20040393 Ver 2_CAMA Application_20150924

North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality
Pat McCrory Donald R. van der Vaart
Governor Secretary
September 22, 2015 20 1 5
0
MEMORANDUM
988
TO: Karen Higgins, Compliance and Permitting Unit Supervisor
DWR - Water Quality Program g ,
FROM: Doug Huggett, Major Permits Coordinator
Division of Coastal Management SEP 19 4 ?015
®FnIR
SUBJECT: CAMA/DREDGE & FILL Permit Application Review �r�RMW,a �RPQ �� „�
Applicant: Town of Kill Devil Hills
Project Location: 2.74 miles of ocean beach south of Tateway Road in Kitty Hawk to Prospect
Street Beach access in Kill Devil Hills
Proposed Project: Beach Nourishment
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this
form by 10/13/15 to 400 Commerce Avenue, Morehead Citv, NC 28557 (fax: 252- 247 - 3330).
If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Lynn Mathis at (252)
264 -3901. When appropriate, in -depth comments with supporting data are requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached
comments.
SIGNED DATE
1367 US 17 South, Elizabeth City, NC 27909
Phone: 252 - 264 -3901 1 FAX: [phone]; Internet: htto: / /Dortal.ncdenr.ora /web /cm /dcm -home
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer

r
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: Town of Kill Devil Hill
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: The project site is located in Kill Devil Hills, along the Atlantic coast of the
Outer Banks within Dare County, and will include the ocean beach and nearshore. The site includes 2.74
miles of oceanfront shoreline and two Outer Continental Shelf borrows located in federal waters. Borrow A is
5.3 miles east of Kill Devil Hills and Borrow C is 8.1 miles northeast.
Photo Index: See Attached Photo Index Sheet Page 2
State Plane Coordinates: (North End of Project) X: 2980030.40 Y: 856138.734
(South End of Project) X: 2987477.507 Y: 843721.272
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA/ Dredge & Fill
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit: July 16, 2015
Was Applicant Present: No
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received Complete: September 8, 2015
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
Office: Elizabeth City
(A) Local Land Use Plan: Town of Kill Devil Hills J D
LUP Land Classification: Residential, Commercial and Public SEP 241015
(B) AEC(s) Involved: OH, PTA & EW STS 'EA'R -LAAtD
(C) Water Dependent: Yes R,;kW, R�Qu L,, N
(D) Intended Use: Public G
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing: Septic Systems on individual properties and private waste-
water treatment plants for some hotels
Planned: None
(F) Type of Structures: Existing: Dwellings, hotels /motels, condominiums & ocean front piers
and pier houses
Planned: Expand Beach, create Sand dunes and Install Sand Fencing
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: A' - 4' per year SBF = 2' - 2.5'
HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands: None
(B) Non - Vegetated Wetlands:
Open Water /Below MHW
(C) Other: Above MHW
Borrow A = 51,094,137sf 3,671,039.34sf
Borrow C = 15,401,542sf
(D) Total Area Disturbed: 71,841,684,3sf (1,649 acres)
(E) Primary Nursery Area: No
(F) Water Classification: SB Shellfish Open: Yes
1,674,965.94sf
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: Kill Devil Hills is proposing beach nourishment along 2.74 miles of ocean beach
beginning just south of Tateway Road in Kitty Hawk to the Prospect Street beach access in Kill Devil Hills.
The project will entail the dredging of 1,095,600 cubic yards of beach quality sand from two offshore borrows
and placing the sand along the ocean beach and nearshore. NOTE: The dimensions stated in the application
were revised on 9/3/2015, after submittal of the application. The oroiect dimensions listed in this report are
correct per the information provided by the consultant. See the revised oroiect dimensions also attached.

.i:
Town of Kill Devil Hills Beach Nourishment
Field Investigation Report
Page 2
Kill Devil Hills
Photo Index Sheet
2006: Flight Line in this year did not cover the Kill Devils ocean beach.
2000: Flight Line in this year did not cover the Kill Devils ocean beach.
1995: 185 1932
V & W
1 -4
U,V &W
5 -24
1851933
U, V & W
1 -14
1851934
S, T & U
1 -6
T,U &V
7 -24
1851935
R, S &T
1 -21
S,T &U
22 -24
.185 1936
Q & R
1 -12
1998: 142-38
P, Q & R
1 -16
Q,R &S
17 -24
142-39
N, 0& P
1- 4
0,P &Q
5 -13
P,Q &R
14 -24
142-40
M, N& 0
1- 6
N,O &P
6 -12
0,P &Q
13 -21
P,Q &R
22 -24
142-41
M, N & 0
1 -18
N,O &P
1 -24
142-42
L, M& N
1- 4
M,N &0
5 -19
N,O &P
20 -24
142-43
L, M& N
1- 7
1984: 138 -144
A, B & C
1 -10
138 -447
A, B & C
1 -24
139 -448
A, B & C
1 -24
138 -449
A & B
21 -24
1978: Not Available

C
Town of Kill Devil Hills Beach Nourishment
Field Investigation Report
Page 3
Project Settinq
The first mention of Kill Devil Hills appears on maps in 1809. It was a small fishing and farming community that
eventually incorporated in 1953. Today the town consists of a traditional village and beach community with mix of
residential dwellings, hotels and retail businesses. The Town is approximately 5.5 square miles (3,740 acres), with
4.7 miles of ocean shoreline. Access to the Town is by US 158 (N. Croatan Road) and by NC 12 (N. Virginia Dare
Trail). The beach and village are characterized by low to medium density, single - family residential developments,
with a year round population of 6,900 residents. It has been estimated that 49% of the residential structures in the
town are seasonal rentals. Like its Outer Banks neighbors, Kill Devil Hills is seeing a yearly increase in both its
permanent and seasonal population. As an ocean to sound community bordering Kitty Hawkto the north and Nags
Head to the south, Kill Devil Hills is a well -known tourist destination spot. The Town is bounded to east by the
waters of the Atlantic Ocean and to the by Kitty Hawk Bay and the Albemarle Sound.
Wildlife that is known to inhabit the beaches and waters within and adjacent to the Kitty Hawk oceanfront include
Horseshoe Crabs (Limulus polyphemus), Ghost Crabs (Ocypode spp.), Mole Crabs (Emerita talpoida), juvenile
Hooded Seals (Cystophora cristata), a variety of sea turtles, shore birds, fish, jelly fish, shellfish, and aquatic
mammals.
Vegetation found on the landward side of the beach includes, but is not limited to the following: American Beach
Grass (Ammophila breviligulata), Sea Oats (Uniola paniculata), Salt Meadow Hay (Spartina patens), Sea Shore
Mallow (Kostelezykya virginica), Blanket Flower (gallarelia pulchella), Dwarf Palmetto (Subal minor), Sea Rocket
(Cakile edentula), Seashore Elder (Iva imbricate), Bitter Panicum (Panicum amarum), and a variety of ornamentals
planted by property owners.
Located offshore on the Outer Continental Shelf are borrow sites (Borrow A and Borrow C) that have been identified
as potential sources of sand for three separate beach nourishment projects in Dare County; Duck, Kitty Hawk and
Kill Devil Hills. Borrow A is located -5.3 - 7.1 miles from the project site and Borrow C is - 8.1 -10.7 miles from the
project site, both of which are located in federal waters under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM). Federal co -lead agencies for the purpose of reviewing environmental documents for the
three towns is the USACE and the BOEM.
The width of the town's beach varies considerably with seasonal accretion and erosion events. The erosion rates
along the project alignment, based on USACE and US Geological Survey (USGS) Light Detection and Ranging
(LiDAR) surveys from 1996 to 2012, are between 0.4' to 4' per year, and the Setback Factor established by the NC
Division of Coastal Management is 2' - 2.5'. The use of sandbags to protect threatened structures, beach bulldozing
and bringing in sand form an outside source have been undertaken on an as -need basis by private property owners.
Since 2012 the Town has issued 14 permits to push sand or bring it in from an outside source, and the Division of
Coastal Management has issued 15 authorizations to beach bulldoze. There are 17 identified structures being
protected by sandbag alignments within the project area.
Based on aerial photography and an onsite investigation it has been determined that all of the oceanfront homes
from the northern Town line .72 miles (3,808') south qualify as eminently threated structures. Most of the dwelling
south of this point do not qualify as eminently; however, the un- vegetated beach does encroach up to and landward
of many of the older structures, including motels, residences and condominium complexes.
The Town's long -term shoreline management plan to maintain its oceanfront beach includes: l) provide reasonable
storm damage reduction, 2) mitigate long -term erosion conditions that could threaten development, recreational
opportunities and biological resources, and; 3) maintain a healthy beach habitat for wildlife.

i.S
Town of Kill Devil Hills Beach Nourishment
Field Investigation Report
Page 4
Development Proposal
The Town of Kill Devil Hills, like Kitty Hawk and Duck, is focused on a long -term shoreline management program
that will serve to sustain the beaches that support a significant portion of their local economy and maintains the tax
base of the Town. The Town is proposing a beach nourishment project along 2.74 miles of ocean beach and the
nearshore to reduce the over wash and flooding that impacts oceanfront properties, NC 12 and the interior portions
of the Town landward of NC 12. To help fund this project the Town has created a Municipal Service District (MSD)
for erosion control, and protection from flooding and hurricanes. Dare County will also assist in funding the project
from the Dare County Beach Nourishment Fund. Kill Devil Hills, in conjunction with Kill Devil Hill, Kitty Hawk and
Duck are working cooperatively to pursue beach nourishment projects that may provide additional cost savings.
The project will include dredging and placing beach quality sand along 2.74 miles of shoreline. Sand will be placed
immediately adjacent to dwellings, condominiums and motels on private property and will necessitate easements.
The main portion of the proposal begins at the north end of the town limits and extends 12,500' to a point three lots
south of the Ashville Street Beach Access. If constructed as a stand along project and not concurrently or
consecutively with the Town of Kitty Hawk, there will be a 933' taper on the north end that will begin just south of
Tateway Road (station 180 +53) in Kitty Hawk. A second 1,031' taper will extend from the main fill area to the
Prospect Street Beach Access (station 325 +61).
A.
Project Length: 14,464' (2.7 miles)
Average Project Width: 369.6'
Maximum Project Width: 5457
Total Area of Placement: 5,346,005.28sf or 122.72 Acres
B.
Ave. Distance from MHW to Landward Limit of Fill: 115.8'
Max. Distance from MHW to Landward Limit of Fill: 221.6'
Avg. Distance from MHW to Seaward Limit of Fill: 253.8'
Max. Distance from MHW to Seaward Limit of Fill: 419.7'
Area of Sand Placement above MHW: 1,674,965.94sf
Area of Sand Placement below MHW: 3,671,039.34sf
Staging of equipment and access to the beach will be from two locations: 1) E. Helga Street Beach Access and
three parcels on the south side of the access, and; 2) two lots located south of Avalon Drive and the Avalon Pier.
While the applicant anticipates no dune alteration is with either staging areas. A recent site visit indicates that some
minor dune alteration will be necessary to facilitate access to the beach.
The project proposal includes excavating beach quality sand from two Outer Continental Shelf borrows by hopper
dredge, cutterhead dredge, or both. Borrow Sites A & C area also being proposed as sand sources for beach
nourishment projects in the Towns of Duck and Kill Devil Hills. Sand source data submitted in this application on
Borrow A and Borrow C was prepared for all three Town projects. According to CP &E's Comprehensive Marine
Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report (digital copy enclosed), the proposed borrow sites have sufficient
beach quality sand to construct all three proposed beach nourishment projects in Dare County's northern beaches.
Town of Kill Devil Hills Beach Nourishment

Field Investigation Report
Page 5
Sand obtained from the borrow(s) will be transported to the beach via pipeline, or from a hopper dredge to a pump -
out site just off shore and then piped the remaining distance to the beach. A temporary dike will be constructed
parallel to the shoreline and a sand slurry will be pumped on the landward side of the dike. Excess water will be
directed around the edge of the dike and back into the ocean. As sand is being pumped onto the beach, bulldozers
and front end loaders will move the sand where needed to shape the new beach profile. This process will be moved
along the beach as needed to complete the process.
Area of Proposed Borrows
Borrow A = 51,094,137sf
Borrow C = 15,401,542sf
Total = 66,495,679
Estimated Dredge -able Sand Volumes
Borrow A = 17,350,000cy
Borrow C = 2,049,000cy
Volume of Available Sand = 19,399,000cy
Required Sand Volumes for All Three Nourishment Proiects
Proposed Volume of Sand for Duck = 1,358,400cy
Proposed Volume of Sand for Kitty Hawk = 2,245,200cy
Proposed Volume of Sand for Kill Devil Hills = 1,095,600cy
Total volume necessary for all three Towns, including a 20% loss rate, is 4,699,200cy
Borrow A and Borrow C will be used as a sand supply for three beach nourishment projects (Duck, Kitty Hawk & Kill
Devil Hills). Impact to the entire area of the two borrow sites by a single project is not probable. Borrow A has six
design cuts that range from -58.5' to -68' NAVD88 with three no work zones for identified magnetic anomalies, and
Borrow C has five design cuts that range from -61' to -65' NAVD88 with five no work zones for identified magnetic
anomalies. Located in the approximate center of Borrow C is a no dredge zone where unsuitable material may
exist. No historic properties, or properties eligible for inclusion in the National Register are present within the
proposed dredge or placement areas according to the applicant's consultant.
The consultant (CP &E) has provided supporting documentation (in digital form) including geophysical and
hydrographic surveys, vibracore samples and photos, cross section profiles of the receiving beach with 65 samples
within the project area, and an archaeological survey. According to the consultant's sediment analysis of Borrow A,
Borrow C and the receiving beach, sand within the two borrow sites are within the allowable limits for placement.
In the event a hopper dredge is used, abundance trawling and relocation trawling will be used to reduce potential
takings of protected species. Additional measures that will be undertaken, regardless of the specific dredge
employed, include: 1) identifying and relocating any existing nests prior to beginning work, 2) sea turtle nest
monitoring and relocation as needed, 3) the use of artificial lighting during all night operations, 4) turtle deflectors on
the dredge head, and, 5) disengaging pumps when lifting the cutterhead.
The Town of Kill Devil Hills proposes no specific start or completion date, but rather a year round construction
window to undertake beach nourishment with a preferred summer placement. Daily operations will include dredging
24 hours a day, 7 days a week, as weather permits to facilitate a speedy completion of the project. It is preferred
that this project be undertaken either concurrently or consecutively with the Kitty Hawk and Duck nourishment
projects. Based on estimated production rates time to complete beach nourishment in Kill Devil Hills is likely to be

N
Town of Kill Devil Hills Beach Nourishment
Field Investigation Report
Page 6
2.5 months. If all three beach nourishment projects are undertaken at the same time using multiple dredges the
estimated time to compete all three projects will be 3.5 months. If undertaken independently the time necessary to
complete all three projects is 9 months.
Upon completion of the beach fill project the Town proposes to install sand fencing the length of the project
alignment and vegetate the constructed dune system. Installation shall be at a 450 angle to the ocean with a
spacing of no less than 7'. The fencing will be 5' in height with 2" x 4" supports or 3" diameter poles, with a 10' deep
footprint perpendicular to the beach as shown in the diagram found on page 13 of the Project Narrative. Placement
of the fencing will begin at the top of constructed dunes, terminate within 10' of the seaward toe of the constructed
dune and will not obstruct pedestrian access.
Anticipated Impacts
1) During the project it is anticipated that noise levels will increase above surrounding background (ambient) levels
at the dredge site(s) and on the beach from heavy equipment.
2) According to the EA "Marine dredging produces broadband, continuous, low frequency sound that can be
detected over considerable distances and may trigger avoidance reactions in marine mammals (Thomsen et al.,
2009) and other organisms ".
3) According to the EA the water bottom disturbance created by the dredge in the borrow areas "can negatively
affect the physiology and feeding behavior of visually orienting fish via increased turbidity", this impact can be
reduced by the use of a cutter suction dredge.
4) The placement of sand along the surf zone will have a temporary adverse effect benthic organisms.
5) The placement of sand along the surf zone and dredging of sand at the borrow sites will have a temporary
adverse effect on infaunal (burrowing) communities. According to the EA it is anticipated that these
communities will be recolonized from adjacent communities.
6) Threatened and endangered species are known to occur in or near project area, and may be impacted by the
beach nourishment project.
7) According to Rumbold, Davis and Parretta's book "Estimating the Effect of Beach Nourishment on Caretta
caretta (loggerhead sea turtle) Nesting," Collective results from their studies show that beach nourishment
significantly diminished loggerhead sea turtle nesting during the first season following the project. Temporary
impacts by increased turbidity could result in a decrease in dissolved oxygen during dredging and during the
placement of sand on the beach and near shore.
8) It is anticipated the proposed project would have only minor impacts to the marine water column at the borrow
areas.
9) The negative temporary effects to benthic organisms could occur during dredging at the offshore borrow sites
and during the placement of sand along the oceanfront shoreline.
10) Proposed sand fencing will encourage dune formation that can increase storm protection on a temporary basis.
11) The placement of sand on the existing beach and near shore will widen the beach and provide additional
protection from storm activity on a temporary basis.
12) Fill of 3,671,039.34sf of near shore /open water below MHW.
13) Fill of 1,674,965.94sf of beach above MHW.
14) Excavation of 21,095,600cy of sandy water bottom from offshore borrows A & C on the outer Continental Shelf.
15) Beach nourishment is temporary in nature and will require future re- nourishment to maintain.
Submitted By: Lynn Mathis
Date: September 18, 2015

nl9 ,,,this, Lynn
u„�,�,�,.,.:.,
From: Bush, Stephanie <stephanie.bush @cbi.com>
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 1:59 PM
To: Mathis, Lynn
Subject: RE: verifying numbers for Duck
Attachments: DC Projects-Summary Fill Parameters.xlsx
Hi Lynn,
After being prompted by your questions for Duck, I went ahead and had our CAD folks double check all the
measurements for Kitty Hawk and Kill Devil Hills as well. While the values are not drastically different, they
have changed enough to warrant updating. I believe what happened is that the drawings were tweaked
numerous times in the lasntages of finalizing the plan view drawings, resulting in the parameters all having
changed slightly. I had not changed the corresponding values in the applications.
That said I have tried to make the changes as clear as possible for you. Please see the attached excel
spreadsheet. At the top I have provided the average and max distances from MHW to the landward the of fill
(LTOQ and to the "seaward toe of fill (STOF). Then, in the bold - outlined box I used your email below as a
template and provided all values /calculations that you should need.
Please excuse the mistake as an oversight on my part. I promise I'm not trying to make your job harder ... at the
risk of looking foblish I'd much rather have the correct parameters permitted, if there anything else I can do to
fix /clarify these certainly let me know.
Thank you and regards,
Stephanie
From: Mathis, Lynn [mailto :lynn.mathis @ncdenr.gov]
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 10:17 AM
To: Bush, Stephanie
Subject: RE: verifying numbers for Duck
Stephanie:
This is 'a basic bottom line for reviewers. We know that this will not be exact given the variables, but we have to have a basE
to start from.
A.
Project Length: 8,4147 (1,6 miles)
Average Project Width =
Maximum Project Width =
8,414.7' x Average.Width = Total Area of Placement:
B.
Total Area of Placement Above MHW: Ave. width above MHW x 8,414.7 =
Total Area of Placement Below MHW: Ave. width below MHW x 8,414.7 =
Total Area of Placement =

