20052016 Ver 1_Complete File_20050113

DS - arc) i Lo
( DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
WILMINGTON DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 0-T
PO BOX 1890
WILMINGTON NC 28402-1890
December 22, 2005
Regulatory Division
Action ID No. 200600158 and State Permit No. 190-05
Town of Surf City
Post Office Box 2475
Surf City, North Carolina 28445
Dear Madam or Sir:

Reference your application for a Department of the Army permit to perform dune
restoration by hauling in beach compatible sand from an upland source and beach bulldozing
along the beach strand adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean from the North Topsail Beach Limits south
to Topsail Beach Town limits, in Surf City, Onslow and Pender Counties, North Carolina.
Your proposal has been reviewed and found to be consistent with the provisions and
objectives of general permit No. 198000291. Therefore, you may commence construction
activity in strict accordance with the attached special conditions and the State authorization and
the approved plan (enclosed). Failure to comply with the Federal and State authorization or
conditions of the general permit could result in civil and/or administrative penalties.
If any change in your work is required because of unforeseen or altered conditions or for
any other reason, plans revised to show the change must be sent promptly to this office and the
North Carolina Division of Coastal Management prior to performing any such change or
alteration. Such action is necessary as revised plans must be reviewed and the authorization
modified.
Questions or comments maybe addressed to me at the Wilmington Field Office,
Regulatory Division, telephone [phone].
Sincerely,
Henry Wicker, Project Manager
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
Enclosures
-2-
Copies Furnished (without enclosure):
Mr. John Dorney
Division of Environmental Management
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
1650 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650
Mr. Ronald J. Mikulak, Chief
Wetlands Section - Region IV
Water Management Division
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
61 Forsyth Street, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Mr. Doug Huggett
Division of Coastal Management
North Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
400 Commerce Avenue
Morehead City, North Carolina 28557
Mr. Pete Benjamin
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Fish and Wildlife Enhancement
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
Mr. Ron Sechler
National Marine Fisheries Service
Pivers Island
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
Mr. David Rackley
NMFS, Habitat Conservation Division
219 Fort Johnson Road
Charleston, South Carolina 29412-9110
Mr. Jim Gregson, District Manager
Wilmington Regional Office
North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, North Carolina 28405
D5-2.Z1t?o
0:i F
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
Raleigh Field Office
Post Office Box 33726
Raleigh, North Carolina 27636-3726
December 22, 2005
Mr. Henry Wicker
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402-1890
D
IEC282005
DENR. WATER QU 11Y
bt"tTLgI?DSANpSTpr,e,4 A
TER LEms.
Subject: Action ID #200600158, Town of Surf City, Onslow and Pender Counties, NC
Dear Mr. Wicker:
This letter provides the comments of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) on the subject
Public Notice (PN), dated November 22, 2005. The applicant, the Town of Surf City, has
applied for a Department of the Army (DA) permit to bulldozer sand from the beach to create a
sand dike. These comments are submitted in accordance with the Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act (FWCA) (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661-667d). Comments related
to the FWCA are to be used in your determination of compliance with 404(b)(1) guidelines (40
CFR 230) and in your public interest review (33 CFR 320.4) in relation to the protection of fish
and wildlife resources. Additional comments are provided regarding the District Engineer's
determination of project impacts pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-1543).
Project Area and Purpose of Action
The Town of Surf City extends for approximately seven miles along the central part of Topsail
Island, a north-south barrier- islands on the Atlantic Ocean. Pilkey et al. (1998, p. 171) note that
Topsail Island has a troublesome geologic setting along its entire length. The island is very
narrow and flat with no significant area higher than the 500-year flood elevation. Most of the
island lies within the 100-year floodplain. Hurricane Hazel which struck the southern North
Carolina coast in 1954 generated a storm surge of 9.5 feet on the island which has an average
elevation of nine feet (Pilkey et al. 1998, p. 171). A 1987 evaluation by the North Carolina
Department of Emergence Management indicated that the island would be largely underwater in
a category 1 or 2 hurricane and would be completely submerged in a category 3 hurricane
(Pilkey et al. 1998, p. 173).
Barnes (1998, pp. 184-187) describes the damage on the island created by Hurricane Fran, a
category 3 storm, in September 1996. After the protective dunes were washed away by
Hurricane Bertha in July 1996, there was little to slow the ten-foot storm surge. The tide which
swept over the island lifted entire cottages and floated them hundreds of yards into the marsh.
Six new inlets were carved across the island.
2
The PN states that the sand barrier was damaged by Hurricane Ophelia in mid-September 2005.
Approximately 20 to 30 feet of the sand barrier were lost. At a minimum the applicant estimates
that half of the barrier was lost. The hurricane waves left an escarpment approximately nine feet
high on the remaining portion of the barrier.
The PN notes that the stated purpose of the work is to rebuilt the barrier to the profile prior to
Hurricane Oplielia for protection against storm events. However, there is no discussion of what
resources require protection. Many of the homes in the project area are well elevated on pilings.
The PN does not indicate whether any resources are imminently threatened.
Proposed Actions
As a linear embankment of small rocks (sand) meant to block the movement of water (the
Atlantic Ocean), the proposed structure functions as, and is consistent with the definition of, a
dike. The natural location of any primary dune line would be landward of the sand dike since
global sea level rise produces "island migration", a natural process "by which the islands avoid
being drowned by the encroaching sea" (Pilkey et al. 1998, p. 41). Pilkey et al. (2004, p. 43)
state that sand piles created by bulldozers on Topsail Island are sand-dike features rather than
dunes because they "lack all the characteristics of natural dunes (for example, well-sorted and
stratified sand that supports the growth of stabilizing dune grasses)." It has been suggested that
Topsail Island has never had a large, continuous dune system (Pilkey et al. 2004, p. 44). The
area from the North Topsail Beach-Surf City town line to the south is characterizes as having
poor or absent dunes (Pilkey et al. 1998, p. 177). Therefore, the proposed bulldozing of beach
sand landward would not produce a dune system in the location dictated by current sea level.
Furthermore, the proposed structure would not have the geologic characteristics of natural dunes
and does not attempt to replicate the natural habitat features of a barrier island sand dune. The
work does not represent dune restoration, but is more accurately a form of dike construction.
The applicant seeks to rebuild the sand dike to its pre-storm dimensions. The dike would be built
to heights ranging from four to ten feet from the existing dry sand beach and have a 2:1 slope.
Sediment for construction would come primarily from bulldozing sand from the mean low water
(MLW) line landward to the existing scarps. Beach bulldozing is predicted to result in the
"relocation" of approximately 148,148 cubic yards (cy) of material. The PN states that project
would impact 25 acres of dry sand beach (6.2 miles in length by an average of 35 feet wide) and
66 aces of intertidal beach. There would an overall total of 91 acres of impacts to both the dry
and intertidal beaches. The PN does not specify a limit to the depth of sand which could be
scraped from the beach and pushed landward to form the dike. However, current state
regulations (15A NCAC 07K.0103) limit beach bulldozing to a maximum depth of one foot. If
bulldozing would not produce sufficient sand to build the dike, the applicant proposes to
supplement the material with truck-hauled sand from a commercial sand mine, Riverside Sand,
located in Chinquapin (Duplin County).
Issues of Sediment Compatibility
While the proposed sand dike may not replicate a natural dune, the material in this structure
would become part of the natural sand sharing system. The material in a natural dune, or even an
artificial dike, serves as a sand reservoir for the beach. A natural dune represents a "sand bank"
and beaches rely on the dynamics of the dunes for sustenance (Pilkey et al. 2004, p. 37). Dunes
are a primary source of sand to maintain the beaches. Sand composing the dike can be expected
to move onto the beach. Scarps seen at the toe of a dune after a storm are evidence that waves
have distributed sand from the dune to the beach (Pilkey et al. 2004, p. 38).
Since natural beaches provide important habitat for wildlife resources, the Service is concerned
that material directly or indirectly entering barrier island beaches should not alter the major
physical characteristics of these habitats. Material used for the dike should be similar to that of
the native beach since it will eventually be incorporated into the beach. The important physical
characteristics include sand grain size, density, shear resistance (a factor in beach hardness),
color, heavy mineral content, and moisture content.
Any sand scraped off the beaches for dike construction would certainly represent beach
compatible material. However, at this time the amount of sand, if any, that would be truck-
hauled to the dike is uncertain. Therefore, the physical characteristics of the truck-hauled
material must be evaluated for potential impacts for all species occupying the beach waterward
of the dike.
The PN contains a one-page Laboratory Sieve Analysis from Contractors & Engineers Services,
Inc. The analysis contains the result of grain size analysis, designated by a single sample
number, of material from Riverside Sand Co. We have also reviewed the supplemental
information from Mr. Steve Padgett, Building Inspector for the Town of Surf City, which you
provided by e-mail on December 6, 2005. This information describes the handling of material at
the Riverside Sand in Chinquapin, near Wallace in Duplin County. First, all topsoil is removed
from the area. The sand is then dug and loaded on to trucks and hauled to a conveyor. The sand
is loaded on the conveyor where it is run through screens and washed to get the right grain size.
It then goes onto a screw where it is sorted more and washed again. It comes out of a chute and
is loaded into trucks and hauled to the disposal site. These procedures would appear to yield a
fairly uniform product which should be free of organic material.
The Service seeks to ensure that sediment placements on potential sea turtle nesting sites, or
which may be transported to such sites, have the physical characteristics supporting nest
construction and successful incubation. One important characteristic is grain size. The grain
size analysis included in the PN shows that 82.2% of the material passed through a #30 sieve
(grain size 0.59 mm), 36.6% passed through a #50 sieve (0.30 mm), and 0.3% passed through a
#200 sieve (0.075 mm). Much of this material with a grain size in the range of 0.3 to 0.6 mm
can be considered as medium sand.
Recent work associated with permitting of a beach construction effort for North Topsail Beach
has collected data on beach characteristics. The composite grain size from 12 sampling stations
was 0.24 mm (Coastal Planning and Engineering, Inc. 2005, p. 22, Table 5.3.1). The truck-
hauled sand moving from the proposed dike onto the beaches is likely to introduce coarser
material, i.e., sand of larger grain size.
The Service has concerns about the color of the upland material proposed for beach construction.
Pilkey et al. (2004, p. 113) state that all natural North Carolina open beaches are light brown to
yellow-brown when viewed from a distance due to iron oxide in shell fragments. Your e-mail
also included two photographs comparing the color of the Riverside sand to sand from Surf City.
The color of the two sand samples appears similar.
4
Specific concerns related to sediment compatibility for the various fish and wildlife resources in
the project area will be presented below. However, the proposed dike is not likely to replicate
the natural sediment characteristics of a natural dune. The sand of natural dunes is consistently
finer (smaller) grained than that of the adjacent beach due to the facts that dunes are built from
sand blown landward from the beach and the wind generally picks up the smaller sand grains and
leave the larger grains behind (Pilkey et al. 2004, p. 18). If the existing beach consists of sand in
the range of 0.24 mm, a natural dune behind the beach would be expected to have smaller-
grained sand. Furthermore, the proposed dike would not have consecutive layers of windblown
sand which create the unique type of layering or stratification called "wind cross-bedding"
(Pilkey et al. 2004, p. 47). Natural dune stratification usually consists of hundreds of very thin,
alternating layers of quartz sand, shell fragment sand, heavy mineral sand, and some layer of all
three sand types.
Issues of Work Scheduling
The second major concern of the Service is the scheduling of the work. The PN does not discuss
a work schedule. However, an article ("North Topsail Might Get a Little Bit of Duplin County")
by Garth McGrath published in the Wilmington StarNews on November 25, 2005, reports that
North Topsail Beach, and presumably Surf City, hopes to have the material in place before the
"heart of winter storm season starts, usually in late January." Scheduling concerns for specific
fish and wildlife resources are presented below.
Federally Protected Species
The Service has reviewed available information on federally-threatened or endangered species
known to occur in Onslow and Pender Counties. The species protected by the ESA that are most
likely to be affected by the proposed work are the loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta), green
sea turtle (Chelouia nrydas), Atlantic Coast population of the piping plover (Charadrius
melodus), and seabeaeh amaranth (Anaaranthus pumilus).
Seabeach amaranth, an annual plant, exists adjacent to inlets, along beaches between dunes and
the high tide line, and in areas of extreme overwash. The plant helps to trap sand and build
dunes. The species is listed as threatened by both the federal government and the State of North
Carolina. While any plants which germinated during 2005 have gone to seed, both the
placement of truck-hauled sand and beach bulldozing would be harmful to Seabeach amaranth
seeds which would germinate in 2006, usually from April to July. The work would bury seeds
currently in the area and prevent germination. However, it is likely that the buried seeds would
be viable when the sand in the proposed dike is blown or washed away. The seeds may wash
back to the beaches or carried to other beaches by the alongshore transport system. While the
proposed work may be detrimental in the short-terns, it is not likely to have a long-term adverse
effect on seabeach amaranth.
Piping plovers (Charadrius melodus) of the Atlantic Coast population, designated as federally
threatened, are known to occur in the project area. Piping plovers nest above the high tide line
on coastal beaches; on sand flats at the ends of sand spits and barrier islands; on gently sloping
foredunes; in blowout areas behind primary dunes (overwashes); in sparsely vegetated dunes;
and in ovenvash areas cut into or between dunes. The species requires broad, open, sand flats for
feeding, and undisturbed flats with low dunes and sparse dune grasses for nesting. Piping
plovers from the federally endangered Great Lakes population as well birds from the threatened
populations of the Atlantic Coast and Northern Great Plains overwinter on North Carolina
beaches.
Piping plovers arrive on their breeding grounds in late March or early April. Following
establishment of nesting territories and courtship rituals, the pair forms a depression in the sand
generally on the upper beach close to the dunes (or in other shoreline habitats depending on the
portion of the range). This is where the female will lay her eggs. By early September both
adults and young will have departed for their wintering areas. To avoid adverse impacts to
piping plover nesting, work on the beach should not occur between April 1 and August 31. The
Service recommends that all beach work should occur outside the recognized piping plover
nesting season.
The Service has designated critical habitat for wintering populations of the species along the
North Carolina coast. The only critical habitat on Topsail Island is at the southern end of the
island. Based on our review of the PN, the proposed work would not include designated piping
plover critical habitat.
The Service believes that sea turtles are ubiquitous nesters along the coast of North Carolina and
that nesting habitat is present within the proposed project area. While all five Atlantic sea turtles
are protected by the ESA and may occur in the coastal waters of North Carolina, we believe that
section 7 can be limited to a consideration of the loggerhead and green sea turtles, both of which
are listed as threatened.
Sediment placement and bulldozing on the beach may have both direct and indirect impacts on
sea turtle reproduction. Such work during the sea turtle nesting and incubation season (May 1
through November 15) may result in the burial or crushing of nests or hatchlings. Reproduction
is also diminished through the disruption of nesting activity by heavy equipment working on the
beach. Such direct impacts can be avoided by scheduling all beach work during the period from
November 16 through April 30.
Beach construction can result in long-term, secondary adverse impacts on sea turtle reproduction.
Such impacts are associated with the use of material which has physical characteristics which are
significantly different from the natural, historic beach. While the truck-hauled sand would use
for dike construction and not placed directly on the beach, this material can be expected to move
waterward onto the dry beach used for sea turtle nesting. Sand is often moved from the upper
beach to the lower beach by storm waves, a process that flattens the beach (Pilkey et al. 2004, p.
34).
The color and organic content of beach sediments can modify nest temperatures and the nutrient
environment, which can result in an altered sex ratio of the sea turtle hatchlings. In addition,
sediments that differ from those of the native beach can result in beach compaction which may
increase false crawls, increase nest digging time, hinder gas exchange within incubating nests,
alter the hydric environment of the nest, and result in broken eggs from clutches deposited in an
egg chamber which is too shallow.
6
Overall, the proposed work has the potential to adversely affect piping plover and both
loggerhead and green sea turtles. However, several measures can be employed to reduce any
adverse impacts to a level which would not be significant. These measures include:
1. Ensuring that all sediment truck-hauled to, and placed on, the beach is similar to the historic,
native beach in sand grain size, density, shear resistance, heavy mineral content, and moisture
content. This conservation measure requires that the assessment of the physical characteristics of
the existing beach which do not reflect sediment placements of the past, but is an accurate
description of the native beach which is essential to normal sea turtle reproduction;
2. Ensuring that the color of the imported material closely matches the color of the historic,
native beach. Material to be imported for beach construction should be evaluated by an objective
criterion, such as the Munsell Soil Color Chart, and compared with sediment of placement area
or a nearby beach which represents the historic beach color;
3. Prohibiting the placement of sediment and beach grading during the piping plover nesting
season (April 1 through July 15);
4. Prohibiting the placement of sediment and beach grading during the sea turtle nesting season
(May 1 through November 15); and,
5. The applicant should take the necessary measures to ensure that escarpments which may
development from the high tide line to the base of the dike do not block access of sea turtles
from potential nest sites. As noted, removal of material in the intertidal zone may reduce the
width of the beach until a natural equilibrium slope is reestablished. The reduced beach width
can allow stronger waves to strike the upper beach and dike. This higher wave energy may
produce escarpments. Any such escarpments should be eliminated prior to the start of the sea
turtle nesting season, May 1.
The inclusion of specific permit conditions addressing these issues would result in dike
construction which is not likely to adverse affect the federally protected species which are likely
to occur in the project area. With such permit conditions, the Service would concur with a
determination by the District Engineer that the proposed actions are not likely to adversely affect
threatened or endangered species under our jurisdiction or their designated critical habitat. The
requirements of section 7 of the Endangered Species Act would be fulfilled. However, section 7
would need to be reconsidered i£ (1) new information reveals impacts of this identified action
that may affect listed species or critical habitat in a manner not previously considered; (2) this
action is subsequently modified in a manner which was not considered in this review; or, (3) a
new species is listed or critical habitat determined that may be affected by the identified action.
Service Concerns and Recommendations for General Fish and Wildlife Resources
In addition to federally protected species, the Service also has concerns about general fish and
wildlife resources that may be impacted by the proposed work. These include the potential for
harm to beach invertebrates which serve as a major food resource for shorebirds and nearshore
fishes. Many species of birds, including migratory shorebirds, occur on or near North Carolina
beaches (Pilkey et al. 2004, p. 125).
Among the two
potential sources of dike ?
scarps, the former is less likely material, truck-hauled sand and bu
is located an appropriate distance from the long
hauled from Riverside Sand in Du -tee environmental harm lldozing to eliminate
ocean. A portion
beach of the ' especially if the dike
material analyzed b plin County appears to have a lar trucker rain which _
what might be ex y CP&E this year. gar grai size thatahe exisin
considered as pected in a natural dune. The imported sand certainl
medium to coarse sand. However, the im Y appears lar g
ported material can still b?er than
on the other hand5 there of beach into the dike to is a concern that
month ern pushing, or scraping
consequences. The short- te Y esca , 148,148 c
Topsail Island rm conse rpments would produce y ri sand from 91 acres
have been described b Uences of beach bulldozin more serous environmental
bulldozing on) h T Y Peterson et al. g °n Bogue Banks, no
(2000 bue Banks was a reduction in the widi Oof tli One northeast of
' P. 373) found that the intertidal beach from th major change p
Pet roduced by
major dune was reduced from 29 ntertidal beach.
bulldozed the waterline at low tide to the baersonse tet al.
m (95 feet) in the area not bulldozed to 22 m
the beach and a reduction of 24%
pushin As noted by Pilke (7? feet) in the
area intertidal beach g it landward is a form of beach e osion. (2004
provides less habitat for beach invertebrates a p 51) removing sand from
