utilizing native soils to construct
dikes and retention walls. The basin footprint, including constructed dikes, would measure
approximately 322 feet in length by 148 feet in width. The applicant is proposing to construct dike walls
measuring approximately 10-15 feet in height at a 2:1 vertical slope. The applicant is proposing to install
a 24-inch outlet pipe that would connect to an 8-inch outfall pipe extending south along the project site
through wetlands ultimately depositing into the river. The applicant states the proposed spoil retention
basin would have the ability to potentially retain approximately 9,050 cubic yards of material with
approximately 4 feet of free board.
11. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
As proposed the hydraulic dredging would impact approximately 87,000 square feet of shallow bottom
area. The proposed dredging would result in approximately 6,500 cubic yards of material being removed
from below Normal High Water (NHW). The proposed dredge would result in the disturbance of
approximately 87,000 square feet of water bottom located within a designated Primary Nursery Area.
Approximately 330 linear feet of floating dock is located approximately 15-45 feet from Coastal
Wetlands. Proposed dredging to a depth of -12 feet NLW in these areas could potentially result in severe
sloughing along the shoreline and adjacent wetlands. The proposed spoil retention basin construction
would result in disturbance to the hillside that is currently stabilized with retaining walls and vegetation.
Spoil disposal would disturb approximately 47,656 square feet of highground. The applicant states the
retention basin could potentially retain 9,050 cubic yards of material. Increases in turbidity should be
expected during the dredging period however, no long term or adverse impacts are anticipated.
Submitted by: H. Snider Date: 6/24/09 Office: Wilmington
Recommendations for State Permit - Bennett Brother's Yachts, Inc.
It is staff's recommendation that the proposed excavation surrounding the proposed docking facility is
INCONSISTENT with the Rule in 15 NCAC 711.0208 (b) (1) which states "Navigation channels,
canals, and boat basins shall be aligned or located so as to avoid primary nursery areas, highly
productive shellfish beds, beds of submerged aquatic vegetation, or significant areas of regularly or
irregularly flooded coastal wetlands." As proposed the excavation surrounding the docking facility
would be located adjacent to, but outside of the existing federally maintained navigation channel. The
proposed new excavation would result in the removal of approximately 6,500 cubic yards of material
from the designated Primary Nursery Area located within the Northeast Cape Fear River. As
proposed the dredge limits would be located, at the nearest point, within 15 feet of Coastal Wetlands,
along the 0 feet contour at Mean Low Water and as proposed would be dredged to a depth of -12 feet
at NLW.
This office has objections to the proposed dredging within the footprint of the existing docking facility
based on the inconsistency with Rule in 15 NCAC 7H.0208 (b) (1) and the Wilmington-New Hanover
County Land Use Plan that prohibits new excavation within designated Primary Nursery Areas.
NOTE: An archaeological investigation sufficient to determine the nature, extent, condition, and-
significance of resources, which might be adversely affected by the proposed construction, shall be
conducted subject to the approval of the Division of Archives and History, through the Division of
Coastal Management, if deemed necessary by the Division of Archives and History.
q?• ?osLV v2
APPLICATION for r
Maier ®evelsoment Permit ?(lost rwlsed 121271'06)
North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc. Project Name (if applicable)
Maintenance Dredging Major Mod CAMA Permit X190-97
Applicant 1: First Name
Tricia MI
D Last Name
Bennett
Applicant 2: First Name MI Last Name
If additional applicents, please attach an additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address
1701 J.E.L. Wade Drive PO Box city
Wilmington state
NC
ZIP
28401 Country
USA Phone No.
910 - 772 - 9277 ext. FAX No.
910 - 772 -1642
Street Address (rf different from above) City State ZIP
Email
[e-mail]
2. Agent/Contractor Information
Business Name
Bruce Marek, P.E.
Agent! Contractor 1: First Name MI Last Name
Bruce J Marek
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name MI Last Name
Mailing Address PO Box city state
5489 Eastwind Rd Wilmington NC
ZIP Phone No. 1 Phone No. 2
28403 910 - 799 - 9245 ext. 910 - 228 - 2484 ext.
FAX No. Contractor #
NC P.E.# 15684
Street Address (if different from above) City State ZIP
Email
[e-mail]
<Fofm continues on back> RECEIVED
APR 0 9 2009
Form DCM MP-1 (Page 2 of 4)
APPUCATION for
Major Development Permit
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple) Street Address State Rd. #
New Hanover 1701 J.E.L. Wade Drive
Subdivision Name City State Zip
Wilmington NC 28401-
Phone No. Lot No.(s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
910 - 772 - 9277 ext.
a. In which NC river basin is the project located? b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Cape Fear North East Cape Fear River
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade? d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project 9".
®Natural []Manmade []Unknown North East Cape Fear River
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction? f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city imd the proposed
®Yes []No work falls within.
Wilmington
4. Site Description
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.) b. Size of entire tract (sq.fL)
l
1910 . 456508 sf (10.48 Acres)
Size of individual lot(s)
c or
d. Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (nornnal him wate
. NVVL (normal water leveq
(N many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list) 10.W at Travel Lift Pier ®NHW or []NVVL
e. Vegetation on tract
Hardwoods, Pines, Coastal & 404 Wetlands and Domestic Grasses
f. Man-made features and uses now on tract
Boatyard, Boat Repair Building/Paint Shop, Offices, Mechanics Bldg/Sheds, Travel Lift Pit, Marina Club House, Parking
Lot,Marina Dock/Slips
g. identify and describe the existing land uses adiage to the proposed project site.
Urban WaterfrontAndustrial
h. How does local government zone the tract? i. Is the proposed project consist with the applicable zoning?
Industrial (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
r
f yes, by whom?
s the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a ?Yes ®No []NA
National Register fisted or eligible property?
<Form continues on next page> RECEIVED
APR 0 9 2009
DCM Wi,?4i
Form DCM MP-1 (Page 3 of 4)
APPLICATION for
Major Development Permit
m. (i) Are there wetlands on the site? RYes ?No
(i) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? Wes ?No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? RYes ?No
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
City of Wilmington
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
City of Wilmington
p. Describe existing stone water management or treatment systems.
Wet Pond on Site per Stonnwater Permit # SWB-970403
5. Activities and Impacts
a. Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use? ®Commercial ?PublWGovemnent
?Private/Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
Maintenance Dredging for Continued Use of existing slips for Bennett Brothers Yachts/Cape Fear Marina; Construction of a
Spoils Basin on-site outside of 76 AEC; Periodic emptying of Spoils Basin and Redredging to requested depths.
c. Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of constriction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored.
Hydraulic Dredge, Barge Mounted Back Hoe, or Back Hoe (Pit Area) for Dredging. Bade Hoe, Bulldozer,Trudcs, Tree
Clearing Equipment for Construction of Spoils Basin. Bade Hoe/Trucks for Periodic Emptying of Spoil Basin or for Spil"
Maintenance
d. List all development activities you propose.
Periodic Maintenance Dredging of Existing Slips (e)isting footprintof marina, part of urban waterfront, no new navigation
channel); Spoil Basin Construction, maintenance and periodic emptying. Note - this is 11ei year of slips in the water.
Periodic dredging hopefully only needed at > 5 year intervals. First dredging: Appx 6500 cu yds
e. Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? Maintenance of an existing project
within existing marina 3.1 ac footprint.
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? Dredge Area 87,000 sf (2.0 Acres)
Spoil Basin Area: 1 Acre (Upland)
?Sq.Ft or ?Acres
g. W91 the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public acoessway 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 stomrwater be discharged into a wetland? ?Yes RNo ?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 RNo ?NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
K rklt IV 1: L)
<Form continues on back>
APR 0 9 ?n9
Form DCM MP-1 (Page 4 of 4) 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 applicabort
package to be complete. Items (a) - (t) are always applicable to any major development applkation. Please consult the application
InstrmlJon booklet on how to property prepare the mqu/red 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
proper pfd Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, dearly 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 Harnett Landing (Adjacent Property to the North): (Mark Maynard) Phone No. 910-251-5030
Address P.O. Box 1229, Wilmington, NC 28402
Name Plantation Builders (South of Holmes Bridge, old Dean Hardwoods site) Phone No. 910-763-8760
(Dave Spetrino, PresideWCEO)
Address 720 N. Third Street, Suite 301, Wilmington, NC 28401
Name Phone No.
Address
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permiltee, and issuing dates.
Store rater. SW8-970403, Approved 6-23-97 CAMA #90-97 7-2-97, with mods through 3-19-07
Corps of Engineers Action I.D. #199602652, 8-15-97/5-29-05 Sediment & Erosion Control: Number unknown, 1997
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 Ad (N.C.G.S. 113A 1-10), if necessary. If the projed involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental Policy Ad.
7. Certification and Permission to Enter on Land
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 application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date 4-6-09 Print Name -Bruce Marek, P.E. , Agenf,fdl'p?nett
Signature
CC Z
- Z ?
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed Prof = 1;30
®DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information DDCM MP-5 Bri49 es end Culverts ?DCM MP-3 Upland Development
RECEIVED ENC .•?co
ODCM MP-4 Structures Information 11%CE ?3N %%%?
APR 0 J 2009
DCM WILINYIN rOhl, NC
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
(NLW or Canal Boat Basin Boat Ramp Rock Groin Rock
Breakwater (excluding
shoreline
NWL stabilization
Length 1854'
47' avg width
Width (87,000 sf
dredge area)
Avg. Existing
NA
NA
Depth
Final Project 6MLW to

Depth
-12' MLW NA NA
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. Sand/Silt
6500 Cu Yds
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
(ii) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas:
d. High-ground excavation in cubic yards.
N/A
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL ?This section not applicable
a. Location of disposal area. b. Dimensions of disposal area.
Proposed SpoilBasin on-site, outside of 75' AEC Available 292'x148' = appx 1.0 acres; x 12' Berm Height
c. (i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
®Yes ?No ?NA
(ii) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner
d. () Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
®Yes ?No ?NA
(ii) If yes, where?
Proposed Basin with Berms is approx 12,500 cu yds,
almost double initial dredge volume requested
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
(N) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
f. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
?Yes ONo ?NA
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?

APR 0 9 20-09
Dt:MNC
Form DVA NIP-2 +.Excavatiian ao,4 F Y3, Facia 2 of 2)
1. SHORELINE STABILIZATION ® This section not applicable
(if development is a wood groin, use MP-4 - Structures)
a. Type of shoreline stabilization:
[]Bulkhead ?Riprap []Breakwater/Sill Daher:
c. Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL:
e. Type of stabilization material:
g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level.
Bulkhead backfill Riprap
Breakwater/Sill Other
i. Source of fill material.
b. Length:
IWrxlth:
d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL:
f. (Q Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months?
[]Yes ?No DNA
(ii) If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
information.
h. Type of fill material.
r) C r_- F-1 P
16y u wr 11 t?s_.
APR 0 9 '2 'i'39
: -WII AIN °i'hl I. NiC
C OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES 0This section not applicable
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. (1 Will fill material be brought to the site? []Yes ?No DNA b. (Q Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands/marsh (CVV),
If yes,
(47 Amobnt of material to be placed in the water
(iii) Dimensions of fill area
(iv) Purpose of fill
submerges aquatic vegetation lorav/, suan w4w, k5u), v
other wetlands tWL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
[]CW []SAV ?SB
[]WL []None
(ii) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas:
5. GENERAL
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion
controlled?
Constructed Berth, Vegetated/Stabilized Slopes, Silt Fence
c. (t) Will n ational aids be required as a result of the project?
[]Yes ONO DNA
(ii) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented.
Date
Maintenance Dredging Major Mod CAMA Permit #90-97
Project Name
b. What type of construction equipment will be used (e.g., dragon,
backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
Hydraukc Dredge Wor Badchoe
d. (Q Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
site? []Yes ONo DNA
(ii) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
environmental impacts.
tcrcrrr
Bruce Marek P.E. , for TriQd Butt Brothers Yachts
licant N •5 ,
Applicant Signature : Z to clEND '
eRUCrr 31;,"