WE
Thank you for your assistance in getting this corrected.
From: Bush, Stephanie fmailto:stephanie.bushPcbi.comj
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 5:37 PM
To: Mathis, Lynn
Subject: RE: verifying numbers for Duck
Lynn,
You are correct my numbers were off. Below are the correct values for the Town of Duck project. There are a
few additional values, besides the ones you questioned, that have changed slightly. This is due to a slight
change in the STOF line, which is updated in the plan view drawings that you have, but not reflected in the
values I provided in the application.:
Average distance from MHW (1.18 NAVD) to Seaward Toe of Fill (STOF) = 381.7 ft.
Maximum distance from MHW (1.18 NAVD) to STOF = 434.9 ft.
Average distance from MHW to Landward Limit of Fill = 235.6 ft.
Maximum distance from MHW to Landward Toe of Fill = 280.1 ft.
Total area above MHW = 1,095,797.1 sq.ft. or 25 acres
Total area below MHW = 3,048,854.30 sq.ft. or 69.99 acres
Total area of the project = 4.144,651.40 sq. ft. or 95.15 acres
The width of the project reported in the Excavation and Fill Table in MP -2 should be updated to 492.55 ft.
I apologize for any confusion, and I hope this answers your questions. I put this all in an email so you would
have the values in writing, but please feel free to call me tomorrow if you need to discuss any of this.
Kindest regards,
Stephanie
From: Mathis, Lynn rmailto :lvnn.mathisCabncdenr,aovl
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 3:48 PM
To: Bush, Stephanie
Subject: RE: verifying numbers for Duck
Thanks
From: Bush, Stephanie fmailto :steohanie.bush(@cbi.comj
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 3:44 PM
7

Avg. distance MHVVto Landward Limit ofFill
Max. distance K4HVVtuLandward Limit ofFill
Avg. distance MHVVto Seaward Toe ofFill
Max. distance MHW to Seaward Toe of Fill
_ ...... ....
'Project Length
;Avg. Project Width
IMax. Project Width
I L x Ave Width Total Area of Placement:
Duck Kitty Hawk Kill Devil Hills
1357 I01.5 115.8
177.5 138.3 221.6
381.7 331.6 253.8
434.90 443.30 4197
�� ... �� ... ���� ... �����
�
8,414J0
20,970.00
14,464.30
510.80
433.00
369.6
548.10
S2S�2U
S45.7U |
4,298,228.76
' 9,080,010.00
.
5,346,005.28
.Total Area of Placement Above N1HVV: Ave. width above K4HVVx L = 1,086,337.77 2,128/455lK0 1,674,965.94
.Total Area of Placement 8e|ovv MHVV: Ave. width below K8HVVx L_ = 3,211,890.99 6,953,652.00 3,671,039 34
!
Total Area of Placement = 4`29O'Z2Q.7G 9,082'107.00 Ei346'00 52O

V
TOWN OF KILL DEVIL HILLS SHORE PROTECTION PROJECT
NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
MAJOR PERMIT APPLICATION
Prepared for:
The Town of Kill Devil Hills
Prepared by:
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc.
4038 Masonboro Loop Road
Wilmington, North Carolina 28409
H
SEP - 8 2015
Submitted to:
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Elizabeth City Regional Office
August 2015

Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
NCDCM Major Permit Application
Contents
1 FORMS ............................................................................................................... ............................... 1
1.1 Form DCM MP- 1 ......................................................................................... ...............................
1
1.2 Form DCM MP- 2 .......................................................................................... ..............................5
1.3 Form DCM MP- 3 ......................................................................................... ...............................
8
2 Supplemental Information ................................................................................ .............................10
2.1 Per Form MP -1, Section 6a: Project Narrative .................................... ...............................
10
2.1.1 Project Scoping and History ............................................................ ...............................
10
2.1.2 Proposed Action ................................................................................ ...............................
11
2.1.3 Construction Schedule ..................................................................... ...............................
16
2.1.4 Borrow Area and Sediment Analysis ............................................. ...............................
16
2.1.5 Summary of Consistency with State Sediment Criteria .............. ...............................
20
2.2 Per Form MP -1, Section 6d: A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other
instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties ............................
23
2.3 Per Form MP -1, Section 6f: Adjacent Riparian Owner Return Receipts ........................23
2.4 Per Form MP -1, Section 6h: Agent Authorization Form ..................... ...............................
25
2.5 Per Form MP -1, Section 6j: Ocean Hazard AEC Notice for Kill Devil Hills ....................
26
2.6 Permission Letter and Ocean Hazard AEC Notice from Kitty Hawk ...............................
28
Appendices
Appendix A: Work Plans
Appendix B: Professional Archaeological Assessment
Appendix C: Geotechnical Report
Appendix D: Survey Report
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

Form DCM MP -1 Application for Major Permit Development
1 FORMS
1.1 Form DCM MP -1
APPLICATION for ' °
Major Development Permlt
(last revised 12127106) North Carolina DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
1. Primary Applicant/ Landowner Information
Business Name
MI
Project Name (if applicable)
Town Of Kill Devil Hills
Kill Devil Hills Shoreline Protection Project
Applicant 1 First Name
MI
Last Name
Debora
P
Diaz
Applicant 2 First Name
MI
Last Name
n/a -
n/a
n/a
If additional applicants, please attach an
additional page(s) with names listed.
Mailing Address PO Box City State
102 Town Hall Drive 1719 Kill Devil Hills NC
ZIP Country Phone No. FAX No
27948 USA 252 - 449 - 5300 ext 252 - 441 - 7946
Street Address (if different from above) City I State ZIP
Email
debbie @kdhnc com
2. Agent(Contractor Information
Business Name
Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina, Inc
Agent/ Contractor 1. First Name
MI
Last Name
Kenneth
Willson
Agent/ Contractor 2: First Name
MI
Last Name
Stephanie
Bush
Mailing Address
PO Box
4038 Masonboro Loop Road
ZIP
Phone No. 1
28409
910 - 791 -
9494 ext.
FAX No
Contractor #
910 791 4129
Federal ID # 020623951
City State
Wilmington NC
Phone No. 2
- - ext
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
1

Form DCM MP -t Application for Major Permit Development
Street Address (if different from above) City State ZIP
N/A N/A N/A N/A -
Email
kennethwillson @cbi com
3. Project Location
County (can be multiple)
Dare
Subdivision Name
N/A
Phone No
Street Address State Rd #
Oceanfront shoreline of Kill Devils Hills from 3522 Virginia Dare N/A
Trail to the Prospect Avenue beach access
City State Zip
N/A NC N/A -
N!A - - ext.
a In which NC river basin is the project located?
Pasquotank
c. Is the water body identified in (b) above, natural or manmade?
NNatural ❑Manmade ❑Unknown
e. Is proposed work within city limits or planning jurisdiction?
NYes ❑No
4. Site Description
a. Total length of shoreline on the tract (ft.)
14,464 feet (Placement Project Limits)
c Size of individual lot(s)
N /A, I ,
(If many lot sizes, please attach additional page with a list)
e Vegetation on tract
Typical beach and dune vegetation.
Lot No.(s) (if many, attach additional page with list)
N /A, I I ,
b. Name of body of water nearest to proposed project
Atlantic Ocean
d. Name the closest major water body to the proposed project site.
Atlantic Ocean
f. If applicable, list the planning jurisdiction or city limit the proposed
work falls within
Kill Devil Hills
b. Size of entire tract (sq.ft.)
4,768,592 (Placement Area), 51,094,137 60 (Borrow Area
A); 15,401,596 32 (Borrow Area C)
d Approximate elevation of tract above NHW (normal high water) or
NWL (normal water level)
—16' to MHW (1 2') NAVD88 ❑NHW or ❑NWL
f. Man -made features and uses now on tract
The tract is contiguous to single and multi - family residential homes, business and commercial uses. The beachfront is
utilized for recreational activities.
g. Identify and describe the existing land uses adjacent to the proposed project site.
Single and multifamily residences, recreational beach uses
h. How does local government zone the tract? i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable zoning?
Multi Family and Single Family Residential (Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
NYes ❑No ❑NA
j Is the proposed activity part of an urban waterfront redevelopment proposal? ❑Yes NNo
k. Hasa professional archaeological assessment been done for the tract? If yes, attach a copy. NYes ❑No ❑NA
If yes, by whom? Tidewater Research
I. Is the proposed project located in a National Registered Historic District or does it involve a ❑Yes NNo ❑NA
National Register listed or eligible property?
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
2

Form DCM MP -I Application for Major Permit Development
m (Q Are there wetlands on the sites ❑Yes ®No
(ii) Are there coastal wetlands on the site? ❑Yes ®No
(iii) If yes to either (i) or (ii) above, has a delineation been conducted? ❑Yes ®No
(Attach documentation, if available)
n. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities
All wastewater infrastructure along the oceanfront is private. Septic tanks are the primary means of treatment, with some
hotels and larger structures relying on a private utility (KDHWWTP) for wastewater treatment There is no municipal
wastewater infrastructure along the Kill Devil Hills oceanfront.
o Describe existing drinking water supply source.
Municipal
p Describe existing storm water management or treatment systems
There are two ocean outfalls in Kill Devil Hills They are nearly a mile south of the beach fill project and will not be impacted
5. Activities and Impacts
a Will the project be for commercial, public, or private use?
❑Commercial ®Public/Government
❑Private /Community
b. Give a brief description of purpose, use, and daily operations of the project when complete.
To this end, the Town proposes to nourish the oceanfront shoreline, with five years of advanced fill incorporated into the
design.
c Describe the proposed construction methodology, types of construction equipment to be used during construction, the number of each type
of equipment and where it is to be stored
A hydraulic hopper dredge and /or cutterhead dredge and pipeline will be used to obtain and transport material from the
offshore borrow area to the beach. A sand dike will be constructed on the seaward side of the discharge area. The sand
slurry will be discharged behind the temporary dike, and excess water will be directed parallel to the shoreline and around
the edge of the dike. Bulldozers, front -end loaders and other earth moving machines will be used to shape the beach to the
design profile Should the equipment need to be stored, it will be done so as to create the least impact to be users and the
environment
d List all development activities you propose.
The proposed action will include sand placement along a 12,500 ft. section of Kill Devil Hills oceanfront shoreline A 933 ft.
taper will be included on the north end extending into the Town of Kitty Hawk, and a 1031 ft taper will be included on the
southern end for a total of 14,464 ft. of shoreline. A 20 -ft wide dine at elevation +15.0 ft NAVD88 will be constructed aong
portions of the project area A 40 -ft. wide berm will be constructed along the entire length of the project. Sand will be
obtained from one or two Outer Continntal Shelf borrow areas offshore Dare County using cutterhead and /or hopper
dredges. Material will be transported from the borrow area(s) to the beach via submerged pipeline from a cutterhead dredge,
or via direct transport to a nearshore pump -out location by hopper dredge. A temporary shore - parallel sand dike will be
constructed in the discharge area to reduce turbidity of slurry within the nearshore. Material on the beach will be shaped and
graded using earth moving machines Sand fencing and vegetation will likely be placed along the constructed dune after
completion of the project. See project narrative in supplemental information for details
e Are the proposed activities maintenance of an existing project, new work, or both? New Work
f. What is the approximate total disturbed land area resulting from the proposed project? 1,354,743.33 ®Sq.Ft or ❑Acres
g. Will the proposed project encroach on any public easement, public access way or other area ®Yes ❑No ❑NA
that the public has established use of?
h Describe location and type of existing and proposed discharges to waters of the state
The placement location is the oceanfront beach adjacent to the Town of Kill Devil Hills, within the reach authorized in the
design template
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
3

Form DCM MP -1 Application for Major Permit Development
i. Will wastewater or stormwater be discharged into a wetland? ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, will this discharged water be of the same salinity as the receiving water? ❑Yes ❑No ®NA
j. Is there any mitigation proposed? ❑Yes ®No ❑NA
If yes, attach a mitigation proposal.
6. Addiddh4tinformaddn"
In addition' to this completed application form, (MP -1) the following items below, if applicable, must be submitted in order for the application
package to be complete. Items (a) — (t) are always applicable to any major development application. Please consult-the application
instruction booklet on how to property prepare the required items below.
a. A project narrative.
b. An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view and cross - sectional drawings) drawn to scale. Please -give the present status of the
proposed project. Is any portion already complete? If previously authorized work, clearly indicate on maps, plats, drawings to distinguish
between work completed and proposed.
c. A site or location map that is sufficiently detailed to guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the site.
d. A copy of the deed (with state application only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the affected properties.
e. The appropriate application fee. Check or money order made payable to DENR.
f. A list of the names and complete addresses of the adjacent waterfront (riparian) landowners and signed return receipts as proof that such
owners have received a copy of the application and plats by certified mail. Such landowners must be advised,that they have 30 days in
which to submit comments on the proposed project to the Division of Coastal Management.
Name Michael G. Kuhn (@ 352614: Virginia Dare Trail) Phone No. n/a
Address 408 East Valleywood Dr., Collierville, TN'38017
Name Forrest L. Bartlett (@ 1015 N. Virginia Dare Trail)
Address 153 Milltown Rd., Shiloh, NC 27974
Name,
Address
Phone No. n/a
Phone-No.
g. A list of previous state or federal permits issued for work on the project tract. Include permit numbers, permittee, and issuing dates.
None
h. Signed consultant or agent authorization' form, if applicable:
i. Wetland delineation, if necessary.
j. A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in oceanfront and inlet areas. (Must be signed by property owner)
k. A statement of compliance with the N.C. Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 413A 1 -10), if necessary. If the project involves expenditure
of public funds or use of public lands, attach a statement documenting compliance with the North Carolina Environmental PolicyAct.
7. Certffickfon and Permission to Enter o'n -Land I
I understand that any permit issued in response to this application will allow only the development described in the application. The
project will be subject to the conditions and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that I am authorized to grant, and do in fact grant permission to representatives of state and federal review agencies to enter on
the aforementioned lands in connection with evaluating information related to this permit application and follow -up monitoring of the
project.
I further certify that the information provided in this application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
Date: Auoust 26. 2015 Print Name: (S�eahic �v5ln Aaent. Coastal Planniha & Enaineerina of North Carolina. Inc.
Signatures.
Please indicate application attachments pertaining to your proposed project.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
4

Form DCM MP -1 Application for Major Permit Development
®DCM MP -2 Excavation and Fill Information ❑DCM MP -5 Bridges and Culverts
®DCM MP -3 Upland Development
❑DCM MP -4 Structures Information
1.2 Form DCM MP -2
EXCAVATION and FILL
(Except for bridges and culverts)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP -1. Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project. Please include all supplemental information
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation and /or fill activities. All values should be given in
feet.
Access
Channel Canal Boat Boat Ramp Rock Groin Rock
Other (excluding
(NLW or Basin Breakwater
shoreline stabilization)
NWL)
14,464.3' (fill area),
Length
16,064'(borrow area A), 7,543'
(borrow area C)
329 68' (fill area, varies);
Width
3180 66'(borrow area A),
2,044 31' (borrow area C)
Avg.
-52 to -56 (borrow area A);
Existing NA NA
Depth
52 to -66 (borrow area C)
Final
-58.5' to -68' (borrow area A);
Project NA NA
Depth
-61 0' to -65' (borrow area C)
1. EXCAVATION El This section not applicable
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below NHW or NWL in b. Type of material to be excavated.
cubic yards. Beach quality sand
1,095,600 cy (fill + 20% loss)
c. (i) Does the area to be excavated include coastal wetlands /marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ®None
(u) Describe the purpose of the excavation in these areas
NA
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED MATERIAL
a Location of disposal area
2.73 miles of Kill Devil Hills oceanfront shoreline, from
Prospect Ave. to Tateway Rd (Kitty Hawk) and nearshore
surf zone
d High- ground excavation in cubic yards.
None
®This section not applicable
b Dimensions of disposal area
14,464 30 ft. (length) by 329 68 ft (width)
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
5

- Form DCM MP -2
Excavation and Fill
c. (i) Do you claim title to disposal area?
❑Yes NNo ❑NA
(n) If no, attach a letter granting permission from the owner.
Easements pending
e. (i) Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands /marsh
(CW), submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB),
or other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected.
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ®None
(u) Describe the purpose of disposal in these areas:
N/A
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION
(If development is a wood groin, use MP -4 — Structures)
a. Type of shoreline stabilization:
❑Bulkhead ❑Riprap ❑Breakwater /Sill ®Other:
nourishment
C Average distance waterward of NHW or NWL. 236.4 ft
e Type of stabilization material.
Sand
g. Number of square feet of fill to be placed below water level
Bulkhead backfill Riprap
Breakwater /Sill Other 3.413.848 67 so. ft.
I Source of fill material.
Offshore Borrow Area
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a (i) Will fill material be brought to the site? ❑Yes ❑No
If yes,
(u) Amount of material to be placed in the water
(iii) Dimensions of fill area
(iv) Purpose of fill
I5. GENERAL
d. (i) Will a disposal area be available for future maintenance?
❑Yes ❑No NNA
(u) If yes, where?
N/A
f. (i) Does the disposal include any area in the water?
®Yes ❑No ❑NA
(ii) If yes, how much water area is affected?
3,413,848 67 sq. ft. of fill will be placed from MHW to seaward
toe -of -fill
[]This section not applicable
b. Length: 14,464 3 ft
Width 329 68 ft
d. Maximum distance waterward of NHW or NWL: 304 ft
f (i) Has there been shoreline erosion during preceding 12
months?
®Yes ❑No ❑NA
(u) If yes, state amount of erosion and source of erosion amount
information.
-0 7 ft /yr according to LIDAR data from 1996 to 2012 and
geophysical profile data compiled by CPE -NC in 2012
h. Type of fill material.
sand
NThis section not applicable
❑NA b (i) Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands /marsh (CW),
submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), shell bottom (SB), or
other wetlands (WL)? If any boxes are checked, provide the
number of square feet affected
❑CW ❑SAV ❑SB
OWL ❑None
(u) Describe the purpose of the fill in these areas:
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site and erosion b. What type of construction equipment will be used (e g., draglme,
controlled? backhoe, or hydraulic dredge)?
A sand dike voll be constructed seaward of the fill area during the Hydraulic hopper and /or cutterhead pipeline dredge and pipeline,
placement of beach fill. This temporary structure will allow the bulldozers, front- end - loaders and other earth moving
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
6