shorebirds and nearshore fishes. The reduction in the width of the
and may result in less food for
Beach invertebrates live in the spaces betty
mole crab (Enierita tae
base for surf zone ftaPOi la) and coquina between sand grains. The swash zone is do
,crabs, and sliorebirdsam (DO1tax s
is closely linked with the sediment horebit urinated by
The health of theiE nerlta an the primary prey
waters surging up and down the beach-face. characteristics
crabs because these organisms d DO11 populations
ris dement tics of the beach, and ility of natural sea
the availab
within the s
asone, t h z do not actuall grain size is extremel
but rather vibrate their owe?`a into the beach as y critical to mole
condition in their immediate area. they change locations
sand with a This makes it easy for the appendages and legs e or create a "
sand"
sa mi nimu many m bexpenditure of energy. If the sand is too coarse, to penetrate o fine, burrow quic into k
the
burrow into the beach. y minerals (dark sands
contains similarly, ), mole crabs find it difficult or impossible well sorted,
impact Entet•ita numbers. significant alterations in beach-face
shorebirds and so If the proposed work reduces possible is
resources.
some near shore fishes would populations of beaclh nve eb ate Potential to
adversely affected due to a reduction in food
Peterson et al.
Banks in Jul (2000, p. 375.76) discuss the impacts
the abundan e of?ostqu1993 after of beach bulldozin Ton inApril beach in tot es macro-invertebrat
cti clams, there was a 37% rd
on Bogue
the bulldozed beach sections.
cuspate morphology Aril 1993.
These authors note that bull while the work increased
Of the shoreline and ors no al mole crab
Donax. dozing may have affected the natural
thereby changed the habitat value for Etttet-ita and
Ghost crabs (Qeypode gtiadrata il
food to higher trophic levels ) occupy the u
active (Greene 2p0?' p' 27 upper
and beach and contribute a si l
ghost crab burrows were references therein).
(Peterson et al. 2000 were, on average, 65% lower oil the bull it BOg e amount of
elimination of , p 375-76). This reduction was the con beach Banks transects
ghost crab burrows from the face of the bulldozed dozed beach almost c In
on the lower beach. sequence of an almost complete
Almost half of (, dune and over a 6080 reduction crab burrows on undisturbed beaches ore ,„ ,
coon
8
high beach, an area which became buried when bulldozing is done. The authors note that the
upper zone of the beach was converted by bulldozing from a gradually sloping intertidal beach of
fine sand sediment to a steeply sloping berm face composed of coarser, shellier materials that
were unconsolidated and incapable of holding a burrow. Peterson et al. (2000, p. 376) found the
natural berm face to be comprised of finer sediment, a condition also stated by Pilkey et al.
(2004, p. 49), less shell, and a greater degree of vegetative cover which held the shape of
excavations made by hand. Pilkey et al. (2004, p. 121) stat that ghost crabs tend to be less
abundant or entirely absent on bulldozed beaches.
There is a concern about the ability of natural processes to restore the habitat value of beaches
scraped to form the dike. Peterson et al (2000, p. 372-373) found that bulldozed beaches on
Bogue Banks regained the topography, or elevation profiles, of unbulldozed beach (but with a
reduced width). However, these beaches were on the same island where material had been added
approximately three years earlier. Cleary (2001) states that much of the shoreline in southeastern
North Carolina is "sediment starved." It is uncertain whether the alongshore transport of
material would be sufficient to restore the sand pushed off the beaches.
Peterson et al. (2000, p. 376) state that if the removal of sand to enhance dunes or to nourish
beaches creates higher wave heights onshore, then modified wave energy could have a "lasting
impact on beach biology." Scarping sand from the low tide line to the dike would remove sand
which serves to dissipate wave energy. The increased wave energy may be detrimental to some
beach organisms.
In light of these concerns and in order to preserve habitat values on the beach, the Service
suggests that beach bulldozing be eliminated as a form of dike repair and that truck-hauled sand
be used to construct an upland dike immediately inland from its present location. The remaining
portions of the existing dike would form the waterward side of the reconstructed protective
barrier. Heavy equipment could be used to form a more natural contour for the ocean facing
slope.
This plan would have the advantage of maintaining the existing width of the beach which serves
to reduce wave energy striking the dike. Constructing the dike with truck-hauled sand
immediately landward of its existing location would reduce our concern that the proposed
actions would be short-lived and require additional work in the near future. Pilkey et al. (1998,
p. 210) state that the simple bulldozing of beach sand into small mounds is highly ineffective as a
method of erosion control. These authors note that while bulldozing piles up sand, increasing the
height of the barrier, the process reduces the width of the beach, an effect observed by Peterson
et al. (2000, p. 373), and brings ocean water closer to threatened property. Artificial dunes erode
with much greater ease than natural dunes (Pilkey et al 2004, p. 50).
It is also noteworthy that the proposed work represents the exact opposite of standard beach
construction. Such construction normally proposes to add material to the beach in order to
protect development. The subject PN actually proposes to remove sediment from the beaches.
The work could result in less recreational beach for public use.
9
However, if the Corps public interest review should conclude that protection of the yet-to-be
specified development necessitates beach bulldozing, the permit should require the following
conditions:
1. No more than one foot of material, as measured from the pre-construction surface elevation,
should be pushed into the dike and no material is removed from below the mean low water line.
The latter feature is a design feature of the proposed work described in the PN. Such restrictions
would comply with current state regulations (15A NCAC 07K .0103). Pilkey et al. (1998, p.
210) state that bulldozing is often done waterward of the low tide line and to a depth greater than
one foot. Therefore, the permit should require measures to ensure compliance with these two
conditions, such as inspector(s) at the site during actual construction; and,
2. The work should occur during the winter months of December through March would
minimize harm to these organisms (Peterson 2000, p. 11). Such a schedule would also avoid the
combined periods when piping plovers and sea turtles are at greatest risk, April 1 through
November 15.
Summary
The Service does not oppose relatively minor repairs to upland dikes on barrier islands to
provide short-term protection for development which is imminently threatened. In fact,
protective dikes built entirely in uplands should not require a Corps permit and thus would not be
subject to Service review except in terms of impacts to federally listed species. Such dikes will
become increasingly critical as the sea surrounding the island rises and the island is prevented
from moving landward. However, in order for the Corps to do an adequate public interest
review, there should be a description of the development requiring protection and the magnitude
of the threat. Such a description seems essential in formulating possible alternatives such as the
use of sand fencing to gradually build up the protective barrier.
Sand dikes built entirely on uplands will impact some wildlife resources, but would have limited
impacts on the very productive area of the intertidal beach used by shorebirds and the upper
beach used for sea turtle nesting. As noted above, scraping 148,148 cy of material off the
beaches may be detrimental to food resources of nearshore fish and shorebirds as well as sea
turtle nesting. In order to do an adequate public interest review, the Corps should have a clear
picture of the societal benefits to be derived. Such benefits can be weighed against the costs to
fish and wildlife resources.
As noted above, the relatively large-scale beach bulldozing being proposed represents a threat to
the coastal resources of Topsail Island. For this reason we have suggested that this aspect of the
project be eliminated in favor of an upland, protective sand dike landward of the existing
structure built entirely with truck-hauled sand. Moving the dike landward is also likely to
increase its longevity by creating a greater distance from storm waves and maintain a wider
recreational beach for public use.
Regardless of the work eventually permitted, there should be a clearly defined construction
schedule. For the benefit of sea turtles, piping plovers, and important beach invertebrates, the
work should occur during the four-month period from December through March. The Service
recommends that the DA permit require that all sediment placement, bulldozin-, and grading be
10
completed during the December. through March period. With regard to section 7, the Service has
recommended five measures to minimize adverse impact to federally listed species that are likely
to occur in the project area.
The Service appreciates the opportunity to comment on this permit application. If you have
questions regarding these comments, please contact Howard Hall at 919-856-4520, ext. 27 or by
e-mail at < [e-mail] >.
Si r ,
Pete B amin
Ecological Services Supervisor
Literature cited
Barnes, J. 1998. North Carolina's Hurricane History - Revised and Updated Edition. The
University of North Carolina Press. Chapel Hill. 256pp.
Cleary, W.J., 2001. Availability of offshore sand resources for shoreline restoration in
southeastern North Carolina. Geological Society of America Southeastern Section
Annual Meeting, 2001 Abstracts with Program.
Coastal Planning and Engineering, Inc. 2005 (August). (Draft) Engineering, Geology, and
Geotechnical Investigations, Shoreline Protection, Town of North Topsail Beach, North
Carolina. CP&E. Boca Raton, Florida.
Greene, K. 2002. Beach Nourishment: A Review of the Biological and Physical Impacts.
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission. Washington, DC. 69 pp. + Appendices.
Peterson, C. H. and J. T. Wells. 2000. Bogue Banks beach renourishment project: Late fall 1999
assessment of benthic invertebrates and demersal fish resources in the offshore mining
sites prior to sand mining. Final Report prepared for Carteret County and CSE Baird,
Inc. 13 pp + Figures and Tables.
Pilkey, O. H., W. J. Neal, S. R. Riggs, C. A. Webb, D. M. Bush, D. F. Pilkey, J. Bullock, and B.
A. Cowan. 1998. The North Carolina Shore and Its Barrier Islands - Restless Ribbons of
Sand. Duke University Press. Durham, North Carolina. 318 pp.
-, T. M. Rice, and W. J. Neal. 2004. How to Read a North Carolina Beach - Bubble
Holes, Barking Sand, and Rippled Runnels. The University of North Carolina Press.
Chapel Hill, North Carolina. 162 pp.
cc:
Rebecca Fox, US EPA, Whittier, NC
Ron Sechler, NOAA Fisheries, Beaufort, NC
John Dorney, NC Division of Water Quality, Raleigh, NC
Jim Gregson, NC Division of Coastal Management, Wilmington, NC
Doug Huggett, NC Division of Coastal Management, Morehead City, NC
Fritz Rohde, NC Division of Marine Fisheries, Wilmington, NC
Steve Everhart, NC Wildlife Resources Commission, Wilmington, NC
Todd Miller, North Carolina Coastal Federation, Ocean, NC
Ted Wilgis, North Carolina Coastal Federation, Wilmington, NC
O?O? W AT ?'QG
o -c
Y
December 9, 2005
Town of Surf City
c/o Mr. J. Michael Moore
PO Box 2475
Surf City, NC 28445
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
DWQ Project 7 052016
Pender County
Subject Property: Surf City Beach Dune Restoration
Approval of 401 Water Quality Certification with Additional Conditions
Dear Mr. Moore:
You have our approval, in accordance with the attached conditions and those listed below, to temporarily
impact approximately 66.0 acres of the inter-tidal zone of Surf City Beach for the purpose of restoring the
vegetated dunes at the subject property, as described within your application dated October 20, 2005 and
received by the N.C. Division of Water Quality (DWQ) on November 1, 2005. After reviewing your
application, we have decided that the impacts are covered by General Water Quality Certification Number
3400 (GC3400). The Certification allows you to use the CAMA Major Permit when issued by the NC
Division of Coastal Management. In addition, you should obtain or otherwise comply with any other
required federal, state or local pen-nits before you go ahead with your project including (but not limited
to) Erosion and Sediment Control, Non-discharge, and NPDES Stormwater regulations. Also, this
approval to proceed with your proposed impacts or to conduct impacts to waters as depicted in
your application sliall expire upon expiration of the 404 Permit or C.-.NIA Permit.
This approval is for the purpose and design that you described in your application. If you change your
project, you must notify us and you may be required to send us anew application. If the property is sold,
the new owner must be given a copy of this Certification and approval letter and is thereby responsible for
complying with all conditions. If total fills for this project (now or in the future) exceed one acre of
wetland or 150 linear feet of stream, compensatory mitigation may be required as described in 15A
NCAC 2H .0506 (h). This approval requires you to follow the conditions listed in the attached
certification and any additional conditions listed below.
The Additional Conditions of the Certification are:
1. Impacts Approved
The following temporary impacts are hereby approved as long as all of the other specific and
general conditions of this Certification are met. No other impacts are approved including
incidental impacts:
Amount Approved (Units) Plan Location or Reference
Stream N/A (feet)
404 Wetlands N/A (acres)
Waters
(Inter-tidal Zone) 66.0 (acres) From North Topsail Town
Limits south to Topsail Beach
Town Limits
Buffers N/A (square ft.)
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington Regional Office Wilmington, NC 28405-3845
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recyded/101% Post Consumer Paper
Phone [phone] Customer Servicet-877-623-6748
FAX [phone] Internet h2o.enr.state.nc.us
NorthCarolina
'Natundil
ToN?n of Surf City
Pae 3 of 3
December 9, 2005
Violations of any condition herein set forth may result in revocation of this Certification and may result in
criminal and/or civil penalties. The authorization to proceed with your proposed impacts or to conduct
impacts to waters as depicted in your application and as authorized by this Certification shall expire upon
expiration of the 404 or CAMA Permit.
If you do not accept any of the conditions of this Certification (associated with the approved wetland or
stream impacts), you may ask for an adjudicatory hearing. You must act within 60 days of the date that
you receive this letter. To ask for a hearing, send a written petition, which conforms to Chapter 150B of
the North Carolina General Statutes to the Office of Administrative Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center,
Raleigh, N.C. 27699-6714. This certification and its conditions are final and binding unless you ask for a
hearing.
This letter completes the review of the Division of Water Quality under Section 401 of the Clean Water
Act. If you have any questions, please telephone Noelle Lutheran in the DWQ Wilmington Regional
Office at 910-796-7405 or Cyndi Karoly in the Central Office in Raleigh at 919-733-9721.
Sincerely,
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
AWKJwn1
Enclosures: GC 3400
Certificate of Completion
cc: Doug Huggett, DCM Morehead City
Jon Giles, DCM Wilmington
Henry Wicker, USACE Wilmington Regulatory Field Office
Noelle Lutheran, DWQ Wilmington Regional Office
Trentt James, DLR Wilmington Regional Office
File Copy
Central Files
Filename: 052016.dec
A J'AMA
Ir
I A-0
rg North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission P
Richard B. Hamilton, Executive Director
MEMORANDUM
To: Doug Huggett, Major Permits Coordinator
NC DENR/DCM
Cyndi Karoly
NC DENR/DWQ
Henry M. Wicker
USACE
P. O. Box 1890
Wilmington, NC 28402-1890
From: Steven H. Everhart, PhD
Southeastern Permit Coordinator
Habitat Conservation Program
Date: November 23, 2005
Q
DEi; 2 2005
! DENR - WAl ER U,JALITY
`
I,r-T? ?LNiDS NZ STOKfhYATER M'rH
RE: Town of Surf City, Dune System Repair, CAMA Dredge and Fill Permit Application and USACE
Public Notice Action ID # 200600158, Pender/Onslow Counties
Biologists with the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission (NCWRC) have reviewed the subject application for
impacts to wildlife and fishery resources. Our comments are provided in accordance with provisions of the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act (48 Stat. 401, as amended; 16 U.S.C. 661 et. seq.), and Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean
Water Act (as amended).
The project is located adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean within the town limits of Surf City. The waters in this area are
NOT designated as a Primary Nursery Area (PNA) by the NC Division of Marine Fisheries.
The applicant proposes to bulldoze sand from mean low water (MLW) landward to existing erosion escarpments to
repair the dune system to its original profile prior to Hurricane Ophelia. The proposed restoration dune heights range
from 4 to 10 ft from the existing level of dry sand beach with a slope of 2:1. If bulldozing does not result in sufficient
sand to repair the dune system, the Town proposes to truck in additional beach compatible sand. This project is
anticipated to impact approximately 25 acres of dry sand beach and 66 acres of intertidal beach. The pushing of sand
will result in the relocation of approximately 148,148 cubic yards of sand from the un-vegetated beach to the dune
system.
Mailing Address: Division of Inland Fisheries • 1721 Mail Service Center • Raleigh, NC 27699-1721
Telephone: [phone] • Fax: [phone]
Surf City Dune Repair
We have the following concerns:
November 23, 2005
• Topsail Island, including the town of Surf City, is home to a rich diversity of fish and wildlife. Its beaches
provide nesting habitat for threatened and endangered species including sea turtles and ground-nesting seabirds
such as plovers and terns. Additionally, many species of birds forage year-round for living invertebrate
organisms within the intertidal zone. The relocation and death of these invertebrates by bulldozing them to the
dune system will eliminate their availability as prey to foraging seabirds until their populations are re-
established in the intertidal zone.
• Moratoria exist for construction activities on the beach for nesting sea turtles (May 1 - November 15) and
piping plovers (April 1- July 15). These must be observed.
• There is a current mechanism that allows emergency beach construction activities to occur if homes are
imminently threatened by erosion or swell. The Town and individual property owners have already
exercised this mechanism. Hence, there does not appear to be a strong reason why this project should be
accomplished.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this application. If you have any questions or require
additional information regarding these comments, please call me at [phone].
cc: Joanne Steenhuis, NCDWQ
Fritz Rohde, NCDMF
Jon Giles, NCDCM
Howard Hall, USFWS
'r c
US Army . Corps PUBLIC NOTICE
Of Engineers
Wilmington District
Issue Date: November 22, 2005
Comment Deadline: December 8, 2005
Corps Action ID M 200600158
All interested parties are hereby advised that the Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
(Corps) has received an application for work within jurisdictional waters of the United
States. Specific plans and location information are described below and shown on the
attached plans. This Public Notice and all attached plans are also available on the
Wilmington District Web Site at www.saw.usace.army.mil/wetlands
Applicant: Town of Surf City R2?F0 " m D
D
Post Office Box 2475 NOV 3 0 2005
Surf City, North Carolina 28445
DENR - WATER QUALITY
Authority Vi-E ,fr'DSANDSTORIMATERBRANCH
The Corps will evaluate this application and a decide whether to issue, conditionally
issue, or deny the proposed work pursuant to applicable procedures of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
Location
The project site is located along the beach strand adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean from the
North Topsail Beach Limits south to Topsail Beach Town limits, in Surf City, Onslow
and Pender Counties, North Carolina. See attached plans and drawings for specifics.
Existing Site Conditions
Surf City received severe erosion to the dune system during Hurricane Ophelia. The
Town lost approximately 20' to 30' of their protective dunes. At minimum the Town lost
the waterward '/z of the dunes. There is an average erosion escarpment of 9' along the
remaining dune system. The existing vegetation on the remaining dunes consists mostly
of American Beachgrass (flnunophilia breviligulata), Seaoats (uniola paniculata), and
Bitter panicum (Panicum anrarulum).
Applicant's Stated Purpose
Surf City wants to rebuild the dune system to its original profile prior to Hurricane
Ophelia for protection against storm events.
Project Description
Surf City is proposing to bulldoze sand from mean low water (MLW) landward to the
existing erosion escarpments to repair the dune system to its original profile. They
propose to restore the dunes to heights ranging from 4' to 10' from the existing level of
the dry sand beach with a 2:1 slope. If the bulldozing does not result in sufficient sand to
repair the dunes to their original dimensions then the Town is proposing to truck in
additional beach compatible sand. The trucked in beach compatible sand will come from
Riverside Sand in Chinquapin, North Carolina. See attached documents for sand
analysis.
The project will impact approximately 91 acres of the dry sand beach and the intertidal
zone. Of this area, the dry sand beach is approximately 6.2 miles long and averages
approximately 35' in width, or approximately 25 acres. The remainder of the 91-acre
project area is within the inter-tidal zone. The beach bulldozing will result in the
relocation of approximately 148, 148 cubic yards of sand from the unvegetated beach to
the dune system.
Other Required Authorizations
This notice and all applicable application materials are being forwarded to the appropriate
State agencies for review. The Corps will generally not make a final permit decision
until the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) issues, denies, or waives
State certification required by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (PL 92-500). The
receipt of the application and this public notice in the NCDWQ Central Office in Raleigh
serves as application to the NCDWQ for certification. A waiver will be deemed to occur
if the NCDWQ fails to act on this request for certification within sixty days of the date of
the receipt of this notice in the NCDWQ Central Office. Additional information
regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be reviewed at the NCDWQ Central
Office, 401 Oversight and Express Permits Unit, 2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27604-2260. All persons desiring to make comments regarding the
application for certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act should do so in
writing delivered to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), 1650 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650 Attention: Ms Cyndi Karoly (all
other projects) by December 13, 2005.
The applicant has not provided to the Corps, a certification statement that his/her
proposed activity complies with and will be conducted in a manner that is consistent with
the approved North Carolina Coastal Zone Management Program. Pursuant to 33 CFR
325.2(b)(2), the Corps can not issue a permit for the proposed work until the applicant
submits such a certification to the Corps and the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management (NCDCM), and the NCDCM notifies the Corps that it concurs with the
applicant's consistency certification.

