SW8030826_HISTORICAL FILE_20030625

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
POST -CONSTRUCTION PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
SW z�ai.CP
DOC TYPE
El CURRENT PERMIT
[:]'APPROVED PLANS
HISTORICAL FILE
❑ COMPLIANCE EVALUATION INSPECTION
DOCDATE-
YYYYMMDD

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
f
DIVISION OF WATER QUALM1TY
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Fax: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
TELECOPY TO: r.0 &
FAX NUMBER:
FROM:
PHONE: # OF PAGES INC 'UDING THIS SHEET:
. n
■ i�
fig
t0'd 9[:Ul 600Z 5Z unf 960ZE0'6L6 Xej A1l1VIl0 a]lb'M n A10 i
- s e

RST ENGINEERING, PLLC
5416 Orchard Oriole Trail
Wake Forest, NC 27587
919-2714465
[e-mail]
�ay 003
�c�
r'. ] PAJ= Klimek, Director
' Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Subject: Cape Lookout Marina
0 ITLF
49
01 V OF WA D1REcrQR, 04� F
Dear Alan,
Enclosed for your review is a transmittal letter and package of correspon ence I received from Gene Cobb
of TRC Triangle, Inc. relating to the subject matter. As you can see from the cover letter, my assistance in
trying to bring a resolution to the problem of permitting for the muina w6 requested. I have known Gene
for about 35 years and know him tobe a very competent and conscientious engineer. The fact that he has
encountered a problem severe enough to call for my help tells me that th ff problem is very real I reviewed
th the correspondence in e package and came to the conclusion that this prroblem cannot be adequately
addressed without either legal action on the part of the applicant or the i�volvemeut of your office.
Because of my long service in a Regional Office, I have a natural hesitancy to call upon the Division
management to get involved in a, situation. In this case, however, it seems that the opportunity to resolve
the issues at the Regional level does not exist.
It appears to me that there are three issues that merit your concern and involvement because they have
implications beyond any narrow disagreement on this specific site and s�Mdgn.
• First of all, the question of fairness and uniformity in application of the applicable regulations needs to
be addressed. It appears that the applicant could show that the regulations concerning built upon area
have not been applied consistently. I would be surprised if the Division knowingly allows such
inconsistent application of the rules. This would certainly be an issue in any legal action.
• The nerd issue that I believe merits your attention is the lack of responsiveness on the part of the
Regional Office to the numerous requests for a meeting or meeting's w attempt to resolve the matter. It
is inexcusable for the Division's staff not to meet with the applicant and their engineers after all the
requests that have been made.
• The final matter that I believe merits your attention is the apparent differences of opinion between
different groups witfiin DWQ on the project. from the correspo ce I see no real effort on the part
of the different, groups within the Division to work with each othe� a situation that leaves the applicant
in limbo_
I would appreciate your setting up a meeting in your office, to involve
necessary, for Gene Cobb and his clients to discuss the details of this 1
that will be acceptable. Please let me know if you have any questions
this information huther.
Sincerely,
Stan Taylor, PE l
RST Pnginewing, PLLC_
yone and everyone you feel is
jest and try to work out a solution
if you would like to discuss any of
- � JUN - 4 2003
ZO 'd 9 l b l EOOZ SZ un f 96bZ00L6 Ai I lvno a IVA J0 r1 m

500 Glenwood Averiue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Telephone [phone]
TRC Triangle, Inc. Facsimile 919.828.11977
April 4, 2003
Mr. R. Stan Taylor, P.E.
5416 Orchard Oriole Trail
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27587
Re: Stormwater Permitting Issues
Cape Lookout Marina
(Ed and Bob Richards)
Harkers island, N.C.
Dear Stan:
This letter is to request your review of the enclosed corre
in regard to our problems with N.C. DNEWs stormwater
mdence and e-mail messages
rmitting process for the
referenced project- Our clients, Ed and Bob Richards, have become increasingly restive
about our lack of progress in resolving the permitting issue . They've seen all of this
correspondence and are somewhat incredulous in reaction to the seemingly inconsistent
direction that we've been given and the never-ending cycle of review. Since you have a
wide experience with and understanding of N.C. DNER's r gulatory programs, I'd
appreciate your advice and assistance in helping us figure qut w-hat is right.
For your reference. I'm including copies of our string of cc
Wilmington Regional Office since our original stormwater
August 16, 2002. (In the interest of time, I've made copies
several letters that were issued on TRC Triangle letterhead
original file copies.) I'm also including copies of pertinent
the Wilmington Regional Office and other state -level persc
Ed Richards.
Our last letter to the Wilmington Regional Office and the
crossed in the mail. We've not yet received a response fr
expect one for several more weeks. We've not replied to
trying to resolve what we should do, given that the latest
direction given in the previous letter (from which we prel
respondence with the
permit application back on
of the electronic files for
rather than tracking down the
e-mail correspondence with
rinel, as well as directly tivith
spouse to our previous letter
our last letter and don't
rn either, but rather are
.r seems to conflict with the
our response) -
We remain confilsed regarding the several directives we've been given in this string of
correspondence, especially on the subject of calculating the Built Upon Area (BUA) for a
redevelopment project. The Wilmington Office directives Ido not seem consistent from
one communication to the next.
Cusbmer-Focused Solutions
00'd 9l:Vl 000Z SZ Unf 96VZCCL6t6:xeJ AlIl'dii0 831VM J0 AI0
U

OaC�\
RST ENGINEERING, PLLC
5416 Orchard Oriole Trail
Wake Forest, NC 27587
919-271-4465
[e-mail]
nek, Director
'ater Quality
-vice Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Subject: Cape Lookout Marina
Dear Alan,
.Illr!i � i 2
003
WATER QU
r°R's OFF ��rY
Enclosed for your review is a transmittal letter and package of correspondence I received from Gene Cobb
of TRC Triangle, Inc. relating to the subject matter. As you can see from the cover letter, my assistance in
trying to bring a resolution to the problem of permitting for the marina was requested. I have known Gene
for about 35 years and know him to be a very competent and conscientious engineer. The fact that he has
encountered a problem severe enough to call for my help tells me that the problem is very real. I reviewed
the correspondence in the package and came to the conclusion that this problem cannot be adequately
addressed without either legal action on the part of the applicant or the involvement of your office.
Because of my long service in a Regional Office, I have a natural hesitancy to call upon the Division
management to get involved in a situation. In this case, however, it seems that the opportunity to resolve
the issues at the Regional level does not exist.
It appears to me that there are three issues that merit your concern and involvement because they have
implications beyond any narrow disagreement on this specific site and situation.
First of all, the question of fairness and uniformity in application of the applicable regulations needs to
be addressed. It appears that the applicant could show that the regulations concerning built upon area
have not been applied consistently. I would be surprised if the Division knowingly allows such
inconsistent application of the rules. This would certainly be an issue in any legal action.
The next issue that I believe merits your attention is the lack of responsiveness on the part of the
Regional Office to the numerous requests for a meeting or meetings to attempt to resolve the matter. it
is inexcusable for the Division's staff not to meet with the applicant and their engineers after all the
requests that have been made.
The final matter that I believe merits your attention is the apparent differences of opinion between
different groups within DWQ on the project. From the correspondence I see no real effort on the part
of the different groups within the Division to work with each other, a situation that leaves the applicant
in limbo.
1 would appreciate your setting up a meeting in your office, to involve anyone and everyone you feel is
necessary, for Gene Cobb and his clients to discuss the details of this project and try to work out a solution
that wilt be acceptable. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you would like to discuss any of
this information further.
Sincerely,
Stan Taylor, PE
RST Engineering, PLLC. ; ( _. _ _. _ __ ._ _ •-- -- ' 1
J if N - 4 2003

1
" , 4

TRC Triangle, Inc.
Mr. R. Stan Taylor, P.E.
5416 Orchard Oriole Trail
Wake Forest, North Carolina 27597
Re: Stormwatcr Permitting Issues
Cape Lookout Marina
(E d and Bob Richards)
Hark ers Island, N.C.
Dear Stan:
500 Glenwood Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Telephone [phone]
Facsimile 919-828-1977
April 4. 2003
This letter is to request your review of the enclosed correspondence and e-mail messages
in regard to our problems with N.C. DNER's stornlwater pernlittirto process for the
referenced project. Our clients, Ed and Bob Richards. have become increasingly restive
about our lack ol'progress in resolving the permitting issues. They've seen all of this
correspondence and are somewhat incredulous in reaction to the seemingly inconsistent
direction that we've been given and the never-ending cycle of review. Since You have u
wide experience with and understanding of N.C. DNER's regulatory programs, I'd
appreciate your advice and assistance in helping us figure out what is right.
For your referencC, I'm including copies of our string ol'corl-cspondence with the
Wilmington Regional Office since our original stormwatcr permit application back oil
August 16, 2002. (in the interest oftime, I've made copies of the electronic files for
several letters that were issued ail TRC Triangle letterhead, rather than tracking down the
original file copies.) 17nl also including copies of' pertinent e-mail correspondence with
the Wilmington Regional Office and other state -level personnel, as well as directly with
Ed Richards.
Our last letter to the Wilmington Regional Office and their response to our previous letter
crossed in the mail. We've not yet received a response f-roin our last letter and don't
expect one for several more weeks. We've not replied to them either, but rather are
trying to resolve what we shouid do, given that the latest letter seems to conflict with the
direction given in the prey ions letter (front which we prepared our response).
We remain confused regarding the several directives we've been given in this string of
correspondence. especially on the subject of calculating the Built Upon Area (BUA) for a
redevelopment project. The Wilmington Office directives do not secin consistent front
one Co111111Llnlcatlon to the next.
Customer -Focused Solutions

TRC triangle, Inc.
On bchalfof our client as well as myself, thank you for your review and comments.
Respectfully yours,
'rRC Triangle, Inc.
Gene 13. Cobb, P.L., P.L.S.
Civil Engineering & Surveying Group Manager
Lncls
Customer -Focused Solutions

i
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURC�S
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Fax: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
TELECOPY TO:
FAX NUMBER:
FROM:
PHONE: # OF PAGES INC UDING THIS SHEET:
COMMENTS:
1
o t: „vtr.o 91:a1.°sZ IUwdoN aalm [90]
81ON jInsea aged ewll jae�s epoW aagwnN auogd/xad
9l UL �00Z 5Z unf
L'd
AKA a oda}U - LAo _t 4. I WSUSa 1 ��
96VZ66L616:xeJ Ainvno 831VA Jo Ala

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Fax: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
TELECOPY TO: �C df Ju,u
FAX NUMBER:
FROM:
PHONE: # OF PAGES INCLUDING THIS SHEET:
COMMENTS:
'X-1-1�'

C (Arl )
{FK4,il T04, TA4AFJc.W EbOT"11G Ftti)
August 16, 2002
Linda Lewis
NCDENR
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
Re: Cape Lookout Marina, Inc.
Stormwater Management Plan
Carteret County, North Carolina
TRC 4 29408 0020 00000
Dear Linda,
Please find attached three sets of plans, stormwater management plan narrative, review fee and
original application with low density supplement for the project referenced above. We are
submitting this package for your review and approval for this project.
Please call if you need additional information or have questions.
Yours truly,
TRC Triangle
Rick Baker, P. E.
Project Manager
Cc: Bob and Ed Richards
Roger Schecter

Ar�9
r
Date: August 27, 2002
To: Rink Baker, P.R.
Company: TRC Triangle, Inc.
FAX #: [phone]
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. 1Zoss, f Jr. Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural esources
FAX COVER SHEET
DWQ Stormwater Project Number: SW8 nla
Project Name: Cape Lookout Marina
MESSAGE:
Dear Mr. Baker,
Alan W. Klimek P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Wilmington Regional Office
No. of Pages: 2
From: Linda LewiN
Water Quality Section - Stormlvater
FAX [phone]
Phone # [phone]
I received the stormwater application for the subject project on August 19, 2002. I am unable to
accept the application for processing until the following items are provided.
I. An original signature on the application. All three application booklets submitted
were copies. Please do not bind the application as part of a booklet. You need not
submit three copies - the original alone will do.
2. Please initial page 4 of the application.
3. Please report the built -upon area in square feet. It is easier for me to calculate and
verify the BUA if it is in square feet.
a. Meeting low density requirements is more than just meeting a magic number. It also
involves the location of the built -upon area in relation to the receiving stream and the
clustering of that built -upon area. It appears that a pocket of high density is occurring
at the southeastern end ofthe project, where the dry stack and parking lot are located.
I am requiring that an infiltration system be designed for the dry stack and east
parking area. The west parking area is OK, however, I would like to see the parking
lot moved as far from the water as practicable. The 30' buffer in the rules is just a
minimum - as much as possible should be provided.
S. Please dimension the buildings and parking.
6. Please show roof drain locations for the drystacks.
7. Please accurately report the site area you used to calculate the density on the
application. The site area used to demonstrate low densitymust also exclude the area
of the existing basin, sinvQ it is below NMW. The 13.26_ acre area you have used
appears to include the basin.
8. Please show sufficient spot elevations to determine the drainage flow directions.
i
N.C. Division of Wator Quality 127 Urd1nai Drive Extanslon WUminQton, N.C. 26405 [phone] Fax [phone] Cu)— . vice
800-623-7748

fIVVtiVLCICJL 1rJ'YUfll I 114 VUI 11♦ W11�V I1V 1 JW I L
9. If the existing 1,07 acres of built -upon will be removed, or new built -upon area will
replace it, (e.g., where the new drystack building is built over the existing concrete
pads) please do not report it as existing on the application. It appears that the only
existing BUA that will remain after development is the marina house. Tlie existing
gravel will become part of the new parking lot and the concrete pads will be removed
to make way for the new dry stacks. You may not subtract the existing built -upon
area from the proposed BUA. The total built -upon area that will remain after
development (including the existing that will not be removed or replaced) must be
included in the total.
These are the main items I saw during the initial review. In the interest of saving time and
money, I will hold the application until September 9, 2002. If you need additional time, please
respond in writing (mail or fax) with the expected date of the submittal. Either the requested items
or a request for a time extension must be provided by September 9, 2002, or the project will be
returned and all fees will be forfeited,
S:IWQSISTORMW ATIADDINF0120021CAPELOOKOUT,AUG