Fornr DCM MP-2 Excava[ian and R1
sandy material to settle out before the water reenters the machines.
Atlantic Ocean. ' In addition, the nourishment sand will be low in
sift, which improves the retainment quality of the material.
c. (i) Will navigational aids be required as a result of the project? d. (i) Will wetlands be crossed in transporting equipment to project
❑Yes ONo ❑NA site? , E]Yes IRNo EINA
(ii) If yes, explain what type and how they will be implemented. (ii) If yes, explain steps that will be taken to avoid or minimize
N/A environmental impacts.
N/A
August 26, `2015
Date
Kill Devil' Hills Shof6lihe Pr6tection Project
Project Name,
The ToWn ofkiii beAArHills,',C16Peb6ra Diaz
Applicant Name -
ftent,,Poa i,-Ia n ng;,,& "6ii*eririg biNorth Cardlirii,, nc.
A
pplicahtySig'nature
I
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING' OF NORTH' CAROLINA, INC.
7

Form DCM MP -3
1.3 Form DCM MP -3
Upland Development
UPLAND DEVELOPMENT
(Construction and /or land disturbing activities)
Attach this form to Joint Application for CAMA Major Permit, Form DCM MP -1 Be sure to complete all other sections of the Joint
Application that relate to this proposed project Please include all supplemental information
GENERAL UPLAND DEVELOPMENT
a Type and number of buildings, facilities, units or structures
proposed
None
c Density (give the number of residential units and the units per
acre)
N/A
e. If the proposed protect will disturb more than one acre of land, the
Division of Land Resources must receive an erosion and
sedimentation control plan at-least 30 days before land- disturbing
activity begins.
(i) If applicable, has a sedimentation and erosion control plan been
submitted to the Division of Land Resources?
[]Yes [-]No ®NA
(ii) If yes, list the date submitted.
g Give the percentage of the tract within the coastal shoreline AEC to
be covered by impervious and /or built -upon surfaces, such as
pavement, building, rooftops, or to be used for vehicular driveways
or parking
No impervious surfaces will be constructed
i Give the percentage of the entire tract to be covered by impervious
and /or built -upon surfaces, such as pavement, building, rooftops, or
to be used for vehicular driveways or parking
No impervious surfaces will be constructed
j. Describe proposed method of sewage disposal.
None
I. Describe location and type of proposed discharges to waters of the
state (e g., surface runoff, sanitary wastewater, industrial/
b. Number of lots or parcels
None
d. Size of area to be graded, filled, or disturbed including roads,
ditches, etc.
Temporary staging areas at beach at Helga Street: 14,600
sq ft (0 3 ac), beach at Avalon Dr.. 14,140 sq.ft (0 3 ac )
f List the materials (such as marl, paver stone, asphalt, or concrete)
to be used for impervious surfaces.
None
h Protects that require a CAMA Major Development Permit may also
require a Stormwater Certification.
(i) Has a site development plan been submitted to the Division of
Water Quality for review?
❑Yes ❑No ®NA
(ii) If yes, list the date submitted:
k Have the facilities described in Item (i) received state or local
approval?
❑Yes ❑No ®NA
If yes, attach appropriate documentation
m Does the proposed protect include an innovative stormwater
design?
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
8

Form DCM MP -3 Upland Development
commercial effluent, `wash down" and residential discharges).
N/A
m. Describe proposed drinking water supply source (e.g., well,
community, public system, etc.)
N/A
o. When was the lot(s) platted and recorded?
N/A
August 26, 2015
Date ,
Town of Kill Devil °Hills Shore Protection Project .
Project Name -
Town of Kill Devil Hills, Go Debora Diaz
Applicant Name
Applicant ignature
❑Yes ❑No ®NA
If yes, attach appropriate documentation.
n. (i) Will water be impounded? ❑Yes []No [DNA
(ii) If yes, how many acres?
p. If proposed development is a subdivision, will additional utilities be
installed for this upland development?
❑Yes ❑No ®NA
Agent, Coastal Planning.& Engineenng,of -North CarolinaJnc:
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC
9

Application for Mayor Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
2 Supplemental Information
2.1 Per Form MP -1, Section 6a: Project Narrative
2.1.1 Project Scoping and History
The Town of Kill Devil Hills is focused on a long -term shoreline management program that will
serve to sustain the beaches that support a significant portion of their local economy and
maintains the tax base of the Town. Infrastructure protection, storm damage mitigation and rapid
recovery from storm events are important considerations. In order to accomplish these stated
goals, the Town is taking steps to maintain its oceanfront beach and dune to a configuration that
1) provides a reasonable level of storm damage reduction to public and private development, 2)
mitigates long -term erosion that could threaten public and private development as well as
recreational opportunities and biological resources, and 3) maintains a healthy beach habitat that
supports valuable shorebird and sea turtle nesting habitat.
Due to federal budget priorities, Dare County has been unsuccessful in obtaining federal
construction funds for the project and the prospects of obtaining federal funding for the project in
the near future appear remote. Consequently, the Town of Kill Devil Hills has elected to pursue a
locally funded beach protection project. As such, on September 14, 2011, the Town of Kill Devil
Hills held an interagency meeting in Washington, North Carolina with state and federal agencies
including the North Carolina Division of Coastal Management (DCM), the North Carolina
Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC), United States Army Corps of Engineers ( USACE),
the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) to present the scope of a proposed locally
sponsored project, as well as develop a permitting approach and scope for necessary
environmental documentation. Subsequent to the 2011 interagency meeting, the Towns of Duck
and Kitty Hawk also expressed interest in pursuing locally funded beach nourishment projects on
their respective shorelines. Considering that all three Towns are proximal to one another and are
simultaneously pursing independent nourishment projects, constructing these projects within the
same year, either concurrently or sequentially, would reduce mobilization costs for each Towns'
independent project. Therefore, another interagency meeting was held on June 19, 2013 with
representatives of the same agencies to discuss permitting approaches and environmental
documentation approaches for all three towns. It was determined that three separate
Environmental Assessments (EA's) could be prepared for each of the three towns, resulting in
three sets of Department of the Army and CAMA permits.
The Kill Devil Hills project involves use of Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) borrow areas, which
fall under BOEM's jurisdiction, and placement of material on the beach, which falls under the
USACE's jurisdiction. It was therefore determined that BOEM and the USACE would act as
joint -lead agencies for NEPA purposes, and would prepare joint NEPA documents. BOEM and
the USACE agreed to participate in the required Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7
consultations; the Magnuson- Stevens Fishery and Conservation Management Act Essential Fish
Habitat (EFH) consultation (Section 305); the National Historic Preservation Act Section
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
10

Application for Major Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
(NHPA) Section 106 process; and the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) Section 307
consistency process.
The proposed dredging of OCS borrow areas falls outside the scope of several existing biological
opinions. The 1995/1997 South Atlantic Regional Biological Opinion (SARBO) does not apply
because 1) the USACE does not have regulatory jurisdiction over OCS borrow areas, and 2) the
project is not being funded or undertaken by the USACE. The USACE has re- initiated
consultation with the USFWS and the NMFS to include new species, actions and geographic
areas in the SARBO. The presently proposed dredging activities would be covered under this re-
initiated SARBO, since both the USACE and BOEM would be party to it. However, it cannot be
assumed that the SARBO will be completed in time to be applicable to the Kill Devil Hills
project; therefore, BOEM will need its own "stand- alone' biological opinion and Incidental Take
Statement to authorize any potential protected species interactions occurring in federal waters.
During the interagency meeting on July 19, 2013, representatives from the USFWS and the
NMFS agreed that while individual EAs could be drafted for each of the three proposed projects
(resulting in three individual sets of permits), a single regional EFH assessment and a single
Biological Assessment (BA) could be submitted to satisfy consultation requirements with NMFS
and USFWS for the Towns of Duck, Kitty Hawk, and Kill Devil Hills. The EFH and BA were
each developed in a batched format, meaning they addressed all three Towns within one
document. The batched EFH has been submitted to NMFS and the batched BA has been
submitted to the USFWS for review.
In a letter from BOEM to the USACE, dated December 2, 2014, it was stated that lead agency in
Endangered Species Act (ESA) Section 7 consultation for potential impacts on protected species
would be determined by jurisdiction. The BOEM will be lead agency and consult with National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) concerning potential effects from dredging activities for
species under their purview (i.e. swimming turtles and whales). The USACE will be the lead
agency and consult with UFWS concerning effects from placement activities for species under
their purview (i.e. nesting sea turtles). BOEM and the USACE will consult jointly with NMFS
Habitat Conservation Division on EFH and request NMFS to assign conservation
recommendations by jurisdiction. The USACE will be lead agency for the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106, and will notify the State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO) and relevant Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPO). The USACE and BOEM will
work with the North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources (NCDENR),
to ensure compliance with Section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA).
2.1.2 Proposed Action
The proposed action is a one -time beach nourishment event that will include sand placement
along a 2.73 -mile section of oceanfront shoreline. The main fill portion of the proposed project
(excluding tapers) begins at the north town limit (baseline station 189 +00) and extends south to
Windsong Way located near baseline station 314 +88. The length of the main portion of
nourished shoreline, excluding the tapers, is 12,500 feet. If the Kill Devil Hills project is
constructed as a stand -alone project, two taper sections would be included, one on the south end
and the other on the north end of the main placement area. The north taper would extend 933.2
feet into the Town of Kitty Hawk, terminating just south of Tateway Road at station 179 +88.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
11

Application for Major Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
The south taper would extend 1,031 feet, ending at the Prospect Avenue public access at station
324 +97. Thus, the maximum extents of the Kill Devil Hills project would include 14,464 feet
(2.73 mi.) of shoreline. The proposed design includes a 20 -foot wide dune at elevation +15.0 feet
NAVD fronted by a 40 ft. berm. Modeling results and topographic data indicate that no design
dune is required between stations 240 +42 and 269 +49, and south of 304 +82; therefore, only a
40 -foot wide berm will be constructed in these areas. The square footage of fill to be placed
below MHW (1.2 ft. NAVD88) to the seaward tow of fill is 3,413,848.67 square feet, and the
total fill area above MHW is 1,354,743.33 square feet, for a total disturbed area of 4,768,592
square feet. Plan view drawings and cross - sections along profiles at 1,000 -foot spacing are
provided in Appendix A.
There are two proposed staging areas: one along the beach front at Helga Street, spanning
approximately 0.3 ac. (Appendix A, sheet 4), and a second located on along the beach front at
Avalon Dr., also spanning approximately 0.3 ac (Appendix A, sheet 6). No impervious surfaces
or alterations to the dunes will be required for use of these areas.
The Town plans to install sand fencing and dune vegetation after the beach is constructed to trap
windblown sand and encourage dune growth. The corridor in which sand fencing may be
installed spans the 2.75 miles of the project area. The sand fencing will be installed in
accordance with 15A NCAC 07H .0311 and 15A NCAC 07K .0212. The plan view for the
proposed sand fencing design is shown below in Figure 1, and the cross section is shown in
Figure 2.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
12

t�
Landward
Application for Major Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
Proposed Sand Fence Configuration
----- - - - - -- ----- - - - - -- - - - - --
%P
Toe of Constructed Dune
- - - - -- ------- - - - - -- ---- ------- I-----
a
�co NOT -IQ Ft.
Minirnut i �c,
An le" =,45°
,Maximum Length,
Of Febit -'Jng = i0 Ft.
Seaward Maximum Height of Fence = 5 Ft.
Maximum Size of Support Posts = 2" x 4" or 3"
diameter
Figure 1. Plan view of the proposed sand fencing design. Fencing may be installed between the crest of the
started dune and a point 10 feet seaward of the toe of the dune.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
13

Crest of
Constructed Dune
Application for Major Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
Proposed Sand Fence Location
Proposed
Sand Fencing
-->
10 Ft.
Ocean
Toe of Constructed
Dune - -
Wet Sand Area;
No Fence
Figure 2. Cross - sectional view of the proposed sand fencing design.
Approximately 775,000 cubic yards of sand would be required to construct the design template
for Kill Devil Hills. The proposed project also incorporates an additional amount of sand,
referred to as advanced fill, to account for background erosion and diffusion losses, such that the
design will be maintained for an extended period. In the case of Kill Devil Hills, 138,000 cubic
yards of advanced fill will be incorporated into the project to maintain the design for five years.
This amounts to a total fill volume of 913,000 cubic yards that will be placed during this single
nourishment event. Due to losses during dredging, actual dredge volume could be up to 20%
higher than the fill volume, making the total dredged volume approximately 1,095,600 cubic
yards.
As discussed, the Town of Kitty Hawk is also seeking permits to allow the construction of a
shore protection project along its entire oceanfront shoreline. Consequently, there is a possibility
both the Kill Devil Hills and Kitty Hawk projects could be constructed concurrently, which
would eliminate the need for the north taper section of the Kill Devil Hills project. Dependent
upon several variables, including whether the project is constructed as a stand -alone project,
available funding, time or contractor constraints, or any unforeseen limitations, the applicant
may build all (14,464 linear feet and 1,095,600 cubic yards) or a portion of the proposed project.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
14

Application for Major Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
Material will be obtained from the borrow area using a hopper dredge, a cutterhead dredge, or a
combination of the two. In the case of a cutterhead dredge, sand will be transported from the
borrow area to the beach as a slurry via pipeline; use of a hopper dredge would involve transport
to a nearshore pump -out location, and subsequent pumping to the beach via pipeline. A sand dike
will be constructed on the seaward side of the discharge area. The sand slurry will be discharged
behind the temporary dike, and excess water will be directed parallel to the shoreline and around
the edge of the dike. Once discharged onto the beach, the material will be shaped and graded
using loaders, dozers, and other earth moving equipment.
Should hopper dredging be utilized, the proposed project will employ relocation trawling as a
means to reduce the potential for entrainment of protected species, such as sea turtles and
Atlantic sturgeon. The protocols and techniques of relocation trawling were researched and
developed by the USACE, and have become a standard practice for reducing lethal sea turtle
takes during dredging projects. Two types of trawls are used during hopper dredging projects.
Sea turtle abundance trawling is employed several days before commencement of dredging
activity, and is used to determine the abundance of sea turtles in the area. Relocation trawling
will be performed during active hopper dredging or in coordination with the NMFS. Essentially,
this method employs a capture- relocation technique, and is targeted at the active dredging site
within the borrow area. The distance covered by each tow may vary as dictated by large vessel
traffic in the area, or by the size and configuration of the borrow site. A separate vessel, usually a
shrimp trawler, deploys a trawling net ahead of the approaching dredge to remove sea turtles
from the dredge's path. Typically, trawlers tow two specially designed 60 -ft trawl nets in the
vicinity of the dredge on a 12 or 24 hour schedule. The position at the beginning of each tow is
determined from GPS positioning equipment, and tow speed is recorded at the approximate
midpoint of each tow. Water temperature measurements are also taken twice per day, and
weather conditions (air temperature, wind velocity and direction, sea state, wave height,
precipitation) are recorded by instrumentation and visual observations aboard the trawler. If
relocation trawling is implemented, standard relocation trawling conditions will be observed as
set forth by NMFS including specification for trawl time, handling, holding conditions, take and
release, any tagging, etc.
In addition to relocation trawling, other measures will be implemented to reduce the threat of
takes during hopper or cutterhead dredging. These include use of a turtle deflector on the hopper
dredge draghead, insuring pumps are disengaged if a drag head or rotating cutterhead is lifted
from the bottom, and use of NMFS-certified Protected Species Observers aboard hopper dredges.
On the beach, several steps will be taken to minimize construction impacts to nesting and
hatchling sea turtles. Artificial lighting used during nighttime construction activities will be
angled and /or shielded to reduce deterrence of sea turtle nesting and hatchling disorientation. Sea
turtle nest monitoring is also considered an important part of sea turtle conservation, therefore a
sea turtle nest monitoring and avoidance /relocation plan will be implemented through
coordination with USFWS and NCWRC. Dare County is included in surveys conducted by
Network for Endangered Sea Turtles (N.E.S.T), the volunteer organization which performs
systematic surveys of the northern Outer Banks from the Virginia border to the southern tip of
Nags Head. Surveys are performed throughout the nesting season (May through August), and
include daily morning patrols to mark and protect newly laid nests, as well as monitoring during
incubation period and emergence. These surveys have been performed since 1981. Because the
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
15

Application for Major Development Permit
Town of KIII Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
Duck project proposes nourishment during the summer months (nesting season), monitoring will
be needed to identify, and subsequently avoid burial or excavation of, existing nests during
construction. This monitoring will be performed by trained individuals knowledgeable of the
beach construction operations. In addition to monitoring surveys, nest relocation will be
implemented by highly trained individuals and in coordination with the appropriate agencies.
2.1.3 Construction Schedule
The inclement weather typically encountered during the winter months offshore the northern outer
banks can make dredging difficult and often reduces dredging efficiencies, especially when
cutterhead dredges are used. Elevated sea states pose a substantial safety risk to crews and
equipment, while weather - related down times raise costs and reduce efficiency. As such, the
Town proposes a year -round construction window with a high likelihood that construction would
occur during the calmer and safer summer months. A year -round construction window would
provide the contractor the most flexibility and provide a safer and more economical work
environment. To allow for the greatest scheduling flexibility, no start and end date will be
specified; rather, this will remain at the discretion of the contractor, and will be based on
equipment availability and weather conditions. Based on estimated production rates, the Kill
Devil Hills project will likely require approximately 2.5 months. The Duck project will likely
require approximately 3 months, and the Kitty Hawk project will require approximately 3.5
months. The Kill Devil Hills project could be constructed independently, or concurrently with
these other two Towns. If constructed independently, the maximum time anticipated for
completion of the three projects is 9 months; however, the contractor could utilize multiple pieces
of equipment and construct the projects in parallel, leading to a minimum construction time of 3.5
months. These timeframes are based on the production rates for hopper dredges achieved during
the 2010 -2011 Nags Head project. The production rates have been adjusted to account for
distances from the project areas to the identified borrow areas.
2.1.4 Borrow Area and Sediment Analysis
Beach quality sand will be dredged from offshore borrow areas using a self - contained ocean -
certified hopper dredge, a cutterhead pipeline dredge, or a combination of the two. There are two
borrow areas that will be utilized for the Kill Devil Hills Shoreline Protection Project— borrow
areas A and C. Both areas are located entirely within federal waters, i.e. seaward of the Three
Nautical Mile Line, placing them under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Ocean Energy
Management (BOEM) (Appendix A, sheets 1 and 2). Geotechnical investigations, including
geophysical (sonar) surveys, vibracores, hydrographic surveys, archaeological resource surveys
and sand compatibility analyses were conducted in association with development of the final
borrow area designs.
Coastal Planning & Engineering, Inc. of North Carolina (CPE -NC) conducted a comprehensive
sand search using a systematic methodology involving three sequential phases of investigation.
Phase I involved a comprehensive desktop study that examined previously collected information
within the geologic context of the investigation area in order to identify features with the highest
potential of containing project compatible sand. Results of jetprobe investigations of several
shoal features conducted offshore Dare County by CPE -NC in 2013 as part of a feasibility study
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
16