Essential Fish Habitat
This notice initiates the Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation requirements of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The Corps' initial
determination is that the proposed project may adversely impact EFH or associated
fisheries managed by the South Atlantic or Mid Atlantic Fishery Management Councils
or the National Marine Fisheries Service. These impacts to EFH include destruction of
habitat at the fill site, siltation plums, erosion and sedimentation issues, time frame work
is performed (fish moratoriums) and water quality issues.
Cultural Resources
The Corps has consulted the latest published version of the National Register of Historic
Places and is not aware that any registered properties, or properties listed as being
eligible for inclusion therein are located within the project area or will be affected by the
proposed work. Presently, unknown archeological, scientific, prehistoric, or historical
data may be located within the project area and/or could be affected by the proposed
work.
Endangered Species
The Corps has reviewed the project area, examined all information provided by the
applicant and consulted the latest North Carolina Natural Heritage Database. Based on
available information, the Corps has determined there may be species listed as threatened
or endangered or their critical habitat formally designated pursuant to the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA) within the project area. A final determination on the effects
of the proposed project will be made upon additional review of the project and
completion of any necessary biological assessment and/or consultation with the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service and/or National Marine Fisheries Service.
Evaluation
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable
impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity on the public interest.
That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of
important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the
proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors
which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including the cumulative effects
thereof; among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental
concerns, wetlands, historic properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain
values (in accordance with Executive Order 11988), land use, navigation, shoreline
erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy
needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property
ownership, and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. For activities involving
the discharge of dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, the evaluation of
the impact of the activity on the public interest will include application of the
Environmental Protection Agency's 404(b)(1) guidelines.
Commenting Information
The Corps is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State and local agencies and
officials; Indian Tribes and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the
impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the
Corps to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this proposal.
To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species,
historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects and the other public
interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental
Assessment (EA) and/or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Comments are also used to determine the
need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed
activity.
Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice,
that a public hearing be held to consider the application. Requests for public hearings
shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing. Requests for a
public hearing shall be granted, unless the District Engineer determines that the issues
raised are insubstantial or there is otherwise no valid interest to be served by a hearing.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will be received
by the Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, until 5pm, December 8, 2005.
Comments should be submitted to Henry Wicker, Project Manager for this project.
Z
o z.
Wp o
0
N
U J ?-
W? o
U
O

?
t TOPSAIL SOUT'Dl?? ti .'.
TOPSAIL SOUND

- c?^sT

.S? ? i
z =
TER7?'{tiE
1lA jW1Yl o o
•
:,
Clrr 1
Y I SwINO BRlDOE
l
2 ?? ! 0•u ?•?Q
STUA41•
? SURF CITY
0 I
I
to
' i
7.
?If
y NORTH
yi u
c 2 ,D
O L
1 =o
1 r.
4 6
0
s X
1^ =
Hw0. +i , I
e
r r:
I I I
`yn S; [?'

4 t

_
M O
+ an a?P

ESC STEER ._ ? '
° °. f ' 1 a R/DUNES
`

+
i CT_ Mb 'AK DR
`u_S VV S
.c>10
e o~.L ° WORE

D- - ti `? - ° J

RIDGC Z JC HNICCA
AD.

a
'o
`w. rt•DR :' - F
? 6
y
„'` . OeMp^ q ?E
D O 5AI NEW
SO LL ?,E G n' n .? r
DR
9? 3 Tp? l RIVaR DR 21D O D n <n?2-zm eft
m <__<? O< tw

J. u W W o (S
f BHOF,,. F Dp i -r R 1 -:Yma?a
N
?" DR pG` HU a,P O C ANAL sr
E
H•
1--?a--+a- o_ > ?o ?5.i16T?? 3E3) a a _ ` - oo".` Oo cf eaNlcC
m a ? m
y z? < ?Z .a- w -a.a... TO>S>IL ? _ MG-.a<?Sa VFN O
SURF u _: -•.. •? -- =?,:T
m 0 z I
` W m m = a i Y clrr o 0
PIER # BARNACLE BILL'S Z
2 m PIER
J
ATLANTIC OCEAN
3
t W "? T N ._ RE DR C/ fo f I Sr
Cil4175 ly D?? De -s b .-D u-aa--.cY_DQq +.
Oc ?IOCEAN city
11 W
S?O7CN?80NN •?,` u175 Pl ER
PIER 0 APPROX. SCALE IN MILES
E
0 1/A 7/2 7

TOPSAIL SOUND
J
> N
J
< to ? ?F
c7 0. O 'G+
u' V n O U D G((
' = p ??<blQNES
? hMMEp,m Y. vi. 1 C7_ _h.'
BLANC ENO l? ,p Dbti pi r?
v
U
'
-
Iz ¢ oTERR• _
S
tr._._.
U
st
J W °!JIW 0¢ SO r.. F
'~
w O r r J
m v
a h < U W

? f = wm
r
c

z

N
TOPSAIL SOU)?.DD?
c? ACaASrAL
W !I `I 1WATERY .?'CIT?-S o 0
I
IISWING BRIDGE w I
c, <
J SURF CITY J !?
1 ? = N
N p w w d, 00 1
~$ N Y d ?} I
?D$
' f
Op a p2
o . v, 3 r Ir.J
R RIDGE '= a:= ¢ .IENNIFER

¢RD 7
SI

5
$ Qp NEW 0
9 5 TDPS AIL• bR
,
F Z
a
RIV St

ER
D R
210 J Sr
^
l
tE 6.1 ?I .-1
`??\ 'nl N m, ?^
'
P (
L !
..
E w>,E'DR?_ ` U
??_. .... - j
S !.
SNORE DR >• >;
w N
?
aIL
Ow
?1 =-
`
P D
S_i
SR 1585) C= x
m.... lnl
`
N

> w
< CITY Lf.tl: S w

pj <. ..
?_
nyu
w
Zw
3 <pa c.>-[rte-II-7 SNOB DR's.
2?.x .- Z ¢ < o< o< "' a <
. ? yQ • w D - Y . Z I m,
TOPS aIt
¢-
? < >,w w.ui-:w W
•m?---¢.,?° w 1;1 z N ti SN_O_R
o<z< w<° ?-
a
J U W
n _= SURF
a ° <
< a x p :e u -' aCfiY ClMITS
z

CITY
m =

i BARNAC E BILL'S
v `._

I
•
P
IER .
IER SCOTCH
BONI
P
ATLANTIC OCEAN

fur a.-? 'j -e SA-ora:{- -o n enj e-Cf,
2e? Ol?
J

C7 APPROX.
n
1/4
n nl
? r
m

N G)r
_.., <
0 0m
Cn Z 0

RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
OCT 2 1 2005

i

'T
I ,
r
f.
-?
?V

1wn ??`. sP P
a o c- 4
I?