500 Glenwood Avenue
i Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Inc.
Telephone [phone]
TRC Amin le, cFacsimile 919-828-1977
September 27, 2002
Linda Lewis
NCDENR
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
Re: Cape Lookout Marina, Inc.
Stormwater Management Plan
Carteret County, North Carolina
TRC 1129408 0020 00000
Dear Linda,
We have received your memo dated August 27, 2002 with comments on the stormwater
application for the project referenced above. We offer the following responses to your
comments. (Please see our letter dated September 9, 2002 requesting a time extension for
response to your comments until this (late.)
We believe there are two separate issues that need to be addressed from your comments:
first, the acceptance of a complete stormwater application package, and secondly, the
stormwater management plan design and any associated corninents on the design -
We will address the application acceptance first. Comments I and 2 had to do with
completeness of our application. We did not include an original signature application and
page 4 of form SWU-101 was not initialed, which were oversights on our part. Please
find attached an original and copy of the completed application with these iterns included.
With this submittal you have now received three sets of plans, three sets of project
narrative including calculations, processing fee of $420, one original and one copy of
Stornwater Management Permit Application form (SWU-101, rev 3.99) and one copy of
the Low Density Supplement (SWU-104, rev 3.99). According to Item V1. Submittal
Requirements (SWU-101), these are the items needed for a complete application
package. In addition we have reviewed NCAC 15A, Subchapter 21-1.1003 ltcm (g) and
have included all applicable items as supporting documents and information in this
package. Therefore, we believe that we have fully complied with the requirements for a
complete application submittal and acceptance and therefore you should consider the
date of.receipt of this letter as the start of the review process.
We would like to make sure that you are aware of the following background inforrnation-
We have been working on this project extensively for nearly three years with the
Customer -Focused Solutions

TC Triangle, Ince
stormwater management plan design being a major element. As part of this process, I
have had numerous conversations with Scott Vinson of the Wilmington Regional office
and a meeting with him in Wilmington and Gene Cobb of this office on June 8, 2000, and
an additional meeting with him at the project site on October 26, 2000. We have also had
numerous discussions with Jeanette Powell (formerly of the Raleigh office) and Todd St.
John and Steve Kroeger of your state office, including a meeting with the same parties on
October 23, 2000. All discussions were aimed at the development of a storniwater
management plan design meeting both the stormwater regulations for the project area
and providing a workable solution for project completion. Items discussed were high
density versus low density, BMP's as may be needed, wetlands, existing impervious area,
stormwater discharge, etc_ Based on the direction received during these meetings and
conversations from State staff and extensive review of the North Carolina regulations and
stormwater design references, we designed a stormwater management plan that we feel
meets or exceeds all requirements.
The second general issue raised by your comments is related to the project design. We
offer the following responses to your Comments 3-9. Once we have received the
requested information and any additional review comments from your complete project
review, we will submit revised plans, narrative, etc., for continuation► of the approval
process.
3. We will report the area in square feet.
4. Please provide to us a reference to the regulation(s) that allows for a
project site (one piece of' property) to be divided into separate tracts of
laird for stormwater penr►itting purposes. We have been enable to locate
arty reference to tills ISSlle.
We will review the 30' buffer and provide additional butler, i f passible.
5_ Building and parking dinlens1011s will be added.
6. Roof drain locations will be added to the plans_
7. The canal and basin area is included in the 13.26 ac_ In numerous past
stormwater management plan design and approvals through the State of
North Carolina; we have included bodies of water contained within the
property as pervious area and have therefore used similar area calculations
for this project. Please provide to us reference to the regulation(s) that
excludes use of the area for the existing canal and basin in the low -density
calculations.
Likewise, we excluded .the land area of the 404 wetlands in our low -
density calculations at the recommendation of State staff, but request
reference to the regulations) that excludes this area from use in those
calculations.
S_ Spot elevations will be added to the plans.
9. We calculated the density subtracting the existing impervious area as
agreed in our June 8, 2000, meeting with Scott Vinson. At his request, we
provided a survey showing the existing impervious surface areas for
record prior to proceeding with this project. 'Therefore, we request
documentation referencing how to include existing impervious area ill
Customer -Focused Solutions

T C Triangle, e, Inc.
density calculations. We have spent considerable time designing this site
and stormwater management plan based on previous conversations with
and direction by agency personnel and are concerned about the different
direction implied in your memo. We would request and appreciate your
clarification.
We thank you for your review and response. Please call if you need additional
information or discussion in any way.
Yours tnily,
TRC Triangle
Rick Baker, P. E.
Project Manager
Encls
xc: Rick Shiver, Water Quality Supervisor
Bob and Ed Ricliards
Rogcr Scheuter
Customer -Focused Solutions
ME

Cobb, Gene
From: Cobb, Gene
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 6:00 PM
To: Ed Richards (E-mail)
Subject: FW: FW: Need advice: Richards Marina stormwater permit, Harker's Island
Ed,
I want to give you an update on the status of our stormwater permitting issues. For your
information, I'm sending you the following train of e-mail that I've had with various DWQ
personnel. I think a portion of it I've sent to you already.
Our meeting with Dorney this morning went better than I expected. I'm optimistic about
working out a wetlands discharge. John actually seemed to be a proponent. The bad news
is they want to do a site visit as the next step and can't get out to the site for another
month at the earliest.
Roger will be here tomorrow and/or Friday morning. I'll advise him regarding these issues
and we'll discuss any other hanging items that need our attention.
Gene
-----Original Message -----
From: Cobb, Gene
Sent: Wednesday, November 20,
To: '[e-mail]'
Subject: FW: FW: Need advice:
Harker's Island
Rick,
2002 5:32 PM
Richards Marina stormwater permit,
FYI, we met with John Dorney and several of his staff this morning regarding a poLerntia.l.
wetlands discharge for this project. I understand that there is a good potential for this
approach if we can provide for returning the wetlands on this site to a hydrologic state
similar to the original (before it was ditched). John Lh.i.nks the next step is to meet at
the site with the appropriate Wilmington Office personnel. I understand that one of
John's staff members will call your office to schedule the meeting (and may have done so
already). Their own schedule conflicts suggested a December 19 or 20 date, with the 19th
being preferred.
Gene
-----Original Message -----
From: Cobb, Gene
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 2:24 PM
To: 'Rick Shiver'
Subject: RE: FW: Need advice: Richards Marina stormwater permit,
Harker's Island
Rick,
Again thanks for your response. 1-may make a further request to you on Wednesday -of next
week or afterward.
FYI, for some reason I'm getting two transmittals of your messages.
Gene
-----Original Message -----
From: Rick Shiver[mai.lto:[e-mail]]
1

Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 2:08 PM
To: Cobb, Gene; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: FW: Need advice: Richards Marina stormwater permit,
Harker's Island
Hi, Gene,
Yes, most of that is known. What I get out of this discussion is that your client is not
eligible for a low density permit and it appears now that your client must propose a plan
that will meet the requirements of a high density permit. [f you have a specific plan
that will meet our high density requirements, please send it to us and we will be glad to
review it. Rick
"Cobb, Gene" wrote:
> Rick,
> Thanks again for your response. I participated with Rick Baker in some of the meetings
that you make reference to. A .large part of our present pred..icament is that: we came away
with quite different understandings than Linda has given to us currently. As a result,
we're needing to understand what if any options we have for treating any part of our site
in a way that you can permit. I don't want to get Scott, Jeanette, or Todd caught in any
kind of rr_oss-fire if for no other reason they were kind enough to meet with us and offer
their honest opinions. neither do we want to argue with Linda. Rick, this site is an old
disturbed site. It's had a boat -building operation and a mobile -home development on it at
one time or another. The two Richards brothers have cleaned it up so it looks pretty
decent now, but still remaining are the concrete floor slabs from the original boat shop.
There's over an acre of existing concrete slabs. There's about seven acres of wetlands
within the
> property that have been previously disturbed by ditching (for mosquito control). It
seems to me that there are a number. of .i.ssues that are peculiar to this site that could
have some bearing on how you could approach it for permitting. What do you think?
> Gene
> -----Original Message -----
> From: Rick Shiver(ma.ilto:[e-mail])
> Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 1:16 PM
> To: Cobb, Gene; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: FW: Need advice: Richards Marina stormwater permit,
> Harker's Island
> Hi, Gene,
>
> I have referred to the file on this project, and it seems that Jeanette Powell, Scott
Vinson, and Linda Lewis, ALL have called this project a "pocket of high density", which
therefore requires the submission of a stormwater permit- application for some form of
engineered system. Consequently, I don't think there's much more to discuss about this
call, unless your client decided to change his original proposal, drastically.
> Furthermore, I see from the file that you all have met with us in the past.
Specifically, Mr. Rick Baker met with Scott Vinson (stormwater} on June 8, 2000, and later
he met on October 26, 2000, with Jeanette Powell (stormwater), Todd St:. John (wetlands)
and Steve Kroeger (wetlands) to discuss all the options available to your client that
would allow DWQ to issue a stormwater permit that would protect water quality.
> In conclusion, I gather that`all your options have 15een discussed concerning the
submission of a stormwater permit application. Consequently, I'm not certain what can be
accomplished by meeting again, unless your client has changed the project substantially.
Ri c k
> "Cobb, Gene" wrote:
> > Rick,
> > Yes, that's the current name.
2

> > Gene
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Rick Shiver[mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Friday, November 15, 2002 9:59 AM
> > To: Cobb, Gene
> > Subject: Re: FW: Need advice: Richards Marina stormwater permit,
> > Harker's Island
> > Hi, Gene,
> > Before I make a more detailed response, was the Richard's Marina previously known as
the Cape Lookout Marina (refer to a June 7, 2000, drawing), which in turn previously was
known as the Earl Davis S/D, Lots 35-41 (refer to a June 26, 1999, drawing)? Rick
> > "Cobb, Gene" wrote:
> > > Rick,
> > > Thank you for your response. We have not talked with anyone in your Central. Office
except Bill Mills, who referred me back to you all and/or Brad Bennett. We've not had a
response from Brad.
> > > Our purpose in seeking a meeting is not to argue, but rather to understand how you
would define the area of high density and to seek the best guidance that we can obtain in
pursuing some other option for the defined high density area other than groundwater
discharge. We're willing to come to your office for that purpose if you all can be
available.
> > > Gene
> > > -----Original Message -----
> > > From: Rick Shiver [mailtc:Rick. [e-mail]]
> > > Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 1:45 PM
> > > To: Cobb, Gene
> > > Subject: Re: f:"W: Need advice: Richards Marina stormwater permiL-,
> > > Harker's Island
> > > Ili., Gene,
> > > I'm not sure there's much to meet about. I understand that both the Central Office
and Regional Office reps believe your project constitutes a pocket of high density, which
therefore requires a high density stormwater. permit.
> > > I do assume that you wish to argue otherwise. Rick
> > > "Cobb, Gene" wrote:
> > > > Rick,
> > > > We need the best advice we can get in resolving the stormwater discharge options
for the subject site. In that regard, I would like to request that you schedule an
appointment for us at your office in the near future. Let me say we're not looking for a
confrontation but just the best direction for a solution.
> > > > For your information, we've also requested a meeting with Brad Bennett, but
understand that he's a bit" overwhelmed right now dealing with the Phase I"I program. We've
also contacted John Dorney about a potential stormwater discharge through reconstructed
wetlands and will meet with him on Nov. 20.
> > > > Thanks in advance for your response.
> > > > Gene B. Cobb
> > > > TRC Triangle, Inc.
> > > > 500 Glenwood Avenue
> > > > Raleigh, N.C. 27603
3

> > > > (919) B28-3150 Extn 237
> > > > -------Original Message -----
> > > > From: Bill Mills [mailtc:bill.mills@ncmail_net]
> > > > Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 2:54 PM
> > > > To: Cobb, Gene
> > > > Subject: Re: Need advice: Richards Marina stormwater permit, Harker's
> > > > Island
> > > > Gene,
> > > > I think you wil find that the Regional Office (Linda and Rick Shiver) are the
persons who make the final decisions on individual projects. I would suggest you continue
to work with them to resolve differences.
> > > > Bradley Bennett, Supervisor, Stormwater and General Permits Unit, 733-5083 x525,
overviews the state stormwater program (they have never hired any replacement for Jeanette
Powell due to budget constraints). You can contact Bradley but I expect he will refer you
back to the regional persons on any issue for a specific project.
> > > > Bill Mills, PE
> > > > Environmental Engineer
> > > > Stormwater and General Permits Unit
> > > > NC Div of Water Quality
> > > > "Cobb, Gene" wrote:
> > > > > Bill,
> > > > > We are in need of advice on how to handle a stormwater permit we have in process
in the Wilmington Office. I'm attaching a file with a letter we'd written to Linda Lewis
there. Since we wrote the letter, we've had a telephone conversation with Linda and
understand that she will hold to her ruling that we have a pocket of high density which
will require a discharge to groundwater. Our site won't pert. Who can we talk to at the
state level who can give us an overview of what options other are available?
> > > > > Thanks in advance for your response.
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Gene B. Cobb
> > > > > TRC Triangle, Inc.
> > > > > 500 Glenwood Avenue
> > > > > Raleigh, N.C. 27603
> > > > > [phone] Extn 237
> > > > ><<SWapplresponsetocommentsRl.DOC>>
> > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > Name: SWapplresponsetocommentsRl.DOC
> > > > > Type: Microsoft Word Document
(application/msword)
> > > > > SWapplresponsetocommentsRI.DOC Encoding: base64
> > > > > Description: 'SWapplresponsetocommentsRl.DOC
> > > > > Download Status: Not downloaded with message
u

r,F W A rF�
C
_6
4
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
r Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
`i Division of Water Quality
Wilmington Regional Office
December 6, 2002
Messrs. Edward F. Richards and Robert D. Richards, Jr.
Cape Lookout Marina, Inc.
3315 Old Forrest Road
Lynchburg, VA 24501
Subject: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Stormwater Project No. SW8 020934
Cape Lookout Marina
Carteret County
Dear Messrs. Richards and Richards:
The Wilmington Regional Office received a Stormwater Management Permit Application
for Cape Lookout Marina on September 30, 2002. Enclosed please find the rule references you
requested in your letter. Please note that implementation guidance regarding the exclusion of the
area below MHW and wetlands from the site area which is used to calculate density was
originally implemented in 1988 as a Directive, and incorporated into the Standard Operating
Procedure in 2001. As far as site area is concerned, I had originally excluded the area of the
entire new basin, but I should only have excluded the area of the existing basin, so I can give you
back 1.18 acres, for a total site area of 11 acres.
The rule regarding pockets of high density is found in NCAC .1003 (d). This allows the
Division to conduct a review of the project, on a case -by -case basis, to ensure that no one area of
the project is loaded up with such an amount of built -upon area that the runoff from that area
might threaten water quality. It has been determined by at least four DENR staff that there is a
pocket of high density on the project in the area of the dry stacks.
There is no guidance on the inclusion of existing built -upon area other than what has been
considered accepted practice over the 15 years that the stormwater program has been in existence
and common sense. It must be understood that the rules do not provide a section on how to
permit development activities at sites with existing built -upon area, except in regards to offsite
runoff. Additionally, the whole issue of existing built -upon area becomes moot if the site plan
shows that the proposed BUA amount will exceed the existing BUA amount. During my 10 years
here I have permitted a handful_of_projects.with existing built -upon -area. For example, if an old . --
project had existing built -upon area, but was now proposing to add onto the existing building and
parking areas, that project could maintain the limited built -upon area aspect of low density
development by calculating the density as follows:
1. Determine the project site area. This is the area within the property boundaries,
above MEW and minus wetlands (if applicable).
2. Add up the amount of built -upon area that existed prior to 1988.
Subtract the total of #2 above from the project area (41). This is the Adjusted Site
Area.
4. Multiply the Adjusted Site Area by the appropriate density factor. In the 20
coastal counties this is 25% for SA and SAORW waters, 30% for all others. This
is the maximum amount of new impervious area that can be constructed on the
project. As long as the proposed BUA is less than or equal to the maximum,
the project can meet one aspect oflow density development.
NGDENR
N.C. Division of Water Quality 127 Cardinal Drive Extension Wilmington, N.C. 28405 [phone] Fax [phone] Customer Service
800-623-7748