Bruce Marek, P.E.
.9
5489 Eastwind Rd APR 17 r4-• n
Wilmington, NC 28403
910-799.9245 DCM WILMINGTON, NC
Project Narrative: Bennett Brothers Yachts/Cape Fear Marina Request for Major Modification to CAMA
Permit #90-97 for Maintenance Dredging of Marina Slips Rev.1: 4-17.07
Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc seeks to be allowed to do periodic maintenance dredging of the Bennett
Brothers Yachts/Cape Fear Marina, located at 1701 J.E.L. Wade Drive, Wilmington (immediately north
of the Holmes Bridge), along the east bank of the North East Cape Fear River. The 1854' long marina is
considered by Mike Christenbury, CAMA District Planner, to be the northern end of the Wilmington
Urban Waterfront. The accompanying drawing Cl with photos dated 2-16-09 shows recent depth
conditions whereas the main floating docks are no longer floating at low tide. This was not the case
when the marina opened 11 years ago (2 photos are also included on drawing C1 from 1998).
Reference drawing R-1 has a photo underlay of the North East Cape Fear River Navigation Channel.
This request is not a request to gain any additional berth area and is not a request for a new
navigation channel. The project boundary as indicated on the drawing is the existing marina
between the landward side of the main docks and the river side of the tee-heads/finger pier ends.
The included area is approximately 135,000 sq it (3.1 acres). River dock frontage from north to south is
approx 1854 If. Proposed dredge area for 2009 (shown hatched in red) is approximately 87,000 sf (2.0
acres), for an average width of 47'. The rivermost side of this 2009 dredge boundary is the -12' Mean
Low Water Line. Depths were measured on 2-16-09. The depth requested for the landward side along
the majority length of the main dock is -6 MLW. This equates to an approximate depth of -8' MLW to
the water side of the main docks. Considering there are several approved slips 50' or larger that are
parallel to the southern main floating dock, having sufficient depth for a sailboat with 8' draft is felt to
be a reasonable request and in line with how the docks were most likely originally set.
Yard owner Paul Bennett passed away two years ago; thus we do not have the benefit of his
recollection of permit discussions and mean low water depths from when the marina/boatyard was
permitted in 1997 as CAMA #90-97. His wife, Tricia Bennett, now president of Bennett Brothers Yachts,
Inc. has asked that I pursue this maintenance dredging major modification. The silting of several of the
slips has reduced the ability of some slip holders to dock in their slips, and for the yard to effectively
berth transients and vessels awaiting repairs. Such maintenance dredging is very important to the
survival of a marina. Vessels or propellers could become stuck or damaged if water depth in a slip is
too shallow to free float the vessel. Floating dock systems can likewise be damaged if the floats are
aground at low tide. We also feel that slips being aground twice a day is not good for the water
environment. With the downturn in the economy, marinas and marine businesses have all been hit
especially hard. Having maintenance dredging capabilities eliminates one more strike against this
job-producing downtown Wilmington business.
Drawing C-2 is the overall Bennett Brothers Yachts Boatyard Site Plan, including the proposed location
for an on-site spoil basin, outside of the 75' AEC. Drawing C-3 includes typical Spoil Basin berm and
spillway details. The basin is shown sized at 148' x 298', which equals approximately a one acre
footprint. Proposed top of berm height is 12' above local grade. Note that a dredger has not yet
been selected, and that they may have their own preferred details and thoughts on basin size.
Included in this request for maintenance dredging is permitted ability to have sand/spoil removed
from the basin to a Land Quality Permitted Site, outside of the AEC, either on-site or elsewhere. Any
such spoil basin material movement to inside an AEC should, of course, require obtaining a Letter of
Refinement.
CAMA#90-97 Bennett Brothers Yachts Major Mod Maintenance Dredging Narrative: Page 1
Dredging will be primarily by hydraulic dredge. At this point the best guesstimate is for hydraulic
dredging every 5 to 10 years, based on the 11 years that the marina has been open. We do ask for
the option to use a land based back hoe (especially in the travel lift pit and adjacent maintenance
slip area) or for use of a barge mounted back hoe (possible smaller/touch up jobs). We will make the
proper advance notifications and provide spoil and spoil basin capacity estimates as required.
The Bennett Brothers Yachts Marina is in a historical wharf location along the North East Cape Fear
River. Three sources of historical information include: "The Big Book of the Cape Fear River" by Claude
V Jackson III, based on a 1993-94 U.S. Army Corps of Engineering cultural resource project and a NC
DEHNR funded Underwater Archeology Unit cartographic study and submerged cultural resources
survey; a 1902 Wilmington Chamber of Commerce Report, which has been scanned and available on
the Internet; and the Cape Fear Heart Pine website. Cartographic research of charts, maps and data
dating back to the 1600's are included in "The Big Book of the Cape Fear". More specifically, an 1873's
map of Wilmington shows a saw mill at the Bennett Brothers location. Several 1880's & 1890's reports
of the North East Cape Fear River also mention a ferry landing south of the Hilton Railroad Bridge at
Hilton Street, which is at the north end of the marina. An 1893 US Army Corps of Engineers chart/report
lists the name of the wharf immediately south of the Hilton Street Ferry as "Parsely's Mill Wharf".
The 1902 Chamber of Commerce report on page 62 lists the Hilton Lumber Company, formed in 1894
by William L. Parsely, located on the site which included approximately 15 acres; 1700 ft of river
frontage; railroad tracks running full length of the property; a 500 hp steam mill with 12,000,000 feet of
annual capacity of dressed pine and cypress; with ships being able to be loaded on at the wharf
directly from the mill. Further history indicates that William L. Parsely's father O.G. Parsley had founded
the business in about 1856, and that for a while the business was also called Parsely & Wiggins.
Page 64 of the some report shows a picture of a couple of large three masted schooners docked
further downtown in Wilmington. Page 24 is a summary of the Port of Wilmington, indicating that "the
deepest draft a vessel could draw in antebellum days was ten to twelve feet, now are often unloaded
ships at the wharfs up to twenty feet, and this without detention". Approximately half the vessels were
steam, the other half sailing vessels. Pages 11 and 12 talk about the lumber and shingle business(es) in
Wilmington. In 1901, of the 42,000,000 feet of lumber shipped from Wilmington, the amount of lumber
shipped coastwise was 33,000,000 feet, with another 9,000,000 feet being dispatched to foreign
countries.
The Hilton Lumber Company provided about'/. of the area total of lumber. While no mention of vessel
size was indicated for the wharf for the Hilton Lumber Company, it would appear that vessels drawing
at least ten to twelve feet, if not greater in draft were commonly docked at the site. At the south end
of the site, there was a romp/wooden slipway at which the logs from "log rafts" or from barges were
dragged up into the mill. There was no direct mention of dredging, but large vessels did use the site
for many years. According to the Cape Fear Heart Pine website, logs occasionally fell off of barges,
and/or got stuck amidst the wharf piles. Machinery in the 1800's and early 1900's was not such that
such lost logs could be easily retrieved. With time, they sunk or got mired along the river bottom.
According to the deed for the property, Bennett Brothers Yachts purchased the site from Corbett
Industries. Corbett Industries among other things is/was in the timber/lumber business, and presumably
also used the site for bringing upstream timber to their mills and/or shipping finished lumber out.
Another historic note is that the site was part of the Hilton Plantation owned by William Hilton in 1663,
and later owned by Comelius Hamett in the 1770's. William Parsley of the Hilton Lumber Company is
the namesake of William L. Parsley Elementary School in New Hanover County. p?
RE pED
APR 17 2009
n t? 1?,t iA11 t A1tt tit t?'? t'` t•f ?C
CAMA#90-97 Bennett Brothers Yachts Major Mod Maintenance Dredging Narrative: Page 2
in an October 2008 multi-agency project scoping meeting about maintenance dredging of the
Bennett Brothers Yachts Marina, it was brought up that at least a portion of the site was considered to
be in a primary nursery area (PNA). Any portion of the marina riverward of the navigation channel
dredgirig setback line was considered outside of the PNA as it was construed as disturbed area. We
were tasked to find proof that dredging/disturbance had occurred closer to shore. Historically
speaking we believe it to be the case based on the long term site use as a saw mill/loading wharf. The
deep draft lumber vessels and the dragging of logs undoubtedly were indications of this. More recent
is the original CAMA #90-97 permit condition #5 regarding the wharf and crib structure. Pile removal
was allowed, and item c allowed for other historical finds. There are still some pile remnants visible east
of the south main dock of the prior wharf.
Evidentially, among the timber piles hundreds of submerged logs were found and subsequently pulled
from the river bottom. This "riverwood" was as large as a 5' diameter cypress, several hundreds of
years old. Removal of timber piles and harvesting of riverwood was in two major stages with CAMA
knowledge. First in 1997-1998 when Phase One, the northern part of the marina (slips A-U) were
constructed. Phase Two, the southern (numbered) slip construction/pile removal occurred in 2005.
Additionally, riverwood was somewhat continuously removed from the southern portion of the site
between 1998 and 2004 by a Mr. Pete Davida, of Riverwood Co., who had his own permit allowing
harvesting of riverwood along the Cape Fear and the North East Cape Fear River. Note that there is
believed to be an 11" x 17" hand drawing that Paul Bennett provided to CAMA that indicated timber
pile locations. I do have a copy of correspondence between the site developer Yerkes Construction,
Inc and the North Carolina Underwater Archaelology Unit, April 27, 1998 referencing Permit Number
97NER595, giving notice of intent to remove an old abandoned steel barge from Underwater
Archaelogy Unit Site #0038NER. This was submerged in the area north of the travel lift pit. It had to be
cut up to be removed from the river bottom.
Another item of disturbance since Phase One of the marina was completed was the collapse of a City
of Wilmington storm drain at the extension of Compton Street, near slips M-O. This sent a lot of silt into
the river, and is part of the problem for the northern docks bottoming out at low tide.
The western edge of the marina slips/tee-heads are per permitted "Revised Slip Layout 6-17-97". Army
Corps of Engineers letter dated 8-15-97 references the agreed on position. The channel dredging
setback is approximately 140 ft, the agreed setback 112'. Thus, the western third of the marina is
already located in an area of existing allowed dredging by virtue of being between the navigation
channel and the dredging setback line. See reference drawing R-1. As mentioned previously, the
marina also is part of the urban waterfront indentified in the Wilmington-New Hanover County 2006
CAMA Plan Update and the Wilmington Vision 2020 Plan. This allows the exception in a PNA for
maintenance dredging where there is a water dependent need. We believe that a working
boatyard/marina permitted in 1997 prior to the 1997 Cape Fear River Corridor Plan and 2004
Wilmington Vision 2020 Plan qualifies as water dependent. The site's purpose has been as a
wharf/vessel dockage/ferry landing area for well over a century.
In further support of this maintenance dredging request, we feel that having the floating docks float,
will be better for protecting water quality than having them rest aground twice a day. The removal of
piles, riverwood and the barge indicates that what we are proposing is not new excavation. The
width of the river is not being increased to create new or expanded use of the channel. We are just
trying to define and return to what we believe was the original depth of the marina footprint.
REEIFD
APR 17 2009
DCNI WILMINGTON, NC
CAMA#90-97 Bennett Brothers Yachts Major Mod Maintenance Dredging Narrative: Page 3
Previously I mentioned that the landward side of the majority of the main docks is requested at a
dredge depth of -6 MLW. The two exceptions to this are the 161' long "U- dock" at the north end of
the marina and the 109' long southernmost main dock. Both of these have slips to the landward side,
and both already exist at a depth greater than -6' MLW. The landward side of U-dock is presently at -
9' MLW to -10' MLW. We ask to be allowed to define the allowed dredge depth to this landward side
as -10' MLW, which equates to approximately -12' MLW on the river side. A sailing vessel longer than
100' could easily have a 12' keel draft. At the southern end of the marina, likewise there is existing -8'
MLW depth to the landward side. We would like to designate the last 109' of the main dock with this
present -8' MLW depth. As such, dredging would not occur under U-dock during this first dredging
cycle, and only minor touch up is needed under the southernmost main dock.
The Mean Low Water Depth of -12' is our dredge limitation within the slips, i.e. we will start at -6 MLW at
the main dock landward edge, and dredge in an approximate straight line taper until we intersect the
existing -12 MLW contour. For the proposed 2009 dredging, this 87,000 sf (2.0 acre) red hatched area
of proposed disturbed area on drawing C-1 has an approximate volume of 6500 cu yds.
,%i -r.
%% GAApUq;',
r
• . ??•i
%
i
4 N.9,
g
9•
' cE dA `
'Of 1111101,
RECEIVED
APR 17 2009
DCM WILMINGTOW NC
CAMA#90-97 Bennett Brothers Yachts Major Mod Maintenance Dredging Narrative: Page 4
Bruce Marek, P.E.
5489 Eastwind Rd
Wilmington, NC 28403
910-799-9245
May 15, 2009
Project Narrative: Bennett Brothers Yachts/Cape Fear Marina Request for Major Modification to CAMA
Permit #90-97 for Maintenance Dredging of Marina Slips: Additional Narrative for Spoil Basin
Drawing C-3 has been revised on 5-15-09 (Rev 1) to reflect comments as to spoil basin sizing. I have
increased proposed length of basin from 298' to 322', in the direction parallel to J.E.L. Wade Drive. The
slope of the hill inside of the boatyard fence has long been stabilized with rip-rap and/or concrete
walls. Thus, the proposed basin is more akin to a three sided basin than a stand-alone spoil basin.
Reference photos show this riprap stabilization and the concrete walls.
From the known surveyor benchmark of 10.68 on the travel lift pier, the boatyard elevation is in the 10'
to 12' range. Road elevation of J.E.L. Wade Dive appears to be at least 30', with a possible centerline
elevation at the intersection of Compton Street & J.E.L. Wade Drive of 35.45'. There is a concrete wall
of approximate 4' height that runs along a portion of the marled boatyard and at the office. Using
the base of this concrete wall as local grade = basin 0' elevation, top of berm is now set at +16' local
grade. The tall retaining wall along J.E.L. Wade is +19' local grade. Allowing for 2' of freeboard over
a 2' water height, volume calculations for spoil are based on top of spoil elevation +12'. To create the
three sided berm, existing soil will be excavated from the site to 2' below local grade (-2'). This gives us
a storage height of 14'. From Autocad listing of areas, this top area is 24000 sf (236' length x avg 96'
width). Bottom area at -2' local grade = 10900 sf by Autocad listing. Bottom dimensions are 180'x
approx 60'.
Volume based on 14' height x ((24000 sf + 10900 sf)/2)= 244300 sf. Dividing by 27 = 9050 cu yds. Thus,
basin as drawn is 905016500 = 1.4 x estimated dredge volume for the first dredge sequence. It is
anticipated that the spoil basin will probably built to a lower height than shown, and then build up the
height with spoil or spoil/soil mixture after the first dredging.
Based on an abundance of poison ivy seen at the site, we may find that after the site is bush hogged
that we have more favorable site conditions than I have conservatively based my design on. We will
also consult with the dredger once one is selected. However, we do have the capacity to store the
required dredge material on site. Bennett Ventures, a sister company, owns property across the street
on the other side of J.E.L. Wade Drive that could also be utilized for a spoil basin. Next door neighbor
to the north, Harnett Landing, may be an additional source for spoiling or disposal, as they will most
likely require fill for their eventual site work.
??,.?GPpIOLfAt.
;?.j? ?'e10N/14••
ok .'kv
Z V N.
e.,.,€NpN•
E 3, '10%
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
MAY 15 2009
r aya tr i
Dudley monument at an expense of $800 and the Weathersby monument costing $T00_ These are but a selection of many
hundreds which have been put up by the house. The firm do an extensive trade in stone for building purposes, and they are now
supplying the stone for the new Murchison National Bank, now in course of erection here. Mr. R_ D. Tucker is a gentleman of
practical experience in his business, with a thorough knowledge of the trade with which he has been identified for twenty-five
years. The pride of a house is in it work and every detail is carefully overlooked by the proprietor to ensure perfection and artistic
excellence in e%ry instance.
HILTON LUMBER COMPANY,
Manufacturers of Lumber, Wilmington, N. C.
This business was founded about 1856 by Mr_ 0. G_ Parsley. Later the firm title was changed to Parsley & Wiggins and
subsequently Mr_ W. L_ Parsley became the sole proprietor. Finally, in 1894, the Hilton Lumber Company was organized with Mr.
W. L. Parsley, the son of the founder, as president and Mr. R. A. Parsley, his grandson, as secretary and treasurer. The plant of
the company covers about Reen acres, with 1700 feet frontage on the river. The mechanical equipment is operated by steam of
500-horse power capacity. The machinery and appliances throughout are of the latest improved and best character. The tracks of
the Atlantic Coast Line and Seaboard Air Line runs the entire length of the property, and ships can be loaded direct from the mill.
The capacity of the mill is about 12,000,000 feet of dressed North Carolina pine and cypress lumber annually- About two hundred
men are given employment at the mill and at the logging camps. The trade of the house is largely in New York and New England,
and other Northern points- The company have also a factory for the manufacture of crates for shipping strawberries, etc. They turn
out about 75,000 crates during the fruit shipping season. The gentlemen at the head of the enterprise are well qualified by
experience to conduct the business. Mr. W. L. Parsley has been connected with it since 1876 and Mr. R. A. Parsley has had
about ten years' experience of its details.
i u @l neU1
RECEIVED
APR 17 2009
DCM. WILMINGTf002, NC
Page a1
O. McEACHERN,
Wholesale Grocer and Naval Stores, 204 and 206 North Water Street.
Prominently engaged in the wholesale grocery trade here is the enterprise of Mr. D. McEachern, who commenced
operations in 1891 Since that period he has succeeded in consolidating a business which has become permanent and which has
gained the favorable consideration of the trade generally. Premises are utilized at the above address, which comprise two floors,
and which occupy an area of 40X 120 feet. The stock comprises a full assortment of heavy groceries, such as canned and pickled
meats, corn, hay, flour, sugar, molasses, tobacco, snuffs, etc., all of which are derived direct from first hands and original sources
of supply, and are placed at the disposal of the trade at the very lowest market prices. The trade of the house extends throughout
[D. McEachern, Wholesale Grocer and Naval Stores, 204 and 206 North Water Street]
a radius of 150 miles from Wilmington, and is represented on the road by commercial travellers. A special department of the
business is in naval stores. Mr_ McEachern. buys and sells these commodities and also handles them on commission. He invites
consignments of the same, making liberal advances as required, and his facilities enable him to assure quick sales and prompt
returns. He carries a large stock and all orders are filled to the satisfaction of shippers. Mr. McEachern, the sole proprietor of this
business, is identified with a number of othe interests, which have contributed in no small measure to Wilmington's facilities and
welfare. Thus, he is president of the Cape Fear and Peoples' Steamboat Company, a freight and mail line, plying between
Wilmington and Fayetteville, and he is chairman of the Board of County Commissioners. He is a member also of the Chamber of
Commerce and the Produce Exchange, and may be said to be generally active in all that would contribute to the city's
advancement and progress. Referring again to the business, we may say that in all that conduces to the interests of his patrons,
he is in every way active, assuring them every inducement in the way of terms and prices, along with fair dealing, and every
courtesy and attention.
Page 24
The Port of Wilmington.
Wilmington is well known among the Southern ports of the Atlantic coast line of North America, achieving a prominent place
as long ago as the beginning of the past century. The calamities of war and the enlargement of sea-going vessels, requiring
deeper water than it could offer, reduced it for a time in importance. But the enterprise of its merchants and the successful work of
the government have completely removed the retraints on its commerce, but there is still room for deeper water, and there is every
reason to hope that the facilities will be still further enhanced in the near future. The deepest draft a vessel could draw in ante-
bellum days was ten to twelve feet, now are often unloaded ships at the wharfs up to twenty feet, and
1. r'"19 *A% C111 Mii1
LUTHERAN CHURCH-
this without detention, with the result that the annual tonage is steadily increasing.
The following figures give some idea of the growth and development of the shipping interests of the port. In 1898 the tonnage
of seagoing American vessels entering and leaving this port was 106,000 tons, 62,000 tons of which were steam vessels. Foreign
tonnage was 84,817 tons, of which 62,000 tons were steam. Total tonage for year, 190,012 tons. In 1899, American tonnage
120,000 tons, of which 77,000 tons were steam, foreign, 62,476 tons, of which 46,052 were steam, numbering 27 vessels. Total
tonage for 1899, 182,000_ In 1900 there were 129,000 tons American, 57 steamers, of 70,000 tons; foreign, 36 steam ships,
aggregating 61,000 tons. Total tonnage 1900, 261 vessels, amounting to 212,385 tons. In 1901, there were 234 American vessels
of 194,933 tons, of which 113 were steam, aggregating 145,150 tons- Foreign, vessels of 80,055 tons, of which 40 were steamers,
amounting to 67,027 tons. Grand total for 1901, 307 vessels of 24,988 tons- The above refers to sea-going vessels.
RECEIVED
APR 17 2009
DCIVI WILMINGTON, NC
Lumoer ana bntngies.
The lumber and kindred interest of Wilmington may be said to rank among the first in the importance and volume of
transactions effected. Throughout this and neighboring states there are vast lands upon which the supply of standing timber is
enormous. There are hundreds of mills in operation throughout this territory and much of their product is shipped to this city or is
marketed through the efforts of the timber agents here, or in other cases. the lumber is manufactured in Wilmington and shipped
to all parts. During the year 1901 the amount of lumber shipped from here was 42,695,644 feet, of
Page 12 rr
1
which 33,316,447 feet went coastwise, the remainder, 9,379.197 feet, being dispatched to foreign countries. This, howsmr. does
not represent the whole of Wilmington's lumber trade, large quantities being sold through the agency of Wilmington houses and
dispatched direct to destinations from the mills. In shingles. 5,614,940 were shipped to domestic points and 1,161.950 went
abroad. The lumber trade of
FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH.
Wilmington is not by any means dependent upon the home demand. large quantities going as will be seen above, to foreign
countries. The long leaf yellow pine and short leaf pine, are the principal varieties handled and then: are the best varieties for all
kinds of building material and house finish, and are particularly well suited to the foreign demand. Lumber, timber and shingles are
shipped from Wilmington to the West Indies and South and Central America, the ships returning
RE EI E
APR 17 2009
DCM WILMING-l'ON, NC
Fly-, 41J -,,-V {, s.??
Bruce Marek, P.E.
5489 Eastwind Rd.
Wilmington, NC 28403
Approximate Dredge Volume Calculations for Bennett Brothers Yachts. Inc./Cape Fear Marina
Location Di Is at North End of Marina (North End of 'U-Dock"); D27 Is at South End of Marina
Length b Distance between Measurement Locations Depth Measurement Date = 2/16/2009