4 .t
U
? Z
Z Lr?
;j Z
r-
?u
U
(V ?
4-
U
O
In
O
N
Ln
to
W
N
m
Ql
O
Z
x
L_
uI
c
si
c
r0
a:
E'
O
u i
-0
c
Ui
N '.
-? i
v
uI
o'
<_
L
LABORATORY SIEVE ANALYJ+Z)
ACCUM.
STANDARD V.S.
SIEVE EVE PASSING SPECIFICATIONS
S_ SIZE
PETER D. CDQNNEl1? SR F.E. 121113
SEPl
12313

J

U.S. STMDAM SZVE SaE
100 4' 10 140 200
flD
50

70
pff
60

50

40
u

3

20

10
0
100
10 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.001
CaU?j SZE IN WLl MMERS
? yyp T BAR
00? QWfiSE I?DIUY f81E 9.7 i:SG
CONTRACTORS & ENGINEERS SERVICES INC.
P== P L_._A N T NA I X
CG,NTpA=R: RIVERSIDE SAND CO.
1pCAT10N: GOLDSBORO, N.C.
oomp-#^r K- DATE: 10/9/03
GRADATION REPORT

SOURCE OF MATERUTAL AT RANT I
1 , rr.? r
?In,
US Army Corps PUBLIC NOTICE
Of Engineers
Wilmington District
Issue Date: November 22, 2005
Comment Deadline: December 8, 2005
Corps Action ID #: 200600158
All interested parties are hereby advised that the Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
(Corps) has received an application for work within jurisdictional waters of the United
States. Specific plans and location information are described below and shown on the
attached plans. This Public Notice and all attached plans are also available on the
Wilmington District Web Site at www.saw.usace.army.mil/wetlands ^?QVD
D
Applicant: Town of Surf City 1?©? 2 9 ZQ05
Post Office Box 2475 ??sJ RQ Ei?Qw,r N
Surf City, North Carolina 28445 Sl?d4Pd .
Authority
The Corps will evaluate this application and a decide whether to issue, conditionally
issue, or deny the proposed work pursuant to applicable procedures of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
Location
The project site is located along the beach strand adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean from the
North Topsail Beach Limits south to Topsail Beach Town limits, in Surf City, Onslow
and Pender Counties, North Carolina. See attached plans and drawings for specifics.
Existing Site Conditions
Surf City received severe erosion to the dune system during Hurricane Ophelia. The
Town lost approximately 20' to 30' of their protective dunes. At minimum the Town lost
the waterward'/2 of the dunes. There is an average erosion escarpment of 9' along the
remaining dune system. The existing vegetation on the remaining dunes consists mostly
of American Beachgrass (Anunophilia breviligulata), Seaoats (uttiola paniculata), and
Bitter panicum (Panictun antarulunt).
Applicant's Stated Purpose
Surf City wants to rebuild the dune system to its original profile prior to Hurricane
Ophelia for protection against storm events.
Project Description
Surf City is proposing to bulldoze sand from mean low water (MLW) landward to the
existing erosion escarpments to repair the dune system to its original profile. They
propose to restore the dunes to heights ranging from 4' to 10' from the existing level of
the dry sand beach with a 2:1 slope. If the bulldozing does not result in sufficient sand to
repair the dunes to their original dimensions then the Town is proposing to truck in
additional beach compatible sand. The trucked in beach compatible sand will come from
Riverside Sand in Chinquapin, North Carolina. See attached documents for sand
analysis.
The project will impact approximately 91 acres of the dry sand beach and the intertidal
zone. Of this area, the dry sand beach is approximately 6.2 miles long and averages
approximately 35' in width, or approximately 25 acres. The remainder of the 91-acre
project area is within the inter-tidal zone. The beach bulldozing will result in the
relocation of approximately 148, 148 cubic yards of sand from the unvegetated beach to
the dune system.
Other Required Authorizations
This notice and all applicable application materials are being forwarded to the appropriate
State agencies for review. The Corps will generally not make a final permit decision
until the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) issues, denies, or waives
State certification required by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (PL 92-500). The
receipt of the application and this public notice in the NCDWQ Central Office in Raleigh
serves as application to the NCDWQ for certification. A waiver will be deemed to occur
if the NCDWQ fails to act on this request for certification within sixty days of the date of
the receipt of this notice in the NCDWQ Central Office. Additional information
regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be reviewed at the NCDWQ Central
Office, 401 Oversight and Express Permits Unit, 2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27604-2260. All persons desiring to make comments regarding the
application for certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act should do so in
writing delivered to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), 1650 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650 Attention: Ms Cyndi Karoly (all
other projects) by December 13, 2005.
The applicant has not provided to the Corps, a certification statement that his/her
proposed activity complies with and will be conducted in a manner that is consistent with
the approved North Carolina Coastal Zone Management Program. Pursuant to 33 CFR
325.2(b)(2), the Corps can not issue a permit for the proposed work until the applicant
submits such a certification to the Corps and the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management (NCDCM), and the NCDCM notifies the Corps that it concurs with the
applicant's consistency certification.
Essential Fish Habitat
This notice initiates the Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation requirements of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The Corps' initial
determination is that the proposed project may adversely impact EFH or associated
fisheries managed by the South Atlantic or Mid Atlantic Fishery Management Councils
or the National Marine Fisheries Service. These impacts to EFH include destruction of
habitat at the fill site, siltation plums, erosion and sedimentation issues, time frame work
is performed (fish moratoriums) and water quality issues.
Cultural Resources
The Corps has consulted the latest published version of the National Register of Historic
Places and is not aware that any registered properties, or properties listed as being
eligible for inclusion therein are located within the project area or will be affected by the
proposed work. Presently, unknown archeological, scientific, prehistoric, or historical
data may be located within the project area and/or could be affected by the proposed
work.
Endangered Species
The Corps has reviewed the project area, examined all information provided by the
applicant and consulted the latest North Carolina Natural Heritage Database. Based on
available information, the Corps has determined there may be species listed as threatened
or endangered or their critical habitat formally designated pursuant to the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA) within the project area. A final determination on the effects
of the proposed project will be made upon additional review of the project and
completion of any necessary biological assessment and/or consultation with the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service and/or National Marine Fisheries Service.
Evaluation
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable
impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity on the public interest.
That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of
important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the
proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors
which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including the cumulative effects
thereof, among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental
concerns, wetlands, historic properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain
values (in accordance with Executive Order 11988), land use, navigation, shoreline
erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy
needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property
ownership, and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. For activities involving
the discharge of dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, the evaluation of
the impact of the activity on the public interest will include application of the
Environmental Protection Agency's 404(b)(1) guidelines.
Commenting Information
The Corps is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State and local agencies and
officials; Indian Tribes and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the
impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the
Corps to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this proposal.
To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species,
historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects and the other public
interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental
Assessment (EA) and/or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Comments are also used to determine the
need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed
activity.
Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice,
that a public hearing be held to consider the application. Requests for public hearings
shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing. Requests for a
public hearing shall be granted, unless the District Engineer determines that the issues
raised are insubstantial or there is otherwise no valid interest to be served by a hearing.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will be received
by the Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, until 5pm, December 8, 2005.
Comments should be submitted to Henry Wicker, Project Manager for this project.
J
Z
Ca z
W p 2
/ \ N
ill z T--1
UJ
W o
U
TUPSA
TOPSAIL SOUND oo,4S IL,DI??
f T' l a III IV.{T E . l'cttT uurts
0
J? J ' c _- •r i1ISWINC BRtDCE ST UArP
% SURF CIrY tQ NORTH
DG _m r
"n° U ? ?( a :,3? ez . n „ b';r J
7 ° G DvNES : Q NEw SO o E
?4 YNl?.n t y°. IC7, ,0.. DR PIDDC z ?? E JCNNIFlB 9n,.,. t TO.SF.IL DR RIV_R DR 210 ? ..? ? ? ? q n •. 1 ??EnO Wann ? aAr?, .1
r O<
al ANC NO ?,?O?9p? Off. ?Cl HbPG - C'DR?? < BD. _ ? /. -' ,?_ O ($R ` ?G9 a?m't?SC,v-??- FL.-3?x?OL %
Cf B.N
D'.15' 5D c:p ST K[ :N.NNEL DII
W - 60 s.w?, veN
< o< ' ?-?---.a+rl muc.] c? x ? La iu 0-11?C ?.?
• ?_?? a..r..r..,7.y?T 4!m+-e..3.?-,? F"'.c.<??2?•z l?'.Y m-, m ` o ` NW < c <?$?x i-i?-'-nom s Dom` p?__ S`?-'?aL-??S=f• Dt.ro-`i W .. Y < rOraF.
O z r _"7-:'_""`*.r- ?W r o o - ?`L' +- S'?= ;.:....: :.? o W ` : : t "',T3Y Zi°'."°-•-o n'__`"^'=?` . r r
Z s c tl ?L4 IND ° n c ° Q q _
? j SURF CIiT I? xn DR
11utTS
° u c ~ u W ^ T = m c .° r CITY •J
° u 3 B4RNA CLE B1L!'S 7 ?• r'•''a-\? p$y OCEAN CIfY
v u u _ PIER PIER, ;COTCH BONA' L <L CRT LIU1iS ? C
m = 1ER
PI FR e
ATLANTIC OCEAN
E
APPROX. SCALE IN MILES
1
0 114 112 1
r

?• ?' `„ I.1'r TOPSAIL SOV
l?y?r?
TOPSAIL SOUND R`?cOIS7,
` ? _
I
TER
`r u 5
z - Y
.{
.I_
CITY
Its W
ciT
WA
w o
o
•.' J ,
S
j
s
< >
D??
SURF CITY BRIDGE
t W0
_
u F
N
ir o o z o w, n s? = z r s
O a r o
?

>
<
q ' HIANC
i O O ?iP D 'ES P
\NaUM?M0p?ti ??ry-?-?, oJO AK DR

DR
'''
'vv
RE v 3
f O. NNI
RIDGE '= i_ < JENNIFER
e¢RD..
v
w,. =DRS`
'r0
'P O'S TOPSAIL' DR NEW
bF
?"
5 SHORE
>
50 - a J E SI'N
RIVER DR 210 0 ?.? ??\t

P(SR 1
N
;! H(
'.;
b. `' H rnl N
?a
ti"
IS1
q
L
EZ ?.pTERR• tib
g
n p•Q„
:SHO _
. ?W
•>;
DR 585)
..
7pP5AIL pq ?.PO Nc?w
L?-??
_ ?p
•^'?1
=
ti
w
`
Wiw e.a
>
.

=
y
50 J = Z
r W r = c` ?

< CRY Ul.tf S
w a <. c

m „w f s , x w
Z w HOR -¢-1 `.TOPSAIL all"rn i-; ..
? p:> ¢
»
o <? s--s n?.w?,a
o-w W.
,
a < D -c
S H
•
-
T
_?
O
fi Y . 4 ..
c
?
?r
Z •w J Q ' a
-• W C `. ci m a W W •
O
J
' -?+?_. ? Z p
p
_
_
m m m tl 2 6 6= a O <W-
'
O R
Y'r -i --•-m
Vp-
2Y
ii
0 = m ~ V J Y
N p¢ SURF ¢ 0 Z
,tj ' U J a CIiY LIMIT
6 U G
a m < L) W
w N z
m x o
'
CITY u. w
BARNAC £ BILL'S S
z 1? ,
r `?-
m
3 r - x PIER
IER SCOTCH BONI
_ P
C
ATLANTIC OCEAN

?:??. .Ie C'1(()I l ?? I ??t;SGT L 6? 6
?u.? ? C,t.'? `?w^•e_ f'?e.s-F'or0.-?.o r? {fro J ?C-?
O APPROX.
0 IN
O 1/4
m
--r r
0m
zo

36
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
OCT 2 1 2005

I D/ mow` Cl- < V ?6
r_

S-f}?QEi
i _ -
?V

Sup F ci-?j?? P.??-?-a-}?,-P??J-c?--E'

U
z
p
u C,
J
U i
N ?
.1 I?
U
O
N
O
r -
U)
O
O
N
m
O
Z
X
Q
LL
UI
C
C
ro:
a;
E'
O
U1
C
v7
u
D
?I
1
LABORATORY SIEVE ANALY515
STANDARD U.S. PASSING SP
SIEVE SIZE
SEAL
9231
PETER D. cDONNELl., SR. P.E. 12613
J10
z-
CONTRACTORS & ENGINEERS SERVICES INC.
??r: PLANT NAIX
cohTtL=R: RIVERSIDE SAND CO.
wrancw: GOLDSBORO, N.C.
coprwr.: DATE: 10/9/03
GRADATION REPORT
:.- i

US Army Corps PUBLIC NOTICE
Of Engineers
Wilmington District
Issue Date: November 22, 2005
Comment Deadline: December 8, 2005
Corps Action ID #: 200600158
All interested parties are hereby advised that the Wilmington District, Corps of Engineers
(Corps) has received an application for work within jurisdictional waters of the United
States. Specific plans and location information are described below and shown on the
attached plans. This Public Notice and all attached plans are also available on the
Wilmington District Web Site at www.saw.usace.army.mil/wetlands
D
Applicant: Town of Surf City NOV ? Q X005
Post Office Box 2475
Surf City, North Carolina 28445 Q1,N11 • WAU;1t 011AL ITY
t:?TU:?3 Pylp aT?; ?;",1??Tifi fs??"Irll
Authority
The Corps will evaluate this application and a decide whether to issue, conditionally
issue, or deny the proposed work pursuant to applicable procedures of Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.
Location
The project site is located along the beach strand adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean from the
North Topsail Beach Limits south to Topsail Beach Town limits, in Surf City, Onslow
and Pender Counties, North Carolina. See attached plans and drawings for specifics.
Existing Site Conditions
Surf City received severe erosion to the dune system during Hurricane Ophelia. The
Town lost approximately 20' to 30' of their protective dunes. At minimum the Town lost
the waterward'/z of the dunes. There is an average erosion escarpment of 9' along the
remaining dune system. The existing vegetation on the remaining dunes consists mostly
of American Beachgrass (Ammophilia breviligulata), Seaoats (uniola paniculata), and
Bitter panicum (Panicum amarulum).
Applicant's Stated Purpose
Surf City wants to rebuild the dune system to its original profile prior to Hurricane
Ophelia for protection against storm events.
Project Description
Surf City is proposing to bulldoze sand from mean low water (ML`s landward to the
existing erosion escarpments to repair the dune system to its original profile. They
propose to restore the dunes to heights ranging from 4' to 10' from the existing level of
the dry sand beach with a 2:1 slope. If the bulldozing does not result in sufficient sand to
repair the dunes to their original dimensions then the Town is proposing to truck in
additional beach compatible sand. The trucked in beach compatible sand will come from
Riverside Sand in Chinquapin, North Carolina. See attached documents for sand
analysis.
The project will impact approximately 91 acres of the dry sand beach and the intertidal
zone. Of this area, the dry sand beach is approximately 6.2 miles long and averages
approximately 35' in width, or approximately 25 acres. The remainder of the 91-acre
project area is within the inter-tidal zone. The beach bulldozing will result in the
relocation of approximately 148, 148 cubic yards of sand from the unvegetated beach to
the dune system.
Other Required Authorizations
This notice and all applicable application materials are being forwarded to the appropriate
State agencies for review. The Corps will generally not make a final permit decision
until the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ) issues, denies, or waives
State certification required by Section 401 of the Clean Water Act (PL 92-500). The
receipt of the application and this public notice in the NCDWQ Central Office in Raleigh
serves as application to the NCDWQ for certification. A waiver will be deemed to occur
if the NCDWQ fails to act on this request for certification within sixty days of the date of
the receipt of this notice in the NCDWQ Central Office. Additional information
regarding the Clean Water Act certification may be reviewed at the NCDWQ Central
Office, 401 Oversight and Express Permits Unit, 2321 Crabtree Boulevard, Raleigh,
North Carolina 27604-2260. All persons desiring to make comments regarding the
application for certification under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act should do so in
writing delivered to the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (NCDWQ), 1650 Mail
Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1650 Attention: Ms Cyndi Karoly (all
other projects) by December 13, 2005.
The applicant has not provided to the Corps, a certification statement that his/her
proposed activity complies with and will be conducted in a manner that is consistent with
the approved North Carolina Coastal Zone Management Program. Pursuant to 33 CFR
325.2(b)(2), the Corps can not issue a permit for the proposed work until the applicant
submits such a certification to the Corps and the North Carolina Division of Coastal
Management (NCDCM), and the NCDCM notifies the Corps that it concurs with the
applicant's consistency certification.
Essential Fish Habitat
This notice initiates the Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation requirements of the
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. The Corps' initial
determination is that the proposed project may adversely impact EFH or associated
fisheries managed by the South Atlantic or Mid Atlantic Fishery Management Councils
or the National Marine Fisheries Service. These impacts to EFH include destruction of
habitat at the fill site, siltation plums, erosion and sedimentation issues, time frame work
is performed (fish moratoriums) and water quality issues.
Cultural Resources
The Corps has consulted the latest published version of the National Register of Historic
Places and is not aware that any registered properties, or properties listed as being
eligible for inclusion therein are located within the project area or will be affected by the
proposed work. Presently, unknown archeological, scientific, prehistoric, or historical
data may be located within the project area and/or could be affected by the proposed
work.
Endangered Species
The Corps has reviewed the project area, examined all information provided by the
applicant and consulted the latest North Carolina Natural Heritage Database. Based on
available information, the Corps has determined there may be species listed as threatened
or endangered or their critical habitat formally designated pursuant to the Endangered
Species Act of 1973 (ESA) within the project area. A final determination on the effects
of the proposed project will be made upon additional review of the project and
completion of any necessary biological assessment and/or consultation with the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service and/or National Marine Fisheries Service.
Evaluation
The decision whether to issue a permit will be based on an evaluation of the probable
impacts, including cumulative impacts, of the proposed activity on the public interest.
That decision will reflect the national concern for both protection and utilization of
important resources. The benefit which reasonably may be expected to accrue from the
proposal must be balanced against its reasonably foreseeable detriments. All factors
which may be relevant to the proposal will be considered including the cumulative effects
thereof; among those are conservation, economics, aesthetics, general environmental
concerns, wetlands, historic properties, fish and wildlife values, flood hazards, flood plain
values (in accordance with Executive Order 11988), land use, navigation, shoreline
-- erosion and accretion, recreation, water supply and conservation, water quality, energy
needs, safety, food and fiber production, mineral needs, considerations of property
ownership, and, in general, the needs and welfare of the people. For activities involving
the discharge of dredged or fill materials in waters of the United States, the evaluation of
the impact of the activity on the public interest will include application of the
Environmental Protection Agency's 404(b)(1) guidelines.
Commenting Information
The Corps is soliciting comments from the public; Federal, State and local agencies and
officials; Indian Tribes and other interested parties in order to consider and evaluate the
impacts of this proposed activity. Any comments received will be considered by the
Corps to determine whether to issue, modify, condition or deny a permit for this proposal.
To make this decision, comments are used to assess impacts on endangered species,
historic properties, water quality, general environmental effects and the other public
interest factors listed above. Comments are used in the preparation of an Environmental
Assessment (EA) and/or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Comments are also used to determine the
need for a public hearing and to determine the overall public interest of the proposed
activity.
Any person may request, in writing, within the comment period specified in this notice,
that a public hearing be held to consider the application. Requests for public hearings
shall state, with particularity, the reasons for holding a public hearing. Requests for a
public hearing shall be granted, unless the District Engineer determines that the issues
raised are insubstantial or there is otherwise no valid interest to be served by a hearing.
Written comments pertinent to the proposed work, as outlined above, will be received
by the Corps of Engineers, Wilmington District, until 5pm, December 8, 2005.
Comments should be submitted to Henry Wicker, Project Manager for this project.
I VY."AIL ZIvUru
Q` n? ST`
ATLANTIC
r?Q sruxrr
NORTH
t
r TS'E ear?K= cwu.wn ow
?v Q
1Zap?-6a FN .C?iy ?Q v???`dC -lops'.
?i ? a wren ? o dq."n
LIt fiS y?OCEAN CITY
PIER
APPROX. SCALE IN MILES
1
0 1I4 vt 1
r C
C. c
TOPSAIL SOUND
rN.
j
• J
y
?` sF
C
¢oJ
>
<
y <rn
a _' V 1CG N Zp w w
w c.i U ' S O U 9.1` D NES C•
z f 0 vO, S Q
.R
K oR
?O
•v ?
?
'"?
IM J
RID
GE IFER
gH
' 13lANC
ErC pTERR• ?
??1
F, OP
t
?-, o
\N
O
n 'Vi w U- CC-- ti•O rs 'vv SHORE Q
D
Q
_
w ,wl DRS u
j W o? Wiry Q.¢
>. ! 50 0 •? _
q• ?
r V o ?
w =
< CITY LIVII, 3 w
??..? O z.. J (] ?
,
j W a
.
-. -Z ` h U
J
w F-i r w r < a
<
O
~
< 2 ? f0
J w
U
U y N_
< U W N
? r