Application for Major Development Permit
Town of KIII Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
for the Town of Kill Devil Hills were also considered during this phase. Details of the findings of
Phase I can be found in the full geotechnical report (Appendix C, beginning on page 15).
Surveys, sampling and analysis of the Kill Devil Hills native beach were also conducted during
Phase I. In keeping with the requirements set forth in the North Carolina State Sediment Criteria,
shore - perpendicular topographic and bathymetric surveys of the native beach were conducted to
determine the beach profile. The locations of the profiles surveyed by CPE -NC were based on a
data set previously collected by the US Army Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District. Each
profile survey extended from a point 150 ft. landward of the vegetation line seaward to an
elevation no less than -25 ft. NAVD88. Characterization of the Kill Devil Hills native beach was
generated from samples collected along five profiles within the project area. As required by the
State Sediment Criteria, samples were taken from 13 locations along each profile: the dune, toe
of dune, mid -berm, berm crest, mean high water, mean tide level, mean low water, trough, bar
crest, and at -12.5, -15.0, -17.5 and -20.0. Therefore, a total of 65 samples were collected by
CPE -NC.
The composite summary and grain size analysis results are displayed in Table I below.
Additionally, the results of sediment analysis for each sediment sample can be found within the
Beach Composite Summary Tables provided in Appendix 4 of the attached Appendix C.
Additionally, CPE -NC conducted a survey of 50,000 square foot portion of the Kill Devil Hills
project area to determine the total number of clasts greater than 3 inches in diameter. A total of
51 clasts greater than 3 inches in diameter were identified during the survey. More detailed
results of the 3 -inch clast survey can be found in Appendix 7 of the attached Appendix C.
Phase II investigations involved reconnaissance level geophysical surveys in order to 1) define
the extent of sediment layers identified during Phase I research of past jetprobe data and historic
vibracore and surface sediment data; 2) develop a vibracore plan to be implemented during Phase
III investigations, and 3) identify potential environmental or cultural resources for avoidance
during Phase III vibracore investigations. The bathymetric data collected in both borrow areas
during Phase II, as well as the locations of vibracores conducted during Phase III are provided in
Appendix A, sheets.
Results of the geotechnical investigations, including geophysical (sonar) surveys, vibracores,
hydrographic surveys, archaeological resource surveys and sand compatibility analyses were
used to develop the proposed borrow area designs. Design considerations for the proposed
borrow areas included:
• Construction of the project may be accomplished using a hopper or cutterhead dredge
• Location of sufficient sand to construct the three proposed beach nourishment projects for
the Towns of Duck, Kitty Hawk, and Kill Devil Hills
• Beach compatible sand with similar mean grain size and sorting of the project beaches
• Avoidance of environmentally sensitive areas such as hardbottom, seagrass beds, etc.
• Avoidance of potentially significant cultural resources
• Avoidance of nearshore impacts due to wave refraction over borrow areas
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
17

Application for Major Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
The proposed design cuts for borrow areas A and C are displayed in sheets 17 and 21 of
Appendix A, respectively. Borrow Area A has six design cuts ranging from -58.5 ft. to -68 ft.
NAVD88, amounting to an estimated total dredge -able volume of 17,350,000 cubic yards.
Borrow Area C contains six design cuts ranging from -61 ft. to -65 ft. NAVD88, amounting to an
estimated dredge -able volume of 2,049,000 cubic yards. A No Dredge Zone has been designated
in the middle of proposed Borrow Area C, where unsuitable material exists. Overall acreage for
borrow area A is approximately 1, 172.96 acres, and approximately 354 acres for borrow area C.
A summary of the sand compatibility analyses for each area is displayed in Table 1, and
indicates these areas contain material deemed compliant with the Kill Devil Hills native beach,
per standards set forth in the NC State Sediment Criteria (I 5A NCAC 07H.0312). There are no
State Standard Allowances for mean grain size of Munsell color; however, these values are listed
in the table for comparison between native beach and borrow area.
Table 1. Results of the compatibility analyses performed for Borrow Area A and C. Allowable limits for the
Town of Kill Devil Hills native beach are defined by Rule 15A NCAC 07H.0312.
Information gathered during the Phase I archival literature studies regarding the geological
setting of the project area give no indication that hardbottom habitats are present within or in the
vicinity of the borrow areas. Additionally, previous geotechnical and geophysical investigations
conducted by the USACE have not indicated the presence of hardbottoms in the area. Finally,
analysis of the sidescan sonar data acquired by CPE -NC for the present project indicated no
presence of hardbottom habitats or consolidated rock exposures or outcroppings within or in the
vicinity of the borrow areas.
To determine the project effects on potentially significant submerged cultural resources,
Tidewater Atlantic Research (TAR) carried out a background literature review and supervised a
cultural resources investigation of the proposed borrow area. The cultural resource report
compiled by TAR is provided in Appendix B. A registered archaeologist from TAR identified 9
magnetic anomalies in the vicinity of Area A, 4 of which were considered potentially significant
(Appendix A, sheet 17). In area C, there were 65 magnetic anomalies, 25 of which were
considered potentially significant (Appendix A, sheet 21). As a result, three buffer areas were
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
18
Allowable Limits
Parameter
Kill Devil Hills
for Kill Devil
Borrow Area A
Borrow Area C
Native Beach
Hills Native
Beach
Wet/Dry Munsell Color
5/7
n/a
5/6
5/6
Mean Grain Size (mm)
0.36
n/a
0.36
0.27
Sorting (Phi)
1.37
n/a
0.90
1.09
Silt ( %) ( <0.0625mm)
0.9
5.9
0.83
1.59
Granular ( %) (2mm < and < 4.76n
5.15
10.15
1.48
2.05
Gravel ( %) ( >4.76mm)
1.62
6.62
0.52
1.07
Carbonate
2.0
17.0
1.0
7.0
Information gathered during the Phase I archival literature studies regarding the geological
setting of the project area give no indication that hardbottom habitats are present within or in the
vicinity of the borrow areas. Additionally, previous geotechnical and geophysical investigations
conducted by the USACE have not indicated the presence of hardbottoms in the area. Finally,
analysis of the sidescan sonar data acquired by CPE -NC for the present project indicated no
presence of hardbottom habitats or consolidated rock exposures or outcroppings within or in the
vicinity of the borrow areas.
To determine the project effects on potentially significant submerged cultural resources,
Tidewater Atlantic Research (TAR) carried out a background literature review and supervised a
cultural resources investigation of the proposed borrow area. The cultural resource report
compiled by TAR is provided in Appendix B. A registered archaeologist from TAR identified 9
magnetic anomalies in the vicinity of Area A, 4 of which were considered potentially significant
(Appendix A, sheet 17). In area C, there were 65 magnetic anomalies, 25 of which were
considered potentially significant (Appendix A, sheet 21). As a result, three buffer areas were
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
18

Application for Major Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
established within Area A — two are located within the borrow area and one is located outside the
western perimeter (Appendix A, sheet 17). Likewise, 14 buffers were established in the vicinity
of Area C, five of which are located within or partially within the borrow area (Appendix A,
sheet 21). These areas will be avoided during dredging.
Mobilization and demobilization costs can run into the millions; therefore, the volume of material
to be dredged in any one operation should be as large as possible to keep the effective unit costs
within reason. In this regard, the Kill Devil Hills project is being developed in conjunction with
similar projects for the Towns of Duck and Kitty Hawk. In the event that the Duck, Kitty Hawk
and Kill Devil Hills projects are combined into one operation, the effective unit cost of the
operation would be lowered to the benefit of all three Towns. The stated volumes within both
borrow areas meet the engineering requirements for the design template plus dredging losses for
Kill Devil Hills (1,095,600 cubic yards), Kitty Hawk (2,245,200 cubic yards), and Duck
(1,358,400 cubic yards) projects, which sum to 4,699,200 cubic yards. Thus, the borrow areas,
which together contain a total of 19,399,000 cubic yards of beach compatible material, can satisfy
the requirements of all three projects.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
19

Application for Major Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
2.1.5 Summary of Consistency with State Sediment Criteria
Provided below is a summary of how each criteria stipulated in 15A NCAC 07H .0312 Technical Standards for
Beach Fill Standards have been adhered to. Those criteria not considered applicable to the project, such as those
pertaining to projects utilizing a borrow area located in a maintained navigation channel, have been omitted.
Table 2. Statement of consistency with each criteria within the 15A NCAC 07H .0312 Technical Standards for Beach Fill
Standards, and location of information within the supporting documentation.
Section (15A
NCAC 07H Description
.0312)
Statement of Consistency:
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
20
Shore - perpendicular bathymetric and topographic surveys of the beach,
were conducted in July 2012 and May 2015 along transects spaced
(1) (c) Topographic and Bathymetric
approximately 1,000 ft apart within the project area. Please refer to Dare
Surveys
County, NC Duck - Kitty Hawk - Kill Devil Hills 2015 Hydrographic and
Topographic Survey Report (Appendix D) for a description of methodology
and cross section plots.
13 sediment samples were collected from 5 representative beach profiles
along the project area, 'spaced approximately 3,000 ft. apart. Samples were
Beach Sediment Sampling
taken from each of the morphodynamic zones specified: 1 sample was
(1)(d)
Locations
collected at MLW and 6 samples were collected both seaward and landward
of the MLW. Please refer to Beach Characterization section under Phase 1
Investigations in Appendix C: Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and
Borrow Area Design Report
Mechanical seive analysis was performed on each of the samples. The
Values for four (4) Sediment
percent by weight of each of the 4 grain size categories (fine, sand, granular,
(1)(e) Grain Size Categories
and gravel) for each individual sample is provided in the Percentage of
(Individual Samples)
Material by Sediment Grain Size Category table in Appendix 4 of the
Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report
(Appendix C).
Composite values of the percent by weight of each of the 4 grain size
Composite Values for four (4)
categories were developed. Please refer to the Percentage of Material by
(1)(f) sediment grain Size
Sediment Grain Size Category table in Appendix 4 of the Comprehensive
Categories
Marine Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix C). Summary
values can also be found in the text of the report on Page 16
Carbonate analysis was performed on a composite sample of all sediment
samples along each of the 5 profiles. Please refer to the Profile Line
(1) (g) Percent Calcium Carbonate
Composite Summary Table in Appendix 4 of the Comprehensive Marine Sand
Search and Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix Q. Summary values can
also be found in the text of the report on Page 16
On September 15, 2013, CPE -NC conducted a survey of a 50,000 square foot
portion of the Kill Devil Hills Project area from a point slightly south of Sea
Total Number of Clasts > 3
Village Lane and slightly north of Wilkinson Street. The total number of
(1) (h) inches (76 mm) in diameter
clasts > 3 inches in diameter identified during the survey of the
representative project area in the Town of Kill Devil Hills was 51. Please refer
to Appendix 7 and page 16 of the Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and
Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix C)
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
20

(2) (c)
(2) (d)
(2) (e)
(2) (g)
Application for Major Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
21
Over the course of two surveys (June 2014 and October 2014) seafloor
surveys were conducted such that 100 percent coverage of each submarine
borrow area was obtained. Both single beam bathymetry and high
Seafloor Bathymetry and
resolution sides scan sonar imagery were collected. Please refer to
Sonar Imagery
descriptions of the Phase II Investigations and Phase III Investigations in the
Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report
(Appendix C). More specifically, figures 21 and 22 show the bathymetric
coverage of the borrow areas and figures 27 and 28 show the sidescan
mosaic of the area verifying 100% coverage.
Over the course of two surveys (June 2014 and October 2014) geophysical
imaging of the seafloor subsurface was used to characterize each submarine
Geophysical imaging of
borrow area. A sub - bottom profiler was used to survey tracklines spaced
seafloor subsurface
approximately 30 -m apart, which greatly exceeds the state standard. Please
(Subbottom Survey)
refere to Phase II Investigations and Phase III Investigations in the
Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report
(Appendix Q. More specifically, figures 16 and 17 show the tracklines along
which data were collected. Also refer to Appendix 9 of Appendix C.
Sediment sampling of Borrow Area A and C used a 271B Alpine Pneumatic
vibracore, configured to collect undisturbed sediment cores up to 20 ft. in
length. Material is fed into a 3 inch diameter plastic core liner, which is split
and sampled. Vibracores were collected at 1,000 -foot spacing. 51 vibracores
were collected within Borrow Area A for an average acreage per core of 23.
18 vibracores were collected within Borrow Area C for an average acreage
Vibracore Spacing, Number,
per core of 20. Refer to figures 21 and 22 in the Comprehensive Marine Sand
and Recovery Depth
Search and Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix C) for spacing of vibracores
within each borrow area. All vibracores within a given borrow area cut
section penetrated and recovered material from below the proposed cut
depth (i.e. all vibracores within a section marked cut to -65 ft. recovered
material from at least a depth of -65 ft.) Please refer to Figures 21 and 22
and the vibracore logs in Appendix 11 of the Comprehensive Marine Sand
Search and Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix C) to verify depths
recovered.
Mechanical seive analysis was performed on each of the samples. The
percent by weight of each of the 4 grain size categories (fine, sand, granular,
and gravel) for each individual sample is provided in the Percentage of
Material by Sediment Grain Size Category table in Appendix 16 of the
Grain size analysis of
Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and Borrow Area Design Report
individual vibracore samples
(Appendix C). Weighted composite values of the percent by weight of each of
and borrow area composites
the 4 grain size categories were developed for each core and ultimately
composite values were developed for each borrow area. These composites
are also provided in the Percentage of Material by Sediment Grain Size
Category table in Appendix 16 of the Report. Summary values for each
borrow area are provided in Table 6 of the Report (Appendix Q.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
21

Application for Major Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC
22
Carbonate analysis was performed on each vibracore sample. A weighted
percent calcium carbonate value was computed for each vibracore. These
values were used to determine the weighted percent calcium carbonate
composite value for Borrow Area A and C. Please refer to the Cumulative
(2) (h) Vibracore calcium carbonate
Percents and Computed Distributions table in Appendix 16 of the Report
composites
(Appendix C) for individual sample percentage and weighted composite
vibracore percentage. Please refer to the Composite Data Table in Appendix
16 of the Report for weighted composite vibracore and borrow area
percentage. Summary values for each borrow area can also be found in the
text of the Report in Table 6.
The average percentage by weight of fine - grained sediment in each borrow
Fine- Grained Size Sediment
site does not exceed the average percentage by weight of fine - grained
(3) (b)
sediment of the recipient beach characterization plus five percent. See Table
Compatibility
1 of the project narrative, and Table 6 of the Comprehensive Marine Sand
Search and Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix Q.
The average percentage by weight of granular sediment in each borrow site
does not exceed the average percentage by weight of fine - grained sediment
(3) (c) Granular Size Compatibility
of the recipient beach characterization plus five percent. See Table 1 of the
project narrative, and Table 6 of the Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and
Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix Q.
The average percentage by weight of gravel in each borrow site does not
exceed the average percentage by weight of fine - grained sediment of the
(3) (d) Gravel Size Compatibility
recipient beach characterization plus five percent. See Table 1 of the project
narrative and Table 6 of the Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and Borrow
Area Design Report (Appendix Q.
The average percentage by weight of calcium carbonate in each borrow site
Calcium Carbonate
does not exceed the average percentage by weight of fine - grained sediment
(3) (e) Compatibility
of the recipient beach characterization plus 15 percent. See Table 1 of the
project narrative and Table 6 of the Comprehensive Marine Sand Search and
Borrow Area Design Report (Appendix Q.
All vibracores within a given borrow area cut section penetrated and
(4)(a) Sediment Excavation Depths
recovered material from below the proposed cut depth (i.e. all vibracores
within a section marked cut to -65 ft. recovered material from at least a
depth of -65 ft.).
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC
22

Application for Major Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
2.2 Per Form MP -1, Section 6d: A copy of the deed (with state application
only) or other instrument under which the applicant claims title to the
affected properties
The Town is currently in the process obtaining the necessary easements to construct the project.
2.3 Per Form MP -1, Section 6f: Adjacent Riparian Owner Return Receipts
Adjacent riparian owner notifications have been sent certified mail. A return receipt was never
received from Forrest L. Bartlett; the sent Certified Mail receipt is provided below. Due to an
expired forwarded time for Michael Kuhn, a second notification was sent via certified mail to the
P.O Box address provided by the LISPS. Should a return receipt be received, it will be provided to
DCM.
R
i e � . O RECEIPT
C3 1s •
C3 k
- - - - a-- -
r.
y
t
co Poa%egs $ $3.45
C3
GettIOed Ree
z N3
ru 09
CM . ° ti I
Re
qt
Qom'- Tow Postage & Fear $
M
to
Ln Amer t
p"neeia \C --------- -- ---- -- ------------------- ------
or F0 Box Ath
- ........ ....................
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
23

Application for Major Development Permit
Town of Kill Devil Hills Shore Protection Project
?6 tal Seruic r
FIPI
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
24

2.4 Per Form MP -1, Section 6h: Agent Authorization Form
XiR FTTI/[rhhii4a11
AGENT AUTHORIZATION FORM
Date _6/5/2015
Name of Property Owner Applying for Permit:
_Coastal Planning & Engineering, of North Carolina, Inc.
Mailing Address:
102 Town Hall Drive
_P.O. Box 1719 Kill Devil Hills, NC 27948
I certify that I have authorized (agent) Coastal Planning & Engineering, of North Carolina, Inc.
to act on my behalf, for the purpose of applying for and obtaining all CAMA Permits necessary to
install or construct (activity) _Town of Kill Devil Hills Shoreline Protection Project_,
at (my property located at) Kill Devil Hills oceanfront shoreline
This certification is valid thru (date) (O / /7 / 2 O / 1
".L /O4. /
P/. roperty Owner Signature
(o /l7 /Z o t 5
Date
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
25