ocation Appx Dist to
-12A' MLW
From Dock
Landward Side MLW Depth
at Dock
Landward Edge
2/16/2009 Desired Depth
at Dock
INBD Edge Existing
Triangular
Profile
Area sf Proposed
Triagular
Profile
Area sf Dredge
= Profile
Differece

ength

olume
Dl 10. -10.0' -10.0' 10 A 10 s 0 sf
D2A 10' -10.0' -100 10 sf 10 sf 0 sf 155.0' 0 cu yds
D26 42' -0.5' 242 s 126 116 s
D3 30' AT 176 90 86 s 60.0' 223 cu
D4 37' 0.7' -6.0' 235 s 111 124 s WAY 116 cu yds
DS 41' 0.0' 7.D' 246 sf 123 123 5 96.0' 439 cu Vds
D6 44' 0.0' -6.0' 264 132 s 132 96.0' 4S3 cu
D7 55' 0.0' -6.0' 330 165 s 165 s S7.0' 314 w
D8 43' 0.0' -6.0' 258 129 129 s 50.0' 272 cu
D9 44' 0.0' -6.0' 264 132 S 132 s 32.0' 155 cu
D10 45' 0.1' -6.0' 272 s 135 sfl 137 s 47.0' 234 cu yd
D31 54' 0.1' -6.0' 327 s 162 s 165 s 100.0' S59 cu yds
D12 73' 0.0' -6.0' 439si. 219 219 s 51.0' 362 cu yd
013 75' -0.2' -6.0' 443 225 s 218 46.0' 372 cu yd
014 83' -0.2' -6.0' 490 249 s 241 sf 51.0' 433 cu yd
D15 48' 252 144 s 108 s 60.0' 387 cu yd
016 48' -1
9' -6.0' 242 s 144 98 sf 78.0' 298 cu yd
D17 22' .
-3.5' -6.D' 94 s 66 28 s 63.0' 147 cu yd
D18 37' -3.2' -6.0' 163 s 111 52 60.0' 98 cu yds
D19 W. 2'
-5 -6.0' 170 150 St . 20 sf 50.0' 66 cu s
D20 43' .
-3.7' -6.0' 178 129 49 sf 58.0' 75 cu yds
D21 36' -3
6' -6.0' 151 108 s 43 s 60.0' 103 w s
D22 44' .
-3
0' -6.0' 198 132 s 66 s 108.0' 218 cu yd
D23A 52' .
-1
0' -6.0' 286 156 s 130 s 71.0' 258 cu yd
D238 52' .
-1
0' -6.0' 156 130 5
D24 51' .
-2
5' -6.0' 153 s 89 127.0' S16 cu yds
D25 63' .
0'
-3 -6
17 E284 189 s 95 s 70JY 238 eu s
026 65' . .
-6.0' 195 20 s 6L0 129 cu yd
D27 63' 8.2'
- f 126
s -6 sf
q 117.0' 29 cu yds
sums 1854' 642S cu Yd4
Round-Up a 6500 cu
RECEIVED
APR 0 9 2009
ocm WiLlV INGTON
Sealed 4-6.09 Bruce Marek, P.E. NC #15684
ANA
P 'per
v :ti;=
lot
O'A
? Env .
Only Sealed Copies are Official Dredge Volumes for CAMA 4-6-09

APR 0 9 2009
DCOA WILMINGTON, NC
}
0
1Z?
Li_
L.
11 .1
Ul-
W
z- LL.
u W
r_r_

T (<Ll
_J
?E o
CL-
(n W
Li-1
z
14-
W
SJ LL
Cl)
z
O
_._l z
J
Q
-?
<??L
W
? LL
Z n
z
F LL1
W 0
L.1._ V
W
N
W LL //>
_
U l.Jl
O I? J
C)
z?
Cn
x I.LJ
LLJ
c?
C
{
"l LL
W
U
LL-
LL
c:l
Q CY_
? <a.
L
<
J
Z W
x zf
El.- 0
L1_
<1
LJ
2
._I
U
CJ_
ivv_ c
LL
N r
L C)
Wn It
Cr? Il.i a Troy
< { C1
zt
U W Yy
L J
It'
Q Ip v
Z 1
I? Q L,J
z
in i? t, o

1 S
0" #_

? h; _ ' I I
r! \ w i I I
v i Lo
?- \, • W
M? AN iV
z
Z?j
U?o? 5
F, ry Z
w
V) U-j
P4 w
W WIZ- CL Oy.,/U°Q
pq i T:
C\ .
o IZ ri)
z Q
H I
W J

`'II
I
a
k
1
`?T0.PVE? l1Fy Plt ......
1 ?y
I1?
1 I?
??i;=:.sJ I 1$
r ?. x
?"'f iJ
I h'
wood
LQU Q
?1( 1 / ?
cu -
r'IL. f1 I?J f
?f 1
J? co
v
l? `u
N
a
i rf r ?y ? c
y ! ail J I
r0 ;.7ylv.J r R '' I o _

m?
Yq
J If)
cn
x?
J
L
?z.

led 1?
r ?
m
a?
Z° to
• ~' 00 2
Q
I o
o+
°
s Z
?
Q
a

I
' Q)
'I
W j ' I 1 NF
w
J a o
<?D $<
age, O F
8
U
20
zZ a
?
Z Z
d
o ?
z ? o o:
?
rr
?I7
xi 4a