f

?0.?. b? o?e.r ? , a-pO ? •
?ro?,, r b ? : S fLP
TOPSAIL SOU1?1J??°?°? ti
c` cOASrAL ?W I%VATEVI-y 'cITITS o 0
uA+,r\? , _ ? .
SURF CITY SWING BRIDGE
J i F' W? .T ?
0 0 N w O
"EW VI' 3 70PS A?• RIVER DR 2(q AHKL Is1
SHORE DR > < -17'iwOP9 All DR .?p.0 Hc7y? 5) m??: y--f 3
<. <.w Z w -¢ C.iOPSAII I rn ?-;?
F. )O" < O¢<C•>?w,Q>-D"7 SHOR D-?"<>•w
a o<
z m s-< -m z ui w z N SHOR
o a ? a y ? ?-- . ? .? ? w n• I-
m = .o a of Y CITY v. z 1 `w z CI11IIA17`..
r' PIER BARNAC E BILL'S z SCOTCH BONI
IER P
ATLANTIC OCEAN
O APPROX.
n
1/4
m
-' r
zm
IV
0m
?o
? z
r,
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
OCT 2 1 2005

S-f-yrL e ?'
Gf?fT ?, l?1
l
i

v' '-V I?

Sup F C.i?j?? Q?sk?-a-}??-P?vJ-cc?
maw ? ??'. s ? P

111) r
I
t
U
Z Lr
?'
R
;1- c {
J_
U i
N ?
U
0
Lo
In
w
N
m
Qi
0
z
x
(I
O_
UI
_C
sI
C
Rf :
0.:
E'
O
V
-0
c
U)
I'll
v
v
?I
0
0
LL
LABORATORY SIEVE ANALYSIS
IE
NDARD VE SIZE U.S. PASSING SPECIFICATIONS
IEVE S .
FCOONTRAMRS & ENGINEERS SE? PLAMIX
R: RIVERSIDE SAND CO.
`? - wcAncN: GOLDSBORO, N.C.
-a 7 231 `Y = c°rit.'.r rte.: DATE: 10 9 03
GRADATION REPORT
-
Q. cDOt HELL, M F.E. 12613 '4•. ""' w
SOURCE OF MATMA ' AT PLANT I
a.aa 6n C-)/S F-
R
Recommendations for State Permit - Town of Surf City N 0 V 3 2005
ws..•7a }.
I have no objections to the proposed project, subject to the following conditions:
(1) The area in which the bulldozing activity is being performed must maintain a slope of adequate grade so as not
to endanger the public or the public's use of the beach.
(2) The movement of material by a bulldozer, front-end loader, backhoe, scraper or any type of earthmoving or
construction equipment shall not exceed 1 foot in depth measured from the pre-activity elevation.
(3) Movement of material from seaward of mean low water is not authorized.
(4) No work shall occur within the period of May 1 through November 15 of any year in order to minimize adverse
impacts to nesting sea turtles. Coordination with local Turtle Program officials shall ensure that no sea turtle
nesting sites are within the project area.
(5) The activity must not significantly increase erosion on neighboring properties and must not have a significant
adverse effect on important natural or cultural resources.
(6) Adding to dunes shall be accomplished in such a manner that the damage to existing vegetation is minimized.
The fill areas will be immediately replanted or temporarily stabilized until planting can be successfully completed.
(7) If one contiguous acre or more of oceanfront property is to be excavated or filled, an erosion and sedimentation
control plan must be filed with the Division of Land Resources, Land Quality Section.
(8) The applicant shall complete a successful Section 7 consultation, with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service prior to the commencement of any work.
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Phone: [phone] \ FAX: [phone] \ Internet: nccoastaimanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled \ 10% Post Consumer Paper
ocf1?: DWQ%
1
DovrjlcpmcnlTypu FE= 114200 1601 435100093 IG25 62531 12430016024351000SS2341)
g -
I. Privib:, ncr..com?ncrcicl r
070 (SO}

dow: U-at dc.:a n l in -c!vc
Ir :nttirt
.i
5250
100;: (5250)
0., (ili, 0 Qf CXr^wSGCn of dry
wcq,uvrc or op::n waler.orc?s:
It. I'u!;lie or commercial dovc!o7mcnt 07a (SO)
dral Coe,, not Involve tha riiGOg or S:00 1C0°b (S{CO)
;,X,_-rv:,fen cf ary vidznd; or c;-,,l

is
(A. tcrdvdopmen(L}II!imo!vc:Lhu
`Glrg :,m?'or dxC •:al7, or. 0f C? 13 1
3cra of w,;&jrnd? znd:a. open w-n!ri'
arna.^., d.:t,trminu if A, E. C, or D -

III(A). Few r-rivaW, ncn•carr,nardal
devnlup, ,Cnl. Ir Gcnont wD;i.r CcaliFj 5??0 1C0„ (SiSC) C% (SO)
nNo.3301 (taa !LU`tcd)
Ctrl::rc-.l;(..

III('): For paaiC or ccmmc:Cia!
0°a(SO)
k dc•:ciIfGrn¢r:atwa.crCua!:rj 100°,:(540C)
Ci;:' %-J:icn No.3?O1 (-CC a:;a:ted)
ctd b,: applind:

??,SSc?t`cn No. 3501 (sa•. _.....:ed)
_f t;14 1'Pkd, but DCM $:•,rT

C0114 ($240)
(51E0)
SJ 1.

dc!mi nr.:l aG::itirr.?l rCrC••v C^.d
Lint

S-1 00
wr!:cn Dt'JQ c:n:sae-.Ca ir
be ac_: of cu;= ra rC.a!cd t_ w:::cr

11l(D). Ir Cur.^_raI Watr;r Qaa! l/ EO°: S2;C
( ) 40% (S10O)
cnrrrc:rii,:c, Na. _301 (::.:3 a Y_: ci) s?CO
c:.a net h.! cpp-,icd:
IV, r- Or d,;•rulopmenl I!« l irve!vcs
lhC GGii:Q rlndl:r axaYi Lon of c:aro 5476 C0% (S:55) 40"'. (5:90)
than cnC arv orv:clland: -I:'i
? open ?+.r!cr ar^.ts:

A?
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
October 31, 2005
Town of Surf City
Attn: Michael Moore, Town Manger, and Authorized Agent
P.O. Box 2475
Surf City, N.C. 28445
Dear Mr. Moore:
The Division of Coastal Management hereby acknowledges receipt of your application for State approval for
development of property located on the entire beach strand from the North Topsail Beach Town Limits south to the
Topsail Beach Town Limits, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in Surf City, Onslow & Pender Counties. It was
received complete on 10/28/05, and appears to be adequate for processing at this time. The projected deadline for
making a decision is 01/11/06. An additional 75-day review period is provided bylaw when such time is necessary
to complete the review. If you have not been notified of a final action by the initial deadline stated above, you
should consider the review period extended. Under those circumstances, this letter will serve as your notice of an
extended review. However, an additional letter will be provided on or about the 75th day.
If this agency does not render a permit decision within 70 days from 10/28/05, you may request a meeting with the
Director of the Division of Coastal Management and permit staff to discuss the status of your project. Such a
meeting will be held within five working days from the receipt of your written request and shall include the
property owner, developer, and project designer/consultant.
NCGS 113A-119(b) requires that Notice of an application be posted at the location of the proposed development.
Enclosed you will find a "Notice of Permit Filing' postcard which must be posted at the property of your proposed
development. You should post this notice at a conspicuous point along your property where it can be observed
from a public road. Some examples would be: Nailing the notice card to a telephone pole or tree along the road
right-of-way fronting your property; or at a point along the road right-of-way where a private road would lead one
into your property. Failure to post this notice could result in an incomplete application.
An onsite inspection will be made, and if additional information is required, you will be contacted bythe appropriate State
or Federal agency. Please contact me if you have any questions and notify me in writing if you wish to receive a copy of
my field report and/or comments from reviewing agencies.
S" cerely,
c
Jon Giles
Field Representative
Enclosure
cc: Doug Huggett, DCM
Jim Gregson, DCM District Manager
Henry Wicker, COE
Ted Tyndall, DCM
Steve Padgett (LPO)
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: =w.nccoastalmanagementnet
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer-50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper
rmb? F7,
COMMENTS ACCEPTED THROUGH ./??D? .2 200 S'
FOR MORE DETAILS CONTACT
THE L CAL PE MI OFFICER BELOW:
Diti. odsigot w
o
Air- x
avy
JOK i 0
CAM/ PERMIT
APPLIED FOR
APPLICANT:
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: Surf City
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: The project site is the entire beach strand from the North Topsail Beach
Town Limits south to the Topsail Beach Town Limits, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in Surf City, Onslow &
Pender Counties.
Photo Index - 2000: 25-327 through 25-332 1995: 25-310 through 25-317 1989: 4 173 10 through 4 173 20
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2,438,618 Y: 248,687 GPS File: Q102817A
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA / Dredge and Fill
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 10-27-05
Was Applicant Present - Yes
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received - Complete on 10-28-05
Office - Wilmington
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Surf City
Classification From LUP - Community
(B) AEC(s) Involved: OH
(C) Water Dependent: No
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing, -N/A
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing -N/A
Planned - Repair the dune system along the entire beach.
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: 2'/ year Source- 1998 LTAASCR
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION: [AREA]
(A) Vegetated Wetlands
(I3) Non-Vegetated Wetlands - open water
(C) Other (Ocean Beach) I I I 6.2 miles
(Disturbed)
(D) Total Area Disturbed: Approximately 91 acres
(E) Primary Nursery Area: N/A
(F) Water Classification: SB Open: N/A
8. PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to repair the dune system that was damaged during
Hurricane Ophelia.
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper
Surf City
Page Two
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The Town of Surf is located in the middle portion of Topsail Island in Onslow & Pender Counties. The project
location is the entire beach strand from the North Topsail Beach Town Limits south to the Topsail Beach Town
Limits, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in Surf City, Onslow & Pender Counties. Surf City received severe
erosion to the dune system during Hurricane Ophelia. The Town lost approximately 20' - 30' of their protective
dunes system. At minimum the Town lost the waterward'/z of the dunes. There is an average erosion
escarpment of 9' along the remaining dune system. The existing vegetation on the remaining dunes consists
mostly of American Beachgrass (Arnmophilia breviligulata), Seaoats (Uniola paniculata), and Bitter panicum
(Panicum amarulum).
The Surf City Land Use Plan classifies the upland areas of this project as Community. The waters of the project
site are classified as SB by the NC Division of Water Quality. The NC Division of Marine Fisheries has NOT
designated this area of the Atlantic Ocean as a Primary Nurserv Area, and the waters adjacent to the proposed
project are closed to the harvesting of shellfish.
PROPOSED PROJECT:
The Town of Surf City is proposing to bulldoze sand from mean low water (MLW) landward to the existing
erosion escarpments to repair the dune system to its original profile. They propose to restore the dunes to heights
ranging from 4' to 10' from the existing level of the dry sand beach with a 2:1 slope. If the bulldozing does not
result in sufficient sand to repair the dunes to their original dimensions then the Town is proposing to truck in
additional beach compatible sand.
10. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
The proposed project will impact approximately 91 acres of the dry sand beach and the inter-tidal zone. Of this
area, the dry sand beach is approximately 6.2 miles long and, of the date of this report, averages approximately
35' in width, or approximately 25 acres. The remainder of the 91-acre project area is within the inter-tidal zone.
The push will result in the relocation of approximately 148,148 cubic yards of sand from the unvegetated beach
to the dune system.
Submitted by: J. W. Giles Date: October 31, 2005 Office: Wilmington
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastaimanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity k Affirmative Action Employer-50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper
Form DCNI-NIP-1 RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
A] Dr.-". ED L I C A r J." I wo - J" N OCT 2 1 2005
(To be completed by all applicants)
1. APPLICANT
b. Citytown, community or landmark
ur F C X
a. Landowner:
Name -T010o 0>r SL'LcF Ct-_-
Address 2-LnE;
City0
u e C\tLl State .
zip 92yyb Day Phone q 10 33M - X31
Fax(A10 3a8-4k3a
b. Authorized Agent:
Name - J.Mlchael moO're__.,
Address P 0 . Rom a41'o
city SUce C* State I-XI
Zip ago ?'J Day Phone q 10,3a? - Y31
FaxC1\0- 3R8 -413a
c. Project name Cif any) S tyre Ci??
NOTE. Perrrdt will be issued in name of lmtidowner(sJ, and/or
project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County [ ,c_rPc
c. Street address or secondary road number
aty N•Ne.?L\ vf.(--D r-
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? X Yes No
e. Name of body of water nearest pro ect (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) ?? CV* C,'o C can
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling activities
Inq CL-N1 Wae+(A- CA
CuC('&0)>v' 6cr(h I ct'An
e'? c udl_t (-P_ -r
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? bah
c. Will the project be for public, private or commercial
use. , _A)' ik M,P
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed
project. If more space is needed, please attach
additional pages, r C 0 h
r0 ? \ S CZ. l?
(-m
f-
Revised 03195
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
a. Size of entire tract to a` ('I'*% ? s p? ?ecO)
C DC'St-
b. Size of individual lot(s) N
c. Approximate elevation of tract above DLLz
NwL V(Ari?s w?Ah\1P- tatto = ecnd. Soil type(s) 5 a.nc re(,?f trrlct (orpw )
e. Vegetation on tract
f. Man-made features now on tract bccM
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (Consult the local land use plan.)
Conservation Transitional
Developed Y_ Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
dsic cr-fha-l -t- 03Mmet'Gka.l
OCT 2 1 2005
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
none
n.. Describe location and type of discharges to waters
of the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
wastewater, industrial/commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.) n On e-
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
N 1a
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
o A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims title
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? Y-- Yes No
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
j•
Has a professional
done for the tract?
If yes, by whom?
archaeological assessment been
Yes k No
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes Y, No
1. Are there wetlands on the site? _ Yes X No
Coastal (marsh) Other
If yes, has a delineation been conducted?
(Armch documentation, if available)
® An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 112" by 11" white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 7J.0203 for a
detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to
guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
Revised 03/95
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
OCT 2 1 2005
Form DCM-MP-1
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary.
o 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. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name ObCC? POIZe-r
Address 131ci5 ainCSV111e-.. Q«en
Phone aknOi 111 Lm 011
Name Io6t n -i-Y)aQrl K. &6 Fin
,t rr!4
Address OU 1 on
Phone 00perS ur- , e p 1 olco
Name
Address
Phone
A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates.?:f:F 112,o(q$
trIdb-
°-?x?1?v?duQ 1 Pec(?i?.s?vp't?e?-? ?neCS
A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
O' A signed . AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public land's, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to conditions
and restrictions contained ;z the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I 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.
This is the -2 0 day of Ccf,9, W Zoos
Print Name T • m' t; ? a e' A( cot e
Signature
D xrsda-r or Authorized Agent
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
_ DCM MP-3 Upland Development
DCM MP-4 Structures Information
_ DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
_ DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE: Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.
ReAwd 03M
DCNI WILMINGTON, NC
Form DCNI-M -2 OCT 1 2005
L 8 T I
X C AN`
ANju L
(Except 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.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or
fill activities. All values to be given in feet.
Average Final
Existing Ptvjed
Length Width Depth Depth
Access
channel
(MLW) or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
Other
(Excluding
shoreline
stabilization)