. 2.5 Per Form MP -1, Section 6j: Ocean Hazard AEC Notice for Kill Devil Hills
OCEAN HAZARD AEC NOTICE
Project is in an: X Ocean Erodible Area X
Property Owner: Town of Kill Devil Hills
Property Address, Kill Devil Hills Ocean Front
Date Lot Was Platted: Easements Pending
This notice is intended to make you, the applicant, aware of the
special risks and conditions associated with development in this
area, which is subject to natural hazards such as storms, erosion
and cunents. The rules of the Coastal Resources Commission
require that you receive an AEC Hazard Notice and
acknowledge that notice in writing before a permit for
development can be issued.
The Commission's rules on building standards, oceanfront
setbacks and dune alterations are designed to minimize, but not
eliminate, property loss from hazards. By grunting permits, the
Coastal Resources Commission does not guarantee the safety of
the development and assumes no liability for future damage to
the development- Permits issued in the Ocean Hazard Area of
Environmental Concern include the condition that structures be
relocated or dismantled if they become imminently threatened
by changes in shoreline configuration. The structure(s) must be
relocated or dismantled within two (2) years of becoming
imminently threatened, and in any case upon its collapse or
subsidence.
The best available information, as accepted by the Coastal
Resources Commission, indicates that the annual long -term
average ocean erosion rate for the area where your property is
located is 2 -2.5 feet per year.
The rate was established by careful analysis of aerial
photographs of the coastline taken over the past 50 years.
Studies also indicate that the shoreline could move as much as
;n feet landward in a major storm.
The Flood waters in a major storm are predicted to be about
11— feet deep in this area.
Preferred oceanfront protection measures are beach nourishment
and relocation of threatened structures. Hard erosion control
structures such as bulkheads, seawalls, revetments, groins, jetties
and breakwaters are prohibited. Temporary sand bags may be
authorized under certain conditions
The applicant must acknowledge this information and
requirements by signing this notice in the space below. Without
the proper signature, the application will not be complete.
llt;�y_4en,, 712015
gnature Date
High Hazard Flood Area Inlet Hazard Area
SPECIAL NOTE: This hazard notice is required for
development in areas subject to sudden and massive storms and
erosion. Permits issued for development in this area expire on
December 31 of the third year following the year in which the
permit was issued. Shortly before work begins on the project
site, the Local Permit Officer must be contacted to determine the
vegetation line and setback distance at your site. If the property
has seen little change since the time of permit issuance, and the
proposed development can still meet the setback requirement,
the LPO will inform you that you may begin work. Substantial
progress on the project must be made within 60 days of this
setback determination, or the setback must be re- measured. Also,
the occurrence of a major shoreline change as the result of a
storm within the 60 -day period will necessitate re- measurement
of the setback. It is important that you check with the LPO
before the permit expires for official approval to continue the
work after the permit has expired. Generally, if foundation
pilings have been placed and substantial progress is continuing,
permit renewal can be authorized. It is unlawful to continue
work after permit expiration.
For more information, conracr:
Lynn Mathis
Local Permit Officer
1367 U.S. Hwy. 17 South
Address
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
Locality
252- 264 -3901
Phone Number
Revised May 2010
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
26

BEFORE YOU BUILD
Setting Back for Safety: A Guide to Wise Development Along the Oceanfront
When you build along the oceanfront, you take a calculated risk
Natural forces of water and wind collide with tons of force, even
on calm days.
Man -made structures cannot be guaranteed to survive the force
of a hurricane Long -term erosion (or barrier island migration)
may take from two to ten feet of the beach each year, and,
sooner or later, will threaten oceanfront structures. These are the
facts of life for oceanfront property owners.
The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) has adopted rules for
building along the oceanfront. The rules are intended to avoid an
unreasonable risk to life and property, and to limit public and
private losses from storm and long -term erosion. These rules
lessen but do not eliminate the element of risk in oceanfront
development.
As you consider building along the oceanfront, the CRC wants
you to understand the rules and the risks With this knowledge,
you can make a more informed decision about where and how to
build in the coastal area.
The Rules
When you build along the oceanfront, coastal management rules
require that the structure be sited to fit safely into the beach
environment.
Structures along the oceanfront, less than 5,000 square feet in
size, must be behind the frontal dune, landward of the crest of
the primary dune, and set back from the first line of stable
natural vegetation a distance equal to 30 times the annual
erosion rate (a minimum of 60 feet) The setback calculation
increases as the size of the structure increases [15A NCAC
7H.0306(a)(2)]. For example: A structure between 5,000 and
10,000 square feet would require a setback from the first line of
stable, natural vegetation to a distance equal to 60 times the
annual erosion rate (a minimum of 120 feet) The graduated
setback continues to increase through structure sizessgreater than
100,000 square feet.
PERMITTED
STRUCTURE;
ADEQUATE
SETBACK
i
1
The Reasons
The beachfront is an ever - changing landform The beach and
the dunes are natural "shock absorbers," taking the beating of the
wind and waves and protecting the inland areas. By
Incorporating building setbacks into the regulations, you have a
good chance of enjoying the full life of the structure. At first, it
seems very inviting to build your dream house as close to the
beach as possible, but in five years you could find the dream has
become a nightmare as high tides and storm tides threaten your
investment.
The Exception
The Coastal Resources Commission recognized that these rules,
initially passed in June 1979, might prove a hardship for some
property owners. Therefore, they established an exception for
lots that cannot meet the setback requirement The exception
allows buildings in front of the current setback, if the following
conditions apply:
1) the lot must have been platted as of June 1, 1979, and
is not capable of being enlarged by combining with
adjoining land under the same ownership;
2) development must be constructed as far back on the
property as possible and in no case less than 60 feet
landward of the vegetation line;
3) no development can take place on the frontal dune;
4) special construction standards on piling depth and
square footage must be met, and
5) all other CAMA, state and local regulations must be
met
The exception is not available in the Inlet Hazard Area.
To determine eligibility for the exception the Local Permit
Officer will make these measurements and observations-
required setback from vegetation line
exception setback (maximum feasible)
rear property line setback
max, allowable square footage on lowest floor
PRE - PERMIT STRUCTURE; INADEQUATE SETBACK
PRE -STORM BEACH PROFILE
POST -STORM BEACH PROFILE
Yom.
ONE YEAR AV-TER STORM /BEACH REBUILDING
After the storm, the house on the dune will be gone. The other house has a much better chance of survival.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
27

. 2.6 Permission Letter and Ocean Hazard AEC Notice from Kitty Hawk
. POST'OFFICE`Scix 549,
101' VETERANS MEMORIAL DRIVE
,KITTY HAWK, NC 27949
July 3, 2015
Lvnn \lathis
Division of Coastal Management
1367 U.S. Highway 17 South
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
Subject: Town of Kill Devil Hills Beach Nourishment Project
Dear IMs. Mathis:
PHONE [2531 26 1 - -3552
PNX,- (.252 1 2 6 1 -79500
TOWN WEE SITE: w".townofklttyttawk,org
'EMAIL ARVAZt s: 1rtf0"JI1yh8wkt0wn.net
This letter is to infornh you that we have been made aware of the proposed beach nourishment project for the Town
of Bill Devil Hills, for which the Town of Kill Devil Hills is proposing to place material along an appro cimarely 1,000
ft. stretch of our Town's ocean front beach to form a taper for their project. We have been informed by the Town's
agent (Coastal Planning & Engineering of North Carolina) that you have requested we review and sign the attached
Ocean Hazard AEC Notice. We have reviewed the notice and have modified the language to indicate that we are
not in fact the applicant. Flowever, we are agreeable to the Town constructing the taper as shown on tine project
drawings, with the understanding that our Town is not responsible for any of the costs associated with the -Town of
Kill Devil Hill's beach nourishment project.
Vem truly yours,
hn Stockton
Town Manager
CC.: Debbie Diaz, Town Manager, Town of Kill Devil Hills
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
28

OCEAN HAZARD AEC NOTICE
Project Is In an: X Ocean Erodible Area X High Hazard Flood Area Inlet Hazard Area
Property Owner: Town of Kitty Hawk
Property Address: Kitty Hawk Ocean Front, vicinity of Sibbem Drive
Date Lot Was Platted: Easements Pending
This notice is intended to make you; Gate- appheent, aware of the
special risks and conditions associated with development in this
area, which is subject to natural hazards such as storms, erosion
and currents. The rules of the Coastal Resources Commission
require that you receive an AEC Hazard Notice and
acknowledge that notice in writing before a permit for
development can be issued.
The Commission's rules on building standards, oceanfront
setbacks and dune alterations are designed to minimize, but not
eliminate, property loss from hazards. By granting permits, the
Coastal Resources Commission does not guarantee the•safety of
the development and assumes no liability for future damage to
the development. Permits issued in the Ocean Hazard Area of
Environmental Concern include the condition that structures be
relocated or dismantled if they become imminently threatened,
by changes in shoreline configuration. The structure(s) must be
relocated or dismantled within two (2) years of becoming
imminently threatened, and in any case upon its collapse or
subsidence.
The best available information, as accepted by the Coastal
Resources Commission, indicates that the annual long -term
average ,=ion rncion rate for the area where your property is
located rs • -_ feet per year.
The rate was established by careful analysis of aerial
photographs of the coastline taken over the past 50 years.
Studies also indicate that the shoreline could,move as much as
_15— feet landward in a major storm. '
The flood waters in a major storm are predicted to be about
144p I feet deep in this area.
Preferred oceanfront protection measures are beach nourishment
and relocation of threatened structures. Hard erosion control
structures such as bulkheads, seawalls, revetments, groins, jetties
and breakwaters are prohibited. Temporary sand bags may be
authorized under certain conditions.
listed .owner
The a artt- must acknowledge this information and
requirements by signing this notice in the space below. Without
the proper signature, the application will not be complete.
P erty caner Signature Date
SPECIAL NOTE: This hazard notice is required for
development in areas subject to sudden and massive storms and
erosion. Permits issued for development in this area expire on
December 31 of the third year following the year in which the
permit was issued. Shortly before work begins on the project
site, the Local Permit Officer must be contacted to determine the
vegetation line and setback distance at your site. If the property
has seen little change since the time•of permit issuance, and the
proposed development can still meet the setback requirement,
the LPO will inform you that you may begin work. Substantial
progress on the project must be made within 60 days of this
setback determination, or the setback must be re- measured. Also,
the occurrence of a major shoreline change as the result of a
storm within, the 60 -day period will necessitate re- measurement
of the setback. It is important that you check with the LPO
before the permit expires for official •approval to continue the
work after the permit has expired. Generally, if foundation
pilings have been placed and substantial .progress is continuing,
permit renewal can be authorized. It is unlawful to continue
work after permit expiration.
For more information, contact:
Lynn Mathis
Local Permit OfNcer
1367 U.S. Hwy. 17 South
Address
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
Locality
252 - 264 -3901
Phone Number
Revised May 2010
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
29

BEFORE YOU BUILD
Setting Back for Safety: A Guide to Wise Development Along the Oceanfront
When you build along the oceanfront, you take a calculated risk.
Natural forces of water and wind collide with tons of force, even
on calm days.
Man -made structures cannot be guaranteed to survive the force
of a hurricane. Long -term erosion (or barrier island migration)
may take from two to ten feet of the beach each year, and,
sooner or later, will threaten oceanfront structures. These are the
facts of life for oceanfront property owners.
The Coastal Resources Commission (CRC) has adopted rules for
building along the oceanfront. The rules are intended to avoid an
unreasonable risk to life and property, and to limit public and
private losses from stone and long -term erosion. These rules
lessen but do not eliminate the element of risk in oceanfront
development.
As you consider building along the oceanfront, the CRC wants
you to understand the rules and the risks. With this knowledge,
you can make a more informed decision about where and how to
build in the coastal area.
The Rules
When you build along the oceanfront, coastal management rules
require that the structure be sited to fit safely into the beach
environment
Structures along the oceanfront, less than 5,000 square feet in
size, must be behind the frontal dime, landward of the crest of
the primary dune, and set back from the first line of stable
natural vegetation a distance equal to 30 tunes the annual
erosion rate (a minimum of 60 feet). The setback calculation
increases as the size of the structure increases [ISA NCAC
7H 0306(aX2)]. For example: A structure between 5,000 and
10,000 square feet would require a setback from the first line of
stable, natural vegetation to a distance equal to 60 times the
annual erosion rate (a minimum of 120 feet). The graduated
setback continues to increase through structure sizes,greater than
100,000 square feet.
PERMITTED
STRUCTURE,
ADEQUATE
SETBACK _
The Reasons
The beachfront is an ever - changing landform. The beach and
the dunes are natural "shock absorbers," taking the beating of the
wind " and waves and protecting the inland areas. By
incorporating building setbacks into the regulations, you have a
good chance of enjoying the full life of the structure. At first, it
seems very inviting to build your dream house as close to the
beach as possible, but in five years you could find the dream has
become a nightmare as high tides and storm tides threaten your
investment.
The Exception
The Coastal Resources Commission recognized that these rules,
initially passed in June 1979, might prove a hardship for some
property owners. Therefore, they established an exception for
lots that cannot meet the setback requirement. The exception
allows buildings in front of the current setback, if the following
conditions apply,
1) the lot must have been platted as of June 1, 1979, and
is not capable of being enlarged by combining with
adjoining land under the same ownership;
2) development must be constructed as far back on the
property as possible and in no case less than 60 feet
landward of the vegetation line,
3) no development can take place on the frontal dune,
4) special construction standards on piling depth and
square footage must be met; and
5) all other CAMA, state and local regulations must be
met.
The exception is not available in the Inlet Hazard Area.
To determine eligibility for the exception the Local Permit
Officer will make these measurements and observations:
required setback from vegetation line
exception setback (maximum feasible)
rear property line setback
max. allowable square footage on lowest floor
PRE - PERMIT STRUCTURE; INADEQUATE SETBACK
PRE -STORM BEACH PROFILE
___ POST-STORM BEACH PROFILE
ONE YEAR AFTER STORM /BEACH REBUILDING
After the storm, the house on the dune will be gone. The other house has a much better chance of survival.
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
30

Appendix A: Work Plans
COASTAL PLANNING & ENGINEERING OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.

g
0
R
a
KILL DEVIL HILLS SHORELINE
PROTECTION PROJECT
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
ti ,
RALEIGH
CHARLOTTE
I
JACKSONVILLE•
N.T.S.
INDEX TO SHEETS
1
COVER SHEET
2
PROJECT OVERVIEW
3 -11
BEACH FILL PLAN VIEWS
12 -16
BEACH FILL PROFILES
17
BORROW AREA A PLAN VIEW
18
BORROW AREA A COORDINATE TABLE
19-20
BORROW AREA A CROSS - SECTIONS
21
BORROW AREA C PLAN VIEW
22
BORROW AREA C COORDINATE TABLE
23-24
BORROW AREA C CROSS - SECTIONS
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
PROJECT SITE
HATTERAS
'{ MOREHEAO GT1'
CAPE LOOKOUT
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
TOWN OF
DUCK
NO --+►
DREDGE
/RRITUCK AREA
SOLING BORROW
TOWN OF AREA C
SOUTHERN
SHORES
ATLANTIC
TOWN OF OCEAN
KITTY HAWK
""'y " PROJECT
NAWKBAY FILL AREA
TOWN OF
KILL DEVIL
HILLS
BORROW
AREA A
0 12500 25000
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
5
UAIL BT I SUiIF'l1UN
if !'
i J
U
W
O
a
2 Q
O?
H J
U
OUH
a�w
zoo
Jza'
uj x�
o
=�U
NO
cU
JW
J ar
xQ
Jp
O
J
J
2
�I
3?
1.
oc =
W Lj
z=
b�
0
s
Z=
Scc
IL
u
SATE:
8/25115
3y.
GK
:OAfAI NO.
149947
311EET:
1 of 24

J
TOWN OF
DUCK
NO DREDGE
F AREA
CURRITUCK BORROW
SOUND AREA C
TOWN OF
SOUTHERN
SHORES r
4 A TLANTIC
OCEAN
J
I.Q
co
TOWN OF
KITTY
HAWK
PROJECT LIMITS
KI TTY HA K
BA
8.2 Sr PUTF
— TOWN OF
KILL DEVIL BORROW
HILLS AREA A
0 6000 12000
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
H
U
W
0
x
a
Za
o?
~0
U.3
OV>
0:
CL
z00
zo
U
OZ -)
U)O�
yv(L
JW
J m
=Q
Jp
W
p
J
J
Y
r�
W.
rs
b3
0
z=
y0 �
O
v #I3
)ATE:
8125/15
M
DALE BY �( IP11( 1 GK
UTAM NO.
149947