Messrs. Richards and Richards
December 6, 2002
Stormwater Project No. SW8 020934
This method is generous in that it will generally result in a larger maximum BUA amount
than the normal method of adding up -all the BUA (exishng'and proposed) and comparing it to
the maximum allowable amount obtained by multiplying the site area by either 25% or 30%.
I look forward to receiving a complete submittal after you have a chance to apply the rule
cites contained in this letter and after incorporating any comments from the upcoming meeting. I
will not be able to attend the meeting, but I believe Noelle Lutheran will. She can address both
ston-nwater and wetlands issues. I believe all the issues have been discussed at least twice, based
on the comments I received from Scott Vinson and Jeanette Powell. Hopefully, a third meeting
will clear up any and all misunderstandings.
Please note that this request for additional information is in response to a preliminary
review. The requested information should be received by this Office within 30 days after the
scheduled meeting, around January 25, 2003, or the application will be returned as incomplete.
The return of a project will necessitate resubmittal of all required items, including the application
fee.
If you need additional time to submit the information, please mail or fax your request for
a time extension to the Division at the address and fax number at the bottom of this letter. The
request must indicate the date by which you expect to submit the required information. The
Division is allowed 90 days from the receipt of a completed application to issue the permit.
The construction of any impervious surfaces, other than a construction entrance under an
approved Sedimentation Erosion Control Plan, is a violation ofNCGS 143-215.1 and is subject
to enforcement action pursuant to NCGS 143-215.6A.
PIease reference the State assigned project number on all correspondence. Any original
documents that need to be revised have been sent to the engineer or agent. All original
documents must be returned or new originals must be provided. Copies are not acceptable. If
you have any questions concerning this matter please feel free to call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
) 0' v1d"
Linda Lewis
Environmental Engineer
RSS/arl: S:IWQSISTORMWATIADDINF0120021020934.DEC
cc: Linda Lewis
Rick Baker, P.E.

0r "
ROG
'�� �--
-
-
Michael F. Easley
r
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
,
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
, -� •' '.�-
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
5r-" ,� _ ��_�
Division of Water Quality
Memorandum
To:
From:
Subject:
State Stormwater Management Program Staff
Kerr T. Steven
Implementation Guidance for the State Stormwater Management Program
The Division of Water Quality, formerly the Division of Environmental Management, has issued
four stormwater Directives over the past 12 years. These Directives have outlined interim policies and
guidelines for the review of stormwater projects under NCAC 2H.1000. New stormwater management
rules went into effect in September 1995, and many of the topics covered by the four Directives were
incorporated into these rules -
All policies established under the four Directives have been superceded by the September 1995
2H .1000 rules and any subsequent revisions. This includes the policy of allowing chlorides testing to
determine if the SA design criteria should be applied to a project submitted under the 2H .1000 rules.
The rules clearly state that if the project is within 1/2 mile of and draining to class SA waters (as defined
in the schedule of classifications) then the project will be limited to a low density threshold of 25%n built
upon area or the use of infiltration or approved alternatives for a I V2 " design storm. The only way to
change the classification of a stream from SA is to go through the formal stream reclassification process.
The administrative issues from the previous four Directives have been consolidated into the
attached Standard Operating Procedure, dated April 24, 2001, which provides staff with implementation
Crfor issues not specifically covered by the existing NCAC 2H .1000 rules.
This information is for your immediate use in implementing the State Stormwater Management
Program . If you have any questions, please contact either Bradley Bennett at [phone] ext. 525,
or Darren England at [phone], ext. 545.
NCDENR
Customer Service
1 800 623-7748
Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 [phone]

s
STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE
STAFF IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE FOR THE
STATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
15A NCAC 2H :1000 -
Under the early version of the NCAC 2H.1000 stormwater rules, four directives were
issued which outlined various procedures to be followed, provided design guidance, and
clarified gray areas of the rules. Many of the issues contained in these four Directives were
incorporated into 15A NCAC 211.1000 during the 1995 rule changes. This SOP consolidates
those remaining issues and provides guidance on implementing the State Stormwater
Management Program under NCAC 211.1000. This SOP supercedes all previous Directives.
Guidance provided below falls under the following subject headings:
1. Calculating Built Upon Area
2. Measuring Distances for HQW & SA Waters
3. Clearing and Grading Projects
4. Vegetated Filters
5. Water Dependent Structures
6. CommonlMaster Plan of Development
7- Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs)
8. Minimum Lot Sizes
9. Swales
10. Cited Document - Overview of Wet Detention Basins
11. NSW Buffers
Calculating Built Upon Area
In calculating built -upon area for the low density option on projects adjacent to tidal
waters, the project` area shall include ands inland from the mean high water line.
Irregularly flooded wetlands above the mean high water line may be credited as pervious
area. In addition, isolated wetlands may also be credited as pervious area. However, for a
project with a relafNdly-large portion of wetlands, this could result in pockets of high
density. A case-b - ase evaluation should b ned b DW staff for low densit
projects to ensure, that no areas within the pro)'ect site are of such high density that
stormwater runoff threatens water quality. .
- 2. Measuring Distances for HQW & SA Waters
Determining "within — mile of and draining to..." as defined in the rules for HQW
(one mile) and SA waters (one-half mile) shall be measured `as the crow flies' from the
Mean High Water line. This distance should not be measured along the stormwater flow
route.

Clearing and Grading Projects
Some development projects will be submitted in which the only immediate activity
is clearing and grading. The type of site development is not known and will be determined
at a later time. In these cases, DWQ will request that the applicant submit a general permit
application. The general permit will cover the clearing and grading activity only and will
require the permittee to modify. the permit when final development plans are known, the
property is subdivided, or the property is sold.
4. Vegetated Filters
Wet detention ponds designed for 85% TSS removal are required to discharge
through a thirty foot.,vegetated filter to minimize erosion and to provide additional pollutant
removal. There may be projects where a developer finds it difficult to construct a functional
vegetated filter, and must discharge. directly back to the watercourse. In these instances,
additional storage should be provided to compensate for the lack of a filter and the pond must
be designed to remove 90% TSS instead of 85%.
It is recommended that the post -development discharge rate from the pond not
exceed the pre -development rate from the project for the I0-year, 24-hour storm as defined
in the DLR Erosion and Sediment Control Manual.
5. Water Dependent Structures
Low density design requirements include a 30' vegetated buffer, however, there are
some low density projects which propose water dependent structures such as boat ramps and
bulkheads that must necessarily be located closer than 30'to the surface waters. These types
of structures can be permitted under the low density option, and must also meet the
requirements described in the "Other Projects" permit found in NCAC 2H.1003(d)(3)(C).
Water dependent structures as defined in NCAC 2H.1002(20) are allowed within the 30'
buffer area, and reasonable access and slopes are also permitted. Proposed water dependent
structures that are not.part of a low density project can be, permitted under the "Other
Projects" option.
6. ..Common/Master Plan of Development
A common plan of development is defined as all development associated with the
construction of the submitted project, not limited to within the property boundaries,
regardless of how long it takes to fully develop. For example, outparcels that are to be
subdivided and sold or leased out of a larger tract must be accounted for at the full buildout
potential in the control system's design. Other examples are future development and access
roads that are a part of the project, but not neces sari ly'l ocated within the property boundary
which are needed to provide access to the proposed project.
In the case of large phased developments, such as golf courses with subdivisions, a
Master Plan will be required prior to permitting any part of the development. The Master
Plan will be reviewed by DWQ and comments regarding the overall development, densities,
pockets of high density etc. will be made. Subsequent submittals for individual phases will
be permitted based on compliance With the Master Plan. Changes to the Master Plan after
04.24.01 PaEe 2 of 4

development begins will require another review by DWQ for continued compliance with the
storrrnwater rules. DWQ must determine on a case -by -case basis whether the permit will be
issued for the Master Plan or for individual phases. If the Master Plan will be permitted, a
complete application package will be required in order to do a full review and issue a permit.
Each modification after that will require a revised Master plan submittal including a new
permit review fee.
Areas of Environmental Concern (AECs)
To insure consistency with CAMA requirements for low density subdivision Iots that
straddle the 575' ORW AEC line, the built -upon surface of the entire lot should be
considered in the AEC if 50% or more of the lot area is in the AEC. If less than 50% of the
lot area is in the AEC, none of the built -upon surface of that lot should be included in the
AEC. For other types of low density projects, the actual built -upon area within the AEC
should be calculated. The most restrictive built -upon area between DWQ and CAMA is the
one that applies.
8. Minimum Lot Sizes
Questions have arisen as to whether every lot must be equal to or greater than the
minimum lot requirement for the low density option. The average lot size of the entire
project must conform to the minimum requirement. However, if a few lots fall slightly under
the requirement because of restrictions in topography, natural boundaries, etc., the project
could be approved. A guideline to follow is to have no more than 10% of the lots under the
required size, and no lot less than 90% of the required size. Modifications to this guideline
can be considered on a case -by -case basis depending on soils, slopes, sensitive areas to be
protected, etc.
For development outside the coastal counties that drains to HQW or ORW waters,
local governments typically use R-40 as a zoning designation to indicate that the minimum
lot size is one acre. The "40" stands for40,000 square foot lots. It is generally assumed that
the roads and rights -of -way not owned by the homeowner typically account for the remaining
3,560 square feet. Therefore, the local government designation for a 40,006 square foot lot
is sufficient to meet the DWQ requirement for a one acre lot size, even though the actual lot
size is smaller. If a development wants to cluster 100 single family dwelling units away from
surface waters on a 100 acre development,'the project could be approved at the discretion of
DWQ. A properly designed cluster project must allow runoff to sheet flow through the
remaining open area. In addition to the lot restrictions, deed restrictions preventing built -
upon area within the open area will - be required. If other features such as clubhouses,
parking lots, community areas, parks, etc. are included in the project, it will be necessary to
ensure that the appropriate built -upon area is maintained through deed restrictions.
9. Swales
It may be necessary to rip -rap ditches in highly erodible areas (steep slopes, poor
soils, etc.) of a low density project. While vegetated swales would be preferable from an
infiltration/pollutant removal standpoint and should, be utilized where feasible, the erosion
from an improperly stabilized swale could result in. significant water quality degradation.
Proper consideration for existing topographic conditions should be given during the design
phase in order to appropriately use rip rap in grassed Swales.

10. Cited Document - Overview of Wet Detention Basins
The "Overview of Wet Detention Basins" cited in the rules has been replaced by the
Best Management Practices (BMP} Manual. Design guidelines for stormwater management
measures including wet detention ponds, dry detention ponds, constructed stormwater
.... _
wetlands, infiltration systems, sand filters, Norefention areas, ;grassedswales and filter strips
can be found in the BMP Manual. The most recent version of the BMP Manual should be
consulted.
12. NSW Buffers
All projects must meet applicable NSW buffer requirements prior to permit issuance.
To date, buffer requirements are in place in the Neuse River Basin and the Tar -Pamlico
River Basin.
04.24.01 Page 4 of 4

-EIINR - ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT T15A. 0211.1000 .
w � � management in accordance with this Section. Local governments with delegated Sedimentation/Erosion Control
—� Programs often implement more stringent standards in the form of lower thresholds for land area disturbed. In
these situations, the requirements of this Rule apply only to those projects that exceed the state's minimum area
of disturbance as outlined in G.S. 113A-57. Specific permitting options, including general permits for some
activities, are outlined in Paragraph (d) of this Rule.
(c) Development activity with a CAMA major development permit or a Sedimentation/Erosion Control Plan
approved prior to January 1, 1988 are not required to meet the provisions of these Rules unless changes are made
to the project which require modifications to these approvals after January I, 1988.
A Projects subject to the permitting requirements of this Section may be permitted under the following
stormwater management options:
(1) Low Density Projects: Projects permitted as low density projects must be designed to meet and
maintain the applicable low density requirements specified in Rules .1005 through .1007 of this
Section. The Division shall review project plans and assure that density levels meet the applicable low
density requirements. The permit shall require recorded deed restrictions and protective covenants to
ensure development activities maintain the development consistent with the plans and specifications
approved by the Division.
(2) High Density Projects: Projects permitted as high density projects must be designed to meet the
applicable high density requirements specified in Rules .1005 through .1007 of this Section with
stormwater control measures designed, operated and maintained in accordance with the provisions of
this Section. The permit shall require recorded deed restrictions and protective covenants to ensure
development activities maintain the development consistent with the plans and specifications approved
by the Division. Stormwater control measures and operation and maintenance plans developed in
accordance with Rule, 1008 of this Section must be approved by the Division. fn addition, NPDES
permits for stormwater point sources may be required according to the provisions of 15A NCAC 2H
.0126.
(3) Other Projects: Development may also be permitted on a case -by -case basis if the project:
(A) controls runoff through an off -site stormwater system meeting provisions of this Section;
(B) is redevelopment which meets the requirements of this Section to the maximum extent practicable;
(C) otherwise meets the provisions of this Section and has water dependent structures, public roads and
public bridges which minimize built -upon surfaces, divert stormwater away from surface waters as
much as possible and employ other best management practices to minimize water quality impacts.
(4) Directors Certification: Projects maybe approved on a case -by -case basis if the project is certified by
the Director that the site is situated such that water quality standards and uses are not threatened and
the developer demonstrates that:
(A) the development p lans a nd s pecifications i ndicate s tormwater c ontroI m easures w hich s hall be
installed in lieu of the requirements of this Rule; or
(B) the development is located such a distance from surface waters that impacts from pollutants present
in stormwater from the site shall be effectively mitigated.
(5) General Permits: Projects may apply for permit coverage under general permits for specific types of
activities. The Division shall develop general permits for these activities in accordance with Rule. 10 13
of this Section. General Permit coverage shall be available to activities including, but not limited to:
(A) construction of bulkheads and boat ramps;
(B) installation of sewer lines with no proposed built -upon areas;
(C) construction of an individual single family residence; and
(D) other activities that, in the opinion of the Director, meet the criteria in Rule .1013 of this Section.
Development designed to meet the requirements in Subparagraphs (d)(1) and (d)(3) of this Paragraph must
demonstrate that no areas within the project'site are'of such high density that stormwater runoff threatens water.
quality.
(e) Applications: Any person with development activity meeting the criteria of Paragraph (b) of this Rule shall
apply for permit coverage through the Division. Previously issued Stormwater Certifications (issued in accordance
with stormwater management rules effective prior to September 1, 1995) revoked due to certification violations _
must apply for permit coverage. Stormwater management permit applications, project plans, supporting
information and processing fees shall be submitted to the appropriate Division of Environmental Management
regional office. A processing fee, as described in Paragraph (f) of this Rule, must be submitted with each
NORTH CAROLINA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE 12115195 Page 3