H "
? ir.
?' ors M x
r ??? ?
.r
Y K
J
?
y
.
am,
+
t
-
?
t
.
4

?,ooc 1ZS ' ? ?tSi.
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below
MHW or NWL in cubic yards
b. Type of material to be excavated Sanct
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? Yes ,Y, No
d. Highground excavation in cubic yards 0
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED
MATERIAL N I A
a. Location of disposal area
b. Dimensions of disposal area
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance? Yes No
If yes, where?
Revised 03195
n:=`.c; v `LJ
GCM WILMINGTON, NC
Form DCAI-MP-2
OCT 2 1 2005
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
Yes No
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION N J A
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
Bulkhead Riprap
b. Length
If Yes,
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the
water
(2) Dimensions of fill area
(3) Purpose of fill
b. Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes _) No
If Yes,
(1) Dimensions of fill area
(2) Purpose of fill
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
5. GENERAL
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
(Source of information)
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
water level
(1) Riprap
(2) Bulkhead backfill
h. Type of fill material
i. Source of fill material
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion c trolled? e -kC7f-AOn'
l CLt iY1 . e-a-
a-?s
b. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic
dredge)? -6u`1 ^I 0-7 cr
c. Will wetlands be cr5ssed in trans orting equipment
to project site? Yes No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
Yes No
S (07 G ? l ?r??t es r lore {?rt?eG-?
Applicant or Proj N
???kl?l? mod, Zdo 5
Date
Revised 03195
0
n
0
0
a
n 0
x
H
^
Z
T
r N
IAAltwi L?nc u
HUMPIMEY
l I19PA
SEACA
TE
CVTL
ELIZAB
SEA Ui
Lr.
IVO,l Pi
Aws
V^In
rgyC
a) •? r
y
^r
w
'-3
'•Y
n
E'??\
`)
wlu
a
a
x
z
o^
r
a rn
m
r J.
N I1

CITY Llulls
on CITY LIMITS ' -
Ilo'?
ET=
IDjO
I¢
ip
41:* y
GL= O
.n °p yMOn OARa LH ?7
uiHOOnos A
o
ci
0 E
SOL'A
5Y h
?' Cr h
A
N v O O
G?''m e C
G r v, ? ? z
n
„ o
a• b

0
EI a
T
,1ia
? i Fp
O N
T
ArrPreOw hD
-r•lirw OUO Un
FAInY TALE IN
I Cn
t On s
nOSEMAnY
,OL IN I
/
LENAUA' $Uw LAKE
cn v E 9
A'E? n
y
ON 5 D
A EIS a 'A

C ^
;
i Q rO
M
?
vs
T
/ i
a
,
O0
.
? J
L
n
r? vE O
3 N E o ?
N E y
1y
? /
?'
z .
Ir
iN A E . t T0:
_ ;f now ?r ???
aE•eA.r_
nOr • U.
0
j
A?
eon f- F
I AV z
BOn

Av
D H
BE ryZ ? O ?
A E . D Ll
m
J•
iTdllN D .
A JE'
y
o ?
'oIPHIN sr
?` r
r
N
N_y
PE MOE
A ELI
?N-?rv E PENDEq COUNTY
Ell ??r_ ONSLOWcc)
UNTY
2.I? = iryl>al--?...
m- Stly9t?._
niN_
dj IA iM?Ef --- - ..
m
.rrl sT_
acolo L.gVy Er eOlli n $?-clrr't lu-rs
SEA IDn6E t` IC>OBrA $T
C ou"I 1I'B'.1 n?iH" T c,rr L141rs•
!t REraEI PCMn AHU1 ST
EL VUNDEn ST
N IIH
It $T
it ? w; ,00 ST
wh lI VOPIA 9+Y? '
w!c t
n n
< nEE C lyy Arno A?
d s m ?. /"r
c aL Ia>I o
I Ieo
?PlcoqH
a o ?a'I • ?r
n E.
L!
? I$r I> O
I Z O E rr, A 1-n
n q$T E?
; a Ib-Af?
i • , a, a y
f X
es
II r?l wa X C
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC,
OCT 2 1 2005
v
?z
;..11 O
?U
J
U
CV ?
y
U
O
In
00
r -
U)
to
07
01
CS)
Q1
0
z
x
cc
Il-
UI
C
TI
C
rd
0..
E'
O
U'
VI
(n I
N`
?I
?I
v
Fi
L.L1
(}?BORATORY SIEVE ANALYSIS
STANDARD U.S. ACCUM. %
SPEClF1CAT10
SIEVE SIZE PASSING
U.S. STA' DAn SIEVE St=
1 DO 3 4' 4 10 200
£(1
s
HIM
70
?i 60
i
Z
C<
u TH-F
40
g '
20
10
0
100 10 1.0 0.1 0.01 0.001
CrrUH SIZE IN t1iLLl6lMRS
5*p T EAR
5A
pO SE TEDIUM fAE 9T L
`I I ` I I ` ` I CONTRACTORS & ENGINEERS SERVICES INC. 1*01 PRa,t=P P LA N T M I X
CoNIRA OR: RIVERSIDE SAND CO.
GOLDSBORO, N.C.
toc?nm+:
sl:Pti °
= -a 9 23,1; g e? _ caN7Rxcr rte.: DATE: 10/9/03
GRADATION REPORT
P= D. COOINEUL SR. P.E. 12613
OWcu%a10
SOURCE CF MATMA ' AT PLANT
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
OCT 2 1 2005

E

Ir-

a-

V
i?
C I
?,? ?. OC?a2r `30, 2coS

f ?
dL S, C_
w
i
a
w
D ¢
S
u l
f
J S
t
f
U? V
BUNC
?c ¢. oTERRs*
P. JAW P6
< x a
'L u cc
_y t u
= m
TOPSAIL SOUND
z
J
y
¢ >
O P J S
n o 'cL = o
' RZ r °
!
Y OJ STUD NES `cl Q.?
Z•? ' _3

It -'
NOyi- MMp s pT.'i..?PP1 ?..¢P'0'AK DR >
RIDGE '= i _ i eJ¢RD-ER
'
' u• G'O'' g Uu .SHORE w> E
DR <-
w =e
7? m
? w r
,?. v¢ ° CITY ULT. 3
4
F
G
r
z w l y
m < W y
?
iL
m L
U

W w
w
y
1j L1 dY\

?Q.?I. bc?1-ate 2U t 2-p05 •
S ?2P
/1%, I TOPSAIL SOW311•-?^"''?"? ti
? ?`` r
COA
C\? XASr?l U I WATE?,t???Y ?r'CIT?I-S o= o
u?urs ? ?'?!f T
• 11 SWING BRIDGE o I I I
SURF CITY 1
O; ? y w a O?•
sl J ST 3? ' I
y
09 S TOPSAIL' OR E
NW 50 . - RIVER s? a v+`'?t? ?? ry 9 ~ yI
DR 210 D ? P ? I C
S T? SNORE OR TOPSAIL DR

N w z w
<' -a'?-D1-5--?2, HOR
m F E S s- _ ¢< O< O<
?L !S1
° y O (SR 1585) m. yj AN
POD` TOPSAIL
D P5 a >,w
x N SMOR
C) a L)

Y SURF
i s

o i
w
CIT
Y
I
1uITS
' z
=
m Z o CITY m ;
BARNAC W
?
E BILL'S
W = PIER SCOTCH BONI
IER P
A TLANTIC OCEAN
21-
?1 J
?.G4 l I?h
2,
S E L T 1? DLL,.
APPROX.
Q
?
J 1/4
?m
? r
z
L
"
m
rv _
0
0 Om
zC)
z
Pender County
. 31 . 1
3

MapView CD
0447 3
.
1468
ae\

July 2005 Release -
32 ,''
; ^
12 s
; ss 2415
,) °
? `
^
'\
'?NT>! 1 28 2441 yy? 10
D?
GO 0400 3° s C
27 S
,r * 2 26 y 2367
* *
I
9335 0386
o
A
AP `y
' 25 J°
2393
,
NOE \ 3 ° s
-
8371
'\ \\ . ^7
24 1.
O
p 1310 23
?
PIN=422346-2858-0000
8247
4 \ \
22 f
m
^
9'L
NAME=POLZER ROBERT W ET AL \
e
' °
o
s
ADDR=13195 PAINESVILLE WARREN RD \ O \ o
1246 21
CITY=PAINESVILLE
STATE,-OH ??^
0204
-
\ \ e?
m 20
1262
ZIP=44077 \ s
'
PROP_ADDR=101 ANDERSON BLVD N -'8201 -08'2 ° 19 0
PROP_DESC=LOT 13 PL 5 PG 69101 N ANDERSON A
DATE=
_
SALE PRICE= 8
59

9159
\
so 'r. 18

U
'/
BKPG=607/113
GEO
PIN=7051010013 , \0
5 io ?
1198 s '?° 3 e
ti
_
ACCOUNT=17741 8-1
TNSH=102
TNSH
DESC=TOPSAIL -7175 9A
y 9134
%
_

ACRES=O .
r
7
4
OS
LANG VAL=185932 2162
BLDG_VAL=72780
.?
TOTAL_VALU=258612
DEFERRED=O
6 !0079
SUBDIVISIO=
ZONE=R1 048 2018
TAX_CODES=GO1C54R40
EXEMPT= -8036 0076
USE=
ALT_PIN=41284
MAPN=TO51 010 013
HEAT ' ^ -+ c? i •} -o
-SO-Fr=1132 `(/
NBRHD=04
EXEMAMT=

7972
PCL_CLASS=R b - 9933 e°
PERS_VALUE= ' 9 +1/ 3
DELREC=
O
`
MYDIS= .
p 2 .
SRAT= C ,
67A
6
Ie

• s.
9
O
a?° ea' 2858
7 -
p ''
J
RD LT 5\.'
8743

1892

0 : ?.
Scale : 1 Inch = 104 Feet.
Date 09/2612005
E I V E D
DCIM
1
L
•
?
0r 2 1 2nc?
Onslow County, North Carolina Spatial Data Explorer Page 1 of 2
Q Spatial Data J=r ;-
NoNi Carolina
- DCM WILMINGTON, NC
Click on the Map to: 0 C j ) 1 2005
Q Zoomin O Zoomout O Recenter Map 0 Identify: Parcel Map
Zoom Factor: ZX ,; j Q Radius Search (feet) 0
u

.,.
Parcel Data
Find Adjoining
Parcels
• Abstract Tax Value: $130,000.00
• Tax Parcel ID: 804A-25 • Current Tax Value: $130,000.00
• NC PIN Number. 424512961714 • Land Value: $130,000.00
• Tax Record Number. 37586 • Structure Value:
• Owner's Name: GRIFFIN ROBERT M & KAREN K • Other Buildings Value:
• Property Record Card • Improvement Code: V
• Plat Book and Page Number. 44-030 • House Square Feet:
• Deed Book and Page:2304 776 • Property Address: 100 SCOTCH BONNET DR
• Date Deed Recorded: 08/19/2004 • Township Code: 114
• Deed Stamp Amount., 625000 • City Code: 26
• Tax Acreage Charged. 0.64 • Neighborhood Code: 103
• Zoning Code: R-15
SCALE 1 :1695
%
Reference Map
E
E>
SE
Map Layers
Draw Layers
Draw selected layers:
Boundary
City Boundaries
Parcel Map
ETJ
Multi Symbol
Fire Districts
Flood Data
Multi Symbol
_s
Soil Map
[71 Township Boundary
Election Districts
Census Tracts
1-1 Neighborhoods
!7 Zoning
Infrastructure
Street Center Line
Index Map
Aerial Photography
Physical
Streams
Draw Layers
MAP Currency
This map is prepared for the
inventory of real property foi
within this jurisdiction, and is
compiled from recorded dee
plats, and other public recor
and data. Users of this map
hereby notified that the
aforementioned public prim<
information sources should I
consulted for verification of 1
information contained on thi
map. The Onslow County,
mapping, and software
companies assume no legal
responsibility for the informo'
contained on this map or in
website.
Data Effective Date: 7
September 2005
Current Date: 9/2612005
Time: 11:21:58 AM
http://72.236.9.254/servletlcom.esri.esrimap.Esrimap?Name=Onslow&Cmd=Clk&Left=2448742.... 9/26/2005
TOPSAIL SOUNIJ?? ??r F
'IS7 '9L ??? I I WATERWAY .?'cl1 s > > , ?
BRIDGE o 0 1 rQQ ST UM!'
I T Y e i 11 S WING
? w a I i ?? rT? NORTH
oo?
S ?.
NE W_50 sl n z 1IS o~i, ?- ?.: r zhzwwmw }?. +I-S
IL OR RIVER DR 210 O ?? SNP rn? CANA w ?m.nir?<=z<i?0< F BAT .t
L $T t.__ ACE BANK
N T o (SR 1585) m.:r z-"' rmmac ???a S CHANNEL DR
-? <. < > N 2 2w P yL_? T
N OPSAII w_c N. 1-. .m m0?''-'e<?SANCICTF7-DAAVEN Sb O?V VILLAGE ?.>
¢ - ?SRORE D O a >. awe i z
"'__° aa+ Z N SNORE DR = SE A , ¢l Z r Cr.9a-Z w ?n Z ¢ :-OPS•+
/ S x ?- z ¢ < O < O < w < ?- < -m---<^>w--,?-W.-aS
< O L m m m V 2 ¢< 2< ?v-?-? < Y? ?-1r-_? m AV E
'Z• W p ?• rn z W U O z< y< F ?`?w SFbr? UE -9" PERMUDA O m Q O w
¢ a y b o? W << DR¢ W '?¢-- - N
o < z SURF w p ? I '-? -'.- a CITY LILT TS ¢?C mi ¢ m WYND I u O Dq ?N
¢ x x CITY o¢ t? • ?? w 00¢ CEAN CITY w
BARNACLE BILL'S CITY =
= PIER PIER SCOTCH BONNET <uN ?? LIMITS IER
u
PIER o m
m
ATLANTIC OCEAN
APPROX. SCALE IN MILES
0 1/4 1/2 1
C)
o v m
v1 Z
- C
Z
n