TATEWAY RD.
TOVW OF I
-KJWY 4AW
to
a
17 B+ .62 �
j
1 r
• I
PROJECT
BASELINEI,r_
�s �'� r
184 +87�
3 E SIBSERN DR
AMC
I>
3 — {Z
VVIINCE
I �
r1
1 I
.r.
I
i
I�
I�
11
STA. 180 +53
NORTHERN
— MICHAEL G. KUHN
3526 N VIRGINIA DARE TRL
KITTY HAWK, N.C. 27949
SEAWARD
TOE OF FILL
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
BEACH FILL
BERM CREST
2015 MLW\
(- 2.05')
2015 MHW
(1.18')
U
W
0
IY
(L
Za
F.j
uor
IrW
0u5
a�
Z
zOa
J Z J
ag
OZS
xnu
J u m
JW
_I%
a
sJD
W
D
J
J
Y
�J viAm - SEAWARD TOE
OF DUNE {
- LANDWARD
z _ � 189 + +Q7 I I LIMIT OF FILL
i I
oil
" ,I 'AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH: 2012. MATCH LINE SHEET 4 0 100 200
it 2. COORDINATES ARE M FEET BIASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM. NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD83}
3 ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL. DATUM OF 1988
MAVD8% VAIL yY I 1
e. CONTOURS SHOWN REPRESENT SURREY DATA rA-*LFC:TFn AT 1000 FOOT INTERVALS BY CPE•NC MAY.
2015. THE CONTOURS SHOWN ARE FOR GRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT INTENDED FOR DESIGN
5. SAID FENCING MAY BE INSTALLED BETWEEN THE CREST OF THE DESIONI DUNE AND A POINT 10 FT. /
SEAWARD OF THE TOE OF FILL
. NORTH TAPER NOT REQUIRED IF KILL DEVIL HILLS PROJECT CONSTRUCTED AT THE SAME TIME I
AS KITTY HAWK
M�
885/15
9Y:
GK
MINIM NO.-
149947
EET:
3 of 24
LEGEND:
1 +80 USACE BASELINE STATION
— • • — 2015 MEAN HIGH WATER (1.16')
— — 2015 MEAN LOW WATER (- 2.05')
EXISTING CONTOURS MAY, 2015
— - - — MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY
® DUNE CREST
— MICHAEL G. KUHN
3526 N VIRGINIA DARE TRL
KITTY HAWK, N.C. 27949
SEAWARD
TOE OF FILL
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
BEACH FILL
BERM CREST
2015 MLW\
(- 2.05')
2015 MHW
(1.18')
U
W
0
IY
(L
Za
F.j
uor
IrW
0u5
a�
Z
zOa
J Z J
ag
OZS
xnu
J u m
JW
_I%
a
sJD
W
D
J
J
Y
�J viAm - SEAWARD TOE
OF DUNE {
- LANDWARD
z _ � 189 + +Q7 I I LIMIT OF FILL
i I
oil
" ,I 'AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH: 2012. MATCH LINE SHEET 4 0 100 200
it 2. COORDINATES ARE M FEET BIASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM. NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD83}
3 ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL. DATUM OF 1988
MAVD8% VAIL yY I 1
e. CONTOURS SHOWN REPRESENT SURREY DATA rA-*LFC:TFn AT 1000 FOOT INTERVALS BY CPE•NC MAY.
2015. THE CONTOURS SHOWN ARE FOR GRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT INTENDED FOR DESIGN
5. SAID FENCING MAY BE INSTALLED BETWEEN THE CREST OF THE DESIONI DUNE AND A POINT 10 FT. /
SEAWARD OF THE TOE OF FILL
. NORTH TAPER NOT REQUIRED IF KILL DEVIL HILLS PROJECT CONSTRUCTED AT THE SAME TIME I
AS KITTY HAWK
M�
885/15
9Y:
GK
MINIM NO.-
149947
EET:
3 of 24

E ARCH ST
-,:w 4
aim
PONSVRUCTI --��
ACCEM-
1
E HELGA ST
IZ3
I
MATCH LINE SHEET 3
1!
:rl
I
I
I
I
ll 4
I�
o I ST, kGI
�- z / I
-20444
I
I
SIB► VLLA03E LN
LEGEND:
,61+80
USACE BASELINE STATION
— • • —
2015 MEAN HIGH WATER (1. IV)
— —
2015 MEAN LOW WATER ( -2.05)
4t5'�
EXISTING CONTOURS MAY, 2015
NORTH CAROLINA BEACH
•
ACCESS AS IDENTIFIED BY
DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT
DUNE CREST
SEAWARD
TOE OF FILL
BEACH FILL
BERM CREST
2015 MLW
(- 2.05')
2015 MHW
(1.1$')
A TLANTIC
SEAWARD OCEAN
TOE OF DUNE
LANDWARD
LIMIT OF FILL
n
n
NOTES: MATCH LINE SHEET 5 0 100 200
. DALE OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH: 2012
3 2. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD83).
3 ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE N FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 VA 1 y N>H
4. CONTOURS SHOWN REPRESENT SURVEY DATA COLLECTED AT 1000 FOOT NTERVAL.S BY CPE- NC I i _
MAY. 2015. THE CONTOURS SHOWN ARE FOR CIRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT INTENDED
FOR DESKaK
5. SAND FENCING MAYBE INSTALLED BETWEEN THE CREST OF THE DESIGN DUNE AND A POINT 10 FT.
c SEAWARD OF THE TOE OF FILL
H
W
ce
0.
zZ
' it
�ULU
>
L Qz
z0g
-j
W y LL
ox
xmu
a
JVUJ
J W
JO
w
O
J
J
Y
z z a:
m
:_
5�
6 4 z
4
�94;l
NY:
F QK
N0.- 947
IEET:
4 0(24

MATCH LINE SHEET 4 LEGEND:
-7-- _ j i — — ry& 01 +80 USACE BASELINE STATION
VALriN4om ST — — 2015 MEAN HIGH WATER (1.18')
/ 2015 MEAN LOW WATER (- 2.05')
EXISTING CONTOURS MAY. 2015
ld� / i
I NORTH CAROLINA BEACH
ACCESS AS IDENTIFIED BY
DIVISION OF COASTAL
/� i f MANAGEMENT
i IMP ( DUNE CREST
r w
E CHMAN '/ I SEAWARD x
TOE OF FILL Z a
O 9
>� I f EACH FILL V O 3
ERM CREST w w
�Q-
21 8'' ' aXQ
E SOTHEL ST _ 1 I p! z_ O a
�� 1 JZJ
PROJECT ' � t 20 5 MLW i � v
i MR 8P*ELINE - ( -2. 5') y O a
_ w
II■� 201 MHW -j w m
E HAYMAN BLVD ✓ I > Lu
i
SEA AR
-A-S4 f ( TOE OF DUNE Y
= TLANDC
1 I . OCEAN
E ARCHDALE ST LI i NB
t2 11111111W
Q
N IZ W
ZZ
E WALKER ST , LANDWARD
° Y LIMIT OF FILL .0 j
22".2 s
F
I S
4.
ry E PYCOCK ST O
0
_ NOTES: MATCH LINE SHEET 6 0 100 200 SATE:
1. DATE OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH: 2012 8125115
2. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM. GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT 3y:
NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1963 (NAD83)
3. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERK'AN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1986 Ar, T �MP TIOn GK
Y (NAVD88) i ., OMM NO..
4. CONTOURS SHOWN REPRESENT SURVEY DATA COLLECTED AT 1000 FOOT INTERVALS BY CPE4JC
MAY. 2015. THE CONTOURS SHOWN ARE FOR GRAPHIf.AL PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT WTEI`DED �f I 149947
c FOR DESIGN. — / �3HEET:
5. SAND FENCING MAY BE INSTALLED BETWEEN THE CREST OF THE DESIGN DUNE AND A POINT 10
a
SEAWARD OF THE TOE OF FILL 5 of 24

MATCH LINE SHEET 5
r w
229+
• - -7 i ( I
E PALMETTO ST
• I II
_. rM
- z
ela ST
1 z /
I
i a .
S, Avl1LON
it
I
PROJECT
-- ,� ffiSELINE _r _ —`-
sar
NOTES: MATCH LINE SHEET 7
j 1. DATE OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH: 2012.
3 2. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM,
NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD03
3. ELEVATIONS SHO4M1 ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988
(NWVD881.
4. CONTOURS SHOWN REPRESENT SURVEY DATA COLLECTED AT 1000 FOOT NYTERVALS BY CPE-NC
MAY, 2015. THE CONTOURS SHOWN ARE FOR GRAPHIC/1L PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT INTENDED
FOR DESIGN.
5. SAND FENCING MAY BE INSTALLED BETWEEN THE CREST OF THE DESIGN DUNE AND A POINT 10 FT
a
SEAWARD OF THE TOE OF IFLL.
LEGEND:
Q 1 +80
USACE BASELINE STATION
— • • —
2015 MEAN HIGH WATER (1.18')
—
2015 MEAN LOW WATER ( -2.05)
-t5�—
EXISTING CONTOURS MAY, 2015
NORTH CAROLINA BEACH
ACCESS AS BY
IK) OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT
®
DUNE CREST
SEAWARD
TOE OF FILL
BEACH FILL
BERM CREST
2015 ML
(- 2.05')
2015 MHW
(1.18')
SEAWARD
TOE OF DUNE
W
7
a
z<
OJ
~O
V
Ir
OV>
ILFz
z0g
J=J
uj
Oz=
X0
JWm
JD
0
J
Y
A TLAN TIC
OCEAN
LANDWARD
LIMIT OF FILL
M�
- � e
0 100 200 ATE:
8/25/15
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT Ty;
GK
BY
DAIL NtIPI_�7N
%wW N0.
1497
lo, 94 — T'
i / of 24

MATCH LINE SHEET 6
7 -
245+12 J i
ir�a I
_LT
F
LI
y
' 24982 I
4=14
w
� I
z
r TH ST
�I
LEGEND:
&1+80
USACE BASELINE STATION
— • • —
2015 MEAN HIGH WATER (1.18')
2015 MEAN LOW WATER (- 2.06)
EXISTING CONTOURS MAY, 2015
NORTH CAROLINA BEACH
•
ACCESS AS IDENTIFIED BY
DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT
SEAWARD
TOE OF FILL
/- BEACH FILL
BERM CREST
2015 MLW
(- 2.05')
2015 MHW
(1.18')
LANDWARD
LIMIT OF FILL
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
• -
1 N
'--PROJECT
BASELINE
_ '9
2�i7'
Pill
NOTES: MATCH LINE SHEET 8 o too 200
3 1. DATE OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH: 2012
= 2 COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM, GRAPHIC SCALE IN ;7T
NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD83).
3. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 L A IE By � DESLRIN IIUN
(NAVD8B).
2 4. CONTOURS SHOWN REPRESENT SURVEY DATA COLLECTED AT 1000 FOOT INTERVALS BY CPE-NC l
MAY. 2015. THE CONTOURS SHOWN ARE FOR GRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT NJTENOED / I
FOR DESIGN.
5 SAND FENCING MAY BE INSTALLED BETWEEN THE CREST OF THE DESIGN DUNE AND A POINT 10 FT.
SEAWARD OF THE TOE OF FILL
a
V
IW
O
CL
za
OJ
~O
U 3 UJI
OU>
(L
zog
'3 z J
Lu Xmu
O�
JWm
S
J Q
W
0
J
Y
a
ac - -
W "
W U
O
�v
z=
IL
i 0 �
0
U p
S i?
8125115
3y.
GK
'OMM N0._
r 1 49947
EE T:
7 of 24

MATCH LINE SHEET 7
f -
II
• 1
E 3RD ST
274+65gh
�- PROJE / I I
I BASELM ,
CL
NgTES: MATCH LINE SHEET 9
1. TE OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH: 2012-
2. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET EASED ON NORTH CAROUNA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM,
NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (KAD63).
3. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988
(N AVD88).
4. CONTOURS SHOWN REPRESENT SURVEY DATA COLLECTED AT 1000 FOOT INTERVALS BY LFE-NC
MAY 2015. THE CONTOURS SHOWN ARE FOR GRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT MflENDED
FOR DESIGN.
5. SAND FENCING MAY BE INSTALLED BETWEEN THE CREST OF THE DESIGN DUNE AND A POINT 10 FT.
a SEAWARD OF THE TOE OF FILL.
LEGEND:
A 1 +80
USACE BASELINE STATION
— • —
2015 MEAN HIGH WATER (1.18')
—
2015 MEAN LOW WATER ( -2.05)
EXISTING CONTOURS MAY, 2015
•
NORTH CAROLINA BEACH
ACCESS AS IDENTIFIED BY
DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT
®
DUNE CREST
TH
-I
-I
-
- im
i
y
l
w
a
II
i
z
j ! -
I .
269 +49'
f -
II
• 1
E 3RD ST
274+65gh
�- PROJE / I I
I BASELM ,
CL
NgTES: MATCH LINE SHEET 9
1. TE OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH: 2012-
2. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET EASED ON NORTH CAROUNA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM,
NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (KAD63).
3. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988
(N AVD88).
4. CONTOURS SHOWN REPRESENT SURVEY DATA COLLECTED AT 1000 FOOT INTERVALS BY LFE-NC
MAY 2015. THE CONTOURS SHOWN ARE FOR GRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT MflENDED
FOR DESIGN.
5. SAND FENCING MAY BE INSTALLED BETWEEN THE CREST OF THE DESIGN DUNE AND A POINT 10 FT.
a SEAWARD OF THE TOE OF FILL.
LEGEND:
A 1 +80
USACE BASELINE STATION
— • —
2015 MEAN HIGH WATER (1.18')
—
2015 MEAN LOW WATER ( -2.05)
EXISTING CONTOURS MAY, 2015
•
NORTH CAROLINA BEACH
ACCESS AS IDENTIFIED BY
DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT
®
DUNE CREST
�- SEAWARD
TOE OF FILL
r.
�- BEACH FILL
BERM CREST
'Y
�- 2015 MLW
(- 2.05')
�- 2015 MHW
(1.18')
SEAWARD
TOE OF DUNE
LANDWARD
LIMIT OF FILL
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
2
H —
0 100 200
GRAPHIC SCALE IN rT
VAIL Y I ` IF'IILX1
J
H
(4)
w
7
O
x
(L
Za
O?
~O
UJM3
W
_
0U�
a =Z
=pa
J Z J
0 U.
u
O�
J W m
x0:
rSJ_, O
W
0
J
J
Y
K
�a
z:
y
O
z=
z
po
c 6
u
I �
8125/15
3Y:
GK
r11 NU.
9947
IEET:
8 of 24

MATCH LINE SHEET 8
11
! II
i
11
�I
Z 1
E7NDST
26t40 1 t
- -j j
—- I PROJECT J.
---• - — BASELiN
It
. 7-Ij
99 .r
I
1 ST ST
.e ok
i
�I
C
:I
.�I
It - : 'I
t
2'34 +99L
_ NOTES: MATCH LINE SHEET 10
1. UAIt OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH: 2012
2 COORDINATES ARE N FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA. STATE PLAN COORDMIATE SYSTEM.
NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD83).
3. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE N FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AA*3;tr- N VERTICAL DATUM OF 1986
1(NAVD8%
4. CONTOURS SHOWN REPRESENT SURVEY DATA COLLECTED AT 1000 FOOT INTERVALS BY CPE44C
MAY, 2015. THE CONTOURS SHOWN ARE FOR GRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT INTENDED
FOR DESIGN.
5. SAND FENCNG MAY BE INSTALLED BETWEEN THE CREST OF THE DESIGN DUNE AND A POINT 10 FT.
a SEAWARD OF THE TOE OF FLl_
LEGEND:
1 +80
USACE BASELINE STATION
— • • —
2015 MEAN HIGH WATER (1.18')
—
2015 MEAN LOW WATER (- 2.06)
-15 -
EXISTING CONTOURS MAY, 2015
NORTH CAROLINA BEACH
i
ACCESS AS IDENTIFIED BY
DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT
®
DUNE CREST
n
1
1
i
LANDWAR
LIMIT OF F LL
0 100 200
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
VAIL
r Ir n
l �
�1
H
U
W
n
O
w
(L
za
OJ
~ °
uj 3
vM
pca w i5
aIz
zog
JZJ
uj
Ozx
yVW
J w m
J
Jp
w
p
J
Y
A
�6
� GC
tl�
O
U
z=
r
o $
iY.-
GK
,LAIM NU.,'
149947
EE T:
9 of 24
/—
SEAWARD
TOE OF FILL
�-
BEACH FILL
BERM CREST
2015 MLW
(- 2.05')
2015 MHW
SEAWARD
TOE OF DUNE
ATLANPC
OCEAN
1
1
i
LANDWAR
LIMIT OF F LL
0 100 200
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
VAIL
r Ir n
l �
�1
H
U
W
n
O
w
(L
za
OJ
~ °
uj 3
vM
pca w i5
aIz
zog
JZJ
uj
Ozx
yVW
J w m
J
Jp
w
p
J
Y
A
�6
� GC
tl�
O
U
z=
r
o $
iY.-
GK
,LAIM NU.,'
149947
EE T:
9 of 24

MATCH LINE SHEET 9
.4
_ I I
- PROJECT ! -I
� • � l3A�ELINE ""�"` I
�294+92 •
_ ll
.I
ij� ,
1
i Z �r i
tiWDtIV4 JON
in
' AM j!
1p
7- -
I'
A .►r, +4,
a � .
F I
_ NOTES: MATCH LINE SHEET 11
`
�&I. UA i I_ OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH: 2012.
2 COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COOR( HATE SYSTEM
NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1963 (44D83).
3. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE N FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1966
(NAVD88�
4. CONTOURS SHOWN REPRESENT SURVEY DATA COLLECTED AT 1000 FOOT INTERVALS BY CPE•NC
MAY. 2015. THE CONTOURS SHOWN ARE FOR GRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT INTENDED
FOR DESKaK
5, SAND FENCING MAY BE INSTALLED BETWEEN THE CREST OF THE DESIGN DUNE AND A PONT 10 FT.
a SEAWARD OF THE TOE OF FILL
LEGEND:
p 1 +80
USACE BASELINE STATION
— • • —
2015 MEAN HIGH WATER (1.18')
2015 MEAN LOW WATER (- 2.05')
x-15^
EXISTING CONTOURS MAY, 2015
— — — —
MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY
®
DUNE CREST
SEAWARD
TOE OF FILL
BEACH FILL
BERM CREST
2015 MLW
(- 2.05')
2015 MHW
(1.18')
SEAWARD
TOE OF DUNE
ATLANTIC
OCEAN
LANDWARD
LIMIT OF FILL
I?
0 100 200
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
UAIL 1'
r M ION
i
r
I-
V
W
3
d
z�
o?
F -'
U0
A
ou >
xmz
9L
ZOO
J Z J
cc
ozx
y0O�
JWm
_IL
J
J
J
Y
L�
�r
W
M�
� g
O �
u
825115
IY:
GK
xw No..�
149947
MT.-
100(24