Cobb, Gene
From: Cobb, Gene
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 3:20 PM
To: Ed Richards (E-mail)
Subject: Cape Lookout Marina update
Ed,
Sorry to have missed you by phone.
Brief update:
The stormwater meeting at Harker's Island will not happen prior to the first of the year. Basically, the Wetlands Group
personnel do not want to meet without Linda Lewis being present, and she will not be available until after the first of the
year.
Rick and i met with Jeanette Powell last Friday afternoon. You may remember that she formerly worked with the state -
level stormwater permitting unit here in Raleigh. We discussed our project and stormwater permitting status and gave her
copies of our pertinent correspondence. She asked to review the materials and will respond to us this week with some
suggested response. I asked her to consider personal roles for herself ranging from advisor to active permitter.
have talked by phone with Todd St John of the Wetlands Unit and Noelle Lutheran of the Wilmington Regional Office
(DNER). I'm anticipating from their remarks that Linda will hold to her ruling that we infiltrate the first 1-112 inches of
stormwater from our designated "high -density" area. Noelle suggested that we have their regional Soils Scientist (Vincent
Lewis) give us an opinion on the site infiltration capacity. I think the answer will be zero. However, I have called Vincent
and left a message for a return call. He has previously been on the site with the County representative regarding the
wastewater permitting, so I'm thinking he will not need to meet at the site to give us a ruling,
Roger will be here tomorrow to touch base with Rick and I regarding any CAMA items
I'll try to give you a report before the end of the week on any further developments.
Gene

Cobb, Gene
From: Baker, Richard
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 5:06 PM
To: Cobb, Gene
Subject: FW: Cape Lookout Marina
Gene,
Jeanette's e-mail for your reference.
Rick
-----Original Message -----
From: Jeanette Powell [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 10:55 AM
To. Baker, Richard
Subject: RE: Cape Lookout Marina
Hi Rick,
I've been traveling lately, so I'm just getting your message. There is no
written documentation of how to determine exisitng built upon area, each
Regional Office handles that as they see fit (mostly because nobody could
ever agree on how to handle it). Linda has a policy on how she handles
these issues, but it is implemented only in the Wilmington Regional Office
and is probably not officially documented anywhere. You would need to
contact her to discuss any specifics.
JP
-----Original Message -----
From: Baker, Richard[mailLo:RBaker@TRCSOLU'rIONS.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 9:56 AM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Cape Lookout Marina
Jeanette,
Ready for the snow?
A question about the Marina SW. In Linda's Dec 6 letter, item #2 at the
bottom of the page she says add amount of built upon are that existed prior
to 1988. Is there a rule or a directive that explains this better? That is
something I would like to read and we have aerial photography in that time
frame that may help us. I assume there is a date this applys such as Dec
31, 1987, can you confirm?
Thanks for your response,
Rick Baker
The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the individual or entity
to whom .it is addressed. Its contents (including any attachments) are confidential and
may contain privileged information. if you are not an intended recipient you must: not
use, disclose, di.ssem:i.nate, copy or print its contents. If you receive this e-mail in
error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete and destroy the message.
1

7C Triangle, Inc.
Linda Lewis
NCDENR
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
Re: Cape Lookout Marina, Inc.
500 Glenwood Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Telephone [phone]
Facsimile 919.828-1977
January 24, 2003
Stormwater Management Plan
Carteret County, North Carolina
TRC ## 29408 0020 00000
Dear Linda,
Thank you for your letter of December 6, 2002, and for your detailed response to
questions raised in our September 27 letter and subsequent conversation. As you may be
aware, the proposed meeting in late December at the site did not materialize. The
Wetlands Unit personnel do not want to meet at the site without your being present. We
may yet request that you schedule for such a meeting at a later date, depending on further
developments in pursuing other permitting options.
This letter is to request that you hold our present application for an additional 30 days to
allow us to further investigate whether we may legitimately claim the discharging option
as shown in our current application. In this regard, we are seeking to establish the BUA
that existed in 1988, as outlined in your letter. We have aerial photography from a 1989
flight that shows the site being used very intensively for a boat -building operation. It is
apparent that there was significantly greater impervious area in existence at that time than
is evidenced at present by the remaining concrete floor slabs.
We would also request your guidance on the following issues.
We are seeking earlier aerial photography to establish that the BUA circ. '89
existed also in '88. Does your policy establish any specific date as the threshold
date for existing BUA?
2. Some significant portion of the site drains to the state road adjoining the property.
Would your policy in any way restrict or limit -this existing drainage pattern_?
3.. In reviewing the General Statutes and Administrative Code provisions regarding
stormwater permitting, we note in a section dealing primarily with local
governmental permitting requirements (I SA NCAC 02H .0126 (10) (h)) the
following language: "For programs with development/redevelopment draining to
Customer -Focused Solutions
RE

TRC Triangle, Inc.
SA waters, the following additional requirements must be incorporated into their
program:...
(ii) New direct points of stormwater discharge to SA waters or expansion of
existing points of discharge to any constructed stormwater conveyance system, or
constructed system of conveyances that discharge to SA waters, shall not be
allowed. Expansion is defined as an increase in drainage area or an increase in
impervious surface within the drainage area resulting in a net increase in peak
flow or volume from the one year 24 hour storm. Overland shee flow of
stormwater or stormwater discharge to a wetland, vegetated buyer or other
natural area capable of providing treatment or absorption will not be considered
a direct point of stormwater discharge for the purposes of this Rule... "(emphasis
added).
This wording seems to indicate that a stormwater discharge through a natural
wetland is permittable for a public body. Is this provision not also pennittable for
a private entity?
4. For your information, in late December we requested that Vincent Lewis meet
with us to determine the suitability of the soils for infiltration. Mr. Lewis did so
in early January and was able to identify a limited area at the northwest corner
that might be suitable. We understand that a detailed field study will be required
to establish an allowable infiltration rate if we are forced to this method of
discharge. However, Mr. Lewis could not tell us if we could use any portion of
the designated buffers for this purpose. Since the existing canals within and
bordering the property create a lot of buffer area, we would be severely restricted
in using this area if allowable only outside the buffer. What is your policy
regarding this issue?
5. In further regard to Item #4 above, would the restriction for a 50-foot separation
between an infiltration system and SA waters also apply to separation from the
internal canals?
Thank you for your consideration of our request and for your response by your most
convenient means to our issues raised above. Please call if you need additional
information or have questions.
Yours truly,
TRC Triangle
Rick lker, P. E.
Project Manager
Cc: Bob and Ed Richards
Roger Schecter
Customer -Focused Solutions

( 6vel )
C .M -'J -z -r►u tic, r`: pro ui c f ILA
February 21, 2003
Linda Lewis
NCDENR
Wilmington Regional Off -ice
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
Re: Cape Lookout Marina, Inc.
Stormwater Management Plan
Stormwater Project No. SW8 020934
Carteret County, North Carolina
TRC 4 29408 0020 00000
Dear Linda,
In response to our request for a 30-day time extension made in our letter dated January
24, 2003, we are providing the l-ollowing submittal. Included in this submittal are a
photograph of the project site dated June 9, 1987, a letter from the distributor certifying
photograph acquisition date and supplier (USGS), an enlargement of the photograph with
boundary, wetland, canal and existing built upon area (BUA) hatching overlay, revised
original signature application (SWU-101), revised low density supplement (SWU-iO4),
and stormwater narrative including revised stormwater calculations.
After receiving your letter dated December 6, 2002, with direction on calculating
adjusted site area (ASA) clue to existing built upon area (BUA), we were able to locate an
aerial photograph of the site dated .tune 9, 1987. At your direction of calculating BUA
prior to 1988, we believe this photo should provide adequate documentation of the
existing BUA. During the time of this photograph, this site was used as an active boat
building/repair facility.
On the enlargement, we have provided an overlay of two existing BUA's. Area 91
includes the gravel entrance, residence, parking and travel area and driveway access to
two mobile homes located on the western peninsula. Please note in the southwest corner
we have not included the light colored area, as we believe these to be boats that are not
permanent impervious area. Area #2 includes at least two buildings (as can be seen by
the shadowing to the west of each) covering the southern concrete slab and the area
between the two northern concrete slabs, concrete slabs, parking, travel area around
buildings and slabs, material storage areas, boat loading/unloading; and a driveway access
on the eastern peninsula that may have been used for an additional boat
loading/unloading into the canal.

)`
From the photograph, we have calculated the existing BUA for each area. These
calculations area as follows: Area 41 = 41,513 sf (0.953 ac) and Area 92 = 113,212 sf
(2.599 ac). Compared to the proposed BUA for final build out, Area 91 = 52,098 sf
(1.196 ac) and Area #2 = 107,463 sf (2.467 ac), there is a net increase (4.6% of ASA) of
BUA for area #i and a net reduction (-2.3% of ASA) for Area 92.
F'or reference, Area 42 includes the area of pocket high density that you referred to in
previous correspondence that at final build out will have a net decrease of BUA.
In addition, we have calculated the allowable new impervious area using your formula in
the December 6, 2002, letter. The allowable new impervious area from this formula is
1.862 ac. 'fhe total new proposed impervious area is 0. l 1 1 acre (3.663 ac proposed less
3.552 ac existing), all of which will be built on the western peninsula.
Please see the attached revised project narrative with additional inlorniation and
calculations for the above data.
With this additional information provided and documented, it is our professional opinion
that this project meets the requirements set forth for low density as provided in your
correspondence and NCAC 211.1005. Also, with this submittal and at your direction, we
believe we have provided the required additional information and documentation to
complete the application package For this project. Therefore, we ask that you begin the
review at your earliest convenience.
Thank you for your consideration. Please call if' you need additional information or have
questions in any way.
Yours truly,
'>rRC Triangle, Inc.
Rick Baker, P. C.
Project Manager
Cc: Bob and Ed Richards
Roger Schecter

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Wilmington Regional Office
February 24, 2003
Mr. Rick Baker, P.E.
TRC Triangle, Inc.
500 Glenwood Avenue
Raleigh, NC 27603
Subject: DESIGN GUIDANCE
Cape Lookout Marina, Inc.
Stormwater Project No. SW8 020934
Carteret County
Dear Mr. Baker:
The Division received your letter of January 24, 2003, regarding several questions you
had about the design requirements for the stormwater management system for Cape Lookout
Marina. The policy regarding redevelopment projects has been fine-tuned over the years since
1995. We can accept a redevelopment application as long as the built -upon area existed within
the 6 months prior to application. This application was received in September, 2002, therefore,
we would consider a redevelopment permit for this site if the built -upon area existed in March,
2002. However, a redevelopment pen -nit still requires stormwater treatment to the maximum
extent practicable. The Division will review the application to determine if everything has been
done to provide adequate treatment for the design stone.
The discharge of runoff into the existing State Road ditch is not restricted or limited,
although it cannot be considered a vegetated filter because the DOT cannot guarantee that it will
remain a ditch. As was previously detennined, the proposed side parking area is low density and
can sheet flow across a minimum of 30' of vegetated area prior to discharge. The runoff from the
concentration of built -upon area around the building, front parking area, and dry -stacks must be
collected and treated in an engineered system. ff the runoff from this concentrated area can be
collected, infiltrated, excess bypassed through a vegetated filter (subject to paragraph 5 on
followitag page) and.lhcn directed into the road ditch, we won't have a problem.
According to NCAC 02H.0126, where other rule requirements overlap, the more stringent
will apply. Additionally, the rules in .0126 apply for the most part to stormwater discharges
which require NPDES permitting. For any projects (public or private) on the coast, the
regulations found in NCAC 2H.1000 apply. These rules require a 50' vegetated filter for the
overflow from all infiltration systems that are within % mile of and draining to class SA waters,
including tidal wetlands. The vegetated filter must be constructed in such a manner that a sheet
flow condition across 50' of grassed area is created prior to discharge into the receiving waters.
Direct point -source discharges into SA waters are prohibited.
tfCDENR
N.C. Division of Water Quality 127 Cardinal Drive Extension Wilmington, N.C. 28405 [phone] Fax [phone] Customer Service
800-623-7748

Rick Baker
February 24, 2003
Stormwater Application Number SW8 020934
What "designated buffers" are you referring to in your item #4? There are several
meanings attached to 30' and 50' "buffers". One can refer to the horizontal separation between
the MHW line and an infiltration system. The other can refer to the 30' undisturbed vegetated
area that is required between the MHW and all impervious surfaces for a low density project. The
coastal rules require at least 50' between the MHW of class SA waters and the infiltration system,
and 30' for other classes of waters.
Per NCAC 2B.0301 (i) (1)(C), depending on when the canals were created, they may or
may not be considered SA. If the canals were first created under an approved dredging project
before November 1, 198b, they are considered SA, and the infiltration system would have to be
sited a minimum of 50' from the MHW line. If the canals were created after that date, they are
considered SC, and the engineered system (infiltration or otherwise) would have -to be sited a
minimum of 30' from the MHW. A vegetated filter would not be required for the excess design
storm bypass if the canals are determined to be class SC..
I hope this information answers your questions and guides you in the design of
stormwater management measures for this difficult site. Please call or email me if you have
additional questions.
Sincerely,
Linda Lewis
Environmental Engineer 1
RSSlarl: S:1WQSISTORMWATILETTERS1020934.FEB03
cc: Linda Lewis

o�OF W AT 6'9Q Michael F. Easley, Governor
.1 William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
jNorth Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
❑ Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
April 17, 2003
Mr. Edward F. Richards
Cappe Lookout Marina, Inc.
3315 Old Forrest Road
Lynchburg, VA 24501
Subject: Request for Additional Information
Stormwater Project No. SW8 020934
Cape Lookout Marina
Carteret County
Dear Mr. Richards:
The Wilmington Regional Office received a Stormwater Management Permit Application
for Cape Lookout Marina on February 24, 2003. A preliminary review of that information has
determined that the application is not complete. The following information is needed to continue
the stormwater review:
Please report your title within the corporation as requested in Part 1.2 of the
application. You must be at least a vice president in order to sign the application.
The signature of an agent or consultant can be accepted only if accompanied by a
letter of authorization.
2. Please add the nearest intersection of two major roads to the vicinity map. A
major road is any 1, 2 or 3 digit NC, US or interstate highway.
3. As previously indicated to your consultant, meeting low density is not just a
matter of number manipulation. Neither the, method used to calculate density, nor
the fact that there is existing built -upon area on the site, will make any difference
regarding the call that was made that a pocket of high density exists at this site.
Please provide an infiltration system for the runoff from the drystack building and
front parking lot.
4. Please report all built -upon areas in square feet on the appplication. For purposes of
this apphcation, the numbers listed in column #1 should be the overall density of
the site, excluding the wetlands. Column #2 should be used to report the numbers
for the infiltration system you will be using to treat the runoff from the dry stacks
and front parking lot. The parking lot along the western edge will not be required
to provide infiltration as long as it will not have an inverted crown and will sheet
flow across at least 30' of grassed area before entering SA waters.
5. Please provide a signed and notarized infiltration basin or trench supplement
form.
N. C. Division of Water Quality 127 Cardinal Drive Extension [phone] Customer Service"
Wilmington Regional Office Wilmington, NC 28405 [phone] Fax [phone] NCDENR

Mr. Richards
April 17, 2003
Stonn«rater Application No. SW8 020934
Please note that this request for additional information is in response to a preliminary
review. The requested information should be received by this Office prior to May 17, 2003, or
the application will be returned as incomplete. The return of a project will necessitate resubmittal
of al required items, including the application fee.
If you need additional time to submit the information, please mail or fax your request for
a time extension to the Division at the address and fax number at the bottom of this letter. The
request must indicate the date by which you expect to submit the required information. The
Division is allowed 90 days from the receipt of a completed application to issue the permit.
The construction of any impervious surfaces, other than a construction entrance under an
approved Sedimentation Erosion Control Plan, is a violation of NCGS 143-215.1 and is subject
to enforcement action pursuant to NCGS 143-215.6A.
Please reference the State assigned project number on all correspondence. Any original
documents that need to be revised have been sent to the engineer or agent. All original
documents must be returned or new originals must be provided. Copies are not acceptable. If
you have any questions concerning this matter please feel free to call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
/D
i
Linda Lewis
Environmental Engineer
RSS/arl: S:1WQSISTORMWATIA.DDINFO120031020934.apr03
cc: Rick Baker, P.E.
Linda Lewis

RE?: T W: Aced ad%,ice: Richards Marina stormwater pemnit, Harker's Island
y
Subject: RE: FW: Need advice: Richards Marina stormwater permit, Harker's Island
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 15:33:07 -0500
From: "Cobb, Gene" <[e-mail]>
To: "Rick Shiver" <[e-mail]>
CC: "Baker, Richard" <RBaker@,rRCSOLUTIONS.com>,
"Roger H. Schecter (E-mail)" <[e-mail]>
Rick,
Thank you for your response. We have not talked with"anyone in your Central Office
except Bill Mills, who referred me back to you all and/or Brad Bennett. We've not had
a response from Brad.
Our purpose in seeking a meeting is not to argue, but rather to understand how you
would define the area of high density and to seek the best guidance that we can obtain
in pursuing some other option for the defined high density area other than groundwater
discharge. We're willing to come to your office for that purpose if you all can be
available.
Gene
-----Original Message -----
From: Rick Shiver (mailto:[e-mail])
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 1:45 PM
To: Cobb, Gene
Subject: Re: FW: Need advice: Richards Marina stormwater permit,
Harker's Island
Hi, Gene,
I'm not sure there's much to meet about. I understand that both the Central Office
and Regional Office reps believe your project constitutes a pocket of high density,
which therefore requires a high density stormwater permit.
I do assume that you wish to argue otherwise. Rick
"Cobb, Gene" wrote:
> Rick,
>
> We need the best advice we can get in resolving the stormwater discharge options for
the subject site. in that regard, I would .like to request that you schedule an
appointment for us at your office in the near future. Let me say we're not looking
for a confrontation but just the best direction for a solution.
> For your information, we've also requested a meeting with Brad Bennett, but
understand that he's a bit overwhelmed right now dealing with the Phase 11 program.
We've also contacted John Dorney about a potential stormwater discharge through
reconstructed wetlands and will meet with him on Nov. 20.
> Thanks in advance for your response.
>
> Gene B. Cobb
> TRC Triangle, Inc.
> 500 Glenwood Avenue
> Raleigh, N.C. 27603
> [phone] Extn 237
> -----original Message------
* From: Bill Mills fmailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 2:54 PM
I oft I 1/ 15/2002 8:41 AM

RE: FW: Need advice: Richards ,'Marina stormwater permit, Harker's Island
d,
> To: Cobb, Gene
> Subject: Re: Need advice: Richards Marina stormwater permit, Harker's
> .island
>
> Gene,
> I think you wit find that the Regional Office (Linda and Rick Shiver) are the
persons who make the final decisions on individual projects. I would suggest you
continue to work with them to resolve differences.
> Bradley Bennett, Supervisor, Stormwater and General Permits Unit, 733-5083 x525,
overviews the state stormwater program (they have never hired any replacement for
Jeanette Powell due to budget constraints). You can contact Bradley but I expect he
will refer you back to the regional persons on any issue for a specific project.
> Bill Mills, PE
> Environmental Engineer
> Stormwater and General Permits Unit
> NC Div of Water Quality
>
> "Cobb, Gene" wrote:
> > Bill,
> > We are in need of advice on how to handle a stormwater permit we have in process
in the Wilmington Office. I'm attaching a file with a letter we'd written to Linda
Lewis there. Since we wrote the letter, we've had a telephone conversation with Linda
and understand that she will hold to her ruling that we have a pocket of high density
which will require a discharge to groundwater. Our site won't pert. Who can we talk
to at the state level who can give us an overview of what options other are available?
> > Thanks in advance for your response.
> > '
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Gene B. Cobb
> > TRC Triangle, Inc.
> > 500 Glenwood Avenue
> > Raleigh, N.C. 27602
> > [phone] Extn 237
> > <<SWapplresponsetocommentsRl.DOC>>
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Name: SWapplresponsetocommentsRl.DOC
> > Type: Microsoft Word Document
(application/msword)
> > SWapplresponsetocommentsRl.DOC Encoding: base64
> > Description: SWapplresponsetocommentsRl.DOC
> > Download Status: Not downloaded with message
2 of 2 l 1 / 15/2002 8:41 AIM

[Fwd: Richards Marina - ]Markers Island]
Subject: [Fwd: Richards Marina - Harkers Islands
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2002 08:24:13 -0500
From: Linda Lewis <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR
To: Rick Shiver <[e-mail]>
Rick, here is the email I sent to Bradley.
Linda
Subject: Re: Richards Marina - Harkers Island
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2002 16:23:05 -0500
From: Linda Lewis <[e-mail]>
Organization: NC DENR
To: Bradley Bennett <bradIcy. bennett@ncmail. net>
Bradley:
This project started about three years ago. Jeanette and Scott Vinson met with
these guys at least twice regarding their pending application. Its a new marina
and drystack with parking. The overall density meets 25%, but according to JP and
SV, the new drystack building and surrounding parking were considered a pocket of
high density. The developers started looking for non-structural alternatives to
treat the runoff.
When I reviewed their application and said it was a pocket of high density, they
acted like it was the first they heard of it and they alluded that some kind of
agreement had been reached with SV and JP so that it wouldn't be considered high
density. I talked to SV and JP and neither recalls making any agreement like
that. At one time, they talked about using the wetlands as the treatment but
Dorney and Todd St. John determined that the wetlands were too close to surface
waters to be of any help in treating stormwater.
I am requiring them to provide treatment for the 1.5" runoff from the drystack and
the immediate parking area- the parking area on the opposite side of the marina is
considered low density and has a 30' buffer to sheet flow runoff through.
That's all I know.
Linda
Bradley Bennett wrote:
> Linda,
> I have received an email from Gene Cobb - TRC Triangle, Inc. - on this
> project. Can you give me some background information on the project
> before I get back with Mr. Cobb.
> Thanks
>
> Bradley Bennett
> NC Division of Water Quality
> Stormwater and General Permits unit
l o f t 11 / 15/2002 8:3 8 AM

FW'Nc�:d &.�Sicc: Richards Marina stomswater permit, Narkcrs Island
Subject: FW: Need advice: Richards Marina stormwater permit, Harker's Island
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 10:36:28 -0500
From: "Cobb, Gene" <GCobb a TRCSOLUTIONS.com>
To: <[e-mail]>
CC: "Baker, Richard" <[e-mail]>
Rick,
We need the best advice we can get in resolving the stormwater discharge options for
the subject site. in that regard, I would like to request that you schedule an
appointment for us at your office in the near future. Let me say we're not looking
for a confrontation but just the best direction for a solution.
r
For your information, we've also requested a meeting with Brad Bennett, but understand
that he's a bit overwhelmed right now dealing with the Phase II program. We've also
contacted John Dorney about a potential stormwater discharge through reconstructed
wetlands and will meet with him on Nov. 20.
Thanks in advance for your response.
Gene B. Cobb
TRC Triangle, Inc.
500 Glenwood Avenue
Raleigh, N.C. 27603
[phone] Extn 237
-----Original Message -----
From: Bill Mills (mailto:[e-mail])
Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2002 2:54 PM
To: Cobb, Gene
Subject: Re: Need advice: Richards Marina stormwater permit, Harker's
Island
Gene,
I think you wil find that the Regional Office (Linda and Rick Shiver) are the persons
who make the final decisions on individual projects. I would suggest you continue to
work with them to resolve differences.
Bradley Bennett, Supervisor, Stormwater and General Permits Unit, 733-5083 x525,
overviews the state stormwater program (they have never hired any replacement for
Jeanette Powell due to budget constraints). You can contact Bradley but I expect he
will refer you back to the regional persons on any issue for a specific project.
Bill Mills, PE
Environmental Engineer
Stormwater and General Permits Unit
NC Div of Water Quality
"Cobb, Gene" wrote:
> we are in need of advice on how to handle a stormwater permit we have in process in
the Wilmington Office. I'm attaching a file with a letter we'd written to Linda Lewis
there. Since we wrote the letter, we've had a telephone conversation with Linda and
Understand that she will hold to her ruling that we have a pocket of high density
which will require a discharge to groundwater. Our site won't perc. Who can we talk
to at the state level who can give us an overview of what options other are available?
> Thanks in advance fox your response.
I of 2 1 1/ i 5/2002 8:39 A M

FW: Need ad:;;cc: Richards Marina stormwater permit, Harker's Island
> Be"st regards,
>
> Gene B. Cobb
> TRC Triangle, Inc.
> 500 Glenwood Avenue
> Raleigh, N.C. 27603
> [phone] Extn 237
> « SWapplresponsetocommentsRI.DOC>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Name: SwapplresponsetocommentsRl.DOC
> Type: Microsoft Word Document
(application/msword)
> SWapplresponsetocommentsRI.DOC Encoding: base64
> Description: SWapplresponsetocommentsRI.DOC
> Download Status: Not downloaded with message
2 of 2 11/15/2002 8:39 AM

ke: Cap' -Lookout
Subject: Re: Cape Lookout
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 13:29:31 -0400
From: Scott Vinson <Scott.Vinson @ncmai1.net>
To: Linda Lewis <[e-mail]>
CC: Joanne Steenhuis <[e-mail]>,
Jeanette Powell <[e-mail]>
Linda,
From what I remember, apparently they had to do an infiltration study to discover the high SHWT, and
they were asked to do an infiltration study because of the pocket of high density. I was not the only one
who told these gentlemen about the pocket. Do you still
have Jeanette's email?:
Subject: RE: Cape Lookout Marina
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 09:20:41 -0400
From: Jeanette Powcll <jcanette.powe l u)amec.coin>
To: Linda Lewis <Linda.Lewis ancmail.net>,
Scott Vinson <Scott.Vinson a_;ncmail.nct>.
Jeanette Powell <jeanette.powell[)amec.com>
"I'll Linda,
Mail, I cannot believe this project is still around! Did they get approval to dredge the channel to the
marina?
When 1 met with Rick 1 told him that it was a pocket of HD and would require treatment. We
discussed breaking the project into separate draiange areas for treatment since there was no reasonable
way to fit in a single treatment measure for the whole developed area. Based on my meeting notes, Rick
was going to contact Bill ]-hint for assistance on finding an innovative treatment measure that would
work for a portion of the site. The other approach they were considering was using the wetlands for
treatment, but they were supposed to discuss that with a DWQ wetlands person. Not sure If they did or
not.
Hope you are doing well! And don't hesitate to call if you have any questions.
Take care,
J I'"
As far as the existing built upon area, f remember a discussion regarding removing the
unused bua (slabs of concrete) to help lower the overall density to below 25%, thereby onlybaving to
treat the HD pocket with an engineered system. This would allow a proposed walkway down the side of
the inlet to sheet flow across vegetation for treatment and not be picked up by an engineered system.
do know we had not come to a conclusion of how this project would be permitted through stormwater
because of all the problems and for Rick to claim that there was no mention of a "pocket of high density"
is wrong. Both Jeanette and I recall telling them about the pocket because it was the biggest problem
and was holding up the SW permit. As far as any deal I "might" have made, I don't remember it. If I did
make this "deal" that Rick is referring to then why didn't I go ahead and permit the project?
Remain standing up for how you see this project because you are right. Don't give in
to their pressure because when the day is over it will be you that permits this project.: )
I still don't uderstand how they got past Wetlands and CAMA. I'm going to ask Joanne
by way of Cc:. Give me a call if you want to discuss this in detail. [phone]
I of 2 10/15/2002 2:34 PM

kc: ,Capd'Lookout
Take care,
Scott
Linda Lewis wrote:
Dear Scott:
Rick Baker and Gene Cobb are bending my ear about some agreement you had
with them concerning submitting the project under low density. They both
claim they had no idea that a pocket of high density existed. It had
something to do with the calculation of built -upon taking into account
the existing built -upon to demonstrate low density.
Apparently, after the initial meeting with you, they discovered they
could not do infiltration because of the high water table and unsuitable
soil. They then attempted to get the wetlands approved as the treatment,
but the policy to allow it was not implemented and we must have objected
because of the direct connection to surface waters. Rick Baker claims he
then talked with you about demonstrating low density by eliminating the
existing BUA from the calculation, and that no mention of a pocket of
high density was made.
The problem is the existing BUA was replaced, almost on a 1:1 basis, by
new BUA, so that method cannot be used. Had the existing BUA remained on
site and new BUA added to the site, (not replacing the existing) then
that method of calculating density could have been used. Do you recall
anything about agreeing to allow them to submit under low density with
no treatment for the pocket of high density? I found your file on the
Marina and the plans you originally looked at, which do not differ from
the ones they propose today, but there were no other notes about the
project.
I told them I can't prove or disprove whether or not they knew about the
pocket of high density. Although I believe you, I can't prove it because
it's not written in any correspondence or meeting notes. If you have
copies of any old correspondence or phone conversations, or emails
regarding the meetings and what was decided, it would be most helpful.
also told them I am going by what I see, since I am the reviewer and I
have to write the permit, and I see a pocket of high density.
Thanks, Linda.
2 of 2 10/15/2002 2:34 PM

Etc: Cape Lookout Marina
Subject: Re: Cape Lookout Marina
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 13:47:02 -0400
From: Scott Vinson <Scott.Vinson@ncmall. net>
To: Linda Lewis <[e-mail]>
CC: "Powell, Jeanette, C." <[e-mail]>
Hey back,
I want to thank you and the rest of DWQ-WiRO again for the prayers and
support that
you gave to my family, esp. Austin. He is doing great. It took about a
month for him
to recover fully from the surgery. For all purposes he appears to be a
normal healthy
four year all for the exception of the 6 in. scar on the back of his head.
He started a
Pre-K program back in the middle of August and is adjusting to public school
as well
as one could expect.
I hope you got my voice mail earlier today, S wasn't sure if I could get my
computer back
up and running today so I called. As far as Cape Lookout is concerned, I
know we
always considered the project as a pocket of HD. Even during the later
discussions
in Oct. 2000, we discussed the likely hood of not being able to use the
wetland as
a treatment device for two main reasons: first we didn't want to start
precedence and thereby opening the door for everyone to build on their
uplands and just using the lowlands to "treat" the stormwater; second and
probably more important for this particular
project.was that the wetlands were tidally influenced. (Ask Joanne S. about
this, I'm sure
she remembers.) What kind of treatment could we get with the tide
constantly affecting
the water levels, i.e. flushing out sediment directly into the receiving
water body.
(Core Sound?) From the start I believe an infiltration system was going to
be required
to pick up the HD pocket. I also believe we ran into a problem with the
SHWT being
too high to meet any separation. I, like Jeanette, would like to know how
in the world
they were able to get permission to dredge? As far as T remember no
reasonable
solution was meet regarding SW because the biggest holdback to the project
was the
dredging. However, I do remember when I met with Gene Cobb and Rick Baker
the last time they didn't have a solution that was acceptable(SHWT). I hope
this helps, and please call if I can help any further with this or any other
project.
Scott
P.S.
let me know how this project turns out
Linda Lewis wrote:
> Scott and Jeanette:
> Hey you two!! Scott, I hope all is well with Austin and he is fully
> recovered and things are back to normal for you. Jeanette, I hope you
l of 2 ] 0/4/2002 3:52 PM

Re: Cape Lookout Marina
> are still loving your new part-time job and spending time with the
> girls. I hate to bother you with this, but I need some information on
> any agreements or design concepts that either of you might have made
> regarding the stormwater plan for Cape Lookout Marina on Harker's
> Island. The engineer is Rick Baker with TRC Triangle, Inc. Rick B. says
> he met with Scott on June 8 and October 26 of 2000, and with Jeanette,
> Todd St. John and Steve Kroeger on October 23, 2000.
> I don't know if you remember the site plan you may have looked at, but,
> if you orient Bayview Drive to the left, with the 20.5 acre site on the
> right, there are 6.5 acres of 404 wetlands in the lower right rectangle;
> the new basin takes up about 3.6 acres, leaving 10.4 acres for upland
> development. Rick B used all 20.5 acres to demonstrate low density, but
> almost every square foot of the area to the left of the wetland (bottom
> left rectangle of the plan) is either dry stack (72,700 sq. ft), asphalt
> parking lot or a concrete "drop zone" between the dry stacks and the
> basin. This area is a definite pocket of high density. The majority of
> the runoff from the parking lot and building in this area sheet flows
> across nothing but concrete before entering the basin. There is a small
> 40' wide x 160' long grassed area adjacent the building that a very
> small percentage of the runoff within the high density area will sheet
> flow through. This percentage could be more, depending on where the roof
> drains are.
> I've requested an infiltration system for the pocket of high density,
> but he seems to think this is going against some agreement he had with
> you guys. Do either of you remember anything about it, or where I can
> find some information on what was agreed to?
>
> Thanks, Linda
2 oF2 10/4/2002 3:52 PM

Capc!`Lookout Marina
r. Subject: RE: Cape Lookout Marina
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2002 09:20:41 -0400
From: Jeanette Powell <[e-mail]>
To: Linda Lewis <[e-mail]>, Scott Vinson <Scott.Vinson cr ncmail.net>,
Jeanette Powell <[e-mail]>
Hi Linda,
Man, 1 cannot believe this project is still around! Did they get approval to dredge the channel to the marina?
When I met with Rick 1 told him that it was a pocket of HD and would require treatment. We discussed breaking the project
into separate draiange areas for treatment since there was no reasonable way to fit in a single treatment measure for the whole
developed area. Based on my meeting notes, Rick was going to contact Bill Hunt for assistance on finding an innovative
treatment measure that would work for a portion of the site. The other approach they were considering was using the
wetlands for treatment, but they were supposed to discuss that with a DWQ wetlands person. Not sure if they did or not.
Hope you are doing well! And don't hesitate to call if you have any questions.
Take care,
ill
-----Original Message -----
From: Linda Lewis LmaiIto: Linda. Lewis a ncmaii.netj
Sent: Wednesday, October 02, 2002 4:10 PM
To: Scott Vinson; Powell, Jeanette, C.
Subject: Cape Lookout Marina
Scott and Jeanette:
Hey you two!! Scott, I hope all is well with Austin and he is fully
recovered and things are back to normal for you. Jeanette, I hope you
are still loving your new part-time job and spending time with the
girls. I hate to bother you with this, but I need some information on
any agreements or design concepts that either of you might have made
regarding the stormwater plan for Cape Lookout Marina on Harker's
Island. The engineer is Rick Baker with TRC Triangle, Inc. Rick B. says
he met with Scott on June 8 and October 26 of 2000, and with Jeanette,
Todd St. John and Steve Kroeger on October 23, 2000.
1 don't know if you remember the site plan you may have looked at, but,
if you orient Bayview Drive to the left, with the 20.5 acre site on the
right, there are 6.5 acres of 404 wetlands in the lower right rectangle;
the new basin takes up about 3.6 acres, leaving 10.4 acres for upland
development, Rick B used all 20.5 acres to demonstrate low density, but
almost every square foot of the area to the left of the wetland (bottom
left rectangle of the plan) is either dry stack (72,700 sq. ft), asphalt
parking lot or a concrete "drop zone" between the dry stacks and the
basin. This area is a definite pocket of high density. The majority of
the runoff from the parking lot and building in this area sheet flows
across nothing but concrete before entering the basin. There is a small
of 2 10/4/2002 8:04 AM

R-: CapA-ookout Marina
_t 40' wide x 160' long grassed area adjacent the building that a very
small percentage of the runoff within the high density area will sheet
flow through. This percentage could be more, depending on where the roof
drains are.
I've requested an infiltration system for the pocket of high density,
but he seems to think this is going against some agreement he had with
you guys. Do either of you remember anything about it, or where I can
find some information on what was agreed to'?
"Thanks, Linda
The information contained in this e-mail is intended only for the individual or ent:
to whom it is addressed. Its contents (including any attachments) are confidential
may contain privileged information. If you are not an intended recipient you must i
use, disclose, disseminate, copy or Print its contents. If you receive this e-mail
error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete and destroy the message.
2 of 2 10/4/2002 8:04 AM

Re: Cape lookout Marina barker's Island
Subject: Re: Cape lookout Marina harker's Island
Date: "hue, 03 Oct 2000 08:23:29 -0400
From: Jeanette Powell <jeanette.powell cr ncmail.nct>
Organization: NC DhNR DWQ
To: Rick Baker <[e-mail]>
CC: Scott Vinson <[e-mail]>,
Steve Kroeger <[e-mail]>,
Todd St John <[e-mail]>,
Joanne Steenhuis <[e-mail]>
Rick
The next state stormwater staff meeting is in Wilmington on Oct. 24 and it's likely the next meeting in
Raleigh will be in early December. I recommend scheduling the meeting independent of the staff`
meeting unless you can wait till December.
I've c-mailed John Dorney to see who he wants on it and he'd like Steve Kroeger (733-9604) and Todd
St. John (733-9584) to be there. John may sit in if he can. Joanne would be a good one to have, as Scott
mentioned, so you should try to get tier on board if she can make it.
The schedule of days I am not available to meet include Oct. 5-13, 19, and 24-27. Just let me know
when you have something set up. Probably easiest to have Todd or Steve schedule the conference room
at the lab.
Thanks, JP
Rick Baker wrote:
Jeanette,
I spoke with Scott Vinson on Friday of last week about this project and
meeting with him and someone from the wetlands unit and possibly you to
discuss a more detailed approach to stormwater management. Scott agreed
this would be a good idea.
Whom would you recommend I contact from Wetlands unit?
I asked Scott about possibly meeting the same day you guys have the monthly
stormwater meeting in Raleigh. Fie thought that could be worked out but he
did not know the date of the next meeting. I was assuming Oct 3. Please
confirm this date.
Would you be available that day and/or do you wish to attend this meeting?
Scott mentioned Joanne Steinhuis may want to be involved. Any thoughts?
Please call if you need to discuss any of this.
Thanks,
Rick Baker
TRC Triangle
828-3150
1 of 2 10/03/2000 9:33 AM

Cape Lookout Marina - Harker's Island
Subject: Cape Lookout Marina - Harker's Island
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 10:06:22 -0400
From: Rick Baker <[e-mail]>
To: "Jeanette Powell (E-mail)" <[e-mail]>,
"Joanne Steenhuis (E-mail)" <[e-mail]>,
"Scott Vinson (E-mall)" <[e-mail]>,
"Steve Kroeger (E-mail)" <[e-mail]>,
"Todd St. John (E-mail)" <[e-mail]>
CC: Gene Cobb <gcobb a triangleenv.coni>
Good Morning,
Jeanette Powell copied each of you on an e-mail reply to me last week
referring to this marina project therefore, I hope you are at least familiar
with the name of this project.
Briefly, our client is proposing to construct a marina on the north side of
Harker's Island on Eastmouth Bay. The site has an existing canal into the
property with a portion of the site classified as wetlands that were created
by digging "mosquito ditches" years ago.
We are proposing to have a meeting with all of you and possibly John Dorney
to review a possible stormwater management system that will utilize BMP's
and discharge into the existing wetlands. In this meeting, I would hope to
accomplish determining a direction of design that would probably get
approved. Obviously, approval cannot be promised since design has not been
submitted, but this discussion can help us reach a solution that works and
is permittable.
I wanted to see if Oct 16, 17, 20 or 23 would work with your schedules with
the meeting preferably in Raleigh.
Please review your calendar and let me know which of these days work.
Thanks,
Rick Baker, P. E.
TRC Triangle
919-828--3150
919-828-1977 (fax) jJ -�-
I of 1 10/09/2000 4:55 PM

TRC Triangle
Scott Vinson
NCDENR
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
Re: Cape Lookout Marina
P.O. Box 41087
Raleigh, North Carolina 27629
Telephone [phone]
Facsimile 919-828-1977
June 12, 2000
Stormwater
Carteret County, North Carolina
TEI # 01-572-0119
Dear Scott,
QE C E I V I
JUN 1 4 2000
DWQ
PROS S
I wanted to thank you for meeting with Gene Cobb and myself regarding the proposed marina on
Harker's Island.
As promised, please find attached two photographs showing the proposed marina site and a
survey showing the existing impervious area that has been on site since at least November 1989.
This existing impervious area covers 1.07 ac. Please note on the photographs the wetlands on
site were created by digging "mosquito" ditches at some point in the past and are not pristine
wetlands.
As requested, I will call you the morning of June 19 to remind you to have a brief meeting with
Linda Lewis to answer the questions we discussed including, the 30' buffer and waters of the
State, low density versus high density, existing impervious area and use of the existing wetlands
as stormwater treatment and other relevant items.
Please call if you need additional information or have questions.
Yours truly,
TRRC�Trian
l ck Baker, 1. E.
Project Manager
Customer -Focused Solutions

RI
1�
ter:
{is ,ti �� L S •. u •�. � _. o.r :f:7 a, �rT �• R ,'}b F�
.'Si 1;. °`. ! r�� � 15 �r ./ ••,' i:kr.,.. �'� �� - %•j: � �: ~ �' "j' I{,`'# i ~,� C •;,fir •1� ti•
•' fey, } �� � sy�• t •. j 17,
jl
' ,� �it ���1 v�• G �e:� �7 €s•.�{• ';�'l� 't�i��� S y�!(.r
J'�•..�„iTj , r t . st ra '� rw, .4: �:y �' i'„' 7 tZ�L't �at Tti..��+•-T ��'Jr f. ig 1 �5:,
�" K'r,ta - �"'-' 4 a f �rx 'b: S " J .� fC i3 1� t� 'i :I aG. •�-`.4
�i���o �••M�* y�y ,yam}; R,��y tiiu"%� ,"l�. Q'+•. � 1 � � + ,,r:':? wK. •.- D � .�+.i4 r •;I� 4 r ![ .i r� .'.
��+.'' 74.'^^y•i��►'gi.: �•f%�f .���..',!' �r� ; ! j Z ?,< ` r.j �'`j,�r� '.df �+*� ..�.4.'i n,� r! i � t, 'L;Y:„.
M. � %:. 7S•S�e+nS.'�Y Li � � _ _ �,�r3�� C t -�}F' i - �. k .• ! 0. �j~ '. � ..`-- r
���or-':C%^;?�4 r� 'd •���?' i !f •' � � •r�{ ' z��i. rk A r�`Iti�'� .S � `'�,C r. '' ��./• �
. 1 �, �� �r f, i�° � - - T? iJS•; ` •+�T rfl. .r.` rs �, t5' � �•� r �r � t � r L Sj'�L 'P% { L,. 1 ��!�1»� f 'i . y
•-a, t �{� �i �re'Ok'V 1•J�` ��' �f�� t<)�.� ��..{ . � .;.. , tr�.h�'f �a�'~ �1 ' a � �i ,Rar� 3y �iC ��'I,..s_, b_ � ��`�:��r . �o • ,.
! sue. � 4 �« �.3�'a �' 4 �- r, !t j •. a s -,. - F.. � � � t '�h:~ti !! � •� r� -, i>
� . mot.^n i' t" «. a"` als. t Lq.,r) � '4 .., 1 nt �. �, L f ✓• ` i C y { r �4� '_ t A .. �t � $� ,- O
. t'! ••1-. Ye s .3 s �x�°�' •t :�a.•: ,L"•_ _.-y 1"'- •,Y• `� .4,+� t^�x•'� � - - �
t � P i i-. - '+ ? -�� � x ..-- It a, � i, • t t.l ��, .t. i a w , ..
I w �� Sri 1 1 y '• ! t
41
!� ? "' n r � • � '�` X R r _ '^ .� �. L� :•� r ) f.-•T.'•.� '/�} 3•.'L`� i�' � w w 4r� I}'4' yt' • + I i' -
4 Pr..''L' ° • t y "� f ' s,�_'•?�.:�'�r , � • ji ,TMsi r�, r ¢, ryr ,f i y.!
t:•s.-x 1, Fes., ,j p r. r`i� I •y L ,
i • i r � ,� y�i+ �tiY�L � :1t,�hfS��
� a a. , - i � . f e" i O 1.� S J '� 7 ''_ "' �F""•• r•' � - • l t'��' r 5 �iY' '. y � 7 <L ! �`
ijv r. -4 � .t r }y w� ������►r +�tj1�'r �+ . ' . t •:a +�'`_ 1...� •'I. I o'= �.0 J s „I ,• . .
U k V t :A .�.. _., �"�._.-+ate#�,�.r'+1l ...1:i K. fy. •7-. rfi� i.!

- / M-3630 q n =80U• 12--1 QPP
TI x� s-r �. � � .ys..i � "� - J - c i.•
' _% � .y .�7 .,,�4 � ,,.ry y 2 /C�`Gza�a , z l Y -'� . a•t
Y x. -. � _ l T � ; .� t•J C-S 4'' ��. 1 .- .++, Jam• �
X'
�ii ' ,, ���r .tea - �� tT'{1'r+k4' Y•^ : i�
14
Ij
oil
sF
-r�
{ff�
4 its!
4 .�• [y�iT� c.
. G:T�- tli1 pf�'.���L ` ���.. 1. T->� ��_Y-•4 - ♦ — 5y1 t ~% I� i
I. � �� 1���� ��� %�� [t, �,;}4 r:1 is •s- r . v+,.1 �i.'4`` _ •.
IJ ! 'f• + `�r;S+%,�,+'i#;•= i'"1.>n•�'r-rlt�� tZ:P'.,'.ti.:.7r'?s�� � f , f � r, ti s a � :' � •.
-"� ',� T•,
4��-�'�i'•',��'�r���� �'i ``�I t ���"i;'.s;}r'q:'�;`1�,�'3' i �� ti" 4 w � : • {r ���� i� —• r6Z —'j � • "'^ d�}r w t�� :IIC F` §%> 4s �''Y ; � `A �i _ 4�t��4rr,4
� Vey �lji.�,� i.��'•„�,� J�1 N-ih ev/7 r�°T�ti �1, '13�7`i �St ��'i �yca` r •lt'''1,i
iiY �^,���, Sl-5`1S1'�' Yt •i{:���{ r. �rh1 • �.. w{•�i}a, _tl
V r•
r-r � x -f. ,�,...��tyr1���!±•1 x4J. ��'u���;J%.�, f�a y} +Y��' 1� 'ter" •K��Y
. �r•F hyiT'�•1r 1 'ls=��� r•c r4 ' .."t� 4't s �,l�
, k y wti";,.. rG'•7 i�]r1 { + r- �1t •iy�, _sc
•' tiS�?&3 {,tern a ♦ wft'r - _ ' . r •. , �'-6%:.:°sl'.'� -hu! .�'�! - N ir.r+ �✓ i��". l't;i1il.J _11. i:-:
..TOM
1461,
ri`ti•,,f--r:�"z� '�S� '' r1. "„V) �r
Al
<' r
43
h¢ V•r {�'4� yt' I t'1';ta ;ri'~} :���.a �'�,P} •.•i d ��� I"�'- r t
Ii' . " IjIj1` . ,��y. h�"tl ' 4-. � tti r-- I �I�� � &�.kl �y � � � �. st.✓ � 1�'^,.�� �,��� '
rq.
s { �``11;i t; L •/4' `^ Y ter• —- T" i
s I-�s���i94�s: Y-�:°.�, St��l... r. ti_•. .i'-,:,� � tea < y. •.: I'.rt'''�'� 'L/
R �',���•' :li, w+�_.S�;�i:�q �- 3�'�y�1����,' 'r:`�f�F� 1k�.=c +y�� -t t- • ;
'�(tj' 1. �"s-yti• 1 i=s' ..'�.` i - R }}.aT+Ti Zoo _.
L1iy �.U.,�,�_uy��"•`t�{{Iy�.j: �''ti:��.c. t Ya,�'y-y��yr, � :• +1 ��v �. � .�A'7.
:1,� _
_I '1,. C7• if I��+ .ww•.. � •t��� ♦ �.� � � 11` �'. -_ •3• 0. + �,�i��,r � 1
'y1. } �G' t]i-�� ..ram t a"`��+r `N ti ;y.�r 1.� • J`.• • " 1 f�.VF?
i ,•.•;. !.. .�� '= r� Est -.` }-aj'40r .
�`q'►-`' `�rt�
vA
.its _gg IFS
, M}n r�7�.r:1' 1ST �� �'•'.�F•_ � x �, M �, r:. V `r -
NAITO

OF wAr�R Michael E. Easley, Governor
0 William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
7
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.,Director
p Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
September 29, 2003
Mr. Robert D. Richards, President
Cape Lookout Marina, Inc.
C/o MIA-COM Private Radio Systems, Inc.
221 Jefferson Ridge Parkway
Lynchburg, VA 24501
Subject: Stormwater Permit No. SW8 030826
Cape Lookout Marina
High Density Project
Carteret County
Dear Mr. Richards:
The Wilmington Regional Office received a complete Stormwater Management Permit
Application for Cape Lookout Marina on September 15, 2003 . The permit and
approved plans were returned on September 29, 2003, because the former address
was unknown to the Post Office. Staff review of the plans and specifications has
determined that the project, as proposed, will comply with the Stormwater Regulations
set forth in Title 15A NCAC 2H.1000. We are forwarding Permit No. SW8 030826 dated
September 19, 2003, for the construction of the subject project.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until September 19, 2013, and
shall be subject to the conditions and limitations as specified therein. Please pay
special attention to the Operation and Maintenance requirements in this permit. Failure
to establish an adequate system for operation and maintenance of the stormwater
management system will result in future compliance problems.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this permit are unacceptable, you
have the right to request an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30)
days following receipt of this permit. 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. Drawer 27447, Raleigh, NC 27611-
7447. Unless such demands are made this permit shall be final and binding.
If you have any questions, or need additional information concerning this matter, please
contact Linda Lewis, or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Rick Shiver
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
RSSlarl: S:1WQSISTORMWATIPERMIT1030826.sep03
cc: Rick Baker, P.E., TRC Triangle Engineering
Carteret County Building Inspections
Division of Coastal Management
qL"iilda.Lewis
Wilmington Regional Office
Central Files
N. C. Division of Water duality 127 Cardln'al Drive Extension [phone] Customer Service
►;mow
Wiimington Regional Office Wilmington, NC 28405 [phone] Fax [phone] NCDEtv`R

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 030826
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
STATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PERMIT
HIGH DENSITY DEVELOPMENT
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of
North Carolina as amended, and other applicable Laws, Rules, and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
Robert D. Richards, President, Cape Lookout Marina, Inc.
Cape Lookout Marina
Carteret County
FOR THE
construction, operation and maintenance of a sand filter system in compliance with the
provisions of 15A NCAC 2H .1000 (hereafter referred to as the "stormwater rules') and
the approved stormwater management plans and specifications and other supporting
data as attached and on file with and approved by the Division of Water Quality and
considered a part of this permit.
This permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until September 19, 2013, and
shall be subject to the following specified conditions and limitations:
I. DESIGN STANDARDS
1. This permit is effective only with respect to the nature and volume of stormwater
described in the application and other supporting data.
2. This stormwater system has been approved for the management of stormwater
runoff as described in Section 1.5 of this permit. The stormwater controls within
the redeveloped area, have been designed to handle the runoff generated by
1.5" of rain, from 75,145 ft2, 14,002 ft2, and 19,075 ft2, respectively, of impervious
area. The overflow from each sand filter must pass through a 50' vegetated filter
prior to sheet flow into the receiving stream. The new parking lot on the west
side will overland sheet flow runoff through 30' wide vegetated buffers prior to
discharge into the receiving stream.
3. The tract will be limited to the amount of built -upon area indicated on page 3 of
this permit, and per the approved plans.
4. All stormwater collection and treatment systems must be located in either
dedicated common areas or recorded easements. The final plats for the project
will be recorded showing all such required easements, in accordance with the
approved plans.
2

I
State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 030826
The permittee shall maintain the permitted engineered system such that the
following approved design parameters and requirements are met:
a. Receiving Stream/River Basin: The Straits 1 White Oak
b.
Stream Index Number:
WOK04 21-35-1-12
C.
Classification of Water Body:
"SA"
d.
Sand Filter Number:
1
2
3
Drainage Area, ft2:
80,049
15,798
20,814
Offsite, ft2:
80,049
15,798
20,814
Offsite, ft2:
0
0
0
e.
Total Impervious Surfaces, ft2:
75,145
14,002
19,075
f.
Dimensions @bottom, ft:
21 x 30
108 x 40
D8 x 50
g.
TSS removal efficiency:
85% (a vegetated filter is required)
h.
Top of Sand Elevation, FMSL:
4.5
4.75
4.75
i.
Permitted Surface Area, ft2:
2,340
320
400
j.
Permitted Storage Volume, ft3:
2,578
480
600
k.
Outlet Elevation, FMSL:
2.75
2.75
3.25
I.
Controlling Orifice:
2@6"�
6" �
6" 0
II. SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE
1. The stormwater management systems and buffers shall be constructed in their
entirety, vegetated and operational for their intended use prior to the construction
of any built -upon surface.
2. During construction, erosion shall be kept to a minimum and any eroded areas of
the system will be repaired immediately.
3. The permittee shall at all times provide the operation and maintenance
necessary to assure the permitted stormwater system functions at optimum
efficiency. The approved Operation and Maintenance Plan must be followed in its
entirety and maintenance must occur at the scheduled intervals including, but not
limited to:
a. Semiannual scheduled inspections (every 6 months).
b. Sediment removal 1 pumping of sediment chambers.
C. Mowin.9 and revegetation of grassed buffer areas and the vegetated filter.
d. Immediate repair of eroded areas.
e. Maintenance of all slopes in accordance with approved plans and
specifications.
f. Debris removal and unclogging of inlets, trench drains, sand filter media,
orifices, outlet structures, flow spreader, catch basins and piping.
g. Access to the sand filters must be available at all times.
3

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 030826
4. Records of maintenance activities must be kept and made available upon
request to authorized personnel of DWQ. The records will indicate the date,
activity, name of person performing the work and what actions were taken.
5. The facilities shall be constructed as shown on the approved plans. This permit
shall become voidable unless the facilities are constructed in accordance with the
conditions of this permit, the approved plans and specifications, and other
supporting data.
6. Upon completion of construction, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy,
and prior to operation of this permitted facility, a certification must be received
from an appropriate designer for the system installed certifying that the permitted
facility has been installed in accordance with this permit, the approved plans and
specifications, and other supporting documentation. Any deviations from the
approved plans and specifications must be noted on the Certification. A
modification may be required for those deviations.
7. if the stormwater system was used as an Erosion Control device, it must be
restored to design condition prior to operation as a stormwater treatment device,
and prior to occupancy of the facility.
8. At least 30 days prior to the sale or lease of any portion of the property, the
permittee shall notify DWQ and provide the name, mailing address and phone
number of the purchaser or leasee. An access/maintenance easement to the
stormwater facilities shall be granted in favor of the permittee if access to the
stormwater facilities will be restricted by the sale or lease of any portion of the
property.
9. Sand filter #1 must be constructed with an impervious liner in the bottom and up
the sides to prevent the intrusion of the water table.
10. The permittee shall submit to the Director and shall have received approval for
revised plans, specifications, and calculations prior to construction, for any
modification including, but not limited to, those listed below:
a. Any revision to any item shown on the approved plans, including the
stormwater management measures, built -upon area, details, etc.
b. Project name change.
C. Transfer of ownership.
d. Redesign or addition to the approved amount of built -upon area or to the
drainage area.
e. Further subdivision, acquisition, or sale of all or part of the project area.
The project area is defined as all property owned by the permittee, for
which Sedimentation and Erosion Control Plan approval or a CAMA Major
permit was sought.
f. Filling in, altering, or piping of any vegetative conveyance shown on the
approved plan.
11. The permittee shall submit final site layout and grading plans for any permitted
future areas shown on the approved plans, prior to construction. If the proposed
BUA exceeds the amount permitted under this permit, a modification to the
permit must be submitted and approved prior to construction.
12. A copy of the approved plans and specifications shall be maintained on file by
the Permittee for a minimum of ten years from the date of the completion of
construction.
13. The permittee must maintain compliance with the proposed built -upon area and
ensure that the runoff from all the built -upon is directed into the permitted system.
4