TOPSAIL SOU'l,
'T,gL ?.° jig ? t?I.aTER??•,a1' -.`IT15 0 ? .??
W O ... r
_'r I SWING BRIDGE STUM1
Ty N 0 R T H
Nag a o`• NN ; Cif
50 a t` h h viz cW °'vTrf °
JA NEW RIVER N `' \ ( n N y?. ?•'E., ?_ nN .0 BA.:t•? ..
N v.i?c_?<21-GC
DP 210O «.? P O ^ CANAL
?N 1585 4 'ST plG?>O4
"ACE SAANKE N
j W < TOFSs (SR
r n; p ) CHAN
m o?ST - EL DR
?.
C. < < < N = W i?-DR a N¢.iu?70P5 A?1 o m.e ., vs r: .- •- 077<;,,?<O SAn?ETF-tiA'/E?: ! G vI,L:ACE
G c > C > _ 0AE G DR C;!'O? ?.r
S Z ¢< OC G< 2 N iSMDRc 2 C? CrD?"
OL m © _ W u<2<_<W<F?._ -DR W;ScA W.U.<. W?2VC?AV:
Z5 'T -f _U W P?RY.UDA v C G?CE/?T
< 4 2 SURF W p 2 ?_ 1 V -? 4 CITY LIMIT$ I? c2m DR O? ¢ w WYND 2`-Gq
¢ = Y cl BARNACLE BILL'S J?OCEAN CITY w
PIER !r SCOTCH BONNET LIMITS PIER
PIER o
U
ATLANTIC OCEAN
5r4^I p PLA S H :
ES of 5Ko12Ee-I-j E
C o p- P c (z i4 T E. 4-1 ,.1 1 T-5
2vos
D S .t c E.j T'
r' (mac P t 2 TY
l1 APPROX. SCALE IN MILES
?; z r
r O 1/4 1/2 1
t-?At2n y, riFPi,
o m ?olo0 3rrrr? sti-r?ef
z p ?o?pz?sbu ?? , PA
z
n 1503 ?
401 Projects
Subject: 401 Projects
From: Patricia Collins <[e-mail]>
Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2005 10:04:42 -0500
To: Ian McMillan <[e-mail]>, Cyndi Karoly <[e-mail]>,
Henry. [e-mail]. army.mi1, doug Huggett <[e-mail]>
The following projects do not require a 401 Permit:
Town of Topsail Beach/dune repair, DWQ #: 2005 1996, Onslow County
Town of Surf City/Dune restoration, DWQ#: 2005 2016, Pender/Onslow County
Yachtman's Cove c/o Colorado Coastal Development, DWQ#: 2005 1998, Pender County
Thanks!
Patricia Collins
Administrative Assistant
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality - Surface Water Protection Section
Wilmington, North Carolina
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
1 of 1 11/10/2005 9:21 AN1
AG
MCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Coastal Management
Michael F. Easley, Governor Charles S. Jones, Director William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
October 31, 2005
MEMORANDUM:
TO: Cyndi Karoly, Supervisor
?(Jj
401 Oversight and Express Permits Unit NO 3 '`J
Division of Water Quality-Surface Water Protection
of k 5
FROM: Doug Huggett, Major Permits Coordinator r0 ills,14.iwy
????fcy
SUBJECT: CAMA & Dredge and Pill Permit Application Review
Applicant: Town of Surf City
Project Location: Entire beach strand from the North Topsail Beach Town Limits south to the Topsail
Beach town Limits, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean in Surf City, in Pender and
Onslow Counties.
Proposed Project: To repair the dune system that was damaged during Hurricane Ophelia.
Please indicate below your agency's position or viewpoint on the proposed project and return this form
by November 23, 2005. If you have any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Jon
Giles at [phone], when appropriate, in-depth comments with supporting data is requested.
REPLY: This agency has no objection to the project as proposed.
This agency has no comment on the proposed project.
This agency approves of the project only if the recommended changes are
incorporated. See attached.
This agency objects to the project for reasons described in the attached comments.
SIGNED
DATE
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper
DIVISION OF COASTAL MANAGEMENT
FIELD INVESTIGATION REPORT
1. APPLICANT'S NAME: Surf City
2. LOCATION OF PROJECT SITE: The project site is the entire beacli strand from the North Topsail Beach
Town Limits south to the Topsail Beacli Town Limits, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in Surf City, Onslow &
Pender Counties.
Photo Index - 2000: 25-327 through 25-332 1995: 25-310 through 25-317 1989: 4 173 10 tlirough 4 173 20
State Plane Coordinates - X: 2,438,618 Y: 248,687 GPS File: Q102817A
3. INVESTIGATION TYPE: CAMA / Dredge and Fill
4. INVESTIGATIVE PROCEDURE: Dates of Site Visit - 10-27-05
Was Applicant Present - Yes
5. PROCESSING PROCEDURE: Application Received - Complete on 10-28-05
Office - Wilmington
6. SITE DESCRIPTION:
(A) Local Land Use Plan - Surf City
Classification From LUP - Community
(B) AEC(s) Involved: OH
(C) Water Dependent: No
(D) Intended Use: Public
(E) Wastewater Treatment: Existing - N/A
Planned - N/A
(F) Type of Structures: Existing -N/A
Planned - Repair the dune system along the entire beach.
(G) Estimated Annual Rate of Erosion: 2' /year Source- 1998 LTAASCR
7. HABITAT DESCRIPTION:
8.
[AREA]
DREDGED FILLED OTHER
(A) Vegetated Wetlands
(B) Non-Vegetated Wetlands - open water
(C) Otlier (Ocean Beach) 6.2 miles
(Disturbed)
(D) Total Area Disturbed: Approximately 91 acres
(E) Primary Nursery Area: N/A
(F) Water Classification: SB Open: N/A
PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is proposing to repair the dune system that was damaged during
Hurricane Ophelia.
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastalmanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer-50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper
Surf City
Page Two
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The Town of Surf is located in the middle portion of Topsail Island in Onslow & Pender Counties. The project
location is the entire beach strand from the North Topsail Beach Town Limits south to the Topsail Beach Town
Limits, adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean, in Surf City, Onslow & Pender Counties. Surf City received severe
erosion to the dune system during Hurricane Ophelia. The Town lost approximately 20' - 30' of their protective
dunes system. At minimum the Town lost the waterward'/z of the dunes. There is an average erosion
escarpment of 9' along the remaining dune system. The existing vegetation on the remaining dunes consists
mostly of American Beachgrass (Ammophilia breviligulata), Seaoats (Uniola paniculata), and Bitter panicum
(Panicum amarulum).
The Surf City Land Use Plan classifies the upland areas of this project as Community. The waters of the project
site are classified as SB by the NC Division of Water Quality. The NC Division of Marine Fisheries has NOT
designated this area of the Atlantic Ocean as a Primary Nursery Area, and the waters adjacent to the proposed
project are closed to the harvesting of shellfish.
PROPOSED PROJECT:
The Town of Surf City is proposing to bulldoze sand from mean low water (MLW) landward to the existing
erosion escarpments to repair the dune system to its original profile. They propose to restore the dunes to heights
ranging from 4' to 10' from the existing level of the dry sand beach with a 2:1 slope. If the bulldozing does not
result in sufficient sand to repair the dunes to their original dimensions then the Town is proposing to truck in
additional beach compatible sand.
10. ANTICIPATED IMPACTS
The proposed project will impact approximately 91 acres of the dry sand beach and the inter-tidal zone. Of this
area, the dry sand beach is approximately 6.2 miles long and, of the date of this report, averages approximately
35' in width, or approximately 25 acres. The remainder of the 91-acre project area is within the inter-tidal zone.
The push will result in the relocation of approximately 148,148 cubic yards of sand from the unvegetated beach
to the dune system.
Submitted by: J. W. Giles Date: October 31, 2005 Office: Wilmington
127 Cardinal Drive Ext., Wilmington, North Carolina 28405-3845
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccoastaimanagement.net
An Equal Opportunity \ Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled 110% Post Consumer Paper
Form DCM-MP-1 RECEIVED
DCM WILL, 1H 1GTON, NC
OCT 2 2005
APPLCATION
IC.
(To be completed by all applicants)
1. APPLICANT
a. Landowner:
b. City,town, community or landmark
Lw F C??l
c. Street address or secondary road number
a ly N- 1-4 e-w ?el--D C-
Name 'ro,u o 0( S U-C C C ck
Address P o.?o?- 241b
City?ucF C-- y State ?li
zip nW Day Phone q 10 -3M-L-V31
Faxetlo 3a3-4k3a
b. Authorized Agent:
Name ?? ??1?hae l f?loo?e?
Address P 0?
City sure CState 1-K,
Zip LA`J Day Phone C1i0 -3a? - qt3 i
Faxq\o-3R?-LAi3a
c. Project name (if any)
?&Skcrn 66 r\ ra e C t
NOTE: Perrrds will be issued in name of lmdamwr(s), and/or
project name.
2. LOCATION OF PROPOSED
PROJECT
a. County Ptnrjer
d. Is proposed work within city limits or planning
jurisdiction? X Yes No
e. Name of body of water nearest project (e.g. river,
creek, sound, bay) 1?+klLR{'lC. 0L-PCLr1
3. DESCRIPTION AND PLANNED USE
OF PROPOSED PROJECT
a. List all development activities you propose (e.g.
building a home, motel, marina, bulkhead, pier, and
excavation and/or filling activities
CLL (W) erm I CW(ni',
e'-t ( L1621 t-r?
b. Is the proposed activity maintenance of an existing
project, new work, or both? ?)c4y-'
c. Will the prQl?ct be for public, private or commercial
use? PtIb?IC. i?
d. Give a brief description of purpose, use, methods of
construction and daily operations of proposed
project. If more space is needed, please attach
additional pages, i hL 0UrQos6 O F-(hP_
-{- w?
SLID
du(, p- 0C\
- i h0 .r)V-n 4-itil It (rn?l?t

Revised 03195
RECEIVED
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
Form DCM-MP-1
4. LAND AND WATER
CHARACTERISTICS
OCT 2 1 2005
m. Describe existing wastewater treatment facilities.
fl0re__1
a. Size of entire tract fh le, t)? JeCL6(A n._ Describe location and type of discharges to waters
CCt)'C_ of the state. (For example, surface runoff, sanitary
b. Size of individual lot(s) N l? wastewater, industrial /commercial effluent, "wash
down" and residential discharges.) n On e-
c. Approximate elevation of tract above Mecure,
d. Soil type(s) and textures of tr ct
Sanc1 RUTmm "
e. Vegetation on tract
f. Man-made features now on tract BC co--)
g. What is the CAMA Land Use Plan land
classification of the site? (Consult the local land use plan.)
Conservation Transitional
Developed Y_ Community
Rural Other
h. How is the tract zoned by local government?
, ? &sA C'U'_ rya- l -t- 031NI we <-C.k CLi
i. Is the proposed project consistent with the applicable
zoning? __ Yes No
(Attach zoning compliance certificate, if applicable)
Has a professional
done for the tract?
If yes, by whom?.
archaeological assessment been
Yes XL No
k. Is the project located in a National Registered
Historic District or does it involve a National
Register listed or eligible property?
Yes `1, No
1. Are there wetlands on the site? _ Yes X No
Coastal (marsh) Other
If yes, has a delineation been conducted?
(Anaeh doaunentation, if available)
o. Describe existing drinking water supply source.
N I?
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
In addition to the completed application form, the
following items must be submitted:
v A copy of the deed (with state application only) or
other instrument under which the applicant claims tide
to the affected properties. If the applicant is not
claiming to be the owner of said property, then
forward a copy of the deed or other instrument under
which the owner claims title, plus written permission
from the owner to carry out the project.
An accurate, dated work plat (including plan view
and cross-sectional drawings) drawn to scale in black
ink on an 8 1/2" by 11" white paper. (Refer to
Coastal Resources Commission Rule 7J.0203 for a
detailed description.)
Please note that original drawings are preferred and
only high quality copies will be accepted. Blue-line
prints or other larger plats are acceptable only if an
adequate number of quality copies are provided by
applicant. (Contact the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers regarding that agency's use of larger
drawings.) A site or location map is a part of plat
requirements and it must be sufficiently detailed to
guide agency personnel unfamiliar with the area to the
Rerised 03195
DCNI VJILNIINGTON, NC
O C T 2 1 2005
Form DCM-MP-1
site. Include highway or secondary road (SR)
numbers, landmarks, and the like.
° A Stormwater Certification, if one is necessary
° 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. Upon signing this form, the applicant
further certifies that such notice has been provided.
Name bbd W • N Lem
Address 131 r1s aCne'Su 111 Off6_\ ELL
Phone CI?ne6Q 1 lIL , LkLA 0"1-7
Name ?i0OG(? (Y1 i'?iQ(Q(1 K. ?rt ('inn
Address ( 0100 1 Or1
Phone GO pCl S Ur_CN P A 1 03(0
Name
Address
Phone
° A list of previous state or federal permits issued for
work on the project tract. Include permit numbers,
permittee, and issuing dates. new. ?:IF 1I?,0JgS
e- mgt AIr
g-q? Tc x r, of Su?F Ct " f. gl?s???l
°-?i?d?v?dua l pecr??s?Q?e?-1? ?wr,ers
° A check for $250 made payable to the Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources
(DEHNR) to cover the costs of processing the
application.
° A signed AEC hazard notice for projects in
oceanfront and inlet areas.
° A statement of compliance with the N.C.
Environmental Policy Act (N.C.G.S. 113A - 1 to
10) If the project involves the expenditure of public
funds or use of public land, attach a statement
documenting compliance with the North Carolina
Environmental Policy Act.
6. CERTIFICATION AND PERMISSION
TO ENTER ON LAND
I understand that any permit issued in response to this
application will allow only the development described in
the application. The project will be subject to conditions
and restrictions contained in the permit.
I certify that to the best of my knowledge, the proposed
activity complies with the State of North Carolina's
approved Coastal Management Program and will be
conducted in a manner consistent with such program.
I 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.
1 further certify that the information provided in this
application is truthful to the best of my knowledge.
t?
This is the day of Qc W bt? W zae S
Print Name _ • I' a e co t
Signature
vL?usdowrur or Authorized Agrnt
Please indicate attachments pertaining to your proposed
project.
_Y_ DCM MP-2 Excavation and Fill Information
_ DCM MP-3 Upland Development
_ DCM MP-4 Structures Information
_ DCM MP-5 Bridges and Culverts
_ DCM MP-6 Marina Development
NOTE: Please sign and date each attachment in the
space provided at the bottom of each form.
Reviwd 03195
Form DCM-NIP-2
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
OCT 2 1. 2005
EXCAVAr"I"N
AND"' FILL
(Except 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.
Describe below the purpose of proposed excavation or
fill activities. All values to be given in feet.
Average Final
Existing Project
UnQth Width DeDth DeDth
Access
channel
(btLW) or (NWL)
Canal
Boat
basin
Boat
ramp
Rock
groin
Rock
breakwater
Other
(Excluding
shoreline
stabilization)

Z;
?,voo 1ZS? ? ' I ?ttSL
a. Amount of material to be excavated from below
MHW or NWL in cubic yards
b. Type of material to be excavated sa nc(
c. Does the area to be excavated include coastal
wetlands (marsh), submerged aquatic vegetation
(SAVs) or other wetlands? Yes _Y_, No
d. Highground excavation in cubic yards 0
2. DISPOSAL OF EXCAVATED
MATERIAL N I A
a. Location of disposal area
b. Dimensions of disposal area
c. Do you claim title to disposal area?
Yes No
If no, attach a letter granting permission from the
owner.
d. Will a disposal area be available for future
maintenance? Yes No
If yes, where?
Revised 03195
F-1 17-- \_? t_ l V ._ ?
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
Form D01-MP-2
J
OCT, 12005
e. Does the disposal area include any coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes No
f. Does the disposal include any area in the water?
Yes No
3. SHORELINE STABILIZATION NJ A
a. Type of shoreline stabilization
Bulkhead Riprap
b. Length
c. Average distance waterward of MHW or NWL
If Yes,
(1) Amount of material to be placed in the
water
(2) Dimensions of fill area
(3) Purpose of fill
b. Will fill material be placed in coastal wetlands
(marsh), SAVs or other wetlands?
Yes No
If yes,
(1) Dimensions of fill area
(2) Purpose of fill
5. GENERAL
d. Maximum distance waterward of MHW or NWL
e. Shoreline erosion during preceding 12 months
(Source of information)
a. How will excavated or fill material be kept on site
and erosion c trolled? C - CL-f-A On'
I C wn quil , ca-
a-_-s
f. Type of bulkhead or riprap material
g. Amount of fill in cubic yards to be placed below
water level
(1) Riprap
(2) Bulkhead backfill
h. Type of fill material
i. Source of fill material
4. OTHER FILL ACTIVITIES
(Excluding Shoreline Stabilization)
a. Will fill material be brought to site?
Yes No
b. What type of construction equipment will be used
(for example, dragline, backhoe, or hydraulic
dredge)? l l„ ^I r
c. Will wetlands be cr;,ssed in trarTrting equipment
to project site? Yes No
If yes, explain steps that will be taken to lessen
environmental impacts.
S urn Ci ? LLRCRi esl rw+ on
Applicant or Pmj 'N
u? ?C
S'
Date
Revised 03M
?a
L
D 7
W p o
o
F- N
LU
U'f'
W v
o
U
C1

k??
1= I TOPSAIL 50U N'D-'?? Ham. a
TOPSAIL SOUND o
'ST'L
` `
I
?t'47EF
l'?i?5 r
? ? ?+
E
i?l
l?• IW
II '• 0 0
_ 2' I' SWI?DOE c O 1 u?? ?•??
uAPI
SURF CITY
V °"
'D r o o NORT
I
H H
' o. I
o
V I
n
? z ? `??
E _ i
- [?
f
?
I
y
CT.
p y
cDt LR
p .`.? 19
wNC O?MM J'_NViiER
5 TDeSti W \ ?
RiCG? L DR RIV=R 1
_
- < [RD. 5 f SHOR
21D/ _ CP (SR
R ?? 5
?
?
BA1
.I
O CtNwl
J
DR
V
BL
C10P
pplERR V UvS E D
:
?
_ - E
r T a?? -TOuSail I
^?- -?_
S
i
?
?t ST
- c - c S T ntVEN 'H HrLC
-
D
?
-=CF
?
ice.. roes.
1
•-.
<
?z:'?^
w '^z._?•-?_ . _ .?f-
r p _ ?- P' i ?. -_ Z O
O
j 9
_?„C_ 1
-. .. .,
a
G ,?0"_ ?.?_.____DR _`?F^??"'_ "La_.j' ????°._'?..?" v r
t4z
a m
.
_ n
u _ J
I ` _
SURF p
n,
CITY
u
3 n C111 [Illl75 -2n DR oT a wT p
---'wo-?q-_w
_ s u

X m W „ V
BARNACL
CR E BILL'S i
PIER
?•- cc
SCOTCH BON" ? G"!?t- , C17T LIN!
_
1S

OCEAN CITYW
r ?'
PIER n PIER co
F
ATLANTIC OCEAN
APPROX. SCALE IN MILES
0 1/4 1!2 1
U _
Z
Z lI ?
?m
°J j cI
c
N? Z
U
N o I?
U
O
!1
Lo
CO
N
O
Lo
co
m
m
O
Z
X
Q
LL
UI
C
s!
C
r0
E
O
U
?i
v`
?I
v
`I
?I
Z
LL !
LA80RATORY SIEVE ANALYSIS
STANDARD
PASSING SPECIFICATIONS
VE SIEEVE SIZE E
S
CONTRACTORS & ENGINEERS SERVICES INC.
=? P?c?Exr: F=" L_A N T M I X
^ coYrR,=R: RIVERSIDE SAND CO.
l _ wcAncn+: GOLDSBORO, N.C.
8EPl
_-° 12,113 z = ccrrr 7 ND-: DATE: 10/9Z23
F G GRADATION REPORT
ti,cl '
-----------------
PETER D. cDONNE.L, SR. P.E. 12613
11 SUUhUt Ur Pf.Altsve%1.: m rwii 1
RECEIVED
OCN1 WILMINGTON, NC
OC1" 2 1 2005
f k1.1

Y
r- ?
Lr
I ?^
t?raJtc+

w
<
n
i
T
W
u a
4
>r
U U
I BLANC
¢ oTERR
"Y , w O¢
s H
U ¢
< U
m

? ?,
rf I I ,.._--•---?j- Y
, 7otsalL souny?'

TOPSAIL SO
UND
?• F tlc
?A ST
?

T
1 ti

Z C
L
Uddrs .
1 o 0
111 SWING BRIDGE
J sF p?, SURF CITY t Ili
a o
62 h O
O O
,CL
C c -
y zOJ N
?(^
00? N
Y S a Ot
O-
w I'
U r
m < O Dr
r '
l r
0 (
'T,- DR
.O..._ '? G F O=
RIDGE = i? c JENNIFER
. _ ccRG

" Ti 5 i
N?S TOPSAIL. OR NEW $D - RIVER DR 2St a

'
F
10 j SrN
63:,

ut
j ,NH\tf hI h H
P CA
O
.,
.
.. c
U L) ¢ OR Vv `,
S VP SHORE ^w>"
DF?_ < ?
LL ..
___ L
w W
S d SHORE DR >> '•' t
H 1GPSa ., NA
y
O CSR 1585
y ?c ?-SI
.
2 J = < ? ?! a < < O.>?"> C m
>
ll __
uOi
S
w (?j v?? Z
OO
? <
w
CITY. Uk;f,j m n, x
<
Z ?c< O<O< o< <
` to U ,.
n
w
--<_:?. cw_=-w N -SHOr,
?. ?N?-y
'Y2
G <
V
rG Vl ©
z r < N
C .
p a p , _
W_
_
o¢ p ?
]?-_
<
< W
U Q w a<
m'
I E!
¢ c SURF
J
•- CI
YLIU TS
U w m m <
Y C1TY
Pl ER
¢
T 3 BARNAC
E BILL'S
.
Z' SCOTCH -0-1
ER I P
ATLANTIC I OCEAN
In
'.
t-tsS -or0. t-i o r-, e ro J c- C
C_-flQ?1
21
Src -: ?»/\.
Cl APPROX.
n
]] 1/4
<-? m

z
^,
° <
0m
(-n z 0
z

Pender County ,-?, .-,
MapView CD 30447 i 146E ae? 13J.
32 12
s
July 2005 Release °
2415

VNT>r '"-

1 28 a 2441 10
ym "
GO O,p 0400 9
27

* * 2 26 2367 0b
;
* 9335
- 0336
61 J
O
o
?•?
p
P 's so ,
25
FNDE 3 2393
24

8371 Q
J
boy ?` ,a 1310 23
'
PIN=4223-46-2858-0000
8247
4 3
9 mss' 22 `9
s
NAME=POLZER ROBERT W ET AL ` °
2
ADDR=131 95 PAINESVILLE WARREN RD 'y
O' 1246 21 so
CITY=PAINESVILLE
STATE=OH
0204 J 12G2 20 ..
ZIP=44077
0
PROP ADDR=101 ANDERSON BLVD N 3201 -
8 2 19
PROP_DESC=LOT 13 PL 5 PG 69101 N ANDERSON 0
OtJ / ti°
DATE=
SALE PRICE=
BKPG=607/113 59 % 9119 9159 { ` sO 18
3

GEO_PIN=T051 010 013
5 0 5
ACCOUNT=17741 8.1
TNSH=102
TNSH
DESC=TOPSAIL %7175
h y 9134 9A °
_
ACRE S=0 ? r° T 4
LAND VAL=185832 2162
BLDG_VAL=72780 .0
TOTAL_VALU=258612
DEFERRED=O
6 !?j3079
SUBDIVISIO=
ZONE=R1 048 i ?•• 2018
TAX CODES=G01 C54 R40 8036 007G
EXEMPT=
USE=
ALT-PIN=41284
MAPN=T051 010 013 5@ v' , ; :'s
-
-- n?'
HEAT
HEAT_SO_FT=1132 - •- --
NBRHD=04
EXEM_AMT= 7972 - -• - , /
PCL CLASS=R r °0 9933 50
PE
VALUE=
o
', 3
LR
DE=
MYDIS= 0 2 O
'
BRAT= 67AC o? o
390:
50?

A i
h°y O
2858
°
-?
0
'
o
RD LT y\
8748
1892

Scale : 1 Inch = 104 Feet.
Date :09/26/2005
E I V E D

0('7 9 1 )nn

Onslow County, North Carolina Spatial Data Explorer Pale I of 2
Q CIS r; Spaia) Data J=rl ,
° hlortti Catclina
DCM WILMINGTON, NC
Click on the Map to: 0 C-11 2 1 ?N05
0 Zoomin n Zoomout C) Recenter Map (!?) Identify: Parcel Map
Zoom Factor: 2X - ) Radius Search (feet) 0
.®.
I X,
S,
0041
\a
rra:
4 Y. a
f'
rr
L
\^,.?a4r S
/ k
T
K .? 4
c s. ?
K
1? 7?
Parcel Data
Find Adjoining Parcels
a
v
V.A
• Abstract Tax Value: $130,000.00
• Tax Parcel ID: 804A-25 • Current Tax Value: $130,000.00
• NC PIN Number: 424512961714 • Land Value: $130,000.00
• Tax Record Number. 37586 • Structure Value:
• Owner's Name: GRIFFIN ROBERT M & KAREN K • Other Buildings Value:
• Property Record Card • Improvement Code: V
• Plat Book and Page Number: 44-030 • House Square Feet:
• Deed Book and Page:2304 776 • Property Address: 100 SCOTCH BONNET OR
• Date Deed Recorded: 08/19/2004 • Township Code: 114
• Deed Stamp Amount: 625000 • City Code: 26
• Tax Acreage Charged: 0.64 • Neighborhood Code: 103
• Zoning Code: R-15
SCALE 1 :1695
1' . A\
\i. v d a
l r-, \ Z? .?14
l\\ /,r -1? 7 \\??(l?i , 123 613 E>
Reference Map
Map Layers
Draw Layers
Draw selected layers:
Boundary
j City Boundaries
Parcel Map
ETJ
Multi Symbol
Fire Districts
Flood Data
Multi Symbol
Soil Map
Township Boundary
Election Districts
Census Tracts
Neighborhoods
Zoning
Infrastructure
'7 Street Center Line
Index Map
Aerial Photography
Physical
Streams
Draw Layers
MIAP Currency
This map is prepared for the
inventory of real property foi
within this jurisdiction, and it
compiled from recorded dee
plats, and other public recor
and data. Users of this map
hereby notified that the
aforementioned public prim,
information sources should I
consulted for verification of I
information contained on thi
map. The Onslow County,
mapping, and software
companies assume no legal
responsibility for the informe
contained on this map or in
website.
Data Effective Date: 7
September 2005
Current Date: 9/2612005
Time: 11:21:58 AM
http://72.236.9.254/servletlcom.esri.esrimap.Esr-imap?Name=Onslow&Cmd=Clk&Left=2448742.... 9/26/2005
TOPSAIL SOUND \1 r?tAcoJST
CITY C
.". J IIMI1? A
,
j >
SURF CITY
>Iti 0 9 ¢0 u
? u ?- r 0 CGS s x O J " CF
w '
= S
O
I 0 u
t - Q?
¢ I q
'M E.m
M p
T¢DUNES
C'
Y. y. CT
<
¢bhK DR
ti y.
2 JENNIFER
=
RIDGE a ¢
m Dt ANC
? D
0
H
R
.
r,..
O
Qvv°
D
C ¢RD
E'DR;
>
° ?''°TERR ei v ¢ D
_` F
t, S
SHDRE >
w

4
- OJw O¢
?u
50
?

"
Z

W 72
)-

< Cl
Y
liT.S wQ
Cl
.?,
? W U .-.t:
.
-
Fil Gi_.rr -•
?- tom
.
-? ?
Z ,
"m m jam" GY
W w f
O
m < 4
j <
J 1 b i U ° w . m
? = m
J I

Sur ctk-n
Shoe 3 rr
II I'I TOPSAIL SOUIV'.
?° t?ftl %'clT?s
Vl I '
W :SWING BRIDGE
00
SAIL DR NEPJI
N
z
a
PO

j 3I3
0 0

' STUAIP
W m z I
? I I
..
NORTH
w
e S a O. F fir

" OP CSR ? CANAL yIT " T< =<2..0< FA OBAr
O+N
F

?¢ ay Ti_CP SAIL .
¢.2.?. "C a D_ANNC ;H,Q,NEL DR
?cm°=zST
. m OOJ<J??<?SAh?:iST-H A'JEI, i 0 ?ItLA
2
'
3Jx?lN^DR
9a<.w ¢w OWW? '" -UCIsW
¢ x N ASHORE"^A..-..-+t.?
2 -
SEA
?`.i
l
! :;
C 90?'- E \.Y
<fOPSn
n ¢-_ AVE
-?---+- " Z
w 0 0 2 < W
n < t .
.
_
?.,yy
-?J SFZJnt"U 'V-- .
pE----:?--+?_. _L m ...
0
FuUD
?.. ??
U a 1
CITY 11MITS N<N DR w
Id ¢?- 03 ¢ "
'° A u
wrND x u
u Dq ...?
JJJ
D
SCOTCH BONNET '?•L, Cl1Y LIM11S
° J OCEAN CITY
<
PIER
w "
'IER
u
u
< ?p> ¢> D;--qHDaE
I ?. ,2 ¢ < 0 < 0 < < <
-. ( D t? N m © p I
a p< C? SURF w o z J I
z ¢ o Y
U g CITY
o D BARNACLE BILL'S
PIER
PIER
ATLANTIC OCEAN
APPROX. SCALE IN MILES
I
G 114 1/2 1
3
r "•
? III
- r7
?y

TOPSAIL SOUND
F
_
? .
J
N
G

'
I a c')
'
C?
?
u
j s
O F O
(
Z
E > ?: J
? < a
1f

VNC
• pC?DU_ES
C'A
bAK DR
'
.
0.
F C
'`.^ yo v';?
RIDGE Z - _
JENNIFER
LL
?" O1ERR. -
O
/? \h
}4L7 c w> E•DR;: <<
DR 0?
•?+ O't; bu ?. S 54DR.. 0
CITY
t-?- c
o u r N
., w
'y ? < u
W u
w a

TOPSAIL SOL'.?'y?
C?T ?0?45TAj ?? ?ni t6'.4TEft1l'.?5' i?•CIT%s
(IAfq? a I??_
r f
\'r SWING BRIDGE
SURF CITY
00® n
L? S= J cFNDc
COI OS TD> NE y,?O y ltf -
)R, Oq Ail DR W y RIVER D
S 0 c?` MCP (SR 1585
OR ?•PO NO ^ TOG
O p „
C?? •I•
STUMF
v NORTH
J tT w T
O N n vi y H? rrr azn_ynar 'F
o a h C `L ST., ,.eJ!c^^Oz SiE B.rvr,E :NAUUEL Ca .4
c < <
m I - c >
?[ O[ p? ? W
< "ORE G.

< ?. SAIL OJpcODc < S6TpEr;

c > w ou :rc?_ >
c W o - DR
e,r 4 O yr„ A^ ?
p..??E ?.?

Cr
F
.. o O [. D? i
0 c --sue m
h? ° v
.?.??
L . <_
<•-i-< z^e snoa?Dq J"' sE.
a
??C=c'-'??-L•_.
? SC,-= W v z ?
O;
??E?.. u, ...
c
w
i
a y w
;URF ?.
.?
I w
W
?
u .?- J 4 CIIA
I? ?2a DR Ci a
'
111 E
vl
;,
WINO :r u U G
m C p Ac C TY c O
BARNACLE
' II
$
?"P: q
z
uu _ PIER BILL
S -
SCOTCH SONNET u .1 lll/li$ IOCEAN CITY W
PIER PIER o m n -? ,`ER E
u t .?_
ATLANTIC OCEAN

. 4R El OF s -j p PLtsH
A D T pl- c r=7 j T
/? D 3 r9 c E ,? '.?
6,? M+r?ES of 9HaREe-(?G (.oPC'2Tr

lr3 t t H l -,.1 C o R P c j214ra

APPROX. SCALE IN MILES

W. 0
?iobe?t
rI,

va

f31?S PAtatSlJlccr F, 0
w `II'r vz 1
PAIN ES v(?CE , o 14
o O lil
U0uo -vcnac ? SA ifCt"
Yo ? 7 SLtr f PA
z
• , c)( ?? c)uo5 IFS 3(n
ceA