CORAL
MATCH LINE SHEET 10
�T
13P15E INE
I
314 +88 77
I .ids
I WINDSONG CT.
Imo'- -- � '� '"� s � �`-�■
- �EI
cy �I
w x ;
a VOL-� i
ASHVILLE DR BEACH ACCESS ry I
> :I
- - -' =now=
X320 +05 I
— - M I
VE.
i
1'+97 }
FORREST L. ETT
IU'IO N V IKLAN000.* TRIL I i
KILL DEVIL HILLS. N.C. 211848
oll
ryAT #6 • s► I
a I ' 9 4W _r � .....�....�, I I
rNOT� .. .
1. UA 1 C>r AERIA! PHOTOGRAPH: 2012.
= 2. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE COORDINATE SYSTEM.
NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (IAMB
3. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988
Y (NAVD881.
g 4. CONTOURS SHOWN REPRESENT SURVEY DATA COLLECTED AT 1000 FOOT INTERVALS BY CPE-NC
R MAY, 2015. THE CONTOURS SHOWN ARE FOR GRAPHICAL PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT "TENDED
FOR DESIGN.
5. SAND FENCING MAY BE INSTALLED BETWEEN THE CREST OF THE DESIGN DUNE AND A POINT 10 FT.
SEAWARD OF THE TOE OF FILL
N
U
0 100 u 200 w
I
O
R GRAPHIC SCAL IN FT
11 a
a
OJ
~O
3
w
SEAWAR p u >
TOE OF F LL CL
g
ATLANTIC ? z
OCEAN
OZ=
2015 MLW N v a
(- 2.05') m v w
J w
x
2015 MHW J o
w
0
` J
J
_ Y
BEACH FILL
BERM CREST
LANDWAR
LIMIT OF FALL
I( ry�
STA.325 +61 N
SOOT RN
PROJE T IMIT W
Z Q
�m
a
s"
:_
LEGEND: "
a o Y
&1+80 USACE BASELINE STATION t
— • • — 2015 MEAN HIGH WATER (1.18') v q
2015 MEAN LOW WATER (- 2.05')
EXISTING CONTOURS MAY, 2015
NORTH CAROLINA BEACH SATE.
• ACCESS AS IDENTIFIED BY 8/25115
DIVISION OF COASTAL
MANAGEMENT 3Y:
VAI Idly lllil�ll o" GK
l 3 149847
f EET:
1 t of 24

PROFILE: STA. 189+87
25 - 25
—20— 1 YfY 0 —20
I J
W 15 - - — 75 0,
10— - , 7 12RJ.1' - 10
EL. 6.0'
H MHW yEL_t_78'
p - - - - - -- - - - �� - - - - -- i- - -- 0
_ MLWEL. -2.05 F
W -5- --5 W
w ���� 0O
-10- —r — _ -., . _ -1D IY
1f 0 160 260 360 460 560 600 700 8� -15 0 Z
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET) V O
WSW
F Q J
PROFILE: STA. 199+93 O V
2:: 25 I
CL 0
20 0
w 20— _ 1 f _� - 29.fi _ Z O J
w 15 — i ` `-0 _ - —15 W Z IL
t0-- J \ l 172.1' - -' to O _ tj
? I� El...Rq M O
5- - - - -- - - -- j- - - ----- - - - -t- -MHW EL_1_'__ 5 J
# - - -- - - - - -r -- - -
-- �-- .J W
0 —� ' MLW EL. -2.05 0 =
5 - -- — - — - -_ { J O
w \ juju
-10— -- - - -- -10
260 360 460 560 600 700 8ik
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
PROFILE: STA. 209+74
23 I 25
- 20 - - -- 2@:9�.... -- - - 20
R w 15— 1 55.0 — 15
u� -� —
> t 107.9'
Q> 10
5 s�
Q _ = " - - -- - - - -- MHWEL
_1_
C 18'- iE
MLW_- -2.05 0
T+- - -- -5
W y
LEGEND: 760 260 360 abO s� 68O 700 8W -20 1
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET) IV
— — — EXISTING GRADE MAY 2015 0 10 20 0
DESIGN TEMPLATE VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
- - - - - MEAN HIGH WATER LINE (MHW)
— — MEAN LOW WATER LINE (MLW) 0 100 200
NOTES: WS/15
HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT ly-
1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN
VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). U&iL dr _ GK
2. SURVEY PERFORMED MAY 2015, BY CPE -NC. J xw No.
3. NOT AN ENGINEERED OR CONSTRUCTION DRAWING, FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING ONLY. ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION �� a „ 49947
DRAWINGS PER ENGINEER. PROFILE(S) BASED ON 2015 DATA AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE. / 12 0124

b_
a
R
ZB
PROFILE: STA. 220+00
2 :, 25
20— 20.(r —20
LLJ 15— SL. 15.0' — 15
1+
Z EL. 6.0'
Z 5_ -5
--- - - - - -- -- � - - - -- ----- - - - - -- MHW EL. 1.18'
1- 0 MLW !EL. -2.05 0 H
w -5- \ O uj
-10- _40 w
IL
-15 - -15 2 Q
0
-20- ` — ^ - -20 V
W itN
W
25 u 160 260 360 460 560 �� 800' 0 v J rL
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET) E H O
�a. a.
2.. PROFILE: STA. 229 +83 25 2 Z J
J J
W —
'20— 4 _� 20.Pr - —20 OZ= LL
ui 15 f —`I iJL.15.� - -- t - - - 0
1
O 11�
10- / ✓ - �} }106 _ - — + - - - 10 W m
dr
I a
----- +--- --i - -- 1 -- r MHW EL_1_18'_ 5J D
0 MLW. -2.05 0 LLj
W J
to— - - -- -- - - -- -10 Y
-1 r u 160 260 360 460 560 600 700 BUD
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
PROFILE: STA. 240+42
2C - 25
20p 0` —20
w 15 FL-3S0 - —15 a
d
U.
1 11 $ EF
-10 se
Z I EL. 6D g
= 5. ---4 � - - - - - - _ - 5
-- - EL 1.18'
0 ---------- ---
MH1N_ � .
L- t- - 0
— MLWEL. -2.05
r
W
-10— - -- -- -10
1
LEGEND: 13 160 260 360 460 560 600 700 Soo-15
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET) g
— — — EXISTING GRADE MAY 2015 0 10 2
DESIGN TEMPLATE VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
- - - -- MEAN HIGH WATER LINE (MHW)
— — MEAN LOW WATER LINE (MLW)
0 100 200 DATE:
NOTES: 6/25/15
1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT 1Y.
w
VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). wit er GK
2. SURVEY PERFORMED MAY 2015, BY CPE -NC. �OW NO.
3. NOT AN ENGINEERED OR CONSTRUCTION DRAWING. FOR ^
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING ONLY. ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION �} ! },I� 149947
DRAWINGS PER ENGINEER. PROFILE(S) BASED ON 2015 DATA AND ARE / 1 t�`� SPET
SUBJECT TO CHANGE. 130124

PROFILE: STA. 249+82
23 25
-
-20- / _ -20
W15- / \1` - -15
EL. 6.0'
O 5 - 5
----------- - - - - -r \ �� -� —
0 �- \ �MLW�EL. -2.05
W ` 1
--lo
1 1 160 260 360 460 560 600 700 -15
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
PROFILE: STA. 260+17
2-- 25
ui Is-
10-
z
Z 5-
O
>Q P
J S
W
-10
17 U 16o 260 360 460 560 600
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
PROFILE: STA. 269+49
2Z
„20 --
W /�
d � 11
> 10-
z
O MFNV - - - - -- - - -- \t -- -- 1
Q 0 MlW 2 E . -2.05
J
W
•10 --
-1C U 160 260 360 460 560 800
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
LEGEND:
— — — EXISTING GRADE MAY 2015
DESIGN TEMPLATE
- - - -- MEAN HIGH WATER LINE (MHW)
MEAN LOW WATER LINE (MLW)
NOTES:
1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN
VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88).
2. SURVEY PERFORMED MAY 2015, BY CPE -NC.
3. NOT AN ENGINEERED OR CONSTRUCTION DRAWING, FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING ONLY. ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION
DRAWINGS PER ENGINEER. PROFILE(S) BASED ON 2015 DATA AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
15
10
5
0
- -10
-15
700 800
25
-- - 20
—- 15
-10
--5
- - - --- 0
-15
700 8w
0 10 20
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
0 100 200
HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
UAl 1�r
V 1
N
U
W
O
Ir
CL
Z
FJ
VOy
�W
0 a:
CK
IL C
io°;
J=J
W
o ' x
Jt1m
JW
W 0
O
J
Y
pM
i
Q
RR:
8@5!15
3Y:
GK
!�Am N0.
149947
1401`24
-----
- ---
- - - --
- - --
_ --
_j --
MHW
----
EL 1.1-
- --
-
17 U 16o 260 360 460 560 600
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
PROFILE: STA. 269+49
2Z
„20 --
W /�
d � 11
> 10-
z
O MFNV - - - - -- - - -- \t -- -- 1
Q 0 MlW 2 E . -2.05
J
W
•10 --
-1C U 160 260 360 460 560 800
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
LEGEND:
— — — EXISTING GRADE MAY 2015
DESIGN TEMPLATE
- - - -- MEAN HIGH WATER LINE (MHW)
MEAN LOW WATER LINE (MLW)
NOTES:
1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN
VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88).
2. SURVEY PERFORMED MAY 2015, BY CPE -NC.
3. NOT AN ENGINEERED OR CONSTRUCTION DRAWING, FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING ONLY. ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION
DRAWINGS PER ENGINEER. PROFILE(S) BASED ON 2015 DATA AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
15
10
5
0
- -10
-15
700 800
25
-- - 20
—- 15
-10
--5
- - - --- 0
-15
700 8w
0 10 20
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
0 100 200
HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
UAl 1�r
V 1
N
U
W
O
Ir
CL
Z
FJ
VOy
�W
0 a:
CK
IL C
io°;
J=J
W
o ' x
Jt1m
JW
W 0
O
J
Y
pM
i
Q
RR:
8@5!15
3Y:
GK
!�Am N0.
149947
1401`24

r.
EE
t-
R
se
W 15- I 5
EL 8.0'
Z
O MHW 1.18 - L - -_ _
Q MLW � E -2.05 �.
-10-
-1r
1uo
260 360 460 560 660 700 800 9W -15
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
PROFILE: STA. 299+92
2£ j 25
20- -- - - - - 290(3' + -... -- 20
W uj -
,I-
LL 15- - + - ¢ - -- 15
b t �1
Q> -10
Z r y 9 '.2' EL. 8.Q
Z 5- - - - -- -5
O
-- r - - - - .r - - - --
0 MfM/ '- -1 -1�- --- - - - - -- ;c - - -- L
>< MLW - L• E -2.05 0 --� I- -1--
J.5-
w
-1r 2w 360 460 500 600 T00 B00 900 10()0-15
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
LEGEND:
— — — EXISTING GRADE MAY 2015
DESIGN TEMPLATE
- - - -- MEAN HIGH WATER LINE (MHW)
— — MEAN LOW WATER LINE (MLW)
NOTES:
0 10 0
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
0 100 0
HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN
VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). unit er
2. SURVEY PERFORMED MAY 2015, BY CPE -NC.
3. NOT AN ENGINEERED OR CONSTRUCTION DRAWING, FOR rte.
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING ONLY. ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION t4
DRAWINGS PER ENGINEER. PROFILE(S) BASED ON 2015 DATA AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
H
V
W
n
0
IL
Z0(
Fi
00
uj�
�W
H J
0VLL
a��
z0�
3yZZJ
FW
Z
001
mom
J_W
S=am
W 0
D
J
J
Y
i
DATE-
8r2&15
3Y:
GK
mm NO.
149947
150(24
PROFILE: STA 279+81
23
25
20
-20
F
w
w 15-
FFi 1-5
- / 5
- 15
10-
—
` 1 85.2'
-�
EL. 6.0'
-10
5-
- 5
O MHW ■E1.1.18' - - - - --
L___ - -
- - --
MLW EL. -2.05'
\
w
�
-10-
-10
-15-
--15
-20 200 360
460 560 660 7&
Boo No
1000-20
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
PROFILE: STA. 289+99
23
25
20-
71 T ru 200
-20
W 15- I 5
EL 8.0'
Z
O MHW 1.18 - L - -_ _
Q MLW � E -2.05 �.
-10-
-1r
1uo
260 360 460 560 660 700 800 9W -15
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
PROFILE: STA. 299+92
2£ j 25
20- -- - - - - 290(3' + -... -- 20
W uj -
,I-
LL 15- - + - ¢ - -- 15
b t �1
Q> -10
Z r y 9 '.2' EL. 8.Q
Z 5- - - - -- -5
O
-- r - - - - .r - - - --
0 MfM/ '- -1 -1�- --- - - - - -- ;c - - -- L
>< MLW - L• E -2.05 0 --� I- -1--
J.5-
w
-1r 2w 360 460 500 600 T00 B00 900 10()0-15
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
LEGEND:
— — — EXISTING GRADE MAY 2015
DESIGN TEMPLATE
- - - -- MEAN HIGH WATER LINE (MHW)
— — MEAN LOW WATER LINE (MLW)
NOTES:
0 10 0
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
0 100 0
HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN
VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88). unit er
2. SURVEY PERFORMED MAY 2015, BY CPE -NC.
3. NOT AN ENGINEERED OR CONSTRUCTION DRAWING, FOR rte.
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING ONLY. ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION t4
DRAWINGS PER ENGINEER. PROFILE(S) BASED ON 2015 DATA AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
H
V
W
n
0
IL
Z0(
Fi
00
uj�
�W
H J
0VLL
a��
z0�
3yZZJ
FW
Z
001
mom
J_W
S=am
W 0
D
J
J
Y
i
DATE-
8r2&15
3Y:
GK
mm NO.
149947
150(24

30
25-
-20- —
w
W 15- - --
Q>10rl -
Z
Z 5- -
O MH-W - -- E
~Q MLW ■ E
�
-5 --
w
.10-
-1C
200
N
R
3
LEGEND:
360 460 560 600 700 800 900
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
- -- - EXISTING GRADE MAY 2015
DESIGN TEMPLATE
- - - - - MEAN HIGH WATERLINE (MHW)
MEAN LOW WATERLINE (MLW)
NOTES:
1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN
VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88).
2. SURVEY PERFORMED MAY 2015, BY CPE -NC.
3. NOT AN ENGINEERED OR CONSTRUCTION DRAWING, FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING ONLY- ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION
DRAWINGS PER ENGINEER. PROFILE(S) BASED ON 2015 DATA AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
30
—25
— 20
-15
-10
-5
- -5
- -t0
-15
1000
0 10 20
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
0 100 200
HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
y I Hy Ik'IIUN
H
U
W
O
Ir
CL
Za
Fi
U0N
UJ Ixw
~OU-
(y = 0
CL
w
Lu
z0IL
J z J
W LL
=ZU
y0Q
JUm
J W
r�
Jp
W
p
J
J
Y
a
c
b
i f?
It
Z3
o
v
s�
DATE:
8125115
3Y:
GK
:OMM NO.
149947
MEET:
16424
PROFILE: STA. 309+71
25
. 2-
-20- -
^
�- — t
- 20
w
w ,s—
LL
� — ` _t --
—,5
> 10l
'
10
I--
91.6' �+- EL. 6.a
z S-
- -
- 5
O MHW-- EL_I_18 -�---------- +- \ - --i -- 1 -
0
0
q MLW = EL. -2.05_
>
J -5-
- -r
- 5
w
I
10-
-10
1J2#0
(- I
360
460 560 600 700 8L 900
1000-l'
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
PROFILE: STA. 320 +05
30
25-
-20- —
w
W 15- - --
Q>10rl -
Z
Z 5- -
O MH-W - -- E
~Q MLW ■ E
�
-5 --
w
.10-
-1C
200
N
R
3
LEGEND:
360 460 560 600 700 800 900
DISTANCE ALONG PROFILE (FEET)
- -- - EXISTING GRADE MAY 2015
DESIGN TEMPLATE
- - - - - MEAN HIGH WATERLINE (MHW)
MEAN LOW WATERLINE (MLW)
NOTES:
1. ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE IN FEET REFERENCED TO NORTH AMERICAN
VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88).
2. SURVEY PERFORMED MAY 2015, BY CPE -NC.
3. NOT AN ENGINEERED OR CONSTRUCTION DRAWING, FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING ONLY- ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION
DRAWINGS PER ENGINEER. PROFILE(S) BASED ON 2015 DATA AND ARE
SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
30
—25
— 20
-15
-10
-5
- -5
- -t0
-15
1000
0 10 20
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
0 100 200
HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
y I Hy Ik'IIUN
H
U
W
O
Ir
CL
Za
Fi
U0N
UJ Ixw
~OU-
(y = 0
CL
w
Lu
z0IL
J z J
W LL
=ZU
y0Q
JUm
J W
r�
Jp
W
p
J
J
Y
a
c
b
i f?
It
Z3
o
v
s�
DATE:
8125115
3Y:
GK
:OMM NO.
149947
MEET:
16424