?? ?C SA
a Aff a N\
V) Mid ? s
L 1
N 4 j?
jig
ji doll...(z
az'z
n
! ?q (4v zm
.. T? 1 i:1A? 1T ?pMPTONSIR
LLI
-i
Z c ?'
c> ?
CJT
0
C.) ro I CO
?F 4 + 1 1k I
4 Z Q
Ck)
All
I ?'Ill '
A,
V l _awe,
l
7 f
loll
a
N2
'1'O 4 s WVj
1 o
01
k y f w
z?
I
O O [^ t\.
f'
CL L
O f _
f'
c z
? -a
LQ ?
Y.
1
Q
.,f
i I.J 1
I J I, i
V
J
J
Ith
I Q
L? y
i
N
t\ I
. I
?W
Y ?
mmo
Z?
ao
O
xo
N
N
1
NJ
O
O
O
Ln
O
J? ?
.
L r
? I
- ? J
I
Q??
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
July 16, 2009
DWQ Project # 96-1054v2
New Hanover County
Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc.
Ms. Tricia Bennett
1701 J.E.L. Wade Drive
Wilmington NC 28401
Subject Property: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging
REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION
To Ms. Bennett
On July 1, 2009, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your CAMA application to hydraulically dredge
within the footprint of your existing marina. The DWQ has determined that your application was incomplete and/or
provided inaccurate information as discussed below. The DWQ will require additional information in order to
process your application to impact protected wetlands and/or streams on the subject property. Therefore, unless we
receive the additional information requested below, we will have to move toward denial of your application as
required by 15A NCAC 2H .0506 and will place this project on hold as incomplete until we receive this additional
information. Please provide the following information so that we may continue to review your project.
Additional Information Requested:
1. This project appears to propose dredging in areas of Primary Nursery Areas (PNA's) that have not been
previously dredged. Comments from the North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) and North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission show concerns that your proposed project would cause
significant adverse impacts to the primary nursery area as identified by DMF. This would be considered a
degradation of waters, which would result in violations of the following Water Quality Standards:
15A NCAC 02B.0201 ANTIDEGRADATION POLICY
(f) Activities regulated under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344) which require a water
quality certification as described in Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1341) shall be evaluated
according to the procedures outlined in 15A NCAC 2H.0500. Activities which receive a water quality
certification pursuant to these procedures shall not be considered to remove existing uses. The evaluation
of permits issued pursuant to G.S. 143-215.1 that involve the assimilation of wastewater or stormwater by
wetlands shall incorporate the criteria found in 15A NCAC 2H .0506®(1)-(5) in determining the potential
impact of the proposed activity on the existing uses of the wetland per 15A NCAC 2H .0231.
15A NCAC 02B .0221 TIDAL SALT WATER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR CLASS SA WATERS
(1) Best usage of waters. Aquatic life propagation and maintenance of biological integrity (including fishing
and functioning PNAs), wildlife, secondary recreation, and any other usage except primary recreation or
shellfishing for marketing purposes.
(2) Conditions Related to Best Usage. The waters shall meet the current sanitary and bacteriological standards
as adopted by the Commission for Health Services and shall be suitable for shellfish culture; any source of
water pollution which precludes any of these uses, including their functioning as PNAs, on either a short-
term or long-term basis shall be considered to be violating a water quality standard.
Please contact Rich Carpenter of DMF and Molly Ellwood of NCWRC at [phone] to try and
resolve this issue.
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, North Carolina 28405 One
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Internet:,lvvur.ncwaterquality.org ?atura!!t?
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer
I go through this "found history" in response to the site as not being previously dredged, and that
dredging would cause a significant adverse impact to the primary nursery area. While actual dredging
records for the site have not been found, a considerable portion of the marina is in an allowed dredge
zone of the side slopes of the navigation channel. The site also has a long history of being bulkheaded,
with much of the wood bulkhead being removed, along with several hundred piles that formed the
foundation for the wooden wharves when the marina was constructed. The installation of the timber
piles and the bulkhead today would be considered as a disturbance, as well as their subsequent
removal. Along with the removal of bulkhead and piles, the marina site contained much "riverwood",
submerged logs that either fell off barges during offloading, or didn't successfully make it up the
slipway to the saw mill. A link to the Bennett Brother Yachts Website shows a 5' diameter Cypress
log that was harvested from the site. Not really dredging, but really the same if not more severe
disturbance. Bennett Brothers Yachts was allowed by their permits to harvest this riverwood (often
found when trying to drive piles), and they also subsequently used another firm that was similarly
permitted to harvest riverwood.
Included with this letter is a copy of a fax letter from Yerkes Construction, Inc. on April 27, 1998 to
the State Underwater Archaeology Unit as advance notification that a semi-submerged barge was to be
removed. Along with the longtime ferry usage from the northern end of the site, this area has had
continued recorded disturbance for over 150 years.
The late Paul Bennett had studied the history of this location prior to and after purchasing the site for
his boatyard/marina. He unfortunately died from cancer two years ago. A lot of the knowledge of the
construction and the initial permitting discussions of the marina are lost with his passing. His wife,
Tricia (Patricia Donovan) Bennett, is now president of Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc., the CAMA
Permit Holder. The marina is a closed head marina, includes multiple in-dock pump out stations, and
has recently received North Carolina's Clean Marina designation. The boatyard has an innovative
system for waste-water treatment for the pressure wash- down pad.
We do understand that there are areas of downtown Wilmington, south of the Holmes Bridge that have
been deemed "no longer functioning PNA". While the 1997 permits indicated the Bennett Brothers
Yachts marina site as PNA, based on the now available history of the site and past usages/disturbances,
coupled with the best management practices that Bennett Brothers Yachts employs, we feel that
maintenance dredging of the existing footprint of the marina would not be a significant adverse impact
or degradation of the water quality.
Thanks in advance for your kind for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please
call me at 910-799-9245 or cell 910-228-2484 or email me at [e-mail]
Bruce Marek, P.E. ' ?.QQ•
Cc: Tricia Bennett, President, laenneW theis Yachts, Inc.
Holley Snider, CAMA; Rich CarpenteR F; Mg1j Wood, NCWRC; Ian McMillan, 401 Wetlands Unit
%
%?9G • FN?IN??Qr?Q.?:
of JAMVS,••?
From: CG Yerkes To: Bennett Brother's Yachts Date: 412711998 Time: 12:15:22 PM Page 2 of 2
C(17?
ERKES
CONSTRUCTION, INC
April 27, 1998
North Carolina Underwater Archaeology
PO Box 58
Kure Beach, NC 28448
Re: Permit Number 97NER595
Dear Sirs:
This is a statement of official notification as required by the above referenced permit. We hereby
give notice that an abandoned barge is to be removed from Underwater Archaeology Unit Site
#0038NER on or about May 4, 1998.
If there are any questions regarding this matter please feel free to call the office at 772-9343,
Regards,
Leigh Anne Lowder
Office Assistant
cc: Bennett Brothers Yachts/Paul Bennett
A ?
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
August 13, 2009
DWQ Project # 96-1054v2
New Hanover County
Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc.
Ms. Tricia Bennett
1701 J.E.L. Wade Drive
Wilmington NC 28401
Subject Property: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging
REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION
To Ms. Bennett
On July 1, 2009, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your CAMA application to
hydraulically dredge within the footprint of your existing marina. New information was received
by the DWQ on August 7, 2009. The Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF) has determined that
the proposed project would impact the surrounding Primary Nursery Areas (PNAs). Because the
proposed project would result in significant impacts to the PNAs, the DWQ has determined that
significant uses could be removed or degraded by this project. Therefore unless modifications of
the proposal are made to alleviate the concerns of DMF, we will recommend moving towards
denial of your application as required by 15A NCAC 2H.0506 and will place this project on
hold as incomplete until we receive this additional information.
Additional Information Requested:
If the project is modified to address the concerns of the Division of Marine Fisheries and there
are no other objections, DWQ will have no objection to the project.
Please respond within three weeks of the date of this letter by sending this information to me in
writing and Ian McMillan of the 401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit. His address is
Ian McMillan, 401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit, 2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh,
NC 27604-2260. If we do not hear from you within three weeks, we will assume that you no
longer want to pursue this project and we will consider the project as withdrawn.
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: www.ncwaterqualil .org
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer
North Carolina
Naturallt,
2
Bennett Brothers Yachts
New Hanover County
1996-1054v2
This letter only addresses the application review and does not authorize any impacts to wetlands,
waters or protected buffers. Please be aware that any impacts requested within your
application are not authorized (at this time) by the DWQ. Please call me at 910-797-7215 or
Ian McMillan at 919-733-1786 if you have any questions regarding or would like to set up a
meeting to discuss this matter.
Sincerely,
A gt"?'
Chad Coburn
Senior Environmental Specialist
cc: Bruce Marek - 5489 Eastwind Road, Wilmington, NC 28403
Ian McMillan - DWQ 401 Oversight and Express Unit, Raleigh
Dave Timpy - USACE Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
Rich Carpenter - DMF Wilmington
Molly Ellwood - WRC Wilmington
Steve Everhart - DCM Wilmington Office
Doug Huggett - DCM Morehead Office
WiRO
Bruce Marek, P.E. P@L9%q25
5489 Eastwind Rd Wilmington, NC 28403
910-799-9245 SEP ` 8 2009
Sept 2, 2009 OENR- WATER GUALrry
WETLANDS MO 8TORMWA7M B M;m
Mr. Chad Coburn
NC DENR DWQ
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
Re: DWQ Project # 96-1054v2 and CAMA Permit # 90-97 Major Modification Submittal for Marina
Maintenance Dredging, Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc. 1701 J.E.I. Wade Drive, Wilmington, NC:
Dear Mr. Coburn,
This letter is in response to your August 2009 request regarding the Bennett Brothers Yachts CAMA
91-96 Major Modification Request for maintenance dredging of their marina within the existing
footprint of the marina, that we eliminate the maintenance dredging request from the proposal. Since
this is the only item in our CAMA 90-97 Major Modification Submittal which was accepted as a
complete application, along with 27 sets of engineering drawings plus fees paid to and collected by the
state, being asked to remove the maintenance dredging is perplexing.
We have been working through CAMA, as lead agency, to state our case for this maintenance
dredging, which we believe is allowable, through exemption for maintenance dredging for marinas in
an urban waterfront. CAMA has confirmed that they consider this marina, at 1701 J.E.L. Wade Drive,
Wilmington to be part of the Wilmington Urban Waterfront and the Wilmington Industrial Waterfront.
As we understand it, there is a specific 60 day time frame for additional agencies to review the
submittal (the reason for 27 sets of drawings), with an available 75 day extension to CAMA of this
review period for them to receive responses. We feel that we are following this procedure as intended.
This procedure resulted in your agency receiving our packet as our application for 401 Water Quality
Certification. We hope that the merits of the project, intended to keep the marina floating docks
floating at low tide, would merit said water quality certification.
In normal cases, I believe this certification would have come out of the fees already paid to CAMA, or
if we desired express service, by a separate fee paid directly to DWQ.
That a portion of, but not all of the marina, is in a PNA has obviously delayed/complicated obtaining
the required 401 Certification. My August 6, 2009 response to your July 16, 2009 request for more
information was intended to satisfactorily answer your questions about the site and to give you some
historical background on its long time usage as dockage/wharfs, dating back to its days as a lumber
mill, pre-Civil War. The Isabel Holmes bridge, immediately downstream of the site, historically
speaking, is a recent addition: larger ships, barges and schooners for many decades used the site to
unload timber and load lumber.
The Bennett Brothers Yachts boatyard/marina should really be looked at for its contribution and
benefit to the water quality of the Cape Fear River Basin/New Hanover County marine environment.
Bennett Brothers Yachts DWQ Project #96-1054v2 / CAMA 90-97 Bruce Marek P.E. 9-2-09
The marina has earned the prestigious "Clean Marina" designation. For its boat bottom pressure
washing operation, after containment of wash water, it utilizes a state of the art treatment process that
removes suspended particles through the process of flocculation, which separates the waste particles,
which are then drained off, dried and disposed of with their other waste/paint materials through their
contracted waste disposal service. For upland boat maintenance work, Bennett Brothers Yachts has a
fully enclosed, NFPA compliant paint building that can house yachts as large as 80' to 90' in length.
Not many boatyards in the state have such environmentally compliant facilities. The site, of course, is
also covered under a state stormwater permit and has an on-site stormwater retention pond.
Probably even more important to the water quality of not only the site, but the downtown Cape Fear
riverfront in general, Bennett Brothers Yachts marina has public in-slip holding tank pump-out
facilities throughout the marina. With an elaborate plumbing system, no docked vessel needs to leave
its slip to get "pumped out". Piping is arranged so that all slips are reachable by hose. We believe the
next nearest public pump-out location south of Bennett Brothers is south of the State Ports at
Wilmington Marine Center. Bennett Brothers definitely has better access depth for larger yachts, as
the access channel to Wilmington Marine Center can be pretty shallow at low tide.
With the stated goal of the EPA and the State to make New Hanover County a "no discharge zone" in
2010, based on a sufficient number of marinas (9) with pump-out facilities, it would be a shame if this
lofty goal of regional water quality issues ends up having pump-out accessability problems if small
marinas can't keep their slips or doors open. Per the Wilmington Star News, Aug 30, 2009, "to be
effective, no discharge zones must have enough accessible pump out facilities to serve the boating
public". 401 Water Quality Certification for the Bennett Brothers Yachts maintenance dredging
project can help to keep sufficient pump-out availability in downtown Wilmington.
New Hanover County is noted for its many water related activities and boating opportunities.
Boatyards and marinas are necessary for both pleasure yachts and commercial fishing vessels. Bennett
Brothers Yachts is doing its best to not only follow, but to lead by example in having an
environmentally friendly marina coupled with a working boatyard. Bottoms are cleaned, bottoms are
painted, hulls are painted, engines are replaced and sailboats are rigged. With the elevation of J.E.L.
Wade Drive about 30' above the river level, the marina site is probably the best hurricane hole in New
Hanover County.
We hope the above helps you to make an independent positive decision on the water quality
certification. While we understand the desire to categorically deny the certification based on the
shoreline rating of PNA, the marina is adjacent to the dredged river navigation channel, so dredging in
the area has occurred. The Army Corps of Engineers has already indicated a positive response to our
project. We also understand that there are areas of downtown Wilmington that have been deemed "no
longer functioning PNA".
After an initial multi-agency scoping meeting in 2008 and multiple discussions with CAMA, I
submitted the Major Modification to the Permit asking for, for a lack of better wording, a dredge
amount that would hopefully not require re-dredging for approximately another 10 years, based on the
marina being open now for 11 years and the shoaling under the docks to date. If a lesser amount of
dredging, at a possible shorter time interval between would be more acceptable to DWQ, then we
would be happy to limit the amount of dredging at any one time. Perhaps one minor dredging will
suffice for years. There was a broken City of Wilmington stormwater drain several years ago near
Hilton Street that contributed some amount of silt to the marina area, which would not be considered as
a recurnng occurrence.
Bennett Brothers Yachts DWQ Project #96-1054v2 / CAMA 90-97 Bruce Marek P.E. 9-2-09
While there is some speed gain in using a hydraulic dredge, if a backhoe on a barge, or crane and
bucket methodologies are deemed more easily "certified", please let us know. We did ask for the
option to use a backhoe on a barge in our original narrative.
To summarize, based on the now available history of the site and past usages/disturbances, coupled
with the best management practices that Bennett Brothers Yachts employs, we feel that maintenance
dredging of the existing footprint of the marina would not be a significant adverse impact or
degradation of the water quality.
Thanks in advance for your kind for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please
call me at 910-799-9245 or cell 910-228-2484 or email me at [e-mail]
??• ?%A CARO
SSlp,1;.'L?
0
SEAL
15684 '
Bruce Marek, P.E. r,?s?` .,Fk W,,,,??A,'?'Rich Ce: Yricia Bennett, President,'achts, Inc.
Holle Snider, CAMA; Steve EVVe°rh Carpenter,
McMillan, 401 Wetlands Unit
DMF; Molly Ellwood, NCWRC; Ian
Bennett Brothers Yachts DWQ Project #96-1054v2 / CAMA 90-97 Bruce Marek P.E. 9-2-09
AN A
R
E NR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretarv
October 20, 2009
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chuck Wakild ? V
Deputy Director, Division if Water Quality
FROM: Rick Shiver O C T 2 1 2009
Regional Supervisor r>dw•w??toux?n
Wilmington Regional Office wETIUM AM 5101400j6t erWW
Subject: Review of 401 Water Quality Certification application
Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc. (BBYI)
New Hanover County, NC
On October 7, 2009, you, Cyndi Karoly, Ian McMillan, Chad Coburn, Joanne Steenhuis, and
myself met via telephone conference regarding the application from Bennett Brothers Yachts,
Inc. for a 401 Water Quality Certification to allow new maintenance dredging within an existing
marina in the Northeast Cape Fear River. These waters are classified as SC by the DWQ and the
Division of Marine Fisheries has designated this area as Primary Nursery Area (PNA).
A 401 WQC was issued by the DWQ on January 6, 1997, for 0.35 acres on 404 impacts.
This certification was modified with a new 401 on February 7, 1997, to pull some of the
marina areas outside of the Army Corps (USACE) navigation channel. The application
for the 401 mentioned that the project site area being applied for was a Primary Nursery
Area.
• The 404 permit was issued on June 19, 1997 by the Army Corps under a General Permit
291. Condition `d' of the USACE's recommendations was that excavation should be
limited to the travel lift basin area and should not exceed twelve fee below the mean low
water (MLW) level.
• The CAMA Major Development permit was issued by the Division of Coastal
Management (DCM) on July 2, 1997.
• BBYI submitted a variance request to the Coastal Resources Commission on July 25,
1997, to allow for new dredging within the PNA for a travel lift basin area at the site.
Notes from a November 1997 meeting between BBYI and the NC Attorney General's
Office (representing the DCM) show that BBYI was aware that they would not be
allowed to conduct new dredging within the PNA at their facility.
Ifo?rihCarolina
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 127 Cardinal Drive Extension Phone [phone] Customer Servicel-877.623-67• Qf!lCll??i,
Wilmington Regional Office Wilmington, NC 28405-3845 FAX [phone] Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/100/9 Post Consumer Paper
• The CRC granted the variance to dredge an area for a travel lift basin within the PNA on
December 3, 1997.
On December 22, 2006, the renewed the previous CAMA permit and included the
following condition under "Excavation - Unless specifically altered herein, the
dimensions of the area to be dredged shall not exceed the footprint of the existing travel
lift, all as expressly and specifically set forth in the attached workplan drawings. Any
proposal to change the area to be dredged shall require permit modification."
On September 16, 2008, representatives from the DWQ, the USACE, the DCM, NC the
Division of Marine Fisheries (DMF), and the NC Wildlife Resources Commission
(NCWRC) met with BBYI about a new proposal to maintenance dredge approximately
5,000 square feet within the existing footprint of the marina. Notes from this meeting
show that BBYI was informed once again that new dredging within a PNA is not
allowed.
On January 7, 2009, BBYI was issued a Violation of the CAMA Major Development
Permit and the variance issued by the CRC for installation of unauthorized rip-rap.
Records do not show that the DWQ was notified of this violation until October 2009
upon reviewing the present application. However, both BBYI and the DCM noted that
the violation was resolved prior to the application.
• The February 17, 2009 renewal of the CAMA permit mentions under Condition 2 that
"All conditions and stipulations of the active permit remain in force under this renewal."
On July 1, 2009, the DWQ received the application for the proposed maintenance
dredging of 87,000 square feet of open waters within the footprint of the existing marina.
The DWQ placed the application on hold for additional information because authorizing
new dredging within a PNA would be a violation of 15A NCAC 02B .0220 (1) and also
15A NCAC 02B .0201. BBYI responded by stating that they were aware that new
dredging within a PNA is not allowable and that they were applying with the intention of
having the application denied. The DWQ again placed the application was placed on
hold for additional information with the indication that the application was headed
towards denial. BBYI submitted new information to the DWQ on September 2, 2009, for
the application, again requesting the DWQ to deny the application.
On July 27, 2009, Rich Carpenter of the DMF objected to this application on the grounds
that the new dredging within a PNA would have significant adverse impact on the
estuarine resources in the project area.
• On August 12, 2009, the Molly Ellwood of the WRC objected to this application on the
same grounds as the DMF.
We feel that there is significant evidence to show that BBYI was aware prior to the construction
of their facility that the area was within a PNA. In addition, they were aware that no dredging
would be allowed within the PNA because they went through the variance approval process not
long after being granted the permits to construct the marina. Notes from meetings leading up to
this application again show that BBYI was aware of the restrictions that their choice of business
location would have. On October 19, 2009, the consultant for BBYI, Bruce Marek, again
communicated via telephone conversation that his client would like for the DWQ to deny this
permit application so that they may move forward with a variance request from the CRC in
January. The Wilmington Regional office recommends that the Division move to deny this
application.
Bruce Marek, P.E.
5489 Eastwind Rd
Wilmington, NC 28403
910-799-9245
October 19, 2009
Mr. Chad Coburn
NC DENR DWQ
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
Re: DWQ Project # 96-10542 and CAMA Permit # 90-97 Major Modification Submittal for Marina
Maintenance Dredging, Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc. 1701 J.E.L. Wade Drive, Wilmington, NC:
Dear Mr. Coburn,
This letter is in regards to our ongoing project seeking maintenance dredging for the Bennett Brothers
Yachts Marina on the North East Cape Fear River at 1701 J.E.L. Wade Drive, Wilmington. Pursuant
to the multi-agency meeting with Jim Gregson, Director of CAMA, on October 7, 2009, we are still
sincere in our efforts in desiring to take our maintenance dredging request to the Coastal Resource
Commission, in order to keep the main floating docks floating at low tide at this state recognized
"Clean Marina".
We understand that your Agency's stance on not being able to grant us a 401 Water Quality
Certification is based predominantly on Marine Fisheries comments regarding dredging in a PNA.
While the New Hanover County CAMA land plan has an exception for allowing maintenance dredging
of marinas within their existing footprint, the State appears to have no such ability to grant such
dredging without the project going for a CRC variance. Rich Carpenter of Marine Fisheries indicated
that he would not have expected the marina, as sited, to experience the siltation/shoaling that has
occurred over the past 10 years because of the location of the marina in regards to fast moving water
and the navigation channel.
A semi-stalemate exists whereas CAMA seeks to put our project "on hold" until we have either a
certification or denial from DWQ. The next CRC Meeting is January 13, 2010. Our hope is for our
maintenance dredging project, which we feel in the big picture is beneficial to the water quality of the
City/ County/Region/State, to be on its agenda.
it is with the facts above that on behalf of Mrs. Patricia Bennett, President of Bennett Brothers Yachts,
Inc. that I respectfully/regretfully request DWQ denial of our CAMA Major Modification Request to
CAMA Permit #90-97. Prompt denial allows for the CAMA process to timely continue for us to meet
the early December deadline of submitting for the Variance Hearing.
Thanks in advance for your kind for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please
call me at 910-799-9245 or cell 910-228-2484 or email me at [e-mail]
Neeett
e r c r,?tuE1?,.
Bruce Marek, P.E. r
Cc: Tricia Bennett, President, Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc
Holley Snider, LAMA; ionathor. !-Howell, CAMA; Ian McMillan r,PWQ 401 We k* 'Vnit

State of North Carolina
@
Department of Environme rep
TP&g .TM A&T?'?TA
Health and Natural Resou ? 197 • •
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor ............. ........
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretory
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Bennett Brothers Yacht, Inc.
8118 Market St.
Wilmington, NC 28405
Dear Sirs,
E) FE F1
February 7, 1997
Re: Certification Pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal Clean Water Act,
Proposed yacht manufacturing and maintenance facility
WQC Project #961054, COE #199602652
New Hanover County
Attached hereto is a copy of Certification No. 3131 issued to Bennett Brothers Yacht, Inc.
dated February 7, 1997.
If we can be of further assistance, do not hesitate to contact us.
Sincerely,
r?
.9 eston Ho azd, Jr.
Attachments
961054.wgc
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Wilmington Field Office
Wilmington DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Domey
Mr. John Parker, Division of Coastal Management
Central Files
Division of Water Quality • Environmental Sciences Branch
Enviro. Sciences Branch. 4401 Reedv Creek Rd.. Raleiah. NC 27607 Teleohone 919-733-1786 FAX # [phone]

NORTH CAROLINA 401 WATER QUALITY. CERTIFICATION
THIS CERTIFICATION is issued in conformity with the requirements of Section 401
Public Laws 92-500 and 95-217 of the United States and subject to the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality (DWQ) Regulations in 15 NCAC 2H, Section .0500 to Bennett Brothers Yacht,
Inc. resulting in 0.32 acres of wetland impact in New Hanover County pursuant to an application
filed on the 16th day of January of 1997 to construct a yacht manufacturing and maintenance
facility.
The application provides adequate assurance that the discharge of fill material into the waters
of the Northeast Cape Fear River in conjunction with the proposed development will not result in
a violation of applicable Water Quality Standards and discharge guidelines. Therefore, the State
of North Carolina certifies that this activity will not violate the applicable portions of Sections 301,
302, 303, 306, 307 of PL 92-500 and PL 95-217 if conducted in accordance with the application
and conditions hereinafter set forth.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you submitted in your application,
as described in the Public Notice or as modified below. If you change your project, you must
notify us and you may be required to submit a revised application. If total wetland fills for this
project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory mitigation may be required as
described in 15A NCAC 2H.0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be valid, you must follow
the conditions listed below. In addition, you should get any other federal, state or local permits
before you go ahead with your project including (but not limited to) Sediment and Erosion
control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-discharge and Water Supply watershed regulations.
Condition(s) of Certification:
1. That appropriate sediment and erosion control practices which equal or exceed those
outlined in the most recent version of the "North Carolina Sediment and Erosion Control
Planning and Design Manual" or the "North Carolina Surface Mining Manual" (available
from the Division of Land Resources in the DEHNR Regional or Central Offices) are
utilized to prevent exceedances of the appropriate turbidity water quality standard (50
NTUs) in all saltwater classes, and all lakes and reservoirs; and 10 NTUs in trout
waters);
2. All sediment and erosion control measures placed in wetlands or waters shall be removed
and the natural grade restored after the Division of Land Resources has released the
project;
3. If an environmental document is required, this Certification is not valid until a FONSI or
ROD is issued by the State Clearinghouse;
4. Measures shall be taken to prevent live or fresh concrete from coming into contract with
waters of the state until the concrete has hardened;
5. The proposed connection of the oil-water separator to the City of Wilmington's sewer
system shall be coordinated through Ms. Dolores Bradshaw, Wilmington Pretreatment
Coordinator.
6. Washing of vessels and equipment shall be done in a manner so as not to result in runoff
into surface waters.
7. All solids from washing of boats must be collected and properly disposed of.
8. All maintenance, pressure washing, painting and scraping of boats shall only occur on
high ground with proper runoff and solids disposal.
Violations of any condition herein set forth shall result in revocation of this certification and
may result in criminal and/or civil penalties. This Certification shall. become null and void unless
the above conditions are-made conditions of the Federal 404 and/or coastal Area Management Act
Permit. This Certification shall expire upon expiration of the 404 or CAMA permit.
If this Certification is unacceptable to you have the right to an adjudicatory hearing upon
written request within sixty (60) days following receipt of this Certification. This request must be
in the form of a written petition conforming to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General
Statutes and filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C.
27611-7447. If modifications are made to an original Certification, you have the right to an
adjudicatory hearing on the modifications upon written request within sixty (60) days following
receipt of the Certification. Unless such demands are made, this Certification shall be final and
binding.
This the 7th day of February, 1997
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
ston oward, Jr.
WQC #3131
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Reso ,, ry,`, / • •
Division of Water Quality
LLL
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor 'Jr?M 0 7 19.9
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary M'????° p E H N 1?
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
January 6, 1997
New Hanover County
DWQ Project # 961054
APPROVAL of 401 Water Quality Certification and ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
Bennett Brothers Yacht, Inc.
8118 Market Street
Wilmington, NC 28405
Dear Sirs:
You have our approval to place fill material in 0.35 acres of wetlands or waters for the purpose of
constructing a yacht manufacturing and maintenance facility with associated marina at N.E. Cape Fear River
at 3rd Street Bridge, as you described in your application dated 15 November 1996. After reviewing your
application, we have decided that this fill is covered by General Water Quality Certification Number 3025.
This approval is only valid for the purpose and design that you described in your application except as
modified below. If you change your project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us a new
application. If total wetland fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre, compensatory
mitigation may be required as described in 15A NCAC 2H .0506 (h) (6) and (7). For this approval to be
valid, you must follow the conditions listed in the attached certification and any additional conditions listed
below. The proposed connection of the oil-water separator to the City of Wilmington's sewer system shall be
coordinated through Ms. Dolores Bradshaw, Wilmington Pretreatment Coordinator. Washing of vessels and
equipment shall be done in a manner so as not to result in runoff into surface waters. All solids from the
washing of boats must be collected and properly disposed of. All maintenance, pressure washing, painting
and scraping of boats shall only occur on high ground with proper runoff and solids disposal. In addition, you
should get any other federal, state or local permits before you go ahead with your project including (but not
limited to) Sediment and Erosion Control, Coastal Stormwater, Non-Discharge and Water Supply Watershed
regulations. This approval will expire when the accompanying 404 or CAMA permit expires unless
otherwise specified in the General Certification.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this certification, you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing.
You must act within 60 days of the date that you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written
petition which conforms to Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of
Administrative Hearings, P.O. Box 27447, Raleigh, N.C. 276 1 1-7447. This certification and its conditions
are final and binding unless you ask for a hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act. If you have any questions, please telephone John Domey at 919-733-1786.
S' e1y,
r ton Hbw , Jr. P.E.
Attachment
cc: Wilmington District Corps of Engineers
Corps of Engineers Wilmington Field Office
)6?W oington DWQ Regional Office
Mr. John Dorney
Central Files
John Parker; DCM
Dolores Bradshaw; City of Wilmington
Steve Morrison; Land Management Group 961054.1tr
Division of Water Quality - Environmental Sciences Branch
Environmental Sciences Branch, 4401 Reedy Creek Rd., Raleigh, NC 27607 Telephone [phone] FAX # [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer - 50% recycled/10% post consumer paper

Permit Class tO?
NEW
Permit Number
90-97
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environment; Health & Natural Resources
and
Coastal Resources Commission 11(
I ??
rrmtt
fora
X Major Development in an Area of Environmental Cpc{c?E4ii
pursuant to NCGS 113A,418 ,v At ',AG wi ";i"
Excavation and/or filling pursuant to NCGS 113-229
Issued to Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc., 8118 Market Street, Wilmington, NC 28405
authorizing development in New Hanover County at
Northeast Cape Fear River, immed. N. of 3rd.
St. Bridge, in Wilmington requested in the permittee's application dated revised 6/17/97, letter revisions dated
5/5/ and 6/18/97 and attached work plan drawings described in Condition #1.
This permit, issued on '1 - a^ --- T1 , 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 a fine, imprisonment or civil action; or may cause the permit to be null and void.
1) The project authorized herein must be carried out in strict compliance with work plan for upland
development dated 5/2/97, with dock alignment deleted by DCM, and work plan for modified dock
layout, "Revised Slip Layout" dated 6/17/97.
2) This permit does not authorize excavation at the boat lift or any other excavation or filling in the
Northeast Cape Fear River and adjacent coastal wetlands.
Docking Facility Construction
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. An appeal requires resolution prior to work
initiation or continuance, as the case may be.
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 Departmental approval.
All work must cease when the permit expires on
December 31, 2000
In issuing this permit, the State of North Carolina agrees
that your project is consistent with the North Carolina
Coastal Management Program.
3) Prior to any construction of the docking facility, an Easement must be obtained from the State
Property Office, Department of Administration, telephone: [phone].
Signed by the authority of the Secretary of DEHNR and the
Chairman of the Coastal Resources Commission.
Roger checter, Director
Division of Coastal Management
This permit and its conditions are hereby accepted.
Signature of Permittee
Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc. Permit #90-97
Page 2 of 4
ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
4) No dockage, including pilings, may be placed closer than 112 feet to the near edge of the
Federally-maintained channel.
Archaeological Investigad
Relic Warf and Crib Structures
5) If these archaeological remains cannot be avoided during construction and thus, destruction or
disturbance is imminent, then the following requirements apply:
a) Wharf and crib structure. An archaeologist shall record the details of this
structure. Portions of the original backfill should be screened to determine
the date of construction. Archival research should be conducted to comple-
ment the archaeological findings.
b) Piling removal. Prior to the removal of any pilings, each shall be surveyed
and plotted on the project map.
C) If the permittee discovers any previously unknown historic or archaeological
remains while accomplishing the authorized work, he will immediately notify
DCM and the Wilmington District Engineer who will initiate the required State/
Federal coordination. Contact the Division of Archives and History at 919/
733-4763 for further consultation.
Upland Development
6) The Division of Water Quality approved the project proposal on June 23, 1997 under
Stormwater Management Permit No. SW8976403. Any violation of this SWMP will be
considered a violation of this CAMA permit.
NOTE: An Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan will be required for this
project. This plan must be filed at least thirty (30) days prior to the
beginning of any land-disturbing activity. Submit this plan to the Dept.
of Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Land Quality Section,
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, NC 28405-3845.
-3-
(3) Damages to other permitted or unpermitted activities or
structures caused by the authorized activity.
(4) Design and construction deficiencies associated with the
permitted work.
(5) Damage claims associated with any future modification,
suspension, or revocation of this permit.
Questions or comments may be addressed to Mr. Jeffery Richter, Wilmington
Field Office, Regulatory Branch, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
Clifford Winefordner
Chief, South Section
Regulatory Branch
Copies Furnished:
Mr. John Dorney Mme- C. Robert Stroud, Jr.
Division of Environmental Management ,,Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Department of f 'North Carolina Division of
Environment, Health and Coastal Management
Natural Resources 127 Cardinal Drive Extension
4401 Reedy Creek Road Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Raleigh, North Carolina 27607
Mr. John Hefner
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Larry Hardy
National Marine Fisheries Service
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Mr. Thomas Welborn, Chief
Wetlands Protection Section - Region IV
Water Management Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
!. ?J;o
4
101-16- 101 15:y1 rmt7-I4I, 1)t:.N1i uoasia1 mgmr
v
Bennett Brother Ylchts, Inc.. Variance Request CRC-749)

Mary Du Caraway advised she was with the North Carolina Attorney General's Office and would be representing the Division of Coastal Management in this matter. Ms. Cutaway stated that
Paul Bennep, tnnstrof Bennttf Brothers Yiclhts,+rauld b, np?esenting himself in this matter, Ms. Caraway then raviewed the Stipulated Fans in this case contained in CIIC-149. Ms. Cutaway
showed the Commission slides of the property involved in thiivariance request.
Paul Bennett advised he was President of Bennett Brother Yachts. Mr. Bennett stated that what they were proposing to do was dredge an area approainusely the size. of area inside the
Commissions table. He said this would give the Commission a sent of how small an area dut was.
Mr. Bennett then reviewed the petitioner's response to the fact variance aitesia contained in CAC-149. Mr. Bennett stated they were taking every effort to make their marina and bat yard
as coresstantwith State and federal programs as possible but the dredging matter was one area where they stuck and there really were no alternatives. Mr. Btanett advised that other options
that might k there would create greater distcrhesces. He said this optioo was the horse of feast resittance in terms of disturbing the bottom of flit river and was a very small amount of
land. Mr. Bennett urged the Comminioa to consider their situation and grant them a variance.
Ms. Carrawayrevitwed staffs response to the four varianct criteria contained in CAC-749. Ms. (arraway $aid that since staff felt the petitioner met all four of tht variance criteria, staff was
in support of the petitioner's variance request.
Reggie Cuoa asked for clarification on where the propoud bulkhead would be located and Ms. Curaway and Mr. Bennett responded to Mr. Caroon's request for clarification. Mr. Carooru moved
that the Commission grant this variance request and his motion was seconded.
Courtney Ilacknry asked exactly where this site was located on the Northeast Cape fear. Akr. Ms. (arraway advised it was north of the Third Street Bridge. Mr. Binnett said the ern they
wanted to dredge was abort 1100 feet Werth of the bridge on the northeastern side of the river. Ds. Hackney asked if staff agreed that removal of the rock rill along the shoreline by the
petitioner was a positive thing. Ms. (arraway responded staff was in favor of the removal of the rock fill.
Pricey Taylor asked for clarification of Mariner fisheries position on this project ad Ms. Caraway explained that Marine fisheries had originally objected to the planned dredging adivhsies
in the PNA, She said subsequent to the s edudion of the area of PHA to be dredged and an on-site visit, Marine Fisheries withdrew its objections to the project.
Courtney, flackneymowd tool! the quertionwif his motion to call the question was unanimously approved. The Commission voted unanimously to approve Mr. Caroon's motion to grant Bennett
Brothers Yachts variance request.
Melvin Shepard stated he had voted for this variarsce request. He said that it seemed to him that one of the arguments for granting this variance request was that the CR(was bound to grant
it due to several actions 4 the Cropsol Engineers. Mr. 9upm4 advised he found that nol io W a driving force br CR( action. Mr. Shepard said because some other permit did not work exactly
the way the petitioner requested he did not think that should necessitate action by the INC- Mr. Shepard stated he questioned whether or rat that should be part of the argument for the
Commission's approval.
Mr.Shepard said another thing he would like topoint act was that maybe on the rubble removal there should have some consultation with the Division of Marine f isheries. Mr. Shepard stated
that the CRCwas talking stabilizing shorelines with nubble and, from evtrytsing he had learned over the fart few years, this rubble, once it was in place far awhile, became a primary nursery
area.
Beachwalk/Whaler Inn tlarrance Request (CRC-752)
Post-it' Fax Note 7671 D•b r F o7 A"908 s?
To From', ca f 10 a
CoJDeps. Co.
Phone # Phone e
Fax $ Fax 0
cis variance request due to his relationship with one of the partners.
:hwafk Condominium Owners Association and Whalen Inn Homeowmn Associaton: He
king was a Variance to cap to a pre-dialing concrete bulkhead that they had previously
passed around a survey which he felt would help the Commission better understand the
preciously sustained to the bulkhead at these properties. .
+walk Owners Association. Mr, Dunn said Dave Metter had accurately sunsmssr4tif the
... •.••..-...... • -.1.....?„ on s,va11111wYx pictures or tout properties in order to give them a better idea of exactly what was at stake in this cut. Mr. Duan said the
bulkhead in front of these properties currondy had about a 42 inch dip in it. Mr. Dunn addstd when repairs had been made to this bulkhead the contractor with knowledge of the property
mxVrs had dettrmined that the panels needed to. Ise buried deeper in the cud for stability than they prtrioesly had been. Mr. Donn raid the property owners had not understood at the
time the consequenas of the contrutor doing this, Mr. Dunn said all the pedtionen were asking to do wu to level off the top of this bulkhead. Mr. Dunn stated that what struck him more
about this than anylbingelse was that sometimes you could actually obscure simple points WMn you seat into analysis under legal criteria such IS the variance criteria Mr. Dunn reiterated
that all the petitioners were asking was In level an existing bulkhead that they had the right to itpair over and over again as necessary if it was damaged. Mr. Dunn said a portion of the
bulkhead had been driven deeper so the increased dimension was under the sand and now all that was being asked was that they be allowed to level it off an that the damaged portion of the

RECEIVED
JUL 2 5 F97
DCM FORM I1 N.C. ATTORNEY GENERAL
Environmental Division
PE'rZ'T'iONER'S NAME Q .--AMA VARIANCE
COUNTY RRQUEST
..?,
------------
FILE NUMBER L K V 1-7-10
(Petitioner leave blank)
Pursuant to North Carolina General Statute 113A-120.1 and 1SA North Carolina Administrative
Code 71 Section .0700, the Petitioner in this matter applies to tl?* Coastal Resources Commission
for a variance.
For this application to be complete, the Petitioner must pro 'de camolcta responses to each
statement below:
(a) Will enforcement of the applicable development guidc&es or standards cause the
Petitioner practical difficulties or unnecessary h dships? If so, the petitioner must
identify the difficulties or hardships.
(b) Do such difficulties or hardships result from conditions pccaar to the Petitioner's
property? Explain.
(c) Could the Coastal Resources Commission
conditions when the applicable guidelines or
(d) Is the proposed dcvelopmcnt consistcnt with the
Commission's regulations? Explain.
NOTE: for chic request to be considered, the Petitioner
and (d) in the affirmative and (e) in the negativq
Dae to the above information and pursuant to statute, the undersi
Ie reasonably anticipated these
?dards were adopted? Explain.
spirit, purpose and intent of the
be ablc to answer (a), (b)
hereby regnests a variance.

.RHVISED: Fcbruary 4, 1994
r
YES. Bennett Brothers Yachts, a small boat building and repair faci`iry, has diligently searched for an
appropriate deepwater commercial site on the Cape Fear River for oveIsle ven (7) years. For environmental
and permitting reasons only, it was forced to reject several prior sites. current site offers the Petitioner
the first, and to the Petitioner's knowledge, the only site suitable for wat r storage and haul-out of deep draft
sailing vessels - the majority component of the Petitioners service im building efforts. The inability to
service deep draft craft will severely restrict the Petitioner's market. The Petitioner estimates that he would
loose up to 50% of his anticipated boat repair business.
A
Bennett Brothers is investing in an eighty five (85) ton travel lift, eapabl
(100) feet in length, With the loss of travel lift pier length due to Eh
channel line being further inshore, the Petitioner would effectively be lit
sailing yacht at low tied and about a seventy five (75) foot yacht at I
limited by the size of the yacht they can repair, The present restrictions
the repair of sailing yachts between seventy-five (75) and one hundred
the business opportunity in the Practitioner's new yard is associated
There are no yards in North Carolina presently serving this market. Mos
areas where the larger yachts don't have access because of draft limitmi
The Cape Fear River is one of the few deep-water ports providing ac
business and associated high paying jobs servicing large sailing yacht,
region as well as to Florida and New England. Sennett Brothers Yacr
larger yachts because of tits current location, being forced to turn am
constitute a hardship for the company and a loss for the community.
YES. A set of unanticipated circumstances is active in this variance r
associated with this site allowed for all craft service operations to take p1
entire project. Due to administration communication problems within t}
and the Petitioner's consultants were unaware that the Cape Fear River
point in the river required reduction in the pier-head line available to 0
reducing the available haul-out-length-to-depth requirements at the
eliminated the typical deep draft sailboats common to the Petitioner's b
selection of this facility site. These requirements were brought to the Pt
to 7 months after filing the CAMA / CUE permit documentation, This
bring all revision ehitnges into a two-week time frame in-order to satisfy 1
In-order to allow full-scale haul-out operations intended by the Petitione
advised Petitioner that a small dredged area would satisfy the water-
necessary for commercial haul-out and still allow for the water corridor
channel width requirements. An excavation approximately 30' by 30' u
accommodate full service facility operations. This dredging represents
disturbance.
Of lifting yachts up to one hundred
unanticipated Corps of Engineers
cited to only lifting a sixty (60) foot
igh tide. A repair y4rd13 growth is
effectively cut the Petitioner out of
100) feet- Nearly fifty percent of
vith these larger yachts,
locations along our coastline are in
)ns along the adjoining waterways.
;ess for larger sailing yachts. The
is going to Savannah. GA in this
s has been turning away work on
ty work in it new location would
quest. All original permit requests
ice without any dredging within the
e Corp of Engineers, the Petitioner
Chanel width requirements at this
e Petitioner. This had the effect of
)oat haul-out point. This in turn
isiness and the core. reason for the
titioner's attention approximately 6
timing pressured the Petitioner to
roperty purchase contracts.
Corps of Engineer administrators
iepth to boat-length requirements
restrictions permitted by the Corps
ide!r PNA coverage is necessary to
rproximately 0.02 acres of surface
The specific 0.02 acres of surface to be excavated is unique on its own m?rits. At low tide, a good part of the
60-foot length to be dredged is out of the water. In addition. J
the make-p of the actual surface of this 0.02
acres is man-made, consisting of old wharf material, dead-men hardwar , and rubble from past seawall and
construction material. Although possible, this surface area is an unlikely reductive site for primary nursery
surfaces falling under PNA guidelines.
Corps of Engineer's Environmental Impact Statement for River Oeepeni;
Location
This entire permit site falls within the area already CAMA approved C
deepening and widening project. It may be informative to outline comp;
project and this variance request. According to the approved Environme
project, "Construction of the project plan will result in the loss of 13.2
primary nursery areas by the State of North Carolina." To accommod
acres of PNA surface areas will be disturbed in this same area water basi
surface disturbance. The Petitioner's request represents only 0.15% of th
the purpose of the Corp's project is to deepen the river to allow deep dre
commercial purposes, the Petitioner's project and the Corp's project have
A Widening Project Includes this
rps of Engineer's Cape Fear River
isons between the Corp's permitted
gal Impact Statement for the Corp's
,res of estuarine bottom designated
.e this variance request, only 0.02
already permitted for dredging and
acreage permitted to the Corp. As
vessels into commercial zones for
tech in common.
Approved Chlorinated Disekarge Water from Adjacent Property Covets Propo d Dredge Site Daily
The City of Wilmington's water treatment plant has a permitted 16-inch Ater discharge conduit on the north
end of the Petitioner's property line, This conduit produces a 500,000-631lon to 1,000,000-gallon constant
stream of treated city water from sludge removal process that passes ovelr the proposed dredge with the river
flow, The effects of this treated water on the proposed dredge site's substrate are unknown with regard to its
Primary Nursery Area effectiveness.
Entire Project Site Is Sandwiched Between Industrial Neighbors
immediately north of the Petitioner's site is the City of Wilmington's wa er treatment plant. Just north of this
plant is the Seaboard System Railroad Bridge connecting east and west banks of the Cape Fear River. Above
that is an oil and chemical storage and shipping facility. lmmediatel below or south of the Petitioner's
property is the Holmes highway bridge managed by the NC DOT. Belo,v the bridge, on the Petitioner's side
of the river, is Almont Shipping, a major bulk storage and shipping facili?,
o NO. There would have been no way to anticipate the set of issues and conditions raised above. The delays
and subsequent pier and haul-out zone length shortening associate with misplaced permit response
information from the Corps could never have been anticipated. The fact hat the reduced haul-out zone would
preclude desired deep keel vessels access to the Petitioner's services as result of the revised pier-head line
could never have been anticipated. Finally, the actual existing surface attributes of the required dredging
zone surface of the haul-out zone are atypical and characteristically not consistent or conforming with
traditional primary nursery area surfaces.
f l e YES. This project is consistent with the water use objectives of the New Hanover County and City of
Wilmington Land Use Plsns. The operation of this facility will be consi tent with DEI-NR objectives spelled
out in the Guide to Protecting Coastal Resources Through 77%- CAMA Permit Program and the basinwide
program document entitled North Carolina's Basinwide Approach t Water Quality Management. The
project is consistent with the Corps of Engineers .Section 10 of the ers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33
U.S C. 403) and with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 134, ).
In addition, the marina component of this facility falls into a classifica?'on of permitted facilities that have
been seen by DERNR to be, for the most part, non-thrcatcning to su rounding waters_ in marina studies
conducted by DUN R, (North Carolina Coastal Marinas.' Water Asselmew [1990), it was shown that the
marinas examined had very few water quality problems. In additio?, the 1991 DE"R study Coastal
Marinas: Field Survey of Contaminants and Literature Review conclud d that marina water quality impacts
on estuarine environment outside marina basins appeared to be minimal.1
TOTAL P.12
"Uu-10-1 J 7 1 J I •'-/ -i rMUI 1 IY. 1... M I 1 UICI'*- I UCINCS."L- I U CI-11 IN 11 ! MI W 1 LI I. 1' J7
V
The undersigned sates that (check one):
He or she has received a fir
Major Development Permit;
He or she has received a fir
Minor Development Permit,
(a) A copy of the Permit
(b) A complete descxipti(
site drawing with ade
1-glIq?
Dares
Except as provided below, this Variance
Administrative Hearings, P.Q. Drawer 27447, Ralei
should be attached showing that copies have been
Management, and the Attorney General's office, 1;1
on the attached Ccatificatc of Service Form. If a
reaolvc disputed facts or you want to appeal the
Request is predicated, a LAMA Permit Appcal and
Office of Administrative Hearings at the above add
this Request may be filed with the Director, Divis:
to the Coastal Resources Commission without a c
NCAC W Section .0700.
REVISED: February 4, 1994
al decision )Ti an Application for a CAM-k
Dr
al decision n an Application for a LAMA
The unders igned has attached:
Application and the decision; and
o of the pro posed development, including a
quate tope aphical and survey infarrnadon.

'nature
Zq -CL-
Name of P citianer or ttorn
Addr s
e-

City tau Zip
Telephone umber
Request m st be filed with the Office of
1h, NC 2761 1.7447. A Ccrtificatc of Sed°vica
served on t ie Director, Division of Coastal
Mronmenta l Section, at The addresses shown
contested ? we hearing will be required to
pcrmir dr.4 iou upon which your Yarianc;,
Jeazing PeA tion si?.ould also be filed with the
ress. If the f acts are unlikely to be disputed,
on of Coaasi al Management for presentation
onrested ca se hearing as provided in 15A,

o,r
"I- uuru?nL- Cr71YR i Ma WILI'I. h'. 117
J
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
(This Certificate of Service should be attached to any II ariance Request which is filed
with the Office of Administrative Hearings. You don't have do attach a Certificate of Service
to any Variance Request you file with the Director or any Diskrict Manager of the Division of
Coastal Management under the Coastal Resources Commission'} expedited variance procedures.)
1 hereby certify that this Variance Request has been served on the State agencies named below
by depositing copies of it with the Untied States Postal S icc with sufficient postage for
delivery by firm class mail or by personally delivering copies the named agencies;
Served on: Director
Division of Coastal Management
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh NC 27611; and
Attorney General's Office
Environmental Section
P.O. Box 629
Raleigh NC 27502-0629
This the Lg? JL
day of Signatim of Petitioner or Attorney

REVISED: February 4, 1994
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA
COASTAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
COUNTY OF NEW HANOVER
N THE MATTER OF: )
PETITION FOR VARIANCE BY ) FINAL ORDER
BENNETT BROTHERS YACHTS )
INC. }
This matter was heard on oral arguments and stipulated facts at the regularly scheduled
meeting of the North Carolina Coastal Resources Commission (hereinafter CRC) on November
21, 1997, in Wilmington, North Carolina pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 113A-120.1 and T15A NCAC
7J.0700, et se4. Associate Attorney General Mary Dee Carraway appeared for the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Coastal Management; Paul W, Bennett
represented the Petitioner Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc.
Upon consideration of the stipulated facts and the arguments of the parties, the CRC
adopts the following:
1. Bennett Brothers Yachts (hereinafter Petitioner) owns property located adjacent to the
Northeast Cape Fear River, on TE.L. Wade Drive, on the north side of the 3rd Street Bridge, in
Wilmington, New Hanover County, North Carolina. The property is located in the Estuarine
Shoreline AEC.
2. In October of 1996, Petitioner applied to DCM for a CAMA Major Development'
permit to construct a yacht manufacturing and repair facility, including a 52 slip marina. The
upland portion of the proposed project includes a building for offices, public toilets, a shop for
the sale of marine supplies, and a building for the manufacture and repair of large sail and motor
Yachts. Proposed development in the Northeast Cape Fear River includes three piers elevated
2
over and extending across wetlands connecting to two main floating docks, with 54 finger slips,
including a lift slip to be used for lifting yachts in and out of the Northeast Cape Fear River for
maintenance and repair work. The project as originally proposed required no dredging activity.
3. The proposed development in the Northeast Cape Fear River is in the Estuarine
Waters and Public Trust AFC's.
4. The area of the Northeast Cape Fear River in which the development is proposed has
been designated as a primary nursery area ("PNA") by the Marine Fisheries Commission
("MFC").
5. The proposed project abuts a channel within the Northeast Cape Fear River which has
been designated by Congress as a federal waterway to be maintained by the Corps of Engineers
(Corps). This federally maintained channel is subject to periodic dredging by the Corp. The
channel is authorized to be maintained at a depth of 32 feet.
6. The project includes a lift slip equipped with a travel lift designed for raising yachts
from the water and moving them landward for maintenance and repair. The lift slip, as drawn on
the original permit diagram was 132 feet long and 30 feet wide. At its watermost point, the lift
slip was set back 80 feet from the near edge of the federally maintained channel.
7. Petitioner applied to the Corps for a Section 'l0 permit in order to construct the piers,
docks and travel lift in the Northeast Cape Fear River. In June of 1997, the Corps informed
Petitioner that in order to receive a Section 10 permit for the project, the development had to be
set back 112 feet from the near edge of the channel, rather than the 80 feet that Petitioner had
originally used in designing the marina. Thus, in order to comply with the Corps's regulations,
3
Petitioner's development in the Northeast Cape Fear River, which included the piers, docks, and
travel slip, had to be moved shoreward a distance of 32 feet.
8. On June 17, 1997, Petitioner submitted a revised permit drawing in which the piers,
docks, and lift slip were moved shoreward a distance of 32 feet. This was accomplished by both
shortening boat slips and moving the entire project shoreward. Because of the shallowness of the
water at the new location, Petitioner submitted a revised drawing to DCM which indicated an
intent to dredge an area approximately 30 feet wide and 30 feet long (900 square feet) in the lift
slip. The dredging operations would allow large sail and motor yachts (boats over 50 feet in
length) to gain access to the lift slip. The entire area to be dredged in the Northeast Cape Fear
River is in an area classified as PNA. The plan required excavation of approximately 480 cubic
yards of material from above and below mean high water.
9. On July 2, 1997, DCM issued CAMA Major Development Permit No. 90-97 to
Bennett Brother's Yachts, Inc. for development of the proposed marina and yacht repair facility.
The permit is based on the revised plans; however, condition No. 2 of the permit states: "This
permit does not authorize excavation at the boat lift or any other excavation or filling in the
Northeast Cape Fear River and adjacent coastal wetlands."
10. On September 3, 1997, Petitioner and representatives from DCM met at the site of
the proposed project. As a result of this meeting, Petitioner reduced the total area of PNA to be
dredged from 900 square feet to 732 square feet by changing the shape of the travel lift from
rectangular to oval. The total area of PNA to be dredged in waters shallower than four feet is
410 square feet. The proposal would require excavation of approximately 150 cubic yards of
material from PNA. The maximum depth of the travel lift area after dredging is 15 feet.
4
Petitioner has agreed to bulkhead the perimeter of the. excavated area in order to stabilize the
edge and reduce the possibility of further disturbance of the PNA.
11. Petitioner voluntarily removed 1,728 square feet of rock fill in the PNA as well as in
an area of coastal wetlands located along the shoreline, approximately 200 feet upstream from
the proposed dredge area.
12. Dredging is prohibited in PNA's by 15A NCAC 7H.0208(b)(1) which states that
"Navigation channels, canals, and boat basins shall be aligned or located so as to avoid primary
nursery areas, highly productive shellfish beds, beds of submerged aquatic vegetation, or
significant areas of regularly or irregularly flooded coastal wetlands."
13. Petitioner seeks a variance from 15A NCAC 7H.0208(b)(1) in order to conduct
dredging activities in a PNA in the Northeast Cape Fear River to facilitate adequate depth for a
travel lift capable of accommodating large sail and motor yachts.
14. The Division of Marine Fisheries ("DMF") originally objected to the planned
dredging activities in the PNA. However, subsequent to the site meeting on September 3, 1997,
and the reduction of the area of PNA to be dredged, DMF withdrew its objections to the project.
Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact the Coastal Resources Commission makes the
following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The CRC has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter.
2. The parties have been correctly designated and there is no question of misjoinder
or nonjoinder of parties. ,/ --
5
3. All notices for the proceeding were adequate and proper.
4. Application of 15A NCAC 7H.0208(b)(1) will result i practical difficulties or
unnecessary hardship to Petitioner in that compliance with the rule would cause Petitioner to
lose approximately 50% of its anticipated boat repair business although the site is otherwise
highly suitable for the storage, maintenance and haul-out of deep draft vessels.
5. This hardship results from conditions peculiar to the subject property in that
Petitioner planned the project to avoid any primary nursery area, but was forced to pull the
proposed project closer to shore and into shallower water in order to comply with the Corps of
Engineers' channel line, causing part of the project to be relocated into an area that is designated
as a PNA, but does not have high functional values. The redesigned project would require
dredging of only .02 acres of PNA
6. The Coastal Resources Commission could not reasonably have anticipated the
application of the rule in conditions where a direct conflict between Corps of Engineers rules
and those of the CRC would foreclose construction of a boat maintenance facility in an area
otherwise highly suited to such a facility based on a very small impact to a PNA that does not
have a high resource value.
7. The project is consistent with the spirit, purpose and intent of coastal
management statutes and rules in that the applicant has minimized the impact to PNA to the
extent possible and the Division of Marine Fisheries has determined that the minor amount of
dredging proposed by Petitioner would have only an insignificant impact on functioning PNA.
Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Coastal Resources
Commission hereby GRANTS Petitioner's request for a variance from 7H.0208(b)(1).
6
This the day of December, 1997.
Eugene B. Tomlinson, Jr., Chairman
Coastal Resources Commission
-,
,ti
--j
.90G: f ?,..

Mcmillan; Ian
From: Coburn, Chad
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 200910:11 AM
To: Wakild, Chuck; Shiver, Rick; Karoly, Cyndi; Mcmillan, Ian; Matthews, Matt
Subject: RE: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Chuck,
From what the DCM folks and our wetlands people have told me, the DWQ can't return this project because it came in
under the CAMA umbrella. We can put it on hold if needed, but then the applicant will not be able to go before the CRC
without first having the DWQ denial.
From: Wakild, Chuck
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 3:22 PM
To: Daniel, Louis; Gregson, Jim; Sullins, Coleen
Cc: Matthews, Matt; Shiver, Rick; Coburn, Chad; Karoly, Cyndi
Subject: RE: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Louis and Jim,
After several conversations last week I believe the best DENR-coordinated course of action for these permits is as
follows:
• DWQ will put the 401 application on indefinite hold or possibly return pending a request from the applicant.
• CAMA will deny the permit application based on the DMF evaluation of impact to PNAs. This denial needs to
happen soon so that the applicant can file a variance request and be scheduled on the CRC asap.
• The applicant says their intention is to request a variance from the CRC at their January or February meeting
which would effectively overturn the staff denial and allow the dredging and other work.
• DWQ will act on the 401 application after the CRC variance proceeding and determine then if issuance or denial
is required. EPA requires that DWQ must act on this application within 1 year of initial receipt which was July 1,
2009.
Please confirm that this plan is acceptable or let's discuss modifications. If we all concur, I will solicit a request to hold
the 401.
From: Daniel, Louis
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 10:44 AM
To: Wakild, Chuck
Subject: RE: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
I'll call ASAP.
Louis
From: Wakild, Chuck
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 4:14 PM
To: Daniel, Louis
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Louis,
Sorry, I accidently sent this email to Lewis Ledford - it should have been sent to you. We in DWQ are trying to ensure a
coordinated DENR response to this application. I would like to talk with you briefly about it if you are still in this
afternoon. I will call.
1
From: Wakild, Chuck
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 9:58 AM
To: Smith, Robin
Cc: Knight; David; Gregson, Jim; Ledford, Lewis; Sullins, Coleen
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Robin,
I would like to ensure that we (DWQ, DCM, and DMF) are together as we make decisions to deny these two permit
applications. I suggest we meet or have a conference call as soon as possible.
Bennett Brothers Yachts is a boat building/full service marina business in downtown Wilmington. They built their
facilities in the 1990s along the NE Cape Fear River. Legend has it that they built with the understanding that they would
never be granted approvals for maintenance dredging because that area is primary nursery for certain aquatic life.
However, the waters around their docks and other facilities has filled in with sediment at a much more rapid rate than
expected and they have applied for permits (CAMA, 401, 404)to dredge the accumulated sediment. DMF has been
consistent in their PNA evaluation and we are now faced with denying their CAMA permit and 401 WQ Certification. I
think that Bennett Brothers believes the success path for them is to get the denials and then seek a variance from the
CRC. While this may get them a CAMA permit, I can't see how we could use that decision to issue a 401. In any event,
we want to be sure we (DENR) are together in the approach we take as individual divisions. Let me know your
thoughts.
From: Bruce Marek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 7:30 PM
To: Wakild, Chuck
Cc: Tdcia Bennett'; 'Brian - Bennett Brothers Yachts'; Gregson, Jim; [e-mail]
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Hi Chuck-
I got an auto-reply that Ms. Sullins is out of the office until December 7, and that I should contact you if I needed
immediate assistance. So, it seems that another week will go by and by our count it will be 180 days since CAMA as lead
agency gave DWQ the project info, and approaching 100 days from our submittal of the August 13, 2009 DWQ request
for information that I submitted on Sept. 2, 2009. If you can't locate a copy of Mrs. Bennett's letter to Ms. Sullins, please
contact Tricia Bennett at 910-772-9277 or at her above e-mail address. I have field work Thursday and won't be in e-
mail contact until the evening.
Thanks for your kind assistance in this matter.
Bruce Marek, P.E.
From: Bruce Marek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 5:19 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Tricia Bennet; 'Brian - Bennett Brothers Yachts'; 'Gregson, Jim'; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Dear Ms. Sullins,
I just received a call from Chad Coburn of the Wilmington Regional DWQ Office in regards to the above project.
Obviously Mrs. Bennett's letter to you has elicited a response to our CAMA Major Permit application. We understand
that you are finally saying that you will issue a denial for 401 water quality certification for our project.
2
As noted in Tricia's letter, the last written correspondence/request for additional information was on August 13, 2009,
with my response back to Chad on Sept. 2, 2009.
We had not received any additional written requests from DWQ by the time we had our multi-agency meeting lead by
Jim Gregson, Director of CAMA on October 7 or since. In the next two weeks, I was in constant contact with Jonathon
Howell of CAMA, about the status of our project, and the need for him to put our project on CAMA hold if he didn't have
DWQ response by October 25, 2009.
We are at 175 days since our Project Application to CAMA was deemed complete on June 10, 2009 and at 91 days since
my September 2, 2009 response to Chad's request for additional project information.
We don't understand how you don't count that as our 60 day time clock that you are required to give a response. By
default, we should be approved for 401 certification.
With CAMA notifying us that they were going to have to put our project on hold, I did voluntarily write a letter to Mr.
Coburn on Mrs. Bennett's behalf on October 19th saying that we request/would accept a denial from DWQ if that would
hurry up the process so that we didn't get put on CAMA hold. We have waited a month and a half for a quick response.
To use this as a new starting date for resetting your 60 day clock is a bit bogus. We are now less than two weeks from
having to submit for a variance, if we have the CAMA paperwork in hand and time to respond to their specific issues. If
Mrs. Bennett sent nothing to you, would you still have waited till December 20, 60 days after that my October 19th
letter, after we missed the next CRC quarterly meeting deadline and then pulled out my letter and said that that is what
you are basing the denial on?
It would be nice if you could respond to Mrs. Bennett and tell her why your department doesn't feel that 60 days from
your last requested information was submitted didn't mean 60 days for her State Designated Clean Marina.
Bruce Marek, P.E.
5489 Eastwind Road
Wilmington, NC 28403
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.426 / Virus Database: 270.14.90/2540 - Release Date: 12/02/09 07:33:00
KNEW
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleert H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
December 9, 2009
DWQ Project # 96-1054, Ver. 2.
.
New Hanover County
CERTIFIED MAIL: RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc.
Ms. Tricia Bennett
1701 J.E.L. Wade Drive
Wilmington NC 28401
Subject Property: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging
Northeast Cape Fear River [030617,18-74-(61), SC, SW]
REQUEST FOR MORE INFORMATION
Dear Ms. Bennett:
On July 1, 2009, the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) received your application dated April 6, 2009,
with additional information received from you on August 10, 2009, September 3, 2009, and October 21,
2009, to conduct new maintenance dredging of 87,000 square feet of PNA habitat within the footprint of
an existing marina. On December 9, 2009, we received email correspondence from your authorized agent
Mr. Bruce Marek in which you requested that we place your project on administrative hold. We
understand that you intend to pursue a variance request through the Coastal Resources Commission
(CRC). We are hereby advising you that your project shall remain on hold in accordance with 15A
NCAC 2H .0507(ax1) pending resolution of your variance request. We will re-activate your application
for a 401 Certification upon written notice from the Division of Coastal Management regarding the CRC
decision.
This letter only addresses the application review and does not authorize any impacts to wetlands or waters.
Please be aware that any impacts requested within your application are not authorized (at this time) by the
DWQ. Please call Ms. Cyndi Karoly or Mr. Ian McMillan at 919-733-1786 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Cyndi Karoly, Supervisor
401 Oversight/Express Review Permitting Unit
401 DversightfExpress Review Permiti ng Unit
1650 Mail Service. Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Location: 2321 Crabtree Blvd., Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]
Internet: httpJ/h2o.enr.state.nc.usfncwetlandsl
` One
N 'rthCaxolina
atura lJ
An Equal Opportunity i Atfirmallve Action Employer
Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc. and Ms. Tricia Bennett
Page 2 of 2
December 9, 2009
CBKlcbk
cc: Chad Coburn - DWQ Wilmington Regional Office
Cyndi Karoly - DWQ 401 Oversite/Express Unit
Bruce Marek - 5489 Eastwind Road, Wilmington, NC 28403
Ian McMillan - DWQ 401 Oversight and Express Unit, Raleigh
Dave Timpy - USACE Wilmington District Office
Ken Jolly - USACE Wilmington District Office
Doug Huggett - DCM Morehead City Office
Stephen Rynas - DCM Morehead City Office
Anne Deaton - DMF Wilmington Regional Office
Rich Carpenter - DMF Wilmington
Molly Elwood - NCWRC Wilmington Regional Office
Rebecca Fox - US Environmental Protection Agency -Region IV
Steve Everhart - DCM Wilmington Office
File Copy
Filename: 961054Ver2BennettBrothersYnchtsMtceDredging(NewHanover)Oo Hold3
¦ Complete items 1, 2. and 3. Also complete
item 4 If Restricted Delivery is desired.
¦ 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:
Bennett Brothers Yachts Inc
Ms Tricia Bennett 12/10/09
1701 J.E.L. Wade Dr
Wilmington NC 28401
DWQ 96-1054 V2 New Hanover Co
2. Article Number
ITansfer fivm service label
A. Sign.
? Agent
X ? Addressee
B. Received by (Prince ame) C. Date of Delivery
t [r.-( "? -() D. Is delivery address different from item 1? ? Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ? No
3. Service Type
Certified Mail ? Express Mail
Registered ? Return Receipt for Merchandise
? Insured Mail ? C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee)
?009 2250 0002 ?823 ?631
? Yes
UNITED STATES.PO.?:TAI,,.SE.RVIGE
a..41First-Class Mail
._ .:. ay. ..,:.
o •e??id
?Sry,` i*: i ;Sy .7.. `lh.,•yL, ?. i.`Y/l. w•/.. K? `.:`,•. ., = y' USFS•`?F' ~L -+A'*!'
• Sender: Please print your name, address;
NC DENR DIVISION OF WAITER QUALITY
401 OVERSIGI-IT/EXPRESS UNIT
2321 CRABTRI:E BOULE=VARD, SUITE 250
RALEIGH, NC 27604

Karoly, Cyndi
From: Bruce Marek [[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 10:16 AM
To: Matthews, Matt
Cc: Karoly, Cyndi; Coburn, Chad; Shiver, Rick; Wakild, Chuck; [e-mail]; 'Tricia
Bennett'; Howell, Jonathan; Gregson, Jim; 'Brian - Bennett Brothers Yachts'
Subject: RE: Bennett Brothers Yachts Project
To: NC DWQ
December 9, 2009
Re: Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc. Request for Maintenance Dredging of Marina/DWQ Project#96-1054v2
As designated agent, on behalf of Mrs. Patricia Bennett and Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc. 1701 J.E.L. Wade Dr.
Wilmington, NC, we are voluntarily requesting that our project seeking DWQ 401 Water Quality Certification be put on
hold. It is our understanding that with this hold, CAMA will proceed with paperwork that will allow us to seek variance
before the Coastal Resource Commission for marina maintenance dredging major modification to CAMA Permit #90-97.
Thank you for kind assistance on this project. We will look to secure 401 Certification after receiving guidance from the
CRC.
Bruce Marek, P.E.
5489 Eastwind Rd.
Wilmington, NC 28403
910-799-9245
1
Karoly, Cyndi
From: Daniel, Louis
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 8:54 AM
To: Wakild, Chuck; Gregson, Jim; Sullins, Coleen
Cc: Matthews, Matt; Shiver, Rick; Coburn, Chad; Karoly, Cyndi
Subject: RE: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
I am fine with this approach.
Louis
From: Wakild, Chuck
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 3:22 PM
To: Daniel, Louis; Gregson, Jim; Sullins, Coleen
Cc: Matthews, Matt; Shiver, Rick; Coburn, Chad; Karoly, Cyndi
Subject: RE: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Louis and Jim,
After several conversations last week I believe the best DENR-coordinated course of action for these permits is as
follows:
• DWQ will put the 401 application on indefinite hold or possibly return pending a request from the applicant.
• CAMA will deny the permit application based on the DMF evaluation of impact to PNAs. This denial needs to
happen soon so that the applicant can file a variance request and be scheduled on the CRC asap.
• The applicant says their intention is to request a variance from the CRC at their January or February meeting
which would effectively overturn the staff denial and allow the dredging and other work.
• DWQ will act on the 401 application after the CRC variance proceeding and determine then if issuance or denial
is required. EPA requires that DWQ must act on this application within 1 year of initial receipt which was July 1,
2009.
Please confirm that this plan is acceptable or let's discuss modifications. If we all concur, I will solicit a request to hold
the 401.
From: Daniel, Louis
Sent: Monday, December 07, 2009 10:44 AM
To: Wakild, Chuck
Subject: RE: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
I'll call ASAP.
Louis
From: Wakild, Chuck
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 4:14 PM
To: Daniel, Louis
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Louis,
Sorry, I accidently sent this email to Lewis Ledford - it should have been sent to you. We in DWQ are trying to ensure a
coordinated DENR response to this application. I would like to talk with you briefly about it if you are still in this
afternoon. I will call.
1
From: Wakiki, Chuck
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 9:58 AM
To: Smith,. Robin
Cc: Knight, David; Gregson, Jim; Ledford, Lewis; Sullins, Coleen
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Robin,
I would like to ensure that we (DWQ, DCM, and DMF) are together as we make decisions to deny these two permit
applications. I suggest we meet or have a conference call as soon as possible.
Bennett Brothers Yachts is a boat building/full service marina business in downtown Wilmington. They built their
facilities in the 1990s along the NE Cape Fear River. Legend has it that they built with the understanding that they would
never be granted approvals for maintenance dredging because that area is primary nursery for certain aquatic life.
However, the waters around their docks and other facilities has filled in with sediment at a much more rapid rate than
expected and they have applied for permits (CAMA, 401, 404)to dredge the accumulated sediment. DMF has been
consistent in their PNA evaluation and we are now faced with denying their CAMA permit and 401 WQ Certification. I
think that Bennett Brothers believes the success path for them is to get the denials and then seek a variance from the
CRC. While this may get them a CAMA permit, I can't see how we could use that decision to issue a 401. In any event,
we want to be sure we (DENR) are together in the approach we take as individual divisions. Let me know your
thoughts.
From: Bruce Marek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 7:30 PM
To: Wakild, Chuck
Cc: Trivia Bennett'; 'Brian - Bennett Brothers Yachts'; Gregson, Jim; [e-mail]
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Hi Chuck,.
I got an auto-reply that Ms. Sullins is out of the office until December 7, and that I should contact you if I needed
immediate assistance. So, it seems that another week will go by and by our count it will be 180 days since CAMA as lead
agency gave DWQ the project info, and approaching 100 days from our submittal of the August 13, 2009 DWQ request
for information that I submitted on Sept. 2, 2009. If you can't locate a copy of Mrs. Bennett's letter to Ms. Sullins, please
contact Tricia Bennett at 910-772-9277 or at her above e-mail address. I have field work Thursday and won't be in e-
mail contact until the evening.
Thanks for your kind assistance in this matter.
Bruce Marek, P.E.
From: Bruce Marek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 5:19 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Tricia Bennett'; 'Brian - Bennett Brothers Yachts; 'Gregson, Jim'; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Dear Ms. Sullins,
I just received a call from Chad Coburn of the Wilmington Regional DWQ Office in regards to the above project.
Obviously Mrs. Bennett's letter to you has elicited a response to our CAMA Major Permit application. We understand
that you are finally saying that you will issue a denial for 401 water quality certification for our project.
2
As noted in Tricia's letter, the last written correspondence/request for additional information was on August 13, 2009,
with my response back to Chad on Sept. 2, 2009.
We had not received any additional written requests from DWQ by the time we had our multi-agency meeting lead by
Jim Gregson, Director of CAMA on October 7 or since. In the next two weeks, I was in constant contact with Jonathon
Howell of CAMA, about the status of our project, and the need for him to put our project on CAMA hold if he didn't have
DWQ response by October 25, 2009.
We are at 175 days since our Project Application to CAMA was deemed complete on June 10, 2009 and at 91 days since
my September 2, 2009 response to Chad's request for additional project information.
We don't understand how you don't count that as our 60 day time clock that you are required to give a response. By
default, we should be approved for 401 certification.
With CAMA notifying us that they were going to have to put our project on hold, I did voluntarily write a letter to Mr.
Coburn on Mrs. Bennett's behalf on October 19th saying that we request/would accept a denial from DWQ if that would
hurry up the process so that we didn't get put on CAMA hold. We have waited a month and a half for a quick response.
To use this as a new starting date for resetting your 60 day clock is a bit bogus. We are now less than two weeks from
having to submit for a variance, if we have the CAMA paperwork in hand and time to respond to their specific issues. If
Mrs. Bennett sent nothing to you, would you still have waited till December 20, 60 days after that my October 19th
letter, after we missed the next CRC quarterly meeting deadline and then pulled out my letter and said that that is what
you are basing the denial on?
It would be nice if you could respond to Mrs. Bennett and tell her why your department doesn't feel that 60 days from
your last requested information was submitted didn't mean 60 days for her State Designated Clean Marina.
Bruce Marek, P.E.
5489 Eastwind Road
Wilmington, NC 28403
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.426 / Virus Database: 270.14.90/2540 - Release Date: 12/02/09 07:33:00
Karoly, Cyndi
From: Matthews, Matt
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 8:37 AM
To: Bruce Marek
Cc: Karoly, Cyndi; Coburn, Chad; Shiver, Rick; Wakild, Chuck
Subject: Bennett Brothers Yachts Project
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Bruce,
As we just discussed, you should make your request to put the project on hold to Chad Coburn, copying the others on this
list.
Thanks,
Matt Matthews
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Matthews v-[phone]
NC DENR/Division of Water Quality f-[phone]
Surface Water Protection Section Matt.Matthews@ncdenr_gov
1617 Mail Service Center http://h2o.enr.state.nc.us/swps/
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
Please note that my email address has changed.
E-mail correspondence to and Prom. this address may be subject to the North. Carolina Public Records Lau.? and may
be disclosed to third parties.
1
Karoly, Cyndi
From: Wakild, Chuck
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 9:29 AM
To: Matthews, Matt; Karoly, Cyndi; Shiver, Rick; Coburn, Chad
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
See the email from Bruce Marek below. Let's discuss asap.
Rick and/or Chad - call when you get this email. Thanks.
From: Wakild, Chuck
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 9:58 AM
To: Smith, Robin
Cc: Knight, David; Gregson, Jim; Ledford, Lewis; Sullins, Coleen
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Robin,
I would like to ensure that we (DWQ, DCM, and DMF) are together as we make decisions to deny these two permit
applications. I suggest we meet or have a conference call as soon as possible.
Bennett Brothers Yachts is a boat building/full service marina business in downtown Wilmington. They built their
facilities in the 1990s along the NE Cape Fear River. Legend has it that they built with the understanding that they would
never be granted approvals for maintenance dredging because that area is primary nursery for certain aquatic life.
However, the waters around their docks and other facilities has filled in with sediment at a much more rapid rate than
expected and they have applied for permits (CAMA, 401, 404)to dredge the accumulated sediment. DMF has been
consistent in their PNA evaluation and we are now faced with denying their CAMA permit and 401 WQ Certification. I
think that Bennett Brothers believes the success path for them is to get the denials and then seek a variance from the
CRC. While this may get them a CAMA permit, I can't see how we could use that decision to issue a 401. In any event,
we want to be sure we (DENR) are together in the approach we take as individual divisions. Let me know your
thoughts.
From: Bruce Marek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 7:30 PM
To: Wakild, Chuck
Cc: Tricia Bennett'; 'Brian - Bennett Brothers Yachts'; Gregson, Jim; [e-mail]
Subject: FW: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Hi Chuck,.
I got an auto-reply that Ms. Sullins is out of the office until December 7, and that I should contact you if I needed
immediate assistance. So, it seems that another week will go by and by our count it will be 180 days since CAMA as lead
agency gave DWQ the project info, and approaching 100 days from our submittal of the August 13, 2009 DWQ request
for information that I submitted on Sept. 2, 2009. If you can't locate a copy of Mrs. Bennett's letter to Ms. Sullins, please
contact Tricia Bennett at 910-772-9277 or at her above e-mail address. I have field work Thursday and won't be in e-
mail contact until the evening.
Thanks for your kind assistance in this matter.
Bruce Marek, P.E.
1
From: Bruce Marek [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 5:19 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Tricia Bennett'; 'Brian - Bennett Brothers Yachts'; 'Gregson, Jim'; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging CAMA #90-97 DWQ##96-1054v2
Dear Ms. Sullins,
I just received a call from Chad Coburn of the Wilmington Regional DWQ Office in regards to the above project.
Obviously Mrs. Bennett's letter to you has elicited a response to our CAMA Major Permit application. We understand
that you are finally saying that you will issue a denial for 401 water quality certification for our project.
As noted in Tricia's letter, the last written correspondence/request for additional information was on August 13, 2009,
with my response back to Chad on Sept. 2, 2009.
We had not received any additional written requests from DWQ by the time we had our multi-agency meeting lead by
Jim Gregsori, Director of CAMA on October 7 or since. In the next two weeks, I was in constant contact with Jonathon
Howell of CAMA, about the status of our project, and the need for him to put our project on CAMA hold if he didn't have
DWQ response by October 25, 2009.
We are at 175 days since our Project Application to CAMA was deemed complete on June 10, 2009 and at 91 days since
my September 2, 2009 response to Chad's request for additional project information.
We don't understand how you don't count that as our 60 day time clock that you are required to give a response. By
default, we should be approved for 401 certification.
With CAMA notifying us that they were going to have to put our project on hold, I did voluntarily write a letter to Mr.
Coburn on Mrs. Bennett's behalf on October 19th saying that we request/would accept a denial from DWQ if that would
hurry up the process so that we didn't get put on CAMA hold. We have waited a month and a half for a quick response.
To use this as a new starting date for resetting your 60 day clock is a bit bogus. We are now less than two weeks from
having to submit for a variance, if we have the CAMA paperwork in hand and time to respond to their specific issues. If
Mrs. Bennett sent nothing to you, would you still have waited till December 20, 60 days after that my October 19th
letter, after we missed the next CRC quarterly meeting deadline and then pulled out my letter and said that that is what
you are basing the denial on?
It would be nice if you could respond to Mrs. Bennett and tell her why your department doesn't feel that 60 days from
your last requested information was submitted didn't mean 60 days for her State Designated Clean Marina.
Bruce Marek, P.E.
5489 Eastwind Road
Wilmington, NC 28403
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.426 / Virus Database: 270.14.90/2540 - Release Date: 12/02/09 07:33:00
DWQ 96-1054 Ver 2 Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging (New Hanover) Page 1 of 1
DWQ 96-1054 Ver 2 Bennett Brothers Yachts Maintenance Dredging
(New Hanover)
Dennison, Laurie
Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 9:22 AM
To: [e-mail]
Attachments: 961054Ver2BennettBrothersY-l.doc (95 KB)
*Courtesy copy of Request for More Information Letter (hard copy is-in the mail)*
Please see attached the Division of Water Quality's request for more
information related to your recent application. Please note that
this message is being forwarded to you electronically so that you may
expedite preparation of your response. Please do not send your
response as a reply to this e-mail or via fax; it will go
unanswered.
A hard copy of this correspondence is being sent via US Mail. All
response correspondence is to be mailed via hard copy to the 401
Oversight and Express Permits Unit, 2321 Crab tree Blvd., Raleigh NC
27604 unless otherwise noted. Questions may be directed to Ian
McMillan [phone].
Laurie Dennison
401 Oversight and Express Permits Unit
Wetlands & Stormwater Branch
NCDENR - Division of Water Quality
Main Line: [phone]
Website: http:/_/h20.enr.state nc.us/ncwetlands
Note updated email address: laudeg dennison@.ncdenr.gov
Email correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may
be disclosed to third parties,
https://mail.nc. gov/owa/?ae=Item&t=IPM.Note&id=RgAAAACChSeOTRSCT5 TNO706... 12/10/2009
46-1 c)54 V21
KT ?
l?A ?Lc.vd [,N)e4,o t.{ amo ue it
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor James H. Gregson, Director Dee Freeman, Secretary
December 23, 2009
CERTIFIED MAIL 0 = fgr=
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
DEC 2 8 2009
Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc.
c/o Trisha Bennett
1701 J.E.L. Wade Drive
Wilmington, NC 28401
Dear Ms. Bennett:
DW - mTBtt]jgM
MUM MIDSMWWAWABRANCH
This letter is in response to your application for a Major Modification to Coastal Area
Management Act (CAMA) Permit No. 90-97, in which authorization was requested to excavate
an area 1,854' X 47' to a depth of -12' below the normal low water level in the Northeast Cape
Fear River, in New Hanover County. Processing of the application, which was received as
complete by the Division of Coastal Management's Wilmington Regional Office on June 10,
2009, is now finalized. Based on the state's review, the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management has made the following findings:
1) The subject property is located adjacent to the Northeast Cape Fear River.
2) The proposed project is located within a Primary Nursery Area (PNA), as
designated by the North Carolina Marine Fisheries Commission.
3) CAMA Major Permit No. 90-97, which was originally issued to Bennett Brothers
Yachts, Inc. on July 2, 1997, authorized construction of a 78-slip open water marina
with associated development. No dredging activities were proposed or authorized
as a part of the originally permitted project.
4) The proposed project involves periodic dredging of areas in and around the existing
marina facility. The N.C. Division of Coastal Management has determined that the
proposed project consists of new dredging in a Primary Nursery Area.
Approximately 87,000 square feet of Primary Nursery Area habitat would be
excavated as a result of the proposed project.
5) During the course of the joint State and federal permit application review process,
N.C. Division of Marine Fisheries stated that, "the new dredging will have a
significant adverse impact on the estuarine resources in the project area and objects
to the project." The N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission also supported the N.C.
Division of Marine Fisheries recommendation for denial of the permit.
400 Commerce Avenue, Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer -50% Recycled \ 10% Post Consumer Paper
Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc.
December 23, 2009
Page 2
Additionally, the N.C. Division of Water Quality indicated that they were heading
towards denial of the required 401 Water Quality Certification due to a finding that
the adverse impacts to the Primary Nursery Area would result in a removal or
degradation of significant existing water quality uses.
Based upon the above referenced findings, the Division has determined that the
proposed project is inconsistent with the following rules of the Coastal Resources
Commission:
a) 15A NCAC 07H.0203, which states "It is the objective of the Coastal
Resources Commission to conserve and manage estuarine waters, coastal
wetlands, public trust areas, and estuarine and public trust shorelines, as an
interrelated group of AECs, so as to safeguard and perpetuate their
biological, social, economic, and aesthetic values and to ensure that
development occurring within these AECs is compatible with natural
characteristics so as to minimize the likelihood of significant loss of private
property and public resources. Furthermore, it is the objective of the Coastal
Resources Commission to protect present common-law and statutory public
rights of access to the lands and waters of the coastal area."
b) 15A NCAC 07H.0206(c), which states "Management Objective. To
conserve and manage the important features of estuarine waters so as to
safeguard and perpetuate their biological, social, aesthetic, and economic
values; to coordinate and establish a management system capable of
conserving and utilizing estuarine waters so as to maximize their benefits to
man and the estuarine and ocean system."
c) 15A NCAC 07H.0208(a)(2)(B), which states "Before receiving approval for
location of a use or development within these AECs, the permit-letting
authority shall find that no suitable alternative site or location outside of the
AEC exists for the use or development and, further, that the applicant has
selected a combination of sites and design that will have a minimum adverse
impact upon the productivity and biologic integrity of coastal marshland,
shellfish beds, beds of submerged aquatic vegetation, spawning and nursery
areas, important nesting and wintering sites for waterfowl and wildlife, and
important natural erosion barriers (cypress fringes, marshes, clay soils)."
d) 15A NCAC 07H.0208(a)(2)(C), which states "Before being granted a permit
by the CRC or local permitting authority, there shall be a finding that the
applicant has complied with the following standards: Development shall not
violate water and air quality standards."
e) 15A NCAC 07H.0208(b)(1), which states that "Navigation channels, canals,
and boat basins shall be aligned or located so as to avoid primary nursery
areas, highly productive shellfish beds, beds of submerged aquatic
Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc.
December 23, 2009
Page 3
vegetation, or significant areas of regularly or irregularly flooded coastal
wetlands."
f) 15A NCAC 07H.0208(1)(B), which states "Marinas which require dredging
shall not be located in primary nursery areas nor in areas which require
dredging through primary nursery areas for access."
Given the preceding findings, it is necessary that your request for issuance of a Major
Permit under the Coastal Area Management Act and State Dredge and Fill Law 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, and N.C.G.S. 113-229(c)(5), which requires denial for projects that will cause a significant
adverse effect on wildlife or freshwater, estuarine or marine fisheries.
If you wish to appeal this denial, you are entitled to a hearing. The hearing will involve
appearing before an Administrative Law Judge who listens to evidence and arguments of both
parties and then makes a recommendation to the Coastal Resources Commission. 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 letter. A copy of this petition should be filed with this office.
Also, you are advised that as long as this state permit denial stands, your project must be
deemed inconsistent with the N.C. Coastal Management Program, thereby precluding the
issuance of federal permits for this project. The Federal Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA)
gives you the right to appeal this finding to the U.S. Secretary of Commerce within thirty days of
receipt of this letter. Your appeal must be on the grounds that the proposed activity is (1)
consistent with the objectives or purposes of the CZMA, or (2) is necessary in the interest of
national security, and thus, may be federally approved.
Members of my staff are available to assist you should you desire to modify your
proposal in the future. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr.
Doug Huggett at [phone], extension 212.
Sincerely,
L ,
J es H. Gregson
cc: Colonel Jefferson M. Ryscavage - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington, NC
David Kennedy, Director - OCRM/NOAA, Silver Spring, MD
Dave Timpy, USACE
DCM - Wilmington
Regulatory Division
Action ID. SAW-2009-01242
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
69 DARLINGTON AVENUE
WILMINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 28403-1343
January 6, 2010
Tricia Bennett
Bennett Brothers Yacht, Inc.
1701 J.E.L. Wade Drive
Wilmington, North Carolina 28401
Dear Ms. Bennett:
qty- IDSt4 Ua
IdO?mO?,y,
JAN 0
? -y4fERQuA<Irr
By copy of the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(NCDENR) letter to you dated December 23, 2009, we have learned that the North Carolina
Coastal Management Consistency Certification for your proposed plans to hydraulically dredge
an area 1,854' X 47' to a depth of -12.0 ft MLW within the footprint of the existing marina at
Bennett Brothers Yachts, Inc, adjacent to the Cape Fear River, on the northeast side of the
Isabella Holmes Bridge, Wilmington, New Hanover County, North Carolina, has been denied.
The Coastal Zone Management Act provides that no Federal permit may be issued for an activity
within the coastal zone where the State has denied a consistency certification. Accordingly, your
Department of the Army application is hereby denied, without prejudice, and your file has been
retired.
Should you appeal and receive a North Carolina Coastal Management Consistency
Certification, the Department of the Army will review your project again for Federal
authorization.
Mr. Dave Timpy of the Wilmington Regulatory Field Office staff is available to answer any
questions. Mr. Timpy may be reached at telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
Jefferson M. Ryscavage
Colonel, U.S. Army
District Commander
Enclosures
Copies Furnished (without enclosures):
Mr. Doug Huggett
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of
Environment and Natural Resources
1638 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1638
Mr. Pete Benjamin
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries Service
Habitat Conservation Division
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Mr. Ronald J. Mikulak, Chief
Wetlands Section - Region IV
Water Management Division
United States Environmental Protection
Agency
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Ms. Cyndi Karoly
visio
n of Water Quality
orth
Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Suite 250
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Mr. Steve Everhart, District Manager
Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Division of
Coastal Management
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
Bruce Marek, P.E.
5489 Eastwind Road
Wilmington, North Carolina 28403
.wAb --3"-

ff? I--?' f F ' (D 0

N 0) Lp 0
F-I

F-I

m

"l m 0 0
01 ) w "
ro ca tl
r? 0
} rl ("t
CA ?30
W (D r- 0 H.
i" t ft rt

rT
f? ::r tt H,
10 fl m 0 a
tU (D w (J'
0
r P rt :31,

ft (D (D 0

LQ 0 m a
0
0 0 0 0' )l
+
t-' K (D r- t+

0 CD

(t 0) :
w Lo
r. 0

0 f ft

P)

td
rt
cr

rt
N
PO
N
0
0

c,tate of North Carolina
jpartment of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Wilmington Regional Office
Division of Coastal Management
James S. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Roger N. Schecter, Director
N I IORANDUM:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Applicant:
Project Location:
099*A
'17
A&4*A
000011% 0*1Wft*.ft
ID F= F1
November 7, 1996
Mr. Bruce Freeman, Director
Division of Marine Fisheries
John R. Parker
Major Permits Processing Coordinator
CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review
ennett Brothers Yachts, Inc.
Adj to t -I\Tortheast Cape Fear River, on the north side of the 3rd Street Bridge,
in Wilmington, NC, in New Hanover County
Proposed Project: The construction of a yacht manufacturing and maintenance facility including a
52 slip marina
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form
by Dec 2, 1996. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Terse Barrett
at extension 246. When appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no abjection 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 a
are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for masons described in the attached comments
RECEIVED ON
SIGNED DATE Z-\ - 1 ? NOV Z t1996
'- MRAT
_J OY 127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, N,G. 28405-3845 • Telephone [phone] • Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
i