State Stormwater Management Systems
Permit No. SW8 030826
14. The Director may notify the permittee when the permitted site does not meet one
or more of the minimum requirements of the permit. Within the time frame
specified in the notice, the permittee shall submit a written time schedule to the
Director for modifying the site to meet minimum requirements. The permittee
shall provide copies of revised plans and certification in writing to the Director
that the changes have been made.
III. GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. This permit is not transferable except after notice to and approval by the Director.
In the event of a change of ownership, or a name change, the permittee must
submit a formal permit transfer request to the Division of Water Quality,
accompanied by a completed name/ownership change form, documentation from
the parties involved, and other supporting materials as may be appropriate. The
approval of this request will be considered on its merits and may or may not be
approved. The permittee is responsible for compliance with all permit conditions
until such time as the Division approves the transfer request.
2. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in this permit may
subject the Permittee to enforcement action by the Division of Water Quality, in
accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6A to 143-215.6C.
3. The issuance of this permit does not preclude the Permittee from complying with
any and all statutes, rules, regulations, or ordinances which may be imposed by
other government agencies (local, state, and federal) which have jurisdiction.
4. In the event that the facilities fail to perform satisfactorily, including the creation of
nuisance conditions, the Permittee shall take immediate corrective action,
including those as may be required by this Division, such as the construction of
additional or replacement stormwater management systems.
5. The permittee grants DENR Staff permission to enter the property during normal
business hours for the purpose of inspecting all components of the permitted
stormwater management facility.
6. The permit may be modified, revoked and reissued or terminated for cause. The
filing of a request for a permit modification, revocation and reissuance or
termination does not stay any permit condition.
7. Unless specified elsewhere, permanent seeding requirements for the stormwater
control must follow the guidelines established in the North Carolina Erosion and
Sediment Control Planning and Design Manual.
8. Approved plans and specifications for this project are incorporated by reference
and are enforceable parts of the permit.
9. The permittee shall notify the Division any name, ownership or mailing address
changes within 30 days.
Permit issued this the 19th day of September, 2003.
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
N
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
5

TRC Triangle,-lnc:- �:;«
Linda Lewis
NCDENR
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
500 Glenwood Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Telephone [phone]
Facsimile 919-828-1977
'A'a
September 12, 2003
Re: Cape Lookout Marina, Inc.
Stormwater Management plan
Carteret County, North Carolina
TRC # 29408 0020 00000
Stormwater Project No. SW8 030826
Dear Linda,
o �2C0
We have received your letter dated September 11, 2003 with comments on the
stormwater application for the project referenced above. Please find enclosed two sets of
revised plans and sealed calculations.
We offer the following responses to your comments.
. Sealed design calculations are attached.
2. An impervious synthetic liner has been specified for sand filter #1 on
detail sheet #6 with installation details added.
3. The length of sand filter #2 has been revised to be 40' as designed. Please
see sheets 43 and 44.
We thank you for your cooperation and prompt review. Please call if you need additional
information or have questions.
Yours truly,
TRC Triangle, Inc.
Rick Baker, P. E,
Project Manager
Customer -focused Solutions
Cc: Bob and Ed Richards
Roger Schecter
K,

P. 1
FILE MOUE
498- MEMORY TX
COMMUNICATION RESULT REPORT ( SEP.11.2883 9:46RM )
TTI
OPTION ADDRESS (GROUP) RESULT
----------------
__ _------------
------- 89199281977 O-
REASON FOR ERROR
E-1) HANG UP OR LINE FAIL
E-3) NO ANSWER
NCDENR WIRO
PAGE
---------P.-1i1
E-2) BUSY
E-4) NO FACSIMILE CONNECTION
Michaei F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr, Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural resources
Alan W._Klimek PE.Arector
Divlslon of Wier Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
FAX COVER SHEET
Date:
September 11, 2003
To:
Rick Baker, P.E.
Company:
TRC Triangle, Inc.
FAX #:
919.828-1977
No. of Pages: 1
From: Linda Lewis 201
Water Quality Section - Stormwater
FAX # [phone]
Phone # [phone]
DWQ Stormwater Project Number: SWS 030826
Project Name: Cape Lookout Marina
MESSAGE:
Rick:
Please seal the design calculations.
Please specify an impervious liner material such as clay or a man-made synthetic under
Basin #1. The shallow water table in this area requires it in order fnr tha �M .�

OF �NA7-F9 Michael F. Easley, Governor
Q William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
qNorth Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.,Director
C3 .� Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
FAX COVER SHEET
Date:
September 11, 2003
To:
Rick Baker, P.E.
Company:
TRC Triangle, Inc.
FAX #:
919-828-1977
No. of Pages: 1
From: Linda Lewis �&
Water Quality Section - Stormwater
FAX # [phone]
Phone # [phone]
DWQ Stormwater Project Number: SW8 030826
Project Name: Cape Lookout Marina
MESSAGE:
Rick:
Please seal the design calculations.
Please specify an impervious liner material such as clay or a man-made synthetic under
Basin #1. The shallow water table in this area requires it in order for the site -built sand
filter to work properly, as discussed at our meeting.
The length of Sand Filter #2 scales only 30', but 4 units are specified to be provided,
each 10' long. Please show at least a 40' area for this filter on sheet 4.
RSSlarl: S:1WQSlSTORMWATIADDINF0120031030826.sep03
N. C. Division of Water Quality 127 Cardinal Drive Extension [phone] Customer Service
Wilmington Regional Office Wilmington, NC 28405 [phone] Fax [phone] iVCDEhrs�

4. 41 ..1% .
TRc
Customer -Focused Solutions SMECT
SHEET NO, OF
PROJECT NO.
DATE coz7/
BY
CHWD
c-,
uj
"SIAZ
ILI
—11,
s
W,
x
A
.1c"
aid
SJ
II
UU�—
e_r
—
-----
--.—._.......
-
_
._i—
L
—
�.�_
?
—
A
cl
punj
�Ei
1
20031
1
_Q4
r.
IN
L."t
0

SHEET NO. OF Lj
PROJECT NO.
rRAVI DATE
my BY
Customer -Focused Solutions SUBJECT C o 4 c Loo Ku uf fCHK'D
_4
I -A
f
—CIL
0,
A*
-Iz4
I
I
IV
dt
r
SA
ate.
V
tol-
C
I
C,
0

l
TRC
Customer -Focused Solutions SMECT Romf ✓law, e�
SHEET NO. OF
PROJECT NO.
DATE
BY
CHK'D
! I
j
I1
��
moo.
t
_V.
--
-3-
-
!�
t+�lr.i.Li�
���",`+�-�
J I
_0.
-
-`A'^`
f�
--
i
`E
4
I
V
f2
S
x
r i.
-1
AA
2G
:Gl
l
it
.,.
i
1
•��
�fl
_
S
n
�"
.sp
UaCiPec-Guy
_
_
i
—
I
4SA�L-
---
/,
I
i ail
Yi J
rr
�(
_
11
u
-
u
!_2
x
1
S /
-
-{,,,f
1r
I
=I
!
77
, "t
1Z
Q�
0

L
Customer -Focused 5olutions
SHEET NO. OF
PROJECT NO.
DATE ?ZI-710 ?
BY f Z . --./
SUBJECT _ C ��y Ur��M (�%av ti ey__ CHK'D
r
-1a
Srr
i
e'
`
[
itr,
I
I
r
�r
-
�.
�s
O
L
I
i
;J
d-
#
e.
,A
z
r,
„L.
✓�
U
J
o
t
X
a
,t

500 Glenwood Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Telephone [phone]
TRC Triangle, Inc. Facsimile 919-828-1977
August 28, 2003
Linda Lewis
NCDENR
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
Re: Cape Lookout Marina, Inc.
Stormwater Management flan
Carteret County, North Carolina
TRC 4 29408 0020 00000
Stormwater Project No. SW8 n/a
Dear Linda,
RECEIVED
AUG 2 9 2003
DWQ
PROJ #
We have received your letter dated August 20, 2003 with comments on the stormwater
application for the project referenced above. Please find enclosed two sets of revised
plans, the original and one copy of the revised application and the original O and M
manual.
We offer the following responses to your comments.
1. The vicinity map has been changed to show the site from the intersection
of NC Hwy 70 and NC Hwy 101.
2. The application has been revised to show all areas in square feet.
3. A signed and notarized O and M manual is included in this submittal.
4. Design calculations for each sand filter and each orifice are included in
this submittal.
5. The application has been signed by the president.
6. Additional spot elevations have been included in this area. This area has
been designed to provide sheet flow.
7. Notes have been added to the details.
8. The filter fabric has been more clearly noted on the detail.
9. Additional columns have been added to the application to include each
sand filter, the western peninsula and the overall site.
10. The drainage areas have been more clearly delineated on the plans.
11. The vegetated filter detail has been added to the detail sheet including a
chart showing elevations, etc for each outlet for each sand filter. Contours
for each outlet are not shown on the detail for each outlet but are shown on
Customer -Focused Solutions

' ' TRC Triangle, Inc.
the plan sheet. Please note that each discharge is flowing through the
wetland area before reaching any surface water.
We thank you for your cooperation. Please call if you need additional information or
have questions.
Yours truly,
TRCTri/angle
Rick Baker, P. E.
Project Manager
Cc: Bob and Ed Richards
Roger Schecter
Customer -Focused Solutions

CAPE LOOKOUT MARINA, INC.
RAY TOTHP
ORDEROF_C. a:>
Wadiovia Bank-, N.A.
Lynchburg, VA 24502
NfEl-To -.5rm
1068
❑ATE 0:3
-1:0 5 1000 2 S 31: 113 SOO G 4 q S ?110 1068

OF WATER Michael F. Easley, Governor
p William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
�O G North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
CO
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.,Director
p Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
August 20, 2003
Edward F. Richards, Sec.ITreas.
Cape Lookout Marina, Inc.
3315 Old Forrest Road
Lynchburg, VA 24501
Subject: Request for Additional Information
Stormwater Project No. SW8 n/a
Cape Lookout Marina
Carteret County
Dear Mr. Richards:
The Wilmington Regional Office received a Stormwater Management Permit
Application for Cape Lookout Marina on August 19, 2003. A preliminary review of that
information has determined that the application is not complete. The following
information -is needed to continue the stormwater review:
1. Please add the nearest intersection of two major roads to the vicinity map.
A major road is any 1, 2 or 3 digit NC, US or interstate highway.
2. Please report all built -upon areas in square feet on the application.
3. Please provide a signed and notarized Operation and Maintenance plan in
accord with Chapter 3.3 of the BMP Manual. In addition, monthly
inspections are required.
4. Please submit detailed design calculations for each sand filter. I am
unable to determine how you arrived at the provided surface areas and
volumes, based on the dimensions of the systems. Include a calculation of
the required orifice sizing as well. Design requirements are outlined in
Chapter 3 of the BMP Manual.
5. The rules require that only the president or vice-president of a corporation
may sign the application. The engineer or an agent may sign only if
accompanied by a letter of authorization from the president or vice
president.
6. Please provide sufficient spot elevations for the double -bay parking areas
on the west side. Sheet flow is required for these areas as well as for the
single -bay parking down the west side. From the grades shown, it
appears that runoff will be channeled in the middle.
7. There are two different sandfilters specified, one is precast, and. one will
be built in place. Which of the 3 proposed sandfilters is precast? If filters 2
and 3 will be precast, please indicate this on the precast detail.
AV
*A
G. Division of Water Quality 127 Cardinal Drive Extension (91 p) 395-3900 Customer Service �A!
Wilmington Regional office Wilmington, NC 28405 [phone] Fax [phone] NC:]ENR

Mr. Richards
August 20, 2003
Stormwater Application
For sand filter #1, please specify the locations that the filter fabric lining
N
will be used. From the detail provided, I am unable to determine exactly
where the filter fabric begins and ends. Additionally, the pipe should be
rn
wrapped in fabric as well.
9.
There are 3 sand filters proposed, but only two columns on the application
have been completed. Please complete a column for each sand filter. In
addition, please complete a column for the overall development to support
your claim of redevelopment. Add as many sheets as needed to provide
the requested information.
10.
Please clearly delineate the drainage area for each of the three sand
filters.
11. Please add the details to the plans (section view, grading detail) for the .
required vegetated filter at the outlet from each sand filter. Please be as
detailed as possible, to include inverts, elevations, slopes, pipe sizes, etc.
A spreader mechanism is required to promote sheet flow across the filter
(see attached detail). As discussed, all discharges to SA waters from
infiltration systems must be via sheet flow. Concentrated point source
discharges are prohibited.
Please note that this request for additional information is in response to a
preliminary review. The requested information should be received by this Office prior to
September 20, 2003, or the application will be returned as incomplete. The return of a
project will necessitate resubmittal of all required items, including the application fee.
The Division is holding this application as not received until the requested information is
submitted.
If you need additional time to submit the information,, please mail or fax your
request for a time extension to the Division at the address and fax number at the bottom
of this letter. The request must indicate the date by which you expect to submit the
required information. The Division is allowed 90 days from the receipt of a
completed application to issue the permit.
The construction of any impervious surfaces, other than a construction entrance
under an approved Sedimentation Erosion Control Plan, is a violation of NCGS 143-
215.1 and is subject to enforcement action pursuant to NCGS 143-215.6A.
Please reference the State assigned project number on all correspondence. Any
original documents that need to be revised have been sent to the engineer or agent. All
original documents.must be returned or new originals must be provided. Copies are not
acceptable. If you have any questions concerning this matter please feel free to call me
at [phone].
Sincerely,
Linda Lewis
Environmental Engineer
RSS/arl: S:1WQSlSTORMWATIADDINFO120031capelookout.aug03
cc: Rick Baker, P.E., TRC Triangle, Inc.
Linda Lewis
E

TRC Triangle, Inc.
Linda Lcwis
NCDENR
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
500 Glenwood Avenue
Raleigh, North Carolina 27603
Telephone [phone]
Facsimile 919-828-1977
August 18, 2003
Re: Cape Lookout Marina, Inc.
Stormwater Management Plan
Stormwater Project No. SW8 020934
Carteret County, North Carolina
TRC 9 29408 0020 00000
Dear Linda,
AUG'19 L�J
g�,, Z003
Per our meeting on July 29, 2003, we are resubmitting the stormwater management plan
for the Cape Lookout Marina. Please find attached three sets of plans, review fee,
original and one copy of the application and three sets of.the narrative for your review.
As discussed, we have used sand filters for stormwater treatment around the dry stack
storage building and sheet flow on the western peninsula for the stormwater management
plan.
Thank you for your consideration. Please call if you need additional information or have
questions.
Yours truly,
TRC Triangle, Inc. r
Vy®rkRick Baker, P. E.�Project Manager eAkm� G�
Cc: Bob and Ed Richards
Roger Schecter
2 �ti A� v '
PV
Customer -Focused Solutions