�CVC-14-14
9ry
0 sp
N 852000 4p
o Q
O
N 847000
DC C -14-13
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
g FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
31
72
VC-14 -12
3
2
DCVG14 DCV(
DCVG14- 0 0 B
3 �
pp DC 1470
4 DC C-14-11 5.0
C - 14 -98A VC `�
00 w,..9 - DCVG14.1�
c c -14-68 DCVO` -' 4- 25 vo
6 CVG�4-0 144
8 pC C -14 0
y�0 VG 4-43
1q-DCV 40-06 VC-14-4 4
32 VC-14 -4
1 VC-14 -4 -58.5 VC-14 BORROW
B 1V[
33 0 1 B' AREA A
14 -4511 34 ,5 23 ' VOLUME=
S 14-05 IC I 17,806,000 C.Y.
DC
11 VC-l"
ODCVC 6 f i 39 1
1
F
V
W
O
N 652M a
OZ
VO_
D
ug
a�a
w 4c
z
J
uj le
_
Z
000
_�Ir
J W
m
O
N 847000
O
2 40 G14-51 22 J
J_
DCVC- 1 7 DCV 14-3 0 21 Y
�G G14
A TLAN TIC
§ 0
DCVO- DCVG1 35 OCEAN
380
ODC 14571A
R 13 D
Sg® 19 a
A � C-14 0 1000 2000
DCV -54 , 37 XVC-14 -59
O
VC1* -58 O V 1,.60 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
t A? 14 v 36 ,0 LEGEND: �
VC-144. �' 0 VC -14.63 S� U MAXIMUM AFTER DREDGE
N 842000 V 142 ELEVATION (FT. NAVD88)€
O , BATHYMETRIC CONTOUR
ODCVC- 2
]C 1 TAR CULTURAL RESOURCE y
8 O O ® AVOIDANCE AREA (NO
VC-14-67 DREDGE ZONE/NO ANCHOR)
D C-14-03
15 1 E DCVG 0 CPE-NC 2014 VIBRACORES g
DCV O V 14-01 CPE-NC 2014 MAGNETICg
ANOMALIES
W 16 Ly_ /� 1 17 18 O CPE -NC 2014 SIDESCAN
NOTES:
A SONAR ANOMALIES
DAM
Q BORROW AREA COORDINATE 8/2515
1. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE ID (SEE SHEET 12) 3r:
w COORDINATE SYSTEM, NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1988 (NAD88).
2. BATHYMETRIC SURVEY PERFORMED JUNE - OCTOBER, 2014 BY CPE -NC. WiE dv GK
3. 3. ELEVATIONS ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL / - cwm No.:
DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88).
4. THE MAXIMUM AFTER DREDGE (AD) ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE THE MAXIMUM , . or ��• 149947
DEPTHS ALLOWED WITHIN THE BORROW AREA PER THE PERMITS AND �% �1 sue:
BASED ON THE AD SURVEY. f 17 d 24
70
Irp
7 D
Wr
D0 CVGI4 -08 W
V 410
Al ,
c c -14-68 DCVO` -' 4- 25 vo
6 CVG�4-0 144
8 pC C -14 0
y�0 VG 4-43
1q-DCV 40-06 VC-14-4 4
32 VC-14 -4
1 VC-14 -4 -58.5 VC-14 BORROW
B 1V[
33 0 1 B' AREA A
14 -4511 34 ,5 23 ' VOLUME=
S 14-05 IC I 17,806,000 C.Y.
DC
11 VC-l"
ODCVC 6 f i 39 1
1
F
V
W
O
N 652M a
OZ
VO_
D
ug
a�a
w 4c
z
J
uj le
_
Z
000
_�Ir
J W
m
O
N 847000
O
2 40 G14-51 22 J
J_
DCVC- 1 7 DCV 14-3 0 21 Y
�G G14
A TLAN TIC
§ 0
DCVO- DCVG1 35 OCEAN
380
ODC 14571A
R 13 D
Sg® 19 a
A � C-14 0 1000 2000
DCV -54 , 37 XVC-14 -59
O
VC1* -58 O V 1,.60 GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
t A? 14 v 36 ,0 LEGEND: �
VC-144. �' 0 VC -14.63 S� U MAXIMUM AFTER DREDGE
N 842000 V 142 ELEVATION (FT. NAVD88)€
O , BATHYMETRIC CONTOUR
ODCVC- 2
]C 1 TAR CULTURAL RESOURCE y
8 O O ® AVOIDANCE AREA (NO
VC-14-67 DREDGE ZONE/NO ANCHOR)
D C-14-03
15 1 E DCVG 0 CPE-NC 2014 VIBRACORES g
DCV O V 14-01 CPE-NC 2014 MAGNETICg
ANOMALIES
W 16 Ly_ /� 1 17 18 O CPE -NC 2014 SIDESCAN
NOTES:
A SONAR ANOMALIES
DAM
Q BORROW AREA COORDINATE 8/2515
1. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE ID (SEE SHEET 12) 3r:
w COORDINATE SYSTEM, NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1988 (NAD88).
2. BATHYMETRIC SURVEY PERFORMED JUNE - OCTOBER, 2014 BY CPE -NC. WiE dv GK
3. 3. ELEVATIONS ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL / - cwm No.:
DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88).
4. THE MAXIMUM AFTER DREDGE (AD) ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE THE MAXIMUM , . or ��• 149947
DEPTHS ALLOWED WITHIN THE BORROW AREA PER THE PERMITS AND �% �1 sue:
BASED ON THE AD SURVEY. f 17 d 24

i�
R
N
BORROW AREA COORDINATE TABLE
POINT ID
EASTING
NORTHING
3019370.9 !
854970.6
-01
2 I
3017204.5
853123.7
3 I
3017798.4
852448.2
4 I
3016995.7
851633.8
5
3016928.0
851150.8
6
3017357.5
850708.4
7
3018654.8
850392.9
8
3018932.5
850596.0
9
3019568.9
849757.4
10
3018120.0
848511.3
11
3018069.8
846700.6
12
3017289.0
846700.2
13
3017302.1 I
843966.8
14
3018139.0 I
842988.7
15 I
3017637.6 I
840084.1
16
3018653.3 I
839011.8
17
3019763.8 ,
838967.9
18
3020753.7 J
838966.2
19
3021081.7 I
844430.1
20 I
3020569.7 I
845124.3
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
BORROW AREA COORDINATE TABLE
POINT ID
FASTING
NORTHING
21
3021352.1
846205.8
22
3021047.1
846601.5
23
3022507.8
847829.8
24
3022106.3
849556.7
25
3021784.4
850590.2
26
3020836.5
851593.4
27
3021646.9
852335.9
28
3020574.6
853476.8
29
30198473
852740.9
30
3019168.0
853414.4
31
3019995.4 i
854247.1
32
30200953 I
849063.5
33 I
3019106.0 I
848168.8
34 I
3020217.4 I
847888.2
35
3019742.8 ;
845124.3
36 I
3019117.8
843436.6
37 I
3019748.5
843429.8
38 I
3018069.8
844635.9
39 I
3020197.4
846629.9
40
3019050.6
846678.1
i
NOTES:
1. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE
COORDINATE SYSTEM, NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1988 (NAD88).
DA I} By N
/ % l
U
w
O
X W
IL J
p?Q
Wes~
Q
0 IL) z
a�IX
WHO
ZOO
Jz0
w Q
z
OLW
NOQ
JW0
O
=Q�
J O
> m
w
O
J
J
Y
J
F
n .
z�
W
M3
O
z
3
p i
V
DATE:
8125!15
3Y
GK
-OMM NO.:
150440
SHEET:
18 of 24

P: Worth CarohrwalDARE COUNTY PROJECTWO15 Borrow Area Parmi6Ced1150440P BA -A XS.dwq - Aug 27, 2015 a 11:48am - howard.rejib
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
SECTION A -A'
A B -e'
At
-20
-20
Q
I
w
JUNE - OCTOBER, 2014
Q
BATHYMETRY
BY CPE -NC
I
3
40 q
4
o s
O
m 7
40
W
LL
I
> V v
LL
j j i -- --
>
>
W Q >
_ v \
Q
\a
—��
z
W/ 0 ��
-60�
�f
U
LJ_
-60
O
F-
>
W
r
w
MAXIMUM AD EL.
-80 —
MAXIMUM AD EL.
I
_ -68.0' NAVD
— -80
_ -65.0' NAVD
MAXIMUM AD EL.
_ -63.0' NAVD
MAXIMUM AD EL.
_ -58.5' NAVD
I
I
1
+
it
100
c
D
0 +00 20 +00 40 +00 60 +00 80 +00
100 +00 120 +00
140 +00 160 +00 170 +00
- -
DISTANCE ALONG
SECTION (FEET)
m
NOTES:
1. ELEVATIONS ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL
0 10
20
DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88).
i
2. BATHYMETRIC SURVEY PERFORMED JUNE - OCTOBER, 2014, BY CPE -NC.
VERTICAL GRAPHIC
SCALE IN FT
3. THE MAXIMUM AFTER DREDGE (AD) ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE THE
0 1000
2000
MAXIMUM DEPTHS ALLOWED WITHIN THE BORROW AREA PER THE
PERMITS AND BASED ON THE AD SURVEY.
HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
A
-5
$
COASTAL PLANNING d ENGINEERING
rme KILL DEVIL HILLS SHORELINE PROTECTION PROJECT
m
OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
p " o
'�°�"Sg1'°"°`"tO •' " ^'
BORROW AREA A CROSS-SECTION A -A'

a
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
SECTION B -B'
B
A -A' B'
-zo
-20
I II
JUNE - OCTOBER, 2014
Q
I BATHYMETRY :Y CPE-NC
ir
I
40 -
0
3 I - -40
W
j
IY
I I
W
m
u-
p o Ly
_3
m
0
O
w ".
4 > u I
1
Q
aO
Zs
O
W
_�
I I
w
MAXIMUM AD EL.
w
= -65.5' NAVD
-so—
I MAXIMUM AD EL. I — -80
= -58.5' NAVD I
MAXIMUM AD EL. I
_ -63.0' NAVD
-100
, 1 I 1 -100
0+00
20+00 40;00 60-00
DISTANCE ALONG SECTION (FEET)
0 10 20
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
0 1000 2000
NOTES: HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
1. ELEVATIONS ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM DATE BY
OF 1988 (NAVD88).
2. BATHYMETRIC SURVEY PERFORMED JUNE - OCTOBER, 2014, BY CPE -NC.
3. THE MAXIMUM AFTER DREDGE (AD) ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE THE MAXIMUM
DEPTHS ALLOWED WITHIN THE BORROW AREA PER THE PERMITS AND
BASED ON THE AD SURVEY.
v
W
0
a °?
Z�m
ozz
�JO
v0F
UA OUW
IL
WHO
ZOIt
W Z V
K Q
0Zi
y:)li
JV;
_
JG0
�j m
O
J
J
9
DATE:
9I25H 5
3Y:
GK
zomm No.:
149947
- -SMET:
20 of 24

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION DCVC-14 -23
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONL oDCVC -14-72 C
�1 m 19 S
DCV -14 -73 -52 -63.0 0 C_ 4-74
ODCVC -14 -22 _ _ p
-68 1.0 U(;VC 14-2 1A V
® � W
O
BORROW 22
-s4.0 16 ,7 ' Z a
AREA C DCVC - 14-25 p O z 3
N 90900p \ VOLUME _ DCVC -14-75 N 909000 V 0 >
\ 2,049,000 C.Y.
2 15 0 u
` NO DREDGE � j a � aJJ
AREA �� z 0 v
TLANTIC
OCEAN DCVG14 -77 m } Q
14 0 z
z
co 4 13 vzi00
JQm
D C -14 -26 D C -14-78 J G
W
Q Eo\ 5 -s5.o E' °
Y
^ D VG
0 500 1000 DCVC-14 -821 DCVC-14 -81 -58 DCVC -14 -79
GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT ? DCVC -14-83 O 'e 12
R LEGEND: D vC -14-84
O MAXIMUM AFTER DREDGE 23
a 66.0 ELEVATION (FT. NAVD88) DC pDCV 14-86 D C- 2i 11 p DCVG14 85
-64 BATHYMETRIC CONTOUR f6DCVC-14-87
TAR CULTURAL RESOURCE + 0--77 + &
® AVOIDANCE AREA (NO 40 X6'0 I m
u DREDGE ZONEINO ANCHOR) W t+ ?
14-18 DCV&-14 -28\h DCVC -14 -91 32
NO DREDGE ZONE v ,.pp DCV -90 0
Q CPE -NC 2014 VIBRACORES N000 w O
CPE -NC 2014 MAGNETIC _
ANOMALIES
DCVC-14 -92 DCJC -14-17
CPE -NC 2014 SIDESCAN p .�
O SONAR ANOMALIES 12 �
w
BORROW AREA COORDINAT _64 o
ID (SEE SHEET 16) -66
c DATE:
= NOTES: oan5r15
1. COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE BY:
w COORDINATE SYSTEM, NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD83).
2. BATHYMETRIC SURVEY PERFORMED JUNE - OCTOBER, 2014. BY CPE -NC. DATE BY GK
D
3. ELEVATIONS ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL _ — i i 7-omm No.:
DATUM OF 1968 (NAVD88).
4. THE MAXIMUM AFTER DREDGE (AD) ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE THE MAXIMUM* I i 5, SHEET:
DEPTHS ALLOWED WITHIN THE BORROW AREA PER THE PERMITS AND
�. BASED ON THE AD SURVEY. 21 0124

t'
N
R
Nee
�3
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
,FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
BORROW AREA COOL
POINT ID EASTING
1 2981154.0
2 2981154.0
3 2982388.3
4 2982388.3
5 29823883
6 29812961
1 12 7 I 2981247.1
8 2981664.6
9 2981664.6
10 l 2983469.1
11 I 2983469.1
2984454.3
I2984454.3
A 14 2983451.5
I 2983264.8
16 2983272.4
17 I 2984111.1
18 I 2984111.1
19 I 2982779.4
20 I 2982204.0
21 I 2982204.0
22 I 2982778.6
23 I 2982388.3
RDINATE TABLE
NORTHING
910671.3
908707.9
908708.4
907702.7
906756.8
906756.8
904958.1
904956.1
903135.4
903135.4
905545.8
906008.4
907703.2
907702.7
908708.7
909684.5
909684.5
910678.2
910680.3
910678.2
909684.5
909684.5
905552.5
NOTES:
1 . COORDINATES ARE IN FEET BASED ON NORTH CAROLINA STATE PLANE
COORDINATE SYSTEM, NORTH AMERICAN DATUM OF 1983 (NAD83).
u
w
O
X w
CL J
OZQ
J �
w ~
OVQ
Z
0: =O
CL I.- W
ZOO
]Zu
0:
OZw
IX
Wo
Jw0
=Q�
J_ O
> m
W
O
J
J
Y
�5
oe -
W V ;�
z=_
d J
O
�V
Z,
L � �
b Y
u
DATE:
08/25/15
3Y:
K
GK
iMiF Hv
:;OMM NO.:
�^ r
i7' 1 C
1
149947
SHEET:
22 of 24
i

P: Worth CaroYnaZARE COUNTY PROJECTS 2015 Borrow Arsa POMIMCadll SC440P BA -C XS.(wo - Aua 27. 2015 ® 11:49am - howaro.r"R)
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
MAXIMUM AD EL. sSECTION C -C'
_ -61.0' NAVD
N
5o C D -D' 4 E -E' Cl
a I 50
NO DREDGE o N N �
JUNE-OCTOBER, 2014
BATHYMETRY BY CPE-NC
AREA
Lo -�
4
w -60 — ° &.
ur
a
Q
? MAXIMUM AD EL. -
z _ -63.0' NAVD
70-
w
w I
_80—
MAXIMUM AD EL. —
-sa
_ -64.0' NAVD
0 +00 10 +00
20+00
4
DISTANCE ALONG SECTION (FEET)
^� m
>
>
w
l
o
o
>
\
3
1. ELEVATIONS ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL
r
o
2. BATHYMETRIC SURVEY PERFORMED JUNE - OCTOBER, 2014, BY CPE -NC.
3. THE MAXIMUM AFTER DREDGE (AD) ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE THE
U-
PERMITS AND BASED ON THE AD SURVEY.
0
w
- -70
— MAXIMUM AD EL. ui
= -64.0' NAVD
I:
40 +00 50+00
>I
DISTANCE ALONG SECTION (FEET)
^� m
l
NOTES:
1p
1. ELEVATIONS ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL
v
DATUM OF 1988 (NAVD88).
2. BATHYMETRIC SURVEY PERFORMED JUNE - OCTOBER, 2014, BY CPE -NC.
3. THE MAXIMUM AFTER DREDGE (AD) ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE THE
MAXIMUM DEPTHS ALLOWED WITHIN THE BORROW AREA PER THE
PERMITS AND BASED ON THE AD SURVEY.
MAXIM JIM AD EL
_ -65.0' NAVD
-80
-84
60 +00 70+00 80 +00 85 +00
0 5 10
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
500 1000
HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
w m A O < � COASTAL PLANNING b ENGINEERING E' KILL DEVIL HILLS SHORELINE PROTECTION PROJECT
T rn C m OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
DARE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA
BORROW AREA C CROSS - SECTION C-C'
.. j WR.1lIG -nM. K 2"m AK 11101 i9ltl9

!Z
co
LL
z L�f 0--
uJ
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
FOR REGULATORY REVIEW ONLY
-50
CULTURAL RESOURCE.
AVOIDANCE AREA
(NO DREDGE ZONE/
NO ANCHOR)
w
4 -60-
Z
0
-
w
J
w
MAXIMUM AD EL
_ -64.0' NAVD
-w
0 {00
1
SECTION D -D'
I-
0
O W
0 =4
moo
19Z
0
W
N
jzy
w O
=
=c�i
�OV
JV..I
JW
IQ�
Jo;
o lz
DISTANCE ALONG SECTION (FEET)
SECTION E -E'
JUNE - OCTOBER, 2014
BATHYMETRY BY CPE-NC
D'
4 I -50
f \ >I o I
Q uj
w(
0
uj w
MAXIMUM AD EL.
_ -63.0' NAVD
IMAXIMUM AD EL.
_ -61.0' NAVD
10+00 20+00 30+00 4(
E C-C' E' � m
-50 -50
JUNE - OCTOBER, 2014 Y
Q BATHYMETRY � a
W BY CPE -NC
Q Q
i
t./
a ao— w � W ao
w
J I MAXIMUM AD EL.
w = -65.0' NAVD
MAXIMUM AD EL. — MAXIMUM AD EL.
� — _ -65.0' NAVD I = -64.0' NAVD I — � � $
$ 0+00 10+100 20100 30100 401+00 45+00 2
0 5 10
VERTICAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT
0 500 1000 BATE:
08/25/15
HORIZONTAL GRAPHIC SCALE IN FT �,:
BY UlmWCRIP7k7N GK
149547
sHEEr:
246924
DISTANCE ALONG SECTION (FEET)
NOTES:
1. ELEVATIONS ARE IN FEET BASED ON THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATE
DATUM OF 1988 (NAV088).
2. BATHYMETRIC SURVEY PERFORMED JUNE - OCTOBER, 2014, BY CPE -NC.
3. THE MAXIMUM AFTER DREDGE (AD) ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE THE
MAXIMUM DEPTHS ALLOWED WITHIN THE BORROW AREA PER THE
PERMITS AND BASED ON THE AD SURVEY.

MAJOR PERMIT FEE MATRIX
Applicant: TOWN OF KILL DEVIL HILLS — Shoreline Protection Proiect
- Selection
Development Type
Fee
DCM %
DWQ %
(14300 1601 435100093 1625 6253)
(24300 1602 435100095 2341)
1 Private, non - commercial
development that does not
$250
100%($250)
0%($0)
involve the filling or
excavation of any wetlands
or open water areas:
11. Public or commercial
development that does not
$400
100%($400)
0%($0)
involve the filling or
excavation of any wetlands
or open water areas:
Major Modification to a
$250
100%($250)
0%($0)
CAMA Major permit
III. For development that
involves the filling and /or
excavation of up to 1 acre
of wetlands and /or open
water areas, determine if A,
B, C, or D below applies -
III(A). Private, non -
El
commercial development, if
$250
100%($250)
0%($0)
General Water Quality
Certification No. 3490 (See
attached) can be applied:
III(B). Public or commercial
development, if General
$400
100%($400)
0%($0)
Water Quality Certification
No 3490 (See attached)
can be applied:
III(C). If General Water
Quality Certification No.
$400
60%($240)
40%($160)
3490 (see attached) could
be applied, but DCM staff
determined that additional
review and written DWQ
concurrence is needed
because of concerns
related to water quality or
aquatic life-
III(D). If General Water
Quality Certification No
$400
60%($240)
40%($160)
3490 (see attached) cannot
be applied:
IV. For development that
®
involves the filling and /or
$475
60%($285)
40%($190)
excavation of more than
one acre of wetlands and /or
open water areas: